Refusal decisions · 12–18 Oct 2026

59Refusals
47Official evidence
47Substantive reasons
0Verification only
12Pending
12 of 59 refusal decisions are awaiting official decision evidence and not included below.

The refusal total is final. 47 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.

47 of 59 records carry official reason text

109 published statements, 2.3 per analysed application

27 refused on more than one ground, up to 7

Most common pairs

  1. 22 Design + Zoning/policy
  2. 18 Design + Residential amenity
  3. 16 Design + Missing evidence

All ten refusal themes

Applications · statements
  1. 01 Design, scale, character or visual impact 35
  2. 02 Zoning, land use, settlement policy or rural housing need 28
  3. 03 Missing or insufficient evidence, surveys or technical detail 20
  4. 04 Residential amenity, privacy, light or noise 20
  5. 05 Traffic, access, parking or road safety 19
  6. 06 Wastewater, effluent, groundwater or public health 14
  7. 07 Unauthorised development, retention or procedural history 12
  8. 08 Surface-water drainage or flood risk 11
  9. 09 Ecology, habitats or Natura impacts 7
  10. 10 Built heritage or archaeology 4
Themes overlap, so an application can appear under more than one theme.
How this is counted

Week of 12–18 Oct 2026. Official refusal reasons were analysed for 47 of 59 refusal decisions; theme percentages use those 47 substantive-reason decisions as the denominator. Every figure comes from the official refusal reasons.

A reason can support more than one theme. Counts show affected applications and published reason statements.

Standard statutory conclusions are tracked separately and are not treated as refusal causes on their own.

  • Proper planning and sustainable development42
  • Development plan cited40
  • Undesirable precedent cited19

2 published reason statements did not fit the ten substantive themes.

Refusal decisions · 12–18 Oct 2026

50 of 59 cards shown · 47 case links · 0 linked projects

Refused

Newtownbarry, Newtownbarry, Wexford

Newtownbarry, Newtownbarry

Wexford County Council · 20261130

What was proposed

Permission for the construction of the following:- Campervan park 3300 sqm. to include 20 campervan pitches, visitors building comprising reception, communal kitchen, visitors room and toilet facilities 100.57 sqm. 1 no. campervan waste disposal unit, 1 no. external bin storage, new vehicular entrance in place of existing vehicular entrance, access roads, footpaths including pedestrian crossing point, car parking, raising of ground levels and all ancillary site works. Proposed works will include removal of existing storage shed on site at Ryland Road

Refusal reasons
  1. The proposed development would be contrary to the zoning objective of the land, which is 'To protect and provide for recreation, open space and amenity areas' and to Objective TM55, which states that the principle of such camping, glamping and campervan/touring sites should only be supported where they satisfy normal planning and environmental considerations. The proposed development would, therefore, be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  2. The application site is located within a Category A (high risk) and Category B (medium risk) flood zones. The applicant has not provided a site-specific flood risk assessment for the proposed development, which is a requirement for all developments incorporating (or partly incorporating) a zone of medium to high risk flooding. In the absence of such an assessment, the proposed development is likely to be prejudicial to public health, would be contrary to Section 1.5.3, of Volume 2, and Objective FRM 08 set out in Section 9.11.10 (Volume 1) of the Wexford County Development Plan 2022-2028 and would, therefore, be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  3. The proposed development is located on a site that has a direct hydrological link to the Slaney River Valley SAC (Site code: 000781), designated Natura 2000 site. Having regard to the location of the site within a flood zone and having regard to the absence of an Appropriate Assessment and any potential mitigation measures, that the Planning Authority cannot conclude that the development would not adversely impact the integrity of the Natura 2000 sites and the associated conservation objectives. The proposed development would, therefore, be contrary to Objective NH08 of the Wexford County Development Plan 2022-2028, Volume One and contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  4. The development, which proposes works within the Riparian Corridor of the River Slaney would be contrary to Objective GI04 of the Wexford County Development Plan 2022-2028, Volume One and contrary to the guidance contained within 'Planning for Watercourses in the Urban Environment' (Inland Fisheries Ireland, 2020) whereby riparian buffer zones of sufficient width are required from streams and rivers.
  5. The site is located within a Proposed Natural Heritage Area and it is considered that a full ecological impact assessment report is required to assess both flora and fauna, such as bats, that may be impacted by the proposed development and having regard to the absence of such an assessment and any potential mitigation measures, that the Planning Authority cannot conclude that the development would not adversely impact the integrity of the proposed Natural Heritage Area and the associated conservation objectives. The proposed development would, therefore, be contrary to Objective NH04 of the Wexford County Development Plan 2022-2028, Volume One and contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  6. Inadequate information has been submitted to properly assess the potential traffic impacts associated with the proposed development along a busy section of the N-80 national secondary road. The proposed development may therefore result in an unacceptable traffic hazard and may be contrary to Objective TS67 of the Wexford County Development Plan 2022-2028, Volume One.
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Oulartard, Tinnacross, Wexford

Oulartard, Tinnacross

Wexford County Council · 20261117W

What was proposed

Permission to erect a dwelling house with services and domestic garage

Refusal reason

The proposed development by virtue of its location in a rural area characterised by an existing pattern of roadside housing, together with the fact that this would be the second infill site in the row, would result in a pattern of ribbon development that would negatively impact on the rural character of the area. The proposed development is therefore contrary to Section 4.9.3 and to Objective SH43 of the Wexford County Development Plan 2022-2028 and to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Pallis Lower, Limerick, Wexford

Pallis Lower, Limerick

Wexford County Council · 20261113W

What was proposed

Permission for indefinite retention of the following a) Sunroom to main house of approx.18m2, b) Dormer window to rear elevation of main house, c) Minor alterations to layout of main house, d) Two storey two bedroom granny flat to the existing outhouse building of approx. 99m2, e) Single storey double garage of approx. 54m2, f) Single storey storage/kennel building of approx. 26m2; permission to revise site boundaries to match existing established boundaries; provide a new link building between main house and granny flat and install a new upgraded treatment plant and percolation area and all associated site works

Refusal reasons
  1. The Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposed two-storey granny flat complies with the requirements of Section 3.3, Self-Contained Residential Unit for a Family Member, of Volume 2 of the Wexford County Development Plan 2022-2028. While a link structure is proposed between the main dwelling and ancillary unit, the development is not considered to provide a satisfactory integrated and fully accessible arrangements in accordance with the policy. Furthermore, insufficient evidence has been submitted to demonstrate a current functional need for the unit in accordance with Section 4.9.5 of Volume 1 of the Wexford County Development Plan 2022-2028. The development is therefore contrary to the provisions of the Wexford County Development Plan 2022-2028 and to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  2. The applicant has failed to satisfactorily address previous concerns regarding wastewater treatment. The proposed wastewater treatment system as detailed in the submitted Site Assessment Report does not correspond with the manufacturer's specifications and insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that the system can adequately serve the proposed development. In addition, the applicant has failed to submit adequate details of nearby private wells and wastewater treatment systems, together with a relevant cross-section of the proposed percolation area/polishing filter. The Planning Authority is therefore not satisfied that the proposed development can be accommodated on the site without risk to public health or groundwater quality. The proposal would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  3. Insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate that the site can adequately accommodate the proposed surface water drainage system. While soakpits are identified as the proposed means of surface water disposal, their location has not been shown on the submitted site layout plan. Accordingly, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposed drainage arrangements are satisfactory or that the development can be accommodated on the site without adverse environmental impacts. The proposal is therefore contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  4. Insufficient information has been submitted regarding the water supply serving the development. The submitted site layout plan identifies only the approximate location of a communal well and fails to provide details regarding its exact location or the number of dwellings served by it. In the absence of this information, the Planning Authority is unable to adequately assess the adequacy of the water supply serving the development. The proposal is therefore contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Graigue More, Kilrush, Wexford

Graigue More, Kilrush

Wexford County Council · 20211262E

What was proposed

Permission to 1) construct a fully serviced extension to existing dwelling house, 2) to refurbish existing dwelling with elevational changes, 3) to construct a garage, 4) upgrade existing treatment system to EPA guidelines with associated site works and retention planning permission of temporary siting of existing mobile home

Refusal reasons

Reasons not yet available here. View the official case.

Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Derries TD, Athlone, Co. Westmeath, N37K0V6, Westmeath

Derries TD, Athlone, Co. Westmeath, N37K0V6

Westmeath County Council · 2660448

What was proposed

retention permission for the following works: change of use of building from domestic to commercial. To retain alteration works carried out internally to this building and parking spaces created to the front of the building and within the boundaries of the site

Refusal reasons
  1. Having regard to the location of the development on unzoned and unserviced lands outside a designated settlement boundary, and having regard to Policies CPO 5.3, CPO 5.23, CPO 5.24 and CPO 5.29 of the Westmeath County Development Plan 2021-2027, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the applicant has demonstrated a need for the veterinary clinic at this rural location or that the development complies with the rural enterprise provisions of the Development Plan. Having regard to its car-dependent nature, separation from services, zoned lands and employment centres, and the absence of any locational justification for a rural siting, the development constitutes an unsustainable form of economic development and its location outside a designated settlement that has not been justified. The Planning Authority is not satisfied that the development would accord with the settlement strategy and economic development objectives of the Westmeath County Development Plan 2021-2027 or that it would be consistent with the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  2. In the absence of a Traffic Impact Assessment, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the retention of the development would not adversely affect traffic safety. Having regard to the commercial nature of the use, the intensification of activity on the site, and the site's location on a narrow rural cul-de-sac, the development would potentially endanger public safety by reason of a traffic hazard and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Zone C, Mullingar Business Park, Mullingar, Co Westmeath, Westmeath

Zone C, Mullingar Business Park, Mullingar, Co Westmeath

Westmeath County Council · 2620

What was proposed

The development consisting of the following works, warehouse and process hall with offices and welfare facilities (circa 1895 sq m) new road entrance, 2 no dock levellers to north facing elevation, new concrete yard, staff and visitor parking with all associated site works

Refusal reasons

Reasons under review. View the official case.

Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Corsallagh, Cloonacool, Co Sligo, Sligo

Corsallagh, Cloonacool, Co Sligo

Sligo County Council · 2660340

What was proposed

for a material change of use of an existing dwelling from a residential unit to short term letting with all associated site works at

Refusal reason

The change of use of a dwelling house to short-term letting would result in the loss of a ns residential unit from the available supply of residential accommodation, would contribute to the existing shortage of residential accommodation for permanent occupation and long- -I term rental within Sligo and contrary to policy SP-HOU-1 of the Sligo County Development Plan 2024-2030 (As Varied). In addition, the proposed development would be contrary to the provisions of the Core Strategy of the County Development Plan, 2024-2030 which seeks to il secure national and regional policy in meeting the housing needs of the County and would nc therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. ou C n ty ou C o ig Sl

Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Disseldoo, Hill of Rath, Balgatheran, Louth

Disseldoo, Hill of Rath, Balgatheran

Louth County Council · 2660597

What was proposed

Permission for a proposed dwelling house, wastewater treatment system with percolation area, soakaway and all associated site development works. The proposal includes a new vehicular entrance onto private laneway with upgrade works to laneway and amended site boundary walls, piers and hedge to neighbouring sites where laneway joins Hill of Rath Road

Refusal reasons
  1. Policy Objective HOU 43 of the Louth County Development Plan 2021-2027, as varied, seeks to manage the development of rural housing in the open countryside by requiring y! applicants to demonstrate compliance with the Local Needs Qualifying Criteria relative to the nl Rural Policy Zone, set out tables 3.4 and 3.5. The applicant has sought to demonstrate O compliance with criteria 5 of Rural Policy Zone 1, which reads: es “5. Residents who have demonstrable social ties to the area and are providing care for an os elderly person(s) or a person(s) with a disability who lives in an isolated rural area and who does not have any able bodied person residing with them. Any application shall demonstrate rp why the existing property cannot be extended or modified to provide residential Pu accommodation for the carer. One house only will be allowed on this basis and the site must be adjacent to the dwelling in which the elderly person(s) or person(s) with the disability resides.” g in In having regard to the above and to the supporting details provided with the application, the ew following requirements have not been demonstrated: • Vi The applicant’s social ties to the area (i.e. that they have resided in the rural area of Louth for a minimum of 18 years prior to this application being made.) The personal t- documentary evidence covers a period of 13 years (from 2007-2020.) en • That the applicant is providing care for an elderly person(s) or a person(s) with a tm disability who lives in an isolated rural area and who does not have any able-bodied person residing with them. ar ep • That the existing property cannot be extended or modified to provide residential accommodation for the carer/s. D g Accordingly, the proposed development contravenes Policy Objective HOU 43 of the of the in Louth County Development Plan 2021-2027 (as varied) and to grant permission for the n development, would set an undesirable precedent for other similar inappropriate development an in the vicinity and be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area (Rural Policy Zone 1.) Pl
  2. Having regard to the siting and backland nature of the proposed development, together with the cumulative impact of existing dwellings in the immediate locality, the proposed, C development would represent an overdevelopment of one-off dwellings in this rural area and C is therefore considered to be contrary to Section 13.9.4 (site selection) of the Louth County Development Plan, 2021 2027 (as varied) which requires that applications consider the h existing number of one-off dwellings in the area and the ability of the landscape to absorb ut further development without further eroding the rural character of the area. Lo -2- REFERENCE NO: 26/60597 The proposed development also constitutes a piecemeal form of backland development, fragmenting agricultural lands and further eroding the rural character of the locality, which is contrary to Section 13.9.6 (backland development). Furthermore, given the extent of native species roadside hedgerow to be removed to facilitate the minimum sightline visibility at the y! vehicular access, the proposed development would adversely impact the rural amenity and nl character of the area. O The development would therefore, if approved, be contrary to the proper planning and es sustainable development of the area and contravene Sections 13.9.4, 13.9.6 and Policy os Objectives HOU 44, HOU 49 and ENV 39 of the Louth County Development Plan 2021 2027 (as varied), which seek to ensure that new dwellings in the open countryside are sensitively rp located and designed, so as to protect the character of the rural area. Pu
  3. It is an objective of the Louth County Development Plan 2021-2027 (as varied) under Policy Objective BHC 16 to protect the northern ridgeline (Chapter 13, Map 13.1) which frames the g views within and from the World Heritage Site of Brú na Bóinne from visually intrusive and in inappropriate development, subject to the Development Management Assessment Criteria ew detailed in Chapter 13 (including Section 13.19.9) and using view-shed analysis as a tool to guide and inform development management. The applicant has (owing to a lack of detail Vi provided with the application) failed to demonstrate that the proposed development would not contravene the above policy objective or adversely affect the protected northern ridgeline to t- the World Heritage Site of Brú na Bóinne. en
  4. The applicant has failed to demonstrate that the required minimum sightline visibility at the tm vehicular access to the public road (L-6300) (i.e. 4.5m x 75m over a height of 0.6m – 1.05m) can be achieved and accordingly, the development in its current form contravenes Sections ar 13.9.14, 13.16, 17 and Table 13.13 of the Louth County Development Plan 2021-2027 (as ep varied) and would, if permitted, endanger public safety by reason of traffic hazard and the obstruction of other road users. D g
  5. The applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposed wastewater treatment system in and polishing filter is in compliance with the EPA Code of Practice, 2021. In this regard, the n proposed development contravenes Policy Objective IU 18 of the Louth County Development an Plan 2021-2027, as varied and would therefore, be prejudicial to public health and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of this rural area. Pl, C C h ut Lo
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Dowdstown, Ardee, Co. Louth, A92 X950, Louth

Dowdstown, Ardee, Co. Louth, A92 X950

Louth County Council · 2660582

What was proposed

Retention of 2no. commercial garages and associated site development works.

Refusal reasons
  1. While the buildings have been in-situ for a significant period of time, it is the policy of the Louth County Development Plan 2021-2027 (as varied) “To support rural entrepreneurship and y! rural enterprise development of an appropriate scale at suitable locations in the County” (EE 55) nl and “To secure vibrant and viable rural communities by supporting the development of rural O based enterprises” (EE 60). Section 5.19.3 of the Plan states that “In the first instance, new employment related developments are directed to settlements where services are available, and es lands have been identified for employment uses”. os Based on the information submitted, the applicant has failed to demonstrate a locational, rp resource-based, regional or national requirement for the retention of this commercial development in the rural area, as required in Sections 5.19.3 and 13.11.11 of the Plan. Pu Therefore, the development if permitted would be contrary to policies EE 55 and EE 60 insofar as they support proposals for business enterprises in the countryside, would establish an g undesirable precedent for similar developments on unserviced land in the rural area and would in be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. ew
  2. It is the policy objective (MOV 58) of the Louth County Development Plan 2021-2027 (as Vi varied) to safeguard the capacity and safety of the National and Regional Road network by restricting further access onto National Primary, National Secondary, and Protected Regional t- Roads in accordance with the details set out in Tables 7.9 and 7.10 and not permit new access en or intensification of existing access onto Protected Regional Routes save for limited exemptions. The development is located along the R215 Protected Regional Route at Dowdstown and does tm not come under the scope of the exemptions set down and as such, it is considered that the proposed would contravene materially the policy of the Louth County Development Plan 2021- ar 2027 (as varied) and thus would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable ep development of the area. D
  3. Having regard to the provisions of Chapter 5 of the Louth County Development Plan 2021– g 2027 (as varied), which seeks to create and promote sustainable rural communities, and in Chapter 13, which sets out development management standards relating to the protection of residential amenity, it is considered that the proximity, scale, and commercial nature of the n an subject building give rise to unacceptable impacts on the adjoining residential property. The development therefore represents a form of commercial activity that is incompatible with the Pl established rural area and fails to protect the amenity of adjacent occupiers as required under the Louth County Development Plan 2021–2027 (as varied). The retention of the buildings in their current form would accordingly constitute a material injury to residential amenity and would, C be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. C
  4. In the absence of a compliant SUDS Design Report, the Planning Authority cannot be h satisfied that surface water runoff would be adequately managed in accordance with Policy ut Objective IU19 of the Louth County Development Plan 2021-2027 (as varied) and as such, it is Lo considered that 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

Lower Shore Road, Lislea, Omeath, Co. Louth, Louth

Lower Shore Road, Lislea, Omeath, Co. Louth

Louth County Council · 2660580

What was proposed

Permission consists of the demolition of a former boat house / agricultural shed and replacement with a detached single storey dwelling house. The proposal also includes the installation of a proprietary waste-water treatment system, including a percolation area, treatment plant and decommissioning and removal of the existing septic tank, proposed vehicular site entrance to facilitate the proposed development and all associated landscaping site works required to facilitate the development. As part of the Application, a Stage 2 Appropriate Assessment (Natura Impact Statement) has been submitted.

Refusal reasons
  1. The proposed development seeks the demolition of a former boathouse/agricultural shed and its replacement with a detached dwelling house. The Planning Authority is not satisfied that y! the structure proposed for demolition constitutes an existing dwelling house for the purposes nl of the replacement dwelling provisions set out in Chapter 3 and Section 13.9.13 of the Louth O County Development Plan 2021-2027, as varied. In the absence of evidence that the structure was last used and occupied as a dwelling, the proposal cannot be considered a replacement es dwelling and instead constitutes a new dwelling in the countryside. The development is os therefore contrary to the replacement dwelling policies and objectives of the Louth County Development Plan 2021-2027 (as varied) and would be contrary to the proper planning and rp sustainable development of the area. Pu
  2. The proposed development, which seeks the construction of a new detached dwelling house within Rural Area Under Strong Urban Influence (Rural Policy Zone 1), has not demonstrated g compliance with the rural housing policy requirements of the Louth County Development Plan in 2021-2027, as varied. The Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposal qualifies as an ew acceptable rural housing proposal in this policy area. Therefore, the development would be contrary to the rural housing strategy and policy objectives of the Louth County Development Vi Plan 2021-2027 (as varied) and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. t- en
  3. Having regard to the location of the site adjacent to the Carlingford Shore SAC (Site Code 002306) and within the zone of influence of the Carlingford Lough SPA (Site Code 004078) tm and the Carlingford Lough SPA (UK), the Natura Impact Statement submitted, and the observations of the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, the Planning ar Authority is not satisfied that sufficient information has been submitted to enable a full ep assessment of the potential effects of the proposed development on the integrity of the European sites concerned. In particular, further assessment is required in relation to the D potential effects of nutrient-enriched groundwater arising from the proposed wastewater g treatment system on the qualifying interest habitats of the adjoining SAC. in While the Planning Authority accepts that further information would be necessary to fully n an assess the implications of the proposal for the conservation objectives of the European sites, it is considered that no planning principle has been established for the proposed development Pl and, therefore, further information is not warranted in this instance. On the basis of the information submitted, and applying the precautionary principle, the Planning Authority cannot ascertain, beyond reasonable scientific doubt and on the basis of the best scientific knowledge, C in the field, that the proposed development, either individually or in combination with other C plans or projects, would not adversely affect the integrity of the Carlingford Shore SAC and associated European sites. h ut The proposed development would, therefore, be contrary to Article 6(3) of the Habitats Lo Directive, Policy Objectives NBG 3, NBG 4, NBG 5 and NBG 6 of the Louth County Development Plan 2021-2027, as varied, and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. -2- REFERENCE NO: 26/60580
  4. Having regard to the significant changes in ground levels across the site, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that sufficient information has been submitted to adequately assess the extent and impact of the proposed cut and fill operations, finished site levels, and associated retaining y! walls. In the absence of detailed level information and site sections, the visual impact of these nl works on the site and surrounding area cannot be properly assessed. The proposed O development would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. es os
  5. The Planning Authority is not satisfied, based on the information submitted, that the proposed development can be accessed safely from the public road network. The applicant has failed to rp adequately demonstrate that the proposed access arrangements achieve the required visibility Pu standards having regard to the nature of the road and the provisions of the Louth County Development Plan 2021-2027 (as varied). Furthermore, insufficient information has been provided regarding the extent of any boundary alterations necessary to achieve the required g sightlines and the management of construction traffic associated with the development. In the in absence of satisfactory information in these respects, the proposed development would give ew rise to a potential traffic hazard and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. Vi
  6. The Planning Authority is not satisfied, based on the information submitted, that the proposed t- development would not be subject to an unacceptable risk from coastal erosion over its lifetime. en The applicant has failed to submit a Coastal Erosion Assessment to assess the vulnerability of the site and adjoining coastline to erosion processes or to demonstrate that any necessary tm coastal protection measures can be provided without adverse environmental impacts. In the absence of such information, the Planning Authority is unable to determine the suitability of the ar site for the proposed development or its long-term sustainability. The proposed development ep is therefore contrary to Policy Objective ENV 50 of the Louth County Development Plan 2021– 2027, as varied, and contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. D g
  7. The Planning Authority is not satisfied, on the basis of the information submitted, that the in proposed wastewater treatment system and percolation area can be accommodated on the n site in accordance with the EPA Code of Practice for Domestic Waste Water Treatment an Systems. Significant deficiencies remain in the site suitability assessment, including the location of the trial hole and percolation testing, the absence of adequate information regarding Pl groundwater flow, separation distances to wells and percolation areas, site-specific cross- sections, and the suitability of the proposed wastewater treatment arrangements having regard to the site's topography and hydrogeological conditions., C C In the absence of sufficient information to demonstrate that the site is suitable for the proposed development and that wastewater can be treated and disposed of without risk to public health, h groundwater quality or the environment, the Planning Authority is precluded from reaching a ut positive assessment of the proposal. The proposed development would therefore be contrary Lo to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Ballinlyny, Reens, Ardagh, Co. Limerick., Limerick

