Latest refusal decisions.

51Refusals
37Case links
20Lead matches
15Counties

What this means

Applications were most often refused because the proposal did not fit its site or surroundings, conflicted with zoning or rural-housing policy, created access or road-safety problems, harmed the amenity of neighbouring homes or involved unauthorised works or retention.

20 of 51 records carry official reason text

30 published statements, 1.5 per analysed application

7 refused on more than one ground, up to 3

Most common pairs

  1. 7 Design + Zoning/policy
  2. 7 Residential amenity + Zoning/policy
  3. 6 Design + Residential amenity

All ten refusal themes

Applications · statements
  1. 01 Design, scale, character or visual impact 12
  2. 02 Zoning, land use, settlement policy or rural housing need 10
  3. 03 Traffic, access, parking or road safety 9
  4. 04 Residential amenity, privacy, light or noise 9
  5. 05 Unauthorised development, retention or procedural history 6
  6. 06 Ecology, habitats or Natura impacts 3
  7. 07 Missing or insufficient evidence, surveys or technical detail 3
  8. 08 Built heritage or archaeology 2
  9. 09 Wastewater, effluent, groundwater or public health 1
  10. 10 Surface-water drainage or flood risk 0
Themes overlap, so an application can appear under more than one theme.
How this is counted

Reporting window 27 Jul 2026–2 Aug 2026. Official refusal reasons were analysed for 20 of 51 records in this weekly snapshot. Every figure is calculated offline from official refusal reason text retained in this snapshot.

A reason can support more than one theme. Counts show affected applications and published reason statements.

Standard statutory conclusions are tracked separately and are not treated as refusal causes on their own.

  • Proper planning and sustainable development17
  • Development plan cited16
  • Undesirable precedent cited14

2 published reason statements did not fit the ten substantive themes.

Refusals published 27 Jul 2026–2 Aug 2026

2 of 2 matching records shown

Refused

THE CORNER OF DOWNSHIRE ROAD & DOWNSHIRE DRIVE, EDENDERRY CO. OFFALY, Offaly

THE CORNER OF DOWNSHIRE ROAD & DOWNSHIRE DRIVE, EDENDERRY CO. OFFALY

Offaly County Council · EX26007

What was proposed

20/314 FOR CHANGE OF USE OF EXISTING 14 NO. DISUSED SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLETED COMMERCIAL UNITS TO USE AS 3 NO.2 BEDROOM RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND 11 NO.1 BEDROOM RESIDENTIAL UNITS, WITH EXTERNAL PRIVATE OPEN SPACE ENCLOSURES, AND ALL ASSOCIATED SITE WORKS

Refusal evidence

Refusal reason evidence not yet indexed.

Open official case No PlanningBrief match
Refused

FRANKFORT, DUNKERRIN, CO. OFFALY, Offaly

FRANKFORT, DUNKERRIN, CO. OFFALY

Offaly County Council · 2560298

What was proposed

A) demolition of existing rear extension B) raising the roof of the existing two storey house C) the construction of a new part single storey part two storey extension to the rear. Permission is also sought for a new treatment system and percolation area and a new site entrance together with all associated site works. The proposed development is within the curtilage of a protected structure, RPS Grid Ref: 64-004

Refusal evidence

Refusal reason evidence not yet indexed.

Open official case No PlanningBrief match