I would just want a Pompeii replacement to retain the pool as well as the building. I think that walk next to the water and train tracks is my favorite little corner of the park in terms of just the vibes there, it’s almost like its own little hamlet just to itself. If a new ride has to come so be it, but I’d like to see the area itself change as little as possible.
I would just want a Pompeii replacement to retain the pool as well as the building. I think that walk next to the water and train tracks is my favorite little corner of the park in terms of just the vibes there, it’s almost like its own little hamlet just to itself. If a new ride has to come so be it, but I’d like to see the area itself change as little as possible.
I’ve tried, but for the life of me, I can’t remember what that area looked like before Pompeii. I know we could walk from Scotland to Italy somehow, and I’m pretty sure the petting zoo (which was where Sesame Street is now) was only accessible from the other side (adjacent to the Globe), but I can’t visualize the site where Pompeii is. I will say it’s definitely iconic at this point, and whatever the future holds, I hope they preserve—rather than destroy—the look and vibe of that area.
This post will be updated with any new maps that are posted to this thread. Last updated 5/12/2025. Pre-Opening Fall 1974 Map (Daily Press Newspaper) Posted by @GrandpaD, here 1975 (Posted by Chris) 1976 1978 (Posted by Cerebral) 1979 1980 Posted to Facebook by Daniel Spence Jr...
This post will be updated with any new maps that are posted to this thread. Last updated 5/12/2025. Pre-Opening Fall 1974 Map (Daily Press Newspaper) Posted by @GrandpaD, here 1975 (Posted by Chris) 1976 1978 (Posted by Cerebral) 1979 1980 Posted to Facebook by Daniel Spence Jr...
Based on the map, I guess the pre-Pompeii path was more or less the same route as it is now, just probably with trees where the ride now sits. The map does show a Pompeii-side path to the petting zoo as well, so it looks like I misremembered the number of entrances.
I don’t understand the investment in clearing more land whenever there are several attractions that need improvement and plots that are in need of replacement.
I don’t understand the investment in clearing more land whenever there are several attractions that need improvement and plots that are in need of replacement.
I’m willing to let them cook. I would rather they focus on optimizing their attraction lineup than rush to fill the physical holes in the park. The park desperately needs a new slow-moving family ride to balance out well over a decade of ride additions that have been exclusively roller coasters and thrill rides.
One could argue that they also desperately need flat rides, having removed 3 significant ones within the last few years. But it sounds like the decision to remove Flying Machine was very last-minute, so I’d prefer they take the time to really plan the right additions to Da Vinci’s Garden, rather than hastily pick something and plop it in. And while coasters and flats are fundamentally different, they still serve a more similar, thrilling role than slow-moving family rides, so I think the car ride is the more pressing need to balance the park’s lineup.
I’m okay with overlooking a few holes in the park for a couple of years, as long as the park is actively working on plans to fill those holes and to do it right.
My thoughts were what if they are planning to shift the two remaining rides to the other side of the garden and incorporate that area they occupy into the "new le mans" I don't know if the site work plans can make or break that case or not but it would make logical sense.
The loss of both The Cradle and Flying Machine is a big dent in ride capacity and I don’t understand the reason for the park not wanting to find replacements for a main thruway
The loss of both The Cradle and Flying Machine is a big dent in ride capacity and I don’t understand the reason for the park not wanting to find replacements for a main thruway
Are we positive there won’t be a new flat on that side too? I could see BGW marketing this as a whole Italy revamp. Would we have documents for that by now?
Are we positive there won’t be a new flat on that side too? I could see BGW marketing this as a whole Italy revamp. Would we have documents for that by now?
A flat ride replacing a similar sized/shaped flat ride wouldn’t require much lead time— basically a swap, so they wouldn’t have to get permits until the last minute.
I still wouldn’t hold my breath for a second new attraction to be added.
Well IMO, I can't see them naming it anything other than Monza. And yeah in time that will have the same gravitas as Le Mans. That type of ride will be perfect to nudge Busch back toward theme park along with BBW2. Or at least back to the middle so something for everyone.
I still say if you didn't need to keep Roman as a wet ride....it would be a half ready made space for a track in fantasy land...
We know the proposed bridge is going to require the demolition of the queues (and op booths?) for both Little Balloons and Little Gliders. It's not impossible to find a solution to this that doesn't involve moving the rides. An example of this would be wrapping new queues around the outside of the ride areas like below:
The issue, of course, is that this would eat further into the already constrained path space through this area. It would also make the entry area around the bridge to the park's new attraction sorta a circus.
I'm very much leaning towards the idea that, at a minimum, Little Gliders is going to move. It can be dropped right onto the Flying Machine plot with next to zero difficulty, it could fix the current pipeline encroachment, and would likely allow the park to better conceal the easement area.
I've also been thinking about the new bridge. It's pretty narrow. It's not too narrow to just be a guest pathway, but it is still fairly narrow. Instead of it being a bridge to a new plaza for this attraction, what if it were part of the queue itself and what we're looking at on the other side of the bridge isn't a new ride plaza but actually the queue and load/unload area?
If Gliders goes and the bridge is used for queue, Gliders' current ride pad could be used for queue as well. Put a tall fence or wall along the back to block views of the easement, put some covers up over this extended queue space and across the bridge, and I think this could work.
Using the bridge as queue would move the attraction's entrance right into Da Vinci's Garden. I think there are pros and cons to this for sure. Thematically, it probably makes things a lot more difficult. It will probably also cause some undesirable congestion if path widening doesn't take place into the gardens. That said, it would also place the ride's entrance directly on the existence guest artery through San Marcos almost certainly resulting in higher ridership.
Not necessarily advocating for something like this, but thought it was an interesting proposal.
parkfans.net
