The Disneyland Resort will commit to spending more than $2 billion in Anaheim over the next decade, under a new development agreement proposed today with the City of Anaheim as part of its DisneylandForward plan.
Today's proposed agreement would amend and extend the 1996 development agreement between the city and the resort that led to its late-1990s expansion. That agreement was set to expire in 2036, but the new agreement would extend the deal through 2064.
Disneyland is seeking City of Anaheim approval for its DisneylandForward proposal that would update land use agreements to allow the resort to build attractions and hotels on land now reserved for parking and other uses. [We last checked in with that proposal here: Anaheim releases Disneyland environmental impact report.]
Under today's proposed development agreement to accompany the DisneylandForward project, Disney would spend a minimum of $1.9 billion on new attractions, entertainment, and lodging within the first 10 years after approval. In addition, Disney would commit $45 million for street improvements in Anaheim and $40 million to acquire Magic Way (which runs south of the Pixar Pals Parking Structure), Hotel Way (a driveway into the Pumbaa Parking Lot),and part of Clementine Street that runs through the Toy Story Parking Area. These streets lie in zones that could be redesignated for attraction use under DisneylandForward.
Disney also would have to pay an additional $5 million for street improvements if it did not spend a total of at least $2.5 billion on new attractions within the first 10 years of the new agreement.
In addition, Disney would commit to spending a total of $30 million on affordable housing projects within five years, with half of that in the agreement's first year. Disney also would commit $10 million for sewer improvements along Katella Avenue and $8 million to improve city parks across Anaheim in the first year. Disney also would commit to continuing to support worker education and development programs for both its own employees as well as up to 10,000 Anaheim residents annually.
“We listened to Anaheim’s leaders and worked hard to address what is important for the city,” Disneyland Resort President Ken Potrock said. “We are proud that DisneylandForward will provide many important benefits directly to the residents of Anaheim.”
The development agreement also includes Disney's support for building up to three pedestrian bridges over Harbor Boulevard and up to an additional two across Disneyland Drive. The Disneyland Drive bridges could provide access from inside Disneyland and Disney California Adventure to new attractions to be built west of Disneyland Drive, on current parking lot space. In a presentation to Anaheim residents last night, Disneyland officials suggested those new attractions could include installations of the World of Frozen and Zootopia lands recently opened at Hong Kong Disneyland and Shanghai Disneyland, respectively, as well as new lands themed to Coco and Wakanda from Marvel's "Black Panther."
City and Disney officials said in a press briefing today that the proposed Harbor bridges would not be a revival of the old Eastern Gateway proposal, which included a pedestrian bridge that would be contained within a secure zone connecting Disneyland and Disney California Adventure with a new parking garage across Harbor. Disney years ago acquired land for a proposed 17,000-space eastside parking structure serving northbound arrivals on I-5.
The officials said that the proposed Harbor bridges would allow Disneyland visitors access to the street and its businesses while also allowing them to avoid having to cross Harbor at street level, much like pedestrian bridges over Las Vegas Boulevard and other streets in Las Vegas serve visitors to that destination.
Disney and Anaheim officials said today that a city Planning Commission workshop on DisneylandForward is expected next month, with a Planning Commission vote in March. If approved, DisneylandForward and the new Development Agreement would go up for a preliminary City Council vote in April, for potential final approval in May.
To keep up to date with more theme park news, please sign up for Theme Park Insider's weekly newsletter.
And to help support Theme Park Insider while saving money on discounted theme park tickets, including SoCal resident deals on Disneyland admission, please follow the ticket icon links our Theme Park visitors guides.
I, personally, would like to see Disney do something more original with DisneylandForward. I applaud Wakanda and Coco as ideas, but wouldn’t it be nice to see Disney do another classic “land” in the vein of New Orleans Square, Mystic Point, or Mysterious Island? I wonder what Walt would’ve thought of fully IP-based lands.
Given that many of the attractions green-lit by Walt were meant as nothing more than promotional vehicles for an upcoming feature, I can't imagine he'd be horrified by it.
$2.5 billion over 10 years is to me is just a sad reminder of the endless moneypit that was "mymagic+" at Disney World where they spent more than that to put your ticket, hotel key, and fastpasses on a wristband....just to have that become obsolete due to phones a few years later.
"Disney also would have to pay an additional $5 million for street improvements if it did not spend a total of at least $2.5 billion on new attractions within the first 10 years of the new agreement."
Agreements like this remind me of LaRonde who made a similar "we will invest or be penalized" agreement with the government, which resulted in them at the last minute hastily adding a used Vekoma SLC to a park that already had a B&M invert.
Also its absolutely hilarious that their punishment if they don't live up to the agreement is $5 million in street improvements, which they will directly benefit from, and is also what they make in line two Halloween Parties.
Sounds like a deal sweet enough that the city will probably go for it without requiring them to sacrifice more of what they'd like to do to the resort. While it would cost Disney ~$100 million in projects that may not directly benefit the resort, that's just a drop in the bucket compared to the earning potential of proceeding with Disneyland Forward. Yeah, the concepts they pitched for more theme park lands aren't the most exciting, but there's no guarantee that's what they'd be going with (though it is a near guarantee it will all be IP-oriented as that's definitely the way of modern Disney).
Honestly, $2 billion seems a bit light for a total investment over 30 years. Disney reportedly spent nearly that much just making improvements to create DCA 2.0, so while most of this spend has clearly been front loaded, I think observers are over-estimating what Disney will do with this authorization.
My biggest concern with this plan is how Disney will get guests from the current parks to the disconnected parcels that will be converted into attraction space (i.e. Toy Story lot). If that area were to become a separate gate, it's probably not a big deal, but if attractions placed across a surface street from the current parks are integrated into Disneyland or DCA, that's a big gap that needs to be bridged AND themed. I don't think it's as simple as building Coco, Wakanda, and Frozen in the Toy Story lot and building some bridges with moving walkways from Cars Land and Avengers CAMPUS to the new area. Universal can get away with it with the escalators/stairway at USH, but I just don't see a similar setup working at Disneyland.
Zootopia and Frozen Lands? Two lands with an excess of theming, but dud rides that we've seen a million times before? Did the brass at Disney get kicked in the head by a mule, do they not see Galaxy's Edge as the big failure that most everyone else sees? Oh gosh, please give us more trackless dark rides, said no one.
Disney is about to get stomped by Universal, and it deserves it. At Universal they're innovating in every direction and giving customers both detailed theming AND thrills.
And I've said it before, but who today cares about Zootopia or Wakanda? We've already got one Marvel-based land that's a gigantic dud, and Marvel's IP is sinking like a stone. I have young kids who watch Disney movies all the time, and one thing they never watch is Zootopia, because it's boring, too much about the message and not enough fun.
Please tell me Disney is not going to waste a third gate on these past-due properties. Give us something new, or, gosh, even exciting!
@thecolonel
Obviously you don't bother to read up about things that don't immediately interest you. Zootopia is a huge franchise in China so mkaes perfect sense to invest heavily in that IP over there. It doesn't mean it will follow over to the US.
Galaxay's Edge a failure? The land with the best attraction in the world and some of the longest lines in the two parks in which it is located is a 'failure'? By any definition other than that of wizened hard-core Star Wars uber-geeks Galaxy's Edge is a huge stonking success for Disney.
And as a casual theme park fan I would be dleighted to have more trackless dark rides. They look amazing and offer.
Epic Universe will be a massive hit. But Disney will continue to be successful because people actually like it....
Um, who are the "everyone" who sees Galaxy's Edge as a failure? I sure don't given how much I loved it and most everyone I know been there does too. Marvel having some issues to be sure but still good potential and trackless rides work well.
@David Brown, we're not talking about putting Zootopia in China, my man, we're talking about a third gate in Anaheim, California, USA. Maybe Zooptopia's huge over there, definitely not seeing it here, in fact I don't see that IP at all, and I have Disney kids in the target range.
As for Galaxy's Edge, the general consensus from what I read is that it has one good ride and is otherwise a dud, a lifeless land where budget cuts kept it from being what it was meant to be. You love it, great, but most everything I read rates the land as a fart. Doesn't help that Disney based it around new IP and then killed that IP. I mean, who cares about Kylo Ren and that fussy ginger guy? No one. GE is a monument to poor brand management, but yes, it has one dope ride.
"Trackless rides work well." Maybe Disney can feature that in their TV ads when they're competing against Epic Universe's jumping Donkey Kong coaster.
Disneyland needs more RIDES, not more trackless dark rides that are getting repetitive. Where is the next Matterhorn? Where is the next Big Thunder Mountain? We need more ride rides!!!
Avenger's Campus is themed after an outlet mall, it is an absolute eye sore and the Spider Man ride is lackluster. What's the new Avengers ride going to be? Another trackless dark ride that ends in a glorified Soarin scene? When I think Avengers I think action, I want a coaster, I want a RIDE that delivers on the promise of the premise.
Marvel land at IOA has one of the best coasters in the world and a fast paced Spider Man ride.
@thecolonel
I agree with you 1000%! When we visit Disneyland we often don't even bother with GE, the novelty has worn off.
If you're thinking these new lands are a third park, your concept of Disneyland Forward is completely off. As stated in the article, "The Disneyland Drive bridges could provide access from inside Disneyland and Disney California Adventure to new attractions to be built west of Disneyland Drive, on current parking lot space." This is an expansion of the existing parks into space directly across the road from them with a couple new IP lands in each, not a brand new park added to the resort (basically, if you look at Tokyo's Fantasy Springs expansion, picture this as something of that scale added to Disneyland and to DCA). Also, this is a 10 year, $2.5 billion project, not 30 years as Russell erroneously stated.
Honestly, if projects like Avengers Campus, Frozen, Galaxy's Edge, or Zootopia aren't your thing, or you find trackless dark rides underwhelming, that's an entirely valid opinion, but it also probably means Disney is no longer for you. Like it or not, the public these days finds these sorts of attractions far more compelling than the mountains as larger, more thrilling rides exist at every theme park, but few offer immersive storytelling in highly themed environments. Disney has decided the parks are solely an extension of their brand and has moved that way for a couple decades, with no indication that they are likely to change course. Personally, I still enjoy the Disney parks, but I definitely don't visit them nearly as much these days as I used to because I don't find the current experience to match my liking well enough to justify the ticket prices.
Ok, so FingerPoppinDaddy is just the colonel on a different account, right?
@MatthewG
Right two people cannot share the same opinion that differs with your own. Get real.
@AJ
I'm with you there, agreeing with what you're saying.
@AJ, you write: "Honestly, if projects like Avengers Campus, Frozen, Galaxy's Edge, or Zootopia aren't your thing, or you find trackless dark rides underwhelming, that's an entirely valid opinion, but it also probably means Disney is no longer for you."
Because Disney is no longer making rides, they're just going to focus on themed lands featuring the same trackless dark ride we've seen 10 times now? If that's true, you're right. Mickey's train is a fun C-ticket ride and we enjoy going on it, but we come to Disneyland for Space, Thunder, Rise, Splash, Pirates, Radiator Springs, GotG, Mansion--the E-tickets. If Disney is no longer making E-ticket rides, they're doomed.
"Like it or not, the public these days finds these sorts of attractions far more compelling than the mountains as larger, more thrilling rides exist at every theme park, but few offer immersive storytelling in highly themed environments."
That's simply false. Look at which rides' G+ passes are gone first: Indiana Jones, Space Mountain, Thunder, Splash, Tron; etc. are all far more popular than Mickey's Railway, Ratatouille; etc. The marquee attractions at Disneyland are ALL rides. Rise would be so-so but for the parts where you go up and down. And it strikes me that Universal is gaining on Disney specifically because of rides like Velocicoaster and all of the innovative rides promised by Epic Universe. And look at GE, it's a highly themed area, but no one goes back there anymore unless they have a fastpass for one of the rides. And why would they? After you've seen a "highly themed area" a couple of times, it has nothing more to offer.
"That's simply false. Look at which rides' G+ passes are gone first: Indiana Jones, Space Mountain, Thunder, Splash, Tron; etc. are all far more popular than Mickey's Railway, Ratatouille; etc. The marquee attractions at Disneyland are ALL rides."
That's very true. And Universal is loading up on rides, Velicicoaster is the exact way to combine theming with thrills, there is zero reason why Disney can't do something of this quality. In fact, they've done it before with Expedition Everest which is an insanely popular ride.
This just in! Disney to announce new "immersive experience" based around Indiana Jones where YOU can try on his hat!
"Because Disney is no longer making rides, they're just going to focus on themed lands featuring the same trackless dark ride we've seen 10 times now?"
So they're no longer making rides, but they're making trackless dark rides? A trackless dark ride is indeed a type of ride last time I checked. Your logic doesn't check out in this case.
