Universal Orlando Resort Expansion (Part 1)

[UniversalRBLX]

Hey guys! Never know if this goes here or the 4th park thread. But Universal appears to have filed plans for the roadway system around the Universal Boulevard land. Looks to have major interchanges and roundabouts to accommodate the heavy flow of traffic. As always, I link to the story (behind a paywall) but I'll share the images below.

Story link: http://bizj.us/1pqpcu

Have a great day!

Please don't tell me that's a surface lot.

 

[JungleSkip]

Whatever the grey blob is it takes up like 1/2 the land we thought would be used for theme parks.

 

[RichOBJ]

To support the theme park/parking believers, this does look like the area where parking booths widen and then narrow back up to allow entrance to a parking lot.

 

[s8film40]

Please don't tell me that's a surface lot.

I've never understood why everyone assumes they would build a garage. It's not like they're going to open this new property with two parks. They could always build a surface lot and put off the costs of building a garage until they start on another park or future developments.

To support the theme park/parking believers, this does look like the area where parking booths widen and then narrow back up to allow entrance to a parking lot.

Even has little parking spots for the toll plaza employees. That is so clearly what this is, I would say it's pretty much confirmed.

 

[JungleSkip]

I've never understood why everyone assumes they would build a garage. It's not like they're going to open this new property with two parks. They could always build a surface lot and put off the costs of building a garage until they start on another park or future developments.

I think it reduces the area's possibility to act as a continuous resort in that case. It makes the layout awkward, but you may very well be right.

FWIW that big grey blob is ~70 acres, the size of the current garages and CityWalk

 

[Parkscope Joe]

I've never understood why everyone assumes they would build a garage. It's not like they're going to open this new property with two parks. They could always build a surface lot and put off the costs of building a garage until they start on another park or future developments.

Yeah, master planning be damned!

 

[JungleSkip]

Yeah, master planning be damned!

Right. It's not so much that it doesn't make sense for them to put the costs of a garage off, it's that it makes no sense from a master planning sense if they build a surface lot

 

[RichOBJ]

I've never understood why everyone assumes they would build a garage. It's not like they're going to open this new property with two parks. They could always build a surface lot and put off the costs of building a garage until they start on another park or future developments.

I would be surprised to see Universal not build garages on that land from the start. Putting off building garages feels like the more bad move than waiting on them. The costs to build a lot, demolish it, build garages seems more than just building garages from the start. Filling those garages wont be an issue from the start, so why not tackle it right away?

 

[s8film40]

Yeah, master planning be damned!

Right. It's not so much that it doesn't make sense for them to put the costs of a garage off, it's that it makes no sense from a master planning sense if they build a surface lot

What if the master plan is for the surface lot to eventually become a garage plus hotel. You can have a master plan that takes into account growth.

I would be surprised to see Universal not build garages on that land from the start. Putting off building garages feels like the more bad move than waiting on them. The costs to build a lot, demolish it, build garages seems more than just building garages from the start. Filling those garages wont be an issue from the start, so why not tackle it right away?

Yeah I could see it going either way. Yes, it would be great to build the garages from the start, but if it frees up extra money to put into other things there's no real need to build them now. I'm just not jumping to the assumption that they're building garages simply because the other property has them. The grey area does look fairly squared off so I wouldn't be surprised if that's a garage. Maybe someone needs to calculate how big of a surface lot that would be and how big of a garage that would be.

 

[JoeCamel]

I would be surprised to see Universal not build garages on that land from the start. Putting off building garages feels like the more bad move than waiting on them. The costs to build a lot, demolish it, build garages seems more than just building garages from the start. Filling those garages wont be an issue from the start, so why not tackle it right away?

$40 a day?

 

[JungleSkip]

What if the master plan is for the surface lot to eventually become a garage plus hotel. You can have a master plan that takes into account growth.

Yeah I could see it going either way. Yes, it would be great to build the garages from the start, but if it frees up extra money to put into other things there's no real need to build them now. I'm just not jumping to the assumption that they're building garages simply because the other property has them. The grey area does look fairly squared off so I wouldn't be surprised if that's a garage. Maybe someone needs to calculate how big of a surface lot that would be and how big of a garage that would be.

If it was entirely just a garage? It would be more than double the surface area of the UOR garages, which are ~15 acres of surface area each. The grey area in the plans is between 60-70 acres in size.

As a surface lot it would be around the size of Epcot's parking lot

 

[s8film40]

If it was entirely just a garage? It would be more than double the surface area of the UOR garages, which are ~15 acres of surface area each. The grey area in the plans is between 60-70 acres in size.

Wow, thanks! Yeah I'm thinking it's a surface lot then.

 

[JungleSkip]

Wow, thanks! Yeah I'm thinking it's a surface lot then.

Personally I think it's probably garages and CityWalk, even in it's a baffling place to put those things

 

[Teebin]

Well this is out of right field... so to speak.

 

[s8film40]

Personally I think it's probably garages and CityWalk, even in it's a baffling place to put those things

I was getting the impression that all of the grey area was drivable surfaces since that was the purpose of the document. It's still early though so who know.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Wow, thanks! Yeah I'm thinking it's a surface lot then.

Here’s my deal, if this is a surface lot then why build all those complicated on ramps? When USF expanded the old lot became part of the new park, CityWalk, and other infrastructure. Why not master plan the garages and citywalk, two things they want to do, right away? This is what they’re doing at Beijing. Additionally that allows for the larger plot to the left being two parks with shared resources and the south and right lot for resorts. Everyone will go through one source for security, one point for a trasit system to/from the North property, etc. PLUS Universal just now is contanstly expanding their employee lots to garages, causing headaches to those designing the expansion.

 

[s8film40]

Here’s my deal, if this is a surface lot then why build all those complicated on ramps? When USF expanded the old lot became part of the new park, CityWalk, and other infrastructure. Why not master plan the garages and citywalk, two things they want to do, right away? This is what they’re doing at Beijing. Additionally that allows for the larger plot to the left being two parks with shared resources and the south and right lot for resorts. Everyone will go through one source for security, one point for a trasit system to/from the North property, etc. PLUS Universal just now is contanstly expanding their employee lots to garages, causing headaches to those designing the expansion.

It looks to me like all the complicated ramps are to the west and support the flow of traffic into surface roads that for now that lead to the parking entrance. Those ramps could easily support the flow of traffic into the same entrance or a moved entrance to a garage on the same site and simply free up land there for future hotels or something else.

CityWalk is another thing I don't get. It seems like everyone just expects Universal to 100% duplicate the first property on this site. They could have very different plans and ideas for this property. Yes it makes sense for them to incorporate shopping and dining into the mix, but I don't think that necessarily means CityWalk 2.0. I'm not saying it doesn't mean that either, but for us to just expect more of the same and use the existing property as a template for what we think they are doing could be a little short sighted on us as far as fan speculation goes.

 

[ParkRumors]

The plans specifically mention how much parking will be provided, so yes, it looks like it's a surface lot:

 

[JungleSkip]

The plans specifically mention how much parking will be provided, so yes, it looks like it's a surface lot:

So if that is the case, something tells me the "two theme parks" they're planning down there are 1 regular theme park and 1 "water" theme park like they like to call VB. I don't see any way 2 full dry theme parks fit down there otherwise.

 

[zg44]

I still agree with what @Happytycho said earlier:

It makes more sense to put garages south of that road than anywhere in the northern area. That surface lot could end up as an IoA-size park down the line in like 15 years. Of course then that'd end up as a pain to have to build your crossover section later to get people to that northern part...