DisneylandForward

[Disney Irish]

I don't think there's any meaningful argument against allowing Disney to develop their property as they see fit, but I'd be remiss not to say that the barriers to development in southern california aren't that there aren't people willing to pay development costs, it's that development costs are extremely high because of local zoning ordinances. The city council would achieve more for housing affordability by up zoning than pushing Disney to contribute to a housing fund.


Cost overruns generally don't generate more investment - they'll just mean Disney gets less for what they choose to spend. Whether it's $1.9B or $2.5B in ~2035 dollars isn't really enough to deliver the kind of results we'd probably all like to see. $2 billion is the cost of 3-4 large attractions (CR in Florida was (somehow?1?) over $400 million, Fantasy Springs in TDS is apparently north of $1 billion, and BATB at TDL was >$200 million) and 1-2 hotels. Substantial growth but not transformative.

It also remains to be seen how much of that is 'new' spending. Disney very likely arrived at that number based on in part on the cost of the Eastern Gateway parking structure and the Avengers E-ticket. So you're really looking at more limited expansion in that number than the concept art and Disney's PR suggests.

It's specifically outlined in the proposal that the $1.9B+ will only be spent on "visitor attractions", as stated here -

"Minimum investment only covers visitor attractions — spending on parking, road improvements and bridges would be separate"

So that $1.9B+ number is likely derived from the cost of several of the recent projects around the Parks including Galaxy's Edge and Avenger's Campus.

 

[October82]

It's specifically outlined in the proposal that the $1.9B+ will only be spent on "visitor attractions", as stated here -

"Minimum investment only covers visitor attractions — spending on parking, road improvements and bridges would be separate"

So that $1.9B+ number is likely derived from the cost of several of the recent projects around the Parks including Galaxy's Edge.

Thanks for clarifying that parking is excluded.

It's still important to emphasize that 'visitor attractions' isn't going to deliver transformative changes in Anaheim. We're really looking at expanded retail, lodging, and a handful of attractions at current WDI prices.

While that is IMO completely immaterial for whether DisneylandForward should get city approval, this doesn't signal any sort of sustained commitment in the DLR from Disney. It really looks like Iger-era status quo levels of spending in the resort.

As further points of comparison, Universal is spending $500 million on their Texas family park, and Epic Universe likely costs significantly in excess of $3 billion. SHDL was more than $5 billion.

 

[Disney Irish]

Thanks for clarifying that parking is excluded.

It's still important to emphasize that 'visitor attractions' isn't going to deliver transformative changes in Anaheim. We're really looking at expanded retail, lodging, and a handful of attractions at current WDI prices.

While that is IMO completely immaterial for whether DisneylandForward should get city approval, this doesn't signal any sort of sustained commitment in the DLR from Disney. It really looks like Iger-era status quo levels of spending in the resort.

Oh I agree, which is why I've said that a 3rd gate is completely out of the question. And why I think Toy Story is being transformed into a new shopping and hotel district. It'll leave the rest of everything for expansion in the future, with a handful of attractions.

But it'll be interesting to see what they come up with.

 

[TP2000]

As for the $1.9B+ that will be spent, I don't know what they will build but remember that is just within the first 10 years. Further investment will hopefully take place after that, including more attractions and such.

Yup. Because contrary to what a shady Texas realtor or two might tell you, Disneyland isn't going anywhere.

Disneyland is either going to continue to grow and exist in Anaheim, or else China or Russia starts WWIII and wipes us all out. There's not really a third option. DisneylandForward gives TDA a lot more leeway in building stuff where the 1996 zoning plan told them they couldn't, and stops Anaheim from expanding Gene Autry Way across Disney property while also allowing them to build two pedestrian bridges over Disneyland Drive to link the new stuff to the existing parks.

But the assertion that it'll be primarily just hotel rooms and DVC and 800K sqft conference space that is first built is a bit hyperbolic in my opinion.

There will be new rides east of Disneyland Drive, I'm sure. I'd bet one land for each park, with one E Ticket and perhaps a D or C Ticket. And also up to 3,300 new hotel rooms and DVC units, plus retail and dining.

