On-site vs Off-site

[dcsnoopy]

Hello, we are planning a visit in mid-May this year with our 2.5 yo twins. My parents live in the Orlando area and we will be going to their house for Mother's Day weekend. We plan to head down to the WDW area Monday night so that we can go to MK on Tuesday, take a day off on Wednesday and then spend Thursday at EPCOT before heading back to grandma and grandpa's house Thursday night. Our twins still nap roughly 2 hours after lunch (ballpark 1-3pm). Due to our travel arrangements, we'll have a rental car so transportation isn't a problem.

Looking at our options, we can stay in a 1-BR suite at Disney All-Star Music Resort for about $730 including free parking and shuttle bus transportation to and from the parks. Alternatively, we can stay at the nearby Residence Inn in a bigger 2-BR suite for about $480 but have to pay $16/day for parking. So it's about $220 cheaper to stay at the Residence Inn (plus we get Marriott Rewards points). The RI is about 1.5 to 2 miles further from the parks and we have to drive ourselves.

Questions: which would you pick and why? How convenient is the bus service to MK and EP?

 

[wdwgoofydaddy]

I've been to WDW 14 times in the past 9 years and have stayed both on-site and off-site and now also own DVC. I would have to say that the connivence of staying on site is really great but note that not all on-site resorts are the same with respect to distance from the parks and time the bus will take to travel to and from. Typically it will take you about 1 hour to travel to and from the All-Star resort each way. If you are planning to take the twins back for naps mid day and plan to use the buses, it will be challenging and eat up a lots of time. I would recommend that you drive to the park. It will be much faster. If you are set on staying at a value resort, I would recommend staying at the POP Century resort. The reason why is because this resort has it's own buses dedicated to the resort. What this means is that the bus at this resort will go directly to and from your resort and the park with no stops. Other resorts, like the All-Star, will stop to pick up and drop off other people at other resorts prior to heading to the actual park. Another alternative would be to use a taxi service. A 1-way trip should run you about $20. People often use this option when leaving the park closing and the line-up is crazy for buses.

When we stay off-site, we will always drive. When we stay on-site, we try to stay at the Contemporary/ Bay Lake Tower, The Board Walk properties, or another resort on the mono rail. I don't recommend that at this point because the mono rail is undergoing upgrades right now and don't run during weekdays between 11:30am and 7:00pm.

Hope this helps

 

[MyAnna]

Bus service isn't super easy with 2 yr old twins and a double stroller...The stroller has to be folded up on the bus, so you have to keep both the kids by you and hold the stroller (and if the bus is super crowded, it's worse). Of course, you also have to fold up the stroller on the tram to self parking, but there's more space for that when parking and riding.

For this reason, we find it more convenient to stay at the monorail resorts, but since you would save so much money by staying off-site, you may want to do that. Would you be leaving the park for nap time? If so, you would need to take into account the time it would take to pack up, leave the park, nap then return. Something else to consider.

 

[disneywalkers]

When driving to MK hubby drops us off where the cabs are and he parks then meets us at the monorail. This solves the tram and stroller issue. We have 6 kids so it's a good method for us to do it that way. But we also get there very early so that extra time for him to park and meet up with us isn't a big deal and I use that time to sunscreen all the kids.

 

[Heluvsme]

We've been 20+ times in the past 20 years and have done both, and the truth is we love both. Whether we're on site, or off site, depends on the situation for that particular trip.

When our kids were your kids' ages, the on-site stays were not that easy, mainly because while they were napping we were being quiet and not making noise. We preferred to rent a condo, but we always had our own car, so that was a huge factor for us.

Once the kids made it beyond napping age, but prior to teen years, staying on-site was our choice! We loved the convenience and the theming and the entire immersion experience.

Now that they're teens, the condo is a better fit, once again. We can all spread out, we each get our own room, there are 2 full bathrooms, and a washer and dryer.

I guess one can surmise that toddlers and teens aren't all that different!

 

[jenne]

I have stayed on-site and off-site and with my family, we prefer off-site. We always rent a condo or townhouse - you could get a three bedroom townhouse in Windsor hills for less. You then have a kitchen to prepare breakfast and lunch since you come back to nap with the kids, anyway. I find that driving back to our unit takes less time then waiting for disney transportation.

 

[eliz603]

Although we considered staying off site this year at Wyndham Bonnet Creek, we ultimately decided to stay on site. We are BIG on site fans. As a family of five who likes space, a regular room no longer works for us. We stayed in a 1 bedroom at BLT last year and LOVED IT. This year, we are spending one night at AoA in a suite before moving to OKW for a 1 bedroom.

My youngest is almost 2.5, and we took him at 16 months. I've also taken my other kids at young ages. We have found that a daily break doesn't work for us. Not that we never return to the room midday, but we have often found that the child will take a pretty good nap in the stroller. It really just depends on the kid and the day, so we stay flexible on that one.

If I were staying at All Star and had to deal with two strollers or a double stroller, I would probably choose to drive to the parks. On site guests do not have to pay to park.

Someone mentioned the monorail service being down, but it is my understanding that is scheduled to be completed 3/31 unless something changed.

So if it were me, I would swing for on site, but I like the immersion!

 

[ajwolfe]

I would stay on site and just use my car to drive to the parks in your scenario. We have stayed off site once and the rest on site. We prefer on site for the immersion, the EMH and other perks and the closeness.
I know someone above mentioned it taking an hour to get from a park to the All Star resort area. We have never had that experience by car. We typically drive to the parks. Once we are back to our car, it's typically about 15 minutes or less depending on which park we are before we are back to the resort.

 

[powellrj]

I would go with off-site. We love the extra room and the cheaper price. While you do pay $16 a day to park, you will have free breakfast at the Resident Inn to offset that cost.

 

[cruisingtwins]

I prefer offsite. The disney rooms are tiny even the family suites. We love having the extra room and a full kitchen.

Last time we went my kids got sick and we were staying on site at CBR thank god my mom was staying right next door at WBC because she did all of our laundry daily and we got to hang out in her room while our kids got better. All the extra room was super nice. Anothre perk is that we cooked gentle foods for sick tummies in the full kitchen.

As long as our kids are little we'll stay in one of the hotels on disney property that are not owned by disney. Best of both worlds.

Also I don't know what is this immersion people talk about at least in CBR you would have no idea if it's a disney resort or not. The only thing "Disney" is the gift shop the rest it's all the same as any other hotel. AoA on the other hand is heavily themed and screams Disney a you in every corner.

 

[eliz603]

Also I don't know what is this immersion people talk about at least in CBR you would have no idea if it's a disney resort or not. The only thing "Disney" is the gift shop the rest it's all the same as any other hotel. AoA on the other hand is heavily themed and screams Disney a you in every corner.

For me, it's not about something screaming Disney. Honestly, I'm really turned off by the value resorts and their over the top theming (yes, we are staying at AoA for 1 night, but seriously, that's about all I can handle of the in your face stuff). I love not seeing the outside world. I like not dealing with traffic. I like not being surrounded with the same stuff I can see/eat at home. I love the atmosphere of the resorts, including places like BLT and CR. Shoot, I still like thinking about the smell of the Wilderness Lodge lobby! It's that kind of stuff for me.

 

[MSSANDRA]

I guess I think a little bit different but hear me out. We always stay on site. It works for us. We did off site years ago and staying on site is my DH's one input of the trip. We are also not fans of the values. We have stayed at them and will again if its the only way to go but we are not huge fans.

So, do you really need three nights? With family so close by, and doing only two park days, what about getting a mono-rail resort room for two nights. The night before the 1st park day and leave after you leave Epcot and drive back to family. Just cut out the off day. Onsite, monorail all the time and quick trips back for naps. Bet cost would be close to the other suits and much nicer.

 

[cruisingtwins]

For me, it's not about something screaming Disney. Honestly, I'm really turned off by the value resorts and their over the top theming (yes, we are staying at AoA for 1 night, but seriously, that's about all I can handle of the in your face stuff). I love not seeing the outside world. I like not dealing with traffic. I like not being surrounded with the same stuff I can see/eat at home. I love the atmosphere of the resorts, including places like BLT and CR. Shoot, I still like thinking about the smell of the Wilderness Lodge lobby! It's that kind of stuff for me.

Gotcha. If I were to pay for a deluxe resort it would be because they are within walking distance to at least one park. The moderates or values are sometimes farther than some of the "offsite" hotels so for me it's a waste of money to stay onsite instead of a huge condo within the same distance to the parks at a much cheaper price. The only thing I would be "giving up" is the bus service which we did not like anyways.

 

[NjMamaMouse]

We have stayed both on and off site for years now. We definitely prefer to stay offsite. Staying off site is cheaper for the actual room that is typically bigger in size. Also in a 1-2 bedroom it usually includes a kitchen. So now we are saving money on breakfast and lunch everyday. Yes now you have to drive into the parks and pay for that, but the other savings make up for that. Not to mention the convenience. We typically get the AAA Diamond Parking Pass that allows for parking toward the front of the lots, so no need for a tram, just open your stroller and walk to the Transportation Hub.

