We need your help now

Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.

You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.

If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.

The Viking Voyage at Tayto Park. Photocall Ireland
An Bord Pleanála

A €14m rollercoaster for Tayto Park has been refused due to noise impact on four residents

Four local residents claimed that the anticipated screaming from passengers on ‘Coaster 2021′ will increase noise disturbance in the area.

AN BORD PLEANÁLA has refused planning permission for an “iconic” €14 million steel rollercoaster for Tayto Park, as the operation of the ride would be too noisy for nearby residents.

In a hammer blow to expansion plans at Ireland’s largest theme park, the appeals board has refused planning permission for Coaster 2021 in response to objections by four residents. Meath County Council gave the plan the go-ahead in February.

However, local residents, Jeremy Butcher and Suzanne Galwey, along with Donal Greene and Clare Smith, appealed the decision to An Bord Pleanála.

In their joint appeal, they claimed that the anticipated screaming from passengers on Coaster 2021 will increase noise disturbance in the area.

The appellants’ dwellings are located 430 metres to the north of the Tayto Park site and 480 metres to the north east of the theme park. 

In its formal order, the appeals board stated that having regard to the location of the rollercoaster in close proximity to residential dwellings the board is not satisfied that the rollercoaster “would not seriously injure the amenities of property in the vicinity by reason of noise”.

The Board has made its refusal following a recommendation from its inspector to refuse planning permission at the end of a 49-page report.

As part of her on-site inspection on 7 June, the inspector noted the ‘rattling’ and ‘screaming’ sounds from the park’s existing Cú Chulainn rollercoaster.

The appeals board also refused planning after stating that it was not satisfied that the proposed development would not be at the risk of flooding.

The board also stated it was precluded from granting planning as it was not satisfied that Coaster 2021 would not be likely to have a significant adverse effect on the EU protected site – the River Nanny Estuary and Shore Special Protection Area (SPA).

Coaster 2021 was to be one metre lower than the park’s 32 metre high Cú Chulainn rollercoaster and be 972 metres in length. The rollercoaster was expected to add 40 full-time and part-time jobs at the park.

Long-term viability at risk

The decision represents a major blow to the future prospects of Tayto Park.

Planning documents lodged with the application state that if the Tayto Park operators do not add a major attraction at this time “the longer term viability of the park would be brought into question”.

The planning documents stated that Coaster 2021 will help projected visitor numbers to Tayto Park – owned by businessmen, Ray Coyle – increase by 15% from 630,000 in 2019 to 725,000 in 2023.

Speaking last November, Coyle said that the new rollercoaster “will copper-fasten the future of Tayto Park”.

He said: “The new rollercoaster will be two rollercoasters in one. It will be a first for Europe and ensure the future of the park. If you don’t create something landmark every three of four years, your numbers will start going down and that is the road to closure.”

Noise disturbance was the first ground of appeal by the residents and they stated that the existing Cú Chulainn rollercoaster produces significant “rattling” while moving accompanied by screaming from those on board every time it is in use, which is every few minutes up to nine hours a day.

The appeal contended: “Although the new rollercoaster is electric and may not produce the same rattle, it will inevitably bring the noise of participants screaming every time it is in use.”

They added that the application actually includes two rollercoaster rides “tripling the total noise disturbance we experience”.

A report commissioned by Tayto Park stated that last year the Park produced a €32 million spend for the economy and sustained over 800 jobs.

The most recent accounts for Tayto Park for 2017 show that it recorded an 8% rise in pre-tax profits to €3.65m.

This followed revenues increasing by 5% to €17.533m – or an average of €92,770 a day in revenues for each of the 189 days Tayto Park was open in 2017.

Statement from Tayto Park

In response to the An Board Pleanála ruling, a statement from Tayto Park stated that “the management of Tayto Park is very disappointed to be informed today of the decision by An Bord Pleanala to refuse the planning application for the construction of two new rollercoasters at Tayto Park (Coaster 2021 is two rollercoasters in one).”

Tayto Park stated: “We believe that our planning application and response to the objections raised to An Bord Pleanála addressed every concern raised.”

We now have no choice but to delay an investment of over €14m into the development of two world class rollercoasters which would have brought over 25 construction jobs to Meath and by 2020 40 new permanent jobs to Tayto Park as well as countless new visitors to the county from Ireland and abroad.

Tayto Park confirmed: “We will continue to strive to create a world class facility encompassing a unique blend of nature and exciting attractions at Tayto Park.

“We will examine the decision of An Bord Pleanála in detail and decide our next course of action and although disappointed with the decision we will continue to look at ways of keeping Tayto Park one of Ireland’s most visited and loved attractions.”

Your Voice
Readers Comments
This is YOUR comments community. Stay civil, stay constructive, stay on topic. Please familiarise yourself with our comments policy here before taking part.
Leave a Comment
    Submit a report
    Please help us understand how this comment violates our community guidelines.
    Thank you for the feedback
    Your feedback has been sent to our team for review.

    Leave a commentcancel