This transcript appears to be a meeting of the **Richfield Planning Commission**. Based on the dialogue and the list of officials provided, here is the identified transcript. *Note: Since timestamps were not provided in the original text, I have used [00:00] as a placeholder.* *** **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** I'd like to call the February 23rd meeting of the Richfield Planning Commission to order. Um agenda is the roll call. We are all—we're all present. Excellent. Um the next thing on the agenda is the open forum uh where Residents can share concerns that they have typically of items that are not on the agenda. Have we received any um emails or letters or other feedback? **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Chair and commissioners, no, we have not. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Right. Then we can approve uh the agenda and I understand there is a proposed change. **[00:00] Commissioner Teraldson:** Yeah. Commissioner Teraldson would propose moving the city planners report and presentation to after other business the agenda. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Is there a second? **[00:00] Commissioner Canaly:** Commissioner Canaly seconds because it sounds interesting. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** All right. All those in favor of amending the agenda, please say I. **[00:00] Commissioners (Unison):** I. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Opposed. All right. Um, you're right. We didn't hold discussion about that. I asked for unanimous consent that we just continue— **[00:00] Commissioner Teraldson:** —blind trust. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Yeah. **[00:00] Commissioner Teraldson:** Yeah. **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** Yeah. **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** Can I in retrospect ask why? **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Oh. why we changed it. **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** Yeah. **[00:00] Commissioner Teraldson:** Because it's just putting two things to do together instead of splitting it across. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** I think we've definitely met the efficiency by discussing this further. All right. Thank you. Um All right. And then uh the next item on the agenda then would be um the annual organization uh meeting uh or business. So, first would be uh the election for chair, chairperson, and secretary. **[00:00] Commissioner Teraldson:** Chair, don't we have to approve the minutes first? **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Pardon? Yeah, we should also approve the minutes. That's correct. Thank you. It's been a while since we've met, obviously. Thank you for pointing that out. Um, do we have a motion to approve the minutes of the previous meeting? **[00:00] Commissioner Teraldson:** Commissioner Teraldson moves to approve. **[00:00] Commissioner Surma:** Commissioner Surma seconds. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** All right. moved and seconded to approve the minutes from the December 8th meeting. Any discussion on that? All those in favor, please say I. **[00:00] Commissioners (Unison):** I. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Opposed? The minutes have been approved. Thank you. Um, now we can uh go down to the election of chair, vice chair, and secretary. Do we have any nominations? **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** Don't we have—well, don't we have presentations first? Public hearings, resolutions. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Oh, sorry. **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Sorry about that. Okay. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Okay. I—I misunderstood what was—what was—right. We only do this once a year, so my apologies if I—if I misunderstand the order of operations. **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** Planner Crosby, could you check back at the minutes? Did Surma—did Commissioner Surma vote yes on that change? **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Quiet, Commissioner Hoie. **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** Uh Commissioner Hoie would like to um would like to nominate u Mr. Holig Johnson for the chair if you'll accept it. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Uh yeah, I—I—I would accept nomination. Yes. Are there any other nominations? All right. It's been— **[00:00] Commissioner Canaly:** Yes. **[00:00] Commissioner Canaly:** Sorry. Uh, Commissioner Canaly here. I second the nomination. I want to just say that you deserve a pat on the back. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Oh, well, thank you. Um, there being no other nominations, all those in favor uh to elect—reelect me as chair, please say I. **[00:00] Commissioners (Unison):** I. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** The next thing would be to elect a—to elect a vice chair. Um, do we have any nominations? **[00:00] Commissioner Teraldson:** I'll nominate Commissioner Hoie. **[00:00] Commissioner Surma:** Oh, I'd like to second that nomination. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** You accept the nomination? **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** I would love to hear other nominations. Um, the idea of running this meeting stresses me out, but... Any other nominations? **[00:00] Commissioner Canaly:** Commissioner Hoie is stressed out by the nomination. I'd like to nominate um Commissioner Teraldson. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** All right. I second that nomination. All right. **[00:00] Commissioner Teraldson:** I'll—I'll accept that. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** All right. So, we do have uh two uh candidates. So, I don't—that's never happened before. So, I suppose we just go one by one. Um All those in favor of electing Commissioner Hoie as uh vice chair, please say I. **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** I. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** All those in favor of selecting Commissioner Teraldson as vice chair, please say I. **[00:00] Commissioner Teraldson:** I. **[00:00] Commissioner Surma:** I. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** All right. The uh every confidence Commissioner Teraldson will do a fine job as vice chair. Agreed. All right. Nominations now for secretary? **[00:00] Commissioner Teraldson:** I would like to nominate uh Commissioner Surma. **[00:00] Commissioner Surma:** I would accept that. **[00:00] Commissioner Canaly:** I'll second it. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Who seconded that? Sorry. **[00:00] Commissioner Canaly:** I did. **[00:00] Commissioner Teraldson:** Teraldson. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** All right. Um Any other nominations? All those in favor of uh Commissioner Surma as secretary, please say I. **[00:00] Commissioners (Unison):** I. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** The next thing on the agenda would be the liaison for um city council, um community services advisory, housing and redevelopment, school board, transportation, the chamber of commerce, and the sustainability commissions. Does anyone have any preferences for those? **[00:00] Commissioner Teraldson:** Chair, I'd love to stay with the sustainability commission. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** All right. **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** Chair, I'd like to stay as a transportation commission. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** You were—you were school board, right? **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** Yeah. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Yeah. So, we need somebody um interested. **[00:00] Commissioner Walsh:** Would you want to do school board? **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** Okay. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** All right. I'm happy to stay with city council, but I—I don't have a strong feeling. **[00:00] Commissioner Kakowski:** Chair, would you like to switch with me with Chamber of Commerce right now? **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Sure. Yeah, why not? **[00:00] Commissioner Kakowski:** All right. Chamber of Commerce and then you do city council. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Um and that leaves uh uh housing and redevelopment. That was um uh Stersas. And then what are we missing? Oh, we have sustain. We need transportation and HRA. **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** Oh, no. I—I—I like to stay as transportation. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Oh, okay. All right. **[00:00] Commissioner Walsh:** So, I'm currently um community services. **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** Um I would uh have the HRA. **[00:00] Commissioner Walsh:** Okay. **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Oh, and we—we will have a vacancy. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** I think we've got one more previously. I also believe the Chamber of Commerce was one that was left undone. Um, so I think we can kind of post that one. I think the ones that are remaining are relatively low impact lower urgency. **[00:00] Commissioner Teraldson:** Lower urgency and not discussed as often. **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** Yeah. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** All right. Probably a good fit. Do you have uh—do you have everything down, planner Crosby? Okay. All right. Would you—will you repeat back who has what? And then we can— **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** All right. Um and then we can make a motion. Commissioner Teraldson and Surma are both going to stay in their current positions. Um you are going to switch with Commissioner Kakowski, chair, and then uh Walsh was going to take school board and uh Hoie was going to take the HRA leaving the uh one of them open community services. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Okay. That was pretty—all right. Um, so do we have a motion to approve that slate? **[00:00] Commissioner Canaly:** Commissioner Canaly. So moved by Commissioner— **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** —and a second. **[00:00] Commissioner Surma:** Second. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** All right. Moved and seconded to appoint the liaison. All those in favor, please say I. **[00:00] Commissioners (Unison):** I. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Opposed. All right. The next thing would be the uh review of the um bylaws. Do we have um a report for that from staff? **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Yes, we do. Thank you, chair. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Go ahead. **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Um part three, section three of our bylaws requires that the planning commission review the bylaws each year at the February organizational meeting. The city selected Civic Plus as our new agenda building software platform last year and we made changes to it last year and we're making changes again. In an effort to make the agendas more consistent, uh the commissions are adjusting their order of operations to better align with city council agendas. Therefore, we're proposing um changing the order of operations to match the city council with the approval of the agenda going first, then approval of the minutes and the open forum thereafter. If any of the commissioners have any other changes they would like to consider, now is the time to bring them up for discussion. **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** I have no opposition, but for curiosity, we just made the [change] a year ago. **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Yeah, we've had—there's been some back and forth with getting used to the—the new— **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** Sure. **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Yeah. And there's some policies that we can't control. So— **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** —no worries. I mean, I don't have a strong opposition. I don't think that either, but just curious. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Any other questions? All right. I would entertain a motion to amend the bylaws. **[00:00] Commissioner Teraldson:** Commissioner Teraldson moves to amend the bylaws. **[00:00] Commissioner Surma:** Commissioner Surma seconds. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** All right. It has been moved and seconded to approve or to amend the bylaws as recommended by city staff. Is there any discussion? All those in favor, please say I. **[00:00] Commissioners (Unison):** I. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Opposed. All right. The bylaws have been amended. Um and then now the annual rescheduling discussion. Do you have a—a report for that? **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Yes, I do, chair. Thank you. Um during the 2024 bylaws review, the planning commission indicated a preference for the annual rescheduling of planning commission meetings that fall on city observed holidays. This year, the May meeting falls on Memorial Day. Staff recommends rescheduling the May meeting to Wednesday, May 27th—27th, which would be the next date that the chambers are available. Um, and we also recommend moving the December meeting. Um, even though it doesn't necessarily fall on a holiday, um, the planning commission has traditionally voted to reschedule this meeting earlier due to end-of-year travel arrangements. We recommend rescheduling the December meeting to two weeks earlier, Monday, December 14th. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** All right. Any questions? I would entertain a motion to adopt the schedule as proposed by staff now that we—we make this change. **[00:00] Commissioner Teraldson:** So moved. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** All right. Is there a second? **[00:00] Commissioner Surma:** Commissioner Surma seconds the motion. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** It's been moved and seconded to adopt the meeting schedule proposed by city staff. Any discussion? All those in favor, please say I. **[00:00] Commissioners (Unison):** I. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Opposed. All right. That has—the motion has passed. All right. The next thing would be uh liaison reports. Um, uh, city council, I have no—I have no report. Uh, community services advisory, I have no report. **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** All right. Um, HRA um, it's not here. Uh, school board report, right? Transportation. **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** Yes. The transportation commission uh received and discussed a presentation by Hennepin County regarding the proposed Penn Avenue reconstruction which is due for 2028. Uh there's ongoing community engagement regarding that. Um Nicollet Avenue is still scheduled to be reconstructed this summer, but uh the—the main focus now is on u planning and community engagement for what the future shape of Penn Avenue corridor will look like uh once that goes under construction. So get involved and uh give your feedback. Uh there's still time to engage on that matter. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** All right. Uh Chamber of Commerce. **[00:00] Commissioner Kakowski:** Um only update I've got is that the chamber is already planning Fourth of July in PennFest and they're needing some sponsorships and they're adding a car show to PennFest. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** A car show. All right. Uh, sustainability. **[00:00] Commissioner Teraldson:** Uh, big things are that the Fix-It Hub is continuing each second and fourth Wednesday of the month through February. Um, and there are several events coming up this year, including Earth Day, shredding and small appliances, recycling, and garden tools. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Thank you very much. Um, now we have the uh city planners report and presentations. Uh, planner Crosby. **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Thank you, chair and commissioners. Um, you'll see in the packet I provided just some data on um, the things that we do on a day-to-day basis, in case you ever wondered. Um, on January 13th, the city council held a joint work session with the HRA to review a revised sketch plan from the Legion and they discussed design expectations, the mix of affordability, and uh, the video is available if—if you're interested. Um, on January 27th, the city council approved the MICC's, uh, which is the Minnesota Independence Community College. Um, actually, it's College and Community. I always say that backwards for some reason... um they approved their request for land use entitlements. And then on February 10th, the city council held a joint work session um with two of you to review draft request for proposals to solicit consultants to assist with the comprehensive plan update. Um I have since uh posted uh the RFP for—so it is out for the consultants to um bid on and the deadline is at the end of uh March uh to—to submit. **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Also I wanted to um—since I bothered to make it—um I had—I had been asked by the transportation commission to put together a presentation on um planning and land use for the Penn Avenue corridor and um didn't really um—I had to do a little bit of—a little bit of research to figure out what that presentation on the Penn Avenue corridor might look like and since I had bothered to put it together I thought I would um also show you guys. There was a brief discussion about having a joint um meeting between the planning commission and the—and um the transportation commission to talk about—but their agenda was so packed it—it made more sense for me to just give the presentation again. So um pull it up here and then give me a second and then—Okay. And it still has the old date on it. **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Um, so I've learned that the Penn Avenue corridor has been studied many times over the decades. The corridor has a few characteristics that make it particularly challenging. There has always been a tension between the busier commercial corridor on the north side of 68th which is shown in the aerial photo here and the quieter more residential leg south of 68th. In the commercial portion, um the parcels—as you can actually see here—the parcels on the east side which is um the bottom are um—yeah below the—the roadway—are uh quite small really—uh and especially when compared to the parcels on the west side. Um, as a pedestrian, the street is not very crossable and it uh therefore feels disconnected, just to name a few. **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** In 2008, the Penn Avenue corridor master revitalization plan and design guidelines were developed to act as a guide to facilitate and direct future development in this area. But these documents assumed a significant amount of redevelopment that may not be practical given uh many things including economic conditions and the difficulty of parcel assembly. Um the current comprehensive plan describes the corridor as 60% residential and 40% um like retail, business, recreational. Um, at first that didn't seem—when I first came to the city that didn't quite—um seem right and I thought, isn't this primarily a commercial corridor? But the reason for the greater emphasis on housing is twofold. First, a previous market study indicated that the corridor already had more commercial than the neighborhood could support. This implied that commercial intensification was unlikely. And second, the zoning allows for mixed use in this area. If properties were redeveloped, the hope is that the new buildings would be ground floor commercial with housing above, resulting in far more residential floor area than commercial. **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** More recently, in 2021, a corridor study was conducted. However, it was interrupted by COVID and ultimately the study was only accepted and not adopted. There is one element of that plan that we are hoping will be carried forward and that is the vignettes. These were little kind of almost nano studies—just two or three parcels maybe four at most at a time—that explored the potential to take advantage of some amenity sharing between parcels such as vehicular access parking and circulation. Now, this part will hopefully be more interesting to you than it was to the transportation commission, but um I told them that you don't get to invite a planner to your meeting without her talking about zoning. **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** So, um there are two zoning districts that regulate this area, and we're specifically talking about the commercial area here. The first is the mixed-use community zoning district, which um is the—what we call the underlying zoning district. It intends to provide a balanced mix of uses between recreational, commercial, residential. Um, vertical mixing of uses is encouraged, but is only required if a parcel is more than two acres in—in size, and there really isn't any—I think there's one parcel that's more than two acres in size. Parking ratios are slightly lower than in other commercial districts, and setbacks are less, promoting a more compact and intense form of development. The Penn Avenue corridor overlay district impacts the underlying district by usually modifying it in some way. So, it's going to add something or remove something. Um, in this case, such modifications include prohibiting auto repair and detailing. The two-story minimum require building height requirement is waived. In other words, one story is allowed and maximum building heights are reduced from 12 stories to eight and a mix of uses is not required. **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** So, some things that we may want to think about in relation to how these two um overlay or these two zoning districts work together. Um we could um and then you know maybe even through the comprehensive plan there would be discussion about this um tweak the overlay district um to maybe uh better reflect the design guidelines that were done back in 20—2008. Um further restrict auto-oriented uses or maybe regulate where office is allowed. Maybe there's no office on the ground floor. It's only a certain percentage of the ground floor. Um, and the—the overlay district waves the two-story minimum requirement. Is single-story redevelopment really desired? And maybe we allow one story, but we only allow it for existing uses. Um, and then we could also take a look at further reducing parking requirements if it's maybe in exchange for other pedestrian-oriented amenities, things that we're—we're looking for. **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** So, I—I gave them a brief update about the Penn Station uh project which you guys—which came before you guys. Um, in short, it's a five-story 42 unit multi-family building uh that's currently under construction. Uh, the building is fully affordable but geared towards families with several larger units and an indoor play area. And then um generally in relation to this corridor, there's definitely a desire to balance keeping open the possibility for redevelopment um while encouraging reinvestment in the interim. And that's—that's a tricky—that's a tricky balance. The city is currently working on a new small business program called Revive. And the goal is to assist businesses or property owners with sprucing up older buildings, which Penn has a predominance of. And I think the threshold would be 30 years or more. Yeah, that's old. We're going to put that "old" in quotes. **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** So, I also let them know that the 2050 comprehensive plan update um is uh getting starting to get started. Um hopefully we'll maybe have somebody on board by the end of May or the middle of June and um overall the meat of the work is done over the next two and a half years and the draft plan needs to be complete by the middle of 2028 in order for the final plan to be submitted to the Met Council by December 31st of 2028. Um the Met Council is looking for increased density along transit corridors and Penn Avenue is a transit corridor. However, um the current comprehensive plan already calls for 25 to 100 units per acre in this area. So, um the 20—the minimum 25 is what the Met Council was looking for and—and we've already—we're already um calling for that. So, I don't know that any um density changes would um necessarily be a must in this area with the next comp plan update. Um but is of course something we could consider. **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Regarding um the redesign of Penn Avenue, we had some internal—and when I mean internal, I mean it wasn't even with public works—it was just literally the planners in the office. We talked about some of the things that um that uh some of the aspects of redesign and we kind of um kind of came to a general—came to a general consensus internally that on-street parking could potentially be traded for on-site parking and there may be places along the corridor where doing so is advantageous. Uh greenery is a priority. Consolidation of access points may be acceptable in locations where it will not adversely impact functionality. And where feasible, owners are encouraged to share access and parking to the benefit of all. And this is that point where we're hopeful that a "let's work together" kind of mentality will arise with some of those—where some of those vignettes can be brought to life. **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** And then finally, um, once the county does land on a preferred roadway design for Penn Avenue, the city might want to revisit and refresh the Penn Avenue design guidelines. Um, I thought this was a really helpful map. Um personally um kind of giving a hierarchy to um the roadways but the land kind of the building configuration is um—was that you know mass redevelopment um scenario that I guess they—they thought was going to happen. Um, and so maybe adding a little bit more—maybe—maybe modifying this to be a little bit more grounded in um honoring some of our existing businesses and um and some of the existing kind of articulation along this roadway. Um, our design guidelines appear to focus on new construction. So it would be good to relook at them through the lens of building expansions and repurposing—the greenest building is an existing building. So um I believe yeah that's the end of my presentation. Do you have any questions? **[00:00] Commissioner Teraldson:** What kind of feedback did you get? **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Um uh I was asked about um five-over-one which is where the ground floor is um commercial and the upper floors—the upper four floors—are residential. It's very um—how do you—like cookie-cutter form of—like a lot of projects are five-over-one um and it does usually um—it does usually lend itself to um—that the ground floor commercial are larger spaces and they want um more um tried-and-true commercial tenants. They—they want a Starbucks. They want somebody that knows that they can finance it, that they're going to stay there. So it doesn't really lend itself to um like mom-and-pop type local startups, those types of things. So that—that's um although a—you know we would love to see that type of redevelopment. That's great. We—we get the best of both worlds. We get commercial and we get residential. Um we also have to balance that with um you know being sensitive to our existing businesses and new businesses. Um the other thing is that basically the redesign needs to accommodate both basically. So when we're talking about yes we'd love to see redevelopment but also and we need to reinvest in—in in the great—in what's there now—that then the roadway needs to do both. **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** Question um can you talk a little bit about um on-street versus on-site parking kind of what the implications are for both options and maybe how we might think about that a little bit um as far as planning perspective and from transportation perspective? **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Um I think that the on-street parking if there—if the right-of-way can accommodate um some on-street parking then maybe the on-site parking could be converted into something else that's more pedestrian-friendly. There's a lot of parking in front of—in front of buildings that is almost heading off of the roadway sometimes. And um that space right in front of the building is—is prime, you know, could be prime real estate for something a little bit um more pedestrian-oriented. And if we can—then if we are able to work with the county to get the same number of stalls on the street, then that could potentially be a win design-wise. **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** Yeah, I agree with that. I thought I remember in the presentation that almost seemed like the perspective was inverse but maybe I—I misread that on the slide or remember that. **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** What do you mean inverse? **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** Uh in the—in your the note you [mentioned] four points from your conversation. **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Yeah. **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** I thought I—I remembered—uh yeah so possible that on-street parking may be able to be traded for on-site parking. **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Oh, like I wrote it backwards. Right. Like don't—we wouldn't we rather have— **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** —Yeah. On-street parking rather than on-site parking? **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** Yeah. I think um we are looking at where there may be opportunities for on-street parking so that we could um utilize the spaces that—the area that is now taken up by on-site parking for other things. Yes. **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** Okay. Yeah. **[00:00] Commissioner Teraldson:** So it'd be more of a public parking type of situation. **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** For sure. **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** And just as a side note, I mean, I'd be curious, you know, for the city to explore with on-street parking, hopefully when things become dense, the idea of paid parking and how the idea of metered parking might encourage walkability and actually would encourage— **[00:00] Sam Crosby (City Planner):** —turnover— **[00:00] Commissioner Hoie:** —turnover, which would be really great. And it has an inverse effect that you'd expect from it. More people tend to visit when they know they can readily find parking rather than [it being] kept by someone who's been there for three and a half days. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Yeah. Thank you. Um before we—before we would adjourn, I want to thank Commissioner Canaly for—for his work with us on the planning commission and I think that we all wish for healing and health for you and your family and we'll miss your presence with us. **[00:00] Commissioner Canaly:** Sold so much. I loved it all the same. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Uh, no, seriously. Uh, thank you and just good luck going forward. It's always going to be good stuff. All right. Um, thank you again. Um, I would entertain um a motion to adjourn. **[00:00] Commissioner Canaly:** Commissioner Canaly, I would like to move that we adjourn. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** All right. And a second. **[00:00] Commissioner Teraldson:** Commissioner Teraldson seconds. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Moved and seconded to adjourn. All those in favor, please say I. **[00:00] Commissioners (Unison):** I. **[00:00] Chair Holig Johnson:** Opposed. We stand adjourned.