In what other U.S. locations would have been ideal to build the Disney parks?
What are your choices?
I think the location at Orlando is perfect. Southern California is also a great idea, but maybe it should have been built outside L.A. Maybe between L.A. and San Diego.
Texas and Arizona are two places without a THEME park that come to mind which have perfect weather.
From Tim W
Posted October 13, 2010 at 3:49 PM
I'm thinking Texas!
walt chose anaheim because it wasn't la. he should have bought more surrounding land before the area around it was built up, but he had no way of knowing disneyland would be so successful. being close to la would create more limits for the park though in my opinion.
Orlando is a nice location but it was far from perfect when I visited this past June and the heat index was somewhere in the 105 degree range.
People have said Texas and Arizona, well El Paso would be nice since it's between Phoenix and Dallas. Lol yeah right. But, hey you would never have to worry about rain here.
I don't know of a place with good weather where another Disney resort could thrive year round. Can't be too far north and have some distance between Orlando and Anaheim. St Louis? Nashville?
Let me also defend the notion that my home state, Texas doesn't have a theme park. Sea World San Antonio is sometimes forgotten and it's obviously not up to Disney or Universal themeing but it is an excellent theme park.
Texas does have big plots of land for sale as well fror less. I easily found 60,000 acres for 15 million just on Google! Does it snow around Dallas, TX?
Also, what about South Carolina. Hard Rock may not have worked out, but all you need is good weather for Disney, as they could build a park anywhere and it would be a success.
Lastly, Disney is building a hotel and shopping center close to Washington D.C. Perhaps in the future they could bring back Disney's America to go along with the hotel and shopping district?
From Tim W
Posted October 14, 2010 at 11:02 AM
Yes, to the last one! I'd still love to see Disney's America built in the DC area!
Daniel, Anaheim is outside of Los Angeles. It's in Orange County, between Los Angeles and San Diego Counties. Blame suburban sprawl and pavement.
I personally wouldn't go to a park I had to drive to. On a subconscious level, one reason we love theme parks (and malls) so much is the enjoyment of a space without cars and their inherent dangers.
From Tyler Bell
Posted October 14, 2010 at 5:10 PM
NC
Javier Suarez said: "On a subconscious level, one reason we love theme parks (and malls) so much is the enjoyment of a space without cars and their inherent dangers."
Is that right, Dr. Freud? On behalf of theme park and coaster enthusiasts everywhere, thank you for speaking for us.
Will you be charging for this session?
And are bumper cars exempt from the above? The ones at Knoebels are particularly dangerous :)
Javaier, don't worry, I'm not going to jump you for your comment, but one thing I don't understand was your comment "I personally wouldn't go to a park I had to drive to." Unless you live within walking distance of a park, or if you live in a metropolitan area with a mass-transit system, how else are we to go to a park? I live in small-town Ohio, 45 minutes from Cedar Point, and I love where I live. I can't and won't design my life around going to amusement parks. Even if I lived across the road from the Cedar Point Causeway I couldn't get there- no pedestrians allowed. Did I misunderstand what you were saying?
From sarah g
Posted October 15, 2010 at 7:46 AM
wait... FLORIDA is too hot, but we're suggested TEXAS??? have any of you BEEN to texas??? and yes, it snowed in Dallas several times last year.
^It's called a dry heat. Poeple say there is no difference, but there is. Texas and Florida heat is hot, but Texas' heat is not humid, so it is much easier to breathe and perhaps feels not quite as hot as a humid heat does.
Don't get me wrong, I love Florida a whole lot more, I am just saying the humidity factor plays a huge role on temperature.
San Antonio, Texas would be the other ideal place to build a Disney park. There is a Sea World for a good reason. It's a tourist destination.
South Carolina! Was on Walt's original shortlist. Can get hot like Florida, but not for as long and traditionally less of a hurricane threat as long as you put it in the midlands and higher. Also a shorter drive....especially for me!! :)
Wow, make a comment about cars, traffic, and possible reasons for why we love theme parks and everyone jumps on you. I think I must be on to something!
If you fly to SNA or LGB and take a shuttle to Disneyland, you didn't drive. If you Amtrak to Orlando or Kissimmee and take a taxicab, you didn't drive. Both ways you can read while you traveling, but you can't read while driving. I recommend you try reading sometime, it could raise the level of discourse in this "discussion" board.
From Baudrillard's "Simulacra and Simulations" (1988).
"Disneyland is a perfect model of all the entangled orders of simulation. To begin with it is a play of illusions and phantasms: pirates, the frontier, future world, etc. This imaginary world is supposed to be what makes the operation successful. But, what draws the crowds is undoubtedly much more the social microcosm, the miniaturized and religious revelling in real America, in its delights and drawbacks. You park outside, queue up inside, and are totally abandoned at the exit. In this imaginary world the only phantasmagoria is in the inherent warmth and affection of the crowd, and in that aufficiently excessive number of gadgets used there to specifically maintain the multitudinous affect. The contrast with the absolute solitude of the parking lot - a veritable concentration camp - is total. Or rather: inside, a whole range of gadgets magnetize the crowd into direct flows; outside, solitude is directed onto a single gadget: the automobile. By an extraordinary coincidence (one that undoubtedly belongs to the peculiar enchantment of this universe), this deep-frozen infantile world happens to have been conceived and realized by a man who is himself now cryogenized; Walt Disney, who awaits his resurrection at minus 180 degrees centigrade. The objective profile of the United States, then, may be traced throughout Disneyland, even down to the morphology of individuals and the crowd. All its values are exalted here, in miniature and comic-strip form. Embalmed and pactfied."
Goodbye, discussion board. Hope this was interesting. Let the anti-intellectual vitriol commence!
I don't think you should have been snapped at like in the previous posts above, but I mean come on. You really need someone to transport you everywhere? This can't be done yourself?
Ok lets clarify the Texas heat situation. I have lived in Texas all my life, but I live in El Paso, on the far west extreme tip of Texas where it's a desert climate and hardly rains. The heat here is hot but it's very dry and more tolerable than the muggy, humid heat of central Florida.
Now the parts of Texas that would most likely get a park(San Antonio,Austin,Houston, and Dallas) are kind of a mix between the dry and humid heat. Believe me it can get awfully hot and humid(especially in Houston and San Antonio) in the Summer.
I went out of my way to not jump on Mr. Suarez for his comment- I just wanted clarification. If I came across as being critical of him, I apologize. I tried to be polite in phrasing my question to him.
Doesn't it ever snow in Paris? Tokyo? Disney was planing on putting a major park in the DC area, and they get more paralyzing ice storms than northern Ohio does. OK, maybe Quebec or Minnesota would not be great locations for a new Disney park during the winter, but couldn't a park be created to deal with or even use the various seasons those of us in the northern half of the US enjoy to the park's advantage?
^Yes, but still, a park in an areay with good wheather is much more easily manageable and does not make for the extra costs there would be for snow removal.
I believe the best spot for Disney to have put a theme park was definitely in Anaheim. Best weather year-round never too cold or too hot always perfect.
I'm going to add my voice to Disney's America. This should be at the top of their list. Mostly because I want a disney park closer to where I live.
I love it being in Orlando. The heat in the summer is something you're going to get anywhere. I'd rather have 3-4 months of "extreme" heat than extreme snow and cold. If you go any farther north of Orlando you lose the nice sea breeze that keeps Orlando cooler than areas north of the area, even though most people don't realize this exists til you've lived in inland south. If you go any farther south you risk more damage from Hurricanes and don't resolve the heat issues.
Somewhere in TX where hurricanes are not as atrocious is ideal. But I disagree slightly with Disney's America in VA. As opposed to being evergreen like my home park resort of WDW, it's likely seasonal thanks to colder winters. I wouldn't consider my birth state of NJ to be an ideal Disney Park location for the same reasons regarding seasonal climate. (Don't get me started on how close that proposed park is to the turnpike or the parkway!)
Supose disney build a new park somewhere else in USA. If you live in east coast, south or center USA, and you need to get a plane to go to this new park, why would you go there instead of going to Orlando, where you can find a large amount of hotel, many of them very affordable, many other attractions besides Disney and a quite perfect weather?
This new park would attract mostly people who live nearby and could go by car. For the others, Orlando would be a far better destination.
Are you saying that the East is a better location in the U.S. than the West, because this is most certainly incorrect. The west is less inclines to natural disasters, many from the overcrowded East are moving West, and thus expansion is the West is more likely.
Considering that LA, San Diego and las Vegas are well served by Disneyland, I don't thing that the rest of west coast population would justify a new Disney theme park site. Maybe I am wrong, but the rest of west US, considering both sides of Rocky mountains wouldn't surpass 25 mi people.
Considering that LA, San Diego and las Vegas are well served by Disneyland, I don't thing that the rest of west coast population would justify a new Disney theme park site. Maybe I am wrong, but the rest of west US, considering both sides of Rocky mountains wouldn't surpass 25 mi people.
The East is just as well served with Walt disney World as the West is with Disneyland.
From J. Dana
Posted October 25, 2010 at 3:02 PM
Personally, I don't think there's anywhere else in the country for a Disney Park. We've got one in the West, and one in the East. The ONLY other option is Texas, and that's a big maybe -- because it would draw people away from the other two parks, and Disney isn't keen on that happening. Orlando's property is grand enough to draw people from all over the world, and Anaheim is trying to get there -- although lack of space will always be a challenge.
There may well be non-theme park Disney attractions being built across the country, such as Washington's hotel and shopping mall, but Disney parks are designed to be "national" in scope, unlike the smaller regional amusement parks like Six Flags (and even Busch Gardens, Knotts, etc). I wouldn't look for another Disney theme park in the states. UNLESS the Washington development is the first step towards "socializing" Disney to the D.C. area....and maybe that "America" theme park would happen. I think it would be mostly indoors, mostly small. It was Michael Eisner's idea, so it may have been scrapped by now. Oh well.
Why not build Disney America at Disney World? With all of the new theme parks popping up everywhere, why not have Disney fight for more market share with a new theme park of their own in Orlando?
This discussion has been archived, and is not accepting additional responses.
