Main Street U.S.A. hub redevelopment at the Magic Kingdom

[BigThunderMatt]

So what you're saying is that they should have taken longer and gotten it right? That they rushed to open it.

What they're saying is that Disney took 4 years to build a ride that had no business taking that long to build and it ended up being an uninspired mess despite the massive amount of time that it took. So clearly lengthy construction periods do not equal a quality product as many here seem to be arguing.

And not only that, but the amount of downtime it's experienced is pretty bad considering the fact that the ride is hardly anything ground breaking. Gringotts I will buy extended downtimes on, at least, as that attraction is complex enough to not expect perfection at the initial opening. But as complex as it was they still managed to complete it in less time than Disney took to make the Mine Train and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who would claim the Mine Train is the more worthwhile experience of the two.

 

[Victor Kelly]

I reserve judgement until January. It looks ok considering Disneys animated view. But, BUT, I prefer the original in any regard.

 

[note2001]

What they're saying is that Disney took 4 years to build a ride that had no business taking that long to build and it ended up being an uninspired mess despite the massive amount of time that it took. So clearly lengthy construction periods do not equal a quality product as many here seem to be arguing.

And not only that, but the amount of downtime it's experienced is pretty bad considering the fact that the ride is hardly anything ground breaking. Gringotts I will buy extended downtimes on, at least, as that attraction is complex enough to not expect perfection at the initial opening. But as complex as it was they still managed to complete it in less time than Disney took to make the Mine Train and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who would claim the Mine Train is the more worthwhile experience of the two.

I'm sorry, I may have missed it, but did someone here post the blue prints and technical specs for both Disney's Mine Train and Universal's Gringotts? I'd love to be able to compare the two projects too, because as far as I can see it's still like we're comparing apples to oranges.

 

[Gabe1]

So what you're saying is that they should have taken longer and gotten it right? That they rushed to open it.

Giggle, nice spin.

I can't say anyone in the industry would agree with you or suggest Disney rushed to get Dwarf open or if they took longer they could have gotten Dwarf to operate with less downtime. It is the mantra lately, even Dumbo is down more than it ever was at it is still just a classic spinner. The hub isn't open water and they can't even move that project along as well as Disney has moved the new dock or the Poly DVC's in open water. Parks are not the priority for contracts with incentives for quick completion dates. While eating at Cosmics I saw 2 workers on duty. Very similar to what we saw on Dwarf the first half of the rise of the mountain. It has nothing to do with quality or reliability it has everything to do with quarterly earning reports.

 

[roj2323]

Giggle, nice spin.

I can't say anyone in the industry would agree with you or suggest Disney rushed to get Dwarf open or if they took longer they could have gotten Dwarf to operate with less downtime. It is the mantra lately, even Dumbo is down more than it ever was at it is still just a classic spinner. The hub isn't open water and they can't even move that project along as well as Disney has moved the new dock or the Poly DVC's in open water. Parks are not the priority for contracts with incentives for quick completion dates. While eating at Cosmics I saw 2 workers on duty. Very similar to what we saw on Dwarf the first half of the rise of the mountain. It has nothing to do with quality or reliability it has everything to do with quarterly earning reports.

Perhaps it has something to do with the multiple Major construction projects scattered throughout property (disney springs, Avatarland, The New laundry facility, EXC.) and the Lack of qualified and approved contractors. Additionally with regards to the hub project in particular there was the issue with the job site flooding repeatedly due to the misguided attempt to use a water filled dam. If you were paying attention the job site flooded at least twice and with projects of this sort it takes time to recover from those mistakes.

 

[Gabe1]

Perhaps it has something to do with the multiple Major construction projects scattered throughout property (disney springs, Avatarland, The New laundry facility, EXC.) and the Lack of qualified and approved contractors. Additionally with regards to the hub project in particular there was the issue with the job site flooding repeatedly due to the misguided attempt to use a water filled dam. If you were paying attention the job site flooded at least twice and with projects of this sort it takes time to recover from those mistakes.

Perhaps, but I lean towards quarterly earnings for the stockholders. Not letting out contracts for large crews and overtime, slow and steady over the long haul is cheaper.

Example: How long it took to demolish the building and small area of the former Skyway and build Tangled potties? A couple years? How long it took to demolish Studio 44 and how quickly Transformers went vertical??? Both within a month. 9 months later was the Grand Opening of Transformers, but there were large crews working 24/7. It isn't a Uni vs Disney it is the type of contract parameters Disney is letting. Now the floating Disney DVC projects, those are full crew contracts and they have gone up quickly on open water. We also saw the same speed with Lion King theater, they worked also during the daylight hours with full crews.

 

[danlb_2000]

What they're saying is that Disney took 4 years to build a ride that had no business taking that long to build and it ended up being an uninspired mess despite the massive amount of time that it took. So clearly lengthy construction periods do not equal a quality product as many here seem to be arguing.

And not only that, but the amount of downtime it's experienced is pretty bad considering the fact that the ride is hardly anything ground breaking. Gringotts I will buy extended downtimes on, at least, as that attraction is complex enough to not expect perfection at the initial opening. But as complex as it was they still managed to complete it in less time than Disney took to make the Mine Train and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who would claim the Mine Train is the more worthwhile experience of the two.

Actually the mine ride took 2 years 8 months to build, still a long time, but no need to exaggerate to make it look worse.

 

[ABQ]

Actually the mine ride took 2 years 8 months to build, still a long time, but no need to exaggerate to make it look worse.

We really need a sticky post with all the time lines of the FLE items. Can't believe how often I've seen you correct people on this one. I think it's also time to post the commencement date of this hub refurb before it too gets exaggerated.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

Ok, again.. what's the excuse for every other project besides SDMC? Consider how Disney pulled off both Splash Mountain and BTMRR construction... both far greater projects in scale, both inside the park and along the boundary as SDMC was... and they were built quicker. And not in 1955 either. Shocker eh?

I have the distinct feeling (or perhaps the wildest guess in the wilderness) that Thunder was delivered on time to entice people to visit in summer of 81 and 82, instead of postponing until the opening of EPCOT. And that Dwarf was the reverse, Disney taking their time to entice people visiting phase 1 of NFL to return again this year. In effect, in 1981 a finished mine coaster functioned as a billboard, in 2012 and 13 a mine coaster construction site did.

 

[Rob562]

Thanks for explaining it. Us non-engineers don't understand things so good.

Look at the top piece of artwork in this post earlier in this thread:
http://forums.wdwmagic.com/threads/...-the-magic-kingdom.880663/page-8#post-5956178

The "steps" are the retaining walls and foundation for the faux "bridge" to the left.

-Rob

 

[danlb_2000]

Another revised permit was filed today for the hub project. The only change is the addresses of the work. What's interesting about this is it address 1400 Monorail Way (Tony's), 1375 Monorail Way (the first main street building on that side of the street), and 1359 Monorail way (don't know exactly what this is but it would be on that side of Main Street closer to the hub).

These new addresses would correspond to the area where the new bypass is going to be built. You may draw your own conclusions from this.

1400 (Tony's),1375 (MO5),1359 Monorail Way, 1200 Market Street, 3780 CO1,CO2,CO3 North World Dr - MK Hub Hardscape Refresh

 

[hpyhnt 1000]

Nice work. I'm guessing you are taking your references from what concepts Disney has released. As 'chilly' as that hub and castle look in your renderings I think they are warmed up by the mature trees both the concept and your renderings include. From what I saw in the concepts for FLE and the twigs that were mostly planted I am not holding out hope for the beautiful, tall trees the concept drawings seem to include. I doubt even the evergreens will be as mature as Disney indicates in the Hub. My fear is the Hub and Castle will have even a chillier feel after landscaping is added.

I too am curious to see just how many trees will be planted for the new hub, and how large they will be. I should note that the trees in the hub area in my rendering are all scaled to roughly 16-22 feet in height. That seemed to me to be a reasonable expectation for the size we can expect in the long term. Maybe Disney will surprise us and let them grow a bit more, but I doubt it. Unfortunately, we probably will never see trees on the scale of the 40-50 foot oaks that used to grace the hub.

