GrantedDecided 29 January 2015Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council

56 Landscape Park, Churchtown, Dublin 14

Planning application D14B/0415
DecisionGrant permission
Decided29 January 2015
Application typePermission
Source documentsPending

Site

What is on file

0refusal reasons0conditions8nearby records

Proposed development

Application description published by Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council.
Permission for demolition of part two storey building to side and rear

Application and appeal history

Structured appeal stages, outcomes and source documents currently tied to this application.
PL06D.244488Submitted 20 February 2015 / decided 20 May 2015
Status not recordedGRANT PERMISSION
  1. Appeal submittedAppeal reference PL06D.244488
    20 February 2015
  2. Appeal decisionGRANT PERMISSION
    20 May 2015
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

No refusal reason on record

No refusal reason is on record for this application yet.

Conditions

No conditions

No conditions are on record for this application yet.

Planning a project near 56 Landscape Park, Churchtown, Dublin 14?

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. €39 incl. VAT, PDF by email.Searching the records is free. A one-off brief for this site is €39, and Pro at €19/month adds full document access and the planning AI for people tracking more than one site.

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 →