Alton Towers' Next Big Thing?

[spicy]

^ I definately think the locals should be abit more lenient towards the planning in the park. Like is this view of a warehouse building far off in the distance really going to cause much of an issue to them..?

I'm possibly in the minority here but AT should be able to build what they like on their land. If my neighbours build something in their garden, unless it blocks out light, they should be able to do so. I don't like the look of next doors gazebo does that mean they shouldn't have it?

However I don't think they should just build whatever they like. Imagine Stealth at Alton Towers for example, it would definately stand out like a sore thumb from Alton Village and the locals would be well within their rights to object to that.

There is a fine balance and I think it does tip the way of the locals more than the park.

 

[DelPiero]

However I don't think they should just build whatever they like. Imagine Stealth at Alton Towers for example, it would definately stand out like a sore thumb from Alton Village and the locals would be well within their rights to object to that.

In coaster corner I agree, not at all reasonable. Launching down the gardens before top hatting out of the canopy before diving down into the gardens again... perfect.

 

[spicy]

^ I am actually surprised that AT have never actually used the natural 200ft drop into the valley to their advantage though..

We know it was once considered in the awesome 2005 woodie plans but that seems to be the only time..

 

[Matt N]

Personally, I think there are things that Alton Towers could do to get the application passed.

They could do simple things such as agreeing to spend money on restoring the Flag Tower (which was raised as a key disappointment by both of the complaining parties).

I dare say that they could even get it through by promising to remove Spinball Whizzer as a bargaining chip. The planners have notoriously hated Spinball Whizzer for years due to the fact that it’s noisy, brightly coloured and located close to the Towers, and the park themselves previously floated the possibility of removing it in their Long Term Development Plan for 2010-2019.

If they promised to remove Spinball, that could gain them enough brownie points with the locals and planners to get something like this through planning more easily. To its credit, this attraction’s building will be painted in a colour scheme that makes its visibility minimal for much of the year, and the attraction will also produce minimal amounts of noise by virtue of its indoor nature.

On the other hand, they may not need to do anything major about these objections to get the application passed. Thorpe got their application passed even with the original objections from Natural England and the Environment Agency.

 

[Dar]

Making the building less of a box would go a long way towards pleasing some of the objectors, some rounded edges, crenellations, etc. Just stuff to make it look more like it belongs there

 

[catsounds]

Couldn't they cover the top with some kind of garden like some other parks have done (i can't remember which) if its about visual issues

 

[Howie]

Honestly, given the history of NIMBYism they've had with the locals over the years, I'm surprised Alton Towers didn't see this coming. A big tin shed on top of a hill? Probably the highest point in the park, in fact, right next to the historic flag tower? I mean, durrr! Any idiot could have told you the neighbours would likely kick up a fuss.

 

[Nicky Borrill]

Making the building less of a box would go a long way towards pleasing some of the objectors, some rounded edges, crenellations, etc. Just stuff to make it look more like it belongs there

Couldn't they cover the top with some kind of garden like some other parks have done (i can't remember which) if its about visual issues

Both of these would go a long way. There are definitely things they could do. But the current plans, as they are now, just seem so slapped together.

Understanding the issue means to understand the local area. It's not just about 'neighbour's complaints.' The area is an area of great natural beauty enjoyed by thousand for generations. (Nominated multiple times as an 'area of natural outstanding beauty,' I believe the current nomination is ongoing, though I could be wrong.) AT, as a theme park, has been there for 40 odd years. Hell, even the Ropers predate the theme park!

It's not just noise and views as experienced from neighbouring properties that are an issue. The park cannot impact on the various nature walks and beuty spots that surround it either.

The cross valley coaster was ruled out due to the impact it would have on the beautiful Churnet Valley down by the river Churnet which the towers valley opens out into.

This will most likely be ruled out (in it's current form) because it stands on the edge of a tall hill, overlooking almost the entire village of Alton.

But there are solutions, lots of options, if AT / Merlin are willing to push.

 

[rob666]

My nan went to Alton for the day in the nineteen thirties for a day trip.
Four hour drive, many , many towns provided a motor coach service.
They had to queue for half an hour to get in.
Theme Park/amusement centre...same thing, different title, different period.
Alton Towers, as an amusement park, has been around as long as any local resident.
There will be lengthy negotiation regarding the plans, this is the early stages of a lengthy application process.
This planning is a long way from over, these are the first hurdles.

 

[Ethan]

My nan went to Alton for the day in the nineteen thirties for a day trip.
Four hour drive, many , many towns provided a motor coach service.
They had to queue for half an hour to get in.
Theme Park/amusement centre...same thing, different title, different period.
Alton Towers, as an amusement park, has been around as long as any local resident.
There will be lengthy negotiation regarding the plans, this is the early stages of a lengthy application process.
This planning is a long way from over, these are the first hurdles.

I mean, you're right, it's been around for a while. Although I doubt your nan was riding huge, loud dive coasters there in the 30s. Very different place.

I honestly think that if the building can be seen from a distance in the surrounding area, and it's unsightly, it's fair the locals wouldn't like it. I doubt I would either.

 

[Nicky Borrill]

My nan went to Alton for the day in the nineteen thirties for a day trip.
Four hour drive, many , many towns provided a motor coach service.
They had to queue for half an hour to get in.
Theme Park/amusement centre...same thing, different title, different period.
Alton Towers, as an amusement park, has been around as long as any local resident.
There will be lengthy negotiation regarding the plans, this is the early stages of a lengthy application process.
This planning is a long way from over, these are the first hurdles.

Not even remotely the same thing.

My family too have been visiting long before the theme park, but they didn't need a coach. There were no rides there in the 30s. Back then it was a country estate and gardens. From the 50s they had a funfair there, and from the 70s permanent rides started appearing.

Saying that it's the same thing is rediculous, like saying they may as well stick an RMC up at Chatsworth House, because 'it's the same thing!'

Part of my job at Alton Towers was giving lectures on the history of the site to visiting schools and groups. So I could go into more detail if you like. But believe me, it's a very different place now to what it was in the 30's, 40's, 50's or even when Mr Broome aquired the site in the 70s.

 

[rob666]

I'm not saying it is anything like the same thing, I wasn't making a ridiculous comparison, neither was I pulling facts out of my arse, I was simply pointing out that there has been heavy tourism in and around the Towers for many years, it didn't start with the Corkscrew.
Back to nan...
It was a charabanc, a fruit and veg wagon that was covered for summer trips with a cloth top and bench seats, wholesale market summer outing.
There was a steam fair on the lawns, boats, bands, dancing... it was a newspaper sponsored open day.
The argument was should they stay as a group for the fireworks at the end...they didn't.
Five hours each way on bench seats.
The place was meant to be very busy, she didn't want to go back when the corkscrew opened.
Back to the new ride shed, it could be screened by evergreens within a decade using mixed conifer hedging, the nasty quick stuff being chopped out after a few years to leave a screen of mixed evergreen.
They managed planning for Oblivion...

 

[Peet]

Hi folks, I think we need a bit of context here, here are some of the closer views from the visual assessment:










Not exactly a Blot on the Landscape is it!

Personally I think the SMDC conservation officer and Historic England would not be doing their jobs if they didn't highlight the concerns that they have done, but none of it really sounds like a showstopper to me.

 

[spicy]

^ You literally can't see it. If this gets denied on the basis of being unsightly for the locals then AT may as well forget ever having anything in that corner of the park.

 

[Matt N]

If anything, I’m quite surprised that the locals have zoned in on sight lines rather than noise.

I’m aware that this would be an enclosed attraction, so the noise would in theory be lower, and certainly very minimal in comparison to the attractions that resided in that area in the 1980s.

However, there could still be a case made for noise from speakers, crowds in the area and such, and particularly given the history of the site, I could have foreseen the locals complaining about noise rather than sight lines.

The sight lines, in that graphic above at least, do seem to me like a relative non-issue in the grand scheme of things. I obviously can’t speak on behalf of the locals, as I don’t live in Alton, but I would not have an issue with the sight line of that warehouse if one like that was built near me (I live in a similarly rural area, if not more rural, than where Alton Towers is located).

With that being said, I am not a local and I am not at liberty to provide much of an opinion on the matter.

 

[Nicky Borrill]

I'm not saying it is anything like the same thing, I wasn't making a ridiculous comparison, neither was I pulling facts out of my arse, I was simply pointing out that there has been heavy tourism in and around the Towers for many years, it didn't start with the Corkscrew.
Back to nan...
It was a charabanc, a fruit and veg wagon that was covered for summer trips with a cloth top and bench seats, wholesale market summer outing.
There was a steam fair on the lawns, boats, bands, dancing... it was a newspaper sponsored open day.
The argument was should they stay as a group for the fireworks at the end...they didn't.
Five hours each way on bench seats.
The place was meant to be very busy, she didn't want to go back when the corkscrew opened.
Back to the new ride shed, it could be screened by evergreens within a decade using mixed conifer hedging, the nasty quick stuff being chopped out after a few years to leave a screen of mixed evergreen.
They managed planning for Oblivion...

I thought you were better than that :/

BTW those fairs were recorded as happening in the 50's not the 30s. The records could be wrong of course, so I'm not saying your nan is wrong, just that the records (that I've seen) don't support that, and that upto 2004 AT or Tussauds weren't teaching that. The dining room and music room of the towers were turned into a tea room for the visiting public around that time though.

Good video here of AT in the 30s if interested... https://www.britishpathe.com/video/fairy-fountains

The evergreen idea is a good one.

^ You literally can't see it. If this gets denied on the basis of being unsightly for the locals then AT may as well forget ever having anything in that corner of the park.

You can only see a small amount of it. The problem is, that they plan to remove some of those trees, I don't 'think' they address exactly which ones will be removed in the LVA. Also that, as you can see from those images, when they took them, in March 22, many of the trees had started to sprout their leaves. What would it look like for the other 6 months of the year, when there is absoloutely no foliage on most of the trees?

Another issue raised by the PC is that the buiding will be illuminated, which will mean it will stand out at night. They cite previous planning applications granted on the basis of tree cover, that are now visible from all over due to illumination.

In fact, I don't think it's been posted, so perhaps a read of the PC obligation letter may help some of you to better understand.





-----------------------

The tree removal also raised concerns regarding ground stability on the hill, particularly in regard to the tower. I don't know who posted it earlier, but IMO they were spot on when they said that if they can get around the issues of the Tower, then the rest shouldn't be a problem to solve at all depends how creative AT / Merlin can be with regards to any solutions they propose in future revisions.

 

[rob666]

My nan was never, ever wrong.
Thirty years deceased though, so we might be safe.

Parish Council opinion doesn't count for much in a great many planning cases where big bucks and major local employers are concerned.
Add a dozen fast and slow conifers, whip out a few dying and dangerously old deciduous trees, then chop out the nasty conifers after a decade...job done quickly and easily.

 

[Nicky Borrill]

My nan was never, ever wrong.
Thirty years deceased though, so we might be safe.

Parish Council opinion doesn't count for much in a great many planning cases where big bucks and major local employers are concerned.
Add a dozen fast and slow conifers, whip out a few dying and dangerously old deciduous trees, then chop out the nasty conifers after a decade...job done quickly and easily.

No, the PC holds very little weight in these matters, I only shared that to reflect the concerns of the locals generally.

The main problems, which they also highlight, are the concerns around the tower, as other consultees, who do hold more weight, have mentioned that too.

 

[Matt N]

Interestingly, I think quite a few rides at Alton Towers are visible above the tree line from the right angle.

I know Oblivion certainly is, Rita is (hence why they painted the top parts of the track dark green rather than pink), and I think that Smiler might be as well.

 

[roomraider]

Off topic but could you at any time in the past go up the flag tower? Looks like it would provide some stunning views.