GrantedDecided 06 July 2020Mayo County Council

LISCROMWELL, CASTLEBAR

Planning application 20160
DecisionConditional grant
Decided06 July 2020
Application typePERMISSION
Source documents1

Site

What is on file

0refusal reasons0conditions8nearby records

Proposed development

Application description published by Mayo County Council.
EXTRACTION AND PROCESSING OF ROAD CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS FOR THE PROPOSED N5 WESTPORT TO TURLOUGH ROAD AND TO REPLACE THE MATERIALS WITH INERT FILL FROM THE AFOREMENTIONED PROJECT (SURPLUS INERT SOIL AND SUBSOIL)ON A 2.95 HECTARE SITE.

Application and appeal history

Structured appeal stages, outcomes and source documents currently tied to this application.
307765-20Submitted 31 July 2020 / decided 13 November 2020
Status not recordedREFUSED
  1. Appeal submittedAppeal reference 307765-20
    31 July 2020
  2. Appeal decisionREFUSED
    13 November 2020
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 Mayo has not started yet.

Conditions

No conditions

No conditions are on record for this application yet.

Planning a project near LISCROMWELL, CASTLEBAR?

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.

1 council document — in the €39 site risk brief

Site brief

Nearby precedent

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