The proposed Spencer Dock development would "flunk second year in architectural school", Mr Paul Leech of the Irish Ecological Design Association said yesterday at the Bord Pleanala hearing.
Mr Leech, who was making submissions as an observer to the development, raised the issue of urban sustainability. He said the development was "so far wide of the mark" of sustainability in relation to other European examples.
He drew examples of sustainability in buildings in cities such as Frankfurt, Berlin and Stockholm where, he said, recycling, open spaces and the local community had been taken into account.
When asked what the impact of the development would have on local residents, he said: "I just throw up my hands. It ignores the local community . . . it would have a devastating effect on the local community". The proposed height of the development to the east "would loom outrageously" over Holles Street Hospital.
Duchas, which has responsibility for waterways, was also an observer at the hearing and said the restoration of Spencer Dock, the site redevelopment and the raising of the Royal Canal's profile were the positive aspects to the proposed development.
Mr John McKeown, senior engineer in waterways in Duchas, said the proposed height of the Mayor Street bridge over the Roy al Canal was 0.3 metres whereas Duchas believed the "minimum requirement" was 1.79 metres.
The 0.3 metres airway proposed under the bridge would allow no canal craft through. The proposal is also to have the Luas light rail run over the Mayor Street bridge.
Duchas also raised the issue of the development of two additional bridges on the Royal Canal.
Mr Tom Philips, planning consultant for the applicant of the development, said the bridges were the responsibility of Duchas, as outlined in a 1995 report on the Royal Canal. The developers agreed to build the Mayor Street bridge and had increased the width of the canal from 19 metres to 30 metres in parts. In the overall plan, £300 million was to be spent on public planning at a private cost.
"A line could be drawn in the sand to which we are willing to pay," Mr Phillips said. In addition, the board could not place a condition on the developers to develop two additional bridges. Mr McKeown said that although at one point the canal met a high blank wall which overshadowed it, the overall positive benefits of the development of the canal and the surrounding areas outweighed the negative.