shivtim Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 This architect has a concept design for an skyscraper-like urban amusement park. It's not a proposal, just a general concept to combat the suburban-style parks and help address issues of pollution/traffic/sprawl that can often be associated with large amusement parks. It's probably not really practical or cost-effective, but still pretty interesting. Like a souped-up stratosphere tower. Here's the original site and the archdaily article. Also Design Co. has an analysis of the concept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larrygator Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 The architect might want to do some fact checking as Six Flags Magic Mountain is more than a 2 hours drive from NYC. I'm sure he meant SFGAdv. In theory it's an interesting idea, but I just don't see it being fiscally viable outside of very few select cities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParkTrips Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Yeah, I find the idea interesting, but unless land is THAT valuable and scarce, I don't see a need for it.. I'd also wonder if a sprawling amusement park may be better from a green space standpoint than yet another sky scraper (are you really telling me a Dollywood/SF Great Adventure/etc are worse environmentally than a skyscraper?), I don't know much about environmental engineering Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace Of Spades Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 "...this vertically stacked theme park will itself become skyscraper." If the guy can't properly spellcheck his concept (one of a few things I noticed), then how the hell does he think any investors will give this concept any credibility? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJeXeL Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 ^He's an engineering major not an English major. (Sarcasm) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParkTrips Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I'd wager that English is not his first language, give him a break Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmicha Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 (are you really telling me a Dollywood/SF Great Adventure/etc are worse environmentally than a skyscraper? It really all depends on the skyscraper honestly. In the Western world, yes, skyscrapers are significantly more environmental than an amusement park. The design and construction practices of pretty much every major firm designing skyscrapers lead to buildings using only a fraction of the amount of energy they used to. Environmentalism has taken off in architecture recently and skyscrapers, some of the most energy intensive structures on earth, have seen great strides in sustainability. Amusement parks on the other hand use quite a bit of energy, most of which is used for the sole purpose of moving rides through the same path over and over again. Not very environmental (but very fun ) As for this concept, regardless of whether or not it even has the possibility of being constructed, it is awesome. I've always dreamt of what a vertical theme park would be like. It's essentially a more dense, much taller version of all those parks that pack rides on top of each other such as Blackpool Pleasure Beach. If certain parts of the world continue growing the way they are now this may be the only possibility for an urban amusement park. Land in some cities is essentially impossible to come by meaning the only way to build is up. I know for sure that if this was built I would be buying myself a ticket to wherever it is located. A combination of two of my favorite things on earth is bound to be pretty epic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeemerBoy Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 This is as stupid as trying to determine if living in outer space will ever be a viable option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larrygator Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 This is as stupid as trying to determine if living in outer space will ever be a viable option. So are you saying "this would work well on the moon"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeemerBoy Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 ^ Only if he incorporates the Big Dipper into the plans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cal1br3tto Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 This is an interesting concept, but at the same time it creeps me the hell out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace Of Spades Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I'd wager that English is not his first language, give him a break Even so, I think that if I were presenting a concept to potential investors, I'd use Microsoft Word's built in spellchecker...and I'm not a grammar Nazi, so I'll usually not notice things like that, but on one of the pages it was almost overpoweringly bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A.J. Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Um? The coaster and log flume components of the park don't look like they're even possible to build. I wouldn't discount the idea entirely though, just the execution. I'd love to see Intamin build a super-cool side-of-the-building drop ride on an existing vertical tower. That would be freaking awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace Of Spades Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I think they did...I swear I saw one on their site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParkTrips Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Even so, I think that if I were presenting a concept to potential investors, I'd use Microsoft Word's built in spellchecker...and I'm not a grammar Nazi, so I'll usually not notice things like that, but on one of the pages it was almost overpoweringly bad. It doesn't appear that he is looking for investors, or even to build it - I believe it is entirely a "concept", closer to art than reality. After reading more, I think the main purpose of this is to reduce car usage, which is admirable. But what is next? No more stadiums with 30-100k seats? Most football and baseball teams outdraw the local theme parks. The more economically viable solution (realistically, these towers could easily soar into the billion-dollar range), to me, is infrastructure improvements - public transport, coupled with $50+ parking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shivtim Posted January 6, 2011 Author Share Posted January 6, 2011 It doesn't appear that he is looking for investors, or even to build it - I believe it is entirely a "concept", closer to art than reality. Exactly. It's not a serious proposal, just a general concept... probably some grad student in graphic or architectural design put together the concept pictures. There are already compact urban amusement parks that are well connected to local transit systems, just not that many in the US (Coney Island?), and obviously none in skyscraper form unless you count Stratosphere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougMJr Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I'm guessing the longest queue in the park would be for... the elevator? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
let1gre Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 That is one hell of a coaster he's got going on there. I could see something like this going into Tokyo due to the massive space issue they have there, and the fact that Japan as a whole is into amusement parks, idiosyncrasies and bizarre architecture. They're also the guys who thought up these two things. Other than there, perhaps China. It's a good bet anything might end up in China, the way their amusement park economy is surging right now. By any means, it will now show up in the US anytime soon (or ever). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mightbeawannabe Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 I wonder if he knows that unless it's a powered coaster it would kill you....Ever heard of force vector design? Yeah, it's pretty cool. And it can also prevent death and bodily damage due to gravitational forces. Glad this is only for kicks-and-grins, as I think it ruins the whole concept of a theme park. The chance to get away from the hustling and bustling cities, out a few miles and into a new world where you have no work, worries, or frets about the outside world is the summer dream. You can relax or pump as much adrenaline through your body as you possibly can. This skyscraper, in the middle of a smoggy, disgusting, loud and [presumably] dangerous city for little tykes, with its high, winding walkways and questionable attractions would just ruin it all for me. There's no atmosphere or greenery in sight and I can't stand heights like this is calling for. It scares me to death, even the looks of some water play structures at water parks look rather tedious to traverse to me. In short, the concept is bound for Mars. Yes, I mean beyond the MOON! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now