Planners reject major expansion plans at Wicklow studio, home of Netflix hits ‘Wednesday’ and ‘Vikings’

By Hugh O'Farrell Walsh, The Wicklow People

Wicklow County Council has refused planning permission for the proposed Phase 3 expansion of Ashford Studios, halting a major scheme that would have more than doubled the size of the existing complex at Kellystown and significantly reshaped the studio campus.

The decision blocks IIB (Invent, Innovate, Build) Ltd’s bid to construct five multi‑storey studio blocks, a smaller single‑storey studio, a restaurant and office building, extensive backlot areas and almost 350 visitor parking spaces, an ambitious development the operators said was essential to boosting Ireland’s film making capacity and attracting large‑scale international productions.

The council’s order cites four detailed reasons for refusal, ranging from the absence of an environmental impact assessment report to concerns about archaeology, rural encroachment, drainage links to designated Natura sites, and a lack of technical assessments on issues such as traffic, water supply and visual impact.

The application, lodged at the end of May, sought permission for five large studio blocks — each rising to between four and five storeys and offering more than 13,600 square metres of internal space, alongside a smaller single‑storey studio, a two‑storey restaurant and office building, extensive backlot areas and 347 visitor parking spaces.

The developers argued that the expansion would allow Ashford Studios to host multiple major productions simultaneously, reduce downtime between projects and strengthen Wicklow’s position within Ireland’s growing screen industry.

They pointed to the studio’s track record with international productions such as Netflix hits Wednesday and Vikings, and said the proposal aligned with national policy to expand audiovisual capacity.

The operators have long argued that additional studio space is essential to keep Ireland competitive in attracting large‑scale international productions, and said Phase 3 would create up to 1,500 jobs once fully operational.

They also emphasised that the land has been used for studio purposes for more than a decade and that the proposal followed the pattern set by earlier permissions, including the Phase 2 expansion upheld by An Bord Pleanála in 2019.

The first reason for refusal states that the development, covering approximately 30 hectares and more than doubling the existing studio footprint, exceeds thresholds for mandatory environmental impact assessment (EIA) under Schedule 5 of the Planning and Development Regulations.

The council notes that an EIA report was not submitted, and that assessing the application without one would be contrary to the EU’s EIA directive and Irish planning law. In the council’s words, considering the proposal “in the absence of such information would be contrary to proper planning and sustainable development”.

The second reason centres on zoning and the County Development Plan. Several of the proposed studio blocks, backlots and infrastructure were located on rural lands, rather than on the employment zoned lands designated for studio expansion.

The council found that the development would “materially contravene” multiple objectives of the County Development Plan, including policies directing employment uses to zoned lands and limiting rural development to small‑scale projects.

‘Vikings’ shooting on set at Ashford Studios.

It also criticised the absence of an updated masterplan or clear phasing plan for the overall employment zoned area, concluding that the proposal would lead to “leapfrogging of existing zoned lands” and set a precedent for unsustainable encroachment into the rural area.

The third reason relates to ecology and the site’s hydrological connection to the Murrough Wetlands SAC and SPA. The council highlighted an existing drainage channel linking the site directly to the Natura 2000 network and said insufficient information had been provided on potential impacts to conservation values.

Without detailed assessment, the council said it could not determine whether the development would affect the protected habitats, making the proposal contrary to the Habitats Directive, national policy and the County Development Plan.

The fourth reason cites a lack of technical information across key environmental and infrastructural areas. The council said no adequate assessments were provided on traffic generation, road network impacts, light and noise pollution, employee and visitor numbers, effluent disposal, water supply, surface water attenuation, archaeology, or visual and landscape impacts.

In the absence of this information, the council concluded that the development would pose a “serious traffic hazard,” negatively affect the rural landscape and biodiversity, injure residential amenities, depreciate property values, impact public health, and potentially give rise to flooding.

These planning concerns emerged alongside a submission from the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage on July 7.

The Department warned that the 29‑hectare site sits within a “surviving archaeological landscape” containing numerous recorded monuments, including ancient field systems, enclosures, moated sites, fulachta fia and a church and graveyard. Part of the land lies within a zone of notification for a recorded fulacht fia, meaning any disturbance could affect protected archaeological remains.

The Department said there was “high potential for the survival of similar and/or related archaeological remains within the footprint of the proposed development” and recommended that the council seek further information, including geophysical survey, licensed test trenching and detailed research.

It stressed that no construction or site preparation should begin until a full archaeological impact assessment was completed and approved.