Well the gov of Denver wants them to. Plus a indoor theme park would work like with Warner Bros in Abu Dhabi.
Take a look at a newly discovered set of blueprints for Riverfront Square, a.k.a. "St. Louis Disneyland"They show us what "the Disneyland that never was" might have been.www.stlmag.com
I've thought of a perfect place for it, Missouri, birthplace of Walt Disney. St Louis was supposed to be the original location for his second Disney park. But for some reason plans fell through for it.
Also it could be built West of the Mississippi River and get around the Marvel details, that limit using the characters East of it.
i highly doubt disney is going to just fitch all their work in florida thoughReally? I hadn't heard of that one before.
They don't exactly have ideal conditions in the state of Colorado though. The airs different, it snows... a lot and there's other options for visitors besides Disney. Which Disney I'm sure wants to shy away from. Plus it would definitely have to all be indoors, which costs extra to do.
@Outbound got anything to add to what i expressed? Also another example of a tiny park is grona lund in sweden. Or if you really want a tiny park look at joyland childrens park. Two rokler coasters, a dark ride, a handful of other kiddie rides and more all in less than 1 measly acre. WOW
I wouldn't focus too much on location yet. The 30-acre footprint is small enough that'll fit basically anywhere, the only impact location would conceivably have right now is limiting us through climate or regional property rights.Well the gov of Denver wants them to. Plus a indoor theme park would work like with Warner Bros in Abu Dhabi.
Parks in dubai aren’t actually that successful, really. but also its 35 acres or 30 acress not counting backstage or expansion plots. Id make it outdoorI wouldn't focus too much on location yet. The 30-acre footprint is small enough that'll fit basically anywhere, the only impact location would conceivably have right now is limiting us through climate or regional property rights.
An indoor theme park (like at Warner Bro World) would be space-efficient, however, it would also be limiting and could transform the park from a miniature Disneyland to a glorified DisneyQuest 2.0 (not that there's anything wrong with DisneyQuest, but I don't think it quite lives up to the mantra of the castle parks). But it's certainly possible considering the success of parks in Dubai.
Regardless of whether we choose to make the parks indoors, outdoors, or a mix, it's important we emphasize the verticality of the park, Much like how Super Nintendo World has rides and paths on multiple layers -- Tomorrowland and Fantasyland especially could have multiple branching paths and stacked rides/restaurants to best maximize space.
I'd make it outdoors.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.