News: Legoland Windsor Refused Planning Permission For Ghost

[StealthFan]

On Thursday it was reported here that Legoland Windsor was refused planning permission to install a clone of the "Ghost: The Haunted House" from Legoland Billund.

 

Here is a quote from the news article:

A haunted house attraction planned by Legoland Windsor has been stopped.

In a surprise move last night, councillors on the Royal Borough's Windsor urban development control panel ignored their officers' advice and refused permission to let it go ahead.

Sue Kemp, Legoland's divisional director, said she was disappointed and felt the success of recent traffic trials designed to ease congestion caused by the theme park's visitors had been ignored.

Earlier in the meeting Cllr Simon Meadowcroft (Con, Clewer South) said he feared the traffic trials had merely reshuffled cars onto different roads.

He could not accept that the haunted house would not add to the traffic, and said: "I'm tempted to think this is the point where we have reached a threshold."

Cllr Phill Bicknell (Con, Park) received unanimous support when he proposed permission be refused.

He said: "We are at a point where something has got to give."

The meeting took place at Windsor Guildhall.

 

The planning application can be found here.

 

Personally I am not bothered in the slightest after going on Ghost at Legoland Billund. I really didn't enjoy it and even by Legoland standards it was poor. KT came off the ride saying "what was the point of that?" which I think sums it up pretty well.

 

This is what "Ghost: The Haunted House" looks like at Legoland Billund.

 

I wouldn't be surprised to see the park appeal this decision but I can't believe they will get the decision overturned because of the traffic issues. Is there a solution to the traffic problem? That I couldn't say but a plan will need to be devised because its logical to assume that with all new investments an increase in traffic is a given.

 

What are you thoughts on this? Do you think they should have been granted permission?

 

-Craig

Edited April 10, 2015 by StealthFan

[SharkTums]

It seems to me that Windsor hates Legoland and they should just move the park to a town that would embrace the park.

 

Blaming traffic patterns after Legoland worked to fix them in denying a new indoor ride (since they hate outdoor rides where people scream) is just petty.

[Nrthwnd]

Dumbest - refusal - ever.

[azza29]

It seems to me that Windsor hates Legoland and they should just move the park to a town that would embrace the park.

 

I'm inclined to agree with this. If the park can't even get approval to add what is essentially a walk-through attraction then it's hard to see what they would possibly be allowed to build!

 

Personally I am not bothered in the slightest after going on Ghost at Legoland Billund. I really didn't enjoy it and even by Legoland standards it was poor. KT came off the ride saying "what was the point of that?" which I think sums it up pretty well.

 

It would have worked better as a dark ride, I reckon. The walk-through section just felt like an extended queue, and while the drop ride was well themed it didn't offer much of a thrill.

[Joshuadrooney]

No local authority likes any of the parks. This just seems like a punitive and unreasonable refusal for the sake of it.

[Morgan]

This is worrying for the park, to me there doesn't seem to be any real alternatives to the traffic issues. The park isn't that far from the M4, but it has Windsor right in the middle of the two, so I can't see how they could possibly do anymore than they have done already.

 

Hopefully the appeal will yield better results, regardless of what attraction they are wanting to build, if the planners turn around and say you're not getting anything else, then it's a very bad situation for the park.

 

It's a similar situation to Alton Towers, they have put traffic management plans in place for when it is busy at the park, but I guess Towers is a bigger part of the local economy, so to hold them back unreasonably like this would be a bad idea.

[StealthFan]

So after spending the day at work thinking about this (because I had nothing better to do!) I get the feeling there must be more to this than we know. If you consider it was recommended highly to the council to grant the application and the park had done quite a significant test to help ease traffic.

 

Reading the news article it did say "Cllr Phill Bicknell (Con, Park) received unanimous support when he proposed permission be refused." That does make me wonder just how much power and influence this guy has that they all just took his side straight away because he said he was "worried".

 

If the park does appeal, which we can only assume they will right now, I think the only thing that will help them sway the decision is to give the council categorical proof that the traffic trails helped ease congestion. That or a giant bribe!

 

On a side note looking at the plans they wanted to put this right next to the boating school. That sounds so horrific to me because that area of the park is always insanely busy and the last thing it needs it another huge influx of people. Personally I would remove that stupid JCB digger attraction and place it there as that area doesn't seem to have such a vast amount of people in there and could do with some investment.

[KarlaKoaster]

This is surely bit of a watershed moment for the park. If a ride this small gets refused, then what exactly can the park add?! I'm not sure where they can go after this Any locals know how fixable the traffic problems are?

[StealthFan]

This is surely bit of a watershed moment for the park. If a ride this small gets refused, then what exactly can the park add?! I'm not sure where they can go after this Any locals know how fixable the traffic problems are?

 

I dont believe there is an easy fix to the traffic problems just due to the location. Arguably after my recent visit considering how busy it was, whatever they did with the new direction signs and multiple alternative routes seemed to help because the queue outside the park was just under a mile long which for that park is amazing.

[KarlaKoaster]

Oh right! What causes the delay? Is it that the car park is too close to the entrance or something and traffic backs out onto the main road? Or do people have to wait to turn into the entrance? It doesn't sound ideal to be honest, but then I can't imagine a small ride would really make that much difference which is what is worrying I guess.

[StealthFan]

Oh right! What causes the delay? Is it that the car park is too close to the entrance or something and traffic backs out onto the main road? Or do people have to wait to turn into the entrance? It doesn't sound ideal to be honest, but then I can't imagine a small ride would really make that much difference which is what is worrying I guess.

 

The entrance to the park is on a roundabout so if the queue makes it down the hill from the park to the roundabout it can cause an insane tailback in all directions very quickly.

 

As I said before there is bound to be more to this than just the traffic but I don't think we will ever find out. We will just have to wait and see if the park appeal this.

[StealthFan]

The official reason for the refusal has now been posted online by the council here.

 

The reasons are as follows

The Council of the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead REFUSES PERMISSION for the above development to be carried out in accordance with the application submitted by you on the above date, for the following reasons:

 

1 The proposed development would lead to an increase in traffic which is considered harmful to the free flow of traffic and highway safety particularly during the peak months in the season. As such the proposal is considered to be contrary to Local Plan Policy DG1(9) and the NPPF Para 32 as the cumulative impacts of the development on the road system are considered severe.

 

2 The proposal is for a new ride which would lead to an increase in visit numbers and the intensification in the use of the site which would be harmful to the Green Belt and the amenity of the Windsor local community.. This would be contrary to Local Plan Policy GB2 and the NPPF Core Principles relating to sustainable development.

 

The first one is the reason we all know already but the second one is new to me. Yet again those eco friendly nut jobs have got their noses into things again and prevented something simple from happening.

 

I do find this all very odd after they allowed a hotel to be constructed which would have increased the traffic through the area substantially yet something like this which I don't believe would cause as big of an increase was denied.

 

I think I can sum all this up very easily. "People are dumb"

 

-Craig

[DLex]

^That refusal reads like "Denied. The park will become more popular. This is contrary to our plans of keeping the park exactly the way it is."

[StealthFan]

So 2 days ago, almost an entire year after the refusal Legoland have finally submitted their appeal against the refusal of Ghost.

 

If you want to see the parks case against the refusal click here. It is a 54 page document and its very boring if I'm honest but the park does make some good points about traffic and how it will effect the land in and around the park. I would expect this to be a long process as no date has currently been set for the decision.

 

What do you think? Do you think the council will overturn their previous decision? Post your comment below!