Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

uh if everyone appears ready then we will go ahead and call the um planning commission meeting to order and I'll turn it to our clerks for a roll call. Chair Winnham here. Vice Chair Will here. Commissioner Blovic here. Commissioner Godert here. Commissioner Miner here. Commissioner Ryan absent. Commissioner Manuel Manuel.

And then uh item number two, approval of minutes. We do not have any. Item number three, we have announcements. We probably should announce that we've got the gentleman on the far corner that's, you know, having a side conversation that is worthy of worthy of welcoming Um, and I will be happy to do so. First, even though I'm sure that the uh, director Peagan had some amazing things to say, I will just say welcome to Kent Emanuel. As I thought as I um, I'll deny this in public, although this may be public. Um, there are very few people that I know of where I think of words like knowledge, experience, thoughtfulness, and simply just being a pleasure to work with. And that's what I think of when I think of Kent Emanuel. So, I think it's an absolute um uh very good thing. Glad you're here. And I want to say welcome. Yeah. Let let that go. Um are there any other announcements? Uh

yeah, Director Peagan. And while you do your announcements, would you introduce the few city staff that are here? I'd be happy to. Thanks, Chair Winnham.

Um so, first of all, I'll just remind us to speak loudly and clearly into your microphone. We do have um outside council joining us over Zoom. So we do have an attorney at our meeting today. Um Mary Wagner uh with our contract attorney's office and so it is a little bit difficult I think for them to hear on their end. So just please be mindful of that and speak into your microphone clearly. Um here with us we have Michelle Yang and Elizabeth Steedman helping to clerk our meeting and then the usual suspects up up here. Josh Anthony, assistant public works director, myself, director of development services. Lily Toy, planning manager, and a few folks in the audience. Um, and I would echo your sentiment with uh, Commissioner Emanuel. Really excited to have him on the commission. Uh, obviously brings a ton of experience and knowledge um, from his many decades of service with the city. Um, and so looking forward to his balanced perspective and his expertise that'll keep staff on their toes, I'm sure, uh, to make sure we're getting our work done well and doing a good job, which we take pride in every day anyway. Uh, but very excited to have Commissioner Emanuel with us. I also too might mention that we don't have planning commission here in a couple weeks. So I think it's Commissioner Godert's last meeting if I'm not mistaken. And so um I just like to take a minute to thank you uh Commissioner God for 16 years is it right of planning commission uh experience. I I really appreciate your perspective, your attention to detail and design, your support of staff. Uh the chances we've had to have one-on-one conversations and learn more about each other professionally and personally. um and just your your value of staff and the trust you place in us and uh the many many hours you've devoted to things like uh the general plan and I I failed to bring the tree ordinance uh under your charge but you've had valuable perspective and input on that as we work through that and I'm sure you'll stay engaged as we eventually get that thing to the to the finish line. So anyway, I could go on and on but uh we really do thank you for your many years of service

to the community in this capacity. I've really enjoyed working with you. So, congratulations. Um, and with that, those are all the announcements I have and I'll turn it back over to you, chair. Okay, very good. Let's go ahead and uh go into the uh planning commission items. Item number four, consent calendar. We don't have any uh public hearings, which is item B. Uh item B1 uh it's an amendment application amendment 202501528 to amend a use permit uh by JFA aggregate products as articulated in the uh agenda and the staff report. With that I will turn it over to staff for a presentation.

Thank you Chair Winnham Lily Toy Planning Manager here project planner for this project. Uh this is a use perm amendment as you indicated for JFA aggregate products that currently operates a mining operation on Clear Creek Road. So I had to kind of educate myself on this process as well because we've never done one as far as since I've been here. Um the last time we ever touched a use per amendment for the two existing mines that we currently have in the city actually down the one now. um was in ' 83 when this one was last touched. So when I started here in ' 03, we were just doing our annual inspections. So I had to really brush up my knowledge on this. So uh just want to share that history with you a little bit. So before going into the actual permit information,

yeah, maybe you could advance the slide for me. Yes. I wanted to kind of go over some of the uh criteria from the state SMAR which is the surface mining and reclamation plan. Is it not advancing? Anticipation. How do I check it out?

I'm clicking on the slide and it's not happening. What do I need to do? It was It did work perfectly.

Can you just click down to the next slide from where you're at? Oh, yeah. Okay. Sorry guys. Oh, we're not all we're all staring at ourselves.

Oh, look at that. There we go.

Sorry. a friendly reminder to turn your microphones on. Second break. Thank you. I actually muted anticipating a staff presentation. Normally I leave my microphone on the full time just to be ready. So we're we had a brief recess. Now we're back in session. Uh we'll turn it back over to planning manager Toy.

All right. So, just to kind of give you a brief background on uh the SMAR permits, a state surface mining and reclamation act. We just call it SMAR for AC acronym. Uh this was enacted in 1975 and it governs extraction and removal of minerals for commercial purposes, wind, it's over a thousand cubic yards and when it uh on property that's over an acre. Uh this is uh um enforced and um in the department of conservation with the existence of the office of mine and reclamation and uh the city adopted the surface mining and reclamation ordinance including the MR mineral resource overlay district to regulate mining operations. Next slide please. So in our surface mining um regula rec reclamation ordinance, it requires a use permit for this type of operation which also includes a mining plan, reclamation plan, financial asurances such as a bond and annual mine field inspections. So as I indicated earlier, uh we do have annual inspection and required reporting um of these mines and we contract for those services annually. Next slide, please. So, the project site is in the southern limit of the city located on Clear Creek Road just west of 273 approximately sits on 490 acres. It's adjacent to the city's power plant. Can you provide the next slide, please? Here you'll see the overlay and uh on there highlighted some of the uh the adjacent uses and around the project site. We've got undeveloped McConnell property to the north, the city of writing power plant to the west, and then um you'll see on the south, Sunrise excavating and paving, and then just to

the west is a former excavating business. Uh it was the Padroi, and they have since uh stopped operating as a mine. And so we're down to one, which is this existing site, JFA. Next slide, please. The zoning of the property is heavy industrial with the MR mineral resource overlay. Next slide, please. And general planned heavy industry. Next slide. So, let's uh let's kind of go into a little bit of the history. So, it was pretty revealing to me as I peeled back the reclamation environmental document that this site was actually mined uh for gold back in the 30s and which resulted in mounds of tailings which really gave an opportunity for this type of business to be operated here for aggregate mining. And so, the owner at the time um initiated their operation with the county since it was in the county jurisdiction, unincorporated area at the time under a use permit. um back in 1975 and then later on in ' 83 it was annexed into the city of Reading in which then they submitted an application for an amendment to their use permit and it was uh granted in 1987 and so since then it's been operating under that existing use permit with the annual inspections and uh reporting uh as required under the SMAR regulations. So the proposal today for JFA, they are asking to allow for receiving and storage of asphalt grindings and recycled concrete. Um they estimate that they receive approximately 7,000 cubic yards of recycled concrete and they receive about 50,000 tons of asphalt grindings. Click to the next slide. And as far as what is being stockpiled on the property, they estimate

approximately 15,000 cubic yards of recycled concrete as you see that's highlighted in yellow. And they stockpile about 70,000 tons of asphalt grindings highlighted there in blue in the middle there of the site. Next slide. Uh inclusive of this, they are also wanting to um actually be more consistent with the the property lines. Um the reclamation plan that was approved in 75 shows a little bit of discrepancy on the west side. You'll see in black lines that is the reclamation plan line and what is shown in red is the actual parcel lines. So we are revising the plan so that it's more reflective of where the parcel lines are. Uh next slide should show the final uh area of the reclamation plan as it should be. Next slide please. So what's the issue? The issue here is for the commission to consider whether this proposed amendment constitutes a substantial deviation. Per the smaller regulations, nonsubstantial deviation is when there's not any substantial effect of completion of the previously approved reclamation plan or does not change the end use of the approved plan to the extent that the scope of the reclamation required for the operation is substantially changed. Next slide, please. So since we we haven't done this in a long time and uh I just thought I'd bring forward to you the findings that are required for SARA you do have uh the findings that we've made in attachment inclusive of the use permit findings but I thought I'd kind of highlight what the SMAR findings are and um I don't want to read through all of them but those are the five findings that are required. Um, so next slide please.

