The future of the PNE/Playland in Vancouver BC

---

GoliathKills said:

Then don't vote.

---

Never before have I seen someone so stunningly miss the point of a post. We have a winner :)

---

Carnage said:

However, I've also posted this at some Canadian forums that I frequent. There's a fair amount of Vancouver residets on these boards. And so far everyone has agreed with everyone here.

---

Fair enough and if the locals choose to save the coaster then fine - I'm all for it. If anything, that's an argument for not stuffing the ballot box. From your observations the good guys win anyway.

I hate to sound so anti-save the coaster again (really, I'm not) but I can think of dozens of issues both more and less important than the future of an amusement ride that affect my local community and I'd be pissed if there were an online forum of influence that outsiders were screwing with.

It's a ride. Get over yourselves and let these people run their community.

You make good points Gonchar.

But looking at the situation I get the idea that a handful of coaster enthusiests voting to save the coaster isn't going to make the difference I think.

I'm sure that the decision is going to come down to much more then what the results of the poll are. I'm sure the government will meet with the people face to face to gather all the opinions they can.

I would surely hope that our government wouldn't spend upwards of $100 million dollars of taxpayers money, just on the results of an internet pole. Especially one that doesn't give the chance for extra input.

I'm a tourist that spent some time and money in Vancouver *specifically* due to Coaster....not exactly SURE that my opinion shouldn't be taken into consideration. I'm not going to say that my *vote* should be counted on par with someone who LIVES there, that's ridiculous.....but by the same token, if they ONLY wanted opinions from residents, it would be VERY easy for them to limit participation in the survey....I didn't read the entire thing, but just as someone who works in the online community (and has to exclude *outsiders* from accessing data they shouldn't), it seems silly for them NOT to exclude votes from people OUTSIDE Vancouver.....that is, if that's what they wanted.

Coaster itself, even if everything else at PNE is leveled, SHOULD be saved...would it be? Unlikely...

---

Lord Gonchar said:

Never before have I seen someone so stunningly miss the point of a post. We have a winner

---

You forgot my ":)". I didn't miss the point, I just don't agree with you, and gave a quick response to your ethical post. *** Edited 4/29/2004 4:53:43 AM UTC by GoliathKills***

---

rollergator said:

...it seems silly for them NOT to exclude votes from people OUTSIDE Vancouver.....that is, if that's what they wanted.

---

True to a degree. But how much interest would one expect from humans outside of their community? Whether or not to tear down the coaster is not the issue. What to do with the area is the issue and it so happens that some of those options include the removal of the coaster. Who in their right mind would have had the foresight to expect a bunch of coaster enthusiasts to show up and start throwing their 2 cents in?

I'm trying to think of parallels or analogies or some similar fictional situation but none seem as ridiculous as this to me. The coaster is a non-issue in the big scheme of what they're trying to decide. They're not trying to determine the fate of a ride, it just so happens the fate of a roller coaster may lie in a much bigger decision...how these people want their local community to move forward in a way that the residents of that community feel it serves them best.

I just find it weird that so many seem so comfortable jumping in on this. I spend WAY too much time discussing, observing, pondering and/or daydreaming about roller coasters and I still feel that this is beyond me and I have absolutely no say in what these people choose to do. I don't understand the motivation (or the obsessiveness) about a roller coaster that would lead one to try to influence an entire real, honest to goodness, living, breathing community full of people who spend their lives there how to move forward with things.

---

GoliathKills said:

You forgot my " :) ".

---

Nah. I saw it. I was just giving you a hard time because you disagree with me and were so glib with your response

;) :) - or whichever smiley means we're keeping it all in fun

*** Edited 4/29/2004 5:31:16 AM UTC by Lord Gonchar***

Giving me a hard time, you fool you. ;)

I see what you're saying about how it can mess the whole poll results, and therefore ruin the poll's objective. Still, what's so wrong about a little raunchy coaster lovin??? They're asking the public their opinion, and we are responding despite our slighty biased attitudes.

Let's not forget that the enthusiasts who are voting aren't exactly voting to tear down the public schools to build a rollercoaster. They are picking from four options preselected by those who "should" care the most.

By voting in this poll, an enthusiast from 1000 miles away isn't necessarily killing the growth of the community. Although I would lose respect for any enthusiast who votes here and then turns around and complains about "Special Interest" groups anywhere else. :)

- Jeff

For the record, I'm with Gonch. Which is why I was the original (though perhaps indirect) thread-killer.

---

Lord Gonchar said:

But how much interest would one expect from humans outside of their community?

---

Quite a lot, actually.

I get what you're saying, Gonch, I honestly do. But on the other hand, we are talking about a community where a big chunk of their economy is from the PNE, which attracts crowds from all over the continent. Considering that is the case, don't you think that the people that patronize the PNE and spend their money there should be allowed to at least state their feelings? I understand that in the end, the decision on what to do with the site ultimately falls upon the shoulders of those directly affected, but I also see no harm in a few enthusiasts expressing their opinions in a poll that is clearly defined as "public."

You're still 'cute', Rob. ;)

(and I mean that in the most hetero of ways)

I'm with Gonch on this and I refuse to vote, but as a person with a little city planning background, just from watching over my Dad's shoulder, the 4th plan, which seems the best due to increased jobs, annual fair attendance and potential profit is probably not the best choice.

From a continuity standpoint, I don't think it's good for Playland to exist because it cuts the park into two pieces. No matter how much access you give, the smaller chunk of the park on the other side of Playland will be cut off from the other parts of the park and perhaps underutilized as a result (or vice versa - you'd be cramming everyone into a smaller area). Also, the major capital investment is a big risk for a commmunity that seems to be in a little financial trouble. It seems to make sense to me that they'd want to balance the potential profit with the capital investment. They're basing their profit forecasts off of conceptual numbers, and there's no way to prove that that many people will visit the fair, or continue to visit Playland, so if their numbers are way off and attendance (and profit) drops, they're left as a struggling community with an even BIGGER debt, and a park that doesn't serve it's potential purpose without further capital investment.

So after all that, I won't vote, but I think probably option 2 (if I remember the survey correctly) is the best option for the area, as far as continuity of the park and capital investment vs. potential profit goes. I think that as much as we all love amusement parks and fairs and anything that involves moving our bodies in ways and at speeds that we can't do without machinery, they're an inherently risky business, and not something that's a good idea for a financially struggling community.

Gonch - you want a fictional situation? Try this one on for size:

There's an intersection close to you that's inadequate, but right near a major shopping area (I'm thinking of Robinson for Pittsburghers). The DOT has come up with 4 solutions, two of which consume a large chunk of the shopping area, effectively taking out the closest grocery store, bank, and other semi-essentials close to you. The way these proposals are presented, each one has a POTENTIAL to make a profit based on the criteria that the DOT has come up with. Now, they open up the vote to people who don't know the region, don't know the importance of that shopping district, to you personally or to the area in terms of jobs and tax revenue, and only show voters the potential profit and cost of each alterantive. How would you feel about someone from 3000 miles away voting on making your trip to get groceries 15 minutes longer just because they're a "highway enthusiast"? Ok, yea, out there, but similar!

Just let it be folks, let the locals decide their own fate. Special interest groups are good until they try and shape events that are larger than they are ...

No one's trying to shape anything. Its a matter of people making their opinion known. The website addresses the public (not just Vancouver citizens specifically), so that opens up the door for opinions from people living far outside of Vancouver. And that's just what this is for: the collection of opinions. No one says that the plan that has the strongest support is the one that will be chosen. Its not like I just cast my vote, and with the click of the button on my mouse just decided the fate of Playland Park and the PNE site.

Let's look at your highway scenario for a minute, where the modification of an intersection could result in the loss of retail stores. What you are saying is that people in that immediate area should be the only people that have a say in what happens because they are the only ones affected- something which I disagree with. Suppose I work in that grocery store but live 30 miles away. Since the plan to change the intersection affects my employment, shouldn't I have a say in what goes on, even though I don't live in that town?

Suppose I work for a company that runs some kind of exhibit at the PNE each year and that is a main source of my company's income... shouldn't I be allowed to make my opinion known if the fact of the PNE is being decided, regardless of whether I live in Vancouver or not?

Look at the situation going on with the World Trade Center site in NYC. How many groups have their say in the future of that site? Ten? Twenty? A hundred? Now, techincally speaking, there is ONE party that should have ultimate say in what kind of development takes place over there- the owner of the site. But since the fate of that site affects a lot more people than just those living in Manhattan, other opinions are being heard. Its what happens when the fate of something that affects the public is being decided, like it or not.

