City Council

Regular Meeting

Taylor, MI · September 2, 2025

TIMOTHY WOOLLEY Mayor City of Taylor CITY COUNCIL DOUGLAS A. GEISS CYNTHIA A. BOWER Chairman City Clerk JILL BRANDANA MICHELLE TOCCO Chairwoman Pro-Tem Treasurer 23555 GODDARD ROAD Council Members Taylor, MI 48180 TINA DANIELS CHARLEY JOHNSON PHONE: (734) 287 6550 LINDSEY ROSE ANGIE WINTON www.cityoftaylor.com The Regular Council Meeting of the Taylor City Council will be held on Tuesday September 02, 2025 in the Taylor Municipal Building at 23555 Goddard Rd., Taylor, MI to begin promptly at 6:30 PM AGENDA 1. Call to order 2. Invocation 3. Pledge of Allegiance 4. Roll Call 5. AGENDA AND MINUTES 5.1 Motion to approve the Agenda. 5.2 Motion to approve the acceptance of the minutes of the meeting held August 19, 2025 and dispense with oral reading. 2025_08_19 Final Minutes.pdf 6. MAYOR COMMUNICATIONS 6.1 Motion to approve the new appointment of Dalton Lee to the Historical Commission for a four (4) year term to expire on September 2, 2029. 7. REGULAR AGENDA 7.1 Motion to approve blanket purchase agreements for the 2026 Taylor Summer Festival, per the attached schedule, for an amount not to exceed $293,500. Funded through Summer Festival Operating. 1 2026 TSF PA's - Sheet1 (1).pdf 7.2 Motion to approve KAB Enterprises Inc., low bid, to install pickleball courts at Heritage Park for an amount of $354,301, plus a 3% contingency, for a total amount not to exceed $364,931. Funded through TBA Capital Outlay and Wayne County Parks Millage Funding. Pickle Ball Bid KAB.pdf Bid Tabulation (1).pdf 7.3 Motion to approve Temperature Services Inc., low bid, to install two (2) new RTU HVAC units at Heritage Hall located at Heritage Park, for an amount of $58,888 plus a 4% contingency amount, for a total amount not to exceed $61,244. Funded through TBA Capital Outlay. Bid Tabulation.pdf Temperature Services, Inc..pdf 7.4 Motion to approve the second reading to amend Chapter 22 - Fire Protection and Prevention, Article II - Fire Code, of the Code of Ordinances, City of Taylor, to remove and replace the sections that adopt and reference the NFPA 1, Fire Code, 2021 and replace them with and adopt the NFPA 1, Fire Code, 2024 Edition. Ordinance_re_Adoption_of_NFPA_1_Fire_Code_2025 (2).docx 7.5 Motion to approve setting the Community Development Block Grant program year 2024 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) Public Hearing for September 16, 2025. 7.6 Motion to approve Appendix A, City of Taylor, Michigan Code of Ordinances, regulating the development and use of land to rezone 21111 Van Born, parcel #60-002-99-0002-002 and the westerly 600 feet of parcel #60-002-99-0001-701 of the NW 1/4 Section 3 T.3S., R.10E., City of Taylor, Wayne County, Michigan from I-1(Zc) to I-1 (Light Industrial). The property is located on the south side of Van Born between Monroe and Merrick. Case # 25-28(Z) 2111 Van Born Rezoning APPLICATION.pdf Case # 25-28(Z) 21111 Van Born REQUEST LETTER.pdf Case #25-28(Z) 21111 Van Born PROOF OF OWN.pdf Case # 25-28(Z) 21111 Van Born PLAN DRAWINGS.pdf Case # 25-28(Z) 21111 Van Born PLAN DRAWINGS 2.pdf Case # 25-28(Z) 21111 Van Born TRAFFIC STUDY.pdf Case # 25-28(Z) FUTURE LAND USE MAP.pdf Case # 25-28 (Z) Proposed Gateway MAP.pdf Case # 25-28(Z) 21111 Van Born TRAFFIC STUDY.pdf Case # 25-28(Z) 21111 Van Born RECOMMENDATION LETTER.pdf August 7, 2025.docx 7.7 Motion to approve the amendment to Article 13.00, Use Requirements, Section 13.05, Motor Vehicle Uses, Sub-section (a) Automobile Filling Stations, of Appendix A of the Taylor, Michigan, Code of Ordinances, as attached. Case # 25-21 (ZTA) MEMO Gas Stations.pdf 2 Gas Station Map Density 2025.pdf Gas Station Map Buffer and Zone 2025.pdf Gas Station Map 750ft Buffer and Zoning.pdf Case # 25-21 (ZTA) DRAFT.pdf August 7, 2025.docx 7.8 Motion to approve the second reading to amend the City of Taylor’s Code of Ordinances Chapter 50 (Utilities) to add Emergency article seven (7) Fats, Oils, and Grease (FOG). Control dated July 25, 2025. FOG Brochure (Final) Informative.pdf FOG Ordinance (07-25-2025 FINAL) CLG.pdf Photos (Confidential) (11-08-2021).pdf Sanitary Sewer (Main and Services) Examples CLG.pdf 7.9 Motion to approve Alta, current vendor, to pay for invoice to repair Windrow Turner for an amount not to exceed $8,028. Funded through Act 179 Equipment and Repair Maintenance. Invoice ALTA 1st Invoice 7.10 Motion to approve Grainger, emergency purchase, for a portable air container units at the Taylor Police Department for an amount not to exceed $23,026, funded through TBA Capital Outlay Account. Grainger Quotation Confirmation 2061725864 (2) (1).PDF AC Approval.pdf 7.11 Motion to approve Knight Watch, sole source, for the purchase of thirty-seven (37) security cameras for the Animal Shelter, for an amount not to exceed $127,744. Funded through Act 179 Animal Shelter Capital Outlay. KnightWatch Quote.pdf Sole Source - KnightWatch.pdf Security Cameras for Animal Shelter 8-25-25.pdf 7.12 Motion to approve the Administration to enter into contract negotiations with BS&A Software for the implementation of ERP software, for an amount of $380,455 in year one (1) and $90,370 annually for five (5) years. Funded through Building Dept., Water Dept., General Fund Administration. Quote_BSA_ERP.pdf 7.13 Motion to approve Ricoh, Sole Source, for PaperCut yearly renewal in an amount not to exceed $4,847, funded through General Fund IT Contractual Services. Ricoh_PaperCut.pdf RicohPaperCut_SS.pdf papercut approval.pdf 7.14 Motion to approve CBTS, Sole Source, for the yearly renewal of RedSky E911 for an amount of $7,427. Funded through General Fund IT Contractual Services. 3 CBTS_RedSkySoleSource.pdf CityofTaylor_Redsky_Renewal.pdf redsky approval.pdf 7.15 Motion to approve Secure Auth, Sole Source, for the renewal of Secure Auth authentication software for an amount of $6,947. Funded through General Fund IT Contractual Services. Q-30808-1 year.pdf secure auth Approval.pdf 7.16 Motion to approve amending CCR 8.360-25 for GHA Technologies, low quote for the purchase of 400 YubiKey Multifactor authentication fobs for an amount of $31,000. Funded through General Fund IT Contractual Services. Quote 2989734 Yubikey.pdf 7.17 Motion to approve Data National, Sole Source, for a purchase agreement in the amount of $30,000 for AS400 programming support. Funded through General Fund IT Contractual Services. DN_PA_SoleSource.pdf DataNational_PA.pdf Data national Approval.pdf 7.18 Motion to approve Plante Moran, PLLC to provide audit of federal award services for fiscal years ending 2025 and 2026 for an amount not to exceed $15,500 and $16,000 respectively, plus $10,350 per additional major program if applicable. Amount to be funded through Budget and Finance contractual services and corresponding grant funds. Federal Auditor Bid Tabulation.pdf Plante Moran Bid Documents.pdf 7.19 Motion to nominate and appoint ____ to fill the vacant position on the Taylor City Council, per section 4.5 of the City Charter. 8. OPEN BUSINESS 9. ADJOURNMENT 4 TIMOTHY WOOLLEY CITY COUNCIL Mayor City of Taylor DOUGLAS A. GEISS CYNTHIA A. BOWER Chairman City Clerk JILL BRANDANA MICHELLE TOCCO Chairwoman Pro-Tem Treasurer Council Members TINA DANIELS 23555 GODDARD ROAD CHARLEY JOHNSON Taylor, MI 48180 LINDSEY ROSE ANGIE WINTON PHONE: (734) 287-6550 www.cityoftaylor.com MINUTES The regular meeting of the Taylor City Council was held on Tuesday, August 19, 2025 at 6:30 p.m. in the Taylor Municipal Building at 23555 Goddard Road, Taylor, Michigan. Council Chairman Douglas A. Geiss called the meeting to order. Present: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Douglas Geiss, Jill Brandana, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Also Present: Mayor Woolley, Clerk Cindy Bower, Corporation Counsel Ed Plato, Council Secretary Tiarra Swain Excused: Treasurer Michelle Tocco Motion By: Jill Brandana Supported By: Angie Winton Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To approve the Agenda with removal of Mayor’s Communication item 6.1. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.365-25 Motion By: Jill Brandana Supported By: Tina Daniels Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To approve the acceptance of the minutes of the meeting held August 6, 2025 with amendment and dispense with oral reading. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.366-25 Page: 1 5 Motion By: Angie Winton Supported By: Charley Johnson Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To receive & file feedback from the Taylor Ethics Commission. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.367-25 Motion By: Jill Brandan Supported By: Charley Johnson Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To approve a resolution commemorating the life and service of Judge Sutherland. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.368-25 Motion By: Charley Johnson Supported By: Jill Brandana Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To approve sending four (4) Police Officers to attend the 2025 Michigan Association of Hostage Negotiators Conference in Traverse City, MI for an amount not to exceed $2,926, funded through General Fund - Police Conferences and Training. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.369-25 Motion By: Angie Winton Supported By: Charley Johnson Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To approve renewal of a one-year software support agreement between the City of Taylor and QennectIT (DBA Cloudvice), for an amount not to exceed $78,864. Funding provided per the attached schedule. Interested Parties: T. Long, Non-Resident Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.370-25 Motion By: Angie Winton Supported By: Charley Johnson Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To approve the purchase of four (4) Dell Pro Rugged Laptop Computers from Dell, State Contract through CLEMIS, for an amount not to exceed $9,404, funded through General Fund- Police IT. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.371-25 Page: 2 6 Motion By: Jill Brandana Supported By: Charley Johnson Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To approve Hennessey Engineers for construction engineering, inspection and testing for the CDBG 2025 Emmett/Murray/Forest Lane Street Project, in an amount not to exceed $48,000. Funded through Community Development Block Grant. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.372-25 Motion By: Charley Johnson Supported By: Angie Winton Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To approve S & J Asphalt Paving Co, lowest qualified bidder, for the 2025 CDBG Street Resurfacing Contract in an amount of $220,900 with a 10% contingency for a total amount not to exceed $242,990. Contract work to be completed in the 2025-2026 Fiscal Year. Funded through Community Development Block Grant. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.373-25 Motion By: Lindsey Rose Supported By: Tina Daniels Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To amend CCR #4.149-25 for Home Rehab project #2025-04 for work to be performed by Cutting Edge Restorations from Roof Replacement to siding, gutters, downspouts, chimney, and front porch brickwork. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.374-25 Motion By: Jill Brandana Supported By: Charley Johnson Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To approve % interest deferred loan for project #2025-06 for work to be performed by Optimum Contracting Solutions per low quote for Roof and Window Replacement in the amount of $21,100, funded through the Community Development Block Grant Home Rehabilitation account. Not to exceed program limits. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.375-25 Page: 3 7 Motion By: Angie Winton Supported By: Charley Johnson Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To receive & file the first reading to amend Chapter 22 - Fire Protection and Prevention, Article II - Fire Code, of the Code of Ordinances, City of Taylor, to remove and replace the sections that adopt and reference the NFPA 1, Fire Code, 2021 and replace them with and adopt the NFPA 1, Fire Code, 2024 Edition. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.376-25 Motion By: Jill Brandana Supported By: Lindsey Rose Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To approve (3) three Taylor Fire Department members to take part in the Downriver Community Conference (DCC) Community Service Grant Project and attend Wayne County Community College Paramedic Course, in an amount not to exceed $12,000. Funded through General Fund-Fire Department- Training Account. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.377-25 Motion By: Charley Johnson Supported By: Tina Daniels Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To approve sending one (1) Building Department employee for an overnight stay to attend the fall Code Official Conference of Michigan (COCM) for an amount not to exceed $700, plus incidental expenses. Funded through Building Department Training and Transportation account. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.378-25 Motion By: Angie Winton Supported By: Jill Brandana Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To receive & file the July 2025 Budget Performance Report. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.379-25 Motion By: Lindsey Rose Supported By: Tina Daniels Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels Nays: None Resolved: To receive & file the July 2025 Paid Invoice Report. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.380-25 Page: 4 8 Motion By: Charley Johnson Supported By: Angie Winton Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To approve the resolution authorizing City of Taylor designated employees to execute storm water management system agreements for storm systems constructed in the City of Taylor. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.381-25 Motion By: Jill Brandana Supported By: Tina Daniels Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To approve Wade Trim, current vendor, to perform 2025 PASER Rating Updates for the City of Taylor for an amount not to exceed $13,900. Funded through Major and Local Street Funds. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.382-25 Motion By: Angie Winton Supported By: Charley Johnson Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To receive & file the first reading of City of Taylor’s Code of Ordinances Chapter 50 (Utilities) to add Emergency article seven (7) Fats, Oils, and Grease (FOG) Control dated July 25, 2025. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.383-25 Motion By: Angie Winton Supported By: Lindsey Rose Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To approve Huron River Watershed Council, current vendor, for City of Taylor 2025 Annual Assessment in an amount not to exceed $63,679. Funded through Major and Local Street Funds. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.384-25 Page: 5 9 Motion By: Angie Winton Supported By: Jill Brandana Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To approve Joint & Crack Sealing Contract One (1) Year Bid Extension to current vendor Carr’s Outdoor Services for an amount not to exceed $260,000. Funded through Local Road and Major Road Street Funds. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.385-25 Motion By: Tina Daniels Supported By: Charley Johnson Ayes: Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss Resolved: To receive & file the first reading of Appendix A, City of Taylor, Michigan Code of Ordinances, regulating the development and use of land to rezone 21111 Van Born, parcel #60 -002-99 -0002-002 and the westerly 600 feet of parcel #60-002-99- 0001-701 of the NW 1/4 Section 3 T.3S., R.10E., City of Taylor, Wayne County, Michigan from I-1(Zc) to I-1 (Light Industrial). The property is located on the south side of Van Born between Monroe and Merrick. Roll Call Vote 2 – 4 Motion failed CCR #: 8.386-25 Motion By: Charley Johnson Supported By: Angie Winton Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To receive & file the first reading of amendment to Article 13.00, Use Requirements, Section 13.05, Motor Vehicle Uses, Sub-section (a) Automobile Filling Stations, of Appendix A of the Taylor, Michigan, Code of Ordinances, as attached. Interested Parties: J. Desahn Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.387-25 Motion By: Lindsey Rose Supported By: Tina Daniels Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To approve the attendance of two (2) City Clerk's Office employees at the 2025 Michigan Association of Municipal Clerk's Master Academy in the amount not to exceed $1,600 plus out of pocket expenses, funded through General Fund, City Clerk's, Training & Transportation. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.388-25 Page: 6 10 Motion By: Tina Daniels Supported By: Lindsey Rose Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To approve to open the public hearing at 7:51p.m. regarding the suspension of the business license of Big League Brews. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.389-25 Motion By: Charley Johnson Supported By: Tina Daniels Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To approve to close the public hearing and reverse the Mayor’s suspension of the business license of Big League Brews. Interested Parties: S. Thompkins Roll Call Vote Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.390-25 Motion By: Charley Johnson Supported By: Angie Winton Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To approve going into a closed door session at 8:04 p.m. to discuss the lawsuit, Area Towing versus City of Taylor. Roll Call Vote Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.391-25 Reconvened at 8:39 p.m. Motion By: Charley Johnson Supported By: Tina Daniels Ayes: Charley Johnson, Angie Winton, Jill Brandana, Douglas Geiss, Tina Daniels, Lindsey Rose Nays: None Resolved: To approve adjournment at 9:16 p.m. Unanimously carried CCR #: 8.392-25 _____________________________________ ________________________________ Douglas A. Geiss, Chairman Cynthia A. Bower, City Clerk Page: 7 11 2026 TAYLOR SUMMER FESTIVAL PA's EXPENSES ENTERTAINMENT National Acts ($ 125,000.00) Local Acts ($ 10,000.00) Fireworks (Ace Pyro) ($ 40,000.00) World Series Fireworks (Ace Pyro) ($ 7,000.00) RENTAL ITEMS Tents, tables & chairs (Olsen Party Rental) ($ 2,000.00) Power Lights (Sunbelt Rentals) ($ 2,500.00) Stage/Sound/Lighting (Mercury Audio) ($ 29,000.00) Porta a Johns (TBD) ($ 3,200.00) Golf Cart Rental ( Michigan Tournament Fleet) ($ 1,200.00) Backline (NV Rentals) ($ 2,500.00) CITY SERVICES Sponsor Event ($ 4,000.00) MARKETING / PROMOTIONAL ITEMS Radio (TBD) ($ 8,000.00) Facebook/Snapchat/Instagram ($ 1,500.00) EVENT DAY ITEMS Signage (MI Custom Signs) ($ 2,100.00) Hard Concert Tickets / Passes / Graphics (Allegra Marketing ) ($ 1,200.00) Ice (Taylor Ice) ($ 600.00) ($ - ) ($ - ) OFFICE EXPENSES Event/Talent Production Management (The KYTE Group) ($ 10,300.00) Concert Booking Services (How To Concerts) ($ 12,500.00) Rider items ($ 2,000.00) Catering (TBD) ($ 3,000.00) MLCC Special License Fee ($ 200.00) West Side Distributing (West Side Distribution) ($ 10,000.00) Sales Tax (estimated based on sales) ($ 1,200.00) VOLUNTEERS/STAFF/CONTRACT WORKERS Security Multiple locations ( Code 3 Security) ($ 5,000.00) Misc. Band Transportation (A Dream Limousine) ($ 3,000.00) Hotel (Home 2 Suites) ($ 3,500.00) Dressing Room Rental/ RVs (TBD) ($ 3,000.00) Total ($ 293,500.00) 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 Bid Tabulation RFP-062325-001 - Pickleball Court Construction – Heritage Park Comments & Name of Vendor Address Telephone Lump Sum Price Recommendations 3000 E. 10 Mile Rd. Hutch Paving, Inc. 313-332-5709 $442,033.00 N/A Warren, MI 48091 3318 Fort Street Kab Enterprises, Inc. 734-719-2642 $394,260.62 N/A Lincoln Park, MI 48146 Purchasing Agent Signature: Aileen Shamoon Date: 08/11/2025 Time: 10:00 AM Page 1 of 1 38 Bid Tabulation RFP-072125-001 - HVAC Units Heritage Hall Comments & Name of Vendor Address Telephone Price Recommendations Allied Building Service 1801 Howard St. 313-230-0800 $69,400.00 Company of Detroit, Inc. Detroit, MI 48216 2925 Waterview Dr. K & S Ventures Inc. 248-299-4212 $70,195.00 Rochester Hills, MI 48309 37679 Schoolcraft Road Temperature Services, Inc. 734-838-3200 $58,888.00 Livonia, MI 48150 2275 N. Opdyke Rd, Suite A Stuart Mechanical, LLC 248-258-5800 $69,819.00 Auburn Hills, MI 48326 Engineered Comfort 12480 Allen Road 734-287-4111 $89,644.35 Systems, Inc. Taylor, MI 48180 Purchasing Agent Signature: Aileen Shamoon Date: 8/19/2025 Time: 10:00 AM Page 1 of 1 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 STATE OF MICHIGAN COUNTY OF WAYNE CITY OF TAYLOR ORDINANCE NO. 2025- AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 22 – FIRE PROTECTION AND PREVENTION, ARTICLE II – FIRE CODE, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CITY OF TAYLOR, TO REMOVE AND REPLACE THE SECTIONS THAT ADOPT AND REFERNCE THE NFPA 1, FIRE CODE, 2021 EDITION AND REPLACE THEM WITH AND ADOPT THE NFPA 1, FIRE CODE, 2024 EDITION. THE CITY OF TAYLOR ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Chapter 22 – Fire Protection and Prevention, Article II– Fire Code, of the Code of Ordinances is hereby amended by repealing current Sections 22-19 through 22-21 and replacing them to read as follows: Sec. 22-19. - Adoption of National Fire Protection Association Fire Code (“NFPA 1”). That the NFPA 1, Fire Code, 2024 edition, and documents adopted by Chapter 2, one (1) copy of which is on file and is open to inspection by the public in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Taylor, are hereby adopted and incorporated into this ordinance as fully as if set out at length herein, and from the date on which this ordinance shall take effect, the provisions thereof shall be controlling within the limits of the City of Taylor. The same are hereby adopted as the code of the City of Taylor for the purpose of prescribing regulations governing conditions hazardous to life and property from fire or explosion and providing for issuance of permits and collection of fees. Sec. 22-20. – Violations; penalties; enforcement. Any person who shall violate any provision of this Code or standard hereby adopted or fail to comply therewith; or who shall violate or fail to comply with any order made thereunder; or who shall build in violation of any detailed statement of specifications or plans submitted and approved thereunder; or fail to operate in accordance with any certificate or permit issued thereunder; and from which no appeal has been taken; or who shall fail to comply with such an order as affirmed or modified by a court of competent jurisdiction, within the time fixed herein, shall severally for each and every such violation and noncompliance, respectively, be responsible of a civil infraction, punishable by a fine of not more than $500, plus costs. The imposition of a penalty/fine for any violation shall not excuse the violation or permit it to continue; and all such persons shall be required to correct 1 53 or remedy such violations or defects within a reasonable time; and when not otherwise specified the application of the above penalty shall not be held to prevent the enforced removal of prohibited conditions. Each day that prohibited conditions are maintained shall constitute a separate offense. In addition to any remedies available at law, the City of Taylor may bring an action for an injunction, public nuisance or other process against a person to restrain, prevent or abate any violation of this Code. Actual costs, including, but not limited to attorney fees, costs and expenses incurred by the City to enforce any injunctive order or abate any violation of this Code shall be assessed against a person determined to be in violation of the provisions of this Chapter. Sec. 22-21. – Authority having jurisdiction (“AHJ”); Additions, insertions, and changes to NFPA 1. The authority having jurisdiction (“AHJ”) referenced in NFPA 1 shall mean the City of Taylor, the City of Taylor Fire Department, the Fire Chief, the Fire Marshal and authorized designees. SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY. If any Section, subsection, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent portion of this ordinance, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. SECTION 3. SAVINGS. All proceedings pending and all rights and liabilities existing, acquired or incurred at the time this ordinance takes effect are saved and may be consummated according to the law in force when they are commenced. SECTION 4. REPEALER. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed only to the extent necessary to give this ordinance full force and effect. SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be effective upon the passage by the City Council and the publication of the Ordinance in accordance with the Charter of the City of Taylor and the statutes of the State of Michigan. I hereby certify that the foregoing constitutes a true and complete copy of an Ordinance duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Taylor, at a Regular Meeting held in the Council Chambers at the Taylor Municipal Building, 23555 Goddard Road, Taylor, Michigan, on the ____ day of _____________, 2025. 2 54 I further certify that the following Council Members were present at said meeting: ________________________________________________________________ Members absent:.____________ I further certify that Council Member moved adoption of said Ordinance, and said motion was supported by Council Member . I further certify that the following Council Members voted for adoption of said Ordinance: ________________________________________ and the following Council Members voted against adoption of said Ordinance: ______. ORDINANCE NO. ________ RESOLUTION NO. ________ CYNTHIA A. BOWER, CITY CLERK I hereby approve the foregoing Ordinance. TIM WOOLLEY, MAYOR 3 55 56 CORE BKG Van Born LLC 30100 Telegraph Rd, Suite 366 Bingham Farms, MI 48025 June 25, 2025 Hand Delivered Ms. Lora Fell – Planning Director City of Taylor 23555 Goddard Road Taylor, MI 48180 RE: Request to Amend the Official Zoning Map of the City of Taylor; 21111 Van Born Road; from B-2 to I-1 Dear Ms. Fell, Planning Commissioners and City Council members: The Applicant and property owner, CORE BKG Van Born LLC (“Applicant”), respectfully requests an Amendment to the official Zoning Map of the City of Taylor of the property located at 21111 Van Born Rd. (“property”), from the underlying B-2 Regional Business classiﬁcation to I-1 Light Industrial. The property is currently conditionally zoned I-1, but only for as long as Ford Motor Company (“Ford”) (or an affiliate or subsidiary of Ford Motor Company) is the holder of a current lease and/or owner of the property. If at any time Ford Motor Company (or its subsidiary) is no longer a tenant at the property, the zoning would revert back to B-2 (Regional Business). Please see Exhibit 1 for the ALTA survey and legal description of the property requested to be rezoned. Parcels 2 and 3 on this ALTA Survey are the parcels to be rezoned. Parcel 1 is 21001 Van Born, which has an underlaying I-1 zoning classiﬁcation. To allow for viable marketing, use, and continued occupancy of the property when Ford vacates, the Applicant desires to permanently rezone the property to allow for light industrial use by-right under I-1. Reverting back to a B-2 zoning would not be marketable or economically feasible for use of the property, since there is an abundance of vacant and underutilized property in the immediate area that is already zoned and used for business/commercial purposes. It should be noted that the property immediately east of the subject property, 21001 Van Born property, formerly the Masco HQ, also has a zoning classiﬁcation of I-1. Rezoning the subject property to I-1 would re-affirm the current conditional industrial zoning and use, as well as create a consistent zoning classiﬁcation for the entire block bounded by Van Born to the north, I-94 to the south, Clippert to the west and Merrick to the east. Further, there is market demand for light industrial uses, and with the abutting I-94 expressway to the south, industrial zoning to the east, and frontage on Van Born Road, the property is ideally situated for such uses. 57 21111 Van Born Rezoning Request Narrative Page 2 Please see attached current Zoning Map as Exhibit 2, showing the underlying zoning classiﬁcations noted above. This map was downloaded from the City of Taylor website on 6-12-25. Current Plans for the Property When Ford vacates, the Applicant would like to continue to lease the property to light industrial tenants that meet the I-1 zoning requirements (presuming its I-1 rezoning request is approved), or build a light industrial building for an end user that would bring many new jobs and tax revenue to the city. The Conceptual Plan attached as Exhibit 4 showing a new industrial building is provided to meet the Rezoning Application Requirements, speciﬁcally 27.02 (b) (1) (g), and as a proposed use. Applicant, who has signiﬁcant knowledge of the real estate market and trends, along with years of developing, owning and constructing industrial buildings throughout Michigan, is very conﬁdent that the property is an ideal site for such uses. Reverting the property back to a B-2 zoning is not marketable or economically viable, and the property would sit vacant, instead of being utilized to create new jobs and tax revenue. Per Section 27.04.(a) – Criteria for amendment of the zoning map; the Applicant offers the following: Consistency with Master Plan The Future Land Use plan, attached as Exhibit 5, shows industrial use directly south of the property in question, Trolley Industrial south of I-94, which has very similar access and locational attributes to the Van Born property. The Applicant strongly disagrees that commercial use as shown on the Future Land Use plan is marketable or viable, demonstrated by the vacation of the property by Kmart as well a signiﬁcant number of vacant or underutilized retail buildings in the vicinity on Van Born Rd. Capability of the site to support the development The site was fully built-out as a large format retail building and is fully served by all necessary municipal utilities. Any future redevelopment in keeping with the proposed Conceptual Plan would have a similar or lesser impervious surface area, create less vehicular traffic, and less ingress/egress to the property, when compared to traffic patterns to the site if it is used for a larger retail development. As noted on the Zoning Map, the property is within the “AE” ﬂoodplain boundary. The current building ﬁnish ﬂoor elevation is above this ﬂoodplain elevation, and any building(s) constructed as part of a redevelopment of the site would have a ﬁnish ﬂoor elevation a minimum of 12” above this ﬂood elevation. If the site is redeveloped, all appropriate permits would be sought, including permits from EGLE for work in this AE ﬂoodplain. Per the requirements of Section 27.02 (b) (1) (f), attached as Exhibit 3 is the Site Analysis. Per the requirements of Section 27.02 (b) (1) (g), attached as Exhibit 4 is the Conceptual 58 21111 Van Born Rezoning Request Narrative Page 3 Development plan showing how the site could be redeveloped with a 192,500 SF light- industrial building; a use that would be marketable, economically feasible, a less intense use than a larger commercial center, and in demand in today’s market. Practicality and Reasonableness of B-2 Zoning. The fact that Kmart vacated the property and it sat vacant until Masco acquired it, subsequently leasing it to Ford for industrial use, speaks to the evolution of the retail landscape. The Applicant has actively marketed the property for lease and sale well over 2 years, for business/retail uses, and to date there has been no interest from any retailer, nor is any expected in the foreseeable future. Regionally, the Eastland Mall was razed and redeveloped into an industrial park. The Summit Place Mall in Waterford was also razed and planned to be redeveloped as an industrial park. Both of these sites are objectively better located to attract retail uses than the 21001 Van Born site, yet were converted to industrial use. With companies like Amazon (and similar), and the huge diversion to online shopping for consumer goods and items during Covid, which has continued thereafter and has become more dominant; the large-scale retail centers and big box uses are a thing of the past. Light industrial use for the property will alleviate additional vacant retail buildings in the City, as use or redevelopment of the property into another form of retail development is not viable. Compatibility of Potential Industrial Use The original use of the property as a Kmart was a much more intensive use of the site as it relates to traffic volume, pedestrian traffic, noise and other impacts on surrounding properties. Most retail operators are open for business seven days a week with many retailers operating from 8:00 am until as late as 10:00 pm, and with many vehicular, pedestrian, and delivery truck trips in and out of the commercial center. Alternatively, most industrial users are open Monday-Friday with minimal operations after 5:00 pm or on weekends. Also, ingress and egress to the site is less frequent once employees are on site, and the retail center “shopper” type traffic is eliminated. There will be truck deliveries typical for industrial uses, but those can be scheduled and coordinated to avoid any traffic or safety issues. The current facility has no truck docks or other access points on the west side facing towards Clippert Street. So, the current impact by the conditional use as industrial is minimal. Any future redevelopment also would not have truck docks or overhead doors facing west towards Clippert Street. The west side would be employee parking and office uses, with a signiﬁcant buffer and screening for the residential to the west, including a minimum 45’ wide greenbelt with a 4’ high berm (already installed as part of conditional rezoning), and a 75’ building setback would be met. 59 21111 Van Born Rezoning Request Narrative Page 4 Site Access Current and proposed access to the site is solely through driveway aligned with the intersection of Campbell St. This intersection has a traffic signal with a dedicated center turn lane. Fire access would be the only access point from Clippert St. Traffic Impacts Comparing the underlying zoning of B-2 using the existing 140,420 SF property for trip generation vs. a conceptual plan showing the maximum build out of a 192,500 SF industrial building, conﬁrms the industrial use will generate signiﬁcantly less traffic. Please see the Fishbeck trip generation comparison report dated June 20, 2025, attached as Exhibit 6. The results of the trip generation comparison revealed the proposed warehousing development would generate 214 fewer total driveway trips during the a.m. peak hour (110 fewer inbound, 104 fewer outbound), 558 fewer total driveway trips during the p.m. peak hour (284 fewer inbound, 274 fewer outbound), and 6,752 fewer total driveway trips during a typical weekday compared to the former Super K-Mart Store. The differential in new trips revealed the proposed warehousing would generate 214 fewer driveway trips during the a.m. peak hour (110 fewer inbound, 104 fewer outbound), and 382 fewer new trips during the p.m. peak hour (198 fewer inbound,184 fewer outbound) when compared to the former Super K-Mart Store. In summary, the current facility continuing use as industrial or any future redevelopment for industrial use will have signiﬁcantly less trip generation and traffic impact than the typical B- 2zoning uses would generate. Infrastructure Capacity The property is fully-served by all necessary municipal utilities, which are adequate for the current facility and any proposed industrial building of similar or even greater size. Any redevelopment for industrial would have a similar, or most likely less, demand on infrastructure than a commercial center would require. Consistency with Market Demand The I-94 corridor from I-275 to Detroit has seen signiﬁcant investment and job creation, almost entirely as industrial uses. An example is the Ashley Capital “Metro 94 Commerce Center” industrial development within the City of Taylor, currently under construction. Proper adoption of the Taylor-Dearborn Heights Gateway Overlay District (TDHG) Applicant is aware the City of Taylor asserts the TDHG Overlay District (“TDHG”) is effective and now controls the land use of the subject property. However, Applicant strongly disagrees with this assertion. A review of city records indicates that the meeting notice that was published to announce 60 21111 Van Born Rezoning Request Narrative Page 5 the April 5, 2023 meeting for the TDHG states that it will be a public hearing. However, a review of the minutes from the April 5, 2023 meeting make no mention of a public hearing (required by law) actually taking place to approve/adopt the TDHG. In addition, Applicant has issue with the TDHG for reasons, including, but not limited to the following. Zoning Map The City of Taylor official zoning map, attached, does not show the TDHG overlay district. Per the TDHG ordinance language, Section 12.02 Scope and Applicability: “(a) Scope. The requirements of this chapter shall apply to all lands that are designated within the TDHG Gateway district as shown on the City of Taylor Zoning Map.”. As the City of Taylor official Zoning Map, attached, does not show any lands with this overlay district in place, the Applicant’s position is that this overlay district does not govern the subject Property. If the TDHG overlay was in fact legally adopted, it should be reﬂected in the City of Taylor Zoning Map, for which the city has had ample time to update. December 2021 Proposed Gateway Overlay District graphic The “Proposed” Gateway Overlay District graphic attached as Exhibit 7 pre-dates the alleged adoption of the TDHG district by 18 months. There is no contemporaneous, “ﬁnal” map of the TDHG in existence to the knowledge of the Applicant, and certainly not on the City of Taylor official Zoning Map. Engagement of the Applicant by the City during the TDHG planning process Applicant is the owner of the largest building in the proposed TDHG district (the former Masco headquarters building at +/- 416,000 SF as well as the contiguous former Kmart property at 140,420 SF) which total 30.72 acres. It would make sense to engage the Applicant in discussions for the TDHG overlay, which if it was in fact properly and legally adopted, would effectively result in a “rezoning” of Applicant’s properties to negate the I-1 zoning and prevent light industrial uses on the property. This action by the city would result in an unconstitutional taking of property for which compensation must be paid, including violation of Applicant’s rights to procedural and substantive due process, and other applicable constitutional rights. The TDHG overlay would render the property unmarketable, and economically not viable if restricted to the uses in the TDHG district. The Applicant was only made aware that this TDHG district was created (with no speciﬁc area burdened by this zoning district on the Zoning Map) after at least two in-person meetings with City officials to discuss marketing and future plans of the property and the Masco building. Again, the Applicant disagrees that the TDHG district was properly adopted, as there are no city council minutes reﬂecting a public hearing and approval of the TDHG, and the accompanying City Zoning Map shows no areas within this TDHG overlay district. 61 62 Exhibit 1 – ALTA Survey and Legal Descriptions 63 Exhibit 2 – City of Taylor Zoning Map (downloaded 6-12-25) 64 Exhibit 3 – Site Analysis 65 Exhibit 4 – Conceptual Plan 66 Exhibit 5 – Future Land Use Plan from City Of Taylor Master Plan 67 Exhibit 6 – Traffic Analysis 68 Exhibit 7 – Proposed Gateway Overlay District (downloaded 3-3-25) 69 70 71 72 73 GERTRUDE AVE t: 844.813.2949 CAMPBELL AVE www.peagroup.com CLIPPERT AVE VAN BORN ROAD Zoned B- 2 (Tim Hortons) Traffic Signal at NORTH Entrance SCALE: 1" = 80' CAUTION!! Zoned B-2 THE LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING ARE ONLY (underlying) APPROXIMATE. NO GUARANTEE IS EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED AS TO THE COMPLETENESS OR ACCURACY THEREOF. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE EXCLUSIVELY RESPONSIBLE FOR Zoned I-1 DETERMINING THE EXACT UTILITY LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS Zoned PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION. Zoned I-1 R-1C (conditional) CLIPPERT AVENUE CLIENT CORE BKG VAN BORN, LLC 30100 TELEGRAPH ROAD SUITE: 366 BINGHAM FARMS, MICHIGAN 48025 PROJECT TITLE BK TAYLOR TAYLOR, MICHIGAN Zoned B-2 REVISIONS (underlying) PER CLIENT REVIEW 06-17-2025 Zoned I-1 Zoned B-2 (conditional) ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE: JUNE 03, 2025 INTERSTATE 94 DRAWING TITLE SITE ANALYSIS PLAN PEA JOB NO. 22-0760 P.M. JPB DN. JPB DES. JPB DRAWING NUMBER: PRELIMINARY C-1.1 t: 844.813.2949 www.peagroup.com Van Born Road (Public) 45' Greenbelt 26' Wide Fire Lane 75' Front Setback 10 10 NORTH SCALE: 1" = 60' 10 10 180' Clippert Street (Public) CAUTION!! THE LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING ARE ONLY APPROXIMATE. NO GUARANTEE IS EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED AS TO THE COMPLETENESS OR ACCURACY THEREOF. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE EXCLUSIVELY RESPONSIBLE FOR DETERMINING THE EXACT UTILITY LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION. 10 10 26' Wide Fire Lane 45' Greenbelt Truck Dock Area Truck Court Area 21111 Van Born Road Zoned R-1C Parcel 3 Zoned I-1 12.67 Acres 10 10 Proposed Warehouse 192,500 Sq Ft 275' x 700' CLIENT 15' Side Setback CORE BKG VAN BORN, LLC 10 10 30100 TELEGRAPH ROAD SUITE: 366 BINGHAM FARMS, MICHIGAN 48025 PROJECT TITLE 8 8 BK TAYLOR TAYLOR, MICHIGAN REVISIONS 26' Wide Fire Lane PER CLIENT REVIEW 06-17-2025 75' Front Setback Detention Basin ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE: 15' Rear Setback JUNE 03, 2025 DRAWING TITLE CONCEPTUAL Parcel 2 SITE PLAN 2.19 Acres (To Remain As Parking to Support 21001 Van Born Road) PEA JOB NO. 22-0760 P.M. JPB DN. JPB DES. JPB I-94 DRAWING NUMBER: PRELIMINARY C-1.0 74 Technical Memo SUBJECT: Trip Generation Comparison for 21111 Van Born Road – Taylor, MI TO: Conrad Schewe – CORE BKG Van Born LLC FROM: Jeffery Morden, PE, PTOE DATE: June 20, 2025 PROJECT NO.: 2501025 Introduction On behalf of CORE BKG Van Born LLC, Fishbeck has completed a trip generation comparison for the proposed warehousing development that will be located at 21111 Van Born Road, which is between Monroe Street and Pelham Road on Van Born Road in the City of Taylor (City), Wayne County, Michigan. The site was originally occupied by a 140,420 square foot (sf) Super K-Mart Store that will be demolished. The site is currently occupied by Ford Motor Company for vehicle storage. The proposed development will consist of 192,500 sf of warehousing. The proposed warehousing development will maintain the existing driveway location on Van Born Road. Access on Van Born Road is currently signalized. The project location is displayed in Figure 1. Figure 1 – Project Location 75 Technical Memo – Trip Generation Comparison for 21111 Van Born Road June 20, 2025 Fishbeck | Page 2 Site Traffic Characteristics A representation of the current conceptual site plan is provided in Figure 2. Figure 2 – Conceptual Site Plan Trip Generation Using the information and methodologies specified in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, Fishbeck forecast the weekday morning (7 a.m. to 9 a.m.) peak hour, afternoon (4 p.m. to 6 p.m.) peak hour, and weekday trips associated with the former Super K-Mart Store and the proposed warehousing development. \\CORP.FTCH.COM\ALLPROJECTS\2025\2501025\WORK\REPT\TM_CORE BKG VAN BORN_21111 VAN BORN ROAD_TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON_2025_0620.DOCX 76 Technical Memo – Trip Generation Comparison for 21111 Van Born Road June 20, 2025 Fishbeck | Page 3 A portion of the site-generated trips from the Super K-Mart Store are anticipated to be “pass-by” in nature, meaning they already exist on the adjacent road network and temporarily divert to visit the site. According to ITE methodology, new trips are assumed to return to their direction of origin whereas pass-by trips continue in their original direction of travel. The ITE Trip Generation Manual was used to calculate what percentage of the trips would be pass-by trips, meaning they are vehicles already on the network that would access the development and are not additional trips added to the network. Table 1 presents the resulting trip generation comparison of the existing development and the proposed development. The proposed warehousing trip generation is broken down by trucks and passenger vehicles. Additional information related to the trip generation forecast is attached to this memo. Table 1 – Trip Generation Comparison a.m. Peak Hour p.m. Peak Hour Land Use LUC Units Weekday In Out Total In Out Total Former Super K-Mart Store Free-Standing Discount Superstore 813 140,420sf 146 115 261 298 310 608 7,094 Total 146 115 261 298 310 608 7,094 Pass-by Rates, LUC 813: 29% p.m. - - - 86 90 176 - Total New Trips 146 115 261 212 220 432 - Proposed Warehousing Warehousing 150 192,500sf 36 11 47 14 36 50 342 Trucks 2 2 4 3 3 6 116 Passenger Vehicles 34 9 43 11 33 44 226 Total 36 11 47 14 36 50 342 Potential Total Driveway Trip Difference -110 -104 -214 -284 -274 -558 -6,752 Potential Total New Trip Difference -110 -104 -214 -198 -184 -382 - LUC Land Use Code sf square foot The results of the trip generation comparison revealed the proposed warehousing development would generate 214 fewer total driveway trips during the a.m. peak hour (110 fewer inbound, 104 fewer outbound), 558 fewer total driveway trips during the p.m. peak hour (284 fewer inbound, 274 fewer outbound), and 6,752 fewer total driveway trips during a typical weekday compared to the former Super K-Mart Store. The differential in new trips revealed the proposed warehousing would generate 214 fewer driveway trips during the a.m. peak hour (110 fewer inbound, 104 fewer outbound), and 382 fewer new trips during the p.m. peak hour (198 fewer inbound, 184 fewer outbound) when compared to the former Super K-Mart Store. \\CORP.FTCH.COM\ALLPROJECTS\2025\2501025\WORK\REPT\TM_CORE BKG VAN BORN_21111 VAN BORN ROAD_TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON_2025_0620.DOCX 77 Attachment Trip Generation Calculations 78 Trip Generation - Weekday Summary - Existing Super K-Mart AM PM Weekday ITE Code ITE Rate Description Unit Amount Ingress Egress Total Ingress Egress Total Ingress Egress Total ITE 813 Free-Standing Discount Superstore sq ft 140420 146 115 261 298 310 608 3547 3547 7094 Pass-By Rates, LUC 821: 40% p.m. 86 90 176 Total New Trips 146 115 261 212 220 432 3547 3547 7094 ITE Trip Generation Rates - Weekday ITE Code ITE Rate Description Unit Amount R2 Rate Std. Dev. # of Studies Pass-by Notes ITE 813 Free-Standing Discount Superstore sq ft 140,420 AM No equation 261 - 1.86 0.75 72 - Use average rate PM No equation 608 - 4.33 1.10 96 29% Use average rate Weekday No equation 7094 - 50.52 12.61 72 - Use average rate AM PM Weekday Ingress Egress Total Ingress Egress Total Ingress Egress Total Directional Distribution 56% 44% 100% 49% 51% 100% 50% 50% 100% Volume Distribution 146 115 261 298 310 608 3547 3547 7094 79 Land Use: 813 Free-Standing Discount Superstore Description A discount superstore is similar to a free-standing discount store described in Land Use 815 with the exception that it also contains a full-service grocery department under the same roof that shares entrances and exits with the discount store area. These stores usually offer a variety of customer services, centralized cashiering, and a wide range of products. They typically maintain long store hours 7 days a week. The stores included in this land use are often the only ones on the site, but they can also be found in mutual operation with a related or unrelated garden center or service station, or as a part of a shopping center, with or without their own dedicated parking area. Freestanding discount store (Land Use 815) is a related use. Additional Data A garden center contained within the principal outside faces of the exterior building walls is included in the reported gross floor area. An outdoor or fenced-in area outside the principal faces of the exterior walls is excluded. Several sites included in this land use indicate the presence of fenced/covered space. A Texas Transportation Institute study titled “Nationwide Discount Supercenter Study” published in 2008 provides information on trip generation rates for what the study defines as “typical” and “peak” seasons. The peak season is defined as the period between the week after Thanksgiving and the week prior to Christmas. The typical season is defined as September through mid-November when sales transactions are close to the annual average. The following are their key findings: • Weekday trip generation rates are similar in both seasons • Saturday trip generation rates are 13 to 20 percent higher during the peak season than the typical season • Sunday trip generation rates are 6 to 10 percent higher during the peak season The weighted average truck trip generation rates from approximately 30 sites surveyed for this land use are summarized in the table below. The average gross floor area of these facilities is 206,000 square feet. General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 800–999) 25 80 Weighted Average Truck Trip Generation Rate Day/Time Period (Trip ends per 1,000 square feet) Weekday 0.87 Weekday AM Peak Hour of 0.05 Adjacent Street Traffic Weekday PM Peak Hour of 0.03 Adjacent Street Traffic Weekday AM Peak Hour of Generator 0.06 Weekday PM Peak Hour of Generator 0.04 Saturday 0.59 Saturday Peak Hour of Generator 0.04 Sunday 0.43 Sunday Peak Hour of Generator 0.02 To assist in the future analysis of this land use, it is important to collect and include information on the presence and size of garden centers, outdoor fenced-in space, and service stations in trip generation data submissions. The technical appendices provide supporting information on time-of-day distributions for this land use. The appendices can be accessed through either the ITETripGen web app or the trip generation resource page on the ITE website (https://www.ite.org/technical-resources/topics/trip- and-parking-generation/). The sites were surveyed in the 1990s, the 2000s, and the 2010s in Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. Source Numbers 354, 522, 577, 595, 607, 609, 612, 618, 625, 630, 636, 651, 652, 661, 731, 735, 851, 866, 946, 960, 1067, 1071, 1072 26 Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition • Volume 5 81 §k̄k¤̄£©akl°¥kas± dqqcde¢goc¢n̄c²³̄cdgqrc¡e¤´µhb¨k¥¶d·¸¡¹b̧ºpºsp¶qd»ecdhb`sm¼f¶½bk¦lo¦¤¶hdqdgb§¨£¶¸µ¡qdg¾hbrgc¡¸¿ 012234567897 975421512 2921978 4 !05!"0# $76 %22&86'( )26&*1+#8,627545122516++9( $72*1-25.227/67806!1! 425597 236597 "27216415672451567 6789:;<=><?@7AB:CD EF GHIJ<KLLL<?MJ<N@J<ONGD KPQ RB;:S@B=TUV<RBC@;B97@B=TD WXY<:T@:;BTIZ<[[Y<:\B@BTI 29219"27216597214 !05!"0# GH:;UI:<]U@: ]UTI:<=><]U@:C ?@UTAU;A<R:HBU@B=T KJ^X LJ^K<_<QJ^X LJEW 656)5678 6597 k©lll ¨ll `abàcdeafghi §ll ¦ll ®ª ¤ll ll £l kll ª«k¬£l ¤ll ¤£l ¥ll jabaklllamnoapqoarps tuvwxytzu{ |}{~{yu{ zuu{wyv~}{y vuzyuyz}{ y kkqafhdqdg giqdqqaàc¡giecq¡qdgafg¢dgci qqei°̄d̄qqcde¢goc¢n̄c²³̄cdgqrc¡e¤´µhb¨k¥¶d·¸¡¹b̧ºpºsp¶qd»ecdhb`sm¼f¶½bk¦lo¦¤¶hdqdgb§¨£¶¸µ¡qdg¾hbrgc¡a̧Àc¹¡gm̄¹c¿ k82 k̄ «¬jj¬£¢¥̀jk¤kr̀® cppbcd¡fnb¡¬mb¯¬°bcfpqbd£±²ga³j¤´cµ¶·¶a¸o¸ro´pc¹dbcga_°lºe´»aj¼kn¼£´gcpcfa«³¢´¶²pcf½gaqfb¶¾ 012234567897 975421512 2921978 4 !05!"0# $76 %22&86'( )26&*1+#8,627545122516++9( $72*1-25.227/6780!1! 425597 236597 "27216415672451567 6789:;<=><?@7AB:CD EF GHIJ<KLLL<?MJ<N@J<ONGD KEP QB;:R@B=STU<QBC@;B97@B=SD VEW<:S@:;BSIX<YKW<:ZB@BSI 29219"27216597214 !05!"0# GH:;TI:<[T@: [TSI:<=><[T@:C ?@TSAT;A<Q:HBT@B=S VJ\\ KJ]\<^<PJVL KJKL 656)5678 6597 j¥¢kk _à`_bcdèfgh j¥kkk ©¨ª ¢kk kk ¢k jkk ¦§j¨¢k £kk £¢k ¤kk iàj̀kkkl̀mǹopǹqor stuvwxsytz {|z}~zx~tz yttzvxu}|zxu~tyx txy|z x jjpègcpcf fhpcpp``_bfhdbppcfèf¡cfbh ppdh¬¬cppbcd¡fnb¡¬mb¯¬°bcfpqbd£±²ga³j¤´cµ¶·¶a¸o¸ro´pc¹dbcga_°lºe´»aj¼kn¼£´gcpcfa«³¢´¶²pcf½gaqfb¶`¿b· f¬l·b¾ j¬83 j ¢£aa£Wab¤aWi¥ ZggYZ[]eY£dY¦£§YZ]ghY[¨©^Xªa«Z¬®X¯f¯if«gZ°[YZ^Xi±²³V\«´Xaµbeµ«^ZgZ]X¢ª«©gZ]¶^Xh]Y· 012234567897 975421512 2921978 4 !05!"0# $76 %22&86' 425597 ()6597 "27216*1+67(4+1+67 ,-./01234256-7809: ;< =>?@2ABBB25C@2D6@2ED=: AFG H810I683JKL2H89618/-683J: MBN20J6018J?O2MBN20P868J? 29219"27216597214 !05!"0# =>01K?02QK60 QKJ?02342QK609 56KJ7K172H0>8K683J MB@M< <A@GF2R2SM@BA A<@TA 656U5678 6597 abbb VWXWVYZ[W\]^_ abbbb ¡ bbb bb b abb ab bb b bb `WXWabbbWcdeWfgeWhfi jklmnojpkq rsqtuvqowukq xpkkqmoyltsqoz{lukp|}~o|kopsq} wo aagW\^ZgZ] ]_gZggWWVY]_[YggZ]W\]Z]Y_ gg[_¤££ZggYZ[]eY£dY¦£§YZ]ghY[¨©^Xªa«Z¬®X¯f¯if«gZ°[YZ^Xi±²³V\«´Xaµbeµ«^ZgZ]X¢ª«©gZ]¶^Xh]YW̧Y®]£c®· a£84 a Vehicle Pass-By Rates by Land Use Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual , 11th Edition Land Use Code 813 Land Use Free-Standing Discount Superstore Setting General Urban/Suburban Time Period Weekday PM Peak Period # Data Sites 19 Average Pass-By Rate 29% Pass-By Characteristics for Individual Sites State or Survey Pass-By Non-Pass-By Trips Adj Street Peak GFA (000) Province Year # Interviews Trip (%) Primary (%) Diverted (%) Total (%) Hour Volume Source 102 Ohio 1996 100 37 — — 63 737 20 102 Ohio 1996 137 44 — — 56 1714 20 130 Ohio 1996 204 43 — — 57 1066 20 146 Ohio 1996 210 35 — — 65 3346 20 167 Ohio 1996 172 32 — — 68 1165 20 167 Ohio 1996 205 26 — — 74 1771 20 173 Ohio 1996 158 17 — — 83 1622 20 185 Illinois 2007 182 13 — — 87 3957 28 199 Florida 2010 341 29 — — 71 1360 9 204 Colorado 2007 180 14 — — 86 3524 28 205 Kentucky 2007 196 32 — — 68 7048 28 213 Iowa 2007 197 36 — — 64 8411 28 213 Texas 2007 621 29 — — 71 12523 28 216 Texas 2007 404 26 — — 74 10832 28 217 Wisconsin 2007 490 25 — — 75 8835 28 218 Ohio 1996 185 29 — — 71 1764 20 220 Pennsylvania 2007 119 34 — — 66 5809 28 222 California 2007 686 34 — — 66 6910 28 226 Virginia 2007 286 24 — — 76 13026 28 85 60-002-0001-701 Same parcel # as Masco building 60-0002-99-0001-701 86 Trip Generation - Weekday Summary - Proposed Warehousing AM PM Weekday ITE Code ITE Rate Description Unit Amount Ingress Egress Total Ingress Egress Total Ingress Egress Total ITE 150 Warehousing sq ft 192500 36 11 47 14 36 50 171 171 342 Trucks 2 2 4 3 3 6 58 58 116 Total Trips 36 11 47 14 36 50 171 171 342 Total New Trips 36 11 47 14 36 50 171 171 342 ITE Trip Generation Rates - Weekday ITE Code ITE Rate Description Unit Amount R2 Rate Std. Dev. # of Studies Pass-by Notes ITE 150 Warehousing sq ft 192,500 AM T = 0.12 (X) + 23.62 47 0.69 0.17 0.19 36 - Use Fitted Curve PM T = 0.12 (X) + 26.48 50 0.65 0.18 0.18 49 - Use Fitted Curve Weekday T = 1.58 (X) + 38.29 342 0.92 1.71 1.48 31 - Use Fitted Curve AM PM Weekday Ingress Egress Total Ingress Egress Total Ingress Egress Total Directional Distribution 77% 23% 100% 28% 72% 100% 50% 50% 100% Volume Distribution 36 11 47 14 36 50 171 171 342 ITE Code ITE Rate Description Unit Amount R2 Rate Std. Dev. # of Studies Pass-by Notes ITE 150 Warehousing (Trucks) sq ft 192,500 AM No equation 4 - 0.02 0.05 21 - Use Average Rate PM No equation 6 - 0.03 0.03 23 - Use Average Rate Weekday T = 0.54 (X) +7.47 116 0.61 0.6 0.86 12 - Use Average Rate AM PM Weekday Ingress Egress Total Ingress Egress Total Ingress Egress Total Directional Distribution 52% 48% 100% 52% 48% 100% 50% 50% 100% Volume Distribution 2 2 4 3 3 6 58 58 116 Trip Generation - COMPARISON TO ALTERNATIVE USES AM PM Weekday EXISTING ZONING LAND USE Total Trips 146 115 261 298 310 608 3,547 3,547 7,094 New Trips 146 115 261 212 220 432 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Total Trips 36 11 47 14 36 50 171 171 342 New Trips 36 11 47 14 36 50 D Trip Potential -110 -104 -214 -284 -274 -558 -3,376 -3,376 -6,752 D Driveway Trip Potential -110 -104 -214 -198 -184 -382 87 Land Use: 150 Warehousing Description A warehouse is primarily devoted to the storage of materials, but it may also include office and maintenance areas. High-cube transload and short-term storage warehouse (Land Use 154), high- cube fulfillment center warehouse (Land Use 155), high-cube parcel hub warehouse (Land Use 156), and high-cube cold storage warehouse (Land Use 157) are related uses. Additional Data The technical appendices provide supporting information on time-of-day distributions for this land use. The appendices can be accessed through either the ITETripGen web app or the trip generation resource page on the ITE website (https://www.ite.org/technical-resources/topics/trip- and-parking-generation/). The sites were surveyed in the 1980s, the 1990s, the 2000s, and the 2010s in California, Connecticut, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Texas. Source Numbers 184, 331, 406, 411, 443, 579, 583, 596, 598, 611, 619, 642, 752, 869, 875, 876, 914, 940, 1050 94 Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition • Volume 3 88 ¯µiiµ«®ª_ij¶¬¬_q· bo¦oabc©¦em£a©µl¥¦a¸µ¹abeopa¨c¢«º»£f¦`i®j¼b½¾¨¿¦¾`ÀnÀqn¼obÁ¦c¦ab£f`^qk¤Âd¼Ã`iÄ«m®¼¦fbob£e`¯Å®¼¾£»¨ob£eÆ£f¦`p¦e¦a¨¾_Ç 01234567 8 9 348328977 !" #91 033$1%& '31$(5625)"*13923321))8& #93(562+3,339-19.1/ 3 89 0151859 !393212231906362319 456789:;<:=>5?@8AB CD EFGH:IJJJ:=KH:L>H:MLEB NNO P@98Q>@;RST:P@A>9@75>@;RB UUV:8R>89@RGW:XCV:8Y@>@RG 348328!3932185932!" EF89SG8:ZS>8 ZSRG8:;<:ZS>8A =>SR?S9?:P8F@S>@;R JHIU JHJX:[:IH\C JHI\ ]11'51961859 ¯jj ®jj ^_`_^abc_defg jj ¬jj «jj ijj ³´ ²² j °±² j iªjjj «ªjjj ¬ªjjj h_`_ijjj_klm_nom_pnq rstuvwrxsy xssyuwt|{y z{y|}~yw}sy xssyuwt|{ywt}sx wwwww w ¡iio¢_dfbob£e ¤egobo¥o¦_£§_^a¨egc£aöob£e_de©be¦¦ag ¢oocg¶µµbo¦oabc©¦em£a©µl¥¦a¸µ¹abeopa¨c¢«º»£f¦`i®j¼b½¾¨¿¦¾`ÀnÀqn¼obÁ¦c¦ab£f`^qk¤Âd¼Ã`iÄ«m®¼¦fbob£e`¯Å®¼¾£»¨ob£eÆ£f¦`p¦e¦a¨¾_Èa¿¨eµk¥¿¥a¿Ç iµ89 i ®ǵgª́©]ghµ««]o¶ m̀¥m_à¨¥ck¢_¨j́¤¥_·´¸_c̀mn_§a¡ª¹º¢d¥^gh»`¼½§¾¥½^¿l¿ol»m̀À¥a¥_¢̀d^\¸i£Áb»Â^gÃªk»¥dm̀¢̀c^®Ä»½¢º§m̀¢cÅ¢d¥^n¥c¥_§½]Æ 01234567 8 9 348328977 !" #91 033$1%& '31$(5625)"*13923321))8& #93(562+3,339-19./ 3 89 0151859 !393212231906362319 456789:;<:=>5?@8AB CD EFGH:IJJJ:=KH:L>H:MLEB CJJ N@98O>@;PQR:N@A>9@75>@;PB STU:8P>89@PGV:WSU:8X@>@PG 348328!3932185932!" EF89QG8:YQ>8 YQPG8:;<:YQ>8A =>QP?Q9?:N8F@Q>@;P JHIT JHJI:Z:IHTJ JHIT [11'51961859 ®hh hh \]^]\_à]bcde ¬hh «hh ªhh ghh ²³ ±² ¯°± hh g©hhh ª©hhh «©hhh f]^]ghhh]ijk]lmk]nlo pqrstupvqw ~vqqwsurzyw xywz{|wu}{qw ~vqqwsurzywur{qvuuuuu }u ggm¡]bdm̀¢̀c £cem̀m¤m¥]¢¦]\_§cea¢_m§m̀¢c]bc¨c̀¥¥_e ¡mmaeµ́´m̀¥m_à¨¥ck¢_¨j́¤¥_·´¸_c̀mn_§a¡ª¹º¢d¥^gh»`¼½§¾¥½^¿l¿ol»m̀À¥a¥_¢̀d^\¸i£Áb»Â^gÃªk»¥dm̀¢̀c^®Ä»½¢º§m̀¢cÅ¢d¥^n¥c¥_§½]Ç_¾§cí¤¾¤_¾Æ g90 ǵ ¨®aa®¤§£Wab¥̄¥Wi° ZggYZ[¢]eY¢®dY±®²YZ]ghY¡[¤³´^Xa§bµZ¶·¡¸·X¹f¹ifµgZº[YZ^Xi»¼½V\µ¾Xa¿¤e§µ^ZgZ]X¨À§µ·´¡gZ]Á^Xh]Y¡·Â 01234567 8 9 348328977 !" #91 033$1% 3 89 &'51859 !39321(2)19&6)62)19 *+,-./012034+56.78 9: ;<=>0:???03@>0A4>0BA;8 CDC E6/.F461GHI0E674/6-+461G8 J?K0.G4./6G=L0J?K0.M646G= 348328!3932185932!" ;<./H=.0NH4. NHG=.0120NH4.7 34HG5H/50E.<6H461G :>O: ?>:J0P0:Q>D9 :>RS T11U51961859 ¨£bbb §£bbb ¦£bbb VWXWVYZ[W\]^_ ¥£bbb ¤£bbb a£bbb «¬ «¬ª bb ©ª« a£bbb ¤£bbb ¥£bbb `WXWabbbWcdeWfgeWhfi jklmnojpkq xpkkqmoyltsq rsqtuvqowukq xpkkqmoyltsqoz{lukp|}~ooooo wo aagW\^ZgZ] ]_gZggWWVY¡]_[Yg¡gZ]W\]¢Z]Y_ gg[_¯®®ZggYZ[¢]eY¢®dY±®²YZ]ghY¡[¤³´^Xa§bµZ¶·¡¸·X¹f¹ifµgZº[YZ^Xi»¼½V\µ¾Xa¿¤e§µ^ZgZ]X¨À§µ·´¡gZ]Á^Xh]Y¡·WÃY¸¡]®c¸Â a®91 a ¨©hª©¢ ¡^ª«¢¬^p anǹabdl`©k`®©¯`adno`b¢°±e_h i²a³´µ´_¶m¶pm²na·b`ae_]pj¸c²¹_hª¢l²eanad_¨¬ ²´±nadºe_od`´^»¼ 01234567 8 9 2628977 ! "91 0331#$ %31&5625'!(13923321''8$ "93&562)3*339+19,1- 389 ./51859 39321012219.6262219 3456789:;9<=4>?7@A BC DEFG9CHHH9<IG9J=G9KJDA LHM N?87O=?:PQR9N?@=8?64=?:PA SBT97P=78?PFU9VWT97X?=?PF 26283932185932! DE78QF79YQ=7 YQPF79:;9YQ=7@ <=QP>Q8>9N7E?Q=?:P HGHB HGHH9Z9HG[M HGHS \11%051961859 £i ¢ ¢i ]^_^]`ab^cdef h hi § ii ¤¥¦ ii h¡iii h¡ii ¢¡iii ¢¡ii g^_^hiii^jkl^mnl^omp qrstuvqwrx yzx{|}xv~|rx wrrxtvs{zxvs|rwvrvwzx ~v hhn^ceanad dfnann^^]`dfb`nnad^cdad`f nnbf«©©anǹabdl`©k`®©¯`adno`b¢°±e_h i²a³´µ´_¶m¶pm²na·b`ae_]pj¸c²¹_hª¢l²eanad_¨¬ ²´±nadºe_od`´^»`µd©jµ`µ¼ h©92 h §f̈©¨\©ª«\n¬ _ll^_`bj^ï^¨®^_blm^` ¯°c]fg±_²³´³]µkµnk±l_¶`^_c][®h·a±¸]f© j±c_l_b]§«±³°l_b¹c]mb^³\º» 01234567 8 9 2628977 ! "91 0331#$ %31&5625'!(13923321''8$ "93&562)3*339+19,- 389 ./51859 39321012219.6262219 3456789:;9<=4>?7@A BC DEFG9HIII9<JG9K=G9LKDA CIM N?87O=?:PQR9N?@=8?64=?:PA SBT97P=78?PFU9VMT97W?=?PF 26283932185932! DE78QF79XQ=7 XQPF79:;9XQ=7@ <=QP>Q8>9N7E?Q=?:P IGIC IGII9Y9IGVB IGIC Z11%051961859 ¢g ¡g [\]\[^_`\abcd g fg ¦ gg £¤¥ gg fggg fgg ggg gg e\]\fggg\hij\klj\mkn opqrstoupv wxvyz{vt|zpv }uppvrt~qyxvtqzputptuxv |t ffl\ac_l_b bdl_ll\\[^bd`^ll_b\ab_b^d ll̀dª̈¨_ll^_`bj^ï^¨®^_blm^` ¯°c]fg±_²³´³]µkµnk±l_¶`^_c][®h·a±¸]f© j±c_l_b]§«±³°l_b¹c]mb^³\º^´bḧ´^´» f93 f̈ ¤¥\¦¥§R̈¦©ªRd« UbbTUVX`T¥_T¬¥TUXbcTV®¯YS\§]°U±²³²S´a´da°bUµVTUYSd¶·¸QW°¹S\¦`§°YUbUXS¤º§°²¯bUX»YScXT²R¼ 01234567 8 9 2628977 ! "91 0331# 389 $%51859 39321&'2(19$6(62(19 )*+,-./01/23*45-67 89 :;<=/8>>>/2?=/@3=/A@:7 88B C5.-D350EFG/C563.5,*350E7 B>H/-E3-.5E<I/B>H/-J535E< 26283932185932! :;-.F<-/KF3- KFE<-/01/KF3-6 23FE4F.4/C-;5F350E >=L> >=>>/M/L=LL >=NL O11P&51961859 ]] QRSRQTUVRWXYZ ]] £ \]] ]] \]] ¡ ]]¢ ]] ]] [RSR\]]]R^_R̀ab̀Rcad efghijekfl skfflhjtgonl mnlopqljrpfl skfflhjtgonljuvgpfkwxyjzj{j|}~jj} r{j|} \\bRWYUbUX XZbUbbRRQTXZVTbbUXRWXUXTZ bbVZ©¥¥UbbTUVX`T¥_T¬¥TUXbcTV®¯YS\§]°U±²³²S´a´da°bUµVTUYSd¶·¸QW°¹S\¦`§°YUbUXS¤º§°²¯bUX»YScXT²R½T³X¥^³¼ \¥94 \ t: 844.813.2949 www.peagroup.com Van Born Road (Public) 45' Greenbelt 26' Wide Fire Lane 75' Front Setback 10 10 NORTH SCALE: 1" = 60' 10 10 180' Clippert Street (Public) CAUTION!! THE LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING ARE ONLY APPROXIMATE. NO GUARANTEE IS EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED AS TO THE COMPLETENESS OR ACCURACY THEREOF. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE EXCLUSIVELY RESPONSIBLE FOR DETERMINING THE EXACT UTILITY LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION. 10 10 26' Wide Fire Lane 45' Greenbelt Truck Dock Area Truck Court Area 21111 Van Born Road Zoned R-1C Parcel 3 Zoned I-1 12.67 Acres 10 10 Proposed Warehouse 192,500 Sq Ft 275' x 700' CLIENT 15' Side Setback CORE BKG VAN BORN, LLC 10 10 30100 TELEGRAPH ROAD SUITE: 366 BINGHAM FARMS, MICHIGAN 48025 PROJECT TITLE 8 8 BK TAYLOR TAYLOR, MICHIGAN REVISIONS 26' Wide Fire Lane PER CLIENT REVIEW 06-17-2025 75' Front Setback Detention Basin ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE: 15' Rear Setback JUNE 03, 2025 DRAWING TITLE CONCEPTUAL Parcel 2 SITE PLAN 2.19 Acres (To Remain As Parking to Support 21001 Van Born Road) PEA JOB NO. 22-0760 P.M. JPB DN. JPB DES. JPB I-94 DRAWING NUMBER: PRELIMINARY C-1.0 95 96 December 2021 Proposed Gateway Overlay District Andcver olga e -Startlord °high co Hophin McDonald 0 or- -FanoJe rill a r tir":Y 1 f •-• City of Dearborn He ghts .. !I . ialL4' Pmr I t t '1 1 Arntlei --; ---y•rE-' r ,,J ,,,--:"..,, 7:, r,i. a ,. _14 '.7i lir---,. T. , I , 41,2 !Kyr ertigarausorr r IP I' . I ',M% ifl - s I' ! Ill .--- ' 4'1 Va at" In kpii .,,, •.. iri1 ‘•: _ - it • 11- 1111,11 01711111111141-11111111. . : ! 4r-erten EJLEL ti Tt,;,;.:roa-- -- I lowitai-i -.! iaill _ ir, Tara - - - ea 4-13 rnlf: .01.• grm.111--• 4, - r II I. ". VaM.Taii jiT: r' 74". A:- r 1..r 4" ie. , 1 • ii.s.;1 gib .r. •r 1 i iii!kr: r a -Lii IT:i 'IC-Itell - t •, I 00 - City of Taylor ii: 2 s -Av Ion AvIon- — r. -Av lon ' 1.1 cn -Av Ion- t _ Av Ion- r•••••:.-, 1 A aor a5 P. ....: , 11; 1 1-„i,31INV Jean tte Debra:-E- Mich Ile Beverly- Be erly SailY ever y- (c..) Cyi res co (I) Ph lom Newc stle —Ecorse VAN BORN ROAD GATEWAY OVERLAY DISTRICT Proposed Overlay District City of Taylor Ire WADE Parcels (within Overlay District) City of Dearborn Heights WI TRIM Roads Miles ------y -wohirriI— \ •icuie2g Ai:121_1 at/ A'Ati 97 Technical Memo SUBJECT: Trip Generation Comparison for 21111 Van Born Road – Taylor, MI TO: Conrad Schewe – CORE BKG Van Born LLC FROM: Jeffery Morden, PE, PTOE DATE: June 20, 2025 PROJECT NO.: 2501025 Introduction On behalf of CORE BKG Van Born LLC, Fishbeck has completed a trip generation comparison for the proposed warehousing development that will be located at 21111 Van Born Road, which is between Monroe Street and Pelham Road on Van Born Road in the City of Taylor (City), Wayne County, Michigan. The site was originally occupied by a 140,420 square foot (sf) Super K-Mart Store that will be demolished. The site is currently occupied by Ford Motor Company for vehicle storage. The proposed development will consist of 192,500 sf of warehousing. The proposed warehousing development will maintain the existing driveway location on Van Born Road. Access on Van Born Road is currently signalized. The project location is displayed in Figure 1. Figure 1 – Project Location 98 Technical Memo – Trip Generation Comparison for 21111 Van Born Road June 20, 2025 Fishbeck | Page 2 Site Traffic Characteristics A representation of the current conceptual site plan is provided in Figure 2. Figure 2 – Conceptual Site Plan Trip Generation Using the information and methodologies specified in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, Fishbeck forecast the weekday morning (7 a.m. to 9 a.m.) peak hour, afternoon (4 p.m. to 6 p.m.) peak hour, and weekday trips associated with the former Super K-Mart Store and the proposed warehousing development. \\CORP.FTCH.COM\ALLPROJECTS\2025\2501025\WORK\REPT\TM_CORE BKG VAN BORN_21111 VAN BORN ROAD_TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON_2025_0620.DOCX 99 Technical Memo – Trip Generation Comparison for 21111 Van Born Road June 20, 2025 Fishbeck | Page 3 A portion of the site-generated trips from the Super K-Mart Store are anticipated to be “pass-by” in nature, meaning they already exist on the adjacent road network and temporarily divert to visit the site. According to ITE methodology, new trips are assumed to return to their direction of origin whereas pass-by trips continue in their original direction of travel. The ITE Trip Generation Manual was used to calculate what percentage of the trips would be pass-by trips, meaning they are vehicles already on the network that would access the development and are not additional trips added to the network. Table 1 presents the resulting trip generation comparison of the existing development and the proposed development. The proposed warehousing trip generation is broken down by trucks and passenger vehicles. Additional information related to the trip generation forecast is attached to this memo. Table 1 – Trip Generation Comparison a.m. Peak Hour p.m. Peak Hour Land Use LUC Units Weekday In Out Total In Out Total Former Super K-Mart Store Free-Standing Discount Superstore 813 140,420sf 146 115 261 298 310 608 7,094 Total 146 115 261 298 310 608 7,094 Pass-by Rates, LUC 813: 29% p.m. - - - 86 90 176 - Total New Trips 146 115 261 212 220 432 - Proposed Warehousing Warehousing 150 192,500sf 36 11 47 14 36 50 342 Trucks 2 2 4 3 3 6 116 Passenger Vehicles 34 9 43 11 33 44 226 Total 36 11 47 14 36 50 342 Potential Total Driveway Trip Difference -110 -104 -214 -284 -274 -558 -6,752 Potential Total New Trip Difference -110 -104 -214 -198 -184 -382 - LUC Land Use Code sf square foot The results of the trip generation comparison revealed the proposed warehousing development would generate 214 fewer total driveway trips during the a.m. peak hour (110 fewer inbound, 104 fewer outbound), 558 fewer total driveway trips during the p.m. peak hour (284 fewer inbound, 274 fewer outbound), and 6,752 fewer total driveway trips during a typical weekday compared to the former Super K-Mart Store. The differential in new trips revealed the proposed warehousing would generate 214 fewer driveway trips during the a.m. peak hour (110 fewer inbound, 104 fewer outbound), and 382 fewer new trips during the p.m. peak hour (198 fewer inbound, 184 fewer outbound) when compared to the former Super K-Mart Store. \\CORP.FTCH.COM\ALLPROJECTS\2025\2501025\WORK\REPT\TM_CORE BKG VAN BORN_21111 VAN BORN ROAD_TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON_2025_0620.DOCX 100 Attachment Trip Generation Calculations 101 Trip Generation - Weekday Summary - Existing Super K-Mart AM PM Weekday ITE Code ITE Rate Description Unit Amount Ingress Egress Total Ingress Egress Total Ingress Egress Total ITE 813 Free-Standing Discount Superstore sq ft 140420 146 115 261 298 310 608 3547 3547 7094 Pass-By Rates, LUC 821: 40% p.m. 86 90 176 Total New Trips 146 115 261 212 220 432 3547 3547 7094 ITE Trip Generation Rates - Weekday ITE Code ITE Rate Description Unit Amount R2 Rate Std. Dev. # of Studies Pass-by Notes ITE 813 Free-Standing Discount Superstore sq ft 140,420 AM No equation 261 - 1.86 0.75 72 - Use average rate PM No equation 608 - 4.33 1.10 96 29% Use average rate Weekday No equation 7094 - 50.52 12.61 72 - Use average rate AM PM Weekday Ingress Egress Total Ingress Egress Total Ingress Egress Total Directional Distribution 56% 44% 100% 49% 51% 100% 50% 50% 100% Volume Distribution 146 115 261 298 310 608 3547 3547 7094 102 Land Use: 813 Free-Standing Discount Superstore Description A discount superstore is similar to a free-standing discount store described in Land Use 815 with the exception that it also contains a full-service grocery department under the same roof that shares entrances and exits with the discount store area. These stores usually offer a variety of customer services, centralized cashiering, and a wide range of products. They typically maintain long store hours 7 days a week. The stores included in this land use are often the only ones on the site, but they can also be found in mutual operation with a related or unrelated garden center or service station, or as a part of a shopping center, with or without their own dedicated parking area. Freestanding discount store (Land Use 815) is a related use. Additional Data A garden center contained within the principal outside faces of the exterior building walls is included in the reported gross floor area. An outdoor or fenced-in area outside the principal faces of the exterior walls is excluded. Several sites included in this land use indicate the presence of fenced/covered space. A Texas Transportation Institute study titled “Nationwide Discount Supercenter Study” published in 2008 provides information on trip generation rates for what the study defines as “typical” and “peak” seasons. The peak season is defined as the period between the week after Thanksgiving and the week prior to Christmas. The typical season is defined as September through mid-November when sales transactions are close to the annual average. The following are their key findings: • Weekday trip generation rates are similar in both seasons • Saturday trip generation rates are 13 to 20 percent higher during the peak season than the typical season • Sunday trip generation rates are 6 to 10 percent higher during the peak season The weighted average truck trip generation rates from approximately 30 sites surveyed for this land use are summarized in the table below. The average gross floor area of these facilities is 206,000 square feet. General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 800–999) 25 103 Weighted Average Truck Trip Generation Rate Day/Time Period (Trip ends per 1,000 square feet) Weekday 0.87 Weekday AM Peak Hour of 0.05 Adjacent Street Traffic Weekday PM Peak Hour of 0.03 Adjacent Street Traffic Weekday AM Peak Hour of Generator 0.06 Weekday PM Peak Hour of Generator 0.04 Saturday 0.59 Saturday Peak Hour of Generator 0.04 Sunday 0.43 Sunday Peak Hour of Generator 0.02 To assist in the future analysis of this land use, it is important to collect and include information on the presence and size of garden centers, outdoor fenced-in space, and service stations in trip generation data submissions. The technical appendices provide supporting information on time-of-day distributions for this land use. The appendices can be accessed through either the ITETripGen web app or the trip generation resource page on the ITE website (https://www.ite.org/technical-resources/topics/trip- and-parking-generation/). The sites were surveyed in the 1990s, the 2000s, and the 2010s in Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. Source Numbers 354, 522, 577, 595, 607, 609, 612, 618, 625, 630, 636, 651, 652, 661, 731, 735, 851, 866, 946, 960, 1067, 1071, 1072 26 Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition • Volume 5 104 §k̄k¤̄£©akl°¥kas± dqqcde¢goc¢n̄c²³̄cdgqrc¡e¤´µhb¨k¥¶d·¸¡¹b̧ºpºsp¶qd»ecdhb`sm¼f¶½bk¦lo¦¤¶hdqdgb§¨£¶¸µ¡qdg¾hbrgc¡¸¿ 012234567897 975421512 2921978 4 !05!"0# $76 %22&86'( )26&*1+#8,627545122516++9( $72*1-25.227/67806!1! 425597 236597 "27216415672451567 6789:;<=><?@7AB:CD EF GHIJ<KLLL<?MJ<N@J<ONGD KPQ RB;:S@B=TUV<RBC@;B97@B=TD WXY<:T@:;BTIZ<[[Y<:\B@BTI 29219"27216597214 !05!"0# GH:;UI:<]U@: ]UTI:<=><]U@:C ?@UTAU;A<R:HBU@B=T KJ^X LJ^K<_<QJ^X LJEW 656)5678 6597 k©lll ¨ll `abàcdeafghi §ll ¦ll ®ª ¤ll ll £l kll ª«k¬£l ¤ll ¤£l ¥ll jabaklllamnoapqoarps tuvwxytzu{ |}{~{yu{ zuu{wyv~}{y vuzyuyz}{ y kkqafhdqdg giqdqqaàc¡giecq¡qdgafg¢dgci qqei°̄d̄qqcde¢goc¢n̄c²³̄cdgqrc¡e¤´µhb¨k¥¶d·¸¡¹b̧ºpºsp¶qd»ecdhb`sm¼f¶½bk¦lo¦¤¶hdqdgb§¨£¶¸µ¡qdg¾hbrgc¡a̧Àc¹¡gm̄¹c¿ 105 kk̄ «¬jj¬£¢¥̀jk¤kr̀® cppbcd¡fnb¡¬mb¯¬°bcfpqbd£±²ga³j¤´cµ¶·¶a¸o¸ro´pc¹dbcga_°lºe´»aj¼kn¼£´gcpcfa«³¢´¶²pcf½gaqfb¶¾ 012234567897 975421512 2921978 4 !05!"0# $76 %22&86'( )26&*1+#8,627545122516++9( $72*1-25.227/6780!1! 425597 236597 "27216415672451567 6789:;<=><?@7AB:CD EF GHIJ<KLLL<?MJ<N@J<ONGD KEP QB;:R@B=STU<QBC@;B97@B=SD VEW<:S@:;BSIX<YKW<:ZB@BSI 29219"27216597214 !05!"0# GH:;TI:<[T@: [TSI:<=><[T@:C ?@TSAT;A<Q:HBT@B=S VJ\\ KJ]\<^<PJVL KJKL 656)5678 6597 j¥¢kk _à`_bcdèfgh j¥kkk ©¨ª ¢kk kk ¢k jkk ¦§j¨¢k £kk £¢k ¤kk iàj̀kkkl̀mǹopǹqor stuvwxsytz {|z}~zx~tz yttzvxu}|zxu~tyx txy|z x jjpègcpcf fhpcpp``_bfhdbppcfèf¡cfbh ppdh¬¬cppbcd¡fnb¡¬mb¯¬°bcfpqbd£±²ga³j¤´cµ¶·¶a¸o¸ro´pc¹dbcga_°lºe´»aj¼kn¼£´gcpcfa«³¢´¶²pcf½gaqfb¶`¿b· f¬l·b¾ 106 j¬j ¢£aa£Wab¤aWi¥ ZggYZ[]eY£dY¦£§YZ]ghY[¨©^Xªa«Z¬®X¯f¯if«gZ°[YZ^Xi±²³V\«´Xaµbeµ«^ZgZ]X¢ª«©gZ]¶^Xh]Y· 012234567897 975421512 2921978 4 !05!"0# $76 %22&86' 425597 ()6597 "27216*1+67(4+1+67 ,-./01234256-7809: ;< =>?@2ABBB25C@2D6@2ED=: AFG H810I683JKL2H89618/-683J: MBN20J6018J?O2MBN20P868J? 29219"27216597214 !05!"0# =>01K?02QK60 QKJ?02342QK609 56KJ7K172H0>8K683J MB@M< <A@GF2R2SM@BA A<@TA 656U5678 6597 abbb VWXWVYZ[W\]^_ abbbb ¡ bbb bb b abb ab bb b bb `WXWabbbWcdeWfgeWhfi jklmnojpkq rsqtuvqowukq xpkkqmoyltsqoz{lukp|}~o|kopsq} wo aagW\^ZgZ] ]_gZggWWVY]_[YggZ]W\]Z]Y_ gg[_¤££ZggYZ[]eY£dY¦£§YZ]ghY[¨©^Xªa«Z¬®X¯f¯if«gZ°[YZ^Xi±²³V\«´Xaµbeµ«^ZgZ]X¢ª«©gZ]¶^Xh]YW̧Y®]£c®· 107 a£a Vehicle Pass-By Rates by Land Use Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual , 11th Edition Land Use Code 813 Land Use Free-Standing Discount Superstore Setting General Urban/Suburban Time Period Weekday PM Peak Period # Data Sites 19 Average Pass-By Rate 29% Pass-By Characteristics for Individual Sites State or Survey Pass-By Non-Pass-By Trips Adj Street Peak GFA (000) Province Year # Interviews Trip (%) Primary (%) Diverted (%) Total (%) Hour Volume Source 102 Ohio 1996 100 37 — — 63 737 20 102 Ohio 1996 137 44 — — 56 1714 20 130 Ohio 1996 204 43 — — 57 1066 20 146 Ohio 1996 210 35 — — 65 3346 20 167 Ohio 1996 172 32 — — 68 1165 20 167 Ohio 1996 205 26 — — 74 1771 20 173 Ohio 1996 158 17 — — 83 1622 20 185 Illinois 2007 182 13 — — 87 3957 28 199 Florida 2010 341 29 — — 71 1360 9 204 Colorado 2007 180 14 — — 86 3524 28 205 Kentucky 2007 196 32 — — 68 7048 28 213 Iowa 2007 197 36 — — 64 8411 28 213 Texas 2007 621 29 — — 71 12523 28 216 Texas 2007 404 26 — — 74 10832 28 217 Wisconsin 2007 490 25 — — 75 8835 28 218 Ohio 1996 185 29 — — 71 1764 20 220 Pennsylvania 2007 119 34 — — 66 5809 28 222 California 2007 686 34 — — 66 6910 28 226 Virginia 2007 286 24 — — 76 13026 28 108 60-002-0001-701 Same parcel # as Masco building 60-0002-99-0001-701 109 Trip Generation - Weekday Summary - Proposed Warehousing AM PM Weekday ITE Code ITE Rate Description Unit Amount Ingress Egress Total Ingress Egress Total Ingress Egress Total ITE 150 Warehousing sq ft 192500 36 11 47 14 36 50 171 171 342 Trucks 2 2 4 3 3 6 58 58 116 Total Trips 36 11 47 14 36 50 171 171 342 Total New Trips 36 11 47 14 36 50 171 171 342 ITE Trip Generation Rates - Weekday ITE Code ITE Rate Description Unit Amount R2 Rate Std. Dev. # of Studies Pass-by Notes ITE 150 Warehousing sq ft 192,500 AM T = 0.12 (X) + 23.62 47 0.69 0.17 0.19 36 - Use Fitted Curve PM T = 0.12 (X) + 26.48 50 0.65 0.18 0.18 49 - Use Fitted Curve Weekday T = 1.58 (X) + 38.29 342 0.92 1.71 1.48 31 - Use Fitted Curve AM PM Weekday Ingress Egress Total Ingress Egress Total Ingress Egress Total Directional Distribution 77% 23% 100% 28% 72% 100% 50% 50% 100% Volume Distribution 36 11 47 14 36 50 171 171 342 ITE Code ITE Rate Description Unit Amount R2 Rate Std. Dev. # of Studies Pass-by Notes ITE 150 Warehousing (Trucks) sq ft 192,500 AM No equation 4 - 0.02 0.05 21 - Use Average Rate PM No equation 6 - 0.03 0.03 23 - Use Average Rate Weekday T = 0.54 (X) +7.47 116 0.61 0.6 0.86 12 - Use Average Rate AM PM Weekday Ingress Egress Total Ingress Egress Total Ingress Egress Total Directional Distribution 52% 48% 100% 52% 48% 100% 50% 50% 100% Volume Distribution 2 2 4 3 3 6 58 58 116 Trip Generation - COMPARISON TO ALTERNATIVE USES AM PM Weekday EXISTING ZONING LAND USE Total Trips 146 115 261 298 310 608 3,547 3,547 7,094 New Trips 146 115 261 212 220 432 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Total Trips 36 11 47 14 36 50 171 171 342 New Trips 36 11 47 14 36 50 D Trip Potential -110 -104 -214 -284 -274 -558 -3,376 -3,376 -6,752 D Driveway Trip Potential -110 -104 -214 -198 -184 -382 110 Land Use: 150 Warehousing Description A warehouse is primarily devoted to the storage of materials, but it may also include office and maintenance areas. High-cube transload and short-term storage warehouse (Land Use 154), high- cube fulfillment center warehouse (Land Use 155), high-cube parcel hub warehouse (Land Use 156), and high-cube cold storage warehouse (Land Use 157) are related uses. Additional Data The technical appendices provide supporting information on time-of-day distributions for this land use. The appendices can be accessed through either the ITETripGen web app or the trip generation resource page on the ITE website (https://www.ite.org/technical-resources/topics/trip- and-parking-generation/). The sites were surveyed in the 1980s, the 1990s, the 2000s, and the 2010s in California, Connecticut, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Texas. Source Numbers 184, 331, 406, 411, 443, 579, 583, 596, 598, 611, 619, 642, 752, 869, 875, 876, 914, 940, 1050 94 Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition • Volume 3 111 ¯µiiµ«®ª_ij¶¬¬_q· bo¦oabc©¦em£a©µl¥¦a¸µ¹abeopa¨c¢«º»£f¦`i®j¼b½¾¨¿¦¾`ÀnÀqn¼obÁ¦c¦ab£f`^qk¤Âd¼Ã`iÄ«m®¼¦fbob£e`¯Å®¼¾£»¨ob£eÆ£f¦`p¦e¦a¨¾_Ç 01234567 8 9 348328977 !" #91 033$1%& '31$(5625)"*13923321))8& #93(562+3,339-19.1/ 3 89 0151859 !393212231906362319 456789:;<:=>5?@8AB CD EFGH:IJJJ:=KH:L>H:MLEB NNO P@98Q>@;RST:P@A>9@75>@;RB UUV:8R>89@RGW:XCV:8Y@>@RG 348328!3932185932!" EF89SG8:ZS>8 ZSRG8:;<:ZS>8A =>SR?S9?:P8F@S>@;R JHIU JHJX:[:IH\C JHI\ ]11'51961859 ¯jj ®jj ^_`_^abc_defg jj ¬jj «jj ijj ³´ ²² j °±² j iªjjj «ªjjj ¬ªjjj h_`_ijjj_klm_nom_pnq rstuvwrxsy xssyuwt|{y z{y|}~yw}sy xssyuwt|{ywt}sx wwwww w ¡iio¢_dfbob£e ¤egobo¥o¦_£§_^a¨egc£aöob£e_de©be¦¦ag ¢oocg¶µµbo¦oabc©¦em£a©µl¥¦a¸µ¹abeopa¨c¢«º»£f¦`i®j¼b½¾¨¿¦¾`ÀnÀqn¼obÁ¦c¦ab£f`^qk¤Âd¼Ã`iÄ«m®¼¦fbob£e`¯Å®¼¾£»¨ob£eÆ£f¦`p¦e¦a¨¾_Èa¿¨eµk¥¿¥a¿Ç 112 iµi ®ǵgª́©]ghµ««]o¶ m̀¥m_à¨¥ck¢_¨j́¤¥_·´¸_c̀mn_§a¡ª¹º¢d¥^gh»`¼½§¾¥½^¿l¿ol»m̀À¥a¥_¢̀d^\¸i£Áb»Â^gÃªk»¥dm̀¢̀c^®Ä»½¢º§m̀¢cÅ¢d¥^n¥c¥_§½]Æ 01234567 8 9 348328977 !" #91 033$1%& '31$(5625)"*13923321))8& #93(562+3,339-19./ 3 89 0151859 !393212231906362319 456789:;<:=>5?@8AB CD EFGH:IJJJ:=KH:L>H:MLEB CJJ N@98O>@;PQR:N@A>9@75>@;PB STU:8P>89@PGV:WSU:8X@>@PG 348328!3932185932!" EF89QG8:YQ>8 YQPG8:;<:YQ>8A =>QP?Q9?:N8F@Q>@;P JHIT JHJI:Z:IHTJ JHIT [11'51961859 ®hh hh \]^]\_à]bcde ¬hh «hh ªhh ghh ²³ ±² ¯°± hh g©hhh ª©hhh «©hhh f]^]ghhh]ijk]lmk]nlo pqrstupvqw ~vqqwsurzyw xywz{|wu}{qw ~vqqwsurzywur{qvuuuuu }u ggm¡]bdm̀¢̀c £cem̀m¤m¥]¢¦]\_§cea¢_m§m̀¢c]bc¨c̀¥¥_e ¡mmaeµ́´m̀¥m_à¨¥ck¢_¨j́¤¥_·´¸_c̀mn_§a¡ª¹º¢d¥^gh»`¼½§¾¥½^¿l¿ol»m̀À¥a¥_¢̀d^\¸i£Áb»Â^gÃªk»¥dm̀¢̀c^®Ä»½¢º§m̀¢cÅ¢d¥^n¥c¥_§½]Ç_¾§cí¤¾¤_¾Æ 113 gǵ ¨®aa®¤§£Wab¥̄¥Wi° ZggYZ[¢]eY¢®dY±®²YZ]ghY¡[¤³´^Xa§bµZ¶·¡¸·X¹f¹ifµgZº[YZ^Xi»¼½V\µ¾Xa¿¤e§µ^ZgZ]X¨À§µ·´¡gZ]Á^Xh]Y¡·Â 01234567 8 9 348328977 !" #91 033$1% 3 89 &'51859 !39321(2)19&6)62)19 *+,-./012034+56.78 9: ;<=>0:???03@>0A4>0BA;8 CDC E6/.F461GHI0E674/6-+461G8 J?K0.G4./6G=L0J?K0.M646G= 348328!3932185932!" ;<./H=.0NH4. NHG=.0120NH4.7 34HG5H/50E.<6H461G :>O: ?>:J0P0:Q>D9 :>RS T11U51961859 ¨£bbb §£bbb ¦£bbb VWXWVYZ[W\]^_ ¥£bbb ¤£bbb a£bbb «¬ «¬ª bb ©ª« a£bbb ¤£bbb ¥£bbb `WXWabbbWcdeWfgeWhfi jklmnojpkq xpkkqmoyltsq rsqtuvqowukq xpkkqmoyltsqoz{lukp|}~ooooo wo aagW\^ZgZ] ]_gZggWWVY¡]_[Yg¡gZ]W\]¢Z]Y_ gg[_¯®®ZggYZ[¢]eY¢®dY±®²YZ]ghY¡[¤³´^Xa§bµZ¶·¡¸·X¹f¹ifµgZº[YZ^Xi»¼½V\µ¾Xa¿¤e§µ^ZgZ]X¨À§µ·´¡gZ]Á^Xh]Y¡·WÃY¸¡]®c¸Â 114 a®a ¨©hª©¢ ¡^ª«¢¬^p anǹabdl`©k`®©¯`adno`b¢°±e_h i²a³´µ´_¶m¶pm²na·b`ae_]pj¸c²¹_hª¢l²eanad_¨¬ ²´±nadºe_od`´^»¼ 01234567 8 9 2628977 ! "91 0331#$ %31&5625'!(13923321''8$ "93&562)3*339+19,1- 389 ./51859 39321012219.6262219 3456789:;9<=4>?7@A BC DEFG9CHHH9<IG9J=G9KJDA LHM N?87O=?:PQR9N?@=8?64=?:PA SBT97P=78?PFU9VWT97X?=?PF 26283932185932! DE78QF79YQ=7 YQPF79:;9YQ=7@ <=QP>Q8>9N7E?Q=?:P HGHB HGHH9Z9HG[M HGHS \11%051961859 £i ¢ ¢i ]^_^]`ab^cdef h hi § ii ¤¥¦ ii h¡iii h¡ii ¢¡iii ¢¡ii g^_^hiii^jkl^mnl^omp qrstuvqwrx yzx{|}xv~|rx wrrxtvs{zxvs|rwvrvwzx ~v hhn^ceanad dfnann^^]`dfb`nnad^cdad`f nnbf«©©anǹabdl`©k`®©¯`adno`b¢°±e_h i²a³´µ´_¶m¶pm²na·b`ae_]pj¸c²¹_hª¢l²eanad_¨¬ ²´±nadºe_od`´^»`µd©jµ`µ¼ 115 h©h §f̈©¨\©ª«\n¬ _ll^_`bj^ï^¨®^_blm^` ¯°c]fg±_²³´³]µkµnk±l_¶`^_c][®h·a±¸]f© j±c_l_b]§«±³°l_b¹c]mb^³\º» 01234567 8 9 2628977 ! "91 0331#$ %31&5625'!(13923321''8$ "93&562)3*339+19,- 389 ./51859 39321012219.6262219 3456789:;9<=4>?7@A BC DEFG9HIII9<JG9K=G9LKDA CIM N?87O=?:PQR9N?@=8?64=?:PA SBT97P=78?PFU9VMT97W?=?PF 26283932185932! DE78QF79XQ=7 XQPF79:;9XQ=7@ <=QP>Q8>9N7E?Q=?:P IGIC IGII9Y9IGVB IGIC Z11%051961859 ¢g ¡g [\]\[^_`\abcd g fg ¦ gg £¤¥ gg fggg fgg ggg gg e\]\fggg\hij\klj\mkn opqrstoupv wxvyz{vt|zpv }uppvrt~qyxvtqzputptuxv |t ffl\ac_l_b bdl_ll\\[^bd`^ll_b\ab_b^d ll̀dª̈¨_ll^_`bj^ï^¨®^_blm^` ¯°c]fg±_²³´³]µkµnk±l_¶`^_c][®h·a±¸]f© j±c_l_b]§«±³°l_b¹c]mb^³\º^´bḧ´^´» 116 ff̈ ¤¥\¦¥§R̈¦©ªRd« UbbTUVX`T¥_T¬¥TUXbcTV®¯YS\§]°U±²³²S´a´da°bUµVTUYSd¶·¸QW°¹S\¦`§°YUbUXS¤º§°²¯bUX»YScXT²R¼ 01234567 8 9 2628977 ! "91 0331# 389 $%51859 39321&'2(19$6(62(19 )*+,-./01/23*45-67 89 :;<=/8>>>/2?=/@3=/A@:7 88B C5.-D350EFG/C563.5,*350E7 B>H/-E3-.5E<I/B>H/-J535E< 26283932185932! :;-.F<-/KF3- KFE<-/01/KF3-6 23FE4F.4/C-;5F350E >=L> >=>>/M/L=LL >=NL O11P&51961859 ]] QRSRQTUVRWXYZ ]] £ \]] ]] \]] ¡ ]]¢ ]] ]] [RSR\]]]R^_R̀ab̀Rcad efghijekfl skfflhjtgonl mnlopqljrpfl skfflhjtgonljuvgpfkwxyjzj{j|}~jj} r{j|} \\bRWYUbUX XZbUbbRRQTXZVTbbUXRWXUXTZ bbVZ©¥¥UbbTUVX`T¥_T¬¥TUXbcTV®¯YS\§]°U±²³²S´a´da°bUµVTUYSd¶·¸QW°¹S\¦`§°YUbUXS¤º§°²¯bUX»YScXT²R½T³X¥^³¼ 117 \¥\ t: 844.813.2949 www.peagroup.com Van Born Road (Public) 45' Greenbelt 26' Wide Fire Lane 75' Front Setback 10 10 NORTH SCALE: 1" = 60' 10 10 180' Clippert Street (Public) CAUTION!! THE LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING ARE ONLY APPROXIMATE. NO GUARANTEE IS EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED AS TO THE COMPLETENESS OR ACCURACY THEREOF. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE EXCLUSIVELY RESPONSIBLE FOR DETERMINING THE EXACT UTILITY LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION. 10 10 26' Wide Fire Lane 45' Greenbelt Truck Dock Area Truck Court Area 21111 Van Born Road Zoned R-1C Parcel 3 Zoned I-1 12.67 Acres 10 10 Proposed Warehouse 192,500 Sq Ft 275' x 700' CLIENT 15' Side Setback CORE BKG VAN BORN, LLC 10 10 30100 TELEGRAPH ROAD SUITE: 366 BINGHAM FARMS, MICHIGAN 48025 PROJECT TITLE 8 8 BK TAYLOR TAYLOR, MICHIGAN REVISIONS 26' Wide Fire Lane PER CLIENT REVIEW 06-17-2025 75' Front Setback Detention Basin ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE: 15' Rear Setback JUNE 03, 2025 DRAWING TITLE CONCEPTUAL Parcel 2 SITE PLAN 2.19 Acres (To Remain As Parking to Support 21001 Van Born Road) PEA JOB NO. 22-0760 P.M. JPB DN. JPB DES. JPB I-94 DRAWING NUMBER: PRELIMINARY C-1.0 118 119 120 121 122 123 TAYLOR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES THURSDAY, AUGUST 7, 2025 The Taylor Planning Commission meeting was held in the Taylor Municipal Building, 23555 Goddard Road, on Thursday, August 7, 2025 at 7:00 P.M., Chairman Ken Stewart presiding. Pledge of Allegiance Present: Messrs. Stewart, Siemion, Ghallozi, Welton, Fisher and Johnson Excused: Messrs. Styles and Fisher Also Present: Ms. Lora Fell, Planning Director, Kaitlyn Hines, Deputy Planning Director, Mayor Timothy Woolley Motion by Johnson Supported by Siemion Resolved: To approve the agenda, as presented. Unanimously carried. Resolution Number 8.49-25 Motion by Mayor Woolley Supported by Siemion Resolved: To the approve the minutes of the July 2, 2025, and dispense with the oral reading. Unanimously carried. Resolution Number 8.50-25 Motion by Johnson Supported by Welton Resolved: To the approve the minutes of the July 16, 2025, and dispense with the oral reading. Unanimously carried. Resolution Number 8.51-25 LEGISLATIVE ACTION Case # 25-21 (ZTA) – Automobile Filling Stations Amendment Amendment to Article 13.00, Use Requirements, Section 13.05, Motor Vehicle Uses, Sub-section (a) Automobile Filling Stations of Appendix A of the Taylor, Michigan Code of Ordinances, as attached. Motion by Ghallozi Supported by Siemion Resolved: To recommend to City Council approval of Case #25-21(ZTA), Automobile Filling Stations amendment. Unanimously carried. Resolution Number 8.52-25 124 TAYLOR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES THURSDAY, AUGUST 7, 2025 Page 2 Case #25-28(Z) – 21111 Van Born Parcel #60-002-99-0002-002 and the westerly 600 feet of parcel #60-002-99-0001-701 of the NW ¼ Section 3 T.3S., R10E., City of Taylor, Wayne County, Michigan to be rezoned from I- 1(Zc) to I-1 (Light Industrial). The property is located on the south side of Van Born between Monroe and Merrick. Mr. Conrad Schewe, CORE BKG Van Born LLC, owner, addressed the Commission regarding Ford Motor Company moving out of the site in 2027 and the proposed rezoning was to accommodate warehousing at this location. Resident asked for clarification as to what type of development was going to occupy the site. Chairman Stewart explained the site was being proposed to I-1 zoning, which would allow any uses permitted in the I-1 zoning. The applicant was proposing warehousing. Resident objected to the I-1 zoning and stated she would like to see the property return to the B-2 zoning. Discussion included: Taylor-Dearborn Heights Overlay, uses existing in the Van Born corridor, spot zoning, location of business district, adjacent residential neighborhood and Planning Consultant’s recommendation. Motion by Siemion Supported by Ghallozi Resolved: To recommend to City Council that Case #25-28(Z) be denied, based upon the recommendation of the Planning Consultant in letter dated July 28, 2025. Unanimously carried. Resolution Number 8.53-25 OTHER BUSINESS The following Cases expire on 10/17/25 and per Section 19.07(b). The petitioner has requested a one-year extension be granted for both projects that were approved on 4/17/24. Case #24-05 (SLU) 06 (SP)– 8200 Telegraph – Sheetz- gas station with convenience and restaurant with drive thru service Parcel #60-021-99-0007-001 of the NE ¼ Section 8, City of Taylor, T.3S.,R.10E., Wayne County, Michigan. The property is located on the southwest corner of Champaign and Telegraph. Proposed uses: automobile filling station with convenience store and drive thru restaurant. Proposed construction: 6,139 sq. ft. building 125 TAYLOR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES THURSDAY, AUGUST 7, 2025 Page 3 Case #24-07A (SLU) 08A (SP) – vacant Eureka & I-75 – Sheetz- gas station with convenience and restaurant with drive thru service Parcels #60-093-99-0010-000 #60-093-99-0012-000 #60-093-99-0009-000 and part of parcel #60-093-99-0011-000 of the NE ¼ Section 34, City of Taylor, T.3S., R.10E., Wayne County, Michigan. The property is located at the southeast corner of Eureka Road and I-75. Proposed uses: automobile filling station with convenience store and drive thru restaurant. Proposed construction: 6,139 sq. ft. building. Alexander Siwicki, representative from Sheetz, explained that the sites were being leased for the projects and due to litigation issues with the property owner at the Telegraph site, the project had been delayed. He stated that the Eureka site incurred delays from Wayne County and EGLE. They were now ready to start construction of both projects, hoping to have more than 25% completion by October, but they are requesting these extensions so their approvals would still be valid if they do not, and they can continue construction. Their start date is currently 9/1/25. Both projects will commence construction at the same time. They plan to open in Spring 2026. Motion by Welton Supported by Johnson Resolved: To grant a one-year extension for Cases #24-05(SLU) and #24-06(SP) Sheetz at 8200 Telegraph. All conditions of approval are to remain the same. Unanimously carried. Resolution Number 8.54-25 Motion by Siemion Supported by Johnson Resolved: To grant a one-year extension for Cases #24-07A(SLU) and #24-08(SP), vacant Eureka Sheetz. All conditions of approval are to remain the same. Unanimously approved. Resolution Number 8.55-25 Motion by Johnson Supported by Siemion Resolved: That the meeting be adjourned. Unanimously carried. Resolution Number 8.56-25 The meeting adjourned at 7:55 P.M. _________ ________ Ken Stewart, Chairman Cynthia A. Bower, City Clerk 126 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Memo To: Planning Commission From: Kaitlyn Hines, Deputy Planning Director Date: 7/29/2025 Re: Case #25-21 (ZTA) – Automobile Filling Stations The City of Taylor has initiated a Zoning Text Amendment to update the Land Use requirements for Section 13.05 – Motor Vehicle Uses of the zoning ordinance. The amendment focuses on regulatory updates for Automobile Filling Stations, including standards related to site design, lot size, separation requirements, transparency, prohibited uses, and architectural compatibility. 1. Traffic and Site Access  Traffic Impact Study Required: All new or expanded stations must submit a Traffic Impact Study, per Section 19.10.  Major Street Access: Sites must have direct access to a major street, as defined in Section 28.11(q). 2. Dimensional Requirements  Minimum Lot Area: One (1) acre.  Minimum Lot Width: 150 feet. 3. Separation Between Stations  Stations must be located a minimum of 750 feet from any other existing or proposed station, measured lot line to lot line in a straight line.  Exemption: Fueling stations accessory to large retail centers (≥ 100,000 sq. ft.) are exempt. 4. Canopy and Pump Placement  Canopy Setback: Minimum 15 feet from the public right-of-way.  Page 1 127  Canopy Height: Maximum 14 feet from drive surface to canopy underside.  Pump Setback: Gasoline pumps must be set back at least 25 feet from all lot lines and may not block public sidewalks or landscaped areas. 5. Architectural and Design Standards  Canopy Design: Must be architecturally compatible with the primary building: o Columns clad in brick or stone. o Fire protection devices must be screened. o Signage on canopy to be reviewed by the Planning Commission and counted toward allowable wall signage. o Internally lit canopies and canopy price signs are prohibited. o Canopy lighting must be recessed and not visible off-site.  Building Transparency: o 60% minimum transparency on street-facing and canopy-facing facades. o False windows and spandrel glass do not count toward transparency. 6. Land Use Restrictions  The following uses are prohibited on filling station sites: o Motor vehicle maintenance and repair (major or minor), o New or used auto sales, o Truck, trailer, or vehicle storage, o Equipment rental. 7. Infrastructure and Utilities  Underground Storage Tanks & Appurtenances: o Setback at least 20 feet from public ROW. o Located 150 feet or more from any residential zoning or use.  Utility Cabinets/Transformers: o Must be underground or located at the rear of the site and screened.  Electric Vehicle (EV) Infrastructure: o Subject to same screening and placement requirements. Planning Department  Page 2 7/29/25 128 8. Accessory Uses and Retail Activity  Accessory Uses (e.g., restaurants) must comply with the requirements for those respective uses.  Retail Sales (except fuel, ice, propane) must occur entirely indoors.  Outdoor display, storage, and sales are prohibited.  Propane must be located in the rear yard, at least 15 feet from building entrances, and protected with bollards. PLANNING RATIONALE This amendment aligns with the goals of promoting orderly development, minimizing land use conflicts, and improving visual and functional compatibility of gas stations with surrounding properties. Specific improvements include:  Enhanced urban design through architectural standards and transparency requirements;  Improved public safety by regulating access, pump placement, and equipment screening;  Reduced visual clutter by limiting canopy signage and outdoor sales/display; RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission should recommend approval to the City Council for the proposed text amendment. The amendment reflects modern best practices and addresses growing concerns related to aesthetics, traffic, land use compatibility, and safety. Attachments:  Draft Ordinance Text Amendment  Map of Existing Stations Planning Department  Page 3 7/29/25 129 ArcGIS Web Map - Gas Stations in Taylor Density 20009 Van Born - Sunoco Gas Station 27327 Van Born - Exxon Gas Station 5858 Telegraph - Citgo Gas Station 6535 Telegraph - Citgo Gas Station 7020 Monroe Blvd - Kroger Gas Station 25745 Ecorse - Rich Gas Station 8350 Telegraph - Marathon Gas Station 8808 Pelham - BP Gas Station 9190 Pelham - Shell Gas Station 27280 Wick - Mobil 9225 Telegraph - BP Gas Station 10924 Telegraph - Sunoco Gas Station 11000 Telegraph - Marathon Gas Station 11796 Allen - Exxon Gas Station 12995 Telegraph - Circle K Gas Station 14055 Telegraph - Sunoco Gas Station 14640 Pardee - Meijer Gas Station 23750 Eureka - Citgo Gas Station 15525 Racho Blvd - B.J.'s Gas Station 7/31/2025, 10:12:33 AM Gas Stations KH 1:72,224 TDHG 3 7 B-1 Station Density 0 0.5 1 2 mi 4 8 B-2 1 0 1 2 4 km 5 9 Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS, FEMA, Sources: Esri, TomTom, B-3 2 6 10 Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community ArcGIS Web AppBuilder130 Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS, FEMA | Province of Ontario, Ohio Rail Development Commission, Esri, TomTom, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, ArcGIS Web Map - Gas Stations in Taylor Buffers and Zoning 20009 Van Born - Sunoco Gas Station 27327 Van Born - Exxon Gas Station 5858 Telegraph - Citgo Gas Station 6535 Telegraph - Citgo Gas Station 7020 Monroe Blvd - Kroger Gas Station 25745 Ecorse - Rich Gas Station 8350 Telegraph - Marathon Gas Station 8808 Pelham - BP Gas Station 9190 Pelham - Shell Gas Station 27280 Wick - Mobil 9225 Telegraph - BP Gas Station 10924 Telegraph - Sunoco Gas Station 11000 Telegraph - Marathon Gas Station 11796 Allen - Exxon Gas Station 12995 Telegraph - Circle K Gas Station 14055 Telegraph - Sunoco Gas Station 14640 Pardee - Meijer Gas Station 23750 Eureka - Citgo Gas Station 15525 Racho Blvd - B.J.'s Gas Station 7/31/2025, 10:03:49 AM Gas Stations KH R-1B Single-Family Residential District B-3 General Business District 1:72,224 B-1 R-1C Single-Family Residential District P-1 Vehicular Parking B-2 0 0.5 1 2 mi R-2 Townhouse Residential District I-1 Light Industrial District B-3 R-3 Manufactured Home Park District I-2 General Industrial District 0 1 2 4 km TDHG RM-1 Multiple-Family Residential District TRO Technology-Research-Office District 500ft_Buffer_of_Gas_Stations Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS, FEMA, Sources: Esri, TomTom, RM-2 Multiple-Family Residential (High Rise) District MT-1 Midtown Taylor Office/Institutional District Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, © OpenStreetMap 750ft_Buffer_of_Gas_Stations O-1 Office District MT-2 Midtown Taylor Mixed Use Commercial contributors, and the GIS User Community 1000ft_Buffer_of_Gas_Stations O-2 Regional Office District Zoning Label Zoning B-1 Local Businiess District TDHG Overlay R-1A Single-Family Residential District B-2 Regional Business District PUD Overlay ArcGIS Web AppBuilder131 Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS, FEMA | Province of Ontario, Ohio Rail Development Commission, Esri, TomTom, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, ArcGIS Web Map - Gas Stations in Taylor 750' Buffer and Zone 20009 Van Born - Sunoco Gas Station 27327 Van Born - Exxon Gas Station 5858 Telegraph - Citgo Gas Station 6535 Telegraph - Citgo Gas Station 7020 Monroe Blvd - Kroger Gas Station 25745 Ecorse - Rich Gas Station 8350 Telegraph - Marathon Gas Station 8808 Pelham - BP Gas Station 9190 Pelham - Shell Gas Station 27280 Wick - Mobil 9225 Telegraph - BP Gas Station 10924 Telegraph - Sunoco Gas Station 11000 Telegraph - Marathon Gas Station 11796 Allen - Exxon Gas Station 12995 Telegraph - Circle K Gas Station 14055 Telegraph - Sunoco Gas Station 14640 Pardee - Meijer Gas Station 23750 Eureka - Citgo Gas Station 15525 Racho Blvd - B.J.'s Gas Station 7/31/2025, 11:07:50 AM Gas Stations KH R-2 Townhouse Residential District P-1 Vehicular Parking 1:72,224 B-1 R-3 Manufactured Home Park District I-1 Light Industrial District 0 0.5 1 2 mi B-2 RM-1 Multiple-Family Residential District I-2 General Industrial District B-3 RM-2 Multiple-Family Residential (High Rise) District TRO Technology-Research-Office District 0 1 2 4 km TDHG O-1 Office District MT-1 Midtown Taylor Office/Institutional District Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS, FEMA, Sources: Esri, TomTom, 750ft_Buffer_of_Gas_Stations O-2 Regional Office District MT-2 Midtown Taylor Mixed Use Commercial Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, © OpenStreetMap Zoning contributors, and the GIS User Community B-1 Local Businiess District Zoning Label R-1A Single-Family Residential District B-2 Regional Business District TDHG Overlay R-1B Single-Family Residential District B-3 General Business District PUD Overlay R-1C Single-Family Residential District ArcGIS Web AppBuilder132 Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS, FEMA | Province of Ontario, Ohio Rail Development Commission, Esri, TomTom, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, TO ALL INTERESTED PERSONS: Notice is hereby given that there will be a Public Hearing for the purpose of hearing comments to a proposed change in Appendix A of the Taylor, Michigan, Code of Ordinances, being the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Taylor. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TAYLOR, MICHIGAN, ZONING ORDINANCE, BEING APPENDIX A, OF THE TAYLOR CODE OF ORDINANCES BY AMENDING ARTICLE 13.00 ENTITLED, Use Requirements, Section 13.05, Motor Vehicle Uses, Sub-section (a) Automobile Filling Stations THE CITY OF TAYLOR ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That Article 13.00, Use Requirements, Section 13.05, Motor Vehicle Uses, Sub-section (a) Automobile Filling Stations of Appendix A of the Taylor, Michigan Code of Ordinances, be amended as follows: Section 13.05 Motor Vehicle Uses (a) Automobile Filling Stations (1) All automobile filling stations newly proposed or expanded are subject to a Traffic Impact Study, subject to the requirements of Section 19.10. (2) Minimum lot area shall be one (1) acre for automobile filling stations. (3) Minimum lot width shall be not less than one hundred fifty (150) feet for automobile service and filling stations. (4) The site shall have access to a major street as defined in Section 28.11(q) Streets. (5) No Automobile Filling station shall be located closer than 750 feet from another fueling station. The measurement shall be made in a straight-line from the nearest point on the lot line of the premises where the fueling station is proposed, to the nearest lot line of any other existing or proposed fueling station. Accessory filling stations as part of a large retail establishment that contains a minimum of 100,000 square feet shall be exempt from these separation requirements. (6) Gasoline pump canopies shall be setback at least fifteen (15) feet from the public right-of-way. The maximum height between the drive surface and the underside of the canopy shall be fourteen (14) feet. (7) All gasoline pumps shall be located a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet from any lot line, and shall be arranged so that motor vehicles shall not be supplied with gasoline or serviced while parked upon or overhanging any public sidewalk, abutting landscaped areas, streets, buildings or adjoining property. (8) The design and materials of the canopy shall be compatible with the principle building. Support columns of any proposed canopy structure shall be covered with brick or stone to match the principal building. Required fire protection devices under the canopy shall be architecturally screened so that the tanks are not directly visible from the street. The screens shall be compatible with the design and color of the canopy. The proposed clearance of any canopy shall be noted on the site plan. Any signs, logo or identifying paint scheme on the canopy shall be reviewed by the planning commission and considered part of the maximum wall sign permitted. Canopy lighting shall be recessed such that the light source 133 cannot be seen from off site. Canopies and canopy signage shall not be internally lit, canopy price signs are prohibited. (9) On facades facing a public street or pump canopy, the building shall have a minimum transparency of 60 percent. Transparency shall be measured based on the total wall area of the façade. False windows, spandrel glass or similar shall not be counted towards the transparency requirement. (10) Motor Vehicle Maintenance and Repair (Major and Minor), New and Used Automobile Sales, Equipment Rental, and Automobile, Truck, and Trailer Storage shall be prohibited. (11) Underground storage tanks, fueling pumps, air and water hose stands, and other appurtenances shall be setback not less than 20 feet from the public right-of-way. All underground storage tanks shall be located a minimum of one hundred and fifty (150) feet away from the nearest residential zoning or use. (12) All utility cabinets and transformers related to fueling stations including those for electrical vehicle charging, shall be located underground or located in the rear of the site and properly screened. (13) Vehicle service centers/fueling stations that include restaurants or other uses shall also be subject to the requirements of those other uses. (14) Except for fueling pumps, ice sales, and propane sales, all retail sales shall be conducted entirely within an enclosed building. Outdoor sales, display and storage is prohibited. Ice sales and propane sales must not block access. Propane must be setback in the rear yard, at least fifteen feet (15’) from any building entrance. Bollards shall be provided to protect propane enclosure from damage. SECTION 2. Repeal. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions set forth herein are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. SECTION 3. Savings Clause. Should any section, clause or phrase of this ordinance be declared by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the declaration by said Court shall not affect the validity of this ordinance as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so declared to be invalid. SECTION 4. Publication and Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective upon passage by the City Council and publication of the ordinance in accordance with the Charter of the City of Taylor and the statutes of the State of Michigan. You are further notified that the Taylor Planning Commission will hear any comments to the proposed changes at the Taylor Municipal Building located at 23555 Goddard Road, Taylor, Michigan, on the 6th day of August 2025, at 7:00 P.M. CYNTHIA A. BOWER, CITY CLERK CITY OF TAYLOR TPH #25-28(ZTA) END OF NOTICE _____________________________________________________________________ TO: NEWS HERALD NEWSPAPER June 30, 2025 The above notice is approved for publication in the July 20th, 2025 edition of the News Herald Newspaper. 134 Lora Fell Planning Director City of Taylor 135 TAYLOR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES THURSDAY, AUGUST 7, 2025 The Taylor Planning Commission meeting was held in the Taylor Municipal Building, 23555 Goddard Road, on Thursday, August 7, 2025 at 7:00 P.M., Chairman Ken Stewart presiding. Pledge of Allegiance Present: Messrs. Stewart, Siemion, Ghallozi, Welton, Fisher and Johnson Excused: Messrs. Styles and Fisher Also Present: Ms. Lora Fell, Planning Director, Kaitlyn Hines, Deputy Planning Director, Mayor Timothy Woolley Motion by Johnson Supported by Siemion Resolved: To approve the agenda, as presented. Unanimously carried. Resolution Number 8.49-25 Motion by Mayor Woolley Supported by Siemion Resolved: To the approve the minutes of the July 2, 2025, and dispense with the oral reading. Unanimously carried. Resolution Number 8.50-25 Motion by Johnson Supported by Welton Resolved: To the approve the minutes of the July 16, 2025, and dispense with the oral reading. Unanimously carried. Resolution Number 8.51-25 LEGISLATIVE ACTION Case # 25-21 (ZTA) – Automobile Filling Stations Amendment Amendment to Article 13.00, Use Requirements, Section 13.05, Motor Vehicle Uses, Sub-section (a) Automobile Filling Stations of Appendix A of the Taylor, Michigan Code of Ordinances, as attached. Motion by Ghallozi Supported by Siemion Resolved: To recommend to City Council approval of Case #25-21(ZTA), Automobile Filling Stations amendment. Unanimously carried. Resolution Number 8.52-25 136 TAYLOR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES THURSDAY, AUGUST 7, 2025 Page 2 Case #25-28(Z) – 21111 Van Born Parcel #60-002-99-0002-002 and the westerly 600 feet of parcel #60-002-99-0001-701 of the NW ¼ Section 3 T.3S., R10E., City of Taylor, Wayne County, Michigan to be rezoned from I- 1(Zc) to I-1 (Light Industrial). The property is located on the south side of Van Born between Monroe and Merrick. Mr. Conrad Schewe, CORE BKG Van Born LLC, owner, addressed the Commission regarding Ford Motor Company moving out of the site in 2027 and the proposed rezoning was to accommodate warehousing at this location. Resident asked for clarification as to what type of development was going to occupy the site. Chairman Stewart explained the site was being proposed to I-1 zoning, which would allow any uses permitted in the I-1 zoning. The applicant was proposing warehousing. Resident objected to the I-1 zoning and stated she would like to see the property return to the B-2 zoning. Discussion included: Taylor-Dearborn Heights Overlay, uses existing in the Van Born corridor, spot zoning, location of business district, adjacent residential neighborhood and Planning Consultant’s recommendation. Motion by Siemion Supported by Ghallozi Resolved: To recommend to City Council that Case #25-28(Z) be denied, based upon the recommendation of the Planning Consultant in letter dated July 28, 2025. Unanimously carried. Resolution Number 8.53-25 OTHER BUSINESS The following Cases expire on 10/17/25 and per Section 19.07(b). The petitioner has requested a one-year extension be granted for both projects that were approved on 4/17/24. Case #24-05 (SLU) 06 (SP)– 8200 Telegraph – Sheetz- gas station with convenience and restaurant with drive thru service Parcel #60-021-99-0007-001 of the NE ¼ Section 8, City of Taylor, T.3S.,R.10E., Wayne County, Michigan. The property is located on the southwest corner of Champaign and Telegraph. Proposed uses: automobile filling station with convenience store and drive thru restaurant. Proposed construction: 6,139 sq. ft. building 137 TAYLOR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES THURSDAY, AUGUST 7, 2025 Page 3 Case #24-07A (SLU) 08A (SP) – vacant Eureka & I-75 – Sheetz- gas station with convenience and restaurant with drive thru service Parcels #60-093-99-0010-000 #60-093-99-0012-000 #60-093-99-0009-000 and part of parcel #60-093-99-0011-000 of the NE ¼ Section 34, City of Taylor, T.3S., R.10E., Wayne County, Michigan. The property is located at the southeast corner of Eureka Road and I-75. Proposed uses: automobile filling station with convenience store and drive thru restaurant. Proposed construction: 6,139 sq. ft. building. Alexander Siwicki, representative from Sheetz, explained that the sites were being leased for the projects and due to litigation issues with the property owner at the Telegraph site, the project had been delayed. He stated that the Eureka site incurred delays from Wayne County and EGLE. They were now ready to start construction of both projects, hoping to have more than 25% completion by October, but they are requesting these extensions so their approvals would still be valid if they do not, and they can continue construction. Their start date is currently 9/1/25. Both projects will commence construction at the same time. They plan to open in Spring 2026. Motion by Welton Supported by Johnson Resolved: To grant a one-year extension for Cases #24-05(SLU) and #24-06(SP) Sheetz at 8200 Telegraph. All conditions of approval are to remain the same. Unanimously carried. Resolution Number 8.54-25 Motion by Siemion Supported by Johnson Resolved: To grant a one-year extension for Cases #24-07A(SLU) and #24-08(SP), vacant Eureka Sheetz. All conditions of approval are to remain the same. Unanimously approved. Resolution Number 8.55-25 Motion by Johnson Supported by Siemion Resolved: That the meeting be adjourned. Unanimously carried. Resolution Number 8.56-25 The meeting adjourned at 7:55 P.M. _________ ________ Ken Stewart, Chairman Cynthia A. Bower, City Clerk 138 WHY BE CONCERNED ABOUT FOG? What is FOG? Eco When Food Service Establishments (FSEs) and other Over 75% of older sanitary sewer systems are working at FOG stands for “Fats, Oils and Grease” found in Friendly businesses improperly dispose of Fats, Oils & Grease 50% capacity due to FOG clogs. In addition to clean-up kitchens and Food Service Establishments (FSEs). The Living (FOG), by-products may end up in wastewater treatment costs, illegal dumping can result in expensive fines and main contribution of FOG is from discharge of used plants and stormwater systems. Grease buildup in criminal charges. grease from cooking processes. Also, many foods we eat sanitary sewer lines can become as hard as concrete and FOG finds its way into storm drains from illegal dumping contain FOG. Generally, food scraps washed down the may completely block pipes and result in back-ups of or leaking exterior storage containers. Introduction of drain contribute to FOG in sewers. Grease accumulation raw sewerage into the street, buildings and waterways. FOG into stormwater systems causes overflows and water in the sewer system causes obstruction by constricting FOG-induced wastewater treatment plant overflows cost quality impacts since stormwater is untreated and flows flow of the sewer pipes, and interfering with the normal millions of dollars annually to correct. directly into local streams and rivers. operation of the wastewater treatment system. Typical The needlessly expended tax dollars required to address grease accumulation in pipes when fats, oils, and this problem nationwide is estimated at $25 billion a year. grease are not disposed of properly. FOG generated by FSEs that use on-site sewerage disposal systems (septic tanks) is also a concern. There are over 1 million commercial food service systems in the U.S. that require proper maintenance and disposal methods to prevent system ADDITIONAL RESOURCES failure and groundwater quality impacts. Pittsfield Charter Township Department of Utilities and Municipal Services Why is so much grease generated? (734) 822-3105 ~ www.pittsfield-mi.gov Community Partners for Clean Streams Washtenaw County Water Resources Commissioner’s Office As a greater number of households opt to save recycling methods for it. Therefore, FSEs and (734) 222-6860 (WCWRC) ~ (734) 222-6833 (Clean Streams) time by dining out or purchasing prepared other businesses are encouraged to develop a www.ewashtenaw.org/government/drain_commissioner foods, the rapidly growing food service industry Best Management Practices Plan for FOG at their Washtenaw County Environmental Health is generating ever-greater volumes of FOG along establishments. (734) 222-3800 ~ www.ewashtenaw.org/government/departments/ with the significant increase in sales. Food Service Establishments (FSEs) and other environmental_health/food_safety/eh_fatsoilsgrease.html Eco Friendly Living Series Emergency Spill Response/Environmental Incidents Since FSEs are a very large generator of commercial enterprises are also responsible for FOG SAFETY (734) 971-3954 FOG, they are responsible for selecting and the maintenance of grease traps and grease Huron River Watershed Council implementing the best handling and disposal/ interceptors on their sites. (734) 769-5123 ~ www.hrwc.org Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) 1-800-662-9278 ~ www.michigan.gov/deq What Every Business Owner Should Michigan Water Environment Association Know About Fats, Oils & Grease (517) 641-7377 ~ www.mi-wea.org U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (202) 272-0167 ~ www.epa.gov/npdes Pittsfield Charter Township Ypsilanti Community Utilities Authority (YCUA) 6201 W. Michigan Avenue | Ann Arbor, MI 48108 (734) 484-4600 ~ www.ycua.org www.pittsfield-mi.gov | info@pittsfield-mi.gov FOR A DIRECTORY OF LOCAL GREASE HAULERS, call the WCWRC Office at (734) 222-6833 or (734) 994-2825, or visit ~ www.ewashtenaw. org/government/departments/environmental_health/food_safety/ eh_fatsoilsgrease.html 139 FOG FACTS WHAT CAN YOUR BUSINESSES When FOG is released into the sewer lines in any amount, it can seriously degrade the DO ABOUT FOG? collection system’s ability to remove waste from our community. It can be deposited directly on pipe walls, thus decreasing pipe capacity and, therefore, requiring an increased frequency of cleaning, maintenance and replacement. Developing a Best Management Practices Plan To help alleviate Fats, Oils & Grease (FOG), Food Service them to ensure maximum effective operation; ensure Establishments (FSEs) and other businesses can adopt a Best Management Practices (BMP) plan to properly that they are cleaned regularly. No bacteria or enzyme products shall be used in the maintenance of the GREASE INTERCEPTORS & GREASE TRAPS dispose of and/or recycle FOG. BMPs are a series of interceptor. activities that can effectively reduce the amount of waste generated in a business. A good BMP can increase safety • Implement “Dry Clean-Up” practices with employees to The different types and how they function: scrape, wipe or sweep FOG from utensils, equipment, and in your work environment, help avoid plumbing problems, floors prior to using “Wet Clean Up” methods that wash The terms grease trap and grease interceptor tend to be interchangeable. assist in protecting local water quality, and can save your FOG along with them. Never “HOT FLUSH” FOG down business money! However, there are differences between the two. sinks, floor drains, or storm drains! Some BMP tips for FOG control include: • Prevent and address FOG spills as soon as they occur by A grease trap is a small receiver built into wastewater A grease interceptor is an in-ground vault, roughly • Reduce fats, oils and grease usage whenever possible, such providing employees with proper tools and training. piping a short distance from the grease producing area. the size of a septic tank, with a minimum capacity of as using less oil and liquid oil instead of solid grease or lard. This is normally an under-sink, box-shaped fixture located 500 gallons, but normally consisting of 1,000 gallons or • Be sure the following fixtures are connected to a trap or in the kitchen, though it can be installed in the service area more. It is located and installed on the exterior, private side • Use a FOG recycling/rendering service that provides interceptor: (a) wall or floor-mounted sinks, (b) automatic floor, but either way, not larger than 20-30 gallons. of the building or property. Current Michigan Plumbing watertight outdoor receptacles of adequate size to avoid dishwashers, (c) floor drains, (d) woks, (e) pulper, Code (2009), to which both Pittsfield Charter Township spills and overflows. (f) can wash. Due to the nature of this system being so limited in size, and Washtenaw County Health Department adhere, • Provide adequate capacity of receptacles. • Maintain records or all FOG cleanings, inspections, and constant monitoring and maintenance is an absolute must! requires a minimum of two compartments with flow removal. These records must be kept for a minimum of The maintenance schedule is largely depended upon • Collect and dispose of used FOG through a licensed between each compartment designed for FOG retention. three years. its usage. grease hauler. With this size system, cleaning is usually extended to a • Adhere to all local, state and federal regulations and If a grease trap or interceptor is not maintained weekly/monthly cycle, but must be done by a licensed • Install grease interceptors or traps for new and existing ordinances on the proper handling and disposal of FOG. regularly, it will not provide proper grease removal. septic service contractor. construction, and consistently and proactively maintain FOG Regulations For local ordinances on FOG, visit the Pittsfield Charter Township website at FOG FACTS www.pittsfield-mi.gov, and select the Ordinances link to review Sections 36-226-241. Running extremely hot water down the drain only For state and federal FOG regulations, visit these websites: moves the FOG further downstream, and once it US Environmental Protection Agency reaches a cold water pipe, it solidifies and clogs National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) (causing sewer back-ups). Catching FOG at its source www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/pretreatment_foodservice_fs.pdf is the most effective and economical means to reduce clogging problems and the costly expense to fix them. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality www.michigan.gov/deq/ 140 STATE OF MICHIGAN COUNTY OF WAYNE CITY OF TAYLOR ORDINANCE NO. 2025- ___ AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 50 — UTILITIES, BY ADDING NEW ARTICLE VII FATS, OILS, AND GREASE (FOG) CONTROL THE CITY OF TAYLOR ORDAINS: SECTION 1. That Chapter 50, entitled, UTILITIES, be amended to add new Article VII, entitled, Fats, Oils, and Grease (FOG) Control to the City of Taylor Code of Ordinances, which shall read as follows: ARTICLE VII. FATS, OILS AND GREASE (FOG) CONTROL Sec. 50-177 DEFINITIONS For the purpose of this article: (a) Act: Federal Water Pollution Control Act, also known as the Clean Water Act, as amended, 33 U.S.C. 1251, et. seq. (b) BOD: The value of the 5-day test for Biochemical Oxygen Demand, as described in the latest edition of “Standard Methods for the Examination of Water & Wastewater.” (c) COD: The value of the test for Chemical Oxygen Demand, as described in the latest edition of “Standard Methods for the Examination of Water & Wastewater.” (d) EPA: The United States Environmental Protection Agency. (e) FOG-CPM: FOG Control Program Manager. City of Taylor Building Official, City of Taylor City Engineer, or their City of Taylor designee. (f) Fats, oils, and greases (FOG): Organic polar compounds derived from animal and/or plant sources that contain multiple carbon chain triglyceride molecules. These substances are detectable and measurable using analytical test procedures established in 40 CFR 136, as may be amended from time to time. All are sometimes referred to herein as "grease" or "greases." (g) FSE: Food Service Establishment. (h) Generator: Any person who owns or operates a grease trap/grease interceptor, or whose act or process produces grease trap waste. 1 141 (i) Grease interceptor (GI): An appurtenance or appliance that is installed in a sanitary drainage system to intercept non-petroleum fats, oils, and greases (FOG) from wastewater. There are two types of Grease interceptors, Gravity Grease Interceptors (preferred) and Hydro-mechanical Grease Interceptors. (j) Gravity Grease/ Grit Interceptor (GGGI): (Preferred) Gravity Grease Interceptor: A plumbing appurtenance or appliance that is installed in a sanitary drainage system to intercept non-petroleum fats, oils, and greases (FOG) from a wastewater discharge and is identified by gravity separation, mass and volume, retention, baffle(s), a minimum of two compartments, a minimum total volume of 500 gallon (retention). These interceptors are designed by a registered professional engineer. GGGI’s are installed typically outside. (See Section B-4) (k) Grease Trap, Hydro-mechanical: (in kitchen area where food is prepared) Hydro-mechanical Grease Trap: A plumbing appurtenance or appliance that is installed in a sanitary drainage system to intercept non-petroleum fats, oils, and greases (FOG) from a wastewater discharge and is identified by flow rate, and separation and retention efficiency. The design incorporates air entrainment, hydro mechanical separation, interior baffling, and/or barriers in combination or separately, and an External flow control, with air intake (vent). (l) Grease Removal Device (GRD): Any hydro-mechanical grease interceptor that automatically, mechanically removes non-petroleum fats, oils, and greases (FOG) from the interceptor, the control of which is either automatic or manually initiated. {check to see how this would work in the kitchen – locate in a utility room out of the kitchen (food prep area)} (m) Grease Waste: Material collected in and from a grease interceptor in the sanitary sewer service line of a commercial, institutional, or industrial food service or processing establishment, including the solids resulting from de-watering processes. (n) FOG Disposal System: A grease interceptor that reduces nonpetroleum fats, oils, and greases (FOG) in effluent by separation, and mass and volume reduction. (o) Indirect Discharge or Discharge: The introduction of pollutants into a POTW from any nondomestic source (commercial food preparation). (p) Interference: A discharge which alone or in conjunction with a discharge or discharges from other sources inhibits or disrupts the POTW, its treatment processes or operations or its sludge processes, use or disposal, or is a cause of a violation of the municipality's NPDES permit. 2 142 (q) mg/L: Milligrams per liter. (r) Monolithic: Single one-piece unit or structure. (s) MPC: Michigan Plumbing Code. (t) pH: The measure of the relative acidity or alkalinity of water and is defined as the negative logarithm (base 10) of the hydrogen ion concentration. (u) POTW or Publicly Owned Treatment Works: A treatment works which is owned by a state or municipality as defined by section 502(4) of the Clean Water Act. This definition includes any devices and systems used in the storage, treatment, recycling and reclamation of municipal sewage or industrial wastes of a liquid nature. It also includes all sewers, pipes and other conveyances that convey wastewater to a POTW Treatment Plant/WWTP. The term also means the municipality as defined in section 502(4) of the Act, which has jurisdiction over the indirect discharges to and the discharges from such a treatment works. For purposes of this ordinance, the terms “sanitary sewer system” and “POTW” may be used interchangeably. (v) Transporter means a person who is registered with and authorized by the MDEQ (EGLE) to transport sewage sludge, water treatment sludge, domestic septage, chemical toilet waste, grit trap waste, or grease interceptor/trap waste in accordance with current regulations. {How is this handled by the state?} (w) Trap: Inside the building grease trap. (x) TSS: The value of the test for Total Suspended Solids, as described in the latest edition of “Standard Methods for the Examination of Water & Wastewater.” (y) User: Any person, including those located outside the jurisdictional limits of the municipality, who contributes, causes or permits the contribution or discharge of wastewater into the POTW, including persons who contribute such wastewater from mobile sources. (z) WWTP: Wastewater Treatment Plant. Sec. 50-178 GREASE INTERCEPTORS REQUIRED FSEs shall discharge all wastewater containing FOG from fixtures or sources in food preparation or cleanup areas into a properly maintained and functioning grease interceptor that is designed and tested in accordance with the installation and sizing requirements of the Michigan Plumbing Code as adopted by the Municipality. Water closets, urinals and other plumbing fixtures conveying human waste shall not drain into or through the grease interceptor. Food disposal units or dishwashers shall not drain into or through the grease 3 143 interceptor unless it is specifically permitted, in writing, by the FOG Control Program Manager. A foods solids interceptor shall be routed through a grease interceptor (See diagrams A & B). (a) Except as otherwise provided in Para. 3 or 4 below, new FSEs shall be equipped with an exterior gravity grease interceptor that is designed and tested in accordance with the requirements of the Michigan Plumbing Code prior to commencement of any discharge. Any permitted construction shall be deemed compliant upon issuance of a certificate of occupancy for such construction by the City Building Official, City Engineer, or designee. (b) Except as otherwise provided in Para. 3 or 4 below, existing FSEs that are not equipped with a grease interceptor or that are equipped with a grease interceptor that does not comply with the most recent edition of the Michigan Plumbing Code, shall install a compliant grease interceptor on a date deemed appropriate by the FOG Control Program Manager when any of the following applies: (1) An expansion, renovation or modification is constructed that requires that a building or plumbing permit be issued. The grease interceptor shall be installed prior to requesting the final inspection and will be a condition of permit approval. (2) The FSE sewage discharge necessitates increased maintenance on the wastewater disposal system in order to minimize the number of blockages occurring and/or to minimize interferences with the normal operation of pumps and other equipment, as determined by the FOG Control Program Manager; or (3) A FSE that is not adequately retaining FOG. This occurs when quantities above FOG discharge limits of 150 mg/L are found, according to Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, Oil and Grease, method 5520. (c) Existing Facilities. Existing FSEs and FM/Ps shall submit a FOG management plan within 24months of the date the ordinance codified in this chapter becomes effective. (d) Any FSE that wishes to be exempt from an exterior grease interceptor installation or maintenance requirement shall file for an exemption from FOG Control Program Manager who has the authority to approve the exemption if: (1) Only catered meals are distributed and consumed and all dishes, pans, utensils, etc. are removed and cleaned at an approved facility with properly operating and sized grease interceptors; or (2) Only pre-packaged foods are served and no oil, grease, or other products containing grease are washed down sinks or drains. 4 144 (e) If an FSE demonstrates to the satisfaction of the FOG Control Program Manager that installation of an exterior gravity grease interceptor is not feasible, the FOG Control Program Manager may grant an exception allowing such owner to install hydro- mechanical grease traps, or other alternative treatment technology which will, in the FOG Control Program Manager's discretion, adequately control the release of FOG from the FSE or the structure into the wastewater system. The FSE bears the burden of demonstrating that the installation of an exterior gravity grease interceptor is not feasible. GGGI tank can be placed below first floor grade, in a separate storage room away from any food prep areas. (1) The request for an exemption shall include the following information, if relevant: i. Evidence of a lack of available exterior space necessary to place an interceptor relative to the location of sewer main and easement. ii. Evidence of a lack of adequate slope for gravity flow between kitchen plumbing fixtures in the FSE and the wastewater facilities. iii. Description and specifications of the alternative grease control equipment that will be installed. (2) Hydro-mechanical and alternative treatment technologies shall remove FOG to the extent that the waste discharge does not exceed the maximum allowed concentration of 100 mg/L. FSE shall make any modifications required to achieve the FOG discharge requirements even if an exemption was granted. (f) An FSE or FM/P with a grease interceptor shall notify the City of Taylor Building Department, Building Official, or City Engineer 45 days in advance and receive confirmation of delivery whenever the FSE or FM/P closes for business and is subsequently: (1) Razed or demolished; (2) Remodeled such that the grease interceptor will not be used; or (3) Replaced with a type of business that will not utilize the grease interceptor. The reason for this notification is to delete the FOG control device from the City’s inventory database. (g) A facility that closes for business shall properly demolish, abandon, or remove their grease interceptor so as to prevent a safety hazard, unless the grease interceptor will be used by a new property owner or occupant. 5 145 (h) Product Submittal Package Review The designer (or project engineer of record) plans and submittal package shall be submitted, reviewed, and approved by the plan reviewing plumbing inspector prior to purchasing the grease interceptor tank. The City of Taylor bears zero responsibility if a grease interceptor tank is purchased without prior approval from the City of Taylor. Design/ submittal package shall provide design information per this ordinance as follows: (a) Design sizing calculations (b) Structural calculations (c) Water tightness testing information (d) Chemical Resistance information (minimum pH 1.5-3) (e) Vendor installation instructions (f) Vendor FOG removal efficiency (>90% TSS FOG removal efficiency) The submittal package shall be prepared and sealed by a current licensed professional engineer in the State of Michigan. Sec. 50-179. GREASE INTERCEPTOR PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS See Exhibit 1 (Gravity Grease Interceptor Manufacturer Protocol for Municipal Approval) for specific performance requirements to be submitted to receive grease interceptor approval for use within the municipality. Sec. 50-180 GREASE INTERCEPTOR INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS In addition to the requirements herein, all exterior grease interceptors shall be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Michigan Plumbing Code (and/or manufacturer’s installation instructions). Plan review plumbing inspector shall determine which installation instructions will apply. (a) Exterior gravity grease interceptor shall be constructed on the property occupied by the structure in a location which allows unrestricted access to municipality’s representatives for the purposes of inspection, sampling, and testing. 6 146 (b) Gravity grease interceptors shall not be installed inside a building where food is handled. If GGGI is installed in the building, it shall be located in a separate storage area away from any food prep areas (See Section B-4). (c) Interceptors shall be placed as close as practical to the building/fixtures they serve. (1) 5 ft. – 50 ft. outside the building. (2) >50 ft. from the building (i) Insulate pipe. (ii) Lateral line from bldg. to grease interceptor to be TV’d and/ or jetted at every cleaning (0-90 days). (iii) Use Heat Trace (d) If the FOG Control Program Manager approves its use, a GGGI, interior hydro- mechanical or grease trap shall be installed in an easily accessible location. City of Taylor representatives shall have unrestricted access for the purposes of inspection, sampling, and testing during normal business hours. It is preferred that these units are not to be installed and maintained in the FSE’s food prep area. Use a separate storage room for the GI. (e) Each FSE that requires a grease interceptor shall have an interceptor that serves that establishment unless otherwise approved by the FOG Control Program Manager and Plumbing Inspector. (f) Plumbing shall be such that dishwasher discharge shall not be directed into or pass through the grease interceptor, unless a properly sized GGGI tank is used (See Appendix A – Method 3). Hydromechanical GI tanks have experienced FOG resuspension due to high water temps (Hot Flushing) and are not recommended. (g) Any wastewater discharged with temperatures more than 140° F shall not be directed into or passed through the grease interceptor, unless a properly sized GGGI tank is used (See Appendix A – Method 3). Sec. 50-181 GREASE INTERCEPTOR INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE The following maintenance and cleaning practices shall be implemented by all FSEs: (a) Exterior gravity grease interceptors shall be pumped /cleaned out a minimum of once every 90 days, or more frequently if the unit has accumulated waste, both floatable and settleable accounting for 25% of its wetted depth, as measured from the static water level to the interior tank bottom. 7 147 (1) Grease interceptor cleaning verification shall be submitted to the FOG Control Program Manager within 14 days after the interceptor is cleaned. Grease interceptor maintenance and cleaning activities shall be recorded on a log that shall be kept on file for a period of three years and be available to the FOG Control Program Manager, plumbing inspector, or health dept. inspector during inspections. The log shall include date, time, volume of waste removed, pH of wastewater, disposal site and signature. (2) The FOG Control Program Manager shall establish a procedure for submitting this information. (3) If a grease hauler is hired to pump out the grease interceptor, a copy of the hauler’s receipts shall be submitted to the FOG Control Program Manager. (4) Decanting or discharging of removed waste liquid back into the interceptor from which the waste was removed, for the purpose of reducing the volume to be disposed of is strictly prohibited. (5) Goal at pump out cycle of 90 days: pH > 3, effluent concentration < 150 mg/L, volume of FOG/grit < 25% of total volume. If goals are not met, FOG Control Program Manager can require more frequent pump outs until the desired goals are met (1-90 days). (b) Interior grease traps and hydro-mechanical grease traps shall be pumped/cleaned out completely a minimum of once every 30 days, or more frequently if the unit has accumulated waste, both floatable and settleable accounting for 25% of its wetted depth, as measured from the static water level to the interior tank bottom. (1) Grease trap cleaning verification shall be submitted to the FOG Control Program Manager within 14 days after the interceptor is cleaned. Grease trap maintenance and cleaning activities shall be recorded on a log that shall be kept on file for a period of three years and be available to the FOG Control Program Manager, plumbing inspector, or health dept. inspector during inspections. The log shall include date, time, volume of waste removed, pH of wastewater, disposal site and signature. (2) The FOG Control Program Manager shall establish a procedure for submitting this information. (3) If a grease hauler is hired to pump out the grease trap, a copy of the hauler’s receipts shall be submitted to the FOG Control Program Manager. 8 148 (4) Decanting or discharging of removed waste liquid back into the grease trap from which the waste was removed, for the purpose of reducing the volume to be disposed of is strictly prohibited. (5) Goal at pump out cycle of 30 days: pH > 3, effluent concentration < 100 mg/L, volume of FOG/grit < 25% of total volume. If goals are not met, FOG Control Program Manager can require more frequent pump outs until the desired goals are met (1-30 days). (c) Any person or entity who cleans a grease interceptor (shall be licensed and certified in the State of Michigan for the activity) shall do so in accordance with the following procedures and requirements. (1) Measure and record the depths of solids on the bottom and FOG on the top of the grease interceptor on a cleaning log or report. Also record the total percent of FOG and solids compared to the design liquid depth. Measure the pH of the wastewater in both compartments of the interceptor. Determine average pH level. These cleaning logs (records) shall be maintained for three years. Copies shall be submitted to the FSE and FOG Control Program Manager, plumbing inspector, or health dept. inspector. (2) Completely empty and remove the contents (liquids and solids) of all vaults of the grease interceptor and remove the grease mat and scrapings from the interior walls. Use pressure washing and vacuum trucks to clean grease interceptor tanks. Avoid scraping walls of tanks with steel scrapers. Use a stiff nylon bristle brush only as steel scrapers can damage fiberglass tanks and steel/concrete tanks with a polymer coating, causing delamination of the protective coating. (3) Dispose of waste and wastewater removed from a grease interceptor at a facility approved for disposal of such waste. Waste and wastewater removed from a grease interceptor shall not be discharged to any public or private sanitary or storm sewer system. (4) Do not deposit waste and wastewater removed from a grease interceptor back into the grease interceptor from which the waste or wastewater was removed or into any other grease interceptor, for the purpose of reducing the volume of waste and wastewater to be disposed of. (5) The grease interceptor shall be refilled with fresh water to the outlet pipe invert (decanting is not allowed). This shall be done prior to start-up in order to avoid surcharging the sanitary sewer line with FOG. Refilling to the outlet pipe invert is essential for the GI tank to function and perform at its maximum removal efficiency. 9 149 (6) Do not introduce enzymes, emulsifying chemicals, hot water or other agents into a grease interceptor to dissolve or emulsify grease or as a grease abatement method. Introduction of bacteria as a grease degradation agent is permitted only with prior written approval by the FOG Control Program Manager. (7) Do not use an automatic grease removal system to clean a grease interceptor without prior written approval of the FOG Control Program Manager. If the use of an automatic grease removal system is approved, the user shall operate the same in a manner that the grease wastewater discharge limit, as measured from the system's outlet, is consistently achieved. (8) Verify that the grease interceptor or trap is good operating condition by checking the following: (9) Check that the sanitary "tees" on the inlet (if applicable) and outlet sides of the grease interceptor are not obstructed, loose, or missing. (i) ii. Verify that the baffle is secure and in place. Inspect the grease interceptor for any cracks or other defects. Check that lids are securely and properly seated after completion of cleaning. (ii) For hydro-mechanical units -check that the flow restrictor is secure. (d) The FOG Control Program Manager may also implement additional maintenance and cleaning verification procedures. Sec. 50-182 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES TO MINIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF GREASE THAT IS DISPOSED OF IN THE SEWER FSEs shall incorporate the following BMPs into their kitchen and dishwashing procedures: (a) Train all kitchen and dishwashing staff on proper FOG management. (b) Scrape dishes and pans or "dry wipe" before putting them into the sink or dishwasher. Place food scraps from dishes into trashcans and garbage bags and dispose of them properly. (c) Never pour grease, oils, oily sauces, syrups, or dressing down the drain. Never "hot flush" oil or grease down sinks or drains. 10 150 (d) Dispose of FOG in covered collection containers. Have FOG picked up by a certified hauler for disposal. (e) Allow FOG to cool before it is skimmed, scraped, or wiped off all preparation and servicing surfaces. (f) Cover the kitchen sink drains and floor drains with screening and empty debris into garbage as needed. (g) Recycle used fryer oil. (h) Do not pour chemicals or additives into the grease interceptor. Sec. 50-183 RECORD KEEPING The building owner or operator of an FSE which is required to pass wastewater through a grease interceptor shall maintain a written record of grease interceptor maintenance as follows: (a) Include the dates upon which the grease interceptor was inspected and the dates upon which FOG waste and wastewater was removed from the grease interceptor and disposed of along with the percentage of FOG and solids of the design liquid depth. Record average Ph of tank liquid. (b) The log shall also contain the location and means of such disposal of waste and wastewater, the name and employer or the person or persons performing each of said tasks and any maintenance issues that require correction. (c) FSE owners shall also record inspection of the grease interceptor to check for maintenance and cleaning issues and keep records in the same log. (d) The log shall always be kept at the premises and maintained, so as to show a record of inspections and waste and wastewater removal and disposal for a continuous period of three years. (e) The log shall be made available for non-routine inspection by the designated City of Taylor Representatives at any time during normal business hours. (f) The FOG Control Program Manager may include other data submittal requirements for compliance verification. (g) Failure to comply with proper record keeping as stated above may result in a fine determined by the municipality. 11 151 Sec. 50-184 FOG INTERCEPTOR INSPECTIONS FSEs which are required to pass its wastewater through a grease interceptor shall allow for an inspection by Municipality personnel and shall: (a) Provide, operate, and maintain, at its expense, safe and accessible monitoring facilities for sampling of the wastewater discharged from the grease interceptor or building sewer or internal drainage systems. There shall be ample room in or near such monitoring facility to allow accurate sampling. (b) Allow personnel authorized by the FOG Control Program Manager or by the designated City of Taylor Representatives, bearing proper credentials and identification, to enter upon or into any building, facility or property housing an FSE at any reasonable time and without prior notification, for the purpose of inspection, observation, measurement, sampling, testing or record review, in accordance with this division. (c) Upon request by the FOG Control Program Manager, open any grease interceptor for the purpose of confirming that maintenance frequency is appropriate, that all necessary parts of the installation are in place, including but not limited to, baffles, influent and effluent tees, and that all grease interceptors and related equipment and piping is maintained in efficient operating condition. (d) Accommodate compliance inspections and sampling events by the FOG Control Program Manager, City of Taylor Building Official, City of Taylor City Engineer, or Designee. The FOG Control Program Manager may conduct routine inspections and sampling events of any FSE. Nonroutine inspection and sampling events shall occur more frequently when there is a history of noncompliance with this ordinance or if excessive amounts of FOG are observed in the collection system downstream of the FSE. Sec. 50-185 CHARGE FOR REMEDIAL MAINTENANCE OR REPAIR OF THE CITY WASTEWATER DISPOSAL SYSTEM (a) In the event an FSE is found to have contributed to the partial or complete obstruction of a wastewater facility resulting from the discharge of wastewater or waste containing FOG and that the city is required to act immediately to control a public health hazard because of such blockage, the FSE Grease Control Responsible Party shall be required to reimburse the city for all costs of abating such condition. (b) If sewer or lift station cleaning is required more frequently than the normal cycle due to documented accumulations of FOG, the FSE responsible for the discharge of the FOG may assess a fee equal to the additional costs incurred to remove and dispose of the FOG. Such costs will include the scheduled/estimated costs of any equipment, work 12 152 force, materials needed, disposal, administrative, and any applicable incidental costs associated with the remediation. (c) In situations where there are multiple owners identified as contributing to FOG causing such obstruction or required additional Cleaning, the FOG Control Program Manager will determine each FSE’s percentage of responsibility for the cleanup fee. (d) Other Remedies (1) City may disconnect water and sewer service to the FSE and to the structure in which the FSE is located if continued violations persist. (2) City may and will impose a fine of not more than $5,000 per month until such property owner of record demonstrates that they are in compliance with the requirements of this ordinance. (3) For failure to pass the FOG inspection due to lack of or ineffective FOG equipment, the FOG Control Program Manager may require the subject FSE to install additional FOG equipment, as necessary, to resolve the problem. (e) Performance Testing of GI for FOG removal efficiency (Goal > 90% FOG removal) ie (Goal < 100-150 mg/l) effluent discharge. (1) Sample influent water at the tank inlet pipe and the effluent water at the outlet pipe/ tee or sampling basin. (2) Determine the GI tanks removal efficiency. If the tank does not meet > 90% TSS FOG removal (100-150 mg/l) FSE to consult with tank manufacturer and FOG Control Manger to determine the appropriate action required to address FOG removal efficiency issue to meet FOG regulations. This could involve replacing the GI tank with a properly sized GI tank or adding an additional tank in series and/or parallel, until discharge effluent levels are met. Sec. 50-186 SEVERABILITY If any provision of this chapter or its application to any person or circumstances is held invalid, the remainder of this chapter, or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected. 13 153 EXHIBIT 1 GRAVITY GREASE INTERCEPTOR MANUFACTURER PROTOCOL FOR MUNICIPAL APPROVAL A manufacturer wanting to obtain approval of their Gravity Grease Interceptor units for use in Municipality shall supply the plumbing department with a product submittal package. The package shall be generated and/or sealed by a professional engineer registered in the State of Michigan. The package shall show product performance in 5 particular areas of design. That being 1) structural performance, 2) FOG (floatable)/grit volume storage performance, 3) vessel water tightness performance, 4) chemical resistance performance, and 5) continuous (min. of 15 minutes) flow rate FOG removal efficiency performance at GI’s 25% working capacity. The package shall contain at a minimum, drawings showing all dimensions of each unit, inlet/outlet pipe, access risers, install & backfill details, backfill materials, approximate weight of units, manufacturer’s recommendations and all information needed for a successful installation and functional performance of the grease interceptor system. Applicable codes and standards that should be referenced in your submittal package should include but are not limited to Michigan Plumbing Code, current edition, Section 303.1, Section 303.4, Section 1003.3.7; IAPMO/ANSI Z1001, ASTM, ASME, etc. In addition to the above, specific performance information shall be included as described below. 1 -STRUCTURAL PERFORMANCE Greenbelt Areas: H-20 load performance at the maximum and minimum depth of bury the manufacturer recommends for their product. Provide calculations. Traffic Areas: HS-25 load performance at the maximum and minimum depth of bury the manufacturer recommends for their product. Provide calculations. Less than 2 ft. of cover: provide shallow bury notes and details. Greater than 10 ft. of cover: provide deep bury notes and details. GI frames and covers (Prefer EJ or Neenah, etc.) for installation in greenbelt and traffic areas shall be designed to withstand an AASHTO H-20/ HS-25-wheel load. If a structural pad or unit containment vault (fiberglass, steel or thermoplastic tanks, etc.) is needed to achieve the HS 25 minimum load, provide detail drawings, calculations and installation instructions for this system. If concrete reinforced slab or vault is poured/constructed on-site, area shall be fenced off and left open without any backfill around or near the structure until concrete cure time has elapsed (28 days +/-). Concrete slab/ vault shall be designed, installed, and approved by the design engineer prior to backfilling the GI tank. PI is to receive a copy of the designers approval of the site inspection. Provide buoyancy calculations with the tank empty. If buoyancy is an issue, provide manufacturer’s recommended tie down system to address the issue. 14 154 Soil boring data shall be provided for the location where the grease interceptor tank is to be placed to determine in situ soil type and water table. The designer is to use this information to determine the type of backfill material to be used to address both structural and buoyancy issues listed above. 2 -VOLUME STORAGE PERFORMANCE Provide volume storage calculations using 1) Chapter 10 of the Michigan Plumbing Code and 2 design storage calculations for a 90-day pump out cycle plus apply the 25% rule for sizing GI units to each sizing method. (a) GI full flow pipe design (2# FOG storage for every 1 gpm flow rate {MPC table a. 1003.3.4.1, note a}) (Preferred Method) (minimum) (Appendix A – Method 1) and (b) Design the GI for 90 day pump out maintenance cycle plus (GSPM) (Appendix A - Method 2) (Appendix A – Method 3) Apply the 25% rule to the larger of the two tank designs – see example calculations in APPENDIX A. 3 -VESSEL WATER TIGHTNESS PERFORMANCE Using IAPMO/ANSI Z1001 check performance for a completely assembled tank (multiple pieces), including inlet/outlet pipe stubs and access riser. Completely assemble the tank at the manufacturing facility if not a monolithic unit (one-piece). If fully assembled at the manufacturer’s facility as a monolithic unit, then in both cases testing can be performed at the manufacturing facility and test certification papers shall be included in the submittal package. Please note for a grease interceptor that is not a monolithic unit (that cannot be tested at manufacturing facility prior to shipping) IAPMO/ANSI Z1001 requires assembly at the jobsite, then perform the water tightness test. This will be required for all non-monolithic grease interceptor tanks (non-one-piece structures/units) that will be used in the municipality. For purposes of compliance with this standard, each manufacturer is allowed to assemble and test their units at their facility. All non-monolithic (non-one-piece) units that will be shipped and assembled at the jobsite will need to perform a water tightness test on site for the plumbing inspector prior to backfilling the grease interceptor tank. This requirement applies for all grease interceptor installations after their product receives municipal approval. The design engineer is to provide the plumbing inspector with the approved watertightness testing report. Testing Requirements and Performance Criteria: 3.1 Water tightness Tests 3.1.1 General Grease Interceptor tanks (fully assembled with pipe inlet/outlet stubs and access risers etc.) shall comply with one of the water tightness tests specified in Sections 3.1.2 to 3.1.4. 3.1.2 Vacuum Test 3.1.2.1 Vacuum Test Procedure 15 155 The vacuum test shall be conducted as follows: (a) Assemble the test specimen onsite with inlet/outlet pipe stubs and access risers (i.e., the complete grease interceptor tank) and seal all openings described above with test plug, fernco cap, etc. (b) Attach a devise capable of drawing a vacuum pressure of at least 3.4 psi (24 kPa) [7 inches (175 mm) of mercury] to the test specimen. (c) Apply a vacuum pressure of 2 psi (13.5 kPa) [4 inches (100 mm) of mercury] to the test specimen and allow it to stabilize for 5 minutes. (d) If there is loss of vacuum pressure, bring it back to 2 psi (13.5 kPa) [4inches (100 mm) of mercury] and allow the pressure to stabilize for an additional 5 minutes. (e) Hold the vacuum pressure for 5 minutes. (f) If there is leakage, the specimen may be repaired in accordance with the manufacturer’s written instructions and retested. 3.1.2.2 Performance Requirement There shall be no loss of vacuum pressure during the 5-minute test period. 3.1.3 Water Test (Hydrostatic) 3.1.3.1 Water Test Procedure The water test shall be conducted as follows: (a) Assemble the test specimen onsite with inlet/outlet pipe stubs and access risers (i.e., the complete grease interceptor tank) and seal all openings as described above with test plug or fernco cap, etc. (b) Fill the test specimen with water to the maximum liquid level (i.e. highest joint in access riser). (c) For test specimens made of materials that absorb water, let them stand for 24 hours and refill with water to the top joint in the access riser. (d) Let the test specimen stand for at least 1 hour. (e) If there is leakage, the specimen may be repaired in accordance with the manufacturer’s written instructions and retested. (f) All pipe inlet/outlet joints, access riser joints and tank joints (multiple piece tank) shall be exposed for visual inspection during the water test. Upon passing the water test backfilling the structure can proceed with the inspector’s approval. 3.1.3.2 Performance Requirement There shall be no visible drop in the water level in the access riser. There shall be no visible leakage. Damp spots due to condensation on exterior surfaces shall not be cause for rejection. 16 156 3.1.4 Air Test 3.1.4.1 Air Test Procedure The air test shall be conducted as follows: (a) Pressurize the test specimen to 3 psi (21 kPa). (b) Cover (e.g. brush or spray) the entire outer surface of the test specimen with a thin-film leak-detection fluid and observe for leakage while covering the test specimen. (c) If there is leakage, the specimen may be repaired in accordance with the manufacturer’s written instructions and retested. 3.1.4.2 Performance Requirement There shall be no air leakage. Continuous formation of bubbles at any location on the test specimen surface shall be evidence of air leakage. 4 -CHEMICAL RESISTANCE PERFORMANCE 4.1 Provide chemical resistance data sheets, studies, charts, etc. showing performance of GI units to (including but not limited to) hydrogen sulfide (H2S) gas, sulfuric acid (H2SO4), oils, grease, and cleaning solvents, etc. State pH range of the composite material the GI unit is manufactured from. GI tank shall be able to perform in an environment with a pH range < 3. GI tanks that require a coating to provide chemical resistance, structural integrity, and/or watertightness shall be coated on the interior and exterior of the tank by the GI tank manufacturer. Per tank sizing mentioned above (Section 2 – Volume Storage) a 90 day pump out maintenance schedule is required. Various municipality pH testing of GI tank contents has shown a range of pH = 1.5-6. For failed GI tanks (concrete and steel coated with epoxy) the tested pH = 1.5- 3. It is requested that the manufacturer provide a letter of statement of the pH their product can perform in for a 90 day pump out cycle. GOAL: manufacturer grease interceptor tank can perform in a pH range of 1.5-3 for a 90-day pump out cycle. Tested concentrations in the failed tanks showed sulfuric acid in the 10-30% range and hydrogen sulfide > 10%. If a manufacturer cannot meet this requirement of pH 1.5-6 in a 90 day pump out cycle, then they shall show recommended or reduced cleanout pump schedule. Provide calculations to justify the recommended days to pump. (PI to review or have calculations and data approved by an engineer of the PI’s choice) All manufacturers that apply coatings to their products for chemical resistance, corrosion resistance and vessel water tightness resistance shall show proof that the bond of the coating to the unit (tank) meets the manufacturer’s bonding requirements (provide what type of bond adherence testing is performed on the coating to provide a quality manufactured product ASTM D4541 & ASTM D7234) as to prevent delamination (separation) of the coating from the tank surface (inside and outside) especially when subjected to vehicular HS-25 loading or injurious cracking/penetration of coating during the installation and maintenance process. In some cases, the manufacturer may recommend special backfill materials to protect the outside 17 157 coating on the tank. For example, you see Xerxes use a pea stone backfill for their fiberglass fuel tanks used in gas station projects. GI manufacturers shall be responsible for the complete GI tank and required coating. 5 -VENDOR FOG REMOVAL EFFICIENCY PERFORMANCE A safety factor of 4 (SF=4), also known as the 25% rule, is a plumbing industry standard that is applied to GI and/or grease trap working capacity when sizing the tank (ASPE Vol 4, pg. 218/219). When implemented, this standard has shown to be very effective in the field. Vendors shall provide continuous flow rate test data (intermittent (i.e. 126 seconds) is not allowed), demonstrating their GI tank and/ or grease trap can remove FOG to acceptable levels as required by this ordinance (set by WWTP operator). Continuous flow rate testing should run for a minimum of 10-15 minutes, by which FOG removal is >90%. GGGI tanks should be tested at 0% capacity (no FOG) and 25% FOG capacity. For example, a 1000-gallon tank would be tested with no FOG and with 250 gallons (1848# of FOG). Testing for a 100gpm hydromechanical GI or grease trap that equates to 200# of FOG volume storage (i.e. 1gpm = 2# FOG at full capacity) should be done at 0% capacity (no FOG) and 25% FOG capacity (50 # of FOG working capacity). Municipality to determine which removal performance test they will enforce. Goal is >90% FOG removal efficiency, with GI tank providing <100-150 PPM (mg/l) effluent discharge. 6 -MARKINGS AND ACCOMPANYING LITERATURE 6.1 Prefabricated grease interceptor (GI) tanks complying with this standard shall be marked with the: (a) Manufacturer’s name or trademark. (b) Model number. (c) Working liquid volume, expressed at least in gallons. (d) Date (i.e., month and year), date code, or identifier traceable to the date of manufacture. (e) Maximum design load and maximum burial depth for which the tank is designed; and (f) Inlet and outlet 6.2 Markings shall be permanent, legible, and visible. 6.3 Acceptable means of applying permanent markings shall include permanently affixed metal plates, etching, mechanical stamping, stamping with a permanent (non-water-soluble) ink and molding in. 18 158 Adhesive labels that comply with UL 969 shall also be permanent when placed on a surface that is not normally submerged in water. 6.4 Grease interceptor tanks shall be accompanied by instructions for their installation. The plumbing inspector is to review and approve installation instructions prior to ordering a GI tank. Product Designer, Vendor, and/or system installation contractor to provide the plumbing inspector with the installation instructions prior to installation of system. 19 159 APPENDIX A Gravity Grease Interceptor Sizing Methods A grease interceptor is to be used for treatment of commercial kitchen effluent, and thus is to be connected to the sanitary sewer system via the sanitary lead from the building. The concern is the sediment and grease will be collected from the kitchen washing activities and be carried in the effluent and that this effluent shall be detained long enough to be separated prior to discharging the separated water into the sanitary sewer lead line. For this example, assume a FSE’s kitchen produces 500 meals per day. Calculations for sizing of the grease interceptor are as follows: METHOD 1 – FULL, PEAK, MAXIMUM FLOW SIZING Potential for full flow of the 6” dia. pipe may happen at 4 peak periods during a day: 1) restaurant opening, 2) shift change breakfast/lunch, 3) shift change lunch/dinner, 4) restaurant closing. Full pipe flow 6” at 1/4”/ft. = 375 gpm. Minimum volume needed in the gravity grease interceptor for FOG storage per Michigan Plumbing Code, Chapter 10, is approximately 2 pounds of FOG for every 1 gpm of flow. 375 gpm (2) = 750 pounds of FOG Specific gravity of FOG = 0.887 (Specific gravity of water = 62.4 #/CF) = 55.3 #/CF 750 # of FOG ÷ 55.3 #/CF = 13.6 CF Applying the plumbing industry standard of the 1/4 or 25% rule (SF = 4) (ASPE Plumbing Engineering Design Handbook Volume 4, pg. 218/219) to the volume needed produces a minimum tank volume of 13.6 (4) = 54.2 cubic feet (54.2 cf x 7.481 gal/cf = 405 gallons) Use a 500-gallon grease interceptor. METHOD 2 – GREASE PRODUCTION SIZING METHOD (GPSM) Determine the type of FSE the GGGI will serve, utilize table 8-3 on page 218 of the ASPE volume 4, and proceed with calculations (example below). Taco Bell Restaurant (0.035 # FOG/meal -GPSM)) FOG specific gravity = 0.887 FOG = 62.4 #/CF x 0.887 = 55.3 #/CF 500 meals/day X 0.035 #/meal X 90 day cycled = 1,575# of grease 1,575#/(55.3#/cf) = 28.5 CF/90 days Using the 25% rule 28.5 CF X 4 = 114 CF OF GREASE INTERCEPTOR TANK STORAGE REQUIRED 114 CF X 7.481 GAL/CF = 853 GALLONS REQUIRED 20 160 Use a 1000-gallon grease interceptor. METHOD 3 – ADDITIONAL FOG GENERATING EQUIPMENT A Properly sized GGGI tank using GPSM and including a dishwasher or food disposal unit in conjunction with a solid’s separator. Like in Method 2 determine the type of FSE the GGGI will serve and proceed with the calculations, this time utilizing the “with flatware” grease production value, in table 8-3 on page 218 of the ASPE volume 4 (example below). Taco Bell Restaurant (0.0455 # FOG/meal -GPSM)) FOG specific gravity = 0.887 FOG = 62.4 #/CF x 0.887 = 55.3 #/CF 500 meals/day X 0.0455 #/meal X 90 day cycled = 2,048# of grease 2,048#/(55.3#/cf) = 37.1 CF/90 days Using the 25% rule 37.1 CF X 4 = 148.4 CF OF GREASE INTERCEPTOR TANK STORAGE REQUIRED 148.4 CF X 7.481 GAL/CF = 1110 GALLONS REQUIRED Use a 1250-gallon grease interceptor. Engineers shall design for a 90 day pump out cycle. It allows for a safety factor of design when we don’t know the true concentrations of effluent that will be coming from an establishment’s kitchen. If concentrations are higher, then the cleaning frequency can be adjusted typically in the first 3 months of the establishment’s startup. Most plumbing ordinances require a monitoring period (0-6 months) to access the grease interceptor system so its implementation can be successful. SUMMARY: Grease Interceptor sizing based on effluent flow resulted in a 500-gallon grease interceptor needed to treat flow (375 gpm) and retain the FOG in the tank (SF = 4). (13.6 CF ÷ 30.1 CF) x 90 = approx. 40 days for pump out. Grease interceptor sizing based on maintenance pump out frequency of 90 days and 500 meals/day resulted in a 1000-gallon grease interceptor for an establishment producing FOG at approximately 0.035#/meal. 500 gallon→ ~ 40 days maintenance pump out, Qmax 375 gpm 1000 gallon → ~ 90 days maintenance pump out, Qmax 375 gpm Sound engineering judgement = Use a 1000-gallon gravity grease interceptor 21 161 162 163 164 165 7/29/25, 2:23 PM 1000002283.jpg • 4r"I - , - ,. '7 f 1 ilk? 44. ,,r , • •-•-,. • 4 'A ;1,. e -1. :,,," i • : -.., .., , I ... , '.- I.: - II. .. 1 a. lb '4, ..1 , ,• . 4' 1/..., 04' .... • .. . J ip7 Play (Ctrl+P) ikii441111iiii 1 141 'TO ( 11, 2 0.1 0 166 https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/QgrcJHrhwLqDcm=gVVPqtgCfkQCMgdHdLl?projector=1 1/1 7/29/25, 2:23 PM 1000002287.jpg SoirrAPY 459Ae N(1ypiod. https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/KtbxLvHLqKJwLxNJtTRfZQvUhmbsqmNZL?projector=1 167 1/1 7/29/25, 2:22 PM 1000002289.jpg 168 1/1 https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/KtbxLwHDkDCZjpjvqDwZ5NQbNmKMWSNQjV?projector=1 7/29/25, 2:22 PM 1000002290.jpg 169 1/1 https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/QgrcJHrtwMVmVBZkMjPZiwLcFmgkjnSfWFv?projector=1 7/29/25, 2:23 PM 1000002284.jpg https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inboWFFNDWMtcwXJJrSxjqGJkBbxBxfnrbhhS?projector=1 170 1/1 7/29/25, 2:22 PM 1000002288 jpg https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/ttinbox/agrcJHsBvFOKKzhzRqsfDNbCGhzJsPBxKKG?projector=1 171 111 ORDER NO DATE ALTA CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT CO CUSTOMER NO SWA798219 08-14-2025 BP0018744 G3283 S DORT HIGHWAY PAYMENT TERMS BURTON MI 48529-1446 CUSTOMER PO NET 30 DAYS REVIEWING WITH BRIAN/BEN 7/31 SERVICE INVOICE ( PROFORMA ) INVOICE TO: WORK SITE: CITY OF TAYLOR CITY OF TAYLOR COMPOST SITE 23555 GODDARD 16300 RACHO RD TAYLOR MI 48180 TAYLOR MI 48180 SALESPERSON: JULIE SOPHA SERVICE ORDER: SWA798219 CONTACT: DAVE 313 477 0770 REF: BACKHUS MODEL: A55 S/N: 1134 CUST UNIT: UNIT: EQ0079474 METER: 2,356.63 SEGMENT: 10 EMISSIONS EMISSION SYSTEM CUSTOMER - POWER SYSTEM (CE) SEGMENT TYPE: Chargeable BACKHUS MODEL: A55 S/N: 1134 CUST UNIT: UNIT: EQ0079474 METER: 2,356.63 WORK SITE: CITY OF TAYLOR COMPOST SITE 16300 RACHO RD TAYLOR MI 48180 LOCATION: WORK DESCRIPTION: EMISSION ISSUE CORRECTION: 3/10/25 FRANK B INSPECTED UNIT CHECKED FOR DTC FOUND DTCS: SCR SYSTEM DOSING FAILURE; INACTIVE HEALED REDUCTANT INJECTION VALVE CONTROL; NO SIGNAL ACTIVE SYSTEM VOLTAGE; INACTIVE REDUCTANT INJECTION VALVE; ACTUATOR STUCK CLOSED. REMOVED INJECTOR AND INSPECTED FOUND INJECTOR CRUSTED OVER AND SLIGHT BUILDUP INSIDE THE PIPE. CLEANED INJECTOR TIP. PERFORMED INJECTOR SPRAY AND VOLUME TESTS. PASSED SPRAY AND SMALL VOLUME TESTS BUT FAILED LARGE VOLUME TEST (5.4 OUNCES INSTEAD OF 6.5 OUNCES). PASSED PRESSURE BUILD UP TEST. PERFORMED UREA ADAPTATION RESET AFTER CLEARING DTC. 3/11/25 FRANK B REMOVED FILTERS FROM THE DEF PUMP AND VERIFIED HAD NO DEBRIS. CLEANED FILTERS 3/19/25 FRANK B REPLACED DEF PUMP WITH TEST PUMP PERFORMED TESTING. TEST PUMP HAS LOWER OUTPUT THAN OLD PUMP. 5/5/25 FRANK B RESET AND CLEANED DOSING VALVE 5/6/25 FRANK B CLEARED DTC’S PAGE NO: 1 of 3 172 ORDER NO DATE ALTA CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT CO CUSTOMER NO SWA798219 08-14-2025 BP0018744 G3283 S DORT HIGHWAY PAYMENT TERMS BURTON MI 48529-1446 CUSTOMER PO NET 30 DAYS REVIEWING WITH BRIAN/BEN 7/31 SERVICE INVOICE ( PROFORMA ) PERFORMED EATS AND DOSING TESTS 5/7/25 FRANK B CLEANED THE DOSING VALVE AND RESET DTC PLUGGED INTO UNIT PERFORMED EATS LOG TESTS WHILE CUSTOMER OPERATED THE UNIT. TEST RAN UNTIL UNIT DERATED AND STARTED TO LOSE POWER THE SAME DTC SHOWED UP ON CONTROLLER SCREEN. STOPPED UNIT AND INSPECTED DOSING VALVE. FOUND VALVE CLOGGED UP CLEANED AND REPLACED. CLEARED DTC. 5/14/25 FRANK B FOUND UNIT IN DERATE RESET DTC AND CLEAN DOSING NOZZLE. PERFORMED TESTING 5/21/25 FRANK B RESET AND CLEANED DOSING VALVE 5/22/25 FRANK B RESET DTC AND CLEANED NOZZLE. 5/23/25 FRANK B RESET DTC AND CLEANED NOZZLE 5/27/25 FRANK B PERFORMED TESTING AND CLEANED DOSING VALVE 5/29/25 FRANK B INSTALLED NEW PUMP AND TESTED. DOSING SIX OUNCES VS THE 4.5 OUNCES. RESET UREA COUNTER. 5/30/25 FRANK B RESET EMISSIONS CODE AND CLEANED OUT NOZZLE. PERFORMED DOSING TESTS. CUSTOMER STATED UNIT FAILED LESS THAN HR LATER RETURNED TO SITE CHECKED THE DOSING VALVE; CLEAN 6/2/25 FRANK B INSPECTED DOSING VALVE VERIFIED VALVE IS DOSING PERFORMED VOLUME TESTS; ONLY FLOWING FOUR OUNCES 6/6/25 FRANK B RESET DTC 6/10/25 FRANK B RESET DTC 6/11/25 FRANK B INSPECTED UNIT FOUND THE HARNESSES AND LINES ASSOCIATED WITH THE ACM AND DEF PUMP WERE DAMAGED. THE EXPOSED WIRES AND MELTED CONNECTORS WERE TOO CLOSE TO A HEAT SOURCE AND MELTED THE PROTECTIVE LOOM. FOUND FOUR HARNESSES/HOSES THAT NEED TO BE REPLACED: 6/18/25 FRANK B PAGE NO: 2 of 3 173 ORDER NO DATE ALTA CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT CO CUSTOMER NO SWA798219 08-14-2025 BP0018744 G3283 S DORT HIGHWAY PAYMENT TERMS BURTON MI 48529-1446 CUSTOMER PO NET 30 DAYS REVIEWING WITH BRIAN/BEN 7/31 SERVICE INVOICE ( PROFORMA ) DELIVERED PUMP AND DOSING VALVE TO CUSTOMER. ***THANK YOU FOR CHOOSING ALTA EQUIPMENT*** ITEM / DESCRIPTION QTY B/O PRICE CORE TOTAL Lot ID HARNESS 1 0 459.00 459.00 HOSE 1 0 663.00 663.00 HOSE 1 0 663.00 663.00 HOSE 1 0 326.40 326.40 MISC - SERVICE SUPPLIES PART 1.00 350.00 350.00 FUEL SURCHARGE 1.00 7.95 7.95 MISC - SHIPPING AND HANDLING 1.00 58.07 58.07 LABOR 5,500.00 SEGMENT 10 TOTAL: 2,111.40 PARTS 5,500.00 LABOR 416.02 MISC. 0.00 TAX 8,027.42 TOTAL PARTS 2,111.40 LABOR 5,500.00 MISC. 416.02 SALES TAX 0.00 TOTAL INVOICE 8,027.42 PAGE NO: 3 of 3 174 ORDER NO DATE ALTA CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT CO CUSTOMER NO SWA798219 06-27-2025 BP0018744 G3283 S DORT HIGHWAY PAYMENT TERMS BURTON MI 48529-1446 CUSTOMER PO NET 30 DAYS SERVICE INVOICE ( PROFORMA ) INVOICE TO: WORK SITE: CITY OF TAYLOR CITY OF TAYLOR COMPOST SITE 23555 GODDARD 16300 RACHO RD TAYLOR MI 48180 TAYLOR MI 48180 SALESPERSON: JULIE SOPHA SERVICE ORDER: SWA798219 CONTACT: DAVE 313 477 0770 REF: BACKHUS MODEL: A55 S/N: 1134 CUST UNIT: UNIT: EQ0079474 METER: 2,356.63 SEGMENT: 10 EMISSIONS EMISSION SYSTEM CUSTOMER - POWER SYSTEM (CE) SEGMENT TYPE: Chargeable BACKHUS MODEL: A55 S/N: 1134 CUST UNIT: UNIT: EQ0079474 METER: 2,356.63 WORK SITE: CITY OF TAYLOR COMPOST SITE 16300 RACHO RD TAYLOR MI 48180 LOCATION: WORK DESCRIPTION: EMISSION ISSUE CORRECTION: 3/10/25 FRANK B INSPECTED UNIT CHECKED FOR DTC FOUND DTCS: SCR SYSTEM DOSING FAILURE; INACTIVE HEALED REDUCTANT INJECTION VALVE CONTROL; NO SIGNAL ACTIVE SYSTEM VOLTAGE; INACTIVE REDUCTANT INJECTION VALVE; ACTUATOR STUCK CLOSED. REMOVED INJECTOR AND INSPECTED FOUND INJECTOR CRUSTED OVER AND SLIGHT BUILDUP INSIDE THE PIPE. CLEANED INJECTOR TIP. PERFORMED INJECTOR SPRAY AND VOLUME TESTS. PASSED SPRAY AND SMALL VOLUME TESTS BUT FAILED LARGE VOLUME TEST (5.4 OUNCES INSTEAD OF 6.5 OUNCES). PASSED PRESSURE BUILD UP TEST. PERFORMED UREA ADAPTATION RESET AFTER CLEARING DTC. 3/11/25 FRANK B REMOVED FILTERS FROM THE DEF PUMP AND VERIFIED HAD NO DEBRIS. CLEANED FILTERS 3/19/25 FRANK B REPLACED DEF PUMP WITH TEST PUMP PERFORMED TESTING. TEST PUMP HAS LOWER OUTPUT THAN OLD PUMP. 5/5/25 FRANK B RESET AND CLEANED DOSING VALVE 5/6/25 FRANK B CLEARED DTC’S PAGE NO: 1 of 4 175 ORDER NO DATE ALTA CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT CO CUSTOMER NO SWA798219 06-27-2025 BP0018744 G3283 S DORT HIGHWAY PAYMENT TERMS BURTON MI 48529-1446 CUSTOMER PO NET 30 DAYS SERVICE INVOICE ( PROFORMA ) PERFORMED EATS AND DOSING TESTS 5/7/25 FRANK B CLEANED THE DOSING VALVE AND RESET DTC PLUGGED INTO UNIT PERFORMED EATS LOG TESTS WHILE CUSTOMER OPERATED THE UNIT. TEST RAN UNTIL UNIT DERATED AND STARTED TO LOSE POWER THE SAME DTC SHOWED UP ON CONTROLLER SCREEN. STOPPED UNIT AND INSPECTED DOSING VALVE. FOUND VALVE CLOGGED UP CLEANED AND REPLACED. CLEARED DTC. 5/14/25 FRANK B FOUND UNIT IN DERATE RESET DTC AND CLEAN DOSING NOZZLE. PERFORMED TESTING 5/21/25 FRANK B RESET AND CLEANED DOSING VALVE 5/22/25 FRANK B RESET DTC AND CLEANED NOZZLE. 5/23/25 FRANK B RESET DTC AND CLEANED NOZZLE 5/27/25 FRANK B PERFORMED TESTING AND CLEANED DOSING VALVE 5/29/25 FRANK B INSTALLED NEW PUMP AND TESTED. DOSING SIX OUNCES VS THE 4.5 OUNCES. RESET UREA COUNTER. 5/30/25 FRANK B RESET EMISSIONS CODE AND CLEANED OUT NOZZLE. PERFORMED DOSING TESTS. CUSTOMER STATED UNIT FAILED LESS THAN HR LATER RETURNED TO SITE CHECKED THE DOSING VALVE; CLEAN 6/2/25 FRANK B INSPECTED DOSING VALVE VERIFIED VALVE IS DOSING PERFORMED VOLUME TESTS; ONLY FLOWING FOUR OUNCES 6/6/25 FRANK B RESET DTC 6/10/25 FRANK B RESET DTC 6/11/25 FRANK B INSPECTED UNIT FOUND THE HARNESSES AND LINES ASSOCIATED WITH THE ACM AND DEF PUMP WERE DAMAGED. THE EXPOSED WIRES AND MELTED CONNECTORS WERE TOO CLOSE TO A HEAT SOURCE AND MELTED THE PROTECTIVE LOOM. FOUND FOUR HARNESSES/HOSES THAT NEED TO BE REPLACED: 6/18/25 FRANK B PAGE NO: 2 of 4 176 ORDER NO DATE ALTA CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT CO CUSTOMER NO SWA798219 06-27-2025 BP0018744 G3283 S DORT HIGHWAY PAYMENT TERMS BURTON MI 48529-1446 CUSTOMER PO NET 30 DAYS SERVICE INVOICE ( PROFORMA ) DELIVERED PUMP AND DOSING VALVE TO CUSTOMER. ***THANK YOU FOR CHOOSING ALTA EQUIPMENT*** ITEM / DESCRIPTION QTY B/O PRICE CORE TOTAL Lot ID HARNESS 1 0 459.00 459.00 HOSE 1 0 663.00 663.00 HOSE 1 0 663.00 663.00 HOSE 1 0 326.40 326.40 MISC - SERVICE SUPPLIES PART 1.00 350.00 350.00 FUEL SURCHARGE 1.00 7.95 7.95 MISC - SHIPPING AND HANDLING 1.00 58.07 58.07 LABOR 17,838.75 SEGMENT 10 TOTAL: 2,111.40 PARTS 17,838.75 LABOR 416.02 MISC. 0.00 TAX 20,366.17 TOTAL PAGE NO: 3 of 4 177 ORDER NO DATE ALTA CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT CO CUSTOMER NO SWA798219 06-27-2025 BP0018744 G3283 S DORT HIGHWAY PAYMENT TERMS BURTON MI 48529-1446 CUSTOMER PO NET 30 DAYS SERVICE INVOICE ( PROFORMA ) PARTS 2,111.40 LABOR 17,838.75 MISC. 416.02 SALES TAX 0.00 TOTAL INVOICE 20,366.17 PAGE NO: 4 of 4 178 Quotation 6874 MIDDLEBELT ROAD ROMULUS, MI 48174 Information www.grainger.com Grainger Quote Number 2061725864 (800)472-4643 Quote Start Date 07/29/2025 Quote Expiration Date 08/28/2025 Creation Date 07/29/2025 Grainger EIN Number 36-1150280 PO # Customer Information PO Create Date CITY OF TAYLOR BUILDING MAINT PO Release # NONE 22805 GODDARD RD Customer Number 803159367 TAYLOR MI 48180-4170 Department Number NONE Project/Job Number NONE Requisitioner Name GUIDO ULIN Attention GUIDO ULIN Caller GUIDO ULIN Billing Information Telephone Number 7343743906 CITY OF TAYLOR Page 1 /2 23555 GODDARD RD TAYLOR MI 48180-4116 Shipping Information CITY OF TAYLOR BUILDING MAINT Freight Forwarder 22805 GODDARD RD TAYLOR MI 48180-4170 We will deliver according to the following terms and conditions: Incoterms® 2020: FOB DESTINATION Freight Terms: Prepaid + Fee Carrier: * See line item detail Payment Terms: Net 30 days after invoice date Special Instructions: Item Material Description Expected Qty Unit Price Total PO-Line Del Date in USD 10 846VZ6 PortableAirConditioner,700sqft,Black 5.00 EA 4,438.08 22,190.40 Manufacturer: MOVINCOOL Part Number: CLIMATE PRO K18E Carrier: Origin: JP 20 5AE93 Warm Air Duct, 10 ft L, Polypropylene 5.00 EA 135.21 676.05 Manufacturer: MOVINCOOL Part Number: LAY45771-0060 Carrier: 179 SOFTWAREAG Quotation 6874 MIDDLEBELT ROAD Information ROMULUS, MI 48174 Grainger Quote Number 2061725864 www.grainger.com Creation Date 07/29/2025 (800)472-4643 Customer Number 803159367 Page 2 /2 Item Material Description Expected Qty Unit Price Total PO-Line Del Date in USD Origin: US ______________ Sub Total 22,866.45 Estimated Shipping 0.00 Estimated Other Shipping 159.00 ______________ Total USD $ 23,025.45 Thank you for the opportunity to provide this quotation. Please reference our Grainger quote number when you are ready to place your order. Any changes to the products and/or quantities identified in the quotation may result in different pricing. If Grainger's cost to supply a product increases due to changes in laws, tariffs, commodity prices, or unforeseen events like the COVID-19 pandemic during the quote period, Grainger reserves the right to adjust the product price. Quoted shipping charges and delivery date are subject to change. Upon acceptance of the quotation by customer.Grainger will provide actual shipping charges for the order, if applicable. This transaction is subject to the current contract between customer and Grainger; or if no contract exists, the Terms of Sale as set forth on https://grainger.com/ 180 SOFTWAREAG 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 Proposal for: City of Taylor, Wayne County MI June 20, 2025 Quoted by: Steve Rennell Software and Services for BS&A Cloud Thank you for the opportunity to quote our software and services. At BS&A, we are focused on delivering unparalleled service, solutions, support, and customer satisfaction. You’ll see this in our literature, but it’s not just a marketing strategy... it’s a mindset deeply embedded in our DNA. Our goal is to provide such remarkable customer service that our customers feel compelled to remark about it. We are extremely proud of the many long-term customer relationships we have built. Our success is directly correlated with putting the customer first and consistently choosing to listen. Delivering unparalleled customer service is the foundation of our company. BS&A Software 14965 Abbey Lane Bath MI 48808 (855) BSA-SOFT bsasoftware.com 196 Cost Summary Software is licensed for use only by municipality identified on the cover page. If used for additional entities or agencies, please contact BS&A for appropriate pricing. Prices subject to change if the actual count is significantly different than the estimated count. Module fees are charged annually and include unlimited support. Cloud Modules - Annual Fee Financial Management GL-General Ledger $8,315.00 Total $8,315.00 Community Development BD-Building Department $26,810.00 BL-Business License $13,205.00 Total $40,015.00 BS&A Online CD-Building $11,805.00 Total $11,805.00 Utility Billing UB- Utility Billing $27,600.00 Total $27,600.00 Platform ePlanSoft Integration $2,635.00 Total $2,635.00 Subtotal $90,370.00 City of Taylor, Wayne County MI Q-01890 | June 20, 2025 Prices good through October 15, 2025 Page 2 of 5 197 Data Conversions/Database Setup UB-Conversion-New World $35,400.00 Accounts, Services, Deposits, Rates, Meters; Billing & Payment History, Service for up to 5 years BD-Conversion-New World $40,485.00 Setup of Permit and Enforcement Types, Fee Schedules, Permit and Enforcement History for up to 5 years BL-Conversion-New World $26,015.00 Setup of License Types, Fee Schedules, conversion of Businesses and License History for up to 5 years Total $101,900.00 Customization Custom Export Custom Journal Entry Export $4,000.00 Total $4,000.00 Project Management and Implementation Planning Services include: - Analyzing customer processes to ensure all critical components are addressed. - Creating and managing the project schedule in accordance with the customer's existing processes and needs. - Planning and scheduling training around any planned process changes included in the project plan. - Modifying the project schedule as needed to accommodate any changes to the scope and requirements of the project that are discovered. - Providing a central contact between the customer’s project leaders, developers, trainers, IT staff, conversion staff, and other resources required throughout the transition period. - Installing the software and providing IT consultation for network, server, and workstation configuration and requirements. - Reviewing and addressing the specifications for needed customizations to meet customer needs (when applicable). Total $62,285.00 City of Taylor, Wayne County MI Q-01890 | June 20, 2025 Prices good through October 15, 2025 Page 3 of 5 198 Implementation and Training - $1,325/day - Days quoted are estimates; you are billed for actual days used - Training days quoted/billed in full day increments only Services include: - Setting up users and user security rights for each application - Performing final process and procedure review - Configuring custom settings in each application to fit the needs of the customer - Setting up application integration and workflow methods - Onsite verification of converted data for balancing and auditing purposes - Training and Go-Live Setup Days ITS Setup - FM Setup Days: 1 $1,325.00 ITS Setup - CD Setup Days: 2 $2,650.00 ITS Setup – UB Setup Days: 4 $5,300.00 Total Setup Days: 7 Subtotal: $9,275.00 Training Days ITS Training - FM Training Days: 1 $1,325.00 ITS Training - CD Training Days: 36 $47,700.00 ITS Training - BSAO Training Days: 2 $2,650.00 ITS Training - UB Training Days: 26 $34,450.00 ITS Training - Platform Training Days: 4 $5,300.00 Total Training Days: 69 Subtotal: $91,425.00 Total Days: 76 Total: $100,700.00 City of Taylor, Wayne County MI Q-01890 | June 20, 2025 Prices good through October 15, 2025 Page 4 of 5 199 Post-Go Live Assistance - Review and consult on streamlining day-to-day activities as they relate to the processes within the BS&A modules - Assist customers with more detailed and advanced report options available within the BS&A modules - Revisit commonly-used procedures discussed during training - As needs arise, provide assistance with bank reconciliations - $1,325/day - Days quoted are estimates; you are billed for actual days used Post-Go Live for all modules for which training was performed Training Days: 16 $21,200.00 Cost Totals Cloud New Purchase – Annual Fee Subtotal $90,370.00 Data Conversion/Database Setup Subtotal $101,900.00 Customization Subtotal $4,000.00 Project Management and Implementation Planning Subtotal $62,285.00 Implementation and Training Subtotal $100,700.00 Post-Go Live Assistance Subtotal $21,200.00 Total Proposed $380,455.00 Estimated Travel Expenses are not outlined in this proposal. The final invoice will reflect actual expenses following the completion of all training activities based on the Federal Guidelines described below. $160/$185/$225 per day hotel, varies by state $90 per day car rental $70 per day meals $730 per trip airfare/related expenses $0.70/mile round trip for drive distance BS&A Online Connection Requirements BS&A Cloud modules require a high-speed internet connection (cable modem or DSL). City of Taylor, Wayne County MI Q-01890 | June 20, 2025 Prices good through October 15, 2025 Page 5 of 5 200 201 CITY OF TAYLOR SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION FORM INSTRUCTIONS: Complete this entire form, including BOTH SECTIONS I and II for all sole source purchases. Send the completed form to the Budget & Finance Department, Central Purchasing. In compliance with Section 4.12 of the City of Taylor Purchasing Policy, this document shall accompany any sole source request to the City Council as part of council package for review and consideration. Failure to provide the requested information and supporting documentation will most likely result in postponement. If you have any questions, or need additional assistance, contact the Purchasing Office at 734.374.1459 or 734.374.1396. Information is also available at http://www.cityoftaylor.com/purchasing. NOTE: 1. Price is never a basis for a sole source request. 2. Supporting documentation must accompany this form. Requisition Title (or) #: Papercut Support Renewal Commodity/service being purchased: Support Agreement Proposed purchase price: $ 4,847.21 Proposed / Requested Supplier: Ricoh Requested by: Ryan Moore Department: IT Date: 9/2/2025 Email/phone #: rmoore@ci.taylor.mi.us Sole source justification prepared by: Ryan Moore I. SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION 1. A Sole Source Purchase is available from only one supplier and meets at least one of the following criteria (please check the appropriate boxes): One-of-a-kind- The commodity or service has no competitive product alternatives on the market. Compatibility - The commodity or service matches existing brand of equipment for compatibility. Replacement part - The commodity is a replacement part for a specific brand of existing equipment. Unique design - The commodity or service meets physical design or quality requirements. Professional Service - The service falls under the Purchasing Policy Professional Service Section 4.10. If any of the above apply – Are you aware of other sources (other than the one requested) that could offer the exact brand or service, such as a distributor, third party broker, or reseller? If so, please list possible sources. OR Delivery date - ONLY ONE SUPPLIER can meet necessary delivery date requirement for the required quantity on . Emergency - URGENT NEED for the item or service does not permit soliciting competitive bids, as in cases of emergencies, disaster, etc., which was required on 2. Briefly explain what it is about this product or service that only this vendor can meet: Ricoh is the preferred reseller for PaperCut and current copier vendor. 1| P a g e 202 CITY OF TAYLOR SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION FORM 3. Indicate if the product or service has been purchased for this department in the past, the approximate date of purchase, and purchase order number, if known: 4. List the specific important features or specific performance specifications or parameters that make this product or service unique or proprietary, AND indicate specifically why these unique features are important to your department operations: Ricoh is the preferred reseller for PaperCut and current copier vendor. 5. List other suppliers generally believed to offer the same or very similar product or service. Indicate if they were contacted for a description and/or price of their product or service. If they were not contacted, indicate why they were omitted. Indicate for each specifically why their product or service is judged to be unacceptable. a) b) c) II. DOCUMENTATION OF PRICE REASONABLENESS Check the box(es) that apply and provide information: 1. I determined that the price is reasonable for one of the following reasons: (a) I compared the proposed price to prices I previously paid for the same or similar goods and/or services. See PO# (Specify price: $ ) (b) I compared the proposed price to current published catalog, price lists, or market prices as documented in the attachments (attach relevant documentation) and the proposed price is less. (c) I compared the proposal price to similar benchmarks, (e.g., dollars per pound, horsepower, or other units of measure) to identify any gross inconsistencies. Describe comparisons made: (d) Based on my knowledge of the market, my experience of prior similar proposals. Describe basis of market knowledge or reference prior proposals: Per item rates are fir pricing for services rendered. (e) The price is set by law or regulations. Provide reference to law or regulation: (f) The goods or services are available on the market for the same or similar price. Provide reference to market pricing information: 2. Sections 1 (a) through (f) do not apply. (Purchasing will contact you to discuss price reasonableness before a requisition can be processed.) 2| P a g e 203 CITY OF TAYLOR SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION FORM III. CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT The Requestor agrees that there is no real or potential Conflict of Interest in recommending this product and/or service as a Sole Source procurement. (NOTE: If you do have a real or potential conflict of interest, please contact the appropriate Purchasing Agent.) As the authorized department official, I certify that the above justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief. Approval: _____________________________________________ 8/25/2025 Signature of Department Head Date Ryan Moore Printed Name 3| P a g e 204 205 CITY OF TAYLOR SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION FORM INSTRUCTIONS: Complete this entire form, including BOTH SECTIONS I and II for all sole source purchases. Send the completed form to the Budget & Finance Department, Central Purchasing. In compliance with Section 4.12 of the City of Taylor Purchasing Policy, this document shall accompany any sole source request to the City Council as part of council package for review and consideration. Failure to provide the requested information and supporting documentation will most likely result in postponement. If you have any questions, or need additional assistance, contact the Purchasing Office at 734.374.1459 or 734.374.1396. Information is also available at http://www.cityoftaylor.com/purchasing. NOTE: 1. Price is never a basis for a sole source request. 2. Supporting documentation must accompany this form. Requisition Title (or) #: RedSky E911 Commodity/service being purchased: License Proposed purchase price: $ 7,426.50 Proposed / Requested Supplier: CBTS Requested by: Ryan Moore Department: IT Date: 9/2/2025 Email/phone #: Sole source justification prepared by: Ryan Moore I. SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION 1. A Sole Source Purchase is available from only one supplier and meets at least one of the following criteria (please check the appropriate boxes): One-of-a-kind- The commodity or service has no competitive product alternatives on the market. Compatibility - The commodity or service matches existing brand of equipment for compatibility. Replacement part - The commodity is a replacement part for a specific brand of existing equipment. Unique design - The commodity or service meets physical design or quality requirements. Professional Service - The service falls under the Purchasing Policy Professional Service Section 4.10. If any of the above apply – Are you aware of other sources (other than the one requested) that could offer the exact brand or service, such as a distributor, third party broker, or reseller? If so, please list possible sources. OR Delivery date - ONLY ONE SUPPLIER can meet necessary delivery date requirement for the required quantity on . Emergency - URGENT NEED for the item or service does not permit soliciting competitive bids, as in cases of emergencies, disaster, etc., which was required on 2. Briefly explain what it is about this product or service that only this vendor can meet: CBTS is the City of Taylor’s E911 service reseller. 1| P a g e 206 CITY OF TAYLOR SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION FORM 3. Indicate if the product or service has been purchased for this department in the past, the approximate date of purchase, and purchase order number, if known: 4. List the specific important features or specific performance specifications or parameters that make this product or service unique or proprietary, AND indicate specifically why these unique features are important to your department operations: Maintenance is direct from preferred reseller 5. List other suppliers generally believed to offer the same or very similar product or service. Indicate if they were contacted for a description and/or price of their product or service. If they were not contacted, indicate why they were omitted. Indicate for each specifically why their product or service is judged to be unacceptable. a) b) c) II. DOCUMENTATION OF PRICE REASONABLENESS Check the box(es) that apply and provide information: 1. I determined that the price is reasonable for one of the following reasons: (a) I compared the proposed price to prices I previously paid for the same or similar goods and/or services. See PO# (Specify price: $ ) (b) I compared the proposed price to current published catalog, price lists, or market prices as documented in the attachments (attach relevant documentation) and the proposed price is less. (c) I compared the proposal price to similar benchmarks, (e.g., dollars per pound, horsepower, or other units of measure) to identify any gross inconsistencies. Describe comparisons made: (d) Based on my knowledge of the market, my experience of prior similar proposals. Describe basis of market knowledge or reference prior proposals: Rate is at market for services. (e) The price is set by law or regulations. Provide reference to law or regulation: (f) The goods or services are available on the market for the same or similar price. Provide reference to market pricing information: 2. Sections 1 (a) through (f) do not apply. (Purchasing will contact you to discuss price reasonableness before a requisition can be processed.) 2| P a g e 207 CITY OF TAYLOR SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION FORM III. CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT The Requestor agrees that there is no real or potential Conflict of Interest in recommending this product and/or service as a Sole Source procurement. (NOTE: If you do have a real or potential conflict of interest, please contact the appropriate Purchasing Agent.) As the authorized department official, I certify that the above justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief. Approval: _____________________________________________ 8/25/2025 Signature of Department Head Date Ryan Moore Printed Name 3| P a g e 208 City of Taylor RedSky - Services Support Quotation Customer Contact Account Representative Name: Ryan Moore Name: Charlie Mitchell Email: rmoore@ci.taylor.mi.us Email: charlie.mitchell@cbts.com Address: 23555 Goddard Rd Taylor, MI 48180 Quote Fields Service Representative Quote Number: QTV 4.07.18.167588 Name: Angela Link Quote Date: 8/5/2025 Email: angela.link@cbts.com Quote Expiration: 9/10/2025 Billing Cycle: Prepaid Term of Support: 9/10/2025 through 9/9/2026 Notes Quote Summary Contract ID Renewal Price MRS10366 $7,426.50 Total $7,426.50 Terms and Conditions See Tab 2 for details CBTS Technology Solutions LLC 25 Merchant St. Cincinnati, OH 45246 This quote constitutes an offer to sell products and services contained herein. Freight and taxes are not included in the quote total unless otherwise indicated and are subject to change upon final invoice. CBTS may send multiple invoices as a result of this quote if the quote incorporated both products and services. Due to uncertainty posed by impending tariffs by the United States, CBTS' suppliers have conditioned their acceptance of purchase orders on the condition that they may pass through tariff-related surcharges. As a result, CBTS' pricing may be impacted by an increase in price related to tariffs before or after a quote is presented or a PO issued by the Client. CBTS reserves the right to amend the price if the supplier exercises their rights to increase prices as a result of changes in tariffs before shipment. Absent any negotiated agreement between the parties, this quote shall be governed by the Master Services, Products, and License Agreement available at https://www.cbts.com/master-services-products-and license-agreement/. CLIENT’S ACCEPTANCE OF THE QUOTE IS EXCLUSIVELY LIMITED TO ACCEPTANCE OF CBTS’ TERMS. CBTS HEREBY OBJECTS TO AND REJECTS ANY PROPOSAL BY CLIENT FOR ADDITIONAL OR DIFFERENT TERMS. Name: __________________________________________________________ Title: _________________________________________________________ Authorized Signature_____________________________________________________Date:________________________________________ 209 QTY Start Date End Date Extended Price Service Part Number Service Description Address City State Zip 100 09/10/2025 09/09/2026 $ 2,904.00 RS-6780(RN) 0-99 MY E911 CLIENT + E911 ANYWHERE SERV RENEWAL 23555 Goddard Rd Taylor MI 48180 250 09/10/2025 09/09/2026 $ 4,522.50 RS-6762(RN) E911 ANYWHERE NETWORK SERVICEFEE 200-499 RENEWAL 23555 Goddard Rd Taylor MI 48180 210 211 Page 1 of 2 SecureAuth Corporation Sales Order #: Q-30808 49 Discovery, Suite 220 Quote Date: 4/11/2025 Irvine, California 92618 Expiration Date: 9/3/2025 United States Payment Terms: Net 30 Account Executive: Terry Enz Phone: (949) 777-6959 Email: terry@secureauth.com Sales Order Customer Name (Bill To) Ship To (Used for sales tax determination) City of Taylor City of Taylor 23555 Goddard Rd , Taylor, Michigan 48180 United States Billing Contact Technical Contact Name: Ryan Moore Name: Phone: (734) 287-2100 Phone: Email: rmoore@ci.taylor.mi.us Email: PRODUCT PRODUCT CODE TERM START END DATE QTY UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE (Months) DATE SecureAuth IdP VM-Windows 12.0000 9/13/2025 9/12/2026 1 $436.8320 $436.83 virtual appliance on Windows IdP - PROTECT - IdP - PRO 12.0000 9/13/2025 9/12/2026 350 $18.5977 $6,509.20 Unlimited Apps TOTAL: $6,946.03 Invoice Date Customer Total Upon Execution $6,946.03 TOTAL: $6,946.03 Terms and Conditions General. This Quote is subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the: • "The Agreement between the Parties" dated 9/21/2010 SecureAuth www.secureauth.com +1 949-777-6959 212 Page 2 of 2 • The STANDARD GLOBAL SUPPORT & MAINTENANCE POLICY located at https://www.secureauth.com/legal/support-terms.pdf (collectively the “Agreement”) and as of its execution becomes an Order and part of the Agreement. “Order” means a quotation or statement or work provided by Company that specifies the products and services ordered by Customer and related fees and includes a unique Company reference number. The Agreement and Order(s) contain the entire agreement terms with respect to Customer’s purchase of the products and services described in this Order and supersede any prior or contemporaneous proposal, understanding, agreement, negotiations and representations, oral or written. Any inconsistent or additional terms of Customer’s purchase order or any other Customer document are excluded regardless of Company accepting the purchase order or other Customer document for payment. In the event of any conflict between this Order and the Agreement, this Order will control only with respect to the products and services described on this Order. Capitalized terms that are used but not defined in this Order have the meanings given to them elsewhere in the Agreement. The individual signing below on behalf of Customer represents to Company that he or she is authorized to sign on Customer’s behalf and that Customer has reviewed, understands and agrees to the terms of the Agreement and to purchase the products and services described in this Order for the duration of the Term. Effective Date. The Order is effective on the later date in the signature blocks below. This Order is non-cancellable after the Effective Date. Quote Expiration. This Quote is voidable by the Company if not fully executed by the parties by the Expiration Date above. After the Expiration Date, all details and prices are subject to change. Taxes. Prices shown do not include shipping charges or taxes. Any shipping charges and taxes are the responsibility of Customer. This is not an invoice. SMS: Unless and except as set forth above, SMS charges are not included and Customer may incur additional SMS fees. Compliance with Laws; Export. Customer must comply with U.S., foreign, and international laws and regulations, including without limitation those related to data privacy, anti-corruption laws, U.S. Export Administration and Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control regulations, and other anti-boycott and import regulations. Customer’s Purchase Order (P.O.) Requirements for Invoicing Purposes: Customer does not require a P.O. for the Software and Services set forth in this Quote. CUSTOMER: City of Taylor SECUREAUTH CORPORATION Signature: ________________________________ Signature: _________________________________ Printed Name: ____________________________ Printed Name: ______________________________ Title: ___________________________________ Title: ___________________________________ Email: __________________________________ Email: legal@secureauth.com Signature Date: ___________________________ Signature Date: ___________________________ SecureAuth www.secureauth.com +1 949-777-6959 213 214 GHA Technologies, Inc. Quotation (Open) *NEW REMITTANCE ADDRESS* Date Dept #880831 Jul 17, 2025 10:24 AM EDT PO Box 29650 Modified Date Phoenix, Arizona 85038-9650 Aug 14, 2025 10:30 AM EDT United States http://www.gha-associates.com Quote # 2989734 - rev 1 of 1 (P) 480-951-6865 (F) 480-951-6956 Description Yubikey SalesRep Diesbourg, Remi (P) 947-207-0314 (F) 480-951-6956 Customer Contact Moore, Ryan Customer Bill To Ship To City of Taylor (CO150680) City of taylor City of taylor Moore, Ryan 23555 Goddard Road 23555 Goddard Road 23555 Goddard Road Taylor, MI 48180 Taylor, MI 48180 Taylor, MI 48180 United States United States United States Customer PO: Terms: Ship Via: Undefined FedEx Ground Special Instructions: Carrier Account #: # Description Part # Tax Qty Unit Price Total 1 YubiKey 5C NFC FIPS Deal Reg SMB (200-500) Blister 5060408464236 Yes 400 $80.00 $32,000.00 2 New Customer Promotion Discount GHA Promotion Yes 1 $-1,000.00 $-1,000.00 Subtotal: $31,000.00 Tax (.0000%): $0.00 Shipping: $0.00 Misc: $0.00 Total: $31,000.00 Sales tax calculation is estimated and subject to change. Terms Definition: Unless agreed upon otherwise; Net 30 terms, cash in the GHA bank 30 days from the date of shipment. Lease payment calculations are estimated and may include sales tax in the payment amount. You can obtain an accurate lease quote from our leasing company. Rates are subject to change without notice. GHA is an authorized and leading supplier for Microsoft, HP, Apple, Dell, Lenovo, VMWare, IBM and Cisco. GHA does not source any of these products from the gray market. If you have a pending quotation from a competitor that is significantly less in price, that may be a strong indication of gray market involvement. Please immediately bring this to the attention of your sales professional who can verify with the manufacturer for your benefit and protection. Your sales representative can also talk to you about the risks associated with doing business with a gray market supplier. -The prices quoted may change due to market conditions beyond our control. -GHA cannot be responsible for manufacturer availability or delays. -No verbal quotations or promises can be honored unless set forth herein. -Due to many people working from home, GHA will not be responsible for the boxes if lost or stolen after the delivery has been made, and if they are lost or stolen, you still agree to pay your GHA invoice. Signature will be required on all shipments. -Handling Fees: Handling fees charged on shipments are in addition to the freight and insurance charges and vary. -Returns Policy: Cloud Service Provider CSP orders for Microsoft require at least 30 days of cancellation notice from Buyer. Buyer agrees to pay for any cloud subscription usage incurred. For all other CSP s, GHA will pass through and honor the cancellation policy as stated in the original contract whether 30, 60 or 90 days of cancellation notice is required. Custom computers and technology orders are non-cancellable and non-returnable. No return will be accepted after 30 days from the invoice date. Goods accepted for credit upon return will be subject to handling/restocking charge, which shall be not less than 15% of the price of Goods. Custom-made Goods are not subject to cancellation or return under any circumstances. In no case are Goods to be returned without first obtaining Seller's written permission. Goods must be securely packed in the original packaging and delivered to Seller in an undamaged condition with Buyer being solely responsible for paying all return freight expenses and keeping the GHA invoice current within 30 days from the date of shipment regardless of the reason for a return. All returns must be accompanied by an authorized RMA number, which is valid for 15 days after date of issuance. GHA Technologies makes NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE with respect to the goods described hereon. Professional Service Organizations are separate companies from GHA. GHA is not responsible for their workmanship and there is no right to offset payment. -International shipments/returns: Customer is responsible to pay all VAT, duties, customs charges, freight forwarding services, storage, handling, foreign exchange rates/fees, miscellaneous fees from any country, expedited or return freight expenses. Customer shall be liable; GHA is NOT responsible. GHA is not responsible for any return shipment expenses. -Supplier represents and warrants that it is an equal-opportunity employer and does not discriminate on the basis of age, race, creed, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, 215 gender identity, national origin, disability, marital or veteran status, or any other basis that is prohibited by law. -This document shall be governed by the laws of the State of Arizona. -You may view all Terms & Conditions at: https://www.gha-associates.com/terms-and-conditions -THIS QUOTE HAS BEEN PROVIDED FOR CLIENT AND GHA PURPOSES ONLY** -CORPORATE OFFICE: (REMIT PAYMENTS TO THE DEPARTMENT NUMBER AND PO BOX LISTED ABOVE; NO PAYMENTS SHOULD BE MAILED TO THE CORPORATE OFFICE) GHA Technologies, Inc. 8998 E. Raintree Drive Scottsdale, AZ 85260 216 CITY OF TAYLOR SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION FORM INSTRUCTIONS: Complete this entire form, including BOTH SECTIONS I and II for all sole source purchases. Send the completed form to the Budget & Finance Department, Central Purchasing. In compliance with Section 4.12 of the City of Taylor Purchasing Policy, this document shall accompany any sole source request to the City Council as part of council package for review and consideration. Failure to provide the requested information and supporting documentation will most likely result in postponement. If you have any questions, or need additional assistance, contact the Purchasing Office at 734.374.1459 or 734.374.1396. Information is also available at http://www.cityoftaylor.com/purchasing. NOTE: 1. Price is never a basis for a sole source request. 2. Supporting documentation must accompany this form. Requisition Title (or) #: AS400 Programming Support Commodity/service being purchased: Labor Proposed purchase price: $30,000 Proposed / Requested Supplier: Data National Requested by: Ryan Moore Department: IT Date: 9/2/2025 Email/phone #: rmoore@ci.taylor.mi.us Sole source justification prepared by: Ryan Moore I. SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION 1. A Sole Source Purchase is available from only one supplier and meets at least one of the following criteria (please check the appropriate boxes): One-of-a-kind- The commodity or service has no competitive product alternatives on the market. Compatibility - The commodity or service matches existing brand of equipment for compatibility. Replacement part - The commodity is a replacement part for a specific brand of existing equipment. Unique design - The commodity or service meets physical design or quality requirements. Professional Service - The service falls under the Purchasing Policy Professional Service Section 4.10. If any of the above apply – Are you aware of other sources (other than the one requested) that could offer the exact brand or service, such as a distributor, third party broker, or reseller? If so, please list possible sources. OR Delivery date - ONLY ONE SUPPLIER can meet necessary delivery date requirement for the required quantity on . Emergency - URGENT NEED for the item or service does not permit soliciting competitive bids, as in cases of emergencies, disaster, etc., which was required on 2. Briefly explain what it is about this product or service that only this vendor can meet: Data National is the City’s AS400 support vendor. 1| P a g e 217 CITY OF TAYLOR SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION FORM 3. Indicate if the product or service has been purchased for this department in the past, the approximate date of purchase, and purchase order number, if known: 4. List the specific important features or specific performance specifications or parameters that make this product or service unique or proprietary, AND indicate specifically why these unique features are important to your department operations: Data National has vast knowledge of the city’s AS400 system and programming. 5. List other suppliers generally believed to offer the same or very similar product or service. Indicate if they were contacted for a description and/or price of their product or service. If they were not contacted, indicate why they were omitted. Indicate for each specifically why their product or service is judged to be unacceptable. a) b) c) II. DOCUMENTATION OF PRICE REASONABLENESS Check the box(es) that apply and provide information: 1. I determined that the price is reasonable for one of the following reasons: (a) I compared the proposed price to prices I previously paid for the same or similar goods and/or services. See PO# (Specify price: $ ) (b) I compared the proposed price to current published catalog, price lists, or market prices as documented in the attachments (attach relevant documentation) and the proposed price is less. (c) I compared the proposal price to similar benchmarks, (e.g., dollars per pound, horsepower, or other units of measure) to identify any gross inconsistencies. Describe comparisons made: (d) Based on my knowledge of the market, my experience of prior similar proposals. Describe basis of market knowledge or reference prior proposals: Hourly rate is at market for engineering services. (e) The price is set by law or regulations. Provide reference to law or regulation: (f) The goods or services are available on the market for the same or similar price. Provide reference to market pricing information: 2. Sections 1 (a) through (f) do not apply. (Purchasing will contact you to discuss price reasonableness before a requisition can be processed.) 2| P a g e 218 CITY OF TAYLOR SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION FORM III. CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT The Requestor agrees that there is no real or potential Conflict of Interest in recommending this product and/or service as a Sole Source procurement. (NOTE: If you do have a real or potential conflict of interest, please contact the appropriate Purchasing Agent.) As the authorized department official, I certify that the above justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief. Approval: _____________________________________________ 8/25/2025 Signature of Department Head Date Ryan Moore Printed Name 3| P a g e 219 Data National Purchase Agreement FY 2026 PA Vendor Amount Data National $30,000 Total $30,000 220 221 222 223 JULY 25, 2025 Count on us. CITY OF TAYLOR Single Audit Services Proposal Plante & Moran, PLLC 1098 Woodward Ave, Detroit MI 48226 Contact – William Brickey 313-496-7231 224 Table of contents Letter of transmittal ............................................................................................................. 1 Our answers to your questions ......................................................................................... 3 D. Profile of the proposer ........................................................................................................ 4 E. Peer review ..........................................................................................................................10 F. Mandatory criteria .............................................................................................................11 G. Summary of the proposer’s qualifications .....................................................................12 H. Proposer’s approach to the examination ......................................................................17 I. Proposed fee structure .......................................................................................................22 Appendix .............................................................................................................................. 24 Firm profile...............................................................................................................................25 Get to know more about Plante Moran.............................................................................. 26 225 July 27, 2025 Mr. Jason Couture Finance Director/Chief Financial Officer City of Taylor 23555 Goddard Rd Taylor, MI 48180 Dear Jason, Thank you for the opportunity to submit our proposal for single audit services to City of Taylor (“the City”) in response to your RFP #0624525-001. Based on our understanding of your needs, we’ve assembled a team of governmental specialists who will provide your requested federal single audit services with the high level of quality and efficiency you deserve so you can focus your attention on what matters most: serving the needs of your community. However, we don’t just want to check off a series of boxes to complete your engagement — we want to be your first call when you need an expert perspective on the City’s goals and challenges. We know you have many options when it comes to selecting a professional services firm for your single audit, but Plante Moran stands apart from the competition. Here’s what that means for the City: We’ve served more than 1,700 public sector clients across the U.S., including more than 1,300 GASB entities and 500 governmental clients, such as local governments, airports, public transit, public utilities, authorities, pension systems, special districts, and state agencies. Many of these public sector clients require single audits resulting in more than 600 performed annually by the firm. Benefits to the City • We will provide broader insights because we draw on a broader base of knowledge gained from serving not just governmental entities within Michigan but also nationwide. • The City won’t need to train or educate our team since each team member’s career focus is government auditing and performing federal single audits. Our professionals are recognized as industry leaders. We participate in the AICPA, the Government Finance Officers Association (at the national and state level), and professional associations (see page 12). Benefits to the City • You’ll receive advance notice of upcoming legislative changes and guidance, quick answers to difficult questions, and help resolving federal compliance issues. • We monitor the impact of GASB standards, create practical tools to assist our clients with implementation, and provide feedback to the GASB on proposed standards on behalf of our clients. 1 226 • The City will have access to frequent educational programs throughout the year at no additional cost. Our publications and CPE-approved webinars will help you analyze how recent changes in regulations, legislation, and economic conditions could impact the City. Our customized workplan will provide a more efficient and seamless audit experience with on- time delivery. Cornerstones of our service approach include frequent communication throughout the year (not just during the audit) and a higher degree of partner and manager involvement. See more about our workplan on page 17. Benefits to the City • Our most knowledgeable and experienced team members will direct the audit and address any issues with the City as they arise. • Having served the City for over four decades, we have familiarity with the City’s single audit, processes, procedures, and controls, as well as the individuals responsible for these processes, procedures, and controls. • Year-round integration of our professional standards team ensures the City experiences a smooth engagement with no year-end surprises. • We’ll employ easy-to-use technology, templates, and tools for efficient and effective collaboration, document sharing, and status tracking throughout the audit. We prioritize client service over maximizing firm profits. That’s why you’ll work with our most qualified experts for the City’s specific needs, regardless of their home office location or geography. This structure — which you can read more about on page 12 — sets us apart from our competitors. As described in more detail on page 22, our proposed fee would be $15,000 for a single audit with one major program and $10,000 for each additional major program (if required). Our proposal describes how we will serve you, what we’ve done for other clients including the city, and specifics on the timeline, fees, and scope of work. I am authorized to make representations for our proposal and bind Plante & Moran, PLLC. I will follow up promptly to answer any additional questions you might have. Sincerely, William Brickey, CPA Engagement Partner 2 227 Our answers to your questions 3 228 D. Profile of the Proposer 1. State whether the firm is local, regional, national or international. Plante Moran is a nationally recognized professional services firm with a strong regional presence. Our nearly 4,000 professionals serve clients across the United States, supported by a network of offices strategically located to deliver personalized, high-quality service. 2. State the location of the office from which the work is to be done and the number of partners, managers, supervisors, seniors and other professional staff employed at the office. Our team will perform the audit using resources from both our Detroit office, located at 1098 Woodward Avenue, Detroit, MI 48226, and our Southfield office located at 3000 Town Center Suite 100, Southfield, MI, 48075. When it comes to the resources we provide the City, we are not limited to this one office. We have the ability to easily draw upon expertise, service offerings, and professionals from across our firm to best fulfill your needs and meet our responsibilities as your auditor. Our service model removes the office- level barriers that are common among other accounting firms. Numbers of staff employed LEVEL DETROIT SOUTHFIELD Partner 15 66 Principal, Senior Manager & 20 282 Manager Senior 14 67 Staff 40 457 4 229 3. Describe the range of activities performed by the local office such as government auditing (Financial and Compliance), accounting, tax service, or management services. We are a full-service firm providing assurance, tax, management consulting, wealth management, corporate real estate, corporate finance, trust, among other services. More specifically, we have included below the information on our governmental practice. We believe our experience with governments is unmatched; we work closely with hundreds of municipal clients in the State of Michigan alone, and so we understand the many financial challenges that communities are facing. Over the last four decades, the City of Taylor and Plante Moran have developed an independent partnership that has both improved audit quality and properly addressed the ever-changing audit standards. The City of Taylor engagement team consists of professionals who have specifically made serving municipalities a focus of their careers. Furthermore, access to our other governmental industry specialists provides quick and meaningful insight into challenging decisions faced by Council and City Management. Governmental experience that’s beyond the expected When we serve governmental entities, assessing compliance is just the first step. As the City’s advisor, we’ll translate our expertise into solutions, helping you streamline operations, contain costs, and stay ahead of the curve. Why? It’s simple: Investing in our clients means investing in the future of our communities. What our practice looks like 500+ Governmental • Airports clients, including: 750+ Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) audits conducted in the • Transportation organizations past 25 years whereby the ACFRs have received the GFOA’s Certificate of • Authorities Achievement for Excellence in • Local government Financial Reporting 600+ Single audits performed annually • Pension systems • Special districts • • State agencies Utilities 45+ States with public sector clients 1,700+ Public sector clients served 250+ Staff dedicated to serving governmental clients 1,300+ GASB entities served 25+ Partners dedicated to serving governmental clients 75+ Years serving government entities $12B Federal expenditures audited per year How we stand apart from the competition When it comes to serving municipalities and government entities, the Plante Moran difference can be boiled down to two key factors: 5 230 Our governmental clients are Our firm is unmatched in the served by professionals who level of research we conduct have made the public sector a on challenges facing focus of their careers. governmental leaders. Because our firm is organized by industry (not by office Our active involvement in government associations — or region), you’ll always be served by specialists who along with our firsthand experience serving a large, have already served many governmental entities, diverse client base — is at the heart of our technical including cities and counties, municipal operations, water expertise. We pass on what we learn to our staff in the and sewer authorities, transit authorities, state form of internal training seminars and to our clients government agencies, and public library systems. through our webinars, white papers, and toolkits. In the inaugural Gartner Market Guide for External Audit Services, Plante Moran was recognized as a Representative Vendor, which we believe highlights the value of our comprehensive audit services. We don’t just participate — we lead We’re heavily involved in public sector professional associations, which keeps us ahead of emerging issues that shape the practical application of standards and regulations. We do this not just to maintain our expertise but also to advocate for our clients and keep them informed. • Founding member of the Governmental Audit Quality Center (GAQC) • Participate in the federal single audit roundtable with invited members from GAO, OMB, and various federal agencies • Past Chair of the American Institute of CPAs (AICPA) in 2008, and a partner has served on the Council. • Plante Moran Principal Sadie Mayle currently serves on the GAQC Executive Committee • Plante Moran Principal Marie Stiegel is a member of the AICPA State and Local Governments Expert Panel • Propose changes to Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Implementation Guides • Involved in national and state-level • Partner Michelle Watterworth serves associations including Colorado on the Governmental Accounting (CGFOA), Florida (FGFOA), Georgia Standards Advisory Council (GASAC) (GGFOA), Illinois (IGFOA), • Actively respond to significant Michigan (MGFOA), New York • Provided training at proposals for new governmental (NYSGFOA), and Ohio (OHGFOA) annual conference accounting rules • Facilitate training sessions at the • Testified before GASB and participated annual conference in some of their research projects 6 231 • Active membership, attend NASC and NASACT conferences • Facilitated conference training sessions • Serve on the Comptroller General’s Advisory Council on Standards for • Active membership, attend Internal Control in the Federal conferences Government Additional industry involvement: • Airports Council International – North America (ACI-NA) • International City/County Management • American Public Transportation Association (APTA) Association (ICMA) • American Water Works Association (AWWA) • Public Technology Institute (PTI) • GMIS International • American Public Works Association (APWA) 7 232 Single audit experience Our team members are undisputed experts in the single audit sector. the City’s engagement will feature trained professional staff with significant single audit experience, as well as our proprietary single audit programs, questionnaires, and tools, which are customized to specific grants. Our audit reports and workpapers are regularly reviewed by federal oversight agencies and are considered best-in-class. Our approach will increase efficiency and minimize the use of your staff’s time and resources. Qualifications that lead to quality single audits An analysis of single audit engagements performed by the AICPA’s Peer Review Program determined that the following factors have a strong correlation to quality performance. Plante Moran excels in all three. 1. Size of the firm’s single audit practice 50+ partners specializing in single audits 600+ single audits completed annually $12B in federal expenditures audited per year 2. Qualifications of the Our single audit practice consists of trained professionals engagement partner deeply engrained in federal compliance issues. Our professionals not only take single audit CPE courses annually but also teach many of those courses attended by other CPA firms. Our training materials are used nationally. 3. AICPA Governmental We’re a charter member of the GAQC and will share Audit Quality Center advance notice of issues that impact the single audit. (GAQC) Membership According to the above-mentioned AICPA study, GAQC members had two times greater conformity to professional standards than nonmembers. Plante Moran Principal Sadie Mayle currently serves on the GAQC Executive Committee. The study also found that GAQC members who performed 11 or more single audits annually — like Plante Moran — had 100% conformity to professional standards. We’re proactive when it comes to the Compliance Supplement. Our involvement: We maintain direct contact with the Our involvement: We annually review and comment AICPA and federal agencies, including the OMB, HHS, on changes being made to the OMB Compliance HUD, U.S. Department of Education, and EPA, and Supplement. frequently conduct training sessions at conferences How you benefit: Faster response time to Uniform sponsored by these agencies. Guidance updates and help identifying changes to How you benefit: Efficiency and ready access to procedures and documentation, before the audit knowledgeable staff, quick answers to difficult starts. questions, and help resolving federal compliance issues. 8 233 4. List recent financial/compliance audits of federally funded programs. See commentary above on the over 600 single audits performed by the firm. Your assigned engagement team members perform the single audits on the following clients: the Counties of Wayne and Livingston, MI; the Cities of Detroit, Grand Rapids, Warren, Monroe, Wyandotte, Lincoln Park, Allen Park, Taylor, Trenton, Southgate, Riverview, Romulus, Grosse Pointe Farms, and Grosse Pointe Woods, MI; the Cities of Commerce, Greeley, Longmont, and Littleton, CO; the Township of Vienna, MI; the Road Commission for Oakland County, Genesee County Drain Commission, Detroit Wayne Integrated Health Network, and Downriver Utility Wastewater Authority. 9 234 E. Peer Review 1. If your firm has had a quality control review, please submit a copy of the report with your proposal. If not, please state how you are in compliance with this GAS requirement and when your review is anticipated. Our peer review report The AICPA peer review involves rigorous inspection of engagements not subject to PCAOB inspection. At the conclusion of the peer review, the peer reviewer expresses an opinion on the design of our system of quality control for our accounting and auditing practice and our compliance with that system, and the reviewer provides a peer review rating. Our most recently completed peer review, conducted in 2022, resulted in a “pass” rating, the highest rating possible. The peer review report is available at aicpa.org. 10 235 F. Mandatory Criteria 1. Affirm that the proposer meets the independence standards of the GAO Government Auditing Standards. We affirm that Plante Moran meets the independence standards outlined in the GAO Government Auditing Standards. 2. Affirm that the proposer auditor/firm/agency has not been debarred from doing business with the Federal government and the state of Michigan. We affirm that Plante Moran has not been debarred from doing business with the Federal government or the state of Michigan. 3. Affirm that the proposer does not have a record of substandard audit work. Plante Moran does not have a record of substandard audit work. Our firm has maintained a reputation for delivering high-quality audit services throughout our 100-year history, supported by rigorous internal quality control processes and compliance with all professional standards. 11 236 G. Summary of the proposer’s qualifications 1. Identify the supervisors who will work on the audit, including staff from other than the local office. Resumes including relevant experience and continuing education for such a supervisory person to be assigned to the audit should be included. Your engagement team Plante Moran’s greatest asset is our people — not just their knowledge, but also their integrity and their commitment to our clients, staff, and communities. Our philosophy for staffing your engagement is simple: find the best people with the most relevant experience, and balance the team with varied ways of thinking that complement one another. We have structured our team to deliver the specialized knowledge and personal fit you deserve. Each person serves a necessary role on the engagement and is experienced in serving clients like you. William Brickey, CPA Engagement Partner 313-496-7231 | william.brickey@plantemoran.com Role: When the City needs an answer, I am your first call. My primary goal is to make sure we look out for your interests proactively, respond to your questions promptly, meet all deadlines, ensure no surprises, and value your time. Government Auditing Experience: With over 25 years of experience serving governmental clients, I work in the firm’s governmental attestation and consulting practice, primarily serving numerous cities, counties, and other governmental entities. Beyond job management, training, supervision of staff, and communication with clients, my recent experience includes managing financial statement audits, including compliance audits of federally funded programs, GASB implementation assistance, assistance with the design and review of internal control systems, financial forecasting, water and sewer rate studies, developing strategic plans for multiyear budgeting, and general business consulting. In addition to helping my clients with compliance-related matters, I provide practical, proactive advice throughout the year to ensure they stay up to speed and ahead of the curve in this ever-changing environment. My goal is to be a valuable resource and universal advisor, not just an auditor. Selected Clients Served: I serve the County of Livingston, MI; Genesee County Drain Commission, MI; the Cities of Grand Rapids, Warren, Monroe, Wyandotte, Taylor, Trenton, Southgate, Allen Park, Rockwood, Riverview, Romulus, Gibraltar, Grosse Pointe Farms, and Grosse Pointe Woods, MI; Townships of Redford and Northville, MI; and Cities of Commerce, Longmont, and Littleton, CO. I also serve the Downriver Utility Wastewater Authority. 12 237 Training and licensure: I graduated from Wayne State University with a Bachelor of Business Administration. I obtain over 40 hours of continuing professional education each year to adhere to the necessary qualifications to practice in the State of Michigan and meet the Yellow Book CPE requirements. Professional Affiliations: I am a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) and the Michigan Association of Certified Public Accountants (MICPA). I am also a member of the MGFOA Professional Development Committee. I frequently speak on a variety of governmental accounting topics and, for many years, was the lead presenter for the MGFOA Back to Basics program — a three-day program covering the fundamentals of government accounting, budgeting, and financial statements (ACFR). I am also a member of the Colorado Governmental Finance Officers Association (CGFOA) and the Colorado Municipal League (CML). Fun fact: I’ve played hockey since I was five years old and continue to play in two leagues. While not as competitive as I once was, I enjoy the camaraderie. In the summer, you can find me enjoying the slower pace of golf. James Haapala, CPA Senior Audit Manager 248-223-3492 | james.haapala@plantemoran.com Role: I’ll manage the overall audit engagement, ensuring that our team works collaboratively to deliver quality and efficient service. You will see me regularly in the field as I work with the rest of our audit team and your staff. I want to hear what’s going well (or not) and what issues are on your mind. Government Auditing Experience: I have ten years of experience with the firm’s public sector attestation practice focused on governments. My experience also includes job organization and management of audit engagements including compliance audits of federally funded programs, engagement quality reviews, training and supervision of staff, communication with clients on emerging issues, presenting at various internal trainings, attending industry conferences, and serving in the firm’s mentoring program. Selected Clients Served: I serve various other cities, townships, and special-purpose governmental entities, including the Cities of Gibraltar, Lincoln Park, Allen Park, Wixom, and Taylor, MI; the City of Greeley, CO; Downriver Community Conference, Detroit Wayne Integrated Health Network, and Western Townships Utilities Authority. Training and licensure: I obtain over 40 hours of continuing professional education each year to adhere to the necessary qualifications to practice in the State of Michigan and meet the Yellow Book CPE requirements. Professional Affiliations: I am a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) and the Michigan Association of Certified Public Accountants (MICPA). Fun fact: I have an orchard of various fruit trees and two colonies of honeybees at home. 13 238 Nate Shureb, CPA Audit Manager 248-223-3555 | nate.shureb@plantemoran.com | Southfield, MI Role: I will oversee the audit planning process and manage staff during fieldwork. As an on-the-ground leader during your audit, I can easily serve as a go-to person for any questions or concerns that might come up during fieldwork. Government Auditing Experience: I am an assurance manager at the firm with six years of experience working with various governmental clients, including local units of government, special-purpose entities and public employees’ retirement systems. Many of my clients require single audits, and I have worked on an increasing number of single audits over the past few years due to the increase in federal grants. Selected Clients Served: I have served various other cities, townships, and special-purpose governmental entities, including the Cities of Grosse Pointe Farms, MI, City of Taylor, MI, City of Trenton, MI, City of Southgate, MI, Vienna Charter Township, the Road Commission for Oakland County, the 23rd, 28th, and 33rd district courts, and Ohio Public Employees Retirement System. Additionally, I am a member of our firms governmental standards team. CPA licensure and relevant training: I obtain over 40 hours of continuing professional education each year to adhere to the necessary qualifications to practice in the State of Michigan and meet the Yellow Book CPE requirements. I am licensed as a CPA in the State of Michigan Professional affiliations and activities: I am a member of the MICPA and the AICPA. I obtained my Bachelor of Arts in accounting degree and Master of Science in accounting degree from Michigan State University. Fun fact: In my free time I enjoy travel and visiting new places across the United States. My Wife and I traveled to Greece for our honeymoon in October of 2024 and have a trip booked to drive down Pacific Coast Highway this fall. Manju Patnaik, CPA Technical Specialist 248-223-3768 | manju.patnaik@plantemoran.com Role: I’ll be a technical resource for the single audit engagement, ensuring our team works collaboratively to deliver quality and efficient service. Government Auditing Experience: I am a senior manager with 20 years of experience serving public sector clients. I am the firm’s single audit technical specialist, and a member of the firm’s Grants Compliance Leadership. As a member of our Grants Compliance Leadership team, I focus on quality control, providing technical assistance and training to staff and clients receiving federal assistance. As a leader in our governmental practice, I have written numerous articles to help clients understand industry changes and their impact, including the impact of the 2024 revisions to Uniform Grant Guidance and various other articles on grant compliance. 14 239 Selected Clients Served: I serve various clients including the City of Detroit (including Detroit Water and Sewer Department), and Charter County of Wayne. Training and licensure: I obtain over 40 hours of continuing professional education each year to adhere to the necessary qualifications to practice in the State of Michigan and meet the Yellow Book CPE requirements. Professional Affiliations: I am a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) and the Michigan Association of CPAs (MICPA). Fun Fact: I’m from a musical family. My mom and grandmother are singers, and I’ve been singing Indian classical music since I was a kid. I share a love of music with my children, who also sing and play instruments. 15 240 2. Describe the recent local and regional office auditing experience similar to the type of audit requested and provide three references. Similar engagements As documented in our resumes, your team provides single audit services to numerous governmental entities. Please feel free to contact any of them to hear about the Plante Moran experience and how well clients are served. Below are 3 local references. City of Southgate Contact information: Doug Drysdale 734 258-3017 Ddrysdale@SouthgateMI.gov Date: For the year ended 6/30/2024 Scope of work: Financial Statement Audit, Single Audit, Court Audit Engagement partner: William Brickey City of Romulus Contact information: Maria Farris 734 955-4566 mfarris@romulusgov.com Date: For the year ended 6/30/2024 Scope of work: Financial Statement Audit, Single Audit Engagement partners: William Brickey City of Lincoln Park Contact information: Lisa Griggs, 313 386-1800 ext 1230 lgriggs@citylp.com Date: For the year ended 6/30/2024 Scope of work: Financial Statement Audit, Single Audit Engagement partners: Kristin Hunt and Timothy St. Andrew – Manager James Haapala 16 241 H. Proposer’s approach to the examination 1. Submit a work plan to accomplish the scope of work defined in these guidelines. This should include the basis for the audit. The work plan should also include time estimates for each significant segment of the work and the staff level to be assigned. Where possible, individual staff members should be named. The planned use of specialists should be specified. The audit work plan should completely cover what audit work will be accomplished to allow the proposer to render: a. An opinion report on the financial statements. b. A report on compliance and internal control over financial reporting in accordance with GAS. c. A report on compliance for major program and internal control over compliance in accordance with OMB Uniform Guidance. Audit approach Our goal is to provide the City with a seamless, efficient audit from engagement letter through statement delivery and beyond. We co-develop every element of our approach with the City, tailoring each phase and process to the City’ specific needs, from deadlines, to testing areas, to fieldwork, to frequency and forms of communication. More than just a historical compliance activity Our comprehensive audit approach is designed to address all significant accounting and auditing issues and is tailored to the unique needs of the City. As a result, we’ll address the City’s critical areas of risk and vulnerability. While professional standards require us to perform certain mandatory auditing procedures, our approach goes above and beyond what is mandatory. Audits should be more than just a historical compliance activity. They should provide suggestions for improving accounting procedures and internal controls. They should involve discussions to review the City’s financial statements and what they should be communicating. Our approach is to deliver an efficient and effective audit by balancing risk, value, and cost. Communication: The heart of a successful relationship Expect to hear from us often. We believe communication is a fundamental right of our clients and is critical for a successful engagement. We will communicate with the City through planned meetings, check-in meetings, ad hoc meetings, proactive email notifications, phone calls, in-person visits (as allowed), and virtual video conferences. We will establish a cadence of communication that suits the City, and we commit to that level of communication throughout the engagement. Your satisfaction is critically important to us. 17 242 Phases of our audit approach In the inaugural Gartner Market Guide for External Audit Services, Plante Moran was recognized as a Representative Vendor, which we believe underscores the innovation and reliability of our audit solutions. Audit approach and timeline We are committed to performing our proposed services within a mutually agreed-upon timeline. Our proposed team for the City is made up of professionals who are dedicated to serving the governmental and public sector. As such, we are well acquainted with the challenges that clients like the city face from a reporting and regulatory compliance standpoint. The timeline below is designed to meet the deadlines outlined in your RFP and can be adjusted based on your needs. Please refer to the items below and on the next page for specific tasks and how the project milestones will be achieved for each phase of the timeline. Phase 1 – Planning September • Co-develop expectations • Gather data • Coordinate work with your • Identify risks and critical issues • Assess IT controls and data staff extraction capabilities • Set goals and milestones Phase 2 - Understanding and testing of internal control structure October • Review preliminary SEFA • Perform interim testing of • Test the SEFA to General • Major program determination selected transaction cycles Ledger Reconciliation • Perform testing of accounting • Design and tailor audit work • Provide a status report to system and internal controls programs for major programs management 18 243 Phase 3 – Testing and analysis October and November • Perform compliance and • Workpaper reviews conducted • Review single audit statements control testing on a sample of in the field drafts and other audit reports federal expenditures • Final adjustments completed, if any Phase 4 – Audit opinion considerations and reporting October and November • Communicate results with • Assess performance against • Deliver audit results to City management verbally and in expectations via client Council and City Management draft format satisfaction survey in person • Deliver audit opinions and compliance reports Hours by phase and staff level Below is how we envision the segmentation of hours for this engagement; this includes all hours as listed in our cost proposal/fee summary on page 22. Please note that these hours are assuming one major program. For each additional major programs, we would expect approximately 60-70 hours cumulative between the levels. PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 PLANNING INTERNAL CONTROL TESTING AND REPORTING AND REVIEW ANALYSIS DELIVERY Partner 2 3 5 5 Manager 3 4 10 5 Supervisory staff 3 4 20 5 Staff and others 2 4 20 5 Total 10 15 55 20 In the inaugural Gartner Market Guide for External Audit Services, Plante Moran was recognized as a Representative Vendor, which we believe underscores the innovation and reliability of our audit solutions. 19 244 2. The work plan should demonstrate the auditors understanding of the audit requirements of OMB Guidance: Cost Principles, Audit and Administrative Requirements for Federal Awards. Single audit methodology Single audit planning Our audit approach and methodology focus on testing organizational compliance with Uniform Guidance, ensuring that all objectives required in a single audit, along with those required by any individual granting agency, are examined and assessed, based on risk. Our general audit approach is outlined below: Step Description Develop audit objectives Develop audit objectives for each compliance requirement based on types of program funding received utilizing a combination of the grant agreement, the Code of Federal Regulations, and published compliance supplements and matrices. Understand the organization and Understand the City’s federal programs, systems, and processes through program details the use of a client questionnaire, which assists in outlining details and is completed mainly by the City’s staff. Assess risk Perform risk assessment, based on our experience with the programs, prior-year findings, and our understanding of the controls over the process, as well as through discussions with the City’s management. Assess compliance control Review environment factors to identify overall effectiveness as it relates environment to federal programs. Identify major programs Identify major programs in accordance with the federal rules to determine the number of major programs to test to meet single audit requirements. Assess inherent risk Assess the risk that errors could occur at the program level. We will examine several factors to determine inherent risk, including, but not limited to, findings from other agency audits or monitoring visits, the City’s experience with the grant, prior findings, and guidance from the granting agency. Based on all planning procedures performed, we will design audit procedures and prepare audit programs. The timing of audit procedures will be coordinated with the City’s staff. Our testing is designed to gather sufficient appropriate audit evidence on whether the City has complied with laws, regulations, and the provisions of contracts or grant agreements that could have a direct and material effect on each major program. Our team of single audit specialists has developed a comprehensive library of proprietary audit tools to test major programs. As new federal funding sources are identified, our team designs and updates the appropriate questionnaires, programs, and approach we use with our clients. We also analyze the grant 20 245 agreements, compliance supplements and matrices, and the applicable sections of CFR to complete the audit programs. Single audit sample sizes and detailed testing Sample size selection is critical to the correct testing of federal programs. We test internal controls over compliance as well as compliance requirements that have a direct and material effect on each major program. We consult the AICPA Audit Guide, Government Auditing Standards, and Uniform Guidance in designing an audit approach that includes audit sampling to achieve both objectives. Since each grant requires customization based on specific grant agreements and additional requirements specified by the applicable U.S. agencies, our detailed testing plan will be finalized to include all related key controls and key compliance areas. 21 246 I. Proposed fee Structure 1. Proposals should be based on the time and effort required to complete the audit. The respondents should state the total hours and hourly rate required by staff classification (Partner, Manager, and Supervisory and staff level) and the resulting maximum fee for which the requested work will be done. Standard hourly rates Our discounted hourly rates we will charge for the single audit are shown below. We review our hourly rates bi-annually in conjunction with our June 30 fiscal year end, and additionally at the December 31 calendar year end. Increases may be made in consideration of annual U.S. inflation rates. Being excellent stewards with our clients’ resources is important to us. We will make every effort to ensure work is assigned to the appropriate level to allow for the greatest efficiency. LEVEL HOURLY RATE HOURS TOTAL Partner $266 15 $3,990 Senior Manager and Manager $185 22 $4,070 Senior $125 32 $4,000 Staff $95 31 $2,945 Adjustment $(5) Total 100 $15,000 22 247 2. Maximum Cost Value must be submitted on a “Not-to-Exceed” basis; however, if the volume of Federal Award programs being audited increases or decreases by more than fifteen (15) percent for an audit year, the City may negotiate a new maximum cost for that audit year. The not-to-exceed amount may be increased by amendment to accommodate matters reasonably within the scope of this RFP at the discretion of the city. Fee summary We understand fair fees are a priority for the City. As such, our fee summary below represents our best estimate based on our knowledge of your business and discussions with you. We would be happy to discuss our fees with you in more detail. ESTIMATED FEES SERVICE YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 First Major Program $15,000 15,500 16,000 Additional Major $10,000 $10,350 $10,700 Programs (per program) Notes: • Our fees assume books, records, and all supporting schedules will be prepared accurately by your staff and we receive accurate and complete beginning depreciation schedules. • Our estimates include the preparation of reports and schedules using our Caseware audit software. • You will not be billed for routine calls or consultation. • Any services provided outside of the scope of this proposal will be discussed and determined before any billing takes place. • Our fees will be invoiced monthly as the work is performed and are payable within 30 days. 3. The total all-inclusive maximum price to be proposed must contain all direct and indirect costs including all out-of-pocket expenses. Travel and other out-of-pocket expenses You will not be billed for any Out-of-pocket or travel expenses 23 248 Appendix 24 249 Firm profile For 100 years, we’ve provided our clients with advisors, ideas, and breakthrough strategies they can count on. We are the 15th largest certified public accounting and management consulting firm in the nation. Our firm specializes in financial, compliance, human capital, operations improvement, strategic planning, technology selection and implementation, and wealth management services. Fast facts 1924 3,800+ 390+ 24 Year founded Staff Partners Offices worldwide 50 150+ 45+ 25+ States with clients Countries where Services available Industries served we’ve served clients A better approach to client service, 100 years in the making. Plante Moran’s founders had a vision: “to create a people firm disguised as an accounting firm.” Now, 100 years later, we’re fully invested in taking that legacy into the future, moving forward together with our clients. When you work with our team, you can count on us to see the story behind the numbers and deliver relationships beyond results. Learn more about our story — and what it means for our clients — at plantemoran.com/count-on-us. 2525 250 Get to know more about Plante Moran Click the items below to learn more about additional Plante Moran resources and initiatives that may benefit you. 26 26 251 We look forward to working with you. Please contact us with any questions. William Brickey, CPA Engagement Partner 313-496-7231 William.Brickey@plantemoran.com 252 253 254 255