Ballinlyny, Reens, Ardagh, Co. Limerick.

Limerick City and County Council · 26196

What was proposed

the construction of a replacement site entrance and to block up the existing site entrance and all associated site works

Refusal reasons

Reasons under review. View the official case.

Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Sarsfield St., Kilmallock, Co. Limerick., Limerick

Sarsfield St., Kilmallock, Co. Limerick.

Limerick City and County Council · 26194

What was proposed

the installation of additional foul/storm pipework and for creating new window openings on all elevations of the rear extension to the existing main building. Planning permission is also sought for the change of use of the ground floor and 1st floor of the main building which is a Protected Structure, Reg. No. 1371) from retail outlet/dwelling to 3 No. apartments and associated site works

Refusal reasons

Reasons under review. View the official case.

Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Loughanure Commons, Clane, Co. Kildare, Kildare

Loughanure Commons, Clane, Co. Kildare

Kildare County Council · 2660956

What was proposed

the construction of a part single storey & storey and a half dwelling house and a garage for domestic use, installation of an on-site wastewater treatment system, provision of a new recessed site entrance & driveway and all associated ancillary site development works above and below ground

Refusal reasons
  1. Objective HO O59 of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 seeks to “carefully rp manage Single Rural Dwelling Densities to ensure that the density of one-off housing does not exceed 30 units per square kilometre, unless the applicant is actively engaged in Pu agriculture, or an occupation that is heavily dependent on the land and building on their own landholding.” The proposed development would be the 95 th dwelling within one square kilometre of the subject site. In conjunction with the level of existing development in the n vicinity, it is considered that the proposed development would exacerbate an excessive io density of development in this rural area and would contribute to the increasing ct suburbanisation of the area. The proposed development would materially contravene Objective HO O59 and Policy HO P26 of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 pe and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. ns
  2. Policy HO P12 of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 seeks to ‘Ensure that the -I siting and design of any proposed dwelling shall integrate appropriately with its physical surroundings and the natural and cultural heritage of the area whilst respecting the character il of the receiving environment. Proposals must comply with Appendix 4 Rural House Design nc Guide and Chapter 15 Development Management Standards.’ The proposed development, by virtue of its overall design, form, scale and external appearance would not comply with current ou rural house design requirements as contained in Appendix 4 Rural House Design Guide of the County Development Plan (CDP). It is considered therefore that the proposed development C would contravene policy HO P12, and Appendix 4 of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 and taken in conjunction with the site’s location within the River Liffey Valley & y Plains Landscape Character Area (Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029, as varied) nt on lands designated as Medium-High Sensitivity where it is a guiding principle to retain the ou strong, largely intact, rural character of this Landscape Character Area in order to contain urban expansion and pressures and in the absence of a detailed landscaping plan, prepared C by a suitably qualified landscape architect, the proposed development would result in the dwelling appearing visually incongruous, and if granted would seriously injure the visual and e character amenities of the area and be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable ar development of the area. ld Ki An Rannóg Pleanála Planning Department y
  3. Policy HO P11 of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 seeks to facilitate nl proposals for dwellings in the countryside outside of settlements in conjunction with the Rural O Housing Policy Zones map and accompanying Schedule of Category of Applicant and Local Need Criteria. Insufficient documentary evidence regarding address records has been s provided, and as such the Applicant has not fully demonstrated compliance with the Local se Need Criteria which is in an area under Strong Urban Influence as identified in the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 and therefore is contrary to Policy HO P11 of the o Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 and to the proper planning and sustainable rp development of the area. Pu
  4. The works required to what appears to be an existing unauthorised entrance to provide for a recessed site entrance and driveway, at a rural location, situated off a narrow laneway would result in an overly-engineered intervention for a rural location and would diminish the rural n character of the area especially having regard to the location of the site within the River Liffey io Valley & Plains Landscape Character Area which is designated as a Medium to High ct Sensitivity. The proposed development would be contrary to Appendix 4 Rural House Design Guide and Section 15.7.6 of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 which seeks pe ’..to discourage the proliferation of access points onto public roads...’, and if permitted, would set an undesirable precedent for similar type development elsewhere in the County, and ns would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. -I il nc ou C y nt ou C e ar ld Ki
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Cromane Lower, Killorglin, Co. Kerry, Kerry

Cromane Lower, Killorglin, Co. Kerry

Kerry County Council · 2660799

What was proposed

Planning Permission to construct: 1) 6no. glamping pods and dedicated carpark 2) 9no. campervan pitches 3) Service building 4) Playground & seating area 5) Carpark including bi-cycle & motorbike parking 6) Events area 7) Install a mechanical treatment unit and polishing filter 8) All ancillary site works

Refusal reasons
  1. The site of the proposed development is located in a rural location zoned Visually Sensitive in the Kerry County Development Plan 2022-2028. The proposed development would conflict with the policy outlined in Section 10.3.5.1 of the Development Plan in relation to the siting of Camping/Glamping developments in the rural area remote from centres which provide facilities to tourists. In particular, the proposed development would contravene Objective KCDP 10-31 to ‘Support the development of appropriately scaled camping/glamping, campervan and caravan type accommodation located within/or adjacent to existing settlements, established tourism assets or adjacent to a main farmyard complex on suitable sites and at an appropriate scale subject to normal planning considerations’. The proposed development would, therefore, be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  2. Having regard to the scenic, open and exposed coastal nature of the site, it is considered that the proposed development would interfere with the character of the landscape in this area, which is necessary to preserve, in accordance with Objective KCDP 11-78 of the Kerry County Development Plan 2022-2028. The proposed development would constitute an obtrusive feature in the landscape at this location which is zoned Visually Sensitive in the Kerry County Development Plan 2022-2028 and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  3. Having regard to the nature and scale of the proposed development and the soil conditions on site, the Planning Authority is not satisfied on the basis of submissions made in relation to the application, that the effluent arising from the proposed development could be adequately disposed of on site. The proposed development would, therefore, be prejudicial to public health. Therefore, the proposed development would be contrary to the proper planning and development of the area.
  4. Having regard to the scale and nature of the proposed development, it is considered that it would not integrate satisfactorily into the surrounding rural area and that it would seriously injure the amenities of residential and agricultural property in the vicinity by reason of general disturbance. The proposed development would, therefore, be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. !
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Clooshgereen, Oughterard, Co Galway, Galway

Clooshgereen, Oughterard, Co Galway

Galway County Council · 2661453

What was proposed

for dwelling house, garage/shed and private wastewater treatment system with all associated works and ancillary services

Refusal reasons
  1. Having regard to the geometric characteristics of the local road, the proposed vehicular access onto the public road network is considered unsatisfactory, having regard to the siting of the proposed entrance on the inside radius of the public road, the absence of satisfactorily demonstrated sightlines in both directions in accordance with DM Standards 28 and 33(a) of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028, and the constraints arising from local drainage flow paths which preclude the provision and ongoing maintenance of a safe and satisfactory means of vehicular access. Furthermore, the significant scale of roadside boundary intervention required to facilitate the proposed access would negatively impact public road safety. Accordingly, if permitted as proposed, the development would interfere with the safety and free flow of traffic on the public road and would endanger public safety by reason of traffic hazard, obstruction of road users, or otherwise, and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  2. Having regard to the location of the proposed development within a Class 4 landscape, the significant landscape sensitivity of the area, the overall height and design of the proposed dwelling, it is considered that the proposed development would not assimilate or integrate satisfactorily with the receiving landscape and would detract from the visual amenities and landscape character of the area. The proposed development would therefore contravene Policy Objective LCM1: Preservation of Landscape Character, Policy Objective LCM2: Landscape Sensitivity Classifications and Policy Objective LCM3: Landscape Sensitivity Ratings of the Galway County Development Plan 2022–2028 and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. 3
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Cill Ogúla, Moycullen, Co. Galway, Galway

Cill Ogúla, Moycullen, Co. Galway

Galway County Council · 2661441

What was proposed

for a new dwelling and the conservation and restoration of existing vernacular sheds together with new garage, wastewater treatment plant and associated site development works

Refusal reasons
  1. Having regard to Policy Objective RH2 and Policy Objective RH4 of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028, it is considered that the applicant has not satisfactorily demonstrated that they meet the housing need criteria as set out in the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028. Therefore, the proposed development is considered contrary to the rural housing provisions of the said county development plan. Accordingly, to grant the proposed development would contravene materially DM Standard 7 and Policy Objectives RH2 & RH4 contained in the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028, would be contrary to ministerial guidelines issued to the planning authorities under Section 28 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended), would set an undesirable precedent for similar future development in the area, and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  2. The Planning Authority is not satisfied that sufficient justification has been provided for the proposed detached garage and the restoration of the existing vernacular sheds for ancillary storage purposes which together would result in an excessive level of ancillary accommodation relative to the requirements of the proposed dwelling. Furthermore, the applicant has failed to submit a structural assessment prepared by a suitably qualified professional demonstrating that the existing vernacular sheds are capable of being retained and restored as proposed. Having regard to the scale of the ancillary structures proposed, the extent of reconstruction required, the sensitive landscape setting of the site, and the provisions of DM Standard 6, DM Standard 8 and DM Standard 29 of the Galway County Development Plan 2023-2029, the proposed development would constitute an excessive and unjustified form of ancillary development and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. 3
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Garbally Demesne, Ballinasloe, Co Galway, Galway

Garbally Demesne, Ballinasloe, Co Galway

Galway County Council · 26214

What was proposed

to construct a single storey dwelling house, treatment system, percolation area and associated site works

Refusal reasons
  1. Having regard to Policy Objective RH16 of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028, it is considered that the applicant has not satisfactorily demonstrated that they meet the housing need criteria as set out in the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028. Therefore, the proposed development is considered contrary to the rural housing provisions of the said county development plan. Accordingly, to grant the proposed development would contravene materially DM Standard 26 and Policy Objective RH16 contained in the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028, would be contrary to ministerial guidelines issued to the planning authorities under Section 28 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended), would set an undesirable precedent for similar future development in the area, and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  2. The applicant has failed to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of DM Standard 28, with the western sightline not shown to the required extent and therefore failing to establish that the required visibility standards can be achieved. Notwithstanding the letter of consent for shared access provision to the site, lands under the control of the applicant for the purpose of access provision and works are not outlined in blue as required under Article 22 (2)(b) (ii) of the Planning and Development Regulations, 2001 (as amended). Consequently, the proposed access arrangement has not been adequately justified or assessed. It is considered that, if permitted as proposed, the development would interfere with the safety and free flow of traffic on the public road and would endanger public safety by reason of traffic hazard, obstruction of road users, or otherwise, and therefore would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  3. The application documentation has failed to demonstrate soak pit or surface water disposal arrangements on the submitted drawings, and insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate how surface water arising from the proposed development will be appropriately managed. The planning authority is not satisfied that surface water generated on site can be satisfactorily disposed of on site. Therefore, if permitted as proposed the development would materially contravene Objective WS7 and DM Standard 67 of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028 and therefore would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  4. The mobile home and associated services currently on site does not have the benefit of planning permission and this application does not seek to regularise the unauthorised development. Therefore, the proposed development if permitted would perpetuate an unauthorised structure and use on site and would be contrary to current planning legislation and the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. 3
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

7 The Green (Townparks T.D.), College Road, Galway, H91 P26T, Galway

7 The Green (Townparks T.D.), College Road, Galway, H91 P26T

Galway City Council · 2660309

What was proposed

Permission for development which consists of: permission is sought for the retention of an access door/gate way located at the rear boundary wall of an existing dwelling providing access to the adjoining property and for all associated site works and services

Refusal reason

Having regard to the location of the site within an established residential area zoned Residential (R) under the Galway City Development Plan 2023–2029, the objective of which is to provide for residential development and associated support development while ensuring the protection of existing residential amenity and contributing to sustainable y! residential neighbourhoods, it is considered that the retention of the access door/gateway nl in the rear boundary wall of No. 7 The Green would create an inappropriate physical and functional connection between an existing dwelling and an adjoining separately O functioning property. The development would undermine the established rear boundary es arrangement, would be injurious to the residential amenity and character of the area, and would set an undesirable precedent for similar rear-boundary access arrangements within os established residential areas. The development would therefore be contrary to the rp Residential (R) zoning objective of the Galway City Development Plan 2023–2029 and to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. Pu n tio p ec ns -I SIGNED: ___________________ ity Director of Services or Urban Development th Au DATE: 16/10/2026 ng ni an Pl ity C ay w al G

Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Ashwood Farm, Glenamuck Road South, Carrickmines, Dublin 18, D18C960, Dublin

Ashwood Farm, Glenamuck Road South, Carrickmines, Dublin 18, D18C960

Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council · LRD26A/0629/WEB

What was proposed

Planning Permission to amend a Large-scale Residential Development (LRD) permitted by Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council, Reg. Ref. LRD25A/0985/WEB at this site measuring c.2.8 hectares (area of proposed change relates to part of this site and measures c. 0.13 hectares), known as Ashwood Farm. The development will consist of: The addition of one storey to a permitted apartment block resulting in a maximum building height of 6 storeys. The additional storey will contain 12 residential apartments, incorporating 6 no. 1-bedroom units and 6 no. 2-bedroom units, all with private amenity space in the form of balconies. The development will also include all other ancillary site works necessary to facilitate the proposed development. The planning application may be inspected at the following website set up by the applicant: http://www.ashwoodfarmlrdamendment.com/

Refusal reason

RECOMMENDATION Refuse permission for the following reason: 1.The proposed 6th storey to the permitted 5-storey building would result in excessive height, scale and massing that would not successfully integrate with the character of the area, would detract from the surrounding townscape and landscape setting, and would fail to make a positive contribution to placemaking. The proposed development is contrary to Policy Objectives KGLAP30 and SDF10-4 of the Kiltiernan-Glenamuck Local Area Plan 2025, and fails to satisfy the criteria set out in Table 5.1 of the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Development Plan 2022-2028, "Criteria for Assessing Proposals for Increased Height". Accordingly, the proposed development would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area and permission should be refused.

Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

42, Grafton Street, Dublin 2, Dublin

42, Grafton Street, Dublin 2

Dublin City Council · WEB2256/26

What was proposed

The development will consist of: the replacement of the existing roller shutter located at the entrance of the premises with a fine density open mesh shutter all associated site works; This building is located within an architectural conservation area.

Refusal reason

The proposed roller shutter placed in front of the window display would be injurious to the character and amenities of this sensitive streetscape and create visual clutter, within a designated Architectural Conservation Area. The proposed development does not comply with the Dublin City Council Shopfront Guidelines 2001 which requires a security roller shutter to be placed behind the window display of a shop. Accordingly, the proposed development would adversely affect the Architectural Conservation Area of Grafton Street and would create an undesirable precedent for similar type development. This would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

CALHAME, BRUCKLESS, DONEGAL PO, CO. DONEGAL, Donegal

CALHAME, BRUCKLESS, DONEGAL PO, CO. DONEGAL

Donegal County Council · 2661617

What was proposed

CONSTRUCTION OF NEW DWELLING HOUSE, INSTALLATION OF SEWERAGE TREATMENT SYSTEM AND PERCOLATION AREA AND ALL ASSOCIATED SITE WORKS

Refusal reasons

Reasons not yet available here. View the official case.

Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

CALHAME, BRUCKLESS, DONEGAL PO, CO. DONEGAL, Donegal

CALHAME, BRUCKLESS, DONEGAL PO, CO. DONEGAL

Donegal County Council · 2661616

What was proposed

CONSTRUCTION OF NEW DWELLING HOUSE, INSTALLATION OF SEWERAGE TREATMENT SYSTEM AND PERCOLATION AREA AND ALL ASSOCIATED SITE WORKS

Refusal reasons

Reasons not yet available here. View the official case.

Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Within the townlands of Blackknock and Adamstown, Kilmeaden, Co. Waterford., Waterford

Within the townlands of Blackknock and Adamstown, Kilmeaden, Co. Waterford.

Waterford City and County Council · 2560625

What was proposed

the proposed development comprises the development of the former cheese factory site and adjoining lands to provide for a mixed use village centre, technology park, and renewable energy development on a total site area of 108.79 hectares. The proposed development will consist of the following: The demolition of 2 no. existing single storey outbuildings and 1 no. AGI building (126 sq.m. GFA in total) in the northern portion of the site, along with all site clearance and enabling works required to facilitate the proposed development. In the northern portion of the site the construction of a new village centre comprising the following: • A two-storey mixed-use building (fronting onto the R680) comprising a gym, café, health centre, pharmacy, and office space, with a total GFA of c. 1,856 sq.m. (c. 10.3m in height). • A two-storey community centre (with a GFA of c. 847 sq.m. and c. 11m in height). • 2 no. three-storey apartment buildings (Apartment Blocks A and B) comprising 48 no. units in total, including 6 no. 1 bedroom apartments and 42 no. 2 bedroom apartments. The apartment buildings have a combined gross floor area (GFA) of c. 5,374 sq.m. and the buildings are c. 14.3m in height. Each of the apartment buildings include private open space in the form of patios and balconies, along with bin stores, communal open space, and access arrangements. • A two-storey supermarket (including off-licence) comprising a GFA of c. 1,605 sq.m. (c. 1,514 sq. m at ground floor level and c. 91 sq. m. at first floor level) with a height of c. 8.2m. A bring bank will be provided to the south of the supermarket. • A two-storey childcare facility building with a GFA of c. 1,345 sq.m. (c. 10m in height), along with adjacent outdoor play area. • A Multi-Use Games Area (MUGA), located adjacent to Apartment Block A and the childcare facility. • A two-storey commercial / office building comprising 4 no. commercial units, (with a GFA of c. 614 sq.m. and c. 10.1m in height). • 2 no. two storey warehouse buildings (each with a GFA of c. 562 sq. m. including ancillary office space and staff welfare facilities, with an overall height of c. 10m). • A District Heating Plant Room (with a GFA of c. 14 sq. m. and c. 3.8m in height) to provide district heating from the technology park to the village center, bin stores, lighting, access arrangements, and the provision of areas of public realm and open recreational spaces including a new village square. In the central portion of the site the construction of a new technology park comprising the following: • 3 no. two storey (with two mezzanine level), information and communication technology (ICT) facility buildings, each with a GFA of c. 24,033 sq.m (c. 72,099 sq.m GFA in total), and with a height (to parapet level) of c. 19.8m and a maximum flue height of c. 25m. • Each of the 3 no. ICT facility buildings will accommodate ICT equipment rooms, associated electrical and mechanical equipment rooms, loading bays, maintenance and storage space, office administration areas, and staff facilities, emergency generators and flues, and plant at roof level. External plant rooms (with an overall height of c. 3.7m) and modular water tanks will be provided adjacent to each of the ICT facility buildings. • An energy center building (with a GFA of c. 3,720 sq.m and with a parapet height of c. 13.8m) including 16 no. gas powered turbines, associated flues (with a height of c. 29.8m), associated ancillary containers and tanks, backup fuel pumps and tanks, fire tanks (with a height of c. 12.8m) and pump house, MCC control room (with a GFA of c. 41 sq.m.), welfare and storage facilities (with a GFA c. 60 sq.m.), a three storey control room building with basement (with a GFA of c. c. 5,343 sq.m. and an overall height of c. 18.9m), a single storey with basement MV building (with a GFA of c. 1,246 sq.m. and an overall height of c. 5.3m), step up and step down transformers, and 7 no. black start generators. • 2 no. warehouses with ancillary office space, with a GFA of c.3,121 sq.m. each, and with a height of c. 14.2 metres • A gas above ground installation (AGI) and pressure regulating and metering station (PRMS) compound, (comprising an AGI Building, Boiler House Kiosk, E&I Kiosk, Control Room and Skid House) with a combined GFA of c. 202 sq.m.), 3 no. ICTpumphouses (c. 40 sq.m. each), and two single storey guardhouses (each with a GFA of c.29 sq.m). In the southern portion of the site the construction of a of a solar farm with PV arrays consisting of 43,056 PV panels mounted on concrete footings, 3 no. single storey transformer cabins (with a combined GFA of c. 54.6 sq.m), a battery energy storage system (BESS) compound with an area of c. 6,682 sq.m.(comprising modular battery units within a fenced compound, along with associated electrical equipment and transformers), internal access tracks, and security fencing. In the western portion of the site the construction of a new vehicular access (including a bridge over an existing watercourse) to the Technology Park to be provided between the R680 and the R681. The primary vehicular access to the village center will be facilitated via the existing access from the local road to the north. Pedestrian and cycling access to the village center will be facilitated via both the local road and R680. Access to the Solar farm is provided via the local road to the north of the solar farm. Provision of areas of public open space and a walking/cycling route which extends from the village center to the southeast of the Technology Park. The development provides 441 no. car parking spaces and 267 no. cycle spaces. The development includes provision of landscaping and planting throughout, PV panel zones at roof level, boundary treatments, signage zones, site lighting, and all associated site services and development works, including underground foul and storm water drainage network and sustainable urban drainage systems, and all ancillary works. An Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) and a Natura Impact Statement (NIS) will be submitted to the Planning Authority with the planning application

Refusal reasons
  1. Having regard to the information on file, the applicant has failed to demonstrate that there is existing capacity in the electricity grid (without which the broader principles and allowances set out in the Government Statement on the Role of Data Centres can be assessed), the lack of significant on site renewable energy to power the proposed development, the lack of satisfactory evidence in relation to the applicant’s engagement with Compulsory Power Purchase Agreements (CPPAs) in Ireland, it is considered that the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposed development would be in accordance with the overarching objectives of the Climate Action Plan 2025, by reference to reducing Greenhouse Gas emissions and the broader principles and allowances set out in the Government Statement on the Role of Data Centres. Notwithstanding the proposal to construct an on-site solar farm, the applicant has not provided any evidence that the proposed development could additionally avail of new locally generated renewable power for the development and that there is sufficient capacity in the grid to service the development. The proposed development would have potential for significant adverse impacts on the environment and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  2. Having regard to the proximity to neighbouring dwellings, the proposed development by reason of its design, scale, nature and layout would result in excessive visual intrusion and overbearing impact to include by reason of the gas flues with significant adverse implications from a residential amenity perspective and in terms of the setting and character of Kilmeaden village. It is considered that the proposed development would represent a disproportionate impact on the amenities of the area and loss of village character contrary to KLMDO1 of the Waterford City and County Development Plan 2022-2028 which seeks to ensure that development on the site “does not detract from the amenity of the existing village”. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  3. The site is not served by an adequate wastewater network to accommodate the proposed development in its entirety and in the absence of a firm proposal and definitive timeline to upgrade the Kilmeaden Wastewater Treatment Plant, the proposed development is deemed to be premature by reason of deficiencies in public wastewater infrastructure.
  4. Having regard to the Site-Specific Flood Risk Assessment submitted at further information stage together with the proposal to construct embankments on Flood Zone A & B, the Planning Authorit ! is not satisfied that it has been adequately demonstrated that the proposed development would not give rise to potential of flood risk and when also taking Climate Change into account. The proposed development would be contrary to The Planning System and Flood Risk Management Guidelines for Planning Authorities 2009 and Policy UTL 10 of the Waterford City and County Development Plan 2022-2028 which seeks to avoid development in areas at risk of flooding. As such the proposed development would have potential for significant adverse impacts on the environment and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. !
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

50, Alpine Rise, Belgard, Tallaght, Dublin 24, D24 HN3P, Dublin

50, Alpine Rise, Belgard, Tallaght, Dublin 24, D24 HN3P

South Dublin County Council · SD26A/0202W

What was proposed

Construction of a single storey ground floor detached auxiliary dwelling with one bedroom a kitchen a living room and bathroom in the rear garden of the principal house together with connection to all public services and all associated site development works.

Refusal reason

The proposed residential unit, with an internal floor area of c.26sq.m, fails to meet the minimum residential standards and private amenity space for a 1-bed house. The proposal would also result in substandard private amenity space in terms of quality, layout and quantum to serve the existing dwelling. The result is an unacceptable standard of residential amenity for occupants which is contrary to Policies H7: Residential Design and Layout, H9: Private and Semi-Private Open Space and H10: Internal Residential Accommodation, and H10 Objective 1, of the South Dublin County Development Plan 2022-2028. It would also fail to comply with Policy H15 in relation to family flats. Furthermore, by reason of its siting and layout, the development comprises of an unacceptable cramped form of development that is contrary to Policy H13: Residential Consolidation and Section 12.6.8 'Residential Consolidation' and the RES zoning objective of the South Dublin County Development Plan 2022-2028 and is, therefore, contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Cakestown Glebe, Kells, Co. Meath, A82 H6C6, Meath

Cakestown Glebe, Kells, Co. Meath, A82 H6C6

Meath County Council · 2661060

What was proposed

the proposed development consists of: 1. Change Of Use permission of the existing domestic garage to provide two separate, self-contained one-bedroom units; and 2. Decommissioning the existing septic tank and installing a new wastewater treatment system with percolation area, together with minor internal and external alterations to the garage and all associated site works and services

Refusal reasons
  1. The proposed development would contravene Condition 4 of the parent permission, Planning Ref. 89/121, granted for the domestic garage. Condition 4 states ‘The proposed development shall not be used for human habitation or for any other purpose other than a purpose incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling house as such’. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. y!
  2. It is considered that Unit A of the proposed development does not meet the minimum design standards nl relating to residential amenity. The proposed floor space is below the minimum threshold of 32 sqm for a studio, as noted in SPPR 2 of the Design Standards for Apartments, Guidelines for Planning Authorities, O 2025. The proposal would unduly impact on the residential amenity of the adjoining property through loss of daylight and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of s the area. se
  3. The proposal provides 3.no north facing windows which would overlook on to the neighbouring property. po The applicant has failed to submit details regarding the boundary treatment between both properties. In the absence of these details, it is considered the proposal would negatively impact the residential amenity r Pu of the dwelling to the north. g in w ie -V il nc ou C y nt ou C th ea M
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Newgrange farm, Newgrange, Co. Meath, C15 X5EV, Meath

Newgrange farm, Newgrange, Co. Meath, C15 X5EV

Meath County Council · 2661056

What was proposed

the development will consist of the construction of a single-story agricultural shed (Approximately 355m2 - 6 bays) to be used for straw/hay/fodder and machinery storage, and all associated site works

Refusal reasons
  1. Having regard to the location of the proposed development within the core of Brú na Bóinne UNESCO World Heritage Site and the proximity of the site to Newgrange Passage Tomb, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposed development would not adversely impact the World Heritage Site. The applicant has failed to demonstrate, through a comprehensive archaeological assessment, that the site can accommodate the proposed development without y! adversely impacting archaeological heritage. The proposed development is therefore contrary to policy HER POL 3, which requires archaeological assessment and investigation for development in nl areas of archaeological potential, and HER OBJ 2 of the Meath County Development Plan 2021– O 2027, which seeks to ensure that development in the vicinity of Recorded Monuments and Zones of Archaeological Potential is sited and designed in a manner that minimises impact on the monument s and its setting. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and se sustainable development of the area. po
  2. The applicant has failed to adequately demonstrate that the development would not have a detrimental impact upon the integrity of the sensitive landscape and protected views within the Brú na Bóinne r Pu UNESCO World Heritage Site. The submitted Archaeological and Visual Impact Assessment fails to adequately assess the landscape and visual effects of the proposed development. The assessment methodology, based on visibility testing using a flagpole from selected viewpoints, is not considered g sufficient to evaluate the likely visual impact of a substantial agricultural structure within the sensitive in landscape setting of the Brú na Bóinne World Heritage Site. The proposed structure, by reason of its w scale, height and isolated location from within the established farmyard complex, would constitute ie an inappropriate form of development that would encroach upon protected viewpoints 87b and 87d and overall sensitive heritage landscape. -V In the absence of a comprehensive Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment prepared by a suitably qualified professional, whilst having regard to Appendix 5 of the Meath County Development Plan il nc 2021–2027 and the principles of the Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (GLVIA3), the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposal would protect the sensitive core ou landscape of the Brú na Bóinne. The proposal is therefore contrary to HER POL 7, HER OBJ 50, and the provisions of Appendix 8(a) UNESCO World Heritage Site Planning Guidance and Supporting C Information of the Meath County Development Plan 2021–2027 and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. y nt ou C th ea M
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Summerhill Townland, Summerhill, Co. Meath, A83 Y680, Meath

Summerhill Townland, Summerhill, Co. Meath, A83 Y680

Meath County Council · 2660647

What was proposed

the development will consist of the provision of a new entrance to serve the existing dwelling permitted under Planning Reg. Ref. TA170282

Refusal reason

The applicant has failed to satisfactorily address Item 1 of the Further Information request, including demonstrating compliance with Condition No. 4 of Planning Reference TA171167 requiring the demolition of the former dwelling following occupation of the replacement dwelling. The proposed development would therefore contravene a condition attached to an existing permission for development. Furthermore, the applicant has also failed to adequately justify the need for a second site entrance serving the stables building or demonstrate why the previously approved access arrangement cannot serve the y! development. The Planning Authority is therefore not satisfied that the proposal represents the orderly nl and coherent development of the site, and the proposed development would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. O s se r po Pu g in w ie -V il nc ou C y nt ou C th ea M

Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Lissardboola, Farmers Bridge, Tralee, Co. Kerry, Kerry

Lissardboola, Farmers Bridge, Tralee, Co. Kerry

Kerry County Council · 26133

What was proposed

(A) Construct a single storey dwelling which will be served by a new septic tank and percolation area and all necessary ancillary site works. (B) A domestic garage.

Refusal reasons

Reasons under review. View the official case.

Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Cathair Ghabhann, Claregalway, Co. Galway, Galway

Cathair Ghabhann, Claregalway, Co. Galway

Galway County Council · 2661448

What was proposed

and completion of the demolition of an existing substandard dwelling and the retention and completion of a replacement dwelling with all associated services

Refusal reasons
  1. Having regard to the existing structure on site which has not been demonstrated as being an existing family home to the requirements of Policy Objective RH 6 contained in the Galway County Development Plan, 2022-2028, and having regard to the limited information included with the planning application, the Planning Authority considers that the proposed development would be contrary to the requirements of Policy Objective RH 6. Accordingly, to grant the development as proposed, would materially contravene a policy objective contained in the current county development plan and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  2. The subject site is located in the rural area within the MASP and GCTPS, which is subject to strong urban influence as identified in the Sustainable Rural Housing Guidelines for Planning Authorities issued by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government in April 2005. Based on the information submitted with the planning documentation, and taking account of the existing original derelict structure on site currently uninhabitable, and in the absence of satisfactory substantiation under Policy Objective RH 7 Renovation of Existing Derelict Dwelling, it is considered that the proposal would not comply with the rural housing objectives as set out in the current Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028, in particular Policy Objective RC 2, Policy Objective RH1 and DM Standard 7 in the absence of sufficiently detailed local rural links substantiated. Therefore, if permitted as proposed, the proposed development is considered contrary to the rural housing provisions of the said county development plan. Accordingly, to grant the proposed development would contravene materially policy objectives and a development management standard contained in the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028, would be contrary to ministerial guidelines issued to the planning authorities under Section 28 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended), would set an undesirable precedent for similar future development in the area, and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  3. Having regard to proposed development access point onto/from the local public road network as indicated on the site layout plan, whilst considering the restricted exit and entry visibility splays owing to the sub optimum horizontal and vertical alignment in particular to the southern approach whereby it is considered traffic concerns will arise. Furthermore, the vehicular access point has not been in use as a residential access point for a prolonged period of time and it is considered the significant scale of roadside intervention that will be required to the south will negatively impact the public road and vulnerable road users’ safety. It is considered that if permitted as proposed that the development would endanger public safety by reason of traffic hazard, obstruction of road users or otherwise, contrary to policy objectives NNR2, DM Standards 28 and DM standard 33a of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028. 3 SCHEDULE REFERRED TO - PLANNING REFERENCE NO. 26/61448
  4. Based on the information submitted, the planning authority are not satisfied that the existing septic tank system onsite can adequately treat and dispose of the effluent arising from the proposed development. Accordingly, to grant the proposed development would be prejudicial to public health, would be contrary to Objective WW6 and DM Standard 38 of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028, would pose an unacceptable risk to surface water and be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. 4
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Kippaunagh, Clonbern, Co. Galway, H53 KP26, Galway

Kippaunagh, Clonbern, Co. Galway, H53 KP26

Galway County Council · 2661437

What was proposed

of (1) extension to front of existing dwelling house, (2) detached one bedroom apartment and (3) shed/store and all associated site works

Refusal reasons
  1. The Planning Authority notes that the applicant has not submitted sufficient information to demonstrate that the dwelling house and other structures on site, including associated site services, constitute authorised development. In the absence of evidence confirming the authorised status of these elements, the Planning Authority cannot satisfactorily assess the proposed development. Additionally, the development description is misleading as it does not truly represent the extent of the structures and development on site. Accordingly, the proposed development is considered unacceptable in principle. The granting of permission in these circumstances could facilitate or perpetuate unauthorised development and would set an undesirable precedent for similar development. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  2. Considering the lack of information submitted on the existing unauthorised effluent treatment system or the condition and capacity of same, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the safe disposal of domestic effluent on site can be guaranteed in strict accordance with the EPA Code of Practice Wastewater Manual Accordingly to grant the proposed development would be prejudicial to public health, would be contrary to the 2021 EPA Code of Practice Wastewater Manual, would seriously endanger public health, would materially contravene Policy Objectives WW6 and DM Standard 38 of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028, and therefore, would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  3. The application does not include any justification for the retention of the one bedroom apartment on site or sufficient information on the proposed use of same. Therefore, the applicant has not satisfactorily complied with the requirements of the DM Standards in the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028 including DM Standard 5. Accordingly to grant the proposed development would materially contravene DM Standard 5 of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028, and therefore, would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. Advisory note: Any future application must satisfactorily demonstrate the extent and planning history of all existing development on site. 3
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Seymour Street, Clonakilty, Co. Cork, Cork

Seymour Street, Clonakilty, Co. Cork

Cork County Council · 26/2194

What was proposed

The construction of a 3-storey apartment building, comprising of 10 no. apartment units (2no. studios, 2no. 1-bed and 6no. 2-bed units) with individual private open space areas. The proposed development will also incorporate new gated maintenance access, bin stores and bicycle parking, entrance ramp, the demolition and rebuilding of an existing wall and all other associated boundary treatments, landscaping, site development and drainage works including a new pumping station. A Natura Impact Statement (NIS) has been prepared and will be submitted to the Planning Authority with the application. The Natura Impact Statement (NIS) will be available for inspection or purchase at a fee not exceeding the reasonable cost of making a copy during office hours at the offices of the Planning Authority.

Refusal reasons
  1. The proposed development is in an area which is at risk of flooding, sited in the Town Centre of Clonakilty on land to which the specific zoning objective CK-T-01 applies, and sited on lands that have been identified as Flood Zone A and Flood Zone B in the Cork County Development Plan 2022. Notwithstanding the Flood Risk Assessment submitted, on the basis of the information submitted, and having regard to the provisions of the County Development Plan and its associated Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposed development has been justified, and considers that the proposed highly vulnerable ground floor residential use would not be appropriate on land that is at risk of flooding within the Town Centre CK-T-01 lands in Clonakilty. Furthermore, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that residual risk has been appropriately addressed, that compensatory storage is not needed, that the development will not increase flood risk elsewhere, and the proposal would conflict with the objectives WM 11-16 and WM 11-17 of the County Development Plan. Accordingly, the proposed development would, if permitted, conflict with the Ministerial Section 28 Guidelines, The Planning System and Flood Risk Management, 2009, would conflict with the Cork County Development Plan 2022 and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  2. The Planning Authority considers, on the basis of the information submitted, and following the completion of Appropriate Assessment, that the proposed development has the potential to give rise to adverse effects on the integrity of the Clonakilty Bay Special Area of Conservation and the Clonakilty Bay Special Protection Area as significant impacts to water quality and qualifying interests and Special Conservation Interests and supporting habitats arising from inadequate surface water management cannot be ruled out, and by reason that significant impacts to water quality and qualifying interests and supporting habitats arising from flooding and the potential associated knock on effects cannot be ruled out. Additionally, the Planning Authority considers that the proposed development would materially contravene the objective BE 15-2 of the Cork County Development Plan 2022, which seeks to protect all natural heritage sites which are designated or proposed for designation under European legislation, National legislation and International Agreements. Accordingly, 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

Kilrush, Mogeely, Co. Cork., Cork

Kilrush, Mogeely, Co. Cork.

Cork County Council · 26/2191

What was proposed

The development consists of the retention of: (i) an existing hard standing area of approximately 641 sqm used for agricultural purposes; (ii) an existing vehicular entrance with ornamental wrought-iron gates onto the public road, for agricultural use; and (iii) existing concrete-panel boundary walls to the road frontage and to the southern and western boundaries of the site.

Refusal reasons
  1. As set out in objective EC 8-15 of the Cork County Development Plan 2022, it is an objective of the Planning Authority to encourage the development of sustainable agriculture and related infrastructure including farm buildings. In this regard, it is considered that the applicant has not adequately demonstrated an agricultural need for the scale and extent of the hard standing area, ornamental wrought-iron gates, concrete-panel boundary walls and associated ancillary works in the context of the stated landholding. Having regard to the nature, scale and design of the development and the extent of the landholding, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the development represents a justified or appropriate form of agricultural development at this location or that it would accord with the stated objective to provide sustainable agricultural development. Furthermore, the development to be retained appears visually prominent in the rural landscape and interferes with the character of the rural landscape, which it is necessary to preserve. In addition, by reason of the proximity to existing third-party dwellings, the development would seriously injure the residential amenities of those properties. The development would, therefore, seriously injure the visual and residential amenities of the area and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  2. The Planning Authority is not satisfied, on the basis of the information submitted, that adequate provision has been made for the management, attenuation and safe disposal of surface water arising from the hard standing area. In particular, it has not been adequately demonstrated that surface water runoff generated by the development can be discharged without increasing the risk of flooding of the application site, adjoining properties or the public road and would not exacerbate future flooding events. The development to be retained would therefore give rise to an unacceptable potential risk of surface water flooding and would be seriously injurious to the amenities of property in the vicinity. The development would therefore be contrary to objective WM 11-15 (Flood Risk Assessments) of the Cork County Development Plan 2022 and contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Lands at Fota Retail & Business Park, Kilacloyne, Carrigtwohill, Co. Cork., Cork

Lands at Fota Retail & Business Park, Kilacloyne, Carrigtwohill, Co. Cork.

Cork County Council · 26/2189

What was proposed

Permission for construction of a single storey drive-thru restaurant including the ancillary sale of hot food for consumption off the premises with an associated corral area, elevational signage, car parking including accessible parking spaces, grill bays, EV charging spaces, bicycle parking, a height restrictor, customer order points with associated canopies, totem signage, free-standing signage, banner frames and digital menu boards, plant and PV panels at roof level, ESB substation and kiosk, landscaping including outdoor furniture/seating area with parasols, boundary treatments, lighting, new vehicular access onto the existing internal access road, and all associated site and engineering works necessary to facilitate the development.

Refusal reason

The proposal involves the development of a 24 hour restaurant including a drive thru on lands zoned "Business and General Employment” under the provisions of the County Development Plan (CDP) 2022. Objective ZU 18-15 of the Plan seeks to promote such areas as the primary locations for employment uses. Objective ZU 18-17 seeks to ‘promote the development of town centres and neighbourhood centres as the primary locations for retail and uses of this nature that provide goods or services principally to visiting members of the public. Having regard to the zoning objective for the site, policy objective ZU 18-17 and having regard to the location of the proposed development outside of town centre or designated retail/neighbourhood areas, it is considered that the proposal, if permitted would constitute an inappropriate departure from the core zoning objective and materially contravene the Development Plan. The granting of permission for this use at this location will also create an undesirable precedent for similar type developments which cumulatively, will conflict with town centre Objective ZU 18-17 which seeks to ensure the vitality and viability of the town centre, and would generate additional car orientated trips on the road network not designed for this purpose. The proposals therefore conflicts with the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Corner of Togher Road and Pearse Road, Togher, Ballyphehane, Cork., Cork

Corner of Togher Road and Pearse Road, Togher, Ballyphehane, Cork.

Cork City Council · 26/44989

What was proposed

Permission for the construction of 2 no. 2-storey semi detached residential units, and all associated site development works, including boundary treatment, landscaping and site service works at lands located at the corner of Corner of Togher Road and Pearse Road, Togher, Ballyphehane, Cork.

