This makes me very sad

[MadameMim]

this is about what makes sense in terms of long term plans, not romantic notions of land hoarding.


snorted coffee through my nose with this one.

 

[CathrynRose]

Thank you very much for setting me straight. I was just about to lose my way when you stepped and showed me the light.

And may I say that you are a lovely person with a simply charming personality.

Bye bye then.

You aint kidding.

Boom spoke for me too - my goodness NewEnglandDisney....

 

[seashoreCM]

I don't know exactly what pieces they are but Disney did buy some additional pieces of land on various later dates. One new piece I am told is somewhere in the Animal Kingdom area.

As far as Celebration goes, there was originally the flexibility of putting a theme park down there with monorail connection to the rest of The World. That might well have come to pass had Walt lived a bit longer and also had Walt decided to put an (the) E.P.C.O.T. where Epcot is today. Because of democracy, Disney ultimately chose not to have provision for many permanent voting residents within The World, which wiped out the idea of a centrally located E.P.C.O.T.

Yet another flexibility still available is converting the MK parking to garages and using the liberated space for another theme park.

 

[CarolA]

Yeah, I read somewhere recently that 1/3 has been developed, and one third is being kept as a nature reservation or something.

Disney actually bought land someplace else in Florida. Under some deal with the state for every acre of that land they "donate" as nature preserve they can develop another acre of the Disney property. They did this when they built some hotels and I would think they could do it again if they want to....

Also, there have been some land sales reported, but nowhere NEAR the volume this article implies.


And I have a BREAKING NEWS FLASH!!!

WALT IS DEAD. How do you or I have a CLUE what he would do today????

(Walt was not the benvolent saint the DIS wants to make him out to be. He was also a businessman who wanted to make money. For all you know he might have decided Disney should NOT even be in the theme park business if he were still around!)

 

[CathrynRose]

And I have a BREAKING NEWS FLASH!!!

WALT IS DEAD. How do you or I have a CLUE what he would do today????

(Walt was not the benvolent saint the DIS wants to make him out to be. He was also a businessman who wanted to make money. For all you know he might have decided Disney should NOT even be in the theme park business if he were still around!)

Okay....

 

[boomhauer]

And I have a BREAKING NEWS FLASH!!!

WALT IS DEAD. How do you or I have a CLUE what he would do today????

First off - Thanks for the sarcasm. The post would have been lost on me without it!

Secondly - All we can go by is what Walt said, and what friends and business associates closest to Walt have said. It is WIDELY know that Walt was furious with himself for what happened with Disneyland. He took all the blame and was quite devestated that things turned out the way they did.

As for the space they have, I have no doubts (or real fears) that they don't have enough room for a couple more theme parks, resorts, etc. My concern isn't space. My concern is, as I stated before, in regards to who owns that space that the company sold within the Disney World borders. I'd say it's a safe bet, that the land occupied in Florida that Disney World lies in, is probably some of the most valuable acreage of land on the face of this planet. What is to stop the owners of said land sold by Disney from putting in, as I said, a laundromat, a car wash, a Wendy's, etc?

 

[maxtomsmom]

I think some are forgetting that Disney thinks about $$$$. I'm not a business expert nor a land developer, but I believe Disney would only do what they think is best for Disney for the now and the future. I believe Walt intended much of the land never to be developed. I remember doing a HUGE paper on him in H.S. He also could have never forseen the magnitude Disney corporation has turned into. Would he like all the change? Who knows? That is something, I believe, not worth arguing. He was a pioneer and pretty progressive in his thinking, but how could a question about how he would feel really be answered. I remember reading that he bought so much property because his investors liked the idea of having extra land to do whatever with. All four parks were dreams of his. He also intended to have EPCOT be a "real" city with homes, buildings, schools, etc. That was another reason for all the land.

I remember when Disney was only Magic Kingdom and River Country. Our family was one of the first 50,000 people to visit MK and stay at FW. It was very pretty, but I do love what there is now. However, I do feel sad that some land is going especially because so much wildlife is disappearing. Again, I do think they have their reasons.

 

[btuftee]

I suppose that's true... there's no way to know exactly what Walt would be doing today (unless you consult Madame Leota that is)... but so what? We know what he did do while he was alive, and he did a rather good job of documenting his style and development philosophy in the years before his death. It is certainly possible to carry on in his tradition - some people may disagree as to exactly what Walt would have done in a particular spot, but we can all agree on things he would not have wanted.

He certainly would not have wanted guests to see any signs of tackiness or cheapness once they enter the property - nothing can spoil the 'show'. That means controlling the environment. I don't see any signs in current Disney management that would betray that concept. As noted eloquently before in this thread, the only properties sold have been on the fringe, unsuitable for development. True, this pushes the fringe further into WDW, but as I pointed out in the map above, there is still a ton of space left within WDW.

Part of what makes WDW unique is that it really is a different world, you can almost imagine it's its own country - many visitors (myself included) enter the property once at the start of the vacation, and leave it only at the end.

 

[PatriciaH]

There is land on the other side of I-4 (right next to Celebration) that Disney owns that is zoned for a theme park or high density mall. So they probably do have land other than what the map shows. The Disney Wilderness preserve is huge. It is down near Poinciana about 20 minutes from WDW. They put that aside when they developed Celebration. I do hate how those high rise towers may be going up right in the middle of property. Also, you can see and hear 192 from some of the higher rooms at AKL and that is a real bummer.

 

[Mono~rail]

As for the space they have, I have no doubts (or real fears) that they don't have enough room for a couple more theme parks, resorts, etc. My concern isn't space. My concern is, as I stated before, in regards to who owns that space that the company sold within the Disney World borders. I'd say it's a safe bet, that the land occupied in Florida that Disney World lies in, is probably some of the most valuable acreage of land on the face of this planet. What is to stop the owners of said land sold by Disney from putting in, as I said, a laundromat, a car wash, a Wendy's, etc[/B]?

Usually laundromats and car washes aren't built on what could be "the most valuable acreage on the face of this planet." In a tourist area such as Orlando, it is more likely that the land would be used for a timeshare resort, hotels, or chain restaurants. I don't think it makes sound financial sense to put businesses like you gave as examples. It is possible that a Wendy's could be built, but I would think it would be a really special one (I'm thinking like the McDonald's restaurants on property).

Do the McDonald's on property bother you? They are a fast food chain restaurant like Wendy's.

I don't think all the stuff that built up around Disneyland was what bothered Walt so much as the untapped profit potential there that he didn't realize. (He may have known what would come, but didn't have the capital to acquire that land around DL.) Dear old Walt Disney was a savvy businessman. Yes, he liked to make people happy, but he also liked to gain profits so that he could continue funding his dreams. He was a true visionary on multi-faceted levels. He bought up such a vast amount of Florida swampland for many reasons, and it is very possible that one of them could have been so that some of it could be sold later for profit to fund more projects. Only those directly involved with Project X know all of Mr. Disney's reasons.

 

[boomhauer]

Usually laundromats and car washes aren't built on what could be "the most valuable acreage on the face of this planet." In a tourist area such as Orlando, it is more likely that the land would be used for a timeshare resort, hotels, or chain restaurants. I don't think it makes sound financial sense to put businesses like you gave as examples. It is possible that a Wendy's could be built, but I would think it would be a really special one (I'm thinking like the McDonald's restaurants on property).

Do the McDonald's on property bother you? They are a fast food chain restaurant like Wendy's.

I don't think all the stuff that built up around Disneyland was what bothered Walt so much as the untapped profit potential there that he didn't realize. (He may have known what would come, but didn't have the capital to acquire that land around DL.) Dear old Walt Disney was a savvy businessman. Yes, he liked to make people happy, but he also liked to gain profits so that he could continue funding his dreams. He was a true visionary on multi-faceted levels. He bought up such a vast amount of Florida swampland for many reasons, and it is very possible that one of them could have been so that some of it could be sold later for profit to fund more projects. Only those directly involved with Project X know all of Mr. Disney's reasons.

