Metro Orlando Airport News

[AndyPok1]

20 hours ago, shardoon said:

Add that all up and the passenger counts for 1 passenger is:

MCO 2, Atlanta 4, Paris 2. The real stress on the airport requiring a lot of staff, ie ticketing, TSA, parking, rental car services, etc etc is at MCO and Paris.

What really happened in Atlanta? Me walking off the plane, going to a lounge for 1-2 hours, and then getting on another plane. Someone also moves my bag from plane A to plane B. 

Yet, Atlanta logs 4 passengers out of this trip and the real airports that had the most use from me using their facilities were MCO and Paris. 

I acknowledge I am coming to this discussion as a frequent flier on a legacy carrier, so my views are skewed compared to most people travelling out of MCO, but I massively disagree with this.  From an airport standpoint I care so much more about the hub airports.  I can't CONTROL my start and end destinations (well I guess I can by living elsewhere or visiting elsewhere), but I can to some degree control where I connect.

The only "pressure" on MCO I have is parking and the VERY occasional bag check.  Otherwise if my flight departs at 10AM, I am leaving my house at 9A, parking in the garage at 920A, walking to TSA/APM to gate until 930A, go to bathroom at 935A, walk up to gate with already boarding plane and enter plane around 940A.  I am continuously moving, not taking up any space at the airport.

Whereas at a hub, I am perpetually stopped.  I need somewhere to sit.  Somewhere to eat.  Somewhere to charge phone.  Somewhere to get work done.  Not to mention the ability to quickly get from gate to gate.  I am using so much more of the airport at hubs.  And I largely try to choose my connection based off of the facilities.  For example, MIA food options are largely crap so I try to avoid there if I know I need to eat during layover.

19 hours ago, jrs2 said:

Do these connecting hubs get more federal money than other O&D airports because of their sheer numbers by chance? Is that what this is about?  I mean you fly Spirit from LaGuardia to MCO direct but if its Delta, you have to connect.  Why?  It's BS. 

I will happily take 3 connections before I ever fly spirit.  Point-to-Point networks have MAJOR downsides as Southwest has shown in the past year.  Hubs are the most efficient way to operate a logistic network which is what air travel is (Well arguably, at this point air travel is simply a money-losing front for a bank in the form of miles but that's a different topic).

[aent]

19 minutes ago, AndyPok1 said:

I will happily take 3 connections before I ever fly spirit.  Point-to-Point networks have MAJOR downsides as Southwest has shown in the past year.  Hubs are the most efficient way to operate a logistic network which is what air travel is

Just curious, what did Southwest's problems have to do with them doing Point to Point networks? I thought there problems were tech issues.

And while I understand its generally more efficient for the AIRLINE to operate with a hub network, as a passenger, I much prefer a point to point network (assuming my "home" area is a destination, which living in Orlando, it obviously is). I must say I've generally gotten reasonably good service out of Frontier, and since they tend to have more direct flights, I end up on them a lot. I also like the red eye flights. Yes, you need to bring seat cushions, but that sounds far better to me then hanging out in a crowded hub airport.

Although realistically, Amazon has been showing even the shipping industry that point to point is a more efficient way to operate a logistical network as well, although admittedly, much more difficult to setup and get right.

[shardoon]

3 hours ago, AndyPok1 said:

I acknowledge I am coming to this discussion as a frequent flier on a legacy carrier, so my views are skewed compared to most people travelling out of MCO, but I massively disagree with this.  From an airport standpoint I care so much more about the hub airports.  I can't CONTROL my start and end destinations (well I guess I can by living elsewhere or visiting elsewhere), but I can to some degree control where I connect.

The only "pressure" on MCO I have is parking and the VERY occasional bag check.  Otherwise if my flight departs at 10AM, I am leaving my house at 9A, parking in the garage at 920A, walking to TSA/APM to gate until 930A, go to bathroom at 935A, walk up to gate with already boarding plane and enter plane around 940A.  I am continuously moving, not taking up any space at the airport.

Whereas at a hub, I am perpetually stopped.  I need somewhere to sit.  Somewhere to eat.  Somewhere to charge phone.  Somewhere to get work done.  Not to mention the ability to quickly get from gate to gate.  I am using so much more of the airport at hubs.  And I largely try to choose my connection based off of the facilities.  For example, MIA food options are largely crap so I try to avoid there if I know I need to eat during layover.

