Latest refusal decisions.

Partial count · 131 records as of this provisional edition.

131Refusals
131Case links
91Lead matches
24Counties

What this means

Applications were most often refused because the proposal did not fit its site or surroundings, created access or road-safety problems, lacked enough technical evidence to demonstrate its impacts were acceptable, conflicted with zoning or rural-housing policy or harmed the amenity of neighbouring homes.

91 of 131 records carry official reason text

198 published statements, 2.2 per analysed application

52 refused on more than one ground, up to 6

Most common pairs

  1. 31 Design + Transport/access
  2. 27 Design + Residential amenity
  3. 25 Design + Zoning/policy

All ten refusal themes

Applications · statements
  1. 01 Design, scale, character or visual impact 56
  2. 02 Traffic, access, parking or road safety 41
  3. 03 Missing or insufficient evidence, surveys or technical detail 38
  4. 04 Zoning, land use, settlement policy or rural housing need 38
  5. 05 Residential amenity, privacy, light or noise 32
  6. 06 Unauthorised development, retention or procedural history 25
  7. 07 Wastewater, effluent, groundwater or public health 24
  8. 08 Surface-water drainage or flood risk 17
  9. 09 Ecology, habitats or Natura impacts 15
  10. 10 Built heritage or archaeology 12

Refusals published 10–16 Aug 2026

5 of 5 matching records shown

Refused

Newgrove, Monaghan, Co. Monaghan, Monaghan

Newgrove, Monaghan, Co. Monaghan

Monaghan County Council · 2560309

What was proposed

planning permission for the infilling of lands with imported inactive or inert waste (app. 6220m³) to a maximum depth of 2.4m over 0.80Ha, accessed off existing entrance, finished with topsoil and grassed over on completion, together with all ancillary & associated site works

Refusal reasons
  1. Objective SSO 22 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031 seeks “To apply the precautionary principle in relation to development on lands identified as being at risk of flooding and to restrict development to uses that are compatible to the level of flood risk unless supported by a site-specific flood risk assessment and development management justification test”. Policy FRP 1 states “Proposals for developments shall comply with Section 15.22.8 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031”. Section 15.22.8 states “Monaghan County Council will restrict development in areas susceptible to flooding except where: a) The proposed development can be justified on strategic grounds. b) The proposed development has addressed the flooding concerns which exist. c) The flood risk can be managed to an acceptable degree and without increasing flood risk beyond the site itself. d) Appropriate and detailed mitigation measures can be implemented to remove/minimise flood effects. The proposal has failed to adequately demonstrate how the potential for flooding from prolonged rainfall events can be managed to an acceptable degree and without increasing flood risk beyond the site itself, and as a result there is a risk that increased water levels would ultimately occur on third party lands as a direct consequence of the infilling of the site area. Consequently, to permit the development as proposed would be contrary to Objective SSO 22 and Policy FRP 1 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031 and thus would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  2. Policy ILP 1 seeks to ensure that ‘Development proposals for infilling of lands shall comply with Section 15.32 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025 – 2031, and that development proposals for the infilling of lands with inert construction and demolition waste will only be acceptable where it is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority that there will be no adverse impact upon surface and ground waters, or upon areas which are at risk of flooding. Proposals for the prevention and mitigation of any perceived impacts shall satisfy the targets of any Waterbody and Catchment Management Plans developed by Group Water Schemes. Proposals for infilling of lands at risk of flooding will be required to be accompanied by a site-specific Flood Risk Assessment in accordance with Section 15.22.8 of Chapter 15 of this Development Plan. The proposal has failed to adequately demonstrate how the proposed fill materials will be accepted, stored or utilised, or to determine the total volume of both types of material to be accepted, and therefore, the proposal has not demonstrated that the there will be no adverse impact upon surface and ground waters, or upon areas that are at risk of flooding. Consequently, to permit the development as proposed would be contrary to Policy ILP 1 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031 and thus would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
Official decision evidence
Refused

Treacys Hotel, Losset Kingscourt Road, Carrickmacross Co. Monaghan., Monaghan

Treacys Hotel, Losset Kingscourt Road, Carrickmacross Co. Monaghan.

Monaghan County Council · 2560410

What was proposed

retention of internal alterations to previous approved plans under 20/155 including the following: 1. Conversion of attic of 528.41sq.m. floor area for the provision of 9 no. bedrooms, associated stairs and lift core. 2. Alterations to previously approved layout of ground floor in relation to 11 no. bedrooms, storage and staircase locations. 3. Alterations to previously approved layout on first floor in relation to bedroom, storage and staircase locations. 4. Repurposing of existing ground floor meeting room (62.00sq.m.) to additional kitchen and laundry facilities. 5. All associated site development work Significant further information received relates to submitted, Bus time table, site layout plan, Certificate of compliance and Environmental Protection Checklist

Refusal reasons
  1. The established and permitted use of the premises is as a hotel. Information received by the Planning Authority on the 16/06/2026 confirms that the premises is currently being used to accommodate persons seeking international protection and is not operating as a hotel. The planning status of this accommodation use has not been formally established. Whilst a Section 5 Declaration request has been submitted in respect of the use, that process remains ongoing and no determination has been made. Accordingly, to permit the retention of the development as proposed, to serve the accommodation use currently occurring on-site, would be contrary to the established and permitted hotel use granted under previous planning permissions. To permit the development as proposed would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  2. Having regard to the current use of the premises as accommodation for protected persons, the scale of accommodation provided, the rural location of the site, its separation from Carrickmacross and other settlement centres, the limited accessibility of services and facilities, and the reliance upon organised transport arrangements, the Planning Authority is of the opinion that the retention of the additional bedroom accommodation and associated alterations represents an unsustainable form of development in this rural location. The proposed development has not been demonstrated to comply with Policy WSP 1 and Section 15.10.8 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031, which require such accommodation to be located within a serviced and sustainable setting. The Planning Authority further notes that the Core Strategy seeks to promote sustainable and balanced development through the settlement hierarchy, with population and development growth directed towards settlements with appropriate infrastructure, services and facilities. The applicant has failed to satisfactorily demonstrate that the proposed development is consistent with this approach. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to Policy WSP 1 and Section 15.10.8, the settlement hierarchy, Core Strategy and Housing Strategy of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031 and contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  3. The applicant has failed to satisfactorily demonstrate that the existing and proposed level of occupation can be accommodated within the development to an appropriate standard having regard to resident amenity, communal facilities, accommodation standards, service provision and the nature and intensity of the use proposed on-site. The applicant has not demonstrated compliance with Policy WSP 1 and Section 15.10.8 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031. The Planning Authority is not satisfied that sufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that the retained development would provide an appropriate standard of accommodation for occupants having regard to the scale and intensity of the use. The Planning Authority is therefore of the opinion that the retained development would provide a substandard form of accommodation for occupants, would be contrary to Policy WSP 1 and Section 15.10.8 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031, and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
Official decision evidence
Refused

Corleadargan, Castleblayney, Co. Monaghan, Monaghan

Corleadargan, Castleblayney, Co. Monaghan

Monaghan County Council · 2660228

What was proposed

permission to construct a new dormer style dwelling house, single storey domestic garage, new entrance onto public road, new sewerage wastewater treatment system and percolation area, together with all associated site development works

