Plans for a €356 million apartment scheme proposed for former Jesuit lands at the corner of Sandford Rd and Milltown Rd, Dublin 6 have been stalled.

Dublin City Council granted planning permission to Ardstone subsidiary, Sandford Living Ltd last month for 562 apartments on the site comprising 267 two-bed units, 176 one-bed units, 43 three-bed unit and 70 studios across seven blocks.

As part of its Part V social housing requirements, Sandford Living is proposing to sell 56 of the apartments to the city council for social housing and has put a price tag of €1.03 million on the largest three-bedroom apartment.

However, An Coimisiún Pleanála has confirmed that a third party appeal has been lodged against the grant of permission by Cherryfield Avenue Residents’ Association,

This is Sandford Living Ltd’s third application for the site. The previous two applications have been subject to High Court judicial reviews.

Advancing the case for the new scheme, planning consultants Thornton O’Connor (TOC) said the large scale residential development had been reduced from 636 in an earlier plan to 562 and a 10-storey apartment block had been reduced to eight storeys.

The council last month granted planning permission for the scheme after concluding that the site will provide for a large number of homes “in a highly sought after existing residential area which is located in an area within close proximity to employment, public transport and a range of services and facilities”.

In its objection to the scheme when the application was before the council, BPS Planning & Development Consultants, for the Cherryfield Avenue Residents Association, contended that the scheme should be refused as the proposals “would have an overbearing. overshadowing and overlooking impact on adjoining properties on Cherryfield Avenue Lower and Upper”.

The objection also said permission should be refused as it would “adversely impact on the amenity of the local area, the skylines enjoyed by adjoining properties and residential areas and adjoining residential properties”.

BPS Planning and Development Consultants also claimed that the scheme “would be significantly denser and heavier-scaled than anything ever granted in the immediate vicinity”.

The objection also contended that “the proposed development would be incongruous in terms of its design, height, bulk and form, would be out of character with this infill site, would constitute overdevelopment of the site and would have a detrimental impact to the residential amenities of adjacent properties, particularly those located to the west on Cherryfield Avenue Lower and Upper”.

A decision is due on the appeal later this year.