GrantedDecided 15 August 2022Kerry County Council

FARRANFLAHERTY, CHAPEL LANE, DINGLE

Planning application 211163
DecisionConditional grant
Decided15 August 2022
Application typePERMISSION
Source documents1

Site

What is on file

0refusal reasons0conditions8nearby records

Proposed development

Application description published by Kerry County Council.
(1) REFURBISH EXISTING DERELICT LABOURERS COTTAGES FOR USE AS A SINGLE DWELLING (2) CONSTRUCT A NEW SET OF EXTENSIONS TO THE LABOURERS COTTAGES, ALL FOR USE AS A SINGLE DWELLING (3) WORKS TO SECURE AND MAKE GOOD THE REMAINING HISTORIC STONE WALLS ON THE SITE ALONG CHAPEL LANE AND THE HISTORIC STONE GABLE WALL ALONG THE NEW RELIEF ROAD. THESE HISTORIC STONE WALLS TO FORM PART OF THE NEW EXTENSIONS (4) WORKS TO PATH AND RAMP ALONG ENTIRE LENGTH OF PROPERTY ALONG CHAPEL LANE (5) ALL ASSOCIATED SITE WORKS. THIS BUILDING IS A PROTECTED STRUCTURE

Application and appeal history

Structured appeal stages, outcomes and source documents currently tied to this application.
314590-22Submitted 09 September 2022 / decided Not recorded
Status not recordedWITHDRAWN
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

Documents are indexed. Reason extraction for Kerry has not started yet.

Conditions

No conditions

No conditions are on record for this application yet.

Planning a project near FARRANFLAHERTY, CHAPEL LANE, DINGLE?

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.

Nearby precedent

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