Construction update from the new Disney Vacation Club tower at Disney's Polynesian Village Resort

LittleBuford7 minutes ago

First, I’m sorry for your loss. I remember you talking about your mother before her passing. We can agree to disagree about the appropriateness of the phrase.

LittleBuford8 minutes ago

I am truly sorry for your losses and thank you for your gracious response.

Ayla11 minutes ago

It's an oft used phrase and I see nothing wrong with using it. And before the expected "bet you never had anyone close to you die of cancer!!!!!", my mother died of breast cancer.

Disstevefan137 minutes ago

I think definition 2 fits the spread of DVC resorts ;)

Virtual Toad44 minutes ago

Having lost both my father and best friend to brain cancer, my father taken at age 47 when I was in my early 20s, and my best friend when he and I were both in our early 50s, I can see how this analogy could be upsetting, and I certainly apologize if I have upset anyone as that was not my intent. Some may also see this an opportunity to crack jokes, but rest assured given my personal experience this was not a term I used lightly. Having said that, let me change the word cancer to blight. Perhaps a more appropriate term, as what has occurred at WDW in the case of DVC properties such as the tower at the Polynesian are not the result of a random life-threatening disease, but of a deliberate, pre-meditated (and in my opinion seriously flawed) decision-making process. I stand by my opinion that these developments are incongruous with their surroundings and thus threaten the integrity and identity of the resort.

JD801 hour ago

I agree, the amount of dramatic responses in this thread has become a rot that is destroying the fabric of our society.

LittleBuford1 hour ago

Perhaps what some consider overdramatic—and I would agree—is invoking a life-threatening disease in relation to a themed resort. Yes, Disney is important to us all, but there’s a point at which the hyperbole tips into something excessive and inappropriate.

Incomudro1 hour ago

Not to me it isn't. This is like putting up Soviet housing projects in my eyes.

Virtual Toad2 hours ago

I can understand the defense of DVC (there are those who absolutely love it, those like me who have been tempted to buy in over the years but decided against it, and those who despise its very existence. Again, some of the DVC additions have been complimentary to the resort. The bungalow trend IMHO pushed the envelope of what was acceptable in terms of DVC overdevelopment but there was at least an attempt at thematic covesiveness. But to clarify my cancer comment, I feel the historically recent 15-ish story DVC towers are in fact a cancerous blight on the resort. Would these even be considered for construction as part of any responsible master plan without the irresistible lure of easy DVC money? Was any consideration made in terms of maintaining developmental integrity and upholding creative standards? Or (as it seems to me) are they now totally okay with putting up a standard-issue hotel tower, slapping a DVC sign out front and calling it a day? The practice of ill-advised placement and construction of high-rise DVC properties, along with a reckless abandonment of once-treasured architectural and creative standards in favor of a style and quality that can literally be found anywhere else on earth, is slowly eating away at the very heart of what made WDW a global phenomenon in the first place. Not unlike a cancer. Possibly hyperbolic? Perhaps, but I feel it's a valid analogy and worthy of discussion.

plutofan152 hours ago

I am not a fan of the high rise trend either but saying "DVC has become a cancer that is literally killing much of the greatness that made WDW special." is a bit overdramatic. Just my take and may have been what pdude81 was referring to. (pdude81, please correct me if I am wrong).

Virtual Toad2 hours ago

I'm sorry, we can agree to disagree, and you are entitled to your opinion, but I suggest reading up on WDW history to understand why my opinion (and the opinions of others here) on this topic are far from ridiculous. Walt Disney yearned for the "blessing of size" and what followed for decades at WDW was exactly what he wanted: a meticulously crafted fantasy environment free from the pressures of misguided and/or incongruous overdevelopment. Michael Eisner and the Disney management of his era managed to expand the resort exponentially in ways that added a massive increase in hotel capacity with minimal intrusion to existing development, while also staying true to the spirit of the resort in terms of architectural and creative quality consistent to the brand. Cynically plopping down generic high-rises void of craftsmanship or creativity right in the middle of one of the most incredible urban development projects ever created-- and expecting no one to care-- is what is truly ridiculous. Again, agree to disagree and I respect your opinion. But please try to understand the perspective of those who may feel otherwise.

pdude813 hours ago

These takes are getting ridiculous. It's a hotel tower. It might annoy you slightly based on where you were staying and the room view, but beyond that come on.

Virtual Toad3 hours ago

Oh dear, that is awful. Between this and the "Reflectionization" of the Ft. Wilderness cabins, it seems the campaign towards Disneyocrity (tm) is proceeding full speed ahead. There was a time when DVC was complimentary to the WDW experience and in some ways even "plussed" it. The Railroad Room at the original Wilderness Lodge DVC building is a great example of that. But those days are long gone. DVC has become a cancer blight that is literally killing much of the greatness that made WDW special. Sigh. ETA: Some have pointed out they feel the use of the word cancer is both hyperbolic and inappropriate so I have changed it to "blight" with apologies to anyone who feels this might have been an excessive or over-dramatic expression of opinion.

CntrlFlPete4 hours ago

some recent photos taken from the GF area: