Could OKW use a new bridge?

[WDWDad]

I will give respect to many counter opinions, but to call something an eyesore before ever seeing a design, especially one from Disney, is just poor conjecture. We can debate many things but until I see an example of an eyesore bridge among the many on WDW, sorry.....no.

Also OK lets pay for the bridge with a special assessment. Gonna run about $2 per contract...... one time.......done. Then maybe .2 cents a year per contract to maintain it.

 

[dcamdad]

It was less then a year ago a 9 year old boy was killed by a disney bus while riding on a side walk.

If I recall he was riding his bike at FW campground where I have stayed a few times and there are no sidewalks.

 

[WDWMom]

Hmmm, Chuck and John, do you think the original question was a planted one?

Sorry this strikes me as hilarious! My Dh the Disney Plant. Oh, to wish he had that much power.

Kids in your town don't walk on sidewalks in the neighborhood???

We have no sidewalks in our neighborhood, so no they don't.


As far as I am concerned, Disney doesn't build anything that is an eyesore, so I have a hard time understanding that arguement. There are bridges all over WDW and none of them are an eyesore. Now I can understand that if you like to walk and think walking an extra 200 steps 6-8 times a day is nothing to you and people you know, but then you should respect that there are people who can't walk that far - physically or because they have young children or whatever.

For our family, we can't stand the buses driving around OKW. I fear for my safety sometimes as the buses are going around the curves, especially at Miller's Rd. So walking is safer in my eyes. When our children were younger, waiting for a bus to go to the back of the resort took forever, a shortcut would have saved a lot of headaches and lots of tears. Now that my boys are teens, they go off on their own throughout the resort. I'd rather they walk than hop on a bus, not for the exercise, but because I know how long it should take them to get back to the room or back to the pool area. By bus it could take 4 minutes or 20 minutes. It's unpredictable.

We spend only 2-3 days at the parks these days. We spend 10 night at OKW and relax around the pool the rest of the days (or pool hop). Realistically, we walk back and forth to the pool 3-4 times a day. That's a ton of steps and I don't even want to think about the precious vacation hours we'd be spending waiting for buses.

For my last random thought on this subject, it amazes me that there can't be an open discussion on here about what someone thinks is an improvement. You may think it is not, so state your opinion and be done with it. Let the others who like the idea and run with it. If you are so worried about DVD getting ideas, stop posting and let the thread die. Just because you don't like and maybe some others, but there are some who do like it and they have the right to discuss it intelligently.

 

[tor]

If I recall he was riding his bike at FW campground where I have stayed a few times and there are no sidewalks.

From channel 2 wesh "Florida Highway Patrol Sgt. Kim Montes said both of the children were on a sidewalk along the roadway. "

Perhaps the Sgt doesn't know what a sidewalk is?

 

[dcamdad]

I will give respect to many counter opinions, but to call something an eyesore before ever seeing a design, especially one from Disney, is just poor conjecture. We can debate many things but until I see an example of an eyesore bridge among the many on WDW, sorry.....no.

Also OK lets pay for the bridge with a special assessment. Gonna run about $2 per contract...... one time.......done. Then maybe .2 cents a year per contract to maintain it.

Nothing Disney/DVD does is ever that cheap, just look at the outrageuos amount paid for the OKW refurb and the cheap results we got for it.

Calling it an eyesore is in the eye of the beholder, my favorite bldgs are 45, 46 and 55, canal views. I can honestly tell you that many of the views from those buildings looking up the canal towards HH area would be impeaded by the bridge.

 

[Chuck S]

Ok I was going to walk away, but there seems to be some discusssion still happening, and one idea that has been proposed as an option for those not wanting to walk is to just take the bus. However if one gets on the bus at say Penninsular Rd. you then have to ride to the back of the resort stopping at South Point and Turtle Crawl, then drive to the front of the resort turn left at the 4 way stop and go to Millers Rd., then make the circle turn thru the parking lot there that always gives me the head spins, then go back to HH to be dropped off so you can still walk 200' to the pool area. Now in fairness that ride is much easier getting back, but still it is by no means convenient. Especially if you have small children in tow.

Also lets not blow the ADA requirements out of proportion ADA restrictions are not that difficult to attain on a pedestrian bridge. Basically the bridge would need to be 50" wide, the grade on the bridge gets relief from the rules on slope as a required walkway over an impediment. The ramps upto the structure would need to be complient but given the area and the fact that the bridge entrance could be at road level would definatly not make this difficult.

As for wetlands, the area on the far side near the Tennis courts does not look like true wetlands to me, but Florida Soils and Structures would make that determination. Obviously there are methods of dealing with this issue or none of WDW would have been built.

Also what if Disney were to bear part of the cost of the project as they did the Castle slide? What if a new walking bridge were to be a precursor to some improved amenities to be located right of the Tennis courts?

Why would Disney bear any of the cost? How would Disney financially gain from it?

Are you positive the bridge could start at road level, given the narrow strip of land that exists and the height the bridge must achieve to allow boat clearance on a canal that changes depth? It is far more likely that there would need to be a series of ramps up to the actual crossing height of the bridge given that is a roughly 30' wide bank.

It would still need to have a gradual enough slope for a wheelchair or ECV to access it, I doubt it could be considered a "required" walkway over an impediment for the purpose of ADA exemption, unless there were no other build options available. And I doubt the FL timeshare board would be too keen on using owners improvement money for a walkway that could not be easily accessed by handicapped owners of that resort. That would be expensive litigation waiting to happen. If you start at road level and figure an 8 foot rise over that 30 foot run of bank, you are looking at a very steep grade of 26.6%.

What "looks" like wetlands, and what is classified as wetlands by law are very different things. The treehouses don't look like wetlands, either. They don't flood regularly, but Disney had to design the new buildings to actually take up a smaller ground footprint than the original treehouses.

 

[WDWMom]

Forgot one thing. As far as the HH booking category, we have tried the last 2 trips and it has been full. No room at the inn. Even requested buildings around the HH that aren't in the category and didn't get it. So you can't use that argument either, it's not a guarantee. I don't remember how far we booked, but it wasn't last minute.

 

[tor]

Why would Disney bear any of the cost? How would Disney financially gain from it?

Are you positive the bridge could start at road level, given the narrow strip of land that exists and the height the bridge must achieve to allow boat clearance on a canal that changes depth? It is far more likely that there would need to be a series of ramps up to the actual crossing height of the bridge given that is a roughly 30' wide bank.

It would still need to have a gradual enough slope for a wheelchair or ECV to access it, I doubt it could be considered a "required" walkway over an impediment for the purpose of ADA exemption, unless there were no other build options available. And I doubt the FL timeshare board would be too keen on using owners improvement money for a walkway that could not be easily accessed by handicapped owners of that resort. That would be expensive litigation waiting to happen. If you start at road level and figure an 8 foot rise over that 30 foot run of bank, you are looking at a very steep grade of 26.6%.

What "looks" like wetlands, and what is classified as wetlands by law are very different things. The treehouses don't look like wetlands, either. They don't flood regularly, but Disney had to design the new buildings to actually take up a smaller ground footprint than the original treehouses.

I am as positive it could be done as you are certain it can't. The best option would be to let the imagineers imagine then create renderings and put it to a vote.

 

[MeTink]

A new bridge would ruin the ambience.

 

[WDWMom]

Nothing Disney/DVD does is ever that cheap, just look at the outrageuos amount paid for the OKW refurb and the cheap results we got for it.

Calling it an eyesore is in the eye of the beholder, my favorite bldgs are 45, 46 and 55, canal views. I can honestly tell you that many of the views from those buildings looking up the canal towards HH area would be impeaded by the bridge.

According to the map we have, you can't see the HH from 46 unless you are standing the parking lot and the same for some of the rooms in 45 (end rooms near 46). Not sure how you could see the HH from building 55 since buildings 45 and 46 are between 55 and where the bridge could go. Having never stayed in buildings 46 and 55 I can't say for sure, but I have stayed in 45.

 

[WDWMom]

As mentioned, HH is a booking category, not a request anymore. I just booked a studio for July this week in the HH category. That's just 5 months ahead. Last year I got HH category at 3 months out. I own at OKW, so I could have booked earlier but we didn't.

We booked at least 5 months out for this April (not Easter) and couldn't get a 2bdrm HH. Couldn't get a 1bdrm last year either. We own at OKW also.

 

[Chuck S]

I am as positive it could be done as you are certain it can't. The best option would be to let the imagineers imagine then create renderings and put it to a vote.

Just how much $ do you think a vote of OKW ownership would cost?

 

[tor]

Just how much $ do you think a vote of OKW ownership would cost?

Not a lot. I seem to think there is some kind of annual meeting. Maybe throw it in there. Saratoga Springs seemed to bear the cost of a bridge far longer than the one required here.

