Rye Playland Discussion Thread

P. 30: The future(?) amid the squabbling
Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 0 guests
Discuss theme parks, roller coasters, and mules!
Why do I still have a donkey title???
User avatar
 
Posts: 14646
Joined: 16 Feb 2005
Location: The bar
Gender: Male
Age: 31

Re: Rye Playland Discussion Thread

Postby coasterbill » Fri Dec 21, 2012 5:32 am

kidcoaster 2 wrote:
larrygator wrote:Cypress Gardens and Rye Playland are completely different entities and preserving Rye Playland presents so many more challenges. Legoland did a great job preserving the Gardens part of Cypress Gardens as was prescribed when they took over control of the park.

The portions of Rye Playland that people will want preserved are classic rides and the architecture. The footprint or Rye Playland is to small for much of the architecture in the existing "rides" area to remain. Also, I do not think it will be easy to preserve all the classic rides and "Legofy" them. I could see the Derby Racer and Old Mill convertd, but the rest of the dark rides would be gone.

I'd love to see it happen if it is the best way to sustain the future of the park.


I completely agree with all this. I really can't see much remaining after the transformation including Dragon Coaster since when they redid Cypress they deemed Starliner out of their targeted age demographic and I can see the same thing here and them getting rid of it. But I could see them trying to keep some of the classics but while drastically changing them such as turning down the speed of Derby Racer and the whip.

It will be interesting to see what they do with the boardwalk though as when I was there a few years ago it was very depressing and felt run down.


The Dragon Coaster is the perfect coaster for a Legoland park. The ride is a forceless family coaster ever since they added the Morgan Trains (I'm not being a whiny enthusiast, it's really forceless and kids love it). As far as the Derby Racer and the Whip; the locals would never let them touch those rides and I don't think they would. Besides those rides...have at it. Many of the other rides are portable anyway.

PS: The Boardwalk was destroyed by Sandy so it will be all new anyway.

A village is missing its IDIOT!
User avatar
 
Posts: 3788
Joined: 29 Jun 2011
Location: California
Gender: Male

Re: Rye Playland Discussion Thread

Postby XYZ » Fri Dec 21, 2012 7:44 am

coasterbill wrote:
kidcoaster 2 wrote:
larrygator wrote:Cypress Gardens and Rye Playland are completely different entities and preserving Rye Playland presents so many more challenges. Legoland did a great job preserving the Gardens part of Cypress Gardens as was prescribed when they took over control of the park.

The portions of Rye Playland that people will want preserved are classic rides and the architecture. The footprint or Rye Playland is to small for much of the architecture in the existing "rides" area to remain. Also, I do not think it will be easy to preserve all the classic rides and "Legofy" them. I could see the Derby Racer and Old Mill convertd, but the rest of the dark rides would be gone.

I'd love to see it happen if it is the best way to sustain the future of the park.


I completely agree with all this. I really can't see much remaining after the transformation including Dragon Coaster since when they redid Cypress they deemed Starliner out of their targeted age demographic and I can see the same thing here and them getting rid of it. But I could see them trying to keep some of the classics but while drastically changing them such as turning down the speed of Derby Racer and the whip.

It will be interesting to see what they do with the boardwalk though as when I was there a few years ago it was very depressing and felt run down.


The Dragon Coaster is the perfect coaster for a Legoland park. The ride is a forceless family coaster ever since they added the Morgan Trains (I'm not being a whiny enthusiast, it's really forceless and kids love it). As far as the Derby Racer and the Whip; the locals would never let them touch those rides and I don't think they would. Besides those rides...have at it. Many of the other rides are portable anyway.

PS: The Boardwalk was destroyed by Sandy so it will be all new anyway.


I can see Dragon Coaster easily converted into the Dragon, they can just re-do the tunnel, re-theme it to medieval times, and put a new color scheme on it.
Image
1: Lightning Run, 2: El Toro, 3: Maverick, 4: Xcelerator, 5: Voyage, 6: TTD, 7: Gold Striker, 8: El Loco (Vegas), 9: Millennium Force, 10: Kingda Ka
Coaster Credits: 110 (89 steel, 21 wood); Last Coaster Credit: Raptor (CP) [8/22/14]; Last Park Credit: Waldameer [8/21/14]
What a season pass??

Why do I still have a donkey title???
User avatar
 
Posts: 5733
Joined: 17 Apr 2009
Location: Salem
Gender: Female
Age: 29

Re: Rye Playland Discussion Thread

Postby cal1br3tto » Fri Dec 21, 2012 6:37 pm

I don't want to lose out on the classic rides the way they're run now. In my perfect world, the Dragon Coaster, Derby Racer, Whip, three dark rides, carousel, and bumper cars would stay. Heck, I love the carny ride selection too, but those can go. That said, this is still a very interesting (and surprising) proposal, and would definitely bring me back to see the changes. It's just too bad that a Lego Derby Racer and Lego Whip would probably not try to kill you.
114 wood+512 steel=626 | Steel Vengeance | Boulder Dash | Twisted Timbers | Coaster | X2 | Twisted Colossus | Storm Chaser | Phoenix | Maverick | Twisted Cyclone | Iron Rattler | Voyage | Kawasemi | El Toro | New Texas Giant
Image

Delicious & Refreshing
User avatar
 
Posts: 8509
Joined: 21 Jan 2006
Location: Orlando, Florida
Gender: Male
Age: 28

Re: Rye Playland Discussion Thread

Postby jedimaster1227 » Fri Jan 25, 2013 7:06 pm

http://whiteplains.dailyvoice.com/politics/county-evaluates-four-proposals-playland-renovation

Playland Amusement Park in Rye is one step closer to revitalization as the Westchester County Board of Legislators continues to consider proposals.

The board evaluated the top four proposals for the reinvention of Playland this week and is expected to receive more information from Sustainable Playland Inc., the developer endorsed by County Executive Rob Astorino in the fall.

“We have already generated a lot of questions and discussion about the proposals for Playland, which will serve as a good framework for our analysis of each presentation,” Legislator Catherine Borgia (D-Ossining), chair of the legislature's Government Operations Committee, said in a news release. “Now, we have to boil it all down to a committee consensus on the pros and cons of each proposal, and make a decision that will be right for Westchester.”

The board is focusing on the economic, recreational and environmental impact each vision of the park’s future will have on all of Westchester.

The first proposal, by Sustainable Playland, is for a $34 million project. Main institutions of the historic amusement park would remain, including the Dragon Coaster, boardwalk and Kiddyland. New elements would be added including an “Aqua Zone” mini-water park and beach attractions, outdoor ball fields and an outdoor field house, renovations to the indoor ice rink and a new outdoor ice rink for the winter, new restaurants, enhanced access to the Edith Read Wildlife Sanctuary, an indoor multiuse facility for rental, and a Great Lawn with views of the Long Island Sound.

Under the plan, general admission to Playland and the Great Lawn would be free. Attractions throughout the park would be grouped into zones like amusement, water, beach and fields and would be pay-as-you-go.

The second proposal, by Standard Amusements LLC, is to create a $25 million New Playland. The park would include a face-lift consistent with its National Historic Landmark status, namely improved food operations, new games to cultivate intergenerational shared experiences, restored and added rides plus water-themed attractions and more live entertainment. In addition, the proposal includes four new sports fields and a community lawn free for use.

The third proposal by Central Amusements International calls for a capital investment of $26.4 million. The plan includes revamping of rides, new rides, an interactive water playground, multilevel adventure-style mini golf, a children’s entertainment center to complement the children’s museum and a summer camp. The focus would be on preservation of historic rides, restoration of historic structures and infrastructure improvements.

The last proposal is from The Paidia Co., a private Louisiana-based company that operates amusement parks and reinvented Cypress Gardens in Florida as Legoland Florida. Its proposal calls for a $150 million investment – with $100 million for construction and improvements.

The Board of Legislators' Government Operations Committee is scheduled to meet at 10 a.m. Tuesday at the Michaelian Office Building, 148 Martine Ave., Eighth Floor, in White Plains.
Change the scheme, Alter the mood! Electrify the boys and girls if you would be so kind!

Image

Why do I still have a donkey title???
User avatar
 
Posts: 14646
Joined: 16 Feb 2005
Location: The bar
Gender: Male
Age: 31

Re: Rye Playland Discussion Thread

Postby coasterbill » Sun Jan 27, 2013 10:14 am

Sustainable Playland seems stupid to me. Their plan is basically to take out all of the rides on the shore side of the park except for the Carousel, add some tennis courts and athletic fields and then force local businesses to pay a fee for "common maintenance". They already do... they're called taxes. They also want to have a partnership between the public and private sector so basically the government will still be involved money, only they'll lose more money because there won't be as many rides so there will be less of a draw (they're not replacing the rides with anything, just a lawn which they call "public event space").

They already have concerts at the park every year and since the new concert area is just a big lawn, it's not like it's the kind of facility that will bring in bigger names. I'm not sure what other events they have in mind but concerts are really the only event I can think of that would bring in any significant number of people. Trade shows and conventions end up at the Westchester County Center in White Plains, so if they plan to add more of them they'll just take money from another county owned, taxpayer funded business and we'll be no better off than we are now. They're also keeping that stupid ice arena which loses about 3 million dollars a year and amounts for roughly half of the parks financial losses.

I Guess Donkeys Are Okay
 
Posts: 5
Joined: 15 Feb 2013
Gender: None specified

Re: Rye Playland Discussion Thread

Postby DizzyDeeds66 » Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:38 am

I live in Rye, NY and grew up in Westchester County, NY. I have been going to Playland all my life. As a teen in the 1980's I worked there for five summers doing just about everything from starting out in the food concession stands to running rides. I was a manager on the Old Mill for a summer (first FEMALE!), worked the Scrambler and Spider for a private ride owner, worked as a ticket taker on the Muzik Express for another private ride owner and ran a number of other rides in the Park as a Westchester County employee, including the Carousel and the Derby. I know this park like the back of my hand. I think it's safe to say about the only ride at that park I *didn't* run was the Dragon Coaster, because back then the Park Managers wouldn't let girls run it (remember, it was the '80's and the majority of the ride operators were teenagers). I spent two winters working in the Ice Rink food concession stand while I was in High School. At the end of the summer season I scrubbed down and closed up the food stands in the Park, and in the Spring I got them ready to open. Until Hurricane Sandy decimated the back boardwalk in Oct. 2012 I walked my dog down the Boardwalk and around the entire perimeter of the Park on an almost daily basis. We are still down there on a weekly basis even in the cold weather walking the limited access areas that are again available post-storm. The Ice Rink is currently closed for repairs due to storm damage (it was announced today that the NY Rangers who used to practice there and Chase Bank are donating a substantial amount of money to pay for repairs to the Ice Casino). I am still friendly with people working there now who I worked with there 30 + years ago (I started there at age 16 in 1992 - the last of a two year contract Marriott Hotels had in which they ran it into the ground by putting a fence around it and charging admission prices).

So, to say I know this Park well is a drastic understatement. And to say I LOVE this park is totally inadequate. This Park is a lifelong friend of mine and it needs our help.

Playland, as a County owned entity, is constantly in the cross hairs of various political interests. When the Democrats are in charge it tends to be treated much more kindly. I am VERY concerned about this Sustainable Playland group and the influence they have with current Westchester County Executive Rob Astorino and local Rye Mayor Doug French (both Republicans, just sayin'). I personally believe they would both very much like to see Playland completely disappear as an amusement park because it is considered to be too expensive to run and a local nuisance to have in its current incarnation for Rye residents. (You have to understand this is a tiny town, and it is right smack in the middle of a completely residential neighborhood.) It is also my belief, being a local resident and watching the way some of the members of this "Sustainable Playland" group operate in other local matters regarding parks, that their plan has far more to do with their own personal agendas as local home/property owners than any long term vision for Playland as an historical landmark and Amusement Park. There is an element of "social climbing" going on here. Understand that Rye is a VERY expensive place to live, homeowners here pay INSANE property and school taxes in addition to the exorbitant housing prices.

The problems with a number of our Sound Shore communities here in Westchester now is that there is an element of residents who purchase expensive homes here in "good" school districts, stay long enough to get their kids the education they want them to have in order to get into "good" colleges, get involved in local politics for limited amounts of time, make long term decisions for the community based on what's best for THEM..NOW, tend to ratchet up school budgets like there's no tomorrow and don't really need to care about the long term future of the community because they know their life plan is to sell that house for as much of a profit as they can when their kids are done with the local school systems and go live somewhere less expensive. Leaving the life long local residents - the folks with ROOTS here - holding the bag. They didn't grow up here and they have no intention of growing old here. It's an opportunistic attitude and it affects the life long local residents negatively in many ways across the board. There is a very strong element of that going on here with this local group who has come up with this 'Sustainable Playland" idea, believe me. And if you think this town needs any more sports recreational facilities or playing fields, think again. WE DON'T.

They have a loud voice and a lot of money and the support of too many local politicians. But the fight is not over, despite what many newspaper articles would have you believe, it's really only just begun. The problem is that few Westchester County Residents seem to know about this issue. I hear a lot about it because I am local to Rye. Outside of tiny Rye, it's not well publicized. If it were, I'm sure there would be more outcry about Sustainable Playland's ideas. I am trying to work on that.

