Lookout Cay long pier.

[Goofy1932]

it was an artists rendition... we see that a lot with the parks, early plans get modified. there will be lots of theories why.

Because it saved money.


They should have added a wider path and a turn-around for a tram.

 

[SL6827]

Because it saved money.
View attachment 874715

They should have added a wider path and a turn-around for a tram.

I agree. I think this sums it up. Maybe a wider pier was the original intent.

 

[Lucien Franciosa]

Because it saved money.
View attachment 874715

They should have added a wider path and a turn-around for a tram.

lol I knew that was going to be a lot of people's go to, government documents be darned. shrugs. not going to rehash 18 pages here

 

[Goofy1932]

lol I knew that was going to be a lot of people's go to, government documents be darned. shrugs. not going to rehash 18 pages here

Okay.

 

[Mr. Drauer]

Besides doing the "cheap" route, they were also required to comply with the environmental concerns of the island. Digging a canal and building a marina/dock are much more environmentally unfriendly.

This was my follow up to a previous post I made explaining why the pier was the environmentally friendly choice. That then given the “cheap way out” tag by others. I prepare Environmental Impact Statements. I’m currently working on one for the Long Key Bridge in the Florida Keys. I’m intimately familiar with environmental regulations and costs for construction. Many think it’s not Disney enough. No matter how you explain facts it doesn’t satisfy the need for their interpretation of what should be there. Every project I’ve ever worked on took a concept in to permitting and it was then further refined to minimize envy impacts. That’s the way it works.

 

[insureman]

You are crazy if you think this represents the "cheap route". A reinforced concrete open trestle pier costs north of $2 million per 100 linear feet. The cheap route is dredging for a tender opening to a marina, or dredging and building a short dock like at CC.

No not crazy. The cheap route was building this pier instead of one that is 10 feet wider to accommodate a tram lane with a turn around at the ship.

 

[Lucien Franciosa]

This was my follow up to a previous post I made explaining why the pier was the environmentally friendly choice. That then given the “cheap way out” tag by others. I prepare Environmental Impact Statements. I’m currently working on one for the Long Key Bridge in the Florida Keys. I’m intimately familiar with environmental regulations and costs for construction. Many think it’s not Disney enough. No matter how you explain facts it doesn’t satisfy the need for their interpretation of what should be there. Every project I’ve ever worked on took a concept in to permitting and it was then further refined to minimize envy impacts. That’s the way it works.

You are more polite than I am. I do appreciate the facts and experience that you bring to the conversation. Sure I’d wish reality was different but i accept it is what it is. Thank you.

 

[SL6827]

As long as they don't eventually start a pay for ride system, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. But stuff like that has just been the Disney norm now.

 

[MomOTwins]

As long as they don't eventually start a pay for ride system, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. But stuff like that has just been the Disney norm now.

I'd love a pay to ride option. I'm reading more FB posts today about families with special needs kids being told "no" at guest services because golf carts are only for the mobility impaired. I understand they are being strict because otherwise too many people would want them for the limited number of golf carts. If they sold a limited number of tickets that would help avoid that issue because people would only pay if it is was really worth it to them.

 

[OKW Lover]

I'd love a pay to ride option. I'm reading more FB posts today about families with special needs kids being told "no" at guest services because golf carts are only for the mobility impaired. I understand they are being strict because otherwise too many people would want them for the limited number of golf carts. If they sold a limited number of tickets that would help avoid that issue because people would only pay if it is was really worth it to them.

The optics of charging those with a physical impairment to ride a golf cart will just not fly.

 

[lanejudy]

As long as they don't eventually start a pay for ride system, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. But stuff like that has just been the Disney norm now.

DCL has not really gotten into that the way the parks have in recent years. Yes there are upcharge options, but all are truly optional without any particular impact on a guest enjoying a cruise without those upcharges.

 

[MomOTwins]

The optics of charging those with a physical impairment to ride a golf cart will just not fly.

Worse than the current optics you mean, where people are saying they needed an accommodation and guest services said no? They charge for golf carts at Fort Wilderness, and for wheelchair rentals at the theme parks, and for handicap accessible excursions at every port--better to pay and have an option than to not have an option for everyone who needs it if you ask me.

 

[brentm77]

This was my follow up to a previous post I made explaining why the pier was the environmentally friendly choice. That then given the “cheap way out” tag by others. I prepare Environmental Impact Statements. I’m currently working on one for the Long Key Bridge in the Florida Keys. I’m intimately familiar with environmental regulations and costs for construction. Many think it’s not Disney enough. No matter how you explain facts it doesn’t satisfy the need for their interpretation of what should be there. Every project I’ve ever worked on took a concept in to permitting and it was then further refined to minimize envy impacts. That’s the way it works.

