Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Alright. Good morning, everyone. Welcome. We are glad you've joined us for today's meeting. Municipal Planning Board or MPB is an advisory board to the city council comprised of citizen members who voluntarily and without compensation devote their time and talents to a variety of zoning and land development issues in the community. All MPB recommendations are subject to final action by city council. We anticipate the meetings of today's meeting will be presented at the city council meeting on 11/10/2025 for approval of recommended actions. Any person desiring to appeal recommended action of the board should observe the notice regarding appeals below. Caution, untimely filing of by any appellant shall result in an automatic denial of the appeal. Go over general rules of order.

The board is pleased to hear all non repetitive public comment. Large groups are requested to name a spokesperson. When you are recognized, state your name, address, and direct all your remarks to the board and limit your comments to three minutes per item or as set during the meeting. Robert's rules of order govern the conduct of the meeting. The city of Orlando encourages courteous civil discourse during in person and online settings.

Persons making public comment virtually are asked to conduct them tell themselves with the same rules of decorum as they would in a traditional public meeting. When acting on items identified with the letters GMP, the board is acting in its capacity as a local planning agency pursuant to and in accordance with section one six three point three one seven four of Florida statutes. Items identified with one star legislative matters or policy setting actions are to be conducted according to standard public hearing procedures. Appeals of one star items must be filed with the city clerk's office between before 5PM, Monday, 10/27/2025 to schedule an appearance before city council in accordance with chapter two, article 24 of the city code. Items identified with two stars are quasi judicial matters or implementing actions that are to be conducted subject to the Florida Supreme Court ruling and Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County versus Snyder.

The board's decision must be supported by competent, substantial evidence. Persons dissatisfied with the board recommendation in such matters may be entitled to a de novo or new hearing before an independent hearing officer in accordance with the provisions of chapter two, article 32 of the city code. A request for a new hearing or an appeal with respect to a two star item must be filed with the municipal planning board recording secretary by 5PM, Tuesday, 10/28/2025. There is a $500 nonrefundable fee for this appeal. The MPB recording secretary may be reached at betsy.brown@orlando.gov or (407) 246-3365.

Any person who desires to appeal any decision at this meeting will need a record of the proceedings and for this purpose, made it to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made that includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is made. Thank you for participating in your government and making Orlando truly the city beautiful. Madam secretary, do we have a quorum?

Yes.

Alright. Thank you. Call the meeting to order at 09:04, and please stand for the pledge of allegiance.

Excuse me.

Alright. We'll open up with a consideration of the 09/16/2025 meeting minutes. We have a motion to waive and accept.

I make a motion to waive the renewed meeting minutes. Alright.

That is a motion by board member Barrett and a second by board member who was that? Is that Board member Bashan. All those in favor, please unmute your mic and say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Alright. Pass unanimously. Alright. If the MPB is not adjourned for the day or voted to take an earlier lunch break, the board will complete the agenda item being viewed as of 12:30PM and will pause for a half hour lunch break at the conclusion of that item. In accordance with section two eight six point zero one one four Florida statutes, any member of the public can be heard on any matter before the board today.

If the item is listed on the consent agenda, you may ask that the item be pulled and placed on the regular agenda. You may then speak on that item when discussed on the regular agenda. Please complete a speaker request form on orlando.gov forward slash public comments. For those of you joining in person who would like to provide a comment for any item on the agenda, please fill out a speaker request form and hand it to the board secretary. For those of you joining virtually, use the raise hand feature and turn on your camera or dial 9 on the phone to request to speak when prompted. Alright. With that, we will go through the, the consent agenda.

Thank you, mister chair. First item on the consent agenda this morning is United Against Poverty. The applicant is Rick Baldacci with Avcon. It's located at 2880 Iliana Court. It's a three part petition. Part a is ABN twenty twenty five dash one zero zero zero four. This is to abandon a segment of Iliana Court right away. Part b is ABN twenty twenty five dash one zero zero zero five. Let's do abandon a segment of West Iliana Street right away. And part c is identified as NPL twenty twenty five dash one zero zero four three.

This is a master plan for a public benefit use. The recommended action is deferral of this request to the 11/18/2025 NPB meeting. We have no speaker cards on this request. We do have a hand raised in Zoom, though. We'd wanna pull that, or do we just wanna verify that?

Would the individual liking to speak on this, would you like to speak, or do you need a clarification? Please unmute.

Miriam Rafferty. Miriam, if there if you're there, please unmute yourself. Keep moving? Yep. Alright.

Item two this morning is salon eighty eight. The applicant is Felicia Lim with salon eighty eight. It's located at 810 Menendez Court. This case is identified as CUP2025Dash10019 as conditional use permit for personal service use or hair salon. The recommended action is approval of the request subject to the conditions in the staff report. And we received no speaker cards on this request, and no hands are raised on Zoom. Item three is identified as Park Lake Townhomes. The applicant is John Prowell with BHB. It's located at 307315, And 319 Park Lake Circle. This is a two part petition.

Part a is identified as g m p twenty twenty five dash one zero zero zero three. This is to change the future land use designation on point five six acres from office load of residential medium and to amend the growth management plan future land use element to remove subarea policy s point one four point seven from the subject properties. Part b is identified as z o n twenty twenty five dash one zero zero zero two. It's rezoning from o one slash t to p d slash t, planned development for a 37 unit townhome development. Recommended action is approval of the request subject to the conditions in the staff report.

We received no speaker requests on this item, and there are no hands raised in Zoom. Item four is identified as the platting code amendment. The applicant is the city of Orlando. Case number is identified as LDC2025Dash10006. This is an amendment to chapter 65, officers board's procedures, the modified planning, regulations, requirements, and processes in order to comply with senate bill seven eighty four and Florida statutes one seventy seven point zero seven one.

Recommended action is approval of their request. We received no speaker cards on this item. Case five is identified as Orlando Lutheran Towers Independent Living. The applicant is Carlos Pereira with Kimley Horn. This is located at 300 East Church Street, and the case number is NPL2025Dash10036.

This is a master plan for a 15 story, 128 unit independent living facility with a parking garage expansion. Recommended action is approval of request subject to the conditions in the staff reports. We had no speaker requests on this item. No hands are raised in Zoom. Item six is identified as Holler Honda Auto dealership.

The applicant is Catherine Schafer with CPH LLC. This is located at 3801 L B McLeod Road. This is case is identified as NPL2025Dash10044. This is a master plan approval of a 92,481 square foot auto sale and service use. The recommended action is approval of the request subject to the conditions of the staff report. And, again, no speaker requests on this item. And last this morning is Woodlands at Baldwin Park. The applicant is Kiana Nieves with Kimley Horn. This is located at 1343 Sassoon Avenue. This is a five part petition.

The first part is a n x twenty twenty five Dash10001. Request is annex the subject property in the city limits Orlando. Case two is identified as GMP2025Dash10007. This is change to future land use designation from Orange County's low medium density residential to the city's residential medium intensity designation. Part c is ABN twenty twenty five dash one zero zero zero zero.

It's an abandonment of approximately 216 foot segment of Sevis Road east of Sassoon Avenue, approximately 250 feet of segment of Moosh Avenue south of Sunrise Boulevard. Part d is identified z o n twenty twenty five dash one zero zero zero three. This is establishing an initial zoning of PD planned development for 02/1932 unit multifamily development. Lastly, would it be the master plan identified as MPL twenty twenty five dash one zero zero two four. There's a master plan for multi project with 232 dwelling units in two to and three story apartment buildings.

The recommended action this morning is an indefinite deferral of this request at the request of the applicant. Closed the consent agenda.

Alright. Thank you. Do we have any board members with conflicts to declare? Alright. Seeing none, we move forward to any motion on the consent agenda?

I'll make a motion. I second.

Alright. We have a motion from board member Bashin, a second from board member Hall. All those in favor, please unmute your mic and say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously. Thank you. Alright. That includes our consent agenda for today. We have no items in the regular agenda and other business. We will start with the West Colonial corridor study presentation.

Yes. Thank you, mister chair. This project is about a year in the making. This this corridor study along West Colonial, the approximate boundaries are from I 4 on the East Side out to Tampa Avenue on the West Side. It and the original purpose of the study was to encourage redevelopment along this corridor. It's compatible with with the adjacent neighborhoods in the area. That includes Lake Dot, Rock Lake, Spring Lake, and and College Park. The city has hired a consultant, Kinley Horn, on this project. And at this time, I'm gonna turn it over to Eliza Uliano with Kinley Horn for a quick presentation on this study.

Good morning. Thank you for having me. My name is Eliza Harris Giuliano. I'm an urban planner with Kimley Horn and the project manager on this effort. And Tim might have to coach me on how to get this on the screen.

I think we have some staff willing to help here. Thank you, Sean.

Oh, it's just the Zoom call.

Thank you.

Okay. Thanks. Let me share. Yep. Where's the

last Oh, there. No.

Okay. Okay. Thank you. So as Tim mentioned, this was this is the West Colonial Drive corridor study. It is a study of the land uses around West Colonial Drive, West of I 4, roughly to to Tampa Avenue.

You can see the boundary on this map here. As Tim mentioned, it impacts a number of neighborhoods that are adjacent to the corridor, including Spring Lake, Rock Lake, College Park, and Lake Dot. We're gonna go through brief introduction as well as some of the background on the study and the proposed regulations. So why are we doing the study in the first place? The recent completion of I 4 and the increasing momentum of the creative village are likely to induce increased demand in this area, which historically has not seen a lot of demand.

The desire of the city is to promote economic vitality and improve the visual attractiveness of the corridor while ensuring that there is compatibility with the adjacent neighborhoods, which are pretty close-up against the back of the commercial areas along this corridor. The primary tool for the study is zoning regulations. There were five community meetings, three business outreach meetings of which one was virtual, and two larger community meetings, towards the beginning of the study and one near the conclusion of the study. In terms of the existing conditions and prior planning, looking at the corridor features, obviously this is centrally located within the Orlando city of Orlando. It's a high visibility corridor.

Lots of people drive down, walk down, or take buses down Colonial Drive every day. There's a large number of customers because of those neighbors that are close by. There's a large number of customers that are potentially within walking or biking distance of the corridor. The reality of the corridor is we see quite a number of vacant lots and vacant buildings. The biking and walking conditions, while it's close to proximity to a lot of people who can bike and walk, the conditions for biking and walking along the corridor aren't great.

There's also a high concentration of social services in the area. There's a pretty distinct difference between the east side of the corridor and the west side of the corridor. The strengths of the east side of the corridor, and by the which I mean East of Orange Blossom Trail, is that it's closer to I 4 in downtown. The buildings are generally pulled up to the sidewalk. There are some open spaces that have potential to contribute, Lake Dot and Springdale Green, But there's more visible vacancy on this side of the corridor, including vacant lots.

There's been a substantial amount of business turnover. There aren't very many street trees, and the sidewalks are quite narrow. There's also poor residential street connections on the north side. The west side of the corridor has more of a mature tree canopy. The buildings are are set back more from the road.

It has more stable occupancy rates and larger parcels. That setback from the road gives more of a suburban character, which is less ideal for biking and walking conditions. There's concerns that there might be loss of trees if redevelopment does happen. There's also, and we learned this from the community meetings, a lack of businesses open in the evening, which means a lack of eyes on the street to make sure that the things that are happening are good, positive business oriented things and less unwarrant unwanted activities. This is the existing land use map.

I won't go into a lot well, you can see predominantly on the West Side is office uses. There's also a notable amount of vacancy, and this is just vacant land, not including buildings that are vacant. And that's the 18.8% that you see in the pie chart there. The uses are are largely reflective of the zoning map. On the West Side, it's predominantly office zoning.

On the East Side, it's mixed use zoning with a little bit of office zoning as well as some PDs as well. There have been a number of recent studies that touched this area, although none of them focused area. So some of the plans that touched on portions of the area are the Paramore plan, the OBT Next master plan, the OBT sidewalk study, the LINX State Road 50 BRT stationary analysis, and the Vision Zero cross study. The Vision Zero cross study is actually ongoing right now. So while this, the focus of this study isn't on the transportation piece directly, there is a concurrent study that's happening that addresses this area with respect to transportation.

So what you see on the screen now is redevelopment illustrations that we developed as part of this study. The purpose, and there's a lot more detail, I'm not going go into these, but there's a lot more detail in the actual document. The purpose of these was twofold, basically to try to illustrate what the standards might look like, both to investigate what standards would be appropriate and communicate that to the public, as well as to provide some inspiration for the development community that might entice investment. So we performed three of these development illustrations along the corridor on different types of sites. We also looked at short term strategies.

So these are temporary installations that would help to demonstrate business demand in the corridor for uses like restaurant or social gathering areas, as well as community building exercises. So to get into the meat of the proposed regulatory changes, the proposal is to create a special plan for the West Colonial Drive corridor. This, with respect to land development regulations and comprehensive plan updates, this would affect uses, streetscape, site development regulations, landscape and buffer yards, as well as sub area policies. In terms of the streetscape requirements, we're responding to public feedback that there's a desire to see more shade trees to make that comfortable walking experience along the corridor as well as better sidewalks. There's a desire for improved lighting.

We also heard feedback about long distances between crosswalks. We addressed that in the short term, but that's really more something that would be passed on to the that cross study to to address with FDOT. We also heard concerns about bikeability. So the the streetscapes you see on the right, there's basically two streetscapes proposed for the study area. One for West Colonial Drive from OBT to I 4.

That's the East Side. As you can see, it's got a little more urban character with more paving and defined street wells. And then on the West Side, which is, as we said, a little bit more suburban in character, the paved area is a little bit smaller, eight feet, and the the park strip is a little bit wider with a continuous green area. These are particularly the the East Side is consistent with what's being worked on now with respect to the downtown streetscape. So we're extending that downtown streetscape into the first portion of this area, and on the West side, leaning more towards that tree preservation mindset.

The streetscape requirements, as I said, differ a little bit on the east side and the west side. On the east side it would be a 15 foot streetscape zone, of which five feet would be for planting and furnishing and 10 feet would be a pedestrian zone. And on the west side, it would still be a 15 foot streetscape zone, seven feet apart strip, and an eight feet wide pedestrian zone. These wider sidewalks, while improving pedestrian comfort, would also help to to address gaps in the bike network where there are there is a need or a desire of people to bike on the sidewalk. There would be wider sidewalks to accommodate that.

There are bike lanes on a portion of the corridor, but not the whole corridor. And as I'm as we as I alluded to earlier, this is an FDOT road, so any changes to the pavement would really be at least in collaboration with FDOT, if not led by FDOT. One other focus on the West Side, as we mentioned, there are some really nice canopy trees out there already. So we did a study that is in more detail in the document about how modifications could preserve existing trees. So while this is the standard streetscape, the expectation is that it would be able to be flexible to move around existing trees, whether that means moving the sidewalk closer to the street or moving the sidewalk in towards the development side.

This map shows those existing trees, and you can see, again, a higher density of existing high quality canopy trees along the west side of the corridor. In addition to being more of them, they're also tending to be closer to the street where everybody can see them and enjoy them, and they can provide shade to pedestrians. Whereas on the West Side, you do see some clumps of trees, for instance, around Lake Dot, but very few that are right on the roadway. So we, in the document, have sample urban tree protection construction details showing what would happen to preserve a large tree that is in the in the park strip close to the roadway or a large tree that is on the edge of the property. There's also a number of other considerations.

We worked with an arborist to really dig into the tree code and see what makes sense for this area. And there are some trade offs. For instance, one of the goals of the city is tree diversity, which is a great goal, and and our arborists would absolutely support that. However, you also wanna make sure you have trees that can survive in pretty harsh urban conditions where there's a lot of pavement. So making sure that the trees are survivable in the context is, is the the first priority in this case.

Also making sure to to emphasize preservation of large trees and prioritizing trees over other landscape that might be on these sites, since we're talking about pretty tight urban sites and the desire of the cities to see some successful redevelopment and investment in this area. As I mentioned, the community talked about the lack of positive business activity on the West Side of the corridor in the evening. You know, as we're driving by, it looks very calm and serene, but what we're hearing is that because the lack of business activity at night, sometimes there's undesirable activity going on. We also heard that those residents wanted to live closer to services. Some of the examples that we heard were hair salons, personal fitness, coffee shops, grocery stores.

So we are proposing as part of the study that additional uses would be allowed in the overlay. In general, these uses are already allowed on the East Side, but the overlay would allow them on the West Side as well. Those are personal services, light retail, and restaurants without drive throughs. We're also proposing a limitation on the size of businesses because we're not looking for big box stores here. Right? We're looking for for small businesses. And there's a desire to support local business as well.

I need to take note of this. Sure. I need to take pictures.

Oh, am I not?

I don't there's supposed to be a button here.

Hello? Ah, there we go. Okay. We also heard a number of uses that the community did not wanna see. So the proposal would be to prohibit those uses throughout the length of the corridor. They include motels, smoke shops, liquor stores. In particular, we heard a desire to distinguish motels from hotels. The so we you can see the first row there is a list of uses that are recommended to be prohibited. The second row is a list of uses that were requested to be prohibited that are already prohibited in the area. And then there were some other requests like gun sales that the community wanted to see prohibited, but that's preempted by state law, so that's not something that we can recommend.

We saw an interest in banks, so we specifically wanted to make sure that banks were permitted to have drive throughs. Drive throughs, we're recommending to be a conditional use, so there's the ability to mitigate any harms that might come from a drive through in terms of impacting the sidewalk and the pedestrian environment, while also allowing for that investment if something that's compatible. Massage parlors is something that's already addressed by the city through this business screening process. And finally, I mentioned earlier that there's a predominance of social services in the area that's been a major focus of the community. There's already a policy within the Paramore heritage overlay, which is the southeast quadrant of the study area that would prohibit expansion of social services in that area.

So one consideration would be to expand that policy to the whole study area. In terms of site development regulations, essentially what we're recommending in order to support that more pedestrian oriented business use is to mirror on the west side what's allowed on the east side in terms of bringing buildings closer to the street. We're also recommending removing buffer yards between uses, which are typically gonna be commercial uses that are on the corridor. Now that doesn't mean exempting the buffer yards behind the uses. We do want to keep the buffer yards between the residential behind and the businesses, but we don't need buffers between a commercial use and a commercial use.

We're also looking at maintaining that 20 foot rear setback on the back streets, because there are a number of conditions where the commercial zoning goes all the way through to a back street where it faces residential. So there's the opportunity to make sure the setbacks mirror the residential in that condition, as well as allowing front porch encroachments, which aren't typically thought of in a commercial context. But as you get into more mixed uses or even some commercial context, you could use that front porch to give it a more residential feel. And as I mentioned, maintaining the buffer yards where you're adjacent to single family. As we mentioned at the beginning, this study is primarily focused on regulatory tools.

But of course, as part of the study, we investigate what other tools may be appropriate to help encourage revitalization in the area. These could include things like gateway signage and public landscaping, additional improvements to link links bus stops, additional safe crossings, as we mentioned, those can be addressed as well as part of the cross study, property maintenance and code enforcement to address some of the community concerns around that, as well as a continued focus on public safety and a continuation of the city's efforts to address the homeless, homelessness concern citywide, which includes this area. We also, do need to mention that Senate Bill 180 could impact the implementation of this study. There are certainly elements of the recommendations that can be implemented that expand the ability of investors and businesses to do business in the area, particularly on the West Side by expanding uses. There are other recommendations in this study that would prohibit uses that are currently allowed, which may be difficult to do under the current legislation.

And with that, I'd be happy to take any comments or questions.

Yes. You talked a lot about the trees and the coverage of the trees. Have you guys looked into and this might sound like a very minute statement, but the types of trees because of the cost involved with the oak trees that are there now and the sidewalk repairs and the amount that is there, would that change into the new area? Would they change the type of trees that are involved because of upkeep?

So we oak trees are included in in the recommendations in part because of their tree canopy and survivability in urban environments. We've not made different recommendations as a result of maintenance concerns. We've been consistent with what the city is doing downtown. I

had a question. Is this within the CRA, this area?

A portion of it is within within the CRA, but not all of it.

Okay. What are some of the, I guess I saw some of the renderings and the types of development. Like, do you envision it seems like maybe mixed use residential infill. Did you have any specific recommendations? Because I think we've had some some cases come before us redeveloping the hotels or the motels into affordable housing.

Mhmm.

Is that one of the uses that might be

So we we did hear a desire, for instance, for market rate housing. The the cons there are real concerns with the motels. And based on what we heard in the community meetings, moving to a permanent affordable housing situation would probably be an improvement over what some of those hotel motels are performing as now. I'm not sure we explicitly talked about that trade off, but the general sentiment is that that would be a a step in the right direction, I believe.

I guess I just wonder what what the incentive for developers might be until some of those properties like, just because there's issues, you know, it doesn't really entice developers to redevelop

Sure. And the current conditions. Conditions. Yeah. And that was one of the concerns is, you know, we did hear these are some nice pictures, but who's actually gonna do that? Right? And the city's not gonna do it. Right? It's it's gonna have to be the private sector. I think there's a couple of factors there. One is that there the market is coming this way in a way that it wasn't previously, and that's that's we wanna be ready for that. But, you know, I would concur with, I think, where you're going, which is that the stabilization of some of those motels would probably help to make the market rate more viable.

And I wonder too because I think it was interesting you showed even some, like, food truck parks, you know, something like boxy parks that could happen. But then again, does any of that open space kind of become overrun with unwanted activity? So how how are there any investments that you can make or that the city can make to help promote those redevelopment? I don't I don't know the answer. But

Yeah. I mean, the, know, the recommendation in the report in terms of short term strategies is that Citi could partner with Main Streets or other private actors to activate some of these empty spaces with community activities. Maybe not twenty four seven, but at least, you know, till later in the evening past 5PM, which is what they are now.

Thank you. Kind of along that same lines, I had a question about the homelessness. You touched on it, but there was no details on it. What sort of infrastructure what are you looking towards as far as addressing the homelessness?

So the city has efforts that are already underway citywide intended to address homelessness. There's pretty significant plans, and I don't remember all the numbers offhand, but a major investment in housing as well as major investments in moving people through investments like the Christian Service Center in getting people off the street both day and night. And we think that that will help to make this study a success. None of those things are direct results of this study other than saying keep doing that and do more of it.

I had a follow-up on the points about redevelopment. Because in this area, I know you mentioned there are vacant lands, and there are also buildings that are vacant and need redevelopment. You know, one of the concerns is I think all the planning standards are great, but generally speaking, they do increase the cost of of development to some extent, as I think you mentioned in here. So I'm just wondering, is there gonna be any difference in the application of these criteria for a redevelopment of an existing vacant building versus vacant property, or is there gonna be any flexibility to, I think, again, encourage people to get in there and redevelop those buildings that are sitting vacant or the motels or Or is this going to be applied across the board whether someone's talking about redevelopment or new development on vacant land?

So redevelopment of excuse me. Redevelopment of existing buildings would be covered by nonconformity regulations, which typically will allow those buildings to be reinhabited with minor upgrades, you know, not moving the building if if they're reinhabiting an existing building. And that does nothing in this study changes that. So and with respect to, for instance, reducing front setbacks would allow for more usable land area on the sites as well as reducing or eliminating buffer requirements where they're not needed would, again, increase the usable land area of the sites.

And do you know what percentage that nonconforming is? Does somebody know what percentage value? Is it 50% value, 75% value?

I'll defer to city staff on that.

It doesn't matter. I can I can link it up?

Would the answer.

I percent is pretty typical, but I

I I'm just wondering because, again, you know, I think it's important that some of these buildings get redeveloped, the buildings that are already there and just sitting sitting vacant. That's okay. Thank you.

I a I a quick question. You may you may have covered this, and I and I missed it. Was there any stakeholder engagement with potential developers to get feedback on what they would like to see to move in?

So we did do outreach not just to residents, but also draw flyers at businesses as well as specifically reach out to property owners. We did, encourage developers to attend, and we did have some developers attending. That's a little bit harder group to reach just because you don't know which developers are interested in these particular sites. But we did have people coming in, particularly property owners, saying that they were interested in redeveloping their property.

Okay. Thank you. Any additional questions from the the board? Alright. Thank you.

Thank you.

Right. Looks like we have, some appeals updates from mister Lewis.

Good morning, board. Paul Lewis, chief plan manager. We have one update for you. The Centro Biblico Internationale case from several months ago back in July. If you remember, that was a conditional use permit to allow a public benefit use for an existing church and a new private school within a portion of an existing office warehouse condo building.

We did reserve receive an appeal. It was a quasi judicial appeal. There were some negotiations going back and forth, but, essentially, how it all ended up is that the appeal was withdrawn because the applicant dropped their request to operate a school. So the CUP that the MPP approved will be limited to the continued operation of the church. So there you go. That's it.

Alright. Any questions? Thank you.

Thank you.

Alright. And with that, that completes our agenda, and we are adjourned at 09:40AM. Thank you.