2026-08-13 - Quarterly Town Council Work Session

01:08Yes. Nice.

09:49Right.

10:00All right. Good afternoon everyone.

10:08And I would like to say thank you.

10:12Also our guest, let's honor our nation

10:16by standing for the

10:23To the flag of the United States of

10:25America and to the republic for which it

10:27stands. One nation under God,

10:29indivisible, with liberty and justice

10:31for all.

10:35[clears throat]

10:39[snorts]

10:42>> I do have one update for the agenda.

10:45Items number 45 and 48.

10:58>> [laughter]

11:00>> photo finish.

11:04>> All right. All in favor say

11:05>> I

11:10sure.

11:11>> All right. Thank you, mayor. Thank you

11:13all for being here. We have a very uh

11:15I'm glad we simplified the agenda

11:16because we have a lot going on park and

11:18wreck. So it'll give us an opportunity

11:20to jump in. I'm going to turn it over

11:22Craig who can kick us off. We've got

11:25like all the way two main items

11:28departmental projects got greenways.

11:32>> Thank you sir. Uh thanks for the

11:34opportunity to bring the projects uh to

11:37to everyone here. Um, what I want to do

11:40is at least give a shout out to two of

11:43our board members who are in attendance.

11:45So, we got Nick Mossberg and we have Ron

11:48Ber here. So, thank y'all for coming

11:49out.

11:54>> This is a parks department. We love the

11:56support and obviously our staff that's

11:58here to support us as well and other

12:00staff that are here to support us too.

12:02Um, so this really while this is the

12:05department show, uh, these two beside me

12:09have put a lot of work into this and,

12:10uh, we have Schua here and we also have

12:13Angela and they're going to be doing a

12:14presentation for us today.

12:20>> Afternoon.

12:23>> Always exciting. It's hard.

12:28>> Um, so

12:31there lot so um I appreciate that we

12:34have the chance to speak with everyone

12:36and give you an update on our projects

12:40as well as get some business done. So

12:43just jump right in. Uh just to go over

12:46the agenda. While there's two main items

12:50on the agenda, we're really focused on

12:52the first item which is the fe study

12:56overviews and then if we have time at

12:58the very end, we can answer questions

13:00about some projects that we know that

13:02you know about and that we um aren't

13:05really fully into uh the planning

13:07process yet. So, we just want to be

13:10available if there's any questions.

13:19uh so the town of Apex hired consultant

13:23Dennis uh to complete a park land

13:26dedication and study in 2025. Um the

13:29study recalculates Apex's park fees for

13:33new residential development based on

13:35population growth, land values, level of

13:38service and statutory requirements. We

13:40are providing the high level findings of

13:42the draft report with an outline of

13:44recommendations that will be brought

13:46forward um based on input and discussion

13:49today at a public hearing later this

13:51year.

13:52Uh, article 14 of the UDO provides that

13:56every person who subdivides or develops

13:58land for residential uh, purposes shall

14:01agree to dedicate a portion of such land

14:04for the purposes of providing park,

14:06recreation or open spaces um to serve

14:10future residents. Each project proposed

14:13is reviewed by the parks recreation

14:16culture resources staff and if

14:18applicable is reviewed with the parks

14:20and recreation advisory board and they

14:22make a recommendation that is presented

14:24to the town council either doing a plane

14:27unit

14:30development zoning or prior to

14:33subdivision.

14:36Uh it also defines in art and media

14:38article 14 as an alternative to

14:41dedication which could include making

14:43provisions for an equitable amount of

14:45land to be dedicated in another

14:47location. The payment and payment

14:51of a fee in lie of dedication um

14:54instruct public recreation facilities

14:56with family money for a combination of

14:59any of those three. Examples of projects

15:02that had recent land dedication would be

15:04the park at Wimberly

15:06that's subdivision just south of

15:10where three acres became a public safety

15:13station the road for the retreat at

15:15friendship station dedicated three acres

15:18that were added to the contract

15:21uh examples of projects that constructed

15:23facilities like greenways such as long

15:27branch and the deer creek smith farm

15:29sweet moderate projects or Hunter Street

15:33Park was originally developed from uh

15:36funds from the villages.

15:40Uh examples of fee and loo would be a

15:43payment of fees based on our fee

15:44schedule either at the time of plat for

15:46subdivision or at the time of site plan

15:50uh building permit for

15:53projects and those funds are all

15:56deposited in the recreation reserves.

15:59Uh what we're discussing today is saying

16:02that the processes and policies that are

16:04spelled out in article 14 are based on

16:07state statutes and special legislation

16:09that the town has regarding all

16:12that's we're talking about policies

16:15today. We're talking about

16:22the last study was undertaken by

16:25associate in 2008. Since then, the

16:28town's population has grown from 35,000

16:31residents 10 to 85,000 residents.

16:36Um, this is both exceeds the number of

16:40residents that were anticipated in the

16:4210year horizon time of the master plan

16:44that was adopted in 2023 and um is

16:49growing at a faster pace than I think we

16:51all projecting in past years.

16:54Uh, since this study in 2008, Parkland

16:57acreage increased from 377 acres to over

17:00699.

17:02Um the changing trends in population,

17:05property value and parkland acreage that

17:08we have available created a need for

17:11this study and we also need to look at

17:13the value of land as well as the rates

17:15for residential development. Um again

17:19these are the fees and which staff

17:21present with development projects.

17:29But I'm going to get a little technical

17:30so bear with me and please ask questions

17:33if what we're explaining

17:36really clear on. When we do these

17:40studies, one of the things we look at is

17:42the level of service. And um the level

17:46of service is based on our plant acres

17:48per 10,000 residents. Um so if you can

17:52imagine as we increase in resident

17:54population if we don't keep up an

17:57acreage acquisition then our level of

18:00service can change.

18:02And in this case when we did the master

18:04plan in 2023 we had 10.03 acres per

18:08thousand residents. population we have

18:11only 8.16 papers per house and so um

18:16what we're seeing is in a sense a

18:18decline in level of service.

18:24So

18:26based on the level of service and the

18:28acreage presented here,

18:31how much how many more acres you need to

18:35get to our

18:37level of service for disaster fund? Is

18:39it almost 20%.

18:42>> Um I we'd have to do the exact and it

18:44changes every day that you change your

18:46population. No,

18:48>> I I I get that. Um but we're basically

18:51saying we got 700 acres worth park

18:54stream and open spaces that calculates

18:57to 8.16

18:58uh as our current level of service

19:02our aim is 10.03 03. So it's about, you

19:04know, 20% difference, right? So our

19:07saying, okay, we really need to be

19:08looking for

19:10um 840 acres total, right? About 20%

19:15more than the 700 that we're presenting

19:17here.

19:19>> We're we're already deficient

19:22140 acres compared to the level of

19:25service that we set out for years.

19:32And it was in that projection of the

19:3410ear plan that we would continue to

19:36acquire land for just try to get that

19:39population number. So while we had a

19:41goal of the 10ear population

19:47>> so just the um the 700 acres does that

19:51include undeveloped parkland or is that

19:54just what we currently have that is

19:56publicly accessible?

19:58>> We include in our our 700 acres

20:02open space that is not developed, future

20:06parkland that is not developed. So it's

20:08all the acreage that conservation

20:11conservation land not necessarily.

20:15So the land that we own along river

20:17would be included in that

20:21>> and I know that was using

20:22[clears throat] basically acorage as the

20:25level of service and terminator here but

20:28[snorts]

20:28how do we capture things like events at

20:32the our services are you our program

20:37because it seems as though that's I mean

20:39our BL is also kind of providing support

20:43for those sort of outside of the

20:45acreage. So does the study account for

20:49or do we have a way of accounting for

20:50that as a value of service as well?

20:53>> Not not in this framework because in

20:55this framework we're talking about a

20:57land dedication ordinance.

20:58>> Okay. So this is the land andor the

21:02value of the land.

21:03>> Okay. And so it it's bas the premise of

21:06that is to protect provide land that can

21:09be used whether it's conservation land

21:12uh land for greenways land for active

21:14recreation passive recreation you know

21:16or just protection. So anything

21:21that was so we have a different level of

21:25service that utilize

21:28[clears throat]

21:31doing a lot of measuring simply for

21:34>> a lot of measurement.

21:36>> Yes.

21:37All right. So um when we go to um taking

21:42our level of service and then looking at

21:44our requirements um that gives us this

21:50per acres per dwelling unit calculation

21:54and if you've heard us say in the past

21:57that there's like

21:5930 units per acre for single family

22:02detached or 45 units per acre. This is

22:05that calculation but is how we determine

22:09what is requested for dedication per

22:12project. So when you see a plan unit

22:14development reszoning, there's paragraph

22:17their document that says parks and

22:20recreation. The recommendation was for

22:24um a land dedication of this many acres

22:26or being new with credit for

22:28construction of the greenway. What we're

22:31doing is basing this this request of

22:35what we're looking at is one, where are

22:39they located within our master plan?

22:40Two, what unit count are they asking um

22:44to be approved? And then we're using

22:47this multiplier to determine how many

22:49acres of land be the maximum that we can

22:51require based on.

22:55And so with the level of service

22:59changing what we're providing land then

23:02the units per acre request has to be

23:05changed.

23:07So in a sense now instead of it being

23:1230th of an acre provided for a resial

23:15and now 14.

23:20So we have to have 40ome

23:22to equal what we used to get the 30

23:29question. So um this uh single family

23:33detached 0.024 02 or 83 and single

23:37family attached model. These numbers

23:40still are calculated based on the 700

23:45life, you know, acres we uh we own,

23:49right?

23:50>> Yes.

23:50>> Okay. Okay. Got it.

23:54and and so how did we get from

23:58a UDO requirement is about 033

24:04to current achieve level service that is

24:07less than that. So does that basically

24:09mean that councils past and present

24:13have approved

24:15developments

24:17that did not meet our stated criteria

24:21for land dedication or payments?

24:25>> No. So when we set the rates from the

24:292008 study, one of the things that

24:32happens is every January we take the

24:34previous year's consumer price index and

24:36increase our

24:38rates based on that. What we haven't

24:41done is reset the value of a neighbor

24:45and what we're working on through these

24:47formulas is creation of what that value

24:50should be today.

24:52>> I get that, but I'm kind of focused on

24:53the level of service, right? I'm just

24:55wondering how we got from there's a

24:58level that we set and codified in our to

25:01some level that's less than that. What

25:03what explains the delta

25:05>> the growth in the number of residents

25:09and the decrease percentage of the

25:11acreage per res.

25:13>> Right? But that means then that's

25:17we approved developments that allowed

25:19for a higher number of residents

25:23due the number of acres that were

25:24dedicated or made avail made available.

25:29I I guess my question is

25:32what are we doing wrong when we're

25:34looking at these development projects as

25:37if we're giving new units or new number

25:39of residents, right? Where are we

25:42missing the mark that is causing us to

25:44be so far removed from

25:47desired level of service that is in fact

25:50th into the UDO but perceiving policy.

25:55So your every time a project comes in

25:59your decision making right now is based

26:02on the on the like approved and modified

26:08level of service. The thing that's

26:10changed is while that's been there we

26:14haven't done an update to to adjust for

26:17those differences. So while we maybe are

26:21collecting land or the fee in lie of

26:24dedication,

26:26we're only able maybe to use some of

26:30that money to develop that land versus

26:32buy.

26:33>> We didn't ask for enough land to be

26:35undervalued.

26:39>> We asked for land based on the master

26:41plan and weren't always able to buy land

26:43in other areas at the same rate that we

26:47>> price and again What I'm trying to get

26:50at like you know we plan to use this is

26:52by far the biggest topic that deals with

26:55and we have found ourselves in a

26:58situation where we say okay we have a

27:01desired level of service

27:03and here's the actuals and the actuals

27:05are lower than our desires

27:08and trying to understand what got us

27:10here so that's as we evaluate future

27:13projects

27:14we're not repeating the same mistake

27:17right or we pay more attention or we

27:19call it out in our staff report more

27:21clearly so that we understand as council

27:26this is is or is not meeting

27:29the

27:32or this will make our level of service

27:34better or worse right depending on on

27:36the proposed

27:38if there's a higher land densation then

27:40you know our level of service will drop

27:42a bit if it's lower then so I'm just

27:46trying to understand what I what I would

27:48be

27:49>> I think let me let us get through two

27:51more slides that will that will help

27:54help you set how we how we can get there

27:57and establishing that up. All right. So

28:02if you take again we just took that

28:04calculation of the percentage this is

28:07the percentage done differently. Um

28:10currently you see the unified

28:12development ordinance 13th 14th 151st.

28:16Um, if we take the current level of

28:20service and we were to adopt those new

28:22numbers, so you get 141 the 82nd and we

28:29take those acres per dwelling unit and

28:32we multiply them in a sense by the land

28:36values. We end up with what is now

28:39currently about 120,000 to 130,000 an

28:42acre to a new value of 320,000 an acre.

28:46Um, and that that happens one because

28:51we've we're looking at all these

28:53properties that we've either purchased

28:54or had appraisals on. We have that

28:57value. We can match that value

29:01by um

29:04calculating using that new 320 by the

29:08level of service. get a a land cost per

29:12resident of $2,600.

29:16And if we multiply that back times those

29:18numbers, we get very close to 300.

29:22So we change the level. We have to match

29:24our current level of service. We can't

29:26just arbitrarily pick the higher amount.

29:29We have to stick with what we have. We

29:31can only achieve that level at this

29:33point. But we can acquire fees and or

29:37get dedication based off the metrics

29:41and then continue to improve by

29:42purchasing land. So then get back up to

29:44a higher level and then reassess more

29:47often so that we don't

29:52point

29:54is that by law we cannot do that. We we

29:58can want to achieve that level, but we'd

30:00have to physically purchase the land and

30:03have that balance with the number of

30:05residents to get to that number.

30:12>> Because if we if we were to use 103

30:15here, our desired level of service, the

30:18lens profession will come out.

30:22No, you'd be multiplying times a

30:24different metric than

30:27you'd be you'd be use your your cost per

30:30resident would go would vary and then

30:33you would be back charging a different

30:34value.

30:37So ideally setting the land value per

30:40acre is like the critical piece because

30:43then then the difference between

30:45dedicating an acre purchasing through

30:48the fees an acre is equivalence

31:04money versus They paid less than the

31:06fees. The fees were substantially lower

31:09than what we could have charged. We just

31:11needed you have to have a study that

31:13sets that value.

31:14>> I I may just want to have a separate

31:17conversation about the math behind all

31:19of this. I just wanted to understand how

31:22we're taking certain numbers. Um, but I

31:27know we're limited on taxes.

31:30>> And I will offer I think the key in this

31:33whole conversation is we're behind on

31:36land value with this formula and and so

31:39for us ultimately this probably should

31:42have been brought back years ago to have

31:45it adjusted. So part of what we're doing

31:48is every five years we're going to go

31:50come back to this and do another study

31:53and ensure that we're our land values

31:55are where they need to be.

31:56>> And so why did he wait 18 years? Like

31:58why why do

32:01>> that's a great question and and that's

32:04why we're doing it now. I mean I I can't

32:06speak for 18 years ago. Um, I can speak

32:10for the time that I've been here and we

32:12knew that we had to have that um that

32:14assessed and that's what we've done.

32:20>> And we can and we can also touch base

32:22offline about some other things um as

32:25well.

32:26>> I think part of it too is recognizing

32:28too

32:31the amount of growth population growth.

32:34I mean there are some that still site

32:35our numbers 80,000. We're using 85,000,

32:38but I've seen 74. Like, it depends.

32:40We've had so many people so quickly.

32:42We've got I was told 1,000 apartments

32:44under construction right now. I mean,

32:47add those people on and then our acreage

32:48is already off in that. So, the pace at

32:51which they're building doesn't match the

32:52pace at which we can build and

32:55accumulate to then do regional more like

32:57the Wimberly Road Park. We've got the

32:59land of mass, but we don't have all the

33:00the money to fund the infrastruure.

33:03>> I get it. Ultimately what I would like

33:05to understand

33:07what's this direction

33:10we don't perpetuate what is a degrading

33:13level service right either you know keep

33:17the status quo at minimum or

33:20better yet you know the level of service

33:24that that's what's trying to understand

33:26is how I interpret these numbers in

33:28terms of how we evaluate

33:31zoning for fe request

33:34Even CIP

33:37>> I was gonna add even CIP prioritization

33:40had to make some decisions this year

33:42that push greenway different things out

33:46had that been it that also then bolsters

33:48acres too. So it's it's multiple it's

33:50this and that and making sure that works

33:52but then it's prioritizing those spaces

33:55in the sky as well.

34:00>> All right. So

34:03to move all of that into where do we go?

34:05Um the calculated parks and recreation

34:08vehicle schedule. So currently our

34:11adopted fees based on this 2008 study

34:15and an increase of a percentage based on

34:17the consumer price index every year

34:20since then has us at you know between

34:242500 and $4,300

34:28unit type. Um, with the new per unit

34:32rate, that's $2,61120

34:36based on the 320,000 an acre based on

34:39the number of residents per unit. You

34:41can see the new piece that work. And so

34:45in a sense, if if the

34:48ultimately when we bring this as public

34:51hearing, we would be adopting the the

34:53value at 320,000 an acre. Then you would

34:58be adopting our current level of service

35:01and then these would be the starting

35:02fees that we would be proposing based on

35:07those two numbers being true. Um and

35:11then the plan would be to provide um the

35:15same process of consumer price index

35:18increases January annually and then no

35:21more than five years before full study

35:25of level of service and land value.

35:31So this this will this could catch us

35:36more to the fees being balanced with

35:38this dedication plan.

35:40>> Um and why didn't we pick 320 because

35:42both samples that you showed has values

35:45per acre higher than 320 350 and 322. So

35:50logic would predict and current state is

35:54somewhere between the difference 336

36:00Given that we're not doing this every

36:03year, but every five years, wouldn't we

36:04want to take into account some future

36:06appreciation of land value on top of

36:09that? So, wouldn't we value our land at

36:11320, let's say it's at that 350 level to

36:15kind of cover us? Because the moment we

36:17implement this, it's going to be out of

36:19date.

36:20>> So, we do something different than other

36:22agencies in that we set a land value. um

36:27other agencies proceed do every project

36:30with an appraisal.

36:32>> Sean has something to add. I think for

36:34general statute it has to be at the

36:36value of the land at that date. So you

36:38can't you can't do any future

36:40protection.

36:44>> And so I think just

36:47municipalities was per project for lens

36:50value assessments. They have an

36:52appraisal with each with each resump,

36:54>> right? And and we just okay, we're gonna

36:57count everything out and it's easier for

37:00us for staff to just have a fixed rate

37:03per

37:04>> we since 2008

37:08through our legislation have adopted the

37:10policy that we set a rate on that

37:16we can change. So which one's better?

37:18Right. I'm trying to help here. try to

37:20get you up. Right. So,

37:22>> and and I it's some of it is about

37:24setting policies what we're

37:27[clears throat]

37:28what the statutes and our legislation

37:30allows us to do,

37:33what our et

37:37value and the rating. Um

37:41we haven't looked at this as a whole

37:44doing something different with each.

37:48The other thing is we have properties

37:51that are on our list that are below 320

37:54and our ordinance does provide that if

37:56someone were paying a fee and live but

37:58they could prove by appraisal we could

38:03review that and approve that appraisal

38:05as being actual if someone had property

38:07that was less than

38:11they could have these fees lowered. Um

38:14and the ordinance provides for that. So

38:16if they had land that was about valued

38:18at less than our range. Um there's a

38:21process that they

38:24adjusted to meet Jared to

38:29have to provide fair market.

38:32>> Yeah. And I don't know if this is the

38:33time to ask the question, but I mean I

38:36like the increase. I think it's a

38:38significant increase. Let's have you

38:41gotten a pulse on the development

38:42community?

38:45uh we have not like had a

38:48>> I mean there's the number

38:50>> um what I will share next is just

38:54because I think this pertains to that is

38:57um we looked at adjacent communities

39:01while they might implement the land a

39:04land dedication ordinance a little bit

39:06different than us we all have our

39:08interpretations of what the state

39:10statutes and our our legislation allows

39:13us to do. Um

39:16these are sort of the range of rates

39:17that we're seeing

39:20if we use the basis of our 32.

39:24So they might have a different formula.

39:25They might do per project appraisal. So

39:28we're using their formulas, you know,

39:32setting the same standard and these are

39:34the ranges of those. Now some charge

39:37them as impact fees and Raleigh which is

39:40listed in seems very low. um their

39:44process is different. They're listed as

39:47not their dedication and they're

39:49currently undergoing a study. So their

39:50study was from 2006. They're obviously

39:54been waiting a long time just and so

39:56they're currently in the way I imagine

39:58that we see a substantial change in

40:00theirs when they done their study. Those

40:03of the others have some of them don't

40:05have a study here in the fact that they

40:07don't separate. So they're doing it

40:09based on

40:11other things. And um there are also some

40:15that that do a differentation of of

40:18these and so

40:21they might be not providing for

40:23providing for something different. So

40:26while it's a range and it should be

40:27based on like there are some places

40:29where we're originally

40:35different it's kind of hard to really

40:37balance

40:39>> it actually

40:42>> if if I can add um [clears throat] when

40:45you talk about the development community

40:46one of the things that these fees are

40:49going to impact is the housing

40:51affordability

40:52and so that is something that we are

40:55going going to have to uh study. We're

40:57going to have to look at not sure what

40:59other communities are doing, but it is

41:01going to impact the housing

41:03affordability. And so, what we need to

41:06be thinking about is how can we offset

41:08those fees for those those costs, not

41:10for the developer, but for buying down

41:13the cost of the house. Um, so that is

41:16something that we're going to have to

41:18take a look at.

41:21>> Appreciate that.

41:24Also want to put it in perspective. Talk

41:25about a fee increase,000

41:34not a huge percentage of the total.

41:38You're right.

41:46Thank you. My quick question about um

41:51a little bit [clears throat] from what

41:52councilman said earlier about timing and

41:55fact we haven't done this since 08. I

41:57see some of the other study years here

41:59hasn't done it since 06. Looks like Wake

42:01Forest and Holly Springs both did it in

42:0424. Um my question is

42:10you talked about you talked about the

42:12five you now that we see where we're at

42:14or behind we need to get uh

42:17proactive.

42:19Why five years is my first question. And

42:22is that a rigid thing? Would that be

42:26built into the policy? And the reason

42:28why I say that is because I imagine that

42:32yeah, from 08 I mean there's a that's a

42:35it's an extensive or an extended period

42:37of time, but I imagine the real jump was

42:40somewhere around 21 22 in terms of

42:43property value. So when I'm to con

42:49earlier he was alluding to

42:52projecting to the future.

42:55Uh let's say it's not a pandemic

42:57something happens that's good this time

42:59and all of a sudden the value shoots to

43:02$450,000 a year. Um and but we've set a

43:07policy of we're going to do this again

43:09in uh what 2031.

43:13Is there flexibility built into the

43:15policy where you say oh hey we

43:18anidotally know that this is going to be

43:20an issue that we need to this going to

43:21affect policy. We need to do this before

43:232031.

43:25>> Uh what I think we're in our language

43:28that we're proposing it would be no no

43:31longer than every month.

43:32>> Okay. So that it does give us if we see

43:34a significant shift.

43:35>> Yeah. I I mean one of the things that we

43:37talked about internally during the

43:39master plan process was right now we

43:41consider single family attached and

43:43detached separately but when there was a

43:45shift from

43:48um what we you know single family

43:50attached as town homes when when they

43:53started becoming as big as you know

43:563,000 square foot and you know twocar

43:58garage you know like they weren't maybe

44:00this affordable option and they became

44:04as big as bigger than a lot of our

44:06single family homes. It's sort of like

44:08are they different types of housing and

44:10we were seeing a shift in the market and

44:12saying how do we we need to capture that

44:15as it different should we look at it

44:17differently

44:19and so so I think when we notice a trend

44:22that's something that we we can pick up

44:25and and I'll add back to the affordable

44:26housing I know one of the things that

44:28happens when we're meeting with people

44:29and they're talking about that

44:30especially if they're doing affordable

44:32housing project is that they've said we

44:35wait for weeks

44:37you you know, in the balance of saying,

44:38well, we we don't this is a different

44:42not just town. It's a state statute that

44:45allows this and it provides the ability

44:47for us to build open space or have open

44:50space for all residents and a lot of

44:53things that are free for residents. It's

44:55a benefit, but it's also like that

44:57balance. we we can't wave these fees,

45:00but then they come back and ask

45:04reimbursement and so they're reimbursing

45:06for the paid and getting back to the

45:11from a different so I think it is

45:13something that we're that's a place

45:15where we have a lot of conversations

45:17is the we

45:20taking from one or the other and the

45:22fact is

45:31So um we uh met with the parks and

45:34recreation advisory board in July.

45:39They decided to make a recommendation

45:42that we could share with you today and

45:45that is that they were supportive of all

45:47findings of the proposal of the peace

45:49study. um they agreed with setting the

45:52land value at 320,000 acre.

45:56They uh noted and supported that we

46:00needed to change the section 14.156 the

46:04computation to meet the new level of

46:07service of 8.16 or 8,000

46:12acres and um that we implement this

46:16starting January 1st and if that needs

46:19to come back to you as a public hearing

46:21and studies and information to be

46:23adopted but the idea will be get that

46:26done and then just wait for when we

46:28normally update anyway. Um and that uh

46:33remaining that adjustment section that's

46:35the what allows us to newly update that

46:39number with the consumer price index and

46:42that um as I said we will no longer than

46:46updating every five years just to assess

46:48where our level of services is and

46:51ensure that we're trying to achieve

46:52those targets in the master. So that's

46:55what they recommendation they made.

46:59>> Go on. I just like not fully

47:02understanding all the math behind the

47:04ratio. If the land value goes up, do

47:09those ratios change like the land

47:11ratios?

47:13Um so if you take the land value and

47:17your level of service by the acreage

47:20that you have um then your your you

47:25would be redoing the math across the

47:27board. You have to have that you have to

47:30set that value.

47:32The basis for my question is how do you

47:35deal

47:372008 studies at

47:40130th of an acre per saying 41st

47:46acre per unit. That is a big regression

47:50in my why would we settle on

47:54what is now the current level of

47:57service. Why would we not stick with the

47:59one period or some number in between to

48:03you know capture more plants that would

48:06add to our total

48:08>> because we can only ask for the level of

48:10service.

48:12>> Okay. So the calculation goes has to go

48:15to that which gives you those new

48:18>> and by statute

48:22that was kind of my question.

48:28>> So um

48:32what we're we're we're sharing this to

48:34give you that first look and then give

48:35you a chance to answer questions. We do

48:38know that it needs to come back to you

48:40as public hearing where you would

48:42officially adopt that. We have time

48:44before we present that to you know go

48:47through and and show you the

48:48calculations by even a draft of the

48:51study for you. But we we know it's it's

48:54got a lot of moving parts and pieces

48:57that we don't normally get into that

48:59detail. Um we're looking at it, you

49:02know, understanding it, but

49:05it's sort of the thing that's not

49:07but it's the process behind how we get

49:09there. So know that that's the next

49:12piece that comes back. I think today

49:14sort of the hope is answer any

49:16questions. The next part is that if

49:20there were something that was

49:22fundamentally

49:24we felt like we needed to go or question

49:28what is the outcome of that

49:32felt like something we were we were

49:34pulling from it wasn't reflective of

49:37where we are had questions about the

49:39land value and obviously kind of gone up

49:42and down we sort of took the middle we

49:44also talked to our real estate folks

49:45about what they were seeing and tried to

49:47find something that we could we could

49:49stand behind and say you looked across

49:51the entire town and picked the parcels

49:54and had appraisals on those and parcels

49:56that we had purchased. This was the

49:58general range that was valued.

50:02>> So I have one concern that will lead to

50:06my question

50:09by setting a average liability

50:13based on current market conditions.

50:17Yet we allow a grievance process to

50:20lower that based on actual value. We

50:24have set an artificial cap for ourselves

50:26based on current price per acre with

50:31an opportunity to go down. But if the

50:34price is higher, like if you have a

50:36price that is worth,

50:38we will never capture that that per

50:41month, right? And so that is because we

50:45have said we do one race based on one

50:49price per acre.

50:51our neighbor to do something a little

50:53bit different today. Actually look at

50:54price per acre per developer.

50:57Is it time for us to reconsider our our

51:00blanket approach? Because I feel like

51:01we're exposed downwards and we're never

51:04going to c capture at least not until

51:07once every five years [clears throat]

51:09capture the upside of it, right? And so

51:12I'm kind of questioning whether we

51:13should stick with the blank approach or

51:16do something that is more valuation

51:18based based on the project. I'd like to

51:21get get, you know, the assessment, the

51:23recommendation.

51:26>> I mean, I think that's something that we

51:28we could discuss and talk to our

51:31consultant about if that exposes us with

51:34something that we're not thinking

51:37through about our what our um

51:40legislation allows us to do and and if

51:43that policy change is something that

51:47that we can determine the best be an

51:50ordinance change and could be a policy

51:53>> and and the two are not necessarily

51:54related. We can do the the debate change

51:56now while we study the the policy, you

52:00know, because that might have a longer

52:02tail. I want to hold this up while we

52:05admin.

52:16>> So overall support for what's been

52:17presented. However, look on the side at

52:20the other option, the appraisal based.

52:22We have that as

52:28>> Okay. Well, thank you. Really quickly, I

52:30was going to say dot dot dot if and

52:31that's where my question came in is uh

52:35will the development community be

52:38engaged before this brought to as

52:40public? [clears throat]

52:42Um we we hadn't necessarily

52:46planned on a you know work session with

52:50a builder association or you know the

52:53development but we recently did

52:55>> I was just

52:57>> for uh council grace comment earlier

53:00about whether or not I just think that

53:02that would be

53:03>> I don't know what words come out but I'm

53:04just wondering if that's all right. So

53:06you're saying that don't make sure that

53:08>> I I there's a question we'll ask Brian.

53:12>> Excellent. Moving on. Next question

53:14is is it really quickly if you don't

53:16mind I just going to say is this

53:18something where we can look at the other

53:20municipalities who are not listed on

53:21there in Wayne County. I saw 71

53:25were not on that list and I just wanted

53:27to say that case by case basis. I just

53:30wonder just

53:36so I think we're on slots where we got

53:3840 plus

53:40>> but one question.

53:43>> Yeah, actually a little bit similar like

53:46if we do it case by case, right? Some

53:49land probably cost

53:5150 500,000 break some maybe cost only

53:56200,000

53:58break. So if we you know charge fee you

54:02based on you know each case different

54:04project maybe it's better for affordable

54:07housing because for the low lower cost

54:11lands we charge you know less and it's

54:15it won't you know u makes the housing

54:17price you know all overall or go up

54:20right so maybe that's better and we

54:24don't have to actually you know like a

54:27refund or you uh just give them give the

54:30developers face or know discount

54:32whatever

54:34wouldn't that be better

54:38>> I think when you talk about getting an

54:41appraisal or attractive land there's all

54:45the factors that go into that appraisal

54:47it's not necessarily the purchase price

54:50>> that someone is paying or that someone

54:53is asking it's also you know appraisal

54:56takes account of

54:59So land can Apex could appraise in a

55:03range of something that if you were

55:05looking at right in downtown one acre

55:08might cost a lot more than than a 100

55:12acres out of the edge of town if there's

55:14no services provided. So it the

55:17appraisal takes into account a lot of

55:19that but but in some ways it's sort of

55:21levels that field. It's not what some of

55:24people are paying. It's what it

55:25appraises at. things that you know that

55:30value that appraisal that change. So it

55:33does sort of level them. It may not

55:36where somebody saying I paid 450 for

55:38this but that 450 would be different if

55:41they weren't in a development that had

55:44utilities available versus something

55:46that has to wait out

55:49>> and even based on the pre

55:53um I guess

55:57explan

56:00for all the projects

56:03and then continue. Thank you

56:17kind of share this one. So

56:24we'll move on from something very very

56:26technical about it to something that is

56:29fun

56:31to ensure.

56:33[laughter]

56:34>> So the first project we want to share

56:36with you all is the Hunter Street bike

56:38park. This is the um portion of Hunter

56:41Street that's located right behind the

56:43baseball field and wanted to show you

56:45all some of the precedent images our

56:47consultant is using to uh create inspire

56:51us and think us creatively on what can

56:54be provided for the bike. So this

56:56project will include um different types

56:59of biking skills um apply from the

57:04younger kids who can who are just

57:06learning the biking to somebody who's

57:08more thrillseeking and adventurous and

57:11taking them to a completely different

57:13height literally. Um and so the second

57:17part of it is all of the structures that

57:20will be involved in this. So we are

57:22thinking of including containers that

57:24would be double stacked to create

57:26exaggerated height for people to go up

57:29and down and enjoy that

57:32completely different

57:36>> nox

57:39has not volunteered to give us a train

57:41card yet we've been

57:47>> [laughter]

57:54>> want to share with you quick.

57:58You can see it

58:02>> this one.

58:11This is one of their projects that that

58:14nature have done and provided it to show

58:16us what the jumps and ramps would be

58:18that they need the height to be able to

58:20to get to.

58:26I I got I can see I was cutting up while

58:29um Councilwoman Sue was asking for a

58:32question about where was this where is

58:33this really

58:34>> um it is it's one of their project sites

58:37they send us a bunch of videos

58:43so you can go and

58:47>> after

58:52another And this is the actual bike

58:54track pract sorry this there is one very

58:58similar to this one in carboro um this

59:00one is a little bit larger one uh but it

59:03kind of gives you an idea of what will

59:04be

59:08so our consultant is right now

59:10finalizing um their site surveys we had

59:13meetings with the TRC all of the town

59:16departments to get their feedback on the

59:18project and based on what we have

59:20received up to now um There are some

59:22changes to the scope of work and I'll

59:25pass it on to explain what has changed

59:28in this.

59:29>> All right. So, um this is the design

59:31build contract. We've kind of presented

59:33some of it to you before. Um while we're

59:36we're at the point where the TRC has

59:39seen the site plans. We're ready to

59:41submit probably October, maybe September

59:44if we can get everything done um for

59:47site plan approval. But um from the very

59:50initial concepts of this and securing a

59:53design build firm to do this uh the

59:56design build process takes sort of a

59:58different step in that we don't bid

59:59construction because the design team is

1:00:01the construction team. Um but they do

1:00:04come back in that process once the plans

1:00:06are approved and provide us with a final

1:00:08cost. Um, and so, uh, we're just sharing

1:00:13that there are some things that were

1:00:15sort of maybe added or enhanced as a

1:00:19part of the design based on public

1:00:20engagement versus on like the fact that

1:00:23we brought to you that the residents

1:00:24were requesting and we thought for

1:00:26maintenance perfectly is an asphalt plus

1:00:28track would be better. So, those things

1:00:30do include a little extra cost. Um,

1:00:33we've been asked to provide a water

1:00:35connection. there is a shelter with a

1:00:37drinking fountain just in the park, but

1:00:40um whether or not we can provide water

1:00:41connection right at the bike park. Um we

1:00:44now need to look at the entire project

1:00:46site and find additional ADA parking

1:00:48spaces. Um even though you know this is

1:00:51within the developed park, it's now

1:00:54something that they brought those spaces

1:00:55closer. Um and uh we found out this year

1:00:59that the wind blows differently every

1:01:00year and the fireworks frenzy left a ton

1:01:03of debris at the business just to the

1:01:06north of us. And so our idea of these

1:01:08lovely shade canopies throughout this

1:01:11new bike that we need to ship to a metal

1:01:13roof um so that we don't lose our shade

1:01:16canopies during our fireworks. Um and

1:01:19then we talked about lighting. We've

1:01:21always planned for some lighting, but

1:01:24due to the concerns of adjacent

1:01:25residents, lighting the walking trail

1:01:28around because now we'll have two

1:01:29amenities open on the north and the

1:01:31south side 24 hours a day providing a

1:01:35lit walkway between those two be

1:01:37critical. And so that involves some

1:01:39additional like we might need an

1:01:41additional transformer and some lines

1:01:43run. So need an electrical engineer to

1:01:45plan something that we had said simply

1:01:48thought we could just install more

1:01:49lights. Um, and so while we anticipate

1:01:52that those will bring this project in a

1:01:55little bit over where we initially

1:01:56planned and have funding for, we've also

1:01:59identified that some of our last uh

1:02:02probably four or five capital projects

1:02:04and parks um came in under budget. So

1:02:07we're sitting with a little bit of of

1:02:09funds in several different project

1:02:11accounts. Um we're working with the

1:02:13budget teams to ensure that those funds

1:02:15can be moved over. So our belief is when

1:02:17we come back with the final plan and we

1:02:20adopt the cost to construct as a part of

1:02:23the design build process, we'll be

1:02:25identifying additional funds. So there

1:02:27won't be an ask for new just be

1:02:29reallocating those funds to this

1:02:31project.

1:02:33So that's our update for can we apply

1:02:35grant for these kind of projects. Um, we

1:02:39probably

1:02:41could look at some um I I think we're

1:02:44more likely to um find we've done some

1:02:47other resource things like getting trail

1:02:50builder groups maybe to come in and home

1:02:53build the the pump the um ramps and

1:02:56stuff. And we also um secured during uh

1:03:00Pleasant Park, Middle Creek, and Beaver

1:03:02Creek every piece of extra lumber, large

1:03:05logs, treated material for our

1:03:07boardwalks and bridges. If it was a

1:03:09substantial size, we collected it. And

1:03:12so we've asked our consultants um to

1:03:14ensure that they're using that material

1:03:16to build this versus saying we need to

1:03:18buy lumber.

1:03:21Um and so I think what we're doing is

1:03:23trying to do cost savings. um and then

1:03:26keep that project um on a schedule

1:03:29because I think if we stopped say the

1:03:31grants now we apply for would probably

1:03:33be two years out before we'd actually

1:03:34cut them in here um to to thank you. I

1:03:40have one quick question

1:03:42as far as far

1:03:50separated area for

1:03:55you.

1:03:59>> You saw the video of the track and this

1:04:01is what we found at we saw a three and a

1:04:035-year-old on the advanced bump track.

1:04:06They just ride it differently. They use

1:04:08they have the striders and like the

1:04:10beginner cyclists do you kind of more

1:04:13walk up to the top and then you roll

1:04:15down versus jumping and um so all of the

1:04:18things have sort of a beginner

1:04:19intermediate and advanced. What we heard

1:04:22and the reason we're talking about these

1:04:24stacked towers which have the probably

1:04:27the biggest cost increase of the track

1:04:29itself is that if you don't build things

1:04:32high enough with jumps that people can

1:04:34advance to. It's sort of like the skate

1:04:36park. everything that's beginner or

1:04:38intermediate, you lose the interest of

1:04:40people because they're not able to just

1:04:42continue to build skills. Um, and then

1:04:45we found out from our our mountain

1:04:46biking enthusiasts, there's not a lot of

1:04:49places to ride. There was that concern

1:04:51about losing Crabtree, although they are

1:04:53getting some of that back. They've

1:04:55opened a couple other areas, but a lot

1:04:57of people are looking for that place to

1:04:59sort of train so that they can go do

1:05:01those big Colorado rides or the, you

1:05:03know, mountains on the weekend. And so

1:05:04this would give them a chance to

1:05:06practice their skills, you know, like

1:05:08every night of the week and then go out

1:05:10on the weekend and have been utilizing

1:05:13that, not just taking, you know, one

1:05:15shot chance to to ride big and then for

1:05:18a couple months as I have. So we think

1:05:21that that will make it a place where

1:05:22it's activated and it's being used by

1:05:25like all ages and people will continue

1:05:27to grow that. And we also think we have

1:05:30some programing that could could enhance

1:05:32people's ability to learn by having

1:05:34local people who like just like the

1:05:36stakeholders kind of did but even more

1:05:38structured when we learn

1:05:41to class.

1:05:42>> What about liability? We saw some pretty

1:05:47people flipping back now somebody

1:05:51for the first time.

1:05:54What's how do we how are we as a child

1:05:57exposed making a facility like this

1:06:00available to

1:06:04>> I would offer I would offer it would be

1:06:06the same liability that we would have

1:06:08skate parking

1:06:10potential liability but that often

1:06:12becomes potential negligence if there's

1:06:14something we've done negative your

1:06:16liability

1:06:18there's something we've done not done

1:06:20that situation and there is some

1:06:22inherent risk that it's a by far that

1:06:25would be

1:06:26>> and so by the reason for question

1:06:28because I I feel the inherent risk here

1:06:31is a little bit higher

1:06:34skate park

1:06:36jump up and flip backwards, right? Um I

1:06:39mean they're

1:06:53[laughter]

1:06:58just the level of trace that I'm seeing

1:07:00just in the short video seems to me

1:07:03right. Um I just wanted to make sure

1:07:05that that's we're not inadvertently

1:07:08getting ourselves at the space that we

1:07:10did not

1:07:12>> is it possible that you have a um

1:07:16registration area you know to ask

1:07:19everyone to sign uh a waiver before they

1:07:24actually enter [laughter]

1:07:26because it's kind of you know scary all

1:07:28those flips.

1:07:30So is that possible? So we can't have

1:07:32people send we were whenever.

1:07:34>> So I'll offer a couple of things on that

1:07:37on that question. So part of the reason

1:07:40that Escape Plaza is so popular is it's

1:07:44you don't have that oversight that

1:07:46supervision on site. Um and and it's not

1:07:50fenced in which is what you typically

1:07:53like a lot of skate plazas are and or

1:07:56bike parks are. They're fenced in. So

1:07:58that that accessibility to the park I

1:08:01think um it it creates a more open space

1:08:04for vehicle and I think that um you'd

1:08:07have to have staffing to do that as well

1:08:09and that's something currently that we

1:08:11don't necessarily we don't do that at

1:08:14the plaza. I think when you add staffing

1:08:16somewhere it does kind of restrict

1:08:17people from coming to that site as well.

1:08:20Um I think it would be kind of difficult

1:08:22to to register each individual that

1:08:23would come out to ride too.

1:08:25>> Yeah. So we just put like in our own our

1:08:29website you have to be responsible for

1:08:31your own safety. If you just follow and

1:08:35break your

1:08:37[laughter]

1:08:40question

1:08:46>> so we do and Brian probably can speak to

1:08:49this too but there is an ordinance in

1:08:51place for for the skate plaza.

1:08:54So, um, this is something that would be

1:08:57we would have to discuss

1:08:58>> before it opens.

1:09:01>> That's right.

1:09:04>> It's another conversation, but we deal

1:09:06with

1:09:10a big challenge. They're not allowed.

1:09:15>> Thanks for the presentation.

1:09:21to the next one [laughter]

1:09:24and the shing

1:09:26to riding a bike.

1:09:30>> All right. So the next presentation is

1:09:32about the kidstown playground. Um you

1:09:34all know the kidstown playground have

1:09:36heard about it. It is at Kelly Park. We

1:09:39have seen the zoomed out picture. The

1:09:41bright colors of this playground. It

1:09:43looks wonderful. When you get closer,

1:09:46this is what you see right now. There

1:09:49are upstream has done wonderful job

1:09:52taking care of it for 27 years uh for a

1:09:56wooden play structure and now it's

1:09:59rotting in different places. Um

1:10:01structural members have been

1:10:03compromised. Um and you can see those

1:10:07are

1:10:09columns that hold the structure

1:10:11together. they have been um there have

1:10:14been installations in place to keep them

1:10:16where they are and now it's time to

1:10:18replace it and so we have taken on this

1:10:21project and moving on with um community

1:10:24engagement process u before I go to the

1:10:27next slide though I just want to give

1:10:28you a little bit of the background on

1:10:30this um playground as I said it's 27

1:10:33years old um community members 27 years

1:10:38back got together and um with private

1:10:41fundraising. They decided that they want

1:10:44to build up a playground at Kelly Park.

1:10:46There were lot of planning meetings for

1:10:50over a year per year per year per year

1:10:51per year per year per year per year per

1:10:51year per year per year and um engagement

1:10:53with local schools and parents and

1:10:56children. They all got together for 10

1:10:58day period to build this play out. So

1:11:01there is a lot of

1:11:04Angela and her family were involved with

1:11:06that too. So I got to hear a lot of

1:11:08stories um from her personal stories as

1:11:10well.

1:11:11Um and so we when we started the

1:11:14community engagement, one of the first

1:11:16thing that we heard was this lot of love

1:11:18for this playground and that stays

1:11:21central to this entire engagement

1:11:24process. Um so the first thing we did

1:11:27was we invited um community members in

1:11:31our focus group meetings. We had three

1:11:33focus group meetings. One was for the

1:11:35legacy people which the people who were

1:11:38involved 27 years back uh to build this

1:11:41playground to hear from them about what

1:11:43they encountered during that time. What

1:11:45are their stories? What are they still

1:11:48passionate about and what they want to

1:11:49carry forward with the new chapter of

1:11:52this playground. The second um

1:11:55engagement was with the present group,

1:11:57the fifth young parents and their

1:12:00children and hear from them about their

1:12:02experiences. what do they see at this

1:12:04playground? What do they experience at

1:12:06other apex playgrounds? And what do they

1:12:09want to see continue uh continue at this

1:12:12playground? And uh what are the new

1:12:14things we should do here? The second

1:12:17engagement was special events. So we our

1:12:21team was present at fest and fest. This

1:12:24was more of an awareness campaign for

1:12:28inviting people to know about the

1:12:30project, inviting them to take our

1:12:32online surveys and just um subscribe

1:12:35into our page so they can be um engaged

1:12:37throughout this process. And so we

1:12:40connected with more than 100 families

1:12:41during these uh two events.

1:12:45And then we had uh very recently we did

1:12:47youth workshop. So one of the best

1:12:50benefit of being at the community center

1:12:52here is we get to see kids every single

1:12:55day. And so we connected with the two

1:12:58summer camp groups. One younger five

1:13:01elementary school group and the other

1:13:02one was um elementary to middle school.

1:13:06And so we had two days workshops with

1:13:08both of those groups. They went to

1:13:11Hunter uh they went to the Kenny Park

1:13:14playground. They played in the morning,

1:13:16came back, had lunch and then worked

1:13:18with us to build playgrounds. And they

1:13:20gave us amazing innovative feedback on

1:13:23they what they want to see at this

1:13:25playground too. And so we had a lot of

1:13:27fun working with these kids um and get

1:13:30to hear from them what they would like

1:13:32to see here. And so through this we

1:13:36connected with almost 40 kids um in the

1:13:38summer camp.

1:13:40And then beyond that we have um um an

1:13:46engagement hub web page where people can

1:13:48go and check out uh what is the current

1:13:51pro progress on this project. We had

1:13:54several social media post. We reached

1:13:56out to the community through that and we

1:13:58had amazing um engagement from these all

1:14:02social uh media connections

1:14:04and then all of that resulted in more

1:14:06than seven 70 people participating in

1:14:09our online surveys which gave us more

1:14:11than 10,000 comments uh or more than

1:14:1510,000 responses overall and more than

1:14:172,000 comments

1:14:19or open-ended questions. So really

1:14:22amazing engagement throughout this

1:14:23process and now we are at a point where

1:14:27we analyzing all of these results. I

1:14:31wanted to share um some of these with

1:14:33you. So the first question we asked

1:14:36people was how they currently use this

1:14:38playground. So 97% people um really use

1:14:44it for playing at the playground

1:14:46followed by having their um open play or

1:14:49birthday party events things like that.

1:14:53The second question we asked them was uh

1:14:57what are the things that they would

1:14:58support at the new playground and the

1:15:00first response was physical activity

1:15:03followed by um providing connection to

1:15:05nature create more creativity and social

1:15:09interaction with other people.

1:15:12The third question was what style of

1:15:15play experience would you prefer? So

1:15:18this was one of the critical questions

1:15:20we wanted to hear from people. As we

1:15:22expected 40% people want more of a

1:15:25nature inspired play that speaks to the

1:15:27existing take out there. um followed by

1:15:30a mix of styles about close to 30% and

1:15:33then themed or magic the least feedback

1:15:37that producing for bright color model

1:15:44and then um we asked them to rank the

1:15:46comfort features. The first and foremost

1:15:49is the shade. that we've been once

1:15:50shared followed by a clear sight lines

1:15:53where parents and caregivers can

1:15:55supervise children and then access to

1:15:58water and restrooms as well.

1:16:01So

1:16:03based on all of these features just

1:16:05wanted to give you a quick highlight as

1:16:07I said earlier the first and foremost

1:16:10was what we experienced was the love

1:16:13people have expressed for this

1:16:15playground. Um, a lot of people made

1:16:18comments about how kids refer to this

1:16:20town, whether it's a castle, whether

1:16:22it's a town, whether it's a village,

1:16:24it's a fairy castle, all different types

1:16:26of anecdotal comments um, regarding

1:16:29very, very sentimental and emotional

1:16:31comments from people.

1:16:33Um, the second was the strong preference

1:16:36for nature inspired material,

1:16:38imaginative play that they want to see.

1:16:40Here there are lots of nooks and

1:16:42crannies that we think of where kids get

1:16:44tagged, they get hide in different

1:16:46places um and just create more of their

1:16:49own experiences and parents want to see

1:16:51that happen here.

1:16:54The third one is emphasis on shade and

1:16:56trees. This playground has mature trees

1:16:59surrounding it and people do want to

1:17:01they appreciate that and want to see

1:17:03that.

1:17:05The next uh thing down

1:17:09the accessibility and inclusion. Um this

1:17:12is the component that specifically

1:17:13relates to existing picnic shelter and

1:17:16the restroom. They are in great

1:17:18condition but there are some changes

1:17:20that we need to make for those um area

1:17:23accessibility is some of the issue. So

1:17:25once we touch the renovation project we

1:17:27have to make sure we make it area

1:17:29compliant. So those will be the um

1:17:31additional uh renovations that will

1:17:33happen along with the takeout

1:17:35replacement.

1:17:36And then the last one is some of the

1:17:38favorites that people said they love the

1:17:41sand pit that's there. They love

1:17:43greenway connectivity. A lot of people

1:17:45use greenway and walk up to the top and

1:17:48use the playground and play and spend

1:17:50time during weekends. Um and they

1:17:53appreciate the control access which is

1:17:55basically the fencing area. So they can

1:17:58see where the kids are going. They're

1:17:59free to ro from different places and

1:18:02parents just feel more secure having

1:18:04kids in that bounded area.

1:18:08And so um I don't know if we have time

1:18:10but we wanted to get all of your

1:18:12feedback as well. So we created a QR

1:18:16code for you all to take the surve

1:18:33>> and if it doesn't work later

1:18:40questions on this

1:18:44search

1:18:46the use of the kids to provide feedback

1:18:50is such a great thing. We need to tell

1:18:53that story. I mean, we need to figure

1:18:55out if people know that, you know, you

1:18:57had a bunch of kids while playing, they

1:18:59come back and say, "Here's what you can

1:19:00do." That's that's amazing. We should be

1:19:03telling that, but kudos to you guys

1:19:05coming up with that as an idea. That's

1:19:06that's just once again, as a staff, you

1:19:09are impressing with your innovation.

1:19:12I I mean I commend our staff for the

1:19:14engagement for this that you can tell by

1:19:16the numbers. They've really like touched

1:19:19on a lot of people and and using our

1:19:21current programs, the youth that we have

1:19:23in our current programs too was

1:19:25definitely beneficial in the input we

1:19:28received. So thank you for saying that.

1:19:31>> Great.

1:19:33>> Thank you.

1:19:35I I would also thank our communications

1:19:38team as well. They helpful in getting

1:19:40the word out and helping us.

1:19:42>> I think they're doing one of our best

1:19:46in terms of number of responses and how

1:19:48much speed

1:19:54to see.

1:19:57Thank you.

1:20:01the next project.

1:20:03>> Things are hopefully well looks like

1:20:06there's a lot to go where these are all

1:20:08one page slides and just updates.

1:20:11>> I I think we're talking about item

1:20:12number three potentially coming back so

1:20:16we can get through what's listed on item

1:20:19two,

1:20:19>> right? Well, three is more of a if you

1:20:22guys had questions and we had time,

1:20:23we're here to answer those.

1:20:26But really once we finish this, we're

1:20:29we're we're on a good choice. Um just to

1:20:31give you an update, Withers Routell is

1:20:34on under contract and completed the

1:20:37schematic design for this project and

1:20:39they're working on the design

1:20:41development drawings. Um the

1:20:43pre-application meeting was held today.

1:20:44We got feedback from CRC. They

1:20:48anticipate submitting the uh plan for

1:20:50approval October 1st of 2026. Um, we've

1:20:54got some other dates uh that get us to a

1:20:57tenative ribbon cutting in April of

1:20:592029. Um, I know that's a long way out,

1:21:02but that's also just scheduling all of

1:21:04the approvals, um, fittings, contracts,

1:21:08and getting construction underway. So,

1:21:10um, we're still on that same schedule.

1:21:12Things are going well. Uh they've got

1:21:15some new uh designs that include the 400

1:21:18foot um field that we had talked about

1:21:21fire access from the other side of the

1:21:24site and um and some other you know

1:21:27trying to work on some green

1:21:29infrastructure for drainage within the

1:21:31common course and and working with our

1:21:34water resources staff. So um that would

1:21:36also include the 250 person shelter on

1:21:39the south side, the open play line which

1:21:42is about five acres which is the cross

1:21:44country start finish line. Um and

1:21:46[clears throat] that big dirt hill

1:21:47that's there now a lot of it was used

1:21:49for the peakway bridge but everything

1:21:51else that's still there is while it will

1:21:53still be a somewhat of a hill all of the

1:21:56material that's on site will be used on

1:21:58site. So we'll have a balance site

1:22:00material with one flat. So

1:22:05high level on that. If

1:22:06>> I could just offer I know that things

1:22:09are working and and have to unfold in a

1:22:12certain way, but I just feel that need

1:22:14to for the record state that both of our

1:22:18Apex High and Apex friendship high cross

1:22:20country coaches are highly interested in

1:22:25opening the track before 2029. even if

1:22:28it were ugly and it just will function

1:22:31and it weren't both form and function.

1:22:33If there were some way they'd be willing

1:22:35to sign a waiver that says, "Hey, you,

1:22:39you know, stepping in the wrong thing."

1:22:41Um, uh, that I just wanted to emphasize

1:22:45how important that is to our high school

1:22:48cross country coaches, the title,

1:22:50>> right? And we I mean we worked with them

1:22:52and they did walk they several times we

1:22:54had all the high school coaches out um

1:22:58both Apex and like green level um I

1:23:01think greenhouse all like walk this site

1:23:04with us. The the real issue with that is

1:23:07is can we get that the hill and and that

1:23:10start finish because while the course is

1:23:12open, you need that distance that you

1:23:14see is the two dash lines and that um

1:23:17but it's something for us to look at how

1:23:19how we do time

1:23:20>> and like I said they weren't it wasn't

1:23:22to have means it was hey can I just get

1:23:24my team out there practice

1:23:26>> right

1:23:26>> thank you

1:23:27>> and my question is are this already in

1:23:31the budget

1:23:34focus.

1:23:36[laughter]

1:23:37>> Good question.

1:23:40>> The next project is the community uh

1:23:42Apex Community Park playground

1:23:44renovations. This is the smaller

1:23:46playground at Community Park. Um that's

1:23:49right off of the uh Laura Duncan Road as

1:23:52you enter the main drive. It's hidden

1:23:55behind the building just across from the

1:23:57hockey rinks. Um there's a parking lot

1:24:00that's accessible and the meandering

1:24:02sidewalk that connects to the Bay Area.

1:24:04This play structure is one of the

1:24:07smaller ones. It's you know getting to

1:24:09its end of its life. Um and um the

1:24:14pathways that connect to this playground

1:24:15are also not area accessible. So once we

1:24:18start the placement project for this

1:24:20one, we have to make sure that we are

1:24:22also replacing the sidewalks and make

1:24:25them area compliant. And so considering

1:24:28all of that, the the general big idea

1:24:31for this project is to comply with the

1:24:33universal design principles which is

1:24:35really looking at the physical abilities

1:24:38of children and their the sensory needs

1:24:40and mental abilities and creating

1:24:42something that um works for children of

1:24:45all ages and abilities. Um so this

1:24:49project um the entire ACP community

1:24:53project was initially funded I think

1:24:561994 by land and water conservation fund

1:25:00and um we just um connected with the um

1:25:05state and the state parks people who

1:25:08administer grant and we are uh applying

1:25:11for the next grant where we can uh

1:25:14request them for a replacement.

1:25:17uh funding support. So we will be coming

1:25:20back to you with a request to u make a

1:25:23commitment for the matching terms if we

1:25:26receive the LWCF funding from this

1:25:28project. Uh but this is one of the um a

1:25:33good candidate as we identified it for

1:25:35invested parks because it was already

1:25:38funded by LWC and there is a good chance

1:25:40that we we can get funded for the

1:25:42replacement.

1:25:43>> What's the what's the timeline of this

1:25:45project? We are just um starting with

1:25:48the consultant on the design process. So

1:25:51we be there um on site. So they finish

1:25:53the site survey and they're moving into

1:25:56the design concept

1:25:59>> and we'll have a lot of public a new

1:26:01public engagement process including that

1:26:04we've already because of the the

1:26:07universal design and inclusive

1:26:08playground. We've got like a bunch of

1:26:11focus groups with the sled hockey

1:26:13program that needs to bring to the site

1:26:15and other groups that that focus on the

1:26:20accessibility.

1:26:22Right.

1:26:25Under greenways, uh we completed the

1:26:27Haden Hall greenway feasibility study.

1:26:29This uh shows the proposed alignment

1:26:32that was re recommended as an outcome.

1:26:35Um if you can see how many times the

1:26:39yellow line crosses the blue line. Um

1:26:42you'll see that this uh site has a lot

1:26:45of constraints that the creek location

1:26:48and where we are able to install

1:26:51greenway um makes this a very very

1:26:54challenging infilled greenway design. Um

1:26:59part of the reason we did the study and

1:27:00didn't go into full design is because we

1:27:02had some concerns of what we knew about

1:27:05the area that this was going to be a

1:27:07pretty complex project. Um it also has

1:27:11dramatic uh slope issue at the tail end

1:27:15looking into um apex pe where we'd have

1:27:18a tremendous number of switchbacks to

1:27:20make it the the um running slope

1:27:25requirements.

1:27:29>> The greenway is the yellow line. The

1:27:32blue line is the creek. Blue dash is our

1:27:35wetlands that were mapped. Um and so uh

1:27:41just in the sense of this include five

1:27:43stream crossings, two road crossings,

1:27:45retaining walls and switchbacks. Um it

1:27:48would have a lot of permitting and

1:27:50coordination with other agencies and um

1:27:53somewhere between if we were to build it

1:27:56based on this is a concept plan not full

1:27:58construction drawings we're looking at

1:28:00something between about four and a half

1:28:02million to um $6 million if built out in

1:28:06a few years

1:28:08right now if we put this into our

1:28:10scoring matrix for prioritization to

1:28:13move it through um design and

1:28:15construction um it does not score well

1:28:18um a lot because it is in an existing

1:28:21neighborhood that already has sidewalk

1:28:23and pedestrian connectivity um because

1:28:26it doesn't connect like the park to a

1:28:29park or a park to a school. Um it's

1:28:31limited in how many people it generally

1:28:34would serve. Um, so our sort of staff

1:28:38recommendation coming out of the

1:28:39feasibility study is that we'll score it

1:28:41in our matrix, but you probably won't

1:28:43see it coming forward with the request

1:28:45for construction um funding um anytime

1:28:49in the near future unless at some point

1:28:51it started to be um balanced into that

1:28:55prioritization. So, just because we had

1:28:58it out there, you've had requests, I

1:28:59know, come through during budget time

1:29:01for this to be funded and and

1:29:04constructed. And so, um, we're just

1:29:06updating you that we've got the study,

1:29:08but we don't feel like at this time it

1:29:10it doesn't score as high as many of our

1:29:13other projects. And so, you probably

1:29:15won't see that.

1:29:18Did some public engagement, had the

1:29:20people on site, met with them, invited

1:29:23them, talked to them. Um and generally

1:29:26while they uh you know was almost 80%

1:29:29supported the additional section being

1:29:32added um we don't have

1:29:35even with that support it still doesn't

1:29:37score high enough

1:29:39to move forward.

1:29:43>> So next one is the branch greenway

1:29:46extension. Um this project um we

1:29:49received 200 um K in grant funding from

1:29:52brave trails. Um So this project is

1:29:55moving forward. The contract is

1:29:57currently underway. Um this project

1:29:59really provides enhanced connectivity to

1:30:02different schools and neighborhoods and

1:30:05ultimately it will help us connect all

1:30:08the way from Kelly Road to AT. So it it

1:30:12creates this really um townwide

1:30:14connectivity here.

1:30:17Um so yeah this one we had um 200k from

1:30:20the uh great trail state program and we

1:30:23moving with the design for that. Uh the

1:30:25general assembly just approved $15

1:30:27million non-recording funding again uh

1:30:31for the next fiscal year and uh this

1:30:34grant is yet to come for the

1:30:36construction projects but because we

1:30:38received the design funding uh we want

1:30:41to make sure we go through the design

1:30:43and if the grant funding is available

1:30:47and we will apply for construction

1:30:48funding for this project. uh and because

1:30:51it connects uh townwide to different

1:30:53destinations, it will definitely we

1:30:56think that it will score really high

1:30:58there's a good chance that we will be um

1:31:00getting fun construction funding as

1:31:02well. So that 15 million is uh for the

1:31:07whole state or

1:31:08>> entire state

1:31:15>> 13.7

1:31:19>> not not a lot [clears throat]

1:31:21but we did we have been engaging with

1:31:23oured officials at the state level and

1:31:26um actually had one come out the

1:31:30thanking

1:31:31the project came and walk the trail um

1:31:35and learn more about what we're trying

1:31:37to do with freeways and hoping that that

1:31:39would establish some good relationships

1:31:42for us to get additional funding.

1:31:44>> Would we need to acquire any?

1:31:48>> Yeah.

1:31:52But when we asked for the original

1:31:54grant, we met with the HOAs and you know

1:31:57made them aware and try to get their

1:31:59support for the grant. So several of

1:32:01them the HOA boards did provide us with

1:32:04letters of recommendation for the

1:32:05project. We're hoping that will assist

1:32:07us when we go to them to to do the final

1:32:11but they'll they all be engaged. We'll

1:32:12be meeting with them

1:32:15for the proposed

1:32:18the best location.

1:32:22Um this is one you've probably heard a

1:32:24lot of about. Um we are working on the

1:32:28renovation plans that are from basically

1:32:31just behind Kelington Court off the

1:32:33Patterson Road and the Pierce Farms

1:32:35neighborhood. Um to the west is NC540.

1:32:39A section of this was um to the west of

1:32:42the yellow area was an area that was

1:32:44already relocated due to flooding

1:32:46movement as part of phase one a creek

1:32:49section. We opened in October. Um we

1:32:52have a contract underway to do a

1:32:55feasibility study and in this location

1:32:58um one of the things that we have as a

1:33:00road lock is that the greenway is

1:33:02currently in the floodway not just the

1:33:04full plane. Um and in FEMA terms that

1:33:07usually means you're very very limited

1:33:08in what you're allowed to do. Um and in

1:33:11most cases they'll allow you to um cross

1:33:14like at a T but they won't let you

1:33:16parallel the creek. And in this case we

1:33:18parallel the creek. And so, um, we have,

1:33:23um, in our past activity as far as what

1:33:26we've proposed in the Capco project

1:33:28budget to this section for renovation is

1:33:32looking at all alternatives. It's

1:33:33considering land purchase. It's

1:33:35considering um, a stream relocation or

1:33:38enhancement. um we don't know what would

1:33:41be the best answer, but we want to go to

1:33:43FEMA with, you know, the the the options

1:33:46that are available and see what we can

1:33:48get them to agree on. Um this greenway

1:33:51section did have recreation trust fund

1:33:54funds allocated to it when it was

1:33:56originally constructed. Um and so in

1:33:59some ways we agreed that we'll keep it

1:34:01open and available in perpetuity. Um

1:34:04obviously if an agency won't allow us to

1:34:06do that, we have to find an alternative.

1:34:08And so, um, we're kind of taking the

1:34:11feasibility study to our consultants as

1:34:14a whatever it takes, we have to find a

1:34:16way. And so, we want to sit at the table

1:34:18with all the agencies that are involved

1:34:20and and figure out what we can do here.

1:34:24So, this is underway, but just I know we

1:34:26get a lot of letters about flooding and

1:34:28trees and we're just trying to clear out

1:34:31what we have been investing

1:34:40here, but close to 540 is kind of that

1:34:43bends as gets mared over and it leaves a

1:34:46lot of sense off there. that seems to be

1:34:50outside of the project.

1:34:51>> That was the area that was really bad is

1:34:53was right here and we relocated this

1:34:55this year last year. So that's that area

1:34:58has been fixed.

1:35:01>> So now it's the next section down where

1:35:04when it rains I walked out there boots

1:35:07and seen fish on the greenway swimming

1:35:10in the water. So

1:35:12>> they like to enjoy it.

1:35:16And then uh this is a feasibility study

1:35:20that we're getting ready to go under

1:35:23contract to um complete. We have three

1:35:25alignments that show the connection from

1:35:27JC Park at 55. Um you're working on the

1:35:31NC 55 widening plan is ongoing right now

1:35:35and um the peak plan is looking at

1:35:39transportation plans and density um

1:35:42development in this area. And so, uh,

1:35:45we've ruled out one as not being

1:35:47available at all, even though we have an

1:35:48ement because the slope wouldn't allow

1:35:51us and we'd have to cross the creek in a

1:35:53place where we really aren't able to.

1:35:55And so, we're going to have them study

1:35:56these two alternatives. Um, we're trying

1:35:59to align the timing so that when they're

1:36:01doing the 55 final plans, we'll be able

1:36:03to make those connections in a way that

1:36:06works with their plan. And so they've

1:36:09been involved in the discussions and our

1:36:11consult will help us finalize an

1:36:13alignment that we can get to there at

1:36:15least have a detailed plan so that

1:36:19whenever the timing of the construction

1:36:21and 55 and this would happen we can make

1:36:24those connections. It's just great

1:36:27separation grade separated.

1:36:30>> Show you the northern like little hook

1:36:32loop that would be great separated. Um

1:36:36that sort of hinges on whether or not

1:36:38that pond that's adjacent it's in

1:36:40existence at the time we would

1:36:41construct. And so we're evaluating that

1:36:44because there's times we've heard it has

1:36:46to be drained and other times, you know,

1:36:49we hear not. And so if it's not drained,

1:36:52there's really no way for us to go under

1:36:54that patient. So it will be one of these

1:36:57two spurs. It's not going to be like

1:36:59this. It's either it's gonna cross over

1:37:02on there or

1:37:04>> Yeah, the study will determine sort of

1:37:06out of those two alternatives.

1:37:09Which one of those is the most viable?

1:37:15>> Last you want to share with you?

1:37:18>> May one more comment.

1:37:22Um, so if the northern route is

1:37:25available to us, would we not construct

1:37:27that kind of extension to the south?

1:37:29>> We probably wouldn't.

1:37:32>> I'm kind of liking that extension to the

1:37:34south because it connects into the just

1:37:38highest neighborhoods a little bit

1:37:40further because now he has kind of a

1:37:42connection to um I

1:37:46think street is right here. No.

1:37:53>> Yeah. So you can actually walk along

1:37:56kind of parallel 55 into the Jefferson

1:37:59neighborhood without that southern spur.

1:38:08but not the same.

1:38:14>> See how it connects a larger slot to a

1:38:17relay that now all the way to AT that

1:38:22will be a great connection.

1:38:29>> Few more minutes. Last project

1:38:31by extension. Um this is the project

1:38:34that um um Sunset Lake Road um the

1:38:39Middle Creek Greenway the existing

1:38:41section starts at uh Sunset Lake Road.

1:38:44One side is Holly Springs, other side is

1:38:46Apex and then it continues northwards

1:38:50uh to Jesse Drive, production drive and

1:38:53then it will connect with alliance. So

1:38:57the section that we are looking at is

1:38:59one of the smaller sections but this is

1:39:01part of the larger corridor um it's part

1:39:04of the great trail state plan as well um

1:39:06and it's a region not only the townwide

1:39:09connectivity but also regional

1:39:11connectivity so that would connect apex

1:39:13to not only Holly Springs but we connect

1:39:15with Kerry and then further uh to

1:39:17Raleigh Kerry also has identified this

1:39:20project in their swift greenway corridor

1:39:23so we will be able to connect with

1:39:25schools and parks works um in Apex uh

1:39:28towards Kerry, we can actually book a

1:39:30full theater in the future. Um and so

1:39:33this is um even though it's a smaller

1:39:36project, it has the impact essentially

1:39:38and so our project really is a smaller

1:39:40section of that. It's a side path

1:39:42project and we have one of our um

1:39:46consultants on the on call consultant

1:39:48who will be working with us to take this

1:39:50project into the design. Um and next

1:39:55slide that shows the the details of this

1:39:58um the side path um design that we are

1:40:00looking at goes through majority of the

1:40:02industrial area. It will help us connect

1:40:05um those businesses through the greenway

1:40:07connectivity and the apartment complex

1:40:10that's on the northern side. Um there

1:40:12are some challenges with this project

1:40:14because of the constraint right of way.

1:40:16There are a lot of uh driveway cuts uh

1:40:19because of the businesses that are

1:40:20existing on either side.

1:40:22um and also some of the topography

1:40:24challenges because the road is so narrow

1:40:26there is quite a bit topography to

1:40:28expand that and include this side path.

1:40:30So our consultant will be helping us um

1:40:33find some creative solutions to make

1:40:35this project happen. They help us with

1:40:38cost est.

1:40:52>> [laughter]

1:40:52>> How uh keep doing it? Um this connects

1:40:59the southern side of Apex to Holly

1:41:01Springs and then into Terry. How do we

1:41:04from kind of the downtown area or the

1:41:06rest part Greenway system connect into

1:41:09this? because it's kind of a straight

1:41:11shot kind of up and over to carry, but I

1:41:15don't really see a whole lot of

1:41:16connectivity

1:41:18into like from the other greenway system

1:41:20like into Apex like to this part of

1:41:24>> I I think it's kind of a it's a it's a

1:41:27ultimately a side path connection on

1:41:30Central Street into downtown

1:41:35and then the swimming creek lead you to

1:41:38community

1:41:39So while that, you know, that's a

1:41:41partnership with Carrie for them to

1:41:43complete Swift, which will cross US and

1:41:4564, but end up in um Apex Community

1:41:48Park. Um but we do have sort of a gap in

1:41:52in greenway corridors on our master plan

1:41:54just because most of that area was

1:41:56already developed.

1:41:58We don't have any any space within there

1:42:01um

1:42:03to make any connections in that with

1:42:06existing development downtown along

1:42:08center street. So once

1:42:10center street

1:42:18>> if we uh connect to Holly Springs Kerry

1:42:21and

1:42:23will those three cities contribute

1:42:28portion of the cost?

1:42:31I think everybody's building their

1:42:33sections of it. Um I mean we I was

1:42:36talking to

1:42:38Harry staff yesterday.

1:42:41We were talking about a joint

1:42:42application for a part of this corridor.

1:42:45Um we know that because we got great

1:42:48trail state funding and it's on the

1:42:49great trail state plan that um we could

1:42:53either pursue that as an alternate

1:42:55branch. you know, the timing between the

1:42:58two and this sets up really well for the

1:43:01local area project to be a team. So,

1:43:05we're looking at all alternatives for

1:43:06funding. Thank you.

1:43:12>> Do we have a

1:43:14when will we know what the cost is? Is

1:43:16that feasibility study?

1:43:17>> Uh the feasibility study for middle

1:43:19grade was already completed. This is

1:43:21moving us into actual construction

1:43:23drawing business. So, we'll have we'll

1:43:25have

1:43:26and she was hoping

1:43:28that

1:43:30>> well we'll have to look we are with

1:43:34>> the green state

1:43:39we have our

1:43:42>> yes so that's one of the things that was

1:43:44brought up during the street earlier

1:43:45this year so they allocate about $500

1:43:49per project um in the state budget this

1:43:52year for bill 257 there is that's been

1:43:56included. Nothing additional for us, but

1:43:59that's marked for our call.

1:44:08>> Excited. So, [laughter]

1:44:11>> we appreciate your enthusiasm.

1:44:15[laughter]

1:44:16>> I'm excited.

1:44:22>> Very excited.

1:44:26We're done.

1:44:27>> So item three did have a list there and

1:44:31it was to see if there were questions. I

1:44:33do think that Greg, you're good. Alan,

1:44:37we could bring it back on the 20th.

1:44:39There's no rush on these, but I do think

1:44:41these are significant projects that we

1:44:44should discuss just a little bit. Is

1:44:46this

1:44:47where I feel like there's more in words

1:44:50just

1:44:55>> it could be depending on if there's a

1:44:56desire for questions but we can

1:44:58absolutely give you an update in writing

1:45:00on these and if there's any followup we

1:45:02do but

1:45:05>> yeah [laughter] I mean you could we

1:45:08could do questions on the front end and

1:45:10that way they're addressed before we do

1:45:11our summary too but that's however y'all

1:45:14want to But so how about this? How about

1:45:17we put together what we have? We can

1:45:18send it out to council and then if you

1:45:21all tell us, hey, we'd like to meet on

1:45:22this or have questions, we can add it to

1:45:24the October 20th.

1:45:26>> Yes.

1:45:27>> October 28th board session.

1:45:29>> Is that good?

1:45:33>> Okay. I figured

1:45:35>> there'll probably be enough questions.

1:45:39>> We'll give you an update on what we have

1:45:40on each of these now.

1:45:45We're talking across because I think we

1:45:47were trying to be on in January, but I

1:45:49think it would be too late at that time.

1:45:52>> I think we we had asked because we knew

1:45:54we had projects that were in motion that

1:45:56we that we were going to bring back like

1:45:58maybe even the kids town in January. So

1:46:02I don't know if any of those

1:46:08we'll work through

1:46:10>> general plan is to give you a written

1:46:12update on these and there

1:46:23>> thank you

1:46:26>> I think it's a

1:46:33>> [laughter]

1:46:44>> So, one administrative item that we just

1:46:47need to take action on is the vice chair

1:46:49appointments to the culture and arts

1:46:50board. So I'll read the the motion

1:46:52motion to correct the action taken by

1:46:54the town council on August 11th

1:46:56regarding the appointment of a culture

1:46:57art board vice chair by resending the

1:47:00designation of Bryant as vice chair and

1:47:02appointing Susan Curley as vice chair

1:47:05effected immediately through 3020.

1:47:18Thank you.

1:47:21>> Great work everyone.