Originally Posted By Darkbeer Bean did a great job on the expansion, let me talk about traffic flow, city streets and the corner of Harbor and Katella. Disney does NOT own this corner, and I seriously doubt that the folks currently on the land (aka Candy Cane Inn, 7-11, ABC Mart, Desert Palms, Alpine Inn and Alamo/National Car Rental will sell out, and while maybe one or two might agree to the price Disney offers, the entire corner will not be available. The other main issue is Traffic, and the City of Anaheim (how needs to approve building permits, etc.), Disney Way is the main exit to Disneyland if you are going Northbound on I-5 (aka from San Diego). Currently Disney Way ends on the west end at the current Disneyland Timon parking entrance at Harbor. This traffic HAS to go somewhere, and I seriously doubt that the City would allow the entrance to be removed unless they build a large parking structure (basically taking Pummba and buying the building just north of it). So Disney has a choice, spend the money for Pummba (and commit to a tram or other way for the folks to get to the main entrance, and the current trams wouldn't work, as they are not street legal, aka more expensive), or leave a road (no need for the Parking Toll booths) that follow the current route that cars take if the Timon lot is closes, guiding them to the Simba lot, or making the right onto Disneyland Drive and the current structure area. Harbor Blvd. just can't take the additional traffic, and the city knows it.
Originally Posted By bean Thats correct. That is why Disney has always felt that the next parking structure would be built in the ocrner of disney way and clementine. The structure would then be connected via a transportation system to the parks. Another alternative that has been considered is S. Manchester Ave. I believe an electronic board is already in place an visible on Disney way when people exit the freeway that would direct traffic up S. Manchester Ave and then left into Ball to th Mickey and friends parking structure. I also need to check but i think the land where the Alpin is currently standing belongs to Disney or their is intentions to sell. Could be wrong though. The obstacle is the Candy Cane Inn. First there needs to be enough hotel rooms built before any of these older motels even get removed but the ideal thing would be for the park to extend to the corner with maybe a large hotel built there. Then across the street the third gate property could also extend into the two empty plots plus the removal of some unsightly motels that line Katella and border the property.
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> Disney does NOT own this corner << Really?! How did that happen? One might think that when walt bought the land back in the fifties, he would have purchased the entire parcel - and not excluded a tiny (but valuable) corner lot. Do you know if it was sold subsequent to the initial land purchase - or was it never part of the parcel? I'm surprised.
Originally Posted By jonvn "And since that 7-11 is supposedly the most lucrative store in the chain I don't know that either are going anywhere soon." Do they own or lease that land?
Originally Posted By jonvn "The obstacle is the Candy Cane Inn." Really, it's not. Anaheim can take the corner and give it to Disney via eminent domain. Disney gives them some fair price, and that's all there is to it.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer As I understand it... Walt Disney sold the land on that South East corner (and what value was it in the mid's 50's?) as a way to help pay for the park. It was the very farthest corner and not that large, and helped him pay for the park. Heck, I remember the South West corner (basically where California Screamin' is) was a gas station, pretty sure it was a Chevron that leased property from Disney, then converted to a 76. And I seriously doubt that the City would use eminent domain to buy the Candy Cane Inn for Disney, after the Supreme Court ruling, a lot has changed, including a lot of laws have passed to prevent it (not sure for the actual plot of land), but it Anaheim tried, there would be a MAJOR uproar for the rights of the owners. Heck, if the city wouldn't buy the Strawberry Field for Disney years ago, how do expect the city today to buy the CCI???
Originally Posted By bean I agree with Darkbeer the way i see it eventually an offer from Disney would be to valuable to not accept. It would most likely start with the smaller motels next that border katela and the 7/11. Even if candy cane owner did not sell that land could still be used for a hotel or DVc expansion. It woudl be similiar to what Disney ahs been doing with land around the third gate. They have been buying pieces of property even if not connected then leaseing them to outside sources. The old doll store was bought that way and is now leased to a fastfood location. Some land is not even under Disney's name
Originally Posted By jonvn "And I seriously doubt that the City would use eminent domain" No laws have changed in this state. The city of anaheim is fully within its rights to do that if it chose. "there would be a MAJOR uproar for the rights of the owners." It flat out does not matter. The law is no longer on the side of property owners. "if the city wouldn't buy the Strawberry Field for Disney years ago" Because the law has changed since then. "eventually an offer from Disney would be to valuable to not accept." I agree that this is probably what will happen. But if the owners absolutely refuse to accept, the city can take matters into their own hands.
