Tullow playground scuppered during bad-tempered meeting 

TULLOW’S hopes for a new children’s playground have been dealt a blow after municipal district councillors voted against proceeding with planning permission for a proposed facility at the 1798 Park.

In a tense meeting that saw accusations of cowardice and vote-chasing, councillors voted 4-2 against allowing a Part 8 planning application to proceed, effectively sending planners back to the drawing board to find an alternative location.

The playground, intended for pre-teens aged two to 12, had been identified as a priority in Tullow’s town centre plan following widespread public demand. However, the proposal to locate it at the 1798 park and green space adjacent to Parc Mhuire estate met with fierce opposition from local residents.

Nicola Lawler, town regeneration officer with Carlow County Council, told the meeting that a courtesy information session held on 17 September was attended by 26 residents from Parc Mhuire.

“Every resident that attended was opposed to the idea of the playground going to their homes,” Ms Lawler said. “Most of the issues related to the potential for increased antisocial behaviour, the impact on the elderly and vulnerable residents, fear of disturbance.” Ms Lawler explained that many concerns had already been addressed in the plans, but residents remained opposed.

Cllr Will Paton proposed abandoning the Parc Mhuire site, noting that “100% of the people who came to the meeting in Teach Bride earlier last month were completely and utterly opposed” to the development.

“Unfortunately, it’s just the site’s not acceptable to the residents in the area and I think their concerns have to be listened to,” he said, adding that Tullow had been without a children’s playground “for the past two summers”.

However, the proposal sparked an impassioned response from cllr Brian O’Donoghue, who fought to allow the planning process to continue.

“It beggars belief that the people in the estate who have grandchildren would rather have no amenities and no facilities than have a playground on their back door,” he said.

Cllr O’Donoghue argued that proceeding to Part 8 would give all 5,000 residents of Tullow – not just the handful of objectors – a chance to have their say through the formal planning process.

He warned that blocking the application set a dangerous precedent: “If a simple playground can be stopped by ten emails, then we will not get one single thing done in any of the RRDF proposals.” In a fiery conclusion, he challenged his colleagues: “To not allow this, and to not allow the people of Tullow an opportunity to have a look at this, is one of the most cowardly things this municipal district will ever do.” Cllr Ben Ward supported proceeding with Part 8, emphasising that the site was publicly-owned land maintained by the council. “We have a town of 5,000 people and the biggest issue that I heard when I canvassed every single house in this town during the local elections is that we have no park for preteens,” he said.

He argued that mitigation measures including fencing, CCTV, accessible pathways and vegetation removal could address residents’ concerns, adding: “No matter where we put it, there’s going to be people that won’t want it there.” Following the 4-2 vote against Part 8, cllr Ward issued a stark warning: “If we can’t get a simple thing like a playground for young kids in our town over the line because some politicians are scared of losing a few votes, to upset few people in the area, how are we going to develop our town into the future? I think people need to stand up and be brave and vote for something, and face the backlash for the good of the town.” Cllr O’Donoghue accused some members who voted against the proposal of “pulling up the ladder after themselves”, claiming they “have children and grandchildren who have gone beyond the age requirement of needing the playground”.

Councillors who voted against proceeding maintained that they supported a playground in principle but wanted a more suitable location. Cllr John Pender said members were “all in favour of the playground but we want to get the right site where there’ll be hopefully agreement on”.

Cllr Jim Deane said he had received “quite a lot of messages and emails from people who didn’t want this playground,” adding: “I believe that people will come on board, but at the moment, unfortunately, I don’t think the area is suitable for this.” The council’s regeneration team must now seek an alternative location for the playground, with no timeline given for when a new proposal might be brought forward.