Epcot Center/Buena Vista Drive Interchange Project

[Lord_Vader]

Or if you don't ally with either one and recognize that "global climate change" has been a political football of zero consequence that both parties have kicked around for decades as a way to get their respective bases fired up.

Wouldn't that be the majority of us?

And... back to our regularly scheduled 10-lane highway vs. mass transit throwdown!

 

[MGMBoy]

And... back to our regularly scheduled 10-lane highway vs. mass transit throwdown!

Agreed! No one has come back with pros or cons of my proposed train hub system!

 

[MichWolv]

Or if you don't ally with either one and recognize that "global climate change" has been a political football of zero consequence that both parties have kicked around for decades as a way to get their respective bases fired up.

The political debate ought to be about what, if anything, to do about it, as science has already shown that it exists.

 

[Otterhead]

Wouldn't that be the majority of us?

I don't belong to any political party. I just know facts & science. Don't give a hoot about any politics or "political base". Just science. Science isn't political. As Neil deGrasse Tyson says, "The great thing about science is that it's true whether you believe in it or not."

 

[Lord_Vader]

Agreed! No one has come back with pros or cons of my proposed train hub system!

I am just an Network Architect not a traffic engineer but since you asked and only off the top of my head:

A single transportation hub would be great in concept except each train route would have to be a loop or you are limited to a single train which isn't even enough to handle the MK. There would need to be enough trains to make stops every 5 minutes or so, otherwise people start complaining about 1/2 hour waits (even if they are 10 minutes.)

The size of road feeding a hub of that size would be huge or require dedicated bus infrastructure to allow the volume of buses coming and going.

Accessibility loading process is already painful and slow, this solution would make it much more difficult for families like mine. If it becomes too difficult guests will stop using the transportation system and drive themselves more than they do today which creates more problems for the roads & parking lots.

There is already a transportation center between MK & EC, if you are only adding three more rail routes, add them from the existing center that is attached to the worlds largest parking lot that is expanding soon once RPE closes.

What is the backup when a rail line goes down? This causes a massive issue at MK when the resort line is down, we couldn't even get to the Poly by way of monorail a while back b/c the friendship boats do not accommodate wheelchair bound guests.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Would you, for the love of God, please stop saying "10 lane highways" and "city buses" like you're describing the drive from LAX to the Staples Center? Traffic is what it is. Adding lanes will make it less congested. I can't see how you're spinning that into a bad thing.

Adding lanes do not reduce congestion. This has been known for about half a century.

 

[PhotoDave219]

I am absolutely stunned that anyone is applauding the implementation of 10 lane highways and more city busses as Disney's magical future.

This is insane.

We still have the model of EPCOT to drool over, right?

 

[lazyboy97o]

We still have the model of EPCOT to drool over, right?

The hacked up, broken model of Progress City along the WEDway PeopleMover route?

 

[MGMBoy]

I am just an Network Architect not a traffic engineer but since you asked and only off the top of my head:

A single transportation hub would be great in concept except each train route would have to be a loop or you are limited to a single train which isn't even enough to handle the MK. There would need to be enough trains to make stops every 5 minutes or so, otherwise people start complaining about 1/2 hour waits (even if they are 10 minutes.)

The size of road feeding a hub of that size would be huge or require dedicated bus infrastructure to allow the volume of buses coming and going.

Accessibility loading process is already painful and slow, this solution would make it much more difficult for families like mine. If it becomes too difficult guests will stop using the transportation system and drive themselves more than they do today which creates more problems for the roads & parking lots.

There is already a transportation center between MK & EC, if you are only adding three more rail routes, add them from the existing center that is attached to the worlds largest parking lot that is expanding soon once RPE closes.

What is the backup when a rail line goes down? This causes a massive issue at MK when the resort line is down, we couldn't even get to the Poly by way of monorail a while back b/c the friendship boats do not accommodate wheelchair bound guests.

That's the kind of conversation I was looking for. I'm envisioning one track each direction with a breakout on each end (maybe 4-5 platforms so multiple trains can load/unload at once before making the return trip). I am actually not thinking that any buses would utilize the Hub. Buses would only run as shuttles between the parks and their closest resorts (DAKL, All Stars & Blizzard Beach for DAK, Wilderness Lodge & Fort Wilderness for MK, Swan/Dolphin/Yacht/Beach/Boardwalk for Studios & Typhoon Lagoon, Port Orleans, OKW & Saratoga for Springs). It would be solely rail at that location. That being said, there would be a few bus loops just in case a line went down. That way they could mobilize a fleet of buses to shuttle until the trains are back up. As for the location, I am thinking that would be the best option to maximize efficiency. As for accessibility, the trains Portland uses are low floor and have ramps that take about 3-5 seconds to extend out, the guest rolls onto the train and the ramp retracts as the doors close. The biggest benefit I could see in terms of the buses is they could maximize the effectiveness because they are only going between two fixed points (resort and single park) so they could easily staff the lines based on occupancy of a resort and, by keeping the routes short, you could handle the majority of the routes with 3-4 buses tops and still have less than 5 minutes of wait time.

