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'<imum reimbursable and
the basis of payment; provide for the maintenance of accounting records in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles, which clearly document the actual cost of the
services provided; provide that costs eligible for reimbursement shall be in accordance with
clearly defined cost criteria such as 49 CFR Part 18, 48 CFR Part 31, 23 CFR Part 140, 0MB
Circular A-87, etc. as applicable; provide for access to the department or its representatives
to inspect and audit all data and records related to the agreement for a minimum of three
years after the department's final payment to the local unit.
All such agreements will be submitted for approval by the DEPARTMENT and, if
applicable, by the FHWA prior to execution thereof, except for agreements for amounts less
than $25,000 for preliminary engineering and testing services executed under and in accor-
dance with the provisions of the "Small Purchase Procedures" FAPG (23 CFR 172), which
do not require prior approval of the DEPARTMENT or the FHWA.
Any such approval by the DEPARTMENT shall in no way be construed as a warranty of the
subcontractor's qualifications, financial integrity, or ability to perform the work being
subcontracted.
G. The REQUESTING PARTY, atno costtothePROJECTortheDEPARTMENT, shall make
such arrangements with railway companies, utilities, etc., as may be necessary for the
performance of work required for the PROJECT but for which Federal or other
reimbursement will not be requested.
H. The REQUESTING PARTY, at no cost to the PROJECT, or the DEPARTMENT, shall
secure, as necessary, all agreements and approvals ofthe PROJECT with railway companies,
the Railroad Safety & Tariffs Division of the DEPARTMENT and other concerned
governmental agencies other than the FHWA, and will forward same to the DEPARTMENT
for such reviews and approvals as may be required.
I. No PROJECT work for which reimbursement will be requested by the REQUESTING
PARTY is to be subcontracted or performed until the DEPARTMENT gives written
notification that such work may commence.
03-15-93 5
J. The REQUESTING PARTY shall be responsible for the payment of all costs and expenses
incurred in the performance of the work it agrees to undertake and perform.
K. The REQUESTING PARTY shall pay directly to the party performing the work all billings
for the services performed on the PROJECT which are authorized by or through the
REQUESTING PARTY.
L. The REQUESTING PARTY shall submit to the DEPARTMENT all paid billings for which
reimbursement is desired in accordance with DEPARTMENT procedures.
M. All work by a consulting firm will be performed in compliance with the applicable
provisions of 1980 PA 299, Subsection 2001, MCL 339.2001; MSA 18.425(2001), as well
as in accordance with the provisions of all previously cited Directives of the FHW A.
N. The project engineer shall be subject to such administrative guidance as may be deemed
necessary to ensure compliance with program requirement and, in those instances where a
consultant firm is retained to provide engineering and inspection services, the personnel
performing those services shall be subject to the same conditions.
0. TheDEP ARTMENT, in administering the PROJECT in accordance with applicable Federal
and State requirements and regulations, neither assumes nor becomes liable for any obliga-
tions undertaken or arising between the REQUESTING PARTY and any other party with
respect to the PROJECT.
P. In the event it is determined by the DEPARTMENT that there will be either insufficient
Federal funds or insufficient time to properly administer such funds for the entire PROJECT
or portions thereof, the DEPARTMENT, prior to advertising or issuing authorization for
work performance, may cancel the PROJECT, or any portion thereof, and upon written
notice to the parties this contract shall be void and of no effect with respect to that cancelled
portion of the PROJECT. Any PROJECT deposits previously made by the parties on the
cancelled portions of the PROJECT will be promptly refunded.
Q. Those projects funded with Federal monies will be subject to inspection at all times by the
DEPARTMENT and the FHWA.
03-15-93 6
SECTION Ill
ACCOUNTING AND BILLING
A. Procedures for billing for work undertaken by the REQUESTING PARTY:
1. The REQUESTING PARTY shall establish and maintain accurate records, in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, of all expenses incurred
for which payment is sought or made under this contract, said records to be
hereinafter referred to as the "RECORDS". Separate accounts shall be established
and maintained for all costs incurred under this contract.
The REQUESTING PARTY shall maintain the RECORDS for at least three (3) years
from the date of final payment of Federal Aid made by the DEPARTMENT under
this contract. In the event of a dispute with regard to the allowable expenses or any
other issue under this contract, the REQUESTING PARTY shall thereafter continue
to maintain the RECORDS at least until that dispute has been finally decided and the
time for all available challenges or appeals of that decision has expired.
The DEPARTMENT, or its representative, may inspect, copy, or audit the
RECORDS at any reasonable time after giving reasonable notice.
If any part of the work is subcontracted, the REQUESTING PARTY shall assure
compliance with the above for all subcontracted work.
In the event that an audit performed by or on behalf of the DEPARTMENT indicates
an adjustment to the costs reported under this contract, or questions the allowability
of an item of expense, the DEPARTMENT shall promptly submit to the
REQUESTING PARTY, a Notice of Audit Results and a copy of the audit report
which may supplement or modify any tentative findings verbally communicated to
the REQUESTING PARTY at the completion of an audit.
Within sixty (60) days after the date of the Notice of Audit Results, the
REQUESTING PARTY shall: (a) respond in writing to the responsible Bureau or the
DEPARTMENT indicating whether or not it concurs with the audit report, (b) clearly
explain the nature and basis for any disagreement as to a disallowed item of expense
and, (c) submit to the DEPARTMENT a written explanation as to any questioned or
no opinion expressed item of expense, hereinafter referred to as the "RESPONSE".
The RESPONSE shall be clearly stated and provide any supporting documentation
necessary to resolve any disagreement or questioned or no opinion expressed item of
·expense. Where the documentation is voluminous, the REQUESTING PARTY may
supply appropriate excerpts and make alternate arrangements to conveniently and
03-15-93 7
reasonably make that documentation available for review by the DEPARTMENT.
The RESPONSE shall refer to and apply the language of the contract. The
REQUESTING PARTY agrees that failure to submit a RESPONSE within the sixty
(60) day period constitutes agreement with any disallowance of an item of expense
and authorizes the DEPARTMENT to finally disallow any items of questioned or no
opinion expressed cost.
The DEPARTMENT shall make its decision with regard to any Notice of Audit
Results and RESPONSE within one hundred twenty (120) days after the date of the
Notice of Audit Results. Ifthe DEPARTMENT determines that an overpayment has
been made to the REQUESTING PARTY, the REQUESTING PARTY shall repay
that amount to the DEPARTMENT or reach agreement with the DEP AR TMENT on
a repayment schedule within thirty (30) days after the date of an invoice from the
DEPARTMENT. If the REQUESTING PARTY fails to repay the overpayment or
reach agreement with the DEPARTMENT on a repayment schedule within the thirty
(30) day period, the REQUESTING PARTY agrees that the DEPARTMENT shall
deduct all or a portion of the overpayment from any funds then or thereafter payable
by the DEPARTMENT to the REQUESTING PARTY under this contract or any
other agreement, or payable to the REQUESTING PARTY under the terms of 1951
PA 51, as applicable. Interest will be assessed on any partial payments or repayment
schedules based on the unpaid balance at the end of each month until the balance is
paid in full. The assessment of interest will begin thirty (30) days from the date of
the invoice. The rate of interest will be based on the Michigan Department of
Treasury common cash funds interest earnings. The rate of interest will be reviewed
annually by the DEPARTMENT and adjusted as necessary based on the Michigan
Department of Treasury common cash funds interest earnings. The REQUESTING
PARTY expressly consents to this withholding or offsetting of funds under those
circumstances, reserving the right to file a lawsuit in the Court of Claims to contest
the DEPARTMENT'S decision only as to any item of expense the disallowance of
which was disputed by the REQUESTING PARTY in a timely filed RESPONSE.
The REQUESTING PARTY shall comply with the Single Audit Act of 1984, P.L.
98-502.
The REQUESTING PARTY shall adhere to the following requirements associated
with audits of accounts ahd records:
a. Agencies expending a total of $300,000 or more in federal funds, from one or
more funding sources in its fiscal year, shall comply with the requirements of the
federal Office of Management and Budget (0MB) Circular A-133, as revised or
amended.
03-15-93 8
The agency shall submit two copies of:
The Reporting Package
The Data Collection Fonn
The management letter to the agency, if one issued by the audit finn
The 0MB Circular A-133 audit must be submitted to the address below m
accordance with the time frame established in the circular, as revised or amended.
b. Agencies expending less than $300,000 in federal funds must submit a letter to
the Department advising that a circular audit was not required. The letter shall
indicate the applicable fiscal year, the amount of federal funds spent, the name(s) of
the Department federal programs, and the CFDA grant number(s). This infonnation
must also be submitted to the address below.
c. Address: Michigan Department of Transportation
Bureau of Highways Technical Services
425 W. Ottawa, P.O. Box 30050
Lansing, MI 48909
d. Agencies must also comply with applicable State laws and regulations relative to
audit requirements.
e. Agencies shall not charge audit costs to Department's federal programs which are
not in accordance with the 0MB Circular A-133 requirements.
f. All agencies are subject to the federally required monitoring activities, which may
include limited scope reviews and other on-site monitoring.
2. Agreed Unit Prices Work -All billings for work undertaken by the REQUESTING
PARTY on an agreed unit price basis will be submitted in accordance with the
Michigan Department ofTransportation Standard Specifications for Construction and
pertinent FAPG Directives and Guidelines of the FHWA
3. Force Account Work and Subcontracted Work - All billings submitted to the
DEPARTMENT for Federal reimbursement for items of work performed on a force
account basis or by any subcontract with a consulting finn, railway company,
governmental agency or other party, under the tenns of this contract, shall be
prepared in accordance with the provisions of the pertinent FHPM Directives and the
procedures of the DEPARTMENT. Progress billings may be submitted monthly
during the time work is being performed provided, however, that no bill of a lesser
'amount than $1,000.00 shall be submitted unless it is a final or end of fiscal year
billing. All billings shall be labeled either "Progress Bill Number _ _ _ ", or
"Final Billing". ·
03-15-93 9
4. Final billing under this contract shall be submitted in a timely manner but not later
than six months after completion of the work. Billings for work submitted later than
six months after completion of the work will not be paid.
5. Upon receipt of billings for reimbursement for work undertaken by the
REQUESTING PARTY on projects funded with Federal monies, the
DEPARTMENT will act as billing agent for the REQUESTING PARTY,
consolidating said billings with those for its own force account work and presenting
these consolidated billings to the FHWA for payment. Upon receipt of
reimbursement from the FHWA, the DEPARTMENT will promptly forward to the
REQUESTING PARTY its share of said reimbursement.
6. Upon receipt of billings for reimbursement for work undertaken by the
REQUESTING PARTY on projects funded with non-Federal monies, the
DEPARTMENT will promptly forward to the REQUESTING PARTY
reimbursement of eligible costs.
B. Payment of Contracted and DEPARTMENT Costs:
1. As work on the PROJECT commences, the initial payments for contracted work
and/or costs incurred by the DEPARTMENT will be made from the working capital
deposit. Receipt of progress payments of Federal funds, and where applicable, State
Critical Bridge funds, will be used to replenish the working capital deposit. The
REQUESTING PARTY shall make prompt payments of its share of the contracted
and/or DEPARTMENT incurred portion of the PROJECT COST upon receipt of
progress billings from the DEPARTMENT. Progress billings will be based upon the
REQUESTING PARTY'S share of the actual costs incurred as work on the
PROJECT progresses and will be submitted, as required, until it is determined by
the DEPARTMENT that there is sufficient available working capital to meet the
remaining anticipated PROJECT COSTS. All progress payments will be made
within thirty (30) days of receipt of billings. No monthly billing of a lesser amount
than $1,000.00 will be made unless it is a final or end of fiscal year billing. Should
the DEPARTMENT determine that the available working capital exceeds the
remaining anticipated PROJECT COSTS, the DEPARTMENT may reimburse the
REQUESTING PARTYsuch excess. Upon completion of the PROJECT, payment
of all PROJECT COSTS, receipt of all applicable monies from the FHW A, and
completion of necessary audits, the REQUESTING PARTY will be reimbursed the
balance of its deposit.
03-15-93 10
2. In the event that the bid, plus contingencies, for the contracted, and/or the
DEPARTMENT incurred portion of the PROJECT work exceeds the estimated cost
therefor as established by this contract, the REQUESTING PARTY may be advised
and billed for the additional amount of its share.
C. General Conditions:
I. The DEPARTMENT, in accordance with its procedures in existence and covering
the time period involved, shall make payment for interest earned on the balance of
working capital deposits for all projects on account with the DEPARTMENT. The
REQUESTING PARTY in accordance with DEPARTMENT procedures in existence
and covering the time period involved, shall make payment for interest owed on any
deficit balance of working capital deposits for all projects on account v.,ith the
DEPARTMENT. This payment or billing is processed on an annual basis
corresponding to the State of Michigan fiscal year. Upon receipt of billing for
interest incurred, the REQUESTING PARTY promises and shall promptly pay the
DEPARTMENT said amount.
2. Pursuant to the authority granted by law, the REQUESTING PARTY hereby
irrevocably pledges a sufficient amount of funds received by it from the Michigan
Transportation Fund to meet its obligations as specified in PART I and PART IL If
the REQUESTING PARTY shall fail to make any of its required payments when
due, as specified herein, the DEPARTMENT shall immediately notify the
REQUESTING PARTY and the State Treasurer of the State of Michigan or such
other state officer or agency having charge and control over disbursement of the
Michigan Transportation Fund, pursuant to law, of the fact of such default and the
amount thereof, and, if such default is not cured by payment within ten (10) days,
said State Treasurer or other state officer or agency is then authorized and directed
to withhold from the first of such monies thereafter allocated by law to the
REQUESTING PARTY from the Michigan Transportation Fund sufficient monies
to remove the default, and to credit the REQUESTING PARTY with payment
thereof, and to notify the REQUESTING PARTY in writing of such fact.
3. Upon completion of all work under this contract and final audit by the
DEPARTMENT or the _FHWA, the REQUESTING PARTY promises to promptly
repay the DEPARTMENT for any disallowed items of costs previously disbursed by
the DEPARTMENT. The REQUESTING PARTY pledges its future receipts from
the Michigan Transportation Fund for repayment of all disallowed items and, upon
failure to make repayment for any disallowed items within ninety (90) days of
demand made by the DEPARTMENT, the DEPARTMENT is hereby authorized to
withhold an equal amount from the REQUESTING PARTY'S share of any future
· distribution of Michigan Transportation Funds in settlement of said claim.
03-15-93 11
4. The DEPARTMENT shall maintain and keep accurate records and accounts relative
to the cost of the PROJECT and upon completion of the PROJECT, payment of all
items of PROJECT COST, receipt of all Federal Aid, if any, and completion of final
audit by the DEPARTMENT and if applicable, by the FHWA, shall make final
accounting to the REQUESTING PARTY. The final PROJECT accounting will not
include interest earned or charged on working capital deposited for the PROJECT
which will be accounted for separately at the close of the State of Michigan fiscal
year and as 'set forth in Section C(l).
5. The costs of engineering and other services performed on those projects involving
specific program funds and one hundred percent ( 100%) local funds will be appor-
tioned to the respective portions of that project in the same ratio as the actual direct
construction costs unless otherwise specified in PART I.
03-15-93 12
SECTION IV
MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION
A. Upon completion of construction of each part of the PROJECT, at no cost to the
DEPARTMENT or the PROJECT, each of the parties hereto, within their respective
jurisdictions, will make the following provisions for the maintenance and operation of the
completed PROJECT:
I. All Projects:
Properly maintain and operate each part of the project, making ample provisions each
year for the performance of such maintenance work as may be required, except as
qualified in paragraph 2b of this section.
2. Projects Financed in Part with Federal Monies:
a. Sign and mark each part of the PROJECT, in accordance with the current
Michigan Manual of Uniform Traffic control Devices, and will not install, or
permit to be installed, any signs, signals or markings not in conformance with
the standards approved by the FHWA, pursuant to 23 USC I 09( d).
b. Remove, prior to completion of the PROJECT, all encroachments from the
roadway right-of-way within the limits of each part of the PROJECT.
With respect to new or existing utility installations within the right-of-way
of Federal Aid projects and pursuant to FAPG (23 CFR 645B): Occupancy
ofnon-limited access right-of-way may be allowed based on consideration for
traffic safety and necessary preservation of roadside space and aesthetic
quality. Longitudinal occupancy of non-limited access right-of-way by
private lines will require a finding of significant economic hardship, the
unavailability of practicable alternatives or other extenuating circumstances.
C. Cause to be enacted, maintained and enforced, ordinances and regulations for
proper traffic operations in accordance with the plans of the PROJECT.
d. Make no changes to ordinances or regulations enacted, or traffic controls
installed in conjunction with the PROJECT work without prior review by the
DEPARTMENT and approval of the FHW A, ifrequired.
03-15-93 13
B. On projects for the removal of roadside obstacles, the parties, upon completion of
construction of each part of the PROJECT, at no cost to the PROJECT or the
DEPARTMENT, will, within their respective jurisdictions, take such action as is necessary
to assure that the roadway right-of-way, cleared as the PROJECT, will be maintained free
of such obstacles.
C. On projects for the construction of bikeways, the parties will enact no ordinances or
regulations prohibiting the use of bicycles on the facility hereinbefore described as the
PROJECT, and will amend any existing restrictive ordinances in this regard so as to allow
use of this facility by bicycles. No motorized vehicles shall be permitted on such bikeways
or walkways constructed as the PROJECT except those for maintenance purposes.
D. Failure of the parties hereto to fulfill their respective responsibilities as outlined herein may
disqualify that party from future Federal-aid participation in projects on roads or streets for
which it has maintenance responsibility. Federal Aid may be withheld until such time as
deficiencies in regulations have been corrected, and the improvements constructed as the
PROJECT are brought to a satisfactory condition of maintenance.
03-15-93 14
SECTIONV
SPECIAL PROGRAM AND PROJECT CONDITIONS
A. Those projects for which the REQUESTING PARTY has been reimbursed with Federal
monies for the acquisition of right-of-way must be under construction by the close of the
twentieth (20th) fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the FHWA and the
DEPARTMENT prbjects agreement covering that work is executed, or the REQUESTING
PARTY may be required to repay to the DEPARTMENT, for forwarding to the FHWA, all
monies distributed as the FHWA'S contribution to that right-of-way.
B. Those projects for which the REQUESTING PARTY has been reimbursed with Federal
monies for the performance of preliminary engineering must be under construction by the
close of the tenth (10th) fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the FHW A and the
DEPARTMENT projects agreement covering that work is executed, or the REQUESTING
PARTY may be required to repay to the DEPARTMENT, for forwarding to the FHWA, all
monies distributed as the FHWA'S contribution to that preliminary engineering.
C. On those projects funded with Federal monies, the REQUESTING PARTY, at no cost to the
PROJECT or the DEPARTMENT, will provide such accident information as is available and
such other information as may be required under the program in order to make the proper
assessment of the safety benefits derived from the work performed as the PROJECT. The
REQUESTING PARTY will cooperate with the DEPARTMENT in the development of
reports and such analysis as may be required and will, when requested by the
DEPARTMENT, forward to the DEPARTMENT, in such form as is necessary, the required
information.
D. In connection with the performance of PROJECT work under this contract the parties hereto
(hereinafter in Appendix "A" referred to as the "contractor") agree to comply with the State
of Michigan provisions for "Prohibition of Discrimination in State Contracts", as set forth
in Appendix A, attached hereto and made a part hereof. The parties further covenant that
they will comply with the Civil Rights Acts of 1964, being P.L. 88-352, 78 Stat. 241, as
amended, being Title 42 U.S.C. Sections 1971, 1975a-1975d, and 2000a-2000h-6 and the
Regulations of the United States Department of Transportation (49 C.F.R. Part 21) issued
pursuant to said Act, including Appendix "B", attached hereto and made a part hereof, and
will require similar covenants on the part of any contractor or subcontractor employed in the
performance of this contract.
E. The parties will carry out the applicable requirements of the DEPARTMENT'S
Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) program and 49 CFR, Part 26, including, but not
limited to, those requirements set forth in Appendix C.
03-15-93 15
APPENDIX A
PROHIBITION OF DISCRIMINATION IN STATE CONTRACTS
In connection with the performance of work under this contract; the contractor agrees as follows:
I. In accordance with Act No. 453, Public Acts of 1976, the contractor hereby agrees not to discriminate against an employee
or applicant for employment with respect to hire, tenure, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, or as a matter
directly or indirectly related to employment, because of race, color, reJigion, national origin, age, sex. height, weight. or
marital status. Further, in accordance with Act No. 220, Public Acts of 1976 as amended by Act No. 478, Public Acts of
1980 the contractor hereby agrees not to discriminate against an employee or applicant for employment with respect to
hire, tenure, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, or a matter directly or indirectly related to employment,
because of a disability that is unrelated to the individual's ability to perform the duties of a particular job or position.
A breach of the above covena~ts shall be regarded as a material breach of this contract.
2. The contractor hereby agrees that any and all subcontracts to this contract, whereby a portion of the work set forth in
this contract is to be performed, shall contain a covenant the same as hereinabove set forth in Section I of this Appendix.
3. The contractor will take affirmative action to insure that applicants for employment and employees are treated without
regard to their race, color, religion, national origin, age, sex, height, weight, marital status or a disability that is unrelated
to the individual's ability to perform the duties ofa particular job or position. Such action shall include, but not be limited
to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer, recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of
pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship.
4. The contractor will, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of the contractor, state that
all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, national origin,
age, sex, height, weight, marital status or disability that is unrelated to the individual's ability to perform the duties of a
particular job or position.
5. The contractor or his collective bargaining representative will send to each !abor union or representative of workers with
which he has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, a notice advising the said labor union
or workers' representative of the contractor's commitments under this appendix.
6. The contractor will comply with all relevant published rules, regulations, directives, and orders of the Michigan Civil
Rights Commission which may be in effect prior to the taking of bids for any individual state project.
7. The contractor will furnish and file compliance reports within such time and upon such forms as provided by the Michigan
Civil Rights Commission, said forms may also elicit information as to the practices, policies, program, and employment
statistics of each subcontractor as well as the contractor himself, and said contractor will permit access to his books,
records, and accounts by the Michigan Civil Rights Commission and/or its agent, for purposes of investigation to ascertain
compliance with this contract and relevant with rules, regulations, and orders of the Michigan Civil Rights Commission.
8. In the event that the Civil Rights Commission finds, after a hearing held pursuant to its rules, that a contractor has not
complied with the contractual obligations under this agreement, the Civil Rights Commission may, as part of its order
based upon such findings, certify said findings to the Administrative Board of the State of Michigan, which Administrative
· Board may order the cancellation of the contract found to have been violated and/or declare the contractor ineligible for
future contracts with the state and its political and civil subdivisions, departments, and officers, and including the
governing boards of institutions of higher education, until the contractor complies with said order of the Civil Rights
Commission. Notice of said declaration of future ineligibility may be given to any or all of the persons with whom the
contractor is declared ineligible to contract as a contracting party in future contracts. In any case before the Civil Rights
Commission in which cancellation of an existing contract is a possibility, the contracting agency shall be notified of such
possible remedy and shall be given the option by the Civil Rights Commission to participate in such proceedings.
9. The contractor \viii include, or incorporate by reference, the provisions of the foregoing paragraphs (l) through (8) in
every subcontract or purchase order unless exempted by the rules, regulations or orders of the Michigan Civil Rights
Commission, and will provide in every subcontract or purchase order that said provisions-will be binding upon each
subcontractor or seller. March, 1998
(Rev. 03/92)
APPENDIX B ·
During the performance of this contract, the contractor, for itself, its assignees, and successors in interest
(hereinafter referred to as the "contractor") agrees as follows:
J. Compliance with Regulations: The contractor shall comply with the Regulations relative to
nondiscrimination in Federally assisted programs of the Department of Transportation, Title 49, Code
of Federal Regulations, Part 27, as they may be amended from time to time (hereinafter referred to as
the Regulations), which are herein incorporated by reference and made a part of this contract.
2. Nondiscrimination: The contractor, with regard to the work performed by it during the contract, shall
not discriminate on the grounds of race, color, or natural origin in the selection and retention of
subcontractors, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment. The contractor shall not
participate either directly or indirectly in the discrimination prohibited by Section 21.5 of the
Regulations, including employment practices wheq the contract covers a program set forth in Appendix
B of the Regulations.
3. Solicitations for Subcontracts, Including Procurements of Materials and Equipment: In all solicitations
either by competitive bidding or negotiation made by the contractor for work to be performed under a
subcontract, including procurements of materials or leases of equipment, each potential subcontractor
or supplier shall be notified by the contractor of the contractor's obligations under this contract and the
Regulations relative to nondiscrimination on the grounds of race, color, or national origin.
4. Information and Reports: The contractor shall provide all information and reports required by the
Regulations, or directives issued pursuant thereto, and shall permit access to its books, records, accounts,
other sources of information, and its facilities as may be determined by the Michigan Department of
Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration to be pertinent to ascertain compliance with such
Regulations or directives. Where any information required of a contractor is in the exclusive possession
ofanotherwho fails or refuses to furnish this information, the contractor shall so certify to the Michigan
Department of Transportation, or the Federal Highway Administration as appropriate, and shall set
forth what efforts it has made to obtain the information.
5. Sanctions for Noncompliance: In the event of the contractor's noncompliance with the
nondiscrimination provisions of this contract, the Michigan Department of Transportation shall impose
such contract sanctions as it or the Federal Highway Administration may determine to be appropriate,
including, but not limited to:
(a) Withholding of payments to the contractor under the contract until the contractor complies,
and/or
(b) Cancellation, termination, or suspension of the contract, in whole or in part.
6. Incorporation of Provisions: The contractor shall include the provisions of paragraphs I through 6 of
every subcontract, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the
Regulations, or directives issued pursuant thereto. The contractor shall take such action with respect
to any subcontract or procurement as the Michigan Department of Transportation or the Federal
Highway Administration may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions including sanctions for non~
compliance; provided, however, that in the event a contractor becomes involved in, oris threatened with,
litigation with a subcontractor or supplier as a result of such direction, the contractor may request the
Michigan Department of Transportation to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the State,
and, in addition, the contractor may request the United States to enter into such litjgation to protect the
interests of the United States.
APPENDIXC
TO BE INCLUDED IN ALL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
AGREEMENTS WITH LOCAL AGENCIES
Assurance that Recipients and Contractors Must Make
(Excerpts from US DOT Regulation 49 CFR 26.13)
A. Each financial assistance agreement signed with a DOT operating administration (or
a primary recipient) must include the following assurance:
The recipient shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color,
national origin, or sex in the award and performance of any US
DOT-assisted contract or in the administration of its DBE
program or the requirements of 49 CFR Part 26. The recipient
shall take all necessary and reasonable steps under 49 CFR Part
26 to ensure nondiscrimination in the award and administration
of US DOT-assisted contracts. The recipient's DBE program, as
required by 49 CFR Part 26 and as approved by US DOT, is
incorporated by reference in this agreement. Implementation of
this program is a legal obligation and failure to carry out its
terms shall be treated as a violation of this agreement. Upon
notification to the recipient of its failure to carry out its approved
program, the department may impose sanctions as provided for
under Part 26 and may, in appropriate cases, refer the matter for
enforcement under 18 U.S.C. 1001 and/or the Program Fraud
Civil Remedies Act of 1986 (31 U.S.C. 3801 et seq.).
B. Each contract MOOT signs with a contractor (and each subcontract the prime
contractor signs with a subcontractor) must include the following assurance:
The contractor, sub recipient or subcontractor shall not
discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in
the performance of this contract. The contractor shall carry out
applicable requirements of 49 CFR Part 26 in the award and
administration of US DOT-assisted contracts. Failure by the
contractor to carry out these requirements is a material breach
of this contract, which may result in the termination of this
contract or such other remedy as the recipient deems
appropriate.
Commission Meeting Date: May 28, 2002
Date: 5-21-2002
To: Honorable Mayor & City Commission
From: Planning & Economic Development Department <fl c__
RE: Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: To approve submittal of potential project list
for the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS).
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.
Memorandum
To: Mayor & City Commission
From: Joel Fitzpatrick, Business Development Specialist
Date: 05/21/02
Re: 2002 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) Project
Submissions - City of Muskegon
Please find the enclosed copies of the City of Muskegon projects proposed for inclusion in
the 2002 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy for the West Michigan Shoreline
Region. The CEDS process is required by the U.S. Economic Development Administration
as a way of identifying projects that may receive funding through the EDA. Projects that
are not included in the CEDS will not be considered for Federal funding.
Each year the City is requested to provide a list of projects that require federal assistance.
By placing these projects on the funding list, the City ensures that the projects are, at a
minimum, considered for funding. It is important to note that the CEDS process is not an
application for funds, but rather a process of getting our projects on-line for future funding.
All of the projects submitted are repeat submissions and there have been no significant
changes in the projects.
The process for including City projects in the CEDS is as follows:
I. Identification of projects.
2. Planning Commission review of projects.
3. Planning Commission recommendation to City Commission for project to be
included in the CEDS.
4. City Commission approval of resolution submitting projects for the CEDS.
5. Submission of projects and resolution to the West Michigan Shoreline Regional
Development Commission.
2002 CEDS
Submitted Projects
SmartZone Business Park
Medendorp Industrial Center Expansion
Medendorp Industrial Center Rail Spur
Downtown Muskegon/Lakefront Development
Port City Industrial Park Expansion
Farmers/Seafood Market
Relocation of West Michigan Steel
Car Ferry Landing
:2ij{))2 CtEDS PROJECT SUIBM~TTAL FORM
Applicant Name: City of Muskegon Project Name: SmartZone Business Park
(Downtown)
Contact Person: Lonna Angu i l m Phone: --'-2..i3~J~1~2~4~6~1~a~2~---------
Note: Please use a separate page for each project submitted
Location of Project: City of Muskegon County: Muskegon
Estimated Project Start Date: _2"'-0-'-0-'-"'-3_ _ _ _ _ _ __ 5ll New Project 0 Facility Expansion
(check one box)
lw,ponant: For Economic Development Infrastructure Construction Project, please remember to provide the required site
location map with this form.
(Check one box per category)
Jl>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 $2,000,000.
D. Funding Sources - Federal funding will be combined with funds from the City and
State, as well as, private investment. The investment from the private sector may
come from individuals or non-profits organizations.
E. Project Beneficiaries - The City of Muskegon, most notably the downtown would
benefit from the improvement of a major property along the waterfront. The property
tax base would expand dramatically and hundreds of new employment opportunities
will emerge. The techoology-based businesses would greatly diversify the local
economy.
..---..•
,,/ ...
"'\, <;/
//
/ ./1 l
r'_.J
.;. )?. \~ -,,
il/lruis~~«>B>l\llai!
/ • 'c/ ,r ·:, •'
./
Medendorp Industrial
Applicant Name: City of Muskegon Project Name: Center Expansion
Contact Person: Lonna Angui lm Phone: _ _,:.2...;3u1.=-17'--'2'-'4'--=--'6,._7u0,.,2"-----------
Note: Please use a separate page for each project submitted
Location of Project: City of Muskegon County: Muskegon
Project Description: _,,,s""e""e'----"a~t~t~a~c,,,_h=e.,,,d~--------------------------
Estimated Project Start Date: --"2-'-0-'-0-'-3_ _ _ _ _ _ __ 0 New Project fl Facility Expansion
(clteclc one box)
lmporltffllt: For Economic Development Infrastructure Construction Project, please remember to provide the required site
location map with this form.
(Check one box per category)
ll'roj ed l'yi!le lLett<ell'§ olf Ci1Dmmitme!llt (flrom incoming and/or expanding iirm(•>)
0 New Submission [JJ Repeat Submission (20__) l2l!l Yes O No O NA
Not Applicable
ll'rnjecit Costs: ( estimated or actual) Matclhi11g Fiimds
Federal: 2,000,000 IZll Secured 0 Lacking
State: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Potential Job Oreatiolll (estimated)
1 00+ 0 NA
Local: 500 000
---~=L-"-=---------- Not Applicable
0 ther: ll"<11t,mtiall Job lRetientiolll (estimated)
----------------- 1 00+ • NA
TOTAL: _ __,$.,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 $2.5 million. This amount includes acquisition and demolition
of 24 houses, relocation and extension of utilities to the area for industrial use. Also
included is the cost of paving Madison, Nims, and Brunswick Streets. If funded the
project could start in 2003.
D. Funding Sources - Local match would be available from LDF A funds/bonds, city
water and sewer funds, Major Street funds, private contributions, and State funds.
E. Project Beneficiaries - The City of Muskegon, as a whole, will benefit from an
increase in industrial land. If industries in Muskegon are to be encouraged to expand,
and new industries are to locate in the City, additional industrial prope1iy is a must.
With the acquisition of the prope1iy described as the project area, within the
Medendorp Industrial Center, new industries will increase the tax and employment
base while clearing blighted properties.
,_
. 17 .IL_
--··-•1-.--,-
,... ! i .· ..
/ ,-...,
_,1..-·1
~
'
'.
.:-' - '1\,"'
~...::;,-"'
z-7',
I
Medendorp Industrial
Applicant Name: City of Muskegon Project Name: Center Rail Spur
Contact Person: -----"'L'-"o'-'-n'-'n"'a"--'A'-"n'-'-_g=u""i'""l"'m'------ Phone: 231-724-6702
Note: Please use a separate page for each project submitted.
Location of Project: City of Muskegon County: Muskegon
Project Description: _,,.s,..e,.e'--"a...,,t..,t.,a..,c""h"-e"'--"'d~'--------------------------
Estimated Project Start Date: --""'2""0""0""'3_ _ _ _ _ __ tl New Project 0 Facility Expansion
(ched< one box)
lmporlomt: For Economic Development Infrastructure Construction Project, please remember to provide the required site
location map with this form.
(Check one box per category)
ll"rojed Type lLett<ell'® olf Commitmennit (llromln<oming ,md/orexpandlng nrm(•l}
D New Submission IIil Repeat Submission (20__) lll.! Yes D No D NA
Not Applie3ble
Project Co$ts: (estimated or actual) Matcilliillg lFm111nails
Federal: 500. 000 Qlll Secured 0 Lacking
State: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ll"iltenntial Jolb> 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!lllr<llject illl a C<lllllllJ!llll"eilllelll!sive lP'Du, Masteir
0 Complete O In Progress lP'i&Hll, 1'lilFA PBaHll, FnDll:ml!llcillllg ll"llmm, orr similar
i&l Lacking O NA liocmrrment?
Not APJ>licahle 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 $2 million for land assembly and
infrastructure improvements. If funded, the project could begin as soon as 2003.
D. Funding Sources - If funding were approved, local match would be provided by the
City and/ or private sources.
E. Project Beneficiaries - The project will benefit the entire community but more
specifically downtown residents and property owners. It is estimated that as many as
300 employment oppo1tunities could arise from this project.
-C tT:j[ 'r=
I-
L
' \
\
I
I
b . \~ ~---- . ·-· .
;'
~. I
I
\
'"'
' \
•
I .,
~-'JI
Z·-/r
21Jlf02 C!EfDS PROJECT SUBM!TTAl FORM
Applicant Name: City of Muskegon Project Name: Port City Industrial Park
Expansion
Contact Person: Lonna Anguilm Phone: 231-724-6702
Note: Please use a separate page for each project submitted.
Location of Project: City of Muskegon County: Mnskeg:ao
Project Description: see attached ·
Estimated Project Start Date: ~2"'0,,__0,,__3,,,___ _ _ _ _ __ 0 New Project U Facility Expansion
(dteck one box)
Important: For Economic Development Infrastructure Const,...1ction Project, please remember to provide the required site
location map with this form.
(Check one box per category)
Pirojed Tyll)e lLettel!'§ <lllf C<!!IIDlllllllitllllllellllt (hmiim.coming and/or expanding fum(s))
0 New Submission fi Repeat Submission (20__J r&:I Yes O No O NA
Not Applicable
Prnjed Costs: (estimated or actual) M:mtclniH!lg Fimds
Federal: 1 , 1 00. 000 [l Secured 0 Lacking
State: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ P11te111ti:ml Job Cireatfonn ( estimated)
100+ 0 NA
Local: ------'2"'3,,_,o,_,_,o'-'o'-'o,____ _ _ _ _ _ __ Not Applicable
Other: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ P<11te111ti:mi Job Retelllltfonn ( estimated)
100+ 0 NA
TOTAL: _ _.,$_,_J~--3'-'-0'-'-o'-','-'o,_,_o,_,_oL__ _ _ _ _ _ __ Not Applicable
PrreiillDllimill!'y Ellllgilllleen-illlg Is yo\llrr J]l)mjectt inn mComm,rrelnennsive ll'im, Masterr
U Complete O In Progress ll'lmnn, TilFA Plallll, Fimmdnng ll'R:mllll, orr similarr
0 Lacking O NA dac\llment?
Not ApJ)licable [l Yes (identify) 0 No
Master Plan, LDFA, CEDS
Do not write beimv this line.
Creation/Cost Ratio: Distress Level: Category:
Retention/Cost Ratio: Low/Mod%: TOTAL POil'ITS:
Rietunm tl!!is forrmm to: 2002 CEDS Projects
West Michigan Shoreline Regional Development Commission
137 Muskegon Mall, P.O. Box 387
Muskegon, l\.ll 49443-0387
(231) 722-7878 ext. 113 Fax: (231) 722-9362
==========.,;E,,,-'"'m,;,a;;;il;;.,: =eku=hn== ~sr!,lid.,,c.,,,o,drn"""'==================
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Port City Industrial Park - Expansion
A. Background - The Port City Industrial Park was created in the l 960's and comprises
over 400 acres. Additional land became available for development with the extension
of Black Creek Drive. Developable industrial land within the park has been
exhausted and the need for additional industrial land within the City is very mgent.
B. Project Scope - The acquisition of a triangular piece of property south the of the
Sunrise Memorial Gardens Cemetery, constrnction of utilities to the property, and the
extension ofindustrial Boulevard south to the property, which will provide an
additional 22 acres for industrial use.
C. Project Cost & Timing - Staff has estimated the project cost to be approximately
$1.33 million, which includes roadway extension, water and sewer services, and 3
property acquisition. If ftmding is secured the project could begin as soon as 2092'-
D. Funding Sources - If the City of Muskegon, were the recipient of an EDA grant, local
match would be available from the Local Development Finance Authority, water and
sewer ftmds, and State funds.
E. Project Beneficiaries - By providing infrastructure to an unimproved area, new
development will occur that will add to the tax and employment base of the
community.
' 1 - --· '-r I
7 1-, -
. --:-·
~--r·
I
-:·- I
-
~
""""
Q I;:\
r,;Q
0
ll;f'\
·-
0
"'-I
Cl
~
0\
Cl\ ~
'F"'i µ:i
~
z :;...
1'1:1
0
0 -oc:....
~
''
- -=
<::1:1
e3
ylJ
:::, "O
ro
;:::! '\\
~
t;,;..
0 ·-u
...,
> ,,
-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. -<l ¼
Commissioner Gawron ,,, . dJ ~\.(J
~·~+~
Commissioner Larson v "'-- I ' "r d.akzJ
Commissioner Schweifler 5 ✓ r---...
Commissioner Shepherd
Commissioner Spataro
,.
f"\ V.
J-.o r--
~""_;~ ~~v~ev
U,\,W?,V1£{11M,~.
PARMENTER O'TOOLE
Attorneys at Law
175 West Apple Avenue • P.O. Box 786 • Muskegon, Michigan 49443-0786
Phone 231.722.1621 • Fax 231.722.7866or231.728.2206
www.Parmenterlaw.com
January 28, 2002
Tim Paul
Finance Director
City of Muskegon
P.O. Box 536
Muskegon, Ml 49443-0536
Re: Police/Fire Retirement System
Dear Mr. Paul:
Enclosed is an Ordinance Amendment providing for benefits and contributions for members who
leave a police or fire bargaining unit and accept a position normally subject to the General
Employee's Retirement System (Bob Grabinski), which as been revised based upon our previous
discussion.
If you have any further questions or concerns, please let me know.
fyCb---;·
John C. Schrier
JCS:mmf
G:\EDSJ\F!LES\00100\0009L\L TR\A01765.DOC
CITY OF MUSKEGON
MUSKEGON COUNTY, MICHIGAN
ORDINANCE NO. 2078
An ordinance amending Appendix A of the Code of the City of Muskegon concerning
Police-Fire Retirement System Ordinance.
THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MUSKEGON HEREBY ORDAINS:
The Police-Fire Retirement System Ordinance is amended as follows:
1. Section 10. RETIREMENT SYSTEM MEMBERSIDP
Section 10 shall be amended to read as follows:
Section 10. (a) The membership oftlie retirement system shall include all police
officers and firefighters who are in the employ of the city and all police officers and
firefighters who become employed by the city, except as provided in subsection (b) of
this section.
(b) The membership of the retirement system shall not include:
(1) Temporary or civilian employees of the police or fire departments,
(2) Special officers or special firefighters, or
(3) Privately employed police officers or firefighters.
(c) Except as provided in subsection (d) ofthis section and except for the
purposes of section 11, subsection (c), should any member cease to be employed by the
city as a police officer or a firefighter he shall thereupon cease to be a member.
(d) 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. A member who retains membership in this retirement system
pursuant to Section 10(d) shall be required to make contributions and is afforded
retirement benefits as if the member had not left employment within the Police or Fire
Department.
(e) In any case of doubt as to the membership status of any person the board shall
decide the question within the meaning of the provisions of this ordinance.
In all other respects Appendix A of the Code of the City ofMuskegon shall remain in full
force and effect.
This ordinance adopted:
Ayes: Shepherd, Spataro, Gawron, .Schweifler
Nays: Warmington, Buie. Larson
G:IEDSIIFILES\00100\0009L\OROIN\9Z9642.DOC
Adoption Date: · May 28, 2002
Effective Date: .T1 me 18, 2002
First Reading: May 14 , 2002
::i::oON~
Second Reading: May 28, 2002
Gail A. Kundinger
City Clerk
CERTIFICATE
The undersigned, being the duly qualified clerk of the City ofMuskegon, Muskegon
County, Michigan, does hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of an
ordinance adopted by the City Commission of the Gity of Muskegon, at a regular meeting of the
City Commission on the 28th day of May · , 2002, at which meeting a quorum
was present and remained throughout, and that the original of said ordinance is on file in the
records of the City of Muskegon. I further certify that the meeting was conducted, and public
a
notice was given, pursuant to and in full compliance with Act No. 267, Public Acts of Michigan
of 1976, as amended, and that minutes were kept and will be or have been made available as
required thereby. I /
DATED: May 28 , 2002 ~ - ~~
Gai A. Kundinger, CMC/AAE
Clerk, City of Muskegon .
Publish: Notice of Adoption to be published once within ten (10) days of final adoption.
G:IEDSIIFILES\00100\0009L\ORDIN\9Z9642.DOC
CITY OF MUSKEGON
NOTICE OF ADOPTION
TO: ALL PERSONS INTERESTED
Please take notice that on May 28, 2002, the City Commission of the City of Muskegon
adopted amendments to Appendix A of the Muskegon City Code concerning the Police and Fire
Retirement System, summarized as follows:
1. Section 10 was amended to clarify the contribution rate and benefits for a member
who remains an employee of the City but not working as a police officer or firefighter.
Copies of the ordinance may be viewed and purchased at reasonable cost at the Office of
the City Clerk in the City Hall, 933 Terrace Street, Muskegon, Michigan, during regular business
hours.
This ordinance amendment is effective ten (10) days from the date of this publication.
CITY OF MUSKEGON
Published ,Tune rf , 2002 By_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Gail A. Kundinger, Its Clerk
----------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLISH ONCE WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS OF FINAL PAS SAGE.
G:IEDSI\FILES\00100\0009LINOTICEIA94466.DOC
ex1J;1
- ex --(7~1
o<
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: To approve the trade of a buildable vacant lot at 1472 Park
Street to Habitat for Humanity in return for the unbuildable vacant lot owned by
Habitat for Humanity at 404 W. Grand Avenue. This property was donated to Habitat
and originally contained a small house, which needed to be demolished. Habitat
invested approximately $6,000 in demolition and other costs only to discover that the
lot was not buildable. Several solutions were discussed with the Planning Department
staff before the lot trade was arrived at as the best possible solution to the problem. As
a result of the lot trade, Habitat for Humanity will be able to construct a home on the
lot at 1472 Park Street. The City will offer the unbuildable lot to the adjacent property
owner for expansion of their yard, since their present lot is 50 x 112.6 ft. and unbuildable
by City policy.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The Trade of these two lot will allow the City-owned property to be
placed back on the City's tax rolls thus relieving the City of continued maintenance
costs.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the resolution and to authorize both the Mayor
and the Clerk to sign the resolution.
o. City - MDOT Agreement for Southbound Exit Ramp at US-31 & Sherman.
ENGINEERING
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: To approve the contract with MOOT for the resurfacing &
widening of the southbound exit ramp at US-31 and Sherman Blvd., and to approve the
resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the contract.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: While this is an MOOT project, we are required to participate since
the project falls within the City's limits. The City's share is estimated at $2,900 but not
more than 11.25% of eligible cost. The total cost of the project is $127,500.
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.
Motion by Commissioner Schweifler, second by Vice-Mayor Buie to approve the
Consent Agenda except for items m and n.
ROLL VOTE: Ayes: Spataro, Wamington, Buie, Gawron, Larson, Schweifler,
Shepherd
Nays: None.
MOTION PASSED
2002-15 ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA:
m. Pension Ordinance Clarification. FINANCE
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Section l0(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. The technical correction ordinance, intended to address this
matter, 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
Motion by Commissioner Larson, second by Commissioner Shepherd to table and
refer back to Pension Board.
ROLL VOTE: Ayes: Wamington, Buie, Gawron, Larson, Schweifler, Shepherd,
Spataro
Nays: None.
MOTION PASSED
n. Utility Poles Relocation as Part of Shoreline Drive East. ENGINEERING
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: It is respectfully requested that staff be authorized to issue a
commitment letter on behalf of the City to reimburse Consumer's Energy an amount
not to exceed $60,000 as a compensation for time, material and labor necessary to
relocate three transmission poles by their sub-station near Western & Pine. The
relocation is necessary for the construction of Shoreline Dr. and the compensation is
due to the fact that the poles in question are not within a public right of way and
therefore a compensation is due.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: A not-to-exceed figure of $60,000 for labor, material and
administration necessary to relocate three poles near sub-station.
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED: None at this time. The cost will be eligible for the build
Michigan Grant to construct Shoreline Dr. East.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize staff to issue a commitment letter.
Motion by Commissioner Schweifler, second by Commissioner Larson to authorize
staff to issue a commitment letter, subject to approval by City Attorney.
ROLL VOTE: Ayes: Buie, Gawron, Larson, Schweifler, Shepherd, Spataro,
Wamington
Nays: None.
MOTION PASSED
2002-16 PUBLIC HEARINGS:
a. Create Special Assessment District - Sidewalk Replacement Program for
2002. ENGINEERING
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: To hold a public hearing on the proposed special assessment
district of the project and to create a special assessment district and appoint two City
Commissioners to the Board of Assessors if it is determined to proceed with the project.
The district will not include those who complete the work under a permit before June
1st , 2002.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None a this time.
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED: None at this time.
The public hearing opened at 6: l 4pm to hear and consider any comments from
the public. There were no public comments made.
Motion by Commissioner Spataro, second by Commissioner Gawron to close
public hearing at 6:15pm and to approve the spreading of the special assessment
roll and adopt the resolution confirming the special assessment roll.
ROLL VOTE: Ayes: Gawron, Larson, Schweifler, Spataro, Warmington, Buie
Nays: None
MOTION PASSED
2002-33 UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
a. Pension Ordinance Clarification (tabled 2-12-02). FINANCE
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Section lO(d) of the City's Police & Rre Retirement System
ordinance provides that "a member who remains in the employ of the city but
ceases to be a po/ice officer or a firefighter shall remain a member of the
retirement system for the duraHon of hfa City employment". This provision recently
came into play when the former Fire Marshal 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. rt 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
Motion by Commissioner Spataro, second by Commissioner Larson to table
this item and refer to Legislative Policy Committee meeting and bring back with
their recommendation.
ROLL VOTE: Ayes: Larson, Schweifler, Spataro, Warmington, Buie, Gawron
Nays: None
MOTION PASSED
b. Option to Purchase Buildable Large Vacant Lots in Jackson Hill
Neighborhood for Finlay Properties, Inc. for Senior Housing
Development. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: To approve an option agreement between the City of
Muskegon and Findlay Properties, Inc. for two large parcels of vacant land in
Jackson Hill Neighborhood (designated as parcel numbers 24--205-020-0008-00
and 24-205-0019-0012-20) as described as:
Parcel No. l: CITY OF MUSKEGON REVISED PLAT OF 1903 S 44 FT LOT 7 ALL LOT 8 & 9
& THAT PART OF LOT 10 LYING W OF MCLAREN ST BLK 20 ALSO LOTS 2 & 3 BLK 21
ALSO LOTS 4 & 5 BLK 22 S OF SUMNER AVE.
Commission Meeting Date: May 28, 2002
Date: May20,2002
To: Honorable Mayor and City Commissioners
From: Planning & Economic Development
RE: 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
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.
5/20/2002
Staff Report [EXCERPT]
CITY OF MUSKEGON
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
May 16, 2002
Hearing; Case 2002-19: Request to amend the zoning ordinance to allow business schools, or
private schools operated for profit as permitted uses in the B-2, Convenience and Comparison
Business zoning district, by the Booker Institute of Cosmetology.
BACKGROUND
The Booker Institute of Cosmetology has recently purchased the former Etterman's store on
Lakeshore Blvd. The property is zoned B-2, Convenience and Comparison Business. The applicant
would like to use the property as a cosmetology school, which use is defined in the zoning
ordinance as a 'private school, operated for profit'. This use is only listed as being permitted in the
B-3, Central Business zoning district. Any use not specifically permitted in a zoning district is by
definition, prohibited. Therefore, the applicant is requesting that the ordinance be amended to allow
this use in the B-2 district.
There are currently several uses of this type in businesses zones within the City, which were likely
classified as service businesses but since the B-3 zone specifically references "for profit" schools, it
should be consistent throughout the ordinance. So long as the business site can accommodate the
use, and the use would not unduly impose upon the neighborhoods or neighboring businesses, such
establishments could be logically placed in other business zones. Since the nature of private, for
profit schools can vary considerably, staff would recommend they be treated as special uses in the
B-2 zone. They should also be considered in the B-4 zone as a use by right. Staffs major concern
with this use is that enough parking be provided on the site. The ordinance already requires one
space per tlu-ee students at any one time. This parking should be required to be provided on-site.
City of Muskegon Planning Commission- 5/16/02 1
CITY OF MUSKEGON
MUSKEGON COUNTY, MICIDGAN
ORDINANCE NO ....2.Q19
An ordinance 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.
Tiffi CITY CO:M:MISSION OF Tiffi CITY OF MUSKEGON HEREBY ORDAINS:
Section 1101 (Special Land Uses Permitted) of Article XI (B-2, Convenience and Comparison
Business) of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Muskegon is hereby amended to add the following:
7. Business schools, or private schools operated for profit. Examples of private schools
permitted herein include, but are not limited to, the following: dance schools, music and voice
schools, and art studios.
a. Parking is required to be provided on the same site as the building. Shared parking
will be allowed, if it is irrevocable, and if it will not consume any parking needed for a
separate use.
Section 1300 (Principal Uses Permitted) of Article XIll (B-4, General Business) of the Zoning
Ordinance of the City of Muskegon is hereby amended to add the following:
16. Business schools, or private schools operated for profit. Examples of private schools
permitted herein include, but are not limited to, the following: dance schools, music and voice
schools, and art studios.
a. Parking is required to be provided on the same site as the building. Shared parking
will be allowed, if it is irrevocable, and if it will not consume any parking needed for a
separate use.
Tiris ordinance adopted:
Ayes: Spataro. Warmington. Buie. Gawron. Larson. Schweifler. Shepherd
Nayes:......,,,_No"'n""e'-------------------------
AdoptionDate: May 28, 2002
Effective Date: ,June 15 , 2002
First Reading: May 28, 2002
_______ ________
Second Reading: _.,,._....,.,_
N/ A
CERTIFICATE
The undersigned, being the duly qualified clerk of the City ofMuskegon, Muskegon County,
Michigan, does hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of an ordinance adopted
by the City Commission of the City of Muskegon, at a regular meeting of the City Commission on the
28th day of May, 2002, at which meeting a quorum was present and remained throughout, and that the
original of said ordinance is on :file in the records of the City of Muskegon. I further certify that the
meeting was conducted and public notice was given pursuant to and in full compliance with Act No.
267, Public Acts of Michigan of 1976, as amended, and that minutes were kept and will be or have
been made available as required thereby. ~ , J __'
DA1ED:May 28 , 2002. ~ ~~1
Gail Kundinger, CMC/
Clerk, City of Muskegon
Publish: Notice of Adoption to be published once wi~ ten (10) days of final adoption.
CITY OF MUSKEGON
NOTICE OF ADOPTION
Please take notice that on May 28, 2002, the City Commission of the City of Muskegon adopted an
ordinance to amend Section 1101 (Special Land Uses Permitted), of Article XI (B-2, Convenience
and Comparison Business) and Section 1300 (Principal Uses Permitted), of Atticle XIII (General
Business) of the City's Zoning Ordinance, to add the following:
Business schools, or private schools operated for profit. Examples of private schools
permitted herein include, but are not limited to, the following: dance schools, music and voice
schools, and art studios.
a. Parking is required to be provided on the same site as the building. Shared parking
will be allowed, if it is irrevocable, and if it will not consume any parking needed for a
separate use.
Copies of the ordinance may be viewed and purchased at reasonable cost at the Office of the City
Clerk in the City Hall, 933 Terrace Street, Muskegon, Michigan, during regular business hours.
This ordinance amendment is effective ten days from the date of this publication.
Published ~ s' ,2002 CITY OF MUSKEGON
C
By _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Gail A. Kundinger
Its Clerk
PUBLISH ONCE WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS OF FINAL PASSAGE.
AccountNo. 101-80400-5354
5
Commission Meeting Date: May 28, 2002
Date: May 22, 2002
To: Honorable Mayor & City Commission
From: Planning & Economic Development Department C6°
RE: Market and Housing Analysis of Downtown
Waterfront
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.
FINANCIAL 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 $25,000
8516 Green Lane, Baltimore MD
Market lnsite Group/McKenna Associates $36,000
3250 West Big Beaver Rd. , Troy, Ml
Beckett &Raeder $25,000
535 West William, Suite 101, Ann Arbor, Ml
BUDGET ACTION REQUIRED: None
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the contract with Gibbs
Planning Group, 148 Pierce Street, Birmingham, Ml.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
21 May 2002
Mr. Joel Fitzpatrick
Planning and Economic Department
933 Terrace Street
P.O. Box 536
Muskegon, Michigan 49443-0536
Dear Mr. Fitzpatrick:
I am pleased to respond to your revised request for consulting services for the City of
Muskegon's waterfront efforts. Our recent meeting with your redevelopment team
clarified your specific goals and issues, resulting in the following modified and
expanded proposal. I am more confident now that GPG's unique combination with
both private and public sector clients will offer you the skills necessary for the
continued successful reuse of your exciting waterfront.
Our experience and expertise allows us to formulate and refine a proven and focused
approach to accomplish the tasks required to assist you with the analysis of the
development potential for this waterfront property. We at GPG are dedicated to
providing practical, implementable results, which reflect economic development
realities and not just theoretical research.
Our experience has demonstrated that an attractive natural feature, alone, is not
enough to attract new residential and commercial development. Many residential and
commercial users are also seeking quality and authentic urban environments not
available in the suburbs.
Understanding
Historically linked to its river and lakefronts, Muskegon's shoreline now represents a
large untapped opportunity to attract new residential and commercial activity in the
downtown area. It is our understanding that the City is seeking to continue its
successful downtown re-development efforts. Recently completed recreational,
educational and commercial projects have helped to improve the downtown area. The
proposed navel museum, hotel and residential development will further contribute to
the region's waterfront access.
The purpose of this study is to explore realistic development opportunities for the
waterfront's remaining vacant or underutilized properties. Specifically, the city is
seeking to determine alternative types of residential and commercial uses that are
supportable by the private market for the study area. It is further GPG's understanding
Page2
Muskegon, MI
GPG-5.20.02
that the City desires for the proposed waterfront development to enhance the
downtown business district and to create better linkages to the waterfront area. It is
anticipated that the findings of this step will assist your group in setting goals, policies
and in making specific short and long-term implementation actions for the subject
area.
This study will focus on Muskegon's downtown waterfront area, along the north side
of Lake Shore Drive between Seventh and Terrace. Although GPG will review many
segments of the region, we suggest that a specific boundary be mutually defined upon
execution of a consulting contract.
Methodology
One of the more critical aspects of the mixed-use commercial redevelopment process
will be an understanding of the market potential for those types of uses likely to be
drawn to the downtown waterfront.
This study will be based upon a series of focus group interviews, analysis of your past
planning and research studies, census data and GPG's own primary research. Based
upon the colleted data, GPG will complete a void analysis, based upon a supply and
demand model. The findings of our analysis, will be tested with private sector brokers,
developers and retailers. GPG will retain at its own expense, and at no additional
fees, specialists necessary to complete any research or analysis not available by our
in-house staff. Our final findings will be presented to your team in both written and
oral form, as described below.
Qualifications
GPG has extensive urban research and planning experience in the Great Lakes region
and across North America. GPG's clients are balanced between city, regional and state
governmental, private developers and investors. Our local projects include: Bay City,
Chicago, Columbus, Glenview, Grosse Pointe, Howell, Milwaukee, Normal, Oregon, St.
Paul, and Suttons Bay. Additional recent GPG commissions have included: Atlanta,
Baton Rouge, Charleston, Ireland, Ft. Meyers, Goshen, Indianapolis, London, Naples,
Norfolk, New Zealand, South Beach, Sidney, Dublin and West Palm Beach.
Urban university redevelopment clients include: Brown, Indiana State, Johns Hopkins,
Michigan State, Ohio State, University of Pennsylvania. In addition, GPG has
developed a speciality in new urban retail market research and planning, resulting in
our participation in almost every significant nee-traditional town plan built during the
Page 3
Muskegon, Ml
GPG - 5.20. 02
past ten years including Seaside, The Kentlands and Lakeland's.
GPG's private sector clients include: Aikens Development, Crosswinds Communities,
General Motors, Pulte, The Limited, The Taubman Company, Simon Properties,
Weyerhaeuser, and Westinghouse (WCI).
Step One: Data Collection & Focus Groups ($6,500.00)
One of the most important elements in redeveloping the waterfront is to have an
accurate and realistic understanding of past research, planning and the region's
perceptions of the site. This research wili contribute to the baseline data for GPG's
market analysis. Working with your team, GPG will collect and review your existing
base data, past studies and policy regarding the waterfront area. This data will be
analyzed and applied to the appropriate information into our economic models and
findings. GPG will also walk and drive the study area, downtown, surrounding
neighborhoods and region.
As a part of this step, GPG will conduct up to six (6) focus groups with stakeholders of
your choice. The City of Muskegon shall select and coordinate the participants of each
focus group. GPG shall record notes and summarize the sessions. These focus groups
will include: various citizen groups (youth, families, seniors, etc.), city staff, shoppers
and property owners. These interviews will assist our team in determining market
conditions, perceptions and opportunities.
This Step shall contain the following items:
a. A summary of informal (non-scientific) local opinions regarding the current
conditions and future condition of the study area. Such analysis shall include
input and opinions from tenants, property owners, residents, patrons,
consumers, and business owners.
b. A review of the following documents and facilities: Boating: sales, rentals,
storage; Mixed use developments; Tourism/Convention Center/ Exhibit Hall;
Certified Business Park; Marina: Condo, annual rental, transient, and charter
boat; Residential; Retail: Farmers/Seafood/Orchard Market; Food and Beverage:
Recreation facilities; The 1999 City Waterfront Redevelopment Plan.
The product of this phase will involve GPG's participation in one (1) day of focus group
sessions, and 2-3 days of research of the above data, and the region. A 3-4 page
written summary of the relevant findings of this step will be included in GPG's final
report.
Page4
Muskegon, Ml
GPG-5.20.02
Step Two: Retail Market Analysis ($16,500.00)
The core of this proposal's scope of services is to determine realistic residential and
commercial market voids for the study area. This analysis will assist you in
determining not only, what is supportable, but also, which of these markets best meets
your community's values and goals.
Based upon the findings above, Step One, GPG will conduct a detailed Retail Market
analysis that will include the following:
a. GPG will define the likely short term and long-term trade area served by the
study areas.
b. GPG will estimate the different patron segments (i.e. workers, tourists,
residents, Boaters, Ferry riders, visitors) to be, as serviced by the retailers of
the study area.
c. GPG will collect demographic data including: household income, consumer
expenditure potential by retail category, education levels, % white-collar
employment, age, projected growth, etc.
d. GPG will prepare a map identifying the location of all major retail centers in the
primary and secondary trade areas, which will better explain the effects of the
gravitational model of competing retail districts on the primary and secondary
trade area.
e. GPG will define a primary and secondary trade area for the supportable retail
development.
f. GPG will factor into it's analysis of consumer expenditure the effects of
pedestrian circulation, general vehicular circulation patterns, strength of existing
retail competition, proposed adjacent residential and commercial construction,
as well as other relevant conditions.
g. GPG will prepare a written summary of the relevant population and demographic
characteristics of the trade area. ·
h. GPG will issue a letter of qualitative opinion as to whether or not additional retail
development is supportable in the study area and what size of retailers would
be most successful.
i. GPG will prepare a written analysis of which retail categories (men's apparel,
sporting goods, hardware, etc.) currently face excessive competition, thereby
making them susceptible to store closures, as well as which retail categories
show a void in competition and can therefore support additional development.
Page5
Muskegon, MI
GPG-5.20.02
j. GPG shall provide a list of potential retail and entertainment businesses that
could be tenants in the redevelopment or new development.
k. GPG shall provide estimations of potential sales volumes for recommended
tenants.
As a part of this step, GPG will comment on the potential for residential housing within
the study area. The study will project a potential range of housing types, sizes,
amenities and general design guidelines. The purpose of this housing study will be to
assist the team in determining general housing options, to be used for your master
planning efforts. The study will also be av:ailable to assist the City in attracting new
potential residential developers to consider building on the study area.
I understand that you are seeking for detailed market information regarding marina
sales and rentals. The scope of services under this proposal will review existing marina
market trends, sales and rental rates, but will not make forecasts regarding future
observations and development potentials. GPG recommends that you retain marina
specialists to meet your dockage requirements.
The deliverability of Step Two shall be a 45-50 page 8.5" x 11" report defining
forecasting supportable residential and retail development for the study area. The
report shall define the trade area, competition, list supportable retail categories and
estimate annual sales per categories. This market analysis shall also estimate the
impact of the new Milwaukee Ferry service and model it finds on a no ferry and ferry
basis.
Step Three: Implementation Strategy ($5,000.00)
Pursuant to acceptance of the findings of the Market/Void analysis by the review
committee, GPG shall prepare a document suitable to begin discussions with potential
developers. This document shall have the following items:
a. A summary of this studies findings: trade area, demographics, supportable
retail, plans and photographs of the study area.
b. Identification of potential developers/investors for contemplated projects.
c. A brochure including an illustration of the proposed use.
Recommendations regarding the physical aspects of the study area relating to potential
adaptive re-use and new construction GPG will review the existing proposals for the
development of the residential and commercial areas located in or adjacent to the
study area.
Page 6
Muskegon, MI
GPG - 5.20. 02
Schedule:
Such services shall commence within 15 days of signing of this agreement and receipt
of retainer as described below. The first draft of GPG's findings shall be completed
within 100 days of receipt of an agreement. The final draft of the report shall be
completed within 30 days of receipt of the City's comments from the first draft.
Project Staff
It is anticipated that GPG project staff will include: Project Principal, Robert Gibbs,
ASLA; Senior Market Analyst, Patricia Formosa; Director, Charles E. Wilson III; Project
Market Analyst and Planner, and additional GPG Market Analysts, Retail Planners &
Designers as required. Staff qualifications are included in the Appendix.
Remuneration
GPG's proposed fees for the services described above in Step One, Two and Three are
Twenty-Eight Thousand Dollars {$28,000.J plus reimbursable expenses for travel,
lodging, mail and reproduction (not to exceed $1,500.00). The following rates apply
for GPG staff to be available for additional services upon prior authorization by the City:
Principal, Two Thousand, Five Hundred ($2,500.00) Dollars per day; Director, One
Thousand, Two Hundred Fifty($ 1,250.00) Dollars per day; Designer, Seven Hundred
Atty($ 750.00) Dollars per day. Additional hourly rates as follows: Two Hundred and
Fifty ($250.00) Dollars per hour for principal, One Hundred Thirty Five ($135.00)
Dollars per hour for director and Eighty-Five ($85.00) Dollars per hour for staff
designer.
Limits of Scope of Services
The services described in this agreement are for qualitative retail and planning analysis
only, and should not be used as the sole basis of development, financing, or leasing.
Actual site, building, parking, utility, environmental, grading, civil engineering,
architectural plans and construction documents are not included within the scope of
work of this proposal and are to be completed by others. In addition, the following
items are not included in this proposal:
a. Environmental reviews or analysis for toxic or contaminated site conditions.
Page 7
Muskegon, MI
GPG- 5.20. 02
b. Civil engineering or design of grading, storm drainage, sewers & roads.
c. Building and structural architectural design and engineering.
d. Detailed cost projections or estimates.
e. Construction management and coordination.
Conditions ofAgreement
a. GPG will begin services as described by this proposal upon receipt of a 25%
retainer. This retainer will be deducted from the final invoice for services
conducted by under this agreement. GPG will invoice you at the completion of
each Step.
b. All invoices will be paid upon receipt. A charge of 1.5% per month will be
applied to invoices not received within 30 days.
c. This proposal will be valid for 30 days from today's date.
d. The owner will supply GPG with necessary site, topographic, boundary surveys,
architectural floor plans and elevations, etc., as required.
e. This agreement will not be enforced by either party until each party has in its
possession a copy of this agreement signed by the other.
f. In the event of termination or suspension due to the fault of others than GPG,
GPG will be paid compensation for all completed work, plus other fees which
may have been authorized by the Owner for expenses resulting from such
termination or suspension.
g. All claims, disputes and other matters in question arising out of, or relating to,
this agreement or the branch thereof, will be decided by an arbitrator: said
arbitrator will be appointed by the American Arbitration Association and
arbitration shall occur in Oakland County M_ichigan.
h. GPG's responsibility to any errors or omissions is limited to the fees invoiced for
the services outlined by this proposal.
i. This agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between GPG
and the signee, and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or
agreements, either written or oral. This agreement may be amended only by
written instrument signed by both GPG and a representative of the signee.
j. Municipal zoning and land-use variances may be needed as part of the design
and submittal process.
Page8
Muskegon, Ml
GPG-5.20.02
Thank you again for the opportunity to interview with you and our entire team is
looking forward to beginning our qualitative analysis as soon as possible. Please do not
hesitate to call if you have any questions. If you agree with these terms, fees and
conditions of this proposal, please sign below and return an original copy with a 25%
retainer check ($7,000.00) made payable to GIBBS PLANNING GROUP, INC., so that
we may begin/assisting you with this exciting project.
f/1'
Sincerely, ~ - - · · ·
GIBBS PLANNING GROUP, INC
date 0-3- 0 -;,..
...~.~~·:>\\,'.":::::>. ... '.;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