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, lacked enough technical evidence to demonstrate its impacts were acceptable or harmed the amenity of neighbouring homes.
43 of 43 records carry official reason text
79 published statements, 1.8 per analysed application
21 refused on more than one ground, up to 6
Most common pairs
16 Design + Zoning/policy
14 Design + Transport/access
11 Design + Residential amenity
All ten refusal themes
Applications · statements
01Design, scale, character or visual impact28
02Zoning, land use, settlement policy or rural housing need19
03Traffic, access, parking or road safety19
04Missing or insufficient evidence, surveys or technical detail17
05Residential amenity, privacy, light or noise16
06Wastewater, effluent, groundwater or public health15
07Unauthorised development, retention or procedural history15
08Surface-water drainage or flood risk6
09Ecology, habitats or Natura impacts6
10Built heritage or archaeology4
Refusal decisions · 3–9 Aug 2026
2 of 2 cards shown · 42 case links · 43 linked projects
revisions to permitted development as per WCC grant Ref 25/60554 at Broomhall, Rathnew, Co. Wicklow: • omission of Creche building and associated car parking, drop off spaces & Refuse & Bicycle stores• revised residential numbers from 87 no. units to 83 no. units (4 No. 1-bed, 15 No. 2-bed, 59 No. 3-bed, 5 No. 4-bed) • revision from 175 No. car parking spaces to 174 No. car parking spaces • revisions to associated Refuse & Bicycle stores; hard and soft landscaping; communal open space; boundary treatments; and all associated site and development works above and below ground
Refusal reason
Having regard to the documentation submitted with the planning application and the lack of information with respect to the existing distribution and capacity of childcare facilities locally, it is considered that the proposed development for the omission of Creche building and associated works would result in the unacceptable loss of social infrastructure for a residential area and would be contrary to objectives CPO 7.28 and CPO 7.29 of the Wicklow County Development Plan 2022-2028 and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. ! Footnote:
temporary mobile home for use as temporary residential accommodation during the renovation & construction works associated with the existing dwelling
Refusal reasons
The mobile home, by reason of its design and materials of construction would be prejudicial to public health and would be seriously injurious to the amenities of the area. The development would be contrary to the established housing standards of the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government that deems mobile homes as being unfit for permanent human occupation. Such a development would establish an undesirable precedent for similar sub-standard forms of residential development in the area, would be contrary to visual amenities of the area, to the objectives of the County Development Plan and to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
No evidence has been submitted to show that the existing septic tank system is compliant with either the EPA Code of Practice 2000 or 2009. As such, increasing the load on this septic presents a risk of pollution and degradation of the site and surrounding area which would conflict with CPO 13.2 Wicklow CDP 2022-2028 and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. ! Footnote: