View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
CITY OF MUSKEGON
CITY COMMISSION MEETING
MAY 28, 2002
CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS@ 5:30 P.M.
AGENDA
• CALL TO ORDER:
• PRAYER:
• PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
• ROLL CALL:
• HONORS AND AWARDS:
• PRESENTATIONS:
• CONSENT AGENDA:
a. Approval of Minutes. CITY CLERK
b. Michigan Municipal League - Annual Membership Dues (7 /1 /02 -
6/30/03). CITY MANAGER
c. Plow Truck Purchase. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
d. Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy. PLANNING &
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
e. Consideration of Bids - Wilson Avenue. Dowd to Henry.
ENGINEERING
f. City - MDOT Agreement for Laketon Avenue. from Peck to Park.
ENGINEERING
• PUBLIC HEARINGS:
• COMMUNICATIONS:
• CITY MANAGER'S REPORT:
• UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
a. SECOND READING: Pension Ordinance Clarification. FINANCE
• NEW BUSINESS:
a. Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Allow Private Schools. Operated
for Profit in the B-2. Convenience and Comparison Business and
the B-4. General Business. Districts. PLANNING & ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
b. Market and Housing Analysis of Downtown Waterfront. PLANNING
& ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
c. Clarification on the Special Assessment Policy Amendment of May
14. 2002. ENGINEERING
d. Consideration of Bids Laketon Avenue at Barclay Street
Intersection. ENGINEERING
• ANY OTHER BUSINESS:
• PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
• Reminder: Individuals who would like fa address the City Commission shall do the following:
• Be recognized by the Chair.
• Step forward to the microphone.
• State name and address.
• limit of 3 minutes fo address the Commission.
• (Speaker representing a group may be allowed 10 minutes if previously registered with City Clerk.)
• ADJOURNMENT:
ADA POLICY: THE CITY OF MUSKEGON WILL PROVIDE NECESSARY AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES TO INDIVIDUALS WHO WANT TO
ATTEND THE MEETING UPON TWENTY FOUR HOUR NOTICE TO THE CITY OF MUSKEGON. PLEASE CONTACT GAIL A. KUNDINGER,
CITY CLERK, 933 TERRACE STREET, MUSKEGON, Ml 49440 OR BY CALLING (231) 724-6705 OR TDD: (231) 724-4172.
Date: May 28, 2002
To: Honorable Mayor and City Commissioners
From: Gail A. Kundinger, City Clerk
RE: Approval of Minutes
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: To approve the minutes of the City
Commission and the Historic District Commission Meeting that was held
on Thursday, April 18, 2002, and the Regular Commission Meeting that
was held on Tuesday, May 14, 2002.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None.
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED: None.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the minutes.
CITY OF MUSKEGON
CITY COMMISSION MEETING
MAY 28, 2002
CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS @ 5:30 P.M.
MINUTES
The Regular Commission Meeting of the City of Muskegon was held at City of
Muskegon was held at the City Hall, 933 Terrace Street, Muskegon, Michigan at
5:30pm, Tuesday May 28, 2002.
Mayor Warmington opened the meeting with a prayer from Pastor Aikin of Central
Assembly of God, after which members of the City Commission and members of the
public joined in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ROLL CALL FOR THE REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING:
Present: Mayor Stephen Warmington; Vice-Mayor Karen Buie: Commissioners
Stephen Gawron, William Larson, Robert Schweifler, Clara Shepherd and Lawrence
Spataro; City Manager Bryon Mazade, Assistant City Attorney John Schrier and City
Clerk Gail Kundinger.
2002-65 CONSENT AGENDA:
a. Approval of Minutes. CITY CLERK
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: To approve the minutes of the City Commission and the
Historic District Commission Meeting that was held on Thursday, April 18, 2002 and
the Regular Commission Meeting that was held on Tuesday, May 14, 2002.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED: None
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the minutes.
b. Michigan Municipal League - Annual Membership Dues (7 /1 /02 -
6/30/03). CITY MANAGER
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: To obtain permission from the City Commission in
accordance with the Purchasing Policies and Procedures, to pay the MML Annual
Membership dues for July 1, 2002 through June 30, 2003.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
MML Membership Dues: $8,689
Environmental Affairs Assessment: $1,043
Legal Defense Fund Membership: $ 869
Total Dues: $10.601
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED: None. Cost applied to proper budget line items.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: None
c. Plow Truck Purchase. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Approval to purchase 2 cab and chassis plow trucks from
Woodland International. Dump Boxes and underbody plows to bid out at a late
date.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Total Cost $96,911.02
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED: None. $100.000 was budgeted for this purchase.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve purchase of budgeted replacements for a
total cost of $96,911.02 from Woodland International.
e. Consideration of Bids Wilson Avenue. Dowd to Henry.
ENGINEERING
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The contract to construct Wilson Ave. from Dowd to Henry
{H-1523) be awarded to Felco Contrators out of Muskegon since they were the
lowest (see bid tabulation) responsible bidder with a bid price of $115,429.0 l.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The construction cost of $115.429.01 plus associated
engineering cost which is estimated at an additional 20%.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Award the contract to Felco Contractors.
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED: None
COMMITTEE REDCOMMENDATION:
f. City - MDOT Agreement for Laketon Avenue. from Peck to Park.
ENGINEERING
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: To approve the contract with MOOT for the milling &
resurfacing and partial widening of Laketon Ave., between Peck & Park and to
approve the resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the contract.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: MOOT participation is about $374,200 but not to exceed
81.85% of eligible cost. The estimated total (including engineering) cost of the
project is $550,000.
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED: None at this time. The City's share of the cost will
come out of the Major Street Fund as was budgeted.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the agreement and resolution be approved.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
Motioned by Vice Mayor Buie, second by Commissioner Schweifler to approve
the Consent Agenda except for item d.
ROLL VOTE: Ayes: Warmington Buie, Gawron, Larson, Schweifler, Shepherd,
Spataro,
Nays: None
MOTION PASSES
2002-66 ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA
d. Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy. PLANNING &
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: To
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED: None
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve submittal of the CEDS project list.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Planning Commission has approved the list.
Motion by Commissioner Schweifler, second by Vice Mayor Buie to approve
submittal of potential project list for the Comprehensive Economic Development
Strategy {CEDS).
ROLL VOTE: Ayes: Schweifler, Shepherd, Spataro, Warmington, Buie, Gawron,
Larson
Nays: None
MOTION PASSES
2002-67 UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
a. SECOND READING: Pension Ordinance Clarification. FINANCE
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Section l 0(d) of the City's Police & Fire Retirement System
ordinance provides that "a member who remains in the employ of the City but
ceases to be a police officer or a firefighter shall remain a member of the
retirement system for the duration of his City employment". This provision recently
came into play when the former Fire Marshall assumed the position of Director of
Inspections. The current ordinance does not, however, specify the benefits or
contributions pertaining to an affected employee. Attached is a technical
correction ordinance intended to address this matter. It provides that the
contributions and benefits will be the same as if the member had not left
employment with the Police or Fire Departments.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED: None. The position was budgeted with the pension
benefits accorded to a Fire Department position.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval.
At the Legislative Policy Committee meeting held Wednesday, April 24, 2002.
Legislative Policy Committee voted to adopt the ordinance as recommended by
staff and legal counsel. Vote was 4 Yeas, l Absent, 2 Nays.
Motion by Commissioner Spataro, second by Commissioner Gawron to approve
the Pension Ordinance Amendment.
ROLL VOTE: Ayes: Shepherd, Spataro, Gawron, Schweifler
Nays: Warmington, Buie, Larson
MOTION PASSES
2002-68 NEW BUSINESS:
a. Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Allow Private Schools. Operated
for Profit in the B-2. Convenience and Comparison Business and
the B-4. General Business. Districts. PLANNING & ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Request to amend Section 1101 (Special Land Uses
Permitted) of Article XI (B-2, Convenience and Comparison Business) and Section
1300 (Principal Uses Permitted) of Article XIII (General Business) of the City's Zoning
Ordinance to allow private schools, operated for profit.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED: None
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends amendment of the Zoning
Ordinance to add the proposed language in the articles and sections described
above.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommended
approval of the request at their 5/16/02 meeting. The vote was unanimous, with
M. Kleaveland absent.
Motion by Commissioner Schweifler, second by Commissioner Spataro to approve
the Zoning Ordinance Amendment.
ROLL VOTE: Ayes: Spataro, Warmington, Buie, Gawron, Larson, Schweifler,
Shepherd
Nays: None
MOTION PASSES
b. Market and Housing Analysis of Downtown Waterfront. PLANNING
& ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: To approve the contract with Gibbs Planning Group, 148
Pierce Street, Birmingham, Ml. Under this contract Gibbs will perform a market
and housing analysis of Muskegon's Downtown Waterfront.
FINACIAL IMPACT: The contract amount is $28,000.00 plus additional expenses not
to exceed $1,500.00. The City has already agreed to contribute $5,000. The
County and the private sector each have contributed $5,000. In addition the City
has received a $15,000 grant for this project from the State of Michigan.
Other consultants did come in with lower bids but did not include the full scope of
services and/or the services outlined did not appear to be of the same quality
offered by Gibbs Planning Group.
The Chesapeake Group, 8516 Green Lane, Baltimore MD, $25,000
Market lnsite Group/McKenna Associates, 3250 West Big Beaver Rd., Troy, Ml,
$36,000
Beckett & Raeder, 535 West William, Suite 101, Ann Arbor, Ml, $25,000
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED: None
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the contract with Gibbs Planning Group,
148 Pierce Street, Birmingham, Ml.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
Motion by Commissioner Spataro, second by Commissioner Larson to approve the
contract with Gibbs Planning Group, 148 Pierce Street, Birmingham, ML
ROLL VOTE: Ayes: Warmington, Buie, Gawron, Larson, Schweifler, Shepherd,
Spataro
Nays: None
MOTION PASSES
c. Clarification on the Special Assessment Policy Amendment of May
14, 2002. ENGINEERING
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: It is respectfully requested that the recent amendment of
the special assessment policy be Vacated due to ambiguous interpretation and
revert to the original table (80%) when preparing the assessable per foot cost
which is based on the cost of assessable items. However, it is requested that the
. policy be amended to limit the total assessment on any pavement project as
described in said policy to a maximum of 45% of the TOTAL COST OF THE PROJECT
which would be determined at the time the roll being spreading.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None anticipated at this time.
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED: None
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Amend the special assessment policy.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
Motion by Commissioner Larson, second by Commissioner Schweifler to approve
to amend the special assessment policy.
ROLL VOTE: Ayes: Buie, Gawron, Larson, Schweifler, Shepherd, Spataro,
Warmington
Nays: None
MOTION PASSES
d. Consideration of Bids - Laketon Avenue at Barclay Street
Intersection. ENGINEERING
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The Whitetopping of Laketon Ave. at Barclay St. contract
(H-1555) be awarded to Veneklasen Concrete Construction out of Rockford since
they were the lowest (see bid tabulation) responsible bidder with a bid price of
$116,495.00.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The construction cost of $116,495.00 plus . associated
engineering cost which is estimated at an additional 15%.
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED: None
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Award the contract to Veneklasen Concrete
Construction.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
Motion by Commissioner Shepherd, second by Commissioner Spataro to award
the contract to Veneklasen Concrete Construction.
ROLL VOTE: Ayes: Gawron, Larson, Schweifler, Shepherd, Spataro, Warmington,
Buie
Nays: None
MOTION PASSES
ADJOURNMENT: The Regular Commission Meeting for the City of Muskegon was
adjourned at 6:05PM.
Respectfully submitted,
ktL~
Gail Kundinger, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
AGENDA ITEM NO. _ _ _ __
CITY COMMISSION MEETING 05/28/02
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM: Bryon L. Mazade, City Manager
DATE: May 13, 2002
RE: MML -Annual Membership Dues (7/1/02 - 6/30/03)
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
To obtain permission from the City Commission, in accordance with the Purchasing Policies and
Procedures, to pay the MML Annual Membership Dues for July 1, 2002, through June 30, 2003.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
MML Membership Dues: $8,689
Environmental Affairs Assessment: $1,043
Legal Defense Fund Membership: $ 869
Total Dues: $10,601
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED:
None. Cost applied to proper budget line items.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
None.
O:COMMON\DEPTMENT\A.DMIN\AGNDAFRM
JMS- 0: (MML-DUES-2002&2003)
.("4"-.../~~
~
1-.}.,.~~
MICHIGAN
MUNICIPAL
President
Ms. Gail A. Kundinger
Muskegon City Clerk
May 3, 2002
ROBERT SLATTERY, JR.
Mayor, Mount Morris 933 Terrace St. MAY 1 o •.. ·--~
PO Box 536 MUSKEG<:.,,
Vice President Muskegon, MI 49443-0536
FRANKLIN L. CAMPBELL
CIIX MANAGsn•s
Mayor, Hastings ._ _ _ _,;;:O;,;;F.;;:l!;,;IC:,::E:_
... -- .
Dear Ms. Kundinger:
Trustees
MARGARET "PEGGI' ARNOLD Enclosed are your Michigan Municipal League renewal invoice and membership
Mayor, Manistique
plaque insert that recognizes your continuing membership in the MML. In preparing
KENNETH BABICH
Mayor, Marlette your invoice, the state shared revenue figures used for the dues calculation are
accurate to the best of our knowledge.
C. D. 'AL' CAPPUCCILLI
Mayor, Monroe
SHEILA COCKREL On behalf of the trustees and staff I would like to thank you for your continued
Councilmember, Detroit support of the League. It is only through the cooperation and participation of our
GRETCHEN DRISKELL municipal members that the League is in a position to help meet the needs of local
Mayor, Saline government by providing information, education, political involvement and a host
MYRON FRASIER of other services tailored especially for member cities and villages.
Council President, Southfield
PATRICIA KILLINGBECK Your participation in League meetings, conferences, training programs and our
City Manager, AuGres
miscellaneous services is encouraged as we move into our second century of
KURT KIMBALL
City Manager, Grand Rapids
furthering and strengthening the objectives of local government.
KA TE LAWRENCE
Mayor, Brighton The three League offices are always available to you, as is the MML's Web site
JAMES LEIDLEIN
(www.mml.org).
City Manager, Harper Woods
THOMAS MARKUS Please feel free to call me or any staff member should you have questions.
City Manager, Birmingham
SPENCER NEBEL Sincerely,
City Manager, Sault Ste. Marie
CAROL SHEETS
Mayor Pro Tern, Wyoming •
JAMES SINCLAIR G
Councilmember, Rogers City
Executive Director
JOEL THOMPSON
Mayor, Otsego
JOSEPH YUCHASZ
Enc.
vmage President, Elk Rapids
Executive Director
GEORGE D. GOODMAN
A member of the National League of Cities
Web Address Headquarters Office Lansing Office Northern Field Office
www.mml.org 1675 Green Road, P.O. Box 1487 320 N. Washington Square, Suite 110 200 Minneapolis Avenue
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1487 Lansing, Ml 48933-1288 Gladstone, Ml 49837-1931
Phone: 734-662-3246 Phone: 517-485-1314 Phone: 906-428-0100
Fax: 734-662-8083 Fax: 517-372-7476 Fax: 906-428-0101
r4::4~
-~&w1~
MICHIGAN
MUNICIPAL
MICHIGAN MUNICIPAL LEAGUE
MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL INVOICE
2002 - 2003
CITY OF MUSKEGON Id: 347
Date: May 3, 2002
Membership Period: July 1, 2002 - June 30, 2003
* 2001-2001 State Shared Revenue: $5,592,276
* Michigan Municipal League Dues. $8,689
* Environment Affairs Assessment 1,043
* Legal Defense Fund 869
* Total due by July 1, 2002 $10,601
Please sign, date and return one invoice copy with your payment.
Make checks payable to the Michigan Municipal League and mail
to the address below. Thank you.
Mayor
(Date) L O ;
* See reverse side
Michigan Municipal League
P.O. Box 7409
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-7409
800.653.2483
Date: 5/20/02
To: Honorable Mayor and City Commission
from: Brett Kraley, Equipment Supervisor DIPW
RE: Plow truck Purchase
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Approval to purchase 2 cab and chassis plow
trucks from Woodland International. Dump Boxes and underbody plows to bid
out at a later date.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Total Cost $96,911.02
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED: None. $100,000 was budgeted for this
purchase.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve purchase of budgeted replacements
for a total cost of $96,911.02 from Woodland International.
t------- - " ------
2 Plow Truck Cab & Chassis
- --- ---- --------
Bid Model
Woodland International $ 96,911.02 International 7400SFA
274 W. Sherman
Muskegon,Ml49444
-
Outhier Truck Center $ 100,302.00 Sterling L7501
4525 Clay SW
----
Grand Rapids Ml 49548 --
-
Dermondy Truck Sales $112,200.00 Peterbuilt 330
1456 28th Street, S.W. -
Grand Rapids Ml 49509 - -
-
Budgeted Amount $100,000.00 - ---
----
- -·--
This is a budgeted replacement of existing units. The trucks that we are replacing
are 1986 and 1987 model year vehicles. We currently have ten International plow
trucks in our fleet and have always received excellent customer service from
Woodland International. Their close proximity to the city yards also helps when
we need parts or warranty work. Therefore, we are requesting commission
approval to purchase two International 7400 plow truck chassis from Woodland
International.
Date: May 28, 2002
To: Honorable Mayor and City Commissioners
From: Engineering
RE: Consideration of Bids
Wilson Ave., Dowd to Henry
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
The contract to construct Wilson Ave. from Dowd to Henry (H-1523) be awarded to Felco
Contractors out of Muskegon since they were the lowest (see bid tabulation) responsible
bidder with a bid price of $115,429.01
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The construction cost of $115,429.01 plus associated engineering cost which is estimated at
an additional 20%.
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED:
None.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Award the contract to Felco Contractors.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
H-1523 WILSON AVENUE, DOWD TO HENRY
BID TABULATION
May 21, 2002
CONTRACTOR JACKSON-MERKEY DIVERSIFIED FELCO K&R
ADDRESS 555 E.WESTERN 6775 HARVEY 874 PULASKI AVE. 3435 BROADMOOR
CITY/ST MUSKEGON, Ml SPRING LAKE, Ml MUSKEGON, Ml GRAND RAPIDS, Ml
DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST UNIT COST TOTAL COST UNIT COST TOTAL COST UNIT COST TOTAL COST
1 ADJUST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE COVER 5 EACH $475.00 $2,375.00 $333.00 $1,665.00 $ 450.00 $2,250.00 $ 550.00 $2,750.00
2 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE, 22A, 6" C.I.P. 3244 SYD $5.00 $16,220.00 $7.00 $22,708.00 $ 5.04 $16,349.76 $ 4.00 $12,976.00
3 AGGREGATE SURFACE COURSE, 23A, AS NEEDED 39 CYD $27.00 $1,053.00 $20.00 $780.00 $ 19.00 $741.00 $ 25.00 $975.00
4 BIT. MIXTURE 3C@ 220#/S.YD. 321 TON $47.35 $15,199.35 $49.00 $15,729.00 $ 45.60 $14,637.60 $ 43.34 $13,912.14
5 BIT. MIXTURE 4C@ 165#/S.YD. 245 TON $53.35 $13,070.75 $55.00 $13,475.00 $ 52.60 $12,887.00 $ 49.34 $12,088.30
6 CATCH BASIN CASTING EAST JORDAN #7045 OR EQUAL 3 EACH $525.00 $1,575.00 $500.00 $1,500.00 $ 505.00 $1,515.00 $ 750.00 $2,250.00
7 CATCH BASIN, FLAT TOP 3 EACH $525.00 $1,575.00 $800.00 $2,400.00 $1,300.00 $3,900.00 $ 1,200.00 $3,600.00
8 CONCRETE APPROACH, 6", STANDARD 205 SYD $26.00 $5,330.00 $25.00 $5,125.00 $ 28.00 $5,740.00 $ 27.50 $5,637.50
9 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER, STANDARD DETAIL 1 2175 LFT $8.50 $18,487.50 $9.00 $19,575.00 $ 8.00 $17,400.00 $ 9.50 $20,662.50
10 CONC. SIDEWALK 4" 75 SFT $2.50 $187.50 $3.25 $243.75 $ 4.60 $345.00 $ 2.65 $198.75
11 CONC. SIDEWALK 6" 1217 SFT $3.00 $3,651.00 $3.75 $4,563.75 $ 4.25 $5,172.25 $ 3.00 $3,651.00
12 DRAINAGE STRUCTURE TAP 1 EACH $425.00 $425.00 $500.00 $500.00 $ 775.00 $775.00 $ 275.00 $275.00
13 EXCAVATION 888 CYD $14.90 $13,231.20 $10.00 $8,880.00 $ 7.05 $6,260.40 $ 3.50 $3,108.00
14 MANHOLE CASTING EAST JORDAN #1000 OF EQUAL 6 EACH $565.00 $3,390.00 $400.00 $2,400.00 $ 520.00 $3,120.00 $ 350.00 $2,100.00
15 MANHOLE FLOW LINE 5 EACH $795.00 $3,975.00 $500.00 $2,500.00 $ 400.00 $2,000.00 $ 500.00 $2,500.00
16 MANHOLE, STANDARD, 4' 1.0. 0'-10' DEEP 1 EACH $1,690.00 $1,690.00 $1,200.00 $1,200.00 $1,400.00 $1,400.00 $ 1,325.00 $1,325.00
17 PREPARED TOP SOIL AND SEED, CLASS A 2500 SYD $2.75 $6,875.00 $4.25 $10,625.00 $ 2.90 $7,250.00 $ 1.50 $3,750.00
18 RECONSTRUCTING MANHOLE 3 VFT $450.00 $1,350.00 $175.00 $525.00 $ 105.00 $315.00 $ 350.00 $1,050.00
19 RELOCATING MAIL BOX 13 EACH $70.00 $910.00 $50.00 $650.00 $ 75.00 $975.00 $ 90.00 $1,170.00
20 REMOVING CURB AND GUTTER 54 LFT $16.00 $864.00 $20.00 $1,080.00 $ 5.00 $270.00 $ 5.50 $297.00
21 REMOVING PAVEMENT 143 SYD $19.75 $2,824.25 $8.00 $1,144.00 $ 4.00 $572.00 $ 9.85 $1,408.55
22 REMOVING SIDEWALK 8 SYD $13.00 $104.00 $20.00 $160.00 $ 13.00 $104.00 $ 9.85 $78.80
23 REMOVING TREE, 25" TO 36" 1 EACH $965.00 $965.00 $250.00 $250.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $ 450.00 $450.00
24 REMOVING TREE, 37" OR LARGER 1 EACH $1,845.00 $1,845.00 $400.00 $400.00 $1,300.00 $1,300.00 $ 1,525.00 $1,525.00
25 SANITARY SEWER, 6", PVC, SDR 35 5 LFT $80.00 $400.00 $100.00 $500.00 $ 32.00 $160.00 $ 70.00 $350.00
26 SANITARY SEWER, 8", PVC, SDR 35 20 LFT $85.00 $1,700.00 $40.00 $800.00 $ 39.00 $780.00 $ 75.00 $1,500.00
27 SANITARY SEWER WYE, 8" X 6", PVC, SDR 35 1 EACH $150.00 $150.00 $250.00 $250.00 $ 200.00 $200.00 $ 250.00 $250.00
28 STORM SEWER, 12", C76 CLASS V 26 LFT $29.00 $754.00 $25.00 $650.00 $ 30.00 $780.00 $ 35.00 $910.00
29 STORM SEWER, 12'", DUCTILE IRON, CLASS 52 110 LFT $36.00 $3,960.00 $30.00 $3,300.00 $ 30.00 $3,300.00 $ 40.00 $4,400.00
30 SAND REFILL 300 CYD $8.00 $2,400.00 $8.00 $2,400.00 $ 3.10 $930.00 $ 5.50 $1,650.00
31 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LUMP $8,975.00 $8,975.00 $3,750.00 $3,750.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $ 33,500.00 $33,500.00
TOTAL $135,511.55 $129,728.50 $115,429.01 $140,298.54
5/21/023:35 PMWilson Bid Tabulation .xis
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE H-1523 WILSON AVENUE, DOWD TO HENRY
DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE
1 ADJUST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE COVER 5 EACH $400.00 $2,000.00
2 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE, 22A, 6" C.I.P. 3244 SYD $5.00 $16,220.00
3 AGGREGATE SURFACE COURSE, 23A, AS NEEDED 39 CYD $25.00 $975.00
4 BIT. MIXTURE 3C @ 220#/S.YD. 321 TON $40.00 $12,840.00
5 BIT. MIXTURE 4C@ 165#/S.YD. 245 TON $45.00 $11,025.00
6 CATCH BASIN CASTING EAST JORDAN #7045 OR EQUAL 3 EACH $500.00 $1,500.00
7 CATCH BASIN, FLAT TOP 3 EACH $1,200.00 $3,600.00
8 CONCRETE APPROACH, 6", STANDARD 205 SYD $30.00 $6,150.00
9 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER, STANDARD DETAIL 1 2175 LFT $9.00 $19,575.00
10 CONG. SIDEWALK 4" 75 SFT $3.50 $262.50
11 CONG. SIDEWALK 6" 1217 SFT $3.30 $4,016.10
12 DRAINAGE STRUCTURE TAP 1 EACH $150.00 $150.00
13 EXCAVATION 888 CYD $10.00 $8,880.00
14 MANHOLE CASTING EAST JORDAN #1000 OF EQUAL 6 EACH $450.00 $2,700.00
15 MANHOLE, STANDARD, 4' I.D. 0'-10' DEEP 1 EACH $1,400.00 $1,400.00
16 PREPARED TOP SOIL AND SEED, CLASS A 2500 SYD $2.70 $6,750.00
17 RECONSTRUCTING MANHOLE 3 VFT $300.00 $900.00
18 RELOCATING MAILBOX 13 EACH $100.00 $1,300.00
19 REMOVING CURB AND GUTTER 54 LFT $20.00 $1,080.00
20 REMOVING PAVEMENT 143 SYD $15.00 $2,145.00
21 REMOVING SIDEWALK 8 SYD $10.00 $80.00
22 REMOVING TREE, 25" TO 36" 1 EACH $1,000.00 $1,000.00
23 REMOVING TREE, 37" OR LARGER 1 EACH $2,000.00 $2,000.00
24 STORM SEWER, 12", C76 CLASS V 26 LFT $30.00 $780.00
25 STORM SEWER, 12", DUCTILE IRON, CLASS 52 110 LFT $35.00 $3,850.00
26 SAND REFILL 200 CYD $10.00 $2,000.00
27 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LUMP $5,000.00 $5,000.00
SUB-TOTAL $118,178.60
20% ENGINEERING $23,635.72
TOTAL $141,814.32
Date: May 28, 2002
To: Honorable Mayor and City Commissioners
From: Engineering
RE: City - MOOT Agreement for:
Laketon Ave., from Peck to Park
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
To approve the attached contract with MOOT for the milling & resurfacing and partial
widening of Laketon Ave. between Peck & Park and to approve the attached
resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the contract.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
MOOT participation is about $374,200 but not to exceed 81.85% of eligible cost. The
estimated total (including engineering) cost of the project is $550,000.
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED:
None at this time. The City's share of the cost will come out of the Major Street
Fund as was budgeted.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the attached agreement and resolution be approved.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
RESOLUTION 2002-65 ( f)
RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL OF A CONTRACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE MICHIGAN
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE CITY OF MUSKEGON FOR THE MILLING &
RESURFACING OF LAKETON AVE. FROM PECK TO PARK TOGETHER WITH NECESSARY
RELATED WORK AND AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR STEPHEN J. WARMINGTON AND CITY
CLERK GAIL A KUNDINGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT
Moved by Vi ce-Mayar B11i e and supported by
Commissioner_ ___...Sc,...h....,w.,,_.,,e...,i..._f...,l"""e._r_ _ _ _ _that the following Resolution be adopted:
WHEREAS, entry by the City of Muskegon into Contract no. 02-5188 between the Michigan
Department of Transportation and the City of Muskegon for the resurfacing & widening of the
southbound exit ramp at US-31 and Sherman Blvd. within the City is in the best interests of the City of
Muskegon.
RESOLVED, that entry by the City into Contract Agreement Number 02-51 88 be and the same is
hereby authorized and approved and the Mayor and Clerk are authorized to execute said contract for
and on behalf of the City of Muskegon.
Adopted this 2St b day of_~M_a_y_ _, 2002.
BY
ATTEST J:hL Q_ ~
Gail A. Kundinger, City Clerk
CERTIFICATION
This resolution was adopted at a meeting of the City c ·ommission, held on
May 28 , 2002. The meeting was properly held and noticed pursuant to the Open
Meetings Act of the State of Michigan, Act 267 of the Public Acts of 1976.
CITY OF MUSK.E
~ O
By--f--"'~~
- ·~G~- - ~
Gail A Kunding~
STATE OF MICHIGAN
JOHN ENGLER DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION GREGORY J. ROSINE
GOVERNOR LANSING DIRECTOR
August 21, 2002
Ms. Gail Kundinger, Clerk
City of Muskegon
933 Terrace Street, P.O. Box 536
Muskegon, MI 49443-0536
Dear Ms. Kundinger:
RE: MDOT Contract Number: 02-5188
Control Section: STUL 61407
Job Number: 56345
Enclosed is a fully executed copy of the above noted agreement.
Sincerely,
~i:J~u
J~Jie Burch
Contract Processing Specialist
Design Division
Enclosure
cc: M. Harbison, Design Division
A. Christensen, Financial Operations Division
Grand Region Engineer ·
MURRAY 0. VAN WAGONER BUILDING• P.O. BOX 30050 • LANSING, MICHIGAN 48909
www.michigan.gov • {517) 373-2090
LH-lAN-0{11/01)
STP DIR
Project STP 0261(331)
Job Number 56345
Control Section STUL61407
Fed Item# HH 3186
Contract No. 02-5188
PART!
THIS CONTRACT, consisting of PART I and PART II (Standard Agreement Provisions),
ismadeandenteredintothisdateof AUG 212002 ,byandbetweentheMICHIGAN
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, hereinafter referred to as the "DEPARTMENT"; and
the CITY OF MUSKEGON, a Michigan municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as the
"REQUESTING PARTY"; for the purpose of fixing the rights and obligations of the parties in
agreeing to the following improvements, in the City of Muskegon, Michigan, hereinafter referred
to as the "PROJECT" and estimated in detail on EXHIBIT"!", dated April 25, 2002, attached hereto
and made a part hereof:
PART A-FEDERAL PARTICIPATION
Grading work along Laketon Avenue from Park Street easterly to Peck Street;
including bituminous resurfacing, drainage structures, concrete curb and gutter, and
restoration work; and all together with necessary related work.
PART B - NO FEDERAL PARTICIPATION
Watermain work along Laketon Avenue from Park Street easterly to Peck Street; and
all together with necessary related work.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, pursuant to Federal law, monies have been provided for the performance of
certain improvements on public roads; and
WHEREAS, the reference "FHWA" in PART I and PART II refers to the United States
Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration; and
WHEREAS, the PROJECT, or portions of the PROJECT at the request of the
REQUESTING PARTY, are being programmed with the FHWA, for implementation with the use
of Federal Funds under the following Federal program(s) or funding:
SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM
09/06/90 STP.FOR 8/7/02 I
WHEREAS, the parties hereto have reached an understanding with each other regarding the
performance of the PROJECT work and desire to set forth this understanding in the form of a written
contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the mutual undertakings of the
parties and in conformity with applicable law, it is agreed:
1. The parties hereto shall undertake and complete the PROJECT in accordance with
the terms of this contract.
2. The term "PROJECT COST", as herein used, is hereby defined as the cost of the
physical construction necessary for the completion of the PROJECT.
Costs for construction engineering and inspection incurred by the DEPARTMENT will be
charged 100 percent to the REQUESTING PARTY. Any other costs incurred by the
DEPARTMENT as a result of this contract will be at PROJECT COST.
The costs incurred by the REQUESTING PARTY for preliminary engineering, construction
engineering and inspection, and right-of-way are excluded from the PROJECT COST as defined by
this contract.
3. The DEPARTMENT is authorized by the REQUESTING PARTY to administer on
behalf of the REQUESTING PARTY all phases of the PROJECT including advertising and
awarding the construction contract for the PROJECT or portions of the PROJECT. Such
administration shall be in accordance with PART II, Section II of this contract.
Any items of the PROJECT COST incurred by the DEPARTMENT may be charged to the
PROJECT.
4. The REQUESTING PARTY, at no cost to the PROJECT orto the DEPARTMENT,
shall:
A. Design or cause to be designed the plans for the PROJECT.
B. Appoint a project engineer who shall be in responsible charge of the
PROJECT and ensure that the plans and specifications are followed.
C. Perform or cause to be performed the construction engineering and inspection
services necessary for the completion of the PROJECT.
09/06/90 STP.FOR 8/7/02 2
The REQUESTING PARTY will furnish the DEPARTMENT proposed timing sequences
for trunkline signals that, if any, are being made part of the improvement. No timing adjustments
shall be made by the REQUESTING PARTY at any trunkline intersection, without prior issuances
by the DEPARTMENT of Standard Traffic Signal Timing Permits.
5. The PROJECT COST shall be met in accordance with the following:
PART A '
Federal Surface Transportation Funds shall be applied to the eligible items of the
PART A portion ofthe PROJECT COST at the established Federal participation ratio
equal to 81.85 percent up to an amount not to exceed $440,000. The balance of the
PART A portion of the PROJECT COST, after deduction of Federal Funds, shall be
charged to and paid by the REQUESTING PARTY in the manner and at the times
hereinafter set forth.
PARTB
The PART B portion of the PROJECT COST is not eligible for Federal participation
and shall be charged to and paid 100 percent by the REQUESTING PARTY in the
manner and at the times hereinafter set forth.
Any items of PROJECT COST not reimbursed by Federal Funds will be the sole
responsibility of the REQUESTING PARTY.
6. No working capital deposit will be required for this PROJECT.
In order to fulfill the obligations assumed by the REQUESTING PARTY under the
provisions of this contract, the REQUESTING PARTY shall make prompt payments of its share of
the PROJECT COST upon receipt of progress billings from the DEPARTMENT as herein provided.
All payments will be made within 30 days of receipt of billings from the DEPARTMENT. Billings
to the REQUESTING PARTY will be based upon the REQUESTING PARTY'S share of the actual
costs incurred less Federal Funds earned as the PROJECT progresses.
In the event of any discrepancies between PART I and PART II, the provisions of PART I
shall prevail.
7. Upon completion of construction ofthe PROJECT, the REQUESTING PARTY will
promptly cause to be enacted and enforced such ordinances or regulations as may be necessary to
prohibit parking in the roadway right-of-way throughout the limits of the PROJECT,
8. The performance of the entire PROJECT under this contract, whether Federally
funded or not, will be subject to the provisions and requirements of PART II that are applicable to
a Federally funded project.
09/06/90 SIP.FOR 8/7/02 3
9. The REQUESTING PARTY certifies that a) it is a person under 1995 PA 71 and is
not aware of and has no reason to believe that the property is a facility as defined in MSA
13A.20101(1)(1); b) the REQUESTING PARTY further certifies that it has completed the tasks
required by MCL 324.20126 (3)(h); MSA 13A.20126(3)(h); c) it conducted a visual inspection of
property within the existing right of way on which construction is to be performed to determine if
any hazardous substances were present; and at sites on which historically were located businesses
that involved hazardous substances, it performed a reasonable investigation to determine whether
hazardous substances exist. This reasonable investigation should include, at a minimum, contact
with local, state and federal environmental agencies to determine if the site has been identified as,
or potentially as, a site containing hazardous substances; d) it did not cause or contribute to the
release or threat of release of any hazardous substance found within the PROJECT limits.
The REQUESTING PARTY also certifies that, in addition to reporting the presence of any
hazardous substances to the Department of Environmental Quality, it has advised the
DEPARTMENT of the presence of any and all hazardous substances which the REQUESTING
PARTY found within the PROJECT limits, as a result of performing the investigation and visual
inspection required herein. The REQUESTING PARTY also certifies that it has been unable to
identify any entity who may be liable for the cost of remediation. As a result, the REQUESTING
PARTY has included all estimated costs of remediation of such hazardous substances in its estimated
cost of construction of the PROJECT.
10. If, subsequent to execution of this contract, previouslyunknown hazardous substances
are discovered within the PROJECT limits, which require environmental remediation pursuant to
either state or federal law, the REQUESTING PARTY, in addition to reporting that fact to the
Department ofEnvironmental Quality, shall immediately notify the DEPARTMENT, both orally and
in writing of such discovery. The DEPARTMENT shall consult with the REQUESTING PARTY
to determine if it is willing to pay for the cost of remediation and, with the FHWA, to determine the
eligibility, for reimbursement, of the remediation costs. The REQUESTING PARTY shall be
charged for and shall pay all costs associated with such remediation, including all delay costs of the
contractor for the PROJECT, in the event that remediation and delay costs are not deemed eligible
by the FHWA. If the REQUESTING PARTY refuses to participate in the cost of remediation, the
DEPARTMENT shall terminate the PROJECT. The parties agree that any costs or damages that the
DEPARTMENT incurs as a result of such termination shall be considered a PROJECT COST.
11. If federal and/or state funds administered by the DEPARTMENT are used to pay the
cost of remediating any hazardous substances discovered after the execution of this contract and if
there is a reasonable likelihood ofrecovery, the REQUESTING PARTY, in cooperation with the
Department of Environmental Quality and the DEPARTMENT, shall make a diligent effort to
recover such costs from all other possible entities. Ifrecovery is made, the DEPARTMENT shall
be reimbursed from such recovery for the proportionate share of the amount paid by the FHWA
and/or the DEPARTMENT and the DEPARTMENT shall credit such sums to the appropriate
funding source.
09/06/90 STP.FOR 8/7/02 4
12. The DEPARTMENT'S sole reason for entering into this contract is to enable the
REQUESTING PARTY to obtain and use funds provided by the Federal Highway Administration
pursuant to Title 23 of the United States Code.
Any and all approvals of, reviews of, and recommendations regarding contracts, agreements,
permits, plans, specifications, or documents, of any nature, or any inspections of work by the
DEPARTMENT or its agents pursuant to the terms of this contract are done to assist the
REQUESTING PARTY in meeting program guidelines in order to qualify for available funds. Such
approvals, reviews, inspections and recommendations by the DEPARTMENT or its agents shall not
relieve the REQUESTING PARTY and the local agencies, as applicable, of their ultimate control
and shall not be construed as a warranty of their propriety or that the DEPARTMENT or its agents
is assuming any liability, control or jurisdiction.
The providing ofrecommendations or advice by the DEPARTMENT or its agents does not
relieve the REQUESTING PARTY and the local agencies, as applicable of their exclusive
jurisdiction of the highway and responsibility under MCL 691.1402, MSA 3.996(102).
When providing approvals, reviews and recommendations under this contract, the
DEPARTMENT or its agents is performing a governmental function, as that term is defined in MCL
691.1401; MSA 3.996(101), which is incidental to the completion of the PROJECT.
13. The DEPARTMENT, by executing this contract, and rendering services pursuant to
this contract, has not and does not assume jurisdiction of the highway, described as the PROJECT
for purposes of MCL 691.1402; MSA 3 .996(102). Exclusive jurisdiction of such highway for the
purposes ofMCL 691.1402; MSA 3.996(102) rest with the REQUESTING PARTY and otherlocal
agencies having respective jurisdiction.
14. The REQUESTING PARTY shall approve all of the plans and specifications to be
used on the PROJECT and shall be deemed to have approved all changes to the plans and
specifications when put into effect. It is agreed that ultimate responsibility and control over the
PROJECT rests with the REQUESTING PARTY and local agencies, as applicable.
15. The REQUESTING PARTY agrees that the costs reported to the DEPARTMENT
for this contract will represent only those items that are properly chargeable in accordance with this
contract. The REQUESTING PARTY also certifies that it has read the contract terms and has made
itself aware of the applicable laws, regulations, and terms of this contract that apply to the reporting
of costs incurred under the terms of this contract.
16. The parties shall promptly provide comprehensive assistance and cooperation in
defending and resolving any claims brought against the DEPARTMENT by the contractor, vendors
or suppliers as a result of the DEPARTMENT'S award of the construction contract for the
PROJECT. Costs incurred by the DEPARTMENT in defending or resolving such claims shall be
considered PROJECT COSTS.
09/06/90 STP.FOR 8/7/02 5
17. The DEPARTMENT shall require the contractor who is awarded the contract for the
construction of the PROJECT to provide insurance in the amounts specified and in accordance with
the DEPARTMENT'S current standard specifications for construction, and to:
A. Maintain bodily injury and property damage insurance for the duration of the
PROJECT.
B. Provide owner's protective liability insurance naming as insureds the State of
Michigan, the Michigan State Transportation Commission, the
DEPARTMENT and its officials, agents and employees, the REQUESTING
PARTY and any other party with jurisdiction for the roadway being
constructed as the PROJECT, and their employees, for the duration of the
PROJECT and to provide copies of certificates of insurance to the insureds.
It is understood that the DEPARTMENT does not assume jurisdiction of the
highway described as the PROJECT as a result of being named as an insured
on the owners protective liability insurance policy.
C. Comply with the requirements of notice of cancellation and reduction of
insurance set forth in the current standard specifications for construction and
to provide copies of notices and reports prepared to those insured.
09/06/90 STP.FOR 8/7/02 6
18. This contract shall become binding on the parties hereto and of full force and effect
upon the signing thereof by the duly authorized officials for the parties hereto and upon the adoption
of the necessary resolutions approving said contract and authorizing the signatures thereto of the
respective officials of the REQUESTING PARTY, a certified copy of which resolution shall be
attached to this contract.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this contract to be executed the
day and year first above written.
CITY OF MUSKEGON
By~ ~
Title: fJ "I'" f;t. C, t;;t- Cir/'){
09/06/90 STP.FOR 8/7/02 7
April 25, 2002
EXHIBIT I
PROJECT STP 0261(331)
JOB NUMBER 56345
CONTROL SECTION STUL 61407
ESTIMATED COST
CONTRACTED WORK
· PART A PARTB TOTAL
Estimated Cost $457,200 $16,000 $473,200
COST PARTICIPATION
GRAND TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $457,200 $16,000 $473,200
Less Federal Funds* $374.200 $ -0- $374.200
BALANCE (REQUESTING PARTY'S SHARE) $ 83,000 $16,000 $ 99,000
*Federal Funds shall be applied to the eligible items of the PROJECT COST at a participation ratio
equal to 81.85 percent up to an amountnot to exceed $440,000.
NO DEPOSIT
09/06/90 STP.FOR 8/7/02 8
DOT TYPEB
BUREAU OF HIGHWAYS
03-15-93
PART II
STANDARD AGREEMENT PROVISIONS
SECTION I COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATIONS AND DIRECTIVES
SECTION II PROJECT ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION
SECTION III ACCOUNTING AND BILLING
SECTION IV MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION
SECTION V SPECIAL PROGRAM AND PROJECT CONDITIONS
I
SECTION I
COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATIONS AND DIRECTIVES
A. To qualify for eligible cost, all work shall be docwnented in accordance with the require-
ments and procedures of the DEPARTMENT.
B. All work on projects for which reimbursement with Federal funds is requested shall be
performed in accordance with the requirements and guidelines set forth in the following
Directives of the Federal-Aid Policy Guide (FAPG) of the FHWA, as applicable, and as
referenced in pertinent sections of Title 23 and Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), and all supplements and amendments thereto.
1. Engineering
a. FAPG (6012.1): Preliminary Engineering
b. FAPG (23 CFR 172): Administration of Engineering and Design Related
Service Contracts
c. FAPO (23 CFR 635A): Contract Procedures
d. F APO (49 CFR 18.22): Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and
Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments-Allowable Costs
2. Construction
a. F APO (23 CFR 140E): Administrative Settlement Costs-Contract Claims
b. FAPG (23 CFR 140B): Construction Engineering Costs
C. FAPG (23 CFR 17): Recordkeeping and Retention Requirements for Federal-
Aid Highway Records of State Highway Agencies
d. FAPG (23 CFR 635A): Contract Procedures
e. FAPG (23 CFR 635B): Force Account Construction
f. FAPO (23 CFR 645A): Utility Relocations, Adjustments and Reimbursement
·g. FAPO (23 CFR 645B): Accommodation of Utilities (PPM 30-4.1)
03-15-93 2
h. FAPG (23 CFR 655F): Traffic Control Devices on Federal-Aid and other
Streets and Highways
1. FAPG (49 CFR 18.22):UniformAdministrative Requirements for Grants and
Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments-Allowable Costs
3. Modification Or Construction Of Railroad Facilities
a. FAPG (23 CFR 140I): Reimbursement for Railroad Work
b. FAPG (23 CFR 646B): Railroad Highway Projects
C. In conformance with FAPG (23 CFR 630C) Project Agreements, the political subdivisions
party to this contract, on those Federally funded projects which exceed a total cost of
$ I 00,000.00 stipulate the following with respect to their specific jurisdictions:
I. That any facility to be utilized in performance under or to benefit from this contract
is not listed on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) List of Violating
Facilities issued pursuant to the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act, as
amended, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended.
2. That they each agree to comply with all of the requirements of Section 114 of the
Federal Clean Air Act and Section 308 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
and all regulations and guidelines issued thereunder.
3. That as a condition of Federal aid pursuant to this contract they shall notify the
DEPARTMENT of the receipt of any advice indicating that a facility to be utilized
in performance under or to benefit from this contract is under consideration to be
listed on the EPA List of Violating Facilities.
D. Ensure that the PROJECT is constructed in accordance with and incorporates all committed
environmental impact mitigation measures listed in approved environmental documents
unless modified or deleted by approval of the FHWA
E. All the requirements, guidelines, conditions and restrictions noted in all other pertinent
Directives and Instructional Memoranda of the FHW A will apply to this contract and will
be adhered to, as applicable, by the parties hereto.
03-15-93 3
SECTION II
PROJECT ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION
A. The DEPARTMENT shall provide such administrative guidance as it determines is required
by the PROJECT in order to facilitate the obtaining of available federal and/or state funds.
B. The DEPARTMENT will advertise and award all contracted portions ofthe PROJECT work.
Prior to advertising of the PROJECT for receipt of bids, the REQUESTING PARTY may
delete any portion or all of the PROJECT work. After receipt of bids for the PROJECT. the
REQUESTING PARTY shall have the right to reject the amount bid for the PROJECT prior
to the award of the contract for the PROJECT only if such amount exceeds by twenty percent
(20%) the final engineer's estimate therefor: If such rejection of the bids is not received in
writing within two (2) weeks after letting, the DEPARTMENT will assume concurrence.
The DEPARTMENT may, upon request, readvertise the PROJECT. Should the REQUEST-
ING PARTY so request in writing within the aforesaid two (2) week period after letting, the
PROJECT will be cancelled and the DEPARTMENT will refund the unused balance of the
deposit less all costs incurred by the DEPARTMENT.
C. The DEPARTMENT will perform such inspection services on PROJECT work performed
by the REQUESTING PARTY with its own forces as is required to ensure compliance with
the approved plans & specifications.
D. On those projects funded with Federal monies, the DEPARTMENT shall as may be required
secure from the FHWA approval of plans and specifications, and such cost estimates for
FHWA participation in the PROJECT COST.
E. All work in connection with the PROJECT shall be performed in conformance with the
Michigan Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Construction, and the
supplemental specifications, Special Provisions and plans pertaining to the PROJECT and
all materials furnished and used in the construction of the PROJECT shall conform to the
aforesaid specifications. No extra work shall be performed nor changes in plans and
specifications made until said work or changes are approved by the project engineer and
authorized by the DEPARTMENT.
03-15-93 4
F. Should it be necessary or desirable that portions of the work covered by this contract be
accomplished by a consulting firm, a railway company, or governmental agency, firm,
person, or corporation, under a subcontract with the REQUESTING PARTY at PROJECT
expense, such subcontracted arrangements will be covered by formal written agreement
between the REQUESTING PARTY and that party.
This formal written agreement shall: include a reference to the specific prime contract to
which it pertains; include provisions which clearly set forth the ma'rojed Type lLetters olf C<11mmmitmme11t (rrom incoming and/or e,pandlng fiml(s))
0 New Submission ~
,\.\
Repeat Submission (20__) U Yes O No O NA
Not Applicable
Project C<11sts: (estimated or actual) Matchil!llg Fllll!lll!lls
Federal: 700 000 ~ Secured 0 Lacking
State: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ll'11tentilll Jolbl Oreation (estimated)
+ 0 NA
Not Applicable
Other: P11tentfal! Joll:i llletenti1m (estimated)
---------------- 100+ 0 NA
TOTAL: $1 , 0 0 0, 0 00 Not Applicable
lP're!imim1ury Engi11eell'i111g ][syomr piroject in a Comprehensive lP'lla11, Masteir
(iii Complete O In Progress P!a11, Tl!FA Plla11, Fim1.H11cing Pla11, or similar
0 Lacking O NA lioc11me11t?
Not Applicable 0 Yes (identify) I]! No
Master Plan CEDS
Do not write below this line.
Creation/Cost Ratio: Distress Level: Category:
Retention/Cost Ratio: Low/Mod%: TOTAL POINTS:
Return this form to: 2002 CEDS Projects
West Michigan Shoreline Regional Development Commission
137 Muskegon Mall, P.O. Box 387
Muskegon, Ml 49443-0387
(231) 722-7878 ext. 113 Fax: (231) 722-9362
E-mail: ekuhn1nln=srdc.or,,.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Smartzone- Certified Business Park (Downtown)
A. Background - The idea of a Downtown Business Techoology Park has grown from
discussion held during the Master Plan process and downtown design with Michigan
State University. The concept is now becoming a reality, with the recent
designation of the former Teledyne property as the Smartzone site. The proposed
site for the Smartzone is located along and adjacent to the route of the new Shoreline
Drive. This location was selected due to its proximity to the waterfront as well as the
core business district. The nearness of GTE and its technology infrastrncture is also
very critical.
B. Project Scope - The acquisition and redevelopment of the project area is a priority of
the City as there is a need for techoology based business and availability of requisite
infrastructure. The development of the Smartzone will not only enhance the
property tax base but will also improve the image and prosperity of the downtown.
The emphasis of the Muskegon Smartzone is alternative energy sources. The
type of employment which will occur at this site is in short supply and will boost the
wage and salary levels of the community. Higher paying jobs will, in turn, enhance
the potential for retail, restaurant, and other commercial development.
C. Project Cost & Timing - To complete the property acquisition, install the techoology
infrastructure and prepare the sites, the estimated cost is $2,000,000.
D. Funding Sources - Federal funding will be combined with funds from the City and
State, as well as, private investment. The investment from the private sector may
come from individuals or non-profits organizations.
E. Project Beneficiaries - The City of Muskegon, most notably the downtown would
benefit from the improvement of a major property along the waterfront. The property
tax base would expand dramatically and hundreds of new employment opportunities
will emerge. The techoology-based businesses would greatly diversify the local
economy.
..---..•
,,/ ...
"'\, <;/
//
/ ./1 l
r'_.J
.;. )?. \~ -,,
il/lruis~~«>B>l\llai!
/ • 'c/ ,r ·:, •'
./
Medendorp Industrial
Applicant Name: City of Muskegon Project Name: Center Expansion
Contact Person: Lonna Angui lm Phone: _ _,:.2...;3u1.=-17'--'2'-'4'--=--'6,._7u0,.,2"-----------
Note: Please use a separate page for each project submitted
Location of Project: City of Muskegon County: Muskegon
Project Description: _,,,s""e""e'----"a~t~t~a~c,,,_h=e.,,,d~--------------------------
Estimated Project Start Date: --"2-'-0-'-0-'-3_ _ _ _ _ _ __ 0 New Project fl Facility Expansion
(clteclc one box)
lmporltffllt: For Economic Development Infrastructure Construction Project, please remember to provide the required site
location map with this form.
