MK Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[flynnibus]

The types of spaces in the utilidors don’t vary enough that they’d have that major of an impact on the building envelope. Nobody said it wasn’t plausible to have an isolated issue. It’s an issue of scale.

No - the statement was "There are already ponds and waterways going directly over the utilidors... why aren't they threatening floods in the utilidors?" -- inferring if its fine somewhere else, how could it be possibly broken elsewhere? A dumb generalization that treats everything uniform.

The “alleged” problem isn’t something small, but something huge. That would point to a larger, more fundamental design problem.

They didn't say huge - they referred to it as a recurring topic requiring frequent intervention. True? Who knows.. but I know better than to dismiss it because simply because no such problem exists 'over there'.

Nobody said “care free”. That it’s not isolated is why it wouldn’t be a problem.

I'll repeat... "I won't even begin to assume we know everything they manage about that element and the infrastructure it interacts with"

I think it's ripe for foot in mouth when you dismiss something without any way to really vet it one way or the other. Reporting on the Water Management in the west side of the park has been a topic online of how many times?? Why would we even know unless Disney were dealing with issues that got to the point of involving the district or WMD overlay.

I'm not saying it's true - I'm simply saying one shouldn't presume because they assume no news = good news.

 

[lazyboy97o]

No - the statement was "There are already ponds and waterways going directly over the utilidors... why aren't they threatening floods in the utilidors?" -- inferring if its fine somewhere else, how could it be possibly broken elsewhere? A dumb generalization that treats everything uniform.

They didn't say huge - they referred to it as a recurring topic requiring frequent intervention. True? Who knows.. but I know better than to dismiss it because simply because no such problem exists 'over there'.

The claim is that the utilidors is at risk of flooding and repairs would cost in the area of a billion dollars. That’s a huge problem.

I'll repeat... "I won't even begin to assume we know everything they manage about that element and the infrastructure it interacts with"

I think it's ripe for foot in mouth when you dismiss something without any way to really vet it one way or the other. Reporting on the Water Management in the west side of the park has been a topic online of how many times?? Why would we even know unless Disney were dealing with issues that got to the point of involving the district or WMD overlay.

I'm not saying it's true - I'm simply saying one shouldn't presume because they assume no news = good news.

We don’t have the same knowledge and experience with these systems. We are at the point of involving the water management district because they just approved a permit application and didn’t require a replacement concrete basin.

 

[Disstevefan1]

Maybe im wrong but just not feeling car land in MK. Guess they are trying to tie in with the southwest theme of Big Thunder. Thought this should have been a Pixar Land area at DHS.

Agreed. Cars land does not fit there, but Disney does not care about theme, sightlines, atmosphere etc.

They just want to get rid of things they don't want to spend money on to maintain that does not sell LLs

Carsland (if they can keep it up and maintain it) will sell LLs

We know when it opens around 2030, will be LL and VQ only, NO STANDBY for at least 2 years or more.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

Saying it would cost nearly a billion dollars is what threw up a red flag for me. That's just not a realistic number for the kind of work he suggested would be necessary.

Indeed. It just sounds like the kind of number you can throw out that everyone will recognise as being huge and a justifiable reason for not doing something.

It's a little...

 

[easyrowrdw]

I never actually noticed before that the Fort Langhorn half is still there. Are they gonna keep the riverboat as a small loop back there?

To that point, why not put Cars in the Fort Langhorn half? It's more room (iirc) and Fort Langhorn is infinitely less interesting than Tom Sawyer. The only thing interesting about it is the old animatronics. Putting Cars back there would preserve the vibe of the entrance to Frontierland/Liberty Square, keep the waterfront view of the Mansion, keep Cars out of view from the "real world" part of the land, and keep the temps down in the busiest part of the land(s).

The whole island is interesting for kids IMO. Mine happen to love it. And the other kids we see out there always seem to be having a good time. I’m sure a Cars ride will be more popular but, as has been repeated, there’s no reason you can’t have both.

I think just making the island more accessible - bridge instead of raft - would make it more popular. That was the best impediment for us to enjoy it. That’s hard to do with the boat of course. And you can’t sell lightning lanes for an free-exploration attraction

 

[Disone]

From Bill Zanetti (Professor at the University of Central Florida):

I have edited some of Bill’s posts for clarity.

“Keeping the rivers open as is would eventually flood the utilidoors. Something has to be done. Major riverbed maintenance, maybe even full replacement, is required. So all the company is doing here is trying to solve some ops issues and get a good ROI.”

“There’s too much potential for overflow in addition to some issues in the actual retaining walls that need replacing and asbestos removal. Happy to go into it more but it was explained to me by an urban planner / industrial engineer so it gets detailed.”

“The utilidoors literally are up against the retaining wall in Frontierland and they’re littered with asbestos. It’s a huge deal.”

“I don’t have a duck in this fight. I’m just telling you what I’ve been told by some EXTREMELY high up people within the company. You are acting like I’m some kind of corporate shill. If you can’t take my word for it, then you’ll have to go talk to someone at CFTOD that has been in water management for at least 15 years. They’ll confirm that WDW’s flood control systems have been pushed to their limits for a very long time now and major changes have been implemented to deal with a lot of development around property. I don’t know how detailed they’ll be about the RoA, but I’m sure they will talk about it at least a little and explain to you that ANY major bodies of water create issues in that area. The utilidoors are at risk and this project with the new proposed drainage systems and retention ponds would partially alleviate some of that risk.

I will also tell you that the powers at be didn’t take removing the RoA lightly. They brainstormed multiple solutions that didn’t go as far and this is the one that made the most economic sense. There are plenty of other ways to fix the problems at hand… but no one wants to spend that much to fix it. We’re talking almost a billion dollars here. Try to convince any company to spend that much on something without any visible ROI. Good luck!”

Bill's an interesting guy. I've met him a few times. I have no doubt that he's repeating what he's been told. No reason to believe otherwise. How accurate it is is still up for debate but it does make me feel slightly better about the project.

Still, If this scenario is genuine then I would like them to find a way to save the northern half of the river.

 

[lazyboy97o]

More backpedaling.

Your map made it seem like the utilidoors are hundreds of feet away from the river but in reality it’s more like 80 or 90 feet. That’s a small enough distance for water to permeate and push up against the retaining wall, especially during a flood event. But sure, okay.

So we’ve gone from the utilidors being adjacent to the Rivers Americans to 30-40 feet away and now to 80-90 feet away. That isn’t a small distance and the ground under hardscape and buildings being that saturated is a serious problem because, again. It means Frontierland is sitting on a sinkhole. If true, fixing this problem would have absolutely nothing to do with the Rivers of America.

 

[Disstevefan1]

From Bill Zanetti (Professor at the University of Central Florida):

 

[MrPromey]

Saying RoA threatens a flood in the utilidors strains credulity.

There are already ponds and waterways going directly over the utilidors... why aren't they threatening floods in the utilidors?

RoA is a giant concrete pond. If overflow from a rainstorm is the issue... then that's true everywhere, and would have already been an issue many times over.

If the concrete base breaks and leaks, then welcome to Florida. Dig a little hole and you hit water. The entirety of the utilidors walls are water barriers.

He heard this from an Imagineer? We can find imagineers who believe Horizons was on a sink hole and the Yeti is connected to the the mountain's infrastructure and is cracking its concrete base.

Also, we've heard from time-tested insiders over the years that WDW has always been considering removing RoA. And not because it leaks or threatens utilidor flooding.

If RoA was a true threat to WDW infrastructure, would not Disney themselves say this, so as to alleviate the backlash? RoA is going because Disney wants it gone as the easy solution to long-delayed expansion and to monetize new D and E Ticket rides. Iger himself has stated the reason for all this Capex.... the parks make money. And so, they're investing in money-making. That's the C-suite reasoning. (Not mine)

And remember, MsterPenguin is commonly accused of being our resident pixeduster saying all of this.

Whether you agree with their decision to do this or not, there is no reason to make up excuses for their choices.

 

[Disstevefan1]

Saying RoA threatens a flood in the utilidors strains credulity.

There are already ponds and waterways going directly over the utilidors... why aren't they threatening floods in the utilidors?

RoA is a giant concrete pond. If overflow from a rainstorm is the issue... then that's true everywhere, and would have already been an issue many times over.

If the concrete base breaks and leaks, then welcome to Florida. Dig a little hole and you hit water. The entirety of the utilidors walls are water barriers.

He heard this from an Imagineer? We can find imagineers who believe Horizons was on a sink hole and the Yeti is connected to the the mountain's infrastructure and is cracking its concrete base.

Also, we've heard from time-tested insiders over the years that WDW has always been considering removing RoA. And not because it leaks or threatens utilidor flooding.

If RoA was a true threat to WDW infrastructure, would not Disney themselves say this, so as to alleviate the backlash? RoA is going because Disney wants it gone as the easy solution to long-delayed expansion and to monetize new D and E Ticket rides. Iger himself has stated the reason for all this Capex.... the parks make money. And so, they're investing in money-making. That's the C-suite reasoning. (Not mine)

I agree with the Penguin. We have truly entered a new golden age!!!

 

[TheMaxRebo]

I agree with the Penguin. We have truly entered a new golden age!!!

"Cats and dogs living together! Mass hysteria!"

 

[mickEblu]

And remember, MsterPenguin is commonly accused of being our resident pixeduster saying all of this.

Whether you agree with their decision to do this or not, there is no reason to make up excuses for their choices.

When you have people here who always disagree about everything agreeing that removing the ROA is terrible it’s probably a bad idea.

 

[Disstevefan1]

"Cats and dogs living together! Mass hysteria!"

 

[Disone]

Even some of these people at times haven’t been the most reliable. Ever heard the story about the colorblind bulldozer operator? Marty just completely made that up and even admitted it.

That Disneyland Story is not true??? Bummer! I loved that story.

Sigh

 

[Agent H]

When you have people here who always disagree about everything agreeing that removing the ROA is terrible it’s probably a bad idea.

IMO this is the worst idea they’ve had since the original California adventure.

 

[DisneyDean97]

Phase 1: Walls go up, northern loop and backstage area is filled in and prepped to build on for phase 2. keep the southern loop, rebuild the liberty bell as a permanent structure and use it plus covered que area as seating or something else. Keep Island and build permanent bridge on northern edge to new pathway looping around it, connecting BTM to HM area. Make bridge high enough off wter to allow canoes to return. Also redo HM que during phase 1 as well and give it a DL treatment and place it beside showbuilding instead of on waterfront.

Phase 2: Walls come down and now you can pick eith Villains Land or Cars land but either one is build out of sight and will very little park disruption to guests. Id go villains land first but regrdles, Cars would go Beyond big thunder. On the NW plot of land behind it and connect to Villains land as well.

Phase 2 would also include rebuilding/raising the train tracks similar to what they did in DL to seperate GE from the park and allow a few tunnls to connet from Villains to Cars for optimal guest flow.

I think your "phase 2" is the problem... Disney doesn't want to spend the money to clear the land and build new infrastructure beyond the train berm.
In their minds, they can cut a cost-heavy maintenance (demolishing ROA) and build within the berm, it's a win/win in their minds. They're not thinking about how special ROA is to a Magic Kingdom park.

 

[Brer Panther]

You’re not gonna get a creative person in charge without a shareholder ousting.

Is there any hope of a shareholder ousting? Iger can't be THAT beloved by the shareholders considering all the controversies and failures he's gotten the company involved in.

They brainstormed multiple solutions that didn’t go as far and this is the one that made the most economic sense. There are plenty of other ways to fix the problems at hand… but no one wants to spend that much to fix it. We’re talking almost a billion dollars here.

Gee, maybe if they hadn't wasted so much money on crap like Tiana's Bayou Adventure and the EPCOT remodeling project...

I've been told by people I trust that LL revenue potential is a line-item for every new ride build. Without it, a ride doesn't get built.

But what generates more LL revenue - A headliner or a D- or C-ticket? And what have Bob and Co. focused on since 2017? Headliners. Sure, sometimes ancillary rides get built, like the Saucers, but look at the last decade and what's been built, rebuilt, or reskinned, and what generates a lot of LL revenue.

You and I and a lot of others around here know that they really should be building more complete lands, with a headliner, supporting ride, and some people eaters instead of headliner... headliner... headliner...

Is that why Stitch's Great Escape is still sitting empty? They can't fit a headliner in there so they won't replace it at all?

I barely even understand what Lightning Lane is. It should not be dominating everything that gets built in the parks. I can't see this as a financially successful way of doing things.

I think just making the island more accessible - bridge instead of raft - would make it more popular.

I agree, it'd probably be more popular if you could get there without the raft.

 

[Disstevefan1]

This all boils down Disney is putting Disney first and the guest experience 2nd.

Come to think of it, since Chapek (another bad decision by Iger) since Chapek, Disney as always put Disney before the guest experience……. Nevermind.

 

[peter11435]

Bill's an interesting guy. I've met him a few times. I have no doubt that he's repeating what he's been told. No reason to believe otherwise. How accurate it is is still up for debate but it does make me feel slightly better about the project.

Still, If this scenario is genuine then I would like them to find a way to save the northern half of the river.

His info is not accurate

 

[Disgruntled Walt]

It's time to ignite the spark. I think this guy says it better than I possibly could, but this is how I feel: