Being critical of the concept art, although not cast in stone, is what the place is going to look like. But, the best concept art can only be as accurate as 2 dimensions are possible. I really don't understand what the theme should be looking like for something that isn't an attraction, but, a utility. Yes, it's landing site should fit in with the area it is in, to a minor degree, but, that,s what it seems to be in my opinion. It is not really worth the cyber space because it is being critical of something that doesn't exist. Critical by itself isn't a problem, but, the negative way it is presented like anybody here has a better idea is where it gets exhausting. We are not going to influence the final outcome. If we want to have a solid argument about something when it actually exists, then at least we have a reality to discuss. This is just a way to sound indignant about what is currently consists of air molecules. How did the little Swiss Chalet that operated out of MK's Skyway, fit with anything in the rest of the land. Did it resemble Small World or perhaps Peter Pan, not that I recall. And it was just around the corner from HoP and Haunted Mansion. At the other end it was a rectangle box with a waterfall effect in the front. What did that match? Did they match anything? If they did or didn't it seems like everyone is trying desperately to convince, maybe themselves, that they will have a reason to not like it. What is being demanded is not a long honored way that WDW has operated. We, in affect, are creating problems where they do not and should not exist. The bigger question is why?