Refusal reasons
  1. Section 15.9.1 (Rural Character) and Policy RCP 1 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031 seek to ensure that new rural housing does not further erode the rural character of an area, having regard to the existing pattern of development and the cumulative impact of new development. The proposed development would be located on a site comprising residual lands situated beside existing and permitted residential development and which has been created as an individual development plot. Having regard to the concentration of existing and permitted dwellings in the area, the incremental subdivision of roadside lands for residential development, and the cumulative impact of such development on the character of the rural area, it is considered that the proposal would cause a detrimental impact on, and further erode, the rural character of the area. Accordingly, the development would, if permitted, be contrary to Section 15.9.1 (Rural Character) and Policy RCP 1 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031 and be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  2. Section 15.22.5 (On-Site Wastewater Treatment Systems) and Policy WWTP 1 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031 seek to ensure that on-site wastewater treatment systems are located and constructed to the highest standards in order to protect water quality, including groundwater and surface water. The Environmental Health Officer has raised serious concerns regarding the suitability of the application site to accommodate an on-site wastewater treatment system and percolation area, having regard to the low-lying nature of the site. In addition, the Environmental Health Officer has advised that the necessary remedial works would be required over the entire site area in order to satisfactorily demonstrate site suitability. Having regard to the information submitted and the concerns raised, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the application site is suitable for the satisfactory treatment and disposal of wastewater arising from the proposed development. Accordingly, the development would, if permitted, be contrary to Section 15.22.5 and Policy WWTP 1 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031, be prejudicial to public health and environmental protection, and be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  3. Section 15.10.4 (Domestic Garages, Sheds, Ancillary Outbuildings and Car Ports) and Policy DGP 1 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031 require satisfactory justification where a domestic garage exceeds 80sqm in floor area. The proposed garage has a floor area of approximately 115sqm and no satisfactory justification has been submitted for a structure of this size. Accordingly, the development would, if permitted, be contrary to Section 15.10.4 and Policy DGP 1 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031 and be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
Official decision evidence
Refused

Cashel, Annayalla, Castleblayney, Monaghan

Cashel, Annayalla, Castleblayney

Monaghan County Council · 2560319

What was proposed

permission for the development will consist of: to construct a new bungalow style dwelling house, establish new entrance onto public road L3442, new sewerage wastewater treatment system and percolation area, together with all associated site development works

Refusal evidence

Refusal reason evidence not yet indexed.

Open official case No PlanningBrief match
Refused

Corleadargan, Castleblayney, Monaghan, Monaghan

Corleadargan, Castleblayney, Monaghan

Monaghan County Council · 2660225

What was proposed

permission to construct a new dormer style dwelling house, single storey domestic garage, new entrance onto public road, new sewerage wastewater treatment system and percolation area, together with all associated site development works

Refusal reasons
  1. Section 15.9.1 (Rural Character) and Policy RCP 1 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031 seek to ensure that new rural housing does not further erode the rural character of an area, having regard to the existing pattern of development and the cumulative impact of new development. The proposed development would be located on a site comprising residual lands situated beside existing and permitted residential development and which has been created as an individual development plot. Having regard to the concentration of existing and permitted dwellings in the area, the incremental subdivision of roadside lands for residential development, and the cumulative impact of such development on the character of the rural area, it is considered that the proposal would cause a detrimental impact on, and further erode, the rural character of the area. Accordingly, the development would, if permitted, be contrary to Section 15.9.1 (Rural Character) and Policy RCP 1 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031 and be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  2. Section 15.9.2 (Site Selection and Design Guidelines), Table 15.3 (Guidelines for Siting and Designing a Rural House in the Vernacular Style) and Policy RSDP 1 seek to ensure that sites are suitable for the scale and nature of development proposed. The scale and extent of development proposed is excessive relative to the size and configuration of the application site. Having regard to the constrained nature of the site, the proposed dwelling, garage, amenity areas, access arrangements, wastewater treatment infrastructure and associated site works would result in an unsatisfactory form of development that fails to demonstrate a satisfactory relationship between the proposed development and the site available. Accordingly, the development would, if permitted, be contrary to Section 15.9.2, Table 15.3 and Policy RSDP 1 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031 and be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  3. Section 15.22.5 (On-Site Wastewater Treatment Systems) and Policy WWTP 1 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031 seek to ensure that on-site wastewater treatment systems are located and constructed to the highest standards in order to protect water quality, including groundwater and surface water. The Environmental Health Officer has raised serious concerns regarding the suitability of the application site to accommodate an on-site wastewater treatment system and percolation area, having regard to the low-lying nature of the site. In addition, the Environmental Health Officer has advised that the necessary remedial works would be required over the entire site area in order to satisfactorily demonstrate site suitability. Having regard to the information submitted and the concerns raised, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the application site is suitable for the satisfactory treatment and disposal of wastewater arising from the proposed development. Accordingly, the development would, if permitted, be contrary to Section 15.22.5 and Policy WWTP 1 of the Monaghan County Development Plan 2025-2031, be prejudicial to public health and environmental protection, and be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
Official decision evidence