Yeah, but it doesnt help that it isnt a very good picture.
Yeah, but it doesnt help that it isnt a very good picture.
I remember reading an article, oh, about a year back, about a community that had the eminent domain problem. A developer wanted to build luxury homes or condos or somesuch on a piece of property that was across the street from the local park. This park was surrounded by 2-bedroom houses. The mayor, wanting the increased taxes that would come from the development (and I assume the planning commission had to be in on this too?) merely had to declare the existing homes to be "blight" by defining blight for that area as homes with only two bedrooms, no fireplace, and what have you until the homes in question qualified as blight. Turns out, the mayor's house, though not in the threatened block, fit the same description, as the owners of threatened homes pointed out. I never did hear if they succeeded in keeping their homes or not.... I'm thinking they didn't.
All the City of Anaheim has to do is define the existing homes as "blight" and boom, they can take it for "redevelopment", or "improvement". It *can* happen. I think the PR is the only thing that keeps Disney from using it.
The area in red are houses. They are low income housing. Anaheim has very little low income housing and if this area was removed without being relocated the city would loose on some federal income. Alhtough it would most likely be little compared to the amount of revenue Disney could provide with a thir dgate.
Screamin closing...No ----- refurbed yes. Mullholland madness thats another story.
the idea of investing the money on Disneyland that they used for DCA sounds interesting but in no way practicle. The money that was put into building the infustructure for DCA would not bring in much extra revenue overall to the resort. Especially since it would not really be much of a resort with one park and one hotel. Anaheims surrounding infustructure was starting to fall apart and it would have been incredibly dificult to convince the city to help put the bill to help clean up the surrounding area by promising it a few new attractions that would really not benefit the city by adding overnight stays for the surrounding hotels and bussiness.
Consider this, When Disney builds some of there new "e" ticket attractions it costs them anything between 70 million dollars to the overally high over the budget expense of "Mission space" hich cost it several hundred million dollars.
Disney could get a much higher return by bidding out a larger construction project instead of one attraction. Disney has been able to start the infustructure of smaller second and third gate parks with an approximate bid of 600 million dollars.
Yes they might not be parks like TDS or Disneyland Paris but the infustructure is there and the park could then more easily continue to grow a few years later after its initial opening.
DCA is not doing as bad as some people believe. The 1.4 billion dollars supposedly report in some of these boards was not just for DCA. It included the hotel and other large improvements that made disneyland into a multiday destination for out of state visitors. Dca will see growth within the next five years that will expand its borders and at the same time leave plenty of room for future devlopment of attractions in each land. So do not ecpect to see large sections being buldozed at one time. expect it to develop into a second gate that will eventually have more attractions than even ome of the WDW second gates.
I didn't notice yesterday that there are 2 red areas. Section 2 is where I was looking which has the red border arount the entire area with the yellow, teal and blue subscetions. I didn't notice that next to area 3 was a red box which are some apartments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Baloo
I wasn't saying Screamin' and Madness were closing for good. They are both getting an extensive, much-needed refurbishment. It is an ideal time to completely redo Paradise Pier since the only draws will be closed.
yeah a perfect time indeed.
Used to be the largest on earth until Tokyo Disneyland made the largest one by 5 or so parking spaces lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jspider
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't a huge chunk of anaheims development a result of Disneyland?
I don't think Disney will ever need to worry about Eminent Domain issues, as the money Anaheim makes off of Disney is already remarkably high. I think this eminent domain (for economic reasons) is a last result tool for planners struggling to revitalize cities with poor economies.
Besides, if you lived close to Disneyland, wouldn't you want to move out of your house for the greater good of Disney? :)
Well I was watching my Disney Treasures: Disneyland DVD and Walt himself said that a few houses had to be cleared so Disneyland could be built.
I remeber seeing them destroy a few farm houses and such when they were building Disneyland in that 50th video they have in the 50 years exibit if I'm remebering correctlyQuote:
Originally Posted by Disney Wrassler
not sure if this was the same thing, I don't think Walt had that kind of power back then though the Disney company should have that kind of power right now
You might be right.
Couple of thoughts here.
It would be a mighty big pricetag to pay off even lower income housing given the current market in CA. (I live in an average, 40 year-old, three bedroom, and our house was appraised for over $400.000)which is ridiculous!
I lived in Japan in the sixites, and I used to visit a year-round resort called Summerland. It was a water park, that was designed to look like a beach, with a wave pool, underwater tropical music, stage shows, and carnival rides.
The whole thing had been built in a huge glass dome, no matter the time of year, it was 80 degrees. in 1967 there wasn't anything like it.
An indoor water park with a retractable roof, could bring visitors all year-round! Locals would love this also I think.
But lets get real. Save DCA First PLEASE...
As a homeowner in a location close to where business might want to build- the eminent domain idea really scares me. Why? Because my house is just far enough from the main street that my house would probably back onto the new construction leaving my home price in the dump with no possibility of getting compensated. I really balk at eminent domain issues.
I would think Disney will just pony up the money and buy out the places as they come around and maybe give the domain a shot on a couple of holdouts as was said earlier.
Frankly- what they have done to the area behind the hotel has made a huge difference back there. The area has been cleaned up immensely although I don't know how many displaced families have been able to find suitable housing.
The city of Garden Grove has just done this to a long time restaurant on Harbor Blvd., Los Sanchez. Their land has been taken for a hotel project. The city got them a new location, but it is not as good as the old location. For more details check out the latest Disneyland update at MousePlanet. Heading is entitled Garden Grove Land Grab. http://www.mouseplanet.com/articles.php?art=dl060117xx
^^A third gate WOULD help fix the problems with DCA. (as said above!)
I think that we forget that all of Disneyland was built in one year. If management wanted to fix the problems with DCA and DL's Tomorrowland, it would not take that much time (if they were willing to commit the MONEY!) ha ha.
I also think that the current management is SO short sighted. Walt thought years ahead. Because of his forethought, WDW enjoyed a bonanza of revenue. Walt bought way too much land to use in Orlando, but he was thinking of the future. Now Disney management cannot think more than one quarter ahead. The time is NOW to work on a third gate for Anaheim. It will pay off in the future. The more parks that are first quality, the more draw everything there would be, more income. Also more Disney hotels could be built which would increase income. This should be obvious to management, but as long as they are focused on THEIR bonuses and not Disney future, it will not happen.