Planners Trip Over Red Tape Put Off Action

A divided Ann Arbor Planning Commission, hindered by a quagmire of parliamentary red tape, first defeated but later changed its mind and simply deferred action on a general development plan for Ann Arbor. The commission originally defeated the staff r e c,o mmended plan when, after more than two hours of debate, much of it spent haggling over procedures, a motion to approve it drew a 5-4 vote. Six votes were needed for approval. But fovrarfl CTie indTOlJ meeting a motion to reconsider the issue was made by Commissioner Peter Darrow, who had voted against it. The reconsideration was approved and the commission then voted to defer the document for 30 days. The long-awaited plan is actually the start of what has been hoped to be a complete planning document for Ann Arbor. Besides the 30 page plan the commission deferred, the planners hope to incorpórate . into it updated versions of other studies to provide the city with a guide to its future development. THe major hangup Tuesday night centered around amendments proposed by the Citiz e n s Association f o r Area Planning (CAPP) and the Ecology Center. W h e n the plan was revealed a 1 i 1 1 1 e more than a week ago both organizations were critical of parts of it. The commission asked the two groups to suggest changes, and disagreements over how to handle the proposed changes brought the defeat and then deferral Most of the attention was focused on a rewriting which CAAP suggested for the second chapter of the ment plan containing policy statements. Besides reorganizing the policy ' tions, CAAP a 1 s o suggested about 30 additional policies be added to remove ambiguities in the staff prepared plan. Most of the commissioners appeared to be in agreement that m a n y of the CAAP and E c o 1 o g y Center r e co mmendations were good, but the split developed on how t h o s e recommendatiohs should be handled. Paramount in the minds of the commissïoiiers was the fact that beginning July 1 three new commissioners will take seats on the commission. Commission Chairman Charles Reinhart said there have been too many times when the inaugeration of new commissioners has resulted in i the commission going back to "replow many fiends that I have been plowed before. I Other commissioners also I expressed fear the new comI mission members, being unfa-, I miliar with the development I plan, might cause that docuI ment to be delayed. ■ Commissioner Eunice Burns ■ warned that unless some sort ■ of development plan was ap■ proved last night, "we can ■ kiss it goodbye for a year. I However, Mrs. Burns said she has not had enough time to go. I through the CAAP and I ogy Center suggestions to I termine which ones should be I accepted. Support for immediately 1 cluding the CAAP and Ecology Center suggestions mto the development plan was voiced by commissioners Ethel Lewis, Franz Mogdis and Robert Potts. Potts twice made motions to delete large sections of the plan, including a move to replace the staff s policy recommendations witn CAAP and Ecology Center recommendations. Both motions were defeated. When consideration w a s ■ originally given to approving ■ the staff-recommended plan ■ and sending the amendments ■ to committee for review I in 30 days, Planning Director I Michael Prochaska noted the I law requires any amendments I be subject to a public hearing before action is taken, meaning the amendments would not be acted upon until August because of public notice requirements. Commissioner Lewis, one of the three retiring commissioners, endorsed the idea oí the commission taking the amendments one at a time to s e e which ones could be agreed to. She then began ofI fering the CAAP amendments one at a time and this brought onrnoreproceduraUuestions Commissioner Dougla Crary, not pleased wih the idea of taking up about .100 amendemnts one at a time I said, 'TUbe damned if lm going to sit here and go fhrough these things all night " Crary had voted against the first three CAAP amendments, but he said his votes did not reflect his thinking "This is a procedural matter and I'm against the ürocedure." , .. , , '.__ Cmsr. Lewis deienaea u ■ action by saying 1 .ion had promised CAAP ana ■ heEcology Center the I suggestions would be I ered before the plan was I adopted Admitting she did I not Uke the idea of taking the SS one at a time, Lewis Padded she had no assurances Were suggested for handhng the amendments, but they were either determmed ülegal rweren'tbroughttoavoe I The 30 day deferral will alow planning staff and a commission subcommittee to take I a'look at the amendments ana Irecommended whichthecomI mission shouldaccept