Another 4-Star Hotel Planned For Anaheim (Goodbye Annabella Hotel)

[mickEblu]

Probably not NOS because perspective. foreground objects will blind you from everything behind you. Over by big thunder is where you'll definitely have the problem! May cut into the silhouettes of the E tickets over there.

Definitely a problem!? Yikes. I'm not sure what you mean by silhouette of E tickets. If I'm at Big Thunder looking towards NOS, the only E ticket I can see is POTC's facade.

 

[nevol]

Definitely a problem!? Yikes. I'm not sure what you mean by silhouette of E tickets. If I'm at Big Thunder looking towards NOS, the only E ticket I can see is POTC's facade.

I've seen PP hotel from on big thunder. I can't say definitely because it could be the same height as mansion for example and set 100 yards further away and you wont see it. But in the same way that M+F is visible from ROA in NOS but not visible when you get closer because a 20 foot tree makes you crank your neck 85 degrees upward to see the top of, being in NOS won't be a problem. But the farther away both objects are from you, the more their scale is relevant. Or from Tarzan treehouse. but the height cone is really intended to keep intrusions out from the midway level, not from on rides. It gets impossible at that point to impose a height limit on nearby buildings to be invisible from within the park when you can see for miles. By the silhouettes I mean the shape of the buildings on the horizon line. How you can make out their intentional building/show building silhouettes and they stand alone, separated by trees. The jagged edge of the tree line between mansion and splash mountain gives the perception that the forest connecting the two goes on forever. put a giant horizontal line between the two and it might just harmlessly peak out from on big thunder, far enough away not to mess up those buildings, but worst case scenario you could get a giant horizontal hotel wing connecting the two from certain vantage points, which would really screw up both shows and especially splash mountain.

Given that they used height balloons when they started star wars land work, and that was an in-park intrusion which really isn't a "no-no," I imagine they'll do the same before finalizing the hotel project as well. The press release kind of shows or mentions a rooftop area where guests can watch the fireworks. The building only has to be so high, above the treeline, to see that, and that doesn't guarantee that guests would conversely be able to see the hotel. Think again about mickey and friends. Can see everything from up there but not the other way around.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

I've seen PP hotel from on big thunder.

I recall that the tops of The Disneyland Hotel towers and their iconic roofline signage was easily visible behind NOS from the top deck of the Mark Twain in the late 70s and 80s. The trees are a lot bigger now of course. Anyone know the hotel towers are still visible?

 

[TP2000]

A hotel property of that caliber would be a first for the Anaheim area where the average daily room rate is just $180.75 compared to $225.00 just a 30 minute drive away in Los Angeles, and close to $400.00 up here in San Francisco. I'd be delighted to see a Four Seasons near Disneyland, but even a scaled down version seems at odds with the type of traveler typically drawn to Anaheim.

We have to remember that this is more about the Anaheim Convention Center and less about Disneyland. The ACC is the largest convention center on the west coast, and just about to open a swanky expansion that will keep it that way for at least several decades. The convention business is booming, which is why these 4 Diamond hotels are going in.

 

[TP2000]

Probably not NOS because perspective. foreground objects will blind you from everything behind you. Over by big thunder is where you'll definitely have the problem! May cut into the silhouettes of the E tickets over there.

This new hotel is on Katella Avenue. There will be no way to see it from Disneyland. You won't be able to see it from DCA either, unless you go up in the Fun Wheel.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

We have to remember that this is more about the Anaheim Convention Center and less about Disneyland.

ACC traffic is more the Marriott/Starwood/Hilton traveler than Four Seasons or Ritz Carlton, but we'll see.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

This new hotel is on Katella Avenue. There will be no way to see it from Disneyland. You won't be able to see it from DCA either, unless you go up in the Fun Wheel.

They're talking about the new Disney hotel on Disneyland Drive. At least I think they are.

 

[mickEblu]

I've seen PP hotel from on big thunder. I can't say definitely because it could be the same height as mansion for example and set 100 yards further away and you wont see it. But in the same way that M+F is visible from ROA in NOS but not visible when you get closer because a 20 foot tree makes you crank your neck 85 degrees upward to see the top of, being in NOS won't be a problem. But the farther away both objects are from you, the more their scale is relevant. Or from Tarzan treehouse. but the height cone is really intended to keep intrusions out from the midway level, not from on rides. It gets impossible at that point to impose a height limit on nearby buildings to be invisible from within the park when you can see for miles. By the silhouettes I mean the shape of the buildings on the horizon line. How you can make out their intentional building/show building silhouettes and they stand alone, separated by trees. The jagged edge of the tree line between mansion and splash mountain gives the perception that the forest connecting the two goes on forever. put a giant horizontal line between the two and it might just harmlessly peak out from on big thunder, far enough away not to mess up those buildings, but worst case scenario you could get a giant horizontal hotel wing connecting the two from certain vantage points, which would really screw up both shows and especially splash mountain.

Given that they used height balloons when they started star wars land work, and that was an in-park intrusion which really isn't a "no-no," I imagine they'll do the same before finalizing the hotel project as well. The press release kind of shows or mentions a rooftop area where guests can watch the fireworks. The building only has to be so high, above the treeline, to see that, and that doesn't guarantee that guests would conversely be able to see the hotel. Think again about mickey and friends. Can see everything from up there but not the other way around.

Ahhh gotcha. I thought you meant the view when standing at the base of BTM near Mark Twain. I'm not as concerned about sightlines when I'm on the ride because the thrill of the roller coaster has my attention. Also as you said, it's much harder for them to hide the outside world from that height. TBH I never noticed the silhouette you are taking about but I will look out for it next time.

Here's to hoping we avoid the worst case scenario you pointed out.

 

[SSG]

They just applied for a building permit:

Received BLD2017-03478 FJS INC 1030 W KATELLA AVE New Commerical Construction: 394,724 sq ft (S1) and 14,204 sq ft (B) Parking Stucture for the Anabella Hotel


Utility permits started moving in July:

Received BLD2017-02738 FJS INC 1030 W KATELLA AVE Plumbing for new 3 inch commercial gas line, "ANABELLA HOTEL."

Received BLD2017-02766 QUINN PAULIN 1030 W KATELLA AVEPlumbing for on-site sewer main for future Annabella Hotel development.

 

[Disney Irish]

The ACC is the largest convention center on the west coast, and just about to open a swanky expansion that will keep it that way for at least several decades.

Don't tell LVCC that, they like to claim to be the largest in the west.

Also Moscone here in SF is under going an expansion itself (finished mostly by the end of this year) to increase its floor space to basically match ACC.

 

[TP2000]

Don't tell LVCC that, they like to claim to be the largest in the west.

Also Moscone here in SF is under going an expansion itself (finished mostly by the end of this year) to increase its floor space to basically match ACC.

Las Vegas is the largest in "the west". But ACC is the largest on the West Coast.

Anaheim - 1.8 Million square feet (upon expansion completion next month)
San Francisco - 950,000 square feet
Portland - 925,000 square feet
San Diego - 885,000 square feet
Los Angeles - 720,000 square feet
San Jose - 630,000 square feet
Seattle - 305,000 square feet

 

[Disney Irish]

Las Vegas is the largest in "the west". But ACC is the largest on the West Coast.

Anaheim - 1.8 Million square feet (upon expansion completion next month)
San Francisco - 950,000 square feet
Portland - 925,000 square feet
San Diego - 885,000 square feet
Los Angeles - 720,000 square feet
San Jose - 630,000 square feet
Seattle - 305,000 square feet

Not saying you are wrong, my post was more of a joke on how LVCC claims to be the biggest in the west. Some even claim the coast itself, but that is just hyperbole.

Actually for Moscone, once completed later this year (early next year) it'll be 1.6 Million sqft, but that is total sqft.

The all important numbers is the exhibition (floor) space:

Anaheim its about 815,000 sqft (not sure the recently completed expansion increased this as I think it was meeting space increases)
Moscone is about 700,000 sqft (current), from my understanding the expansion and reconfiguration will add over 100,000 sqft to exhibition space. So it'll be about the same in terms of exhibition space between the two convention centers.

Anyways its not worth fighting about. Anaheim will still be king in terms of total sqft by 200,000 sqft.

 

[rle4lunch]

Any upgrades to that skeezy area are good ones.

 

[TP2000]

Not saying you are wrong, my post was more of a joke on how LVCC claims to be the biggest in the west. Some even claim the coast itself, but that is just hyperbole.

Actually for Moscone, once completed later this year (early next year) it'll be 1.6 Million sqft, but that is total sqft.

The all important numbers is the exhibition (floor) space:

Anaheim its about 815,000 sqft (not sure the recently completed expansion increased this as I think it was meeting space increases)
Moscone is about 700,000 sqft (current), from my understanding the expansion and reconfiguration will add over 100,000 sqft to exhibition space. So it'll be about the same in terms of exhibition space between the two convention centers.

Anyways its not worth fighting about. Anaheim will still be king in terms of total sqft by 200,000 sqft.

The Anaheim expansion that opens next month takes them from 1.6 Million square feet to 1.8 Million. And it adds 100,000 square feet of column-free exhibit hall space on the ground floor, and another 100,000 square feet of ballroom space upstairs. It will be hard to beat for most West Coast cities for decades to come.

 

[Disney Irish]

Like I said not worth fighting about. Expansion projects will come and go and sizes will increase. Someone is always bigger, if that is Anaheim so be it. Moscone being second biggest doesn't bother me.

Each convention center tends to market to different conventions.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

Each convention center tends to market to different conventions.

No kidding. I can't imagine Moscone hosting D23 and I can't see ACC hosting Apple WWDC.

 

[TP2000]

ACC traffic is more the Marriott/Starwood/Hilton traveler than Four Seasons or Ritz Carlton, but we'll see.

The one at GardenWalk was already claimed as a JWMarriott, so that's taken. The architecture just reminds me of some Four Seasons that I've seen, but it also rules out the contemporary/sleek 4-Diamond brands like W or Conrad. I suppose it could be one of those Starwood faux boutiques "Luxury Collection" places that isn't branded as anything but something vaguely related to the local culture. Hilton and SPG both have several high-end divisions of luxury hotels not branded as anything Hilton or SPG, to try and take on the hipster boutique hotels the upscale, childless under-40's love.

Kind of like InBev-Anheuser creating fake microbreweries to sell beer to 28 year olds who wouldn't be caught dead holding a Budweiser at a party.

They'd probably call it something like "The Grove House - A Luxury Collection Property" or some silly name, and create a story panel in the lobby about the genteel orchard owners gathering for sociables in a stately home in the middle of the Anaheim orange groves in the 1920's.

But those vaguely tropical yet mostly French Colonial mint green mansard roofs just say Four Seasons to me for some reason.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

The one at GardenWalk was already claimed as a JWMarriott, so that's taken. The architecture just reminds me of some Four Seasons that I've seen, but it also rules out the contemporary/sleek 4-Diamond brands like W or Conrad. I suppose it could be one of those Starwood faux boutiques "Luxury Collection" places that isn't branded as anything but something vaguely related to the local culture. Hilton and SPG both have several high-end divisions of luxury hotels not branded as anything Hilton or SPG, to try and take on the hipster boutique hotels the upscale, childless under-40's love.

Kind of like InBev-Anheuser creating fake microbreweries to sell beer to 28 year olds who wouldn't be caught dead holding a Budweiser at a party.

They'd probably call it something like "The Grove House - A Luxury Collection Property" or some silly name, and create a story panel in the lobby about the genteel orchard owners gathering for sociables in a stately home in the middle of the Anaheim orange groves in the 1920's.

But those vaguely tropical yet mostly French Colonial mint green mansard roofs just say Four Seasons to me for some reason.

I get that vibe too. Not saying it won't be a Four Seasons, I would just be surprised if that's what it turns out to be.

I'm mildly surprised that a JW Marriott would set up shop in Anaheim, especially connected to a dead mall some distance from DLR or the Convention Center. Maybe they're betting on the Eastern Gateway? I guess there's little risk since Marriott owns dozens of brands under thr Marriott and Starwood umbrellas allowing some flexibility to easily downshift if they can't attract enough well-heeled customers.

 

[rle4lunch]

Sightlines, pshh... Let's be real, we're not looking up anymore, we're looking down, trying to avoid the massive overcrowding, 4-6 year olds not on a leash (not saying they should be, just bad parenting going on there when your kid is running/weaving through the crowd like a bull in a china shop) various wheeled walking aids (strollers, scooters, wheelchairs, etc) or the other folks who are buried in their phones... and oh, the various parade squatters who pretty much ruin any type of seamless walking path for people actually trying to enjoy main street.

 

[Stevek]

I recall that the tops of The Disneyland Hotel towers and their iconic roofline signage was easily visible behind NOS from the top deck of the Mark Twain in the late 70s and 80s. The trees are a lot bigger now of course. Anyone know the hotel towers are still visible?

I can't remember ever noticing any hotels from inside DL during all my years...not that they weren't visible, I think I was always so immersed in the experience of the park that I probably just never noticed. DCA is obviously a different animal.