Management at Dublin port has accused the city council of wanting to turn the docklands into “Yuppyville”, as a row escalates over a plan to fill in a large area of Dublin bay.

Enda Connellan, the chief executive of Dublin Port Company (DPC), made the claim after the council opposed the expansion of the shipping facility. The council believes infilling is “premature” and could cause flooding.

Council officials commissioned their own report on the long-term future of the bay, which proposes the relocation of the port, with the exception of some ferry terminals and cruise liner docking. It suggests moving the port’s business farther north and redeveloping the existing site for housing, shopping, office and recreation.

Connellan said he cannot understand this position, arguing it runs contrary to the council’s own development plan “which promises to support Dublin port”.

“The city council has several good statements in the Dublin city development plan. One is to protect the industrial lands, most of which are within the port, from alternative uses. These are important objectives and I cannot understand why the council would want to turn the port area into Yuppyville,” he said.

Connellan argued that moving the port and redeveloping the area was not necessary to allow for its continued use by cruise liners, and argued that passengers on such ships liked to dock in the capital.

“Dublin is a marquee port; when it is put on a cruise itinerary, it attracts people as it is the capital. Our research also shows that cruise line visitors like the people of Dublin. When moored, those who do not go ashore like to sit watching containers being moved around. In 12 years I have heard no complaints from any cruise liner about the location,” he said.

Jim Keoghan, executive manager in the city council’s planning department, said it is not opposed to the development of Dublin port, but did not want any infill of the bay until its future had been decided. “Consideration is being given to the bay and what it means to the city from an environmental, ecological and economic point of view. The expansion of the port should not go ahead while this process is ongoing,” he said.

The council’s report looked at a number of options for Dublin port, he pointed out, and the proposed relocation was a long-term one, possibly “30 to 50” years away.

DPC says it urgently needs to expand because it requires deep-water facilities to cater for larger ships. “Otherwise we will be confined to servicing smaller and less efficient vessels, which will ultimately result in higher freight costs,” Connellan said.

An Bord Pleanala has received more than 100 objections to the infill plan. Noel Dempsey, the transport minister, has remained neutral. However, he has said that as Dublin port is nearing capacity, “we must examine ways of either expanding that capacity or operating in a different manner”.

The proposal is to reclaim 21 hectares between the North Bull Wall and the South Bull Wall. Dublin Bay Watch has said the port’s plan is “destructive and unnecessary”. It claims the infill could cause the “destruction of bird sanctuaries and wildlife habitats”.

Times Recommends

• James Kilgore's 27 years on the run
• Palin caught with crib notes scrawled on hand
• Hugo Chávez takes to the airwaves – 24/7