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

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

Refused

Levally, Ballinrobe, Co. Mayo, Mayo

Levally, Ballinrobe, Co. Mayo

Mayo County Council · 2660597

What was proposed

Permission to construct silage slabs with concrete apron & effluent tank and all assorted site works

Refusal reasons
  1. The proposed development, by reason of its location, design and nature, does not comply with the requirements of the European Union (Good Agricultural Practice for the Protection of Waters) Regulations 2022 i.e., the GAP regulations and the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, minimum specification for concrete silage bases (S128). The proposed development would therefore be prejudicial to public health due to the potential for groundwater pollution arising from a failure in the integrity of the proposed development.
  2. On the basis of the information provided with the application and in the absence of a Natura Impact Statement, the Planning Authority cannot be satisfied that the proposed development, individually or in combination with other plans or projects would not be likely to have a significant effect on Lough Carra/Mask Complex Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and Proposed Natural Heritage Area (pNHA) (Site code 001774) and the Lough Carra Special Area of Conservation (SAC) (site code 004051). Therefore, the development is likely to have significant negative adverse impact on the qualifying criteria of the Natura 2000 sites, would contravene materially an objective (NEO 11 – “To ensure that the impact of development within or adjacent to national designated sites, Natural Heritage Areas, Ramsar Sites and Nature Reserves likely to result in significant adverse effects on the designated site is assessed by requiring the submission of an Ecological Impact Assessment report (EcIA), Environmental Report (ER), an Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR), if deemed necessary, and/ or a Natura Impact Assessment (NIS)…”) and policy (NEP 1 – “To support the protection, conservation and enhancement of the natural heritage and biodiversity of County Mayo, including the protection of the integrity of European sites, that form part of the Natura 2000 network, the protection of Natural Planning and Development Section Áras and Chontae, Castlebar, Co. Mayo www.mayo.ie | 0949064000 Heritage Areas, proposed Natural Heritage Areas…”), contained in the current Mayo County Development Plan 2022-2028, and therefore would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  3. The proposed development is located within a designated flood risk area i.e. within the NIFM 1% and 0.1% AEPs. Notwithstanding any mitigation or compensatory measures, the proposed development, if permitted, would incur a loss of flood plain storage and as a result would increase flood levels elsewhere in the vicinity. It is therefore considered that the proposed development is in an area which is at risk of flooding and if permitted, would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

North of junction of Pontoon and Turlough Roads, Castlebar, Co. Mayo, (former Coal Bunker site), Mayo

North of junction of Pontoon and Turlough Roads, Castlebar, Co. Mayo, (former Coal Bunker site)

Mayo County Council · 2660593

What was proposed

Permission for development of a housing scheme to North of junction of Pontoon and Turlough Roads, Castlebar, Co. Mayo (former Coal Bunker site), comprising: 1. Construction of 12 no. apartments (4 no. two bed and 8 no. one bed) in a three storey building; 2. Vehicular, pedestrian and cycle access via Turlough Road; and, 3. Associated development and works including hard and soft landscaping, car and cycle parking, bin stores, communal and private amenity spaces and all other ancillary works above and below ground including works and connections to water supply, wastewater and surface water infrastructure and utilities.

Refusal reason

In accordance with the land use zoning map for Castlebar town the site the subject of this application is zoned ‘Enterprise and Employment’. Therefore, the proposed residential development would materially contravene land use zoning objective 1 of the Castlebar Town and Environs Local Area Plan 2023-2029. Land use zoning objective 1 is ‘To Ensure that development progresses in accordance with the land use zoning objectives as set out in Table 11.1 and the Land Use Matrix contained in Table 11.2.” of the Plan. Therefore, the proposed development would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

KNAPPAGH BEG, WESTPORT, Mayo

KNAPPAGH BEG, WESTPORT

Mayo County Council · 2111590

What was proposed

EXTENSION OF DURATION: CONSTRUCT A NEW DWELLING HOUSE AND GARAGE, TOGETHER WITH PROPRIETARY TREATMENT UNIT AND ALL ASSOCIATED SITE WORKS AND SERVICES

Refusal reasons

Reasons under review. View the official case.

Open official case Not linked yet