Main Street U.S.A. hub redevelopment at the Magic Kingdom

[note2001]

The Entire Polynesian Resort was built in like 8 months... Grading , buildings Pool and all.. It took 3 years to build 7 Dwarfs Mine Train...lol crazy and yes it is all about spreading it out... During the NFL build they built the GF DVC in under a year....

You're comparing building on fresh land with months, even years of pre-planning going into it to work being done on areas with pre-existing structures and lines, both above and below the soil. I'm sure there's no small amount of engineering going into this work. Much more so than the Polynesian or the VGF required once they broke ground.

 

[NeXuS1000]

Large corporations, especially publically traded ones, like to spread capital expendatures over multiple fiscal quarters to mask the outlay of cash flow that is being made.

For those that are claiming they are taking their time to keep quality high - remember, they are grading some dirt, putting in some utility buildings, a few planters, and some fake grass. This is not a year long project due to the complexity. There are other factors driving it. The same factors that made New Fantasyland the extracted build that it was.

As the expression use to be, where there is a Will there is a Way. That expression no longer applies in Reedy Creek.

For those that claim they are only working after hours due to the noise and concern for the guests, this is the same resort and same park that has a giant crane in front of the resort's icon for months at a time each year. Why can't that work be done after hours? Again, if there was a will there would be a way. The resort has always done construction during "show" hours. A half decade of NFL construction has served as the most recent example. With the high walls around any of Disney's projects sound goes straight up and not as far out into the park as you'd imagine. Just like the sound barrier walls you see in cities along interstates.

I encourage anyone that thinks this project should last a year to play a little game at home. Find a construction site and watch progress there versus this one. Pay attention how quickly the average construction site goes from soil grading, to foundations, to vertical construction and then report back if you think the Hub redesign should look this way a half year into its project. Then remember, that the average construction site isn't being run by the same multimillion dollar corporation that built Disneyland from soil to grand opening in a year.

I know corporations sometimes spread out costs to several quarters, but it's not always a financially sound decision, and when it comes to construction, the longer it takes, the more expensive it usually is. I highly, highly doubt that the time it takes is to save money. Quite the contrary.

There's a roundabout being built close to where I live, and it's been under constructions for several months now. A roundabout. Of course, on unbuilt land or in countries with less restrictions or just less care for construction quality and such, it could be done a lot faster.

My basic point is that neither you or I are construction experts, and we don't have the full insight on what's going on here, but I highly doubt that it would benefit Disney in any possible way to make the construction process longer than it should. It's much cheaper to wrap things up quickly.

 

[BoarderPhreak]

Can't wait until this parking lot, err, hub is finished!

 

[danlb_2000]

I know corporations sometimes spread out costs to several quarters, but it's not always a financially sound decision, and when it comes to construction, the longer it takes, the more expensive it usually is. I highly, highly doubt that the time it takes is to save money. Quite the contrary.

There's a roundabout being built close to where I live, and it's been under constructions for several months now. A roundabout. Of course, on unbuilt land or in countries with less restrictions or just less care for construction quality and such, it could be done a lot faster.

My basic point is that neither you or I are construction experts, and we don't have the full insight on what's going on here, but I highly doubt that it would benefit Disney in any possible way to make the construction process longer than it should. It's much cheaper to wrap things up quickly.

The project that makes me believe that Disney takes longer to build things then necessary is the Tangled Restrooms. Construction walls went up around the old Fantasyland skyway in May of 2011, they came down again on the completed restroom March 2013.

 

[NeXuS1000]

The project that makes me believe that Disney takes longer to build things then necessary is the Tangled Restrooms. Construction walls went up around the old Fantasyland skyway in May of 2011, they came down again on the completed restroom March 2013.

So do you know exactly what had to be done during that construction? Often there's more than meets the eye to these projects, and just because Disney doesn't share every single detail of what they're doing, doesn't mean there isn't stuff being done. Maybe there were issues with the foundation, I don't know. And neither do you. It's easy to accuse them of dragging out the construction projects, but I see little hard proof for it besides the speculative "to distribute costs across financial quarters". Seriously, I don't think the Tangled restrooms were an expense of such a proportion Disney would even consider dragging it out for the sake of quarterly distribution.

 

[Bocabear]

I was actually told they were spreading 7 Dwarfs out over fiscal years on purpose...by someone that I cant disclose who was NOT a bus driver...lol

 

[danlb_2000]

I was actually told they were spreading 7 Dwarfs out over fiscal years on purpose...by someone that I cant disclose who was NOT a bus driver...lol

... and I believe someone with construction experience did explain how stretching out a project can save money. Maybe it was @Tom?

 

[lazyboy97o]

I know corporations sometimes spread out costs to several quarters, but it's not always a financially sound decision, and when it comes to construction, the longer it takes, the more expensive it usually is. I highly, highly doubt that the time it takes is to save money. Quite the contrary.

There's a roundabout being built close to where I live, and it's been under constructions for several months now. A roundabout. Of course, on unbuilt land or in countries with less restrictions or just less care for construction quality and such, it could be done a lot faster.

My basic point is that neither you or I are construction experts, and we don't have the full insight on what's going on here, but I highly doubt that it would benefit Disney in any possible way to make the construction process longer than it should. It's much cheaper to wrap things up quickly.

Construction is not exactly some super secret industry of only a few people where those who talk about how it works are charged with a crime.

 

[DrewmanS]

... and I believe someone with construction experience did explain how stretching out a project can save money. Maybe it was @Tom?

Every project has an optimum duration to minimize costs based on given constraints. Those constraints could include working hours, availability of labor, lead time on parts, and cash flow. However, once that optimum duration is determined, intentionally stretching out a project NEVER saves money.

It's possible for companies to set contraints like "capital spending can not exceed X or X%" in a given period. When you have multiple projects, it would still be cheaper to optimize each project and just stagger starts to manage cash flow.

Any company that simply extends projects to spread out the cost over longer periods of time would fail in their fiduciary responsibilities to shareholders.

It would be much cheaper to close the hub completely, work during the day, and complete the project in much less time. The duration of this project and many others are driven by Disney's desire to minimize impacts on guests, not save money.

 

[hpyhnt 1000]

I know minecraft isn't for everyone but this videos gives us a better idea of what new hub will look like from a guest's point of view. It was made on MC Magic a 1.1 scale recreation of WDW (link at bottom). The disney parks video only gives us an aerial view so I thought I'd share this video as it gives us a better of idea of what it will be to walk through the hub. The people who made this have done a good job at staying accurate to the new design with little to work with.

--Minecraft Rendering--

Link to mc magic: http://mcmagic.us/

I've actually been working on something similar for the past few months using SketchUp (yes, I know I hae had too much time on my hands; unemployment will do that to you). Below is what I managed to come up with.

As nice as the Disney video is, it does a poor job of showing what the new hub area will look like from ground level. I thought I would try to fix that problem. Everything you see in this rendering is based solely on the video and the information and leaked blueprint documents from this thread. It is to accurate to scale (or as accurate as I could be) and tries to offer a realistic perspective of the final product. Of course, there are some details which we don't know about yet or which Have probably already changed, and I had to work within the limits of my own skill in Sketchup. It's not perfect, but I think it does a decent job of showing what the new hub could look like. Enjoy!

Main Street View


Hub View; Hub View Looking West; West Ring Path

East Bridge View (in front of The Plaza Restaurant)


Hub View from Crystal Palace; Crystal Palace from Hub

 

[hpyhnt 1000]

A few more:

Tomorrowland Terrace View


View from Cosmic Ray's Bridge; East FP+ Viewing Area; View from FP+ Viewing Area

Hub Fountain View


Plaza Dining Area; Casey's Corner Dining Area

 

[JediMasterMatt]

Every project has an optimum duration to minimize costs based on given constraints. Those constraints could include working hours, availability of labor, lead time on parts, and cash flow. However, once that optimum duration is determined, intentionally stretching out a project NEVER saves money.

It's possible for companies to set contraints like "capital spending can not exceed X or X%" in a given period. When you have multiple projects, it would still be cheaper to optimize each project and just stagger starts to manage cash flow.

Any company that simply extends projects to spread out the cost over longer periods of time would fail in their fiduciary responsibilities to shareholders.

It would be much cheaper to close the hub completely, work during the day, and complete the project in much less time. The duration of this project and many others are driven by Disney's desire to minimize impacts on guests, not save money.

You are making an important assumption - that the method that is selected is the most cost effective. That is not necessarily true. Projects can and are usually driven by the budget provided. If the budget is determined to spread the costs over a greater duration, then the net result is more capital at each reporting period. The total spend may be the same or more; but, the amount of capital spend per reporting period is lessened. Think of it as layaway on the corporate level.

The bottom line is that if you want projects completed faster you increase rate at which progress is made - usually by increasing the hours worked. That would result in a bigger impact to the fiscal numbers. With the exception of the DVC projects others have mentioned, nothing in the parks gets much in the way of labor these days. It's this lack of wanting to spend that also causes reduced monorail hours and attractions with broken effects.

Disney could get any of their projects done quicker. They simply choose not to pay the price to do so.

If Pixie dust makes you think the rate at which ground is leveled or restrooms are opened is perfectly acceptable, then keep supporting the resort that you care so much about and do it with a smile. If you remember what made you love the place to begin with, you should step back and realize that it's not being managed with the same love and caring you've invested in it.

 

[Kman101]

On the issue of dragging out construction, I don't need an insider or a construction worker to tell me any of this. WDW tells me this all on their own with how they do things. It's obvious. I wish the ones who just refuse to see this could actually open their eyes and see this. It's not "let's hate and bash Disney". It's the clear truth and I don't need anyone to tell me this. How can some not see this?

 

[NeXuS1000]

Construction is not exactly some super secret industry of only a few people where those who talk about how it works are charged with a crime.

Point being? I didn't say it was secretive, I just said that I've yet to see proof that Disney deliberately "delays" the construction process to split out the cost to several financial quarters, and I see plenty of plausible reasons for why that wouldn't be the cause for the seemingly long construction times. If I get proof, I'll of course accept that situation straight away and shut up, but it's apparently very easy to accuse Disney of doing something and accept that as the fact without any evidence of sorts.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Point being? I didn't say it was secretive, I just said that I've yet to see proof that Disney deliberately "delays" the construction process to split out the cost to several financial quarters, and I see plenty of plausible reasons for why that wouldn't be the cause for the seemingly long construction times. If I get proof, I'll of course accept that situation straight away and shut up, but it's apparently very easy to accuse Disney of doing something and accept that as the fact without any evidence of sorts.

The most glaring evidence is right up the road in a less favorable building environment.

 

[NeXuS1000]

The most glaring evidence is right up the road in a less favorable building environment.

Which is?

 

[lazyboy97o]

Which is?

Primarily Universal Orlando Resort but also the rest of the entertainment industry in Orlando. For decades there were people who argued that the Reedy Creek Improvement District gave Disney an unfair advantage because of the speed with which they were able to accomplish building projects. Nobody would say that now and the legislature never changed the Reedy Creek Improvement District. The changes that have slowed Disney's pace to be behind the neighboring areas that still lack their own government to play with is the result of changes by Disney. Some projects Walt Disney World have risen rather quickly, and those are the ones most like other projects in the world, ones where direct revenue is to be generated. Disney is at their slowest when the project will not directly generate revenue.

 

[RayTheFirefly]

I've actually been working on something similar for the past few months using SketchUp (yes, I know I hae had too much time on my hands; unemployment will do that to you). Below is what I managed to come up with.

As nice as the Disney video is, it does a poor job of showing what the new hub area will look like from ground level. I thought I would try to fix that problem. Everything you see in this rendering is based solely on the video and the information and leaked blueprint documents from this thread. It is to accurate to scale (or as accurate as I could be) and tries to offer a realistic perspective of the final product. Of course, there are some details which we don't know about yet or which Have probably already changed, and I had to work within the limits of my own skill in Sketchup. It's not perfect, but I think it does a decent job of showing what the new hub could look like. Enjoy!

View attachment 60574
Main Street View

View attachment 60576 View attachment 60577 View attachment 60578
Hub View; Hub View Looking West; West Ring Path

View attachment 60581
East Bridge View (in front of The Plaza Restaurant)

View attachment 60582 View attachment 60583
Hub View from Crystal Palace; Crystal Palace from Hub

Impressive! Thanks!

 

[FerretAfros]

Disney is at their slowest when the project will not directly generate revenue.

What a curious coincidence that the projects that don't directly generate revenue are also the ones that generally have the most constraints to work around (like being in the middle of an operating theme park). Even the revenue-generating projects within the parks (recent examples like Be Our Guest or Spice Road Table) didn't exactly pop up overnight. It's far easier to build a DVC on an empty site than to change something within a working theme park with tens of thousands of guests and CMs passing through daily

Additionally, projects that require large amounts of earthworks and utility work (like the reconfigured hub) generally seem to move at a snail's pace, simply due to the type of work involved, not just at Disney but everywhere. Consider how local roadway projects can last for years even if the changes don't appear to be especially noteworthy to the untrained eye. Vertical buildings go up quite quickly in comparison, and it's much easier to track visible progress in photos

I find it interesting that most of the posters who are saying Disney intentionally slows projects down because it's somehow cheaper to them are the ones who generally don't have as much experience in the construction industry (though, of course, there are exceptions on both sides)

 

[lazyboy97o]

What a curious coincidence that the projects that don't directly generate revenue are also the ones that generally have the most constraints to work around (like being in the middle of an operating theme park). Even the revenue-generating projects within the parks (recent examples like Be Our Guest or Spice Road Table) didn't exactly pop up overnight. It's far easier to build a DVC on an empty site than to change something within a working theme park with tens of thousands of guests and CMs passing through daily

Additionally, projects that require large amounts of earthworks and utility work (like the reconfigured hub) generally seem to move at a snail's pace, simply due to the type of work involved, not just at Disney but everywhere. Consider how local roadway projects can last for years even if the changes don't appear to be especially noteworthy to the untrained eye. Vertical buildings go up quite quickly in comparison, and it's much easier to track visible progress in photos

I find it interesting that most of the posters who are saying Disney intentionally slows projects down because it's somehow cheaper to them are the ones who generally don't have as much experience in the construction industry (though, of course, there are exceptions on both sides)

Such constraints are not new or unique to Disney.