Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1

    • MiceAge Columnist
    • Curator of Yesterland
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    971

    January 21, 2011: The Model Villa at Aulani

    Last week, I took you on a January 2011 tour of the construction site for Aulani, a Disney Resort & Spa at Ko Olina, Hawaii.

    I know, I know. Yesterland is supposed to be about things that are gone, not things that are being built. Fair enough.

    Today, we’ll spend most of the article touring a place that’s almost gone. The temporary building that houses the Aulani model villa on the grounds of the resort is scheduled to be demolished in February 2011.


    Please discuss it here.
    Werner Weiss
    Curator of Yesterland, featuring discontinued Disneyland attractions

  2. #2

    • MC Blogger
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,035
    Blog Entries
    52

    Re: January 21, 2011: The Model Villa at Aulani

    Looking forward to returning to Ko Olina one day, but a visit to Disney would be a nice addition if just to see the place!
    Mark

    Disney parks and art, movies, music, more... Over 1, 000 Posts!
    www.InsightsandSounds.blogspot.com

  3. #3

    • New Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2

    Re: January 21, 2011: The Model Villa at Aulani

    While I find the cruise ship laws ridiculously outdated, couldn't Disney have a cruise that left from Los Angeles, make a quick stop in Mexico before going to Hawaii -or even a ship leaving out of Vancouver to Hawaii, and still be compliant with these silly rules?

  4. #4

    • MiceAge Columnist
    • Curator of Yesterland
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    971

    Re: January 21, 2011: The Model Villa at Aulani

    Quote Originally Posted by funtobfree View Post
    While I find the cruise ship laws ridiculously outdated, couldn't Disney have a cruise that left from Los Angeles, make a quick stop in Mexico before going to Hawaii -or even a ship leaving out of Vancouver to Hawaii, and still be compliant with these silly rules?
    The cruise lines operating large ships out of U.S. ports, including DCL, have all made the business decision to operate foreign-built ships with foreign registration, foreign officers, foreign crews -- and the substantial cost savings that go along with this, including avoiding U.S. labor laws. (There's one exception, a single U.S.-flagged NCL ship based in Honolulu.)

    The PVSA is an old law (1886), but it seems reasonable to have U.S. laws for U.S. maritime operations by foreign ships. The PVSA still allows all sorts of itineraries out of U.S. ports with foreign passenger ships, but the PVSA requires foreign passenger ships to include a foreign port for closed-loop itineraries or a DISTANT (not in North America) foreign port for one-way cruises between two U.S. ports.

    If you have a hotel company and you want to open a hotel in New York, you can't build it with European construction workers working under European labor laws and then operate it with an international crew without green cards, working six months without a day off, and without being paid U.S. wages. (Okay, I know this analogy is flawed, but the basic idea is that you have to follow the laws of the country in which you do business.)

    A ship out of Los Angeles that makes a stop in Mexico needs to be a closed-loop cruise that begins and ends in Los Angeles. If it were to end in Hawaii, the itinerary would have to include a DISTANT foreign port, such as a port in South America or the South Pacific.

    Yes, Disney could offer one-way cruises between Vancouver and Hawaii. It's not an itinerary that's regularly offered by cruise lines, even though it's legal. Vancouver does not offer a huge population base, so such an itinerary would require passengers to travel to Vancouver first, primarily from U.S. cities. Also, it would probably add another day at sea compared to the already long cruise time from Los Angeles.
    Werner Weiss
    Curator of Yesterland, featuring discontinued Disneyland attractions

  5. #5

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,497

    Re: January 21, 2011: The Model Villa at Aulani

    The rooms look a bit tight. The sofa looks uncomfortable. That kids bed in the cabinet seems too small for anyone over 5 years old or 5 feet tall. Not sure any kid would try it.

    The kitchen is not impressive. The bathrooms seem slightly better.

    Oh well, I hope to see the landscaping and pool when they are done.

  6. #6

    • MiceAge Columnist
    • Curator of Yesterland
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    971

    Re: January 21, 2011: The Model Villa at Aulani

    Quote Originally Posted by StevenW View Post
    The rooms look a bit tight. The sofa looks uncomfortable. That kids bed in the cabinet seems too small for anyone over 5 years old or 5 feet tall. Not sure any kid would try it.

    The kitchen is not impressive. The bathrooms seem slightly better.

    Oh well, I hope to see the landscaping and pool when they are done.
    I agree that the photos can come across that way.

    In my opinion, the model makes a much better impression if you're actually there. The rooms are compact, but the space is used well.

    The living room has a queen-size sleeper sofa in addition to the hidden "pull-down bunk size bed" in the HD television cabinet. When the DVC Guide showed pull-down bed, I thought it was the normal-sized single bed. But given that Disney call it "bunk size," it's possibly narrower. I agree that it looks tiny in the photo, but it didn't look that tiny in person.

    The kitchen, especially, comes across as much nicer and "high end" than a typical timeshare (including DVC) kitchen.
    Werner Weiss
    Curator of Yesterland, featuring discontinued Disneyland attractions

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •