Walk Around the World to be removed.

[Master Yoda]

And if they built a Magic Kingdom parking garage to the west of the light show canal, there would be 4 methods. They would be able to walk to the tram stop.

And if Scotty would get off his but and fix the transporter we wouldn't have to worry about any of this!:lol:

 

[RiversideBunny]

Scotty got beamed up to that great MK in the sky.

As he left, he sang:

Goin' up to the Spirit in the sky(Spirit in the sky)
That's where I'm gonna go when I die(When I die)
When I die and they lay me to rest,
I'm gonna go to the place that's the best

 

[kramden88]

and if scotty would get off his but and fix the transporter we wouldn't have to worry about any of this!:lol:

:roflol:

 

[s8film40]

It is my understanding that they do not share revenue. Sure, the DVC will conceivably increase attendance in the parks but profits from the parks are not directed toward the DVC or vice-versa.

All the departments work together to make money, it's the job of the executives who are over multiple departments to decide where to direct money from the shared company profit and develop plans to increase business. If DVC did not generate more business for the parks they would not push it so hard, in fact they might not do it all.

 

[wdwfan100]

I am sad to see the bricks go. I never thought it was a gimmick. I knew going into it that I would get at least 10 years. I actually got more, so I am quite pleased. I would pay for another 10 years too. Why not collect some more revenue from the owners who want to stay and re sell the rest. That should off set the cost of up keep a little

 

[wdwfan100]

Really? I would much rather hop on the monorail and be whisked right to the MK front gate.

~Amanda

I love the option to walk. When we stay at the beach club we walk every wher. DHS, Epcot, all around the Boardwalk, over to fantasia gardens. I actually loose weight. When we stay at the Poly we ride everywhere. The weight comes back on. If we could walk to the MK from the Poly we would.

 

[MichWolv]

I just heard from a friend who maintains the bricks in the Walk Around the World that it will be removed in about 6 - 12 months. Apparently they have already stopped maintaining the bricks with the exception of keeping them level and smooth for walking on. The areas where the bricks are present are to be resurfaced presumably with pavement similar to what surrounds them. I know that this has been talked about for a long time but it sounds like there finally going to do it.

I hope that isn't true. I would be to lose my brick, which was purchased for my wife and I to commemorate our wedding (best wedding present ever, I think). It's in a lovely spot by the TTC.

 

[RiversideBunny]

What were the contract terms for the bricks between WDW and the buyer when the bricks were purchased?

Tks.

 

[tahqa]

There are no plans now to complete the path.

A resort on the plot won`t happen - try a search for Mediteranian or Venitian resorts. The ground was found to be unsuitable.

My understanding is that every time they sank test pilings they lost them.

 

[s8film40]

A resort on the plot won`t happen - try a search for Mediteranian or Venitian resorts. The ground was found to be unsuitable.

That is a complete myth. RCID's land suitability map has listed that area as suitable to build on all along and still does to this day. The same goes for WDW's Master Land Use Plans which have always and still do designate that site as a future hotel site.

 

[kittybubbles]

If they completed the walkway between the Magic Kingdom and Grand Floridian, then that would be the only Resort with three options to get to/from a park.

From the CR, can't one take a boat, a monorail, or walk?

 

[kramden88]

That is a complete myth. RCID's land suitability map has listed that area as suitable to build on all along and still does to this day. The same goes for WDW's Master Land Use Plans which have always and still do designate that site as a future hotel site.

Are you quite sure, because I've always heard the same thing as marni. I'd love to see the Venetian go up as was originally intended, monorail spur and all!

 

[s8film40]

From the CR, can't one take a boat, a monorail, or walk?

Technically that is correct, however the boat is not direct. You would need to transfer boats at the Wilderness Lodge or Fort Wilderness.

 

[SeaCastle]

That is a complete myth. RCID's land suitability map has listed that area as suitable to build on all along and still does to this day. The same goes for WDW's Master Land Use Plans which have always and still do designate that site as a future hotel site.

From what I remember, it was listed as "marginally suitable", but I could be wrong. I believe they also put pylons at the site to see if that land could support a hotel, and they sunk very quickly from what I heard. Sure, Disney could build a hotel there, but at this point in the economy, it wouldn't make much sense at all.

Also, seeing that the statement was made by Martin (who very much knows his stuff) I would throw out the possibility of the hotel.

 

[s8film40]

Are you quite sure, because I've always heard the same thing as marni. I'd love to see the Venetian go up as was originally intended, monorail spur and all!

Pretty sure, I've always heard the same thing as well but never seen any proof that the land was unsuitable. It always seems to be someone hearing from someone else that they tested the land and found it to be unsuitable, if this were the case I'm sure they would remove it from their land use plans but it still seems to be there. There are lots of myths associated with WDW, until I see something outside of second hand information I don't buy it. See map below you may also note that there are three categories they use: Suitable, marginally suitable, and unsuitable. I would think that if there were any issues with the land that it would at least be listed as marginally suitable but this isn't the case.

 

[marni1971]

I know. I can`t figure it out either. Prime real estate sitting empty with at least 3 resort plans ready to go.

 

[kramden88]

I know. I can`t figure it out either. Prime real estate sitting empty with at least 3 resort plans ready to go.

New hotels are always nice but there are about 23 right now, correct? I think that's enough for the time being. I'd rather the money be spent on fixing problems and refurbishments. Or even better, tying some of the existing hotels into the monorail system. During my last trip I stayed at Saratoga and Bay Lake Tower and it's amazing how different the experience is when you're on the monorail.

 

[WDW Vacationer]

New hotels are always nice but there are about 23 right now, correct? I think that's enough for the time being. I'd rather the money be spent on fixing problems and refurbishments. Or even better, tying some of the existing hotels into the monorail system. During my last trip I stayed at Saratoga and Bay Lake Tower and it's amazing how different the experience is when you're on the monorail.

No new resorts are really needed now,I agree.

 

[vonpluto]

Pretty sure, I've always heard the same thing as well but never seen any proof that the land was unsuitable. It always seems to be someone hearing from someone else that they tested the land and found it to be unsuitable, if this were the case I'm sure they would remove it from their land use plans but it still seems to be there. There are lots of myths associated with WDW, until I see something outside of second hand information I don't buy it. See map below you may also note that there are three categories they use: Suitable, marginally suitable, and unsuitable. I would think that if there were any issues with the land that it would at least be listed as marginally suitable but this isn't the case.=QUOTE]

I agree. I first heard of the "My God the piles are disappearing!" scenario on RADP in '97 or '98. It baffled me then and still does. Either the story is total brown sky, or somebody got it sideways.

If the foundation is the problem, here is one possible reason: soil bearing tests have shown that foundation requirements would put that part of the cost out of balance with the cost of the total project. Structural engineers usually spec pile load in one if two ways, either driven to refusal or to a specific bearing load normally spec'd in tons. (see attached below, original CR Tower piles were driven to bearing(refusal))

It would seem to me that soil bearing tests had to be done way back before Phase One to identify suitable building areas. I would think that before the Venetian was designed, the site was found to be usable and cost effective for hotel construction. Something must have changed over time, one possibility is that construction minimums have risen since 1970.

Not having any inside info, the foundation cost effectiveness seems the most likely scenario. But, since Disney is so tight-lipped about all things past, present and future (shades of Mintz and Powers), the reason nothing has happened at that site is something no one has considered.

Below is a scan of foundation support plans from the plan package for BLT that was posted on the county site last year. Note that it spells out the pile support for the CR Tower, and two possibilities for BLT. If it works there, you would think it would work for the Venetian/Med site.:shrug:

Note: I am not an architect or engineer. I'm a general contractor, been in the biz since '72. I live on a barrier island and my house is on 40' piles, driven to refusal.:wave:

 

[bork]

If the new paving makes it easier to clean, I'm all for it. I was surprised at how much gum was all over the bricks outside the MK and around the TTC when we were there last year.