I will happily take 3 connections before I ever fly spirit.  Point-to-Point networks have MAJOR downsides as Southwest has shown in the past year.  Hubs are the most efficient way to operate a logistic network which is what air travel is (Well arguably, at this point air travel is simply a money-losing front for a bank in the form of miles but that's a different topic).

I will go out on a limb and say that you are placed in the 0.1% category that realistically would be leaving their house 60 minutes before their flight. The other 99.9% people do in fact spend more time in the airport. How do I know this? Simply look at the lines to get into the lounges and restaurants in OIA. 

[AndyPok1]

On 5/13/2023 at 10:02 AM, aent said:

Just curious, what did Southwest's problems have to do with them doing Point to Point networks? I thought there problems were tech issues.

The short-ish version is that because a WN plane goes... MCO  --> BNA --> DEN --> LAS, as soon as the tech issues impacted the MCO-->BNA flight, the subsequent flights get messed up as well.  Whereas at a hub airport, they can repurpose another plane and save the last 2 flights.

[HankStrong]

On 5/12/2023 at 9:24 AM, codypet said:

Where? I'm not visualizing it.  Are you talking east and west of the existing tracks?  Or south of the current station?

 

On 5/12/2023 at 10:31 AM, jrs2 said:

I think he's talking about the grass easement that is between the building and the vehicle exit lanes to the south.  you see the two tracks taper down to one track prior to reaching there en route to the Maintenance Facility.  To the north of the station, not so much, but to the south, they could hypothetically put an expanded mini "rail yard" of tracks that taper down before entering the platform area...  @HankStrong

 

Correct.  

[jliv]

On 5/13/2023 at 2:30 PM, AndyPok1 said:

I acknowledge I am coming to this discussion as a frequent flier on a legacy carrier, so my views are skewed compared to most people travelling out of MCO, but I massively disagree with this.  From an airport standpoint I care so much more about the hub airports.  I can't CONTROL my start and end destinations (well I guess I can by living elsewhere or visiting elsewhere), but I can to some degree control where I connect.

The only "pressure" on MCO I have is parking and the VERY occasional bag check.  Otherwise if my flight departs at 10AM, I am leaving my house at 9A, parking in the garage at 920A, walking to TSA/APM to gate until 930A, go to bathroom at 935A, walk up to gate with already boarding plane and enter plane around 940A.  I am continuously moving, not taking up any space at the airport.

Whereas at a hub, I am perpetually stopped.  I need somewhere to sit.  Somewhere to eat.  Somewhere to charge phone.  Somewhere to get work done.  Not to mention the ability to quickly get from gate to gate.  I am using so much more of the airport at hubs.  And I largely try to choose my connection based off of the facilities.  For example, MIA food options are largely crap so I try to avoid there if I know I need to eat during layover.

I will happily take 3 connections before I ever fly spirit.  Point-to-Point networks have MAJOR downsides as Southwest has shown in the past year.  Hubs are the most efficient way to operate a logistic network which is what air travel is (Well arguably, at this point air travel is simply a money-losing front for a bank in the form of miles but that's a different topic).

These “busiest airport” lists are funny.  They really are ranking apples and oranges and don’t give anyone bragging rights about regional economic health.  MCO and Charlotte’s CLT often ranked closely in terms of passenger numbers , but they are very different airports with a difficult user profile for each.  I’m always more interested in how MCO ranks against Las Vegas LAS, because both generate traffic mostly from leisure and convention-bound travellers. However, LAS shows higher numbers typically because Las Vegas visitors are more dependent on air travel than Orlando visitors.  (More population density on the East Coast).  Meanwhile, Austin and Nashville airports have much smaller numbers, but you could argue that both of much more successful than Orlando in the economic development game and probably draw more non-convention business travel.  I’d like to see a breakdown of the nature of travel for each passenger to make these numbers more interesting.

[shardoon]

3 hours ago, jliv said:

These “busiest airport” lists are funny.  They really are ranking apples and oranges and don’t give anyone bragging rights about regional economic health.  MCO and Charlotte’s CLT often ranked closely in terms of passenger numbers , but they are very different airports with a difficult user profile for each.  I’m always more interested in how MCO ranks against Las Vegas LAS, because both generate traffic mostly from leisure and convention-bound travellers. However, LAS shows higher numbers typically because Las Vegas visitors are more dependent on air travel than Orlando visitors.  (More population density on the East Coast).  Meanwhile, Austin and Nashville airports have much smaller numbers, but you could argue that both of much more successful than Orlando in the economic development game and probably draw more non-convention business travel.  I’d like to see a breakdown of the nature of travel for each passenger to make these numbers more interesting.

May I add another wrench to your LAS MCO comparison? ............LAS has a huge private air passenger count that gets added into their numbers, but never set foot in the terminal. Also, it does not seem like a lot, but the Area 51 737 plane transports a plane full of passengers daily to and from Area 51....each passenger counts twice. 

[jrs2]

On 5/13/2023 at 9:30 AM, AndyPok1 said:

I acknowledge I am coming to this discussion as a frequent flier on a legacy carrier, so my views are skewed compared to most people travelling out of MCO, but I massively disagree with this.  From an airport standpoint I care so much more about the hub airports.  I can't CONTROL my start and end destinations (well I guess I can by living elsewhere or visiting elsewhere), but I can to some degree control where I connect.

The only "pressure" on MCO I have is parking and the VERY occasional bag check.  Otherwise if my flight departs at 10AM, I am leaving my house at 9A, parking in the garage at 920A, walking to TSA/APM to gate until 930A, go to bathroom at 935A, walk up to gate with already boarding plane and enter plane around 940A.  I am continuously moving, not taking up any space at the airport.

Whereas at a hub, I am perpetually stopped.  I need somewhere to sit.  Somewhere to eat.  Somewhere to charge phone.  Somewhere to get work done.  Not to mention the ability to quickly get from gate to gate.  I am using so much more of the airport at hubs.  And I largely try to choose my connection based off of the facilities.  For example, MIA food options are largely crap so I try to avoid there if I know I need to eat during layover.

I will happily take 3 connections before I ever fly spirit.  Point-to-Point networks have MAJOR downsides as Southwest has shown in the past year.  Hubs are the most efficient way to operate a logistic network which is what air travel is (Well arguably, at this point air travel is simply a money-losing front for a bank in the form of miles but that's a different topic).

Connecting versus Direct flights: 

Say what you will about Spirit...and direct flights on "lesser" carriers.  But I've connected at Hartsfield on international flights before (not just domestic), where they were already boarding the flight to Europe by the time our flight landed and they forced us to go from Concourse A all the way to the Intl concourse, literally running to the APM  or thru the concourse(s); no thank you.  How about all the times when the plane lands, and they tell everyone to stay seated while ONLY the connecting passengers for "Flight XYZ" debark first b/c the departure is so close in time?  Been there done that.  Great logistics? Kind of like Air France always overbooks their flights from Charles de Gaulle?  

I've never connected within the same concourse with Delta.  NEVER.  O'Hare is no better with United and/or American.  DFW has made me take their elevated walkway all the way across their highway spine to the OTHER SIDE of DFW (look at Google Map)...literally running with a luggage cart... for the connecting flight on American. I've also had American lose my luggage (at DFW) on a flight to SFO where the a55holes drove my luggage to my hotel room in Napa and woke me up at 1am and made me pay for it to boot.  

I flew Delta direct going to NYC via LGA two weeks ago, except that their return flight at the time I chose had to connect thru Hartsfield.  Oh, hell no.  So, I elected to take Spirit instead to get my butt home fast. I've got a life; and I'm not spending trip time at Harsfield even if it means I have to fly Spirit.  Hartsfield's operations are not that efficient; neither is DFW's; not by a long shot.  It is heart attack city for the passengers.

And I will NEVER take 3 connections to avoid Spirit (I know you weren't being literal).  But you paint this rosy picture of connecting flights in practice, and all of the convenient infrastructure they've built to support passengers, and that you choose your connecting hub based on their facilities.  Really?  Why not just fly direct and avoid all of that instead?  Because in practice, it's what I said above; that is the reality of what happens at a major connecting hub, even the large ones with nicer facilities, because it has happened to me and people I know time and again. 

