View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
CITY OF MUSKEGON
CITY COMMISSION WORKSESSION
AND
COMMUNITY RELATIONS COMMITTEE
Monday, December 3, 2007
5:30 p.m.
City Commission Chambers
AGENDA
I. Muskegon/Webster Speed Limit and Traffic Lights. ENGINEERING
2. Renaissance Zone Extensions. PLANNING
3. Summer Property Tax Collections. TREASURER
4. Any Other Business.
COMMUNITY RELATIONS AGENDA
I. Approval of November 5, 2007, Minutes.
2. Appointment to the DDA.
3. Any Other Business.
4. Adjournment.
City of Muskegon
City Commission Worksession
Monday, December 3, 2007
City Commission Chambers
5:30 PM
MINUTES
2007-102
Present: Commissioners Warmington, Gawron, Shepherd, Spataro, and Wisneski.
Absent: Commissioner Carter and Wierengo.
Muskegon/Webster Speed Limit and Traffic Lights
The tum back of Muskegon and Webster to two-way traffic was completed on November 15,
2007. There have been no reported accidents. There have been a few requests to add additional
on street parking.
City Commissioners made inquiries regarding possible additional changes including signage.
City Engineer, Mohammad Al-Shatel, responded.
Police Chief Kleibecker indicated that State Law mandates that proper testing take place before
the speed limit can be adjusted. Testing should happen in the spring.
Renaissance Zone Extensions
It was the consensus of the Commission to place each Renaissance Zone extension request on the
agenda for City Commission consideration.
Summer Property Tax Collection
Motion by Commissioner Spataro, seconded by Vice Mayor Gawron to adopt the
resolution to begin collection of the State Education Tax in a summer levy beginning with
the summer 2008 levy.
Ayes: Spataro, Warmington, Wisneski, Gawron, and Shepherd.
Nays: None.
MOTION PASSES
Adiournment
Motion by Commissioner Wisneski, seconded by Commissioner Shepherd to adjourn at
6:30 p.m.
MOTION PASSES
~ ; : \ , ~ ~·u SL J-~
Ann Marie Becker, MMC
City Clerk
CITY OF MUSKEGON
COMMISSION WORKSESSION MEETING
RESCHEDULED
The Commission Worksession Meeting that was scheduled for
Monday, December 10, 2007, has been rescheduled to Monday,
December 3, 2007, at 5:30 p.m. in the City Commission
Chambers, 933 Terrace, Muskegon. It will be a joint meeting with
the Community Relations Committee Meeting.
~'"''f\\~\J\;U ~\_,(Jl~
Ann Marie Becker, MMC
City Clerk
Notice Dated: November 20, 2007.
Commission
City Manager
Department Heads
Chronicle
Post
CITY OF MUSKEGON
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
Memo
To: Mayor Warmington & City Commission
From: Bryon Mazade, City Manager df1/
Copy: Bob Kuhn, Director of Public Works
Tony Kleibecker, Director of Public Safety
Mohammed AI-Shatel, Deputy Director of Public Safety
v Ann Becker, City Clerk
Date: November 15, 2007
Re: Speed Limits
Attached are some information from AAA that Bob Kuhn found and a memo from
Tony Kleibecker regarding setting speed limits. I thought you would like to have
this information in advance of our discussion about speed limits at your December
work session.
Of particular note is the 2006 law that determines the methods that can be used to
set speed limits.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
BLM /pb
Alt.
pb\BLM COMM, SPEED LIMITS 111507
Automobile Club of Michigan
SETTING
REALISTIC
Mich~n
SPEED LIMITS
SPEED
LIMIT
This publication is based on a booklet produced
by the Highway Engineering Department of the Au-
tomobile Club of Southern California under the direc.
tion of Paul Fowler, Traffic Engineer.
The initial need for a practical guide on speed
zoning in Michigan was voiced by Bruce Madsen, Man-
aging Director of the Traffic Improvement Association
of Oakland County, who is a co-author of this text.
Information for the booklet was obtained from Richard
Folkers, formerly Traffic Engineer for the Oakland
County Road Commission, and from interviews with
several traffic authorities in Michigan actively engagecl
in traffic engineering, traffic Jaw enforcement and safety
education.
Technical references include: ,,'
Institute of Traffic Engineers' Handbook
Michigan Manual of Uniform Traffic Control
Devices (1973)
Michigan State Police Standards for Traffic En•
gineering Investigations
"Realistic Speed Zoning," by Paul Fowler, Au-
tomobile Club of Southern California
Uniform Vehicle Code, National Committee on
Uniform Laws and Ordinances
Vehicular Speed Manual, Inter-County Regional
Planning Commission, Denver, Colorado
Additional copies may be obtained from:
Arthur C. Gibson, Manager
Safety and Traffic Engineering Department
Automobile Club of Michigan
Auto Club Drive
Dearborn, Michigan 48126
Introduction
This manual is designed as a practical guide to
REALISTIC speed zoning. It is offered to both in-
terested citizens and public officials for better under-
standing of "why," "where" and "how" speed zoning
is established, and the laws which make it possible.
Hopefully, it will serve to explain why the
arbitrary enactment of speed limits is not
a cure-al/for traffic ills and why it might,
in fact, create new and greater problems.
Speed zoning was made necessary by changing
times. In the early days of the automobile in Michigan,
the demarcation between rural areas and cities or vil-
lages was clear. Thus, it was simple to set speed limits
- one for the open countryside and one for the centers
of population.
With the spread of urbanization and the
development of suburban communities, the situation
changed. Rural areas began to shrink and disappear.
Often they became difficult to identify. During the same
period the volume of motor vehicles multiplied and re-
multiplied. There came a need for modified speed post-
ings in these transition areas between maximum limits
for,open areas and maximum limits for business.
This manual will emphasize the special need for
neighboring communities to have speed limits on major
streets as uniform as possible, to encourage smooth and
!
I
I
orderly flow of traffic. It will outline the means by
which this objective can be attained.
It will also emphasize that the great majority of
drivers are reasonable and prudent and will voluntarily
comply with speed limits which are realistically estab-
lished for both their safety and convenience.
r
,I
THE LAWS FOR SPEED ZONING
Realistic speed zoning is predicated on national
acceptance of a traffic engineering truism that . . .
. . . in the absence of intensive enforce-
ment, drivers tend to operate their vehi- i
cles at speeds they feel are reasonable
and proper, regardless of posted speed.
This "reasonable and proper" theme is reflected in
Michigan's Basic Speed Law, set fo11h in the Michigan
Vehicle Code. Taking precedence over all other speed
laws, it reads:
"Any person driving a vehicle on a highway
shall drive the same at a careful and prudent
speed not greater than nor less than is reason-
able and proper, having due regard to the traffic,
surface and width of the highway and of any
other conditions than [sic] existing, and no per-
son shall drive any vehicle upon a highway at a
speed greater than will permit him to bring it to a
stop within the assured clear distance ahead."
(Sec. 257.627)
All 50 states have a similar basic law, although
some phrase it in the negative, such as "no person shall
drive ... at a speed greater than is reasonable or
prudent."
Other laws on speeds included in the Michigan
Vehicle Code are briefly reviewed below.
Absolute Speed
At one end of the spectrum is the "absolute,"
sometimes referred to as a "blanket" speed maximum,
covering all highways in Michigan. Prior to the 1974
energy crisis, this law set a limit on state and county
highways at 65 mph in daylight hours and 55 mph in
hours of darkness, except upon freeways. The top limit
at this publication is, of course, 55 mph. Provision for
reduction of maximum speeds is provided by statute.
(Sec. 257.628)
Prima Facie Speed
In contrast, there is the "prima facie speed
limit." Legal theory indicates that a violator of this "on
the face of it" limit might defend himself in court as
"careful and prudent" despite his violation. The prima
facie limit sets speed for business and residential dis-
tricts at 25 mph (Sec. 257.627b) but ample authority,
frequently used, is provided for modification. This area
of modification is the main thrust of the present text.
Certain "special" speed limits for school buses,
vehicles with trailers and heavy trucks may be estab-
lished. Likewise, there is authority for special controls
at unsafe bridges.
There is also provision for "advisory" speed
signs. These are used to alert otherwise careful drivers
confronted by a situation for which they are unpre-
pared, such as a sharp curve. So-called "advisory"
speeds are enforced only under the basic speed law.
Modified Prima Facie Speeds
Nighttime maximum speed is set at 55 mph on
county and state trunk lines and prima facie speed is set
at 25 mph in business and residential areas. Therefore,
between 25 mph and 55 mph there exists a gray, inter-
mediate area which may be described as "modified" or
"permissive" speed zones. These would not exceed
the 55 mph nighttime limit.
The state highway commissioner or the county
road commission, working with Michigan State Police,
has authority to "determine upon the basis of an en- f
gineering and traffic investigation that the speed of ve-
hicular traffic on a state trunk line or county highway is
greater or less than is reasonable or safe ... " They
may then declare "a reasonable and safe maximum or
minimum speed limit .. " (Sec. 257.678)
Local authorities may establish prima facie
speed limits on their own highways with certain limita-
tions. In business and residential areas the limits may
be set above 25 mph if the arteries are designated as
through streets and cross traffic is halted by "Stop"
signs. Outside business and residential districts, local
prima facie limits "shall in no case be less than 25 miles
per hour." (Sec. 257.629) A special statute prohibits
local authorities from establishing any speed or traffic
controls upon a state highway within their limits unless
approved by the state highway commissioner "in the
interest of public safety and convenience." (Sec.
257.609)
The 1973 Michigan Manual of Uniform Traffic
Control Devices (Sec. 7B-12) provides for special
school zone speed postings, applicable at times when
children are expected to be present.
r Mt' e'thtif
I I
The Why of Speed Zoning
Such words and phrases as "reasonable and
proper"; "careful and prudent speed not greater nor
less than is reasonable and proper"; "reasonable and
safe maximum or minimum speed limit" and ,.
"convenience" appear throughout the statutes.
Realistic speed zoning, through adoption
of modified prima facie limits, is based
upon the documented conclusion that a
great majority of drivers behave in a
reasonable manner upon the highway.
Unreasonable restrictions encourage
wholesale violations and disrespect for
the whole traffic control system.
Speed laws are established for protection of the
public and the regulation of unreasonable behavior by
any individual. Realistic zoning, as authorized by stat-
ute, recognizes that the normally careful and competent
actions of a reasonable person should be consid-
ered legal.
85 Percentile Speed
The prime basis of what is considered proper
speed for the normally careful and competent actions of
a reasonable person is the so-called and nationally rec-
ognized "85 percentile speed." This is that speed at or
below which 85 percent of the observed traffic is
moving. Experience gained over a long period indicates
that posting of higher or lower speed limits has not
significantly changed the 85 percentile speed. Likewise,
it has been demonstrated time and time again that rais-
ing a prima facie speed to its proper limit causes no
increase in accidents.
Adoption of the 85 percentile speed determina-
tion recognizes that the other 15 percent of drivers are
above that speed which is "reasonable and proper,
having due regard to the traffic, surface and width of the
highway and of any other conditions ... " This is the 15
percent of the driving public at which enforcement ac-
tion should be directed. It has been established by
many studies that this 15 percent of motorists cause a I:
disproportionate number of accidents and have the '
worst driving records.
Realistic Zoning
Well-meaning but often uninformed citizens, and
even officials under pressure, persist in the idea that the
mere posting of lower speed limits within their corpo-
rate boundaries will improve safety. Actually, compe-
tent surveys show that it is the driving environment
which mainly influences speed.
Realistic speed zones are of the utmost public
importance for safe highways, if for no other reason
than that they give enforcement officers a handle for the
control of hazardous drivers without infringing upon I '
11
I
normally safe drivers.
A few points to remember about realistic
speed zones are:
• They satisfy the requirements and in-
tent of the state law for establishing
prima facie speed limits on streets and
highways.
• They invite public compliance by con-
forming to the behavior of the great ma-
jority and by giving a clear reminder to
non-conforming violators.
• They offer an effective enforcement tool
to police by clearly separating the
flagrant violator from the reasonable
majority.
• They tend to minimize public an-
tagonism toward police enforcement of , I
unreasonable regulations.
• They serve to place responsibility for
justifying so-called "tolerances" upon
those administrative agencies that grant
them. I,.
'
: L-
• They lend credence and acceptability to
the widely posted admonition "Speed
Laws Strictly Enforced" at many city
boundaries.
And perhaps most important:
• Realistic speed zones contribute sub-
stantially to the smooth, orderly flow of
traffic which is a majorfactor in pre-
venting highway accidents.
Any measure that encourages a smooth traffic
flow should be adopted not only for safety but for the
convenience and economy of the individual motorist.
An unreasonably slow driver is a hazard. This is found
in areas where unreasonably low posted limits may
cause the over-cautious or law-conscious driver to be-
come a hazard, especially when the limit is recognized
as unreasonable by the majority. This causes lane hop-
ping and sudden and dangerous spurts by normal
drivers who would observe a realistic limit. Such prac-
tices result in accidents and raise the ire of the average
motorist.
The national Uniform Vehicle Code recognizes
this slow-speed problem in a regulation to the effect
that no driver should operate at such a slow speed as to
impede normal traffic flow, except when such reduced
speed is required for safe operation or in compliance
with law.
Whenever possible, the setting of the speed limit
to coincide with progression speed of the traffic signal
system is desirable. When the posted speed limit varies,
the use of signs indicating the signal setting speed pro-
motes a smoother traffic flow.
The Where of Speed Zoning
The objective of a realistic speed zoning is to
facilitate the orderly movement of traffic by increasing
driver awareness of reasonable speed. Certain hazards
may appear when an increase in prima facie speed is
contemplated. If so, it is better to correct the hazardous
conditions to meet traffic requirements than to restrict
speed to conform with faulty conditions which can be
corrected.
Michigan Zoning
In Michigan the areas for realistic speed zoning
largely fall into two broad categories:
1. Realistic speed zones are needed on state and
county trunk lines which carry appreciable
volume of traffic through various roadside
conditions and through numerous contiguous
corporate limits in urban or suburban areas.
It is especially important to establish realistic
speed zones on highways where each _com-
munity might otherwise set independent and
conflicting limits despite the similarity of
highway and traffic conditions.
2. Realistic speed zones are needed also on
state and county trunk lines in rural areas
which pass through small towns and villages
or may include highway segments upon
which unusual or unexpected hazards exist.
By Michigan State Police rule-of-thumb, if a
road segment has fewer than 30 intersecting
driveways per mile, it is generally considered
rural.
ii
Basically, these areas as broadly defined are 'I'
].,:
transition areas which require modified prima facie :ui
speed limits between the statutory 25 mph and 55 mph
limits.
Broad Participation
The State Legislature has vested authority for
regulation of state and county trunk lines with subse-
quent involvement of state and county road authorities
and Michigan State Police. If local authority were to
dominate on these trunk lines the essential factor of
similar speeds under similar conditions would be
sacrificed.
This does not imply that city, village and town-
ship officers are, in practice, to be ignored. Explicit
instructions to state police officers making recommen-
dations for speed zoning state, "Opinions will be
sought from the local State Police Post Commander,
the sheriff or chief of police having jurisdiction, as well
as from other local officials with known interests."
Further instructions are for "close coordination with
local officials and with their understanding."
Numerous factors must be considered in deter-
mining those areas in which modified prima facie
speeds are indicated. In the next section of this booklet
the several criteria have been reduced to a few broad
categories. Information was compiled from publica-
tions of the Michigan State Police, the Michigan Man-
ual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and standards
of the Institute of Traffic Engineers.
':,,,
I1:
l:f
I,
!
I
I ,
I
C'
The How of Realistic Speed Zoning
This text does not purport to be a manual for
traffic engineers, trained police officers or skilled tech-
nicians. Rather, it is to provide a basic guide for those
officials and laymen who wish better to understand how
realistic speed zoning is determined.
