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

1 of 1 matching records shown

Refused

Site of c. 0.3 ha at Riverside Works, Bray, Co. Wicklow, Wicklow

Site of c. 0.3 ha at Riverside Works, Bray, Co. Wicklow

Wicklow County Council · 2560942

What was proposed

demolition of an existing dilapidated warehouse totalling c.291sqm and ancillary walls throughout the site, the reinstatement of the Old Chimney together with alterations to the boundaries of the site, and the construction of a mixed use residential development ranging from 2 storey over ground floor to 6 storey over ground floor in height as follows: Provision of 54 no. residential units, in the form of 2 no. new apartment and duplex buildings (Blocks 1 & 2), as follows: Block 1 (6 storey over ground floor) comprising 53 no. apartment and duplex units (1 no. studio unit, 4 no. 1-bed units, 29 no. 2-bed units & 19 no. 3 bed units, a tenant gym, a coffee shop and 2 no. office units). Block 2 (2 storey over ground floor) comprising 1 no. 3 bed unit and 1 no. bin store (c. 60 sqm) at ground level. Open space (c. 1116 sq. m) is proposed in the form of public open space (c. 690 sq. m) at podium level (Block 1), and residential communal open space (c. 426 sq. m) provided as a rooftop garden on top floor level of Block 1. Each residential unit is afforded with associated private open space in the form of balconies. The development will be served by 2 no. access/egress points for vehicular and pedestrian access to the east of the site via The L19545 Road (1 no. existing site access point & 1 no. new vehicular and pedestrian access point). An access point to the west of the site for emergency vehicles and pedestrians only is provided. Car park proposed on the ground floor level below podium. A total of 15 no. car parking spaces are proposed, which includes 12 no. spaces for residential units and 3 no. for the commercial units. A total of 178 no. bicycle spaces are proposed within Block 1, which includes 2 no. spaces for the commercial units. 1 no. ESB substation, 1 no. switch room, 1 no. cold water storage room & 1 no. sprinkler plant area are provided at ground floor level within Block 1. Bin Storage areas for the Block 1 & 2 are proposed at ground level within Block 2. All associated site and infrastructural works above and below ground to include provision for water services; foul and surface water drainage and connections; internal roads, attenuation proposal; permeable paving; all landscaping works including green infrastructure zones; green roofs; and general plant areas; landscaped boundary treatment; footpaths; public lighting; and electrical services

Refusal reason

Having regard to: a) The constrained nature of the site and its proximity to existing residential properties; b) The density, scale, height and massing of the proposed mixed-use development relative to the size and context of the site resulting in a development which would be visually inconsistent with the established pattern of development in the area; c) The proximity, height and bulk of the proposed development in relation to adjacent properties, which would have an overbearing impact on these properties; d) The loss of natural sunlight to the existing properties and lack of sufficient direct sunlight to the proposed development; e) The provisions of the Bray Municipal District Local Area Plan 2018, in particular Objective BT3, which provides that ‘Generally, a height of 4 storeys (including ground floor) will be considered appropriate in the Bray ‘town centre’ zone, irrespective of adjoining property heights. However, the Council may permit heights above this, where the specific context of the site and the design of the building allow it (for example where additional storeys are set back from street frontage).’ It is considered that the proposed development would be incongruous, disproportionate, and out of character with its surrounding context in terms of its density, height, scale and massing, would have an overbearing impact on adjoining properties and would have a negative dominant impact in this area. The proposed development would be contrary to the provisions of the Wicklow County Development Plan 2022 – 2028 and the Bray Municipal District Local Area Plan 2018 (Objective BT3), would seriously injure the visual and residential amenities of property in the vicinity and would, therefore, be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

Official decision evidence