Applications tied to the site
Partial coverage7 register records are within the point-match tolerance; a parcel boundary is needed to treat this as exact.
7 matchedFree preview / €39 incl. VAT site brief
See sample PDFSite planning risk brief
Fix the brief to an Eircode, a dropped pin or a drawn site boundary. PlanIntel then checks the planning register, available spatial layers, appeals and current indexed policy evidence.Site locator
Define the land to check
The report your architect will ask for — here is how it compares with a €49 pre-planning report.
| PlanIntel brief | PlanningCheck | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | €39 incl. VAT | €49 |
| Nearby decisions | Up to 80 detailed (40 refusals + 40 grants) | Not stated |
| AI planning chat | 5 messages/day free | None |
| Saved-site alerts | Free | None |
€39 incl. VAT once-off PDF, no account required
Refund requests are reviewed under the published refund policy
Derived from public planning records and linked source documents
PlanIntelSite risk brief preview
Site planning risk brief
34 Swords Manor Grove, Swords, Co. Dublin, K67 P8D9.
One-off house / within 5 km where a location match is available
Preview
Executive snapshot
Local planning pattern
16% of nearby decided applications were refused. The site check found 1,650 decisions within 5 km, 7 exact-site or onsite candidate records, and 298 structured appeals.
- Matched source
- F19B/0005
- Project type
- One-off house
- Coverage
- 5 km radius
Evidence maturity
What this site brief can substantiate today
Each section reports its own coverage, per county. “Not yet covered” means the source dataset is not loaded for this local authority, so the brief draws no conclusion there and says where to check — it never reads as “no constraint found”.
Zoning and settlement
Partial coverage1 of 2 layers are loaded for Fingal County Council and were intersected with the site; settlement boundary is not loaded and no conclusion is drawn for it.
1 matchedRural-housing policy
Confirmed coverage2 current citations from the Fingal County Council development plan, each with section, page and source URL.
2 matchedFlood, heritage, ecology and archaeology
Partial coverage3 of 4 layers are loaded for Fingal County Council and were intersected with the site; flood is not loaded and no conclusion is drawn for it.
3 matchedAccess, road and wastewater prompts
Partial coverage0 prompts are backed by extracted nearby decision evidence; all prompts remain checks, not predictions.
Structured appeal history
Confirmed coverage298 structured nearby appeal records.
298 matchedCurrent policy citations
Confirmed coverageCitations are current-dated and carry policy name, section, page and source URL from the Fingal County Council development plan.
2 matched1,650Nearby applications
7Site-linked candidates
16%Nearby refused
298Structured appeals
Open preview
Top refusal reasons nearby
Visual Amenity29
Residential Amenity24
Design23
Zoning Contravention20
Other19
Open preview
Nearest planning decisions
F19B/0005
Conversion of attic to storage, including a dormer window to side at r
F23A/0488
Andrew Behan of 5 Swords Manor Grove Co. Dublin intend to apply for pe
F17B/0304
Retention and completion of single storey home office (19.5 sq.m) and
F19B/0054
Demolish an existing ground floor only shed to the rear of the existin
F24A/0656
Intend to apply for Planning Permission
F26A/0269
Permission for retention of
The brief summarizes the pattern across all 1,650 matched decisions within 5 km and includes up to 80 detailed comparables (40 nearest refusals and 40 nearest grants), with extracted reasons, quotes, and available source links. €39 incl. VAT.
Source match
Matched from public planning record F19B/0005The site brief adds up to 80 nearest detailed grants and refusals, extracted source evidence, document links, and a shareable risk summary.
Included in site brief
Exact site history and boundary checks
Site brief
Included in site brief
Policy and mapped constraints
Site brief
Included in site brief
Appeals and comparable decisions
Site brief
Included in site brief
Deterministic risk prompts
Site brief