PDE-26-7876

Published agenda

2 appearances between Apr 15, 2026 and Jun 2, 2026, at 2 boards.

OutcomeApproved by the Board of County Commissioners on Jun 2, 2026

Approved Staff’s recommendation.

Official title

Substantial Modification (Consent) - Evans C-1/Evans Properties, Inc – A Substantial Modification to the Evans C-1 MPUD to Increase the Non- Residential Uses from 82,000 Square Feet to 94,840 Square Feet on Approximately 52.08 Acres Located in the Villages of Pasadena Hills within Village C on the North Side of McCabe Road, Approximately One and One- Quarter Mile East of Curley Road

On a calendar

Apr 15, 2026 → Jun 2, 2026 · click a mark to jump to that appearance

Every appearance1 of 2 are in a recording

Each appearance carries the official title above. Where the county’s wording changed, the change is marked: added and ~~removed~~. Steps with no marks were worded identically.

TranscriptWhat was said at each appearance is below it. Machine transcription, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 56% of 172 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong. 1 of the 2 appearances are not in any recording, so what was said at those is not here.

1Apr 15, 2026
Village of Pasadena Hills Planning and PolicyPC5Public hearingNo disposition in the minutes
Substantial Modification (Consent) - … Road, Approximately One and ~~One- Quarter~~ One-Quarter Mile East of ~~Curley~~ Curly Road
Open this item →No recording
2Jun 2, 2026
Board of County CommissionersP34Public hearingApproved
Approved minutes
Approved Staff’s recommendation.
Open this item →
33m
Starkey
Um yeah, can you That maybe this isn't where it happens, but And I I did have a meeting on this, and I'm sorry I don't have my notes all in particulars and I met with the county administrator yesterday. And um Oh, is that it? Right. Which is the one that has Oh, she's a malmaston. Which is the one that we talked about with the commercial that we That it's gonna look like those pictures. What is that one? Okay. Okay. And
maybe this isn't the right place, but I want to make sure that the development pattern. is what we want on McC on what's the broth that's going north south, McKay? Had part? So um You shall be a picture. And you shall be a picture. Um Can you put that picture up? I don't
Unidentified speakerVoice A
know what we uh word for million blank development.
Starkey
It is, I just didn't remember.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
But a I fast forward to Here. So actually
Starkey
That
Unidentified speakerVoice A
picture.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Uh
Unidentified speakerVoice A
A little bit of context. Originally, this MPUD was approved the 145 multifamily dwelling units and some support commercial. They came to staff with their original submittal wanting to increase the multifamily to 300 dwelling units from the 145. And in working with staff, they eliminated the multifamily component entirely in lieu of more commercial retail gear. And so what we did with the applicant was to make this a more uh walkable downtown village area. This is the area where we're reducing the hand
cart road to typical section, the comprehensive plan originally contemplated this memory.
Starkey
But you're telling me you took out residential.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
But that's
Starkey
what's that's what's in this picture.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
So This this picture is entirely Not residential on the other side of Hangro.
Starkey
That's ver that's vertical mixed use.
Is it not is that not commercial and retail on the bottom and vertical mixed cheese on the top? So
Unidentified speakerVoice A
that picture right there for the 82 AA. That's just a picture of the cross section for the village to Passian Hills comprehensive plan. Well it it's meant to show the width. of the road as well as the pedestrian infrastructure and how the building should form on it. It's not necessarily trying to indicate a specific use in the cross section. And if I was to The area immediately adjacent to this project on Ancart Road Um the
This area here. This is where um staff is anticipating. the multi-family integration and reloaded topical products to go on the
Chris Shaver
opposite side here.
I I I think
Starkey
it's disingenuous to show me that picture. Like that's what we're gonna get. But when I look when I look at this. And I I I get that the buildings are pulled up to Clinton, but Clinton is It's not necessarily a road that you're gonna have a lot of pedestrian. It's not where you would want to hang out, right? You would want to hang out on hand carton.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Exactly. And that's why we reduced the cross section from 142 to 82 feet width here. What the comprehensive plan is trying to show is what can be accomplished with the smaller typical section. But if we go back to the binding plan.
Well so we stop lots. So so the the red the red lots there that don't have a building footprint on them, that is commercial development as well.
Starkey
Yeah, I I get it. But what kind of commercial development? I mean that was that Right? I mean
Unidentified speakerVoice A
So we do our conditions of approval because we didn't show the building footprint do force the buildings on either side of Handcar to be up along the road as is shown at the typical
Starkey
side. But are they gonna have parking lots surrounding them? No,
Unidentified speakerVoice A
it's one parking is conditioned to be to the side and rear. Of the building as a part of this approval. Much like indicated on the southern piece, they just didn't have any users for the building footprints within the red. lots for the commercial users, but the conditions of approval um mandates and require to be that the buildings be up on the road and that the parking be shielded.
Starkey
I would rather have given them the residential. I might have put it up above. And um Ahead. more customers for the restaurants and shops that we would hope would be downstairs. But again, but Now we're getting away from
What? We were trying to make VOPA special about we just had it as a workshop. An ideal. See what I'm talking about? I was interested
Chris Shaver
in but
Starkey
I mean is that gonna be a McDonald's and a Burger King and a Taco Bell?
Chris Shaver
Well then it's fighting to decide you know
Unidentified speakerVoice B
every two residentials. on along the line, plus if it goes along the upper part of the roadway. With a mixed use.
Starkey
I'm just saying I don't want to see a Taco Bell, a Burger King, and a McDonald's in downtown V O P H. And to me, that's the pattern we're setting up here unless I'm missing. Yeah, they may have the parking lot on the back road. But
You would turn left to get in to the to the fast food. It it's just I just want to be sure that's not what we can.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Uh
Chris Shaver
let's hear a little bit more presentation from staff unless staff stuff will definitely have.
Yeah. sure. Well well now we're gonna speak to as end users since that appears to be
Good afternoon, Joel 2, Palmar
Unidentified speakerVoice C
Florida Land Use Consultant for Evans Properties, the Land Owner. Commissioner, I appreciate your comments. We actually did discuss this when we had our 101 preview with you. Uh so I'll try to summarize what um what we've explained. Um at this point in time, we have absolutely zero users. For the project. Therefore we cannot Wrong. a specific user site plan that tells you the users to
the next blue one. Number two, uh what we have agreed to do to call to that. Um And and let me start off by saying that giving up These partners an increasing commercial we understood was something that you actually wanted us to do. Would be happy with us doing. And we're happy to do that in this location, which is probably one of the best commercial locations at B O P H. The What we agreed
to do to get you comfortable with this. Is as you can see, the portion of the project that is running directly on the cave, we specifically committed. Did that building lay out? To give you exactly what you want, the building frontage on McCain, and hand cart centralized parking. We're committing to that. They're because even though we have no idea what users will be in those buildings. Uh We further have agreed and and it's it's a little confusing
because we agreed on a specific cross-section with the county engineer and PDEG, a specific cross-section for Hancart going north. For the specific reason you're addressing, we did not like The big white Wallboard cross-section that would not be pedestrian friendly because we want to integrate, fully integrate the eastern commercial. With Western. And we want it to be an integrated quote
main street. Depends. So that section of Hancart is intended to become the main street for this project where where in fact we have exactly what you're asking for. Now what's causing the confusion? is that in the adopted DOPH comp All of these various types of cross sections have illustrations and renderings that you invented in your comp plan. And when we have to attach the
specific cross section that we're agreeing to, we have to attach that picture from your own complex. So the picture you don't like is the picture, is the picture you adopted in your comp plan. It is
Starkey
not out. Fine. I like that picture. That's what I just want. As applied here,
Unidentified speakerVoice C
as Will was saying, the material part of that reference is to define the right-of-way width in the specific cross-section so that we can make sure this is pedestrian friendly. What we in fact, if you then read all the conditions, what we're required to construct along that frontage on each side is retail. And we are required to have the storefronts on the main street. We're required to make it pedestrian friendly and required to put the parking behind it. Just as
you want. So even though we don't have specific users, you're going to have exactly the form. And let me just say one additional thing which we did discuss. I and I've said this at several public hearing on B OPH.
And the Galvin Company. Collectively own More control. Over ninety percent. of the currently entitled retail land within V OPH. Just those two ones. They both have voluntarily agreed, and I'm helping them do this with planning development and economic growth. We are collaboratively working on retail design. Which you have never had. We have 82,000 square feet of retail approved for this property
today and 145 apartments that we have no design requirements and no use requirements and no main street requirements. I mean we can build a project there with none of this. But Evans is voluntarily agreeing. To not only help formulate these proposed retail design guidelines, which we intend to have back to you before the end of this calendar year, hopefully for the board to adopt and embed in VOPH though they apply to all properties in VOPH. And we've agreed in these conditions
that whatever comes out. Of that boarding proof at the end of this year. This MQD is going to be bound by now. So we're willing to abide by your future control of the design guidelines. And we're going to help you try to come up with that. So that's why we're going forward with this. We really prefer to have more commercial here. At this tremendous corner. And we think we've given you in the conditions, we've given you one hundred percent control. over what that future retail is
going to look like. We simply I could we could throw you a plan today and it it would it would not be the plan. It can't be the plan when you don't have the
Starkey
users. Can I can I say that I don't You know, when when you think of apartment complexes or multifamily. The only way you think about it in the k in the context in the county right now. is the way we have had these national apartment builders come in and build. But there are many other ways, especially in this kind of community, to bring in multifamily that makes it. um woven into the street structure and uh Town homes.
lofts above the buildings. Um A D years. So so when when When I say multifamily, it doesn't mean 300 apartments that have no context to anything around. Um But I don't I would prefer if you don't. take out the ability for someone to come in here. and put some kind of housing above the shops. Well we have retained because that makes the shops more viable if they're done right. And we we didn't
Unidentified speakerVoice C
discuss this. We have retained that right. If you look at these conditions. We have retained the right to do vertical bench use. And the conditions. And we have an exchange matrix that allows us to do that. We we agree if we get a capital investor. Who's willing to cause you can't just wish those projects to happen. You can't just draw a picture of the project. You actually have to raise money from someone who's into business that thinks that they can build and market and rent those units. And if we find that person, it would
be silly for us to not do that deal. So we have retained the right to do vertical mixed use, but we're obligated to do that ground floor retail on both sides. Yeah. No matter what
Starkey
What I What I want to know is Can that be a Burger King, a McDonald's, and a taco?
Unidentified speakerVoice C
Well, let's discuss the use things. Here's the problem with what you want. The problem is your adopted V O P H Regulations. Do not allow you to say, I don't want to Burger King of Taco Bell McDonald's. Okay. You don't have that legal power. You were never given that planning power and your documents don't allow. You are allowed to control you are allowed to control land design. and building design. And we're going to go through that process.
But there is nothing present. In my opinion. And then I helped write the documents and we've stood here for 20 years talking about it. There is nothing in the BOPH documents that you can just decide one morning that you don't like Taco Mill or you like McDonald's but not Burger King. You just you don't have that legal power under a zoning framework. You've never had it in the state of Florida or almost anywhere else. Jerry, were you gonna say
Starkey
something?
Unidentified speakerVoice C
That's not to say we
Starkey
intend to mainstream. That's you know that's not the character of some
but you only have the authority that you are provided in
Unidentified speakerVoice C
your
Starkey
own documents you you have the ability to say we won't we we won't put those in in. But let me ask
Sarah.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Joel is right there in terms of like limiting land use, and he is right that. uh you can control the site design. So one way that uh these types of users can be mitigated is by Designing And locating their drive through facilities at the
Applicant representative
at
Unidentified speakerVoice B
the right locations. So if if you want to
USR big service restaurants that typically have drive foods. And then a condition of approval could be uh developed that says You know, drive-throughs should only be or shall only be to the rear or sides of buildings that shall not wrap around. And
there
Starkey
should not be any drive-throughs. I mean that's What we want. That's not a
Office Session
that's not a business, that's not a regulation of the the aim of the business, it's a regulation of the design of the property.
Unidentified speakerVoice C
And and I su I suggest that if the commission as a whole decides to go there. Sure. then obviously that's something you would need to impose not on one approval when you've got a dozen others already given. That would be correct. That is something that would have to be discussed in the context of an overall regulatory requirement for V OPH or whatever area you're regulating. So that would be and again. Well. Well, and we've talked about that. For example, are you
really not going to allow a Costco or SAMS Club Anywhere in around VOPH and require 40,000 residents to drive to Wesley Chapel to go to those things.
Starkey
No, I think they can be right outside the boundary. But that's but see that's my that's my
Unidentified speakerVoice C
point. And that's part of what we're we're looking at with PDEG in this global view. We're going to be talking about Certain types of uses proposed locations for certain types of uses, where would these things Be best suited to provide the needs of the residents, but without unnecessarily intruding on what was intended to be the village design concept. So we're not at odds with you on any of this. I'm just saying that it has to be done on a
global basis through this process we're working on the next few months. We've talked about workshopping those ideas with you, obviously, before we waste time driving. Regulations because we've got to get a consensus among you. So we're we're in tune with that, but it really needs to be done on a global basis because everyone needs to abide by the same regulations. We're out 81 property owners at a huge disadvantage.
Starkey
And Joe, we had a wonderful workshop last week on VOP. Um and was it filmed by
Unidentified speakerVoice C
Okay.
Starkey
So That might be something that you want to look at. I know Clark Clark was there. Um I'll do big cedar lodge blank golf. I I probably
Unidentified speakerVoice C
not not really.
But we we understand the point, but I guess what I'm trying to say is for this particular approval. We honestly believe that we're bringing you what we've heard from you in the last year or two that you wanted, and we're committing to abide by whatever those design regulations are that come out of this process and our our written conditions say that.
Starkey
So do you guys um Would you be with me on the That we don't want that kind of the drive-throughs in here. I mean this should be walkable. Local. When you do that, you take out the mom and pop opportunity to have great restaurants and bakeries and coffee shops and If they can't they don't they can't compete. And and I think that's the flavor that we want want would be okay. So you're gonna have 40,000,
Unidentified speakerVoice C
just being double second, you're gonna have 40,000 residents that can't have a Starbucks, a Dunkin' Donuts, or another drive-through service in Twenty square miles. I I don't understand I think this is something that you might I don't
Starkey
know how you
Unidentified speakerVoice C
you might want to think through before you just jump.
Starkey
I I mean I'm not opposed to Starbucks. Okay, come on up take.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Good afternoon, David Engel, Planning and Economic Development Director. Just to give the board some context and background, we asked the Galvin Companies and the Evans Group to come in and work with us. We are working on drafting new design standards for BOPH. And this was a pre existing application. The applicant has agreed to abide by our our our new design standards. They're going to be stakeholder driven as well as board driven. And we will be back, but the applicant is willing
to work with us in perfecting these design standards.
Starkey
But David, they could you could still have a Three or fast food restaurants in a row like what we've done to 54 just pulled up to the street.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
They were already entitled to allow that. And we
Starkey
Well, I'm just wondering if they'd agreed not to put any in because we said yesterday we didn't or last week we don't want any drive-throughs at
Unidentified speakerVoice B
David Seth
Starkey
Centers.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
and voluntarily yeah free to work with us and come up with a consensus and then work on Oh Have we asked? If there's no um drive-throughs allowed, then and and you will pass that, then there's no-
Starkey
can you can you legally say coffee shop but nothing else? I don't know. If we if we were able to get uh an agreement that we wouldn't have Um Certain kinds of drive threes, can you discriminate? Oh. Yeah, see, I I don't I don't think you can do that. So I mean one. Okay, it's your it's your side of the county. You can screw it up like 54 if you want to, or you can make a special, you know?
Office Session
And this is Twelve thousand square foot increase. Yeah they've already got sixty or eighty-two thousand square feet. And multifamily. They're asking to to get rid of the multifamily.
Starkey
I don't think that's a good idea. I mean, we just saw that in Metville. I I I do.
Office Session
Do you want an apartment complex in the rule of EOB?
Starkey
I did not say apartment complex.
Office Session
But that's what they're giving up. Joel I've already said to you that they they reserve the right to do vertical mixed use. To do vertical mixed use.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
And and and also uh Board members. We view um V O P H as underentitled for commercial. It's overweight residential. So we call them in to
Starkey
balance. Family resident.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Yes.
Starkey
Not multifamily. resident.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Oh you're correct. Most of the uptake is single family details.
Starkey
There's not enough multifamily
Unidentified speakerVoice B
commercial there regardless of the type of residential there. Okay, when I look at his allocation, I'm looking at the as you say, twelve thousand more square feet. We gotta do all this for that. I'm wondering, are you asking for enough corrosion? Do
Chris Shaver
you want a string one?
Unidentified speakerVoice C
That's a very good question. The answer is yes, we do ultimately, but right now we're trying not to be fixed because Village C only has a specific allotment, and we've committed to Galvin that we'll leave the rest of this on the table for what they have on the south side of McCain. But as part of
the same big village, but as part of this overview we're doing with Mr. Ingall and his team, part of that analysis is looking at the quantities of commercial. And I believe we're going to propose to you as part of this update that we in fact increase the total square footage of commercial allowed in certain villages and certainly villages. C is one of those because of its location. So the short answer is we will be asking in that update later this year to increase
the total allowment LHC, at which time we then will ask for a partial allocation of that back here into theirs. Well, once again, I thought we wanted Santa's club if it was across the street. No
Starkey
big box and VOP eats. Let's go. That's 301. That's 52. That's 54. That's not a walkable village.
Unidentified speakerVoice C
How far are you willing to drive to one of those if you live in the OPH?
Starkey
I I I get my paper towel at Publix. I don't have to drive the Cascar too. Well there
Unidentified speakerVoice C
are other people that
Starkey
don't do that.
Unidentified speakerVoice C
Well
Starkey
they don't you know they'll all shop with you. I think they'll trade having a great place to live than live in Well, I submit that that's
Unidentified speakerVoice C
I I submit that that's another discussion for another day as part of this global overview. And we think that we're going to be able to identify some locations where those would work and not offend your sense of the village structure. and yet be a service to your future constituents who are going to live in the OPH. But we are going to audibly ask for more when it's available in village C if you decide to up the square foot village to see.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
So again, my my first thing with looking at this was like small small, you just go through this whole process. So I'd like to say to you, as you're coming forward for what you've added. if you come across someone that wants to build this big office complex. And what comes to mind is in Westing Chapel. The one the gentleman has built a couple around the area, they're all full and sold. So you have and I'll even get you with the introduction with that general. But if he wants to build an office complex there, I don't want that to limit you from doing the other things you want to do as well.
Unidentified speakerVoice C
Right. And we did talk in the one-off meeting about that and and we committed to you and I think to other individual commissioners. We actually think that given the topo here, this is the highest, one of the highest points of VPH, the vista to the northwest. Over Saint Leo. It's spectacular here. We think long term that A taller structure on the side. Whether it's you know Boutique hotel with rooftop bar and restaurant, whether it's
office building and some purchase residences in a vertical configuration. We think that this has great potential for high-end product. We have tremendous slope going to the northeast. We can do an outdoor amphitheater on that slope for outdoor events. This property, even though it's only 52 acres, has tremendous. Members put hair to Um and we just don't want to get hamstrung to the point that if we have an idea like Commissioner Oakley is saying, we have to come back and say,
hey, we've got a chance to really do something, can we get more square footage? Uh but right now there simply isn't enough available in Village C. For us to ask for more. without unfairly limiting our co-developer, we're not we're not gonna do that to them at this point.
Uh I think we're allowed to do Up to one point seven five.75. So I'd say Huh? Is that anything fun? Well, that could be changed in the global update. See, right now we're bound. I mean, we have to live with what the documents say until you change the document, but that's a good point. That's something we can put on our to-do list. And in this update you need to see if you're willing to go higher. We can say we I agree with you as long as we can park the knee. As long as we can park the need, why why wouldn't you why wouldn't you build
the space? I
Unidentified speakerVoice B
know this. In US 19, we've had a floor ratio so low, even though we put a no height restriction on it, because the floor rate area ratio was so low for the past 18 years after this board voted to increase the height, we couldn't do it because the floor area ratio. So it's an issue. I mean it hasn't been addressed yet, it needs to get addressed. So David, if you would Yeah.
Starkey
I just sent you a picture. Can you can you show me?
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Thank you, Commissioner. And that was a good point about the uh 0.75 FAR. It doesn't really fit for these uh village centers and V OPH. In the uh in the case of US 19, you're right, unrestricted height. We did have a very strict FAR there. About, I think it's 2022, Tyreek can correct me if I'm wrong, we elevated it to three three times FAR, which would give you about a 15 and 18-story building. So that's currently, and we're now exploring going to a five times
FAR, and we're incorporating that in our land use analysis for the corridor. Where we are going to be initiating a redevelopment study for the West Market area. and nineteen and that will be addressed sir.
Chris Shaver
Thank you. Um Gina, I just sent you a picture.
Yeah, that's the floor.
MarianoChair
Um I'm not sure that this is the place that you'd want a big box like a SAMS or something like that in this particular area because you're so close to Zephyrhills and you're really not that far from West Chapel at this point. Well if you live where I do North of Mlanton, north on seventy five. We need a Hold depot or um or Lowe's or some other big box that we can get to. That was having to drive fifteen miles to get there.
The problem we have now is we don't have the infrastructure to handle the traffic because of all the growth we've got. And people are having to travel longer distance to get to what they need. For their households. And we've got to pay attention to that, but I don't mean to Put a big box right behind another big box for the 301 in the Carroll handcart room. But we need to pay attention to where these sections are located.
Starkey
Um what I'm showing you in this picture. I I'm not sure if it's this one. Um but um because one of these is I think this is assisted living or senior housing. This is a This is something like what One of the hotels looks like in downtown Norton Commons. So above the retail. And I don't think this is it. I think it was a white building that looks has a little more architectural detail than this. It's the hotel. It's it's not a Holiday in. Or you
know the parkings behind this it's a It's a touchless No, no lobby hotel, kind of like a VRBO or Airbnb, but it's a hotel and you can book it online. When you unlock the door when you check in. And um when you leave, they come and clean it. I mean it's it's woven right to the community. Um Then I want to show you this one. Down the street.
This is
Chris Shaver
A um senior Senior County.
Regina, said you.
We haven't.
Sunday again.
Gee, Jeffrey. Jack Mariano.
Starkey
All right. What do you? Well that's Showing what the main street is. Um I'm not even sure if that's Main Street, that might be Cross Street, but Hopefully you get it again. But anyway. The um
Chris Shaver
Mr. I think
Starkey
that could be it right there on the corner. The senior. Is that it on the corner? Yeah. That that above is senior housing.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
No, it's to the right then.
Starkey
Right right there. The
Unidentified speakerVoice B
three story. That that that brick building on the right. That's it.
Starkey
I think those were the apartments actually. Those are the apartments. Yep. No, I think those are the apartments. I took a picture. But that's a apartment comp that those are that's multifamily woven into a a walkable downtown that doesn't look like the big apartment class. complexes that we get that are don't fit in a neighborhood like this. So I'm saying you can get multifamily. in a community like like this neighborhood that they are trying to build.
With with those kind of structures. Gina, did you get my email? Yeah, that's the senior housing complex.
Chris Shaver
And if someone wants to build that on this property, we would be
Starkey
ecstatic to have that. Come with me next year and you can meet all kinds of developers who do this kind of stuff. You're going to build it for us? Oh, I'm going to introduce you to people who build that. We may move we may send send some names to you, but they they want to have the framework done so they don't have to go through variance after variance after variance to try and do really good quality valve like trying to do here. Like you have to do a longly. Every single thing we did was a variance. Okay.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
But I'm gonna say if we can get something more commercial, more elevated up. They didn't create jobs and people aren't driving down south to go work somewhere else and it's
Office Session
all
Starkey
shops and restaurants
Office Session
underneath. There's I understand that we talk about
Starkey
story with office complex. That's where I'm gonna be go back to that picture. This is right downtown. You have townhomes and single family. Go back to where you just were on the map.
Chris Shaver
Right, right.
Um You were behind the street. I'm all right to it.
Starkey
No, but if you don't have the bones right, then they'll come in and they'll But what you don't want. Um you've you've lost the spot that you brought. But these are the homes that right. Like downstream to one of those commercial buildings.
Chris Shaver
And offices.
Yeah, he's got a flexibility to do that if it chose to. Uh
Starkey
only if the only if the The details of right. He's got the rights right now to do so. Actually. As the back.
Chris Shaver
It's
crazy.
Starkey
That that's hidden from view. That's where you obviously they need to redo it, but that's That's um The parking is in the back and the the front is absolutely lovely.
I think that's the senior housing.
Applicant representative
That's what I want to say right there. And to a little bit like a spot, that's true. Don't like
Chris Shaver
that.
Applicant representative
We don't
Chris Shaver
Has to fourth. Well Okay.