With regards to SQA, the environmental portion of this project, an EIR was previously adopted back in 1975. Uh, there were there's no intensive change to the operation. Um, we don't see that it will have any additional impact to the environment. Um, so more in detail, the asphalt grindings and recycled concrete are being brought back to the site on the return trips um to the facility. So when they bring out materials to a work site when they come back they used to come back empty. So um with this new CALR requirement for using recycled material in their manufactured um processing they have to bring back uh some recycled material from their construction sites. Um so they are coming back on the return trips. So there won't be any additional truck trips. And then with regards to any storm water, they're still subject to the state required SWIP, which is the storm water prevention plan program. So per SQA, an addendum to the EIR is appropriate since uh we don't have any um uh any additional mitigations that need to be uh incorporated. Um so EIR does not need to be recirculated. So in this case uh dendum is being is appropriate. Next slide. Conclusion. So since the an this uh amendment is ancillary to the operation and minor in nature um this would bring the operation to compliance with CALR requirements and also bring consistency to the existing facility uh in accordance with the reclamation plan boundary. So with that, staff makes the recommendation that planning commission make the necessary findings pertaining to the SMAR permit and use permit and adopt addendum to the Clare Creek Aggregate Plant Facilities EIR and approve the amendment subject to the original conditions of approval. So I just want to put up the site plan so

that you have something to reference as you're discussing this. That concludes my presentation. Thank you, Miss Toy. So, we'll turn to commissioners now and and see if you have any questions or clarifications of staff. Mr. Emanuel, uh just a comment. Thank you, uh Lily, for bringing us up to date on on this particular project in the history of Sara. Uh it was good to know. And also, thank you. I see uh on the site pen have we've clarified that the asphalt grinding is for storage. The previous one in your packets just said asphalt grinding. So now it's consistent with the uh the storage aspect of the project. That's all I had. Okay. Good. Commissioner Goer

Lily. Um just out of curiosity in your report you the on the graphics it mentioned the expiration date. Would the expiration date of this project? Good question. So I dug through the EIR and it does talk about, you know, this was back in 75 when they were proposing it. So it's a good estimate. It said that the operation is estimated to go for 30 to 40 years. So I did the math. That's 2015. So we're running on year 51. Um, but it's also based on market driven, how much material is being demanded, right? So obviously they still have areas to excavate. So it was just an estimate. There was no

Right. There's no very good. Um, what prompted the applica the amendment application? So, uh, Calrans adopted some regulations with regards to requiring, uh, the finished product to incorporate recycled material. I think it's something like 25% of their finished product has to contain recycled material. So, that prompted them to import or receive back onto their site recycled material. Are they currently storing grindings and concrete on site?

They are. And what prompted it was, I think in 24 when we did the annual inspection, um the contractor said, "Oh, we're doing this little tiny thing that's really not part of the plan. We need to really do an amendment." So, that's kind of how it it started. It was about two years in the making, and we finally got the paperwork together.

Okay. I'm just curious about this. How were grindings and leftover concrete handled in the past? Were they just taken to a landfill or that was the process? Okay. Um, do we need a provision that says that we that these grindings won't be coming from contaminated sites like brownfield sites or are uh or are grindings from that kind of property like a brownfield are they recycled? Yeah, I don't know too much, but I would just think that before a site is demoed, they have to go through some sort of inspection of some sort, right?

So, there probably is some other process for disposing of contaminated materials other than recycling them. Yeah. I mean, Jeremy might speak to it. Well, I was just hazarding to guess that likely Cal Recycle regulations in terms of hazardous waste materials, recycling, what's appropriate for landfill, what's not, or even if CALR has regulations because it's their requirement to to have the 25% recyclable material as part of the manufacturing process. It's just an educated guess. I don't know for sure if there's other regulatory controls, but I would think I would think there would be and that it wouldn't be uh the spot wouldn't be in our permit to have that, but I suppose we a condition wouldn't hurt. Um, but I I don't think it's necessary. Okay.

I I could clarify with actual knowledge, the projects where the product comes from have their own environmental approval and their own environmental regulations and their own requirements where the product goes. Okay. And in past they were never sent to landfills. They were recycled into road embankments, uh, driveways. Oh, so they were being used. Oh, yeah. 100. They've been grindings have been a sought-after reuse product for decades and decades. Okay. Very good. and and the requirement CALR is began doing this decades ago and they upped it to 25% more recently and they're now actually um doing some testing at 40%. So it's it's not something new.

