Orlando Attractions Area News & Developments

[Abent1988]

According to WFTV, The Wizarding World of Harry Potter Roller Coaster is coming to Universal’s Islands of Adventure and will replace Dragon Challenge f/k/a Dueling Dragons.  Dragon Challenge is expected to close down on September 5th, 2017.

http://www.wftv.com/news/local/dueling-dragons-closing-to-make-room-for-harry-potter-roller-coaster-at-universal-orlando/569980598

[codypet]

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/tourism/os-bz-universal-potter-dragon-challenge-20170724-story.html

So does this mean the coasters are coming down or is the ride cue area being rethemed and the coasters staying?  I read this as the coasters are coming down.

Side note I was at Busch Gardens this weekend and its crazy they have the ghosts of old rides just sitting rendering whole lands in the park dead.

[jrs2]

2 hours ago, Abent1988 said:

According to WFTV, The Wizarding World of Harry Potter Roller Coaster is coming to Universal’s Islands of Adventure and will replace Dragon Challenge f/k/a Dueling Dragons.  Dragon Challenge is expected to close down on September 5th, 2017.

http://www.wftv.com/news/local/dueling-dragons-closing-to-make-room-for-harry-potter-roller-coaster-at-universal-orlando/569980598

Based on the article language, this might be a cross between the Diagon Alley ride and The Mummy.  It may be enclosed and have a stop go format where the riders can "see" different stuff like the article states.  Otherwise, a coaster is a coaster.

[spenser1058]

A second JW Marriott on the way?

From Orlando Rising:

http://orlando-rising.com/a-second-jw-marriott-planned-near-epcot/

[jrs2]

2 hours ago, spenser1058 said:

A second JW Marriott on the way?

From Orlando Rising:

http://orlando-rising.com/a-second-jw-marriott-planned-near-epcot/

I just saw this.  Bonnet Creek.  Wow.  The other JW is not that far, right?  This is supposed to be more luxurious than the other.

What I'm waiting to see is a luxury brand hotel at Universal other than the Loews brands they have.  Nothing yet...

[spenser1058]

The other local JW Marriott adjoins the Ritz-Carlton over around JYP and FL 528, I think (not my usual stomping grounds.)

The JW Marriott flag is the next tier up from the standard Marriott brand and a notch below the Ritz-Carlton.

[jrs2]

8 minutes ago, spenser1058 said:

The other local JW Marriott adjoins the Ritz-Carlton over around JYP and FL 528, I think (not my usual stomping grounds.)

The JW Marriott flag is the next tier up from the standard Marriott brand and a notch below the Ritz-Carlton.

That's what bugs me; the other one connects to Ritz; so, how can this one be more luxurious?

[spenser1058]

7 minutes ago, jrs2 said:

That's what bugs me; the other one connects to Ritz; so, how can this one be more luxurious?

Maybe it's our next 7-star hotel! *giggles*

[jrs2]

18 hours ago, spenser1058 said:

Maybe it's our next 7-star hotel! *giggles*

oh, man, did I want that 7-star property built.  it would have been such a landmark for North I-Drive.

[Boomer136]

On July 25, 2017 at 4:37 PM, spenser1058 said:

Maybe it's our next 7-star hotel! *giggles*

You are correct in the JYP location. Mid-size (for Orlando) convention space. The only difference between the Ritz and the JW as far as I can make out is the fixture design (JW - modern-boring, Ritz - Edwardian-esque) and the color scheme both of which is also reflected in the uniforms/costumes of the staff. The transition happens abruptly in the convention space between the two.

Bonnet Creek hosts another such pairing of Hilton/Waldorf Astoria and lots of room in that neck of the woods to build more. 

I would expect more hotels. The expansion of the parks not only offer new and more attractions, but also adds more guest capacity. Operations folks while still having the hand clickers to count guests engaged in streetmosphere acts, know to the second guests engaged in queued rides. The more capacity of guest engagement, the more guests per day in the parks, the more beds for those guests at night. I would also expect the studios parking lot to be expanded.

[jrs2]

A big gripe against WDW is the Mickey Ears solar farm near Epcot.  They could have built a canopy over part of the parking lot with solar panels like Darden did on the top floor of their parking deck.  That would've been 'advanced' and "innovative" for people to see.  Instead, they bulldozed some trees instead.

Edited July 27, 2017 by jrs2

[Boomer136]

On July 27, 2017 at 5:47 PM, jrs2 said:

A big gripe against WDW is the Mickey Ears solar farm near Epcot.  They could have built a canopy over part of the parking lot with solar panels like Darden did on the top floor of their parking deck.  That would've been 'advanced' and "innovative" for people to see.  Instead, they bulldozed some trees instead.

And provided shade and rain canopy for people and 120 degree cars....

[prahaboheme]

On 7/27/2017 at 2:47 PM, jrs2 said:

A big gripe against WDW is the Mickey Ears solar farm near Epcot.  They could have built a canopy over part of the parking lot with solar panels like Darden did on the top floor of their parking deck.  That would've been 'advanced' and "innovative" for people to see.  Instead, they bulldozed some trees instead.

Proof that people will legit criticize Disney for anything -- even when they are minimizing their carbon footprint.

[shardoon]

On 7/28/2017 at 9:24 PM, Boomer136 said:

And provided shade and rain canopy for people and 120 degree cars....

Honestly, can you imagine the gridlock the parking would be? Think how fast and efficient they get people in while parking their cars. Canopies have those metal stilts all over the place, there is no way you can direct cars in that fast. I admit that I have to back up a time or two to line up perfectly when parking my car in fast park and relax by the airport. 

[jrs2]

On 7/28/2017 at 11:16 PM, prahaboheme said:

Proof that people will legit criticize Disney for anything -- even when they are minimizing their carbon footprint.

How is Disney minimizing it's carbon footprint?

[aent]

1 minute ago, jrs2 said:

How is Disney minimizing it's carbon footprint?

Using an on site solar farm rather then coal?

For true, large scale solar farms, its often not practical to install it above parking lots, due to the cost of hurricane rated supports, the increased risk of damage, and the higher repair and maintenance costs as now everything would need a lift. On top of that, you're now possibly going to need lights running much more often to light up the parking lots further decreasing the cost effectiveness.

There's a reason the large scale "utility" solar farms are all clearing the land for it, and even looking at the largest rooftop  PV system in the southeast, our convention center, they still only covered less then 1/4 of the roof on one building... I'd say facilities like that are great targets before building structure to keep them up in the air over parking lots. Unless its for show and not really to produce in an economically feasible way.

[codypet]

I feel like the convention center or I don't know Walmart/Target/HomeDepot/Lowe's and larger Publix roofs provide a perfect opportunity to put rooftop solar.   When I landed from the north, I was floored at the sea of retail buildings that didn't have solar.  It's such a missed opportunity.

[metal93]

It's never going to happen, but I always thought it would be great for Disney to ditch their huge parking lots in favor of garages, and replace their parking lot trams for each park with a moving walkway system kind of like Universal Studios has. Maybe they could do garages for their resorts too. A number of benefits would be realized - no more getting wet in the rain, less space eaten up by asphalt allowing for more greenery: this reduces the heat island effect and the amount of impervious surface, the visual blight of a parking lot full of cars can be hidden away behind nice garages (imagine an Art Deco garage for Hollywood Studios, or one covered in vegetation for Animal Kingdom, for example), and that the roofs can easily be used for solar panels or rooftop gardens. I can't begin to imagine how much such an endeavor would cost Disney, so for now it's just some wild dream of mine.

[spenser1058]

The latest on Margaritaville, the mega resort underway on US192 west of Kissimmee.

Irlo Bronson's highway has been moribund for some time - the billions of dollars invested here will hopefully be a game changer. 

Part of the problem has always been that development has always been a slave to the sea of asphalt that is US192. It's good to see a Universal-style water taxi included for guests and residents of the project.

Also interesting is the possibility of a water park by a name operator (although I'm not convinced anyone can compete with the Mouse or Uni on that score anymore.)

It also notes the possibility of a fourth Fun Spot.

From Orlando Weekly:

https://m.orlandoweekly.com/Blogs/archives/2017/07/31/more-than-just-a-place-to-waste-away-margaritaville-is-going-to-be-huge

[jrs2]

On 7/28/2017 at 11:16 PM, prahaboheme said:

Proof that people will legit criticize Disney for anything -- even when they are minimizing their carbon footprint.

Am I being unfair to Disney? 

By comparison, Universal has two huge 5 & 6 story parking decks and a third employee parking deck.  Cabana Bay's surface parking footprint has been reduced with two 3-story parking decks.  The only Universal resort out of six without a parking deck is the Hard Rock.  At Disney, only MGM has an employee parking deck, and that is it.  The Disney Springs parking decks are...a good start and nothing more.  So, that's probably 3 parking decks on the entire property (with a 4th u/c).  The Hilton/ Waldorf & The Wyndham Bonnet Creek each have parking decks- but that's not Disney property.  You see a trend?  The EPCOT employee parking lot is huge, but it's hidden from view with a tree barrier.  It's amazing that none of the resorts have parking decks.

So, is cutting down hundreds of Pine trees in exchange for a small Mickey Ears solar farm that big of a deal ala carbon? Should they be applauded for this?  What about the notion of all the trees that don't exist in place of asphalt ocean theme park parking lots on their property? They don't even do a good job of mixing in tree coverage within those lots.  Ever been to Animal Kingdom and seen their fully tree-less parking lot?  It's pathetically barren, and it's relatively new.

They can start reducing their carbon footprint by planting a couple of thousand shade trees in their parking lots- with irrigation- if they want to impress me.  Otherwise, stop tearing down trees for a solar farm. 

1 hour ago, aent said:

Using an on site solar farm rather then coal?

For true, large scale solar farms, its often not practical to install it above parking lots, due to the cost of hurricane rated supports, the increased risk of damage, and the higher repair and maintenance costs as now everything would need a lift. On top of that, you're now possibly going to need lights running much more often to light up the parking lots further decreasing the cost effectiveness.

There's a reason the large scale "utility" solar farms are all clearing the land for it, and even looking at the largest rooftop  PV system in the southeast, our convention center, they still only covered less then 1/4 of the roof on one building... I'd say facilities like that are great targets before building structure to keep them up in the air over parking lots. Unless its for show and not really to produce in an economically feasible way.

So, how many megawatts have they saved from that small solar farm vs the coal they haven't had to burn as a result of using it?  I'm not going to get into a debate about coal vs clean coal, or alternative clean energy arguments.  What about Crystal River?  Isn't that a nuclear power plant?  How far does it's service territory extend?  What about wind energy? 

Central Florida isn't Nevada.  It is not acceptable to tear down trees in favor of solar farms under the guise of reducing one's carbon footprint.  Period.  They should be made to replace those trees elsewhere.

Or, at EPCOT, for example, They need to look at peak attendance numbers over the past 5 years, see how much of the parking lot is unnecessary, and then built the solar farm on former parking space areas of that lot.

Seriously, am I the only tree-huger on these boards?

[shardoon]

2 minutes ago, jrs2 said:

Am I being unfair to Disney? 

By comparison, Universal has two huge 5 & 6 story parking decks and a third employee parking deck.  Cabana Bay's surface parking footprint has been reduced with two 3-story parking decks.  The only Universal resort out of six without a parking deck is the Hard Rock.  At Disney, only MGM has an employee parking deck, and that is it.  The Disney Springs parking decks are...a good start and nothing more.  So, that's probably 3 parking decks on the entire property (with a 4th u/c).  The Hilton/ Waldorf & The Wyndham Bonnet Creek each have parking decks- but that's not Disney property.  You see a trend?  The EPCOT employee parking lot is huge, but it's hidden from view with a tree barrier.  It's amazing that none of the resorts have parking decks.

So, is cutting down hundreds of Pine trees in exchange for a small Mickey Ears solar farm that big of a deal ala carbon? Should they be applauded for this?  What about the notion of all the trees that don't exist in place of asphalt ocean theme park parking lots on their property? They don't even do a good job of mixing in tree coverage within those lots.  Ever been to Animal Kingdom and seen their fully tree-less parking lot?  It's pathetically barren, and it's relatively new.

They can start reducing their carbon footprint by planting a couple of thousand shade trees in their parking lots- with irrigation- if they want to impress me.  Otherwise, stop tearing down trees for a solar farm. 

So, how many megawatts have they saved from that small solar farm vs the coal they haven't had to burn as a result of using it?  I'm not going to get into a debate about coal vs clean coal, or alternative clean energy arguments.  What about Crystal River?  Isn't that a nuclear power plant?  How far does it's service territory extend?  What about wind energy? 

Central Florida isn't Nevada.  It is not acceptable to tear down trees in favor of solar farms under the guise of reducing one's carbon footprint.  Period.  They should be made to replace those trees elsewhere.

Or, at EPCOT, for example, They need to look at peak attendance numbers over the past 5 years, see how much of the parking lot is unnecessary, and then built the solar farm on former parking space areas of that lot.

Seriously, am I the only tree-huger on these boards?

You are missing one huge key in the entire discussions............ all those places that have the parking garage have limited land. Parking garages are more expensive than surface lots. Its that simple. If Universal had an infinite amount of land to work with like Disney, you will see parking lots as well.........in fact, Universal used to have surface lots back in the day, until they ran out of land. Disney springs ran out of land, Hilton and Wyndam Bonnet creek have garages because their lot sizes are limited............see the trend? 

Yes, I would love for everyone to build in a urban mold........... but the all powerful dollar still runs all businesses. 

[jrs2]

14 minutes ago, shardoon said:

You are missing one huge key in the entire discussions............ all those places that have the parking garage have limited land. Parking garages are more expensive than surface lots. Its that simple. If Universal had an infinite amount of land to work with like Disney, you will see parking lots as well.........in fact, Universal used to have surface lots back in the day, until they ran out of land. Disney springs ran out of land, Hilton and Wyndam Bonnet creek have garages because their lot sizes are limited............see the trend? 

Yes, I would love for everyone to build in a urban mold........... but the all powerful dollar still runs all businesses. 

I know, but Universal still makes money- enough to keep at it with Disney financially.  So, if they can still make money while still having to pay extra for their infrastructure and not increase ticket prices any more than their trend setting rival, then Disney can do the same with their parks.  IMO. 

I think that Disney should operate as though they have limited land if they are to be taken seriously as a friend to the environment.

Edited July 31, 2017 by jrs2

[shardoon]

37 minutes ago, jrs2 said:

I know, but Universal still makes money- enough to keep at it with Disney financially.  So, if they can still make money while still having to pay extra for their infrastructure and not increase ticket prices any more than their trend setting rival, then Disney can do the same with their parks.  IMO. 

I think that Disney should operate as though they have limited land if they are to be taken seriously as a friend to the environment.

Well, I agree........... but those nasty stockholders and quarterly earning reports lol. 

[spenser1058]

http://www.azquotes.com/quote/1154973

"And parking lots!"

In Anaheim, the Mouse has parking garages. And when USH got started, they had surface lots. As they developed the property and needed more capacity in limited space, they went vertical.

shardoon called it, the bottom line is space and maximizing shareholder wealth. If you don't, the Wall St. vultures circle, just like they did over Disney in 1984 and did almost continuosly over Uni until the Comcast acquisition.

Edited July 31, 2017 by spenser1058

[dcluley98]

On 7/24/2017 at 1:22 PM, codypet said:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/tourism/os-bz-universal-potter-dragon-challenge-20170724-story.html

So does this mean the coasters are coming down or is the ride cue area being rethemed and the coasters staying?  I read this as the coasters are coming down.

Side note I was at Busch Gardens this weekend and its crazy they have the ghosts of old rides just sitting rendering whole lands in the park dead.

Saw the plans for this new ride today. It is an entirely new ride. Actually, it is quite a bit more than just the ride, with them completely removing the old dueling coasters and using the area to build on in Hogsmeade area, but none of us can say anything about it, LOL.  So let's just say that there are a lot of rumors out there and probably a several of them happen to be true, and if so, it is gonna be a magical ride experience!