Blackpool Pleasure Beach: General Discussion

Discussion in 'European Parks and Attractions' started by John, 13th Jun 2012.

  1. Benjsh

    Benjsh TowersStreet Member

    Messages:
    1,151
    Likes Received:
    1,869
    Location:
    Manchester
    Favourite Ride:
    Steel Vengeance
    I choose the not riding it anymore seat. Its a classic ride but its in a woeful state it really is.

    Be great if PB had the money to spruce it up as I do love the ride. Its just far too jolty and painful now for me. Ironically though I find Big Dipper a lot smoother. Last season I had about 6 or 7 rides on it I'd say and found it to be riding really well. Don't know if anyone else thought the same.
     
  2. rob666

    rob666 TowersStreet Member

    Messages:
    3,795
    Likes Received:
    6,201
    Location:
    Lancashire
    Yup, the structure is listed, not the trains.
     
    skyscraper likes this.
  3. Mr Pearse

    Mr Pearse TowersStreet Member

    Messages:
    533
    Likes Received:
    549
    I could be wrong but wasn’t the park against the woodies getting listed?.
     
  4. pluk

    pluk TowersStreet Member

    Messages:
    1,026
    Likes Received:
    1,503
    Location:
    Essex
    Pretty much anyone that owns anything would be against it being listed, it is an expensive pain in the arse.
     
    Alsty, MattyH, jon81uk and 2 others like this.
  5. Mr Pearse

    Mr Pearse TowersStreet Member

    Messages:
    533
    Likes Received:
    549
    It’s something like 6/7 listed structures in the entire park. You can understand any company having to maintain that many to be a complete hassle.
     
    skyscraper likes this.
  6. Dar

    Dar TowersStreet Member

    Messages:
    2,399
    Likes Received:
    2,520
    Location:
    T'north
    Favourite Ride:
    Taron
    What does being listed actually entail? Could they scrap the ride, but leave the structure and build around it. Have the new station built over Nash's, with glass floors over the tracks, and then just weave the supports as close to the old structure as possible, with access for routine maintenance.
     
  7. pluk

    pluk TowersStreet Member

    Messages:
    1,026
    Likes Received:
    1,503
    Location:
    Essex
    Any changes to the structure or its aesthetics would require planning permission. So those things could be possible but would likely to be very difficult to get permission for. It does not compel them to operate it, but it does compel them to maintain it.
     
    skyscraper likes this.
  8. Mr Pearse

    Mr Pearse TowersStreet Member

    Messages:
    533
    Likes Received:
    549
    I would say big problem for this situation you’d have a big structure sticking out like a sore thumb. Unlike the ark where it blends in nicely I doubt a full coaster structure could blend in aswell.
     
  9. rob666

    rob666 TowersStreet Member

    Messages:
    3,795
    Likes Received:
    6,201
    Location:
    Lancashire
    Sorry pluk, my two customers who live in listed properties love the prestige of listing!
    Tends to add value to residential properties.
    When I had to do a tiny patch of lime pointingat one, I followed all the rules, contacted the local listings officer, and didnt hear a thing back, as all the local tradesmen said would happen.
    The top 2* listing for Blackburn is one of my gardens, nice photo on wiki!
    Edit...
    And sorry to nit pick again pluk, but you are forgetting that the Beach is one of the few places that doesnt need planning permission for new rides...they bargained that right when they gave up land for the "new" prom about ninety years ago.
    Geek nitpick over.
     
    Last edited: 1st Jun 2020
    Rojo and skyscraper like this.
  10. MakoMania

    MakoMania TowersStreet Member

    Messages:
    2,243
    Likes Received:
    3,687
    Listing multiple large structures in a park as small as BPB is a horrendous outcome. It will make it that much more difficult for the park to compete and invest. Of course preservation of heritage is important, but the survival of the park long term is more important in my opinion.
     
    skyscraper likes this.
  11. Rick

    Rick TowersStreet Member

    Messages:
    4,284
    Likes Received:
    7,398
    Favourite Ride:
    Crux
    What I don't understand with listing, is what happens if the park stops operating a listed ride either through choice or necessity.

    For example, if the Mouse had been listed and the park had decided that they couldn't/wouldn't operate it - would it still be sat there unused? The listing forbids its removal, but doesn't insist on its operation, right?
     
  12. Funcone

    Funcone TowersStreet Member

    Messages:
    511
    Likes Received:
    977
    Yes, that’s what happened at Dreamland. The Scenic Railway was listed in 2002. Soon After the owner/developer stopped operating it, but the ride couldn’t be demolished. Listed doesn’t mean it has to be operated, just that it can’t be demolished or altered without permission. Theoretically it also means that it has to be maintained, but there seem to be quite a few listed buildings on the at risk register, so I’m not sure how easily that’s enforced.
     
    Pleasure Beach Valhalla and Rick like this.
  13. jon81uk

    jon81uk TowersStreet Member

    Messages:
    2,756
    Likes Received:
    1,791
    Noah's Ark is listed and non-operational (and despite only ever visiting as an adult, I miss it as fun houses are just fun!).

    I'm curious if/when we will start seeing steel coasters listed. Do we think the Corkscrew should have been listed? How about the Revolution as UKs first looping coaster or The Big One as it was Europe's tallest when it opened.
     
  14. Funcone

    Funcone TowersStreet Member

    Messages:
    511
    Likes Received:
    977
    It's about the age more than the material. The Wild Mouse didn't get listed, partly because it's post war. It's easier to get something older than WWII listed than something more recent. As time goes on, you'd expect them to move these cut off dates, so presumably at some point steel coasters will become eligible for listing. I think it'll be a while before the Big One is, though.
     
  15. rob666

    rob666 TowersStreet Member

    Messages:
    3,795
    Likes Received:
    6,201
    Location:
    Lancashire
    *Rodent alert*
    .
    The Mouse wasnt listed because it had substantial changes over its "short" life, the first drop is* a later addition.
    But as dippy would be keen to point out, that's inconsistent because the dipper had major changes, and that is listed.
    Dippers 90th birthday bash was great, got to leave my pint in the luggage cages on infusion.
    Little things, little minds.
    Edit.
    *Sorry, past tense, was. Still hard to come to terms.
     
  16. jon81uk

    jon81uk TowersStreet Member

    Messages:
    2,756
    Likes Received:
    1,791
    Oh yes the material isn't important, its just given we saw Corkscrew removed after just over 20 years, will we see any steel coasters get to an age before being removed where they will be considered for listing.
     
    Funcone likes this.
  17. rob666

    rob666 TowersStreet Member

    Messages:
    3,795
    Likes Received:
    6,201
    Location:
    Lancashire
    Nemesis.
    The recent listings were assisted by one of the geeks...
    On here???
     
  18. skyscraper

    skyscraper TowersStreet Member

    Messages:
    3,658
    Likes Received:
    2,472
    Location:
    Sheffield
    Favourite Ride:
    Nemesis
    Didn't someone try to obtain listed status for Southport Pleasureland's old Cyclone? The application was refused, then the cyclone was chainsawed. :(
     
  19. jon81uk

    jon81uk TowersStreet Member

    Messages:
    2,756
    Likes Received:
    1,791
    Although it is not a particularly unique design, Revolution was the UKs first looping coaster and among the first steel coasters I think so it does feel like there is some historical significance.
     
    MattyH and skyscraper like this.
  20. Rick

    Rick TowersStreet Member

    Messages:
    4,284
    Likes Received:
    7,398
    Favourite Ride:
    Crux
    I would argue not enough to make it even worth close to listing. At some point, all of the steel will need to be replaced, as will the train and all the plant. When you've done that on a steel coaster, what are you even 'protecting' anymore... ? The sheer cost associated with doing that for the benefit to a park that has already had its financial challenges, seems mad.

    It's slightly different with a wooden ride in that most of track and structure are replaced routinely over time, but even then, I am not sold. In fact, for me, 'listed' coasters should only be a thing in the most unusual of circumstances. You could maybe convince me the Big Dipper and the Flying Machine fall into that category.

    They're not things that are supposed to exist forever, they're supposed to do their time and be replaced by something else. The distinction with coasters vs. a listed building is you can list a building and retain it in a far more straightforward and pragmatic way. With coasters, people need to be able to ride them safely. With a coaster, given enough time, I struggle to understand how listing something doesn't create a situation whereby you have something that you can't/won't operate and can't demolish.

    Not forgetting, if you list something at the Pleasure Beach, in most circumstances, something even older had to be demolished to build it in the first place.
     
    Alsty, rob666 and skyscraper like this.

Share This Page