Refusal reason

Having regard to the location of the proposed development in an area zoned ZO 1 Sustainable Residential Neighbourhoods in the Cork City Development Plan 2022-2028, it is considered that the proposed development, by reason of its siting and design, would fail to respect the established building line of properties in the vicinity and would also detract from the character of the local area. Consequently, the proposed development would result in a disorderly and visually obtrusive feature which would dominate the streetscape and detract from the visual amenity and character of the area. If permitted, the proposed development would set an undesirable precedent for similar sites in the vicinity. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Scurlockstown, Trim, County Meath, Meath

Scurlockstown, Trim, County Meath

Meath County Council · 2660006

What was proposed

the proposed development will consist of an agricultural development comprising (i) grain intakes, grain drying plant, elevators, conveyors, grain storage silos and grain storage sheds; (ii) upgrade existing entrance onto the R154 Regional Road and the existing access road to the existing dwelling house, farmyard buildings and lands and extend the road to access the proposed agricultural development located on lands zoned RA (Rural Area) also within our ownership; (iii) the extended road comprising metalled carriageway, kerbing, drainage, grass margin, footpath and public lighting shall be constructed through existing designated E1 and E2 Employment zoned lands within our ownership; (iv) 2 no. weighbridges and an office building accommodating the weighbridge office and staff welfare facilities including a wastewater treatment system and percolation area, car and bicycle parking; (v) site services, fuel storage, photovoltaic solar panels to the Southern facing roof planes of proposed grain sheds and associated site works. A Natura Impact Statement (NIS) has been prepared for the proposed development. Significant further information/revised plans submitted on this application

Refusal reason

The proposed development, if permitted, would constitute an intensification of an access onto the R154 Regional Road, a route subject to a 100 km/h speed limit, carrying significant volumes of traffic, and would thereby give rise to conditions that could adversely affect road safety and the efficient operation of the public road network. Furthermore, the provision and intensification of a separate access serving lands within a wider landholding would result in an undesirable proliferation of entrances onto a strategic transportation corridor, contrary to the y! RD POL 38 and 39 of the Meath County Development Plan 2021-2027, and the principles of nl access management and road safety. In addition, the proposed use of the access by agricultural and heavy goods vehicles associated O with the grain storage and drying facility would be prejudicial to the coordinated and orderly development of adjoining lands zoned E1-High Technology Uses and E2-General Enterprise s and Employment. The nature of the proposed traffic movements would undermine the se development potential of these lands for their intended high technology and employment- generating purposes. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the proper po planning and sustainable development of the area and would conflict with the transport and land-use objectives of the Meath County Development Plan 2021–2027. r Pu g in w ie -V il nc ou C y nt ou C th ea M

Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

No. 1 St. Manntans Road, Wicklow Town, Co. Wicklow, Wicklow

No. 1 St. Manntans Road, Wicklow Town, Co. Wicklow

Wicklow County Council · 26183

What was proposed

the provision of a balcony at first floor level along with alterations to East Elevation and all ancillary site works and services

Refusal reason

PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT ACT 2000 (as amended) Reference Number in Register z 261L83 SCHEDULE Having regard to the location of the proposed balcony, its proximity to the northern and southern boundaries of the application site coupled with the elevated position of the subject site in comparison to the properties to the north/north east, it is considered that the proposed balcony would have an undue impact on the privacy and amenity of the adjoining properties to the south and north as the development would significantly increase overlooking opportunities of the private rear amenity space of these adjoining properties' The proposed development would therefore contravene the zoning objective of the site, Existing Residential, as set out in the Wicklow Town-Rathnew Local Area Plan 2025 and which seeks "To protect, provide and improve residential amenities of existing residential areas", would be contrary to Objective CPO 6.21. and Section 3.1'8 Appendix 1 - Development Design Standards of the Wicklow County Development Plan 2022-2028 which seek that house improvements, alterations and extensions and appropriate infill residential development in existing residential areas shall have regard to the protection of residential amenity of houses in the immediate environs and would set a precedent for similar type development in the area. 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

Ballinacor West, Kilbride, Co Wicklow, Wicklow

Ballinacor West, Kilbride, Co Wicklow

Wicklow County Council · 26175

What was proposed

temporary cabin style dwelling on site for a period of 12 months, while the dwelling granted on site is constructed and associated works

Refusal reasons
  1. The cabin, by reason of its design, materials and construction, would be prejudicial to public nl health and would be seriously injurious to the amenities of the area. The development O would be contrary to the established housing standards of the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government that deems such accommodation as being unfit for es permanent human occupation. Such a development would establish an undesirable precedence for similar sub-standard forms of residential development in the area, would be os contrary to visual amenities of the area, to County Development Plan policy and to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. rp
  2. No evidence has been submitted to show that the existing septic tank system on site is Pu compliant with either the EPA Code of Practice 2000 or 2009. As such, increasing the load on this septic presents a risk of pollution and degradation of the site and surrounding area n which would conflict with CPO 13.2 Wicklow CDP 2022-2028 and would be contrary to the io proper planning and sustainable development of the area. ct pe ns -I F\p il nc ou C y nt ou C ***Note to the Applicont*** ow The opplicant is advised that PRR2L/582 is due to expire on the 11/01/2027 ond thot they may wish to consider seeking on ertension ol the oppropriate period of this planning applicotion noting kl that the construdion works are only at foundotion level. ic W
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Knockenduff, Tramore, Co. Waterford, Waterford

Knockenduff, Tramore, Co. Waterford

Waterford City and County Council · 2683

What was proposed

for erection of timber framed modular dwelling and all associated site works including connection to existing wastewater treatment plant at rear of existing dwelling.

Refusal reasons

Reasons under review. View the official case.

Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Inishkeen, Glebe, County Monaghan, A91 DW66, Monaghan

Inishkeen, Glebe, County Monaghan, A91 DW66

Monaghan County Council · 2660119

What was proposed

permission for alterations to three existing classrooms and a resource room to form three special education needs classrooms with external exit doors, alterations to one existing classroom to form a multi sensory room and office with staff toilets, the construction of a two storey extension at the rear of the south west facing school building and bounded by the north west facing school building to provide four classrooms to include alterations to existing school building to provide access, alterations and extension to existing resource room at first floor level, alterations to existing ground floor corridor and storage and an extension to the existing ground floor boiler house, alterations to part of the boundary wall and the gate of the adjacent 'Open eir' property to the east of the school to include realignment and extension to the existing footpath and all associated site works to include alterations to existing car parking facilities

Refusal reasons

Reasons not yet available here. View the official case.

Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Kilsallagh Lower, Westport, Co. Mayo, Mayo

Kilsallagh Lower, Westport, Co. Mayo

Mayo County Council · 2660668

What was proposed

Permission for development at Kilsallagh Lower, Westport, Co. Mayo. The proposed development will consist of the construction of a dwelling with proprietary wastewater treatment system, percolation area and all associated site works.

Refusal reason

Based on the trial hole excavated on site and the Site Suitability Report submitted, which does not comply with the EPA Code of Practice for Domestic Wastewater Treatment Systems (Population Au Equivalent <10), and the existing density of domestic dwellings serviced by septic tanks in the immediate vicinity; Mayo County Council is not satisfied that effluent from the development can be satisfactorily treated and disposed of on-site and/ or that groundwater quality would not be adversely g affected. The proposed development would therefore be prejudicial to public health, pose an in unacceptable risk of environmental pollution and be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable nn development of the area. a Pl

Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Lurgankeel, Kilcurry, Dundalk, Co Louth, Louth

Lurgankeel, Kilcurry, Dundalk, Co Louth

Louth County Council · 26107

What was proposed

EXTENSION OF DURATION OF 21/712 - Permission for a new waste water treatment system, revised site boundaries and associated site development works. *Further information received on 17/09/2021*

Refusal reasons

Reasons under review. View the official case.

Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Tuckmilltown, Straffan, Co Kildare, Kildare

Tuckmilltown, Straffan, Co Kildare

Kildare County Council · 2660953

What was proposed

planning permission to construct a 2 storey dwelling, double garage, waste water treatment system and raised percolation area, bored well, new entrance, general landscaping and all associated site works

Refusal reasons
  1. The proposed development would be the 43rd dwelling within a 1km radius of the subject site, rp which exceeds the maximum acceptable density of 30 and would therefore contravene Policy HO P26 and Objective HO 059 of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 (as varied) which Pu seeks to control rural densities. Furthermore, the dwelling would be the eighth dwelling in a row on the southern side of the L6021 (notwithstanding the minimal gaps between) which is contrary to Policy HO P13 of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 which seeks to restrict n further development which would exacerbate or extend an existing pattern of ribbon io development, defined as 5 or more houses along 250 metres on one side of any road. ct Furthermore, this location is categorised as Farmed Foothills with only a medium to low capacity for development as defined in the Landscape Character Assessment (Variation No. 4 of the pe Kildare County Development Plan 2023–2029). The proposed development would therefore set an undesirable precedent for similar development of this nature and would therefore be contrary ns to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. -I
  2. The subject site is at risk of pluvial flooding from the River Kill. It is within the 0.1% AEP in the CFRAM High End Future Scenario. A Site-Specific Flood Risk Assessment has not been il submitted and therefore the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposed development is nc not at risk of flooding or will not cause residual flood risk including flooding on adjoining or nearby properties. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to Policy PO P33 of the ou Kildare County Development Plan 2023–2029 (as varied) and to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. C
  3. Policy HO P12 of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023–2029 (as varied) is to ensure that y the siting and design of any proposed dwelling integrates appropriately with its physical nt surroundings whilst respecting the character of the receiving environment. The proposed ou development, by virtue of its two-storey bulk, scale of its two-car garage, its extensive setback from the carriageway and its associated requirement for an extensive new driveway, would C constitute haphazard piecemeal development that would not integrate appropriately with the sites physical surroundings or respect the character of the receiving environment. Furthermore, the e proposed dwelling, by reason of its location being carved out of a larger field, which requires new ar boundary treatments, would result in a development which would unnecessarily fragment the ld Ki An Rannóg Pleanála Planning Department rural landscape. y nl Having regard to the foregoing, it is considered that the design and location of the dwelling does O not respond sensitively to the characteristics of the receiving environment. New dwellings should blend into and not dominate the local landscape. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy HO s P12 and Appendix 4 (Rural House Design Guide) of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023- se 2029 and to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. o
  4. Section 15.7.6 of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023–2029 (as varied) seeks to rp discourage the proliferation of access points onto public roads, particularly in areas where the maximum speed limit applies or where road safety is of concern. The removal of an existing Pu agricultural access with no consideration as to how said agricultural lands will be accessed once the subject site is developed is considered inappropriate. The proposed development would therefore likely lead to a requirement for an additional entrance and there is already an over n proliferation in this location off the L6021. The proposed development would therefore conflict io with Section 15.7.6 of Kildare County Development Plan 2023–2029 (as varied) by interfering ct with the safety and free flowing nature of traffic on the road, contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. pe
  5. Policy HO P11 of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 seeks to facilitate proposals ns for dwellings in the countryside outside of settlements in conjunction with the Rural Housing Policy Zones map and accompanying Schedule of Category of Applicant and Local Need Criteria. -I Based on the information submitted with this application, the Applicant has not demonstrated, to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority, that they fully comply with the local need criteria, and a il grant of permission in this instance would be premature. nc ou C y nt ou C e ar ld Ki
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Parsonstown, Carbury, Co Kildare, Kildare

Parsonstown, Carbury, Co Kildare

Kildare County Council · 2660946

What was proposed

Permission to construct a single storey detached bungalow, single Storey detached garage, recessed entrance, secondary effluent Treatment system and all associated site works

Refusal reasons
  1. Policy HOP13 of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 (as varied) discourages rp ribbon development (defined as five or more houses alongside 250 metres of road frontage). Taken in conjunction with the existing level of development in this rural area, the proposed Pu development would give rise to the creation of ribbon development as defined by policy HOP 13 of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 (as varied) and result in the extension n of linear development which would erode the rural amenities of the area. The proposed io development, if permitted, would be contrary to the provision of policy HOP13 of the Kildare ct County Development Plan 2023-2029 (as varied) and would therefore be contrary to the proper pe planning and sustainable development of the area. ns
  2. Section 15.7.5 of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 (as varied) requires all applications to clearly indicate the sightlines available at the proposed access and objective HO -I O52 requires all applications to demonstrate the ability to provide safe vehicular access to the site without the necessity to remove extensive stretches of native hedgerow and trees. Based on the information provided relating to sightlines, the Applicant has not satisfactorily il nc demonstrated that the proposed development can achieve the minimum required sightlines, or that extensive removal of hedgerow is required. Therefore, the proposed development, if ou permitted, would pose a traffic hazard and would be contrary to, Section 15.7.5 and objective HO O52 of the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029 (as varied) and the proper C planning and sustainable development of the area. y nt ou C e ar ld Ki
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Kilcornan, Galway, Galway, Galway

Kilcornan, Galway, Galway

Galway County Council · 2661429

What was proposed

to granted outline planning permission under PL.REF.25/60801 for dwelling house including private wastewater treatment system with all associated works and ancillary services

Refusal reasons
  1. The Planning Authority is not satisfied that the submitted wastewater treatment proposals have been appropriately designed and assessed having regard to the scale and occupancy potential of the development proposed. The submitted Site Characterisation Form, wastewater treatment proposals and associated calculations were prepared on the basis of a four-bedroom dwelling with a design population equivalent of 6 PE. The current application proposes a seven-bedroom dwelling which requires assessment on the basis of a design population equivalent of 9 PE in accordance with the EPA Code of Practice for Domestic Waste Water Treatment Systems (Population Equivalent ≤10). Furthermore, no revised wastewater treatment calculations, polishing filter sizing calculations or updated supporting assessment have been submitted demonstrating the adequacy of the proposed wastewater treatment arrangements for the development now proposed. Having regard to the location of the site within a Regionally Important Aquifer with an Extreme Vulnerability rating and the requirements of DM Standard 38 of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposed wastewater treatment system and associated effluent disposal arrangements would adequately protect groundwater quality. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to DM Standard 38 of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028, the EPA Code of Practice for Domestic Waste Water Treatment Systems (Population Equivalent ≤10), 2021 and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  2. Having regard to the overall scale, footprint, ridge height, massing, bulk and visual presence of the proposed dwelling, the Planning Authority considers that, notwithstanding the revisions made from the development previously refused under Pl. Ref. 26/60361, including the removal of the basement level, omission of the detached garage, reduction in floor area and simplification of certain elevational treatments, the proposed dwelling remains excessive in scale and has failed to sufficiently address the concerns identified in the previous refusal. The Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposed development adequately reflects the principles of simplicity of form, appropriate scale, visual integration and reduced massing promoted within Appendix V - Design Guidelines for the Single Rural House. The proposed dwelling, by reason of its substantial floor area of approximately 615sqm, seven-bedroom layout, ridge height of approximately 9.15m, extensive footprint and overall bulk, would constitute an overly dominant form of development which would fail to assimilate satisfactorily into the receiving rural landscape and would not respect the established character and identity of the area. Accordingly, the Planning Authority considers that the proposed development is contrary to Policy Objective RH9, DM Standard 8 and Appendix V - Design Guidelines for the Single Rural House of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028 and would materially contravene Condition 4 of Planning Permission Pl. Ref. 25/60801. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. 3
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Meanus, Kilrickle, Loughrea, Galway

Meanus, Kilrickle, Loughrea

Galway County Council · 2661417

What was proposed

to construct a new dwelling, domestic garage, treatment system and percolation area, access road and all associated works

Refusal reasons
  1. Based on the information submitted, the proposed development entrance will generate overlapping visibility splays, and traffic conflicts that will arise precluding the provision, and maintenance of a safe and satisfactory means of vehicular access, in conjunction with the absence of satisfactorily demonstrated sightlines in both directions. The scale of roadside boundary intervention that will be required including traversing lands outside the control of applicant whilst negatively impact public road safety. It is considered that if permitted as proposed that the development would endanger public safety by reason of traffic hazard, obstruction of road users or otherwise, contrary to policy objectives NNR 2, and DM Standards 28 of the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028.
  2. Having regard to the proposed site configuration and siting of the proposed development, in conjunction with the proposed substandard access to serve same, the Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposed development would effectively assimilate into the local landscape. The Planning Authority has serious concerns that the proposed development would set an undesirable precedent for similar future development in the immediate area by way of the proposed substantial internal access road and that the proposed siting and configuration of the proposed development constitutes as disorderly and haphazard development. It is considered that if permitted as proposed the development would contravene materially DM Standard 8, and DM Standard 29 contained in the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028. Accordingly, to grant the development as proposed, would interfere with the character of the landscape, would detract from the visual amenity of the area, would set an undesirable precedent for similar developments in the area, would militate against the preservation of the rural environment, would materially contravene an objective and a development management standard contained in the current county development plan and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. 3
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

2 Dangan Court, Newcastle, Co.Galway, H91 K6DR, Galway

2 Dangan Court, Newcastle, Co.Galway, H91 K6DR

Galway City Council · 2660307

What was proposed

Permission for development which consists of: The demolition of an existing single-storey side porch attached to the existing dwelling house, and the construction of a new 2 bedroom, detached single-storey dwelling (c. 81 sq.m) located to the side and rear of the existing two-storey dwelling at 2 Dangan Court, Newcastle, Galway, H91 K6DR. The proposed development will utilise the existing site entrance and access arrangements and includes all associated site development, landscaping, drainage, and ancillary works

Refusal reasons

Reasons under review. View the official case.

Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

Damastown, Naul, Co. Dublin, Dublin

Damastown, Naul, Co. Dublin

Fingal County Council · F26A/0761E

What was proposed

The development will consist of: Retention of existing freestanding dwelling and change of use to ancillary building for agricultural use.

Refusal reasons
  1. The proposed development seeks the retention of an unauthorised structure (i.e. a dwelling) however, the applicant has not demonstrated how this structure complies with the criteria and policies of the Councils Rural Settlement Strategy. Additionally the change of use of an unauthorised dwelling is therefore not permitted and would set an undesirable precedent for other similar unauthorised uses and buildings The application fails to demonstrate how the development to be retained would either protect or promote in a balanced way, the development of agriculture and rural related enterprise, or the built and cultural heritage of the area. The development is therefore considered unacceptable in principle having regard to the RU zoning objective of the Fingal Development Plan 2023-2029 and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  2. The proposed development, by reason of its design and finish which includes features more accustomed to a residential dwelling, would not be suitable in this rural location or acceptable as a permanent structure on the site in the long term given its prefabricated nature. The development would be seriously injurious to the rural amenities of the surrounding area. The development proposed and for retention is therefore considered to be in direct conflict with Objectives DMSO100, DMSO101 & DMSO102 of the Fingal Development Plan 2023-2029, would set an undesirable precedent and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.
  3. The applicant has failed to demonstrate the required sightlines, as per the requirements of DN-GEO-03060 as published by Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII), are available to serve the proposed development and, due to the relationship of the site entrance with the R108 alignment and road levels, sightlines in accordance with TII DN-GEO-03060 do not appear to be achievable. Furthermore, insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate safe traffic movement for large agricultural vehicles can be achieved at the site. The proposed development is therefore considered to comprise a serious traffic hazard given inadequate sightlines and the proximity of the site access to the four-way junction to the south and would be contrary to Objective DMSO118 of the Fingal Development Plan 2023-2029 and contrary to the proper and sustainable development of the area
Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

MACE, The Grange, Ballyboughal, Co. Dublin, A41 PW67, Dublin

MACE, The Grange, Ballyboughal, Co. Dublin, A41 PW67

Fingal County Council · F26A/0760E

What was proposed

Planning Permission is sought for a new enlarged carpark area to south with new Carwash, Laundromat, Plant Room, general landscaping, Sustainable Drainage, nature pond/swale/biodiversity friendly community garden & seating area & all associated site works.

Refusal reason

The applicant has failed to satisfactorily address the reason for refusal issued under Reg. Ref. F25A/0469E as insufficient information has been submitted in relation to the proposed development relating to surface water drainage, foul sewer or water supply arrangements to serve the proposed development. Insufficient information has been submitted in respect of boundary treatments and hedgerow ownership issues;and concerns about tree and hedgrow removal remain. The applicant has also failed to submit a noise impact assessment of the proposed development. In the absence of such critical information, the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposed development would be in accordance with Objectives DMSO197, DMSO126 & DMSO245 of the Fingal Development Plan 2023-2029. To permit the proposed development would set an undesirable precedent and would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

The Blackhills, Baltrasna Skerries, Co. Dublin, K34KP03, Dublin

The Blackhills, Baltrasna Skerries, Co. Dublin, K34KP03

Fingal County Council · F26A/0750E

What was proposed

Renovation and extension of existing dwelling to include 1/ Construction of new single storey rear extension to provide enlarged kitchen, utility room, and en-suite bathroom. 2/ Construction of new single storey side and rear extension connecting existing garage to existing dwelling. 3/ Conversion of existing garage to rear to new kitchen/dining area. 4/ Construction of new first floor dormer roof extension to side/front to accommodate new walk-in wardrobe and ensuite bathroom, and remodelling of existing bedroom to include 2 no. Velux windows to side, and all associated site works at The Blackhills, Balbriggan, Co. Dublin. K34KP03.

Refusal reason

The applicant has not demonstrated that the family flat would be in use by a family member or provided adequate justification for its need. The flat far exceeds the 75sqm limit listed in Objective SPQHO46. The applicant also proposes own-door access to the front. As a result, the proposed development contravenes Sections 3.5.13.2, 14.10.3, Policy SPQHP42 and Objective SPQHO46 of the Fingal Development Plan 2023-2029. To grant permission for the proposed development would set an undesirable precedent and would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet
Refused

56, Taney Crescent, Goatstown, Dublin 14, D14KD35, Dublin

56, Taney Crescent, Goatstown, Dublin 14, D14KD35

Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council · D26B/0469/WEB

What was proposed

A dormer window extension in roof at front & associated works

Refusal reason

RECOMMENDATION Refuse permission for the following reason: 1. Having regard to the position, scale, form and design of the proposed front dormer window, and to the established character of the surrounding streetscape, which is characterised by a consistent pattern of hipped and pitched roof forms, it is considered that the proposed development would result in a visually prominent and incongruous feature on the front roof slope of the dwelling. The proposed dormer would detract from the visual amenities and established character of the area and would therefore be contrary to Section 12.3.7.1 Extensions to Dwellings (i) Extensions to the Front and (iv) Alterations at Roof/Attic Level, and Section 12.3.1 Quality Design of the Dún Laoghaire Rathdown County Development Plan 2022 to 2028. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

Official decision evidence
Open official case Not linked yet