Pool hopping at Uzima Pool at Disney's Animal Kingdom Lodge
Red
Pool at Disney's Animal Kingdom Lodge? We've stayed there many times and the
pool was often almost empty. Summer I can see,,,,,,, maybe.....
dreamcometr...@gmail.com
just SAB.
Lifeguards can check resort id's and ask you to leave at any pool.
I believe the only time that it is allowed is between sister resorts,
such as the All-Stars, or the Port Orleans resorts, or if a pool is
being renovated (i.e. Boardwalk guests could use SAB when their pool
was being renovated.)
-Joe
Dream Come True Vacations
http://www.dreamcometruevacations.com
clkel...@msn.com
members have of going to any pool on WDW property except Uzima at
Animal Kingdom Lodge and Storm Along Bay at Yacht and Beach Club. Of
course the folks at Beach Club Villas can enjoy Storm Along Bay.
Let me note again, this is ONLY for DVC members staying at a DVC resort
on points!!
Carol
Rudeney
Yes, I took it that way, too. And I do wonder why AKL is not a part of DVC
pool-hopping privileges. The only thing I can think of is maybe it was the
first of the new style pools (zero-depth entry and a big slide) so they were
trying to keep it less crowded. Also, maybe they are just trying to
discourage "day visitors" to AKL altogether.
--
- RODNEY
admiralBoom
In 1998, the DVC submitted plans to the WDWCompany that would allow
them rights to 'land, facilities and concessions' at each of the WDW
resorts, past and future, in order to expand the DVC business. So far,
the results have been in the form of WLV and BCV. AKL was designed with
this in mind (and if you look around you can see exactly where the AKLV
will go).
The rights of a DVC member with regard to WDW property usage is a very
complex issue (sometimes the decisions concerning DVC discounts suffer
because of this) and the pool usage issue is no exception. In the case
of any resort that becomes a host to a DVC property, that resort gains
the right to limit the pool usage provision to only those staying at
that resort's DVC property (although the resort loses the right to
demand that the guests staying at the DVC property be members of the
DVC and/or use points for their stay).
WLV chose not to enforce the provision and so DVC members can still
'hop on over' and use the pools (but must be staying at a DVC resort
using points).
BCV chose to enforce the provision for obvious reasons.
AKL also chose to enforce the provision because of the fear that the
guest experience would be ruined by 'inviting' all the DVC members over
to swim (they already knew that the resort would see a
larger-than-normal share of curious, non-AKL guests).
AKL could do this because the DVC had already purchased their piece of
the resort property - with full expectation of building right away -
even though the actual building and quiet pool haven't yet
materialized.
If the DVC continues to sell as well as it has so far, we'll see a DVC
Villas building at every resort by the end of phase 4 (2039) !!
Boom
Patty Winter
admiralBoom <admir...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
>In 1998, the DVC submitted plans to the WDWCompany that would allow
>them rights to 'land, facilities and concessions' at each of the WDW
>resorts, past and future, in order to expand the DVC business.
DVC is owned by Disney, right? But it's separate from the company
that runs WDW?
>So far,
>the results have been in the form of WLV and BCV. AKL was designed with
>this in mind (and if you look around you can see exactly where the AKLV
>will go).
Oh. Wow. Villas at ALK would be so cool for those who are into DVC!
I hope they wouldn't go at the back part of Arusha Savannah, though.
That would ruin the natural, undeveloped appearance one now gets when
looking in that direction. So maybe the villas would go on the far
side of Sunset or Uzima Savannah?
>If the DVC continues to sell as well as it has so far, we'll see a DVC
>Villas building at every resort by the end of phase 4 (2039) !!
Including the monorail resorts? I'm trying to visualize where there
would be room for new buildings at all of those.
Oh, and are you talking about the moderate and value resorts as well
as the deluxes?
Patty
dreamcometr...@gmail.com
the Animal Kingdom Lodge would fit perfectly into the area just east of
the bus stop, almost precisely the way that the Villas at the
Wilderness Lodge are in relation to that lodge.
Rudeney
>
> In 1998, the DVC submitted plans to the WDWCompany that would allow
> them rights to 'land, facilities and concessions' at each of the WDW
> resorts, past and future, in order to expand the DVC business. So far,
> the results have been in the form of WLV and BCV. AKL was designed
> with this in mind (and if you look around you can see exactly where
> the AKLV will go).
As someone else pointed out, it's gotta be almost exactly like WLV - just
east of the bus stop, so the villas view of the Savannah would be a mirror
image of the Lodge, right?
> The rights of a DVC member with regard to WDW property usage is a very
> complex issue (sometimes the decisions concerning DVC discounts suffer
> because of this) and the pool usage issue is no exception. In the case
> of any resort that becomes a host to a DVC property, that resort gains
> the right to limit the pool usage provision to only those staying at
> that resort's DVC property (although the resort loses the right to
> demand that the guests staying at the DVC property be members of the
> DVC and/or use points for their stay).
OK, I think I understand what you are saying. Does the opposite hold true,
where a resort without any DVC property usage would have no rights to deny
DVC members from pool hopping? So if DVC owns no property at GF, then GF
can't deny DVC members access? That's just odd, but still not the strangest
intra-corporate relationship I've seen.
> WLV chose not to enforce the provision and so DVC members can still
> 'hop on over' and use the pools (but must be staying at a DVC resort
> using points).
> BCV chose to enforce the provision for obvious reasons.
>
> AKL also chose to enforce the provision because of the fear that the
> guest experience would be ruined by 'inviting' all the DVC members
> over to swim (they already knew that the resort would see a
> larger-than-normal share of curious, non-AKL guests).
>
> AKL could do this because the DVC had already purchased their piece of
> the resort property - with full expectation of building right away -
> even though the actual building and quiet pool haven't yet
> materialized.
I think I am getting it now. So, is AKL the only resort where DVC has
actually purchased the land and rights but not built, or are there others?
> If the DVC continues to sell as well as it has so far, we'll see a DVC
> Villas building at every resort by the end of phase 4 (2039) !!
2039!!! You mean Disney actually plans that far ahead? Gee whiz! If I'm
still around then, I would likely be way too old to enjoy WDW!
As usual, Boom, thanks for the very informative unbiased behind-the-scenes
info that keep us Disney freaks entertained!
--
- RODNEY
admiralBoom
Patty Winter wrote:
> In article <1128616978....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
> admiralBoom <admir...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> >
> >In 1998, the DVC submitted plans to the WDWCompany that would allow
> >them rights to 'land, facilities and concessions' at each of the WDW
> >resorts, past and future, in order to expand the DVC business.
>
> DVC is owned by Disney, right? But it's separate from the company
> that runs WDW?
There is a massive hierarchy of companies under the Disney name,
starting with Business Units at the bottom and working up through
various subsidiaries and corporations. I'll bet there are others on
RADP that can do this description better justice but yes, WDW and DVC
are different companies operating under the Disney Corporation
unbrella. Although all the money eventually ends up in the same place,
these companies have to buy and sell from each other just as if they
were not connected. This goes on all over WDW although the WDW Business
Units (resorts, parks, etc.) can use some shortcuts and exceptions....
> Oh. Wow. Villas at ALK would be so cool for those who are into DVC!
>
> I hope they wouldn't go at the back part of Arusha Savannah, though.
> That would ruin the natural, undeveloped appearance one now gets when
> looking in that direction. So maybe the villas would go on the far
> side of Sunset or Uzima Savannah?
Between the bus stop and the feature pool, as pointed out by others..
Boy, you guys are quick !!
> >If the DVC continues to sell as well as it has so far, we'll see a DVC
> >Villas building at every resort by the end of phase 4 (2039) !!
>
> Including the monorail resorts? I'm trying to visualize where there
> would be room for new buildings at all of those.
I'll let the google-mappers help with these.
At the GF and Poly, the odds are that the DVC would purchase an already
existing building although plans have also been filed that might have
the DVC build a new building in the GF parking lot, just across the
monorail from the main entrance and in place of the luau show building
at the Poly.
At the CR, the building would be north of the north wing, the long side
facing Bay Lake (with it's own beach). Nobody really uses the tennis
courts anyway...
>
> Oh, and are you talking about the moderate and value resorts as well
> as the deluxes?
All of the resorts.
>
>
> Patty
Boom
admiralBoom
> admiralBoom wrote:
> > The rights of a DVC member with regard to WDW property usage is a very
>
> OK, I think I understand what you are saying. Does the opposite hold true,
> where a resort without any DVC property usage would have no rights to deny
> DVC members from pool hopping? So if DVC owns no property at GF, then GF
> can't deny DVC members access? That's just odd, but still not the strangest
> intra-corporate relationship I've seen.
Yes, that is correct. If it seems strange then it's because of such an
unusual combination of laws and regulations: Reedy Creek bylaws,
Florida timeshare (with expiration) regulations, and WDW (private)
public-use property. I've been told that there were legal hoops-a-many
that the DVC had to jump through in the beginning... just to get OKW up
and running (on purchased land, no less).
> > AKL could do this because the DVC had already purchased their piece of
> > the resort property - with full expectation of building right away -
> > even though the actual building and quiet pool haven't yet
> > materialized.
>
> I think I am getting it now. So, is AKL the only resort where DVC has
> actually purchased the land and rights but not built, or are there others?
The AKL situation has been talked about in the press, so I feel safe
talking about it here. There is one other property in a similar
situation but I'll have to keep my mouth shut about which.
> > If the DVC continues to sell as well as it has so far, we'll see a DVC
> > Villas building at every resort by the end of phase 4 (2039) !!
>
> 2039!!! You mean Disney actually plans that far ahead? Gee whiz! If I'm
> still around then, I would likely be way too old to enjoy WDW!
Well, there is a 100-year plan that floats around the office from time
to time but no-one takes it too seriously. On the other hand the
50-year plan is almost a bible around here (except that on page 449 it
says 'Admiral Boom retires in the year 2022' and I just don't see that
happening so early).
>
> As usual, Boom, thanks for the very informative unbiased behind-the-scenes
> info that keep us Disney freaks entertained!
Happy to entertain as long as you keep your seatbelts fastened...
Safety, Courtesy, Show, Efficiency, Boom !!
>
> --
>
> - RODNEY
JackM
> Patty Winter wrote:
>
>>Oh, and are you talking about the moderate and value resorts as well
>>as the deluxes?
>
>
> All of the resorts.
Oh I can hardly wait for the offering of VASMu! ;)
Hey Boom, you finally going to make a RADP meet this December?
Jack
--
My email address on the header is a non-monitored spam catching account.
If you need to reach me, use radp10 at wvnh dot net. I check that one at
least once a week. ;)
Patty Winter
admiralBoom <admir...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>Hi Patty,
Hi, Boom. :-)
>There is a massive hierarchy of companies under the Disney name,
> Although all the money eventually ends up in the same place,
>these companies have to buy and sell from each other just as if they
>were not connected.
Got it, thanks.
>Between the bus stop and the feature pool, as pointed out by others..
>Boy, you guys are quick !!
:-) Yes, thanks to the folks who worked this out on Google Maps.
Depending on exactly where the buildings went, and how they were
oriented, it looks like some rooms might have pool views and some
savannah views. Anyway, I'll bet this will be extremely popular
when it comes to pass. If I were buying into DVC, I'd sure be
interested in staying at AKL.
>At the GF and Poly, the odds are that the DVC would purchase an already
>existing building although plans have also been filed that might have
>the DVC build a new building in the GF parking lot, just across the
>monorail from the main entrance and in place of the luau show building
>at the Poly.
Ah, okay.
>At the CR, the building would be north of the north wing, the long side
>facing Bay Lake (with it's own beach). Nobody really uses the tennis
>courts anyway...
:-) Yeah, I was just looking at the satellite photos and thinking that
would be the obvious place, except for the presence of the tennis courts.
It's also quite a hike from the main building; I wonder whether they'd
include some sort of restaurant there to help with that problem. (I
imagine that DVC members don't like to cook all the time!) Although I
guess it would be no further than the outermost Poly building is from
that hotel's central building.
>All of the resorts.
Very interesting. I'm sure more people will hop on the bandwagon
when lower-priced resorts join the program.
Thanks for the info, Boom! Oh, and tell the surveyors to put in
some pretty benchmarks. :-)
Patty
Nick Enicks
pat...@wintertime.com (Patty Winter) wrote:
>
> Thanks for the info, Boom! Oh, and tell the surveyors to put in
> some pretty benchmarks. :-)
>
But, of course, don't tell us where they are. Its more challenging to
find them on our own.
--
NJE
Patty Winter
:-)
Well, a few *hints* would be okay, though. :-)
Patty
admiralBoom
I'll do my best. Just in case you are keeping track, there are 11
markers at HKDL, one each at the three hotel locations, one each in the
center of the five (future expansion...) lands in the MK and three that
mark specific locations used for monitoring the stability of the land
(remember the land is man made). The latter of these have (what looks
like) a telescope outline on them and sets of numbers that refer to
notes on the architectural drawings.
Boom
Patty Winter wrote:
<snipped info about future DVC buildings>
Patty Winter
admiralBoom <admir...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
>I'll do my best. Just in case you are keeping track, there are 11
>markers at HKDL, one each at the three hotel locations, one each in the
>center of the five (future expansion...) lands in the MK and three that
>mark specific locations used for monitoring the stability of the land
That's very helpful information, Boom! Okay, gang, you have your
assignment! I expect folks to start finding these and letting us
know. Photos and coordinates would be a bonus, but even written
descriptions of where they are would help.
>(remember the land is man made). The latter of these have (what looks
>like) a telescope outline on them
Theodolite?
>and sets of numbers that refer to notes on the architectural drawings.
Good info, thanks!
Patty
NJE
pat...@wintertime.com (Patty Winter) wrote:
>
> That's very helpful information, Boom!.
>
I must admit I'm at the point where hints like this would be helpful at
WDW. I don't think I'm going to make it to HKDL anytime in the
forseeable future.
> >(remember the land is man made). The latter of these have (what looks
> >like) a telescope outline on them
>
> Theodolite?
>
OK, we definitely need a picture of this.
--
NJE
Lloyd Lee-Lim
>markers at HKDL, one each at the three hotel locations, one each in the
>center of the five (future expansion...) lands in the MK and three that
>mark specific locations used for monitoring the stability of the land
>(remember the land is man made). The latter of these have (what looks
>like) a telescope outline on them and sets of numbers that refer to
>notes on the architectural drawings.
Woohoo! Information like this is extremely useful. Counts alone
are useful, because we never know when to stop looking. :)
I sense a group trip to Hong Kong in the future... :)
+++
Lloyd Lee-Lim