WDW literally falling apart

lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
celluloid said:
If only they had the exact schematics, with alterations to make sure it did not happen again.

Do you really believe what you state, or just wish everyone was as apologetic.

Rides have been rebuilt after fires safely and show ready in a shorter amount of time.

Remember how Splash Mountain had sinking logs, but it was all up and running even though logs sank... again?

You would think there would be quite a. It of downtime to investigate and redesign so it did not happen again.

You are only kidding yourself at this point. The truth is, it's just not that much of a priority.
Click to expand...
I would hope they’re not using schematics, as that level of drawing would definitely not have the necessary information. As-design drawings (the final construction drawings provided to the contractor) do not always match as-built conditions. Even as-built drawings prepared by the contractor can have discrepancies. Methods of documentation have also changed over 30 years with much less information included in older drawings compared to contemporary drawings. But even if you do easily get all of that information about existing conditions, it doesn’t tell you the actual scope of the job because you don’t know how far the issue extends (water can move horizontally along and under surfaces). It doesn’t tell you what changes to make. It doesn’t tell you how to run new conduit through existing concrete. It doesn’t tell you how or where to integrate the new design so that you’re not functionally repeating the same mistakes.

I am not speaking from belief. I am speaking from experience. A proper fix is something that can and does take time no matter how many other examples of other things you can think up. Renovations often catch people off guard because they contain so many unknowns and the process is not as neat as new construction. They obviously had people do some work and if they didn’t care they could have just redone what was there (assuming someone else was up for taking the liability). The planters though suggest some level of concern about more than just the door portal as the block people from getting near the display windows as well.

Calling me an apologist is one of the stupid things people can post on this board.
 
C

celluloid

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
How is being the one to point out that this was the result of a bigger problem than just an ECV hitting a wall being a Disney apologist?
Click to expand...

My conversation with you was about none of that.
The apologist is the part where you won't just admit that fixing a facade is not their priority. It does not have to take an entire year.
 
Last edited:
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
celluloid said:
My conversation with you was about none of that.
The apologist is the part where you won't just admit that fixing a facade is not their priority. It does. not have to take an entire year.
Click to expand...
It is about that because it’s all the same issue. My assessment of the underlying problem has not changed. I have no qualms about criticizing Disney and it seems to be missed that I’ve been saying that this is a bigger problem. Dealing with waterproofing in new construction can be a challenge and remains a major source of issues and liability; those challenges only increase when dealing with older buildings. I am speaking from experience and the kind of issue that the photos suggest are ones that absolutely can take a year (or even more) to resolve even when given top priority, overtime and only use readily available materials. Disney being Disney will almost certainly have too much bureaucracy involved and take longer than the fastest it could be done. They may well just end up slapping together something just at the door that doesn’t really address the issue. But we’re not there yet, and there is a small bit of evidence that suggests otherwise. I’m not willing to just ignore my knowledge and experience to get in a dunk on Disney, especially when legitimate criticisms are so easy to find.
 
L

Lilofan

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
I would hope they’re not using schematics, as that level of drawing would definitely not have the necessary information. As-design drawings (the final construction drawings provided to the contractor) do not always match as-built conditions. Even as-built drawings prepared by the contractor can have discrepancies. Methods of documentation have also changed over 30 years with much less information included in older drawings compared to contemporary drawings. But even if you do easily get all of that information about existing conditions, it doesn’t tell you the actual scope of the job because you don’t know how far the issue extends (water can move horizontally along and under surfaces). It doesn’t tell you what changes to make. It doesn’t tell you how to run new conduit through existing concrete. It doesn’t tell you how or where to integrate the new design so that you’re not functionally repeating the same mistakes.

I am not speaking from belief. I am speaking from experience. A proper fix is something that can and does take time no matter how many other examples of other things you can think up. Renovations often catch people off guard because they contain so many unknowns and the process is not as neat as new construction. They obviously had people do some work and if they didn’t care they could have just redone what was there (assuming someone else was up for taking the liability). The planters though suggest some level of concern about more than just the door portal as the block people from getting near the display windows as well.

Calling me an apologist is one of the stupid things people can post on this board.
Click to expand...
Does take time but when the boss wants it done it will get done in quicker fashion .
 
L

Lilofan

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
More sycophants isn’t a solution to any problem.
Click to expand...
Your feedback is similar to how many people does it to change a lightbulb. Feedback on bosses wanting things done and getting it done and safety related matters getting fixed in a quicker fashion is real world.
 
J

James Alucobond

Well-Known Member
Lilofan said:
Your feedback is similar to how many people does it to change a lightbulb. Feedback on bosses wanting things done and getting it done and safety related matters getting fixed in a quicker fashion is real world.
Click to expand...
When this does happen, it typically means it wasn't done as safely as it should have been and that the "boss" involved simply signed off on being okay with increased risk or liability.
 
