Refusal decisions · 17–23 Aug 2026

45Refusals
45Substantive reasons
0Verification only
0Document not published
0Portal unavailable
0Manual review

48 of these refusals have page-cited grounds from a checked review. Browse the decision-date inventory.

What this means

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

45 of 45 records carry official reason text

82 published statements, 1.8 per analysed application

23 refused on more than one ground, up to 4

Most common pairs

  1. 16 Design + Residential amenity
  2. 15 Design + Transport/access
  3. 15 Design + Zoning/policy

All ten refusal themes

Applications · statements
  1. 01 Design, scale, character or visual impact 33
  2. 02 Traffic, access, parking or road safety 19
  3. 03 Zoning, land use, settlement policy or rural housing need 17
  4. 04 Residential amenity, privacy, light or noise 16
  5. 05 Missing or insufficient evidence, surveys or technical detail 12
  6. 06 Unauthorised development, retention or procedural history 8
  7. 07 Built heritage or archaeology 8
  8. 08 Wastewater, effluent, groundwater or public health 7
  9. 09 Ecology, habitats or Natura impacts 5
  10. 10 Surface-water drainage or flood risk 5

Refusal decisions · 17–23 Aug 2026

2 of 2 cards shown · 42 case links · 45 linked projects

Refused

Derryherbert Liscarney, Westport, Co. Mayo, Mayo

Derryherbert Liscarney, Westport, Co. Mayo

Mayo County Council · 2660515

What was proposed

The development will consist of a change of use of existing public house and restaurant to an education and training centre including internal layout alterations, together with all ancillary site works

Refusal reasons
  1. Having regard to the location of the proposed development which would generate increased traffic from an existing vehicular access onto the N59 National route, the proposal would be contrary to the Mayo County Development Plan 2022-2028 with specific reference to Policy MTP-24 which states ‘To avoid the creation of additional direct access points from new development adjoining national roads or the generation of additional traffic from existing direct accesses to national roads to which speed limits greater than 60 km/h apply’. Accordingly, to grant the proposed development would be at variance with the Mayo County Development Plan 2022 - 2028 policy in relation to development involving access onto national roads, would endanger public safety by reason of traffic hazard and obstruction of road and be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  2. The site is located within a rural area outside of any town or village boundary, therefore the proposed development for change of use to an education and training centre for medical devices would be contrary to Objective EDO 54 of the current Mayo County Development Plan 2022-2028, which aims to facilitate rural enterprises and resource development that are M a y o P l a n n i n g A u t h o r i t y - I n s p e c t i o n P u r p o s e s O n l y ! Planning and Development Section Áras and Chontae, Castlebar, Co. Mayo www.mayo.ie | 0949064000 dependent on their locality in rural locations. The proposed development, if permitted, would set an undesirable precedent for unsuitable non rural dependent commercial development in the rural area, would constitute haphazard development in a rural area which would militate against the preservation of the rural environment and interfere with the character of the landscape at this location which it is necessary to preserve. The proposed development is, therefore, contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. END OF SCHEDULE M a y o P l a n n i n g A u t h o r i t y - I n s p e c t i o n P u r p o s e s O n l y !
Official decision evidence
Refused

Mullenmore North, Crossmolina, Ballina County Mayo, Mayo

Mullenmore North, Crossmolina, Ballina County Mayo

Mayo County Council · 2660502

What was proposed

Consist of the Construction of 1 No. Dwelling House & Wastewater Treatment System with Soil Polishing Filter. Including all other ancillary site work and services.

Refusal reason

The development as proposed, which involves the creation of access road in excess of 100m in length to serve a single dwelling house located to the rear of existing dwelling houses along this stretch of rural road, would, create an undesirable precedent, leading to further proposals for in depth- suburban type development in an un-serviced rural area, and would, both by itself and the precedent it would set, mitigate against the preservation of the rural landscape which it is necessary to preserve. The proposed development is therefore contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. END OF SCHEDULE M a y o P l a n n i n g A u t h o r i t y - I n s p e c t i o n P u r p o s e s O n l y !

Official decision evidence