Actually, I think the McDonalds on property aren't bad. They did a fantastic job with them. However, the french fries wagon in Frontierland is pretty tacky.

When Disneyland opened, the area in Anaheim right outside was some of the most valuable on the planet. Have you seen some of the businesses that call that area home?

Of course Walt was a businessman, but he was also meticulous and fanatical to an extreme. Noone on here knew Walt personally, but there isn't a shred of doubt in my mind that Walt bought the space he did in Florida to prevent what happened with Disneyland from happening.

 

[Mono~rail]

Actually, I think the McDonalds on property aren't bad. They did a fantastic job with them. However, the french fries wagon in Frontierland is pretty tacky.

Frenchy's Fry Wagon!

I looked in the other day when DD13 was ordering fries and a coke, and that covered wagon needs to be shut down for a refurb! It was broke down and crusty in there! Way too many years of french fry grease have taken their toll!

I don't think we have anything to worry about. I understand your frustration that the land was sold, but there isn't a darn thing that anyone can do about it. I truly think WDW is safe from being invaded by "the outside world."

 

[NewEnglandDisney]

LOL, it's just absurd at this point (no matter what romantic notions one has to the past, or what marketing schemes one falls prey to) to see people arguing what a man that has been dead since long before the park ever opened thinks. Not only is it irrelevant, it's pretty arrogant to think you can speak for the man no matter what you believe you know about him, unless it's first hand experience between you and the man.

You've been enjoying WDW for years without being wise to WDW's land holdings or dealings. If you actually want to go to that absurd place of arguing what a dead man none of us knew wanted, you'd know that he didn't just hoard land for craps and giggles. He wanted to preserve that illusion. Before this thread began you didn't even know about any of this - in fact, you disputed the fact that WDW has sold property at all (which, as someone kindly did, was reported months and months ago by the Orlando Sentinel and was posted above).

It is true that WDW is aproximately 1/4 smaller than it was WHEN IT OPENED. It's been happening FOR MANY YEARS and you never noticed it. Now, someone posts about a recent sale of a single-digit percent of property, and suddenly WDW is ruined?

You get all worked up over something that was invisible to you, and if you actually took the time to dig out a map and look at what was sold, you will find it was all property that had NO AFFECT on the "illusion", and was all sold for specific purposes. Someone can't build a 200-foot high rise - they are for small homes and condos that YOU WILL NEVER SEE. That's all the land was zoned for.

It was also all land that was costing Disney money just to maintain. Since you go to WDW so often, I assume you've seen the hurricane damage over the last few years? So hard to miss it, even from the monorail. It was excess fat that was simply draining the finances - you do know about a little thing called property taxes, right? That property was doing NOTHING for the magic, and Disney was losing money just by owning it and it was all parcels that could never be used for a hotel or attraction AND it wasn't part of insulating the property.

Really, man. Do some searches, and look at a map. You keep posting the same rant over and over yet you do not absorb any of the facts that people like myself and others have shared. You are so stuck on what you think a dead man you never knew wanted you are just missing the big picture. If you really are so passionate about this, how about you actually look into the matter instead of going around in circles here when you don't seem to absorb any information presented to you?

NED

 

[JeanfromBNA]

My concern is, as I stated before, in regards to who owns that space that the company sold within the Disney World borders. I'd say it's a safe bet, that the land occupied in Florida that Disney World lies in, is probably some of the most valuable acreage of land on the face of this planet. What is to stop the owners of said land sold by Disney from putting in, as I said, a laundromat, a car wash, a Wendy's, etc?

Zoning, planning restrictions, deed restrictions, and environmental laws could limit what could be built on that property. Any number of civic and Disney-specified restrictions could be placed on the land that Disney sold to others.

