flynnibus
Premium Member
Yet ironically.. if built today we'd have people telling us how poor the design is because it doesn't roll them right up to the door with minimal effort...
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
AK walk from bus stop to gate - in need of moving walkway?
- Thread starter DisneyJunkie
- Start date
- Status
Yet ironically.. if built today we'd have people telling us how poor the design is because it doesn't roll them right up to the door with minimal effort...
flynnibus
Premium Member
A postulation you've made and supported with nothing - while being countered with proof illustrating it's commonality, rather than it's stand-out vs other implementations.
wolf359
Well-Known Member
Good question. So allow me to ask how you reconcile this statement:
with your belief that excess walking to get to the main entrance of the park is bad planning on Disney's part at the Animal Kingdom.
At the Magic Kingdom you park and walk to the tram. From the tram you walk to the boat dock or monorail station. Once across the lagoon you (gasp!) walk again to the front gate. That is more walking than the distance from the AK bus stop to their front gate, and significantly more hassle for those mobility-challenged folks because of the standing around waiting to board multiple transports, folding and unfolding strollers or wheelchairs multiple times and navigating ramps significantly steeper than anything found between the bus stop and turnstiles at the Animal Kingdom.
amazingwdw
Member
For those saying the entrance to AK has no theming, picture this:
You're walking through the desert for days and you come upon a lush green paradise - let's call it an oasis. You've been surrounded by hot, dry terrain for what seems like an eternity. But what's this?! Lush green canopies and flowing springs! I bet you would appreciate this paradise more after a trip through the desert than if you just hop off a bus ten feet away.
For those saying that they enjoy the moving sidewalks at Universal, here's a fun fact:
It is over 1,200 feet to get to the entrances of each park (this number seems familiar
) . That is AFTER the walk TO the moving sidewalks from where you parked, your journey down the moving sidewalk, and down the escalators.
Would it be cool if they built a moving sidewalk from the buses to the entrance? Sure
Is it practical, even logical? I don't believe so.
You're walking through the desert for days and you come upon a lush green paradise - let's call it an oasis. You've been surrounded by hot, dry terrain for what seems like an eternity. But what's this?! Lush green canopies and flowing springs! I bet you would appreciate this paradise more after a trip through the desert than if you just hop off a bus ten feet away.
For those saying that they enjoy the moving sidewalks at Universal, here's a fun fact:
It is over 1,200 feet to get to the entrances of each park (this number seems familiar
) . That is AFTER the walk TO the moving sidewalks from where you parked, your journey down the moving sidewalk, and down the escalators.Would it be cool if they built a moving sidewalk from the buses to the entrance? Sure
Is it practical, even logical? I don't believe so.
Tip Top Club
Well-Known Member
I have two points to make.
1. The most-often sited example here has been Universal's Moving walkway. And rightfully so, it's a theme park environment. That said. There are two flaws here. Universal's Moving walkway doesn't take you to the entrance. It takes you to City Walk where you then have to walk probably longer than the walk in question to get to a park entrance.
Regardless it still takes off the strain, so that's a point I'm willing to concede.
However. Universal does not allow Strollers and Wheelchairs on their moving walkway.
So if one of the arguments here is Handicapped people and small tired children...This wouldn't really fix the problem. Universal Security is very lax on this rule, I see it broken all the time, but you know Disney Security wouldn't be. I'm no expert on moving walkway systems, but I'm guessing if it's a rule, it's probably a safety concern of some kind, and Disney would probably have this rule as well. If anyone has more information on this, I would love to hear it. Trust me, I feel your pain though, as much as I disagree that this should happen, or should even be considered, I'm the first person to admit that DAK is not an easy park to get around if you have wheels. Slopes and highly themed concrete combined with narrow pathways to make you feel like you're on an adventure is not easy to navigate with wheels.
My second point is not directly related to the problem at hand:
I was SHOCKED to learn that there was no transportation to Magic Kingdom Handicapped parking. I had to experience this first hand once, it doesn't bother me, I'm a fit-twenty-something, but it did bother others in my group, and quite frankly, on principle it bothered me as well. Considering that there is no theme to the TTC, I think this would be a great place for some kind of mobility solution.
1. The most-often sited example here has been Universal's Moving walkway. And rightfully so, it's a theme park environment. That said. There are two flaws here. Universal's Moving walkway doesn't take you to the entrance. It takes you to City Walk where you then have to walk probably longer than the walk in question to get to a park entrance.
Regardless it still takes off the strain, so that's a point I'm willing to concede.
However. Universal does not allow Strollers and Wheelchairs on their moving walkway.
So if one of the arguments here is Handicapped people and small tired children...This wouldn't really fix the problem. Universal Security is very lax on this rule, I see it broken all the time, but you know Disney Security wouldn't be. I'm no expert on moving walkway systems, but I'm guessing if it's a rule, it's probably a safety concern of some kind, and Disney would probably have this rule as well. If anyone has more information on this, I would love to hear it. Trust me, I feel your pain though, as much as I disagree that this should happen, or should even be considered, I'm the first person to admit that DAK is not an easy park to get around if you have wheels. Slopes and highly themed concrete combined with narrow pathways to make you feel like you're on an adventure is not easy to navigate with wheels.
My second point is not directly related to the problem at hand:
I was SHOCKED to learn that there was no transportation to Magic Kingdom Handicapped parking. I had to experience this first hand once, it doesn't bother me, I'm a fit-twenty-something, but it did bother others in my group, and quite frankly, on principle it bothered me as well. Considering that there is no theme to the TTC, I think this would be a great place for some kind of mobility solution.
Rob562
Well-Known Member
There are courtesy wheelchairs near the AK buses that handicap Guests without their own chairs can use to get from the buses to the park rental location. These same wheelchairs are located by most (if not all) handicap parking areas in the lots, too. In theory, they'll restock these corrals during the day so that mobility-impaired Guests don't have to walk that distance.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-E9a-vjeRhuA/T72eAR0FcSI/AAAAAAAAA4k/J3E3aQEES3Q/s1600/004.JPG
-Rob
If YOU say so yourself, and quite incorrectly as well.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
It was already measured by somebody. Instead of offering your own numbers to counter the assertion you just dismiss the measurements. It's starting to look childish. Either prove the distance is greater or accept that your perception does not align with reality.
I'm sorry, but I'm not as naive as some who simply accept anyone's claims of "this is actually such-and-such feet" and take that as absolute fact. I don't need to offer any numbers to counter it. Your childish tenor notwithstanding, this whole thread has been about opinion, that the walk is quite far. I still stand by that assertion, which, like my perception does align with reality.
Joshua&CalebDad
Well-Known Member
I do agree Americans are too fat and too lazy. But I'm not American, I'm European. And, oh irony, it is in the European Disney park that they use the lazy option proposed by the OP, that of a moving sidewalk.
WDW will not build a moving sidewalk at DAK any time soon. My concern in all this is that my next trip to WDW will be with a special needs person. She can walk, but she has limited energy. It's a shame if it is expended having to walk to a bus, having to stand waiting for a bus, having to walk in the blistering heat to a bus. Those sort of things matter to her. Me, I'm fine. I'll run that distance, for fun. But not everybody has that option. What I want is not an automated sidewalk - it's not going to happen anyway - but a consideration in every design decision of as many special needs as can reasonably be taken into account. There are a lot of people in between fit and handicapped - the elderly, the pregnant, the very young, the sickly, those with physical limitations. They don't need ECV's. They need shaded waiting areas and short walking distances.
I would like to note that I never truly stated that I had a masters in planology I only asked if it would help the discussion.
FYI...I'm sure that there are plenty of fat and lazy Europeans out there too. I really don't even want to go there so I'll let that comment slide.
As for the comment regarding the special needs person, I can sympathize. This upcoming trip my MIL will be joining us. Although she is not a special needs person she is older and my wife and I know that she will probably have a hard time keeping up with us. She tends to get winded while shopping at our local mall. What this will translate to when we go to the parks is that she will probably need to stop and rest every few minutes and may even need to do so when she walks from the bus to the front entrance. She doesn't need a wheel chair she just not a spring chicken anymore.
I do believe that Disney takes into account different needs when they build their parks. However, they cannot cater to everyone, if they tried to do so they probably wouldn't have the money to build the parks. I may not be an civil engineer but I do work in the construction industry and have done so for all of my professional career and it would boggle your mind to know what it costs to design and build a home or commercial building for special needs person. Now translate that into an amusement park and there is probably not enough money even Scrooge McDuck's Money Vault to build it.
Again, try and be realistic.
I noticed you conveniently didn't calculate the distance from the furthest part of the AK bus stop to the main entrance. Try it again and I'm sure it'll come up with the walking distance at AK being the biggest.
midwest_mice
Well-Known Member
I think the walk to the front gate of Epcot from the furthest bus parking is close to the same walk as a few at AK.
Mad Stitch
Well-Known Member
This thread reminds me of when I worked in parking at the Studios. There were always people who didn’t want to park where they were directed because it’s too far to walk. Then they would always throw in additional excuses “I have kids” or “I have a bad knee.” Face it, you chose to go to a theme park so you will be doing a lot of walking. There is no way around it.
It is from the furthest spot. Show me a further one.
That's not the furthest spot. You went to the furthest spot from the bus drop off point closest to the entrance. You need to go around the horseshoe, so to speak, from the other bus drop off point. I'm sure that'll add on a good 100 ft or more.
Nope. About the same.
You came in with the notion that the walk from the buses to AK was too long. It would certainly appear to be longer than the others, I have trudged it myself many times, but I know looks can be deceiving so I checked it out. Turns out that 3 of the 4 parks have about the same maximum walking distance. I relayed this information but you did not believe it. I showed you proof but you still do not believe it. My only conclusion can be that you are not interested in the truth and simply want your opinion validated.
The Empress Lilly
Well-Known Member
Easy. The double standard is that one is asked for a degree in engineering to criticise a design, but not to praise a design.
My two statements that, one, the DAK area is a poor design that involves a needlessly long walking distance, and two, I have a preference for going through all the hassle and long walking distances at the MK instead of arriving by bus near its entrance, do not need to be reconciled at all.
I believe that the Turkey Leg contains needlessly many calories. I also prefer a Big Mac over a spinach salad. These two don't need reconciliation either.
The Empress Lilly
Well-Known Member
Yes, thank you for those. They show exactly what I mean.
At the MK, they managed to later cram in a bus stop in an existing situation, with barely any space to work with, and the distance is still shorter than the one at DAK, where they had infinite space and a blank space to work with. And without the need to also cram in boats and monorails. Then add that the MK's walking distance was greatly increased after 9-11 and the awkwardly placed bagage check, and the poverty of the design at DAK becomes clear.
DAK's design is simply not made with short walking distance as top prority.
The Empress Lilly
Well-Known Member
...face it, you operate a theme park so you have to take tired guests into account.
Far from being spoiled brats with excuses, their concerns could be taken seriously ('they may not always be right, but they are always our guests') and taken into account at the design. Not everybody is a fit young male who goes trekking in the Himalaya's for a hobby.
- Status