New parking structure

Discussion in 'Disneyland News, Rumors and General Discussion' started by brian8871, Aug 10, 2016.

Tags:
Random Thread
  1. Dabob2

    Dabob2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2003
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    63
    For DTD restaurants it's probably a plus, or at least a wash (there's the downside of non-park visitors now having to go through security to go to DTD, a potential PITA that may cause some non-park would-be-DTD-visitors to opt for other local restaurants instead).

    For the restaurants on Harbor, though, it's unquestionably going to hurt. I wouldn't be surprised to see some close after all this takes effect, especially if/when the crosswalk closes.

    Which, by the way, is supposed to be... when?
     
  2. FerretAfros

    FerretAfros Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2003
    Messages:
    689
    Likes Received:
    167
    Trophy Points:
    43
    I haven't heard anything, but given the scale of the project it would probably take 18-24 months to construct the pedestrian bridge and associated walkways/security areas. They don't appear to have broken ground on any of this yet (work may have begun on the parking structure, but that's not clear), so I wouldn't expect the existing crosswalk to be removed until the first half of 2019.

    If they really want to rush it, I think they could probably get the pedestrian facilities ready in 12-18 months, but that might be tough with the maintenance of traffic requirements on Harbor Blvd and Disney's typically slow construction schedules
     
  3. Dabob2

    Dabob2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2003
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Pretty amazing that in 1954-55 they built the whole park in a year, and now it takes them 1-2 years to do a pedestrian bridge!
     
  4. ni_teach

    ni_teach Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2000
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    8
    To be fair back in 1954 there was nothing else around. Building a pedestrian bridge without having to block a major street is a major undertaking.
     
  5. Dabob2

    Dabob2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2003
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Sure. But a 2-year undertaking?
     
  6. berol

    berol Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    53
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    8
    It'll be months more just to get city approval. They're only in the workshopping phase.
     
  7. FerretAfros

    FerretAfros Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2003
    Messages:
    689
    Likes Received:
    167
    Trophy Points:
    43
    That's pretty standard for roadway projects like this. Most of the construction is cast-in-place concrete, which requires time to set the forms and lots of time to cure. The work also has to be done in phases to allow traffic to continue to flow on Harbor. Although the end result is pretty simple, the construction process is a lot more complicated than assembling an erector set-like steel building (depending what method they use for the garage, it could go from essentially nothing to completion in 8 months or so)

    Also, keep in mind that much of the park's original build-out was done with far more relaxed building codes and worker protections. Any construction project in 2017 will be a lot more time consuming than the equivalent project in 1955 (not to mention the hasty work that's been systematically rebuilt and replaced through the years, which isn't as feasible with transportation projects)
     
  8. Dabob2

    Dabob2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2003
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    63
    That last part was kind of my point. It's just a different world than it was in the 50's, both good or bad (of course, it's some of both).

    Two years still seems excessive to me, but I'm actually glad it will take them a while, because I will miss the crosswalk if they do indeed do away with it.
     
  9. Jim in Merced CA

    Jim in Merced CA Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2000
    Messages:
    480
    Likes Received:
    268
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Finally - the company is cleaning up the area around Disneyland once and for all. Walts dying wish! As the various restaurants go out of business, Disneyland can buy up the land and expand the resort.
     
  10. ni_teach

    ni_teach Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2000
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    8
    The locals business are starting to fight the plans.
    They have put up a website to talk about their point of view.
    Home

    What do you think?
     
  11. Dabob2

    Dabob2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2003
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I'm not at all surprised. If I owned a lodging or (especially) an eating establishment on Harbor I'd know that closing the crosswalk means my business takes a steep dive, and maybe goes out of business.

    One interesting claim in the link is that "Disneyland and the City of Anaheim are required by code and specific agreement to “provide convenient access to all hotel, restaurant and retail opportunities in the Anaheim Resort to enhance the areawide tourist experience.”

    Is this true? Was it agreed to when they got approval for DCA? If so, I could see a convincing argument raised that closing the crosswalk takes away convenient access.

    They also have a good argument that public land would be used to benefit one particular business, while disadvantaging others.

    I think they know this bridge is coming in one form or another. So ultimately they call for "In exchange for the city granting Disneyland the use of public property for its bridge crossing at Harbor Boulevard, a written commitment from Disney to never close the existing east gate to the park. This gate admits visitors directly from Harbor Boulevard, without subjecting them to a 20-minute hike past, through and over the parking tower, transportation hub, security complex and bridge."

    This seems reasonable to me. The bridge is great for those using the new parking facility. But as someone who sometimes stays on Harbor, I know I'd rather have that crosswalk option open. As I pointed out before, if they close the crosswalk and current gate, even those staying on the West side of Harbor (Candy Cane, around the corner on Katella, West side of Harbor north of Ball) will have a much longer walk to get to and from the park. Obviously the Harbor businesses will feel even stronger about this.
     
  12. FerretAfros

    FerretAfros Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2003
    Messages:
    689
    Likes Received:
    167
    Trophy Points:
    43
    This is the first I've heard of it, but it sure wouldn't surprise me. As part of the Anaheim Resort District that was created in the late 90's as a way to clean the area up (largely pushed by Disney as part of their own Resort expansion), they created a special tax district. It would seem logical to include language in the tax district that convenient access must be maintained as part of the agreement for all the other businesses to pay up; seems like a fair trade to me. And given that Disney is clearly making it more difficult for them to access the parks, they have every right to push back. I don't think Disney necessarily needs to keep the existing eastern gateway open, but there are feasible ways for them to provide a connection from the eastern sidewalk on Harbor Blvd up to the proposed walkway

    Though I will say that "using public land" is a bit dubious, since the only public land that Disney is using is the aerial space over Harbor Blvd. Yes, that does belong to the public (as will the roads accessing the new garage and transit area), but it's not as if they're building the parking garage on a city park. Though I certainly agree with the complaint that the bridge isn't especially attractive; it was clearly designed from the perspective of park-goers, not road-users and is a far cry from the DTD bridge (which is hardly an architectural achievement itself)
     
  13. wachawacha

    wachawacha Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2000
    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    3
    This is only to try and get concessions form Disney. “provide convenient access to all hotel, restaurant and retail opportunities in the Anaheim Resort to enhance the areawide tourist experience.” Is relative. If you are Motel 6, Residence Inn, Peacock suits, La Quinta, the World Mark Hotel, or even the Garden Walk you can argue that Disney is making it easier to access your business. Disney is trying to make a safer better resort. Everyone will not be happy with whatever is decided upon.
     
    Jim in Merced CA and Ifzorro68 like this.
  14. Dabob2

    Dabob2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2003
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    63
    " I don't think Disney necessarily needs to keep the existing eastern gateway open, but there are feasible ways for them to provide a connection from theeastern sidewalk on Harbor Blvd up to the proposed walkway"

    Maybe, but such a connection would presumably have to go back east behind the security checkpoint. Which is quite a bit east of Harbor. People couldn't just go up to the bridge from Harbor, and walk west, because that's post security.
     
  15. Ifzorro68

    Ifzorro68 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2000
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    3
    There have been several studies and additional walking is minimal if the hotels decide to open up gateways at the back of their hotels to merge directly to the pre security area.

    The issue is mostly with some of the business that are concerned about less foot traffic from guests that are there primarily because of the Disney resort. They feel Disney is not being fair by possibly choking some of their business.
    Some study show that those business thrive because of hotel clientele that stay on that street and to a lower extent further south.
    By pushing for direct access to the security area they are actually adding to the possible decrease of guest flow. If those back gates are not built guests would have a slightly longer walk but they would also be walking in front of the business that are concerned

    What's funny is that they exist only because of Disney. They are even complaining about the look of the bridge
     
  16. Dabob2

    Dabob2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2003
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Well, sorta. If you're staying in the back (east) end of one of the hotels relatively close to the entry area to security, yes. If you're staying in the front (west, near Harbor) end and/or not near the security area (certainly any of the properties north of the current crosswalk), the additional walk is considerable. Ditto if you're on the west side of Harbor.

    I don't think it's at all unreasonable to keep the crosswalk and gate open. It would necessitate having a small security area just west of Harbor (presumably east of where it is now), but not even necessarily any more security employees, since they'd be split between that area and the new bridge security area, which would have fewer people going through it if the crosswalk/gate were left in place. Presumably they have to have some sort of security area for cm's remaining in that general area anyway.

    Well, the hotels would benefit it their back gates could connect to a sidewalk leading to the security area, but the restaurants haven't been pushing for such a thing, for exactly that reason. In this instance the hotels' interests and the restaurants' are at odds with each other. But they'd both benefit by leaving the crosswalk and Harbor gate open.
     
  17. FerretAfros

    FerretAfros Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2003
    Messages:
    689
    Likes Received:
    167
    Trophy Points:
    43
    There is adequate space under the walkway that they could add another security checkpoint there, accessed directly from the Harbor Blvd sidewalk, with some sort of vertical circulation to the path above. It would be more expensive for Disney to build than just sending everybody to the new checkpoint behind the hotels, but it would keep the entire west side of the street available for park expansion space. As far as urban planning goes, the solution they're proposing is overly basic for the needs of the area
    I'm not familiar with all of the hotels, but several of them would lose a room or two to add access in the back, which doesn't seem like an improvement. The neighboring rooms would also see a significant increase in traffic and noise, in what is currently the quietest part of most hotels
     
  18. Dabob2

    Dabob2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2003
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    63
    You think so? That sidewalk isn't THAT wide. First of all, Disney would have to gain rights to that part of what is now public sidewalk. There would have to be adequate space for people simply walking down Harbor to bypass it. And it couldn't be more than one or at most two checkpoints wide, I wouldn't think, would could create horrendous backups at peak times with all those people who stay on Harbor, with the queue potentially backing up into other business's spaces.


    That's a good point. I'm sure the hotels would do it anyway, and let the guests worry about it, though.
     
  19. FerretAfros

    FerretAfros Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2003
    Messages:
    689
    Likes Received:
    167
    Trophy Points:
    43
    There isn't room on the sidewalk, but the walkway will be tall enough that they could easily put ground-level facilities underneath it as it approaches Harbor Blvd. Doing some rough math, they should have enough clearance for pedestrian facilities for about 200' behind the sidewalk. They already own the land (and paid a boatload for it), so it would make sense for them to get the most out of it; I would be surprised if Disney wasn't already planning some sort of use for that space, maybe a stock room for the ODV that will inevitably clog the new walkway. Why not use that space for guests instead?
     
  20. Dabob2

    Dabob2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2003
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Okay, I can picture what you're talking about now.

    It still necessitates a second security checkpoint, so to me it makes just as much sense to put in just west of the current Harbor gate. Then people staying on the west side of Harbor don't have to cross the street (at Katella or Ball, both extraordinarily busy intersections, assuming they close the current crosswalk), just to cross it again with Disney's bridge.
     

Share This Page