-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Tomorrowland Speedway - Big Tree Removed
- Thread starter degunter
- Start date
raven
Well-Known Member
Trees are removed all the time on property, most go unnoticed by guests. Last week they removed a very large tree between Group Sales and Guest Service outside of Epcot.
Really doesn't have anything to do with the environment when the company reserves acres and acres of land just for preservation. They grow and add trees all the time.
Really doesn't have anything to do with the environment when the company reserves acres and acres of land just for preservation. They grow and add trees all the time.
hpyhnt 1000
Well-Known Member
Eh, the removal of one tree from the Speedway isn't really an environmental issue. And considering the area it was located, its not really a big deal as there are several equally large trees in the immediate area.
I do wonder if some of these larger trees that have been removed (or in the case of the future Dumbo area, will be removed) will find their way into the Fantasyland Expansion. It'd be a great way to give the forest area a "grown in" appearence as the other plants take a few years to grow in.
I do wonder if some of these larger trees that have been removed (or in the case of the future Dumbo area, will be removed) will find their way into the Fantasyland Expansion. It'd be a great way to give the forest area a "grown in" appearence as the other plants take a few years to grow in.
danlb_2000
Premium Member
That's just one tree, they removed a lot more in the area where the rest of the Fantasyland expansion is going to be.
RandySavage
Well-Known Member
In my experience & opinion, the presences of big, old trees, whether in your yard, a city park or a Disney theme park is a good, and increasingly rare, thing. Big trees add shade, beauty and a unspoken sense of class & wisdom that comes with age. They legitimize a landscape.
Which of the following city parks is more appealing to you, the top one, with all newly-planted, young trees or the bottom examples, with their big mature trees that have been living for many decades:
Mature tree removal at the MK is a bit of sore subject for me. Like others have said, I don't think this case shown in post 1 is that egregious (although, being a tree-lover, I would have liked to see it stay), but the changeover of the Hub (and Town Square) really got me sad and angry. After three decades of growth, it had become a shady and park-like oasis but then, in the 2002-2005 period, and for reasons discussed throughout these boards, most of the sizable trees in the Hub were removed. The area became (and remains) a hot, sun-scorched, tree-less plaza with open visual intrusions from Liberty Square through Tomorrowland to the Contemporary (and looming Bay Lake Tower).
When Disney removes the big, mature shade trees from its parks & property, it diminishes the environment - not in a broad ecological sense, but more in an aesthetic, place-making & design sense... at least until newly-planted ones grow up (if they are allowed to), but then we are talking a 20-40 year wait to re-establish that beatific presence.
Which of the following city parks is more appealing to you, the top one, with all newly-planted, young trees or the bottom examples, with their big mature trees that have been living for many decades:
Mature tree removal at the MK is a bit of sore subject for me. Like others have said, I don't think this case shown in post 1 is that egregious (although, being a tree-lover, I would have liked to see it stay), but the changeover of the Hub (and Town Square) really got me sad and angry. After three decades of growth, it had become a shady and park-like oasis but then, in the 2002-2005 period, and for reasons discussed throughout these boards, most of the sizable trees in the Hub were removed. The area became (and remains) a hot, sun-scorched, tree-less plaza with open visual intrusions from Liberty Square through Tomorrowland to the Contemporary (and looming Bay Lake Tower).
When Disney removes the big, mature shade trees from its parks & property, it diminishes the environment - not in a broad ecological sense, but more in an aesthetic, place-making & design sense... at least until newly-planted ones grow up (if they are allowed to), but then we are talking a 20-40 year wait to re-establish that beatific presence.
NASAMan
Member
Thanks for posting the before and after pictures. I noticed things looked a little more 'open' when I walked by last weekend, but could not put my finger on it.
Another tree getting removed is the one in the Tour Garden by City Hall (or maybe it is just being moved). That area is getting a new layout to make Photopass photography easier.
Another tree getting removed is the one in the Tour Garden by City Hall (or maybe it is just being moved). That area is getting a new layout to make Photopass photography easier.
TiggersPooh
Active Member
the track is over where that tree was...it had to go
several trees have also been removed at the old skyway turn (looks like they dug up the old foundation of it as well)
several trees have also been removed at the old skyway turn (looks like they dug up the old foundation of it as well)
sweetpee_1993
Well-Known Member
In my experience & opinion, the presences of big, old trees, whether in your yard, a city park or a Disney theme park is a good, and increasingly rare, thing. Big trees add shade, beauty and a unspoken sense of class & wisdom that comes with age. They legitimize a landscape.
Which of the following city parks is more appealing to you, the top one, with all newly-planted, young trees or the bottom examples, with their big mature trees that have been living for many decades:
It depends. If it's a clear, sunny day I'll seek the shade of the mature trees. If there's a thunderstorm I'll be running from said trees.
I noticed the wide-open-ness. Still looks nice and they only took what they had to. It's all good with me. :wave:
flavious27
Well-Known Member
They really can't complain when disney removes trees that they built 40 years ago, they aren't nature or old growth.
WDW1974
Well-Known Member
In my experience & opinion, the presences of big, old trees, whether in your yard, a city park or a Disney theme park is a good, and increasingly rare, thing. Big trees add shade, beauty and a unspoken sense of class & wisdom that comes with age. They legitimize a landscape.
Which of the following city parks is more appealing to you, the top one, with all newly-planted, young trees or the bottom examples, with their big mature trees that have been living for many decades:
Mature tree removal at the MK is a bit of sore subject for me. Like others have said, I don't think this case shown in post 1 is that egregious (although, being a tree-lover, I would have liked to see it stay), but the changeover of the Hub (and Town Square) really got me sad and angry. After three decades of growth, it had become a shady and park-like oasis but then, in the 2002-2005 period, and for reasons discussed throughout these boards, most of the sizable trees in the Hub were removed. The area became (and remains) a hot, sun-scorched, tree-less plaza with open visual intrusions from Liberty Square through Tomorrowland to the Contemporary (and looming Bay Lake Tower).
When Disney removes the big, mature shade trees from its parks & property, it diminishes the environment - not in a broad ecological sense, but more in an aesthetic, place-making & design sense... at least until newly-planted ones grow up (if they are allowed to), but then we are talking a 20-40 year wait to re-establish that beatific presence.
Couldn't agree more, Randy.
It's funny (well, not really) that MK appears vastly less greener and lush in 2011 than it did in 1991. You just notice vast concrete swaths (better for the double-wide stroller and ECV brigade, I guess) that absorb the FLA sun and make it very unpleasant.
DL ... DLP ... TDL ... even HKDL are much greener and park-like ... and that does make for a more magical experience.
'Course, you also have the vast tracts of trees cut for projects that may never be (like Flamingo Crossings) or shouldn't be (Rotting Oaks).
RandySavage
Well-Known Member
^ Yes, sir.
Some visual samples from the old, arboreal MK:
Then came the men with axes (figuratively).
Note how before the trees were removed they partially obscured the castle, making it look more distant, mysterious, romantic, real. Now that the trees are gone, there is no more stage by stage reveal: from the moment you get past Main St. Station, the castle has a zoomed-in effect, making it more in-your-face, kitschy, plastic-y and toy-like in its unobstructed enormity.
Some visual samples from the old, arboreal MK:
Then came the men with axes (figuratively).
Note how before the trees were removed they partially obscured the castle, making it look more distant, mysterious, romantic, real. Now that the trees are gone, there is no more stage by stage reveal: from the moment you get past Main St. Station, the castle has a zoomed-in effect, making it more in-your-face, kitschy, plastic-y and toy-like in its unobstructed enormity.
flavious27
Well-Known Member
Well the tdo of the past should have found ways to keep the paths shaded while also making them wider. There are plenty of 2 and 4 lane highways that are fully shaded.
MiklCraw4d
Member
Great post, Randy. I too was ill when they nuked the hub. It made me think of that old interview with Walt, when he talks about how the park will grow more beautiful as the trees grow in.
In my experience & opinion, the presences of big, old trees, whether in your yard, a city park or a Disney theme park is a good, and increasingly rare, thing. Big trees add shade, beauty and a unspoken sense of class & wisdom that comes with age. They legitimize a landscape.
Which of the following city parks is more appealing to you, the top one, with all newly-planted, young trees or the bottom examples, with their big mature trees that have been living for many decades:
Mature tree removal at the MK is a bit of sore subject for me. Like others have said, I don't think this case shown in post 1 is that egregious (although, being a tree-lover, I would have liked to see it stay), but the changeover of the Hub (and Town Square) really got me sad and angry. After three decades of growth, it had become a shady and park-like oasis but then, in the 2002-2005 period, and for reasons discussed throughout these boards, most of the sizable trees in the Hub were removed. The area became (and remains) a hot, sun-scorched, tree-less plaza with open visual intrusions from Liberty Square through Tomorrowland to the Contemporary (and looming Bay Lake Tower).
When Disney removes the big, mature shade trees from its parks & property, it diminishes the environment - not in a broad ecological sense, but more in an aesthetic, place-making & design sense... at least until newly-planted ones grow up (if they are allowed to), but then we are talking a 20-40 year wait to re-establish that beatific presence.
How pithy.....
thehowiet
Wilson King of Prussia
I couldn't agree with you more, especially your comment about it looking "real." You really felt like you were in this magical land when you were in the hub, surrounded by green with a huge castle in front of you. Removing the trees totally killed that illusion.