Hypothetically speaking....

[Aliceacc]

Many of us with more than 2 kids agree that it would be nice if Disney offered a better variety of affordable options for larger families. (NOTE: we're not looking for a free ride, honest. Just more options from which to choose.)

OK, let's play a game. You've just been hired by Disney as the new Apprentice. Your job is to come up with the solution to this problem.

The BIG obstacle is the fire codes. In order to make changes, realize that hallways and staircases also enter into the equation. More people in a resort means wider hallways and staircases-in the event of an emergency evacuation- and that's an expense that Disney is probably not willing to take on. Realize too that another fire issue is room around the building (remember those fire drills in school: you not only have to exit the building, you have to have room for everyone to get away from the building.)

SO: How do you work some affordable options into the already existing resorts without costing Disney an arm and a leg??

Here are my first two: (Shamelessly copied from my post on the other thread.)

#1:
I think one relative easy fix would be for Disney to find a way to guarantee adjoining rooms if you book early enough. It wouldn't be an incredibly difficult linear programming problem for Disney to determine just what that time frame should be-- at which point it becomes difficult to guarantee adjoining rooms.

They could offer an option something like this for larger families:
- You book x months ahead of time. (let's say 6, for the sake of argument.)
- You specify your resort classification: Value, Mod, Deluxe
- You offer your choices in order: choice #1, #2, #3.
- Disney guarantees that you will have adjoining rooms (and, yes, that's paying for 2 rooms), and they'll try to get you your top choice. Either way, you'll know where you'll be staying by, say the 2 month mark.

I most certainly don't mean to equate the two, but as I understand it, Disney does a great job guaranteeing handicapped accessible rooms. I think it would be possible to do the same with adjoining rooms if they're given enough lead time.

People who booked beyond the designated window would find themselves in the same position as large families are in at present. Fire codes wouldn't be an issue, because I'm not suggesting altering the maximum room capacity.

I realize there must be some flaws in there somewhere. But larger families would still be able to find on site rooms (access to EMH and dining plan) within a defineable budget.


Or #2:
How about working with the fire marshal's office to convert more ground floor rooms into trundle rooms? I understand about fire codes, but surely some rooms in some resorts besides POR have enough room around them to allow the proper exit procedures? Again, let's assume that the 4 end rooms (and very possibly a good number of other rooms, depending on the building) on the ground floor of many resorts probably have enough room to allow a safe exit (and I'm only talking ground floor here, so the issue of interior hallways doesn't enter into it.) Still, add in all those buildings in all those resorts, and at least there are MORE options for larger families. Should those rooms not be needed by the larger families, they would still be available to others, just as the trundle rooms at POR are at present.

I don't think this is an insurmountable problem, given the brain power at Disney. I just think it hasn't yet hit the top of their "to do" list.
__________________

 

[kaytieeldr]

Okay, first, you mean connecting rooms - not adjoining rooms. HUGE difference. Adjoining rooms may or may not connect (adjoining meaning next to or near each other); connecting rooms (rooms with an internal set of doors between the two rooms) always adjoin.

You're right about there being no comparison between a handicapped-accessible room and connecting rooms. A large family would prefer/appreciate all being in a single unit; a person in a wheelchair would NEED - for example - a roll-in shower.

The smartest, most cost-effective solution would be to simply turn Pop Century's Legendary Years into all Family Suites. No, it wouldn't give the option of choice of resort 'levels' - but many Deluxe rooms can already hold up to six people; PO-R has the trundles; each level of resort (not each resort) has at least some suites; there are the Fort Wilderness Cabins... plenty of existing options already.

 

[Laura.bora]

Okay, first, you mean connecting rooms - not adjoining rooms. HUGE difference. Adjoining rooms may or may not connect (adjoining meaning next to or near each other); connecting rooms (rooms with an internal set of doors between the two rooms) always adjoin.

You're right about there being no comparison between a handicapped-accessible room and connecting rooms. A large family would prefer/appreciate all being in a single unit; a person in a wheelchair would NEED - for example - a roll-in shower.

The smartest, most cost-effective solution would be to simply turn Pop Century's Legendary Years into all Family Suites. No, it wouldn't give the option of choice of resort 'levels' - but many Deluxe rooms can already hold up to six people; PO-R has the trundles; each level of resort (not each resort) has at least some suites; there are the Fort Wilderness Cabins... plenty of existing options already.

I disagree for those with large families with small children. For example my neighbors area family of 6 - with all children under the age of 6. That's not a "I'd prefer to be together" that's an "I need to be together".

 

[BostonRob]

The reason this issue hasn't hit the top of their "to do" list is because they don't want to do it. All this talk about fire codes is baloney. I'm sure the codes exist, but Disney is just hiding behind them because it forces larger families to spend more by either paying for two rooms of paying for a deluxe room, villa, or suite. Converting rooms would involve some sort of expense on their part and what would it get them? It would cost them the extra room that you're forced to pay for now. And as far as garunteeing connecting rooms, I've never run a hotel, but I'm thinking that would be a logistical nightmare. The reason they can do it for handicapped people is that they're required by law to do so. They have no motivation to go out of their way to accomidate larger families.

 

[shellybaxter]

I disagree for those with large families with small children. For example my neighbors area family of 6 - with all children under the age of 6. That's not a "I'd prefer to be together" that's an "I need to be together".

Large families with young children can make two non-connecting rooms work - its inconveinent, but they can. Dad and two kids in one room and Mom and two kids in another.

 

[Aliceacc]

Yeah, I never meant to use that as a one-or-the-other thing, just as an example. Of COURSE a large family can adapt in a way that a handicapped person can't.

But come on, guys, how else could they do it if they decided it was a priority??

 

[disneyplanner76]

Disney does need to do something for larger families; we travel as a family of 8 (some extended family included). The option to stay in two rooms that aren't connected is "an option" - yes it "could" work but this is a family vacation we want to be together. Especially with younger children we spend a good amount of time in the rooms for naps etc; and it's ridiculous that in order for us to stay together in the same unit we have to pay over $1000 a night to say in a villa or deluxe club level suite. There should be NO reason Disney can't guarantee adjoining rooms if you book early. If they wanted to charge a premium for these rooms that could be one option (though I'm not really in favor of that) but a 25 or 50 premium to a270-300 room would be a blessing compared to 1000+ a night! Families are Disney's bread and butter and you would think they would be more willing to accommodate more than a 4-5 person family.

 

[Deb & Bill]

If you can take the same space and rent it out to two different families or just one family, do you think you are going to reduce the price for the larger space compared to two separate rooms? It's all about return on investment.

Disney is in the business to make money. They'd rather you rent two rooms form them rather than them giving you that space for a single room at a cheaper price.

 

[kaytieeldr]

There should be NO reason Disney can't guarantee adjoining rooms if you book early.

First, excuse me one moment while I reiterate, more loudly, what I stated above: ADJOINING ROOMS ARE NOT NECESSARILY CONNECTING ROOMS. All connecting rooms adjoin; not all adjoining rooms connect. It is EXTREMELY important to use the correct terminology when making any such REQUEST.

Now, I also don't see the reasoning behind "guarantee connecting if you book early enough" theory. Aside from such a policy penalizing Guests who can't or don't book 'early enough', whatever that is - room assignments are not 100% guaranteed until the Guest checks in to the room.

Example: A family of eight books two rooms at Pop Century today, checking in December 29. Using the above suggested policy, they are guaranteed connecting rooms. They cancel the trip December 20 (it's okay - room only, full deposit refunded). Now what? Some other family that could have been 'guaranteed' that connection, wasn't - and stays elsewhere. Ultimately these two connecting rooms go to unrelated parties.

I do empathize with large families - I grew up in a family of six kids; we took a total of three hotel vacations growing up: one time-share demonstration where we got two adjoining but not connecting rooms; one to New York, where we stayed in a suite due to party size NOT because my parents had money to throw around on a suite; and one to the Worlds Fair in Queens where they left two of my brothers with grandma and grandpa so we wouldn't exceed the room occupancy (and about which the remaining brother still complains).

Being/having a large family costs more, in many many ways. It doesn't necessarily entitle that family to pay prices comparable to what a smaller family unit would pay - for a car, a home, food, a vacation, plane fare, clothing...

 

[shellybaxter]

Disney does need to do something for larger families; we travel as a family of 8 (some extended family included). The option to stay in two rooms that aren't connected is "an option" - yes it "could" work but this is a family vacation we want to be together. Especially with younger children we spend a good amount of time in the rooms for naps etc; and it's ridiculous that in order for us to stay together in the same unit we have to pay over $1000 a night to say in a villa or deluxe club level suite. There should be NO reason Disney can't guarantee adjoining rooms if you book early. If they wanted to charge a premium for these rooms that could be one option (though I'm not really in favor of that) but a 25 or 50 premium to a270-300 room would be a blessing compared to 1000+ a night! Families are Disney's bread and butter and you would think they would be more willing to accommodate more than a 4-5 person family.

Disney already listened to you - they did something to help larger families. They are called the family suites at the All Stars. They are essentially just two units placed together with a slightly different layout. They do charge a permium for them, but they are still pretty affordable.

It is my opinion that Disney has made lots of options available to larger families, just not every option. There is at least one value (family suites), moderate (POR), Deluxe (lots), and home away from home (DVC) option for larger families. And on top of that there are the cabins at Fort Wilderness

 

[Poohbug]

The family suites are a great idea, however, there are not nearly enough of them. I do not know why Disney cannot guarantee connecting rooms-many hotel chains have no problem doing it. Many times they also offer a discount on the second room. I know a family can make adjoining rooms work but a hotel is not just a place to sleep for a family with young children. Kids need more down time than adults do so connecting rooms are important for everyone(parents need vacation too) to have a good vacation.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Also, there's Fort Wilderness Campgrounds for larger groups who like (or at least are willing) to camp out. Each site holds up to ten people.

 

[minnie61650]

The family suites are a great idea, however, there are not nearly enough of them. .......

I agree that during busy times the Family Suites sell out and perhaps WDW will build more.

I was really surprised when they refurbished All Star Sports that they did not convert some of their rooms into Family Suites.

If a family is able to plan 5 or 6 months ahead they are usually able to book a Family Suite.

 

[Escape Artist]

The reason this issue hasn't hit the top of their "to do" list is because they don't want to do it. ... Converting rooms would involve some sort of expense on their part and what would it get them? ... They have no motivation to go out of their way to accomidate larger families.

Well, I think Disney is leaving some money on the table here, so there is motivation. Lots of bigger families stay offsite because it's easier to get accomodations for families of 5 or 6 (or more!) people. Personally, my dream would be for them to have more rooms with a King, Bunk Beds, and a Sleeper Chair that would hold a total of 5 people.

I wonder if Disney doesn't do this on purpose, to discourage groups with a minimal number of chaparones from booking bigger rooms and cramming more rowdy kids in them!

Sue in Texas
...party of 5...

 

[Deb & Bill]

Well, I think Disney is leaving some money on the table here, so there is motivation. Lots of bigger families stay offsite because it's easier to get accomodations for families of 5 or 6 (or more!) people. Personally, my dream would be for them to have more rooms with a King, Bunk Beds, and a Sleeper Chair that would hold a total of 5 people.

I wonder if Disney doesn't do this on purpose, to discourage groups with a minimal number of chaparones from booking bigger rooms and cramming more rowdy kids in them!

Sue in Texas
...party of 5...

I don't think they have any room big enough for a king bed, a set of bunks AND a sleeper chair or day bed. Even the AKL deluxe rooms (since converted to DVC villas) only had one queen bed, a set of bunks and a day bed.

 

[kimberlym4]

Here's my idea... not thought of because we have a larger family but because we craved more room for our family of 4.

In the space where there would normally be 3 rooms you create 2 rooms. The middle of the three rooms would be cut in half and each of the adjacent rooms would get a half. That is, imagine that each of the 2 rooms would be L - shaped. That extra area could be space for an extra (trundle/bunk?) bed (or for my family of 4, a small sitting area.)

If each of the original rooms cost $200 per night they would have brought in $600 total and housed 12 people (4 people x 3 rooms). The new 2 rooms could be priced at $300 each (1/2 of what 2 rooms usually cost albeit the space is smaller than the space that two full rooms would afford) and house up to 6 people each (6 people x 2 rooms = 12 individuals) and not mess with the so-called fire codes.

OK - rip it apart!

 

[kaytieeldr]

Structural work. Would never work. It's ENTIRELY different from converting connecting rooms into a suite; or even turning all the rooms in Legendary Years into suites (even the ones currently without connecting doors.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Plus, at probably all but the BUSIEST times, it should be possible to find a discount that would effectively price a WL/AKL room at or under the $300 level - even a deluxe room that would hold the six people at issue.

And, truly, Disney is not going to configure some rooms to sleep six, and other, otherwise identical rooms, to sleep four and include a sitting area.

 

[Aliceacc]

Plus, at probably all but the BUSIEST times, it should be possible to find a discount that would effectively price a WL/AKL room at or under the $300 level - even a deluxe room that would hold the six people at issue.

And, truly, Disney is not going to configure some rooms to sleep six, and other, otherwise identical rooms, to sleep four and include a sitting area.

Good point. This has to be something that would be practical in the eyes of the accountant-- something requiring minimal cost. They're NOT going to go for it if it costs an exhorbitant amount, or if it costs them money in terms of the amount they can charge per square foot.

I think that any plan involving 3 rooms needs to sleep 12. And while I've seen lots of posts here about rooms for 5 and 6, I'm not sure there are that many families of 12 who want THAT MUCH togetherness.

 

[minnie61650]

Structural work. Would never work. It's ENTIRELY different from converting connecting rooms into a suite; or even turning all the rooms in Legendary Years into suites (even the ones currently without connecting doors.

I agree. Structural work at exsisting resorts most likely will not happen.
One cannot go into a building and just start knocking down walls.
Many of the walls are support walls and if they are knocked down the building would become structurally unsound. There are also fire walls, electrical, plumbing, heating, air, ventilation in some of the walls and these all need to be taken into consideration.

It far easier to take 2 or 3 rooms and convert them into a Suite keeping most of the exsisting walls intact.


Here is the layout of the Family Suite:

The Junior Suite at CSR is another option for Families of 5 or 6.
It was made from 2 standard rooms.

------------------------------------------

As far as I know it seems like there are usually jr Suites available at CSR available at and givien time and it seems there enough rooms in POR AB to handle the number of families who request them.

I understand families of 5 may feel limited to choices of resorts but there seem to be enough rooms that sleep 5 in the mod category.

Just my 2 cents.