Originally Posted By ArchtMig My understanding of eminent domain is that its original intent was for the acquisition of land for projects that are for the public good. Land for roads, interchanges, schools, municipal buildings, etc. It was never supposed to be that the government could take one private owner's property for the benefit of another private owner. In more recent years, the definition of "in the public interest" has been stretched beyond the breaking point where entities would force property owners to divest their land to developers, who would then gain the lion's share of the "benefit". They did this under the guise that the local economy would benefit by these developments, and therefore, the public in general would benefit. What's turned out to be the case more realistically is that the developers pocket the profits and are never to be seen again, the taxpayers are left holding the bag on providing for services for these new developments, and the original land owners are never adequately compensated for their loss. This type of abuse is why there has been such a backlash against eminent domain in recent years. In my opinion, Disneyland is not a "use in the public interest" such as roads, schools, etc. that would justify subjecting the property owners on that corner to eminent domain to compel them to sell to Disney. Sure, Disney is the driving force behind the entire resort area, and it could be argued, Anaheim and Orange County at large. Disneyland pays property taxes. But so do the businesses on that corner, which are obviously not hurting economically. And while I do really want to see Disney acquire that corner, I don't think it should be done through eminent domain. Disney ought to outright buy that land in the free marketplace.
Originally Posted By jonvn "My understanding of eminent domain is that its original intent was for the acquisition of land for projects that are for the public good." Not any more. Now governments can take anyone's property and give it to another business they deem would be a better use of the land. A recent supreme court decision made it this way. This was big news. If Anaheim wants to take your house now, and put in a tire store, they can, and you can't do dirt about it.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer But what does that corner really do for Disney, there is a lot of other hotels and shops in the area, across the street, etc.... The land is MORE valuable as NON-Disney land, as in giving guests options than a piece of the Disneyland Resort. That corner does serve a major purpose, as in having something like the CCI and Desert Palms as an option compared to the Disney owned hotels. Anaheim is NOT WDW, an IMHO the land near the Strawberry field is much moire valuable than the corner of Harbor and Katella. Get those crappy Hotel on Katella that are on the north side of the Katella CM parking lot as a "land grab". We know the Radisson (soon to be the Red Lion) on Harbor won't be available, but those low rated buildings should be available at the right price....
Originally Posted By Darkbeer As for Eminent Domain, I did a bit more research, It is NOT possible, as the citizens have said it is WRONG to take over property for a private group!... <a href="http://www.anaheim.net/administration/PIO/news.asp?id=873" target="_blank">http://www.anaheim.net/adminis tration/PIO/news.asp?id=873</a> City of Anaheim Press Release. >>Big city mayors looking to spur economic development without abusing eminent domain should look to Anaheim, Calif., and a new report released by Anaheim Mayor Curt Pringle. “Development Without Eminent Domain: Foundation of Freedom Inspires Urban Growth,†was published by the Institute for Justice, the nonprofit public interest law firm that litigated the Kelo eminent domain case before the U.S. Supreme Court. Pringle’s report explains how Anaheim’s leadership brought economic vibrancy to the City without resorting to any takings of private property. It also explores the successes and failures of other cities around the nation in economic redevelopment. “Some urban infill advocates question if development can really occur without the government taking property through its eminent domain powers; without eminent domain, they ask, can first-ring suburbs compete with outlying suburbs?†Pringle said. He explained, “In Anaheim, my City Council colleagues and I decided that we would not agree to any development plan that proposed the use of eminent domain. We believed strongly that any economic development needed to happen without the government violating the private property rights of our residents and business owners.†Additionally, the Anaheim City Council voted to put a measure (Measure P) on the most recent ballot to permanently ban such seizures of property for private development. In the November 7, 2006 election, 80.3% of the residents of Anaheim voted in favor of Measure P and the Council’s decision to restrict the City’s use of eminent domain. Pringle states in the report, “If local officials regularly made zoning requirements more flexible and acknowledged market principles, new projects could move forward without taking away rights from existing landowners.†The mayor cited the Platinum Triangle area of Anaheim as an example of how this view can be practicably applied. Among other commonsense solutions, the City rezoned the area to allow easier development, took responsibility for clearing environmental impact statements, simplified the permitting process and reduced arcane building requirements. Pringle reported that as a result of these more-responsive and responsible government policies, “[T]he area is blossoming with more economic activity than ever imagined. And today, as housing and commercial uses move forward, there has been an increased demand for more intense high-end office space.†“Anaheim’s success created through free market negotiation and wise public policy rather than the force of eminent domain is a lesson for other cities,†said Chip Mellor, president and general counsel of the Institute for Justice. “Anaheim shows that respect for the rights of property owners and economic development can go hand in hand with better results for cities, property owners and private developers. “In the wake of the Kelo decision, state and local governments need to protect private property,†said Pringle. “They need to reform their blight laws, reduce government’s reach into people’s lives, while at the same time improving municipal services and making it easier for people to interact with their government.†Plain and simple, Measure P PREVENTS the City from buying CCI for Disney.
Originally Posted By gadzuux I believe disney will build their new hotel on timon - facing katella and the ACC - regardless of whether the candy cane and the alpine and the rest of them are there or not. But still it must be a burr in their side. The likelihood is that disney wants a high end, fully themed, full-service hotel with convention amenities to take full advantage of the location between the ACC and the resort. And having their fancy-dancy hotel sitting smack-dab next door to the humble little candy cane inn and alpine motor lodge is not their favorite idea. Even if the owners won't "sell" - perhaps they would come to terms with a long-term lease on the plot. That way disney gets their way, and the landowner's are happy. The loser's would be the current tenants, and possibly the city itself who might end up with a net loss on revenue. I've never stayed at the CCI, but I've also never gotten the impression from the fan-base that it's a particularly beloved hotel in the same way as, say hojo's. Disney's phyical footprint isn't so large that I would begrudge them spilling over into that corner. Gawd knows there's plenty of space left over in the rest of anaheim for 7/11s and ticky-tack motels.
Originally Posted By jonvn I was not aware of Measure P. That's interesting. They'd have to do it now via zoning laws, if they wanted to go that route. But like I said, I think if Disney wanted that property, they'd just pay the owners off and that's how it'd happen. It's not more value as non-disney owned land to disney. It is property that is making cash and not going into disney coffers.
Originally Posted By bean "But what does that corner really do for Disney, there is a lot of other hotels and shops in the area, across the street, etc.... The land is MORE valuable as NON-Disney land, as in giving guests options than a piece of the Disneyland Resort. That corner does serve a major purpose, as in having something like the CCI and Desert Palms as an option compared to the Disney owned hotels. Anaheim is NOT WDW, an IMHO the land near the Strawberry field is much moire valuable than the corner of Harbor and Katella. Get those crappy Hotel on Katella that are on the north side of the Katella CM parking lot as a "land grab". We know the Radisson (soon to be the Red Lion) on Harbor won't be available, but those low rated buildings should be available at the right price...." Thats true but there is an advantage for that land. In order to see this you need to look at the whole picture. There has been ideas thrown around. One of those ideas was to reroute the monorail around DCA. Imagine if that corner was eventually added as part of the Disneyland resort. Now if Disney was able to adquire some of the decaying motels that run along Katella and border the strawberry field it would allow for an easy acces to the devlopment in that land if nothing else was in those corners. Eventually a monorail stop could be placed in that corner of the lot and or eventually convince Anaheim that a pedestrain overpass would help improve tourist safety and movability from the convention center, the three gates and garden walk.
Originally Posted By jonvn "Eventually a monorail stop could be placed in that corner of the lot and or eventually convince Anaheim that a pedestrain overpass would help improve tourist safety and movability from the convention center, the three gates and garden walk." If it could be set up such that a city owned pedestrian overpass and or transit hub were set up there, the motels could be taken not for private development, but for public use, getting around measure P. There is more than one way to skin a cat.
Originally Posted By bean Lets not forget what was mentioned a few weeks ago about a new transportation system for the area.
Originally Posted By jonvn I've already forgotten...what is that? I can't place the comments. But if there is a new transit system going in, and this area is needed, zip, it is gone. The owners of the property are going to be made painfully aware of this, and will either sell out to Disney or the city. One way or another, the candy cane inn is not going to get in the way of development if Disney wants the property.
Originally Posted By 2001DLFan <<jonvn: I've already forgotten...what is that? I can't place the comments. But if there is a new transit system going in, and this area is needed, zip, it is gone. The owners of the property are going to be made painfully aware of this, and will either sell out to Disney or the city. One way or another, the candy cane inn is not going to get in the way of development if Disney wants the property.>> Well, that corner property already provides more for Anaheim in the way of taxes than anything Disney could do with it as a DCA addition. The only way Anaheim could use ED for Disney would be if Disney put in a hotel that would provide more tax revenue. That won’t happen (sorry gadzuuks). Even if Disney wanted to add a new hotel, that corner would be the worst location for it. The more likely location for any new hotel would probably be where the bus drop off is located off Harbor. That would put in close proximity to the entrance of both parks.
Originally Posted By gadzuux You're forgetting the largest convention center west of chicago right across the street. I don't think they'd want the new hotel physically on the corner, they'd want it directly opposite the ACC. But they also wouldn't want ticky-tack motels right next door to their new hotel either.
