DisneylandForward

Purduevian

Well-Known Member
I'm trying to think of the longest "nothing" stretch in a Disney Park with no food, shops, or attractions. Best one I could think of off of my head was from Satu'li Canteen to Festival of the Lion King (I don't count the restrooms) ~1000 feet of nothing but trees, a river, and a restroom.
1695307778626.png

Compared to potential DL and DCA routes:
1695308123681.png

1695308188460.png
 

Consumer

Well-Known Member
I'm trying to think of the longest "nothing" stretch in a Disney Park with no food, shops, or attractions. Best one I could think of off of my head was from Satu'li Canteen to Festival of the Lion King (I don't count the restrooms) ~1000 feet of nothing but trees, a river, and a restroom.
View attachment 744154
Compared to potential DL and DCA routes:
View attachment 744156
View attachment 744158
Why are we assuming there would be nothing along those stretches? FDR Dr and 478 both run under Battery Park in NYC. The entire street could easily be enclosed in a similar tunnel with restaurants and shops along the stretch.
1695308739191.png


We'll use the green to represent the land bridges, the red for attraction space, and the blue for shops/restaurants. With proper engineering, there is no logical reason this couldn't work, more or less. This would help ease the transition and prevent guests from feeling like they're exiting the berm into a tacked on land.
Disneyland Expansion.jpg
DCA Expansion.jpg


Effectively, this is no different than having a subway tunnel beneath a skyscraper or the dozens of bridges with buildings on them, many of which date back to the Middle Ages. The only problem is this would require a temporary closure of Disneyland Dr. with the road itself being sunken down, which would be a tremendous cost, far more than I'm sure Disney would want to spend.
 

Purduevian

Well-Known Member
Why are we assuming there would be nothing along those stretches?

The only problem is this would require a temporary closure of Disneyland Dr. with the road itself being sunken down, which would be a tremendous cost, far more than I'm sure Disney would want to spend.
Yeah it all comes down to money IMHO. I'm guessing it will look a little more dressed up than the DTD or the bridge by EPCOT that goes over a road and waterway (I never knew there even was a road there for a very long time).
 

PiratesMansion

Well-Known Member
I'm trying to think of the longest "nothing" stretch in a Disney Park with no food, shops, or attractions. Best one I could think of off of my head was from Satu'li Canteen to Festival of the Lion King (I don't count the restrooms) ~1000 feet of nothing but trees, a river, and a restroom.
View attachment 744154
Compared to potential DL and DCA routes:
View attachment 744156
View attachment 744158
Not sure how it compares, but the walk from Hungry Bear to Rise feels like it takes forever. It's such a jarring contrast when compared to the rest of the park.
 

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
Not sure how it compares, but the walk from Hungry Bear to Rise feels like it takes forever. It's such a jarring contrast when compared to the rest of the park.

If Disneyland Forward moves forward on the Disneyland side (which I hope it doesn’t not or at least not for a long time after the DCA expansion and when the park is is in better hands) I propose a People Mover from this area to the new lands. This area meaning the GE area on the way to ROTR. Not Critter Country. Ideally of course the station would be on village side and not the more rustic ROTR side.
 

Nirya

Well-Known Member
The path to the new lands is going to be walkable, full stop. Disney is not going to want to slow down the rate at which people enter any new lands with some system that could theoretically break down.
 

etc98

Well-Known Member
Why are we assuming there would be nothing along those stretches? FDR Dr and 478 both run under Battery Park in NYC. The entire street could easily be enclosed in a similar tunnel with restaurants and shops along the stretch.
View attachment 744160

We'll use the green to represent the land bridges, the red for attraction space, and the blue for shops/restaurants. With proper engineering, there is no logical reason this couldn't work, more or less. This would help ease the transition and prevent guests from feeling like they're exiting the berm into a tacked on land.
View attachment 744163View attachment 744164

Effectively, this is no different than having a subway tunnel beneath a skyscraper or the dozens of bridges with buildings on them, many of which date back to the Middle Ages. The only problem is this would require a temporary closure of Disneyland Dr. with the road itself being sunken down, which would be a tremendous cost, far more than I'm sure Disney would want to spend.
I feel like they need to do this too for sound. On that downtown Disney bridge you can still hear the traffic, especially when cars are speeding or revving their engines. Having the bridge lined with buildings could help dampen the sound of the road
 

MarvelCharacterNerd

Well-Known Member
OC Register talking about the possibility of a monorail extension as part of the DisneylandForward project:


Pointing out the need for the GardenWalk property to do so:
Connecting Disneyland and Disney California Adventure to the Toy Story parking lot via monorail would likely involve a route through Anaheim GardenWalk — an outdoor shopping mall that Disneyland does not own.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
OC Register talking about the possibility of a monorail extension as part of the DisneylandForward project:


Pointing out the need for the GardenWalk property to do so:
Nice to know its being reported on, but they must be reading these threads for story ideas.... ;)

Thinking about this as if the only need for Gardenwalk in DisneylandForward is for monorail right-of-way, then Disney may not actually need to own it. Now obviously for future area improvements and more contiguous land it would make more sense for Disney to own it. But deals could be worked out where the monorail can pass overhead without having Disney buy the entire property.

But Disney should seriously look at buying it when its up for sale again in a few years.
 

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
OC Register talking about the possibility of a monorail extension as part of the DisneylandForward project:


Pointing out the need for the GardenWalk property to do so:

The wait for that Monorail would be rough. Still, bring it on.
 

Purduevian

Well-Known Member
Not sure how it compares, but the walk from Hungry Bear to Rise feels like it takes forever. It's such a jarring contrast when compared to the rest of the park.
Probably the longest current "dead" space in DLR. ~500 feet. Could be similar to what the length of the bridge would be... I always forget how large SWGE is with only 2 attractions until I look at a map...

1695386453631.png
 

Attachments

  • 1695386418205.png
    1695386418205.png
    965.1 KB · Views: 69

DrAlice

Well-Known Member
Monorail isn't a viable option as a major mode of transportation around the resort (like at WDW) unless they fix the lack of A/C problem. You can't rely on a system that has to close every time the weather gets too warm.

Well... I mean, you could.... but that would be silly. 🤪
 

DrAlice

Well-Known Member
Just a reminder that the announcement said they were planning to add $60 billion in spending to the Parks, Experiences, and Products division. That's not just parks. Cruise ships, upcharge stuff experiences, and design of new popcorn buckets all fall under this heading too. Adjust your expectations accordingly. ;)
 

shambolicdefending

Well-Known Member
I'm guessing the 60 billion is a blue sky number that they have PR reasons for hyping. In reality they will probably spend well short of that amount, especially if economic uncertainty persists.

I mean, 60 billion would build a couple of brand new full park resorts from scratch. It's actually pretty hard for a company to spend that much money in a 10-year time frame.
 

J4546

Well-Known Member
I'm guessing the 60 billion is a blue sky number that they have PR reasons for hyping. In reality they will probably spend well short of that amount, especially if economic uncertainty persists.

I mean, 60 billion would build a couple of brand new full park resorts from scratch. It's actually pretty hard for a company to spend that much money in a 10-year time frame.
id rather the 60bil go into existing parks than building all new ones....though I wouldnt mind seeing Shanghai or HK get a sister park, that may entice me to visit one of those resorts.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom