GrantedDecided 06 June 2019Limerick County Council

Churchfield/Island MacTeige, Foynes, Limerick.

Planning application 181236
DecisionConditional grant
Decided06 June 2019
Application typePERMISSION
Source documents1

Site

What is on file

0refusal reasons0conditions8nearby records

Proposed development

Application description published by Limerick County Council.
The demolition of the existing three span bridge and construction of a new single span bridge consisting of piled abutments and a stell truss superstructure to facilitate the potential future re-introduction of freight traffic on the Limerick to Foynes railway line at Churchfield/Island MacTeige. The existing intermediate piers will remain in place in a non load bearing capacity. The works also includes the temporary relocation of a salt marsh during the construction of the bridge structure. A Natura Impact Statement has been prepared for the development

Application and appeal history

Structured appeal stages, outcomes and source documents currently tied to this application.

No indexed appeal history

No structured appeal case is tied to this application. This means no appeal is indexed, not that an appeal is impossible.

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 Limerick has not started yet.

Conditions

No conditions

No conditions are on record for this application yet.

Planning a project near Churchfield/Island MacTeige, Foynes, Limerick.?

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 →