Skip to content

Refusals and conditions

From the council's decision notices

Louth: why applications are refused, and the conditions permissions carry

Counted from Louth’s own decision notices: 776 of its 788 decisions made from 25 October 2025 to 25 October 2026 (98%). Findings, not verdicts — each figure is a share of the notices read.

Decision notices read
776
of 788 decisions, last 12 months
Refusals read
99
of 101 refused or part refused
Permissions read
677
of 687 granted or part granted
Conditions on a permission
6
the median permission read

Why applications are refused

Grounds cited in refusals

Share of 99 refusals whose decision notice we read

  1. Contrary to development plan policy77%
  2. Undesirable precedent38%
  3. Insufficient information35%
  4. Design, scale and visual impact34%
  5. Traffic safety, access and sightlines33%
  6. Rural housing policy and local need26%
  7. Other19%
  8. Ecology, Natura 2000 and appropriate assessment18%
  9. Landscape, scenic views and routes18%
  10. Zoning and land use18%
  11. Environmental effects (noise, emissions, EIA)17%
  12. On-site wastewater and public health16%

A notice counts once for each theme it cites, however often it cites it — the share of refusals refused at least partly on that ground. A notice can cite several, so the shares do not add up to 100%. The 12 most common of 19 are drawn; the table has them all.

Show the numbers
ThemeNoticesShare
Contrary to development plan policy7677%
Undesirable precedent3838%
Insufficient information3535%
Design, scale and visual impact3434%
Traffic safety, access and sightlines3333%
Rural housing policy and local need2626%
Other1919%
Ecology, Natura 2000 and appropriate assessment1818%
Landscape, scenic views and routes1818%
Zoning and land use1818%
Environmental effects (noise, emissions, EIA)1717%
On-site wastewater and public health1616%
Density, layout and residential standards1515%
Flood risk1515%
Neighbours' amenity (overlooking, overshadowing, overbearing)1515%
Protected structures, ACAs and archaeology1414%
Water supply and public sewer capacity1010%
Premature pending infrastructure or a plan55%
Ribbon development55%

The conditions permissions carry

Kinds of condition attached

Share of 677 permissions whose decision notice we read

  1. Built as per the plans and particulars100%
  2. Protecting neighbours (screening, glazing, noise, light)74%
  3. Construction hours and management68%
  4. Entrance, sightlines, roads and parking67%
  5. Surface water and drainage (SuDS)66%
  6. Restrictions on use or further development53%
  7. Materials, finishes and design changes48%
  8. Development contributions and security bonds36%
  9. Landscaping, hedgerows, trees and boundaries31%
  10. On-site wastewater treatment system26%
  11. Waste management19%
  12. Occupancy and local-need conditions17%

A notice counts once for each theme it cites, however often it cites it — the share of permissions given at least one condition of that kind. A notice can cite several, so the shares do not add up to 100%. The 12 most common of 20 are drawn; the table has them all.

Show the numbers
ThemeNoticesShare
Built as per the plans and particulars677100%
Protecting neighbours (screening, glazing, noise, light)49874%
Construction hours and management46368%
Entrance, sightlines, roads and parking45467%
Surface water and drainage (SuDS)44866%
Restrictions on use or further development35753%
Materials, finishes and design changes32448%
Development contributions and security bonds24236%
Landscaping, hedgerows, trees and boundaries20831%
On-site wastewater treatment system17426%
Waste management12719%
Occupancy and local-need conditions11217%
Uisce Éireann water and sewer connections9614%
Archaeology and built heritage8412%
Duration or temporary permission8012%
Ecology (bats, nesting birds, AA mitigation)7110%
Other629%
Estate completion, lighting, naming and taking in charge528%
Part V social housing375%
Energy, EV charging and climate345%

By type of development

The grounds cited in refusals and the conditions attached in Louth, by type of development
TypeNotices readRefusals: most citedPermissions: most common conditions
Alterations6498% of decisions3 read — too few
  1. Entrance, sightlines, roads and parking62%
  2. Construction hours and management57%
  3. Protecting neighbours (screening, glazing, noise, light)52%
Change of use5498% of decisions2 read — too few
  1. Protecting neighbours (screening, glazing, noise, light)83%
  2. Construction hours and management77%
  3. Entrance, sightlines, roads and parking71%
Extension15597% of decisions7 read — too few
  1. Protecting neighbours (screening, glazing, noise, light)93%
  2. Construction hours and management90%
  3. Restrictions on use or further development81%
Housing estate46100% of decisions8 read — too few
  1. Construction hours and management89%
  2. Entrance, sightlines, roads and parking89%
  3. Development contributions and security bonds84%
New dwelling14399% of decisions
  1. Contrary to development plan policy79%
  2. Rural housing policy and local need53%
  3. Design, scale and visual impact47%
  1. Entrance, sightlines, roads and parking83%
  2. Surface water and drainage (SuDS)82%
  3. Development contributions and security bonds81%
Retention17598% of decisions28 read — too few
  1. Surface water and drainage (SuDS)60%
  2. Protecting neighbours (screening, glazing, noise, light)59%
  3. Restrictions on use or further development59%

Shares are of the refusals or permissions whose notice was read. The conditions column leaves out “built as per the plans and particulars”, which nearly every permission carries. A group with fewer than 30 notices read shows its count and no breakdown.

By town

Towns with at least 30 refusals or permissions read, listed alphabetically.

The grounds cited in refusals and the conditions attached in Louth's towns, listed alphabetically
TownNotices readRefusals: most citedPermissions: most common conditions
Drogheda10297% of decisions12 read — too few
  1. Protecting neighbours (screening, glazing, noise, light)73%
  2. Construction hours and management66%
  3. Entrance, sightlines, roads and parking62%
Dundalk18899% of decisions12 read — too few
  1. Protecting neighbours (screening, glazing, noise, light)81%
  2. Construction hours and management74%
  3. Entrance, sightlines, roads and parking69%

Shares are of the refusals or permissions whose notice was read. The conditions column leaves out “built as per the plans and particulars”, which nearly every permission carries. A group with fewer than 30 notices read shows its count and no breakdown.

About the figures

PPI’s reader reads each decision notice, finds every refusal reason and condition in it word for word, and tags each with what it is about from a fixed list. A figure counts notices: a refusal citing flood risk in two of its reasons counts once for flood risk. Reasons and conditions the reader could not find word for word are not counted.

What a council refuses for, and the conditions it attaches, depend on what it was asked to decide as much as on the council. A group with fewer than 30 notices read shows its count and no breakdown. Every council read →

Source Louth's decision notices, read and counted by PPI; no notice text is reproduced hereAlways confirm a decision against the council’s own register.

Independent planning information for Ireland — not a government website or an official planning service, and not legal advice. Contains Irish Public Sector Data licensed under CC BY 4.0. Always confirm details with the relevant local authority before relying on them.

Planning portal

Free pre-planning reportCheck a site before you apply
Map of applicationsEvery application on one map, with zoning and heritage layers
AreasCounties and towns
Planning statisticsThe national picture, and every council side by side
CommencementsWhat actually got built
Property salesWhat it sold for
Ask the planning assistantPlain-English questions