I've worked in land development for 14 years, and worked for land developers doing research in Florida (though not for Disney). Besides limiting the land use via planning and zoning, a landowner transferring title is able to place some restrictions on future development as long as the proposed restrictions are legal (you can't, for instance, restrict sales of future subdivided property to a certain ethnic group) and agreeable to the purchaser. Disney could, for instance, limit the height of future buildings, and the materials of which they are made. On the civic front, the land sale may have been contingent upon an approved zoning change to accommodate the residential development that the buyer wanted.

I don't know if Disney's done any, all, or none of these things. However, as an admirer of their business strategy, I've observed that Disney is very protective of what is associated with their brand. I'm sure that Disney has done its own extensive research and considered the effect that the sale of their land might have on their park operations.

The sold land is valuable, to be sure, but probably has it's own problems. If I remember correctly (it's been five years since I've worked in FL), about half of the state is classified as water, flood plain, or wetlands. Building in an area subject to flooding presents a set of challenges that can take awhile to overcome and occasionally are insurmountable. What was once known as "useless swampland" in Florida and elsewhere is now federally protected wetlands that can be very costly to develop. Combine that with endangered species issues and you can forget it.

So, I've gone through all of that to say that I don't think that Disney is selling off their property indiscriminately. There are other factors, such as capital gains, that could be discussed exhaustively, but it seems that's been done. NED, although I agree with 90% of what you said, I didn't like the mean way that you stated it. We are talking about the happiest place on earth, after all. Would it hurt to keep that in mind while discussing the facts?

 

[NewEnglandDisney]

There are other factors, such as capital gains, that could be discussed exhaustively, but it seems that's been done. NED, although I agree with 90% of what you said, I didn't like the mean way that you stated it. We are talking about the happiest place on earth, after all. Would it hurt to keep that in mind while discussing the facts?

While I admit my tone was rather exasperated, we've got people in here saying "Disney execs are jerks because they sold it off!" and talking about crazy delusions of "OMG! THEY ARE RUINING WALTS DREAM!"

We've got the same couple of people ranting over and over about a topic they admittedly do not understand, and have no knowledge of outside this thread. People posted much evidence to the contrary, but they insist on getting on a high horse and saying we must not "understand the magic" or know what Disney is about because we understand the realities of the situation and don't want people to come across this thread and think the cries of "OMG THEY ARE RUNING DISNEY!" are actually real.

You are correct, this is a message board about the happiest place on Earth, and while you may not have found my tone pleasant enough as the thread has worn on, hopefully it will stop the misinformation some people are trying to spread, and the false-panic they want to errupt.

I love Disney, but that doesn't mean I'm blind to their faults. This isn't one of them, and I felt the need to defend the "greedy evil jerks" who made the decision to sell the useless property, versus people who think they know what a dead man they never knew might want in the next century.

NED

 

[CleveRocks]

Getting rid of a few hundred acres of land that wasn't useful to them isn't the end of the world.


If selling off a few acres out of MANY THOUSANDS was in the best interest of the resort, then so be it.


The land that has exchanged hands is peripheral on the actual property.


Most of the parcels could only be accessed from outside roads and wouldn't have been worth developing.


It's all much ado about nothing...they aren't selling WDW off in pieces. They got rid of some fat on the outer edge, again, a tiny, tiny percentage of the property that was useless to them (and in some cases costing them more than it was worth).

Thank you for making sense!!!

If you want to get all excited, be worried about that spot they never bought that Hilton is building two huge super-tower hotels on, just off-site. If you believe some people, you are going to be able to see them from Epcot and/or MGM.

Actually, I saw construction from CBR's Trinidad North last May. I was told it was a on a parcel of land not owned by Disney.

 

[NewEnglandDisney]

Actually, I saw construction from CBR's Trinidad North last May. I was told it was a on a parcel of land not owned by Disney.

That's correct. It was land Disney never bought up (as far as I know - anyone know the exact history for sure? I know there was a MiceAge or MousePlanet article about it), so my point was if people were gonna be upset, that is something to ACTUALLY get upset about, LOL.

