The Wilderness Must be Destroyed!

[Tri-Circle-D 2,059]

“God has cared for these trees, saved them from drought, disease, avalanches, and a thousand tempests and floods. But he cannot save them from fools."

— John Muir

I've had a visit to Wilderness Lodge on my to-do list for a few weeks.

I heard that the chainsaws and bulldozers showed up right after Christmas and that they have been going to town on the big DVC expansion over there.

I needed to check on that.  So I did on Sunday, January 31, 2016

Before we get to the "after" photos, let's take a look at what used to be.  I dug up a few photos from the TCD archives for us to examine.

Here's a typical view of the Wilderness Lodge property as seen from a Fort Wilderness-Magic Kingdom boat on Bay Lake.  The Lodge building is right of center. Straight ahead we just see a nice, unspoiled, forested shoreline:

And, that is how the shoreline has looked since before Disney purchased this property and opened in 1971.  The men who planned and built Disney World understood what an asset Bay Lake and its unspoiled shoreline was, so they let it be.  When they built Fort Wilderness, they set all of the development back from the lake, and left it natural.  That respect for the environment and the wilderness was honored when they built Wilderness Lodge in 1994, and again when they added the DVC Villas building to it a few years later.

Here's another look at the shoreline from Bay Lake from another trip.  Again, we see the Lodge near the center.  To the left of it, we can see just the green roof of the little shack used for marina and bike rentals, and we can barely see the rooftop of part of the DVC building behind all the trees:

Even when we zoom in, all we can see is the shack, and then lots and lots of trees, and just a bit of the brown roofline behind the trees:

Here's another photo from another trip showing the Lodge as seen from Bay Lake- you can't see the Villas building at all-it just looks like a beautiful, unspoiled shoreline:

Zooming in again, we can just see the top of the brown roof peeking up behind those nice trees:

Just so we're all on the same page here, let's look at how things looked from the air, as shown on Google and Bing.

Here's a look at the current DVC Villas building on Google maps- they color enhanced the photo- the long building with the brown roof is the DVC building.  You can see the nice blue pool, and the marina and that little shack we were just looking at from the lake view:

And here's how things look from a different angle on Bing Maps- we can see the DVC building, and then a nice forest shielding it from Bay Lake:

And that's how things have looked for the last 20+ years that the Wilderness Lodge has been in operation.  They left the shoreline alone, and focused on the Wilderness.  Everyone was happy.  Especially the trees.

Well, times change.  And the geniuses who run the Disney Vacation Club found out that there's a market for guests willing to pay $2000 a night to stay in waterfront bungalows.  They built a bunch of them over at the Polynesian resort, so why not add a bunch more over at Wilderness Lodge?  Screw the wilderness, let's make hay while the sun shines.

So, they cooked up this plan to add even more bungalows than they did over at the Polynesian:

Why so many? You ask.

Do the math . . . $2000 a night per bungalow is over $700,000 per year in revenue per bungalow. They couldn't get started on this project soon enough.

So bring on the chainsaws!

They did.

That brings us to Sunday, January 31.

Here's a look over the current state of the project as seen from the 6th floor of the DVC building.  The pool is gone, and so are the trees:

Don't worry about the pool, though, there's a bigger and better one on the plans.  They have a lot more space to work with now that they got rid of that awful wilderness that was junking up the place.

Here's another couple of photos from the same spot on the 6th floor- we can see the rental shack and the boat rental dock there at the lake-the view is so much better without all those pesky trees in the way:

Instead of seeing a nice bit of wilderness from the DVC rooms, we now see bare dirt:

Again-don't worry about the dirt.  A gigantic pool is coming.  And probably a nice bar too!

The lucky guests who stay on the lower floors don't have to see that mess.  They get to look at this beautiful artwork wrapped around the construction fencing:

This is what that fence is hiding (it's the same stuff we already looked at, but now from ground level) :

Here, we can see that it looks like they are adding a new road and some infrastructure.  Those guests paying $2000 a night have needs that must be accommodated:

All those drainage pipes stacked across the way over there tell me that a new drainage system is coming, and probably a lovely retention pond.  Maybe they'll stick a fountain in there, and the DVC guests who can't afford those bungalows will have that to distract them from looking at all of those bungalows which will be lining the shore:

And guess what else?  The guests over here at the DVC will now have a pretty good view of the Magic Kingdom fireworks without all of those stupid trees in the way:

Big deal.

So what?

That's over at the Lodge.  We are Fort Fiends.  Not Lodge Fiends.  It doesn't affect us.

Not so fast.

Here's how things look now from the lake:

Let's zoom in on that:

Now you can see that whole Villas building.

So much nicer than all of those stupid trees.

I can see trees anywhere.

Now I can enjoy seeing the moldy roof of the Villas at Wilderness Lodge.

Magical.

And, they're just getting started!

TCD

 

 

 

 

 

[dvccamper 32]

Wow, those pictures are really shocking. I knew they would be clearing trees for the cabins but that seems like overkill. It's more like the No-Wilderness Lodge.

The only plus for us is that the resale prices recently for VWL are very good (for the seller). We've contemplated selling and this would be a good time to do so just in case as it gets closer they may make those cabins separate and lock out the current VWL owners from the 11 month booking window. I have read those rumors in a few places.

Very sad though to see it like that, it was always one of my favorite WDW spots.

 

 

[Avatab.... Steve 124]

Does this count as getting on Page One of a TCD trip report??

I don't like what I'm seeing, but I am still glad that it's over at the WL and not at the Fort.

We have bought ourselves a couple more years before they start the same stuff at FW.

I do wish there was a similar profit motive to build more campsites or another Disney CG to take the pressure off the Fort as it is now. 

[CCIntrigue...aka Gwen 547]

Those pictures are just sad.

BTW, did you see anything going on in River Country?

[shoreline99 137]

This really makes me sad, and just reinforces my current attitude towards Disney and their greed.

[Beckers 1,136]

Wow.

 guess Disney knows money really doesn't grow on trees, it's only comes from knocking them down.

[Travisma 1,317]

2 minutes ago, Beckers said:

Wow.

 guess Disney knows money really doesn't grow on trees, it's only comes from knocking them down.

But just think, they can make various souvenirs in 3rd world countries out of the wood, and then make a huge profit because they were made out of magical Disney trees.  Just like the overpriced paper beads they sell at HS that are made out of old park maps by kids in Africa.

[momof3kids-Yvonne 596]

Glad we went over to explore on our trip in October. I had been over there before during a WWW, but Steve and the girls had never been.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[LONE-STAR 370]

Well so much for the beauty of the Lodge from the lake.

[lightbikes 73]

Thanks for the pictures TCD - we have been watching the steady destruction since mid December - your shots from the 6th floor really show it up - we tried to walk in from the River Country end of the old trail but there are signs every where saying stay out!!!

11 hours ago, Tri-Circle-D said:

Do the math . . . $2000 a night per bungalow is over $700,000 per year in revenue per bungalow. They couldn't get started on this project soon enough.

But your math says it all!!   Bless the Disney bean counters and the rest of the world can rot!

 

[djsamuel 322]

Why not wait to see what the final result will be?  It won't look like a construction site.  

[Katman1356...Jason 1,140]

52 minutes ago, djsamuel said:

Why not wait to see what the final result will be?  It won't look like a construction site.  

None of that crazy talk around. 

[Travisma 1,317]

I'm sure they had to jump thru hoops and submit hundreds of pages of paperwork before they could do any work, but it's still surprising they removed that many large trees, especially since the main construction of the bungalows is along the waters edge.  And they could have figured out a better way of building a pool/clubhouse among the trees instead of clear cutting them.

[keith_h 420]

While I don't like the clear cutting nor the look from the lake it frequently makes sense to do it. When trees grow closely together like these did they are frequently spindly and too weak to stand on their own. The first good storm and they will come down because the other tress that used to support them are gone. If they could leave clumps of forest that would be nice but from what I've seen of the Disney plans they intend a high density of buildings that would not allow this approach to work. It appears to another case of Disney is choosing profit over aesthetics.  I'm also of the opinion that leaving a few spindly lollipop trees around as you frequently see in new subdivisions looks much worse. I'd rather to see them all cut down and landscaped after the work is done. Yes it takes a generation before the new trees are mature but they are much healthier and develop better shapes in that time. 

I feel the larger issue is with Disney trying to fill every square in of its property with lodging or other sales related businesses. One of the things I really like about WDW is the openness and distance between facilities. If I wanted crowded city like conditions I would save money by staying at a hotel on International Drive. Instead I am willing to spend a bit more for the open spaces and non-cluttered look of WDW.

[Tri-Circle-D 2,059]

20 hours ago, dvccamper said:

Wow, those pictures are really shocking. I knew they would be clearing trees for the cabins but that seems like overkill. It's more like the No-Wilderness Lodge.

The only plus for us is that the resale prices recently for VWL are very good (for the seller). We've contemplated selling and this would be a good time to do so just in case as it gets closer they may make those cabins separate and lock out the current VWL owners from the 11 month booking window. I have read those rumors in a few places.

Very sad though to see it like that, it was always one of my favorite WDW spots.

It seems to me that they intentionally clear-cut the wilderness so they can now offer rooms with waterfront and fireworks views.  But, that was never the intent of the Villas, and the way the building is laid out attests to that- the attraction was supposed to be the wilderness, and beautiful and pretty much identical wilderness views were afforded from all rooms.  Now, half the rooms will have lake and fireworks views, and half won't.  Now all the rooms aren't equal.  Some will be viewed as greatly superior.  That's going to cause problems.

18 hours ago, Avatab.... Steve said:

Does this count as getting on Page One of a TCD trip report??

I don't like what I'm seeing, but I am still glad that it's over at the WL and not at the Fort.

We have bought ourselves a couple more years before they start the same stuff at FW.

I do wish there was a similar profit motive to build more campsites or another Disney CG to take the pressure off the Fort as it is now. 

Nope- no bragging rights for this kind of thread.

I can't imagine any kind of campground that would create the profit motive that these bungalows have.  The cash flow from one bungalow is more than they bring in from a whole loop full of campsites.

17 hours ago, CCIntrigue...aka Gwen said:

Those pictures are just sad.

BTW, did you see anything going on in River Country?

I did get over to River Country and took a peek through the fence.  I didn't see anything new from that view, nor from the MK boat.

16 hours ago, shoreline99 said:

This really makes me sad, and just reinforces my current attitude towards Disney and their greed.

Yup.

1 hour ago, djsamuel said:

Why not wait to see what the final result will be?  It won't look like a construction site.  

Of course it will be very, very nice when it is finished. It has to be-they're asking 2000 bucks a night for those bungalows. I'm sure there will be all kind of cute touches playing off of the wilderness theme. 

But those trees are gone forever.

And it's still going to look like crap from the lake- just like the Polynesian Resort's beach has been wrecked by those bungalows they slapped in there.

36 minutes ago, Travisma said:

I'm sure they had to jump thru hoops and submit hundreds of pages of paperwork before they could do any work, but it's still surprising they removed that many large trees, especially since the main construction of the bungalows is along the waters edge.  And they could have figured out a better way of building a pool/clubhouse among the trees instead of clear cutting them.

I really think that some genius got the idea that by clearing out the wilderness, they can jack up rates for the lake and fireworks view.

Plus, construction is so much easier without having to work around those darn trees.

17 minutes ago, keith_h said:

I feel the larger issue is with Disney trying to fill every square in of its property with lodging or other sales related businesses. One of the things I really like about WDW is the openness and distance between facilities. If I wanted crowded city like conditions I would save money by staying at a hotel on International Drive. Instead I am willing to spend a bit more for the open spaces and non-cluttered look of WDW.

I agree.  These resorts were not designed to have these bungalows added.  I know that if I was paying $400+ a night to stay in a deluxe room, I wouldn't be too happy about my view including even richer folks staying in those $2000 a night bungalows.

TCD

[Avatab.... Steve 124]

27 minutes ago, keith_h said:

While I don't like the clear cutting nor the look from the lake it frequently makes sense to do it. When trees grow closely together like these did they are frequently spindly and too weak to stand on their own. The first good storm and they will come down because the other tress that used to support them are gone. If they could leave clumps of forest that would be nice but from what I've seen of the Disney plans they intend a high density of buildings that would not allow this approach to work. It appears to another case of Disney is choosing profit over aesthetics.  I'm also of the opinion that leaving a few spindly lollipop trees around as you frequently see in new subdivisions looks much worse. I'd rather to see them all cut down and landscaped after the work is done. Yes it takes a generation before the new trees are mature but they are much healthier and develop better shapes in that time. 

I feel the larger issue is with Disney trying to fill every square in of its property with lodging or other sales related businesses. One of the things I really like about WDW is the openness and distance between facilities. If I wanted crowded city like conditions I would save money by staying at a hotel on International Drive. Instead I am willing to spend a bit more for the open spaces and non-cluttered look of WDW.

I agree with your take on the trees. If you are doing new lakeside construction, it makes sense to take out the old and (hopefully) put in new trees.

I also agree that Disney has gone DVC crazy. It wouldn't be so bad if they would create new DVC only resorts but they are trying to have it both ways. They build lots of new DVC money makers, but siting them so that they leach off of the existing resorts without having to add anything new to support the extra guests.

The WL already had DVC rooms, now they will have many more.  And all those new guests will be using the WL and it's amenities.  A regular guest will still be paying top dollar for a room, but sharing the Lodge with lots more people....

[Tri-Circle-D 2,059]

2 hours ago, Avatab.... Steve said:

I agree with your take on the trees. If you are doing new lakeside construction, it makes sense to take out the old and (hopefully) put in new trees.

I also agree that Disney has gone DVC crazy. It wouldn't be so bad if they would create new DVC only resorts but they are trying to have it both ways. They build lots of new DVC money makers, but siting them so that they leach off of the existing resorts without having to add anything new to support the extra guests.

The WL already had DVC rooms, now they will have many more.  And all those new guests will be using the WL and it's amenities.  A regular guest will still be paying top dollar for a room, but sharing the Lodge with lots more people....

Excellent point.

And the thing is- the DVC leaches only take, they don't give.  Look at Bay Lake Tower- the DVC guests there can use all of the amenities at the Contemporary Resort, but not the other way around.  The Bay Lake Tower pool and roof-top bar are only for DVC guests- Contemporary guests and everyone else have to stay out.

TCD

[ImDownWithDisney 342]

I'm not down with these changes to my favorite resort. SMB DVC.

[Avatab.... Steve 124]

6 hours ago, Tri-Circle-D said:

Excellent point.

And the thing is- the DVC leaches only take, they don't give.  Look at Bay Lake Tower- the DVC guests there can use all of the amenities at the Contemporary Resort, but not the other way around.  The Bay Lake Tower pool and roof-top bar are only for DVC guests- Contemporary guests and everyone else have to stay out.

TCD

I HATE the BLT. Prime example of all that is wrong with the current version of Disney.  IMHO it looks like someone tacked an old Holiday Inn onto the side of the Contemporary.....

It has nothing in common with the architecture of the Contemporary, it has no unique appeal, styling, or attributes.

It reflects laziness, greed and a lack of imagination of the people in charge.

 

[Travisma 1,317]

34 minutes ago, Avatab.... Steve said:

I HATE the BLT. Prime example of all that is wrong with the current version of Disney.  IMHO it looks like someone tacked an old Holiday Inn onto the side of the Contemporary.....

It has nothing in common with the architecture of the Contemporary, it has no unique appeal, styling, or attributes.

It reflects laziness, greed and a lack of imagination of the people in charge.

 

They got the most bang for their buck!  Squeezing in the biggest footprint they could then going up to get the most rooms.

[djsamuel 322]

12 hours ago, keith_h said:

While I don't like the clear cutting nor the look from the lake it frequently makes sense to do it. When trees grow closely together like these did they are frequently spindly and too weak to stand on their own. The first good storm and they will come down because the other tress that used to support them are gone. If they could leave clumps of forest that would be nice but from what I've seen of the Disney plans they intend a high density of buildings that would not allow this approach to work. It appears to another case of Disney is choosing profit over aesthetics.  I'm also of the opinion that leaving a few spindly lollipop trees around as you frequently see in new subdivisions looks much worse. I'd rather to see them all cut down and landscaped after the work is done. Yes it takes a generation before the new trees are mature but they are much healthier and develop better shapes in that time. 

I feel the larger issue is with Disney trying to fill every square in of its property with lodging or other sales related businesses. One of the things I really like about WDW is the openness and distance between facilities. If I wanted crowded city like conditions I would save money by staying at a hotel on International Drive. Instead I am willing to spend a bit more for the open spaces and non-cluttered look of WDW.

Good post.  In addition there may be other factors such as changes to the land being required to accommodate structures within flood plains, drainage changes, etc.  The regulations that must be addressed could make clearing and re-grading the land the best approach.

[PGHFiend 140]

Change is hard to take, but I'm sure they will put in some trees from the tree farm that will look the part and not be damaged during the work. Don't forget all of Disney is man made, and for whatever reason we all like it so much, we feel we have some say in the operation, which we never will. 

Now, if they started clearing trees for sone more sites, we'd all be on board.

 

[GaDawgFan.....Kelly 799]

Wow. Those pictures are shocking. 

[LONE-STAR 370]

1 hour ago, PGHFiend said:

Change is hard to take, but I'm sure they will put in some trees from the tree farm that will look the part and not be damaged during the work. Don't forget all of Disney is man made, and for whatever reason we all like it so much, we feel we have some say in the operation, which we never will. 

Now, if they started clearing trees for sone more sites, we'd all be on board.

 

I wish they would start clearing cabins for more sites. I tried to get a spring break reservation. No sites at any level but they have plenty of cabins.

[Hammer bird 6]

I'm hoping that Disney saw the error they made with the Poly bungalows.  But I do think Disney has realized (finally) that not every family has 4 people and the need for suits and bigger rooms in general.  The Poly studios had sleeping room for 5 and a bath and a half.  I'd have to think that they are planning to add higher occupancy rooms along that line.