View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
CITY OF MUSKEGON
CITY COMMISSION MEETING
OCTOBER 25, 2022 @ 5:30 P.M.
MUSKEGON CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS
933 TERRACE STREET, MUSKEGON, MI 49440
AGENDA
□ CALL TO ORDER:
□ PRAYER:
□ PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
□ ROLL CALL:
□ HONORS, AWARDS, AND PRESENTATIONS:
A. Presentation on New Website by Pete Wills
□ PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS:
□ CONSENT AGENDA:
A. Approval of Minutes City Clerk
B. Fireworks Display Contract City Clerk
C. Interim City Manager Stipend City Manager
D. Sale – 653 Yuba Planning
E. Special Events DPW
F. CWSRF & DWRF FY23 Engineering Assistance DPW
G. MDOT Resolution DPW
H. Skate Park RFQ DPW
I. Source Water Intake Protection Plan Update DPW
J. Splashpad RFQ DPW
K. Stormwater Management Ordinance DPW
L. Rezoning 398 Catawba Ave – 2nd Reading Planning
M. Ordinance Amendment – Reduced Housing Unit Size Minimums – 2nd
Reading Planning
N. First Amendment to Purchase Agreement for NBR Labs Development
Development Services
Page 1 of 2
□ PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Infill Housing Project Brownfield Plan Public Hearing (4th Amendment)
Economic Development
□ UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
□ NEW BUSINESS:
A. City Manager Contract Mayor’s Office
B. Sale of 1227 Pine Street City Manager
□ ANY OTHER BUSINESS:
□ PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS:
► Reminder: Individuals who would like to address the City Commission shall do the following:
► Fill out a request to speak form attached to the agenda or located in the back of the room.
► Submit the form to the City Clerk.
► Be recognized by the Chair.
► Step forward to the microphone.
► State name and address.
► Limit of 3 minutes to address the Commission.
► (Speaker representing a group may be allowed 10 minutes if previously registered with City Clerk.)
□ CLOSED SESSION:
□ 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 ANN MARIE MEISCH, CITY CLERK, 933 TERRACE STREET, MUSKEGON, MI 49440 OR BY CALLING (231) 724-
6705 OR TTY/TDD DIAL 7-1-1-22 TO REQUEST A REPRESENTATIVE TO DIAL (231) 724-6705.
Page 2 of 2
Agenda Item Review Form
Muskegon City Commission
Commission Meeting Date: October 25, 2022 Title: Approval of Minutes
Submitted By: Ann Marie Meisch, MMC Department: City Clerk
Brief Summary: To approve the minutes of the September 16, 2022 Special Meeting (City
Manager Interviews), September 20, 2022 Special Meeting (City Manager Selection), September
20, 2022 Joint meeting with Muskegon Public Schools, September 27, 2022 Regular Meeting, and
October 7, 2022 Special Meeting (City Manager-2nd Interview/Selection).
Detailed Summary: N/A
Amount Requested: N/A Amount Budgeted: N/A
Fund(s) or Account(s): N/A Fund(s) or Account(s): N/A
Recommended Motion: To approve the minutes.
For City Clerk Use Only:
Commission Action:
CITY OF MUSKEGON
SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETING
September 16, 2022 @ 9:00 am
Muskegon City Hall, 933 Terrace Street, Muskegon, MI 49440
In the Commission Chambers, Room 107
MINUTES
Present: Mayor Johnson, Commissioners German, Gorman, Emory, Ramsey, St. Clair,
and Hood.
Absent: None.
2022-82
City Manager Interviews.
City Commissioners interviewed the six final candidates for City Manager as listed
below. Each candidate was given approximately 45 minutes to answer a prepared list of
questions by the City Commission.
Dennis Durham – Located in West Des Moines, IA. Mr. Durham is currently the City
Administrator for the City of Windsor, IA for the past two years. Previously he was the City
Manager for the City of Carlton, OR for two years, City Manager for the City of Parchment, MI
for ten years, Deputy City Manager for the City of Kalamazoo, MI for two years, Assistant City
Manager for the City of Kalamazoo, MI for one year, and Assistant City Manager for the City of
Portage, MI for six years.
Dennis’ education includes a Bachelor of Arts Degree from Michigan State University, graduate-
level coursework in Business Administration from the University of Colorado at Denver Co for
one year, and graduate-level coursework in Public Administration at Western Michigan
University for one year.
Jerry Gabrielatos – Located in West Linn, OR. Currently City Manager at West Linn, OR for
the past two years. Previously he was the Assistant City Manager at Albert Lea, MN for one-
year. Mr. Gabrielatos also served various roles in the Chicago City Council including Senior
Advisor (1st Ward) for one year, Chief of Staff (45th Ward) for one year, and Director of
Constituent Services (1st Ward) for four years.
Jerry’s education includes a Bachelor’s Degree in Political Science and History and a Master’s
Degree in Public Policy and Administration from Northwestern University.
LeighAnn Mikesell – Located in the City of Muskegon. Ms. Mikesell is currently Interim City
Manager for the City of Muskegon since April 2022. Previously she was Deputy City Manager
from July 2021 to present, Director of Development Services for two years, and Director of
Municipal Services from November 2017 to February 2019 all with the City of Muskegon.
Previously, Ms. Mikesell worked for the Michigan Department of Transportation as an
Operations Manager for 15 years.
LeighAnn’s education includes a Bachelor’s Degree in Civil Engineering from the University of
Michigan.
Joe Neeb – Located in the City of Roswell, New Mexico. Mr. Neeb is currently the City
Manager for the City of Roswell for the past five years. Previously he was City Administrator for
the City of Spearfish for seven years, Town Manager for the Town of Dyer for six years, Town
Manager for the Town of Fortville for four years, and Town Manager for the Town of
Morristown for three years.
Joe’s education includes an Associates of Arts Degree in Liberal Arts from Concordia College, a
Bachelor of Science Degree in Business Administration from Indiana Wesleyan University, and
a Masters Degree in Business Administration from Indiana Wesleyan University.
Jonathan Seyferth – Located in the Muskegon area. Mr. Seyferth is currently the Township
Manager for the Charter Township of Gaines, MI since May 2021. Previously he was with the
City of Coopersville, MI, for six years and three of those years he served as City Manager. Mr.
Seyferth also served on Muskegon Area First and was the Executive Director of Downtown
Muskegon Now for a combined total of four years.
Jonathan’s education includes a Bachelor of Science degree from Central Michigan University, a
Master of Science in International Administration from Central Michigan University, and a
Master of Public Administration Degree from the University of Colorado Denver.
Gerald C. Smith – Located in Creedmoor, NC. Mr. Smith is currently the City Manager for the
City of Creedmoor since March 2021. Previously he was the City Manager for the City of
Maquoketa, IA for four years, the City Manager for the City of Junction City, KS for one year,
and Director of General Services for the City of Kansas City, MO six years.
Gerald’s education includes a Bachelors of Arts and Urban History and Political Science, and a
Master’s of Public Administration Degree from Northern Illinois University.
After the interviews, the City Commission decided to meet on September 20, 2022 at 2 pm to
deliberate on their final selection.
Shaw Walker Environmental Assessment Financial Assistance.
Staff is recommending an appropriation of $25,000 to match the Downtown
Development Authority’s commitment to environmental and other due diligence items
faced by Parkland Properties related to purchase of the Shaw Walker Building.
Motion by Commissioner Hood, seconded by Commissioner St. Clair to approve
the appropriation of $25,000 for environmental investigation and other due
diligence for the Shaw Walker/Watermark Building as presented so long as the
City of Muskegon gets a copy of the results and the City is to be reimbursed from
the City of Muskegon Brownfield Authority Tax Increment Financing prior to any
other disbursement.
Roll Call Vote:
Ayes: Johnson, Hood, Ramsey, German, Gorman, Emory, and St. Clair.
Nays: None.
MOTION PASSES.
Public Comments were received.
ADJOURN.
Motion by Commissioner Ramsey, seconded by Commissioner Gorman to
adjourn the meeting at 5:47 pm.
MOTION PASSES.
Respectfully Submitted,
Ann Marie Meisch, MMC – City Clerk
CITY OF MUSKEGON
SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETING
September 20, 2022 @ 2:00 pm
Muskegon City Hall, 933 Terrace Street, Muskegon, MI 49440
In the Commission Chambers, Room 107
MINUTES
Present: Mayor Johnson, Commissioners German (arrived 2:13 pm), Gorman, Emory,
Ramsey, St. Clair, and Hood.
Absent: None.
2022-83
Deliberation on City Manager Interviews.
After a long discussion of City Manager candidates, a majority of the Commissioners
agreed the two finalists are LeighAnn Mikesell and Jonathan Seyferth. Gerald Smith,
Jerry Gabrielatos, Dennis Durham, and Joe Neeb were removed from consideration.
It was decided to schedule a second interview for finalists Mikesell and Seyferth in
October.
ADJOURN.
Motion by Commissioner Ramsey, seconded by Commissioner Emory to adjourn
the meeting at 3:04 pm.
MOTION PASSES.
Respectfully Submitted,
Ann Marie Meisch, MMC – City Clerk
2022-84
________________________________________________________________________
Ann Marie Meisch, City Clerk Adopted 10/25/2022
CITY OF MUSKEGON
CITY COMMISSION MEETING
SEPTEMBER 27, 2022 @ 5:30 P.M.
MUSKEGON CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS
933 TERRACE STREET, MUSKEGON, MI 49440
MINUTES
The Regular Commission Meeting of the City of Muskegon was held at City Hall,
933 Terrace Street, Muskegon, Michigan at 5:30 p.m., Tuesday, September 27,
2022, Vice Mayor Willie German, Jr., opened the meeting with prayer, after
which the Commission and public recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
Present: Mayor Ken Johnson, Vice Mayor Willie German, Jr., Commissioners
Teresa Emory, Rebecca St.Clair, Rachel Gorman, Michael Ramsey, and Eric
Hood, Interim City Manager LeighAnn Mikesell, City Attorney John Schrier, and
Deputy City Clerk Kimberly Young.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS: No public comments were received.
2022-85 CONSENT AGENDA:
A. Approval of Minutes City Clerk
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: To approve the minutes of the August 23, 2022 Regular
Meeting and the August 31, 2022 Special Commission meeting.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the minutes.
B. Getty Street Study Engineering Agreement Public Works
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Staff is requesting authorization to enter into an
agreement with the cities of Norton Shores and Muskegon Heights to share the
cost of the Getty Street Traffic Study.
Conversion of four-lane roads, such as Getty Street, to three-lane roads have
been proven to be safer and to provide better access or non-vehicular users
with little or no impact to travel times when properly studied and executed. Staff
feels that Getty Street could be a great candidate for this treatment, and has
worked with Norton Shores and Muskegon Heights to solicit a study to determine
if the project should move forward.
Presented to you tonight is a three-party shared engineering services agreement
with the cities of Norton Shores and Muskegon Heights. The agreement
designates our staff as the lead contacts for the project, designates Muskegon
Page 1 of 4
as the lead agency for payment, and requires Norton Shores and Muskegon
Heights to pay their portions to Muskegon based on the centerline miles of Getty
Street in each community. The agreement has been reviewed by the City
attorney, and has already been approved by the city commission of Norton
Shores and Muskegon Heights at prior meetings.
Award to the consultant helping with the traffic study was approved at the
August 9, 2022 Commission Meeting. The agreement presented tonight has a
lower cost to the City than the original request, due to how the cast sharing is
split among the three communities.
AMOUNT REQUESTED: N/A (Approved 8/9/22) AMOUNT BUDGETED: $50,000
FUND OR ACCOUNT: 202 (Major Streets)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To authorize staff to enter into an agreement with
the cities of Norton Shores and Muskegon Heights to share the cost of the Getty
Street Traffic Study.
C. 30” Water Main Meter Public Works/Water Filtration Plant
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: A water meter is needed on the new 30” water main
near the Water Filtration Plant. Prein & Newhof have provided an agreement for
engineering services for the design, bidding, and construction phases of this
project.
A 30” water main was recently constructed from the Water Filtration Plant to the
Muskegon Channel. While the primary purpose of this water main was to provide
a second connection to the Muskegon County Northside water system, it also
serves the City of Muskegon’s water system.
An existing water meter near the channel measures all water flow into the
Muskegon County Northside water system, but it does not capture any water
used between the channel and the Water Filtration Plan. Installing a water
meter near the Water Filtration Plant will measure all the water flowing through
this main, both to the Muskegon County Northside system and to the City.
Metering this water as it leaves the Water Filtration Plant is critical to overseeing
water plan operations, managing the water fund, and ensuring regulatory
compliance.
As part of the Water Filtration Plan’s Reliability Study, Prein & Newhof
investigated two options for metering this water. Because of Prien & Newhof’s
familiarity with this project from their work developing these two options, we did
not solicit proposals from other firms. The proposal includes engineering services
during the design, bidding, and construction phases of the water meter project.
The construction portion of the project will be posted for bids and presented to
the Commission for approval at a later date.
This project is a budgeted capital improvement project for FY 2022-23.
Page 2 of 4
AMOUNT REQUESTED: $41,000 AMOUNT BUDGETED: $150,000
FUND OR ACCOUNT: 591-901-801-092034
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To authorize staff to enter into an agreement with
Prein & Newhof for a not to exceed cost of $41,000.00 for engineering services
related to the installation of a water meter near the Water Filtration Plant.
D. Interim City Manager Stipend City Manager
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Extend stipend paid for the additional duties being
performed in the Interim City Manager role.
The $450 weekly salary stipend is set to expire on September 30, 2022. It is being
proposed to extend the stipend for a one month time period, ending October
29, 2022 to allow time for the new City Manager to get settled into the position
with the assistance of the Interim Manager. If the Interim Manager is selected,
the stipend will cease once a contract is negotiated and accepted by the City
Commission.
AMOUNT REQUESTED: $1,800 AMOUNT BUDGETED: Included in salary line
FUND OR ACCOUNT: 101-10172-5100
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the weekly stipend as presented.
Motion by Commissioner Ramsey, second by Commissioner Hood, to accept the
consent agenda as presented.
ROLL VOTE: Ayes: Ramsey, German, Gorman, Emory, St.Clair, Johnson, and
Hood
Nays: None
MOTION PASSES
NEW BUSINESS:
A. New City Manager Selection – Next Steps City Clerk
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The City Commission has carried out several steps of
the hiring process for a new city manager and has narrowed the candidate
filed to two remaining candidates. The City Commission will discuss and decide
what the next steps are in the process. The City Commission will also select a
meeting date and time to continue the process.
The Commission discussed the next steps for City Manager interviews and will be
inviting the finalists to give a presentation regarding Diversity, Equity, and
Inclusion (DEI), Community Engagement, and Environmental Sustainability and
how to keep these in mind while continuing Economic Development. There will
also be questions regarding community policing and public safety. Finalists
interviews will be conducted on Friday, October 7, 2022 at 2:30 p.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS: Public Comments were received.
Page 3 of 4
ADJOURNMENT: The City Commission meeting adjourned at 6:10 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Kimberly Young - Deputy City Clerk
Page 4 of 4
CITY OF MUSKEGON
SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETING
October 7, 2022 @ 2:30 pm
Muskegon City Hall, 933 Terrace Street, Muskegon, MI 49440
In the Commission Chambers, Room 107
MINUTES
Present: Mayor Johnson, Commissioners German, Gorman, Emory, Ramsey, St. Clair,
and Hood (arrived 2:38 PM).
Absent: None.
2022-87
City Manager Interviews – Second Round.
LeighAnn Mikesell and Jonathan Seyferth were interviewed as finalists for the City
Manager’s position. Each candidate gave a presentation and then asked a list of
prepared questions.
The City Commission deliberated on both candidates. Commissioners St. Clair,
German, and Hood indicated a desire to start the recruiting process again. After great
discussion, the City Commission voted on a candidate to be offered the position of City
Manager.
Motion by Commissioner Gorman, seconded by Commissioner Emory to
authorize the City Attorney and Mayor to negotiate a contract for City Manager
with Jonathan Seyferth.
Roll Call Vote:
Ayes: Gorman, Emory, St. Clair, Johnson, and Ramsey. (5)
Nays: Commissioners German and Hood. (2)
MOTION PASSES.
ADJOURN.
Motion by Commissioner Ramsey, seconded by Commissioner Emory to adjourn
the meeting at 5:53 pm.
MOTION PASSES.
Respectfully Submitted,
Ann Marie Meisch, MMC – City Clerk
Agenda Item Review Form
Muskegon City Commission
Commission Meeting Date: October 25, 2022 Title: 4th of July Fireworks
Submitted By: Ann Meisch Department: City Clerk
Brief Summary: The City Clerk’s Office is requesting approval of a contract with Pyrotecnico for a
fireworks display in downtown Muskegon on July 4, 2023.
Detailed Summary & Background:
Goal/Focus Area/Action Item Addressed:
Amount Requested: $40,000 Amount Budgeted: $60,000
Fund(s) or Account(s): Fund(s) or Account(s):
Recommended Motion: To approve the fireworks contract with Pyrotecnico.
Approvals: Get approval from division head at a minimum prior Guest(s) Invited / Presenting
to sending to the Clerk.
Immediate Division Head Information Technology Yes
Other Division Heads Communication No
Legal Review
For City Clerk Use Only:
Commission Action:
PYROTECNICO FIREWORKS, INC.
This Fireworks Display Agreement (“Agreement”) entered into this on October 12, 2022 by and between PYROTECNICO FIREWORKS, INC.
(“Pyrotecnico”) and City of Muskegon, MI(CUSTOMER).
Pyrotecnico, for and in consideration of the terms hereinafter mentioned, agrees to furnish to the CUSTOMER Fireworks Display(s) and related
services (“Fireworks Display”), including the services of Pyrotecnico’s on-site representative to take charge of and perform the Fireworks Display
under the supervision and direction of the CUSTOMER. The Firework Display to be given on July 4, 2023. (the “Display Date”), weather
permitting.
Customer agrees to pay Pyrotecnico the sum of $40,000.00 (the “Contract Price”). Pyrotecnico will invoice CUSTOMER a deposit of $20,000.00 is
due February 15, 2023. and the final balance shall be due Net 10 from the Display Date. A service fee of 1 ½% per month shall be added if the
account is not paid in full within 30 days of the Display Date. CUSTOMER agrees to pay any and all collection costs, including reasonable attorney’s
fees and court costs incurred by Pyrotecnico for any amount due under this Agreement.
Pyrotecnico and CUSTOMER agree that should inclement weather prevent the performance of the Fireworks Display on the Display Date, the parties
shall agree to a mutually convenient alternate date, within three (3) months of the Display Date. If the show is rescheduled prior to Pyrotecnico’s
truck leaving the facility, CUSTOMER shall remit to Pyrotecnico an additional $6,000.00 for additional expenses in presenting the Fireworks
Display on an alternate date. If the show is rescheduled after Pyrotecnico’s truck leaves the facility, CUSTOMER shall remit to Pyrotecnico an
additional $16,000.00 for additional expenses incurred. The determination to cancel the show because of inclement or unsafe weather conditions
shall rest within the sole discretion of Pyrotecnico. In the event the CUSTOMER does not choose to reschedule another date or cannot agree to a
mutually convenient date, Pyrotecnico shall be entitled to $20,000.00.
Pyrotecnico agrees to furnish all necessary fireworks display materials and personnel for fireworks display in accordance with the program approved
by the parties. Quantities and varieties of products in the program are approximate. After final design, exact specifications will be supplied upon
request. Should this display require any Union, permit, or fire department related costs; their fees are not included in the Contract Price.
CUSTOMER will timely secure and provide the following: (a) Sufficient area for the display, including a minimum spectator set back distance of 425
FEET at all points from the discharge area; (b) Funds for all permits, licenses, and approvals as required by local, state and federal laws for the
Fireworks Display; (c) Protection of the display area by roping-off or similar facility; (d) Adequate police protection to prevent spectators from
entering display area; (e) Search of the fallout area at first light following a nighttime display; and (f) Provide credit as “Fireworks by Pyrotecnico” in
all advertising and marketing materials.
Pyrotecnico will maintain general liability, property damage, transportation and workers compensation insurance. All those entities/individuals who
are listed on the certificate of insurance, provided by Pyrotecnico, will be deemed to be an additional insured on such policy. This insurance coverage
specifically does not include coverage for any independent acts of negligence of any additional insured.
CUSTOMER shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Pyrotecnico and its shareholders, directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives and
insurers from any and all demands, claims, causes of action, judgments or liability (including the costs of suit and reasonable attorneys’ fees) arising
from damage to or destruction of property (including both real and personal) or bodily or personal injuries (including death), whether arising from
tort, contract or otherwise, that occur directly or indirectly from (a) the negligence or willful misconduct of CUSTOMER or its employees, agents,
contractors or representatives, (b) the failure of CUSTOMER to comply with its obligations under this Agreement, or (c) any claims or actions
arising out of Pyrotecnico's use of the show site. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the Parties for this show and any prior
agreements are terminated. This Agreement may only be amended, revised or terminated in writing, executed by the Party against which enforcement
is asserted. The parties hereto do mutually and severally guarantee terms, conditions, and obligations under this Agreement to be binding upon the
parties, themselves, their successors and assigns.
PYROTECNICO : CUSTOMER:
By (sign):________________________________________ By (sign) :______________________________________
Name:__________________________________________ Name:_________________________________________
Title: ___________________________________________ Title:_____________________________________________
Date:___________________________________________ Date: __________________________________________
Address: PO Box 149 Address: _______________________________________
New Castle PA 16103 _________________________________________
Phone: (724) 652-9555 Phone:___________________________________________
Email: contracts@pyrotecnico.com Email: :___________________________________________
Pyrotecnico Fireworks Display Agreement 2022 Page 1 of 2
Sponsor Initials: ____________________
CONTACT/INSURANCE INFORMATION FORM
You must return this form with your signed Agreement for the Certificate of Insurance to be issued, and for the permit application to be
completed and submitted. If information isn’t applicable, please state such by indicating “N/A”.
Customer Name (Entity Contracting Pyrotecnico): __________________________________________________________________
Primary Point of Contact Name: _______________________________________________________________________________
Phone: ________________________________________ Fax: ____________________________________________
Email:____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Billing Address:____________________________________________________________________________________________
City, State & Zip: ___________________________________________________________________________________________
Accounts Payable Contact: ___________________________________________________________________________________
Accounts Payable Email: ____________________________________________________________________________________
Date(s) of Show: _____________________________________ Display Start Time(s): ______________________________
Rain/Postponed Date(s): ________________________________________
Day-of-Show Contact Name:__________________________________________________________________________________
Day-of-Show Mobile Phone Number:___________________________________________________________________________
Day-of-Show Email:_________________________________________________________________________________________
Display Site Location(s) and
Address(es):_______________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
If Pyrotecnico has produced a show at this site, has the geography changed (i.e, new structures, new terrain, etc.)? If yes, please describe:
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Additionally Insured – If Applicable:
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Agenda Item Review Form
Muskegon City Commission
Commission Meeting Date: October 25, 2022 Title: Interim City Manager Stipend
Submitted By: LeighAnn Mikesell Department: City Manager
Brief Summary: Extend stipend paid for the additional duties being performed in the Interim City
Manager role.
Detailed Summary: The $450 weekly salary stipend is set to expire October 29, 2022. It is being
proposed to extend the stipend until 2 weeks after the new City Manager starts to allow time for the
him to get settled into the position with the assistance of the Interim Manager.
Amount Requested: $2,700 Amount Budgeted: Included in salary line
Fund(s) or Account(s): 101-10172-5100 Fund(s) or Account(s): 101-10172-5100
Recommended Motion: To approve the weekly stipend as presented.
Check if the following Departments need to approve the item first:
Police Dept.
Fire Dept.
IT Dept.
For City Clerk Use Only:
Commission Action:
Agenda Item Review Form
Muskegon City Commission
Commission Meeting Date: October 25, 2022 Title: Sale – 653 Yuba
Submitted By: Hope Griffith Department: Planning Department
Brief Summary: City staff is seeking authorization to sell the City owned vacant lot to Ramos
Enterprises LLC.
Detailed Summary: Ramos Enterprises LLC Crowley will be constructing a commercial structure
on the lot owned by the City of Muskegon within eighteen (18) months. The property is zoned B-4
(General Business). The buyer made an offer of $3,000 which is less than 75% of the True Cash
Value (TCV) per policy (TCV is $4,600 @ 75% would be $3,450). This property does have direct
access to the City water & the storm sewer. The sanitary sewer would have an added expense to
the buyer as it would need to go uphill where the residential homes are located. There has been no
interest in developing this property. The City has owned this property since 1997. This property is a
popular dumping site, and the sale would alleviate the City’s expense of cleaning the property.
Amount Requested: None. Amount Budgeted: $0
Fund(s) or Account(s): Public Improvement Fund(s) or Account(s): N/A
Recommended Motion: Authorize the Code Coordinator to work with the developer and complete
the sale of the City owned buildable lot as described and to have the Mayor and Clerk sign the
purchase agreement and deed.
Check if the following Departments need to approve the item first:
Police Dept.
Fire Dept.
IT Dept.
For City Clerk Use Only:
Commission Action:
653 Yuba
Aerial:
Agenda Item Review Form
Muskegon City Commission
Commission Meeting Date: 10/25/2022 Title: Special Events
Submitted By: Jacqui Erny Department: DPW
Brief Summary: Staff is seeking approval to the proposed changes to the Special Event Policy.
Detailed Summary & Background: Attached is the Special Event Policy with the proposed
changes as presented at the October 10, 2022 Worksession meeting. Changes include:
• Additional fee waiver opportunities to Veteran’s groups, Neighborhood Associations, and
non-profits. This addition comes with removing the existing fee waiver application.
• Additional $50 fee for road closures beyond two blocks.
• Removal of free parking passes for Pere Marquette events.
Goal/Focus Area/Action Item Addressed:
Proceed with events and activities.
Amount Requested: $0 Amount Budgeted:
Fund(s) or Account(s): N/A Fund(s) or Account(s): N/A
Recommended Motion: Approve the changes to the Special Event Policy.
Approvals: Get approval from division head at a minimum prior Guest(s) Invited / Presenting
to sending to the Clerk.
Immediate Division Head Information Technology Yes
Other Division Heads Communication No
Legal Review
For City Clerk Use Only:
Commission Action:
CITY OF MUSKEGON
SPECIAL EVENT POLICY
The City of Muskegon has many parks and facilities available for use. A
Special Event Application is required for any public event held on City
property or requiring City services. While there are several City departments
involved in the special event process, this policy centralizes the
administration of special events with the Department of Public Works. Email
specialevents@shorelinecity.com or call (231) 724-6907 for any questions.
For events where alcohol is served, applicants must also obtain
approval from the State of Michigan Liquor Control Commission and the Muskegon Police
Department (231-724-6750), in addition to completing the Special Event Application. Liquor
license approval is a separate process from the Special Event Application, with its own fees and
regulations. The final authority for signing special liquor licenses is with the Public Safety Director. For
State of Michigan liquor license regulations and information, please visit the State of Michigan’s website
at www.michigan.gov/lara.
SPECIAL EVENT APPLICATION PROCEDURE
I. Special Event Application (“Application”) Submission & Fee Schedule
All Applications shall be filed with the Department of Public Works at least thirty (30) days prior to the
event. The non-refundable Application fee must be paid at the time the Application is submitted.
Application fee schedule:
Events occurring during peak event season Events occurring outside of peak season
April 15 – September 30 January 1 – April 14 / October 1 – Dec. 31
$100 fee for applications submitted 60 days or more $100 fee for applications submitted 60 days or
prior to the event date more prior to the event date
$250 fee for applications submitted 45-59 days prior $200 fee for applications submitted 45-59 days
to the event date prior to the event date
$400.00 fee for applications submitted 30-44 days $300.00 fee for applications submitted 33-44 days
prior to the event prior to the event
Applications submitted less than 30 days prior to $400 fee for applications submitted less than 30
the event date will not be accepted. days prior to the event
Application and parade event fees may be waived for Veteran’s groups. In addition, the City’s
recognized Neighborhood Associations are entitled to one two Application and event fee waivers per
year in addition to National Night Out festivities, provided that the Application is submitted to the
Department of Public Works at least 30 days in advance of the event date. Up to two application fees
may be waived for a non-profit organization in its lifetime. The non-profit must serve City of Muskegon Formatted: Not Highlight
residents to qualify.
The Application shall be submitted on the appropriate form. The Application fee must be paid at the
time of Application submission or the Application will not be considered. The City of Muskegon
Request for Special Event Application form can be found on the City’s website at www.muskegon-
mi.gov, or you may email specialevents@shorelinecity.com or call (231) 724-6907 to have one mailed,
or visit the Department of Public works at 1350 E Keating Ave, Monday – Friday from 8:00 am. Until
4:300 p.m. excluding holidays.
Block Parties. The City has a separate Block Party Policy and Application. Contact the Department of
Public Works at specialevents@shorelinecity.com or 231-724-6907 for further information about block
parties.
4th of July weekend. Margaret Drake Elliott Park is not available for special events on the 4th of July,
-1-
including the entire weekend if July 4 falls on a Friday, Saturday, or Sunday. The park is reserved for
picnicking during this holiday.
-2-
Reserving event dates for multiple years. As long as prior year event fees are paid in full, established
events may reserve their event date(s) and location for future years. A completed special event
application must be received by February 1 of each year in order to hold the date(s) and location.
II. Event Requirements
All Special Event permittees must adhere to the following rules and regulations. Failure to do
so may result in the applicant having any conditional approvals revoked, being held responsible for
any damages and/or denial of future event Applications.
(a) Public Safety Personnel. While the presence of public safety personnel
(police/fire/medical) may not be required at all special events, it shall be the discretion of the Public
Safety Director if city police and/or fire officials may be required. The applicant/organization will be
responsible for payment of public safety personnel services. See Fee Schedule (Section IV) for fee
estimates. If an event is cancelled with less than 72 hours’ notice, the applicant/organization will be
responsible for paying two hours’ pay per officer, per union contract requirements. Applicants are not
allowed to provide their own public safety staff (police/fire/medical) without prior approval of the City of
Muskegon’s Public Safety Director.
(b) Liability Insurance. The applicant must provide proof of liability insurance in the amount
of $1,000,000 naming the City of Muskegon as an additional insured. You may use an insurance agent
of your choice. An acceptable certificate of insurance must be submitted no later than 10 days before
the event date. Please inform your insurance agent that the wording on the certificate must read:
“The City of Muskegon, all elected and appointed officials, all employees and volunteers, all boards,
commissions and/or authorities and board members, including employees and volunteers thereof; it
is understood and agreed that by naming the City of Muskegon as additional insured, coverage
afforded is considered to be primary and any other insurance the City of Muskegon may have in
effect shall be considered secondary and/or excess.”
(c) Restroom Facilities. All outdoor events shall provide adequate restroom facilities (i.e.
portable toilets) including handicapped-accessible facilities per ADA requirements. Restroom
placement shall not impede sidewalk traffic.
(d) Digging & Staking. Digging or staking at into paved areas, including roadways, sidewalks,
and public parking areas, is not permitted. Digging or staking into non-paved ground shall be cleared
through Miss Dig in order to avoid damage to underground utilities. The Applicant Organization is
responsible for contacting Miss Dig (1-800-482-7171, or dial 811) a minimum of 5 working days prior to
event set-up. The applicant will also be responsible for paying an electrician to locate underground utility
lines and a City employee to location irrigation/water lines, if required. A penalty of $100 will be charged
for an unapproved staking and the Applicant Organization will be responsible for the cost of any
damages to underground utilities, including irrigation lines, caused by digging or staking.
(e) Electrical and Water Hook-up The applicant must adapt to electrical power available on-
site, or provide their own generator. When using City electrical panels, the applicant shall read the meter
before and after the event, and report those numbers to the City’s special event coordinator upon
request. City fire hydrants may be used as a water source for a fee (see Fee Schedule - Section IV) for
cost. It is the responsibility of the applicant to provide acceptable hoses for potable water usage, which
meet Health Department requirements.
(f) Inspections. The event location is subject to all building, plumbing, mechanical, electrical,
and fire codes. It is the permittee’s responsibility to schedule an inspection by any and all required
inspectors and pay the required inspection fee(s). The City’s building inspection department
(SAFEbuilt), requires an inspection of assembly tents that are 400 sq ft or greater. See Fee Schedule
(Section IV) for costs. For events having multiple tents, contact the City’s Building Official for inspection
fees.
-3-
(g) Food trucks. Any food trucks or vendors using deep fryers and/or propane cylinders must
be inspected and approved by the Fire Marshal prior to participation in a special event. These vendors
are required to have no less than a 5 lbs ABC-type fire extinguisher which has a current inspection tag
and a class K type fire extinguisher for any deep-frying equipment wherein oils and/or grease is used
as a medium. Contact the Fire Marshall for an inspection at (231) 724-6793.
(h) Camping/Campgrounds. Approval must be given by the City Commission to have camping
at your event at least 60 days before the event. The Department of Public Works will submit the request
to the City Commission. Events that include overnight camping or a campground area also require a
permit from the Muskegon County Health Department and Department of Environment, Great Lakes
and Energy. To obtain information about this permit, call (231) 724-6208. A copy of an approved permit
must be provided to the City.
(i) Event Set-up and Tear-down. For events utilizing any public roadway, no tents, booths,
vendors, or equipment shall be set up in the roadway prior to 6:00 p.m. the day before the event. All
signs, tents, booths, vendors, and equipment must be removed from the roadway prior to 6:00 a.m. the
day after the event.
(j) Site Clean-up and Trash Disposal. The Applicant shall be responsible for clean-up of City
facilities after the event. This includes the removal of trash from the site (do not leave full trash cans on
site). Applicants shall provide their own Dumpster. The City shall have the right to enforce cleanup
measures, including but not limited to entry and cleaning of property by City personnel with costs
charged to the owner, occupant, or applicant. City staff may require a walk-through after the event to
ensure satisfactory clean-up.
(k) Merchandise Sales. Sales of all merchandise for Special Events must be out of the public
right-of-way, unless prior authorization is received.
(l) Events Using Water. Events utilizing a body of water such as Muskegon Lake and/or Lake
Michigan require Coast Guard (414-747-7100) and/or Department of Natural Resources (269-685-
6851) special event approval.
(m) Pyrotechnics. Events utilizing any kind of pyrotechnics must contact the Fire Marshal (231-
724-6793) and must also obtain the appropriate permits from the City Clerk’s Office (231-724-6705).
(n) Compliance with all regulations. Special Event applicants/organizations are responsible
to ensure that all applicable laws and ordinances are followed. Failure to comply with all city ordinances,
rules and regulations may result in the denial of future special event requests.
III. Special Event Application Processing
(a) Application Intake. Department of Public Works Office staff shall be responsible for intake
of Special Event Applications and dissemination to appropriate City staff for review and approval. The
Application fee must be submitted with the Application. Liquor license Applications shall be filed with
the Public Safety Director.
(b) Event Approval. The City will issue a conditional approval or denial no later than 30 days
after the Application date whenever possible. Preliminary approval may be given to allow the applicant
to advertise the event, with final details to be worked out with staff. An approval letter will be issued,
listing conditions of approval.
(c) Application Denial. If City staff reviews an Application and denies same, it shall be stated
in writing the reasons for the denial. An appeal of that decision may be made to the City Commission,
whose decision shall be final.
(d) Unpaid Invoices Due the City. Any past due fees/invoices owed to the City will result in
denial of the event Application and/or future Special Event requests until paid in full.
-4-
(e) Meetings with Staff. City staff will meet with applicants to discuss event details if needed.
Contact the City’s special event coordinator in the Department of Public Works to request a meeting.
There may also be instances when City staff may require a meeting with the applicant. Failure to attend
a requested meeting may result in denial of the Application.
(f) Street Closures/Barricading. Requests for City road closings/barricading require approval
of the Public Safety Director and the DPW Superintendent. DPW Office staff will forward requests to the
appropriate personnel once the Application and fee are submitted. The applicant is responsible for all
associated costs, which may include barricades, public safety services, etc. There is an additional $50
fee for each block closed beyond 2 blocks. City Commission approval may be required in some cases.
If a street closure is approved for an event, the Applicant must provide written notification to all
businesses and residences located along the affected street(s) at least 10 days prior to the event date.
Changes to street closures requested within 30 days of the event date will incur a $50 fee. No route
and/or road closure changes will be allowed within 14 days of an event.
(f)(1) Time Restrictions Streets shall not be closed prior to 6:00 p.m. the day before the event
and must be open by 6:00 a.m. the day following the conclusion of the event.
(f)(2) Parking along event routes. The applicant shall be responsible for posting “No Parking”
signs along the closed streets of an event route at least 48 hours in advance of the event date.
The City’s Department of Public Works may have No Parking signs available for use. However,
the applicant/organization must attach 5 ½” by 8 ½” addendums to the signs noting the name of
the event and date and time the parking restrictions will be in effect.
(g) Runs/Walks. For races, runs, walks, or parades, the applicant must submit a map with the
Application, showing the proposed route. In addition, if any streets will be closed or partially closed, the
applicant must provide written notification to all residents and businesses along the route as stated
above in paragraphs (f) and (f)(1). The City’s special event coordinator can provide the names and
addresses of affected homes and businesses to be notified. The applicant is responsible for any public
safety and/or DPW costs for street closures (barricades, police presence at intersections if needed, etc).
(g)(1) Use of Lakeshore Trail bike path. For events utilizing the Lakeshore Trail bike path,
there is a trail use fee that will be billed upon completion of the event (see Fee Schedule) to
help cover trail maintenance expenses. In addition, any events using the path must post
signage at trail entry points on the day of the event, notifying users that there is an event
occurring on the trail. Signs may be generic, such as “EVENT ON BIKE PATH TODAY”
(organizations using the path for events may share signs to reduce costs). The City’s Parks
Supervisor can assist you in locating sign placement locations.
(h) Site Plan. The City may require submittal of a site plan showing the event grounds and
the location of tents, vendors, portable toilets, and other structures.
-5-
IV. Special Event Fee Schedule (Use of City Equipment, Labor Charges, Liquor Licenses,
Inspections, Park use fees)
ITEM / SERVICE RENTAL FEE (plus labor if necessary)
55-gallon metal trash can $5.00 each
Plastic trash bags (1 case) $40.00 per case or actual cost
Snow fence – 50 ft per roll Standard Traffic Cone $30.00 per roll $1.00 each
Fence posts – 1 needed for every 10 ft Tall “Grab” $3.00 per post $3.00 each
Cone
Picnic tables $10.00 each
Fire hydrant use (installation & removal of
$100.00 flat rate per hydrant
hydrant tree, water testing, and water usage)
DPW/Parks personnel labor costs $60.00/hour
(Transportation of Barricades/Cones/tables, etc) Truck/ trailer rental may also be charged
PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES / FEES
NOTE: Liquor License fees are lowest when applied for at least 45 days in advance of the event date.
Liquor licenses will not be issued within 15 days of an event.
Special liquor license (non-profit)/New event $150.00 (if applied for at least 45 days in advance of event)
Special liquor license (non-profit)/Return event
$125.00 (if applied for at least 45 days in advance of event)
Organization located outside City of Muskegon
Special liquor license/Return event, in-City rate $ 75.00 (if applied for at least 45 days in advance of event)
Special liquor license (all) within 15-44 days of
$250.00
event
Liquor license/Temporary authorization –
$40.00 ($60 if within 15-44 days of event)
existing business/club
Public safety labor charges (police/fire/medical) $60.00 per hour (time and ½)
Public safety labor charges (police/fire/medical) $120.00 per hour (triple time/holidays)
INSPECTIONS
Inspection of assembly tent $50.00 (if multiple tents, contact building official for fees)
Contact the building inspection department to see if
Electrical or plumbing inspections
these are required
Fire Department inspection of food trucks Included with application fee
PARK USE FEES
Hackley Park exclusive use fee with Liquor License $100/hour or $500/day
Hackley Park use fee per quadrant $50/day per quadrant
Harbour Towne Beach user fee $1500.00 per event
Trail bicycle/walking paths $200 per event
Pere Marquette Park user fees (applicable May 15 through September 15)
Events less than 100 people $100 per event (includes 1 parking pass)
Events with 100 - 250 people $200 per event (includes 2 parking passes)
Events with 250 – 500 people $350 per event (includes 5 parking passes)
Events with 500 - 2000 people $500 per event (includes 10 parking passes)
Events over 2000 people $1500.00 per event (includes 20 reserved parking spaces
and 20 parking passes)
Parking spaces for event use $10 per parking space reserved per day and each vehicle
must have Beach Parking pass
Exclusive use fee of Ovals parking lot area $250 per day and each vehicle must have Beach Parking
pass
Camping at Pere Marquette Park $20 per night per camper or tent*
*The City Commission may opt to collect a percentage of
camping revenue for larger events in lieu of the $20 per unit
Route changes for parades, races/walks or any event requiring street closures - Any changes made within 30 days of
-6-
the event date will incur a $50 fee. No road closure changes are allowed with 14 days of an event.
-7-
Agenda Item Review Form
Muskegon City Commission
Commission Meeting Date: October 25th, 2022 Title: CWSRF & DWRF FY23
Engineering Assistance
Submitted By: Leo Evans Department of Public Works
Brief Summary:
Staff is requesting authorization to approve the Professional Services Agreement and a Contract
Amendment with Prein & Newhof related to water and sewer engineering services on a variety of
projects.
Detailed Summary & Background:
Staff has been working to pursue multiple water/sewer projects as a part of the State of Michigan
Revolving Loan programs (DWRF / SRF) during the State 2023 Fiscal Year. The projects included for
engineering within the new Professional Services Agreement are as follows and would be constructed
during 2024.
Glenside Phase 2 & 3
The first phase of this project was completed in 2020 and included work on Westwood Street. Phase 2
is focused on Hadden Street and was designed last year though the project was shelved before being
moved into construction. Phase 3 includes the remainder of the southwest portion of the Glenside
neighborhood. These projects are geared towards eliminating water/sewer utilities that are located in
non-existent alleys that are inaccessible for maintenance. These projects require a meeting with the
neighborhood to review options to fund the ineligible portions of the project which will be scheduled
later this fall or early this winter. If an amicable solution cannot be found for addressing the ineligible
pieces these projects will likely be shelved and not pursued in earnest.
Wilcox and Thompson Avenues
This project is focused on repairing two of the major sewer lines in the Bluffton area that contributed
largely towards the inflow and infiltration that our sewer system saw in 2019-2020. The work will also
replace the water lines within the roadways and see roadway reconstruction on both streets.
Morton Avenue
This project is targeted towards a water reliability issue in the Lakeside neighborhood and seeks to
improve flows in the impacted portion of the neighborhood by improving the connection between the
larger water mains in Lincoln Street and Denmark Street. The project will also address one section of
sewer that has shown signs of failure between Meuer Court and Leon Street.
Harbour Towne and Edgwater Lift Stations
These projects will be targeted towards rehabilitation and system upgrades for the existing lift stations
which are nearing end of life.
Lead Service Lines
This project will seek to contract the replacement of around 500 lead service lines in the city. A
targeted area has not yet been identified, but will be advised by the work that is currently underway to
verify and catalogue our existing service line materials throughout the city.
The project included in the amendment is a reduction to a previously approved professional services
agreement (9/14/2021) to eliminate the remaining funds in that approval which were dedicated towards
the completion of Glenside Phase 2 (Hadden Street) as those costs are now being shifted to the new
Professional Services Agreement and are incorporated above.
Portions of the engineering work required for these projects are included in the 22/23 budget and
should they all move forward the projects will continue to have allocations included in the 23/24 and
24/25 fiscal years. The projects represent an approximately $16M Investment of which the state is
prepared to award a combination of grants and principal forgiveness of around $10M, leaving
approximately $1M in cash costs due during construction (Glenside) and around $5M to be financed
through the DWRF/CWSRF loan programs for 20 years at a 1.875% interest rate. These projects are
situated to be large benefactors of the Federal/State infrastructure dollars that were allocated under
the IIJA (Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act).
Staff has reviewed the proposal from Prein and Newhof and feels they are the best suited firm to
handle these projects based on their past experience. A qualifications for bid process was used in
2019 that shortlisted Prein & Newhof along with two other firms to provide engineering services for
these projects for the next 5-years.
Goal/Focus Area/Action Item Addressed:
Financial Infrastructure / Identify specific major capital projects across all departments
Amount Requested: $1,319,600 (TOTAL) Amount Budgeted: $500,000 (22/23)
$423,600 (23/24 – Prelim + Design + Bidding)
$448,000 (24/25 – ½ Construction Eng.)
$448,000 (25/26 – ½ Construction Eng.)
Fund(s) or Account(s): Fund(s) or Account(s):
590/591-UNASSIGNED 590/591-UNASSIGNED
Recommended Motion:
Authorize staff to sign the professional services agreement and the professional services
agreement amendment with Prein & Newhof to provide comprehensive engineering services for
the cities fiscal year 2024 DWRF and CWSRF projects and modify the previously approved
professional services agreement.
Approvals: Guest(s) Invited / Presenting
Immediate Division Head Information Technology
Yes
Other Division Heads Communication
No
Legal Review
For City Clerk Use Only:
Commission Action:
September 23, 2022
Mr. Leo Evans, P.E.
City of Muskegon
Department of Public Works
1350 Keating Avenue
Muskegon, MI 49442
Re: Proposal for Professional Engineering Services for FY 23 SRF/DWRF Implementation
Dear Mr. Evans:
We appreciate this opportunity to provide a proposal for professional engineering services to assist
you with your SRF/DWRF projects for Fiscal Year 2023. This is a continuation of services for
projects outlined in your 2021 Project Plans for Water and Wastewater system improvements.
The specific projects covered under this proposal include the following:
• Glenside Phase II – Hadden Street (Design is Complete)
• Glenside Phase III – Winchester Drive and Montague Avenue west of Wickham
• Morton Avenue – Lincoln to Denmark
• Wilcox and Thompson Avenues – Plum to Edgewater including Edgewater, Cherry, and
Walnut Streets
• Harbor Towne and Edgewater Lift Station Rehabilitations
We have reviewed the projects and have developed the following scope of services based on the
project descriptions in the SRF and DWRF Project Plans. We assume that the City will follow the 4th
quarter funding schedule, which requires project documents to be completed and ready for bidding
by spring 2023, and construction will occur through the 2024 construction season.
Design and Bidding Phase
• Gather and review record plans, private utility information and any available records
pertinent to the proposed project areas;
• Complete topographic survey of all projects;
• Complete approximately one soil boring per 500 feet of project length;
• Complete design of proposed sanitary sewer, water main, service laterals, water services and
road reconstruction as detailed in the SRF and DWRF Project Plans;
• Assist City in tracking and developing easement documents for replacement of water services
on private property;
• Assist City in locating and communicating with residents to determine locations of laterals in
the Glenside Phase III project limit;
• Review limits of Glenside Phase II in relation to Glenside Phase III and make adjustments as
necessary to provide a constructible project to fit in the construction season;
• Attend three design review meetings;
• Prepare and submit permit applications (City to pay any permit fees);
4910 Stariha Drive Muskegon, MI 49441 t. 231-798-0101 f. 231-798-0337 www.preinnewhof.com
R:\PRP - Proposal Preparation\City of Muskegon\2022-09 2023 SRF DWRF\prp 2022-09-23 Evans.doc
Mr. Leo Evans
September 23, 2022
Page 2
• Prepare opinion of probable cost based on final design;
• Prepare Alternative Justifiable Expense (AJE);
• Prepare project specifications including specific SRF/DWRF requirements;
• Assist City with preparation of bidding packages (assumes 5 contracts) and contract
documents;
• Assist City with advertising for bids, providing responses to questions, preparing addendums;
• Attend pre-bid meeting and prepare minutes;
• Review bids, prepare bid tabulations, and provide recommendations;
• Assist City with Parts I, II, and III SRF and DWRF forms and administration;
• Prepare Notice of Award and Notice to Proceed; and
• Assist City with preparation of final contracts for signing by Contractor
Construction Phase
• Schedule and attend preconstruction meetings and prepare minutes;
• Track and review shop drawings;
• Provide construction staking;
• Provide testing (soil density, gravel, asphalt, and concrete, etc.);
• Provide construction observation for all utility work and reconstruction of Hadden Street
assuming 21 weeks of construction, this will require two Construction Observers at certain
times (1,230 hours);
• Provide construction observation for all utility work and reconstruction of Glenside Phase III
assuming 24 weeks of construction, this will require two Construction Observers at certain
times (1,505 hours);
• Provide construction observation for all utility work and reconstruction of Morton Avenue
assuming 14 weeks of construction, (730 hours);
• Provide construction observation for all utility work and reconstruction of Thompson and
Wilcox assuming 18 weeks of construction, this will require two Construction Observers at
certain times (930 hours);
• Provide as needed construction observation and attendance at start-up for Edgewater and
Harbor Towne Lift Stations.
• Schedule and attend monthly progress meetings for each contract as needed, and prepare
minutes for each;
• Respond to RFIs, prepare payment applications and change orders;
• Assist with SRF/DWRF administration;
• Prepare punch lists and close out documents; and
• Complete record plans and property iron replacement following completion.
Fee
Based on the scope of work described above, we propose to complete the work for a not to exceed cost of
$1,319,600. Our estimated time/work level of effort is attached. Our hourly rates are adjusted each
January. Given the current labor and inflation climate, we have included an increase of 8% in hourly
rates in 2023 and 2024.
R:\PRP - Proposal Preparation\City of Muskegon\2022-09 2023 SRF DWRF\prp 2022-09-23 Evans.doc
Mr. Leo Evans
September 23, 2022
Page 3
Please note that there are still some uncertainties in the projects that may not have been
accounted for. Once the construction contracts are awarded and construction schedules are
provided, we will review the hours allocated for the construction phase services with you to
determine whether adjustments need to be made.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide this proposal. Please contact us if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Prein&Newhof
Barbara E. Marczak, P.E. Jason Washler, P.E.
Enclosures: Estimated work effort/fee, Professional Services Agreement
R:\PRP - Proposal Preparation\City of Muskegon\2022-09 2023 SRF DWRF\prp 2022-09-23 Evans.doc
Professional Hours Worksheet
City of Muskegon - SRF/DWRF 2023
Sen. PM Sen. PM Sen. PM PM Sen Eng II Eng. CADD/GIS Sen. Observer Observer Eng II Survey Office Tech Expense
Staff Member Mileage Total Cost
Marczak Staff VerHuel Hulst DeNooyer Staff Staff TBD TBD Assink Staff Van Kuik Item Cost
Preliminary Design
Kickoff Meeting 4 4 4 6 35 $2,400
Preliminary Engineering 4 5 5 20 $4,200
Meeting with Stakeholders for Glenside 3 20 3 35 $3,700
Soil Borings (Glenside III) 2 1 $5,800 $6,900
Soil Borings (Morton) 2 1 $5,300 $6,300
Soil Borings (Wilcox) 2 1 $5,550 $6,600
Topo Survey and Aerial Mapping (Glenside III) 1 114 Mapping $6,310 $28,100
Topo Survey (Morton) 1 90 $16,700
Topo Survey (Wilcox) 1 85 $15,800
Topo Survey (Harbor and Edgewater LS) 1 22 $4,200
Glenside III Sanitary Lateral Survey 12 100 $14,900
QA/QC 4 4 2 2 $1,800
Review Meeting 4 4 4 35 $1,700
Preliminary Subtotals 19 6 4 54 114 30 0 0 0 0 311 0 $22,960 105 $113,300
Design Glenside II
Hadden Design 2 4 10 20 $5,000
SESC Permit Application 1 2 4 Printing $600 $1,400
EGLE Sewer Permit Application 1 $100
EGLE Water Permit Applications - Received $0
Specifications for Hadden 2 1 $400
Cost Estimate 1 1 2 10 $1,600
QA/QC 1 1 1 $400
Design Glenside III
Easements water services and sanitary laterals 1 20 $2,800
Glenside III Design 4 20 144 283 $62,400
Glenside Staging, Phasing Design 2 2 $500
SESC Permit Application 1 2 4 Printing $600 $1,400
EGLE Sewer Permit Application 1 2 $400
EGLE Water Permit Application 1 2 5 Printing $600 $1,500
Specifications for Phase III 2 5 15 10 15 $3,500
Meeting w/ Client (1) 2 2 2 35 $900
Cost Estimate 1 2 5 15 $2,700
QA/QC 10 5 10 5 4 5 $5,700
2022 Rates Inflation $6,500
Page 1 of 4
Professional Hours Worksheet
City of Muskegon - SRF/DWRF 2023
Sen. PM Sen. PM Sen. PM PM Sen Eng II Eng. CADD/GIS Sen. Observer Observer Eng II Survey Office Tech Expense
Staff Member Mileage Total Cost
Marczak Staff VerHuel Hulst DeNooyer Staff Staff TBD TBD Assink Staff Van Kuik Item Cost
Design Morton
Easements water services 1 5 $700
Morton Design 4 20 10 80 150 $34,500
Morton Staging, Phasing, MOT Design 1 1 $200
SESC Permit Application 1 2 4 Printing $600 $1,400
EGLE Sewer Permit Application 1 2 $400
EGLE Water Permit Application 1 2 5 Printing $600 $1,500
Specifications for Morton 5 20 10 $3,700
Meeting w/ Client (1) 2 2 2 35 $900
Cost Estimate 1 5 15 $2,500
QA/QC 20 5 5 5 5 $6,100
2022 Rates Inflation $4,200
Design Thompson
Easements water services 1 10 $1,200
Thompson Design 4 20 5 210 274 $65,300
Thompson Staging, Phasing, MOT Design 5 5 $1,200
SESC Permit Application 1 2 4 Printing $600 $1,400
EGLE Sewer Permit Application 1 2 $400
EGLE Water Permit Application 1 2 10 Printing $600 $1,900
Specifications for Thompson 5 20 20 $4,600
Meeting w/ Client (1) 2 2 2 35 $900
Cost Estimate 1 5 15 $2,500
QA/QC 20 5 10 5 4 5 $7,400
2022 Rates Inflation $6,900
Design Lift Station
Lift Station Design 12 7 58 36 10 Century $10,400 235 $26,600
2022 Rates Inflation $2,100
Design Subtotals 74 15 12 152 221 504 772 15 0 0 0 86 $14,600 355 $275,700
Bid Phase
Advertise and Issue Bid Package 5 2 4 15 30 $5,900
Bidder Questions 5 20 5 $4,300
Pre-bid Meeting 8 10 20 $2,800
Addenda 20 2 15 5 $5,100
Attend Bid 2 20 $300
Review Bids/Recommend Award 1 15 5 15 8 $5,300
Prepare Contracts-SRF/DWRF admin. 30 1 10 15 Printing $600.00 $8,300
2022 Rates Inflation $2,600
Bid Phase Subtotals 39 0 10 70 16 55 0 0 0 0 0 58 $600 40 $34,600
Page 2 of 4
Professional Hours Worksheet
City of Muskegon - SRF/DWRF 2023
Sen. PM Sen. PM Sen. PM PM Sen Eng II Eng. CADD/GIS Sen. Observer Observer Eng II Survey Office Tech Expense
Staff Member Mileage Total Cost
Marczak Staff VerHuel Hulst DeNooyer Staff Staff TBD TBD Assink Staff Van Kuik Item Cost
Construction Engineering Services
Hadden
Preconstruction Meeting and Minutes 2 2 4 20 $1,200
Preconstruction Video (2 hours ) 2 20 $200
Construction Staking Hadden 190 $35,000
Hadden CO (21 weeks, 110 days) 800 410 Misc. Test. $5,000 1,100 $132,000
Project Administration 10 42 115 $22,800
Respond to RFIs 5 10 $2,000
Change Orders (3 per contract) 6 30 $4,800
Pay Apps (5) 5 20 $3,300
Progress Meetings (monthly per contract) 4 8 8 30 $2,900
Punch List Visits (2) 6 20 10 30 $4,500
Record Plans/Closeout 2 20 40 10 $9,500
Iron Replacement (Included in survey) $0
2022 Rates Inflation $36,300
Glenside III
Preconstruction Meeting and Minutes 2 2 4 20 $1,200
Preconstruction Video (2 hours ) 2 20 $200
Construction Staking Glenside III 194 $35,700
Glenside III CO (24 weeks, 135 days) 1485 Misc. Test. $5,000 1,350 $151,900
Project Administration 10 48 120 $24,300
Respond to RFIs 5 10 $2,000
Change Orders (3 per contract) 6 30 $4,800
Pay Apps (6) 6 24 $4,000
Progress Meetings (monthly per contract) 4 10 10 30 $3,400
Punch List Visits (2) 6 20 10 30 $4,500
Record Plans/Closeout 2 20 40 10 $9,500
Iron Replacement (Included in survey) $0
2022 Rates Inflation $40,200
Morton
Preconstruction Meeting and Minutes 2 2 4 20 $1,100
Preconstruction Video (2 hours ) 2 70 $200
Construction Staking Morton 128 $23,600
Morton CO (14 weeks, 72 days) 720 Misc. Test. $4,000 720 $81,900
Project Administration 10 28 40 $9,900
Respond to RFIs 5 10 $1,800
Change Orders (3 per contract) 3 6 $1,100
Pay Apps (4) 4 20 $2,700
Progress Meetings (monthly per contract) 3 6 6 100 $2,100
Punch List Visits (3) 4 10 10 72 $2,700
Record Plans/Closeout 2 10 24 $4,700
Iron Replacement (Included in survey) 4 $600
2022 Rates Inflation $22,000
Page 3 of 4
Professional Hours Worksheet
City of Muskegon - SRF/DWRF 2023
Sen. PM Sen. PM Sen. PM PM Sen Eng II Eng. CADD/GIS Sen. Observer Observer Eng II Survey Office Tech Expense
Staff Member Mileage Total Cost
Marczak Staff VerHuel Hulst DeNooyer Staff Staff TBD TBD Assink Staff Van Kuik Item Cost
Thompson
Preconstruction Meeting and Minutes 2 2 6 20 $1,300
Preconstruction Video (2 hours ) 2 70 $200
Construction Staking Thompson 127 $23,400
Thompson CO (18 weeks, 92 days) 15 920 Misc. Test. $4,000 920 $96,800
Project Administration 10 40 60 $13,700
Respond to RFIs 5 10 $1,800
Change Orders (3 per contract) 3 6 $1,100
Pay Apps (4) 4 20 $2,700
Progress Meetings (monthly per contract) 8 8 8 100 $3,400
Punch List Visits (3) 10 10 10 72 $3,500
Record Plans/Closeout 5 10 32 20 $8,200
Iron Replacement (Included in survey) 4 $600
2022 Rates Inflation $26,100
Harbor Towne Edgewater LS
Preconstruction Meeting and Minutes 4 4 24 $1,000
Project Administration Assistance (assuming 8 weeks) 4 8 8 8 2 $4,100
Respond to RFIs/Bulletin Prep. 4 $500
Pay Applications (two applications) 4 $500
Shop Drawing Review (6 items) 2 8 $1,200
Observation Checks 4 40 188 $5,400
Electrical (Century A&E) $3,700.00 $4,100
System Start-up 1 12 47 $1,600
Operation & Maintenance Manuals 2 $200
Record Plan/Closeout Documentation 4 2 $800
2022 Rates Inflation $3,200
Construction Engineering Subtotals 71 0 15 304 465 251 148 1520 2903 84 639 2 $5,000 1,200 $896,000
Project Grand Total 164 21 41 580 816 840 920 1,535 2,903 84 950 146 $43,160 1,700 $1,319,600
Page 4 of 4
Laketon
Township
J:\GIS_Client\Mskgn-GD\Mskgn-GD\2221072_SRF-DWRF FY23 Projects\2221072_Project Area Map.mxd - PN\EJD - 10/11/2022 4:04:08 PM
Muskegon Lake
BE
AC
H
ST
EDGEWATER & HARBOR TOWNE LIFT STATIONS
RE
T
E
RD
#
*
E
AV
Y
ER
M
O
#
*
G
NT
WILCOX & THOMPSON AVENUE
O
M
MORTON AVENUE
M
CG
LAKESHORE DR RA GLENSIDE PHASE II
BE
F
AC
T
BARCLAY ST
HS
PA
RK
Ru
T
d
RD
dim
City of
LINCOLN ST
an
LEBOEUF ST
Cr
Muskegon ee
k
Lake Michigan GLENSIDE PHASE III
SHERMAN BLVD
City of Norton
Shores
CITY OF MUSKEGON
I
!
Feet
LEGEND
Proposed Project Areas
FY23 SRF/DWRF
MUSKEGON COUNTY, MI
PROJECT LOCATION MAP
0 1,000 2,000 4,000 OCTOBER, 2022
1 inch = 2,000 feet 2221072
Project No.
Professional Services Agreement
This Professional Services Agreement is made this 10th day of October, 2022 (“Agreement”) by
and between Prein & Newhof, Inc. (“P&N”), of 3355 Evergreen Drive, NE, Grand Rapids, MI
49525, and City of Muskegon (“Client”), of 933 Terrace Street, Muskegon, MI 49443.
WHEREAS Client intends to:
Implement FY 2023 projects defined in the City of Muskegon’s FY 2023 SRF and DWRF
Project Plans including Glenside Phase II (Hadden Street), Glenside Phase III, Morton,
Thompson/Wilcox and Edgewater/Harbor Towne Lift Station projects.
NOW THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the terms and conditions contained herein, the
parties agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1 – DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES
Client and P&N each designate the following individuals as their representatives with respect to
the Project.
For Client For P&N
Name: Leo Evans, P.E. Name: Barbara Marczak, P.E.
Title: Director of Public Works Title: Team Leader
Phone Number: 231-724-6920 Phone Number: 231-798-0101
Facsimile Number: 231-727-6904 Facsimile Number: 231-798-0337
E-Mail Address: leo.evans@shorelinecity.com E-Mail Address: bmarczak@preinnewhof.com
ARTICLE 2 – GENERAL CONDITIONS
This Agreement consists of this Professional Services Agreement and the following documents
which by this reference are incorporated into and made a part of this Agreement.
☐ P&N Standard Terms and Conditions for Professional Services
☒ P&N Proposal dated September 22, 2022
☒ P&N Standard Rate Schedule
☐ P&N Supplemental Terms and Conditions
☒ Other: P&N Modified Standard Terms and Conditions for Professional Services (Limitation
of Liability)
3355 Evergreen Drive, NE Grand Rapids, MI 49525 t.616-364-8491 f. 616-364-6955 www.preinnewhof.com
Page 1 of 2
Template date: January 15, 2016 R:\PRP - Proposal Preparation\City of Muskegon\2022-09 2023 SRF DWRF\PSA agm 2022-10-10 City of Muskegon.docx
ARTICLE 3 – ENGINEERING SERVICES PROVIDED UNDER THIS AGREEMENT:
Client hereby requests, and P&N hereby agrees to provide, the following services:
☒ P&N Scope of Services per Proposal dated September 22, 2022
☐ Scope of Services defined as follows:
NA
ARTICLE 4 – COMPENSATION:
☐ Lump Sum for Services Described in Article 3 above - $.
Additional services to be billed per P&N’s Standard Rate Schedule in effect on the date
the additional service are performed.
☐ Hourly Billing Rates plus Reimbursable Expenses per P&N’s Standard Rate Schedule in effect
on the date services are performed.
☒ Other: Hourly rates and expenses as described in September 22, 2022 proposal. Maximum
not to exceed $1,319,600.00 without City of Muskegon authorization.
ARTICLE 5 – ADDITIONAL TERMS (If any)
None
This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between P&N and Client and supersedes all prior
written or oral understandings. This Agreement may not be altered, modified or amended, except
in writing properly executed by authorized representatives of P&N and Client.
Accepted for: Accepted for:
Prein&Newhof, Inc. City of Muskegon
By: By:
Printed Name: Jason Washler, P.E. Printed Name: Leo Evans, P.E.
Title: Vice President Title: Director of Public Works
Date: October 10, 2022 Date:
Page 2 of 2
Template date: January 15, 2016 R:\PRP - Proposal Preparation\City of Muskegon\2022-09 2023 SRF DWRF\PSA agm 2022-10-10 City of Muskegon.docx
Standard Terms & Conditions
A. General - As used in this Prein&Newhof Standard Terms and Conditions for Professional Services (hereinafter “Terms and
Conditions”), unless the context otherwise indicates: the term “Agreement” means the Professional Services Agreement
inclusive of all documents incorporated by reference including but not limited to this P&N Standard Terms and Conditions
for Professional Services; the term “Engineer” refers to Prein & Newhof, Inc.; and the term “Client” refers to the other party
to the Professional Services Agreement.
These Terms and Conditions shall be governed in all respects by the laws of the United States of America and by the laws of
the State of Michigan.
B. Standard of Care - The standard of care for all professional and related services performed or furnished by Engineer under
the Agreement will be the care and skill ordinarily used by members of Engineer’s profession of ordinary learning, judgment
or skill practicing under the same or similar circumstances in the same or similar community, at the time the services are
provided.
C. Disclaimer of Warranties - Engineer makes no warranties, expressed or implied, under the Agreement or otherwise.
D. Construction/Field Observation - If Client elects to have Engineer provide construction/field observation, client
understands that construction/field observation is conducted to reduce, not eliminate the risk of problems arising during
construction, and that provision of the service does not create a warranty or guarantee of any type. In all cases, the
contractors, subcontractors, and/or any other persons performing any of the construction work, shall retain responsibility for
the quality and completeness of the construction work and for adhering to the plans, specifications and other contract
documents.
E. Construction Means and Methods - Engineer shall not have control or charge of and shall not be responsible for
construction means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, or for any safety precautions and programs in
connection with the construction work, for the acts or omissions of the Contractor, Subcontractors, or any other persons
performing any of the construction work, or for the failure of any of them to carry out the construction work in accordance
with the plans, specifications or other contract documents.
F. Opinions of Probable Costs - Client acknowledges that Engineer has no control over market or contracting conditions and
that Engineer’s opinions of costs are based on experience, judgment, and information available at a specific period of time.
Client agrees that Engineer makes no guarantees or warranties, express or implied, that costs will not vary from such
opinions.
G. Client Responsibilities
1. Client shall provide all criteria, Client Standards, and full information as to the requirements necessary for Engineer to
provide the professional services. Client shall designate in writing a person with authority to act on Client’s behalf on all
matters related to the Engineer’s services. Client shall assume all responsibility for interpretation of contract documents
and construction observation/field observation during times when Engineer has not been contracted to provide such
services and shall waive any and all claims against Engineer that may be connected thereto.
2. In the event the project site is not owned by the Client, the Client must obtain all necessary permission for Engineer to
enter and conduct investigations on the project site. It is assumed that the Client possesses all necessary permits and
licenses required for conducting the scope of services. Access negotiations may be performed at additional costs.
Engineer will take reasonable precaution to minimize damage to land and structures with field equipment. Client
assumes responsibility for all costs associated with protection and restoration of project site to conditions existing prior to
Engineer’s performance of services.
3. The Client, on behalf of all owners of the subject project site, hereby grants permission to the Engineer to utilize a small
unmanned aerial system (sUAS) for purposes of aerial mapping data acquisition. The Client is responsible to provide
required notifications to the property owners of the subject project site and affected properties where the sUAS services
will be performed. The Engineer will operate the sUAS in accordance with applicable State and Federal Laws.
H. Hazardous or Contaminated Materials/Conditions
1. Client will advise Engineer, in writing and prior to the commencement of its services, of all known or suspected
Hazardous or Contaminated Materials/Conditions present at the site.
2. Engineer and Client agree that the discovery of unknown or unconfirmed Hazardous or Contaminated
Materials/Conditions constitutes a changed condition that may require Engineer to renegotiate the scope of or terminate
its services. Engineer and Client also agree that the discovery of said Materials/Conditions may make it necessary for
Engineer to take immediate measures to protect health, safety, and welfare of those performing Engineer’s services.
Client agrees to compensate Engineer for any costs incident to the discovery of said Materials/Conditions.
3. Client acknowledges that Engineer cannot guarantee that contaminants do not exist at a project site. Similarly, a site
page 1 of 3
R:\Draft Specifications and Documents\Final P&N Agreements 2015-06-24\Standard Terms and Conditions - Public Entities.docx
(updated May 27, 2022)
which is in fact unaffected by contaminants at the time of Engineer’s surface or subsurface exploration may later, due to
natural phenomena or human intervention, become contaminated. The Client waives any claim against Engineer, and
agrees to defend, indemnify and hold Engineer harmless from any claims or liability for injury or loss in the event that
Engineer does not detect the presence of contaminants through techniques commonly employed.
4. The Client recognizes that although Engineer is required by the nature of the services to have an understanding of the
laws pertaining to environmental issues, Engineer cannot offer legal advice to the Client. Engineer urges that the Client
seek legal assistance from a qualified attorney when such assistance is required. Furthermore, the Client is cautioned to
not construe or assume that any representations made by Engineer in written or conversational settings constitute a legal
representation of environmental law or practice.
5. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing, the scope of services does not include the analysis, characterization or disposal of
wastes generated during investigation procedures. Should such wastes be generated during this investigation, the Client
will contract directly with a qualified waste hauler and disposal facility.
I. Underground Utilities – To the extent that the Engineer, in performing its services, may impact underground utilities,
Engineer shall make a reasonable effort to contact the owners of identified underground utilities that may be affected by the
services for which Engineer has been contracted, including contacting the appropriate underground utility locating entities
and reviewing utility drawings provided by others. Engineer will take reasonable precautions to avoid damage or injury to
underground utilities and other underground structures. Client agrees to hold Engineer harmless for any damages to below
ground utilities and structures not brought to Engineers attention and/or accurately shown or described on documents
provided to Engineer.
J. Insurance
1. Engineer will maintain insurance for professional liability, general liability, worker’s compensation, auto liability, and
property damage in the amounts deemed appropriate by Engineer. Client will maintain insurance for general liability,
worker’s compensation, auto liability, and property damage in the amounts deemed appropriate by Client. Upon request,
Client and Engineer shall each deliver certificates of insurance to the other evidencing their coverages.
2. Client shall require Contractors to purchase and maintain commercial general liability insurance and other insurance as
specified in project contract documents. Client shall cause Engineer, Engineer’s consultants, employees, and agents to be
listed as additional insureds with respect to any Client or Contractor insurances related to projects for which Engineer
provides services. Client agrees and must have Contractors agree to have their insurers endorse these policies to reflect
that, in the event of payment of any loss or damages, subrogation rights under these Terms and Conditions are hereby
waived by the insurer with respect to claims against Engineer.
K. Limitation of Liability - The total liability, in the aggregate, of Engineer and Engineer’s officers, directors, partners,
employees, agents, and consultants, whether jointly, severally or individually, to Client and anyone claiming by, through, or
under Client, for any and all injuries, losses, damages and expenses, whatsoever, arising out of, resulting from, or in any
way related to the Project or the Agreement, including but not limited to the performance of services under the Agreement,
from any cause or causes whatsoever, including but not limited to the negligence, professional errors or omissions, strict
liability or breach of contract or warranty, expressed or implied, of Engineer or Engineer’s officers, directors, partners,
employees, agents, consultants, or any of them, shall not exceed the amount of the compensation paid to Engineer under this
Agreement, or the sum of fifty thousand dollars and no cents ($50,000.00), whichever is less. Recoverable damages shall be
limited to those that are direct damages. Engineer shall not be responsible for or held liable for special, indirect or
consequential losses or damages, including but not limited to loss of use of equipment or facility, and loss of profits or
revenue.
Client acknowledges that Engineer is a corporation and agrees that any claim made by Client arising out of any act or
omission of any director, officer, or employee of Engineer, in the execution or performance of the Agreement, shall be made
against Engineer and not against such director, officer, or employee.
L. Documents and Data
1. All documents prepared or furnished by Engineer under the Agreement are Engineer’s instruments of service, and are
and shall remain the property of Engineer.
2. Hard copies of any documents provided by Engineer shall control over documents furnished in electronic format. Client
recognizes that data provided in electronic format can be corrupted or modified by the Client or others, unintentionally or
otherwise. Consequently, the use of any data, conclusions or information obtained or derived from electronic media
provided by Engineer will be at the Client’s sole risk and without any liability, risk or legal exposure to Engineer, its
employees, officers or consultants.
3. Any extrapolations, conclusions or assumptions derived by the Client or others from the data provided to the Client,
either in hard copy or electronic format, will be at the Client’s sole risk and full legal responsibility.
page 2 of 3
R:\Draft Specifications and Documents\Final P&N Agreements 2015-06-24\Standard Terms and Conditions - Public Entities.docx
(updated May 27, 2022)
M. Differing Site Conditions - Client recognizes that actual site conditions may vary from the assumed site conditions or test
locations used by Engineer as the basis of its design. Consequently, Engineer does not guarantee or warrant that actual site
conditions will not vary from those used as the basis of Engineer’s design, interpretations and recommendations. Engineer is
not responsible for any costs or delays attributable to differing site conditions. .
N. Terms of Payment - Unless alternate terms are included in the Agreement, Client will be invoiced on a monthly basis until
the completion of the Project. All monthly invoices are payable within 30 days of the date of the invoice. Should full
payment of any invoice not be received within 30 days, the amount due shall bear a service charge of 1.5 percent per month
or 18 percent per year plus the cost of collection, including reasonable attorney’s fees. If Client has any objections to any
invoice submitted by Engineer, Client must so advise Engineer in writing within fourteen (14) days of receipt of the invoice.
Unless otherwise agreed, Engineer shall invoice Client based on hourly billing rates and direct costs current at the time of
service performance. Outside costs such as, but not limited to, equipment, meals, lodging, fees, and subconsultants shall be
actual costs plus 10 percent. In addition to any other remedies Engineer may have, Engineer shall have the absolute right to
cease performing any services in the event payment has not been made on a current basis.
O. Termination - Either party may terminate services, either in part or in whole, by providing 10 calendar days written notice
thereof to the other party. In such an event, Client shall pay Engineer for all services performed prior to receipt of such
notice of termination, including reimbursable expenses, and for any shut–down costs incurred. Shut–down costs may, at
Engineer’s discretion, include expenses incurred for completion of analysis and records necessary to document Engineer’s
files and to protect its professional reputation.
P. Severability and Waiver of Provisions - Any provision or part of the Agreement held to be void or unenforceable under
any laws or regulations shall be deemed stricken, and all remaining provisions shall continue to be valid and binding upon
Client and P&N, who agree that the Agreement shall be reformed to replace such stricken provision or part thereof with a
valid and enforceable provision that comes as close as possible to expressing the intention of the stricken provision. Non-
enforcement of any provision by either party shall not constitute a waiver of that provision, nor shall it affect the
enforceability of that provision or of the remainder of the Agreement.
Q. Dispute Resolution - If a dispute arises between the parties relating to the Agreement, the parties agree to use the following
procedure prior to either party pursuing other available remedies:
1. Prior to commencing a lawsuit, the parties must attempt mediation to resolve any dispute. The parties will jointly appoint
a mutually acceptable person not affiliated with either of the parties to act as mediator. If the parties are unable to agree
on the mediator within twenty (20) calendar days, they shall seek assistance in such regard from the Circuit Court of the
State and County wherein the Project is located, who shall appoint a mediator. Each party shall be responsible for paying
all costs and expenses incurred by it, but shall split equally the fees and expenses of the mediator. The mediation shall
proceed in accordance with the procedures established by the mediator.
2. The parties shall pursue mediation in good faith and in a timely manner. In the event the mediation does not result in
resolution of the dispute within thirty (30) calendar days, then, upon seven (7) calendar days’ written notice to the other
party, either party may pursue any other available remedy.
3. In the event of any litigation arising from the Agreement, including without limitation any action to enforce or interpret
any terms or conditions or performance of services under the Agreement, Engineer and Client agree that such action will
be brought in the District or Circuit Court for the County of Kent, State of Michigan (or, if the federal courts have
exclusive jurisdiction over the subject matter of the dispute, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
Michigan), and the parties hereby submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of said court.
R. Force Majeure - Engineer shall not be liable for any loss or damage due to failure or delay in rendering any services called
for under the Agreement resulting from any cause beyond Engineer’s reasonable control.
S. Assignment - Neither party shall assign its rights, interests or obligations under this Agreement without the express written
consent of the other party.
T. Modification - The Agreement may not be modified except in writing signed by the party against whom a modification is
sought to be enforced.
U. Survival - All express representations, indemnifications, or limitations of liability included in the Agreement shall survive
its completion or termination for any reason.
V. Third-Party Beneficiary - Client and Engineer agree that it is not intended that any provision of this Agreement establishes
a third-party beneficiary giving or allowing any claim or right of action whatsoever by a third party.
W. Fee Escalation - Proposed fees include a three percent (3%) per year cost of living adjustment. Should CPI increase by
more than 3% in a year, Engineer reserves the right to adjust fees at the beginning of the following year by the amount of
the prior year CPI increase.
page 3 of 3
R:\Draft Specifications and Documents\Final P&N Agreements 2015-06-24\Standard Terms and Conditions - Public Entities.docx
(updated May 27, 2022)
Project No. 2211000
Professional Services Agreement Amendment
Amendment Number : 2
Project Name: SRF/DWRF Project – Sanford and Hadden Streets
P&N Representative: Barbara E. Marczak, P.E.
Client: City of Muskegon
Client Representative: Leo Evans, P.E.
AGREEMENT: The Agreement Amendment modifies the original agreement for professional services dated:
August 30, 2021
Client hereby requests and authorizes a change in services in accordance with the following:
SCOPE OF SERVICES MODIFICATION:
Delayed construction of Hadden Street to FY23 SRF/DWRF funding cycle. Construction phase services for Hadden
are removed from this contract.
SCHEDULE OF SERVICES MODIFICATION:
NA
BUDGET MODIFICATION:
$149,010.00 decrease. Revised budget will be $651,190.00.
METHOD OF COMPENSATION:
☐ Lump Sum for Defined Scope of Services
☒ Hourly Billing Rates plus Reimbursable Expenses
☐ Other:
ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS (IF ANY):
None.
Prepared by: Accepted for:
Prein&Newhof, Inc. City of Muskegon
By: By:
Print Name: Jason Washler, P.E. Print Name: Leo Evans, P.E.
Title: Vice President Title: Director of Public Works
Date: Date:
3355 Evergreen Drive, NE Grand Rapids, MI 49525 t.616-364-8491 f. 616-364-6955 www.preinnewhof.com
Template date: October 28, 2015 Page 1 of 1 S:\2021\2211000 City of Muskegon\PRM\PSA amendment 2 2022-09-26.docx
City of Muskegon - CWSRF/DWRF FY23 Projects
DWRF Projects
DWRF Eligible LSL included
Title Total Cost Cost Description
Glenside Neighborhood - Phase II Mod $3,270,000 $1,078,000 $758,000 Flipping water/sewer from alley service to street service
Glenside Neighborhood - Phase III Mod $3,869,000 $1,645,000 $453,000 Flipping water/sewer from alley service to street service
Wilcox Avenue and Thompson Avenue $2,384,000 $1,100,000 $506,000 Water/Sewer reconstruction on Wilcox Avenue and Thompson Avenue
Morton Avenue $1,917,000 $1,384,000 $569,000 Lincoln to Denmark Upsize and Replace water main and reconstruct street
Lead Service Lines $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 Lead Service Line Replacements
$9,207,000 $6,286,000
CWSRF Projects
Ineligible
CWSRF Eligible Private Lat.
Title Total Cost Cost Cost Description
Glenside Neighborhood - Phase II $3,270,000 $1,700,000 $492,000 Flipping water/sewer from alley service to street service
Glenside Neighborhood - Phase III Mod $3,869,000 $1,642,000 $582,000 Flipping water/sewer from alley service to street service
Morton Avenue $1,917,000 $533,000 Replace sewer from Meurer Ct. to Leon St.
Harbor Towne and Edgewater LS $500,000 $500,000 Rehabilitate lift station, new pumps, controls and station piping
Wilcox Avenue and Thompson Avenue $2,384,000 $1,284,000 Replace sewer in the area of Wilcox and Thompson Ave.
$5,659,000
Totals $15,940,000 $14,866,000
Estimated based on DRAFT PPL DWRF (75%) $6,905,250
Estimated forgiveness/grant SRF (50%) $2,829,500
Total grant/forgiveness $9,734,750
City DWRF/CWSRF loan (1.875%) $5,131,250
City funded (ineligible private laterals) $1,074,000
Agenda Item Review Form
Muskegon City Commission
Commission Meeting Date: October 25th, 2022 Title: MDOT Resolution
Submitted By: Leo Evans Department of Public Works
Brief Summary:
Staff is requesting authorization for the Clerk to sign the attached resolution for MDOT.
Detailed Summary & Background:
The city maintains an existing performance resolution with MDOT (Michigan Department of
Transportation) that is attached with all of our work that is completed under a permit for MDOT. The
original resolution was approved by the Commission and signed by the Clerk in 2017 and is attached
for reference.
MDOT has subsequently made minor revisions to the standard resolution language and is requesting
the City sign an updated copy.
Goal/Focus Area/Action Item Addressed:
N/A
Amount Requested: N/A Amount Budgeted: N/A
Fund(s) or Account(s): N/A Fund(s) or Account(s): N/A
Recommended Motion:
Authorize the Clerk to sign the attached resolution for MDOT.
Approvals: Guest(s) Invited / Presenting
Immediate Division Head Information Technology
Yes
Other Division Heads Communication
No
Legal Review
For City Clerk Use Only:
Commission Action:
Clear Form
Michigan Department
Page 1 of 2
of Transportation
2207B (05/21) PERFORMANCE RESOLUTION FOR
MUNICIPALITIES
This Performance Resolution (Resolution) is required by the Michigan Department of Transportation for
purposes of issuing to a Municipality an ''Individual Permit for Use of State Highway Right of Way'', and/or
an ''Annual Application and Permit for Miscellaneous Operations within State Highway Right of Way''.
RESOLVED WHEREAS, the
(County, City, Village, Township, etc.)
hereinafter referred to as the ''MUNICIPALITY,'' periodically applies to the Michigan Department of
Transportation, hereinafter referred to as the "DEPARTMENT," for permits, referred to as ''PERMIT,'' to
construct, operate, use and/or maintain utilities or other facilities, or to conduct other activities, on, over, and
under State Highway Right of Way at various locations within and adjacent to its corporate limits;
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the DEPARTMENT granting such PERMIT, the MUNICIPALITY
agrees that:
1. Each party to this R e s o lu t io n shall remain responsible for any claims arising out of their own acts and/or
omissions during the performance of this R e s o lu tio n , as provided by law. This R e s o l u t io n is not
intended to increase either party's liability for, or immunity from, tort claims, nor shall it be interpreted,
as giving either party hereto a right of indemnification, either by Agreement or at law, for claims arising
out of the performance of this Agreement.
2. If any of the work performed for the MUNICIPALITY is performed by a contractor, the MUNICIPALITY shall
require its contractor to hold harmless, indemnify and defend in litigation, the State of Michigan, the
DEPARTMENT and their agents and employee’s, against any claims for damages to public or private
property and for injuries to person arising out of the performance of the work, except for claims that result
from the sole negligence or willful acts of the DEPARTMENT, until the contractor achieves final acceptance
of the MUNICIPALITY Failure of the MUNICIPALITY to require its contractor to indemnify the
DEPARTMENT, as set forth above, shall be considered a breach of its duties to the DEPARTMENT.
3. Any work performed for the MUNICIPALITY by a contractor or subcontractor will be solely as a contractor
for the MUNICIPALITY and not as a contractor or agent of the DEPARTMENT. The DEPARTMENT shall
not be subject to any obligations or liabilities by vendors and contractors of the MUNICIPALITY, or their
subcontractors or any other person not a party to the PERMIT without the DEPARTMENT’S specific prior
written consent and notwithstanding the issuance of the PERMIT. Any claims by any contractor or
subcontractor will be the sole responsibility of the MUNICIPALITY.
4. The MUNICIPALITY shall take no unlawful action or conduct, which arises either directly or indirectly out
of its obligations, responsibilities, and duties under the PERMIT which results in claims being asserted
against or judgment being imposed against the State of Michigan, the Michigan Transportation Commission,
the DEPARTMENT, and all officers, agents and employees thereof and those contracting governmental
bodies performing permit activities for the DEPARTMENT and all officers, agents, and employees
thereof, pursuant to a maintenance contract. In the event that the same occurs, for the purposes of the
PERMIT, it will be considered as a breach of the PERMIT thereby giving the State of Michigan, the
DEPARTMENT, and/or the Michigan Transportation Commission a right to seek and obtain any necessary
relief or remedy, including, but not by way of limitation, a judgment for money damages.
5. The MUNICIPALITY will, by its own volition and/or request by the DEPARTMENT, promptly restore and/or
correct physical or operating damages to any State Highway R ight of Way resulting from the
installation construction, operation and/or maintenance of the MUNICIPALITY’S facilities according to a
PERMIT issued by the DEPARTMENT.
MDOT 2207B (05/21)
Page 2 of 2
6. With respect to any activities authorized by a PERMIT, when the MUNICIPALITY requires insurance on
its own or its contractor's behalf it shall also require that such policy include as named insured the State
of Michigan, the Transportation Commission, the DEPARTMENT, and all officers, agents, and employees
thereof and those governmental bodies performing permit activities for the DEPARTMENT and all
officers, agents, and employees thereof, pursuant to a maintenance contract.
7. The incorporation by the DEPARTMENT of this Resolution as part of a PERMIT does not prevent the
DEPARTMENT from requiring additional performance security or insurance before issuance of a
PERMIT.
8. This Resolution shall continue in force from this date until cancelled by the MUNICIPALITY or the
DEPARTMENT with no less than thirty (30) days prior written notice provided to the other party. It
will not be cancelled or otherwise terminated by the MUNICIPALITY with regard to any PERMIT which has
already been issued or activity which has already been undertaken.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following position(s) are authorized to apply to the DEPARTMENT for
the necessary permit to work within State Highway Right of Way on behalf of the MUNICIPALITY.
Title and/or Name:
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of a resolution adopted by
the
(Name of Board, etc.)
of the of
(Name of MUNICIPALITY) (County)
at a meeting held on the _______day
of ______________________ A.D. ________________.
Signed
Title
Print Signed Name
Agenda Item Review Form
Muskegon City Commission
Commission Meeting Date: October 25th, 2022 Title: Skate Park Request For
Qualifications
Submitted By: Leo Evans Department of Public Works
Brief Summary:
Staff is requesting authorization to accept the Skate Park proposal submitted by Grindline Skateparks,
Inc.
Detailed Summary & Background:
Staff solicited proposals for firms to assist in Phase 1 (Conceptual Design) and Phase 2 (Financing) for
the development of a new skate park in the City located primarily within Rotary Park adjacent to the
Boys and Girls Club. A copy of the request for qualifications is attached.
Five proposals were received and scored by a team of three (Matt Schwemin – City Parks Supervisor,
Steve Fink – County DPW/Facilities Engineer, and Don Steigman – Local Skate Park Advocate).
Additional seats on the review team were offered to the Boys and Girls Club and Rotary, they both
declined to participate in the selection, but wished to remain actively involved and engaged in the
development of the project. After independent scoring and rigorous group discussion Grindline
Skateparks was determined to be the firm providing the best proposal for this project. Scoresheets are
attached showing the average score for each proposal in each category. Grindline also received an
excellent reference from the City of Detroit in regards to the Riverside Skate Park built in 2019.
A copy of the proposal submitted by Grindline Skateparks is included for reference with this
commission packet.
We are roughly 2 weeks behind where we had hoped to be at this stage as it took longer than
anticipated to complete the scoring and reference checks but we should still be in a good position to
host an initial kickoff meeting in November.
Goal/Focus Area/Action Item Addressed:
Destination Community & Quality of Life / Enhanced Parks and Recreation Department and
Services
Amount Requested: $9,440 (TOTAL) Amount Budgeted: $10,000 (22/23)
Fund(s) or Account(s): 101-770 (Parks Maint) Fund(s) or Account(s): 101-770 (Parks Maint)
Recommended Motion:
Award the contract for Phase 1 and 2 services on the Skate Park Development to Grindline
Skateparks, Inc. and authorize work to commence.
Approvals: Guest(s) Invited / Presenting
Immediate Division Head Information Technology
Yes
Other Division Heads Communication
No
Legal Review
For City Clerk Use Only:
Commission Action:
Request For Proposals Scoresheet
Skatepark
Reviewed by: Matt Schwemin, Steve Fink, Don Steigman
Date: 11-Oct-22 A. B. C. D. E.
Frontier Skateparks /
Firm: Greenwald Builders MCSA / Spohn Ranch S.E.H. Carbonsix Grindline Skateparks
Location: Meadowview, VA East Grand Rapids, MI Appleton, WI / Muskegon Grand Rapids, MI Seattle, WA
Scoring Criteria Possible Points
Qualifications of Team 100 82 90 58 87 92
Understanding of Service 100 77 82 75 83 95
Priced Proposal 100 70 97 85 82 97
Total Score 300 229 269 218 252 284
Rank 4 2 5 3 1
Qualifications of Team - Highlight similar past experiences, and technical competence as it relates to the specific project details and previously completed projects. Include a summary of the items
and phases of work that would be self-performed by your firm and any items/phases that would be performed by sub-contractors. Include a brief summary with resumes of the key staff for the project,
including any key staff that work for proposed subcontractors. Qualifications of Team limited to three (3) pages of text (Not including resumes and pictures).
Understanding of Service - Include a narrative description of your plan for accomplishing the project. Provide a timeline for the project including key milestones to be met and identify dates for
completion of project deliverables. Identify critical areas of the project and your plan for addressing the critical needs. Understanding of Services limited to one (1) page of text (Not including
example pictures).
Priced Proposal - Confirm that your firm can complete Phases 1 and 2 for the identified allocation of $10,000. Cost for the remaining phases will be negotiated based on the design and cost estimates
prepared in Phase 1 and the successful identification of a funding mechanism for the project.
Request for Proposals:
Design Services for a Skatepark in
The City of Muskegon, MI.
LETTER OF INTEREST
City of Muskegon
Clerk’s Office
Skate Park
933 Terrace Street
Muskegon, MI. 49440
Design Services for a Skatepark in The City of Muskegon, MI.
Dear Mr. Evans,
Grindline Skateparks appreciates the opportunity to submit a proposal to the City of Muskegon for design services of a
skatepark located at 900 West Western Avenue Muskegon, MI 49441. Grindline was incorporated in Washington State on
April 8, 2002 and has since been evolving the art and science of skateparks with a track record of over 300 successful
Skatepark design and construction projects nationally and internationally on our resume. When it comes to skatepark
specialists, our ability to translate the needs of a community into a new landscape of skateboard terrain is unrivaled by
any other company in the world. Grindline can complete all skatepark speci�c design services including Site Analysis,
Community Outreach, Conceptual Design, Cost Estimating, an�� nal Construction Documents.
Grindline will manage this project as the Prime Design Consultant to provide a single point of contact throughout the
life of this project and we will leverage our existing relationship with ROWE Professional Services Company to provide
Civil Engineering, for the project. ROWE’s local staff has the necessary skills and quali�cations required to support and
compliment Grindline in providing a successful project for the Township. ROWE is currently working with Grindline on
similar projects in Port Huron. Pontiac, and Flint, MI.
It is our understanding that the City of Muskegon proposes to design and construct a "state of the art" park utilizing the
latest skate park design principles and construction with high quality materials to ensure durability and longevity. The
skatepark shall answer to the community and City’s needs and typically include a mix of street-scape type and transitional
style elements to accommodate primarily skateboarders, scooters, and BMX riders. It should be designed to develop and
expand a variety of experience and skills, and encourage progressive skill building at all levels. The size of the skatepark
is currently planned to be designed around approximately 10,000 square feet. The design shall not only be focused on
the functionality, but also engage with the surrounding area and blend into the area with a cohesive sense of place. We
understand that during the design phase, the Boys and Girls Club property can afford to lose no more than 8 parking
spaces, and should allow for ample room for a driveway or road to be built alongside the east side of the Boys and Girls
club building. The design should also include two sidewalks that connect from the Boys and Girls Club parking lot and the
Rotary Park. We also are aware that the pine trees on the proposed site should be preserved. There should also be a fence
and no features constructed on top of the storm water sewer outfall in the event of needed maintenance.
Within our submission, you will �nd information about our team, previous project experience, and our design methodology.
Our combination of world class skatepark design and knowledge make our team the best �t for your project. Collectively,
we are enthusiastic about this project and the prospect of developing a skatepark that will meet the needs of the City and
serve as an active recreation destination for the youth and families of the community.
As the CEO of Grindline Skateparks, I am authorized to represent the�rm in any negotiations and sign any legally binding
contracts for this project.
Sincerely,
Matt Fluegge
�����������
GRINDLINE SKATEPARKS, INC.
4619 14th Ave SW, Seattle, WA 98106 | 206.932.6414 | inform@grindline.com
1
FIRM QUALIFICATIONS
Our Company
GRINDLINE SKATEPARKS INC.
Since 2002, the Grindline team has designed, sculpted, and skated millions of tons of concrete across the United States and
around the World. Grindline has developed the full spectrum of skate terrain including street courses, bowl complexes, snake
runs, pump tracks, hobbit trails, professional training facilities, skateable sculptures and all those features yet to be named.
We translate the needs of local skaters into skatepark designs that will progress with them into the future. Our parks range in
size from the largest skatepark in North America all the way down to a single skate obstacle. Regardless of square footage,
skaters are riding our parks from dawn to dusk. We have designed and constructed over 300 skateparks to date, from Orcas
Island in Washington State to the Holy Lands of Israel, giving us an intimate understanding of building community through
skateboarding.
Grindline has extensive knowledge and experience with skatepark design and construction in climates similar to Troy. Similar
to other Grindline projects, we will implement speci�c design and construction techniques to prevent frost heaving or damage
from freeze thaw cycles such as air entrained concrete, low slump, minimal water to cement ratio in the concrete mix design
and footings placed below frost lines. We recommend the majority of concrete placement during the spring through early fall
months to avoid concrete placement in cold weather. We recommend the majority of concrete placement during the summer or
early fall months to avoid concrete placement in cold weather. If the schedule does dictate pouring concrete in winter months,
we are well versed in cold weather concreting (ACI 306.1) and follow all guidelines set forth by the American Concrete Institute,
including but not limited to, taking appropriate measures to thaw sub-grade prior to placement, hot water concrete batching,
not non- chloride accelerator, insulated concrete blankets during cure, and tenting and heating during the � nishing process.
Note - cold weather/hot weather concreting can impact costs signi� cantly, and should be a consideration when developing the
overall schedule and budget for the project.
As a contractor specializing in concrete construction, we are highly aware of the effects from the growing amount of hardscape
on the environment. On every job, Grindline incorporates green construction techniques such as:
• Recycled concrete for sub base materials
• Fly-ash in our concrete and shotcrete mixes
• On-site stormwater management
• Recycling of construction materials such as formwork and site spoils
Grindline has the appropriate � nancial and staf� ng resources to undertake a project of this scope and size. It is the normal
means of business for Grindline to manage, design, and construct multiple projects at any given time such that each meets
its speci�
ed objectives. Our of� ce is staffed such that any given task can be performed on more than one project at any given
time. Our multiple construction crews allow for us to construct multiple projects simultaneously. Our positive � nancial position
includes a $250,000 revolving line of credit with a local commercial bank, surplus cash reserves held with a local bank,
over $380,000 in positive working capital, a bonding program with an A+-rated Surety (Travelers) that supports $6,000,000
aggregate of projects with a $2,000,000 single project limit as well as revolving credit accounts with local and national material
suppliers.
Roc City Skatepark - Rochester, NY
2
FIRM QUALIFICATIONS
Our Philosophy
Star Skatepark - Star, ID
A successful skatepark is the result of an entire community coming together to work toward a common purpose. It’s our respon-
sibility to engage all interest groups throughout the development of their park and motivate them to work together. We aim to
empower skate advocates and community groups by giving them the tools and knowledge they need to make informed decisions
about their park. The development process relies on a commitment to collaboration and communication amongst stakeholders.
We facilitate the exchange of ideas and information related to aesthetics, safety, crime prevention, as well as programming, and
meld these “needs” and “wants” into a successful skatepark. Our principal design philosophy is based on our recognition that
every community and project site is unique, requiring a skatepark design tailored to its location. To do so, our approach is based
on four fundamentals:
• Open collaboration with the client and community through community involvement & public outreach
• Timeless Designs that appeal to all ages and skill levels
• Integration & Context
• Ef�cient Engineering, Sustainable Design and Budget Management
DESIGNING FOR DIFFERENT SKILL LEVELS
Grindline’s designs offer a Ladder of Progression for skaters to incrementally develop their skills and advance their sport.
The skatepark is more than a sum of all its individual elements, it is the overall experience of the park that brings end users
back—day after day, week after week.
Advanced
Intermediate Grindline is renowned for including big-
ger and more challenging transitions that
Intermediate street elements and mellow encourage higher speeds and large airs
Beginner transitional features are key to success- that seasoned skateboarders desire. With
ful skatepark planning. These features endless �ow, advance transitional fea-
Small and low street elements are among are accessible to the majority of skaters, tures attract advanced users from near
the most important to a balanced skatepark and therefore are in higher demand. For and far on a weekly basis. For advanced
formula. These features can be can be skaters working towards advanced street street skaters, the elements incrementally
equally enjoyed by skaters off all skill levels, skills, we can include various stair sets grow in size and dif�culty that encourages
but are especially fun for beginners. and sizes for “step by step” development. their continued progression and growth.
3
FIRM QUALIFICATIONS
OUR CAPABILITIES
Our
LocalCreativity
Identity & Unique Features
LOCAL IDENTITY & UNIQUE FEATURES
It is important that skateparks incorporate the feel of the local community in creative ways. Grindline has extensive experience of
It is important
working that skateparks
with communities incorporate
during theoutreach
the public feel of the local community
process in creative
to determine how to tieways. Grindlineinhas
a skatepark withextensive experience
the community of
through
working
the use ofwith communities
historical, cultural,during the public
geographical, or outreach process
other thematic to determine
elements. howsome
Below are to tieexamples.
a skatepark in with the community through
the use of historical, cultural, geographical, or other thematic elements. Below are some examples.
Natural
NaturalConnections
Connections Regional
RegionalContext
Context Cultural
CulturalConnections
Connections
Hana Skatepark,
Hana Skatepark, Hana, Hana,
Hawaii Hawaii A-Dog Memorial
A-Dog Memorial Park,Park, Burlington,
Burlington, VT VT S'klallam Tribe
S'klallam Tribe Skatepark,
Skatepark, Port Gamble,
Port Gamble, WA WA
The community
The community of of Hana,
Hana, Hawaii
Hawaii wanted
wanted Burlington’s
Burlington’s new skatepark features
new skatepark features aa The place
The place of the salmon
of the salmon inin the
the S'klallam
S'klallam
the skatepark to
the skatepark to re�reflect how important
ect how important surf- skateable
skateable sail sculpture to tie in
sail sculpture to tie in with
with tribe's history and culture
tribe's history and culture cannot be cannot be
ing is in the community and the
surf-ing is in the community and the volcanic Burlington’s rich sailing history
Burlington’s rich sailing history on adjacent overstated. The five stair above
overstated. The �ve stair above set set was
nature
volcanic of the Hawaiian
nature of Islands. Grindline
the Hawaiian Lake Champlain.
on adjacent It also
Lake features a It
Champlain. manual
also painted
was paintedto represent the scales
to represent of the
the scales
came up with an organic
Islands. Grindline came up with flowing design
an pad that is shaped like the state of
features a manual pad that is shaped like Vermont salmon in order to honor it's
of the salmon in order to honor it's presence in
with multiple
organic � volcanos centrally
owing design with multiple located. for
theastate
regional tie in.
of Vermont for a regional tie in. the lives of the members of the
presence in the lives of the members of S'klallam
The organiccentrally
volcanos flow reflects the local
located. Thenature
organicof tribe.
the S'klallam tribe.
surfing,
� ow re� while paying homage to
ects the local nature of sur�the volca-
ng,
nic nature
while of the
paying HawaiiantoIslands.
homage the volca-nic
nature of the Hawaiian Islands.
Historical Re-use Multi-Purpose Features
Historical Re-use PA
Paine's Park, Philadelphia, Multi-Purpose Features
McVicker Park Skatepark, Lake Elsinore, CA
Paine's Park, Philadelphia, PA McVicker Park Skatepark, Lake Elsinore, CA
Paine’s Park in Philadelphia features recycled granite from At McVicker Park, we created a unique seating/skating
both Love
Paine’s ParkPark and City features
in Philadelphia Hall, both of which
recycled were legendary
granite from both At McVicker Park,
experience dubbedwe created
"Skatium a unique seating/skating
seating." There was anexperience
elevation
skatePark
Love spotsandinCity
the Hall,
late both
90’s of
and early
which 2000’s.
were legendaryAs the
skate park
spotsis dubbed "Skatium seating." There was
change from the parking lot to the skatepark an elevation change
where the from
City
supposed
in to be
the late 90’s andthe legal
early replacement
2000’s. As the parkfor isskater’s
supposed tired of
to be the parking lot to the skatepark where the City
wanted to build concrete bleachers for event seating. wanted to build
By
getting
the legalkick out of Love
replacement forPark, we brought
skater’s an existing
tired of getting skate
kick out spot
of Love concrete
includingbleachers
transitionsfor atevent seating.
the end of eachBy riser,
including transitions
Grindline madeat
back we
Park, to life for theanskate-boarders
brought of Philadelphia..
existing skate spot back to life for the skate- the end of each riser, Grindline made the bleachers
the bleachers a unique skateable entrance to the park a unique
boarders of Philadelphia. skateable usedtofor
entrance
when not being theevents.
park when not being used for events.
4
9
FIRM QUALIFICATIONS
Our Ability to Problem Solve
Just like every Grindline Skatepark, each designated project site is unique. Each distinctive construction site seems to come
with at least one problem, sometimes completely unique to anything we have seen before. At Grindline we strive to identify
these problems early in the design process, and turn them into opportunities to manifest, design, plan, and ���� implement
innovative solutions. The following list are just few examples of the problems we have come across, and the innovate
solutions we have executed to mitigate them.
Location Problem Solution Photo
Jamail Skatepark The site was located in Houston’s Buffalo We worked with our structural, civil,
Houston, TX Bayour Park (a bayou converted to and geotechnical sub consultants to
an urban park/greenway) which was design the skatepark bowls to bot�� ll
susceptible to hurricane relate�� ood up with, and hold water during these
events and also included unpredictable events. This allowed the bowls to
soil with potential for expansion when act as stormwater detention facilities
extremely saturated. during these events, while the weight of
the water also acted as ballast to keep
the bowls from lifting due to hydrostatic
pressure from the expansive soils.
Volcom Brothers Several large boulders (some being Grindline was able to implement some
Skatepark immovable) we unearthed during value engineering to the project by
Mammoth, CA excavation of the skatepark. The designing around the immoveable
boulders that were moveable would boulders, while even utilizing a portion
have been a costly unforeseen of them as actual skateable elements.
condition if they were to be removed This quickly execute�� eld change also
from the site. provided an enhanced aesthetic, tying
the skate facility in with its surrounding
context.
Rhodes Skatepark A site located under a freeway The Grindline design/build team
Boise, ID overpass with bridge pillars scattered worked with all 3 agencies to design
throughout the site, potentially and construct approved skateable
requiring easements and impeding features around the pillars, while
skateboarding circulation. Ownership/ accommodating required maintenance
Lease agreements for the site were access routes, and without
held by three public agencies: Idaho compromising the structural integrity
Department of Transportation, Ada of the pillars themselves. The shape
County Highway District, and City of and texture of the pillars themselves
Boise. provided an opportunity for visual
enhancements through the addition of
LED accent lighting.
Vista Skateparks The Vista contract required that 2 Our team implemented innovative
Vista, CA skateparks be constructed on two “Modular Wetlands” into both skatepark OVERVIEW
The Bio Clean Modular Wetlands® System Linear (MWS Linear) represents a pioneering breakthrough
in stormwater technology as the only biofiltration system to utilize patented horizontal flow, allowing for
APPROVALS
The Modular Wetlands® System Linear has successfully met years of challenging technical reviews and
testing from some of the most prestigious and demanding agencies in the nation and perhaps the world.
adjacent sites, with a required skatepark designs. These pre-cast concrete
a smaller footprint, higher treatment capacity, and a wide range of versatility. While most biofilters use Here is a list of some of the most high-profile approvals, certifications, and verifications from around the
little or no pretreatment, the Modular Wetlands System Linear incorporates an advanced pretreatment country.
chamber that includes separation and pre-filter cartridges. In this chamber, sediment and hydrocarbons
are removed from runoff before entering the biofiltration chamber, reducing maintenance costs and Washington State Department of Ecology TAPE Approved
improving performance. The MWS Linear is approved for General Use Level Designation (GULD) for Basic,
size that would take up nearly the entire vaults allow storm water to be treated
Horizontal flow also gives the system the unique ability to adapt to the environment Enhanced, and Phosphorus treatment at 1 gpm/ft2 loading rate. The highest performing
through a variety of configurations, bypass orientations, and diversion applications. BMP on the market for all main pollutant categories.
The Urban Impact
For hundreds of years, natural wetlands surrounding our shores have California Water Resources Control Board, Full Capture Certification
site footprint, leaving very little area to as required within a much smaller
played an integral role as nature’s stormwater treatment system. CA The Modular Wetlands® System is the first biofiltration system to receive certification as
But as cities grow and develop, our environment’s natural a full capture trash treatment control device.
filtration systems are blanketed with impervious roads,
rooftops, and parking lots. Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, Assignment
The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality assigned the MWS Linear the
accommodate Southern California’s footprint and also self-irrigated some
Bio Clean understands this loss and has spent VA highest phosphorus removal rating for manufactured treatment devices to meet the new
years re-establishing nature’s presence in urban Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) regulation technical criteria.
areas, and rejuvenating waterways with the
MWS Linear.
Maryland Department of the Environment, Approved ESD
Granted Environmental Site Design (ESD) status for new construction, redevelopment,
very strict on site water treatment plantings on the project.
and retrofitting when designed in accordance with the design manual.
MASTEP Evaluation
The University of Massachusetts at Amherst – Water Resources Research Center issued
PERFORMANCE a technical evaluation report noting removal rates up to 84% TSS, 70% total phosphorus,
requirements
The Modular Wetlands® System Linear continues to outperform other treatment methods with 68.5% total zinc, and more.
superior pollutant removal for TSS, heavy metals, nutrients, hydrocarbons, and bacteria. Since 2007
the MWS Linear has been field tested on numerous sites across the country and is proven to effectively Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management, Approved BMP
remove pollutants through a combination of physical, chemical, and biological filtration processes. In Approved as an authorized BMP and noted to achieve the following minimum removal
fact, the MWS Linear harnesses some of the same biological processes found in natural wetlands in efficiencies: 85% TSS, 60% pathogens, 30% total phosphorus, and 30% total nitrogen.
order to collect, transform, and remove even the most harmful pollutants.
Texas Commission on Atlanta Regional
66 %
69 %
38 %
64 % Environmental Quality Commission
REMOVAL REMOVAL REMOVAL REMOVAL
OF OF TOTAL OF OF TOTAL
DISSOLVED ZINC DISSOLVED PHOSPHORUS
ZINC COPPER
ADVANTAGES
45% REMOVAL
OF
50% REMOVAL
OF TOTAL
95% REMOVAL
OF MOTOR
67% REMOVAL
OF ORTHO
85% REMOVAL
OF TSS
• HORIZONTAL FLOW BIOFILTRATION
• GREATER FILTER SURFACE AREA
• FLOW CONTROL
• NO DEPRESSED PLANTER AREA
NITROGEN COPPER OIL PHOSPHORUS • PRETREATMENT CHAMBER • AUTO DRAINDOWN MEANS NO
• PATENTED PERIMETER VOID AREA MOSQUITO VECTOR
5
QUALIFICATIONS OF TEAM
ROWE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMPANY
Large-Firm Resources. Personal Attention.
I-69 / I-475 RECONSTRUCTION MARATHON ROAD BRIDGE
LAND SURVEYING LAKESIDE PARK
Civil Engineering Surveying Aerial Imagery
Landscape Architecture Planning Aerial Mapping
Established Professionals Offices ENR Top Firm
1962 230 + 8 #76
Website: www.rowepsc.com Social Media:
6
QUALIFICATIONS OF TEAM
Civil Engineering Surveying Landscape Architecture
Construction Management and Engineering LiDAR • Streetscapes and Enhancements
• Roads/Bridges • Aerial • Park Design
• Traffic Engineering • Mobile • Parks and Recreation Plans
• Pavement Management Systems • Stationary • Trailways
• Sidewalks and Bicycle Paths
Survey Types
• Streetscapes
• Architectural
Planning
Utility Planning and Analysis • Cadastral and Boundary Plan Types
• Sanitary Sewers • Land Title (ALTA/ACSM)
• Land Use
• Storm Water Management • Retracement
• Comprehensive
• Water Mains • Right-of-Way • Master
• Water Storage and Wells • Topographic Mapping • Parks and Recreation
• Water and Wastewater Treatment
Additional Surveying Services • Downtown Development
• Pumping Stations
• Aerial Control • Tax Increment
• Rate Studies
• Construction Layout and Control • Strategic
Land Development Services • Government Corners
• Due Diligence • Remonumentation Additional Planning Services
• Site Planning • Mortgage Reports • Zoning Ordinances and Maps
• Detailed Engineering • Wetland Mapping • Grant Application Preparation
• Construction Administration • Implementation Manuals
• Wetland Permitting and Mitigation • Zoning, Site Plan, and ZBA Review
Michigan
• Flint (HQ)
• Lapeer
• Kentwood
• Farmington Hills
• Mt. Pleasant
• Grayling
• Myrtle Beach
South Carolina
Flint, MI (HQ) Lapeer, MI Kentwood, MI Farmington Hills, MI
540 S. Saginaw Street 128 N. Saginaw Street 4345 44th Street SE 27280 Haggerty Road
Suite 200 Lapeer, MI 48446 Suite A Suite C-2
Flint, MI 48502 (810) 664-9411 Kentwood, MI 49512 Farmington Hills, MI 48331
(810) 341-7500 (616) 272-7125 (248) 675-1096
Mt. Pleasant, MI Grayling, MI Oscoda, MI Myrtle Beach, SC
127 S. Main Street 2342 Industrial Street 212 N. State Street 6009 Kings Hwy
Mt. Pleasant, MI 48858 Suite A Oscoda, MI 48750 Myrtle Beach, SC 29577
(989) 772-2138 Grayling, MI 49738 (Field Office) (843) 444-1020
(989) 348-4036 (800) 837-9131
Website: www.rowepsc.com Social Media:
7
QUALIFICATIONS OF TEAM
Grindline Skateparks, Inc.
Matt Fluegge - CEO, Principal in Charge
As Grindline's CEO and Senior Project Manager, Matt has the authority and responsibility for the
daily management of the project. He develops project scope and budgets, generates accurate cost
estimates, oversees preparation of project documents, communicates with clients, and manages
schedules. Matt has extensive interdisciplinary experience from leading design teams and working
with architects, engineers, surveyors, and artists. Matt reviews and approves all project deliverables,
attends site meetings, handles changes in the scope of contracts and gets �nal acceptance of the
projects.
ROWE Professional Services Company,
James Klinedinst - Construction founded
ProjectinManager
1962, is one of Michigan’s l
firms, employing more
For this projectthan 230
James will people
provide in Michigan
cost estimating and South
and QC of construction Carolina.
documents ROWE
during design.
project from our Farmington Hills and Flint offices. ROWE provides civil enginee
During construction, he'll provide construction support for our onsite foreman and construction crews.
James works closely with the design and construction crews to bring projects in on schedule and on
photography/mapping,
budget, with thelandscape architecture,
quality of craftsmanship that Grindline is planning,
famous for. He isand
a highlyland development
skilled AutoCAD and
Rhino technician with extensive insight towards graphic and drafting multimedia. James is responsible
nationwide. for the preparation of Grindline’s construction documents, taking the project from conceptual design to
detailed construction bid documents.
ROWE has worked with Northville Township on various projects including its cu
ROWE Professional
Recreation Services
Plan. We Company,
are currently founded
working withinGrindline
1962, is one of Michigan’s
on similar leadin
projects in P
firms, employing more
Brett than 230
Johnson people inDesigner
- Skatepark Michigan and South Carolina. ROWE will p
Alex Temple,
project from ourPE
Farmington Hills and Flint offices. ROWE provides civil engineering,
Brett Johnson initially joined the Grindline Team as an intern while in his 3rd year of Washington State
photography/mapping,
Lead Civil Engineer landscape architecture, planning, and land development servic
University’s Voiland College of Engineering and Architecture. With his degree in Civil Engineering and
nationwide. specialty in Structural Engineering, Brett brings highly valuable engineering knowledge to the world of
Alex will coordinate the civil engineering for this project. He has
skatepark design. Brett is one of Grindline’s Skatepark Designers and AutoCAD Draftsmen. He applies
ROWE has worked with Northville
his engineering Township
focus on designing on various
safe and economical
recreation and site development projects with ROWE and is a N projects
skateparks5 including
for a changing its current
environment and
increases the ef�ciency in the use of skatepark construction materials.
Recreation Plan. We
our are currentlyMichigan
southeast working with Grindline
office, Alex ison similar
within projectsofinthe
minutes Port H
site
ROWE
Alex Temple,Professional
PEthe team. Services
Lead Civil Engineer
Alex will be an active part of this team by providing the team wi
Alex
Alex will coordinate
Temple,
experience. PEHe the
- Lead
will becivil engineering
available
Civil Engineer for this project.
for meetings He has
throughout been
the pr
recreation
Alex will coordinate and
the civilsite development
engineering projects
for this project. He has beenwith ROWE
involved andrecreation
with various is a Northv
andour southeast
site development Michigan
projects with ROWEoffice,
and is Alex is within
a Northville resident. minutes
Working fromofourthe site and w
southeast
Michigan of�ce, Alex is within minutes of the site and will be responsive to assist the team. Alex will be
an the
activeteam.
part of this team by providing the team with background information and experience. He will
Douglas R. Schultz, PLAbe available for meetings throughout the project as necessary.
Alex will be an active part of this team by providing the team with bac
Lead Landscapeexperience.
Architect He will be available for meetings throughout the project a
Doug came to ROWE 21 years ago with nine years of professio
Douglas R. Schultz, PLA - Lead Landscape Architect
with Alex on various projects as well as other skate park and pa
Doug came to ROWE 21 years ago with nine years of professional experience. He has worked with
ROWE
Douglas R. Schultz,
Alex PLA
on various and Grindline
projects within
as well as other skate parkexisting park locations.
and park improvement projects with Doug
ROWE and will lea
and
Grindline
Lead Landscape coordinate
within
Architect existing parkquality assurance/quality
locations. Doug control
will lead the site design for (QA/QC)
the project proce
and coordinate
quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) process for ROWE’s work.
8 Doug came to ROWE 21 years ago with nine years of professional ex
with Alex on various projects as well as other skate park and park imp
QUALIFICATIONS OF TEAM
BIO
As Grindline’s CEO, Matt has overall responsibility for managing the operations and administration for
Grindline Skateparks. With 19 years of skatepark experience and 300+ projects completed, Matt ensures
that all contract obligations are fulfilled and maintains a high level of communication with clients for the
duration of their project. Matt oversees all of Grindline’s construction and design projects. He is
responsible for developing project scope and budgets, generating accurate cost estimates, overseeing
preparation of project documents, communicating with clients, and scheduling projects. Matt has
extensive experience working with architects, engineers, surveyors, and artists on interdisciplinary
design teams.
PROJECTS
Matt Fluegge 2022
Anacortes, WA (design)
Bainbridge, WA
Smithfield, UT
Israel "Netanya"
Chief Executive Officer Bainbridge Island, WA Baltimore, MD 2014
Edmonds, WA Columbus, OH Baker, MT
Buffalo, NY Phase 3 Maple Valley, WA Tulalip Tribes, WA
Ellicottville, NY Oklahoma City, OK Marshfield, MA
EDUCATION Plymouth, MA Issaquah, WA
Post Graduate Project Management Program 2021 Reading, PA Louisville, KY
Anchorage, AK Stony Point, NY Cave Junction, OR
University of Washington
Salida, CO Wilkeson, WA
Wilkeson, WA (Bacon and Eggs) 2017 Newburgh, NY
Bachelor of Landscape Architecture Auburn, NY Issaquah, WA Wilmington, DE
Washington State University Buffalo, NY Phase 3 Palisade, CO
Black Diamond, WA Seattle "Lake City", WA 2013
Washington, DC Wilmington, OH Philadelphia, PA
Baltimore, MD Darrington, WA Bingen, WA Phase II
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Jamestown, NY Sheboygan, WI Carnegie, PA
Springville, NY Leavenworth, WA Arlington, TX
2003 - Present Newton County, GA Lapwai, ID Seattle "Benefit", WA
Principal Project Manager - Design Seattle Center, WA Bellevue, WA Skatercity, Denmark
Grindline Skateparks Sun Prairie, WI Pine Point, MN Spring, TX
North Bend, WA San Diego, CA Bob Burnquist, CA
2003 - Present San Juan Capistrano, CA Coeur d'Alene, ID Corpus Christi, TX
Dover, DE Olympia, WA Scappoose, OR
Principal Project Manager - Build Madisonville, KY Rockton, Il
Grindline Skateparks 2020 Lakeland, TX
Salem, MA 2016 Sturgeon Bay, WI
Qualifying Party for State Contractor’s License Sun Prairie, WI Monroe, WA Milford, CT
ID, OR, CA, AZ, HI, NM, WV, FL, NC, SC, LA, MS, Atlanta, GA Amherst, NY Waco, TX
MT, WA, VA, UT, GA, TN Parklane Portland, OR Buckley, WA Israel "Rishon"
Milwaukee, WI (TURF) San Francisco 'Hilltop", CA Israel "B'er Shiva"
ROC City Skatepark Anaheim, CA Port Gamble, WA
OSHA 30 Certification
*Galveston, TX Middleton, ID
Hudson, OH Lake Stevens, WA 2012
CESCL Certified Erosion & Sediment Control Lead *Zionsville, IN Sonoma, CA Seattle, WA
WA/OR Hapeville,GA Bryan, TX - Judkins Park
Wauwatosa, WI Colfax, CA - Roxhill Park
Wilmington, DE Boise, ID Medford, NJ
Zelienople, PA Ashdod, Israel South Kitsap, WA
Star, ID Cleveland, OH
2019 Marshfield, MA Tehaleh, WA
Anchorage, AK Union Gap, WA Sante Fe, NM
Spokane, WA Coeur D’ Alene, ID Lahaina, HI
Kalama, HI College Park, MD
Round Rock, TX 2015 Seatac, WA
Manchester, VT Portage, WI Hana, HI
St. Helena, CA Snoqualmie, WA El Paso, TX
Adidas Corporate HQ Portland, OR Montague, MA Redlake, MN
Ann Arbor, MI Tuscaloosa, AL Westpoint, MS
Lake Elsinore, CA Kenmore, WA Copenhagen, Denmark
Edmonds, WA New Hanover County, NC Pine Ridge, SD
Detroit, MI McCook, NE
Oregon City, OR Atlanta, GA 2011
Cookeville, TN Portland "Beech", OR Atlanta, GA - 4th Ward
North Bend, WA Tuscon, AZ Ithaca, NY
Maple Valley, WA Pine Ridge, SD Herzelia, Israel
Wenatchee, WA Wounded Knee, SD Kfar Saba, Israel
Hopkinsville, KY San Marcos Phase 2
2018 Amherst, NY San Antonio, TX
N. Houston BMX Park, TX Yellow Springs, OH Parkersburg, WV
Smithfield, UT Vista, CA Tacoma, WA - Kandle Park
Orcas Island, WA Cypress, TX Vashon, WA
GRINDLINE
Chico, CA Oakland, CA
St Bernard Parish, LA Zelienople, PA
Allentown, PA Israel "Hadera" And more...
9
QUALIFICATIONS OF TEAM
BIO
BIO
James works closely with the design and construction crews to bring projects in on schedule and on
As Grindline’s CEO, Matt has overall responsibility for managing the operations and administration for
budget, with the quality of craftsmanship that Grindline is famous for. He is a highly skilled AutoCAD and Rhino
Grindline Skateparks. With 19 years of skatepark experience and 300+ projects completed, Matt ensures
technician with extensive insight towards graphic and drafting multimedia. James is responsible for cost
that all contract obligations are fulfilled and maintains a high level of communication with clients for the
estimating and construction estimating for bids. He works alongside the design team to cost estimate
duration of their project. Matt oversees all of Grindline’s construction and design projects. He is
projects and produce real-time costing based on actual construction costs. James is ready to offer prompt
responsible for developing project scope and budgets, generating accurate cost estimates, overseeing
response to anything that may arise during the bid and construction process. James has 18 years of skatepark
preparation of project documents, communicating with clients, and scheduling projects. Matt has
experience and 300+ completed projects with his time at Grindline.
extensive experience working with architects, engineers, surveyors, and artists on interdisciplinary
design teams.
James Klinedinst PROJECTS
PROJECTS
Matt
ProjectFluegge
Manager 2022
2019
Kalama,
Anacortes, HI WA (design)
Tuscaloosa,
Bainbridge, WA
Kenmore,
Smithfield,WA
AL
UT
Redlake, MN
Israel "Netanya"
Westpoint, MS
Chief Executive Officer Manchester, VT
Bainbridge Island, WA New Hanover
Baltimore, MDCounty, NC 2014
Copenhagen, Denmark
Adidas,
Edmonds, Portland,
WA OR McCook,
Columbus, NEOH Pine Ridge,
Baker, MT SD
EDUCATION Lake Elsinore,
Buffalo, NY PhaseCA 3 Atlanta, GA WA
Maple Valley, Tulalip Tribes, WA
Detroit, MI NY
Ellicottville, Portland
Oklahoma "Beech",
City, OKOR 2011
Marshfield, MA
EDUCATION
Post Graduate Project Management Program, Cookeville, TN Tuscon,
Plymouth, AZMA Atlanta,
Issaquah,GAWA - 4th Ward
University of Washington
Post Graduate Project Management Program 2021 Valley, WA
Maple Pine Ridge,
Reading, PASD Ithaca, NY KY
Louisville,
Anchorage, AK Wounded
Stony Point, Knee,
NY SD Herzelia, Israel OR
Cave Junction,
University of Washington
Engineering Technology 2018
Salida, CO Hopkinsville, KY Kfar Saba,WA
Wilkeson, Israel
Western N. HoustonWA
Wilkeson, BMX Park,and
(Bacon TX Eggs) 2017
Amherst, NY San MarcosNY
Newburgh, Phase 2
BachelorWashington University
of Landscape Architecture Smithfield,
Auburn, NYUT Yellow Springs,
Issaquah, WA OH San Antonio,DE
Wilmington, TX
Washington State University Orcas
Buffalo,Island, WA 3
NY Phase Vista, CA CO
Palisade, Parkersburg, WV
Chico, CA
Black Diamond, WA Cypress, TX City", WA
Seattle "Lake Tacoma,
2013 WA - Kandle Park
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE St Bernard Parish,
Washington, DC LA Oakland,
Wilmington, CA OH Auburn, WA PA
Philadelphia,
Allentown,
Baltimore, PA MD Zelienople,
Darrington,PA WA Bingen, WA Phase II
2005 - Present
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Bainbridge,
Jamestown,WA NY Israel "Hadera"
Sheboygan, WI 2010
Carnegie, PA
Project Manager Smithfield,
Springville,UT NY Israel "Netanya"
Leavenworth, WA Vashon,
Arlington,WA TX
2003 - Present
Grindline Skateparks Baltimore,
Newton County, MD GA Lapwai, ID Delridge Seattle, WA
Seattle "Benefit",
Principal Project Manager - Design Columbus,
Seattle Center,OH WA 2014
Bellevue, WA Copenhagen,
Skatercity, DenmarkDenmark
Grindline
2017 Skateparks
- Present Maple Valley,WI
Sun Prairie, WA Baker, MT MN
Pine Point, Aurora,
Spring, CO
TX
Oklahoma
North Bend, City,
WAOK Tulalip Tribes,
San Diego, CAWA Tacoma, WA - Norpoint
Bob Burnquist, CA
Skatepark Assessment Specialist
2003 - Present Plymouth, MA
San Juan Capistrano, CA Marshfield,
Coeur d'Alene, MA ID Norfolk, VA
Corpus Christi, TX
Grindline Skateparks Reading,
Dover, DEPA Issaquah,
Olympia, WA WA Cleveland,
Scappoose,OH OR
Principal Project Manager - Build Stony Point, NY Louisville,
Madisonville, KY KY College
Rockton, Park,
Il MD
Grindline
20 Years ofSkateparks
Construction Experience 2020 Cave Junction, OR Seattle,
Lakeland,WATX- Jefferson Park
2017
Salem, MA 2016
Wilkeson, WA Bingen,
Sturgeon WA Bay, WI
Qualifying
OSHA Party for State Contractor’s License
30 Certification Issaquah,
Sun Prairie, WAWI Newburgh,
Monroe, WANY Herndon,
Milford, CT VA
ID, OR, CA, AZ, HI, NM, WV, FL, NC, SC, LA, MS, Palisade,
Atlanta, GA CO Wilmington,
Amherst, NYDE Lewiston,
Waco, TX ID
MT, WA, VA, UT, GA, TN Seattle
Parklane "Lake City", OR
Portland, WA Buckley, WA Bethlehem,
Israel "Rishon" PA
CESCL Certified Erosion & Sediment Control Lead Wilmington,
Milwaukee, WI OH(TURF) 2013
San Francisco 'Hilltop", CA Houston, TXShiva"
Israel "B'er - Spring Park
Darrington, WA
ROC City Skatepark Philadelphia,
Anaheim, CA PA Portland,
Port Gamble,OR - WASteel Bridge
OSHA 30 Certification
Sheboygan,
*Galveston,WI TX Bingen, WA ID
Middleton, Phase II
Leavenworth,
Hudson, OH WA Carnegie,
Lake Stevens,PA WA 2009
2012
CESCL Certified Erosion & Sediment Control Lead Lapwai, ID IN
*Zionsville, Arlington,
Sonoma, CA TX San Jacinto,
Seattle, WA CA
WA/OR Bellevue,
Hapeville,GA WA Seattle
Bryan, TX"Benefit", WA Muckleshoot
- Judkins ParkTribal Skatepark
Pine Point, MN
Wauwatosa, WI Skatercity,
Colfax, CA Denmark College
- RoxhillStation,
Park TX
San Diego, CA
Wilmington, DE Spring,
Boise, IDTX Portland,
Medford, OR NJ - Steel Bridge
Coeur d'Alene,
Zelienople, PA ID Bob Burnquist,
Ashdod, Israel CA Aurora, CO
South Kitsap, WA
Olympia, WA Corpus
Star, ID Christi, TX Imperial
Cleveland,Beach,
OH CA
2019
Madisonville, KY Scappoose,
Marshfield, MA OR Edwards,
Tehaleh, WACO
Anchorage, AK Rockton,
Union Gap, Il WA San
SanteDiego,
Fe, NM CA - Campland
2016
Spokane, WA Lakeland, TX ID
Coeur D’ Alene, Wilmington,
Lahaina, HI OH
Monroe,
Kalama, HI WA Sturgeon Bay, WI St. Helena,
College Park,CAMD
Amherst,
Round Rock, NY TX 2015 CT
Milford, Tacoma,
Seatac, WAWA - Norpoint
Buckley,
Manchester, WA VT Israel "Rishon"
Portage, WI Seattle,
Hana, HIWA - Delridge
San Francisco
St. Helena, CA 'Hilltop", CA Israel "B'er Shiva"
Snoqualmie, WA Seattle,
El Paso, WA
TX - Seattle Center
Anaheim, CA
Adidas Corporate HQ Portland, OR Port Gamble,
Montague, MAWA Winter Park,
Redlake, MNCO - Phase 2
Middleton,
Ann Arbor, MI ID Tuscaloosa, AL Westpoint, MS
Lake
Lake Stevens,
Elsinore, WA CA 2012
Kenmore, WA 2008
Copenhagen, Denmark
Bryan,
Edmonds, TX WA Seattle, WA County, NC
New Hanover Oceanside,
Pine Ridge, CA SD
Colfax,
Detroit,CA MI -McCook,
Judkins Park
NE Kelso, WA
Boise,
OregonIDCity, OR -Atlanta,
Roxhill Park
GA Lawrence,
2011 IN
Ashdod,
Cookeville, Israel
TN Medford, NJ
Portland "Beech", OR Fayetteville,
Atlanta, GA -WV 4th Ward
Star,
NorthIDBend, WA South
Tuscon,Kitsap,
AZ WA Bakersfield,
Ithaca, NY CA
Marshfield,
Maple Valley, MAWA Cleveland,
Pine Ridge,OH SD Yakima,
Herzelia,WAIsrael
Union Gap, WA
Wenatchee, WA Tehaleh,
WoundedWA Knee, SD Bainbridge, GA
Kfar Saba, Israel
Coeur D’ Alene, ID Sante Fe, NMKY
Hopkinsville, Bellevue,
San Marcos WAPhase
- Highlands
2
2018 Lahaina,
Amherst,HI NY Forks, WA
San Antonio, TX
2015
N. Houston BMX Park, TX College Park, MD
Yellow Springs, OH Tualatin Hills, WV
Parkersburg, OR
GRINDLINE
Portage,
Smithfield, WIUT Seatac,
Vista, CAWA Myrtle
Tacoma,Creek,
WA - OR
Kandle Park
Snoqualmie,
Orcas Island,WA WA Hana, HI TX
Cypress, Vashon, WA
GRINDLINE
Montague,
Chico, CA MA El Paso, TX
Oakland, CA and more...
St Bernard Parish, LA Zelienople, PA
Allentown, PA Israel "Hadera" And more...
10
QUALIFICATIONS OF TEAM
BIO
Brett Johnson initially joined the Grindline Team as an intern while in his 3rd year of Washington State
University’s Voiland College of Engineering and Architecture. With his degree in Civil Engineering and
specialty in Structural Engineering, Brett brings highly valuable engineering knowledge to the world of
skatepark design. He uses his skateboarding experience, 3D modeling capabilities, and his advanced CAD
drafting skills to both produce and display informed, functional, and buildable skatepark terrain. Brett
applies his engineering focus on designing safe and economical skateparks for a changing environment
and increases the efficiency in the use of skatepark construction materials.
Brett Johnson PROJECTS
2022 2018 2015
Lead Designer Anacortes, WA (design) N. Houston BMX Park, TX Portage, WI
Bainbridge Island, WA Smithfield, UT Snoqualmie, WA
Edmonds, WA Chico, CA Montague, MA
Ellicottville, NY St Bernard Parish, LA Kenmore, WA
EDUCATION Allentown, PA New Hanover County, NC
2021 Smithfield, UT Atlanta, GA
Bachelors in Civil Engineering Portland "Beech", OR
Anchorage, AK Baltimore, MD
Washington State University Salida, CO Columbus, OH Pine Ridge, SD
Wilkeson, WA (Bacon and Eggs) Maple Valley, WA Wounded Knee, SD
Pierce College Auburn, NY Plymouth, MA Hopkinsville, KY
University of Washington Black Diamond, WA Reading, PA Amherst, NY
Washington, DC Stony Point, NY Yellow Springs, OH
Baltimore, MD Vista, CA
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Jamestown, NY 2017 Cypress, TX
2020 - Present Springville, NY Issaquah, WA Oakland, CA
Newton County, GA Palisade, CO Zelienople, PA
Lead Designer Sun Prairie, WI Seattle "Lake City", WA Israel "Hadera"
Grindline Skateparks North Bend, WA Wilmington, OH Israel "Netanya"
San Juan Capistrano, CA Darrington, WA
2015 - 2020 Dover, DE Leavenworth, WA
Design Associate Lapwai, ID
Grindline Skateparks 2020 Bellevue, WA
Salem, MA Pine Point, MN
Sun Prairie, WI San Diego, CA
Atlanta, GA Olympia, WA
Parklane Portland, OR Madisonville, KY
Milwaukee, WI (TURF)
Hudson, OH 2016
Hapeville,GA Monroe, WA
Wauwatosa, WI Amherst, NY
Wilmington, DE Buckley, WA
Zelienople, PA San Francisco 'Hilltop", CA
Anaheim, CA
2019 Middleton, ID
Anchorage, AK Lake Stevens, WA
Spokane, WA Sonoma, CA
Manchester, VT Bryan, TX
Adidas Corporate HQ Portland, OR Colfax, CA
Lake Elsinore, CA Boise, ID
Edmonds, WA Star, ID
Detroit, MI Marshfield, MA
Cookeville, TN Union Gap, WA
North Bend, WA Coeur D’ Alene, ID
Maple Valley, WA
Wenatchee, WA
GRINDLINE
11
QUALIFICATIONS OF TEAM
Qualifications
ROWE Professional Services Company, founded in 1962, is one of Michigan’s leading professional consulting
firms, employing more than 230 people in Michigan and South Carolina. ROWE will provide services for this
project from our Farmington Hills and Flint offices. ROWE provides civil engineering, land surveying, aerial
photography/mapping, landscape architecture, planning, and land development services to its valued clients
nationwide.
ROWE has worked with Northville Township on various projects including its current 5 Year Community
Recreation Plan. We are currently working with Grindline on similar projects in Port Huron and City of Flint, MI.
Alex Temple, PE
Lead Civil Engineer
Alex will coordinate the civil engineering for this project. He has been involved with various
recreation and site development projects with ROWE and is a Northville resident. Working from
our southeast Michigan office, Alex is within minutes of the site and will be responsive to assist
the team.
Alex will be an active part of this team by providing the team with background information and
experience. He will be available for meetings throughout the project as necessary.
Douglas R. Schultz, PLA
Lead Landscape Architect
Doug came to ROWE 21 years ago with nine years of professional experience. He has worked
with Alex on various projects as well as other skate park and park improvement projects with
ROWE and Grindline within existing park locations. Doug will lead the site design for the project
and coordinate quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) process for ROWE’s work.
12 Page 1 of 1
SCOPE OF WORK
Scope of Work
Project Understanding - Based off the information provided by the City in the RFP, our current understanding of the project is
as follows:
• Conceptual Design – Includes participation in a kick-off meeting with the designated group of stakeholders to review the
proposed location, establish the target size of the park (+/- 10,000 SFT), and identify the potential elements. Upon completion
of the kick-off meeting the selecte�� rm shall create preliminary site renderings and cost estimates.
• Community Outreach – Includes presenting the conceptual design material and cost estimates in a community meeting
format and soliciting feedback from the wider public, possibly through a survey.
• Concept Revision - Includes re� nement of the conceptual designs and preparation of � nal renderings and cost estimates
for the selected alternative. Cost estimates should be all inclusive of construction costs, engineering fees, permit fees,
future maintenance costs, etc… The goal is to ensure that fundraising efforts successfully cover all necessary costs for
construction and perpetual care.
• Concept Finalization – Includes hosting a second community meeting to present th�� nal design details.
• Detailed Design – Upon identi� cation of an appropriate fundraising mechanism for the project, the selected vendor will
be directed to complete a detailed design for the site including all appropriate survey, plans, speci� cations, and complete
contract documents for bidding.
• Bid Solicitation – Vendor shall assist the city in obtaining bids for the entire project, and/or for any individual components
of the project that are not directly performed by the selected vendor. The city’s preference is to hire a vendor that can
design and construct the skate park. City purchasing policy guidelines shall be followed for any items sent for bidding, and
any vendors involved in the construction phase shall be required to comply with all standard City policies and procedures
regarding contracting.
• The Boys and Girls Club property can afford to lose no more than 8 parking spaces as a result of this project.
• The design should allow ample room for a driveway/road to be constructed along the east side of the Boys and Girls Club
building in the future if/when that is ever needed.
• The design should include two (2) sidewalk connections between the Boys and Girls Club parking lot and Rotary Park. Two
(2) connections exist currently; they can be maintained in their existing state, or rerouted as a part of the design.
• The mature pine trees on the south end of the identi� ed area should be preserved if possible with a preference to incorporate
them into the design.
• The skate park should include fencing along the perimeter where necessary to comply with standard practices. Appropriate
separation and access should be maintained between the existing playground features and the proposed skate park.
• There should be no primary features constructed on top of the storm sewer outfall in the event it requires future maintenance.
Consideration could be given to potentially removing the enclosed storm sewer outlet and incorporating an open channel for
the outlet into the design of the park.
Scheduling - Each of our Project Managers have completed formal educational training, receiving post graduate certi� cates
from University of Washington Project Management Program. We are well versed in Critical Path Method (or CPM) scheduling
for both design and construction, and will tailor our customized CPM Master Schedule Template to your project speci� cally.
Through close communication with the Project Team we will develop a list of appropriate tasks throughout the lifecycle of project,
while identifying key deliverables and milestones within each of the project phases. Our experience with Microsoft Project
software allows us to revise schedules on the � y if needed and communicate that information back to the project team. During
construction each of our foreman is equipped with mobile daily reporting software which allows our PM’s to get information that
may impact schedule and/or budget from the � eld immediately so that we can alert the Owner’s Representative and determine
the best course of action.
Budget Control - With Grindline’s vast experience in Skatepark projects, we understand the unique set of challenges that
accompany the design/build approach. Here at Grindline we see the Design/Build approach as an opportunity to maximize
a project budget through the following:
1. Preliminary organized framework that is easy for all parties to understand and decipher.
2. Complete budget transparency through design and construction.
3. Treating the budget as a living document where changes can be easily tracked and traced.
4. Engaging all stakeholders to prioritize the project elements and maintain sort of a project “menu” based on those
priorities.
5. Organized accounting and project tracking throughout in order to provide backup upon request for any project costs
incurred.
13
SCOPE OF WORK
A revised budget document will be prepared and submitted at every design submittal phase throughout the design process.
For use of preliminary estimating, we maintain a signi� cant data base of past bids and proposals from the last 18 years and are
constantly updating material and labor costs in the areas we work in. Grindline works on a nationwide basis with both public and
private projects and we continually document budget trends to assist clients in developing realistic budgets. As we move through
the project we will constantly value engineer the project to maximize your budget. As the design develops, we will reach out to
and solicit local subcontractors for hard costs in order to lock in a project program based on the re�ned budget document.
If the projected costs are signi�cantly below budget levels, we will present and discuss possible project scope expansions
to take advantage of project scale in lowering unit costs. Should the projected costs exceed the budget, we will revisit the
design elements, materials and methods to determine where changes can be made without sacri�cing important project
goals. In both cases, the �nal decisions on scope increases or reductions remains with the Township, and in both cases,
the project would not intentionally move forward without a resolution to the issue.
Progress Reports and Required Meetings – We have provided review/coordination meetings in our scope of work at important
milestones but the interval and timing of actual Progress Review Meeting will be determined at the Project Kick-off meeting. Prior
to each Progress Review Meeting, the Design Team will submit an updated schedule and all completed or partially completed
plans, speci�
cations and estimates which have been developed or altered since the last Progress Review Meeting
PHASE 1A: PROJECT STARTUP
i. Obtain site information: Grindline will review existing site information and determine what additional information is
required to complete the design. We will schedule and acquire an Existing conditions Survey for the skatepark site.
ii. Project Kick Off Meeting: Grindline will meet virtually with the City committee and any other key stakeholders to
discuss and �nalize project objectives including scope, schedule and budget. A communication plan will be made to identify
preferred communication methods. Key meetings and deliverables will be scheduled and areas requiring coordination such
as public meetings, online forums and exchange/review of documents will be identi�ed. The discussion will identify any
outstanding issues with the project, and propose solutions for any issues identi�ed.
iii. Site Analysis: Grindline and the Project Team will perform a Site Analysis to review the existing conditions, explore
opportunities and constraints of the site, evaluate and review current usage of existing skatepark, adjacent park facilities, and
programming spaces to assist in design development.
Existing Site Conditions - The proposed site area for the skatepark is on a � at area adjacent to the lake. These will factor
into how drainage is planned heavily. The area also has two intersecting walking paths, meaning implimenting elements
of CPTED will be feasible. The site has a handful of trees but besides this is grass meaning a minimal impact on natural
vegitaion will happen when adding the skatepark. Stormwater will be directed to a bioretention and in� ltration area designed
to accommodate the required storm events. Only areas that need to be cleared for construction will be cleared minimizing
the impact the existing natural vegetation.
Current and Planned Improvements - The skatepark must integrate with existing and future adjacencies at the
Recreations. Restrooms, walkways, connection paths, park seating, non-skatepark play areas, and parking all play
roles in the skatepark placement on site. We will look at the siting of current skatepark as well as connections to and
from the skatepark.
External Circulation & Public Safety - We look at how users get to the skatepark, whether by car, board, bike, foot,
public transportation, and determine if any improvements need to be included in the current and future phases of the
project to allow safe access to the skatepark. And, as in any park where younger citizens will gather, we put CPTED
principles into practice to discourage or impede criminal behavior and, at the same time, encourage honest citizens to
keep a watchful eye.
Internal Circulation - Proper placement of amenities, traf�c patterns, and circulation through the park are reviewed.
We scrutinize the location and placement of the proposed skate features to create smooth �ow through the skatepark
and avoid potential collision routes or blind spots. We identify safe paths for spectators in the skatepark by properly
locating entrances to the facility and including passive zones for viewing or resting areas.
14
Internal Circulation
scrutinize - Proper
the location placement
and placementof amenities, trafficskate
of the proposed patterns, and circulation
features throughflow
to create smooth the through
park arethe
reviewed. We and
skatepark
scrutinize the location and placement of the proposed skate features to create smooth flow through the skatepark and
avoid potential collision routes or blind spots. We identify safe paths for spectators in the skatepark by properly locating
avoidentrances
potential tocollision routes
the facility andorincluding
blind spots. We identify
passive safe
zones for paths or
viewing forresting
spectators in the skatepark by properly locating
areas.
entrances to the facility and including passive zones for viewing or resting areas. SCOPE OF WORK
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
PUBLICiv. Virtual
INVOLVEMENTPublic Design Workshop #1: Grindline proposes a Virtual
We engage park users and the surrounding community throughout the study with a
Public Design
We engage Workshop on the same day as the kick off meeting and site
professional,users
park and the
organized and surrounding
fun attitude. community
We anticipate throughout the study
holding 2 public input with a
sessions
visit to get
professional, input from
organized and stakeholders
fun attitude. onanticipate
We the type holding
of features
2 to be
public included
input sessions
for this project. These meetings allow us to educate the community about the design
in the
for this skatepark
project. Thesedesign.
meetings The goals
allow of educate
us to this workshop
the is introduce
community aboutGrindline
process, establish open lines of communication, and provide them thethe design so
knowledge
to community,
process, establish explain
open the
lines of design/public
communication, input
and process,
provide and share
them the how the so
knowledge
that they can make informed decisions that will determine the ultimate vision for the
that community
they can make
skatepark.
drives
In order
the project
informed
to address
development.
decisionscommunity
We provide end
that will determine
members’ the varied
users with the
ultimate
ideas vision for the
and ideals about
project Inspeci�
skatepark. c to
knowledge the need members’
to make informed decisions that will
skatepark design, our working sessions are highly interactive. In addition about
order address community varied ideas and ideals to vetting
determine
skatepark the ultimate
design, vision for the skatepark.
our working In order to address variedtoideas
important issues throughsessions are highly
meaningful interactive.
discussion, In addition
we encourage othervetting
types of
and ideals
important about
issues skatepark
through design, discussion,
meaningful this workshop we will be highly other
encourage interactive.
types of of
‘hands on’ involvement such as writing, sketching, and real time modeling
‘hands In addition
on’ to vettingsuch
involvement important
as issuessketching,
writing, through meaningful
and real discussion,
time modeling we of
park ideas/elements alongside our team. We then build consensus by identifying
parkencourage other types
ideas/elements
commonalities
of ‘hands
alongside
among our on’
different team.involvement
stakeholders
such consensus
We thentobuild as writing, sketching,
drive the skatepark by identifying
design. Our
and real time
commonalities modeling
among of park
different ideas/elements
stakeholders to alongside
drive the our team. We
skatepark thenOur
design.
social media channels are always open to collect feedback from the community in
socialbuild consensus byare identifying commonalities among different stakeholders
themedia
eventchannels
members cannot always open
attend in to collect
person or feedback from the
wish to comment community
later in
on the process.
to drive
the event the skatepark
members cannotdesign.
attend inOur socialormedia
person wish tochannels
comment arelater
alwayson theopen to
process.
collect feedback from the community in the event members cannot attend in
person or wish to comment later the process.
GRINDLINE
S K A T E P A R K S
Boulevard Crossing Skatepark
Public Meeting #1 Findings
GRINDLINE Boulevard Crossing Skatepark
S K A T E P A
Skate Elements
R K S
Tier 2 Findings ExamplesPublic Meeting #1 Findings
GRINDLINE
S K A T E P A R K S
Boulevard Crossing Skatepark
Public Meeting #1 Findings
Tier 2 Findings
GRINDLINE
S K A T E P A R K S
Boulevard Crossing Skatepark
Public Meeting #1 Findings
Skate Elements Tier 2 Findings
These preferences were expressed Examples
less frequently
GRINDLINE
S K
Skate Elements
A T E P A R K S Tier 1 Findings Boulevard Crossing
ExamplesSkatepark
Public Meeting #1 Findings
Tier 2 Findings than those in Tier 1, but nevertheless should be
considered important to the final design.
GRINDLINE
S K
Skate Elements
A T E P A R K S Tier 3 Findings Boulevard Crossing
ExamplesSkatepark
Public Meeting #1 Findings
Tier 1 Findings Tier 3 Findings
These preferences were expressed less frequently
Skate Elements Tier 1 Findings
Tier 1 findings represent the most requested features
Examples
for the skatepark. They are the most important to
than those in Tier 1, but nevertheless should be
Flow
considered important to the final design.
Skate Elements Tier 3 Findings
Tier 3 preferences were expressed less frequently
Examples
than those in Tier 1 or Tier 2. If possible, they should
Tier 1 Findings skaters and therefore should be considered integral Much like the request for transition, the request for Tier 3 Findings be included in the final design, but not at the expense
to the final design. flow is broad (some requests contained the words of the elements in Tier 1 or Tier 2.
Tier 1 findings represent the most requested features transition andflow together), but there are significant Tier 3 preferences were expressed less frequently
for the skatepark. They are the most important to Flow than those in Tier 1 or Tier 2. If possible, they should
Bowl specific requests within this category. Six (6) skaters Gaps
skaters and therefore should be considered integral Much like the request for transition, the request for be included in the final design, but not at the expense
to the final design.
Skaters expressed an overwhelming desire for a bowl in expressed the desire for a snake run, with an This category is dominated by the request for stairs,
of the elements in Tier 1 or Tier 2.
the skatepark. Seven skaters suggested that the bowl flow is broad (some requests contained the words with six (6) skaters expressing a preference for a
additional two (2) requesting a pump track.
be a backyard pool style or feature pool coping. Two (2) transition andflow together), but there are significant stair set of some kind in the park. Two (2) skaters
Bowl
skaters expressed a preference for a large, pro-sized
specific requests within this category. Six (6) skaters Snake Run Gaps
requested a euro gap, with one (1) mentioning that
bowl. Their preference should understood knowing that Grind there is only one euro gap presently in Atlanta.
Skaters expressed an overwhelming desire for a bowl in
many other skaters requested small elements in the expressed the desire for a snake run, with an This category is dominated by the request for stairs,
the skatepark. Seven skaters suggested that the bowl Pool Style Bowl This category groups all requests for non-steel with six (6) skaters expressing a preference for a Stairs
park. We will touch on this finding shortly. additional two (2) requesting a pump track. Manual Pad
be a backyard pool style or feature pool coping. Two (2) grindable surfaces. The overwhelming prefence here stair set of some kind in the park. Two (2) skaters
Six (6) skaters expressed the desire for a manual pad.
skaters expressed a preference for a large, pro-sized
Transition is for a ledge of some kind, with nine (9) skaters Snake Run requested a euro gap, with one (1) mentioning that
bowl. Their preference should understood knowing that
This category overlaps with the request for a bowl, Grind there is only one euro gap presently in Atlanta.
Street Elements
many other skaters requested small elements in the expressing that desire.
since a bowl is a transition element, but there are Pool Style Bowl This category groups all requests for non-steel Some skaters requested street elements throughout the Stairs
park. We will touch on this finding shortly. Manual Pad
specific additional desires expressed here. Seven grindable surfaces. The overwhelming prefence here park. Two (2) expressed a desire for a plaza style section.
Banks Six (6) skaters expressed the desire for a manual pad.
(7) skaters expressed a preference for a hip of some
Transition is for a ledge of some kind, with nine (9) skaters
kind, and five (5) skaters requested quarterpipes or a
This category overlaps with the request for a bowl,
A total of twelve (12) skaters requested a bank of Street Elements
Wallride
miniramp section. expressing that desire. Several skaters expressed the desire for a place to
since a bowl is a transition element, but there are some kind be featured in the park. Two (2) skaters Some skaters requested street elements throughout the
practice wallrides.
specific additional desires expressed here. Seven
Small Elements requested china banks. park. Two (2) expressed a desire for a plaza style section.
(7) skaters expressed a preference for a hip of some Banks
Many skaters requested small elements throughout
kind, and five (5) skaters requested quarterpipes or a
the park. Some expressed a desire for elements A total of twelve (12) skaters requested a bank of Wallride
miniramp section. Pyramid Several skaters expressed the desire for a place to
specifically designed for beginners, while others some kind be featured in the park. Two (2) skaters
may simply prefer smaller, gentler elements to larger Hip Ten (10) skaters requested a pyramid be featured practice wallrides. Manual Pad
Small Elements requested china banks.
ones. Either way, this preference should be taken into in the park. Because this request was broad and
Many skaters requested small elements throughout Ledge
consideration for the final design.
the park. Some expressed a desire for elements unspecific, there is room for creativity during design.
Pyramid
specifically designed for beginners, while others
Rails
may simply prefer smaller, gentler elements to larger Hip Ten (10) skaters requested a pyramid be featured Manual Pad
Skaters hoping to grind or boardslide expressed the
ones. Either way, this preference should be taken into in the park. Because this request was broad and
desire for steel rails in the park. Several rail types
consideration for the final design. unspecific, there is room for creativity during design. Ledge
were suggested, the most popular being flat bars (4)
and A frame rails (2).
Rails
Skaters hoping to grind or boardslide expressed the
desire for steel rails in the park. Several rail types
were suggested, the most popular being flat bars (4)
and A frame rails (2).
Rail Wallride
Rail Wallride
China Banks
China Banks
above : analysis of findings from public meetings
above : analysis of findings from public meetings
v. Coordination Meeting #1 Grindline will summarize all information collected in task 1a - 1d in a Project Startup Report
and submit for review by the Project Team. Via phone conference/online meeting, the Grindline and the Project Team will
meet to discuss the Project Startup Report and �nalize the direction for moving forward with the design of the Skatepark.
Solutions will be proposed for any issues identi�ed in the Project Startup Report
PHASE 1A DELIVERABLES
Project Startup report addressing the following:
• Site Inventory / Analysis identifying site opportunities and constraints
• Recommendations for renovations and repairs to the existing park with associated costs for each item Updated
schedule and preliminary budget
• Summary of Input from Virtual Public Design Workshop #1
PHASE 1B & 2: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
Skate parks are more than athletic facilities. They are gathering places and can be focal points for other activities like
concerts, competitions or community events. Facilities must be designed to meet skating demands, incorporate areas
for spectators, and to appropriately blend with their existing surroundings. Through the use of custom materials and the
placement of green space in and around the design, the skatepark ties into the overall form and function of its setting.
Conceptual Designs illustrate our skatepark philosophy to key stakeholders and the community in interactive, full color
presentations of the custom skate features and facilities included in the project. 3D models allow us to clearly and effectively
communicate our skatepark concepts to the client and community as well as assist in the development of accurate cost
estimates and material take-offs. The result is a design produced from the ideas and recommendations of ALL stakeholders
involved with the project.
15
SCOPE OF WORK
i. Preliminary Concept: Based on the �ndings in the Project Startup and direction from the Project Team, Grindline
will develop 3 Preliminary Conceptual Designs and submit for review. These will be submitted in both a plan view with
elevations and multiple three-dimensional renderings, and include both the actual skatepark and proposed amenities. The
submission will also include a revised budget document and quantity of material estimates for review.
ii. Virtual Public Design Workshop / Coordination Meeting #2: In a virtual meeting like Public Design Workshop #1,
Grindline will present the Preliminary Concept and get feedback. Concepts will be presented through a combination of
photos, Power Point slides, large presentation boards, and interactive 3-D models. Input collected at this meeting will be
used to create th�� nal concept.
iii. Final Concept: Based on input and direction from Task 2b, Grindline will create a Final Concept and submit for review.
Similar, to Task 2a, will be submitted in both a plan view with elevations and multiple three-dimensional renderings, and
include both the actual skatepark and proposed amenities. The submission will also include cost and quantity of material
CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
estimates for review.
Skate parks are more than athletic facilities. They are gathering places and can be focal points for other activities like concerts,
competitions or community events. Facilities must be designed to meet skating demands, incorporate areas for spectators, and
to appropriately blend with their existing surroundings. Through the use of custom materials and the placement of green space
PHASE 1B & 2 DELIVERABLES
in and around the design, the skatepark ties into the overall form and function of its setting. Conceptual Designs illustrate our
skatepark philosophy to key stakeholders and the community in interactive, full color presentations of the custom skate features
• Preliminary and Final Concepts submitted in 3d renders and site plan
and facilities included in the project. 3D models allow us to clearly and effectively communicate our skatepark concepts to the
• Updated budget and quantity of material estimates with each submittal
client and community as well as assist in the development of accurate costs estimates and material take-offs. The end result is
a design produced from the ideas and recommendations of ALL stakeholders involved with the project.
Manchester Skatepark Concept - Manchester, VT
PHASE 3 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS
Cutting edge design and drafting software are important tools for our designers, draftsmen and engineers use to convert
concepts into permit ready construction drawings. The latest versions of AutoCAD and Rhinoceros software give us the
COST ESTIMATING
ability to develop dimensionally correct design concepts from the beginning of design development. Viewing the 3D model
Our first-hand knowledge of skatepark construction costs allow us to provide more precise cost estimates than our competition.
alongside a full set of construction documents and technical speci�cations give us an opportunity to check adherence to
We have constructed projects across the country and have an intimate understanding of the large variance in material pricing
local building codes and engineering requirements. Drawings are produced in ACI, ASTM, CSI, or state organizational
Concept and
- 17,400prevailing wage labor costs in different regions of the United States. As a skatepark design-builder exclusively engaged in the grindline.com
formats. We are also well versed with ASTM Section F2334 – Standard for Above Ground Public Use Skatepark Facilities,
art and science of skatepark development, we haveManchester Skatepark
sq ft
C011719 | January 17, 2019
the ability to estimate budgets and value engineer our designs to maximize inform@grindline.com
ASTM F2480 - 06 Standard Guide for In-ground Concrete Skateparks,
Vashon, WA as well as Skaters for Public Skateparks Public
the project budget.
Skatepark Development Guide, the industry’s most frequently used reference publications.
CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS
i. Coordination Meeting #3: Grindline will meet with the Project Team via phone / internet to discuss the Final Concept.
Cutting edge design and drafting software are important tools for our designers,
The �nal approved concept will be used to create detailed plans and speci�cations for construction and meet any permitting
draftsmen and engineers use to convert concepts into permit ready construction
requirements.
drawings. AutoCAD 2018 and Rhinoceros 4.0 give us the ability to develop dimensionally
correct design concepts from the beginning of design development. Viewing the 3D
ii. Construction Documents: Construction Documents will be submitted at a 50%, 90%, and 100% level and will include
model alongside a full set of construction documents and technical specifications
high quality, professional construction drawings, details, speci�cations and cost estimates for all aspects of the skate
give us an opportunity to check adherence to local building codes and engineering
improvements. The documents will include an updated estimate of probable costs and material quantities for the skatepark.
requirements. Drawings are produced in ACI, ASTM, CSI, or state organizational formats.
We are also well versed with ASTM Section F2334 – Standard for Above Ground Public
Use Skatepark Facilities, ASTM F2480 - 06 Standard Guide for In-ground Concrete
Skateparks, as well as Skaters for Public Skateparks Public Skatepark Development
Guide, the industry’s most frequently used reference publications.
16
CONSTRUCTION
SCOPE OF WORK
Construction document submissions will include the following:
• Site Plan & Details • Skatepark Vertical Controls • Technical Speci�cations
• Grading Plan (by others) • Skatepark Horizontal Controls • Final cost estimate and quantity
• Erosion Control Plan (by others) • Skatepark Jointing Plan of materials estimate for skate-
• Drainage Plan (by others) • Skatepark Sections park
• Skatepark Materials Plan • Skatepark and Site Details
iii. & iv. Coordination Meetings #4 and #5: After each Construction Document submittal, Grindline will meet with the
Project Team via phone / internet to have a “page turn” review of the submittal and gather feedback and direction on
revisions to be included in the next submittal.
PHASE 3 DELIVERABLES
• Final Approved Concept
• 50%, 90% and 100% Construction Documents including plans, specs and updated cost / quantity of materials estimates
for the project.
• Updated Schedule for remainder of the project
Napa Skatepark Concept - Napa, CA
PHASE 4: CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES (optional)
i. Bid Assistance: The Design Team will provide pre-quali�cation language that the Town can insert into the bid documents
to ensure that only capable �rms with a successful track record of building skateparks similar to the scope and scale of
this one can bid on the project. The Design Team will attend the pre-bid meeting is available to respond to any RFI’s
during bidding. Preparation of an addendum shall be completed by the Design Team and reviewed/approved by the Town
if required.
ii. Construction Support: The Design Team will attend the pre-construction meeting and conduct site visits/�eld
inspections during construction. Each �eld visit/inspection would be followed up with a �eld report and digital photos noting
any items needing correction, as well as general comments based on the �eld visit. An onsite inspection would be given
upon substantial completion and the Design team would produce a report listing all punchlist items to be completed prior to
acceptance of the project. The Design Team will also complete the following services during construction.
17
SCOPE OF WORK
PHASE 4 DELIVERABLES
• Provide pre-quali�cation language for bid package
• Attend pre-construction meeting.
• Review and approve all required shop drawings and submittals.
• Field report for each site visit
• Punchlist report
• Review all payment requests for the project to ensure project completeness.
• Review and assist any change orders that may come up in the project.
• Prepare and deliver as-built plans of the project at the conclusion of the construction.
• Provide a copy of all records to the Client
PROGRAMMING, OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
At Grindline our motto is "Grindline for Life". When you hire Grindline we embrace your community and are with you long
after the Grand Opening. While a Grindline skatepark is a self-suf�cient venue for year-round recreation, planning and
care will add to the success of the project. Grindline has done numerous projects with multiple phases (such as Hideaway
Park in Winter Park) and we provide maintenance plans to enhance the lifespan of your skatepark. Grindline has valuable
relationships with organizations such as Skate Like a Girl, United States Skateboarding Education Association, and the
Stronghold Society who collectively advocate for skateboarding and host programs to give local youth access to the sport.
Programs such as skate lessons, skate camps, contests and demonstrations provide opportunities to further support the
skateboarding community.
Our collective experience in the �eld of skatepark design and construction also gives us the knowledge to assess skateparks
in terms of physical condition and carry out maintenance and repair actions to extend the life of a skatepark. On aging
skateparks, we can evaluate the current function and condition of the skatepark, provide cost of repairs, and create a service
plan for ongoing maintenance and/or repair.
Tibbett's Valley Skatepark - Issaquah, WA
18
PROJECT EXAMPLES
Riverside
Detroit, MI
OWNER
City of Detroit, MI
GRINDLINE’S SCOPE
Skatepark Designer & Contractor
DESIGN
February – August 2017
CONSTRUCTION
Skatepark
July 2018 – February 2019
BUDGET
Design: $22,350
Construction: $726,500
SIZE
21,000 SQ FT
PROJECT TEAM
Matt Fluegge
Project Manager
Andy Macdonald at the Riverside Skatepark Grand Opening Micah Shapiro
Lead Designer
Detroit’s massive revitalization effort includes redevelopment of multiple parks CONTACT
along the east side of the Detroit River. Riverside Park is now a park and promenade Tim Karl, LLA
extending along the city's three-mile riverfront, revitalizing a patchwork of abandoned Chief of Landscape Architecture
City of Detroit
factory sites and drawing residents and tourists back downtown. The 21,000 sq
(313) 224-3484
ft skatepark at it’s epicenter includes replicas of the Heart Plaza manual pad Email: tkarl@detroitmi.gov
fashioned in the style of a Motown vinyl record and the Fort Street handrail, a local
iconic (yet illegal) street skating spot recently decommissioned by the installation of
parking bollards.
19
PROJECT EXAMPLES
Salida, CO
Salida Skatepark
OWNER
City of Salida, CO
GRINDLINE’S SCOPE
Skatepark Designer & Contractor
DESIGN
August 2020
CONSTRUCTION
November, 2020 - August 2022
BUDGET
Design: $81,122
Construction: $711,416
SIZE
14,700 SQ FT
PROJECT TEAM
Matt Fluegge
Project Manager
The City of Salida in Partnership with Friends of Salida Skatepark (FOSS), a non-
Micah Shapiro
profit organization committed to making this project happen, requested Design/Build
Lead Designer
Proposals for a new skatepark located at the forefront of Centennial Park, which
already hosted an indoor aquatic center, as well as several outdoor active use areas. Kevin Lane
Grindline was selected as the Design/Builder for the project based a qualification Foreman
based selection criteria. The existing site conditions required that the skatepark
CONTACT
footprint to meander through the park’s existing mature trees, while carefully avoiding
Mike 'Diesel' Post
encroachment into any root system areas. The Grindline design team worked closely Director of Parks and Recreation
with both the City and FOSS to produce a skatepark with a variety of terrain as 719-966-9378
requested while utilizing the site context to design a park that appears as though it diesel.post@cityofsalida.co
must have always been there. Additional aesthetic attention was given to the park by
using an integral concrete color plan which reflected the Rocky Mountains, colored
brick stamped banks, and even a heart shaped center island in one of the flow bowls
to pay homage to the City’s mantra, “Heart of the Rockies.”
20
PROJECT EXAMPLES
Portage Family Skatepark
Portage, WI
OWNER
City of Portage, WI
GRINDLINE’S SCOPE
Skatepark Designer
General Contractor Phase 2
CONSTRUCTION
Design - June 2016
Phase 2 Construction - Summer
2020
BUDGET
Design - $26,880
Construction Admin. Phase 1
$14,875
Construction Phase 2 $134,500
SIZE
10,000 SQ FT
PROJECT TEAM
The Portage Family Skate Park (PFSP) is an example of the power of teamwork and Matt Fluegge
perseverance. Rather than putting together a skatepark committee comprised solely Project Manager
of skaters, the PFSP assembled a diverse team comprised of leaders from many
Micah Shapiro
different areas of the local community in the early 2000s. In 2016, after years of Lead Designer
fundraising, Grindline was hired to design a phased skatepark with a total size of
10,000 sq ft. Grindline worked with the City and PFSP to design a park that met the CONTACT
needs of the community and also conduct construction administration, ensuring the Kyle Little
President
project was built to plan and spec. The first of three phases of the Portage Skatepark
Portage Family Skate Park Project
was finally built. The community soon began teaching skateboard basic programs at portageskatepark@gmail.com
the park through the Parks & Recreation Department. In 2020 the Portage Family (608) 697-5960
Skatepark secured the funding necessary to construct phase 2 and Grindline was
hired to construct it. Grindline was able to complete the phase 2 construction during
the height of the Covid pandemic safely while making sure the budget and schedule
were maintained. No change orders were needed for the project. The PFSP is diligently
fundraising for phase 3 with the goal of construction in 2022.
21
PROJECT EXAMPLES
Star, Id
Star Idaho Skatepark
OWNER
City of Star, ID
GRINDLINE’S SCOPE
Skatepark Designer
& Contractor
DESIGN
June - December 2013
CONSTRUCTION
June – November 2016
BUDGET
Design: $34,220
Construction: $397,880
SIZE
16,000 SQ FT
PROJECT TEAM
Matt Fluegge
Senior Project Manager
Dave Palmer
In Spring 2013 Grindline was contracted by the City of Star to create a conceptual Site Foreman
design for a skatepark that was to be incorporated into the Hunter Creek Sports
Complex. The concept and associated cost estimate was to be used for grant Eddie Lawrence
applications and other fundraising activities. Through a series of community meetings Site Superintendent
and online forums, Grindline presented and refined concepts until a preferred
Mackay & Sposito
concept was achieved. Design aesthetics include incorporating the city logo Civil Engineering
and unique color patterns throughout the park. The concept was approved by city Landscape Architecture
council December 2013, and the community began an active fundraising campaign
to acquire the construction funds. Once the funding was secured in spring of 2016 PROJECT TEAM
Tom Erlebach
Grindline returned to Star to construct the skatepark. The project was completed in
Star Skatepark Committee
November 2016 and has opened to rave reviews. Chairperson
208 863 0195
tominstar@cableone.net
22
PROJECT EXAMPLES
Manchester
Manchester, VT
OWNER
City of Manchester
GRINDLINE’S SCOPE
Skatepark Designer & Builder
DESIGN
July 2018 – May 2019
CONSTRUCTION
June – Sept. 2019
BUDGET
Skatepark
Design: $29,500
Construction $305,000
SIZE
Design 20,000 sq ft phased skatepark
Construction of Phase 1 (6,000 sq ft)
PROJECT TEAM
Matt Fluegge
Project Manager
After 15 years of use and harsh Vermont winters the existing Manchester skatepark was
Micah Shapiro
severely dilapidated and in need of replacement. The Town of Manchester, together with the Lead Designer
Manchester Skatepark Committee, decided to develop a world-class skatepark in Southern
Vermont to replace the existing skatepark. The Town recieved $50,000 in matching funds, CONTACT
a donation of land, and a pledge to manage and maintain the park. Consensus was for a John P. O'Keefe
Town Manager
phased design with a total size of approximately 20,000 sq ft. The design was a collaborative
(802) 362-1313
effort with Grindline, Town Staff, Skatepark Committee members, and community members j.okeefe@manchester-vt.gov
working together to toward the best possible design. Additional funding came in while
Grindline was onsite constructing phase 1, and an additional 1,000 sq ft were added to
construction phase of the project. The project opened in Fall of 2019, and the community is
currently raising funds for phase 2 to be constructed in the spring of 2020.
23
PROJECT EXAMPLES
Boise, ID
Rhodes Park Skatepark
OWNER
City of Boise, ID
GRINDLINE’S SCOPE
Skatepark Designer & Contractor
DESIGN
February - July 2015
CONSTRUCTION
August 2015 - May 2016
BUDGET
Design: $75,432
Construction: $1,130,000
SIZE
35,000 SQ FT
PROJECT TEAM
Matt Fluegge
Project Manager
Grindline was selected as the Design/Build firm to renovate the Rhodes Park
Micah Shapiro
Skatepark. The existing skatepark consisted of metal ramps on a large slab located
Lead Designer
under Interstate 84 in downtown Boise. The goal was to create a facility that would
provide for the needs of local end users as well as serve as a world class regional Dave Palmer
attraction. Funding was provided by the Albertson’s Foundation, a local non-profit Site Superintendent
organization, as well as the Boise Skateboard Association, the advocacy group
CONTACT
that got the project off the ground. The design needed to balance the challenges
Ken Fisher
of being located under a major transportation artery and working around numerous Owner Rep.
underground untilities onsite with the criteria of being a world class facility. Grindline 208-867-3652
collaborated with all stakeholders to come up with a unique design that met the needs kjfisher@cableone.net
of local users and will be a regional attraction for skateboard tourism. Rhodes Park
Josh Davis
opened in April 2016 and is already a popular venue for X Games competition.
Boise Skateboard Association
208-869-2487
jmilesd@gmail.com
24
PROJECT EXAMPLES
Manchester
Manchester, VT
OWNER
City of Manchester
GRINDLINE’S SCOPE
Skatepark Designer & Builder
DESIGN
July 2018 – May 2019
CONSTRUCTION
June – Sept. 2019
BUDGET
Skatepark
Design: $29,500
Construction $305,000
SIZE
Design 20,000 sq ft phased skatepark
Construction of Phase 1 (6,000 sq ft)
PROJECT TEAM
Matt Fluegge
Project Manager
After 15 years of use and harsh Vermont winters the existing Manchester skatepark was
Micah Shapiro
severely dilapidated and in need of replacement. The Town of Manchester, together with the Lead Designer
Manchester Skatepark Committee, decided to develop a world-class skatepark in Southern
Vermont to replace the existing skatepark. The Town recieved $50,000 in matching funds, CONTACT
a donation of land, and a pledge to manage and maintain the park. Consensus was for a John P. O'Keefe
Town Manager
phased design with a total size of approximately 20,000 sq ft. The design was a collaborative
(802) 362-1313
effort with Grindline, Town Staff, Skatepark Committee members, and community members j.okeefe@manchester-vt.gov
working together to toward the best possible design. Additional funding came in while
Grindline was onsite constructing phase 1, and an additional 1,000 sq ft were added to
construction phase of the project. The project opened in Fall of 2019, and the community is
currently raising funds for phase 2 to be constructed in the spring of 2020.
25
PROJECT EXAMPLES
City of Cookeville, TN
Parkview Park Skatepark OWNER
City of Cookeville
GRINDLINE’S SCOPE
Prime Designer & Contractor
DESIGN
Summer 2018
CONSTRUCTION
April 2019
BUDGET
Design: $16,183.49
Construction: $399,800
SIZE
10,000 SQ FT
PROJECT TEAM
The story of Cookeville Skatepark is a prime example of collaboration done Matt Fluegge
right. The City of Cookeville first expressed the desire to redevelop an abandoned Project Manager
swimming pool into a 12,000 sq ft skatepark in the spring of 2016. They worked
Micah Shapiro
together with HFR to prepare an LPRF grant application to the State of Tennessee.
Lead Designer
HFR developed a preliminary floor plan and site plan along with an estimate of
probable construction costs for the application. Upon award of the grant, HFR was CONTACT
selected by the City to continue the design process of the project. HFR then turned Rick Woods
to Grindline to administer two public meetings for the conceptual design of the Director
Cookeville Leisure Services
park. The result is a a beautifully balanced design combining flowy street features
and Public Facilities
and bowls of varying depths to accommodate skaters of all ability levels. The existing rwoods@cookeville-tn.gov
pool house was being re-purposed into an ADA accessible restroom facility for the (931) 520-5284
skatepark in addition to receiving some general building improvements.
26
PROJECT EXAMPLES
Jake’s
Baltimore, MD
OWNER
Waterfront Partnership of Baltimore
GRINDLINE’S SCOPE
Skatepark Designer
Skatepark
DESIGN
May 2017 - February 2019
BUDGET
Design: $38,000
Construction: $477,000
SIZE
8,700 SQ FT
PROJECT TEAM
Matt Fluegge
Project Manager
Micah Shapiro
Lead Designer
Jake’s Skatepark at Rash Field in Baltimore is named in memory of Jake Owen, a CONTACT
South Baltimore resident, avid skater, and sports lover, who was tragically killed Ben Hyman
in 2011 by a cell phone-distracted driver. Jake’s Skatepark will be located on the Director of Special Projects
west side of Rash Field in Baltimore's revitalized Inner Harbor. The park's unique Waterfront Partnership Of Baltimore
ben@waterfrontpartnership.org
design was inspired by the shape of nearby Fort McHenry, the military base 443-779-3308 x5310
turned historical landmark where the Star Spangled Banner was written during the
War of 1812.
27
FEE
Muskegon Skatepark Design Fee Proposal
Item Labor Quantity Unit Rate Cost Totals
PRELIMINARY DESIGN (Phases 1 & 2)
Project Startup, Site Visit, 1st Open House
Principal 2 hrs $165.00 $330.00 $800.00
Lead Design 2 hrs $145.00 $290.00
Design Associate 2 hrs $90.00 $180.00
Preliminary Design Development
Principal 4 hrs $165.00 $660.00 $4,320.00
Lead Design 24 hrs $145.00 $3,480.00
Design Associate 2 hrs $90.00 $180.00
Final Conceptual Design
Principal 4 hrs $165.00 $660.00 $4,320.00
Lead Design 24 hrs $145.00 $3,480.00
Design Associate 2 hrs $90.00 $180.00
Total Services $9,440.00
4619 14th Ave SW, Seattle, WA 98106 | 206.932.6414 | inform@grindline.com
28
APPENDIX A
Proposal & Award Agreement
PROPOSAL & AWARD AGREEMENT
PROPOSAL & AWARD
The undersigned having become thoroughly familiar with and understanding of all the proposal
documents attached hereto, agrees to provide the services as specified herein, for the total fees as
stipulated herein, subject to negotiation.
I hereby state that all of the information I have provided is true, accurate and complete. I hereby
state that I have authority to submit this proposal which will become a binding contract if
accepted by the City of Muskegon.
I hereby state that I have read, understand and agree to be bound by all of the terms of this
proposal document.
Signature _____________________________ Title Chief Executive Officer
________________________
Print Name Matt Fluegge
____________________________ Date September 20th 2020
________________________
Firm Name Grindline Skateparks Inc.
4619 14th Ave SW, Seattle WA 98106
Address
Telephone No. 206 612 3401
E-Mail matt@grindline.com
Fax No.
3
30
CITY OF MUSKEGON
REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS
PROJECT NAME: Skate Park
DATE OF ISSUANCE: August 22nd, 2022
DATE PROPOSAL DUE: September 20th, 2022
ISSUING OFFICE: City of Muskegon
c/o – Leo Evans
1350 East Keating Avenue
Muskegon, MI 49442
Tel. (231) 724-6920
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROPOSAL & AWARD .................................................................................................... 3
INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS ....................................................................................... 4
SPECIFIC PROJECT INFORMATION.......................................................................... 6
CONTENTS OF PROPOSAL ........................................................................................... 9
EVALUATION ................................................................................................................... 9
TENTATIVE SCHEDULE FOR AWARD ...................................................................... 10
INSRUANCE REQUIREMENTS ..................................................................................... 11
ATTACHMENT A – PROJECT VICINITY MAP
Note: Should any of the pages or documents listed above be missing from your packet, or if you
have any questions regarding this RFQ, please contact Leo Evans at the City of Muskegon via
(231) 724-6920 or via E-mail at Leo.Evans@shorelinecity.com
2
PROPOSAL & AWARD
The undersigned having become thoroughly familiar with and understanding of all the proposal
documents attached hereto, agrees to provide the services as specified herein, for the total fees as
stipulated herein, subject to negotiation.
I hereby state that all of the information I have provided is true, accurate and complete. I hereby
state that I have authority to submit this proposal which will become a binding contract if
accepted by the City of Muskegon.
I hereby state that I have read, understand and agree to be bound by all of the terms of this
proposal document.
Signature _____________________________ Title ________________________
Print Name ____________________________ Date ________________________
Firm Name
Address
Telephone No.
E-Mail
Fax No.
3
INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS
PROPOSALS
All proposals must be submitted following the proposal format supplied by the City of
Muskegon in this document and shall be subject to all requirements of this document.
The City may consider as irregular any proposal in which there is an alteration of or departure
from the format stated in the documents, and at its option may reject the same.
Each bidder will include in their proposal a listing of each principal firm and the names of any
proposed sub-consultant/contractor and the name and address of each office which may be
involved in the project.
Before executing any subcontract, the successful firm shall submit the name and principals of
any proposed subcontractor for prior approval.
SUBMITTAL OF PROPOSALS
Three (3) copies of the proposal documents shall be submitted in a sealed envelope:
City of Muskegon
Attn: Clerk’s Office
RE: Skate Park
933 Terrace Street
Muskegon, MI. 49440
The envelope shall be clearly marked on the exterior denoting the name of the firm submitting
the proposal and the name of the particular RFP for which the proposal is offered.
The proposals shall be submitted by no later than 2:00 PM on Tuesday, September 20th, 2022.
AWARD / REJECTION OF PROPOSALS
The City reserves the right to reject any and all proposals and to waive any irregularity in
proposals received whenever such rejection or waiver is in the best interest of the City. The
bidder to whom the award is made will be notified at the earliest possible date. All bidders
submitting proposals will be notified when the award is made.
Award will not be completed until confirmed and recommended by the City Commission.
4
CITY RESPONSIBILITIES
The City of Muskegon will provide information as to the City’s requirements for the project and
make available pertinent information which may be useful in the project work.
The City will designate a person to act as the City’s Project Manager (Leo Evans) with respect to
the work to be performed. Such person will have the authority to transmit instructions, receive
information, interpret and define the City’s policies and decisions with respect to elements
pertinent to the project.
The City will examine all studies, reports, estimates, proposal, and other documents prepared by
the bidder and render in writing, if necessary, decisions pertinent thereto within a reasonable
time.
The City will direct the consultant in writing to begin the work on each phase of the project upon
receipt of written evidence from the firm of the appropriateness of such action.
The City will direct the bidder in writing to furnish any special services, sub-consultants and/or
extra work that may be required on the project upon receipt of written evidence from the firm
detailing as to cost, time schedule, and reason for such special service or extra work.
5
SPECIFIC PROJECT INFORMATION
INTRODUCTION TO PROJECT
The City of Muskegon is seeking proposals from qualified full-service firms to assist in the
design and construction of a new skate park within the City of Muskegon. The City of
Muskegon previously had a skate park which has become obsolete and is essentially fully
abandoned. Some work has been done by the City and Stakeholders to kick start the campaign
for construction of a new park, the information compiled to date is available here:
https://www.muskegon-mi.gov/skate-park-project/
The location of the proposed skate park has been identified and is included in Attachment A.
The proposed work will be broken into phases as follows:
Phase 1 – Conceptual Design
• Conceptual Design – Includes participation in a kick-off meeting with the designated
group of stakeholders to review the proposed location, establish the target size of the park
(+/- 10,000 SFT), and identify the potential elements. Upon completion of the kick-off
meeting the selected firm shall create preliminary site renderings and cost estimates.
• Community Outreach – Includes presenting the conceptual design material and cost
estimates in a community meeting format and soliciting feedback from the wider public,
possibly through a survey.
• Concept Revision - Includes refinement of the conceptual designs and preparation of final
renderings and cost estimates for the selected alternative. Cost estimates should be all
inclusive of construction costs, engineering fees, permit fees, future maintenance costs,
etc… The goal is to ensure that fundraising efforts successfully cover all necessary costs
for construction and perpetual care.
• Concept Finalization – Includes hosting a second community meeting to present the final
design details.
Phase 2 - Financing
• Fundraising – This phase is to be completed primarily by City staff and the various
project stakeholders, with some amount of minimal clarification and expertise required
from the selected vendor. City Staff and stakeholders will utilize the final renderings and
cost estimates to identify the grant funding, private fundraising, and public financing
options available to complete construction and start a maintenance fund for the proposed
skate park.
6
Phase 3 – Detailed Design & Bidding
• Detailed Design – Upon identification of an appropriate fundraising mechanism for the
project, the selected vendor will be directed to complete a detailed design for the site
including all appropriate survey, plans, specifications, and complete contract documents
for bidding.
• Bid Solicitation – Vendor shall assist the city in obtaining bids for the entire project,
and/or for any individual components of the project that are not directly performed by the
selected vendor. The city’s preference is to hire a vendor that can design and construct
the skate park. City purchasing policy guidelines shall be followed for any items sent for
bidding, and any vendors involved in the construction phase shall be required to comply
with all standard City policies and procedures regarding contracting.
Phase 4 – Construction
• Construction Oversight and Project Management – Selected vendor will be responsible to
provide management of the construction project from inception through final completion.
Work will include addressing any requests for information, ensuring the project remains
on schedule, maintaining the project budget, and preparing detailed As-Built drawings
upon completion of the project.
Special Considerations
• The Boys and Girls Club property can afford to lose no more than 8 parking spaces as a
result of this project.
• The design should allow ample room for a driveway/road to be constructed along the east
side of the Boys and Girls Club building in the future if/when that is ever needed.
• The design should include two (2) sidewalk connections between the Boys and Girls
Club parking lot and Rotary Park. Two (2) connections exist currently; they can be
maintained in their existing state, or rerouted as a part of the design.
• The mature pine trees on the south end of the identified area should be preserved if
possible with a preference to incorporate them into the design.
• The skate park should include fencing along the perimeter where necessary to comply
with standard practices. Appropriate separation and access should be maintained
between the existing playground features and the proposed skate park.
• There should be no primary features constructed on top of the storm sewer outfall in the
event it requires future maintenance. Consideration could be given to potentially
removing the enclosed storm sewer outlet and incorporating an open channel for the
outlet into the design of the park.
7
At this time the City has committed an amount of $10,000 to be allocated to the selected vendor
for completion of Phases 1 and 2 of the project. Commitments for the later Phases of the project
will be subject to a successful fundraising campaign in Phase 2.
A proposed schedule for the project is included later in this RFP.
Questions on the above phasing can be submitted to Leo Evans via email
(Leo.Evans@shorelinecity.com). Questions received prior to Monday, September 12th, 2022
will receive a response prior to the acceptance of the RFP. Requests received after that date will
receive a response pending staff availability.
8
CONTENTS OF PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL
At a minimum, each proposal shall include the following items:
QUALIFICATIONS OF TEAM
Highlight similar past experiences, and technical competence as it relates to the specific project
details and previously completed projects. Include a summary of the items and phases of work
that would be self-performed by your firm and any items/phases that would be performed by
sub-contractors.
Include a brief summary with resumes of the key staff for the project, including any key staff that
work for proposed subcontractors.
Qualifications of Team limited to three (3) pages of text
(Not including resumes and pictures)
UNDERSTANING OF SERVICES
Include a narrative description of your plan for accomplishing the project. Provide a timeline for
the project including key milestones to be met and identify dates for completion of project
deliverables. Identify critical areas of the project and your plan for addressing the critical needs.
Understanding of Services limited to one (1) page of text
(Not including example pictures)
PRICED PROPOSAL
Confirm that your firm can complete Phases 1 and 2 for the identified allocation of $10,000.
Cost for the remaining phases will be negotiated based on the design and cost estimates prepared
in Phase 1 and the successful identification of a funding mechanism for the project.
EVALUATION
Staff and Stakeholders will review the submitted proposals and make a recommendation to the
City Commission for award of the contract for Phases 1 and 2 based on the current purchasing
policies of the City. Subsequent Phases will require separate Commission approval.
9
TENTATIVE SCHEDULE FOR AWARD
Issue RFP ...................................................................August 22nd, 2022
Proposal Due Date .....................................................September 20th, 2022
Staff / Stakeholder Proposal Scoring .........................September 20th – 26th, 2022
City Commission Consideration of Bids ...................October 11th, 2022
Phase 1 Start Date ......................................................After Notice to Proceed issued by City Staff
City / Stakeholder Kickoff Meeting...............November 2022
Community Meeting #1 .................................February 2023
Community Meeting #2 .................................April 2023
Phase 1 Completion Date ...........................................May 1st, 2023
Phase 2 Start Date ......................................................May 2023
Phase 2 Completion Date ...........................................TBD
Phase 3-4 ....................................................................TBD
10
INSURANCE REQUIRMENTS
The Bidder will be required to comply with the following insurance and indemnity requirements
BEFORE ANY AGREEMENTS CAN BE EXECUTED:
a. Hold Harmless Agreements: To the fullest extent permitted by law, Vendor agrees to
defend, pay on behalf of, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed
officials, employees, volunteers and others working on behalf of the City against any and
all claims, demands, suits, or loss, including any costs connected therewith, and for any
damages which may be asserted, claimed or recovered against or from the City, its
elected and appointed officials, employees, volunteers, or others working on behalf of the
City, by reason of personal injury, including bodily injury and death, property damage,
including loss of use thereof, and/or the effects of or release of toxic and/or hazardous
material which arises out of or is in any way connected or associated with this contract.
The obligation to defend and hold harmless extends to Consultant’s employees, agents,
subcontractors, assigns and successors.
b. Vendor Insurance Requirements: Vendor shall not commence work under this contract
until obtaining the insurance required under this paragraph. All coverage shall be with
insurance companies licensed and admitted to do business in the State of Michigan and
Best Rated A VIII. All coverage shall be with insurance carriers acceptable to the City.
.
c. Workers' Compensation Insurance: The Vendor shall procure and maintain during the
life of this contract, Workers' Compensation Insurance, including Employer's Liability
coverage, in accordance with all applicable Statutes of the State of Michigan.
d. General Liability Insurance: The Vendor shall procure and maintain during the life of
this contract, commercial General Liability Insurance on an "Occurrence Basis" with
limits of liability not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and/or aggregate combined
single limit, Personal Injury, Bodily Injury and Property Damage. Coverage shall include
the following extensions: (a) Contractual Liability; (b) Products and Completed
Operations; (c) Independent Contractor's Coverage; (d) Broad Form General Liability
Extensions or equivalent.
e. Motor Vehicle Liability: The Vendor shall procure and maintain during the life of this
contract Motor Vehicle Liability Insurance, including Michigan no-fault coverage, with
limits of liability of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence or combined single limit
Bodily Injury and Property Damage. Coverage shall include all owned vehicles, all non-
owned vehicles and all hired vehicles.
11
f. Professional Liability Insurance: The Vendor shall procure and maintain during the life
of this contract and during the performance of all services Professional Liability
Insurance covering all performances from the beginning of the consultant's services on a
"claims made basis" and shall maintain coverage from commencement of this contract
until six (6) months following completion of the consultant's work with limits of liability
not less than $500,000 per claim. This section is only applicable for RFP’s requesting
professional services (Architect, Engineer, etc…)
g. Additional Insured: Commercial General Liability and Motor Vehicle Liability
Insurance, as described above, shall include an endorsement stating the following shall be
"Additional Insured": The CITY OF MUSKEGON, all elected and appointed officials,
all employees and volunteers, all boards, commissions and/or authorities and board
members, including employees and volunteers thereof.
h. Cancellation Notice: Workers' Compensation Insurance, General Liability Insurance,
Motor Vehicle Liability Insurance, and Professional Liability Insurance, as described
above, shall include an endorsement stating the following: "It is understood and agreed
that Thirty (30) Days Advance Written Notice of Cancellation, Non-Renewal, Reduction
and/or Material Change shall be sent to: CITY OF MUSKEGON ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT.
i. Proof of Insurance Coverage: The Consultant shall provide the City at the time the
contracts are returned by him for execution, certificates and policies as listed below:
1. Two (2) copies of Certificate of Insurance for Workers' Compensation Insurance
2. Two (2) copies of Certificate of Insurance for Commercial General Liability
Insurance
3. Two (2) copies of Certificate of Insurance for Vehicle Liability Insurance
4. Two (2) copies of Certificate of Insurance for Professional Liability Insurance
5. If so requested, certified copies of all policies mentioned above will be furnished.
If any of the above coverage expires during the term of this contract, the Consultant shall
deliver renewal certificates and/or policies to the City at least ten (10) days prior to the
expiration date.
12
Agenda Item Review Form
Muskegon City Commission
Commission Meeting Date: October 25, 2022 Title: Source Water Intake
Protection Plan Update
Submitted By: Joe Buthker Department:
Public Works - Filtration
Brief Summary: The Water Filtration Plant’s Source Water Intake Protection Plan is due for an
update, and the City has been awarded an EGLE grant to cover half of the project’s total cost.
Detailed Summary & Background:
City staff worked with Tetra Tech in 2017 to develop Muskegon’s first Source Water Intake
Protection Plan (SWIPP). This document is due to be updated as EGLE recommends updates
every 6 years.
The purpose of a SWIPP is to protect the long-term viability of a drinking water supply by reducing
the potential risk of surface and subsurface contamination from affecting the source water
protection area. The project will culminate with an updated SWIPP that will focus on protecting our
drinking water source, form a basis for informed decision-making regarding land use within the
community, form a basis for dealing with future regulations, and produce an approvable report with
all required elements.
Staff requested Tetra Tech provide the City with a proposal to update the plan. Tetra Tech has
extensive experience from its creation of the original plan, and the City will be working with some
of the same integral staff that created the original plan. Tetra Tech has already worked alongside
City staff on a successful grant application for this project.
This project is budgeted for $30,000 in FY 2022-23, and the grant the City was awarded from
EGLE will reimburse $15,000 of project-related expenses.
Goal/Focus Area/Action Item Addressed:
Action Item 2022 - 4.2: Take advantage of external revenue sources
Amount Requested: $30,000.00 Amount Budgeted: $30,000.00
Fund(s) or Account(s): 591 Fund(s) or Account(s): 591
Source Water Protection Source Water Protection
Recommended Motion: Authorize staff to enter into an agreement with Tetra Tech to update the
City of Muskegon’s Source Water Intake Protection Plan.
Approvals: Get approval from division head at a minimum prior Guest(s) Invited / Presenting
to sending to the Clerk.
Immediate Division Head Information Technology Yes
Other Division Heads Communication No
Legal Review
For City Clerk Use Only:
Commission Action:
September 28, 2022
Mr. Joe Buthker, Water Plant Superintendent
Muskegon Water Filtration Plant
City of Muskegon
1900 Beach Street
Muskegon, MI 49441
Re: Surface Water Intake Protection Plan Proposal
Dear Mr. Buthker:
The approximately 80,000 customers you serve expect the Muskegon water filtration plant to not only provide potable
water, but also be economical in the process. In this time of shrinking governmental financial support and difficult local
economic times, your water treatment process should give you the best value for each dollar, and the best way to do that is
to ensure that your source water is as free from contaminants as is practicable.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide this proposal to assist you with creating the Surface Water Intake Protection Plan
for the City of Muskegon based on your EGLE Grant requirements. We are confident that Tetra Tech offers unsurpassed
value with our water resource planning and assessment services. Attachment A details our proposed scope of services to
assist you with the activities associated with and development of a Surface Water Intake Protection Plan for the area
contributing to the Muskegon Water Treatment Plant.
We propose a lump sum compensation amount of $30,000 for this work.
If you concur with our proposal, please sign in the space provided below and return one original signed copy of this proposal
to indicate your authorization to proceed. The agreement for this project is comprised of this letter, Attachment A, and the
accompanying Standard Terms and Conditions.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City of Muskegon. Please feel free to call if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Gary Markstrom, P.E. Steve Pennington, Ph.D.
Unit Vice President Project Manager
Encl.: Scope of Services
Standard Terms and Conditions
PROPOSAL ACCEPTED BY CITY OF MUSKEGON
BY:
TITLE: DATE:
Tetra Tech
401 South Washington Square, Suite 100, Lansing, MI 48933
Tel 517.316.3930 Fax 517.484.8140 www.tetratech.com
Muskegon, Michigan
Source Water Intake Protection Plan
Scope of Work
September 28, 2022
INTRODUCTION
Tetra Tech understands the goal of the City of Muskegon Water Filtration Plant management is to
produce abundant, clean, safe, and aesthetically pleasing water for its customers. To effectively and
efficiently do so, it is imperative that the source water being withdrawn is of the highest quality feasible
before it is treated, polished, and eventually distributed.
Tetra Tech completed a SWIPP for the Muskegon Filtration Plant in 2017 and enlists the expertise of
some of the same integral staff to update that plan. Tetra Tech will provide a team of water resource and
land use management experts that will work with you to identify both real and potential threats to the
area source water supply. The intent is to produce a plan that contains policies, procedures, and action
items designed to ensure the safety of your water supply, now and in the future.
BACKGROUND
The Muskegon Water Filtration Plant is a conventional water treatment plant with a capacity of 40 million
gallons per day. Customers include not only the City of Muskegon, but also North Muskegon, Muskegon
Township, Roosevelt Park, County Northside, Fruitport, and Norton Shores. Water is withdrawn from
Lake Michigan.
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) performed an assessment of the City’s source
water in 2003 to determine the susceptibility to or the relative potential of contamination. The
susceptibility rating is on a six-tiered scale from very low to high and is based primarily on geologic
sensitivity, water chemistry, and contaminant sources. The susceptibility of the source water is
moderately high. MDEQ was rebranded as Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy
(EGLE) but the acronyms are still used interchangeably in guidance documents.
Tetra Tech completed a SWIPP for the Muskegon Water Filtration Plant in December 2017. Muskegon
has received a grant to update the SWIPP. The following activities will provide an update to that plan by
or before the end of the grant period: August 30, 2023.
DESCRIPTION OF APPROACH AND SCOPE OF SERVICES
Tetra Tech anticipates the following as goals of the Surface Water Intake Protection Plan (SWIPP):
To focus limited resources to protect the drinking water source(s). The SWIPP will provide your
community with recommendations for actions within the source water area (SWA) that potentially
can directly affect your water supply. It is within this SWA that a spill or improper use of potential
contaminants may cause these contaminants to migrate toward the water intake. By addressing where
the source waters are most susceptible to contaminants, and where potential contaminants are located,
the SWIPP will clearly identify the potential risks and actions that should be undertaken to mitigate
the introduction of contaminants.
To form the basis for informed decision-making regarding land use within the community.
Recommendations in the SWIPP will guide the City planning authorities to make informed decisions
regarding proposed land uses within the SWA that are compatible with both your drinking water
resource and the vision of growth embraced by the city and neighboring communities.
To form the basis for dealing with future regulations. The SWIPP will be designed to functionally
meet proposed requirements for your surface-water supply. Actions needed to address the City’s
needs and requirements will be made through this report.
Tetra Tech Page 1 of 5
To produce an approvable report with all seven required elements including: Defining
responsible agency roles, designating a source water protection area (completed by MDEQ in 2003
assessment), contingency plans, the updated contaminant sources, alternate sources, new sources,
and a public education plan.
The following proposed scope of work reflects Tetra Tech’s understanding of the EGLE requirements.
TASK 1: DEVELOP A SURFACE WATER INTAKE PROTECTION PLAN (SWIPP)
1.1: Document Review and Planning Meeting
Tetra Tech will review the Source Water Assessment and will meet with the City of Muskegon to refine
the scope for this project.
1.2: Update the 2017 Muskegon Source Water Intake Protection Plan
The current assumption is that little has changed regarding the identified land use threats in the 2017 plan
based on the the 2003 Susceptibility Determination. Essentially, the first four elements of an approvable
SWIPP are covered by the assessment, so it will need to be updated. Tetra Tech will update the assessment
information as agreed upon during the implementation of Task 1.1. Based on our preliminary review of
the existing assessment, it is anticipated that the following plan updates will be necessary:
Contact List for SWIPP
The City of Muskegon will provide contact names for the SWPP team and Tetra Tech will update
the plan (from the assessment information) to reflect current team members.
The Assessment Inventory
Tetra Tech will search the government environmental databases and update the assessment
information for other land uses to be considered for inclusion in the SWIPP. It is anticipated that
the following databases will be reviewed:
o EGLE leaking underground storage tank (LUST) sites;
o EGLE registered underground storage tank (UST) sites;
o EGLE Environmental Cleanup Site Information System (ECSI) sites;
o EGLE Source Information System (for water discharge permit sites including National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, Water Pollution Control
Facility (WPCF) permits, storm water discharge permits, and on-site sewage (septic) system
permits);
o EGLE Underground Injection Control (UIC) database;
o EGLE Active Solid Waste Disposal Permits list;
o Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) - Hazardous Materials database;
o State Fire Marshall registry of above-ground fuel storage tank sites;
o State Fire Marshall Hazardous Material Handlers and Hazardous Material Incidents
(HAZMAT) sites;
o U.S. EPA BASINS software, version 2.1;
o U.S. EPA Envirofacts database;
o U.S. EPA Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) generators or notifiers list;
o U.S. EPA RCRA Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facility (TSDF) Permits list;
o U.S. EPA National Priorities List (NPL);
o U.S. EPA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability
Information System (CERCLA) List;
Tetra Tech Page 2 of 5
o U.S. EPA RCRA Corrective Action Activity List (CORRACTS);
o U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Hazardous Materials Information Reporting
System (IIMIRS).
In addition to the database review results, Tetra Tech will review the following:
Aerial photographs;
If needed, Tetra Tech will verify the database search results using windshield surveys and
interviews with City officials. Tetra Tech will update the Potential Contaminant Source Inventory
Map that is provided in the assessment with the current potential contaminant sources.
1.3: Recommendations/Response Plan and Timeline
Based on discussions with the City, and Tetra Tech’s expertise, a list of recommendations will be
developed and prioritized. A timeline for the implementation of the recommendations will also be
developed. Tetra Tech will review the existing emergency response and make additional recommendations
for the most likely contaminants that might occur.
1.4: Cost Estimates and Alternative Funding Sources
Cost estimates for implementing the recommendations will be developed. Where applicable, alternative
funding sources will be presented for which the City may consider applying to offset the cost of
implementing the recommendations.
1.5: Perpetuating the Plan
The EGLE has a recommendation that SWIPPs be updated every six years. Tetra Tech will recommend
steps the City can take to ensure the plan data is being continually updated, thus ensuring that if future
policy changes are required they are based on the best available information.
TASK 2.0 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PLAN (PEP)
In partnership with the City, Tetra Tech proposes to design a community engagement process that will
support the Surface Water Intake Protection (SWIP) planning effort. The PEP team will ensure seamless
alignment of public engagement activities and ongoing communication through participation in select
meetings with the project team (City staff, the West Michigan Shoreline Regional Development
Commission, and others).
It is anticipated that the following tasks will be part of the PEP.
Task 2.1: Public Meetings:
Host three public meetings, to be staged at logical intervals throughout the project, as follows:
1. An initial public meeting to announce the launch of the SWIPP project, sharing a high-level
orientation that includes project goals, timeline, and public engagement opportunities;
2. A second public meeting to present the early findings from the project team’s benchmarking of
peer communities; feedback will be welcomed and collected in the interest of forming the plan’s
final content; and
3. Finally, a third public meeting will share the SWIPP in its final form, including a description of
the prioritization process as well as the context of how the SWIPP reflects feedback gathered
through the public engagement process and the work of the SWIPP Team, with anticipated next
steps and implications.
Tetra Tech Page 3 of 5
One consultant will be present at each of the public meetings. Each meeting is anticipated to require 90
minutes.
Task 2.3: Progress Meetings
Lead by Tetra Tech, the PEP team will participate in progress meetings with the City of Muskegon and
project team. Project progress meetings are in the Project Management Task outlined below. It is not
anticipated that all personnel will be physically present and that some people may phone or video cast into
the meetings.
Task 2.4: Meeting Minutes and Content
The PEP Team will review all existing documentation from previous public engagement efforts as well as
prepare, refine, and finalize supporting documentation (e.g., meeting agendas/summaries; presentation
materials) and other content (e.g., to be used for the project website, press releases, social media, mailings)
as needed to advance the work.
Additionally, this proposal reflects a modest accommodation for the necessary project-related email and
phone communication to occur throughout the course of the project.
TASK 3.0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND DELIVERABLES
Project management will consist of weekly internal monitoring of the project status and budget. Progress
with the City’s SWIPP steering committee are also important and we propose three meetings occurring at
the following times:
Kickoff
An intermediate meeting to review progress and interim deliverables.
A meeting to review the draft report and plan for the first public presentation.
We anticipate delivering a digital copy of the draft SWIPP. Upon receiving the City’s final comments, we
will update the SWIPP and deliver a PDF copy of the final report. We anticipate the final SWIPP to be a
10- to 20-page document inclusive of figures.
We suggest that the SWIPP be structured as per the EGLE guidance with the following program headings:
Basic Information
Defining roles and duties of government units and water supply agencies
Designating the source water protection area (SWP)
Identification of potential sources of contaminants within the SWP area
Identifying available management approaches for protection of the source water
Contingency plans and alternative drinking water sources
Assuring proper siting of new water sources
Encouraging public participation
ASSUMPTIONS
The following assumptions were considered in developing a scope of work and pricing for this proposal:
The current water production is the same as it was when the existing SWIPP was completed.
The SWIPP will be delivered in PDF format.
Presentations to the City Council are not included.
Meeting room costs (if necessary) will be borne by the City of Muskegon.
There will be no more than three progress meetings with the City team.
Tetra Tech Page 4 of 5
No water quality monitoring or modeling will be done on this assignment.
Implementation and development of recommendations (e.g., writing model zoning ordinances for
upstream communities) are not included in the scope.
IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Based on the above Scope of Services, Tetra Tech anticipates the date for completion of the Source Water
Intake Protection Plan to be prior to the grant period ending August 30, 2023. The following timeline will
be used for milestones:
Targeted
SWIPP Elements Completion
Date
1 Defining roles and duties of government units and water supply agencies. November
2022
2 Designating a source water protection area for each water supply source
March 2023
based on the state’s defined source water area.
3 Identifying potential contaminant sources within each source water protection
March 2023
area.
4 Establishing management approaches for protection of source water,
May 2023
including but not limited to education and regulatory approaches.
5 Creating contingency plans for public water supply sources including the
May 2023
location of alternate drinking water sources.
6 Assuring proper siting on new water sources to minimize potential
Mar 2023
contamination.
7 Encouraging public participation. March - July
2023
8 Completion and Submittal of SWIPP August 15,
2023
Tetra Tech Page 5 of 5
Agenda Item Review Form
Muskegon City Commission
Commission Meeting Date: October 25th, 2022 Title: Splashpad RFQ
Submitted By: Leo Evans Department of Public Works
Brief Summary:
Staff requests authorization to issue a request for qualifications to replace the downtown splash pad.
Detailed Summary & Background:
During the summer of 2022 the downtown splash pad was subject to frequent breakdowns and
disruptions in service. An extensive amount of resources were put towards the project on numerous
occasions to provide what little operational use the site was able to provide in 2022. Late in 2022 the
system failed again and it was determined in the best interest to close it for the remainder of the year
rather than continue to try and limp the system along. Repair options for the existing system are still
being evaluated, however even if a repair is feasible it is unlikely to be more than a stopgap measure
and there is a high likelihood of numerous service interruptions and resource requirements during the
2023 season.
Staff is requesting approval to issue the attached request for qualifications to begin the next phase of
this project which will start to envision a long term replacement for the site. The process is planned for
a similar rollout to how the playgrounds at Reese and Beukema were completed. Proposals received
through the RFQ process will be reviewed and shortlisted by a team of stakeholders and then
presented to the Commission and Public for additional feedback. Construction of a new site for use in
2023 is a potential that we will request of those submitting a proposal for the project.
No funds are currently allocated towards this project and financial resources would need to be
identified to support the completion of this project. To that end staff is preparing an application to the
Michigan Spark Grant program, which aims to distribute 65 million dollars from Michigan’s federal
Investment in Infrastructure and Jobs Act (IIJA) disbursement into the state’s parks systems. The
application period closes December 19th, with awards to follow in three tranches in the winter, spring
and summer of 2023.
Goal/Focus Area/Action Item Addressed:
Destination Community & Quality of Life / Enhanced Parks & Recreation Department and Services
Amount Requested: N/A Amount Budgeted: N/A
Fund(s) or Account(s): N/A Fund(s) or Account(s): N/A
Recommended Motion:
Authorize staff to issue a request for qualifications for the replacement of the downtown splash pad.
Approvals: Guest(s) Invited / Presenting
Immediate Division Head Information Technology
Other Division Heads Communication Yes
Legal Review No
For City Clerk Use Only:
Commission Action:
CITY OF MUSKEGON
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
PROJECT NAME: Splash Pad Reconstruction
DATE OF ISSUANCE: October 26th, 2022
DATE PROPOSAL DUE: November 22nd, 2022
ISSUING OFFICE: City of Muskegon
c/o – Leo Evans
1350 East Keating Avenue
Muskegon, MI 49442
Tel. (231) 724-6920
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROPOSAL & AWARD ................................................................................................ 3
INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS ................................................................................... 4
SPECIFIC PROJECT INFORMATION....................................................................... 6
CONTENTS OF PROPOSAL........................................................................................ 8
EVALUATION............................................................................................................... 8
TENTATIVE SCHEDULE FOR AWARD ................................................................... 9
INSRUANCE REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................. 10
ATTACHMENT A – PROJECT VICINITY MAP
Note: Should any of the pages or documents listed above be missing from your packet, or if you
have any questions regarding this RFP, please contact Leo Evans at the City of Muskegon via
(231) 724-6920 or via E-mail at Leo.Evans@shorelinecity.com
2
PROPOSAL & AWARD
The undersigned having become thoroughly familiar with and understanding of all the proposal
documents attached hereto, agrees to provide the services as specified herein, for the total fees as
stipulated herein, subject to negotiation.
I hereby state that all of the information I have provided is true, accurate and complete. I hereby
state that I have authority to submit this proposal which will become a binding contract if
accepted by the City of Muskegon.
I hereby state that I have read, understand and agree to be bound by all of the terms of this
proposal document.
Signature _____________________________ Title ________________________
Print Name ____________________________ Date ________________________
Firm Name
Address
Telephone No.
E-Mail
Fax No.
3
INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS
PROPOSALS
All proposals must be submitted following the proposal format supplied by the City of
Muskegon in this document and shall be subject to all requirements of this document.
The City may consider as irregular any proposal in which there is an alteration of or departure
from the format stated in the documents, and at its option may reject the same.
Each bidder will include in their proposal a listing of each principal firm and the names of any
proposed sub-consultant/contractor and the name and address of each office which may be
involved in the project.
Before executing any subcontract, the successful firm shall submit the name and principals of
any proposed subcontractor for prior approval.
SUBMITTAL OF PROPOSALS
Three (3) copies of the proposal documents shall be submitted in a sealed envelope:
City of Muskegon
Attn: Clerk’s Office
RE: Skate Park
933 Terrace Street
Muskegon, MI. 49440
The envelope shall be clearly marked on the exterior denoting the name of the firm submitting
the proposal and the name of the particular RFP for which the proposal is offered.
The proposals shall be submitted by no later than 2:00 PM on Tuesday, November 22nd, 2022.
AWARD / REJECTION OF PROPOSALS
The City reserves the right to reject any and all proposals and to waive any irregularity in
proposals received whenever such rejection or waiver is in the best interest of the City. The
bidder to whom the award is made will be notified at the earliest possible date. All bidders
submitting proposals will be notified when the award is made.
Award will not be completed until confirmed and recommended by the City Commission.
4
CITY RESPONSIBILITIES
The City of Muskegon will provide information as to the City’s requirements for the project and
make available pertinent information which may be useful in the project work.
The City will designate a person to act as the City’s Project Manager (Leo Evans) with respect to
the work to be performed. Such person will have the authority to transmit instructions, receive
information, interpret and define the City’s policies and decisions with respect to elements
pertinent to the project.
The City will examine all studies, reports, estimates, proposal, and other documents prepared by
the bidder and render in writing, if necessary, decisions pertinent thereto within a reasonable
time.
The City will direct the consultant in writing to begin the work on each phase of the project upon
receipt of written evidence from the firm of the appropriateness of such action.
The City will direct the bidder in writing to furnish any special services, sub-consultants and/or
extra work that may be required on the project upon receipt of written evidence from the firm
detailing as to cost, time schedule, and reason for such special service or extra work.
5
SPECIFIC PROJECT INFORMATION
INTRODUCTION TO PROJECT
The City of Muskegon is seeking proposals from qualified companies to design and construct a
new splash pad to replace the existing splash pad located in the 200 Block of West Western
Avenue adjacent to the City Farmers Market, the Post Office and Alcoa Square.
Approximate Location - https://goo.gl/maps/SDBbbc9SyiQWZjy59
The existing splash pad is currently non-functional and the City is requesting that companies
provide the following documents as a part of this RFP related to the replacement of the existing
facility:
• Site specific conceptual design including renderings and site amenities as necessary to
properly convey the proposed design for the site.
• Full turnkey cost estimate for the demolition of the existing site and construction of the
new facility. Inclusive of any administration, permitting, and other soft costs.
• A conceptual project schedule based on receiving a notice to proceed in January 2023.
Plans for the existing splash pad and site are included as an attachment to this document for
reference along with an aerial view of the site showing the approximate existing public utility
features of the site. Pictures can be provided upon request for interested firms that are unable to
visit the site in person.
Site Design Considerations
• Proposed site design cannot permanently impact the surrounding amenities including seat
walls, art work, landscaping, trees, etc…
• Design should be at least as large as the existing splash pad which is approximately a 40
FT diameter circle (1,250 SFT). Designs can be larger to utilize more of the surrounding
space provided there are no impacts to the adjacent features.
• Design should have primary features be above ground installations.
• Design should be geared towards all ages of youth use.
• The design must be universally accessible.
• The design should be based on a non-recirculating system. The existing system was
designed for recirculation and later converted to non-recirculating. The design should
include an estimated annual water usage for purposes of estimating the operating costs.
6
• City is requesting turnkey cost proposals for this project in the range of $400,000.
• The proposal should include a conceptual schedule for the project based on a notice to
proceed in January 2023 and identifying a target date that the site could be operational.
Questions on the above phasing can be submitted to Leo Evans via email
(Leo.Evans@shorelinecity.com). Questions received prior to Monday, November 14th, 2022 will
receive a response prior to the acceptance of the RFP. Requests received after that date will
receive a response pending staff availability.
7
CONTENTS OF PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL
At a minimum, each proposal shall include the following items:
CONCEPTUAL DESIGN RENDERINGS
Presentation quality, site specific design renderings showing the general layout of the site from
various views. Renderings should be set to convey a clear and concise conceptual layout;
highlight the overall size of the splash pad; how the proposed design fits into the existing site;
specific noteworthy features/amenities of the site; and options for color schemes. The site
should highlight Muskegon and in particular the downtown city core.
TURNKEY COST ESTIMATE
Provide a cost estimate for the full scope of the project inclusive of all features needed from start
to finish on the project. City has identified a target cost of $400,000 for the project and will
provide additional scoring points to projects that can deliver a successful project below that
threshold.
PROJECT SCHEDULE
Provide a conceptual schedule for the project based on a January 2023 notice to proceed for
consideration by the staff/commission/stakeholders.
EVALUATION
Staff and Stakeholders will review the submitted proposals and make a recommendation to the
City Commission based on a qualifications based selection.
8
TENTATIVE SCHEDULE
Issue RFP ................................................................ October 26th, 2022
Proposal Due Date .................................................. November 22nd, 2022
Staff / Stakeholder Proposal Scoring ....................... November 22nd – December 19th, 2022
City Commission Consideration of Bids .................. January 2023
Notice to Proceed .................................................... January 2023
Construction Completion ........................................ As outlined in proposal
9
INSURANCE REQUIRMENTS
The Bidder will be required to comply with the following insurance and indemnity requirements
BEFORE ANY AGREEMENTS CAN BE EXECUTED:
a. Hold Harmless Agreements: To the fullest extent permitted by law, Vendor agrees to
defend, pay on behalf of, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed
officials, employees, volunteers and others working on behalf of the City against any and
all claims, demands, suits, or loss, including any costs connected therewith, and for any
damages which may be asserted, claimed or recovered against or from the City, its
elected and appointed officials, employees, volunteers, or others working on behalf of the
City, by reason of personal injury, including bodily injury and death, property damage,
including loss of use thereof, and/or the effects of or release of toxic and/or hazardous
material which arises out of or is in any way connected or associated with this contract.
The obligation to defend and hold harmless extends to Consultant’s employees, agents,
subcontractors, assigns and successors.
b. Vendor Insurance Requirements: Vendor shall not commence work under this contract
until obtaining the insurance required under this paragraph. All coverage shall be with
insurance companies licensed and admitted to do business in the State of Michigan and
Best Rated A VIII. All coverage shall be with insurance carriers acceptable to the City.
.
c. Workers' Compensation Insurance: The Vendor shall procure and maintain during the
life of this contract, Workers' Compensation Insurance, including Employer's Liability
coverage, in accordance with all applicable Statutes of the State of Michigan.
d. General Liability Insurance: The Vendor shall procure and maintain during the life of
this contract, commercial General Liability Insurance on an "Occurrence Basis" with
limits of liability not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and/or aggregate combined
single limit, Personal Injury, Bodily Injury and Property Damage. Coverage shall include
the following extensions: (a) Contractual Liability; (b) Products and Completed
Operations; (c) Independent Contractor's Coverage; (d) Broad Form General Liability
Extensions or equivalent.
e. Motor Vehicle Liability: The Vendor shall procure and maintain during the life of this
contract Motor Vehicle Liability Insurance, including Michigan no-fault coverage, with
limits of liability of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence or combined single limit
Bodily Injury and Property Damage. Coverage shall include all owned vehicles, all non-
owned vehicles and all hired vehicles.
10
f. Professional Liability Insurance: The Vendor shall procure and maintain during the life
of this contract and during the performance of all services Professional Liability
Insurance covering all performances from the beginning of the consultant's services on a
"claims made basis" and shall maintain coverage from commencement of this contract
until six (6) months following completion of the consultant's work with limits of liability
not less than $500,000 per claim. This section is only applicable for RFP’s requesting
professional services (Architect, Engineer, etc…)
g. Additional Insured: Commercial General Liability and Motor Vehicle Liability
Insurance, as described above, shall include an endorsement stating the following shall be
"Additional Insured": The CITY OF MUSKEGON, all elected and appointed officials,
all employees and volunteers, all boards, commissions and/or authorities and board
members, including employees and volunteers thereof.
h. Cancellation Notice: Workers' Compensation Insurance, General Liability Insurance,
Motor Vehicle Liability Insurance, and Professional Liability Insurance, as described
above, shall include an endorsement stating the following: "It is understood and agreed
that Thirty (30) Days Advance Written Notice of Cancellation, Non-Renewal, Reduction
and/or Material Change shall be sent to: CITY OF MUSKEGON ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT.
i. Proof of Insurance Coverage: The Consultant shall provide the City at the time the
contracts are returned by him for execution, certificates and policies as listed below:
1. Two (2) copies of Certificate of Insurance for Workers' Compensation Insurance
2. Two (2) copies of Certificate of Insurance for Commercial General Liability
Insurance
3. Two (2) copies of Certificate of Insurance for Vehicle Liability Insurance
4. Two (2) copies of Certificate of Insurance for Professional Liability Insurance
5. If so requested, certified copies of all policies mentioned above will be furnished.
If any of the above coverage expires during the term of this contract, the Consultant shall
deliver renewal certificates and/or policies to the City at least ten (10) days prior to the
expiration date.
11
Agenda Item Review Form
Muskegon City Commission
Commission Meeting Date: October 25, 2022 Title: Stormwater Management Ordinance
Submitted By: Dan VanderHeide Department: Public Works
Brief Summary: A new stormwater ordinance for adoption that puts the City in responsible charge
for stormwater management reviews for new developments and other similar situations.
Detailed Summary & Background: The City has used the Muskegon County Drain Commissioner’s
Office for storm water management reviews of new development since about October of 2016. In
2021 the City began the process of taking back management of our own storm water reviews to
increase quality and control over the process and to speed review times. Staff has been working with
ENG. Inc. to prepare a new storm water ordinance that will allow the City to formally take back control
of storm water management with an ordinance and other documents in compliance with our state
permitting requirements and EGLE procedures. The City attorney has reviewed the ordinance.
Developers will see little change to the process, as the new ordinance and rules are designed very
similar to the County standards we now use, and reviews will continue to be performed by ENG. Inc.,
the same consultant that performs reviews for the County. What changes do occur are anticipated to
be positive to both the City and developers, with the goal of increasing service and practicality of
application.
The ordinance and associated procedures manual were presented for review at the October 10 Work
Session meeting. Both documents will require review by the state, however in a quirk of procedure
the state will not approve the documents until adopted. Given the similarity of these documents and
rules to those of other Muskegon County governments and similar governments throughout the state,
staff and the consultant anticipate minimal comments from the state, if any.
Focus Area Addressed: Sustainability in financial practices and infrastructure.
Amount Requested: N/A Amount Budgeted: N/A
Fund(s) or Account(s): Fund(s) or Account(s):
Recommended Motion: Move to repeal Sections 26-300 through 26-400 of Chapter 26 Article V,
and to adopt Sections 26-500 through 26-585 of Chapter 26 Article V, of the Code of Ordinances
of the City of Muskegon, Michigan, and to adopt the Stormwater Management Standards guidance
documents dated October of 2022.
Approvals: Guest(s) Invited / Presenting
Immediate Division Head Information Technology
Other Division Heads Communication Yes
No
Legal Review
For City Clerk Use Only:
Commission Action:
CITY OF MUSKEGON
MUSKEGON COUNTY, MICHIGAN
ORDINANCE NO. ____
THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MUSKEGON HEREBY ORDAINS:
1. Chapter 26 Article V of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Muskegon,
Michigan, Sections 26-300 through 26-400 are repealed.
2. Chapter 26 Article V of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Muskegon,
Michigan, Sections 26-500 through 26 –585 are adopted to read as follows:
ARTICLE V
Stormwater Management
DIVISION 1
Generally
Sec. 26-500 Definitions.
The following words, terms, and phrases, when used in this Article, shall have the
meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly
indicates a different meaning:
AUTHORIZED ENFORCEMENT AGENCY
The director of the Department of Public Works or the director’s designees.
BASE FLOOD
The 100-year flood with a magnitude which has a one percent (1%) chance of
occurring or being exceeded in any given year.
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs)
A practice, or combination of practices and design criteria, to minimize
stormwater runoff and prevent the discharge of pollutants into stormwater
discharged from a site and designed in accordance with the City’s Stormwater
Management Standards.
BUILDING OPENING
Any opening of a solid wall such as a window or door, through which
floodwaters could penetrate.
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
CITY
The City of Muskegon, Michigan, acting by and through its Department of
Public Works for the purposes of the Article, unless the context refers to the
City of Muskegon as a whole.
CITY STORMWATER STANDARDS
The most current version of the City of Muskegon Stormwater Management
Standards published pursuant to this Article.
CLEAN WATER ACT
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq., as
amended, and the applicable regulations promulgated thereunder.
CONSTRUCTION SITE STORMWATER RUNOFF
Stormwater runoff from a development site following an earth change.
COUNTY ENFORCING AGENCY
A county agency or a conservation district designated by a county board of
commissioners under Section 9105 of Part 91, Soil Erosion and Sedimentation
Control, of the Natural Resource and Environmental Protection Act, Public
Act 451 of 1994 (MCL 324.9101 et seq.).
DESIGN ENGINEER
A registered and licensed professional engineer in the state responsible for the
design of a drainage plan.
DETENTION
A system that is designed to capture stormwater and release it over a given
period of time through an outlet structure at a controlled rate.
DEVELOPED or DEVELOPMENT
The installation or construction of impervious surfaces on a development site
that require, pursuant to state law or local ordinance, the City's approval of a
site plan, plat, site condominium, special land use, planned unit development,
rezoning of land, land division approval, private road approval or other
approvals required for the development of land or the erection of buildings or
structures.
DEVELOPER
Any person proposing or implementing the development of land.
DEVELOPMENT SITE
Any land that is being or has been developed, or that a developer proposes for
development
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
DISCHARGER
Any person or entity who directly or indirectly discharges stormwater from
any property. The term "discharger" also means any employee, officer,
director, partner, contractor, or other person who participates in, or is legally or
factually responsible for, any act or omission which is or results in a violation of
this Article.
DRAIN
Any drain as defined in the Michigan Drain Code of 1956, Public Act 40 of
1956 (MCL 280.1 et seq.), other than an established county or intercounty
drain.
DRAINAGE
The collection, conveyance, or discharge of groundwater and/or surface
water.
DRAINAGE PLAN
See “Plan.”
DRAINAGEWAY
The area within which surface water or groundwater is carried from one part
of a lot or parcel to another part of the lot or parcel or to adjacent land.
DRAIN COMMISSIONER or WATER RESOURCES COMMISSIONER
The county agency charged with the management of county and intercounty
drains established pursuant to the Michigan Drain Code of 1956, Public Act
40 of 1956 (MCL 280.1 et seq.), and responsible for site plan drainage review
pursuant to the Land Division Act, Public Act 288 of 1967, as amended by
Public Act 591 of 1996 (MCL 560.101 et seq.), and the Mobile Home
Commission Act, Public Act 96, of 1987 (MCL 125.2301 et seq.).
EARTH CHANGE
A human made change in the natural cover or topography of land, including cut
and fill activities. The term "earth change" includes, but is not limited to, any
excavating, surface grading, filling, landscaping, or removal of vegetative
roots. The term "earth change" does not include the practice of plowing and
tilling soil for the purpose of crop production.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)
The agency of the federal government charged with environmental
protection.
EROSION
The process by which the ground surface is worn away by action of wind,
water, gravity, or a combination thereof.
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
EXEMPTED DISCHARGES
Discharges other than stormwater as specified in Section 26-537.
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA)
The agency of the federal government charged with emergency
management.
FLOOD or FLOODING
A general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of normally
dry land areas resulting from the overflow of water bodies or the unusual and
rapid accumulation of surface water runoff from any source.
FLOOD PROTECTION ELEVATION
The base flood elevation plus one foot at any given location.
FLOODPLAIN
The area of land adjoining any watercourse or waterbody that will be inundated
by the base flood.
FLOODPROOFING
Any structural and/or nonstructural additions, changes, or adjustments to
structures or property that reduce or eliminate flood damage to land or
improvements, including utilities and other structures.
FLOODWAY
The channel of any watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be
reserved to carry and discharge a base flood without cumulatively increasing
the water surface elevation more than 1/10 of a foot due to the loss of flood
conveyance or storage.
GRADING
Any stripping, clearing, stumping, excavating, filling, leveling or stock- piling of
soil or any combination thereof and the land in its excavated or filled condition.
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Any material, including any substance, waste, or combination thereof, which,
because of its quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical, or infectious
characteristics, may cause, or significantly contribute to, a substantial present
or potential hazard to human health, safety, property, or the environment
when improperly treated, stored, transported, disposed of, or otherwise
managed.
ILLICIT CONNECTION
Any method or means for conveying an illicit discharge into water bodies or the
City's stormwater drainage system.
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
ILLICIT DISCHARGE
Any discharge to the City’s stormwater drainage system or water bodies that
does not consist entirely of stormwater, discharges pursuant to the terms of
an NPDES permit, or exempted discharges as defined in this Article.
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
A surface, such as a paved or gravel driveway, roof, parking area or road, that
prevents the infiltration of water into the soil.
LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION FACILITY
An agricultural activity, in which 100 or more livestock are fed, bred and/or
raised within a confined area, other than an open pasture either inside or
outside an enclosed building.
LOWEST FLOOR
The lowest floor or the lowest enclosed area, including a basement, but not
including an unfinished or flood-resistant enclosure which is usable solely for
parking of vehicles or building access.
MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, GREAT LAKES, AND ENERGY
(EGLE)
The State department charged with protection of the environment. Previously
known as Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ).
MUNICIPAL SEPARATE STORM SEWER SYSTEM (MS4)
A publicly owned conveyance system designed or used for collecting or
conveying stormwater. (May also be referred to as “stormwater drainage
system”).
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES)
STORMWATER DISCHARGE PERMIT
A permit issued by EPA, or by a state under authority delegated pursuant to
33 U.S.C.§ 1342(b), that authorizes the discharge of pollutants to waters of the
United States. The permit may be applicable on an individual, group, or
general area-wide basis.
NON-STORMWATER DISCHARGE
Any discharge to the stormwater drainage system that is not composed entirely
of stormwater.
OVERLAND FLOW-WAY
Surface area that conveys a concentrated flow of stormwater runoff.
PLAN
Written narratives, specifications, drawings, sketches, maps, written
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
standards, supporting calculations, operating procedures, or any combination
of these, which contain information pursuant to this Article.
POLLUTANT
A substance discharged which includes, but is not limited to, the following:
any dredged spoil, solid waste, vehicle fluids, yard wastes, animal wastes,
agricultural waste products, sediment, incinerator residue, sewage, garbage,
sewage sludge, munitions, chemical wastes, biological wastes, radioactive
materials, heat, wrecked or discharged equipment, rock, sand, cellar dirt, and
industrial, municipal, commercial and agricultural waste, or any other
contaminant or other substance defined as a pollutant under the Clean Water
Act.
PREMISES
Any building, lot, parcel of land, or portion of land, whether improved or
unimproved, including adjacent sidewalks and parking strips.
PROPERTY OWNER
Any person having legal or equitable title to property or any person having or
exercising care, custody, or control over any property.
REDEVELOPMENT
Redevelopment projects are those that change the existing site footprint or
offer new opportunities for stormwater control. Projects that do not disturb the
underlying or surrounding soil, remove surrounding vegetation, or increase
the area of impervious surface are not considered redevelopment projects.
For roadway projects, reconstruction of the subbase is considered
redevelopment, whereas an overlay of the pavement surface is not.
RETENTION
A system which is designed to capture stormwater and contain it until it
infiltrates the soil or evaporates.
SOIL EROSION
The stripping of soil and weathered rock from land creating sediment for
transportation by water, wind or ice, and enabling formation of new
sedimentary deposits.
STATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
All applicable state rules, regulations, and laws pertaining to water quality,
including the provisions of Section 3106 of Part 31, Water Resources
Protection, of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act,
Public Act 451 of 1994 (MCL 324.3106).
STORM DRAIN
Any portion of the stormwater drainage system, including any natural outlet,
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
which carries storm and surface waters and drainage or unpolluted industrial
process water, such as permitted by Section 26-537. (May also be referred to
as “storm sewer”).
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY
The method, structure, area, system, or other equipment or measures which
are designed to receive, control, store, or convey stormwater.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
All of the stormwater management facilities used on a site.
STORMWATER PERMIT
A permit issued by the City pursuant to this Article.
STORMWATER REVIEW AND APPROVAL
Review and approval of a site stormwater management system conducted by
the City pursuant to state law.
STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPP)
A document which describes the best management practices and activities to
be implemented by a person to identify sources of pollution or contamination
at a site and the actions to eliminate or reduce pollutant discharges to
stormwater, stormwater conveyance systems, and/or receiving waters to the
maximum extent practicable.
STORMWATER RUNOFF
The runoff and drainage of precipitation resulting from rainfall or snowmelt or
other natural event or process.
STREAM
A river, stream or creek which may or may not be serving as a drain, or any
other water body that has definite banks, a bed, and visible evidence of a
continued flow or continued occurrence of water.
WASTEWATER
Any water or other liquid, other than uncontaminated stormwater, discharged
from a facility.
WATER BODY
A river, lake, stream, creek or other watercourse or wetlands.
WATERSHED
A region draining into a water body.
WETLANDS
Land characterized by the presence of hydric soils and water at a frequency
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
and duration sufficient to support wetland vegetation or aquatic life.
Sec. 26-501 Statutory authority and title.
This Article (Article V of Chapter 26 of the City Code of Ordinances) is adopted
in accordance with the Home Rule City Act, as amended, Public Act 279 of 1909
(MCL 117.1 et seq.); the Michigan Drain Code of 1956, Public Act 40 of 1956
(MCL 280.1 et seq.); the Land Division Act, Public Act 288 of 1967 (MCL
560.101 et seq.); the Revenue Bond Act, Public Act 94 of 1933 (MCL 141.101 et
seq.); and the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, Public Act
451 of 1994 (MCL 324.101 et seq.); Section 401(p) of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act (also known as the Clean Water Act), as amended (33 U.S.C. §
1342(p) and 40 CFR 9, 122, 123 and 124); and other applicable state and
federal laws.
This Article shall be known and may be cited as the City of Muskegon Stormwater
Management Ordinance.
Sec. 26-502 Findings.
The City finds that:
1. Water bodies, roadways, structures, and other property within, and downstream of
the City are at times subjected to flooding;
2. Flooding is a danger to the lives and property of the public and is also a danger to
the natural resources of the City and the region;
3. Land development alters the hydrologic response of watersheds, which may result
in increased stormwater runoff rates and volumes, increased flooding, increased
stream channel erosion, and increased sediment transport and deposition;
4. Stormwater runoff produced by land development may contribute to increased
quantities of waterborne pollutants; Increases of stormwater runoff, soil erosion,
and nonpoint source pollution may have occurred as a result of land
development, and may cause deterioration of the water resources of the City
and downstream municipalities;
5. Stormwater runoff, soil erosion, and nonpoint source pollution, may have
resulted in a deterioration of the water resources of the City and downstream
municipalities;
6. Increased stormwater runoff rates and volumes, and the sediments and
pollutants associated with stormwater runoff, absent reasonable regulation and
control, can adversely affect the City's water bodies and water resources, and
those of downstream municipalities;
7. Stormwater runoff, soil erosion, and nonpoint-source pollution can be controlled
and minimized by the regulation of stormwater runoff from development;
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
8. Post-Construction Storm Water Runoff Program requirements for new and
redevelopments within the City are set forth in the State of Michigan National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit Application for Discharge of
Storm Water to Surface Waters of the State from a Municipal Separate Storm
Sewer System (DEQ, 2013 Rev. 10/2014);
9. Adopting the standards, criteria and procedures contained in this Article and
implementing the same can address many of the deleterious effects of
stormwater runoff;
10. Adopting these standards is necessary for the preservation of the public health,
safety and welfare;
11. Adopting these standards is necessary to comply with the NPDES MS4 Permit.
12. Illicit discharges may contain pollutants that can significantly degrade the City's
water bodies and water resources;
13. Illicit discharges enter the MS4 through either direct connections (e.g.,
wastewater piping either mistakenly or deliberately connected to the storm
drains) or indirect connections (e.g., infiltration into the stormwater drainage
system or spills connected by drain inlets);
14. Establishing the measures for controlling illicit discharges and connections
contained in this Article and implementing the same will address many of the
deleterious effects of illicit discharges.
Sec. 26-503 Purpose.
It is the purpose of this Article to establish minimum stormwater management
requirements and controls to accomplish, among others, the following objectives:
1. To reduce artificially induced flood damage;
2. To minimize increased stormwater runoff rates and volumes from identified new
land development;
3. To minimize the deterioration of existing watercourses, culverts and bridges, and
other structures;
4. To encourage water recharge into the ground where geologically favorable
conditions exist;
5. To prevent an increase in nonpoint source pollution;
6. To maintain the integrity of stream channels for their biological functions, as well
as for drainage and other purposes;
7. To minimize the impact of development upon stream bank and streambed
stability;
8. To reduce erosion from development or construction projects;
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
9. To preserve and protect water supply facilities and water resources by means of
controlling increased flood discharges, stream erosion, and runoff pollution;
10. To reduce stormwater runoff rates and volumes, soil erosion, and nonpoint
source pollution, wherever practicable, from lands that were developed without
stormwater management controls meeting the purposes and standards of this
Article;
11. To reduce the adverse impact of changing the land use along water bodies
and, to that end, this Article establishes minimum standards to protect water
bodies from degradation resulting from changing land use where there are
insufficient stormwater management controls;
12. To regulate the contribution of pollutants to the MS4 by stormwater discharges by
any user;
13. To prohibit illicit discharges and connection to the MS4;
14. To establish legal authority to carry out all inspection, surveillance, monitoring
and enforcement procedures necessary to ensure compliance with this Article.
Sec. 26-504 Applicability, exemptions, and general provisions.
1. This Article shall apply to all new development and all redevelopment projects,
including private, commercial and public projects that disturb one (1) acre or
more, and projects less than one (1) acre that are part of a larger common plan
of development or sale that would disturb one (1) acre or more as required by the
NPDES MS4 Permit.
2. Further, this Article shall apply to any development or redevelopment site which:
a) requires approval of a plat under Chapter 78;
b) requires approval of a site plan under Chapter 26, a building permit, or any
other permit for work which will alter stormwater drainage characteristics of the
site;
c) is exempt from site plan and permit approval, but work will alter stormwater
drainage characteristics of the site, and there is an increase in impervious
surface exceeding 10,000 square feet; provided, however, that this Article
shall not apply to the following:
i. The construction of, or addition, extension or modification to, an individual
single family or a two-family detached dwelling;
ii. Street and utility projects that do not modify the footprint of the street of
increase impervious area within the public right of way.
iii. Non-motorized improvements (sidewalk, pathway) within public rights- of-way
that disturb less than one (1) acre;
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
iv. The installation or removal of individual mobile homes within a mobile home
park. This exemption shall not be construed to apply to the construction,
expansion, or modification of a mobile home park;
v. Farm operations and buildings, except dwellings, directly related to farm
operations. This exemption shall not apply to livestock production facilities as
defined in this Article, greenhouses and other similar structures;
vi. Plats with preliminary plat approval and other developments with final land
use approval prior to the effective date of this Article, where such approvals
remain in effect.
3. Redevelopment and additions requiring a stormwater permit shall comply with City
Stormwater Management Standards for the redeveloped or newly constructed
portion of the site, except that the City reserves the right to require the entire site
be brought up to the current standards. The City also reserves the right to define
the last land use for a redevelopment site as the interim vacant condition.
4. This Article shall apply to all discharges entering the stormwater drainage system
generated on any developed and undeveloped lands unless explicitly exempted.
Sec. 26-505 through Sec. 26-510. (Reserved)
DIVISION 2
Stormwater Permit
Sec. 26-511 Permit required.
1. A developer shall not engage in any development without first receiving a
stormwater permit from the City pursuant to this Article via the City's site plan
approval process contained in the zoning regulations in Chapter 26.
2. The granting of a stormwater permit shall authorize only such development for
which the permit is issued, subject to the terms of the permit, and it shall not be
deemed to approve other development or other land use activities or replace
other required permits.
Sec. 26-512 Review procedures.
1. The City shall grant a stormwater permit after approval of the site plan (Chapter
26) and before issuance of a building permit[s], and may impose terms and
conditions in accordance with Section 26, only upon compliance with all of the
following requirements:
a) Completed stormwater permit application form.
b) The developer has submitted a drainage plan for the site complying with Section
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
26-513 for the approval of post-construction stormwater runoff BMPs.
i. The drainage plan contains a description of an adequate, temporary
stormwater management facilities to control construction site stormwater
runoff and prevent offsite sedimentation, satisfying the requirements of
Section 26, and the developer has obtained a soil erosion permit from the
County Enforcing Agency, if necessary.
ii. The drainage plan contains permanent onsite stormwater management
facilities complying with the City’s Stormwater Management Standards,
and the performance and design standards as set forth in Division 8 of this
Article.
c) The developer has submitted restrictive covenant language for review and
subsequent recording at the County Register of Deeds, if required for the
development.
d) Written construction plan approval obtained from the County Drain or Water
Resources Commissioner, or intercounty drainage board, if required.
e) The developer has paid or deposited the stormwater permit review fee
pursuant to Section 26.
f) The developer has paid or posted the applicable financial guaranty pursuant to
Section 26.
g) The developer provides all easements necessary to implement the approved
drainage plan and to otherwise comply with this Article, including, but not
limited to, Section 26. All easements shall be acceptable to the City in form and
substance and shall be recorded with the County Register of Deeds.
h) The developer provides the required maintenance agreement for routine,
emergency, and long-term maintenance of all structural and vegetative BMPs
installed and implemented to meet the performance standards. This
agreement shall be in compliance with the approved drainage plan and this
Article including, but not limited to, Section 26.
i) The maintenance agreement shall be acceptable to the City in form and
substance and shall be subsequently recorded with the County Register
of Deeds.
a) Limitations of Review. The City will review private developments for offsite
impact, but will not review the internal storm sewer and drainage system for the
site.
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
Sec. 26-513 Drainage plan.
A preliminary drainage plan meeting the requirements of Section 26 shall be included
on the site plan submitted to the City for site and development plan review. The
drainage plan submitted for stormwater permit review shall be shown on the approved
site plan if planning commission or administrative staff review is required, or on a site
plan meeting the requirements in the City Stormwater Standards. The drainage plan
shall identify and contain all of the information required in the City Stormwater
Standards.
Sec. 26-514 Review fees; escrow.
1. All expenses and costs incurred by the City directly associated with processing,
reviewing and approving or denying a stormwater permit application shall be
paid or reimbursed to the City from the funds paid directly to the City. The City
reserves the right to request a separate escrow account be established by the
developer, as provided in Subsection (b) of this section. The City may draw funds
from a developer’s escrow account to reimburse the City for out-of-pocket
expenses incurred by the City relating to the application. Such reimbursable
expenses include, but are not limited to, expenses related to the following:
a. Services of the City Attorney directly related to the application.
b. Services of the City Engineer directly related to the application.
c. Services of other independent contractors working for the City, which are
directly related to the application.
d. Review required by County Drain or Water Resources Commissioner.
e. Any additional public hearings required mailings and legal notice requirements
necessitated by the application.
2. At the time a developer applies for a stormwater permit, the developer shall pay
the required fees established by the City for a stormwater permit. The developer
may also be required to deposit with the City, as an escrow deposit, an initial
amount as determined by resolution of the City commission for such matters and
shall provide additional amounts as requested by the City in such increments as
are specified in said resolution. Any excess funds remaining in the escrow
account after the application has been fully processed, reviewed, and the final
City approval and acceptance of the development has occurred will be refunded
to the developer with no interest to be paid on those funds. At no time prior to
the City’s final decision on an application shall the balance in the escrow
account fall below the required initial amount. If the funds in the account are
reduced to less than the required initial amount, the developer shall deposit into
the account an additional amount as determined by City commission resolution,
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
before the application review process will be continued. Additional amounts may
be required to be placed in the escrow account by the developer, at the discretion
of the City.
Sec. 26-515 Financial guaranty.
1. The City shall not approve a stormwater permit until the developer submits to the
City, in a form and amount satisfactory to the City, a letter of credit or other
financial guaranty for the timely and satisfactory construction of all stormwater
management facilities and site grading in accordance with the approved
drainage plan. Upon (l) certification by a registered professional engineer that
the stormwater management facilities have been completed in accordance with
the approved drainage plan, and (2) receipt of construction record drawings for
all private drainage systems meeting the minimum requirements of the City
Stormwater Standards, the City may release the letter of credit or other financial
guaranty, subject to final City acceptance and approval.
2. The amount of the financial guaranty shall be in accordance with the City’s
adopted fee structure, unless the City determines that a greater amount is
appropriate, in which case the basis for such determination shall be provided to
the developer in writing. In determining whether an amount greater is
appropriate, the City shall consider the size and type of the development, the
size and type of the on-site stormwater management system, and the nature of
the off-site stormwater management facilities the development will utilize.
3. This Article shall not be construed or interpreted as relieving a developer of its
obligation to pay all costs associated with onsite private stormwater runoff
facilities as well as those costs arising from the need to make other drainage
improvements in order to reduce a development’s impact on a drain consistent
with City Stormwater Standards.
Sec. 26-516 Certificate of occupancy.
No certificate of occupancy shall be issued until a stormwater permit has been
issued and stormwater management facilities have been completed in accordance
with the approved drainage plan and all applicable restrictive covenants,
construction record drawings have been submitted and approved, and until the
executed maintenance agreement is recorded with the County Register of Deeds;
provided, however, the City may issue a temporary certificate of occupancy if an
acceptable letter of credit or other financial guaranty has been submitted to the City.
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
Sec. 26-517 No change in approved facilities.
Stormwater management facilities, after construction and approval, shall be
maintained in good condition, in accordance with the approved drainage plan, and
shall not be subsequently altered, revised or replaced except in accordance with
the approved drainage plan, or in accordance with approved amendments or
revisions in the plan.
Sec. 26-518 Terms and conditions.
1. In granting a stormwater permit, the City may impose such terms and
conditions as are reasonably necessary to effectuate the purposes of this Article.
A developer shall comply with such terms and conditions.
2. Approval of the stormwater management system is considered to be granted by
the City upon issuance of a stormwater permit, unless authorization is required
to be granted by the County Drain or Water Resources commissioner under state
law and this approval has not been offered.
Sec. 26-519 through Sec. 26-525 (Reserved)
DIVISION 3
Stormwater Management System, Protection and Other
Standards, Soil Erosion Control
Sec. 26-526 Responsibility for stormwater management system.
1. The City is not responsible for providing drainage facilities on private property for
the management of stormwater on such property. It shall be the responsibility of
the property owner to provide for, and maintain, private stormwater management
facilities serving the property and to
2. Prevent and correct any conditions interfering with, or impeding, the
management of stormwater, including the accumulation of debris that interferes
with the drainage function of a water body.
3. Existing sites found to be in violation of this Article shall be subject to enforcement
as outlined in Division 6 of Section 26.
Sec. 26-527 Stormwater management system.
All stormwater management facilities shall be constructed and maintained in
accordance with all applicable federal, state and local ordinances, and rules and
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
regulations.
Sec. 26-528 Public health, safety and welfare.
Protection of the public health, safety and welfare shall be a primary consideration in
the design of all stormwater management facilities.
Sec. 26-529 Protection of environmentally sensitive areas.
1. Environmentally sensitive areas shall be identified on the site plan with
measures shown for protection of these areas as defined and in accordance with
the City’s Stormwater ManagementStandards.
2. The City may include provisions for the acceptable replacement of floodplain
storage volume, where such storage volume is lost or diminished as a result of
approved development.
Sec. 26-530 Flood protection and building openings.
1. All new buildings and substantial improvements to existing buildings shall be
protected from flood damage up to the flood protection elevation and shall be in
accordance with all applicable federal, state and City ordinances (Section 26 –
Article VI and Section 2323 of the City of Muskegon Zoning Ordinance - Flood
Hazard Areas).
a. Additionally, the lowest floor shall not be constructed below the following
elevations:
i. One (1) foot above the design high water level of stormwater
management facilities.
ii. Two (2) feet above the highest known groundwater elevation.
2. The lowest floor elevation established at the time of plat or development approval
and on file in the City and/or County Drain or Water Resources Commissioner.
3. A waiver from elevations stated in Subsection (a) of this section may be granted by
the City following receipt of a certification from a registered professional
engineer demonstrating that the proposed elevation does not pose a risk of
flooding. Floodproofing measures must be in accordance with FEMA Technical
Bulletins and Michigan Building Codes.
4. Land Survey and Elevation Certificate. If the City and/or County Drain or Water
Resources Commissioner has specified a minimum building opening at the time
of plat or development approval, or if construction occurs within the one-
hundred-year floodplain pursuant to Section 26 – Article VI and Section 2323 of
the City’s Zoning Ordinance upon completion of construction of the structure’s
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
foundation and/or slab on grade, a registered land surveyor shall certify any
minimum building opening elevation specified by this Article. This certificate shall
attest that the building opening elevation complies with the standards of this
Article. The permittee for the building permit shall submit the certificate to the
City building inspections official prior to the commencement of framing and/or
structural steel placement. If the surveyor should find that the minimum building
opening elevation is below the elevation specified in Subsection (a) of this
section, that opening must be raised using a method that meets with the
approval of the City. After reconstruction, a registered land surveyor or engineer
shall recertify that the minimum building opening elevation complies with the
standards of this Article prior to the commencement of framing and/or structural
steel placement
5. Waiver of Land Survey. The City building inspection official may grant a waiver
of the required land survey under Subsection (c) of this section if the minimum
building opening appears to be at or above the elevation of adjacent buildings that
have already been certified, or if a grade map shows that the low opening
elevation of the building is at least three (3) feet higher than the minimum
building opening established pursuant to Subsection (a) of this section.
Sec. 26-531 Soil erosion and sedimentation control.
1. All persons who cause, in whole or in part, any earth change to occur shall provide
soil erosion and sedimentation control so as to adequately prevent soils from
being eroded and discharged or deposited onto adjacent properties or into a
stormwater drainage system, a public street or right-of- way, wetland, creek,
stream, water body, or floodplain.
2. Prior to making any earth change on a development site regulated by this
Article, the property owner or developer shall first obtain a soil erosion and
sedimentation control permit from the County Enforcing Agency issued in
accordance with Part 91 of Public Act 451 of 1994 (MCL 324.9101 et seq.), if one
is required.
3. A soil erosion and sedimentation control permit is required for any earth change
that is greater than one acre or less than 500 feet from any lake or stream. Permits
are obtained from the County Enforcing Agency.
4. The property owner and other persons causing or participating in the earth change
shall comply with the terms of the soil erosion and sedimentation control permit.
5. During earth change activities on the development site, the City Engineer may
inspect the site to ensure compliance with the approved construction site runoff
controls.
6. During any earth change which exposes soil to an increased risk of erosion or
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
sediment tracking, the property owner and other persons causing or participating
in the earth change shall do the following:
a. Comply with the stormwater management standards of this Article.
b. Prevent damage to any public utilities or services within the limits of
grading and within any routes of travel or areas of work of construction
equipment.
c. Prevent damage to or impairment of any water body on or near the
location of the earth change or affected thereby.
d. Prevent damage to adjacent or nearby land.
e. Maintain all required soil erosion and sedimentation control measures,
including, but not limited to, measures required for compliance with the
terms of this Article.
f. Promptly remove all soil, sediment, debris, or other materials applied,
dumped, tracked, or otherwise deposited on any lands, public streets,
sidewalks, or other public ways or facilities, including catch basins,
storm sewers, ditches, drainage swales, or water bodies. Removal of
all such soil, sediment, debris or other materials within 24 hours shall
be considered prima facie compliance with this requirement, unless
such materials present an immediate hazard to public health and safety.
g. Refrain from grading lands at locations near or adjoining lands, public
streets, sidewalks, alleys, or other public or private property without
providing adequate support or other measures so as to protect such
other lands, streets, sidewalks or other property from settling, cracking
or sustaining other damage.
Sec. 26-532 through Sec. 26-535. (Reserved)
DIVISION 4
Prohibitions and Exemptions
Sec. 26-536 Prohibited discharges.
1. Prohibition of illicit discharges.
a. No person shall discharge or cause to be discharged into the City’s
stormwater drainage system or waterbodies any materials, including
but not limited to pollutants or waters containing any pollutants, other
than stormwater, or an exempted discharge pursuant to Sections 26-
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
537, or discharges specified in writing by the authorized enforcement
agency as being necessary to protect public health and safety.
b. The City is authorized to require dischargers to implement pollution
prevention measures, utilizing BMPs, necessary to prevent or reduce
the discharge of pollutants into the City’s stormwater drainage system.
2. Prohibition of illicit connections.
a. The construction, use, maintenance or continued existence of illicit
connections to the stormwater drainage system is prohibited.
b. This prohibition expressly includes, without limitation, illicit connections
made in the past, regardless of whether the connection was
permissible under law or practices applicable or prevailing at the time of
connection.
c. A person is considered to be in violation of this Article if the person
connects a line conveying wastewater to the MS4 or allows such a
connection to continue.
Sec. 26-537 Exempted discharges.
The following non-stormwater discharges shall be permissible, provided that they do
not result in a violation of state water quality standards or Section 26-536:
1. Water supply line flushing;
2. Landscape irrigation;
3. Diverted stream flows;
4. Rising groundwater;
5. Uncontaminated groundwater infiltration to storm drains;
6. Uncontaminated pumped groundwater;
7. Discharges from potable water sources;
8. Foundation drains;
9. Air conditioning condensate;
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
10. Individual residential car washing;
11. Dechlorinated swimming pool water;
12. Street wash water;
13. Discharges or flows from emergency firefighting activities; and
14. Discharges for which a specific federal or state permit has been issued.
Sec. 26-538 Interference with natural or artificial drains.
1. It shall be unlawful for any person to stop, fill, dam, confine, pave, alter the
course of, or otherwise interfere with, any natural or constructed drain or
drainageway without first submitting a drainage plan to the City and receiving
approval of that plan. Any deviation from the approved plan is a violation of this
Article. This section shall not prohibit, however, necessary emergency action so
as to prevent or mitigate drainage that would be injurious to the environment or
the public health, safety, or welfare. When any of the activities mentioned in this
section involves an established county drain, a drain use permit is required from
the County Drain or Water Resources Commissioner.
2. No filling, blocking, fencing or above-surface vegetation planting shall take place
within a floodplain/floodway.
3. For an overland flow-way:
a. Silt fence shall not be permitted below the top of the bank of a water
body.
b. Chain-link fences may be permitted if the City determines that the fence
will not obstruct or divert the flow of water.
c. If a fence is removed by the City or the County Drain or Water
Resources Commissioner for drain access or drain maintenance, the
fence may be replaced by the owner of the fence at the owner’s
expense.
d. No shrubs or trees shall be planted below the top of the bank of a water
body, or within an easement for a waterway (for example, a backyard
swale).
4. Shrubs, trees or other above-ground vegetation should not be planted over the
top of an underground storm sewer or over the top of the easement within which
the storm sewer has been installed.
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
Sec. 26-539 Storage of hazardous or toxic materials in drainageway.
Except as permitted by law, it shall be unlawful for any person to store or stockpile
within a drainageway any hazardous or toxic materials unless adequate protection
and/or containment has been provided so as to prevent any such materials from
entering a drainageway.
Sec. 26-540 through Sec. 26-545. (Reserved)
DIVISION 5
Inspection, Monitoring, Reporting, and Recordkeeping
Sec. 26-546 Inspection and sampling.
To ensure compliance with the standards in this pervasively regulated area, the City
may inspect and/or obtain stormwater samples from stormwater management
facilities of any discharger to determine compliance with the requirements of this
Article. Upon request, the discharger shall allow the City’s properly identified
representative to enter upon the premises of the discharger at all hours necessary for
the purposes of such inspection or sampling. The City shall provide the discharger
reasonable advance notice of such inspection and/or sampling. The City or its
properly identified representative may place on the discharger’s property the
equipment or devices used for such sampling or inspection.
Sec. 26-547 Stormwater monitoring facilities.
A discharger of stormwater runoff shall provide and operate equipment or devices for
the monitoring of stormwater runoff, so as to provide for inspection, sampling, and
flow measurement of each discharge to a water body or a stormwater runoff facility,
when directed in writing to do so by the City. The City may require a discharger to
provide and operate such equipment and devices if it is necessary or appropriate for
the inspection, sampling and flow measurement of discharges in order to determine
whether adverse effects from or as a result of such discharges may occur. All such
equipment and devices for the inspection, sampling and flow measurement of
discharges shall be installed and maintained in accordance with applicable laws,
ordinances and regulations.
Sec. 26-548 Accidental discharges.
1. The name and telephone number of the person making the report, and the name of
a person who may be contacted for additional information on the matter. A properly
reported accidental discharge shall be an affirmative defense to a civil infraction
proceeding brought under this Article against a discharger for such discharge. It
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
shall not, however, be a defense to a legal action brought to obtain an injunction, to
obtain recovery of costs or to obtain other relief as a result of or arising out of the
discharge. A discharge shall be considered properly reported only if the discharger
complies with all the requirements of Subsection (a) of this section.
2. Any discharger who accidentally discharges into a water body any substance other
than stormwater or an exempted discharge shall immediately inform the City
concerning the discharge. If such information is given orally, a written report
concerning the discharge shall be filed with the City within five (5) days. The written
report shall specify:
a. The composition of the discharge and the cause thereof.
b. The exact date, time, and estimated volume of the discharge.
c. All measures taken to clean up the accidental discharge, and all
measures proposed to be taken to reduce and prevent any recurrence.
Sec. 26-549 Recordkeeping requirement.
Any person subject to this Article shall retain and preserve for no less than three (3)
years any and all books, drawings, plans, prints, documents, memoranda, reports,
correspondence and records, including records on magnetic or electronic media
and any and all summaries of such records, relating to monitoring, sampling and
chemical analysis of any discharge or stormwater runoff from any property.
Sec. 26-550 through Sec. 26-555 (Reserved)
DIVISION 6
Enforcement
Sec. 26-556 Sanctions for violation.
1. Any person violating any provision of this Article other than Sections 26-531, 26-
536 and 26-538, and except as provided in Subsection (b) of this section, shall be
responsible for a municipal civil infraction and subject to a fine of not less than
$500 for a first offense, and not less than $1,000 for a subsequent offense, plus
costs, damages, expenses, and other sanctions as authorized under Chapter 87
of the Revised Judicature Act of 1961 and other applicable laws, including, without
limitation, equitable relief.
2. Each day such violation occurs or continues shall be deemed a separate offense
and shall make the violator liable for the imposition of a fine for each day. The
rights and remedies provided for in this section are cumulative and in addition to
any other remedies provided by law. An admission or determination of
responsibility shall not exempt the offender from compliance with the
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
requirements of this Article.
3. For purposes of this section, “subsequent offense" means a violation of the
provisions of this Article committed by the same person within twelve (12)
months of a previous violation of the same provision of this Article for which said
person admitted responsibility or was adjudicated to be responsible.
4. Any person who neglects or fails to comply with a stop work order issued under
Section 26-557 shall, upon conviction, be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by
a fine of not more than $500 or imprisonment in the county jail for not more than
93 days, or both such fine and imprisonment, and such person shall also pay
such costs as may be imposed in the discretion of the court.
5. Any person who aids or abets a person in a violation of this Article shall be subject
to the sanctions provided in this section.
Sec. 26-557 Stop work order.
Where there is work in progress that causes or constitutes in whole or in part, a
violation of any provision of this Article, the City is authorized to issue a stop work
order so as to prevent further or continuing violations or adverse effects. All persons
to whom the stop work order is directed, or who are involved in any way with the
work or matter described in the stop work order, shall fully and promptly comply
therewith. The City may also undertake, or cause to be undertaken, any necessary
or advisable protective measures so as to prevent violations of this Article or to
avoid or reduce the effects of noncompliance herewith. The cost of any such
protective measures shall be the responsibility of the owner of the property upon
which the work was performed.
Sec. 26-558 Failure to comply.
In addition to any other remedies, should any owner fail to comply with the
provisions of this Article, the City may, after the giving of reasonable notice and
opportunity for compliance, have the necessary work done, and the owner shall be
obligated to promptly reimburse the City for all costs of such work.
Sec. 26-559 Emergency measures.
When emergency measures are necessary to moderate a nuisance, to protect
public safety, health and welfare, and/or to prevent loss of life, injury or damage to
property, the City is authorized to carry out or arrange for all such emergency
measures. Property owners shall be responsible for the cost of such measures made
necessary as a result of a violation of this Article and shall promptly reimburse the
City for all of such costs.
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
Sec. 26-560 Cost recovery for damage to stormwater drainage system.
A discharger shall be liable for all costs incurred by the City as the result of causing
a discharge that produces a deposit or obstruction, or causes damage to, or impairs
a storm drain, or violates any of the provisions of this Article. Costs include, but are
not limited to, those penalties levied by the EPA or EGLE for violation of an NPDES
permit, attorney fees, and other costs and expenses.
Sec. 26-561 Collection of costs; lien.
Costs incurred by the City pursuant to Sections 26-531, 26-536 and 26-538 shall be
a lien on the premises which shall be enforceable in accordance with the Revenue
Bond Act, Public Act 94 of 1933 (MCL 141.101 et seq.). Any such charges which
are delinquent for six (6) months or more may be certified annually to the City
Treasurer, who shall enter the lien on the next tax roll against the premises and the
costs shall be collected and the lien shall be enforced in the same manner as
provided for in the collection of taxes assessed upon the roll and the enforcement of
a lien for taxes. In addition to any other lawful enforcement methods, the City shall
have all remedies authorized by such Act.
Sec. 26-562 Appeals.
1. Any person to whom any provision of this Article has been applied may appeal
in writing, not later than thirty (30) days after the action or decision being
appealed from, to the City commission the action or decision whereby any such
provision was so applied. Such appeal shall identify the matter being appealed,
and the basis for the appeal. The City commission shall consider the appeal
and make a decision whereby it affirms, rejects or modifies the action being
appealed. In considering any such appeal, the City commission may consider
the recommendations of the City Engineer and the comments of other persons
having knowledge of the matter. In considering any such appeal, the City
commission may grant a variance from the terms of this Article so as to provide
relief, in whole or in part, from the action being appealed, but only upon finding
that the following requirements are satisfied:
a. The application of the Article provisions being appealed will present or
cause practical difficulties for a development or development site;
provided, however, that practical difficulties shall not include the need for
the developer to incur additional reasonable expenses in order to comply
with the Article; and
b. The granting of the relief requested will not substantially prevent the goals
and purposes sought to be accomplished by this Article, nor result in less
effective management of stormwater runoff.
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
Sec. 26-563 Suspension of MS4 access.
1. Suspension due to illicit discharges in emergency situations. The City may,
without prior notice, suspend MS4 discharge access to a person when such
suspension is necessary to stop an actual or threatened discharge, which
presents or may present imminent and substantial danger to the environment,
or to the health or welfare of persons, or to the MS4. If the violator fails to
comply with a suspension order issued in an emergency, the City may take such
steps as deemed necessary to prevent or minimize damage to the MS4 or the
environment, or to minimize danger to the health or welfare of persons.
2. Suspension due to the detection of illicit discharge. Any person discharging to the
MS4 in violation of this Article may have the person's MS4 access terminated if
such termination would abate or reduce an illicit discharge. The City will notify a
violator of the proposed termination of the violator's MS4 access. A person
commits an offense if the person reinstates MS4 access to premises terminated
pursuant to this section, without the prior approval of the City.
Sec. 26-564 Tracking enforcement.
The City shall implement a method for tracking instances of non-compliance. The
tracking procedure shall ensure that detailed information about non-compliance and
follow up enforcement action is adequately documented, including at a minimum:
1. Name of the person responsible for violating the ordinance;
2. Date and location of violation;
3. Description of the violation, including how the violation was identified;
4. Description of the enforcement response;
5. Schedule for returning to compliance
6. Date the violation was resolved.
Sec. 26-565 through Sec. 26-570. (Reserved)
DIVISION 7
Stormwater Easements and Maintenance Agreements
Sec. 26-571 Applicability of requirements.
The requirements of this division concerning stormwater easements and
maintenance agreements shall apply to all persons required to submit a drainage
plan to the City for review and approval.
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
Sec. 26-572 Stormwater easements.
The developer shall provide all stormwater easements necessary to implement the
approved drainage plan and to otherwise comply with this Article in form and
substance required by the City, and shall record such easements as directed by the
City. The easements shall ensure access for proper inspection and maintenance of
stormwater management facilities and shall provide adequate
emergency overland flow-ways. Easements for private stormwater management
systems shall be conveyed by each landowner to the entity responsible for
operation and maintenance of the stormwater management system. The City will
not accept easements over private stormwater management systems.
Sec. 26-573 Maintenance agreements.
1. A maintenance agreement is required for all developments requiring stormwater
review. The developer shall provide all stormwater maintenance agreements
necessary to implement the approved drainage plan and to otherwise comply
with this Article in form and substance as required by the City. The maintenance
agreement shall be signed and submitted to the City for review and approval at
the time application for a stormwater permit is made. After construction of the
stormwater management system has been verified and approved or accepted by
the City, the Developer shall execute a final maintenance agreement with the
City, record such agreements with the County Register of Deeds, and provide a
copy of the recorded document to the City. The City reserves the right to require
the maintenance agreement be recorded prior to issuance of a stormwater permit.
2. Maintenance agreement provisions. The maintenance agreement shall, among
other matters, ensure access for proper inspection by the City or their designee,
allow for maintenance or corrective actions of stormwater BMPs, and include
provisions for the tracking of maintenance activities, and transfer of operation
and maintenance responsibility to ensure the performance standards are met in
perpetuity.
a. Maintenance Plan. The maintenance agreement shall include a
maintenance plan and schedule for routine, emergency and long-term
maintenance of all structural and vegetative stormwater BMPs installed
and implemented to meet the performance standards, with a detailed
annual estimated budget for the initial three (3) years, and a clear
statement that only future maintenance activities in accordance with the
maintenance plan shall be permitted without the necessity of securing
new permits.
b. Maintenance Documentation. Written notice and submittal of maintenance
documentation shall be provided to the City by the property owner at the
interval set forth in the maintenance agreement and subject to the
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
provisions of Sections 26-546 through 26-562.
c. Failure to Perform Maintenance. If it has been found by the City, following
notice and an opportunity to be heard by the property owner, that there
has been a material failure or refusal to undertake maintenance as
required under this Article and/or as required in the approved
maintenance agreement as required hereunder, the City shall then be
i. authorized, but not required, to hire an entity with qualifications and
experience in the subject matter to undertake the monitoring and
maintenance as so required, in which event the property owner
shall be obligated to advance or reimburse payment for all costs
and expenses associated with such monitoring and maintenance,
together with a reasonable administrative fee. The maintenance
agreement required under this Article shall contain a provision
spelling out the requirements; and if the applicant objects in any
respect to such provision or the underlying rights and obligations,
such objection shall be resolved prior to the commencement of
construction of the proposed development on the property. If the
property owner fails to pay the costs incurred by the City under this
Section, the costs shall be a lien on the property and enforced as
provided in Division 6 of Section 26.
3. Tracking Operation and Maintenance. The City shall implement a tracking
system to include procedures for filing and retrieval of all recorded maintenance
agreements, maintenance plans, and stormwater management system maps to
document location and ages of stormwater BMPs. The City shall also track
annual inspection reports required to be submitted from the developer, and any
inspection conducted by the City to document condition of stormwater BMPs and
maintenance performed.
Sec. 26-574 Prohibition of orphan drains.
Prior to issuance of a stormwater permit, all stormwater management systems must
have a single entity responsible for long-term operation and maintenance. The City
will not approve an “orphan” drainage system serving multiple landowners without
recorded stormwater easements and maintenance agreements.
Sec. 26-575 through Sec. 26-580. (Reserved)
DIVISION 8
Performance and Design Standards
Sec. 26-581 Resolution to implement performance and design standards.
The City Commission may adopt a resolution establishing detailed design and
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
performance standards for stormwater management facilities, consistent with the
terms of this Article, and in order to further implement the goals and purposes set
forth in this Article. Amendments to the design and performance standards must be
approved by the City Commission.
Sec. 26-582 Performance standards.
In order to achieve the goals and purposes of this Article, sites shall meet the
stormwater management performance standards for water quality treatment, channel
protection, flood control, and other site-specific standards as published in the City’s
Stormwater Management Standards.
Sec. 26-583 Alternatives for meeting performance standards.
1. The City may establish programs and procedures for alternative means to meet the
channel protection performance standard if onsite retention is determined to be
not feasible.
2. Requirements for programs and procedures (if any) adopted by the City are given
in the City’s Stormwater Management Standards.
Sec. 26-584 Design standards.
Stormwater BMPs shall be designed to meet the performance standards as
described in Section 26-582. Stormwater management system design shall be in
accordance with the City’s Stormwater ManagementStandards.
Sec. 26-585 Responsibility to implement best management practices (BMPs).
The owner or operator of a commercial or industrial establishment shall provide, at
the owner’s or operator’s own expense, reasonable protection from accidental
discharge of prohibited materials or other wastes into the City’s stormwater
drainage system or waterbodies through the use of these structural and non-
structural BMPs. Further, any person responsible for a property or premises, which
is or may be the source of an illicit discharge, may be required to implement, at said
person’s expense, additional structural and non-structural BMPs to prevent the
further discharge of pollutants to the MS4. Compliance with all terms and conditions of a
valid NPDES permit authorizing the discharge of stormwater associated with industrial
activity, to the extent practicable, shall be deemed compliance with the provisions of
this section. These BMPs shall be part of a stormwater pollution prevention plan
(SWPPP) as necessary for compliance with requirements of the NPDES permit.
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
3. This Ordinance is to become effective ten (10) days after adoption.
Ayes:
Nays:
First Reading:
Second Reading:
CERTIFICATE
The undersigned, being the duly qualified Clerk of the City of Muskegon, 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 ____ day of _______________, 2022, at which meeting a quorum was
present and remained throughout, and 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.
Date:_______________________, 2022
________________________________
Ann Marie Meisch, MMC
City Clerk
Publish: Notice of Adoption to be published once within ten (10) days of final adoption.
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
CITY OF MUSKEGON
NOTICE OF ADOPTION
TO: ALL PERSONS INTERESTED
Please take notice that on ___________________, 2022, the City Commission of the City
of Muskegon repeals Chapter 26, Article V, Section 26 – 300 through Section 26 – 400 and
adopts Section 26-500 through 26-585 of the Muskegon City Code, summarized as follows:
1. Sections 26-300 through 26-400 are repealed.
2. Section 26-500 is adopted to provide Definitions for the Stormwater Management
ordinance.
3. Section 26-501 is adopted to provide Statutory Authority for the Stormwater
Management ordinance.
4. Section 26-502 is adopted to provide Findings for the Stormwater Management
ordinance.
5. Section 26-503F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX is adopted to
provide the Purpose for the Stormwater Management ordinance.
6. Section 26-504 is adopted to provide Applicability, exemptions and general for the
Stormwater Management ordinance.
7. Section 26-505 is adopted to provide Definitions for the Stormwater Management
ordinance.
8. Section 26-511 is adopted to require a stormwater permit for the Stormwater
Management ordinance.
9. Section 26-512 is adopted to provide the review procedures for a stormwater permit for
the Stormwater Management ordinance.
10. Section 26-513 is adopted to provide a drainage plan for the Stormwater Management
ordinance.
11. Section 26-514 is adopted to provide the review fees and escrow for the Stormwater
Management ordinance.
12. Section 26-515 is adopted to provide for a financial guaranty for the Stormwater
Management ordinance.
13. Section 26-516 is adopted to provide for a certificate of occupancy for the Stormwater
Management ordinance.
14. Section 26-517 is adopted to provide a prohibition on altering a stormwater management
facility, except as provided in a drainage plan for the Stormwater Management ordinance.
15. Section 26-518 is adopted to provide the terms and conditions of a stormwater permit for
the Stormwater Management ordinance.
16. Section 26-526 is adopted to provide the responsibility for a stormwater management
system for the Stormwater Management ordinance.
17. Section 26-527 is adopted to provide for a stormwater management system for the
Stormwater Management ordinance.
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
18. Section 26-528 is adopted to provide the primary considerations for a stormwater
management system for the Stormwater Management ordinance.
19. Section 26-529 is adopted to provide for the protection of environmentally sensitive areas
in the stormwater management system for the Stormwater Management ordinance.
20. Section 26-530 is adopted to provide for flood protection and building openings in the
stormwater management system for the Stormwater Management ordinance.
21. Section 26-531 is adopted to regulate soil erosion and sedimentation control in the
stormwater management system for the Stormwater Management ordinance.
22. Section 26-536 is adopted to prohibit certain discharges in the stormwater drainage
system.
23. Section 26-537 is adopted to provide for discharges exempt for certain non-stormwater
discharges.
24. Section 26-538 is adopted to prohibit the interference with natural and artificial drains.
25. Section 26-539 is adopted to prohibit the storage of hazardous or toxic materials in the
drainageway.
26. Section 26-546 is adopted to provide for the inspection of sampling of stormwater.
27. Section 26-547 is adopted to provide for stormwater monitoring facilities.
28. Section 26-548 is adopted to provide for the reporting of accidental discharges.
29. Section 26-549 is adopted to require recordkeeping requirements.
30. Section 26-556 is adopted to provide for sanctions for violations.
31. Section 26-557 is adopted to provide for stop work orders.
32. Section 26-558 is adopted to provide for ramifications for failing to comply with this
ordinance.
33. Section 26-559 is adopted to provide for emergency measures discharges exempt for
certain non-stormwater discharges.
34. Section 26-560 is adopted to provide for cost recovery for damage to a stormwater
drainage system.
35. Section 26-561 is adopted to provide for collection of costs and right to lien property.
36. Section 26-562 is adopted to provide for a right to appeal discharges exempt for certain
non-stormwater discharges.
37. Section 26-563 is adopted to provide for the suspension of MS4 access.
38. Section 26-564 is adopted to provide for the tracking of enforcement.
39. Section 26-571 is adopted to prescribe the applicability of requirements.
40. Section 26-572 is adopted to provide for the requirement of stormwater easements.
41. Section 26-573 is adopted to provide for maintenance agreements.
42. Section 26-574 is adopted to prohibit orphan drains.
43. Section 26-581 is adopted to provide for resolutions to implement performance and
design standards.
44. Section 26-582 is adopted to provide for performance standards.
45. Section 26-583 is adopted to provide for alternatives for meeting performance standards.
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
46. Section 26-584 is adopted to provide for design standards.
47. Section 26-585 is adopted to provide for the responsibility to implement best
management practices (BMPs).
This ordinance is effective 10 days after adoption.
Copies of the ordinance may be viewed and purchased at a 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.
Published: _________________, 2022 CITY OF MUSKEGON
By________________________
Ann Marie Meisch, MMC
City Clerk
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLISH ONCE WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS OF FINAL PASSAGE
F:\EDSI\FILES\00100\1693.02\ORDIN\14Y6777.DOCX
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
STANDARDS
Procedures & Design Criteria for
Stormwater Management
City of Muskegon, Michigan
October 2022
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
STANDARDS
Procedures & Design Criteria for
Stormwater Management
Adopted:
October 2022
1
Prepared By:
Eng. Inc.
16930 Robbins Road
Suite 105
Grand Haven, MI 49417
Ryan McEnhill, PE
Published by:
City of Muskegon
Department of Public Works
1350 E. Keating Ave
Muskegon, MI 49442
2
PART 1 - GENERAL PROVISIONS
I. Purpose ............................................................................................................................................................ 1
A. Compliance with State and Federal Stormwater Mandates ...................................................................... 1
B. Preferred Stormwater Management Strategies ........................................................................................ 2
II. Authority .......................................................................................................................................................... 6
A. State Law and Code of City Ordinances…………………………………………………………………………………………………6
B. Provisions for Requirements in Addition to Minimum Standards ............................................................. 6
III. Applicability ...................................................................................................................................................... 6
A. Review Required ........................................................................................................................................ 6
IV. Severability Clause...................................................................................................................................................6
V. Adoption and Revision ..................................................................................................................................... 6
VI. Fees .................................................................................................................................................................. 6
PART 2 - PROCEDURES FOR PLAN SUBMISSION AND APPROVAL
I. Submission and Approval ................................................................................................................................. 7
A. Concept Review Meeting ........................................................................................................................... 7
B. Submission................................................................................................................................................. 7
C. Changes and Resubmission ....................................................................................................................... 7
D. Approval .................................................................................................................................................... 8
E. Expiration of Approval ............................................................................................................................... 8
F. Revocation of Approval ............................................................................................................................. 8
G. Submission of Construction Record Drawings ........................................................................................... 8
II. Stormwater Drainage Requirements................................................................................................................ 8
A. Drainage Plan............................................................................................................................................. 8
B. Regional Stormwater Management Facility .............................................................................................. 9
C. Off-site Mitigation and Payment-in-lieu .................................................................................................... 9
D. Restrictive Covenants .............................................................................................................................. 10
E. Maintenance Plan and Agreement .......................................................................................................... 13
PART 3 - STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS
I. Summary ........................................................................................................................................................ 15
II. Standards ....................................................................................................................................................... 17
A. Water Quality .......................................................................................................................................... 17
B. Channel Protection .................................................................................................................................. 18
C. Flood Control ........................................................................................................................................... 19
D. Pretreatment ........................................................................................................................................... 20
E. Hot Spots ................................................................................................................................................. 21
III. Design Process ............................................................................................................................................... 22
A. Identify Sensitive Areas ........................................................................................................................... 22
B. Select Source Controls............................................................................................................................. 23
C. Size Runoff Controls ................................................................................................................................ 23
D. Confirm an Adequate Outlet ................................................................................................................... 23
3
E. Select Best Management Practices (BMPs)............................................................................................. 23
PART 4- STORMWATER DESIGN CRITERA
I. Soils Investigation........................................................................................................................................... 25
A. Qualifications ........................................................................................................................................... 25
B. Background Evaluation ............................................................................................................................ 25
C. Test Pit/Soil Boring Requirements ........................................................................................................... 25
D. Highest Known Groundwater Elevation .................................................................................................. 26
E. Field Permeability Testing........................................................................................................................ 26
F. Design Infiltration Rates .......................................................................................................................... 26
G. Minimum Allowable Infiltration Rate ...................................................................................................... 28
II. Calculation Methodology ............................................................................................................................... 29
A. Calculating Runoff.................................................................................................................................... 29
B. Rainfall ..................................................................................................................................................... 35
C. Calculating Storage Volumes and Release Rates ..................................................................................... 36
D. Groundwater Mounding .......................................................................................................................... 40
E. Computing Tools ...................................................................................................................................... 40
F. LGROW Design Spreadsheet .................................................................................................................... 41
PART 5 | BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
I. Non-Structural Best Management Practices .................................................................................................. 44
A. Minimal Disturbance Area ....................................................................................................................... 44
B. Protect Natural Flow Pathways ............................................................................................................... 45
C. Protect Sensitive Areas ............................................................................................................................ 46
D. Native Revegetation ................................................................................................................................ 47
E. Stormwater Disconnect ........................................................................................................................... 48
II. Structural Best Management Practices .......................................................................................................... 49
A. Storm Sewer ............................................................................................................................................ 50
B. Culvert or Bridge ...................................................................................................................................... 53
C. Open Channel .......................................................................................................................................... 54
D. Detention Basins ...................................................................................................................................... 55
E. Retention Basins ............................................................................................................................................ 65
F. Sediment Forebay .................................................................................................................................... 71
G. Spill Containment Cell.............................................................................................................................. 72
H. Infiltration Practices................................................................................................................................. 75
I. Bioretention/Rain Garden ....................................................................................................................... 80
J. Constructed Filter .................................................................................................................................... 84
K. Planter Box .............................................................................................................................................. 88
L. Pervious Pavement .................................................................................................................................. 92
M. Capture Reuse ......................................................................................................................................... 95
N. Vegetated Roof ........................................................................................................................................ 97
O. Water Quality Device ............................................................................................................................... 98
P. Bioswale and Water Quality Swale ............................................................................................................... 99
Q. Vegetated Swale .......................................................................................................................................... 104
R. Vegetated Filter Strip ............................................................................................................................. 108
S. Level Spreader …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..113
4
List of Tables
Table 1 Minimum Required Stormwater Standard 16
Table 2 Stormwater Hot Spots 22
Table 3 Stormwater BMP Matrix 24
Table 4 Minimum Number of Soil Tests Required 25
Table 5 Determination of a Design Infiltration Rate 27
Table 6 Design Infiltration Rates by USDA Soil Texture Class 27
Table 7 Rational Method Runoff Coefficients (10- to 100-year rainfall frequencies) 29
Table 8 Surface Retardants Coefficients 30
Table 9 Curve Numbers (CNs) from TR-55 32
Table 10 Runoff Coefficients for Small Storm Hydrology Method 34
Table 11 Rainfall Amounts (inches) 35
Table 12 Manning’s Roughness Coefficients 51
Table 13 Minimum and Maximum Slopes for Storm Sewers 62
Table 14 Hydraulic Conductivities for Filter Media 85
Table 15 Permanent Stabilization Treatment for Vegetated Swales 105
List of Figures
Figure 1 USDA Soil Textural Triangle 28
Figure 2 Extended Detention Hydrograph 37
Figure 3 Manning’s Roughness Coefficients for Vegetated Swales 105
Figure 4a Filter Strip Length (Sandy soils with HSG A) 109
Figure 4b1 Filter Strip Length (Sandy Loam soils with HSG B) 109
Figure 4b2 Filter Strip Length (Loam, Silt-Loam soils with HSG B) 110
Figure 4c Filter Strip Length (Sandy Clay Loam soils with HSG C) 110
Figure 4d Filter Strip Length (Clay Loam, Silty Clay, Clay soils with HSG D) 111
List of Appendices
Appendix 1 Watershed Policy Statements
5
PART 1 – GENERAL PROVISIONS
I. PURPOSE
This manual was produced to update and unify site plan review procedures within City of Muskegon. It is the
purpose of these site development rules to establish a uniform set of minimum standards for the management of
stormwater to be applied city-wide and meet the following objectives:
1. Ensure stormwater drainage systems are adequate to address stormwater management needs within a
proposed development, and protect the drainage, property, and water rights of landowners outside of
the proposed development.
2. Reduce flood damage due to development.
3. Minimize the degradation of existing watercourses.
4. Prevent an increase in nonpoint source pollution.
5. Maintain site hydrology to avoid detrimental changes in the balance between stormwater runoff,
groundwater recharge, and evapotranspiration.
The City has applied the Muskegon County Water Resources Commissioner Site Development Rules with
Procedures and Design Standards for Stormwater Management Systems, since adoption by City Commission on
October 25, 2016. This manual was developed to update and unify site plan review procedures pertaining to
stormwater within the City and supplement the City’s newly adopted Stormwater Ordinance. This manual was
developed to comply with state and federal stormwater guidelines.
A. Compliance with State and Federal Stormwater Mandates
Drains located within an urbanized area defined by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
are considered MS4s. The City is required to obtain an individual NPDES MS4 permit under Section 402 of the
Federal Clean Water Act, as amended, and under Water Resources Protection (Part 31, Act 451, PA 1994) of
the Michigan Natural Resource and Environmental Protection Act, as amended. An application for an MS4
permit was submitted to EGLE on April 1, 2016.
The MS4 permit requires the City to adopt an ordinance or other regulatory mechanism to address post-
construction stormwater runoff from new development and redevelopment projects, including preventing or
minimizing water quality impacts. The Post-Construction Stormwater Runoff Program of the MS4 permit
requires among other things:
1. A water quality performance standard to ensure specified reductions in total suspended solids.
2. A channel protection performance standard to address resource impairments resulting from increases in
bankfull flow rates and volumes.
3. A review procedure for the evaluation of infiltration best management practices (BMPs) to meet water
quality and channel protection standards in areas of soil or groundwater contamination.
4. Measures to address associated pollutants in identified "hot spots," which include land uses with the
potential for significant pollutant loading that could result in the contamination of surface water or
groundwater, including public water supplies.
5. A long-term operation and maintenance plan and agreement allowing for inspection, including a
mechanism for tracking the transfer of operation and maintenance responsibility and compliance.
The minimum standards in this manual meet the Post-Construction Storm Water Runoff Program requirements
for new and redevelopments set forth in the State of Michigan National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Permit Application for Discharge of Storm Water to Surface Waters of the State from a Municipal Separate Storm
Sewer System (DEQ, 2013, Rev 10/2014).
1
PART 1 – GENERAL PROVISIONS
TMDLs
The MS4 permit also requires identification and prioritization of actions to reduce pollutants in stormwater
discharges to make progress in meeting Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Water Quality Standards. TMDL water
bodies in City of Muskegon are summarized below:
TDML Waterbody Pollutant Pollutants(s) of Concern
Little Black Creek Biota Sedimentation and Siltation
Black Creek Biota Sedimentation and Siltation
Ruddiman Creek E. Coli Human and wildlife, pathogens, refuse, illicit
discharges
B. Preferred Stormwater Management Strategies
Regional Stormwater Management
The management of stormwater on a regional basis is encouraged where practical, particularly where site
constraints may preclude effective onsite treatment of stormwater. A regional stormwater management
approach allows for the use of superior performing BMPs that require more space and provides more flexibility
for BMPs to be sited strategically to address a known water quality issue.
Developers are encouraged to pursue a regional approach for private facilities where practical. Specific
requirements are provided in Part 2 section “Regional Stormwater Management Facility.”
Flood Control
The prevention and mitigation of property damage caused by flooding is priority for the City. The standards for
flood control require among other things:
1. A minimum flood control volume to be retained or detained onsite with provisions for emergency
overflow.
2. Confirmation of an adequate outlet for the discharge of stormwater offsite.
Alternatives for Channel Protection
An alternative approach using extended detention is allowed by EGLE for the urbanized area within the City of
Muskegon when the full channel protection volume cannot be retained onsite, and offsite options are not
available. These standards define the conditions under which the alternative approach will be approved for use. A
flow chart outlining this process is shown on the following page. Specific requirements are provided in Part
3 section “Channel Protection.”
Off-site mitigation for channel protection is allowed where physical constraints of individual sites may preclude
effective onsite treatment. Specific requirements are provided in Part 2 section “Off-site Mitigation.”
Payment-in-lieu for channel protection will only be allowed if a program is available from the City or as set forth
in a Watershed Policy Statement. Specific requirements are provided in Part 2 section “Payment-in-lieu.”
Limiting site conditions can be addressed using off-site mitigation or payment-in-lieu (offsite options), the
alternative approach (onsite option), or a combination of these options as the City sees fit, only if the use of all
other onsite BMPs has been maximized.
2
PART 1 – GENERAL PROVISIONS
Low Impact Development
Where regional stormwater management is not available to developers, onsite Low Impact Development (LID) is
the preferred stormwater management strategy to meet the multiple objectives identified previously. LID uses
the basic principle modeled after nature to manage rainfall where it lands. The outcome of LID is mimicking
existing site hydrology by using design techniques to infiltrate, filter, store, evaporate and detain runoff close to
its source. Many of these techniques incorporate the use of vegetation and are collectively referred to as Green
Infrastructure. A LID approach offers additional benefits in terms of increased property value and potential cost
savings.2 The size of stormwater storage facilities and infrastructure can often be reduced by incorporating LID
principles into a site design up front.
The Low Impact Development Manual for Michigan (SEMCOG, 2008) was used to develop this manual. The
standards in this manual incorporate LID principles into the design process and include design criteria for LID and
small site BMPs.
______________________________________________________________________
1
Maupin, Miranda, and Wagner, Theresa (2003). Regional Facility vs. On-site Development Regulations: Increasing
Flexibility and Effectiveness in Development Regulation Implementation, City of Seattle, Seattle, Washington.
2
United States Environmental Protection Agency (December 2007). Reducing Stormwater Costs through Low Impact
Development (LID) Strategies and Practices, EPA 841-F-07-006
3
PART 1 – GENERAL PROVISIONS
4
PART 1 – GENERAL PROVISIONS
Stormwater Management
Preferred Approach Incorporates Low Impact Development (LID)
Traditional Parking Lot Design Preferred: LID Parking Lot Design
Traditional “Big Box” Site Layout Preferred: Equivalent LID Site Layout
5
PART 1 – GENERAL PROVISIONS
II. AUTHORITY
A. State Law and Code of City Ordinances
Under the Home Rule City Act, PA 279 of 1909 (MCL 117.1 et seq), the City Commission has the power to enact,
amend and repeal all ordinances that may be necessary or proper for carrying out the powers conferred, and the
duties imposed upon the City by the charter and by the laws of the State.
The Code of City Ordinances, Zoning, Section 514 and Chapter 78 Subdivisions & Other Land Divisions, establish the
site plan review procedure under the Land Division Act, PA 288 of 1967 (MCL 560.101 et seq.); Condominium Act,
PA 59 of 1978 (MCL 559.101 et seq.) and local regulation of condominiums (MCL 559.241); the Mobile Home
Commission Act, PA 96 of 1987 (MCL 125.2301 et seq.); and the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act, PA 110 of 2006 (MCL
125.3101 et seq.), as amended.
Chapter 26 Environment, Article V (Stormwater Management), provides for the regulation and control of
stormwater runoff and establishes procedures for obtaining a stormwater permit as part of the site plan approval
process. These published Stormwater Standards are established pursuant to and incorporated by reference into the
Stormwater Ordinance.
B. Provisions for Requirements in Addition to Minimum Standards
This manual provides minimum standards to be complied with by Developers and in no way limit the authority of
the City to adopt or publish and enforce higher standards as a condition of approval of the final plat or site plan.
The City reserves the right to determine site-specific requirements other than those herein, based upon review of
the plans. Any deviations from these standards shall be subject to approval by the City.
III. APPLICABILITY
A. Review Required
These standards apply to private and public development and redevelopment projects in City of Muskegon. These
standards also apply to City owned facilities and City Public Works projects, including road projects.
Developments subject to review under these Standards, limited to City review, and exemptions are identified in
Section 26-304 of the Stormwater Ordinance.
IV. SEVERABILITY CLAUSE
If any part of these rules is found to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the remaining portions of the rules
which can be given effect without the invalid portion, and to this end the rules are declared to be severable.
V. ADOPTION AND REVISION
The City council has adopted these Stormwater Standards by approval of the Stormwater Ordinance at the October
25, 2022 City Commission meeting. The effective date of these standards is November 1, 2022. Revisions to the
standards or fees will be subject to review and approval by City Council.
Revisions to the standards affecting MS4 permit requirements must be reviewed and approved by EGLE, if required
by law.
VI. FEES
The fees for reviewing a plat or site development under these rules are set forth on the Stormwater Review
Application.
6
PART 2 - PROCEDURES FOR PLAN SUBMISSION AND APPROVAL
I. SUBMISSION AND APPROVAL
These procedures have been developed in the context of the plat requirements specified in the Land Division Act,
which lays out a two-step submittal and approval process. A preliminary plat and final plat are required by statute.
For other types of developments, submittal of a condominium subdivision plan, preliminary plan, or site plan is
required, which will typically culminate in a final set of construction drawings.
A. Concept Review Meeting
A concept review meeting is strongly encouraged prior to submittal of a site plan. The purpose of the concept
review meeting is to initiate communication and provide uniform direction to the Developer to maximize
efficiency in design and reduce costs.
The Proprietor is responsible for contacting the City’s office to request the meeting, submit the concept plan,
and coordinate the location, date, and time for the meeting with all parties involved. Information provided by
the Proprietor in the concept plan shall include at a minimum the items on the Stormwater Review Checklist.
If the conceptual layout of the drainage plan is approved, the Developer may begin completing design plans and
calculations for application submittal under these Standards.
B. Submission
The following submittals are required for City review and approval prior to the start of any work on the proposed
development requiring review under these rules. Soil borings and test pits, soil testing, vegetative cutting solely for
land surveys, and normal maintenance shall not be considered a start of work under these rules. An application
packet is available from the City.
Site Plan Review
1. Site Plan Review Application.
2. Stormwater Worksheet and calculations prepared by a professional engineer licensed in the State of
Michigan.
3. Drawings. Initial submission requires one (1) print and one (1) electronic PDF file containing the
information on the Stormwater Review Checklist prepared by a professional engineer or surveyor
licensed in the State of Michigan. Resubmittals require only one (1) electronic PDF file.
4. Applicable fee (refer to Part 1 section "Fees").
Staged Development
Should the Developer plan to develop a given area but wish to begin with only a portion of the total area, the
original preliminary plat or site plan shall include the proposed general layout for the entire area. The first phase
of the development shall be clearly superimposed upon the overall plat or site plan in order to clearly illustrate
the method of development that the Developer intends to follow. Each subsequent plat or site plan shall follow
the same procedure until the entire area controlled by the Developer is developed.
Final acceptance by the City of only one portion or phase of a development does not ensure final acceptance of
any subsequent phases or the overall general plat or site plan for the entire area; nor does it mandate that
the overall general plat or site plan be followed as originally proposed, if deviations or modifications acceptable to
the City are proposed.
C. Changes and Resubmission
Changes made without resubmission and approval may result in revocation of approval.
If the Developer finds it advantageous or necessary to make design changes, or if the information given to the
7
PART 2 - PROCEDURES FOR PLAN SUBMISSION AND APPROVAL
City does not represent the conditions as they exist on the ground, and revisions are required as a result, such
revisions shall be made by the Developer and the drawings resubmitted to the City for approval.
D. Approval
Payment of all fees is prerequisite to approval (refer to Section 26-314 of the Stormwater Management Ordinance.
E. Expiration of Approval
Approval of construction drawings by the City's office is valid for two (2) calendar years. If an extension
beyond this period is needed, the Proprietor shall submit a written request to the City for an extension. The City
may grant one-year extensions of the approval and may require updated or additional information, if needed.
Should modifications be made to the drawings, a new review may be required subject to the appropriate fees.
F. Revocation of Approval
Any approval issued by the City under these rules may be revoked or suspended for a violation of the conditions of
approval, or a misrepresentation or failure to disclose relevant facts in the application submittal. The City will
provide the Proprietor written notice of any revocation of approval.
G. Submission of Construction Record Drawings
Construction record drawings (“as-builts”) shall be submitted to the City for developments reviewed under
these rules. A letter of certification by a professional engineer shall accompany the construction record drawings
or may be accepted in lieu of record drawings for some projects at the City’s discretion. An Engineer’s
Certification of Construction is available from the City.
One (1) print, one (1) electronic PDF file, and one (1) electronic file meeting G I S digital submission
requirements shall be submitted, and contain the information listed on the Stormwater Review Checklist.
Construction record drawings must be submitted prior to release of any review deposit. The City will review
construction record drawings for completeness and respond with written comments or acceptance within thirty
(30) days of submittal or resubmittal.
II. STORMWATER DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS
A. Drainage Plan
Drainage Patterns
Proposed drainage for the development shall conform to existing watershed boundaries, natural drainage
patterns within the site, or any established county drainage districts.
Staged Development
Each phase shall be self-sufficient from the standpoint of drainage.
Location of Stormwater Management Facilities
Stormwater management facilities within a development planned to have multiple lot owners shall be located on
dedicated outlots, within road rights-of-way, or have separate easements granted to the entity responsible for
operation and maintenance of the stormwater management system.
Parking lots, roadways, walkways, and roadside ditches shall not be flooded for use as stormwater detention.
Offsite Stormwater
Surface water flows from offsite land shall be routed around the development’s onsite stormwater system
whenever possible. An onsite detention basin shall not be used to pass this flow through the site. If water from
offsite is directed through an onsite detention basin, the basin must either be designed as a regional stormwater
management facility or be sized to additionally store the existing offsite water with no change in the allowable
8
PART 2 - PROCEDURES FOR PLAN SUBMISSION AND APPROVAL
release rate for the site.
Stormwater Discharge
The rate, volume, concentration, or constitution of stormwater discharged from a site for the specified design
storms shall not create adverse impacts to downstream properties or the public stormwater management
system. To that end, the following stormwater discharge requirements must be met for all sites:
i. Post-development discharge shall not exceed the capacity of the existing infrastructure
or the existing discharge rate from the site, whichever is lower.
ii. Post-development discharge shall not cause adverse impact to offsite property due to
concentrated runoff or ponded water of greater height, area, and duration.
iii. Discharge shall not cause downstream erosion or sedimentation.
iv. For a downstream drainage system that is inadequate to handle any increase to the existing
design discharge from the site development, it is the Proprietor’s responsibility to:
1. Stabilize or upsize the existing conveyance system.
2. Obtain flooding easements.
3. Provide additional onsite stormwater controls.
v. Discharge to groundwater shall not cause groundwater mounding sufficient to adversely
impact structures or adjacent property.
vi. Post-development discharge shall not cause impairments by the contribution of
pollutants to surface water or groundwater.
vii. Post-development discharge shall not cause impairments to coldwater streams due to
thermal properties of the discharge.
It is the Developer’s obligation to meet these requirements. Should a stormwater system, as built, fail to comply,
it is the Developer’s responsibility to have constructed at their expense, any necessary additional and/or
alternative stormwater management facilities, subject to the City’s review and approval.
B. Regional Stormwater Management Facility
Regional stormwater management facilities are designed to serve multiple developments or parcels with more
than one property owner at the time of development or redevelopment.
The City may pursue projects to serve a particular city stormwater district, or may approve facilities proposed to
be constructed by individual Developers. Private facilities must have a written agreement between responsible
parties with recorded easements to ensure operation and maintenance of the facility in perpetuity. Agreements
must specify maximum allowable runoff coefficients for each parcel contributing to the facility.
The regional facility should be constructed first, prior to any development or redevelopment. Written approval is
required from the City if construction is to be delayed. Financial surety and temporary onsite measures must
be provided until the facility is constructed.
C. Off-site Mitigation and Payment-in-lieu
Off-site Mitigation
Off-site mitigation refers to BMPs implemented at a location other than the proposed development or
redevelopment, but within the same jurisdiction and watershed/sewershed as the original project to meet
channel protection standards required by the MS4 permit. The watershed is the area represented by the DEQ, 10-
digit Hydrologic Unit Code. The sewershed is the area where storm water is conveyed by an MS4 to a common
outfall or point of discharge.
The City also requires that the off-site mitigation is protective of the same watercourse or waterbody to
which the site discharges and is located downstream of the proposed development or redevelopment if
possible.
9
PART 2 - PROCEDURES FOR PLAN SUBMISSION AND APPROVAL
Payment-in-lieu
Payment-in-lieu refers to the Proprietor paying a fee to the City, which is then applied towards a public
stormwater management project that fulfills the channel protection and/or other stormwater requirements for
the site. The stormwater management project may be either a regional stormwater management facility, a
new BMP, or a retrofit to an existing BMP.
The City will only consider payment-in-lieu if the City has a planned or constructed improvement project
meeting the requirements for off-site mitigation as identified in a Watershed Policy Statement. The cost of
payment-in-lieu will be determined on a case-by-case basis and will represent the actual cost of implementing
public water quality enhancements.
Criteria
The determination to approve off-site mitigation or payment-in-lieu will be based on multiple criteria and not
solely on the difficulty or cost of implementing BMPs on site. Conditions under which the option to move off site
would become available may include:
i. Limited size of the lot outside of the building footprint to create the necessary infiltration capacity even
with amended soils.
ii. Soil instability as documented by a thorough geotechnical analysis.
iii. A site use that is inconsistent with capture and reuse of stormwater.
iv. Too much shade or other physical conditions that preclude adequate use of plants.
v. The potential water quality impact from the original project site and the benefits realized at the off-
site location.
The City may approve off-site mitigation or payment-in-lieu if the Developer demonstrates that site constraints
preclude sufficient treatment and restoration of hydrology onsite, and the following minimum requirements
are met:
1. Offset ratio. The offset ratio for the amount of storm water not managed onsite in relation to the amount
of stormwater required to be mitigated at another site, or for which in-lieu payments will be made is as
follows:
a. First Tier: Manage a minimum of 0.4 inches of storm water runoff onsite and provide a 1 to 1.5
offset ratio for the remaining amount of storm water managed offsite.
b. Second Tier: If it completely infeasible to manage the minimum onsite, provide a 1 to 2 offset
ratio for the amount of storm water managed offsite.
2. Schedule. Off-site mitigation shall be completed within 24 months after the start of the original site
construction.
3. Assurances. Offset and in-lieu projects shall be preserved and maintained in perpetuity through the
procedures and tracking system administered by the City.
D. Restrictive Covenants
For plats and site condominiums, a copy of restrictive covenants or master deed language related to drainage shall
be provided to the City along with construction drawings for approval. Covenants and deeds shall be recorded at
the Register of Deeds prior to release of posted surety.
Block Grading Plan
A block grading plan shall be incorporated in the restrictive covenants of the plat or master deed to ensure proper
drainage of individual lots. In addition, the Developer shall provide a copy of the block grading plan to the City for
their permanent files. The block grading plan shall include the Lowest Allowable Floor Elevation and Lowest
Allowable Opening Elevation for each lot and include the “basement type” for each lot (e.g., walkout, daylight,
or standard basement) as indicated by the topography of each site and according to the approved design
plans. The block grading plan shall state:
10
PART 2 - PROCEDURES FOR PLAN SUBMISSION AND APPROVAL
The block grading plan shows the direction of flow for the surface drainage for all lots. It is the lot
owner’s responsibility to ensure that the final grading of the lot is in accordance with the block
grading plan. During the final lot grading and landscaping, the owner shall take care to ensure
that the installation of fences, planting, trees, and shrubs do not interfere with nor concentrate
the flow of surface drainage. No changes will be made in the grading of any lot areas used for
drainage which would later affect surface runoff drainage patterns without the prior written
consent of the City for all portions of the drainage system. Finish grading for home construction
shall be completed in conformance with the master drainage plan for the development and in
such a manner so as not to create the excessive ponding of stormwater on the sites within the
development.
Minimum Floor and Opening Elevations
Provisions for flood protection and building opening are set forth in Section 26-330 of the Stormwater
Management Ordinance. Documentation to support allowable minimum floor and opening elevations shall
be submitted with construction drawings
Criteria for determining the Lowest Allowable Floor Elevation
i. Proximity to detention/retention facilities due to groundwater mounding (which may not be apparent
until after construction).
ii. Groundwater elevations from monitor wells, test pits and/or soil borings including any soil mottling noted
in the soil profile.
iii. Regional and cyclical groundwater levels available online.
iv. Hydrogeologic studies and groundwater modeling.
Criteria for determining the Lowest Allowable Opening Elevation
1. Proximity to open drain or natural watercourse, pond, or wetland and the 100-year flood elevation.
2. Proximity to detention/retention basin and design high water level.
3. Proximity to drainage swales and/or flood routes designed to convey the 100-year storm event runoff
including overflows from detention/retention basins.
4. Proximity to an enclosed storm sewer system with open ends or catch basins that could surcharge during
the 100-year storm event.
5. Type of building foundation (e.g., walkout, daylight, or standard basement) as dictated by the topography
of each site.
Minimum floor and opening elevations shall be incorporated in the restrictive covenants of the plat or master
deed, including benchmark references. It is the responsibility of the Proprietor to provide a sufficient number of
benchmarks (NAVD 88 datum) to use as a reference for establishment of minimum floor and opening elevations
for all lots. Lots not impacted by high groundwater or potential flooding from a 100-year storm event as
determined by the Design Engineer shall be so noted as well. The restrictive covenant shall state:
The lowest allowable floor elevations are set at 2-foot or more above the highest known ground
water elevation. The lowest allowable floor and/or opening elevations are set 2-foot or more
above the 100-year floodplain or design high water level of the stormwater system. These
elevations are set to reduce the risk of structural damage and the flooding of building interiors. A
waiver from the set elevations may be granted by the City following receipt of a certification
from a professional engineer or surveyor licensed in the State of Michigan demonstrating that
the proposed elevation does not pose a risk of flooding. Minimum building floor and opening
elevations and benchmark locations and elevations are indicated on the Block Grading Plan.
Footing Drains and Sump Pumps
Where footing drains and sump pumps are required or utilized, a stormwater lateral shall be provided for each
parcel at the time of construction, unless a waiver is granted in writing by the City.. Provide direction in the
restrictive covenants of the plat or condominium master deed for footing drain and sump pump outlets. If
proposed to be directed to the storm sewer system, the restrictive covenant shall state:
11
PART 2 - PROCEDURES FOR PLAN SUBMISSION AND APPROVAL
Water from such sources as eave troughs and footing drains shall be directed to laterals provided
for the lots. Water from footing drains shall be discharged to the lateral via a sump pump with
check valve system. If no lateral is provided, the lot owner shall discharge said water in such a
manner as to not impact neighboring land or public streets.
Floor drains, laundry facilities or other similar features shall not be connected to a footing drain or
sump pump system discharging to footing laterals and the storm sewer system. Laundry facilities
and sewage lift pumps must discharge into the sanitary sewage disposal system.
Provisions for interference with natural of artificial drain are set forth in Section 26-338 of the Stormwater
Ordinance.
Easements for Side Yard and Surface Drainage
Private easements for enclosed yard drains and surface drainage are for the benefit of upland lots within the
development or upland sites that currently drain across the proposed plat or site. Language shall be included
within the restrictive covenants of the plat or condominium master deed that clearly notifies property owners of
the location and purpose of private easements for side yard and surface drainage, as well as restrictions on use or
modification of these areas. A separate, recordable easement form is not required. The restrictive covenant shall
state:
Private easements for side yard and surface drainage are for the benefit of upland lots within the
subdivision and any improper construction, development, or grading that occurs within these
easements will interfere with the drainage rights of those upland lots. Private easements for
surface drainage are for the continuous passage of surface water and each lot owner will be
responsible for maintaining the surface drainage system across their property. No construction is
permitted within a private easement for side yard and surface drainage. This includes fences,
swimming pools, sheds, garages, patios, decks, or any other permanent structure or landscaping
features. No dumping of grass clippings, leaves, brush, or other refuse is allowed within a drainage
easement. These items obstruct drainage, restrict flow, and plug culverts. This can lead to higher
maintenance costs and cause flooding situations.
Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Permits
It is the responsibility of the Developer to contact the Muskegon County Public Works Department (Enforcing
Agency) to determine which lots if any need a permit for Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control (Part 91,
Act 451, PA 1994). The restrictive covenant shall state:
Each individual lot owner will be responsible for the erosion control measures necessary on their
lot to keep loose soil from their construction activities out of the street, catch basins, and off of
adjacent property. If any sedimentation in the street, catch basins, or adjacent lots of results
from construction for a particular site, it is the responsibility of that lot owner to remove the
sediment and restore the lot to prevent further erosion. This applies to ALL lot owners.
A Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Permit must be obtained from Muskegon County
D epar tm ent of Public Works prior to excavation for lots through _. All conditions
set forth by permit shall be met throughout construction activity until permit is allowed to expire.
Responsibility for Maintenance of Open Water Bodies
The restrictive covenant shall state:
Lot owners are responsible for the management and maintenance of open water bodies for
aesthetics, aquatic habitat, recreation, and water quality, including liability and costs. Lot owners
are also responsible to prevent open waterbodies from becoming a nuisance due to smell or
wildlife conditions and shall take positive action to prevent such conditions from occurring.
12
PART 2 - PROCEDURES FOR PLAN SUBMISSION AND APPROVAL
E. Maintenance Plan and Agreement
Provisions for maintenance agreements are set forth below and in Section 26-373 of the Stormwater Management
Ordinance. Contact the City for necessary documents.
A. A maintenance agreement is required for all developments requiring stormwater review. The
developer shall provide all stormwater maintenance agreements necessary to implement the
approved drainage plan and to otherwise comply with this Article in form and substance as
required by the City. The maintenance agreement shall be signed and submitted to the City for
review and approval at the time application for a stormwater permit is made. After construction of
the stormwater management system has been verified and approved or accepted by the City, the
Developer shall execute a final maintenance agreement with the City, record such agreements
with the County Register of Deeds, and provide a copy of the recorded document to the City. The
City reserves the right to require the maintenance agreement be recorded prior to issuance of a
stormwater permit.
B. Maintenance agreement provisions. The maintenance agreement shall, among other matters,
ensure access for proper inspection by the City or their designee, allow for maintenance or
corrective actions of stormwater BMPs, and include provisions for the tracking of maintenance
activities, and transfer of operation and maintenance responsibility to ensure the performance
standards are met in perpetuity.
a. Maintenance Plan. The maintenance agreement shall include a maintenance plan and
schedule for routine, emergency, and long-term maintenance of all structural and
vegetative stormwater BMPs installed and implemented to meet the performance
standards, with a detailed annual estimated budget for the initial three (3) years, and a
clear statement that only future maintenance activities in accordance withthe
maintenance plan shall be permitted without the necessity of securing new permits.
b. Maintenance Documentation. Written notice and submittal of maintenance
documentation shall be provided to the City by the property owner at the interval set forth in
the maintenance agreement and subject to the provisions of Sections 26-346 through 26-
362.
c. Failure to Perform Maintenance. If it has been found by the City, following notice and an
opportunity to be heard by the property owner, that there has been a material failure or
refusal to undertake maintenance as required under this Article and/or as required in the
approved maintenance agreement as required hereunder, the City shall then be
i. authorized, but not required, to hire an entity with qualifications and experience in
the subject matter to undertake the monitoring and maintenance as so required, in
which event the property owner shall be obligated to advance or reimburse
payment for all costs and expenses associated with such monitoring and
maintenance, together with a reasonable administrative fee. The maintenance
agreement required under this Article shall contain a provision spelling out the
requirements; and if the applicant objects in any respect to such provision or the
underlying rights and obligations, such objection shall be resolved prior to the
commencement of construction of the proposed development on the property. If
the property owner fails to pay the costs incurred by the City under this Section,
the costs shall be a lien on the property and enforced as provided in Division 6 of
Section 26.
13
PART 2 - PROCEDURES FOR PLAN SUBMISSION AND APPROVAL
C. Tracking Operation and Maintenance. The City shall implement a tracking system to include
procedures for filing and retrieval of all recorded maintenance agreements, maintenance plans,
and stormwater management system maps to document location and ages of stormwater BMPs.
The City shall also track annual inspection reports required to be submitted from the developer,
and any inspection conducted by the City to document condition of stormwater BMPs and
maintenance performed.
A copy of the recorded maintenance agreement must be presented to the City prior to construction drawing
approval and release of any review deposit.
14
PART 3 – STORMWATER REQUIREMENTS
I. SUMMARY
The following stormwater management requirements comply with the City’s Stormwater Ordinance NPDES MS4
permit and shall apply to all new developments and redevelopments in the City of Muskegon:
1. Protection. The design process shall begin by identifying environmentally sensitive areas located on the
site and laying out the site to maximize protection of the sensitive areas.
2. Source Controls. Non-structural BMPs shall be used for protection of environmental sensitive areas on the
site, and to reduce the amount of stormwater runoff.
3. Runoff Controls. Stormwater runoff shall be managed onsite using structural BMPs to protect both water
resources and real property. Minimum stormwater standards are summarized in Table 1. Higher
standards may be required for sites that discharge to areas with known issues.
4. Watershed Policy Statements. Specific stormwater management policies (if any) established for identified
watersheds or protection areas must be met in addition to these minimum standards.
5. Offsite Stormwater Management Options. Regional stormwater management facilities are encouraged,
particularly where site constraints preclude effective onsite treatment of stormwater. Off-site mitigation
and payment-in-lieu programs (if available) may be approved to meet channel protection standards.
6. Adequate Outlet. The design maximum release rate, volume or concentration of stormwater discharged
from a site shall not exceed the capacity of the downstream stormwater infrastructure or cause
impairment to the offsite receiving area.
7. BMP Design. BMPs must be designed to meet the minimum criteria provided. BMPs selected to meet the
water quality treatment standard must also be shown to reduce TSS in stormwater runoff by at least 80%
or to a concentration of no greater than 80 mg/L.
8. Groundwater. The highest known groundwater elevation and extent of mounding from infiltration BMPs
shall be determined to ensure no adverse impacts internal and external to the development.
9. Soils. Test pits or soil borings are required for most structural BMPs to determine soil classification, depth
to groundwater and the presence of other site constraints. Field permeability testing is not generally
required but must be conducted to use the alternative approach for channel protection when soils are
questionable.
10. Restrictive Covenants. Plats and site condominium developments must incorporate specific requirements
for lot grading, minimum floor and opening elevations, footing drains, private easements for side yard
drainage, and individual soil erosion and sedimentation control permits.
11. Operation and Maintenance. Stormwater BMPs must be designed to allow for operation and
maintenance, demonstrated in the review submittals. A maintenance agreement between the Developer
and the City is required. A maintenance plan and compliance tracking are required as part of the
maintenance agreement.
15
PART 3 – STORMWATER REQUIREMENTS
Table 1 – Minimum Required Stormwater Standards
Standard/Where Required Criteria
Water Quality “first flush” Treat the runoff generated from one inch of rain over the project site (i.e., the
All sites. 90% annual nonexeedance storm) through BMPs designed to reduce post-
development TSS loadings by 80%, or achieve a discharge concentration not to
exceed 80 mg/L.
Channel Protection The post-development runoff rate and volume shall not exceed the pre-
Surface water discharges; not development rate and volume for all storms up to and including the 2-year, 24-
required for direct discharge hour storm. Retention of the volume increase is required.
to Lake Michigan or Where site conditions preclude infiltration (onsite and offsite), an alternative
Muskegon Lake. approach may be allowed consistent with the flowchart in Part 1:
Extended Detention of the 2-year, 24-hour storm for a period of 24 hours
resulting in a drawdown time no greater than 72 hours. The resulting peak
discharge shall be no greater than the existing 1-year peak discharge.
Flood Control Collection and Conveyance: Design storm sewers and swales for the 10-year
All sites: unless exception is storm, and open channels for the 25-year storm.
allowed pending
Detention and Retention: Store runoff from the 25-year storm with a maximum
downstream storm sewer
release rate of 0.13 cfs per acre.
capacity and other factors.
Not required on sites with a Overflow Routes for Extreme Flood: Identify overflow routes and the extent of
direct discharge to Lake high-water levels for the 100-year flood to ensure no adverse impacts offsite or
Michigan or Muskegon internal to the site. Where overland flow routes do not exist:
Lake. 1. Protect buildings with redundant storm sewer system sized for the 100-
year storm; and
2. Increase size of detention and retention basins to store two (2) times
the flood control volume.
Pretreatment Forebay volume equal to 15% of water quality volume (required for
When required by BMP, Refer detention/retention basins); Vegetated Filter Strip; Vegetated Swale; or Water
to Table 3. Quality Device.
Hotspot Isolate transfer and storage areas to minimize need for treatment.
Industrial and commercial
Pretreatment BMP with impermeable barrier above groundwater and
land uses in Table 2.
provisions for the capture of oil, grease, and sediments.
Part 201 and Part 213 sites
(Brownfields). Minimum spill containment volume: 400 gallons.
16
PART 3 – STORMWATER REQUIREMENTS
II. STANDARDS
A. Water Quality
Where Required
Treatment of the water quality volume is required for all sites to capture and treat the “first flush” of stormwater
runoff that typically carries with it the highest concentration of pollutants.3
Standard
Capture and treatment of the runoff from the 90% annual nonexceedance storm is required for the project site.
This storm is approximately equivalent to one inch of rain (0.93 inch for Michigan Climatic Zone 5 per DEQ
memo “90 Percent Annual Nonexceedance Storms” dated March 24, 2006).
Treatment of the runoff volume from the 90% annual nonexceedance storm with properly designed BMPs to
reduce TSS loading by 80% or achieve TSS discharge concentrations not to exceed 80 mg/L, is required.
Note: TSS is a surrogate for other pollutants normally found in stormwater runoff. Control of TSS to meet this
requirement is expected to achieve control of other pollutants to an acceptable level that protects water quality.
Natural areas of the site left undisturbed and BMPs that provide water quality treatment need not be included in
the calculations. This effectively results in the directly connected impervious areas and disturbed pervious areas
of the site being used to calculate the water quality volume.
Treatment BMPs
Selected BMPs must meet the TSS target either alone or in combination. Pollutant (TSS) removal efficiencies for
BMPs are provided in Table 3. Water quality volume can be provided through one of the following methods:
1. Settling (Permanent Pool or Detention)
2. Filtration
3. Infiltration
4. Absorption
5. Chemical/Mechanical Treatment
Permanent Pool. The volume of a permanent pool incorporated into a stormwater BMP and sized at 2.5 times the
water quality volume.4 This is the volume below the ordinary static water level (also known as dead storage).
Detention. The storage volume provided by detention of stormwater. Extended detention is defined as holding
the stormwater runoff volume and releasing it gradually over a period of 24 hours with a drawdown time no
greater than 72 hours.
Filtration. The volume of stormwater runoff routed through a BMP that provides filtration (i.e., an underdrained
BMP). In the case of a vegetated filter strip or vegetated swale, the filtering area must meet minimum standards
for slope, length, drainage area and vegetative cover.
Infiltration. The volume of stormwater runoff infiltrated into the ground through a stormwater BMP.
Absorption and Chemical/Mechanical Treatment. The volume of stormwater runoff routed through a proprietary
water quality device, or natural or engineered system.
_________________________
3
Stenstrom, Michael K. and Kayhanian, Masoud (2005). First Flush Phenomenon Characterization. California Department of
Transportation, Sacramento, California.
4
Barrett, Michael (2005). BMP Performance Comparisons: Examples from the International Stormwater BMP Database,
Center for Research in Water Resources, PRC#119, University of Texas, 2005 Water Environment Federation.
17
PART 3 – STORMWATER MANGEMENT REQUIREMENTS
B. Channel Protection
Where Required
Channel protection is required for surface water discharges. Channel protection is not required for direct
discharges to Lake Michigan or Muskegon Lake, including directly connected storm sewer.
Standard
The post-development runoff rate and volume shall not exceed the pre-development rate and volume for all
storms up to and including the 2-year, 24-hour storm. Retention of the volume increase is required.
Pre-development is defined as the last land use prior to the planned new development or redevelopment.
Retention can be provided through infiltration, or interception and evapotranspiration or reuse.
Note: Volume control for channel protection is required to mitigate increases in runoff rates and volumes for the
more frequent (bankfull) rainfall events that have the greatest influence on shaping stream channels. An increase
in runoff volume can expose channels to critical erosive velocities for a longer duration, causing accelerated
channel adjustments to occur.
Alternative Approach
Where site constraints limit infiltration (onsite and offsite), and field permeability testing has confirmed the limits
of the infiltration rate, an alternative approach may be allowed after all other onsite BMPs are maximized
consistent with the flow chart in Part 1. A certification form (Appendix 1) signed by the Design Engineer must
be submitted for approval before the alternative approach can be used. Site constraints that limit the use of
infiltration may include:
1. Poorly draining soils (<0.24 inches per hour; typically, hydrologic soil groups C and D).
2. Bedrock.
3. High groundwater, or the potential of mounded groundwater to impair other uses.
4. Wellhead protection areas.
5. Stormwater hot spots.
6. Part 201 and Part 213 sites, and areas of soil or groundwater contamination.
The alternative approach shall consist of extended detention of the 2-year, 24-hour storm for a period of 24 hours
resulting in a drawdown time no greater than 72 hours. The resulting peak discharge shall be no greater than the
existing 1-year peak discharge.
Note: A developed peak discharge no greater than the existing 1-year peak discharge is required by EGLE. The
intent is to release stormwater runoff in such a gradual manner that critical erosive velocities during the bankfull
event will seldom be exceeded in downstream channels.
If the allowable opening area for extended detention becomes too small for practical design (less than the area of
a ¾-inch diameter hole), a 4-inch underdrain below a biofiltration BMP (e.g., bioretention/rain garden, planter box,
water quality swale) may be used.
Note: Studies have shown that underdrained biofiltration BMPs provide a significant percentage of volume
reduction (23% to 73% for 25th and 75th percentiles),5 and a large percentage of rate reduction (80% or more).6
_________________________
5
Geosyntec Consultants and Wright Water Engineers, Inc. (May 2012). International Stormwater Best Management
Practices (BMP) Database, Addendum 1 to Volume Reduction Technical Summary (January 2011), Expanded Analysis of
Volume Reduction in Bioretention BMPs.
6
University of New Hampshire Stormwater Center (2007). 2007 Annual Report.
18
PART 3 – STORMWATER MANGEMENT REQUIREMENTS
C. Flood Control
Where Required
Flood control is required for all sites.
Standard
Detention or retention of the 25-year storm with a maximum release rate of 0.13 cfs per acre is required.
Note: The 25-year storm is selected to balance flood risk management with economics based on federal studies
comparing the cost of flood damage to storm return interval.7 The release rate of 0.13 cfs per acre is selected to
be generally protective of floodplains in downstream watercourses and is based on result found in previous
hydrologic studies on West Michigan streams.8 When volume control is not provided, an extremely low release
rate is required to prevent an increase in peak flow rates in downstream watercourses or storm sewers. The
increased volume and prolonged duration of runoff from multiple detention basins can have a cumulative effect
to increase peak flow rate and duration in downstream reaches.
An alternate maximum release rate may be allowed under certain conditions, including, but not limited to:
1. Sites with specific discharge requirements per a Watershed Policy Statement.
2. Redevelopment sites discharging to a municipal storm sewer where the municipality has determined the
sewer has adequate capacity for the existing peak runoff rate from the site. Detention need only be
provided for any increase in impervious area.
3. Direct discharges to waterbodies or watercourses where the Developer demonstrates that the receiving
waters possess capacity to convey the post-development discharge safely and with no negative
downstream impacts due to increased flow rates, water levels or velocities. In addition, the peak flow of
the receiving waters cannot be increased by the proposed development (i.e., there is a sufficient difference
in the timing of the two hydrographs).
4. When the site is located adjacent to or within a floodplain, excavation of new floodplain in lieu of standard
stormwater detention may be required. The excavated volume shall be equal to the standard detention
basin storage volume. Only the volume above the 2-year and below the 100-year floodplain elevation can
be counted to meet the volume requirement.
Overflow Routes for Extreme Flood
Overflow routes and the extent of high-water levels for the 100-year flood shall be identified for the site and for
downstream areas between the site and the nearest acceptable floodway or outlet. Provisions shall be made to
ensure no adverse impacts offsite or internal to the site. Where acceptable overflow routes do not exist:
1. Buildings shall be protected from flooding by two separate enclosed drainage systems, a primary and a
redundant system, each independently protecting the building from flooding during the 100-year storm.
Runoff shall be directed to the inlets of the primary system for up to a 10-year storm, to minimize the
accumulation of debris over the redundant inlets; and
2. Detention and retention basins shall be increased in size to store two (2) times the flood control volume.
_______________________
7 Johnson, William K. (January 1985). Significance of Location in Computing Flood Damage. ASCE Journal of Water
Resource Planning and Management.
8 Camp, Dresser and McKee, Inc. (1991). Buck and Plaster Creek Stormwater Management Masterplan, prepared for the Kent
City.
19
PART 3 – STORMWATER MANGEMENT REQUIREMENTS
Note: The intent of the extreme flood criteria is to prevent flood damage from large but infrequent storm events
by identifying and/or designing overland flow paths that are clear of structures and have grades below the lowest
openings of structures. Overflow routes may include floodplains along open channels, overbank areas along
vegetated swales, curb jumps in drives and parking lots, and other flow paths flood waters will take to reach an
outlet, whether overland or underground.
D. Pretreatment
Where Required
Pretreatment is required prior to discharging stormwater runoff to the following structural BMPs to preserve the
longevity and function of the BMP:
1. Detention basins
2. Retention basins
3. Infiltration practices
4. Bioretention/rain gardens
5. Constructed filters
6. Capture reuse
Treatment BMPs
Pretreatment provides for the removal of fine sediment, trash, and debris. Methods of pretreatment include:
1. Forebays (including spill containment cells and level spreaders)
2. Vegetated filter strips (including buffers and green roofs)
3. Vegetated swales (including natural flow paths)
4. Water quality devices
Standard
Sediment Forebay
A minimum pretreatment volume equivalent to 15% of the water quality volume is required for sediment forebays
using gravity.
Note: This is a conservative approximation of results given by the Hazen Equation for sediment basin sizing using
a 50% settling efficiency for a 50-micron particle (silt) at a maximum 4-foot settling depth with a 1-year peak inflow
at a rainfall intensity of one inch per hour, consistent with recommendations in the Low Impact Development
Manual for Michigan (SEMCOG, 2008).
Vegetated Filter Strip
Provide a 10-foot minimum sheet-flow length at a maximum slope of 2% with an impervious approach length no
greater than 3.5 times the filter strip length, up to a maximum approach length of 75 feet.
Provide a 15-foot minimum sheet flow length for slopes between 2% and 6% with an impervious approach length
no greater than three times the filter strip length, up to a maximum approach length of 75 feet.
Vegetated Swale
Provide a 20-foot minimum length at a maximum slope of 4% with a 1-foot-high check dam at the downstream
end, and a maximum upstream drainage area of 0.13 acre per 2-foot of bottom width.
Note: Minimum lengths for vegetated filter strips and vegetated swales are selected to provide a workable length
for small sites and right-of-way constraints, while providing an area for sediment to drop out of suspension.
Vegetated filter strip sizing for pretreatment from Design of Stormwater Filtering Systems (Center for Watershed
Protection, 1996). Vegetated swale upstream area ratio assumes a 1-year peak inflow (rainfall intensity of
2.20 inches per hour for a time-of-concentration of 15 minutes) from an impervious area, with a settling efficiency
20
PART 3 – STORMWATER MANGEMENT REQUIREMENTS
of 50% for a 50-micron particle (silt).
Water Quality Device
Configured to trap floatables and sediment. Follow manufacturer’s guidelines. See notes in Table 3.
E. Hot Spots
Where Required
Sites considered to be stormwater hot spots are identified in Table 2. These include activities with a high potential
to cause contamination, and sites that have existing contamination. More specifically:
1. Industrial and commercial land use activities involving the production, transfer, storage and/or use of
hazardous materials in quantities that pose a high risk to surface and groundwater quality (exceeding 55
gallons aggregate for liquids and 440 pounds aggregate for dry weights), as defined in Part 5 Rules: Spillage
of Oil and Polluting Materials, Water Resources Protection (Part 31, Act 451, PA 1994).
2. “Brownfield” sites with soil or groundwater contamination under Part 201 Environmental Remediation
and Part 213 Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (Act 451, PA 1994).
Standard
Pretreatment volume with a minimum of 400 gallons required for spill containment from hot spot land use
activities.
Note: The minimum spill containment volume provides a reasonable capture size (e.g., a standard liquid propane
truck has a hauling capacity of 1,000 gallons) that can be accommodated with a 6-foot diameter water quality
device.
Pretreatment BMPs must have an impermeable barrier between the treated material and the groundwater and
have provisions for the capture of oil, grease, and sediments.
Treatment BMPs
Specific stormwater management strategies for hotspots include the following:
1. Isolate transfer and storage areas from permeable surfaces and reduce exposure to stormwater.
2. Identify opportunities for use of infiltration BMPs in other areas of the site.
3. Where storage and transfer areas exposed to stormwater cannot be avoided:
a. Infiltration of runoff from pavement surfaces is discouraged in favor of a surface water discharge.
b. Pervious pavements that infiltrate into the groundwater are not permitted because they do not allow
for any pretreatment or spill containment.
c. Perforated pipes for infiltration are not permitted due to the difficulty in isolating an accidental spill.
d. A standard catch basin and outlet pipe with a downturned end is not permitted because the area of
the permanent pool is insufficient to prevent the captured low-density fluids from becoming
entrained in the water when surface inflow enters the structure.
Evaluation Procedure
Brownfield sites must be evaluated before an infiltration approach can be approved so as not to exacerbate
existing conditions. The following steps must be followed for sites with known contamination:
1. Include a qualified environmental consultant on the design team.
2. Show areas of known contamination on the site map.
3. Specify on the drawings how contractor is to address any contamination which may be found during
construction.
4. The site evaluation process must follow the document entitled Implementing Stormwater Infiltration
Practices at Vacant Parcels and Brownfield Sites (EPA, 2013).
5. Submit supporting documentation of the site evaluation process with the stormwater review package.
21
PART 3 – STORMWATER MANGEMENT REQUIREMENTS
6. Contact EGLE Remediation and Redevelopment Division (RRD) staff for consultation. The final plan must
have EGLE staff approval.
Table 2 – Stormwater Hot Spots
2017 North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)
31 – 33 Manufacturing.
44 – 45 Retail Trade (441 Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealers, 444 Building Material and Garden Equipment
and Supplies Dealers, 447 Gasoline Stations, 454 Non-store Retailers (e.g., fuel dealers)).
48 – 49 Transportation and Warehousing.
71 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation (79393 Marinas).
81 Other Services (8111 Automotive Repair and Maintenance, 8113 Commercial and Industrial
Machinery and Equipment Repair and Maintenance, 8123 Dry Cleaning and Laundry Services,
8129 Other Personal Services (e.g., photofinishing laboratory)).
42, 56 Salvage Yards (423930 Recyclable Material Merchant Wholesalers) and Recycling Facilities
(562 Waste Management and Remediation Services).
Brownfield Sites classified under Part 201 Environmental Remediation and Part 213 Leaking
Underground Storage Tanks (Act 451, PA 1994) of the Michigan compiled laws.
Areas with the potential for contaminating public water supply intakes.
Other land uses and activities where petroleum products, chemicals or other polluting materials
have a high probability of polluting surface or groundwater due to quantity of use, storage or
waste products generated, as determined by the City.
Many of these sites will also be regulated under the EPA NPDES Industrial Stormwater Program.
A detailed list of NAICS industries can be found at: https://www.census.gov/cgi-
bin/sssd/naics/naicsrch?chart=2017
III. DESIGN PROCESS
The stormwater site design process is summarized in the steps below. This process is intended to
minimize negative impacts from development sites that could be avoided through proper planning.
A. Identify Sensitive Areas
Identify existing environmentally sensitive areas on the site plan that may require special consideration or pose
a challenge for stormwater management. For the purpose of these rules, sensitive areas include:
1. Waterbodies (lake and ponds) 7. Sand dunes
2. Rivers and streams 8. Natural drainageways
3. Floodplains (and flood prone areas) 9. Soils and topography (erodible, steep, karst)
4. Riparian areas 10. Susceptible groundwater supplies
5. Wetlands 11. Threatened and endangered species habitat
6. Woodlands
Sensitive areas are determined on a site-specific basis through survey, delineation, aerial photographs, or
maps. Sensitive areas must be shown on the site map or drawings. The total acreage of protected areas must
also be indicated and demonstrate a good faith effort to maximize protection of sensitive areas.
22
PART 3 – STORMWATER MANGEMENT REQUIREMENTS
B. Select Source Controls
Source controls reduce the volume of runoff generated onsite, encourage infiltration and evapotranspiration,
and prevent pollutants from entering the drainage system. Non-structural BMPs are used for this purpose.
Maximize the use of non-structural BMPs as the most effective option for controlling stormwater to meet
sensitive area protection requirements and reduce the size of site runoff controls.
C. Size Runoff Controls
After source controls have been maximized, site runoff controls are typically needed to manage the
additional post-development stormwater runoff. Determine the standards applicable to the site to properly
size runoff controls. Minimum required stormwater standards are summarized in Table 1.
D. Confirm an Adequate Outlet
Once all onsite source and runoff controls have been implemented, excess runoff can be discharged offsite.
The design criteria specified in this manual is generally protective of the receiving waterbody. However, an
adequate outlet must always be identified downstream of the development to receive the design rate,
volume, and concentration of the post-development site runoff. Discharge from the site, including discharge
from emergency overflow spillways and pipes, must not cause adverse impact to downstream property or
infrastructure (refer to Part 2 section “Stormwater Discharge”).
E. Select Best Management Practices (BMPs)
Select appropriate BMPs to meet minimum required pollutant reduction, volume, and peak rate requirements.
A list of common BMPs and their treatment ability is given in Table 3. The BMPs selected must be
designed in accordance with the calculation methods and design criteria provided in this manual. BMPs
proposed for use, but not included in this manual, will be evaluated on an individual basis.
23
PART 3 – STORMWATER MANGEMENT REQUIREMENTS
Table 3 – Stormwater BMP Matrix
Stormwater BMP Treatment
Requires TSS Removal Provides Provides S p i l l
Pretreatment Efficiency Pretreatment Containment
Non-Structural BMPs
Minimal Disturbance Area
Protect Natural Flow Pathways X
Protect Sensitive Areas
Native Revegetation X
Stormwater Disconnect
Structural BMPs – Conveyance and Storage
Storm Sewer (22) X
Culvert or Bridge
Open Channel
Detention Basin (dry) X (49)
Detention Basin (wet) X (80)
Detention Basin (extended/wetland) X (72)
Retention Basins X (89)
Sediment Forebay (50) X
Spill Containment Cell (50) X X
Structural BMPs – LID and Small Site
Infiltration Practices X (89)
Bioretention/Rain Garden ^ X (86)
Bioswale ^ (86) X
Constructed Filter X (86) X
Planter Box ^ (59)
Pervious Pavement ^ (84)
Pervious Pavement ^ (roof discharge to (50)
Capture Reuse X (*) X
Vegetated Roof (*) X
Water Quality Device (*) X X
Water Quality Swale (86) X X
Vegetated Swale (81/50) X
Vegetated Filter Strip (81/50) X
Level Spreader X
Blank No. BMP does not provide treatment.
X Yes.
() BMP may be used to meet water quality treatment criteria. Median TSS Removal Efficiency in percent.
Source: Fraley-McNeal, L. (September 2007). National Pollutant Removal Performance Database, Version 3, Center
for Watershed Protection. Bioretention/Rain Garden, Bioswale and Water Quality Swale same as Constructed Filter.
Pervious Pavement average TSS Removal. Source: Rowe, Amy A., Borst, Michael, and O’Connor, Thomas P. (2007).
Pervious Pavement System Evaluation, EPA, Office of Research and Development.
Storm Sewer average TSS removal for standard catch basin. Source: Pitt, R. and Field, R. (1998). An Evaluation of
Storm Drainage Inlet Devices for Stormwater Quality Treatment, WEFTEC’98 Water Environment Federation 71st
Annual Conference & Exposition, Proceedings Volume 6, Facility Operations I&II.
Sediment Forebay, Spill Containment Cell, and Vegetated Swale/Vegetated Filter Strip sized for pretreatment: 50%
settling efficiency used.
(/) BMP sized for water quality treatment / BMP sized for pretreatment only.
(*) NJDEP certified; or submit independent third-party testing results of pollutant removal efficiency for review.
http://www.nj.gov/dep/stormwater/treatment.html
^ TSS removal efficiency assumes underdrained BMP, use value for Infiltration Practices if BMP has no underdrain.
Notes: Design criteria in this manual is provided to meet or exceed the median TSS removal efficiency.
24
PART 4 – STORMWATER DESIGN CRITERIA
I. SOILS INVESTIGATION
A. Qualifications
Soils investigation by a qualified geotechnical consultant is required for retention and detention basins, infiltration
practices, bioretention/rain gardens, constructed filters, planter boxes, and pervious pavement to determine the
site soil infiltration characteristics and groundwater level. The geotechnical consultant shall be a professional
engineer, soil scientist, or professional geologist.
B. Background Evaluation
An initial feasibility investigation shall be conducted to screen proposed BMP sites. The investigation involves
review of the following resources:
1. Soil Survey prepared by the NRCS and USDA Hydrologic Soil Group (HSG) classifications.
2. Existing soil borings, wells, or geotechnical report on the site.
3. Onsite septic percolation testing.
4. Cyclical groundwater levels http://waterdata.usgs.gov/mi/nwis/gw
C. Test Pit/Soil Boring Requirements
A test pit (excavated trench) or soil boring shall be used for geotechnical investigation. Test pits may typically be
selected for shallower investigations in locations where groundwater is sufficiently low.
The number of test pits or soil borings will vary depending on site conditions and the proposed development. The
minimum number of test pits or soil borings shall be determined from Table 4.
Additional tests may be requested based on local conditions and initial findings (e.g., large variability in soil type,
high groundwater table).
Table 4 – Minimum Number of Soil Tests Required
Depth of Test Field Permeability Test
Type of BMP Test Pit/Soil Boring Pit/ Soil Boring Design
Retention basin 1 per 5,000 square feet 10 feet below 1 per change in soil class; 1
of bottom area; 1 proposed minimum
Infiltration bed
minimum bottom
Pervious
Infiltration trench 1 per 500 to 1,000 5 feet below 1 per change in soil class; 1
linear feet of BMP; 1 proposed minimum
Bioswale
minimum bottom
Dry well 1 minimum 5 feet below 1 per change in soil class; 1
Leaching proposed minimum
Bioretention/Rain bottom
Garden Planter box
Detention basin 1 per 10,000 square feet 5 feet below Not applicable
of bottom area; 1 proposed
minimum bottom
25
PART 4 – STORMWATER DESIGN CRITERIA
Excavate a test pit or soil boring in the location of the proposed BMP. The following conditions shall be noted and
described, referenced from a top-of-ground elevation:
1. Depth to groundwater recorded during initial digging or drilling, and again upon completion of the
excavation.
2. Depth to bedrock or hardpan.
3. Depth and thickness of each soil horizon including the presence of mottling.
4. Unified Soil Classification System for all soil horizons. USDA soil texture classification when required.
Test pit reports and soil boring logs shall include the date(s) data was collected and the location referenced to a
site plan.
D. Highest Known Groundwater Elevation
The highest known groundwater elevation shall be determined by adjusting the measured groundwater elevation
using indicators such as soil mottling and regional water level data. It should also take into consideration local
conditions that may be temporarily altering water levels at the time of measurement. Such conditions could
include, but not be limited to dewatering, irrigation well or large quantity withdrawals in the area, or areas of
groundwater infiltration (such as a nearby retention basin).
E. Field Permeability Testing
Field permeability testing is generally not required but may be performed to determine a design infiltration rate.
The City reserves the right to request that field permeability testing be performed. Field permeability testing
must be conducted for questionable soils before the alternative approach for channel protection will be
considered.
Acceptable field tests include:
1. Infiltration Rate of Soils in Field Using Double-Ring Infiltrometers (ASTM D3385).
2. Modified double-ring infiltration testing, using smaller diameter metal or plastic casings, where bore hole
is required to reach design depth. The “Methodology for double-ring infiltrometer field test” outlined on
page 440 in Appendix E of the Low Impact Development Manual for Michigan (SEMCOG, 2008) shall be
followed for each test.
Laboratory tests are not allowed.
The minimum number of field permeability tests shall be determined from Table 4. The City reserves the
right to request additional field permeability tests be performed.
Tests shall be conducted in the location of the proposed BMP at the proposed bottom elevation. An alternate
testing depth may be allowed if material is identical, and groundwater is not an issue.
Tests shall not be conducted in the rain or within 24 hours of significant rainfall events (>0.5 inch) or when the
ground is frozen.
Test reports shall include the date(s) data was collected and the location referenced to a site plan.
F. Design Infiltration Rates
The procedure used to determine a design infiltration rate is summarized in Table 5. The resulting design
infiltration rate shall be the limiting value of the underlying soil or filter media/top dressing.
26
PART 4 – STORMWATER DESIGN CRITERIA
Table 5 – Determination of a Design Infiltration Rate
Maximum
Description Source
Design
1. Underlying soil
Field permeability testing conducted Test value divided by 2 10 in/hr
No testing, BMPs used for flood control Table 6 3.6 in/hr
2. Filter media/top dressing Table 14 As calculated
The infiltration rate determined from field permeability testing shall be divided by 2 to calculate the design
infiltration rate, up to a maximum design infiltration rate of 10 inches per hour. The least permeable soil horizon
within 4 feet below the proposed BMP bottom elevation shall be used to determine the design infiltration rate.
Where field permeability testing is not performed, and for all stormwater BMPs used for flood control, the
design infiltration rates provided in Table 6 shall be used to calculate the storage volume and minimum
infiltration area of the BMP necessary to drain in the allotted drawdown time.
Note: A conservative value for the infiltration rate is used for retention basins due to the high probability for
diminished performance due to clogging and the risk of failure.
When a filter material is used, or several materials are blended together in a homogenous mixture, the hydraulic
conductivities provided in Table 14 shall be used to calculate the design infiltration rate through the filter
media/top dressing placed in retentive BMPs.
Table 6 – Design Infiltration Rates by USDA Soil Texture Class
Effective Water Design
Capacity1 Infiltration Rate2
Soil Texture Class (inches per inch) (inches per hour) HSG
Gravel 0.40 3.60 A
Sand 0.35 3.60 A
Loamy Sand 0.31 1.63 A
Sandy Loam 0.25 0.50 A
(Medium) Loam 0.19 0.24 B
Silty Loam / (Silt) 0.17 0.13 B
Sandy Clay Loam 0.14 0.11 C
Clay Loam 0.14 0.03 D
Silty Clay Loam 0.11 0.04 D
Sandy Clay 0.09 0.04 D
Silty Clay 0.09 0.07 D
Clay 0.08 0.07 D
1
Source: Maryland Department of Environment (2000). Maryland Stormwater Design Manual,
Appendix D.13, Table D.13.1 (Rawls, Brakensiek and Saxton, 1982).
2
Source: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (2004). Site Evaluation for Stormwater Infiltration
(1002), Table 2 (Rawls, 1998). Note: Values are reduced by approximately a factor of 2 from those given
in Table D.13.1.
Table 6 provides design values of the infiltration rate and effective water capacity (void ratio) for soils based on
their textural classification. Soil textural classes correspond to the USDA Soil Textural Triangle shown in Figure 1.
Note: Infiltration is the process by which water on the ground surface enters the soil. Infiltration rate is a measure
of the rate at which soil is able to absorb rainfall or irrigation in inches per hour. The rate decreases as the soil
27
PART 4 – STORMWATER DESIGN CRITERIA
becomes saturated. The design infiltration rate assumes saturated conditions and closely approximates the
hydraulic conductivity (typically given in feet per day) of the near-surface soil.
Note: The effective water capacity of a soil is the fraction of the void spaces available for water storage
measured in inches per inch.
G. Minimum Allowable Infiltration Rate
Soil textures with design infiltration rates less than 0.24 inches per hour are deemed not suitable for
infiltration BMPs.
Soils with design infiltration rates between 0.24 and 0.50 inches per hour may be used for LID and Small Site BMPs
if suitable supplemental measures are included in the design. Supplemental measures may include subsoil
amendment, underdrain placed at the top of the storage bed layer, or placement of wick drains.
Figure 1 – USDA Soil Textural Triangle
Soils Suitable
for Infiltration
28
PART 4 – STORMWATER DESIGN CRITERIA
II. CALCULATION METHODOLOGY
The Rational Method and the NRCS Runoff Curve Number Method are typically used to calculate
stormwater runoff, peak discharges, and runoff volumes for design of stormwater conveyance and storage
systems.
The NRCS Method is presently the only acceptable method to calculate the channel protection volume.
The Small Storm Hydrology Method is used to calculate runoff volumes from the smaller rainfall amounts used
for water quality treatment.
A. Calculating Runoff
1. Rational Method
The Rational Method may be used to calculate stormwater runoff volumes and peak discharges to
size conveyance and storage systems for contributing drainage areas of 40 acres or less. The peak
runoff rate is given by the equation:
where:
Q = peak runoff rate (cubic feet per second).
C = weighted runoff coefficient of the drainage area.
I = average rainfall intensity for a storm with a duration equal to the time
of-concentration of the drainage area (inches per hour). Use rainfall amounts from
Table 11 and divide by the duration in hours to obtain the average rainfall intensity (I).
A = drainage area (acres).
Runoff coefficients shall be selected from Table 7. Lawns and Open reflect average slopes (2% to 7%).
Subtract 0.05 for flat pervious slopes (0% to 7%). Add 0.05 for steep pervious slopes (over 7%).9
Table 7 – Rational Method Runoff Coefficients (10- to 100-year rainfall frequencies)
10 Return Period (years) 25 100
Character of Surface
Asphalt and Concrete Pavement/Roofs 0.95 0.97 0.98
Brick Pavement and Gravel Surface 0.85 0.88 0.91
Lawns and Open (HSG A)* 0.15 0.17 0.20
Lawns and Open (HSG B) 0.20 0.27 0.38
Lawns and Open (HSG C) 0.35 0.45 0.55
Lawns and Open (HSG D) 0.50 0.57 0.67
Water 1.00 1.00 1.00
Source: Runoff coefficients are calculated to match 24-hour runoff volumes from CN Method with antecedent moisture
condition II and initial abstract (Ia) = 0.2S using CNs for “Open Spaces, Good Condition” for Lawns and Open, and a CN of 95 for
Brick Pavement and Gravel Surface.
*The runoff coefficient for Lawns and Open (HSG A) is adjusted to match values in American Society of Civil Engineers and the
Water Pollution Control Federation (1969). Design and Construction of Sanitary and Storm Sewers, as the calculated value is less
than 0.01. Frequency adjustment factors of 1.1 and 1.25 have been applied for the 25- and 100-year frequencies respectively, with
a maximum value of 1.00. Adjustment factors from Mays (2001). Stormwater Collection Systems Design Handbook.
_____________________
9 C.T. Hann, B.J. Barfield, J.C. Hayes (1994). Design Hydrology & Sedimentology for Small Catchments.
29
PART 4 – STORMWATER DESIGN CRITERIA
Time of concentration for the Rational Method is the sum of overland flow and channel flow. A minimum
of 15 minutes shall be used.
Overland flow time may be calculated using the following formula:
where:
to = time of overland flow (minutes)
L = length (feet); the distance from the extremity of the subcatchment area in a
direction parallel to the slope until a defined channel is reached. Overland flow
will become channel flow within 1,200 feet in almost all cases*
n = surface retardants coefficient (from Table 8)
s = slope (feet per foot); the difference in elevation between the extremity of the
subcatchment area and the point in question divided by the horizontal distance
Table 8 – Surface Retardants Coefficients
Type of Surface Coefficient (n value)
Smooth impervious surface 0.02
Smooth bare packed soil 0.10
Poor grass, cultivated row crops, or moderately rough bare surface 0.20
Pasture or average grass 0.40
Deciduous timberland 0.60
Conifer timberland, deciduous timberland with deep forest litter, or
0.80
dense grass
*Source: Formula, coefficients, and empirical observations from W.S. Kerby, J.M. Asce. Servis, Van Doren
& Hazard Engineers, Topeka, Kansas. “Time of Concentration for Overland Flow” ENGINEER’S NOTEBOOK.
Channel flow shall be calculated using Manning’s equation:
where:
V = velocity (feet per second)
A = wetted area (square feet)
n = Manning’s roughness coefficient (from Table 12)
R = hydraulic radius (feet)
S = slope (feet per foot)
30
PART 4 – STORMWATER DESIGN CRITERIA
The time-of-concentration is then:
where:
Tc = time-of-concentration (minutes)
to = time of overland flow (minutes)
Lc = length of channelized flow (feet)
V = velocity of channelized flow (feet per second)
60 = factor to convert seconds to minutes
2. Runoff Curve Number Method
The Runoff Curve Number Method developed by the NRCS may be used to calculate stormwater runoff
volumes and peak discharges to size conveyance and storage systems. This method must be used when
it is necessary to calculate runoff volumes for channel protection. The formulas are as follows:
where:
Qv = surface runoff (inches). Note: Qv=0 if P ≤ 0.2S
P = rainfall (inches)
S = potential maximum retention after runoff begins (inches)
and where:
Surface runoff (Qv) is calculated separately for each land use and soil type combination. Total runoff
volume can then be calculated by the formula:
where:
Vt = total runoff volume of the design storm (cubic feet)
Qv = surface runoff for the ith land use (inches)
A = contributing area associated with the ith land use (acres)
3630 = factor to convert acre-inches to cubic feet
Curve Number (CN) values are taken from NRCS TR-55 and provided in Table 9.
The “Water” cover type shall be used for detention/retention basins with a permanent pool or surface
water temporarily ponded during the rain event. The “Meadow” or “Open spaces” cover type may be
used for vegetative BMPs, including those that temporarily pond surface water, to receive credit for
channel protection.
Peak Discharge
The LGROW Design Spreadsheet, the DEQ procedure outlined in “Computing Flood Discharges for Small,
Ungaged Watersheds” by Richard Sorrell, or computer software such as NRCS WinTR-55 may be used to
calculate peak stormwater runoff rates.
31
PART 4 – STORMWATER DESIGN CRITERIA
A Michigan Unit Hydrograph is used in the LGROW Design Spreadsheet, the DEQ small ungaged watershed
spreadsheet, and can be input into WinTR-55. The ordinates for the Michigan Unit Hydrograph for TR-55
are: [0.0, 0.5, 1.0, 0.8, 0.6, 0.4, 0.2 and 0.0].
Note: Using the standard NRCS unit hydrograph will overestimate peak runoff rates by 30 to 50 percent
or more.
Table 9 – Curve Numbers (CNs) from TR-55
Land Use Description Curve Number1
Hydrologic Hydrologic Soil Group
Cover Type Condition2 A B C D
Cultivated land Good 64 75 82 85
Pasture or range land Poor 68 79 86 89
Fair 49 69 79 84
Good 39 61 74 80
Meadow 30 58 71 78
Orchard or tree farm3 Poor 57 73 82 86
Fair 43 65 76 82
Good 32 58 72 79
Woods Poor 45 66 77 83
Fair 36 60 73 79
Good 304 55 70 77
Open spaces (grass cover)5 Poor 68 79 86 89
Fair 49 69 79 84
Good 39 61 74 80
Paved parking lot, roof, driveway 98 98 98 98
Gravel6 88 93 94 95
Bare Soil 77 86 91 94
Water7 100 100 100 100
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service (1986). Urban Hydrology for Small
Watersheds, Technical Release No. 55.
Antecedent moisture condition II and initial abstract (Ia) = 0.2S
1
Poor Condition: pasture or open space with less than 50% ground cover or heavily grazed with no
2
mulch; woods - forest litter, small trees, and brush are destroyed by heavy grazing or regular burning.
Fair Condition: pasture or open space with 50% to 75% grass cover and not heavily grazed; woods are
grazed but not burned, and some forest litter covers the soil.
Good Condition: cultivated land (row crops, straight row) with conservation treatment (crop residue
cover), also small grain; pasture or open space with 75% or more ground cover and lightly or only
occasionally grazed; woods are protected from grazing, and litter and brush adequately cover the soil.
3
CN’s shown were computed for areas with 50% woods and 50% pasture (grass) cover. Other
combinations of conditions may be computed from the CN’s for woods and pasture.
Actual curve number is less than 30; use CN = 30 for runoff computations.
4
CN’s shown are equivalent to those of pasture.
5
Surface only; not including right-of-way.
6
Water added.
7
32
PART 4 – STORMWATER DESIGN CRITERIA
Time-of-concentration for the Runoff Curve Number Method shall be calculated using NRCS TR-55 methodology
as outlined below. A minimum of 0.1 hour (6 minutes) shall be used.
The flow path is split into three where: sections – sheet flow, shallow
concentrated flow, and open = slope (feet/foot) channel flow. The travel time is
computed for each flow regime. v = velocity (feet per second) The time-of-concentration is then
the sum of the travel times:
(1) For sheet flow the travel time (t1) in hours is given as:
where:
n = Manning’s roughness coefficient (from TR-55 Table 3-1)
L = flow length (feet)
P2 = 2-year, 24-hour precipitation depth (from Table 11)
s = slope (feet/foot)
(2) Shallow concentrated flow velocities are calculated for paved and unpaved surfaces. The velocities are
given as:
The flow length (feet) is then divided by the velocity (feet per second) and a conversion factor of 3600 to obtain
travel time (t2) in hours:Open channel flow uses
(3) Manning’s equation to calculate the velocity based on slope, flow area, and wetted perimeter (refer to
Equation 4.3). The flow length (feet) is then divided by the velocity (feet per second) to obtain travel time (t3) in
hours (refer to Equation 4.11).
BMP Residence Time
BMP residence time shall be calculated as the storage volume divided by the 10-year peak inflow rate.
33
PART 4 – STORMWATER DESIGN CRITERIA
3. Small Storm Hydrology Method
The Small Storm Hydrology Method is used to calculate the water quality treatment volume. The method was
developed to estimate the runoff volume from urban land uses for relatively small storm events where the
Rational and NRCS Methods prove less accurate. Water quality volume is calculated by the formula:
where:
Vwq = minimum required water quality volume (cubic feet)
A = area (acres); the developed portion of the site, both impervious and
pervious, not receiving treatment with a non-structural BMP
Rv = area-weighted volumetric runoff coefficient (from Table 10)
1 = 90% non-exceedance storm rainfall amount (inches)
3630 = factor to convert acre-inches to cubic feet
Note: The Volumetric Runoff Coefficients (Rv) provided in Table 10 are similar to the Rational runoff
coefficient but are exclusive to the rainfall amount (1-inch).
Table 10 – Runoff Coefficients for Small Storm Hydrology Method
Volumetric Runoff Coefficient, Rv
Rainfall Amount Directly Connected Impervious Area Disturbed Pervious Area
(inches) Sandy Clayey
Flat Roofs/ Pitched Soils Silty Soils Soils
Unpaved Roofs Paved (HSG A) (HSG B) (HSG C&D)
1.0 0.815 0.965 0.980 0.035 0.120 0.2015
Source: Adapted from SEMCOG (2008). Low Impact Development Manual for Michigan, Table 9.3. (R. Pitt
(2003). The Source Loading and Management Model (WinSLAMM): Introduction and Basic Uses).
The area-weighted volumetric runoff coefficient, RV, is calculated as:
34
PART 4 – STORMWATER DESIGN CRITERIA
B. Rainfall
The rainfall duration-frequency table provided in Table 11 shall be used with the Rational Method to determine
rainfall intensity for rainfall duration equal to the time-of-concentration. Divide the rainfall amount by the
duration in hours to obtain the rainfall intensity.
The 24-hour rainfall amounts provided in Table 11 shall be used with the Runoff Curve Number Method.
An MSE4 rainfall distribution shall be used when a unit hydrograph approach is used (e.g., WinTR-55 computer
program).
Table 11 – Rainfall Amounts (inches)
Duration 1-Year 2-Year 5-Year 10-Year 25-Year 50-Year 100-Year
24-hr 2.25 2.57 3.21 3.87 4.94 5.91 6.99
12-hr 1.92 2.21 2.79 3.37 4.30 5.14 6.07
6-hr 1.60 1.87 2.37 2.86 3.65 4.34 5.10
3-hr 1.33 1.56 1.99 2.39 3.03 3.57 4.17
2-hr 1.18 1.39 1.78 2.13 2.68 3.15 3.66
1-hr 0.96 1.14 1.45 1.74 2.18 2.55 2.94
30-min 0.75 0.89 1.13 1.35 1.67 1.94 2.22
15-min 0.55 0.65 0.82 0.98 1.21 1.40 1.60
10-min 0.45 0.53 0.67 0.80 0.99 1.15 1.31
5-min 0.31 0.36 0.46 0.55 0.68 0.78 0.90
Source: NOAA (2013). Atlas 14, Precipitation-Frequency Atlas of the United States, Volume 8, Version 2.0.
Rainfall amounts from: CITY OF MUSKEGON CO AP. Station ID 20-5712.
35
PART 4 – STORMWATER DESIGN CRITERIA
C. Calculating Storage Volumes and Release Rates
1. Water Quality
Treatment of the runoff generated from one inch of rain (the 90% annual nonexceedance storm) over
the developed portion of the site is required. Water quality volume is calculated using the Small
Storm Hydrology Method.
A 1-year frequency rainfall may be used with the time-of-concentration of the contributing drainage area
to calculate the peak flow rate for sizing diversion structures and treatment BMPs.
Note: A 1-inch, 1-hour rainfall has approximately a 1-year frequency of occurrence. The use of a constant
rainfall frequency allows for reasonable sizing of infrastructure for drainage areas with times-of-
concentration less than 1 hour, since 1-inch of rain over these shorter durations results in high intensities
and rainfall frequencies on the order of those used for flood control.
Calculation of the TSS removal efficiency for BMPs in a series is given in Part 4 section “TSS Accounting.”
2. Pretreatment
Pretreatment volume may be included in the total water quality volume, and is calculated as:
where:
Vpt = minimum required pretreatment volume (cubic feet)
Vwq = water quality volume (cubic feet)
3. Channel Protection
(1) Retention
Channel protection consists of retaining onsite the net increase in runoff volume between pre-
development and post-development conditions for a 2-year, 24-hour storm using the Runoff
Curve Number Method. Channel protection volume is calculated with the following equation:
where:
Vcp = minimum required channel protection volume (cubic feet)
Vtpost = total runoff volume of the 2-year, 24-hour storm for post-development
conditions
Vtpre = total runoff volume of the 2-year, 24-hour storm for pre-development
conditions
The “Open Spaces” cover type in “fair” hydrologic condition shall be used for existing impervious
surfaces. The “Woods” cover type in “good” hydrologic condition shall be used for existing woods.
The “Meadow” cover type shall be used for all other existing land covers.
36
PART 4 – STORMWATER DESIGN CRITERIA
(2) Extended Detention
The storage volume of an extended detention basin shall be sized for that part of the 2-year volume
difference not met by retention, with a maximum release rate that results in a 24-hour detention
time.
The peak discharge for a 24-hour detention time may be calculated assuming triangular inflow and
outflow hydrographs with a lag between the peaks of 24 hours. If the inflow peak occurs 12 hours into
the 24-hour inflow hydrograph, the outflow peak should occur 36 hours into a 72-hour outflow
hydrograph as shown in Figure 2. The extended detention peak discharge can then be computed with
the following equation:
where:
QED = peak extended detention release rate (cubic feet per second)
Vcp = total channel protection volume required (cubic feet)
Vret = channel protection volume met by retention (cubic feet)
36*3600 = half of the base time of outflow hydrograph (seconds)
The 2-year peak discharge after extended detention (QED) must be equal to or less than the existing
1-year peak discharge. (Exceptions may be made for HSG A, where extended detention has been
approved due to site constraints, but existing runoff is zero.) If the 1-year peak discharge limit is not
met, the total channel protection volume provided must be increased to reduce the required
extended detention volume. Simply using a lower extended detention release rate will violate the
72-hour drawdown time requirement.
Figure 2 – Extended Detention Hydrograph
37
PART 4 – STORMWATER DESIGN CRITERIA
4. Flood Control
(1) Detention
Detention of the 25-year rainfall event with a maximum allowable release rate of 0.13 cfs per acre is
required, unless an exception is allowed.
a. Rational Method for Detention
If the Rational Method is used, the minimum required storage volume shall be calculated by the
“Modified Chicago” Method.
The calculated storage volume shall be multiplied by 1.25 to obtain the minimum required storage
volume.
Note: This additional adjustment is necessary since the Modified Chicago Method tends to
underestimate the storage volume when compared to pond routing, particularly for short
times-of-concentrations (15 to 30 minutes)10.
b. Runoff Curve Number Method for Detention
If the Runoff Curve Number Method is used, the minimum required storage volume shall be
determined through routing using the LGROW Design Spreadsheet, or may be calculated by the
formula:
where:
Vfc = minimum required storage volume for flood control (cubic feet)
Qp = peak runoff rate (cubic feet per second)
Qout = maximum allowable peak discharge (cubic feet per second)
Vt = total post-development runoff volume for the 25-year, 24-hour
storm (cubic feet)
Vbmp = volume (storage only) provided by upstream retentive BMPs (cubic
feet)
Note: This formula provides a conservative approximation of the required storage volume.
____________________
10
Stahre, Peter and Urbonas, Ben (1990). Stormwater Detention for Drainage, Water Quality and CSO Management, pp.
268 274.
38
PART 4 – STORMWATER DESIGN CRITERIA
(2) Retention
Retention basins shall be sized for the 25-year, 24-hour rainfall event.
a. Rational Method for Retention
If the Rational Method is used, the minimum required storage volume shall be calculated by the
“Modified Chicago” Method.
The calculated storage volume shall be multiplied by 1.25 to obtain the minimum required
storage volume.
The discharge or exfiltration rate into the soil from the retention basin shall be calculated at:
where:
Qout = discharge rate (cubic feet per second)
A = infiltration area (square feet)
i = design infiltration rate (inches per hour)
12 = factor to convert inches to feet
3600 = factor to convert hours to seconds
b. Runoff Curve Number Method for Retention
If the Runoff Curve Number Method is used, the minimum required storage volume shall be
calculated by the formula:
where:
Vfc = minimum required storage volume for flood control (cubic feet)
Vt = total post-development runoff volume for the 25-year, 24-hour storm
(cubic feet)
Vinf = infiltrating volume (cubic feet), calculated the same as indicated in
“Retentive BMPs Sized for Channel Protection or Water Quality”
39
PART 4 – STORMWATER DESIGN CRITERIA
5. Retentive BMPs Sized for Channel Protection or Water Quality
The BMP volume (Vbmp) credited towards meeting the channel protection or water quality volume is the
storage volume of the BMP plus the volume infiltrated by the BMP during the infiltration time.
The infiltrating volume shall be calculated with an iterative process using the following equations, or with
the LGROW Design Spreadsheet, which incorporates these equations. The infiltrating volume is calculated
as:
The infiltration time shall be calculated by the formula:
where:
Vinf =
infiltrating volume (cubic feet)
i =
design infiltration rate (inches per hour)
A = infiltration area (square feet)
tinf =
infiltration time (hours); the period when the BMP is receiving runoff and
capable of infiltrating at the design rate
12 = factor to convert inches to feet
Note: Based on extensive computer modelling, the infiltration time is found to be a function of the drain time
through the BMP. An empirical formula was developed to model this function for drain times between 0 and 72
hours. This equation is not valid for drain times greater than 72 hours.
The drain time through the BMP is calculated as:
where:
td = BMP drain time (hours)
VS = storage volume of the BMP (cubic feet)
i = design infiltration rate (inches per hour)
A = infiltration area (square feet)
12 = factor to convert inches to feet
D. Groundwater Mounding
A spreadsheet developed by the USGS is recommended to calculate the extent of groundwater mounding beneath
infiltration BMPs. The USGS Scientific Investigations Report 2010–5102 “Simulation of Groundwater Mounding
Beneath Hypothetical Stormwater Infiltration Basins,” may be used with the accompanying spreadsheet, which
solves the Hantush (1967) equation to predict the extent of groundwater mounding based on user-specified site
conditions. Other finite-difference groundwater flow models such as USGS MODFLOW are also acceptable.
E. Computing Tools
Hydrologic and hydraulic calculations can be performed using a variety of customized spreadsheets and computer
software. The LGROW Design Spreadsheet shall be used to determine minimum required storage and treatment
40
PART 4 – STORMWATER DESIGN CRITERIA
volumes. Results of computer models that use detailed routing methods to optimize storage volume may be
considered for more complex situations. Accompanying design calculations may include hand calculations or
spreadsheets using the formulas specified in this manual, and computer models with submittal of clear and
complete input and output.
F. LGROW Design Spreadsheet
The LGROW Design Spreadsheet is a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet application developed for Design and Review
Engineers to show compliance with the stormwater standards. The spreadsheet allows the user to size BMPs in
series or in parallel but is not intended to be used for the complete design of BMPs. A copy of the spreadsheet
and tutorial is available from the City.
Runoff
The spreadsheet uses the Runoff Curve Number Method to compute runoff volumes by subcatchment. A tabular
TR-55 approach is used with a Michigan Unit Hydrograph to compute peak runoff rates. The spreadsheet can be
used to calculate the required channel protection volume and the flood control volume for both detention and
retention. The Small Storm Hydrology Method is used to calculate the required water quality volume.
The 24-hour rainfall amounts, and rainfall distribution specified in Part 4 section “Rainfall” are incorporated into
the spreadsheet. Time-of-concentration formulas from TR-55 are also incorporated into the spreadsheet to
calculate peak discharges. Output is graphed as hydrographs and summarized in tabular form for a range of rainfall
frequencies.
The spreadsheet allows the user to select non-structural and structural BMPs to meet required runoff rates and
volumes.
TSS Accounting
The spreadsheet can be used to calculate the TSS reduction for a series of BMPs. The TSS removal efficiencies for
the BMPs provided in Table 3 are used to demonstrate a TSS reduction of 80% or more. When BMPs are used in
series (i.e., a treatment train) to achieve the 80% reduction, the TSS removal efficiency of the treatment train is
calculated as:
where eTSS is the removal efficiency of the treatment train, and en is the removal efficiency for the nth BMP in the
chain of n BMPs. This calculation assumes all water entering the treatment train is passed through to the next
downstream BMP. The spreadsheet allows the user to calculate TSS reduction when either all or a portion of the
water quality volume is passed downstream.
BMPs used for water quality treatment can be classified as retentive or pass-through. Retentive BMPs (e.g.,
infiltration practice) retain and treat some or all of the water quality volume. Pass-through BMPs (e.g., catch basin)
treat all of the water entering and send this volume to the next BMP or subcatchment.
TSS accounting is done by tracking TSS through the subcatchments. In order to do this, it is assumed that one unit
of TSS is the mass of TSS carried by one cubic foot of the water quality volume. The effective removal efficiency is
the BMP removal efficiency multiplied by the portion of the water quality volume treated by the BMP. The TSS
removed for each BMP is the effective removal efficiency multiplied by the TSS remaining in the treatment train.
The TSS removal efficiency for the subcatchment and/or site is the sum the TSS removed by all BMPs divided by
the total TSS to be treated. The released water volume and the TSS remaining are both passed to the next
downstream subcatchment.
41
PART 4 – STORMWATER DESIGN CRITERIA
Pond Routing
Detention storage volume for flood control is computed by numerically routing the hydrograph for the developed
site through a detention basin (pond). The steps in the process are as follows:
1. The inflow hydrograph is interpolated from a collection of scaled hydrographs computed using TR-20 for
various times-of-concentration and the ratio of initial abstract to total rainfall (Ia/P) values.
This is similar to the tabular TR-55 approach. The hydrograph collection was generated using the
Michigan specific dimensionless unit hydrograph.
2. Structural BMP volumes are removed from the front of the hydrograph, effectively reducing the required
flood control volume. The resulting hydrograph does not start until all retention volume is satisfied.
3. The inflow hydrograph adjusted for structural BMPs is routed through a detention pond model using the
Modified Puls Method (see Section 8.4.8 of the MDOT Drainage Manual). The pond is assumed to be
prismatic and defined by a bottom area, side slope, and orifice diameter. Pond routing is the calculation
of the outflow hydrograph given the inflow hydrograph and pond characteristics. This calculation is based
on the continuity equation written in differential form:
where V is the volume of water in storage in the pond at time t, I is the inflow at time t, and Q is the
outflow at time t. To calculate the outflow hydrograph, a finite difference method approximation of the
continuity equation is used. This allows Q to be calculated as a time series:
where Δt is the time step, i+1 refers to the present time and i refers to a time Δt earlier. At time i+1
everything on the right-hand side of the equation is known, allowing the value of the left-hand side to be
determined. Since V and Q are both functions of the pond depth, H, given the pond
characteristics a table can be constructed. This table is then used to find the pond depth at time i+1. Given
this pond depth, the storage volume, V, and outflow, Q, can also be computed at time i+1. The
calculation can then proceed to the remaining time steps resulting in the outflow hydrograph.
4. The pond model characteristics include bottom area, side slope, and orifice diameter. The spreadsheet
computes the required orifice diameter to produce the desired peak discharge at an arbitrary depth of
5 feet. The sides are conservatively assumed to be vertical.
5. The spreadsheet runs a macro that iteratively adjusts the bottom area until the desired peak discharge
and storage depth are met.
Application
The LGROW Design Spreadsheet can assist the Design Engineer in applying the correct land uses and Curve
Numbers in calculating channel protection volume, accounting for travel time through BMPs, accounting for total
TSS reduction from a series of BMPs, and quickly evaluating a variety of stormwater management options for a
range of rainfall frequencies.
42
PART 4 – STORMWATER DESIGN CRITERIA
Design calculations submitted using the LGROW Design Spreadsheet can help to expedite the review process
because reviewing engineers are familiar with the spreadsheet and can more quickly check for compliance with
stormwater standards.
The Stormwater Worksheet is incorporated into the LGROW Design Spreadsheet and need not be submitted
separately if the spreadsheet is used.
43
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
I. NON-STRUCTURAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Non-structural BMPs consist of protection measures that reduce the volume of stormwater runoff from the site.
This differs from the goal of many structural BMPs which is to help mitigate the impact of stormwater runoff.
Design criteria is provided for the following non-structural BMPs:
A. Minimal Disturbance Area
B. Protect Natural Flow Pathways
C. Protect Sensitive Areas
D. Native Revegetation
E. Stormwater Disconnect
Further information and examples are provided in the BMP Fact Sheets in Chapter 6 of the Low Impact
Development Manual for Michigan (SEMCOG, 2008):
All the following criteria must be met to receive credit for each non-structural BMP selected for use.
A. Minimal Disturbance Area
1. Summary
Description: Identify and avoid disturbance to existing pervious areas during
construction to reduce potential for erosion and increased runoff.
Application: Larger sites with pervious areas; difficult to implement on small,
high-density developments.
Pretreatment Required: No.
Maintenance Plan: Yes, for trees receiving a credit.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: Assign a CN reflecting open space in “good” condition, woods in
“good” condition, or a combination.
For small sites, individual trees can receive a credit of
800 square feet per tree, counted as woods in “good” condition.1
Rate Reduction: By virtue of lower CN.
Water Quality: Exempt from water quality criteria.
1
Source: Low Impact Development Manual for Michigan (SEMCOG, 2008).
Note: Trees in minimal disturbance areas receive a larger area credit than trees planted under “Native
Revegetation” due to the assumption that the existing trees will typically be larger and more mature
than planted trees at the time of site plan submittal and during ensuing years.
2. Criteria
This BMP applies to those portions of buildable lots located outside of lot building zones, construction
traffic areas, and staging areas that can be maintained as “minimal disturbance areas” during construction
(i.e., wooded back portions of residential lots, green space required by ordinance).
Minimal disturbance area – Construction disturbance is limited to clearing of brush and minor grading. No
clear-cutting, excavation, filling, stockpiling of material, or construction traffic is allowed. Area is
vegetated after disturbance (if any).
44
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
a. Identify minimal disturbance areas on site plan and construction drawings.
b. Minimal disturbance areas must be protected by having the limits delineated/flagged/fenced in the
field. Notes to this effect must be included on construction drawings.
c. Minimal disturbance areas must not be subject to excessive equipment movement. Vehicle traffic and
storage of equipment and/or materials is not permitted.
d. Pruning or other required maintenance of vegetation is permitted. Additional planting with site-
appropriate plants including turf grass is permitted.
e. Areas receiving credit must be located on the development project.
B. Protect Natural Flow Pathways
1. Summary
Description: Identify and map natural drainage features to maximize
protection and benefits of use.
Application: Lower-density developments.
Pretreatment Required: No. This BMP can provide pretreatment.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: Assign a CN reflecting a meadow or open spaces in “good”
condition.
Rate Reduction: Due to longer time-of-concentration for natural flow pathway.
Water Quality: Exempt from water quality criteria.
2. Criteria
a. Identify all existing natural flow pathways on site plan.
b. Identify natural flow pathways to be protected on site plan and construction drawings.
c. Protected natural flow pathways on private property must have an easement or deed restriction to
prevent future disturbance or neglect.
d. Natural flow pathways to be protected must have the limits delineated/flagged/fenced in the field.
Notes to this effect must be included on construction drawings.
e. Identify flow pathways designed as part of the stormwater management system including strategies
such as:
(1) Increased length.
(2) Increased roughness.
(3) Decreased slope.
f. Ensure adequacy of flow pathway for post-development flows.
45
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
C. Protect Sensitive Areas
1. Summary
Description: Identify, map, and prioritize sensitive areas on the site to
be preserved and protected in perpetuity.
Application: Plats; Condominiums; More difficult to implement as
development density increases.
Pretreatment Required: No.
Maintenance Plan: No.
Calculation Credits: Remove protected sensitive areas from stormwater management
calculations or select an appropriate existing land use if
necessary to include the area for sizing of conveyance systems.
Volume Reduction: Exempt from channel protection criteria.
Rate Reduction: Exempt from flood control criteria.
Water Quality: Exempt from water quality criteria.
2. Criteria
This BMP includes protected areas on the development property located on separate out lots or set asides
with language in the master deed or bylaws that requires protection and preservation, and that restricts
land uses to those that do not increase runoff. For developments involving drains, a recordable
conservation easement in the name of the drainage district must also be provided.
a. Identify all sensitive areas on site plan.
b. Identify all sensitive areas to be protected on the site plan and construction drawings.
c. Sensitive areas to be protected must have the limits delineated/flagged/fenced in the field during
construction and visible permanent boundary markers set to minimize encroachment (as
appropriate). Notes and details to this effect must be included on construction drawings.
d. Identify municipal ordinance requirements, if any, and incorporate sensitive area standards for
development site. In the absence of a local ordinance, standards for riparian buffers shall consist of:
(1) Variable width depending on topography, minimum 25-foot width (Zone 1).
(2) Naturally vegetated.
e. Minimal clearing is allowed for lot access and fire protection.
f. For activities proposed within floodplains the Developer shall demonstrate any activity proposed
within a 100-year floodplain will not diminish the flood storage capacity. Compensatory storage will
be required at a minimum ratio of one-to-one (1:1) for all lost floodplain storage.
(1) The compensating cut must be available during a flood event.
(2) Water must be able to move freely from stream to storage.
(3) Excavation must be adjacent to the floodplain.
(4) Flood storage must be between the 2-year flood elevation and the 100-year flood elevation.
(5) Compensating storage shall NOT be provided through channel widening.
46
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
D. Native Revegetation
1. Summary
Description: Restoration of disturbed pervious areas with deeper-rooted
native plants in lieu of conventional turf grass to reduce runoff
volume.
Application: All development types: Limitations where rapid establishment of
dense turf grass is needed to prevent erosion in concentrated
flow situations.
Pretreatment Required: No. This BMP can provide pretreatment.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: Assign a CN reflecting a meadow.
For small sites, individual trees can receive a credit of
200 square feet per tree, counted as woods in “good” condition.1
Rate Reduction: By virtue of lower CN.
Water Quality: Exempt from water quality criteria.
1
Source: SEMCOG (2008). Low Impact Development Manual for Michigan.
Note: Trees in minimal disturbance areas receive a larger area credit than trees planted under “Native
Revegetation” due to the assumption that the existing trees will typically be larger and more mature
than planted trees at the time of site plan submittal and during ensuing years.
2. Criteria
a. Identify native revegetation areas on site plan and construction drawings.
b. Native revegetation areas must be protected by having the limits delineated/flagged/fenced in the
field. Notes to this effect must be included on construction drawings.
c. Standards shall consist of:
(1) Variable width depending on topography, minimum 25-foot width (Zone 1).
(2) Native revegetation selected from the Low Impact Development Manual for Michigan (SEMCOG,
2008), Appendix C.
d. Areas receiving credit must be located on the development project.
47
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
E. Stormwater Disconnect
1. Summary
Description: Minimize runoff volume by disconnecting impervious
areas from the stormwater conveyance system.
Application: Rooftops; Driveways; Walkways; Patio areas; Minor roads.
Pretreatment Required: No.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: Weight impervious CN with pervious CN for open spaces in
“good” condition.
The following weighted CNs can be assigned to the
disconnected impervious area. They assume a pervious area
twice the size of the impervious area.
A B C D
59 73 82 86
Rate Reduction: By virtue of weighted CN.
Water Quality: Exempt from water quality criteria.
2. Criteria
a. Stormwater from rooftops and other impervious areas is considered disconnected if it is routed to a
stabilized vegetated area, or an onsite depression storage area that meets the following criteria:
(1) Pervious area is not a structural BMP that must be designed to treat the runoff from the
impervious surface.
(2) Impervious area must be limited to 1,000 square feet per discharge point.
(3) Roof downspouts and curb cuts must be at least 10 feet away from the nearest connected
impervious surface to discourage “re-connections.”
(4) Disconnection in less permeable soils (HSGs C and D) may require the use of dry wells, french
drains, or other temporary storage device to compensate for poor infiltration capability if
ponding of water for extended period of time becomes problematic.
(5) For disconnects to stabilized vegetated areas:
(a.) Size of disconnect area shall be twice the size of the contributing impervious area.
(b.) Length of disconnect area must be at least the length of the flow path of the contributing
impervious area (maximum 75 feet).
(c.) Slope of disconnect area must be no greater than 5%.
(d.) Disconnect area may be a “minimal disturbance area.”
(6) Disconnection must ensure no basement seepage.
(7) Identify disconnect areas on site plan and construction drawings.
48
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
II. STRUCTURAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Structural BMPs are constructed measures that convey, store, and treat stormwater in a site-specific location and
help mitigate the impact of stormwater runoff.
Design criteria is provided for the following structural BMPs:
Conveyance and Storage
A. Storm Sewer
B. Culvert or Bridge
C. Open Channel
D. Detention Basins
E. Retention Basins
F. Sediment Forebay
G. Spill Containment Cell
LID and Small Site
H. Infiltration Practices
I. Bioretention/Rain Garden
J. Constructed Filter
K. Planter Box
L. Pervious Pavement
M. Capture Reuse
N. Vegetated Roof
O. Water Quality Device
P. Bioswale and Water Quality Swale
Q. Vegetated Swale
R. Vegetated Filter Strip
S. Level Spreader
BMPs shall be designed in accordance with these standards.
Further information and examples for LID and Small Site BMPs are provided in the BMP Fact Sheets in Chapter 7
the Low Impact Development Manual for Michigan (SEMCOG, 2008).
Note: Design criteria for BMPs used primarily for soil erosion and sedimentation control and channel stabilization
(i.e., riprap, in-stream structures, natural channel design), and technical specifications for construction are beyond
the scope of this manual.
49
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
A. Storm Sewer
1. Summary
Description: Provides stormwater conveyance in an enclosed system.
Application: Urban areas: Where above-ground conveyance is not desirable.
Types: Pipe (solid wall, perforated).
Pretreatment Required: No. This BMP can provide spill containment.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: Solid wall pipe: None.
Perforated pipe (with slope): None.
Rate Reduction: None.
Water Quality: Count volume routed through catch basin.
2. Design Requirements
a. Sizing and Configuration
(1) Storm sewer shall be designed to convey the peak discharge from a 10-year rainfall event.
(2) A dual or redundant storm sewer may be required to convey the peak discharge from a 100-year
rainfall event if acceptable overland flow routes do not exist (refer to Part 3 section “Flood
Control”).
(3) Design velocities, capacities, and friction losses shall be based on Manning's equation:
where:
Q = discharge (cubic feet per second)
A = wetted area (square feet)
R = hydraulic radius (feet)
S = slope (feet per foot)
n = Manning’s roughness coefficient
(4) Manning's coefficients for closed conduit are included in Table 12.
(5) Acceptable slopes for circular pipe ("n" = 0.013) are included in Table 13. Minimum and maximum
grade for other Manning's n values must be calculated based on allowable minimum and
maximum velocities (V).
(6) As a general rule, the storm sewer system shall be designed without surcharging. Where this is
not possible, surcharging may be allowed to one foot below the top of casting. However,
minor losses must be considered in hydraulic grade line calculations.
(7) Storm sewer pipe shall have a minimum diameter of 12 inches. Smaller pipe may be approved for
private systems.
(8) The minimum depth of cover shall be 24 inches from grade to the top of pipe.
50
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
(9) Restricted conveyance systems designed to create backflow into stormwater storage facilities are
not permitted. A storm sewer line shall not be used as both an inlet and outlet line to a stormwater
storage facility.
Table 12 – Manning’s Roughness Coefficients
Conduit Coefficients
Closed Conduits
Asbestos-Cement Pipe 0.011 to 0.015
Brick 0.013 to 0.017
Cast Iron Pipe (Cement-lined and seal-coated) 0.011 to 0.015
Concrete (Monolithic)
Smooth forms 0.012 to 0.014
Rough forms 0.015 to 0.017
Concrete Pipe 0.011 to 0.015
Corrugated-Metal Pipe (1/2-inch corrugated) 0.022 to 0.026
Paved invert 0.018 to 0.022
Spun asphalt-lined 0.011 to 0.015
Plastic Pipe (Smooth) 0.011 to 0.015
Vitrified Clay Pipes 0.011 to 0.015
Liner channels 0.013 to 0.017
Open Channels
Lined Channels
Asphalt 0.013 to 0.017
Brick 0.012 to 0.018
Concrete 0.011 to 0.020
Rubble or riprap 0.020 to 0.035
Vegetal 0.030 to 0.040
Excavated or Dredged
Earth, straight and uniform 0.020 to 0.030
Earth, winding, fairly uniform 0.025 to 0.040
Rock 0.030 to 0.045
Unmaintained 0.050 to 0.140
Natural Channels (streams, top width at flood state <100 feet)
Fairly regular section 0.030 to 0.070
Irregular section with pools 0.040 to 0.100
Source: American Society of Civil Engineers and the Water Pollution Control Federation (1969). Design
and Construction of Sanitary and Storm Sewers.
51
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
Table 13 – Minimum and Maximum Slopes for Storm Sewers
Pipe Size Minimum % of Grade Maximum % of Grade
(inches) (Velocity = 2.5 feet per second) (Velocity = 10 feet per second)
12 0.32 4.88
15 0.24 3.62
18 0.20 2.84
21 0.16 2.30
24 0.14 1.94
27 0.12 1.66
30 0.10 1.44
36 0.08 1.12
42 0.06 0.92
48 0.06 0.76
54 0.04 0.60
60 0.04 0.54
66 0.04 0.48
Manning’s “n” = 0.013
b. End Treatment
(1) Outlet pipes shall require energy dissipation. Riprap protection or equivalent erosion control
measures shall be used where the velocity exceeds 4 feet per second, up to maximum allowable
design velocity of 8 feet per second.
(2) Outlets into open channels or grassed swales shall enter at an angle of 90 degrees or less with the
direction of flow.
c. Manholes and Catch Basins
(1) Manhole spacing shall not exceed 400 feet for sewers less than 42 inches in diameter and 600 feet
for larger sewers.
(2) Manholes shall be placed at all changes in pipe direction, slope, pipe size, all inlet connection
locations, and at the upper end of the storm sewer.
(3) Where possible, pipe inverts at junctions shall be designed to minimize junction losses (match
0.8 points of pipe diameters).
(4) Minimum inside diameter of all manholes, catch basins, and inlet structures shall be 48 inches,
except that a 24-inch diameter structure may be allowed with a single 12-inch outlet pipe.
(5) All structures receiving direct surface water runoff shall have a sump not less than 24 inches deep.
(6) Catch basins shall be placed at low points of streets and yards. Spacing and/or number of inlet
structures required to accommodate the design flows in streets, private drives, and parking areas
shall be provided based on inlet capacity with no ponding occurring during a 10-year storm, and
the following additional stipulations:
(a.) No more than 300 feet of pavement surface drainage will be allowed. No more than
200 feet of surface drainage will be allowed for grades exceeding 4%.
(b.) Consideration shall be given to pedestrian crossings when siting catch basins in
intersections. Catch basins shall be placed upstream of pedestrian crossings when practical.
(c.) No more than 150 feet of street drainage will be allowed to flow around a corner.
52
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
(d.) No flow will be allowed across a public street intersection.
d. Sump Discharge
(1) Sump discharge outlets for individual lots shall be a catch basin (minimum 4-foot diameter) with
lead (6-inch minimum diameter); manufactured tees; or cored and booted lead.
e. Materials
(1) All materials must comply with the authority having jurisdiction over the storm sewer system.
(2) Storm sewer pipe within the influence of a public road shall be reinforced concrete pipe. All other
storm sewer pipe shall be reinforced concrete or smooth interior wall polyethylene in accordance
with MDOT Standard Specifications. Other materials shall be subject to approval.
(3) Pipe joints shall be designed to prevent excessive infiltration or exfiltration.
(4) Manholes and catch basins shall be in accordance with MDOT Standard Specifications.
(5) Connections to manholes shall be made with a resilient connector for pipe diameters 24 inches
or less. Concrete pipe connections shall be made by grouting the inside and outside wall of the
structure.
B. Culvert or Bridge
1. Summary
Description: Provides stormwater conveyance through a crossing
structure.
Application: Where crossing of open channels, wetlands, waterbodies,
and grassed swales is required. Culverts can also provide
equalization and outlet control.
Types: Pipe Culvert; Box Culvert; Bridge.
Pretreatment Required: No.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: None.
Rate Reduction: None.
Water Quality: None.
2. Design Requirements
a. Sizing and Configuration
(1) Bridges shall be designed to provide a 4.3-foot minimum underclearance at normal flow for canoe
traffic on navigable waterways, and a 2-foot minimum freeboard to the underside (low chord) of
the bridge for a 100-year flood where conditions allow.
(2) Footings shall extend at least 4 feet below the bottom of the channel.
(3) Culverts serving a drainage area of less than 2 square miles shall be designed for the 25-year peak
discharge in the developed watershed with a maximum outlet velocity of 8 feet per second. A
maximum of one foot of inlet submergence may be permitted if this does not backup water out
of the easement.
(4) The effect of the 100-year storm shall be reviewed to ensure no adverse increase in water
elevation off of the development property or flooding of structures within the development.
53
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
(5) Sizing of culverts and bridges shall be performed using the Bernouli Equation and include
consideration of inlet and outlet control, entrance and exit losses, and tailwater condition.
Published culvert nomographs and other computer software may be used.
(6) Minimum diameter of a drive culvert shall be 12 inches.
(7) Minimum diameter of a road crossing culvert shall be 18 inches or equivalent pipe arch.
b. End Treatment
(1) Headwalls, wingwalls, and all other end treatments shall be designed to ensure the stability of the
surrounding soil. MDOT, Road Commission, or manufacturer’s designs may be used.
(2) Riprap protection or equivalent erosion control measures shall be used where the velocity
exceeds 4 feet per second, up to maximum allowable design velocity of 8 feet per second.
c. Materials
(1) All materials must comply with the authority having jurisdiction over the roadway.
(2) Culverts may be reinforced concrete pipe, corrugated steel pipe, or pipe arch in accordance with
Road Commission or MDOT Standard Specifications. Smooth interior wall polyethylene may also
be allowed.
C. Open Channel
1. Summary
Description: Stormwater conveyance in an excavated channel.
Application: Larger drainage areas with concentrated runoff.
Types: Channel; Ditch.
Pretreatment Required: No.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: None.
Rate Reduction: None.
Water Quality: None.
2. Design Requirements
a. Sizing and Configuration
(1) The open channel shall be designed to convey the 25-year peak discharge.
(2) Open channel design velocities, capacities, and friction losses shall be based on
Manning's equation:
54
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
where:
Q = discharge (cubic feet per second)
A = wetted area (square feet)
R = hydraulic radius (feet)
S = slope (feet per foot)
n = Manning’s roughness coefficient
(3) Manning’s Coefficients shall be determined from Table 12. A minimum Manning’s Coefficient of
0.035 shall be used for open channels, unless special treatment is given to the bottom and sides
(riprap, paving, mown sod, etc.).
(4) Minimum bottom width shall be 2 feet.
(5) Minimum longitudinal slope shall be 0.10%.
(6) Side slopes shall be no steeper than 2:1 (horizontal to vertical).
(7) The minimum velocity for open channels during the design event shall be 1.5 feet per second.
(8) The maximum velocity shall be 4 feet per second. Riprap protection or equivalent shall be used
where the velocity exceeds 4 feet per second, up to maximum allowable design velocity of 8 feet
per second.
b. Connections and Crossings
(1) Outlets into the open channel shall enter at an angle of 90 degrees or less with the direction
of flow.
(2) A minimum clearance of 5 feet is required between open channel inverts and underground
utilities unless special provisions are approved.
D. Detention Basins
1. Summary
Description: Provides stormwater storage with a surface outlet.
Application: Practical for a wide range of applications including large sites.
Types: Dry Basin; Extended Detention Basin; Wet Pond; Constructed
Wetland; Underground Vault.
Pretreatment Required: Yes, may be needed to meet TSS removal, facilitate maintenance,
or preserve intended aesthetics of basin.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: None.
Rate Reduction: Calculated release rate.
Water Quality: Count volume routed through BMP.
2. Sizing Calculations
a. Calculate the allowable release rate and the required storage volume for flood control (refer to Part 4
section “Calculating Storage Volumes and Release Rates, Flood Control, Detention”).
b. Extended detention volume provided for water quality treatment and/or channel protection may be
included in the flood control volume if it comprises no more than 30% of the flood control volume.
Where channel protection and water quality treatment are provided through upstream retention
55
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
BMPs, these volumes may be subtracted from the total inflow volume.
c. Size forebay(s) for pretreatment (refer to Part 4 section “Calculating Storage Volumes and Release
Rates, Pretreatment”).
d. Detention basins without an acceptable surface water overflow route shall be designed for 2 times
the required flood control volume.
3. Design Requirements
a. Siting
(1) Soil borings are required (refer to Part 4 section “Soils Investigation”).
(a.) A minimum of 2 feet is required between the bottom of dry detention basins and the highest
known groundwater elevation.
(b.) Wet ponds and constructed wetlands shall have a reliable supply of baseflow or groundwater
to support a permanent pool.
(c.) A constructed wetland must have a minimum contributing drainage area of 10 acres (5 acres
for a pocket wetland).
(d.) Wet ponds and constructed wetlands proposed in HSG A and HSG B soils above
the groundwater table shall have a clay or synthetic liner to minimize infiltration.
(2) Setbacks shall be as follows:
(a.) Public and private sidewalk/non-motorized pathway: 5 feet
(b.) Adjacent property line: 10 feet
(c.) Building foundation: 30 feet
(d.) Private well: 50 feet
(e.) Public well: 200 feet from Type I or Type IIa wells, 75 feet from Type IIb or Type III wells (Safe
Drinking Water Act, Act 399, PA 1976)
(f.) Septic system drainfield: 100 feet
(g.) Airport: Per Federal Aviation Administration guidelines (wet pond, constructed wetland)
b. Configuration
(1) General
(a.) Distances of flow paths between inlets and outlets shall be maximized. A minimum basin
length-to-width ratio of 2 to 1 is required.
(b.) If site constraints preclude placing pipes at opposite ends of the basin or meeting the
length-to-width ratio, baffles (berms) may be used to lengthen the flow path.
(c.) Where steeper side slopes than those specified are unavoidable, safety railing, fencing, or
other access barriers may be approved.
(2) Dry Basin
(a.) The design high water depth should generally not exceed 10 feet above the bottom of the
basin.
(b.) Side slopes shall not be steeper than 3:1 (H:V). Where basins are to be maintained as a mown
lawn, side slopes shall be no steeper than 4:1 (H:V) to facilitate mowing.
(c.) The bottom of dry detention basins shall be graded to provide positive flow to the pipe outlet.
A minimum longitudinal bottom slope of 1% shall be provided. Cross slopes shall be 2%
minimum. If continuous flow is anticipated, a low-flow channel shall be provided, with
necessary crossings, and sloped to eliminate standing water. If site grades prohibit achieving
56
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
these minimum slopes, the use of an underdrain with flatter slopes may be approved.
(3) Wet Pond
(a.) At a minimum, the volume of the permanent pool for wet ponds shall be 2.5 times the water
quality volume to account for reduced settling efficiency due to turbulence caused by wind.
(b.) Wet ponds shall generally be wedge-shaped with inflow at the narrow end to prevent
short-circuiting and stagnation. However, other shapes meeting the design intent may be
approved.
(c.) Permanent pools shall have a minimum depth of 3 feet across the deepest part of the basin
to discourage aquatic plant infill and provide open water.
(d.) The design high water depth should generally not exceed 10 feet above the permanent pool
elevation.
(e.) Side slopes shall not be steeper than 3:1 (H:V). Where basins are to be maintained as a mown
lawn to the water’s edge, side slopes shall be no steeper than 4:1 (H:V) to facilitate mowing.
(f.) A minimum 8-foot-wide safety bench shall be constructed on the slopes of wet ponds
with a permanent pool 3 feet or deeper. The safety bench shall have a maximum slope of
6:1 (H:V) and extend a minimum of 8 inches below the permanent pool level and a minimum
of 8 inches above the permanent pool level.
(g.) Warning signs prohibiting swimming and skating shall be posted for wet ponds.
(4) Constructed Wetland
(a.) The emergent vegetation zone shall comprise 60 to 65% of the total surface area. Half shall
be high marsh with a normal water depth of 6 inches or less, and half shall be low marsh with
a normal water depth between 6 and 18 inches.
(b.) The open water zone shall comprise 35% to 40% of the total surface area with a normal water
depth of between 18 inches and 6 feet.
(c.) At a minimum, the volume of the permanent pool for the open water zone shall be 2.5 times
the water quality volume to account for reduced settling efficiency due to turbulence caused
by wind.
(d.) The design high water surface elevation shall not exceed the normal water surface elevation
by more than 4 feet.
(e.) Side slopes shall be 4:1 to 5:1 (H:V) wherever possible. Side slopes shall not be steeper than
3:1 (H:V).
(f.) A minimum 8-foot- w i d e safety bench shall be constructed on the slopes of
constructed wetlands with a permanent pool 3 feet or deeper. The safety bench shall have
a maximum slope of 6:1 (H:V) and extend a minimum of 8 inches below the permanent
pool level and a minimum of 8 inches above the permanent pool level.
(g.) A micro pool shall be located at the outlet of the stormwater wetland to protect the low flow
pipe from clogging and prevent sediment resuspension. The micro pool shall be 3 to 6 feet
deep and have a minimum surface area equivalent to the forebay.
(h.) A pocket wetland shall consist of a forebay and micropool with safety benches.
c. Inlet Design
(1) Inlet pipes shall not be fully submerged at normal pool elevations.
(2) Inlet pipes shall require energy dissipation. Riprap protection or equivalent erosion control
measures shall be used where the velocity exceeds 4 feet per second up to maximum allowable
design velocity of 8 feet per second.
(3) Pretreatment shall be provided in a sediment forebay, spill containment cell, or water quality
57
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
swale. For small sites, a water quality device may be used prior to the basin. Pretreatment for
overland sheet flow entering the basin can be provided through a vegetated filter strip.
(4) When spill containment is required, all pipes contributing runoff from the high-risk area
must enter the pretreatment BMP.
d. Outlet Design
(1) The outlet shall consist of a multi-stage outlet and include a low flow orifice or multiple orifice
openings, a primary overflow (typically provided through the top of a grated riser pipe), and a
secondary emergency overflow spillway.
(2) Staged low flow outlet: When required, the lowest stage openings shall be sized to accommodate
the water quality or channel protection volume. The flood control opening shall be placed at the
resulting high-water level and sized so that the cumulative discharge from all openings is limited
to the maximum allowable design discharge at the design high water level.
(3) Low Flow Outlet
(a.) The low flow outlet may be designed using the orifice equation, rearranged to solve for area:
where:
A = required area (square feet)
Q = required outflow (cubic feet per second)
c = orifice coefficient (approximately 0.6)
2g = 2 times the gravitation constant (g = 32.2 feet per second)
H = height of design high water level above center of orifice outlet (feet)
(b.) Other types of outlet devices shall have full design calculations provided for review.
(c.) The outlet shall be designed to prevent clogging and be accessible for maintenance.
(d.) Pipes or orifice plates shall have a minimum diameter of 4 inches without additional
protection against clogging.
(e.) Pipe or orifice openings less than 4 inches in diameter shall be protected from clogging by
directing inflow through a sufficiently large opening area protected with a properly sized filter
or screen prior to the orifice.
(f.) A gravel filtration jacket consisting of 3-inch washed stone and 1-inch washed stone must be
placed around all perforated riser pipes in basins, wet ponds, and constructed wetlands. The
orifice configuration must be wrapped with hard wire mesh with an appropriate opening size
to prevent any stone from passing through the orifice. The 3-inch stone must be placed
immediately adjacent to the riser pipe with the 1-inch stone covering the larger stone. The
gravel jacket must extend sufficiently above all orifice patterns.
(g.) Orifices used to maintain a permanent pool shall be designed to withdraw water a minimum
of 2 feet below the normal water surface.
(4) Primary Overflow
(a.) All detention basins must have a primary overflow at the design high water level.
58
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
(b.) The primary overflow shall be designed to convey the 10-year undetained peak inflow at the
maximum design high water level. The depth of water at the crest of the secondary
emergency overflow is the maximum design high water level.
(c.) The downstream outlet pipe shall be designed to convey the 10-year undetained peak inflow
from the primary overflow and the discharge from the low flow orifice(s) at the maximum
design high water level.
(d.) Hoods and trash racks shall be placed on riser pipes. Grate openings shall be a maximum of
3 inches on center. A vertical flow area must be provided where leaves and debris are prone
to clog a horizontally seated grate.
(e.) Riser pipes shall have a minimum diameter of 24 inches. Riser pipes greater than 4 feet in
height shall be a minimum of 48 inches in diameter.
(f.) Riser pipes shall be constructed of reinforced concrete or corrugated metal and be set in a
concrete base designed to prevent buoyancy. Plastic is not acceptable as a material unless
riser is buried, due to lack of durability.
(g.) The riser must be placed near or within the embankment to provide for ready maintenance
access.
(h.) When possible, a drain for completely dewatering the detention basin shall be installed for
maintenance purposes.
(i.) Pipes placed through embankments shall have anti-seep collars.
(j.) Outlet pipes shall require energy dissipation. Riprap protection or equivalent erosion control
measures shall be used where the velocity exceeds 4 feet per second up to maximum
allowable design velocity of 8 feet per second.
(5) Secondary Emergency Overflow Spillway
(a.) All detention basins must have a provision for emergency overflow (i.e., a spillway).
(b.) The spillway shall be designed for the 10-year undetained peak inflow with a maximum flow
depth of one foot. The spillway shall be sized using the weir equation:
where:
Q = discharge (cubic feet per second)
C = coefficient of discharge (varies from 2.6 to 3.3)
m = Horizontal component of side slope
L = length of spillway crest (feet)
H = total head measured above spillway crest (feet)
(c.) Freeboard. The top of berm elevation shall be a minimum of 0.5 foot above the design flow
depth over the spillway. In no case shall the spillway depth (distance between spillway crest
and top of berm) be less than 1 foot.
(d.) Overflow spillways shall be protected with concrete, riprap, or a permanent erosion control
59
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
blanket (preferred) to prevent erosion of the structure. Protection shall extend across the
entire spillway up to the top of berm, start on the basin side a minimum of 3 feet below the
spillway crest and extend down the spillway to an apron a minimum of 6 feet beyond the toe
of the spillway.
e. Access
(1) Outlet control structures shall be placed near or within the embankment to facilitate maintenance
access.
(2) Berm top width shall be a minimum of 4 feet, or 12 feet where vehicle access is required for
maintenance.
(3) A minimum 10-foot-wide maintenance access route from a public or private right-of-way shall be
provided to the basin. The access way (including side slopes on trapezoidal and triangular
spillways) shall have a vertical grade of no greater than 20% (5:1 H:V slope) and shall be stabilized
to withstand the passage of heavy equipment. Direct access to the forebay, control structures and
the outlet shall be provided.
60
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
4. Design Schematics
61
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
62
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
63
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
64
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
E. Retention Basins
1. Summary
Description: Provides stormwater storage without a surface outlet.
Application: Practical for a wide range of applications including large sites.
Not recommended for regional use without supplemental
measures and provisions for a positive outlet.
Types: Dry Basin; Wet Pond.
Pretreatment Required: Yes.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: Count volume stored and infiltrated.
Rate Reduction: Designed for flood control: 100%.
Water Quality: Count volume stored and infiltrated.
2. Sizing Calculations
a. Calculate the required storage volume for flood control (refer to Part 4 section “Calculating Storage
Volumes and Release Rates, Flood Control, Retention”).
b. Calculate the minimum infiltration area required to drain the required storage volume in the specified
drawdown time using the design infiltration rate (refer to Part 4 section “Design Infiltration Rates”).
where:
A = minimum infiltration area (square feet)
Vs = storage volume (cubic feet)
i = design infiltration rate (inches per hour)
td = maximum allowable drawdown time (hours)
2 factor to convert inches to feet
c. Drawdown time shall be no more than 72 hours.
d. The infiltration area shall be defined as the bottom of the basin, or the horizontal projection of the
side slopes up to half of the design water depth above a permanent pool.
e. Where channel protection and water quality treatment are provided through upstream retention
BMPs, these volumes may be subtracted from the total inflow volume. If provided in the same
retention basin, channel protection and water quality volumes are included in the flood control
volume.
f. Pretreatment: Size forebay(s) for the pretreatment volume (refer to Part 4 section “Calculating
Storage Volumes and Release Rates”). Regional retention basins may require spill containment,
forebays sized for the full water quality volume, additional pretreatment volume, or other measures
to reduce the potential for groundwater contamination and protect the infiltration capacity of the
BMP.
g. Retention basins without an acceptable surface water overflow route shall be designed for 2 times
the required flood control volume.
65
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
3. Design Requirements
a. Siting
(1) Soil borings are required (refer to Part 4 section “Soils Investigation”).
(a.) A minimum of 3 feet is required between the bottom of dry retention basins and the highest
known groundwater elevation.
(2) Setbacks shall be as follows:
(a.) Public and private sidewalk/non-motorized pathway: 5 feet
(b.) Adjacent property line: 10 feet
(c.) Building foundation: 30 feet
(d.) Private well: 50 feet
(e.) Public well: 200 feet from Type I or Type IIa wells, 75 feet from Type IIb or Type III wells (Safe
Drinking Water Act, Act 399, PA 1976)
(f.) Septic system drain field: 100 feet
(g.) Airports: Per Federal Aviation Administration guidelines (wet ponds)
(3) Perform groundwater mounding calculations to ensure no adverse impacts to adjacent structures.
b. Configuration
(1) General
(a.) Where steeper side slopes than those specified are unavoidable, safety railing, fencing or
other access barriers may be approved.
(2) Dry Basin
(a.) The design high water depth should generally not exceed 7 feet above the bottom of the
basin.
(b.) Side slopes shall not be steeper than 3:1 (H:V). Where basins are to be maintained as a mown
lawn, side slopes shall be no steeper than 4:1 (H:V) to facilitate mowing.
(c.) The bottom of dry retention basins shall be flat to encourage uniform ponding and infiltration.
(3) Wet Pond (no surface water outlet)
(a.) The design high water depth should generally not exceed 7 feet above the permanent pool
elevation.
(b.) Where excavation and reshaping of the retention area is necessary, side slopes shall not be
deeper than 3:1 (H:V). Where basins are to be maintained as a mown lawn to the water’s
edge, side slopes shall be no steeper than 4:1 (H:V) to facilitate mowing.
(c.) A minimum 8-foot safety bench shall be constructed on the slopes of wet ponds with a
permanent pool 3 feet or deeper. The safety bench shall have a maximum slope of 6:1 (H:V)
and extend a minimum of 8 inches below the permanent pool level and a minimum of 8 inches
above the permanent pool level.
(d.) Warning signs prohibiting swimming and skating shall be posted for wet ponds.
c. Inlet Design
(1) Inlet pipes shall not be fully submerged at normal pool elevations.
(2) Inlet pipes shall require energy dissipation. Riprap protection or equivalent erosion control
measures shall be used where the velocity exceeds 4 feet per second, up to maximum allowable
design velocity of 8 feet per second.
66
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
(3) Pretreatment is required for each inlet and shall be provided in a sediment forebay, spill
containment cell, or water quality swale. For small sites, a water quality device with an 80% or
greater TSS removal efficiency may be used prior to the basin. Pretreatment for overland sheet
flow entering the basin can be provided through a vegetated filter strip.
(4) When spill containment is required, all pipes contributing runoff from the high-risk area
must enter the pretreatment BMP.
d. Overflow
(1) Primary Overflow
(a.) When possible, retention basins must have a primary overflow at the design high water level.
(b.) The primary overflow and downstream pipe shall be designed to convey the 10-year
undetained peak inflow at the maximum design high water level. The depth of water at the
crest of the secondary emergency overflow is the maximum design high water level.
(c.) Hoods and trash racks shall be placed on riser pipes. Grate openings shall be a maximum of
3 inches on center. A vertical flow area must be provided where leaves and debris are prone
to clog a horizontally seated grate.
(d.) Riser pipes shall have a minimum diameter of 24 inches. Riser pipes greater than 4 feet in
height shall be a minimum of 48 inches in diameter.
(e.) Riser pipes shall be constructed of reinforced concrete or corrugated metal and be set in a
concrete base designed to prevent buoyancy. Plastic is not acceptable unless riser is buried,
due to lack of durability.
(f.) When possible, a drain for completely dewatering the retention basin shall be installed for
maintenance purposes.
(g.) Pipes placed through embankments shall have anti-seep collars.
(h.) Outlet pipes shall require energy dissipation. Riprap protection or equivalent erosion control
measures shall be used where the velocity exceeds 4 feet per second up to maximum
allowable design velocity of 8 feet per second.
(2) Secondary Emergency Overflow Spillway
(a.) All retention basins must have a provision for emergency overflow (i.e., a spillway).
(b.) The spillway shall be designed for the 10-year undetained peak inflow with a maximum flow
depth of one foot. The spillway shall be sized using the weir equation:
(c.) Freeboard. The top of berm elevation shall be a minimum of 0.5 foot above the design flow
depth over the spillway. In no case shall the spillway depth (distance between spillway crest and
top of berm) be less than 1 foot.
(d.) Overflow spillways shall be protected with concrete, riprap, or a permanent erosion control
blanket (preferred) to prevent erosion of the structure. Protection shall extend across the
entire spillway up to the top of berm, start on the basin side a minimum of 3 feet below the
spillway crest and extend down the spillway to an apron a minimum of 6 feet beyond the toe of
the spillway.
67
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
e. Access
(1) Berm top width shall be a minimum of 4 feet, or 12 feet where vehicle access is required for
maintenance.
(2) A minimum 10-foot-wide maintenance access route from a public or private right-of-way shall be
provided to the basin. The access way (including side slopes on trapezoidal and triangular
spillways) shall have a vertical grade of no greater than 20% (5:1 H:V slope) and shall be stabilized
to withstand the passage of heavy equipment. Direct access to the forebay, control structures and
the outlet shall be provided.
f. Finishing and Top Dressing
(1) Care must be taken during the excavation and finishing process to make sure that soil compaction
does not occur.
(2) The bottom of dry retention basins shall be scarified or deep tilled to a depth of 6 to 12 inches
after final grading has been established.
(3) Top Dressing for basin bottom and side slopes
(a.) Native permeable soil (sand and gravel); or where turf establishment is desired
(b.) 3-inches of compost tilled into the top 6-inches of native permeable soil (equivalent to a 9-
inch homogenous mixture of 70% sand; 30% compost); or
(c.) 4-inches of topsoil tilled into the top 6-inches of native permeable soil (equivalent to a 10-
inch homogenous mixture with maximum 20% silts, 4% clay, and 80% to 92% sand).
(d.) The soil mix shall have a pH between 5.5 and 7.5.
(4) Topsoil shall be sandy loam, loamy sand, or loam per USDA Soil Textural Triangle with 20% to 50%
fines by volume (silt and clay with <10% clay), and 2% to 8% organic matter by dry weight.
g. Supplemental Measures
(1) Supplemental measures may be required to ensure that a retention basin drains sufficiently as
the soil becomes less permeable with use. The need for supplemental measures may be based on
a number of indicators including:
(a.) Soils with a design infiltration rate between 0.50 and 1.63 inches per hour (Sandy Loam).
(b.) High probability for sedimentation (particularly fines).
(c.) Larger regional basin where there is less control over contributing area runoff.
(d.) Probability of groundwater rising higher than minimum isolation distance.
(2) Supplemental measures may include:
(a.) Leaching basins, infiltration trench, or wick drains placed in the bottom of the basin.
(b.) Valved outlet to drain basin.
(c.) Conversion to a wet basin with sufficient storage volume provided above the permanent pool
for reduced infiltration area.
68
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
4. Design Schematics
69
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
70
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
F. Sediment Forebay
1. Summary
Description: Stormwater pretreatment practice.
Application: Typically used with a detention or retention basin.
Types: Wet basin; Dry basin; Level spreader.
Pretreatment Required: No. This BMP can provide pretreatment.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: None.
Rate Reduction: None.
Water Quality: Count volume routed through BMP.
2. Sizing Calculations
a. Size for pretreatment (refer to Part 4 section “Calculating Storage Volumes and Release Rates,
Pretreatment”).
b. The pretreatment volume is the volume of the forebay to the elevation of the level spreader or
overflow spillway including any permanent pool.
3. Design Requirements
a. Siting
(1) Where more than one inlet pipe is required, the calculated forebay volume shall be pro-rated by
flow contribution of each inlet.
b. Configuration
(1) The sediment forebay shall be a separate sump, which can be formed by grading.
(2) The minimum surface area shall be 25% of the pretreatment volume.
(3) The length-to-width ratio shall be a minimum of 1.5:1 and a maximum of 4:1 to allow for adequate
hydraulic length yet minimize scour velocities.
(4) The top-of-berm elevation between the forebay and the basin shall be a minimum of one foot
below the outer berm elevation.
(5) The overflow spillway shall be sized using Equations 4.25 through 4.27 and designed to prevent
erosion.
4. Design Schematics
a. See “Detention Basin” and “Retention Basin” BMPs.
71
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
G. Spill Containment Cell
1. Summary
Description: Lined stormwater pretreatment practice.
Application: Typically used with a detention or retention basin.
Types: Wet cell; Extended detention cell.
Pretreatment Required: No. This BMP can provide pretreatment and spill containment.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: None.
Rate Reduction: None.
Water Quality: Count volume routed through BMP.
2. Sizing Calculations
a. Size for pretreatment (refer to Part 4 section “Calculating Storage Volumes and Release Rates,
Pretreatment”).
b. The pretreatment volume is the volume of the spill containment cell to the elevation of the level
spreader or overflow spillway including any permanent pool.
c. The spill containment volume is the storage volume between the normal water level and the entrance
of the outlet pipe. The minimum spill containment volume shall be provided to capture a slug
pollutant load from an accidental spill of toxic materials.
3. Design Requirements
a. Siting
(1) All inlets shall enter the spill containment cell unless the inlet collects stormwater exclusively from
non-hotspot areas (i.e., office parking, courtyard, roof.)
b. Configuration
(1) General
a. The minimum surface area shall be 25% of the pretreatment volume.
b. The length-to-width ratio shall be a minimum of 1.5:1, and a maximum of 4:1 to allow for
adequate hydraulic length yet minimize scour velocities.
c. The top-of-berm elevation between the spill containment cell and the basin shall be a minimum
of one foot below the outer berm elevation.
d. Side slopes shall not be steeper than 3:1 (H:V). Where basins are to be maintained as a mown
lawn, side slopes shall be no steeper than 4:1 (H:V) to facilitate mowing.
e. Minimum depth of the permanent pool shall be 3 feet.
f. Unless protected by fencing, a minimum 4-foot-wide safety bench shall be constructed around
the permanent pool. The safety bench shall have a maximum slope of 6:1 (H:V) and extend a
minimum of 4 inches below the permanent pool level and a minimum of 4 inches above the
permanent pool level.
72
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
c. Outlet Design
(1) The outlet structure from the spill containment cell shall be designed to draw water from the
central portion of the water column within the cell to trap floatables and contain sediments. The
inlet of the transfer pipe shall be located a minimum of one foot below the normal water level,
and a minimum of one foot above the bottom of the spill containment cell or manhole sump.
(2) The transfer pipe(s) between the spill containment cell and the basin shall be sized for the peak
inflow from a 10-year rainfall event.
(3) Minimum pipe diameter shall be 12 inches.
d. Emergency Overflow
(1) The crest of the level spreader or overflow spillway from the spill containment cell shall be set at
the elevation of the calculated 10-year hydraulic head.
(2) The overflow spillway from the spill containment cell shall be sized using Equations 4.25 through
4.27 and designed to prevent erosion.
e. Materials
(1) The spill containment cell shall be lined with impermeable materials extending up to the design
high water elevation. A minimum 18-inch-thick clay layer, or an impermeable liner protected with
a minimum 12 inches of soil cover are acceptable alternatives. Maximum allowable permeability
shall be 1 x 10-7 centimeters per second as determined by the geotechnical consultant for clay
placement, or manufacturer’s certificate for liner products.
73
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
4. Design Schematics
74
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
H. Infiltration Practices
1. Summary
Description: Stormwater treatment and storage without a surface outlet.
Application: Practices are typically applicable to small sites and drainage
areas.
Types: Dry Well; Leaching Basin; Infiltration Trench; Infiltration Bed;
Infiltration Berm.
Pretreatment Required: Yes.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: Count volume stored and infiltrated.
Rate Reduction: Designed for flood control: 100%.
Designed for channel protection and/or water quality: Adjust
time-of-concentration by dividing storage volume by 10-year
peak flow rate.
Water Quality: Count volume stored and infiltrated.
2. Sizing Calculations
a. Infiltration practices may be sized for channel protection or water quality treatment. Use the methods
outlined in Part 4 section “Calculating Storage Volumes and Release Rates” to calculate the
required volumes. Use the methods under “Retention” to calculate the required storage volume of
the BMP.
b. Infiltration practices may be able to provide flood control for small drainage areas. Use the formulas
included in Part 4 section “Calculating Storage Volumes and Release Rates, Flood Control, Retention”
to calculate the storage volume of the BMP.
c. Calculate the minimum infiltration area required to drain the required storage volume in the specified
drawdown time using the design infiltration rate (refer to Part 4 section “Design Infiltration Rates”).
where:
A = minimum infiltration area (square feet)
Vs = storage volume (cubic feet)
i = design infiltration rate (inches per hour)
td = maximum allowable drawdown time (hours)
12 = factor to convert inches to feet
d. Total drawdown time shall be no more than 72 hours. Depth of surface ponding shall be no more than
2 feet and drain within 24 hours.
e. Infiltration area shall be defined as:
(1) Dry Well/Leaching Basin: Bottom of stone and ½ the height of the sides
(2) Infiltration Trench: Bottom of trench (length x width) and ½ the height of each side
(3) Infiltration Bed: Bottom area of the bed and ½ the height of each side
(4) Infiltration Berm: Ponding area (length of berm x average width of ponding behind berm)
75
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
f. Calculate the storage volume of the BMP:
(1) Dry wells, infiltration trenches, infiltration beds:
Subsurface Storage Volume (cubic feet) = Length (feet) x Width (feet) x Depth (feet) x Void Ratio
of Material
Where perforated pipe is used, the formula is modified:
Subsurface Storage Volume (cubic feet) = Volume of Pipe (cubic feet) + [Length (feet) x Width
(feet) x Depth (feet) – Volume of Pipe (cubic feet)] x Void Ratio of Material
(2) Leaching basins:
Storage Volume (cubic feet) = Π r2 (square feet) x Depth (feet)
where:
r = radius of leaching basin (feet)
Π = pi (approximately 3.14)
Volume of storage in stone envelope around leaching basin may also be counted.
(3) Infiltration berm:
Surface Storage Volume (cubic feet) = Average Ponding Area (square feet) x Design High Water
Depth (feet)
3. Design Requirements
a. Siting
(1) Soil borings are required (refer to Part 4 section “Soils Investigation”).
(a.) A minimum of 3 feet is required between the bottom of infiltration practices and the highest
known groundwater elevation.
(b.) Void ratio for the imported material shall be based on the USDA soil textural class and
effective water capacity in Table 6. A maximum design value of 0.40 shall be used for the void
ratio of stone.
(2) Setbacks shall be as follows:
(a.) Adjacent property line: 10 feet
(b.) Building foundation: 10 feet
(c.) Private well: 50 feet
(d.) Public well: 200 feet from Type I or Type IIa wells, 75 feet from Type IIb or Type III wells (Safe
Drinking Water Act, Act 399, PA 1976)
(e.) Septic system drain field: 50 feet
(3) Infiltration practices shall be located outside of the drip line of adjacent trees to avoid root
intrusion.
b. Configuration
(1) General
(a.) A combination of surface and subsurface storage may be used to provide the required storage
volume.
(2) Dry wells, infiltration trenches and infiltration beds
(a.) Infiltration trench width shall generally be as follows: 3-foot minimum to 6-foot maximum.
(b.) Coarse aggregates shall be uniformly graded, washed, and wrapped in a non-woven geotextile
to provide separation between the aggregate and the surrounding soil and prevent fines from
clogging the infiltration surface.
76
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
(c.) An observation well shall be provided for each dry well, at each end of an infiltration trench,
and at each corner of an infiltration bed with intermediate center wells added so as not to
exceed maximum distance of 50 feet between wells.
(d.) Perforated pipes laid flat may be used to distribute runoff over the bottom of infiltration
trenches and infiltration beds.
(e.) Cleanouts shall be provided at pipe ends.
(f.) Care must be taken during the excavation and finishing process to make sure that soil
compaction does not occur.
(3) Leaching Basins
(a.) Leaching basins shall have a minimum diameter of 4 feet, and meet the layout requirements
for catch basins (refer to “Storm Sewer”).
(b.) Leaching basins shall have an open bottom and perforations around the circumference of the
structure at no greater than 12-inch intervals horizontally and vertically the entire depth of
the sump.
(c.) Bedding and backfill shall consist of clean stone with nonwoven geotextile fabric placed along
the walls of the trench and wrapped around the stone and the basin.
(4) Infiltration Berms
(a.) Infiltration berms shall be constructed along (parallel to) contours at a constant level
elevation.
(b.) Maximum berm height shall be 2 feet to prevent excessive ponding behind berm.
(c.) Berm top width shall be a minimum of 2 feet.
(d.) Side slopes shall not be steeper than 4:1 (H:V) to facilitate mowing and ensure stable side
slopes.
(e.) Well compacted cohesive soil shall be used to construct the berm.
(f.) The berm shall be well vegetated to prevent erosion if overtopped.
c. Inlet Design
(1) Pretreatment is required for each inlet and for overland flow entering the infiltration practice.
Exceptions may be allowed for small, p a v e d drainage areas contributing directly to a
leaching basin.
d. Emergency Overflow
(1) All infiltration practices must have a provision for overflow at the high-water level.
(2) Infiltration practices without an acceptable surface water overflow route shall be designed for
2 times the required flood control volume.
e. Access
(1) Inspection and maintenance access to the infiltration practice shall be provided.
77
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
4. Design Schematics
78
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
79
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
I. Bioretention/Rain Garden
1. Summary
Description: Provides stormwater treatment, storage, and uptake with
or without a surface outlet.
Application: Small sites and drainage areas. Underdrained BMP may be
used on small sites to provide extended detention.
Types: Bioretention: Natural-looking herbaceous.
Rain garden: Landscaped and manicured.
Infiltration; Underdrain at top of storage layer; Underdrain at
bottom of storage layer; Lined.
Pretreatment Required: Yes.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: Infiltration: Count volume stored and infiltrated.
Underdrained: Count volume stored and infiltrated between
bottom of BMP and invert of underdrain.
Rate Reduction: Adjust time-of-concentration by dividing storage volume by
10-year peak flow rate.
Water Quality: Count volume stored and infiltrated or routed through filter.
2. Sizing Calculations
a. For underdrained BMP, follow criteria for “Constructed Filter.”
b. Bioretention/rain gardens may be sized for channel protection or water quality treatment. Use the
methods outlined in Part 4 section “Calculating Storage Volumes and Release Rates” to calculate the
required volumes. Use the methods under “Retention” to calculate the required storage volume of
the BMP.
c. Bioretention/rain gardens may be able to provide flood control for small drainage areas. Use the
formulas included in Part 4 section “Calculating Storage Volumes and Release Rates, Flood Control,
Retention” to calculate the storage volume of the BMP.
d. Minimum surface area (loading ratio): 0.06 times contributing impervious area, with a maximum
impervious area of one acre (43,560 square feet) per bioretention cell.
e. Calculate the minimum infiltration area required to drain the required storage volume in the specified
drawdown time using the design infiltration rate (refer to Part 4 section “Design Infiltration Rates”).
The bottom area of the BMP shall be used as the infiltration area.
where:
A = minimum infiltration area (square feet)
Vs = storage volume (cubic feet)
i = design infiltration rate (inches per hour)
td = maximum allowable drawdown time (hours)
12 = factor to convert inches to feet
80
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
f. Total drawdown time shall be no more than 72 hours. Depth of surface ponding shall be no more than
12 inches and drain within 12 hours. Surface ponding depth may be increased up to 24 inches for
bioretention areas and drain within 24 hours.
g. Calculate the storage volume of the BMP:
Average Bed Area (square feet) = [Area at Design High Water Depth (square feet) + Bottom Area
(square feet)] / 2
Surface Storage Volume (cubic feet) = Average Bed Area (square feet) x Design High Water Depth
(feet)
Subsurface Storage Volume (cubic feet) = Length (feet) x Width (feet) x Depth (feet) x Void Ratio of
Material
Note: Count subsurface storage volume only if permeability of media is greater than permeability
of subsoil.
Total Storage Volume (cubic feet) = Surface Storage Volume (cubic feet) + Subsurface Storage
Volume (cubic feet)
3. Design Requirements
a. Siting
(1) Soil borings are required (refer to Part 4 section “Soils Investigation”).
(a.) A minimum of 3 feet is required between the bottom of bioretention/rain gardens capable of
infiltration and the highest known groundwater elevation.
(b.) A minimum of 2 feet is required between the bottom of lined or underdrained
bioretention/rain gardens and the highest known groundwater elevation.
(c.) An underdrain shall be provided for design infiltration rates of the underlying native soil less
than 0.50 inches per hour, or if bioretention/rain garden will be lined.
(d.) Void ratio for the amended soil material shall be based on the USDA soil textural class and
effective water capacity in Table 6. A maximum design value of 0.30 shall be used for the void
ratio of the amended soil material. A maximum design value of 0.40 shall be used for the void
ratio of stone.
(2) Setbacks shall be as follows:
(a.) Adjacent property line: 10 feet
(b.) Building foundation: 10 feet
(c.) Private well: 50 feet
(d.) Public well: 200 feet from Type I or Type IIa wells, 75 feet from Type IIb or Type III wells (Safe
Drinking Water Act, Act 399, PA 1976)
(e.) Septic system drain field: 50 feet
b. Configuration
(1) General
(a.) The bottom shall be flat to encourage uniform ponding and infiltration.
(b.) Minimum bottom width shall be 3 feet.
(c.) Bioretention/rain gardens located in areas with steep slopes shall be terraced to minimize
earth disturbance and maximize infiltration area.
(d.) Care must be taken during the excavation and finishing process to make sure that soil
compaction does not occur.
81
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
(e.) Bioretention/rain gardens located in areas of existing soil contamination shall be lined to
prevent infiltration.
(f.) Underdrains shall have a 4-inch minimum pipe diameter.
(g.) All underground pipes shall have clean-outs accessible from the surface.
(h.) Pipes shall be sloped to prevent siltation.
(i.) Side slopes shall not be steeper than 3:1 (H:V), unless landscape retaining walls are used.
(j.) An observation well shall be provided for each bioretention/rain garden without a bottom
underdrain.
(2) Rain gardens
(a.) A landscape plan shall be provided.
c. Inlet Design
(1) Inlet pipes shall require energy dissipation. Riprap protection or equivalent erosion control
measures shall be used where the velocity exceeds 4 feet per second up to a maximum allowable
design velocity of 8 feet per second.
(2) Pretreatment is required for each inlet and for o v e r l a n d f l o w e n t e r i n g t h e
bioretention/rain garden.
d. Emergency Overflow
(1) All bioretention/rain gardens must have a provision for overflow at the high-water level.
e. Materials
(1) Amended soil material shall consist of 18 to 48 inches of the following materials, evenly mixed:
Compost: minimum 20%; Sand: 20-80%; Topsoil: maximum 30% (with less than 10% clay content).
(a.) Alternative mix designs with ratios outside of the limits provided will be considered with
justification.
(b.) The soil mix shall have a pH between 5.5 and 7.5.
(2) Topsoil shall be sandy loam, loamy sand, or loam per USDA Soil Textural Triangle with 20% to 50%
fines by volume (silt and clay with <10% clay), and 2% to 8% organic matter by dry weight.
(3) Stone shall consist of clean, uniformly graded coarse aggregate.
(4) A woven geotextile fabric shall be placed between the amended soil and the stone when a stone
layer is used.
(5) When used, impermeable liner shall have a maximum permeability of 1 x 10-7 centimeters per
second certified by the manufacturer.
(6) Plant selection shall consider exposure and tolerance to salt, sediment and pollutants, and the
design depth of surface storage. Native species are encouraged.
(a.) Bioretention: Plugs and seed.
(b.) Rain gardens: Container stock.
(7) Mulch shall be applied after planting.
(a.) Bioretention: Shredded hardwood mulch, straw mulch or mulch blanket shall be uniformly
applied and tacked.
(b.) Rain gardens: Shredded hardwood mulch shall be uniformly applied to a depth of 2 to
3 inches.
f. Access
(1) Inspection and maintenance access to the bioretention/rain garden shall be provided.
82
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
4. Design Schematics
83
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
J. Constructed Filter
1. Summary
Description: Provides stormwater treatment and storage with a surface
outlet (underdrain).
Application: Areas with high heavy metal pollutant loads. May be used on
small sites to provide extended detention.
Types: Sand; Gravel; Sand/compost mix; Other media.
Dry; Static water level within filter media.
Pretreatment Required: Yes.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: None.
Rate Reduction: Adjust time-of-concentration by dividing storage volume by
10-year peak flow rate.
Water Quality: Count volume routed through filter.
2. Sizing Calculations
a. Use the methods outlined in Part 4 section “Calculating Storage Volumes and Release Rates” to
calculate the required volumes for channel protection, water quality and/or pretreatment. Use the
methods under “Retention” to calculate the required storage volume of the BMP.
b. Calculate filter surface area required to drain the design volume in the specified drawdown time using
hydraulic conductivity of filter media:
where:
A = minimum surface area of filter (square feet)
V = design runoff volume (cubic feet)
df = depth of filter media (1.5-foot minimum to 3-foot maximum)
K = hydraulic conductivity (feet per day)
td = maximum allowable drawdown time (days)
hf = average head; typically ½ of the maximum head on filter media (feet)
c. Total drawdown time shall be no more than 72 hours. Maximum depth of surface ponding above the
filter bed shall be 24 inches and drain within 24 hours.
d. Check whether soil conductivity or hydraulics of underdrain governs.
3. Design Requirements
a. Siting
(1) Soil borings are required (refer to Part 4 section “Soils Investigation”).
(a.) A minimum of 2 foot is required between the bottom of the constructed filter and the highest
known groundwater elevation.
(b.) Design values for hydraulic conductivity of the filter media shall be as specified in Table 14.
Values for other types of filter media will be reviewed for use on an individual basis.
84
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
Table 14 –Hydraulic Conductivities for Filter Media
Hydraulic Conductivity, K
Filter Media (feet per day)
Gravel 141
Compost (loose) 8.72
Coarse Sand 3.52
Peat 22
Topsoil (< 10% clay) 1.33
1
Adapted from William E. Sanford, et. al. (1995). Hydraulic Conductivity of Gravel and
Sand as Substrates in Rock-reed Filters, Table 3 (using lowest initial conductivity for
sand and gravel (0.25 cm/s) and correction factors from Source 2 (p. 5-18) to obtain a
design value).
2
Center for Watershed Protection (1996). Design of Stormwater Filtering Systems.
3
D. Carpenter and L. Hallam (2007). An Investigation of Rain Garden Planting
Mixtures and the Implications for Design.
A composite value of hydraulic conductivity for mixture combinations shall be
calculated as: K = (%xK1 + %xK2 +%xK3)/100
𝐾𝐾(ℎ𝑓𝑓+d𝑓𝑓)
Effective infiltration rate, i (in/hr) = for filter; i = K/2 for top dressing in
2d𝑓𝑓
b. Configuration
(1) Filter media shall have a minimum depth of 18-inches and a maximum depth of 36 inches.
(2) Stone bedding shall consist of at least 2 inches under the pipe and 4 inches above the pipe. An
aggregate window extending to the filter surface may also be provided as a factor-of-safety.
(3) A 4-inch minimum diameter underdrain shall be provided in the gravel layer with lateral spacing
at 10 feet, and in any case no more than 25 feet.
(4) All underground pipes shall have clean-outs accessible from the surface.
(5) Pipes shall be sloped to prevent siltation.
(6) Constructed filters located in areas of existing soil contamination shall be lined to
prevent infiltration.
c. Inlet Design
(1) A level spreader, distribution pipes or other flow dispersion measure shall be used for energy
dissipation and to uniformly distribute the flow.
(2) Pretreatment is required for each inlet and for overland flow entering the constructed filter.
d. Emergency Overflow
(1) All constructed filters must be designed so that larger storms may safely overflow or bypass the
filter. Flow splitters, multi-stage chambers or other devices may be used.
85
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
(2) Sufficient space must be provided between the top of the filtering bed and the overflow to allow
the maximum design head to be stored for filtration.
e. Materials
(1) Stone bedding shall consist of clean, uniformly graded coarse aggregate (MDOT coarse or
open-graded aggregate).
(2) A woven geotextile fabric, or an additional 2 inches of gravel choker course shall be placed
between the filter media layer(s) and the stone layer.
(3) When used, impermeable liner shall have a maximum permeability of 1 x 10-7 centimeters per
second certified by the manufacturer.
f. Access
(1) Inspection and maintenance access to the constructed filter shall be provided.
(2) For underground vault heights greater than 4 feet, ladder access shall be provided.
86
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
4. Design Schematics
87
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
K. Planter Box
1. Summary
Description: A type of rain garden.
Application: Small sites or highly urban areas. Underdrained BMP may be
used on small sites to provide extended detention.
Types: Infiltration; Underdrain at top of storage layer; Underdrain at
bottom of storage layer; Lined.
Pretreatment Required: No.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: Infiltration: Count volume stored and infiltrated.
Underdrained: Count volume stored and infiltrated between
bottom of BMP and invert of underdrain.
Rate Reduction: Adjust time-of-concentration by dividing storage volume by
10-year peak flow rate.
Water Quality: Count volume stored and infiltrated or routed through filter.
2. Sizing Calculations
a. For underdrained BMP, follow criteria for “Constructed Filter.”
b. Planter boxes may be sized for channel protection or water quality treatment. Use the methods
outlined in Part 4 section “Calculating Storage Volumes and Release Rates” to calculate the
required volumes. Use the methods under “Retention” to calculate the required storage volume of
the BMP.
c. Minimum surface area (loading ratio): 0.06 times contributing impervious area, with a maximum
impervious area of 15,000 square feet per planter box.
d. Calculate the minimum infiltration area required to drain the required storage volume in the specified
drawdown time using the design infiltration rate (refer to Part 4 section “Design Infiltration Rates”).
where:
A = minimum infiltration area (square feet)
Vs = storage volume (cubic feet)
i = design infiltration rate (inches per hour)
td = maximum allowable drawdown time (hours)
12 factor to convert inches to feet
e. Total drawdown time shall be no more than 12 hours. Depth of surface ponding shall be no more than
12 inches and drain within 4 hours.
f. The bottom area of the BMP shall be used as the infiltration area.
g. Calculate the storage volume of the BMP:
Surface Storage Volume (cubic feet) = Bed Area (square feet) x Design High Water Depth (feet)
Subsurface Storage Volume (cubic feet) = Length (feet) x Width (feet) x Depth (feet) x Void Ratio of
Material
88
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
Note: Count subsurface storage volume only if permeability of media is greater than permeability
of subsoil.
Total Storage Volume (cubic feet) = Surface Storage Volume (cubic feet) + Subsurface Storage
Volume (cubic feet)
3. Design Requirements
a. Siting
(1) Soil borings are required (refer to Part 4 section “Soils Investigation”).
(a.) A minimum of 3 feet is required between the bottom of the planter box and the highest
known groundwater elevation.
(b.) A minimum of 2 foot is required between the bottom of a lined or underdrained planter box
and the highest known groundwater elevation.
(c.) An underdrain shall be provided for design infiltration rates less than 0.50 inches per hour, or
if planter box will be lined.
(d.) Void ratio for the amended soil material shall be based on the USDA soil textural class and
effective water capacity in Table 6. A maximum design value of 0.30 shall be used for the void
ratio of the amended soil material. A maximum design value of 0.40 shall be used for the void
ratio of stone.
b. Configuration
(1) A combination of surface and subsurface storage may be used to provide the required storage
volume.
(2) Minimum width of planter boxes shall be 30 inches, or 18 inches if flow-through.
(3) Care must be taken during the excavation and finishing process to make sure that soil compaction
does not occur.
(4) Planter boxes located in areas of existing soil contamination shall be lined to prevent infiltration.
(5) Underdrains shall have a 4-inch minimum pipe diameter.
(6) All underground pipes shall have clean-outs accessible from the surface.
(7) Pipes shall be sloped to prevent siltation.
(8) A planting plan shall be provided.
c. Inlet Design
(1) Inlet pipes shall require energy dissipation. Riprap protection or equivalent erosion control
measures shall be used where the velocity exceeds 4 feet per second, up to a maximum allowable
design velocity of 8 feet per second.
d. Emergency Overflow
(1) All planter boxes must have a provision for overflow at the high-water level.
e. Materials
(1) Suggested structural elements of planter boxes are stone, concrete, brick, or pressure-treated
wood.
(2) Amended soil material shall consist of 12 to 36 inches of the following materials, evenly mixed:
Compost: minimum 20%; Sand: 20-80% ; Topsoil: maximum 30% (with less than 10% clay content).
(a.) Alternative mix designs with ratios outside of the limits provided will be considered with
89
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
justification.
(b.) The soil mix shall have a pH between 5.5 and 6.5.
(3) Topsoil shall be sandy loam, loamy sand, or loam per USDA Soil Textural Triangle with 20% to 50%
fines by volume (silt and clay with <10% clay), and 2% to 8% organic matter by dry weight.
(4) Stone bedding shall consist of clean, uniformly graded coarse aggregate.
(5) A woven geotextile fabric shall be placed between the amended soil and the stone.
(6) Impermeable liner shall have a maximum permeability of 1 x 10-7 centimeters per second
certified by the manufacturer.
(7) Plant selection shall consider exposure and tolerance to salt, sediment and pollutants, and the
design depth of surface storage. Native species are encouraged.
(8) Plants shall be container stock.
f. Access. Inspection and maintenance access to the planter box shall be provided.
90
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
4. Design Schematics
91
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
L. Pervious Pavement
1. Summary
Description: Provides stormwater treatment and storage with or without
a surface outlet.
Application: Parking lots, alleys and roads and drives with low-volume
vehicular traffic and minimal turning motions.
Types: Infiltration; Underdrain at top of storage layer; Underdrain at
bottom of storage layer; Lined.
Pretreatment Required: No.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: Infiltration: Count volume stored and infiltrated (limited by
design rainfall on pavement and roof).
Underdrained: Count volume stored, and volume infiltrated
between bottom of BMP and invert of underdrain (limited by
design rainfall on pavement and roof).
Rate Reduction: Infiltration: 100%.
Underdrained: Calculated allowable release rate.
Water Quality: Count volume stored and infiltrated, or volume filtered.
2. Sizing Calculations
a. For underdrained BMP, follow criteria for “Constructed Filter.”
b. Use the methods outlined in Part 4 section “Calculating Storage Volumes and Release Rates” to
calculate the required volumes for water quality and channel protection.
c. Use the formulas included in Part 4 section “Calculating Storage Volumes and Release Rates, Flood
Control, Retention” to calculate the storage volume of the BMP for flood control.
d. The bottom area of the BMP shall be used as the infiltration area.
e. Maximum allowable drawdown time shall be 72 hours.
f. Calculate the subsurface storage volume of the BMP:
Subsurface Storage Volume (cubic feet) = Length (feet) x Width (feet) x Depth (feet) x Void Ratio of
Material
3. Design Requirements
a. Siting
(1) Soil borings are required (refer to Part 4 section “Soils Investigation”).
(a.) A minimum of 3 feet is required between the bottom of pervious pavement capable of
infiltration and the highest known groundwater elevation.
(b.) A minimum of 2 foot is required between the bottom of lined or underdrained pervious
pavement and the highest known groundwater elevation.
(c.) An underdrain shall be provided for design infiltration rates less than 0.50 inches per hour, or
if stone bed will be lined.
(d.) A maximum design value of 0.40 shall be used for the void ratio of stone.
92
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
(2) Runoff from offsite areas shall not be directed onto pervious pavement surface.
b. Configuration
(1) The stone bed shall be flat to encourage uniform ponding and infiltration.
(2) For pervious pavements located in areas with steep slopes, stone beds shall be terraced to
maximize infiltration area.
(3) Pervious pavements located in areas of existing s o i l contamination shall be lined
to prevent infiltration.
(4) Underdrains shall have a 4-inch minimum pipe diameter with lateral spacing at 10 feet, and in any
case no more than 25 feet.
(5) All underground pipes shall have clean-outs accessible from the surface.
(6) Pipes shall be sloped to prevent siltation.
c. Inlet Design
(1) Pervious pavements shall have a backup method for water to enter the storage bed. Backup
drainage may consist of an unpaved 1- to 2-foot-wide stone edge or inlets with sediment traps.
d. Emergency Overflow
(1) Stone beds must have a provision for overflow below the level of the pavement surface when an
underdrain is not already provided.
e. Materials
(1) Stone bed shall consist of 8 to 36 inches of clean, uniformly graded coarse aggregate.
(2) A woven geotextile fabric or 2-inch gravel choker course shall be placed between the pervious
pavement and stone bed.
(3) A nonwoven geotextile fabric or liner shall be placed between the stone bed and the subsoil for
underdrained pavements.
(4) Impermeable liner shall have a maximum permeability of 1 x 10-7 centimeters per second
certified by the manufacturer.
93
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
4. Design Schematics
94
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
M. Capture Reuse
1. Summary
Description: Stormwater capture, storage, and removal from storm
flow by reuse for irrigation or as greywater.
Application: Most practical for roof runoff. Other collection areas may
require pumping for reuse.
Types: Rain barrels; Cisterns (both above ground and underground);
Tanks; Ponds.
Pretreatment Required: Yes. This BMP can provide spill containment.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: Count storage volume provided.
Rate Reduction: Adjust time-of-concentration by dividing storage volume by
10-year peak inflow rate.
Water Quality: Count volume stored.
2. Sizing Calculations
a. Determine water use (gallons per day) and add up for each month of the year.
b. Obtain average monthly precipitation (inches) and evapotranspiration (ET) in inches.
www.enviroweather.msu.edu
c. Multiply average monthly precipitation by contributing area and area-weighted Small Storm
Hydrology Method runoff coefficient (assuming 90% of the storms produce one inch of rain or less)
to obtain volume of recharge. A modified equation for the Small Storm Hydrology Method is
given below:
where:
V = recharge volume (cubic feet)
P = rainfall (inches)
Rv = area-weighted volumetric runoff coefficient (individual runoff
coefficients are given in Table 10)
A = contributing area (acres)
3630 = factor to convert acre-inches to cubic feet
d. Multiply recharge volume by 7.48 gallons per cubic foot to convert to gallons.
e. Calculate ET for open water surfaces. Multiply average monthly ET (inches) by surface area of pond
(square feet) and divide by 12 to calculate the volume of water evaporated in cubic feet. Multiply by
7.48 gallons per cubic foot to convert to gallons.
f. Select trial size container or pond volume.
g. Calculate the water balance. A tabular method may be used similar to that illustrated below.
h. Adjust size of container or pond to balance reuse efficiency and cost.
95
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
Volume of Water in Storage at End of Month =
Storage Volume at Start of Month + Recharge from Monthly Precipitation – ET – Monthly Water
U Month Vstart +Recharge -Et -Use =Vend* Lost
1
2 =Vend1
Total -- --
*Limited by total volume of the selected container or pond. If value is greater than container volume,
surplus is lost to overflow. If value is negative, it means that amount must be supplemented.
3. Design Requirements
a. Siting
(1) Storage units shall be positioned to receive rooftop runoff.
(2) Protect storage units from direct sunlight to minimize algae growth.
(3) Discharge points and storage units shall be clearly marked “Caution: Untreated Rainwater. Do Not
Drink.”
b. Configuration
(1) If storage units are used to supplement greywater needs, a parallel conveyance system must be
installed to separate greywater from other potable water piping systems.
(2) Storage units shall be watertight with a smooth interior surface.
(3) Covers and lids shall have a tight fit to keep out surface water, insects, animals, dust, and light.
(4) Observation risers shall be provided for buried storage units.
(5) Pumps and pressure tanks may be used to add pressure (most irrigation systems require at least
15 pounds per square inch).
c. Inlet Design
(1) Screens shall be used to filter debris from runoff flowing into the storage unit.
d. Emergency Overflow
(1) A positive outlet for overflow shall be provided a few inches from the top of the storage unit and
sized to safely discharge the peak flow from the 10-year design storm when the storage unit is
full.
(2) Above-ground storage units shall have a release mechanism to drain and empty the unit between
storm events.
96
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
N. Vegetated Roof
1. Summary
Description: Provides stormwater treatment and storage with a surface overflow.
Application: Most practical for flat rooftops.
Types: Intensive (> 4 inches, wide variety of plants, public use); Extensive (≤
4 inches, plants are herbs, mosses, succulents, and grasses).
Pretreatment Required: No. This BMP can provide pretreatment.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: Count subsurface storage volume below the overflow (limited by
design rainfall on roof).
Rate Reduction: Adjust time-of-concentration by dividing storage volume by 10-year
peak inflow rate.
Water Quality: Count subsurface storage volume.
2. Sizing Calculations
a. For water quality, the minimum subsurface storage volume shall be equal to the volume from 1-inch
of rain falling on the roof area.
b. For channel protection, the subsurface storage volume below the overflow may be counted as
retention.
c. Calculate the subsurface storage volume of the BMP:
Subsurface Storage Volume (cubic feet) =
Length (feet) x Width (feet) x Depth (feet) x Void Ratio of Material.
3. Design Requirements
a. Configuration: Follow manufacturer’s and structural engineer’s guidelines.
b. Emergency Overflow: A positive outlet for overflow shall be provided.
4. Design Schematics
97
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
O. Water Quality Device
1. Summary
Description: Stormwater treatment unit.
Application: Practical for small sites and drainage areas.
Types: Oil and grit separator; Hydrodynamic separator.
Pretreatment Required: No. This BMP can provide pretreatment and spill containment
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: None.
Rate Reduction: None.
Water Quality: Count volume routed through BMP.
2. Sizing Calculations
a. Select water quality device unit/model based on manufacturer’s recommendations.
b. When the device is used to provide spill containment, the minimum spill containment volume shall
be provided between the normal water level and the entrance of the outlet pipe to capture a slug
pollutant load from an accidental spill of toxic materials.
3. Design Requirements
a. Configuration
(1) The geometry of the water quality device shall promote the trapping of floatables and sediments.
(2) The water quality device shall be designed to prevent surcharging in pipes upstream of the device.
b. Emergency Overflow
(1) A bypass overflow shall be designed to convey the 10-year peak discharge at a minimum without
release of trapped sediments and pollutants.
(2) The outlet from the overflow shall not be submerged under normal conditions.
98
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
P. Bioswale and Water Quality Swale
1. Summary
Description: Bioswale: Vegetated swale designed to capture and treat
stormwater within a dry storage layer beneath the base of the
channel.
Water Quality Swale: Lined swale designed to provide spill
containment.
Application: Bioswale: Linear projects or areas.
Water Quality Swale: Small sites in lieu of a spill containment
cell when a permanent pool is not desirable.
Types: Dry swale; Swale with check dams.
Pretreatment Required: No. This BMP can provide pretreatment and spill containment.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: Bioswale: Count volume stored and infiltrated.
Rate Reduction: Adjust time-of-concentration by dividing storage volume by
10-year peak flow rate.
Water Quality: Bioswale: volume stored and infiltrated or routed
through filter.
Water Quality Swale: Count volume routed through filter.
2. Sizing Calculations
a. Size for pretreatment (refer to Part 4 section “Calculating Storage Volumes and Release Rates,
Pretreatment”).
b. The pretreatment volume is the volume of the voids within the filter media including any temporary
surface storage volume to the elevation of the overflow and including any permanent pool within the
outlet structure.
c. The spill containment volume is the storage volume between the normal water level in the filter and
the entrance of the outlet pipe. The minimum spill containment volume shall be provided to capture
a slug pollutant load from an accidental spill of toxic materials.
d. Depth of surface ponding shall be no more than 2 feet and drain within 24 hours. The bottom area of
the BMP shall be used as the infiltration area. For bioswales, use Equation 4.28 to calculate drain time.
For water quality swales, use Equation 4.29 and Table 14 from “Constructed Filter” to calculate drain
time.
e. The swale shall be designed to pass the 10-year peak discharge with a minimum of 6-inches of
freeboard to the top of bank.
f. Volume Behind Check Dam (if used with bioswale)
(1) Calculate the wedge-shaped storage volume behind each check dam:
Storage Volume (cubic feet) = 0.5 x Length of Swale Impoundment Area per Check Dam (feet) x Depth
of Check Dam (feet) x [Top Width of Check Dam (feet) + Bottom Width of Check Dam (feet)] / 2
99
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
3. Design Requirements
a. Siting
(1) All inlets shall enter the water quality swale unless the inlet collects stormwater exclusively from
non-hotspot areas (i.e., office parking, courtyard, roof).
b. Configuration
(1) The bottom of the water quality swale shall be flat to encourage uniform ponding and filtration.
Bioswales shall have a maximum longitudinal slope of 1%.
(2) The swale shall have a minimum bottom width of 2 feet and a maximum bottom width of 10 feet.
(3) Side slopes shall be 3:1 (H:V) or flatter.
(4) Sand filter shall have a minimum depth of 18 inches and a maximum depth of 36 inches.
(5) Stone bedding shall consist of at least 2 inches under the pipe and 4 inches above the pipe. An
aggregate window extending to the filter surface may also be provided as a factor-of-safety.
(6) Underdrains shall have a 4-inch minimum pipe diameter.
(7) All underground pipes shall have clean-outs accessible from the surface.
(8) Pipes shall be sloped to prevent siltation.
c. Check Dam Design
(1) Check dams may be used along bioswales to encourage ponding and infiltration.
(2) Check dams shall be earthen or other impervious design. Rock check dams are not suitable for
infiltration.
(3) Maximum ponding depth behind check dams shall be 24 inches.
(4) Minimum top width of earthen check dam shall be 2 feet.
(5) Check dams shall be keyed into the bottom and sides of the swale a minimum of 1-foot on all
sides. The height of the key must exceed the 10-year water surface elevation by a minimum of
6 inches on both sides.
(6) The center of the check dam crest must be below the sides of the check dam by a minimum of
12 inches.
(7) The crest of a downstream check dam shall be no lower than the downstream toe of the upstream
check dam.
(9) Erosion control measures (i.e., riprap, turf reinforcement mat) shall be used to protect the integrity
of the check dam and downstream toe.
d. Inlet Design
(1) Inlet pipes shall require energy dissipation. Riprap protection or equivalent erosion control
measures shall be used where the velocity exceeds 4 feet per second up to a maximum allowable
design velocity of 8 feet per second.
e. Outlet Design
(1) The containment structure in a water quality swaleshall be constructed within a manhole and be
designed to draw water from the central portion of the water column within the manhole to trap
floatables and contain sediments in a minimum 3-foot sump.
100
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
f. Emergency Overflow
(1) A positive outlet for overflow shall be provided.
(2) A catch basin and outlet pipe may be used to convey the 10-year peak discharge. In water quality
swales this must be a separate structure, or chamber within the containment manhole to prevent
the captured low-density fluids from becoming entrained in the water when surface inflow enters
the structure.
g. Materials
(1) Top Dressing
(a.) Native or imported permeable soil (sand and gravel); or where turf establishment is desired
(b.) 3-inches of compost tilled into the top 6-inches of native permeable soil (equivalent to a 9-
inch homogenous mixture of 70% sand; 30% compost); or
(c.) 4-inches of topsoil tilled into the top 6-inches of native permeable soil (equivalent to a 10-
inch homogenous mixture with maximum 20% silts, 4% clay, and 80% to 92% sand).
(d.) The soil mix shall have a pH between 5.5 and 7.5.
(e.) Topsoil shall be sandy loam, loamy sand, or loam per USDA Soil Textural Triangle with 20% to
50% fines by volume (silt and clay with <10% clay), and 2% to 8% organic matter by dry weight.
(2) Stone bedding shall consist of clean, uniformly graded coarse aggregate.
(3) A woven geotextile fabric or 2-inch gravel choker course shall be placed between the sand and
the stone bedding.
(4) The water quality swale shall be lined with impermeable materials extending up to the design
high water elevation. A minimum 18-inch-thick clay layer, or an impermeable liner protected with
a minimum 12-inches of soil cover are acceptable alternatives. Maximum allowable permeability
shall be 1 x 10-7 centimeters per second as determined by the geotechnical consultant for clay
placement, or manufacturer’s certificate for liner products.
101
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
4. Design Schematics
102
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
103
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
Q. Vegetated Swale
1. Summary
Description: Stormwater conveyance designed to slow and filter
stormwater.
Application: Small drainage areas with concentrated flow; side yard
drainage.
Types: Dry swale; Swale with check dams (no infiltration).
Pretreatment Required: No. This BMP provides pretreatment.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: None.
Rate Reduction: Due to longer time-of-concentration for swale.
Water Quality: Count volume routed through BMP.
2. Sizing Calculations
a. Used for Pretreatment
(1) Provide a 20-foot minimum length at a maximum slope of 4% with a 1-foot-high check dam at the
downstream end, and a maximum upstream drainage area of 0.13 acre per 2 feet of bottom
width.
b. Channel
(1) The vegetated swale shall be sized to pass the 10-year peak discharge with a minimum of 6 inches
of freeboard to the top of bank.
(2) Calculate 10-year peak flow rate (refer to Part 4 section “Calculating Runoff”).
(3) Size swale using Manning’s Equation:
where:
Q = discharge (cubic feet per second)
A = wetted area (square feet)
R = hydraulic radius (feet)
S = slope (feet per foot)
n = Manning’s roughness coefficient
104
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
(4) Select the more conservative (higher) value of Manning’s roughness coefficient from Table 12 or
Figure 3 below.
Figure 3 – Manning’s Roughness Coefficients for Vegetated Swales
0.16
0.14
0.12
Manning's n
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Flow Depth (inches)
Source: SEMCOG (2008). Low Impact Development Manual for Michigan, Figure 7.62.
(5) Check that flow velocities are within acceptable limits. The minimum velocity for
open channels shall be 1.5 feet per second. The maximum velocity shall be 4 feet per
second.
3. Design Requirements
a. Siting
(1) Vegetated swales can be used for drainage areas up to 5 acres. Drainage areas
greater than this may require open channels.
(2) Minimum surface area to meet water quality standard by vegetative filtering:
(a.) The maximum bottom width to depth ratio for the water quality discharge shall
be 12:1, or approximately equal to the grass height.
(b.) Minimum length per Figures 4a through 4d.
b. Configuration
(1) Trapezoidal, with a minimum bottom width of 2 feet and a maximum bottom width of 8 feet.
(2) Side slopes shall be 3:1 (H:V) or flatter.
(3) Longitudinal slope shall be a minimum of 1% and a maximum of 6%. Flatter slopes may
be allowed on permeable soils.
c. Check Dam Design
(1) Check dams may be used for energy dissipation along vegetated swales with
longitudinal slopes greater than 3%.
(2) Maximum ponding depth behind check dams shall be 18 inches.
(3) Check dams shall be keyed into the bottom and sides of the swale a minimum of 1-
foot on all sides. The height of the key must exceed the 10-year water surface
elevation by a minimum of 6 inches on both sides.
(4) The center of the check dam crest must be below the sides of the check dam by a
minimum of 12 inches.
(5) The crest of a downstream check dam shall be no lower than the downstream toe of
the upstream check dam.
105
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
d. Materials
(1) Establishment of vegetation shall follow the guidelines outlined in Table 15.
Table 15 – Permanent Stabilization Treatment for Vegetated Swales
Swale Bottom Treatment Swale Grade
Seed and Mulch 0.3% to 0.5%
Standard Mulch Blanket 0.5% to 1.5%
High Velocity Mulch Blanket or Sod 1.5% to 3.0%
Turf Reinforcement Mat or Check Dams 3.0% to 6.0%
Specific Design Required > 6.0%
Source: Michigan Department of Transportation Drainage Manual (2006).
106
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
4. Design Schematics
107
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
R. Vegetated Filter Strip
1. Summary
Description: Overland flow path designed to slow and filter stormwater.
Application: Contributing drainage areas with sheet flow surface runoff.
Types: Turf grass; other dense herbaceous groundcover vegetation.
Pretreatment Required: No. This BMP provides pretreatment.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: None.
Rate Reduction: Adjust time-of-concentration.
Water Quality: Count volume routed through BMP.
2. Sizing Calculations
a. Used for Pretreatment
(1) Provide a 10- f o o t minimum sheet flow length at a maximum slope of 2% with an
impervious approach length no greater than 3.5 times the filter strip length, up to a
maximum approach length of 75 feet.
(2) Provide a 15-foot minimum sheet flow length for slopes between 2% and 6% with an impervious
approach length no greater than 3 times the filter strip length, up to a maximum approach length
of 75 feet.
b. Used for Water Quality
(1) Calculate the minimum required filter strip area by the equation:
where:
Afs = area of filter strip (square feet)
A = contributing drainage area (square feet)
Note: This equates to a loading ratio of 0.17 from the contributing drainage area (both impervious
and pervious surfaces).
(2) Calculate minimum required longitudinal length based on slope and type of vegetation using the
graphs in Figures 4a through 4d.
3. Design Requirements
a. Siting
(1) Maximum upstream drainage area shall generally be 100 feet impervious or 200 feet pervious.
b. Configuration
(1) The upstream edge of the filter strip shall be level and at an elevation at least one inch below
the adjacent pavement.
(2) A level spreader may also be required to evenly distribute flow across filter strip.
108
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
(3) Slopes shall range from a minimum of 1% to a maximum of 8%. Optimal slopes range from 2%
to 6%.
(4) The maximum lateral slope shall be 1%.
(5) Berms and curbs may be installed along the sides of the filter strip parallel to the direction of flow
to prohibit runoff from laterally bypassing the filter strip.
Figure 4a – Filter Strip Length (Sandy soils with HSG A)
Figure 4b1 – Filter Strip Length (Sandy Loam soils with HSG B)
109
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
Figure 4b2 – Filter Strip Length (Loam, Silt-Loam soils with HSG B)
Source: SEMCOG (2008), Low Impact Development Manual for Michigan, Figures 7.52, 7.53 and 7.54 (New Jersey Stormwater
Best Management Practices Manual, 2004)
Figure 4c – Filter Strip Length (Sandy Clay Loam soils with HSG C)
110
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
Figure 4d – Filter Strip Length (Clay Loam, Silty Clay, Clay soils with HSG D)
Source: SEMCOG (2008), Low Impact Development Manual for Michigan, Figures 7.55 and 7.56 (New Jersey Stormwater Best
Management Practices Manual, 2004)
111
PART 5 BMP DESIGN CRITERIA
4. Design Schematics
112
S. Level Spreader
1. Summary
Description: Shallow, level berm placed perpendicular to a flow path.
Application: Used with other BMPs to disperse concentrated stormwater
flows.
Types: Inflow (prior to BMP); Outflow (at outlet of BMP).
Pretreatment Required: No. This BMP provides pretreatment.
Maintenance Plan: Yes.
Calculation Credits:
Volume Reduction: None.
Rate Reduction: None.
Water Quality: None.
2. Sizing Calculations
a. The level spreader shall be sized to pass the 10-year peak flow.
b. Calculate 10-year peak flow rate (refer to Part 4 section “Calculating Runoff”).
3. Design Requirements
a. Siting
(1) Slopes below outflow level spreaders should be no greater than 8% in the direction of flow to
discourage channelization.
b. Configuration
(1) Construct level spreaders in compacted fill or of other non-erodible material.
(2) Minimum length: 10 feet.
(3) A bypass may be required for higher flows.
c. Material
(1) Level spreaders may be constructed of compacted earth, rock, stone, concrete, treated timber or
perforated pipe in stone.
113
APPENDIX 1 – WATERSHED POLICY
• Ruddiman Creek Watershed
Ruddiman Creek Watershed
A. BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
The Ruddiman Creek watershed is located in portions of the Cities of City of Muskegon, Norton Shores,
Roosevelt Park and City of Muskegon Heights. Ruddiman Creek discharges to City of Muskegon Lake and is
located with the City of Muskegon Lake Area of Concern (AOC). Ruddiman Creek is presently not meeting its
designated uses for wildlife, other indigenous aquatic life, and as a warm water fishery due primarily to a
poor macroinvertebrate community. Ruddiman Creek is also not meeting its designated uses for fish
consumption, and total and partial body contact.
In 2010, the Grand Valley State University (GVSU) Annis Water Resources Institute (AWRI) received a FY 2010
Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) grant to conduct studies to support a Ruddiman Creek
Implementation-Ready Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for biota to address the wildlife, other indigenous
aquatic life, and warmwater fishery designated uses.
Conclusions are taken from the final report “Studies to Support an Implementation-Ready TMDL for Ruddiman
Creek” dated February 2013. The technical information included in the report was used to support the
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) in the development of a TMDL for biota.
The poor macroinvertebrate community was attributed primarily to the flashiness of the watershed hydrology
(Nederveld, 2009); therefore, a hydrologic surrogate was used for the biota TMDL. The relationship between
flashiness and Directly Connected Impervious Area (DCIA) was used to develop TMDL targets in terms of
percent reduction in DCIA needed to reduce flashiness and improve biota.
A spreadsheet application referred to as a Scoping Tool was developed to relate P-51 macroinvertebrate
scores with a Richards-Baker Flashiness Index (FI). The Scoping Tool was also used to relate changes in the
amount of DCIA to changes in the FI by subwatershed. A BMP inventory sheet is included to account for
progress made towards meeting the TMDL.
The purpose of the design criteria included in this section is to account for reductions in DCIA to reduce the
flashiness of stormwater runoff associated with urbanization to meet TMDL targets and improve biota in
Ruddiman Creek.
B. CONCLUSIONS
The Ruddiman Creek watershed is highly urbanized; impervious cover from developed land is over 50%, far
exceeding the 10-15% threshold that has been suggested to cause biotic impairment in streams (Wang et al.
2001). As a consequence, the tributaries in the Ruddiman Creek watershed are subject to altered hydrology,
characterized by high flashiness. The unnatural flow regime can physically dislodge benthic organisms;
mobilize sediment, causing habitat impairment; and transport previously buried or sequestered
contaminants, rendering them bioavailable to organisms (cf. Cooper et al. 2009; Johnson et al. 2011).
In terms of sediment, the primary form of sediment transported by storm flows is suspended sediment.
Monitoring indicated that all branches of Ruddiman Creek meet the “Good to Moderate” threshold (≤ 80
mg/L) for annual mean suspended sediment concentrations (SSC) suggested by Alabaster and Lloyd (1982) for
protection of fish communities. However, short term increases in SSC during storm events are much higher
and may cause impacts to aquatic communities. Improvements in watershed hydrology resulting from BMPs
are projected to reduce SSC by 25-50%.
C. TMDL
A biota TMDL for Ruddiman Creek has not been accepted by the United States Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), and therefore has not been implemented by the DEQ. However, loading capacities identified in
the study are still recommended to restore the identified designated uses. Loading capacities for each branch
of Ruddiman Creek are summarized in Table 5.3 from the report:
Branch Current Fraction DCIA WLA + LA MOS LC
Percent DCIA Reduced*
Main 21% 0.35 13.5% 1.2 12%
North 7.5% 0.52 3.6% 1.2 2.9%
West 16% 0.68 5.0% 1.2 2.8%
DCIA = Directly Connected Impervious Area
WLA = Waste Load Allocation (point sources)
LA = Load Allocation (nonpoint sources) MOS
= Margin of Safety
LC = Load Capacity (the greatest amount of DCIA the watershed can support without violating the
stream’s aquatic life criteria)
*Modeling a Benchmark Scenario identified the reduction in DCIA needed to achieve reductions in
FI resulting in minimum acceptable P51 macroinvertebrate scores.
D. DESIGN CRITERIA
The following criteria shall apply for all new developments and redevelopments subject to review under these
standards and located within the Ruddiman Creek watershed:
1. Standard design criteria for water quality and channel protection with an emphasis on reducing DCIA. An
increase in DCIA is not allowed. The design engineer must treat any additional DCIA so it is effectively
“reduced.”
2. DCIA is considered effectively “reduced” when:
a. Impervious surfaces are physically removed and replaced with pervious surfaces.
b. Impervious surfaces are disconnected from the storm sewer system by routing runoff to pervious area
meeting minimum size, length, and slope requirements (e.g., a rain barrel with an overflow directed
to yard, away from the storm sewer).
c. Impervious surfaces are disconnected from the storm sewer system by routing runoff to an infiltration
BMP sized for the channel protection volume.
d. An underdrained LID BMP (e.g., rain garden, porous pavement, green roof) is engineered and
implemented for channel protection and volume reduction with a hold time no less than 72 hours.
E. SCOPING TOOL
For redevelopments (and new developments if applicable) impacting existing DCIA, the design engineer shall
complete the BMP Inventory Sheet in the Scoping Tool spreadsheet application and submit this
documentation with the design calculation package.
117
APPENDIX 2 –ABBREVIATIONS, ACRONYMS, & DEFINITIONS
List of Abbreviations
Acronyms
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
BMP Best Management Practice
CN Curve Number
DEQ Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes
and Energy (EGLE) as of April 7, 2019)
DNR Michigan Department of Natural Resources
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
GASB Governmental Accounting Standards Board
GIS Geographic Information System
GPS Geographic Positioning System
GVMC Grand Valley Metropolitan Council
HSG Hydrologic Soil Group
LGROW Lower Grand River Organization of Watersheds
LID Low Impact Development
MCL Michigan Compiled Laws
MDOT Michigan Department of Transportation
MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NAVD 88 North American Vertical Datum of 1988
NJDEP New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
RRD Remediation and Redevelopment Division
PA Public Acts of Michigan
PDF Portable Document Format
SEMCOG Southeast Michigan Council of Governments
TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load
TR-55 Technical Release 55
TSS Total Suspended Solids
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
USGS United States Geological Survey
WMSRDC West Michigan Shoreline Regional Development Commission
118
List of Units
ft ( ′ ) feet
in ( ″ ) inches
ac acre
cfs cubic feet per second
cft cubic feet
hr hour
H:V horizontal to vertical
in/hr inches per hour
mg/L milligrams per liter
min minute
119
120
Agenda Item Review Form
Muskegon City Commission
Commission Meeting Date: October 25, 2022 Title: Rezoning 398 Catawba
Ave – 2nd Reading
Submitted By: Mike Franzak Department: Planning
Brief Summary: Request to rezone the property at 398 Catawba Ave from R-3, Single Family High
Density Residential to B-4, General Business, by Gordon Painting and Pressure Washing, LLC.
Detailed Summary & Background: The Planning Commission recommended approval of the
rezoning by a 7-0 vote.
Goal/Focus Area/Action Item Addressed:
Goal 2: Economic development, micro-commercial areas in neighborhoods.
Amount Requested: Amount Budgeted:
Fund(s) or Account(s): Fund(s) or Account(s):
Recommended Motion: I move to rezone the property at 398 Catawba Ave from R-3, Single Family
High Density Residential to B-4, General Business.
Approvals: Guest(s) Invited / Presenting
Immediate Division Head Information Technology
Yes
Other Division Heads Communication
No
Legal Review
For City Clerk Use Only:
Commission Action:
Planning Commission Excerpt:
Hearing; Case 2022-26: Request to rezone the property at 398 Catawba Ave from R-3, Single Family
High Density Residential to B-4, General Business, by Gordon Painting and Pressure Washing, LLC.
SUMMARY
1. The property is zoned R-3, High Density Single Family Residential.
2. The commercial building on site is considered grandfathered and has been used by Gordon
Painting for many years.
3. The applicant would like to put an addition on to the building in order to start a power washing
business alongside the painting business. However, non-conforming uses are only allowed to
expand their buildings up to twenty-five percent.
4. The property is adjacent to a commercial/industrial corridor.
5. Staff had initially discussed rezoning the property to Light Industrial since it is adjacent to light
industrial properties. However, these uses can be located in a General Business zone and will offer
protection to the residential neighborhood that more intensive uses will not be able to be located
there.
6. Notice was sent to all properties within 300 feet. At the time of this writing, staff had not received
any comments from the public.
398 Catawba Ave
Zoning Map
Aerial Map
CITY OF MUSKEGON
MUSKEGON COUNTY, MICHIGAN
ORDINANCE NO.
An ordinance to amend the zoning map of the City to provide for a zone change for 398 Catawba Ave from R-3 to B-4
THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MUSKEGON HEREBY ORDAINS:
The zoning map of the City of Muskegon is hereby amended to change the zoning for 398 Catawba Ave St from R-3 to B-
4.
CITY OF MUSKEGON REVISED PLAT OF 1903 ENTIRE LOTS 7 & 10 PART LOTS 8 & 9 BLK 263 DESC AS COM
@ NELY COR OF SD BLK BEING NELY COR LOT 9 SD BLK TH S 56D 39M 12S W ALG N LN SD LOT 9 40 FT TO
POB TH S 33D 26M 50S E PAR WITH ELY LN SD LOT 9 132 FT TH S 19D 29M 54S E 69.80 FT TH N 89D 53M
26S E 20 FT TO SLY LN LOT 8 ALSO BEING WLY LN WOOD ST TH S 00D 06M 39S E 63.68 FT TH S 56D 39M
12S W ALG SLY LN LOT 7 57.33 FT TO SWLY COR LOT 7 TH N 33D 26M 50S W ALG WLY LN LOTS 7 & 10 264
FT TO NWLY COR LOT 10 TH N 56D 39M 12S E ALG NLY LN LOTS 10 & 9 92.44 FT TO POB SD PARCEL
CONTAINS 0.52 AC M/L SUBJECT TO ANY & ALL ESMT OR RES OF REC OR APPARENT (DESC CHANGE
10/19/99)
This ordinance adopted:
Ayes:
Nayes:
Adoption Date:
Effective Date:
First Reading:
Second Reading:
CITY OF MUSKEGON
By: __________________________
Ann Meisch, MMC
City Clerk
CERTIFICATE (Rezoning 398 Catawba Ave from R-3 to B-4)
The undersigned, being the duly qualified clerk of the City of Muskegon, 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 11th day of October 2022, 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 the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act, Public Acts of Michigan No. 33 of 2006, and that minutes were kept
and will be or have been made available as required thereby.
DATED: ___________________, 2022 ________________________________
Ann Meisch, MMC
Clerk, City of Muskegon
Publish Notice of Adoption to be published once within ten (10) days of final adoption.
CITY OF MUSKEGON
NOTICE OF ADOPTION
Please take notice that on October 11, 2022, the City Commission of the City of Muskegon adopted an
ordinance amending the zoning map to provide for the change of zoning for 398 Catawba Ave from R-3 to B-4:
CITY OF MUSKEGON REVISED PLAT OF 1903 ENTIRE LOTS 7 & 10 PART LOTS 8 & 9 BLK 263 DESC
AS COM @ NELY COR OF SD BLK BEING NELY COR LOT 9 SD BLK TH S 56D 39M 12S W ALG N LN
SD LOT 9 40 FT TO POB TH S 33D 26M 50S E PAR WITH ELY LN SD LOT 9 132 FT TH S 19D 29M 54S
E 69.80 FT TH N 89D 53M 26S E 20 FT TO SLY LN LOT 8 ALSO BEING WLY LN WOOD ST TH S 00D
06M 39S E 63.68 FT TH S 56D 39M 12S W ALG SLY LN LOT 7 57.33 FT TO SWLY COR LOT 7 TH N 33D
26M 50S W ALG WLY LN LOTS 7 & 10 264 FT TO NWLY COR LOT 10 TH N 56D 39M 12S E ALG NLY LN
LOTS 10 & 9 92.44 FT TO POB SD PARCEL CONTAINS 0.52 AC M/L SUBJECT TO ANY & ALL ESMT
OR RES OF REC OR APPARENT (DESC CHANGE 10/19/99)
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 ____________________, 2022 CITY OF MUSKEGON
By ___________________________
Ann Meisch, MMC
City Clerk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLISH ONCE WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS OF FINAL PASSAGE.
Account No. 101-80400-5354
Agenda Item Review Form
Muskegon City Commission
Commission Meeting Date: October 25, 2022 Title: Ordinance Amendment
– Reduced Housing Unit Size
Minimums – 2nd Reading
Submitted By: Mike Franzak Department: Planning
Brief Summary: Staff-initiated request to amend section 2319 of the zoning ordinance to reduce the
minimum size requirements for single-family houses, rowhomes, duplexes and small multiplexes (up
to 6 units) from 850 sf of floor area to 550 sf (total) and to also change the minimum size requirements
for large multiplexes (6 units and above), mixed-use buildings and accessory dwelling units from 650
sf of floor area to 375 sf (total).
Detailed Summary & Background: A motion to recommend approval of the original request failed
by a 2-3 vote at the August 11 Planning Commission meeting. At the august 23 City Commission
meeting, staff requested to remove the item from the agenda in order to make some changes to
the proposal and bring back to Planning Commission. The proposal was amended and brought
back to the Planning Commission at their September 15 meeting, where they recommended
approval of the new amendments by a 6-1 vote.
The changes to the original amendment include requiring an additional 100 sf for each additional
bedroom; additional language stating that all units located in single-family residential districts must
comply with Section 400 of the zoning ordinance, which will prevent single-family houses from being
split into additional units. It should also be noted that the current minimum housing size is measured by
“floor area,” which is defined by the zoning ordinance as “the area in a dwelling unit included in the
determination of occupancy restrictions. It includes the sum of floor areas of bedrooms, and common
living areas. The floor area of storage areas and closet, basements without a second egress, attached
garages, breezeways, and enclosed and unenclosed porches shall be excluded.” Staff is proposing to
no longer use this method in determining the minimum size, but rather by measuring from the outside
wall of the unit.
Goal/Focus Area/Action Item Addressed:
Goal 2: Economic Development, Housing, and Business/Diverse Housing Types/2.3 Increase
Variety of Housing Types/2.4 Develop Subsidies to Improve Housing Affordability
Amount Requested: Amount Budgeted:
Fund(s) or Account(s): Fund(s) or Account(s):
Recommended Motion: I move to approve the request to amend section 2319 of the zoning
ordinance to reduce the minimum size requirements for single-family houses, rowhomes, duplexes
and small multiplexes (up to 6 units) from 850 sf of floor area to 550 sf (total) and to also change the
minimum size requirements for large multiplexes (6 units and above), mixed-use buildings and
accessory dwelling units from 650 sf of floor area to 375 sf (total).
Approvals: Guest(s) Invited / Presenting
Immediate Division Head Information Technology
Other Division Heads Communication Yes
No
Legal Review
For City Clerk Use Only:
Commission Action:
Planning Commission Excerpt:
Case 2022-22: Staff-initiated request to amend section 2319 of the zoning ordinance to reduce the minimum
size requirements for single-family houses, rowhomes, duplexes and small multiplexes (up to 6 units) from
850 sf of floor area to 550 sf (total) and to also change the minimum size requirements for large multiplexes
(6 units and above), mixed-use buildings and accessory dwelling units from 650 sf of floor area to 375 sf
(total).
SUMMARY
1. This case was presented at the August 11 Planning Commission meeting. The board did not
recommend approval of the amendments at the meeting. At the following City Commission meeting,
staff requested to take the case back to the Planning Commission with some changes and
clarification, to which the City Commission approved.
2. Staff is now proposing to keep the requirement that an additional 100 sf is required for each
additional bedroom.
3. Staff has added that all units located in single-family residential districts must comply with Section
400 of the zoning ordinance, which will prevent single-family houses from being split into additional
units.
4. For one and two family homes, staff has proposed the clause that states that if the house is less than
850 sqft and is to be located on a lot that is large enough to split under the zoning regulations, it must
be placed in such a fashion as to allow enough room to split the lot and create an additional buildable
lot. This clause had previously been proposed for the for the mixed-use building section as well, but
is not needed because these types of requirements are addressed elsewhere in the ordinance,
specifically the form based code and multifamily sections of the code.
5. It should be noted the current minimum housing size is measured by “floor area,” which is defined by
the zoning ordinance as the area in a dwelling unit included in the determination of occupancy
restrictions. It includes the sum of floor areas of bedrooms, and common living areas. The floor area
of storage areas and closet, basements without a second egress, attached garages, breezeways, and
enclosed and unenclosed porches shall be excluded. Staff is proposing to no longer use this method in
determining the minimum size, but rather by measuring from the outside wall of the unit.
Summary of the case from the precious meeting:
6. In an effort to address housing affordability and to provide residents with a wide range of housing
choices, staff is proposing to reduce the minimum housing size requirements listed in the Residential
Design Criteria section of the zoning ordinance.
7. Currently, single-family houses and duplexes are required to have a minimum living area (excluding
all basement area) of 850 sqft for a one bedroom dwelling. For each bedroom thereafter, an additional
100 sqft of living space is required.
8. Living area is defined in the zoning ordinance as the area in a dwelling unit included in the
determination of occupancy restrictions. It includes the sum of floor areas of bedrooms, and common
living areas. The floor area of storage areas and closet, basements without a second egress, attached
garages, breezeways, and enclosed and unenclosed porches shall be excluded.
9. Staff is proposing to reduce the minimum size of single-family houses, rowhomes, duplexes and small
multiplexes (up to 6 units) to 550 sqft total (excluding all basement area) per unit, measured by the
outside dimensions of the building, not by using the “living area” definition in the zoning ordinance.
There would also be a stipulation that structures under the current minimum size of 850 sqft, which are
to be placed on large lots, must be placed on the property in a way as to leave room for a potential lot
split, if the property is large enough to split under its zoning designation regulations.
10. Staff is proposing to reduce the minimum size of apartment units in large multiplexes (6 units and
above) and mixed-use buildings from 650 sqft of living space to 375 sqft total. The current size
requirements are too large for developers to be able to provide traditional studio apartments.
Current ordinance excerpt:
SECTION 2319: [RESIDENTIAL DESIGN CRITERIA]
In the case of a one (1) family or two (2) family dwelling unit which is of standard construction, a mobile
home, a premanufactured, or a precut dwelling structure, and any additions or alterations thereto, erected or
placed in the City of Muskegon, other than a mobile home located in a licensed mobile home park approved
under the provisions of Article V, MHP Mobile Home Park Districts, shall conform to the following regulations
in addition to all other regulations of this Ordinance:
1. The dwelling unit shall have a minimum living area (excluding all basement area) of eight hundred and
fifty (850) square feet for a one (1) bedroom dwelling. For each bedroom thereafter, an additional
100 square feet of living space shall be provided.
In the case of a multi-family (more than 2 units) dwelling structure which is of standard construction, a mobile
home, a premanufactured, or a precut dwelling structure, and any additions or alterations thereto, erected or
placed in the City of Muskegon, other than a mobile home located in a licensed mobile home park approved
under the provisions of Article V, MHP Mobile Home Park Districts, shall conform to the following regulations
in addition to all other regulations of this Ordinance:
1. Each dwelling unit shall have a minimum living area (excluding all basement area) of six hundred and
fifty (650) square feet for a one (1) bedroom unit, of eight hundred and seventy-five (875) square
feet for a two (2) bedroom unit, and of twelve hundred (1200) square feet for a three (3) bedroom
unit. For each bedroom thereafter, an additional 100 square feet of living space shall be provided.
Proposed ordinance:
All single-family houses, duplexes, rowhouses and small multiplexes (3-6 units), other than a mobile home
located in a licensed mobile home park approved under the provisions of Article V, MHP Mobile Home
Park Districts, shall conform to the following regulations in addition to all other regulations of this
Ordinance:
1. Each dwelling unit shall have a minimum size of 550 sqft, excluding all basement area. This shall be
measured from the outside wall of the unit as described on the site plan.
2. If a principal structure is less than 850 sqft and is to be located on a lot that is large enough to split
under the zoning regulations, it must be placed in such a fashion as to allow enough room to split the
lot and create an additional buildable lot. The lot does not actually have to be split at the time of
construction and may be done at a later date at the property owners discretion.
3. All buildings located in single family residential districts must comply with Section 400.2 of the zoning
ordinance. Multiple family dwellings are only allowed in single-family residential districts if the home
has already been altered with prior approval to allow for multiple dwellings. One-family dwellings may
not be altered to allow for multiple dwellings, not may new homes be built for multiple dwellings.
All dwelling units within large multiplexes (6 units and above), mixed-use buildings and accessory
dwelling units shall conform to the following regulations in addition to all other regulations of this
Ordinance:
1. Each dwelling unit shall have a minimum size (excluding all basement area) of 375 sqft. This shall be
measured from the outside wall of the unit as described on the site plan.
2. All buildings located in single family residential districts must comply with Section 400.2 of the zoning
ordinance. Multiple family dwellings are only allowed in single-family residential districts if the home
has already been altered with prior approval to allow for multiple dwellings. One-family dwellings may
not be altered to allow for multiple dwellings, not may new homes be built for multiple dwellings.
CITY OF MUSKEGON
MUSKEGON COUNTY, MICHIGAN
ORDINANCE NO._____
An ordinance to amend the section 2319 of the zoning ordinance to reduce the minimum size requirements for
single-family houses, rowhomes, duplexes and small multiplexes (up to 6 units) from 850 sf of floor area to
550 sf (total) and to also change the minimum size requirements for large multiplexes (6 units and above),
mixed-use buildings and accessory dwelling units from 650 sf of floor area to 375 sf (total).
THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MUSKEGON HEREBY ORDAINS:
All single-family houses, duplexes, rowhouses and small multiplexes (3-6 units), other than a mobile home
located in a licensed mobile home park approved under the provisions of Article V, MHP Mobile Home
Park Districts, shall conform to the following regulations in addition to all other regulations of this
Ordinance:
1. Each dwelling unit shall have a minimum size of 550 sqft, excluding all basement area. This shall be
measured from the outside wall of the unit as described on the site plan.
2. If a principal structure is less than 850 sqft and is to be located on a lot that is large enough to split
under the zoning regulations, it must be placed in such a fashion as to allow enough room to split the
lot and create an additional buildable lot. The lot does not actually have to be split at the time of
construction and may be done at a later date at the property owners discretion.
3. All buildings located in single family residential districts must comply with Section 400.2 of the zoning
ordinance. Multiple family dwellings are only allowed in single-family residential districts if the home
has already been altered with prior approval to allow for multiple dwellings. One-family dwellings may
not be altered to allow for multiple dwellings, not may new homes be built for multiple dwellings.
All dwelling units within large multiplexes (6 units and above), mixed-use buildings and accessory
dwelling units shall conform to the following regulations in addition to all other regulations of this
Ordinance:
1. Each dwelling unit shall have a minimum size (excluding all basement area) of 375 sqft. This shall be
measured from the outside wall of the unit as described on the site plan.
2. All buildings located in single family residential districts must comply with Section 400.2 of the zoning
ordinance. Multiple family dwellings are only allowed in single-family residential districts if the home
has already been altered with prior approval to allow for multiple dwellings. One-family dwellings may
not be altered to allow for multiple dwellings, not may new homes be built for multiple dwellings.
This ordinance adopted:
Ayes:______________________________________________________________
Nayes:_____________________________________________________________
Adoption Date:
Effective Date:
First Reading:
Second Reading:
CITY OF MUSKEGON
By: _________________________________
Ann Meisch, MMC, City Clerk
CERTIFICATE
The undersigned, being the duly qualified clerk of the City of Muskegon, 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 11th day of October 2022, 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 the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act, Public Acts of
Michigan No. 33 of 2006, and that minutes were kept and will be or have been made available as
required thereby.
DATED: ___________________, 2022. __________________________________________
Ann Meisch, MMC
Clerk, City of Muskegon
Publish: Notice of Adoption to be published once within ten (10) days of final adoption.
CITY OF MUSKEGON
NOTICE OF ADOPTION
Please take notice that on August 23, 2022, the City Commission of the City of Muskegon adopted an
ordinance to amend section 2319 of the zoning ordinance to reduce the minimum size requirements for
single-family houses, rowhomes, duplexes and small multiplexes (up to 6 units) from 850 sf of floor area
to 550 sf (total) and to also change the minimum size requirements for large multiplexes (6 units and
above), mixed-use buildings and accessory dwelling units from 650 sf of floor area to 375 sf (total).
All single-family houses, duplexes, rowhouses and small multiplexes (3-6 units), other than a mobile
home located in a licensed mobile home park approved under the provisions of Article V, MHP Mobile
Home Park Districts, shall conform to the following regulations in addition to all other regulations of
this Ordinance:
1. Each dwelling unit shall have a minimum size of 550 sqft, excluding all basement area. This shall
be measured from the outside wall of the unit as described on the site plan.
2. If a principal structure is less than 850 sqft and is to be located on a lot that is large enough to split
under the zoning regulations, it must be placed in such a fashion as to allow enough room to split
the lot and create an additional buildable lot. The lot does not actually have to be split at the time
of construction and may be done at a later date at the property owners discretion.
3. All buildings located in single family residential districts must comply with Section 400.2 of the
zoning ordinance. Multiple family dwellings are only allowed in single-family residential districts
if the home has already been altered with prior approval to allow for multiple dwellings. One-
family dwellings may not be altered to allow for multiple dwellings, not may new homes be built
for multiple dwellings.
All dwelling units within large multiplexes (6 units and above), mixed-use buildings and accessory
dwelling units shall conform to the following regulations in addition to all other regulations of this
Ordinance:
1. Each dwelling unit shall have a minimum size (excluding all basement area) of 375 sqft. This shall
be measured from the outside wall of the unit as described on the site plan.
2. All buildings located in single family residential districts must comply with Section 400.2 of the
zoning ordinance. Multiple family dwellings are only allowed in single-family residential districts
if the home has already been altered with prior approval to allow for multiple dwellings. One-
family dwellings may not be altered to allow for multiple dwellings, not may new homes be built
for multiple dwellings.
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 ____________________, 2022. CITY OF MUSKEGON
By _________________________________
Ann Meisch, MMC
City Clerk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLISH ONCE WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS OF FINAL PASSAGE.
Account No. 101-80400-5354
Agenda Item Review Form
Muskegon City Commission
Commission Meeting Date: October 25th, 2022 Title: First Amendment to Purchase
Agreement for NBR Labs Development
Submitted By: Jake Eckholm Department: Development Services
Brief Summary:
All due diligence items have been completed and grant funding secured for portions of the road
addition to the Port City Industrial Park, necessitating minor additions to the original Purchase
Agreement for the development site.
Detailed Summary & Background:
City Staff have been working with the development team from Northern Biomedical Research for
most of the year on several critical details to move this project into construction, and we are
approaching a final closing date. DPW and Development Services staff have achieved a $630,000
Transportation Economic Development Fund Grant to help offset infrastructure costs to the
expansion to the industrial park, and timelines for this construction are reflected in the amendment.
We also have some remaining concrete millings and spoils from the deconstruction of the West
Shoreline Correctional Facility that will be reused in construction of the public and private assets in
the new section of the park, and this is referenced as well.
Goal/Focus Area/Action Item Addressed:
Focus Area 2: Progress toward completion of existing economic development projects
Amount Requested: N/A Amount Budgeted: N/A
Fund(s) or Account(s): N/A Fund(s) or Account(s): N/A
Recommended Motion:
Motion to approve the First Amendment to the 2725 Olthoff Purchase Agreement as presented
Approvals: Guest(s) Invited / Presenting:
Immediate Division Head Information Technology Yes
Other Division Heads Communication No
Legal Review
For City Clerk Use Only:
Commission Action:
FIRST AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT
This First Amendment to Purchase and Sale Agreement (“Amendment”) is executed this _____
day of October, 2022, by and between 2725 Olthoff LLC, a Michigan limited liability company (“Buyer”)
and the City of Muskegon, a Michigan municipal corporation (“Seller”).
WHEREAS, Buyer and Seller entered into that certain Purchase and Sale Agreement dated January
26, 2022 (“Agreement”) for the sale and purchase of certain real property located in the City of Muskegon,
Muskegon County, Michigan, more particularly described in the Agreement (“Property”), a copy of which
is in the possession of each Seller and Buyer; and
WHEREAS, Buyer and Seller desire to amend the Agreement as more particularly set forth below.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements
contained herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are
hereby acknowledged, Seller and Buyer agree as follows:
1. Exhibits. Exhibit B referred to in the Agreement shall be Exhibit 1 attached to
this Amendment. Exhibit C referred to in the Agreement shall be Exhibit 2 attached to this
Amendment.
2. Public Road. On or before June 1, 2023, Seller shall, at its sole cost and expense,
cause Olthoff Drive, a public road and right of way, and public utilities to be extended along the
western boundary of the Property, as set forth in Exhibit 3 attached to this Amendment (“Road
Extension”). Seller’s obligation under this Section 2 shall survive the Close of Escrow and delivery
of the Deed.
3. Easements. At the Close of Escrow, Seller and Buyer shall each execute and
deliver original notarized copies of (a) the Access Easement Agreement in the form attached to this
Amendment as Exhibit 4; and (b) an exclusive, perpetual easement granting Buyer the right to use
a portion of the Retained Property between the Road Extension and the Property as approximately
depicted on Exhibit 5 attached to this Agreement (“Permanent Easement Area”) for utilities and
ingress and egress to and from Olthoff Drive and to construct driveways, entrances, walkways,
landscaped areas, curbing, curb cuts, lighting, markings, directional signs, pavement and any other
structures or improvements used for access the Permanent Easement Area, the form and contents
of which will be mutually agreed upon by Buyer and Seller prior to the Close of Escrow.
4. Sanitary Sewer. On or before June 1, 2023, Seller shall, at its sole cost and
expense, cause sanitary sewer utilities to (a) extend to the northern boundary of the Property and
be stubbed to the Property in a location shown on Exhibit 6 attached to this Agreement and (b)
extend to and across the “City Easement for Sewer Main” and the “Perpetual Access Easement”
depicted on Exhibit 7 attached to this Agreement and southerly under the Road Extension and
stubbed to Buyer’s central utilities plant to be constructed on the west side of the Property.
5. Storm Sewer. On or before June 1, 2023, Seller shall, at its sole cost and expense,
cause storm sewer utilities to extend to the northern boundary of the Property and be stubbed to the
Property in a location shown on Exhibit 8 attached to this Agreement
1
3597304_8
6. Close of Escrow. The Close of Escrow shall occur on or before November 1, 2022,
or on an earlier date as shall be specified by Buyer on at least one week’s notice to Seller; provided,
however, that Buyer may delay the Close of Escrow up to sixty (60) days for the purpose of curing
Defects by delivering written notice to Seller on or before November 1, 2022.
7. Concrete Millings. Following the date of this Amendment and continuing for
twelve (12) months after the date of this Agreement, Seller shall allow Buyer and its agents and
contractors and their equipment and machinery to enter onto the parcel of real property owned by
Seller that is located adjacent to and south of the Property, having Parcel No. 61-15-102-200-001-
00 (“Adjacent Parcel”) to collect and remove the concrete millings located on the Adjacent Parcel
(“Millings”). Seller conveys to Buyer all title and interest in and to the Millings removed from the
Adjacent Parcel by Buyer and/or its agents and contractors.
8. Miscellaneous. In the event of a conflict between the terms of this Amendment
and the terms of the Agreement, the terms of this Amendment shall govern and control. Except
as specifically modified hereby, the Agreement will continue in full force and effect and is
hereby ratified and confirmed as amended by this Amendment. All of the capitalized terms
used in this Amendment, unless otherwise defined herein, shall have the same meaning as
assigned to such terms in the Agreement. This Amendment will be construed, interpreted, and
enforced under the laws of the State of Michigan. This Amendment is binding upon and will
inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective successors and assigns under the
Agreement. This Amendment may be executed in counterparts, each of which may be deemed
an original, and both of which such counterparts together will constitute one and the same
Amendment. An executed signature page sent by facsimile or electronic mail will be deemed
an original executed signature page of this Amendment.
[Signatures on following page.]
2
3597304_8
Buyer and Seller have executed this First Amendment to Buy and Sell Agreement as of the date set
forth above.
BUYER: SELLER:
2725 OLTHOFF LLC, CITY OF MUSKEGON,
a Michigan limited liability company a Michigan municipal corporation
By:______________________________ By:___________________________
Shane Woods Name:___________________________
President and CEO Title: Mayor
By:___________________________
Name:___________________________
Title: Clerk
3
3597304_8
EXHIBIT 1
EXHIBIT B
4
3597304_8
EXHIBIT 2
EXHIBIT C
5
3597304_8
EXHIBIT 3
[Attached]
6
3597304_8
INDEX TO SHEETS
SHEET DESCRIPTION
1 ..................... COVER SHEET
2 ..................... CROSS SECTIONS
3 ..................... DETAIL SHEET
4 ..................... DETAIL SHEET
5 ..................... EXISTING SITE PLAN
6 ..................... PROPOSED SITE PLAN
CITY OF MUSKEGON
7 ..................... REMOVAL SHEET
8 ..................... ROAD IMPROVEMENTS - STA. 34+50 TO STA. 38+00
9 ..................... ROAD IMPROVEMENTS - STA. 38+00 TO STA. 42+00
10 ................... ROAD IMPROVEMENTS - STA. 42+00 TO STA. 46+00
11 ................... ROAD IMPROVEMENTS - STA. 46+00 TO STA. 51+00
12 ................... UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS - STA.34+50 TO STA.38+00 PLAN AND PROFILE OF PROPOSED
13 ................... UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS - STA.38+00 TO STA.42+00
14 ................... UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS - STA.42+00 TO STA.46+00
15 ................... UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS - STA.46+00 TO STA.51+00
16 ................... UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS - SANITARY PIPE CONNECTION
INDUSTRIAL PARK ROADWAY
17 ................... CUL-DE-SAC DETAIL GRADES
18 ................... PAVEMENT MARKING AND SIGNAGE PLAN EXPANSION PROJECT
OLTHOFF DRIVE EXTENSION AND SITE IMPROVEMENT PLANS
UTILITIES
ELECTRIC CABLE GAS
JOEL BROWN JIM STITZEL VINCENT DUCA
CONSUMERS ENERGY COMCAST DTE ENERGY
700 E STERNBERG RD 700 W BROADWAY AVE 2359 OLTHOFF DR
NORTON SHORES, MI 49441 MUSKEGON, MI 49441 MUSKEGON, MI 49444
(231) 332-2682 (810) 217-1642 (231) 578-0488 (CELL)
TELEPHONE WATER & SEWER FIBER OPTIC
DAVID B. FLERMOEN DAVE BAKER ERICA FILKINS
FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS CITY OF MUSKEGON - DPW US SIGNAL COMPANY, LLC
860 TERRACE ST 1350 E KEATING AVE ERIC FILKINS
MUSKEGON, MI 49440 MUSKEGON, MI 49442 201 IONIA AVE SW
(231) 727-1319 (231) 724-4100 GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49503
(616) 233-7144
Know what's below.
GENERAL NOTES:
PROPOSED
PROJECT Call before you dig.
1. UPON REQUEST AND APPROVAL, THE CONTRACTOR MAY OBTAIN A WATER SUPPLY
FROM THE CITY OF MUSKEGON FIRE HYDRANTS AT NO COST, PROVIDED THAT THEY
FOLLOW THE CONDITIONS OF THE CITY WATER DEPARTMENT. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
2. FOR PROTECTION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CALL MISS PROJECT THIS PROJECT INCLUDES THE CONSTRUCTION OF 0.29 MILES OF NEW ROAD AND THE EXPANSION OF
DIG, 1-800-482-7171, A MINIMUM OF THREE (3) WORKING DAYS, EXCLUDING SATURDAYS, SANITARY SEWER, WATERMAIN, AND STORM SEWER SYSTEMS FROM THE EXISTING WEST OLTHOFF
SUNDAYS, AND HOLIDAYS, PRIOR TO EXCAVATING IN THE VICINITY OF ANY UTILITY
LINES. ALL MISS DIG PARTICIPATING MEMBERS WILL THUS BE NOTIFIED, THIS DOES NOT
LOCATION DRIVE ALIGNMENT TO THE APPROXIMATE MIDDLE OF THE FUTURE INDUSTRIAL PARK DEVELOPMENT.
ADDITIONALLY, THIS PROJECT INCLUDES SOME SITE IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE INDUSTRIAL PARK
RELIEVE THE CONTRACTOR OF THE RESPONSIBILITY OF NOTIFYING OWNERS, WHO MAY EXPANSION.
NOT BE PART OF THE MISS DIG ALERT SYSTEM.
3. ALL PUBLIC UTILITIES HAVE BEEN SHOWN ON THE PLANS USING AVAILABLE CITY APPROVAL
INFORMATION, BUT ARE NOT GUARANTEED AS ACCURATE OR THAT UTILITIES OTHER
THAN THOSE SHOWN ARE NOT PRESENT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CALL MISS DIG CITY OF MUSKEGON, MICHIGAN
(1-800-482-7171) THREE (3) WORKING DAYS (EXCLUDING SAT., SUN., AND HOLIDAYS)
BEFORE DIGGING.
4. EXISTING TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS THAT NEED TO BE REMOVED TO ALLOW THE
CONTRACTOR TO WORK WILL BE REMOVED BY THE CONTRACTOR AND STORED IN A BY:
SAFE PLACE TO AVOID DAMAGE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL THEN REINSTALL THE SIGNS LEO EVANS, P.E., DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE
IN THEIR ORIGINAL LOCATION, OR AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER, UPON COMPLETION
OF THE CONSTRUCTION IN THAT AREA. REMOVAL AND REINSTALLATION OF THE SIGNS
WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE BID ITEM OF "MINOR TRAF DEVICES." SIGNS THAT ARE
DAMAGED OR LOST BY THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE REPLACED BY CITY FORCES, AND
THE CONTRACTOR WILL PAY THE CITY FOR THE COST OF REPLACEMENT.
5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SAWCUT ALL MEETS RELATIVE TO SIDEWALK OR PAVEMENT
CONSTRUCTION, UNLESS WAIVED BY THE ENGINEER. PAYMENT FOR SAWCUTTING
SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE PAYMENT FOR THE BID ITEMS "CURB AND GUTTER, REM,"
AND "HMA SURFACE, REM." NO ADDITIONAL PAYMENT WILL BE ALLOWED FOR
SAWCUTTING. 1925 BRETON ROAD NE SUITE 100
VICINITY MAP GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49506
6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PREVENT EROSION AND CONTROL SEDIMENTATION
ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT. CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP SEDIMENTATION WITHIN
NO SCALE
N PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF:
THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND OUT OF SURFACE WATERS, CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN
TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS (CONTROLS TO INCLUDE
EROSION CONTROL, INLET PROTECTION, AND FABRIC DROPS ON ALL INLET
STRUCTURES, NEW AND EXISTING), AND INSTALL TEMPORARY EROSION AND
SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL
REMOVE, ON A DAILY BASIS, SOIL TRACKED ONTO EXISTING PAVED ROADS, (VACUUM
METHODS ARE PREFERRED BUT BROOM SWEEPING IS ACCEPTABLE, IF THE MATERIAL IS
REMOVED). THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT ALL SOIL EROSION / SEDIMENTATION
CONTROL MEASURES ON A WEEKLY BASIS OR AFTER EACH RAIN FALL EVENT.
CONTRACTOR SHALL CLEAN, REPAIR, OR REPLACE ANY SOIL EROSION / SEDIMENTATION
CONTROL MEASURE, AS NECESSARY, TO ENSURE PROPER FUNCTION. ALL SOIL
EROSION / SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS SHALL REMAIN UNTIL ALL DISTURBED AREAS
ARE STABILIZED. ALL SOIL EROSION / SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS (EXCEPT FOR THE
EROSION CONTROL, INLET PROTECTION, AND FABRIC DROP), SHALL BE INCLUDED WITH BENCHMARK: NOTE:
THE BID ITEM "PROJECT CLEAN UP," AND NO OTHER ADDITIONAL PAYMENT SHALL BE
MADE, THEREFOR. HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83 (2011) STATE PLANE COORDINATES SOUTH ZONE 2113 THE IMPROVEMENTS COVERED BY THESE PLANS SHALL BE DONE IN
VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 (GEOID18) ACCORDANCE WITH THE MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
7. PAYMENT FOR GRADING AND COMPACTING THE CONC. CURB AND GUTTER AND HAND (MDOT) STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION, LATEST
PATCHING SHALL BE INCLUDED IN PAYMENT FOR THE BID ITEMS "CURB AND GUTTER, BM - 300 EDITION, THE MICHIGAN MANUAL OF UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL
CONC, DET F4" AND "HAND PATCHING." ELEV. 638.57' DEVICES (MMUTCD), LATEST EDITION, AND THE PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS. RANDY WILCOX, P.E., PROJECT MANAGER DATE
(CHECKED WITH CNTRL #3000 AND #3001)
20210307 1 18
1925 BRETON ROAD SE SUITE 100
GRAND RAPIDS, MI. 49506
PHONE: (616) 454-4286
FAX: (616) 454-4278
CL CL
WEB SITE: http: / / www.hrcengr.com
ROW 66' ROW 66'
33' 33' 33' 33'
33' 33'
EX. 2" HMA, 4E3 TOP COURSE
2' 14.5' 10' VA
IES
10' 14.5' 2' EX. 2" HMA, 4E3 LEVELING COURSE 10' 14.5' 2' 2' 14.5' 10'
RIE R
EX. 2" HMA, 4E3 BASE COURSE S VA
2%
(2%) (2%) 2% 2%
VA
RIES RIE
VA S
EX. 5" AGGREGATE BASE
DATE ADDITIONS AND/OR REVISIONS
DESIGNED
DRAWN
CHECKED
VA 10' 14.5' 2' 2' 14.5' 10' S APPROVED
RIE IE
S VAR
VA
HMA APPLICATION TABLE. RIES RIE
VA S
PERFORMANCE
HMA MIX RATE GRADE
HMA, 4EML (TOP COURSE) 110# / SYD 70-28(P) 2 INCH - ONE LIFT (AWI 260, MIN)
HMA, 4EML (LEVEL COURSE) 110# / SYD 64-28 2 INCH - ONE LIFT
HMA, 4EML (BASE COURSE) 110# / SYD 58-22 2 INCH - ONE LIFT
HAND PATCHING 110# / SYD 64-28 3 INCH - TWO LIFTS
HMA BOND COAT, SS-1H, AT 0.05 GAL/SY, SHALL BE PLACED BETWEEN
EACH LIFT. THE COST IS INCLUDED WITH THE "HMA, 4E3" BID ITEM.
CITY OF
MUSKEGON
OLTHOFF DRIVE
EXTENSION
HRC JOB NO. SCALE
DATE SHEET
NO. 2 18
OF
water
INSTALL BONNET ON FOUR (4) 1925 BRETON ROAD SE SUITE 100
EQUALLY SPACED CONC. BRICKS. GRAND RAPIDS, MI. 49506
PHONE: (616) 454-4286
FAX: (616) 454-4278
WEB SITE: http: / / www.hrcengr.com
NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE
DATE ADDITIONS AND/OR REVISIONS
DESIGNED
DRAWN
CHECKED
APPROVED
PIPE RESTRAINT SCHEDULE
LENGTH OF RESTRAINT REQUIRED * (FEET)
CITY OF
MUSKEGON
OLTHOFF DRIVE
BASIS OF DESIGN FOR ABOVE TABLE:
EXTENSION
HRC JOB NO. SCALE
NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE DATE SHEET
NO. 3 18
OF
1 1/2" LETTERS
(RECESSED FLUSH)
K E
S G
U O
1 1/2"
M
N
(2) CLOSED
Y
W
I T
E
PICKHOLES 1925 BRETON ROAD SE SUITE 100
S
C
GRAND RAPIDS, MI. 49506
T
E
M
N
I
PHONE: (616) 454-4286
I
C
H
L
I
G R
E
CUSTOM LOGO FAX: (616) 454-4278
A O
N ' S S H
3/4" LETTERS
(RECESSED FLUSH) WEB SITE: http: / / www.hrcengr.com
1 1/2"
21 1/2" DIA
NO SCALE NO SCALE NO SCALE
NO SCALE
NOTE: ALL ITEMS INCLUDED IN: LEACHING BASIN, 48 INCH DIA
DATE ADDITIONS AND/OR REVISIONS
DESIGNED
DRAWN
CHECKED
APPROVED
CITY OF
MUSKEGON
OLTHOFF DRIVE
EXTENSION
STANDARD MANHOLE
HRC JOB NO. SCALE
DATE SHEET
NO. 4 18
OF
NORTH
637
7
63
1925 BRETON ROAD, SE SUITE 100
GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49504
49506
PHONE: (616) 454-4286
FAX: (616) 454-4278
6 37
WEB SITE: http: / / www.hrcengr.com
ST
7
63 638
6
63
638
DATE ADDITIONS AND/OR REVISIONS
DESIGNED
DRAWN
CHECKED
APPROVED
TOPSOIL DARK BROWN FINE TO MEDIUM TOPSOIL DARK BROWN FINE SANDY
0.7' SANDY WITH A TRACE OF GRAVEL 0.9'
SAND SLIGHTLY COMPACT LIGHT BROWN FINE
SAND COMPACT BROWN FINE TO COARSE WITH
TO MEDIUM
A TRACE OF GRAVEL
4.5'
7.0' SAND COMPACT BROWN FIN TO MEDIUM
WITH A TRACE OF GRAVEL
7.0'
SAND COMPACT LIGHT BROWN FINE TO SAND SLIGHTLY COMPACT BROWN FINE
MEDIUM TO MEDIUM
9.0'
14.5' SAND COMPACT BROWN FINE TO MEDIUM
WITH A TRACE OF GRAVEL
SAND EXTREMELY COMPACT LIGHT 14.5'
BROWN FINE
CITY OF
SAND VERY COMPACT LIGHT BROWN FINE
TO MEDIUM
MUSKEGON
18.5' OLTHOFF DRIVE
SAND VERY COMPACT LIGHT BROWN FINE
TO MEDIUM EXTENSION
20' GROUND WATER 20' 20' GROUND WATER 20'
END OF BORING END OF BORING
HRC JOB NO. SCALE
DATE SHEET
NO. 5 18
OF
NORTH
1925 BRETON ROAD, SE SUITE 100
GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49504
49506
PHONE: (616) 454-4286
FAX: (616) 454-4278
WEB SITE: http: / / www.hrcengr.com
ST
QUANTITIES THIS SHEET
TOTAL UNIT DESCRIPTION
1 LSUM Mobilization, Max
4060 Cyd Excavation, Earth
1 LSUM Site Grading
1421 Ft Erosion Control, Silt Fence
1 LSUM Project Cleanup, Modified
DATE ADDITIONS AND/OR REVISIONS
DESIGNED
DRAWN
CHECKED
APPROVED
CITY OF
MUSKEGON
OLTHOFF DRIVE
EXTENSION
HRC JOB NO. SCALE
DATE SHEET
NO. 6 18
OF
NORTH
1925 BRETON ROAD, SE SUITE 100
GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49504
49506
PHONE: (616) 454-4286
FAX: (616) 454-4278
WEB SITE: http: / / www.hrcengr.com
DATE ADDITIONS AND/OR REVISIONS
DESIGNED
DRAWN
CHECKED
APPROVED
QUANTITIES THIS SHEET
TOTAL UNIT DESCRIPTION
1 Acre Clearing
6 Ft Sewer, Rem, Less than 24 inch
REMOVAL LEGEND 630 Ft Curb and Gutter, Rem
30 Ft Fence, Rem
265 Cyd Excavation, Earth
1 Ea Dr Structure Cover, Adj, Case 1, Modified
2 Ea Catch Basin, Removal and Relocation
Syd HMA Surface, Rem
CITY OF
4485
MUSKEGON
1 Ea Hydrant, Relocate, Case 2
1 Ea Gate Box, Adj, Case 1
OLTHOFF DRIVE
1 Ea Sanitary Structure Cover, Adj, Case 2 EXTENSION
HRC JOB NO. SCALE
DATE SHEET
NO. 7 18
OF
NORTH
1925 BRETON ROAD, SE SUITE 100
GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49504
49506
QUANTITIES THIS SHEET
PHONE: (616) 454-4286
TOTAL UNIT DESCRIPTION
FAX: (616) 454-4278
90 Cyd Embankment, CIP
4 Sta Machine Grading WEB SITE: http: / / www.hrcengr.com
1675 Syd Aggregate Base, 6 inch
16 Ft Sewer, Cl IV, 12 inch, Tr Det B
2 Ea Catch Basin, Removal and Relocation
2 Ea Dr Structure Cover, Type K, Modified
446 Ton HMA, 4EML
700 Ft Curb and Gutter, Conc, Det F4
ET 9 00.00
SHE :38+
SEE - STA
STRUCTURE SCHEDULE
E
LIN
CH
OLTHOFF DRIVE
MAT
STATIONING BASED ON CENTERLINE
DATE ADDITIONS AND/OR REVISIONS
DESIGNED
DRAWN
CHECKED
APPROVED
CONSTRUCTION LEGEND
CITY OF
MUSKEGON
OLTHOFF DRIVE
EXTENSION
EX 636.44
EX 636.54
EX 636.60
EX 636.70
EX 636.76
EX 637.82
EX 636.68
EX 637.58
EX 637.39
EX 637.83
EX 637.43
EX 637.16
637.54
636.36
636.66
637.36
637.16
HRC JOB NO. SCALE
DATE SHEET
NO. 8 18
OF
RTH
NO
MATCH LINE - STA:38+00.00
.00
SEE SHEET 8
+00
QUANTITIES THIS SHEET
SHE A:42
1925 BRETON ROAD, SE SUITE 100
TOTAL UNIT DESCRIPTION
10
GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49504
49506
103 Cyd Embankment, CIP
ET
SEE E - ST
PHONE: (616) 454-4286
4 Sta Machine Grading FAX: (616) 454-4278
1914 Syd Aggregate Base, 6 inch
343 Ft Sewer, Cl IV, 12 inch, Tr Det A WEB SITE: http: / / www.hrcengr.com
IN
36 Ft Sewer, Cl IV, 12 inch, Tr Det B
HL
343 Ft Video Taping Sewer and Culv Pipe
TC
1 Ea Dr Structure, Tap, 12 inch
2 Ea Catch Basin, Special, 48 inch dia
MA
2 Ea Dr Structure Cover, Type K, Modified
359 Ft Underdrain, Subgrade, Open-Graded, 6 inch
509 Ton HMA, 4EML
800 Ft Curb and Gutter, Conc, Det F4
OLTHOFF DRIVE STRUCTURE SCHEDULE
STATIONING BASED ON CENTERLINE
DATE ADDITIONS AND/OR REVISIONS
DESIGNED
CONSTRUCTION LEGEND DRAWN
CHECKED
APPROVED
CITY OF
MUSKEGON
OLTHOFF DRIVE
EXTENSION
EX 637.45
EX 637.29
EX 636.96
EX 636.75
EX 636.95
EX 636.85
EX 637.43
EX 636.63
EX 636.63
EX 637.21
EX 637.37
EX 637.15
637.36
637.06
636.26
637.33
636.87
HRC JOB NO. SCALE
DATE SHEET
NO. 9 18
OF
NORTH
MATCH LINE - STA:46+00.00
SEE SHEET 11
QUANTITIES THIS SHEET
1925 BRETON ROAD, SE SUITE 100
TOTAL UNIT DESCRIPTION
GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49504
49506
103 Cyd Embankment, CIP
PHONE: (616) 454-4286
4 Sta Machine Grading
FAX: (616) 454-4278
1914 Syd Aggregate Base, 6 inch
78 Ft Sewer, Cl IV, 12 inch, Tr Det A WEB SITE: http: / / www.hrcengr.com
36 Ft Sewer, Cl IV, 12 inch, Tr Det B
78 Ft Video Taping Sewer and Culv Pipe
2 Ea Catch Basin, Special, 48 inch dia
6 Ea Dr Structure Cover, Type K, Modified
M 4 Ea Leaching Basin, 48 inch dia
AT 800 Ft Underdrain, Subgrade, Open-Graded, 6 inch
CH HMA, 4EML
509 Ton
L
SE INE 801 Ft Curb and Gutter, Conc, Det F4
E -S
SH T
EE A:4
T 2+
9 00
.0
0
OLTHOFF DRIVE CONSTRUCTION LEGEND
STATIONING BASED ON CENTERLINE
DATE ADDITIONS AND/OR REVISIONS
DESIGNED
DRAWN
CHECKED
STRUCTURE SCHEDULE APPROVED
CITY OF
MUSKEGON
OLTHOFF DRIVE
EXTENSION
EX 635.94
EX 633.64
EX 633.22
EX 635.85
EX 635.25
EX 634.58
EX 632.99
EX 635.93
EX 635.03
EX 635.41
EX 633.10
EX 634.16
634.80
636.26
633.95
633.33
635.61
HRC JOB NO. SCALE
DATE SHEET
NO. 10 18
OF
NORTH
MATCH LINE - STA:46+00.00
SEE SHEET 10
1925 BRETON ROAD, SE SUITE 100
GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49504
49506
PHONE: (616) 454-4286
FAX: (616) 454-4278
WEB SITE: http: / / www.hrcengr.com
QUANTITIES THIS SHEET
TOTAL UNIT DESCRIPTION
134 Cyd Embankment, CIP
5 Sta Machine Grading
3206 Syd Aggregate Base, 6 inch
4 Ea Dr Structure Cover, Type K, Modified
OLTHOFF DRIVE
4 Ea Leaching Basin, 48 inch dia
652 Ft Underdrain, Subgrade, Open-Graded, 6 inch
299 Ton HMA, 4EML
STATIONING BASED ON CENTERLINE 1045 Ft Curb and Gutter, Conc, Det F4
DATE ADDITIONS AND/OR REVISIONS
DESIGNED
DRAWN
CHECKED
APPROVED
CONSTRUCTION LEGEND
STRUCTURE SCHEDULE
CITY OF
MUSKEGON
OLTHOFF DRIVE
EXTENSION
EX 636.44
EX 635.04
EX 636.42
EX 634.85
EX 635.58
EX 636.36
EX 636.48
EX 636.45
EX 636.46
EX 635.36
EX 636.23
EX 636.23
EX 635.87
EX 634.71
EX 636.15
636.32
633.95
636.49
636.46
635.67
634.57
HRC JOB NO. SCALE
DATE SHEET
NO. 11 18
OF
NORTH
1925 BRETON ROAD, SE SUITE 100
GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49504
49506
PHONE: (616) 454-4286
FAX: (616) 454-4278
QUANTITIES THIS SHEET
TOTAL UNIT DESCRIPTION
0
WEB SITE: http: / / www.hrcengr.com
ET 1 8+00.0
1 Ea Gate Valve and Box, 12 inch
1 Ea Hydrant, Relocate, Case 2
1 Ea Live Tap, 12 inch by 16 inch
:3
3
180 Ft Water Main, DI, 12 inch, Tr Det G
SEE E - STA
1 Ea Bend, 12 inch, 22.5 Degree, DI MJ
5 Ea Bend, 12 inch, 45 Degree, DI MJ
SHE
1 Ea Tee, 16 inch X 12 inch, DI MJ
LIN
CH
MAT
OLTHOFF DRIVE
STATIONING BASED ON CENTERLINE
DATE ADDITIONS AND/OR REVISIONS
DESIGNED
DRAWN
CHECKED
APPROVED
CITY OF
MUSKEGON
OLTHOFF DRIVE
EXTENSION
EX 636.44
EX 636.54
EX 636.60
EX 636.70
EX 636.68
EX 636.76
EX 637.58
EX 637.82
EX 637.39
EX 637.83
EX 637.43
EX 637.16
637.54
636.36
636.66
637.36
637.16
HRC JOB NO. SCALE
DATE SHEET
NO. 12 18
OF
R T H
NO
MATCH LINE - STA:38+00.00
0
SEE SHEET 12
00.0
1925 BRETON ROAD, SE SUITE 100
SHE A:42+
GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49504
49506
14
PHONE: (616) 454-4286
ET
FAX: (616) 454-4278
S E E E - ST
QUANTITIES THIS SHEET
TOTAL UNIT DESCRIPTION WEB SITE: http: / / www.hrcengr.com
405 Ft Water Main, DI, 12 inch, Tr Det G
LIN
1 Ea Bend, 12 inch, 22.5 Degree, DI MJ
TCH
4 Ea Bend, 12 inch, 45 Degree, DI MJ
2 Ea Hydrant, 6 inch, Standard
MA
OLTHOFF DRIVE
STATIONING BASED ON CENTERLINE
DATE ADDITIONS AND/OR REVISIONS
DESIGNED
DRAWN
CHECKED
APPROVED
CITY OF
MUSKEGON
OLTHOFF DRIVE
EXTENSION
EX 637.45
EX 637.29
EX 636.96
EX 636.75
EX 636.95
EX 636.85
EX 637.43
EX 636.63
EX 636.63
EX 637.37
EX 637.21
EX 637.15
637.36
637.06
636.26
637.33
636.87
HRC JOB NO. SCALE
DATE SHEET
NO. 13 18
OF
NORTH
MATCH LINE - STA:46+00.00
SEE SHEET 15
1925 BRETON ROAD, SE SUITE 100
GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49504
49506
QUANTITIES THIS SHEET
TOTAL UNIT DESCRIPTION PHONE: (616) 454-4286
FAX: (616) 454-4278
2 Ea Sanitary Manhole Cover
2 Ea Gate Valve and Box, 8 inch
WEB SITE: http: / / www.hrcengr.com
2 Ea Water Main, 8 inch, Cut and Plug
420 Ft Water Main, DI, 12 inch, Tr Det G
106 Ft Water Main, DI, 8 inch, Tr Det G
M 7 Ea Bend, 12 inch, 45 Degree, DI MJ
AT 1 Ea Hydrant, 6 inch, Standard
CH 2 Ea Tee, 12 inch X 8 inch, DI MJ
L
SE INE
20 Ft Sanitary Sewer, PVC, 8 inch, Tr Det B2
E 73 Ft Sanitary Sewer, PVC, 12 inch, Tr Det B2
SH - ST 2 Ea Sanitary Structure, 48 inch dia
EE A:
T 42+
13 0
0 .0
0
OLTHOFF DRIVE
STATIONING BASED ON CENTERLINE
DATE ADDITIONS AND/OR REVISIONS
DESIGNED
DRAWN
CHECKED
APPROVED
CITY OF
MUSKEGON
OLTHOFF DRIVE
EXTENSION
EX 635.94
EX 633.64
EX 633.22
EX 635.85
EX 635.25
EX 634.58
EX 632.99
EX 635.93
EX 635.03
EX 635.41
EX 633.10
EX 634.16
634.80
636.26
633.95
633.33
635.61
HRC JOB NO. SCALE
DATE SHEET
NO. 14 18
OF
NORTH
MATCH LINE - STA:46+00.00
SEE SHEET 14
1925 BRETON ROAD, SE SUITE 100
GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49504
49506
PHONE: (616) 454-4286
FAX: (616) 454-4278
WEB SITE: http: / / www.hrcengr.com
QUANTITIES THIS SHEET
TOTAL UNIT DESCRIPTION
3 Ea Gate Valve and Box, 8 inch
3 Ea Water Main, 8 inch, Cut and Plug
341 Ft Water Main, DI, 12 inch, Tr Det G
166 Ft Water Main, DI, 8 inch, Tr Det G
2 Ea Hydrant, 6 inch, Standard
1 Ea Reducer, 12 inch X 8 inch, DI MJ
OLTHOFF DRIVE
2 Ea Tee, 12 inch X 8 inch, DI MJ
STATIONING BASED ON CENTERLINE
DATE ADDITIONS AND/OR REVISIONS
DESIGNED
DRAWN
CHECKED
APPROVED
CITY OF
MUSKEGON
OLTHOFF DRIVE
EXTENSION
EX 636.44
EX 635.04
EX 634.85
EX 636.45
EX 636.42
EX 634.70
EX 635.58
EX 636.36
EX 636.48
EX 636.46
EX 635.36
EX 636.23
EX 636.23
EX 634.83
EX 635.87
EX 634.71
EX 636.15
633.95
636.32
636.49
636.46
635.67
634.57
HRC JOB NO. SCALE
DATE SHEET
NO. 15 18
OF
NORTH
OLTHOFF DRIVE EXTENSION IMRPOVEMENTS
1925 BRETON ROAD, SE SUITE 100
GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49504
49506
PHONE: (616) 454-4286
FAX: (616) 454-4278
WEB SITE: http: / / www.hrcengr.com
DATE ADDITIONS AND/OR REVISIONS
DESIGNED
OLTHOFF DRIVE EXTENSION IMRPOVEMENTS DRAWN
CHECKED
SAN. PIPE CONNECTION
APPROVED
STATIONING BASED ON PIPE CENTERLINE
CITY OF
MUSKEGON
OLTHOFF DRIVE
EXTENSION
635.84
635.34
635.50
635.40
635.22
636.68
636.26
635.29
637.10
HRC JOB NO. SCALE
DATE SHEET
NO. 16 18
OF
NORTH
1925 BRETON ROAD, SE SUITE 100
GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49504
49506
PHONE: (616) 454-4286
FAX: (616) 454-4278
WEB SITE: http: / / www.hrcengr.com
OLTHOFF DRIVE
STA:49+00.00
DATE ADDITIONS AND/OR REVISIONS
DESIGNED
DRAWN
CHECKED
APPROVED
OLTHOFF DRIVE
STATIONING BASED ON CENTERLINE
CITY OF
MUSKEGON
OLTHOFF DRIVE
EXTENSION
HRC JOB NO. SCALE
DATE SHEET
NO. 17 18
OF
1925 BRETON ROAD, SE SUITE 100
GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49504
49506
PHONE: (616) 454-4286
FAX: (616) 454-4278
QUANTITIES THIS SHEET WEB SITE: http: / / www.hrcengr.com
TOTAL UNIT DESCRIPTION
2954 Ft Pavt Mrkg, Waterborne, 4 inch, Yellow
0
FT 0.0
LE +0
NORTH
W :42
LO TA
OLTHOFF DRIVE
BE - S
E E
SE LIN
STATIONING BASED ON CENTERLINE
CH
AT
M
DATE ADDITIONS AND/OR REVISIONS
DESIGNED
DOUBLE-SOLID, 4" YELLOW LINE DRAWN
CHECKED
APPROVED
M
AT
CH
SE LI
E NE
AB -
OV STA
E :4
RI 2+
CITY OF
GH 00 MUSKEGON
T .0 0
OLTHOFF DRIVE
EXTENSION
OLTHOFF DRIVE NORTH
STATIONING BASED ON CENTERLINE
HRC JOB NO. SCALE
DATE SHEET
NO. 18 18
OF
EXHIBIT 4
[Attached]
7
3597304_8
ACCESS EASEMENT AGREEMENT
This instrument is exempt from Michigan real estate transfer tax pursuant to MCL 207.526(a).
This instrument is exempt from county real estate transfer tax pursuant to MCL 207.505(a).
This ACCESS EASEMENT AGREEMENT (the “Agreement”) is made this ______ day
of _____________, 2022 (“Effective Date”), by and between 2725 Olthoff LLC, a Michigan
limited liability company, of 55 Campau Avenue NW, Suite 300, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49503
(“Grantee”) and the City of Muskegon, a Michigan municipal corporation, of 933 Terrace,
Muskegon, Michigan 49440 (“Grantor”).
RECITALS
A. Grantor is the owner of certain real property located in the City of Muskegon,
Muskegon County, Michigan, legally described on the attached Exhibit A (the “Grantor
Property”).
B. Pursuant to a Purchase and Sale Agreement between Grantor and Grantee dated
January 26, 2022, as amended by that certain First Amendment to Purchase and Sale Agreement
dated as of the date of this Agreement (collectively the “Purchase Agreement”), Grantor has, on
or about the date of this Agreement, conveyed to Grantee certain real property located in the City
of Muskegon, Muskegon County, Michigan, legally described on the attached Exhibit B (the
“Grantee Property”).
C. The Grantee Property is located east of and is contiguous to the Grantor Property.
D. Pursuant to the Purchase Agreement, the City has agreed to cause Olthoff Drive, a
public road and right of way, and public utilities to be extended along the western boundary of the
Grantee Property in accordance with the Purchase Agreement (“Road Extension”) on or before
June 1, 2023.
E. Grantor has agreed to grant Grantee a non-exclusive, perpetual easement for ingress
and egress across the Grantor Property to access the Grantee Property in connection with Grantee’s
construction of a life science research and office facility on the Grantee Property until the
completion of the Road Extension as depicted on Exhibit C.
1
3709539_5
AGREEMENT
NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of
which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:
1. Grant of Access Easement. Grantor hereby grants and conveys to Grantee, its
successors and assigns, a nonexclusive easement for pedestrian and vehicular ingress and egress
on, over and across the Grantor Property until the Road Extension is completed and open to the
public for vehicular travel. The Grantor Property may be used by Grantee, along with its agents,
lessees, contractors, subcontractors, and employees, for the purposes described above, including,
but not limited to, such use for ingress and egress of construction vehicles and heavy equipment
and machinery, and any related purpose. Grantee may, during the term of this Agreement, remove
trees and other vegetation within the easement area on the Grantor Property if Grantee determines
that such removal is necessary in connection with Grantee’s rights under this Agreement.
Grantee acknowledges that access may be disrupted from time to time due to the
construction of the Road Extension. At times when access is disrupted, Grantor will provide
alternate access options to suit the needs of the Grantee.
2. Repair and Maintenance of Easement Area. Grantor shall maintain the Grantor
Property so as to afford continuous access and safe and unimpeded passage of vehicular and
pedestrian traffic on, over and across the Grantor Property. Any damage caused to any
improvements within the Grantor Property by the acts or neglects of the owner of the Grantor
Property or the Grantee Property, or by such owners’ agents, lessees, employees, contractors, or
subcontractors shall be repaired or replaced solely by such owner, at its sole cost and expense.
3. Indemnity. Grantee agrees to defend, indemnify, and save harmless Grantor from
and against any and all liability or claim thereof (including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney
fees and costs), whether for injury to persons, including death, or damage to property, which may
be imposed upon, incurred by or asserted against Grantor (i) arising in connection with or as a
direct or indirect result of any activity by Grantee, its employees, agents, lessees, contractors, or
subcontractors in, on or about the Grantor Property during the term of this Agreement; or (ii)
arising out of any negligent act or omission to act by Grantee, its agents, employees, lessees, or
contractors, or subcontractors during the term of this Agreement. The foregoing indemnity from
Grantee shall not extend to liability resulting from the negligence of willful misconduct of Grantor,
or Grantor’s employees, agents, contractors or subcontractors.
4. Appurtenant Property. The easement granted and conveyed herein shall be deemed
appurtenant to and shall be used only in connection with the Grantee Property and Grantor
Property.
5. Covenants Running With the Land. All of the provisions of this Agreement are
intended to be, and shall be construed as, covenants running with the land and shall be binding
upon, inure to the benefit of, and be enforceable by the parties hereto and their respective lessees,
transferees, successors and assigns for the term of this Agreement. However, neither party shall
have any further rights or obligations under the terms of this Agreement from and after the date
that such party transfers and conveys all of its rights and interests in its property.
2
3709539_5
6. Term. This Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue
until the Road Extension is complete and open to the public for vehicular travel, at which time this
Agreement shall automatically terminate.
7. No Waiver of Default. No waiver of any default by any party shall be implied from
an omission by another party to take any action in respect to a default if such default continues or
is repeated. One or more waivers of any default in the performance of any term, provision or
covenant of this Agreement shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent default of same.
The rights and remedies given to any party to this Agreement shall be deemed to be cumulative
and no one of such rights and remedies shall be exclusive of any of the others, or of any other right
or remedy at law or in equity which any such party might otherwise have by virtue of a default
under this Agreement, and the exercise of one such right or remedy by any such party shall not
impair such party’s standing to exercise any other right or remedy.
8. No Gift or Dedication. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be deemed to be
a gift or dedication of any portion of the Grantor Property to the general public or for any public
purposes whatsoever, it being the intention that the easements created herein shall be strictly
limited to and for the purposes expressed in this Agreement.
9. Amendments. This Agreement may not be amended, modified, rescinded, limited,
or changed except by written agreement signed by the parties (or their successors and assigns).
10. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed, interpreted and applied in
accordance with the laws of the State of Michigan.
11. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, and
by separate counterpart signature pages, each of which shall be deemed to be an original. Facsimile
or pdf signatures shall be acceptable.
12. Severability. If any term, provision or condition contained in this Agreement shall,
to any extent, be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement (or the application of
such term, provision or condition to persons or circumstances other than those in respect of which
it is invalid or unenforceable) shall not be affected thereby, and each term, provision or condition
of this Agreement shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law.
[Signatures on following pages.]
3
3709539_5
This Agreement shall be effective as of the date first above written.
GRANTOR
CITY OF MUSKEGON, a Michigan municipal
corporation
By:___________________________
Name: Ken Johnson
Title: Mayor
By:___________________________
Name: Ann Meisch
Title: Clerk
STATE OF MICHIGAN )
)
COUNTY OFMUSKEGON )
Acknowledged before me in Muskegon County, Michigan, on _____________________,
2022, by Ken Johnson, the Mayor of the City of Muskegon, a Michigan municipal corporation, on
behalf of the municipal corporation.
____________________________________
Notary Public, Muskegon County, Michigan
Acting in Muskegon County, Michigan
My commission expires: ______________
STATE OF MICHIGAN )
)
COUNTY OFMUSKEGON )
Acknowledged before me in Muskegon County, Michigan, on _____________________,
2022, by Ann Meisch, the Clerk of the City of Muskegon, a Michigan municipal corporation, on
behalf of the municipal corporation.
____________________________________
Notary Public, Muskegon County, Michigan
Acting in Muskegon County, Michigan
My commission expires: ______________
4
3709539_5
GRANTEE
2725 OLTHOFF LLC, a Michigan limited liability
company
By: __________________________________
Name: Shane Woods
Its: President and CEO
STATE OF MICHIGAN )
)
COUNTY OF KENT )
Acknowledged before me in __________ County, Michigan, on
_____________________, 202___, by Shane Woods, the President and CEO of 2725 Olthoff
LLC, a Michigan limited liability company, on behalf of the limited liability company.
____________________________________
Notary Public, ________ County, Michigan
Acting in ________ County, Michigan
My commission expires: ______________
DRAFTED BY AND WHEN
RECORDED RETURN TO:
Timothy R. Dudley
Rhoades McKee
55 Campau Avenue, NW, Suite 300
Grand Rapids, Michigan 49503
5
3709539_5
EXHIBIT A
TO
ACCESS EASEMENT AGREEMENT
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF GRANTOR PROPERTY
Located in the City of Muskegon, County of Muskegon, State of Michigan:
LOT 69 AND PART OF LOT 68 OF THE PLAT OF PORT CITY INDUSTRIAL PARK NO. 6
AS RECORDED IN LIBER 22 OF PLATS PAGES 5-8, MUSKEGON COUNTY RECORDS,
CITY OF MUSKEGON, MUSKEGON COUNTY, MICHIGAN AND MORE ALSO
DESCRIBED AS; BEGINNING AT THE SOUTH 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 35 ALSO
BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 69, PORT CITY INDUSTRIAL CENTER NO.
6 LIBER 22, PAGES 5-8, SAID POINT BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE
NORTH 89 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 02 SECONDS WEST (R=S89°59'00"W), A DISTANCE
OF 633.62 FEET (R=634.53 FEET D=633.97 FEET) TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT
69 OF SAID PLAT; THENCE NORTH 01 DEGREE 28 MINUTES 35 SECONDS EAST
ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 69, A DISTANCE OF 889.87 FEET TO THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 69 (R=N00°45’00" E R=891.68 FEET D=N00°40'22"
E D=890.06 FEET); THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 07 MINUTES 07 SECONDS EAST, A
DISTANCE OF 633.38 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 68 (R=89°56'00"E
633.30 FEET); THENCE SOUTH 01 DEGREE 23 MINUTES 20 SECONDS WEST, A
DISTANCE OF 99.95 FEET (D=S00°37'04"W 100.00 FEET); THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES
06 MINUTES 57 SECONDS EAST (D & R=S89°56'00" E), A DISTANCE OF 149.54 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 01 DEGREE 28 MINUTES 35 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF 788.13
FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 15 MINUTES 10 SECONDS WEST (R=S89°53'00"W
D=S89°55 '56"W), A DISTANCE OF 141.58 FEET TO A NORTH 1/4 CORNER OF SECTION
2, T9N, R16W AS MONUMENTED BY F.F. SMITH & MID MICHIGAN ENGINEERING &
SURVEY; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 14 MINUTES 02 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE
OF 7.91 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
6
3709539_5
EXHIBIT B
TO
ACCESS EASEMENT AGREEMENT
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF GRANTEE PROPERTY
Located in the City of Muskegon, County of Muskegon, State of Michigan:
Part of Lots 67 and 68 of the plat of PORT CITY INDUSTRIAL PARK NO. 6 as recorded in Liber
22 of Plats, pages 5-8, Muskegon County Records, City of Muskegon, Muskegon County,
Michigan and more also described as: Commence at the South 1/4 corner of said Section 35 also
being the Southeast corner of Lot 69, PORT CITY INDUSTRIAL CENTER NO. 6 as recorded in
Liber 22, pages 5-8, Muskegon County Records; thence North 89 degrees 14 minutes 02 seconds
East, a distance of 7.91 feet to the North 1/4 corner of Section 2, Town 9 North, Range 16 West,
as monumented by F. F. Smith & Mid Michigan Engineering & Survey; thence South 89 degrees
15 minutes 10 seconds East (R=South 89 degrees 53 minutes 00 seconds West D=South 89 degrees
53 minutes 56 seconds West) along the South line of the plat of PORT CITY INDUSTRIAL PARK
NO. 6 as recorded in Liber 22 of Plats, pages 5-8, Muskegon County Records, a distance of 141.58
feet to the Point of Beginning; thence North 01 degree 28 minutes 35 seconds East, a distance of
788.13 feet; thence South 89 degrees 06 minutes 57 seconds East (R & D=South 89 degrees 56
minutes 00 seconds East), a distance of 1139.79 feet to the Westerly right-of-way line of DeBaker
Road; thence Southwesterly, a distance of 304.99 feet (D=303.18 feet) along a curve to the right
(curve data being R=642.00 feet, long chord=302.13 feet (D=300.37 feet), long chord bearing =
South 23 degrees 45 minutes 47 seconds West (D=South 22 degrees 50 minutes 42 seconds West);
thence Southerly, a distance of 369.14 feet (R=370.18 feet D=371.00 feet) along a curve to the
left, curve data being Radius=303.00 feet, long chord = 346.69 feet (D=348.26 feet), long chord
bearing = South 02 degrees 09 minutes 26 seconds West (D=South 01 degrees 33 minutes 47
seconds West); thence along a line non-tangent to said curve, South 32 degrees 23 minutes 22
seconds East (R=South 33 degrees 22 minutes 00 seconds East D=South 33 degrees 11 minutes
07 seconds East), a distance of 191.91 feet to the Southeast corner of Lot 67 of said plat; thence
North 89 degrees 15 minutes 10 seconds West (R=South 89 degrees 53 minutes 00 seconds West
D=South 89 degrees 55 minutes 56 seconds West) along said South line of the PORT CITY
INDUSTRIAL CENTER NO. 6, a distance of 1127.94 feet to the Point of Beginning.
7
3709539_5
EXHIBIT C
Easement
THAT PART OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF SECTION 35, TOWN 10 NORTH, RANGE 16 WEST,
MUSKEGON, MUSKEGON COUNTY, MICHIGAN DESCRIBED AS:
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTH 1/4 CORNER, SECTION 35, TOWN 10 NORTH, RANGE
16 WEST; THENCE ALONG THE NORTH AND SOUTH 1/4 LINE OF SAID SECTION,
NORTH 01 DEGREES 26 MINUTES 16 SECONDS EAST 604.13 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 66 DEGREES 40 MINUTES 22 SECONDS WEST 483.58
FEET; THENCE NORTH 01 DEGREES 23 MINUTES 31 SECONDS EAST 99.83 FEET TO
THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE FOR OLTHOFF DRIVE; THENCE ALONG SAID
RIGHT OF WAY LINE, SOUTH 89 DEGREES 07 MINUTES 07 SECONDS EAST 449.08
FEET; THENCE SOUTH 01 DEGREES 36 MINUTES 39 SECONDS WEST 99.88 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 07 MINUTES 07 SECONDS EAST 149.94 FEET; THENCE
SOUTH 01 DEGREES 28 MINUTES 38 SECONDS WEST 246.22 FEET; THENCE NORTH 66
DEGREES 40 MINUTES 22 SECONDS WEST 161.36 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 2.63± ACRES (118,543± SQ. FT.). SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS,
RESTRICTIONS, AND RIGHTS OF WAY APPARENT AND OF RECORD.
8
3709539_5
EXHIBIT 5
Approximate Depiction of Permanent Easement Area
8
3597304_8
EXHIBIT 6
Sanitary Sewer
9
3597304_8
EXHIBIT 7
Sanitary Sewer
10
3597304_8
EXHIBIT 8
Storm Sewer
11
3597304_8
Agenda Item Review Form
Muskegon City Commission
Commission Meeting Date: 10-25-22 Title: Infill Housing Project
Brownfield Plan Public Hearing
(4th Amendment)
Submitted By: Pete Wills Department: Economic Dev
Brief Summary: To hold a public hearing and approve the attached resolution which seeks to adopt
an amendment to the City’s Brownfield Plan (Infill Housing Project, 4th Amendment). On October
11th, the BRA approved the Plan Amendment and further recommends that the Muskegon City
Commission approve the Plan Amendment.
Detailed Summary & Background: Staff is seeking to amend the Scattered Site Brownfield Plan to
update the number of eligible parcels within the Plan.
The 4th Amendment removes two mixed-use projects (395 Houston and 301 W. Muskegon -
Catholic Charities), 880 First St-208 W Clay-216 W Clay (880 First St development), Allen Edwin
Homes (former Farmers Market), as well as a modified parcel at the former Froebel School.
Developers for a few of the projects, listed above, are expected to pursue their own Brownfield
Plan Amendment so as to directly benefit from the TIF capture. Removal of these parcels is
necessary in order for them to accomplish that goal.
Ten parcels have been removed from the Plan. The project will now focus on the redevelopment of
495 parcels that are scattered throughout the city. Some of these lots will be split, creating even
more parcels. The plan incorporates two types of redevelopment projects; infill housing on vacant
City lots and the rehab of existing homes (10 detached houses).
• 417 Jackson (former Froebel school) – increased to $1,000,000 in public infrastructure costs if
water/sewer improvements become necessary.
• 417 Jackson (former Froebel school) – retained $2,000,000 in demo & abatement costs.
• Staff anticipates potential construction of an additional 28 new infill houses as part of a
potential redevelopment project of the Froebel site.
• Removed the properties associated with the former Allen Edwin Homes development at the
former farmers market. Removal of these parcels did not take out “cost of sale” expenditures
because Allen Edwin intended to build and own themselves, so those never were included in
the former “total houses built” estimate. It was included for the infrastructure expenses (alley
additions). The site is too contaminated and will need its own brownfield if it is to be developed.
The 4th Amendment also includes the following updates:
• Developer’s Reimbursement Costs: Infill Housing - $11.4M / Demo & Abatement - $2M / Public
Infrastructure- $1M / Reimbursable Costs of Construction (before 15% contingency): $14.4M
• Estimated Total Capital Investment: Infill Housing - $107,200,000 / Home Rehab - $500,000 /
Total estimated capital investment: $107,700,000
• The Plan anticipates eligible activities, paid through future capture of tax increments, to include
$11,400,000 cost of sale/seller concessions; $2,000,000 for demolition and abatement;
$1,000,000 to construct public infrastructure at the former Froebel School; $20,000 for
brownfield plan preparation and development; a 15% plan contingency fee of $2,163,000; and
which reflects total eligible activities to be paid under this plan at $16,582,000.
• The Authority intends to enter into Development & Reimbursement Agreements with future
property owners/developers of properties included in the Plan to reimburse them for costs of
eligible activities.
• The duration of this Plan is not to exceed 30 years and complete recapture of eligible costs
through tax increment revenue are expected to occur within this period.
• The plan contemplates continued five-year capture of tax increments for a local Brownfield
Revolving Loan Fund if there is time left in the 30-year plan after eligible costs are covered.
https://www.muskegon-mi.gov/cresources/Brownfield-map-1-of-3.pdf
https://www.muskegon-mi.gov/cresources/Brownfield-map-2-of-3.pdf
https://www.muskegon-mi.gov/cresources/Brownfield-map-3-of-3.pdf
Goal/Focus Area/Action Item Addressed:
Goal: Economic Development, Housing, and Business / Focus Area: diverse housing types /
Action Item 2022-2.3: Increase variety of housing types
Amount Requested: N/A Amount Budgeted: N/A
Fund(s) or Account(s): N/A Fund(s) or Account(s): N/A
Recommended Motion: Discussion Only
Approvals: Get approval from division head at a minimum Guest(s) Invited / Presenting
prior to sending to the Clerk.
Immediate Division Head Information Technology Yes
Other Division Heads Communication No
Legal Review
For City Clerk Use Only:
Commission Action:
CITY OF MUSKEGON
BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
BROWNFIELD PLAN AMENDMENT
INFILL HOUSING PROJECT (4th Amendment)
October 11, 2022
Prepared for The City of Muskegon Brownfield
Redevelopment Authority
Prepared by City of Muskegon Staff
PROJECT NAME
Infill Housing Project
DEVELOPER
City of Muskegon, a qualified unit of local government, as defined by Public Act 381 of 1996, as
amended
ELIGIBLE PROPERTY LOCATION
There are 495 Eligible Properties for this project and the lots are scattered throughout the city. Please
refer to the “Eligible Property Information Chart” and the “Eligible Property Map (Attachment A)” on the
following pages.
TYPE OF ELIGIBLE PROPERTY
Blighted
SUBJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project will focus on the redevelopment of 495 parcels that are scattered throughout the city. Some
of these lots will be split, creating even more parcels. The plan incorporates two types of redevelopment
projects; infill housing on vacant City lots and the rehab of existing homes (10 detached houses).
The residential infill units will consist mostly of detached houses, with some rowhouses, duplexes and
small multiplexes mixed in as the market dictates. The infill housing project includes the demolition of
the former Froebel School (demo and abatement costs) in order to redevelop the property with a variety
residential units.
ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES
Cost of Sale, Demo & Abatement, Public Infrastructure, Preparation of Brownfield Plan
DEVELOPER’S REIMBURSABLE COSTS
Infill Housing ‐ $11,400,000
Home Rehab ‐ $0
Demo & Abatement ‐ $2,000,000
Public Infrastructure ‐ $1,000,000
Total Reimbursable Cost – $14,400,000
MAXIMUM DURATION OF CAPTURE
30 years
ESTIMATED TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT
Infill Housing ‐ $107,200,000
Home Rehab ‐ $500,000
Total Estimated Capital Investment ‐ $107,700,000
INITIAL TAXABLE VALUE
$0 (City & County Owned)
1. Introduction
The City of Muskegon, Michigan (the “City”), established the Muskegon Brownfield Redevelopment
Authority (the “Authority”) on July 4, 1997, pursuant to Michigan Public Act 381 of 1996, as amended
(“Act 381”). The primary purpose of Act 381 is to encourage the redevelopment of eligible property
by providing economic incentives through tax increment financing for certain eligible activities.
The main purpose of this Brownfield Plan is to promote the redevelopment of and investment in
certain “Brownfield” properties within the City. Inclusion of the subject properties within this Plan
will facilitate the development of infill housing at eligible properties. By facilitating redevelopment of
underutilized properties, the Plan is intended to promote economic growth for the benefit of the
residents of the City and all taxing units located within and benefited by the Authority.
This Plan is intended to be a living document, which can be amended as necessary to achieve the
purposes of Act 381. It is specifically anticipated that properties will be continually added to the Plan
as new projects are identified. The Plan contains general provisions applicable to the Plan, as well as
property‐specific information for each project. The applicable Sections of Act 381 are noted
throughout the Plan for reference purposes.
This Brownfield Plan contains the information required by Section 13(1) of Act 381, as amended.
Additional information is available from the Muskegon City Manager or the Planning Director.
The Infill Housing Project was originally added to this Plan on April 14, 2019. It was amended for the
first time on July 28, 2020; a second time on December 8, 2020; and a third time on December 13,
2021. This amendment seeks to modify the plan by removing the mixed‐use projects, removing the
Allen Edwin development and modifying the Froebel School development.
2. General Provisions
A. Costs of the Brownfield Plan (Section 13(1)(a))
Any site‐specific costs of implementing this Plan are described in the site‐specific section of the Plan.
Site‐specific sources of funding may include tax increment financing revenue generated from new
development on eligible brownfield properties, state and federal grant or loan funds, and/or private
parties. Where private parties finance the costs of eligible activities under the Plan, tax increment
revenues may be used to reimburse the private parties. The initial costs related to preparation of the
Brownfield Plan were funded by the City’s general fund. Subsequent amendments to the Plan may
be funded by the person requesting inclusion of a project in the Plan, and if eligible, may be
reimbursed through tax increment financing.
The Authority intends to pay for administrative costs and all of the things necessary or convenient to
achieve the objectives and purposes of the Authority with fees charged to applicants to be included
in the Plan, and any eligible tax increment revenues collected pursuant to the Plan, in accordance with
the provisions of Act 381, including, but not limited to:
i) the cost of financial tracking and auditing the funds of the Authority,
ii) costs for amending and/or updating this Plan, and
iii) costs for Plan implementation
Tax increment revenues that may be generated and captured by this Plan are identified in the site‐
specific sections of this Plan.
B. Method for Financing Costs of Plan (Section 13(1)(d) and (e))
The City or Brownfield Authority may incur some debt on a site‐specific basis. Please refer to the site‐
specific section of this Plan for details on any debt to be incurred by the City or Authority. When a
property proposed for inclusion in the Plan is in an area where tax increment financing is a viable
option, the Authority intends to enter into Development Agreements with the property
owners/developers of properties included in the Plan to reimburse them for the costs of eligible
activities undertaken pursuant to this Plan. Financing arrangements will be specified in a
Development and Reimbursement Agreement, and also identified in the Site Specific section of the
Plan.
C. Duration of the Brownfield Plan (Section 13(1)(f))
The duration of this Plan is not to exceed 30 years. It is the goal of the city to build as many homes as
possible over that time frame, however, it is unlikely that all 495 parcels will be developed. Since the
“cost of sale” will vary for each home, as will construction costs, it is impossible to know exactly how
long it will take to completely recapture eligible costs through tax increment revenues, although it is
anticipated that it will be well within the 30 year time frame. In addition, once all activity costs are
reimbursed, funds may be captured for the local site remediation revolving fund, if available. The
duration of capture for the Project already began in 2020 and will continue until such time that all the
eligible activities undertaken in this Plan are reimbursed, but in no event will the Plan exceed the
maximum duration provided for in (MCLA 125.2663(1)(22)). The total costs of eligible activities
include the cost of principal and interest on any note or obligation issued by the Authority to pay for
the costs of eligible activities, the cost of principal and interest otherwise incurred to pay for eligible
activities, the reasonable costs of a work plan or remedial action plan and the costs of preparation of
Brownfield Plans and amendments.
D. Displacement/Relocation of Individuals on Eligible Properties (Section 13(1)(i),(j)(k)(l)
Eligible properties identified in this Plan will not require the displacement/relocation of existing
residences, therefore the provisions of Section 13(1)(i‐l) are not applicable at this time.
E. Local Site Remediation Revolving Fund (Section 8; Section 13(1)(m))
Whenever this Plan includes a property for which taxes will be captured through the tax increment
financing authority provided by Act 381, it is the Authority's intent to establish and fund a Local Site
Remediation Revolving Fund ("Fund"). The Fund will consist of tax increment revenues that exceed
the costs of eligible activities incurred on an eligible property, as specified in Section 13(5) of Act 381.
Section 13(5) authorizes the capture of tax increment revenue from an eligible property for up to 5
years after the time that capture is required for the purposes of paying the costs of eligible activities
identified in the Plan. It is the intention of the Authority to continue to capture tax increment
revenues for 5 years after eligible activities are funded from those properties identified for tax capture
in the Plan, provided that the time frame allowed by Act 381 for tax capture is sufficient to
accommodate capture to capitalize a Fund. The amount of school operating taxes captured for the
Revolving Fund will be limited to the amount of school operating taxes captured for eligible
environmental response activities under this Plan. It may also include funds appropriated or
otherwise made available from public or private sources.
The Revolving Fund may be used to reimburse the Authority, the City, and private parties for the costs
of eligible activities at eligible properties and other costs as permitted by Act 381. It may also be used
for eligible activities on an eligible property for which there is no ability to capture tax increment
revenues. The establishment of this Revolving Fund will provide additional flexibility to the Authority
in facilitating redevelopment of brownfield properties by providing another source of financing for
necessary eligible activities.
3. Site Specific Provisions
A. Eligibility and Project Description (Sec. 13(1)(h))
The eligible properties included in the Infill Housing Project compromise approximately 173
acres of vacant land spread across 495 parcels in Muskegon, Michigan (See Attachment A).
Some of these lots will be split, which will result in additional parcels.
Project Breakdown:
Parcels = 495
New homes = 570
Rehabbed homes = 10
“Cost of sale” concessions = $11,400,000
Public Infrastructure = $1,000,000
Demo & abatement = $2,000,000
Reimbursable Costs of Construction (before 15% contingency) = $14,400,000
The chart below depicts a listing of eligible properties and the basis for their eligibility.
Basis of
Area Reimbursable
Parcel No. Address Brownfield Investment Cost
Acreage Cost
Eligibility
24‐205‐378‐0006‐00 1248 5th St 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐405‐003‐0007‐00 740 Leonard Ave 0.37 Cost of Sale $400,000 $40,000
24‐405‐003‐0008‐00 754 Leonard Ave 0.37 Cost of Sale $600,000 $60,000
24‐205‐014‐0020‐00 558 Jackson Ave 0.61 Cost of Sale $400,000 $40,000
24‐205‐015‐0006‐10 608 Jackson Ave 0.24 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐019‐0002‐00 677 Jackson Ave 0.24 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐020‐0001‐00 621 Jackson Ave 0.34 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐021‐0001‐00 601 Jackson Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐022‐0001‐00 579 Jackson Ave 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐022‐0002‐00 553 Jackson Ave 0.55 Cost of Sale $600,000 $60,000
24‐205‐022‐0003‐20 530 Herrick St 0.41 Cost of Sale $600,000 $60,000
24‐205‐023‐0008‐00 527 Herrick St 1.41 Cost of Sale $1,800,000 $180,000
Demo, COS, Public
24‐205‐024‐0001‐00
417 Jackson Ave 7.20 Infrastructure $8,600,000 $3,560,000
24‐205‐068‐0010‐00 438 E Isabella Ave 0.21 Blight Elimination $200,000 $0
24‐205‐076‐0009‐00 580 Catherine Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $50,000 $20,000
24‐205‐078‐0003‐00 441 E Isabella Ave 0.20 Blight Elimination $200,000 $0
24‐205‐078‐0004‐00 435 E Isabella Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $50,000 $20,000
24‐205‐081‐0001‐10 591 Catherine Ave 0.11 Blight Elimination $200,000 $0
24‐205‐092‐0001‐00 589 Mclaughlin Ave 0.18 Blight Elimination $200,000 $0
24‐205‐092‐0004‐00 559 Mclaughlin Ave 0.19 Blight Elimination $200,000 $0
24‐205‐191‐0001‐00 185 E Muskegon Ave 0.29 Blight Elimination $200,000 $0
24‐205‐191‐0009‐00 209 E Walton Ave 0.49 Blight Elimination $200,000 $0
24‐205‐232‐0007‐00 1047 Ambrosia St 0.57 Cost of Sale $1,400,000 $140,000
24‐205‐236‐0008‐00 1075 Ambrosia St 0.35 Cost of Sale $1,200,000 $120,000
24‐205‐245‐0002‐00 1192 Pine St 0.10 Cost of Sale $50,000 $20,000
24‐205‐245‐0002‐10 1194 Pine St 0.09 Cost of Sale $50,000 $20,000
24‐205‐250‐0008‐00 1155 Ambrosia St 0.61 Cost of Sale $1,200,000 $120,000
24‐205‐254‐0001‐00 1338 Arthur St 0.13 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐261‐0008‐00 1205 Ambrosia St 0.41 Cost of Sale $1,200,000 $120,000
24‐205‐266‐0001‐00 1386 Ransom St 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐281‐0002‐10 1530 Hoyt St 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐336‐0008‐00 382 W Muskegon Ave 0.24 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐340‐0001‐00 619 W Webster Ave 0.08 Cost of Sale $2,000,000 $200,000
24‐205‐345‐0001‐00 579 W Muskegon Ave 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐345‐0002‐10 583 W Muskegon Ave 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐345‐0006‐00 617 W Muskegon Ave 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐347‐0004‐00 487 W Muskegon Ave 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐352‐0004‐10 1078 2nd St 0.10 Blight Elimination $50,000 $0
24‐205‐352‐0008‐00 180 Houston Ave 0.00 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐364‐0008‐10 1141 Jefferson St 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐367‐0008‐00 1188 4th St 0.21 Blight Elimination $50,000 $0
24‐601‐000‐0001‐00 250 Monroe Ave 0.02 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐601‐000‐0006‐00 240 Monroe Ave 0.02 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐369‐0004‐00 395 Houston Ave 0.21 Cost of Sale $400,000 $40,000
24‐205‐369‐0006‐30 1262 6th St 0.07 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐371‐0004‐10 507 Houston Ave 0.10 Blight Elimination $200,000 $0
24‐205‐374‐0007‐00 462 Washington Ave 0.08 Blight Elimination $200,000 $0
24‐205‐375‐0003‐20 1392 Park St 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐375‐0005‐00 1387 7th St 0.24 Cost of Sale $400,000 $40,000
24‐205‐375‐0009‐10 408 Washington Ave 0.16 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐375‐0010‐00 420 Washington Ave 0.09 Cost of Sale $400,000 $40,000
24‐205‐376‐0007‐00 1360 7th St 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐376‐0007‐20 388 Merrill Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $400,000 $40,000
24‐205‐377‐0001‐00 1245 5th St 0.12 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐377‐0011‐00 1261 5th St 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐378‐0006‐10 1256 5th St 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐601‐000‐0008‐00 239 Monroe Ave 0.02 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐601‐000‐0010‐00 235 Monroe Ave 0.02 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐384‐0007‐20 1259 Sanford St 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐386‐0012‐00 219 Merrill Ave 0.12 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐387‐0005‐00 271 Merrill Ave 0.19 Cost of Sale $400,000 $40,000
24‐205‐387‐0007‐00 248 Mason Ave 0.14 Cost of Sale $50,000 $20,000
24‐205‐388‐0006‐20 1342 6th St 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐388‐0007‐00 1352 6th St 0.09 Cost of Sale $400,000 $40,000
24‐205‐388‐0008‐00 292 Mason Ave 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐389‐0008‐00 352 Mason Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐389‐0009‐00 346 Mason Ave 0.09 Cost of Sale $400,000 $40,000
24‐205‐389‐0012‐00 1349 6th St 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $40,000
24‐205‐390‐0011‐20 288 Washington Ave 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐391‐0003‐00 275 Mason Ave 0.18 Cost of Sale $400,000 $40,000
24‐205‐391‐0011‐00 242 Strong Ave 0.08 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐394‐0001‐00 1280 Sanford St 0.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐401‐0001‐10 1370 Sanford St 0.08 Blight Elimination $200,000 $0
24‐205‐405‐0013‐00 1464 6th St 0.17 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐405‐0014‐00 1458 6th St 0.16 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐405‐0019‐00 237 Washington Ave 0.17 Blight Elimination $200,000 $0
24‐205‐406‐0007‐00 329 Washington Ave 0.19 Blight Elimination $200,000 $0
24‐205‐406‐0018‐00 314 W Grand Ave 0.17 Blight Elimination $200,000 $0
24‐205‐407‐0004‐00 1456 Park St 0.18 Blight Elimination $200,000 $0
24‐205‐407‐0011‐10 1457 7th St 0.12 Cost of Sale $50,000 $20,000
24‐205‐408‐0002‐00 459 Washington Ave 0.46 Cost of Sale $600,000 $60,000
24‐205‐408‐0007‐00 1468 8th St 0.19 Blight Elimination $400,000 $0
24‐205‐418‐0003‐00 1514 Park St 0.19 Blight Elimination $200,000 $0
24‐205‐419‐0001‐00 355 W Grand Ave 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐419‐0001‐20 337 W Grand Ave 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐419‐0007‐00 1542 7th St 0.08 Blight Elimination $200,000 $0
24‐205‐419‐0013‐00 1535 6th St 0.16 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐419‐0019‐00 305 W Grand Ave 0.17 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐420‐0012‐20 254 W Southern Ave 0.07 Cost of Sale $50,000 $20,000
24‐205‐425‐0007‐00 1605 Sanford St 0.15 Cost of Sale $400,000 $40,000
24‐205‐428‐0007‐00 340 W Forest Ave 0.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐430‐0004‐00 487 W Southern Ave 0.26 Cost of Sale $400,000 $40,000
24‐205‐439‐0006‐10 408 W Dale Ave 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐439‐0007‐00 1670 Park St 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐440‐0004‐00 1660 7th St 0.31 Cost of Sale $400,000 $40,000
24‐205‐441‐0003‐00 1639 5th St 0.17 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐441‐0007‐00 204 W Dale Ave 0.08 Blight Elimination $200,000 $0
24‐205‐449‐0001‐00 1686 7th St 0.31 Cost of Sale $400,000 $40,000
24‐205‐449‐0009‐00 324 W Larch Ave 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐449‐0010‐00 318 W Larch Ave 0.27 Cost of Sale $400,000 $40,000
24‐205‐463‐0003‐00 1772 5th St 0.23 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐463‐0004‐00 1782 5th St 0.31 Cost of Sale $400,000 $40,000
24‐205‐484‐0004‐00 1067 W Grand Ave 0.20 Blight Elimination $50,000 $0
24‐405‐003‐0001‐00 704 Leonard Ave 0.38 Cost of Sale $400,000 $40,000
24‐405‐003‐0011‐00 766 Leonard Ave 0.38 Cost of Sale $600,000 $60,000
24‐745‐000‐0033‐00 1227 Fleming Ave 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐406‐0009‐00 0 7TH ST 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐066‐0011‐00 0 CHESTNUT ST 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐232‐004‐0010‐00 0 Jefferson St 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐391‐0006‐20 0 MASON AVE 0.06 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐248‐0002‐00 0 Sophia St 0.12 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐493‐0009‐00 0 Southern Ave 0.35 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐612‐000‐0519‐00 1003 Ducey Ave 0.22 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐612‐000‐0553‐00 1007 Albert Ave 0.31 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐190‐001‐0020‐00 1032 Evanston Ave 0.03 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐173‐0001‐00 105 E Western Ave 0.23 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐480‐002‐0018‐00 1056 WINDSOR AVE 0.12 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐069‐0006‐00 1060 Williams St 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐248‐0002‐20 1061 Wood St 0.13 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐612‐000‐0531‐00 1065 James Ave 0.30 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐190‐001‐0001‐00 1070 Evanston Ave 0.38 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐357‐0001‐10 1075 SANFORD ST 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐247‐0009‐00 1077 Sophia St 0.30 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐612‐000‐0492‐00 1085 Marquette Ave 0.25 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐215‐012‐0030‐00 1085 E Holbrook Ave 0.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐248‐0003‐00 1088 Sophia St 0.30 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐472‐0013‐00 1100 Washington Ave 0.26 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐078‐0006‐00 1114 WOOD ST 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐077‐0001‐00 1115 CHESTNUT ST 0.13 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐077‐0002‐00 1123 CHESTNUT ST 0.13 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐076‐0001‐10 1125 MAPLE ST 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐074‐0006‐10 1126 KENNETH ST 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐249‐0002‐00 1160 Ambrosia St 0.30 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐080‐0006‐00 1162 Williams St 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐382‐0001‐00 1163 Sanford St 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐613‐000‐0768‐00 1172 Marquette Ave 0.32 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐613‐000‐0755‐00 1175 Morgan Ave 0.61 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐082‐0007‐00 1186 Maple St 0.22 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐613‐000‐0780‐00 1200 Adams Ave 0.37 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐384‐0011‐00 1221 SANFORD ST 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐613‐000‐0781‐00 1224 Adams Ave 0.39 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐613‐000‐0789‐00 1227 ADAMS AVE 0.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐252‐0010‐10 1227 Pine St 0.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐745‐0002‐00 1230 Channel Dr 0.26 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐611‐000‐0484‐00 1243 Marquette Ave 0.34 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐320‐0001‐00 1249 9th St 0.98 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐611‐000‐0250‐00 1258 Wesley Ave 0.24 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐260‐0001‐30 1270 Pine St 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐252‐0003‐00 1278 Terrace St 0.27 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐745‐000‐0016‐00 1282 FLEMING AVE 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐611‐000‐0371‐00 1284 James Ave 0.24 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐771‐000‐0030‐00 1294 Williams St 0.32 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐582‐0001‐00 1296 Lakeshore Dr 0.92 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐216‐0017‐00 130 E APPLE AVE 0.22 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐376‐0001‐10 1303 6TH ST 0.07 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐611‐000‐0415‐00 1315 Ducey Ave 0.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐264‐0002‐00 1318 Pine St 0.16 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐269‐0002‐00 1320 Spring St 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐264‐0003‐00 1324 PINE ST 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐258‐0010‐00 1325 Terrace St 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐611‐000‐0234‐00 1325 Wesley Ave 0.16 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐340‐0006‐20 1326 9th St 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐611‐000‐0376‐00 1328 James Ave 0.25 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐264‐0004‐00 1334 Pine St 0.26 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐611‐000‐0413‐00 1341 Ducey Ave 0.30 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐749‐0001‐00 1351 Bluff St 0.81 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐613‐000‐0844‐00 1355 Adams Ave 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐267‐0010‐00 1355 Pine St 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐611‐000‐0472‐00 1357 Marquette Ave 0.25 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐613‐000‐0876‐00 1364 Morgan Ave 0.25 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐376‐0007‐15 1366 7th St 0.07 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐613‐000‐0839‐00 1366 Leonard Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐267‐0008‐00 1373 Pine St 0.21 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐611‐000‐0352‐00 1375 James Ave 0.40 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐342‐0009‐00 1390 Henry St 0.29 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐375‐0010‐10 1402 Park St 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐273‐0004‐00 1408 Leahy St 0.12 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐611‐000‐0408‐00 1419 Ducey Ave 0.26 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐611‐000‐0444‐00 1428 Ducey Ave 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐273‐0016‐00 1431 Hoyt St 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐274‐0006‐00 1440 Jiroch St 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐273‐0015‐00 1441 Hoyt St 0.18 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐274‐0014‐00 1451 Leahy St 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐272‐0017‐00 1459 TERRACE ST 0.18 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐408‐0013‐00 1461 Park St 0.05 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐406‐0014‐00 1480 7th St 0.06 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐272‐0011‐10 1490 HOYT ST 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐585‐0001‐00 1490 Lakeshore Dr 33.40 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐280‐0012‐00 1499 Hoyt St 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐279‐0003‐00 1518 Jiroch St 0.36 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐281‐0002‐00 1524 HOYT ST 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐280‐0009‐00 1527 Hoyt St 0.16 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐526‐0012‐00 1535 Lakeshore Dr 0.17 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐611‐000‐0453‐00 1536 Ducey Ave 0.28 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐611‐000‐0397‐00 1539 Ducey Ave 0.23 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐613‐000‐0893‐00 1542 Adams Ave 0.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐611‐000‐0214‐00 1554 Marcoux Ave 0.18 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐611‐000‐0335‐00 1556 Albert Ave 0.22 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐611‐000‐0275‐00 1561 Albert Ave 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐675‐003‐0023‐00 159 E Laketon Ave 0.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐185‐100‐0001‐00 1608 ELWOOD ST 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐295‐0001‐00 1608 Smith St 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐292‐0025‐10 1647 Terrace St 0.16 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐185‐101‐0011‐00 1657 Elwood St 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐292‐0023‐10 1679 Terrace St 0.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐609‐0001‐00 1682 Lakeshore Dr 0.77 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐128‐400‐0019‐10 1690 Creston St 1.66 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐297‐0024‐00 1691 SMITH ST 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐292‐0009‐10 1692 Hoyt St 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐297‐0005‐00 1694 PINE ST 0.13 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐206‐0003‐00 171 E WALTON AVE 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐185‐111‐0007‐00 1710 Superior St 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐296‐0017‐00 1725 WOOD ST 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐298‐0012‐00 1728 Terrace St 0.29 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐611‐0021‐40 1737 Lakeshore Dr 0.28 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐185‐119‐0011‐00 1769 Mcilwraith St 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐185‐115‐0010‐00 1773 SUPERIOR ST 0.12 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐307‐0007‐00 1778 PINE ST 0.13 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐307‐0010‐00 1783 Smith St 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐210‐000‐9991‐00 1820 Crozier Ave 1.78 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐880‐000‐0004‐00 1826 RAY ST 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐675‐004‐0020‐00 1838 Jiroch St 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐232‐012‐0008‐00 1856 Commerce St 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐206‐0011‐00 186 Myrtle Ave 0.46 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐215‐002‐0021‐00 1867 AUSTIN ST 0.23 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐675‐003‐0009‐00 1867 Hoyt St 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐890‐000‐0020‐00 1874 MANZ ST 0.12 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐255‐009‐0001‐00 1908 Superior St 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐215‐012‐0002‐00 1916 Huizenga St 0.12 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐255‐006‐0026‐00 1919 ELWOOD ST 0.13 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐215‐007‐0002‐00 1920 S Getty St 0.63 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐675‐024‐0021‐00 1930 CLINTON ST 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐215‐011‐0026‐00 1931 Huizenga St 0.47 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐796‐002‐0019‐00 1932 REYNOLDS ST 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐675‐025‐0004‐00 1933 LEAHY ST 0.13 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐215‐013‐0004‐00 1936 Brunswick St 0.13 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐255‐010‐0025‐00 1947 S Getty St 0.34 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐215‐012‐0022‐00 1957 Brunswick St 0.25 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐215‐013‐0007‐00 1962 Brunswick St 0.25 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐796‐003‐0009‐00 1967 REYNOLDS ST 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐796‐003‐0014‐00 1968 HOYT ST 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐290‐001‐0003‐00 1968 PARK ST 0.30 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐763‐001‐0019‐00 1968 Smith St 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐290‐001‐0005‐00 1974 Park St 0.17 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐255‐007‐0013‐00 1984 Elwood St 0.24 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐215‐013‐0013‐00 1992 Brunswick St 0.13 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐215‐008‐0015‐00 1994 Continental St 0.12 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐232‐004‐0009‐00 1995 Sanford St 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐622‐0004‐00 2035 BOURDON ST 0.18 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐665‐000‐0485‐00 2043 Dowd St 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐647‐0010‐00 2048 Crozier Ave 0.01 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐209‐0007‐00 205 Amity Ave 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐665‐000‐0486‐00 2051 Dowd St 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐266‐0005‐00 206 Irwin Ave 0.23 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐665‐000‐0487‐00 2065 Dowd St 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐200‐0005‐00 207 E Walton Ave 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐665‐000‐0488‐00 2075 Dowd St 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐628‐0009‐00 2105 Torrent St 0.12 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐860‐000‐0117‐00 2127 Austin St 0.12 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐209‐0005‐00 213 Amity Ave 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐205‐0004‐00 213 Myrtle Ave 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐351‐9991‐00 215 W Muskegon Ave 0.06 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐860‐000‐0052‐00 2155 Continental St 0.16 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐129‐0001‐00 216 Yuba St 0.30 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐129‐0012‐00 223 Erickson St 0.22 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐860‐000‐0159‐00 2247 Valley St 0.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐665‐000‐0442‐00 2250 Dowd St 0.23 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐666‐0006‐00 2259 Meurer Ct 0.59 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐860‐000‐0145‐00 2262 Austin St 0.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐133‐400‐0008‐03 2301 S Harvey St 0.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐667‐0006‐00 2309 Meurer Ct 0.59 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐665‐000‐0413‐00 2347 HUDSON ST 0.12 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐665‐000‐0424‐00 2358 Dowd St 0.45 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐665‐000‐0417‐00 2369 Hudson St 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐236‐0012‐00 247 Delaware Ave 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐129‐0003‐00 252 Yuba St 0.30 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐613‐000‐0681‐00 254 Meeking St 0.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐260‐0016‐00 269 Catherine Ave 0.28 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐613‐000‐0683‐00 270 Meeking St 0.60 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐210‐0009‐00 280 Allen Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐199‐0003‐00 283 E Walton Ave 0.21 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐199‐0008‐00 286 Myrtle Ave 0.21 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐264‐0012‐00 291 Mclaughlin Ave 0.18 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐210‐0010‐00 298 Allen Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐264‐0011‐00 301 Mclaughlin Ave 0.25 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐201‐0009‐00 302 Orchard Ave 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐204‐0013‐00 304 Amity Ave 0.21 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐260‐0007‐00 304 Mclaughlin Ave 0.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐210‐0003‐00 305 Amity Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐210‐0011‐00 306 Allen Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐204‐0013‐20 306 AMITY AVE 0.03 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐264‐0010‐00 307 Mclaughlin Ave 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐193‐0001‐00 307 E Muskegon Ave 0.64 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐141‐0009‐00 312 Jackson Ave 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐201‐0001‐00 313 Myrtle Ave 0.17 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐204‐0001‐00 313 Orchard Ave 0.21 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐283‐0009‐00 316 E Forest Ave 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐554‐0001‐20 32 W Western Ave 0.51 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐389‐0012‐10 320 Mason Ave 0.13 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐008‐0008‐10 320 Wood St 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐702‐0012‐08 3201 Millard Ave 0.29 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐194‐0006‐00 324 E Walton Ave 0.17 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐247‐0012‐00 325 IONA AVE 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐149‐0001‐00 325 Jackson Ave 0.21 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐194‐0001‐00 325 E Muskegon Ave 0.72 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐283‐0009‐10 326 E Forest Ave 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐250‐0005‐10 328 Catherine Ave 0.08 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐297‐0013‐10 328 E Larch Ave 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐613‐000‐0690‐00 329 Leonard Ave 0.49 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐194‐0007‐00 332 E Walton Ave 0.16 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐250‐0006‐00 334 Catherine Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐264‐0007‐00 336 Catawba Ave 0.07 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐247‐0011‐10 337 Iona Ave 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐290‐007‐0014‐00 345 Shelby St 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐419‐0001‐10 345 W Grand Ave 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐008‐0010‐00 346 Wood St 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐194‐0009‐00 346 E Walton Ave 0.58 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐563‐0010‐00 350 Shoreline Dr 4.94 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐742‐0001‐50 3510 Channel Dr 1.50 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐263‐0012‐10 355 Mclaughlin Ave 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐249‐0012‐10 357 E ISABELLA AVE 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐186‐0024‐00 36 E Muskegon Ave 0.12 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐263‐0011‐00 363 Mclaughlin Ave 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐613‐000‐0717‐00 366 Bennett St 0.25 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐763‐001‐0026‐10 367 E HOLBROOK AVE 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐249‐0010‐00 369 E ISABELLA AVE 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐211‐0010‐00 370 Allen Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐249‐0004‐00 370 Catherine Ave 0.12 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐269‐0001‐10 373 Catawba Ave 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐203‐0009‐30 373 Orchard Ave 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐249‐0004‐10 376 Catherine Ave 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐249‐0005‐00 384 Catherine Ave 0.22 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐296‐0015‐00 384 E Larch Ave 0.16 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐139‐0002‐00 388 Jackson Ave 0.36 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐249‐0006‐00 390 CATHERINE AVE 0.23 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐140‐0001‐00 396 Erickson St 0.21 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐140‐0015‐00 397 Marquette Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐407‐0007‐10 404 W Grand Ave 0.05 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐146‐0003‐00 411 Seaway Dr 0.05 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐094‐0005‐00 415 Mclaughlin Ave 0.42 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐044‐0008‐00 420 Oak Ave 0.21 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐140‐0014‐00 425 Octavius St 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐015‐0005‐10 430 LANGLEY ST 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐146‐0008‐00 431 Seaway Dr 0.05 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐370‐0007‐00 432 Monroe Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐612‐000‐0600‐00 434 Abbey St 0.37 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐094‐0003‐00 435 Mclaughlin Ave 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐376‐0006‐00 435 Monroe Ave 0.21 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐013‐0005‐00 436 Charles St 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐007‐0006‐00 438 Adams Ave 0.34 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐012‐0001‐00 445 Marquette Ave 0.99 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐045‐0005‐00 447 Oak Ave 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐007‐0005‐00 448 Adams Ave 0.37 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐068‐0011‐00 448 E ISABELLA AVE 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐094‐0002‐00 449 Mclaughlin Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐045‐0017‐00 450 Orchard Ave 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐148‐0011‐00 451 Erickson St 0.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐044‐0012‐00 452 Oak Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐007‐0004‐00 456 Adams Ave 0.35 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐079‐0001‐00 457 Catherine Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐044‐0001‐10 461 White Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐043‐0012‐00 462 White Ave 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐149‐0002‐10 466 Erickson St 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐156‐0003‐00 468 Ottawa St 0.07 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
477 MCLAUGHLIN
24‐205‐093‐0006‐00 AVE 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐066‐0006‐00 477 E Apple Ave 0.13 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐041‐0008‐10 480 Oak Ave 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐149‐0004‐00 486 Erickson St 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐077‐0009‐00 488 Catherine Ave 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
489 MCLAUGHLIN
24‐205‐093‐0005‐00 AVE 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐066‐0008‐00 492 Ada Ave 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐042‐0007‐10 492 White Ave 0.22 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐347‐0004‐10 493 W Muskegon Ave 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐430‐0005‐00 495 W Southern Ave 0.12 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐069‐0004‐00 499 ADA AVE 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐054‐0004‐00 499 Amity Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐066‐0004‐00 501 E APPLE AVE 0.21 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐077‐0010‐00 502 Catherine Ave 0.16 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐612‐000‐0620‐00 502 Mary St 0.36 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐041‐0010‐00 502 Oak Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐069‐0009‐00 502 E Isabella Ave 0.29 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐022‐0011‐00 505 Alva St 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐009‐0009‐00 509 Adams Ave 0.23 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐020‐0003‐00 509 Mclaren St 0.46 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐149‐0008‐00 509 Octavius St 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐066‐0010‐00 510 ADA AVE 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐080‐0010‐00 510 Mclaughlin Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐069‐0010‐00 510 E Isabella Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐057‐0011‐00 512 E Apple Ave 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐041‐0011‐00 514 OAK AVE 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐041‐0012‐00 518 Oak Ave 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐159‐0001‐00 522 Ottawa St 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐155‐0010‐00 523 Yuba St 0.22 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐041‐0013‐00 528 Oak Ave 0.24 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐042‐0001‐00 530 White Ave 2.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐009‐0012‐00 532 Leonard Ave 0.27 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐155‐0009‐00 535 Yuba St 0.17 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐048‐0001‐10 539 Oak Ave 0.21 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐155‐0007‐00 540 Yuba St 0.05 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐612‐000‐0645‐00 556 S Getty St 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐612‐000‐0639‐00 561 Mary St 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐102‐0016‐00 576 E Dale Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐275‐0009‐00 58 E Grand Ave 0.13 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐049‐0016‐30 586 ORCHARD AVE 0.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐049‐0016‐40 594 Orchard Ave 0.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐049‐0011‐10 595 Oak Ave 0.18 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐160‐0009‐00 599 Yuba St 0.31 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐064‐0008‐00 612 ADA AVE 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐075‐0005‐00 613 E ISABELLA AVE 0.19 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐767‐000‐0005‐00 615 Mulder St 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐040‐0001‐00 616 Oak Ave 4.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐049‐0007‐00 617 Oak Ave 0.22 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐052‐0003‐00 619 Amity Ave 0.45 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐345‐0006‐10 621 W Muskegon Ave 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐344‐0001‐00 625 W Muskegon Ave 0.21 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐340‐0001‐20 625 W Webster Ave 0.06 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐590‐001‐0016‐00 628 Mulder St 0.30 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐340‐0002‐00 631 W Webster Ave 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐049‐0005‐00 635 Oak Ave 0.17 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐340‐0002‐10 637 W Webster Ave 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐040‐0004‐20 638 Oak Ave 0.17 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐767‐000‐0011‐00 641 Glen Ct 0.13 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐082‐0012‐00 642 Mclaughlin Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐767‐000‐0001‐00 643 Mulder St 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐340‐0003‐00 643 W Webster Ave 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐064‐0012‐00 644 Ada Ave 0.28 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐033‐0001‐20 645 Wesley Ave 5.56 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐340‐0003‐10 649 W Webster Ave 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐168‐0014‐00 653 Yuba St 0.72 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐015‐0011‐00 655 MARQUETTE AVE 0.13 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐034‐0001‐00 655 MULDER ST 0.16 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐064‐0001‐00 655 E Apple Ave 0.16 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐340‐0003‐20 655 W Webster Ave 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐340‐0004‐00 661 W Webster Ave 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐015‐0011‐10 663 Marquette Ave 0.12 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐340‐0004‐10 667 W Webster Ave 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐340‐0005‐00 673 W Webster Ave 0.09 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐590‐002‐0001‐00 675 S Getty St 0.32 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐340‐0005‐10 679 W Webster Ave 0.06 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐414‐0012‐00 682 W Southern Ave 0.18 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐016‐0001‐00 685 Marquette Ave 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐340‐0006‐00 685 W Webster Ave 0.06 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐411‐0004‐00 687 Washington Ave 0.25 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐414‐0004‐00 689 W Grand Ave 0.38 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐340‐0006‐10 691 W Webster Ave 0.08 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐411‐0013‐00 692 W Grand Ave 0.26 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐558‐0001‐40 710 Shoreline Dr 1.35 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐043‐0006‐00 712 Wood St 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐405‐003‐0002‐00 716 Leonard Ave 0.17 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐405‐003‐0004‐00 720 Leonard Ave 0.17 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐037‐0001‐01 723 Sumner Ave 0.29 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐590‐001‐0011‐00 725 Wesley Ave 0.23 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐405‐003‐0005‐00 730 Leonard Ave 0.17 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐590‐001‐0021‐00 730 MARCOUX AVE 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐590‐002‐0010‐00 733 MARCOUX AVE 0.27 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐039‐0006‐50 741 S GETTY ST 0.78 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐073‐0008‐00 748 CATHERINE AVE 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐405‐003‐0007‐00 750 Leonard Ave 0.17 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐405‐003‐0010‐00 760 Leonard Ave 0.17 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐413‐0014‐00 766 W Southern Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐040‐0011‐20 768 Scott St 0.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐001‐0003‐96 770 Access Hwy 0.50 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐089‐0026‐00 776 Catawba Ave 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐434‐0001‐00 791 W Southern Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐045‐0009‐00 802 Wood St 0.37 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐442‐000‐0016‐00 810 GRACE AVE 0.22 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐045‐0011‐00 818 Wood St 0.31 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐201‐0012‐00 821 Emerald St 0.08 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐048‐0007‐00 822 Williams St 0.22 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐191‐0006‐00 824 Cedar St 0.44 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
828 W SOUTHERN
24‐205‐487‐0012‐00 AVE 0.23 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐595‐000‐0044‐00 839 Turner Ave 0.11 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐612‐000‐0631‐00 845 Ducey Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐665‐000‐0108‐00 846 Wilson Ave 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐203‐0005‐00 856 Emerald St 0.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐612‐000‐0626‐10 861 Marquette Ave 0.33 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐595‐000‐0040‐00 861 Turner Ave 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐121‐300‐0066‐00 873 STEVENS ST 0.13 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐049‐0019‐70 874 Scott St 0.15 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐250‐000‐0153‐00 876 E Isabella Ave 0.13 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐121‐300‐0116‐00 877 Amity Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐047‐0015‐00 881 Scott St 0.16 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐121‐300‐0049‐00 892 Orchard Ave 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐478‐0014‐00 900 W GRAND AVE 0.18 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐189‐0011‐00 902 Pine St 0.38 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐121‐300‐0062‐00 907 Orchard Ave 0.17 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐478‐0004‐00 909 Washington Ave 0.21 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐250‐000‐0157‐00 912 E ISABELLA AVE 0.25 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐665‐000‐0269‐00 912 W HACKLEY AVE 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐053‐0004‐10 914 SCOTT ST 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐054‐0014‐00 919 Scott St 0.20 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐205‐210‐0001‐00 923 Emerald St 0.10 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐170‐000‐0012‐00 929 E FOREST AVE 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐202‐000‐0018‐00 942 AURORA AVE 0.14 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
24‐612‐000‐0575‐00 982 Ducey Ave 0.36 Cost of Sale $200,000 $20,000
TOTALS 174.71 $127,100,000.00 $14,400,000.00
495 Total Properties
Eligible Activities, Financing, Cost of Plan (Sec. 13(1) (a) (b) (c) (d) (g))
Eligible activities include cost of sale, demo & abatement, public infrastructure and brownfield
plan preparation and development (see chart below).
Eligible Activities Chart
Eligible Activity Cost
Cost of Sale $11,400,000
Blight Elimination $0
Demo & Abatement $2,000,000
Public Infrastructure $1,000,000
Brownfield Plan Preparation and Development $20,000
Sub‐total $14,420,000
Contingency (15%) $2,163,000
Total Eligible Activities to be paid under this Plan $16,582,000
The eligible activities described above will occur on the Property and are further described as follows:
1. Cost of Sale: If the sale of a home results in a loss to the developer, the difference between the
cost of construction and the sale price is considered the cost of sale or a seller concession. Some
of these concessions could come from title work, acquisition costs and selling costs. For this Plan,
it is anticipated that each home may result in the loss of $20,000 per unit.
2. Demo & Abatement: The cost to demolish the property and return it to a developable state,
which may include lead and asbestos abatement.
3. Public Infrastructure: The cost to construct public infrastructure like alleys and water/sewer lines.
4. Brownfield Plan Preparation and Development: Costs incurred to prepare and develop this
brownfield plan, as required per Act 381 of 1996, as amended.
It is intended that the above eligible activities will be reimbursed with interest at 5%.
Effective Date of Inclusion in the Brownfield Plan
The amended Infill Housing Project was added to this Plan on 10/11, 2022 and will be amended
accordingly upon adoption of this Plan Amendment.
City of Muskegon
Brownfield Redevelopment Authority
County of Muskegon, State of Michigan
RESOLUTION APPROVING REVISED BROWNFIELD PLAN AMENDMENT
City of Muskegon Infill Housing Project, 4th Amendment
Minutes of a regular meeting of the Board of the City of Muskegon Brownfield
Redevelopment Authority, County of Muskegon, State of Michigan, held on the 11th day of October
2022, at 10:30 a.m., prevailing Eastern Time.
PRESENT: Members Brad Hastings, Michael Johnson Sr, Heidi Sytsema, Jay Wallace
Jr, Doug Pollock, LeighAnn Mikesell, Martha Bottomley
ABSENT: Members John Riegler, Jeanette Moore, Sherri Black, Michael Kleaveland
The following preamble and resolution were offered by Member LeighAnn Mikesell and
supported by Member Michael Johnson Sr.:
WHEREAS, a Brownfield Plan has been adopted pursuant to Act 381, Public Acts of
Michigan, 1996, as amended ("Act 381"), a copy of which is on file with the Secretary of the City of
Muskegon Brownfield Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority"); and
WHEREAS, the Authority is authorized to approve amendments to the Brownfield Plan and
recommends the Amendment, which updates the number of eligible properties within the City of
Muskegon Infill Housing Project, for approval to the City of Muskegon, County of Muskegon, State
of Michigan (the "City").
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
1. Approval of Brownfield Plan. The Board hereby adopts and approves the
Brownfield Plan Amendment for the City of Muskegon Infill Housing Project (4th
Amendment), and recommends the approval of the Brownfield Plan Amendments by the
Muskegon City Commission.
2. Public Hearing. The Board hereby requests city personnel to provide a notice of
Public Hearing on the proposed Brownfield Plan Amendments, and further requests that
such hearing notice be provided to all taxing jurisdictions. Notice of the time and place of
the hearing shall be given pursuant to Act 267, Public Acts of Michigan, 1976, as amended
("Open Meetings Act").
3. Deliver Resolution and Brownfield Plan to City. The Chair of the Authority is
directed to deliver a certified copy of this resolution and the Brownfield Plan Amendments to
the City Clerk.
4. Disclaimer. By adoption of this resolution and approval of the Brownfield Plan
Amendments, the Authority assumes no obligation or liability to the owner, developer or
lessor of the Eligible Property for any loss or damage that may result to such persons from
the adoption of this resolution and Brownfield Plan Amendments.
5. Work Plan Transmittal. The Chair of the Authority shall be authorized to transmit to
the Michigan Strategic Fund, the Michigan Economic Development Corporation and/or the
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, on behalf of the Authority, a final Act 381
Work Plan that has been reviewed and approved by the Authority.
6. Repealer. All resolutions and parts of resolution in conflict with the provisions of this
resolution are hereby repealed or amended to the extent of such conflict.
AYES: Brad Hastings, Michael Johnson Sr, Heidi Sytsema, Jay Wallace Jr, Doug Pollock,
LeighAnn Mikesell, Martha Bottomley
NAYS:
RESOLUTION DECLARED ADOPTED.
Martha Bottomley, Chair
City of Muskegon Brownfield Re
-2-
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE BROWNFIELD PLAN AMENDMENT
City of Muskegon Infill Housing Project, 4th Amendment
City of Muskegon
County of Muskegon, Michigan
2022-October 25
Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the City Commission of the City of Muskegon, County of
Muskegon, Michigan (the “City”), held in the City Commission Chambers on the 25th of October,
2022 at 5:30 p.m., prevailing Eastern Time.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
The following preamble and resolution were offered by Commissioner
___________________ and supported by Commissioner __________________.
WHEREAS, in accordance with the provisions of Act 381, Public Acts of Michigan, 1996,
as amended (“Act 381”), the City of Muskegon Brownfield Redevelopment Authority (the
“Authority”) has prepared and approved a Brownfield Plan Amendment to include the Infill
Housing Project (4th Amendment) in the Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Authority has forwarded the Brownfield Plan Amendment to the City
Commission requesting its approval of the Brownfield Plan Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission has provided notice and a reasonable opportunity to
the taxing jurisdictions levying taxes subject to capture to express their views and
recommendations regarding the Brownfield Plan Amendment, as required by Act 381; and
WHEREAS, not less than 10 days has passed since the City Commission provided
notice of the proposed Brownfield Plan to the taxing units; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Brownfield Plan
on October 25th, 2022.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT:
1. That the Brownfield Plan constitutes a public purpose under Act 381.
2. That the Brownfield Plan meets all the requirements of Section 13(1) of Act 381.
3. That the proposed method of financing the costs of the eligible activities, as identified
in the Brownfield Plan and defined in Act 381, is feasible and the Authority has the
authority to arrange the financing.
4. That the costs of the eligible activities proposed in the Brownfield Plan are
reasonable and necessary to carry out the purposes of Act 381.
5. That the amount of captured taxable value estimated to result from the adoption of
the Brownfield Plan is reasonable.
6. That the Brownfield Plan in the form presented is approved and is effective
immediately.
7. That all resolutions or parts of resolutions in conflict herewith shall be and the same
are hereby rescinded.
Be it Further Resolved that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute
all documents necessary or appropriate to implement the provisions of the Brownfield Plan.
AYES:
NAYS:
RESOLUTION DECLARED APPROVED.
Ann Marie Meisch, City Clerk
Kenneth D. Johnson, Mayor
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of a resolution adopted by
the City Commission of the City of Muskegon, County of Muskegon, State of Michigan, at a
regular meeting held on October 25, 2022 and that said meeting was conducted and public
notice of said meeting was given pursuant to and in full compliance with the Open Meetings Act,
being Act 267, Public Acts of Michigan, 1976, as amended, and that the minutes of said meeting
were kept and will be or have been made available as required by said Act.
Ann Marie Meisch, City Clerk
Agenda Item Review Form
Muskegon City Commission
Commission Meeting Date: October 25, 2022 Title: City Manager Contract
Submitted By: Mayor Johnson Department: Mayor’s Office
Brief Summary: To approve an agreement with Jonathan Seyferth as City Manager beginning
November 28, 2022.
Detailed Summary & Background: The City Commission interviewed several candidates for City
Manager and voted to offer the position to Jonathan Seyferth by a 5-2 vote. An agreement has
been reached with the candidate for an annual salary of $148,000 beginning November 28, 2022.
Goal/Focus Area/Action Item Addressed:
Amount Requested: NA Amount Budgeted:
Fund(s) or Account(s): Fund(s) or Account(s):
Recommended Motion: To approve the agreement as presented.
Approvals: Get approval from division head at a minimum prior Guest(s) Invited / Presenting
to sending to the Clerk.
Immediate Division Head Information Technology Yes
Other Division Heads Communication No
Legal Review
For City Clerk Use Only:
Commission Action:
Agenda Item Review Form
Muskegon City Commission
Commission Meeting Date: October 25, 2022 Title: Sale of 1227 Pine
Street
Submitted By: LeighAnn Mikesell Department: City Manager
Brief Summary: Staff is requesting approval of the purchase agreement for 1227 Pine Street.
Detailed Summary & Background:
1227 Pine Street was constructed through the agreement with Dave Dusendang to construct infill
housing with ARPA funding.
Goal/Focus Area/Action Item Addressed:
Create an environment that effectively attracts new residents and retains existing residents by
filling existing employment gaps, attracting new and diverse businesses to the city, and expanding
access to a variety of high-quality housing options in Muskegon. Diverse housing types
Amount Requested: N/A Amount Budgeted: N/A
Fund(s) or Account(s): Fund(s) or Account(s):
Recommended Motion: to approve the purchase agreement for 1227 Pine Street.
Approvals: Guest(s) Invited / Presenting
Immediate Division Head Information Technology
Yes
Other Division Heads Communication
No
Legal Review
For City Clerk Use Only:
Commission Action:
dotloop signature verification: dtlp.us/U0ac-1jiH-vLxQ
WEST MICHIGAN REGIONAL PURCHASE AGREEMENT
#
DATE: 10/21/2022 , (time) MLS #
SELLING OFFICE: Grand Rapids Keller Williams East BROKER LIC.#: 650298151 REALTOR® PHONE: 616-363-1660
LISTING OFFICE: West Urban Realty REALTOR® PHONE: 6163662459
1. Effective Date: This Agreement is effective on the date of Seller's acceptance of Buyer's offer or Buyer's acceptance of any
counteroffer, as the case may be, and this date shall hereafter be referred to as the "Effective Date". Further, any reference to "days"
in this Agreement refers to calendar days. The first calendar day begins at 12:01 a.m. on the day after the Effective Date. Any reference
to "time" refers to local time.
2. Agency Disclosure: The Undersigned Buyer and Seller each acknowledge that they have read and signed the Disclosure Regarding
Real Estate Agency Relationships. The selling licensee is acting as (choose one):
Agent/Subagent of Seller Buyer’s Agent Dual Agent (with written, informed consent of both Buyer and Seller)
Transaction Coordinator
Primary Selling Agent Name: David Gregory Email: david@smalleganrealestate.co Lic.#: 6501447362
Alternate Selling Agent Name: Mike Smallegan Email: Mike@smalleganrealestate.com Lic.#: 6506048009
3. Seller’s Disclosure Statement: (This paragraph applies to sales of one-to-four family residential units.)
Buyer has received the Seller’s Disclosure Statement, dated . Seller certifies to Buyer that the Property
is currently in the same condition as Seller previously disclosed in that statement. Seller agrees to inform Buyer in writing of any
changes in the content of the disclosure statement.
Buyer has not received the Seller’s Disclosure Statement. Buyer may terminate this Agreement, in writing, any time prior to receipt
of the Seller’s Disclosure Statement. Once Buyer has received the Seller’s Disclosure Statement, Buyer may terminate this
Agreement, in writing, within 72 hours of receipt if the disclosure was received in person, or within 120 hours if received by
registered mail. Exceptions:
Seller is exempt from the requirements of the Seller Disclosure Act.
4. Lead-Based Paint Addendum: Transactions involving homes built prior to 1978 require a written disclosure which is hereby attached
and will be an integral part of this Agreement.
5. Property Description: Buyer offers to buy the property located in the City Village Township of Muskegon ,
County of Muskegon County , Michigan, commonly known as (insert mailing address: street/city/state/zip code)
1227 Pine Street, Muskegon, MI 49442
with the following legal description and tax parcel ID numbers:
PP# 24-205-252-0010-10 .
The following paragraph applies only if the Premises include unplatted land:
Seller agrees to grant Buyer at closing the right to make (insert number) division(s) under Section 108(2), (3), and
(4) of the Michigan Land Division Act. (If no number is inserted, the right to make divisions under the sections referenced above stays
with any remainder of the parent parcel retained by Seller. If a number is inserted, Seller retains all available divisions in excess of the
number stated; however, Seller and/or REALTOR® do not warrant that the number of divisions stated is actually available.) If this sale
will create a new division, Seller’s obligations under this Agreement are contingent on Seller’s receipt of municipal approval on or
before , of the proposed division to create the Premises.
6. Purchase Price: Buyer offers to buy the Property for the sum of $ 180000
one hundred eighty thousand U.S. Dollars
7. Seller Concessions, if any: $10,800
8. Terms: The Terms of Purchase will be as indicated by “X” below: (Other unmarked terms of purchase do not apply.)
SOURCE OF FUNDS TO CLOSE: Buyer represents that the funds necessary to close this transaction on the terms specified below
are currently available to Buyer in cash or an equally liquid equivalent.
If the Property’s value stated in an appraisal obtained by Buyer or Buyer’s lender is less than the Purchase Price, Buyer shall within
three (3) days after receipt of the appraisal: 1) renegotiate with the Seller, 2) terminate the transaction, in which case Buyer shall
receive a refund of Buyer’s Earnest Money Deposit, or 3) proceed to close the transaction at the agreed Purchase Price.
CASH. The full Purchase Price upon execution and delivery of Warranty Deed. Buyer Agrees to provide Buyer Agent/Dual Agent
verification of funds within five (5) days after the Effective Date, and consents to the disclosure of such information to Seller and/or
Seller’s Agent. If verification of funds is not received within 5 days after the Effective Date, Seller may terminate this Agreement
at any time before verification of funds is received by giving written notice to Buyer. Any appraisal required by Buyer shall be
arranged and paid for by Buyer within ten (10) days after the Effective Date of this Agreement.
NEW MORTGAGE. The full Purchase Price upon execution and delivery of Warranty Deed, contingent upon Buyer’s ability to
obtain a 30 type FHA (year) mortgage in the amount of 96.5 % of the Purchase Price
bearing interest at a rate not to exceed 8 % per annum (rate at time of loan application), on or before the date the sale is
to be closed. Buyer agrees to apply for a mortgage loan, and pay all fees and costs customarily charged by Buyer’s lender to
process the application, within days after the Effective Date, not to impair Buyers’ credit after the date such loan if
offered. Seller Buyer will agree to pay an amount not to exceed $ 0 representing repairs required as a
condition of financing. Buyer agrees does not agree to authorize Buyer’s Agent/Dual Agent to obtain information from
©Copyright, West Michigan REALTOR® Associations
Page 1 of 6 Rev. Date 8/2022 JM DJ Buyer’s Initials LM Seller’s Initials
10/22/22 10/22/22 10/25/22
5:45 PM EDT 9:56 AM EDT 8:53 AM EDT
dotloop signature verification: dtlp.us/U0ac-1jiH-vLxQ
West Michigan Regional Purchase Agreement Page 2 of 6
Buyer’s lender regarding Buyer’s financing, and consents to the disclosure of this information to Seller and/or Seller’s Agent.
Exceptions:
SELLER FINANCING (choose one of the following): CONTRACT or PURCHASE MONEY MORTGAGE
In the case of Seller financing, Buyer agrees to provide Seller with a credit report within 72 hours after the Effective Date. If the
credit report is unacceptable to Seller, Seller shall have the right to terminate this offer within 48 hours of Seller’s receipt, or if
Buyer fails to provide said credit report to Seller within the time frame allotted, Seller shall have the right to terminate this offer
within 48 hours. Seller is advised to seek professional advice regarding the credit report.
$ upon execution and delivery of a
form (name or type of form and revision date), a copy of which is attached, wherein the balance of $
will be payable in monthly installments of $ or more including interest at % per annum,
interest to start on date of closing, and first payment to become due thirty (30) days after date of closing. The entire unpaid balance
will become due and payable months after closing. Any appraisal required by Buyer shall be arranged and
paid for by Buyer within ten (10) days after the Effective Date of this Agreement. Exceptions:
EQUITY (choose one of the following): Formal Assumption or Informal Assumption
Upon execution and delivery of: Warranty Deed subject to existing mortgage OR Assignment of Vendee Interest
in Land Contract, Buyer to pay the difference (approximately $ ) between the Purchase Price above
provided and the unpaid balance (approximately $ ) upon said mortgage or land contract, which Buyer
agrees to assume and pay. Buyer agrees to reimburse Seller for accumulated funds held in escrow, if any, for payment of future
taxes and insurance premiums, etc. Any appraisal required by Buyer shall be arranged and paid for by Buyer within ten
(10) days after the Effective Date of this Agreement. Exceptions:
OTHER:
9. Contingencies: Buyer’s obligation to consummate this transaction (choose one):
IS NOT CONTINGENT - is not contingent upon the sale or exchange of any other property by Buyer.
IS CONTINGENT UPON CLOSING - is contingent upon closing of an existing sale or exchange of Buyer’s property located at:
A copy of Buyer’s agreement to sell or exchange that property is being delivered to Seller along with this offer. If the existing sale
or exchange terminates for any reason, Buyer will immediately notify Seller, and either party may terminate this Agreement in
writing, within 3 days of Buyer’s notice to Seller. If either party terminates, Buyer shall receive a refund of any applicable Earnest
Money Deposit.
IS CONTINGENT UPON THE SALE AND CLOSING - is contingent upon the execution of a binding agreement and the closing
of a sale or exchange of Buyer’s property located at
on or before . Seller will have the right to continue to
market Seller’s Property until Buyer enters into a binding agreement to sell or exchange Buyer’s property and delivers a copy
thereof to Seller. During such marketing period, Seller may enter into a binding contract for sale to another purchaser on such
price and terms as the Seller deems appropriate. In such event, this Agreement will automatically terminate, Buyer will be notified
promptly, and Buyer’s Earnest Money Deposit will be refunded. Exceptions:
10. Fixtures & Improvements: The following is not intended to be an all-inclusive list of items included with the Property. All
improvements and appurtenances are included in the Purchase Price, if now in or on the Property, unless rented, including the
following: all buildings; landscaping; attached smart home devices; attached security systems; lighting fixtures and their shades and
bulbs; ceiling fans; hardware for draperies and curtains; window shades and blinds; built-in kitchen appliances, including garbage
disposal and drop-in ranges; wall to wall carpeting, if attached; all attached mirrors; all attached TV mounting brackets; all attached
shelving; attached work benches; stationary laundry tubs; water softener; water heater; incinerator; sump pump; water pump and
pressure tank; heating and air conditioning equipment (window units excluded); attached humidifiers; heating units, including add-on
heating stoves and heating stoves connected by flue pipe; fireplace screens, inserts, and grates; fireplace doors, if attached; liquid
heating and cooking fuel tanks; TV antenna and complete rotor equipment; satellite dish and necessary accessories and complete
rotor equipment; all support equipment for inground pools; screens and storm windows and doors; awnings; installed basketball
backboard, pole and goal; mailbox; flagpole(s); fencing, invisible inground fencing and all related equipment, including collars;
detached storage buildings; underground sprinkling, including the pump; installed outdoor grills; all plantings and bulbs; garage door
opener and control(s); and any and all items and fixtures permanently affixed to the Property; and also includes:
Dishwasher, Microwave
but does not include:
1227 Pine Street, Muskegon, MI 49442
Subject Property Address/Description Date Time
©Copyright, West Michigan REALTOR® Associations
Revision Date 8/2022 JM DJ Buyer’s Initials LM Seller’s Initials
10/22/22 10/22/22 10/25/22
5:45 PM EDT 9:56 AM EDT 8:53 AM EDT
dotloop verified dotloop verified dotloop verified
dotloop signature verification: dtlp.us/U0ac-1jiH-vLxQ
West Michigan Regional Purchase Agreement Page 3 of 6
11. Heating and Cooking Fuels: Liquid heating and cooking fuels in tanks are included in the sale and will transfer to Buyer at time of
possession unless usage is metered (in which case it is not included in the sale). Sellers are responsible for maintaining heating and
cooking liquid fuels at an operational level and shall not permit fuels to fall below 10% in the tank(s) at the time of possession, except
that the tank(s) may be empty only if now empty. Further, Seller is precluded from removing fuel from tank(s) other than what is
expended through normal use. Exceptions:
12. Assessments (choose one):
If the Property is subject to any assessments,
Seller shall pay the entire balance of any such assessments that are due and payable on or before the day of closing (regardless
of any installment arrangements), except for any fees that are required to connect to public utilities.
Seller shall pay all installments of such assessments that become due and payable on or before day of closing. Buyer shall assume
and pay all other installments of such assessments.
13. Property Taxes: Seller will be responsible for any taxes billed prior to those addressed below. Buyer will be responsible for all
taxes billed after those addressed below.
Buyer is also advised that the state equalized value of the Property, principal residence exemption information and other real property
tax information is available from the appropriate local assessor’s office. Buyer should not assume that Buyer’s future tax bills on the
Property will be the same as Seller’s present tax bills. Under Michigan law, real property tax obligations can change significantly when
property is transferred.
No proration. (Choose one):
Buyer Seller will pay taxes billed summer (year);
Buyer Seller will pay taxes billed winter (year);
Calendar Year Proration (all taxes billed or to be billed in the year of the closing). Calendar year tax levies will be estimated, if
necessary, using the taxable value and the millage rate(s) in effect on the day of closing, broken down to a per diem tax payment
and prorated to the date of closing with Seller paying for January 1 through the day before closing.
Fiscal Year Proration - Taxes will be prorated as though they are paid in (choose one): advance. arrears.
Fiscal Year will be assumed to cover a 12-month period from date billed, and taxes will be prorated to the date of closing. Fiscal
year tax levies will be estimated, if necessary, using the taxable value and millage rate(s) in effect on the day of closing, broken
down to a per diem tax payment and prorated to the date of closing with Seller paying through the day before closing. Exceptions:
14. Well/Septic: Within ten (10) days after the Effective Date, (choose one) Seller or Buyer will arrange for, at their own expense,
an inspection of the primary well used for human consumption (including a water quality test for coliform bacteria and nitrates) and
septic systems in use on the Property. The inspection will be performed by a qualified inspector in a manner that meets county (or
other local governmental authority, if applicable) protocol.
If any report discloses a condition unsatisfactory to Buyer, or doesn’t meet county standards that are a condition of sale, Buyer may,
within three (3) days after Buyer has received the report, by written notice to Seller, either terminate this Agreement and receive a
refund of Buyer’s Earnest Money Deposit, or make a written proposal to Seller to correct those unsatisfactory conditions. If Buyer fails
to make a written proposal within the above referenced time period, then Buyer will be deemed to have accepted the well/septic as-
is. Seller will respond in writing within three (3) days to Buyer’s request. If Seller fails to respond or to arrive at a mutually agreeable
resolution within three (3) days after Seller’s receipt of Buyer’s proposal, Buyer will have three (3) days to provide written notice of
termination of this Agreement and receive a refund of any applicable Earnest Money Deposit. If Buyer fails to terminate the contract,
Buyer will proceed to closing according to the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
Other:
15. Inspections & Investigations:
Inspections: Buyer, or someone selected by Buyer, has the right to inspect the buildings, premises, components and systems, at
Buyer’s expense. Any damage, misuse, abuse, or neglect of any portion of the Property or premises as a result of inspections will be
Buyer’s responsibility and expense.
Investigations: It is Buyer’s responsibility to investigate (i) whether the Property complies with applicable codes and local ordinances
and whether the Property is zoned for Buyer’s intended use; (ii) whether Buyer can obtain a homeowner’s insurance policy for the
Property at price and terms acceptable to Buyer; (iii) and whether or not the Property is in a flood zone.
All inspections and investigations will be completed within 10
____ days after the Effective Date. If the results of Buyer’s inspections and
investigations are not acceptable to Buyer, Buyer may, within the above referenced period, by written notice to Seller, either terminate
this Agreement and receive a refund of Buyer’s Earnest Money Deposit, or make a written proposal to Seller to correct those
unsatisfactory conditions. If Buyer fails to make a written proposal within the above referenced time period, then Buyer will be
1227 Pine Street, Muskegon, MI 49442
Subject Property Address/Description Date Time
©Copyright, West Michigan REALTOR® Associations
Revision Date 8/2022 JM DJ Buyer’s Initials LM Seller’s Initials
10/22/22 10/22/22 10/25/22
5:45 PM EDT 9:56 AM EDT 8:53 AM EDT
dotloop verified dotloop verified dotloop verified
dotloop signature verification: dtlp.us/U0ac-1jiH-vLxQ
West Michigan Regional Purchase Agreement Page 4 of 6
deemed to have accepted the Property as-is. Seller may negotiate with Buyer, or by written notice to Buyer, accept Buyer’s proposal
or terminate this Agreement. If Seller fails to respond, or to arrive at a mutually agreeable resolution within three (3) days after Seller’s
receipt of Buyer’s proposal, Buyer shall have three (3) days to provide written notice of termination of this Agreement and receive a
refund of any applicable Earnest Money Deposit. If Buyer fails to terminate this Agreement within said three (3) day period, Buyer will
be deemed to accept the Inspections & Investigations and will proceed to closing according to the terms and conditions of this
Agreement.
Buyer has waived all rights under this Inspections & Investigations paragraph.
Exceptions:
16. Municipal Compliances: Seller will arrange and pay for current certificates of occupancy, sidewalk compliance, and smoke detector
ordinances, if applicable.
17. Title Insurance: Seller agrees to convey marketable title to the Property subject to conditions, limitations, reservation of oil, gas and
other mineral rights, existing zoning ordinances, and building and use restrictions and easements of record. An expanded coverage
ALTA Homeowner’s Policy of Title Insurance in the amount of the Purchase Price shall be ordered by Seller and furnished to Buyer at
Seller’s expense, and a commitment to issue a policy insuring marketable title vested in Buyer, including a real estate tax status
report, will be made available to Buyer within ten (10) days after the Effective Date. If Buyer so chooses, or if an expanded policy is
not applicable, then a standard ALTA Owners’ Policy of Title Insurance shall be provided.
If Buyer objects to any conditions, Buyer may, within three (3) days of receipt of the Title Commitment, by written notice to Seller,
either terminate this Agreement and receive a refund of Buyer’s Earnest Money Deposit, or make a written proposal to Seller to correct
those unsatisfactory conditions. If Buyer fails to make a written proposal within the above referenced time period, then Buyer will be
deemed to have accepted the Title Commitment as-is. Seller may negotiate with Buyer, or by written notice to Buyer, accept Buyer’s
proposal or terminate this Agreement. If Seller fails to respond, or to arrive at a mutually agreeable resolution within three (3) days
after Seller’s receipt of Buyer’s proposal, Buyer shall have three (3) days to provide written notice of termination of this Agreement and
shall receive a refund of any applicable Earnest Money Deposit. If Buyer fails to terminate this Agreement within said three (3) day
period, Buyer will be deemed to accept the Title Commitment as-is and will proceed to closing according to the terms and conditions
of this Agreement. Exceptions:
18. Property Survey: Broker advises that Buyer should have a survey performed to satisfy Buyer as to the boundaries of the Property
and the location of improvements thereon.
Buyer or Seller (choose one) shall within ten (10) days of the Effective Date, order, at their expense, a boundary survey with iron
corner stakes showing the location of the boundaries, improvements and easements in connection with the Property. Upon receipt of
the survey, Buyer will have three (3) days to review the survey. If the survey shows any condition, in Buyer’s sole discretion, which
would interfere with Buyer’s intended use of the Property, the marketability of the title, or zoning non-compliance, then Buyer may,
within said three (3) day period, terminate this Agreement, in writing, and Buyer will receive a full refund of Buyer’s Earnest Money
Deposit.
No survey. Buyer has waived all rights under this paragraph.
When closing occurs, Buyer shall be deemed to have accepted the boundaries of the Property and the location of such improvements
thereon. Exceptions:
19. Home Protection Plan: Buyer and Seller have been informed that home protection plans may be available. Such plans may provide
additional protection and benefit to the parties. Exceptions:
20. Prorations: Rent; association dues/fees, if any; insurance, if assigned; interest on any existing land contract, mortgage or lien
assumed by Buyer; will all be adjusted to the date of closing. For the purposes of calculating prorations, it is presumed that Seller
owns the Property through the day before closing.
21. Closing: If agreeable to Buyer and Seller, the sale will be closed as soon as closing documents are ready, but not later than
12/07/2022 . An additional period of fifteen (15) days will be allowed for closing to accommodate the correction of
title defects or survey problems which can be readily corrected, or for delays in obtaining any lender required inspections/repairs. During
this additional period, the closing will be held within 5 days after all parties have been notified that all necessary documents have been
prepared. Buyer and Seller will each pay their title company closing fee, if applicable, except in the case of VA financing where Seller
will pay the entire closing fee. Exceptions:
22. Pre-Closing Walk-Through: Buyer (choose one) reserves waives the right to conduct a final walk-through of the
Property within three (3) days of the scheduled closing date. The purpose of the walk-through is to determine that the Property is in
a substantially similar condition as of the Effective Date, any contractually agreed upon items have been fulfilled, and that any included
personal property is still located at the Property. Buyer shall immediately report to Seller any objections to these conditions and Buyer’s
requested corrective action.
23. Possession: Seller will maintain the Property in its present condition until the completion of the closing of the sale. Possession to be
delivered to Buyer, subject to rights of present tenants, if any.
At the completion of the closing of the sale.
At a.m. p.m. on the day after completion of the closing of the sale, during which time Seller
1227 Pine Street, Muskegon, MI 49442
Subject Property Address/Description Date Time
©Copyright, West Michigan REALTOR® Associations
JM DJ Buyer’s Initials LM Seller’s Initials
Revision Date 8/2022 10/22/22 10/22/22 10/25/22
5:45 PM EDT 9:56 AM EDT 8:53 AM EDT
dotloop verified dotloop verified dotloop verified
dotloop signature verification: dtlp.us/U0ac-1jiH-vLxQ
West Michigan Regional Purchase Agreement Page 5 of 6
will have the privilege to occupy the Property and hereby agrees to pay Buyer $ as an occupancy
fee for this period payable at closing, WITHOUT PRORATION. Payment shall be made in the form of cash or certified funds.
If Seller fails to deliver possession to Buyer on the agreed date, Seller shall become a tenant at sufferance and shall pay to Buyer as
liquidated damages $ per day plus all of the Buyer’s actual reasonable attorney's fees incurred in removing the Seller
from the Property.
If Seller occupies the Property after closing, Seller will pay all utilities during such occupancy. Buyer will maintain the structure and
mechanical systems at the Property. However, any repairs or replacements necessitated by Seller’s misuse, abuse, or neglect of any
portion of the Property will be Seller’s responsibility and expense.
On the agreed delivery date, Seller shall deliver the Property free of trash and debris and in broom-clean condition, shall remove all
personal property (unless otherwise stated in this or an additional written agreement), shall make arrangements for final payment on
all utilities, and shall deliver all keys to Buyer. Exceptions:
24. Earnest Money Deposit: For valuable consideration, Buyer gives Seller until 11:59 PM (time) on
10/22/2022 (date), to deliver the written acceptance of this offer and agrees that this offer, when accepted by
Seller, will constitute a binding Agreement between Buyer and Seller. An Earnest Money Deposit in the amount of $ 1000
shall be submitted to Grand Rapids Keller Williams East (insert name of broker, title
company, other) within 72 hours of the Effective Date of this Agreement, and shall be applied against the Purchase Price. If the Earnest
Money Deposit is not received within 72 hours of the Effective Date or is returned for insufficient funds, Seller may terminate this
Agreement until such time as the Earnest Money Deposit is received. If Seller terminates this Agreement under this provision, Seller
waives any claim to the Earnest Money Deposit. If the sale is not closed due to a failure to satisfy a contingency for a reason other
than the fault of Buyer, the Earnest Money Deposit shall be refunded to Buyer. If the sale is not closed as provided in this Agreement
and Buyer and Seller do not agree to the disposition of the Earnest Money Deposit, then Buyer and Seller agree that the Broker holding
the Earnest Money Deposit may notify Buyer and Seller, in writing, of Broker’s intended disposition of the Earnest Money Deposit. If
Buyer and Seller do not object to such disposition in writing within fifteen (15) days after the date of Broker’s notice, they will be deemed
to have agreed to Broker’s proposed disposition; if either Buyer or Seller object and no mutually agreeable disposition can be
negotiated, Broker may deposit the funds by interpleader with a court of proper jurisdiction or await further actions by Buyer and Seller.
In the event of litigation involving the deposit, in whole or in part, either the Seller or the Buyer that is not the prevailing party, as
determined by the court, will reimburse the other for reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses incurred in connection with the litigation,
and will reimburse the Broker for any reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses incurred in connection with any interpleader action
instituted. If the entity holding the Earnest Money Deposit is not the Broker, then to the extent that the terms of any escrow agreement
conflict with this paragraph, then the terms and conditions of the escrow agreement shall control.
25. Professional Advice: Broker hereby advises Buyer and Seller to seek legal, tax, environmental and other appropriate professional
advice relating to this transaction. Broker does not make any representations or warranties with respect to the advisability of, or the
legal effect of this transaction. Buyer further acknowledges that REALTOR® above named in the Agreement hereby recommends to
Buyer that an attorney be retained by Buyer to pass upon the marketability of the title and to ascertain that the required details of the
sale are adhered to before the transaction is consummated. Buyer agrees that Buyer is not relying on any representation or statement
made by Seller or any real estate salesperson (whether intentionally or negligently) regarding any aspect of the Property or this sale
transaction, except as may be expressly set forth in this Agreement, a written amendment to this Agreement, or a disclosure statement
separately signed by Seller.
26. Disclosure of Information: Buyer and Seller acknowledge and agree that the Purchase Price, terms, and other details with respect
to this transaction (when closed) are not confidential, will be disclosed to REALTORS® who participate in the applicable Multiple Listing
Service, and may otherwise be used and/or published by that Multiple Listing Service in the ordinary course of its business.
27. Other Provisions:
12 month builders warrany
28. Mergers and Integrations: This Agreement is the final expression of the complete agreement of Buyer and Seller, and there are no
oral agreements existing between Buyer and Seller relating to this transaction. This Agreement may be amended only in writing signed
by Buyer and Seller and attached to this Agreement.
29. Fax/Electronic Distribution and Electronic Signatures: Buyer and Seller agree that any signed copy of this Agreement, and any
amendments or addendums related to this transaction, transmitted by facsimile or other electronic means shall be competent evidence
of its contents to the same effect as an original signed copy. Buyer and Seller further agree that an electronic signature is the legal
equivalent of a manual or handwritten signature, and consent to use of electronic signatures. Buyer and Seller agree that any notice(s)
required or permitted under this Agreement may also be transmitted by facsimile or other electronic means.
30. Wire Fraud: Seller and Buyer are advised that wire fraud is an increasingly common problem. If you receive any electronic
1227 Pine Street, Muskegon, MI 49442
Subject Property Address/Description Date Time
©Copyright, West Michigan REALTOR® Associations
JM DJ Buyer’s Initials LM Seller’s Initials
Revision Date 8/2022 10/22/22 10/22/22 10/25/22
5:45 PM EDT 9:56 AM EDT 8:53 AM EDT
dotloop verified dotloop verified dotloop verified
dotloop signature verification: dtlp.us/U0ac-1jiH-vLxQ
West Michigan Regional Purchase Agreement Page 6 of 6
communication directing you to transfer funds or provide nonpublic personal information (such as social security numbers, drivers’
license numbers, wire instructions, bank account numbers, etc.), even if that electronic communication appears to be from the
Broker, Title Company, or Lender, DO NOT reply until you have verified the authenticity of the email by direct communication with
Broker, Title Company, or Lender. DO NOT use telephone numbers provided in the email. Such requests may be part of a scheme
to steal funds or use your identity.
31. Buyer’s Approval and Acknowledgment: Buyer approves the terms of this offer and acknowledges receipt of a copy of this offer.
Buyer 1 Address X Jelani McKenzie Buyer
dotloop verified
10/22/22 5:45 PM EDT
FTJI-XGPE-VDO6-ON1R
Buyer 1 Phone: (Res.) 231-689-8815 (Bus.) Jelani Mckenzie
Print name as you want it to appear on documents.
Buyer 2 Address X Devin Jones Buyer
dotloop verified
10/22/22 9:56 AM EDT
PLML-NYYI-MTZA-5JIV
Buyer 2 Phone: (Res.) 231-329-5477 (Bus.) Devin Jones
Print name as you want it to appear on documents.
32. Seller’s Response: The above offer is approved: As written. As written except:
Sales Price to be $181000
Builders home warranty effective from date of occupancy permit issued by the city of muskegon
Counteroffer, if any, expires 10/25/2022 , at 5pm (time). Seller has the right to withdraw this
counteroffer and to accept other offers until Seller or Seller’s Agent has received notice of Buyer’s acceptance.
33. Certification of Previous Disclosure Statement: Seller certifies to Buyer that the Property is currently in the same condition as
disclosed in the Seller’s Disclosure Statement dated (choose one): Yes No. Seller agrees to inform
Buyer in writing of any changes in the content of the disclosure statement prior to closing.
34. Notice to Seller: Seller understands that consummation of the sale or transfer of the Property described in this Agreement will not
relieve Seller of any liability that Seller may have under the mortgages to which the Property is subject, unless otherwise agreed to by
the lender or required by law or regulation. Buyer and Seller are advised that a Notice to Seller & Buyer of Underlying Mortgage form
is available from the respective agents via the West Michigan REALTOR® Boards.
35. Listing Office Address: 255 W Western Ave, Muskegon, MI 49440 Listing Broker License # 6505429509
Listing Agent Name: Mariana Murillo VanDam Listing Agent License # Mariana Murillo VanDam
36. Seller’s Approval and Acknowledgment: Seller approves the terms of this Agreement and acknowledges receipt of a copy. If Seller’s
response occurs after Buyer’s offer expires, then Seller’s response is considered a counteroffer and Buyer’s acceptance is required
below.
X (Seller’s Signature, Date, Time): LeighAnn Miksell
dotloop verified
10/25/22 2:54 PM EDT
TNNB-9Y9Y-SNRM-CTAS
Is Seller a U.S. Citizen or Resident Alien? Yes No*
Print name as you want it to appear on documents.
X (Seller’s Signature, Date, Time):
Is Seller a U.S. Citizen or Resident Alien? Yes No*
Print name as you want it to appear on documents.
Seller’s Address: Seller’s Phone (Res.) (Bus)
* If Seller(s) is not a U.S. Citizen or Resident Alien, there may be tax implications and Buyer and Seller are advised to seek professional advice.
37. Buyer’s Receipt/Acceptance: Buyer acknowledges receipt of Seller’s response to Buyer’s offer. In the event Seller’s response
constitutes a counteroffer, Buyer accepts said counteroffer. All other terms and conditions in the offer remain unchanged.
X (Buyer’s Signature, Date, Time):
X (Buyer’s Signature, Date, Time):
38. Seller’s Receipt: Seller acknowledges receipt of Buyer’s acceptance of counter offer.
X (Seller’s Signature, Date, Time): LeighAnn Miksell
dotloop verified
10/25/22 2:54 PM EDT
WDA0-HMTG-IPPF-YIS1
X (Seller’s Signature, Date, Time):
1227 Pine Street, Muskegon, MI 49442
Subject Property Address/Description Date Time
©Copyright, West Michigan REALTOR® Associations
Revision Date 8/2022 JM DJ Buyer’s Initials LM Seller’s Initials
10/22/22 10/22/22 10/25/22
5:45 PM EDT 9:56 AM EDT 8:53 AM EDT
dotloop verified dotloop verified dotloop verified
Sign up for City of Muskegon Emails