City Council - Regular Meeting

There he is right there.

It

is now 06:30 and the meeting will come to order. Good evening and welcome to the 04/21/2026 Kennewick City Council meeting. Will the city clerk please state who is present and whether a quorum is established?

Good evening, Mayor McShane. All council members are present. A quorum is established and council member Milbauer is joining via Zoom.

Yes, we can see him on the screen. Looking good up there, Jim. Thank you. And yeah. Alright.

Thanks. Will council member Clifford please lead us in the pledge of allegiance? Thank you all. Will Christine Herrick please come to the podium and provide our to mission. Of We

which is to come. We stand are before you this evening to humbly be beseech you for favor over the city of Kennewick. I pray for this council that they would work as unto you Lord and that they may honor you by their patience under every trial. May they fulfill their duties with integrity and fidelity. May they remember that this day your eye is continually upon us and as we think of you, may we put our trust in you and commit this work to you and be found in the fear of the Lord with each decision rendered and all with view to your glory.

Lord, I ask that you bless these men and women for their service to this city. Grant them joy in the midst of their work. Unify them in their concern for this city and the people they serve. May they be instruments in your hand for the peace and prosperity of Kennewick. I offer these humble prayer humble and imperfect prayers in Jesus mighty name. Amen. Amen.

You.

Next we'll have honors and recognitions for International Firefighters Day. Will firefighter Eddie, is it Higginbotham or Higginbotham? Higginbotham.

Thank you.

Whereas the role of firefighters respond to emergencies involving life, property, or environment, and then fight together against one common enemy that can destroy lives. And whereas most people would risk their lives to save a family member, friend, or even a pet, but a firefighter makes the conscious decision daily to risk their lives for those in their community that they have never met. And whereas the men and women of the fire service industry are a special group of individuals that exude extraordinary commitment and exceptional courage to tirelessly work in a profession whose focus is to serve and protect others. And whereas International Firefighters Day was established in 1999 following the tragic deaths of five firefighters in Australia during a sudden change in wind direction that led them to being surrounded by flames. The day falls on May 4, which coincides with Saint Florian's Day.

Saint Florian, the first commanding firefighter of a Roman battalion, is celebrated as the patron saint of firefighters for his heroic acts for saving numerous lives. And whereas International Firefighter Day is

an occasion for the global community to acknowledge and pay tribute to

the dedication of firefighters, their tireless work to safeguard their communities, and to remember those who made the ultimate sacrifice to ensure the safety of others. Now therefore I, Mary Jason McShane, on behalf of the Kennewick City Council, hereby proclaim 05/04/2026 as International Firefighters Day in Kennewick. And accordingly, encourage our citizens to thank and show their appreciation to firefighters who dedicate their lives to protect the life and property for all. I present this proclamation here Eddie to you and I just want to just mention how how important it is in our community to have our firefighters and all of our first responders who take that time and risk away from their families to provide support and safety and health for ours. I can't be prouder to be able to stand up here today to help honor that.

Hi, my name is Eddie. I just wanted to say I am here to accept this on behalf of the Kennewick Fire Department as well as thanking the citizens of Kennewick. If it wasn't for the citizens, we wouldn't be able to do what we do which is to serve you. So, thank you. Next on the agenda is visitors.

This is the only opportunity for visitor comments at tonight's meeting. Visitors are opinion on any topic except for election matters and item 5B, which is a site specific quasi judicial matter. The city clerk has informed me that we have one online visitor, but now they're no longer online and they're here in person. If someone wishes to speak, we'll ask you to raise your hand. Before we do that, just a couple of quick things.

Public comment period is not an opportunity for mutual conversation with council members or for questions with the expectation of an immediate answer. Council members will listen closely to your comments, but will not directly respond to you. The City Clerk's business card is on the table near the door. If you need to follow-up after the meeting, reach out to her and she will connect you with the appropriate person at the city for that. When it's your turn, please let's see.

Each person is permitted to speak once for a maximum of three minutes. A three minute timer will be question now begin We and

Good evening, Mr. Mayor council members. My name is James Carmody. I'm a land use environment point.

Team.

That's

ir the in structure. To the zoning ordinance that you're considering this evening with respect to expansion of the nonconforming use rights. We're concerned about expansion impacting in a negative way and unexpected way potential redevelopment. The property is on the western perimeter of it and is buffered and shielded by the existing auto row zoning. And our request to you and I did send a letter.

I hope you had an opportunity at least to receive it. If not, look at it. But our request to you would be that if you choose to make that amendment that the amendment apply to the properties lying East of Fruitland. I think that would buffer what the investment is here. I don't think it has a significant impact on it. And it would give the opportunity for the expansions that you've been looking at and considering on that side. In a way, we'd be a little bit like Vista Field, and that would be a protected area for development. So we would ask you to consider that in your deliberations this evening. Thank you. Thank you.

My name is Marie Redout. Sure. Oh, Marie Redout. I am a Richland resident, I am here because I have several concerns. I have sent emails out to all of you. I do understand that there are limitations. Obviously, that's not anything I'm asking you to jump in and change any rulings for judges or do any of that. That's not what I'm trying to point out. But you do have some latitude. And part of the the reason for contacting you, in addition to Benton Franklin County commissioners, has to do with the components altogether.

Because it does impact the city, it does impact the county, it does impact everybody that you're here to support and serve. And you can't look at the email that I sent and note that there's over two thirty cases and now it's actually risen to 300 cases where you've got the things that I highlighted out in the email regarding ethical breaches and law violations and just flat out non responsiveness. The rules are not being followed and the families that are being impacted, it's gut wrenching to hear them talk about it. I personally am not in a case. I do not have a family member in a case.

But I've watched this get over the years. My law enforcement career early on, I had connections with the court. I served in a security position within court. I was a police officer with Richland Police Department. I served in other capacities as well in law enforcement for over twenty years.

My problem is I've seen it get exponentially worse over the last five, and it is gut wrenching. If you haven't heard any of the testimony that some of these people are bringing forward, listen to the Franklin County, they have it live on YouTube. You can look up Franklin County Commission meetings. The commissioners have it broadcast on YouTube. They have acknowledged that there is a problem and what I'm looking at from you all is to acknowledge, look, it impacts the city, it impacts the people here, you do have some responsibilities that you can look at, you do have options.

And I want to know what it is that can happen here in collaboration with the others, with the Benton Counties. I have a meeting scheduled already with our our state representatives. We are meeting with them. My first meeting is on twenty eighth. We will have meetings following that.

Franklin County agreed to do a workshop that's going to be on the twenty ninth at the commissioner's meeting. At the end of the commissioner's meeting in Franklin County on the twenty ninth, there will be workshop. They are looking at this and acknowledging that this is a problem. And I'm happy to answer any questions after your meeting today or any time by email or by phone. I've included that information in there and I really want to have some responsiveness and have somebody feel what is going on out here and acknowledge that it is a problem and something you can work on. Thank you.

Hello, everyone. I am Nelly Aquino Bautista. I am the current regional interim director for Heritage University of Tri Cities. Today, I am here because today there will be an MOU being presented from our institution. And so I am here sharing my excitement for the collaboration today. So that is what I'm here for, so I'm very excited. Thank you.

Yes, please.

Hi. I'm Trita Lisa Tippett. I'm a longtime Kennewick resident, head swim coach for Kennewick High School, and longtime volunteer in Kennewick Parks and Rec aquatic, programs. So I've been here many times, and I'm back with update and urgency. Urgency. So if you haven't got the update, about a a little over a month ago, city employees were getting ready to do maintenance on the pool so they could get ready for spring training for summer programs to launch. And they went to turn on the pump, and it didn't turn on. It's broken. So currently, the pool is broken. They have ordered a replacement pump.

They have scheduled a time for installation. However, someone who's been around, the last time something was broken, it was the heater, and it was broken for five years. Not because employees did not work hard to fix it. I wanna make that very clear. It's because the pool is antiquated and finding people that can adequately it took a long time before they could find the right parts and the right people to get the installation to work.

So fingers crossed, pump should be easier than the heater, but we don't know. So I know I stood here not too many months ago and said it's not a matter of if it breaks, it's when. Well, when's now? It's broken. So, I saw about a week ago some new stories coming out that are in early talks of planning for a pool replacement for the city.

And I'm here to say we need to do that with a sense of urgency because it's currently broken. And so it takes years to build a pool between the planning process, between the approval process, especially with the voters, and then between the actual building process. So if this doesn't get off the ground with some sense of urgency, it will be years before the community has a place to learn how to swim, to recreate, to work out, and or compete. We are there. Sadly, we are there. So it's time. It's obviously been over time. As a side note, some of you that came out, thank you. Thank you for those of you that did to our Mid Columbia invite this fall, one of the bigger high school swim meets. It's grown.

It's moved to Pasco. We've outgrown the Keno exterior pool. We already have 600 confirmed athletes. We have high schoolers over here at Keno Mackay competing to create the logo. They're really excited for some swag to create something that'll be worn by about 800 people. So the need is here in every capacity for recreation, learning to swim, competing, etcetera. It's time. It's more than time. And we would love to help you, any of us in the aquatic community, can in any fashion. Thank you for all that have listened and are working towards it. Thank you.

Good

evening, Mr. Mayor and council members. My name is Larry Peterson. I'm the planning and development director for the Port Of Kennewick and I'm joined this evening by with Amber Hanshaf from the she's the real estate of the director of real estate for the Port Of Kennewick. We're here to speak or to show our support for item six, the Vista Field Development Agreement. We ask that you give strong consideration to your staff recommendation and the unanimous Planning Commission recommendation. And we are here if there are any questions that arise if it's appropriate at that time when you get to the matter. We're here to show our support for the Vista field development agreement. Thank you.

Thank you, Larry. All right. Tina.

Good evening, Tina Gregory. I just wanted to say it was wonderful having somebody pray tonight, and I wonder if you would consider opening it up a little bit differently to where we can have more act of doing that. And I've asked you many times, so I'm hoping maybe it'll go on ears that'll act. And then I know a lot of times that we have the agenda up there on the screen, but most of us don't wanna look at a little tiny cell phone. So I print off copies each time.

And when we had big turnouts, was printing off a lot of copies, and I bring them each time. And I think it's silly that our city can't have four or five agendas out there. And then I'm really not understanding. Last meeting, we had a discussion about Arbor Day and all these wonderful things that we're doing with trees. And I'm a landscaper and done a lot of developing in this area.

Why are all the trees getting cut down in front of the sports complex? I'm just shocked that every tree that's on that road right there got cut down. So I'm wondering what's going on with there. And I wanna know if you're working hard at these LRA restrictions because it's not going to go away it's going to be your neighborhood next so just those things if you'd please look out and I just thank you for all the things that you did to help stop the one house and our community coming together. It's a grassroots effort that did it and I'm asking for that grassroots effort to continue and you to come up with some more resolutions and ordinances. Thank you.

Any board.

The I'm going you the opportunity to remind you that at the end of this year, we'll be implementing the new 96 gallon carted recycle program that we worked hard to establish within the contract. As part of that implementation myself and our education outreach coordinator Mackenzie's who also in the crowd are here in town for the salmon summit. We had the pleasure of working today down at Columbia Park with the youth youth educating them through a recycle relay. Had some great results and look forward to doing it again in the rain. So if anyone wants to come down tomorrow and hold an umbrella, it'll keep my hair from going curly.

So additionally, much like your group, I want to congratulate Mayor McShane on your new role as mayor and Councilmember Clippert for joining. For us as well, many of you may recall Mike Slack. He built a great foundation for our company and he has chosen another career path as he's looking going into retirement. So all on positive notes. But with that, I wanted to take tonight to introduce our newest district manager.

Introduce myself. This is actually my first council meeting ever attending, so it will be the first of many to come. I previously worked at the Department of Licensing as a district manager, and I'm now leading the Kennewick Waste Management site. So looking forward to the continued relationship that we have with the city and doing the best for our residents. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor. Thank you. All right. Any Directors question. Of Board Board I'll entertain take a the next motion. I'll Mayor Minshane. Mayor Pro Tem Torelli.

Move to approve the agenda as presented. Is there a second?

Mayor, I second that.

It's been moved by Mayor Pro Tem Torelli and seconded by Council Member Anderson to approve the agenda as presented. The floor is open for discussion. There being no further discussion, it's been properly moved and seconded excuse me, moved by Mayor Pro Tem Turrell and seconded by Council Member Anderson to approve the agenda as presented. Will the clerk please start the vote?

I see

you and I feel like I'm here.

What's that?

I said I see you all and I feel like I'm here.

It's like you're one of the gang. Okay, hold on. Alright. Council Member Milbauer, you may need to give your voice audibly, if you don't mind.

Well, let's, can you hear me all right?

I can.

All

right. And your vote is?

I'm sorry.

Yes. Okay.

Thank you.

I was looking for a button to press.

That's the unmute button and you got it. It's perfect. Okay.

I'm watching Jim over here. Missed that. I didn't see it pop up on the screen. That motion has passed. Right. The next item on the agenda is the consent agenda for approval. All matters listed within the consent agenda been distributed to each member of the Kennewick City Council for a reading and study and are considered to be retained. It will be enacted by one motion of the council with no separate discussion. I'll entertain a motion. Mayor McShane. Mayor Pro Tem Turley.

I move to approve the consent agenda as presented. Is there a second?

Mayor. Mayor McShane. I'll second that motion.

It's been

moved by Mayor Pro Tem and seconded by council member millbauer to approve the consent agenda as presented. Will the clerk please start the vote?

Council member what is your vote?

Aye. Thank you.

That motion is passed unanimously. Next is ordinances. First under item 5A, we have a docket of four ordinances pertaining to municipal code housekeeping updates to transition regulations from the outdated Kennewick Administrative Code to the Kennewick Municipal Code. All matters listed within the ordinance docket have been distributed each member of the Kennewick City Council reading and study are considered to be routine and may be enacted by one motion of council. All matters listed within the ordinance docket were presented to the City Council at the 04/14/2026 workshop last week.

Following the staff report, council request additional information or speak to any of the ordinances under the docket. If the council member is opposed to one or more ordinance, they may strike that item from the docket for separate consideration and vote. Will the city clerk please read the ordinance titles

for the docket items?

For item 5A1, we have an ordinance relating to city manager performance review process and amending section 2.08.025 of the Kennewick Municipal Code. For item 5A2 we have an ordinance relating to revenue and taxation and adding chapter 3.1 to the Kennewick Municipal Code. For item 5A3 we have an ordinance relating to arts commission establishment and amending section 2.16.420 of the Kennewick Municipal Code. For item 5A4 we have an ordinance relating to arts commission powers and duties and amending section two point one six point four three zero of the Kennewick Municipal Code.

Ms. Beaton will you provide us with the staff report please?

Thank you, Mayor McShane and members of City Council. You recall on April 14, we conducted a workshop and reviewed these proposed ordinances with council. The is contained in appendix B of the governance manual that council adopted about a year ago. And it's basically a housekeeping measure to clean that up to make sure it's aligned and there isn't any confusion. And it eliminates reference to what will now be an outdated provision in our Kennewick Administrative Code, which is a part of why we're here tonight.

We're going through that Administrative Code and cleaning that up. The second item, 5A2, is a proposal to incorporate a policy to surplus city owned real property into our municipal code rather than having it in the administrative code. And we went over that proposal with council last Tuesday as well. So it goes over the criteria to declare real property surplus, and then it provides council options on how you would go about conveying that property once you determine it being surplus. Surplus meaning there's no longer a public purpose for the city, for the city's purposes, whether that be for governmental building or a service.

So once you declare real property surplus, then you have options as a council to decide how you would go about to convey that to include holding a public hearing if you so chose at that time. You don't necessarily have to. So those are the first two items that are on the docket. Yeah. So the next two items.

Was it five a three and four relate to the art commission and again it's housekeeping nature, we're moving provisions that were in our administrative code, into the municipal code, related to the powers and duties of the arts commission, as well as their responsibilities. Responsibilities. So again, it it also changes the number of seats to seven. Up Up to.

Sorry. As Up I as I recall

a fairly lengthy conversation. Terribly sorry. I don't want to miss that part. So, with that said, I'd be happy to answer any questions that council might have before

today. Board done. Sense I'm going to

1 through 5A4. Is there a second?

Mayor, I second that.

It has been moved by Mayor Pro Tem Terrelli and seconded by Council Member Anderson to approve the housekeeping fee update ordinance document. As presented, docket items 5A1 through 5A4. The floor is open for discussion. I'll just mention that I want to express appreciation for the team of folks that have been going through our administrative code and updating that for the municipal code. That's usually something that gets put on the back burner and doesn't get done and it's not something that everybody wants to join into.

Although I heard that Mr. Lestick enjoys being a member of that committee. We appreciate everyone's efforts in that. It's a lot of effort to get it done and appreciate getting us up to speed where we need to be. So without any additional discussion it's been board.

Question. Think that's question. Their Will the clerk please start?

Council Member Milbauer.

Aye.

Alright. That is passed unanimously. Our next ordinance pertains to a site specific changes zone at 2918 South Jean Street. Will the city clerk please read the ordinance by title.

This is an ordinance amending the zoning classification of certain real property within the city of Kennewick located at 2918 South Jean Street from residential suburban RS to residential low density RL COZ twenty twenty six dash zero zero zero two Clover Planning and Zoning care of Shane O'Neill.

Thank you. This is considered quasi case. The that's I And pleased And

And

to to to ex parte communication with either a proponents or opponents? Council member Trumbo.

This address is possibly within 300 feet of my property line. I didn't step it off. Please on close.

So

Councilmember Trumbo, do you have any factors that may affect the perception of fairness? And whether you'll refrain, are you are you intending to refrain from voting on this discussion and from discussing voting on this issue? I guess you stated what that perception might

point. Important

And yeses to those questions? Important hearing none. This is an opportunity to rebut the communications that just were described by Councilmember Trumbo. Comments outside of the scope are not permitted at this time. When it's your turn, come to the podium and state your name and city of residence before beginning your remarks. Is there any member of the public present that would have a complaint about that? I'm good. Well, that's why I feel about it as well. Okay, perfect. What's that? We do have one, Warren. Hold on, Pause. Crystal, please provide a clarification for us.

Thank you, Mayor McShane. Council Member Trumbo, I understood your remarks to say that you were not ex parte communications but just simply your proximity to the subject property is that correct? Then there is no ex parte communication and no need to open the record back up for additional testimony.

Thank you for that clarification and apologies for my error on that. So yes, thank you for and thank you Councilmember Trummer for disclosing that. All right. It has been established that Kennewick City Council can consider this matter fairly. Now Mr. Donovan, I'm sorry, we have a staff report please.

Sorry about that. I stepped up way too soon.

You're just excited to listen to that.

Yeah. I'm ready to go. So applicant for this particular proposal is Clover Planning Care of Shane O'Neill on behalf of Elijah Holmes, again proposing to change it from rural residential suburban to residential low. Land use designation is low residential, and it is located at 2918 South Jean Street. It's just slow.

There

we go. Okay. So this is a vicinity map of the proposal. The boundary of the property for the change of zone is outlined in red. 27th Avenue approximately quarter of a mile to the north of this particular site. There we go. Next is the land use designation map. As you can see, the yellow is a low density residential. All the surrounding properties in this general are designated as low density residential. Next slide, please.

This map is the zoning map showing residential suburban, which is kind of the tan color, and the residential low zoning districts are the yellow. The property was annexed by the city in February 1999 by ordinance thirty eight forty eight and zone residential suburban. The main differences between these two zoning districts, residential low and residential suburban is the minimum lot size, with residential low being 5,500 square feet, residential suburban being 8,000 square feet. Both properties do allow for town homes, although town homes are not being proposed in the future. And residential suburbans does still allow for farm animals.

So those are the main difference would be the size of the lot and allowing farm animals. Next slide please. These are the findings that staff and the Planning Commission took into account when they made their recommendations. I'm not going to read through every one of them. But subsection this property is across the street from residential low zoning district, so therefore it is applicable to be zoned residential low from residential suburban in staff's opinion.

The Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 6. Staff recommended that the proposed change of zone be approved. The applicant did speak in favor. There was no additional testimony that was taken at the hearing and planning commission. Question staff about what the property is going to be used for in the future.

This is an Elijah family homes property. Plan is to provide for supportive housing for families in the near future. They're in the process of construction, getting some of the infrastructure put in place for that, and they will have eventually the existing residents that's on-site will be a community building in addition to a residence, and then they will have six additional cottage type housing units on the site for the supportive housing. And Planning Commission did recommend approval of COZ twenty twenty six-two, and if there's any questions of staff, I'd be more than happy to answer them.

Right, Council

Member So just a question on the ingress, egress on that property. What is the frontage of that?

The frontage as far as the width or?

Width, yeah, the lot.

I don't know the exact distance, but I would say it's probably approximately 45 to 50 feet. They do have, I believe it's going to be just a private easement, access easement going through there to the back with a turnaround. That easement is somewhere between 20 to 30 feet wide. So there's an existing home and then just to the north of that in between the property to the north there will be an access easement that you'll access the site from. On the property to the north?

No, it's so along this north property line there is an access easement that it will be will be that is constructed as of right now paved roadway with a with a proper turnaround approximately right there.

Okay and so will is there a requirement for on-site parking?

There is yes there is a requirement for on-site parking. There is a parking area behind the existing home I think there was roughly two to three parking lots parking spaces there, and then there were some additional parking spaces that were proposed in this area. I don't remember the exact number, but I believe we were they were required to have a minimum of one roughly one per unit. So I think there's roughly 10 total about in there. I don't remember, I'd have to look

at That the will be part of the requirements when they submit plans.

It'll all be contained on-site. They are putting in curb gutter sidewalk on Jean Street, that was not anything that they proposed that they would be parking out in the mid. You know. They were proposing to have everything contained within that site.

Any additional questions? Council member Truman.

Right by this frequently. And the entrance into the property is with curves present all the way back. And I can't quite see everything in the back because there's quite a large amount of land that's partially hidden by the structure that's there on the street edge. My concern was. Also.

Can you. You know at this time. To

the best of my knowledge it's just going be a single story cottage type development. I think the homes are no bigger than 700 square feet.

Well. You don't have any further questions, but from my observance, it's going be tight.

Any additional questions? Thank you. With no additional questions, I'll entertain a motion.

Mayor Shane.

Mayor Pro Tempterrelly.

I move to adopt the ordinance as presented. Is there a second?

Mayor I second that. It's been moved by Mayor Pro Tempterrelly and seconded by Councilmember Anderson to adopt the ordinance as presented. The floor is open for discussion. Has been properly moved and seconded to adopt the ordinance as presented. Will the clerk please start the vote?

Council Member Millbauer.

Aye.

Thank you.

Alright. That motion has passed unanimously. Our next ordinance will add expansion of use to the Kennewick municipal code. Will the city clerk please read the ordinance by title?

I sure will as soon as my computer starts participating here. Let me go to plan B. Hold on just a moment. Thank you for your patience. This is an ordinance relating to structures lots and adding section eighteen point fifteen point zero six five to the Kennewick Municipal Code.

You. Mister Otto, will you please provide a staff report on this issue?

Thank you, mister mayor and council. Okay. So you're all familiar with this one. This originally started out as where the applicant had wanted to allow for vehicle sales to be an outright permitted use in the UMU zone other than allowing for it to be in the field area. We went to public hearing.

The staff recommended denial to Planning Commission. Planning Commission recommended approval to City Council. City Council reviewed the application remanded it back to staff to try to develop an alternative to what was originally proposed. And that's where we're at right now. So what staff did is we proposed a new section to the code that would address non conforming uses in all zones.

All non conforming uses will be subject to specific criteria and non non conforming uses in the UMU zone will be subject to the conditional use permit conditional use permit process in addition to some additional criteria that the other zones in city would be subject to. So this is kind of an outline of what staff has proposed in the recommendation that the planning commission made to you in regards to how people would be able to expand a use, a nonconforming use in the zones, all zones within the city limits of Kennewick. Unless you want me to go specifically through that, I won't read through every one of them. Think you are all relatively familiar with that. But with that being said, the main difference between the majority of the zones and the UMU zone is that in the UMU zone they would be allowed to expand beyond 25%.

Provisions for expansion would not be applicable to the Vista Field area. You would be subject to the criteria above in which the other zoning districts are subject to an eighteen fifteen 0651Ai through III. Then also they would be subject to the conditional use permit process. There an explanation there also in regards to Expansions having to be contiguous to the site. The existing use.

And But this contiguous does not include being across an alleyway or street. It has to be on the same side of the street and directly adjacent to. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 6. Staff recommended approval of the proposed amendments. Two members of the public spoke in favor of the amendment. Two members of this public spoke against the proposal, and the Planning Commission voted four to zero on this particular, proposal with one, commissioner recusing himself. And the Planning Commission recommends approval of the development code DCA twenty twenty five dash six to council. And if there's any questions of staff, I'd be more than happy to answer them.

Council have any questions. Thank you, Steve. Okay. Council member.

You, mister mayor. In the hearing summary slide, it says, as you mentioned, there are two members of the public who spoke against the proposed amendment. Do you happen to recall what their opposition was?

They were felt that it wasn't in compliance with the bridge to bridge plan much similar to what Mr. Carmody spoke about in the visitor section. Pretty much reflected exactly what he had stated in that although he was I

good

John I

I that's from next

the

progress in that plan and trying to get that property developed so surrounding property would meet bridge to bridge plan and they just had concerns that there was going to be more of the same what's down there now as opposed to sticking with what the vision was that was adopted.

Member Turnbull.

Thank you, Mayor Mashane. This proposed amendment expansion of use with the exceptions noted Yes.

Yes. Majority of the zones will be impacted by the section one. And then specifically the UMU is is subject to sections two of the of the amendment.

On our prior in automobile sales that would have been East Of Fruitland that kind of prompted this. Is that correct? That's correct. Applies to the entire urban mixed uses zone in that area. That's correct.

So it would have would be usable West Of Fruit. That's correct. The

plan went into effect in 2010. The zoning district was established in 2017. So in 2017, it was determined that at least for the original proposal, vehicle sales, service, repair was not a permitted use in the urban mixed use zone.

That was our decision that took effect in 2017, is that correct? Correct. Is this a good idea now? It's not for you to That's my question for council.

Other comments or questions?

Comment to says that I got two questions. Guess number one is. Sent your conditional use permit so assuming somebody has a property that was built years ago is not up to compliance with current city standard. Would if they're continuous like that with the first property have to be brought up to city standard mean curb gutter sidewalks, streetlights, whatever, if they're going to expand into a second property that is not to a city standard?

There are specific financial threat or monetary thresholds they have to meet. I believe for curb gutter, sidewalk, I think it's 30% of the assessed value of the structure. UMU standards would come into play at 50% of the assessed value of the structure if there was one on there. There could be, definitely there could be some improvements in regards to on the ground for curb gutter sidewalk

and

if they

could meet this. On the old property, the new property you go to the current city standard or no?

Yeah, I mean you're looking at your

I guess this would be as if you're expanding out of your I mean you're expanding

to another lot is

what I'm saying. The new lot has nothing on it. If you're expanding over there, then you're going

Yes, if you're expanding into there, you're going to be subject to whatever is new is going to be subject to whatever the assessed value requirements are for like curb gutter sidewalk and whatever they are for having to meet the urban mixed use design standards.

And then also on there, I forgot what the wording was, during the conditional use permit process, we as a council are able to look at other items potentially that are not in code.

The conditional use process is administrative. So the planning director of community planning would make that call.

It goes

back to hearing examiner.

It does not go back to hearing. It's administrative. Is

the appeal process to the hearing examiner?

If it was appealed, then it would go to the hearing examiner.

So planning director at that time would be able to put conditions in that conditional use permit to, I don't want say blend if a neighborhood if it was out of sync, I know that gets you know it gets touchy, but that's what you're trying to do. You asked for a conditional use permit. There's a reason you're asking for it. That gives the. Governing body ability to add conditions that I would say are outside of code if it's a non conforming is that a right way to say it?

You couldn't do anything arbitrary and capricious.

Maybe just to clarify if I could. Steve was explaining, when you talk about expanding onto another property, if you're expanding into an existing structure, those thresholds that Steve talked about are going to apply. If you're constructing a new building, you're absolutely 100% under the code in place. And then from a conditional use standpoint, those conditions that we would place on there because expansion, like if you expand into another building that's existing on a neighboring site, what we wanna make sure that anything additional that you're doing is or any improvement that you do do is is as harmonious as possible with the existing code. And so there are certain things that may you know, certain aspects of of a particular nonconforming use that we may say, well, while you can do that, we may wanna shield some of that or we may want you to design how you're doing

to to business,

We're a business. Going

And the with site that never had your nonconforming use on it unless you're expanding to a neighboring property that abuts your property. So you can't introduce new non conforming uses. What's non conforming now is what will be there until it goes away and is replaced with something that is conforming. Or if they choose to expand, if they're successful enough that they can expand and they choose to expand, then they'd be able to expand within the bounds that are outlined in the code. And so we've looked at a map of what that looks like.

It's very limited because in a lot of cases you look at adjacency or abutting even as properties across the street, across an alley, across different rights of way. That's off the table here. So if you want to move across an alley and use a portion of that property for your nonconforming use, you can't do it.

You.

There's a nonconforming use. Not active. Example, not a part story that is closed. I don't know if that's non conforming, but I'm using that as an example. It's vacant, it's not being used.

So

there's to

to we're going going

into that space. I will say that there is case law that kind of trumps that a little bit depending and there's certain circumstances in which that doesn't apply. So it's gonna really be fact dependent on what's going on related to that property. But essentially what the code says right now after six months of that use ceasing, it's not allowed to go back.

Thank you for that detailed explanation. Appreciate it.

Councilor Moran Anderson.

Steve, so regarding the concern that the landowners adjacent to the bridge have on this, how does this adversely impact in your opinion? Mean, what what have you have you looked at that and said, this could potentially hear some potential negative effects for their property?

I think that the the property owner in question, the West property, the 40 acre piece of property is adjacent to a legal nonconforming automotive repair shop that's there right now. He's wanting to expand, and he has purchased a property directly to the north of him. Okay, he can expand, but when he does that, he is going to be subject to the UMU standards if he goes on to that site. I mean, is there possibly some impact? Maybe, but, you know, anything that's gonna be new out there is going to be subject to the UMU standards in addition to you know conditional use permit approval.

Could there be an impact to it? Yes. I have think

point.

Point. I council I approved development regulations, determined that those types of uses weren't desirable for that particular zoning district. So why should they be allowed to expand?

And how long has that vacant lot been vacant? Seems like it's been a decade or more?

I would say at least since I've been here The

large parcel.

The large 40 acre parcel, it's been a decade at least I would say.

Steve I apologize I'm not quite tracking the exact location that council member referenced and then you suggested can we see that on a map?

If you would like, I could if you could it may give a better sense of what's going on in that area. So, I've connected up if you could share my screen. Thank you. Yeah. If you could go up to page one.

Okay. Thank you. So this area here. Is the large the acre parcel. It's vacant. The West property. The property. The gentleman that wasn't the original applicant, but he did speak at the hearing that has an existing. Automotive repair shop right here that's been there for quite some time. He has purchased this piece of property, and he stated at the hearing that he would like to expand his business and possibly move on to this property to the North.

So all of this. I believe is all owned by the same entity right here, so there is a little bit of at least some structures and some activity that are in between. That to what degree now I don't know. Not as much as what's shown. In this particular area, but that is the existing property that's would directly be maybe possibly impact the 40 acre parcel.

Mayor Mashane. Council Member Trummel. I'd kind

of like to know if that auto repair business is auto repair or machine shop.

To the best of my knowledge what was presented and what was described at the public hearing, it is an automotive repair business. I'm not aware that they do any specific other than automotive repair machining, maybe they have something like that but I don't believe they are specifically a machine shop.

Could you identify that location on the map again?

It's outlined in red right there where the pointer is

at.

I believe that this area is currently an RV park or some type, maybe a mobile home park, I believe. In that particular corner, and then there are some residences over on West Side.

Ahead.

If you see right above right below where it says vehicle repair. There is a potential. I don't know if that is a city where Medellin would potentially be pushed through there. Right there to the right. What is that? I don't think Medellin goes out there to get it.

I think it's just right away. Is it right away? I'm not aware of anything being there.

I'm looking at GIS. Doesn't It show anything on there, but it doesn't show there's nothing on there. In line with Medellin all the way through.

Just recognizing the GIS mapping isn't always accurate to actually look at. Could be that that's an extension of that, right? What would have been that right away? Well, there's maybe thinking. Steve, as we're talking about the idea of an expansion of up to 2025% in land area. Again, not being as familiar with this. If I had an existing property with a business, the square footage that the business is covering, is that what the 25% is based off of? Or is it 25% of the lot that the business is on?

So we've got two portions of the code. You have structure and you've got use. So it would be, I guess, we would look at use for most likely being lot. And the use itself what's taking on there and then structure. Portion of it would be specifically for the structure. Since there are two separate subsections that are in the code. So yes, there would be an expansion of the use. And if they had an adjacent property that they could expand onto, then that's

That would be the 25%. Again, apologies No for

more than that in the zones other than the urban mixed use. And in that 25 in the case

of an auto repair shop, just as an example, auto repair shop use as part of their parking lot for storage for cars that are going to be fixed. They have a certain amount of their square footage of their building that's for that type of use. They then expand to the property adjacent to them. They're allowed to do 25 per code. But then in addition to that, in this case, they could go beyond 25%.

If they were in the UMU zone under the conditional use permit process.

And then we're focused on sorry, I'm focused just on the UMU zone. I understand that. And at what point so we do this 25% and now I'm on to two lots. How does it affect when can I try to expand that again? At what point is this static in time or is this that's what I'm trying to guess.

I guess at that point, since you're in the UMU, you're able to expand beyond 25%. You're going come in for a conditional use permit in order to do that, you're gonna show us your proposal, we're gonna look at it, you're gonna lay out your plan, that's what's gonna be approved, let's say in ten years you decide that you wanted to do it again. You're successful. Then at that point in time, you would come back and go through the application application process again.

To see if you can expand. That's my interpretation. Yeah, typical '25 like your typical expansion is a one time expansion. The difference in the UMU is that you're this proposal I should say. Is it allows you to go beyond 100%? Or excuse me beyond the 25 through a conditional use permit process.

But beyond 100% could be approved depending on where it would be although it doesn't appear that there are many opportunities where that would be really

the case.

Yeah, be if there are any. It's limited where those opportunities exist. I mean, you look at this particular area, what you see highlighted, those are the noncon conforming uses. What you see boxed on the screen. And they show you you can get from there where they can expand.

And as Steve explained, you've got 40 acres that are all in single ownership. The car sales lot on the south end near the roundabout, that is part of their ownership. The black where it says vehicle storage yard is not part of their ownership, but they do own the lot directly to the east of that. And so the vehicle storage yard guy is not going to expand because the property owner is not interested and doesn't want this expansion to happen. The same property owner also owns both manufactured home parks.

It's not likely that those are going to expand. And if they did, they're limited in where they could go because there's a break in the zoning line there. And so on the South Side Of Klamath, they could expand to the East, pick up one parcel, but they'd be tearing down a lot of improvements to put manufactured that. And And do

to that.

North and wants to expand his business. The only way for him to expand further than that lot to the north is to buy the lot behind him and potentially by the manufactured home park which is owned by the property owner who owns the other 40 acres. Yeah and sorry,

you ran through that a little just a tiny bit quick for me. So just making sure I understand. So the same ownership group or owner that owns the large parcels off to the west side of this map is the same one that owns the what is labeled as a manufactured home park to the right. That's correct. And

the one to the south, I guess, isn't owned by the same owner, but a family member. It's my understanding, at least. So the opportunities for expansion in this area are very, very limited. The last property that hasn't been talked about is the roofing contractor. They have nowhere to go. Because the property to the south and the properties that are above them are in a different zoning designation.

Is there another question? Yes, please. So if I vote yes for this today. Excuse me. What do the residents of the

city of Kennewick gain by my yes vote? An opportunity to expand legal nonconforming uses in all the zones subject to that criteria that are in subsection or in subsection eighteen fifteen sixty five.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Council member trouble.

This is focused. Genesis was focused on Columbia Drive nonconforming use of Long Island. And because it's the solution, the answer to that problem, that one specific problem, is a citywide that applies citywide for non conforming use of urban mixed zones, allowing non conforming use expansion beyond 25%, granted using appropriate review process. This is a

to ask to I'm going

thing. The

purpose, I guess just to address Mr. Trumbo's comment, the purpose for establishing the new section dealing with nonconforming uses is that there is not a section in there that addresses nonconforming uses. And for I've been at the city for nineteen years. For at least that amount of time, the interpretation in the section entitled nonconforming structures has also been utilized to address uses. When you expand a nonconforming structure, you're essentially expanding the use which occurs inside that structure.

We're be do

And going

to same limitations that. That are applied to the nonconforming structure section regarding how much it can expand, what it can and can't do as far as increasing density and the like. All of those things are still being included in this section so that past practice is documented in the code and consistent. The new section is dealing strictly with the UMU zone and it's addressing the issue that came to counsel a few meetings ago related to wanting to deal with car sales on Columbia Drive. I hope that clarifies why there is a new section, why it affects all of the zones throughout the city.

It's to put in place what has been done in practice over at least two decades.

Thank you for that bit of history and explanation.

Just brings to my clarifying question there, Anthony. As it relates to this, so is there a process allowable for a twenty five percent increase in structure, right, previously that's what we talked about is in code currently for the urban mixed use zone?

Yeah, that applies to urban mixed use as well. And so It applies across the city, every zone.

And so so like I said, that already exists. And so really what we're saying is we're considering an allowance through a conditional use permit of expansion beyond the 25%. Again, clarifying these things, but then also expanding that beyond 25% of urban mixed use. And so we've talked and focused a lot on the area West Of Fruitland. And so how this applies then to the area East Of Fruitland is also of interest, at least to me, in understanding better what it is that we would imagine could happen. Do you

have a map like the one that you're showing us now? Sure you can. The city clerk would go to page two. You could get a section generally between Fruitland and Washington with highlights, which highlights properties that are in the UMU zone and are non performing uses currently. And then page three has for Linda Gum Street.

And so again as we're looking at this map what this would say is that we could see expansions anywhere adjacent to these properties so long as properties were purchased and otherwise met all those same criteria.

Correct. I'd say in many of them there's especially as you go West or East Of Washington much of that land is owned by the Port Of Kennewick. It's not likely that much of that's going to be any of that's going to be expanded. It would be very difficult to. And then the section in the middle, especially dealing with when you're dealing with the vehicle sales, you can see a majority of those really don't have anywhere else to go. Because of what's around them,

and it seems like some of them would like to consider how many cars are parked on their parking lot. Yeah. But again, we're not allowing in this condition and consideration. There's no expansion across alleyways, streets or otherwise immediately adjacent. Is there a little bit more off to the east side as well.

Page three. So the north side for the most part, as you can see, is fairly protected. What you see between the manufactured Home Park and the vehicle sales to the east is all owned by the port. The property zone properties north of the vehicle sales lot are owned by the port. The property south of the plumbing yard or excuse me, south of the manufactured home park is owned by the port.

The former manufactured home park along Clover Island Drive north of Columbia Drive owned by the port. And then you have the south side. Everything that's nonconforming is basically across the street from industrial. And there's are some semi industrial uses or vehicle repair vehicle Which are Confined primarily by the streets or alleys within the vicinity. So

to clarify on this, we're basically addressing property owner that did expand, growing his business, expanding to the next lot. He's nonconforming. He needs to bring his property into conformance, but he exists. He's providing taxes, services, vehicles to the community. All the rest of this is potential, maybe possible future events, correct?

Yes, I mean the original applicant is an existing vehicle sales the zone, zone. He had moved on to a property adjacent to his. He was notified that that wasn't permitted, and that's when he applied to propose the original proposal that you guys saw in front of you, which was the vehicle sales and incidental repair and service. So yes, that was the original. So I think

in response to council member Clifford's question. How does the city of Kennewick benefit? I think this business is a benefit Kennewick and I think you benefit Kennewick by facilitating the continuance of this business. I is that correct?

Yeah, I would say so. He has been successful. He does pay taxes like you said. He would like to expand and he provides a service to residents of Kennewick. Thank you.

And so as we see this, council member Anderson said we have one property owner, one business owner that had intended to do that first. It seems like after this is proposed to Planning Commission, we had another business owner come and say, hey, this is something I think is good for my business as well.

That correct?

The the other the gentleman that was to the west of the the applicant came at the hearing and spoke. He would like to be included somehow in the amendment that was originally proposed.

And is there another alternative to where we could allow these two nonconforming uses that have been proposed or one or the other to be able to expand their nonconforming use? Mean, one of them has already done that. We're kind of fixing that, right? They're already out of compliance with city code. Is there another methodology that could be utilized to do the same?

And while you're thinking about that, what you're thinking about.

Yes. There is not anything currently within the code or within staff or council's authority to do that currently, but something could And very of options that could I be laid out there, but there's not currently anything within the municipal code that gives the staff or the council authority to Just allow the two to expand. On a one off basis.

And just as a clarification and their only you Muse zoning in the city are the ones we've looked at this evening on the maps and Vista Field?

Correct.

And again, Vista Field being exempted from this, we're talking really about only this area, loosely called bridge To Bridge that we would be affecting. So although we talk about it being citywide, I think it's been clarified that really we're codifying what has been the practice of previous planning directors interpretations of the code and then also looking at an expansion of code just for this area. Is that correct? Correct. And we've heard again.

Have we heard I thought we said that there were two people that spoke against this. That's correct. And so eleven being the property owner that we've been discussing has the 40 acres and you know, it's been represented this evening. Who is the second one again? And what was

their concern? The second was developer someone who's developed within the community who's been looking at properties throughout has been following the bridge to bridge discussion and felt like that wasn't appropriate.

And again, what was what was his concern? What what what did he I mean, to say it's inappropriate is one thing and that maybe all he said because it wasn't there but what what explanation was given? From their perspective.

Their feeling is that it was detrimental to what the Bridge to Bridge plan was trying to accomplish, which was a more walkable, more urban type development. And the plan specifically looked at uses of what should and should not be within those zones in order to create that type of environment and vibrancy. And they felt like opening this up to allow some of those uses that were excluded on purpose detracts from the overall vision essentially.

And so an auto repair yard is what we're talking about on this western side. What zone would that normally be allowed in?

That'd be allowed in your commercial general

zones? Industrial light. So not exactly in that same concept of we would consider this urban mixed use concept right which is really not related to that type of work but what kind of work is that I mean what kind of.

I was gonna say I would also say commercial auto row are also permitted there, which is a neighboring zone.

And so the urban mixed use, not having been as maybe familiar in-depth familiar with the bridge to bridge plan, urban mixed use, what kind of things were they

we're next the housing, typically multifamily of housing to at a higher density. There are stricter design standards regarding how that's developed, where buildings are placed, more focus on the pedestrian environment with a

that we

of different get

to I we're to the market then, the think, desire of property the owners and desires of those in our community to try to enhance this area bridge to bridge, which I think has been a desire of both council members as well as members of our community to see something different and really revitalizing the waterfront. It's a lot of the activity that we're doing. I guess that was more of a comment than a question. Looking at this section here, as we talk about the expansion of this concept, right, what percentage of this area to the west, I'm going call it the West UMU zone, what percentage of the area does this really preclude from being interconnected with this idea of this what ideologically would be in this UMU future going going able sense able get get to a a of And And sense light industrial type use as opposed to this idea of UOMU. Looks to me to be somewhere between 58% just roughly.

Are you saying what percentage of the entire area would that business if expanded take up?

No, more along

the lines of It just

connects it, right? So if you imagine the left hand side of this picture has the one side and then you have this other property to the right of that. Again, not necessarily all in the same ownership, but assuming they were for a moment, right? You have this connectivity issue I think is what is probably most concerning I would think unless it's making that area undesirable to develop as a UMU, right, or what we would want in a UMU, what someone would want in a UMU. Is that really how I'm looking at it?

Yes. I guess, like from a connectivity standpoint, I'm looking at at connectivity from a pedestrian standpoint and a vehicular standpoint. I don't know that it impacts it really that much. You're to have sidewalks. You're going to have areas that you're going to be able to walk through walk along there across the street. As that develops, you're going to get the same thing. You're going to get because there isn't any

a And

we're think going question. Than I that's would about this small lot with an auto repair shop. It's almost essentially across the street from a zone where it's allowed. Yes.

Any time we do a big reason like this, there's pains, right? For existing businesses that are there if they want to expand, you bump into this and it's like, I've been here for twenty five years and you rezone me and you put a UMU in there. I didn't really want UMU and now here my business has grown. So kind of the people that have been in place that have been down there for a long time, they might potentially have a little reward with this zoning. That might be it. New ones coming in are all UMU. We've already looked at the map. The nausea here to say there's about three pieces this could work on. And so we really got to get to a point where we understand old ones could get a little reward, new ones stick to UMU. Am I seeing is wrong?

And so we're talking about really like two or three pieces of property. It doesn't want to become a spot zone, but it kind of is just based on what is currently there. So I don't know what we need to do to move to a vote, but I'd love to get to that next step.

Registered. Thanks. I think I have a couple more questions first. You. And I guess just again trying to appreciate the work that had been done and recognizing I think and again I'm not trying to get comment, I'm trying to get to a question.

Recognizing what has been said and shared by both members of the public, our staff and council members, it seems like there may be a method to where we can stay with some of these UMU need and desire to more be more in in alignment with what the adjacent units are going to be asked to do as they develop. And I believe that's what we're including in this requirement today. Is that correct?

Correct.

And so although it is a non conforming use and it may not be what everybody would like in the UMU zoning area, it seems like as they're being expanded there's requirements that will help to match and really provide that vision that we're trying to accomplish with the UMU zoning. That correct? That's the goal. Think that was the last of my questions. Member Beacham so if anyone else would have another comment. Council Member Millbauer any comments online?

I'm just enjoying the conversation. Thank you.

Thanks Jim. Alright so are there Board

of

of hard that the legislation that we put out to the citizens of Washington State would be understandable by the general public. And I don't see this as that, but then not everything can be. I understand that. Also in my career as an elected official life. Two things that I've Held to that many people do is a keep it simple. And be if it's not broke, don't fix it.

We'll

do we'll

And conforming uses have been regulated to in the past, it didn't give a clear direction. It only addressed one issue. That was non conforming structures. We feel that this addresses the issue in regards to non conforming uses and doesn't open up everything for the UMU zone.

Thank you sir. Thank you.

There are no additional questions I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Mayor. Mayor Pro Tem Torelli.

I move to adopt the ordinance as presented. Is there a second?

Mayor, I second.

It has been moved by Premier Pro Tem Torelli and seconded by Council Member Anderson to adopt the ordinance as presented. The floor is open for discussion. Mayor. Council Member Anderson.

I think it's important to also recognize that because this would allow for the opportunity to apply for a conditional use permit, it is not a guarantee that a conditional use permit will be granted because there's quite a bit of requirements that will be placed on the applicant. So it's not a green light. It's just the opportunity to see if they can meet that.

Additional I'd like to make a comment that I and I appreciate everyone's education this evening as we've gone through this, at least for me particularly. I do think it's important as Council Member Anderson may have noted earlier today that existing businesses in our city that can grow within the general area of those businesses and continue to be successful are a success of our city. And I think it's important that we continue to support those businesses as we're going through. I also think it's important for us to look long term at the vision that we're trying to achieve as we see redevelopment in this area. And I think that the staff has tried balance both of those needs and desires here tonight.

And so I appreciate the efforts that have gone on. Appreciate we got this originally and we sent it back. And now we've received it back with, I think, what the goals that we had hopefully intended to come through. And so with that, I support the motion as it's been made. Any other discussion? Okay. It's been properly moved and seconded to adopt the ordinance as presented. Will the clerk please start the vote?

Council Member Milbauer.

Aye.

Thank you.

Motion is passed five to two. Our last ordinance this evening pertains to virtual currency kiosks. Will the city clerk please read the ordinance by title?

Yes. This is an ordinance relating to virtual currency kiosks and adding chapter 6.09 to the Kennewick Municipal Code.

Alright. Mister will you please provide a staff report this evening?

Good evening mayor mayor pro tem council members city staff and residents. Chapter six zero nine of the Kennewick Municipal Code proposes to prohibit the placement of new virtual kiosks in and requires removal of existing kiosks from Kennewick. It provides up to one hundred and eighty days to remove existing kiosks and to ensure that the Kennewick Police Department and Kennewick City Attorney's Office have the opportunity to educate businesses, residents, officers, detectives if City Council decides to enact the policy. I'm happy to answer any questions council members have.

Alright, thank you. Are there any questions from council? There are no questions will entertain a motion this evening. Mr. Mayor. Mayor Pro Tempterrella.

I move to adopt the ordinance as presented.

Is there a second? Mayor, I second. It has been moved by Mayor Pro Temporelli and seconded by Council Member Anderson to adopt the ordinance as presented. The floor is open for discussion. I think I want to just express appreciation for the work that's gone forward to do this in the presentation we received last week.

I think that this has not been something that I knew was a major concern. And here the report and the statistics of the challenges associated with our city particularly and others in the area. I'm very happy to see this coming forward for both this evening and thank the staff for the work that's gone forward to get that done. With no additional discussions, it's been properly moved and seconded to adopt the ordinances presented. Will the clerk please start the vote?

Aye.

Now under new business, we'll consider an extension of the development agreement for Vista Field. After the staff report, the council will have an opportunity to ask questions or to request clarifying information. General discussion and debate must wait until after a motion has been made. Mr. Donovan, will you please provide the staff report again this evening? Thanks, Steve.

Okay. So as I'm sure you all know, because we've gone through this before at a workshop, the city entered into a development agreement with, the Port of Kennewick for Vista Field in December 2017, and the Port has recently requested extension for up to ten additional years. Staff reviewed the proposal or the agreement, felt that there were some amendments that needed to be made, and that's what we're looking at tonight. Okay. So this is just an area of the Vista Field site outlined in black, basically the old airport adjacent to not too far from the convention center to the west.

And I will turn this over to Mr. Cowling to discuss the transportation amendments. Just a simple clarification that the exhibit showing construction costs that the port pays a proportionate share of intersection improvements. Just a clarification that it is actual construction costs versus what's in the exhibit for estimated costs. The next section will be presented by chief Hefner in regards to design standards for some of the roads.

Good evening, Mayor City Council.

The

design specifications still ensure that proper modeling is being used for proposed design, street designs, preventing city's fire trucks navigating the turns. We're using the auto turn software technology to ensure the turning rate is adequate. Still a section added to improve clarity regarding the international fire code requirements and the height of the structure and the width of the roads. Still looking make sure there's adequate space for fire apparatus to to turn. And lastly, still some clarification language added regarding fire impact fees and that they're only applicable to the development of the South Ridge area, but that the port and their successors would agree to pay any impact fees if and only if a zone was established by council in Vista Fields.

Thank you.

Just to give you a little analysis. Per KMC eighteen forty eight twenty consider the city may enter into a development agreement. Came C eighteen forty eight zero two zero subsection four allows you to extend it up to one between one to ten years. And then subsection eighteen forty eight zero five zero requires that the Planning Commission hold a public hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council for the proposed development agreements and extensions. The planning commission held a public hearing on April 6.

Staff recommended approval of the amendments and the extension. Mr. Peterson, who spoke earlier today, spoke at that particular hearing and was in favor of the amendments and extension and the Planning Commission voted five to zero to recommend approval of the proposed amendments and extensions. That being said, there's any questions of staff, I'd be more than happy to answer them.

All right. Any questions staff on this issue? I'll entertain a motion. Mayor Pro Tem Turoli.

I move to approve the resolution as presented. Is there second?

Mayor I second that.

It's been moved by Mayor Pro Tem Turrell and seconded by Council Member Anderson to sign the agreement as presented. The floor is open for discussion.

Excuse me, I think I am supposed to say explicitly I moved to sign the development agreement as presented.

How's that? And is that what you second? And

I second that.

That's what you second

it. I got the glare.

Know how Well, to so it has now been, was not quite previously but it has now been moved by Mayor Pro Tem Turillian seconded by Councilor Anderson to sign the agreement as presented. And now the floor is open for discussion. Having them. It's been properly moved and seconded to sign the agreement as present. Will the clerk please start the vote?

Council Member Milbauer.

Aye.

And

that motion is passed six to one. Next is council comments and discussion and council members and the city manager may report on significant items relating to their boards and commissions or other items of interest. We will start with council member Clipper.

Thank you, We're getting late into the evening, so I'll be very quick. And not discuss things that have been involved in most recently, but I would like to say appreciate it one more time. Reference our city pool and would like us to have a workshop or something at our earliest opportunity to discuss what we are going to do concerning our city. Mayor Pro Tempterra.

Nothing permitted. Council Member Anderson.

I was in shock. I thought I had about ten minutes to prepare. We can come back. I'm good. Just attended the Good Roads Transportation meeting and just appreciate the work that our city staff has done to create and and we'll give a lot of kudos to Carrie on this but a good system of main maintenance and repair of our roads.

The state has not done the same and is in utter disrepair and I go to that meeting every time and it's nothing but bad news all around. They're just working with a completely unmanageable budget and so appreciate the work that the city does on that. Other than think do

I

silently online at the BF Cog meeting last Friday morning. Jason McShane, our mayor, was the lead dog there for the city of Kennewick and he had some useful comments, important things to say. Both of us skipped early so we could go to the Columbia Valley ribbon cutting. And it was all good. The weather was great.