Obviously it isn't going to happen but it is kind of fun to scheme. :-D

 

[PhotoDave219]

I am just an Network Architect not a traffic engineer but since you asked and only off the top of my head:

A single transportation hub would be great in concept except each train route would have to be a loop or you are limited to a single train which isn't even enough to handle the MK. There would need to be enough trains to make stops every 5 minutes or so, otherwise people start complaining about 1/2 hour waits (even if they are 10 minutes.)

The size of road feeding a hub of that size would be huge or require dedicated bus infrastructure to allow the volume of buses coming and going.

Accessibility loading process is already painful and slow, this solution would make it much more difficult for families like mine. If it becomes too difficult guests will stop using the transportation system and drive themselves more than they do today which creates more problems for the roads & parking lots.

There is already a transportation center between MK & EC, if you are only adding three more rail routes, add them from the existing center that is attached to the worlds largest parking lot that is expanding soon once RPE closes.

What is the backup when a rail line goes down? This causes a massive issue at MK when the resort line is down, we couldn't even get to the Poly by way of monorail a while back b/c the friendship boats do not accommodate wheelchair bound guests.

I was just suggesting light rail to augment buses, not replace. It could be small, just down BVD, World Drive and Epcot Center drive. Doesn't need to be a huge system. Just an additional mode of transit to run as streetcars.

Like if you had one Line that ran down BVD from DAK lodge to DTD. A second line that ran down World Drive From MK to DHS.

Doesn't need to be a grand scale, just an additional way of moving guests.

 

[Otterhead]

I was just suggesting light rail to augment buses, not replace. It could be small, just down BVD, World Drive and Epcot Center drive. Doesn't need to be a huge system. Just an additional mode of transit to run as streetcars.

Like if you had one Line that ran down BVD from DAK lodge to DTD. A second line that ran down World Drive From MK to DHS.

Doesn't need to be a grand scale, just an additional way of moving guests.

I fantasize about this every time I go there now. Yes, please.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Adding lanes do not reduce congestion. This has been known for about half a century.

How do you figure? Congestion = Vehicles / Space. Growing the denominator while holding the numerator constant means the ratio decreases.

 

[lazyboy97o]

How do you figure? Congestion = Vehicles / Space. Growing the denominator while holding the numerator constant means the ratio decreases.

The additional lanes attract additional vehicles. People changing lanes also delays traffic and more lanes means more changes.

 

[Otterhead]

The additional lanes attract additional vehicles.

Wait, just so I'm clear, the argument against wider roads is that they'll allow more cars to use them?

 

[PhotoDave219]

How do you figure? Congestion = Vehicles / Space. Growing the denominator while holding the numerator constant means the ratio decreases.

I'm friends with a traffic engineer here in the DC area.

The minute you open a road that was widened, the lane capacity is filled up within days of it opening.

I don't see widening as a viable answer. More modes of transit seem to be a better solution IMO.

 

[Master Yoda]

How do you figure? Congestion = Vehicles / Space. Growing the denominator while holding the numerator constant means the ratio decreases.

Wait, just so I'm clear, the argument against wider roads is that they'll allow more cars to use them?

Here is an interesting article on the subject.

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Traffic/story?id=469096&page=1

What it seems to break down to is there are a number psychological X factors that have to be considered when designing highways. While it makes perfectly logical sense that more lanes equals greater capacity, us stupid humans tend to mess it up.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Wait, just so I'm clear, the argument against wider roads is that they'll allow more cars to use them?

The argument is that they do not reduce congestion. That is the big selling point and it is a lie. Then there are the issues of there being more vehicles.

 

[CDavid]

Why is point to point stupid? Do you prefer waiting in a second line at some hub somewhere after you've already waited in a first line at a park somewhere? I'd personally rather just wait in the one.

Don't forget the joy of waiting for bus driver shift changes and ECV/wheelechair arrival and egress at every transfer point.

There is no reason you cannot design a rail based system (light-rail, monorail, etc.) at a reasonable construction cost which operates on a point-to-point basis. It would be more efficient than a "hub & spoke" layout, but more importantly, it has long been demonstrated that people do not like to change trains (or buses or airplanes), even between modes. Passengers want a one-seat ride from origin to destination.

Rail does not require hubs any more than buses do.

Not everything needs to be or can be magical. If you have to pee in Adventureland, you're going to use a white porcelain urinal very similar to what you'll find in the Orlando International Airport. When you park your car at Epcot, you'll likely find black asphalt with white painted spaces similar to the Walmart on 192. The rolling steel cages used to transfer your luggage from DME to your room kind of look like... rolling steel cages. The dumpsters behind Wilderness Lodge look eerily similar to this dumpster I saw one time at a McDonald's.