Bocabear

Bocabear

Well-Known Member
It's a decorative surround on a doorframe... The discussion is now taking a turn that it is a deeply seated structural and safety issue... If they are concerned there are structural issues, the building should be evacuated... That section of the sidewalk should be closed, and in short order, the building should be repaired and restored....Maybe they are having a special piece fabricated for it.. maybe they are redesigning it and cant agree on the look, maybe a lot of things, but the fact remains it is damaged and on the front of a building in the main approach to the hub of a major theme park owned by a company that built it's reputation on good show and quality details....
Oh yeah, and a couple of price increases have happened since then....lol
 
J

James Alucobond

Well-Known Member
The facade being structurally unsound does not mean the entire building is structurally unsound. And that part of the sidewalk is completely closed. Why else do you think they put planters around the undamaged display windows and not just in front of the visibly affected doorway?
 
C

celluloid

Well-Known Member
James Alucobond said:
The facade being structurally unsound does not mean the entire building is structurally unsound. And that part of the sidewalk is completely closed. Why else do you think they put planters around the undamaged display windows and not just in front of the visibly affected doorway?
Click to expand...

But if the facade is structurally unsound, than the entire facade should have been ripped off and the scrims put up over it. You still don't want the rest of it falling apart.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Bocabear said:
It's a decorative surround on a doorframe... The discussion is now taking a turn that it is a deeply seated structural and safety issue... If they are concerned there are structural issues, the building should be evacuated... That section of the sidewalk should be closed, and in short order, the building should be repaired and restored....Maybe they are having a special piece fabricated for it.. maybe they are redesigning it and cant agree on the look, maybe a lot of things, but the fact remains it is damaged and on the front of a building in the main approach to the hub of a major theme park owned by a company that built it's reputation on good show and quality details....
Oh yeah, and a couple of price increases have happened since then....lol
Click to expand...
And there you go just making things up again. I’m the one saying it’s a deeper issue and I never said anything about “a deeply seated structural and safety issues.” I have not even said it’s a structural issue. The images showed a failure of the steel furring, not the concrete structure. Furring is built out around structure, to the extent that would be considered structure it is at most tertiary, not primary or even secondary structure such that occupancy is no longer safe.

The area in front of the door portal and the windows is closed.

They are fabricating custom pieces because the door portal wasn’t made of something like EIFS or stucco like you previously tried to claim.

The envelope assembly can be redesign without changing the general appearance.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
celluloid said:
But if the facade is structurally unsound, than the entire facade should have been ripped off and the scrims put up over it. You still don't want the rest of it falling apart.
Click to expand...
Structural soundness is not binary, it exists across a continuum. What appeared to fail was the furring that built out the facade from the concrete structure. There’s no point in ripping open an area with water intrusion issue early because you’re just inviting more water into your building. The panels may be corroded and compromised but not yet at the point of failure unless they’re acted upon by a larger force, like being hit by an ECV.
 
MagicRat

MagicRat

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
Structural soundness is not binary, it exists across a continuum. What appeared to fail was the furring that built out the facade from the concrete structure. There’s no point in ripping open an area with water intrusion issue early because you’re just inviting more water into your building. The panels may be corroded and compromised but not yet at the point of failure unless they’re acted upon by a larger force, like being hit by an ECV.
Click to expand...
We seem to be in the same business but maybe other sides of the spectrum. A monorail support column could have been replaced in this timeframe.

I do agree that management is probably holding up a final decision by figuring what that want to do with the space. I chalk that up to people being in positions they are assigned to be in and lack of experience/education. Businesses like Disney are spending money but unfortunately irrationally these days.

I blame it all on the smart phone, even seismic engineers are falling lazy to its powers!
 
C

celluloid

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
Structural soundness is not binary, it exists across a continuum. What appeared to fail was the furring that built out the facade from the concrete structure. There’s no point in ripping open an area with water intrusion issue early because you’re just inviting more water into your building. The panels may be corroded and compromised but not yet at the point of failure unless they’re acted upon by a larger force, like being hit by an ECV.
Click to expand...

If being hit by an EVC(and yeah, I get that those things have torque) than the thing would not be structurally unsafe enough to keep in the elements of Florida Hurricane season in a populated theme park area. You have a lot of conjunctures there, and it is reasonable to say that the structural integrity of collapsing from something as simple as an EVC hitting it is nonexistent.
Think man think.

It's a mostly cosmetic thing that broke, and its not a priority to rush afix for it. That simple
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
celluloid said:
If being hit by an EVC(and yeah, I get that those things have torque) than the thing would not be structurally unsafe enough to keep in the elements of Florida Hurricane season in a populated theme park area. You have a lot of conjunctures there, and it is reasonable to say that the structural integrity of collapsing from something as simple as an EVC hitting it is nonexistent.
Think man think.

It's a mostly cosmetic thing that broke, and its not a priority to rush afix for it. That simple
Click to expand...
The whole reason for this discussion is because the wall was hit by an ECV. It happened and the result was that it dislodged a sizable chunk of the exterior finish, multiple panels well above the height of an ECV fell off, panels broke overhead and a junction box was ripped out of concrete.

Wind loads and impact loads are not the same. Those wind loads though are part of why it would not be advisable to rip everything open as you previously suggested.

Just because something is largely cosmetic does not mean it is not part of the building envelope.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom