Wetland Use Expansion Permit

[danlb_2000]

Interesting permit was just filed with the South Florida Water Management District. The permit if modifying the RCID mater plan to allow for an additional 350 acres of wetland impacts on top of the 599.94 acres already allowed for in the plan. To offset this they have added a number of small parcels of land (which Disney already owened) at the edges of the property to the RCID Master Plan area. They will also be purchasing a 3,004 acre parcel called "Mira Lago" which is in southern Osceola/northern Polk counties to help offset the wetland use. Note that the permit does not say where the new 350 acres of wetland impact will be, but says these changes will provide them the freedom to determine this as needed.

http://www.sfwmd.gov/ePermitting/DetailedReport.do?applicationNo=140801-15

 

[danlb_2000]

Here is a map of the new parcels being included in the RCID Master Plant. This does not show the Mira Lago parcel.

 

[WDWLover#1]

Call me dumb but I'm not that sure what it means as a whole.

EDIT- so they're buying more land?

 

[sshindel]

Interesting permit was just filed with the South Florida Water Management District. The permit if modifying the RCID mater plan to allow for an additional 350 acres of wetland impacts on top of the 599.94 acres already allowed for in the plan. To offset this they have added a number of small parcels of land (which Disney already owened) at the edges of the property to the RCID Master Plan area. They will also be purchasing a 3,004 acre parcel called "Mira Lago" which is in southern Osceola/northern Polk counties to help offset the wetland use. Note that the permit does not say where the new 350 acres of wetland impact will be, but says these changes will provide them the freedom to determine this as needed.

http://www.sfwmd.gov/ePermitting/DetailedReport.do?applicationNo=140801-15

As a layman, does this mean that they could effectively add 350 more acres of development and use the new areas to offset the wetland impact?

Not saying they will develop that much space, but that they in theory could?

 

[tl77]

Isn't the largest parcel, #4, out were Flamingo Crossing was going to be?

 

[danlb_2000]

As a layman, does this mean that they could effectively add 350 more acres of development and use the new areas to offset the wetland impact?

Not saying they will develop that much space, but that they in theory could?

Basically, yes....

The way I read it is when the master plan was first drawn up they made provisions so that they could develop 599 acres of wetlands. This modifications will allow them to do develop on up to another 350 acres of wetlands, and the other changes will offset this use. Remember this is only talking about wetlands, there is other land that is not considered wetlands that can already be developed.

 

[Master Yoda]

As a layman, does this mean that they could effectively add 350 more acres of development and use the new areas to offset the wetland impact?

Not saying they will develop that much space, but that they in theory could?

Yes. I am not sure how the current law is written, but there was a time where it was quite common for a company to buy a section of near worthless property in the middle of nowhere, have it designated as preserved wetlands so they could build on a section of property already designated as wetlands in a more favorable area.

I am pretty sure that this law was revised in such a manor that it required the new property to be adjacent to the old one, but I am not 100% sure on that.

 

[danlb_2000]

Isn't the largest parcel, #4, out were Flamingo Crossing was going to be?

Yes, parcel 4 is just beyond where Flamingo Crossing is. FC is between that parcel and highway 429.

 

[danlb_2000]

Yes. I am not sure how the current law is written, but there was a time where it was quite common for a company to buy a section of near worthless property in the middle of nowhere, have it designated as preserved wetlands so they could build on a section of property already designated as wetlands in a more favorable area.

I am pretty sure that this law was revised in such a manor that it required the new property to be adjacent to the old one, but I am not 100% sure on that.

The property they are buying is NOT adjacent to WDW. The red area is the Mira Lago parcel.

 

[NJBrandon]

Thanks for taking the ball and running with this. I saw it this morning and thought it might be interesting so I posted it. You will garner much more information from it than I will. Cheers!

 

[Master Yoda]

The property they are buying is NOT adjacent to WDW. The red area is the Mira Lago parcel.

View attachment 60858

Then that revision must not have happened or was at least amended.

 

[asianway]

Some of it may be to relocate north service infrastructure in advance of the Floridian Way entension

 

[jrlang1]

Will this pave the way for expansion around HS for Star Wars Lang?

 

[marni1971]

5th gate 5th gate!

I'll say it first.

 

[Bob]

5th gate 5th gate!

I'll say it first.

I think that it's all the land necessary for a monorail expansion.

 

[DocMcHulk]

5th gate 5th gate!

I'll say it first.

I think that it's all the land necessary for a monorail expansion.

A bus driver told me they are expanding the monorail to a 5th gate.

 

[wm49rs]

Yes, parcel 4 is just beyond where Flamingo Crossing is. FC is between that parcel and highway 429.

The rumored third-party hotels at Flamingo Crossing?

 

[ABQ]

5th gate 5th gate!

I'll say it first.

lol. Then I'll say this first.... CASH GRAB!

 

[Clamman73]

Is something going to be mentioned at tomorrow's third quarter report???

 

[Monorail_Orange]

5th gate 5th gate!

I'll say it first.

jt will be supremely disappointed that you beat him to the punch.