Mount Dora project with Chick-fil-A, Texas Roadhouse, more gets timeline to open
Editor's note: This story is available as a result of a content partnership between WFTV and the Orlando Business Journal.
A Lake County retail project with several high-profile tenants likely will see its restaurants debut by the end of the year, according to its developer.
Andy Hawkins, development partner for Clearwater-based One Oak Development, told Orlando Business Journal restaurant tenants at Mount Dora Groves South — his firm's 17-acre project on the south side of U.S. 441 in Mount Dora near Loch Levin and adjacent Taylor Morrison's large residential project there — should open by the fourth quarter.
These include Chick-fil-A, Texas Roadhouse, First Watch and Mission BBQ, plus a to-be-named restaurant concept negotiating for a 3,000-square-foot space. Heartland Dental also is confirmed as a tenant for the project, which is permitted and under construction, along with a Fifth Third Bank and Circle K.
Click here to read the full story on the Orlando Business Journal's website.
Click here to download our free news, weather and smart TV apps. And click here to stream Channel 9 Eyewitness News live.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
30 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
New program at Anderson Humane in South Elgin lets you ‘try out' a pet before you adopt
A new program at the Anderson Humane animal shelter lets people take a potential pet for a 'test drive' before formally adopting them. Foster to Adopt is a win-win for all involved, said Dean Daubert, CEO of the South Elgin-based nonprofit. The pet gets to live with a family rather than in a cage at the shelter, the shelter has more space to take in another animal and the foster family has time to make sure the cat or dog is a good fit for them. The deal sweetener for those who are part of the program is they get first pick of the animals that come into the shelter, Daubert said. 'Many large organizations have foster-to-adopt programs,' he said. 'It's a great way for folks that want to try a dog or a cat in their home first. (They) aren't sure whether it's going to be a good fit (so they) get to try it out and fall in love with an animal. 'We've taken it a step further and have said, why don't we let folks know which animals are coming into the shelter and hopefully divert them from ever having to spend a night in the shelter.' The program started June 1, and so far they've had one animal placed in a home through the initiative. The goal is to get the word out to people who might be interested in adoption. They can take 'advantage of fostering and seeing if the animal is right for them before they adopt,' he said. Anderson posts photos of available animals on its website, and every animal gets a vet exam before being sent to a foster home, Daubert said. If someone ends up adopting a foster animal, Anderson covers the the cost of the initial set of required vaccines and spaying/neutering. Adoption fees range from $75 to $400, Daubert said. While the program is new, it's not unheard of for a foster family to adopt a pet to whom they initially thought they were giving a temporary home. 'They hadn't planned to adopt at first but they … fell in love with their (animal) during the foster period,' Daubert said. Bartlett couple Kim and Jim Saxton did just that, Kim Saxton said. They initially agreed to take in Jenny — now called Yennifer — between November 2023 to January 2024 so the dog didn't have to stay in the shelter over the holidays, she said. 'Our sons visited from Phoenix and Portland and met her at Christmas. Everyone loved her,' Saxton said. '(The dog) charmed everyone she met so we decided to adopt her in late January 2024.' What her family did can be seen as a prototype for the program Anderson has started, Saxton said. When someone lets a pet into their home, the animal has time to decompress and show its personality and the family gets to see if it fits into their day-to-day life, she said. 'It's so much better for the animal to be out of the noise of the shelter,' Saxton said. 'People looking for a way to help should consider fostering. It helps the animal and clears a space at the shelter for another animal to get saved.' Kelly Rakunas, of St. Charles, has been Anderson Humane's volunteer engagement coordinator for two years. Her family, which includes husband Eric and sons Charlie, Bryce and Mack, had fostered older dogs for several years before taking in a puppy last October, she said. One month later, they wound up adopting Wiggles. 'She turned out to be the missing piece to our family,' Rakunas said. Rakunas agreed with Saxton assessment — Foster to Adopt program is a great way to find out if pet ownership is for you and if one particular animal fits in with your family. 'It allows a pet to be away from a shelter and allows people to see if a pet is the right fit for them. It's a win-win situation,' Rakunas said. For more information on the Foster to Adopt program, go to or call 847-697-2880.
