DHS Monster Inc Land Coming to Disney's Hollywood Studios

[TheMaxRebo]

Yes, but the building being pushed back to allow space for the service road seems to indicate the road will stay. At least to me.

For the record I don’t care what they do with the road - just the way I’m seeing it. Haha.

The images today do seem to indicate it pushed back past the road - but that could just be to allow for access during construction, for utilities, or just coincidence

Guess this means there is a higher probability a road could stay that before this was out but I don't think it means it "is clear" that the road will stay

Could potentially be neat if it did stay and walkway goes over it, maybe even a subtle hill to differentiate the area, help with perspective, etc. (kinda like the subtly incline up toward Cinderella's castle)

 

[lazyboy97o]

Could potentially be neat if it did stay and walkway goes over it, maybe even a subtle hill to differentiate the area, help with perspective, etc. (kinda like the subtly incline up toward Cinderella's castle)

Main Street, USA being inclined is an urban legend. It’s no more than a 2’ difference between Town Square and the Hub. Not enough to notice or do any visual tricks, but enough to still shed water.

 

[JackCH]

Main Street, USA being inclined is an urban legend. It’s no more than a 2’ difference between Town Square and the Hub. Not enough to notice or do any visual tricks, but enough to still shed water.

Whelp. I've been naively misleading my friends for years!

 

[doctornick]

The images today do seem to indicate it pushed back past the road - but that could just be to allow for access during construction, for utilities, or just coincidence

Guess this means there is a higher probability a road could stay that before this was out but I don't think it means it "is clear" that the road will stay

Could potentially be neat if it did stay and walkway goes over it, maybe even a subtle hill to differentiate the area, help with perspective, etc. (kinda like the subtly incline up toward Cinderella's castle)

...but there's no road on the concept art. Yes, it's obvious that the coaster building is located beyond the current perimeter road, though that was clear prior to the information on the buildings. There's essentially zero chance that the perimeter road will cross at the same grade as an "on stage" guest walkway. Yes, there are some cases of such crossings but they are pathways with limited use during park hours; for example the road at DHS between SWGE and TSL but it doesn't really get used while the park is open. The perimeter road is used significantly more and would need to be not crossing any guest areas.

The only way the perimeter road would remain is if it were grade separated in some fashion - the guest path going over it like a bridge or the road being buried below the guest path. Neither of those makes any sense compared to just redirecting the road behind the show building which is a pretty trivial activity in the grand scheme of things.

 

[JackCH]

I think the concept art still doesn't capture what the final product will look like very well. The amount of space between Melrose and the coaster building is almost as big as the open space in the land itself. There is either a coaster bridge a la Guardians (pointed out by Penguin) or there is a bigger plaza area than the art shows.

 

[JohnD]

Yeah, it would be far easier and cheaper to just route the road around the building.

Unless you walk up into the building on a ramp, then they just have a clearance tunnel built into it underneath the ramp.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

...but there's no road on the concept art. Yes, it's obvious that the coaster building is located beyond the current perimeter road, though that was clear prior to the information on the buildings. There's essentially zero chance that the perimeter road will cross at the same grade as an "on stage" guest walkway. Yes, there are some cases of such crossings but they are pathways with limited use during park hours; for example the road at DHS between SWGE and TSL but it doesn't really get used while the park is open. The perimeter road is used significantly more and would need to be not crossing any guest areas.

The only way the perimeter road would remain is if it were grade separated in some fashion - the guest path going over it like a bridge or the road being buried below the guest path. Neither of those makes any sense compared to just redirecting the road behind the show building which is a pretty trivial activity in the grand scheme of things.

oh, definitely not at same grade, would either be a bridge (which isn't in the concept art) or below

And even then, I would bet dollars to donuts they move the road by the end of the build - just saying with this latest placement it is back further so in theory something could be done, but to me that makes it go from like 0% chance to 1% chance

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

oh, definitely not at same grade, would either be a bridge (which isn't in the concept art) or below

I was imagining a bridge like for tron - it would go up and over the service road and then you would enter the large building from a bit higher than ground floor.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Unless you walk up into the building on a ramp, then they just have a clearance tunnel built into it underneath the ramp.

It’s about 80’ from the current backstage wall to the back corner of Mama Melrose’s at the road. A minimum 15’ grade change would require about three times that linear length to provide bare minimum clearance. It would require a terraced plaza and switchbacks.

The coaster building needs its own back of house and fire truck access.

 

[SamusAranX]

It'd be almost impossible to see the building from anywhere except its head-on entrance, which, according to artwork, is supposed to be fulled facade-ed.

