City Commission Worksession Agenda 12-03-2007

View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer

                           CITY OF MUSKEGON
                     CITY COMMISSION WORKSESSION
                                  AND
                    COMMUNITY RELATIONS COMMITTEE

                           Monday, December 3, 2007
                                   5:30 p.m.
                           City Commission Chambers


                               AGENDA

I.   Muskegon/Webster Speed Limit and Traffic Lights. ENGINEERING

2.   Renaissance Zone Extensions. PLANNING

3.   Summer Property Tax Collections. TREASURER

4.   Any Other Business.



           COMMUNITY RELATIONS AGENDA

I.   Approval of November 5, 2007, Minutes.

2.   Appointment to the DDA.

3.   Any Other Business.

4.   Adjournment.
                                       City of Muskegon
                                 City Commission Worksession
                                  Monday, December 3, 2007
                                  City Commission Chambers
                                            5:30 PM

                                          MINUTES


2007-102
Present: Commissioners Warmington, Gawron, Shepherd, Spataro, and Wisneski.
Absent: Commissioner Carter and Wierengo.

Muskegon/Webster Speed Limit and Traffic Lights
The tum back of Muskegon and Webster to two-way traffic was completed on November 15,
2007. There have been no reported accidents. There have been a few requests to add additional
on street parking.

City Commissioners made inquiries regarding possible additional changes including signage.

City Engineer, Mohammad Al-Shatel, responded.

Police Chief Kleibecker indicated that State Law mandates that proper testing take place before
the speed limit can be adjusted. Testing should happen in the spring.

Renaissance Zone Extensions
It was the consensus of the Commission to place each Renaissance Zone extension request on the
agenda for City Commission consideration.

Summer Property Tax Collection
Motion by Commissioner Spataro, seconded by Vice Mayor Gawron to adopt the
resolution to begin collection of the State Education Tax in a summer levy beginning with
the summer 2008 levy.

Ayes: Spataro, Warmington, Wisneski, Gawron, and Shepherd.
Nays: None.

                                                                  MOTION PASSES

Adiournment
Motion by Commissioner Wisneski, seconded by Commissioner Shepherd to adjourn at
6:30 p.m.

                                                                  MOTION PASSES



                                                         ~ ; : \ , ~ ~·u           SL J-~
                                                            Ann Marie Becker, MMC
                                                                City Clerk
                          CITY OF MUSKEGON

             COMMISSION WORKSESSION MEETING

                             RESCHEDULED


The Commission Worksession Meeting that was scheduled for
Monday, December 10, 2007, has been rescheduled to Monday,
December 3, 2007, at 5:30 p.m. in the City Commission
Chambers, 933 Terrace, Muskegon. It will be a joint meeting with
the Community Relations Committee Meeting.



                                   ~'"''f\\~\J\;U   ~\_,(Jl~
                                   Ann Marie Becker, MMC
                                   City Clerk



Notice Dated: November 20, 2007.



Commission
City Manager
Department Heads
Chronicle
Post
                                              CITY OF MUSKEGON
                                            CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE




Memo
 To:              Mayor Warmington & City Commission

 From:            Bryon Mazade, City Manager   df1/
 Copy:            Bob Kuhn, Director of Public Works
                  Tony Kleibecker, Director of Public Safety
                  Mohammed AI-Shatel, Deputy Director of Public Safety
              v   Ann Becker, City Clerk

 Date:            November 15, 2007

 Re:              Speed Limits



 Attached are some information from AAA that Bob Kuhn found and a memo from
 Tony Kleibecker regarding setting speed limits. I thought you would like to have
 this information in advance of our discussion about speed limits at your December
 work session.

 Of particular note is the 2006 law that determines the methods that can be used to
 set speed limits.

 Please contact me if you have any questions.

 BLM /pb

 Alt.




 pb\BLM COMM, SPEED LIMITS 111507
Automobile Club of Michigan



                         SETTING
                   REALISTIC
              Mich~n


                SPEED LIMITS




           SPEED
            LIMIT
         This publication is based on a booklet produced
by the Highway Engineering Department of the Au-
tomobile Club of Southern California under the direc.
tion of Paul Fowler, Traffic Engineer.
         The initial need for a practical guide on speed
zoning in Michigan was voiced by Bruce Madsen, Man-
aging Director of the Traffic Improvement Association
of Oakland County, who is a co-author of this text.
Information for the booklet was obtained from Richard
Folkers, formerly Traffic Engineer for the Oakland
County Road Commission, and from interviews with
several traffic authorities in Michigan actively engagecl
in traffic engineering, traffic Jaw enforcement and safety
education.
Technical references include:                                ,,'
      Institute of Traffic Engineers' Handbook
      Michigan Manual of Uniform Traffic Control
      Devices (1973)
      Michigan State Police Standards for Traffic En•
      gineering Investigations
      "Realistic Speed Zoning," by Paul Fowler, Au-
      tomobile Club of Southern California
      Uniform Vehicle Code, National Committee on
      Uniform Laws and Ordinances
      Vehicular Speed Manual, Inter-County Regional
      Planning Commission, Denver, Colorado
Additional copies may be obtained from:
       Arthur C. Gibson, Manager
      Safety and Traffic Engineering Department
       Automobile Club of Michigan
       Auto Club Drive
       Dearborn, Michigan 48126
                      Introduction

        This manual is designed as a practical guide to
REALISTIC speed zoning. It is offered to both in-
terested citizens and public officials for better under-
standing of "why," "where" and "how" speed zoning
is established, and the laws which make it possible.
       Hopefully, it will serve to explain why the
       arbitrary enactment of speed limits is not
       a cure-al/for traffic ills and why it might,
       in fact, create new and greater problems.
        Speed zoning was made necessary by changing
times. In the early days of the automobile in Michigan,
the demarcation between rural areas and cities or vil-
lages was clear. Thus, it was simple to set speed limits
- one for the open countryside and one for the centers
of population.
        With the spread of urbanization and the
development of suburban communities, the situation
changed. Rural areas began to shrink and disappear.
Often they became difficult to identify. During the same
period the volume of motor vehicles multiplied and re-
multiplied. There came a need for modified speed post-
ings in these transition areas between maximum limits
for,open areas and maximum limits for business.
        This manual will emphasize the special need for
neighboring communities to have speed limits on major
streets as uniform as possible, to encourage smooth and
                                                            !
                                                            I
                                                            I

orderly flow of traffic. It will outline the means by
which this objective can be attained.
        It will also emphasize that the great majority of
drivers are reasonable and prudent and will voluntarily
comply with speed limits which are realistically estab-
lished for both their safety and convenience.
                                                              r
                                                              ,I
           THE LAWS FOR SPEED ZONING
       Realistic speed zoning is predicated on national
acceptance of a traffic engineering truism that . . .
         . . . in the absence of intensive enforce-
        ment, drivers tend to operate their vehi-             i

        cles at speeds they feel are reasonable
        and proper, regardless of posted speed.
This "reasonable and proper" theme is reflected in
Michigan's Basic Speed Law, set fo11h in the Michigan
Vehicle Code. Taking precedence over all other speed
laws, it reads:
        "Any person driving a vehicle on a highway
        shall drive the same at a careful and prudent
        speed not greater than nor less than is reason-
        able and proper, having due regard to the traffic,
        surface and width of the highway and of any
        other conditions than [sic] existing, and no per-
        son shall drive any vehicle upon a highway at a
        speed greater than will permit him to bring it to a
        stop within the assured clear distance ahead."
        (Sec. 257.627)
        All 50 states have a similar basic law, although
some phrase it in the negative, such as "no person shall
drive ... at a speed greater than is reasonable or
prudent."
        Other laws on speeds included in the Michigan
 Vehicle Code are briefly reviewed below.
Absolute Speed
        At one end of the spectrum is the "absolute,"
sometimes referred to as a "blanket" speed maximum,
covering all highways in Michigan. Prior to the 1974
energy crisis, this law set a limit on state and county
highways at 65 mph in daylight hours and 55 mph in
hours of darkness, except upon freeways. The top limit
at this publication is, of course, 55 mph. Provision for
reduction of maximum speeds is provided by statute.
(Sec. 257.628)
Prima Facie Speed
        In contrast, there is the "prima facie speed
limit." Legal theory indicates that a violator of this "on
the face of it" limit might defend himself in court as
"careful and prudent" despite his violation. The prima
facie limit sets speed for business and residential dis-
tricts at 25 mph (Sec. 257.627b) but ample authority,
frequently used, is provided for modification. This area
of modification is the main thrust of the present text.
        Certain "special" speed limits for school buses,
vehicles with trailers and heavy trucks may be estab-
lished. Likewise, there is authority for special controls
at unsafe bridges.
        There is also provision for "advisory" speed
signs. These are used to alert otherwise careful drivers
confronted by a situation for which they are unpre-
pared, such as a sharp curve. So-called "advisory"
speeds are enforced only under the basic speed law.
Modified Prima Facie Speeds
        Nighttime maximum speed is set at 55 mph on
county and state trunk lines and prima facie speed is set
at 25 mph in business and residential areas. Therefore,
between 25 mph and 55 mph there exists a gray, inter-
mediate area which may be described as "modified" or
"permissive" speed zones. These would not exceed
the 55 mph nighttime limit.
        The state highway commissioner or the county
road commission, working with Michigan State Police,
has authority to "determine upon the basis of an en-         f

gineering and traffic investigation that the speed of ve-
hicular traffic on a state trunk line or county highway is
greater or less than is reasonable or safe ... " They
may then declare "a reasonable and safe maximum or
minimum speed limit .. " (Sec. 257.678)
       Local authorities may establish prima facie
speed limits on their own highways with certain limita-
tions. In business and residential areas the limits may
be set above 25 mph if the arteries are designated as
through streets and cross traffic is halted by "Stop"
signs. Outside business and residential districts, local
prima facie limits "shall in no case be less than 25 miles
per hour." (Sec. 257.629) A special statute prohibits
local authorities from establishing any speed or traffic
controls upon a state highway within their limits unless
approved by the state highway commissioner "in the
interest of public safety and convenience." (Sec.
257.609)
       The 1973 Michigan Manual of Uniform Traffic
Control Devices (Sec. 7B-12) provides for special
school zone speed postings, applicable at times when
children are expected to be present.




                                                r   Mt' e'thtif




                                                                  I   I
               The Why of Speed Zoning
       Such words and phrases as "reasonable and
proper"; "careful and prudent speed not greater nor
less than is reasonable and proper"; "reasonable and
safe maximum or minimum speed limit" and                     ,.
"convenience" appear throughout the statutes.
       Realistic speed zoning, through adoption
       of modified prima facie limits, is based
       upon the documented conclusion that a
       great majority of drivers behave in a
       reasonable manner upon the highway.
       Unreasonable restrictions encourage
       wholesale violations and disrespect for
       the whole traffic control system.
         Speed laws are established for protection of the
public and the regulation of unreasonable behavior by
 any individual. Realistic zoning, as authorized by stat-
 ute, recognizes that the normally careful and competent
 actions of a reasonable person should be consid-
ered legal.
85 Percentile Speed
         The prime basis of what is considered proper
speed for the normally careful and competent actions of
a reasonable person is the so-called and nationally rec-
ognized "85 percentile speed." This is that speed at or
below which 85 percent of the observed traffic is
moving. Experience gained over a long period indicates
that posting of higher or lower speed limits has not
significantly changed the 85 percentile speed. Likewise,
it has been demonstrated time and time again that rais-
ing a prima facie speed to its proper limit causes no
increase in accidents.
        Adoption of the 85 percentile speed determina-
tion recognizes that the other 15 percent of drivers are
above that speed which is "reasonable and proper,
having due regard to the traffic, surface and width of the
highway and of any other conditions ... " This is the 15
percent of the driving public at which enforcement ac-
tion should be directed. It has been established by
many studies that this 15 percent of motorists cause a                    I:
disproportionate number of accidents and have the                         '
worst driving records.
Realistic Zoning
       Well-meaning but often uninformed citizens, and
even officials under pressure, persist in the idea that the
mere posting of lower speed limits within their corpo-
rate boundaries will improve safety. Actually, compe-
tent surveys show that it is the driving environment
which mainly influences speed.
       Realistic speed zones are of the utmost public
importance for safe highways, if for no other reason
than that they give enforcement officers a handle for the
control of hazardous drivers without infringing upon              I       '
                                                                          11
                                                                          I
normally safe drivers.

       A few points to remember about realistic
       speed zones are:
       • They satisfy the requirements and in-
         tent of the state law for establishing
         prima facie speed limits on streets and
         highways.
       • They invite public compliance by con-
        forming to the behavior of the great ma-
        jority and by giving a clear reminder to
         non-conforming violators.
       • They offer an effective enforcement tool
         to police by clearly separating the
        flagrant violator from the reasonable
         majority.
       • They tend to minimize public an-
         tagonism toward police enforcement of                ,       I


         unreasonable regulations.
       • They serve to place responsibility for
        justifying so-called "tolerances" upon
         those administrative agencies that grant
         them.                                                        I,.

                                                                      '
                                                                      : L-
       • They lend credence and acceptability to
         the widely posted admonition "Speed
        Laws Strictly Enforced" at many city
         boundaries.
        And perhaps most important:
       • Realistic speed zones contribute sub-
         stantially to the smooth, orderly flow of
         traffic which is a majorfactor in pre-
         venting highway accidents.
        Any measure that encourages a smooth traffic
flow should be adopted not only for safety but for the
convenience and economy of the individual motorist.
 An unreasonably slow driver is a hazard. This is found
in areas where unreasonably low posted limits may
cause the over-cautious or law-conscious driver to be-
come a hazard, especially when the limit is recognized
as unreasonable by the majority. This causes lane hop-
ping and sudden and dangerous spurts by normal
drivers who would observe a realistic limit. Such prac-
tices result in accidents and raise the ire of the average
motorist.
        The national Uniform Vehicle Code recognizes
this slow-speed problem in a regulation to the effect
that no driver should operate at such a slow speed as to
impede normal traffic flow, except when such reduced
speed is required for safe operation or in compliance
with law.
        Whenever possible, the setting of the speed limit
to coincide with progression speed of the traffic signal
system is desirable. When the posted speed limit varies,
the use of signs indicating the signal setting speed pro-
motes a smoother traffic flow.
               The Where of Speed Zoning

        The objective of a realistic speed zoning is to
facilitate the orderly movement of traffic by increasing
driver awareness of reasonable speed. Certain hazards
may appear when an increase in prima facie speed is
contemplated. If so, it is better to correct the hazardous
conditions to meet traffic requirements than to restrict
speed to conform with faulty conditions which can be
corrected.
Michigan Zoning
        In Michigan the areas for realistic speed zoning
largely fall into two broad categories:
       1. Realistic speed zones are needed on state and
          county trunk lines which carry appreciable
          volume of traffic through various roadside
         conditions and through numerous contiguous
         corporate limits in urban or suburban areas.
          It is especially important to establish realistic
         speed zones on highways where each _com-
         munity might otherwise set independent and
         conflicting limits despite the similarity of
         highway and traffic conditions.
      2. Realistic speed zones are needed also on
         state and county trunk lines in rural areas
         which pass through small towns and villages
         or may include highway segments upon
         which unusual or unexpected hazards exist.
         By Michigan State Police rule-of-thumb, if a
         road segment has fewer than 30 intersecting
         driveways per mile, it is generally considered
         rural.
                                                              ii
        Basically, these areas as broadly defined are         'I'
                                                              ].,:

transition areas which require modified prima facie           :ui
speed limits between the statutory 25 mph and 55 mph
limits.
Broad Participation
        The State Legislature has vested authority for
regulation of state and county trunk lines with subse-
quent involvement of state and county road authorities
and Michigan State Police. If local authority were to
dominate on these trunk lines the essential factor of
similar speeds under similar conditions would be
sacrificed.
        This does not imply that city, village and town-
ship officers are, in practice, to be ignored. Explicit
instructions to state police officers making recommen-
dations for speed zoning state, "Opinions will be
sought from the local State Police Post Commander,
the sheriff or chief of police having jurisdiction, as well
as from other local officials with known interests."
Further instructions are for "close coordination with
local officials and with their understanding."
        Numerous factors must be considered in deter-
mining those areas in which modified prima facie
speeds are indicated. In the next section of this booklet
the several criteria have been reduced to a few broad
categories. Information was compiled from publica-
tions of the Michigan State Police, the Michigan Man-
ual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and standards
of the Institute of Traffic Engineers.
':,,,
I1:
l:f
I,
!
I


I ,
I
    C'
            The How of Realistic Speed Zoning

        This text does not purport to be a manual for
traffic engineers, trained police officers or skilled tech-
nicians. Rather, it is to provide a basic guide for those
officials and laymen who wish better to understand how
realistic speed zoning is determined.
        Foremost criteria for determination of modified
prima facie limits in speed zoning are:
        1. The 85 percentile speed of those actually
           driving upon the highway segment in ques-
           tion.
       2. Accident history of the area, including
           analysis of the type and apparent causes of
           accidents as well as location.
       3. Traffic volumes, including projected in-
           creases.
       4. Roadside and adjacent area development, in-
           cluding turning movements as observed by
           the officer or traffic engineer.
       5. Design speed of the particular highway seg-
           ment.
       6. Determination of hidden hazards which
           might not readily be apparent to even the
           normally "careful and prudent driver."
Speed Studies
        In Michigan, determination of 85 percentile
speeds is usually made by radar check. The speed of
separately traveling vehicles, from the slowest to the
fastest, is recorded. It is simple to determine that, if 85
motorists of each 100 are driving at "X" mph or under,
then "X" mph is the 85 percentile speed.
        The Vascar, a modification of radar, is some-
times used. This requires a measured distance estab-
lished in advance. Another device, seldom used, is the
Enoscope. This is a system of mirrors placed at mea-
sured distances by which motorists may be timed by
stopwatch. The "pacing" system is also sometimes
used. This is a system by which authorities cruise the
highway and keep pace with random vehicles to learn
motorists' speeds.
        Location of the speed survey is of great impor-
tance. In practice, observation is made from an un-
marked car in an inconspicuous place at the roadside.
Intersections or momentary conditions which might
slow driver speed are avoided.
        The time of speed studies is also carefully
selected to avoid rush-hour commuter traffic when the
presence of too many vehicles on the highway forces
lower than normal speeds. As a national rule-of-thumb,
the hours chosen are usually between 9:00 and 11:30
a.m. and 1:00 and 4:00 p.m., Mondays through Thurs-
days, inclusive.
        In rural areas a normal minimum of JOO vehicles
or two hours of sampling will be checked. Under urban
or suburban conditions, the number of vehicles which
must be checked may depend upon the Average Daily
Traffic (ADT).
        One major Michigan county takes counts from
8:00 to 10:00 a.m. and from 2:00 to 4:00 p.m., Mondays
through Fridays, and uses the following sliding scale
based upon statistical analysis:
      I. JOO vehicle sample (or two hours maximum)
         for roads with an estimated ADT of 10,000 or
         less.
      2. 200 vehicle sample for roads with estimated
         ADT of 10,000 to 20,000.
      3. 300 vehicle sample for roads with estimated
         ADT of20,000 to 30,000.
      4. 400 vehicle sample for roads with estimated
         ADT of 30,000 to 40,000.
      5. For roads over 40,000 the sample should be
         increased proportionately.
        In general, longer time periods may be required
in rural areas. But unless extraordinary conditions
exist, the check points may be several miles apart when
highway conditions are similar.
        The "pace speed" can be determined easily
from the vehicle speed data sheet. It will usually be
found that when the greatest number of vehicles travel
within the same 10 mph range, 15% of the motorists will
be over the IO-mile pace and 15% below.
Accident Records
        Analysis of the accident records of a given seg-
 ment of highway to be zoned requires a study of the
 "where" and "why" of each crash rather than mere
numbers. A high accident frequency could simply be
 the result of a high traffic volume, hence, increased
exposure.
        The "where" of accidents is determined by spot
 maps or computer printouts. For some high accident
 locations, traffic authorities prepare "collision dia-
 grams" to further identify problems. These diagrams
 are schematic representations of the direction of
 movement of each vehicle or pedestrian involved. In
 addition, a "condition diagram" may be prepared to
 show physical features of the roadway when such
 things as view obstruction and roadside hazards should
 be considered in speed zoning.
        The other criteria for speed zoning previously
listed may also have bearing on the "why" of acci-
dents, as well as on the correct prima facie speeds to be
determined. An increase in traffic volumes, not prop-
erly projected in advance, would require restudy of the
area. Roadside developments, new or under construc-
tion, might necessitate major changes to prevent acci-
dents. A hedge may blind an intersection or a factory
exit. Any number of situations might be found which
contribute to accidents. Proper analysis and evaluation
 of all factors underscore the importance of the experi-
ence and expertise of the traffic engineer or the
qualified police officer. No two areas or highway seg-
ments are precisely alike but there are enough
similarities to make what is learned at one location
valuable at other locations.
         When need for modified prima facie zones has
been established, a Traffic Control Order may be ob-
tained on recommendation of Michigan State Police.
The MSP and the Michigan Manual of Uniform Traffic
Control Devices set forth standards for posting of the
modified speeds limits. A few salient points are:
       • The speed limit should not be set at more than
         7 mph below or above the 85 percentile speed.
       • Speed postings inside corporate limits should
         be in increments of 5 mph, as near as possible
         to the 85 percentile speed.
       • Speed limit changes on adjacent highway seg-
         ments outside incorporated limits should be
         made in increments of 10 mph.
       • Changes in speed limits along a given route
         should be held to a minimum.
       • Modified prima fade limits under favorable
         conditions are not usually established for a
         highway segment less than one-half mile long.
         Advisory signing is used instead.
       • Speed limit postings should be located as near
         as practicable to the point of change in limit.
         Additional signs should be installed beyond
         major intersections or at other locations where
         is is necessary to remind motorists of the limit.
       • Normally, signs should be installed at approx-
         imately one-half mile intervals.
       In rural areas "Reduced Speed Ahead" signs
should be posted to give motorists advance warning of
speed changes. The signs are not ordinarily needed in
urban areas where speeds are relatively low. The
Michigan Manual, Sections 2B-9 through 2B-15, gives
detail as to the types and combinations of signing to be
used.
        The Institute of Traffic Engineers' Handbook
suggests that, after posting of speed zones, they be re-
studied to determine if more than 15% of motorists are
exceeding the limit. If so, it should be determined
whether the limit should be raised or whether there are
other factors such as inadequate posting or lack of
enforcement or education.
        Location of modified speed posting is critical on
state or county trunk lines which cross successive
municipal limits. If there is no notable change in road-
side conditions at these limits, any changes should be
made in accord with realistic zoning rather than on the
basis of invisible boundaries.
       Regardless of the other matters consid-
       ered, however, the 85 percentile becomes
       the critical criterion in determination and
      posting of modified prima facie speeds.
       By all standards the realistic speed zone
      limit, unless there are clear contradictory
      findings, is set at not more than seven
      miles per hour below the 85 percentile.
                 ' l ,,_ '-J '"'"' V   Muskegon Police Department
                     NOV   {j   5 200?                Anthony L. Kleibecker
                                                      Director of Public Safety




                     980 Jefferson                  www. muskegonpo I ice.com      Phone: 231-724-6750
                     Muskegon, Michigan                                            FAX: 231-722-5140
                     49440




MEMORANDUM


TO:            Mr. Bryon Mazade
               City Manager

FROM:          Anthony L. Kleibecker
               Director of Public Safety
                                               r;;-    L. ) ~


CC:            Mr. Bob Kuhn
               Mr. Mohammed Al-Shatel

DATE:          November 5, 2007

SUBJECT:       Speed Limitations

After the discussion at a recent City Commission meeting regarding the posted speed limits
along Muskegon Avenue and Webster Avenue, I reviewed the cun·ent law in regards to the
establishment of speed limits. Under the current Michigan Vehicle Code, section 257.627
addresses the issue of establishing speed limits. It should be noted that this law changed last year
and the current provisions went into effect in November of 2006.

Based upon this current statute, there are two statutory methods which may be utilized to
establish posted speed limits. The first is a traffic and engineering study which has been the
practice for many years. The second involves a measurement which utilizes the term "vehicular
access points". The statute defines a "vehicular access point" as a driveway or intersecting
roadway. The speed is then determined by a count which corresponds with the following speed
assignment:

    •   25 miles per hour on a highway segment with 60 or more vehicular access points within
        ½mile.
    •   35 miles per hour on a highway segment with not less than 45 vehicular access points but
        no more than 59 vehicular access points within ½ mile.
    •   45 miles per hour on a highway segment with not less than 30 vehicular access points but
        no more than 44 vehicular access points within ½ mile.

I thought it would be helpful to have this information for future discussions. I reiterate my
statement at the time of the previous discussion that we must follow state statute when
establishing speed limits within the city.

Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me.
~-vrintDocument                                                                                       Page 1 of2


                                  MICHIGAN VEHICLE CODE (EXCERPT)
                                            Act 300 of 1949


    257.627 Speed limitations.

    Sec. 627.

    (1) A person operating a vehicle on a highway shall operate that vehicle at a careful and prudent speed
    not greater than nor less than is reasonable and proper, having due regard to the traffic, surface, and
    width of the highway and of any other condition then existing. A person shall not operate a vehicle upon
    a highway at a speed greater than that which will permit a stop within the assured, clear distance ahead.

    (2) Except in those instances where a lower speed is specified in this chapter or the speed is unsafe
    pursuant to subsection (I), it is prima facie lawful for the operator of a vehicle to operate that vehicle at
    a speed not exceeding the following, except when this speed would be unsafe:

    (a) 25 miles per hour on all highways in a business district as that term is defined in section 5.

    (b) 25 miles per hour in public parks unless a different speed is fixed and duly posted.

    (c) 25 miles per hour on all highways or parts of highways within the boundaries of land platted under
    the land division act, 1967 PA 288, MCL 560.101 to 560.293, or the condominium act, 1978 PA 59,
    MCL 559.101 to 559.276, unless a different speed is fixed and posted.

    (d) 25 miles per hour on a highway segment with 60 or more vehicular access points within 1/2 mile.

    (e) 35 miles per hour on a highway segment with not less than 45 vehicular access points but no more
    than 59 vehicular access points within 1/2 mile.

    (f) 45 miles per hour on a highway segment with not less than 30 vehicular access points but no more
    than 44 vehicular access points within 1/2 mile.

    (3) It is prima facie unlawful for a person to exceed the speed limits prescribed in subsection (2), except
    as provided in section 629.

    (4) A person operating a vehicle in a mobile home park as defined in section 2 of the mobile home
    commission act, 1987 PA 96, MCL 125.2302, shall operate that vehicle at a careful and prudent speed,
    not greater than a speed that is reasonable and proper, having due regard for the traffic, surface, width of
    the roadway, and all other conditions existing, and not greater than a speed that permits a stop within the
    assured clear distance ahead. It is prima facie unlawful for the operator of a vehicle to operate that
    vehicle at a speed exceeding 15 miles an hour in a mobile home park as defined in section 2 of the
    mobile home commission act, 1987 PA 96, MCL 125.2302.

    (5) A person operating a passenger vehicle drawing another vehicle or trailer shall not exceed the posted
    speed limit.

    (6) Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, a person operating a truck with a gross weight of
    10,000 pounds or more, a truck-tractor, a truck-tractor with a semi-trailer or trailer, or a combination of
    these vehicles shall not exceed a speed of 55 miles per hour on highways, streets, or freeways and shall
 printDocument                                                                                                                               Page 2 of2


 not exceed a speed of 35 miles per hour during the period when reduced loadings are being enforced in
 accordance with this chapter. However, a person operating a school bus, a truck, a truck-tractor, or a
 truck-tractor with a semi-trailer or trailer described in this subsection shall not exceed a speed of 60
 miles per hour on a freeway if the maximum speed limit on that freeway is 70 miles per hour.

 (7) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (6), a person operating a school bus shall not exceed the
 speed of 55 miles per hour.

 (8) The maximum rates of speeds allowed under this section are subject to the maximum rate established
 under section 629b.

 (9) A person operating a vehicle on a highway, when entering and passing through a work zone
 described in section 79d(a) where a normal lane or part of the lane of traffic has been closed due to
 highway construction, maintenance, or surveying activities, shall not exceed a speed of 45 miles per
 hour unless a different speed limit is determined for that work zone by the state transportation
 department, a county road commission, or a local authority, based on accepted engineering practice. The
 state transportation department, a county road commission, or a local authority shall post speed limit
 signs in each work zone described in section 79d(a) that indicate the speed limit in that work zone and
 shall identify that work zone with any other traffic control devices necessary to conform to the Michigan
 manual of uniform traffic control devices. A person shall not exceed a speed limit established under this
 section or a speed limit established under section 628 or 629.

 (10) Subject to subsections(!) and (2)(c), speed limits established pursuant to this section are not valid
 unless properly posted. In the absence of a properly posted sign, the speed limit in effect shall be the
 general speed limit pursuant to section 628(1).

 (11) Nothing in this section prevents the establishment of an absolute speed limit pursuant to section
 628. Subject to subsection(!), an absolute speed limit established pursuant to section 628 supersedes a
 prima facie speed limit established pursuant to this section.                       ·

 (12) Nothing in this section shall be construed as justification to deny a traffic and engineering
 investigation.

 (13) As used in this section, "vehicular access point" means a driveway or intersecting roadway.

 (14) A person who violates this section is responsible for a civil infraction.

  History: 1949, Act 300, Eff. Sept. 23, 1949 ;-- Am. 1957, Act 190, Eff. Sept. 27, 1957 ;-- Am. 1959, Act 76, Eff. Mar. 19,
  1960 ;-- Am. 1962, Act 120, Eff. Mar. 28, 1963 ;-- Am. 1966, Act 223, Imd. Eff. July 11, 1966 ;-- Am. 1974, Act 28, Imd .
. Eff. Mar. 2, 1974 ;--Am. 1976, Act 190, Imd. Eff. July 8, 1976 ;--Am. 1978, Act 510, Eff. Aug. 1, 1979 ;-- Am. 1986, Act
  92, Eff. June 5, 1986 ;-- Am. 1988, Act 460, Imd. Eff. Dec. 27, 1988 ;-- Am. 1990, Act 165, Imd. Eff. July 2, 1990 ;-- Am.
  2003, Act 315, Eff. Apr. 8, 2004 ;--Am. 2004, Act 62, Imd. Eff. Apr. 13, 2004 ;--Am. 2006, Act 19, Eff. Nov. 9, 2006 ;--
  Am. 2006, Act 85, Eff. Nov. 9, 2006


 © 2007 Legislative Council, State of Michigan


 Rendered 11/2/2007 09:42:16                                     Michigan Compiled Laws Complete Through PA 114 of 2007
 © 2007 Legislative Council, State of Michigan                                         Courtesy ofwww.legislature.mi.gov




 1   .,   II    1   •   ..   •        un,-,.,,   1   rt n                 1   t"'\'\.   I .. __ • __ .,_r,. _ ---·-- ___ .,, ______ n_l..!    11 /")/.-,0.f\'7
                                  CITY COMMISSION POLICY

      EXTENSION OF TIME PERIOD FOR EXISTING RENAISSANCE ZONE PARCELS
                                (July 24, 2007)


POLICY:       The City will establish a program which allows individuals, businesses,
              developers and business areas to submit proposals for extending the timeline for
              properties in the City's Renaissance zone for significant new economic
              development projects. Applications will be accepted to extend the time period for
              individual parcels for specific economic development projects located within the
              existing Zones and will be evaluated on the basis of the criteria identified in this
              policy.

PURPOSE: To provide guidelines for evaluating and approving requests for extension of
         Renaissance Zone parcels for new development in zones that have not
         experienced significant development.


GOALS:        The City's goals in extending the time period for existing individual Renaissance
              Zone parcels are:
                    1.     To create jobs;
                    2.     To encourage investment; and
                    3.     To clean up and reutilize vacant and underutilized properties.


BACKGROUND

In 1999, the Cities of Muskegon and Muskegon Heights were jointly designated as a
Renaissance Zone. At that time, the City of Muskegon selected two areas of the city as sub-
zones. The City of Muskegon Heights designated four sub-zones. These sub-zones are
identified as development zones that are virtually tax free for fifteen years. In 2000, the State
of Michigan approved legislation, permitting the Muskegon/Muskegon Heights Renaissance
Zone to apply to the Michigan Economic Development Corporation to expand existing zones
contiguously and designate up to four new sub-zones. In 2002, four new sub-zones were
approved by the State for the City of Muskegon. The goal of the program has been to
encourage investment and create jobs by reutilizing vacant, contaminated, and underutilized
properties in blighted neighborhoods and industrial zones

In 2006, the State of Michigan approved legislation which allows communities to apply to the
Michigan Economic Development Corporation to extend the time period for existing
Renaissance Zone parcels when a major economic development opportunity is proposed.

PROGRAM

The City will establish a program which allows individuals, businesses, developers and
business areas to submit proposals for extending the timeline for properties in the City's
Renaissance Zone for significant new economic development projects. Applications will be
accepted to extend the time period for individual parcels for specific economic development
projects located within the existing Zones and will be evaluated on the basis of the criteria
identified in this policy.

REVIEW PROCESS

Proposal Content: All proposals must demonstrate that the project cannot reasonably be
facilitated in the existing Renaissance Zone time frame. They must identify the parcels being
proposed for extension of the Zone, the amount of real and personal property tax currently
assessed to the site(s), and verify that the property meets at least three of the threshold
criteria. Also, proposals should describe the type of use, amount of investment, jobs to be
created, and other pertinent information about the project. A pro forma showing the difference
in return on investment with and without Renaissance Zone savings must be submitted with
the proposal.

The applicant will supply a statement of Renaissance Zone outcomes achieved since inclusion
of the property in the zone, which include the number of years that the property has been in
the Zone, the total investment in the property and building, the investment in personal property,
the employment at the start of the Zone and the current employment at the site. The applicant
will provide an estimate of the tax savings, to date, from the Renaissance Zone designation.

Applicants must pay a $5000 application fee and agree to pay all legal fees associated with the
preparation of a Development Agreement.

Review: A proposal must meet a minimum of three of the threshold requirements that will be
reviewed by City Staff based on the extent to which the project addresses the evaluating
factors cited in this policy.

A review of the capacity, if any, below the modified (see next paragraph) $500,000 cap of
property and income tax revenue the City may forego to support the Renaissance Zone
program will be made as each application is reviewed.

INVESTMENT CAP LIMITATION

•   The original City Renaissance Zone established an investment cap in 1999 at $50,000,
    focusing solely on lost City tax revenue.

•   This revised policy maintains the $50,000 cap, but will evaluate projects on a case-by-case
    basis to determine whether the project is cap neutral, adds cap capacity or reduces
    available cap capacity.

•   Cap Capacity will be determined by analyzing the annual value of income tax receipts from
    new jobs created within the City Renaissance Zones. The value will be used to calculate
    the available cap capacity as follows:

       $50,000              Base Cap Established 1999

       ($8,200)             Existing Cap Capacity Utilized

       $41,800              Existing Cap Capacity (before Income Tax Factor)
       $1,000               Total 1999 Job Value (from new jobs created in Ren. Zone)

       $42,800              Total Remaining Cap Capacity

       Where:

       Base Cap             = The Cap of $50,000 established by City
                                   Commission in 1999
       Utilized Cap Value     =    The estimated amount of actual property and income
                                   tax abated as of January 1999
       Existing Cap Capacity  =    The difference between the Base Cap and the Utilized
                                   Cap Value
       Job Value              =    The total number of jobs created by all projects
                                   in the City's Renaissance Zone multiplied by
                                   an estimated income tax value of $300 per job
       Remaining Cap Capacity =    Amount of City public revenue remaining to be
                                   invested in Renaissance Program

•   A project's cap capacity impact will be determined by calculating the difference between
    property tax loss and income tax to be generated by the proposal. Projects may be neutral,
    may add cap capacity or may reduce cap capacity.


DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

Successful applicants will be required to enter into a development agreement with the City
committing to the investment and/or job creation it has proposed and posting a performance
bond or other guarantee of performance acceptable to the City. The City Commission will
make a determination as to the number years each new or expanded area will be designated
as a zone on a case-by-case basis and in compliance with State law. In no case will the
designation be for more than fifteen years from the date of application to the Board of the
Michigan Strategic Fund.


THRESHOLD CRITERIA
Must meet "a" or "b" of the following criteria plus two others to be considered for a
Renaissance Zone Extension.

    a. Project will be a catalyst for a major development or for multiple redevelopment
       opportunities in the City.
    b. Project will add significant new City income tax from the creation of jobs new to
       Muskegon within three years of project completion. This income tax is to offset
       the loss of property taxes which are abated under the Renaissance Zone
       expansion.
    c. Property has been vacant or fifty percent of building(s) unoccupied, for at least one
       year.
    d. Project investment will be significant on a square foot basis.
   e. Property is a contaminated site or functionally obsolete, as defined by current Michigan
      law.
   f. Project shows other evidence of under-utilization or disinvestment.

EVALUATION FACTORS

Proposals for extending existing Zone areas which meet the appropriate threshold criteria will
be considered based on the extent to which a project addresses the following evaluation
factors:

   a. The amount of income tax to be generated by new jobs relative to the amount of local
      City taxes abated.
   b. The amount of investment in buildings and equipment.
   c. The project allows a business to expand in the City, retains a significant number of jobs
      in the City, and/or will add jobs.
   d. The project includes other investment in neighborhood revitalization or public
      infrastructure improvements or utilizes other public and private financing tools to
      maximize redevelopment benefits.
   e. In the case of residential property, the extent to which the project will work to
      deconcentrate poverty, create mixed use redevelopment or develop downtown housing.
   f. The amount of tax loss for the project does not exceed the amount the City Commission
      identifies for support of Renaissance Zones.
   g. The extent to which designation may adversely affect DOA or other City financial
      obligations.
   h. The project will enhance an area of the City and/or cause additional investment.
   1. The project is consistent with the City's Master Plan.
   J. Compliance with the following City ordinances and policies:
          1. All applicants must be current with all real and personal property taxes.
          2. All applicants must not be under written orders for violations of the zoning
              ordinance.
          3. All applicants must have a satisfactory record of compliance with regulations
              enforced by the City's Environmental Services Department.
   k. History of investment. What is the history of ownership of and investment in the
      property since it was designated as a Renaissance Zone? What are the reasons that
      the property is still blighted and underutilized?


OTHER CONDITIONS

The City reserves the right to not award Renaissance Zone status to any or all proposals, nor
is it obligated to abate taxes to the limit of capacity available. It may also decide to exceed the
cap, if it believes the benefits of a project to the City warrant doing so. Applications must be
filed by October 15, 2011, in order that they can be filed with the State by December 31, 2011.
New Renaissance Zone designations are subject to approval by the Michigan Economic
Development Corporation.
Adopted July 24, 2007
                                                        ~-N~~¼, 2z~~~
                                                          Ann Marie Becker, MMC
                                                          City Clerk
                                                               City of Muskegon
                                                               Treasurer's Office




Memorandum
  To:     Mayor and City Commissioners

  From:   City Treasurer

  Date:    November 28, 2007

  Re:     Summer Property Tax Collections



 Public Act 331, of 1993, the State Education Tax Act, as amended by Public Act 244 of 2002,
 required cities and townships to collect the State Education Tax in a summer levy, except as
 otherwise provided by law.

 Cities were required to collect the State Education Tax (SET) in a summer levy unless, before
 November 1, 2002, the legislative body adopted a resolution declining to collect the tax. A
 copy of the resolution had to be sent before November 1, 2002 by the city to the state
 treasurer and the local county treasurer. This was the case with the city of Muskegon. At
 that time, we analyzed the potential revenue and associated costs of the city taking on the
 administrative burden of handling a summer property tax levy and concluded that there was
 no net benefit in the City's assuming that responsibility. Also at that time, it was city staff's
 opinion that the City should avoid being associated with the negative public reaction that may
 be generated by the summer SET tax collection.

 As we know, since that time, state legislation was enacted to eliminate state shared revenue
 from counties while moving county operating tax levied from the winter to the summer over a
 three year period. This past summer (2007) all of the county's operating millage was levied in
 the summer. The resulting effect for the city has been a further decline in property tax
 administration fees revenue which has gone to the county. While other county tax millages
 remain on the winter bill (county museum, quality of life, central dispatch, etc.), it may be
 possible for these items to be moved from the winter to the summer in the future as well.

 Further, each year brings an opportunity for the local public schools to explore the possibility
 of moving their tax levy from the winter to the summer. If this were to occur without the city
 rescinding it's resolution declining to collect the summer tax levy, it would result in an even
 more significant erosion of the city's property tax administration fees revenue.

 Under PA 244 of 2002, by January of each year the legislative body of a city that has
 declined to collect the summer tax levy may by resolution adopted by a majority of the
 legislative body rescind the earlier decision to decline to collect the tax.

 Given the city's current and projected budget situation and in light of the information that we
 currently have on hand, it is our recommendation that the city rescind its resolution declining
 to collect the summer tax levy. The 2008 fiscal year budget was prepared and adopted
based upon the city taking over the summer tax levy from the county. City staff have met with
and discussed this with the County Treasurer.

The approved 2008 budget projected the additional revenue to the city that would be
generated from tax administration fees by collecting the summer tax levy and the additional
expenses that would be associated with the change. The overall projected net impact is a
$22,000 increase to the fund balance of the general fund.

Attached is a resolution for your approval to rescind the previous resolution that declined to
collect the SET in a summer tax levy and begin collecting the taxes levied in the summer
effective with the July 2008 taxes.

Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions.




• Page2
                                           CITY OF MUSKEGON

                                          Resolution No. 2 OO7 -1 0 2

     A Resolution to rescind a previous resolution that declined to collect the State Education Tax in a
                                               summer levy.

                                                RECITALS

1.   That Public Act 331 of 1993, the State Education Tax Act, as amended by Public Act 244 of 2002,
     requires cities and townships to collect the State Education Tax in a summer levy, except as
     otherwise provided by law.

2.   Cities are required to collect the State Education Tax in a summer levy unless, before
     November 1, 2002, the legislative body adopted a resolution declining to collect the tax.

3. On October 22, 2002, the City Commission of the City of Muskegon adopted Resolution No.
   2002- l l 9(b), which declined to collect the State Education Tax in a summer levy beginning
   with the sunimer 2003 levy.

4. In accordance with Act 331 of 1993, as amended by Public Act 244 of 2002, the legislative
   body of a city or township that has declined to collect the State Education Tax in a summer
   levy may by resolution adopted by a majority of the legislative body rescind the earlier
   decision to decline to collect the tax.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION:

That the City of Muskegon rescinds Resolution No. 2002-l 19(b) which declined to collect the State
Education Tax in a summer levy and herby elects to begin collection of the State Education Tax in a
summer levy beginning with the summer 2008 levy.

This resolution passed.

       Ayes    Spataro, Warmington, Wisneski, Gawron, and Shepherd.

       Nays    None.


                                                    CITY OF MUSKEGON

                                                     By\ \ \"-,~Y\~0u             (b~Jh
                                                       Ann Marie Becker, MMC, City Clerk

                                               CERTIFICATE

This resolution was adopted at a meeting of the City Commission, held on December 11 , 2007 . The
meeting was properly held and noticed pursuant to the Open meetings Act of the State of M ichigan, Act
267 of the Public Acts of 1976.

                                                         ~        FMUSKEGON
                                                         By~ '\~~---C~J'>v~~~rcJ~
                                                          Ann Marie Becker, MMC, City Clerk


U:\TREASURERISMITH\WORD\Commissn\RDCSET

Top of Page


New Agenda Notifications

* indicates required