Walkway between Disney's Grand Floridian and Polynesian Village Resort closed

nickys13 hours ago

No it isn’t. They still haven’t announced an opening date or declared rooms into DVC inventory. We should hear sometime in the Summer about an opening date, with sales starting November / December. It probably won’t open until Spring 2025. Usually it’s a few months from sales to opening.

nickys14 hours ago

Maybe not a theme as such but I found a lot to interest me. The library / lounge room is chock full of photos and memoribila, and two hallways full of photos. The mosaics in the tunnel through to the Skyliner. I loved the splash pad, nice to see Fantasia get some love at WDW. All of that is literally Walt Disney themed. I also liked the style of the “formal gardens” around the pool with Primo Piatto (? Spelling) opening out onto it .I enjoyed visiting and spent far longer there than I’d anticipated. That though is separate from the design aspect of say AKL, WL or the (original) Poly. I certainly wouldn’t claim the design of Riviera compares favourably to those resorts.

lazyboy97o20 hours ago

Per code a high rise has occupied floors more than 75’ above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access.

UNCgolf21 hours ago

You're right -- it's shorter than I realized. It seems taller than it actually is, likely due to the location.

Animaniac93-9823 hours ago

Riviera's height is more noticeable because is so close to the rest of Caribbean Beach's 3-story structures (a byproduct of it being on a former section of that hotel). Wilderness Lodge is nestled in the trees and doesn't have another building so close to compare.

BrianLo23 hours ago

Is also a mid-rise. I know it's semantics, but it matters when the definition of a mid-rise is 5-15 stories and Riviera is smack in the middle of that range. The Riviera's issues really are not its height, the lodges are very well received I think, despite being in the same range.

BrianLo23 hours ago

Completely and I was not meaning to entirely get caught up in semantics, though people were using high rise technically too liberally. I did forget Aulani though, that would qualify! I think my broader point is that "DVC" somehow gets the blame for being the issue. It's really just hotel design in general from modern WDI. It just so happens that DVC leads to a lot of the hotel builds at WDW There is nothing wrong with mid-rise hotel design or even a few of the high-rise designs (Disneyland Hotel that is sort of grandfathered in and I personally think Aulani is great). I think that gets misattributed. I'd argue my personal favourite resorts at WDW are all actually mid-rises. Poly suffers obviously because it's a mid-rise being added to a low-rise resort. But more to my point about how this problem is not purely "DVC" related: the Disney Fantasy Springs Hotel in Tokyo. That thing is an atrocious mess and it is all hotel based from a provider who is willing to spend money. They just can't figure out how to design hotels these days, even if some of the rooms are nice.

Bocabear1 day ago

Oh Yeah! The Riviera is the case study for usual-ness invading the WDW Resort.... It doesn't even try...

UNCgolf1 day ago

The Riviera?

Ayla1 day ago

I would add Riviera to that disappointing trend toward the ordinary.

imagineer971 day ago

Yes, this exactly!

Virtual Toad1 day ago

15-ish so without nitpicking over numbers and to clarify, yes, I would put mid rises in that category. I understand some seem to prefer the more centrally-located amenities and limited walking these newer structures provide. But as others have mentioned, the other issue with these newer projects is the lack of theme and architectural quality/cohesiveness relative to their surroundings. The original WL and AKL buildings are great examples of mid-rises that meet the expected WDW standard of quality. They are both jaw-dropping architectural gems rich in detail and theme and worthy of inclusion in the WDW landscape. Many of the newer DVC projects and mid-rises, including the one at the Poly, fail to meet either bar. They're taller *and* more generic which is why they stand out as incongruous. If they didn't look so bland and cheap (relative to what we know WDW is capable of) their placement, while still intrusive, might be easier to justify. But in the case of the "Polyday Inn" you get the worst of both worlds-- a taller structure that's incongruous by virtue not only of its height, but also its lack of cohesive theme relative to its surroundings. What troubles me and others here is that this project is part of an ongoing and disappointing trend toward the ordinary-- in what's supposed to be an extraordinary place. You should never expect to see mundane structures common in everyday urban landscapes at WDW. It's what folks go to WDW to get away from. Yet here we are. It's a paradigm shift that's fundamentally changing the nature and essence of the resort in incremental but irreversible ways.

ToTBellHop1 day ago

If I’m honest, I prefer the deluxe resorts with covered walkways between all buildings (or just one building). My family tends to be happiest at BLT, Wilderness Lodge, AKL, Y&BC, and BoardWalk. While I may not love the edifice, I’m sure we will stay in this tower if it has a gym, dining, nice pool, and reasonable points requirement for a studio. The walk to the existing Poly villas can be unpleasant in the summer. But they’ll need a QSR. Captain Cook’s is inadequate as it is.

dmw1 day ago

Yep, I remember the RADP days, too. FWIW, there is a RADP group on FB with many of the peeps who used to be active on that Usenet group.