And Gonch- thanks for thinking me cute! I accept your kind words- in the most hetero way possible, of course ;) *** Edited 4/29/2004 3:20:42 PM UTC by Rob Ascough***

I think you're cute, too, but you got nothing to worry about, Rob. I prefer masculine men ;)

---

Rob Ascough said:

Let's look at your highway scenario for a minute, where the modification of an intersection could result in the loss of retail stores. What you are saying is that people in that immediate area should be the only people that have a say in what happens because they are the only ones affected- something which I disagree with. Suppose I work in that grocery store but live 30 miles away. Since the plan to change the intersection affects my employment, shouldn't I have a say in what goes on, even though I don't live in that town?

---

In that case, yes. However the equivalent would be working at Playland or at the very least being relatively local and being a regular visitor - and I already understand those people getting involved (to a degree) as I mentioned in one of my previous longwinded posts.

But for most of the people voting in this situation, it's the equivalent of "I shopped at that grocery store once a couple of years ago" or "I'd like to shop at that grocery store someday, so I don't want it removed" - this is a rare case where those voices shouldn't be heard.

The answer should be "Tough luck, you missed your chance. We're moving forward and making things better in what we feel is the best decision"

Remove the internet facade from the whole thing and imagine a public meeting. I know I wouldn't fly to Vancouver, head into the meeting, stand-up and say "I'm from 3000 miles away and I'd like to ride this coaster someday. I like options 3 or 4 because it affords me future opportunities to do so"

I'd get laughed out of the building. (and not just because of my looks :) )

Hey Gonch...check your Private Messages...

---

Lord Gonchar said:Remove the internet facade from the whole thing and imagine a public meeting. I know I wouldn't fly to Vancouver, head into the meeting, stand-up and say "I'm from 3000 miles away and I'd like to ride this coaster someday. I like options 3 or 4 because it affords me future opportunities to do so"

---

But isn't one of the great things about the internet the fact that gathering opinions is much easier than holding a physical meeting? Not to mention allowing for the gathering of a broader range of opinions?

I need to stress the fact that I voted because I wanted to contribute my opinion. Just as I can't vote for Vancouver's mayor, I know that I can't vote for the future of the park and the PNE Coaster. All I can do is read over the proposals and say what I think. I don't see any real harm in that. Especially because I'm not stuffing the ballot box or anything like that, trying to "force" my opinion (which seems like it could be done very easily.) I said my peace just once and am now done with it.

---

I'd get laughed out of the building. (and not just because of my looks )

---

Better than getting laughed out for other reasons!

*** Edited 4/29/2004 3:51:03 PM UTC by Rob Ascough***

Did I stir up a can of worms with this topic or what?

Still ,I am a resident of the Pacific Northwest and a frequent visitor of Vancouver and the PNE.From where I live to Vancouver is only a five hour drive. From this standpoint I consider myself "local"enough for my voice to be heard.

Also,there are a lot of historical ties between the PNE and Portland,Oregon.

I know that Lord Gonchar disagrees with me on getting involved with the decision on the fate of the PNE and that is fine ,we all have a right to our own opinion. Besides,it is just an internet poll,not a ballot box.They would not have put it on the internet if they did not want some feedback.

Ultimately,the fate of the PNE/Playland lies with city of Vancouver and I respect that. Now if this was happening in some far off place like Boston,MA or Sandusky,OH I would not be getting involved .

Here in the Pacific Northwest,we only have a handfull of quality parks.The PNE/Playland IMO is one of them. Our local park here in Portland is little more than a permanent collection of portable carnival rides. At one time Portland had a Carl Phare designed wood coaster,very similar to the PNE Coaster, out at Jantzen Beach .The park closed and was razed to make way for a shopping mall,which to this day,is scorned by area residents.A lot of non enthusiasts have told me that they wish the park and coaster were still there instead of the mall.

And if they do tear down Coaster,at least I have copies of the Blueprint of it to build another.:)

Yeah, you opened a can of worms, but it was a good can. It needed opening.

I don't dismiss Gonch's opinion on this matter- he makes a lot of sense. All I'm saying is that I am treating this poll as nothing more than it is- an internet poll. I assume this is just a chance for the planning board to gather some opinions. Like Mr. Anderson said, if they didn't want to get the opinions of non-locals, or if they wanted to filter the opinions of non-locals, they would have set up the site so that you had to enter your location. Not fool-proof, but it would be pretty effective.

Glad to hear that someone has the blueprints. All we need is some land, some wood and then we'll have a coaster. Its that simple... right? ;)

If you guys want to rebuild it near me, I'll vote for that. :)

You WILL be held to that. Provided I get my hands on some money. Lots and lots of money.