[Music] [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] Banging [Music] Nat. Heat. Heat. [Music] Oh. [Music] Oh. Ooh. Oh. [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] D hey. Donald. [Music] Data [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] Hey everybody. [Music] [Laughter] [Music] First item is the greenway master plan. and we have Adam Foreman from parks and wreck. >> Members of the council, thanks so much for having me. Um so this is an update. Uh last May we came uh and spoke about some greenway um land use matters um to kind of get you up to date on where we were moving forward with and get the green light. Wanted to come back um and mostly share good news uh of progress we've made um and some continued um you know aspirations uh that we have for greenway oriented development uh and get your approval to move forward. So just a overview uh the greenway master plan. We give some background on specifically the land use uh components of the greenway master plan that came out uh in 2022. Some accomplishments to date regarding the comp plan amendments and upcoming UDO amendments. Uh the next phase of implementation uh and then this is somewhat separate from the greenway oriented development uh and land use. Some safety updates uh that council had requested. Uh, I'll hand it over to my colleague Lisa at that point to talk about some safety upgrades along the greenway. >> And uh, Adam, just to interrupt you, uh, councelor Lambert Melton cannot make the work session, so he should just go as an excused absence. Thank you. >> Uh, some overview of the land use components of the greenway master plan. Um, the first greenway master plan was in 1976. Um, it designated greenway corridors as well as easement dedication um, on new developments. uh our most recent master plan which came out a few years ago, updated these corridors, designated some priority trails that we wanted to focus on um and also proposed new kind of greenway trail oriented development, developer built trails, uh and also more active use along our greenway. So not just for leisure and recreation uh but also for kind of active use and commuting um to getting to school, getting to work, getting to services. So, it's those land use components that we've been moving forward with. Um, and have a few more proposals for you guys to consider. Um, so specifically accomplishments to date, uh, we adopted the new priority corridors and proposed trails in the comp plan, uh, and updated some of the policy language. Uh, that happened last year. Uh, and very soon, uh, we'll bring for public hearing, um, a couple of key UDL amendments. Um, many of you have had a chance to review these. want to present them to you now just in case there were any follow-up questions uh before the vote, but this has been approved by the text change committee uh by the planning board uh and has been scheduled for a public hearing. And specifically, it's easement dedications um to align with our proposed trail. Some developer incentives recognizing that we have aspirations for 100 more miles, hundreds of more miles of greenway trails. um some public private partnerships are going to be needed um in order to execute on those plans uh as well as some kind of administrative tweaks uh to the UDO. So the first one uh this you'll see that different uh widths of easement um are allowed in uh new developments uh when it comes to the greenways. 150 feet for Noose River, 100 ft for Crabtree and Walnut. And then there's this language about all other tributaries as established by the Raleigh parks plan. That was a floating document uh and we wanted to link it to the new 2022 plan and particularly the priority trails. So you'll see this is the updated language. It's all those proposed trails, priority trails will now be 75 ft easements. All other corridors are 50 feet. Getting that 75 ft width is important just for the topography for the distance to the stream bank, making sure that those are constructable. Secondly, uh this does allow for reduction of this is language that was kind of inspired by Kerry um a reduction um to 30 feet if the developer builds the trails. Um so a lot of incentives around developer built trails uh that they only have to designate a 30-foot easement um if the developer themselves build the trails and importantly news river buffer rules would still be um uh entailed in this or it would still be in play. So this doesn't in any way negate that. And what's important is this developer greenway trail city of Raleigh standards. So they could only reduce it to 30 ft if they are upholding the city of Raleigh standards in terms of width and constructibility. We've actually had a lot of success um in recent years working with developers when they bring in site plans to encourage them to develop and to build trails. Unfortunately, a lot of cases it'll be 4 foot width, six foot width, there'll be staircase involved. It's not the trails that we want. So, by putting this in and incentivizing develop build trails, but also the type of trails that we're looking for and not just at their behest, um is really important. So this is a small tweak uh but an important one for getting a more kind of fluid greenway network uh and also working with developers in developing these requirements and incentives. And along those lines, there's also this open space incentive where if you the developer builds the trails themselves, that easement width counts two and a half towards your open space incentive. Um so it's a way to once again encourage developers to build more trails. Uh we're excited about these. So and we can swing back to those. Those are coming to you guys soon for a vote on those easement widths on those developer incentives. Uh but we also want to talk about some next steps for greenway trail oriented development. You know obviously these this package of UDO amendments which is coming to you guys soon has a lot of this greenway trail oriented development. Thinking about developers building trails when they construct their um new buildings and thinking about those easements uh and integrating um construction uh with trail oriented with trails. But we wanted to kind of more zone in on this um this angle of trail oriented development. You know, inspired by places like Atlanta and New Orleans and Bentonville who have done a really great job um connecting trails with new development and encouraging active transportation. Uh so this is something that has been in the comp plan that we've heard from council um I think specifically after the interlocal trip uh to uh to Atlanta. But you know the benefits of greenway trail oriented development leverages existing infrastructure. So, we're not just building new greenways to existing de to um populated areas, but also bringing population to the greenway, bringing services to the greenway, bringing schools to and jobs to the greenway so that people can use it uh for active use. Uh the vibrant walkable communities, obviously sustainability in terms of encouraging biking and walking for daily trips. And then a really important one is we have made a lot of surgical investments over the last years to make our greenways um more appropriate for active use in terms of and we'll talk about this lighting in tunnels in terms of glow-in-the-dark strips in terms of um lighting with solar lighting in terms of neighborhood connections. So we're building a greenway network that can be used throughout