More New Hotels Rumored for Disney World
Permits filed by Walt Disney World suggest new hotels are coming to the Magic Kingdom and Epcot areas. The latter is the resurfacing of a rumor about a main entrance hotel, while the former is a Disney Vacation Club project on the abandoned River Country parcel at Fort Wilderness. (Last updated June 3, 2018.)
The developments as to the front entrance hotel at Epcot are predicated upon a slew of 27 permits found by WDWNT that they believe pertain to one of two different concepts. It’s worth noting that the pre-eminent expert on Walt Disney World permits, danlb_2000, disputes that these have anything to do with the Epcot hotel.
Permits for the Fort Wilderness resort have been uncovered over the course of the last month by danlb_2000 in this thread on WDWMagic. These permits are all under the name “Project 89” and have been filed with the South Florida Water Management District.
June 3, 2018 Update: This rumor just gained a lot more credence, as Central Florida business community site GrowthSpotter is reporting a number of concrete details about Project 89. The design firm Wimberly Allison Tong & Goo (WATG) has been selected as the lead designer for the resort, with Balfour Beatty will be the construction manager for the project. The hard construction cost of the resort is projected at $350 million, with additional design and development (think Imagineered details) by Disney of an unknown amount.
GrowthSpotter reports that the new hotel and resort at the River Country site is being planned for 1,340 bays, an industry term used for a standard room measurement when considering the variability of multi-room suites.​ Disney Vacation Club would utilize approximately 940 of those bays with rooms of various size, with standard hotel rooms constituting around half of the resort in terms of room numbers, but one-third in terms of size.
WATG has designed hotels for Disney in Paris, Tokyo, Hong Kong, and Florida, most notably the original Grand Floridian Resort & Spa at Walt Disney World. Balfour Beatty has led numerous projects in the Orlando area, including the Dr. Phillips Center for the Performing Arts, work within Pandora – World of Avatar, and Cabana Bay & Loews Sapphire Falls Resorts at Universal Orlando. They are currently constructing the new tower at Disney’s Coronado Springs Resort.
Initially, the Fort Wilderness permits focused on “geotechnical investigation to assess the suitability of subsurface soils.” Basically, whether the swampy area was suitable for construction. Unsurprisingly, this is a concern with any area to be developed at Walt Disney World, but that’s especially true on the shores of the Seven Seas Lagoon and Bay Lake.
During the Eisner-era, land was actually cleared for work to begin on the Mediterranean Resort, only to be abandoned once it was discovered that developing the site would be cost-prohibitive. It should also be noted that the Mediterranean Resort is one of many hotel concepts for the Magic Kingdom that has been dropped–several have even been announced before having the plug pulled.
This is also not the first time there have been plans for an expansion project between Fort Wilderness and Wilderness Lodge on/around the old River Country location. Several years ago, permits were filed similar to what has occurred recently, and numerous insiders corroborated rumors that there were plans for a Disney Vacation Club wing at Fort Wilderness.
This culminated in the filing of actual site plans in September 2011, which made it Fort Wilderness DVC sound like a done deal. DVCInfo.com shared some of these site plans, as well as this concept fly-through produced by the design firm:
It’s unclear why these plans were abandoned, but one theory is that expanding at Grand Floridian and Polynesian Village were prioritized, as those were safer bets in terms of sales. To my knowledge, there have been no reliable rumors that it was determined that this site was unsuitable for construction (to the contrary, the previous progress suggests it was/is suitable).
It’s entirely possible these plans were placed on indefinite hold, and we’re now seeing them resumed. Disney has a “feed the beast” mentality with Disney Vacation Club, with one project typically beginning as soon as the previous one ends. With Disney’s Riviera Resort slated to open in Fall 2019, it only makes sense that construction on another DVC resort would begin by 2020.
My Reaction
For starters, I think both of these rumors will end up being confirmed sooner or later. To my knowledge, specifics about the Future World re-imagining for Epcot remain in flux (hence zero concept art having been released). We would not be surprised if the 2-3 different hotel locations are still vying for the green-light. Disney making another splashy announcement within the next year about a comprehensive ‘vision’ for Epcot that includes this hotel seems like a distinct possibility.
In the case of the Fort Wilderness DVC, that confirmation will probably come much later. Past practice for Disney Vacation Club is to not confirm projects, even those under construction, until sales targets for the current project have been satisfied. I still chuckle when thinking about Bay Lake Tower’s existence being denied even as it was going vertical.
Sales have not started for Riviera Resort and Copper Creek has also yet to sell out. In other words, it could be several years (2021?) before there’s even an announcement for Fort Wilderness. What little we’ve seen of Riviera Resort thus far doesn’t look all that exciting, so it wouldn’t surprise me if early sales of that are slow-going, leading to even further hesitation on the Fort Wilderness project.
I would not expect the Epcot entrance hotel to be Disney Vacation Club, both because Fort Wilderness seems to be the next development in that regard and since a Deluxe Resort overlooking Spaceship Earth is a slam-dunk concept that would command high nightly rates and would easily achieve occupancy goals.
Even with the assumption that they are happening, there’s the question as to whether they should happen. In our last post about the Epcot entrance hotel rumor, I focused primarily on occupancy rates. I believe that Walt Disney World should continue to build hotels to satisfy current and future demand, lest we want to see rack rates driven up to stratospheric levels.
I’m also on board at the conceptual level, as I think both of these locations have the potential to be really cool. We are huge fans of Fort Wilderness, and regret that we don’t take the opportunity to visit there more often. This resort would definitely expose more guests (us included) to the greatness that is Fort Wilderness. I also like its location relative to key Fort Wilderness amenities, as it would make those more accessible.
This, however, is a double-edged sword. Part of what makes Fort Wilderness so special is that it’s been relatively undisturbed by time, and is one of the last bastions of “Vacation Kingdom” Walt Disney World. It’s almost remarkable how different Fort Wilderness feels from the rest of Walt Disney World–even its neighbor, Wilderness Lodge.
There’s a very legitimate concern, especially after seeing how the Copper Creek and Boulder Ridge projects at Wilderness Lodge unfolded, that any expansion at Fort Wilderness will destroy some of the primitive and secluded characteristics of the campground that give it so much appeal. This doesn’t necessarily have to be the case, but it very well could if Disney takes a ham-fisted or overzealous approach when building at Fort Wilderness.
My other concern, and this applies equally to both resorts, is that Walt Disney World’s recent hotel developments have placed an emphasis on function and scale at the expense of theme. This is borne out, for example, in the heights of Bay Lake Tower, Villas at Grand Floridian, Riviera Resort, and Coronado Springs Tower.
All of those developments are taller than they should be to maintain appropriate scale with their surroundings. Contrast these to the 1990s developments of BoardWalk Inn, Yacht & Beach Club, and Wilderness Lodge, where more restraint was exercised in scale. I think Disney fans widely view the Swan & Dolphin a mistake that has blighted Crescent Lake and the Epcot area for a while…if so, why be cool with Disney repeating this same mistake?
Then there’s the issue of the core theme and resort’s style. While I do not believe the developments at Grand Floridian, the Poly, or Wilderness Lodge to have this problem, the generic design of Riviera and the Coronado tower worries me. These hotels have a bland sense of luxury, presumably aiming to appeal to the broadest selection of guests. (Or, in the case of Coronado, conventioneers who probably don’t care about Disney for the most part.)
I can understand Walt Disney World developing more hotels that aim for classy luxury and clean, contemporary designs. It’s hard to fault the approach with the Coronado tower. The obvious market for that hotel is not going to be Disney fans, but convention and business guests. Even beyond those demographics, there are plenty of normal guests who will favor that style. To be sure, luxurious designs like that certainly have their place.
I do not think that place is at the front entrance to Epcot, and it is certainly not in the heart of Fort Wilderness. Epcot’s front entrance deserves an eye-catching, imaginative resort that evokes the sense of optimism and futurism highlighted in Future World. No matter what you think of the slow decline of EPCOT Center, I think it’s undeniable that the architecture is still very inspired. I fear this front entrance resort will just apply some mid-century modern flourishes to a generic hotel and call that “futuristic.”