(Check one box per category)
ll'roj ed l'yi!le lLett)
0 New Submission [JJ Repeat Submission (20__) l2l!l Yes O No O NA
Not Applicable
ll'rnjecit Costs: ( estimated or actual) Matclhi11g Fiimds
Federal: 2,000,000 IZll Secured 0 Lacking
State: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Potential Job Oreatiolll (estimated)
1 00+ 0 NA
Local: 500 000
---~=L-"-=---------- Not Applicable
0 ther: ll"<11t,mtiall Job lRetientiolll (estimated)
----------------- 1 00+ • NA
TOTAL: _ __,$.,2._,•._.5.,_,0.,_,0,-,.;,O:.c0'-'-"-0_ _ _ _ _ _ __ Not Applicable
lP'ireili111111i11ary E11gilllleeiri11g lls yolll!ir IIJlll'IBJectt im a C<11m1pnrd1ensive lP'Ilruu, Master
[! Complete O In Progress ll"Rmun, TilFA ll'llaun, Fillllmcilllg P!aun, oir similar
0 Lacking O NA 11foc1111ment?
Not Applicable lllll Yes (identify) 0 No
Master Plan, CEDS, LDFA Plan, CIP
Do not write below this line.
Creation/Cost Ratio: Distress Level: Category:
Retention/Cost Ratio: Low/Mod%: TOTAL POil'ITS:
R~illl!m th.is form to: 2002 CEDS Projects
West Michigan Shoreline Regional Development Commission
137 Muskegon Mall, P.O. Box 387
Muskegon, MI 49443-0387
(231) 722-7878 ext. 113 Fax: (231) 722-9362
E-mail: ekuhn""''=srdc.or"
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Medendorp Industrial ·center - Prope1ty Acquisition & Site Preparation
A. Background - The Medendorp Industrial Center is one of the fastest growing
industrial districts in Muskegon County. During 1997, the City of Muskegon sold its
last three industrial lots in the Center. Given the present economic climate, it is vital
for the City of Muskegon to make ready additional industrial property. The cun-ent
inventory of industrial property in the City of Muskegon is near exhaustion.
B. Project Scope - The acquisition and development of the project area specified within
the Medendorp Industrial Center is a priority for the City has there is a definite need
for ready-to-develop industrial land. The total project area is 45acres. The industrial
lots within the project area will range between 2-8 acres, thus creating greater
diversity of industrial lots.
C. Project Cost & Timing - To complete the property acquisition and site preparation,
the estimated cost is $2.5 million. This amount includes acquisition and demolition
of 24 houses, relocation and extension of utilities to the area for industrial use. Also
included is the cost of paving Madison, Nims, and Brunswick Streets. If funded the
project could start in 2003.
D. Funding Sources - Local match would be available from LDF A funds/bonds, city
water and sewer funds, Major Street funds, private contributions, and State funds.
E. Project Beneficiaries - The City of Muskegon, as a whole, will benefit from an
increase in industrial land. If industries in Muskegon are to be encouraged to expand,
and new industries are to locate in the City, additional industrial prope1iy is a must.
With the acquisition of the prope1iy described as the project area, within the
Medendorp Industrial Center, new industries will increase the tax and employment
base while clearing blighted properties.
,_
. 17 .IL_
--··-•1-.--,-
,... ! i .· ..
/ ,-...,
_,1..-·1
~
'
'.
.:-' - '1\,"'
~...::;,-"'
z-7',
I
Medendorp Industrial
Applicant Name: City of Muskegon Project Name: Center Rail Spur
Contact Person: -----"'L'-"o'-'-n'-'n"'a"--'A'-"n'-'-_g=u""i'""l"'m'------ Phone: 231-724-6702
Note: Please use a separate page for each project submitted.
Location of Project: City of Muskegon County: Muskegon
Project Description: _,,.s,..e,.e'--"a...,,t..,t.,a..,c""h"-e"'--"'d~'--------------------------
Estimated Project Start Date: --""'2""0""0""'3_ _ _ _ _ __ tl New Project 0 Facility Expansion
(ched< one box)
lmporlomt: For Economic Development Infrastructure Construction Project, please remember to provide the required site
location map with this form.
(Check one box per category)
ll"rojed Type lLett Oreaitiol!I ( estimated)
1 00 + 0 NA
Local: 250,000 Not Applicable
-----'--------------
Other: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ P11tellltiall J111b> Retennitimn ( estimated)
10-99 0 NA
TOTAL: _ ___,,$"-7""5,,,,0,,,_,;c.00,,_0,c__ _ _ _ _ _ __
--------- Not Applicable
lPreRimmi11ary E11gim:erilllg lis ym11r prnjed i111 a Compreliellllsive lPlu, Mastew
D Complete D In Progress ll"Hann, TlilFA Pfta111, lFinnanncinng Plann, or similar
[! Lacking O NA 1focument?
Not ApJ)Iicable @JI Yes (identify) D No
CEDS, LDFA 'Plan
Do not write below this line.
Creation/Cost Ratio: Distress Level: Category:
Retention/Cost Ratio: Low/Mod%: TOTAL POINTS:
Ret1111m tlhis foirm to: 2002 CEDS Projects
West Michigan Shoreline Regional Development Commission
137 Muskegon Mall, P,O, Box 387
Muskegon, Ml 49443-0387
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Medendorp Industrial Center - Rail Spur
A. Background - Several resident industries of the Medendorp Industrial Center have
expressed an interest in utilizing rail services. As pati of the Center's development
plan, a rail spur would expand the level of services available to both existing and
future industries.
B. Project Scope - To construct indush-ial grade rail service from the CSX line within the
Medendorp Industrial Center. A Master Development Plan exists for the Center.
C. Project Cost & Timing - Construction and related costs are estimated to be $750,000.
If funded, the project could begin as early as 2003.
D. Funding Sources - If funding were approved, local match would be provided by the
LDFA, the City, or private sources.
E. Project Beneficiaries - The project will benefit resident industries and retain
approximately 150 jobs and help ath·act new industries to the Center.
-/1=-:.! ;~=--
/ I ! 1J- /
1
1II - I
'
f,
' '\
\
\
\
\
\
\
Applicant Name: City of Muskegon Project Name: Downtown Muskegon Lake front
Development
Contact Person: Lonna Anguilm Phone: 231-724-6702
Note: Please use a separate page for each project submitted
Location of Project: City of Muskegon County: Muskegon
Project Description: see attached·
Estimated Project Start Date: _ _2_0_0_3_ _ _ _ _ __ ~ New Project 0 Facility Expansion
(check one box)
Important: For Economic Development Infrastructure Constroction Project, please remember to provide the required site
location map with this form.
(Check one box per category)
ll"iroject TyJ!l)e lLelilteirn of COllllllllllitlllllleDllil (from mcommg mul/or expanding fim>(•))
0 New Submission @ Repeat Submission (20__) 0 Yes Qll No O NA
Not Applicable
lP'irojecit Costs: ( estimated or actual) l\:!LmilclniDllg Fl!lunills
Federal: 1,600.000 IJll Secured 0 Lacking
State: lP'oileDllilia! Joih> Ore11lli1m ( estimated)
----------------- 100+ 0 NA
Loca I: ______:4,_,o,_,o,_,'-'o"'o,,_o,,__ _ _ _ _ __ Not Applicable
Other: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ll"oilemitiall Job Retelilticm ( estimated)
10-99 0 NA
TOTAL: --~$~2_,_• .,,_0,._0,._0.,_.o"-'o=o~------ Not Applicable
Jl"relimilllairy JEn1giJI1eeiriDllg fa y111ll!r J!lllrlicahle 0 No
Q.iJI Yes (identify)
Master Plan, CEDS 1 DDA Plan
Do not write below this line.
Creation/Cost Ratio: Distress Level: Category:
Retention/Cost Ratio: Low/Mod¾: TOTAL POINTS:
Rd11l!m tlnis fo>nn to: 2002 CEDS Projects
VI/est Michigan Shoreline Regional Development Commission
137 Muskegon Mall, P. 0. Box 3 87
Muskegon, MI 49443-0387
(231) 722-7878 ext. 113 Fax: (231) 722-9362
E-mail: ekuhn(a).wrnsrdc. om
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Downtown/Lakefront Redevelopment
A. Background - The City has established a goal to redevelop its Muskegon Lake
frontage. The City has a downtown/lakeshore Master Plan and a Waterfront
Development Plan to help meet this goal. Other projects funded to implement this
goal include: 1) $ I million MDEQ Site Assessment Grant for determining the
marketability of contaminated sites along the Iakefront; 2) $3 million from the
federal and state government for the Enterprise Community; and 3) $12,500,000 from
MDOT for the design of the completion of Shoreline Drive. Specific site
development efforts are hampered by the typical brownfield versus greenfield
scenarios. Therefore, sites for redevelopment must be prepared to a greater extent
that in rural or suburban areas.
B. Project Scope - Several sites contained within our MDEQ study area are targeted by
developers. These sites will require land assembly and infrastructure improvements
to make sites suitable for development upon completion of remediation of
environmental concerns. Infrastructure improvements will include the relocation of
existing and construction of new utilities and access drives.
C. Project Cost & Timing - Estimated costs are $2 million for land assembly and
infrastructure improvements. If funded, the project could begin as soon as 2003.
D. Funding Sources - If funding were approved, local match would be provided by the
City and/ or private sources.
E. Project Beneficiaries - The project will benefit the entire community but more
specifically downtown residents and property owners. It is estimated that as many as
300 employment oppo1tunities could arise from this project.
-C tT:j[ 'r=
I-
L
' \
\
I
I
b . \~ ~---- . ·-· .
;'
~. I
I
\
'"'
' \
•
I .,
~-'JI
Z·-/r
21Jlf02 C!EfDS PROJECT SUBM!TTAl FORM
Applicant Name: City of Muskegon Project Name: Port City Industrial Park
Expansion
Contact Person: Lonna Anguilm Phone: 231-724-6702
Note: Please use a separate page for each project submitted.
Location of Project: City of Muskegon County: Mnskeg:ao
Project Description: see attached ·
Estimated Project Start Date: ~2"'0,,__0,,__3,,,___ _ _ _ _ __ 0 New Project U Facility Expansion
(dteck one box)
Important: For Economic Development Infrastructure Const,...1ction Project, please remember to provide the required site
location map with this form.
