DisneylandForward

[Vegas Disney Fan]

Given the choice I actually think this is a stronger proposal. I think fans are addicted to the idea of extra gates because it leads to a one-time bolus. I don't think extra gates area always healthier or the natural answer. The proposal basically includes an extra gate (or Florida style one at least), just grafted onto DCA and DL instead.

It's exactly the approach Tokyo decided to take in the end and I thought people here treated all OLC/Tokyo moves as religious and beyond criticism?

Agree, until the existing parks are “complete” I’d rather see them use the money on the existing parks than see a new gate.

DL and MK are near capacity but I’d argue DCA, AK, Epcot, and HS all need more rides, shows, and parades before I could justify spending a dime on another gate.

 

[Consumer]

I thought people here treated all OLC/Tokyo moves as religious and beyond criticism?

Not at all. Although their maintenance is impeccable, many of their latest attractions are bland and uninspired. Despite all the praise it gets, Beauty and the Beast, for instance, is a soulless ride through of a singalong. It is an overbudgeted dark ride that still doesn't hold a candle to the plywood cutouts of Mr. Toad's Wild Ride.

 

[TP2000]

100 percent, tempering expectations is important. Albeit sometimes the tempering desire is so strong these days people minimize it into nothing...

But I don't know why you or no one brought it up. Those projects failed on the back of major political interference. Not seemingly a desire for Disney to carry through the projects. The city council and local businesses basically blocked the eastern gateway. The hotel development was crushed when the council found a loophole that they didn't need to provide the tax breaks because Disney wasn't placing the 4 star hotel exactly where they were supposed to have.

Why this feels so blasé to you is exactly because of this historical context. There is no desire to tip their actual hands this time, they want full approval so their future projects cannot be kiboshed. They don't want more fake art work for people to oppose, they want approvals.

There are fantastic points in there! It is true, the political falling-out and subsequent disaster between Anaheim and DLR (then controlled by clueless and shortsighted Chapek and charmless and snobby Colglazier) should be turned into a political-business book. It's a fascinating tale of mild malfeasance and blatant idiocy from both sides.

But the fact that DisneylandForward is at its core a plan to remove Anaheim's ability to influence/approve future construction on Disneyland's existing surface parking lots around the Resort area doesn't make this process any less comical. Or predictable. And TDA's track record in the 2010's, long before we could blame Covid, still exists.

I just can't wait to see the hazy artwork Sidekick Tightpants rolls out at the VISA D23: Ultimate Fan Whatever Thing this summer. You just know they're going to have to say something about Anaheim! Let's hope they get artwork that at least comes down to the 500 foot level, as the "Unfunded Vague Projects Seen From Afar Through Wispy Clouds!" thing is just so eye-rollingly pointless now. Put up, or shut up.

 

[MarvelCharacterNerd]

DCA is already EPCOT mashed with Hollywood Studios - festivals and a few IP-slapped thrill rides along with some lesser-regarded kid rides.

And a third park at DLR is not likely to change the dynamic that DLR is the locals resort and WDW is the tourist resort. They'd just up the passes to over $2K each (for starters) and sell more of them since they'd have more room to bring them in.

So if they do a third park, they'd probably make it an adult-focused park in terms of attractions as more and more of their park attendees and fans (see Disney+ subs) seem to be SINKS. So thrill rides and booze. Exactly what Walt never wanted. It would leave DL to be the kids and family park and DCA to be the tween to young adult park, with the adults getting NewDisneyPark featuring Tron, Cosmic Rewind, Pandora II, Land of Wakanda, Zootopia: The Furries Experience, and Frozen IV: The Wrath of Olaf (just to be able to say "hey, there's something for kids to do while their parents get drunk and ride the E-Tickets!").

So, yeah, add me to the chorus of "add more and better stuff to do at DCA, which needs it" rather than a third park as that ship sailed when they didn't make the obvious Marvel/Star Wars third gate.

 

[the.dreamfinder]

They're not going to build a third gate. The idea of having an overarching theme for a park died long ago, and building a third gate that just echos the same concepts as DCA and DL would just cannibalize the existing attendance or devalue the resort as a whole. The economics of it just don't make any sense.

Don’t tell that to Universal…

 

[the.dreamfinder]

When we started this DisneylandForward journey, I asked Darkbeer how property acquisitions play into their plans. He said that Disney was going to hold off on buying more property until DLForward was approved. If the DLR property gets bigger, things like building a third gate or expanding DCA or DL without building bridges across Disneyland Drive are doable.

 

[PiratesMansion]

So if they do a third park, they'd probably make it an adult-focused park in terms of attractions as more and more of their park attendees and fans (see Disney+ subs) seem to be SINKS. So thrill rides and booze. Exactly what Walt never wanted. It would leave DL to be the kids and family park and DCA to be the tween to young adult park, with the adults getting NewDisneyPark featuring Tron, Cosmic Rewind, Pandora II, Land of Wakanda, Zootopia: The Furries Experience, and Frozen IV: The Wrath of Olaf (just to be able to say "hey, there's something for kids to do while their parents get drunk and ride the E-Tickets!").

So, yeah, add me to the chorus of "add more and better stuff to do at DCA, which needs it" rather than a third park as that ship sailed when they didn't make the obvious Marvel/Star Wars third gate.

I don't think we're getting a new park anytime soon, and Disney's current approach to just shoehorn whatever the hot IP is wherever they can put it regardless of whether it fits is not the sort of thing that would allow them to design a cohesive park. That said, they'd be foolish to just not consider it if a compelling vision could be realized.

But some counterpoints:
DCA was explicitly designed to be more adult focused than Disneyland, and that was one of the reasons it failed and why one of the first things they did was shoehorn in ABL. As much as they have a large adult fanbase, they're not going to design a park with adults as the target audience.

The Marvel Star Wars gate wouldn't have worked, especially given what has already been built and Disney's mismanagement of both brands as of late. Combining those properties into one place only makes sense if you are absolutely certain they will be evergreen (Star Wars, maybe, Marvel, well...I'm skeptical that the highs of Endgame are ever going to be replicated, at the very least), and that Disney will do them justice (in my view, their track record is at best mixed to negative). And the idea of such a gate is often predicated on a thinly failed hope that if there was a Marvel/Star Wars/other big IP I don't like park, the two existing parks would remain "thematically pure" or devoid of things that don't fit or properties that people don't like and...that is absolutely not something that will ever happen with Disney's current approach to their parks. Nor would it have happened in a time of better Parks management, because there was (and would be, in any circumstance in modern corporate America) obvious pressure to use the brands in the parks in a big way as soon as possible, and adding on to the existing parks was always going to be easier, quicker, and cheaper than a third gate. It also assumes the ability of Disney to act rationally and deliberately in service of adding a third gate within a reasonable amount of time, which nothing the company has done lately has in any way supported.

People say that DCA needs more, and I agree. However, the bigger problem is that Disney from at least 2016 onward seemingly has no idea how to add anything to DCA without undoing something about the park that works, in addition to the inherently flawed foundation the park was built upon. Waiting for a perfect DCA before building a third gate is akin to saying (as many are, either deliberately or not) that a third gate will never come. And that might be your personal hope, as well as the hope of many others here, but realistically, as fans we should be, at least in a theoretical sense, rooting for a third gate to come eventually.

This is not to say that I think the resort needs a third gate any time soon, or that I don't agree that there are much more pressing issues at Disneyland at the moment. But ideally DLR would be working to build itself up to the point that a third gate becomes a reality, because a third gate done right should be a moneymaker. It may not ever get to that point, but it should be their long term goal, and they should be working towards it more aggressively than they currently are, even if that third gate remains a hypothetical pie-in-the-sky for the foreseeable future.

 

[BrianLo]

I don't think we're getting a new park anytime soon, and Disney's current approach to just shoehorn whatever the hot IP is wherever they can put it regardless of whether it fits is not the sort of thing that would allow them to design a cohesive park. That said, they'd be foolish to just not consider it if a compelling vision could be realized.

But some counterpoints:
DCA was explicitly designed to be more adult focused than Disneyland, and that was one of the reasons it failed and why one of the first things they did was shoehorn in ABL. As much as they have a large adult fanbase, they're not going to design a park with adults as the target audience.

The Marvel Star Wars gate wouldn't have worked, especially given what has already been built and Disney's mismanagement of both brands as of late. Combining those properties into one place only makes sense if you are absolutely certain they will be evergreen (Star Wars, maybe, Marvel, well...I'm skeptical that the highs of Endgame are ever going to be replicated, at the very least), and that Disney will do them justice (in my view, their track record is at best mixed to negative). And the idea of such a gate is often predicated on a thinly failed hope that if there was a Marvel/Star Wars/other big IP I don't like park, the two existing parks would remain "thematically pure" or devoid of things that don't fit or properties that people don't like and...that is absolutely not something that will ever happen with Disney's current approach to their parks. Nor would it have happened in a time of better Parks management, because there was (and would be, in any circumstance in modern corporate America) obvious pressure to use the brands in the parks in a big way as soon as possible, and adding on to the existing parks was always going to be easier, quicker, and cheaper than a third gate. It also assumes the ability of Disney to act rationally and deliberately in service of adding a third gate within a reasonable amount of time, which nothing the company has done lately has in any way supported.

People say that DCA needs more, and I agree. However, the bigger problem is that Disney from at least 2016 onward seemingly has no idea how to add anything to DCA without undoing something about the park that works, in addition to the inherently flawed foundation the park was built upon. Waiting for a perfect DCA before building a third gate is akin to saying (as many are, either deliberately or not) that a third gate will never come. And that might be your personal hope, as well as the hope of many others here, but realistically, as fans we should be, at least in a theoretical sense, rooting for a third gate to come eventually.

This is not to say that I think the resort needs a third gate any time soon, or that I don't agree that there are much more pressing issues at Disneyland at the moment. But ideally DLR would be working to build itself up to the point that a third gate becomes a reality, because a third gate done right should be a moneymaker. It may not ever get to that point, but it should be their long term goal, and they should be working towards it more aggressively than they currently are, even if that third gate remains a hypothetical pie-in-the-sky for the foreseeable future.

Well yes, as an eventuality it would be nice. But functionally what difference does it make if the *theoretical* eventual endpoint is 2-3 new lands for DCA and 2 new lands for DL? Thats about all a third gate would be anyways.

From a business standpoint it’s far safer and consistently marketable to open one of those lands every couple years rather than prolonging for 5 at once.

It’s more the addiction to the idea of a sudden bolus that has people wanting new gates over expanding existing parks. But sudden boluses mean delays. See Universal: going over a decade without a new land because Epic slowly gathered up and delayed many other projects.

The actual Disneyland forward major parcel I feel is better utilized in the current proposal. It functionally creates new entrances for both parks and significantly improves ability to flow around the resort. Using it for this purpose seems a strong decision. A true third gate can always be off-property, acquired more far removed from the resort ala Epic Universe rather than shoving it into the existing plots. Sometimes the whole reason to move forward with new gates is because of bottle necks with existing ones, but new back-door gates solves that problem for the resort. Again very similar to Tokyo Disney Sea.

 

[PiratesMansion]

Well yes, as an eventuality it would be nice. But functionally what difference does it make if the *theoretical* eventual endpoint is 2-3 new lands for DCA and 2 new lands for DL? Thats about all a third gate would be anyways.

From a business standpoint it’s far safer and consistently marketable to open one of those lands every couple years rather than prolonging for 5 at once.

It’s more the addiction to the idea of a sudden bolus that has people wanting new gates over expanding existing parks. But sudden boluses mean delays. See Universal: going over a decade without a new land because Epic slowly gathered up and delayed many other projects.

The actual Disneyland forward major parcel I feel is better utilized in the current proposal. It functionally creates new entrances for both parks and significantly improves ability to flow around the resort. Using it for this purpose seems a strong decision. A true third gate can always be off-property, acquired more far removed from the resort ala Epic Universe rather than shoving it into the existing plots. Sometimes the whole reason to move forward with new gates is because of bottle necks with existing ones, but new back-door gates solves that problem for the resort. Again very similar to Tokyo Disney Sea.

I don't disagree, but perhaps because that hypothetical third gate plot has always existed for as long as I've followed the resort, I'd still like them at some point to deliver on it.

I have no illusions that a third gate would be on its way anytime soon, or that DLForward wouldn't be preferable for DLR operationally and in some ways serve as a substitute to the real thing.

