Alton Towers Ruins - Behind a Paywall

[Squiggs]

Ultimately this so-called problem has appeared suddenly after many decades of open access.

And ultimately, there's no indication that the problem has actually appeared at all.

There's no indication that security has suddenly become a problem in the ruins, not least because it has been years since they were last open to the public (essentially having closed due to the lockdown and never reopened), so there's been no chance for there to suddenly be an issue with guests running rampant.

 

[DistortAMG]

And ultimately, there's no indication that the problem has actually appeared at all.

There's no indication that security has suddenly become a problem in the ruins, not least because it has been years since they were last open to the public (essentially having closed due to the lockdown and never reopened), so there's been no chance for there to suddenly be an issue with guests running rampant.

People have been breaking into closed parts and damaging the Towers for as long back as I can remember, which is 2001 ish, likely to have happened before that too. It is just the park or authorities have quite rightly put their feet down and said enough is enough. The problem has existed for a LONG time.

The majority of clientel you get in a themepark are generally not the type to appreciate the history. Atleast when you go visit a castle, you go for the purpose of the castle and thus appreciate it as thats what you go there for. Most people don't do the same for Towers, they go for the rides, which is a totally different demographic. Which ends up in vandalism and damage that we have seen for decades from minorities within the public. We even see same damage and vandalism in ride queue lines to this day! That is where they CAN be seen.

 

[dave___]

Merlin have an 800 year old castle in their portfolio, the Towers are positively infant in comparison. If they wanted to put CCTV and so on everywhere there will be enough experts hovering around Warwick Castle that they could easily draw on to work out how to do it.

I expect the £10 fee will be a drip feed to see how popular it is prior to maybe opening in full next year if the demand is there; no point sorting it all out if only a handful of people a day go for a look.

 

[flyingguitar]

People have been breaking into closed parts and damaging the Towers for as long back as I can remember, which is 2001 ish, likely to have happened before that too. It is just the park or authorities have quite rightly put their feet down and said enough is enough. The problem has existed for a LONG time.

The majority of clientel you get in a themepark are generally not the type to appreciate the history. Atleast when you go visit a castle, you go for the purpose of the castle and thus appreciate it as thats what you go there for. Most people don't do the same for Towers, they go for the rides, which is a totally different demographic. Which ends up in vandalism and damage that we have seen for decades from minorities within the public. We even see same damage and vandalism in ride queue lines to this day! That is where they CAN be seen.

if it happened in the past, I could imagine it would defiantly happen nowadays, especially with tic toc, I recall the "lick" trend where people were encouraged to just steal stuff, I would imagine if it was open then people may be tempted to take something, I can fully understand why they would want to have it limited currently, I can imagine people getting into dangerous situations just for a tic toc or Instagram trend.

 

[DiogoJ42]

Meh. If people hurt themselves for online likes... let them.

 

[cloudburster]

Meh. If people hurt themselves for online likes... let them.

 

[Ryan]

I know this is controversial. But I think a non-wristband theme park is always going to struggle to maintain the ruins of a gothic country house, as an attraction in itself.

Access means upkeep. The more free the access the more it needs to be monitored, kept safe, the more damage the little that is left will endure. As a fully open free-roam attraction, for a safety focused, good-custodian theme park operator, it could end up being the most dangerous and most maintenance hungry attraction in the entire resort. For what improvement to their theme park offering? And if that improvement is only slight, marginal, how is this shift to open access being paid for?

Now personally, I love the Towers, it's a gorgeous house to me, even gutted and rotting. But any attraction at a theme park needs to pay it's way, either in marketability, increased guest satisfaction, or directly creating revenue.

"We have a relatively mid historical attraction, a stones throw from Little Moreton Hall, Chatsworth House, Shugborough Hall, Trentham Gardens, Biddulph Grange, Calke Abbey....come see our inferior ruin and gardens for £29-68pp! When you get here, please excuse the fact that it's literally falling apart, don't think too much about how insensitive most restoration and efforts to secure the ruin have been, try not to feel too uncomfortable about the unattended school group vaping on the spiral staircase, and don't be alarmed by the loud screaming echoing through the unglazed windows at regular intervals"

It just isn't right for the resort at this moment in time.

---

And here's where I probably get really controversial. The best thing that happened to Alton Towers itself since perhaps the 20s, is Hex. No comparable ruin in the area attracts such footfall through it's doors. Very few decaying country houses can entertain such a wide range of guests with a slice of local history. The safest, most structurally sound part of the entire building, is now the Armoury and the Octagon.

The Towers as a part of a theme park are managing, as they of course did for nearly a hundred years as a standing home, and for a few decades as a stately ruin, to wow and excite a new generation of visitors. The majority of the still standing building. was originally built with a spirit not too different to that of Oblivion's hole, or Nemesis' station, or Curses façade. Alton Towers House and Grounds, as we see it today was always a theme park. Keeping to that spirit, and utilising the shell to continue entertaining visitors, I think is a great way forward.

I think Alton Towers should sensitively use most of the structure for sympathetic, interesting and unique theme park attractions. Being a major theme park shouldn't be an inconvenience to the life of the ruins and grounds - they should use their skills, experience and funding as a way to make them relevant, safe and there for future generations to enjoy. After all, that's their responsibility as a heritage custodian.

Fill it with Hexes.

 

[Ash]

I know this is controversial. But I think a non-wristband theme park is always going to struggle to maintain the ruins of a gothic country house, as an attraction in itself.

Access means upkeep. The more free the access the more it needs to be monitored, kept safe, the more damage the little that is left will endure. As a fully open free-roam attraction, for a safety focused, good-custodian theme park operator, it could end up being the most dangerous and most maintenance hungry attraction in the entire resort. For what improvement to their theme park offering? And if that improvement is only slight, marginal, how is this shift to open access being paid for?

Now personally, I love the Towers, it's a gorgeous house to me, even gutted and rotting. But any attraction at a theme park needs to pay it's way, either in marketability, increased guest satisfaction, or directly creating revenue.

"We have a relatively mid historical attraction, a stones throw from Little Moreton Hall, Chatsworth House, Shugborough Hall, Trentham Gardens, Biddulph Grange, Calke Abbey....come see our inferior ruin and gardens for £29-68pp! When you get here, please excuse the fact that it's literally falling apart, don't think too much about how insensitive most restoration and efforts to secure the ruin have been, try not to feel too uncomfortable about the unattended school group vaping on the spiral staircase, and don't be alarmed by the loud screaming echoing through the unglazed windows at regular intervals"

It just isn't right for the resort at this moment in time.

---

And here's where I probably get really controversial. The best thing that happened to Alton Towers itself since perhaps the 20s, is Hex. No comparable ruin in the area attracts such footfall through it's doors. Very few decaying country houses can entertain such a wide range of guests with a slice of local history. The safest, most structurally sound part of the entire building, is now the Armoury and the Octagon.

The Towers as a part of a theme park are managing, as they of course did for nearly a hundred years as a standing home, and for a few decades as a stately ruin, to wow and excite a new generation of visitors. The majority of the still standing building. was originally built with a spirit not too different to that of Oblivion's hole, or Nemesis' station, or Curses façade. Alton Towers House and Grounds, as we see it today was always a theme park. Keeping to that spirit, and utilising the shell to continue entertaining visitors, I think is a great way forward.

I think Alton Towers should sensitively use most of the structure for sympathetic, interesting and unique theme park attractions. Being a major theme park shouldn't be an inconvenience to the life of the ruins and grounds - they should use their skills, experience and funding as a way to make them relevant, safe and there for future generations to enjoy. After all, that's their responsibility as a heritage custodian.

Fill it with Hexes.

Fantastic post, one I whole heartedly agree with.

The towers themselves remain both iconic, but in practical terms are a wholly underutilised asset to the park.

Yes, any development needs be justified but since Hex they have been an either a maze area or dumping ground. And just about suitable for the latter. I still think a headline TOTT is like nothing else and could/should still be used for a maze in the future.

But when you consider what the towers themselves “could” be used for…

- Retail space
- Food and beverage
- Museum
- Guided tours
- Historical recreation (akin to Warwick castle)
- Scare maze
- Walkthrough attraction (room with a broom)
- Low footprint dark ride (Snoori torren)
- Event space
- Cinema
- Accommodation
- Wedding venue
- Queue line space for external attraction (Hex)
- Show space
- Corporate space
- Arts & crafts

The towers are currently wholly un-utilised. Any part of that building with a roof should have its windows fitted and used for something to help pay for repairs elsewhere.

It will take effort and changing publics culture/habits as to what is in there but it can be done. Utilising unique prime real estate in the centre of a theme park for things which can be used all year.

The fact there’s never been a “santas grotto” of sorts in there amazes me. The events and AV teams could do something really special if they put their mind to it. Getting the absolute most out of the space

 

[Poisson]

There's signs of vandalism even in the small amount of the Towers access through Her Ladyship's Gardens. It is a thing and I imagine the park can't find justification to keep having to scrub the names and handles and phone numbers off all the Towers. Use it for something? Yes. Unrestricted access? I can see why they say no.

 

[venny]

I look forward to them restricting access to all areas where there is vandalism.

£10 for a ”tour” of the Nemsesis queue by some people’s logic.

 

[Ryan]

I look forward to them restricting access to all areas where there is vandalism.

£10 for a ”tour” of the Nemsesis queue by some people’s logic.

Yes, the Grade II* listed Nemesis Queue.

 

[James]

I look forward to them restricting access to all areas where there is vandalism.

£10 for a ”tour” of the Nemsesis queue, by some people’s logic.

I guess the key difference is a queue line with metal fencing that can be easily repainted/replaced versus historical ruins that may require specialist cleaning or receive irreparable damage.

 

[The_bup]

See, what I would love is for them to deck out the towers with re-creations of furniture it might of had, so they could hold tours through the towers. No vandals, as they are supervised, and maybe a little more interesting than the empty halls left now

 

[TBoy535]

I mean it’s only £10 for a unique experience of a heritage castle, within a theme park I’m certainly not complaining! To be honest this kind of experience would be a lot more in other parks with up charges. I don’t think in today’s world anyone would expect them to be free but it’s a specific market, not everyone who goes to a Theme park wants to see castles, they are there solely for rides understandably. It’s almost a completely different market which I feel they should charge more for and it’s great new addition for hotel guests if marketed right, who to be honest probably wasn’t even aware you could go into the towers previously before they closed.

I agree this is something they could certainly build on in the future as tours offer more of an experience with the explanation of the history and heritage. They could add to that experience with more plaques explaining each room , pamphlets, gift shop, souvenirs and opening up new rooms at a later date. I see this as another great addition and an idea to build on along side so many positive changes this season, with the sky ride to compliment next year.

 

[NuttySquirrel]

I've booked onto the tour on 20 July, a day I was planning to go anyway. I've been inside the ruins before but will be interested to see how the tour is presented and which areas are/aren't included.

I do think 2 hours is too long though. It's not really an issue for me as a platinum passholder, but for a day ticket holder I think reducing one's riding time by 2 hours would be an issue - especially given the current state of ride reliability. I'm not sure it's the right decision to make it a "house and gardens" tour as the gardens can be explored freely anyway. Also the capacity isn't very high at 20pp per week and it seems unlikely that anyone would be able to book on the day.

Hoping they're just using this to test the waters and perhaps tweak the format slightly. I think shorter and more frequent tours might be the way to go and would open up the experience to more people.

 

[Sazzle]

It just isn't right for the resort at this moment in time.

I'm not sure if I've misconstrued your wording, as I understand your perspective for the most part, but can I just check if you're suggesting that open access to a building which literally gave the theme park life, is "not right for the resort at this moment in time"?

I understand that in business, everything has to at least wash it's own face if it doesn't turn a profit. In this case, history and access trump any business need. English Heritage aren't interested in the profitability of the place, only that it is looked after.

The park is quite literally built on a site of historical interest which has the ruins at it's core. Large parts of the house have been open access for multiple decades, until relatively recently when it has apparently become a dumping ground / storage shed for Ents who, for whatever reason, have taken the decision not to complete the take-down operation of Scarefest each year. If it's a case of reduced storage space across the site, then the park's support service infrastructure needs improving. If it's a case of reduced man-power to complete the take-down, then they need to bolster this to ensure the ruins open.

I spent hours wandering the ruins in the 00s and early 10s, getting to know the layout, the history, and enjoying being immersed in the true meaning of the place. I took responsibility for myself, following the signs and guidance on display. Guests have a responsibility to take care of themselves; as we all do in our everyday lives.

Places like the West Wing I can understand, but I have to point out that part of this section was used for a scare maze not so long ago... so what's the problem?

I don't for one moment believe the risks of allowing guests to wander the ruins (the parts that have always been accessible; banqueting hall, conservatory, library, music room, poets corner, roof terraces) are any higher than they have always been. This feels like a slap in the face to the history of the ruins, and the opportunity for every guest to experience them. A guided tour gives an opportunity to curate a paid-for carefully crafted route through areas that don't interfere with storage, while shafting everyone else who can't visit on those days.

You might say I am a bit miffed!!

 

[DistortAMG]

This risks most certainly are not higher. The stakes certainly are though.

A good portion of people don't take responsibility for themselves in this day and age, they don't follow signs, they don't do as they should and they don't care for not damaging things.

This is seen across the park with the passive aggressive danger of death signs everywhere, the damage to new themeing and scenery and the graffiti covering most posts in a massive portion of queue lines.

It is a shame, but I can see where the park are coming from.

 

[Sazzle]

It is a shame, but I can see where the park are coming from.

So am I to expect a net around the lake with a 'danger of drowning' sign?
Should I expect to see chained fences for pedestrians across the car parks, with 'danger of death' signs?
Perhaps some signage on all the edges of steps across the gardens to point out if I don't mind my step I might trip?
Multiple signs across the steep banks and walls around the Resort to let me know if I climb, I might fall and cause myself harm?

I don't doubt the concerns the management team have, it's clear to see they're being cautious. The possibility of guests climbing places, smoking various substances and scrawling graffiti into walls is not new to the 2020s - you'll find marks etched into the stonework from the 80s onwards.

I suppose on a much wider scale, I despair at the way people are becoming infantilised into no longer taking responsibility for themselves.

 

[DistortAMG]

So am I to expect a net around the lake with a 'danger of drowning' sign?
Should I expect to see chained fences for pedestrians across the car parks, with 'danger of death' signs?
Perhaps some signage on all the edges of steps across the gardens to point out if I don't mind my step I might trip?
Multiple signs across the steep banks and walls around the Resort to let me know if I climb, I might fall and cause myself harm?

I don't doubt the concerns the management team have, it's clear to see they're being cautious. The possibility of guests climbing places, smoking various substances and scrawling graffiti into walls is not new to the 2020s - you'll find marks etched into the stonework from the 80s onwards.

I suppose on a much wider scale, I despair at the way people are becoming infantilised into no longer taking responsibility for themselves.

I totally agree with you. I do. But with the sorry state of the world these days I fear we are not far off those things mentioned.

I thihk the difference between now and then though is the huge elevated level of entitlement people seem to carry with them. That causes all sorts of issues and problems and puts people, at times into more danger than years ago.

 

[Ryan]

I'm not sure if I've misconstrued your wording, as I understand your perspective for the most part, but can I just check if you're suggesting that open access to a building which literally gave the theme park life, is "not right for the resort at this moment in time"?

You quoted that sentence at the top of your own, then repeated my words in quotation marks, so I'm sure you haven't missed me saying that?

I don't think it is the right time for the theme park to embark on a project of making the ruins a viable attraction. And yes, I believe making it a viable attraction, suitable for open access, is a project that would need to be undertaken sensibly and with a decent plan of action in place.

I'm sure many of us here had some great times when it was simple to roam around the structure, but it's no God given right, there are plenty of historical structures around the country you can't even see from outside of their respective grounds. English Heritage may have their wishes, and planning is made easier when the park act as good custodians, but the park has zero legal responsibility to even maintain the structure, never mind provide access to it. At present, keeping the structure safe and free of guests, is the easiest option for the park. I don't think that's controversial to say?

Don't get me wrong, I think they should maintain it, restore what they can, and eventually provide access to as much of the ruins as possible. I don't think the time is now to just throw open the gates and let potentially tens of thousands of guests loose in a ruin.

I don't see the park agreeing that it isn't the right time, or the right project for the resort right now, as that surprising. There's plenty to be done elsewhere that actually aligns with their purpose as a business.