SFGAM's extra land

by **coastercrazy111** on July 2nd, 2003, 2:03 pm

WHO'S WITH ME ON WRITING A LETTER?If enough of us write a letter they might just listen because they are sick of reading letters.

by **SfGaMownz** on July 2nd, 2003, 2:04 pm

They won't listen stop trying. If you keep writing they will just throw them away.

by **coastercrazy111** on July 2nd, 2003, 2:06 pm

I guess your right. Maybe if we're lucky they might build a parking garage, but i doubt that it will happen.

by **SfGaMownz** on July 2nd, 2003, 2:16 pm

A parking grage is not comming anytime soon. Please don't write them on this one. I know alot of people are hoping for this to happen, I am to but it won't. I'm not trying to bring your hopes down or anything :wink:

.

by **INTAMIN** on July 2nd, 2003, 2:58 pm

Im not sure but does gam own the land next to S: UF?, look to the left when ur going up the lift, there's a tiny street for the parking lot and next to it a bunch a land.

by **SfGaMownz** on July 2nd, 2003, 3:00 pm

If I am understanding your question correctly, then that tiny street is a service road that leads to the employee parking lot. They won't expnad over there in the near future.

R.I.P. Deja Vu 10/07/01-10/28/07

I wrote a letter to the park a few years ago. They so respond. The response is not what you want either. So dont write any letters.

by **SFGAmguy262** on July 11th, 2003, 8:31 pm

well... have any of you been to McCormik place for a show, like the Chicago Auto Show every year? they built HUGE overpasses right over the expressway.. therefore, it IS possible to build a bridge like that above the expressway in Gurnee, SFGAm should think about that, and would most likely need to show the Village of Gurnee an estimate of what kind of revenue and tourism this expansion would bring them in the near future...this part is pretty far-out, but how sweet would it be if they built some kind of dome or something over this 'new theme park expansion' and was able to host year-round attendance?! i think that would be the best, because it would also lower the prices for admission, food, merch, EVERYTHING. b/c it's only open for a few months, so they have to earn as MUCH revenue as they possibly can in that short amount of time.

R.I.P. Deja Vu 10/07/01-10/28/07

Ive walked through the overpass for the auto show. But the the ends of the overpass is connected to buildings. Anyway the dome idea isnt all that good. A lot of people wouldnt travel in the winter time to go to an amusement park when its cold and all that other good stuff. Also riding all the rides in thick clothes wouldnt be fun. Also it would be hard to close the harnesses on the coasters with the thick clothes. During Fright Fest my dad barely fits in any of the coasters because of the sweatshirts he wears.

by **coastrcorey** on July 11th, 2003, 9:39 pm

I think what SFGAmguy means is if the new part were under a dome, people wouldn't need jackets and stuff, because it would be warmer in there. I think it would be too weird though, going to ride roller coasters under a dome...

by **coasterzak** on July 11th, 2003, 9:51 pm

They do have an amusement park like that out in Vegas. But get real, this is Illinois. That would be too weird. I say they just build coasters on top of each other with really high stations like on RCT! J/k.

by **T_Biggs** on July 11th, 2003, 9:52 pm

Is McCormik on the same highway? It's been over a year since I've been places in Chicago by road. I thought that place was on Lake Shore Drive, which isn't part of the interstate or tollway. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think it's a different highway there.And it wouldn't be that strange to have an indoor park. It's been done at large malls, like West Edmonton Mall and Mall of America. The problem is, I don't think there would be a point to go to an indoor amusement park if there were only that. The only indoor amusement park where that was the main attraction I can think of is Old Chicago. That place failed miserably. Although it did have the co-first modern looping coaster... I wish Knotts would stop getting all the credit for it when Old Chicago built the same coaster the same year.

by **coastrcorey** on July 11th, 2003, 10:28 pm

Yeah, they would never be able to attract that many guests with an indoor park (I mean in the off-season). I mean, it would have to have something really cool for me to even go down there.

by **SfGaMownz** on July 11th, 2003, 10:37 pm

I bet alot of people from the Chicago land area would go. I mean come on what do all of you do in the winter? Yes, I know you just post on the SFGAMWorld fourms :lol:

.

by **coastrcorey** on July 11th, 2003, 10:43 pm

I know what people from Illinois do, come to Wisconsin! Lol, just kidding all you Illinois natives (pretty much everyone).

by **T_Biggs** on July 11th, 2003, 11:26 pm

The people in Illinois who want to get out are the old ones. They go to Wisconsin in the summer, and Florida in the winter. And what do you do in winter? People that want to get out go to Florida or do winter sports. In general, people go to amusement parks once or twice a year. Why would a small indoor park entice people in the middle of winter? The only people it would attract are a small number of people who need better things to do with their lives. :lol:

And I bet a lot of people in the Chicago area wouldn't go. They didn't go to Old Chicago almost 30 years ago. Why would that be any different now? It would be stupid for any company to repeat what Old Chicago did.If you want a website for Old Chicago, go to http://members.tripod.com/lisawebworld1/oldchicago.html . It has a good history of this short lived park that was Great America's closest thing ever to "competition."

by **Timmy179** on July 12th, 2003, 9:31 am

that old chicago place looks pretty cool for its time. my grandma says she thinks shes been there a couple times. i wonder what happened to all of the rides

by **coasterzak** on July 12th, 2003, 12:15 pm

I think the indoor amusement park would be a horrible idea. That's true, no one would want to go there during the winter because they only go once or twice to a park.

by **SfGaMownz** on July 12th, 2003, 7:31 pm

Yeah, after looking through that Old Chicago stite, I realized I didn't factor in thaqt you can't expand at all :lol:

. So yeah, it wouldn't be the brightest of ideas, but then again we could end up getting an water park :wink:

.

by **coasterzak** on July 12th, 2003, 8:37 pm

A waterpark attracts a ton of people to the park. You would need a lot more parking. I know this is a problem with SFWoA. The park sucks up a ton of people, then when it closes at 7 the whole park floods with people. It's insane. The name of the waterpark is Hurricane Harbor, and they call it the Hurricane Harbor effect when there are a ton of people in the park, but it still looks empty because none of them are on rides, but rather in the waterpark.

by **SfGaMownz** on July 12th, 2003, 8:42 pm

Lol. So SfWoA is the exact opposite of SfGaM. At 7 there, the park gets more crowded becasue of HH closeing. When here at 7 the park empties out for the day and lines are a minimum.

by **coasterzak** on July 12th, 2003, 8:50 pm

Well crowded is a relative term. You have to get off the train, you can't stay on it to for rerides. LOL, everything is still a walkon at 7, except for X-Flight, and that gets 15 mins longer.

by **coasterkid86** on July 21st, 2003, 9:20 pm

ok sfgam has two parking lots anyway. Either tear up most of the first one close to were the entrance is and build stuff there or just tear it all up and build underground. Then they can move the entrance further down and have a lot more space. Thats the only logical parking improvement i could think of, and as to the extra land. bulid something underneath the highway that can bring people to either side.

by **coasterguy** on July 21st, 2003, 9:39 pm

Building an underground parking lot is not logical to me.

by **coasterkid86** on July 21st, 2003, 9:41 pm

Why is it not logical

SFGAM's extra land

Who is online

Administrator Control Panel