Don Lessem, aka "Dino Don," explains the park's development. All images courtesy of Patricia Hernandez.
Big “Green” Theme Park Idea Raises Hopes and Questions
During an information session at Kirksey Architects on Wednesday, September 8, a team including former Disney “imagineer” Chris Brown, developer Don Lessem (aka Dino Don), and scientist Dr. Matt Gardner presented plans for EarthQuest.
The 1,600-acre resort and learning institute is set to break ground at an undisclosed date in New Caney, Texas. The facility would teach “green living” and “re-engage the public with what’s real,” according to Brown, who is president of Contour Entertainment. Houston was a strategic choice. As the fourth largest metropolitan area in the country, Brown said that an estimated 18 million people live within a few hours drive of the potential park. This, along with Houston’s position as an energy capital, and the city’s lack of a theme park since the demise of Astroworld, make its location prime real estate.
If people are on a quest for anything in this day and age, it’s one to figure out how to be more “green.” Now, theme parks are vying for a coveted position in the green arena. But the notion of “green” can be amorphous.
The presenters acknowledged that the project would involve “cutting down” most of the 1,600 acres of quality bottomland natural forest on the site along Caney Creek.
New Caney, Texas where park is being planned for development
The park is set for construction in three phases. The first phase of development is the entertainment resort that will house, among many other attractions, the “Land” zone. Here, according to the website, “guests embark on a journey to explore, respect, and most of all enjoy the land on which we live.” Other parts of the park include the “Water” zone. Park-goers will have the opportunity to bobsled through ice-caps, and splash through hundred of thousands of gallons of water, as they learn about our earth’s most precious resource.
EarthQuest Resort rendering
EarthQuest Resort Model
“It’s hard to see how this could qualify as ‘green,’” says Director of the Texas Watershed Program, John Jacob. “No doubt they will have a few stormwater practices to make that claim—but don’t think it quite makes up for the loss in ecology.”
While some Houstonians are beaming with excitement about the prospect of the park, Jacob isn’t the resort’s only critic. Comments on Houston Chronicle’s July 14 article reflect the mixed feelings about EarthQuest’s ability to be truly sustainable. One reader said,
“This is perhaps the most outlandish misapplication of a concept and of half a billion dollars I have ever seen. The development of this “theme park/teachable moment” would be the living (or should I say dying) antithesis of what it purports to advance…[the] massive wasting of natural resources (not only through all of the materials needed to construct it, but the massive, unsustainable energy inputs needed to operate it) makes no sense to me at all.”
Yet another Chronicle reader exclaimed “This is awesome!!!!! I always wondered why Disney had neglected us. With this project, who cares!! We don’t need them we’ve got something better, newer, more creative and greener.”
From left to right: Unknown, Matt Gardner, Chris Brown, and Don Lessem
Matt Gardner, the scientist who presented, lauded the potential positive impact of the EarthQuest Institute, to be built during phase 1. The Institute, a non-profit scientific research and information center, will provide possible solutions for sustainable lifestyles. Matt Gardner commented that the Institute will offer opportunities for researchers at institutions like MIT to disseminate their research findings, and for developing industry technologies to be tested.
Email
Filed Under: Community, Growth, Public Space, sustainability
T. Keefe writes:
09.10.10
10:04 pm
We already have this. It’s called the State and National Parks System. Protect and enjoy the real deal.
Keith writes:
09.12.10
8:46 am
“The presenters acknowledged that the project would involve “cutting down” most of the 1,600 acres of quality bottomland natural forest on the site along CaneyCreek.”
‘The facility would teach “green living” and “re-engage the public with what’s real,” according to Brown, who is president of Contour Entertainment.’
Which more adequately engages the public about pristine environments? Pristine environments reshaped with the best human intentions just so long as make a profit? or Pristine environments?
In scarcely more than the lifetime of a dragonfly, acres of quality bottomland natural forest on 18th Street in the Heights were buzzed and formed into an Albertson’s grocery store. Hardly any shoppers came and it was quickly and quietly shuttered. Presently, with intentions arguably more noble, proprietors of a boat storage business are making use of what is left. The life of their business might even surpass their own.
