Author Topic: Branson Debates Diversification  (Read 24887 times)

cowboy

  • Cave Guide
  • Posts: 447
    • View Profile
Re: Branson Debates Diversification
« Reply #45 on: June 10, 2014, 11:16:28 AM »
Branson is going to have to do something to survive, and to make people keep wanting to come back,

My biggest issue with Branson, isn't it's variety of attractions, it's that it's loosing it's charm. You have way too many abandoned attractions (Grand Palace, Celebration City, Outlet mall) and other attractions that look like they need to be abandoned. These items just give Branson a "dirty" or "going out of business" feel....also, a lot of "clearing" for roads, developments, and such that are yet to be complete.

It's too bad that the city of Branson didn't make covenants that would have required better building practices. It seems that metal buildings with false fronts were perfectly fine......I know Tanger was constructed in their standard format, but what if Branson just required them to do a little more to improve the aesthetics of the development...(more trees, a wooded or natural theme with the area).

I just think it's time for a big clean and re-landscape.

Jay

chittlins

  • Craftsman
  • Posts: 2305
  • I want a watermelon stand
    • View Profile
Re: Branson Debates Diversification
« Reply #46 on: June 10, 2014, 11:57:45 AM »
<soapbox>

I've come to the conclusion that modern society is sick and I want no part of it. I want nothing more than to be left alone to think what I want to think and believe what I want to believe. If that makes me paranoid, I really don't care what anybody thinks.

Branson used to be a place to escape all that, but the more commercial it becomes, the less I like it. My parents went every year for 50+ years but won't go anymore. That's ok, I guess we're just no longer in the targeted demographic

</soapbox>

It's not that you are not the targeted demo, it's that it has to have a broader demographic to thrive. You rail against commercialization but that's what built Branson in the first place. Miles and miles of billboards promoting it has scarred the scenic beauty of the Ozark for decades. That's commercialism in the raw. What made Branson unique isn't unique anymore.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2014, 12:05:04 PM by chittlins »

chittlins

  • Craftsman
  • Posts: 2305
  • I want a watermelon stand
    • View Profile
Re: Branson Debates Diversification
« Reply #47 on: June 10, 2014, 12:11:57 PM »
Branson is going to have to do something to survive, and to make people keep wanting to come back,

My biggest issue with Branson, isn't it's variety of attractions, it's that it's loosing it's charm. You have way too many abandoned attractions (Grand Palace, Celebration City, Outlet mall) and other attractions that look like they need to be abandoned. These items just give Branson a "dirty" or "going out of business" feel....also, a lot of "clearing" for roads, developments, and such that are yet to be complete.

It's too bad that the city of Branson didn't make covenants that would have required better building practices. It seems that metal buildings with false fronts were perfectly fine......I know Tanger was constructed in their standard format, but what if Branson just required them to do a little more to improve the aesthetics of the development...(more trees, a wooded or natural theme with the area).

I just think it's time for a big clean and re-landscape.

Jay

Yep,  poor central planning has done Branson no favors.  Never addressing 76 is another. It's too late for Tanger unless they decided to rebuild elsewhere. The latest expansion about does it for present location.

Preachin_Bill

  • Citizen
  • Posts: 322
    • View Profile
Re: Branson Debates Diversification
« Reply #48 on: June 10, 2014, 02:29:06 PM »
Branson is going to have to do something to survive, and to make people keep wanting to come back,

My biggest issue with Branson, isn't it's variety of attractions, it's that it's loosing it's charm. You have way too many abandoned attractions (Grand Palace, Celebration City, Outlet mall) and other attractions that look like they need to be abandoned. These items just give Branson a "dirty" or "going out of business" feel....also, a lot of "clearing" for roads, developments, and such that are yet to be complete.

It's too bad that the city of Branson didn't make covenants that would have required better building practices. It seems that metal buildings with false fronts were perfectly fine......I know Tanger was constructed in their standard format, but what if Branson just required them to do a little more to improve the aesthetics of the development...(more trees, a wooded or natural theme with the area).

I just think it's time for a big clean and re-landscape.

Jay

I totally agree. Branson just looks like crap anymore in many places.  I like going there at least once a trip but prefer to be in a cabin in the hills around Table Rock.  It gets more depressing there it seems every time I go driving down the strip.

When Mutton Hollow went under I think that was a major sign of things to come.  The whole Branson USA/Celebration City never really felt like Branson to me, more like cheap thrills you'd find at a county fair for expensive prices.  Now there's this big ugly empty lot there full of crap.  Whatever Branson does to improve, I think it is imperative that something happens with that area.  And it can't be another CC with a different name.  Those don't work and quite frankly make Branson look worse.

Sorry to upset anyone who enjoyed CC, but I just never liked anything about the place.
Small wonder our lives have so little of God in them, when we come in touch with so little that God has made.

cousin bubba

  • Ozark Hillbilly
  • Posts: 48
    • View Profile
Re: Branson Debates Diversification
« Reply #49 on: June 10, 2014, 02:59:33 PM »
I go to SDC through West Branson. I stay and eat at Indian Point. I leave SDC through West Branson. I stay out of Branson if I can. Why? Traffic.

History Buff

  • School Master, Circuit Rider, and Novelist
  • Global Moderator
  • Master Craftsman
  • *****
  • Posts: 4195
  • We're History!
    • View Profile
    • CHECK OUT MY AUTHOR SITE!
Re: Branson Debates Diversification
« Reply #50 on: June 10, 2014, 07:36:05 PM »
I fail to see how "diversification" means Branson has to look like every other tourist/vacation town in order to survive.  That seems to be a conflict of terms to me.
Always SEEKING Memories Worth Repeating

shavethewhales

  • Administrator
  • Master Craftsman
  • *****
  • Posts: 4171
    • View Profile
    • SDCFans.com
Re: Branson Debates Diversification
« Reply #51 on: June 10, 2014, 09:58:31 PM »
The strong feelings expressed in this thread reveal more than anything that there is an underlying charm of Branson. It is undeniably a unique, cheap, clean, and uncharacteristically safe place to visit, in contrast to many other attractions-based towns around the world where you need to watch your back constantly. The niche appeal of ozarks/christian/old-timer oriented attractions has reinforced and sustains this status.

I think it's a fair assumption that if you care enough about Branson to make an account on this forum, you probably don't want to see that appeal be damaged too much. I haven't seen anything really game-changing proposed in this thread other than mulling the possibilities of gambling in the region. Upscale alcohol-based attractions and modern music is already in Branson and a little more won't hurt it.

But really, if I were to visit Branson for the first time today, it would be so hard to see any of that. Branson has become buried under decades of crappy developments and failed sub-par businesses. I think cowboy (and a few others) hit this issue on the head: a lot of Branson's principle troubles these days don't necessarily stem from its diversity of attractions. The more I think about it, the problems most people I know have with Branson stem from the fact that it's just plain built to be crappy.

How much easier would it be to visit multiple attractions in Branson if it weren't for the 76 crawl? How much more quaint would the place be if there was some sort of architectural standard instead of random stripmalls and dumpy hotels dug into the side of the hills all over the place? Don't even get me started on all the vacancies that exist due to cheap speculation builds.

I'm starting to think the discussion of what Branson needs to do to save itself should shift into a discussion of responsible development and urban renewal rather than so much about what types of attractions are acceptable. If Branson continues to literally become nothing more than stagnant theaters, plain strip malls, and run-of-the-mill hotels, then its pointless to discuss attractions because none of them will come here anyway.

How about transit solutions, or form-based codes, or incentives to follow district-based architectural trends?

chittlins

  • Craftsman
  • Posts: 2305
  • I want a watermelon stand
    • View Profile
Re: Branson Debates Diversification
« Reply #52 on: June 10, 2014, 10:48:39 PM »
This is what Shave is talking about, Branson should come up with a basic theme/architectural standards that all developments should have to meet.

This is a Tanger outlet in Oregon. notice this is the rear of stores


Here's Branson


Here's one in NC


Again, Branson's


Here's the one in the Dell's It's  outdoors but with shade, weather shelter


Another with shade shelter


A common refrain is that they will not come if you make it too tough but that's never really true. A market is a market and they will build to the specs laid out to them but most will take advantage to cut costs if allowed. Branson allowed substandard design for lots and lots of stuff and it's showing. Had a Brother in Law that was once in the store design/construction dept at Walmart when Sam was dead set on building on the cheap, eventually under Glass, they had to start conforming to build stores in some areas, too much revenue to be had over being hard headed about store design.

Fayetteville had this image of being hard to develop in (well for Arkansas casue it's a breeze compared to a city like Germantown TN)and yet over the past 20 years, it's funny to see the other cities in the region come up to Fayetteville's standards on sign size , landscape standards and such.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2014, 10:58:28 PM by chittlins »

chittlins

  • Craftsman
  • Posts: 2305
  • I want a watermelon stand
    • View Profile
Re: Branson Debates Diversification
« Reply #53 on: June 10, 2014, 11:47:48 PM »
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the Branson plan for 76 to improve walkability?

Take this Sonic as an example that invites pedestrian traffic with a patio with an outdoor fireplace


Google "The Island Pigeon Forge" this will be home to Margaritaville and Paula Dean eartery now imagine Celebration City done like this and with a operating Ozcat  for six bucks a ride or unlimited for 15.
 
Google "Walden's Landing Pigeon Forge" as another example of a new mixed use entertainment/shopping development.

Branson get a prime piece of real estate tragically destroyed by a tornado  but the silver lining was a chance to redevelop it. but you got newer versions of what was there. Missed opportunity.

runner1960

  • Conductor
  • Posts: 994
    • View Profile
Re: Branson Debates Diversification
« Reply #54 on: June 11, 2014, 06:52:49 AM »
I agree with a lot of the above about the shoddy uncontrolled development. What if Branson had invested in a Light rail system on the strip instead of roads to nowhere years ago. A architectural zoning standard is the way to go in the future. Also as I mentioned before take some of the empty lots for central parking and put a modern light rail, monorail, or whatever you want to call it right down the center of the strip. Reduce car usage and give the area more of a pedestrian , urban feel.  But, I still feel the type of attractions need to change also. Hints of this are happening, but if it is left uncontrolled it will fail miserably.  The CC site is a eyesore and you would hope HFE would do what is right instead of being stubborn and short sighted.

chittlins

  • Craftsman
  • Posts: 2305
  • I want a watermelon stand
    • View Profile
Re: Branson Debates Diversification
« Reply #55 on: June 11, 2014, 08:56:42 AM »
I agree with a lot of the above about the shoddy uncontrolled development. What if Branson had invested in a Light rail system on the strip instead of roads to nowhere years ago. A architectural zoning standard is the way to go in the future. Also as I mentioned before take some of the empty lots for central parking and put a modern light rail, monorail, or whatever you want to call it right down the center of the strip. Reduce car usage and give the area more of a pedestrian , urban feel.  But, I still feel the type of attractions need to change also. Hints of this are happening, but if it is left uncontrolled it will fail miserably.  The CC site is a eyesore and you would hope HFE would do what is right instead of being stubborn and short sighted.

A trolley line along 76 perhaps. At this point the logistics and costs of such a transit system would be astronomical.



History Buff

  • School Master, Circuit Rider, and Novelist
  • Global Moderator
  • Master Craftsman
  • *****
  • Posts: 4195
  • We're History!
    • View Profile
    • CHECK OUT MY AUTHOR SITE!
Re: Branson Debates Diversification
« Reply #56 on: June 11, 2014, 11:11:13 AM »
I agree with a lot of the above about the shoddy uncontrolled development. What if Branson had invested in a Light rail system on the strip instead of roads to nowhere years ago. A architectural zoning standard is the way to go in the future. Also as I mentioned before take some of the empty lots for central parking and put a modern light rail, monorail, or whatever you want to call it right down the center of the strip. Reduce car usage and give the area more of a pedestrian , urban feel.  But, I still feel the type of attractions need to change also. Hints of this are happening, but if it is left uncontrolled it will fail miserably.  The CC site is a eyesore and you would hope HFE would do what is right instead of being stubborn and short sighted.
A trolley line along 76 perhaps. At this point the logistics and costs of such a transit system would be astronomical.


It's not to invest in teleportation, my friends!
Always SEEKING Memories Worth Repeating

oldsdcer

  • Cave Guide
  • Posts: 403
    • View Profile
Re: Branson Debates Diversification
« Reply #57 on: June 11, 2014, 01:04:09 PM »
Twenty years ago the time share people were always mention that Branson was planning to put a mono-rail system down 76 as one of their selling point. Vegas had a nice mono-rail system when I visited  in 2006, but their was a discussion on many of their news programs that it was not profitable.
SDC has always made a great past to remember

Old Guy

  • Citizen
  • Posts: 254
  • The Author as a Boy
    • View Profile
    • Withe and Stone
Re: Branson Debates Diversification
« Reply #58 on: June 13, 2014, 12:47:16 AM »
The big debate on the monorail was that every business wanted it to stop in front of them. To many stops on a long trip down miles of road. Not enough stops, to far to walk to your business. No one could agree.
"Loved on Four Contenents!"

thelarsonsix

  • Conductor
  • Posts: 810
    • View Profile
    • My facebook page. Just let me know you're from SDC fans
Re: Branson Debates Diversification
« Reply #59 on: June 14, 2014, 09:22:00 PM »
There is a plan, or at least some ideas being kicked around for 76.

http://bransonspiritof76.com/
"He takes a log, then he just cuts away everything that don't look like an injun" - Jed Clampett