spacemt354
Chili's
Unless you plan on having a Goofy attraction in your Mickey land, I don't see how it would be spread across lands. Mickey is also in PhilharMagic too.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
What to put in the northwestern end of the Magic Kingdom?
- Thread starter mharrington
- Start date
Can we PLEASE get back on topic, please?!? 
For the LAST time, there will NOT... I repeat, there will NOT be any hotels in this area! Now, can we please dispense with the jokes about Kirin, please?
Well, in my Magic Kingdom plans, Mickey's PhilharMagic is being scrapped for an extension of the Peter Pan ride. And yes, I was kind of planning on having Goofy in this new land.
The question is, can a Mickey land exist in the park if there is a Storybook Circus area with not only a Goofy coaster, but also a proposed Mickey dark ride (that is, Mickey's Fun House)?
For the LAST time, there will NOT... I repeat, there will NOT be any hotels in this area! Now, can we please dispense with the jokes about Kirin, please?
Well, in my Magic Kingdom plans, Mickey's PhilharMagic is being scrapped for an extension of the Peter Pan ride. And yes, I was kind of planning on having Goofy in this new land.
The question is, can a Mickey land exist in the park if there is a Storybook Circus area with not only a Goofy coaster, but also a proposed Mickey dark ride (that is, Mickey's Fun House)?
spacemt354
Chili's
If I say it can't -- where does the discussion go?
It would be odd to have a Mickey Land near Frontierland...and another Goofy ride.
But, if I say it does fit, you won't be convinced because you've said that you don't want Goofy to be spread around across two lands...even though that's what you're proposing.
So...I'm kinda confused as to what you want.
Okay...
I'm inclined to agree, it can be odd for a Mickey and friends-type land to exist not as an extension of Fantasyland (there was something there like it, but now it's been replaced by Storybook Circus). I want to do something with the land back there, but I don't know what to do. Everything that we all proposed just seem too radically different for a park.
As a compromise, I proposed something like Camp Minnie-Mickey, but less cheap-looking. I just think that it would seem odd for there to be a land with the Fab Five and others, but not feature Goofy in some way, like if not a ride per se, then maybe a special meet-n-greet area.
The fact is, this land is more accessible from Liberty Square than from Frontierland. I want to do something with the area that's not a radical departure from anything else.
I'm sorry if you're confused. I understand. The truth is, it's very difficult to do anything back there without not being purist. It was proposed to do a Cars Land back there, but it would seem quite jarring, especially if you can see the land from the river. Besides, the access point is more from Liberty Square than Frontierland, as I said. Also, the space seems too small to duplicate the land and its content.
spacemt354
Chili's
Western River Expedition -- and an expanded Frontierland, would fit in that area.
This area is more off Liberty Square than Frontierland, so Western River is out. The only way it could connect to Frontierland is with a proper path beyond Big Thunder.
It has to be different. And no hotel either.
spacemt354
Chili's
Ok....looking at your map on the first page...your dimensions are all off, which if we are being realistic, they need to be accurate.
This is what the aerial view looks like...and why I'm confused what you are doing.
Why are you gutting the back half of the Rivers of America -- to then put the land very close to, if not in...the Fireworks Fallout Zone?
Why not place the expansion in the blue oval in the map above? And why do you have a pathway from Liberty Square...when the Haunted Mansion queue completely blocks it. You would have to create a very very narrow path along the water, and wind behind the Haunted Mansion show building...just to get to the land.
Instead... why not expand towards the blue? Creating two access points. One by extending the pathway towards the Splash Mountain queue (under the railroad station) by having it make a right hand turn and heading up towards the expansion area.
You can then have it circle back around to a bridge to Tom Sawyer, and back across to Big Thunder Mountain.
I gutted the river so I wouldn't have to worry about the railroad. And hey, it happened in Disneyland, which gutted the back of the river AND rerouted the train to make room for Star Wars.
There wouldn't be a lot of room for much of anything in your spot in blue, just one ride. Western River is not happening. The first map took the buildings and such into account beforehand. And your path behind Splash doesn't make a lot of sense. It has to cross over a canal into the park.
There wouldn't be a lot of room for much of anything in your spot in blue, just one ride. Western River is not happening. The first map took the buildings and such into account beforehand. And your path behind Splash doesn't make a lot of sense. It has to cross over a canal into the park.
Last edited:
spacemt354
Chili's
Then why not do exactly what they are doing in Disneyland and re-route the railroad and the river so a larger land can be placed in the blue.
Your placement is off.
You have two tiny paths for an entrance and exit into the land...which is just unrealistic. It's awkward.
If you want a larger land...a blueprint for how and where to place it is already laid out for you.
Western River is still my suggestion...I don't have much else.
Then why not do exactly what they are doing in Disneyland and re-route the railroad and the river so a larger land can be placed in the blue.
Your placement is off.
You have two tiny paths for an entrance and exit into the land...which is just unrealistic. It's awkward.
If you want a larger land...a blueprint for how and where to place it is already laid out for you.
Western River is still my suggestion...I don't have much else.
Western River has many elements used in Splash Mountain for one thing.
That map I used was from Wikimaps.
I also would have to reroute the canal as well as the train. That is not happening.
spacemt354
Chili's
No. Directly above Big Thunder is a waterway that goes into and out of the park, feeding the Rivers of America. We couldn't use the space back there without impacting that waterway.
I also think the only reason the potential path by the Haunted Mansion looks difficult is because there are trees there, which are relatively easy to remove.
If there were no canals beyond the berm, that would be one thing, but I am to work around these obstacles.
spacemt354
Chili's
You do realize in your own map you have bridges going over the Rivers of America. Unless those bridges are 30+ feet in the air, the Liberty Boat will have to be discontinued, and the main reason for that canal is for Liberty Boat maintenance (also the reason why the monorail track by the Grand Floridian is so tall) so the boat can fit underneath and head towards the maintenance facility by Bay Lake.
The main reason for the canal is made obsolete with your own designs, so not sure why it's considered an 'obstacle'
That's just it, in my plan, the Liberty Belle Riverboat will be discontinued, at least as an attraction. Now it will be made a restaurant. However, to compensate for the loss of the riverboat, I was thinking of bringing back the keelboats or some other small vessel so the guests can continue to have a reason to go on the river. I don't know how big the keelboats are in relation to the riverboat, but they are not very big (certainly less than the 30-foot height of the riverboat).
I thought it was a real river that fed into the park. I see from a map that it may not be, but it is connected to this area of the park from the Seven Seas Lagoon, so I don't think it can be removed without creating headaches. And although it won't be used for the riverboat, there will still need to be maintenance for the keelboats.
Google Maps shows that there is some space available to move past the Haunted Mansion. It doesn't look quite as slender as you think it is.
spacemt354
Chili's
Please refer to the maps posted above, your pathway extends past the Haunted Mansion queue...which a) not only ruins the aesthetics of going towards an abandoned manor in Upstate New York, if crowds of guests are traveling right by you and going further north but b) is a very narrow entrance to get to a land. Typically...entrances need to be wider to accommodate traffic flow. Your path doesn't do that. Furthermore, your land is close to the fireworks fallout zone, which is an non-buildable zone due to debris from fireworks and the potential to catch on fire.
It's why there are areas behind small world and Fantasyland that do not house walkways or attractions. Even outside of the zone can be prone to fires (see the Mine Train grass that caught on fire a few years ago)
So, in my view, your land placement is running the risk of the same fate the Mine Train did...and I can't see Disney making all these changes you are doing to the river and extended pathways...just to have a large land that could catch on fire.
Rather, why not simply do what Disneyland did...and place the expansion in the furthest northwest corner of the park, re-routing the railroad and Rivers of America...in order to accommodate more space.
But what about the canal in and out of the park, the one connected to the Seven Seas Lagoon? I have to work around that, and it just seems rather awkward to have the only access point be behind the railroad tracks and behind Big Thunder. Not only that, but your proposed route also moves perilously close to some backstage areas there. And then you want me to get as radical as rerouting the train and the river just to accommodate something like Western River, which has elements already in other attractions, some quite close by?
Furthermore, there are several reasons why Western River never came to be. For one thing, it was to have been the Florida equivalent of Pirates, but after that ride opened, Western River seemed relatively moot. Both have different settings, yet they are actually quite similar in story. It also was to have a cost $60 million (in 1970s dollars, anyway - goodness knows how much it would be today). Not only that, but the depiction of the Native Americans in the ride was quite cartoon-like (think the Indians in "Peter Pan") and none too politically correct (even by 1970s standards), and besides, it was to have had a Western (as in, entertainment genre) theme, but the popularity of such had long since waned and never really came back again. Honestly, I'd much rather just let this sleeping dog lie and do something else instead.
spacemt354
Chili's
Ok, then do what you want to do. I'm not here to change your mind...just offer suggestions/feedback.
Unfortunately, based on what you're telling me, there doesn't really seem to be anything that can be done without radically altering the landscape.
We can't do a river rapids ride there, because there's already one in the Animal Kingdom. We can't really do Geyser Mountain or whatever (i.e., a freefall ride), because its technology is used in the Tower of Terror. And I don't think we can really do anything Indiana Jones-related because rumor has it that something like it is going in the Animal Kingdom instead. And even if it was coming to the Magic Kingdom, it would work best in Adventureland.
Based on what you're saying, it seems like you kind of have changed my mind - several times over. That's why I overthink, because I'm trying to do things in ways everyone will be happy, not just me.
Last edited:
spacemt354
Chili's
I don't think you're trying to make everyone happy because you've shut down most of the suggestions people have given you for attractions.
On the same hand, I also don't think pleasing everyone is an attainable goal, more important than anyone else...are you designing something that you would want to see? That you would want to experience?
If you don't take care of that factor first, and narrow down what you would want to see, then it becomes a circuitous exercise because there's no set objectives.
The only reason why I elaborated on a different location was an attempt to help give you more room for your expansion and to make it more realistic (in my view at least).
I shut down their ideas, because they just don't seem really doable in reality. In the case of, say, the Radiator Springs Racers, if they simply use only the technology from Test Track there, why aren't they using the technology elsewhere in the Florida resort?
There are many things I myself would like to see, but it's no fun doing them when the space for them is not (or will not be) available. On many of these threads, I see most people decide on what they want to see and then just go with it, whether it's realistic or not. It's really no fun coming up with ideas that I want to see, only to be stopped by logistics. Unlike someone like, say, @MANEATINGWREATH, I prefer not to be too fictitious in what I would like to see happen. I prefer to work in parks that actually exist (or in the case of that park idea in Brazil, come up with a real location for it). As far as I'm concerned, it's just as important to decide on a location for an idea as it is to do the idea itself. I once did a whole thread devoted to this very subject: https://forums.wdwmagic.com/threads/blue-sky-vs-all-else-but-mostly-constraints.897813/. In this, I argued that constraints are just as important (if not more so) as the blue sky process.
On a slightly unrelated matter, in that thread, I believed you mentioned that all four parks have several expansion pads, but besides the one you proposed beyond the train tracks, where else can they happen in the Magic Kingdom?
Anyway, this different location you speak off would only work if the river was not rerouted by scrapped entirely. This would open up a lot of space for something else since the Rivers of America takes up a ton of space anyway, but what about, say, that little turnabout at the base of Splash Mountain's main drop, which always juts out into the river in all parks?
Last edited: