Universal Orlando Resort Expansion (Part 1) | Page 415 | Inside Universal Forums

Universal Orlando Resort Expansion (Part 1)

  • Signing up for a Premium Membership is a donation to help Inside Universal maintain costs and offers an ad-free experience on the forum. Learn more about it here.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah, I expect there to be one very high end hotel right there at the entrance to park #3/CW; probably around 800-1000 rooms across 20 acres; those will probably end up being the most expensive rooms that Universal offers in Orlando over time.


The next 3 hotels would look similar to what UOR has: 2 moderate hotels like Sapphire Falls/Royal Pacific of around 1000 rooms across 20ish acres each, and one giant premier value hotel of 2000+ rooms spread over 40 acres that's near the water park (i.e. like Cabana Bay vis-a-vis Volcano Bay).


Those first 4 hotels take up around 100 acres; after that I'd imagine the rest is Aventura-like towers to get the room count as high as possible... 100 rooms per acre on small plots of 6-7 acres.
I agree with most of the logic here, but I just don't see where they are going to find 100 acres to use for hotels on the main property. Looking at the infrastructure plans, it seems like 2 parks and a water park plus parking will take up almost all of the space. I can see a couple small hotels fitting, but I can't visualize anywhere near 100 acres.

This is also why I'm hoping that they grab those 2 parcels on Universal Blvd so they can put the value hotels there with another 6000 rooms west of the Kirkman extension. There really isn't space on the main property for more than 5000 rooms if you want some larger resorts (and not just towers).
Were you counting some of this in the 100 acres expectation?

I'm of the opinion that they will really need to cram in rooms on the offsite parcels, and also that the additional UCPM ones would be really helpful.

They already have the 20 acres west of Topgolf, and 20 acres south on Destination pkwy, each of which should be good for a 1500-2000 room tower style value resort. (Dockside is 2050 rooms on 24 acres.) Getting the western UCPM parcel would allow for another hotel of similar size.

The 15 acres south of the substation looks good for a potential 750-1000 room moderate hotel regardless of additional acquisition, but getting that "middle" UCPM parcel would allow for a 2000+ room prime value to be built there as well.

So they can fit a LOT of rooms on disconnected parcels, but I think they will be really hurting for land to build hotels on the main area.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zg44
They'd be crazy not to partner with (or even absorb if Rosen was willing to deal) the Rosen Shingle Creek. It's a great hotel, actually borders the land, has 1,500 rooms ready and available, and comes with a golf course. I'd be shocked if they weren't at least considering doing something with it.
 
Shingle Creek is Rosen's crown jewel. I seriously doubt they'd want to sell.

Not sell but it could be a great partnership, especially with the golf course and Universal and NBC wanting synergy with golf and everything else.

The fact is though is that as good of a partnership they could have, Universal and Loews have an incredibly partnership and I don't want to see it tarnished in anyway, especially with the potential for them to build more excellent hotels.

Now that I've had a little time to think about the idea of a surface lot car park for the new resort, I don't think it's comparable at all to what Universal did with USF and IOA. When USF opened, how many guests did it have a year? 4 million? This new park could be pushing 10 million annual visitors if trends continue and redirecting that much traffic during construction sounds like a nightmare.

The only way I think a surface lot would work would be as a way of protecting the ground until it's needed. Breaking up the concrete could be an easier way to get the ball rolling than grade all the ground before hand.

As for when the 4th dry park could open is anybody's guess but I think the idea will be in flux. It could be in 2040 but there's going to be a master plan for a new park and if this new resort hits the ball out the park, they will want to jump at the chance when they can. Of course, there's a million things that could make Universal put off a new park.
 
I agree with most of the logic here, but I just don't see where they are going to find 100 acres to use for hotels on the main property. Looking at the infrastructure plans, it seems like 2 parks and a water park plus parking will take up almost all of the space. I can see a couple small hotels fitting, but I can't visualize anywhere near 100 acres.


Were you counting some of this in the 100 acres expectation?

I'm of the opinion that they will really need to cram in rooms on the offsite parcels, and also that the additional UCPM ones would be really helpful.

They already have the 20 acres west of Topgolf, and 20 acres south on Destination pkwy, each of which should be good for a 1500-2000 room tower style value resort. (Dockside is 2050 rooms on 24 acres.) Getting the western UCPM parcel would allow for another hotel of similar size.

The 15 acres south of the substation looks good for a potential 750-1000 room moderate hotel regardless of additional acquisition, but getting that "middle" UCPM parcel would allow for a 2000+ room prime value to be built there as well.

So they can fit a LOT of rooms on disconnected parcels, but I think they will be really hurting for land to build hotels on the main area.
Yeah I'm in agreement that things will be crammed in there, which is why they need to grab those 2 parcels on Uni Blvd. that Thomas lost. Those 2 parcels are 3500 value hotel rooms.


Combined with their 2 current usable parcels west of Kirkman; that gets you up to 5000 hotel rooms.


Add another 1500 on Destination.


I still think though they will try for at least 3 "resort style" hotels as @JungleSkip is talking about: 1 attached to the park/CW directly for premium pricing (15-20 acres). Another moderate offering like Sapphire (20 acres), and a final larger value resort like Cabana Bay (35-40 acres) next to the water park.


They'd need at least 75 acres for those 3. I think the Sapphire and Cabana Bay plots will be in the far east where they currently put those ponds. Then you can build 2 or 3 Aventura towers


I would still say they target 5000 rooms on the land and another 6000 or so off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JoeCamel
Does anyone think they will recreate a water taxi system ie. as the north property currently has? Or just not enough space? As I frequent the RP I think it is a nice touch.
 
Does anyone think they will recreate a water taxi system ie. as the north property currently has? Or just not enough space? As I frequent the RP I think it is a nice touch.
I don't think they will if only because it's not clear that there's enough space to put extra random bodies of water.


I'd certainly expect the theme parks and hotels to have lakes in/around them, but whether there's a water taxi system depends on how things connect.


Right now, it doesn't seem likely but maybe down the road when the east part is built it could be possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ridgepole
Well, the good about Comcast is that they're all in on building out UOR to rival WDW, and all the good that comes with that.

But Comcast is all about profit maximization; if you asked them if they'd ever build another Portofino Bay, they'd laugh probably.

Now that doesn't mean we won't get another premier or more horizontal hotel, but it'd be much closer to Hard Rock's 650 rooms on 15 acres than Portofino Bay's 750 rooms on 30 acres. There's going to have to be some towers if they're going to hit around 5000 hotel rooms on this property.


This is also why I'm hoping that they grab those 2 parcels on Universal Blvd so they can put the value hotels there with another 6000 rooms west of the Kirkman extension. There really isn't space on the main property for more than 5000 rooms if you want some larger resorts (and not just towers).

I"m going to disagree here with a explanation coming forth.

While I do agree that Comcast is all about profit maximization, they also do know the value of the splurgy tourist who likes more perks than others. The way all the plots are set up, they super large resort may not be right next to the parks but they are multiple location options they could use for it.

Additionally a well build resort like complex can mitigate the lack of a large scale citiwalk that competing with I-drive.
 
I don't think they will if only because it's not clear that there's enough space to put extra random bodies of water.


I'd certainly expect the theme parks and hotels to have lakes in/around them, but whether there's a water taxi system depends on how things connect.


Right now, it doesn't seem likely but maybe down the road when the east part is built it could be possible.


That's a serious bummer. The water taxi that lets you never leave Universal property, skip security at the parks is one of the highlights for me. A monorail or something of the like that keeps you "connected" to the resort at all times would go a long way. Not to mention it would "one-up" Disney.
 
That's a serious bummer. The water taxi that lets you never leave Universal property, skip security at the parks is one of the highlights for me. A monorail or something of the like that keeps you "connected" to the resort at all times would go a long way. Not to mention it would "one-up" Disney.

Plus, water taxis are not too efficient and costly. They'd be better off with a gondola or train-type system.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.