the day throughout the seasons for trips to work, trips to school, trips to services, trips to shopping. And so we've made these investments and we want to kind of welcome uh more development along these trails so that people can use it uh for that use not just leisure which is and recreation and exercise but also for those uh transportation trips for the commuting. So in terms of case studies and this is important kind of working with um transportation and working with planning we looked at a bunch of um you know other cities that have very active uh trail networks and have greenway trail oriented development and I think there were kind of four key takeaways from this research uh and this work. I think one is we have a very distinct type of greenway. The belt line of course was built on rails to trails mostly outside uh of floodway. our system is built along streams. So that doesn't lend itself to the same type of development patterns and something to be very conscientious about. Another one is not every trail is appropriate for uh development. You really want to zone in on those ones that are high use close to downtown. So it's not the trails in the woods, but those ones that are already um can be and are, you know, used for active development. Another one is when you're building new trails, connecting with those developers so that you are integrating trails into those developments so that uh both you're sharing costs but also kind of planning ahead. Um and then lastly, it's that connection with transport, you know, Raleigh transportation or just transportation and streets in general is so essential. Charlotte is a great example of that where it goes from county parks onto kind of multi-use paths in the right of way and back into parks. So it's really important kind of those linkages between transportation and parks and greenway to create that fluid network. So bringing those lessons uh we started kind of with an analysis of can we build um transit kind of greenway oriented development today. Uh and the answer is really yes. You know looking at oak city trails. So these are these active greenways that are already used for active transportation. It's basically Crabtree and Walnut. you'll see that about 70% of the zoning is for high density development around those areas. So you have we ranked from five to zero all of our land uses. So you can see there's already as of right you know opportunities um for five over ones for mixeduse development along the greenway. So it's less about not having the envelope and more about what is um you know stopping developers from taking advantage of these opportunities. We did a similar analysis with our high priority trails. Once again, for these are the trails that we'd like to build over the next 5 10 20 years. Uh most of them are within uh you know high density areas where mixed use um is already allowed. So it's less about the mapping exercise and changing the envelope around greenways and I it pointed us to another direction that's really important which is how we the the design a greenway trail oriented design rather than development. how we ensure that new developments are actually integrated with the greenway to encourage that active use. Um, and you know, this development I think is one kind of an unfortunate example where we don't see a lot of that those design elements. Crabshet Creek Greenway, which is an Oak City Trail lined entirely with a fence, so no access to this development. Parking lots line the greenway. There are no pedestrian networks connected to it. All of the homes are pointed away from the greenway rather than connected with the greenway. and it's somewhat out of sight, but Wake Tech has a campus there. Wake Med is here. There's four schools. This could be an area that really brings people to the greenway and encourages active transportation commuting and instead it's turning its back to the greenway. So, thinking about, you know, developments that have not kind of taken on this greenway orientation um and how we can build, you know, through our UDO, how we can encourage, you know, better trail oriented development. And so these were the three elements speaking with planning and transportation that were big takeaways. And one was, you know, a requirement through the UDO for internal pathways to connect to greenway trails. So you're really integrating the development itself and beyond to the greenway. The second one is green trail oriented design. So frontage uh and openings are on the greenway. So it's not the back and the parking lot, but you actually have frontage on the greenway as we've seen with other photos in this slide. uh that is inspired by New Orleans and Charlotte both have uh very good code on that. And then the last one that's not represented from this picture, but is that street side greenway requirements. And to kind of go into that, you know, for our trail oriented map, most of these are the greenways we picture, you know, in our heads of going through on on the creeks or going through the woods, but a lot of our high priority trails are actually intended to be uh roadside or or street side. you know, this is Trion, this is Lake Wheeler, this is Sanderford, this is Lenor. Um, and thinking about how in these trails that are meant to be in the right of way, how we're designing um those sidewalks, those rights of way. And you'll see in this photo, this is actually in the UDO, the design standards, there is a requirement for developers to build this kind of multi-use path, 12 to 18 ft appropriate for greenway, but they have options for multi-use path or a narrower sidewalk with a bike lane or other orientations. What we want to do is encourage specifically the multi-use path um to be developed so that you do when you there's a new development you had this seamless integration of greenway on street trail um with the um uh with the rest of our greenway network and importantly just to point out last week you heard from uh transportation on the active mobility plan the bike plan a lot of their priority corridors overlap with this um so we see Trion is one of them lake wheeler is another one of them lenor which I've already mentioned those are all ones that are high priority projects for them. So, working closely with transportation so that we're building a network that's seamless whether you're on the street or in the woods, creek side or roadside, always feeling that, you know, fully protected network that's that's fully integrated um is critical. So, these are kind of the next steps going forward. We want to get your kind of green light um and kind of hear your thoughts. Uh in terms of UDO amendments, it is those greenway connection requirements, having those internal pedestrian paths connected to the greenway for new developments that are adjacent to the greenway. It is those frontage requirements if you're adjacent to the greenway. And then for street side greenway requirements, kind of the multi-use path where uh there is new right ofway and new development uh that is meant to be a roadside greenway. So kind of very uh regulatory in the UDO, but at the end of the day, it's these design standards that is going to produce developments that embrace the greenway and and hopefully inspire others to do the same. Kind of showing the benefit of it. Before we move on to safety, maybe it's worth it to ask since we're kind of pivoting to a different subject to uh answer questions on just these. >> Councelor Silver and then Harrison. >> Adam, thank you so much uh for the presentation. Uh just another case study to take a look at. It's a suburb of Boise, Idaho. I'll get you the location, but uh going down that greenway, stunned by the amount of outdoor restaurants and residential. Uh hadn't seen anything like it, so I have a lot of pictures I can send to you. Uh I support this 100% love the direction. Uh I know it's focused primarily on greenway frontage. >> I don't know where parks fit in. Uh we just approved West in Peace last week. There's a desire to front on uh Smoky Hollow Park and didn't know if that is included. I don't know if you make a distinction between parks and greenways. I know that staff is working on an agreement to see how those two projects blend. Uh so I support the greenway frontage requirements makes perfect sense. Having development versus a parking lot. Uh so can you just answer that question about is this extending also? Yeah. Is it specific to just greenways or are there opportunities for parks as well to have that frontage? >> As we were envisioning it, it's just greenway and of course greenways and parks are are tightly connected. We truly do have people talk about park system very lightly, but we do have a park system of a greenway that connects to really a huge percentage of our existing parks. Smoky Hollow is example that will have a greenway um and a park. So in that case, because there is greenway there, the the pigeon house branch, that would include that development if it came in the future after the UDO was passed. But no, we weren't thinking of parks on their own. But that's something worth considering because it has, you know, some of those same benefits. >> Councelor Harrison. >> Yeah, just two questions. I was curious on the um incentive for developers, the 30 foot easement. Um so it looks like the requirement that we have at a minimum is 50 ft, although it does depend. um you know if you're how close you are right to the news river or the creeks. So can you tell me about how does that 30 ft do the job when we're not you know requiring that or we do more. >> So the same buffers from streams would apply in terms of state law. So in terms of the protection of the creek you know that would still apply from you know from state regulatory framework in terms of the 30 ft it is you know there are times where um a developer can build and I think the important element is kind of two greenway standards in terms of having the 10 to 12ft path having a shoulder making sure that it is level and stable um so if they can do that within 30 ft then they're kind of allowed to do it so it's more of prove to us when all these easements are a we ask for 75 ft because that gives us a greater chance that landscape and the creek that we're going to be able to build a stable and protected trail to our standards within 75 ft. If the developer can prove they can do that within 30 ft, then that is also um sufficient. >> So just to confirm those noose river and the Crabtree and Walnut Creek rules, they would be the same, but then it's those proposed trail corridors and all other corridors, that's where it would be different. >> Yeah, that's right. >> Okay. Thank you. And then also curious um you had mentioned that open space could be counted with um trail dedication and easement multiplied by 2.5 and so I'm just curious do you expect existing developments you know that have already been built out to take advantage of this or is this more for new developments that you anticipate? >> All this applies to new developments so to new site plans. Um I I think the open space incentive is often very successful in building kind of um green space within a larger development but sometimes it leads to kind of low density and sprawl. Like the idea is that this would be very intentional about building a greenway path which we know um development and residents uh would use. Um so it is incentivizing that that development of the greenway trails but only for new development to your question. >> Okay. And then for those new developments, um, will we see like in our staff reports, for example, in a reasonzoning case like a mention of this like this property is on the greenway trail or could be and they could use the open space for this. >> Yeah. I mean, I'll I'll leave that to land use to when they to planning when they present. I will say that in a lot of cases, we did an analysis of, you know, new developments um that have come over the last five years. In most cases the open space requirement is less than if you had built a greenway trail there. So the two and a half but there are some cases where that two and a half would be meaningful. Um so how much how often it's taken up we will see but yeah we can mention those with um with new site plans. >> Yeah I think it would be helpful in the staff report just to know oh we are part of a possible greenway trail here. >> Thank you. >> Any I'll go. Well, thank you for this presentation. And you know, to me, greenway oriented development is one of the most exciting transformational things we could be doing. >> And to me, it's about embracing your local ecology, being authentic, actually, right? Uh not just paving over and putting a grid, but honoring this incredible like creek and waterways we have here in Raleigh. Um I guess just multiple questions. this idea that we are on right flood zones and I appreciated your zoning map that shows these are areas suitable for density but we also have to do this in a way that honors uh the flood planes and is responsible where we're not creating new problems that you know we saw in the 80s and 90s. So, are you going to kind of map out where there are parcels along greenways that are big enough and appropriate? Um just curious how we take it from this step to >> we've done some of that exercise not including these maps but we looked at where there is at least an acre outside of the flood plane um along these kind of from 1/8 mile from the greenway trail and it was you know over 300 lots like so it is pretty significant the number of lots where you are outside um of the flood plane. Obviously there are areas where that's not the case um and would be less suitable for development but that was top of mind in talking to storm water. There were two ele two things that we looked at. One was how many lots have at least an acre outside of the flood plane. So that kind of buildable space and especially for the kind of mixeduse development we're talking about. But then secondly, where we see a lot of permeable lots. These are kind of old industrial lots, used, semi, vacant lots. So there actually is opportunity just outside of the flood plane to replace these kind of oceans of pavement with u mixeduse development that includes a lot of green storm water um elements. So in a lot of ways that kind of that development will actually make the area kind of more permeable and kind of and more sustainable than what we have right now which is you know large underutilized parking lots right near the greenway. So another just again referencing this map you know the noose river when we're thinking that a lot of this is about prospective and the noose and how powerful that could be as we grow out into that area >> sort of having the the master plan really think about what that looks like and I guess are we specifically having sections of the comprehensive plan or UDO that really address new river development and all of It's >> I we'll take our kind of cues from you of how we integrate this into the comp plan. Um you know that was something for consideration. The noose is not actually is not an oak city trail. Yeah. >> Because it is you know so far from the downtown core in terms of thinking about for commuting to jobs to services. It is more of kind of a leisure path. So it wasn't kind of top of our mind in consideration of greenway oriented development. We kind of focus more on Crabtree, Rocky Branch and Walnut. But yeah, I I think the answer is, you know, what we do with comp plan is still in consideration. >> And then I do hope retrofit, you know, I think about Crabtree Valley Mall and of course some of the changes going on there which may be that may be too far a field to really reorient towards Crabtree Creek. However, it does seem like there would be other examples. some of the ones you showed that really missed the boat on embracing the greenway that's right there on their property and how one could do some simple retrofits of connecting trails and things that that make it more of an amenity >> for those who missed out. Uh >> and actually Crapree Mall is probably opportunity where there there will be an opportunity because you know they'll have to offer a site plan if they're thinking about redevelopment in that area and when a site plan for site plan review these would apply. Yeah. So there would be an opportunity to retrofit these areas um for the trail area development that we're looking for. >> Okay. And then two more comments. I just want to piggyback on Mitchell Silver's comment about the parks and greenways. I mean one of the I know Z12 was controversial height and there's many things but one of the special parts about that was it was greenway oriented park oriented development >> and it is one of the examples of the direction. >> Yeah. from that perspective of the project that I think was important and I I highlighting some of these other projects I think right along Dixs >> some of those projects are actually orienting right creating coffee shops there so highlighting kind of what this looks like would be helpful for folks >> um and then finally this begs public private because uh as you know we don't have a lot of amenities right now on our greenways and the parks department um there's a possibility right to do maybe there's a coffee shop at Lake Johnson on the greenway trail or may or Shelley Lake on the greenway trail and I think Dicks Park has done a great job on their food and beverage uh and having that be successful revenue generating. So just what are your thoughts on naming rights public private um and ways the parks department can really accelerate this? Yeah, in terms of, you know, having more amenities along the greenway, especially on our property, we we did launch the um food truck vendor rental program where we selected six locations along the greenway where food trucks can rent. We've seen um some interest in that, but I think to your point having like a not brick and mortar, but more of an established site um is often more successful. One thing that we're hoping to carry in the future is a lot of our parks don't allow for um you know, whether coffee, little coffee kiosks or otherwise. uh because of the zoning allowing an accessory use so that we can have that is important as well. So that's also something we're looking at in the zoning code. >> Okay. Thank you. As you can tell, I'm excited. >> Yeah. All right. Awesome. >> And the city is called Garden City, Idaho. >> Garden City. Okay. >> I will I just will send city manager the images more closer to Raleigh's fabric. >> What's that? Oh, I'm so sorry. >> The city is Garden City, Idaho. And I will send images to the city manager. So we'll send it to Park. So you can see it's more lower scale density along the greenway versus high, but it gives another option and it's all greenway oriented development. Did you? That's great. >> Yeah. Now I'll just say I would be helpful. It sounds like you all were go if you'll go back to that high the high density map slide. >> Um and you said y'all had gone through an exercise with the you know over one acre outside the blood plane etc. It might be helpful if we could be provided with that when you finish the exercise so we have an understanding. You know, we we visited the Atlanta belt line. It's beautiful and awesome, but that was purpose-built for the type of development that's there and is not built in the flood plane. Um, and so I think, you know, as you as you already noted, like that distinction in how we've built out our trail network is is really important. And so, um, I don't know, it would be helpful maybe to have >> Yeah, we could provide that map of all the lots that have at least an acre outside. >> Okay. >> All right. So, I'll kick it over to my partner for the safety side of the conversation. >> Hello. My name is Lisa Schiffer. For those of you that don't know me, I um do work um part of the the greenway group and I am going to give an update on um some safety measures that we've placed have put in place. Um now that we've explored our greenway oriented development and how that can shape neighborhoods, um we'll shift it to the safety measures and programs that make our trail system accessible, secure, and enjoyable for everyone. We've recently made some several key safety improvements across our trail system. Tunnel lighting is now installed in most previously unlit tunnels with one at Wade Avenue, Rey Creek Trail that is still under review. Trail connectivity is expanding which not only makes it safe, easier for people to get around, but also improves emergency response. At Lake Lynn and Lake Johnson, we've widened trails. We resurface them and we've provided pavement markings to make them safe. Um, we've also added pavement markings in high use areas with in our capital area greenway system to reduce conflicts and keep all trail users moving smoothly. And I can say without incident, we haven't had a reported incident of conflict of uses since we installed those markings. These capital improvements are important, but safety isn't just about infrastructure programs and community engagement also play a big role. Ongoing programs uh to help enhance both safety and trail experience. Um we've been working on those in fiscal year 26. Funding supported new signage and way funding to help people navigate the trails more easily. Our outreach programs better with a buddy, kindness in motion, and treasure our trails encourage safe and respectful use of trails. And trail activation through public art, food trucks, as Adam had mentioned, and community events is bringing more people to the trails, increasing visibility, and making everyone feel safer. Of course, keeping trails also depends on how we're maintaining the trails. Regular maintenance like sweeping, trail surface enhancement, vegetation control is critical to keeping our trails accessible and secure. Since 2001, we've completed over nearly 1,500 structural and construction repairs. We have over 200 vegetation management tasks. Altogether, that's more than 2.2 2 million invested in maintaining safe high quality trails. Lighting is another component of safety and also requires a careful balance. Currently, trails operate from dawn to dusk. As you know, uh limited lighting is due to environmental concerns, floodprone areas, and installation and maintenance costs. As part of the capitol area greenway master plan, we have provided guidance on prior prioritization of lighting by troll type. We've talked about the oak city trails in the previous presentation and those are the trails that would u be pri prioritized for lighting. Scenic trails remain mostly unlit. Sorry, I didn't move to the next slide. uh scenic trails remain mostly unlit to preserve the natural experience and neighborhood trails have proposed lighting at key access points. We have also explored innovative lighting solutions to improve visibility without compromising the environment. One example is the glow-in-the-dark pavement pilot on Crouchy Creek in the innovation corridor which provides visibility without traditional lighting. We are continue to work with partners to identify future lighting solutions that balance safety cost and inter environmental impact. Finally, safety depends not just on infrastructure and programs, but also on the people keeping our trolls secure. Public safety is reinforced through our professional patrols and volunteers. Since fiscal year 22, the Raleigh Police Parks and Greenway unit has conducted over 6,000 park visits and over 2400 greenway patrols using bikes, UTVs, horses, um, and foot patrols. The Greeno Volunteer Program also makes a big impact. In 2024, 50 volunteers contributed over 5,000 hours interacting with trail users more than 22,000 times. Their efforts help keep the trail safe, welcoming, and enjoying enjoyable for everyone. And that wraps it up. Um, we do have our Sergeant Burgess here as well to answer any um, safety questions from RPD, but happy to entertain any questions. >> Questions on Yes, Councelor Jones. >> Thank you so much. I have two questions. Um the first one uh related to the transportation department because as we grow our networks and uh as we're seeing in the upcoming big creek big branch creek when it's going to cross over six forks will those pavement markings and all that would that be under transportation or because it's a greenway trail would that go under this? >> It would fall under parks. >> It would fall under parks. So, as we grow and we're beginning to make those connections outside of just small, you know, in in smaller uh greenway trails, when they begin to cross those bigger streets, uh the parks department will begin to take on that. So, >> you're talking about where it does intersect with the streets. >> That is an ongoing discussion with Raleigh Transportation on who maintains, but if it's part of the greenway network, so far it has been parks responsibility. So, anytime the city has any kind of on street connection, um I'm thinking about the Trenton Road connection that we did an on street um bicycle style facility, uh Raleigh Parks does maintain that. So, until like a policy would change, parks um maintains those facilities. >> Yeah, it just reminded me because I was in our transit and uh committee and we talked about how low their budget is in from transportation and able to handle pavement markings. So, I just wanted to make sure that we're clear on who's responsible that I'm clear on who's responsible for what moving forward. So, maybe that's a question for later. Um, but that's number one. And then number two, in terms of the police department, I know that it's between six and eight officers for the greenway unit, I think. And as we grow, do you guys have metrics in place that say when does that need to grow? When does that need to increase? Um, what does that look like for you? Hey, uh, Sergeant Jeff Burgess, Raleigh Police Department. Now, as of stands, the Raleigh Police Department has now dedicated 12 positions. >> Sweet. >> Applicably, we have six working right now. >> Beyond that 12, that'll take another study to get to that point. >> Okay. Right. So, from what it I guess my question goes beyond what we currently have, but is there a plan within parks or greenways or with the police department that as we add more trails, is there like a number that triggers, oh, we need to add two more officers to this because we're getting bigger? I guess that's my question. >> Oh, there is a population in crime relative. That's how we got to 12, but beyond that, I could not tell you any further how that would go. >> Okay. I just know in and and this question isn't for I just think and overall as we talk about greenway growth, I know that um concerns because there have been issues in the past with uh some incidents. I just want to ensure the public that we're proactively thinking of that and understanding that adding more people to the greenway and continuing to do that, which is lovely and I want that to be done that we're also have a metric that says we're going to make sure constant metrics being measured to make sure that we have enough officers >> say per capita if you want to say. Okay. >> And that's all that's broken down to subsections, but we don't really need to get into there. But yes, the answer you're correct there is. >> Thank you. >> Yep. Councelor Silver and then Patton. >> U Thank you so much for the update. Um had a question about lighting. uh particularly we're about to move into a season where dusk could be as early as 4:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. Uh and you mentioned on one of the slides regarding lighting that you have priority type trails. Uh and then Adam had just mentioned uh the potential of solar lighting which doesn't require the same infrastructure. Uh so just wanted an update. I know this is very costly. There are some of our trails and greenways are long and I can see the scenic trails are a bit different. Uh but to extend the usability and life of some of these greenways, is there a strategy to increase uh some of the lighting on some of the greenways using solar so you don't have to extend utilities that far? Uh just a question because it said here it's on Oak City trails. It's strategic lighting and courage and then neighborhood trails at the access points only but along the trail itself cuz when I go out there bikes are using lights, runners are using headlights. Uh yes, the paving with the phosphorus is going to help. But just want to get an understanding about uh the the future as we see our greenway oriented development that we want these to be attractions of expanding the lighting knowing there's cost implications. And I want Adam, if you can come up to speak to the solar lighting um pilot project, but we are uh we are exploring solar lighting. So the answer to that is yes. Um I don't know of the location of that yet if that has been >> uh selected. So I'll let Adam >> Yeah. So there is working with innovation. Um there's actually a mile of greenway trail around Industrial Drive and Atlantic that we've, you know, um dubbed the innovation zone of the Greenway corridor where we've tried out a lot of new innovations. One has been the uh glow-in-the-dark um lining. Another one has been certain kinds of signage. More broadly, we've launched a greenway app. And then latest one that we're coming out with uh is the solar lighting fun. It's a German company, very reputable. Um, and what's really good about, so we'll be um, unveiling that over that kind of mile of innovation corridor uh, over the next several months. What's nice about it is to your point, it can be well timed. You know, only bring you through dusk. Maybe it's 4 to 6 p.m. You know, we're very cognizant of flight patterns and when we do and don't want to use light along the greenway, but it'll allow us to expend expand um, those hours where the greenway is usable at the end of the day. So we'll be beginning with, you know, that mile stretch of greenway trail and then kind of taking it from there to see if it's a successful model, bringing it to other parts of Greenway Trail. >> And quick other point before my colleagues ask a question, would it be fair to say if we approach this greenway oriented development, those locations where you have buildings fronting the greenway actually will cast light onto the greenway for those segments. we not only get eyes on the greenway, but you also get light on the greenway for those segments where the building is adjacent to the greenway. >> Yeah, that's that's absolutely true. And I I think Oak City Trails has become it was a really important distinction that was made in the last greenway master plan to focus on increased maintenance to make sure those trails are always open after floods, to think about lighting, to think about greenway oriented development. So, we're really making different kinds of investments along those Oak City trails because we think there's a an opportunity for active transportation um along those uh and but similar to your point is when there is new development that that frontage also provides light. A big reason why there's lots of reasons why there's not lighting along the greenway, but wiring a greenway right next to the uh a creek is very expensive and very challenging. some of the greenways in remote areas but where there is new development and it is fronting it rather than us providing those electric lines it is from the development and providing the light to the greenway. So yeah that is a real opportunity that comes with that frontage. Um, my questions are for the sergeant, I think. Um, one is about how, it's kind of a twofold, so I'll put them both out there. Just sort of in general, how are we divvying up six people across these hundreds of miles of greenway? That's a lot of places to be at one time. And, um, I do get some resident feedback around um, sort of, I don't know, nuisance behaviors like off leash dogs on the greenway. And it's my understanding that's um falls to RPD, but often because of the vast distance that needs to be covered, by the time an officer could respond, the the nuisances cleared, the dog and owner are are gone. So, just kind of wondering how we how we manage that across such a large system. I can um I'll invite Sergeant Burgess down here again to answer how we spread out those officers throughout our park and Greenland system, but and then he might also have some information on the dog leashing. Um I from from Raleigh Parks and some of the things that we have done we've done um through our user safety campaigns we have advertised you know how dogs should be on leashes and promoting safe use of the greenway system and um how and why leashing leashing your your pet when they're on the greenway is important. Um, we have that information too on our websites and anytime we have any opportunity to communicate that through educational information, we do um do that. But I don't know if you have any information on how that's addressed. >> Um, we can certainly follow back up if we have to, but if you could answer the question about >> Yes. the the dog leash. So the officers um when they bring report back that's that that's a daily interaction. They have uh they really stride on voluntary compliance. They will talk we'll basically talk to him and get voluntary compliance. We haven't really had any interaction where it went bad. So occasionally about every 2 3 weeks they'll start on the map indicating where are they getting the most offenses. Then internally luckily for us animal control is in my building. So, we'll consult them and for a while there every I don't remember what day it was week. They would team up for about three hours in the morning and go to those areas where they're the most offended. >> And I didn't get the other question. I'm sorry. >> Uh just like how are you distributing six people across so many hundreds of miles of Greenway? >> It's I'll be open. It's very difficult with six. You have 125 miles and 235 parks. Um, I do the best I can. Um, on the field ops side, I'll get field ops reports and it's basically where I would or anybody in this table would want to see an officer during that time. I tried to get an officer there. If there's es and flows with crime and desires and wants and needs with many departments that I interact with, I really just try to get the officers there at that at that point. So you don't have like a you don't have like a officers aren't broken into pairs and then they have a beat and so some of them are covering Capital Area Greenway and some of them are covering Walnut Creek. >> No, there's um you'd have to have many more officers to in that line of thinking. >> Got it. >> Okay. >> Okay. Helpful part. >> Um yeah, we've got somebody who shall remain nameless who loves riding on the greenway um on her bicycle um without a buddy. Um, but I guess this question is related to um I know installation and maintenance cost is a concern about um putting in lighting, but is there like a ballpark estimate? And I know you're in the the uh um the stages of sort of testing out the solar uh infrastructure, but is there like a ballpark figure about how much it would cost to cover solar with the entire length of the greenway? Have y'all gotten that far yet or? >> That is a great question. I don't know if Adam has received any ballpark estimates on solar lighting. Um I have not and we haven't really done a cost analysis on what it would take to install in particular area. I think um you could probably take the most challenging and start with that to get an estimate. Yeah, because at some point we'll be talking about budget processes and I'm looking at the city manager and I guess the sooner we kind of figure out if that's going to be a workable solution and can kind of get a sense of how much it will cost then that may be something that we talk about from a budgetary standpoint because it's really important for our constituents throughout the entire city and that I'm imagining is probably going to be the most efficient solution is is some type of solar power installation throughout the greenway system. So >> yeah, I'm certain through our due diligence of exploring the solar lighting, we'll eventually get to that point of having some cost associated with that um that we can use sort of, you know, as a baseline. >> Okay. So, the only thing I would add to Council Member Patton's question, just so that there isn't this um u misconception that we only have six people out on the greenway, we have hundreds of greenway volunteers who kind of support our system and serve as that force multiplier. They're not sworn officers obviously, but they're able to detect when there's something going on and they do call it back into the system. So, we do have a lot of folks. Um that number has shifted a little bit since um the COVID pandemic. Um, but obviously we're rebuilding that group back up to to where they are our eyes and ears on the greenway to help report stuff back into the system. >> And I'll add to that we're actually doing a data exercise right now with RPD looking at um crime across the greenway and mapping where there are hot spots. The truth is there's not many fortunately. Um, but we'll use kind of that data to also deploy volunteers and help out with kind of the deployment as well. So Parks has a really expansive and fantastic GIS team and kind of using that historic uh NIMS crime data kind of looking at within adjacent properties and adjacent to adjacent properties, we can find out where there are issues and deploy necessarily for both the volunteers and officers. >> Do you have a sense of like a ballpark of how many volunteers are on the greenway at any given day or time? >> We'd have to come back on that one. We have a there's an RPD volunteer unit and then also a parks PD unit. and they work closely together. >> Appreciate the robust discussion. I know we've got 15 minutes left scheduled. So, do we have time to go to the second item sec? >> So, that is totally up to you all. I've gotten notification that we can punt that one if you want to, but if you all are so inclined to hear about neighborhood traffic, I mean parking program, we can continue. >> What is the pleasure of the council? >> Members of the public on that topic. >> Yeah. If they if they can do it in 15 minutes, that'd be great. >> Okay. >> I don't know how long this >> 15 minutes plus questions. So, depends on how many questions we get. So, yes. >> Yeah. Let's see. Uh why don't we go ahead and at least start the conversation. Um since we're all here and we've got the materials. Thank you. Good morning, Mayor and Council. My name is Caitlyn Parker and I'm the parking manager for the city of Raleigh. Today we will be discussing the residential permit parking program. Quick agenda. We're going to do an overview, speak to challenges, and then provide a next step. This program was created in 1979 to address parking congestion issues in a residential zone around the colleges. At that time, it was for single family homes and included one zone, and the annual permit cost was $10. The next changes were not done until 2018, which is when we defined zone requirements, defined petition process, increase the permit price, and added guest passes. >> Then in 2023, we did expand this program to include town homes and duplexes. So, as you can see, in 46 years, this program has not changed drastically. So this graphic hopefully will work and show the growth of the program throughout the decades. So as you see it slightly grows each decade that it changes and we saw a lot of growth after the 2000s. Little fun fact, our current program has 13 zones which is equivalent to 232 football fields. This is an example of a zone, zone U, which is around the Hillsboro Street area. For reference, Cupa Joe and the Crumble Cookie next to the former Starbucks is in this zone. Permit only parking is from 11p to 7A. Those non-p permit holders can park up to two hours between 8 to 5:00 pm. Within this zone, there are 261 properties, but only 235 are eligible for this program or and there's also 446 on street spaces or around 9,000 linear feet. So, as I mentioned, there are three eligible properties for this program. Single family, town homes, and duplexes. The town homes pictured are actually what brought this topic to council in 2023. They're off of Clark Avenue in the Tupelo Honey area. I also want to point out that if you look at the duplex, it does appear to be a single family home. I mentioned that because prior to 2024, staff had to use a visual interpretation to accept or deny applications for this program. This did lead to some properties being allowed into the program that they did not actually fit the criteria. So when we started using IMAPs in 2024, there were some residents obviously that were frustrated that they can no longer participate. So what properties are excluded? The garden apartment here is four units with four bedrooms in each unit. So that could mean 16 residents could live at this property. Also, we have a four family. This is 300 Chamberlain, which is very well known to this program. It is over there on Chamberlain and Clark. I also want to note that this property is right across the street from the town homes that are allowed into the program. This is four units with two bedrooms in each unit. So, a minimum of eight residents at this property. And then finally, this multifamily home used to be a single family home but was converted. So, at one point they were allowed into the program, but technically they do not meet the needs to be into this program. So during our evaluation, we did compare ourselves to other cities and we found that we charge less than most other cities. Other cities do restrict the amount of permits allowed per resident and most other cities do allow more properties into their program. I want to highlight that Austin and Charlotte say average because they follow a dynamic pricing structure, meaning that the first permit could be $30 and the last permit could be $90. there's a gradual increase. So during the ev evaluation, it was very important for us to get feedback from the community. Quick kudos to my team because a small team of us of seven or eight handd delivered over 3500 survey letters to all properties within the zones and a oneb block perimeter of all the zones. The survey was open from September 12th to October 8th. So, as you can see, we got some really good feedback. Most of those views might be from me for checking the data every day, but 916 people did participate in the survey, and we received 831 comments. From those comments, we identified five themes, which are listed here. Fairness and eligibility, which really went to the homeowners versus renters argument. proactive development planning, increased enforcement, resident priority parking, and improve online renewal process. Also, all the results in all 831 comments are in your packet. So, I've spoken to the challenges and I want to use zone A as an example. In this zone, there are 21 non-eligible properties. One of those is 300 Chamberlain. There are eight residents that live at this property, but none of them can park within a block of their home. And again, the town homes across the street are eligible. Also, the community has grown. Single family homes have been converted into multi-er duplexes, so they once were allowed, but technically no longer meet the criteria. And these historic homes lack modern parking needs. This property was built in 1948. Parking is obviously a little bit different than it is in 1948. and this property does not have any on-site parking for their residents. So, from our evaluation and from the feedback that we received from the community, staff has proposed recommendations for the future of this program. We do want to allow all properties, excluding those with more than 12 residential units and schools into the program. We do propose that we increase the costs from $ 20 to $30 and increase the guest permit cost to $2. Now, I want to say that that additional revenue could be used to help the customer experience. For example, we know signs get hit, they get dirty. That additional revenue could be used to replace those signs. Also, that $2 is less than other cities at this time. for example, not to throw them under bus, but Charlotte charges $3 per guest permit plus a $3.50 processing fee. So, it was very important for us to bring everyone to the table. However, in order to do that, we do have to put some restrictions in place that we also went off of data to ensure parking availability would still be allowed in the community. So, with that, we're proposing four per property. So, for example, 300 Chamberlain, that is four for the entire property, not for each unit. And we do want to limit the number of guest passes to ensure there's parking availability. Plus, businesses would not be eligible for guest passes. Back in 2018, we did add a caregiver permit. That is for someone providing hospice, home health, or nanny services to our residents. We do propose that we reduce that to $0 to help out those families going through a time of need. And then lastly, just as our community has grown, so has our program and things have changed. We do want to propose a new name, which is the per permit parking program. And I do realize I'll have to say the PPP program. Um, so those are our recommendations. Next steps would be recommendations will be brought back at a future meeting for adoption. I try to do that as quickly as I could. >> We've got any questions? >> Got six minutes. >> Yeah. Thank you. That was wonderful. Um, so most of these uh areas are in district D and I think some in C. Um, I do receive a number of resident complaints, concerns, questions about the program. So, I really appreciate you all bringing this back. Um, a couple questions about the recommendations. Um, do you have any data or a sense of if we move to this future state recommendations, will there be enough parking in those areas? Are we then basically there will be some people who will no longer get their parking spots? >> Yes. So, my team did a great job. We actually went to each zone and collected amount of on street spaces plus spaces on people's properties and then we did the math and ensured that that's why we proposed four because if we went over that um because we do have to ensure that there's enough room for guest passes in the community members for that 2-hour free parking. So we did do that research and we have that data. >> And when you say there's space on someone's private property, do you mean a garage or a driveway? >> Um driveway. We didn't really include garages cuz most people use them from storage. >> Yeah. Okay. >> And we did not go on their property. This was a visual from the street. >> So just again to confirm, your expectation is that for all of the zones, this future state, there would be enough parking for everyone that's eligible. >> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Um did you want to go ahead and ask some questions? >> Thank you so much. I had a question. And it's it's a broader view of it. I'm live my residents in five points. They are not part of this program. Not all of them yet, but there has been some discussion of it. And in there it's that mixed use where you've got, you know, that that business and all um who now we have a no parking minimums requirement and that's coming into play there. So how do you envision with that no parking minimums but now residents saying no, we want our parking. How do we make that marry? How do we how do we how does that look to you? >> Yeah. And so that was one of the topics on the survey was this proactive planning and that goes for the large apartment complex but also these smaller town homes. Um that's why we want to work together and be proactive with this program. Um so that a town home can't come in and get 20 spaces while the apartment or garden apartment next to them cannot. Um it's an active ongoing issue that we're addressing. >> Right. And I think for me the businesses are restaurants. So they're not they're not um apartments or anything, but it's if I have a business that has a capacity of 80 and they have four parking spots, they're relying on neighborhood parking in order to sustain their business. But if these residents go and put residential parking and it prevents them, then that really hurts that business. And so those are like the thoughts that I'm just weighing in my head um of how do we make that balance and I'm not sure the difference between apartments and this really addresses that concern. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong. >> No. So, we we are allowing businesses into the program with the restriction that they only can have four. And so, the thought was that the owner, the general manager, and maybe other designated employees could park in the residential area during the day and that would free up four spaces on their property for their business. Um, however, that's how we're making sure there's still parking availability so that a barbecue place doesn't have 40 guest passes in one day for the neighborhood because then at that point we would not have enough space. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Councelor Brandt, did you have a good >> Yeah. Uh, councelor Patton. >> Hi. >> Um, the chart with the future state, um, the guest permit at $2, um, 50 cents seems super low. $2 still seems really low. And I just wonder if it covers like cost to serve. Like is this going to cover processing or do we also need to charge $2 plus a 350 processing fee? >> So we did propose these costs to ensure that it's not a shock to the community but also cover those costs um as well because there is a backend cost to run the portal and everything. Um to be honest to cover probably the full program we would have to charge much more but I don't know that's what we want to go forward with the community. What would be cost recovery? Just to give me like a um >> barometer. >> I would have to do the math because I don't want to give you a false number. >> Um but staff labor for this program is pretty heavy and does cost around 90,000 a year to cover. >> Thank you, Mayor Proton. >> And I just want to say thank you for being able to you and your team picking up on the caregiver aspect and being willing to drop that fee. I mean, that's great sensitivity on your part. So, um, kudos for y'all for for recognizing that. >> Thank you. >> Yeah, I just want to say I I was one of the recipients of your handdelivered surveys. I was impressed and I didn't even know the extent of foot and then the fact that you have counted all of these spaces. I just think it's amazing work. >> Thank you. >> It's important to provide these multif family units, you know, around not just the university but all over the city. Um, and I think your recommendations um, sound really reasonable and well thought out. Um, I would just say on the caregiver, I also appreciate the sensitivity. It does require then you to have to research, right, who is actually a caregiver. So I just administratively is that pretty easy to determine. >> So we actually already have a requirement that they have to provide a letter for most places are home health agencies um, or nannies. We do know someone might try to abuse his program, but we're able to look that down in the future. Okay. No, just thank you so much for this great work. >> Hey, so Paul Cal Transation, just a quick thing. So, great questions, great feedback, and Caitlyn and actually her entire team right here did did a lot of work on this. So, one thing I just want to say is I think great feedback. We can look at the program going forward and again, this this can be kind of static. So, if we see like we need to make changes down the road, we can do that as well. So, we're not locked into this. I think this is just a next best step for us. >> Thanks. Thanks to all of you who who walked those neighborhoods. Yeah. >> Okay. Any other questions? So, it sounds like we got directional uh receptivity to this. >> Perfect. Thank y'all. >> Great. >> That's pretty good. She did good. >> Yeah. She was about that speed when we did the practice. [Music]