Likewise, Fort Wilderness deserves something that meshes with the existing design of both it and Wilderness Lodge. I worry less that Disney will botch the theme here, if only because a fairly good job was done with the recent Copper Creek and Boulder Ridge projects in terms of thematic work (the deforestation is a project and some of the wide open spaces are a problem).
Moreover, wedging a modern luxury resort in the woods between Wilderness Lodge and Fort Wilderness is such a preposterous idea that even those within Disney who want to build more hotels of that nature must realize it’s a bad idea on this parcel. I still have concerns that the depth and detail of a Fort Wilderness DVC resort might not be on par with Wilderness Lodge, but I think there’s enough potential upside that I’m willing to be cautiously optimistic.
Cautious optimism is ultimately where I stand with both of these potential hotels. I think both resorts have a tremendous amount of potential, and could be among the absolute best resorts at Walt Disney World if done right. As previously noted, Hotel MiraCosta (Tokyo) and Disneyland Hotel (Paris) demonstrate what an asset a front entrance hotel can be if done right. Wilderness Lodge demonstrates what that a rustic high-end resort can be if done right. If these resorts live up to even half of their full potential, they will be assets to Walt Disney World. The questions are how Disney well will balance form with function in each hotel, and whether the sheer number of projects currently being undertaken at Walt Disney World will cause corners/budgets to be cut in development of these resorts.
Planning a Walt Disney World trip? Learn about hotels on our Walt Disney World Hotels Reviews page. For where to eat, read our Walt Disney World Restaurant Reviews. To save money on tickets or determine which type to buy, read our Tips for Saving Money on Walt Disney World Tickets post. Our What to Pack for Disney Trips post takes a unique look at clever items to take. For what to do and when to do it, our Walt Disney World Ride Guides will help. For comprehensive advice, the best place to start is our Walt Disney World Trip Planning Guide for everything you need to know!
Your Thoughts
What do you think of the potential of new hotels in these locations at Walt Disney World? What do you think the likelihood is that these rumors will come to fruition? Any questions we can help you answer? Hearing your feedback is part of the fun, so please share your thoughts below in the comments!
I join the ranks of those who do not want to see Fort Wilderness spoiled by a hotel on site. It would thrill me to no end, though, to see a section of the campground dedicated to DVC members. At this time, it is VERY difficult to score a campsite with DVC points. Fort Wilderness is my favorite place to stay. We’ve camped there and we’ve stayed in the cabins (and those mobile home-type things that preceded the cabins) and it’s the perfect respite from the rest of the hustle of WDW. That would be something, wouldn’t it? To have DVC campsites!
If this ends up being like Wilderness Junction, a separate resort from both Fort Wilderness and the Wilderness Lodge that just has one end on the old River Country property, this is fantastic news.
(Time to dust off some 20+ year old plans for the Wilderness Railroad.)
They need to either refurbish Fort Wilderness cabins and camp sites or leave it alone. Add more camping sites to River Country area, but NOT another hotel. That would take away from the quaintness of everything over there. Camping, hay rides, horse rides, the dinner show. Everything. NO HOTEL.
Just curious. Does Disney have any plans to build more non-park resorts like Aulani? Or would that stretch them to thin with all the resorts and hotels they are adding at the parks.
They really need to open a new park if they keep adding all of the hotels and hotel expansions. The parks can only hold so many people and they are not an enjoyable experience when near or at capacity. At some point there will be people staying on property who cannot enter the parks
I’ve seen this come up several times, and it’s a misconception. Walt Disney World has far (far!) more theme park capacity than hotel capacity. If every single hotel were fully booked and all of those guests went into the parks at the same time, that would still account for less than half of the parks’ capacity.
At any given moment, there are significantly more off-site guests or locals in the parks than WDW hotel guests. As new attractions in the parks open, expect to see WDW undertake more efforts to shift hotel stays from off-site to on-site. (Past examples of this include EMH, expanded FastPass+ booking windows, parking fees at the theme parks, etc.)
Even when the parks do hit capacity now, they first close to off-site guests while remaining open to on-site guests. Depending upon the popularity of Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge, this is something that might start happening more, and if word gets out that off-site guests are being shut out of this land, people will start changing their behavior and staying on-site.
I agree….A new park….They need more attractions added….Not to replace existing ones so that the guest can spread out and not just stand in line waiting….
Most of these hotels seem very unappealing to me. They don’t seem like they have any unique theming that separates them from any other high end hotel. I mean if you can’t tell the difference between an onsite Disney hotel and an onsite Hyatt or Hilton hotel (or whatever), then what’s the point? Also, without the theming, what makes Disney different than Universal? I understand that Disney wants to expand to meet demand. And I believe it will ultimately expand the parks as a result (which is a good thing for all of us). But there needs to be much greater thought into theming hotels so that you feel like you’ve actually gone away from home on a vacation.
Also, I have to say the one reason why I’ve loved vacationing at Orlando is because it feels away as opposed to Disneyland which feels what it is, a vacation in the middle of the city. If that changes, it will likely change the way we vacation.
While I share your cautious optimism for Fort Wilderness, having a pool with an homage to River Country should be a no brainer, and if there a return of the Railroad, though highly doubtful, it will be a huge show of goodwill.
Random thought just occurred to me that reminded me of this article. Could the new hotel in Epcot – Future World and the new Start Wars hotel be one and the same? Remember how Disney announced the Star Wars hotel would be “seamlessly connected” to the parks? It is pretty seamless to be able to walk out the front door and be at Epcot, the EP-MK monorail, and a short-ish walk to the friendship boats or gondolas to Hollywood Studios. Plus, a space-themed hotel (even one tied to Disney Star Wars IP) arguably makes sense for Future World, or at least makes as much (or as little) sense as Guardians.
Laila, I recently read that construction has begun on the Star Wars hotel on property behind HS, allowing the hotel to be seamlessly connected to the theme park, which makes sense since that’s where the new Star Wars land is.
I am not sure how they vet people requesting scooters but there should be something to ensure one really needs them instead of just a convenience from walking while there. My family frequents WDW yearly and there are some on these scooters that are questionable. I do have a sister that is only 48 but requires one due to MS. Alot on the scooters seem to think they have the right of way. Maybe a scooter lane would help also.
People with disabilities require scooters and people should respect that and watch out for them. I have a EVC as I can not walk long distances and I’m respectful of others but it needs to work both ways. Remember EVC’S need more room that someone without it
Invisible disabilities are real. You have no way of knowing whose use of a scooter is “questionable,” and “vetting” people through something like medical records puts an unnecessary time/money burden on disabled people who are already spending a lot of money to be in the park. Plus it’s likely both a privacy and human rights violation. My friend is in his 30s and seems able-bodied but has extreme back pain as a result of of horrific child abuse. It severely limits his mobility and his ability to carry out daily tasks. He used a scooter in WDW and received many comments and sidelong glances from people thinking he was faking it. You never know what people have going on.
Why would someone use a scooter if they didn’t need one? That is absurd. They are more of an inconvenience to the person using it then the other people walking. I have never understood why scooters are a nuisance to people on foot who have the luxury of walking long distances. I am not disabled nor do I know anyone who needs to use a scooter, but I am still empathetic to those who need them. I have the heart to realize that I am able to enjoy WDW in a way that people in scooters cannot. Instead of complaining about how others’ misfortune inconveniences you, maybe cherish your own health and try to help those less fortunate by letting them have the right of way. “Vetting” disabilities is illegal for good reason.
So sorry to write this but sometimes I get so frustrated. I hate when people say “people on scooters are questionable” or “people asking for a DAS pass really don’t look like they need one”.
I, myself, had open heart surgery at the age of 59. After a few weeks I was going out to doctors appointments, lunch dates, etc. with the help of others driving. I also used the handicap parking which I really needed.
Although I was in need of assistance I looked FANTASTIC! Did I feel fantastic, absolutely not. But looking at me you would have never know that three weeks before I had major open heart surgery that was life threatening and took over 9 1/2 hours. I looked like I was in good shape, young, and healthy. But my body wasn’t.
I cannot tell you how many dirty faces, ignorant comments said under peoples breath, and shaking of heads I received while using my handicap permit. One time I even had a confrontation with an arrogant man who started yelling at me. I politely told him he can have my handicap pass right now if God will give him or someone close to him all my health issues. It stopped him mid sentence and he hurried away.
I wish that people would not judge one’s disability by just looking at them, as you really do not know what they are personally going through.
Also, another point I want to make is that an innocent comment like you wrote – “there are some on these scooters that are questionable” reinforces the wrong type of thinking to others.
I am sorry your sister has MS. I am sure you understand my point of view.
Best wishes to your sister.
There is no VETTING of someone needing a scooter. You can rent from Disney, from a private renter or bring your own. For someone that has a relative that is disabled I am very surprised at this. Do you truly think that someone has to have very clear visible issues to need a scooter? I have had multiple neck & back surgeries – because I can do almost no exercise I have also gained weight. I can’t tell you how self-continuous I am about using a scooter. I can stand & walk and don’t use a scooter in my day to day life, however I can’t be on my feet for more that 20-30 minutes without my back basically giving out. The last time I went to Disney I used a scooter and I was able to have a great time, but I absolutely saw looks from some people that clearly didn’t think I should be using it. A scooter doesn’t let you jump the line or get special treatment, it allows you to be able to enjoy Disney as other people do.
As far as ‘thinking they have the right of way’ Well I would like you to try and get through crowds of people, who continually walk in front of you, just to stop short, or just won’t let you move. Do you think that is appropriate? Have you tried the scooter, do you know how hard it is to maneuver and stop on a dime? How about people with strollers that ‘think they have the right of way’ should they be treated like second-class citizens? Years ago when I was able to go and walk, I got bumped into and run into by people with strollers, but I didn’t complain about parents thinking they had ‘the right of way’.
This is exactly the attitude that made me hesitate to go back to WDW last year when I knew I would need a scooter in order to go. I was encouraged by my family to go anyway and I tried very hard to ignore the looks from people that have the same attitude as you do, but there will always be people that will judge.
Honestly I would LOVE a scooter only lane, it would make getting around a lot easier – how many people do you think would honor it and actually leave it to scooters?
I look like there’s not a damn thing wrong with me, that I could happily tap dance through Disney World with no effort at all. Yet I have had a Disney DAS (disability pass) for years, along with a state issued disabled parking placard. I’ve never noticed anyone looking at me like I’m abusing the system. Unless they direct their comments directly to me, I’m not that alert as to what they think. And if I was, I wouldn’t care. Not a bit.
When requesting a DAS if your disability isn’t evident, it is always good to offer a little information as to what your limitations are. Also, you should know that it is illegal for a cast member to ask exactly what your disability is. They’ll usually stop you in your tracks if you begin to tell them, as they don’t want to get fired.
Things have changed drastically since the brouhaha where guests were using disabled people to get easy access to attractions. But the good news is, once you are approved for a DAS card, you can use it on every trip.
In closing, having a disability is never a picnic. If people look at you sideways and are that rude, they don’t deserve a second of your thoughts. I was run into twice by the same stroller on my last trip. I didn’t get hurt and just shrugged it off. Be tolerant people, be tolerant.
I like the granger of the swan/dolphin.
It makes the skyline in the epcot resort area. However a little imaginative restoration on the entrance like the rear entrance (the lights and music/waterfall etc) would go a long way.
The fountain remains unchanged, but the whole walkway between Swan and Dolphin has been upgraded recently, with some very cool light and sound effects. I agree they form a somewhat distinct entity, but I’ve never known a Boardwalk without them, and I’ve grown to appreciate both resorts as the years went by. In fact, come Food & Wine, they are my go-to for an adult get-away weekend …. I kind of like being in Disney without being “over Disneyed”.
A few months ago I had posted that I thought a Villages Nature Paris Resort type resort would be a good fit for the entrance of EPCOT. I know realize that it would be a much, much better fit for the Fort Wilderness Resort area. An eco-friendly resort, that offers a wide variety of non-DVC villa type rooms and an abundance of recreation, it just what Disney needs. They could replace the cabins and River Country and even expand to include Discovery Island and the undeveloped land around Bay Lake. But in turn, they could create a beautiful resort that enhances everything great about Fort Wilderness instead of destroying it.
