Refusal decisions · 7–13 Sep 2026

103Refusals
86Substantive reasons
0Verification only
12Document not published
0Portal unavailable
5Manual review

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, lacked enough technical evidence to demonstrate its impacts were acceptable or harmed the amenity of neighbouring homes.

86 of 103 records carry official reason text

178 published statements, 2.1 per analysed application

47 refused on more than one ground, up to 6

Most common pairs

  1. 34 Design + Transport/access
  2. 33 Design + Zoning/policy
  3. 28 Design + Residential amenity

All ten refusal themes

Applications · statements
  1. 01 Design, scale, character or visual impact 63
  2. 02 Zoning, land use, settlement policy or rural housing need 46
  3. 03 Traffic, access, parking or road safety 42
  4. 04 Missing or insufficient evidence, surveys or technical detail 36
  5. 05 Residential amenity, privacy, light or noise 31
  6. 06 Unauthorised development, retention or procedural history 24
  7. 07 Wastewater, effluent, groundwater or public health 16
  8. 08 Built heritage or archaeology 13
  9. 09 Surface-water drainage or flood risk 13
  10. 10 Ecology, habitats or Natura impacts 12

Refusal decisions · 7–13 Sep 2026

1 of 1 cards shown · 86 case links · 3 linked projects

Refused

Main Street, Drumlish, Co. Longford, Longford

Main Street, Drumlish, Co. Longford

Longford County Council · 2660140

What was proposed

(a) the material change of use of an existing post office building to 1 no. 1 bed apartment unit (b) permission for an extension to the rear of an existing dwelling house to include internal and external alterations to same and convert into 1 no. 1 bed and 1 no. 2 bed apartment units, and (c) external private and public amenity areas, hard and soft landscaping, fencing, carparking, bicycle parking, bin storage, ancillary storage, lighting, provision of all associated surface water and foul drainage services and connections and all ancillary site works and services

Refusal reasons
  1. The Planning Authority is not satisfied, on the basis of the information submitted, that safe vehicular access, manoeuvrability and circulation can be achieved within the site or along the shared access laneway serving the development. The proposed development would materially increase both vehicular and pedestrian movements along this constrained route, and the Planning Authority cannot be satisfied that the proposed development would not endanger public safety by reason of traffic hazard or obstruction of road users.
  2. The applicant has failed to demonstrate compliance with the ‘Sustainable Residential Development and Compact Settlements Guidelines for Planning Authorities’ and The Longford County Development Plan 2021-2027. The planning application lacks sufficient information to demonstrate that the proposed development would not have a serious impact on the residential amenity of any future residents by reason of its siting and design. The proposed development would therefore set an undesirable precedent within the area and is considered to be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet