180º
Well-Known Member
It is, and it's also a good one.Her latest post is very relevant to this thread.
It is, and it's also a good one.Her latest post is very relevant to this thread.
I really don't understand what the problem is? They're just trees. At least we have the castle to look at. Personally I'd rather see the Disney castle in Disney rather than some trees.
The point is Disney USED to care about those little things. The things most guests. (Like ypurself) won't care about but that DO make a difference. Regardless I think the best argument for trees is the rampant use of umbrellas in broad daylight.
The area without trees or the area with trees is a personal liking. Can you imagine how messed up things would be if everyone's little desire is classified as "care about little things". You like it with trees. Others like it without trees. Apparently, for whatever purpose Disney has they have decided that without will serve the "little things needs" of more then those of the other way of thinking. Not everyone's "little things" are the same.The point is Disney USED to care about those little things. The things most guests. (Like ypurself) won't care about but that DO make a difference. Regardless I think the best argument for trees is the rampant use of umbrellas in broad daylight.
The area without trees or the area with trees is a personal liking. Can you imagine how messed up things would be if everyone's little desire is classified as "care about little things". You like it with trees. Others like it without trees. Apparently, for whatever purpose Disney has they have decided that without will serve the "little things needs" of more then those of the other way of thinking. Not everyone's "little things" are the same.
It's already been stated over and over and over and over, by the same people, how terrible it is that the trees are gone. They've been gone before, things will change over the years, it's not your personal park, it needs to serve the masses. One person does not the masses make. Rampant use of umbrellas? A little hyperbole there don't you think. So the solution to that would be to not allow those people in the park so all those with an anti umbrella, anti scooter, anti stroller, anti anything new, mindset can enjoy the parks the way the God and Walt and you personally planned it.
What they have done with the Hub area is different, no argument there, but, to some different means bad. That is not the case as far as I can see. Boo Hoo they took out a tree! Get over it. Tree's are a detail of a specific plan. The new specific plan didn't include them as a detail. Well, they did actually, but, not how some of you would like to see them. They also included many "little things, that didn't exist before that added to the beauty of the place. I can grow trees in my backyard with little or no effort. Fountains, trimmed shrubs and flowers require a lot more effort to develop and maintain. Solution, buy the park and do it whatever way you want. Until then make the best of what is there and enjoy what was done instead of mourning what you consider a major loss while ignoring the "detailed" gain.
Hub ruined and one in a lifetime visits destroyed by stage lights!!! /sarcasmView attachment 108962
Interesting tthat they chose to go back to the Red color here when they are trying to get away from it everywhere else.Hub ruined by first pour not matching previous pour!!!! /sarcasm View attachment 108963
Interesting tthat they chose to go back to the Red color here when they are trying to get away from it everywhere else.
The main pavement is beige. In this courtard area in front of the stage they are going for a grey and red colour combination and the red is to highlight the compass design. If the compass was in beige too then there wouldn't be any point doing the design!
Interesting tthat they chose to go back to the Red color here when they are trying to get away from it everywhere else.
They still care about the look of the hub. That is evident in many of the features in this redesign. But of course, if it does not involve giant trees, it is still just garbage to many.
If you don't get it you probably never will.I really don't understand what the problem is? They're just trees. At least we have the castle to look at. Personally I'd rather see the Disney castle in Disney rather than some trees.
22,000 +/- of trees on property, and people boo-hoo about a dozen or so removed for progress and construction... the framing trees will likely be replaced, IMHO they were getting Too big anyway, and throwing off the perspective of the castle... much like the stand of bamboo in Epcot completely hiding communicore east around the restrooms... needs scaling back (read <cut down and replaced>)363 pages of people crying about trees.
this area22,000 +/- of trees on property, and people boo-hoo about a dozen or so removed for progress and construction... the framing trees will likely be replaced, IMHO they were getting Too big anyway, and throwing off the perspective of the castle... much like the stand of bamboo in Epcot completely hiding communicore east around the restrooms... needs scaling back (read <cut down and replaced>)
We should all be able agree that the light poles are awful. And, I think most rational folks would be able to agree that, if not for the light poles, this project was a success. It is otherwise a great-looking area where some of the park's beauty had to bow out to operational issues, but they introduced wonderful landscaping elsewhere.If you don't get it you probably never will.
The poles on the other hand...
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.