I can also stand behind this. The only reason I would really go into the water park is views of the coasters(especially Racer as you can get right up to it).
Dedicated Soak City Entrance & Park Restructuring
- Thread starter cschnizer
- Start date
I planned to go to soak city twice this summer with my wife while we were there. Woke up and said... nah im good. I would just rather ride coasters. I also do not want to go change in their digusting bathrooms. However I did go to WCUSA like 5 times. I do like water parks
I agree about it feeling inconvenient when it comes to leaving the water park then going back to the dry side of the park. It's much better when you're already dressed for the occasion and leaving. One of the biggest reasons why I avoid Soak City is the god awful walk ways. I have no problem walking around WCUSA or other water parks in general without shoes, but Soak City is like walking on fire. If I'm visiting, I usually bring my Crocs to get around but even then, you still can't avoid it in certain spots when getting on or off an attraction. Plus that's just more stuff I have to pack.
About a decade ago we'd park, go change in the restrooms at the gate, then lock our regular clothes in the car - go do the water park - then come back and repeat the process in reverse to go do coasters. Usually the bathrooms were fairly clean and not busy, and we didn't have to get a locker.
But then times changed and that wasn't the way to go anymore.
But then times changed and that wasn't the way to go anymore.
The only thing that would justify a separate entrance for the waterpark is if the waterpark became a separate gate. That would be the only way the expense would be recovered.
It’s a shame that the waterpark wasn’t as extensive in the back when the train was removed. The train station in the waterpark like Kings Island might have saved the train.
It’s a shame that the waterpark wasn’t as extensive in the back when the train was removed. The train station in the waterpark like Kings Island might have saved the train.
On the unlikely chance that we do see a separate waterpark gate, would it be likely to see a large waterpark restructuring? It could create a new area and provide cohesive flow, especially if they add a path that borders Backlot to what would be the former waterpark area. Even if it was just to the edge of Racer 75, that could still provide a decent amount of land for future development.
Whoever originally said a tram road and tram service would make more sense, I've really come to agree.
It's definitely a greater ongoing cost, but the initial investment would be FAR lower than a parking lot and, if the decision was ever made that the full separation of Soak City wasn't the optimal choice, it's a much easier alteration to unwind. Additionally, upgrading the perimeter service road behind Old Virginia and part of Candy Apple Grove for tram usage is MUCH easier logistically than running a new, guest-drivable road all the way around the other side of the property to a theoretical new lot.
I could envision a new entry plaza with new guest services facilities, changing rooms, a gift shop, an eatery, and restrooms connecting to the current waterpark between Lighthouse Landing and Lil' Barefoot Beach. A huge advantage of this positioning is that you can maintain a Kings Dominion park connection via a new side gate that would connect to the path that runs to Twisted Timbers and Apple Zapple.
It's obviously a very rough, imprecise sketch, but here's what I'm thinking generally:
I think you'd want the tram to board within the park's main security loop to avoid duplicative security facilities and staffing. This general concept could accommodate new security facilities too though if needed.
It's definitely a greater ongoing cost, but the initial investment would be FAR lower than a parking lot and, if the decision was ever made that the full separation of Soak City wasn't the optimal choice, it's a much easier alteration to unwind. Additionally, upgrading the perimeter service road behind Old Virginia and part of Candy Apple Grove for tram usage is MUCH easier logistically than running a new, guest-drivable road all the way around the other side of the property to a theoretical new lot.
I could envision a new entry plaza with new guest services facilities, changing rooms, a gift shop, an eatery, and restrooms connecting to the current waterpark between Lighthouse Landing and Lil' Barefoot Beach. A huge advantage of this positioning is that you can maintain a Kings Dominion park connection via a new side gate that would connect to the path that runs to Twisted Timbers and Apple Zapple.
It's obviously a very rough, imprecise sketch, but here's what I'm thinking generally:
I think you'd want the tram to board within the park's main security loop to avoid duplicative security facilities and staffing. This general concept could accommodate new security facilities too though if needed.
Last edited:
Thanks - this is roughly what I was proposing. I envisioned that the gate would go a little further south than you have it so it's closer to the existing bend in the road there in case this concept works enough for them to go through the effort and cost of building guest parking back there, but otherwise it's the same general idea.
The park would only need to invest in maybe 4-5 total vehicles since there's only two stops, with most days not needing all in service to cover the demand... So for staffing that's maybe 10 people total they'd need on regular days and 15-18 on busier days.
Ballparking costs here: let's say this is $1 million a year to operate with a $4 million startup cost - it's probably far cheaper than the $10 million startup for road redevelopment and lot creation, plus maybe the $750k yearly to operate it. But, if it's successful, over time the break even will be realized and they can then reevaluate the parking option.
Like the idea a good bit of doing that. Would have to make sure in that southwest corner though it does make it wide enough to keep the boneyard thing down there and the Dino’s plot open for expansion.
So the downside is that path would be almost a mile long. That would be twice as long as BGW’s tram, longer than Hershey’s, it’s just short of the boat ride from Disney’s Yacht Club to Hollywood Studios.
Yeah, it's a long route. My measurements have it at probably about 1.8 miles for a round trip. BGW's main tram loop is basically spot-on a mile loop and its overflow loop is about 1.4. I don't think 1.8 should be a dealbreaker, but yeah, it is definitely long.
Curious to see how you (or anyone) would route the front-gate-portion of this tram loop. I imagine it would have to take up part of the employee lot in front of HR, cut through the parking lot, cross the entry road somewhere near La Herradura, then turn south onto the current Theme Park Way / tram road.
I assume they could fence off the tram route to hide the backstage areas, but there doesn't seem like a 'good' solution anywhere.
Yeah, I'm imagining routing it between the main employee lot and the backstage complex.
You'd have to reconfigure the employee lot a bit, but it wouldn't be too bad I don't think? You'd definitely want to try to do a little beautification around the maintenance facility and whatnot, but I don't think it would need to be too extreme. BGW's railroad shows you all sorts of backstage areas.
Last edited:
Slap some go-away green on the warehouses and set some parking cones out and call it a day.
…Rumors have it the paragliders over the park last weekend were actually testing out the new transportation method to get “Soak City Only” guests from the parking lot to the water park entrance…
The boats don't function as transport though.
Anyways, for practical purposes -
If they were to create a second gate entrance for Soak City, even if they choose to also continue the regular dry park entrance as-is (not sure why they'd do that), I still believe a tram or bus would be a better short-term option.
Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if there's already road access that would simply have to be improved for guest access/ADA compliance that could be opened as a test of the concept before investing in long-term permanent installations (ticket booths, parking, etc).