[aent]

On 5/14/2023 at 12:30 PM, AndyPok1 said:

The short-ish version is that because a WN plane goes... MCO  --> BNA --> DEN --> LAS, as soon as the tech issues impacted the MCO-->BNA flight, the subsequent flights get messed up as well.  Whereas at a hub airport, they can repurpose another plane and save the last 2 flights.

But you're probably twice as likely to encounter a tech issue, because you have twice the landings and takeoffs, and more miles in the air. You're also dependent on the weather being good in an extra location, which seems more likely to be causing a delay, on top of the connecting flight issues. If significant weather is causing the delay somewhere else, they aren't going to have enough equipment and pilots regardless.

In fact, thinking back, at my previous job, they started sending me every other week to California for project implementation and testing for a customer, and I had to buy the ticket then received reimbursement. It eventually got noticed that I was flying Frontier and Spirit all the time, and the others were busy calling me stupid and telling me that I should be using one of the nicer airlines, and also be trying hard to claim all the frequent flier miles as well as an extra benefit. Out of the 6 months I was on that job before I decided to quit, I never once had a missed/cancelled flight, and probably arrived more then 10 minutes late maybe 2 times, and they were all less then an hour late. My coworkers who took their favorite airlines FREQUENTLY arrived a day late due to a missed connection, weather, or some other problem, and I believed they were purposely doing it because they still got paid and got to avoid working due to lost travel days (no actual proof, but my assigned duties were a year ahead of schedule when I left, whereas everyone else was behind schedule). It was actually annoyed me enough that it was one (of many) reason that I quit that job. Needless to say, nobody EVER beat my travel time the entire time I worked there. 

There was actually a couple times when I was annoyed towards the end where I called my boss and told him "I'm the only one here, everyone else says they ain't make it for another day or 2 due to flight issues, I'm taking off to explore California till people get here". They were surprisingly ok with me doing that.

[jrs2]

1 hour ago, aent said:

But you're probably twice as likely to encounter a tech issue, because you have twice the landings and takeoffs, and more miles in the air. You're also dependent on the weather being good in an extra location, which seems more likely to be causing a delay, on top of the connecting flight issues. If significant weather is causing the delay somewhere else, they aren't going to have enough equipment and pilots regardless.

In fact, thinking back, at my previous job, they started sending me every other week to California for project implementation and testing for a customer, and I had to buy the ticket then received reimbursement. It eventually got noticed that I was flying Frontier and Spirit all the time, and the others were busy calling me stupid and telling me that I should be using one of the nicer airlines, and also be trying hard to claim all the frequent flier miles as well as an extra benefit. Out of the 6 months I was on that job before I decided to quit, I never once had a missed/cancelled flight, and probably arrived more then 10 minutes late maybe 2 times, and they were all less then an hour late. My coworkers who took their favorite airlines FREQUENTLY arrived a day late due to a missed connection, weather, or some other problem, and I believed they were purposely doing it because they still got paid and got to avoid working due to lost travel days (no actual proof, but my assigned duties were a year ahead of schedule when I left, whereas everyone else was behind schedule). It was actually annoyed me enough that it was one (of many) reason that I quit that job. Needless to say, nobody EVER beat my travel time the entire time I worked there. 

There was actually a couple times when I was annoyed towards the end where I called my boss and told him "I'm the only one here, everyone else says they ain't make it for another day or 2 due to flight issues, I'm taking off to explore California till people get here". They were surprisingly ok with me doing that.

fascinating.  I never even considered canceled connecting flights...

But if you read my post above, think about this...why even bother with the Clubs at the airports?  Delta, United, etc...it's like a concession to a bad situation that they don't intend to fix but for offering a Club for Club Members...

I mean, if you have to connect, then do so.  But if you can avoid it...

You took that extra time in CA and put it to good use.  Had I connected at Hartsfield en route to NYC, I would have lost from 1 hr best case scenario to perhaps 3 hrs...time I could spend checking into my hotel and making arrangements for dinner or whatever.  It's like a cousin of mine who is the cardiac kid, always getting to the airport at the last minute because he wants to maximize his tourist time and not spend it in a waiting area.  Same with connections...