I was at a meeting at Westchester County Center last night hosted by the Westchester County Board of Legislators. There are FOUR proposals on the table, Sustainable Playland's being only one of them. Somehow "LEGO LAND" managed to get themselves a seat at the table and I have to tell you the presentation they gave bordered on the ridiculous (at one point my head was in my lap to muffle my guffaws) so I cannot fathom that anyone is going to give them any serious consideration. As of right now, no matter WHAT County Executive Rob Astorino wants (and there are many locals who are convinced that he and his cronies have their sites set on eventually razing the entire thing and selling it off for development - waterfront property comes at a premium around here, it's worth so many millions I can't tell you), Sustainable Playland DOES NOT HAVE THE CONTRACT. It is still being discussed by the County Board of Legislators and may very well go in another direction. There are two other entities that have much experience in running actual AMUSEMENT PARKS - I suspect you folks on this site would know more about them than I do. I am completely averse to any ideas of eliminating any part of this park or knocking any structures down or reducing the size of the parking lot. The two amusement park companies spent a lot of time last night using words like, 'repair', 'restore" "restoration" "there's nothing fundamentally wrong with Playland" "Preserving" and basically showed a lot more respect and appreciation for the history of the Park AS AN AMUSEMENT PARK. That was completely absent from the Sustainable Playland presentation. The amount of rides that will have to be removed to do what Sustainable Playland wants will decimate this place as an Amusement Park and it will cause irrevocable damage. I believe it will be the Death Knell for Playland if it's allowed to go through.

If you want to keep apprised of what is going on with this, here's your best source, the Westchester County Board of Legislators. They are the ones making the decision and may actually end up suing County Executive Rob Astorino in court if he tries to go ahead with Sustainable Playland without their agreement.

http://westchesterlegislators.com/media-center/2257-westchester-legislators-public-information-session-on-playland-revitalization-a-big-success.html


The other two groups interested are:
Central Amusements/Zamperla (http://westchesterlegislators.com/pdf/PlaylandPresentationCAI.pdf)
and
Standard Amusments (http://westchesterlegislators.com/pdf/PlaylandPresentationStandardAmusements.pdf)

I tend to lean towards the Central Amusements proposal because it doesn't call for any "fields" or anything (there isn't anywhere to PUT any "fields" without taking away something else, so I just don't get this whole concept unless they remove the Picnic Grove, which is traditionally always seriously under utilized and right on the waterfront, about the only wasted space I can think of there). With that said, I have to really look at all this more closely and do more of my own research.


I'm interested in any input anyone from this forum may have to offer.

Delicious & Refreshing
User avatar
 
Posts: 8509
Joined: 21 Jan 2006
Location: Orlando, Florida
Gender: Male
Age: 28

Re: Rye Playland Discussion Thread

Postby jedimaster1227 » Fri Feb 15, 2013 4:49 am

^If you don't mind elaborating, what of Legoland's proposal was ridiculous? Without seeing the details, we here are only able to judge based on what we know of the brand, and having seen how they successfully revived Cypress Gardens to become Legoland Florida while keeping the soul and essence of the park intact, I have a lot of faith in that group.
Change the scheme, Alter the mood! Electrify the boys and girls if you would be so kind!

Image

Site Admin
User avatar
 
Posts: 33768
Joined: 01 Feb 2005
Location: Swimming in the Ocean
Gender: Female
Age: 38

Re: Rye Playland Discussion Thread

Postby SharkTums » Fri Feb 15, 2013 7:12 am

^^I agree with the poster above, I'd like to hear from your point of view why you felt the Legoland proposal was so bad?

Don't make me kick you in the donkey!
User avatar
 
Posts: 1990
Joined: 03 Dec 2009
Location: dimension not only of sight & sound but parabolic airtime hills/g-spot orgasms
Gender: Male

Re: Rye Playland Discussion Thread

Postby DirkFunk » Fri Feb 15, 2013 7:20 am

Well, here's the Legoland proposal:

http://westchesterlegislators.com/pdf/PlaylandPresentationlegoland.pdf

There's a pretty clear difference in the proposal content from Legoland and the ones from Zamperla and Falfas' group - those two actually had content, suggested organizational charts, showed concepts for future expansion, discussed budgets, etc. Legoland's doesn't seem to have any of that, but does have pictures of the Legoland Malaysia map.

I Guess Donkeys Are Okay
 
Posts: 5
Joined: 15 Feb 2013
Gender: None specified

Re: Rye Playland Discussion Thread

Postby DizzyDeeds66 » Fri Feb 15, 2013 8:26 am

Thanks Dirk for posting that and pointing out the lack of attention to detail in the Lego Land proposal. That's pretty much what the live presentation was like. The woman sent to give it clearly knew absolutely NOTHING about Rye Playland or it's unique past and history. It was a very generic presentation, poorly done and disorganized. She was not able to answer any questions without the answers coming from a template. I cannot recall specifics now, but as I listened I realized their idea is to take this majestic Art Deco museum and turn it into a Lego Land. Which is absolute blasphemy and obscene. Lego Lands may be great parks for kids for what they are, and I'm sure they can be a lot of fun but there is no way their model is appropriate for Rye Playland. It's just not. There was also too much talk of making drastic changes to structures etc. and no talk of restoration, preservation or appreciation for the historic nature of the Park. She was almost laughed out of the room. All she could keep coming back to was to keep throwing out the words "FAMILY" and "FAMILIES" as if they were buzz words that were going to catch everyone. And she just kept saying over and over again how it would be geared towards children ages 2 to 12 because "Children deserve it". It really was a joke. Whatever they've done in Cypress Gardens may or may not be great, but it ain't gonna work at Rye Playland, I can tell you that. The other two Amusement Park companies had much more thorough presentations about the plan for upkeep, maintaining the knowledgeable staff already there (very important to me personally as I know many of them and understand that because these people have been caring for the park their whole careers as "Lifers" sort of, they KNOW THIS PARK and how it works and they KNOW THESE CLASSIC RIDES and how to take care of them). Playland is so old, it isn't just your average amusement park. And that's part of the problem. It needs a lot of special TLC and it needs to be run by people who GET THAT. It's a very unique animal. Lego Land's presentation just came across as if they didn't have a clue. It was just so far off the mark in every way from what everyone else in the room was talking about that people were either looking horrified or laughing.

Here are the notes I took while listening to her:
Lego Land
Padia Company ("Pay-dee-uh")

WTF????!!!?? SERIOUSLY????!!!!
A lesson on how to play with LEGOS ???? We all KNOW how to play with Legos!
Awful presentation
Useless
Bad joke
History of Legos whoo hoo how about a history of PLAYLAND?
MIND NUMBING
While this was going on I was texting friends located elsewhere in the room to ask "What is this company even DOING here wasting our time with this???" And they agreed with me.

In contrast, here are the notes I took for Standard Amusements as they were giving THEIR presentation: (often noting points they were making)

Who has cash on hand NOW for these projects? (they do)
Who will work with existing workers and appreciate their experience
It's a standard investment firm with $500,000,000 in capital focusing on amusement industry interests
Nick Singer - local guy Harrison resident loves Playland, knows it well, grew up going there (he was the presenter)
They believe there is nothing fundamentally wrong with Playland (Sustainable Playland and Lego Land sure do!)
Want to RESTORE Playland with no radical alterations
$25,000,000 commitment to the venture and they HAVE the financing
Want to EXTEND season
Current employees and workers will keep their jobs
Playland is the largest summer youth employer in Westchester County they GET THIS, Lego Land wants to DECREASE operating hours and season
SAFETY focus
Increase marketing to $2 million a year (from its current paltry $600,000 with Westchester County)
They also propose soccer and playing fields (I don't see why this is necessary, we don't need it or have room for it, I think this portion is pandering to those who support Sustainable Playland, but these guys suggest being able to do that without eliminating any of the parking lot or rides - Sustainable wants to eliminate HALF the parking lot and pretty much all the rides BUT the historic ones like the Dragon Coaster, the Carousel and the Derby and a small handful of others).

My notes on Central Amusements presentation were not as copious but included things like:
Re-do mini golf
RESTORE the Bathhouse
Renovate the Pool
KEEP AS IS/Just refresh the park
22 NEW ATTRACTIONS (no talk here of eliminating 50% of the rides)
Historic PRESERVATION
More $ for MARKETING
5% of revenue earmarked for preservation
Their web site is http://www.keepitplayland.com

I hope this helps you understand better what was brought to the public for review the other night. Seriously, Lego Land was an absolute joke.

PreviousNext

Return to Theme Parks, Roller Coasters, & Donkeys!

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 0 guests

These pages are in no way affiliated with nor endorsed by SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment, Cedar Fair, Legoland, Merlin Entertainment,
Blackstone, Tussaud's Group, Six Flags, Universal Theme Parks, the Walt Disney Company or any other theme park company.

All onride photos and videos on this website were taken with the permission of the park by a professional ride photographer.
For yours  and others safety, please do not attempt to take photos or videos at parks without proper permission.

Disclaimer!  You need a sense of humor to view our site, 
if you don't have a sense of humor, or are easily offended, please turn back now!
Most of the content on this forum is suitable for all ages. HOWEVER!
There may be some content that would be considered rated "PG-13."
Theme Park Review is NOT recommended for ages under 13 years of age.

cron