I think that’s a brilliant idea and probably the best-case scenario for bringing something new to the table in that area while maintaining the natural integrity.
As a practical matter, I wonder if it’s realistic. Assuming this will still be a DVC resort, is it something that Disney could actually sell? Do American Disney fans actually care about eco-friendly lodging? I know there’s a huge global travel market for it, but I wonder how WDW’s demo intersects with that market.
Regardless, great thought!
I do not care about eco-friendly anything to be honest. I avoid anything marketed as ‘green’.
I believe that this idea of new Disney hotels is a great idea. I have been a Disney Vacation Club member for some time now and it becomes infuriating trying to find a hotel room. The number of people going to Disney is drastically rising. More and more people are going to enjoy themselves but the number of hotel rooms hasn’t changed. I do agree that they have to be more creative when it comes to the hotel. I want to see hotels that bring life and magic to Disney, not some boring and bland hotel. I would like to see how this unfolds and hopefully they do a good job.
My issue is that all of these additional resorts are not alleviating the room crunch – they are just bringing in more people overall. I’m going back to WDW this November for the first time since April ‘16, and trying to book Copper Creek at the 7th month window was a nightmare. I’ve never had any issues booking at either the Polynesian, Grand Floridian or Kidani Village for past visits (on Easter week as well). Maybe November is just the new “it” month to go since it’s cheap and not 100 degrees, but DVC availability is scant for the month, even at Saratoga Springs if you want more than 3 nights. It was never this way in the past – either DVC membership grows substantially each year, or people are just being more discerning with when they visit and packing the ideal months to visit (August is wide open in comparison).
I’m starting to wonder what rental rates are for renting out my points. I’ve not checked in a while, but once the room crunch starts it might be more valuable to rent out points!
I might also have to investigate, again, buying points just for rental purposes.
None of these potential projects sound like they will be in the “moderate” resort category. We are moderate-resort guests, largely because we can stay longer if we avoid the deluxe rates, while on the other hand we really appreciate the theming at the moderate resorts compared to the what is at the value resorts. What do you think, is there a need to expand the inventory of moderate-priced resort rooms? We keep seeing new deluxe and DVC projects, but those of us without the scratch for deluxe accommodations who want to stay on-property in non-motel settings are looking at the same 3-4 moderate resorts that have been there for decades (and some rooms in those have been demolished for other sorts of accommodations). The current moderate resorts are popular, and with the anticipated surge in attendance I fear that folks like us will be looking off-property because these resorts will be swamped.
I think the Moderate tier will continue to be neglected in the immediate future, unfortunately.
OK enough already. We all know if you build it they will come. My question is as WDW builds more resorts and more DVC RESORTS where will all the people that are coming go?? The parks have gotten progressively more crowded. The skill level required to plan a trip to WDW has become progressively more complex also. I love WDW and am one of the original DVC members, and have been visiting 1 to 2 x per year past 29 years. Next year we’re going to Disneyland in hopes of finding less insane planning, less intense crowds and more of the old feel Disney we loved. WDW needs to pay it’s employees decent wages and build another park before it builds more resorts. I feel the crowds have reached a tipping point and I for one am tired of waking in middle of the night 180 days out to make dining reservations and 60 days out for fast passes and paying extra to get dining reservations to get seats for nighttime entertainment.
Disillusioned,
Joan
I grew up going to Disneyland in the late sixties and seventies, it’s just not the same now .Be prepared it is just packed full of people .
Yes, the parks aren’t the same but DLR doesn’t need nearly as much planning as WDW but has a lot of great things to do and experience none-the-less. My family loves to go back to your hotes mid-afternoon, and it is so much easier/faster to do that at DLR.
The increase in crowds and the increase in hotels are mostly a matter of correlation, not causation. Even with more on-property hotel rooms, the fact remains that the majority of day guests at Walt Disney World come from off-site. Building more hotels doesn’t create additional demand for the parks–it satisfies existing demand for hotels (there’s a ton of unsatisfied demand–hence the sky-high hotel prices right now).