Also all the parking and bridges are separate from the $1.9B, as that is only meant to be spent on what they call "visitor attractions". So cross that off the list of things that you hyperbolically talk about.

How much do you think a pedestrian bridge costs? How much do you think this Downtown Disney bridge over Disneyland Drive would cost to build in 2025 dollars? I'd bet about $5 to $10 Million. .

So we'll see what they actually build, but its likely going to be more than just a single attraction for each park.

Agreed. C Tickets need love too!

 

[Disney Irish]

Yup. Because contrary to what a shady Texas realtor or two might tell you, Disneyland isn't going anywhere.

Disneyland is either going to continue to grow and exist in Anaheim, or else China or Russia starts WWIII and wipes us all out. There's not really a third option. DisneylandForward gives TDA a lot more leeway in building stuff where the 1996 zoning plan told them they couldn't, and stops Anaheim from expanding Gene Autry Way across Disney property while also allowing them to build two pedestrian bridges over Disneyland Drive to link the new stuff to the existing parks.

Yes I agree DLR isn't going anywhere. And that DLForward is meant to give TDA more flexibility.

There will be new rides east of Disneyland Drive, I'm sure. I'd bet one land for each park, with one E Ticket and perhaps a D or C Ticket. And also up to 3,300 new hotel rooms and DVC units, plus retail and dining.

While I do think there will be some new rooms added into the expansion areas made from crossing DL Drive, I believe any major new hotel and shopping will be done in the Toy Story lot.

How much do you think a pedestrian bridge costs? How much do you think this Downtown Disney bridge over Disneyland Drive would cost to build in 2025 dollars? I'd bet about $5 to $10 Million. .

Doesn't matter how much it costs, it won't be coming out of the $1.9B+ commitment. Its separate from that, as is the whole Eastern Gateway.

Agreed. C Tickets need love too!

This I actually agree with, they do need to add a few more smaller attractions around the resort.

 

[TP2000]

It's still important to emphasize that 'visitor attractions' isn't going to deliver transformative changes in Anaheim. We're really looking at expanded retail, lodging, and a handful of attractions at current WDI prices.

While that is IMO completely immaterial for whether DisneylandForward should get city approval, this doesn't signal any sort of sustained commitment in the DLR from Disney. It really looks like Iger-era status quo levels of spending in the resort.

It looks that way because it is.

DisneylandForward is basically a $200 Million per year commitment for Disneyland Resort over the next 10 years, in exchange for amending the 1996 zoning laws that dictated where they could build hotels and parking and where they could build theme parks or "visitor attractions". But since the average E Ticket now costs northwards of $400 Million, and a 1,000 room deluxe hotel would be nearly that much, spending only $200 Million per year on Disneyland Resort is nothing special.

$200 Million per year dedicated to Disney's Anaheim property doesn't accelerate spending, it doesn't turbocharge investment, it simply maintains it at the same level its had for the past 15 years. Except now you've got inflation.

As further points of comparison, Universal is spending $500 million on their Texas family park, and Epic Universe likely costs significantly in excess of $3 billion. SHDL was more than $5 billion.

$1.9 Billion. Spread across 3,500+ new hotel rooms and DVC units, plus 800,000 square feet of retail/dining/hotel amenities, and whatever is left over hopefully buys you two E Tickets and a C Ticket spinner.

Two pedestrian bridges over Disneyland Drive not included. Plus a $5 Million kickback payment to Anaheim city hall.

 

[Disney Irish]

It looks that way because it is.

DisneylandForward is basically a $200 Million per year commitment for Disneyland Resort over the next 10 years, in exchange for amending the 1996 zoning laws that dictated where they could build hotels and parking and where they could build theme parks or "visitor attractions". But since the average E Ticket now costs northwards of $400 Million, and a 1,000 room deluxe hotel would be nearly that much, spending only $200 Million per year on Disneyland Resort is nothing special.

$200 Million per year dedicated to Disney's Anaheim property doesn't accelerate spending, it doesn't turbocharge investment, it simply maintains it at the same level its had for the past 15 years. Except now you've got inflation.

Except as we know Disney isn't going to spend it as $200M per year, they will spend it in lump sums per project phases. So it'll be X amount for this phase, and Y amount for that phase, etc.

$1.9 Billion. Spread across 3,500+ new hotel rooms and DVC units, plus 800,000 square feet of retail/dining/hotel amenities, and whatever is left over hopefully buys you two E Tickets and a C Ticket spinner.

Two pedestrian bridges over Disneyland Drive not included. Plus a $5 Million kickback payment to Anaheim city hall.

You keep using that 800K Sqft number as if its listed somewhere. At first you said it was for conference space until I pointed out they can't increase their conference space by that much. And now you're claiming its going to be for retail, dining, and hotel amenities. You're pulling that number out of thin air, as its nowhere listed in any of the proposals that have been submitted, because it doesn't exist.

They cannot build out that much space for that type of stuff. Once again they aren't requesting to modify what was already permitted, only where it can be done.

Here is the reality right from the fact sheet -

They can only build out ~140K Sqft more in retail, and as pointed out before ~38K Sqft more in meeting/conference space. Even DTD cannot be expanded out that much more.

Those ~3500 rooms are likely going in the Toy Story area in two hotels with that ~140K Sqft of retail. The remaining ~1000K rooms will probably be used as expansion to one of the 3 current hotels, likely for DVC.

That means everything else with the expansion across DL Dr is going to be used to expand both DL and DCA with whatever they can fit there. Note they can add up to ~1.5M Sqft for DL, and 2M Sqft for DCA.

How they divvy up that $1.9B among the various areas, who knows at this point. And who knows if it'll all be done within that 10 year period. But its clear its not going to be primarily for hotels, retail, etc, as they cannot build out that much as you claim.

 

[TP2000]

Except as we know Disney isn't going to spend it as $200M per year, they will spend it in lump sums per project phases. So it'll be X amount for this phase, and Y amount for that phase, etc.

Sure, but it averages out to $200 Million per year. That's not a historically impressive number, it's what should be happening anyway at the prices that WDI charges them to build stuff, and as under-capacity as both parks are now. (Not as bad as WDW, but still desperately in need of new rides, shows, entertainment, park capacity)

You keep using that 800K Sqft number as if its listed somewhere. At first you said it was for conference space until I pointed out they can't increase their conference space by that much.

Huh?!? I never said any such thing, as 800,000 square feet of conference space would be half the size of the giant Anaheim Convention Center!

And now you're claiming its going to be for retail, dining, and hotel amenities.

I had to search my posts with that little search thingy to figure out what the heck you were talking about, but I found the two instances I that used the phrase "conference space", and those quotes are here from a few days ago...

That is in addition to the 3,300 new hotel rooms that can be built in the DCA and Disneyland expansion areas west of Disneyland Drive, plus 500,000 new square feet of conference space and hotel specific retail/dining. So the total number of new hotel rooms that Disney can build as part of DisneylandForward expansion is 5,150 new hotel/DVC units.

Disney will spend $1.9 Billion to build thousands of new hotel rooms, DVC units, and 800,000+ square feet of conference space, retail, and dining. Plus a few "attractions", perhaps one E Ticket for each park, accessed via bridges over Disneyland Drive. That will use up the $1.9 Billion pretty quickly.

It was supposed to be read as part of the rest of those sentences; square footage designated as hotels rooms, DVC, conference space, retail, and dining. Not 800,000 square feet of solely conference space. I just Googled, and the Salt Lake City Convention Center is 515,000 square feet.

You're pulling that number out of thin air, as its nowhere listed in any of the proposals that have been submitted, because it doesn't exist.

They cannot build out that much space for that type of stuff. Once again they aren't requesting to modify what was already permitted, only where it can be done.

Here is the reality right from the fact sheet -

View attachment 766405

They can only build out ~140K Sqft more in retail, and as pointed out before ~38K Sqft more in meeting/conference space. Even DTD cannot be expanded out that much more.

That's where many people get confused. Again, because too many fan sites rushed to try and announce this as theme park expansion, when it's really just rezoning existing parking zones west of Disneyland Drive into Anything And Everything Disney Wants To Build Zones.

Here's the table from the Anaheim planning document I linked to earlier this week. DisneylandForward does away with the defined parking districts and hotel districts from 1996, and instead classifies almost all of Disneyland Resort as a "Theme Park District", and then transfers the 1996 square footage allowances for the two parks to the entire Disney property.

There are two exceptions: The new Parking District that is the existing Mickey&Friends/Pixar Pals parking complex, and the existing Pumbaa lot to be turned into the Eastern Gateway. And the new "Southeast District", which is the existing Toy Story Lot to become a 1,800+ room hotel/dining/entertainment zone aimed at convention business trade.

Those ~3500 rooms are likely going in the Toy Story area in two hotels with that ~140K Sqft of retail. The remaining ~1000K rooms will probably be used as expansion to one of the 3 current hotels, likely for DVC.

Nope. Under DisneylandForward's rezoning/rewording, the Toy Story Lot is now zoned for up to 1,852 rooms and 390,000 square feet of "Theme Park Uses", which can be anything really.

It should be noted that the 550 room Pixar Place Hotel is not in the plan, and does not count towards the 5,600 total hotel rooms Disney may build on its property. Assuming the Pixar Place Hotel lives to see the year 2035, Disney property gets to have roughly 6,150 hotel rooms via DisneylandForward.

That means everything else with the expansion across DL Dr is going to be used to expand both DL and DCA with whatever they can fit there. Note they can add up to ~1.5M Sqft for DL, and 2M Sqft for DCA.

Correct, as the newly branded "Theme Park Use", which is no longer limited to the two theme park properties that the 1996 plan demanded, and all that newly liberated square footage can now include hotels, DVC, retail, dining, and some conference space.

How they divvy up that $1.9B among the various areas, who knows at this point. And who knows if it'll all be done within that 10 year period. But its clear its not going to be primarily for hotels, retail, etc, as they cannot build out that much as you claim.

If DisneylandForward is approved, they certainly can build out that much. DisneylandForward frees up the square footage already approved for the two theme park footprints and spreads it out over the entire property. Plus an extra dollop of 1,892 hotel rooms and 390,000 square feet of retail/dining/day spas/whatever in the Toy Story Lot.

https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/51215/Appendix-M-Disneyland-Resort-Specific-Plan-DRSP

 

[TP2000]

I think what the conversation here between @Disney Irish and I proves is just how misrepresented this DisneylandForward plan was in the media, and especially on some fan websites.

It rezones pretty much all of Disney's property in Anaheim, and it dramatically changes the original 1996 zoning laws that were very strict in which parts of the property different types of uses could go; parking, hotels, retail/dining, theme parks, etc.

Much of the original square footage maximums and hotel room capacities from 1996 have remained in DisneylandForward. But instead of limiting only to specific blocks of the property, it basically applies those square footage and zoning rights to the entire property as one entity. Hotels don't have to be only west of Disneyland Drive, and Toy Story doesn't have to be only parking with an extension of Gene Autry Way running through it for no good reason. Etc., etc.

I've been looking through the planning documents, and while we are all focused on the two expansion plots west of Disneyland Drive, I'm struck that the rezoning works the other direction too. I can't find anything in DisneylandForward that would prevent them from building hotels inside the two parks, or in new park expansion.... A new Discoveryland Hotel on the old Autopia plot? A Frozen Chalet Hotel in the old Motorboat Cruise Area? A DVC development as part of Pandora north of Star Wars Land?

If DisneylandForward prevents that from happening, I can't find the page or text that spells that out. When nearly the entire Disneyland Resort property is rezoned as general Theme Park District, and Theme Park is described as anything and everything a visitor might want, nothing seems to prevent them from building a hotel/retail/attraction complex inside the existing boundaries of Disneyland or DCA.

I'm not automatically opposed to that type of Disneyland or DCA reuse in general, I just find it interesting that DisneylandForward seems to grant TDA the right to rebuild any of their existing property with that sort of mixed-use hotel and theme park development.

 

[Disney Irish]

Sure, but it averages out to $200 Million per year. That's not a historically impressive number, it's what should be happening anyway at the prices that WDI charges them to build stuff, and as under-capacity as both parks are now. (Not as bad as WDW, but still desperately in need of new rides, shows, entertainment, park capacity)

Except you can't state it that way, because that is not how its going to work. You're purposely putting into terms that makes it seem like they aren't going to fund this properly, which is a false narrative.

Huh?!? I never said any such thing, as 800,000 square feet of conference space would be half the size of the giant Anaheim Convention Center!



I had to search my posts with that little search thingy to figure out what the heck you were talking about, but I found the two instances I that used the phrase "conference space", and those quotes are here from a few days ago...




It was supposed to be read as part of the rest of those sentences; square footage designated as hotels rooms, DVC, conference space, retail, and dining. Not 800,000 square feet of solely conference space. I just Googled, and the Salt Lake City Convention Center is 515,000 square feet.

Except even the 800k Sqft of the combined "conference space, retail, and dining" is way more than they are even permitted. So this number is false, its a number you pick from nothing. Again its a false narrative that you are trying to spin to make it seems like they aren't going to be spending on real attractions. Its not valid and so shouldn't be touted as if that is the real plan, because its not.

That's where many people get confused. Again, because too many fan sites rushed to try and announce this as theme park expansion, when it's really just rezoning existing parking zones west of Disneyland Drive into Anything And Everything Disney Wants To Build Zones.

Here's the table from the Anaheim planning document I linked to earlier this week. DisneylandForward does away with the defined parking districts and hotel districts from 1996, and instead classifies almost all of Disneyland Resort as a "Theme Park District", and then transfers the 1996 square footage allowances for the two parks to the entire Disney property.

There are two exceptions: The new Parking District that is the existing Mickey&Friends/Pixar Pals parking complex, and the existing Pumbaa lot to be turned into the Eastern Gateway. And the new "Southeast District", which is the existing Toy Story Lot to become a 1,800+ room hotel/dining/entertainment zone aimed at convention business trade.

View attachment 766559


Nope. Under DisneylandForward's rezoning/rewording, the Toy Story Lot is now zoned for up to 1,852 rooms and 390,000 square feet of "Theme Park Uses", which can be anything really.

It should be noted that the 550 room Pixar Place Hotel is not in the plan, and does not count towards the 5,600 total hotel rooms Disney may build on its property. Assuming the Pixar Place Hotel lives to see the year 2035, Disney property gets to have roughly 6,150 hotel rooms via DisneylandForward.


Correct, as the newly branded "Theme Park Use", which is no longer limited to the two theme park properties that the 1996 plan demanded, and all that newly liberated square footage can now include hotels, DVC, retail, dining, and some conference space.



If DisneylandForward is approved, they certainly can build out that much. DisneylandForward frees up the square footage already approved for the two theme park footprints and spreads it out over the entire property. Plus an extra dollop of 1,892 hotel rooms and 390,000 square feet of retail/dining/day spas/whatever in the Toy Story Lot.

https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/51215/Appendix-M-Disneyland-Resort-Specific-Plan-DRSP

I'm not reading "fan sites", I'm reading it right from the Anaheim DisneylandForward site, and what was discussed during the Council meeting workshop, again something that you didn't even watch.

That graphic I provided comes directly from the DisneylandForward fact sheet made by the city and posted on Aneheim's site here -

https://ca-anaheim.civicplus.com/Do...9/DisneylandForward-fact-sheet-winter-2023-24

Those are the number that should be used, as those are what is part of the DisneylandForward proposal. It was specifically discussed during the Council Workshop that the numbers in the sheet above are what is being used. You're misrepresenting numbers here to paint some type of narrative, for whatever reason.

 

[TP2000]

That graphic I provided comes directly from the DisneylandForward fact sheet maybe by the city and posted on Aneheim's site here -

https://ca-anaheim.civicplus.com/Do...9/DisneylandForward-fact-sheet-winter-2023-24

You seem to be under the impression that the Fact Sheet you showed here represents DisneylandForward zoning numbers, when it does not. The problem is that fact sheet you used represents what has been built, and what is permitted to be built, using the original 1996 zoning agreements. Those aren't the DisneylandForward numbers where Theme Park square footage allotments get to be used west of Disneyland Drive, etc.

That's the Anaheim example of what Disney has currently built towards its 1996 zoning plans. What was permitted to be built circa 1996, not if and when DisneylandForward is voted on and approved by the Anaheim City Council later this year.

Those are the number that should be used, as those are what is part of the DisneylandForward proposal. It was specifically discussed during the Council Workshop that the numbers in the sheet above are what is being used. You're misrepresenting numbers here to paint some type of narrative, for whatever reason.

Those are the numbers from 1996. So those aren't the numbers that should be when discussing DisneylandForward. You seem to be under the assumption that the zoning categories from 1996 stay the same, when they do not. With DisneylandForward, Anaheim is granting Disney the right to use the total square footage and hotel rooms approved across all of Disney's property in Anaheim. It unlocks those 1996 square footage and hotel room allotments from certain parts of the property, and lets Disney build whatever they want wherever they want, up to those total square footage and room allotments.

From Page 1 of the Anaheim Fact Sheet you posted the 1996 allotments from above...

That little bullet about taking four decades should temper expectations a bit, of course.

 

[Disney Irish]

You seem to be under the impression that the Fact Sheet you showed here represents DisneylandForward zoning numbers, when it does not. The problem is that fact sheet you used represents what has been built, and what is permitted to be built, using the original 1996 zoning agreements. Those aren't the DisneylandForward numbers where Theme Park square footage allotments get to be used west of Disneyland Drive, etc.

That's the Anaheim example of what Disney has currently built towards its 1996 zoning plans. What was permitted to be built circa 1996, not if and when DisneylandForward is voted on and approved by the Anaheim City Council later this year.



Those are the numbers from 1996. So those aren't the numbers that should be when discussing DisneylandForward. You seem to be under the assumption that the zoning categories from 1996 stay the same, when they do not. With DisneylandForward, Anaheim is granting Disney the right to use the total square footage and hotel rooms approved across all of Disney's property in Anaheim. It unlocks those 1996 square footage and hotel room allotments from certain parts of the property, and lets Disney build whatever they want wherever they want, up to those total square footage and room allotments.

From Page 1 of the Anaheim Fact Sheet you posted the 1996 allotments from above...

View attachment 766566
That little bullet about taking four decades should temper expectations a bit, of course.

Yes I'm fully aware of the fact that it allows to use the entire property for development, that is the whole point of DisneylandForward. But what it doesn't do is increase any of the permitted numbers for development, all those remain the same from the 1996 plan. Again this was discussed during the Council workshop. And is even stated in that graphic you just posted.

So these numbers that you keep touting like the 800K Sqft of new combined "conference space, retail, and dining" is just factually wrong as that would be beyond what they are permitted to build.

 

[TP2000]

Here is the reality right from the fact sheet -

View attachment 766405

They can only build out ~140K Sqft more in retail, and as pointed out before ~38K Sqft more in meeting/conference space. Even DTD cannot be expanded out that much more.

Using the Fact Sheet you posted, and understanding that DisneylandForward removes the ability for Anaheim to dictate what Theme Park use is and what it is not, DisneylandForward frees up about 3 Million square feet of development for anything and everything Disney wants across almost their entire property.

Granted, one of the things from 1996 that remains in DisneylandForward is the cap on hotel rooms at 5,600 (not including Pixar Place Hotel) in the Theme Park District.

So with DisneylandForward, Disney can build about 3,300 new hotel rooms inside and/or around Disneyland/DCA and Downtown Disney or on the Toy Story Lot.

For the most part, there's 3 Million square feet of new development Disney can play with, and put wherever they like if DisneylandForward gets approved.

