Originally Posted By dagobert I loved the Las Vegas hotels, especially the Bellagio. Until I have been to the US, I have never seen such hotels in Europe. I even liked the Pop Century at WDW, although it's badly themed, but the whole experience was so much better than at the Sequoia Lodge at DLRP, and that's a better category.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros That's kind of funny, while I've never visited either in person(I have driven past Pop), I would much prefer to stay at the Sequoia Lodge than Pop Century. In addition to executing the theme in a much more subtle way, I just prefer the theme itself at Sequoia over Pop. I guess that's why they have so many different hotels with different themes: there's something for everybody!
Originally Posted By dagobert The Sequoia Lodge in Paris is better themed and has a nicer overall theming. However the quality of service and of the rooms has also to be taken into account. The rooms at the Pop Century were nicer and in better shape. We have been to the SL before the refurb started. Now the new rooms look a lot nicer. We chose the Pop Century, because after spending a semester in the US and visiting NY, Las Vegas and several other cities, money was a bit tight and so we could afford to stay at WDW for 13 days.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn <<In what way? My all accounts City Center is a bust - it almost brought down the whole of MGM Mirage. The complex is an ugly mismatch of glass buildings with limited masterplanning. One building - Harmon Tower - is going to be razed to the ground due to poor construction. City Center isn't a planned community - there is little on-site for residents - not even a supermarket. If you want to spend all of your time in a Fendi store then it is for you. The Palm Jumeirah is an even bigger disaster. Condos/villas unsold, poor transportation links and it is sinking into the gulf. It is a perfect example of poor masterplanning. Thankfully the other two Palms have been put on permanent hold - even though a lot of land reclamation has already happened.>> Never said they were perfectly designed or perfectly executed. Just manifestations of Walt's dream, good/bad/ugly.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom <<You can consider some of Hong Kong a planned community, especially in the new territory areas where they just build new complexes and connect them up with the subway.>> In many ways it is easier to create planned communities in Hong Kong. Afterall, Hong Kong is 400 stand alone islands ( with the exception of the New Territory area ). Look at the island of Macau. It is practically a stand alone country, who's citizens enjoy dual citizenship in China and Portugal. I don't think the UK ever granted dual citizenship to the Hong Kong citizens despite the UK having legal claim over Hong Kong for 100 years.
Originally Posted By DlandDug The Bellagio is not really typical of the Las Vegas themed hotels. (Unless the theme is "vaguely beaux arts with a great eye for detail.") It's places like New York, New York, Paris, the Venetian or the newer parts of Caesar's Palace that are so egregious. I am astonished that no one has yet "done" Spain. The Plaza Mayor in Madrid would make a great food court, know what I mean?
Originally Posted By SuperDry << I hope SuperDry chimes in - he visited some recently including the unintentionally hysterical Thames Town. >> Yes, in fact I did! It's on the far outskirts of the Shanghai municipality. There's all sorts of things going on in Shanghai these days, and when you take into account the size of the metro area, it's really quite amazing. Thames Town is one of what must be in the high hundreds or even low thousands of "master-planned communities" that are under construction or have been completed within the past 10 years in greater Shanghai. Thames Town is somewhat unique in that is one of a handful of such communities where the theming was just not "-esque" of a certain genre, such as a "Tuscany-esque" community with Italian touches, but one that was designed to be more of a replica community. That is, when you are there, the intention is that you feel that you're actually in a small town along the banks of the River Thames. There is the "town center" area with cobblestone streets, and "Ye Olde English Village" storefronts. This is completely surrounded by rings of residential areas, with condos and single-family homes. There's even a cathedral-style church. As a "master-planned community," it's designed very much like Celebration: it's supposed to be like a small town, with a self-sustaining set of local businesses. That is, you're supposed to be able to do all of your daily shopping, get your hair done, go to the bank, have a selection of restaurants, a couple of local pubs, and have kindergarten and elementary schools all within walking distance of your home. There's a hotel, and modern "community center" function space as well. Although having nothing to do with Disney, this place was "imagineered" to the hilt. There's no one single element that's "over the top" (although the private security guards that are dressed just shy of the Beefeaters at the Tower of London are close). If the place "worked," it wouldn't be all that bad, although the daily juxtaposition between life at home and at work for those that commuted would be dramatic: imagine spending your nights/weekends in an English village, and your working hours in urban China. Somewhat ironically, the high-profile nature of the heavy-handed design and theming lead to its downfall. It was completed in 2006, just a couple of years before the global economic problems started. Selling the housing units was not a problem: in fact, most of them were bought by speculators instead of intended residents. But that's what lead to its downfall: when most of the residential units were sold but few people moved in, the core of the new town collapsed economically. Houses sitting vacant on speculation, or second homes that are occupied only on vacation, don't send people to the local shops and restaurants on a daily basis. Most of the people that made a "sure thing" investment by opening independent businesses in the core soon went out of business. And now that the core is mostly a ghost town, the value of the residential units has collapsed. Instead of having all of your daily needs readily available within walking distance, it's reduced to just another residential-only subdivision where you must get in your car to go anywhere. So now they have a chicken-and-egg problem as to getting back any of the extra value of the community that early investors paid for. Visiting a couple of months ago, I don't know quite what to make of Thames Town. It was a very ambitious project, but it unfortunately suffered as much from its own initial success (that is, with primarily speculative purchases) as it did from the global economic situation. These days, it's hard to describe. It certainly has become somewhat of a tourist attraction, with many obvious day visitors (although from what I gather, not too many of the Caucasian variety, as people looked at me as if I had two heads when I was walking about). It's not quite a ghost town, as there are people living there and there are a small number of local shops, restaurants, and pubs with their doors still open and struggling to get by. It felt almost like I was on a movie set, or perhaps a "studio theme park" recreation of a movie set (after closing time), of an English Towne. And, it's exactly for this reason that an accidental industry has sprung up as perhaps the only vibrant one on site: wedding photography. On the day I visited, there were dozens of couples-to-be, dressed in their wedding clothing, in various parts of the town with a full photography crew in tow to take pictures. I understand that this happens daily. Between the cobblestone streets, English storefronts, and the Cathedral church, there is an excellent backdrop for such activity. And, many of the formerly-abandoned storefronts have had their original resident-focused business replaced with wedding services of various types. Overall, it made for a fascinating visit. Just seeing the spectacle for what it was was interesting, and considering the issues of economics, master planned communities, and what has been done elsewhere as far as "themed development" made it all the more interesting.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***There's even a cathedral-style church*** Decorative or functional? That certainly seems like it would be unnecessary in a place like Shanghai. What a story - I gotta see this place someday!
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA Wow -- the Thames project is fascinating.-- it's for all those guests who walk through EPCOTs World Showcase countries, and quip "I'd like to live here!'
Originally Posted By fkurucz "That certainly seems like it would be unnecessary in a place like Shanghai." Maybe it's part of the wedding industry. I've read about old churches in England being dismantled and shipped to China, where "themed" weddings are held, including a dude dressed up like an Anglican priest, performing the ceremony.
Originally Posted By CDF2 "But that's what lead to its downfall: when most of the residential units were sold but few people moved in, the core of the new town collapsed economically. Houses sitting vacant on speculation, or second homes that are occupied only on vacation, don't send people to the local shops and restaurants on a daily basis. Most of the people that made a "sure thing" investment by opening independent businesses in the core soon went out of business. And now that the core is mostly a ghost town, the value of the residential units has collapsed. Instead of having all of your daily needs readily available within walking distance, it's reduced to just another residential-only subdivision where you must get in your car to go anywhere. So now they have a chicken-and-egg problem as to getting back any of the extra value of the community that early investors paid for." The best-laid plans by architects, developers and planners are often times undone by human nature and in some cases, human greed. Core businesses have to be good to survive - you can't just open up a mediocre (or overpriced) corner diner and expect to make money if the locals can drive 10 minutes away to find a better place to eat - you can't support a "town core" if most of the dwellings in the town are bought by speculators or as second homes. Places like Irvine, Ca or Reston, VA work because the residents are permanent folks who work in the area and enjoy the benefits of the planned mixed of local services and park areas. The surrounding areas of both of those citys have both white and blue collar industries that can support a permanent population. EPCOT as a theme park seems fine to me - I agree with those that feel that its too bad that the World Showcase is hemmed in now by surrounding development as pavilions for other countries would be nice but for now the area that probably needs updating in the Futureworld area as there is one empty pavilion and the communicore areas need a bit more "meat" than just more gift shops and eating places.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost By one pavilion empty I'm assuming that you are talking about Wonders of Life. Please don't overlook Imagination and how awful it is. It might just as well be closed and probably will be before too long unless they can somehow manage to Imagine something that could go in there. I wouldn't count on it though.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn I have a plan to bring EPCOT back to its roots, keep it a theme park, keep it relevant, keep it engaging, keep it growing, keep it profitable, and keep it sustaining for 50 more years... but Disney would have to hire me.
Originally Posted By SuperDry << As has been alluded to in this conversation, "Master Planned Community" can be understood in different ways, depending on the context. EPCOT was really an expression of the "New Town" movement, which did result in a few successful examples, as well as a lot of developments that never got off the ground. >> Absolutely. I can think of at least 3 levels at which you could use the term "master-planned community": 1. What in the US might be called a "large subdivision." That is, the plan is created by what might be a single developer that wants to develop a tract of homes, and might throw in neighborhood parks, an elementary school, and perhaps a limited amount of retail to serve the residents. 2. A plan that a small municipality might enact, which covers all aspects of that city's development, focusing on zoning issues, but constrained by whatever the neighboring jurisdictions decide to do. 3. A plan that encompasses a metro area, including everything that such an area would need. This would include things like freeway layout, airports, heavy industrial, etc. << Two viable "New Towns" that spring to mind are Reston, Virginia and Irvine, California. >> I don't know anything about Reston, but I suspect that Irvine would fall somewhere in between 2 and 3 above. It's a big enough city in of itself for its master plan to have wide effect, but it's still just a cog in the contiguous wheel of Orange County. I think that EPCOT strived to be more of a "3". That is, the plan might result in a city perhaps the size of Irvine, but existing in stand-alone form so it wasn't just one freeway stop away from unplanned sprawl or the next master plan with a totally different concept. Certainly, the notion of EPCOT where most residents could use public transport for daily use isn't realized in Irvine. But Irvine exists in the existing car culture of California, and is not stand-alone, so I don't fault it for that. But EPCOT tried to address it all. What comes to mind when I hear the term "New Town" is Hong Kong. There, they have a pretty comprehensive way of developing them. It certainly helps that for the most part, people live in high-rise apartments/condominiums. When they are developed, they are complete with schools, neighborhood and regional retail, and the town center is built up around the new subway station, which is connected into the existing subway network. This allows New Towns from Day 1 to have the density to allow most residents to not need a car for daily use. Even though many might have a car, they're not needed to get to most of the needs in daily life, which are within walking distance, or perhaps a subway station or two away, nor to commute into the central business district where a professional job might be. The Hong Kong "New Towns" aren't quite as developed as the original EPCOT plan, as they don't usually include office space other than what's needed locally, nor heavy industry, nor in most cases even light industry. They are more or less bedroom communities, but designed such that they don't sprawl and that you can get a quart of milk without having to drive a mile in your car. Unlike what I think the plan for EPCOT was, HK New Towns operate in conjunction with the greater metro area, and relies on it for a central business district and factory areas.
Originally Posted By ExpDave One thing that many may not know about EPCOT that separates the the plan from any other community that's been discussed here and also made it so that it would NOT have been an answer to the urban problems that Walt hoped that it would be, but instead made it more of a company town of old or perhaps like a military base, is that everyone living there would have worked for Disney. I got the following quote from the bottom of this page https://sites.google.com/site/theoriginalepcot/the-florida-project on a great site about Walt's EPCOT. "As stated above, no one living in EPCOT would own their own land or home, thereby having no municipal voting rights (bond issues, etc.). Walt Disney wanted to exercise this control only to be able to change technology in the homes easily. According to the film, everyone living in EPCOT would be employed, thereby preventing the formation of slums and ghettos. There would be no retirees, everyone would have had a job. Residents would have been employed at either the Magic Kingdom theme park, the city central core shopping areas, the hotel/convention center, the airport, the Welcome Center, or the industrial park. And, as the film states, "everyone living in EPCOT will have the responsibility to maintain this living blueprint of the future". I think it could have worked as a company town and been a great showcase for a vision of the future. But because of the controls he wanted to have it would not have worked outside that context, at least not in a democracy. I still like a lot of the main ideas though and think it's a loss that it was never built as planned. Although I think many Disney cast members already think Disney has too much control over their lives, and that would have been much more so!
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost ^^^I have never been able to express my thoughts on EPCOT with any degree of finesse. You have done so, thanks!
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>But Irvine exists in the existing car culture of California, and is not stand-alone...<< Not true. Irvine was conceived and carried out as a complete, stand-alone community. It exists within the framework of southern Orange County, but it is not simply a string of unrelated housing tracts and shopping centers. Irvine was master planned in the mid-1960s. A major component was the establishment of University of California Irvine, on a large tract of land donated to the UC system. Irvine has small scale manufacturing and office parks, as well as retail centers. Residential areas have been developed in a series of "villages," each complete with schools, shopping, parks, and recreational areas. Because mid-20th-century town planners were opposed to traditional "downtowns," Irvine does not have a centralized city core, although the development of the Spectrum in the last few years has given it something of a "town square" feeling.
Originally Posted By DlandDug Oh! Nearly forgot the Disney connection. (There's always a Disney connection!) WIlliam Pereira, the master planner of Irvine, had a long and prolific career (starting in 1931 and lasting over 50 years). Among his many commissions was... the Disneyland Hotel. (He also designed the Howard Johnson across Harbor Boulevard.)