"Mickey's train is a fun C-ticket ride and we enjoy going on it, but we come to Disneyland for Space, Thunder, Rise, Splash, Pirates, Radiator Springs, GotG, Mansion--the E-tickets."
I think most would consider Runaway Railway an E ticket, or at the very least a high D. Regardless, I certainly rank it as better than a couple of those attractions you listed as E tickets.
"If Disney is no longer making E-ticket rides, they're doomed."
They've got a "new" one opening up either late this year or early next year on both coasts, unless a change of theme is enough to change ticket levels despite nothing else about the ride changing.
"Look at which rides' G+ passes are gone first: Indiana Jones, Space Mountain, Thunder, Splash, Tron; etc. are all far more popular than Mickey's Railway, Ratatouille; etc."
I don't know about Florida, but in California Runaway Railway is definitely more popular than several of the park's other E-Tickets, namely Mansion, Pirates, Splash (R.I.P.), and Thunder. It is also the third most popular G+ redeem in the park after Indy and Space (Rise doesn't count since it's ILL). I'd say that makes it a pretty successful ride.
"The marquee attractions at Disneyland are ALL rides. Rise would be so-so but for the parts where you go up and down. And it strikes me that Universal is gaining on Disney specifically because of rides like Velocicoaster and all of the innovative rides promised by Epic Universe."
I believe you left out the word "thrill." Given your assessment of Rise, it seems you prefer thrills. In that case, Six Flags or Cedar Fair may be more up your alley than Disney, which has never branded themselves as a thrill-focused park.
"And look at GE, it's a highly themed area, but no one goes back there anymore unless they have a fastpass for one of the rides."
The number of individuals roaming the area at any given time says otherwise.
Look, thecolonel, we get it: You want the Disney of Eisner's time back. Unfortunately, that Disney no longer exists, and unless their attendance and revenue numbers take a massive nosedive it's not going to return. If you really dislike modern Disney to the extent your comments indicate, I challenge you to vote with your wallet and not spend another dime on any Disney product until they build their next E-ticket ride (or at least what qualifies as such for you), as railing against them online won't accomplish anything and buying a ticket to visit tells Disney that they're doing exactly what their audience wants.
I actually agree with the two posters that are saying Disney parks may be in more trouble than we are giving credit for because of poor management decisions and short sightedness, especially in regards to over the top IP reliance. I definitely miss the days back when Disney allowed their creative people to actually be creative and come up with new ideas instead of forcing everything to be branded Disney IP. Obviously most of the classic stuff people love at the parks was not forced Disney IP so the fact that they now pretty much rely entirely on data and surveys to dictate everything they build, which is the exact opposite of creativity, puzzling at best and at the end of the day just really sad. Its a glaring example of corporate numbers people calling the shots instead of having real leaders.
However, I also want to point out that Universal is doing the exact same thing, especially with Epic Universe. And doing things like putting 3 Harry Potter areas in 3 different parks is ridiculous, blatant, slap-in-the-face cash grab. So there is that lol.
"However, I also want to point out that Universal is doing the exact same thing, especially with Epic Universe. And doing things like putting 3 Harry Potter areas in 3 different parks is ridiculous, blatant, slap-in-the-face cash grab. So there is that lol."
Except that each HP experience in IOA, EU and UNI is different, including different rides, whereas GE in FL is the same as CA and if they truly slap one of the mini-themed areas like Arendale or Zootopia in CA and then raise ticket prices that will be the ultimate slap in the face.
My post was in reference to Universal Orlando and how they purposely put the three HP areas in three different parks to make HP fans (and everyone else) have to visit all three parks...meaning buy the most expensive ticket packages and spend the most time on property. Disney is following their lead as well hence why they put Frozen and Guardians of the Galaxy at Epcot even though they make no sense there. They knew that Epcot at the time was the least draw for people with little kids, and Frozen was the biggest IP on the planet at the time, so from a business standpoint making Frozen into Maelstrom was going to give them the greatest return on investment. Also with DHS getting Star Wars and Avatar having DAK (and to a lesser extent MK getting Tron) they knew that putting Guardians at Epcot was going to basically force people to go to all 4 parks even though it makes no sense there thematically.
Also not sure what you're trying to get at with your argument about clones at DLR since Harry Potter land is basically the same at California and Japan as it is in Orlando, maybe there was some confusion on what I was trying to get at.
This article has been archived and is no longer accepting comments.
What definition of "Affordable" are they using for "Affordable Housing"?