Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 7: To ask the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism his views on the decision of Dublin city councillors to seek advice on preserving a building due to be demolished under the plan to redevelop Lansdowne Road; if this development will delay the redevelopment of the stadium; his further views on whether the building can be preserved without altering the design of the stadium; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26928/06]

Jimmy Deenihan (Kerry North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 25: To ask the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism if progress is on schedule regarding the new Lansdowne Road stadium; the deadline for a decision from Dublin City Council on the planning application; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26964/06]

Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 40: To ask the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the position on the redevelopment of Lansdowne Road as the new national stadium; if the project remains on schedule despite objections to the original planning application; the concerns expressed by local residents; the dispute between the IRFU and Wanderers RFC; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26929/06]

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 7, 25 and 40 together.

In January 2006, the Lansdowne Road Stadium Development Company — LRSDC — the company charged with delivery of this project, submitted a planning application to Dublin City Council and then provided a detailed response to questions raised by the city council about that application. In the process of preparing the planning application the company engaged in extensive consultations with relevant interests and specialists, including local resident groups. The application lodged endeavoured to address, to the maximum extent possible, the issues identified by expert advisors and the concerns expressed by those groups consulted.

The issue raised by the Deputy relates to the house at No. 70 Shelbourne Road, which it is proposed to demolish in order to allow for a new access point to the stadium. I understand the company had this house surveyed and was advised that it was not listed and, indeed, is of insufficient heritage value for listing. Further, it was the opinion of the heritage architect expert consulted that the house has no special architectural merit, as it presented only a veneer of authenticity and did not contribute to the streetscape in a positive manner. I understand that in discussions with Dublin City Council there was no indication to the contrary as regards this issue.

It seems that recently a number of local councillors, through the local area committee, have objected to the demolition of the house and have intimated they will seek advice and attempt to have this house and the terrace in which it stands listed. This is a matter for the councillors concerned and for Dublin City Council and it would be inappropriate for me to comment on the initiative.

The deadline for a decision from Dublin City Council on the planning application is also a matter for the council, although a response to the planning application is due by the end of July.

The dispute between the IRFU and the named football club, as I have indicated previously, is a matter between the IRFU and the club in question. It is clear that ultimately the issues must be resolved by the parties directly involved. Discussions between those parties are still ongoing.

To date, the project has proceeded on schedule and while no one can say what length of time will be required to obtain planning permission, I am hopeful the planning process will not delay that schedule. I believe a solution will be found to the dispute between the IRFU and Wanderers Football Club and, equally, I am hopeful the local residents will not delay the redevelopment of the stadium. I put my views on the record on a number of occasions that if this project does not go ahead at Lansdowne Road, it might ultimately result in other, and perhaps less attractive, developments on the site.

With a view to resolving the dispute between the IRFU and Wanderers Football Club, I may have to intervene in the matter. If I can help, I will do that.

Jack Wall (Kildare South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On this record of protected structures, according to The Irish Times the executive manager within the council's planning department stated there could be a legal issue raised by the stadium developers if the councillors added the affected properties — initially, it was stated Nos. 4 to 70 Lansdowne Road were being determined here and now there is probably only one building which may be preserved. If a legal position will be taken by the stadium developers and also an independent opinion will be sought from the Civic Trust and An Taisce, it must be a cause of concern. Can something be done to alleviate the concerns of the councillors involved or is there any part the Minister can play in trying to overcome a problem which could develop into a long legal action if these houses or, in particular, the house at No. 70 Shelbourne Road, is recorded as a protected structure?

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have given Deputy Wall my Department's perspective. However, a group of councillors operating through the local area committee does not agree with this and they have intimated that they will seek to have the house and the terrace on which it stands listed. Of course, their efforts so far have been unsuccessful, as the council heritage architect agreed the house was not of sufficient heritage value to be listed.

The council legal executive has taken legal advice on the matter and advised the councillors concerned that they should have the backing of a technical architectural statement before continuing. This group has now asked the executive to commission An Taisce and the Civic Trust to carry out another heritage study and I understand that Dublin City Council is due to respond to this matter on or before Monday next.

It is not for me to comment on all of these matters other than to say that we are just trying to build a world-class stadium at Lansdowne Road. It seems there are people who, for one reason or another, are seeking to prevent that happening. They should carefully consider the alternative again. The alternative is a concrete jungle, which is what will go into Lansdowne Road if the stadium does not go in. Many of the people actively pursuing objections today may well be sorry in the future that they did not listen now.

Jimmy Deenihan (Kerry North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the problem with this particular house hold up the planning process? Will the council be able to grant planning permission and at the same time not consider the status of this house?

Can the city council look for further information at the end of the month or has the time for seeking further information expired? Will the decision, whether or not to grant planning permission, at the end of the month be the final one? That is an important factor because that is the timeframe envisaged by the company set up to provide the stadium. If further information is requested and the process is protracted, the entire project would be thrown off schedule.

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I must take it that Dublin City Council will listen to its own heritage architect and determine whether this particular issue should interfere with it in deciding whether to grant planning permission, and what conditions might apply. As far as I am concerned we, or at least the development group, replied to the issues which were raised by Dublin City Council. Those replies were comprehensive. I look forward to a decision from Dublin City Council by the end of this month. If planning permission is granted, I assume an appeal will be made to An Bord Pleanála but that has been factored into the timeframe. We remain on course for construction to commence in 2007 and it is estimated to take 29 months. I do not have a crystal ball but every deadline has been met thus far.