 

[FreeThinker]

I haven't every stayed on-site, because with napping little ones we would prefer a seprate bedroom for them to nap in. I've got twins, and know all about dealing w/ the stroller and baby gear, so I would want to take my own car to/from the parks.

You could take the $$ you save off-site and buy 3 day tickets instead. This way you can go to MK 2 days, and just stay for shorter periods of time. That might work out better for your kids to split the days up.

 

[beck02]

If we can afford the higher end on-site, we like to do that occasionally, but usually off-site is easier/cheaper/nicer. It's more a vacation to us that way. Last time we got a 2 bedroom, 3 bath for a little under $650 for 7 days. There's probably cheaper AND nicer places as well. On our way to disney, we can stop for a good (and cheap!) breakfast, or have a nice dinner outside the park on the way back. Travel time to the park isn't any longer than when we stayed at one of the value resorts, and actually less stressful. And the timeshare has a full sized fridge so I can store lots of cold drinks & snacks, like fresh fruit.

 

[dcsnoopy]

Thank you so much, everyone. A lot to digest. My wife and I will review all of the comments as we consider our options. We are still slaves to the nap, so we do have to take that into account. We're planning on about 4 hours for a 2 hour nap, but even that may not be conservative enough from the various comments.

A few responses:
wdwgoofydaddy--thanks for the tips about the Pop Century and the buses. At this point from the various comments we've seen both on disboards and elsewhere, I think even if we stay on-site, we'll probably drive and take advantage of the free parking rather than rely on the buses.

disneywalkers--we do this a lot of places, but for MK, that could be a little more challenging as the time between drop off and when I make it back to the park could be quite long to be apart. My wife is visually impaired, so we're a little worried about the kids getting away from her in a crowd when it's hard for her to see them, but we'll be going with very visually distinctive clothing and even though we gave up the puppypack harnesses about a year ago, they may come back out for this trip.

eliz603--thanks, but unfortunately from experience although ours are good nappers, they rarely sleep in the stroller. They are usually too stimilated from outside things. And on the infrequent chance that they do nap in the stroller, it's usually a short nap which doesn't always completely help.

mssandra--knowing that our kids sometimes get overwhelmed (especially if we try to stay for the parade which is past their normal bedtime), so we want to build in the option to do the parks on Tue and Thu with a built-in day off on Wed for something quieter and calmer. We may do Tue-Wed and then head back to my parents house on Thu after checkout, but either way the third night will make it more like a vacation for Mommy & Daddy.

Freethinker--we won't be paying for park tickets. My parents have one tenant who is a chef on-site at Disney and they periodically have him buy them 5-day park passes with his employee discount. Then they keep the tickets at their house for whenever the family visits. We already have park passes (I think we've only used 1-day off our passes). Plus, we're going in May because the twins turn 3 in September and it's our last chance for getting them in free!

Thanks again everyone!

 

[Wills Mom]

We brought our 14 month old DS last May and stayed off site. We hit the parks early as he is an early riser, finished up around 1pm, back to villa for nap and dinner and left the villa around 6pm to go back to parks. The break was great for getting DS to wind down and plus we were out of the heat for the main part of the day. We are going back (all going to plan!) in October with a 31 month old and a 7 month old (like yourselves its our last chance to bring DS1 for free!) and we will be staying off site. We will probably follow the same plan as last time. I can't wait until we are no longer slaves to the nap!!

 

[Irish Piglet]

The 1st time I vacation at WDW I want to experience everything Disney as much as possible so I will stay on site for sure.

 

[tourguide81]

My take is a little different - I'd rather stay onsite in a regular room that stay off site in a bigger room/suite/condo, whatever. Disney just isn't the kid of trip we need that much for. The kids crash at nap and bedtime so sharing the room isn't a big deal. We usually rent DVC so we save money that way and we get a balcony which is great to hang out on for the adults.

I love not having to drive, do carseats, park, etc. We walk or do disney transport everywhere and not having to worry about a car is part of the vacation for me. I find it very easy to go back for a rest when staying onsite. But again, renting DVC and staying closer to the parks is part of that.

I also wouldn't waste a day in the middle like that for a break day on a 3 day trip. Maybe do 2 days in a row so you can enjoy the whole entire day in the parks and then make the last day a pool day and/or downtown Disney, etc.