 

[dcamdad]

According to the map we have, you can't see the HH from 46 unless you are standing the parking lot and the same for some of the rooms in 45 (end rooms near 46). Not sure how you could see the HH from building 55 since buildings 45 and 46 are between 55 and where the bridge could go. Having never stayed in buildings 46 and 55 I can't say for sure, but I have stayed in 45.

Never said I could see HH, I stated looking towards HH. From villa 4532 and 4531 which I have stayed in you can see as far as the lighthouse. And from villa 5522 you can see up the canal to about where this proposed bridge would be. I'll give you 46 wouldn't be affected as it is facing down the canal.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree, you want it I don't. Who knows as age catches up in the years to come I might see your desire for the bridge more clearly.

 

[WDWDad]

Chuck , I am positive that it could be done. The height that would need to be achieved at the center of the river could be easily attained. There can be exemptions to the rules for ADA slope and I believe on a quick examination of the code that this could be one of them. The bridge itself may, or may not be ADA compliant. The ramp leading off the pool side would certainly have to be, but given the run avauilable this would definatly not be an issue. The road side would be a virtual walk on so again I do not see this as an issue.
The bridge would still be a vast improvement over existing walking routes.

The reason I say Disney might be interested in footing some, or all of the bill is for the increased possibility of additional amenities beyond the proposed foot bridge. Increaded dining comes to mind, as a larger Gurgling Suitcase would be awesome. The profits, which Disney would keep, from this alone would totally offset the construction price of the bridge IMHO.

As far as obstructed views from the canal buildings, with the orientation of these buildings very few rooms could have views looking down the canal. And besides I love the view of HH all lit up at night. Perhaps the bridge could add a new romantic picture/walkway possibility. The new view may eclipse the old. You have to at least allow for the possibility.

 

[Chuck S]

Not a lot. I seem to think there is some kind of annual meeting. Maybe throw it in there. Saratoga Springs seemed to bear the cost of a bridge far longer than the one required here.

That bridge was part of the original construction for SSR, it wasn't added later at owners expense.

Sorry, I don't think a vote for an additional dues expenditure by those present at an annual meeting would stand up to legal scrutiny. Just like with the OKW extension, ALL members would need to be notified. For a vote all members would need to be notified and vote, with a certified legal tally...much like stockholders vote.

Disney didn't do that with the OKW slide, because an initial informal poll showed overwhelmingly that members would not support the dues expenditure.

 

[tor]

That bridge was part of the original construction for SSR, it wasn't added later at owners expense.

Sorry, I don't think a vote for an additional dues expenditure by those present at an annual meeting would stand up to legal scrutiny. Just like with the OKW extension, ALL members would need to be notified, and vote, with a certified legal tally...much like stockholders vote.

Disney didn't do that with the OKW slide, because an initial informal poll showed overwhelmingly that members would not support the dues expenditure.

The annual meeting is the appropriate place and would stand up the members rep would vote for the members.

 

[Chuck S]

The annual meeting is the appropriate place and would stand up the members rep would vote for the members.

Not exactly. If that is the case, then the members rep could easily have simply voted to have the membership pay for the slide. There was no need to poll any members. Under FL timeshare law, Disney/DVD is obligated to maintain the physical aspects of the resort in a like manner to which it was represented. They can not just build things to add to the resort at the expense of the membership. They can add things at their expense, and have the membership pick up the maintenance, as in the case of the pool slide, but they can not simply decide to build something new at members expense.

 

[tor]

Not exactly. If that is the case, then the members rep could easily have simply voted to have the membership pay for the slide. There was no need to poll any members. Under FL timeshare law, Disney/DVD is obligated to maintain the physical aspects of the resort in a like manner to which it was represented. They can not just build things to add to the at the expense of the membership. They can add things at their expense, and have the memberhsip pick up the maintenance, as in the case of the pool slide, but they can not simply decide to build something new at members expense.

The change would be seen as de minimis particularly if argued as a safety issue

 

[Chuck S]

The change would be seen as de minimis particularly if argued as a safety issue

Sorry, I think it would be challenged by appeals to the FL timeshare board. It is not a minimal change, nor necessary for safety, given the current option of bus transportation, which statistically would be safer than crossing Peninsular Rd.

But it is interesting that someone that owns at SSR and BWV is so interested in a bridge at OKW, though your opinions are welcome.