Foremost criteria for determination of modified
prima facie limits in speed zoning are:
1. The 85 percentile speed of those actually
driving upon the highway segment in ques-
tion.
2. Accident history of the area, including
analysis of the type and apparent causes of
accidents as well as location.
3. Traffic volumes, including projected in-
creases.
4. Roadside and adjacent area development, in-
cluding turning movements as observed by
the officer or traffic engineer.
5. Design speed of the particular highway seg-
ment.
6. Determination of hidden hazards which
might not readily be apparent to even the
normally "careful and prudent driver."
Speed Studies
In Michigan, determination of 85 percentile
speeds is usually made by radar check. The speed of
separately traveling vehicles, from the slowest to the
fastest, is recorded. It is simple to determine that, if 85
motorists of each 100 are driving at "X" mph or under,
then "X" mph is the 85 percentile speed.
The Vascar, a modification of radar, is some-
times used. This requires a measured distance estab-
lished in advance. Another device, seldom used, is the
Enoscope. This is a system of mirrors placed at mea-
sured distances by which motorists may be timed by
stopwatch. The "pacing" system is also sometimes
used. This is a system by which authorities cruise the
highway and keep pace with random vehicles to learn
motorists' speeds.
Location of the speed survey is of great impor-
tance. In practice, observation is made from an un-
marked car in an inconspicuous place at the roadside.
Intersections or momentary conditions which might
slow driver speed are avoided.
The time of speed studies is also carefully
selected to avoid rush-hour commuter traffic when the
presence of too many vehicles on the highway forces
lower than normal speeds. As a national rule-of-thumb,
the hours chosen are usually between 9:00 and 11:30
a.m. and 1:00 and 4:00 p.m., Mondays through Thurs-
days, inclusive.
In rural areas a normal minimum of JOO vehicles
or two hours of sampling will be checked. Under urban
or suburban conditions, the number of vehicles which
must be checked may depend upon the Average Daily
Traffic (ADT).
One major Michigan county takes counts from
8:00 to 10:00 a.m. and from 2:00 to 4:00 p.m., Mondays
through Fridays, and uses the following sliding scale
based upon statistical analysis:
I. JOO vehicle sample (or two hours maximum)
for roads with an estimated ADT of 10,000 or
less.
2. 200 vehicle sample for roads with estimated
ADT of 10,000 to 20,000.
3. 300 vehicle sample for roads with estimated
ADT of20,000 to 30,000.
4. 400 vehicle sample for roads with estimated
ADT of 30,000 to 40,000.
5. For roads over 40,000 the sample should be
increased proportionately.
In general, longer time periods may be required
in rural areas. But unless extraordinary conditions
exist, the check points may be several miles apart when
highway conditions are similar.
The "pace speed" can be determined easily
from the vehicle speed data sheet. It will usually be
found that when the greatest number of vehicles travel
within the same 10 mph range, 15% of the motorists will
be over the IO-mile pace and 15% below.
Accident Records
Analysis of the accident records of a given seg-
ment of highway to be zoned requires a study of the
"where" and "why" of each crash rather than mere
numbers. A high accident frequency could simply be
the result of a high traffic volume, hence, increased
exposure.
The "where" of accidents is determined by spot
maps or computer printouts. For some high accident
locations, traffic authorities prepare "collision dia-
grams" to further identify problems. These diagrams
are schematic representations of the direction of
movement of each vehicle or pedestrian involved. In
addition, a "condition diagram" may be prepared to
show physical features of the roadway when such
things as view obstruction and roadside hazards should
be considered in speed zoning.
The other criteria for speed zoning previously
listed may also have bearing on the "why" of acci-
dents, as well as on the correct prima facie speeds to be
determined. An increase in traffic volumes, not prop-
erly projected in advance, would require restudy of the
area. Roadside developments, new or under construc-
tion, might necessitate major changes to prevent acci-
dents. A hedge may blind an intersection or a factory
exit. Any number of situations might be found which
contribute to accidents. Proper analysis and evaluation
of all factors underscore the importance of the experi-
ence and expertise of the traffic engineer or the
qualified police officer. No two areas or highway seg-
ments are precisely alike but there are enough
similarities to make what is learned at one location
valuable at other locations.
When need for modified prima facie zones has
been established, a Traffic Control Order may be ob-
tained on recommendation of Michigan State Police.
The MSP and the Michigan Manual of Uniform Traffic
Control Devices set forth standards for posting of the
modified speeds limits. A few salient points are:
• The speed limit should not be set at more than
7 mph below or above the 85 percentile speed.
• Speed postings inside corporate limits should
be in increments of 5 mph, as near as possible
to the 85 percentile speed.
• Speed limit changes on adjacent highway seg-
ments outside incorporated limits should be
made in increments of 10 mph.
• Changes in speed limits along a given route
should be held to a minimum.
• Modified prima fade limits under favorable
conditions are not usually established for a
highway segment less than one-half mile long.
Advisory signing is used instead.
• Speed limit postings should be located as near
as practicable to the point of change in limit.
Additional signs should be installed beyond
major intersections or at other locations where
is is necessary to remind motorists of the limit.
• Normally, signs should be installed at approx-
imately one-half mile intervals.
