Originally Posted By AutoPost This topic is for Discussion of: <a href="http://www.laughingplace.com/w/news/2014/11/10/orlando-sentinel-disney-purchases-conservation-area-with-hopes-to-further-develop-wdw-in-return/" target="_blank"><b>11/10/14: Orlando Sentinel: Disney Purchases Conservation Area With Hopes To Further Develop WDW I</b></a>
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt Anyone else think they should start by tearing down some of the crappy development in and adjacent to WDW rather than destroying parts of a wildlife preserve?
Originally Posted By FerretAfros Just because an area is designated as wetlands doesn't mean that it's a wildlife preserve; that designation typically refers to the soil classification and its suitability for development and drainage purposes It's been rumored that this is being done to offset development at the Studios, which is surrounded by roads on 3 sides (Osceola Pkwy, World Dr, Buena Vista Dr) and wetlands on the 4th. If they have any intention of ever expanding that park's footprint, they will need to encroach on the wetlands between the parking lots/access roads and Victory Way
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Curious about the crappy development in WDW. Not saying it isn't there, just don't know what it would be. Plenty of crappy development down on 192.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Curious about the crappy development in WDW." I was being frivolous, but there are some developments at WDW that have left me scratching my head. I'm mostly thinking about the Lake Buena Vista hotel plaza area and the cookie-cutter Crossroads strip mall located on the edge of WDW property. There's also a few cringe worthy Eisner era post modern monstrosities like this: <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://www.greatbuildings.com/gbc/images/cid_20060103_kmm_img_0119.jpg">http://www.greatbuildings.com/...0119.jpg</a> And this: <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://www.mattwargo.com/data/photos/74_1r14.jpg">http://www.mattwargo.com/data/...1r14.jpg</a>
Originally Posted By FerretAfros The McDonalds was redone about 5 years ago, and looks pretty nice now. It was one of the first locations to get the renovations that have occurred throughout the country recently, giving them a more sleek and modern appearance <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://img.groundspeak.com/waymarking/log/8c5a59c0-52a6-4aaf-8919-a09a7999f1a5.JPG">http://img.groundspeak.com/way...f1a5.JPG</a> And just because the postmodern look has fallen out of vogue doesn't mean that TDO (or the equally divisive Swan and Dolphin) isn't good design or architecturally significant. Compared to most of what Disney builds ("decorated sheds" to borrow a term from Leaning From Las Vegas) those structures are actually very well done and serve their purpose well. Ironically, that photo you found of TDO is from a website called GreatBuildings.com : )
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "The McDonalds was redone about 5 years ago, and looks pretty nice now. It was one of the first locations to get the renovations that have occurred throughout the country recently, giving them a more sleek and modern appearance" Well that's an improvement. "And just because the postmodern look has fallen out of vogue doesn't mean that TDO (or the equally divisive Swan and Dolphin) isn't good design or architecturally significant." I think the Team Disney building in Glendale is a good example of when post modern architecture is successful. There's also Robert Stern's GAP headquarters here in SF: https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3611/3289105802_464a3067fe.jpg I like it. Disney is an entertainment company, so I applaud Eisner for establishing a culture of engaging well known architects to design fanciful buildings outside of the parks. While it's true that I'm not a fan of post modern architecture, ugly is ugly and the TDO building has it in spades.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt Here: <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://tinyurl.com/pwfkdxh">http://tinyurl.com/pwfkdxh</a>
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I don't know which specific building is being referred to, but nothing shown there looks like much to me. You could see the same in any photo of an American city in 1965. Of course, then I think THIS is a beautiful building: <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://www.greatbuildings.com/cgi-bin/gbi.cgi/Weisman_Art_Museum.html/cid_aj3294_b.html">http://www.greatbuildings.com/...4_b.html</a>
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt It's a nice building, but if you know anything about the architect (who also designed the Disney Concert Hall in LA) you also know that he's a one trick pony.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "I don't know which specific building is being referred to, but nothing shown there looks like much to me. You could see the same in any photo of an American city in 1965." That kind of sums up a basic principle of post modernism. It borrows elements from the past, blends them with modern materials and building techniques to create a "building mashup" of sorts. Michael Graves was/is considered the master and Eisner was big fan apparently. His Team Disney Burbank building is a good example of the style: www.wttw.com/img/graves/slideshow/sw-10.jpg
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://tinyurl.com/o7dgvjc">http://tinyurl.com/o7dgvjc</a>
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Yes, although he has done different things in the past, Gehry is definitely stuck in that place for now. The museum in Bilbao, Spain looks the same way.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn Google ParkRoyal hotel in Singapore. Been there. Talk about awesome. Everything in Singapore is awesome.
