Avengers Campus: E-Watch! (Waiting on the new ride)

[DrStarlander]

Isn't there some provision in the zoning changes for DisneylandForward that any tall building on the Harbor side has to be set back a bunch from Harbor and any building that butts up against Harbor must also be camouflaged by trees and such? I doubt you're getting 7-8 story tall trees or at least enough of them to camouflage those buildings you're suggesting. So this is probably a no go. Its probably why they also set the Avengers and Stark buildings back so far into the property rather than closer to Harbor.

The restrictions are more onerous adjacent to residential. But, yes, there are indeed setbacks (including sky exposure plane requirements that could require an angled/stepped-back approach to structures depending on how tall they are), landscape screening (though tree heights do not need to necessarily match building heights), and specific aesthetic requirements of the structures (how they look).

For example, my understanding is that a structure can be, say, 75-feet high at the setback and then angle/step up one foot for every two feet away from the setback, so a 200-foot-wide show building (such as Cosmic Rewind) could reach 175 feet of height at the inside edge. (I think Mission Breakout is about 180 feet and I've seen Cosmic Rewind reported at 140 feet).

But my review of the resort specific plan does not reveal, in principle, any issues preventing the general placement/uses I describe (ignoring the simplicity/exact shapes in my drawing). I included a few screen caps as reference but here's the full doc so I'm very open to fact-finding on this topic if you see something: Disneyland Resort Specific Plan

 

[Disney Irish]

The restrictions are more onerous adjacent to residential. But, yes, there are indeed setbacks (including sky exposure plane requirements that could require an angled/stepped-back approach to structures depending on how tall they are), landscape screening (though tree heights do not need to necessarily match building heights), and specific aesthetic requirements of the structures (how they look).

For example, my understanding is that a structure can be, say, 75-feet high at the setback and then angle/step up one foot for every two feet away from the setback, so a 200-foot-wide show building (such as Cosmic Rewind) could reach 175 feet of height at the inside edge. (I think Mission Breakout is about 180 feet and I've seen Cosmic Rewind reported at 140 feet).

But my review of the resort specific plan does not reveal, in principle, any issues preventing the general placement/uses I describe (ignoring the simplicity/exact shapes in my drawing). I included a few screen caps as reference but here's the full doc so I'm very open to fact-finding on this topic if you see something: Disneyland Resort Specific Plan
View attachment 886012
View attachment 886013
View attachment 886014
View attachment 886015
View attachment 886016
View attachment 886017
View attachment 886018

Yes the residential stuff was for Walnut for the future DLF expansion pads in that area which has a height/setback requirement. But I believe there was a minimum setback needed for Harbor as well, and it needed to be camouflaged with trees and such so there is no eye sores with just blank warehouse buildings since it is public facing.

 

[DrStarlander]

Yes the residential stuff was for Walnut for the future DLF expansion pads in that area which has a height/setback requirement. But I believe there was a minimum setback needed for Harbor as well, and it needed to be camouflaged with trees and such so there is no eye sores with just blank warehouse buildings since it is public facing.

Yes, as seen in image I posted, the setback is 26 feet from the Edison Electric corridor....basically width of the service road.

No, the tress do not need to be as tall as buildings. Again, here's a portion of a cross section image of Harbor but the doc has plenty of info in text.

Yes, there are aesthetic requirements to backsides of buildings, so they do stuff like paint borders and put "decorative panels" on the exterior to break up the expanse, such as these metal panels on Galaxy's Edge. It's a low-demand requirement.

 

[Disney Irish]

Yes, as seen in image I posted, the setback is 26 feet from the Edison Electric corridor....basically width of the service road.

No, the tress do not need to be as tall as buildings. Again, here's a portion of a cross section image of Harbor but the doc has plenty of info in text.
View attachment 886031
Yes, there are aesthetic requirements to backsides of buildings, so they do stuff like paint borders and put "decorative panels" on the exterior to break up the expanse, such as these metal panels on Galaxy's Edge. It's a low-demand requirement.
View attachment 886033

Sorry if I didn't make it clear in my last post, I stand corrected on the trees being as tall as the building.

The point is that it has to be layered landscaping, not just bushes, to block out as much as possible of the building from view, ie it has to be more than what you're showing for the backside of GE.

Anyways its very unlikely they will be putting in an indoor coaster there anyways, no matter whether they are allowed to or not.

 

[DrStarlander]

Sorry if I didn't make it clear in my last post, I stand corrected on the trees being as tall as the building.

The point is that it has to be layered landscaping, not just bushes, to block out as much as possible of the building from view, ie it has to be more than what you're showing for the backside of GE.

View attachment 886036

Anyways its very unlikely they will be putting in an indoor coaster there anyways, no matter whether they are allowed to or not.

Yes, the landscaping occurs in the "setback realm" and yes it's layered and according to specific requirements and there's many pages all about it. As far as I'm concerned, that's not a disagreement between us, I never sought to replicate the details in the doc (instead I provided a link).

To clarify, I didn't show the backside of SWGE to show the landscaping requirement, that was a topic about the aesthetic requirements of the backside of show buildings.

Curious why you think that "anyways" (i.e., setting aside any land-use issues) they'd not put an indoor coaster there -- or do you mean anywhere in DCA? In a park as tight as DCA, I don't see where an outdoor coaster can easily fit in (without replacing Grizzly River) and one way or another I think DCA will get a second (more themed) coaster (as DHS meanwhile gets it's third). Putting a gravity building (which is usually a sightline issue in a park) behind Avenger's Campus to continue the skyline as seen in the concept art seems like an unusually no-brainer opportunity.

 

[Disney Irish]

Curious why you think that "anyways" (i.e., setting aside any land-use issues) they'd not put an indoor coaster there -- or do you mean anywhere in DCA? In a park as tight as DCA, I don't see where an outdoor coaster can easily fit in (without replacing Grizzly River) and one way or another I think DCA will get a second (more themed) coaster (as DHS meanwhile gets it's third). Putting a gravity building (which is usually a sightline issue in a park) behind Avenger's Campus to continue the skyline as seen in the concept art seems like an unusually no-brainer opportunity.

I'm talking about there specifically behind MB, to me it seem they've decided what they are doing with Avengers and Starks is probably it for that space.

If an indoor coaster goes anywhere in DCA it'll be in the future Simba lot expansion in my opinion. I just don't see Disney expanding the existing footprint of DCA beyond what has already been announced. Any future projects will be part of DLF in my opinion.

 

[Professortango1]

Seeing the footprint of the structure so far makes me think there may be room behind Mission Breakout for an indoor themed coaster (something DCA desperately needs). They could also put a substantial Backstage/Operations building in the corner, and even if it can be seen from inside Avenger's Campus, if it looks modern and has a few thematic details (scaled-down vehicle on roof?), it could add to the expansive skyline depicted in the concept art.
View attachment 885963

Does DCA desperately need an indoor coaster? Right now it has one less than Disneyland; which has one. Indoor coasters are all pretty same-y to me and would only reinforce the reputation of DCA as a park of mild thrills and "themed" warehouses.

I could make a list of 10 things I think DCA needs and an indoor coaster isn't one of them.

 

[mickEblu]

Does DCA desperately need an indoor coaster? Right now it has one less than Disneyland; which has one. Indoor coasters are all pretty same-y to me and would only reinforce the reputation of DCA as a park of mild thrills and "themed" warehouses.

I could make a list of 10 things I think DCA needs and an indoor coaster isn't one of them.

I mean technically you re not wrong but Matterhorn and BTMRR both indoor/ outdoor coasters and are well themed so it feels like DL has more.

 

[Disney Vault]

I would say dca desperately needs a 40 inch disney themed coaster

 

[mickEblu]

I would say dca desperately needs a 40 inch disney themed coaster

Right. Whether it’s completely indoors or not

 

[DrStarlander]

Does DCA desperately need an indoor coaster? Right now it has one less than Disneyland; which has one. Indoor coasters are all pretty same-y to me and would only reinforce the reputation of DCA as a park of mild thrills and "themed" warehouses.

I could make a list of 10 things I think DCA needs and an indoor coaster isn't one of them.

DCA desperately needs a landmark coaster, something iconic, unique, themed. Incredicoaster is a super-fun coaster, but not a great Disney coaster. And overall the park needs 2-3 coasters. It's a general theme park and it doesn't have DAK's "animal thing" or Epcot's "learning/world's fair thing" to explain away a lack of 2-3 coasters.

Because they can pack the track tight, I think an indoor coaster is easier to shoehorn in than an outdoor coaster. Super relevant for DCA given the lack of space.

It's got two boat dark rides coming, a filler mechanical ride, and hopefully an E-ticket dark ride. In my mind, a themed coaster is next on the list. And while I respect @Disney Irish saying that could come with DLF, I'm not sure that's going to happen in the next 15-20 years, and I think the need for a themed coaster is sooner than that. If they can fit in a themed coaster, either where I described and/or where the Hyperion Theater is, it could buy them the time until DLF happens, if ever. With four new attractions coming (adding 4+ hours of park fun) and a coaster (another 1-2 hours), DCA would be a full-day park for sure, even without DLF. And I think that fits with Josh's mandate to use up the existing park acreage before DLF.

 

[mickEblu]

DCA desperately needs a landmark coaster, something iconic, unique, themed. Incredicoaster is a super-fun coaster, but not a great Disney coaster. And overall the park needs 2-3 coasters. It's a general theme park and it doesn't have DAK's "animal thing" or Epcot's "learning/world's fair thing" to explain away a lack of coasters.

Because they can pack the track tight, I think an indoor coaster is easier to shoehorn in than an outdoor coaster. Super relevant for DCA given the lack of space.

It's got two boat dark rides coming, a filler mechanical ride, and hopefully an E-ticket dark ride. In my mind, a themed coaster is next on the list. And while I respect @Disney Irish saying that could come with DLF, I'm not sure that's going to happen in the next 15-20 years, and I think the need for a themed coaster is sooner than that. If they can fit in a themed coaster, either where I described and/or where the Hyperion Theater is, it could buy them the time until DLF happens, if ever. With four new attractions coming (adding 4+ hours of park fun) and a coaster (another 1-2 hours), DCA would be a full-day park for sure, even without DLF. And I think that fits with Josh's mandate to use up the existing park acreage before DLF.

It would really kill two birds with one stone as the resort as a whole has not had a new themed E ticket coaster in 46 years.

While 2-3 more coasters would be nice I think the two new boat rides kind of offsets that. Not from a thrill perspective but from just having two more well themed indoor attractions. I think 1-2 more would be great. But I’ll be happy with one. I think we’d be lucky if DLR as a whole gets 2-3 more coasters. I think that’s probably the max for both parks unless we get a third gate.

I didn’t realize they weren’t using any of the space behind TOT. That + Hyperion you could probably make something happen. How realistic that is I’m not sure.

 

[mickEblu]

Speaking of not getting a new themed E ticket coaster for 46 years. Coco will be breaking a pretty long streak. It’ll be the first boat ride at DLR since POTC in 1967. So that’ll be roughly 61 years.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Speaking of not getting a new themed E ticket coaster for 46 years. Coco will be breaking a pretty long streak. It’ll be the first boat ride at DLR since POTC in 1967. So that’ll be roughly 61 years.

Grizzly River Run?

 

[mickEblu]

Grizzly River Run?

Not a boat. Haha

 

[Gusey]

DCA desperately needs a landmark coaster, something iconic, unique, themed. Incredicoaster is a super-fun coaster, but not a great Disney coaster. And overall the park needs 2-3 coasters. It's a general theme park and it doesn't have DAK's "animal thing" or Epcot's "learning/world's fair thing" to explain away a lack of 2-3 coasters.

I still appreiciate Incredicoaster being in the top 10 longest rollercoasters in the world

 

[Disney Irish]

Not a boat. Haha

While the vehicle isn’t shaped as a boat I think most consider it a “boat ride” since you float on the water. As rapid rides I believe are classified as a type of “boat ride”. Also again while the vehicle wasn’t shaped as a boat Splash was considered a “boat ride” too in the truest sense, and so by extension so is TBA.

So it would only be 38ish years even if you remove Grizzly.

 

[mickEblu]

While the vehicle isn’t shaped as a boat I think most consider it a “boat ride” since you float on the water. As rapid rides I believe are classified as a type of “boat ride”. Also again while the vehicle wasn’t shaped as a boat Splash was considered a “boat ride” too in the truest sense, and so by extension so is TBA.

So it would only be 38ish years even if you remove Grizzly.

People can consider it whatever they want. Doesn’t make it a boat. Now if I said water ride…

Also if Grizzly counts that would make it 27 years if Coco opens in 2028.

If this was MK you may have a point calling Splash a boat but not here where it’s definitely a traditional log flume.

 

[DrStarlander]

While the vehicle isn’t shaped as a boat I think most consider it a “boat ride” since you float on the water. As rapid rides I believe are classified as a type of “boat ride”. Also again while the vehicle wasn’t shaped as a boat Splash was considered a “boat ride” too in the truest sense, and so by extension so is TBA.

So it would only be 38ish years even if you remove Grizzly.

I understand your point from a literal perspective. But I think when people say "boat ride" what they're referring to is an attraction in which you are in a vehicle floating on water and the emphasis of the experience is on what you can see from that vantage point...scenes, landscaping, etc. The emphasis on Grizzly is the pitch/yaw/rotational physical action, peril of getting wet, and looking at other passengers to see their reaction. Splash/TBA is at least half about the thrill of the drops.

Disneyland happened to be blessed with several boat rides (including Jungle Cruise, Small World, Pirates., Storybook Land Canal Boats, and arguably Mark Twain, even if we ignore Submarines and Phantom/Motor Boat Cruise). So no new additions of that type in DL is not surprising. But the lack of slow-moving, scenic boat rides in DCA is the issue. And a weird one at that, since boat rides can have a very high joy-to-cost ratio. With attractions featuring technological ride systems costing hundreds of millions of dollars, and the park clearly (I would argue) needing a classic boat ride to feel fully-dimensional/complete, why wasn't Little Mermaid built as a boat ride, for example? How much more loved would it be (I think a lot).

Seeing them building two boat rides at once is great but does call attention to the lapse for the park's first quarter century. Again, I think the same is true with themed coasters. With DCA, Disney has this weird ignorance or blind spot as to what the park needs. It's really pretty obvious what's required to get this park to a place where it stands on its own as a legitimate full-day Disney theme park.

I still appreiciate Incredicoaster being in the top 10 longest rollercoasters in the world

Yes, it's fun. But it doesn't represent what Disney does uniquely well compared to competitors, and it (along with a ferris wheel) unfortunately sends a signal that DCA is more of an "amusement park" instead of a "theme park," and very secondary to DL (thus the 17 million to 10 million visitation difference). That characterization may not be totally fair nowadays, after DCA 2.0, but the impression in the marketplace is baked in. I don't think that perception will be truly overcome until Pixar Pier is completely replaced with a fully-themed immersive land, which seems more unlikely with Coco being shoehorned at the back (a poor decision in my mind).

 

[Professortango1]

Yes, it's fun. But it doesn't represent what Disney does uniquely well compared to competitors, and it (along with a ferris wheel) unfortunately sends a signal that DCA is more of an "amusement park" instead of a "theme park," and very secondary to DL (thus the 17 million to 10 million visitation difference). That characterization may not be totally fair nowadays, after DCA 2.0, but the impression in the marketplace is baked in. I don't think that perception will be truly overcome until Pixar Pier is completely replaced with a fully-themed immersive land, which seems more unlikely with Coco being shoehorned at the back (a poor decision in my mind).

I completely agree and the problem of cheaply themed "non-Disney quality" extends to almost every "E" ticket.

Soarin - exposed ride system in big empty warehouse room with blue screen/terrible queue.
GRR - Pretty landscaping for lacking any moments that set Disney apart from the rest.
Mission BO - Cheaply rethemed attraction with the physical show scene being replaced with screens. (Upgrade from Amusement Park, but downgrade from Disney)

Right now, RSR is the only "Disney-Quality E Ticket" at DCA. Another Space Mountain with light themeing isn't going to make that roster better, only worse. I'd rather see Goofy Sky School moved/redesigned to Redwood Challenge and themed to the cartoon with Donald and Burro mining. Indoor/outdoor coaster, some show scenes, and another people eater in Grizzly Peak while opening up the worst corner of DCA for a complete redo.