How much space does WDW have left? (Aerial pictures!)

[kay1864]

I've read about the thousands of acres that Walt bought back in the 60's.

But where is there room for say, another park or another hotel?

I'm assuming (feel free to correct) that WDW is bound by 429 on the west side, 192/I-4 on the south side, Buena Vista Dr (and then 535) on the east side. Dunno about the north side.

Key questions are:
1. Which of the areas below are not owned by WDW?
2. In these areas, is there something already there that precludes a resort?
3. In these areas, is there something already there that precludes a 5th park?
4. Since I don't know what the northern boundary is, which areas (if any) are available north of MK?

Possibilities:
A. West of the Magnolia/Palm golf course
B. Area between CSR and the Car Care Center

C. South of Bay Lake, between Fort W campground and the WDW airport (although this might be Golden Oak??)
D. North of Epcot

E. West of BB (to AK)
F. East of BB (to World Dr)
G. West of ASMovies
H. East of ASMovies

I. Between DHS and Art of Animation
J. East of CBR/Waldorf Astoria Golf Club (may not be owned by WDW though, plus there's a waterway running through it)
K. Northeast of ESPN
L. East of ESPN

That seems to be it. The OKW/DTD area seems to be pretty built out.

These pictures are not all the same scale, so here's the whole area:

It looks like there might be another area to the west of AK.

 

[WillAustin]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think all of that is buildable land.

 

[JoshuaShaw]

I wouldn't hold my breath for a new park in the WDW resort anytime in the next 40 years. It's a common rumor, of course, but there just doesn't seem to be a need for a new park. The amount of money it would cost versus the added money it would bring in, all speculation on my part of course, doesn't make it worthwhile. I expect moderate expansions and refurbishments to the four existing parks, but nothing beyond that.

New hotels on the other hand, seem like a reasonable expectation and they appear to have the land to do it, if they decided to grow.

 

[PSUGuy]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think all of that is buildable land.

I'm sure Disney can and will fill or drain swamps and create lakes or solid land where it suits them. I'm pretty sure the lagoon one ferries to get to MK was created and the dirt excavated was spread over the utili-door system to make MK elevated.

Bill From PA

 

[Raenstoirm]

This is a bit old, but it gives you the full scope of what Disney owns.

 

[Bellestreak]

I wouldn't hold my breath for a new park in the WDW resort anytime in the next 40 years. It's a common rumor, of course, but there just doesn't seem to be a need for a new park. The amount of money it would cost versus the added money it would bring in, all speculation on my part of course, doesn't make it worthwhile. I expect moderate expansions and refurbishments to the four existing parks, but nothing beyond that.

New hotels on the other hand, seem like a reasonable expectation and they appear to have the land to do it, if they decided to grow.

This is what I think too. Disney has set this up to be a week long vacation (on the average). If they added another park, it is not a given that people would extend their stay rather than just squeeze another park in.

 

[chartle]

I'm sure Disney can and will fill or drain swamps and create lakes or solid land where it suits them. I'm pretty sure the lagoon one ferries to get to MK was created and the dirt excavated was spread over the utili-door system to make MK elevated.

Bill From PA

Some areas just can't be built on because I think anything built there would just sink into the mud but a fair amount of that land is set aside for conservation and can't be built on.

Look at all the green areas on the map posted above.

 

[PSUGuy]

Some areas just can't be built on because I think anything built there would just sink into the mud but a fair amount of that land is set aside for conservation and can't be built on.

Look at all the green areas on the map posted above.

Take note that the map is by Reedy Creek I D. RCID IS Disney. Disney has its own government. There is no 'government' preventing Disney from developing a plot of land, that map will change in whatever manner Disney management dictates.

Bill From PA

 

[jason10mm]

Personally, I hope they build a whole new park in another state (Texas?). There was a rumor of some sort of mega-theme park in that region (envirnmental theme?). Central/North has good land access, lots of feeder airports, decent weather (if they stay away from the tornado belt). WDW seems pretty much maxed out to me, but a whole new experience in a different location might entice lots of folks who would not go to Florida or California, or who could now go more often. It is certainly economically possible to build more theme parks, I guess it depends on whether or not the numbers support it.

I suspect WDW, MK and Epcot in partiuclar, will hit some serious infrastructure problems in a few decades, something that would require extensive and prolonged closures for rebuilding. I'd like to think WDW would make a back-up park for this eventuality, instead of constantly slapping band-aids. Then again, I guess closing MK for a year would still be cheaper than a whole new park.

 

[joelkfla]

Take note that the map is by Reedy Creek I D. RCID IS Disney. Disney has its own government. There is no 'government' preventing Disney from developing a plot of land, that map will change in whatever manner Disney management dictates.

Although RCID controls development on the county level, Disney is bound by the St. John's Water Management District and the South Florida Water Management District in regard to wetlands preservation (the boundary of the 2 divides the property). But mitigation can usually satisfy any concerns. If you look at those districts' web sites, you can often find permit requests by Disney.

Of the 40-some-odd square miles (the actual number varies by the source), WDW is approximately 1/3 developed, 1/3 reserved for wetlands preservation, and 1/3 available for development.

 

[W.E.D.]

Thanks for all the maps, everyone. Very informative thread. For one, I had no idea how far south their property went.

 

[ExBellhop]

Personally, I hope they build a whole new park in another state (Texas?).

Maybe even Virginia. Nice central East Coast location. Maybe even theme it to like, America, or something.

 

[Cherinva]

Maybe even Virginia. Nice central East Coast location. Maybe even theme it to like, America, or something.

There was some talk a few years ago about Disney possibly taking over the Busch Gardens park in Williamsburg VA, but that never happened.....

 

[Missyrose]

According to our Keys to the Kingdom tour, Disney has only built on about a quarter of the land it owns in central Florida. So they could build many more parks and resorts before ever running out of space.

 

[kay1864]

According to our Keys to the Kingdom tour, Disney has only built on about a quarter of the land it owns in central Florida. So they could build many more parks and resorts before ever running out of space.

If I read the RCID map above correctly, the only options for expansion are the tan and brown areas. I'm assuming that areas marked "conservation" (dark green) cannot be built upon.

So although they've built on only a quarter of their land, that doesn't mean they can build anywhere on the other three-quarters.

 

[JoshuaShaw]

Personally, I hope they build a whole new park in another state (Texas?). There was a rumor of some sort of mega-theme park in that region (envirnmental theme?). Central/North has good land access, lots of feeder airports, decent weather (if they stay away from the tornado belt). WDW seems pretty much maxed out to me, but a whole new experience in a different location might entice lots of folks who would not go to Florida or California, or who could now go more often. It is certainly economically possible to build more theme parks, I guess it depends on whether or not the numbers support it.

I suspect WDW, MK and Epcot in partiuclar, will hit some serious infrastructure problems in a few decades, something that would require extensive and prolonged closures for rebuilding. I'd like to think WDW would make a back-up park for this eventuality, instead of constantly slapping band-aids. Then again, I guess closing MK for a year would still be cheaper than a whole new park.

Lots of rumors pop up from time to time about Disney building new parks in different regions of America, but it's usually just wishful thinking from people who aren't local to California and Florida.

One of the big reasons the geographic areas the parks are in were chosen is because of the weather. Southern California and Florida both have pretty consistent temperatures year round, so the parks can be open 365 days. There aren't too many other areas that experience this. While I would love a Disney park in Texas, the weather just doesn't make it viable. 100+ degrees in the Summer months and freezing in the Winter months means much lower attendance, as well as outdoor rides needing more maintenance due to being exposed to extreme weather conditions. There is a reason the local parks, like Six Flags Over Texas, are closed for a quarter of the year.

Maybe even Virginia. Nice central East Coast location. Maybe even theme it to like, America, or something.

There was some talk a few years ago about Disney possibly taking over the Busch Gardens park in Williamsburg VA, but that never happened.....

They wouldn't risk building on the East coast and potentially cannibalizing attendance at the Florida park.

While nothing is impossible, I wouldn't hold my breath for a new park outside of CA or FL anytime soon, much as I'd love to have a park closer to home.

 

[RJP77]

Got to agree with the above. Why cannibalize your own parks in California or Florida when you can hit new and untapped markets like China that have a much larger population to draw from and far less easily available Disney options than in the U.S. I wouldn't be surprised to hear about a park in India before another one in the U.S., though I admittedly have no idea about the appetite for Disney in that region of the world.

 

[kay1864]

Thanks for all the maps, everyone. Very informative thread. For one, I had no idea how far south their property went.

True, but if I read the RCID map right, their usable property only goes as far south as ESPN.

 

[andyman8]

Much of that "conservation" by the way is "unusable land". For example, there were quite a few problems that occurred when Disney was constructing Epcot, which is why they generally just devote that area to "conservation" now.

 

[ExBellhop]

They wouldn't risk building on the East coast and potentially cannibalizing attendance at the Florida park.

Sorry, I was just being a smarty pants, and referencing this old rumor:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disney's_America

Remembering that rumor like it was yesterday... Feel kinda old right now...