• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

Gardaland

I'm guessing it's the same rule that covers wind turbines. Painting them white doesn't make them any less visible either.

If there's one thing I hate about European coasters, it's the amount of red tape and bureaucracy involved in getting them built. Whilst occasionally it leads to gems like Nemesis, it can also lead to stupid situations like this where the mandatory colour choice ends up having a much greater impact on the skyline than the originally intended colour. As well as this, the arduous planning procedures and general high levels of NIMBYism throughout the continent makes building coasters much more expensive than it should be.

No wonder Americans are always horrified when they encounter our planning laws. In the US or China, as long as it's not a national park, you can pretty much build whatever you want. This definitely has its drawbacks but for coasters it's great.
 
Last edited:
Agreed, it's one American law I actually agree with: if you own the land, you can do what you like with it.
 
Originally they planned the coaster to have a black and orange colour scheme. They had wanted to repaint the Drop Tower and Flying island with similar colours to match the theme but arent aloud to do that either.
 
I presume none of you have actually been to Gardaland?

This isn't the salt plains of Utah.

This is the shores of one of the most beautiful places in Europe - where millions of tourists flock to every year. It is genuinely stunning scenery. If there were a load of huge coasters it would look horrendous.

I know this coaster looks ugly even in white, but I think it's a good thing that Gardaland have such tight restrictions.
 
AstroDan said:
I presume none of you have actually been to Gardaland?
This is the shores of one of the most beautiful places in Europe - where millions of tourists flock to every year. It is genuinely stunning scenery. If there were a load of huge coasters it would look horrendous.
Click to expand...

Maybe that's true for the Northerly, more mountainous part of Lake Garda but from what I've seen, the shoreline near Gardland is pretty much lined with modern holiday homes. I wouldn't say it's exactly unspoiled natural scenery in any case. I think it's also worth considering that Gardaland does have some part to play in attracting around three million of those tourists to the region each year, something that is rarely acknowledged by planning authorities.

I don't think anyone's demanding that Gardaland should be allowed to have a skyline like Cedar Point. Surely though, the park should be able to decide what colour they can paint their coasters at least below a certain height. It just seems stupid when the regulations end up acting against their original intentions. Then again, Italy in particular is infamous for its rigid bureaucracy that often defies all logic.
 
I don't disagree about the colour schemes. I was just (perhaps wrongly) getting the impression that a free-for-all attitude should be in place on land in the area.

As much as Peschiera del Garda and so on is not the mountainous part, it is still tranquil and scenic - with a lot of beauty in the landscape.

:)
 
AstroDan said:
I don't disagree about the colour schemes. I was just (perhaps wrongly) getting the impression that a free-for-all attitude should be in place on land in the area.

As much as Peschiera del Garda and so on is not the mountainous part, it is still tranquil and scenic - with a lot of beauty in the landscape.

:)
Click to expand...

I do think that beautiful landscapes should be protected from development. It was just a general rant about how much time, effort and money it takes to build even a fairly low key coaster in Europe vs. other parts of the world even in a place that isn't particularly scenic.

There are times, if an exciting proposal is continuously rejected for seemingly no good reason that I can see the appeal of a free for all system. Unfortunately though, people just can't be trusted not to build hideous things in nice places.
 
Last edited:
It's not everywhere to be fair.

Portaventura, Europa-Park, Thorpe Park for example have less stifling restrictions than say Gardaland or Alton Towers.
 
Thorpe is still pretty heavily restricted. They can't build too high due to the proximity of Heathrow. They have to make taller rides less visible hence Stealth's gradient paint job. They also have to maintain the surface area of the lake if they alter the shape of the island.

Europa has had issues with noise that resulted in the first drop scream shield on Silverstar and the polymer wheels on Wodan.

Spain is probably the only place in Europe where parks pretty much have free reign. It's perhaps not surprising though as the same laws have seen the Mediterranean coast decimated by holiday homes, golf resorts, high rise flats and hotels.

There's definitely a balance to be had when it comes to these restrictions. Looking at the UK alone, I think there are some places and scenarios where planning restrictions could do with being relaxed. At the same time, I think there are a lot of unique landscapes that are currently under threat and need protecting. Unfortunately, it doesn't matter where you try to build, people seem to find reasons why their area is more beautiful and culturally significant than all the others. I feel this NIMBY attitude seriously hinders the UK economy, stifles its infrastructure and reduces job creation.

There are some amazing coasters in spectacular locations that would sadly never be allowed to exist in Europe. Mountain Flyer is the one that springs to mind most. But it is built in a country where they will happily flatten a mountain to build a factory in its place.

As you can probably tell, I have conflicting thoughts on this issue. All I do know is that if I had some land and someone told me I couldn't build something on it or what colour I had to paint it, that would annoy me greatly.
 
Last edited:
I know the parks I mentioned have restrictions - but they don't tend to stifle growth.

Restrictions at LLW for example, stifle development.

Europe is far more culturally historic than a lot of the USA...
 
TedTheHuman said:
Merlin build a completely white coaster which will get dirtier far quicker and they won't clean it, it's like they're a self parody. The very least they could have done was make the supports and rails black so it would look a bit better.
Click to expand...

The colour scheme was dictated by the terms of the planning application.

So technically not Merlin's fault.
 
I don't really understand why Gardland didn't go for a terrain-level launched coaster...

Launched rides are perfect for parks with severe planning problems - which is why I hope Alton Towers' next project is a multi-launched ride from Mack or Intamin.
 
Last edited:
Exactly. Why build a coaster that is naturally tall if you know you have lots of restrictions? Especially when it is almost identical to another coaster in one of your parks. If again shows a severe lack of creativity from Merlin. I have never been to Gardaland but it does look like a terrain hugging launched coaster with inversions would fit their line-up well.

:)
 
10917409_10152500869127680_1877088195371097830_n.png


What an awful name. What an awful lack of creativity. I don't care that it is in Italy. Typical Merlin.

:)
 
Hahahahahahah. Hahah. Hahahahah. Ha.

Terrible.

Also, why is it not an Italian name?
 
If I said what I really wanted to say about this, I'd probably be playing with Joel's banstick. :p

This shows a complete lack of creativity and imagination from the people who came up with this. And as has already been mentioned, if they'd gone for something more Italian, it would be better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top