News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District

[flynnibus]

You just hit on another thing when you mention Disney's internal controls being stronger than state level criteria as RCID building codes were already higher than state ones, their buildings are probably the best place to be if a hurricane hit full on. Will the OCTOD be as strict for future building works?

What motivation would there be to rework the codes to be less strict? That's a lot of effort for what payoff exactly?

The corruption comes from adding to requirements, or in how they are applied/interpreted.. not really lessening them.

 

[Kamikaze]

You just hit on another thing when you mention Disney's internal controls being stronger than state level criteria as RCID building codes were already higher than state ones, their buildings are probably the best place to be if a hurricane hit full on. Will the OCTOD be as strict for future building works?

Disney will continue to build to exceed EPCOT Codes.

 

[GoofGoof]

What motivation would there be to rework the codes to be less strict? That's a lot of effort for what payoff exactly?

The corruption comes from adding to requirements, or in how they are applied/interpreted.. not really lessening them.

Agreed….unless somehow building codes become woke too . I’m not sure how that would be possible, but look at what happened to vaccines . I think anything is possible. Of course even if the district lessened the codes there‘s nothing to stop Disney from continuing to follow higher standards. The code is the minimum.

 

[lazyboy97o]

You just hit on another thing when you mention Disney's internal controls being stronger than state level criteria as RCID building codes were already higher than state ones, their buildings are probably the best place to be if a hurricane hit full on. Will the OCTOD be as strict for future building works?

The EPCOT Building Code is not some completely different beast. A lot of it is in line with the Florida Building Code. The resiliency of Walt Disney World is exaggerated. Today what makes Walt Disney World more resilient than neighboring areas isn’t the different codes but the different scale, with the size of many properties pushing them up to be a Risk Category III instead of a standard Risk Category II, which requires being able to withstand a higher ultimate wind load.

Disney will continue to build to exceed EPCOT Codes.

They largely follow the EPCOT Building Code. Only in certain instances do internal standards require a more restrictive approach.

 

[Tha Realest]

That's hyperbole but it really feels that way. Every single stupid idea, like adding tolls or using health regulations to screw with operations, was mentioned about 200-400 pages ago.

It seemed stupid when you consider a baseline level of rationality or decorum in government, but I'm happy to admit I was wrong.

Ah got it. I checked her Twitter feed and didn’t see much on this, so just curious if our rantings have manifest as quasi policy

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Is that a quote from The American President?

I believe that was “they’ll crawl through the desert to a mirage that doesn’t exist and then they’ll drink the sand”


…that’s one of my gags around these parts “drink the sand”

 

[Stripes]

Here’s proposed resolution No. 639

 

[castlecake2.0]

Can someone explain what this resolution means?

 

[GrumpyFan]

Here’s proposed resolution No. 639

View attachment 709669View attachment 709670View attachment 709671View attachment 709672

Do you have a link?
I can't read that.

 

[drnilescrane]

Do you have a link?
I can't read that.

I was able to skim it - basically says that Lake Buena Vista and Bay Lake can't override the district's planning authority, disbands the separate planning board and makes the Board of Supervisors the ultimate planning authority with no recourse to appeal, and reduces the requirement for notice to 1 simultaneous public hearing and reading.

 

[castlecake2.0]

I was able to skim it - basically says that Lake Buena Vista and Bay Lake can't override the district's planning authority, disbands the separate planning board and makes the Board of Supervisors the ultimate planning authority with no recourse to appeal, and reduces the requirement for notice to 1 simultaneous public hearing and reading.

But wasn’t all this planning already “locked in” already with the previous agreement? I’m assuming if any of this really changed anything they would have made it part of the previous RCID/Disney deal?

 

[flynnibus]

Can someone explain what this resolution means?

First part is to try to deny the two cities any powers to accept development orders, permits, or any developer agreements - saying all this should be with the power of the district. Also their land development regulations should not be less strict than the district's plan.

Second part aims to redefine the planning board that manages the development regulations to eliminate the planning board and just replace it with the board of supervisors.

Basically a big power grab to try to consolidate decision making on development planning into the BoS directly.

 

[drnilescrane]

But wasn’t all this planning already “locked in” already with the previous agreement? I’m assuming if any of this really changed anything they would have made it part of the previous RCID/Disney deal?

Yeah, IANAL so I really can't comment on what this means but it's the internet so I'm going to do it anyway.

My guess this is the wheels turning on Plan A - strip all the power out of the bureaucracy of Reedy Creek and circumvent the cities. Put it in the board so they can actively stymie development.

Plan B would be the board voting to tear up the old agreement, change the planning rules anyway, and sit back and wait for Disney to sue. Which is what they want.

 

[flynnibus]

But wasn’t all this planning already “locked in” already with the previous agreement? I’m assuming if any of this really changed anything they would have made it part of the previous RCID/Disney deal?

this looks like an attempt to close off other avenues for land mangement and permitting... while eliminating the professionals that are supposed to manage it.

Note the prior act required at least one of the planning board to have professional experience... of course the BoS has no such requirement.

 

[LAKid53]

I was able to skim it - basically says that Lake Buena Vista and Bay Lake can't override the district's planning authority, disbands the separate planning board and makes the Board of Supervisors the ultimate planning authority with no recourse to appeal, and reduces the requirement for notice to 1 simultaneous public hearing and reading.

That will be challenged. You cannot deny property owners the right to appeal planning board decisions.

 

[scottieRoss]

For all the questions about pools. They have 4 inspections per year from RCID inspectors
Here is the info from RCID

https://www.rcid.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Welcome_OPWelcome2022_11.pdf

 

[flynnibus]

and makes the Board of Supervisors the ultimate planning authority with no recourse to appeal, and reduces the requirement for notice to 1 simultaneous public hearing and reading

I don't see where you get these last two statements. The whereas statement about one reading isn't redefining the land development regulations... nor do I see any changes about appeals.

 

[flynnibus]

For all the questions about pools. They have 4 inspections per year from RCID inspectors
Here is the info from RCID

https://www.rcid.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Welcome_OPWelcome2022_11.pdf

well interesting! "Facilities with Pools – The District is responsible for Department of Health swimming pool inspections and Operating Certificate renewals. The following information outlines pertinent information for owners about the Pool Inspection Program"

So the district was performing the role of the county health dept inspectors. Probably an area not covered by Disney's lock up deal so they are probably trying to strip those possibilities back?

 

[drnilescrane]

I don't see where you get these last two statements. The whereas statement about one reading isn't redefining the land development regulations... nor do I see any changes about appeals.

Section 7-30:

When the Board of Supervisors makes a decision pursuant to the duties of the Planning Board as set forth in these Land Development Regulations, the BoS are the final decision making authority for the District and no further administrative appeal is available. The BoS may act concurrently as the LPA and the governing body when considering matters.

Normally you'd submit to the planning board, and appeal to the BoS if you think the decision needs to be reviewed.

I think I misinterpreted the passage on the one reading/hearing (since I'm trying to read 7 point font) - I think it just means that the Board can act simultaneously as the planning authority and the governing board when giving public notice.

 

[Tha Realest]

This appears to be clearing the decks for if/when they render the development agreement a failure.