It still feels to me like it'd be more possible (and beneficial) than that WDW 5th gate. Maybe it's just one pipe dream I'm not quite ready to give up yet, unrealistic though it may be.

 

[MarvelCharacterNerd]

I don't think we're getting a new park anytime soon, and Disney's current approach to just shoehorn whatever the hot IP is wherever they can put it regardless of whether it fits is not the sort of thing that would allow them to design a cohesive park. That said, they'd be foolish to just not consider it if a compelling vision could be realized.

But some counterpoints:
DCA was explicitly designed to be more adult focused than Disneyland, and that was one of the reasons it failed and why one of the first things they did was shoehorn in ABL. As much as they have a large adult fanbase, they're not going to design a park with adults as the target audience.

The Marvel Star Wars gate wouldn't have worked, especially given what has already been built and Disney's mismanagement of both brands as of late. Combining those properties into one place only makes sense if you are absolutely certain they will be evergreen (Star Wars, maybe, Marvel, well...I'm skeptical that the highs of Endgame are ever going to be replicated, at the very least), and that Disney will do them justice (in my view, their track record is at best mixed to negative). And the idea of such a gate is often predicated on a thinly failed hope that if there was a Marvel/Star Wars/other big IP I don't like park, the two existing parks would remain "thematically pure" or devoid of things that don't fit or properties that people don't like and...that is absolutely not something that will ever happen with Disney's current approach to their parks. Nor would it have happened in a time of better Parks management, because there was (and would be, in any circumstance in modern corporate America) obvious pressure to use the brands in the parks in a big way as soon as possible, and adding on to the existing parks was always going to be easier, quicker, and cheaper than a third gate. It also assumes the ability of Disney to act rationally and deliberately in service of adding a third gate within a reasonable amount of time, which nothing the company has done lately has in any way supported.

People say that DCA needs more, and I agree. However, the bigger problem is that Disney from at least 2016 onward seemingly has no idea how to add anything to DCA without undoing something about the park that works, in addition to the inherently flawed foundation the park was built upon. Waiting for a perfect DCA before building a third gate is akin to saying (as many are, either deliberately or not) that a third gate will never come. And that might be your personal hope, as well as the hope of many others here, but realistically, as fans we should be, at least in a theoretical sense, rooting for a third gate to come eventually.

This is not to say that I think the resort needs a third gate any time soon, or that I don't agree that there are much more pressing issues at Disneyland at the moment. But ideally DLR would be working to build itself up to the point that a third gate becomes a reality, because a third gate done right should be a moneymaker. It may not ever get to that point, but it should be their long term goal, and they should be working towards it more aggressively than they currently are, even if that third gate remains a hypothetical pie-in-the-sky for the foreseeable future.

While an exclusively Star Wars/Marvel park, agreed, might not have the longterm it factor, if they'd made it a genuine SF/F park - so, Star Wars, Marvel, Pandora, & Tron, for example, I think would've had staying power if the execution was good.

Look at Waterworld - the ultimate example of an IP no one cares about executed so well it lasted decades in a park.

I think a park that's essentially a Futureworld/Tomorrowland park was the best opportunity for a cohesive theme - call it "Disney's World of Tomorrow" or whatever. Point is, it would've made sense together rather than whatever mishmash we may wind up with in the future in whatever format - i.e. Fantasy Springs Meets Disney Springs or Gate #3: The IP Adventure Continues - Featuring Various Properties in Big Box Buildings That Block the Sky (Sponsored by Visa).

 

[duncedoof]

Please fill me in real quick what we actually believe this project is right now.

 

[TP2000]

Please fill me in real quick what we actually believe this project is right now.

We actually have no idea. Because TDA and WDI execs still have no idea.

It's all just a rezoning effort by TDA to get Anaheim to rezone the western third of Disney's property into broadly undefined theme park use to be built on into the 2030's.

That way, TDA could have planning and zoning autonomy from Anaheim to build hotels or timeshare condos or land expansions for either park or whatever TDA wants, even a new Walgreens!

There's no solid information on any of it. Just a few vague, hazy sketches of unknown and unfunded park expansions that WDI made up back in 2021, and a Double-Pinky-Promise from TDA to totally always be really super cool to Anaheim's taxpayers and politicians for ever and ever. DisneylandForward!

 

[PiratesMansion]

We actually have no idea. Because TDA and WDI execs still have no idea.

It's all just a rezoning effort by TDA to get Anaheim to rezone the western third of Disney's property into broadly undefined theme park use to be built on into the 2030's.

That way, TDA could have planning and zoning autonomy from Anaheim to build hotels or timeshare condos or land expansions for either park or whatever TDA wants, even a new Walgreens!

There's no solid information on any of it. Just a few vague, hazy sketches of unknown and unfunded park expansions that WDI made up back in 2021, and a Double-Pinky-Promise from TDA to totally always be really super cool to Anaheim's taxpayers and politicians for ever and ever. DisneylandForward!

If it gets approved, you keep conveniently forgetting that they are obligated to spend a fair amount of money on attractions, attractions that would ostensibly be easier to build on that rezoned parcel than within the existing parks, and infinitely more likely to be built than that Walgreens.

We don't know what's coming, but broadly speaking, it will primarily consist of attractions of some kind.

They can be stupid, but not stupid enough to use the bulk of that land on stuff like Walgreens. And if they're going to the bother of getting that land rezoned to be usable as theme park space, they're not going to just dump more hotels there. They're not going to get that much theme park expansion without straight up building a third gate, and they know that. We may not like what they put there, but it will primarily be attraction based.

There's hating Disney when it's justified, and then there's hating on Disney just because it's habit or because of personal vendettas. This is the latter.

 

[shambolicdefending]

If it gets approved, you keep conveniently forgetting that they are obligated to spend a fair amount of money on attractions, attractions that would ostensibly be easier to build on that rezoned parcel than within the existing parks, and infinitely more likely to be built than that Walgreens.

We don't know what's coming, but broadly speaking, it will primarily consist of attractions of some kind.

They can be stupid, but not stupid enough to use the bulk of that land on stuff like Walgreens. And if they're going to the bother of getting that land rezoned to be usable as theme park space, they're not going to just dump more hotels there. They're not going to get that much theme park expansion without straight up building a third gate, and they know that. We may not like what they put there, but it will primarily be attraction based.

There's hating Disney when it's justified, and then there's hating on Disney just because it's habit or because of personal vendettas. This is the latter.

I don't think you're wrong. But I don't think TP2000 is either. Your arguments aren't mutually exclusive, IMO.

The only hard and fast plan the company has is for the eastern gateway expansion. Beyond that it's all just pretty colors on a canvas. And, like everything else they do, budgets and plans for any and all capital projects will get slashed or downgraded at a moment's notice.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I don't think you're wrong. But I don't think TP2000 is either. Your arguments aren't mutually exclusive, IMO.

The only hard and fast plan the company has is for the eastern gateway expansion. Beyond that it's all just pretty colors on a canvas. And, like everything else they do, budgets and plans for any and all capital projects will get slashed or downgraded at a moment's notice.

The days of projects having their budget slashed in the middle of development are generally long since past. Disney’s problem for awhile now has been that they spend too much money on projects. And if they are legally committed to spend a certain amount then not doing so opens up its own issues.

This is a zoning exercise. It not having specificity is part of its nature. It’s like being confused as to why a story reel doesn’t have final effects shots in it.

 

[PiratesMansion]

I don't think you're wrong. But I don't think TP2000 is either. Your arguments aren't mutually exclusive, IMO.

The only hard and fast plan the company has is for the eastern gateway expansion. Beyond that it's all just pretty colors on a canvas. And, like everything else they do, budgets and plans for any and all capital projects will get slashed or downgraded at a moment's notice.

While there's no guarantees of anything, they wouldn't be going through this process at all if they didn't want to expand their parks into the area.

Could they put other things there? Sure. But they know that they're obligated to spend on attractions if this deal goes through, and it wouldn't look great on Disney's part if they end up just turning that land into, say, a DTD expansion, because the entire reason they're doing this is to give them the flexibility to add attractions in that space. And if they're legally obligated to add more attractions, using the DLF parcel offers the most flexible way of doing so.

So to me, while nothing is confirmed or will be for some time, it makes the most sense to assume that the bulk of the development, if not all of it, will be attraction-focused. It's not in their best interest to put anything else there, and they know it.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

If it gets approved, you keep conveniently forgetting that they are obligated to spend a fair amount of money on attractions, attractions that would ostensibly be easier to build on that rezoned parcel than within the existing parks, and infinitely more likely to be built than that Walgreens.

We don't know what's coming, but broadly speaking, it will primarily consist of attractions of some kind.

They can be stupid, but not stupid enough to use the bulk of that land on stuff like Walgreens. And if they're going to the bother of getting that land rezoned to be usable as theme park space, they're not going to just dump more hotels there. They're not going to get that much theme park expansion without straight up building a third gate, and they know that. We may not like what they put there, but it will primarily be attraction based.

If attractions = hotels, shopping, and infrastructure like parking garages we agree, but it reads like you are referring to theme park attractions like rides, shows, etc, in that case you’re much more optimistic than I am.

It’s nearly guaranteed the eastern gateway land will be parking and I’m also fairly confident the Toy Story lot will be a mixed use development of hotels and shopping, just like the plan shows, that’s already about 2/3 of the land going to things other than theme park attractions.

At most I could see the remaining 1/3, to the north and south of the DL hotel, being actual theme park expansion, and even that I suspect will see a couple hotels along the edges, why waste land on a berm when you could use that space for a hotel and block the outside world that way?

My guess is 25% of the land will actually go to attractions, with the majority 75% going to hotels, shopping, and parking. I hope Disney surprises me and uses more of it for the parks but I’m not holding my breathe.

 

[PiratesMansion]

If attractions = hotels, shopping, and infrastructure like parking garages we agree, but it reads like you are referring to theme park attractions like rides, shows, etc, in that case you’re much more optimistic than I am.

It’s nearly guaranteed the eastern gateway land will be parking and I’m also fairly confident the Toy Story lot will be a mixed use development of hotels and shopping, just like the plan shows, that’s already about 2/3 of the land going to things other than theme park attractions.

At most I could see the remaining 1/3, to the north and south of the DL hotel, being actual theme park expansion, and even that I suspect will see a couple hotels along the edges, why waste land on a berm when you could use that space for a hotel and block the outside world that way?

My guess is 25% of the land will actually go to attractions, with the majority 75% going to hotels, shopping, and parking. I hope Disney surprises me and uses more of it for the parks but I’m not holding my breathe.

I'm talking exclusively about the hotel-adjacent parcel here. While the Eastern Gateway is now bundled with this, that was always a parking and infrastructure-focused project. I do not have any faith, nor did I say I did, that Toy Story Lot would become anything more than what it is now for some time.

Weren't they basically already able to use the hotel adjacent parcels for more lodging and shopping/dining as it is? I was under the impression that the entire purpose of this was to rezone the aforementioned hotel-adjacent parcels to allow theme park expansion into that space, and that other uses were already pretty much allowed under the current area zoning arrangements.

 

[Nirya]

I mean, the easy answer for what their plan is for the redevelopment is to build the Eastern Gateway, redevelop the Toy Story lot, and then do something with the land freed up by the Eastern Gateway (aka the bus pickup area) and something with Tomorrowland, which would give them something shiny to promote as part of their infrastructure upgrades. Anything on those plots of land on the west side will be saved for "later".

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

I'm talking exclusively about the hotel-adjacent parcel here. While the Eastern Gateway is now bundled with this, that was always a parking and infrastructure-focused project. I do not have any faith, nor did I say I did, that Toy Story Lot would become anything more than what it is now for some time.

Weren't they basically already able to use the hotel adjacent parcels for more lodging and shopping/dining as it is? I was under the impression that the entire purpose of this was to rezone the aforementioned hotel-adjacent parcels to allow theme park expansion into that space, and that other uses were already pretty much allowed under the current area zoning arrangements.

Disneyland forward encompasses all of it, but if you’re just talking about the land to the north and south of the DL hotel I agree, most of that should be theme park expansion, but I think that’s 100% dependent on the other land getting approval for all the garages, hotels, shopping, etc.

Disney is pushing this as a theme park expansion but I firmly believe DL forward is about building more hotels, shopping, and infrastructure… the theme park expansion is just the carrot to get the rest approved.