RefusedDecided 15 December 1999South Dublin County Council

20 Ambervale, Cookstown, Tallaght, Dublin 24.

Planning application S99A/0791
DecisionRefuse permission
Decided15 December 1999
Application typePermission
Source documents1

Site

What is on file

0refusal reasons0conditions8nearby records

Proposed development

Application description published by South Dublin County Council.
Demolition of existing garage and construction of 3-bed attached terraced house and garage to rear with vehicular entrance to side.

Application and appeal history

Structured appeal stages, outcomes and source documents currently tied to this application.
06S.117901Submitted 13 January 2000 / decided 11 August 2000
Appeal decidedGrant Permission
  1. Appeal submittedAppeal reference 06S.117901
    13 January 2000
  2. Appeal decisionGrant Permission
    11 August 2000
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 South Dublin has not started yet.

Conditions

No conditions

No conditions are on record for this application yet.

Planning a project near 20 Ambervale, Cookstown, Tallaght, Dublin 24.?

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 →