Apr 1, 2007 5:09 pm US/Mountain

No Screaming Allowed On Ride Called 'The Screamer'

(CBS) SACRAMENTO - Screams on a thrill ride. It's hard to imagine a ride without them. But a northern California community is saying, 'keep your mouth shut as you enjoy the ride.'

It turns out, that noise is just part of the dispute at a Sacramento amusement park which features the Scandia Screamer, a ride that's thrilling customers -- but also irritating to neighbors, who are threatening a lawsuit.

At 168 feet tall, spinning at 60 miles an hour and pulling 3.5 Gs, there is no thrill in Sacramento that compares with this screamer.

“It was breathtaking,” said one rider.

But, in fact, you're not allowed to scream.

Some neighbors who live in the shadow of the new ride are complaining about the noise, so management at the Scandia Family Fun Center enacted a strict policy: No screaming allowed on the 'screamer.'

And you can even be kicked off the ride if you do.

“If you feel like you might make noise cover your mouth like this because if we can hear a noise we're required to take you off the ride so it's aggressive,” said Steve Baddley, Scandia’s general manager. “We believe we're taking every effort to make this a really mutually-beneficial relationship between the business owner the county and the residents,” said Steve

During our visit people were getting bumped off for sounding out.

“I didn't think we were that loud,” said one rider who was ejected. “It’s hard to tell. It’s a human reaction to yell when you’re going in the sky, face-down on the freeway.”

But neighbors say the sound isn’t the only problem. They say it’s also an eyesore at night when it’s all lit up.

“It's like going from fire crackers to the atomic bomb,” said Mike Bayless, neighbor. “I mean, it’s like you’re going from small family entertainment to something that's grossly out-of-place out of place in a neighborhood.”

And then there's the issue of privacy.

“And when they’re on the top of that thing they’re looking right down in my backyard,” said John Eams, neighbor.

And now, there’s even talk amongst the neighbors of a class-action lawsuit.

“I'm certainly willing to participate in the class action lawsuit but it's going to be a long road to hoe and I'm sure we will see great loss in our property values in the interim,” said Bayless.

“I would love to hear your opinions and options. Help us implement policy or words to policy that you think might be more effective” said Baddley.

The county approved this ride after taking a lot of public input, but the neighbors say their input was not adequately considered.

Scandia says it chose that particular ride because it's one of the quietest thrill rides that you can get as far as the motor. They say they needed the ride to stay viable in a competitive marketplace.

These people should fucking move.

I cannot stand people who complain about concerts or airport or amusement park or traffic noise by thier houses.

No one forced you to live there, buy fucking ear plugs, close your windows and get the sand out of your genetalia.

this is ridiculous

Although I agree with you in general, you have to take into account what happens when a noisy place is built after the residences were built. That can be a decrement to land value, and in the case of the government, could be a case for inverse condemnation depending on the circumstances.

just give them a year long free pass. they'll shut up right away.

I have some sympathy for these people, but not much. I had someone ask me a few weeks ago why I don't like Cary (a northerner-packed suburb of Raleigh) and choose to live way out in Chapel Hill. Raleigh is the fastest growing mass of fucking people in North Carolina and Cary bares the brunt of it. It's constantly packing with people. Nobody gives a fuck about the environment or sustainability. It's just build, build, build. Cram, cram, cram. How many trees can we mow down, and how many McFuckingDonalds can we cram in? It's only a matter of time before the residents of Wake County have to deal with a highway up their ass or an amusement park in their backyard. They can't pretend they don't know it. They've all got post-graduate degrees and $400,000 to plunk down on a home, yet they'll bitch like these little Sacramento babies when it happens.

And I would bet my dick that the people complaing about screaming on this ride aren't living in an established or poor neighborhood. I'd be interested to see how much older the neighborhood is than the park.

Heh, someone had to vent a little against suburban sprawl. I like it.

These people should fucking move.

I cannot stand people who complain about concerts or airport or amusement park or traffic noise by thier houses.

No one forced you to live there, buy fucking ear plugs, close your windows and get the sand out of your genetalia.

Although I agree with you in general, you have to take into account what happens when a noisy place is built after the residences were built. That can be a decrement to land value, and in the case of the government, could be a case for inverse condemnation depending on the circumstances.

Heh, someone had to vent a little against suburban sprawl. I like it.

The example that started this thread is pretty lame--I was thinking more along the lines of say, an airport being built with its approach zones going over residential areas.

The issue should be what was there when the residents moved in. If they're talking about massively expanding the scope of something or building something entirely new that they have to change zoning regulations for, the residents have the right to complain. But I doubt these residents were there before the amusement park...

A "nuisance" is anything that works hurt, inconvenience or damage to another. The fact that the act done may otherwise be lawful does not keep it from being a nuisance. The inconvenience complained of must not be fanciful or such as would affect only one of a fastidious taste, but it should be such as would affect an ordinary reasonable man.

Apr 1, 2007 5:09 pm US/Mountain