Through at least 2021, you should expect increased attendance at Walt Disney World every single year. That has nothing to do with the hotels being built and everything to do with the new attractions that are opening.
Joan, I share your frustrations, and much of that is due to the fact that I can recall just 7-8 years ago visiting WDW in November and not waiting in a single line to enjoy an attraction. Now, the crowds at all of the parks are massive. I am not so sure that the large crowds are a result of the new resorts and available rooms as much as an improvement in the national economy as well as the global economy. My family was visiting WDW in January and on one attraction my son and I counted no fewer than six different languages being spoken by park guest surrounding us. The meteoric rise in international guest explains much of the crowd issue in what would normally be down times at WDW. At this point, I think that there is no such thing as a down time.
“…as much as an improvement in the national economy as well as the global economy…”
Bingo.
What concerns me most about all this building and expansion, is the the lack of infrastructure to support this. The transportation systems, even with the new Gondola system are unable to accommodate the number of guests that require the use of scooters or wheelchairs or assistance of some sort. We were there in very early December last year, with my mom and my aunt, both in their 80s, who were using scooters. We learned very quickly that none of the transportation systems can support the number of people that are riding them. One monorail car holds two scooters, one bus can carry two scooters, the boats are even worse. Cast members are kind and patient and accommodating, but wait times, especially at the beginning and end of the day are almost unbearable, and we weren’t even there at the busiest time. If Disney plans on continuous expansion, they really need to consider how to upgrade or modify the transportation systems so they can support the number of guests that these expansions will bring.
Totally agree. I use a wheelchair and there are just a lot of trouble. Perhaps elevator service for monorail would be s help. However it would need people to make sure it is for those who really need it
I am not sure how they vet people requesting scooters but there should be something to ensure one really needs them instead of just a convenience from walking while there. My family frequents WDW yearly and there are some on these scooters that are questionable. I do have a sister that is only 48 but requires one due to MS. Alot on the scooters seem to think they have the right of way. Maybe a scooter lane would help also.
Given that I still don’t understand why Disney decided to tear down 1 1/2 of the “islands” at the Caribbean Beach Resort to put in another Homewood Suites, er, excuse me, Disney’s Rivera Resort, when they could’ve built it right across from CBR on Victory Way, and still gotten it on the Skyliner route, I wouldn’t place too much money on whether I’m right (of course, that is one of those areas actually big enough to put a 5th park; not holding breath).
But I think that the Ft. Wilderness project can be successfully done in a number of ways that would have a minimal impact on the Ft. Wilderness campgrounds. The biggest concern I have would be traffic, which could be solved by routing it along W. Wilderness Road from the Wilderness Lodge entrance, not by bringing traffic through Ft. Wilderness itself. I’m also not crazy about this minimalist design phase WDW seems to have entered into for its hotels, but I don’t think they’re incompetent enough to blow this design.
I really doubt that shared amenities will really be an issue with such a new DVC and Ft. Wilderness, as I doubt there would be many. One of the things most lacking at Ft. Wilderness is a really solid pool, and a restyled update on the old River Country, with it given Storm-Along Bay treatment would be something that I doubt would happen, save maybe on a small scale, and just for the DVC. Or to put in another way, you don’t see too many luxury condos sharing pool facilities with a neighboring campground.
As to the EPCOT main entrance, I feel this would actually be better served by placing a hotel or two onto the monorail line just outside EPCOT. To me, they’d be able to put far more rooms into hotel resorts at the north and southern corners of the intersection of EPCOT Center & World Drives. After overlaying a number of the resort hotels, I just don’t see this really working well inside Epcot, since you’d need a deluxe level pool and other deluxe facilities, and the amount of real estate that’d be lost from EPCOT would be substantial to make it a proper job, even by WDW’s current Homewood Suites standards. Then again, I’d have never gone for the short-term money with Golden Oaks or Celebration, holding onto that land for future WDW resort use with a tighter fist than Scrooge McDuck.
Disney’s hotels are very well designed and well appointed. I have no issue with them. The theming is a double edged sword. While they are a selling point, they were never 100% successful. It seems like we fully accept DVC in each hotel resort as if they work together. They are contradictory. Hotels are usually single rooms suites. Timeshare Resorts usually begin at one bedrooms to 3 bedrooms with full kitchens and laundry machines. Some might have cheaper single room suites with kitchenette. So what happens is Disney might sell these DVC units on a per night basis if owners do not book an allotted time. Disney or other timeshares do not share these profits with the owners.
At this point, I think Disney ran out of ideas as to how they should theme their resorts. There’s only so many possible ideas and the added theming adds costs that I consider to be unnecessary. Also, it’s not fair to restrict the number of levels in a hotel project. Higher density makes sense in most cases. Spreading out the resorts like what you see with Old Key West Resort that I stayed is not ideal if you must catch a resort bus that can’t take on more passengers if you’re unlucky to stay in the far side, which I was smart to ask for a room close to the lobby after reading the reviews. Unless you want to see lots of green space get absorbed into the resorts, they need to fill in the spaces more efficiently.
My immediate reaction to news of DVC at Fort Wilderness was Oh, that’s cool, followed shortly by NOOOO. I am leaning more towards pessimistic about this. While the DVC at Wilderness Lodge, and WL in general does a good job of “rustic luxury” I’ll call it, I would argue that this need is already being fulfilled there, and building a new rustic luxury DVC at the Fort would just be more of the same….If folks are looking for “glamping” they can head on over to the cabins at Copper Creek. I also don’t want the precious “primitive and secluded characteristics of the campground” to be ruined. I kind of see Fort Wilderness as a hidden gem in this regard, and wouldn’t want it to be crowded by hordes of people coming over for DVC. I just feel that Fort Wilderness satisfies such a specific niche at WDW that would be very difficult to appropriately blend into DVC. Also, how would they go about managing a large influx of people utilizing an already overcrowded boating system to and from MK? Bigger boats? More boats?
The thought of a resort of any kind at the Fort makes me sick to my stomach. I have been a Fort guest since 1974, leave Ft. Wilderness to the campers, it’s a CAMPGROUND, there are plenty of resorts already, but only one Fort. We don’t need it invaded by resort people, and encourage them to use the “Fort Amenities”, these should be for Fort guests, as are the resort amenities that do not allow Fort guests to partake in (no pool hopping allowed!). If you want to camp, be a camper and enjoy the Fort, but do NOT ruin it with a resort.
If the Epcot resort becames a reality they’ll probably build a DVC wing there. Disney splits hotel operating costs in their mixed hotels by occupancy rates and DVC members tend to fill their rooms to the full more than hotel guests. Having a DVC wings with a lot of studios (which sleeps 5) will allow Disney to charge DVC owners with most of the hotel costs while commanding very high rack rates on the hotel part.
And selling the DVC units pays for the development of the hotel.
It’s a win-win for them, there is no reason to not do it.
This is an excellent point.
If the only hotel presently being rumored were the Epcot hotel, I’d say having a DVC wing is a sure-thing. What about with both of these hotels simultaneously being developed, though? To my knowledge, DVC has not built and sold two resorts at Walt Disney World simultaneously in the past. This is why I assume Coronado isn’t getting the DVC treatment.
Has Disney ever built two resorts at the same time?
I don’t believe they would build both in any case. When a DVC resort opens they declare only about 20% of rooms there, this leaves them 80% to rent for cash for a while. Increasing inventory by opening 1,8 resorts at the same time can be risky: they don’t know how the travel market will be in 3-4 years.
“they don’t know how the travel market will be in 3-4 years.”
I mean, the same could be said for building new cruise ships. Yet here they are with 3 on order, even as other cruise lines also rapidly ramp up development.
I think we’re seeing an unprecedented degree of bullishness by Disney in terms of the totality of their Parks & Resorts projects around the world. That could definitely bite them at some point, but I think everything at Walt Disney World in the next <5 years is probably safe--Star Wars Land strikes me as recession (or whatever) proof.