Is a fifth gate even possible?

[spock8113]

Yadda, yadda, yadda but I'll put my suggestion up until someone listens or they banish me to Witch Mountain (I don't either).
RetroDisney®-all the removed classic rides in one park. Horizons, Ellen's EA, Delta Dream Flight, World of Motion the ORIGINAL Figmund.
Gives Disney a place to keep rides they remove to update.
Of course they'd hafta upgrade their treatment plant, Mouse has gotta flush!

 

[TraderSam]

When it comes to location, everybody seems to love to tout the fact that "Disney has only used 1/3 of its space" or something along those lines and while that may be true, much of the property owned by Disney isn't entirely suitable for another theme park to be built upon it. It's very difficult to find a large contiguous space for Disney to build a fifth gate. So, where would it be? Does anyone on the forum have knowledge on the suitability of the land? Could anyone point one out on a property map? I believe I've seen one before and there appeared to be a patch of land west of the Magic Kingdom but to build upon that would likely require a massive restructuring of the infrastructure around the Polynesian, Grand Floridian and Magic Kingdom parking lot area.

They hit the water table almost immediately when breaking ground for Magic Kingdom, hence the Seven Seas Lagoon. If Dubai can have manmade islands, wetlands should pose much less of a problem for WDI.

That being said, if I were to guess at a fifth gate, it would be a park of nothing but real thrill rides. Disney has its coasters and they're fun, but they still don't serve the demographic of the real thrill seekers. Seeing as they're spending significant cash to spread IP across the existing parks (Marvel, Star Wars, etc.), I'd put my money on a park of thrill rides.

 

[Tim Lohr]

On the Land Suitability map square #13 seems like the most logical place to build a 5th gate, because it's right on the Epcot Monorail line and could probably also use the MK parking that's just to the west of it, plus there is a smaller plot of land east of, it and south of the Fort Wilderness Campground, that could be home to a resort connected to that park. Originally square #13 was the STOL Airport and they still use that area to store construction equipment (bulldozers ect) and prep different projects, I think the new spires that were added to the MK's expanded hub were either stored or assembled back there.

Maybe in 20 years they'll "need" a 5th park, I think they should finish Epcot, AK, and the Studios first, and as far a as "theme" goes? ...they really don't seem all that concerned with keeping the "themes" of the parks consistent anymore... Honestly I think the Magic Kingdom works so well because it's 5 or more different themed lands in one, and that's what they seem to slowly be turning the Studios into

 

[SteamboatJoe]

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

In addition, I-4 and the growth projections for sleepy Orlando also helped. Although, they were relatively close to picking Lakeland. Project Future by Chad Denver Emerson is a short read for anyone interested in how the WDW site was selected and acquired. However, it's a little dry if you aren't familiar with or interested in site selection analysis, real estate transactions, civil engineering, or the politics of setting up the more mundane aspects of local governing authorities. I'd love to get my hands on some the actual site selection studies that were done.

 

[World_Showcase_Lover007]

There is land, even if golf courses and old hotels have to be demolished. But I don’t think we’ve reached that point yet. Disney has historically been great at sandwiching parks and hotels right next to each other and making them feel worlds apart.

Even if land is “unsuitable”, it can still be done if Disney puts money and creative genius into it. It just comes down to their willingness to get it done.

 

[The Pho]

I think the land for use has been settled. That was a great map posted earlier. They have plenty of options and could fix road infrastructure to accommodate.

As for it ever happening, it would certainly be way down the line.
For theme, there are lots of options. A villains park has been spoken of for years, as has the resurrection park, as well as a thrill park (which would be a great idea since Orlando has no thrill parks, just Busch Gardens in Tampa. Disney and Universal have the same number of high thrill coasters, 2). But ultimately, with current Disney I wouldn't even expect a real heavy theme for the park. The clear path they are on right now shows that the company isn't interested in themed parks, just collections of themed lands. Animal Kingdom is the only one with a consistent theme still (and that could be argued post Pandora and is by many people).

And to me Disney Quest was the fifth gate before it was abandoned.

 

[Walt Disney1955]

It is really hard to say. Right now I think the biggest problem they have is the crowds. They can always add more attractions to spread things out. As others have said, the other parks can always get tuned up more. I really don't know what the other park would entail. The villains idea and the extinct rides would be nice but what is the theme of the park? What is its name? How can you put Toad and Great Movie Ride and 20,000 leagues in the same land? So I think there has to be more than this. The villains/extinct rides would only fill about half a park. Can anyone think of more than 10 rides from this? I can't.

 

[danheaton]

I have mixed feelings about a 5th gate. Sure, I'd be super excited for it. But would Disney really shore out the capital investment to make a complete park? I know this was under Eisner, but examples like the WDS in Paris and DCA opened without enough attractions. The amount of money and effort to build an entirely new park would be astronomical. It would likely take furious competition from Universal to make that happen (even more than now). In the meantime, all four parks have room to grow and need more capacity given the demand. I'd like to see four parks that have more than we could possibly do in place before a 5th is added.

I will give a caveat that if the classic attractions park ever was a real thing, I'd toss aside everything I just said and say BUILD IT NOW!

 

[admiralDax]

I have seen early property maps that show a proposed gate on the west side of World Drive, just opposite Epcot. On those maps, Epcot Center Drive was extended to the proposed (now a reality) 429 extension and the new gate was just south of that. The last map I saw of this ilk had additional proposals for a fully connected multi-resort area between AK and the 5th gate, similar to the multi-resort area between Epcot and HS. This is just my opinion and an old one at that!

 

[dieboy]

Most of what is being built will be complete by the 50th anniversary. *most.

The big announcement for the 50th could be a 5th gate? I mean they could announce it, obviously it'd be ten years out or more.

 

[MileZXO]

I think we will see the marvel contract with UNI sorted first before we see a 5th park so that DHS has a marvel land built up.

 

[justintheharris]

On the Land Suitability map square #13 seems like the most logical place to build a 5th gate, because it's right on the Epcot Monorail line and could probably also use the MK parking that's just to the west of it, plus there is a smaller plot of land east of, it and south of the Fort Wilderness Campground, that could be home to a resort connected to that park. Originally square #13 was the STOL Airport and they still use that area to store construction equipment (bulldozers ect) and prep different projects, I think the new spires that were added to the MK's expanded hub were either stored or assembled back there.

Maybe in 20 years they'll "need" a 5th park, I think they should finish Epcot, AK, and the Studios first, and as far a as "theme" goes? ...they really don't seem all that concerned with keeping the "themes" of the parks consistent anymore... Honestly I think the Magic Kingdom works so well because it's 5 or more different themed lands in one, and that's what they seem to slowly be turning the Studios into
View attachment 315370

I agree with the exception of using Magic Kingdom's parking lot. That would not fly.

 

[Tom P.]

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.

Hey, it worked for Microsoft with Windows 10...

 

[thomas998]

The blank slate is lost forever, this much is true. One does not simply bullldoze a few trees anymore. WDW did paint itself in a corner with its urban sprawl under Eisner, carelessly squandering it's unique advantage and identity.

But property can be bought and sold. And Universal shows what you can do with small footprints and real estate aquisitions. Transportation and logistics can be solved to. Cities do it every day.


There are a gazillion more themes and attractions begging to be a theme park. Plus an infinite more that don't follow the standard gated park with rides formula.

Given Disney was willing to pony up to purchase a strip of hotels near Disneyland so they could tear them down for their own expansions, there is certainly that option available to Disney in Orlando... And unfortunately that is probably the only way Disney World could expand because the incredibly constraining environmental laws that are in effect today that weren't when WDW was created make filling in swamp land an insanely costly and near impossible thing to do. Unfortunately while DL was able to find some pretty run down hotels where they needed land, you are hard pressed to find run down hotels butted up against WDW properties, the run down hotels that wouldn't be cost prohibitive to buy and bulldoze are way off from WDW and wouldn't give you a good space for a new park.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

No parks...they’ll never pay for the labor.

Labor and costs is everything behind the scenes.

Couple that with the average length of stay hasn’t and won’t move above 7 days...which is why dak sat far from completion for 20 years

 

[thomas998]

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.

Only problem with this map is it is based on what the Florida planning department would allow. The reality is that land that is considered suitable or marginally suitable would be considered wetland under the federal laws and those regulations become insanely constraining to anyone doing anything that would eliminate the wetlands which is what would happen if you slapped the concrete and asphalt on top of it for another Disney park. I used to work for a company that had to deal with the environmental laws and regulations when we built pipelines and while some states are very forgiving in what they will allow you to do, the feds have always been the biggest problem. I'm' sure Disney could get approval eventually but it would come at an insane price tag.

 

[danlb_2000]

Given Disney was willing to pony up to purchase a strip of hotels near Disneyland so they could tear them down for their own expansions, there is certainly that option available to Disney in Orlando... And unfortunately that is probably the only way Disney World could expand because the incredibly constraining environmental laws that are in effect today that weren't when WDW was created make filling in swamp land an insanely costly and near impossible thing to do. Unfortunately while DL was able to find some pretty run down hotels where they needed land, you are hard pressed to find run down hotels butted up against WDW properties, the run down hotels that wouldn't be cost prohibitive to buy and bulldoze are way off from WDW and wouldn't give you a good space for a new park.

Difficult but no where near impossible. Disney has already done it a few times recently.

 

[danlb_2000]

Only problem with this map is it is based on what the Florida planning department would allow. The reality is that land that is considered suitable or marginally suitable would be considered wetland under the federal laws and those regulations become insanely constraining to anyone doing anything that would eliminate the wetlands which is what would happen if you slapped the concrete and asphalt on top of it for another Disney park. I used to work for a company that had to deal with the environmental laws and regulations when we built pipelines and while some states are very forgiving in what they will allow you to do, the feds have always been the biggest problem. I'm' sure Disney could get approval eventually but it would come at an insane price tag.

The land between DHS an Victory was marked as unsuitable and was also conservation land. It was released from the conservation easement a couple years ago and has already had parking and the new entrance road built on it. Yes, there are costs to building on this land, but it's clear Disney is willing to do it.

 

[drod1985]

I agree with everybody saying there is a point of diminishing returns in regards to a fifth gate increasing length of guest stay, and that's likely why it won't happen any time soon.

Besides that, I think the fifth gate ship sailed when Galaxy's Edge, Toy Story Land and Guardians were delegated to areas in their respective parks. A fifth gate could've been for the big franchises like Star Wars, Pixar IPs, the Tron coaster, Guardians of the Galaxy, etc., but now they're all dispersed amongst the existing parks and for the most part have replaced other attractions.

 

[Tim Lohr]

I agree with the exception of using Magic Kingdom's parking lot. That would not fly.

Not the current MK lot, but they're doubling the size of the MK lot at the moment, not sure why though