With loss of parking could they go ala DLR and build a small parking garage adjacent? More parking to compensate for loss of spaces and it can hide the back of the big “box”

 

[SplashJacket]

From an uninformed perspective:
I think the most likely reason behind the show building placement is twofold:

1st, sightlines.

2nd, future expansion.

The positioning enables a non-dead-end path for a future land while NOT eliminating Star Tours or what will become Harryhausen.

The Feature Animation blog post, to me, is a plea for us to "stop calling for the demolition of this building, we're not getting rid of it."

Inside Feature Animation Florida Where Lilo & Stitch Was Made

I'm taking you with me inside Feature Animation Florida, where we work in the halls and offices where Disney's "Lilo & Stitch" was made.

disneyparksblog.com

Animation Courtyard may undergo an expansion or overhaul, but a significant land expansion would require demolishing Feature Animation, and I don't believe they're willing to do that.

So, in the coming decades, I would expect large future expansions behind Star Tours / Indy, and not within Animation Courtyard, though I would expect that area to be revitalized.

 

[JackCH]

From an uninformed perspective:
I think the most likely reason behind the show building placement is twofold:

1st, sightlines.

2nd, future expansion.
View attachment 867353
The positioning enables a non-dead-end path for a future land while NOT eliminating Star Tours or what will become Harryhausen.

The Feature Animation blog post, to me, is a plea for us to "stop calling for the demolition of this building, we're not getting rid of it."

Inside Feature Animation Florida Where Lilo & Stitch Was Made

I'm taking you with me inside Feature Animation Florida, where we work in the halls and offices where Disney's "Lilo & Stitch" was made.

disneyparksblog.com

Animation Courtyard may undergo an expansion or overhaul, but a significant land expansion would require demolishing Feature Animation, and I don't believe they're willing to do that.

So, in the coming decades, I would expect large future expansions behind Star Tours / Indy, and not within Animation Courtyard, though I would expect that area to be revitalized.

Trusted insiders have said AC’s transformation is a matter of when, not if.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

The Feature Animation blog post, to me, is a plea for us to "stop calling for the demolition of this building, we're not getting rid of it."

If they are willing to demolish Jim Hensons last work, and an opening day WDW area that was part of Walt’s original vision for the parks - I highly doubt they care about saving a building that is not accessible to the public that once housed a department that no longer exists in the company for historic purposes.

 

[SplashJacket]

The Feature Animation blog post, to me, is a plea for us to "stop calling for the demolition of this building, we're not getting rid of it."

Inside Feature Animation Florida Where Lilo & Stitch Was Made

I'm taking you with me inside Feature Animation Florida, where we work in the halls and offices where Disney's "Lilo & Stitch" was made.

disneyparksblog.com

Animation Courtyard may undergo an expansion or overhaul, but a significant land expansion would require demolishing Feature Animation, and I don't believe they're willing to do that.

So, in the coming decades, I would expect large future expansions behind Star Tours / Indy, and not within Animation Courtyard, though I would expect [Animation Courtyard] area to be revitalized.

Trusted insiders have said AC’s transformation is a matter of when, not if.

Completely irrelevant to what I said. Never disputed that.

I just don't see that parcel becoming the large 10+ acre land people are expecting, and instead think they'll put GE / TSL-sized lands over behind Star Tours & Indy, as evidenced by the positioning of the building, over the coming decades.

If they are willing to demolish Jim Hensons last work, and an opening day WDW area that was part of Walt’s original vision for the parks - I highly doubt they care about saving a building that is not accessible to the public that once housed a department that no longer exists in the company for historic purposes.

One replacement will likely drive revenue and minimal expense.

One would cost 8-figures to demo and replace elsewhere.

I'm not making the argument that Disney would preserve Feature Animation for historical purposes, but the random blog post is signaling "hey, this is a really cool building that is a lot bigger than y'all seem to think, we kind of like it, we're not getting rid of it."

 

[doctornick]

Completely irrelevant to what I said. Never disputed that.

I just don't see that parcel becoming the large 10+ acre land people are expecting, and instead think they'll put GE / TSL-sized lands over behind Star Tours & Indy, as evidenced by the positioning of the building, over the coming decades.

One replacement will likely drive revenue and drive revenue with minimal expense.

One would cost 8-figures to demo and replace elsewhere.

I'm not making the argument that Disney would preserve Feature Animation for historical purposes, but the random blog post is signaling "hey, this is a really cool building that is a lot bigger than y'all seem to think, we kind of like it, we're not getting rid of it."