And a good sized crowd, well represented across the Tri Cities there that day. And it's not often that we get to hear a long list of speakers, but we did that day. What, eight? Think it was maybe more. It was a lot. Anyway, but the weather was great, so there was no harm done. And although people were standing, I do believe there were a couple of chairs that went empty. So it was all great and applause was earned all the way around. That that suffices for the ZEU's comments. Thank you.

Councilwoman Beecham. Two things, just an update

there on BFT. I'm sure we

all read the paper, but there was

a decision made by the board to release, let the CEO go from the findings of the internal Brian, I forget his last name, stepped in. He's been number two in command, does a good job. So that will go back out and we'll see if we can get our third or fourth since I've been there. I can't remember what it is at this point, but working on that. So, that's probably been the biggest change on my committees. Also, I I want to say thanks to all the members of council and staff especially council members that are able to attend all of those ribbon cuttings. I do see em on the Facebook page or whatever we have when we post those and I know that's a big commitment that some of us aren't able to attend. So, appreciate you guys taking all that time to do every single one of them. So, thank you.

Yes, Council Member

council's rep on the community action committee, the CAC, which is based in Pasco. I had an emergency meeting about a week and a half ago, I think it was, one day's notice. And it was important because we still have trouble at the top end. Our number one and number two people have expressed concerns about leadership. And it's we had to take an emergency action, so to speak, save everything.

Unhappy people with very responsible positions. That's all I want to share. You.

Right. City manager.

Mayor McSheen. Just wanted to follow-up with some updates on the pool based on the visitor comments that were given today. We did get ready to turn that on. The pump was not working. We have since we we kinda had a moment of panic because we didn't know if we were gonna be able to get one in time, but we have found someone locally that will rebuild the pump.

So we hope to have that by the end of it this week. And so they should start filling the the pool now, get the pump installed at the end of the week, and turn it on turn heat on Monday and should be ready to go by Wednesday. So, I think we're we're on the right track there. In regards to the planning and the capital piece, as you guys are aware, coming out of our council retreat, that was a priority to see if we could squeeze a new pool out of our capital reserve fund. We did have a great meeting at the department head level today regarding the city hall RFP that is in process.

As part of that is the master planning of the city hall campus. And so that pool discussion did come up today. We do have them scheduled to come back to council at the May 12 workshop to go through where we are at to date with the RFP for city hall. So again, they're looking at this existing facility. The if we could retrofit this for the long term, looking at a potential new facility and then the master plan of this site.

And then based off of the council retreat and the process that we are in play that is in place for city hall, our thought process was once we make a determination on that, then we would look to see if we wanted to combine maybe a design build process for city hall and a pool at the same time so we would bring those back after we have made a decision on the city hall piece. So that's kind of our thought process. If council would like us to shift gears at any point, please let us know. But that's the path we're on right now.

And we'll hear more details on that on the twelfth.

You'll hear on the twelfth.

Thank you. Okay.

And I neglected to remember council member Milbauer who I've been seeing on the screen all evening. Sorry, Jim.

I was going snag you out. Okay. Thank you, mayor. I know it's getting early back there for you guys, so I'll keep this long. I did attend the mental health court graduation.

It was a special graduation as it was the February, two hundred and first, and two hundred and second graduation. So I congratulate those three individuals on the accomplishments they made on improving their lives, basically. I also attended with others, staff and counsel for the pending of Deputy Fire Chief Van Horn. Attended the adult court grand opening. Mayor Pro Tem read the proclamation, did a wonderful job as always, and also attended the Columbia Valley Center for Recovery ribbon cutting. It's really exciting. I'm glad to see this coming to fruition. Mayor did a good job in a proclamation. All the other ones talk too long. Let's see.

And as you may or may not know, I am attending the ECA's nuclear conference. So I'll give a quick brief to save me from two weeks from now remembering it. Today's sessions, dealing with nuclear opportunities and what to know. So it's a great breakdown. We've got physics lessons from some very smart people on fission and fusion reactors and how they're split and how much energy they create, which I didn't know some of that.

Was nice to hear it. Let's see. The new modular reactors of different size, many large and whatnot, how it's gonna take state, tribal, local government, and community engagement to make these things happen, and federal. Talked about the nuclear fuel cycle, where we're at with that. And along those lines, for future, hopefully not too distant future, they have possible recycle and reuse of the, byproduct of fuel that has been burnt in the reactors in the 90, what is it, 94 nuclear reactors across The United States.

Of those in that fuel, there's, not really you think of it as a lot of fuel that's sitting on each nuclear reactor site property. It's not wide enough to fill a very large warehouse as of yet. But still, we need to find some avenue of deep repository within The United States to handle that. Let's see here. Also, they did citing advanced nuclear reactors at data centers.

That was a really good conversation roundtable, not only on citing those, but on data centers in general. I generated a lot of questions from everyone that attended it. Wanted to know there's 2,827 US data centers right now approximately. They think it will be up to 3,000 really soon. There's a lot of good and some bad to go with those. Have one of the bad things is the water usage. They now have data centers, at least on the East Coast and the Virginia area, there are closed loop water systems that use no more water than a tip the hotel would use in servicing the people that, stay there.

What else is it?

The good things are, some of the things that the data centers are doing in different areas around The United States is the tax exemption. But also, what the companies that want these installed are paying for, that money goes to the schools in that area in the different type of programs in the area where these data centers are being located. So there's another positive way for data centers to become useful from a standpoint of in neighborhoods or in different communities. So I'll give you more on this when we get done, but thank you very much and you all have a good evening.

Thanks, Council Member Millbauer. So just kind of report earlier, Council Member Trumbo mentioned the BFCOG meeting. BFCOG, the Board approved development of an RFP for a larger metro loop. So this would include access across the Columbia River potentially from Pasco to North Richland, also looking at potential enhancements of the 395 corridor through Kennewick and so forth. I don't not going to get into all the details of that.

It's a big, big picture thing. But there is they're anticipating spending over $1,000,000 1,000,000 point dollars on that study looking out. Again, are future outlook things, but that's something that most folks probably don't know is something that is being actively worked on here in our community. I'm also very humbled to have an opportunity to go to the Columbia Valley Recovery Center ribbon cutting and provide a proclamation for that on behalf of the city of Kenworth that's hosting that facility. I was touched by a couple of different things.

And one of those was the amount of new jobs that's been created through the Columbia Valley Recovery Center. That was not something that I knew all the details of. And I'm not talking about just the center itself, which I think was something like up to 140 new jobs in Kennewick, but also the additional jobs that are being built by businesses that are now opening nearby to help service that facility. And the other thing that struck me was the amount of activity that's going on in outreach. As we recognize the need for this recovery center in our community, there's still other uses and needs that we don't currently have.

And so one of the things I've talked with Benton County folks about is, you know, one of the needs we have in our community is we really don't have a place to take folks with special needs. If you can imagine a mother who's a sole provider of an adult child who has severe special needs, if that mother has a medical emergency and has to go to the hospital, there's nowhere to take that dependent at this time. And so what is great about our facility and the takeover of the old Kennewick General Hospital site is it's a large facility with a lot of room. And so those are things that just one example of what can be expanded. The other thing that was surprising to me was how many other services in the community that are going to be touched through this Columbia Valley Recovery Center.

We heard a little bit about an Elijah home tonight. For those that are unfamiliar with that, that's going to be something outreach that the Columbia Valley Recovery Center starts and then can get those folks placed out into some of those facilities. And so there's lots of those needs around our community. One thing that struck me was how many people I met, how many nonprofits, and how many folks would like to have additional funding related to these projects. But I think there's a great need there.

I do think it's a great step forward. And the number of private donations that came in for that, for those that aren't familiar with that project, was in excess of $3,000,000 And that's a significant benefit to our community. So appreciate everyone that went to that and participated in that last Friday. With that, I think I will conclude our remarks for this evening. I appreciate everyone's time and efforts this evening and being here. So there's no further business and it's now 08:26. And the meeting is concluded.