It continues to be a completely baffling decision. They had huge tracks of completely flat, empty land to the direct west of both parks and chose to squeeze Star Wars Land in the narrowest strip available. And for a company looking to save on costs, they chose the very expensive option of demolishing, leveling and regrading 14 acres that was being heavily used as attractions and backstage instead of building on land that was nothing but asphalt.
And even of the location they chose, they had room to reroute or narrow the overly broad road (it's six lanes wide!) directly behind the backstage gates, which would have provided enough of the square footage they needed for Star Wars Land without having to consume Rivers of America. Cheaper too, rerouting a road as opposed to demolishing/relocating/regrading/rerouting that river. It's like some student who flunked the site layout course at architecture school got to head this whole thing.
On a separate note, Harry Potter land has been open here in Hollywood for a little over a month now, and the reaction has been very muted. People I know who work there say it has been a walk on most days, and word-of-mouth has been almost nothing. I've only gotten a single non-employee anecdote about it (I haven't sensed any rush by Angelenos to go, it's almost creepy the lack of hype), and it amounted to little more than, "It's smaller than I imagined and the ride is like everything else in Universal Studios, you just move between simulation screens. It's kinda redundant."