There are backstage building behind Echo Lake (stuff like parade storage, costuming, etc) that would need to be torn down and built elsewhere if they added a land there. Nothing impossible but no easier than tearing down Animation which is actually simple to replace as it’s just offices. Nothing impossible but to mention that replacing Animation and connecting to the RNR area substantially improves guest flow options.

I’d be pretty shocked if the next area used for (additional) building at DHS isn’t on the Animation footprint. Even ignoring that credible insiders have stated that there are plans for that space.

 

[SplashJacket]

There are backstage building behind Echo Lake (stuff like parade storage, costuming, etc) that would need to be torn down and built elsewhere if they added a land there. Nothing impossible but no easier than tearing down Animation which is actually simple to replace as it’s just offices.

I’d argue there’s a huge difference between a 4 story parking garage and a 4 story building and a fancy shed, but YMMV

Feature is apparently 4 stories, and using Google earth is about 60,000 sq feet. So 60,000*4 is 240,000 sq feet of office space.

According to Google, high end offices can cost around $250 per square foot, so about $60,000,000 to replace Feature Animation. Parking garages are apparently around $100 per square foot, and at 50,000 square feet with 5 decks via Google Earth, that’s $25,000,000 to replace what they already have.

So in total $85,000,000 in new office construction costs, plus however many millions in demo, before you even begin building whatever you want to build (which would be more costly due to the longer project timeline).

These are estimates of course, I’m sure you could find cheaper office construction costs or higher, but the point stands, office space isn’t free. Lake Nona was going to cost over $1 billion. Costuming sheds and modular construction are not expensive.

All in all, it’s really silly how willy-nilly people throw around Feature Animation getting thrown down, when it’s realistically one of the last back of house assets Disney would want to tear down.

Nothing impossible but to mention that replacing Animation and connecting to the RNR area substantially improves guest flow options. I’d be pretty shocked if the next area used for (additional) building at DHS isn’t on the Animation footprint. Even ignoring that credible insiders have stated that there are plans for that space.

Oh I agree, plot between RNR and launch bay is an inevitable attraction, that likely takes Launch Bay and much of AC with it, but again, every fan concept on here has these plans gobbling up all of the garage, feature animation, and the other backstage over there, whereas the AC plans will be far far smaller scale and likely leave animation.

I can see a world 15 years from now where Feature is still standing, with a couple 10 year old attractions in AC, and a brand new land behind Star Tours.

 

[MisterPenguin]

According to Google, high end offices can cost around $250 per square foot, so about $60,000,000 to replace Feature Animation. Parking garages are apparently around $100 per square foot, and at 50,000 square feet with 5 decks via Google Earth, that’s $25,000,000 to replace what they already have.

They did that already. The new office is called "Starcruiser."

 

[sedati]

I honestly think I’ll prefer seeing that to the current views across to popsicle stick Galaxy’s Edge.

In park I want no breaks in theme, but I honestly love seeing the behind-the-magic illusions when I'm... behind the magic.

 

[DCBaker]

Aerial photos from bioreconstruct:

 

[lazyboy97o]

I’d argue there’s a huge difference between a 4 story parking garage and a 4 story building and a fancy shed, but YMMV

Feature is apparently 4 stories, and using Google earth is about 60,000 sq feet. So 60,000*4 is 240,000 sq feet of office space.

According to Google, high end offices can cost around $250 per square foot, so about $60,000,000 to replace Feature Animation. Parking garages are apparently around $100 per square foot, and at 50,000 square feet with 5 decks via Google Earth, that’s $25,000,000 to replace what they already have.

So in total $85,000,000 in new office construction costs, plus however many millions in demo, before you even begin building whatever you want to build (which would be more costly due to the longer project timeline).

These are estimates of course, I’m sure you could find cheaper office construction costs or higher, but the point stands, office space isn’t free. Lake Nona was going to cost over $1 billion. Costuming sheds and modular construction are not expensive.

All in all, it’s really silly how willy-nilly people throw around Feature Animation getting thrown down, when it’s realistically one of the last back of house assets Disney would want to tear down.

You’re completely ignoring that the animation building is not a true back of house asset and is not full of people who have to be at the park. They can be relocated to existing facilities, even ones not at Walt Disney World, so the building construction cost would be $0. The park may have to support moving people out if they agreed to house them for a fixed term, but they wouldn’t have to carry the full cost of building brand new facilities.

Actual backstage facilities may not be in the most expensive to build construction but they’re use is actually part of operating the park. The park is responsible to relocating them and dealing with any negativity from shuffling around or making things inconvenient.