jus saying, no matter how you slice it 25 mil is alot of cash, especailly considering most people only make 20-30K a year, do yall have 25 mil lying around to blow?
Project 2022: Pantheon
- Thread starter Shane
- Start date
- Status
I mean, I don’t have $30M sitting around, but I’m also not on the hook to park, entertain, feed, clean up after, and provide security for ~20k people at my place everyday, all spring, summer, and fall. And also do all the gardening.
Shrug.
Shrug.
Well, since I didn't win Powerball, I can now disclose I was planning to pay for the whole thing and require riders to have a membership to this site. It was going to be ornately themed in Ancient Roman architecture, with ride ops wearing togas.
That’s why, to me, the $25 million price tag likely isn’t the attraction itself; but rather the “all in” cost of all the work going on. Generally any construction work isn’t priced by what the structure itself is, but rather the value of the entire project. The continued ramblings about how “expensive” this is could be one of the silliest arguments in this thread. #SorryNotSorry
I agree, that would be a total project cost which includes the structures, buildings, demolition and/or modification of existing facilities, relocation of existing pastures, grading, erosion control, stormwater management, utilities, landscaping, and I'm sure there will be some challenges with site access.
While I think the valuation is an generalized estimate, Seaworld also has an obligation to its shareholders. The plan where this was found states the valuation of the attraction is $25mil. I also went on the website again to find the information from yesterday and somehow, this information is no longer on the James County Site...Maybe we gave them a scare yesterday hahaha....but still! How can it be taken off from public records?
Anyways, you should take a look at the information presented in Griffon's Height waiver and compare it to the waiver for Madrid...Clearly at this point the coaster is going to be the tallest at the park. In comparison
Griffon:
Madrid:
This isn't new information, but it's interesting to note the differences in both proposals. The wording is changed.
Last point, this project is 100% certainly going to happen, and in recent days, a number of plans and documents have been coming out. Additionally, while amendments can always be made, the original height waiver and proposal was signed back in August of 2017 and gave three years to start construction. It doesn't take a year to make a coaster, but based on the size of this entire project, things are going to start heating up sooner than later.
Does anyone else think that 4200 sq feet is a little small for a queue line and building? Griffon's is nearly 7,500 sq. feet.... Don't think it's the case, but wouldn't that be pretty cool if it actually meant length?
Anyways, you should take a look at the information presented in Griffon's Height waiver and compare it to the waiver for Madrid...Clearly at this point the coaster is going to be the tallest at the park. In comparison
Griffon:
- 210 ft. above grade
- 280 ft. above sea level (approx*)
Madrid:
- 315 ft. above grade
- 387 ft. above sea level (Up to*)
This isn't new information, but it's interesting to note the differences in both proposals. The wording is changed.
Last point, this project is 100% certainly going to happen, and in recent days, a number of plans and documents have been coming out. Additionally, while amendments can always be made, the original height waiver and proposal was signed back in August of 2017 and gave three years to start construction. It doesn't take a year to make a coaster, but based on the size of this entire project, things are going to start heating up sooner than later.
Does anyone else think that 4200 sq feet is a little small for a queue line and building? Griffon's is nearly 7,500 sq. feet.... Don't think it's the case, but wouldn't that be pretty cool if it actually meant length?
Attachments
In regards to the building sq. footage, that is definitely small if you're considering not only the queue building but the maintenance and "controls" buildings as well.
While I think the valuation is an generalized estimate, Seaworld also has an obligation to its shareholders. The plan where this was found states the valuation of the attraction is $25mil. I also went on the website again to find the information from yesterday and somehow, this information is no longer on the James County Site...Maybe we gave them a scare yesterday hahaha....but still! How can it be taken off from public records?
Anyways, you should take a look at the information presented in Griffon's Height waiver and compare it to the waiver for Madrid...Clearly at this point the coaster is going to be the tallest at the park. In comparison
Griffon:
Madrid:
- 210 ft. above grade
- 280 ft. above sea level (approx*)
This isn't new information, but it's interesting to note the differences in both proposals. The wording is changed.
- 315 ft. above grade
- 387 ft. above sea level (Up to*)
Last point, this project is 100% certainly going to happen, and in recent days, a number of plans and documents have been coming out. Additionally, while amendments can always be made, the original height waiver and proposal was signed back in August of 2017 and gave three years to start construction. It doesn't take a year to make a coaster, but based on the size of this entire project, things are going to start heating up sooner than later.
Does anyone else think that 4200 sq feet is a little small for a queue line and building? Griffon's is nearly 7,500 sq. feet.... Don't think it's the case, but wouldn't that be pretty cool if it actually meant length?
One possible explanation for the altitude difference is that they might be doing some excavating and are not sure the exact grade height will be at construction time so the filed using 315ft above it's current grade above sea level to insure that they didn't get in trouble by being off a little.
Wait so Griffons height waiver gave only 5 feet of leeway but Tempestos gave nearly 100? What was Apollo’s waiver height because I believe that required some terrain work(?)
Some of your changes in language arts potentially due to the fact that there is a 12 year difference between the two. Also I would imagine that once the structure is complete BGW has to update the waiver with more information such as how many times it exceeds and so on.
Also as the park has announced something is coming to Festa Field I agree it is 100% happening
Griffon like Apollo has a drop that is longer than the actual height due to the trench under the bridge. I believe that Griffon is like 190 or 195 feet high I just can't recall the exact number at the moment.
Griffon like Apollo has a drop that is longer than the actual height due to the trench under the bridge. I believe that Griffon is like 190 or 195 feet high I just can't recall the exact number at the moment.
[/QUOTE]
Griffon is 205 feet tall at it's highest point, right after the lift then gravity pulls it down to the drop.
[/QUOTE]
Griffon is 205 feet tall at it's highest point, right after the lift then gravity pulls it down to the drop.
This actually isn't true. Have you noticed that there are no lights on the top as would be required by the FAA? That's because the actual height is below 200 feet. The drop is 205 feet but that's how pretty much every single coaster is at BGW. The drop is larger than the actual height of the drop.
It's "documented" because BGW let it be that way. In article after article it said "a 205ft drop". Then, it sort of matriculated to being 205ft. tall. Do you think BGW would clarify a shorter height? Nope.
Looking at the terrain, if it's a 205 drop (as they advertise) then it's obviously not 205ft tall. But, looking at the same below ground level first drop bottom, if it was 205ft tall, then the drop would be, ah, 215? 220? Don't you think they'd promote that?
Last edited:
Yes and they state Apollo's is 210 feet tall.
Also I forgot to link it but I'll get to it when I'm home with the FAA lighting guidelines and styles of lights structures need to have. Nitro is also 230 feet tall and has not had an FAA light its entire life. So obviously there are some exceptions to tha rulez.
Also I forgot to link it but I'll get to it when I'm home with the FAA lighting guidelines and styles of lights structures need to have. Nitro is also 230 feet tall and has not had an FAA light its entire life. So obviously there are some exceptions to tha rulez.
- Status