Another thing to note: as important as the number of trees is, I almost feel the amount of grass/shrubs vs. flower beds will be even more important. The video from Disney, as well as some of the leaked blueprints and plans, indicate extensive flower beds with sculpted hedges. I've been bullish on this and included quite a few flowers in my rendering. If they actually follow through on that, then the area will really pop; otherwise it could be quite lackluster with large expanses of only green.

And I'm sorry about the color temperatures. For some reason the screen shots have made everything a shade or two darker than what it looked like on my computer. I wasn't anticipating that.

 

[Cesar R M]

I too am curious to see just how many trees will be planted for the new hub, and how large they will be. I should note that the trees in the hub area in my rendering are all scaled to roughly 16-22 feet in height. That seemed to me to be a reasonable expectation for the size we can expect in the long term. Maybe Disney will surprise us and let them grow a bit more, but I doubt it. Unfortunately, we probably will never see trees on the scale of the 40-50 foot oaks that used to grace the hub.

Another thing to note: as important as the number of trees is, I almost feel the amount of grass/shrubs vs. flower beds will be even more important. The video from Disney, as well as some of the leaked blueprints and plans, indicate extensive flower beds with sculpted hedges. I've been bullish on this and included quite a few flowers in my rendering. If they actually follow through on that, then the area will really pop; otherwise it could be quite lackluster with large expanses of only green.

And I'm sorry about the color temperatures. For some reason the screen shots have made everything a shade or two darker than what it looked like on my computer. I wasn't anticipating that.

id love to know too. We know that WDW executives hates both benches, seating places and trees. They want to force the customers to go to their restaurants, snack, store areas at all costs.

 

[Gabe1]

We really need a sticky post with all the time lines of the FLE items. Can't believe how often I've seen you correct people on this one. I think it's also time to post the commencement date of this hub refurb before it too gets exaggerated.

Somewhere there is a FLE timeline out there that is comical. It was heartbreaking to watch it get revised. Even Fairtale Hall the timeline kept getting pushed out. That M&G didn't open close to the original timeline Disney originally threw out there.

Has Disney even given a projected completion date for the Hub?

 

[danlb_2000]

Somewhere there is a FLE timeline out there that is comical. It was heartbreaking to watch it get revised. Even Fairtale Hall the timeline kept getting pushed out. That M&G didn't open close to the original timeline Disney originally threw out there.

Has Disney even given a projected completion date for the Hub?

All Disney has said is that it will be complete "in 2015". The permits have an expiration date of November 2015, so I expect it to be well into 2015 before it is complete.

 

[RayTheFirefly]

Another revised permit was filed today for the hub project. The only change is the addresses of the work. What's interesting about this is it address 1400 Monorail Way (Tony's), 1375 Monorail Way (the first main street building on that side of the street), and 1359 Monorail way (don't know exactly what this is but it would be on that side of Main Street closer to the hub).

These new addresses would correspond to the area where the new bypass is going to be built. You may draw your own conclusions from this.

1400 (Tony's),1375 (MO5),1359 Monorail Way, 1200 Market Street, 3780 CO1,CO2,CO3 North World Dr - MK Hub Hardscape Refresh

Do we know anything about this Construction and what they've worked on before?

 

[Gabe1]

All Disney has said is that it will be complete "in 2015". The permits have an expiration date of November 2015, so I expect it to be well into 2015 before it is complete.

Thanks.

Wow! That is really a long, long time. Seems like they could have boarded the whole area up, ripped the whole dang thing out and rebuilt it quicker.

 

[danlb_2000]

Do we know anything about this Construction and what they've worked on before?

is one of Disney's big contractors. Most recently they were the general contractor for the Fantasyland expansion and the new Festival of the Lion King theater.

 

[danlb_2000]

Thanks.

Wow! That is really a long, long time. Seems like they could have boarded the whole area up, ripped the whole dang thing out and rebuilt it quicker.

I think they definitely could have but the disruption to the park would have been un-acceptable.

 

[Cesar R M]

is one of Disney's big contractors. Most recently they were the general contractor for the Fantasyland expansion and the new Festival of the Lion King theater.

they did an impressive job in the Arambe theatre area.