 

[TP2000]

Yes I'm fully aware of the fact that it allows to use the entire property for development, that is the whole point of DisneylandForward. But what it doesn't do is increase any of the permitted numbers for development, all those remain the same from the 1996 plan.

But no longer are they bound to specific blocks, or specific uses. 2 Million square feet of "theme park" space for DCA can be used via DisneylandForward for any use Disney wants; hotels, DVC, retail, dining, rides, shows, a day spa, etc.

Again this was discussed during the Council workshop. And is even stated in that graphic you just posted.

Which is why I posted it. You seemed to be saying that the graphic you posted was the DisneylandForward permitted use, when it was not. That was the 1996 permitted use that has been developed thus far by Disney while playing by the 1996 rules on placement and land use, until DisneylandForward hopefully goes into effect with a vote this summer and wipes almost all of those old rules away.

 

[Disney Irish]

Using the Fact Sheet you posted, and understanding that DisneylandForward removes the ability for Anaheim to dictate what Theme Park use is and what it is not, DisneylandForward frees up about 3 Million square feet of development for anything and everything Disney wants across almost their entire property.

Granted, one of the things from 1996 that remains in DisneylandForward is the cap on hotel rooms at 5,600 (not including Pixar Place Hotel) in the Theme Park District, and an additional 1,850 rooms in the Southeast District that is currently Toy Story. The Southeast District zoning lowers that from the 1996 agreement for 3,936 hotel rooms that in 1996 were thought to be owned by a variety of companies once Gene Autry Way and Clementine Street were expanded to criss-cross that property.

So with DisneylandForward, Disney can build about 3,300 new hotel rooms inside and/or around Disneyland/DCA and Downtown Disney, plus an additional 1,850 new hotel rooms on the Toy Story Lot.

For the most part, there's 3 Million square feet of new development Disney can play with, and put wherever they like if DisneylandForward gets approved.

Wrong, the caps on the type of usage is still in place, again they cannot go beyond what is permitted. So if the cap for retail is 300,000 Sqft, and they have already used up ~160,000 Sqft, then they are only allowed an additional ~140,000 Sqft of retail within the new borders being setup by DisneylandForward. It doesn't change any of those caps. Again this is what is stated in the Fact Sheet, and what was stated in the Council workshop.

 

[Disney Irish]

But no longer are they bound to specific blocks, or specific uses. 2 Million square feet of "theme park" space for DCA can be used via DisneylandForward for any use Disney wants; hotels, DVC, retail, dining, rides, shows, a day spa, etc.



Which is why I posted it. You seemed to be saying that the graphic you posted was the DisneylandForward permitted use, when it was not. That was the 1996 permitted use that has been developed thus far by Disney while playing by the 1996 rules on placement and land use, until DisneylandForward hopefully goes into effect with a vote this summer and wipes almost all of those old rules away.

You're making the assumptions that the change to "Theme Park District" removes all caps on what is permitted. This is not correct based on the proposal nor what was discussed during the Council workshop. All the caps set in the 1996 agreement remain in place. All that is changing is the zoning on WHERE they can build, not WHAT they can build.

 

[TP2000]

You're making the assumptions that the change to "Theme Park District" removes all caps on what is permitted.

No, I've never said that. What changes with DisneylandForward is that Disney can take the millions of square footage they were permitted for in 1996 but still haven't used for the two theme parks, and shift those millions of square feet across nearly their entire property and use it for a wide variety of uses; hotels, DVC, retail, dining, entertainment. All of those things are now considered "Theme Park Use", whereas back in 1996 the plan considered Theme Park Use as a rather obvious thing... theme parks, like Disneyland. Where you pay to get in and then go on rides.

This is not correct based on the proposal nor what was discussed during the Council workshop. All the caps set in the 1996 agreement remain in place. All that is changing is the zoning on WHERE they can build, not WHAT they can build.

