Good morning.

The time is now 9 30, and we'll go ahead and call our community development committee meeting to order.

For once we have a little bit smaller agenda, so we'll let you take a little break, Tim.

Um, you know, but that's not as many as Mr.

Berkman usually has, but we appreciate his work.

Um so the first item is a resolution awarding a contract with Earhart Construction for improvements to Oxford Trail in the amount of five million fifteen thousand three hundred and thirty-five dollars and ninety-eight cents with a total amount not to exceed of nine million dollars.

Do you have a motion?

So moved.

Or moved and supported.

Good morning, everyone.

So I'm here to talk about the Oxford Trail project.

This project is a partnership between downtown Grand Rapids Inc.

and the City of Grand Rapids Parks Department.

What we are looking at is the existing Oxford Trail.

It starts on Wealthy, just on the west side of the river.

It travels south through Butterworth, it crosses over the Grand River, which if you haven't been on that pedestrian bridge, you should go.

It's lovely.

And then continues down to Oxford Street currently.

So our project will reconstruct that section that I just mentioned, and then also extend the trail down to curve and then down to hall.

So that work is looking to start in September.

Air Hart would like to get started really quickly so that they can meet the timeline associated with the funding.

The funding for this project is city ARPA funds as well as the DGRI greenway funding for the entire project.

The goal of this project really is to connect the Black Hills and the Roosevelt Park neighborhoods to each other and then also to downtown.

And having this trail extend to Hall is just another section for us to get closer to connecting this trail system to Roosevelt Park, and then eventually we'll have you know the Plaster Creek.

Silver Creek Trails connect to Roosevelt Park as well and have a complete trail system.

So we only had two bids for this project.

However, the engineer's estimate was the middle bid in between those two bids, so that's perfect.

Um so we felt really happy with the cost that we got for it and really excited that um air heart actually came a little bit um under budget for that.

And there is some MLBE participation on this project.

It was it's not allowed because of the funding to be able to utilize bid discounts.

However, Earhart is still subcontracting 15% of their work to an MLBE.

And I think that is everything I have.

So if there's any questions, say look at Mr.

Berkman got Miss Enriquez to to do the presentation on that one.

But um any questions?

It's great to see this project.

Um the the state money, the greenway money, that was also ARPA dollars from the state, or was that additional it was it was separate, so it's part of that $55 million greenway funding.

But yeah, I couldn't remember if that was that if that was COVID dollars that they got or if that was you know when there was an additional surplus in the budget, but that's okay.

We got the money.

So we exactly have the money.

So okay.

Um all those in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Thanks, Gary.

Um, item number two is a resolution rejecting bids for construction of Oxford Street from Norwich Avenue to Godfrey Avenue.

Do you have a motion?

I'll move.

Support.

Moved and supported, Mr.

Berkman.

Good morning, commissioners.

Um, so we are seeking to reconstruct this segment of Oxford between Norwich and Godfrey.

That's a distance of about 800 feet.

Um that work uh will eventually include some combined sewer separation and some bridge rehabilitation work for that uh segment that goes over the Oxford Trail.

Uh we received five bids on July 31st, and the low bid uh came in approximately 1 million dollars over the 1.9 million dollar estimate.

Uh we reviewed that.

Um we we believe the price is reflective of the contractor's limited capacity at this um yet this fall, and there were only a few select subcontractors that were able to perform the bridge rehab work that we had included in the project.

So since we um believe that um or we would like to uh review the scope, uh reissue a new bid package in the fall.

Uh and that brings me to you today to ask that you formally reject all bids just to close the loop since we did receive and open those, and then we'll return to you uh later with a new bid package for construction next year.

Thank you.

Questions for Mr.

Berkman?

Um, can you just repeat uh my brain?

Uh the how much it was over.

It was about a million dollars over, and the estimate was 1.9 million, so a little over 50 percent over.

Okay, thank you.

Hearing no other questions, all those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Item number three is a resolution approving a construction agreement and accepting 10 public utilities easements for walnut woods.

Moved.

Support and supported Mr.

Berkman.

This is a private residential development consisting of 62 single family homes located in Kentwood.

It's um just a little bit north of M6, uh, between midway between Kalamazoo and East Paris to give you a general vicinity.

Uh the construction agreement covers the installation of public sanitary sewer and water main that the city will eventually accept, and then acceptance of the utilities will give us rights.

Uh acceptance of the easements will give us rights to maintain those utilities once installed.

Any questions?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Item number four is a resolution accepting a utility easement at uh 220 Graham Street Southwest in connection with water main relocation and public easement along Martin Luther King Junior Street from U.S.

131 to Buchanan Avenue for $19,800.

So moved.

Support, Mr.

Berkman.

We've been working with our partners at MDOT on this upcoming project to replace uh the eastern portion of the MLK bridge.

So from uh really the east side 131 to the east, it crosses uh a few railroad treks.

Um there's an existing 12-inch water main that currently runs uh under the length of the bridge that needs to be replaced and relocated to avoid conflicts with the new bridge piers uh and foundations in March of this year.

You approved entering into an encroachment agreement uh with the railroad to facilitate this relocation, so it's related to that um that same item.

The easement uh before you is located on the south side of the property at 220 Graham Street, that's uh just on the north side of this bridge, uh, and payment of $19,800 for that easement will come from the Vital Streets Fund.

We're working on additional easements that are being sought for the project, and we'll return to you at a later date once we have those available.

Thank you.

And the next item is to about continuing that work.

But any questions for Mr.

Berkman on this one?

Is that a permanent easement?

Yes.

Okay.

All those in favor?

Hi.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Item number five is a resolution granting a noise variance to the Michigan Department of Transportation in connect connection with Martin Luther King Jr.

Street bridge replacement east of 131.

So moved for it.

So, yes, related to the same project.

This is your third time hearing about it, but I'll I'll just give a brief overview for anybody who may be watching.

Again, MDAT planning to replace that eastern portion of the MLK bridge.

Uh, work is scheduled to occur in 2026, and in order to uh complete that project in one construction season, working around those two active railroads that it will be crossing.

MDOT's requested a noise variance to allow for certain operations to occur on up to 45 nights during next year's construction, which is uh slated to be between March 30th and November 20th of 2026.

Uh the uh extremely loud operations like sheepile driving would still be prohibited between 10 p.m.

and 7 a.m.

Um, but the uh the uh other services that they're looking to perform uh would be permitted again on uh up to those 45 nights.

Um you did hold up here a hearing of public necessity at your last meeting at August 12th, and there were no um comments made.

So we recommend uh your approval granting this request to MDOD.

Questions about this item, colleagues?

And Mr.

Berkman, uh just for the audience, those that will be is there a certain kind of circumference of that area where they'll be notified of that as well?

Yeah, so our our requirements are that um residential properties and hospitals located with this 600 feet receive notice.

So they did receive notice of that hearing.

MDOT's already held a um a design meeting um a couple of months ago.

They'll also be holding a pre-construction meeting prior to it starting next year, and so that same area will get uh canvas.

They did uh make contact with the uh housing authority, the apartments located in the southeast quadrant of this intersection or this uh interchange, and uh we'll be updating them as well.

Thank you.

Uh appreciate you just doing that overview for anybody who might be watching and a reminder to all of us.

So thank you.

Sure.

Um hearing no other questions, all those in favor?

Aye, aye.

Any opposed?

This item carries.

The last resolution for today is a resolution setting Tuesday, September 9th, um, 2025 at 2 p.m.

as the date the city commission will convene a public hearing to sit as the board of review to hear appeals on special news on special assessment nuisance roll eight eight zero zero.

So moved support moved and supported.

Hello, filling in for policy.

Hi, yep, I'm Lindsay Post, the deputy city of the city.

Thank you.

I'm filling in for Paula today.

So on July 29 of this year, the city commission issued an order for the assessor to create the special assessment nuisance roll 8800.

This was of all unpaid charges for services or code violations issued between January of 2025 and June of 2025.

These charges can come from housing violations, yard violations, rental certifications, and blight monitoring.

Property owners affected by these charges were already sent notices on August 8th.

It included the amount of the charge as well as how they can appeal.

The appeal period is currently open.

And this proceeding is to set the date for that public hearing to be September 9th to take any in any additional appeals.

So thank you, Miss Post.

Yep.

Any questions?

Any questions?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Item carries.

And with that, we are adjourned.