News Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[brettf22]

It doesn't need to get physically larger. More acreage. Not "it never needs new things."

There's enough land here to hold all the ideas and plans we could possibly imagine… but we really don’t need it for Magic Kingdom. We can squeeze all our ideas and plans in there just fine. If we get a new idea, I guess something’s just gotta go!

 

[eddie104]

Coco seems to be the furthest out from starting, for sure. That seems like the one piece of the presentation that could have been dropped.

Is Coco still being considered for the MK ?

Spare me. There is water all around the hub. There are 2 outdoor water rides. The rendering (again I know, it's just a rendering) has a waterfall. And there is a giant lagoon right in front of the park entrance. Nostalgia for lost attractions is one thing. To complain that MK will not have enough water features now is dumb.

Don’t shoot the messenger as I wasn’t one of the ones complaining about this project.

I never stated MK didn’t have enough water features at all.

it’s even harder because of its location to free moving water ways that lead to the Everglades.

A lot of people forget the a good portion of land Disney owns in Florida is wetlands or swamps which requires heavy investment and mitigation to make it suitable for building.

 

[KDM31091]

I would assume they still have to leave the river/stream along the edge of the park here (sloppily highlighted) that leads to seven seas lagoon. This is where Electrical Water Pageant floats are stored (then again, that's another "dated", classic thing that could easily be taken away). Or not? Wonder where they will dam and fill in the river. Maybe still some glimpses of water from the Railroad. Who knows.

 

[danlb_2000]

This is interesting. The is the proposed conditions map that was used to design the new storm water control improvements. The "D" color is designated as "impervious" land. Water is marked in blue, and it's interesting to note that the entire river is gone except the one small part. I thought this might be because the river has a concrete bottom, but the second picture shows it as water not impervious.

 

[Advisable Joseph]

This is interesting. The is the proposed conditions map that was used to design the new storm water control improvements. The "D" color is designated as "impervious" land. Water is marked in blue, and it's interesting to note that the entire river is gone except the one small part. I thought this might be because the river has a concrete bottom, but the second picture shows it as water not impervious.

View attachment 808904


View attachment 808906

Do you have the filename?

 

[danlb_2000]

Do you have the filename?

407 Basin_EngRpt

 

[EeyoreFan#24]

This is interesting. The is the proposed conditions map that was used to design the new storm water control improvements. The "D" color is designated as "impervious" land. Water is marked in blue, and it's interesting to note that the entire river is gone except the one small part. I thought this might be because the river has a concrete bottom, but the second picture shows it as water not impervious.

View attachment 808904


View attachment 808906

It also omits all interior water, JC and all castle moats. I wonder if that’s because there connected to the ROA system? (I think)

 

[CaptainAmerica]

There's enough land here to hold all the ideas and plans we could possibly imagine… but we really don’t need it for Magic Kingdom. We can squeeze all our ideas and plans in there just fine. If we get a new idea, I guess something’s just gotta go!

There are just real, actual operational considerations. A theme park that takes 3 days to see is dumb. Nobody needs or wants that.

 

[Quietmouse]

genuine question, why is there such a distaste for attractions associated with ips?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t Disney land in part originally built by Walt Disney to promote his work in animation and promote then via attractions in a theme park ??

I understand there were a lot of original attractions as well ( but obviously some were also based off popular novel - book based - ips), but couldn’t one argue that Disney at the same time in the 50s didn’t have as huge of a catalogue film wise to make every single ride a movie based attraction?

I guess my point being is, there seems to be a lot of tug and war between rides being connected to ips. 20k leagues under the sea, journey to the center of the earth, these are some super beloved attractions but they are also based off ips.

So is it more about not like what Disney as a whole is producing animation wise lately and that’s why we hate when they are connected to ips?

Because y’all don’t seem to throw a fit about 20k leagues or journey to the center of the earth ?

 

[SoFloMagic]

I think he’s right. As I said in my other post, this is a company now ashamed of its American roots. Today it’s Frontierland, tomorrow it’s Liberty Square and don’t be surprised if one day its Main Street USA being converted into a version of Shanghai’s ‘Mickey Ave’.

We don’t know much about what Walt would have done (so I tend to avoid that), but it’s well documented that Walt was a patriot. I think he’d be ashamed to see his company run like this.

Or... It's an island that gets 400 visitors a day being replaced by two rides that will be experienced by 15,000 a day.

But you know, stir the culture wars pot instead if ya want

 

[MrPromey]

But this isn’t about Tom Sawyer and the river not being “trendy” it’s about no longer having water and peaceful views in the middle of a busy theme park.

Watching someone try to compare a section of the Magic Kingdom to a Hot Topic in a mall* is kind of funny, though.


*especially with malls and the stores occupying them being dying business models of their own.

 

[doctornick]

There are just real, actual operational considerations. A theme park that takes 3 days to see is dumb. Nobody needs or wants that.

It's okay if a person doesn't "do everything" as long as they do enough to be satisfied. Having more attractions reduces crowding/waits at each and makes it easier to do more and have a better experience.