In rural areas "Reduced Speed Ahead" signs
should be posted to give motorists advance warning of
speed changes. The signs are not ordinarily needed in
urban areas where speeds are relatively low. The
Michigan Manual, Sections 2B-9 through 2B-15, gives
detail as to the types and combinations of signing to be
used.
The Institute of Traffic Engineers' Handbook
suggests that, after posting of speed zones, they be re-
studied to determine if more than 15% of motorists are
exceeding the limit. If so, it should be determined
whether the limit should be raised or whether there are
other factors such as inadequate posting or lack of
enforcement or education.
Location of modified speed posting is critical on
state or county trunk lines which cross successive
municipal limits. If there is no notable change in road-
side conditions at these limits, any changes should be
made in accord with realistic zoning rather than on the
basis of invisible boundaries.
Regardless of the other matters consid-
ered, however, the 85 percentile becomes
the critical criterion in determination and
posting of modified prima facie speeds.
By all standards the realistic speed zone
limit, unless there are clear contradictory
findings, is set at not more than seven
miles per hour below the 85 percentile.
' l ,,_ '-J '"'"' V Muskegon Police Department
NOV {j 5 200? Anthony L. Kleibecker
Director of Public Safety
980 Jefferson www. muskegonpo I ice.com Phone: 231-724-6750
Muskegon, Michigan FAX: 231-722-5140
49440
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mr. Bryon Mazade
City Manager
FROM: Anthony L. Kleibecker
Director of Public Safety
r;;- L. ) ~
CC: Mr. Bob Kuhn
Mr. Mohammed Al-Shatel
DATE: November 5, 2007
SUBJECT: Speed Limitations
After the discussion at a recent City Commission meeting regarding the posted speed limits
along Muskegon Avenue and Webster Avenue, I reviewed the cun·ent law in regards to the
establishment of speed limits. Under the current Michigan Vehicle Code, section 257.627
addresses the issue of establishing speed limits. It should be noted that this law changed last year
and the current provisions went into effect in November of 2006.
Based upon this current statute, there are two statutory methods which may be utilized to
establish posted speed limits. The first is a traffic and engineering study which has been the
practice for many years. The second involves a measurement which utilizes the term "vehicular
access points". The statute defines a "vehicular access point" as a driveway or intersecting
roadway. The speed is then determined by a count which corresponds with the following speed
assignment:
• 25 miles per hour on a highway segment with 60 or more vehicular access points within
½mile.
• 35 miles per hour on a highway segment with not less than 45 vehicular access points but
no more than 59 vehicular access points within ½ mile.
• 45 miles per hour on a highway segment with not less than 30 vehicular access points but
no more than 44 vehicular access points within ½ mile.
I thought it would be helpful to have this information for future discussions. I reiterate my
statement at the time of the previous discussion that we must follow state statute when
establishing speed limits within the city.
Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me.
~-vrintDocument Page 1 of2
MICHIGAN VEHICLE CODE (EXCERPT)
Act 300 of 1949
257.627 Speed limitations.
Sec. 627.
(1) A person operating a vehicle on a highway shall operate that vehicle at a careful and prudent speed
not greater than nor less than is reasonable and proper, having due regard to the traffic, surface, and
width of the highway and of any other condition then existing. A person shall not operate a vehicle upon
a highway at a speed greater than that which will permit a stop within the assured, clear distance ahead.
(2) Except in those instances where a lower speed is specified in this chapter or the speed is unsafe
pursuant to subsection (I), it is prima facie lawful for the operator of a vehicle to operate that vehicle at
a speed not exceeding the following, except when this speed would be unsafe:
(a) 25 miles per hour on all highways in a business district as that term is defined in section 5.
(b) 25 miles per hour in public parks unless a different speed is fixed and duly posted.
(c) 25 miles per hour on all highways or parts of highways within the boundaries of land platted under
the land division act, 1967 PA 288, MCL 560.101 to 560.293, or the condominium act, 1978 PA 59,
MCL 559.101 to 559.276, unless a different speed is fixed and posted.
(d) 25 miles per hour on a highway segment with 60 or more vehicular access points within 1/2 mile.
(e) 35 miles per hour on a highway segment with not less than 45 vehicular access points but no more
than 59 vehicular access points within 1/2 mile.
(f) 45 miles per hour on a highway segment with not less than 30 vehicular access points but no more
than 44 vehicular access points within 1/2 mile.
(3) It is prima facie unlawful for a person to exceed the speed limits prescribed in subsection (2), except
as provided in section 629.
(4) A person operating a vehicle in a mobile home park as defined in section 2 of the mobile home
commission act, 1987 PA 96, MCL 125.2302, shall operate that vehicle at a careful and prudent speed,
not greater than a speed that is reasonable and proper, having due regard for the traffic, surface, width of
the roadway, and all other conditions existing, and not greater than a speed that permits a stop within the
assured clear distance ahead. It is prima facie unlawful for the operator of a vehicle to operate that
vehicle at a speed exceeding 15 miles an hour in a mobile home park as defined in section 2 of the
mobile home commission act, 1987 PA 96, MCL 125.2302.
(5) A person operating a passenger vehicle drawing another vehicle or trailer shall not exceed the posted
speed limit.