Infrastructure isn't sexy, nor does it need to be. It needs to be safe, clean, and reasonably efficient.

Infrastructure does matter, however, when it is "on-stage" or otherwise part of the "show", which by definition would include transportation within Walt Disney World. The dumpsters aren't placed out in plain view (doesn't mean you can't ever catch sight of one, of course); When trash receptacles have been on-stage, such as trash cans in the parks, they have (generally) been themed or at least distinctively presented. There are whole threads around here devoted to well themed restrooms, while even parking lots are at least landscaped - no plain, ugly asphalt jungles. Point is, the presentation of infrastructure within a resort district does indeed matter.

While I would absolutely applaud it, you do know that first off, people aren't going to get out of their cars. Ever. We see on these boards all the time that even people staying at a WDW resort, will still drive to MK and have to take the boat or monorail, even though the bus would get them a lot closer. Not because they like the boat or monorail, but because they insist on driving, and think it's the best way to go. Second, Disney is NEVER going to spend that kind of money at WDW. What are you thinking??

The one way to get more people out of their cars and into mass transit is to make the transit option more convenient than driving. We all know the drawbacks and delays inherent in Disney bus transportation - they aren't more convenient, and thus people drive.

I don't belong to any political party. I just know facts & science. Don't give a hoot about any politics or "political base". Just science. Science isn't political. As Neil deGrasse Tyson says, "The great thing about science is that it's true whether you believe in it or not."

Science is hardly always true, unless you believe that the Earth has aged 2 billion years in roughly the same amount of time that Walt Disney World has existed. Science is always developing and knowledge expanding, and what was once thought to be true is revealed to be incorrect. Believing in science (sometimes to avoid belief in something else) doesn't make it true any more than believing in the tooth fairy makes her real.

Wait, just so I'm clear, the argument against wider roads is that they'll allow more cars to use them?

Expanded road capacity is not necessarily the same thing as reduced congestion. @lazyboy97o is correct; Studies have shown that roads tend to reach capacity soon after they're expanded. You cannot solve transportation issues solely by building more lanes/roads. There are limits to how much you can do, and literally how wide you want (or are able) to build a highway. Hence, the push for greater rail-based options across the nation (but they don't come cheap).

Any kind of rail lacks the number one attribute of buses; flexibility. In other words, rail needs RAILS. You can pick any "Point A" and "Point B" on a map and a bus can get from one to the other on existing roadways. Rail needs stations and tracks to get from Point A to Point B. So while a bus can get you to an infinite number of destinations, a train can only carry you on a predetermined line with some stops along the way.

Rails are actually the modes greatest asset, not a liability (dedicated right-of-way, instead of mixed with congested road traffic).

But those examples aren't applicable to Walt Disney World. A traditional mass transit system operates on a commuter schedule with heavy volume coming from the suburbs into the downtown area (pretty much) all at once and then leaving the downtown area back out to the suburbs (pretty much) all at once. There is no "high load fixed route traffic" at WDW because people are coming and going from every which way at all times of day. That's why the monorail loop works as a circle. It's only five stops and they're fairly close together so the circle works. But a giant round trip loop connecting every park and resort at WDW would take far too long, and a hub-and-spoke model wouldn't work either because there are simply too many spokes.

A loop would be silly and a hub - again - far less efficient than just running the trains (of whatever type) directly to the destination. Fortunately, Walt Disney World has a relatively limited number of origins (resorts) and destinations (parks and Disney Springs) as opposed to literally thousands for a major city (bus stops every couple blocks, for instance, on miles of route). Things are far more manageable.

Agreed. If it was a system of transfer after transfer than it wouldn't be easier. I should have specified that more direct links on transportation that isn't busses would improve guest satisfaction. The realty is, any improvement to the transportation system would improve guest satisfaction.

And to a much greater degree, arguably, than the entire NGE debacle. Perhaps for less cost, too, depending on whose numbers you use.

 

[Otterhead]

Believing in science (sometimes to avoid belief in something else) doesn't make it true any more than believing in the tooth fairy makes her real.

I'll put it this way. If 99% of the scientists in the world believe that something is true, and have extensive data and research compiled over decades to support that belief, I'm way more likely to put my trust in their belief than that of the 1% who simply say "everyone else is lying". In that sense, belief in facts is well placed.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I'm friends with a traffic engineer here in the DC area.

The minute you open a road that was widened, the lane capacity is filled up within days of it opening.

I don't see widening as a viable answer. More modes of transit seem to be a better solution IMO.

The big difference there is that Walt Disney World is not Washington, DC. In a real city, people are making commuting decisions based on traffic tolerance. Walt Disney World isn't going to have 20% more bus route or 20% more guests just because the roads are 20% wider.