001e e e if you would like to start the meeting I don't know if you've resolved your audio issues I think I've resolved my audio issues uh and you all look very good so I must have resolved my video issues too so uh call the meeting to order uh welcome to the weddingday June 12 202 4 design review board meeting public comment is by Zoom or by phone by calling 877 852 5247 or 888 788 0099 and entering meeting ID 974 9412 this channel 99 and on to go. Mr Perkins Mr Perkins your audio is coming in and out um you may have to repeat the last portion of your what you were saying I don't know what the problem is uh what part I I'm just gonna go on and if it's not working
002I'm G to have to turn it over to Lori uh because I don't know what the problem is can you all hear me I can hear you right now okay um I'll repeat the last paragraph this information is also available on the published agenda in the Public Notices section of the city website and on the broadcast of this meeting on CTN Channel 16 AT&T channel 90 9 and online at www.a2gov.org slatch CN the volunteer resident design review board appointed by the mayor and confirmed by city council Fosters excellence in an arber's built environment design and advises applicants on the meeting on meeting downtown design guidelines or at least that's what we used to do um if uh you could Miss Singleton would you mind uh taking over the chairing of the meeting uh due to
003these issues Mr Perkins we should hand it over to Lori I'm happy to do that I do not have the script in hand um so I might need we can forward that over to you okay but the next uh item would be to do a roll call after call to order which I can take care of great uh Jeff Perkins here Lor Singleton here Tamara Burns here William Kinley here Richard Mitchell here Wendy Ramson here John K tski here you have a quorum the next item um as Vice chair would be the approval of the agenda so I need a mover and a seconder okay anyone move to approve the agenda I move yeah I'll second moved by Kinley and burns all in favor before vote on this before we vote on this can you
004hear me yes um on the 6th of uh this month Tamara and I sent comments back on these minutes and they did not get Incorporated is there a reason that didn't happen um we did make updates to the minutes today have you checked them again as of today I opened the minute I opened the link that was in the email that was sent out and I didn't see either cam Tamara's comment or mine addressed that would depend on when you open the link do you know when you have when you had clicked on the link because they were updated very recently just before the meeting I mean literally okay we can accept modifications to the minutes um right now we are just doing approval of a was the agenda approved heard a m seconder but
005I don't think we actually moved through that item yet so we're not to minutes yet we're still on agenda so all in favor of approving the agenda raise your hand okay that's the majority approved next item is that the minutes yes okay so um sounds like we have comments to modify the minutes um that were submitted and those comments were provided via email by camera and Jeff correct so can we say once those comments are added to the minutes we can move to approve I'm fine with that that procedurally acceptable um I if they were uh could we have a little discussion on this because I thought that we had Incorporated all comments is this comments on the summary of feedback for 621 Church yes or were there other comments my understanding is that those
006were all Incorporated so I might need more guidance on if you could tell me what needs to change do you have access to the latest file perhaps there was a sinking issue or something that we aren't seeing the most current do you you share share that on the call and uh yes so what I would recommend to access the latest version is to go to A2 gov.com calendar. aspx and navigate to the design review board and find the agenda link although it would be the same as what was emailed you sorry when was that emailed Brittney can you come off mute and share information about when that email was sent to the board members yes I can um second here it was at 2:16 that the updated agenda was sent out and then I updated
007the meeting minutes on the legend on the legend calendar probably a few minutes after that but also I do see what they're talking about when I use the agenda the meeting minutes have not updated but when I go through the lestar calendar um and actually click click the link provided on the leder star calendar that provides the updated meeting minutes okay so the link in this actual report isn't correct in the in today's agenda isn't correct but the legistar link is correct is that what you're saying um basically I believe so um I'm not sure 100% um how like the agenda gets updated in terms of the meeting minutes that might be an error on my part and I have to go in through um the agenda and you know reattach the meeting minutes so
008I apologize if um I missed that step okay with that in mind yes I accept that with the Incorporation of the comments made that we can um vote on the minuts thank you for okay that so with incorporation of comments received on the staff's meeting minutes um anyone move to approve the meeting minutes from our last meeting I'll move okay Mitchell and Perkins seconded um all in favor of approving the minutes as modifi hi all right just got my chair script so let me open that up our next item is public comment okay um do we have any general comments from the public not seeing anyone other than CTN staff having joined no we do not okay next item regular business um status of city council resolutions and changes to the design review board so
009we do have a memorandum that has been shared um un half of the board via um kind of subcommittee uh input um do we want to pull that up and share that within this meeting I don't have it at my fingertips does somebody have I can share uh the memo that's in the packet and then we can um move on to some other items we will require Miss Perkins audio for this and I will also note we are joined by Deputy City administrator John fornier on today's call to help answer questions and move through this discussion but to give brief background at your last meeting we talked through the impact of recent City Council resolutions uh and policy Direction on the future of the design review board there was a fair amount of discussion uh
010chair Perkins followed up with two documents one a letter discussing um opinions of the design review board on recent on on that issue and then another was a document showing projects which U may have benefited from or made notal modifications with drb input I shared for reference the resolutions in question indicating that the quote unquote Housing Development resolution is the resolution that impacts the board most closely and also the overall Economic Development report that talks high level about the direction that is influencing these follow on actions and then there's there's two attachments so I'm happy to hand this over to our board members now for discussion I can pull up any materials you'd like or I can let you share screen directly they're also linked in your agenda I guess I'd like to ask um
011Mr forer and I don't have everybody on the screen right now sorry um but have you read the memo and do you have any questions on it I guess to start with uh thank you uh and thank you for having me here today um I was pleased to get the invitation I have read the memo and uh I appreciate that you put yourself thought on paper and provided it to us and I guess we were all a little startled by this news and um especially Bill and uh Richard and myself have been involved for I don't know 12 years working on this um you know on volunteer basis as many people do for the city and we're happy to do that but then to get this news and no one not a single person talked
012to any of us I don't we we're not quite sure if anyone really even understands the value we bring and um I guess was just very startled that nobody had reached out to any of us or even attended a meeting um to see what we do um we did do this document with Alexis um couple years in to the process and felt that it really demonstrated that we are making the design in our downtowns better and so it's it's a little um I guess we just wondering why you would give that up for such a little gain well let me uh start by saying that you know the recommendation in the report is not a judgment of any of you or really of the design review board you know we have a lot of activity
013in the city that adds value and we're really appreciative of community members who volunteer their time on our boards so I I don't want this to be viewed as an indictment however you know we it's a 90 page report uh plus several hundred page of appendices there are a lot of ideas and recommendations discussed in the report uh that you know we did not uh you know necessarily do a um you know we didn't do a workshop by committee for a lot of the recommendations um what we did do was try to identify a lot of changes in our land develop processes that could make the process more efficient in terms of investment of time and in term of investment of resources that doesn't mean that all the things that we identified uh to be
014eliminated or to be changed right now aren't adding some value but in the whole we have an urgent need to develop housing in the city and we had a desire to make recommendations that would regularize our development processes and so the drb was identified as one of those processes that does add time to uh to Our Land Development in some instances in the downtown and so uh what you'll find in that report is a roster of small changes that all add up to something much bigger uh and I think that's a recognition of the fact that there is no Silver Bullet to fix what I think is an inefficient process in the city what it is instead is a lot of small changes that add up to quite a big change at the end of
015the day and so uh you know I do think that there's familiarity with what the design review board does and the role that you play I think in a vacuum just looking at this board there's certainly examples where value has been added to projects in the city I I think that's undeniable but we have to weigh that against the urgency we have to develop housing in an arbor and to confront the housing crisis and on the scale the recommendation of staff was to move forward with making changes to how we evaluate our downtown design review guidelines let me just ask is is uh when you were interviewing developers and contractors and everyone except us um was there uniformity in uh dismay over the time that was spent going through the one-step design review process there's
016uniformity in the dismay of how long it takes our process overall and that our own evaluation I can agree with that but I also have been as a developer subject to some of the delays uh which have taken months one project took years till I finally threw up my hands and sold the property to the city four years for affordable housing that ended up with the city adding it to a park and none of that had to do a design review all of it was the city processes I will say we didn't have much time getting this boort this afternoon to scan through I did scan through as much as I could in the last 45 minutes and I saw no indictment of design review process what I have heard from citizens and I'm sure
017you have is dismay the word I used before in the appear appearance of the the highrises downtown I believe that the report that was sent through the comparative uh examples showed Improvement in the appearance of buildings while I have great trust in the planning department they don't represent the same spectrum of expertise that this board does in making considerate reviews of Design Elements it takes usually one step through our process as you know it's a mandatory review voluntary compliance most developers have taken advantage of the voluntary compliance and made some improvements I've tried to educate everybody that I can think of about the by right element that governs everything in the downtown area it certainly doesn't include the historic district doesn't include anything other than the DDA District so we're talking about basically mid and
018high-rise buildings downtown I fail to see how that one step which might add what's everybody's guess three to four weeks to the process I fail to see the Improvement being eliminated just for the sake of streamlining a few projects the process in downtown as you know and from what I've seen in scanning that the document that were just sent it's much more serious of all the siloing that goes on in City Hall in the various departments Solid Waste for example I noticed that very prominently displayed that has taken weeks if not months in a lot of downtown projects has nothing to do with the design but it's an elemental part part of the delay it has nothing to do with the ultimate design of the buildings What I Hear most complaints about citizenry I mentioned
019before is the appearances of downtown buildings I think what has the effect has been from the professionals and I'm the developer have I think I have a decent sense of design but I'm not a designer the rest are they bring elements of discussion in that the plan Department simply doesn't have the expertise of background to address and so while it won't be any skin off my back if you eliminate it and drop this this process but I think it's unfortunate for the appearance of the downtown Long Term that's all I got to say I would just note on top of that that it is evident amongst the many of the um petitioners that this is not a holding pattern where they submit materials it goes in and it they they're waiting for this meeting to
020happen for the direction and to keep going they continue their design process often sharing with us updates that they've been working on since that submission so the design process with the development teams and The Architects continue to move this isn't a period of stagnancy waiting for this response to happen so the other than the kind of hour of time that they're attending the meeting and the preparation of the materials which frankly recognizing the context of your building developing renderings are all part of the standard design process whether they come before us or not there is an additional time being spent other than sharing that with us and then taking upon themselves to integrate that feedback into the design to make the project better which they do as they recognize the value in that in in
021that feedback so um it's really minuscule in terms of the amount of time that this is causing and the amount of value versus that minuscule amount of time really seems like a bad value engineering exercise from a process standpoint thank you uh I think the next hand that went up was um Mr MIT yeah um when when you John in your comments and we really appreciate that and your writing you're you wrote a beautiful document I have to commend you on that um and the connection or the impetus to create more housing and especially affordable housing in the city is something we totally agree with we're we're developers Builders and designers and we are construction Advocates and in our town we're housing Advocates every one of us we we are on board with you but
022I framing the demise of the design review board with the need for more housing as you did is a disconnect for me I I I don't see a strong connection where by eliminating the design review board the results going to be more housing I I don't see that condition condition could you explain that well like I said I think our report contemplates a whole roster of small process improvements that would add up to a big change in terms of um how long it takes for final site plan approval uh and I think that as you all know uh being developers yourselves or adjacent to developers time uh is the number one enemy in in many cases to getting a project built and so um you know I appreciate the comments that things like our civil
023engineering approval or solid waste approval those probably represent more systematic issues in terms of uh the time for approval but there are also issues around the timeliness of our site plan review and I I think there report says that through a series of small changes we think we can accelerate site plan approval by as much as you know minimum I think of two and a half months that's a pretty significant Improvement um you know and like I said that's a lot of small changes that add up and I think that's important to contextualize here were you given examples of projects specifically related to affordable housing that were held up uh by the design review step complaints by the developers that that extra three weeks caused them great heartache well again I think what the feedback
024we got was much more General right um and part of that is that when a lot of people give us complaints about the city process they say generally well it's the building it's the building department it's the building department it's all the processes related to building they don't in many instances actually mean the building code official they use the building department as kind of a catchall term for all of our city processes together um and it was really left up to us to evaluate you know our specific processes and identify specific improvements but something I I do want to say is that one of the major conclusions of our report is that it's incumbent upon the city to support housing development at all income levels and that that is an important strategy for stimulating affordability
025across the whole city so I think there are some specific bar that come with supporting affordable housing but there also a lot of specific tools that we have access to to to support affordable housing but we're really focused on housing generally uh in the report John I have a couple of uh uh comments that I wanted to make uh relative to the recommendation and it starts out with if city council doesn't want to have a design review board in the city previous councils did if this one does not um it's not hurting my feelings that we are being uh done away with um and you know statements have been made that there's appreciation for what this board has done and the guidelines that were put together um so it's not really personal feelings that bother
026me that it is being done away with it's really more a matter of I doubt that Council has any concept whatsoever of what the design review board is actually here for and what we do um one of the council people what this was where I first heard about it was when Lisa dish brought it up a couple of months ago and I was flabbergasted that it was being proposed by a council member without any inkling on our part that this was coming so um and that's okay um if they don't want to have a design review board that's fine many many cities do not um I got on this design review board back in the beginning when Tamara and Bill asked me to be on it because I don't think design review board should exist
027my biggest fear was we were going to have a design review board that was going to dictate design to the developers and The Architects and I'm dead set against that and in practice this board does not operate that way and that's why I've stuck with it all of these years and I think it has brought value to projects in the city the next part of what my concern is is that if we do get done away with um this should absolutely not be a staff function the staff um well intended as they are cannot do what we do and they should not be entrusted with it and if the city council decides to do away with the design review board they need to do away with the guidelines because there's no way staff can enforce
028what's in those guidelines um I think that's the choice that Council has to make in this case um we all want housing um I basically had a career of doing housing in the city of Ann Arbor maybe not on the scale that some have but uh it's been a big focus of my uh career so we all want housing um it's a question of how we get it um but I think the council has a pretty simple decision to make either they want to regulate design or they don't but they can't have staff doing it um if my microphone work through all of that then I guess you all can hear me Lori do you want to continue I think John has his hand up I'm sorry did you Lori did you have a question
029I I I just wanted to I'm kind of late to this this discussion so um I I want to applaud uh uh what you're doing John and I you know streamlining process I think is very important and um moving the city into having a champion uh that for for U development I think is important but but I think process is I think what you're hearing uh right now and I think the city dropped the ball a bit that your needs assessment really needed to engage this group first not after and uh that um and I think there's an important component to uh to to your recommendations and that is placemaking if that's the case I think you should have also involved the public art commission and I'm on the public art commission I wasn't asked
030about anything so to um to not bring those sort of folks uh into that discussion uh merely asking you know what do they think about placemaking and how can it be improved and things like that I mean you don't have to agree you don't even have to follow it I mean the same thing for the design review board uh and I think you did do A needs assessment and uh and interview uh citizen volunteers on the DDA and the Housing Commission and things like that so I mean you recognized you know those folks I don't think it's really an ego here it's rather a surprise I would be delighted to have another afternoon free I mean I'm like Jeff like fine no problem at all um so uh if if if it doesn't seem like
031you got the process right in terms of assessing the needs I I I I'm I'm kind of questioning the product now as well uh in particular the notion of a champion for development um I maybe this is just me but I just think that uh you know a champion you know in the city for development uh independently align not aligned with everyone else I think everyone should be on the same page there shouldn't be just one person one Department I mean it's like Dei that you know uh uh diversity inclusion and and Equity I mean if you just have one person but nobody else cares about it it isn't going to happen and I believe the same thing so the description of it as a champion um I think that may resonate with folks with
032me it sort of is a red flag is like oh now we've got a CH Champion you know the uh the art commission doesn't need to care about development it does I think you know so the city clerk needs to care about development so um the the fact that this board was kind of left out of this and and kind of Blindsided and I don't think the art commission has any idea that you're thinking of a motion for placemaking uh so that makes me wonder uh um I don't you know if if if if you didn't get that process right just simply asking our opinion I I would just kind of wonder whether you know you got the big picture right as well so I applaud what you're trying to do I applaud the direction
033you you're going in I think you're we the city really needs to have a depart a department for um uh uh development uh but uh I think you can hear um the feelings you know on this board and I think they do matter the all all on the board are important um voices you know in the city as far as development goes so I just um my two cents thank you B oh I think it was Bill and then Wendy I'm not sure if that that's the other way U I said what a clarification I may as John um corck my if I'm wrong but I I the last I was aware where city of Van arber wasn't considered a development ready community that classification is that correct that is actually not correct we are
034a development ready Community as designated by MEC wasn't there a a uh a roadblock for a while that uh to become a development ready Community the Planning Commission was to be given the final say on approval as opposed to moving on to city council correct and we implemented that change about two years ago good so so the last step is Planning Commission the last step for some site plans is Planning Commission rezonings still go to the city council but that's required by state law thank you yes Wendy sure so um I think I've been involved in the design review board longer than any of you because uh it was part of the an arbor discovering downtown uh group of efforts to make changes and the reason why the design review board came into being is
035because the community felt that the design of buildings up until that point was um not up to community standards so at the time the discussion was do we have a um voluntary type of process or do we codify it and we opted to go with the voluntary uh side of things uh the city of Grand Rapids went with codification and so um we can get rid of design guidelines we can get rid of the design review board my sense is that Community after seeing a couple of um developments uh may want that to come back and if you end up codifying it then yes it's the Planning Commission the planning staff that will be reviewing it like they do in Grand Rapids and some other cities so I guess it's just a question of where
036it ends up but my sense is that the community will want some element of design review uh in new projects in the downtown um I have three things I've been jotting down here um first to expand a little bit on Jeff's comment about whether staff should apply the guidelines or not um a report is done at each of our meetings by staff Alexis has been doing them and uh Jeff before her before he retired and Jill Thatcher substituted a few times and and they're all just great and um and terrific to work with as is all the planning staff what what I think Jeff means by that is as an example at at a recent review we had there was a multistory um housing building being proposed that was sheathed in an ephas system which
037is exterior insulation finish system which is a rigid insulation with a layer of stule over it and and we raise concerns that exist for that material in terms of longevity and uh color fastness and and other issues and it it that's just the thing that we routinely do um because we know materials and the difference between that material and a metal panel or a pre-cast panel or masonry or stone and and we can speak to that and speak the language of the petitioner usually the architect is propped up to talk to us and and so it it it's an informed conversation which which does not mean to say Alexis and the rest of staff are uninformed we just have a depth of that because of what we've done all the time so we don't mean
038that as a dig to staff um and the the second point is it it seems like to me and this is just my opinion that the there's a need to streamline the process so you you can show some measurable results coming out of this streamlining process and and we are not ordinance mandated um we're a voluntary group that is more or less the lwh hanging fruit and pretty easy to get rid of and and so I I think I think you you've probably taken the path of the least res distance and and um I understand that um I I've been contacted by one city council member and I did not respond the question was what what is going on and and further what you folks do and I haven't responded because I think that's that's
039for you folks to do to keep Council in form but I would like to know if the memo we wrote in response to the news that that we were on the chopping block got to council and and where that was distributed so if are you referring to the one that was uh that's in your packet today no I'm referring to the one we wrote to you yeah it's the one that's in the packet today oh it's in the packet okay right so nothing has happened with that yet because I need uh as discussed your last meeting I need a votee from you on the communication that you want to send to council so um I wouldn't just forward necessarily an email and put it on a council agenda as a formal communication from the board
040I want to make sure that what is in the packet is represents the the full body here and we could move to that now if you all would like I can share screen has everyone had a chance to look at this letter yes I would like to just um if no one else has comments close with one thing that is I think a bit of a conclusion um I think what we're hearing is that you Unearthed a breadth of possible remedies to a process that's problematic today and made those recommendations I think our sense is that there is another step in the process that may have been foregone in terms of a deeper dive in kind of value versus investment and more rigor in the investigation toward those recommendations to really ensure that you're not
041throwing the baby out with the bath water and I think our consensus is that the baby is being thrown out with the bath water right now because the level of of value versus the cost to the system and I know you say these are lots of incremental changes but this is not a small value has been and that has been brought to the projects and very little investment outside of the norm of frankly what needs to get submitted anyway it's basically showing up on a webinar from these teams that's the investment that they have to make in addition to what they already have to make and in such aren't getting any of this valued multidisiplinary multifaceted diverse perspectives of free input and sanctioned by a process that had a lot of Community Support so it
042just feels very desperate in terms of the loss versus The Savings in effort and I don't I don't know if there are other aspects of what's being discarded in this process to save time that fit that same criteria but I wonder if there isn't more bit more research a bit more rigor a bit more data around some of these um opportunities that are maybe in contention that could help lead to a stronger set of recommendations that make our city better John one of the uh things that happened at the last minute in preparation of this memo that we're about to um take action on to send on to city council was that a paragraph was taken out of there um this was in a discussion between dick and and I because it had to do
043with from our perspective and I think probably from the perspective of several other people on this board the real problem with getting projects through the city of an arbor having to do with staff functions and those kinds of holdups and I know that you and I have been in other meetings talking about some of these issues um that paragraph came out because it just didn't seem relevant to whether the design review board should be how the design review board should get dealt with and I'm not proposing that it get put in now but John it's a real issue and from our perspective when we talk when we when we look at here's the city trying to cut time out of um getting developments approved so we can get this much needed housing but we've got
044these problems within City Hall [Music] um it's flabbergast I mean it's it's frustrating uh to me as a builder um and several other people on this board that do development work here know what these things are so like I said it it got taken out of the memo because it is not pertinent to whether the design review board should exist but it certainly is pertinent to whether or not the city wants to achieve its objective um so I'm not proposing that it go back in I I don't think it should so but but I don't want it to get lost in this discussion if you want to do something about getting projects approved directly you got to do something in your own house if you want to send that language to me directly I'd be
045happy to read it all right John is it possible um to make amendments to the resolution well the resolution has already been adopted by Council and so um what I can tell you is that I will certainly be sharing this discussion and your thoughts with city leaders uh I can't promise that that'll uh cause a change in Direction but I can promise that your words will be very thoughtfully considered and talked about thank you I make a motion that we approve the memo as drafted and ask City staff to please forward it to councel Second I think we all seconded that might be a good thing to show everyone's hand shot up yeah all in favor of approving the memo included in the packet to submit I unanimous we will find the best way to
046get that to uh the council so would you like to include the attachment yes sure could could you copy us on what goes to council eventually so so we know what they have and if we get another call as I did I can talk more intelligently to them uh sure we can track which agenda this might go on and how it will be incorporated um whether it's under Communications um I'm not sure exactly the line item that it would belong under on upcoming Council agenda but we can track that and when that is prepared we will make sure to send you that agenda link so that you can see which meeting it's on and thank you John I'd like to thank you for attending this meeting um I I know the resolution has been adopted
047and it was a courtesy to us that you came and uh we held this special meeting and that you listen to what we had to say so I just want to express my appreciation that um that you've given us this further opportunity sure and I appreciate that you all called the meeting and invited me to come here and I I we will consider your comments and we will be discussing them I promise you that okay right oh I to make one note and that is just to clarify that the resolution removed the requirement to go in front of the design review board that doesn't necessarily mean it can't be highly encouraged and that we can't still continue to hold meetings should those I don't know if anyone would take take us up on it but
048um especially where there might be a high level of community concern it might be a venue that helps teams get The Leverage the support they need I don't know if there's any any possibility or reality in which that is a functioning outcome of this but I guess it it could certainly be something that through the culture of the organization they were or you know teams were encouraged to submit attend and get that feedback for the betterment of the project and for the community so it could be a lot premium it does remain well it could be a lot premium that's true thank you for that okay so I think we are on to um unfinished business which has nothing on the agenda unless someone has something to raise um Communications this uh I think we've
049covered that with our last topic um dick did you have something to share on yeah well now now that the uh open meetings act no longer applies to us as a group of people we should all get together it it's been a pleasure working with all of you and um it it's been terrific so well you are still aboard we don't have the you're not formally dissolved okay I'm just letting you know we actually have two agend we have two submissions for drb for next month so we will still be availing ourselves of your design um expertise until you until there's a formal disolution which I don't P I don't have a timeline for that yet well when the guillotine Falls drinks at my house so let me get this straight so the resolution has
050been adopted but we're still a functioning board until what let me let me clarify the council has adopted a resolution directing us to premare prepare an ordinance Amendment however the ordinance amendment has not come before Council yet and until that happens the board still exists and functions got thank you thanks for that clarification because I think there's been a a lot of confusion on our part so uh any any timeline any idea when that uh ordinance change is going to just so we don't get blindsided again Fair probably before the end of the summer but we're still working on it okay I just have one question so John when this uh resolution you're preparing gets passed then the design review board will cease to exist is that what you're saying that's correct okay but doesn't
051it doesn't the resolution right now just say that we're you're not required to come before us Ian which the same thing but it it yeah it would be good to know whether we are a board or not right um perhaps uh Hank and I can just review the documents and provide that feedback to you in writing so I make sure that I'm not speaking out of turn the intent would be that with that being approved there would be within it an Absolution of the board the dissolution of the board whatever the right word is for that then can I can I ask a follow-up question as long as we have everybody still assembled assuming this ordinance change will occur and well I'm not a processed person myself I say I'm very critical of the process
052that's been gone so far but assuming that the ordinances approved and were dissolved are there any elements of design review anticipated as projects go through the city in the downtown area the design review guidelines would still exist and so I think as discussed by Jeff and others on this call we would you know ask developers to consult with them uh staff would provide ments back based on them or some process would be instituted to provide comments back based on them uh but the board itself would be dissolved but the group that would be accepting those changes or discussing those and responding to those would be members of the planning department yes okay okay um I think at this point we have another opening for public comment though I don't believe there is uh anyone in
053attendance there is not so that leaves us to adjournment anyone motion to adjourn Jeff any a second Tamara all in favor of adjourning this session of the Ann Arbor design review board I all in favor all right okay thank you all thank you everyone we'll see you next month thank you maybe Lori thanks for stepping in for me in my