Possible Frontierland expansion

danlb_2000

Premium Member
Does anyone know what percentage of the land they own has to be preserved as wetlands? That could be part of the reason (maybe).

WDW proper (not counting offsite conservation lands) has 29,745 acres total. 9395 is currently in use, 1373 is water and 8322 is part of the Wildlife Management Conversation Area, so that leaves 10655 undeveloped acres. Disney also recently released 251 acres from the conversation easement (offset by new offsite conservation lands).
 

HauntedMansionFLA

Well-Known Member
Not enough for what the MK needs to happen though.

Epcot has the biggest potential and wasted capacity for swallowing crowds. It used to have people eating pavilions. It has wide walkways. It used to have a wide, uncluttered promonade for easy access around the lagoon.
I agree with you on EPCOT. We were there this week a couple of times and that place is huge. Poorly light at night but wide walkways.
 

Phil12

Well-Known Member
1/3 of the land has to be preserved for conservation. They've developed 1/3 of the existing property already. That leaves 1/3 of the land for future development.
They are allowed to develop all of the land at 100% if they desire. The only requirement is that they must purchase and preserve an equal amount of land outside of the existing WDW boundaries in the state of Florida in order to mitigate their development. The Disney Wilderness Preserve is a good example: http://www.nature.org/ourinitiative...sweprotect/the-disney-wilderness-preserve.xml

It should be noted that Disney owns a great deal (or has options to buy) other Florida property outside of the current WDW property.
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
The backlot needed to go. Also LMA. It's just that there's still more that needs to be done.

I agree completely, but then in that same vein, the two Star Wars rides are replacing those two attractions. Jack Sparrow wasn't a good attraction but it was still an attraction that closed so you could say Slinky Dog is replacing that. I guess we are getting a net gain of one ride (Swirling Saucers, which they need flat rides, regardless of personal opinion on them) .... that's how I see it.

Now if we were getting what I stated before, Monsters/Toy/SW/Animation makeover/etc. .....

We need additions, not just replacements.

Stating the obvious of course and I know you agree ... it's just a shame we aren't getting true expansion. Toy Story Land itself in a way is, I suppose.
 

Mike S

Well-Known Member
Then There will be a call for a SW expansion because of the success of the new land hitch it should be bigger with at least three to fours rides to start with.
Luckily they'll have room for that.
I agree completely, but then in that same vein, the two Star Wars rides are replacing those two attractions. Jack Sparrow wasn't a good attraction but it was still an attraction that closed so you could say Slinky Dog is replacing that. I guess we are getting a net gain of one ride (Swirling Saucers, which they need flat rides, regardless of personal opinion on them) .... that's how I see it.

Now if we were getting what I stated before, Monsters/Toy/SW/Animation makeover/etc. .....

We need additions, not just replacements.

Stating the obvious of course and I know you agree ... it's just a shame we aren't getting true expansion. Toy Story Land itself in a way is, I suppose.
We'll actually have a gain of 3 rides. Before BLT closed we had 6 and now there'll be 9. What the park needs is to finally break double digits.
 

HauntedMansionFLA

Well-Known Member
Luckily they'll have room for that.

We'll actually have a gain of 3 rides. Before BLT closed we had 6 and now there'll be 9. What the park needs is to finally break double digits.
I know. They painted themselves into a corner. Unless Muppets is on the chopping block in a few years - it could save Star Tours which is still fun to ride. Plus, it can get a lot of guests on that ride per hour.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom