AKL and Cont. both DVC??

[sean-1966]

I'm just throwing this out there. I've seen drawing for the CR Villas. Pretty convincing stuff. I just saw an application for a building permit for AKL listing DVD as the owner. Again pretty convincing. With SSR being almost sold out does anybody think they might convert part of AKL over to DVC to carry them over the hump until they are ready to sell CR? Or vice versa? They might offer both options? Just putting it out there.

 

[MinnieGirl33]

I thought about this too.

SSR is scheduled for completion in mid-2007 (less than a year).

There is no way they could have any kind of new structure (CRV) ready any time close to that. Yes, I know all about pre-sale mode but you'd be asking people to wait an awful long time to be able to use those points. I am anxious to buy CRV but, unless the pre-sale incentives are unbelievable, I don't know that I would want to wait (let WDW hold my money) for that long.

They would be able to convert existing structure (AKL) to villas in a much shorter time frame and buy themselves time & money.

My personal opinion, if they are really planning on both CRV & AKV & AKV will be in the already existing structure, AKV will be announced sooner rather than later.

JMO

 

[ryanmilla]

What I'm thinking with the AKL model rooms is that they are just building model rooms. As much as I would like to see an AKL DVC in the near future, I don't think they are anything more than a way to help promote DVC. I wouldn't be surprised if we saw them building model rooms in both Poly & GF as well. As they see more interest for DVC I think the small tables/kiosks at the resorts aren't cutting it. With the model rooms in each resort (at least the deluxe resorts that don't have DVC already), they can easily show a potential customer a room immediately rather than attempt to schedule some time during the customer's vacation.

So, I think what we will be seeing next is a CR DVC (CRV) announcement and just model rooms at AKL. But who knows, I could be wrong. It wouldn't be the first time.

 

[Lewisc]

Everyone is assuming that wetlands restrictions will prevent Disney from using the tree house villa section. I suspect Disney will get around that restriction. Either by doing something that technically qualifies as remodeling or by swapping land.


I don't think Disney could get either AK or CR ready to sell by the middle of 2007. Aren't there restrictions that stop Disney from selling before construction is almost completed for at least part of the property?

 

[spiceycat]

depends upon where AKL is located if in a separate building - then no way.

but if they are really converting the 5th floor - they might be able to do it.

of course I can't see that happening because the conceirge at AKL is very, very popular.

what happening last time - the sale guides start reselling the sold out resorts.

during that time DVC brought just about everything on the market. It was very hard to get a resale through ROFR.

go look at the end of this post.
http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?p=14250054#post14250054

 

[sean-1966]

I don't know about that. When we bought SSR it was a pile of mud and 2x4's.

 

[sean-1966]

I don't think Disney could get either AK or CR ready to sell by the middle of 2007. Aren't there restrictions that stop Disney from selling before construction is almost completed for at least part of the property?

I don't know about that. When we bought SSR it was a pile of mud and 2x4's.

 

[vonpluto]

Everyone is assuming that wetlands restrictions will prevent Disney from using the tree house villa section. I suspect Disney will get around that restriction. Either by doing something that technically qualifies as remodeling or by swapping land.

You don't have to assume, go here http://www.rcid.org/ and click on 2008 Comp Plan. This is the Reedy Creek site and the 2008 Comp spells out all the various prohibitions, restrictions and classifications for the entire resort. It includes a ton of maps so you can visualize everything. Cautionary note: take sandwiches and beverages, the plan runs to almost 500 pages.

Here's my take on the info. WDW has two wetlands classifications: Class One, which is governed by Federal, State, Local, and whoever; and Class two which is regulated by Disney and RCID.

The Treehouses fall into the Class Two group. This area is rated as "marginally suitable for construction", which would require the normal protection for nearby wetlands (the wooded area across the Sassagoula from the THV is classified "conservation area") and possibly some extra construction measures. (ie: beefed up foundations or pilings).
The plan (written in 1998, updated 2003) does note the marginally suitable areas will not be considered prime for future construction. The areas it calls out for future expansion include: 1 - along Osceola Parkway, 2 - west of World Drive, 3 - north of AK, and 4 - east of MK parking lot.

Interesting note: Three areas that often come up as sites for future expansion, Treehouses, north of CR tennis courts and STOLPORT are all classified as marginally suitable. Yet, the Great Sinking Venetian/Mediteranean is classified as "suitable for construction". Go figure. Oh yeah, notice that the STOLPORT area is rated marginal, yet it is on the future expansion list.

Let me close with another rumor.
Back in 2004, I learned from some CM's (insert your own qualifier; bus driver, boat pilot, Mickey Mouse), that DIS was doing some preliminary studies to add the Treehouses to SSR. Initial, blue sky idea was to demolish the THV and construct Catskill type lodges there. I don't think it will happen for a couple of reasons. THV is a stand lone area. It has it's own gate, and has never had a internal road connection to LBVR/SSR. To far from the central Carriage House complex. I think if THV were going to be part of SSR, a CS eatery would have been part of the Grandstand section.

YMMV

 

[spiceycat]

I don't know about that. When we bought SSR it was a pile of mud and 2x4's.

but the utilities and under ground stuff was there. (from when it was DI)

so SSR was allowed to sell.

florida law requires part of a timeshare to be built before sales began.

DVC follows florida law exactly.

with VWL and BCV it was mostly completely - okay the outside - not the inside.... before it was offered for sales. VWL was definited announced but you couldn't buy until the place was almost finished I think?

 

[MinnieGirl33]

florida law requires part of a timeshare to be built before sales began.

That's why I think we'll see AKV before CRV.

DVD is not going to want years to pass without anything new to be selling (IMO).

If they are claiming an already existing section of AKL for DVC & remodeling the process will be quick (relatively speaking) as compared to CRV.

 

[jdg345]

but the utilities and under ground stuff was there. (from when it was DI)

so SSR was allowed to sell.

florida law requires part of a timeshare to be built before sales began.

DVC follows florida law exactly.

with VWL and BCV it was mostly completely - okay the outside - not the inside.... before it was offered for sales. VWL was definited announced but you couldn't buy until the place was almost finished I think?

Utilities and under ground stuff should be under the NGW too though ... and who's to say that if VAKL isn't technically part of AKL that it qualifies as partially complete. Depends on the 'grey area' imo ...

Anyways, I'm still going with VAKL first followed quickly thereafter by CRV ...