• 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.

Stargazing Pods

There do seem to be some ongoing environmental concerns about this. The site layout was changed to try and address some of these concerns and the footprint of the site was reduced by having less buildings.

But maybe they won't be happy unless the toilet block is removed and people have to use buckets! :tearsofjoy:

Anyway here is a section of an email with feedback from the conservation officer:
The facilities block will be a large flat-roofed structure clad in timber with artificial grass roof. It will look large and very box-like in comparison to the small, arched pods and will look stark without an active frontage or interest to the elevations. Could it have some recessed panels or bespoke planting to soften its appearance?

Subject to some design amendments to the facilities block there will be no detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.
Click to expand...

So back to the drawing board. Again. :tearsofjoy:
 
GaryH said:
That would be too expensive. You can on the odd occasion get a room in Splash for close to £100 a night where you get your own loo and shower/bath! For these sheds, I wouldn't pay more than £70 a night at the very maximum, even then however, the thought of using public toilets to also shower and wash in just fills me with dread, so I would probably just go to a B&B close by, or even one of the local Travel Lodges where I have had rooms in the past for £19.
Click to expand...
Oh. I thought Splash was a lot more than £100 per night! So let me amend that to £50. That sounds fair; hopefully Merlin feels the same. Maybe a good way to determine price would be to look at how much the barrels at Legoland Deutschland (I think?) currently charge per night.
 
If these ever do open, I can imagine that they will be very overly expensive to start off with as all the sheep will be wanting to be the first to stay in them, pushing up the price due to supply and demand :rolleyes:

As far as I'm concern, they will have to pay me good money to spend a night in one of those.
 
It be cheaper to bring your own barrel to spend the night in.


wzLxmq6.jpg
 
“The development would have economic benefits as the average day visitor brings in £168 to the economy as this would be a multi day centre.”
Click to expand...

Odd sentence.
 
Oh dear! Feel sorry for Alton, having their second plan rejected! I thought the layout was only a minor niggle; to tell you the truth, I didn't think the council really cared about such things!

Oh well, I'm even more optimistic for what they devise for the site next!
 
Matt N said:
Oh dear! Feel sorry for Alton, having their second plan rejected! I thought the layout was only a minor niggle; to tell you the truth, I didn't think the council really cared about such things!

Oh well, I'm even more optimistic for what they devise for the site next!
Click to expand...
Jackpot Matt.
Four sentences, four exclamation marks.
The fact that you are even more optimistic for what they dream up next surprises no one on here.
 
Matt N said:
Oh dear! Feel sorry for Alton, having their second plan rejected! I thought the layout was only a minor niggle; to tell you the truth, I didn't think the council really cared about such things!

Oh well, I'm even more optimistic for what they devise for the site next!
Click to expand...
What‽
They deserve no sympathy whatsoever. They are supposed to be a place of entertainment and escapism, not a budget hotel at a Japanese airport. This is just the latest in a long line of cheap, tacky projects, and a useless one at that, given they can't even fill the hotel rooms they already have. Clearly the local planners have had enough. Good on them!

They should put a flat out ban on Towers building any more accomadation for at least a decade. Cite whatever reasons they need to; competition with local B&Bs, impact on traffic, etc. But the real reason should be to kick Merlin up the arse in to investing in the park itself.
 
This seems to one of the rare instances where I'm very glad the locals are giving Merlin a hard time! They absolutely deserve it. Sadly, I only trust Merlin to go back to the drawing board and do the bare minimum they have to to get it approved. I'm half expecting them to come back and say that the theme is supposed to resemble a scout camp! :(
 
The ironic thing about this is the park used to call itself 'magical'. Now look at Alton Towers, getting accommodation rejected with it is described as being 'dull,boring and lacking magic'.
 
Rick said:
Odd sentence.
Click to expand...

I find the response from the park depressing yet not surprising. You would expect something along the lines of ‘we are dedicated to providing unique themed accommodation and entertainment in line with our current offering and will be working towards improving this scheme’.

But no, they just state how much money it would have brought in.
 
Ok so design and plan a magical wooden cross valley coaster - rejection as it’s too wild and out of keeping with the area

Design some pods in a circular layout - I.e sensible and not ‘wild and out there’ - rejection

Honestly this is the first time I have actually felt sorry for Merlin. Shows you can’t win with planning committees
 
Well I don't feel sorry for Merlin.

Realistically, the cross valley coaster would never have happened, there was just way too much going against Towers. Logistical issues, environmental and historical conservation issues, noise and visual pollution, etc.

The problem with the accommodation pods is that Merlin are clearly just trying to do the bare minimum in order to get them built without any thought into the quality and the consequences of building something which is clearly being done on the cheap and lacks any creativity whatsoever – they are literally applying for planning permission to construct 100 unthemed garden sheds with beds inside, with limited and inconveniently located facilities. How the hell are they supposed to market that, even if more accommodation was needed!?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top