Treehouse Villas part of Saratoga Springs?...Maybe!

[NMW]

We stayed in the tree houses around '89 or '90. Wouldn't do it again. We found the layout to be awkward. There is a bedroom on the lower level which was accessed via a narrow winding iron staircase. All other room were on the upper level. The deck, which is off the upper level was very dirty because of all the vegetation. The area was very dark at night.

The worse part was our van (parked in the driveway directly in front of the treehouse) was broken into during the night. Disney security came but we actually had to call the local police ourselves. Disney wanted to keep it quite. I didn't feel safe. On subsequent trips we noticed that there was a guard gate, so maybe things got better.

We've been DVC member since "92 and I know I would never want to stay in the treehouses. In my opinion it would take a major overhaul to become popular.

I agree, it would take a lot to make them popular. They look terrible-like something from the 1970's.

 

[mark&sue]

I have always looked at then during our boat trips and thought it would be lovely to stay in them. But I did think they looked a bit secluded with regard to security and after reading Lizanne's post about the van being broken into it would really worry me.

It does seem a shame though to just leave them getting more and delapidated.

I wonder if Disney will do something with them in the foreseeable future and not to just leave them for as long as they have already?



Susan

 

[Dsnyvryyear]

My family had stayed a few time in the Fairways with my Aunt and Uncle in the Treehouses circa 1978-81. They were really neat, however the first floor was damp all the time and since they were stand alone they seemed to be in need of maintenance. Much more than the Fairways.
I think they would be a maintenance nightmare to keep up to DVC standards. They are pretty far apart and in the woods (no big machines). I'd have a hard time believing they could make them work unless they were 4 BR and a lot of $$.
Would definetly be worth the price of the GV but I doubt they could make it work.

JMO

 

[tomerin]

when i first saw the Tree house villas this past july i too thought how great it would be to stay there. expceially if it was part of SSR or DVC. but after reading how expensive it would cost for maintenance i am not so interested any more.

 

[Cobra B.]

Would that mean no pool? That would be one heck of a walk to High Rock Springs!

Maybe each Treehouse would come with its own golf cart???

 

[Pluto4Pres]

How many treehouses are there? I'd bet that they would be very popular if offered It would be a chance to do something completely different. Kind of like the beach cottages at VB. If it became part of SSR, you would probably need the 11mo. booking window to get one.

 

[DVCME]

We must have been among the last people to stay in a Treehouse. We were there in early November 2001. I liked the isolation. Hope they come back in some form.

 

[Sox_Fan]

I have always looked at then during our boat trips and thought it would be lovely to stay in them. But I did think they looked a bit secluded with regard to security and after reading Lizanne's post about the van being broken into it would really worry me.

It does seem a shame though to just leave them getting more and delapidated.

I wonder if Disney will do something with them in the foreseeable future and not to just leave them for as long as they have already?

We returned from at trip to Port Orleans Riverside two weeks ago. Our boat captain said that there are plans to use them to house college students on Disney internship programs. Don't know how true this is, but can see these as excellent accomodations for students - lucky kids!

 

[bicker]

Tearing them down makes little sense. As long as they can be maintained in some semblance of repair there is a chance of using the grandfathering to advantage at some point in the future. The law may change; the business environment may change; even evolving technology could pave the way to a constructive use of the property that could be obstructed by cavalierly tearing them down now.

I don't see DVC venturing into these perilous waters given the current regulatory restrictions, at least not as long as there are viable alternatives for expansion. The specific piece of land is not so perfectly situation that it could command such a premium, either in terms of DVC purchase price (translated into a substantially greater number of DVC points-per-night for those specific units) or in terms of regular rental rates.

 

[RoyalCanadian]

The Treehouse Villa property has already been declared into the Saratoga Springs Resort property -- the survey was done long ago and I posted a link to the survey map included in the material we received when we did our 30 point add-on in Spring 2005.

At that point there was discussion on these boards as to whether that declaration into the SSR property was for maintenance issues or representative of future Disney Vacation Club plans.

 

[NJOYURLIFE]

My husband stayed in them with his family when he was a child and his whole family hated the layout. I really can't see them commanding a premium price. Plus if they will be a maintenance fee nightmare, who needs that?

I'd hate to see them incorporated into SSR.

 

[CharlesTD]

Our family would love to use them even if they weren't owned by DVC and were just a regular resort we would trade out for them hell we are trading out for the cabins the treehouses would be even better.

 

[NJBlackBerry]

Out family stayed at the Treehouse Villas several years ago. We wanted to do something different. And it was. It was very quiet and isolated, but the treehouses - year ago - needed a lot of work then. We would never have stayed there again. Certainly not at a premium price.

 

[jiggerj]

Awww.... I am sad to see so many unhappy thoughts on the treehouses. Maybe (probably) I am just a sentimental sap but my family really enjoyed the treehouses. We enjoyed the privacy, the peacocks and armadillos around the treehouses. We liked the layout (especially sticking DML in the bottom floor ) Watching and waving to people that were on the boats in the canal from the kitchen. We had no issues with the bus system at all and enjoyed the pool and hot tub. the only problem that we had and that was our own fault is that you could walk to DTD and we "thought" we knew what we were doing and got lost on the golf course! We past by them last month and we were sad to see how they are now. I hope Disney can come up with something for them.

 

[Shelby5514]

We went by them this past Jan. and thought they looked a bit creepy!

​

 

[SyrCinderella]

We saw them years ago from the ferry from POR to Downtown Disney, and they looked really neat, a totally different experience. They did look a bit run down but if they were made a part of SSR, Im sure they would be brought up to Disney standards first. As for the theming, back in the period that SSR represents ppl built octagon houses, we live down the street from one in Upstate New York. Personally, I am all for adding them into the SSR family. Lets face it, all the maintenance fees are going to rise as the units age, we might as well get used to the idea. No different than planning to replace items like a roof on a traditional vacation home.

 

[DrTomorrow]

We saw them years ago from the ferry from POR to Downtown Disney, and they looked really neat, a totally different experience. They did look a bit run down but if they were made a part of SSR, Im sure they would be brought up to Disney standards first. As for the theming, back in the period that SSR represents ppl built octagon houses, we live down the street from one in Upstate New York. Personally, I am all for adding them into the SSR family. Lets face it, all the maintenance fees are going to rise as the units age, we might as well get used to the idea. No different than planning to replace items like a roof on a traditional vacation home.

Yes, MF may increase as the units age; that's still no justification for acquiring assets that are known to be extra-costly to maintain. Yes, SSR has grass, but not grass that costs 3 times as much to maintain as the grass everywhere else....

 

[buzz5985]

We loved the treehouses. At the time we stayed in them, if I remember correctly, the price was about $125 more a night than the Poly. My DH hates my memory. LOL The layout wasn't that bad, just wasn't square. You walked up a set of stairs, the deck went off to your left and wrapped half way around the building. When you entered the treehouse you were in the sitting area of the kitchen, over the other side of the room was the living room. In the middle was a staircase down to the lower bedroom, along with a washer and dryer. On the right, after the kitchen table, was a hallway down to one bedroom, with a bathroom accross the hall. Down the end of the hallway was the other bedroom with a private bathroom. We used golf carts to get around, plugged them right into the treehouse. There were several pools. When you think of it - the treehouses were the only place on property that you could get a kitchen and laundry.

I don't think they are ugly, just not part of that "cookie cutter McMansion" look that people find so attractive. I think Disney could make it work. I would definitely stay there again.

 

[bicker]

I think the preference for "cookie-cutter McMansions" come from the fact that that particular class of building is designed to be far less costly to maintain, and therefore for the same budget, you'll get a cleaner, more operational hotel room than you would have gotten in an older, less optimally-engineered building.

 

[NMW]

For the life of me I can't understand why people find these buildings attractive. I think the poster who said they look spooky is right. LOL.