(Check one box per category)
Pirojed Tyll)e lLettel!'§ ,,
-w
~
' \
~
-
0
~ ,.,,.,,
( .) /\!:) )JO
I,;..;...._
(
.. ,.- ' - 1 .
"'
\
~-(Jl
:z-~
2010:2 CEDS PROJECT SUIBM!TTAl FORM
Applicant Name: City of Muskegon Project Name: Farmers/ Seafood Market
Contact Person: ---'Lc!,o<.!n.:.!n.:.!a'°--'A"'n'-'-"lg-"u~i~l"'m'----- Phone: -~2-3~J=1~2~4=6u1..,_n,_..2'-----------
Note: Please use a separate page for each project submitted
Location of Project: City of Muskegon County: Muskegon
Project Description: see attached,
Estimated Project Start Date: ~2=-0"--0"--3"--------- ~ New Project D Facility Expansion
(check one box)
lmporlant: For Economic Development Infrastructure Construction Project, please remember to provide the required site
location map with this form.
(Check one box per category)
Project l'ype lLelttell's off C11>mDJJ11iltlllllelllllt (!i-omlncommg and/oroxpandlngfum(•l)
D New Submission Cill Repeat Submission (20_J D Yes Kil No O NA
Not Applicable
ll"irojed Costs: (estimated or actual) Matclhillllg JF,mtd!s
Federal: 2.000.000 D Secured Kil Lacking
State: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ il"oltentiall Jolb> Creation ( estimated)
10-99 0 NA
Local: _ __,,_4_,_• .,,,,0.,,,,0.!,1,0_,•.;i0c,i0'"0'------------- Not Applicable
Other: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Poltentiall Jolb> .IReteH11ti11>H1 ( estimated)
10-99 0 NA
TOTAL: -"'-$6"-'-'.0e.,;0""0""•._,0'--'0'-"0'------------- Not Applicable
ll'ire!immimniry Ellllgirneerilllg ][:; yo1111r jp)ll"ll>jed in a Compreluemmnve ll'Ilan, Master
D Complete O In Progress il"Dilll!II., Tl!FA lP'!an, lFiHllocirng ll"Ilam, or similar
Cill Lacking O NA 1focument?
Not Applicable l:U Yes (identify) D No
Master Plan, CEDS
Do not write below this line.
Creation/Cost Ratio: Distress Level: Category:
Retention/Cost Ratio: Low/1\tlod%: TOTAL POINTS:
Rietllllm this foll"m to: 2002 CEDS Projects
West Michigan Shoreline Regional Development Commission
137 Muskegon Mall, P.O. Box 387
Muskegon, MI 49443-0387
(231) 722-7878 ext. 113 Fax: (231) 722-9362
E-mail: ekuhn!@wmsrdc.or"
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
· Farmer's/Seafood Market
A. Background - The idea of a downtown Farmer's/Seafood Market first surfaced during
the Master Plan process. The Muskegon Boilerworks has been identified as the
primary location for the complex, although other lakefront properties would be
feasible. The location was chosen for its proximity to the waterfront and the central
business district.
B. Project Scope - The scope of this project includes the acquisition and redevelopment
of the Muskegon Boile1works and adjacent sites. This project will enhance the image
of downtown and provide a new outlet for fresh produce.
C. Project Cost & Timing - To complete the property acquisition and rehabilitation as
well as the installation of new utilities, the estimated cost is $6 million. This amount
includes the acquisition of the former Muskegon Boilerworks, as well as several
adjacent sites and all requisite environmental assessments.
D. Funding Sources - If funding were approved, local match would be provided by the
City and/ or private sources.
E. Project Beneficiaries - The project will benefit the entire community but more
specifically downtown residents and property owners. Inner-city residents and
employees would greatly benefit from tl1e availability of fresh produce. An activity
of this sort would also increase the amount of pedestrian activity in the downtown.
\
\
\
\.
\
Relocation of West
Applicant Name: City of Muskegon Project Name: Michigan Steel
Contact Person: Lonna Angui lrn Phone: 231 724 6702
Note: Please use a separate page for each project submitted
Location of Project: City of Muskegon County: Muskegon
Project Description: see attached .
Estimated Project Start Date: ~2""0"'0""3"----------- 0 New Project ~ Facility Expansion
(chedc one box)
important: For Economic Development Infrastructure Construe/ion Project, please remember to provide the required site
location map with this form.
(Check one box per category)
Proj ed Type Letters olf CollllilmmitllllilCllllt ( mrom mcooong ond/or expanding fiml(•l)
0 New Submission (] Repeat Submission (20__) • Yes 01 No O NA
Not Applicable
Pirojed Costs: (estimated or actual) Maitchilllg Flll!nllils
Federal: 5 000 000 0 Secured ID Lacking
State: 5 000 000 Potenltn!nl Job Orealtiol!ll ( estimated)
10-99 0 NA
Local: 1 000 000 Not Applicable
Other: 4,000.000 Pot1mltial Job lReltentiolll ( estimated)
1 00+ 0 NA
TOTAL: $15.000.000 Not Applicable
JP'l!"e!illllilimniry lEHlgineeiril!llg To yolll!ll" !l)ll"Ojed Illll Ill C@lll!R!l)l!"CheillSive ll."Hrum, Mmsteir
0 Complete O In Progress PH11J11, TIFA PBal!ll, lFillll:lllHICilllg ll."l:llllll, oir simil!:lllir
fi Lacking O NA document'.'
Not Applicable [l Yes (identify) 0 No
Master Plan, CEDS
Do not write below this line.
Creation/Cost Ratio: Distress Level: Category:
Retention/Cost Ratio: Low/Mod%: TOTAL POINTS:
Return this foirm to: 2002 CEDS Projects
West Michigan Shoreline Regional Development Commission
137 Muskegon Mall, P.O. Box 387
Muskegon, MI 49443-0387
(231) 722-7878 ext. 113 Fax: (231) 722-9362
E-mail: ekuhn@wrnsrdc.oro
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
West Michigan Steel Relocation
A. Background - West Michigan Steel is one of the last industrial uses located on the
shoreline of Muskegon Lake. In order to completely redevelop the shoreline, West
Michigan Steel should be relocated to a more proper location in one of the Industrial
Centers in the City of Muskegon.
B. Project Scope - The project scope would be first to locate a new site for the company,
followed by building a new facility and installing new utilities and infrastrncture.
Secondly, the companies existing assets would need to be relocated to the new
facility. The existing facility would then require demolition and environmental
remediation to prepare it for new development. New development would be more
appropriate for a lakeshore location.
C. Project Cost & Timing - Total estimated costs are $16 million. This includes costs
for building a new facility, equipment moving costs, environmental remediation, new
infrastrncture and utilities. If this project were to receive funding, the project could
begin in 2003.
D. Funding Sources - If funding were approved, local match would be provide from
State, City, and private sources.
E. Project Beneficiaries - The general public would benefit from the relocation of the
facility both economically and ecologically. The relocation would also benefit West
Michigan Steel by placing them in a more proper location with better highway access.
2@02 CE:DS PROJIECT SUBM!TTAl FORM
Applicant Name: City of Muskegon ProjectName:car Ferry r.anding
Contact Person: _ _,L"'o°'n'°'n'°'a"-----'A"'n,.,_g1 u=i=-lm"'-------- Phone: --='--'---'-'"-'--"--'---"-"----------
231-724-6702
Note: Please use a separate page for each project submitted
Location of Project: City of Muskegon County: Muskegon
Project Description: --"s"'e'-"e'-"a'-'t"-'t"'a"--'c"-'h""'e""d"-·----------------~-------
Estimated Project Start Date: ----=2'-"0c,0'--'3'--------- il.91 New Project 0 Facility Expansion
(check one box)
lmponltmt: For Economic Development Infrastructure Construction Project, please remember to provide the required site
location map with this form.
(Check one box per category)
ll"lrojed Type lLetlterr§ oif Commitment (iirom incoming and/or e,pandmg mm(•))
0 New Submission l1lll Repeat Submission (20__J QI Yes O No O NA
Not Applicable
ll"rnjed Costs: ( estimated or actual) Matchi11g F1m11fa
Federal: _ _ _----'....L!.L,_ucWL_ _ _ _ _ _ __ (] Secured 0 Lacking
State: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Potellltia! Job Cnatiolil ( estimated)
1 00+ 0 NA
Local: - - - ~ 2...s,..,o'-'-'.o""o""'o.,_________ Not Applicable
Other: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Potelllti::nl Job Retention ( estimated)
1 00+ 0 NA
TOTAL: -~$"---1c.,,,__,o,.,o,.,oL,,,__,o,_,o,.,oL.__ _ _ _ _ __ Not Applicable
ll"ll'e!immi11acy Engimiell'ing lls yow11r JlllR'Oject ilil a ComJllln-elhielllsive ll"Hllllll, Masteil"
l2ll Complete O In Progress Pllim, TIFA ll'!mm, Finumcinng Jl"l:m, orr simillaR'
0 Lacking O NA 6-llCIIDllieilt?
Not Applicable IJl Yes (identify) 0 No
Master Plan, CEDS
Do not write below this line.
Creation/Cost Ratio: Distress Level: Category:
Retention/Cost Ratio: Low/Mod%: TOTAL POINTS:
Return this foR'm to: 2002 CEDS Projects
West Michigan Shoreline Regional Development Commission
137 Muskegon Man, P.O. Box 387
Muskegon, MI 49443-0387
(231) 722-7878 ext. 113 Fa,"l:: (231) 722-9362
E-mail: ekuhn!alwmsrdc.oro-
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Car Ferry Landing
A. Background - The proposed car ferry landing would provide high-speed ferry service
from Muskegon to Milwaukee, Wisconsin. One of the requirements for designating
Muskegon as the Michigan port is the siting of the requisite car ferry landing with
adequate parking and access.
B. Project Scope - The project scope will be acquiring property for the proposed landing.
Associated site development will include parking and docking facilities as well as
potential landing facilities such as ticket office, restaurant, and other amenities.
C. Project Cost & Timing - Total estimated costs are $1.5 million. This includes costs
for property acquisition and site development. If this project were to receive funding,
the project could begin in 2003.
D. Funding Sources - If funding were approved, local match would be provide from
State, City, and private sources.
E. Project Beneficiaries - The general public would benefit from the availability of
alternative means of transportation to and from Wisconsin. The project would also
provide additional potential customers to the downtown market thereby increasing the
marketability of the downtown.
City of Muskegon . . CEDS
Car Ferry Landing
Date: February 12, 2002
To: Honorable Mayor and City Commissioners
From: Finance Director
RE: Pension Ordinance Clarification
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Section 10(d) of the City's Police & Fire Retirement
System ordinance provides that "a member who remains in the employ of the city but
ceases to be a police officer or a firefighter shall remain a member of the retirement
· system for the duration of his City employment." This provision ·recently came into
play when the former Fire Marshall assumed the position of Director of Inspections.
The current ordinance does not, however, specify the benefits or contributions
pertaining to an affected employee. Attached is a technical correction ordinance
intended to address this matter. It provides that the contributions and benefits will be
the same as if the member had not left employment with the Police or Fire
Departments.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None.
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED: None. The position was budgeted with the
pension benefits accorded to a Fire Department position.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval.
At the Legislative Policy Committee meeting held Wednesday, April 24, 2002
Legislative Policy Committee voted to adopt the ordinance as recommended by staff and
legal counsel. Vote was 4 Yeas, 1 Absent, 2 Nays.
ROLL CALUACTION SHEETS
Present Name Action Ayes Nays C~men t
-----
Mayor Warmington .... I i) ~J,lw,1.k'- s~r.,,.;,
Vice Mayor Buie , .V 1
'7 Jt'~'IV""-.1 St-., J. -\\,'.":::::>. ... '.;r.. \::0..eic)/x1. ,:-:::-.~,0~·::::-: ...
Please print
Robert J. Gibbs, ASL.A
President ...../.1.J..y.Q.C..................................................................
Title
..... C..1.:.y.. ......... R-f ........./11.u.~. %.y..9..a .............
Representing
Downtown Waterfront Market Analysis
Muskegon, Michigan
Step 1
Market Assessment
June 1-July15
Step 2
Retail Market Analysis
June 15-August 1
Step 3
Implementation Strategy
August 1-September 1
Initial Draft
1-Sep
Final Draft/Presentation
15-Oct-02
Date: May 28, 2002
To: Honorable Mayor and City Commissioners
From: Engineering
RE: Clarification on the Special Assessment Policy Amendment
of May 14, 2002
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
It is respectfully requested that the recent amendment of the special assessment policy be
Vacated due.to ambiguous interpretation and revert to the original table (80%) when
preparing the assessable per foot cost which is based on the cost of assessable items.
However, it is requested that the policy be amended to limit the total assessment on any
pavement project as described in said policy to a maximum of 45% of the TOTAL COST
~,/
OF THE PROJECT which would be determined at the time the roll being spreading.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None anticipated at this time.
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED:
None.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Amend the special assessment policy.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
Date: May 28, 2002
To: Honorable Mayor and City Commissioners
From: Engineering
RE: Clarification on the Special Assessment Policy Amendment
of May 14, 2002
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
It is respectfully requested that the recent amendment of the special assessment policy be
Vacated due to ambiguous interpretation and revert to the original table (80%) when
preparing the assessable per foot cost which is based on the cost of assessable items.
However, it is requested that the policy be amended to limit the total assessment on any
pavement project as described in said policy to a maximum of 45% of the TOTAL COST
OF THE PROJECT which would be determined at the time the roll being spreading.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None anticipated at this time.
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED:
None.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Amend the special assessment policy.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
AMENDED TABLE AS OF 05/28//02
Activity/improvement Share of Total**** Area Amount to be
Cost Assessable Assessed Assessed per
front foot
1. Maintenance 0% 0 N/A
2. Rehabilitation 0% 0 N/A
3. Resurfacing 80% * $6.40 ***
4 Mi II ing/Resu rfaci ng 80% * $11.40 ***
5. Rehab./Resurfacing Majo 80% * $18.70 ***
6. Reconstruction 80% * $19.70 ***
7. New Construction 80% * $19.70
8. New Subdivision 100% ** Actual
(where assessed)
* standard residential width
** entire improvement performed by City
*** these front foot assessments included an adjustment reflecting credit
for residual value of existing street per Section V (C) (9), with
total assessment not to exceed benefit to abutting property.
**** total assessment shall not exceed 45% of total project cost
V Assessment Policy; Improvements Included: Allocation of
Cost: Financing and Scheduling - This policy shall be
implemented as follows:
A. Design and Engineering - All streets, including subdivision streets, shall be
constructed or reconstructed to engineering standards and design as
established by the City, unless determined that sufficient reasons exist to
provide exception/deviation from standards.
B. New Subdivision Development - All new development requiring streets shall be
the responsibility of the developer; however, when available, and deemed
advisable by the City Commission, the City may utilize special assessment
bonding to provide for street and public infrastructure, assessments to the
properties benefiting to the extent permissible by law.
C. Assessment Method - The method of assessment for the work determined
assessable shall be as follows:
1. Cost of the work shall include all cost directly and indirectly chargeable to
the project.
-4-
\\l\.'IUSKDATA\IJata\ENGINEERING\COMMON\WORD\SA POLICY PG 4.doc
Date: May 28, 2002
To: Honorable Mayor and City Commissioners
From: Engineering
RE: Consideration of Bids
Laketon Ave. @Barcaly St. Intersection
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
The Whitetopping of Laketon Ave. @ Barclay St. contract (H-1555) be awarded to
Veneklasen Concrete Construction out of Rockford since they were the lowest (see bid
tabulation) responsible bidder with a bid price of $116,495.00.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The construction cost of $116,495.00 plus associated engineering cost which is estimated at
an additional 15%.
,
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED:
None.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Award the contract to Veneklasen Concrete Construction.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
H-1555 LAKETON AVE. & BARCLAY ST.
INTERSECTION WHITETOPPING
BID TABULATON
May 7, 2002
CONTRACTOR NAGEL CONSTRUCTION VENEKLASEN AJAX PAVING
ADDRESS PO BOX 10 6760 NORTHLAND DR ONE AJAX DR
CITY/ST MOLINE, Ml ROCKFORD, Ml MADISON HTS., Ml
UNIT
DESCRIPTON QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTALPRIC UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE PRICE TOTAL PRICE
1 ADJUST MANHOLE CASTING PER DETAIL 5 EACH $150.00 $750.00 $330.00 $1,650.00 $570.00 $2,850.00
2 ADJUST WATER VALVE CASTING PER DETAIL 2 EACH $100.00 $200.00 $130.00 $260.00 $570.00 $1,140.00
3 COLDMILLING 4" 3280 Q.YD $6.10 $20,008.00 $3.60 $11,808.00 $4.50 $14,760.00
4 CONCRETE PAVEMENT 4" (WHITETOPPING) 3280 Q.YD $30.00 $98,400.00 $23.45 $76,916.00 $31.75 $104,140.00
5 MANHOLE CASTING E.J.#1000 OR EQUAL 5 EACH $300.00 $1,500.00 $250.00 $1,250.00 $450.00 $2,250.00
6 PAVEMENT MARKING 4" WHITE 435 IN.FT $1.00 $435.00 $1.35 $587.25 $1.35 $587.25
7 PAVEMENT MARKING 4" YELLOW 1130 IN.FT $1.00 $1,130.00 $1.35 $1,525.50 $1.35 $1,525.50
8 PAVEMENT MARKING 6" CROSSWALK 435 IN.FT $1.30 $565.50 $2.65 $1,152.75 $2.65 $1,152.75
9 PAVEMENT MARKING 18" STOP BAR 90 IN.FT $3.00 $270.00 $7.95 $715.50 $7.95 $715.50
10 PAVEMENT MARKING SYMBOL (LEFT TURN ARRO 3 EACH $100.00 $300.00 $95.00 $285.00 $95.00 $285.00
11 PAVEMENT MARKING SYMBOL (ONLY) 3 EACH $150.00 $450.00 $115.00 $345.00 $115.00 $345.00
12 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LUMP $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00
LAKETON & BARCLAY TOTAL $128,008.50 $116,495.00 $139,751.00
H-1555 LAKETON AVE. & BARCLAY ST.
INTERSECTION WHITETOPPING
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE APRIL 10 2002
·--·------------ - - - --======--~-~--=~=------,-----,-----~
DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE PRICE
1 'ADJUST MANHOLE CASTING PER DETAIL 5 EACH $400.00 $2,000.00
2 ADJUST WATER VALVE CASTING PER DETAIL 2 EACH $400.00 $800.00
-- ~-+---==-=-+-~-=+-=--'=='-4
3 COLDMILLING 4" .............. -· --·-·---··---·-----·- 3280 SQ.YD. $6.00 $19,680.00
-·-------- --·--c--:--c---'1--~===-i
4____CONCRETE PAVEMENT 4" (WHITETOP_P_!NGL__ ------+------3_2_80_, _S9:_'r'_D . ·----c-'$cc2 5.-c0 0+-~$~82~,~00~0~.0~0-1
7 7
5 MANHOLE CASTING E.J.#1000 OR lcCl'!"L__ -------+----5+-_EA_C_H +--~$5_0_0_.o_o-+-_~$_2,~5~00~·~00'-l
6 PAVEMENT MARKING 4" WHITE 435 LIN.FT. 1----$~0_.5_0-+-_ _$~2~1_7.~5---10
-
7 PAVEMENT MARKING 4" YELLOW
--- - •---
1130 __Ut-,IJ''T,_
_,_,_
_$o.5o __ $565.oo
8 -
PAVEMENT
---- ---·- MARKING 6" CROSSWALK
"-------------------------- ----1----4_3_5+ LJN£I:.-+---$~1_.o_o-+-_ _$4~3~5.~o---10
9 PAVEMENT MARKING 18" STOP BAR 90 LIN.FT. $2.00 $180.00
1_0__ l'AVEMENT MARKING SYMBOL (LEFTTURN ARROW) 3 EACH $50.00 $150.00
11 PAVEMENT MARKING SYMBOL (ONLY) - - - - 1 - - - ~ 3•-- E=A~C~H~+---~~$~50~-~oo'--+--=~$1~5~0~.0-'--10
_1_2__iT_RAFFIC CONTROL 1 LUMP $20,000.00 $20,000.00
SUBTOTAL $128,677.50
- - - - - - - -·-··----··--·-·· -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - + - - - - - + - - - - - - + - - - - - + - - ~ - - - - ,
15% ENGINEERING
----- ·------- ---- ··- ... - ........ ____ --------- ---- - ----- --- -------------- -------·
,,
$19,301.63
.
------
TOTAL
--- -----. · · · • • s . - - , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - ~ - - - " ·
$147,979.13
•
Sign up for City of Muskegon Emails