Hyperia Speculation and Construction Thread

[Parm Pap]

I sent it only yesterday however it went pom ba da bom bom bom and rejected the plan out. so now I dont know if I'm coming or going, swimming with the fish or flying with the birds or if I could in fact be doing all of these things at once. Crucially the permission was rejected when I was right in the swing of things and I am dazed confused and bamboozled.

 

 

your disco, your disco, your disco needs you                . 

[Matt N]

On 7/27/2022 at 10:45 AM, MattyMoo said:

Wonder if the prelim work not happening could affect Creak Freak opening or not... it's really not that long until the sPoOkY sEAsoN gets going now to be honest - Tulleys open their doors in 2 months time... talking of which, and a bit OT - they are revealing the first of their two new mazes next Friday.

Perhaps Creek Freak might be moving location? It wouldn’t be unheard of for Thorpe to move it; they’ve done this with other mazes in the past.

 

As for Exodus, I gather that a decision won’t be made until at least September. I seem to remember reading that it wasn’t on the agenda for the Runnymede Council meeting at the end of July, and the next one isn’t until September.

[JoshC.]

On 7/30/2022 at 10:50 AM, Matt N said:

Perhaps Creek Freak might be moving location? It wouldn’t be unheard of for Thorpe to move it; they’ve done this with other mazes in the past.

 

 

I think it's unlikely the maze would move like-for-like as is. I don't think it was built or designed to be taken down and moved, so much of the scenery simply wouldn't survive a move. This is unlike other mazes which have moved, which were designed in temporary areas and could be taken down and rebuilt.

 

That's not to say that the Creek Freak brand would not return (either in a 'reimagined style', a la Big Top or in a Creek Freak Massacre 2: Electric Boogaloo scenario) in the future. But the maze, as in, moving is almost entirely out of the question.

[MattyMoo]

On 7/30/2022 at 10:50 AM, Matt N said:

As for Exodus, I gather that a decision won’t be made until at least September. I seem to remember reading that it wasn’t on the agenda for the Runnymede Council meeting at the end of July, and the next one isn’t until September.

 

Calling it now, looking at Summer 2024 opening - really can't see them getting all that needs to be done, done in that reduced timeframe...

[Parm Pap]

no!

[I caN't]  [we can]

build the new ride, build it sO high, build iT quickly, befoRe they see

 

 

planning it was always gonna go this way, I couldn't gEt it approved for Another day

the Long project

[MattyMoo]

NOT REAL 😁

[Matt N]

Sorry if this is a slightly random question, but; out of interest, when the planning application talks about high points on Exodus being painted white a la Stealth, what is the height threshold for something to be considered a "high point" and roughly where (as in, how high up) would the track turn from dark to white?

 

I'll admit I'm not entirely sure what the point of painting the high points white is. Is it to make it blend in more or something?

[Parm Pap]

On 8/3/2022 at 11:15 AM, MattyMoo said:

NOT REAL 😁

Ready?           3................  2.....................      1................................................................................

 

bom bom bom bom bom bom bom bom bom  bom bom bom bom bom bom bom bom obm bom bom obmo mobm ombo mbom bom bom bom bom bom bom 

 

ding dong ding dong, ding dong ding dong, ding dong ding dong

 

it's taking all much too uch time, to get it looked at and we need to press on, for everything that we Have done, this is prime time and this time is right now

 

the Uploads have only just ogn,e and now theRe is only a shoRt time for us,

 

,

 

whY there are window breaks Under the Park

 

all that they knew, we wait and they say nothing

[coasterverse]

On 8/5/2022 at 12:49 PM, Matt N said:

Sorry if this is a slightly random question, but; out of interest, when the planning application talks about high points on Exodus being painted white a la Stealth, what is the height threshold for something to be considered a "high point" and roughly where (as in, how high up) would the track turn from dark to white?

 

I'll admit I'm not entirely sure what the point of painting the high points white is. Is it to make it blend in more or something?

 

I'd imagine there's probably a reason why Stealth is painted the way it is, so I presume the transition point will be very similar to that of Stealth's. Pure assumption, mind. I could be completely wrong.

[Benin]

As its a skyline issue I think somewhere between 100-150ft is where the colour change needs to happen.

 

Something that varies from park to park since Towers obviously is anything above tree height that needs to be a darker colour.

[Parm Pap]

take me away, to this new exciting place

[coasterverse]

On 8/16/2022 at 2:48 PM, Parm Pap said:

take me away, to this new exciting place

 

[WWTPRadio]

On 8/5/2022 at 3:28 PM, Parm Pap said:

Ready?           3................  2.....................      1................................................................................

 

bom bom bom bom bom bom bom bom bom  bom bom bom bom bom bom bom bom obm bom bom obmo mobm ombo mbom bom bom bom bom bom bom 

 

ding dong ding dong, ding dong ding dong, ding dong ding dong

 

it's taking all much too uch time, to get it looked at and we need to press on, for everything that we Have done, this is prime time and this time is right now

 

the Uploads have only just ogn,e and now theRe is only a shoRt time for us,

 

,

 

whY there are window breaks Under the Park

 

all that they knew, we wait and they say nothing

Gosh, you’re fun. 

[JoshC.]

18 minutes ago, WWTPRadio said:

Gosh, you’re fun. 

 

Oh WWTPRadio.

 

It's nice to have your quippy remarks back on the forums.

[Parm Pap]

On 8/18/2022 at 5:23 PM, WWTPRadio said:

Gosh, you’re fun. 

oh HIIII!

[ML27]

Natural England have today Withdrawn their objection(s) to project exodus.

 

If I have got this correct, this is separate to the environment agency’s objection which relate more to flooding then anything else.

One less hurdle and hopefully stuff starts to pick up as we reach September.

 

Maybe a sign of things to come….  Or maybe not 😝

 

[Inferno]

I wasn’t even aware that Natural England had an issue with the plans.

 

I wasn’t even aware of Natural England at all tbh.

 

Good news though I suppose.  
 

Now for the Environment Agency to withdraw their complaint…

[JoshC.]

Yes, Natural England had their own, separate, concerns regarding the Construction Management Plan, as well as some of the archeology of the area. As seen, the park have resolved these concerns (largely by providing more details and making things clearer). From my understanding, it was a largely simple thing to resolve, since all it required was more information and clearer information. These are the sort of concerns which aren't uncommon to be seen during planning applications: ones where a body doesn't really have a proper concern, but they need more information just be to sure

 

But yes, the big concerns from the EA are still unresolved as things stand from my understanding, and we'll see what happens.

[Parm Pap]

oh with lunch I had food, and with that I had salsa, I will take you away, into the exodus

[Cal]

  🥱 🥱 🥱

[Parm Pap]

WE ARE WAITING WAITING WAITING!!!

 

do you prefer version 1986 or the pee wee mix?

[A.T.I]

Ok so the EA has got back to Thorpe and they are withdrawing their third objection:- 

 

 

https://docs.runnymede.gov.uk/PublicAccess_Live/Document/ViewDocument?id=A9AD7DB3E5854B9686F139BE08E3D049

 

Objections 1 and 2 still remain, however. The only way these could be overcome would be to build the coaster elsewhere in the park which obviously won't happen, especially considering much of the park already lies within floodzone 3b. So now we just have to await the council's decision, whenever that may be.

[JoshC.]

I could be mistaken, but it's always been my understand that only small pockets of the park are classed as flood zone 3b. The majority of the park is in a flood zone, but not this 'inconvenient' flood zone category. For example, Swarm has a couple of supports in an area that is classed as flood zone 3b, but the majority of the ride is not.

That is where Thorpe's argument is standing at the moment, of course. They have form and a handshake agreement of sorts that suggested it would be okay to place supports in this area, but the EA disagree.


I'm not surprised at this response, but I genuinely don't know what the next step will be. Will Thorpe try and respond and strengthen their case further in an attempt to get the EA to change their minds? Have they started talking with Mack to see if the support structure could be reworked? Will they just take their chances and hope the council overrule the objections of the EA? Who knows. But it's certainly an interesting situation, and one that Thorpe have never really faced before.

[Inferno]

That’s interesting that The Swarm has a couple of supports in the same flood zone.

I guess the scale of this project blows that out of the (flood) water though.

 

I have to admit I do kind of wonder if the EA would ever be that enthusiastic about any major construction on a high risk flood zone.

 

I know there are housing estates up and down the country built on flood planes - wonder if the EA objected and were over-ruled there? No idea how to check.

 

Will be interesting to see what happens.

[ML27]

I feel like if the council are minded to approve it still. The EA still highlight that they have to go to the Secretary of State (unless this is just a threat/lie and the council can approve it under a technicality)

 

if they have to go to the government (over a relatively low investment project) then that’s going to be a long process.