(6) Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, a person operating a truck with a gross weight of
10,000 pounds or more, a truck-tractor, a truck-tractor with a semi-trailer or trailer, or a combination of
these vehicles shall not exceed a speed of 55 miles per hour on highways, streets, or freeways and shall
printDocument Page 2 of2
not exceed a speed of 35 miles per hour during the period when reduced loadings are being enforced in
accordance with this chapter. However, a person operating a school bus, a truck, a truck-tractor, or a
truck-tractor with a semi-trailer or trailer described in this subsection shall not exceed a speed of 60
miles per hour on a freeway if the maximum speed limit on that freeway is 70 miles per hour.
(7) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (6), a person operating a school bus shall not exceed the
speed of 55 miles per hour.
(8) The maximum rates of speeds allowed under this section are subject to the maximum rate established
under section 629b.
(9) A person operating a vehicle on a highway, when entering and passing through a work zone
described in section 79d(a) where a normal lane or part of the lane of traffic has been closed due to
highway construction, maintenance, or surveying activities, shall not exceed a speed of 45 miles per
hour unless a different speed limit is determined for that work zone by the state transportation
department, a county road commission, or a local authority, based on accepted engineering practice. The
state transportation department, a county road commission, or a local authority shall post speed limit
signs in each work zone described in section 79d(a) that indicate the speed limit in that work zone and
shall identify that work zone with any other traffic control devices necessary to conform to the Michigan
manual of uniform traffic control devices. A person shall not exceed a speed limit established under this
section or a speed limit established under section 628 or 629.
(10) Subject to subsections(!) and (2)(c), speed limits established pursuant to this section are not valid
unless properly posted. In the absence of a properly posted sign, the speed limit in effect shall be the
general speed limit pursuant to section 628(1).
(11) Nothing in this section prevents the establishment of an absolute speed limit pursuant to section
628. Subject to subsection(!), an absolute speed limit established pursuant to section 628 supersedes a
prima facie speed limit established pursuant to this section. ·
(12) Nothing in this section shall be construed as justification to deny a traffic and engineering
investigation.
(13) As used in this section, "vehicular access point" means a driveway or intersecting roadway.
(14) A person who violates this section is responsible for a civil infraction.
History: 1949, Act 300, Eff. Sept. 23, 1949 ;-- Am. 1957, Act 190, Eff. Sept. 27, 1957 ;-- Am. 1959, Act 76, Eff. Mar. 19,
1960 ;-- Am. 1962, Act 120, Eff. Mar. 28, 1963 ;-- Am. 1966, Act 223, Imd. Eff. July 11, 1966 ;-- Am. 1974, Act 28, Imd .
. Eff. Mar. 2, 1974 ;--Am. 1976, Act 190, Imd. Eff. July 8, 1976 ;--Am. 1978, Act 510, Eff. Aug. 1, 1979 ;-- Am. 1986, Act
92, Eff. June 5, 1986 ;-- Am. 1988, Act 460, Imd. Eff. Dec. 27, 1988 ;-- Am. 1990, Act 165, Imd. Eff. July 2, 1990 ;-- Am.
2003, Act 315, Eff. Apr. 8, 2004 ;--Am. 2004, Act 62, Imd. Eff. Apr. 13, 2004 ;--Am. 2006, Act 19, Eff. Nov. 9, 2006 ;--
Am. 2006, Act 85, Eff. Nov. 9, 2006
© 2007 Legislative Council, State of Michigan
Rendered 11/2/2007 09:42:16 Michigan Compiled Laws Complete Through PA 114 of 2007
© 2007 Legislative Council, State of Michigan Courtesy ofwww.legislature.mi.gov
1 ., II 1 • .. • un,-,.,, 1 rt n 1 t"'\'\. I .. __ • __ .,_r,. _ ---·-- ___ .,, ______ n_l..! 11 /")/.-,0.f\'7
CITY COMMISSION POLICY
EXTENSION OF TIME PERIOD FOR EXISTING RENAISSANCE ZONE PARCELS
(July 24, 2007)
POLICY: The City will establish a program which allows individuals, businesses,
developers and business areas to submit proposals for extending the timeline for
properties in the City's Renaissance zone for significant new economic
development projects. Applications will be accepted to extend the time period for
individual parcels for specific economic development projects located within the
existing Zones and will be evaluated on the basis of the criteria identified in this
policy.
PURPOSE: To provide guidelines for evaluating and approving requests for extension of
Renaissance Zone parcels for new development in zones that have not
experienced significant development.
GOALS: The City's goals in extending the time period for existing individual Renaissance
Zone parcels are:
1. To create jobs;
2. To encourage investment; and
3. To clean up and reutilize vacant and underutilized properties.
BACKGROUND
In 1999, the Cities of Muskegon and Muskegon Heights were jointly designated as a
Renaissance Zone. At that time, the City of Muskegon selected two areas of the city as sub-
zones. The City of Muskegon Heights designated four sub-zones. These sub-zones are
identified as development zones that are virtually tax free for fifteen years. In 2000, the State
of Michigan approved legislation, permitting the Muskegon/Muskegon Heights Renaissance
Zone to apply to the Michigan Economic Development Corporation to expand existing zones
contiguously and designate up to four new sub-zones. In 2002, four new sub-zones were
approved by the State for the City of Muskegon. The goal of the program has been to
encourage investment and create jobs by reutilizing vacant, contaminated, and underutilized
properties in blighted neighborhoods and industrial zones
In 2006, the State of Michigan approved legislation which allows communities to apply to the
Michigan Economic Development Corporation to extend the time period for existing
Renaissance Zone parcels when a major economic development opportunity is proposed.
PROGRAM
The City will establish a program which allows individuals, businesses, developers and
business areas to submit proposals for extending the timeline for properties in the City's
Renaissance Zone for significant new economic development projects. Applications will be
accepted to extend the time period for individual parcels for specific economic development
projects located within the existing Zones and will be evaluated on the basis of the criteria
identified in this policy.
REVIEW PROCESS
Proposal Content: All proposals must demonstrate that the project cannot reasonably be
facilitated in the existing Renaissance Zone time frame. They must identify the parcels being
proposed for extension of the Zone, the amount of real and personal property tax currently
assessed to the site(s), and verify that the property meets at least three of the threshold
criteria. Also, proposals should describe the type of use, amount of investment, jobs to be
created, and other pertinent information about the project. A pro forma showing the difference
in return on investment with and without Renaissance Zone savings must be submitted with
the proposal.
The applicant will supply a statement of Renaissance Zone outcomes achieved since inclusion
of the property in the zone, which include the number of years that the property has been in
the Zone, the total investment in the property and building, the investment in personal property,
the employment at the start of the Zone and the current employment at the site. The applicant
will provide an estimate of the tax savings, to date, from the Renaissance Zone designation.
Applicants must pay a $5000 application fee and agree to pay all legal fees associated with the
preparation of a Development Agreement.
Review: A proposal must meet a minimum of three of the threshold requirements that will be
reviewed by City Staff based on the extent to which the project addresses the evaluating
factors cited in this policy.
A review of the capacity, if any, below the modified (see next paragraph) $500,000 cap of
property and income tax revenue the City may forego to support the Renaissance Zone
program will be made as each application is reviewed.
INVESTMENT CAP LIMITATION
• The original City Renaissance Zone established an investment cap in 1999 at $50,000,
focusing solely on lost City tax revenue.
• This revised policy maintains the $50,000 cap, but will evaluate projects on a case-by-case
basis to determine whether the project is cap neutral, adds cap capacity or reduces
available cap capacity.
• Cap Capacity will be determined by analyzing the annual value of income tax receipts from
new jobs created within the City Renaissance Zones. The value will be used to calculate
the available cap capacity as follows:
$50,000 Base Cap Established 1999
($8,200) Existing Cap Capacity Utilized
$41,800 Existing Cap Capacity (before Income Tax Factor)
$1,000 Total 1999 Job Value (from new jobs created in Ren. Zone)
$42,800 Total Remaining Cap Capacity
Where:
Base Cap = The Cap of $50,000 established by City
Commission in 1999
Utilized Cap Value = The estimated amount of actual property and income
tax abated as of January 1999
Existing Cap Capacity = The difference between the Base Cap and the Utilized
Cap Value
Job Value = The total number of jobs created by all projects
in the City's Renaissance Zone multiplied by
an estimated income tax value of $300 per job
Remaining Cap Capacity = Amount of City public revenue remaining to be
invested in Renaissance Program
• A project's cap capacity impact will be determined by calculating the difference between
property tax loss and income tax to be generated by the proposal. Projects may be neutral,
may add cap capacity or may reduce cap capacity.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
Successful applicants will be required to enter into a development agreement with the City
committing to the investment and/or job creation it has proposed and posting a performance
bond or other guarantee of performance acceptable to the City. The City Commission will
make a determination as to the number years each new or expanded area will be designated
as a zone on a case-by-case basis and in compliance with State law. In no case will the
designation be for more than fifteen years from the date of application to the Board of the
Michigan Strategic Fund.
THRESHOLD CRITERIA
Must meet "a" or "b" of the following criteria plus two others to be considered for a
Renaissance Zone Extension.
a. Project will be a catalyst for a major development or for multiple redevelopment
opportunities in the City.
b. Project will add significant new City income tax from the creation of jobs new to
Muskegon within three years of project completion. This income tax is to offset
the loss of property taxes which are abated under the Renaissance Zone
expansion.
c. Property has been vacant or fifty percent of building(s) unoccupied, for at least one
year.
d. Project investment will be significant on a square foot basis.
e. Property is a contaminated site or functionally obsolete, as defined by current Michigan
law.
f. Project shows other evidence of under-utilization or disinvestment.
EVALUATION FACTORS
Proposals for extending existing Zone areas which meet the appropriate threshold criteria will
be considered based on the extent to which a project addresses the following evaluation
factors:
a. The amount of income tax to be generated by new jobs relative to the amount of local
City taxes abated.
b. The amount of investment in buildings and equipment.
c. The project allows a business to expand in the City, retains a significant number of jobs
in the City, and/or will add jobs.
d. The project includes other investment in neighborhood revitalization or public
infrastructure improvements or utilizes other public and private financing tools to
maximize redevelopment benefits.
e. In the case of residential property, the extent to which the project will work to
deconcentrate poverty, create mixed use redevelopment or develop downtown housing.
f. The amount of tax loss for the project does not exceed the amount the City Commission
identifies for support of Renaissance Zones.
g. The extent to which designation may adversely affect DOA or other City financial
obligations.
h. The project will enhance an area of the City and/or cause additional investment.
1. The project is consistent with the City's Master Plan.
J. Compliance with the following City ordinances and policies:
1. All applicants must be current with all real and personal property taxes.
2. All applicants must not be under written orders for violations of the zoning
ordinance.
3. All applicants must have a satisfactory record of compliance with regulations
enforced by the City's Environmental Services Department.
k. History of investment. What is the history of ownership of and investment in the
property since it was designated as a Renaissance Zone? What are the reasons that
the property is still blighted and underutilized?
OTHER CONDITIONS
The City reserves the right to not award Renaissance Zone status to any or all proposals, nor
is it obligated to abate taxes to the limit of capacity available. It may also decide to exceed the
cap, if it believes the benefits of a project to the City warrant doing so. Applications must be
filed by October 15, 2011, in order that they can be filed with the State by December 31, 2011.
New Renaissance Zone designations are subject to approval by the Michigan Economic
Development Corporation.
Adopted July 24, 2007
~-N~~¼, 2z~~~
Ann Marie Becker, MMC
City Clerk
City of Muskegon
Treasurer's Office
Memorandum
To: Mayor and City Commissioners
From: City Treasurer
Date: November 28, 2007
Re: Summer Property Tax Collections
Public Act 331, of 1993, the State Education Tax Act, as amended by Public Act 244 of 2002,
required cities and townships to collect the State Education Tax in a summer levy, except as
otherwise provided by law.
Cities were required to collect the State Education Tax (SET) in a summer levy unless, before
November 1, 2002, the legislative body adopted a resolution declining to collect the tax. A
copy of the resolution had to be sent before November 1, 2002 by the city to the state
treasurer and the local county treasurer. This was the case with the city of Muskegon. At
that time, we analyzed the potential revenue and associated costs of the city taking on the
administrative burden of handling a summer property tax levy and concluded that there was
no net benefit in the City's assuming that responsibility. Also at that time, it was city staff's
opinion that the City should avoid being associated with the negative public reaction that may
be generated by the summer SET tax collection.
As we know, since that time, state legislation was enacted to eliminate state shared revenue
from counties while moving county operating tax levied from the winter to the summer over a
three year period. This past summer (2007) all of the county's operating millage was levied in
the summer. The resulting effect for the city has been a further decline in property tax
administration fees revenue which has gone to the county. While other county tax millages
remain on the winter bill (county museum, quality of life, central dispatch, etc.), it may be
possible for these items to be moved from the winter to the summer in the future as well.
Further, each year brings an opportunity for the local public schools to explore the possibility
of moving their tax levy from the winter to the summer. If this were to occur without the city
rescinding it's resolution declining to collect the summer tax levy, it would result in an even
more significant erosion of the city's property tax administration fees revenue.
Under PA 244 of 2002, by January of each year the legislative body of a city that has
declined to collect the summer tax levy may by resolution adopted by a majority of the
legislative body rescind the earlier decision to decline to collect the tax.
Given the city's current and projected budget situation and in light of the information that we
currently have on hand, it is our recommendation that the city rescind its resolution declining
to collect the summer tax levy. The 2008 fiscal year budget was prepared and adopted
based upon the city taking over the summer tax levy from the county. City staff have met with
and discussed this with the County Treasurer.
The approved 2008 budget projected the additional revenue to the city that would be
generated from tax administration fees by collecting the summer tax levy and the additional
expenses that would be associated with the change. The overall projected net impact is a
$22,000 increase to the fund balance of the general fund.
Attached is a resolution for your approval to rescind the previous resolution that declined to
collect the SET in a summer tax levy and begin collecting the taxes levied in the summer
effective with the July 2008 taxes.
Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions.
• Page2
CITY OF MUSKEGON
Resolution No. 2 OO7 -1 0 2
A Resolution to rescind a previous resolution that declined to collect the State Education Tax in a
summer levy.
RECITALS
1. That Public Act 331 of 1993, the State Education Tax Act, as amended by Public Act 244 of 2002,
requires cities and townships to collect the State Education Tax in a summer levy, except as
otherwise provided by law.
2. Cities are required to collect the State Education Tax in a summer levy unless, before
November 1, 2002, the legislative body adopted a resolution declining to collect the tax.
3. On October 22, 2002, the City Commission of the City of Muskegon adopted Resolution No.
2002- l l 9(b), which declined to collect the State Education Tax in a summer levy beginning
with the sunimer 2003 levy.
4. In accordance with Act 331 of 1993, as amended by Public Act 244 of 2002, the legislative
body of a city or township that has declined to collect the State Education Tax in a summer
levy may by resolution adopted by a majority of the legislative body rescind the earlier
decision to decline to collect the tax.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION:
That the City of Muskegon rescinds Resolution No. 2002-l 19(b) which declined to collect the State
Education Tax in a summer levy and herby elects to begin collection of the State Education Tax in a
summer levy beginning with the summer 2008 levy.
This resolution passed.
Ayes Spataro, Warmington, Wisneski, Gawron, and Shepherd.
Nays None.
CITY OF MUSKEGON
By\ \ \"-,~Y\~0u (b~Jh
Ann Marie Becker, MMC, City Clerk
CERTIFICATE
This resolution was adopted at a meeting of the City Commission, held on December 11 , 2007 . The
meeting was properly held and noticed pursuant to the Open meetings Act of the State of M ichigan, Act
267 of the Public Acts of 1976.
~ FMUSKEGON
By~ '\~~---C~J'>v~~~rcJ~
Ann Marie Becker, MMC, City Clerk
U:\TREASURERISMITH\WORD\Commissn\RDCSET
Sign up for City of Muskegon Emails