Okay, very good. Well, thank you very much. Any other comments from commissioners or questions, please? I just to clarify the in this picture for the grindings will in the future the long term will it stay in that footprint that's shown on this map. Yeah, they're they don't expect to stockpile any more than what's being proposed. Perfect. Thank you for your They're using the material. Yeah. Okay. Thanks,

Mr. Emanuel. Um, I don't know if you can answer this, Lily, but you know, we are being asked to approve the new reclamation plan that shows basically almost all open water at some point. Uh, but we're also the mine is under SMAR regulations. Do you happen to know if SMAR reviews that and has ultimate approval of the reclamation plan or is that simply up to cities who are not particularly informed adequately about reclamation plans? Yeah, I peeled back the um EIR and it looked like there was intention of keeping it open water because they talked about potential reuse of the site. Um one of them was like a a water recreation facility. So I think it's it's planned to keep it as open water in the end when this when they're done.

Yeah. I I guess my question really is does tomorrow get back involved in this or do we have final say that? Yep. Open water is fine.

Yeah, I think um after they decide they're going to stop operating, then I think Samara will finally like close out their permit to some degree with an inspection and everything that's paid by the operator and then I think the city would have ultimate say. I do think too from my my time my previous life the water board I want to say there's wastage charge requirements and regulation from the local the regional water boards as well in these sites too. Um I don't know if the owner operator could speak to this some if if uh the commission so wishes but in terms of other regulatory control or if any uh approval of this reclamation plan. Do you know? Yeah.

Yeah. If we can ask you to, since we're doing this, if we can ask you to come up to the um microphone, state your name, and uh and perhaps uh identify what uh the state minds and geology does to regulate this.

So, I I don't know what states, Minds, and Geology does. Uh my name is Logan Hansen. I represent JFA. Um, I don't know what their day-to-day operations look like, but my understanding of this site is it's supposed to be open water at the end. Um, that was always the intention. The only the only change to the recck plan, I believe, was taking the power plant out of the existing rec plan that was sold to the city reading. That's that's my understanding of this um oper operation or project and it is regulated by it's not not for this project. State mines and geology. Yes. O o oversees SMAR. Yeah.

At the state level. And so yeah, it's the bottom line is I I used to um in a different career had to get multiple sites SMAR compliant and get SMAR permits um at one time in my life. So it's the end of the day there's no concerns. It's uh heavily regulated at multiple levels. But to Commissioner Emanuel's point, I mean I my understanding is there's no approval from SMAR at this stage. This is a local level approval. Um is is my understanding. That's correct. I mean they just want to make sure that it goes through the process use permit process here.

Very good with that. The only thing uh I would add is the the everything is very simple as far as I'm concerned. This is a very standard industry practice on a site that is super forgiving. uh can't possibly pick a better spot to do this exact thing. And and it's not just CALR. This exact um uh hot mix with this recycled asphalt pavement goes into You were doing something. Microphone, please. Sorry, I was leaning back. Sorry to pick you up. Yeah.

Um you know, it goes into every city project because they just use the exact same mix. So it's city cal parking lots. generally speaking, you're getting recycled in everything and it's a it's a good thing. There's a good spot for it. It's already happening. Um, we're really just approving uh truth be told, we're just approving what uh they accidentally started doing without having proper permits. And that's a good thing we're bringing them into compliance. So, I'm I'd be very supportive. And it's my understanding that Mr. Emanuel might have when the time comes after we have public hearing have an idea on one of the conditions. But with that, if no other commissioner comments, we'll go to public hearing. And with that, we will open the public hearing. And I have no speaker cards, so we will close the public hearing. We'll bring it back to commission. And I'd be happy to entertain a motion.

Well, if I may, I'll make my comments. So, you know, there's often issues that come up with these legacy permits. This permit even predates me, which is hard to hard to believe since I started the city in ' 85. But um I was looking through the condition of noise and we had just updated our noise element with the general plan and I noticed that it's really not consistent with our current noise element for a couple couple reasons. Uh one, it talks about db decibb, but now we'd use a dba a measure. It gets rid of the highs and the lows. It more approximates the ear. Um there are some issues with uh it calls both the county and the city but the county and the city don't use the same metrics uh for noise. Uh we measure at residential property lines they measure 100 ft away because they're typically larger parcels. It's just kind of difficult. So if the commission wants to and this is not going to have any particular effect at all. So, if you disagree with bringing this uh um condition up to date, I would suggest that we we do so. And it would totally replace condition 19 in your packet to just to simplify.

On page what in the packet? Uh let me see. I had that written down somewhere. It's on page 17. Page 17. Packet. Page 17.

Seven. Thank you. So you'll see right now it's broken down into the city and county is broken down into residential industrial. The city no longer has for instance um sound level maximums and its industrial districts. That's another thing on our new general plan. Uh, so I would suggest we simply say this. On-site activities shall not result in noise levels in surrounding land use districts as classified in the city of Reading and Chester County general plans that exceed the thresholds established by those adopted documents in implementing regulations and get away with trying to I could concoct a four paragraph one, but I think this deals with it uh easily.

I very much like that. Anytime we can simply say you have to comply with what's already in the law as opposed to writing a bunch of stuff out is a really good idea. And I appreciate that you uh looked into that and it will potentially cut down on some confusion in the future when someone starts uh um worrying about a bunch of um data that isn't quite accurate today. And I know that you gave a copy of this to city staff before this meeting. Um um and so is staff comfortable with that language? Does that cover?

Yeah, we are. We've discussed. Um I just to clarify though, Commissioner Emanuel, that's inclusive of all of 19 A, B, C, D, and E. Strike all that and provide the language or is it just No, just just simply this first two paragraphs, A and B and B. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Yeah. So, we got a question from Mr. Miner.

Yeah, thank you for bringing that up. Um, Kent is it it is exciting to have somebody with that level of, you know, with your level of insight and knowledge looking at these. Um, so I think that's great. Uh, two quick questions for, you know, staff. And just to clarify something that you said, um, Mr. manual. Uh, this won't impact. There's no way that this will negatively impact the applicant. Maybe I could get some nods from staff as far as their current operations. This isn't going to make them have to add a bunch of silencing equipment or

I will have I have to make the assumption since we have no complaints from Friendly Hills up on the south side of of Clear Creek Road or anyone else at this point that they are in compliance with the current current sound requirements and this does not add anything more ownorous. Okay. Then it's really Yeah, it's really just they're the law is already in effect. These noise standards are we're just making this to Commissioner Winnham's point. We're making this match what our current laws say and we haven't received a lot of complaints. It's not a more ownorous requirement that's already on the books. We're just making this match what's currently on the books.

Um so if I can restate it, it it's not going to make them modify equipment or do things though. It'll it's really more of a paperwork side. And then secondly, a condition like this um the only the only counter so I have no issue with that but a condition like this um often times we write them in specifically so that a business can accommodate those specific requirements. Then if we go change the rules somewhere else, all of a sudden a a applicant like this, you know, let's say in however many years we change the noise rules and we say heavy commercial has to have a hard maximum and all of a sudden they could be out of compliance accidentally. I'm not saying that it's likely, but um does it make sense to add in some time in place language on this condition that says it'll not exceed the threshold established by these documents as of you know 2026, those adopted in 2026. so that the applicant if more ownorous restrictions were added later that put the applicant out of compliance, I'm concerned that this language could be used against them um since it doesn't describe those specific levels. Does that does the question even make sense? I I think I understand exactly what you're asking that I' I'd probably simplify the question to hopefully answer it and that is does the situation Mr. Miner is referring to already happen anyway? What what trumps written conditions of approval or ordinances when implemented? And my suspicion is the ordinances implement in all cases.

Yeah, I would think though that you'd have I mean a case to be made that you're conforming with the laws in in effect at the time your permit's issued, right? I mean that's I'm going to look at Miss Toy and but I mean you could say uh you could append onto Commissioner Emanuel's language uh in effect at the time of adoption or of this of this amendment that would fully satisfy the question or something. Yeah. And that would that would make it certain. Although I I do kind of feel like um even absent that language, it would be the rules in effect at the time you're adopting the regulatory instrument. Uh usually that's how that works. But adding that language wouldn't hurt. I don't know if Commissioner Emanuel's good with that. Is that a no or a yes?

That that that's fine. You know, I I am not u an attorney so I can't address the whole issue of really does that uh deal with your question or not. Um, and if things change, you'd have the same question with the existing condition, you know, but but I'm I'm fine with adding a date in.

Certainly. I just, you know, being a business owner, I just don't want to go into signing up for a condition that points to when I when I could have it very, you know, intricatally spelled out and I know exactly how to operate my business and then later something changes and now I I have to change because the condition points to the law, not points to the condition itself. Certainly, I think there's a good chance, like the chair mentioned, the municipal ordinance may trump all of that, but then they would be in the same boat as everybody else in the city. Um, so if we're okay to say and at the time of the what what language do you use, Mr. Pagan?

At time of adoption, perfect of of this amendment perhaps. Fully satisfied the question. Yeah. And and if I way that's that's just fine. I would let you know that this is less ownorous than the existing condition as pertains to properties within the city. So Okay. So we have a motion, right? Not officially. No, we don't have a motion. We've had a discussion. So would you like to turn that into a motion, Mr. Manuel? It's your first meeting. No wants. I I think we should allow Michelle who's this could be her last motion of a 16-year career here. Okay.

So, I move that. Thank you. Let's see what's the best way to say this. Okay. Um, based upon the determination the necessary findings are in evidence, I move that the planning commission adopt addendum to the Clear Creek Aggregate Plant Facilities EIR and approve the amendment thereby amending use permit UP26583 subject to the original conditions of approval but with um Commissioner Emanuel's addition and um stated amendment to section Condition 19

19 A and B. Condition 19 A and B. Is there a second? I'll second. Wonderful. Any other discussion? All in favor? I. Any opposed? No. Excellent. That was a very good improvement and discussion there. Mhm.

Um uh the next uh item on the agenda is uh under commission consideration. There's none. Number six is public comment for any non-aggendaized matters within city jurisdiction. Uh we'd be happy to entertain that at this time. Seeing none, we'll move on to item number seven, commissioner's comments. And uh I will simply again thank you, Michelle Godert. Um, it's it's uh interesting to us. I don't know how many times, let's say a couple dozen times I found myself standing over there when Commissioner God was up here and I was representing a project and I always knew be on my toes because she was on her toes. She she was going to pick up on things that no one else would. And it it brought a uh a clarity and an accuracy and equality to the decisions. And I want to say thank you and 16 years is just extraordinary. Uh you will be missed uh by the city writing by your fellow commissioners.

Well, thank you and I would like to say a few comments. You you have the floor as long as you want.

Um even though it sounds very trit, it has been my privilege to serve on the planning commission for 16 years. And Lily, you and I started at the same time, 2003. So we she's made the distance with me. Um, being on the planning commission is an experience that I would recommend to anyone who cares deeply about the city of Reading. It's one of these rare functions where you can affect placemaking. You can help shape the community. Um, you can help decide what the community is going to look like, how it's going to grow, how we move about the community to my transportation guy. and just the day-to-day experience of living in the city of Reading. And I was honored to be appointed by three mayors, each of a different political perspective, and I have served under four um development services directors. He's my favorite.

Oh, yeah. Good, good. Um but you know that has reassured me that diversity has reassured me and reinforced that planning does transcend politics as it should

and I know that over the years I've developed this reputation of being say um thorough in my questioning as you alluded some would say prosetorial maybe um but it's always because I have taken this position very seriously. Um, I believe in the process, the applicants, the public, and every application deserves a thorough hearing, and every public comment deserves to be heard and weighed. And I know that staff understands that. It might have taken it some of you a while to understand that. But so I do want to thank you all for your um professionalism, for your patience and your partnership over the years and your the quality of work that you have exhibited has really elevated the decision makingaking process for the the planning commission. So, um, I've really enjoyed serving with all my fellow planning commissioners, past and present, some of you more than once. And, um, you know, the work here matters. It's not just about approving projects. It's about the character and livability of our community. And I am so proud that I've been a part of it. So, thank you all.

That was that was well done. and on point. Thank you. Um, so with that, we'll go to item number eight, director's report. I dare you to follow that. Well, I I you took the words out of my mouth, uh, Commissioner Winnham, which isn't fair, but she didn't even look at any notes or anything. Just off the cuff, it was very well said, and I would just take the opportunity to re reiterate my thanks to Commissioner God for all her service. And, uh, a warm welcome to Commissioner Emanuel. Looking forward to to working with him. And then in the ensuing month here in in May, uh we'll have Commissioner Josh Johnson back to the commission starting in May. So, um no further comments from me and uh that's all I have.

Very good. With that, the meeting is adjourned. Thank you.