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
‘We can't wait forever': GOP frustrated but unwilling to act on Trump's TikTok extension
President Donald Trump's latest move to keep TikTok alive is yet again frustrating congressional Republicans, many of whom object to China's continued involvement in the popular app but just want to be done with the whole drama. 'Not my favorite thing,' Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), along-time proponent of the ban, deadpanned, when asked about the president's plan to issue another extension. He spoke a day before the White House confirmed Trump signed a 90-day suspension of enforcement of the law requiring TikTok to divest from ByteDance, its China-based parent company, throwing another lifeline to the short-form video app. By Friday, some House lawmakers registered a note of resigned irritation. The extension — Trump's third since the law went into effect on Jan. 19 — is a unilateral decision not envisioned in the bipartisan law passed by Congress and upheld last year by the Supreme Court. Rep. Darin LaHood (R-Ill.), a member of the House Intelligence and China committees, told POLITICO. 'The national security concerns and vulnerabilities are still there, and they have not gone away. I would argue they've almost become more enhanced in many ways.' But Trump's extension of the TikTok law largely boxed out Republicans in both chambers who have shown little inclination — beyond stern words — to prevent him from making these postponements almost routine. Many GOP lawmakers saw themselves as granting the president space to cut a promised deal while the White House deals with urgent priorities, like trade negotiations and the Israel-Iran conflict. 'In light of everything going on, I think he did the right thing,' Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), a China hawk who voted for the ban, told POLITICO of Trump. 'I have concerns about all kinds of things — that [the extension] is on the list — but it's not at the top of the list.' Though Trump has promised his TikTok negotiations areclosely tied to trade talks with China, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent testified last week to a Senate panel that TikTok's sale was not currently a part of the negotiations with China, raising a further potential obstacle to Trump inking a deal in the near future. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a close ally of the president and longtime national-security hawk said earlier in the week: 'The sooner we get that issue solved, the better,' without offering any ideas for further enforcement. 'I just want finality,' Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) told POLITICO. 'I want some certainty and just know that the Congress isn't being played when we make a decision [that the app] be sold.' Another member of the House China Committee, Rep. Zach Nunn (R-Iowa), told POLITICO, 'No more extensions. It's time to follow through.' Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.), also a member of the China panel, noted in a post on X Thursday the law only allows one extension of the compliance deadline, adding, 'I was proud to support the ban of TikTok and believe the law should be implemented as written.' With their comments, the lawmakers echoed House China Chair John Moolenaar (R-Mich.), who in early June called for the U.S. to 'let [TikTok] go dark' to bring China to the table to negotiate. He reiterated that stance on Friday. 'Delays only embolden the Chinese Communist Party,' Moolenaar said in a statement to POLITICO. 'I urge the administration to enforce the law as written and protect the American people from this growing national security threat.' Still, observers say Republicans are not exercising their leverage to demand the White House enforce the law they helped write, for example by withholding funding or congressional oversight hearings. 'I keep reading that Republicans are 'frustrated' and 'impatient' about their TikTok law being ignored, but they should stop complaining to reporters and take it up with Trump,' said Adam Kovacevich, founder and CEO of the pro-tech Chamber of Progress. Among the Republicans being undercut by the president is his own secretary of state. Marco Rubio — who as senator was one of the loudest critics of TikTok's ties to China, and a huge backer of the app's ban — has been conspicuously silent as Trump has repeatedly granted more time to strike a deal for its sale. 'You have to decide what's more important, our national security and the threat that it poses to our national security,' Rubio told POLITICO in March 2023, as Congress was considering a ban. 'You have to weigh that against what you might think the electoral consequences of it are. For me, it's an easy balancing act. I mean, there is no balance. I'm always going to be for our national security.' A spokesperson for Rubio at the State Department did not respond to a request for comment. Democrats — even those who support keeping TikTok online — say Trump's approach is the wrong one. 'These endless extensions are not only illegal, but they also put TikTok's fate in the hands of risk-averse corporate shareholders,' Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) told POLITICO in a statement. 'This is deeply unfair to TikTok's creators and users. I'm prepared to work towards a solution, but Trump isn't coming to the table.'
USA Today
2 hours ago
- USA Today
Walmart to pay $10 million to settle FTC fraud lawsuit over money transfers
Walmart WMT.N has agreed to pay $10 million to settle a U.S. Federal Trade Commission civil lawsuit accusing the world's largest retailer of ignoring warning signs that fraudsters used its money transfer services to fleece consumers out of hundreds of millions of dollars. The settlement was filed on Friday in Chicago federal court, and requires approval by U.S. District Judge Manish Shah. Walmart also agreed not to process money transfers it suspects are fraudulent, or help sellers and telemarketers it believes are using its services to commit fraud. "Electronic money transfers are one of the most common ways that scammers tell consumers to send them money, because once it's sent, it's gone for good," said Christopher Mufarrige, director of the FTC consumer protection bureau. "Companies that provide these services must train their employees to comply with the law and work to protect consumers." Average worker pay: Walmart reveals its highest paying job, excluding managers The Bentonville, Arkansas-based retailer did not admit or deny wrongdoing in agreeing to settle. Walmart did not immediately respond to requests for comment. In its June 2022 complaint, the FTC accused Walmart of turning a blind eye to fraudsters who used its money transfer services to cash out at its stores. Walmart acts as an agent for money transfers by companies such as MoneyGram, Ria EEFT.O and Western Union WU.N. Money can be hard to trace once delivered. The FTC said fraudsters used many schemes that included impersonating Internal Revenue Service agents, impersonating family members who needed money from grandparents to avoid jail, and telling victims they won lotteries or sweepstakes but owed fees to collect their winnings. Shah dismissed part of the FTC case last July but let the regulator pursue the remainder. Walmart appealed from that decision. Friday's settlement would end the appeal. The case is Federal Trade Commission v Walmart Inc, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois, No. 22-03372. Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Marguerita Choy
