News:

Long overdue maintenance happening. See post in the top forum.

Main Menu

Parking Lot for Bells? Reaaaaaallllly?

Started by tim huntzinger, November 10, 2006, 09:01:23 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

TheArtist

Is there some reason why the Bells couldnt have slowly bought up blocks of property to the west of the amusement park and used that for parking and or more "quiet" types of attractions to act as a buffer?  Built the roller coasters closest to the fairgrounds and the things like the put put course, boat rides,restaurants etc. on the west side of the grounds.

Not to mention he could have done something like the different indoor attractions and theme parks around the country like DisneyQuest. I always have a blast going to those.  Plus it would be year round revenue and entertainment. There were always so many creative options for him to expand and grow that he never took.

http://disneyworld.disney.go.com/wdw/entertainment/entertainmentDetail?id=DisneyQuestIndoorInteractiveThemeParkEntertainmentPage&bhcp=1

http://www.park-tickets.com/florida-attraction-guide/disney-quest.aspx

I did the coaster simulator, created my coaster in outer space, then rode in it, and yes I was green with sickness afterwards,[:P]. First and last time I will ride in on of those.
"When you only have two pennies left in the world, buy a loaf of bread with one, and a lily with the other."-Chinese proverb. "Arts a staple. Like bread or wine or a warm coat in winter. Those who think it is a luxury have only a fragment of a mind. Mans spirit grows hungry for art in the same way h

Steve

Bell's opened in 1951, when the biggest thrill ride around was the Tilt-A-Whirl.  Many of the homes around Bell's were built before the park opened.  Bell's was originally a kiddie park, with kiddie rides for small children and miniature golf for adults.  Today, amusement parks want the biggest, fastest, most dangerous thrill rides, and the Bell's location is not suited for these.  In 1951, the Bell's location was on the outskirts of the city limits.  My home was built in 1954 at 26th and Yale, and was considered the far southeast limits of the city at the time.
I think the fairgrounds authorities should try to keep the Zingo coaster, buy it from Bell, and keep it for the fairgrounds.  If Bell wants to stay in the park business, then he should move all their other rides to a better suited location, where expansion and greater thrill rides are possible.

Hawkins

Bell's rent was based on revenue, and the revenue kept falling.

Aside from the behind-the-scenes politics that finally killed this landmark, the key factor was the falling grosses.

I blame 2 elements for this. One is local, the other global.

1)The revenue drop at Bell's coincided with the rise of the Casinos. Instead of staying a "Family" park, it became a place where the kids got dropped off while the parents went gambling.

2)The rise of online fantasy games (such as World of Warcraft) has taken a big chunk out of the amusement industry. How many 18 to 20-somethings hung out out Bell's last year?  Cocooning is still a marketing trend that grows each year as the internet expands.

These factors were not Bell's fault. And if Bell didn't have the revenue, then he couldn't upgrade the park.


sgrizzle

This reason is why I think a future "bells" should be a come & go park tied into a shopping and entertainment district. You could have an outdoor ampitheater, restaurants, etc. Then if you want to go ride the zingo, you can. No gate admission.

All on the river preferably. Around 21st, 41st, or Sand Springs.

South_Tulsan

There's already a shopping and entertainment development built on the river with an outdoor ampitheater; the Riverwalk Crossing at 96th & Riverside, on the Jenks side of the river.

I'm not sure Bell's could afford to move out there, though.

The Riverwalk is by far the best piece of river development out there right now, and it didn't cost $60 million of the taxpayer's money.

sgrizzle

Riverwalk doesn't have the room. A boardwalk-facing development featuring second story lofs, hotels, and amusement park rides would be a real attraction.

Riverwalk Crossing isn't the best in riverfront development, it's just the best we've got so far.

perspicuity85

Maybe if Bell's moved to about 81st St. South on the west side it could be near the Riverwalk and still have plenty of room to expand.  I think if Bell's, the Riverwalk (with phase 2 actually finished), the aquarium, and expanded Creek Nation Casino were all connected by a water taxi, the whole area would make for a decent entertainment destination.  This is what the Riverwalk really needs-- to be part of an entertainment destination instead of trying to serve as an entertainment destination itself.  The whole area could be called "Riverside South," and marketed as one entity.  Of course, that low water dam would help this a lot, too.