-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Major DTD update
- Thread starter Tim_4
- Start date
No residential in this area. All commercial -- hence the parking garage. If you're coming here, you aren't walking unless you are staying in one of the 8 hotels in the area. But otherwise, I agree. Nothing revolutionary, but they spent a lot of money and it came out very nice.
sgtmgd
Well-Known Member
I'm curious to where you got that information..seems odd that Disney would pay anything for I4 maintenance...it benefits Orlando far more than Disney....in fact part of the concessions Florida made to Walt Disney was infrastructure...
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com..._interchange-reedy-creek-animal-kingdom-theme This indicates that back when what is now Exit 62 (I think), the southern exit to World Drive, was constructed, Reedy Creek paid for the work, but that the state handles maintenance.
You won't find it. It's real. No, I do not have a link to a website. There might be a contract filed in some public record somewhere but nothing I'd know how to find.
There's a lot you can do in small space. I-4 in the Disney area is WIDE OPEN compared to big (or even small) cities. They could probably even use existing ramps and, rather than a new exit number, make a 67 "A" and "B" or something along those lines.
People always exclude Disney when they refer to Florida taxpayers. Disney is THE biggest taxpayer in the State. Just like individuals pay their portion of taxes for their usage of the roads and bridges, Disney's monstrous tax bill pays for a proportionally large percentage of the usage for which they're directly responsible. Another major taxpayer in Florida is the Floridian tourist. Disney and their guests more than make up for any financial burden on the State in the form of tons and tons of property, tourism, and sales taxes. Not to mention the jobs they provide.
luv
Well-Known Member
I believe that Disney is the reason that there aren't tolls on I-4 yet. Everything else has tolls. I don't know how the deal was worked out, but it only makes sense that they're the reason for it.
I'd much prefer tolls on I-4 than, say, the Florida Hwy. But that's me and the whole city doesn't revolve around me, of course.
It sure would be nice to just get on the highway and drive without having to pay for it. I'd vote for anyone who took the tolls away.
I'd much prefer tolls on I-4 than, say, the Florida Hwy. But that's me and the whole city doesn't revolve around me, of course.
It sure would be nice to just get on the highway and drive without having to pay for it. I'd vote for anyone who took the tolls away.
Mouse Detective
Well-Known Member
A few years ago a federal transportation bill had a clause put into it that prohibited tolls on I-4. That has now been removed and several toll lanes will be added to the road but these will be up north in Seminole County and into Orange County to downtown Orlando. Not sure how far south these tolled lanes will be built, but not as far as Disney. The toll rates will vary based on how heavy the traffic is and SunPass/E-PASS transponders will be required on the tolled section. Non-tolled lanes on I-4 will continue to exist too.
Unfortunately, I-4 is the only free expressway in the Orlando area. All other expressways were built by the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority or the Florida Turnpike Authority as toll roads and will remain toll roads.
Rasvar
Well-Known Member
Any agreement for I-4 would have likely been done through Reedy Creek (RCID) and not Disney directly. Probably through issuing bonds.
As far as a ramp to a garage, I can only see one location it could be possible and that is the current cast lot behind the Hess Station. Any other ramp location will run into regulatory issues and also just make Buena Vista Blvd a bigger mess. However, I think a flyover to the backside behind Cirque would be possible too. But that would be more expensive. Sounds like a lot of capital outlay for a parking garage, though. I could only see it happening if a DTD expansion is going to use the existing parking. That would mean the garage and ramp would have to be in place before the expansion project occurs. A pedestrian walkway/moving ramp over BVB would alleviate the need for many of the congestion causing lights on BVB. Bus transit could then operate much more efficiently. Once the garage is in place, then big chunks of the parking lot can be turned over to expansion.
If that idea sounds familiar, it should. Think Mickey and Friends lot at DL freeing up the parking for DCA.
As far as a ramp to a garage, I can only see one location it could be possible and that is the current cast lot behind the Hess Station. Any other ramp location will run into regulatory issues and also just make Buena Vista Blvd a bigger mess. However, I think a flyover to the backside behind Cirque would be possible too. But that would be more expensive. Sounds like a lot of capital outlay for a parking garage, though. I could only see it happening if a DTD expansion is going to use the existing parking. That would mean the garage and ramp would have to be in place before the expansion project occurs. A pedestrian walkway/moving ramp over BVB would alleviate the need for many of the congestion causing lights on BVB. Bus transit could then operate much more efficiently. Once the garage is in place, then big chunks of the parking lot can be turned over to expansion.
If that idea sounds familiar, it should. Think Mickey and Friends lot at DL freeing up the parking for DCA.
xdan0920
Think for yourselfer
I'd say it does... for some perspective... adding ramps to a 6 lane road here in our county.. ranged from $18 million to $26 million based on different factors at each location. Something that is likely 10 million dollars plus.. I'd consider that major capital
And usually efforts like this are privately funded. Municipalities tie improvements desired by developers to proffer agreements to pay for the transportation improvements. Or if it's a move to lure a business in, a municipality may offer some money towards transportation improvements to offset the costs.. but generally this is all work funded by the developers. Just part of their cost of business to get development done.
Thanks for that data. I know little to nothing about projects like this.
However, how much is 18 million when it comes to the overall expenditures spent on roadways? Honest question, I don't know. It seems like it would be a very small percentage, and not likely to impact individual tax-payers very much. I could be wrong though.
EOD K9
Well-Known Member
An area where we used to have a lot of fun...There were some top notch acts there at one time. I remember KC and the Sunshine Band for example. "Daddy, whats KC and the Sunshine Band?"
fillerup
Well-Known Member
I'll just have to remain respectfully but highly skeptical that Disney is paying to maintain I-4 thru something called I-4 Fair Share or any other name. Just doesn't make sense to me that something this important remains completely under the radar. If it were so, I would think that USO, SeaWorld, and many more large businesses would have to do the same.
I think DTD will get its own I-4 access when they pay for it. It doesn't really matter that they're Florida's largest taxpayer - it doesn't entitle them to this kind of gift from the public treasury.
And since this interchange would be putting a bulls eye squarely on the back of CityWalk and a couple of hundred other I-Drive and Restaurant Row businesses, I think you'd see an instant lawsuit to stop it. I don't think the state could win a case of spending public money to disadvantage one taxpayer (US) to the advantage of its largest competitor (WDW).
I think DTD will get its own I-4 access when they pay for it. It doesn't really matter that they're Florida's largest taxpayer - it doesn't entitle them to this kind of gift from the public treasury.
And since this interchange would be putting a bulls eye squarely on the back of CityWalk and a couple of hundred other I-Drive and Restaurant Row businesses, I think you'd see an instant lawsuit to stop it. I don't think the state could win a case of spending public money to disadvantage one taxpayer (US) to the advantage of its largest competitor (WDW).
flynnibus
Premium Member
@fillerup - such public funding for improvements that would benefit a private entity are not illegal nor uncommon. But they are typically done in the guise of 'mutal benefit'. Meaning.. assume an organization pledges to build something big and new that would draw a new tax base in the area. The local government may agree to fund transportation improvements with intend that the public will ultimately gain from those improvements. However, in most cases, it works the other way. In zoning and exception processes, the local government hold the developers to proffer funds or outright construct, the road improvements that the government feel are necessary to accomodate the impact of the new development.
A good simple example of that is a new traffic light. If you build a new shopping center and need zoning approval, the county is probably going to make you pay to install a traffic light at your egress to the main highway.
An example of something the other way is imagine someone is going to build a new entertainment complex that will bring out of area people to spend in the locality. The government may help fund transportation arteries that would ultimately benefit this place and maybe future development around it. (The Anaheim Resort District is another example of this type of codevelopment)
I think the biggest thing is, Disney would have make some compelling case on how they are going to ADD enough that would benefit the local/state government to justify investing in something like that. And we're talking big expansions to be able to make such arguments. I doubt that would be.. so Disney would just have to pay for it and probably offer to build it themselves to FVOT specs to ensure the project's timeline.
A good simple example of that is a new traffic light. If you build a new shopping center and need zoning approval, the county is probably going to make you pay to install a traffic light at your egress to the main highway.
An example of something the other way is imagine someone is going to build a new entertainment complex that will bring out of area people to spend in the locality. The government may help fund transportation arteries that would ultimately benefit this place and maybe future development around it. (The Anaheim Resort District is another example of this type of codevelopment)
I think the biggest thing is, Disney would have make some compelling case on how they are going to ADD enough that would benefit the local/state government to justify investing in something like that. And we're talking big expansions to be able to make such arguments. I doubt that would be.. so Disney would just have to pay for it and probably offer to build it themselves to FVOT specs to ensure the project's timeline.
Rasvar
Well-Known Member
There are few hundred agreements between FDOT and Reedy Creek on various I-4 projects. I-4 Fair Share sounds like some political name when almost all of the agreements are only dry governmental wonk names. There are I-4 diversion projects, traffic counting projects, etc. all coordinated with RCID. One or two mention Disney but the vast majority only act on a government to government basis. Whenever work is done in the area, it is done as a coordination between county, local and RCID. As far as paying for a ramp, it's easy. Disney floats a bond issue through RCID to cover most of the cost. It's issued as a municipal bond. FDOT then takes charge of the project. Usually what happens is that it gets combined in with another I-4 project as an addendum. Universal worked out a similar deal when it added its parking garages. Very common process. Easier for Disney to do it since it has its own governmental body. Heck, Disney was able to wrangle a toll free exit from the 429. Getting a ramp off of I-4 is the easy part. It is where they are going to put the thing that runs into regulatory issues of wetlands along with drainage mitigation that tend to be the bigger issues.
Texas84
Well-Known Member
xdan0920
Think for yourselfer
Sometimes I am flat out stunned by the amount of knowledge on these boards.
It's real. You're probably right that it has some boring government name and it was only called "I-4 Fair Share" for some press release whenever it was announced.
Omnimover
Member
Seriously. I learned more about roadway infrastructure improvements in the last 75 posts than I had in my whole life.
You wanna know about paving techniques? Repaving on WDW property is paid for by the company through a group called Facilities Asset Management.
The most common paving problem is "alligatoring" which you can see an example of with a quick Google search. The replacement process is known as a Mill and Overlay, which consists of grinding up the top two or three inches of asphalt and laying a fresh top layer.
Fun, huh?
Further to the above.
http://www.rcid.org/uploads/Intergovernmental Coordination Element.pdf
See in particular page 8B-5 indicating that Disney "has an agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation to purchase trips on Interstate -4 pursuant to a Joint Participation Agreement".