The square footage capacities (7.6 Million square feet!) and the hotel room capacities remain in place from 1996. But most everything else regarding where and how gets thrown out the window with DisneylandForward. Want to build a hotel where Autopia is now? Sure. Want to add DVC units to your Pandora land north of Star Wars Land? Sure. Want to build an Enancto land on the Downtown Disney parking lot with one E Ticket and also more Downtown Disney expansion? Sure.

I'm supportive of these changes in general, as I think government should have a limited role in telling property owners what they can and can't do with their property. But again, DisneylandForward isn't really about building lots of new rides and new theme park lands like the fan websites first claimed. As the first clause in the DisneylandForward contract states...

 

[Disney Irish]

No, I've never said that. What changes with DisneylandForward is that Disney can take the millions of square footage they haven't used for the two theme parks under the 1996 plan, and shift that across nearly their entire property and use it for a wide variety of uses; hotels, DVC, retail, dining, entertainment. All of those things are now considered "Theme Park Use", whereas back in 1996 the plan considered Theme Park Use as a rather obvious thing... theme parks, like Disneyland. Where you pay to get in and then go on rides.



The square footage capacities and the hotel room capacities remain in place from 1996. But most everything else regarding where and how gets thrown out the window with DisneylandForward. Want to build a hotel where Autopia is now? Sure. Want to add DVC units to your Pandora land north of Star Wars Land? Sure. Want to build an Enancto land on the Downtown Disney parking lot with one E Ticket and also more Downtown Disney expansion? Sure.

I'm supportive of these changes in general, as I think government should have a limited role in telling property owners what they can and can't do with their property. But again, DisneylandForward isn't really about building lots of new rides and new theme park lands like the fan websites first claimed. As the first clause in the DisneylandForward contract states...

View attachment 766569

Again you keep missing the point. They are not changing any development usage, everything already permitted remains the same including the caps. The only thing that changes is the WHERE development can occur, not the WHAT.

"Net change: no added acres, square footage of development or hotel rooms proposed; would shift already approved
development across Disney-owned land"

As stated above, there will be no changes in the acreage or square footage of development, it only shifts what is already approved to all areas of the Resort. So that means the caps in-place remain in-place, it doesn't change it. So that means they can't just build out 1M Sqft of new retail, as they are still bound by the caps from the 1996 agreement.

 

[Parteecia]

My simpleminded version (no numbers!) is that Disney is presenting what they think will get approved, then will pay the penalty and do what they want.

 

[TP2000]

Again you keep missing the point. They are not changing any development usage, everything already permitted remains the same including the caps. The only thing that changes is the WHERE development can occur, not the WHAT.

No, I'm not missing the point. That's been my point all along; DisneylandForward allows Disney to do whatever they want with their existing property, and they'll no longer have to abide by the 1996 planning agreement that segregated hotels into one area, parking into another, theme parks over there where they've always been, etc.

But by classifying anything and everything as Theme Park, as DisneylandForward does, they can move those millions of unused square footage from the 1996 zoning agreement all over the place. That's not neccesarily bad, it could turn out great.

"Net change: no added acres, square footage of development or hotel rooms proposed; would shift already approved
development across Disney-owned land"

As stated above, there will be no changes in the acreage or square footage of development, it only shifts what is already approved to all areas of the Resort. So that means the caps in-place remain in-place, it doesn't change it. So that means they can't just build out 1M Sqft of new retail, as they are still bound by the caps from the 1996 agreement.

Yes, I know. I've known that since the first time I read through all the planning documents a week ago. Those planning documents for DisneylandForward are not exactly a saucy read like Valley Of the Dolls, but it's fairly straightforward and is easy to understand. And I understand exactly what DisneylandForward does, and what it doesn't.

You were the one who asserted that there would be $600 Million given by Disney to Anaheim for citywide purposes, when there will only be $133 Million given to Anaheim for five specific projects outlined above.

And that $5 Million "penalty" Disney will pay to Anaheim when they don't quite hit $2.5 Billion in construction costs 10 years from now? That's a good, old-fashioned political kickback to city hall. It should be illegal, as we all know what they're doing, but since they are bold enough to put the kickback right into the planning documents there's not much anyone can do. Keep that bar tab at The Ranch going until at least 2036!