A New Orlando Perspective

[NativeCracker Member Find all posts View Profile Close NativeCracker]

I heard the original owner of the Bonnet Creek land got wind of Disney buying up land in Orlando and wanted more money for it than what Disney would pay. Wouldn't you have loved to own that land? Really, if you think about it, Bonnet Creek is probably as close to permanently owning something that close to Disney grounds as anybody could ever get. We own DVC and it's just a lease.

The same Bonnet Creek manager who told us the monorail story also said that the man (now deceased) who originally owned the Bonnet Creek property hated Disney and refused to sell to them at any price. He supposedly even forbade his heirs from selling to them. Again, only repeating what I was told.

Cindy

[bnoble Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close bnoble]

It might not be true, but *that* is a good story!

[gjw007 Member Find all posts View Profile Close gjw007]

I heard that Disney wasn't too happy about having to grant road access for Bonnet Creek and Disney did NOT have to grant utility access. So the developers had to drill under the interstate to bring utilities to the Bonnet Creek site.

I would find that a little unusual since these are public laws that require utility access. Of course, Disney doesn't have to grant its private utilities but public utilities is another issue. Here is an interesting URL, http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache...s&ct=clnk&cd=1.

It would appear from some articles that some of the public service of the development district is actually using Disney functions rather than a separate public entity but it still has a public function to perform. I'm not an attorney but I would be curious if there are any attorneys to see what their opinion on this would be. I would be curious to know the logic for denying access to public utilities.