Walt Disney’s decision to acquire so much land in Florida wasn’t an accident or an overestimation of needs. It was a deliberate move driven by a grand vision that far exceeded the idea of just building a large theme park. Unlike Disneyland, which was constrained by the quick urban sprawl of Anaheim, California, especially following the construction of Disneyland, Walt saw the opportunity in Florida to create a massive canvas where he could bring to life his most ambitious ideas—an experimental city of the future, combined with a vacation destination. Walt’s plans for the property included not just theme parks, but also an airport of the future, an industrial park, and the Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow (EPCOT) that would serve as a living, breathing city.
Walt’s intent was clear: there would always be plenty of room at Walt Disney World for new ideas and expansion. As he famously said, “Here in Florida, we have something special we never enjoyed at Disneyland—the blessing of size. There’s enough land here to hold all the ideas and plans we can possibly imagine.” This expansive vision was why the Florida property spans nearly 25,000 acres—enough to fit Disneyland’s entire footprint multiple times over.
But today, many fans are left wondering: why does Disney World, with all this available land, so often choose to build new attractions by replacing existing ones rather than expanding into the unused areas? By contrast, Disneyland—which is hemmed in on all sides by hotels, roads, and urban development—has repeatedly found creative ways to add rides, shows, and attractions without sacrificing beloved classics.
Take Mickey & Minnie’s Runaway Railway, for example. At Disneyland, this ride was carefully added to Toontown with minimal disruption to existing attractions. At Disney World, however, the same ride came at the cost of The Great Movie Ride, a quintessential Hollywood Studios experience that could have been updated rather than replaced. Attractions like Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, Horizons, and soon even areas like Grand Avenue (a.k.a. Muppets Courtyard) have all been casualties of Disney World’s tendency to build on top of what’s already there. While some sacrifices are understandable, the constant replacement of older rides erodes the park’s ability to distribute crowds more evenly, a critical issue given that overcrowding remains one of the most frequent complaints about Disney vacations.
Disneyland’s ability to innovate despite its space limitations is especially impressive when compared to Disney World’s land use strategy. While Disneyland has had to remove some less popular attractions—such as Big Thunder Ranch, which was replaced by the impressive Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge—these changes tend to result in major upgrades that justify the loss. Disney World, on the other hand, often seems boxed in not by physical constraints, but by a reluctance to expand into its massive undeveloped areas. For instance, while it’s true that Disney’s Hollywood Studios is somewhat landlocked, much of what surrounds it is just parking lot space that could be reconfigured or relocated to make room for new attractions. By contrast, Disneyland’s true land limitations have forced it to make the most of every available square foot, often to great success.
The irony is that Walt Disney himself envisioned Disney World as a place where space would never be an issue. Yet today, it feels like the parks are often managed as if they’re just as constrained as Disneyland, despite sitting on a vast property with endless possibilities. Building new attractions on top of existing ones does little to address the need for increased park capacity, which could help alleviate the crowding that so many guests experience. Expanding into unused areas would not only honor Walt’s original vision but also improve the guest experience by redistributing crowds and offering more attractions without sacrificing the classics that so many visitors cherish.
Ultimately, the question remains: why doesn’t Disney World use the land it has? For a property born out of the idea of limitless potential, it’s frustrating to see so much of that potential go untapped. Instead of continually replacing existing attractions, Disney World should embrace the “blessing of size” that Walt envisioned.
