South Dublin County Council · SD26A0127W
Latest linked evidence
SD26A0127W · Permission granted
Open official sourceThis page connects records for one planning case. Separate permissions, amendments and phases may belong to a wider development. A notified commencement date does not confirm that building work started.
Reviewed build intelligence
Government document review
Final grant recorded on 2 September 2026. Energy and area schedules remain submitted design evidence; no commencement or installation is established.
3 official documents inspected · Checked 2026-09-06 · Official file index
Final grant recorded; submitted systems remain design proposals · South Dublin SD26A/0127W; the existing Red Cow depot and its extensions
What the evidence says
The final grant dated 2 September 2026 follows the 23 July decision. It permits new lower-ground maintenance lanes 7 and 8, extensions to existing lanes 3 and 4, a first-floor Central Control Room with stairs and lift, solar panels on new and existing roofs, and an ESB substation. It does not establish commencement or completed installation.
Why it may matter — interpretation
Design teams can distinguish the now-granted depot work from an application still awaiting a decision.
What is not established
Commencement, construction progress, operational acceptance and any later amendments are unverified.
Red Cow Luas depot: final grant and conditions · p.1
02-Sep-2026 · Issued 2026-09-02 · Final grant 2 September; decision 23 July 2026; register SD26A/0127W · Checked 2026-09-06
02-Sep-2026
Final grant recorded; submitted systems remain design proposals · Area schedule received 29 May 2026; existing and added building components remain distinct
What the evidence says
The submitted area schedule states 5,511 m² existing and 6,878 m² proposed total building area. It separately lists 1,021 m² for lanes 7 and 8, 99 m² for extensions to lanes 3 and 4, 203 m² for the control room and 44 m² for the ESB substation. These are application figures, not measured completed floor areas.
Why it may matter — interpretation
Building and M&E teams can size their initial review around the separate maintenance, control-room and substation spaces.
What is not established
Final measured areas, fit-out quantities and detailed equipment schedules are unverified.
Red Cow Luas depot: submitted building-area schedule · p.1
6,878 sqm Proposed Area · Issued Not stated · Undated schedule; council receipt stamp 29 May 2026 · Checked 2026-09-06
6,878 sqm Proposed Area
Final grant recorded; submitted systems remain design proposals · Energy Report cover dated 20 May 2026, received 29 May; thermal options in section 3.3
What the evidence says
The energy report proposes replacing outdated mechanical and electrical equipment with lower-energy systems. Its thermal strategy explores air-source heat pumps, geothermal heat pumps or other electric heating to replace or supplement gas heating where feasible, alongside plant optimisation and possible ventilation/process heat recovery. It does not select one of these alternatives.
Why it may matter — interpretation
M&E engineers can compare electrification and heat-recovery options against depot loads before treating any plant type as specified.
What is not established
Selected heating technology, output, manufacturer, refrigerant, plant locations and feasibility results are unverified.
Red Cow Luas depot: Energy Report · p.5
where feasible · Issued 2026-05-20 · Cover dated 20 May 2026; internal version 01 table instead says 10 April 2025; both received 29 May 2026. No revision-date reconciliation is inferred. · Checked 2026-09-06
where feasible
Final grant recorded; submitted systems remain design proposals · Energy strategy for the depot operational areas
What the evidence says
The submitted energy strategy calls for LED lighting with motion and daylight sensors in operational areas. No luminaire count, photometric design, emergency-lighting schedule or selected product is provided in the reviewed energy pages.
Why it may matter — interpretation
Lighting designers and controls suppliers can identify the stated control approach and the detailed schedules still needed.
What is not established
Luminaire quantities, layouts, lux targets, emergency-lighting design and selected products are unverified.
Red Cow Luas depot: Energy Report · p.5
motion and daylight sensors · Issued 2026-05-20 · Cover dated 20 May 2026; internal version 01 table instead says 10 April 2025; both received 29 May 2026. No revision-date reconciliation is inferred. · Checked 2026-09-06
motion and daylight sensors
Final grant recorded; submitted systems remain design proposals · Energy monitoring and control within the existing and extended depot
What the evidence says
The report proposes an intelligent building management system to monitor and control energy use in real time across different operational zones. This is a functional intention, not a controller, protocol or points specification.
Why it may matter — interpretation
BMS integrators can use the zoned-control intention to identify the metering and equipment interfaces that require definition.
What is not established
System architecture, communications protocol, metering points, controls supplier and installed interfaces are unverified.
Red Cow Luas depot: Energy Report · p.5
intelligent building management systems · Issued 2026-05-20 · Cover dated 20 May 2026; internal version 01 table instead says 10 April 2025; both received 29 May 2026. No revision-date reconciliation is inferred. · Checked 2026-09-06
intelligent building management systems
Final grant recorded; submitted systems remain design proposals · Condition 4 and the submitted roof-PV strategy; safeguarding-zone review remains a separate requirement
What the evidence says
The energy report proposes PV on the existing depot and extension roofs, with detailed design to follow and capacity matched to daytime loads. Final-grant condition 4 requires a glint-and-glare assessment and agreement involving the Department of Defence and Tallaght University Hospital before commencement unless otherwise agreed. It expressly allows mitigation or minor panel-array changes; no final panel count or generating capacity is established here.
Why it may matter — interpretation
Solar designers can check glare constraints before fixing roof layouts, panel quantities or electrical sizing.
What is not established
Agreed glare study, final layout, panel model, capacity, inverter schedule and installation are unverified.
Red Cow Luas depot: final grant and conditions · p.2
minor modifications to the PV panel array · Issued 2026-09-02 · Final grant 2 September; decision 23 July 2026; register SD26A/0127W · Checked 2026-09-06
minor modifications to the PV panel array
Red Cow Luas depot: Energy Report · p.5
detailed design specifications to follow · Issued 2026-05-20 · Cover dated 20 May 2026; internal version 01 table instead says 10 April 2025; both received 29 May 2026. No revision-date reconciliation is inferred. · Checked 2026-09-06
detailed design specifications to follow
Final grant recorded; submitted systems remain design proposals · Staff parking and van/truck bays, distinct from the tram-maintenance lanes
What the evidence says
The energy report proposes EV charging for staff and operator commercial vehicles in extended staff parking and redeveloped van/truck bays. It also proposes passive ducting for additional chargers as demand increases. The reviewed page provides no charger count or power rating.
Why it may matter — interpretation
Electrical designers can separate staff and fleet charging requirements and allow for future cable routes.
What is not established
Charger number, duty cycle, load-management design, power rating and network capacity are unverified.
Red Cow Luas depot: Energy Report · p.6
passive ducting · Issued 2026-05-20 · Cover dated 20 May 2026; internal version 01 table instead says 10 April 2025; both received 29 May 2026. No revision-date reconciliation is inferred. · Checked 2026-09-06
passive ducting
Final grant recorded; submitted systems remain design proposals · Final-grant condition 5; surface-water design and separate connection requirements
What the evidence says
Condition 5 requires surface-water attenuation through above-ground SuDS, permeable surfacing for parking and hardstanding, and complete separation of foul and surface-water drainage. It also requires drainage drawings for the public record and a water or wastewater connection agreement before commencement. The condition does not select an attenuation product or establish installed capacity.
Why it may matter — interpretation
Drainage designers and suppliers can check proposed storage and paving solutions against the specific above-ground requirement.
What is not established
Final hydraulic calculations, storage volumes, product choice, agreed connection details and completed works are unverified.
Red Cow Luas depot: final grant and conditions · p.2
above-ground SuDS systems · Issued 2026-09-02 · Final grant 2 September; decision 23 July 2026; register SD26A/0127W · Checked 2026-09-06
above-ground SuDS systems
Selected pages of 3 government-published PDFs were visually inspected. 33 DMS PDF rows retained; seven PDFs retrieved. Selected pages of three PDFs support these findings. The complete environmental assessment and all architectural drawings were not visually reviewed. Proposals do not establish procurement or installed work.
Source history
SD26A0127W
SD26A0127W
Permission granted
Evidence
Only exact linked records appear here. A missing appeal, commencement or completion entry means that evidence has not been established on this page. It does not prove that the event never happened.
Planning scale and individual notice or phase quantities remain separate. Notice quantities are not added into a development total or completion percentage.