Lansdowne residents claim proposed stadium too high and too large

LOCAL residents have claimed the scale of the proposed new stadium at Lansdowne Road is too large and designed merely to incorporate highly lucrative conference facilities.

Opponents of the 50,000 all-seater stadium said many other sports grounds accommodate more spectators than Lansdowne Road even though they are lower in height and without having such a detrimental impact on the local neighbourhood.

They also called for a decision to grant planning permission for the redevelopment of Lansdowne Road to be postponed until a new development plan for the Ballsbridge area has been drafted.

At the start of an An Bord Pleanála oral hearing into the €365m development yesterday, a majority of opponents said plans for the new stadium were unacceptable, although they were not against the project in principle.

Many residents also called for a limit on the number of events held at Lansdowne Road in future, especially music concerts.

The planning appeals authority decided to hold an oral hearing after receiving 33 separate appeals against last July’s decision by Dublin City Council to grant planning permission for the redevelopment of Lansdowne Road subject to 29 conditions.

The Lansdowne Road Stadium Development Company (LRSDC) — a joint project between the IRFU and FAI — hopes to begin demolition on stands at the 128-year-old ground early next year once planning permission for the new stadium has been secured.

Ben Vickery, a LRSDC senior architect, said the facility was designed to provide a new home for Irish rugby and soccer as well as to host meetings and conferences on non-match days.

Mr Vickery said the concerns of local residents had been taken into account in the design of the stadium by having the polycarbonate glass roof “pressed down” at both the north and south ends to facilitate daylight on adjoining houses.

However, resident and community groups as well as individual homeowners outlined their concerns on a wide number of grounds including problems with noise, traffic, parking, litter and overshadowing as well as an increased risk of flooding.

Many suggested the stadium would reach 49 metres in height solely as a result of plans to accommodate major conference facilities in its design. They also expressed concern that the back pitch at Lansdowne would eventually be developed as a hotel with more conference facilities.

Conall Hamill, on behalf of the residents of Shelbourne Road pointed out that the proposed stadium was only 150 metres away from another major development being planned on the site of three existing hotels including Jury's and the Berkeley Court by property developer, Sean Dunne.

Mr Hamill said the area was going to be so radically transformed that Dublin City Council had recognised the need for a development plan for Ballsbridge. For that reason, he called on An Bord Pleanála to postpone any decision on the application by the LRSDC until it had been incorporated into such a plan by the council.

Mr Hamill said Mr Dunne had promised to bring Knightsbridge to Ballsbridge. However, unless the planning authorities adopt the utmost vigilance, he claimed they would be creating “a balls-up in Ballsbridge.”

Residents also questioned the low capacity of the new stadium given its proposed height.