Is a fifth gate even possible?

[The Empress Lilly]

A bus driver told me that a cast member was told by another bus driver, that they were skipping the 5th gate and going right to the 6th.

He was just counting parks in Universal style.

 

[justintheharris]

There's a lot of threads on the possibility of a fifth gate and the answer is always no.

I didn’t mean a “is it on the table now?” I meant “if Disney even wanted to construct one, could they?”

 

[Master Yoda]

I didn’t mean a “is it on the table now?” I meant “if Disney even wanted to construct one, could they?”

Yes. If I remember correctly, the property as is could physically fit around 7 +/- theme parks.

 

[justintheharris]

Yes. If I remember correctly, the property as is could physically fit around 7 +/- theme parks.

As I addressed in my original post, can it really? Where would these seven theme parks go? Much of the land is unsuitable for a theme park either due to the current limitations of technology and conservation purposes. The few patches of land I see on the map posted in this thread would require significant redoing of the infrastructure which I'm sure is possible but an extra pain in the butt on top of constructing everything else.

 

[justintheharris]

Do they have the space absolutely. Will they do it, probably not. I think the plan is to do what they are doing and add to each of the 4 existing parks. This is the cheapest way to do it. Think of all the infrastructure needed for a new gate; power, water, sewer, drainage, parking, to name a few. By adding to the existing parks all the infrastructure is already in place.

But if I were to dream of a fifth gate, it would be a villains park, this would be a roller coaster park, use off the shelf coasters and let Disney do what they do best Theme the heck out of them! This gives the older kids in the family a really cool and exciting park to enjoy.

Did you read my original post? I'm under the impression the majority of people who posted on this thread didn't read what I wrote.

 

[justintheharris]

You may have meant it as a joke, but if look back to the openings of the WDW parks that number is about right. I believe the only land in MK to open with more then one


Here is the land suitability map, red is land suitable for construction, light green is marginally suitable and dark green is unsuitable. Most of the dark green is also considered conservation land. Technically Disney can build on any of it, but the less suitable the land the harder it becomes from both a regulatory standpoint and the practical issues of building on it. Even if you limit it to the red there are still a couple good chunks available, including the light green opens up more options.

Thank you for the map! You might be the only person so far who I believe read my original post.

 

[Master Yoda]

As I addressed in my original post, can it really? Where would these seven theme parks go? Much of the land is unsuitable for a theme park either due to the current limitations of technology and conservation purposes. The few patches of land I see on the map posted in this thread would require significant redoing of the infrastructure which I'm sure is possible but an extra pain in the butt on top of constructing everything else.

If you don't look at parking and just look at the parks themselves, you can it 2 MK sized parks just west of MK along with a larger park south west of MK on the other side of 429. That gets you to 7 on land that is relatively easy to build on.

As to "unsuitable land"... There really is no such thing. If they can build an airport over the ocean, you can build a theme park over even the deepest swamp, it just costs a heap to do it.

As to the legal designation of wetlands, there are ways around that as well.

I am not saying they will do this, but it is physically possible.

 

[justintheharris]

If you don't look at parking and just look at the parks themselves, you can it 2 MK sized parks just west of MK along with a larger park south west of MK on the other side of 429. That gets you to 7 on land that is relatively easy to build on.

As to "unsuitable land"... There really is no such thing. If they can build an airport over the ocean, you can build a theme park over even the deepest swamp, it just costs a heap to do it.

As to the legal designation of wetlands, there are ways around that as well.

I am not saying they will do this, but it is physically possible.

I guess maybe it's just me but I consider the extremely unlikely to be practically impossible but I guess you're technically right.

 

[ppete1975]

You may have meant it as a joke, but if look back to the openings of the WDW parks that number is about right. I believe the only land in MK to open with more then one


Here is the land suitability map, red is land suitable for construction, light green is marginally suitable and dark green is unsuitable. Most of the dark green is also considered conservation land. Technically Disney can build on any of it, but the less suitable the land the harder it becomes from both a regulatory standpoint and the practical issues of building on it. Even if you limit it to the red there are still a couple good chunks available, including the light green opens up more options.

ive always wondered how suitable the land where magic kingdom was built was... I don't think it was great land just cheap and a state they wanted to build in, and epcot well its sinkholapoolaza, .. its swampland after all

 

[Shouldigo12]

Well so far, Disney has it defined as 2 lol.

Woops. I meant to put park haha. My bad.

 

[LUVofDIS]

Can it be done... Hmph, Disney is pure magic and with that everything is possible and possible is everything.

 

[MisterPenguin]

I guess maybe it's just me but I consider the extremely unlikely to be practically impossible but I guess you're technically right.

Just look on the suitability map for the land in between DHS and Caribbean Beach, it is dark green. On other maps it is listed as being in a flood plain and marked for preservation.

It's now all available for development, and it is being developed with an expanded parking lot, new DHS entrance, and the Star Wars Resort. How? WDW bought land elsewhere in the region (much larger than the land they're going to develop) and set it aside for preservation. By doing that, the got permission to develop that preservation offset. And because it's in a flood plain, they bring in metric tons of sand to build it up.

This just proves they can build anywhere with enough costs being outlayed with preservation offsets and building up the swamp to make it happen.

Of course, it's easier to build in those areas that aren't in the flood plain or set aside for preservation or 'green space' recreation (like golf courses).

For a look at the maps: https://forums.wdwmagic.com/threads/maps-of-the-reedy-creek-2010-2020-plan.935133/

 

[justintheharris]

Just look on the suitability map for the land in between DHS and Caribbean Beach, it is dark green. On other maps it is listed as being in a flood plain and marked for preservation.

It's now all available for development, and it is being developed with an expanded parking lot, new DHS entrance, and the Star Wars Resort. How? WDW bought land elsewhere in the region (much larger than the land they're going to develop) and set it aside for preservation. By doing that, the got permission to develop that preservation offset. And because it's in a flood plain, they bring in metric tons of sand to build it up.

This just proves they can build anywhere with enough costs being outlayed with preservation offsets and building up the swamp to make it happen.

Of course, it's easier to build in those areas that aren't in the flood plain or set aside for preservation or 'green space' recreation (like golf courses).

For a look at the maps: https://forums.wdwmagic.com/threads/maps-of-the-reedy-creek-2010-2020-plan.935133/

Thank you! You're the best!

 

[atjimfromdisney]

I look at it this way: The present ticket buyer is supporting 4 parks. Disney's bread & butter is people who come in for a multi-day stay so they can go to all the parks or multiple parks during a stay. Right now, doing all the parks for a typical vacation can be a stretch. I think Disney's run the numbers and seen a diminishing return; that basically a 5th park would not result in enough of a stay increase for families to make the budget increase support a 5th gate. Sure, they get tourists who stay 2 weeks or more, but I think they've run the numbers, see that the average stay is X number of days, that to support a 5th gate they'd have to increase that to X + ? days and also increase the multi-day passes to support a 5th gate, and they don't see the public willing to do that. Yet.

This.

 

[Damon7777]

At least 5, including one thrill ride, one spinner, one show, one dark, and one kiddie ride.

You responded to how many attractions should be in a first built land.

And you think a "spinner" is the right answer.
So a park with 5 lands gets 5 of those.......I hope you are not one of the Disney decision makers on park planning.

