Refusal decisions · 14–20 Sep 2026

80Refusals
60Official evidence
60Substantive reasons
0Verification only
20Pending
20 of 80 refusal decisions are awaiting official decision evidence and not included below.

The refusal total is final. 60 evidence-complete decision cards are available below.

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, lacked enough technical evidence to demonstrate its impacts were acceptable, harmed the amenity of neighbouring homes or created access or road-safety problems.

60 of 80 records carry official reason text

132 published statements, 2.2 per analysed application

31 refused on more than one ground, up to 7

Most common pairs

  1. 23 Design + Missing evidence
  2. 23 Design + Zoning/policy
  3. 19 Design + Residential amenity

All ten refusal themes

Applications · statements
  1. 01 Design, scale, character or visual impact 42
  2. 02 Zoning, land use, settlement policy or rural housing need 31
  3. 03 Missing or insufficient evidence, surveys or technical detail 26
  4. 04 Residential amenity, privacy, light or noise 23
  5. 05 Traffic, access, parking or road safety 21
  6. 06 Unauthorised development, retention or procedural history 17
  7. 07 Ecology, habitats or Natura impacts 15
  8. 08 Wastewater, effluent, groundwater or public health 15
  9. 09 Surface-water drainage or flood risk 13
  10. 10 Built heritage or archaeology 9

Refusal decisions · 14–20 Sep 2026

2 of 2 cards shown · 60 case links · 3 linked projects

Refused

Mullaghattin, Riverstown, Dundalk, Louth

Mullaghattin, Riverstown, Dundalk

Louth County Council · 2660528

What was proposed

Permission for the refurbishment, alterations and extension to existing derelict dwelling house, new effluent treatment system and all associated site development works

Refusal reason

Policy Objectives BHC 42, BHC 44, HOU 50 and HOU 51 of the Louth County O Development Plan 2021-2027 (as varied) promote, where feasible, the protection, retention, sympathetic maintenance and appropriate refurbishment and use of the es vernacular built heritage, in both urban and rural areas, which contribute to the streetscape and landscape character and encourage the re-use and adaption of os existing historic buildings in a manner compatible with their character. rp Pu Section 13.9.12 Development Management Guidelines requires that all external structural walls and internal walls of such vernacular buildings are substantially g intact and that the building is capable of being renovated/refurbished without in demolition. The subject structure comprises the remnants of a stone structure, ew whereby there is 1 no. external (structural) gable wall substantially intact, with only remnants of the further external walls with no roof or window / door openings and Vi as such, given its ruinous condition, the structure does not constitute a ‘vernacular t- building’ eligible for restoration in principle under the above policies. en tm The proposed development which would provide a new one-off dwelling house in ar this rural area where rural qualifying criteria applies, would not (on the basis of ep information provided) meet the requirements of the policy objectives as set out above pertaining to vernacular buildings, nor has it been demonstrated that it would D comply with Policy Objective HOU 43 of the Louth County Development Plan 2021 ng 2027 (as varied) which seeks to manage the development of rural housing in the open countryside by requiring applicants to demonstrate compliance with the Local ni Needs Qualifying Criteria relative to the Rural Policy Zone. The proposed an development would therefore contravene the proper planning and sustainable Pl development of the rural area and would set an undesirable precedent for other similar developments in the area., C C h ut Lo

Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Dillonstown, Dunleer, County Louth, Louth

Dillonstown, Dunleer, County Louth

Louth County Council · 2660514

What was proposed

Outline permission sought for a dwelling house, new waste water treatment system and percolation area, on site soakaway, new vehicular entrance on to public road and all associated site works

Refusal reasons
  1. The proposed development, by reason of its location on an undeveloped O greenfield site along castle lane road, separate from the existing residential cluster, es would extend the established pattern of one-off housing development into the rural os landscape and result in additional visual intrusion and erosion of the rural character of the area. Furthermore, the proposed dwelling would contribute to the continuation and rp Pu extension of a ribbon pattern of development along castle lane road. The proposed development would, therefore, be contrary to the provisions of Sections 13.9.4 and g 13.9.5 of the Louth County Development Plan 2021-2027 (as varied), which seek to in ew ensure that rural dwellings integrate appropriately into the landscape and to avoid the creation or extension of ribbon development in rural areas. The proposal would Vi therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. t
  2. The proposed development would endanger public safety by reason of traffic en hazard as the minimum sightlines of 75m required at the proposed vehicular entrance tm point onto the L-6329, measured from a point 3m back from the road edge over a ar height of 0.6 metres to 1.05 metres above road level, are not achievable to the east ep due to the horizontal alignment of the road. D ng ni an Pl, C C h ut Lo
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet