Document Kennewick_doc_4a13e57f25

KENNEWICK PLANNING COMMISSION Notice of Planning Commission Workshop Meeting The Kennewick Planning Commission will meet December 7, 2009 at 6:30 pm in the City Hall Council Chambers for a workshop meeting. (Workshop agenda below) The regularly scheduled Kennewick Planning Commission pre-decision meeting for December 7, 2009 has been cancelled. The Community Planning Department is pleased to inform you that all Planning Commission agendas, minutes and current meeting packet information are available to you through the City of Kennewick website: http://www.ci.kennewick.wa.us/Community_Planning/home.asp If you have comments or questions – please contact: Ferdouse Oneza Community Planning [PHONE REDACTED] Workshop Agenda 1. Bridge-to-Bridge/River-to-Railroad Revitalization Update from Tom Beckwith ---PAGE BREAK--- BRIDGE-TO-BRIDGE/RIVER-TO-RAILROAD REVITALIZATION UPDATE DECEMBER 7, 2009 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers 1: Review results of stakeholder interviews 2: Review results of neighborhood and citywide workshops 3: Review results of internet survey 4: Review range of alternatives to be developed for further study ---PAGE BREAK--- Kennewick BB/RR Revitalization Planning Stakeholders Interviewed 11.18.09 Stakeholders interviewed Affiliation First Last 1 Benton County Commissioner James Beaver 2 Housing Authority City of Kennewick Karlene Navarre 3 Tri-City Bicycle Club John Ittner 4 Tri-City Home Consortium Carol Evans 5 TRIDEC Carl Adrian 6 TRIDEC Kayla Pratt 7 UDAT member Skip Novakovich 8 Arculus Design & Technical Services Steve Mallory, A.I.A., CSI 9 Benton County Mike Shuttleworth 10 Benton County Susan Walker 11 Benton-Franklin Council of Governments (BFCG) Art Tackett 12 Tri-City Visitor & Convention Bureau Kris Watkins 13 Tri-Cities Rivershore Enhancement Council (TREC) Kris Watkins 14 CID Keith Martin 15 Kennewick General Hospital Glen Marshall 16 Kennewick School District Doug Carl 17 Port of Kennewick Tim Artnzen 18 Three Rivers Community Roundtable Mike Schwenk 19 Tri-Ctiy Regional Chamber of Commerce Lori Mattson 20 Benton PUD Jim Sanders 21 Tri-Cities Young Professionals Group Tyler Adams 22 Tri-Cities Young Professionals Group Melissa McAloon 23 Auto Dealers Ken Williams 24 Ben-Franklin Transit Tim Fredrickson 25 Ben Franklin Transit Kathy Mullens 26 Historic Downtown Kennewick Partnership Tim Dalton 27 Property Owner Rudolph Jesering 27 Property Owner Rudolph Jesering 28 Tri-City Herald Rufus Friday 29 Kennewick City Manager Bob Hammond 30 Mayor,Kennewick Tom Moak 31 Tri-Cities Hispanic Chamber of Commerce Edison Valerio 32 Police Chief Kennewick Ken Hohenberg ---PAGE BREAK--- 1 City Of Kennewick RR/BB Revitalization Plan Stakeholder Interview Summary This document summarizes the results of personal interviews conducted with 37 individual stakeholders in October and November 2009. Below is a summary of responses organized under each interview question asked. The summary statement under each question represents the interviewer’s attempt to identify the primary theme from all responses generated. Each interview was conducted as a conversation, focusing on areas relevant to the particular stakeholder and using the interview questions as a guide Attachment A shows a complete list of individuals interviewed. General Background 1. Describe your organizations interest or responsibilities in the Kennewick community and the Tri-City Area. Warm up question – did not record answers 2. As a place to do business and live what do you think are Kennewick’s greatest assets?  The Columbia river and shore line  An educated population  Community’s “can do” attitude  Central regional location  Pro-business attitude from city council  Community thinks regionally  Room to grow to the west  Low cost of living  Still has small town values  Excellent climate  Pro business attitude in community  Hard working service clubs  Varied recreational opportunities  Cooperative attitude  Leaders have the big vision  Downtown – unique stores  Clean, well kept image  Many quality transportation links  Booming local economy  Great public education system  An active port 3. Describe your organization’s (personal) interest or responsibilities in the BB/RR revitalization area. Warm up question – did not record answers 4. How would you describe your organization’s impact in the BB/RR revitalization area over the last 5 years? Warm up question – did not record answers 5. Given current conditions how would you describe the likely future evolution of the BB/RR revitalization area? Warm up question – did not record answers ---PAGE BREAK--- 2 SWOT Assessment 6. What would you say are the major or opportunities of the BB/RR revitalization area? Summary Statement – The major or opportunities of the district include; □ the visual and physical access to the Columbia River, □ the close proximity to the historic downtown, □ the suitability of the district redevelopment potential, □ Clover Island, Duffy’s Pond potential □ the Port’s commitment to improvement, and □ good circulation and access infrastructure. Summary of Most Significant Comments -  Vibrant downtown historic area  Riverfront utilization potential  Can see river shore form bridges  Clover Island as it is and potential  Duffy’s Pond redevelopment potential  Proximity to downtown activities  A unique area to region and state  Current uses make redevelopment possible  Good automobile access  Infrastructure/transportation links  Port’s ownership and involvement  River based views and use  Is in a transition period  Water views from entire district  Cable bridge  The one area where major redevelopment can take place  The one chance to create a “go to “ place  Central to metro area  Entry portal to downtown  Good circulation within the district  Sacagawea trail  Port’s commitment to the area  Opportunity for mixed income housing  Historic downtown sign good  View of the bridges  Grain elevator reuse potential  Potential warehouse reuse  Partnership with the Port  Underutilized/valued land 7. What would you say are the major weaknesses or threats of the BB/RR revitalization area? Summary Statement – The major weaknesses or threats to the district include; □ the overall rundown appearance and underutilized land uses, □ negative public perceptions, □ lack of a major destination activity, □ significant road blocks to revitalization including multiple small landownership’s, Corps and Tribes □ a lack of appropriate zoning regulations and design standards, □ difficult pedestrian and biking circulation and □ no community endorsed revitalization plan. Summary of Most Significant Comments -  Run down trailer parks  Difficult working with all the various interests  Little diversity  “outside” views not welcome  Levees  RR ROW cuts off downtown  RR have significant control  Community negative perceptions  “that’s the way it has always been” attitude  No consistent landuse  No theme to area  Corps control of dikes  Difficult identifying how to “get started”  Multiple ownerships – difficult to create partnerships  Auto dealers not the best use of space  Truck traffic and speed on Columbia Drive  Small property parcels  General overall appearance  Interior transportation circulation a problem  Too much sprawl  Difficult a create “a place” critical mass  Current owners not interested in development  Inappropriate zoning  Most current uses must go or change  Lack of city support or follow through  No amenities on the trail  Duffy’s Pond in current condition  Old hotel near SR 395  Run down housing  No destination activity ---PAGE BREAK--- 3  View shed needs to be protected  Future uncertain  Not perceived as safe  Homeless population at Duffy’s Pond  Not on the way to anything  No public awareness of the area  Port Duffy’s Pond plan just a vision – can’t be implemented  Lack of design standards  No direct access to river  No contact with the water  The RR’s are a major distraction  An Agenda for the Future 8. How can we capitalize on the riverfront, Duffy’s Pond, Columbia Park, and other recreational assets in the BB/RR revitalization area? Summary Statement –We can capitalize on the recreational assets in the BB/RR revitalization area by; □ Creating a clean safe and attractive district which the community will frequent □ implementing the Port’s Duffy’s Pond Plan, □ creating a point destination recreational activity □ promoting mixed uses that expand public shopping, dinning, living and recreational choices, □ maximizing water contact and views, □ capitalizing on the existing regional trail system and □ making strong visual and physical connections with the historic downtown area. Summary of Most Significant Comments -  Reduce and enhance the levees  Enhance Clover Island  Encourage mixed use  Create actual contact with water  Market the Clover Island Inn  Make it a lifestyle area  Create activities/festivals to occur in the area  Create levees similar to Columbia Park  Help existing business  Port plans should proceed  Develop a pride of ownership  Make the boat basin more user friendly  Manage pool levels  Provide appropriate directional signs  Buying more property in Duffy’s Pond area  Reroute and underground power lines  Create links to wine industry  Create a complete urban village  A “knock your socks off” development – world class  Implement UDAT plan elements  Remove blight  Make a place to live/work/play  Enhance trails and connections  Increase directional signage  Market the area amenities to target businesses  Create walking, shopping areas  Destination activity like an ice rink  Grass over the levees  Create a 24/7 community  Mixed uses along waters edge  Create a dog park  “get on with it”  Look to other communities that have done it  Prioritize and enhance pedestrian safety  Establish consistent business hours  Create a regional draw  Direct contact with river  Create and implement design standards  9. How can we develop linkages between the river, downtown, school and civic campus, and other adjacent development areas? Summary Statement – Linkages connecting the river, downtown, civic center and other development areas can be created by; □ enhancing pedestrian/biker amenities throughout the district including an effective direction signage system □ calming traffic along Columbia Drive, Washington Street and Fruitland Street □ strengthening and improving pedestrian/biker amenities along Washington Street, Columbia Drive, and Fruitland Street □ investigate constructing an overpass/underpass of the RR crossings on Washington Street, Benton Street or Fruitland Street □ Connecting the district with other regional amenities by trail and water connections ---PAGE BREAK--- 4 Summary of Most Significant Comments -  Expand the trail system  Create a water taxi to Richland and Pasco  Create a public dock near Fruitland Street.  Make pedestrian friendly improvements along Washington Street, Fruitland Street and Benton Street  More parking incorporated in and along pedestrian corridors  Stairs up to the levees  No need for new connections  These connections are not important  Develop design themes for the various subareas  Develop a directional sign system  Get trucks off Columbia Drive  Traffic calming on Columbia Drive  Too far to much a real link  Implement elements of the UDAT plan  Improve bike and pedestrian access on and off the bridges, especially the able bridge  Trail connections down Washington and Fruitland to downtown and civic center enhanced   Create bike lanes on bridges  Upgrade the RR crossings  Improve sidewalks through out the district  Fill in the frontage gaps along retail streets  Pedestrian overpass over the RR  Create continuous pedestrian routes through the district  Underpass the RR crossing  Build green  Create a linear park along Canal Drive  Walking, biking as alternative to be promoted more  Improve RR crossings  Complete trail along levee through Duffy’s Pond  Benton is the best pedestrian bikers corridor  Change Washington and Fruitland into boulevard design  Streets not pedestrian friendly or safe  10. What businesses, industries, commercial, or other uses should we target for the BB/RR revitalization area in general and each of the 7 specific neighborhoods therein in particular? Summary Statement – The businesses, industries, commercial, or other uses we should we target for the BB/RR revitalization area include; □ employment generating uses such as retail shops, specialty stores, eating establishments, overnight accommodations, service sector offices, recreational activity support services □ uses that bring citizens and visitors to the area such as art galleries, book stores, arts and craft outlets, entertainment venues, wine industry theme services and a major recreation point destination □ uses that capitalize on the location of trail activities and the rail lines such as bike/kayak rentals, excursion trains up the valley or to Hanford □ uses that contribute to a 24/7 district such as clubs, theaters, restaurants, cafes and coffee shops. Summary of Most Significant Comments -  Recruit fine restaurants, cafes, coffee shops, bookstores  Art galleries  Exploit wine country theme  Retail along Columbia Drive will be difficult  Tourist oriented family activities create a point destination activity  Arts and crafts markets  Resort hotel/motel  Encourage mixed uses  Fisherman’s Wharf atmosphere  Revitalize existing business  Mixed retail uses  Office space  Corporate headquarters  Places to meet and linger  Tourist, retail, in area 7 and light manufacturing warehousing in area 4  Unique specialty shops  Create an arts and entertainment center  Develop regional attractions  Office/retail/housing mixed uses  Upscale housing  Develop clover island to the max  24/7 community  Night life  Small performing arts venues  Excursion train along river  Dinner train back – to Prosser  Cultural events  Expand and enhance auto services in area 2  Improve the train depot  Performing arts center  Implement the port’s Duffy’s Pond plan  Attract new business types to the community  Develop theme for the area  Live/work  Medical offices and clinics  Develop an incubator and incubator programs for small business ---PAGE BREAK--- 5 11. What are your thoughts about auto row and what role will or should auto sales and service activities have in the BB/RR area? Summary Statement- We should address the auto sales/services activities in the BB/RR district by; □ creating an auto district theme □ enhancing the Columbia Drive streetscape ROW to ROW adding new sidewalks, street lights, signage, street trees, and a median strip □ create gateways to area 2 from SR 305 interchange □ assisting in façade improvements and general property fix up □ assisting owners in creating an association to market area Summary of Most Significant Comments  Develop an “auto” theme to area  Major streetscape improvements  Make it a “happening” place  Creates a poor to district  Ugly junky appearance  No future  Move them to another corridor  Concentrate auto services from SR 395 to Fruitland Street  Enhance building appearance  Fix up facades, repair paint buildings  Enhance the strip  Install additional traffic circles  Seems to work as is  Unsure of auto sales value to area  Assist with façade loans  Should stay and fix up the streetscape 12. What are your thoughts about Area 4 and what role will or should rail-oriented salvage, shipping, and warehousing activities have in the BB/RR area? Summary Statement- We should address the current uses in Area 4 by; □ encouraging and assisting the market initiated relocation of current salvage, scrape and recycling uses □ screening with various landscape techniques uses unable or unwilling to relocate □ developing use specific design standards □ assisting the reuse of existing buildings to uses such as wine industry based activities □ work with the RR’s to reduce the size and impact of their trackage and rights of way Summary of Most Significant Comments  Area needs to “people service” area  Move them out  Not sure it is important  Shift this use out to the finely area  Restore RR station to serve as a wine industry venue  Convert warehouses to vine tasting rooms  Clean up where we can  Develop design standards  Should be moved out to big Pasco  Need to reduce the width of the RR ROW  Retain the buildings but reuse  Screen it or hide it  Leave it to market transition  Not a problem  Landscape the area  Transition to high tech  Bring in other uses ---PAGE BREAK--- 6 13. What kind of housing opportunities should we seek to retain and enhance, and/or attract to the area and what kind of housing occupants should we seek to retain and/or attract? Summary Statement – We should capitalize and maximize the opportunities for housing within the district by; □ retaining and enhancing the current single family neighborhood in Area 3 □ encouraging mixed income, mixed use and mixed age projects □ allowing for rental and ownership products □ providing for high densities in Areas 1, 6, and 7 □ maximizing the river views for upper income housing Summary of Most Significant Comments -  Allow for market rate housing  Provide for retirement and “empty nesters”  Ensure that multifamily rentals are available  Place housing near the levee  Maintain low density in some areas  Include the housing authority as a partner  Housing up over the levees  Mixed use – retail on ground floor  Mixed income looking over the levee  Maximize high density  Allow for high rises (above 5 stories)  Mixed type – rentals and condos  Upper price market units  Mixed income and use  Push the housing, have it lead  Upscale condos  Preserve single family area  14. What public improvements should we make to BB/RR revitalization area that would support your proposals above? Summary Statement – We should take the following public improvement actions to promote the revitalization of the BB/RR district; □ ensure that adequate water, sewer, irrigation and storm drainage systems are in place □ put in place appropriate zoning and landuse regulations □ develop a brand theme for the district □ implement traffic calming along Columbia Drive and Fruitland Street □ upgrade the streetscape including bike lanes along Columbia drive from SR – 395 to SR-397, Washington Street from the levee to 6th Street, Fruitland Street form the levee to 1st Street and Benton Street from Columbia Drive to 3rd Street □ investigate underpass/overpass at RR crossing on Washington, Benton and Fruitland Streets □ develop a new public space/square and make improvements to Fruitland Park □ assist the Port in property assembly for redevelopment and implementation of the Duffy’s Pond plan □ create additional water access by developing a new river inlet area or floating pier □ create a public point destination such as a museum or performing arts venue □ promote and assist in the presentation of events, festivals, farmer’s market □ utilize appropriate public funding for micro/façade loans Summary of Most Significant Comments  Upgrade public infrastructure  Create events, activities  Develop a point destination such as museums, Farmer’s Mkt.  Implement port’s plan for Duffy’s Pond  Create small pocket parks  Improve streetscape along Columbia Drive  Public environment image improved  An inlet in from the river  Assemble property  Be dramatic actions  Central public gathering place square  Tighten up land use regulations to eliminate unwanted uses  Create public access to water  Traffic calming  Cascade walk  Link Clover Island to east downtown  Upgrade all of the streetscapes  Install an RR ROW over pass at Washington Street or Benton Street  Create bike lanes on Columbia drive, Washington and Fruitland  Improve Fruitland Park  Trails, sidewalks, landscaping, open space, public gathering places  Set up several micro loan programs  Under ground power lines  Public art  Investigate realigning Columbia Drive from Washington to Gum Street to provide additional uplands for Duffy’s Pond  Increase lighting throughout area  ---PAGE BREAK--- 7 15. Who should take the lead or be responsible for making each of these improvements – the City, Port, private sector? Summary Statement – Responsibility for implementing the improvements needed to revitalize the RR/BB district should be with; □ The Port as lead □ A partnership of Port and City □ The City as lead □ A special purpose entity Summary of Most Significant Comments  City primary lead  Port should be a major player  Don’t do join implementation – city should control  Port should lead the way  City/port partnership  Port should lead – city support  City needs to stop planning and get on with it  City support to the Port’s efforts  City to provide infrastructure , port to provide development expertise  Find a local project ‘champion” to promote work  Special entity if well put together  Uncertain/changing city priorities 16. How should we finance these public improvements and/or private development projects in the BB/RR revitalization area? Summary Statement – Financing public improvements and or public/private projects in the BB/RR district will have to consider the following issues; □ public bonding or levy’s will be difficult if not impossible □ use of condemnation will not be popular □ a non government project “champion or spokesperson” should be recruited ASAP □ a clear and understandable revitalization plan needs to be developed □ city priorities need to match up with recommendations □ a clear financing plan should be developed that lays out the “what”, “where”, “when” and “why” □ the benefits in return for development needs to be very clear for the public □ a new pioneer use in the district could show immediate success □ identify other partners, such as, the PUD, Housing Authority and Council of Governments Summary of Most Significant Comments  Need “good” spokesperson for project  Visuals of plan  Get public buy in  No new taxes  No special business area organization  Must create private sector buy in  Bid’s, lid’s, public/private partnerships  No new taxes  No condemnation  Make a good case for public support  Find a major pioneer  Start with a good foundation and create success  Build a good case for public expenditures  This will be tough  City to reroute funds from south ridge and vista  Benton PUD to help underground power lines  Public bonds and levy’s  Grants, Loans  Changing city priorities  Inform to the public clearly about what when where why.  Must be sold to public – how does it benefit me?  Leverage local funds  Bring in many partners  Lid type of funding  Private lenders need to be involved  Community needs to be sold before they will pay  Develop a clear well understood funding plan  Special purpose tax recovery programs  A logical case for public spending must be presented  Need to show results soon  Start with “low hanging” fruit  No bonding or levies  ---PAGE BREAK--- 8 Added Comments Do you have other comments or suggestion that would be useful in shaping a BB/RR Revitalization Plan? Native Americans need to be involved Previous plans did not have stakeholder support Area not much in common with downtown Corps has too much control over area outcomes Council of government has approximately $100k available for lending in the area People get corps fatigue Area needs to be branded Mixed city priorities a problem City/port relationship is a problem Council needs to approve plan first General feeling that UDAT plan was impractical Can the city follow trough? Involve the tribes Tumble weeds and floating debris are a problem at foot of causeway to Clover Island ---PAGE BREAK--- 1 Appendix: Results of neighborhood/citywide workshops Kennewick Bridge-to-Bridge/River-to-Railroad Revitalization Plan Workshop results Note – does not yet include comments from graphics or neighborhood workshop 1. Neighborhoods Likes 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 city1 city2 Access - from SR-395 and Cable Bridge X X X X X X X Access - to SR-395, Cable Bridge, rest of region X X X X X X X Access - to river including fishing X X X X Access - local street grid – functional X X X X X Aesthetics – of Cable Bridge and night lighting X X X Auto Row – convenience of services and sales X X X Climate – sunshine and temperature X Clover Island Marina – view and activity X X X Clover Island – quality of redevelopment X X X Clover Island – relationship with city X X Columbia Park – relationship to riverfront X X Commercial on Columbia Drive - convenience X X Cost – of housing, properties X X Demographics - of city and district X Diversity - of uses and activities X X X Diversity - people friendly and diverse X X X Housing – single family neighborhood X Property/business ownership – local X Property/business ownership – potential X X X Levy – lowering and swale improvement X Noise – lack of, quiet neighborhood X Railroads – 2 class 1 freight carriers X River - Lake Wallula for impounded river area X X Sacajawea Trail – views, location, and activity X X X X Scale - of area and downtown X Tax rate - low X Traffic - access and volumes on Columbia Drive X X Trees – especially large trees in developed areas X Veteran’s Memorial – adjacent Cable Bridge X X Views - north of river from hillside X X Views - of river, bridges, and marinas X X X Neighborhoods Dislikes – features needing improvement 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 city1 city2 Aesthetics – district lacks definition X X X X Appearances in general – need cleaning up X X X X X Appearances – auto row X X Branding - lack of X X X Culture of area – drugs, transients, and crime X X X X X X Dark streets - add street lights for safety X X X Dogs – pooper scooper requirement X Facades – no street/pedestrian definition X X X Gateways – need entry definition X X Land use – some incompatible X Momentum – lack of to date X Parking – for levy and river activities X X X Preserve character of area in any improvements X Property ownership – too much rental X Public facilities – are none in area X Railroad tracks – crossing hazards X Railroad tracks and yard – barrier X River edges and water quality – improve X X X ---PAGE BREAK--- 2 Appendix: Results of neighborhood/citywide workshops Kennewick Bridge-to-Bridge/River-to-Railroad Revitalization Plan River activities – increase boat landings/access X X Road – Benton intersection turning visibility X Roundabouts – confusing, need better wayfinding X X Roundabouts – too narrow for trucks X X Seasonal parking – hydroplane races X Smells/odder – from produce plant X Strategy – need one X X X Streets – need resurfacing, curbs, gutters X X Streetscape – need basic sidewalks, trees, etc X X Traffic – volume on Columbia Drive X Trails – need on-road route definitions X Trails – need additional river/levy connections X X Underutilized - empty buildings X X X Underutilized lands and properties X X X Neighborhoods Duffy’s Pond 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 city1 city2 Activities – create beach for swimming X Activities – create ice skating rink in winter X X Activities – create water ski/wakeboard area X Activities – install amphitheater X Activities – install fishing pier towards Blue Bridge X Activities – install dock as bridge to island X Activities – paddle boat and canoe rentals in pond X X Activities – farmers’ market X X Activities – water park X Activities – active recreation X Catfish Island – green area, small park X X X Levy – remove and relocate around pond X X X Land use – develop mixed use around pond X X X X Land use – develop hotel adjacent Cable Bridge X Swale – expand pond west into swale X X Trails – expand around pond and onto island X X Transit – loop around area to increase access X Water quality – aerate/increase pumping into river X Wildlife – improve habitat conditions, views of X Neighborhoods Riverfront 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 city1 city2 Access – increase direct access to river X X X X Access – bridge over swales to levy top X Access – improve connections with Columbia Park X X Activities – wakeboarding park X Activities - fishing pier addn towards Blue Bridge X X X Activities – transient boat docks incl tour boats X X X Activities – extend railroad from Columbia Park X X X Activities – performing arts center X Activities – museum of transportation X X Activities – miniature golf X X Activities – family-oriented fun center X X Activities – indoor community/recreation center X X Activities – community gardens X Downtown – make river connections X X Improvements – install lighting, other amenities X X Parking – at convenient locations to levy X X X X Land use – create river oriented developments X X Land use – create river oriented destinations X X ---PAGE BREAK--- 3 Appendix: Results of neighborhood/citywide workshops Kennewick Bridge-to-Bridge/River-to-Railroad Revitalization Plan Land use – houseboats X X X Levy surface – install landscaping inner and outer X X X Levy surface – create more park-like nodes X X Levy outer – install beaches and habitat X X Levy – fill Clover Island shallows on west end X X X Swale – improve aesthetics – landscaping X X X X Swale – install furnishings X Swale – create access over to levy X X X Swale – expand into wetlands and ponds X X Swale – cover over X Viewpoints – create views corridors on roadways X Neighborhoods Auto Row – when separated from other uses 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 city1 city2 Aesthetics – better landscaping, signage, etc X X Auto mall – consolidate, relocate X Incompatible – with other developing uses X Important use – but not here X Land values- will intensify or relocate X X Parking – require on-lot rather on-sidewalk X X Streetscape – not pedestrian friendly X X Marketing – promote Auto Row brand X Off-loading of vehicles – median only area X Neighborhoods Industrial area – when separate from other use 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 city1 city2 Retain - historical railroad oriented X Parking/vehicle storage – relocate from roadways X View – install screening of junky areas X Neighborhoods Railroads and corridor area 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 city1 city2 Crossings – extend streetscape across tracks X X X Crossings – waiting shelters for bikes, people X Crossings – better road surface levelers X Farmers’ Market – depot to east of Benton X X X X X Parking lot – depot to east of Benton X X X Railroad – excursion/dinner train from BNSF depot X X Railroad – retain warehouse, industrial uses X X Transit center – between rails at BNSF depot X Landscape – create greenway X X Old tunnel at - reactivate X New crossing – west of Fruitland X Emergency access – improve connections X Under/overpass – from west end X X Spurs and sidings – remove unused (Port owned?) X Switch yards – relocate east or into Pasco X Neighborhoods Roads, transit, bikes, pedestrians 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 city1 city2 Benton – extend to river as road or view corridor X Bikeways – no access under/across bridges X X Bikeways – improve on-road throughout area X X X X Columbia Park – improve roadway connections X X Columbia Trail – relocate away from levy X X X Columbia Trail – extend parallel levy Cable Bridge X Parking – place below new buildings X Roundabouts – on-ramp to Blue Bridge too narrow X ---PAGE BREAK--- 4 Appendix: Results of neighborhood/citywide workshops Kennewick Bridge-to-Bridge/River-to-Railroad Revitalization Plan Streetscape – upgrade function, appearances X Sidewalks – buffer from street edge X Trails – link levy trail to Clover Island X X Transit – improve shelters and waiting areas X X Visibility – around corners, especially Fruitland X Yellowstone Highway – Cable Bridge off-ramp X Neighborhoods Density - building heights 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 city1 city2 Height – staggered lowest at shore, highest back X Height - 5-story over parking/retail platforms X X X X Height - 20-story – locate along shorelines X X X X Height – multiple, mixed use structures X X X X Height – retain single family on west end X X X X Levy – integrate new buildings into inside edge X View corridors – between buildings to shoreline X X X X Neighborhoods Occupants of revitalized area 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 city1 city2 Childless couples – in higher density housing X X X X Retirees - growing regional market segment X X X X X Snowbirds – retirement segment X X X X Families – important for diversity X X X X Mixed income – including upper and affordable X X X X X X X X Ownership – rather than rental X Workforce housing – affordable, mixed housing X X X X X X Live-work units – in mixed use structures X Extended stay – time share condos X Elderly – assisted living X X X Neighborhoods Land use 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 city1 city2 Auto row – electric, smart cars, bikes, multi-modal X X Conference/convention – w/hotel developments X X Conference hotels – adjacent Blue/Cable Bridges X X X X X Education – technical or college X X Entertainment – cinema and performing arts X X Entertainment – restaurant of family menu X X Entertainment – restaurant and X X Entertainment – more microbrew, winery tasting X X Industrial – light and railroad related X X Industrial – nuclear related X X Industrial – high tech Hanford incubators X X Interpretive – river, Native American, history X Interpretive – children’s museum, education, play X Interpretive – agriculture, wineries, nuclear X Mixed use – with retail, upper floor office/housing X X X X X Recreation – community center, workout facility X X Retail – grocery and convenience uses X X Neighborhoods Economics – sustainability 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 city1 city2 Incubators – of high tech industries X X X X X Retirement – will outlast Hanford cycles X X ---PAGE BREAK--- 5 Appendix: Results of neighborhood/citywide workshops Kennewick Bridge-to-Bridge/River-to-Railroad Revitalization Plan Neighborhoods Implementation agents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 city1 city2 Kennewick/Benton County X X X Kennewick Housing Authority X Port of Kennewick X X X Umatilla Tribe X Corp Engineers X X PUD X BNSF & UP Railroads X Private developers X X X Property/business owners X X X Residents X X X Community Development Corp – nonprofit X Public Development Authority – public X Neighborhoods Momentum building 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 city1 city2 Artworks X Design standards – overlay performance zones X Duffy’s Pond – cleanup program w/volunteers X Duffy’s Pond – RFP on redevelopment potential X Facades – upgrade program X Landscaping – levy and swale X Marketing – branding and promotions X X Marketing – auto row promotional X Package - public and private properties for RFPs X X Public investment project – partner with private X Streetscape – through Auto Row and Duffy’s Pond X Wayfinding signage – to and through district X X ---PAGE BREAK--- 1 Appendix: Workshop results – graphics Kennewick Bridge-to-Bridge/River-to-Railroad Revitalization Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- 2 Appendix: Workshop results – graphics Kennewick Bridge-to-Bridge/River-to-Railroad Revitalization Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- 3 Appendix: Workshop results – graphics Kennewick Bridge-to-Bridge/River-to-Railroad Revitalization Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- 4 Appendix: Workshop results – graphics Kennewick Bridge-to-Bridge/River-to-Railroad Revitalization Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- 5 Appendix: Workshop results – graphics Kennewick Bridge-to-Bridge/River-to-Railroad Revitalization Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- 6 Appendix: Workshop results – graphics Kennewick Bridge-to-Bridge/River-to-Railroad Revitalization Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- 7 Appendix: Workshop results – graphics Kennewick Bridge-to-Bridge/River-to-Railroad Revitalization Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- 8 Appendix: Workshop results – graphics Kennewick Bridge-to-Bridge/River-to-Railroad Revitalization Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- 1 of 19 Kennewick BB/RR - existing conditions 1. 1: How often do members of your household use the following facilities in the BB/RR and downtown area? never rarely yearly weekly daily Response Count Sacajawea Heritage Trail? 34.7% (52) 22.7% (34) 20.7% (31) 14.0% (21) 6.7% (10) 1.3% 150 Columbia Park Fishing Pond, Splash Park, Playground? 33.8% (51) 18.5% (28) 27.8% (42) 16.6% (25) 3.3% 0.0% 151 Fruitland Park? 69.1% (103) 19.5% (29) 6.7% (10) 2.7% 0.7% 1.3% 149 Keewaydin Park? 42.9% (63) 32.7% (48) 17.0% (25) 5.4% 2.0% 0.0% 147 Civic Center and Memorial Pool? 49.7% (73) 29.3% (43) 11.6% (17) 8.2% (12) 0.7% 0.7% 147 Clover Island Marina or Yacht Club? 42.7% (64) 22.7% (34) 17.3% (26) 13.3% (20) 3.3% 0.7% 150 Clover Island restaurants or brewery? 17.9% (27) 23.2% (35) 21.9% (33) 29.8% (45) 6.6% (10) 0.7% 151 Park Middle/Kennewick High School athletic fields (Lampson Stadium)? 47.7% (72) 23.2% (35) 9.9% (15) 13.9% (21) 3.3% 2.0% 151 Columbia Drive businesses (auto and others)? 10.7% (16) 27.3% (41) 19.3% (29) 25.3% (38) 12.7% (19) 4.7% 150 Downtown businesses and stores? 9.9% (15) 14.6% (22) 19.2% (29) 33.8% (51) 16.6% (25) 6.0% 151 answered question 152 skipped question 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- 2 of 19 2. 2: Shopping behavior - how often do members of your household shop at the following areas? never rarely yearly weekly daily Response Count Columbia Drive businesses? 19.5% (29) 28.9% (43) 16.1% (24) 20.8% (31) 12.1% (18) 2.7% 149 Historic Downtown? 14.2% (21) 23.0% (34) 16.2% (24) 29.7% (44) 13.5% (20) 3.4% 148 Columbia Center Mall? 6.0% 8.1% (12) 20.8% (31) 42.3% (63) 20.8% (31) 2.0% 149 Elsewhere in Kennewick? 0.7% 2.0% 2.7% 34.0% (51) 48.0% (72) 12.7% (19) 150 Elsewhere in Tri-Cities? 1.3% 9.4% (14) 6.7% (10) 32.2% (48) 34.9% (52) 15.4% (23) 149 Elsewhere outside Tri-Cities? 4.7% 31.1% (46) 29.1% (43) 32.4% (48) 2.0% 0.7% 148 answered question 150 skipped question 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- 3 of 19 3. 3: Where are members of your household most likely to shop for the following items? Columbia Drive businesses Historic Downtown Columbia Center Mall Elsewhere in Kennewick Elsewhere in Tri- Cities Elsewhere outside Tri-Cities R Food and drug? 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 71.7% (109) 26.3% (40) 0.0% Clothing and accessories? 0.0% 3.3% 42.4% (64) 34.4% (52) 11.9% (18) 7.9% (12) Barber and hair salons? 0.7% 12.6% (19) 4.0% 58.9% (89) 21.9% (33) 2.0% Cards, flowers, and gifts? 0.7% 10.0% (15) 6.7% (10) 59.3% (89) 22.0% (33) 1.3% Hardware? 2.0% 14.0% (21) 2.0% 58.7% (88) 23.3% (35) 0.0% Auto sales? 9.5% (14) 2.0% 0.0% 43.5% (64) 36.1% (53) 8.8% (13) Auto services? 7.5% (11) 6.8% (10) 1.4% 57.1% (84) 26.5% (39) 0.7% Bank and financial? 0.7% 8.7% (13) 3.3% 62.0% (93) 24.7% (37) 0.7% Dental and/or medical? 0.0% 5.3% 0.0% 59.6% (90) 34.4% (52) 0.7% Professional and legal? 0.0% 9.9% (14) 0.7% 53.2% (75) 34.8% (49) 1.4% Restaurants and/or breweries? 4.0% 13.9% (21) 4.0% 56.3% (85) 19.9% (30) 2.0% answered question skipped question ---PAGE BREAK--- 4 of 19 4. 4: Which factors affect your decision NOT to purchase in the BB/RR-Downtown area versus other commercial areas in Kennewick or the Tri-Cities using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 is very low and 5 is very high impact? 1 - very low 2 - low 3 - moderate 4 - high 5 - very high Response Count Goods and services not available in BB/RR-Downtown? 4.7% 10.1% (15) 20.8% (31) 34.9% (52) 29.5% (44) 149 Better selection of goods and services offered elsewhere? 2.0% 5.4% 16.1% (24) 38.3% (57) 38.3% (57) 149 Better customer service provided elsewhere - friendly, helpful, etc? 36.7% (54) 22.4% (33) 23.8% (35) 11.6% (17) 5.4% 147 Lower prices provided elsewhere? 14.2% (21) 17.6% (26) 25.0% (37) 24.3% (36) 18.9% (28) 148 More/better traffic and parking conditions elsewhere? 20.4% (30) 24.5% (36) 20.4% (30) 20.4% (30) 14.3% (21) 147 Better access by transit bus routes and stops? 69.9% (100) 11.9% (17) 8.4% (12) 4.2% 5.6% 143 Cleaner, more pleasant looking stores and grounds elsewhere? 19.5% (29) 14.1% (21) 24.2% (36) 19.5% (29) 22.8% (34) 149 Perception of better safety and security measures? 24.5% (36) 15.0% (22) 21.1% (31) 17.0% (25) 22.4% (33) 147 Convenience - closer to home? 24.3% (36) 10.8% (16) 10.8% (16) 20.3% (30) 33.8% (50) 148 Ability to pay elsewhere with check, debit, or credit card? 50.7% (75) 16.2% (24) 15.5% (23) 8.1% (12) 9.5% (14) 148 answered question 150 skipped question 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- 5 of 19 5. How would you rate the following conditions in Kennewick on a city-wide basis using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 is poor and 5 is excellent condition? 5: Existing employment opportunities in Kennewick: 1 - poor 2 - fair 3 - average 4 - good 5 - excellent Response Count Number of jobs available? 7.7% (11) 16.1% (23) 39.2% (56) 33.6% (48) 3.5% 143 Quality of jobs available? 10.5% (15) 21.0% (30) 39.2% (56) 24.5% (35) 4.9% 143 Pay or wage scales? 13.3% (19) 21.0% (30) 36.4% (52) 27.3% (39) 2.1% 143 Job benefits (health insurance, etc)? 12.7% (18) 25.4% (36) 37.3% (53) 23.9% (34) 0.7% 142 Working conditions? 4.2% 17.5% (25) 38.5% (55) 35.0% (50) 4.9% 143 Job support services - child and daycare facilities? 8.5% (12) 22.7% (32) 45.4% (64) 22.0% (31) 1.4% 141 Opportunities for training and skill development? 10.6% (15) 16.2% (23) 40.8% (58) 29.6% (42) 2.8% 142 Opportunities for advancement? 10.5% (15) 21.0% (30) 47.6% (68) 20.3% (29) 0.7% 143 answered question 143 skipped question 9 6. 6: Existing safety and security measures in Kennewick: 1 - poor 2 - fair 3 - average 4 - good 5 - excellent Response Count Police protection? 6.0% 10.7% (16) 18.0% (27) 42.7% (64) 22.7% (34) 150 Fire protection? 1.3% 4.0% 19.3% (29) 46.7% (70) 28.7% (43) 150 Streets, sidewalks, and roadway lighting? 6.0% 20.0% (30) 31.3% (47) 32.7% (49) 10.0% (15) 150 answered question 150 skipped question 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- 6 of 19 7. 7: Existing public services in Kennewick: 1 - poor 2 - fair 3 - average 4 - good 5 - excellent Response Count Schools - grades K-12? 1.4% 7.5% (11) 34.2% (50) 45.9% (67) 11.0% (16) 146 Schools - technical and college? 18.8% (27) 17.4% (25) 28.5% (41) 29.9% (43) 5.6% 144 Land use planning and development? 26.4% (39) 25.0% (37) 25.7% (38) 20.9% (31) 2.0% 148 Utility costs? 6.3% 21.5% (31) 38.2% (55) 27.1% (39) 6.9% (10) 144 answered question 149 skipped question 3 8. 8: Existing transportation conditions in Kennewick: 1 - poor 2 - fair 3 - average 4 - good 5 - excellent Response Count Traffic volumes and patterns? 9.3% (14) 23.8% (36) 33.8% (51) 29.8% (45) 3.3% 151 On and off-street parking? 8.0% (12) 19.3% (29) 34.7% (52) 36.0% (54) 2.0% 150 Bus routes, stops, and schedules? 5.6% 24.5% (35) 30.1% (43) 37.1% (53) 2.8% 143 On and off-road trail systems? 20.7% (30) 23.4% (34) 28.3% (41) 22.8% (33) 4.8% 145 On and off-road bike routes? 18.4% (27) 25.2% (37) 23.1% (34) 25.9% (38) 7.5% (11) 147 answered question 151 skipped question 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- 7 of 19 9. 9: Existing housing market conditions in Kennewick: 1 - poor 2 - fair 3 - average 4 - good 5 - excellent Response Count Housing selection - type and design? 4.1% 10.2% (15) 37.4% (55) 40.1% (59) 8.2% (12) 147 Neighborhood selection - quality and location? 4.1% 13.6% (20) 34.7% (51) 40.1% (59) 7.5% (11) 147 Sales housing - availability? 2.7% 12.9% (19) 44.9% (66) 32.7% (48) 6.8% (10) 147 Sales housing - prices? 6.2% 14.4% (21) 30.1% (44) 43.8% (64) 5.5% 146 Rental housing - availability? 17.4% (24) 29.0% (40) 40.6% (56) 12.3% (17) 0.7% 138 Rental housing - rent levels? 15.9% (22) 25.4% (35) 48.6% (67) 9.4% (13) 0.7% 138 answered question 148 skipped question 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- 8 of 19 10. 10: Existing recreational opportunities in Kennewick: 1 - poor 2 - fair 3 - average 4 - good 5 - excellent Response Count Conservation areas and open spaces? 11.3% (17) 26.5% (40) 29.8% (45) 30.5% (46) 2.0% 151 Off-road trail systems? 23.6% (34) 31.9% (46) 25.0% (36) 16.7% (24) 2.8% 144 Parks with picnicking and playgrounds? 2.7% 16.9% (25) 29.7% (44) 39.9% (59) 10.8% (16) 148 Athletic courts and fields? 2.0% 11.5% (17) 44.6% (66) 34.5% (51) 7.4% (11) 148 Aquatic facilities? 53.4% (78) 27.4% (40) 15.1% (22) 3.4% 0.7% 146 Indoor physical conditioning and gymnasiums? 17.4% (25) 28.5% (41) 35.4% (51) 16.0% (23) 2.8% 144 Community center classrooms and meeting rooms? 12.4% (18) 29.0% (42) 47.6% (69) 10.3% (15) 0.7% 145 Large meeting and conference facilities? 4.1% 19.3% (28) 29.0% (42) 35.9% (52) 11.7% (17) 145 Quality of life in general? 2.7% 7.4% (11) 25.5% (38) 49.7% (74) 14.8% (22) 149 answered question 151 skipped question 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- 9 of 19 11. How would you rate the following conditions in the BB/RR area in particular using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 is poor and 5 is excellent condition? 11: Existing environmental/riverfront conditions in the BB/RR area in particular: 1 - poor 2 - fair 3 - average 4 - good 5 - excellent Response Count Woodlands and wetlands along the riverfront? 30.2% (45) 29.5% (44) 24.8% (37) 14.8% (22) 0.7% 149 Wildlife habitat protections around Duffy's Pond? 24.8% (36) 34.5% (50) 25.5% (37) 14.5% (21) 0.7% 145 Open space and scenic areas along the riverfront? 31.8% (47) 31.8% (47) 18.9% (28) 14.2% (21) 3.4% 148 Stormwater systems - drainage basins? 10.5% (15) 30.8% (44) 35.7% (51) 18.2% (26) 4.9% 143 Flood systems - levies and dams? 8.8% (13) 21.1% (31) 31.3% (46) 27.2% (40) 11.6% (17) 147 answered question 149 skipped question 3 12. 12: Existing transportation conditions in the BB/RR area in particular: 1 - poor 2 - fair 3 - average 4 - good 5 - excellent Response Count Traffic conditions on Columbia Drive? 14.8% (22) 30.9% (46) 36.2% (54) 16.8% (25) 1.3% 149 Roadway access between Columbia Drive, SR-240, and the bridges? 20.8% (31) 23.5% (35) 26.8% (40) 24.2% (36) 4.7% 149 Roadway access between BB/RR and the Downtown? 13.4% (20) 32.2% (48) 30.9% (46) 21.5% (32) 2.0% 149 Bus routes and stops in BB/RR? 8.6% (12) 26.6% (37) 46.0% (64) 18.0% (25) 0.7% 139 Sidewalks and pedestrian access? 20.9% (31) 29.1% (43) 33.1% (49) 16.9% (25) 0.0% 148 On-road bicycle routes? 39.6% (57) 34.7% (50) 18.8% (27) 6.9% (10) 0.0% 144 answered question 150 skipped question 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- 10 of 19 13. 13: Existing housing conditions in the BB/RR area in particular: 1 - poor 2 - fair 3 - average 4 - good 5 - excellent Response Count Mobile home parks - quality and appearances? 72.1% (106) 19.7% (29) 6.8% (10) 1.4% 0.0% 147 Single family housing - quality and appearances? 46.6% (69) 35.1% (52) 15.5% (23) 2.7% 0.0% 148 Neighborhood improvements - sidewalks, curbs, pavement, lighting? 39.0% (57) 35.6% (52) 19.2% (28) 6.2% 0.0% 146 answered question 148 skipped question 4 14. 14: Existing design and development conditions (aesthetics)along Columbia Drive in the BB/RR area in particular: 1 - poor 2 - fair 3 - average 4 - good 5 - excellent Response Count Building appearances and conditions in general? 51.0% (76) 34.2% (51) 12.1% (18) 2.7% 0.0% 149 General cleanliness and attractiveness? 51.0% (76) 35.6% (53) 10.1% (15) 3.4% 0.0% 149 Advertising signage - content, location, and number? 40.9% (61) 39.6% (59) 16.1% (24) 3.4% 0.0% 149 Street amenities - trees, landscaping, benches, etc? 60.4% (90) 24.2% (36) 10.7% (16) 4.0% 0.7% 149 Street improvements - crosswalks, lighting, and sidewalks? 33.8% (50) 35.8% (53) 21.6% (32) 8.1% (12) 0.7% 148 View from SR-240 and the bridges? 32.2% (48) 28.2% (42) 18.1% (27) 19.5% (29) 2.0% 149 City entrances from SR-240, SR- 395, and Cable Bridge? 30.4% (45) 33.8% (50) 19.6% (29) 14.2% (21) 2.0% 148 answered question 149 skipped question 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- 11 of 19 15. How would you rate the following planning priorities for the BB/RR area using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 is very low and 5 is very high priority? 16: New business development in the BB/RR area in particular: 1 - very low 2 - low 3 - moderate 4 - high 5 - very high Response Count Establish business retention programs? 14.4% (21) 14.4% (21) 28.8% (42) 25.3% (37) 17.1% (25) 146 Recruit more auto sales and services? 55.8% (82) 32.0% (47) 7.5% (11) 4.1% 0.7% 147 Recruit more industrial jobs and opportunities? 25.3% (37) 28.8% (42) 23.3% (34) 15.8% (23) 6.8% (10) 146 Recruit more retail businesses? 8.8% (13) 8.8% (13) 16.9% (25) 40.5% (60) 25.0% (37) 148 Recruit more professional goods and services? 8.9% (13) 9.6% (14) 24.0% (35) 32.9% (48) 24.7% (36) 146 Recruit more tourist and entertainment services? 8.2% (12) 4.8% 18.4% (27) 26.5% (39) 42.2% (62) 147 answered question 148 skipped question 4 16. 16: New housing development in the BB/RR area in particular: 1 - very low 2 - low 3 - moderate 4 - high 5 - very high Response Count Retain and improve mobile home parks? 58.8% (87) 17.6% (26) 8.1% (12) 7.4% (11) 8.1% (12) 148 Retain and improve single family neighborhoods? 20.3% (30) 11.5% (17) 30.4% (45) 23.6% (35) 14.2% (21) 148 Develop townhouse and higher density single-family housing? 18.9% (28) 16.2% (24) 18.2% (27) 25.7% (38) 20.9% (31) 148 Develop apartments and higher density multi-family housing? 32.0% (47) 22.4% (33) 19.0% (28) 18.4% (27) 8.2% (12) 147 Develop mixed-use structures with housing on upper floors? 15.6% (23) 11.6% (17) 19.0% (28) 20.4% (30) 33.3% (49) 147 answered question 148 skipped question 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- 12 of 19 17. 17: Who should housing be developed for in the BB/RR area in particular: 1 - very low 2 - low 3 - moderate 4 - high 5 - very high Response Count For existing residents? 14.7% (21) 19.6% (28) 38.5% (55) 16.1% (23) 11.2% (16) 143 For younger, first-time buyer households? 10.3% (15) 13.8% (20) 37.9% (55) 28.3% (41) 9.7% (14) 145 For middle families with children? 13.4% (19) 15.5% (22) 35.9% (51) 26.8% (38) 8.5% (12) 142 For older, empty-nestor households? 7.7% (11) 11.2% (16) 39.2% (56) 28.0% (40) 14.0% (20) 143 For workforce households - single adults or couples? 6.3% 6.9% (10) 35.4% (51) 34.0% (49) 17.4% (25) 144 In mixed income developments - all households? 14.0% (20) 14.7% (21) 38.5% (55) 19.6% (28) 13.3% (19) 143 answered question 146 skipped question 6 ---PAGE BREAK--- 13 of 19 18. 18: Planning priorities - physical development in the BB/RR area in particular: 1 - very low 2 - low 3 - moderate 4 - high 5 - very high Response Count Connect roads between BB/RR and the downtown? 4.8% 19.0% (28) 34.7% (51) 28.6% (42) 12.9% (19) 147 Extend views and trails to the riverfront? 1.4% 7.4% (11) 14.2% (21) 33.1% (49) 43.9% (65) 148 Improve access and habitat around Duffy's Pond? 6.9% (10) 11.7% (17) 22.1% (32) 33.1% (48) 26.2% (38) 145 Breach the levy and naturalize the shoreline? 14.4% (21) 13.0% (19) 15.1% (22) 17.8% (26) 39.7% (58) 146 Install trees, medians, and other streetscape on Columbia Drive? 8.2% (12) 4.1% 22.4% (33) 25.2% (37) 40.1% (59) 147 Buffer and landscape the railroad tracks? 8.2% (12) 5.4% 28.6% (42) 27.2% (40) 30.6% (45) 147 Improve signage and appearance from SR-240 and the bridges? 6.8% (10) 11.6% (17) 26.5% (39) 25.2% (37) 29.9% (44) 147 answered question 148 skipped question 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- 14 of 19 19. Please provide the following characteristics so that we may compare your opinions with others in the survey sample. 19: Where do you work? Response Percent Response Count Retired? 9.3% 14 BB/RR-Downtown area? 14.6% 22 Elsewhere in Kennewick? 38.4% 58 Richland? 17.9% 27 Pasco? 8.6% 13 Elsewhere in Tri-Cities? 7.9% 12 Elsewhere outside of Tri-Cities? 3.3% 5 answered question 151 skipped question 1 20. 20: How many people in your household are employed on a full-time basis? 0 1 2 3 4 5 Response Count Number employed? 8.8% (13) 32.7% (48) 51.7% (76) 5.4% 1.4% 0.0% 147 answered question 147 skipped question 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- 15 of 19 21. 21: What are the occupations of the employed members of your household? Management Professional Technical Office or retail worker Laborer Housewife/husban Your occupation? 16.9% (24) 52.8% (75) 10.6% (15) 7.7% (11) 1.4% 4.2% Other employed member? 13.3% (14) 42.9% (45) 6.7% 13.3% (14) 8.6% 7.6% Other employed member? 0.0% 23.1% 0.0% 38.5% 7.7% 7.7% Other employed member? 25.0% 0.0% 0.0% 50.0% 0.0% 0.0% answere skippe 22. 22: How many years of school have you and the employed members of your household completed? Grade school High school Technical school Some college College graduate Graduate school Response Count Your education? 0.7% 12.0% (18) 6.0% 24.7% (37) 35.3% (53) 21.3% (32) 150 Other employed member? 0.0% 19.4% (21) 0.9% 25.0% (27) 35.2% (38) 19.4% (21) 108 Other employed member? 6.3% 37.5% 12.5% 25.0% 12.5% 6.3% 16 Other employed member? 12.5% 50.0% 12.5% 0.0% 0.0% 25.0% 8 answered question 150 skipped question 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- 16 of 19 23. 23: Where do you live? Response Percent Response Count Kennewick - in the BB/RR neighborhoods? 8.1% 12 Kennewick - west of SR-395? 26.8% 40 Kennewick - east of SR-395? 34.9% 52 Elsewhere in Tri-Cities? 28.2% 42 Outside of Tri-Cities? 0.7% 1 Elsewhere in Washington State? 0.7% 1 Outside of Washington State? 0.7% 1 answered question 149 skipped question 3 24. 24: How many years have you lived in the Kennewick/Tri-Cities area? 0-1 2-5 6-10 11-20 21+ Response Count Years? 0.7% 8.0% (12) 13.3% (20) 18.7% (28) 59.3% (89) 150 answered question 150 skipped question 2 25. 25: What type of housing do you live in? Own Rent Response Count Type housing? 90.5% (133) 9.5% (14) 147 answered question 147 skipped question 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- 17 of 19 26. 26: What is your gender? Male Female Response Count Gender? 61.7% (92) 38.3% (57) 149 answered question 149 skipped question 3 27. 27: In which age group are you in? <18 18-24 25-34 35-49 50-64 65+ Response Count Age group? 0.0% 4.0% 24.7% (37) 30.7% (46) 34.7% (52) 6.0% 150 answered question 150 skipped question 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- 18 of 19 28. 28: How many people in your household are in the following age groups (including yourself)? 0 1 2 3 4 5 Response Count >18? 30.8% (20) 24.6% (16) 30.8% (20) 7.7% 1.5% 4.6% 65 18-24? 43.2% (16) 35.1% (13) 21.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 37 25-34? 29.8% (17) 21.1% (12) 49.1% (28) 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 57 35-49? 22.7% (15) 28.8% (19) 48.5% (32) 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 66 50-64? 11.4% 41.4% (29) 47.1% (33) 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 70 65+? 53.6% (15) 21.4% 21.4% 3.6% 0.0% 0.0% 28 answered question 149 skipped question 3 29. 29: What is your household income range? 20,000 $21- 30,000 $31- 40,000 $41- 50,000 $51- 75,000 $76- 100,000 $100,000+ Response Count Income range? 2.1% 5.5% 3.4% 9.0% (13) 18.6% (27) 29.0% (42) 32.4% (47) 145 answered question 145 skipped question 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- 19 of 19 30. 30: Do you have any suggestions or recommendations concerning the BB/RR Revitalization Planning process or this survey? Response Count 77 answered question 77 skipped question 75 31. 31: Would you like to be added to the city's e-mail list to receive future information on the BB/RR planning process, open houses, and other progress? If so, please provide your e-mail address. Response Count 50 answered question 50 skipped question 102