Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Washington council delays decision on Hanks Foundation amphitheater, asks for independent studies
Summary
City council reviewed a letter of intent from the Hanks Foundation to build a 5,000‑capacity amphitheater on about 50 acres of a 223‑acre city parcel, but members agreed to postpone action and asked for independent financial, market and sound studies before committing taxpayer resources.
The Washington City Council reviewed a letter of intent from the Hanks Foundation proposing to purchase or lease roughly 50 acres of the city’s 223‑acre property for an amphitheater, but members agreed on May 19 to delay any formal commitment and to seek independent studies first.
City Administrator Carr summarized the foundation’s proposal: the nonprofit would build an amphitheater with a maximum capacity of about 5,000 people (roughly 2,000 fixed seats and park‑style lawn seating), room for up to 1,700 parking spaces, concessions, restrooms and related utilities. The LOI asks the city to construct roadway, storm sewer, lighting, bike facilities and extend water and sewer to the site; staff estimated those roadway and utility costs at about $3.5 million and engineering for roadway utilities at roughly $300,000. Carr also said the foundation proposed commissioning a sound study and that the LOI references following the state noise standard (cited in the LOI as not to exceed 72 dB during daytime hours).
Several council members said they appreciated that the materials were public but said the studies submitted by the foundation did not relieve the city of responsibility to verify projections and impacts. "I would feel comfortable moving forward only after an independent study that represents taxpayers’ interests," Alderperson Blundy said, urging a financial feasibility review, governance risk assessment, infrastructure cost validation and market viability analysis. Alderperson McIntyre and others backed that view, emphasizing especially an independent sound study.
Resident Bob McGomery, who spoke during public comment, told the council the LOI contained problematic descriptions of property boundaries that appeared to place parts of his farmland inside the city parcel and asked that noise modeling include his county‑owned property. "We request noise data for our property to ensure the long‑term value is not degraded," McGomery said, and he objected to parts of the LOI’s confidentiality language that could limit public access to reports.
Alderperson Moss asked the city to commission the sound study rather than rely on one paid for by the foundation and suggested the foundation should consider creating an operating endowment to underwrite long‑term operations. Mayor Blundy and staff said the LOI item was informational: the foundation had submitted its materials, but the council will use a forthcoming goal‑setting process and community input to frame decisions about use of the entire 223‑acre property.
No formal motion to sell or lease the land was adopted at the meeting. Council members asked staff to include the LOI in the public record, to plan for a goal‑setting session with community survey components, and to report back with options for commissioning independent analyses and clarifying scope and costs.
What’s next: Council members agreed to postpone any final action until after a goal‑setting session and until independent technical and financial studies are completed and presented to the council.