For what it's worth, the discussion of the environmental impact statement changed my opinion. Frankly, I hadn't thought of the shade issue from making it wider, and it absolutely would be worse for the reef in the area to have more shade. That said, I think that it can be true that it was much better for the local environment and DCL jumped on it because it saved money. But your input and the input of others changed my mind about the potential environmental impact.

It seems like some shaded rest spots could be added with very minimal impact to the environment if they were spaced out and placed strategically to not cause significant shade in the water - maybe even temporary shade tents with water stations when a ship is in port. They really should be adding a giant fleet of golf carts too, with local drivers if needed, to make it very easy to catch a golf cart. I suspect the customer concern is registering with DCL and they will find some ways to make it more comfortable in the months to come. I hope it works out better for those who are concerned for young kids who won't handle it well - parents know their children's limits, and I am particularly sympathetic to those who booked assuming it would be similar to CC. Despite what some have said here, I think that was a very reasonable assumption to make, given DCL's propensity to copy what works over and over.

 

[brentm77]

Worse than the current optics you mean, where people are saying they needed an accommodation and guest services said no? They charge for golf carts at Fort Wilderness, and for wheelchair rentals at the theme parks, and for handicap accessible excursions at every port--better to pay and have an option than to not have an option for everyone who needs it if you ask me.

I respectfully disagree. The answer isn't to charge disabled guests for access, it is to make sure access covers all guests who need it. That likely means increasing the size of the golf cart fleet substantially. Someone renting their own mobility device, since they chose not to bring one, is not the same as charging for access to the island. Under most situations, disabled guests understand that the tools they use to access the world are at their cost, but they don't pay to use an elevator, ramp, etc. That's just cruel.

 

[byanks7]

For what it's worth, the discussion of the environmental impact statement changed my opinion. Frankly, I hadn't thought of the shade issue from making it wider, and it absolutely would be worse for the reef in the area to have more shade. That said, I think that it can be true that it was much better for the local environment and DCL jumped on it because it saved money. But your input and the input of others changed my mind about the potential environmental impact.

It seems like some shaded rest spots could be added with very minimal impact to the environment if they were spaced out and placed strategically to not cause significant shade in the water - maybe even temporary shade tents with water stations when a ship is in port. They really should be adding a giant fleet of golf carts too, with local drivers if needed, to make it very easy to catch a golf cart. I suspect the customer concern is registering with DCL and they will find some ways to make it more comfortable in the months to come. I hope it works out better for those who are concerned for young kids who won't handle it well - parents know their children's limits, and I am particularly sympathetic to those who booked assuming it would be similar to CC. Despite what some have said here, I think that was a very reasonable assumption to make, given DCL's propensity to copy what works over and over.

 

[byanks7]

As a senior citizen with a handicap and a veteran traveler and cruiser, I want to throw my 2 cents in the ring. The long pier is a colossal blunder and the person that pulled the trigger on that PR nightmare should be reassigned to the mail room. They cant say that they took a cheap option to build the thing, so Disney blames it on the environment, and the Bahamian government.
Im gold on Disney and I for one will not book any cruise if it includes a stop where this pier comes into play.

 

[Kwami]

They cant say that they took a cheap option to build the thing, so Disney blames it on the environment, and the Bahamian government.

Because they didn't take the cheap option and they did consider the environment and government regulations when making their decisions. You don't have to like it, but that's how it is.

 

[ShaneDJ]

Because they didn't take the cheap option and they did consider the environment and government regulations when making their decisions. You don't have to like it, but that's how it is.

Disney could have done better with the long pier...with regards to their guests' comfort and experience.

That long pier walk is not inviting (especially on hot days) and there are not enough golf carts for everyone.

 

[obsesseddisneyfan]

My dad is having his 80th birthday on board and has bad knees (will not get them replaced) and can barely walk. I am trying to understand my whole trip to make sure it's a good experience for him. I was concerned about the pier and was certain that my dad would want to CXL when he saw it. When he saw it and found out that he could ride a golf cart he was happy. "I would love to get the senior treatment, sign me up." Not everyone with mobility issues has a problem with the pier.

 

[Henlady]

I’m a 72yo who will not be walking that pier in mid August heat, wouldn’t make it even if I wanted to. If they allow golf cart transport I will go ashore, if not I’ll just treat it as a sea day, stay onboard and enjoy the peaceful surroundings since most will likely be off the ship. Now if it was a beautiful 70 degrees I’ll take the leisurely stroll for however long it takes and enjoy myself on shore. We have choices