5 hours ago, shardoon said:

May I add another wrench to your LAS MCO comparison? ............LAS has a huge private air passenger count that gets added into their numbers, but never set foot in the terminal. Also, it does not seem like a lot, but the Area 51 737 plane transports a plane full of passengers daily to and from Area 51....each passenger counts twice. 

Area 51 is like right down the street from there.  Does LAS break it down between commercial airline traffic and private jet traffic?

[shardoon]

18 minutes ago, jrs2 said:

fascinating.  I never even considered canceled connecting flights...

But if you read my post above, think about this...why even bother with the Clubs at the airports?  Delta, United, etc...it's like a concession to a bad situation that they don't intend to fix but for offering a Club for Club Members...

I mean, if you have to connect, then do so.  But if you can avoid it...

You took that extra time in CA and put it to good use.  Had I connected at Hartsfield en route to NYC, I would have lost from 1 hr best case scenario to perhaps 3 hrs...time I could spend checking into my hotel and making arrangements for dinner or whatever.  It's like a cousin of mine who is the cardiac kid, always getting to the airport at the last minute because he wants to maximize his tourist time and not spend it in a waiting area.  Same with connections...

Area 51 is like right down the street from there.  Does LAS break it down between commercial airline traffic and private jet traffic?

They still use a full 737 for their commute to and from the Area 51 AFB. I no longer can find the exact stats on the McCarren website, they used to have detailed stats like OIA does. With that being said, I distinctly remember them adding all their private air traffic numbers to total passenger counts...... and it being Las Vegas...... it was substantial. 

Edited May 15, 2023 by shardoon

[AndyPok1]

5 hours ago, aent said:

But you're probably twice as likely to encounter a tech issue, because you have twice the landings and takeoffs, and more miles in the air. You're also dependent on the weather being good in an extra location, which seems more likely to be causing a delay, on top of the connecting flight issues. If significant weather is causing the delay somewhere else, they aren't going to have enough equipment and pilots regardless.

In fact, thinking back, at my previous job, they started sending me every other week to California for project implementation and testing for a customer, and I had to buy the ticket then received reimbursement. It eventually got noticed that I was flying Frontier and Spirit all the time, and the others were busy calling me stupid and telling me that I should be using one of the nicer airlines, and also be trying hard to claim all the frequent flier miles as well as an extra benefit. Out of the 6 months I was on that job before I decided to quit, I never once had a missed/cancelled flight, and probably arrived more then 10 minutes late maybe 2 times, and they were all less then an hour late. My coworkers who took their favorite airlines FREQUENTLY arrived a day late due to a missed connection, weather, or some other problem, and I believed they were purposely doing it because they still got paid and got to avoid working due to lost travel days (no actual proof, but my assigned duties were a year ahead of schedule when I left, whereas everyone else was behind schedule). It was actually annoyed me enough that it was one (of many) reason that I quit that job. Needless to say, nobody EVER beat my travel time the entire time I worked there. 

There was actually a couple times when I was annoyed towards the end where I called my boss and told him "I'm the only one here, everyone else says they ain't make it for another day or 2 due to flight issues, I'm taking off to explore California till people get here". They were surprisingly ok with me doing that.

There's an old rule among AA frequent fliers from before the US merger.  In the winter you connect through DFW, and in the summer you connect through ORD.  That's how you avoid the lightning/snow.  I take a priority on comfort and service.  The legacy carriers give that to me by being an elite status by extra leg room seats and first class upgrades, and I save my miles so that I can sleep and lie flat in pods on 10+ hour international flights.  In close to 1000 lifetime flights, I've only had my bag not make it to my destination once (it got there 8am the next day), and I've only been delayed so badly that it impacted me 3 times.  I know everyone has horror stories, but travel is fun.  And the flight is part of the travel.

8 hours ago, jrs2 said:

And I will NEVER take 3 connections to avoid Spirit (I know you weren't being literal).  But you paint this rosy picture of connecting flights in practice, and all of the convenient infrastructure they've built to support passengers, and that you choose your connecting hub based on their facilities.  Really?  Why not just fly direct and avoid all of that instead?  Because in practice, it's what I said above; that is the reality of what happens at a major connecting hub, even the large ones with nicer facilities, because it has happened to me and people I know time and again. 

I actually was being literal.  This happens to/from MSY for me decently often.  Friends take a direct flight on WN/F9/NK and I'll connect through MIA/CLT/AUS/DFW on the way there, and sometimes through two of them on the way home to get extra miles.  Its a chill travel day after a fun weekend.  Got nowhere to be.

I just love air travel.  I've spent a day just flying to a random city and back just to relax and read a book.  Its like sitting by a pool at a resort, but you can do it on a cloudy day.

[HankStrong]

I'm no Andy, but I've flown a couple hundred times in my life, both domestic and international.  I started as a teen collecting miles on TWA and started learning how to use the system to my advantage early.  In the early days on the internet you couldn't find much, so I actually went to the library and found books on how to get the most out of frequent flyer miles.  My friends and family thought I was crazy for randomly flying to TWA cities for weekends away with my girl.  Free trips were the best trips!  I got to know St. Louis airport extremely well in those days.  When they were folded into American, I tried AA several times and really hated them.  I moved to Delta.

My least favorite part about choosing Delta is Atlanta, although I'll go to great lengths to get around going there if reasonable.  It is a miserable wretch of an airport.  For every 1 great connection I've had there, I've had 5 bad ones.  Most of the worst airline experiences I've ever had were in Atlanta, with the grand exception of Allegiant which I'll never fly again by choice.

I just don't enjoy the budget flight experience.  I like the upgrades to the better seats.  I like the lounges.  I like the in-flight entertainment.  I like the pseudo-special treatment and I know it's only a mirage a lot of times.

[jrs2]

15 hours ago, shardoon said:

They still use a full 737 for their commute to and from the Area 51 AFB. I no longer can find the exact stats on the McCarren website, they used to have detailed stats like OIA does. With that being said, I distinctly remember them adding all their private air traffic numbers to total passenger counts...... and it being Las Vegas...... it was substantial. 

I remember this being brought up several years ago in an airport comparison discussion.

I think LAS has about 105 jetways/gates/parking aprons and MCO has 110 before the 4 others from Terminal C are built out within a couple of years.

[prahaboheme]

5 hours ago, HankStrong said:

I'm no Andy, but I've flown a couple hundred times in my life, both domestic and international.  I started as a teen collecting miles on TWA and started learning how to use the system to my advantage early.  In the early days on the internet you couldn't find much, so I actually went to the library and found books on how to get the most out of frequent flyer miles.  My friends and family thought I was crazy for randomly flying to TWA cities for weekends away with my girl.  Free trips were the best trips!  I got to know St. Louis airport extremely well in those days.  When they were folded into American, I tried AA several times and really hated them.  I moved to Delta.

My least favorite part about choosing Delta is Atlanta, although I'll go to great lengths to get around going there if reasonable.  It is a miserable wretch of an airport.  For every 1 great connection I've had there, I've had 5 bad ones.  Most of the worst airline experiences I've ever had were in Atlanta, with the grand exception of Allegiant which I'll never fly again by choice.

I just don't enjoy the budget flight experience.  I like the upgrades to the better seats.  I like the lounges.  I like the in-flight entertainment.  I like the pseudo-special treatment and I know it's only a mirage a lot of times.

Oh, TWA — those truly were the (flight) days.

[jrs2]

8 hours ago, HankStrong said:

I'm no Andy, but I've flown a couple hundred times in my life, both domestic and international.  I started as a teen collecting miles on TWA and started learning how to use the system to my advantage early.  In the early days on the internet you couldn't find much, so I actually went to the library and found books on how to get the most out of frequent flyer miles.  My friends and family thought I was crazy for randomly flying to TWA cities for weekends away with my girl.  Free trips were the best trips!  I got to know St. Louis airport extremely well in those days.  When they were folded into American, I tried AA several times and really hated them.  I moved to Delta.

My least favorite part about choosing Delta is Atlanta, although I'll go to great lengths to get around going there if reasonable.  It is a miserable wretch of an airport.  For every 1 great connection I've had there, I've had 5 bad ones.  Most of the worst airline experiences I've ever had were in Atlanta, with the grand exception of Allegiant which I'll never fly again by choice.

I just don't enjoy the budget flight experience.  I like the upgrades to the better seats.  I like the lounges.  I like the in-flight entertainment.  I like the pseudo-special treatment and I know it's only a mirage a lot of times.

Oh yeah...

 

 

And this gem that @JFW657should recognize from a certain show:

 

 

Edited May 16, 2023 by jrs2

[shardoon]

Just curious, with all this cheese that the TDT turned into, can we use the money for the airport? Sure, one might all it infrastructure, however the airport is directly related to tourists. Maybe they can build the terminal C APM?

Hahaha.......I know you all are gonna say I'm obsessed with the APM. 

[WAJAS]

1 hour ago, shardoon said:

Just curious, with all this cheese that the TDT turned into, can we use the money for the airport? Sure, one might all it infrastructure, however the airport is directly related to tourists. Maybe they can build the terminal C APM?

Hahaha.......I know you all are gonna say I'm obsessed with the APM. 

Airports have access to such huge pots of federal money that it'd be a waste to use TDT on it, but I'm an APM fan too

[codypet]

12 hours ago, shardoon said:

Just curious, with all this cheese that the TDT turned into, can we use the money for the airport? Sure, one might all it infrastructure, however the airport is directly related to tourists. Maybe they can build the terminal C APM?

Hahaha.......I know you all are gonna say I'm obsessed with the APM. 

I think the Sunshine cooridor can qualify for TDT, but they don't seem to like to spend money on anything off I-drive.

[jliv]

On 5/17/2023 at 2:29 PM, codypet said:

I think the Sunshine cooridor can qualify for TDT, but they don't seem to like to spend money on anything off I-drive.

It wouldn't qualify.  State law limits funds to stadiums, arenas, performing arts centers, auditoriums, museums, and tourism marketing, but no transportation infrastructure updates.   Some of the extra cents added over time are explicitly limited to sporting venues.   That won't change as long as tourism lobbyists continue their influence in Tallahassee.

Edited May 18, 2023 by jliv

[codypet]

3 hours ago, jliv said:

It wouldn't qualify.  State law limits funds to stadiums, arenas, performing arts centers, auditoriums, museums, and tourism marketing, but no transportation infrastructure updates.   Some of the extra cents added over time are explicitly limited to sporting venues.   That won't change as long as tourism lobbyists continue their influence in Tallahassee.

Boo.  I'd wish it would extend to transportation infrastructure in the area as well as fire and law enforcement for the vicinity.

[aent]

4 hours ago, jliv said:

It wouldn't qualify.  State law limits funds to stadiums, arenas, performing arts centers, auditoriums, museums, and tourism marketing, but no transportation infrastructure updates.   Some of the extra cents added over time are explicitly limited to sporting venues.   That won't change as long as tourism lobbyists continue their influence in Tallahassee.

This was changed a while back, from the statute this is a permitted use:

6. To acquire, construct, extend, enlarge, remodel, repair, improve, maintain, operate, or finance public facilities within the boundaries of the county or subcounty special taxing district in which the tax is levied, if the public facilities are needed to increase tourist-related business activities in the county or subcounty special district and are recommended by the county tourist development council created pursuant to paragraph (4)(e). Tax revenues may be used for any related land acquisition, land improvement, design and engineering costs, and all other professional and related costs required to bring the public facilities into service. As used in this subparagraph, the term “public facilities” means major capital improvements that have a life expectancy of 5 or more years, including, but not limited to, transportation, sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water, and pedestrian facilities. Tax revenues may be used for these purposes only if the following conditions are satisfied:

a. In the county fiscal year immediately preceding the fiscal year in which the tax revenues were initially used for such purposes, at least $10 million in tourist development tax revenue was received;

b. The county governing board approves the use for the proposed public facilities by a vote of at least two-thirds of its membership;

c. No more than 70 percent of the cost of the proposed public facilities will be paid for with tourist development tax revenues, and sources of funding for the remaining cost are identified and confirmed by the county governing board;

d. At least 40 percent of all tourist development tax revenues collected in the county are spent to promote and advertise tourism as provided by this subsection; and

e. An independent professional analysis, performed at the expense of the county tourist development council, demonstrates the positive impact of the infrastructure project on tourist-related businesses in the county.

 

[shardoon]

3 minutes ago, aent said:

This was changed a while back, from the statute this is a permitted use:

6. To acquire, construct, extend, enlarge, remodel, repair, improve, maintain, operate, or finance public facilities within the boundaries of the county or subcounty special taxing district in which the tax is levied, if the public facilities are needed to increase tourist-related business activities in the county or subcounty special district and are recommended by the county tourist development council created pursuant to paragraph (4)(e). Tax revenues may be used for any related land acquisition, land improvement, design and engineering costs, and all other professional and related costs required to bring the public facilities into service. As used in this subparagraph, the term “public facilities” means major capital improvements that have a life expectancy of 5 or more years, including, but not limited to, transportation, sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water, and pedestrian facilities. Tax revenues may be used for these purposes only if the following conditions are satisfied:

a. In the county fiscal year immediately preceding the fiscal year in which the tax revenues were initially used for such purposes, at least $10 million in tourist development tax revenue was received;

b. The county governing board approves the use for the proposed public facilities by a vote of at least two-thirds of its membership;

c. No more than 70 percent of the cost of the proposed public facilities will be paid for with tourist development tax revenues, and sources of funding for the remaining cost are identified and confirmed by the county governing board;

d. At least 40 percent of all tourist development tax revenues collected in the county are spent to promote and advertise tourism as provided by this subsection; and

e. An independent professional analysis, performed at the expense of the county tourist development council, demonstrates the positive impact of the infrastructure project on tourist-related businesses in the county.

 

Amazing......does anyone have a connection to anyone associated with the airport and tell them to put in a request for constructing the terminal C APM?

[jack]

19 hours ago, aent said:

This was changed a while back, from the statute this is a permitted use:

6. To acquire, construct, extend, enlarge, remodel, repair, improve, maintain, operate, or finance public facilities within the boundaries of the county or subcounty special taxing district in which the tax is levied, if the public facilities are needed to increase tourist-related business activities in the county or subcounty special district and are recommended by the county tourist development council created pursuant to paragraph (4)(e). Tax revenues may be used for any related land acquisition, land improvement, design and engineering costs, and all other professional and related costs required to bring the public facilities into service. As used in this subparagraph, the term “public facilities” means major capital improvements that have a life expectancy of 5 or more years, including, but not limited to, transportation, sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water, and pedestrian facilities. Tax revenues may be used for these purposes only if the following conditions are satisfied:

a. In the county fiscal year immediately preceding the fiscal year in which the tax revenues were initially used for such purposes, at least $10 million in tourist development tax revenue was received;

b. The county governing board approves the use for the proposed public facilities by a vote of at least two-thirds of its membership;

c. No more than 70 percent of the cost of the proposed public facilities will be paid for with tourist development tax revenues, and sources of funding for the remaining cost are identified and confirmed by the county governing board;

d. At least 40 percent of all tourist development tax revenues collected in the county are spent to promote and advertise tourism as provided by this subsection; and

e. An independent professional analysis, performed at the expense of the county tourist development council, demonstrates the positive impact of the infrastructure project on tourist-related businesses in the county.

 

I am not sure how this applies to the above statue, but every penny in orange county has a list of things it can fund.

Expenditures for the first four cents are limited by Florida Statutes to the acquisition and operation of convention centers, sports stadiums and arenas, auditoriums and museums, promotion and/or advertisement of tourism and funding of tourist and convention bureaus and tourist information centers. Expenditures for the fifth cent are limited by Florida Statutes to pay the debt service on bonds issued to finance the construction, reconstruction, or renovation of a professional sports franchise facility or subsequently a convention center or promote and advertise tourism. Expenditures for the sixth cent are limited by Florida Statutes to pay the debt service on bonds issued to finance the construction, reconstruction, or renovation of a new professional sports franchise facility or a retained spring training franchise that was not based in Florida prior to April 1, 1987

[aent]

On 5/19/2023 at 4:35 PM, jack said:

I am not sure how this applies to the above statue, but every penny in orange county has a list of things it can fund.

 

Local areas can indeed be more restrictive on the spending then state law, my point was more that it was not state law, just local policy.