The non existant walkway from Grand Floridian to Magic Kingdom

[TDC Nala]

They could have certainly made the bridge high enough.

How do you make a footbridge that high, without stairs (they'd have to install elevators on both ends if they had stairs), in that small a space? Apparently they didn't want to do it.

 

[cigar95]

How do you make a footbridge that high, without stairs (they'd have to install elevators on both ends if they had stairs), in that small a space? Apparently they didn't want to do it.

Precisely why I would thing the swinging-door bridge makes the most sense. Those are used across rivers with boat/barge traffic all the time. Nothing has to go vertical at all.

 

[MikeandReneePlus5]

You can do it as is...it's really not that hard.

You just wade in a little bit and the swim where you can't touch the ground is quite short and then wade out the other side.

 

[blabbermouth]

As a Disney upcoming first timer, I've been wondering why the CR is walking distance to MK but the GF is not. I love this board

I think it would be a fair bit farther walking from GF than CR. Maybe twice as far even?

 

[baler31]

Depends, if I was a DVC owner with young kids at Grand Floridian, I want the walkway. Heck, I don't own at GF and I want the walkway more anyway. At least then I could justify the cost a little more.

If indeed it came down to an either or situation, don't you think that's weird though?

Someone at Disney has an idea for a walkway, they price the project, the project gets approved, the project gets underway, then the Walt Disney Company suddenly has to divert the funds to another project more pressing?

They complete projects all the time that seem to be a complete waste of time and money, but for some reason abandoned this one. I will be interested to see if something is reborn after the new DVC area is up and running.

As other mentioned funding was not there. However, there is a very big rumor that dues from the GF DVC may be used to fund this project. As you mentioned many owners would want a walkway. This would also make it possible to walk from the Poly all the way to MK.

 

[LSUfan4444]

How do you make a footbridge that high, without stairs (they'd have to install elevators on both ends if they had stairs), in that small a space? Apparently they didn't want to do it.

To make a pedestrian bridge, you would have started well before where the path currently ends, like I mentioned earlier.

I can only assume they decided to take the path all the way to canal and put a bench there because it looked better than stopping halfway. Unless the initial plan was a tunnel, or a very short drawbridge, any foot bridge would have had to start much before where it currently ends.

What I can't seem to find anything other than speculation on is what the initial plan was (drawbridge, swinging gate, raised etc).

And I certainly don't think Disney had to hault a minor construction project, (when compared to the other enormous tasks underway), even if tagged at $1.5 mil to purchase LucasFilmes

 

[MHSweb79]

You just wade in a little bit and the swim where you can't touch the ground is quite short and then wade out the other side.

Throw in some water jets and call it an attraction! (We got that wet on Kali, why not?)

Perhaps the answer is that they intended the path to end there. Maybe it was more cost-effective continue the path at that time, in anticipation of further building in that area, than to leave it undeveloped.

At POFQ, there is a sidewalk along the river that ends just around the corner at Bldg 1. We had a room on that corner and it was quite amusing to watch the early morning joggers - who probably started way up at POR - trot along the river, turn the corner and stop short in surprise. Whoa! The sidewalk ends! (Call Shel Silverstein!)

I don't see a big mystery here - Disney is constantly evolving and plans change all the time.

 

[goofy4tink]

This seems like the most obvious, but wasn't sure if there was anything else that was known.

The money they spent on the walkway is already wasted without a connection to GF, it just seems hard for me to accept Disney "ran out of money" for all intents and purposes.


You have to think that was all taken into account before the project began right. I mean, it seems like they started building a railroad in the 1800's and hit a ravine and didn't know what to do. Plus, people walk from water level to monorail level to take the monorail from Magic Kingdom. How would a bridge that is monorail height by any different?





I guess I am just bored in between trips trying to wrap my head around Disney either:

1 - Not realizing the complexities of building a bridge high enough or cost of a bridge that allows both boat access and pedestrian access

2 - Scrapping a project because priorities shifted

It just doesn't very Disney-like to me, which is why I was curious of any "insider" info.

I would think that Disney has to weigh costs vs benefits. I doubt that many people would use it or even think of it as a selling point for staying at GF. Why? Because they already have two ways to get back and forth to MK...from the GF, the MK is about a 4 min ride on the monorail. From MK to GF, the boat takes under 10 mins. So, no need to have a pathway.
I stay at BWV a lot. I have to tell you that the walkway to DHS is seldom well used. Most people take the boat..even though it can take longer!! As it is, plenty of people complain about the long walks to food courts at their resorts, or to the bus stops. I doubt many people would use a walkway from the GF to MK.

Yes, they could make a bridge similar to the one in WS that allows the fireworks barges in and out of the lake. But, that costs money to build and maintain. Then, you have to maintain the actual walkway and make sure it is always safe for guests to walk on.
I just think that Disney has thought about it, and come to the conclusion that there isn't a big enough need to make the money spent on it worthwhile.

 

[jw50]

That walkway from the MK may never have been intended to go all the way to the GF (actually I think it even pre-dates the GF). It may have just been there for viewing of the shows that have periodically been presented on the Seven Seas Lagoon. Those shows were primarily done in front of the MK and walkway may have been a way to spread out the crowds that were watching the shows. Back in the early 70's they had a water skiing show and I think there have been a couple of other shows on the water in that general area.

Another reason may be that they didn't want to increase foot traffic through the MK resorts with people deciding to just walk back to the TTC.

It would not be a short stroll to walk around that part of the lagoon. I have walked it from the MK to the canal and from the GF to the canal and other than doing it to say that you did it I doubt many people would routinely want to walk from the GF to the MK, especially in the summer.

Obviously this is all speculation since to the best of my knowledge Disney has never said what the purpose of that walkway is.

 

[Superspectral]

Does anyone know why this project was ever scrapped and left uncompleted?



For those who are unaware, there is a paved walkway from Magic Kingdom that comes to an end right at the canal.

This is part of the "Walk Around the World". Disney sold commerative hexagonal paver bricks that were engraved with the buyer's name from about '94-'2000. You can find these pavers to the east and west of the MK, at the Contemporary, the TTC, and the Poly. Some of the bricks are on paths that are heavily traveled (for example TTC to Poly); others like those on the path you show are not. Many of the bricks are quite worn and/or filled with grime and are quite hard to read in the well travelled areas, and I suppose many visitors who have only visited in recent years might not know that the pavers have names or messages!

The sale of bricks ended shortly after the "Leave a Legacy" promotion started at Epcot. But honestly, I think they pretty much filled up the paver paths and interest waned and Disney didn't want to make new paths, so they upped the ante with "Leave a Legascy" to try to resurect the idea.
IMHO the pavers are generally nice landscaping but the Epcot "Leave a Legacy" is a blight.

The portion of the walkway shown was basically created to sell more pavers. It never weant anywhere, and making pathways to nowhere just to sell more bricks probably didn't help sales. Even if Disney did put a bridge at the canal, it would be a heck of a walk from the MK to the Grand Floridian. I doubt too many would be interested in taking it.

As it is the walkway serves as nice landscaping visible from the Monorail or maybe some boats in the lagoon.

I have seen a rumor that the pavers were only guaranteed to be in place for 10 years. That time is up. So I suppose it is possible that Disney might repair pavers with unmarked bricks, or remove this pathway altogether at some point.

 

[ChloroFiend]

2 - Scrapping a project because priorities shifted

It just doesn't very Disney-like to me, which is why I was curious of any "insider" info.

Come now...this is the same company that has left River Country to fester along Bay Lake for what, 15 years now? Same with Wonders of Life at Epcot....or hell, the Backlot Tour.

They leave stuff unfinished, half-done, and just leave it to decay all the time.

 

[Schmeck]

It would be easy to build an ADA compliant bridge - just need to put in switchback ramps on each side. No need for an elevator or other bells and whistles.

 

[TheRustyScupper]

That ramp up to the monorail at MK is actually too steep to meet ADA guidelines.
It is grandfathered in . . .

1) Yes, it is previous construction and not in compliance with ADA.
2) But, there is no Grandfather Clause.
3) It does not need to be altered or grandfathered.
4) This is because the Ferry is the alternative.
5) Thus, there is ADA access to MK transportation.

NOTE: We had a meeting in about 2006, and ADA was a
topic. The monorail was a specific example, in case guests
would ask us. Also, the monorail is termed as transportation,
NOT an attraction, thus the ferry is an allowed substitute.

 

[mcd2745]

Perhaps there are concerns that when the MK closes on a busy night and there is a long line for the monorails - when it will take multiple monorails before you will even be able to get on at all - that people may then walk to the GF and get the monorail there (where it should be basically empty) flooding the monrail station there with tons of people. I can see the GF guests being very unhappy with that.

 

[mikedoyleblogger]

Simple answer is: because they (Disney) doesn't want to build it...at least not now. If they did want to build it, it would be built.

Exactly. CR is actually closer to MK anyway--the walk would be longer from GF. And since you have to take the monorail the whole way around from CR, GF is better served even without the walkway. MK is always a short, one-stop monorail ride away from GF. CR is always a 10-minute walk in the sun from MK or what can be a lengthy, all-the-way-around and please-no-delays-at-the-TTC (etc.) monorail ride, depending on crowds.

 

[Deb & Bill]

Probably because GF guests do not walk these distances. Disney would need to provide shuttle carts or something to transport the guests from the GF to the MK on the path. They already have the monorail and a boat system.

 

[SueM in MN]

1) Yes, it is previous construction and not in compliance with ADA.
2) But, there is no Grandfather Clause.
3) It does not need to be altered or grandfathered.
4) This is because the Ferry is the alternative.
5) Thus, there is ADA access to MK transportation.

NOTE: We had a meeting in about 2006, and ADA was a
topic. The monorail was a specific example, in case guests
would ask us. Also, the monorail is termed as transportation,
NOT an attraction, thus the ferry is an allowed substitute.

Grandfathered was not the correct term, but all I could think of without a lot of explaining at the time.
The correct term is "Safe Harbor", which has specific meaning in the ADA , but most people would just interpret as the same as 'grandfathered'. Those are things that were not accessible, but were not required to be made accessible.
There were some things that had been safe harbored that are no longer after a revision to the accessibility standards that took effect in March 2012.

There was ( and still is) a clause that says if making something accessible that existed before 1991 is not "readily achievable" (the words in the ADA), it doesn't need to be made accessible, but there needs to be an alternative which is accessible. That is where the ferry fits in.
(1991 is when the ADA first came into existence).

But, if it was being built today, it could not be built the way it is. The boarding area and the monorails themselves are accessible, but the ramp doesn't meet the guidelines for how steep a straight ramp can be.
It could and would be required to be designed to be accessible if it was being built now. That was what I meant.

 

[parkhopping]

Perhaps there are concerns that when the MK closes on a busy night and there is a long line for the monorails - when it will take multiple monorails before you will even be able to get on at all - that people may then walk to the GF and get the monorail there (where it should be basically empty) flooding the monrail station there with tons of people. I can see the GF guests being very unhappy with that.

I doubt that's much of a concern. If this was the case you'd see that exact situation happening at the Contemporary. I did it myself one night, but didn't notice anyone else using the same strategy.

 

[larryz]

Perhaps there are concerns that when the MK closes on a busy night and there is a long line for the monorails - when it will take multiple monorails before you will even be able to get on at all - that people may then walk to the GF and get the monorail there (where it should be basically empty) flooding the monrail station there with tons of people. I can see the GF guests being very unhappy with that.

A true Dis-er analysis, and probably with a big grain of truth to it!

And they're probably afraid people will re-use their refillable mugs before boarding, too.

 

[LSUfan4444]

It would be easy to build an ADA compliant bridge - just need to put in switchback ramps on each side. No need for an elevator or other bells and whistles.

Great point, but I wonder if it would have to be ADA compliant since the ferry is an effective alternative.