 

[Shouldigo12]

An Imagineer has told me, on multiple occasions, that there is a plan for a fifth gate filled with classic attractions. I say multiple occasions, because I too am always doubtful of Disney plans positively becoming reality. There are always many more plans discussed than ever come to pass. But he sounded pretty sure of this one. Classic attractions meaning those that fans got very attached to, then for whatever reason, Disney replaced them with "something better" (or just something else). At first this idea makes so much sense to me based on fan sites like this and the multitude of others, which function partly as gathering places for the chorus of pining for all the great rides of days gone by. On second and third consideration, it doesn't connect in my brain with the current emphasis on new, new, new. Out goes the Maelstrom, in with Frozen. Out goes a tired old Ellen DeGeneres educational ride, in with Guardians of the Galaxy IP. Old DHS backlot area out, new Star Wars IP/Toy Story IP in. So, the rides that were taken out of the areas I just mentioned, would anyone believe the Disney of today would resurrect any of those? This is where MY imagination fails me, but some here might help me list the great rides of the past which would merit resurrection in a Classic Disney Park, if it were to get serious money behind it.

Which rides? There was no exhaustive list. Carousel of Progress was one mentioned, if I recall correctly (I think they desperately want to move that one so Tomorrowland can be revitalized), Mr. Toad's Wild Ride, Snow White, etc. This was around the time just before and just after The Great Movie Ride was taken out, and both times I asked him about that one, he didn't know. Theming? I don't know if it's gotten to that point, yet.

So, for what it's worth, there is discussion of a plan, it has to do with a kind of greatest hits of rides that don't exist at WDW anymore (I don't know if it would extend to rides taken out of other parks, or if it would duplicate rides that still do exist elsewhere). And that's from an Imagineer who has worked for WDW 20+ years, and is now knee-deep in SW:GE and GotG.

So, if this were to actually survive the discussion phase, which rides would you want to appear in a fifth gate park like this?

I'm with you. I can't really see Disney putting all of that time and resources into building a fifth gate just to fill it with attractions they decided they didn't want in the other parks. I mean it would be nice, I know some of the rides you mentioned were loved and people would be thrilled to get to ride them again, but it doesn't make much sense from a business point of view.

 

[justintheharris]

An Imagineer has told me, on multiple occasions, that there is a plan for a fifth gate filled with classic attractions. I say multiple occasions, because I too am always doubtful of Disney plans positively becoming reality. There are always many more plans discussed than ever come to pass. But he sounded pretty sure of this one. Classic attractions meaning those that fans got very attached to, then for whatever reason, Disney replaced them with "something better" (or just something else). At first this idea makes so much sense to me based on fan sites like this and the multitude of others, which function partly as gathering places for the chorus of pining for all the great rides of days gone by. On second and third consideration, it doesn't connect in my brain with the current emphasis on new, new, new. Out goes the Maelstrom, in with Frozen. Out goes a tired old Ellen DeGeneres educational ride, in with Guardians of the Galaxy IP. Old DHS backlot area out, new Star Wars IP/Toy Story IP in. So, the rides that were taken out of the areas I just mentioned, would anyone believe the Disney of today would resurrect any of those? This is where MY imagination fails me, but some here might help me list the great rides of the past which would merit resurrection in a Classic Disney Park, if it were to get serious money behind it.

Which rides? There was no exhaustive list. Carousel of Progress was one mentioned, if I recall correctly (I think they desperately want to move that one so Tomorrowland can be revitalized), Mr. Toad's Wild Ride, Snow White, etc. This was around the time just before and just after The Great Movie Ride was taken out, and both times I asked him about that one, he didn't know. Theming? I don't know if it's gotten to that point, yet.

So, for what it's worth, there is discussion of a plan, it has to do with a kind of greatest hits of rides that don't exist at WDW anymore (I don't know if it would extend to rides taken out of other parks, or if it would duplicate rides that still do exist elsewhere). And that's from an Imagineer who has worked for WDW 20+ years, and is now knee-deep in SW:GE and GotG.

So, if this were to actually survive the discussion phase, which rides would you want to appear in a fifth gate park like this?

And I’ve met someone who worked on developing Shanghai Disneyland and typically speaking, unless you are directly involved in a specific project, you don’t know what’s going on elsewhere. If he’s “knee-deep” in Galaxy’s Edge and Guardians of the Galaxy, he probably doesn’t know anything related to a fifth gate. More importantly, such a park will never exist as I stated in my original post. You’re telling me disney finds it beneficial to build the EXACT same showbuilding as Frozen Ever After just so they can put in Maelstrom? Which is an inferior attraction in Disney’s eyes? Or the Universe of Energy which nobody went into to begin with? Get real! And just as in the human world, all attractions are the same in the graveyard. Stitch’s Great Escape is on the same level as the Great Movie Ride from the perspective of the imagineers. And in regards to your question at the end, that’s wholly irrelevant to the discussion on this thread. This thread isn’t about what someone wants to see in a fifth park. It’s about whether Disney is even capable of building one in a meaningful sense at this point.

 

[TwilightZone]

An Imagineer has told me, on multiple occasions, that there is a plan for a fifth gate filled with classic attractions. I say multiple occasions, because I too am always doubtful of Disney plans positively becoming reality. There are always many more plans discussed than ever come to pass. But he sounded pretty sure of this one. Classic attractions meaning those that fans got very attached to, then for whatever reason, Disney replaced them with "something better" (or just something else). At first this idea makes so much sense to me based on fan sites like this and the multitude of others, which function partly as gathering places for the chorus of pining for all the great rides of days gone by. On second and third consideration, it doesn't connect in my brain with the current emphasis on new, new, new. Out goes the Maelstrom, in with Frozen. Out goes a tired old Ellen DeGeneres educational ride, in with Guardians of the Galaxy IP. Old DHS backlot area out, new Star Wars IP/Toy Story IP in. So, the rides that were taken out of the areas I just mentioned, would anyone believe the Disney of today would resurrect any of those? This is where MY imagination fails me, but some here might help me list the great rides of the past which would merit resurrection in a Classic Disney Park, if it were to get serious money behind it.

Which rides? There was no exhaustive list. Carousel of Progress was one mentioned, if I recall correctly (I think they desperately want to move that one so Tomorrowland can be revitalized), Mr. Toad's Wild Ride, Snow White, etc. This was around the time just before and just after The Great Movie Ride was taken out, and both times I asked him about that one, he didn't know. Theming? I don't know if it's gotten to that point, yet.

So, for what it's worth, there is discussion of a plan, it has to do with a kind of greatest hits of rides that don't exist at WDW anymore (I don't know if it would extend to rides taken out of other parks, or if it would duplicate rides that still do exist elsewhere). And that's from an Imagineer who has worked for WDW 20+ years, and is now knee-deep in SW:GE and GotG.

So, if this were to actually survive the discussion phase, which rides would you want to appear in a fifth gate park like this?

Let's say your imagineer friend is right. here are the only attractions I can imagine disney bringing back due to hints and merch.
1. Journey into Imagination
2. Alien encounter
while it would be nice to have both back, it's not worth creating an entire theme park just for 2, or a handful of rides.

 

[Willmark]

A bus driver told me that a cast member was told by another bus driver, that they were skipping the 5th gate and going right to the 6th.

“Gates?” Where were going we don’t need “gates”.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

I don’t believe your imagineer friend.

I'll second that.

An Imagineer has told me, on multiple occasions, that there is a plan for a fifth gate filled with classic attractions.

There are a few very basic issues/flaws with this conceptually. Here are a couple:

1. Let's say you were to resurrect these rides. So. You going to use current technology? Or you gonna use the older outdated technology that probably attributed to the removal of these rides in the first place? Cause if you're going to use newer technology then you're not bringing back an old ride. You're re-imagining one and you can't stay true to the original version. I'd have no nostalgia over seeing a screen Toad Ride. On the other hand, if you recreate it based on older technology, you're dated out of the gate. What's the staying power? My guess....not long.

2. This would only play to nostalgia. And as with anything nostalgic - if you were to experience these rides again - they wouldn't live up to the nostalgia (you can't go home again). Sure I'd visit a few times as I'm sure others would but Nostalgia World would get stale very, very quick. Probably to the point of replacing these rides all over again. Think about it. How many times can you go see If You Had Wings in 2018? - Once, maybe twice......and I'm good for another 20.