D
Deleted member 107043
Right? What a terrible problem to have! A ton of foot traffic all around your property.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
New Disneyland Parking Garage and Transportation Hub
- Thread starter RMichael21
- Start date
Right? What a terrible problem to have! A ton of foot traffic all around your property.
yookeroo
Well-Known Member
To be honest, I though your post sounded kind of rude. You came off as pretty entitled.
TP2000
Well-Known Member
Exactly. I am also sympathetic to these small mom n' pop motels and franchise owners on this block.
But what I also wanted to remind folks of is that this is really a very small collection of rather small properties. The way it was being mentioned in the media and online it sounded as if Disneyland was closing itself off from the entire Resort District. The giant, major hotels and dozens of smaller motels around the Resort District are all still there and will not be impacted by this design change. There's 500 to 700 motel rooms impacted here, out of 20,000 Resort District rooms.
If anything, the dramatic improvement to the car/bus traffic on Harbor Blvd. and the aesthetic improvement of the Eastern Gateway project overall will benefit everyone. And then there's the 15 acres or so of DCA park expansion this opens up for future rides and attendance gains, again benefiting everyone in the Resort District.
I've come down on the side of Disney on this one, and feel the dozen or so businesses along that one block of Harbor need to adapt and get on with a new business model. Captain Kidd's may even need to improve their food!
DDLand
Well-Known Member
Darkbeer1
Well-Known Member
I has been brought up, but heck,what a way to be able to take advantage of the Disney offer, and design the property around the new eastern gateway with Disney's help, and of course, an vehicle entrance for PVI and the IHOP on their property.
The Cold Stone Creamery could be moved to the eastern edge, and nice "tunnel"like at GCH for an entrance between the new walkway and the property to lessen the impact of parking spaces (underground parking).
MoonRakerSCM
Well-Known Member
Interesting, what good timing for them to be redoing their entire property. If I were Park Vue Inn, and I'm not, I would be pouncing on this opportunity, to put in a small but purposeful walkway along the side of their property, involving Cold Stone like Darkbeer mentioned, and 'claim' the new Harbor entrance to Disneyland. Get the deal in place with Disney and promote their new walkway and gate to Disneyland before any of the other properties do.
Ismael Flores
Well-Known Member
Exactly, you would think Mcdonalds wouldn't mind loosing a few feet wide swath of land for a walking path. It doesn't have to be big most sidewalks are only about four feet wide. It would be used by thousands walking throughout the day that might just decide to grab some to go food to snack on in the park or after getting back from the park.Right? What a terrible problem to have! A ton of foot traffic all around your property.
FerretAfros
Well-Known Member
For ADA compliance, the sidewalk would need to be 6' wide. The sidewalks along the east side of Harbor Blvd appear to be 8' wide and this path would likely need to be at least that wide for capacity; for a landscaped buffer to make it a welcoming environment, they would need even more room, likely 3-4' on each side
Looking at the McDonald's site, it doesn't look like they can add an 8' pedestrian path without removing the entire line of parking on the south side. That means losing 30% of the parking capacity (26 of 87 spaces) at one of the busiest McDonald's in the country. No matter how many incidental customers that sidewalk may bring, that's going to be a very tough sell by Disney
Similarly, Disney may allow the adjacent hotels to connect a "back door" to their new walkway, but it would require them to lose revenue-generating rooms and/or parking to make that connection. Just because someone lets you make a connection to their property doesn't mean it's a palatable option for you
As it currently stands, that segment of Harbor Blvd is one of the most walkable streets in southern California (which may say more about the general state of things than about Harbor Blvd specifically). It has a lot of elements that urban planners refer to as "complete streets" and is a welcoming environment, despite the heavy usage of the road and the excessive number of driveway entrances interrupting the sidewalks.
As a transportation engineer, Disney's proposal to force all Harbor Blvd pedestrians to the new security site seems misguided at best. Any guest staying on Harbor Blvd (no matter how far north or south) will be forced to go east to go west to the parks, adding about a quarter mile to their trip. Good pedestrian design seeks to make the most direct route possible, which this certainly does not do
I know that Anaheim has different priorities than more dense urban areas that deal with a lot of pedestrians, but I'm really surprised they're even giving this serious consideration. I work for pedestrian-friendly jurisdictions and I'd get laughed out of the room if I suggested something like this; even as a temporary detour this would be a tough sell. There is more than enough room at the existing Harbor transit plaza for them to build an adequate security checkpoint for pedestrian arrivals alongside the proposed bridge/ramp, so I'm not sure why this proposal has made it this far.
I think it also opens them up pretty easily to an ADA lawsuit since it adds so much distance to the most direct route. I don't think that requiring 2 buses/shuttles to cover that distance would fly in court, especially since boarding and alighting is significantly more complicated for people with mobility impairments. ADA is vague about this specific type of scenario, but it typically encourages the accessible route to be the most direct route whenever possible
I'm also curious about the fate of the existing traffic signal; it appears that it will remain for the ADA and cast shuttles to make the left turns. If the signal remains, it will be very difficult to discourage pedestrians from crossing there (even if they remove all sidewalks along the west side of the street), which could make the intersection even more unsafe than it is now if there's no marked crosswalk. Short of removing the signal and adding a median with a fence in that area, people are going to keep crossing there
I don't fault Disney for this proposal at all. They want to serve their guests, the vast majority of whom will arrive at the parking garage; pedestrians aren't a major concern for them. I'm just surprised that the City is going along with it. It just doesn't seem to be good urban design, for a variety of reasons
D
Deleted member 107043
This is part that bothers me most about the plan.
And for what its worth, "good urban design" was Walt's obsession in his final years.
truecoat
Well-Known Member
I think that signal is gone. Cast shuttles will have to approach from the north or do a U-turn at Manchester. ADA shuttles will probably turn at the entrance on Disney Way.
truecoat
Well-Known Member
Then you have to add the cost of an elevator and staffing plus space to handle all those people continually coming up. You'd have to add stairs in case the elevator didn't work and now you have the beginning of a headache. It's not feasible considering the small percentage of visitors coming this way in the grand scheme.
NobodyElse
Well-Known Member
Thank you for your input! I find it valuable when people with professional experience add to these discussions.
Let's not forget that a major driver in this project (though largely unspoken at the meetings) is Disney's desire to add contiguous expansion area to their existing parks.
This will be interesting to discuss further. Things have certainly changed over the years - remember when you could park yards away from the ticket booths? ADA stuff seems nebulous at times. There are so many things/locations that people need "access" to. Could Disney claim that the first thing you need access to is the security check point? Thus by moving that closer to the new parking, they are improving access? (I'm half kidding, half not.)
flynnibus
Premium Member
You missed the part where you told him what he should do so YOU don't have to do more work. Your tone sucked. Maybe he was just posting them for his own direct linking purposes vs worrying about the rest of youtube finding them, etc. Either way TP2000 was right.. When someone hands you a gift, try not being a jerk back.
TP2000
Well-Known Member
Because the design has to be able to accommodate demand like this, for multiple hours at least 60 to 90 days out of each calendar year.
An elevator short-cut to the top of a 20 foot wide bridge, 100 yards past the real security screening area, isn't going to work in that environment.
Darkbeer1
Well-Known Member
While at the park today, came up with a solution regarding Cm's and catching the OCTA/LA Metro buses. In the secure area, plenty of special gates that CM's can enter exit at, just have the Cm enter the Guest area,and take the bridge to the new Transportation Hub, and catch the bus.
When coming into the park, have a special CM entrance over at one side (say the north side near the Building that will support the Security CM's (aka bathrooms, break room, etc.).
Seems simple to do, and will get the CM's to the bus stops.
FYI, Disney parked both Pumbaa and GardenWalk today. And used all 6 levels of M&F Structure, and were sending folks to Toy Story in the afternoon that tried to park at M&F.
When coming into the park, have a special CM entrance over at one side (say the north side near the Building that will support the Security CM's (aka bathrooms, break room, etc.).
Seems simple to do, and will get the CM's to the bus stops.
FYI, Disney parked both Pumbaa and GardenWalk today. And used all 6 levels of M&F Structure, and were sending folks to Toy Story in the afternoon that tried to park at M&F.
Last edited:
Old Mouseketeer
Well-Known Member
Thank you for talking some sense. I'm stunned that Disney thinks that guests will be content to hike a long distance before they spend an entire day standing and walking in environment that does not offer a lot of opportunities to sit (I'm comparing this to the park environment when I was growing up in the '60s).
I see more reactive planning on Disney's part that proactive. They dropped the ball on developing the Pumbaa parking structure, even though it was in the Master Plan back in the Westcot days.Now guests are paying the price and CMs aren't doing so good, either.
Meh.
Ismael Flores
Well-Known Member
I doubt that it would add a quarter mile to the walk. The distance from The proposed resort gateway on Disney way up the new walkway thru security and over the bridge is only .33 of a mile.
If the motels add a back gate guests don't have to walk down to Disney way so the distance is greatly reduced.
Also the slight walk east is irrelevant because as of now guests staying at the back end hotel rooms have to walk the whole distance of the hotel property to get to harbor while the guests staying at the hotel rooms in front near harbor have a shorter walk.
The new proposed path would just reverse that and now the guests at the back of the hotel would have less of a walk while the ones staying at the front rooms have to walk through hotel ground to gateway.
No matter what the gateway on harbor is moving because they have plans for the property used right now for possible park expansion. Supposedly a new gate will be near the bridge at northern side of existing shuttle area.
As an example the distance from the Grand legacy of walking on harbor to new gate is about .25 mile and that is from the hotel driveway entrance.
guest staying at the back of property rooms have to walk about .34miles
so basically the guests at back rooms of hotel have to walk length of hotel property, cross to west sidewalk of harbor (same distance as length of new bridge from security point to gate). Then they have to walk north on harbor (same distance as walking from hotel backgate to the bridge access point) these guests already have a longer walk then guests staying at front of hotel now.
With the new proposal the whole thing gets reversed guests at front rooms now have to walk thru hotel grounds to back gate, walk north and then walk on bridge. This is where the additional walking distance is added to the hotel guests staying closest to harbor since they need to walk east on hotel property. The property length according to google is about .10 of a mile. Again that is for guests staying in room closests to harbor. If I remember correctly many of those hotels don't even have rooms all the way in front of property because many have business in that area so that .10 of a mile is actually less