The land they are selling is meant for small condos and the like, that you wouldn't see above the tree line, let alone from the property.

What I think some people are also missing is that the very sites that were sold were sold because they COULDN'T be used because it would ruin the magic, not done to ruin the magic. It's the opposite of what people think.

As has been said, most of the parcels (if one looks at a map) were locked either by roadways, too small to be used at all, or if they could be used wouldn't be feasable because they couldn't block the outside world for whatever they choose to put there.

WDW is not falling, LOL. It cut some of the fat around the edges to make the entire operation run more smoothly and efficently. It was a very smart decision.

NED

 

[CarolA]

First off - Thanks for the sarcasm. The post would have been lost on me without it!

Secondly - All we can go by is what Walt said, and what friends and business associates closest to Walt have said. It is WIDELY know that Walt was furious with himself for what happened with Disneyland. He took all the blame and was quite devestated that things turned out the way they did.

As for the space they have, I have no doubts (or real fears) that they don't have enough room for a couple more theme parks, resorts, etc. My concern isn't space. My concern is, as I stated before, in regards to who owns that space that the company sold within the Disney World borders. I'd say it's a safe bet, that the land occupied in Florida that Disney World lies in, is probably some of the most valuable acreage of land on the face of this planet. What is to stop the owners of said land sold by Disney from putting in, as I said, a laundromat, a car wash, a Wendy's, etc?

WHAT SCARASM.. It's a FACT. He is dead and NONE of us know what Walt would do if he were alive....

His associates etc. are just as guilty.. Walt is frozen in time in thier memory too. (And when Disney was running the company using the "Walt never advertised" and "We can only do what Walt did" they NEARLY found themselves bought up by venture capitalists and SOLD as PARTS. So that model had some problems didn't it?)


Walt also moved on a lot. It's not outside the realm of possiblity to think that he would have sold off the amusement parks and moved onto another venture.


(And has been pointed out. The Bonnett Creek property was NEVER owned by Disney. The landowners had to take Disney to court just to get permission to build the road. Very "Disney like" to take someone land's rights away wasn't it?)

 

[boomhauer]

Really, man. Do some searches, and look at a map. You keep posting the same rant over and over yet you do not absorb any of the facts that people like myself and others have shared. You are so stuck on what you think a dead man you never knew wanted you are just missing the big picture. If you really are so passionate about this, how about you actually look into the matter instead of going around in circles here when you don't seem to absorb any information presented to you?
NED

Not sure if you're referring to me or not, but at this point, I'm basically just replying to your beyond insulting, rude comments.

I'm not an idiot - I've read the posts, articles, and seen the pics. Yes, it seems that Wikipedia's interpretation of what's happened over the years is a bit exaggerrated. No surprise coming from them. Personally, I don't think you've read one of my posts since the first page. The only point I'm trying yo make is, there's alot of undeveloped land that's left. It concerns me that Disney may look down the line into selling more of that off. I don't think they'll sell half of the parking lot to the Magic Kingdom, but as others have said, they did sell some land for housing so near to the Magic Kingdom that people living there have complained about the noise form the fireworks.

As you have so rudely stated, Disney is a business. No denying that. And whereas I have no idea what Walt Disney would think of anything that has happened since his death, I seriously doubt you have inside knowledge about what the execs at Disney are planning for the future.

Let me bottom line this: No, it seems as though what Disney has done to this point will not affect any part of what we know as Disney World. However, this is a Disney discussion board and all of us have a right to our opinions based on everything Disney.

Again, as I said before, "'I'd rather people think I was wrong for standing up for my beliefs, than be a ******* by stepping on others."

Maybe I should be a meaner person. I don't know. I always try to make my points without being rude.

 

[boomhauer]

WHAT SCARASM.. It's a FACT.

"And I have a BREAKING NEWS FLASH!!!

WALT IS DEAD. How do you or I have a CLUE what he would do today????"

THAT sarcasm.

You know, it IS possible to have a discussion and get your point across without trying to make people feel bad.