Universal Orlando Resort Expansion (Part 1)

[Nick]

This is why the Ripley's land (red) is important.

It touches both the current Universal land (blue) as well as is near the parts of UCPM III (purple) that are in bankruptcy proceedings right now. Look at that northwest sliver of red near the Universal land in particular, is that land even useful to Ripley's?

That's why I think Comcast should consider buying Ripley's land if possible. If Comcast makes an offer that's 30-40% above what they paid, would they consider just offloading that 40 acres at a quick profit?

That Ripley's land and the UCPM III parcels in bankruptcy would be hugely useful as hotels off of the main property on Universal Blvd.

I honestly wonder if Ripley's honestly has legit plans for this area or if they simply bought in hopes of Universal wanting the land and making an easy profit without ever building.

 

[JungleSkip]

So is this near the main, big plot of Uni land or one of the smaller, unconnected plots?

 

[fryoj]

I honestly wonder if Ripley's honestly has legit plans for this area or if they simply bought in hopes of Universal wanting the land and making an easy profit without ever building.

Or the flip side, they want to build specifically because Uni is going to put a lot of potential customers at their doorstep. It's kind of a win-win either way.

 

[Mad Dog]

I would think that if Comcast really wanted that land , they would have already purchased it. Why wait for someone like Ripley to purchase the plots, and then pay many points over that purchase to buy it off them?

 

[zg44]

I would think that if Comcast really wanted that land , they would have already purchased it. Why wait for someone like Ripley to purchase the plots, and then pay many points over that purchase to buy it off them?

Ripley's bought it from OEP (Stan Thomas); no way he and Universal are doing business given the current lawsuit on the main properties. So it's reasonable to think Universal wouldn't want to overpay him (i.e. he'd raise the value of UCPM III lands if they did).

 

[Mad Dog]

Ripley's bought it from OEP (Stan Thomas); no way he and Universal are doing business given the current lawsuit on the main properties.

:thumbsup:Makes sense.

 

[zg44]

So is this near the main, big plot of Uni land or one of the smaller, unconnected plots?

The Ripley's land is in orange. Universal land is in purple.

Those 3 Parcels in red are the UCPM III lands currently in bankruptcy proceedings.

If Universal were to buy those Ripley's parcels as well as those 2 parcels in bankruptcy nearby (Parcel #1 and Parcel #2), that would end up as the main hotel lands for the 2nd resort.

Universal would be able to build at least 4000 rooms on those parcels off of the main site if they went in that direction.

 

[Andysol]

The green is all still Stan Thomas, correct?

If they could grab the 77 acres in foreclosure, that would help for sure.

That green parcel separating that area from the main property (right above Ripley's) seems to be the most critical if they get this red land. It would allow them to connect both red (with existing purple) parcels to the main purple parcel.

 

[fryoj]

The green is all still Stan Thomas, correct?

If they could grab the 77 acres in foreclosure, that would help for sure.

That green parcel separating that area from the main property (right above Ripley's) seems to be the most critical if they get this red land. It would allow them to connect both red (with existing purple) parcels to the main purple parcel.

Even if they don't get it, theres still the Mandarin extension that goes through there. It runs along the LMCO loop road, so they could use that to connect the properties. Also, a lot of that green is retention ponds, and creeks, so I don't know how much is usable anyway. What I wouldn't give to have 5 minutes in Uni's planning offices. lol

 

[UniversalRBLX]

I hope that we get the same type of resort feel in this land. Compact but lush gardens between the parks and hotels. Also hope for a forest buffer between public roads and the resort.

 

[zg44]

The green is all still Stan Thomas, correct?

If they could grab the 77 acres in foreclosure, that would help for sure.

That green parcel separating that area from the main property (right above Ripley's) seems to be the most critical if they get this red land. It would allow them to connect both red (with existing purple) parcels to the main purple parcel.

Even if they don't get it, theres still the Mandarin extension that goes through there. It runs along the LMCO loop road, so they could use that to connect the properties. Also, a lot of that green is retention ponds, and creeks, so I don't know how much is usable anyway. What I wouldn't give to have 5 minutes in Uni's planning offices. lol

Basically only the top part of that green parcel above Ripley's is usable as road, the rest is stormwater tract (darker blue on the map).

But you can build a circular road following the path that I drew on this map in green. That would probably be the likely "internal road" that Universal would make if they wanted to have a private road for the hotels that connects directly to Kirkman extension and the main area of the resort. (Would require Universal to purchase Parcels 1-2 out of foreclosure, the Ripley's parcels, and the UCPM III land above the stormwater tract).

As @fryoj said, that darker green line on the map is the Mandarin extension that goes on Lockheed's property. They can use that instead of there's no deal with Stan Thomas/UCPM III.

The ideal outcome though is probably to have the circular road that I drew and to possibly cancel the Mandarin extension. I don't see why Universal would want the Mandarin extension if they could acquire the UCPM III and Ripley's land and make their own "private" road.

 

[fryoj]

The ideal outcome though is probably to have the circular road that I drew and to possibly cancel the Mandarin extension. I don't see why Universal would want the Mandarin extension if they could acquire the UCPM III and Ripley's land and make their own "private" road.

My only thought on that is if they use the Mandarin extension, the state pays for it and maintains it.

 

[Mad Dog]

Almost looks like a chess match.

 

[Scott W.]

I would think that if Comcast really wanted that land , they would have already purchased it. Why wait for someone like Ripley to purchase the plots, and then pay many points over that purchase to buy it off them?

There could be deals to be had. Ripley purchases the land on behalf of Universal, they maybe get a few things built inside the new CityWalk.

 

[Teebin]

Coming full circle for both those that are new here as well as myself, can we get a recap of what this lawsuit is all about?

I think it has to do with land-use clauses put in place when Universal sold the land... and now that they have purchased the land back, want the clauses rescinded. If I am mistaken, please correct.

 

[zg44]

The important thing is that now Ripley's land connects the Universal land in the west to the foreclosure land. That wasn't the case before when Ripley's only owned the parcel in the center without that northwest sliver and that large eastern parcel below the new apartment buildings.

Looking at what Ripley's paid:

$23 million for the central 23 acres touching Universal Blvd.
$7.6 million for the 17 acres in the northwest sliver and eastern parcel

That's $30.6 million total for the 40 acres.

If I'm Universal, that land is worth much more than $30.6 million. I could easily see Universal willing to pay $40+ million to grab that 40 acres if they're able to grab the other lands in foreclosure.

I agree with @scott_walker that it might take a bit of a trade to pull off. Maybe Universal offers a choice 3-4 acres in the new CityWalk 2.0 on a 30 year lease for a Ripley's complex along with $40 million cash. With 3-4 acres, Ripley's could build a 100k+ square foot attraction (multiply that by 2-3 floors).

 

[WAJAS]

Orange County is really making a push to urbanize the area around the OCCC, which includes improved traffic flow with an urban road network. I don’t see them cancelling the Mandarin extension as it will be a necessary alternate to Universal, Sandlake, and I-Drive in the future. They already started the new network with the two roads built for Top Golf and that apartment complex.

 

[zg44]

Coming full circle for both those that are new here as well as myself, can we get a recap of what this lawsuit is all about?

I think it has to do with land-use clauses put in place when Universal sold the land... and now that they have purchased the land back, want the clauses rescinded. If I am mistaken, please correct.

The lawsuit is basically Stan Thomas trying to halt development of a theme park on the property. Originally, the Vivendi sale restrictions on the land prevented non-Universal operators from building theme parks on the land. Stan Thomas changed the restrictions to apply to all theme park operators a few years before the foreclosure.

Then the foreclosure happened and the land was bought by Universal.

So the question is whether the old restrictions (from the original land sale by Vivendi) or the newer restrictions made by Stan Thomas should apply.

There's all sorts of questions of whether the restrictions were properly made or whatnot, but those are for a judge to decide later this year.

 

[Teebin]

Thanks! It was the later restrictions that eluded me. I wonder if the city of Orlando or the county could, by rewriting the law applying to that property, supersede a judges ruling? That is, if the judge rules no theme park ever, ever. Universal cannot sit on its hands appealing ad nauseam.

 

[fryoj]

The important thing is that now Ripley's land connects the Universal land in the west to the foreclosure land. That wasn't the case before when Ripley's only owned the parcel in the center without that northwest sliver and that large eastern parcel below the new apartment buildings.

Looking at what Ripley's paid:

$23 million for the central 23 acres touching Universal Blvd.
$7.6 million for the 17 acres in the northwest sliver and eastern parcel

That's $30.6 million total for the 40 acres.

If I'm Universal, that land is worth much more than $30.6 million. I could easily see Universal willing to pay $40+ million to grab that 40 acres if they're able to grab the other lands in foreclosure.

I agree with @scott_walker that it might take a bit of a trade to pull off. Maybe Universal offers a choice 3-4 acres in the new CityWalk 2.0 on a 30 year lease for a Ripley's complex along with $40 million cash. With 3-4 acres, Ripley's could build a 100k+ square foot attraction (multiply that by 2-3 floors).

They've been paying ~$275,000 an acre for their other recent purchases. While the Ripley's land is valuable, I don't know that its worth 4 times as much an acre as what they have already bought. They bought the 100 acre plot on Sand Lake for 27.5 million. 40 million for 40 just sounds steep. If anything, they might buy a sliver at the northern part of the plot to make a road with the condition of Ripley getting entrance and exit rights to the road onto their property. Couple that with the CW idea above, and maybe something is doable. To buy the whole thing, I think they'd have to be desperate.

Looking further at the UCMP land, I don't know that they can build a cross road with just that. It's tight. If the map site is accurate, we are only talking 25-30 feet between the property edge and the waterway in places. Thats not really wide enough for more than a 2 lane road and that's assuming they could even build there. Otherwise, they'd have to eliminate that waterway, and I can't see that being approved. If that's the case, they either have to use the Mandarin extension or buy land from Ripley. I'm starting to think that routing traffic down Universal might be their best play.