The proposed Spencer Dock development fundamentally contravenes the objectives of the plans for the docklands area and is a premature design plan, the Bord Pleanala hearing was told yesterday.
Mr Michael O'Donnell, for Mr Dermot Desmond - an objector to the scheme - said the development was excessive in terms of bulk and was a clear contravention of the Dublin Corporation Development Plan and the Dublin Docklands Authority Master Plan.
Mr O'Donnell said the developers had acknowledged that some of the buildings had not been fully designed. "The scheme is not designed to the extent appropriate for full application," he said. The underground station and the cross-river link had as yet not been given an exact location.
The Luas line also was of "fundamental architectural concern", he said. "Where it will go, how it will be served is not at all clear." Mr O'Donnell said the bus service for the area was also unclear with regard to the bus interchange and the Quality Bus Corridor. "The entire basis of the scheme is premature," he said. "The entire development will focus on car transport."
With regard to the proposal to demolish Campion's public house, a listed building, he said: "The developers have said it is impossible to locate the conference centre on a 51-acre site without the removal of a listed building."
Mr O'Donnell said the Dublin Corporation conditions would limit the design and should not be accepted by the board. He recommended that the development be refused and the developers resubmit with regard taken of "good planning permission".
Mr David Healy, for local residents' groups, outlined his opposition to the development because of its disregard for the communities. "We are prepared to welcome any proposal that is sensitive to the communities."
The most striking impact on communities was overshadowing, particularly on Mayor Street, he said. Mr Healy added that there was a lack of information on the impact of dust and contaminated lands. The development did not address the idea of sustainability. "The development is so old-fashioned in terms of sustainability. If this is the future then we are in trouble," he said.
Mr Michael Smith, for An Taisce, said if the board did not receive additional necessary details from the developers with regard to the scheme, they would "have no option but to seek in the courts orders of prohibition preventing the board reaching a decision".
The Dublin Docklands Development Authority, as observers to the hearing, said it was concerned about the lack of any element of social and affordable housing, the height of the scheme, and the amount of traffic which would be generated in the development.
Ms Mary Bryan of the Georgian Society said she welcomed the development of the docklands site but said that "it can be done without the height and bulk of this scheme" and in a way which would be more respectful of listed buildings.
Councillor Ciaran Cuffe said the scheme could be placed anywhere, in any city in the western world, and Dublin should not lose its distinct identity.
Dublin Corporation outlined its concerns with regard to the area space and traffic generation. "There is a link between parking supply and congestion," said Mr Eoghan Madden, an engineer with the corporation.