 

[doctornick]

Or... It's an island that gets 400 visitors a day being replaced by two rides that will be experienced by 15,000 a day.

But you know, stir the culture wars pot instead if ya want

Or... have both.

 

[Trauma]

Or... have both.

Nah.

More important to destroy everything that makes Disney Special.

 

[Disnutz311]

Took some time to skim 60 pages and analyze the concept art. This is what I can conclude in my opinion...

• TSI needed to be changed somehow (Story & Attendance)
• Rivers did not have to go and this is the biggest mistake Disney has made yet in the current regime
• The loss of kenetic energy form the river is going to be huge
• Don't understand the need for snow covered mountains, as it is unnecessary
• Snow right next to dry aired Frontier tumbleweed landscape?
• Going to plant a lot more trees separating this from what is existing
• Feels like Grizzly Peak area and Redwood Trail in DCA recycled with IP put in
• As some insiders have stated, "this is not over yet" which I take it more undesired changes are on the way
• How does modern off road vehicles fit into Liberty Square timeline?
• Think we are going to see LS change as a whole land eventually
• HOP will change 100% because of our on going political climate
• Does this keep the speedway or put it on chopping block?
• This is 100% a merch and Lighting Lane grab for Disney
• Why does there have to be a giant piston on top of the mountain viewable from so many other lands
• If the 90% of you don't like this, (I don't either) then have you already written an email to multiple departments & people? I did before writing on this forum.

 

[The Chatbox Ghost]

This forum has blow up fast in the last few hours. I don’t like to post much, but I do have insight on land use management in the state of Florida. It is far easier for Disney to use land inside the burm than opposed to getting new land use permits. In Magic Kingdoms specific case it’s even harder because of its location to free moving water ways that lead to the Everglades. They have to prove in the new land use permits it’s not going to have major issues down stream.

But there was a scenario where they could’ve stayed within the berm and had plenty of space for Cars, Villains, AND the Rivers of America. If they built cars on the northern half of the river you could keep the southern half, TSI, and the riverboat while still getting two new Cars rides, with plenty of space for Villains

 

[UNCgolf]

genuine question, why is there such a distaste for attractions associated with ips?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t Disney land in part originally built by Walt Disney to promote his work in animation and promote then via attractions in a theme park ??

I understand there were a lot of original attractions as well ( but obviously some were also based off popular novel - book based - ips), but couldn’t one argue that Disney at the same time in the 50s didn’t have as huge of a catalogue film wise to make every single ride a movie based attraction?

I guess my point being is, there seems to be a lot of tug and war between rides being connected to ips. 20k leagues under the sea, journey to the center of the earth, these are some super beloved attractions but they are also based off ips.

So is it more about not like what Disney as a whole is producing animation wise lately and that’s why we hate when they are connected to ips?

Because y’all don’t seem to throw a fit about 20k leagues or journey to the center of the earth ?

I don't think anyone is opposed to using IP across the board. People would just prefer WDI had the option to also create new attractions that weren't tied to IP. Many of Disney's best ever attractions didn't have any specific IP attached, so it's unfortunate they don't have the freedom to even try to develop something like that now.

A designer can be be hamstrung with the constraints set by a particular IP (or by having to find an IP that could fit a potentially great design); there's more freedom in designing something totally new. That doesn't guarantee that it will be better, of course, but I don't think there's any downside to having additional options.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

I don’t like to post much, but I do have insight on land use management in the state of Florida. It is far easier for Disney to use land inside the burm than opposed to getting new land use permits.

You’re a brand new member (joined 45 minutes ago) and insiders have said there was land already planned for the coco expansion “beyond big thunder”

Hopefully you’ll still get your paycheck

 

[The Chatbox Ghost]

If the 90% of you don't like this, (I don't either) then have you already written an email to multiple departments & people? I did before writing on this forum.

Who specifically did you reach out to? I’ll definitely make a case for the rivers.

 

[WDWhopper]

The riverboat is too classic. As much as I love Cars what they are doing there looks like a project fit for Disney's California Adventure Park retheming and replacing Grizzly's Peak. If they'd done that it wouldn't of taken anything as classic as the Riverboat.

My thoughts exactly and this has been my fear for a while. They are taking out iconic rides and to be honest, this group doesn’t have enough talent to do that. Imagine if they would’ve removed pirates in the 80s and replaced it with some lame attraction like they were doing back then. This is why I feel they need to build a fifth park to put these things in. Because they’re not doing that, they are having to remove giant sections of one of the most iconic areas in their flagship park. I mean, the Riverboat and the Rivers of America are as classic Disney as it gets and once removed, they’re not coming back. Walt bought all this land in Central Florida so that he would never have to remove things to build new things. It’s just plain silly to not put these new lands and attractions in a new park. There is room for three or four more theme parks in the current area that Disney World owns. I mean, even landlocked Disneyland has not removed their Rivers of America, Riverboat and Tom Sawyer Island. Even with the land being so much of a premium there, they understand not to touch such a signature element of DL.