RefusedDecided 18 August 2025Dublin City Council

7 Ailesbury Park, Ballsbridge Dublin 4

Planning application WEB2500/25
DecisionRefuse permission
Decided18 August 2025
Application typePermission
Source documentsPending

Site

What is on file

0refusal reasons0conditions8nearby records

Proposed development

Application description published by Dublin City Council.
The development will consist for creation of vehicular access to front to form new off-street parking within the curtilage of the dwelling incorporating a new gate by modification of existing railings/hedgerow and kerbing and all associated site works.

Application and appeal history

Structured appeal stages, outcomes and source documents currently tied to this application.
ACP-323573-25Submitted 09 September 2025 / decided 18 December 2025
Status not recordedREFUSE PERMISSION
  1. Appeal submittedAppeal reference ACP-323573-25
    09 September 2025
  2. Appeal decisionREFUSE PERMISSION
    18 December 2025
No appeal document has been bound to this case yet; the timeline will enrich as indexing continues.

Decision details

Core application dates and identifiers from the public planning record.

Planning analysis

Refusal reasons and planning conditions extracted from the public decision file.

Refusal reasons

Refusal reasons not machine-readable

Documents are indexed. Reason extraction for Dublin City has not started yet.

Conditions

No conditions

No conditions are on record for this application yet.

Planning a project near 7 Ailesbury Park, Ballsbridge Dublin 4?

Get a site risk brief with the local decision pattern and up to 80 detailed nearby comparables (40 refusals and 40 grants), including extracted reasons and source links. €29 incl. VAT, PDF by email.

Source documents

Original council portal records and source PDFs where available.

Source link pending

This application was published at source, but the document inventory has not been bound yet.

Nearby precedent

Similar nearby applications linked to this planning decision.
Get up to 80 detailed nearby comparables in a site risk brief →