Within the span of a lifetime, developers with the best intentions dreamed up and made a patch of Gulf coastal plain into Astroworld, a truly fun and profitable place for kids and adults. Business waxed then waned; too few kids came, and it was quietly flattened into a scalded field of invasive grasses.
No doubt, Earthquest’s entrepreneur/developers looked at the old Astroworld location and determined it was unsuitable for a variety of reasons. By vetoing this and other already-been-chewed sites, they are denying the public the earth the short and long term advantages of adaptive reuse.
It is Brown, et al who need to “re-engage with what’s real” and take year or so to think before unleashing their bulldozers. If their dream does not make a profit for centuries, it will take centuries for nature to undo their dream.
Frank Schulte-Ladbeck writes:
09.23.10
2:03 pm
Well, it will be a nice bit of greenwashing. I wonder how teachable the moments will be. It would be nice to have an entertaining experience that also teaches, but that might be better left to the state and national park system. Otherwise, I would love to see an urban center that taught sustainable ways to maintain your home, neighborhood, or office.
Kevin writes:
10.06.10
12:09 pm
I think you guys may have missed the point.
The development is not intended to teach people about pristine environments alone. The intent is to entertain guests with themes that inform and educate guests about the environment on a global scale. The information will extend to how human activity has affected these environments and most importantly, what is being done and what can be done to preserve and sustain these environments. This complex also looks to provide a medium for research and development to harbor new green technologies and a network for green businesses to grow.
This is not something that our national and state parks can do. They are limited to the local environment and can only teach, and identify local ecological problems. They lack the ability to identify any viable solutions for these troubles other than stop doing it. Unless you decide to quit your day job, sell your house and car, and vow to life among the trees, can you really take anything from the experience that state and national parks give you that directly helps mother nature? There has to be a better solution than boycotting the problem point. Innovation is the answer and EarthQuest can deliver the message that will transcend all society and not just the campers and outdoorsy people.
In order for that message to be heard and have an impact, the park has to be successful. While the prospect of building on an already “chewed up” plot of land may be more ecologically reasonable, it would be an ascetic eyesore and have no natural appeal and could be a deal breaker for the community. Successful parks have a feeling of escape from the outside world (Just take a look at Walt Disney World). Not to mention, the old Astroworld site is far too small and engulfed in the city-atmosphere. Furthermore, building into a pine forest gives the architects the opportunity to demonstrate first hand how to interface cultural and natural features together harmoniously.
At most, one can say that clearing natural forests to build a place that intends to help preserve nature is ironic, but it is far from counter-intuitive. I look at this park plan and I see an ecological investment. Areas are deforested to place a park and research institute that inspires millions of children to grow up in this world with a mind on the environment and innovate new ecologically friendly construction methods, architecture, materials, communities, manufacturing methods, and transportation. The ecological benefits could be direct through the institute, or indirect through positive societal indoctrination of future generations. If these technologies existed today then Keith would probably have no objection with the construction in New Caney. But if they already existed, their would be no need build such a place. That’s the nature of progression. Someone had to build the first tool with their bare hands.
But lets play the devil’s advocate and say that they shouldn’t build the park on this location and due to negative media attention concerning deforestation. The park’s plans fall through and EarthQuest never happens. Do you think that Marlin Atlantis is going to just leave to property the way it is? It is far more likely that they will develop a strip center or sell it to someone who will level the entire plot for commercial or industrial use. At best it becomes a country club with a golf course. Either way it won’t be a forest for long.
I think that this park couldn’t be developing in a better way. There are huge benefits for the local and state economy, and it delivers an important message. I consider teaching campers at national and state parks about the local environmental concerns to be much like preaching to the choir. Showing urbanites and city-dwellers (who are otherwise sheltered from the natural world) that they don’t have to sacrifice convenience for a green life style in an environmentally conscientious world. It sets a precedent for a shift in perspective that will benefit the world ecology by leaps and bounds over time. A sustained ecology and modern technology can coexist with a little ingenuity.
Keith writes:
11.24.10
11:15 am
If this thing doesn’t work out exactly as planned, it will take centuries for nature to undo it. Nothing written here or claimed by developers convinces me this endeavor is worth it, including surrendering claims that is going to be buzzed anyway. It ain’t happened yet.