People living near the planned Charlemont Metrolink station terminal are not opposed to the move because of a "not in my back yard" mentality, a representative of the group has said.
Jerry Barnes was speaking at an An Bord Pleanála meeting which also heard one resident joke that a proposed €45,000 protection scheme for people whose property is damaged might only be enough to "get the wallpapering done".
An Bord Pleanála has been holding public meetings at the Riu Plaza Gresham hotel in Dublin city since 19 February to discuss the value of the €9.5bn Metrolink project, and its potential impact on people close to the proposed line.
The 16 station-proposed line is expected to run from Swords Estuary to Charlemont between Ranelagh and Baggot Street, with the proposed scale of the Charlemont station, which is due to become a terminal for the project, being the subject of local criticism in recent days.
At today's afternoon session, representatives of the Charlemont and Dartmouth Community - specifically Dartmouth Road, Dartmouth Square West, and the general area - outlined their concerns.
Mr Barnes, a chartered town planner who was speaking on behalf of the Dartmouth Road residents, told the hearing local concerns are legitimate and "not based on a 'not in my back yard'" mentality.
Mr Barnes said he believes any decision on the proposed Metrolink plan is of "critical importance to residents" in the area as it has the potential to impact "on homes and lives, not merely properties".
While saying "we fully understand the board [An Bord Pleanála] has to balance this with the common good", he said his group believes "certain parts of the project were poorly conceived".
Concen over 'excessive' impact
Another local resident, chartered engineer and former chair of the Geological Society of Ireland Paul Quigley, said in his view "the scale and magnitude" of the planned work is "excessive for Dartmouth Square".
He said the buildings in the square are "tall masonry structures" and on the "registry of protection".
He said many residents are concerned about potential "excessive" impact on their properties, and what he described as the potential future issue of residents being "drawn into significant crossfire" in relation to legal disputes about the project.
A third resident representative, immediate past president of the Society of Consulting Engineers Brian Kavanagh, said residents believe "significant" cracks could occur in walls due to the planned works and that in his view it is "clear" some Dartmouth Square properties may be "compromised".
Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TFI) officials rejected the scale of the claims, but acknowledged some issues may occur and that this is one of the reasons for the open discussions about the positives and negatives of the planned works at this stage.
The TFI officials were then asked what protections and support would be in place and if the proposed Property Owners Protection Scheme (POPS) for residents, which is currently capped at €45,000, would be used if "your building will fall into a hole".
Officials clarified that while the POPS scheme will be used for smaller issues "it is not there to cater for the type of catastrophic failure", before one member of the resident representative group said the capped price "might get the wallpapering done".
In further evidence this afternoon Dartmouth residents representative Kenneth Goodwin, who is a member of the Acoustics Association of Ireland, gave more information on the noise impact of work at the proposed nearby Charlemont station.
Mr Goodwin said in his view TFI has "failed to provide a robust assessment of the impact" of noise on locals during construction.
TFI officials said all issues are being taken on board and examined as required, and that the current assessment of each potential issue including blasting, boring and other matters is outlined in existing impact assessment documents.
'Red flags' in plans - construction expert
Earlier, a construction expert claimed there are "red flags" in the high-profile Dublin Metrolink plans, after it emerged an impact assessment for the project did not include a new building being constructed along the line.
Conor O'Donnell, who is a geotechnical engineer and managing director of AGL Consulting, gave the evidence on behalf of Irish Life at the latest An Bord Pleanála public meeting into the project.
In evidence to the hearing at the Gresham Hotel in Dublin, Mr O'Donnell said in his view there is a "glaring omission" in the project plans.
He said this is because the Irish Life Cadenza Building was not included in the Metrolink's impact assessment report - with the Davitt House building, which was previously in the location, included instead.
Mr O'Donnell said the Cadenza Building "reached practical completion" in October 2022 and that "it would have been very evident there was a new building under construction" at the site when assessments were taking place.
He said the Cadenza Building has a deeper basement than its predecessor and as the base "is on rock there is a direct connection of ground movements".
Mr O'Donnell said, in his view, these issues could result in "lower tolerance to cracking, distortion and damage" in the new Cadenza Building.
He said "in my opinion it [the impact assessment] does not properly assess" the impact of the Metrolink's construction and said that he would recommend lowering the tunnel by five metres and moving it to the east.
"The building management assessment has identified red flags popping up all over Dublin," he said, and asked if one building was not included is it possible this is also the case for other areas.
Responding to Mr O'Donnell's evidence, John Kinnear, director of tunneling for the Metrolink engineers Jacobs, said while the Cadenza Building was under construction "at the time of the assessment" it concluded in October 2022.
He said the Metrolink project's planned route "went in before that, only just" and added that relevant parts of the impact assessment of Davitt House took place in 2019, before acknowledging plans for the Cadenza Building were available online in 2018.
Colman Billings of BDA Consultants also gave evidence on behalf of Irish Life.
Mr Billings, who told the hearing he has been a facade consultant for 30 years and has worked on projects including earthquake-protected towers in the Caribbean, said the Metrolink project's current plans pose potential problems for the Cadenza Building.
Mr Billings said there are window walls linked to "extremely large slabs" on the outside of the Cadenza Building and that the impact of the Metro project could see these glass walls "rotate on the slab" by as much as seven millimetres in its corner.
He said this would put the facade "under an extreme amount of stress" and that "we might get cracking of stone, and if we get cracking of stone we might get falling of stone, which obviously we want to avoid" as parts of the building are "hanging out onto the street".
At an earlier morning session, Hines Real Estate Ireland said while it is supportive of the Metrolink plans it also has concerns over the potential impact to its property Aercap House.
The company said the impact assessment described Aercap House as a "five-storey building without a basement" and said "that is a better description of the previous building which was Canada House", as Aercap House is a "six-storey building with a two-storey basement and a piled perimeter wall".
Hines Real Estate Ireland said in its view "the incorrect information used to assess the degree of damage calculated, based on masonry building and not the type of building Aercap House is" and that in its view "we don't believe the board and inspector can rely on the assessment done" as it may "allow water into the building".
Eamon Galligan, a senior counsel acting for Hines Real Estate Ireland, said the company "therefore request elevation [of the Metrolink's tunnel] be lower to ensure no damage be caused to any part of Aercap House".
Responding to the points raised by Hines Real Estate Ireland and if the building referenced in the impact assessment is not Aercap House, Mr Kinnear said: "We can confirm that assessment doesn't have the full details.
"At that point we didn’t know about the piles and the double basement, which we now know about. We updated that assessment overnight."
He said he did not disagree that the details of the buildings are essential for the project and will be addressed as part of the project, but said "the submission made by the applicant didn't mention the basement".
