Originally Posted By Phantom <a href="http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/homepage/abox/article_1326330.php" target="_blank">http://www.ocregister.com/ocre gister/homepage/abox/article_1326330.php</a> Would this even be a debate if Disney hand't cheapened out on DCA? If Disney had done something impressive for their second park, I'd think them movers & shakers in Anaheim would be clamoring for a third theme park. Now, they're talking about building "affordable" housing, which is another word for SUBSIDIZED. All mandated "affordable" housing costs either taxpayers or other buyers more $$$. Anyway, this is another example of how "resting on your laurels" costs you... something not figured in to the cost/benefit analysis for DCA.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I don't think Anaheim could support a third park no matter how nicely DCA had been done. A WDW style resort requires multi-day visits and the infrastructure to support it. As long as the majority of DL's visitors are day trippers, there will never be enough visitors to support a third park. From most places in the country you can get to Orlando at least as cheaply as you can get to Los Angeles. People looking for an extended Disney visit are going to go to WDW no matter what DL does (except for hardcore Disney freaks like us). JMHO As for housing… I’m all for affordable housing, but to build it on some of the most valuable property in the United States would be absolutely INSANE! That property would make a GREAT DVC location!!
Originally Posted By trekkeruss You'd think Disney would want a source of low-income workers and would welcome a housing project that could house more people than the trailer park can.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer ^But why does the housing project be in these few blocks, there are plenty of places a few blocks north of the resort on Harbor that could use some "upgrading" From the OC Register article >>Disney and resort-area businesses believed the debate was resolved 12 years ago, when the city approved a plan outlining the Anaheim Resort's zoning. Because the area around Disneyland had developed in a haphazard manner, the resort community wanted to take control of the future as Disney made plans to add Disney's California Adventure and Downtown Disney. "The Anaheim Resort area … was very seedy-looking," said Bill O'Connell, who has owned resort hotels for four decades. "There were big ugly neon signs and telephone poles and wires and no landscaping to speak of." The city floated $510 million in bonds to be paid with hotel bed taxes, but Disney agreed to pay the debt if city funds fell short. In 1998, Disney bought a 78-acre plot for expansion. Bed taxes and hotel occupancy have since soared. Under city zoning, mobile homes and a strip mall are allowed to stay on the plot, but any new development must be resort-related. In August, the council decided also to permit hotels that incorporate luxury condos.<< Disney agreed to help pay off the bond if the Hotel Taxes don't cover it, and now some folks want to change the zoning to a use that will not create Hotel Taxes....
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<But why does the housing project be in these few blocks, there are plenty of places a few blocks north of the resort on Harbor that could use some "upgrading">> It doesn't have to be there, but I think affordable housing (I assume apartments) would look a heck of a lot better than a trailer park. I suppose I might side with Disney if they had some plans on the drawing board, but they don't. If they really don't want non-resort development there, maybe they should buy out the people who own that land.
Originally Posted By Indigo I disagree with SoCal not being a multi-day destination. Right now those extra days are spent at Knotts, Universal, Hollywood, the beach. Rather than try to recreate those (and do so cheaply, like they did at California Adventure), they should build a third gate then do the 'Magic your way' tickets that would reward people for staying that 4th or 5th day. A Third gate won't do Disney anygood, however, without increased Disney real estate, and disney owned hotel rooms nearby. Building DVC 'down the street' won't cut it.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss Just say NO to a third gate. Forget that they could build a nice park and get tourists to stay another day away from the rest of SoCal. Disney has enough trouble getting enough CM's as it is, and I wouldn't count on them magically paying significantly more.
Originally Posted By skywilliams A third park would only be feasible if California Adventure could pull its own weight. Of course to do that would require a major overhaul. They need to concentrate on helping DCA become a resort someone would want to spend a whole day in rather than being the mid-day break park. Once that is accomplished then another park would be reasonable. As long as it offered a different style of entertainment.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "Would this even be a debate if Disney hand't cheapened out on DCA? If Disney had done something impressive for their second park, I'd think them movers & shakers in Anaheim would be clamoring for a third theme park." There is no evidence that a more impressive park would have produced greater profits than DCA has. The question still remains: can Southern California support another full-day Disney theme park experience on the level that we all expect from the company? So far no one has been able to assert any proof that such an investment would reap long term growth. And consider this: if the answer is a resounding 'yes', then there would have been no question about proceding with the third park when it was first proposed back in 2000. Personally, I think that location is wrong for housing of any kind. But, then again, I'm biased.
Originally Posted By avromark Just throwing this out of the blue: How about a water park as the third gate? Plausible? Not recommended?
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<They need to concentrate on helping DCA become a resort someone would want to spend a whole day in rather than being the mid-day break park.>> Judging by occupancy at the DLR hotels, DCA did accomplish one of the set goals: to get tourists to add a day to their DLR visit. <<Once that is accomplished then another park would be reasonable. As long as it offered a different style of entertainment.>> No, people don't want a different style of entertainment. They tried that when DCA opened and it was not well received. They tried it when EPCOT opened too, and people wondered where the Disney characters and whatnot were. People want and expect Disney entertainment.
Originally Posted By Socrates I dunno... I still like the idea of a Disneyland as designed by the villains. Socrates "The unexamined life is not worth living."
Originally Posted By avromark How about a theme park made by excel spreadsheet accountants, marketers using powerpoint and mba's who have never "experienced" the pleasure of a teen job at their favourite park? Wasn't there a Jim Hill article about a Pirates themed water park, that would be cool... Or they could just could import river country. How about putting some updated retro attractions into DCA or the third park for a new generation to experience.
Originally Posted By Indigo Third-Gate. Mind you I'm not saying open this up soon. Something more in the 8-11 year range, after they've fixed the second gate. Any expanded DL Resort would have to be thematically tied and transportation-linked to really work as well. HOWEVER, if they let this real estate go to homes right now, then the possibility of ever having a third gate located anywhere near the existing two gates, is zero to none.
Originally Posted By ChiMike ^ I agree. It's in their best interest to hedge for the future. Whether it ends up being an in-demand third gate or more resort hotels & entertainment.
Originally Posted By fkurucz I have pretty much given up on the concept of the "Disneyland Resort". As lovely and wonderful as DL is, it is a day tripper park. Weekends (especially Saturdays) have simply become unbearable due to heavy crowds, no matter what time of the year. If I were a first time visitor who had just plunked down big bucks for rooms at the GC on a weekend, only to be confronted by the day tripping weekend rabble (is it me, or are they looking more and more like the Six Flags crowd?) at DL and DCA, I would be very upset. As you may have guessed we just got back from a 5 day visit. Saturday was so packed that there were still long lines even after Fantasmic #2 was finished (Sunday was better later in the evening). To make a long story short, we are going to WDW next time (during the "off season" of course).
Originally Posted By nemopoppins Aren't crowds what would inspire or make a third park possible? Isn't it the prospect of crowds that made the whole 50th anniversary maintenance/improvements possible? It would be counterproductive to discourage crowds. The trick is to make the park as pleasant and entertaining as possible in spite of the crowds, and sure there's room for improvement, but the continued attendance says that Disney is accomplishing this pretty well.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss Once DCA gets up to speed (fingers crossed) there will be somewhere for the DL park crowds to go. As it is now, many people don't spend much time at DCA, AND it closes much earlier than DL.
Originally Posted By BrigmanMT 2 With agressive improvements to area theming and decent, but numerous, attraction additions, DCA could easily stay open later. I still can't believe that the Tower was built yet the park closes at 6. 2-3 extra hours and a nightime show could probably squeeze and extra meal and souveneer out of the guests that are already there.
Originally Posted By BrigmanMT 2 Oh, and I do believe Disneyland could easily support a small well themed park at the moment, but in the near future it could take a huge resort makeover. I have posted my ideas about hotels, transportation, parking structures, and pathways numerous times. Hopefully by the time I am in Imagineering the parks will be just about ready for the new addition. One only has to look at growth projections for the Inland Empire to see that a major audience is growing within a 1 hour drive. The populations between San Bernardino and Palm Springs are expected to grow 300 percent in the next 8 years. Those will be young families and first time home buyers. This is the crowd Disneyland wants. When the war is over, there will be a baby boom. There always is. This delievers another new audience for Disney theme parks. As the parks are now, DCA is expecting a major overhaul to drive attendance. The ideas for making the lands more immersive and expanding existing storylines to the attractions are perfect. Disneyland has had its vest attendance since its last E-Ticket opened over a decade ago. This is incredible. No major attractions and yet nostalgia alone brought people to both parks in droves. DCA had to close a few days this summer due to passing capacity. This was unthinkable last year. New family attractions that will reach for crowds somewhere between Monsters Inc. and the Tower of Terror are on the drawing boards. We could see another Soarin caliber attraction appear in the next 4 years. Disneyland has some fun stuff on the drawing boards, (Pirates plusses, Space Mountain night version, and of course the Nemo attraction, which I am actually quite excited for after reading about the Living Seas). Heck, the hotels are doing so well they are serious about building another one. As much as I dislike DVC this ensures a constant flow of guests throughout the slow seasons, just like the annual passholder program. Downtown Disney is ripe for expansion and this portion of orange and LA county needs some more nightlife that kids 16+ can enjoy. The cruise line is coming for sure and park packages are a definete. Those folks need some place to stay and play for some extra days. The first step in resort expansion will be a new hotel and a new parking structure basically for these folks. An elaborate but small water park will soon follow. Disney history has led me to this. Once the above 3 actions occur the resort is ready. I have some pretty elaborate ideas that range from guest walkways to hotel designs to actual themes for the new park's lands. Local growth and shifts in the economy lend themselves perfectly to resort development. Everyone west of the Rockies will be clamoring to make that Disneyland trip an every 2 years kind of thing. Disneyland will certainly become a self sustaining mega resort. Right now the question is when? My guess, with the crusie expansion and a new hotel/parking structure. This shows us that Disney is ready to think about the future. Before that, any years given are a guessing game. In the mean time I hope Disney has the foresight to go through both parks, tighten the attraction operations and increase the capacity with new attraction and walkway improvments and additions. The Resort will happen, it can easily happen, but when will it happen? Hopefully not until I am in a position to be a driving force on the project, I would really love to do this (maybe 5-7 years down the line.)
