Loading...
2013 City of Ridgefield Comprehensive Plan[Y N O M i U N U c C O O .4 N 41 O O O O O O ❑ ❑ � N N N N N N (0 � ` 0) � 41 Q -0 .-•( O O- -0 r -I O? - .--I O rl ? ? rj ? O O al C� U U i >- O O N C C •L u N 4-1 41 L ❑ �' O p41 V1 N C O O — (6 •E +O O N C O C U (6 a= U (O U -C C to 4'� M a=+ N tp � r6 C rO U N ON .� i rip "- ,L -O C "0 p i� "0 (6 > E r6 -' of 00 -0 O N L OL ++ N c vi -0 O N a U 0 -T� .c p � p p E ro ro "O (O .0 C C _0 N p' 00 C r0 C p� L O 0 c — U C E C N a C O (n p C U U .. (0 U — Lr) O C E .� c E ro a••' VI c C tll 0 (0 O 4. > a� c fu U r6 o O i (n rd Oi .� C COCvi YO 0 0) a) N D -p 0ro Q) -0 'L �� O C C a C Oo i--� 4. U c to LA— -0 C ._ f6 + p C O C E C 7 O -0 M= 3 X u C C rQ N v) -Up ro j w' ru i ) U u E o rn U L O 0),T) U rn E a)-0 C o 0- U O L Q C c 4-+ - N U C y� 7 'w c X a L.- o 0 0 3— 0 w� 0 +, o L 3 O �- 0 c a cn a N U � O a cn > p c 4-+' a� c� 6 o N C Ln 3 � U O N C 0 L o + C +�+ O C CY •0 p C 4J U L � � O Q_ � Ln O E �� L a �� L � ,o � CD y L C: a '- a)LO v O p v p c �+ c ('a = a) � c ( 07 _n 4-1 0 N rn E L CL a)L 0\ N E O C �o L) rn ra -O "0 E c fo c t}o O C a N C� 0 a ren U c r0 U J L '� : � U o E o p 0 ❑ C 4-1 C O C O N E of N +� CL a� U w O O U cn c 0)4+ 0)> C Ln C `� N N O OU L1 N C L O J C o Q)- '� O M C �_ C E QU y U VI cn .- i> r0 _ a"' "- 0 0 > UO L w L, C O V1 • (o � a� 3 o E� ° '- o o ° o wL. U ra E v Ln � c L 0 a 41 c _ O >- (A a) =O o a a y `° ° 'c c •� -0 ra a V) 11 C E E c�c G L E L U n (a a� C J..+ o N a N > C L L (� -0 >� N c a a) a c w o o°> Ln 0 7 v ro a- a o v ° c' o 0 ❑ �0 c D- 'n o„ > c Ln= o ro U m o a� o cn 0 'n 0 . � o 0 g U> cn �, c E � a� c v a o v v Q) o C v c Q) 4 M o a rLo D c o v o D a -n t -0 L N �� CZ Mm M 44 0 0- M -0 D o o aL CD m U c 0) a 'E O O Ul) O N C (6 4-' � u rL6 N C N � L � V) a U 0 0 Q, av c U ra 41 - _0� p (n :3c_ v c w a� t ai W 'n a) c fu a)7 3 -0 f�0 U N U Q C m a a 0)0)c E cc 3= 3 3 3 3 d U 0) O o N Q ._ O O 0 0 M N N Q ren N .- C C C 3 c 3 m O c o Li It O O= O C o 0 0 Z N N U ❑ +-4 N U rp ❑ ❑ ❑ L N M Ln 00 Q1 O E 7 Z City of RIDGEFIELD Comprehensi ve Plan CII RI()I'DG'EF1ELP) 2013 Update � DoLLAR TREE STORES Acknowledgements 2005 Work Team City Council Gladys Doriot, Mayor Gary Adkins Scott Hanson Gary Holmberg David Standal Planning Commission John Dingethal, Chair Karen Beall Gary Bock Fran Kemper Chad Sessions Jon Studeny Cyrus Yamin City of Ridgefield Staff George Fox, JD, CPA, City Manager Kevin Snyder, AICP, Community Development Director Justin Clary, PE, Public Works Director Consultant Team Parametrix Jason Franklin, AICP Nathan Banks Derek Chisholm, AICP Jamie Fleek Colin McConnaha David Stocker, AICP Kay Wiggins Gray and Osborne Mike Johnson, PE Parsons Brinkerhoff Charles Green, PE Mark Garrity, AICP 2008 Work Team City Council Ron Onslow, Mayor Matt Swindell David Taylor Lee Wells Darren Wertz Planning Commission John Dingethal, Chair Gary Bock Cyrus Yamin Jerry Bush Richard Hanford Celia Antonini Jeff Carlson City of Ridgefield Staff Justin Clary, PE, City Manager Kent W. Anderson, AICP, Community Development Director Steve Wall, PE, Public Works Director Steven Hale, PE, City Engineer Dale Schulze, AICP, Senior Planner Consultant Team Parametrix Derek Chisholm, AICP Lauren Golden Megan Taylor Craig Hainey Karen Martinek Gray and Osborne Mike Johnson, PE Parsons Brinkerhoff Charles Green, PE Japji Chahal-Virk 2010 Work Team 2013 Work Team City Council Ron Onslow, Mayor David Taylor Lee Wells Dan Stose Darren Wertz Planning Commission Jerry Bush, Chair Gary Bock Jeff Carlsen Randy Mueller John Main Jim Hall City of Ridgefield Staff Justin Clary. P.E., City Manager Steve Wall, P.E. Public Works Director Consultant Team Gray and Osborne Mike Johnson, PE Joseph Plahuta Parsons Brinkerhoff Charles Green, PE Abby Caringula Sine Adams Scott Noel E2 Land Use Planning, LLC Eric Eisemann, J.D. Elizabeth Decker Updates City Council Ronald Onslow, Mayor Sandra Day John Main Donald Stose David Taylor Lee Wells Darren Wertz Planning Commission Jerry Bush, Chair Juanita Wertz Mark Burton Jason Carnell Stephen Leong Larry Rasmussen Phil Strader City of Ridgefield Staff Steve Wall, P.E., Public Works Director Consultant Team E2 Land Use Planning, LLC Eric Eisemann, J.D. Elizabeth Decker The City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan, adopted on December 5, 2013, updates the 2010, 2008 and 2004 Ridgefield Urban Area Comprehensive Plan. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction......................................................................................1-1 1.1 VISION.............................................................................................................1-1 1.2 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT.......................................................................................1-2 1.3 LOCAL AND STATE PLANS AND LAWS..................................................................1-2 1.4 PLANS ADOPTED BY REFERENCE.........................................................................1-4 2. Land Use........................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 RIDGEFIELD'S CURRENT LAND USE.....................................................................2-1 2.2 DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE.............................................................................2-1 2.2.1 A Balanced Community................................................................................2-2 2.2.2 Ridgefield Urban growth Area.......................................................................2-3 2.2.3 Community Design......................................................................................2-3 2.2.4 Land Use Designations.................................................................................2-4 2.3 LAND USE POLICIES..........................................................................................2-7 3. Historic Preservation........................................................................ 3-1 3.1 CURRENT CONDITIONS......................................................................................3-1 3.2 DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE.............................................................................3-2 3.3 POLICIES.........................................................................................................3-2 4. Economic Development.....................................................................4-1 4.1 CURRENT CONDITIONS......................................................................................4-1 4.1.1 Regional Conditions.....................................................................................4-1 4.1.2 Local Conditions..........................................................................................4-1 4.2 DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE.............................................................................4-2 4.2.1 Balanced Job Growth...................................................................................4-2 4.2.2 Partnerships...............................................................................................4-2 4.2.3 Healthy Downtown......................................................................................4-3 4.2.4 Regional Employment Center.......................................................................4-3 4.3 POLICIES..........................................................................................................4-3 5. Housing.............................................................................................5-1 5.1 CURRENT CONDITIONS......................................................................................5-1 5.1.1 Population..................................................................................................5-1 5.1.2 Households................................................................................................5-1 5.1.3 Housing Types............................................................................................5-1 5.1.4 Housing Affordability ...................................................................................5-2 5.2 DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE.............................................................................5-2 5.3 HOUSING POLICIES...........................................................................................5-3 6. Environment..................................................................................... 6-1 6.1 CURRENT CONDITIONS......................................................................................6-1 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate i 6.1.1 The Land...................................................................................................6-1 6.1.2 Fish and Wildlife Habitat...............................................................................6-1 6.1.3 Water Quality.............................................................................................6-2 6.1.4 Air Quality..................................................................................................6-2 6.1.5 Hazard Areas..............................................................................................6-2 6.1.6 Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge................................................................6-3 6.1.7 State and Federal Environmental Regulations................................................6-3 6.1.8 Local Environmental Regulations...................................................................6-3 6.3 DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE.............................................................................6-3 6.4 POLICIES..........................................................................................................6-5 7. Public Facilities................................................................................... 7-1 7.1 CURRENT CONDITIONS......................................................................................7-1 7.2 DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE.............................................................................7-1 7.3 POLICIES..........................................................................................................7-2 7.4 WATER RESOURCES...........................................................................................7-3 7.4.1 Current Conditions......................................................................................7-3 7.4.2 Fire Flows...................................................................................................7-4 7.4.3 Direction for the Future................................................................................7-4 7.4.4 Policies.......................................................................................................7-6 7.5 SANITARY SEWER..............................................................................................7-6 7.5.1 Current Conditions......................................................................................7-7 7.5.2 Direction for the Future...............................................................................7-7 7.5.3 Policies.......................................................................................................7-8 7.6 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT............................................................................7-10 7.6.1 Current Conditions....................................................................................7-10 7.6.2 Direction for the Future..............................................................................7-10 7.6.3 Policies.....................................................................................................7-10 7.7 FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES.....................................................................7-11 7.7.1 Current Conditions....................................................................................7-11 7.7.2 Direction for the Future..............................................................................7-11 7.7.3 Policy.......................................................................................................7-11 7.8 LAW ENFORCEMENT.........................................................................................7-11 7.8.1 Current Conditions....................................................................................7-11 7.8.2 Direction for the Future..............................................................................7-12 7.8.3 Policy.......................................................................................................7-12 7.9 SOLID WASTE FACILITIES AND SERVICES..........................................................7-12 7.9.1 Current Conditions....................................................................................7-12 7.9.2 Direction for the Future..............................................................................7-13 7.9.3 Policy.......................................................................................................7-13 7.10 EDUCATION...................................................................................................7-13 ii City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 7.10.1 Current Conditions..................................................................................7-13 7.10.2 Direction for the Future............................................................................7-14 7.10.3 Policies...................................................................................................7-15 7.11 LIBRARY SERVICES........................................................................................7-15 7.11.1 Current Conditions..................................................................................7-15 7.11.2 Direction for the Future............................................................................7-16 7.11.3 Policy.....................................................................................................7-16 7.12 PRIVATE UTILITIES........................................................................................7-16 7.12.1 Electricity..............................................................................................7-16 7.12.2 Natural Gas...........................................................................................7-17 7.12.3 Telecommunications...............................................................................7-17 7.12.4 Policy.....................................................................................................7-17 7.13 ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES.......................................................................7-17 7.13.1 Current Conditions..................................................................................7-17 7.13.2 Direction for the Future............................................................................7-17 7.13.3 Policy.....................................................................................................7-18 S. Transportation....................................................................................8-1 8.1 CURRENT CONDITIONS......................................................................................8-1 8.1.1 Roadway Functional Classification.................................................................8-1 8.1.2 Roadway Inventory .....................................................................................8-2 8.1.3 Traffic Capacity...........................................................................................8-6 8.1.4 Level -of -Service Standards...........................................................................8-6 8.1.5 Accident History ..........................................................................................8-7 8.1.6 Transit.......................................................................................................8-8 8.1.7 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities....................................................................8-8 8.2 DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE.............................................................................8-9 8.2.1 Trip Generation...........................................................................................8-9 8.2.2 Required Transportation Facilities................................................................8-11 8.2.3 Capital Cost and Projected Revenue............................................................8-11 8.3 KEY CHANGES FROM THE 2005 TRANSPORTATION PLAN.....................................8-13 8.4 POLICIES........................................................................................................8-14 9. Parks and Recreation........................................................................ 9-1 9.1 CURRENT CONDITIONS......................................................................................9-1 9.2 DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE.............................................................................9-1 9.3 POL.ICIES..........................................................................................................9-2 10. Annexation..................................................................................... 10-1 10.1 CURRENT CONDITIONS..................................................................................10-1 10.2 DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE..........................................................................10-1 10.3 ANNEXATION POLICIES..................................................................................10-1 KeyTerms and Acronyms........................................................................ A-1 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate iii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1. Vicinity Map............................................................................................1-3 Figure 2-1. Comprehensive Plan Map.........................................................................2-4 Figure2-2. Zoning Map............................................................................................2-5 Figure 7-1. Proposed Water Distribution System.........................................................7-5 Figure 7-2. Proposed Wastewater Collection System....................................................7-9 Figure 8-1. Existing Functional Classifications.............................................................8-3 Figure 8-2. Existing Roadway Characteristics..............................................................8-4 Figure 8-3. Existing Traffic Volumes...........................................................................8-5 Figure 8-4. Proposed Roadway Functional Classifications............................................8-10 Figure 8-5. 2024 Traffic Volumes.............................................................................8-12 Figure 9-1. Parks and Trails......................................................................................9-2 LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1. Ridgefield Overall Density, 2004.................................................................2-2 Table 2-2. Ridgefield Land Consumption by Use, 2010 .................................................2-2 Table 2-3. Comparative Residential Densities for New Construction, 2000-2004 ..............2-3 Table 2-4. Comprehensive Plan Designations and Implementing Zones ..........................2-9 Table 4-1. Clark County Employment.........................................................................4-1 Table 4-2. Ridgefield Economic Development in 1st Half of 2005 ...................................4-1 Table 4-3. Significant Employers in Ridgefield.............................................................4-2 Table 5-1. Population of Ridgefield, 1980 to 2024 ........................................................5 -1 Table 5-2. Housing Units in Ridgefield, 1990 to 2010 ...................................................5-1 Table 5-3. Housing Types in Ridgefield, 1990 to 2010 ..................................................5-1 Table 5-4. 2010 Median Housing Costs.......................................................................5-2 Table 5-5. Housing Densities and Lot Sizes.................................................................5-3 Table 7-1. Ridgefield Facilities/Service Providers..........................................................7-2 Table 7-2. Summary of Ridgefield Water Service Capital Facilities Plans for 2010-2016...7-6 Table 7-3. Summary of Ridgefield Wastewater Service Capital Facilities Plans for 2010-2016.........................................................................................7-7 Table 7-4. Ridgefield Schools..................................................................................7-13 Table 7-5. Non -instructional Facilities.......................................................................7-13 Table 8-1. Level -of -service (LOS) Categories..............................................................8-7 Table 8-2. Selected Intersection LOS Summary (PM Peak)...........................................8-7 Table 8-3. Accident Summary ...................................................................................8-8 Table 8-4. Urban Growth Area Plan Designations.........................................................8-9 Table 9-1. Ridgefield Existing Parks and Open Space (2005) .........................................9-1 iv City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 1. INTRODUCTION Ridgefield's origins can be traced back more than 1,000 years to early Native American settlements that prospered in the area now designated as the Ridgefield National Wild- life Refuge. After the Civil War, this area was known as Union Ridge and grew rapidly through the second half of the nineteenth century. The town of Ridgefield was incorpo- rated in 1909. Located 10 miles north of Vancouver, Wash- ington and 20 miles north of Portland, Oregon, Ridgefield has easy access to metropolitan amenities yet enough distance to maintain a small-town atmosphere (Figure 1-1). The adja- cent Ridgefleld National Wildlife Refuge and a direct connection to Interstate 5 provide the city the opportunity to grow but remain a dis- tinctive community. This document, the Ridge- field Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2004-2024 (RUACP), outlines the City's vision for accom- modating expected growth through 2024. The 2013 RUACP is an update to the City's previous Comprehensive Plan approved on December 16, 2004, August 14, 2008, and December 16, 2010. This 2013 update incor- porates minor comprehensive map and text amendments initiated by the City and by pri- vate property owner request. The 2010 up- date addressed minor comprehensive map and text amendments initiated by Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board action and by private property owner request. The 2005 update, which was com- pleted in September 2008, addressed revised growth estimates for Clark County and Ridge- field by providing accommodations for an in- creased rate of growth. The jurisdiction of the Ridgefield Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2004-2024 includes the land within Ridgefield's city limits as well as unincorporated areas within the Ridgefield Urban Growth Area (RUGA). These unincor- porated areas are anticipated to be annexed by the City during the 20 -year planning pe- riod and will be subject to the Comprehen- sive Plan if and when this annexation occurs. This plan is intended to enhance community livability, coordinate development, and to smooth the transition of services between the incorporated and unincorporated urban areas as annexation occurs. i9FILVh&_col ►i The RUACP is guided by a vision for how Ridge- field and the surrounding area will grow and develop during the next twenty years. This vi- sion is best described by four principles: Regional Employment Center The first principle of the RUACP is that Ridge- field will become a regional employment center for Clark County and Southwest Wash- ington. Rather than become a "bedroom community," Ridgefield will continue to build a robust economy that provides a wealth of living wage employment opportunities for residents. Development of the Pioneer Street interchange around Interstate 5 will play an important role in achieving this goal, attract- ing employers who provide additional high quality jobs. The Discovery Corridor (see the Economic Development section) will also play an important role in developing Ridgefleld as a regional employment center. The City's Capital Facilities Plans for sanitary sewer, water and transportation reflect the communi- ty's desire to provide urban services to support economic development and long term stability. Quality Neighborhoods The second principle of the RUACP is main- tenance of Ridgefield's quality residen- tial neighborhoods and the creation of new neighborhoods which reflect these qualities. Desirable pedestrian environments and con- nectivity, access to schools and parks, and high-quality design are neighborhood charac- teristics that the City seeks to enhance. The City's Development Code will require adher- ence to performance standards while allow- ing the design flexibility necessary for a mix of high quality neighborhoods; cul-de-sacs, City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 1-1 gated communities and homogeneity sub- division layout and design will be discouraged and avoided. However, the RUACP recognizes that Ridgefield has an obligation to provide housing opportunities for all its citizens, by allowing for well-designed multiple family development along transit corridors, in the Downtown area and other parts of the city. Protection of Critical Areas The third principle of the RUACP is the protec- tion of critical environmental resources areas within the growth demands. The diverse to- pography and abundance of natural amenities are important aspects of Ridgefield's com- munity identity and play an important role in attracting economic growth. The RUACP rec- ognizes the Ridgefield National Wildlife Ref- uge as both an economic and an aesthetic asset, which is directly affected by develop- ment along Ridgefield's streams and canyons. Conscientious promotion and management of these assets will help Ridgefield to maintain its character. Managed Growth The fourth principle of the RUACP is careful management of growth. This principle rec- ognizes that the City is the logical provider of key urban services, and that development shall assist in the necessary plan review and infrastructure development costs. Ridgefield has adopted a "pay as you go" philosophy to ensure that urban -level services are provided concurrently with new development. Ridge- field is committed to providing sewer, water, transportation and storm drainage services throughout its urban area. As annexation occurs and existing develop- ment is brought into the City, services must be provided in a timely manner. Annexation to the City must be assured as a condition of connecting to City services. The City's Capi- tal Facilities Plan (CFP) includes detailed pro- grams explaining how growth is supported and paid for. 1.2 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 1.2 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT The RUACP was developed with extensive help from the public and can only be imple- mented by continued support from the com- munity. The City will continue to work with citizens, stakeholder groups and other gov- ernment agencies to ensure this plan repre- sents the community's priorities and vision. Five open houses were held during the 2005 Comprehensive Plan development process as well as the 2008 and 2010 updates to pro- vide an opportunity for City staff to discuss the RUACP with the public. Three addition- al open houses were held; one in 2007 and two in 2008. Staff showed large-scale maps and illustrations of important elements of the RUACP to explain the proposed plans and policies. In turn, interested citizens provided valuable opinions and advice that were incor- porated into the RUACP. The Ridgefield Planning Commission conduct- ed two public hearings in the fall of 2010. In addition, the Ridgefield City Council held a work session and two public hearings on the 2010 update of the plan. Public testimony was recorded and considered as the Council delib- erated and voted to adopt and later amend the RUACP. In 2013, the Planning Commis- sion and City Council each conducted a public hearing on the proposed 2013 update, and received public testimony that was consid- ered in Council's deliberation and adoption of the RUACP. 1.3 LOCAL AND STATE PLANS AND LAWS Growth Management Act (GMA) The Ridgefield Urban Area Comprehensive Plan is consistent with the requirements of the GMA, adopted in 1990 and since amended. The GMA requires counties and cities meet- ing certain population and growth criteria to adopt and maintain Comprehensive Plans. Among other requirements, plans must en- sure that projected growth in urban areas a =Qcc U K o y .-a d E E E � d`Q`c 4 A h O 4 m h O 7 V Z 1 4 C o 1 1 1 � 1 1 DOI 1 1 N 1 1 1 1 0 0 be accommodated through a range of urban densities, that capital facilities keep pace with the growth, and that critical environmental areas be protected. Community Framework Pian The Community Framework Plan, adopted by Clark County and its cities in 1993, updated in 2000 and 2001, and readopted in 2004 and 2007 provides guidance to local jurisdic- tions on regional land use and service issues. The Ridgefield Urban Area Comprehensive Plan is consistent with the concepts put for- ward in the Community Framework Plan: that development will occur at varying densities throughout the region, and that more inten- sive development will occur at various cen- ters or nodes. Ridgefield Development Code Under state law, the direction set by Ridge - field's Comprehensive Plan must be imple- mented in related City standards contained in the Ridgefield Municipal Code. Title 18 of the Ridgefield Municipal Code contains the Ridgefield Development Code, and is periodi- cally amended to ensure consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. 1-4 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 1.4 PLANS ADOPTED BY REFERENCE The following plans are adopted with this Comprehensive Plan, by reference: • Ridgefield Capital Facilities Plan, including specific plans for — transportation — sewer service — water provision — parks and recreation — general facilities • Stormwater Management Comprehensive Plan • Clark County Community Framework Plan • Fort Vancouver Regional Library System Plan • Fire District 12 Capital Facilities Plan • Metropolitan Transportation Plan • Port of Ridgefield Comprehensive Scheme of Harbor Improvements • Ridgefield School District Capital Facilities Plan pr -- i �V�;'.r-},r��•� .•-41' •• � � .'�f �• .t�,�';�''•'r��- `�_`���' �;f.:ice .r: •- ac v. 'v!. � Jr � `?'�; fat �':�'t y .. ��•, , j�.- •,�� �,y {,+,'�a� t. ,� �"�"'46 _ `tom a '�'. ; lot it 2. LAND USE 2.1 RIDGEFIELD'S CURRENT LAND USE Ridgefield is a rapidly growing city in north Clark County, with a long history that exem- plifies the historical development pattern for many small communities in the Pacific North- west. Early settlers built a vibrant agricultur- al and forestry -based economy, followed by growth in the industrial and shipping sectors with the creation of the Interstate 5 junction and the expansion of the Port of Ridgefield. Ridgefield has also been discovered as a de- sirable residential community for families who participate in the broader regional economy. Historically and currently, State Route 501, also known as Pioneer Street, has acted as the primary transportation corridor connect- ing downtown and the Interstate 5 junction. Land uses along this corridor reflect the spec- trum of development types in Ridgefield, with a combination of industrial, residential and commercial development. This stretch of Pio- neer Street is clearly an attractive area for development, which is demonstrated by ex- tensive new residential subdivisions that are currently under development. Main Avenue and 9th Street/Hillhurst Road are north -south connectors that are near or traverse down- town. These roads are the heart of Ridgefield's existing residential neighborhoods. This area reflects over 100 years of settlement, with a mix of old historic residential structures in- terspersed with modern subdivisions and infill housing. In the past ten years, considerable development has occurred in the City, includ- ing residential development north of Pioneer Street and along Hillhurst Road, as well as on both sides of I-5 at the Ridgefield inter- change. The area near the Interstate 5/Pioneer Street junction, otherwise known as the Ridgefield Interchange, has experienced and is planned to see significant commercial and industrial development. The completion of the major improvements to the Ridgefield interchange will facilitate extensive employment growth in the immediate vicinity and land to the north and south of the interchange. The industrial and transportation sectors have already dis- covered this area as evidenced by the re- cent development of major warehousing and shipment facilities serving the entire Pacific Northwest. Ridgefield has developed less densely than some other Clark County cities to date, but future growth is anticipated to alter that pat- tern. Table 2-1 compares land consumption and density data for the City of Ridgefield and the unincorporated UGA (for 2004). Ta- ble 2-2 compares land consumption by use for the City of Ridgefield and the unicorpo- rated UGA. Table 2-3 compares recent resi- dential densities among local jurisdictions. It indicates that Ridgefield has developed less densely than other cities in Clark County, in part due to the fact that the city has grown at a slower rate, although the city entered a period of high residential and non-residential growth from 2004 to 2008. Although the City expects density to increase rapidly, the long- term effects of the 2008-2009 recession are unknown. 2.2 DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE Ridgefield's population is anticipated to grow from approximately 4,215 people in 2009 to over 24,706 people in 2024. The 2013 population is estimated at 5,545 residents. City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 2-1 The explosive rate of settlement between 2000 and 2008, unparalleled in the history of Ridgefield, was driven by convenient highway access, attractive residential living opportu- nities, and an expanding regional economy. The dramatic nationwide falloff in new home- building, beginning in 2008, is slow to bounce back. Future comprehensive plan revisions will evaluate the impact of economic upsurge and decline more carefully. This section out- lines strategies that Ridgefield will implement during the next 20 years to enhance the city's livability, economy, efficiency, and environ- ment as it grows into a mid-sized city. 2.2.1 A Balanced Community The City of Ridgefield will guide development within the UGA to improve the balance of residential, commercial, industrial, and public land uses. As Ridgefield is transformed from a small city to a mid-sized city, a complete com- munity will begin to take shape that affords a diversity of residential and non-residential options strategically located throughout the community, with centralized nodes of activity. The Land Use element provides for adequate residential and employment land to accom- plish this strategy in tandem with the policies identified in the Housing and Economic De- velopment elements. This development strat- egy will result in a strengthened community identity, a greater "sense of place;' improved economic opportunities, increased park and school options, an expanded tax base, and opportunities to reduce the per capita de- mand for automobile travel. Ridgefield will also pursue development of a mix of housing products, including multi -family and single- family dwellings. The Comprehensive Plan Map shows the locations and intensities of Table 2-1. Ridgefield Overall Density, 2004 Unincorporated Category City of Urban Ridgefield Growth Area Size Population 2,602 1036 Jobs 1,300 Data Acres vacant and unavailable Pop. Density 0.74 people/ 0.21 people/ acre acre Sources: Clark County, City of Ridgefield Table 2-2. Ridgefield Land Consumption by Use, 2010 City of Ridgefield Ridgefield UGA Water 71.32 n/a 73.19 n/a Total 4,609.37 2,997.80 1,417.47 1,093.77 Source: Clark County GIS 2-2 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 1. In 2000 the Ridgefield population was under 2,000 persons. Acres vacant and Acres vacant and Land use Total Acres zoned underutilized Total Acres zoned underutilized Urban Low Density 2,089.02 1,465.44 800.40 732.87 Residential Urban Medium/ 317.26 248.11 247.39 241.63 High Density Residential Commercial 360.28 276.37 24.81 21.06 Mixed Use 47.11 n/a 0.00 0 Office Park 477.83 396.98 155.61 86.51 Industrial 908.30 610.91 17.36 11.70 Parks/Open Space 135.86 n/a 98.72 n/a Public Facilities 202.40 n/a 0.00 n/a Water 71.32 n/a 73.19 n/a Total 4,609.37 2,997.80 1,417.47 1,093.77 Source: Clark County GIS 2-2 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 1. In 2000 the Ridgefield population was under 2,000 persons. Table 2-3. Comparative Residential Densities for New Construction, 2000 — 2004 New units per net City/area New units residential acre Single-family units Multi -family units City of Ridgefield 132 4.0 97% 3% Vancouver 6,431 5.0 99% <1% Battle Ground 1,331 5.7 99% <1% Camas 1,085 4.6 99% 1% Washougal 692 4.1 96% 4% Sources: Clark County Plan Monitoring Report Update (2000 — 2004) planned land uses within the Ridgefield Urban uses are allowed under certain circumstance Growth Area (see Figure 2-1 and Table 2-4). in residential areas. The City of Ridgefield provides flexible zoning regulations that creatively maintain quality neighborhoods. The Comprehensive Plan des- ignations dictate the basic land uses and in- tensities. The Zoning districts, which typically provide very prescriptive limitations on the types of development, will also consider the impacts and forms of development. This will allow for individual neighborhoods to develop a unique sense of place. Commercial develop- ment will be different in Downtown and at the waterfront than at the Ridgefield interchange. Likewise residential development will have to meet different standards along Pioneer Street than in the South Gee Creek area. 2.2.2 Ridgefield Urban Growth Area (RUGA) One of the main tools for managing growth under Washington's Growth Management Act is establishing an Urban Growth Area. Land outside Ridgefield's UGA is rural or resource land. Land inside the RUGA is reserved for urban uses, based on the need for housing, employment, public facilities and open space over a twenty (20) year period. Ridgefield's intent is to provide urban services and annex land within the UGA in concert with its abil- ity to provide these services. Table 2-2 shows the acreage dedicated to different land uses in the Ridgefield Urban Growth Area. This data is based on Comprehensive Plan desig- nations. The actual development pattern will differ. For example, neighborhood commercial 2.2.3 Community Design Good community design is an important el- ement in creating high quality and livable neighborhoods. Most home buyers are at- tracted not only to their personal dwelling, but to the character of the street, neighbor- hood, and community in which it is located. The main ingredients of good design include development that is acceptable to public per- ception and comprehension in terms of the size, height, bulk, and/or massing of buildings or other features of the built environment. Further, new subdivisions will be designed to provide attractive areas for pedestrians. De- sign elements that contribute to a sense of place include structures which are built near- er to the street, front porches, landscaping, convenient walkways, narrower streets, and parking on the street and behind the struc- tures. The City of Ridgefield will continue City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 2-3 T— N N Q LL 7 y. 3Atl 1SlS MN .x t 3- H1OS 3N � S — C 7 O = g u c F � .3 s p .� c ci ¢ V3- anw ; 3Ab H�ceS 1 3i\t'H.101 O aN 7 y. 3Atl 1SlS MN .x t 3- H1OS 3N 41 ._. IE CE 02 Q v j 1 1 1 i 1 1 F 1 3Atl HtSaS — . . u-, N 3Atl1SIT MN to explore opportunities for improving and enhancing community design through de- velopment regulations and encouraging site master planning that incorporates the design elements identified above. Ridgefield will work to maintain and improve the quality of existing residential neighbor- hoods, while encouraging the development of new residential neighborhoods that have distinctive and individual character. The RU - ACP acknowledges that walkability is a vi- tal component of livable neighborhoods. As such, pedestrian -friendly amenities such as connectivity, well maintained sidewalks, and convenient access to schools, grocery stores and parks are encouraged. Flexible develop- ment regulations will allow developers to in- tegrate these features into new and existing neighborhoods. Allowing construction of the "corner market" within neighborhoods is fos- tering healthy communities. Increasing con- nectivity and allowing alternative modes of transportation should be viewed as both a transportation issue and an important factor for positive community development. Shopping and employment centers in Ridge- field will be developed under an innovative hybrid zoning code that incorporates ele- ments of form -based and performance-based zoning. Performance-based zoning sets stan- dards for impacts of land uses such as noise, vibration, air pollution, post -development stormwater runoff, and solar access. It focus- es on land use impacts, not the uses them- selves. Form -based zoning (like that outlined in the "14 Essential Guidelines for Downtown Ridgefield" developed by UrbsWorks Inc.) is closely related to performance zoning, and may be integrated into the code. The form - based regulations will guide the development of the built environment in Ridgefield, so that new development helps to frame public spaces, fit into the existing communities, and form distinct neighborhoods. 2.2.4 Land Use Designations Within the UGA, land will be classified accord- 2-6 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate ing to the following land use designations and overlays, to implement the RUACP planning priorities. See Figure 2-1 for the Comprehen- sive Plan Map. The plan designations will be implemented by the corresponding zones list- ed in Table 2-4. The designations and over- lays are intended to achieve the following objectives: Urban Low Density Residential Provide predominately single family, detached residential opportunities at low densities. Urban Medium Density Residential Provide for a mix of residential opportunities at higher densities. City Center (C) Protect and enhance the small-scale, com- pact and mixed character of the City's older central core. General Commercial (GC) Provide for business and commercial activi- ties to meet local and regional demand. Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Create opportunities for low -intensity busi- ness and service uses to serve proximate residential neighborhoods. Mixed Use Facilitate a mix of residential and commer- cial uses to create compact development patterns. Office Park/Business Park (OP) Provide for business and office uses serving regional market areas with significant em- ployment opportunities supported by limited commercial uses. Light Industrial (ML) Provide for industrial and manufacturing uses that create significant regional employment opportunities. Employment Center (EC) Provide for a mix of private business and office uses, and essential public uses that generate employment opportunities. Public Facilities (PF) Provide for essential public uses such as ed- ucation, medical and infrastructure facilities necessary to serve City or regional residents. Park/Open Space Preserve open land for recreational use and environmental protection. Special Overlay Districts Lake River View Protection (LRVP) Preserve and capitalize upon the views from the downtown heights over the waterfront area and onto the wildlife refuge. Urban Holding (UH -10) Limit development until the area can be ad- equately served by public infrastructure. Employment Mixed Use Overlay (EMUO) Provide for a mix of compatible light industri- al, service, office, retail and residential uses. 2.3 LAND USE POLICIES LU -1 Citywide land supplies Establish land supplies and density allow- ances that are sufficient but not excessive to accommodate adopted long-term City of Ridgefield population, public facilities and employment forecast allocations. LU -2 Efficient development patterns Encourage efficient development through- out Ridgefield. Encourage higher density and more intense development in areas that are more extensively served by facilities, partic- ularly by public schools, transportation and transit services. LU -3 Infill and redevelopment Where compatible with surrounding uses, ef- ficiently use urban land by facilitating infill of smaller undeveloped properties, and redevel- opment of existing developed properties. Al- low for conversion of single- to multi -family housing where designed to be compatible with surrounding uses. LU -5 Mixed-use development Facilitate development that combines mul- tiple uses in single buildings or integrated sites. Target areas for mixed use develop- ment include the Lake River waterfront and the central city core. LU -6 Neighborhood livability Maintain and facilitate development of stable, multi -use neighborhoods that contain a com- patible mix of housing, jobs, stores, public schools and open and public spaces in a well- planned, safe pedestrian environment. LU -7 Human scale and accessible development Facilitate development that is human scale and encourages interaction. Elements of hu- man scale include pedestrian access, street front commercial activity, low to mid-range building elevation, and architectural variety at the street level. LU -8 Design Guidelines Utilize the report titled 14 Essential Guide- lines for Downtown Ridgefield, by adopting it and integrating it with development review and strategic planning. LU -9 Subdivision design Facilitate development and develop design standards to address the following: • Increased street front use, visual interest, and integration with adjacent buildings • Improved pedestrian connections and proximity of uses within developments • Enhanced sense of identity in neighborhoods City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 2-7 LU -10 Downtown design Ensure that the existing strengths of Down- town Ridgefield and the Waterfront areas are maintained by: • Integrating the findings and recommendations of the 2010 Integrated Planning Grant into downtown and waterfront zones • Orientating buildings toward the Lake River shoreline • Maintaining the comfortable, "Main Street" feeling which includes pedestrian scale, ground floor commercial uses, a flexible approach towards intermingling of residential and small scale commercial and office uses • Encourage pedestrian, bicycle and bus access throughout the downtown and waterfront areas LU -11 Compatible uses Facilitate development that minimizes ad- verse impacts to adjacent areas. LU -12 Complementary uses Locate complementary land uses near to one another to maximize opportunities for people to work or shop nearer to where they live. LU -13 Property rights Ensure that property owners within the Ridgefield Urban Growth Area (RUGA) enjoy the right to use their property in ways consis- tent with public policy. City land use decisions shall not deny an owner of all reasonable in- vestment backed expectations in their prop- erty resulting in an unconstitutional taking' of private property for public use. Critical ar- eas regulations shall ensure an owner of a reasonable use of their property. LU -14 Commercial development Provide incentives and establish regulations 2-8 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate that facilitate revitalization of the Downtown and Waterfront and appropriately planned commercial development at the Pioneer Street and Interstate 5 interchange. LU -15 Development code Adopt clear and objective zoning, environ- mental and land division standards and regu- lations that ensure development consistent with the goals and policies of this plan. City, County and special district regulations shall be consistent with and adequate to carry out the provisions of the Ridgefield Urban Area Comprehensive Plan. The comprehensive land use designations and implementing zon- ing districts are listed in Table 2-4. LU -16 City center To facilitate the orderly growth of the down- town core expand the range of uses allowed in the central residential to allow limited commercial activity in existing buildings on lots platted 10,000 square foot or less. LU -17 Districts Form neighborhood districts to help guide de- velopment of unique and distinctive neighbor- hoods. Development in districts would reflect their topographic, historical, economic, and natural features. Districts may be formed to relate to key amenities, such as parks, natural resources, schools, or commercial activities. LU -18 Land use reassessment Assure consistency of overall land use and capital facilities plans by reevaluating Ridge - field's land use plan when necessary to en- sure adequate funding to provide necessary public facilities and services to implement the plan. LU -19 Public participation The city shall adopt procedures and regula- tions to ensure that the public has a right to participate in the adoption or amendment of Table 2-4.Omprehensive Plan Designations and Implementing Zones Plan Designation Residential Urban Low (UL) Residential Urban Medium (UM) City Center (C) General Commercial (GC) Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Mixed Use (MU) Zoning Residential Low Density (RLD-4, RLD-6, RLD-8) Residential Medium Density (RMD-16) Central Mixed Use (CMU) Community Business (CCB) Regional Business (CRB) Neighborhood Business (CNB) Waterfront Mixed Use (WMU) Waterfront Low Scale (WLS) Office Park/Business Park (OP) Office (OFF) Light Industrial (ML) Industrial (IND) Employment Center (EC) Office (OFF), Public Facilities (PF) Public Facilities (PF) Public Facilities (PF) Park/Open Space (P/OS) Public Park/Open Space (P/OS) Special Overlay Districts Lake River View Protection (LRVP) same Urban Holding (UH -10) same Employment Mixed Use Overlay (EMUO) same land use plans, policies and regula- tions in a meaningful way. City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 2-9 3. HISTORIC PRESERVATION 3.1 CURRENT CONDITIONS Historic and cultural resources in Ridgefield are rooted in a rich and colorful history that dates back thousands of years. The historical record of the county includes the formation of the region's unique landscape, settlement of the region by Native American groups, ex- ploration by European nations, location as headquarters for the Hudson's Bay Company Columbia District trade networks, destination for thousands who took the Oregon Trail, and location as an industrial center (first for pulp and paper, then aluminum and shipbuilding, and now high-tech industries). After the Civil War, the Ridgefield area built up rapidly, and was known as Union Ridge. In 1909, the town of Ridgefield was incorpo- rated. Ridgefield is a community whose heri- tage is deeply connected to the water and the land. As the gateway to the Ridgefield Na- tional Wildlife Refuge and a key entry point to the Columbia River, Ridgefield offers un- paralleled access to prime examples of the Pacific Northwest way of life. Knowledge of Ridgefield's history can provide a context in which to understand current growth and de- velopment trends, and to affirm a sense of continuity and community. The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 authorized the creation of the Nation- al Register of Historic Places as a means of recognizing sites and structures associated with significant people or events in our na- tion's history. Ridgefield also participates in the Clark County Historic preservation pro- gram and, with it, the Clark County Heritage Register. Both the National and the local his- toric registers provide protections for historic properties and valuable assistance for their rehabilitation. The Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (OAHP) perform the functions of the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) which were established by the National Historic Preservation Act. OAHP maintains records of all historic resource in- ventories and sites and acts as liaison between local agencies and the federal government. OAHP is also responsible for reviewing pro- posed federal projects for their potential im- pact on historic and archaeological resource. There are a number of other groups and or- ganizations that participate in the preserva- tion of historic, archaeological and cultural resources at specific sites, for designated ar- eas or for the entire county. Cathlapotle Plankhouse When the Corps of Discovery stopped in Ridgefield in November of 1805, they found a prosperous village called by fur traders "Cathl- apotle." The village consisted of what is now the Ridgefield National Wildlife Reserve. "I counted 14 houses," Clark wrote in his diary. There were nearly one thousand native Ameri- cans living in the village, with nearly twenty thousand people in southwest Washington. Lewis and Clark returned to the village in March 1806. Volunteers have worked tireless- ly to reconstruct the Cathlapotle Plankhouse. City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 3-1 Cathlapotle is one of the few archaeological sites on the Lower Columbia River that has withstood the ravages of flooding, looting, and development. A decade of archaeological research -the result of a partnership between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Chi- nook Tribe, and Portland State University -has produced a wealth of information about the Chinookan people who lived on the river long before Lewis and Clark first observed Cathl- apotle in 1805. The cedar plankhouse on the Refuge will serve as an outdoor classroom for interpreting the rich natural and cultural heritage preserved on the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge through the site of Cathlapo- tle. The addition of the plankhouse to the refuge will be a significant attraction for resi- dents and tourists alike. This will contribute to economic development activities at the Ridgefield Interstate 5 interchange and the downtown. 3.2 DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE Ridgefield has unequalled assets in its down- town. No other place in north Clark County has such a diverse array of historic buildings. Additionally, the community character of the downtown has been very well preserved. It is vitally important to the future of Ridge- field that the downtown maintains its historic sense of place. This can be achieved by ap- propriate rehabilitation of the vintage build- ings and by mindful development of vacant sites. The report, 14 Essential Guidelines for Downtown Ridgefield, will be studied and ap- plied during the development review of new construction, street design, etc. Ridgefield has joined with Clark County and the State of Washington to administer a his- toric preservation program. This program can provide design assistance to property owners, as well as an understanding of the significant tax benefits of historic preservation. Ridge- field has the opportunity to leverage County and State resources to its own benefit. 3.2 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 3.3 POLICIES HP -1 Partnerships for historic preservation Partner with Clark County to provide a strong historic and archeological preservation pro- gram. HP -2 Identify and protect resources Identify and encourage the preservation of lands, sites, and structures that have histori- cal or archaeological significance. HP -3 Education programs Raise public awareness of cultural resourc- es by creating educational and interpretive projects that highlight sites included on the county inventory or those eligible for inclu- sion in local or state heritage registers, or the National Register of Historic Places. HP -4 Rehabilitate historic structures Provide assistance to developers, landowners, and the construction trade regarding appropri- ate re -use and rehabilitation of identified his- toric sites and buildings. Provide assistance to developers, landowners and others interested in obtaining grants and receiving available tax incentives for re -use and rehabilitation of identified historic sites and buildings. HP -5 Downtown historic district Explore the benefits of a downtown historic district. Benefits will include flexible building codes, reduced assessments, and more. HP -6 History tours Develop guided and self -guided tours which highlight cultural and historic resources in Ridgefield. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT T4s r.. 4. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Economic development is essential to Ridge - field's ability to sustain itself. Economic de- velopment helps to establish a balance of residential and employment opportunities, the basic elements of a complete community. A strong and diverse economy provides em- ployment and a tax base that supports public services and a livable community. The City also recognizes that the provision of a quality public education enhances economic devel- opment. Although most economic activity is in the private sector, the City of Ridgefield's role is to establish parameters that help pri- vate markets flourish, provide support, and encourage beneficial economic development projects. 4.1 CURRENT CONDITIONS 4.1.1 Regional Conditions The City of Ridgefield's economic vitality is coupled with the broader regional economy for Clark County and the Portland metropoli- tan area. Many of Ridgefield's workers cur- rently commute to workplaces located in other jurisdictions, and many Ridgefield jobs are filled by workers living in other cities. In April 2003 there were an estimated 123,900 jobs in Clark County. Ridgefield's economy is diversified, with con- centrations in services, retail trade, manufac- turing, government, and construction. Over the past decade, the economic base of the region has shifted from manufacturing to services, retail trade, and transportation and utilities (Source: Washington Employment Security Department). Of the ten largest employers in Clark County in 2002, half were public agencies. However, firms new to the region, not the growth of existing large businesses, have largely driven the economic expansion in the region during the 1990s. The vast majority of Clark County workers are employed by small to mid-sized firms. Table 4-1 shows the breakdown of firm size for Clark County based on number of employ- ees. This data demonstrates how important small- and mid-sized firms are to the overall economic vitality of the region. It is expected that much of the region's economic growth will be driven by small- to mid-sized firms that, for a variety of reasons, tend to better circulate wealth within the local economy and grow in-place. Table 4-1. Clark Countv EmDlovment Firm Size (number Percentage of Total of employees) Employment 0-19 87.8% 20-49 7.7% 50-99 2.7% 100-499 1.7% 500-999 0.1% 1000+ 0.1% Sources: US Census 2000, 2001 County Business Patterns Industrial development was a major thrust of regional economic development strategies during the 1990s. According to the Regional Industrial Lands Study (Metro, 2002), Clark County has the largest inventory of industri- al lands in the six county Portland -Ridgefield Metropolitan Statistical Area; a substantial amount of that inventory is in the Ridgefield area. 4.1.2 Local Conditions Over the past decade, the economic base of the city has expanded to include transporta- tion and distribution sectors that benefit from superb interstate access. (Table 4-2). Ridge - Table 4-2. Ridgefield Economic Development in 1st Half of 2005 Approved Industrial 175,000sq. ft Approved 36,000 sq. ft. Commercial Proposed 67,000 sq. ft. Commercial Source: Clark County GIS City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 41 Table 4-3. Sianificant EmDlovers in Ridaefield Sources: 2005 CREDC, Clark County Economic Data Profile field is estimated to currently support 1,300 jobs within the existing city limits. Industri- al activity in Ridgefield is supported by the Port of Ridgefield, which established indus- trial lands around the I-5 junction during the 1980s and through waterfront lands prior to that. The Port of Ridgefield district includes 35,480 acres of land, including sensitive ar- eas, open space, and industrial lands. Nearly one thousand people are employed at busi- nesses on Port related properties, both at the river and at the Pioneer Street and Interstate 5 interchange. Recent economic development investments have significantly expanded Ridgefield's em- ployment base (Table 4-3). These efforts have been facilitated by recent Urban Growth Boundary expansions, annexations, acceler- ated provision of public services, and a dedi- cation to timely permit processing. 4.2 DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE This plan is intended to increase jobs, par- ticularly family -wage jobs that provide an 4-2 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate adequate income to live decently and raise families in Ridgefield. This requires a wage and benefits package that takes into account the area -specific cost of living, as well as the basic expenses involved in supporting a family. The Economic Development Element is also intended to reduce the number of resi- dents who commute long distances to work. A sound economy will also provide revenues for the City to support facilities and services desired by residents (parks, trails, police pro- tection, fire protection, public schools, etc.) 4.2.1 Balanced Job Growth The City is pursuing a ratio of at least one lo- cal job for every 1.20 people. This equates to over one local job per household. Providing land and public services that are adequate for job growth are important parts of this strat- egy. The City must be a good steward of land designated for job growth, which includes us- ing the land efficiently and limiting conversion to non -employment uses. The City must also ensure the timely permitting of businesses that support family -wage jobs and other pri- ority economic development projects. Further, special attention will be paid to attracting and retaining small- to mid-sized businesses with high growth potential. 4.2.2 Partnerships Ridgefield's contribution to economic de- velopment extends beyond the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The City has staff NAICS Estimated Company Product/Service 2 digit Employees Ridgefield School District Education 61 153 Corwin Beverage Pepsi Bottling Facility 31 105 Dollar Tree Distribution center 23 100 Bonar Plastics Bonar Plastics Injection Molding 32 150 U.S. Foodservice Warehouse Distribution 48 120 Total 628 Sources: 2005 CREDC, Clark County Economic Data Profile field is estimated to currently support 1,300 jobs within the existing city limits. Industri- al activity in Ridgefield is supported by the Port of Ridgefield, which established indus- trial lands around the I-5 junction during the 1980s and through waterfront lands prior to that. The Port of Ridgefield district includes 35,480 acres of land, including sensitive ar- eas, open space, and industrial lands. Nearly one thousand people are employed at busi- nesses on Port related properties, both at the river and at the Pioneer Street and Interstate 5 interchange. Recent economic development investments have significantly expanded Ridgefield's em- ployment base (Table 4-3). These efforts have been facilitated by recent Urban Growth Boundary expansions, annexations, acceler- ated provision of public services, and a dedi- cation to timely permit processing. 4.2 DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE This plan is intended to increase jobs, par- ticularly family -wage jobs that provide an 4-2 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate adequate income to live decently and raise families in Ridgefield. This requires a wage and benefits package that takes into account the area -specific cost of living, as well as the basic expenses involved in supporting a family. The Economic Development Element is also intended to reduce the number of resi- dents who commute long distances to work. A sound economy will also provide revenues for the City to support facilities and services desired by residents (parks, trails, police pro- tection, fire protection, public schools, etc.) 4.2.1 Balanced Job Growth The City is pursuing a ratio of at least one lo- cal job for every 1.20 people. This equates to over one local job per household. Providing land and public services that are adequate for job growth are important parts of this strat- egy. The City must be a good steward of land designated for job growth, which includes us- ing the land efficiently and limiting conversion to non -employment uses. The City must also ensure the timely permitting of businesses that support family -wage jobs and other pri- ority economic development projects. Further, special attention will be paid to attracting and retaining small- to mid-sized businesses with high growth potential. 4.2.2 Partnerships Ridgefield's contribution to economic de- velopment extends beyond the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The City has staff and elected officials dedicated to economic development. The City works with groups such as the Ridgefield Business Association, the Ridgefield Junction Association, and the Port of Ridgefield. 4.2.3 Healthy Downtown A healthy downtown that provides a setting for mutually supportive businesses and com- munity events is essential to a livable com- munity. In addition to efforts to revitalize downtown, the City will continue to work with developers to create efficient and attractive development in all areas of the city. Ridgefield will support existing businesses and encour- age them to expand by providing information resources and completing economic develop- ment oriented public projects. 4.2.4 Regional Employment Center Ridgefield will participate in the creation of a regional employment center at the Pioneer Street and Interstate 5 interchange as part of the Discovery Corridor. The Discovery Cor- ridor is an economic development initiative that the Port of Ridgefield has developed and that the Port and the City of Ridgefield have advanced in partnership with other Clark County agencies and organizations. It is envi- sioned that the Discovery Corridor will be de- veloped to establish a vibrant industrial base in central Clark County. 4.3 POLICIES EC -1 Discovery Corridor Implement the Discovery Corridor concept along both sides of Interstate 5. EC -2 Downtown Support continued renaissance of Ridgefield's downtown. EC -3 Neighborhood Retail Promote development of service-oriented businesses to serve residents and reduce the needs to travel out of the community. EC -4 Public revenue enhancement Promote development that encourages rev- enue generation for public services. EC -5 Employment Capacity Restrict zone changes or legislative approv- als which lessen long term capacity for high wage employment unless accompanied by other changes within the same annual review cycle which would compensate for the lost ca- pacity, or unless the proposed change would promote the long term economic health of the city. City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 43 HOUSING 5. HOUSING Adequate, safe, affordable and diverse hous- ing options for all residents are essential to the health of a community. This element presents an evaluation of the current housing needs for Ridgefield and an estimate of what will be needed over the next 20 years, based on projected growth. 5.1 CURRENT CONDITIONS 5.1.1 Population In 2013 there were 5,545 people living within Ridgefield's city limits. Ridgefield grew slowly until 2004 and experienced a period of rapid growth from 2004-2008. Population contin- ues to increase following the 2008-2009 re- cession; the City was the third -fastest growing city in Washington in 2013. Table 5-1 shows population trends and estimates for Ridgefield. 5.1.2 Households A household is defined as the person or group of persons who live in one housing unit, whether related or not. A single person living in an apartment and a family living in a house are both considered households. Table 5-2 shows the number of households in Ridgefield and the average household size from 1980 to 2010. 5.1.3 Housing Types It is important to provide a variety of hous- ing types to accommodate the community's diverse needs. Younger people often rent apartments, families generally desire homes, and retirees increasingly prefer to move into condominiums or apartments. As the "Baby Boom" generation ages during the next 20 years, there is likely to be a greater need and demand for smaller units, retirement homes, and assisted living. The predominant type of housing in Ridge- field is single-family dwellings (94 percent in 2010). However, different types of housing have been built to meet the diverse needs of Ridgefield's residents (Table 5-3). Table 5-1. Population of Ridgefield, 1980 to 2024 1980 1990 2000 2005 2010 2013 2024 Ridgefield 1,062 1,332 2,147 2,602 4,763 5,545 24,706 Clark County 192,227 238,053 345,238 413,273 425,363 435,500 621,763 Sources: US Census 2000, US Census 2010, Washington State Office of Financial Management, Clark County Vacant and Buildable Lands Model Table 5-2. Housing Units in Ridgefield, 1990 to 2010 2010 Single-family 363 1990 2000 2005 2010 Total Households 450 777 847 1,695 Occupied Households 435 739 807 1,591 Avq. People/Household 2.9 2.82 2.79 2.99 Sources: US Census 2000, US Census 2010, Claritas Table 5-3. Housing Types in Ridgefield, 1990 to 2010 Type 1990 2000 2010 Single-family 363 704 1,518 Multi -family 54 55 56 Mobile -home 38 35 41 Total 455 797 1,615 Sources: US Census 2000, US Census 2010 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 5-1 5.1.4 Housing Affordability Ridgefield's housing costs have risen relative to the the rest of Clark County, and are now second only to Camas for median home val- ues and La Center for median rent. Table 5-4 shows median home values and rent for all Clark County cities. 2010 estimates place the median home price in Ridgefield at $300,000, 123% of the median home price in the Coun- ty, whereas median Ridgefield home values in 2000 were essentially equal to the County median value. One of the US Department of Housing and Ur- ban Development's (HUD) guidelines is that if people purchase a home worth more than three times the household's annual income, they will have to sacrifice something (for ex- ample, health care, transportation, food). The median home value reported by homeown- ers in Ridgefield in the 2010 US Census was $300,000. According to the 2010 Census, the median household income for Ridgefield resi- dents was $86,429. This means that in 2010, more than half the households in Ridgefield could not afford the median value home of $300,000. The median monthly rent report- ed in Ridgefield in the 2010 US Census was $1,245, and an estimated 27.7% of residents were paying more than 30% of their income in rent. People choose to rent or buy for different reasons. Some moderate- and high-income households (particularly retirees) choose to rent a home or apartment even though they can afford to buy a home. Young adults of- ten rent as an interim step before buying a home. For many low and moderate -income households, renting is the only financially feasible choice because of the higher initial cost (down payment, closing costs, etc.) of purchasing and the ongoing expense of main- taining a home. However, home ownership creates wealth for those who can afford it. Rising rents have the greatest effect on the most vulnerable of the city's population. If rents are too high, low-income residents are forced to double up with others, seek housing farther from their workplaces and friends, or accept substandard accommodations. 5.2 DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE Consistent with adopted Clark County policy, the City shall ensure through its development regulations that no more than seventy five percent (75%) of all housing units shall be of a single type, e.g. single-family detached housing. Some vacant land zoned residen- tial will be encouraged to be developed with multi -family units in order to achieve this de- sired mix. Past growth in Ridgefield has been primarily driven by new single-family homes. While it is anticipated that single family dwell- ings will constitute the majority of new con- struction, the City will encourage construction of multi -family dwellings to accommodate much of the anticipated population growth. The RUACP designates 564.65 acres of Resi- dential Medium Density zones that will allow up to sixteen (16) units per acre, and be lo- cated along transportation corridors such as Pioneer Street. 2,889.423 acres of Residen- tial Low Density zones will allow up to eight (8) units per acre. An analysis of the acreage Table 5-4.2010 Median Housing Costs Battle Ridgefield Ground Camas La Center Vancouver Washougal Yacolt Clark County Median House $300,000 $227,900 $315,100 $271,000 $215,500 $238,200 $187,100 $243,300 Value Median Monthly $1,245 $998 $952 $1,339 $881 $986 $1,092 $919 Rent Source: US Census 2010 5-2 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate zoned for multiple family and single family zoned built out at average densities shows the Ridgefield will not only achieve its Goals for housing density and a mix of uses, it will bring the UGA-wide average up to meet these goals. 5.3 HOUSING POLICIES HO -1: Accommodate Growth Provide for an adequate supply of housing to meet the City's anticipated population growth. The City shall adopt policies and regulations to meet the following objectives: • New overall density target of six (6) units per net acre • No more than seventy five percent (75%) of new houses shall be of a single housing type • A minimum density of four (4) units per net acre (10,890 sq. ft. average lot size) for single family dwellings in any single development HO -2: Multi -family Development Encourage multi -family residential develop- ment in designated Medium Density Residen- tial (MDR) areas. Designated MDR areas shall be located within one-half mile of commercial or employment centers, and along existing or planned transit corridors. HO -3: Affordability Encourage innovative housing policies, reg- ulations and practices to provide affordable housing. Provide secure funding mechanisms and programs for housing targeted at house- holds below the median area income. HO -4: Housing options Maintain a continuous and adequate supply of residential land to meet long-range multi- ple -family and single-family housing needs, as well as all economic segments, within the RUGA. Urban residential development shall be preceded by annexation. No single type of housing should comprise over 75% of new development. HO -5: Housing for special needs Encourage self-determination and indepen- dence among individuals with special needs. City development regulations shall treat households with special needs equivalent to the general population and shall not discrimi- nate against these households. Land use reg- ulations shall address only land use impacts (traffic, noise, appearance, etc.) of housing for people with special needs, without consid- eration for the special circumstances of special needs households. HO -6: Residential Development Density Encourage a mix of single family and multiple family housing that achieves an overall goal of 6 units per net acre. 6 units per acre is approximately 6000 square foot lots. How- ever, the goal is to have a variety of housing options so that more dense development of townhomes and the like balances with some large lot single family residences. Table 5-5. Housina Densities and Lot Sizes Gross Units Net Units Lot Sizes Zoning per Acre per Acre (sq ft) District Minimum Density 5.0 4 8,712 RLD 4 Average Between Density 7.5 6 5,808 RLD 6 and RLD 8 HO -7: Infill Actively support residential rehabilitation and infill. Incentives such as reduction of System Development Charges (SDC) and traffic im- pact fees for infill projects can ease the fi- nancial burden of such developments enough to make these profitable and attractive for developers. The City can also actively seek grants and funding from State and Federal sources to partially subsidize development or redevelopment of infill lots. City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 5-3 ENVIRONMENT x �N 1 '� 6. ENVIRONMENT People have long been attracted to the Ridge- field area because of its high quality natural environment. The City of Ridgefield recogniz- es the importance of the natural environment in contributing to economic development, community livability, and quality of life. This element describes many of the functions and values of Ridgefield's natural environment. Most importantly, it establishes policies that protect and enhance the environment for present and future generations while sup- porting economic development. The natural environment consists of many in- terrelated components: • geological resources (earth, soil, minerals, etc.) • biological (living things, plants, animals, microorganisms, people, etc) • hydrological resources (groundwater, surface water, streams, etc.) • atmospheric resources (air) The quality of the environment is determined by the individual integrity of these compo- nents and how well they interact with each other. In turn, the quality of life that Ridge- field offers is affected greatly by the health of its natural environment. Human activities are the primary cause of environmental deg- radation to environmental resources, which contributes to serious long-term economic and social problems. The City of Ridgefield is committed to avoiding, minimizing, and miti- gating harmful environmental impacts to the greatest practicable extent while supporting the City's land use and economic develop- ment policies. 6.1 CURRENT CONDITIONS 6.1.1 The Land Ridgefield enjoys gently rolling topography (landform). The Columbia River has sculpted much of Ridgefield's western topography by depositing clay, silt, sand, and gravel onto its banks over tens of thousands of years, creat- ing a fairly flat terrain. Some steep slopes are found along portions of the Columbia River and Lake River. 6.1.2 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Although it is a thriving small city, Ridgefield still has abundant habitat for fish and wildlife. In fact, the annual Bird Fest draws visitors from many states and foreign countries. The Columbia River, Lake River, and smaller creeks are home to salmon and trout. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) has classified certain important fish and wildlife habitats and species as "prior- ity habitats" and "priority species" to ensure they are considered in land use planning and management. Many of the priority habitats in the Ridgefield area are wetlands and ripar- ian areas (areas adjacent to streams, riv- ers and lakes). There are many threatened and endangered plant and animal species in Clark County. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife maintains an updated list of these species. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) prohibits harming threatened and endangered species or their habitats. The threatened and endan- gered salmon species that occur in the Co- lumbia Basin above migrate along Ridgefield's shore, up the Columbia River as adults, and down the river as juveniles. Trees contribute to air and water quality, con- serve energy by providing shade, contribute to the aesthetic environment, and provide habitat for many species. Ridgefield's land- scape is a reflection of the City's effort to pre- serve existing trees and other vegetation and to add new vegetation. The UGA contains Oak woodlands which are designated as priority habitats by the Wash- ington Department of Fish and Wildlife. There is also bountiful Douglas Fir forestland, which is not designated as priority habitat but does support sensitive native species. Protection of these native landscapes is important. City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 6-1 6.1.3 Water Quality An inevitable part of urbanization is the re- placement of some portions of the forests, grasslands and wetlands with impervious surfaces (roads, sidewalks, parking lots, and roofs). Increasing the amount of impervious surface increases potential flooding and im- pacts groundwater recharge. Urban stormwa- ter also carries toxic substances and bacteria, which can damage groundwater, lakes, rivers, and streams if not properly managed. Soil from erosion and fertilizers contribute phos- phorus and nitrogen, both of which cause excess growth of plants and microscopic ani- mals. The organisms use oxygen from the wa- ter, reducing the amount available for salmon and other native animals. Toxic metals from street runoff cling to soil particles that can be carried into the water bodies. Other pol- lutants, such as motor oil, are undoubtedly transported by stormwater. The City of Ridgefield works to limit adverse impacts caused by urban stormwater run- off. The City has adopted engineering stan- 6-2 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate dards that are consistent with the 1992 Puget Sound Water Quality Manual and implements industry standards relying on the authority of engineering best management practices. 6.1.4 Air Quality An airshed is defined as "a body of air bound- ed by topographical and/or meteorological features in which a contaminant, once emit- ted, is contained." Ridgefield is within the airshed bounded on the south by Eugene, Or- egon, on the north by Chehalis, Washington, on the west by the Coast Range, and on the east by the Cascade Mountains. Air quality in the airshed is generally good. Motor vehi- cles are the largest producer of air pollution, but other combustion engines, such as lawn mowers and those associated with industry, all contribute. The Metropolitan Transporta- tion Plan (2002) requires that pollution from motor vehicles must be reduced to conform with the federal and state Clean Air Acts. The Southwest Washington Clean Air Agen- cy (SWCAA) monitors air quality for ozone, carbon monoxide and fine particulates and enforces regulations requiring industries to reduce emissions. The region has an excel- lent record of compliance with SWCAA. 6.1.5 Hazard Areas Hazard areas in Ridgefield that have the po- tential to threaten public health and safety are floodplains, steep and unstable slopes, and unconsolidated soils (topsoil and other loose material). The Federal Emergency Man- agement Agency (FEMA) has mapped the floodplains for the Columbia River, and pro- vides guidelines to ensure that development in or near these areas does not pose a risk to upstream or downstream neighbors or to important natural functions. The Washing- ton State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has mapped areas with steep and un- stable slopes, which pose potential landslide hazards, and areas with potential for earth- quakes. Steep slopes occur along parts of the Columbia River, Gee Creek, Lake River, and other creek basins. Areas with unconsolidat- ed soils, the most likely to be damaged by earthquakes, are found in the floodplains and in lowlands. 6.1.6 Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge The Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) is comprised of five management units that total 5,148 acres of pristine marshes, grass- lands and wildlife habitat. Preservation of the natural Columbia River floodplain is a manage- ment objective of the Carty, Roth and Ridge - port Dairy units. The River "S" and Bachelor Island units are managed to maximize habitat for waterfowl and other wetland wildlife. Sand - hill cranes, shorebirds and a wide variety of songbirds stop on the refuge during spring and fall migrations. Visitors to this area have nu- merous opportunities for wildlife observation. 6.1.7 State and Federal Environmental Regulations Many of Ridgefield's environmental decisions are influenced by state and federal regulations, including the State of Washington's Growth Management Act of 1990 (GMA), the state Shoreline Management Act (1971), the federal Clean Water Act of 1972 (CWA) and the state Water Pollution Control Act (1973), the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), and the federal (1990) and state (1991) Clean Air Acts (CAA). The City has adopted State En- vironmental Policy Act (SEPA) rules that are implemented through the City's Development code. ESA prohibits harm, including habitat degradation, to threatened and endangered species. The Clean Air Acts (CAA) regulate air quality at the regional level. The GMA requires the City to designate and protect critical areas such as wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat, aquifers (groundwater), and geologically hazardous areas such as steep slopes and areas that flood frequent- ly. The GMA also requires the City to protect the functions of these areas that are benefi- cial to the environment and to public health and safety. The Shoreline Management Act (SMA) requires local governments to protect shoreline functions, including environmental functions such as fish and wildlife habitat, by adoption of a Shoreline Management Pro- gram. The City has adopted Clark County's shoreline management program, through the chapter of the development code addressing regulations and permitting processes. The CWA requires that pollution of lakes, streams and rivers be controlled so these bodies of water are safe for swimming and fishing. 6.1.8 Local Environmental Regulations In addition to the protection provided by the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), the City adopted a Critical Areas Ordinance, consistent with Best Available Science, to protect wetlands and shorelines, water bod- ies, groundwater and surface water, fish and wildlife habitats, and trees and other vegeta- tion. The regulations include a requirement that floodplains and steep terrain be evalu- ated for potential hazards. Implementation of the regulations includes development review, inspection, enforcement and education. 6.3 DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE By integrating the natural and built environ- ments, Ridgefield will create a sustainable urban environment with clean air and water, habitat for fish and wildlife, and comfortable and secure places for people to live and work. Ridgefield is committed to protecting and en- hancing the environment as the City meets its other community, economic development, and housing and infrastructure goals. Ridgefield will seek to balance various goals, not just make tradeoffs, and identify ways to meet multiple objectives. The goals are to preserve healthy ecological communities with rich biodiversity and to protect public health and safety. The following discussion sets the framework for the policies at the end of the element. City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 6-3 Wildlife Habitats Ridgefield will protect priority habitats, lo- cally important habitats, and priority species. Ridgefield will work with others in the region to develop and implement recovery plans for threatened salmon species. Endangered Species Ridgefield will avoid harming ESA listed spe- cies and their habitats. The City will work with local, county, state and federal jurisdictions to plan and implement region -wide actions. Shoreline Management Ridgefield will continue to implement its Shoreline Management Program to protect shoreline resources, the environment, water - dependent and water -related economic de- velopment, and public access and recreation. Ridgefield will update the Shoreline Manage- ment Program by working with the County, State, and other regional partners based on guidelines established by the Washington State Department of Ecology. Public Health and Safety Ridgefield will help protect public health and safety from flooding, landslides, and earth- quakes. Maintaining clean groundwater and improving the quality of surface water will also protect public health and safety. Manag- ing development in geologically hazardous ar- eas and floodplains will protect public health and safety. Ridgefield will work with state and federal regulatory agencies to achieve com- pliance in a way that is resource -wise, both in terms of financial and environmental re- sources. Sustainability Ridgefield will provide for the needs of its res- idents without sacrificing the needs of future generations. The City will consider econom- ics and the environment as it manages water, energy, land and natural resources. Ridgefield will promote sustainable public and private development practices and patterns, building design, water -use reduction, and waste re- 6 -4 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate duction. The City will incorporate green build- ing (environmentally friendly) principles and practices into the design, construction, and operation of City facilities, City -funded proj- ects, and infrastructure to the fullest extent possible, consistent with wise management of scarce public financial resources. Coordination Other agencies, the private sector, and citi- zens, and each City department will coordi- nate with one another and with others to be efficient and consistent. Implementation Environmental protection and enhancement, based on the "Best Available Science" (as de- fined in the GMA), will be important factors in Ridgefield's land use planning, zoning and development regulations. Development that cannot reasonably avoid critical areas will in - clude mitigation of potential impacts to pre- vent material loss of environmental function. The GMA requires critical area regulations to be updated as necessary to maintain consis- tency with state law. As part of that review, the City will strive to make environmental reg- ulations clear and understandable to provide consistent environmental protection and to streamline the development review process. Incentives, education, acquisition, and res- toration are also important tools in achiev- ing environmental quality. Ridgefield will seek ways to provide incentives for protecting and enhancing the environment. The City will con- tinue to protect and restore sensitive areas. The City's own operations will reflect environ- mental stewardship. Protecting air and water quality and vegeta- tion will help protect habitats for fish, wildlife, and people. Transportation choices will help protect air quality. Source control (keeping pollutants out of the environment) and wa- ter treatment (removing pollutants from the water) will protect groundwater and surface water quality. Water conservation and inno- vative substitutions for impervious surfac- es will protect the quantity of groundwater. Surface water management will help reduce the impacts of development on surface water quality and quantity. Preserving and plant- ing native plants and removing invasive plant species will help protect and enhance vegeta- tion. 6.4 POLICIES EN -1 Environmental protection Protect, sustain, and provide for healthy and diverse ecosystems. EN -2 Stewardship EN -4 Environmental coordination Coordinate environmental policies and pro- grams. Explore opportunities to consolidate environmental regulations. EN -5 Habitat Protect riparian areas, wetlands, and other fish and wildlife habitat. Link fish and wildlife habitat areas to form contiguous networks. Support sustainable fish and wildlife popula- tions. EN -6 Endangered species Protect habitat for listed species and facilitate recovery. Encourage and support actions that protect other species from becoming listed. EN -7 Water quality and quantity Protect and enhance surface, stormwater, and groundwater quality. Ensure adequate water supplies and promote wise use and conserva- tion of water resources. EN -8 Flooding Maintain consistency with Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) guidelines when adopting or implementing policies or regu- lations that relate to flooding, groundwater recharge, wetlands, waters of the state or waters of the US. EN -9 Trees and other vegetation Conserve tree and plant cover, particularly native species, throughout Ridgefield. Pro- mote planting using native vegetation. EN -10 Air quality Protect and enhance air quality, in coordina- tion with local and regional agencies and or- ganizations. EN -11 Hazard areas Demonstrate and promote environmental Manage development in geologically hazard - stewardship and education. ous areas and floodplains to protect public EN -3 Restoration and enhancement health and safety. Promote and facilitate ecosystem restoration and enhancement. EN -12 Density transfers Encourage the use of density transfers from City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 6-5 Open Space (OS) lands to contiguous Low Density or MDR properties, anywhere with- in the RUGA. Encourage residential density transfers to preserve wetland resource areas. EN -13 Sustainability Facilitate use of water, energy, land, and nat- ural resources to provide for current needs without sacrificing the needs of future gener- ations. Incorporate green building principles and practices into the design construction, and operation of all City facilities, City -fund- ed projects, and infrastructure to the fullest extent possible, consistent with wise man- agement of scarce public financial resourc- es, using a building life -cycle cost approach. Consider implementation of an sustainability initiative to review City's operations with a focus on purchasing, energy efficiency, recy- cling, and other practices. EN -14 Building Practices Encourage the use of green building principles and practices for private development. Pro- mote sustainable public and private develop- ment practices and patterns, building design, water -use reduction, and waste reduction. Develop a system of incentives to encourage green building, perhaps tying LEED'm certi- fication with reduced fees, streamlined per- mitting, and more. 6-6 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 7 7. PUBLIC FACILITIES 7.1 CURRENT CONDITIONS Urban communities must be supported by a range of public services and facilities, in- cluding transportation, water, sanitary sewer, stormwater, parks, fire and emergency, po- lice, solid waste, schools, libraries, electric- ity, and telecommunications. This element describes the current status of Ridgefield's public facilities and services and how they will be expanded to accommodate growth that is projected to occur over the next 20 years. The information in this element is closely linked to the Ridgefield Capital Facilities Plans, a sepa- rately bound and frequently updated list of capital facilities projects that will be needed in the next six years. The 1990 Growth Management Act (GMA) requires growth to occur first in developed areas already served by public services and utilities, and second in undeveloped areas needing new services. Public services must be provided in a timely and efficient manner to support planned growth and existing us- ers. Extension of urban services must be co- ordinated with adopted land use and growth plans, and capital facility investments should be targeted and cost-effective. This element focuses on infrastructure provi- sion within city limits and areas in the un- incorporated RUGA planned for services by City providers, such as sewer, water, and fire services. As required by GMA, this element includes a policy requiring that land use plans be revisited if probable funding falls short of meeting those needs. The analyses in this el- ement focus on the first six years of the plan- ning period. Infrastructure and service needs for the 20 -year planning period are more speculative, so the review is more general- ized. The review is limited to capital facilities and major physical infrastructure related to growth, not all government services. The in- formation in this element is drawn from spe- cific service area plans, such as the service provider capital plans and budgets. For more detail, please consult these plans and the Ridgefield Capital Facilities Plan. Services are provided by the City of Ridge- field, Clark County, and private utilities or service districts. Some providers serve ar- eas within the city limits, while others have larger, regional service areas. The City co- ordinates with providers and considers how service area boundaries may change (for ex- ample, through annexation). Local capital fa- cilities projects are financed and constructed through a variety of local, state and, in some cases, federal sources. 7.2 DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE Providing adequate services to accommodate increasing service demands with limited fund- ing sources is one of the central challenges facing the City as it implements the Ridge- field Urban Area Comprehensive Plan. The City and all of its partners are committed to providing robust services to Ridgefield's resi- dents and businesses. This will help to ensure a high quality of life and sustainable growth. Refer to the specific sections of this Public Fa- cilities Element for visions and policies associ- ated with each service. The GMA requires that communities "en- sure that facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the de- velopment is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally established standards" (RCW 36.70A.020.12). This concept is identified as "concurrency" and requires local governments to adopt level -of -service (LOS) standards and to test individual land use proposals to ensure they will not exceed those standards. Pro- posed developments that would cause these standards to be exceeded cannot be approved unless necessary mitigation is provided. For example, the established level -of -service standard for sanitary sewer is 355 gallons per City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 7-1 Table 7-1. Ridgefield Facilities/Service Providers Facility/Service Provider(s) Transportation City of Ridgefield (incorporated areas) Various wireless and fiber optic provider day for residential units. If sewer transmis- sion and treatment capacity is not available, the unit will not be occupied. 7.3 POLICIES The City of Ridgefield adopts the following overarching public facilities policies in order to provide adequate transportation, sew- er, water, and other capital facilities, public schools and public services in a cost-effective manner. These policies are consistent with and implement policy sections 6.0, 7.0, and 8.0 of the Community Framework Plan, ad - 7-2 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate opted by Clark County and local jurisdictions, and planning policies 36.70.A.020(3), (9), and (12) of the Washington Growth Manage- ment Act. Refer to the specific sections of this Public Facilities Chapter for visions and poli- cies regarding each service. PF -1 Provide service Consider water, sewer, police, transportation, fire, schools, stormwater management, parks and trails as necessary public facilities and services. Ensure that facilities are sufficient to support planned development. Clark County (unincorporated area) Washington Department of Transportation Port of Ridgefield Burlington Northern Railroad Water City of Ridgefield (incorporated areas) Clark Public Utilities (unincorporated areas)) Sanitary Sewer Clark Regional Wastewater District Stormwater Management City of Ridgefield Parks and Recreation City of Ridgefield Clark County Washington State U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ridgefield School District Emergency Services City of Ridgefield Police Department Clark County Sheriff Washington State Highway Patrol Fire District 12 Private ambulance services Solid Waste Waste Connections, Inc. Columbia Resource Company Education Ridgefield School District Library Fort Vancouver Regional Library System Natural Gas Northwest Natural Electrical Power Clark Public Utilities Telecommunications AT&T Broadband Qwest Communications Various wireless and fiber optic provider day for residential units. If sewer transmis- sion and treatment capacity is not available, the unit will not be occupied. 7.3 POLICIES The City of Ridgefield adopts the following overarching public facilities policies in order to provide adequate transportation, sew- er, water, and other capital facilities, public schools and public services in a cost-effective manner. These policies are consistent with and implement policy sections 6.0, 7.0, and 8.0 of the Community Framework Plan, ad - 7-2 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate opted by Clark County and local jurisdictions, and planning policies 36.70.A.020(3), (9), and (12) of the Washington Growth Manage- ment Act. Refer to the specific sections of this Public Facilities Chapter for visions and poli- cies regarding each service. PF -1 Provide service Consider water, sewer, police, transportation, fire, schools, stormwater management, parks and trails as necessary public facilities and services. Ensure that facilities are sufficient to support planned development. PF -2 Service standards Establish service standards or planning as- sumptions for estimating needed public facili- ties, based on service capabilities, local land use designations and nationally recognized standards. Use LOS standards to encourage growth in designated centers and corridors. PF -3; Impact fees and system development charges. Maintain and amend as necessary traffic, park, and school impact fees, to ensure that new development pays a reasonable, propor- tionate share of the new public infrastructure costs. PF -4 Essential public facilities. Ridgefield will adopt policies and regulations, to identify future needs for regional and state- wide facilities, such as airports, state educa- tion facilities, state or regional transportation facilities, state and local correctional facilities, solid waste handling facilities, and in-patient facilities including substance abuse facilities, mental health facilities, group homes, trans- portation facilities of state-wide significance defined according to RCW 47.06.140, and se- cure community transition facilities. No other Comprehensive Plan policy may preclude the siting of essential public facilities The following Services will be reviewed in de- tail herein. • Water • Sewer • Stormwater • Parks/Trails • Fire and Emergency Services • Law enforcement • Solid Waste • Education • Libraries • General Government • Private Utilities • Transportation • Siting of Essential Public Facilities For more detail, please refer to the Ridge- field Capital Facilities Plan which is adopted by reference as Volume II of the RUACP. The Ridgefield Urban Area Capital Facilities Plan will include a full list of existing facilities, their locations, and all other data that meets the requirements of the County -Wide Plan- ning Policies, RCW 36.70A.070(3), and WAC 365-195-315. Additionally, some services are planned by other agencies, including the Ridgefield School District, Fire District #12, etc. Each of their respective plans is also ad- opted by reference. PF -5 Budget Conformity The City shall ensure that all budget decisions relating to public facilities are made in confor- mance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. PF -6 Reassessment of Assumptions In the event that budget projections for capi- tal expenditures fail to meet the forecasted demand the City shall demonstrate compli- ance with Policy PF -5 by reassessing the land use element of the plan, the population and employment projections, the CFP level of ser- vice standards, or a combination thereof. 7.4 WATER RESOURCES 7.4.1 Current Conditions Ridgefield, and the rest of Clark County, re- lies almost entirely on groundwater aquifers for public and private water use. In the past, the location and development of productive groundwater sources has been a significant problem for county water purveyors. As a re- sult, numerous studies have been completed by county water purveyors to address the need for an adequate water supply to meet the county's projected growth. Washington State law also requires all water service pro- viders to work with the Department of Ecol- ogy before constructing a well or withdrawing any groundwater from a well and to obtain a water rights permit. Unfortunately, the issu- ance of new water rights permits has been extremely limited since 1991. Water service City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 7-3 purveyors have undertaken extensive plan- ning efforts to ensure that groundwater use is consistent with region -wide watershed management programs and salmon recovery efforts. It is hoped that through sharing of groundwater resources, a sufficient ground- water supply can be sustained for the ex- pected growth in demand while continuing to reduce impacts to watersheds considered es- sential to endangered salmon species. The City of Ridgefield has four (4) wells with a total pumping capacity of 1,165 gallons per minute (gpm) plus an intertie agreement with Clark Public Utilities. The intertie provides ad- ditional water resources from outside of the area, during times of peak demand. The City currently has water rights for 1,875 gpm in- stantaneous withdrawal and 962 acre-feet annual withdrawal. There are three (3) wa- ter reservoirs in Ridgefield with a total stor- age capacity of 1.1 million gallons. Water is brought from these sources to residences and businesses via approximately 210,600 feet of water mains. 7.4.2 Fire Flows A water system is required to have a sup- ply, storage, and distribution system grid with sufficient capacity to provide firefight- ing needs while maintaining maximum daily flows to residential and commercial custom- ers. Because fire fighting requires a large amount of water in a short time, fire flow re- quirements typically determine the minimum size of water lines needed to serve an area, as well as the amount of storage needed. The City of Ridgefield's water delivery system provides fire hydrants and water distribution mains in neighborhoods and business areas throughout the water service area. Develop- ment approval requires new water mains and hydrants to serve new buildings, per the lat- est adopted version of the International Fire Code and the Ridgefield Municipal Code. 7.4.3 Direction for the Future The City of Ridgefield and Clark Public Utilities 7 -4 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate have completed a 20 -year Water System Plan which identifies existing inventory, forecasts future water supply needs, and provides rev- enue sources to fund capital improvements to meet the requirements of the GMA RCW 36.70A.070(3)(a)(b). These Water System Plans outline the strategy for serving antici- pated population growth with a clean, reli- able, and adequate water supply. Clark County has established a Water Util- ity Coordinating Committee (WUCC) as a standing committee made up of representa- tives from each water purveyor, fire protec- tion agencies, and the Department of Health (DOH). The WUCC updates water utility de- sign standards, establishes procedures for resolving conflicts between water purveyors, and updates the Coordinated Water System Plan (CWSP). The City of Ridgefield and Clark Public Utilities will continue to collaborate with other regional water providers to ensure that service plans and use of scarce water re- sources are coordinated. The CWSP fulfills the regulatory requirements as prescribed in WAC 248-56, Public Water System Coordination Act. The CWSP serves as the Regional Supplement for State -approved Clark County water purveyors' individual wa- ter system plans, which are on file at WDOE, and together with the petition for Reserva- tion of Public Waters, fulfill the requirements under WAC 173-590 relating to the reserva- tion of water for future public water supply. The City of Ridgefield and Clark Public Utilities will implement the CWSP through their Water System Plans. The City of Ridgefield's 2005 Water System Plan Update evaluated the City's projected future water demands based on projected growth in population and employment. The Plan evaluated the city's existing water system facilities and identified needed improvements to provide water service to the Ridgefield Ur- ban Growth Area for the six-year and 20 -year planning horizons. Proposed improvements in - a IN --r 7 CD cn cc 2 0 .2 z I 3 0 0 x LU CID 0 CL LL CL F-1 a IN --r 7 clude source improvements (new wells, water rights and treatment systems), improvements to existing booster stations, new water stor- age facilities, and pipeline extensions and up- grades. Continued growth in the water system will require the City of Ridgefield to develop ad- ditional water resources or work with Clark Public Utilities on the development of regional water resources (Figure 7-1). There are also jurisdictional issues which need to be ad- dressed as Ridgefield annexes into area cur- rently served by Clark Public Facilities. The City has developed water infrastructure im- provement plans, revenue estimates, and costs estimates for a six-year and a 20 -year planning horizon. A detailed description of planned capital improvement projects is pro- vided in the updated Water Chapter of The Ridgefield Urban Area Comprehensive Plan Capital Facilties Plan. Table 7-2 summarizes the estimated cost of planned projects and projected revenues during the next six years needed to maintain or improve the level -of - service for Ridgefield water customers. 7.4.4 Policies PF -W-1 Provide water Provide safe, clean, quality drinking water to every Ridgefield home, business, public facil- ity and industry. Discourage development and use of private drinking water wells. Provide water pressures and volumes necessary to support fire suppression hydrants and sprin- kler systems. Ensure that the infrastructure to support water service is in place prior to development. PF -W-2 Water service Area Restrict provision of urban services outside the RUGA. The City will work with property owners to annex properties requiring City services in the near term (i.e. within 6 years), in accordance with the City's Capital Facilities Plan. Therefore, all utilities within Ridgefield's Urban Growth Area shall be designed to City Standards, and provisions shall be made for the eventual integration of facilities into City systems. PF -W-3 Responsibility for system Maintain sole responsibility for provision of water within the RUGA. PF -W-4 Private systems Work with Clark County to eliminate private water systems within the RUGA over time. The city will additionally coordinate with Clark County and the Washington State Depart- ment of Health to ensure that existing wells are properly decommissioned when they are taken out of service. PF -W-5 Water and sewer connection required Connect all new construction within the RUGA to the City's water and sewer systems con- current or subsequent to annexation, except for single-family residences on lots existing at the time of adoption of the Ridgefield Urban Table 7-2. Summary of Ridgefield Water Service Capital Facilities Plans for 2010 - 2016 7-6 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate Cost (Millions, in Capital Facility Project Type Number of Projects 2010 dollars) Revenue Sources Reservoirs and 1 $1.82 Booster Stations Distribution and 8 $1.84 Transmission Source of Supply 4 $6.76 TOTAL 13 $10.42 Water rates, connection fees 7-6 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate Area Comprehensive Plan that cannot rea- sonably hook up to the City water system. PF -W-6 Protect groundwater Coordinate with Clark County to develop ground water protection mechanisms which protect well heads, reduce the risk of acci- dental groundwater contamination and en- courage the conservation of groundwater. 7.5 SANITARY SEWER 7.5.1 Current Conditions Sanitary sewer systems consist of neighbor- hood sewer lines that take waste from pipes serving individual properties, trunk lines that collect waste from these lines within individual drainage basins, and interceptors that receive flow from several drainage basins and route it to treatment facilities. Pump stations and force mains augment the system. In 2014 the Clark Regional Wastewater District (Clark Regional) will assume ownership and opera- tion of the City's sanitary sewer service. Clark Regional will maintain approximately 230,000 linear feet of existing sewer collection system including gravity sewers and force mains. The Clark Regional will also own and maintains twelve (12) sewer lift stations. The existing City of Ridgefield sewer system meets all fed- eral and state standards and has adequate capacity for existing and future demand. The sanitary sewer system is monitored by instru- mentation, computer modeling, and tracking development trends so that sewer projects can be implemented before the mains reach capacity. Preventive maintenance keeps problem areas clean to minimize blockages. Wastewater is currently treated at the City of Ridgefield's Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). The WWTP provides physical and biological treatment of wastewater prior to discharge to an outfall in Lake River. In 2013 biosolids generated from the wastewater treatment process are hauled to Clark Coun- ty's Salmon Creek WWTP for further treat- ment and disposal. The City's existing WWTP has a permitted capacity of 0.7 million gallons per day (MGD). There are numerous onsite sewage treatment or septic systems in the Ridgefield sewer service. Because many of the systems are more than 24 years old and reaching the end of their expected life spans, failures are in- creasing. Septic system failures may go un- detected, allowing contamination of nearby streams, lakes, or shallow drinking water wells. Septic systems can also cause an in- crease in nitrates in groundwater. The City of Ridgefield supports elimination of septic tanks in the RUGA, and seeks to help homeowners eliminate unreliable septic systems. 7.5.2 Direction for the Future Planning for adequate sewage treatment ca- pacity is very important to Ridgefield. It is critical to water quality as well as economic de- velopment. While new construction will always provide its own service lines, and sometimes Table 7-3. Summary of Ridgefield Wastewater Service Capital Facilities Plans for 2010 — 2016 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 7-7 Cost (in millions of Project Type Number of Projects 2010 dollars) Funding Sources Lift Stations and 5 $3.82 Forcemains Sewer Trunk Mains 13 $3.03 Wastewater Treatment 3 $30.00 Improvements TOTAL 22 $36.85 Sewer rates, connection fees City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 7-7 provides pump stations, it is the responsibility of the City to plan trunk lines and adequate treatment plant capacity. The City also seeks to coordinate sewer projects with other proj- ects so that, for example, utilities in new road- ways are placed during construction. The Ridgefield General Sewer and Wastewa- ter Facility Plan was developed in 2005 and has been updated in 2007. This Plan was de- veloped to ensure that the network of pipes, manholes, pumps, and other physical facili- ties are adequate to service the 20 years of growth in the RUGA. The City has developed infrastructure improvement plans, revenue estimates, and costs for the six-year and 20 -year planning horizons (Figure 7-2). A detailed description of current wastewater capital improvement projects is provided in the updated Ridgefield Urban Area Compre- hensive Plan Capital Facilities Plan. Table 7-3 summarizes estimated costs and revenues for planned projects during 2005 - 2011 to main- tain or improve levels of service to Ridgefield sewer customers. To accommodate planned growth in popula- tion and wastewater flows, the City of Ridge- field has entered into an agreement with Clark Regional to participate in a regional sewer framework. The agreement provides a governance and financial structure for a re- gional sewer utility and engineering design of a regional pump station and pipeline to con- vey wastewater from Ridgefield to the Salm- on Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant. 7.5.3 Policies PF -S-1 Provide sewer service Provide sewers and sewer service to every Ridgefield home, business, public facility and industry. Encourage existing development us- ing septic systems to connect to public sewer as soon as available. Ensure that the infra- structure to support sewer service is in place prior to development. 7-8 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate PF -S-2 Sewer Service Area Restrict provision of urban services outside the RUGA. The City will work with property owners to annex properties requiring City ser- vices in the near term (i.e., within 6 years), in accordance with the City's Capital Facilities Plan. Therefore, all utilities within Ridgefield's Urban Growth Area shall be designed to City standards, and provisions shall be made for the eventual integration of facilities into City systems. Urban services shall not be provided outside the RUGA. PF -S-3 Responsibility for system Clark Regional shall maintain sole responsi- bility for provision of sanitary sewer service within the RUGA. PF -S-4 Private systems Work with Clark County to eliminate private sewer systems within the RUGA. PF -S-5 New construction All new construction within the RUGA shall be required to connect to the Clark Regional sanitary sewer system, except for single-fam- ily residences on lots existing at the time of adoption of the Ridgefield Urban Area Com- prehensive Plan that cannot reasonably hook up to the regional sewer system. PF -S-6 Efficiency To control power and maintenance costs, Clark Regional is committed to minimizing the number of pump stations and force mains in the collection system. To that end, Clark Regional is committed to developing a more efficient gravity flow sewer system in the long-term to serve the entire Urban Growth Area. Therefore, lift stations, force mains or individual home pumps will only be allowed within the RUGA where topography makes the use of gravity sewer systems impractical. PF -S-6 Protect groundwater Clark Regional will coordinate with Clark County and the Washington State Depart- ment of Health to ensure that existing septic N co 0 Co >� T N C: N N O 4) N U i O 7 O_ N P O O IL IL U W 2• C m LL" o E a p — m g— O a, F LL m .Y N m w w z z a z w •- -¢ r c¢¢ f= LU I m LI O U L i4 '-!H d1p7 M1 systems do not contaminate ground or sur- associated regulations are to: face water. 7.6 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 7.6.1 Current Conditions Mismanaged stormwater runoff from streets and buildings can pollute lakes, streams, riv- ers and groundwater and may cause erosion, flooding and other safety hazards. Because it picks up nutrients, metals, oil and grease and other forms of pollution, untreated stormwa- ter can threaten drinking water, plants and animals that live in surface waters, and wa- ter -related recreation. The City of Ridgefleld's goal is to maintain or improve surface and groundwater quality. Increased urbanization can make this goal difficult to meet. An increase in the amount of impervious surfaces (roadways, parking lots, driveways, and sidewalks) increases the amount of runoff, and the potential for it to carry pollutants from erosion or chemical con- tamination to surface waters. Before it was fully understood how rainfall can replenish the supply of groundwater, stormwater runoff in most cities was collected in storm drainage pipes and sent to sewage treatment plants or large water bodies. Most of the older neigh- borhoods in Ridgefleld dispose of stormwa- ter this way. Ridgefield's current approach to stormwater management is to require prop- erty owners to retain stormwater on site and treat it, usually by running it through vege- tated areas where plants filter out and absorb pollutants prior to its release into the ground or nearby surface water. This approach also reduces the risk of flooding along streams by regulating flow into streams during storms. 7.6.2 Direction for the Future Ridgefield's stormwater management goal is to safely pass floodwaters and drainage in a manner that improves water quality, provides fish passage and habitat, promotes recre- ation opportunities, and enhances community aesthetics. The objectives of the program and 7-10 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate • Protect surface and groundwater from contamination • Protect people and property from flood damage. • Protect aquatic life • Provide recreation opportunities, community aesthetics, and good neighbor facilities • Protect and enhance riparian and habitat areas Ridgefield will work with private property owners to enhance the functioning of flood - plains and riparian areas throughout the City and RUGA. Increased planting of native veg- etation and removal of impervious surfaces will also enhance stormwater management. 7.6.3 Policies PF -ST -1 Stormwater management Manage storm water to safely pass floodwa- ters, maintain and improve water quality of receiving streams, lakes, and wetlands, pro- tect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat, promote recreational opportunities, and en- hance community aesthetics. PF -ST -2 New construction All new development shall be designed con- sistent with the City's long-range stormwater management plans and programs, and shall only occur consistent with the following provi- sions: • Off-site water quality and quantity impacts shall be controlled through appropriate design • The use of source control and treatment best management practices shall be required • The use of infiltration, with appropriate water quality precautions, shall be the first consideration in stormwater management • Stream channels and wetlands shall be protected • Erosion and sediment controls for excavation, new development and redevelopment projects shall be required PF -S-3 Regional Consistency Implement the provisions of the policy above (PF -S-2) in accordance with the Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Ba- sin, Clark County's stormwater ordinance, or equally effective standards approved by the City Engineer. PF -5-4 Groundwater protection Develop ground water protection mechanisms which protect well heads, reduce the risk of accidental groundwater contamination and encourage the conservation of groundwater. 7.7 FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES 7.7.1 Current Conditions Clark County Fire and Rescue provides fire protection and emergency services within the Ridgefield Urban Growth Area. Clark County Fire and Rescue also serves the unincorpo- rated area within the Ridgefield UGA. The insurance industry uses a rating system to determine premiums. On a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being the best, Ridgefield scores a 5. The unincorporated areas around Ridgefield are scored a 6. Factors contributing to the level of emergency services include water availability and water flow, and the number of emergency, traffic congestion and traffic calming devices. 7.7.2 Direction for the Future The number and type of calls received from a specific area is influenced by several factors: increases in population and density, number of aging structures that have not had ongo- ing maintenance, lower income levels that restrict the ability of residents and owners to maintain and repair their homes and busi- nesses, number of senior, nursing and skilled care facilities, and increasing age of the baby boomer generation. The need for addition- al response units (engines, trucks, etc.) is based on the many of these factors and on the number of emergency calls per response. In 2006, Clark County Fire and Rescue opened a new 17,500 square foot station lo- cated along Northwest 65th Avenue. In the 2004 Comprehensive Plan update, the Fire District identified the need for an expanded replacement to their main station, and a lad- der truck at a cost of $5,700,000. Also, the City of Ridgefield is developing a second in- tertie with Clark Public Utilities for water. This new intertie will be on 65th Street and will provide double redundancy for many areas. Refer to the water section of this element for further information. 7.7.3 Policy PF -F-1 Fire protection Provide for a high quality fire and emergency services. These services rely heavily upon staffing and other operational expenses. Therefore, this capital facilities element does not attempt to capture all of the policies re- lated to fire and emergency services in Ridge- field. While the City has no direct authority over policy setting for Clark County Fire and Rescue, the two organizations will work to- gether cooperatively. 7.8 LAW ENFORCEMENT 7.8.1 Current Conditions The Ridgefield Police Department (RPD) pro- vides police protection and other law enforce- ment services within Ridgefield's city limits. The RPD provides a range of services includ- ing: • emergency response • 24-hour patrol • traffic enforcement • criminal investigations including arson • forensics • traffic collision investigations • special response units such as the new canine officers In cooperation with other local agencies, RPD also provides police services related to child abuse, domestic violence, and drug en- forcement and investigation. Clark Regional Emergency Services Agency (CRESA) pro- cesses 911 calls, radio dispatch, and County City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 7-11 jail and criminal records. Through interlocal agreements, all jurisdictions in Clark County provide backup to each other in emergen- cies. The Washington State Patrol has police jurisdiction on state routes in the county, is largely responsible for state facilities, and provides backup for the Clark County Sheriff's Department and local jurisdictions. Regional or shared law-enforcement and correctional facilities include the county jail, a leased of- fice for the inter -jurisdictional Clark-Skama- nia Narcotics Task Force, the Child Abuse Intervention Center, and the Clark Regional Emergency Services Agency (CRESA), which directs 911 calls to the appropriate agency. CRESA also coordinates emergency manage- ment, provides oversight of ambulance con- tracts, and operates and maintains regional radio services. Responsibility for law enforce- ment in the formerly unincorporated areas will transfer from the Clark County Sheriff's Department to the RPD. 7.8.2 Direction for the Future Law-enforcement staffing is usually based on population and average response time to emergency calls. Ridgefield's population since 2000 has greatly increased. Service stan- dards demand for law-enforcement services are related directly to population and employ- ment. Crime rates are also closely related to population, age distribution, and economic conditions. Additional staffing, equipment, and facilities are needed as the population continues to grow and land is annexed. Plans are based on current activity statistics, cen- sus demographic data, and other information. The City's current goal is provide municipal police officers at a 1.2 to 1000 ratio. The cur- rent staffing levels exceed this goal. Howev- er additional resources will be needed in the future. In addition to staffing and resource needs, the City of Ridgefield has planned a new facility for police services. 7 -12 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 7.8.3 Policy PF -F-2 Po/ice protection Provide for police protection that creates a safe environment to residents and visitors alike. However, law enforcement is not a capi- tal facility. It relies, instead upon staffing and other operational expenses. Therefore, this capital facilities element does not attempt to capture all of the policies related to police protection and law enforcement services in Ridgefield. 7.9 SOLID WASTE FACILITIES AND SERVICES 7.9.1 Current Conditions All cities and towns in Clark County have del- egated responsibility for solid waste transfer and disposal planning to the County through 2011. The adopted Clark County Solid Waste Management Plan (CSWMP) of 2000 is updat- ed regularly and reviewed by the County Sol- id Waste Advisory Commission. Agreements between Clark County and its cities commit each to the plan and to the plan's waste dis- posal system. Counties and cities in the State of Washington are required by RCW 70.95 to: • Prepare and maintain coordinated comprehensive solid waste management plans • Determine the nature and extent of various solid waste streams (for example, from households, industries, offices, etc.) • Establish management strategies for the handling, utilization, and disposal of solid waste • Identify waste reduction, source -separated recycling, and waste separation programs as priority management tools Waste Connections Inc. is responsible for managing collection services within the Ridgefield boundaries. Clark County and the City of Ridgefield entered into a 20 -year contract with Columbia Resource Company (CRC) in1992 to recycle solid -waste mate- rials collected and delivered to transfer and recycling stations, with the remaining non - recycled wastes transported for final disposal to CRC's Finley Buttes Landfill 180. Waste is compacted into intermodal containers and transported upriver by private barge, then trucked to the landfill. In 2002, the two facili- ties handled approximately 225,000 tons of waste. Original design capacities for the two transfer stations indicated they could handle up to 438,000 tons per year of solid waste. 7.9.2 Direction for the Future Since 1994, daily waste generation per per- son in Clark County has risen from 2.35 to 2.62 pounds (about 1/2 ton/person/year). Ongoing efforts to educate the public about reducing waste may help minimize the rate of waste generation, but nationally the per capita rate is steadily increasing. Current per capita waste generation nationally is about 1 ton per person per year (including residen- tial, commercial, and industrial waste that is disposed and recycled). It is difficult to deter- mine Clark County's overall waste generation rate because of the proximity to the Portland metro area and its disposal facilities and re- cycling plants. 7.9.3 Policy PF -SW -1 Waste management Implement the Clark County Solid and Mod- erate Risk Waste Management Plan. Reduce the production of waste, recycle waste that is produced, and properly manage and dis- pose of waste that is not recycled. Provide education and outreach to businesses and the public on benefits and opportunities for waste reduction and recycling. 7.10 EDUCATION 7.10.1 Current Conditions Schools The Ridgefield School District serves the City of Ridgefield and a large portion of the unin- corporated area of Clark County. It spans I-5 and extends from the northern edge of Van- couver to the Lewis River. Ridgefield is expe- riencing rapid growth, and will likely continue to do so. The School district annually reas- sesses its needs in response to this growth. The following findings are derived from the Table 7-4. Ridgefield Schools Table 7-5. Non -instructional Facilities Type Location Administrative Offices Building October 2004 Capacity Portables School Type Location Sq. Ft. Enrollment South Ridge Elementary 502 NW 40,172 491 450 2 199th Union Ridge Elementary 330 N 5th 43,925 475 400 4 View Ridge Middle 5th and 44,079 301 297 1 School Pioneer Ridgefield High School 2630S 83,418 622 487 4 High School Hillhurst Total 211,594 1,889 1,634 13 Table 7-5. Non -instructional Facilities Type Location Administrative Offices 2724 S Hillhurst Maintenance Department 304 Pioneer SW Washington Child Care Consortium 509 NW 199th (4 classrooms, enrollment of 129) Single Family Home 300 N 5th City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 7-13 District's Capital Facilities Plan 2005-2011, on file at the City of Ridgefield.) Table 7-4 inventories the existing instruction- al facilities in the Ridgefield School District; Table 7-5 inventories the non -instructional facilities. The District determines capacity at for Ridge- field schools according to a student teacher ratio of 25:1 per teaching station. There is a 75% utilization factor for Junior High and an 85% utilization factor for High School. The uti- lization factor accounts for the average time each day that a teaching station is being used. Other Major Educational Institutions The Washington State School for the Deaf (WSD) operates in the City of Vancouver from a 17 -acre site with an adjacent 11 -acre play- ing field. Enrollment at WSD fluctuates an- nually between 100 and 200 students. WSD provides both residential and day programs for deaf and hard -of -hearing students from around the state. The Washington State School for the Blind (WSSB) is a fully accredited residential K-12 school for blind and partially sighted students from all over Washington. This state -support- ed institution is located on East 13th Street in Vancouver. The WSSB provides assistance, advice and best practices for educators in other school districts with blind or partially sighted students as well as education to the over 1,400 students enrolled at the Vancou- ver campus. Clark College is a community college provid- ing two-year transfer degree studies, techni- cal training and basic skills classes to more than 12,500 full-time and part-time students each quarter. It is the second largest college in the Washington State system of 35 commu- nity and technical colleges. Founded in 1933, Clark College received its first accreditation in 1936-37 and has been accredited since 1. The Ridgefield School District will update its capital facilities plan in 2011, consistent with state law. The City will amend Section 7.10 of the Comprehensive Plan thereafter to be consistent with the revised Ridgefield School CFP. 7 -14 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 1948. Washington State University began of- fering courses in Southwest Washington in 1983 as part of the Southwest Washington Joint Center for Education. In 1989, the Uni- versity formally established Washington State University Vancouver as a branch campus of the state's land-grant institution. The Salmon Creek campus opened in 1996. WSU Vancou- ver offers junior, senior and graduate level courses in more than 35 fields of study. Stu- dents may pursue one of WSU Vancouver's 15 bachelor's and eight master's degrees. In the spring of 2005, enrollment was 1,895 Students; There are more than 90 fulltime, Ph.D. faculty. Additional technical institutes and degree pro- grams in the area include Ashmead College, Business Computer Training Institute (BCTI), International Air Academy, and Western Busi- ness College. There are no post -secondary schools currently located within the Ridgefield City limits. 7.10.2 Direction for the Future The City of Ridgefield is expressly seeking post secondary education facilities to locate within the City limits. The Ridgefield School District expects to con- tinue to grow and will therefore need to add new facilities. To cover the local share of the new facilities, the district imposes school im- pact fees, as allowed under the GMA and local implementing ordinances. The maximum al- lowable impact fee is calculated according to an adopted formula. As more development takes place in the RUGA, large parcels of land available for schools will become increasingly scarce. School districts try to purchase land in advance, based on growth trends, but this is sometimes difficult to do with limited funding. As a result, dis- tricts renovate and make more efficient use of existing facilities when possible. There are plans to build a new High School, with 192,000 square feet, and a total capac- ity of 1200 students. This will provide a ca - pacity improvement of 213 students. High school growth has outpaced all other levels. This is partly due to a demographic factor as- sociated with the aging children of the baby - boom generation. By 2009, The Ridgefield School District is pro- jected to add 338 students, an enrollment in- crease of nearly 18 percent from the 2004 totals. The 2009 enrollment is projected to be 2227 students, but could be higher if new housing units become available faster than is projected. The largest number of students will be added at the elementary level. In five years, an additional 171 K-6 students are ex- pected. A total 2009 elementary level student enrollment of 1137 is projected. The greatest gains are forecasted for 2005 and 2006. There has been discussion about reorganiza- tion of class levels. This may provide a means by which to better accommodate the project- ed 2227 students in 2009. 7.10.3 Policies PF -ED -1 Coordination Coordinate with the Ridgefield School District on capital facilities planning efforts and facili- ties plans. The City will also notify and coordi- nate with the Ridgefield School District in the review of plan amendments or developments involving five (5) acres or more of residential land or twenty-five (25) or more residential units. PF -ED -2 Site selection Assist the Ridgefield School District in select- ing appropriate sites for new school facilities, in locations that enhance neighborhoods and urban districts. PF -ED -3 Double use of facilities Pursue an intergovernmental agreement with the Ridgefield School District to formally al- low Ridgefield citizens access to School Dis- trict recreational and educational facilities. PF -ED -4 An adequate supply of kindergarten through twelfth grade (K-12) public schools and pub- lic school facilities is essential to avoid over- crowding and to enhance the educational opportunities for our children. The City will work with the School District to develop and implement policies and regulations that sup- port the School District's mission of providing a quality public education. PF -ED -5 Facilitate location of post secondary educa- tion facilities within the City limits as part of providing quality public education to the community. 7.11 LIBRARY SERVICES 7.11.1 Current Conditions The Fort Vancouver Regional Library District (FVRLD) provides library services in four counties in southwestern Washington (Clark, Skamania, Klickitat). The FVRLD serves a total population of 385,000 and an area of 4,200 square miles. The FVRLD's service area includes the RUGA. The district's central li- brary is the Vancouver Community Library in Central Park. Built in 1963, this library is the largest in the district with more than 260,000 books. The library also provides support ser- vices to the other libraries in the district. The Ridgefield Library is located in the heart of downtown Ridgefield, and is an integral part of the community. Readers enjoy books on a wide range of topics for all reading levels. Audio cassettes and books on CD are popular with commuters. The library also offers non- fiction videos. Public access computers are available for use free of charge. In addition, children will enjoy the interactive Story Sta- tion. The library covers 2055 square feet and has approximately 18,645 volumes and a cir- culation of 54,926. 7.11.2 Direction for the Future It is understood that library services must keep pace with population growth. The Fort Vancouver Regional Library System devel- City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 7-15 oped a plan in 2003 to address this need; the plan proposed new facilities, expansions, and improvements. The entire system will in- crease from 69,400 square feet to 215,500 feet of facilities. This will maintain the 0.5 square feet -to -person ratio for a population of 465,000 people. However, the projected population in the County will exceed this within 20 years. The library system will revise its plans based on a higher rate of population growth than previously anticipated. 7.11.3 Policy PF -L-1 High quality libraries The City of Ridgefield will continue to partner with the Fort Vancouver Regional library Sys- tem to provide high quality library services to residents of the city and surrounding areas. 7.12 PRIVATE UTILITIES 7.12.1 Electricity Electric service throughout Clark County is provided by Clark Public Utilities (CPU), a customer -owned public utility district with ad- ministrative offices in its Electric Center, 1200 Fort Vancouver Way, Vancouver. Engineering and operations functions are located at the Ed Fischer Operations Center, 8600 N.E. 117 Avenue. About half of the power the utility sells its customers is generated at the Riv- er Road Generating Plant, a combined -cycle combustion turbine that uses natural gas to produce electricity. The remaining power sup- ply is purchased, mainly from the Bonneville Power Administration, a federal agency that markets power generated at federal dams in the Pacific Northwest. Clark Public Utilities has invested about $500 million in its electric system. The system con- sists of more than 100 miles of high-volt- age transmission lines (69,000 and 115,000 volts), 47 substations, three switching sta- tions, and about 6,000 miles of overhead and underground distribution lines. The facilities serve about 162,000 customers. CPU rou- 7-16 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate tinely reviews the county's growth plans and coordinates the construction of new electri- cal facilities with those plans. Major electrical facilities are in place to serve existing utility customers; however, additional substations, transmission lines and distribution facilities will be required to meet the needs of new customers. It should be noted that state law requires utilities to provide electricity to all who request it. The utility believes it has adequate supplies of electricity to meet anticipated customer de- mands. Utility officials routinely prepare pro- jections of future demand for electricity and review available supplies. When projections show that demand for electricity will exceed the available supply, the utility will conduct extensive evaluations of the available op- tions. The major options are to build addi- tional electrical generating capacity, purchase additional supplies of electricity, or expand electricity conservation programs to reduce demand for power. Any one or a combination of the options could be selected. 7.12.2 Natural Gas Granted its service territory by the Washing- ton Utilities and Transportation Commission, Northwest Natural Gas is the sole purveyor of natural gas in Clark County. The company serves about 50,000 residential, commercial and industrial gas customers in the county. Its customer base has grown rapidly over the past 10 years, reflecting a strong preference by builders for natural gas heating in new homes as the county's residential population increases. Northwest Natural Gas receives its supply from Northwest Pipeline, which owns and operates more than 7,000 miles of inter- state pipelines, including lines in the county. Northwest Pipeline's current and future need is to keep its pipeline corridors accessible for maintenance. Despite recent fluctuations in energy prices, as the local distribution company of natural gas, Northwest Natural anticipates continued strong growth in customer additions in Clark County and is planning for future infrastruc- ture construction and maintenance to serve the expected need. Additional distribution lines will be constructed on an as -needed ba- sis in accordance with local, state and federal regulations and codes covering land use and safety issues. Public safety has been the number one consid- eration in the siting and construction of new pipelines, as reflected by natural gas's supe- rior safety record in the pipeline industry. The growth of new development and housing sub- divisions in the county to be served by natural gas will only increase the need for stringent adherence to safety and maintenance stan- dards for the building and operation of trans- mission and distribution lines. 7.12.3 Telecommunications The telecommunications industry is currently in the midst of tremendous advances in tech- nology. Cellular and optical fiber technologies are transforming the way service is delivered. In addition, the physical barriers that separate data, video, and voice technologies are rap- idly disappearing. With the breakup of AT&T in 1984, new technology and new providers have entered the market at a rapid pace and have fostered a competitive industry. Many telecommunication companies provide ser- vice to Ridgefield residents. These include Qwest Communications, AT&T Broadband, Sprint, and Verizon. Comcast provides cable televisions and internet access. Because of the rapid change in this industry, there may be service providers not mentioned herein that provide service in the Ridgefield area. 7.12.4 Policy PF-PU-1 Quality Service Assist in providing quality and reliable private utilities and service options to the Ridgefield residents and business operators, through partnering, licensing, and negotiations with utility companies. 7.13 ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES 7.13.1 Current Conditions Ridgefield will adopt policies and regula- tions, to identify future needs for regional and statewide facilities, such as airports, state education facilities, state or regional transportation facilities, state and local cor- rectional facilities, solid waste handling fa- cilities, and in-patient facilities including substance abuse facilities, mental health fa- cilities, group homes, transportation facilities of state-wide significance defined according to RCW 47.06.140, and secure community transition facilities. No other Comprehensive Plan policy may preclude the siting of essen- tial public facilities. Essential Public facilities includes: • airports • state education facilities • state or regional transportation facilities • state and local correctional facilities • solid waste handling facilities • regional parks/trails • in-patient facilities, including substance abuse facilities, mental health facilities, and group homes • transportation facilities of state-wide significance defined according to RCW 47.06.140 • secure community transition facilities • hospitals and medical clinics 7.13.2 Direction for the Future The process for siting essential public facili- ties (EPFs) depends on whether the facility is a state-wide EPF (like a university or prison), a local, or a regional EPF. The state-wide pro- cess will be managed by a board or coun- cil comprised of representatives from state and local agencies. Local or regional facilities would be sited by local governments using the existing GMA process. A public facility siting negotiation process may be recom- mended if the GMA process does not provide a definite result. The negotiation process City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 7-17 would include representatives from jurisdic- tions where the facility may be located or wherein the impacts of the facility would be manifest. The facility siting committee would seek to negotiate a resolution to the siting issue(s) with assistance from the State Office of Dispute Resolution, if it is available. If an agreement is reached, each legislative body represented on the committee would have to ratify the agreement. If an agreement cannot be reached, the State oversight body would be presented with the proposals from each party. The oversight body would select the proposal it determines is most consistent with state policy. 7.13.3 Policy PF-EPF-1 Essential Public Facilities Coordinate with Clark County, the state, and special districts to identify future needs for regional and statewide facilities. 7-18 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate TRANSPORTATION 8. TRANSPORTATION The transportation system is part of everyday life. The entire community relies on the sys- tem to get people where they want to go, to bring goods to and from the community, and to connect people to the services they need. Ridgefield's transportation system has a va- riety of components, including rail freight (through the Port of Ridgefield), state high- ways (managed by Washington State De- partment of Transportation [WSDOT]), local streets, sidewalks, transit (C-TRAN) and bicycle paths. Regional coordination and consistency are integral to Ridgefield's trans- portation program. Regional partnerships are maintained with Clark County, the Southwest Washington Regional Transportation Council (RTC), C-TRAN (regional transit agency), WS - DOT, the Port of Ridgefield, and other cities in Clark County. These relationships are formalized through active participation in the RTC, which serves as the area's federally designated Metropoli- tan Planning Organization (MPO) and state - designated Regional Transportation Planning Organization (RTPO). The RTC maintains and runs the traffic modeling for all jurisdictions in Clark County, based on a common land use geographic information system. This ensures consistency in land use and transportation planning among neighboring jurisdictions. RTC, as the regional RTPO, certifies Ridge - field's transportation element for consistency with the regional plan and with the plan of each jurisdiction responsible for transporta- tion planning within Clark County. 8.1 CURRENT CONDITIONS Before a local government can adequately plan for its future, it must assess the capabil- ity of its existing traffic circulation system to serve current demand. It is therefore neces- sary to determine existing levels of service and to identify existing system deficiencies within the traffic circulation system. 8.1.1 Roadway Functional Classification Functional classification defines streets and roads according to the type of service they are intended to provide. Two major consid- erations are to: (1) serve the through move- ment of traffic and (2) provide access to abutting property. The classification of differ- ent types of roadways and streets can vary depending upon the size of the community and the community's vision. Clark County, as part of its countywide planning process, and the Regional Transportation Council, as part of the Metropolitan Transportation Planning process, define the functional classification system along the following guidelines: 1. The principal arterial system shall consist of a connected network of rural arterial routes with appropriate extensions into and through urban areas, which serve regional and subregional trips. Access is limited to other arterials and state highways, and for regional trip generators. Access is subservient to the roadway's function. 2. The minor arterial system provides for subregional access to and from the principal arterial system, and serves regional and subregional trips. Access is less restrictive than for principal arterials but is still subservient to the roadway's function. 3. The collector system provides connections through and between neighborhoods and subregions of the county, and serves as the principal means of land access to residential neighborhoods, commercial centers, and into and through industrial and business parks. Access is provided to adjacent land uses, but is often managed to occur at appropriately spaced locations and is often shared between adjacent land uses. 4. Those roadways which perform no arterial or collector function, which serve only local access functions and which lack essential arterial characteristics shall be designated "local or neighborhood access" roadways. City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 8-1 The City of Ridgefield has developed a Func- tional Classification Plan for the different types of street facilities as shown in Figure 8-1. Pioneer Street/SR 501 and the south section of Hillhurst Road are designated prin- cipal arterials. These roadways serve regional trips and provide the main routes of access into and out of the city. Minor arterials include the remainder of Hillhurst Road, N Main Ave- nue, 45th Avenue, Royle Road, S 15th Street, N 20th Street in the UGA (NW 289th Street in the county), Union Ridge Parkway, and 85th Avenue (NE 10th Avenue in the county). These roadways serve trips within the region and connect to the principal arterial system. The collector roadways have been grouped in the following three subcategories: standard collector, scenic collector, and commercial/in- dustrial collector. Standard collectors include Heron Ridge Drive, N 10th Street (sections both east and west of Interstate 5), 35th Av- enue, Bertsinger Road, N 65th Avenue (NW 11th Avenue in the county), and S 5th Street. Commercial/industrial collectors include 51st Avenue, Timm Road, 56th Place, S 20th Way, S 6th Way, N 5th Street and roadways inter- nal to the "Boschma" area east of Interstate 5 and north of Union Ridge Parkway. These roadways will primarily serve the employ- ment and retail developments forecast for the junction area. These roadways will also be designed to accommodate truck movements from these developments. Reiman Road north of Pioneer Street/SR-501 to Heron Ridge Drive is classified a "scenic collector". Although classified as a collector, 8 -2 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate the roadside environment and topography constrain the ability to widen Reiman Road much beyond its current 22 -foot width. Main- taining a narrower roadway width will help preserve the "rural and scenic" nature of the roadway. As other roadways are improved or constructed, it is expected that through traffic will be directed to the north via 35th and 45th Avenues, instead of Reiman Road. Improve- ments to Reiman Road will consist of main- taining the two 11 -foot travel lanes along with a few feet of safety shoulders on each side. Several roadways not included in the previous or current Ridgefield UGA are noted in Figure 8-1. Although not in Ridgefield's jurisdiction at this time, these roadways are neverthe- less considered important to transportation access to and circulation within the city. The City supports efforts to include the N 20th Street minor arterial including a crossing over I-5, the NW 219th Street extension from the Interstate 5/SR-502 interchange west to NW 31st Avenue/Hillhurst Road, and the S 51st Avenue extension to the NW 219th Street extension, which is in the county's Arterial Atlas. These functional classification desig- nations and corresponding design standards are compatible between the City and County to allow the facilities to blend and function well (i.e., the sidewalks align, lanes are of similar width and configuration, etc.). Design standards for these facilities are illustrated in the City of Ridgefield Engineering Standards, Chapter 3 - Streets. 8.1.2 Roadway Inventory An inventory of the existing arterial and col- lector street system was prepared using infor- mation obtained from the City, Clark County and field investigations. The existing physi- cal roadway characteristics and traffic control for the Ridgefield Urban Growth area are il- lustrated on Figure 8-2 while current traffic (2005-2006 counts) is shown on Figure 8-3. The existing street network is made up en- tirely of two-lane roadways. Traffic control is presently provided by posted stop sign con - _ y a (6 _ O 75 a 1 r m v o v z0 LL � 11 +r cn U m r !i— W X c6 J LL W U o NE 24TH 4V ONZZ 1J 0 Atl H102 t�R7sR9� l lOZ 3N z 191StZ 1J B AVH1Sl 2% 3AV1410t 3N 3ntl H1013N - pp - ~ C+pIk a �• ry "-11L 3 z N ny i AV ONZ UF 1d H191 0 x Id UNE 3ntl QNZ MN -. HLb la N15 1J H1S,yN � eo NW 410 CT � e z y G 3ntl H15 N 1J H101 i3ntl HLS9N3ntl KS9N 0 �i;ii1S •�" Hl£l MN l,NN 19TH PV ld H191 MN s- w �- u rc 7d H19SS �•C' ILN1'TA m o 4P i TdlWMN a i ARMlSE PA R x m 7d AQ 3 3AVH16Z i 3 ' V1Sl£ 3AV1Sl£MN - 3Atl1Slf MN y 3AV1S,, 1JN10£ N vC-,S x - - N 3ntl Hl b S a p " 1tllSlf MN z tl1SlE l�1 3n p NOd 13 f MN 3k rlSlbM x 3A 1St MN ® 3AV H1S 3AVOy£ n > b ? B 17 ON Q -Zy Ort, Id �6 x 3AV1SlS MN 3Atl1SlS MN 1515 � � o " - g H15Z5 B � i x 3:— N IDIS z m r m STN N d1SlZS 13 =SMN 3AtlH19S 519TH Pl 3z $ � d p x K �, J sls tly 8 1Jh1ag m O II N0113NlpJ 3,tv1S,:.., �y i `d p 0 �+ 6TlH PVE �_� 3 H�3111.-1 3ntl1stlMN 3nrlsuMN 6i H off_ 'Y O O1 NO d �• Ob QNVlS, NOl3HDVS M � Obba' �Ud.1S y U N L U R L m U mo H � E u " L _ Np ` rn a J N 'D (nQ l0 v C o O ON N cc ♦- U) F L Q� = Z X 0- W 'U LL W o -3,WU6Z g,.b NE 26TH INE z 3N AV H16Z 3N `- H16Z 3N �3Atl H16Z 3N3Atl H1fiZ 3'; 5 Hlg=3 �ZglN AVE � c 3nb ONfZ 3N VONZZ J 130 AVHICZ RmR7wmrnm IOZ 3N z 1315{Z3 � 1,7 i g13ry � � R 9AVH10i 3N AV H10{3 4P y 3A H10 3N �� RTS w " 13 H19 N z NVY POLl0OK 0.0 t ? `� 'i AH INZ ld HiBL 9 a Id 08C OHC 3f ONZ MN A pppp ti H10 13HiSMN �o-o .yc' m ~ 13H101 - • H1L{ MN $ 3AVH1S5k 3Atl H154N O- H kv S ) 3A W, 1%jNAV sw Id H1Bl MNz �s 1 u1d H195 S ae IL Y p PA RK 0.D PQ' � WP pRA01$E PAR R )dHl r ; 3AVH16ZMN N ARAOISE tl1SLf 3AVIS{EMN 2 'N 'H15 _r y 13 _ i 1SL MN y 3AVISIC MN N10E S FSZ& N ti - H156S NV W1SlE MNN K 3A 3 I y H 13 E MN �L�� s ■ o S blSlb•Hry x 3A ISL MN 3AV H19 =tea 3AV OLf � S ~ 1 S ld Hl S ¢. eydJ i o �6 x 3AV1SlSMN 3AV1StS V1S{S HiSZS a S N )d 16S I z d1StZS Z 3AV - ZM 13 `~ N 9 q3� N195 AN S 19TH PL m �_ -- 1L5 MN 0 a s 11 y kl �6'RM RVE kl � yL'p� 3 Hi[ MN {L MN 3AII.ILMN III rll -S 0-,Zr2gz� Is 1 ,tom �• 7�1 ONV1Si 4O13N3V8 M w M L iMWE LL W A Q ¢ W o ¢ o ,�,�� it m F WE i :5'u 1 ry i Z o N P' j J -�►"i NE 24TH AVE o N z 3AtlOMEZ 3N W ONZZ lO Otl[ A1111 ��Q���e7na• IGZ 3N z 13 1SIZ 3 r AtlH1S13N 3Atl H1ol 3N 3'.tl H1C: W AVH10I x �+ s 3Atl H10 3N N (D 6n a i AVON' z H!Id (INCE I 3AV (W? MN i lO HIS 0HIS MN F '� ■ 3Atl 1415 1�H10{ - ■ - ' NWSTH $ HIST MN t; 3Atl H159N CLl - _ dl'IWIl$ C 3A Hl l 3AY Hlll NJI = _ `,��J Id H1SI MN z 3 v ap �nrrn iISEpPH'p C ld1Sl2 NN p{tpplSE PA R < 3,ivNlrz 3 - i s tlISLE N 3AVISIEMN 3AVISIEMN h 3Atl1SlE MN m ■ 3Atl HI91 -:SIEMN, S AV 1S If IA k N 17 CMN N & � Y1SI6,4y1 x 3A ISI MN ®co 3 3Atl OHC _ Q2 T d 3z a lO ON N � ld Hl S b i MAY 1SlS MN 3lltliSts MN ISISI rs H1SZS M o g N lr?S a - yta 3AYH195 N 1SIZS w z n NW3 lO SMN P z i rq N If) N z 0 3 1 �H1ag 1'6y fn Sly qq �� II b0113NypO i 6 s '^ NW 671H AVE F, 3AYlSlL MN 3AY1SlL MN �/ yy • Oz H v �O Qom- 3 H u 3Atl H1LSMN z g ,>NIV4;M CV unObb 7 Ob ONYISI )JOTHOtlB M p bb�yb1S 3W trol at intersections. Traffic signals exist only at Pioneer Street and North Main Avenue, and at the interchange at Pioneer Street (SR 501) and Interstate 5. The highest traffic volumes occur along Pioneer Street/SR 501 west of In- terstate 5 to 45th Avenue. 8.1.3 Traffic Capacity In order to evaluate existing traffic condi- tions, intersection capacity analyses and a SYNCHRO/SimTraffic traffic analysis and sim- ulation model were prepared for the morning and afternoon peak hours in the Ridgefield UGA. The capacity analyses were conducted using the methodology of the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). The HCM contains guidelines and computational procedures for computing the capacity and quality of ser- vice for various highway facilities, including freeways, signalized and unsignalized inter- sections, and rural highways. SYNCHRO is a software package that employs the HCM guidelines and is used to assess roadway capacity. The use of SYNCHRO allowed as- sessment of the existing transportation infra- structure and identification of potential future improvement needs. 8.1.4 Level -of -Service Standards The following section provides an outline of roadway level -of -service (LOS) and method- ology as developed for the 2008 Ridgefield UGA Transportation Plan update. The purpose of this information is to provide an overview of LOS and identify its relationship to the Transportation Goals and Policies of the City. The level -of -service used for the Capital Fa- cilities Plan is "D", except at unsignalized in- tersections that do not meet signal warrants or where a signal is not desired, where the planned LOS is "E". This is consistent with the City's adopted concurrency policy. Level -of -service (LOS) is an estimate of the quality and performance efficiency of trans- portation facilities in a community. LOS categories provided in the Transportation Re- search Board's Highway Capacity Manual were 8-6 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate adopted for this study. The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) LOS system measures the de- gree of traffic congestion and delay using the letter rating "A" (the best) for least amount of congestion to letter rating "F" (the worst) for the most amount of congestion. The fol- lowing LOS categories provide some general ideas as to the different levels of service used in the HCM and their performance measures. For this effort, LOS D is considered accept- able except for unsignalized intersections, where LOS E is acceptable if the intersection does not meet traffic signal warrants. These standards are the city's current concurrency ordinance. The Washington State Department of Trans- portation (WSDOT) is responsible for de- termining level -of -service on Highways of Statewide Significance. The only such high- way in the Ridgefield UGA is Interstate 5. Various planning efforts including the Ridge- field Transportation Plan project that deficien- cies will occur at Interstate 5 at the Pioneer Street/SR 501 interchange in the not -to -dis- tant future, even with interim improvements that were undertaken in 2005. An increase in peak hour trips both into and out of Ridgefield on Interstate 5 is the result of increased land designated for employment in the Pioneer Street/SR 501 and Interstate 5 interchange area. These impacts have been identified in local, regional, and state transportation anal- yses; efforts are underway to fully -fund a long-term reconstruction of the interchange. Level -of -service Categories (LOS) Level -of -service A - Low volumes, high speeds, and no delays. Freedom to select de- sired speeds and to maneuver within the traf- fic stream is extremely high. (Example - Most arterials in the Ridgefield area at all times of the day.) Level -of -service B - Zone of stable flow. Driv- ers still have reasonable freedom to select their speed. (Example - Pioneer Street/Union Ridge Parkway east of Interstate 5.) Level -of -service C - Still in the zone of sta- ble flow, but speeds and maneuverability are more closely controlled by the higher vol- umes. The selection of speed is now affected by the presence of others, and maneuvering within the traffic stream requires vigilance on the part of the driver. (Example - traffic on Pioneer Street/SR 501 west of I-5.) Level -of -service D - Approaches unstable flow. Speed and freedom to maneuver are severely restricted. Small increases in traf- fic flow will generally cause operational prob- lems at this level. (Example - Pioneer Street/ SR 501 through the I-5 interchange area.) Level -of -service E - Represents operating conditions at or near the capacity of the high- way. Low speeds. Freedom to maneuver with- in the traffic stream is extremely difficult. Any incident can be expected to produce a serious breakdown with extensive queuing. Table 8-1. Level -of -service (LOS) Categories LOS Segment or Intersection Roundabout Volume/ Volume/Capacity Ratio Capacity Ratio A Less than or equal to 0.3 0.00-0.40 B Less than or equal to 0.5 0.41 - 0.60 Less than or Pioneer Street/SR 501 & Main Street C equal to 0.75 0.61-0.75 Less than or C D equal to 0.90 0.76-0.85 E Less than or equal to 1.0 0.86-0.95 F Greater than 1.0 >0.95 Level -of -service F - Describes forced flow op- eration at very low speeds, where volumes are above theoretical capacity. Operations are characterized by stop -and -go traffic. Vehicles may progress at reasonable speeds for sev- eral hundred feet or more, then be required to stop in a cyclic fashion. Long delays. The V/C ratios in Table 8-1 represent the ac- tual volume of traffic traveling on the road- way divided by the volume capacity of that roadway. Capacity is defined as the maximum rate of flow that can be accommodated on a particular roadway segment. Table 8-2 summarizes the LOS for existing (2007) conditions. All of the intersections op- erate at LOS C or better. 8.1.5 Accident History Accident records for SR -501 and Pioneer in the study area were obtained from WSDOT and from the Ridgefield Police Department. The WSDOT and Police records are for Janu- ary 2004 through January 2008 (five years). The most current accident records along Pio- neer Street are summarized in Table 8-3. As indicated in Table 8-3, the high collision seg- ment is Pioneer Street between 45th Avenue and 56th Place which has experienced 27 ac- cidents. Of these accidents the intersection of Pioneer Street and 45th Avenue experienced 12 accidents while seven accidents were re - Table 8-2. Selected Intersection LOS Summary (PM Peak) Notes: 'represents a signalized intersection. ' Recent development traffic study submittals indicate this intersection will be at LOS E/F by 2009 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 8-7 LOS Delay (sec/vehicle) Pioneer Street/SR 501 & Main Street A 8 Pioneer Street/SR 501 & 9th Ave. C 171 Pioneer Street/SR 501 & Reiman Road B 13 Pioneer Street/SR 501 & 45th A v/c = 0.35 Avenue (roundabout) Pioneer Street/SR 501 & 56th Place C 15 Pioneer Street/SR 501 & 1-5 Southbound Ramp* B 15 Pioneer Street/SR 501 & 1-5 Northbound Ramp* C 21 Pioneer Street/SR 501 & 65th Avenue B 11 65th Avenue/S 5th Street A 9 S 5th St./85th Ave. B 14 Notes: 'represents a signalized intersection. ' Recent development traffic study submittals indicate this intersection will be at LOS E/F by 2009 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 8-7 Table 8-3. Accident Summar Segment Number of Accidents Pioneer Street Between Main Avenue and 5th Avenue (Downtown) 6 Pioneer Street Between 5th Avenue and 9th Avenue 4 Pioneer Street Between 9th Avenue and Reiman Road 6 Pioneer Street Between Reiman Road and 35th Avenue 18 Pioneer Street Between 35th Avenue and 45th Avenue 5 Pioneer Street Between 45th Avenue and 56th Place 27 Pioneer Street/SR 501 Between 56th Place and 65th Avenue 13 65th Avenue Between N 10th Street and S 10th Street 12 corded at the intersection of Pioneer Street and 56th Place. Note that many of the ac- cidents which occurred at the 45th Avenue/ Pioneer Street intersection occurred prior to the installation of the roundabout in 2007, and many of those which occurred at the Pio- neer Street/56th Place intersection occurred prior to intersection improvements completed there in late 2005. 8.1.6 _i ransit Transit service for Ridgefield is provided by C-TRAN's "Connector" service. The Connec- tor serves the cities of Camas, La Center, and Ridgefield with fully accessible dial -a -ride and regular stop service (www.C-TRAN.com). Rides are provided via prior arrangements on a first come, first served basis. Fixed route service is provided from La Center through Ridgefield to the 99th Street Transit Center twice in the morning peak and twice in the afternoon peak on weekdays, one once mid- day on weekdays. Connector routes operate Monday through Friday only and do not oper- ate on weekends or holidays. 8-8 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 8.1.7 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities The City of Ridgefield Engineering Standards identify the requirements for non -motorized uses on streets, such as sidewalks, trails, and bikeways. Currently, a 1 -mile pedestrian trail exists in Abrams Park. Striped shoulders exist along sections of SR -501. While not officially designated bike lanes, the shoulders do pro- vide refuge for bicyclists and pedestrians. Bike lanes exist or are being constructed on the fol- lowing roads: Heron Ridge Drive east of Main Avenue, Reiman Road from the city limits to N 5th Street, S 5th Street east of I-5, Union Ridge Parkway, S. 11th Street and S. 85th Av- enue near S 5th Street. On other roadways within the city, bicycle users currently share the roadway with motorized traffic. Sidewalks exist through the downtown area and sporadically throughout the older sec- tions of the community. Sidewalks are being included in all new residential developments. The City adopted the Ridgefield Comprehen- sive Park and Recreation Plan, which includes a Trail and Bikeway System Plan that desig- nates locations for future pedestrian and bike facilities in the Ridgefield area. Included in this study are trails identified along Pioneer Street/SR-501, Union Ridge Parkway, 45th Avenue, Royle Road, Hillhurst Avenue, and Main Street. 8.2 DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE Basic transportation access to obtain goods and services and engage in social activities is an essential need that must be met. Motor- ists, pedestrians, bicyclists and transit riders should all be able to use the transportation system in a safe, efficient, and uniform way. Through coordination with Clark County, C- TRAN, and RTC, Ridgefield will develop a multi -modal transportation system that safe- ly, attractively and efficiently serves plan land uses within the RUGA. Most people who live in Ridgefield view the community's streets as more than simply concrete and asphalt. Streets affect the way people live, work, and play. Streets should be viewed as part of a dynamic, integrated land use and transportation system. Street treatments (paving type, sidewalks, light- ing, street trees, signs, and furniture such as benches and trash cans) should address the needs of regular users and the surrounding a rea . Connected, continuous street systems make activities of daily living easier to accomplish. Ridgefield's early development was based on a grid street system. As development moved out, a grid based on major corridors was es- tablished, but many of the connections have not been completed. In many areas, connec- tivity for auto travel, pedestrians, and bicy- clists needs improvement. The City's roadway system will be improved to serve development within these new urban ar- eas and infill development. The Proposed Road- way Functional Classification map illustrates how the transportation system will be improved to serve new development (Figure 8-4). 8.2.1 Trip Generation The Regional Transportation Council (RTC) provided a special sensitivity model run of the Ridgefield area which included the proposed land use assumptions for the Ridgefield area as shown in Table 8-4. The 2024 PM peak hour traffic volumes are illustrated in Figure 8-5. The county's Vacant and Buildable Lands Mod- el (VBLM) was used to estimate the existing number of dwelling units and employment in the City's UGA and the capacity for additional growth. Additionally, the comprehensive plan and zoning designations for the additional UGA included in the September 2007 Clark County Comprehensive Growth Management City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 8-9 Table 8-4. Urban Growth Area Plan Designations Approximate Approximate Net Net Developable KSF of Building Dwelling Trips per Total Peak Total Daily Land Use Acres Floor Area Units Unit/KSF Hour Trips Trips 1. Single Family Residential (ITE 210) 1500 N/A 7,500 1.01 7,575 75,750 2. Multi -Family Residential (ITE 220) 300 N/A 3,000 0.62 1,860 18,600 3. Employment Center (ITE 210; 850) 150 967.5 N/A 6.00 5,805 58,050 4. Commercial (ITE 850, 862) 30 193.5 N/A 5.00 968 9,675 5. Mixed Use Overlay (Various ITE) 500 1500 400 3.50 1,400 14,000 6. Other (Schools, Miscellaneous) N/A 115 N/A 3.50 403 4,025 TOTAL 2776 10,900 18,010 180,100 Based on RTC's 2024 TAZ dataset with Ridgefield proposed adjustments; approximate developable acreage and density assumptions for Clark County's September 2007 Comprehensive Plan adoption; and previous VBLM assumptions. City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 8-9 C O w m J w N C Q W= O U g c m L, L c LL N qW M'C m '� .� ` r -u -` oo m m u ma E W c� Ci N& `o b b Q m (LLj JR m m r -i d) 13a U U V N o o '° v r m t E �- �� ZQ n C W mLL OY L1 Axa 't" s ° �° �� mO-ja 'av'v E "C7 Q V .O C d ? yyc rN U fn V; m m � rN (0 a L 2 Rte' Y i V >. o m�' 2m N j> LL Vo I ' III y z�`O",4eaEP I F �114 /�T ;l a' 1 6 Lu m°� O N >. C F N 3 tlH1L£ 3 > � 0 3Atl H11£3N Y Q U 3Ab Hid 3.Y ¢ 3Ab H1S 3N CD � Q m 101SLE .N L N w N N N M W m= 3AtlHi6Z3N z z �- tlH16Z Z C m j bONZZ �L. C m 1D OW = iE a 1D LSLZ 3 h s o A - w mN £.�'j NN N m ]AVHM ,N "M r- w z 3tlHi 3 is o m m21 °- c E m j!: z o q dv ' �m ■ Q 'm � ♦� 63 m 1D HISM,N Sim 32° K ■ 3o c HSNg _ II Z N z 2VA -- 1D aae vO v mRo i■ � o L- 1 1 F ld Hi9t MN Id HL99 S � 0:, 1 1 tir � �m ■ 1 r N OC c m �S mom c U L c ■ a3k0 0 EA 'p. Oa w c m 1 nS D cF- Fc N aLry D C Y7 ' �! fh ■ N 7Q m > .2 0 ■ U l N .v tl1SlS ■ w ' c t d 10 GUS J ' � ■ 2 m m v - iD HUS. c Q ■ ' 4 ■ ' m �s~ 3Ab1S19 N c ■ � ' ' NR N . . • a V 3 Nll MN 3AV Hll9 PNJ � o o m m a8 as Htoa ✓N V R W p O) C 0.0 � o ■ �' r d 31�p odd r�o ' Ov ISLFND RD .0 ;,*40CHELOR tM c r,2O a o 4 Plan were used along with estimations of em- ployment and household densities to project development through the year 2024. The ad- ditional household and employment growth between now and 2024 was used to project the number of new trips generated by this growth. These new trips were factored into the transportation demand analysis which serves as the basis for transportation facili- ties being planned in this CFP, as well as the basis for calculating traffic impact fees (cost of new transportation facilities divided by the number of new trips per weekday in the 2024 planning horizon). COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION Rather than provide new roadway capacity to mitigate the impacts of urban growth, there are also strat- egies for reducing the number of new trips that are generated. The Washington State Legislature passed the Commute Trip Reduc- tion (CTR) Law in 1991, incorporating it into the Washington Clean Air Act. The goals of the program are to reduce traffic conges- tion, air pollution, and petroleum consump- tion through employer -based programs that decrease the number of commute trips. By encouraging people to ride the bus, vanpool, carpool, walk, bike, work from home, or com- press their workweek, the CTR Program re- moves nearly 19,000 vehicles from roadways statewide every morning. Statewide the pro- gram reduces impacts from air pollution (by about 4,800 tons each year) and from gaso- line consumption (by 6 million gallons a year). The CTR Program can be implemented in the Ridgefield area as major employers are es- tablished. Employers must participate in CTR if they have 100 or more full-time employees at a single worksite who begin their sched- uled workday between 6:00-9:00 a.m. (Most construction and seasonal agricultural work- ers are exempted.) Results will be achieved through collaboration between Ridgefield, other Clark County cities, employers, and WSDOT. Established programs, incentive options, and promotional campaigns make collaboration an efficient method of adminis- trating this program on a county -wide basis. 8.2.2 Required Transportation Facilities Based on the Year 2024 traffic modeling using traffic analysis and travel demand modeling provided by Regional Transportation Council (RTC), deficiencies appeared along Pioneer Street/SR-501 between 35th Avenue and 6511 Avenue, and at the Pioneer Street/SR 501 and Interstate 5 interchange. Additionally, several intersection deficiencies were identi- fied along several of the UGA's arterial and collector facilities. To serve the proposed additional UGA and maintain the current plan's level -of -service minimum standard, the City needs to con- struct new roads as shown in Figure 8-5. Planning -level cost estimates were developed for the new roads based on the improvement needed, as well as additional improvements needed in the current UGA to accommodate the new trips. The new roads and improve- ments are estimated to cost approximately $306 million. To balance the cost of roadway improvements with the affordability of the Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) rate per trip, a modified TIF program is recommended. Roadways that are classified as minor arterials, principal arterials, as well as Pioneer Street/SR 501 would be eligible to be included on the program. Certain collector facilities which serve to transport trips sub - regionally between areas of the City are also included. These are roads that carry regional trips and will serve the majority of trips to and from Ridgefield — they are the gateways to and major traffic carriers within the city. 8.2.3 Capital Cost and Projected Revenue The Capital Facilities Plan summarizes the to- tal estimated capital cost to provide roadway improvements for the UGA. This is summa- rized by funding source and notes the change in TIF eligibility. If this is adopted, the City's TIF rate would increase from $203 per daily City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 8-11 Qi L ` � _a! N LL N Ze Lu o W J I N L n -0 f O u � O p rvE O O i D w O. ■ `� c �' ■ j o � U Z axi i+ 1 ^� �_ o NE AIH PVE c 3AV 08EZ AN V ONZZ 1015M 3nH H1oZ 7�f7■��� !OZ 3N � 101SIZ3 1J O glary 3Atl H1013N4� 3ntl H10l 3N 3Atl,4LOl 3,\' ~ v AVH1013 - w x ,p> 3Atl H10 3N e, ld H1B[ Id ONE - .' O M _ I7HISMN @ N x 1'Yj N'w 4 17 HIS g � Q � - ___ m z ■ ?AVHIS , 17,4101 - O`�' Nw 9tH Hit 1 MN y x 8 �- 3Atl H1S9 N O ._ _ - awwus - ---, -_"_-- N Je 3Atl Nl 11 MN 3Atl Hill MN H PV ~ N O.p. �N tgt d o iR- 5 h - r ■ _ Id H191 MN !t - � L �nr■rn Q�sEpPRN RN N M i ld 1Sl2 MN i PPRP x M 3AV PRAISE V1Sl£ 3AVISIE MN 3AVISIEMN y 3AVISLEMN _ x 3AVHISISo d WISIEMNr x VlsIE A'1 tz R t` b1SthMN 1 x 3A 1SI AW ® � ZO=f 3Ab08E n a 13 ON ~ r � �yau m 11 long -.d H1 s N - l1 8 3AVISISMN 3AVIS15MN Gists s HIGZs B 3 N lees d1SIZS i �c�N 3p9tN 17 4,LLS MN 3AVH19S IIw' F ■ z _ z C 000 Y $ 17Hlbg 7 SIF y II Nall Na07 34V1S19MN Z � n I " W67THAVE 711Sl1MN 3AV1Sl1 MN o 1wa C�_�I� 3 Hl1 MN 3AVH1L9MN •• 4tc�l Oa ONtl1Sl a013H7tl9 M trip currently to approximately $313 per daily trip under the new TIF program. It also in- creases the private/TIF share to 58% (from 52% in the previous Plan) and decreases the public and grant share to 42% from 48% in the current Plan. Based on this analysis, it ap- pears that the City will have adequate finan- cial resources to serve the proposed additional UGA. Because facilities must be constructed prior to the City collecting the TIF revenue, some of these improvements may need to be financed with loans or bonds. 8.3 KEY CHANGES FROM THE 2005 TRANSPORTATION PLAN There are several noticeable changes that have occurred in the Ridgefield 2008 Trans- portation Plan update as compared to the 2005 Ridgefield Transportation Plan. These include: • Reclassifying the NW 219th Street extension west of I-5: the 2005 Plan assumed that most of this facility would be included in the Ridgefield UGA. However, with the final UGA having been established with the September 2007 Clark County Comprehensive Growth Management Plan adoption, most of the NW 219th Street extension is outside of the Ridgefield UGA and would have a county rural collector designation. The 2008 RUGA Transportation Plan update maintains the city's support of the NW 219th Street extension, and includes the corridor in the city's Traffic Impact Fee project list. Constructing the NW 219th Street extension would provide for regional capacity between west parts of Ridgefield's UGA and I-5, as well as serving to relieve the Pioneer Street/SR 501 corridor. Inclusion of Bertsinger Road/25th Place/S. 10th Way/35th Place/South 15th Street collector corridor, in the "doughnut hole" area that is now part of the UGA, in the Traffic Impact Fee project list, and removal of the 35th Avenue corridor south of Pioneer Street/ SR 501 from the CFP and TIF list. Subsequent engineering analysis since the 2005 Transportation Plan was adopted indicates that constructing a South 35th Avenue corridor south of Pioneer Street to South 10th Way would likely be impractical to build, due to terrain, wetland and riparian habitat areas, and would provide some engineering as well as environmental impact challenges. Replacing this sub -regional corridor with the Bertsinger collector corridor, most of which currently exists but would need to be upgraded to provide transportation capacity, would continue to provide the sub -regional and regional transportation mobility that S. 35th Avenue would have provided. • The Traffic Impact Fee project lists separate out the costs of new interchanges and crossings of I-5 (South 15th Street, Pioneer Street/SR 501, NW 289th Street) from the roadway portion of those corridors. This reflects the fact that the I-5 crossings would be built as a separate project and would not be phased in via developer -required frontage improvements, since developers would not have land contiguous to these I-5 crossings (they would be built in WSDOT right-of-way). • Pioneer Street extension into the Port of Ridgefield's Waterfront Development: the 2005 Plan included this segment but did not provide for TIF funding. The 2008 Plan provides 10% of the project's cost as TIF funding. The 2008 Plan process determined this segment was eligible for TIF funding as it is an extension of a regional, TIF -eligible facility (Pioneer Street), provides the only regional transportation capacity into the waterfront area, and increases transportation capacity by removing delays associated with the at -grade crossings on the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) mainline on roads now serving the waterfront. • Studies undertaken since the 2005 Plan indicate that with adequate, 1/4 minimum spacing, roundabouts along the Pioneer/ SR 501 corridor, at 35th, 45th, 51st, 56th City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 8-13 and 65th Avenues, will provide for adequate transportation capacity, mobility and safety compared with signalizing all of these intersections. • The cost of the Ridgefield Interchange Project has been increased to $40 million, reflecting the preferred design alternative and construction cost increases since the 2005 Plan. 8.4 POLICIES TR -1 Transportation options Develop and maintain an interconnected and overlapping transportation system with ex- cellent roadways for automobiles and freight, pedestrian walkways, bicycle facilities, and transit service. Include support programs such as traffic operations, transportation demand management, neighborhood traffic manage- ment, and the regional trails program. Work toward completing and sustaining individual components and programs to ensure success of the entire system. TR -2 System balance Allocate resources using a cost -benefit ap- proach to improve the transportation sys- tem. Focus most resources on satisfying peak commuting demand with roadway capacity and consider other transportation and options as funding allows. TR -3 Transportation safety Ensure high safety standards for motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists through the devel- opment and capital improvement processes. Allocate City capital resources to high risk and collision locations for motorists, bicy- clists, and pedestrians. TR -4 Transportation finance Develop recurring and dedicated funding for a complete transportation program, including system operation and maintenance. Lever- age local funding with innovative and aggres- sive finance strategies including partnerships, grant development, efficient debt, fee-based funding sources, and assistance from state 8-14 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate and federal government as appropriate. TR -5 Transportation circulation and system connectivity Develop a transportation grid that provides good connections to surrounding land uses and activity centers and allows for multiple circulation routes to and from each location. Close gaps and complete system connections through the development and capital im- provement processes. TR -6 Land use and transportation integration Develop and implement innovative transpor- tation investment, design, and program in- centives to achieve the urban environment envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. TR -7 Livable streets Design streets and sidewalks and manage vehicular traffic to encourage livability, inter- action, and sense of neighborhood or district ownership in linkage with adjacent land uses. TR -8 Transportation system efficiency Invest in and improve efficiency of the trans- portation system with multi -modal design, advanced traffic management and operations technologies, demand management strate- gies and high -frequency transit service, con- sistent with the population density. TR -9 Neighborhood traffic Protect and enhance neighborhoods with an active program that focuses on safety, safe routes to school, traffic calming, education, and law enforcement. TR -10 Transportation regional and metropolitan coordination Coordinate Ridgefield's transportation plans, policies, and programs with those of other jurisdictions serving the Clark County area to ensure a seamless transportation system. Focus particularly on cooperation with the Southwest Washington Regional Transporta- tion Council, Washington State Department of Transportation, Clark County and C-TRAN. TR -11 Transit service Restore previous level of transit service, and explore opportunities for improvement. TR -12 Economic development In order to support the continued economic vitality of Ridgefield, major transportation system investments should facilitate freight mobility, job creation, regional competitive position, and revenue growth. Coordinate with the Port of Ridgefield, the affected rail companies and the county to ensure ade- quate rail, port and freight transportation fa- cilities are located and well managed near the downtown core and the Pioneer Street and Interstate 5 interchange. TR -13 Vehicle miles traveled When economically feasible, given the pop- ulation density, use transportation and land use measures to maintain or reduce single occupant motor vehicle miles traveled per capita to increase system efficiency and low- er overall environmental impacts. Such mea- sures include: • Encourage mixed land uses within easy walking distance of transit stops • Provide higher density residential development near employment centers and major transportation routes • Coordinate with C TRAN in the development of a transit master plan, which anticipates long- term transit routes and required transit support facilities, such as bus stops and turnout lanes • Revise development standards and design criteria in residential, commercial, and industrial zones to facilitate pedestrian access and to support transit use TR -14 Parking standards Adopt coordinated parking standards which maintain neighborhood integrity, promote effi- cient utilization of limited land, and encourage desired economic development and growth. TR -15 Transportation demand management Work with major employers, Clark County and other jurisdictions to establish traffic demand reduction programs, including the Commute Trip Reduction Program, and park and rides which decrease reliance on private automo- bile transportation, through the development of a balanced system which emphasizes ade- quate roads, transit (bus service), and bicycle and pedestrian improvements. TR -16 Service standards • Maintain LOS "D", except at unsignalized intersections that do not meet the requirements for use of signals or where a signal is not desired, where the planned LOS is "E" For Pioneer Street/SR 501, maintain LOS D or a mutually -agreed upon LOS between the City of Ridgefield and WSDOT. TR -17 Downtown transportation Recognize and accommodate the pedestri- an -oriented nature of Downtown Ridgefield through: • coordinated urban design which encourages and supports alternative means of travel • sidewalk construction and planting of street trees where adequate right-of-way exists • development of off-street bicycle paths in Open Space corridors, or on -street bicycle lanes which link Downtown to residential neighborhoods • providing attractive and functional bus stops • establishing a downtown parking district to provide attractive and functional public parking, rather than requiring individual businesses to construct private parking facilities • encouraging residential urban infill near Downtown, so that more people can walk to Downtown TR -IS Transit partnerships • Coordinate with C -IRAN in providing bus stops as well as developing urban design and parking standards for major developments and for areas where transit use either exists or is planned. City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 8-15 TR -19 System design Minimize traffic congestion and encourage public safety in Ridgefield through the follow- ing programs and design techniques: • Require sidewalks for all new and infill development unless the benefits of providing sidewalks are significantly outweighed by the burden the sidewalk may place upon critical areas • Plan for "grid" street patterns (rather than series of dead-end streets), to facilitate emergency vehicle access, avoid overloading arterial streets, and reduce "out -of -direction" travel • Minimize direct (driveway) access to arterial streets and encourage access to local streets wherever possible • Consider traffic calming devices, such as specially -design speed bumps and traffic circles, as methods of discouraging or slowing through traffic on local streets • Encourage the use of innovative traffic management strategies such as roundabouts, center turn lanes or other strategies where prudent, feasible, and cost-effective TR -20 Pedestrian and bicycle facilities Plan bicycle and pedestrian facilities that serve the purposes of recreation and com- muting through the following: • Coordinate with Clark County in developing and implementing bicycle and recreational trail plans and systems, through public acquisition, dedication, transferable development rights, development exactions and other appropriate means • Provide bicycle lanes along arterial and collector streets, to reduce hazards to bicyclists and the motoring public • Provide sidewalks for all recognized arterial, collector and local streets, on one or both sides of local streets, in accordance with City standards 8-16 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate • Recreational trails shall be provided to connect neighborhoods and to provide public access to the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, the Gee Creek, and the Allen Creek Basins TR -21 Pioneer Street Consider the Pioneer Street/SR 501 and Union Ridge Parkway corridor, Hillhurst Road, 65th Avenue and 45th Avenue (Royle Road) to be managed or controlled access arterial streets. Driveway access to residential and commercial development from arterial streets shall normally occur from side (local) streets, as shown on the City's transportation plan. Direct (driveway) vehicular access from new development to arterial or collector streets shall be discouraged, except where consistent with City engineering standards regarding street and intersection spacing. The City shall consider developing an access management plan for limited access streets. TR -22 Access management Maximize distance between and minimize the number of curb cuts to increase traffic safety and visibility, and to minimize congestion. Additional access management techniques will be identified. TR -23 Urban to rural connections Coordinate with Clark County in developing a collector street master plan, which identifies the general location of planned minor collec- tor streets for the urban growth area and the urban reserve area. Compliance with this plan shall be required for development approval for both urban and rural developments. In rural areas within Ridgefield's urban reserve (outside the RUGA), and in unincorporated areas within the RUGA, new residential devel- opment shall not cause LOS C to be exceed- ed for any County collector street or arterial street. PARKS !!1 4 9. PARKS AND RECREATION 9.1 CURRENT CONDITIONS The City of Ridgefield is responsible for man- aging all parks, trails, greenways, and oth- er park and recreation facilities in the City of Ridgefield. The City also manages a Park Impact Fee Program. Regional parks are pro- vided by a host of other agencies including the State, Clark County/Vancouver Parks and Recreation, and others. The City completed a Comprehensive Parks and Recreation Plan in 2006. The Comprehensive Parks and Recre- ation Plan identifies the need for six (6) types of park and recreation areas in Ridgefield: Regional Parks, Community Parks, Neighbor- hood Parks, Pocket Parks, Special Use Areas and Greenways. Currently, Ridgefield man- ages seventeen (17) parks: Abrams, Davis, Ridgefield Community/Skate, Hayden, Crows Nest, Lark, Overlook, Eagles View, Horn Family, Columbia Hills, Columbia Hills Open Space, Rose Homestead, Pioneer, Allen Can- yon, Pioneer Canyon Park #1, Canyon's View Park #1 and Canyon's View Park #2 (Table 9-1 and Figure 9-1). 9.2 DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE The City of Ridgefield prides itself on its great parks. The City is fully committed to pro- viding recreational and natural spaces to its growing population. However, the provision of state parks is the shared responsibility of the State, Clark County, Cowlitz County, and the City of Ridgefield. As it grows, Ridgefield will have to acquire and develop new parks. Although many of the parks will be in areas with high growth po- tential, other developed neighborhoods would benefit from additional parks. The Capital Fa- cilities Plan for Ridgefield has a well devel- oped section on parks and open space. That document includes projected needs for addi- tional parks, and a discussion of the types of recreational opportunities that these should include. There is also an established level -of - service for parks, cost estimates, and reve- nue projections. Table 9-1. Ridgefield Existing Parks and Open Space (2005) Parks Acres Notes Neighborhood Parks Whipple Creek Park and Trail Clark County Fairgrounds Davis Park 0.5 Picnic tables, playground equipment, and open space Ridgefield 0.3 Basketball, benches, gazebo, fountain, and skate park Community Park Community Parks Abrams Park 37 Softball and soccer fields, group picnic shelter, covered bandstand, stream, trails, and restrooms Urban Open Space National Wildlife Refuge 5,148 Carty Unit: Trails, fishing, Cathlapotle Plankhouse, historic site, restrooms, outdoor education, and interpretive unit River S Unit: driving route, walking trail, waterfowl hunting, visitor contact, restrooms, fishing Total 5,186 Regional Facilities (nearby) Whipple Creek Park and Trail Clark County Fairgrounds Fort Vancouver Paradise Point State Park Gifford Pinchot National Forest East Fork Lewis River Greenway Vancouver Lake Woodland Special Campground City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 9-1 d 0 ata .0 d L E i W � C -ca a' � �i SME NE Av NliO e � 3AYNLOt3N: - 4 � • 1 3nY NaN Aw 1 3Ar N159N 3nr Nls95 d•--• 1 1 - c( / 1 1 Ai N .-_... t � 1 1 I 1 I - 1 3Av AW 3AY 1 MLSYN 3 AY M14Y9 � _ —3ntlislcrnN 1 1 1 1 - b i �1obs 1 s' 1 1 I 1 1 MYNR -- 1 _ _ _ • � - - � _ _ _ '..•. [ I _ �� 3Av Nibs — _ - _ • ,w Li_.gf �O/ -' _ • BAY MIYIIOIM ._... 3AY NYOIM 5 [ = ` 1 I 1 �z"rc 3 d 0 ata .0 d L E 9.3 POLICIES P-1 Provide parks Ensure that park land is acquired, developed, and maintained in an economically efficient way to meet the needs of existing and future residents. P-2 Local trail system Plan for and develop a city-wide interconnect- ed system of trails that link schools, parks, and other public facilities with residential and mixed-use areas. P-3 Regional trail system Coordinate with Clark County and other ap- plicable jurisdictions to provide regional trail and bike access and to encourage the con- tinuity of trail and bike corridors within and outside the UGA. P-5 Parks service standards Provide adequate acreage of parkland to meet existing and future park, trails and open space needs consistent with the City's policies and the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. P-6 Shared use Coordinate with the Ridgefield School District to formally allow Ridgefield citizens to have access to Ridgefield School District recre- ational and educational facilities. P-7 Parks funding Develop dedicated funding for a complete park system that includes acquisition, devel- opment, maintenance and operation of parks, trails, open space, and recreation programs to serve City residents. P-8 Parks education Provide public education on the uses and benefits of parks, open spaces, habitat pro- tection, and recreational services. City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 9-3 ANNEXATION 10. ANNEXATION 10.1 CURRENT CONDITIONS Annexation may occur through various means under state statute and local regulations. The State of Washington's Growth Management Act of 1990 (GMA) requires counties to estab- lish 20 -year Urban Growth Area (UGA) bound- aries to accommodate for projected growth, and encourages cities to annex lands within the UGA and provide urban -level services to these areas. Lands outside the UGA cannot be annexed. The Community Framework Plan adopted by Clark County, Ridgefield, and oth- er local cities also encourages annexation of lands in the UGA. The Community Framework Plan establishes County support for such an- nexations. Annexations can be initiated by property own- ers or cities. When an annexation is initiated by a city, local support is required. This sup- port is generally provided through an election or petitions. The election method requires approval of the majority of voters in the an- nexation area, or 60 percent, if the proposal includes the assumption of indebtedness. The petition method requires petitions signed by and owners representing the majority of acre- age in the annexation territory, and also by the majority of registered voters in the area if there are any. Proposed annexations in Clark County are reviewed by the local Boundary Review Board to ensure proposed areas are logical and practical based on service areas, physical boundaries, existing communities, and other factors. Other methods for munici- pal annexation are available for specific cir- cumstances but are rarely applicable. 10.2 DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE The City of Ridgefield supports annexation to provide a full range of urban services and efficiencies to developing and developed ur- ban areas. The City will work closely with the community, Clark County, and service provid- ers to determine annexation issues that exist in specific areas, and to develop and imple- ment annexation plans. Larger annexations will be generally preferable because of ser- vice efficiencies, and to keep neighborhoods and communities intact. 10.3 ANNEXATION POLICIES The City of Ridgefield adopts the follow- ing policies to ensure orderly urban transi- tion and efficient delivery of urban services. These policies are consistent with and imple- ment Policy Section 9.0 of the Community Framework Plan, adopted by Clark County and local jurisdictions, and planning policies 36.70.A.020(2), (11) and (12) of the Wash- ington Growth Management Act A-1 Coordination with Clark County Work with Clark County to facilitate future annexation of lands within the unincorporat- ed RUGA, to facilitate infrastructure mainte- nance prior to annexation. A-2 Annexation before service extensions To receive City -provided urban services, de- veloping or developed unincorporated areas should annex or commit to annexation. A-3 Responsive annexation timelines Annexation timelines should be responsive to the interests of citizens and Ridgefield's abil- ity to provide services. City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate 10-1 A-4 Large annexations encouraged Annexation of large areas, preferably master - planned, are encouraged, although individual property owners should not be prevented from pursuing annexation. Annexations should in- clude both sides of streets and roads, includ- ing rights of -way. A-5 Service transition Explore creative ways to facilitate the transi- tion of government services, particularly pub- lic safety, transportation, parks, utilities, and land use review. A-6 The City will coordinate with the Ridgefield School District on annexation requests so that the School District can continue to meet its service standards. 10-2 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate KEY TERMS AND ACRONYMS Acre A measure of land area containing 43,560 square feet Acre, net An acre of land calculated excluding all unusable spaces (e.g., roads, infrastructure, environmentally sensitive areas) Affordable housing Housing is considered affordable for a household if it costs no more than 30 percent of the gross monthly income for rent or mortgage payments or up to three times annual income for purchasing a home. This is the standard used by the federal and state governments, and the majority of lending institutions. Arterial A major street carrying the traffic of local and collector streets to and from freeways and other major streets. Arterials generally have traffic signals at intersection, and may have limits on driveway spacing and street intersection spacing. BCTI Business Computer Training Institute BNSF Burlington Northern Santa Fe BAS Best Available Science Information that is based on existing professional peer-reviewed scientific research and applicable to local conditions. See WAS 365-195-90off. CAA Clean Air Acts Capital Facilities Permanent physical infrastructure, such as roads, sewer and water lines, police and fire stations, schools, parks and government buildings. CFP Capital Facilities Program Collector A street for traffic moving between major or arterial streets and local streets. Collectors generally provide direct access to properties, although they may have limitations on driveway spacing. CPU Clark Public Utilities CRC Columbia Resource Company CRESA Clark Regional Emergency Services Agency Critical Areas Defined by the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A.030[5] to include wetlands, sensitive fish and wildlife habitat areas, critical recharge areas for groundwater aquifers, and geologically hazardous areas (such as landslide areas, earthquake fault zones, and steep slopes) and floodplains. CSWMP Clark County Solid Waste Management Plan (2000) CTR Commute Trip Reduction Law (1991) C-TRAN Regional transit agency CWA Federal Clean Water Act City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate A-1 CWSP Coordinated Water System Plan Density For residential development, density means the number of housing units per acre. For population, density means the number of people per acre or square mile. Discovery Corridor The Discovery Corridor is an economic development initiative that the City of Ridgefield has advanced in partnership with other Clark County agencies and organizations to establish a vibrant industrial base in central Clark County. DNR Washington State Department of Natural Resources DOH Department of Health EPF Essential Public Facilities ESA Endangered Species Act FEMA Federal Emergency Management Act Floodplain Lowland or relatively flat areas adjoining inland or coastal waters that is subject to a one percent chance of flooding in any given year. Also known as the 100 -year floodplain. FVRLD Fort Vancouver Regional Library District GMA State of Washington Growth Management Act of 1990 Groundwater Water that exists beneath a land surface or beneath the bed of any stream, lake reservoir or other body of surface waters. It is water in a geological formation or structure that stands, flows, percolates or otherwise moves. HCM Highway Capacity Manual (2000) Household All persons living in a dwelling unit, whether or not they are related. Both a single person living in an apartment and a family in a house are considered a "household." HUD US Department of Housing and Urban Development Impact Fee Fee levied on the developer of a project by a city, county or special district as compensation for the expected effects of that development. The Growth Management Act authorizes imposition of traffic, school, and park impact fees on new development, and sets the conditions under which they may be imposed. LDR Low Density Residential. LOS Level of service is an estimate of the quality and performance efficiency of transportation facilities in a community. MDR Medium Density Residential MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area MGD Millions of Gallons per Day MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization A-2 City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate MVMT Million vehicle miles traveled Non -motorized travel Pedestrian or bicycle modes of transportation NWR Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge OAHP Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation OS Open Space. Any parcel or area of land or water that is essentially unimproved, and provides passive recreational opportunities compatible with resource protection. RCW Revised Code of Washington RPD Ridgefield Police Department RTC Washington Regional Transportation Council RTPO Regional Transportation Planning Organization RUACP Ridgefield Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2004-2005 SDC System Development Charges SEPA State Environmental Policy Act (RCW 41.230:, as amended) SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer SMA Shoreline Management Act Stormwater Any flow occurring during or following any form of natural precipitation, and resulting from such precipitation, including snowmelt. SWCAA SW Washington Clean Air Agency TIF Traffic Impact Fee Urban Growth Areas (UGA) Areas designated by a county pursuant to RCW 36.70A where urban growth will be encouraged VBLM Clark County Vacant and Buildable Lands Model V/C Volume/Capacity Ratio Vehicle miles traveled Average number of miles traveled by a vehicle in a given area. This is both a measure of trip length, and of dependency on private vehicles. WAC Washington Administrative Code WDFW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife WUCC Water Utility Coordinating Committee WWTP City of Ridgefield`s Wastewater Treatment Pliant WSD Washington State School for the Deaf WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation WSSB Washington State School for the Blind City of Ridgefield 2013 Comprehensive Plan Upate A-3 NE TIMMENRP 5 / 1 1 1 .. t - '_. —— 9F! e C -E e e _` E E E o e ice'- r NE TIMMENRP 5 / 1 1 1 .. t PROPOSED RDC Chapter 18.235: MIXED-USE DISTRICTS (CMU, WMU, WLS, LRVP) Sections: 18.235.010 Purpose. 18.235.020 Special provisions for the Central Mixed Use District. 18.235.030 Special provisions for the Waterfront Mixed Use District. 18.235.040 Special provisions for the Waterfront Low Scale District. 18.235.050 Special provisions for the Lake River View Protection Overlay District. 18.235.010 Purpose. A. The purpose of the mixed-use districts is to encourage multiple uses within the unique areas that make up Ridgefield's central downtown and waterfront areas. The mixed-use districts include the older commercial and residential core of Ridgefield, the waterfront business center and a waterfront residential area that accommodates floating homes. The three districts are tied together by geography, varying proximity to Lake River, transportation links and public infrastructure. Each district has a distinct character and opportunities, to be emphasized through use and design standards tailored to each of the three districts. B. The mixed-use districts shall allow for a mix of uses in a single building or across an integrated site of multiple buildings, and across the district more broadly. Mixed-use developments are intended to allow for efficient use of land and public services in an urban setting; encourage human interaction and sense of place; create safe, attractive and convenient environments; and increase development flexibility. C. Views of the Lake River Shoreline and the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge are prominent visual features in the central core of Ridgefield. It is the intent of the Lake River View Protection Overlay District (LRVP) to protect these views in order to provide for a unifying feature across all three mixed-use districts. 18.235.020 Special provisions for the Central Mixed Use District. A. Purpose. The purpose of the Central Mixed Use (CMU) district is to provide for and enhance the traditional commercial and civic core of the community in downtown. The district shall: 1. Encourage a mix of uses including residential, commercial, office and civic uses. The district shall provide for flexibility in the mix of uses, both within an individual development and across the district. 2. Accommodate a range of housing types, densities, costs and ownership patterns, with a focus on multifamily and mixed-use residential development including senior housing, in close proximity to employment opportunities and goods and services. 3. Promote the highest quality architectural design and preserve the character -defining elements of the downtown core area as articulated in the 14 Essential Guidelines for Downtown Ridgefield." Design guidelines shall encourage new development and redevelopment that reflects the scale and materials of existing development. RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 1 July 11, 2013 4. Create a pedestrian -friendly atmosphere that promotes pedestrian, bicycle and transit access and lessens traffic impacts and dependence on automobile transportation. 5. Preserve or create open space for the enjoyment of local residents, business employees and the general public, in part through a density transfer program. 6. Provide a transition to adjacent residential neighborhoods that preserves neighborhood livability, and integration with the adjacent waterfront districts. B. Applicability. Full site improvements are required for parking, lighting, landscaping, walkways, storage space, and service areas if a development proposal is: 1. New development; 2. Expanding the square footage of an existing structure by 20 percent; or 3. The construction valuation is 50 percent of the existing site and building valuation. C. Uses. 1. Uses shall comply with the requirements of RDC 18.205. 2. Mix of uses. The CMU district allows and encourages a mixture of land uses, both vertically and horizontally, on one parcel or several contiguous combined parcels, but does not require such a mixture of uses on site, provided the development proposal, when considered in relation to surrounding development, achieves the purposes and objectives of this chapter. D. Lot requirements. 1. Minimum lot area shall be 5,000 square feet. 2. Minimum lot width shall be 50 feet. 3. Minimum lot depth shall be 90 feet. E. Dimensional standards. TABLE 18.235.020-1 1. Minimum front yard setback (street). (1) (2) 0 - 5 feet 2. Maximum front yard setback (street). (2) (3) 0 - 10 feet 3. Minimum side or rear yard (interior) setback: i. Abutting RLD, RMD, PF or POS zones. (2) 5 feet ii. Not abutting one of the above. 0 feet 4. Minimum height (4) 20 - 30 feet 4. Maximum height (5) 65 feet 5. Maximum impervious surface coverage. (6) 100% RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 2 July 11, 2013 Table notes: 1) Parking structures, surface parking areas, service areas, gas station islands and similar paved surfaces shall have a minimum 5 -foot wide setback landscaped to an L2 standard. 2) Underground parking may extend into any required setbacks, provided it is landscaped at ground level. 3) Maximum setback for new corner buildings shall be zero feet. Maximum setback for all other buildings shall be 10 feet. 4) Minimum height for new corner buildings shall be 30 feet or at least two stories. Minimum height for all other buildings shall be 20 feet, which can be accomplished through fagade treatments such as the false front. 5) The Lake River View Protection Overlay District standards, when applicable, supersede this provision. See RDC 18.235.050. 6) Provided setback and site landscaping requirements are met. F. Density. 1. Maximum residential density for development in CMU district shall be 16 dwelling units per acre, except as modified by the density transfer or senior housing bonus up to a maximum of 32 dwelling units per acre. Minimum residential density shall be eight dwelling units per acre, if residential uses are included in the development. 2. Maximum floor area ratio (FAR) for nonresidential development in the CMU district shall be 2.0, except where modified by the density transfer provisions up to a maximum of 3.0. Floor area for residential uses shall not be calculated as part of the FAR for the site and shall be allowed in addition to the FAR limits. Minimum FAR for nonresidential development shall be 0.5. 3. If a building combines residential and nonresidential uses, residential uses shall occupy a minimum of 25 percent to a maximum of 70 percent of the gross floor area of the building. The minimum and maximum standards in 18.235.020.E.1 and 2 for residential density and FAR shall be met. Residential uses shall not occupy the ground floor. G. Street frontage. 1. At least 50 percent of a street frontage not encumbered by protected critical areas shall be occupied by buildings. 2. At least one main entrance of a building shall face directly toward the street. Entrances shall be made physically and visually inviting by means of incorporating a minimum of two of the following entry enhancement features: i. Additional landscaping equal to 10 percent of required site landscaping; ii. At least 200 square feet of paving materials different from the street sidewalk; iii. At least 100 square feet of awning, marquee, or arcade over the entry; iv. At least 200 square feet of pedestrian plaza with landscaping and benches that is attached to the entry; RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 3 July 11, 2013 v. Entry recessed from the fagade surface by at least three feet; or vi. Accent lighting. H. Building design and features. 1. Building design shall reinforce the building's location adjacent to street edge and public space. 2. Building design should emphasize high quality design that implements the provisions contained in the City of Ridgefield's 14 Essential Guidelines for Downtown Ridgefield" document, including but not limited to: Use of colors and architectural details in building design. ii. Articulation of base, body and cornice in building design. iii. Use of stone, brick, stucco and wood as primary materials. 3. New buildings must build a floor to ceiling height of at least 12 feet on the ground floor, and be fire -rated construction to accommodate retail or restaurants. 4. Fenestration. i. Where the lot abuts Main Avenue or Pioneer Street, new buildings must have a minimum of 50 percent of the first floor facing the street treated with transparent windows or doors. ii. Where the lot abuts Main Avenue or Pioneer Street, new buildings must have a minimum of 25 percent of the upper stories facing the street treated with transparent windows. iii. Where the lot abuts Main Avenue or Pioneer Street, buildings not subject to subsections (i) and (ii) must maintain the existing percentage of the first floor facing the street treated with transparent windows or doors, or treat a minimum of 25 percent of the first floor facing the street with transparent windows or doors, whichever is greater. iv. New alley -facing facades must have a minimum of 25 percent of the first floor treated with transparent windows or doors. 5. Any portion of the first floor fagade facing Main Avenue or Pioneer Street without windows or doors that is at least 30 feet in length shall be articulated in one or more of the following ways: i. Incorporating relief through such features as wall projections or recesses, projecting windows, entrances, or other visual relief. ii. Installing a vertical trellis in front of the fagade with climbing vines or planting materials. iii. Awning, marquee or arcade at least four feet and six inches deep, over the full length of sidewalk or walkway adjacent to the building, and minimum eight feet above the walkway level. iv. Providing texture or artwork (mosaic, mural, sculpture, relief, etc.) over the fagade surface. RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 4 July 11, 2013 v. Other equivalent methods that provide for the enhancement of the fagade, as determined by the planning director. 6. New buildings located at an intersection where at least one leg of the intersection is Main Avenue or Pioneer Street shall accentuate the building corner facing the intersection by including architectural treatment that emphasizes the corner, such as: balconies, turret, corner accentuating roof line, sculpture, chamfered corners, distinctive use of materials, canopy, and bay window. 7. The following accessory structures shall be screened by a fence or landscaping to a value of 80 percent year-round opacity from public view along Main Avenue or Pioneer Street: i. All on-site service areas, loading zones, outdoor storage areas, garbage collection, recycling areas, and similar activities. ii. Utility vaults, ground -mounted mechanical units, trash receptacles and other similar structures. iii. Satellite dishes or pedestrian -oriented waste receptacles along walkways are not required to comply with this standard. 8. Mechanical units, utility equipment, elevator equipment, and telecommunication equipment located on the roof shall be grouped together, incorporated into the roof design, and/or screened from adjacent walkways to a value of 80 percent year-round opacity. Signs. Signs are permitted according to the provisions of Chapter 18.710. J. Lighting. Lighting shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 18.715. In addition, lighting shall comply with the following standards: All building entrances and storefronts shall be illuminated. 2. Lighting fixtures should complement the design of the project in reference to the character, style and scale of the project. Parking area light post height shall not exceed 25 feet. K. Parking. Off-street parking and loading shall be provided as required in RDC Chapter 18.720. 2. Parking areas shall be located so as to minimize their visual impact. Parking shall be placed at the side or rear of buildings, to encourage pedestrian, transit and bicycle access. Parking shall not be located between the front of a building and the street except as a nonconforming use pursuant to Chapter 18.340. On corner lots where one leg of the intersection is an arterial, minor arterial, or collector street, the parking area shall be no closer than the lesser of 100 feet or 25 percent of the street frontage, measured horizontally along the frontage, from the intersecting rights-of-way of the arterial, minor arterial, or collector street with another street. L. Landscaping. Landscaping shall meet the requirements of RDC 18.725. RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 5 July 11, 2013 2. There is no minimum percentage of required landscaping in the CMU district, provided setbacks and buffers are provided as required by RDC 18.725.050. M. Fences Fences shall comply with the provisions of RDC 18.740. 2. Fences designed for privacy, security and/or screening shall be: i. Made of material that is compatible with the building design, such as repetition of the building material on fence columns and/or stringers. ii. Used only in combination with trellis, landscaping, or other design alternatives to separate such fence from the pedestrian environment along Main Avenue or Pioneer Street. N. Outdoor uses. 1. Outdoor storage or display areas, excluding outdoor seating or event areas, shall occupy an area no larger than 10 percent of gross floor area except for plant sales that shall occupy no more than 75 percent of gross floor area. 2. Permanent outdoor seating and event areas, cumulatively, are limited to 20 percent of the gross site area. The Planning Director may issue a temporary use permit for the use of up to 30 percent of the gross site area for temporary outdoor seating and event space consistent with RDC 18.205.015.F. The City Council, in a public meeting, may authorize a temporary use permit for temporary outdoor seating and event space that uses more than 30 percent of the gross site area. 3. Outdoor uses in the public right-of-way are prohibited unless the city expressly authorizes the temporary use of the right-of-way, e.g. for sidewalk sales or other special events. O. Open space density transfer. 1. Purpose. The purpose of density transfer regulations is to provide an incentive to property owners for encouraging the provision of open space, while maintaining the overall density of the CMU district. 2. Applicability. i. All land within the CMU district is eligible for designation as open space for the purpose of density transfer under this subsection. ii. Trails through land designated for other use, or isolated open areas such as pedestrian plazas fully integrated in other use areas, shall not qualify for transfer of density. iii. Density may be transferred to any parcel within the CMU district provided resulting development meets all other provisions of the CMU district contained in this section. 3. Transfer rates. Transfer of density from land planned for open space shall be at a rate of either eight dwelling units per acre or an FAR of 1.0, as elected by the applicant. Dwelling units or FAR to be transferred shall be calculated based on the net buildable acreage of the open space lot. The number of bonus dwelling units shall be determined by RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 6 July 11, 2013 rounding fractional numbers to the nearest whole number and rounding up to the nearest whole number from 0.5. 4. Lots qualifying to receive a transfer of density must be a minimum of 5,000 square feet. 5. The application of this subchapter shall not result in the creation of a single open space lot with a gross area that is less than 80 percent of the minimum lot size in the CMU district, nor shall any lot dimension (width, depth) be created that is less than 80 percent of the minimum required dimension. 6. The property owner shall provide a guarantee that the land qualifying for such transfer shall be protected as open space. Such guarantees may include, but are not limited to: conservation covenants or easements; mitigation plans; designation of open space areas to be held in common ownership; public dedications or easements; and, special setbacks from protected resources. 7. Should the City not accept dedication of the property, the property owner and City Council shall enter into a Development Agreement which shall establish the requirements and standards for the upkeep and maintenance of the property, in perpetuity, and the property owner shall record a covenant that runs with the land requiring that the owner of the property shall maintain the property in accordance with the requirements and standards of the Development Agreement, in perpetuity. 8. Process. The property owner may apply for open space density transfer concurrent with other applications for the same parcel(s). Applications shall be processed as a Type II request or higher, depending on the level of review for concurrent applications. i. The application must include a site plan delineating the boundaries of the proposed open space parcel(s) and receiving parcel(s). ii. The application must include calculations of the area in square feet of each lot proposed, and resulting density. P. Senior housing bonus. 1. Purpose. The purpose of the senior housing bonus is to encourage the construction of housing which is accessible and affordable to seniors of Ridgefield. 2. Applicability. The senior housing bonus may be used for any multifamily or mixed-use development in the CMU zone. The bonus shall be part of any subdivision, PUD, binding site plan, or site plan application. If the bonus is approved, the use shall comply with the requirements for this section for the life of the use. 3. Requirements. Senior housing restrictions. a. Age restriction. The development shall be restricted to persons 55 years of age or older and handicapped persons as defined by federal law. At least half of the total housing units shall be occupied by persons 55 years of age or older, except for spouses of such residents for whom there is no minimum age requirement. RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 7 July 11, 2013 b. Conversion from occupancy by seniors. No conversion of occupancy to persons other than those specified by subsection (a) shall be allowed without first complying with the underlying zoning and site requirements. The bonus shall not apply to the property if it is no longer occupied by those persons specified by subsection (a), and the bonus housing units shall be eliminated unless otherwise authorized by the applicable development regulations. ii. Density bonus. If a senior housing bonus application is approved, developments may exceed the allowed density of the CMU zone by as much as 50 percent, up to a maximum of 24 dwelling units per acre. a. The number of bonus units shall be determined by rounding fractional numbers to the nearest whole number and rounding up to the nearest whole number from 0.5. b. An agreement in a form approved by the City shall be recorded as a covenant or other legally binding limitation on the use and intensity of the property requiring compliance with the requirements of this section and requiring that the age restrictions on housing units created under this section shall be upheld for the life of the project. This covenant or other legally binding limitation on the use and intensity of the property shall run with the land, shall be binding on the assigns, heirs and successors of the applicant, and shall be recorded in Clark County's real property records before the use is occupied. iii. Application for and use of the density bonus. The density bonus shall only be used in the multifamily or mixed-use development for which it is approved. The bonus application shall be made as part of the first discretionary application made for the project. The decision maker for this application shall decide the request for the bonus. iv. Site requirements. All site requirements and development standards of the CMU district shall apply to uses that obtain a senior housing bonus. Additionally, developments shall be designed to project a residential appearance through architectural design, landscaping, the use of building materials, and surface lengths. 18.235.030 Special provisions for the Waterfront Mixed Use (WMU) District. A. Purpose. The purpose of the WMU district is to encourage multiple uses while providing an environment for public access to and enjoyment of the waterfront. The WMU district shall accommodate both employers and visitors. The district encourages development that will establish a waterfront where people can be productive, work, and create value while also serving as a destination that caters to those who want to visit, recreate, relax, and shop. The goal of this zone is to implement the Ridgefield Urban Area Comprehensive Plan (RUACP) revitalize the waterfront as a publicly accessible shoreline for community gathering and recreation. B. Function of the WMU District. 1. Provide responsible economic reuse of a brownfield site. Redevelopment within this district will create jobs, provide shopping and housing opportunities, and offer education on the environmental history and stewardship of the area. RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 8 July 11, 2013 2. Provide public access to the water. This district is the nearest public waterfront and access to the Columbia River for the community of North Clark County, and therefore, access to the water is an essential element of this district. 3. Transition to the Wildlife Refuge. The proximity and relationship the WMU district has with the National Wildlife Refuge is unique. Development in the district should embrace this bond by incorporating connectivity to the environment, the active community, and vibrant ecology. Design guidelines for this district shall be conscious of the transition to the Wildlife Refuge and shall minimize impacts to wildlife by utilizing construction techniques and building materials likely to reduce impacts to the bird population. 4. Relationship to Downtown. Integration of the WMU district with the Downtown Mixed Use district is a key element for successful redevelopment of the waterfront. Both the CMU and WMU districts will benefit from well-planned adjacent districts that accommodate a variety of users and business opportunities. C. Uses. 1. Uses. Uses shall comply with the requirements of RDC 18.205 and 18.235.030.C. 2. Review procedures. For any uses proposed in the WMU district, the proposal shall demonstrate compliance with: Concurrency and level -of -service standards of the city's capital facilities plan; ii. Adopted engineering standards; iii. An approved master planned subdivision; and iv. Any development agreement applicable to property within this district. 3. Primary and accessory uses. The planning director shall distinguish between primary and accessory uses as follows: L Primary uses are uses which are listed as permitted or limited uses in Table 18.205.020-1 and Table 18.235.030-1. ii. Accessory uses have the following characteristics: a. Occupy less gross floor area than the permitted use(s); b. Do not occupy the majority of storefront area visible from the primary entrance; c. Signage is less than provided for the primary use(s); d. Do not have significant adverse impacts on the city, the environment, or the surrounding neighborhood which cannot be adequately mitigated through compliance with the RDC; e. Are listed as a permitted or limited use in Table 18.205.020-1 or Table 18.235.030-1 or are accessory to a permitted or limited use as defined in RDC 18.100.280.A. 4. The uses in Table 18.235.030-1 are intended to provide for specific uses appropriate for the waterfront in the WMU. These uses supplement the uses listed in Table 18.205.020-1. Together these uses are intended to encourage a mix of uses in the WMU. RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 9 July 11, 2013 i. Permitted uses. Permitted uses are listed in Table 18.235.030-1 with a "P". These uses are allowed, subject to site plan review if required per RDC 18.500, if they comply with the development standards and other regulations contained in the RDC. ii. Limited Uses. Allowed uses with additional limitations are listed in Table 18.235.030-1 with an "L". If the property proposed for development is owned by the Port of Ridgefield, limited uses are allowed if they comply with the limitations listed in the footnotes to Table 18.235.030-1, as determined by the Planning Director through a Type I review, and the development standards and other regulations contained in the RDC. Limited uses in Table 18.235.030-1 are subject to site plan review as governed by RDC 18.500. Limited uses shall not be approved unless the application includes a Resolution made by the Port of Ridgefield Commissioners that the proposed use was anticipated in the master plan approved by the City. iii. Prohibited Uses. Uses listed in Table 18.235.030-1 with an "N" are specifically prohibited. iv. Notes. A (#) references specific review/approval criteria as noted. TABLE 18.235.030-1 SPECIFIC WMU LAND USE USE A. Marine Related Uses. P 1. Public safety docks and boathouses for emergency services or public safety officers such as Fire Districts, Police, Coast Guard, and similar services. 2. Marine fuel sales. I P P 3. Private docks and boathouses in support of a commercial or educational use. Private docks shall be accessory to a research company or educational institution located within the WMU district. 4. Private docks and boathouses. Private docks not accessory to a research L(1) company or educational institution located within the WMU district_ L(2) 5. Floating restaurant and floating retail uses. Floating retail uses shall directly serve the boating public or shall be retail uses which support water recreation. P 6. Recreational boat launches and associated vehicle/trailer parking. 7. Water taxi. P B. Employment Uses. 1. Assembly of finished products. L L 12. Waterfront light manufacturing not t -o exceed 10,000 square feet, and not involving noise, vibration, or odors beyond the interior of.the building which are not common, or otherwise incompatible in a predominantly commercial district. Waterfront light manufacturing may include winemaking, breweries, bakeries, assembly of finished products, artisan crafts utilizing welding or construction, RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 10 July 11, 2013 fabrication of recreational products, woodworking, small machine repair when most noise or odors from such repair can be contained within the place of business, artists' studio, and similar uses. 3. Waterfront light manufacturing as provided in B-2 above, except the product or products manufactured at that location are made available for sale to retail customers at the location at which they are made. 4. Outdoor storage (covered or uncovered). P L (3) 5. Warehousing, including mini warehouses. L (4) C. Heavy Industrial Uses. 1. Wood treatment industry. N N 2.All other heavy industrial uses. D. Transportation Uses. 2. Public transit stops and station. L 3. Passenger rail station. L E. Public Recreation and Open Space Uses. 1. Outdoor meeting and gathering spaces. 2. Public restrooms P P 3. Public plazas and outdoor markets. 4. Art and sculpture installations. I P P 5. Public information kiosks. P Table Notes: 1) Private docks and boathouses will be approved subject to the Special Provisions in Section 18.235.030.E. 2) Floating restaurants will be approved subject to the Special Provisions in Section 18.235.030.E. 3) Outdoor storage shall be allowed secondary to primary uses if it is screened according to the provisions of Section 18.725, and does not cover more than 10 percent of the gross site area of the primary lot of parcel where the primary use is located. Outdoor storage not directly associated with a primary use, such as storage of boats, trailers, building materials, equipment or similar objects, shall only be permitted to the extent expressly allowed in a development agreement adopted by the Port of Ridgefield and the City of Ridgefield. 4) Consistent with the purpose of the WMU zoning district, warehousing is a prohibited use in the WMU zone unless the Ridgefield City Council and the Port of Ridgefield adopt a development agreement which expressly allows warehousing and which delineates the scope and intensity of warehousing allowed. RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 11 July 11, 2013 5. Similar Use. In addition to uses listed in Table 18.235.030-1, the planning director shall determine whether a use not clearly identified in Table 18.235.030-1 as "Permitted", "Limited", or "Prohibited" is sufficiently similar to uses identified in Table 18.235.030-1, or an approved master plan, and if similar to a permitted or limited use or use approved in the master plan, the use is allowed subject to all other provisions of this chapter. This determination will be made through a Type I process. Submittal requirements for a Type I use determination review require a detailed description of the use, applicable fee, a resolution made by the Port of Ridgefield Commissioners that the proposed use was anticipated in the master plan approved by the city, a completed Type I application form, and additional supporting materials the planning director deems essential to the review. The planning director shall complete the review under the Type I application process pursuant to RDC 18.310.060. Appeals of the planning director's determination shall be allowed pursuant to RDC 18.310.100. D. Site Requirements. TABLE 18.235.030-2 SITE REQUIREMENTS A. Minimum area for new development. WMU one B. Minimum lot area. C. Minimum lot width. (1) �50 5,000 square feet feet D. Minimum lot depth. 30 feet E. Minimum front yard setback. 0 feet F. Maximum front yard setback. G. Minimum side or rear yard setback: 25 feet 1. Abutting RLD and RMD zones. 10 feet 2. Abutting other zones. 0 feet H. Minimum landscaped area. 15%(2) I. Maximum impervious surface coverage. 85%(3) J. Maximum height. 75 feet (4) Table Notes: 1) Minimum width does not apply to the flag portion of a flag lot which shall be a minimum of fifteen feet wide. 2) Minimum landscaped area can be consolidated to include additional lots when approved through a master plan and/or development agreement. 3) Maximum impervious area can be consolidated to include additional lots when approved through a master plan and/or development agreement. RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 12 July 11, 2013 4) Rooftop mechanical units are excluded from maximum height requirements when screening is supplied for the mechanical unit. To be exempt from height limitations, screening provided which is the same height as the mechanical unit, constructed of materials consistent with the architectural features of the structure including roof elements, and measuring no more than thirty percent of the building length from north to south is permitted. Architectural features, including but not limited to, parapets, roof elements, mechanical screening improvements, and aesthetic architectural features are also excluded from maximum height regulations. E. Special Provisions. 1. Public access to the waterfront. All lots abutting a shoreline must provide reasonable public access to the shoreline for Lake River. Reasonable public access can be provided through vehicular and/or pedestrian access in public city rights-of-way or other private public easements. 2. Parking lots. Parking lots shall not be located closer to the shoreline than occupied buildings. Existing parking associated with uses existing on the date this district is established shall be permitted to continue but no expansion will be allowed. 3. Nonconforming uses. In recognition of the time needed to attract uses within the WMU district, the period of discontinuance of non -conforming use pursuant to Section 18.340.040.A.5. shall be two years. 4. Relocation of existing uses. In recognition of the need to relocate structures and uses within the WMU district to accommodate on-going environmental remediation of property within the district, the businesses lawfully operating within the district on the date the district is established may be relocated, moved, or reconstructed within the district and will continue to be considered as permitted uses. 5. View corridors. Views of the waterfront and of the adjacent National Wildlife Refuge are an important amenity to the waterfront development and the adjacent residential and commercial downtown districts. To protect these views, and provide for waterfront development as planned, view corridors shall be provided as follows: no structures with a height of more than 25 feet shall be located within view corridors established within the westerly projections of Depot, 9th, Cook, Hall, Elm, Maple, Division, and Mill Streets to the mean low water line of Lake River, and are measured 30 feet from each side of the centerline of these streets. The city may permit exceptions to the view corridors to allow obstruction of up to two of these corridors or may modify the restrictions on height and width standards through a Type II process, when accompanied by a resolution adopted by the Port of Ridgefield Port Commission at a public meeting. 6. View sheds. View sheds have been established in order to preserve maximum views of the National Wildlife Refuge from downtown, the adjacent hillside south of Ash Street, and residential areas north of Cook Street. To protect these views, no structures with a height of more than 45 feet shall be located south of the westerly projection of the centerline of Ash Street or north of the westerly projection of the centerline of Cook Street. Exceptions allowable to height limitation in Table 18.235.030-2 (site requirements) are permitted in the view shed protection area. RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 13 July 11, 2013 7. Private docks. Private docks, or limited access docks, are generally inconsistent with the goals of the WMU district. However, in limited cases where public access is incompatible with a proposed use, a private or limited access dock may be permissible. In the site plan review process, the applicant must first demonstrate why public access is not desirable for the dock. Appropriate reasons may include public safety concerns with access to the dock, possible interference with a critical function of the dock if public access were permitted, the need for additional privacy to protect research or trade secrets, or the need for emergency services security. In these limited cases, the city may consider the needs for the private dock in comparison to the goals of the WMU district zone and any applicable master plan. The city may permit private docks only when the request is accompanied by a resolution adopted by the Port of Ridgefield Port Commission at a public meeting. 8. Floating retail or restaurants. The waterfront is a limited resource and water -dependent uses must be given priority along the water and adjacent shoreline. Floating retail and restaurants are generally consistent with the purpose of the WMU district if limited according to the provisions of this section. Floating retail uses are limited to retail uses which cater to the boating or water recreating public. Floating restaurant uses are permitted if they promote public access and enjoyment of the waterfront and if they are designed to increase public enjoyment and access. Floating restaurant uses are also permitted when the design does not obstruct public use of walkways or marina facilities. The city may permit floating retail or restaurants only when the request is accompanied by a resolution adopted by the Port of Ridgefield Port Commission at a public meeting. 9. Building orientation. Buildings should be oriented with the front of the building facing the internal circulation corridor. Buildings should generally be oriented along an east -west axis when located between the internal circulation and Lake River. Buildings between the internal circulation and the railroad tracks can be oriented along a north -south or east -west axis. Buildings within two hundred feet of the Lake River shoreline must include an entrance and storefront display on the west side of the building. F. Landscaping. Landscaping shall be provided as required in Section18.230.070 to provide a minimum of 15 percent landscaped area. Landscaping shall meet all requirements detailed in RDC 18.725. G. Parking and Loading. Off-street parking and loading shall be provided as required in Chapter 18.720. Parking garages are exempt from parking lot landscaping standards and dimensional standards for surface parking lots. Parking dimensions and drive aisles shall be designed to promote efficient use of parking areas and provide adequate passenger car maneuverability. H. Signage. Signs are permitted according to the provisions of Chapter 18.710 18.235.040 Special provisions for the Waterfront Low Scale (WLS) District. A. Purpose. 1. The Waterfront Low Scale (WLS) District encompasses the area bounded by Railroad Avenue, Mill Street and Lake River. 2. The WLS district is intended to implement provisions of the Ridgefield Urban Area Comprehensive Plan for well designed, mixed-use development along the Lake River RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 14 July 11, 2013 waterfront. The purpose of the district is to preserve and enhance the natural resources base of the area and to connect the city to its waterfront. The district shall provide for a mix of uses including existing waterfront housing, primarily floating homes; visual access to the waterfront; and commercial uses. The district shall provide for primarily water -oriented uses within the shorelines of the City that meet the provisions of the City's adopted Shoreline Master Program (SMP). B. Shorelines restrictions. 1. The city may approve developments within the city's shorelines only after the applicant meets the provisions contained in the City's adopted Shoreline Master Program. Applicants are required to obtain any required shorelines permits in addition to land use permits required by this Title. See Chapter 18.820, Shoreline Management. 2. Applicability. If the provisions of the SMP conflict with other applicable local ordinances, policies and regulations, including this section, the more restrictive shall apply. C. Uses. 1. Uses shall comply with the provisions of RDC 18.205. 2. Uses in over -water structures. Uses in over -water structures must comply with all use regulations applying to the upland lot that the floating structures are attached to. In addition, uses in over -water structures must comply with the adopted SMP and the Ridgefield Building Code for over -water structures. D. Lot requirements. 1. There shall be no minimum or maximum lot size for development in the WLS district. 2. The minimum lot width shall be 50 feet. E. Threshold for design and site improvements. Conformance with RDC 18.235.040.F -J is required if a development proposal is: 1. New development; 2. Expansion of the gross floor area of an existing structure by 20 percent; or 3. Construction valued at 50 percent of the existing site and building valuation. F. Dimensional standards. TABLE 18.235.040-1 Table Notes: RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 15 July 11, 2013 WLS A. Minimum front yard setback (street). (1) R4 0 ft (1) B. Minimum side or rear yard (interior) setback: 0 ft C. Maximum height 35 ft D. Maximum impervious surface coverage. 85%(2) Table Notes: RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 15 July 11, 2013 1) Front yard setback for residential developments (excluding mixed-use developments), parking structures, surface parking areas, service areas, gas station islands, and similar paved surfaces shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide measured from the back of the sidewalk, and be fully landscaped to an L2 standard. 2) For over -water structures, requirements apply to upland lot only. G. Design standards. 1. Building design shall reinforce the building's location adjacent to street edge and public space. Building design shall also reinforce the connection with the Lake River waterfront. 2. Where the lot abuts Mill Street, at least 50 percent of the lot's street frontage not encumbered by protected critical areas shall be occupied by buildings 3. Where the lot abuts Mill Street, at least one main entrance of a building shall face directly toward the street. Entrances shall be made physically and visually inviting by means of incorporating a minimum of two of the following entry enhancement features attached to the entry: Additional landscaping equal to 10 percent of required site landscaping; At least 200 square feet of paving materials different from the street sidewalk; iii. At least 100 square feet of awning, marquee, or arcade over the entry. iv. At least 500 square feet of pedestrian plaza with landscaping and benches that is attached to the entry. v. Entry recessed from the facade surface by at least three (3) feet; or vi. Accent lighting. 4. Where the lot abuts Mill Street, nonresidential buildings must have a minimum of 50 percent of the first floor facing the street treated with transparent windows or doors. Any portion of the first floor facade without windows or doors that is at least 30 feet in length shall be articulated in one or more of the following ways: i. Incorporating relief through such features as wall projections or recesses, projecting windows, entrances, or other visual relief. ii. Installing a vertical trellis in front of the fagade with climbing vines or planting materials. iii. Providing texture or artwork (mosaic, mural, sculpture, relief, etc.) over the fagade surface. iv. Other equivalent methods that provide for the enhancement of the facade, as determined by the planning director. 5. The following accessory structures shall be screened by a fence or landscaping to a value of 80 percent year-round opacity from public view along Mill Street: i. All on-site service areas, loading zones, outdoor storage areas, garbage collection, recycling areas, and similar activities. RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 16 July 11, 2013 ii. Utility vaults, ground -mounted mechanical units, trash receptacles and other similar structures. iii. Satellite dishes or pedestrian -oriented waste receptacles along walkways are not required to comply with this standard. 6. Mechanical units, utility equipment, elevator equipment, and telecommunication equipment located on the roof shall be grouped together, incorporated into the roof design, and/or screened from adjacent walkways. H. Signs. 1. Signs are permitted according to the provisions of Chapter 18.710. Lighting. 1. Lighting shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 18.715. J. Parking. 1. Off-street parking and loading shall be provided as required in RDC Chapter 18.720 in addition to the following standards. 2. Parking visible from Mill Street shall be screened to 80 percent year-round level of opacity. 3. Parking lots shall be located so as to minimize their visual impact. Parking shall be placed at the side or rear of buildings, to encourage pedestrian, bus and bicycle access. 4. For development within the shorelines of the city, parking shall be located landward of the primary structure as far as possible or within the primary structure where parking is allowed as accessory to a permitted use. 5. Floating home moorages must provide a minimum of 1.5 parking spaces and a maximum of two parking spaces per floating home. The parking is to be provided on the upland lot to which the floating home moorage is attached. K. Landscaping. 1. Landscaping shall comply with the provisions of RDC 18.725. 2. A minimum of 15 percent landscaped area shall be required for development in the WLS zoning district. L. Fences. 1. Fences shall meet the requirements of RDC 18.740. 2. Fences designed for privacy, security and/or screening shall be: i. Made of material that is compatible with the building design, such as repetition of the building material on fence columns and/or stringers. ii. Used only in combination with trellis, landscaping, or other design alternatives to separate such fence from the pedestrian environment along Mill Street. M. View corridors. RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 17 July 11, 2013 1. Views of the waterfront and of the adjacent National Wildlife Refuge are an important amenity to the waterfront development and the adjacent residential and commercial downtown districts. To protect these views view corridors shall be provided as follows: no structures with a height of more than 25 feet shall be located within view corridors established within the westerly projections of Mill, Simons, Pioneer, and Sargent Streets to the mean low water line of Lake River, and are measured 30 feet from each side of the centerline of these streets. The city may permit exceptions to the view corridors to allow obstruction of up to one of these corridors or may modify the restrictions on height and width standards through a Type III process. 18.235.050 Special provisions for the Lake River View Protection Overlay District. A. Purpose. 1. The Lake River shoreline and the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge are prominent landmarks in the central core of Ridgefield. Views of these areas produce a variety of significant and tangible benefits for both residents and visitors to Ridgefield. Views contribute to the economic environment of the city by substantially enhancing property values. Views contribute to the visual environment of the city by providing inspiring panoramic vistas, and creating distinctive supplements to architectural design. Views contribute to the cultural environment of the city by providing a unifying effect, allowing individuals to relate different areas of the city to each other in space and time. 2. To maintain and enhance the beneficial effects of the Lake River shoreline and Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge views from the central core, the city shall create an overlay district that limits the heights of buildings and structures that may impede such views. 3. The goals of this overlay are to provide visual access along the westerly projections of the public right-of-ways west of Main Avenue and to encourage the preservation of upper story view sheds westward from Main Avenue over individual lots. 4. To achieve these purposes the height of buildings shall stair step down the hill from Main Avenue to the western edge of the district. In addition, building and structure orientation should both enhance view shed opportunities from the building and should minimize obstruction of view sheds from adjacent buildings and structures. B. District. The Lake River View Protection Overlay District shall extend from the centerline of Sargent Street to the centerline of Mill Street and from the centerline of Main Avenue to the eastern edge of the main line of the BNSF railroad tracks. 1. View corridors within the overlay district include Sargent, Pioneer, Simons and Mill, streets west of Main Street. 2. View sheds include views of the Lake River shoreline and the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge over private property from Main Avenue westward. 3. Within the overlay district: i. The elevation differential between the centerline of Main Avenue and the centerline of First Avenue, as extended north to south through the district, ranges between six to 12 feet; RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 18 July 11, 2013 ii. The elevation differential between the centerline of First Avenue and the centerline of Railroad Avenue, as extended north to south through the district, ranges between 20 to 32; and iii. The overall elevation differential between the centerline of Main Avenue and Railroad Avenue, as extended north to south through the district, ranges between 26 to 44 feet. C. Applicability. If a structure, lot, or other parcel of land lies partly within the overlay district, that part of the structure, lot, or parcel shall meet all the requirements for this district as set forth in this subsection. D. Relationship to underlying zoning. With the exception of the maximum building or structure height requirement, all other requirements of the underlying zoning district shall apply to development within this district. E. Maximum building and structure height limits. Maximum building and structure heights shall conform with Figure 18.235.050-1. The height of buildings shall stair step down from east to west in order to preserve the upper story views from upslope buildings. Property owners are encouraged to maximize viewing opportunities from western -facing facades. RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 19 July 11, 2013 FIGURE 18.235.050-1 F. Exemptions. 1. Development in the CMU district that qualifies for a senior housing bonus as detailed in RDC 18.235.020.N shall be exempt from the maximum building and structure height limits listed in 18.235.050.E. 2. Public works infrastructure, including but not limited to transportation and lighting structures, shall be exempt from the maximum building and structure height requirements listed in 18.235.050.E. G. Review Required. 1. As part of an application for any proposed land use action within the LRVP overlay, the applicant shall provide a scaled map showing the location, species, diameter at breast height, and approximate crown diameter at its widest point of all trees and tree canopies within the boundaries of this district. RDC 18.235 Mixed Use Districts Page 20 July 11, 2013 RIDGEFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE 18.210.130: DOWNTOWN TRANSITION AREA 18.210.130 Special provisions for the Downtown Transition Area. A. Purpose. To accommodate potential future expansion of the CMU district, which encompasses the City's traditional commercial and civic core, the Downtown Transition Area allows for limited commercial activity in the residential districts surrounding the CMU district. B. District boundaries. The Downtown Transition Area (DTA) shall be bounded by the centerline of Sargent Street extended to 8th Avenue, 8th Avenue south of Pioneer Street, 5th Avenue north of Pioneer Street, Division Street, and Railroad Avenue, exclusive of properties zoned RMD-16, CMU or P/OS. The district shall also include parcels abutting Division Street on the north side of the street between N Railroad Avenue and N 5th Avenue, and parcels abutting Sargeant Street on the south side of the street between S 3rd Avenue and S 5th Avenue. The district boundaries shall be as illustrated in Figure 18.210.130-1. Figure 18.210.130-1 .,taiw Mali r -i C. Uses. Within the Downtown Transition Area, limited commercial and office activity may be allowed provided: 1. Use is located on a lot platted 10,000 square feet or less zoned RLD. RDC 18.210.130 Downtown Transition Area Page 1 2. The building in which the use is located was lawfully established prior to the effective date of this ordinance. Existing buildings may be expanded by no more than 20 percent of the existing total floor area. Non-residential SDCs, impact fees, and building and life safety codes may apply to proposed alterations or expansions. Use meets the definition of General Office, General Retail Trade/Services, Eating and Drinking Establishment use types as defined in RDC 18.100. D. Review. The planning director shall review applications for uses in the Downtown Transition Area not allowed by the underlying zoning as well as proposed expansions and alterations consistent with RDC 18.210.130.0 through a Minor Site Plan Review as described in RDC 18.500.030.B. E. Development standards. The parking, landscaping, lighting, and sign standards for the CMU zone shall apply to proposed nonresidential uses in the DTA. F. Adjustment of dimensional standards for building expansions. The city will attempt to allow flexibility in lot coverage and dimensional standards set forth in RDC 18.210.030 and 18.210.040 so long as the adjustments to the standards are consistent with the character of the Downtown Transition Area as follows: 1. The burden of demonstrating that the proposed relaxation of the base zone dimensional standards is consistent with the character of the DTA lies solely on the applicant and shall be supported by substantial evidence, including, but not limited to, demonstrating consistency with the "14 Essential Guidelines for Downtown Ridgefield." 2. Building setbacks to the street may be reduced if the proposed structure is of the same, or substantially similar, scale, mass, height and composition of materials as 50 percent of like types of buildings within a distance of two blocks of the proposed structure on the same street. 3. The building height must meet the requirements for the underlying residential zone. 4. The request for flexibility may exceed 20 percent of the numeric base zone standard without application of RDC 18.350.030.6. RDC 18.210.130 Downtown Transition Area Page 2 ifl M ifl h O.M V! n O, O O O O N N N N N M M M M M E O 0 z a L O O N A E U N L CO' Oil O T A Co t N Gl 0 0. w v v 0 L r d an ai FL - d N M �t CL t V L- ?, N 0 0 �+ C O V —y W A j 0- w� �✓ 1✓ N A v u Q � t^ c A u E -E L_ m — A d.1 LL d N C O dl O C U J E i+ v sj M 9 d d ai L K H m H f m y C C L A a f0 L H to m N m H u M IT In a N N N N N iQ t u L- 0 0 O V —y W w� �✓ 1✓ N C 3 H 0 � t^ c A 3 y CJ m O A l0 O` UC an 0 C N d v' M 9 d d ai L K H m H f a f0 L u C O aJ u O L 4J c rM oc^n d ur E o n wr o a o L A o. Y O •°' M«� N s,wOY v`wCoO O C ; '; $ w cw= is Z a v cwFa y;omm a^°wE° c w % c. ° G00 Sc MO w R ci E a ar N o N E y c 0m w w c w yv_ Y` ? ; E - � w K 'a y K w d O w L : m 7 C w G w G j O G L y N Y O C c '0 V 5 = V on O O v m ^C 7 d w M O G 3 : « o M� a N Y c G ar C ur ` ,mo . 0 w_D w : o O o m Q S w E _c e r o c� rFn aro 3> .0 O0x 3 3y a a i O E4+ D aE Lo E O y V Y w O cuo O0 ° w a 3 c c c `o w 3 c° c i a G L D w d ',^' ya.E Y a w rp w _r N w C m a w u w v w a w u E o c E 'S E w o 9 s to v yo ~ > > o=ir v in 3 > :5 n $ m v"i CO N n V v E yon c ; H c w v N m yw on --Or- v v m u y w ar y u w ` w V d t a V H C y3c:0� L O L a 41 C N O d O c `Do cyo m N 3:wm 'a m v o y w y E Y y n42 E vL, $ :- c iO o v v y c o_ o 'w w m w u d c a N w w yL w u y q C A w O 0 E v v A c O 1 E O0 ° o Q o w �i a ='o o a_ w b m w On V C O 70 N c O a m N y 3 'S v v " $ .s v K V .5 •p w on N w d V C c m on y L y d w O w i0 9 a m aa+ N 'w0 aL_r > H w 4 an a t C pl Nr m a E d ~IE N w A C c 0 C C L U V O w M W w w 9 w Q a Z-" N v Yc E a, ; o e e u_ e v w .o e c C 0 c ,w„ c o o f on `o c c o c •o +' c w 3 E w •w w w E v c o m cr C N c E ' •g y-vo on v;w w c w a a o c'AOa4cu .^ ° `ao v"y ajcn dvm woe3 Y>� m v v `$ 0 E aN '> o o y o C d vta _ 'E m = .; cm H `o w n K Fc S E' air A E > e w « o 0. c N y ai e p w u t j E N Z c E E '' m m E E a o$ E Yc w w y o 'S c °c v " w ro t E' O. ' a - - £ E Lw, aN E E w E m y R au 3 v `o v a m` o +° o c o u 0 u u v y= �, m E n °i y o E `o E a A c ,y s i t v a' a m E u y u o °w E n 3 y v c d- c t :° u y CC, N O w oJn _ -O - v 3 c .v o m m g c E w ti ° E o. u +• q o ° 3 ,ac, 72 c « u L n w v- `c E y o0 o f °�' °" ,v_ v« 0 O- O �n N C �! C w vOUi u C J v w 3 M "O $ L R c "O E W N u N Jv°i u `C C y c c° 3 y y w c« m Y o R 3 0° wu lu u d -00 ° a j R w u N T- Y L N OII J'o U yw« N= n n d m -O w w v i Z° r m E W v y y ° `o t 'u" o` c v v i2 cc rn 3 w- w m m E_w c i $ v� w 2 .Q c Q p an v u C F U w 1 N w E .N+ N p� > 00 c d G L ai .` w E u m a>, w E 'w Y = v w `o v '" 3 E v i. -r y v X w t«« °tf ° A o o e R o > A° N E c n« 0 5 y e u o o w v o x u u u° E 3 O E a J J 7 C pl l w a v 3 .................................... w w w c N « Q 3 lbW O m ` 9 'E E O y v Y ° m e w J t o w N E E y t o o w$ ;G E o E v E tm a w w a >> o n E c m w : C O a N o p C z v y w a o C E 'C q m o u E u '° ao w o y > O w 3 R° m .ym. m Y 'o°' ai N O « a 'E o � N d > a C EO N W W A N N u C Q L L75 Q i C S d v3 m -o +'_.� O w e o 3 .? v `w ,wn y :� "n O c v m o 0 o v Y m$° c A « o i2 C>i •G R 7 a c c w `w ; c E w J V p .nG. z Loo N E t u= o > A w y m n v m c 3 Oi V o QJ 9 o v 'c m e o> 3 n 'A C v v- v 3� 3..`'._.. -..EB 00u����N w c c c ._ L o E ,_ u n a 3 v o H i wv w L w cS « p w N L N C C « `^ C y N > C 0 n E c r '^ c" n.8 c L w E m c o `n 'w�� ZE `o « �� E Y`o r o r a �° v !� w o 3 w m o .J � v c o 3 r°- v E w c °" m m" o Z' = n v '> v m w$ E ,ce °u 3 a R« y v R c y u v w~ 0 3 c u c v E o o. E - s i= .° o E E a u N« w o w m m t c C E C CN 3 C z J R O 0 E L Lj C w ° dl E A w i-. W Z N O CLu p y C °., KO. w N w wN v E Do ME a O Ew o c>o c;onuc E N o A w EoE'Wy o ° o � a o m w p E o w w « a o v dmo cc v v N oo w; y c O o s A A w E w o v v v = c u w a w c a E o R" o~> v v S d 3 v c o z m L o o E A m v w o v F o v o - �Lw, E i' m o c Q 3 io o v m u c w i E ° p jp v w E 3 w u v v c N w L c a E o o E c 0 0 0 3 R y G u ° K z ` dl C D- N u 3 C E N C w L dl « dl Y C c c 3 m« u H n o m 3« m H m E o .w 00 u `u « 3 c `o n ............................................................. _....._............................. ........................ .................. ......................... . y $ a y Q a c y ° 3 v o�°o1=3 Iti v u +� vEo :?aLi vo va aa° �N .N ami C+ o G v ° s 3 q ao38 °a o G: ° o w8 °c o t= ~�c°v°3~'>3 _.................. ........ ........... ....._...... __..........._._...._._............................................._.......... __ ....._ ..._._._........_._ .......... ....... ................. ........ .. _.. _ ..._ . ..._..................... _........... ................. . G p (na• c >, w n c o° o, E ` L v a Q, c- Z a�j L a' N N p E zN E O W E W E tar" ��aE3>da Ngo 9cam d+, On +' a o u a O u t r o a G o c +, O ,�° c v�L�oy�m a > t 'Naa fi ° m [......_................................ ........ ..........E :._...._...... ....................... u a t o _._...._...._...................... 3 a a$ 13 ..................... F- r a E ............. ...................... E o p Q T C T O c0 'C O a0+ A .0O m cn° o o L r c u v - ro v es N-' E c v c E v o no c c y y K L ; U L W w a, O 's wc C t] ; 2 a N o m N N i°� v" u C •.-' o> 3 m W «. o o 'co E° v t s o o y >O - .0 E o a E A 3 v ww o s E n u 3 c x> ^' E n w•• -o m o f .o '� a a N ,.+ d '9 G v L 4i '�'' .L -i V C p Y d ac' ac, E c .> al H E c L CO o E ayr O C C d E a0 + o`n O y d U E A L u df v v v g v v R v= c v o E F�0 E a 'J O3o L E c c •�oa', L«3• .0=n 3;a, VL LHm j Cm ooyn E � v p ; - � Yw i uO '^ oo C m: mC v m n b N o r w A E U o `> u n > vai d O Y C N T v A v E > > U L N n 3 0 E n n n L E o ; E: Q E o o`n 3 M A o= a c icc 0a °1 � o � v v w s£ m a o ` o -�i of -o �c v L E v m m ooi, v m 5 c o a y, v ai v c t ib a K = J H a, A J p •O C1 O • • • C C a ♦— V K w C o a v t o $ u � O A N C d y a E 2 avi v 'c u v O w r y n ocn 0 a, y Y •� u 3 u= y O C v c s o c y a > N 3 c O.IM � °-c" o • ,Eo v c Q m a, a V o v >ol v a N A C J cl r Q L d �•Iwfl' a, M = N N > •+ � � C ti 0 W � � ,n } \ \ lu \( ©� Co { 2 } \ � _M _ 4a cc -_ k \ )Nn Ui in( ( § 2 g ! e { { « f \ \ \ \ \ 0 2 _ a_ i!2 M tf�14 ƒ$§#\( o o�0 >°\ V 4-J MUM d y F A a:asL' c w3 w E m c c w m o v c A 3 E 3 d E v L$ E o w w j w m .m c c w c v O c o v o w c a+ y ` y T v R v v> a T d A U 'E A y n� •L' j d u Ny d d W A V W Z w p� •� jp oil iC a `o v°° A 3 z m _H c c c v c° w `o ° n c �+ Q c c of y 9 •m y 90 v CL C 9 y w L m W m `o a DfI d $ m m W m °" a A v i '•E y N v S c o w U o •° ° v v u O o w °" w` q o N O c v v a ° E m u u v L E o o E '> L v p E N y C L o C a Y W U, C V '� 4J 3 r w °^ E m N a E i° `o o N o $ L .N `^ om`n o A on /C .° .o m 3 ;a u 9 v _ m g o u ` D C +� v y C m a'_; N 3 O v w al m w v c u> d o E .T A Y G! a v c .� c E i c O l Eo c m- a m� o N a> = a N ,co v a 9 u v O vm` u w o° 11 c 3 o ° A Y m C W p Y C, N vmi v Y o a i W ; w `o aL+ i c L 'c W O C N = v ro o m A > v' E v B 74 _ _ . � ct• 1 ■ Y I - Y m s, v d ' v ^� L l a c ............................................................. d1 O tJ a L W G� C c Qi C l N C� 3 y O C 0 :.................... .... .................... ............... : s` r � L O L LL Q� a� s L V - m rt .SR ac t° m a m .o a A� e .+ A a o W y V a O v A O � L O W 'O Y N V E A A N M j '^ ui LUi °" ''' A vi m O aL+ c o N e N g F ° w w E w u cym` E w L w O N o Ix NN} J ° i o � i6 •U V O C d' y 0 Z w O J Q M ` _ u A d C y� j C V �i dl 3 S L A Y y q �'' T• +°' u v a n m rt o E c at.� c ` ! j c oz w q �_ a n c4 `o N o -!>2 ° .A`. c'1a u s0 o 2c L i0 'o EN W w o A m y u A =J C uA iL c W aL+ LC ��i` N.- K1+1 C C I� ; `w, q>, aY N N ' NW OC uyA Jic N.- Y.- `O q • tN d d,W vE AN .0u_ aj o� s` r L o c c -0 c 11 0 70 N 0 0 i?O C W 0 T �� u 'C � �« o N J E E v M ri i t c � L V n V d n v a v C N L T Y n C z A N L O = C CL N R _����C u N Cd;; HO A o C T i O N O L K c 41 °1 't; . n O J v v L Q ol E U _.� _ W = `u C C G1 O v a p u EA Q :....................y... Q L Q �............ C 0 N w H O a a 41 v o c o a v o o m c v E o. c u p y v H> c [ I'D lou, �� °y � + 0 .3 E X ° m om is x v m x c :t2 Q Y dl W W H O H A .q y a E N oc w c _ W d C O C t% y W u 'O u E • • �!'!�� V S u r E N E 99 M a a°+ ; o L b v L c 0 V 0 d v c N Q1 R O YY N v a E o E 0 �; E E 0 w a A v a wo-�u �I z E HO MM H. 3nN3AV NMV e I o mo E� s o o m E § E @ V) � 0 CL a 0 § I { | f } k { \} f E22 \ j \ \ \ / \ \ \ � / \ § 2 { ) (® ` ��� �Ek(�\ m L� ............................... T c v o 0 0 L O -0 O O w � n L .•. a C 3 N 01 R " N R o? E s J W O L A O / 4 / 4 A r� s F (�� K Y J {/ \ 7 % \ co\ƒ E § - / k/Em £ ] � Z2 , a � /f § _ ! \■\ © e \ \ § aƒ \ k{\ -- })� d\\ \\k \\\) N L tm c a -v E •� L L o V co li Y ; V v v -' `o ai w m c a A A a y a u F r w y w c n o `o E 0 N E w A on r p 3 ain NC In m > o o c a d c c vl m w a :: YL• 'S T o v i0 A A A J Q O Jm u H L T N v E A N G= v CQ v � v LL F i w N d O O C dl ate'+ L' L 7 u L d a o o m c 0 A E uYw a • m m o m F T c -c„ o a E w c c Za r n E u N o m N N N N N 3 O E a W W u Q m - !E � r ) � _ ) 06. � f \:! sol --ID E \ k } / \ \ \ f $ ��\\I\\\k } ®k 2 C 7 k ! 3:(; (( « _ ) 06. � f \:! !; 7E 7o k/\ 4 ; / C R a� O a E _N _N t ►- W V N N N N r---1 F---1 II N E E m 3 J � E 0 41 4A 0 a a \ \ \ \ \ \ � : ` ! # \ \ ( k _ CL m 41cw n �Ia� � ' d \ C dd = N N L- C - C V fu =V mmt m � E v 3 u L E w .� m w J v i � io ti O O d E a v> 1p u 10 `` !G m w a 3 0 m u 0 k c v .E v >t E y m n v y v 3 0 ° a, E W2 O o y y.r m y n O E c E ,n a C v m E C R w° v c RS a m `o 'o. E a o$ v v m Cm a m c . 0 u yi = E o J H w _c H G c o. B a .� Y m E d .E N -p c °' a m N m u m u ; c E L n L c`o 1, E C `w *W$ \ c Q § | E E w 4.0 #A 2 CL a COL f ; | ID �) \ E j } w {) �0 }[{{ ) |) f o \\\\ \� \\ w0 f f § $ / } I § - § k I « 0 2 { ) _ w § ® ' E F. 0 0 W W W W D p 9 W LL W z 0 0 0 Z o a 3 G W Z O �" Q K W iZ 0 V O D N W J W W 2 7 S 2 N M Ln M M1 M M � 4-J 75 � = w Z E/ ■ _ _ k[OE%IK�) 'Ej{§§{3*) 2-7� f ({ \§ i $ _ ! & ■ a $ CLzee��$�� fk J/)k27\f = 15 kk\ _j�§%�G\§£« /� f � ) -Co. wx m 2 § ) ) \ } \ k } ) f \ § { } f \ J 2{ f Z] g■ Z / k E t a$) \ r .� S. # § § /\ \ \ \ \ a 76 7;(] ke f ■ , « | | wc §\§ [ §k \ \ \ \ 8 \ { 4-J\ - { \ f f } ! � {1.5- ${a. �j \ u IA( A{{\ ƒ/\ a{ƒ\ f �&is { \ \ \ M9- d \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ } \ / # § § /\ 4- 0 C O �: V C N a� 3on s O ., How A o f e � c B i u NV v vcmi V A W t+ d N L A O V d u d C L fp Irv. m � ��$ .� o c c y v v b a a N .'• R � a� v D N Sc M o0 T C G � 3 N o� u o v m v N E H o 5 � o°in § § a 2 42 � � � Ln � � \Z. %CL CD \ f j 20 -Z / \ # a § \ \§ kƒ 2 (§ 2 7 f k! E| f ).0{\ § ) } -,"M- ) } | I ) kiQ. E (xcm \2J16 _ . 0 % K \ o ■ « _ - j 2 \* 3,© 0§d{f-/ #73 £7 X22 �§/a� - / / \ k \ } \ \ \ \ { \ 16 0 : k o �f=i= :22 0 a: ,)2®/§� 2 Kf� CX ���\� // 41 a /}\ :3 § ■ E A k: ±.■.� ��� ;) 2 f<«$ 5» a,& a 2 �_ a¥ 2 2£; r t e { \ \ : . §a ca Ir 41 f { \ \ §a ca Ir 41 f )fet :E( k \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \w \ \ \ } I} { ) -f e2 /' ■ s ® { | [ ®� E \ > § E § - 5E I 2$! a m ) f f § k )# § \ \ ) \ \ } � w N m %«# I (i ® k / N E a E k 0 § ° ` J ` ) j \ \ o' �N m 0.v �v2,) \ \ } \ \ \ \ d \ \ \ \ \ } a \ j { 1. § { \ \ � D � � F— cu O \)/ ®k { « } ! t ƒ •#�/f « \ \ k § 7 a 2 ®$ £ k) ¥ 2 « § f E k k ou /f&!2 -If w;■ E k §/£| c 41 Z %)k§ { #t ° / Z { ; � � « s \ { § _ 2 2 < | « \ k J a . ; 'or _ 2 , [ ƒ f § \ J k/ZkI\k}\.\k\ i{w {J§{k co � E @ 41 LA ■ CL a ;)I \){{ k ®f( ){ § } a \ k ] k / { -{ { § -22 f \t § \ ] ® # { c - ik ® o"oo Li o \ 7 \ ) { .41 ƒ f k § \ / k \ ( .5 § a!) o - d} {{\- -\ ' / E - j \ 7 = 7 } } § /ƒ{{k }\w -\o }§° (A 4-J Qi 0 N L on 0 H V) 0 e � CD E � 4A ■ 2 a � ) k | F /k®\/ ) \{) 041 ■ _ f ! 4 | y { 2 \ & f ! f 0 § 2 00 )(/ ~ - T \ } \ \ \ \ \ ) \ \ \ E 0`§« « \{ ƒ{ME )\ §!& � \ \ ( \ � -0E SER /£°% }( /)L*!ƒ »§ r w a- t 1 I d C I S T 1 O Vi W c p� C 55 E v 0 @ c •- �, o f I Ty 1 jQ aN c .00 + a c ~ i VVI v i q C C 7 u C E- d Ou I v m ao'.0 T -- r n.� l Y `• 1 �v Iwovl �no a s tZ as 1 U O I y c u d� u tLu I C 1 O aT+ 1 d m f d w r r c Y �� aav,c 4 L b 'N N , o On N I y vyi N O 1 0 1 0 o @ i Eo 0 m 3 y d ayi •O N N a a O N @ N N O O i OI d O O IrC d 01 O N y C N O y y rr te > o d rL-. rn 0 3 o 0 a ad N 7 a d L w °x-� 3 api C c 0 L o o •o 3 c% '0 o ° E° n¢ y@ c N x 3 -° c Cd a WF ad rd e a o3 o c m o V o a o ¢ o y 0 c ° ° c aLd c c ° y a R p J N O O cm ° ° o C O C C o C cc dd 'yc 3 d> d =p d 0 x o c y-° f p E a° 75. @ o o v co f Yw 5 a c m 0> d dF x y ° d@ J -- @ o@ 0 Q to r O- d 3 O C d C C m C d @ O C H y d a N O ° c >` G. @ w •° m 7 E d Q N d 0 N y 3 Y C •C w a lCd N n C N d a) rn y r � d - o d d C @ N •° d U a a C O @ E L C )= O C N ty0 •p c .L. !=� ° dd a d m o y N 15 0 '-' a d OL lC y O O d C C •CL y @ d 0 rn @ C o U @ _ ° o c E -0 > E° a y c o E c .° w r E> E N N y U tc0 C -0 y O y � O -0 N Gpi O N `p> 7 N 0 v N @ '� � E N n0 d y y r O W C O @ H 0 -0 C N w d « CL U N d N E y N 'c L R° @ L @ N 0 l•°C a C +L. E d E « "' 's O y Q U d E E E w rn U- N A 5� 3 a d o y E m y m- ° 0 c o ° c c p a? iC d C5 d c d c J F a o U t.. U f- i O V C F- E A L l.°6 E 0 a N .0 la @ 0 y 1 c O '° p d cy8 yo O oC 0n o E 3 y L ° o F o o °E 3 d = N > N o F" 01 p r 7 O) OI a E C r Ltm a a[ 0 N .,T. ac C o �' c 0 o o[ = n R °' d E V E w d o Q 0) _ d o f p Et c @ •0 '0 C E O e d d O` c a d 3 rn y N •vi ° -° C m o E c 3 a 0) U 3 o E y > 0 a ci v 3 y e 3 t O f0 c E c Y cc 0 3 v° v-0 c° -Oo 'd6 z c Z `� o E a E d 7 N 'p 'p 0 R c Y C @ w 0 0 Z d C N O 'f, N d 1 N 'o U 0 o@ @ L_ T N @ 0 3 m r O c a d_ � cl •0 = a E o a _a L a� Y y 3 d -> rn C rn C a E E 9 o d i L o d •U m U C @ C O) d C > O y C y 6 O! R Q @ a d ° `0 'a N d C o c 3 d m Y a J U E N m A d q d L p rn C 'Y.. m c- c •U d a p vi m O L' m d 3 o a @ o a 3 y a m@ @ a 2 c E v o Z Q @= o a �i m D o d E 3 c 3 0 ° d o y a v; c y d E° o co) a a a Z Q a hep m c o o (� o U o>i c E CD E o O Cf C > @ C O 0 ° d N o C O O N O C 3 -0 Ol d c a 0 0 3 F F- N @ a c c `� c 'y y c` l6 C L P• D7 Z m U� p y o 4 E 2 C p N = d T d j 01 d V lC C l0 N •� H Y d r 0) N -o C a E d U 0 3 Q r E 3 d A a cm c m o 0¢ d ° 0 d U 0 0) m a °°° m r a m a `o c v Q a o �, F° c ° 0 V 5 o ,... o U E a U` m d n rn c c S, -cc> @ > N 'C c0 3 c O m « N C 0 U Of t L o V '0 @ E 0) p "0 f6 -� p- Y y Oa E F O l0 t -5 @ y r C d L 3 y y @ 0) y C U d !. Z @ @ > p C C y O d C L N m c N r -y yZ" U N 'O C U J •dp O •° > C C � @ •E d a� u' 'Y C E c ° °' N E .Ld-• m E°° x a d 3 c E E 3 0 E 3 E D �, W t E o y c c' Q >? o, @` D o c o E o E M L r$ `° ¢ c 3 � `n c `@ y c@ �n y S a y U = V C 5 O d 'm J d o U '° > d C @ d C d ° F O N O d L Q Y w N c 0 C •0 d C a F- @ C 'O 0 tm d N E E Q d E a r C Y _rn N a U d U E 5 E 0 d 0 O I) O d y 7 C x fn @ OI c y I T -Z 3 d O •O cc O H X• d a > c 3 0 c N y L 'o as o @ O V 0 O C N C T 3 y m o m L o a@ E° Ld > 3(D °� 0)> c o o d rn w @ c p c 5 ° 3 o D° dp o Y d d o 3° v�j�-- c I 0 cc'°f c @ V -00 L O V F- L 0 y 0 0- d d d > U C C @ a O 'p > a w v c d @ ti a� OC � c E 3@ a 2 -0°3 o a U v � � o d w a-°5 Vl O .2: 3 O N d a a y° > O �N J N � 3 N 7 E =0 U C d •° O O E W 01 ° T p`a i r a c y •a p OE 01 p cu C 0) 0 is ¢ .� U Y I t •� = 0 2 w Y m> c fLd y E d- .d. g — c > Z a c ti o ° E d A o io c> c° o c 0 c m> o> 0 E @ 7 N ° @ O C aai 3 C o W O E N ~ R w Mn C d d > N N y d C 0 d O C 3 y d - a > Mnd •y E C d U y O w o c�i o o 3 c m E o o 3 -0 c .° ¢ d y 0 0 0� E a 0 u ¢ o$ a @ U U E -c r w 0 a E -Op a L a' w 0 N O) N C C R C 2 0 v 3 4 •� ai EE ::,4c09� W C Z d d 0 0 vi R N m d y E o 0 R CL 4' N j 0 'V 7 X 0 0 0 - N 7 c N d a 0 O C 3p 0 YO E a 0 U U C 0• N .0 M O 7 R z v t N U 2 L '0 2 '0 T d R 0 3 N � M 5 N � 1 a W m o m m 3 c' R E R c R N Y N a A ~ O O> O L O ' y W_ C 3 ON z O dN C W 0 a 0 Y 0 0 N CC M N R 0• l` '0 0 0 tm 3 m o .2 r 7 0 O d .t. o 0 tSF y d v o= o o d w R a 0a� 0a " c a r c E Q a a M c 0 a C W go)7 0 R r !� m R R c c � L R m 3 c 0 E E c> m Y y° v > C O C 0 N d U A 10 O 0 ;S0 L 0 N N _ 0 L N •p d �` 0 O' 07 ~ y 'O 0 > O N R N N R 0 !EO a w 0 C a, m C R 0 7 i N E m e f0 m E rn °' 0 8 a 2 V 0 U 0 R E- O �' R R `m N > a� « E c o 7 c o R c a o N O_ w C m 0 7 0 C 0 m N E 0 3 7 N O. a N o c N Y J O N Y a a' :O o V d N F- R .L. 0. Q r H 0: Vl OJ C T C 0 N N0 : 0 N N N U O W CCNO N ? 0 ` NN0 O C Q O O U O O 7 a 0 '~ U a O L COL y LL LL 3 c N c m O r a m O C d W -00 `° oC o coy a '0 m 5 c m° m S - R o, > mE w> m O 'H a a (� r C �p K U O a' E O .N 3 0 'C 0 0 7 o cam - v U °' io > o c > d 00 W v c p t C > 0] 0 7 aoi O c O a E c 0 0 R M 7 � C U R i a O C (D N y N 0 ' U M U C U 7 li U R L C a 7 7 N O E N U N L d O C O 0 = Y L O C ° E m a N ta N « R o Q' E U N m d ^�" C —1]0 O Z Z c .0 N '0 0 3 o a L m R a) Z� !. N -0 d a$ .� -o 3_ p a s �' $ c (g W >_ 'V L `� C R E E R a c 3 ._.. -0 O 3 m m E c c R 3 D] a U t 0 0 -o a '0 R 7 -y 7 N -0 a 0 R d E o O o Z o a 0 `-° p U C R 3 g W c cm N d o R o rn LL N Ojr 0 U 0 ® m E -5 R � C C � O N � 0 ai ` r Z U 0 a C N 'S O N O N R C N N 3 O V LL 0 O 7 E EO d t Ra O E 0 C > - H N r ✓ 0 Q) m O) l6 0 C 0 O C a j E Z Q W a c c c o y c v c a ° a c 3 Ja a ZH R c R 3 o c a a 0 a 0 i a E 00) c0 - tiR ir0s mm OQ 0 U LC 'c c A 3 T L N 0V a s p LCORNo0 E C c 0 o E D. . 0 H o G '0 R N R 0 N C 0 a N Jk r R E wi ca -. oa�00 w R c 3 cmca-0 ± c 4> a $i E c y� iC - R -0y :F; C) N yNC O fla m NEN 0 ISe- C. La '0 >� 0• O 0 R � U O O y 0 O 0 Ro OC 30 0 E p N 0> 0 0 cts c L OCE NEp70Ro m C UD CO O C a C 0 � 0 U O a dCL O c z a E> R 0- m o rn x' m v N E V' U -O 0 N C = 0 -., 0 0 R 0 = 0 llJ R Qi N yE 2, d ,- 0 C U 'D R 0 c' -� > O = U R N t03 Y d n M U O 0 fn •Op R O '> N C E R C N i l0 a Q T 0 E 7 O C R E i O .0 0 R O N C C C 0 R r 'L- R U R E - N 3 5 o � o c T w a 3 R R c O y 'g c ° c o C O E R x ° 0 c y E 3 a N A o .0 �' R E L R R o a CL R axi S N E m o c w 3 cc d w y 0 i c O c� t-. o v o 0 c o o d o 0 .a rn 0 L U c c O E Q m> j R :e m =o ° :t -- 3 0 m M ami E N c w N :O ai ¢ c Q N 0 J 0 O c v E L E o 2 Y is 0 0 p v_ a t .7 E g Y a r 3 y z -0 ..>_ is Z o 0 y `° r n a 0 0° w 3 0 0 0 W d o y N E a U Q F-o a0i C7 .6 E c o c c0i °' U c d y aci o 'c a� N rn c r ° d a>i 0 m o o" a c0i o M r 1° L ai6i > c m a' _ v N 7 ° N g 0 a0> p s v -o . o U '> H C7 o T Fr Q c E 0 Oc ._ N OC r ii o_ a is N I 0 C O 4 C 0 m a 0 L v .P 12 m m c rn ca .O a N c =p c° ° o _d 'o aO m a2i rn E Fr 3 v t.` a N yO m 75 O L 3 r 3a 3 O y -0 O 3 '00 O> v m 00 m $ Y .0 ' m E y cm T Y a d 3 C O U a M a U N i C N E N O) man L O mm NoC NmN m C mU OU U C A U m U OC mN C O O N 8 N od oC EU .2 p c c 3 0 E a:C OE NNm oN E E 01E m 1 0N1 mU U m O C N N m d m 7 C 3 r m m 7 m' -y w _ .cl N N U 7 m L m d m' O C N O 7 O w m N 7 7 a 01 N .O E D1 N g L N U O m a m « n C 0 c 0 `m 0$ o` o c OR U L ye7 N7 7 UZ COm mC C N O ' a YNm aii L'C " Cm_ N 7O O C- O a m " m 'a 0-> L c O a Y:O NN y O 0N mO E N0) Y R d a E « E apo a M -0 a 3tOOtl N m E m > E y O G U L f m O y V O m N m O m N Y C O U O C N 7 L N O OE N m m - Q. m `` m a N G E N r m C 0 C N m C A m 'O 7 r .O O 7 UO m C O a�oi w" E 3 m m oN a w° d> '° ax, d p E E o o v E E 3 0 m o 0 o c- E o '� o0 E C O'Fa 0 L 0 0) A a; L_ y cm _ . � Nv Cm EN 3 7 p p �moi ym ts mX ac 3 c N 0 '0 > ° o232 ! a ° 0? o m oiOOLdN Ty N M a Vai 01 Vi m a mp C m-0 2io U FN L N F- V) o 7 mm N QE 12 c E m 0 c E aci c U m R 3 'p m N 0 0 c « d C L0 U N EL .lVp m a mym NN C d w ON NO NNNN 0yYmN'Om OOa U ymE N O Y 'O a 7 Ola JC O m >, p. m d X Om`f> o m o m c 'O Y L d m C m m L O O O) :E U O m c. 'C F N "" U U N N 3 U m L N C. C L a O C -UNmpaac-mrno o3C3 mmO) amE crn Y_mma`7ti�i M• U La> mC =0)0 =OC OOm o v �0.0 mp m Nacm 0° 0 a n m o 00 0 M o a c y E7A a 1a m 03 yd d o 0 o. y 0 a V moNo .- i0 a& LSmam - aa m Cm m mmc om0 c« a m = C > O L O r aaEy R o % N L' NE 6 0 a) Lm yc c N 7Nm m Np waEo Y 0 3> ad>Nm� aQco '3cmE m46 '� L°F 3 a 3 c mcm' to C � C m N L m N m m m m .N C >. p co 00 m m aci >> a " a w m Oc 3 c p c a v o 0 m m C O N E O > E y A m CL '� o o y c a aci o c M m c N cOo c_ o c `o m Em > o` 2,122 N 3 O L C 'ar A O '00 t- C ° ° 7 C N N3 00 .°-: E p O aa)i N O W m NC O ` > N a m L a Oo m m ,; a o 3 r o c > r c c N N m C a m C C O Of - .? C y a D. O O 'O C •C C C im D1 J A y al �_' tm -'o E E' a ° c 5 0 .g > m` a m m d m y is () O y J >i 0: 85 U .L. 0 a a. C .L. L O m F U a O 0- V a v S y V .P 12 m m c rn ca .O a N c =p c° ° o _d 'o aO m a2i rn E Fr 3 v t.` a N yO m 75 O L 3 r 3a 3 O y -0 O 3 '00 O> v m 00 m $ Y .0 ' m E y cm T Y a d 3 C O U a M a U N i C N E N O) man L O mm NoC NmN m C mU OU U C A U m U OC mN C O O N 8 N od oC EU .2 p c c 3 0 E a:C OE NNm oN E E 01E m 1 0N1 mU U m O C N N m d m 7 C 3 r m m 7 m' -y w _ .cl N N U 7 m L m d m' O C N O 7 O w m N 7 7 a 01 N .O E D1 N g L N U O m a m « n C 0 c 0 `m 0$ o` o c OR U L ye7 N7 7 UZ COm mC C N O ' a YNm aii L'C " Cm_ N 7O O C- O a m " m 'a 0-> L c O a Y:O NN y O 0N mO E N0) Y R d a E « E apo a M -0 a 3tOOtl N m E m > E y O G U L f m O y V O m N m O m N Y C O U O C N 7 L N O OE N m m - Q. m `` m a N G E N r m C 0 C N m C A m 'O 7 r .O O 7 UO m C O a�oi w" E 3 m m oN a w° d> '° ax, d p E E o o v E E 3 0 m o 0 o c- E o '� o0 E C O'Fa 0 L 0 0) A a; L_ y cm _ . � Nv Cm EN 3 7 p p �moi ym ts mX ac 3 c N 0 '0 > ° o232 ! a ° 0? o m oiOOLdN Ty N M a Vai 01 Vi m a mp C m-0 2io U FN L N F- V) o 7 mm N QE 12 c E m 0 c E aci c U m R 3 'p m N 0 0 c « d C L0 U N EL .lVp m a mym NN C d w ON NO NNNN 0yYmN'Om OOa U ymE N O Y 'O a 7 Ola JC O m >, p. m d X Om`f> o m o m c 'O Y L d m C m m L O O O) :E U O m c. 'C F N "" U U N N 3 U m L N C. C L a O C -UNmpaac-mrno o3C3 mmO) amE crn Y_mma`7ti�i M• U La> mC =0)0 =OC OOm o v �0.0 mp m Nacm 0° 0 a n m o 00 0 M o a c y E7A a 1a m 03 yd d o 0 o. y 0 a V moNo .- i0 a& LSmam - aa m Cm m mmc om0 c« a m = C > O L O r aaEy R o % N L' NE 6 0 a) Lm yc c N 7Nm m Np waEo Y 0 3> ad>Nm� aQco '3cmE m46 '� L°F 3 a 3 c mcm' to 3 n N 3 A V 4 3 9 'N 0 C m� _l C W W W 'Q O F, m I V) i ,o m� 3PN'.3AV. 43i/ 'N O N f 1 N 3 A' V 4 3 9 'S NLU LU ¢ _._.... W O W � W N fa IN o W -I o m ¢ m F — H ¢ 3n N3AV PIE 'N W 3nN3AV PIC 'S C N U V U 8 i I 3nN3AV NIVW 'N...... 3nN3AV N.1VW 'S a J Z WO LL H W v oa �. p LL Z 30 OZ 1.-0 Z 3� L a O tib _ 3 a) L y °o E m E - '3 0 _ o E v V O 7 r N CL � > (D c 'c 3 y ari o r w 7 O N a) Z a O r o D N °' E r o> m E o 3 ayi r .L.. U Al- a) r c O r ) > r> 7 C N d m U N >O O Y c L it, O N d > d 'C a lL lC CL � U N c E 3 3 J N c d D o o° m c c 0 a>- a m m L 'O L Q ttl a7 N .� D. ,O Z c N r 'C O m O) a o U r a c d r c L y E ir O C d d m d L L a) II cm y d ti > - 3 LL `m m d 0ir I� II U gII II 3 U c r p C II 11 II C II E p) II O 3 m o a) W w C a m o a t CL a m o Y m' r a 0 v ' v 0. i 0 c 3 Q c E o v 'c ; E y N 7 0 > Im yE 3c 0) d ° '0 a) c0� ° a � tY�a E a) N c° c o v Y O N U ,0 it 3 30 .Lr, d N L a) O N C 0 N c Q)3 a m a.r E E oto 'oo aa)i r p. o r c c E c E r o Q N o a o CD Cc ar �'m m a 3 aci a o y o 32 Z Y C rC N a7 a m o y 3 y r L c U L a) a1 O a7 O N r N 1] E y 'O N C a) a 'o E r Eaa E-6 E> a) a _o o oc B O O Uc ar OO 75 Z wa OC a, a) O c aO E ECn O. T 0) 0 L r C Y O L N L c E L N N U L A r L L r0 O c 03 Y r O N N >. N 'p 'y > r :E o f l m 1 C.0 a O d 3 o c as 0L" ;� Y 00 m E O r m 3 U o d a o a a R« c uN r N v y Z r c o E yr :E 0 N m r .L a) r E a Y c> 3 E D > c °' as E _ N E c 0 0 0 5 o E cm L o x o 0 N 3 U O N U C N 3 •N OO O U a3 .ON yN S, N c0 m 0 N .L. C Q r N .O N �O E •r U O N r > O 0 0 a) d c E y .E 3 a c 3 c y 3 A U o c L Y c c O 0 U N O E O m 00 F -O N N O r `� a3 O N r a) r E O. 3 N N > C a) y r ` U N y r J- 4) t0 lC r C N O E L T y Y L O ♦L,,, a1 r � C N N 0 y 3 a� t 3 t �0 N o L atm 2 E F o v a .0 OW ae N N T U c c d 0 U) r N U U arc m N N d E C O d Ag CL N ai a> ari A P7 H O m U m m m CL L O 0 r Q N U o C � E U C la O ❑ m m N ao � m o o L E = m co a 0 m ❑ Q U) N > C F U N m � C p O O U d c m N to CA �a d � U 3 CD H a0 w o o N m o N "Vl c Ln N C C U O d T6 'O E c O C C (' CL -L M 0 a L) c ci N a O a m > N a r c N a O Q p E c Q3 S m c Y v vm m. 4-- m d m a m O O p :UN p m m "O c N m N 0 O) N U N mtm E ❑m N a > C m o N N C m 0 N N E U'° c m °' a �' E E v �m Qa a Rm L o w Q O Q m N ° c Q C U C :3 m L O O L) 7 o O Q m L U m O) E c N v N O N m m W -0 p m m ` -0E > >. O N OCD C O L L) 3 m.� CO L �m a'm 3 CD ° 3° N L 3 m o U o N° m ac g° Nom° p E cao 3 0 L m O CP Uw N C N 0 U m Q a mc c p O H o o To 0 -° E m c 3 0 m ¢ O N U Ln -p 'o m U L E m Q ~ N O C E Y a C CA 15 m o� 0 o oUa 0--o-0o 0 v° 5 0 o- m E m N ❑w m N 3? o C Q N N E °U `p ° 'O O 0c N .a EL C 0.0 a O O L L O a 0 y U N c L O p N p N 5 CO a N L a 0 3 3 m m 0 3 a a E a U c ❑ a L N S m E E m L N o p o yc -0 o ❑ p c m 3 m3 m La a o p-`—' m RYE c c H H —� m° N m y y Ta N O O w 3 U "' U C C U- > In L ° L Ta F a U a s ❑ y C7> U N c E N N N y O E c c c 3 $ m U O O O (r N •H cr IrN U d a_ a ❑ m o 2 0 ❑ a ❑ cc U CU U U 2 ❑ dc J U U ii U U ❑ I Ln lY m M ai r N N ; Q L Nm N U y cn O N U O C L rn co m� d �° aL L E o wa L > G c U A c E c c o �o °O> , o 3 d rn '4 4 N E m 0 °' L c 3 vi > .E c o m N c ;H 16 T E' m 'O d y N N O 03 0�rn m crn a> >o o� o °> a`)D N 0 0 C C O c m O L O LA :O U) Ir O > >` S= C la O c O C m m c m3 mow 3]± o Sao m mo U co y_c ac 7 U o 0 00 75 -0 mU 5 y c o a magi mT Q" �e m3 3 0 r 2a) m > O O c '� '� "m N -O O m .E E� N o m F O "� m N m N c IM m m d c E o ° �o N Q m o " L y U 0 m o E C j m :o C m co, D.o L O N m CL if m 2C m Q --Om U t rn0 m E o�v a -0163(DO cCmlN .�m L~Cai N Em O� °mo mp d ipEd rn o �mai Ep m0 E L L p m p o m m U a G Q N W H 0o it N {7 O 10 0 P 0 U ❑ U Lo N N m 0 (L U a >. a E 0 E R L N M a 0 0 U M 0 rn Y C, CL j E R N 4) Y CL $a P. 0 Y 0 0- w N PC U Q m m o x U O N N C C O m 3 3a d o a :- C � O O N `o c c c y N O Y .5 O. R N d 'O tyamc R C d C N C CO m m a N U M M P a� R L U E 0 0 O CLCL r 3 U cr ❑ Y U r 0 a CJ ❑ M E 07 O CL E U d U rn C Y `m E R it n R LU a N 0 r U O. E a �C m � °Ca�oi C O U y N � U E o 0 o m J N O T o E d -p 0 N J m 3 E c E I- y ay0E 0 . M > C O w C Zi O N N E 3 Nab o U E -0 EUaLO 0LL E O C "I C O c .0 "W � 3 C ca U ami o CL Y 0 U y O D m N C C 3 16 _O O N O O O L 6a o 3 c c a C y p N O N d N C m N O.= _ Y C N U (U fU C N s > L d m o N E fU y O C6 y y N C y w N C L L U 0 G ° y U p O -0 C CY Y ¢ U ° U A a e v a N c c o o a N O L 0 3 sg ° 3 NO d O p N c N' O O td '6 N X C a N y O C N O ° 0 yCL N.= y OT rn>cof a o .N - O °� Cd J "O L S a)a o c J 3 OC 'a •N O M J M p O C p d O C N N O O L U a E c 0 m J E N 75 C- U E Oal U�w O O U..O. tt1 O tAN C mN C C� y :0). •C ca O O C N C a'S E L >0 N L E N t4 d 0 •6 H o o EL U a0 N 0 N C N J m 0 C 3 16 _O 'O O O O L o 3 c c C O C y p N O N O C w a N C m N O.= _ Y C N U (U fU C N U a > L d m o N E fU y O C6 y y L y w N C L L U 0 ° y U p O -0 C CY Y J y d °c O O. O o E Y ° ° J > th e N C rn 3 C a p J C U O N O N + 3 .o a C C C U (U 3a� c 3m O N O Q T y N T p co am J aCO w O C N O m c m O N C O- C 0 L N (D L N C =o o a Y N i V l) O p 3 O 0 3 Ep o m o a E U J'i 75 O i O J O O wE o w`o pa O .2 O cp OC 0 O Q N w co E y C U M Eod ? Ecu mC E.2m o Eo o) •o0 °U "O C N C ° Y C R C U C C m F 0O C m�O °N Y V E m C 53-o y E C -c O C C6�tl O r 0 N N C O aJ m am °- a3 ° u T L C (O (U L L •N 9 d F d 5 _T 4-- 0 U U U M M ll•! N C U (Q l6 O d O N O y C Y C.0 O p y N E C C J N 0 0 O O p N O cu C N 0 0o y Q' o < J U y N 0 L U C U U U O C n m N y0 N Z N E OCL qmmm L O U O Y O N O EO N N Cd U c `m U N U L O E O N m `O N p N .0 _ i4 a U �¢� co HH Ci W Q W m E 00 LL J ym Z� 0a �-0 IL 014 m a' a m E s U c 3 E � La' c .L -D „ o R O c c T Y E 'o c w y E o N O '` O f` O N a C a a v axi o� X EL0• C a) N O c O c r a L N w C1 N 3 c m 0 O E E :c aci 0 3 0 U o O 3 E 0 00 Q 0 3 LL d E c > N y a1 O 0 d a o YOn-ad a O c O � O O r U T o 0) Q d U L U r C c O U > O O. a1 a a) a7 a O L CO y O O Q O N .L. N U O :0 EO r a N O` OQ Q N N U a O > y O 0 Q L N U Q Q U U a d a aa) E O d R 3 L 0 C E E I 6 O V 0 CL `o 'c CL I R 7 N CD ft � — N R C a N Qy d N m om O1 LD y L � N O a3 L N O F O > C L 0EQ OD oA a�� m a 0 IE N N 01 M M r N N O U N M N r E d C 0, 0 � C E � mU Um¢w Uca m c 3 m d' 3 rn O> C 3 a) 0> Q >O a° L a Q a O� Q O L N �2 i O O p p i N N �O R 7 N CD ft � — N R C a N Qy d N m om O1 LD y L � N O a3 L N O F O > C L 0EQ OD oA a�� m a 0 IE N N 01 a � Q O � N c0 NM r C N L^ U o r � O � a ()md0 N .e , df O C 3. 0 C x 0 0 0' c a > a- L 'C C CL N 4-1 r r rn J c cn caN N N In `o w O N 9 N N r N L O N R R N :o m C c o(D C yl N o ro 'O L Y O "0 N cc M 6 CIOC L a o 0 m o M N r � N V N U L^ C yw'rnr aci a > i N O to N l] U C N L y O :Uco O ro N ._ f>6 N ro m O c ro roa �- c 0 ro m�- a E 3 6 _ ' L 0 C N N ro 'i ro- o._ aro N h O a y G -O cr -0 'O y O O D N 0 0 c O L O 6 N? y .m O CO N ro .L. m E v, p O p a T � N L mi In, iiz otco p� U a � Q O � N c0 NM r C N L^ U o r � O � a ()md0 N .e , df O C 3. 0 C x 0 0 0' c a > a- L 'C C CL N 4-1 r r rn J c cn caN N N In `o w O N 9 N N r N L O N R R N :o m C c o(D C yl N o ro 'O L Y O "0 N cc N d, c 3 m a n o s ao r O r l0 N M 6 CIOC L a o 0 m o M N r � N V N U L^ C yw'rnr aci a - U m m d i d N d, c 3 m a n o s ao r O r l0 N N N CIOC L a o 0 m O.3 Q > O L a N r �2 r c Q N 7 � R N N N O N L_ O C C c p ME � N � C ro O i U N O � O Y N fQ N E co O p a T � N L a N ro N U c o -0 a M a c N N y mro d 0 O ) Ir 0 N d, c 3 m a n o s ao r O r l0 N ,o CL a o 0 T > - a 3 L m $ 0 � O. 7 ° C ° U N N y > O U t1 T 'O c p r O -0 m O _ _ O rnd m m :5 � � 25 -c Y W - Q 5 ao U3 xU r C a oo 3- L� r a _E mcL � E >'�°� s .� w a°) � O Q y E e O y O o ` °m a) E �o O) •aO Ctiaea)) m c Ema aE O NNO mn -Z �yU um) a omodtO LL �3c6 E� � � r'9O 3 a > CD J O ' O 0 ° RSL y CL Z5 NomoE o o E� cL �N O — mroc°i YTa a CoQ C> O Oo s Lm N m N OO .p "° A0 zaw Q F - SL cpm m mF- O A�— N r N N d m M N M N ch N N N N C, y N M N m r N N N d C) c N e�'y > c 2-11 C m C Z, U) c U y C C y dUm'a` Um(L UC7 U m Uam'n- m L N y N y N r N N L a o o a N C L a m'o o rn dl y G L a o o o rn Y C L a o 0 3g C L o 0O_ 3 rn C L d 3 0 a'0> °> Y C L 3 m N C L 3 rn a° Q> O.— L Q> CL— O L --I> 0 L Q O. O L Q >Oa O L a o L a! r N r t0 O >N N O) N r t17 WON N N r l0 NONW PD Cl) r 10 �Lo P•1 V' [O DOO VIom W OO r 7 r m {n Lf) Q1 to U:) p) e. m rn L « O y R N O O N d a L a o O) c ) oyc •O moS O o C cc:01 _m > co a Cl) 't acic — �om5o2o cNm cm o°o oC c a�' a O m fi N oNO T Lc t = 3 my. OCo i—L7:P '-Id—"n>) m m y E 0 a) Z 1 E :3 c o-0 ] " ° m ma OE ) pcJ.m" O O ¢ ro fl E O cr °° C �wNO °� =M CL o7 0 2NNN C o > 0 w a, m O O 0 ) E cm •aw�aC3 dO QmY °y � y Opcy C o 0 Ow c xym O H y ym °mENcC > ° > ° Q �3 `4-: o d 3 fE o N� aa '-ML c o 2o —waOL f a ♦i~No-°C O Ym m c.0 p N C° U aaa YL2� N E ► m N O a) Y om a5 L ¢mm O� a0 a ¢ M V W W h W 0 N e E E v IL O N N � i 4` a q: d UJB N rN. ch o 0 3 0 Q ' > a L C r N c W E U O NY C >i O a o ° o � > a r CO O> r M N 0 O Tw y a • � O °o o-° E O C o'j (0 c y OL Tc._ C Eto N o Oxo E y d C 0 N 0 N > O = w >o o T N L i 7 O d 0 h_ N co rz °>' U E 0 t A ID N d .> a 0 N tin3mR No U � d N OR Ec`T N a O w C O a Y._ O O C X�y9_ N d O N Y> > C U a to N I Y y d o 3 rn a o 0- L a>M O a m m O -O 01 _N as N C C y O 'y Of ro C E - `_a o C l06 cm � O N N .0-_- E c O to 0 Y_ CL CL m ° C) U N W d N w H a is M ai cl- d U ld n L m 0 E aNi .N m 3 0 L o -3 0 c � d U N N C `o U C a ° C N U ro � cl U O O. E N c t ° E O._ > a O n o . a E a d as <oa > C d > N N O O— N N 000¢arz O a c d rn N o o N d r o N 7 N E C N N N r N0-0 o f Z' N M C N !Lp d N d 0> 7 L p N Qii3Uwr ch +U, CL N C L ah N.9 L � N C L � O o 3 rn ' o o 3 E a � 6' ° 2 o > m o 0 rn a> Q3 L a> o L o o. t a 0 o° L ar�n Krco "t >oN r ) Cor r r r r r r M � [ r M � r r M w N 0 I- CD 04 # ch \l (D E- c /\: ) /{/ \! } / \\A \/ \/} \ / 6\� CL ��kt ''t §� - 22 T 2 , &tee& °�, C, _� 2,, ©2 } C7� ) /3tet% ` a- /)§ it m0 o� GEcc e5J of CL (9 CD 04 # ch \l (D E- c /\: ) /{/ \! } / \\A \/ \/} \ ( \ } cm ƒ\}g Lo04 Lf) I\\)/ ;27_& co 2 0 3 m Q o o r a o > cp U CI Y C 3 m Q >O a L r N .-- Nco .- � N U 0 3 m Q 0 p s a > m N c0 r r M E m O E U a) N N 7 m N L doom Q O > < > N N m N r Cl) c O C O U NY 0O c >i m 0 0 o Q > CL— C:) .—o N O 0 M a an Lo N q N N C L 0'p 0 0 Q 0 O t fO > r A CL C w 40 a: U 0) E E 0 c 3 0 C r• O O N L T Tc CL C N 0 0 cu 0>, > E L0 (D T U vi y 7 N 0 0 o m a000.� r 00— Z5 Or O a0i 0 O C O � U C 0 U r- 4) 0 O U O CL N N 0 Ea l0 C -2 E> W 06 n N N C L 0 a o o ° L N a> Q 9 A A =. N N C L 0 0 0 rn 6 p a r N CO N N C L 0 0 0 a a o a°� N � N — W 0 Z" U N N y 3 m C > a O r CV � l0 N r N r 0) I T � Ua ro m .O O c N to U E -o d C a N w GO C 0 .0 O > a 0U O C O. o y E o CL m 4E) t V N 0 C C O O C U U E a 0 W U U V N N �ayo0rn Z C O d L r > N 0 cIl a7 -O 0 0 0 0 = L N 3 E 0 N N > W O � � O N N 7 rna d N al (D F c a1 •O O 75 aa O L a) 0 N O U U C C N N C L 0'p 0 0 Q 0 O t fO > r A CL C w 40 a: U 0) E E 0 c 3 0 C r• O O N L T Tc CL C N 0 0 cu 0>, > E L0 (D T U vi y 7 N 0 0 o m a000.� r 00— Z5 Or O a0i 0 O C O � U C 0 U r- 4) 0 O U O CL N N 0 Ea l0 C -2 E> W 06 n N N C L 0 a o o ° L N a> Q 9 A A =. N N C L 0 0 0 rn 6 p a r N CO N N C L 0 0 0 a a o a°� N � N — W 0 Z" U N N y 3 m C > a O r CV � l0 N r N r 0) I T � Ua ro m .O O c N to U E -o d C a N w GO C 0 .0 O > a 0U O C O. o y E o CL m 4E) t V N 0 C C O O C U U E a 0 W U U V N CL c co ! / § 2\ 22o!« ) /\\2\ p e72j \\ �/ 0 ){ m 00 cu0 \ \\\m \ � �L &[(/ • �0E_ � � 202i \0 - ch 0. c ƒ\c / \ �\ 'Fu \ CL 0.0 § 2\ \ p e72j �/ 0 ){ § \{ \ \3 G3 a § \ \ . { { \ ; ®/ , co cu _} / \ i / {) %co ca \ a)! ; 4 ƒ 2 ± a C). CL T N C _ f6 7f0 0 °- - C O N y y w .L] N -am T -p N C N C O C 'U N CO O C m L U N 1 m E aXi 10 E' N 7 a d E O y y g 3 -C iV N C N l6IN N W L d f0 'O y CO L w 01 C j y Y -O III m L @ N C 01 C w w O C l6 d O O C C 0 N N N y Q 7 C T 0.S >+ C -p C C L -� Y U d A .p a m N N a « X E Z V1 w L E Y 7 O M N O U 3 7 ° R N N N E C .L.. O U mCL O d C l0 3 .N-. O N F a f0 Y L L U p) C N O C A N 'nVS N m O N L > U CD L C J QC >' 0 f0 S] N •L" .° N Ul 3 E C m l0 N N N m N N N C 'O 2] L T •V O F O d C 7 �I/A� i t Vi m y p N L 7 r 7 O C V C O C O Z D7 N U l0 .L.+ N N Vi T '3 N Z' �O d Y 7 C Q YV D m 3 C C O aO ld N U C N C R 0 r 7 N p Y L a A G1 0 fL0 °o ya n d p p f o ac a 3 v o •� o o WE y y ayi o m A C N m a N N -0 Y a C > m O. E 'N O Q E d d N N Y 5 E d T a a 00 a o a m c (j A rn Z E o ° 01 d c0� Z J s. 7 7 L J N -° N d N y E a N A N m @ = N 70 .O C C N d w F 7 7 O. N "OO N N N O 0 0 C U O Y YO 3 C N a1 c a1 o eca N H° °° E Q R o> o ai y 7 y ¢ d o d r m J H L y 'p li W L .7 p .� N v ? N IM ° Y d -:5 P E 0 3 C G F a $. n t Q y m 'c F N r m W N M N O '> O N W h L c = Or X N Y O = N O L j O N N W Oi Z N l0 N .R r> 0 -O C a N i C N � p U ~ d O N N J D7 d 'y ` COJ .0 F 2 O Z Q N ° t t d C co U d i0 c r '� N c d o C m C C ° d 3 7 E °o p c oo N a W °' N C m N C N o `�_ 8 0 'O 3 F C F d 'p aci E O O Z y E 2 m� 7 n ro ° a 0 E 61 N° c r m p a a') 0) C1 L r C N v_ U N _O 7 O T 6 N (A R ('J O 4 w a C d > W L >+ 3 S] N ° > A N a O C a Z ° d C m ¢ O E r d a 0 N 7 O c N Y 00 y d L 7 3 3 N o a1 L ° y p o � y a s y p1 r p c m .o a1 a 'o a 5 d N c 0 O O L N N 3 d 00 N O T d lT0 A m c 7 C N L1 O/ °' loo l0 F m C N 4 d1 E C U N 7 a N aN R NN OOmEE OO am C OZ N dr LR'O J iJaWiI O N6. CT 6C - C r— O L m L O N > N7 ° AO m m HmQ O w N NO NOE O60 a y O F U X W N C O ° O y m d 'O L ,� L.. C G N N N Nr •� N E Z` r E d y y t (_D N 'O C 7 c. C r d Z C m 7p p > " 0 0 E 0 m E _ " N7 00 t E 3 c L a -E N 7 c d L)i c°i ° m U Q 0 Y C i1 N O O C O p1 F O LL «O 7 N F m E O U :5U O a w N O m; Q W z 3 ^ F Z 0 � W N LLL � W m W a a z 0 J m EAAL�1 ■ A ■INIMINI ■ ■ 2�_■■_ i m W a a z 0 J m ,F a� 0 L C W N H N d U Cc L U viWAX I I 'SH4 oL X of Hd > a Willi � LN N o 'al Z I w o (7 C F I rl o W I m I io W I o'I a `ol W I d I W'I o I � I I > a N W a 2 V ,F a� 0 L C W N H N d U Cc L U viWAX I I 'SH4 oL X of Hd > a Willi � F o 'al Z I w o, C F I rl o W I m I io W I o'I a `ol W I d I W'I o I � I I � E. IM N R II II tl I x 4) l4 y x U ioYmQ Nm cc Z 0 LL c 0 N -1 co OC x x R II II tl I 9 oweij baa;g le.injowls ZAL ,6,Z I ZAL LGnZA . 6 116 6 0.5 Ale 0 Le NL T--Z/I5 I 4 I Ln N °' DD❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ DDD - _--------------- o N --------------N — -- - ---- _T � ❑D❑ DDD D D D DDD L C Ego 7OO O Ot y D D D N 20 a0 ❑DD C O U E d w DDD :ii �•+ y U3o d 0M y O !L9 O T b ca r a� Y � N x x m s r N N O O tG •N x N x T I Ln N `a, c m N U LL LL L. d /N A o!f Vl N mac ct3 4614 bE 0- O U y C N N O C i O 16 � V V `a, c m N U LL LL L. 133UJLS U33NO1d c m a .y d d L N LL 4) U) � 3 v 0 \ J Z y 0 a Q N t z V, C. m E G J W LL W a C cc V co O N 00 I M C. m E G J W LL W a C cc t Z U 3 3 N 0 1 d 6 It ji N V 0 MJ W cc m N 133 u1S '111IN flN N y y 9 �T�TI y U O r N O IL 3 CL dd ryQ c c0 y F V m c C 1 3 3 U I S U 3 3 N 0 1 d t z a N z a 0 0 J z m Z 0 N a h K W A-) cc + Q J W LL W D r� 1 3 3 U I S 7 7 1 W t Z m 0 PFA 1 3 3 U I S S N O W I S e oi • Y c`v IL m U I 4 0 i t W W Z "��• Z W 1> > W l Q c > v W i Q 8 = J m i �v J LL y a ' Q L L ' a Z Z o � o .m £ i O d V £ C d U C L £ x x 0 0 U V V fn � 1 3 3 U I S U 3 3 N 0 1 d 0 M 711 J W LL W a 13 N M t z 133 bfIS U33NOld 133UJLS 1N30UVS m M M 133Ei1S a33NO1d oa a'y t z W 0 Z W Q P7 � 1, a 1 3 3 H I S 1 N 3 0 W V S co v 0 J m Z 0 a N J Q F i W cc 0 J W LL W 0 m a ro 1 3 3 L-1 1 S S N O W I S I d U o M o M t C N N •.3 = 1 3 O •� � 7 LL d 01.` — d � � d U 0 u 133 tl1S W 3 3 N Old t z W 3 z W Q S a z 0) i v 0 J m Z N J Q `H W cc 13 J W LL W cc Ln m W n z W Q M z I 133 Li1S 7l I W 1 3 3 H 1 S SNOW IS Q ►i z z 0 Q N J Q F' W cc 0 J W LL W 0 m r r W 3 r z w y Q � M s 0 J a � m z z 0 Q N J Q F' W cc 0 J W LL W 0 m 1 3 3 d 1 S 7 7 1 W s Z 13311 1S SNO W IS F� 0 M N he u 0 J to G J W LL W 0 m 1 3 3 U I S SNOWIS t z 1 3 3 H I S H 3 3 N O l d V r NI Y V 0 J m Z 0 H a N J Q r W 0 J W LL W 0 0 m co M ins sacs say 133 WJLS 1N3 Duns W n Z W Q s N t Z 0 co N r V 0 J m Z 0 N J F W cc C J W LL W 0 cc a a @ E N E o E N a 0y O N 7 o 00 o E c ° 0 o oo O �p N �C U O _ = N L E 0 'o x m C M Z c o E Z E 0 r `0 0 `° a 'c F. 0 3L L o -r- m W a S a Y > > '. W o 5 p L 0 o Z T C m N a, N o a) N EO N C F Ci G' 0 E a) @ E O E 0 Z N LL c @ cm LL z.C 0 c m @ E 'o J F v c a 0 > E y E c0i w O v N ca LL W c_ R c 2 O Z N aa)i N c Z p C @ Z Y .O $ R m O d N E O > p O_ C o m 'N C O Q A a QQ. y N Q O N p) N U F -=p m .D W v a, O N C @ 'O Q y g F 7 .p. O m @ N O @ Z U W F. N p� 3 O` �. a) A C o N i m L N Y N N Z a U O I a @ @ o �' A L i 0 U _ a y a 0 W a @ a, _ C d a E E W ¢ O m m N E ` F N C in �$ C Q N v 12 = N @ m o L O) 7 O a) U ` o ¢ O U i O Z r « r 'O W 0 Q W W O to p a m o c c0 � c N N c W E 0 a o c m > C N N 7 L U y C ¢ O N € _O >` C O N 7 U O C = N @ C � = 10 W 'v o N c r H U N y @ c r to = a) a W ti v N c U (D = Y m N E Z u C W N Q @ a w C clj�' U E N N Q d w W m N as E m m to O C E O a E = 0 O N aa, v = .L o l0 o 7! v N c = U oo > C 0 F a y E O, om a o U a C ? m om O N a�Ei U ] = E E H N m m T r m o Z o L U O! u c > � O ID U N 'D cm, a N N Z N a) N m Q V @ c O p O v c E W x E E N O c N N c C Y T U o y a) a a r f U y y £ o a C rn E w @ ° d E N o d m 0 0 p o c c o y 0 E R o > o co O O C Lm a = 4") N y Q o 0 P Z O m I� n. xQ W F- d i0 LL LL co W = _ 3 � is m o d a c g C U y .N W o � " c m a E O _ O L N a o N U m m 3:@ E 0 d N o d j p 0 U O a C .� L Z O �, L N W N C U = C Z b O aci d v o`a J @ Q d w J 0 c m a aN $ L c c R O H =o J go E U y OI 7 �_ =O F m .0, U N T .0 c C @ 0 O Y T W W y a Q a O c N 3 o aci ° E Q c L m 0 a > Q E 9 a m° id o o Z c 3 E m k O T E o o W Z c ,n @ = m .� 0 O m c o L d m W T a T @ U t c o a o c c aci 'm _ ce a m @ o o 0 F d .a d °' o 3 C .A N N y y O N o T Z U 0 W N N Q. w ' N a) i C Q C C Q a) a y N T. �i U N N U U f6 'U X N C O1 m N > o 7 N 'Q Q N 7 N V/ U O >` Y A = UO _> N F L C L as a a @ fA !' y a E C ? c eaL+ N m aX m a, m m w m o 0 o c a, o 0 0 0 co c 3 T T a m ¢ d Q U W 2 2 (n d d LL ¢ = I M 1n W c0 o S- o c, ,ca Y i 0 — - - - - - - 3 a a J N 0 N 0 N � r U N 7 0 N�O L e6 Z a W o w R o ;� a E o W O _ O H R OO E Y f � � a m D L M 3 O 0 Z r m C W r ¢ O ¢ O 0 d Ly W i I C O f 0 Q Cl) c 'a j y Y E 5 p a d in E Tc' O N O y ° L m o 1 ?E c°' O E E U O 0 O N c0i °w-' N 16 O N R a IL M0' W v W N- Q W r = W 0 a)ry Y a o N D —w C O � oc 7 y m o C O m c N D �� `° 3 o Z' o o 0 Y Q W Qr 0 W Z Q Z > J 4 d N N E 7 D 3 w °' 0 U N iin � d E N U y rn c ` !4 m w 3 1° iA V Z y E yo 'O N w E " Q c E O` 0 , L O E aD i0 U E oo U d N N -0 O. O 3 0 d C'S c O O U D N > N ° " c O N N 7 N — E E w E Oi O. 7Uaci'' E O � `6 d m E Q d i a m Cr r U W J m NE Z W H W Z W r y Z N o W ° itl 7 y E M U °' o 1 2 E C7 Z r W Y O a Z W f > o. N N 3 C N y o r0l C O i70 a t 3 N 'E a� 0, = aNi t o1 T a� T 0 > > •� ti a E p U v 7 d l0 N 0 E C(D y y W Z y N J O F y N d c j D io 7 'O N N Q r � O .0 CL 0 C ,C N N �' 01 c00 O R N c .2 E(D VOU U E o 3 U m N N d U.) 1 c O E o o OO. m > c N c a � c llS O 0 yA W 1 0 J m 7 d .. J O 0 ¢Z uj Q C .N > c d y � O >, Y o E m O C O a 0 UN W ayi c D >. 0 � �1 C c a 0 DOO CdEym _ 5- 'E5 jNw Uo rn > O •� T m L 0 3 D D LyyoOy m ~Q¢ U E M M.f. - M a= M a J N 0 N 0 N � r U N 7 0 N�O L e6 Z a W o w R o ;� a E o W O _ O H R OO E Y f � � a N a y Z' � ` a m i N U N ` Y C N c O L R •° ° � c N N E U U L N R c0 � ° a) N U a O 7 N N a s O ° E 3 L Y U C C a A L N CD CL0 a CO :3 C E L C Q) 7 N C7 41 E i C U O Y Q) L °) .N C ° d c 3 N « E N O C O N a C G O N Vj N C_ a o y N O C p) a 3 'V) N R C N E ro C N C a) > i E m > �a •° C N L a) O N .p w N N a N 0 m E ° N c N o R L N a) -6a .N :Z3 N c .N O C R R L N ` a > a) a .0 •y C > x O a O 3 ? a) vi O N c vi V N d N N E p id N ro C o �° L p a> C N a a ?i d O .o y N m R a n o •� R m g E c x 0) m `� CO c 'y ° r y 3 O E a a a) C C 0> o E v� C m C c 3 t Y C N aa)) N c N N N O v) 0 Q w R m 9 '� m 7 C d : m Q Y n a c C O N ri p U O a c O C O d N m 3 U o a o :: c rn ; o c ro U O E � -- N Q �.1 R 'c d° ai X N` U E 8 rn E N� a o^ � C C. � R Q a ro R $ N C N> ERlp Oa) � � co if ° m3 c l`d• rN RN C> 3: 3: N UR '0ro c Ra) E aC f0N a) N > aN i>' O Ns CL RNJ c m E N � Or_ C L E OT -0 mC N CN O LO N O E NN Q ] E C Q O 20 aQN'°O N O3 C - ~ N p OC UNO 3O U QOECm a R U Q E - a Q R N N ro a Q Q U) 2 C4 vi o° :° 8 S a °� d E '- °. a a' - A� c N O N = d •c T m m h .. C r R •Rp R +' O C _� C d °) a C 0 L C '� N C N a i1 O' a) N O a E N y a N 3 y ` a R y ~ a) > N O) C N m m i0 a CL W R i c C R cu p R N C R L C Y C O a 0 .N a) a T N p N '� R C" L a) d C U E L R 0 O. a) C N aL+ fca N w A a (OD C Y c Q) N '.' O Q) ?� C N d c N r m C a) N y R C m . N ro d N N co O a d O a) a C y O N o O R a C O a y c 0 a m ¢ 0 3 m m y c c° a ° c m C 3 'c 'o c" o L O H m •R C E .� N N d C O R co y C C 3 V O= U = a) p 3- O c r 3 i L .o a) C N W m c Y ti 10 R E c y E a ° c° o yia o E� a) a •F'i ca T7 R ° O N ° N •� d L d U ° ',D, - C c N R y Q) a N a Q U >. O- U C 7 C Y m A r N ` R y E m 00 a U R a) d a a) c R U ;o a) 0. y T L a d ,yd-_, j U R •O E m R 'C N E V O O L' C 0 > •c p N C -0 V R N N � a •� a) C ° ?) a) N > °- N () ° C Ln y O d O y L 7 a li3 N R - 'p V '00 p t0 iii d N a y N •° o 'O R a) N a) R d I 3 U N U > > w ro R m O C O N N a) > >. E N C E OC r N T y C N t .� N d O O N O) W E t => /� N y R V X 0 0 N N X p) y C 3 Q p C a U L .a .3 z N C d N L D. U V ' 4 — N Ii m 71 ° C 'O N N rn > .R c .d o- i0 3 L O o a) R v N > a) L 9` la ?j C m C a c N y 7 O) w R N N ` a R L O N w U R C O- C N a Q a G p° D O N 7 m C o m °' `i O c U N N d R a c a y 3 m R U y N c E L R U a) ELv U o o° a ° w p c c° 0= d R N R 3 ` ° N c0 N •N 0 O a O C U •> N w C O C L N D. C E C d d m d c c a r o d 'a c F. 'i> ~ d �;�� L°' p 3 y m� v d�> � c �a d c N c w d '� � ° m m o ° d ° a •c croi E U L (D p a>i a w a :.. R `m a w 4) M d c c .c E in o y a o a R o 0 3-° ¢ m N a - R 3 a: w o :° $ � 8 d Sc 0 0 Ev N R m O NR •C `R dLa) N 00 0cO is hCm m oa @rn. o c E = N a cO Uad CN rE a O ar) >f E QE) U U Ld a r m Or 0 0 O °co6'!5 O __ ma1 a E N 3 3 N a a) N N d a) O) X > m C N C N i z J C � R E N N U c a R (Yp V) N E a F, O _O _ O N �, (` of _ Q I C R J C_ C 'p R O a R N W N C E 3 N .0 7 I O N L N c N N R R E � O Y y C C R A ° i a) LL W 3 C— O a ° 3 C O V= m Y .L. N C. N N Of a ° N J M C E J O O ° 3° ry. N N N U O) a U 6 O C N R N O O r-O E Q 0 O CL N > N m N O N N Vol a O m c N T is N N E U C N •� E U w N Q N C U C 0 C 3 .7 = O N N a) N .O R A lUC O __ R m > O d O N R >, N fUC E U ry U) O N N 3 S z' co '0 • 3' a) > C c y Q N U d L w T N h p c m O U a a � 7 m > m c a N ° E a) O x> WO O p a) L o ° .. N y r ai c a) 0 a C c p A v 0 0 d a ro L E m E — rn A E a 0 F S a d la U m° 3 m a o w M `° o N c Y 3 m d () :3 w 3 m C z d Q w N O t C C Q a d ro Y p L `p L) a d V O N a O O 0 O 3 a a) O ws N L •p N E O U N p :O cc -02c: Q a > CO a r N a �,11=IELD RIDd Preserving Downtown Ridgefield u =1 May 2010 Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................1-1 2. BACKGROUND..........................................................................................................2-1 2.1 GOAL OF THIS PROJECT.................................................................................................2-1 3. HISTORIC INVENTORY.............................................................................................3-1 3.1 OVERVIEW......................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 INITIAL ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................ 3-1 3.3 CONCLUSION.....................................................................................................................3-3 4. PRESERVATION GOALS.......................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 GOALS IN 2008 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.......................................................................4-1 4.2 DOWNTOWN PRESERVATION PLANNING GOALS ........................................................ 4-2 5. FUNDING RESOURCES............................................................................................5-1 List of Tables Table 4-1. Preservation Goals and Implementation Steps ........................................................ 4-6 Appendices Appendix A. How -To Documents May 2010 Preserving Downtown Ridgefield i 1. INTRODUCTION Inhabited by native peoples for centuries, the Ridgefield area was settled by Euroamerican families in the middle 1800's. After the Civil War, the area built up rapidly, and became known as Union Ridge. The post office was established in September of 1865 in the home and small trading post of the first postmaster, Asa Richardson. Commerce became more established in 1882 when Stephen Shobert and J.J. Thompson opened the first store. The 1890 name change to "Ridgefield" was even more formalized at a special election held in 1909 when the people decided by a vote of 62-12 to incorporate as the City of Ridgefield. Ridgefield is a community whose heritage is deeply connected to the water and the land. As the gateway to the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge and a key entry point to the Columbia River, Ridgefield offers unparalleled access to prime examples of the Pacific Northwest way of life. Knowledge of Ridgefield's history can provide a context in which to understand current growth and development trends, and to affirm a sense of continuity and community. The City of Ridgefield has made considerable efforts to invest in and invigorate its downtown. The design of the downtown has successfully encouraged pedestrian activities, shopping, and tourism. The City participated in the 1999-2000 historic inventory project overseen by Clark County Community Development. Since that time, the City has been closely involved with projects in the downtown, the establishment of Overlook Park, and the creation of the 14 Essential Guidelines for Downtown Ridgefield and the Downtown Ridgefield Walking Map. With this Preservation Plan, the City of Ridgefield has completed the planning portion of a project to promote and advance historic preservation in downtown Ridgefield. Funded by a grant through Clark County, the Preserving Downtown Ridgefield Project aimed to energize local business and property owners to preserve the historic heritage and quality of Downtown. As part of this project, a booklet of resources and "How -To" documents was compiled for property owners and staff with information about what it means to list property on the Clark County Heritage Register, the National Register of Historic Places, or both, and how to do it (see Appendix A). A basic reconnaissance -level survey of the downtown core was completed evaluating the potential for a commercial historic district and identifying the properties with immediate potential for listing on historic registers. This Preservation Plan for downtown Ridgefield is built upon the findings of the reconnaissance survey, the discussion during previous planning projects, a public meeting that was held in 2010, and the context of previous downtown planning efforts. These findings are not intended to stand alone. The recommendations contained herein should be integrated with the concurrent planning effort for the downtown and the waterfront. Historic preservation, and the action steps in this report should be incorporated with new plan and direction for the downtown. May 201C Preserving Downtown Ridgefield 1-1 2. BACKGROUND The cultural and historic resources of a community tell the story of its past and make any single community distinct from other places. These resources provide tangible connections to the people and events that have shaped our communities and our collective histories. Historic preservation and landmark designation also generate a wide range of economic benefits, including heritage tourism, tax incentives, and the jobs and businesses associated with the rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of vintage buildings. Given the growing recognition of the energy embodied in existing traditional downtowns and older neighborhoods, historic revitalization is today increasingly viewed as synonymous with sustainability. Preserving the physical reminders of our past creates a sense of place and focuses community pride. In Clark County and in Ridgefield, there has been a great deal of discussion about how to create livable and sustainable communities through compact, mixed land use patterns. This discussion includes the concepts of new urbanism and traditional neighborhood design, among others. A consistent theme in these dialogues is the goal of attaining a community core that has a human scale, a pedestrian orientation, and an area of mixed retail, business, residential, and civic uses. This pattern has existed historically in cities of all sizes for hundreds of years, and can be seen today in the core of virtually every community, including downtown Ridgefield. A traditional downtown concentrates people close to many of their daily needs, promotes a mix of transportation modes, and offers alternatives to sprawl. Furthermore, concentrating growth in existing areas conserves resources and maximizes public investment in infrastructure. These goals are supported by the County's Historic Preservation program and by goals adopted as part of the City of Ridgefield Comprehensive Growth Management Plan. The City of Ridgefield is engaged in numerous events and projects in support of the historic downtown. In addition to the heritage events listed below, the City also participates, through interlocal agreement, with the County Historic Preservation program. Preservation -minded organizations in Ridgefield include: The Heritage Committee, Friends of the Ridgefield Library, Friends of the Ridgefield Wildlife Refuge, Ridgefield Art Association, and the Ridgefield Business Association. Events include commemorative Heritage Days, which celebrate the City's history through various activities throughout downtown Ridgefield featuring antique photos, fire engines and farming equipment, genealogical exhibits, and the popular Old Timers Panel. Other events with historic elements are the City's Hometown Celebration, Garden Club Plant Sale, Art Association Sale, Cruise - In, Fourth of July Parade, National Night Out, Port of Ridgefield Annual Picnic, and Bird Fest. 2.1 GOAL OF THIS PROJECT The goal of this project is to provide a detailed Downtown Preservation Plan. This Plan addresses the importance of the area in the history of Ridgefield, increases the ability of owners to May 2010 Preserving Downtown Ridgefield 2-1 rehabilitate historic structures, and recommends updates to development standards and review procedures that are applicable to the District's unique character. This project provides: ■ Goals and objectives, ■ Recommended amendments to development review, ■ Identification of eligible structures, and discussion of the potential for historic districts, ■ Information and assistance to owners of historic properties, and ■ Recommendations for funding additional preservation work. Attendees at public meetings about the present and future of Ridgefield's downtown in 2010 commented about how they see the area, identified its strengths and weaknesses, and described the opportunities and threats to preserving its historic character. Historic preservation was frequently suggested as one of the primary principles with which to guide downtown development. The vision of a well-preserved downtown reflects the community's desire to strengthen the character and cohesion of the area, and promote its economic viability with heritage. The goals are focused on property owner and resident education, increasing the number of properties on the historic registers, and improving regulatory protections. For each goal, Table 1 provides a list of implementation steps along with an estimated time frame for when the steps could be completed. 2-2 Preserving Downtown Ridgefield May 2010 3. HISTORIC INVENTORY Properties in downtown Ridgefield were surveyed for their eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Determination of eligibility for the National Register is the appropriate methodology for historic surveys and is also used as the preliminary determination of eligibility to the Clark County and the Washington State Heritage registers. Holly Chamberlain and Derek Chisholm surveyed the area in early May, setting study area boundaries. Chamberlain returned to the area and completed a detailed assessment which is summarized below. Derek Chisholm and Holly Chamberlain are local architectural historians and preservation planners. Chisholm has served on the Board of Directors of the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation, has been a speaker at the National Preservation Conference and teaches a class in Historic Preservation at Washington State University, Vancouver. Chamberlain was appointed to the Governor's Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and served as Vice Chair of the Clark County Historic Preservation Commission. Together, they have nearly four decades of experience in preservation planning and historic rehabilitation. 3.1 OVERVIEW The study area for the field survey included the commercial buildings within the downtown area of Ridgefield. Centered on Main and Pioneer, the area also included surrounding blocks, south to Sargent Street, north to Mill Street, and east to 5th Avenue. Presently, there are 142 Ridgefield or Ridgefield "vicinity" properties inventoried. The information is archived at the State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) and available for viewing on line through DAHP's "WISAARD" tool (http://www.dahp.wa.gov/pages/ wisaardIntro.htm). Of these, 27 are located very close to the commercial study area roughly centered at Pioneer and Main, while 12 are within commercial core. According to Clark County Community Planning's website, the Shobert House at 415 Shobert Street is the only property currently listed in the National Register of Historic Places in the vicinity of the study area (http://www.clark.wa.gov/ longrangeplan/historic/sites.htm l). Project staff reviewed the inventory information on line, visited the inventoried properties in person, and conducted a basic reconnaissance -level assessment of other buildings in the area. 3.2 INITIAL ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS While there are many buildings within the study area which contribute to understanding the history of Ridgefield, there are not sufficient numbers with a high enough level of architectural integrity close enough together to form an historic district. Typical character - changing alterations include window and storefront replacements and application of siding over historic material. Some individual properties are likely eligible for the Clark County Heritage Register and/or the National Register of Historic Places. These properties are listed below. May 2010 Preserving Downtown Ridgefield 3-1 104 N Main Ave. Built: c. 1910 Historic uses: Ridgefield State Bank, Independent Order of Odd Fellows Lodge (fraternal organization), furniture store, hardware and paints store. Current uses: True Value Hardware (retail store), Country Insurance and Financial Services (office). An historic photograph compared with a contemporary view indicates that 104 N. Main Avenue has received few alterations over the years. Located at a prominent intersection, and survivor of a 1916 fire which destroyed much of downtown, this building has played an important historic role as community social and commercial center. 304 Pioneer Built: c. 1918 Historic uses: Greeley's Ford Garage, auto sales showroom and repair, Ridgefield School District bus barn. Current use: Ridgefield School District Maintenance Shop. Built c. 1918 by farmer -turned automobile salesman Charles Henry Greeley (spelled Greely in some sources), this building has had a strong connection with transportation in Ridgefield since its construction. Greeley lived in Clark County from at least 1907, and branched out from farming to selling agricultural implements by 1912. He built another auto sales and repair facility in Vancouver in c. 1920. By 1930, Greeley had left the auto business and had returned to farming. In the 1940s, the building was owned by Harold Patee who operated the Patee Garage. The school district purchased the property in the 1950s. 3-2 Preserving Downtown Ridgefield May 2010 113 S. Main Street Built: 1884 Historic use: Union Ridge Church, The Presbyterian Church of Ridgefield, Community Church of Ridgefield. Current use: Bell Tower Cathedral wedding chapel and special event center. Built by community subscription, this was the first church structure in Ridgefield, and it retains many of the original architectural features included by builders Shobert and Forcia. An important symbol of spiritual life within the community, it has also been used as a community gathering spot. In 1928, students met here for classes after the school building burned down. 230 Pioneer Street Built: c. 1920 Historic Use: Ridgefield State Bank Current Use: Ridgefield City Hall The Ridgefield State Bank is historically important for having been a relatively large bank (in terms of its financial holdings) for a relatively small community. In c. 1930, the bank was purchased by Ed Firstenburg, who converted it into a branch of First Independent Bank. This financial institution -turned city hall is an example of adaptive re -use. 3.3 CONCLUSION While an historic district meeting National Register or Clark County register standards is not likely to be created at this time, there is a core historic area which should be commemorated in other ways. Extant vintage buildings represent the historical development of the town. While these structures may not retain a high enough level of architectural integrity to qualify for a landmark May 2010 Preserving Downtown Ridgefield 3-3 register, they contribute greatly to the small-town streetscape and help communicate the past. Additional research would provide sufficient information to update the existing interesting walking tour brochure and/or create historic plaques or other interpretive elements. The owners of the four properties identified above should be provided with a property owners handbook (Appendix A). Additionally, there are two residential areas near the downtown with a strong potential for historic district eligibility. These areas should be the subject of future studies, as is recommended in the following action items. 3-4 Preserving Downtown Ridgefield May 2010 4. PRESERVATION GOALS Ridgefield has excellent historic assets in its downtown. The community character of the downtown has been very well preserved. It is vitally important to the future of Ridgefield that the downtown maintain its historic sense of place. This can be achieved by appropriate rehabilitation of the vintage buildings and by mindful development of vacant sites. The 14 Essential Guidelines for Downtown Ridgefield report should be studied and applied during the development review of new construction, street design, etc. The City has adopted preservation - related goals as part of previous planning projects. The following goals are adopted as part of the City's 2008 Comprehensive Growth Management Plan. These goals were listed under Land Use (LU) and Historic Preservation (HP). 4.1 GOALS IN 2008 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 4.1.1 LU -8 Design Guidelines Utilize the report titled 14 Essential Guidelines for Downtown Ridgefield, by adopting it and integrating it with development review and strategic planning. 4.1.2 LU -10 Downtown Design Ensure that the existing strengths of Downtown Ridgefield and the Waterfront areas are maintained: ■ Orientation and access to the Lake River shoreline ■ Continued use of Floating Homes along Lake River ■ Comfortable, "Main Street" feeling ■ Pedestrian, bicycle, and bus access 4.1.3 HP -1 Partnerships for Historic Preservation Partner with Clark County to provide a strong historic and archaeological preservation program. 4.1.4 HP -2 Identify and Protect Resources Identify and encourage the preservation of lands, sites, and structures that have historical or archaeological significance. 4.1.5 HP -3 Education Programs Raise public awareness of cultural resources by creating educational and interpretive projects that highlight sites included on the county inventory or those eligible for inclusion in local or state heritage registers, or the National Register of Historic Places. 4.1.6 HP -4 Rehabilitate Historic Structures Provide assistance to developers, landowners, and the construction trade regarding appropriate re -use and rehabilitation of identified historic sites and buildings. Provide assistance to developers, landowners, and others interested in obtaining grants and receiving available tax incentives for re- use and rehabilitation of identified historic sites and buildings. May 2010 Preserving Downtown Ridgefield 4-1 4.1.7 HP -5 Downtown Historic District Explore the benefits of a downtown historic district. Benefits will include flexible building codes, reduced assessments, and more. 4.1.8 HP -6 History Tours Develop guided and self -guided tours which highlight cultural and historic resources in Ridgefield. Many of these existing goals have been addressed, but require ongoing implementation. These goals are refined in the section below, based on the new survey information, and formatted for incorporation into the current Downtown Planning project. 4.2 DOWNTOWN PRESERVATION PLANNING GOALS The goals listed above have been reviewed. These existing goals, recent public input, and the results of the field survey have been considered in the development of the goals below. Each of the goals in Table 4-1 will provide downtown with continued momentum for improvement and economic stability through maintaining and improving individual buildings and a cohesive neighborhood scale in the downtown. More about each goal is provided below: 1. Provide education and involvement in Downtown Ridgefield history This goal is intended to raise the profile of the historic nature of downtown by reaching out to groups through information and recreation. Making historic details accessible via several avenues will ensure a wide audience is reached. Some implementation steps, such as sign blade toppers are passive and yet provide a hint of information that piques the interest of visitors to the downtown. More intensive methods cater to those already interested but wanting to know more, such as the walking tours and sidewalk installations. Each approach aims at continuing to stimulate interest in downtown history. 2. Provide education about preservation tools and resources Providing education and tools will facilitate getting more properties preserved. There are few implementation steps included herein for this goal because the "How -To Guidebook" has already been created as a great starting place for people needing preservation resources. It would also be beneficial for City of Ridgefield staff, who frequently work with property owners, to attend historic preservation training. The City has adopted the Washington State Historic Building Code (WAC 51-19). This code (or the International Existing Building Code) should be routinely employed to provide flexibility for historic rehabilitations. 3. Increase number of properties listed on the Clark County and National Historic Registers The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 authorized the creation of the National Register of Historic Places as a means of recognizing sites and structures associated with significant people or events in our nation's history. Ridgefield also participates in the Clark County Historic Preservation Program and, with it, the Clark County Heritage 4-2 Preserving Downtown Ridgefield May 2010 Register. Both the National and the local historic registers provide some level of protection for historic properties and valuable assistance for their rehabilitation. The Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) performs the functions of the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) which were established by the National Historic Preservation Act. Demolition of historic buildings would detract from the historic character of downtown. In fact, the downtown has so few in -tact historic resources, that the loss of only one of two of them may forever undermine the identity and charm of the downtown. Recognizing properties that are listed on registers with plaques easily readable by the public will further elevate the interest in Ridgefield history and the success of Ridgefield in the future. 4. Establish zoning ordinance protections Another goal that will aid in prevention of demolition and help maintain and potentially improve the historic character in downtown is the establishment of a historic preservation district. As explained above, there is not currently a consistent cluster of eligible buildings, as would be necessary for the formation of a historic district. Overlay zones, however, can define appropriate design, scale, and materials for remodeling and new construction projects, without requiring the establishment of an historic district. Numerous similar issues will be addressed by the Downtown/ Waterfront Integration Planning Project. The City has previously enlisted support in developing downtown design guidelines. However, these guidelines have not been fully implemented as part of a design review program. The Downtown/ Waterfront Project will balance economic development, streamlining and design issues, and develop a recommendation, with accompanying code language, for how to conduct development reviews in the downtown. The code should address preservation of historic structures, and integrating new structures into the historic setting. S. Encourage appropriate rehabilitation and restoration Goal 5 is intended to work in concert with Goals 1, 2, and 3, but is more focused on getting actual improvement projects underway and completed downtown. The City may want to consider setting a more defined goal with a dollar amount in investment (i.e., $50,000 private investment per year in rehabilitation or restoration work) as an annual objective for this goal. Implementation steps include recognizing and thanking property owners for their work, educating staff to facilitate the review processes for historic rehabilitation projects, and potentially retaining services of historic resource experts for review processes or education. 6. Consolidate commercial opportunities It is not the task of the Preservation Planning Project to assess market demand or the adequacy of local zoning. However, a well-preserved downtown is very likely to be an May 2010 Preserving Downtown Ridgefield 4-3 economically vibrant downtown. In many cities the greatest benefit to the downtown can be had from limiting the amount of commercial development outside of the downtown. The 2008 Comprehensive Plan reports the following total commercial land within the City limits, for the year 2004. There is additional land zoned for eventual commercial development, outside of the City limits. It is clear from the totals below that there is far more commercial property than the mere 21 acres zoned City Center. Commercially- 620 acres (in city limits) zoned property: 391 vacant and underutilized General 246 acres Commercial: Neighborhood 47 acres Commercial: City Center: 21 acres The City's Comprehensive Plan acknowledges two distinct commercial areas: downtown and the I-5 interchange. These two areas can serve distinct purposes and complement one another. However, there should not be so much commercially -zoned land at the interchange that the downtown is unable to attract business, or loses its position as the heart of the City. More importantly, the City should reconsider the provision of commercial land at the 45th Avenue roundabout. Developing this area as a commercial node would further diminish the viability of the downtown area. 7. Establish residential historic district(s) The reconnaissance survey of downtown found the potential for one or two residential historic districts nearby. Implementation steps for Goal 6 pursue this finding with the aim of creating one or more residential historic districts. A formal survey will be needed for this goal, and there is an opportunity if districts are formed to create design goals for the districts, further strengthening and protecting the character of the area. Revenues for the surveys can be won from the DAHP annual CLG grants or from the Clark County Historical Promotions Grant program. The areas include small stretches along North Main and another on Maple Street, are depicted on the map below. 4-4 Preserving Downtown Ridgefield May 2010 0 g=1L1b H16 _ n` ! •i t _ �.—3AV- H16 _ z _ �•+ 3At!•H!8 -3 Ab H18 °' ai L cn CD 3Ad HIL = 3AV HlS dCD F- O_ o� CD a W a Z QZ - 3AV- Hlti F __a g and abl n 3AV'NIVVY w F l 1000/ t � cn 1 � i = v-3nn•adoa�rda --3AV,avo8lf'da, L r § c N CD -W 0 N M V CC) 7 N M N M r 7 N CM t 7 N M 7 N M V CO a) C � (p M M V V I In 0 LO CD (D (D (D (D C C C C C C C C C C 0 0 n o° c co 3 c m co O c m 'c io n fl- CO o O O O O O O O O O O O O O (.i O O U U U U U U U U U " N N N N N aci a)co \ Q aE a).� U a) N 'O O- U ma) O O O O O O O O O O O O 0000 O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N (N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M V CC) 7 N M N M r 7 N CM t 7 N M 7 N M V CO a) C � (p M M V V I In 0 LO CD (D (D (D (D c OO m o 0 0 n o° c co 3 c m co O c m 'c io n fl- CO p o 0 Y � a) C 0 d 0 �_ 0 - 2— aco aci a)co �.0 Q aE a).� U a) N 'O O- U ma) = f0 a 00 N C Em > o a a)= a)c m 0 c o_'c m2 o I cn� v C C - (� U C ui 30 > no O a) u) O C >U 5 c a) a) 0 L a) > d aN E=z C C > "O C W a) .0 '(6 N @ 4 Cf) CD p0 a N O c 'in "U a) D- 2g C c C •a O 0) N r 00 ` m V) 0 0M p UiE •- 3 L T onU�m U O` °)o 41 > (D N U 7 a) U Q O aa)) p a O- C O a) U o O U O 'O v m m a) L, c- E c (n N a? u) v m S O N Y O O '� L X - !n a) Q O E C U U >, 7 Co OO 3 O O w C O N O` 0- C 'U Q E" -0 O d -0 3 O °)a_ r Cn c0 m o o C Q (.� O >, c o° N in -o ani n �j ) o c0 3:O%o O T 'Oc O L o > a Z oO E mY En O r C 0 T c� -0OOC O> O E O O a) U C, V OU C U o y f a) a) a) N O m 0-o o n n N o 0tf T ° '� '� o� o` o m c m N o a aUi 3 o a) m a 0)m a) o c O a) U C, o co »- O _0 N c o c c '6 _ co m a) -0 H U O -� C m O U (6 O Q N C O -� >' w c 3°� �' E c o m co c u cz a��i ac) (T N a) O �_ O N_CD C O_ a) a) N_ _0 co a) w p) T a) L N i fl -'O C E (U 0 0_ C Q) (V a) O Q) C O U (0 O=- N .L-• 0) a) >, 07 0 � C d U n' o co O C O O d C (n>L0 Lo -0 ���� ���� �ocoo ��� ���oo c 0, p m E Q Q 2 U) 0 cr W p 2' p U p UC� W d Q p d U d N M -It (f) - N M N N N M M M M tt l! i In CD O O to O CD n. u) 'O a) C � (p a) O C O U 3 o m U m o 0 0 n o° c co 3 c m co o_ o. — U m c m 'c io n fl- m p o 0 Y � a) co 0 `o N 0 - 0 �_ 0 c`v -0U o 2— aco aci a cL �.0 73 aE a).� a) N 'O O- U ma) = CO N L Em > o a a)= a)c m 0 c o_'c m2 o I cn� v >ozT O 'O > no O a) u) a)a) U m >U 5 c a) a) 0 L in in > d aN E=z p E C W a) LU-a N M 4 Cf) CD CD n. 5. FUNDING RESOURCES There are limited resources available for private property rehabilitations. Public buildings have a few additional options. These are outlined below. There are also resources available to assist the City with continuing the preservation project. 5.1 CLARK COUNTY HISTORIC PROMOTIONS GRANT This Preservation Plan was funded in the 2009 annual cycle of this program. The program has annual funds which can be used for the study of the recommended residential districts, the installation of historic exhibits, and other projects. The deadline for submittals is each September. The City and its partners should track the awards made in 2010, and determine if funds are available in 2011 for activities such as these. The contact is Troy Rayburn in the Clark County Commissioners Office. 5.2 DAHP CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT GRANTS With passage of the National Historic Preservation Act in 1966, Congress provided funding for preservation endeavors, including a program of matching grants to the states. To provide a regular source of revenue, the law established the Historic Preservation Fund in the U.S. Treasury with proceeds derived from the federal leasing of offshore oil drilling sites. These funds are distributed to State Historic Preservation Offices on an annual basis. States use the funds for the historic preservation activities specified in federal laws and regulations. Among these are conducting surveys to identify historically, architecturally, archaeologically, and culturally - significant resources, nominating these to the National Register of Historic Places, and carrying out a program of comprehensive preservation planning. Because these activities are also intended to meet local historic preservation needs, states are authorized to award 10% of their annual grant from the Historic Preservation Fund to grantees interested in participating in the state programs through the Certified Local Government Program. The 10% pass- through grant funds are awarded annually on a competitive basis. The Certified Local Government Program (CLG) helps local governments toward preserving Washington's irreplaceable historic and cultural resources as assets for the future. In Washington, the CLG program is implemented and administered by the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP). Many local units of government use the Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) grants to conduct architectural and historical or archaeological surveys to accumulate data for comprehensive planning. Frequently, their motivation is to identify significant districts and individual properties that are eligible for listing on a local, state or national landmark register. Some municipalities conduct prehistoric or historic surveys and/or sponsor the preparation of National Register historic district nominations in order to enable property owners to take advantage of the federal tax credits and/or state Special Tax Valuation program that can result from May 2010 Preserving Downtown Ridgefield 5-1 National Register listing. CLGs also use grant funds to develop design guidelines for locally -designated resources and historic districts. HPF grants can also be used for preservation planning activities. Communities typically use the grant funds to educate property owners about historic preservation through brochures, web sites, school curriculum development, and walking tours. The HPF grant amount varies year-to- year based on the dollar amount granted to DAHP. During each of the last five years, the average amount DAHP has been able to grant has been approximately $100,000. The average amount of each individual grant is approximately $9,000. The City of Vancouver pursues these grants annually and uses the funds for historic surveys. The City of Ridgefield should coordinate with Clark County's preservation staff person and the City of Vancouver's Community Planning Department in order to position itself for a grant in 2011. 5.3 M.J. MURDOCK CHARITABLE TRUST In 2006, the Murdock Trust, headquartered in Vancouver, put over $29 million into the economy in the form of grants and enrichment programs. Founder Jack Murdock's desire to 'nurture and enrich the educational, spiritual, cultural, and social lives of individuals, families, and communities" continues to be reflected in grants, enrichment programs, and Trust activities to this day. Organizations involved in advancing culture and the arts are welcome to apply for funding each year, as are projects targeted to elevating human services, health, and health care in the region. In most cases, awarded funds are at work for the benefit of the people living and contributing in the Pacific Northwest, just as Jack Murdock did, although some are made beyond the five -state region of Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington to foster the commerce of national and international ideas in the Pacific Northwest. Applications for grants are considered from organizations which have been ruled to be tax-exempt under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and which are not private foundations as defined in Section 509(a) of the Code. Charitable organizations applying for support must have in hand such IRS documentation of status. Of major interest are organizations and projects that are not primarily or normally financed by tax funds. 5.4 WASHINGTON TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION, VALERIE SIVINSKI "WASHINGTON PRESERVES" GRANTS The Valerie Sivinski Washington Preserves Fund is an annual grant program that provides up to $2,000 to organizations involved in historic preservation around our state. The goal of the fund is to provide small yet meaningful amounts of money to help promote historic preservation where it really happens - at the community level. Awards are given in the name of Valerie Sivinski, a preservationist who died in October 2000 while performing preservation -related work. Examples of eligible projects include purchasing materials or services for "bricks and mortar" projects to 5-2 Preserving Downtown Ridgefield May 2010 preserve a property or producing publications and/or interpretive elements that promote historic preservation of a specific resource. Highest priority will be given to projects that are urgent in nature, contribute significantly to the development of community preservation organizations, and/or are included in the Trust's Most Endangered Historic Properties list. Project work must conform to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and must comply with local design guidelines when applicable. 5.5 LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT A Business Improvement District (BID) assesses businesses or buildings in a specific geographic area to pay for program development or capital improvements such as parking. Property owners or businesses within the BID contribute money based on an assessment to a fund that is normally managed by a non-profit agency. Several cities, including Portland, have formed BIDs to promote downtowns and main street districts. BIDs can be funded through a variety of sources. The most straightforward source is an assessment based on building value or business square footage. Commonly, the City or a non-profit organization can implement property management license fees that are managed. The costs of BIDs vary depending on the reach of the plan and the businesses that join. Typically, commercial BID members pay ten to fifteen cents per square foot. Local Improvement District (LID) is a well-established mechanism whereby benefiting property owners are assessed to pay the cost of a major public improvement (including parking). An LID is a property tax assessment that requires "buy -in" by property owners within a specifically identified boundary. LIDs usually result as a consequence of a petition process requiring a majority of owners to agree to an assessment for a specific purpose. LIDs are a common funding tool used by municipalities. 5.6 OTHER City of Ridgefield General Fund Private donations May 2010 Preserving Downtown Ridgefield 5-3 APPENDIX How -To Documents Ridgefield Downtown/Waterfront integration Project ,,fv Ridgefield Downtown/Waterfront Integration Project ACTION PLAN April 21, 201 1 Prepared For .r CITY OF RIDGEFIELD City of Ridgefield, Washington ortof Rfield RAISING - TOMORROVi S STANDARD Port of Ridgefield, Washington Prepared By Normandeau Associates 00 040 M A U L FOSTER ALONGI Maul Foster & Along], Inc. RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Funding for the Downtown/Waterfront Integration Action Plan was made possible by the Washington State Department of Ecology and the City of Ridgefield. This plan represents a collaborative effort that has been supported by many committed community members in Ridgefield. We would like to particularly acknowledge the involvement of: • Citizens of Ridgefield • City of Ridgefield • Port of Ridgefield • Ridgefield Business Association • US Fish and Wildlife Service • Washington State Department of Ecology RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT—ACTION PLAN CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.......................................................................................................... i FIGURES................................................................................................................................ v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................................................... ES -1 1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 RELATIONSHIP TO EXISTING PLANS.............................................................................4 1.3 PLANNING PROCESS..................................................................................................6 1.4 KEY FINDINGS............................................................................................................8 1.5 DOWNTOWN ASSESSMENT......................................................................................10 1.6 WATERFRONT ASSESSMENT......................................................................................14 1.7 INTEGRATION OF DOWNTOWN AND WATERFRONT...............................................15 2. DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT VISION...............................................................................19 General Policy Recommendations.....................................................................................20 Land Use Recommendations.............................................................................................20 Connections & Access Recommendations..........................................................................20 3. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES........................................................................21 3.1 CAPITALIZE ON NATURAL ASSETS — Eco -Recreation Destination..................................21 3.2 COMPLETE COMMUNITY— Live, Work, and Play in Ridgefield.....................................21 3.3 CAPITALIZE ON A REGIONAL INNOVATION ECONOMY — Clean & Green Technology.......................................................................................22 4. ACTION ITEMS - IMPLEMENTATION.................................................................................. 25 4.1 CATALYST PROJECTS.................................................................................................26 QUICKREFERENCE.............................................................................................................27 APPENDIX A PlanMatrix.....................................................................................................................A-1 ProjectMatrix................................................................................................................A-3 APPENDIX B ActionItems List............................................................................................................. B-1 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN FIGURES ActionPlan Flow Chart................................................................................................ 1 Figure 1 -1 . Aerial Photograph of Downtown and Waterfront Project Area ...................... 2 Figure 1-2. Action Plan Flow Chart.............................................................................. 4 Figure 1-3. Aerial Photograph of Downtown and Waterfront Project Area, Surrounding Residential Areas, and Ridgefield Junction................................................5 Figure 1-4. Current Boundary of Downtown Project Area ............................................ 11 Figure 3-1. Community DevelopmentStrategies.........................................................24 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Project Overview The citizens of Ridgefield are working to revitalize their historic downtown area and to clean and redevelop the community's waterfront. The primary purpose of the Integrated Planning Grant (IPG) project was to develop a shared vision along with a coordinated set of planning strategies, priority actions, and projects for the downtown and waterfront areas. Additionally, the community wanted to encourage coor- dination, collaboration, and communication among the inter- ested parties working in the area including elected officials and staff of the Port and City, business owners, property owners, and interested citizens. The plan is designed to promote the social, environmental and economic well being of Ridgefield through the revitalization of downtown and redevelopment of the waterfront. The citizens of Ridgefield endeavor to create a community where people of all ages can pursue their aspirations in ways that do not preclude future generations from doing the same. The City of Ridgefield, Port of Ridgefield, and the Ridgefield com- munity worked together to forge a partnership and develop consensus to create a unified vision and integrated planning strategy with guidelines to direct a multi-year downtown and waterfront area development initiative. Before beginning the public process, representatives from the City and Port discussed the suc- cesses, challenges, and missteps other communities went through in the process of redeveloping/ revitalizing their local waterfront. That information was folded into the Port's waterfront redevel- opment plan for Miller's Landing. Three public meetings and workshops were held in 2010 to develop a unified vision and to iden- tify and prioritize catalyst projects that will help achieve that vision. Issues, concerns, and oppor- tunities associated with the integrated planning project were identified, discussed and resolved. From those discussions and public input at community events, through the City of Ridgefield's website, and stakeholder interviews a clear executive action implementation plan was created. Ridgefield, a community in transition from small town to regional center for innovative industry, creative residents, and excellent outdoor recreation opportunities, has an un- precedented opportunity to shape its future. This plan presents a vision for integrating long-term redevelopment of the Ridgefield waterfront with its historic downtown through community conversations and City and Port of Ridgefield planning. Ridgefield is an active community with a strong sense of its identity and the intrinsic values that make it a won- derful place to live, work, and play. This plan seeks to leverage its assets to foster sustain- able economic and community development. Ridgefield is a regional employment and residential center that drives a local, robust economy. Ridgefield preserves and protects critical natural areas and is committed to community and environmental sustainability. Ridgefield is a destination area for tourists and visitors — admired for its walkable down- town, "Main Street" feeling, and small town character. Ridgefield is pedestrian, bicycle, and transit friendly with strong connections between neighborhoods, the downtown -wa- terfront, and adjoining activity centers. ES -1 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN The Vision Statement is implemented through targeted community development strategies. These strategies provide focus on where the community will primarily target its resources and energy. Community building themes and economic strategies were reviewed and refined during the public involvement process. These strategies synthesize the community's inherent assets and its values to direct future marketing, development, and investment. ,tRpTEGIC VALUZS S ERS opEN SPACE, TRA/(S �p L�►p'`RPG Marina/ eS Adequate & ACCF Boating Affordable SSS, Lodging Government/ O� �� g g Public Services Northwest '`F .Z; Dining & Entertainment Lifestyle Cultural Assets Outdoor Recreation Destination Extensive Parks, Trails & Open Spaces Targeted Business Recruitment Economic Strategy for Revitalization & Integration of ntown & Waterf 1-5 Junction & Discovery Corridor Affordable & Desired Housing Active, Innovative Educational Opportunities Boutique & Retail Services Engaged Community Local & Regional Marketing Plan Pacific Northwest Portland/Vancouver Metro Area ES -2 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT—ACTION PLAN Recommendations General Policies Capitalize on previous community successes • Downtown businesses should be oriented toward services more than goods due to behavioral changes with demographic shifts • Cleanup and redevelopment of downtown brownfield properties in core downtown area to create economic critical mass • Improve Main Street as a focal point to assist in connecting the downtown and waterfront areas • Support the vision with investment in necessary public infrastructure • Provide for pedestrian friendly circulation and access • Maintain the community's quality of life with development efforts Capitalize on proximity to the Refuge and Lake River Land Use Encourage upper story residential development in the downtown and waterfront for a 24/7 presence to support community and business vitality Focus development and redevelopment of the downtown areas between Main Avenue and 5th Avenue and Mill Street to Pioneer Street Encourage arts, cultural and institutional uses in the downtown core • Implement the provisions contained in the International Building Code to allow for greater flexibility to utilize existing buildings when desired • Protect view sheds to the waterfront through identified view protection corridors • Provide for appropriate building heights in downtown to maintain the "small town feel" • Implement design guidelines for the downtown area that will integrate guidelines identified in the 2004 Downtown Design Guidelines Plan • Establish design guidelines for the waterfront to create consistency and connectivity to downtown while allowing for the waterfront to develop its own character and identity • Downtown should remain the civic and cultural center for the community Connections & Access • Support the completion of the Pioneer Street Rail Overpass • Support a second connection to the waterfront from the downtown to provide for looped pedestrian access • Provide for public access opportunities to Lake River Connect downtown, waterfront, refuge and residential areas via land and water trails and pathways Prepare a Transportation Plan to assess impacts to the Pioneer Street Corridor Include design improvements for pedestrian mobility and create an iconic gateway for the downtown and waterfront Port of Ridgefield: Miller's Landing ES -3 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT — ACTION PLAN Action Plan Flow Chart List of Catalyst Projects DRAFT ACTION PLAN - Priorities (short-term & COMMUNITY long -tern) MEETING I S Funding mechanisms PRIORT1ZE Assign responsibilities J PROJECTS The following projects were evaluated and prioritized based on the following criteria: ✓ Does the project promote integration? ✓ Was the project identified as a priority by the public? ✓ Is the project consistent with the existing plans? ✓ Is the project feasible? ✓ Does the project benefit the community? Economic Development Projects • Waterfront Cleanup and Redevelopment • Facilitate the Recruitment of an Environmental Center on the Waterfront • Facilitate Coordinated Branding, Marketing and Business Recruitment Program • Public Events Comprehensive Way -Finding and Signage Program Government Civic Center Public Amenity Projects • Trails and Pathways • Public Marina Feasibility Study • Open Space Development and Improvement Land Use Policy and Regulation Projects Complete Development Code Update Design Guidelines Local Financing Mechanisms Infrastructure Projects • Pioneer Street Rail Overpass Pioneer Street Corridor Transportation Plan Downtown Streetscapes and Uses ES -4 DRAFT VISION, ECONOMIC STRATEGY AND ACTION ITEM LIST COMMtlMTY - Analysis of potential actions MEETING R7 VISIONING and priorities COMMUNITY WORKSHOP MEETING M 2 REVIEW ECONOMIC STRATEGY BROWNFIELD EDUCATION W 8 PROJECT WORKSHOP MATRIX Information antl guWance City documents Port IJSFWS County CREDC I rAF:P Action Plan Flow Chart List of Catalyst Projects DRAFT ACTION PLAN - Priorities (short-term & COMMUNITY long -tern) MEETING I S Funding mechanisms PRIORT1ZE Assign responsibilities J PROJECTS The following projects were evaluated and prioritized based on the following criteria: ✓ Does the project promote integration? ✓ Was the project identified as a priority by the public? ✓ Is the project consistent with the existing plans? ✓ Is the project feasible? ✓ Does the project benefit the community? Economic Development Projects • Waterfront Cleanup and Redevelopment • Facilitate the Recruitment of an Environmental Center on the Waterfront • Facilitate Coordinated Branding, Marketing and Business Recruitment Program • Public Events Comprehensive Way -Finding and Signage Program Government Civic Center Public Amenity Projects • Trails and Pathways • Public Marina Feasibility Study • Open Space Development and Improvement Land Use Policy and Regulation Projects Complete Development Code Update Design Guidelines Local Financing Mechanisms Infrastructure Projects • Pioneer Street Rail Overpass Pioneer Street Corridor Transportation Plan Downtown Streetscapes and Uses ES -4 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT—ACTION PLAN 1. INTRODUCTION Ridgefield, a community in transition from small town to regional center for innovative industry, creative residents, and excellent outdoor recreation opportunities, has an unprecedented oppor- tunity to shape its future. This plan presents a vision for integrat- ing long-term redevelopment of the Ridgefield waterfront with its historic downtown through community conversations and City and Port of Ridgefield planning. Ridgefield is an active commu- nity with a strong sense of its identity and the intrinsic values that make it a wonderful place to live, work, and play. This plan seeks to leverage its assets to foster sustainable economic and commu- nity development. Integrating the development of the waterfront with revitalization and re -invention of the downtown will enhance Ridgefield's efforts to become a sustainable regional center where residents can live and work and visitors will be captivated by the natural and man-made attractions. Prior to beginning the actual work of the Integrated Planning Grant (IPG), representatives and staff of the Port and City visited seven recently redeveloped northwest waterfront development areas. During the tour the group met with local leaders and development professionals who were involved in the redevelopment of different waterfronts in Bremerton, Kirkland/Carillon Point, Bell- ingham Washington, as well Granville Island, False Creek/Olympic Village, North Vancouver and Dockside Green/Victoria in British Columbia. The tour group included Port Commissioners Melroy, Wiseman, and Hughes, Mayor Ron Onslow, and other key Port and City leadership. They had the opportunity to discuss the successes, chal- lenges, and missteps other communities went through in the process of redeveloping/revitalizing their local waterfront. It was the intent of the Port and the City to learn as much as possible about how the various communities and project partners worked to vision, plan, design, implement, partner and manage successful waterfront redevelopment. The City and Port wanted to learn from the experience (good and bad) of others in order to increase the chances of a successful downtown and waterfront revitalization in Ridgefield. Additionally, the tour was designed to establish a shared understanding between the City and Port regarding the opportunities, challenges, innovations, respective roles and forms of cooperation that can be expected as they move through the redevelopment and revitalization process. In order for the Port of Ridgefield's planning for the waterfront development — a brownfield proj- ect — to be successful, it must be well integrated with the City of Ridgefield's downtown revitaliza- tion planning. Ridgefield's historic downtown traditionally depended on the mill jobs located on the waterfront. Today, the mill jobs are gone and the downtown is primarily dependent on the patronage of residents in the surrounding neighborhoods and some visitors to the area. Al- though Ridgefield is becoming more of a destination area for people wanting to experience the community's events and festivals, regional entertainment, wildlife viewing and other recreational activities, economic transition has been stagnant due, in part, to limited funding for creating a comprehensive vision for the historic downtown, and constrained access to and redevelopment of the waterfront. This integrated planning effort was initiated by City of Ridgefield (City) and Port of Ridgefield (Port) leadership to coordinate redevelopment of the waterfront with revitalization of downtown (Figure RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT—ACTION PLAN Figure 1-1. Aerial Photograph of Downtown and Waterfront Project Area RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN 1-1). A major cleanup of the former wood treating facility on the waterfront is nearing comple- tion. The Port is leading the effort to redevelop the 40 -acre property into a community asset that provides economic, environmental, and community benefits. This joint planning effort through the City and the Port in conjunction with community members seeks to: • Maximize mutual benefits and remove barriers to waterfront redevelopment and down- town revitalization • Coordinate economic development efforts, land use policy and regulations, infrastructure development, and public amenity improvements • Incorporate sustainable development principles into land use planning and facility devel- opment 1 PURPOSE The primary purpose of the IPG project was to develop a shared vision along with a coordinated set of planning goals, priority actions and projects for the downtown and waterfront areas. In addition, the community wanted to encourage coordination, collaboration and communication among the interested parties working in the area which include elected officials and staff of the Port of Ridgefield and City of Ridgefield, business owners, property owners and interested citizens. The plan is designed to promote the social, environmental and economic wellbeing of Ridgefield through the revitalization of downtown and redevelopment of the waterfront. The citizens of Ridgefield endeavor to create a community where people of all ages can pursue their aspirations in ways that do not preclude future generations from doing the some. Both the City and Port are interested in establishing a strong working relationship and strategic plan that can guide public decision making and investment for the twenty to thirty year redevel- opment horizon. The Port and City recognize that in order to be successful, successions of civic leadership will be contributing to the implementation and updating of this plan. The parties also recognize that some of the component projects in the downtown and on the waterfront will re- quire support and potentially investment by the Port and City. To be successful in creating a vital, dynamic downtown and attractive, engaging waterfront, the community must: • Integrate land use planning; • Cooperate in project and amenity development; • Coordinate public investments; and • Attract private investment in the planning area. This plan is designed to support a shared endeavor of the Port, City and people of Ridgefield. This plan must be a living document - it will need to evolve over time in order to address opportu- nities and challenges as they emerge. This plan is a starting point, community leadership should plan to regularly revisit this plan and amend it as necessary in order to ensure successful revital- ization of the downtown area. RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT—ACTION PLAN COMMUNITY MEETING Mf VISIONINGI WORKSHOP PLAN B PROJECT MATRIX City Port -USFWS - County -CREDC -LCREP DRAFT VISION. ECONOMIC STRATEGY AND ACTION ITEM LIST -Analysis of potential actions 14 and prionties BROWNFIELD EDUCATION WORKSHOP - Information and guidance documents Figure 1-2. Action Plan Flow Chart 4 COMMUNITY MEETING M 2 REVIEW ECONOMIC STRATEGY DRAFT ACTION PLAN 1 Priorities (short-term & COMMUNITY tong -term) MEETING n 3 - Funding mechamsms PRIORITY Assign res PROJECTS g possibilities 1 1.2 RELATIONSHIP TO EXISTING PLANS The Port and City each have carefully prepared and planned for long-term development. The integrated planning effort builds on these existing plans including: • Ridgefield Urban Area Comprehensive Plan (2004-2024) • Port of Ridgefield Comprehensive Scheme of Harbor Improvements • Downtown Ridgefield Planning Guidelines The City and Port plans share common overarching principles of sustainability in their vision for future development: Environment —maintain a healthy environment with abundant opportunities for outdoor recre- ation and public access to the waterfront Economy —promote a robust local economy with regional connections Community —maintain Ridgefield's unique character and foster a high quality of life Clark County, the Ridgefield School District, and the US Fish and Wildlife Service that manages the adjacent Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge have also crafted land use and capital facilities plans that have important implications for the Ridgefield Community. A summary of the major projects and elements of these plans is presented in Appendix A. RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN MATE RFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT — ACTION PLAN 5 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN 1.3 PLANNING PROCESS The Downtown/Waterfront Integration Action Plan was developed through a community-based planning process designed to engage residents, business owners, and City and Port leadership in a creative conversation about the future. The needs and priorities were identified largely by input from community members. Interviews with City and Port staff and community organizations were also essential to this effort and are available in a separate document. Step 1: Analyze Community Needs and Existing Conditions The planning process was initiated in the spring of 2010 with a comprehensive review of existing planning documents and meetings with City and Port staff. The objectives of these meetings were to identify the needs of the community and develop an understanding of the relationships be- tween City and Port planning efforts. The findings of this analysis were presented at a community meeting on April 28, 2010. The community meeting included small group discussions to identify strengths, weaknesses and opportunities for the downtown and waterfront and to formulate a draft vision statement for the downtown and waterfront. As this plan was drafted, the nation and Ridgefield are beginning to emerge from the great eco- nomic recession of 2008-9. We are now in the middle of a great national economic restructuring. For planning purposes, it is still too early to predict which economic sectors and technologies will emerge as front runners behind which we can form a set of specific, targeted economic develop- ment actions. That said, Ridgefield must continue to prepare and position its community, its economic properties (i.e., the waterfront) and assets for future success - no matter which economic sector, activities and technologies form the basis of our restructured economy. Ridgefield can't pick winners and losers and risk being wrong and wasting public time and money. It needs its economic development planning (i.e., land use and infrastructure planning) and investments that prepare Ridgefield to be quick, nimble and responsive when a suitable employment creating opportunity/client is identi- fied. To the extent that Ridgefield can prepare for economic success, it will be able to successfully out -compete other communities and win the prize of high-quality employers and good corporate citizens for the community - which is ultimately what will catalyze redevelopment of the waterfront and revitalization of the downtown. This plan is structured around three strategic values (see below). These values, developed by the community through a comprehensive public process, are used to focus the plan and make it easier for the reader to understand how seemingly disparate components of the plan support at- tainment of the overall vision. The three strategic values are: Create a complete community in which one can live, work, and play through community collaboration — Communication, coordination, and cooperation between elected leaders, public staff and other interested parties (business owners, property own- ers, citizens) will be critical to the successful attainment of the community's shared vision. No single entity can be expected to implement the plan and related projects. Collabora- tion is essential, without it this plan will fail. 2. Capitalize on natural environmental assets through environmental care — The cleanup of environmentally contaminated sites within the project area to protect human health and the environment is a key planning directive of the community. The citizens of Ridgefield clearly desire to protect, clean, enjoy and learn from their environment. Sus- tainability is a community value. Citizens want to see wise and efficient use/re-use of RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN natural resources and energy. Being good stewards of the environment will also translate into Ridgefield as an Eco -destination — The development and promotion of Ridgefield as a place to visit for outdoor recreation and appreciation of the area's natural assets or to start or locate a business. Ridgefield will attract people (visitors, shoppers, entrepreneurs and investors) to the waterfront and downtown area that have the same values and con- nection to the environment and who will promote sustainable commerce and investment in downtown as well as in the greater Ridgefield area. Part of Ridgefield's brand will be a center of Eco -tourism, where visitors are asked to preserve, protect, and observe wildlife and their habitats. Capitalize on Regional Innovation Economy — Economists foresee the coming of the "innovation economy". Ridgefield is the heart of the Discovery Corridor - an area suited for innovation -based companies including technology-based companies, medical ser- vices, research and development companies and education facilities. The downtown and waterfront area can serve to attract entrepreneurs, startup businesses and private sector investment by providing employment space, entertainment, social venues, recreation op- portunities, etc. A business friendly, business savvy regulatory environment coupled with an attractive, dynamic, thriving downtown business district will attract and retain innova- tors — all key components to regaining and sustaining the area's economic health. Step 2: Formulating a Vision and Strategy Based on the findings of Step 1, the project team drafted a vision statement (see page 19) for the downtown and waterfront and options for strat- egies to implement that vision. The vision and strategies were shared with the community in a town hall meeting on June 22, 2010. A meeting was also held with members from the Ridgefield Business Association (RBA) to gather input on April 28 Town Hall Meeting community building themes and economic strategies. Additional public input and feedback were received during the City of Ridgefield's National Night Out and the Port of Ridgefield's Annual Picnic during the month of August 2010. The vision statement, community building themes and economic strategies were revised based on community input received at those events. Step 3: Prioritizing Actions A large list of potential projects to promote downtown/waterfront integration and development was generated from existing plans and input from the community. The project team evaluated the feasibility, benefits, and community support for each project and prioritized them based on those criteria. The project list is discussed in Section 4 (Action Items). In a community meeting on Oc- tober 19, 2010, the public identified "catalyst projects" that would have the greatest potential to move Ridgefield's downtown and waterfront toward the vision for the future. Comments from community meetings, presentations, and exhibits can be found in a separate document. Steq 4: Draftina Action Plan The Action Plan synthesizes the findings and input of the planning process and identifies imple- mentation steps to guide the community to achieving the downtown/waterfront vision. RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN 1.4 KEY FINDINGS The planning process revealed a number of key findings that must be considered to successfully achieve sustainable development and integration of the Ridgefield downtown and waterfront. This study focuses on the waterfront and downtown, but their development is inherently connected to commercial development at the 1-5 Junction, residential development in Ridgefield, and proxim- ity to the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge. The challenges and opportunities of each of these areas need to be considered in planning for the future of downtown and the waterfront and the community as a whole. 1-5 Junction — A growing commercial, medical, and light industrial complex is developing at the Junction. These businesses operate on a different business model than downtown shops or future waterfront enterprises. Businesses located at the junction capitalize on the freeway traffic and greater access to the met- ropolitan region. There is a potential for these three geographic concentrations (1-5 Junction, Downtown, Waterfront) of economic development to complement one another, but there are tensions inherent in their different needs. Residential Neighborhoods — There has been a recent boom in residential development in Ridgefield. The newly devel- oped residential properties are primarily single-family dwelling United Natural Foods, Inc. Facility units. The average cost of new housing in Ridgefield is priced above the cost of housing in other north Clark County com- munities including La Center and Battle Ground. While this growth has slowed with the national recession, the population growth in the community has important implications for infrastructure, schools, transportation, and economic development. Downtown —The primary assets of downtown are its small town charm and walkable scale. Supporting the small businesses in downtown is an important goal for the community. There is limited information on shoppers at these businesses, but it appears there is great potential to market to the growing residential neighborhoods within Ridgefield city limits and adjacent areas. An emerging trend in successful small downtowns is for consumers to frequent these areas for services, such as restaurants and cafes more than for goods, which are typically purchased at larger retail stores or on the internet. Businesses and public buildings are clustered on a three block section of Pioneer Street and three blocks along Main Avenue. While this is a limited area, successful downtowns are built on a criti- cal mass of businesses, so the community should focus on filling in this area, rather than expand- ing it. Cleanup and redevelopment of potentially contaminated properties (brownfields) can also play a key role in creating more developable land within this downtown core. However, finding funding assistance for property owners to clean up smaller, individual properties is difficult. Waterfront — The primary assets associated with the waterfront include public access to the wa- terfront; proximity to natural resources including the water, Refuge and wildlife; and the business and economic benefit potential associated with the redevelopment of the waterfront properties. The cleanup of contamination at the former wood treating facility on the Port's waterfront property is nearing completion. The completion of this cleanup effort will provide the opportunity to rede- velop approximately 40 acres of waterfront property in the core of the community of Ridgefield. RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN This site has historically been the traditional employment center for Ridgefield. The redevelopment of this property will be for a mixed-use waterfront employment center that is intended to provide for a diversity of job types and wages. The redevelopment of this area will also provide for in- creased public access to the waterfront and recreational opportunities. The waterfront development needs to lead development in the downtown/waterfront area. Retail never leads in development. Downtown's growth will be dependent on the development, growth, and success of the waterfront. The waterfront will be a major attraction for visitors, residents, and business people who might not leave or explore beyond the junction area. Downtown will benefit from the increased traffic to the waterfront and should support and promote that development. Waterfront developers should reach out to the entire community to ensure that when built out, Ridgefield is still a place in which people still want to live, work, and play. The waterfront area also contains property currently built with a floating home development known as the McCuddy Marina. In 2010, McCuddy secured a new 25 -year lease from the De- partment of Natural Resources. It is important to everyone's future that the Port, City and Mc - Cuddy work together to improve the waterfront. Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge — According to information contained in the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assess- ment, the Refuge draws approximately 90,000 visitors each year and tourism is expected to grow. With close proximity to over 2 million residents in the Portland/Vancouver Metropolitan area, the Refuge is considered an "urban" refuge. Visitation at the Refuge has increased 8 -fold since the 1980s and is expected to continue to increase. The current perception of Ridgefield residents and business owners is that visitors largely bypass downtown Ridgefield and if they do come into L" downtown, they spend little money in the commu- nity. There is a great opportunity for local busi- nessesto profit from eco -tourism. Eco -tourism is tourism in often threatened natural environments E especially to support conservation efforts and ob- serve wildlife. Keys to capturing that opportunity_ include: creating physical linkages that encourage Refuge tourists to stop in downtown, improving way -finding and signage to lead tourists to local businesses, and developing partnerships between the Refuge, City, Port and local businesses to leverage investment, tourism, and achieving the vision set forth by the community. RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT—ACTION PLAN 1.5 DOWNTOWN ASSESSMENT 1.5.1 Downtown Assessment The boundary of the downtown project area is shown in Figure 1-4 H Ridgefield is a growing community with a great deal to offer residents, business- es, and visitors. With the picturesque Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge as its backyard, Ridgefield's rolling hills, tranquil setting, and old-fashioned downtown evoke a welcoming "Main Street America" charm and character. So, what is "Main Street America"? The phrase has been used to describe ev- erything from our nostalgic past to our current economic woes, but when we talk about Main Street America, we are thinking of real places doing real work to re- vitalize economies and preserve their character. Ridgefield wants to preserve the small, hometown feel that brings to mind a safe, walkable downtown with tree lined streets - a place you are likely to meet and greet your neighbors. With sweeping views of the Wildlife Refuge, downtown Ridgefield's tree -lined streets are the perfect place to enjoy a number of unique shops and charming restaurants. A pleasant walk along Main and Pioneer streets will take you past a salon, coffee house, antiques store, art gallery, gift boutique, tea house, and more. Downtown Ridgefield is also the City's civic center with City Hall, the post office, community library, community center, and police station. 1.5.2 Setting the Stage In the mid-1990s, Ridgefield expanded its city limits from the downtown area to include the area surrounding the 1-5 interchange. This expansion opened a significant amount of land for em- ployment -based development. For example, Southwest Washington Health System (PeaceHealth) purchased a 75 -acre development east of the interchange for a future medical campus. The op- portunity for new jobs and a base for local, regional, and national businesses will allow Ridgefield to continue to be a well-balanced, vibrant community. Downtown Ridgefield has been the historic business core of Ridgefield. The expanded city limits offer both opportunities and challenges for downtown. Growth in population and businesses in Ridgefield will bring people and business prospects to downtown. Development of the 1-5 Junc- tion and waterfront will bring challenges, especially if downtown tries to compete with, rather than complement, uses at the 1-5 Junction and waterfront. Strategic planning is about creating shared vision and action - identifying needs, priorities, part- ners, actions and funding sources allows us to work forward. We plan in order to be prepared and as we have seen repeatedly, being ready to act attracts funding partners — preparation is the key to success. Now is the time to be planning for economic recovery. Ridgefield has been fortu- nate to have funding support for planning during slow economic times. The IPG allowed Ridge- field to take stock, to assess its needs and priorities and determine its best path forward. Periodic strategic planning has brought over $75 million to Ridgefield projects in the past ten years. These projects have addressed the most pressing community priorities — environmental clean-up and protection; transportation safety and efficiency; waste -water treatment, yet impor- tant community projects remain. Therefore the present round of strategic planning was under- taken. RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT—ACTION PLAN 4. ' - 'a1 AT Alp i.I.�'TY /'•!�Ya. _ ..... e� ,' '�—x �, � • � ''t �'�'-.I�"-.,fin � �:�r" I:�.�w�► ��ir.� t'. lip 40 � 't •' 'fir a�;✓F •;. � �� , "- ' ' �-Ja` riT� €�'f-_, A N, -'' « k v L—, 3 } - Figure 1-4. Current Boundary of Downtown Project Area 1; RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT—ACTION PLAN 1.5.3 Building on Current Assets Currently, downtown is underutilized by residents, businesses, and visitors, making it difficult for existing businesses to succeed. Retail and office space is limited. Residents go elsewhere to shop b h h: : d' d t B ecause s opping c a ces are ino equate in own own. usi- nesses are challenged to bring new interest into downtown. Downtown has the Refuge, Bird Fest, community events and com- munity commitment for economic growth and expansion from which to draw. In the short term, business and property owners in downtown should expand on these opportunities to encourage visitors, and ultimately, investors to downtown. One consistent theme and overriding value in the unified vision for downtown/waterfront integration is "keeping the hometown feel" of Ridgefield. Downtown will be the cornerstone for ensur- ing that Ridgefield's "hometown feel" is carried through to the future. Downtown should provide services for locals and visitors alike, as well as enhancements for the waterfront experience. BirdFest Downtown should acknowledge the community's history and complement the new development of the waterfront and 1-5 Junction. 1.5.4 For Residents and Visitors Alike People attracted to Ridgefield embody the casual, outdoor, Northwest lifestyle. Local residents need services to include, but certainly not limited to, dry cleaners, salons, a specialty paper store, and high-end pet supplies. Downtown should also remain the civic and cultural center for the community. In the future, visitors may enjoy additional cafes, gift stores, art galleries, coffee shops and spe- cialty shops geared to a clientele exploring the natural environment. Downtown's growth will be tied to the success and type of development that occurs at the 1-5 Junction and waterfront. 1.5.5 Accent on Access Downtown's future will also be impacted by the extension of Pioneer Street to the waterfront. Keeping downtown friendly to walkers may be affected by changes in traffic that accesses the wa- terfront; Pioneer Street will be the direct connection for boaters, visitors, and employment. Pioneer Street, east of Main Avenue, will see more vehicular traffic than Main Avenue. This is not to say that Pioneer Street will not be walker friendly. Rather, street design should consider more vehicles sharing the streetscape as the waterfront develops. Main Avenue will, more likely be, the strollable "avenue" for downtown Ridgefield. Anchored by Overlook Park, Davis Park, the Library and Community Center — and serving as the gateway to the waterfront — Main Avenue will grow into the "meet and greet" spine of Ridgefield for local residents and visitors alike. Lined with specialty stores and eateries, Main Avenue will set the pace for a classic Northwest experience – urbane yet connected to the surrounding environment, ac- cessible to economic resources like airports and cultural activities without having to bear the brunt of their direct impacts like noise, traffic, or competing uses. Development and implementation of design standards and policy will ensure that Main Avenue is the downtown showcase that anchors local and visiting commerce. 12 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN The intersection at Pioneer Street and Main Ave- nue will literally and figuratively be the gateway to the waterfront. That intersection is the pivot point for the Ridgefield "menu" — east of the intersection is the civic leg of downtown and the connection to the Junction: west of the intersection is the newly developed waterfront, public access to the water, and views of the Refuge: and north and south of the intersection connects the strollable downtown shops and activities with the residences and views of the Refuge. It will be the crossroads for the type of experience the community is looking for in Ridgefield. Ridgefield has the opportunity to make this intersection an waterfront — a visual representation of what Ridgefield is at its core. 1.5.6 Strategies for Growth iconic entrance to the Downtown development needs to look at short-, medium- and long-term strategies for growth. In the short term, the business community, residents, school district, City, and Port of Ridgefield should form a task force to work through strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and challenges to downtown development. Out of this effort a road map with timelines, roles and responsibilities, and partners for downtown development should be identified for implementation. The community should begin a downtown master plan process to identify uses and pedestrian and transporta- tion flow. It should also include planning for clean up and economic use of the brownfields in the downtown area. It is important the planning process include downtown development experts from outside Ridgefield. They will have the experience and know-how that can help avoid unnecessary pitfalls. Also in the short term, downtown leaders should increase participation in key events that already have a strong following. BirdFest is at the forefront of this effort. Downtown should actively look for ways to tap into BirdFest-like events that will draw people specifically into downtown. Ridge- field should also look for ways to work with the school district to enhance opportunities to com- bine education with downtown and waterfront discovery. In the mid term, the City should work with the Port to develop a recruitment agenda for down- town. The Port has a long, successful history in economic development and will already have recruitment efforts underway for the waterfront. Working together, and indirectly working with recruitment at the 1-5 Junction, the City can more easily identify the niche downtown will play in the regional economy. Historically, downtown areas serve as business incubators that will help fledgling business grow and expand through support from an overall master plan, with planning, policies and incentives, for downtown businesses. The City of Ridgefield should apply for economic development grants and work with regional developers on devising incentives for in -fill development. Using the Master Plan and connecting the transportation improvements, Ridgefield would compete well for funding sources that focus on economic development, downtown development, and transportation/sustainability. 13 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN 1. 5.7 Gateway to Opportunity Long term, downtown Ridgefield can be the "Gateway" to the waterfront and the Refuge. It can be a great place to walk and bike. Development of downtown to accommodate the needs of its residents and business owners, as well as visitors, to find services and enjoy a Northwest experi- ence in a charming, "Main Street" town that looks to the future while honoring its past and the environment. 1.6 WATERFRONT ASSESSMENT The waterfront properties adjacent to the downtown area of Ridgefield consist of the Port owned waterfront property, the City of Ridgefield Wastewater Treatment Plant, Union Pacific Railroad property and private property currently owned by McCuddy's Marina. The Port -owned property is in the process of obtaining land use entitlement permits for the redevelopment while the privately owned property is operated as a private marina. The Port property consists of over 40 acres of waterfront property and includes the existing public boat and kayak launches. McCuddy's Marina property is approximately 14 acres in size and contains a floating home community, boat moor- age facility and commercial uses such as Ridgefield Kayak. 1.6.1 Waterfront Redevelopment The Port is currently nearing completion of a major environmental clean up effort and intends to redevelop the waterfront property. The clean up effort began in 1995 when the Port and the Washington State Department of Ecology reached an agreement to begin cleaning the site. The site has been the traditional employment center for the community. Historically, the site was utilized by industrial businesses. The Port has been preparing for the redevelopment of this prop- erty and has included the guiding vision, goals, and design factors for the project in the Port of Ridgefield Comprehensive Scheme for Harbor Improvements (current revision adopted by the Port Commissioners in 2008). The Port is currently obtaining the necessary land use and environmental permits from local, state and federal agencies to redevelop the property. The proposed zoning for the waterfront property provides for an opportunity of mixed uses including employment and light industrial uses; in - water uses and structures, upper-level residential; office and professional uses; retail and service uses; accompanied by open spaces and public waterfront access. Considerations to allow for the continued use of adjacent waterfront properties for floating home and private boat moorage and additional commercial uses have also been addressed. 1.6.2 Access In 2006, planning began for a rail overpass to provide a new, direct road access to the Lake River waterfront from downtown Ridgefield. Following a feasibility study of alignments, the selected alignment will extend Pioneer Street to the west via a curving overpass that will land near the base of Mill Street. The project provides for safe and efficient access to the waterfront and allows for the closure of the at -grade rail crossings at Mill Street and Division Street. Preliminary planning on the overpass project has been started and preliminary design work is currently being com- pleted. The planning and construction of the overpass is part of the redevelopment plan for the waterfront. Completion of the rail overpass is critical to the redevelopment of the waterfront area. Inclusion of aesthetic design details at the intersection of Pioneer Street and Main Avenue and on the fagade of the overpass should be considered and included to provide for design integration of the downtown and waterfront areas. 14 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT—ACTION PLAN Pedestrian and trail connections between downtown and the waterfront are critical to the overall integration of these two areas. The community has expressed a strong desire to increase pedes- trian, bicycle and water linkages between the downtown and waterfront areas. The Ridgefield community also wants be an active part of the county pedestrian, bike, and water trails so that Ridgefield can be part of the larger Clark County recreation plan for trails and the promotion and marketing that serves the plan. Construction of the rail overpass project should provide for ap- pealing pedestrian access provisions that provide adequate separation from vehicular traffic as well as areas to stop and enjoy the view of the natural waterfront amenities. 1.6.3 Design and Character The natural environment and the adjacent Wildlife Refuge should be reflected in the design and character of the waterfront redevelopment. Downtown has approved design guidelines that can be adopted or waterfront design guidelines can be proposed to the City Council. Zoning provi- sions have been adopted that include providing for the protection of view sheds to Lake River and the Refuge, and limiting the height of structures adjacent to the Refuge and floating home devel- opment by allowing for increased heights in the center of the Port redevelopment site. It is recom- mended that building and site design standards be adopted to guide the overall development of the waterfront and provide design integration provisions with the downtown and surrounding environment. 1.7 INTEGRATION OF DOWNTOWN AND WATERFRONT 1.7.1 Physical The two major barriers to physical connectivity between downtown and the waterfront are topog- raphy and the rail corridor. The topographic distinction can be approached as an asset. The top of the ridge east of the rail corridor affords expansive views over Lake River and the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge. These views from downtown are an amenity for individual properties and for the community. The development of Over- look Park takes advantage of these views and has the potential to be a focal point linking downtown, the waterfront, and the Refuge. The low lying elevation of the waterfront also provides an op- portunity for development of buildings of greater height than existing buildings in downtown withoutkiii impacting views or architectural cohesiveness. milk The rail corridor serves as a backbone for moving_ freight and passengers on the west coast. PlansNow_:ate- S' are underway to support high-speed rail trans- portation along this line. The railroad overpass is being designed to provide safe, unobstructed, and direct vehicle and pedestrian access to the Ridgefield waterfront, as well as to the "Carty" unit (and potentially the "River S" unit via a future bridge spanning Lake River) of the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge. At present, safety and access to the waterfront by emergency vehicles, cars, trucks, and pedestrians are considered deficient because of the at -grade rail crossings and inadequate emergency access. The Pioneer Street rail overpass has the potential to be a land- mark architectural gateway; drawing people to downtown and the waterfront as well as a critical element of the transportation infrastructure. 15 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN There is also great potential for walking and bicycle trails to connect downtown, the waterfront, the Refuge, and residential neighborhoods. There is strong support in the community for such a trail system and the City Parks Capital Facilities Plan identifies potential routes for new trails. 1.7.2 Economic There is potential for both competition and synergy between businesses in the downtown and waterfront districts. The types of businesses that currently thrive in downtown are mostly food and drink establishments, niche retail, and entertainment. These businesses all benefit from the char- acter and scale of the downtown. Plans for redevelopment on the waterfront can promote busi- nesses that complement rather than compete with existing shops. Such businesses could include research and development, professional services, and high tech companies. Downtown will be more boutique type shops that are family owned. The Waterfront will attract specialty stores look- ing for a regional presence. They will be destinations for those seeking a recreational, Northwest experience. It is recommended that the Port of Ridgefield implement its waterfront master plan. The Port's plans for redevelopment on the waterfront include restaurants, a hotel, and retail stores. While these new businesses will, to a degree, compete with existing downtown businesses, they may also raise the cache of Ridgefield as a destination and attract more consumers to the entire area. Both downtown and the waterfront mutually benefit from increasing the critical mass of amenities and businesses that draw people to Ridgefield. 7.3 Land Use Policy The City of Ridgefield's Comprehensive Plan updated in 2010 identified the need to adopt clear and objective zoning, environmental, and land division standards and regulations to ensure con- sistency with the goals and policies contained in the plan. The Planning Commission completed a review of the entire Uniform Development Code and prepared recommended changes to the City Council in January 2009. As part of the Integrated Planning Grant process, a stakeholder committee was established to review the recommenda- tions of the Planning Commission to ensure adequate vetting and public review of the proposed changes occurred prior to adopting changes to the development code. Several recommendations by the stakeholder committee were applicable to the downtown and waterfront areas and have been forwarded to the City for consideration. These recommendations include: • Preparing separate mixed-use districts for the downtown and waterfront areas. The sepa- rate zones are intended to recognize that although the areas are tied together by geog- raphy, proximity to Lake River, transportation and infrastructure; they each have distinct characteristics. The separate mixed-use zones are intended to protect and enhance the character of each area while ensuring overall integration of the downtown and waterfront areas. Dividing the waterfront area into two zoning districts; a waterfront mixed-use district for the Port property and a mixed-use commercial and residential district for the McCuddy Marina property. These separate waterfront districts are intended to recognize that the Port has vested land use entitlement permits to develop the waterfront property and that the adjacent McCuddy property has recently secured the necessary permits to continue using 0 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN the property for a floating home community but to also allow limited commercial use of the property. • Adopt a zoning map consistent with the Comprehensive Plan map. The zoning map that is contained in the Comprehensive Plan is intended to be implemented upon the adoption of revised development regulations. State law requires that the zoning map and the land use designation map contained in the Comprehensive Plan are coordinated and consistent with each other. (Completed in December 2010) • Adopt the boundary for the downtown mixed-use zone as designated on the adopted Comprehensive Plan map. Recommend that the City review this boundary to allow for the expansion of the boundary to allow for future growth of the downtown area. • Include the 14 Essential Guidelines for Downtown Ridgefield by integrating the guidelines into the downtown mixed-use zoning district. • Review possible standards to evaluate the inclusion of a Lake River View Protection Over- lay District in the development code to maintain and enhance the beneficial effects of preserving views of Lake River and the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge. 17 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT—ACTION PLAN 2. DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT VISION Early in the process, the project team crafted a draft unified vision from existing vision statements contained in the City and Port's Comprehensive Plans. A draft vision statement was presented as a starting point for community input and refinement at the first community meeting. Public com- ment was taken throughout the public involvement process and the vision statement was refined. The following is the final unified vision: Ridgefield is a regional employment and residential center that drives a local, robust economy. Ridgefield preserves and protects critical natural areas and is committed to community and environmental sustainability. Ridgefield is a destination area for tourists and visitors - admired for its walkable downtown, "Main Street" feeling, and small town character. Ridgefield is pedestrian, bicycle, and transit friendly with strong connections between neighborhoods, the downtown -waterfront, and adjoining activity centers. This vision identifies the values most important to the community. When asked what they would like the waterfront and downtown to be like in ten years, the most common responses from com- munity members were: Green* — with open space, access to Lake River and other natural assets, and green jobs all con- nected by trails and pathways, roads and rail Vibrant — with community activities, outdoor recreation, gathering spaces for families and neigh- bors, jobs, entrepreneurial spirit Thriving Local Business Community — with independent shops and businesses in downtown, the waterfront, and 1-5 Junction that complement each other and take advantage of the unique assets of each location, known for its quality workforce, and employment opportunities Destination — an attractive town for residents and tourists known for its small-town character, natural assets, and water recreation, shopping, quaint business district: regional employment center Complete Community — where people can live, work and play The vision formulated by the community is for Ridgefield to be recognized for its livability, natural environment and innovative local economy. The vision statement is the framework from which the general policy recommendations and revitalization and integration strategies for the downtown and waterfront were crafted. *"Green" is defined in 201 1 as using environmentally friendly, sustainable materials and practices in new development and redevelopment. IM RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN The overarching general policy recommendations for the Plan that were crafted from the vision statement and community input and are the basis from which the community development strate- gies formulated are: General Policy Recommendations • Capitalize on previous community successes • Downtown businesses should be oriented toward services more than goods due to behav- ioral changes with demographic shifts • Cleanup and redevelopment of downtown brownfield properties in core downtown area to create economic critical mass • Improve Main Street as a focal point to assist in connecting the downtown and waterfront areas • Support the vision with investment in necessary public infrastructure • Provide for pedestrian friendly circulation and access • Maintain the community's quality of life with development efforts • Capitalize on proximity to the Refuge and Lake River Land Use Recommendations • Encourage upper story residential development in the downtown and waterfront for a 24/7 presence to support community and business vitality • Focus development and redevelopment (new and infill) of the downtown areas between Main Avenue and 5th Avenue and Mill Street to Pioneer Street • Encourage arts, cultural and institutional uses in the downtown core • Implement the provisions contained in the International Building Code to allow for greater flexibility to utilize existing buildings when desired • Protect view sheds to the waterfront through identified view protection corridors • Provide for appropriate building heights in downtown to maintain the "small town feel" • Implement design guidelines for the downtown area that will integrate guidelines identi- fied in the 2004 Downtown Design Guidelines Plan • Establish design guidelines for the waterfront to create consistency and connectivity to downtown while allowing for the waterfront to develop its own character and identity • Downtown should remain the civic and cultural center for the community Connections & Access Recommendations • Support the completion of the Pioneer Street Rail Overpass • Support a second connection to the waterfront from the downtown to provide for looped pedestrian access • Provide for public access opportunities to Lake River • Connect downtown, waterfront, refuge and residential areas via land and water trails and pathways • Prepare a Transportation Plan to assess impacts to the Pioneer Street Corridor • Include design improvements for pedestrian mobility and create an iconic gateway for the downtown and waterfront F RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT—ACTION PLAN 3. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES The vision statement is implemented through targeted community develop- ment strategies. These strategies provide focus on where the community will primarily target its resources and energy. Community building themes and economic strategies were reviewed and refined during the public involvement process. These strategies synthesize the community's inherent assets and its values to direct future marketing, development, and investment (See Fig- ure 3-1. Community Development Strategies). Successful communities often achieve their goals by persistent focus on a small number of key strategies. Based on the strategies, specific projects and policies can be prioritized. It is important to note the three economic strategies proposed are mutually sup- portive rather than mutually exclusive. The identified strategies are described below. 3.1 CAPITALIZE ON NATURAL ASSETS - Eco -Recreation Destination There is strong community interest in branding Ridgefield as a destination for outdoor recreation based on the assets of Lake River, which also provides access to Vancouver Lake and the Colum- bia River, the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, and a regional network of land and water trails. Catalyst project priorities, timeframes, and lead agencies to implement strategies are addressed in Chapter 4. Implementation of this economic strategy focuses on: • Investing in public amenities to enhance outdoor experiences, such as trails, a nature education center, and public marina • Promoting, recruiting, and expanding existing food, drink, and lodging services • Marketing and branding Ridgefield as a destination for outdoor recreation 3.2 COMPLETE COMMUNITY - Live, Work, and Play in Ridgefield The traditional small-town layout of Ridgefield with residences in walking distance to businesses provides the urban form for a community where people can live, work, and play in one area. With rising gasoline prices and traffic congestion, many people and businesses are seeking to locate in such communities. The natural assets of Ridgefield make it all the more attractive. Rede- velopment of the waterfront expands the opportunities for businesses to grow in close proximity to residential neighborhoods and a beautiful environment. Businesses in the technology, research, and professional services fields have the ability to locate outside metropolitan areas and away from highways, and often base their location decisions greatly on quality of life. Implementation of this economic strategy focuses on: • Continuing targeted business recruitment efforts • Supporting development of needed office space with public infrastructure • Investing in high speed communication and fiber optic capacity • Committing community resources to excellent schools 21 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN • Promoting development of a range of desirable housing options • Investing in public amenities to enhance outdoor experiences, such as trails, a nature education center, and public marina • Promoting, recruiting, and expanding existing food, drink, and lodging services • Promoting the development of a downtown Civic Center Master Plan 3.3 CAPITALIZE ON A REGIONAL INNOVATION ECONOMY - Clean & Green Technology The Portland/Vancouver metropolitan area is home to many high-tech companies that thrive on innovation and creativity. The Port and other agencies have been actively promoting the 1-5 corri- dor in North Clark County as the "Discovery Corridor," an ideal location for these types of busi- nesses. Redevelopment of the waterfront creates an opportunity to build a cluster of technology- based businesses, such as alternative energy or software development. Implementation of this economic strategy focuses on: • Continuing targeted business recruitment efforts • Supporting development of needed office space with public infrastructure • Investing in high speed communication and fiber optic capacity • Promoting, recruiting, and expanding existing food, drink, and lodging services • Encouraging the use of "green" design in new construction and reconstruction through use of sustainable products and materials with low environmental impact Momentum and Success Over nearly two decades, the Port of Ridgefield and City of Ridgefield have successfully worked together on developing and implementing a plan to meet the needs of the growing community, plan for the future and establish Ridgefield as a destination for commerce and livability. The Port and City realized that working together, they could improve Ridgefield's standing with elected officials and prospective funders. The following illustrates the significant success and momentum accomplished: 1995 — Environmental "Emergency Action" Declared on Waterfront In 1995, the Department of Ecology declared an, "Emergency Action" was necessary to pro- tect Carty Lake and Lake River from pending impacts of PWT contamination. The Port and City are liable parties but have no financial means to fund the clean-up. Strategic environ- mental remediation planning begins. The Port begins to seek funding support and forms political relationships necessary to respond to the crisis. 2001 — Environmental Funding Agreement Reached In 2001 the Port and Ecology reach a landmark funding agreement whereby Ecology would finance the clean-up of the PWT site and the Port would manage the physical work. The value of this funding package today is nearly $80 million; by 2010 $60 million had been received. 2001 — Port of Ridgefield coins the term, "Discovery Corridor" Acting on the belief that the economic potential of North County and the Port District was under imagined, the Port set out to rebrand the area as a home for technology-based com- panies. The Port promotes the concept with state, federal and local elected officials. 22 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN 2002 — "Defining the Discovery Corridor" Published The Port prepared and published a vision and strategic action plan promoting the 1-5 Corri- dor and North County as a future home for technology, education and knowledge based em- ployers. Community transportation infrastructure was identified as a potential limiting factor. 2003 — Discovery Corridor Transportation Visioning A small group of citizens met to discuss transportation needs and policies of North County. The map and policies became talking points during meetings with Clark County and WSDOT. New Ridgefield Interchange contemplated. 2004 — Ridgefield Interchange Sketch Community members sketched a redesigned Ridgefield Interchange and presented the con- cept to WSDOT staff. Work began to put the project on transportation plans. 2005 — Ridgefield Rail Overpass $1 million Planning Grant The Port submits a funding request for planning the rail overpass project. Freight mobility and safety were driving concerns and helped gain outside support for the project. 2005 — Ridgefield 1-5 Interchange Funding Together the Port and City approached state and federal legislators and requested funding for interchange planning and reconstruction. That year, the City receives $9 million in federal SAFETEA-LU funding and $12 million in Washington State "Transportation Package" and CTED grant funding. Over the following few years, the City ultimately receives over $32 mil- lion in State and federal funding, allowing the project to proceed with construction. 2009 — Regional Sewer Plan Completed & MOU Signed Based in large part on the job creation potential of Ridgefield, the area receives $4 million in grant funds to support regional sewer planning and development. Policies and cooperative planning result in a regional plan and an agreement of local jurisdictions to work toward a regional sewer system. The regional approach allows Ridgefield to plan and develop cost- effective sewer treatment for its citizenry and businesses. 2009 — Stimulus Funding & Interchange Construction Based on project planning and preparation the City of Ridgefield was successful in getting federal stimulus funding for the interchange. Construction gets underway. Excavated mate- rial is brought to the Port to be used to cap the site and protect human health and the envi- ronment. 2010 — $100,000 Integrated Planning Grant Received Working together the Port and City of Ridgefield received a grant from Washington State De- partment of Ecology to fund strategic coordinated planning to support revitalization of down- town Ridgefield and the waterfront. The planning goal is to create a shared roadmap to a vibrant, healthy community, economy and natural environment. 2010 — Second Rail Overpass Planning Grant Received The Port received a second $1 million grant. Funds will be used to complete overpass engi- neering to 90% level. Project permitting and entitlement work begins. Project is prepared for construction prior to next federal transportation funding bill. The estimated funding request for construction is $9.5 million. In a time of economic woes, Ridgefield has managed to continue to attract funding for key infra- structure projects to prepare Ridgefield for the future. The IPG provides the vision and roadmap to continue the tradition of success. 23 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN ,tap'TEG'C VANES S�ROpEt4 SPACE, TRAIjS� Jp SPG 8S Marina/ Adequate & CCF Boating Affordable SSA, Lod in Government/ 0 ��� g g Public Services Northwest �4 Dining & Entertainment Lifestyle Cultural Assets Outdoor Recreation Destination Extensive Parks, Trails & Open Spaces Targeted Business; Recruitment Economic Strategy for Revitalization & Integration of ntown & Waterf 1-5 Junction & Discovery Corridor Affordable & Desired Housing Active, Innovative Educational Opportunities Boutique & Retail Services Engaged Community Local & Regional Marketing Plan Pacific Northwest Portland/Vancouver Metro Area Figure 3-1. Community Development Strategies 24 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN 4. ACTION ITEMS - IMPLEMENTATION The development and improvement of commu- nities can be a long-term endeavor. The unified vision for integration of downtown and the water- front will be achieved over time through an incre- mental approach. Consultants can provide analy- sis and guidance, but it will be the hard work of agency staff, local entrepreneurs, elected officials and community volunteers that make the unified vision a reality. Integration will be achieved step by step over time through implementation of specific projects, initia- tives, and policies. Dedication and commitment of City, Port, and the community business and prop- erty owners and residents to the long-term vision and community development strategies is critical to success. This set of specific action items has been developed to implement the community's shared vision and community development strategies. (Action Item List, page 42). These action items have been compiled and vetted through multiple community meetings, review of existing City and Port plan- ning documents, and professional experience of the consulting team. The Action Items are orga- nized into four categories: 1. Economic Development 2. Public Amenities 3. Land Use Policy and Regulations 4. Infrastructure The Action Items were evaluated and prioritized based on the following criteria: Does the Item Promote Integration? — refers to physical and economic connectivity be- tween the waterfront and downtown Was the Item Identified as Priority by the Public? — based on comments and surveys in the community meetings hosted as part of this planning process Is the Item Consistent with Existing Plans? — refers to City and Port Comprehensive Plans and related planning documents Is the Item Feasible? — based on assessment of availability of funding, organizational capac- ity, and whether an action is within the influence of local organizations that will implement the Action Plan Does the Item Benefit the Community? — based on the three criteria that emerge from the community's vision for the future of downtown and the waterfront: improves the economy, pro- tects and integrates nature, and preserves, promotes, and enhances the character of Ridgefield 25 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT—ACTION PLAN 4.1 CATALYST PROJECTS Based on the evaluation of the identified Action Items utilizing the review criteria, public input and the consultant's recommendation, priority catalyst projects were identified. Catalyst is a word from chemistry for a compound that causes a reaction to occur more quickly and vigorously. These projects have been identified as the most important for catalyzing revitalization and integration of the downtown and waterfront. These Catalyst Projects should be considered high priorities for allocation of public and private resources and necessary to achieve the community vision. Many of the Catalyst Projects represent a bundle of related Actions on the list (see Priority Action Items table on page 42). Many of the projects, taken from existing documents and plans, have a set lead agency and time- frame. Other projects that emerged from the community process were added to the action list and have also been summarized. The lead agency and timeframe are noted with the projects. Short term is defined as one to three years; Mid term is defined as three to 10 years; Long term is defined as 10 to 20 years or longer. 26 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT — ACTION PLAN QUICK REFERENCE Priority Action Items (Catalyst Projects) Public Marina Feasibility Study Open Space Development and Improvement j Land Use Policy and Reaulation Port of Ridgefield (Assisted by the City of Ridgefield) Long Term City of Ridgefield (downtown) and Port of Ridgefield Short to Long Term (waterfront) Complete Development Code Update for Downtown and Waterfront City of Ridgefield (Assisted by the Port of Ridgefield) Short Term Economic Development Catalysts City of Ridgefield/Port of Ridgefield Short to Mid Term Waterfront Cleanup and Redevelopment Port of Ridgefield Cleanup - short term Short Term Infrastructure Redevelopment - mid Port of Ridgefield (Assisted by the City of Ridgefield) Short to Long Term to long term Recruit Environmental Center on the Port of Ridgefield/City of Ridgefield Mid to Long Term Waterfront Mid to Long Term Coordinated Marketing and Recruitment Facilitated by City of Ridgefield Short to mid term Program Public Events City of Ridgefield (Assisted by Port of Ridgefield, Short to long term Ridgefield Business Assoc., and Friends of the Refuge) Mid Term Comprehensive Way -Finding and Signage City of Ridgefield (assisted by WSDOT and Clark Program County) Long Term Government Civic Center City of Ridgefield (Assisted by Ridgefield School District, US Postal Service, Fort Vancouver Regional Library, Clark County Fire and Rescue) Public Amenity Catalysts Trails and Pathways City of Ridgefield (Assisted by Clark County, US Short to Long Term Fish and Wildlife Service, Port of Ridgefield, Friends of the Refuge) Public Marina Feasibility Study Open Space Development and Improvement j Land Use Policy and Reaulation Port of Ridgefield (Assisted by the City of Ridgefield) Long Term City of Ridgefield (downtown) and Port of Ridgefield Short to Long Term (waterfront) Complete Development Code Update for Downtown and Waterfront City of Ridgefield (Assisted by the Port of Ridgefield) Short Term Design Guidelines City of Ridgefield/Port of Ridgefield Short to Mid Term Local Financing Mechanisms City of Ridgefield/Port of Ridgefield Short Term Infrastructure Pioneer Street Rail Overpass Port of Ridgefield (Assisted by the City of Ridgefield) Short to Long Term Pioneer Street Corridor Transportation Plan City of Ridgefield Short to Mid Term Downtown Streetscapes and Uses City of Ridgefield Mid to Long Term 27 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN 4. 1.1 Economic Development Catalysts Waterfront Cleanup and Redevelopment The cleanup and redevelopment of the 40 -acre Port property on the Ridgefield waterfront is a transformative project for the community. After years of dedicated effort, the clean-up phase of the project is nearing completion. The Port has developed a conceptual plan for redevelopment of the property as a mixed-use waterfront with a promenade along Lake River, open space, and flexible development pads for retail, office, and hospitality uses. Considerations • Cleanup action effectiveness for supporting future use • Integration of cleanup with redevelopment (example: placing protective soil cap over site and creating final grade for property) • Pedestrian, vehicular, and bicycle connections with downtown, Refuge, and neighborhoods • Positioning physical and marketing redevelopment efforts to mutually benefit waterfront and downtown development • Implications for on- and off-site transportation infrastructure and utilities • Plans for Rail Overpass/Pioneer Street Extension • Bridge over Lake River to Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge Implementation Steps 1 . Complete cleanup action in coordination with redevelopment 2. Entitle property — Federal, state, and local environmental and land use permitting 3. Marketing and targeted business recruitment 4. Construction of public amenities and infrastructure 5. Building construction through Port reviewed and recommended development agreements Lead Agency • Port of Ridgefield Timeframe • Clean Up: Short Term • Redevelopment: Mid to Long Term 28 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN Recruit Environmental Center on the Waterfront One of the most compelling ideas for attracting visitors to the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, downtown and the waterfront is to establish a dynamic, interactive environmental research and education center on the waterfront. This potential center could function as the official visitor center to the Refuge or be affiliated with a university or non-profit organization. This concept has been articulated as part of the Confluence Project, a regional art and cultural collaboration along the Columbia River. While the City and Port would take the lead in recruiting an Environmental Cen- ter, the ultimate decision will be at the state or federal level (i.e., WSU or Department of Interior). Economic feasibility has yet to be determined. Considerations Compatibility between the research and learning center and potential future businesses on the waterfront Potential for US Fish and Wildlife Service presence to move or change their plan to non - federally owned property Implementation Steps Complete a market demand and feasibility analysis 2. Develop partnerships with academic institutions and/or other organizations to support, develop and operate the center I Develop conceptual plans for physical development and operation 4. Pursue funding sources for development Lead Agency Port of Ridgefield/ City of Ridgefield Timeframe Mid to Long Term 29 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN Facilitate Coordinated Branding, Marketing and Business Recruitment Program The City, Port, and Ridgefield Business Association actively market the community. Marketing is a perpetual effort and can always be improved. Current marketing efforts could be expanded to include branding identification and awareness, collection of data on consumer spending, tar- geted recruitment and expansion of desired businesses including food and drink establishments, lodging and accommodations, outdoor recreation, and high-tech firms. With the large population growth in the City of Ridgefield and surrounding area, a "buy local" marketing effort targeting area residents could also be potentially very successful for downtown businesses. Additionally, expanding into the regional "Land Here, Live Here" marketing effort would improve and enhance efforts to recruit entrepreneurs, businesses and visitors from outside the area. Downtown busi- nesses will be part of an economic restructuring based on needs in today's market and not the historic business mix. Considerations • Coordination and collaboration between businesses in downtown, the waterfront and the 1-5 Junction • Developing a brand for Ridgefield used by all organizations promoting the community (Both the City and Port have recently participated in the "Land Here, Live Here" marketing effort led by Identity Clark County but that effort does not specifically "brand" Ridgefield) Implementation Steps 1 . Form Downtown Revitalization Task Force with representatives from, but not limited to, the City, Port, Ridgefield Business Association, School District, Friends of the Refuge, and the arts community to focus on downtown design and recruitment priorities, timelines, and resources (after the transportation plan is completed) 2. Build capacity in the existing Ridgefield Business Association (the Main Street Program model has been successful in communities across Washington and the country) 3. Collect data on consumers in Ridgefield including where they live, what they buy, how much they spend, and other goods and services they would like to see in Ridgefield 4. Establish a list of properties in downtown and the waterfront available for redevelopment 5. Take appropriate steps to position available properties for redevelopment (such as ad- dressing potential environmental issues or infrastructure needs) 6. Develop a marketing strategy coordinated with the Port, City and Ridgefield Business Asso- ciation 7. Develop and provide additional resources to priority marketing efforts Lead Agency • Facilitated by the City of Ridgefield (ultimately, the RBA will lead this effort) Timeframe Short to Mid Term 30 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT—ACTION PLAN Public Events Events like the 4th of July Parade, Bird Fest, Heri- tage Days, Hometown Celebration and First Friday create energy and vitality in communities by bring- ing people together in public spaces and advance economic development. They also drive con- sumers to local businesses. Programming many events throughout the year is a proven strategy for promoting downtown districts. The redevelopment of the waterfront increases the potential for events that draw people to both downtown and the river. Considerations Filling in gaps during the year when there are few public events in the community Coordinating between regional events like the Clark County Fair, events on the Refuge, events in downtown and the waterfront E Develop capacity to create and host additional events to attract visitors and customers to the Downtown and Waterfront Implementation Steps 1 . Continue to support existing regular events 2. When possible, hire an events coordinator 3. Expand Bird Fest to make it a sustainable, annual event — seek counsel with other large events to gain insight on how to take the event to the next level 4. Coordinate between City, Port, Ridgefield Business Association and Refuge to create new events that fit the vision of the community 5. Develop events strategy to create events that promote business (i.e., Sidewalk sales, Holi- day shopping events) Lead Agency City of Ridgefield (assisted by Port of Ridgefield, Ridgefield Business Association, Friends of the Refuge) Timeframe • Short to Long Term (Ongoing) 31 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT —ACTION PLAN Comprehensive Way -Finding and Signage Program A signage program provides visitors with direction to the amenities of the community including downtown, the waterfront, and the Refuge. Currently, there are signs on 1-5 identifying the exit for the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge and along Pioneer Street welcoming people to Old Town Ridgefield. Plans for Overlook Park include an information kiosk to adver- tise events and activities. A way -finding and signage program could improve the existing signs by creating a uniform design that identifies Ridgefield, directing residents and visi- tors to different amenities, and signifying arrival at different destinations. Example Way -Finding Sign 32 Considerations • Coordination with Washington State Department of Transportation on additional signage on 1-5 • Maintenance and updating of information • Signage should be consistent with developing and promotion of Ridgefield Brand Implementation Steps 1. Identify key locations for additional signage 2. Utilize a uniform design for signs 3. Select fabricator to construct signs 4. Install and maintain signage Lead Agency City of Ridgefield (assisted by WSDOT and Clark County) Timeframe • Mid Term RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN Government Civic Center A large portion of existing downtown and waterfront office space is occupied by government of- fices including City Hall, the Port administration building, library, post office, and police station. These civic uses act as anchor tenants that identify these areas as centers of the community and draw in people during weekdays when many tourists and residents are at work. Considerations • Maintenance and upgrading of civic buildings to accommodate current and future use • Need for a long-term plan for centralizing a Civic Center as part of the downtown revital- ization plans Implementation Steps Continue to operate existing government services from locations in downtown and the waterfront 2. Include centralizing a Civic Center in downtown as part of the work of the Downtown Revitalization Task Force recommended in coordinated branding, marketing, and business recruitment catalyst project Lead Agency City of Ridgefield (Assisted by Ridgefield School District, US Postal Service, Fort Vancouver Regional Library, Clark County Fire and Rescue) Timeframe • Long Term 33 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN 4.1.2 Public Amenitv Catalvsts 34 Trails and Pathways The Ridgefield community is close to nature both physically and culturally. The walkability of downtown and the extensive trail system in the Refuge are great assets to be enhanced and pro- moted. At the community meetings, there was strong consensus and desire for more pedestrian and bicycle connections between the residential neighborhoods, downtown, waterfront, and the Refuge. Staff from City, Port, Clark County, LCREP, water trails, and the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge have all begun to coordinate plans to develop these trail and pathway connections, including water trails. Considerations • Connecting City, County, and Refuge trail planning efforts • Pedestrian and bicyclist safety • Waterfront Access Implementation Steps 1 . Identify priority trail and pathway projects 2. Identify gaps/opportunities to increase connectivity. 3. Continue coordination between agencies 4. Identify funding sources to implement trail projects 5. Construct and maintain trails and pathways Lead Agency City of Ridgefield (assisted by Clark County, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Port of Ridge- field, Friends of the Refuge) Timeframe Short to Long Term RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN Public Marina Feasibility Study The cleanup of the former wood treatment facility on the waterfront creates a historic opportunity to create more public access to the water. In addition to McCuddy's Marina and the public boat launch facilities, there is potential to expand boating opportunities and visitors on Lake River and the Columbia River by creating a public marina on Port property. The proximity to the Columbia River and the distance between existing marinas drive the economic potential to brand Ridgefield as a boating destination. The economic and financial feasibility of construction and operation of a public marina should be studied. Considerations • Cost of dredging Lake River to create a boat basin • Environmental conditions - potential that sediments have been contaminated by the for- mer wood treatment facility • Financial balance of revenues from slip fees and other sources with costs of construction, operation and maintenance of marina • Availability of grant funding to support construction of a marina Implementation Steps 1 . Conduct market assessment of demand for marina facilities, including optimal mix of slip sizes 2. Develop financial pro forma of marina costs and revenues Lead Agency • Port of Ridgefield (assisted by City of Ridgefield) Timeframe Long Term 35 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN M Open Space Development and Improvement Several major park projects are planned including renovation of Abrams Park, development of Overlook Park, and public green spaces on the rede- veloped waterfront. These green spaces are important elements of the com- munity that provide recreation opportunities and bring nature into the city. Parks are also economic assets that can enhance the character of a town, raise property values, and attract residents and tourists who in turn spend money at local businesses. Considerations Competition for limited space downtown between parks and private businesses • Balance of public open space and business opportunities on the redeveloped waterfront • Maintenance of park facilities Implementation Steps Ji . Complete design of Overlook Park and construct using grant funds 2. Consider changes to consolidate Davis Park and Ridgefield Commu- nity Park as recommended in the Ridgefield Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan — Implement City's Parks Plan Lead Agency • City of Ridgefield (downtown) and Port of Ridgefield (waterfront) Timeframe Short to Long Term RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN 4.1.3 Land Use Policy and Regulation Complete Development Code Update for Downtown and Waterfront The City is updating the Municipal Code that regulates land development within the City lim- its. The Development Code addresses important issues including zoning standards, subdivision requirements, and permit review processes. The update of the Development Code is especially important for downtown and the waterfront because it will provide the framework to ensure future development aligns with the community vision for the future. Considerations Scale and intensity of development that should be allowed in downtown and the water- front Size and extent of the downtown commercial area Types of uses that should be allowed in downtown and the waterfront A view protection overlay area for residential properties between downtown and the wa- terfront that facilitates the protection of views to Lake River • Creation of a subarea plan and zone for the McCuddy's Marina property to consider redevelopment and code compliance consistent with the unified vision for the IPG Implementation Steps 1. Complete work of the stakeholder committee to revise the code 2. Approval of updated code by Planning Commission 3. Adoption of updated code by City Council Lead Agency City of Ridgefield (assisted by Port of Ridgefield) Timeframe Short Term 37 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN Desian Guidelines Design guidelines establish a framework to promote quality development that fits the character of an area. The City developed design guidelines for downtown in 2004 (Downtown Ridgefield Plan- ning Guide). The community meetings for this public involvement effort reinforced the findings of previous community planning processes in Ridgefield — that maintaining the character of down- town is a priority. Currently, there are no design guidelines for the waterfront beyond the stan- dards in the Development Code. Design guidelines are a useful tool for achieving that objective. Considerations G Applicability of the downtown design guidelines to the waterfront • Development on the waterfront could be required to meet a minimum number of the spe- cific design guidelines for downtown to create architectural consistency while allowing it to develop a distinct character and identity The waterfront and downtown design should include bird safe standards and encourage- ment of sustainable building practices and energy efficiency Implementation Steps 1 . Develop a form of design guidelines for the waterfront in conjunction with the Port of Ridgefield 2. Approval of waterfront design guidelines by planning commission which were created by the City and Port 3. Adoption of waterfront design guidelines by the City Council Lead Agency City of Ridgefield/Port of Ridgefield Timeframe Short to Mid Term 38 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT - ACTION PLAN Local Financing Mechanisms Many of the projects identified to promote sustainable development and integration of the down- town and waterfront require investment of public funds. Over time, these projects will spur eco- nomic development and increase local tax revenues through higher property values and greater sales. In the short term, there is a need to develop financing plans for specific projects in the downtown and waterfront areas. In most states, such revitalization efforts are supported by tax increment financing (TIF) districts. In Washington state, the ability to utilize TIF is limited by legal constraints. Modified versions of TIF are being explored as pilot projects in several communities across the state. State and federal grants for infrastructure, economic development, and open space and public recreation can play a significant role in financing public projects. The establishment of a public development authority (PDA) is another effective redevelopment financing mechanism. A PDA is a public corporation created by a city or county to fulfill a particu- lar public purpose or perform a public function pursuant to Revised Code of Washington Chapter 35.21.730. PDAs are typically created to manage the development and operation of a single project or revitalization of a neighborhood, which the city or county determines is best managed outside of its traditional bureaucracy and lines of authority. The particular project may be en- trepreneurial in nature and may intersect with the private sector in ways that would strain public resources and personnel. The Port of Ridgefield is a type of PDA and is working to redevelop the waterfront as well as other projects in the community. Combination of the brownfield properties in Downtown might be a candidate to consolidate as a PDA. It will take creative thinking to underwrite such a project. By appearing larger, and as a key component of downtown revitalization, there may be some unforeseen opportunities that could be attractive to potential public project funders. Considerations • Partnerships are strong benefits for competitiveness of grant applications (Joint Port and City applications should be attractive to funding agencies, especially if other partners are supportive) • The community's vision for sustainable development aligns with the priorities of many federal and state grant programs Implementation Steps 1 . Identify state and federal grant programs to support Catalyst Projects 2. Develop a systematic plan for obtaining grant funding for Catalyst Projects over time (as projects are implemented, momentum will grow, and the community will find itself in an increasingly better position to obtain future grants) 3. Consider establishing a PDA to promote revitalization of downtown 4. Combine downtown brownfields into a single project — include in Downtown Revitalization Task Force agenda S. Work with private sector developers to form partnerships to promote redevelopment and reinvestment in downtown and waterfront areas. 09 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN Lead Agency • City of Ridgefield/Port of Ridgefield Timeframe y Short Term 40 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN 4.1.4 Infrastructure Pioneer Street Rail Overpass A grade -separated rail crossing is critical to redevelopment of the waterfront. The Pioneer Street Rail Overpass is intended to provide safe, unobstructed, and direct access to the waterfront, as well as to the "Carty" unit (and potentially the "River S" unit) of the Ridgefield National Wild- life Refuge. At present, safety and access to the waterfront by emergency vehicles, cars, trucks, and pedestrians are considered deficient because of the at -grade rail crossings and inadequate emergency access. The Port is leading the effort to construct the overpass. Preliminary design has been completed and funding is being assembled for the project. In addition to being an important infrastructure investment for Ridgefield, the Pioneer Street Rail Overpass will visually and physically connect downtown and the waterfront. The intersection at Pioneer Street/Main Avenue will also be the visual connection to the Refuge. An iconic design that signifies the Ridgefield brand and vision should be part of the finished project. Considerations • The overpass has the potential to be an iconic gateway for the waterfront and Refuge. At- tractive architectural design will be essential to making the overpass a landmark. • Transportation patterns and parking availability will be altered by the project, and the needs of nearby businesses and property owners need to be considered. Implementation Steps Proceed through project engineering and design to address considerations 2. Ensure final design of the Pioneer Street/Main Avenue intersection includes the appropri- ate consideration for the place where downtown meets the waterfront I Obtain remaining funding to construct the overpass 4. Construct the overpass Lead Agency • Port of Ridgefield (assisted by City of Ridgefield) Timeframe • Short to Long Term (depending on funding) 41 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT—ACTION PLAN Pioneer Street Corridor Transportation Plan Increased development and activity in the waterfront and downtown will result in increased traffic in this area. Redevelopment of the waterfront is projected to generate over 1200 pm peak hour trips through downtown. The Pioneer Street Overpass will also alter traffic patterns through down- town. The Refuge draws approximately 90,000 visitors per year and tourism is expected to grow. The cumulative effects of these changes should be addressed through a comprehensive transpor- tation plan for the downtown and waterfront area. The plan should at a minimum address Pio- neer Street from Main Avenue to 9th Avenue (to the barn). Considerations • Increased traffic through downtown and the waterfront is a sign of economic activity, but will also likely be considered a nuisance by some community members • Integration of walking and biking with vehicle traffic is important to the community • Changes in traffic patterns in downtown in the vicinity of Pioneer Street and Main Avenue will affect the type of business that will be successful – Main Avenue will be much more "scrollable" than Pioneer Street • The transportation plan must include bridge connections between downtown and the wa- terfront, pedestrian, bicycle, and water connectivity • Second access point in addition to recommended access at the northern end of the water- front property Implementation Steps 1 . In the short term, identify funding support from the City, Port, USFWS, private or state grants, as part of the development program 2. Hire a transportation planning firm to update the transportation analysis of the City's Transportation Capital Facilities Plan and develop a plan for efficient circulation, parking, and multi -modal access. Draft the transportation plan update prior to forming the Downtown Revitalization Task Force Lead Agency • City of Ridgefield (although, the plan will be development dependent) Timeframe • Short to Mid Term 42 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN Downtown Streetscapes and Uses The downtown street design should include buffers between sidewalks and the roadway and con- sider the level of bike access needed. Buffers, like landscaping or some kind of street amenity like benches, provide real and perceived separation between traffic and walkers. Generally, because of the anticipated high volume of vehicular traffic, local services will be located on Pioneer Street, complementing the services provided at the Junction. Alleyways north and south of Pioneer Street should be developed for increased walkability and access to an expanded commercial center. De- veloping alley access can also add another layer of interest and opportunity for downtown retail development and ensure that business enterprises located off Pioneer Street and Main Avenue attract clientele. Considerations • Shared use of the streets and sidewalks • Changes and increase in traffic on Pioneer Street • Underutilized alley system that could improve pedestrian and bike connections Implementation Steps Include downtown circulation, including alleys, in the transportation plan 2. Include outcomes of the plan in information supplied to the Downtown Revitalization Task Force Lead Agency • City of Ridgefield Timeframe • Mid to Long Term 43 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN APPENDIX A Plan Matrix & Project Matrix RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT—ACTION PLAN Plan Matrix Vision based on four principles: of Harbor Improvements Our shared vision is for our Concentrate on what we Preserve and protect critical communities to be recognized for have, a quaint walkable natural areas and commitment their livability, healthy environment downtown, the Wildlife to community and environmental and contributions to a robust Refuge, the Refuge plank sustainability; a local, robust local economy. Our communities house, archeological economy, destination area for want to be vibrant, clean, safe, resources, and Lewis and tourists and visitors; maintaining enjoyable and productive places Clark connections. "Main Street" feeling and small where citizens work together town character; pedestrian, to manage the implications bicycle, and transit friendly with of their social, economic and strong connections between environmental actions so as to not neighborhoods, the downtown/ compromise the ability of future waterfront and adjoining activity generations to do the same. centers. Ensure that the existing strengths The waterfront property is owned Downtown Ridgefield has of Downtown Ridgefield and the by the citizens of the Port District; always been the traditional Waterfront areas are maintained: it is the intent and strong desire heart of the community. • Orientation and access to of the Port Commission and Downtown is the social, the Lake River shoreline citizens that the site accommodate commercial, governmental • Comfortable, "Main Street" a variety of activities and and crossroads of old amenities. Public access, spaces Ridgefield. However, this feeling and facilities where family and central position is likely to be • Pedestrian, bicycle and bus friends can gather, socialize, relax challenged as the community access and recreate will be important and region focus upon the attributes of the site. The site development of the regional, • Continued use of Floating is close to nature and presents industrial and commercial Homes along Lake River wonderful opportunities for property and infrastructure at people to enjoy the outdoors, the 1-5 Junction. natural landscape and nearby wildlife. (continued on next page) A-1 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT—ACTION PLAN A-2 of Harbor Improvements A Build a robust economy that The waterfront will again Create a destination area provides a wealth of living wage become a place for industrious for downtown Ridgefield that employment opportunities for people to generate value in provides quality merchandise, v residents. A healthy downtown products & services. We can service, and activities within that provides a setting for mutually imagine productive work areas an ambience that is unique supportive businesses and supporting uses such as research to Ridgefield and not readily community events is essential to and development, education, available elsewhere. a livable community. In addition and professional offices. Retail to efforts to revitalize downtown, commerce and the exchange the City will continue to work with of value and ideas can also re- developers to create efficient and emerge on the waterfront. A mix attractive development in all areas of retail shops catering to the of the city. Ridgefield will support needs of workers, residents and existing businesses and encourage visitors is encouraged. them to expand by providing information resources and completing economic development oriented public projects. By integrating the natural and The Lake River site is located Ridgefield has abundant built environments, Ridgefield in an environmentally sensitive resources to draw upon will create a sustainable urban area. Past uses of the site have including its small town environment with clean air and degraded and damaged the character and charm, the water, habitat for fish and wildlife, quality of the site. As the Port natural surroundings, such as and comfortable and secure places redevelops the site, it will be the rolling hills, the Lake River for people to live and work. simultaneously working to clean waterfront, and the Ridgefield and environmentally secure National Wildlife Refuge, the site. Redevelopment will be its attraction to artisans, guided by the Port's commitment its rich Native American to community and environmental archaeological history, and its sustainability. association with the Lewis and Clark Expedition. A-2 z :5 IL z O \ | z 0 � 0 z 0 LU� 0 z z 2 LU \ z 3 z 0 0 0 2 �ra � 7 / ` E E & _ g g c / 0 > § 7 k 7 ƒ \ / FD 0 [ CL 0 \ / o o « /ƒ/ƒ'§�\ / )-0D J � o '7ƒ 77-0/%\$} ° \ C CL 00 ECN E z2\\c o / § ƒ \ I § c u { x 0% e [ /ƒ�-0$0�� -0 cu EE —0 c ; o G° $ 5 %.g 2 u>! t o` ref;®��w § a==¥ # CL -0 c E G 9 £•> » 0 f o& c- c o « o \ /k$\///f / —0 0 g $ 2t' I� E+ / 2� $0ƒ / �d�ƒ.E\E$ a § CL C: ± -u .E > u u § EF a) a) o o E �� cou e U e L - I ° ° -b 3: & o S u -0 F— � -E » O$ƒ/a 2 2 U U U U 0 ` 0 ` ' �0 �/ G � J \ § \ $ %/ %/ / a 2 2 \ �7kA)kk� ƒu /520 2 % X22±2a+2 -C—C c D °$\ ƒa3 $+§ t20 \& a 2 c e a= .E0 c-© \u7 e- o o, '•` § / u 0._ r / •` f 5% a& e E ° » ?+ S. \ a[J§7m e o -0 ? EE2�Ek/cam « moo§/ ƒ+ƒ-$-0 e R Sƒ CU E x e E± « t� E C3 § x ƒ o- c f o 2 ° u c 2 b c = e» -0 -E ° _o %33u0 —0 - E �2\°� ®o°_ r c E ' °� »ƒ/$ %#% ®c 0 '52t-C°fƒ+o2 r ± o c ��-•R0 > Ee;_0 /[�§\ƒ\k \� k�-0aaL \/�{ • $ § ± ƒ 2 u f S U ± 7 2 % / J $ J .E .t -7 & \ \ / & ƒ \ C ƒ C d u\ k 'n \( » - ._ -0 . /// �[ % CL 2 3e.[O > o/ kƒ2 z :5 z 0 k | z 0 b 0 z 0 B 0 uiz z 2 LU / § 0 z 0 0 LL ui 0 ce ) ) $ 2 • T 2 7 0 ,• & a 2 E 2 E 0 / 0 ƒ @ _ C: �E - $0 §7 �0 ��E0 ±\ G CL s =E 0 � 0 3 .. t £ 3 \ S .0 / G # _ E a [ f E $ ,2 E ; E \ U (D U -0 q$ 0 % � o C: o C: c � � CL CLcel\ . , § / § § C3 C 0 0 0 o u u E a t E c F e o • ƒ \ o ƒ o § / / e - » e e e U U U U - 5 c 5 c 5 D ' 0) m/ D)/ o)/ 0 2 0C 0 7 0c / o �f oƒ ® § U \ o_0 J / 7 / 2 2 f S J & 2 [ ° 7 0 R o § _ ± ƒ c_� o f o- 0 0 c ƒ c 2 f � t§- o U - o §- o o 5 2 0 o C CU- o -° o-0 _ . -0 c 0 0 0� o f ` E ' 2 @ \ -0 � e o > c § /.! § 2 & q 3 0 -0 G S 2 o E° k E c o -a ± e o>�= X o u r °•E C: a) a c E -o E c 2§� c 3 } S\ 2 c= o E i/ e - 0 S S o e 5[ y R �.E o 2 0 0 o 0$\ E/ ^ off$ ƒ-0 -00 c -se o .c E •- © u2 o.� a 4$ o 'E o ƒ�e ° 3 c7 - »'` ` 2 f;2±0f50/ 7 o ƒ o 0-0 o 0. * E W S - e° c- o _ .0 -•- O u _ o � & 0 - / k K ƒ 0 ± § \ % E 2.0 2 7 ± 7 \ t . « m e R 3 3 u._ o_/ / 7 a_ e a» o» > o ƒƒ 2 ƒC 0 E 5 ) & k c / >ko> / �# / / / .c G N u/ c% . 0-ƒq J u - o0 G S$ 0 @\ \D r< S \ § \\ 2k \ 0 Cl) .$ \E 7I .\ E E% e '[ \ / / ; �C'4 \ z 7 z O \ | z 0 F- u � z O � 0 LLIz § 0 m � k z 4 2 z 0 c \ 0 ❑ ■ \ $ $ $ $ 7 & ± J �0 0 0 /0 0 U U U 2 � ` § .0 a � e 2 k/ �)�c ¢CL c\/0 = A\2/ � _ o O § § f 2 E c 0 0) E \§ c o u .g uo E .§ t ƒ ; � ` ƒ -0 <\¥o ƒ/ aCL- CL— 6 ƒ OƒC)/ƒ � - - E oƒ c c 004 — — .g x 0 p o # 9 U(D ED2 77� Tae -Yo �Eƒ2\ 22\ 7 [ o @ b & Ecr - W \ k f§/ §.g 7 S F ƒ c @= J / /ƒk/ \o ƒDikƒƒ.}-O-a s] _ e( D o 0 7 $ -D 0 -0 0 (/ 7 = —(D ( %§$ \§u » 0 0 _0 � 7 S UU i2_\ k < : . ) / 5 C ƒ 5 � ƒ w \ K G t 0 ' \ \ 0 0 } � '2/ 2/ $ƒ /ƒƒ § §0 2ƒ / • ( k b � � �� � / :® G o ƒ / c00 00 b 27 c ota c— `\/k}0- a) a0 0 Ewƒ/$2 c 2« o 0 o c" - S-»;- 2« o ° 5- 3� c E� o= o c 0 o— u ` b$ x ' o o_§/\ o f r a U§ e o S o$ -F : { oƒ k a° o - t E w'§ 9 G S\ 2 e 7 G ? ( $ 7 ® ƒ — ° o » e ` « Ua—c±o3 a� \Jƒ\$� 0 =�703\�3��/ ƒ/5s'5E o o>e�� ��-C\;U �0 [�\&7$ § o/ 0) E k e& 3 7 0 $ ®� 2 0 a§ $±e o i�ƒ�SIf %f¥-0.%§///\% cu f[{� • e o=£ 2 ©5 ; K E 7 K ° b 0 0 t E a ƒ 2 e u# o e ._ o e U o e U u U s; U .§ o 0 / * 0 / E a / C: §E/ a2 +r Ef £7 > �.-so�c 0 G ƒ CL ƒ 7� a (U ¥o 'io0 -0 Ln 3& E 5U I ow— < ' CN CN a \ Z O V Q Z O U W CL Z O LUV F- Z F - Z w W w W Q J 0 3 O J W LL LU OG n n y fn N a) (D a) a) 0 0 0 0 0- CQ E C C C C 0 O m o — C U ) o rn N 4) t rn _ O p c OY O N'� C O 0) CS C C o> E a) U 7 En > a) s E o C U Q 3 p C o s p :� 0 E 0 a� $�°-' °�' 0V �� 6 Ou E Q� � a) 0 0 N N a O x o _p _O > U s CN p U d u a) o W U 6 a N o Q s he y c 0--Ct 3.-�;-E a) a s p��t 1 N t `u N N C m t p U-0 d a p O C N �-' vii N O N N OZ -0-0m �Z a)i•�•c EV) E O= C a) O CS O .� m c C in O C s a Q > O °' y s u C p O dU a�O uu c E y 0 o ao t O o>s 4 E a� m CL -p p o _ O t a) U o c C a) p) C o L _ L n o c c -p O c vi NS J �� u p) C a) O, O �> Q - E a) C y 0)— O 7 O C �- m N O w 0 O -o p U O V . N c rn p ° a a) a) s a D a) E o � CO N C E a o N y � O O O s U 0-0 O O C - O J s s s C C F- a U a) v) C, > a F� C C C C -6 O O -O O -0 O • — V) • — N •y- p) a O �'N O 0)•N O O)'y Oy V�mQ UnemQ Uoe72 mQ cemQ C dS = C c c O o �0 ° 0 0 0 ° C ALO c c `c o c ` �0 0 0a) LL so f—o 30 0 03ne � N C 3 CL gE co C -0 c -0 dp 0 C � u cpa) Oi c= E C -0O 0) E ) o- O6 O p a) o o O_ � .2- u -CN 13 W O*� O C U .LO E O L •y p a) OQ �� O c o a) =0; E OL Q p y p E O y c> E 0(n y O> E O j _6 N _d j y CL a) O O) N a) C� U c -p a)c c U C) C y p C ,L C `O •y a) C) U a a) 0 .� U C s 'C U 4) y c O Q.2 6 '� C p). 0)-p E U 3 p0 N O O N 0 0) j rn Q U u p. C -O o Cl 0 Z) a) L> u o a c c t a `) a O s c H- y a CL a) N ` O c m o a) L a rn aU E.° i3 -o -ao c C �Q) C o 0 . 3— o c -p m = p y_ Q p C a O •� O .0 E 0 V; T J c N C O N C C cn U '- a) U -C O a) �t L c U a) N c > 3'� O ms > E �-a o' C O o > 3 0 0 o -2:- o a) c u c� c 3 a �•- s L V) -F S pO_ 3 N LA "D N V .9 O O CL y y.= H Nn s O C O C me rn -2).-0 m rna) o c- '� C E E L c y s E N p p mi 6 �°' t °' o a �°' (D E CA C C O E L O s O E u o L C O 0) �_ O y C N N N N N vi N o II II LO 10 c 0 C) 0 c c 0 j C y 0 '0 u 0).a c � a II II M �t C O `a N � C C 0 U a E u_ O d C C o II II N z 0 \ | z 0 H4 0 z 0 � 0 z z 2 ui k z 3 z 0 0 S 0 c ■ \\ e5 ! i r10 § \ \ § )ƒ co -0 / k 11 11 r� .2 $ \2 c §3 .¢ E E\ aE \ [ ƒ 8 ir \ ) $ � ) 0 2 E Ea- 0 & &/ /S U 3 ) ; G73 % / § 9 ° 7 / \ 0 ƒ E3: / fo -C 2 [027777// : 0- k - f c 0 o 2 $ 0 U S=/% o e _ .g 2 2 $ § ± k § \ / 7•k ƒ & » •- ; a - E t / }.\ ƒ [ � \.§ 2 ƒ S � E « E•/ / E ƒ E f ƒ 7f -_ ° 2 0 E ƒ & » E : / @ $ ) n ƒ S o ! � ¥ 0 + E@ f e e o o Qm°( $e g [ / § E % 2.0\2±I) / �2K / \/-03:T) � ��CD o o E o> o« ° 7 2-0 a o -a r U» 7 J e e z-© 2 a . ƒ ƒ D g - & t : ±%»Z O ƒ 2 \ oO b 5 C: 0 3 t 7LD 0t $ c$ e \0 5 § 0 &ƒ /\ $O/ 2/ J2 D ƒ o �� $\0)± E �° �/ 2-c 3: 7 \ƒ o0±o / 0 •� » E e; •- o r $ 6 3 ! .« o•� ± / o g f a 0) 0 2 2 _� {° 0° E E %$ ° \ \ / / 0 - 0 u c 2 a _CD ` 8 0 //� /§3k 7 C 7±7ƒ°®a �� .: 5 7 & 2 'c $'a a a§ E 0 0 f CD -C Joy$ a E ` $ e 0 Ln LE k/ 0 E °\/\0 0Eƒ . 3»± CL -0 5§ 2 b 2 0 5 0§ O� 2 0— c / 0 E\ 0 G k § o § 7 oo oƒ r ULE Et % c 2 22_0 a 0» a)q o // \/ao/E 37/ ` CN a Cl) Cl) \\ e5 ! i r10 § \ \ § )ƒ co -0 / k 11 11 r� .2 $ \2 c §3 .¢ E E\ aE \ [ ƒ 8 ir \ N N CD V a) O O O 0-0- QE E C C C I° 0 p N -C p C N CD C 0 C '� �F C 0 y C a) Li 3 a)a-a a O c a _ _ a 0 N a N C L rn r C O N -a t c �, CD 3 ac)o 0 0 .0 .� c aO O Q 30 y���L 0 N c -D Cil c E y a) a a) O• N p C N 7 CO u .- CL s E >. _ N C_0 O y N 1 o ou _ y m a) QC 0 p a) O OQ a 4) p_C •C C ,� > C e- > } C O O a ON L a) C V up C a) C N a) C O O Q o a Q T c a) •y V C y-0 • W � a) � QI N N •� L �,Q �' EE a) N a a) a 6 u O 30 p S j C N__ MO V V -o `c V 0 3 L L a� o L s o _ 0) D C rn a� o a y c 0 3 -C o c 0 O C 6 y CN coQ—.y O C N O a= N> N y a) -pp O _0 O o N a _ a �C a) a E N u -O O O_ u C 0 m a) 0 N c c 2 O a: y u a) > O 0- s t O a1 a c J Q O O a u a O O N — O O u V- N O 0) N O u `� Q C N N 6 7 N O s s Q� Q 0 N— co O '—� 'a Cp E C y\ 6 p Q a a y> « N Y- > O❑ Q C N 3 t a C a) C 0-= a 0) a) U w • E a) C o N a) a) a v C: a) L > cia v; 0_c 3 �' C c_ o U X a o �: m 3 C y p N s O' j u u X v> --o N Q y N C `o O rn E `� _a o� �� a o 'a °� � ai p�> 0 E ¢ m a E 3� 0 Q () y- a- N +- E C a) O �� Q O J OO N 'j O N E y N `� a Q Y- C 0 0-0 > n c aai s C c 0 a•c 0 .� N C) 0 3_ N O a� O 7 -a C >- Y C u N 0 '0 a a a) N L a �_ � a CD de cQM a 0 o a>i a O_ 0_ o❑ } Z }O -0.O a-0 a>) ❑ .0 n ❑.0 L a m T- E E i C Q 0 N •a) y v C C a) — a a ❑ y a) ORU L E in a (D s a) Zd❑ M Cl) M M N a) O 0 II II LO 10 c 0 c c O N y o 'a v c -0 Q II II M V c 0 `a C C 6 � E o� Q- u N E p C C O a �� II C QZ J Z O U Q Z O W 0 d Z O V LU Z Z 1w w W Q OR Z O W LL LLJV O N T) 0 II II Ln 10 c 0 Q C c (1 N N c — 0 0 U - 0) .6 _C '� La -0 0_ II II co 0 0 5 0) N (� C a C 6 u a E 0-- u N E 0 C � O II II N 0� a CD a) a 0 0 O CQ Ca- E C O 0- Q O C V c c U C) a N a a) N O Q a v () a) C a s O -a Loo N U i, a L '� a) 0 0 O V N m a> � -a 69 a m E c ,e a o c_ u O O �t a aci o 0 V� o �15U a'a E �s H c: _0 •L� CD V Q a y a a) c c 0 N � �, a ❑ a > > Q� >> `t a C N O ° ,C O N ❑CD E O ° U r c O a) N N �C _ -a Q _0CV U a Q - 6 a) C D > a Ca) Q E C4 C a) Q' D E CA N -a cu O C U Ln a s N.E Q a C a C O S U 3 > 0� d a O E a rn O QN H s > H a C)- a° w c° a O O T Q L 0 0 0 a C~ N E s c N O vOi L -a a L a) T = U Lu oQo F ,E— a) o�'� a)s CL a s d. t d a) a) 2:-_ D_ U U V CD Cie U C N c CE s C L a y- a) LO W C° C c o Q- > N N o ° N a) a) C N E ° .O . O N � L L • j -c _ -a >j a.4 a U N a a) 3 U Q I—�❑�Q aav)Q `2 ° c Q o L _.-.:_.. ... - Q N N N u _ m a a) O c a 0 a s a c C O o a N -a "' T-7 ° N a o N `t y C O u O .0 � Cl s c j O N a a O o a c c c c N a) c a L ai 04--C a) s a c O- N a L E c c a N c Q o 05 °v 0 , O :) N `*'- �` ,} + L C ° E 3 'o a° o 0 aci a N a V> M a) a a L o -a E o a c C O� 3 C 3 u C -a ° •° c❑ L c> O O a O L a) a C a O Q C a ° N E u a CD E a 3 0 �U a o c_ 0 N - .O c Q_ a c -a o O L a) C -0 `'c i a a) L u a) . c a 0 ° C a _a CD N > N a > a a) U > O a •� N Q° u CL) N a) O c� E a a _ a) a y c 0 c a 3 0 0 a > E L u��: a v d m -a a > O 0 ° E o (D 0> O O D U Y C O N N CEa)C E Ln c a O + L _ a) a) N N a) E OC o T a U a c > H ams u a 3 3s C C •rn L o M 'IT d ct N T) 0 II II Ln 10 c 0 Q C c (1 N N c — 0 0 U - 0) .6 _C '� La -0 0_ II II co 0 0 5 0) N (� C a C 6 u a E 0-- u N E 0 C � O II II N 0� a z 0 U | z 0 § CL CL z 2 § a z § z * 0 e k ) 2 ) ' o 0 0 ' % E & ± Z u ± \ ƒ ) ^ k � / » /CL 41 -© 0 ^\ƒ ¥ 0 CL . / E �0 \ \ ƒ n \ (D .* )0 .` / / ƒ ƒ/ n o J D 0 U / / 'ƒ / F2 22 \7 $2J / §05 V) 5 E c •2 2 § 5 $ :/. \ u E I «§ zƒ o .0- $\� —§a�oa$, C: mom 0 — --Y / 2 (D J 0 E$ 5 U E a f\+— 0 3ƒ • o 2 & 2© + § B f ® $ 0 7 9 ®° ® ƒ ¥ o © ƒ ƒ .i 0- °•® m ® g 7 § 4 u \ ƒ o 0 0 0 E 0.0 k o n / 7 \ --1 ) } > c—�u�&°�—x�®e�o���° 0 0 2 / \ E % § 7 / ° COL % °a `&Eo®�-§^� \�/ t� �& / a - ƒ a 2 U � \ ƒ E + » \ § # 0 � L� 0-0 F $ J I;�O7/I225UT/B 0 7$ ° 0 ƒ o n o c f S E\ /\ ) --Ne -C o oƒ o u 0 o c o c E o _cL_0 »0§w o—Kgoo-0o2-uƒ 2 0 EE± ƒ -E E c E 2« Q E § $ 2 0 1ƒ # E \ \ $ ! o& o } E', S $ § L § 2 } ƒ ` u%& K & -0u 0-/»OaC3 CC)oUBU�a\=2#i:2U 2 0-0 O0 + / D \0 0 / @$ % 7@ƒ\/ /\° '> ; /// . \/ eg r10 \ 9 ( \ uƒ \\ \ / r� 5 \ /E \\ .\ E \\ \ ou ƒ ; �CN z 5 z 0 \ | z 0 v 0 z 0 � LU z z 2 � k z » O \ 0 0 0 LL- 0 0 re / § / ' / / \ _ C _ § 0 .5 / 9 7 `0® }� o �&� 2 @ .- / _° J G C:w /)k E $\/ U o G c a k e * / » 7 \89 "/c c±�7 0 o c- � c g @& J CN . � o � E � ; $ o & 5 c C ƒa <a k -C LO � g CL = o 0- � °®C� G ¢ U ƒ 5 • B LO a & / « o .- 7 o o m o • %£f a_a 0 -CL 0 / \ O / ` E & E \ & & § / / / \ \ / \ - \\/\ \( Lo 0 6 a o ± c o & 3 o ƒ ® � LE c & < � z z z § E 2$%�ƒ/�\ ®� °� (�E�k\\ƒ Ij -E E/$»�ƒE�\ 0) o D � I -C c 0 -- (M C � 7 ; > c C e \ E { § / > o c o v o c ±._ o a a o = g X § o a•- o O 3 • 5$# f o 2 =- o c_ c® ' g u= a u c o � o a o o@ G / a t § « c w o\ 3E 2 Q a o o � G ƒ o f± ° o° a` -0 c \.c \$- 5 - Q z D o o aƒc e -C § ƒ > o e @ - m # c m $ � § -oma � § �3c70u->0>a-0-0-0 -E3 LO .,--0 . S E ° e t'` - o f o a 0 e o « / = t- / » o t E % ƒ _& ƒ / / ` ƒ 5 * : D & t_ 72- ƒ/ a e 2 g- o 2 o z o o r< - 0 o, > a-[$ 0 0 7-% o C m»_ > o -ƒ§ u. © c o t t= 3® •�� y 3 m« ` ?« 0 5 ° $ c ° - o u E-- c o c e 2> o « o } U+ 3 a k c a 2& 2§ E 7 o§ e% a§ , J\ o+-2-2 /ƒ \ / & . b f m m u §/ k /t / \ ( 0 $ k / S« CL Q, E w ± at ` < LO q / Z :5 2 0 \ | 2 0 b 0- Z 0 2 LU 2 z 2 LLm k $ * O $ 0 0 0 LL 0 c � $ 2 2 ) 2 $ 9 2 2 ± / a ± a ± a ± ` E E E E R u G U / / / u u u \ \ ƒ/0 ƒfƒ k b o a) a ._cA » » -.. )mEƒ%\? ( ( = E_ m C14 - - e 7 » 0 2 U-± e 0 a) $ $ ƒ 0 e § c = k"/ (D / E > / � U .g § §C: \ ^ • § 2 °/ w K° e u e § � u U) 'n c> §\ \ /E2CLIw�-a -0± ° ' �'® ° %Q $ f / 2 2 7722\cu.-5 eƒ �'- Q_° ° S c c o o E/ E\ u �Eo- ƒ0 02 02 / DE2j 2( f 0U F2 // /$ t$ ƒ 2 O O Q U k « \ @ �In Lr- §ƒ& ƒ § 0, )�a) 4) ƒ/ ƒ //k/ $ƒ/De Q -a ...& k t3# \/ 0� �(// /\� ( c n /$ E E§ \ D[ ° 2ƒ 2 7/ t.2 7 k o$ �z \/ o > §27x4 t o S: %7 �$ oc a &; ��r b o / o_ m \§ § e-0 o _o t /% /jCDF& E o5R e e & o > ° �'� c > •§ o c._§ oa �� 0 a)0)E 2 , /// U# U f w 3 0 4 2.E m 7 u a a a o a% $ f 2 T S§ « o S c o o f E « o c._ ] v m .2 7 ƒ/ƒ 2.2 = \'cam ° e%[ & - $ @q*§ cLnE . f2& o/� w0 Cl—Ln wf ' < r 2 « q C'4 4 N N N O a) L CL � CL O O O E Q CL CL O �2 O u Cm C C N 1 CLy y U m a N N o c 0 v c o' O O O E O O ° V C O C -Ct � 0 AD ° > > aa) c L Q. O N E 3 O aa'i L N o, N O ] ui c > ink N �O h C C_ L U O. c Q ti c ° a) _ N _o -C V t� Qs CL O O•C•C p ucM, 3, > u00, o � � o. -DoE 3 E c c o >, a o a '� m ai E N 3 o c o a 0 L C:a) s o N C m O N s D N o 3 cn 3 a is L N a V C -20 '> O O ,} O O E y L S_ O NCA N N O° a rs- N Lo os c °� >' O .N — N E° N O _0 O N 0) m S E Z v N E °' O O L 7 C a) a a� �� �Q w E ; Qcn CL -cn a ►�—•� D Zl- V V V V V D c� — Q) C o a) a� o0 a'o 0 3 O N O V 3 D O p U c 0 o` o -C 0 o a `t 0 3 O _o y N n O O Q c 0 ° O 0 V O O" Q 0 S ro c> —off S w O r� 0-0 0 3 °v`> N LO C c W d L y O OCN CD _E c ' �. cnp L y CL _ ° � °Q`O Op am) y C C C CL -O 2 y 0 -° a O C2 Cr fl C y 6 O C u 4) 0 U a� 3 0 o o u 2°° rn c 0 c° 3 o m o m —_ ° '3 ; Q'c L 3. Ln o -° ' U a °° V a p y 0 c �c y y y y c c a) 3 c CL c cu 3 CD F2 o o aEi E CL E c cn o L CL m E 0 •> o L CL O 6= N a> O 2 E aE u 0 ._� y O O .O Q C 00 = > a>'u >0c4 ° a� >-�°c a w.c �� Z.E �-o HUi'06 0-0 Q a FS-CL_0 O O a> C y C O a7 c c3 O L N c c S �Lc a°> 0Z a) . �oL uy -° 3°=c N O E a 3— a E0 °C L' CLQ CLa)D Z J)u� ��w 3u3 %0 10 10 10 10 Qz J z O U Q z O V W 0 d z O o� 0 W z z 0 W OC w a H O J w Lb U' O oc 0 a a a) a E E -0 E u o o d m () d a) a) n a Q 0 0 0 u u v a) a) a) H H H t 2:- CJ V U C a) O a) 0 y C 0 d E j> 0 01 E .O O > j O 0� 0 a) L E N d t N E O a N N Q� Q OL w N O S + Lo, fZ y � L t in > O 0 j j j O O E j E j E C_ a) a) CC_ _E C C 0 L a) a).�� L a) o m a 3 0 0 `� a 3 0 0 `� Q- 3 0 a) a) 0 a) d a) c E - 3 a) E s " 3`} ac) E s 3 E O E 0 O -V E () O N o f �' o f �' > E L a) H N a) O w l Q N N O' L a) H D Q a N 6 N Q i E0 - i) E C N L ai c a) D 4) C c a) a C C a) to c a) 0 � o c c ) 0 E 0 N 0E C, > 75L N s _ � y E a 0) E �D E N �D �� 0 O pa N >D to m O 10 10 10 RIDGEFIELD DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT INTEGRATION PROJECT -ACTION PLAN APPENDIX B Action Item List r r > > Z10 Z N) :? ni M 1-0- CY • � 0 = • � • = • � • 1*010 , Ilips* ■ m • 0 • - low.. O N �gU. :7, OQ> N pai O aOJl .;C 3 p 'D� °ocuQ° - cv °O o0c t 'ai ° � c D� umoo a a) ° o .� , co v s a g _ a- m -v p a J o c N u� $ o ° °i� yr a co 5 ��` ? E O m N a O' r 0 6 C C E N p >L^ Q7 U N - C y �' ° d ) C U C p a ° �<„ ° ° C y > d 0 0 � C O �ar oma Lip c� am° °� E v Ot O d C a '- O. V v '�•' .. D CD u Jk ° ac 09�, me n� oma °u c C N 'naC C O O U .N C O N a s U o = o to° o°rJ °nE Oa o� m ° a f T Y o t v m O L o Q u c° 0 0 Ln 0.9 O •� a o � 3 m g .� � Gl °ate 0 0 C o v o c s 3 mt y .z oU � o o dEo mo Na .o°C� maa a C C N d G L� o u �' 4 Upu �t -E °E ao'o °t° c o d }�h� E 3 O� a�> O7 d O O O .OD `�U t0 3 H Q a� �'oc ��� �'� v'o-ins�� da �a Ea Jr.g ��a p° Q cv ops pyQo c o o`c°r� °�� 2_ E •°°�, �°'o .qua a O u C 'p ° O C O. , O L U j� 'a�u�i ° � O; C C O Q O ;c a 2 gE° 'c o° do8 ,c m oc�n o_ � �oOo o°n o °0 0 o a °o o° mo oco ooc or O�U°p opo o�� o v U 0.z U� op o$ U jz io dam i3O$ Lac W N O �i Oa O� OUO Q z ZU Nw< �w Z m< Q D LL LL Z w �� � =mow c(� ��U O� mW m� U �� p � a a Z � � U� C7 Q � m Qw QU LLw< O Q m> Z Oa m wa a. Z Za ma OQ Z �Ix 3 �wU3 OU2L a OU3() U U < �w �tLj m N LY] � •� ee _ low w w � ) - K . © : k 3 ) / ) f � / r a / 0 § § \ k}t \ . ) g g -u § E i £ c cu ƒ § %¥ V } $ \. LZ \ k) §\ kQ o£ eE > tE W 5b \ f C� -..o ® " \/ % § \ G )§ k § (\ kk )) ){ 0 yb § °lk c §\ k) \ )) ° 0$ 3\3Ju£ 1?2 Mm2 < ? z > ± §« _9 > o &§ #( / >z k� <§�\} //§ §�z 3 §2z§k / }/ A§j3 Iw< �� ® » �@ R° ° `4 }(` 2( < ® �§ ( u ) } $� C4 _ 8 I - `i5 w = z do& no-lnl- C%r ._ cm 0 SOON - PIA / o m 0 0 m m «_/ e-5 k2 .qua �_§ m e e e e � .. •� a « ƒ E « � e \! i2 \f C / § ( ( 0& k - - _ % ® ! \ - - E. + . k / y\ \ \ \ - \ ( \ \ § E 0 $ { \ ® f f§ \ > tE gee ! ! t5 E z� } } / g of f ( 0 o ®a ° E Q 2- �E (% ) /E # {\ \ ( k § «=u # 3! ± o n c z ( �<E /9 �)ze [ zy �§ § }3 § �y }aEf> g? q (/:Eook§ 2# :/ 2 �± {- E= 05< z< B( 2 k�2o �J \ - k �\ {\§ }) } \ §-)})�j\§\�§ \ § 2 • • • 0 • - w O t p1 = O 0 ❑ p c c > 0 2 3 . u m o N O -:g:> Q a cc 0 o� �E a 3 y o N _>N a O _ ° >c c S u m e o 'D 2 n .4 a �a -C: Q °` �° 0 3 ov oav m v as a 4>�' E c OC �= 3p _TN's y� d "O [ .0 O U $ c E > u. o pia a -:Z ov ° - ��0v � In o v 0 9 $a'2 np u v E N Q, U U `c c c a rpv �rn a� E� O a= r. v c r u .0-0- E- p c d OL UU O p Of N d° O 6 u _c O d C2 t O U O p Q O O C c - K c E o E c a 'p O CO`l U E L N O E .0 O% U O O �u y •� c 0L O 'a �°� D'1 '- c c O O 3 r C C m o p 3 3 �a o'G c m c° �c 0O oc 30� m `° o f m o m= � �o oo ° Oo3 Uo U ❑oo SU �v3 a w J W PC C j IK' .51212Z MW Z W W W l� H O C G w H W= Q ? N W o O OC 'fi�nn K YC w 7 8- Q. W 0 W Q V N ? Q W o Z Q a 3 a < < a W d m 7. > Z > Z N N N N } y tV N N N Q W N Z W � • • . • od N O pq W d , pg o c L ">- V 9c � D8 va Yo E oG•° �� p a° o •a a '� a� $ c o 0 o c o 0 68E >O p, ° n 33: E ? w ��m a 'w': .6u L6° Eo „�'4 zu E°p `� �r E- -0. ata v d� mtpp_S O �o 'a te o Eo E°o °� ~'o�a a� o3t v a o o m ao oo° 2 o a�o rna Et° r�� rn�o E c > ° p C g. n °. O> ° Q p Q°u ;62. m off_ Out°v U N Q�j p r o� �S amr d 2 CL m G Uvuo . Uoc�e u'S u n n < Z 2 CL w OJ <w UQ �>Z'u >� w�<> a w OZ CJ <O OZ �' O��O <O U 00 m ma CSO w ��ina Ya O J U S < g U -a < < ca 7 u O i LO m Downtown Accessory Guidelines Committee Recommendations to City Council August 8, 2013 Executive Summary The Downtown Accessory Guidelines (DAG) Committee developed a series of streetscape recommendations for downtown. Selection of street furniture was identified as a priority action item in previous downtown planning documents. Based on committee discussions and feedback from the public, the committee developed street furniture recommendations consisting of a series of recommended characteristics and examples. Benches: Select a bench model with the following characteristics: • Antique or historical style to emphasize "Old Town Ridgefield" theme. • A metal frame with recycled plastic slats, rather than wood, to reduce maintenance. • Substantial armrests on the ends. • Metal powder -coated in black, brown, or dark green color. Garbage Cans: Select models with the following characteristics: • Unobtrusive visual design that blends into downtown, does not compete visually with benches or buildings. • Vandalism -resistant materials, such as recycled plastic or metal. • Metal powder -coated in black, brown, or dark green color, similar to benches. • Side -opening entry, to facilitate emptying the cans. • Lids large enough to fit most pieces of waste, but small enough deter pests. Planters: The DAG Committee does not recommend installing new planters at this time, but rather maintaining the existing planters and realigning them along the main streets as needed. For future installations, the committee recommends: • Pre -cast concrete planters that are similar to the existing planters. • Smooth surface rather than exposed aggregate, to minimize moss and dirt build-up. • Square shape to maximize planting area and coordinate with existing planters. The committee recommends working with the Public Works Department to finalize the model recommendations and incorporate the final recommendations into the City Engineering Standards. The committee identified a series of funding and implementation measures, including a pilot installation outside of City Hall in the near term as a "showcase" of the recommendations. i Sample furniture models, from left: Columbia Cascade Craftsmen model, Columbia Cascade Manor model, Dura Art Stone Capstan Square model Introduction Planning Commission charged the Downtown Accessory Guidelines (DAG) Committee with the task of recommending street furniture styles for downtown. Selection of street furniture was identified as a priority action item in previous downtown planning documents. Based on committee discussions and feedback from the public, the committee has developed recommendations on specific models of street furniture, general recommendations about the installation of street furniture, and recommendations for future downtown planning priorities to complement the work on street furniture. Committee Structure The DAG Committee drew together a variety of stakeholders, including downtown business owners, representatives of City boards, representatives of local clubs, citizens and City staff. The committee met four times over the spring on 2013. Members included: Jason Carrell, Planning Commission, Chair Barb Blystone, Downtown business owner Aley Huesgen, Ridgefield High School Scott Hughes, Port of Ridgefield and downtown business owner Terry Hurd, Downtown business owner Don Stose, City Council Kay Stringfellow, Downtown business owner Linda Tracy, Citizen Vernon Veysey, Parks Board Phyllis Vidin, Garden Club Steve Wall, City Engineer and Public Works Director Juanita Wertz, Planning Commission Phil Messina, City Manager, ex offs o Ron Onslow, Mayor, ex oficio Thank you to everyone who participated and made this planning process a success. Relationship to Previous Downtown Planning Efforts The City has focused previous planning efforts on downtown over the past 10 years, producing a series of planning documents that highlight the need for downtown streetscape improvements guided by streetscape standards. The recommendations developed by the DAG Committee contribute towards downtown development by implementing planning priorities for downtown streetscapes identified in these previous plans. Downtown Accessory Guidelines Committee Page 1 Recommendations to City Council 2002 Downtown Ridgefield Planning Guidelines The report calls for developing a streetscape standard consisting of lights, benches, trellises, paving bricks, and appropriate trees and vegetation that will enhance the architectural character and small town atmosphere of downtown. One of action items identified was to develop a selection of the types of amenities appropriate in downtown, e.g., benches, streetlights, flower baskets, etc. (Action Item PI -2) 14 Essential Design Guidelines for Downtown Ridgefield (2004) Although the report focuses more heavily on architectural design, it also identifies the importance of an animated, inviting sidewalk that includes space for a frontage zone, for cafe seating and outdoor merchandise displays; a through zone for pedestrian movement; and a utility zone for street furniture, utilities, and landscaping. The report recommends including street furniture such as benches, garbage receptacles, newspaper stands, kiosks and street trees within the utility zone. (Section 2.1, The Pedestrian Level) Ridgefield Downtown/Waterfront Integration Project—Action Plan (2011) The report identifies improvements to downtown streetscapes and use as an Infrastructure Priority Action Item. (Plan, pg 27 and 43) As part of a broader redesign of main streets Eke Pioneer and Main, local streets, and alleyways, the plan recommends adding buffers between sidewalks and the roadway such as landscaping and benches. The plan promotes an overall "safe, walkable downtown with tree -lined streets" and "a small, hometown feel." (Plan, pg 10) Public Outreach The DAG Committee held a public outreach event in May to solicit broader community feedback on preferred bench styles. The "Battle of the Benches" attracted more than 100 community members to try out actual bench models and share their preferences. The committee used the community feedback to shape their recommendations. More than half of the respondents indicated a preference for the Craftsmen -style bench, pictured on page 3. A full summary of public comments is included in Appendix A. Special thanks to Steve Kirn at Columbia Cascade Company for making benches available for the event. Street Furniture Recommendations The DAG Committee developed a series of recommended characteristics to be used in selecting street furniture for the City. Given the large number of manufacturers and available models, the committee recommends working with the Public Works Department to refine and finalize the model recommendations, rather than making specific product recommendations as part of this report. Final selection should incorporate Public Works' opinions on installation and maintenance issues, such as preferred lids for garbage cans. The Public Works Department may initiate a procurement process for street furniture based on these recommendations, and may ultimately choose models similar to but not identical to examples shown here based on the bids received. In selecting a manufacturer, the committee recommends emphasizing product quality relative to cost, and prioritizing local vendors. Downtown Accessory Guidelines Committee Page 2 Recommendations to City Council After specific models are identified by the Public Works Department, the furniture models should be incorporated into the City Engineering Standards and formally adopted. Criteria that the committee considered in developing their recommendations included: • Comfort: For benches, how comfortable they are to sit on. • Design: How the furniture looks and functions. • Downtown Integration: How the furniture relates visually to the "Old Town Ridgefield" theme and existing downtown environment. • Durability: How sturdy the furniture is and how well it will hold up over time. • Ease of Maintenance: Ongoing maintenance requirements to keep furniture functional. • Cost: How expensive furniture models are, taking into account expected life cycle costs. Benches The DAG Committee recommends selecting a bench model with the following characteristics: • Antique or historical style to emphasize "Old Town Ridgefield" theme. • A metal frame with recycled plastic slats, rather than wood, to reduce maintenance requirements. • Substantial armrests on the ends. • Metal powder -coated in black, brown, or dark green color. • Seat at a higher level to make it easier for those with disabilities to sit do« -n and stand up. Standard Powder -Coating Colors The committee recommended selecting black, brown, or evergreen for street furniture, similar to these standard colors available for Columbia Cascade Company's products as shown here. Note that additional custom colors are also available. Several benches that meet the committee's criteria and that were specifically recommended by the committee include the Craftsmen and Restoration models from Columbia Cascade Company', pictured below. Initial quotes from the manufacturer for these bench models, with recycled plastic slats, are $1,490 for the Craftsmen and $1,335 for the Restoration model. 'Note that models from Columbia Cascade Company are referenced as representative samples only, and a future procurement process may be used to select final models. Downtown Accessory Guidelines Committee Page 3 Recommendations to City Council Regal Blue Evergreen Red Brown Black 00 Chrome Ocean Yellow Teal Burgundy Coffee Tan White The committee recommended selecting black, brown, or evergreen for street furniture, similar to these standard colors available for Columbia Cascade Company's products as shown here. Note that additional custom colors are also available. Several benches that meet the committee's criteria and that were specifically recommended by the committee include the Craftsmen and Restoration models from Columbia Cascade Company', pictured below. Initial quotes from the manufacturer for these bench models, with recycled plastic slats, are $1,490 for the Craftsmen and $1,335 for the Restoration model. 'Note that models from Columbia Cascade Company are referenced as representative samples only, and a future procurement process may be used to select final models. Downtown Accessory Guidelines Committee Page 3 Recommendations to City Council Two bench model recommendations from the committee include the Craftsmen model, at left, and the Restoration model, at right. There was significant committee discussion about opportunities for creative bench and furniture designs, and concern that a "one size fits all" policy may be too limiting. In addition to recommending a general style for the City to adopt for City -funded installations, the committee recommends encouraging property owners to create and install unique benches that reflect the nature of their business or the city. The City also wishes to accommodate existing benches installed by business owners, such as the bench with an American flag design outside of Bob's Automotive. The committee recommends drafting some basic guidelines for custom benches if they are to be installed in the public right-of-way, such as minimum sidewalk clearances, materials, and maintenance agreements. The committee recommends encouraging benches that incorporate a natural palette of materials, such as wood and stone, or incorporate natural motifs. To ensure benches installed within the right-of-way meet these standards, the committee recommends establishing a review process at the Planning Commission level. a Examples of custom-designed benches that incorporate natural materials and motifs. A salmon design forms the back of a bench in Manzanita, OR (left), and basalt is used to create a unique bench (right). Garbage Cans The DAG Committee recommends trash receptacles with the following characteristics: • Unobtrusive visual design that blends into downtown, does not compete visually with benches or buildings. Downtown Accessory Guidelines Committee Recommendations to City Council Page 4 • Vandalism -resistant materials, such as recycled plastic or metal. • Metal powder -coated in black, brown, or dark green color, similar to benches. • Side -opening entry, to facilitate emptying the cans. • Lids large enough to fit most pieces of waste, but small enough deter pests. Examples of garbage cans that meet these criteria include: Examples of garbage cans include the following models, all from Columbia Cascade Company (clockwise from upper left): Renaissance, Madison, Manor and Craftsmen. Additional recommendations for ongoing management of trash receptacles include: • Develop collection system to ensure receptacles are emptied periodically. • Develop system to sort and collect recyclables and install additional recycling receptacles. Planters The DAG Committee does not recommend installing new planters at this time, but rather working with the existing planters. In the future, if additional planters are required, the committee recommends a model with the following characteristics: • Pre -cast concrete planters that are similar to the existing planters. Downtown Accessory Guidelines Committee Page 5 Recommendations to City Council • Smooth concrete surface rather than exposed aggregate, to minimize moss and dirt build-up. • Square shape to maximize planting area and minimize footprint within narrow ROW, and coordinates with existing square-shaped planters. Examples of planters that could meet these criteria include: Additional recommendations relating to the planters include: Dura Art Stone planter models Capstan square (left) and Spanish square (right) are examples of planters that would meet the committee's recommendations for replacement planters, as needed to supplement existing planters. • Continue to support the Garden Club's efforts to plant, weed, and water the planters. The Garden Club has had some concerns about being able to water the planters on an on-going basis, but they have developed a pilot system that will be tested this year. Depending on the results and the future club capabilities, the City should be prepared to assume daily watering responsibilities if needed to ensure plants continue to thrive. • Redistribute and realign existing planters. Existing planters are concentrated on the north side of Pioneer Street, and some could be relocated to the south side of the street for a more uniform appearance. Several planters need to be realigned relative to the curb and moved back a minimum of 1.5 feet from the curb to prevent conflicts with car doors. Clean the exterior of the planters on a periodic basis to remove dirt and moss; apply concrete sealer to discourage growth between cleanings. Street Furniture Placement Recommendations Recommendations about placement of street furniture are made in the context of the existing 9 to 12 -foot -wide sidewalks. In the course of any future road improvements on Pioneer and Main streets, there will not likely be any opportunity to widen the existing sidewalks due to the limited right-of-way width bounded by existing development on both sides of the road. The DAG Committee made recommendations about the placement of downtown street furniture to maximize use of the limited sidewalk space as currently configured. Recommendations include: • Place street furniture in the utility zone adjacent to the curb. Set furniture 1.5 feet back from the curb to avoid conflicts with car doors. • Alternatively, place street furniture in the frontage zone adjacent to buildings, akin to outdoor seating for cafes or the benches in front of City Hall. • Leave a minimum of 5 feet of clear space for pedestrian movement between the utility zone and the frontage zone. • Cluster benches and planters where space allows to create pocket refuges for pedestrians. Place trash receptacles near by but not close enough to create odor issues; near street corners would provide a sufficient number of receptacles with sufficient spacing in between. Downtown Accessory Guidelines Committee Page 6 Recommendations to City Council Funding and Implementation Recommendations The sidewalk right-of-way along Main and Pioneer streets in downtown Ridgefield needs to accommodate several functions, including room for: a) Frontage zone: canopy and merchandise display, cafe seating b) Through pedestrian zone c) Utility zone: street trees, utilities, and street furniture The DAG Committee also recognized that funding is the key to implementation of street furniture installation that meets the new design guidelines. In order to maximize the impact of limited City funding for street furniture, the committee recommends that the City: • Initiate a pilot project funded by the City to install two new benches and a garbage can and to realign the existing planters in front of City Hall, to coincide with City Hall remodel in summer 2013. The City Hall installation can serve as an illustrative model of the streetscape recommendations, and will be a tangible accomplishment in downtown that implements, in part, years of planning efforts. • Allocate a portion of the City budget every year for street furniture, possibly as part of the Public Works budget, to gradually upgrade downtown amenities. Identify annual priorities for new or replacement street furniture needs based on the location and condition of existing furniture. - Location: Prioritize installation of benches outside civic locations, such as City Hall and the library, and along Pioneer and Main streets! Review placement of existing furniture to determine which locations merit replacement, as well as consider new locations for benches where furniture is needed. - Condition: Prioritize replacement of the more deteriorated benches based on inventory of existing benches. If locations no longer warrant a bench, remove benches and furniture at the end of their life cycle. • Engage business owners through a matching grant program administered by the City to split costs of furniture installation outside of businesses. Businesses wishing to install street furniture would apply to the City, and the City would pay half the installation costs, which 2 The committee also received recommendations from the public to install additional amenities at downtown parks, which will be forwarded to the Parks Board. Downtown Accessory Guidelines Committee Page 7 Recommendations to City Council would stretch City funds to cover the installation of double the quantity of street furniture. The City -portion of the funds would be allocated on an annual basis from the general budget; applications would be reviewed based either on a first come, first-served model or scored based on location and condition factors described above. • Create a memorial donation program for community members to dedicate a bench in honor of loved ones, on downtown streets or local parks. Work with the Parks Board to implement and use the program created by the Parks Foundation of Clark County as a model. (http://-,vw-�v.parksfoundation.us/support/sponsor-a-bench) • Partner with local businesses to support benches and trash cans outside of their businesses. Develop info sheets for businesses wanting to install street furniture with guidelines on standard street furniture options and guidelines for custom features. In addition to sponsoring installation of the furniture, develop opportunity for adjacent businesses to support ongoing maintenance for street furniture through financial and in-kind donations. • Pursue additional grant funding for downtown streetscape improvements. Consider applying for CDBG funding through the County. Larger transportation grants can also include a streetscape element, if opportunities arise for projects along Pioneer and Main streets. • Consider the use of a Business Improvement District (BID)3 to fund limited but high- priority streetscape improvements. Give the relatively small number of businesses and the scale of downtown businesses, the fund -generation capacity of the district is likely to be limited, but could be leveraged for targeted improvements with strong support from the business community. Additional consideration would need to be given to the administrative overhead for such a district relative to the funds it would raise; BIDs are typically created in larger communities but could be tailored to serve a smaller city with active volunteer and/or City support for administrative functions. Downtown Partners Vital to the success of past and future downtown efforts are local partners, including community groups and business groups. In particular, the continued, unified support of the downtown business owners, whether formally organized as an independent group or through more informal participation in ongoing City -sponsored initiatives, such as the DAG Committee, is key to future improvements. Potential partners for ongoing downtown efforts include: American Legion Post 44, Ridgefield: Veterans -focused group that installed Veteran's Memorial downtown. • Fort Vancouver Regional Library District: Operates the Ridgefield Community Library downtown. Friends of Ridgefield Wildlife Refuge: Coordinates Bird Fest and smaller events in downtown throughout the year. Future partnerships could strengthen the connections 3 Business Improvement Districts are formally known as parking and business improvement areas (PBIA) in Washington and are authorized under RCW 35.87A. For more information, see http://,,vww.mrsc.org/subjects/econ/ed-bia.aspx. Downtown Accessory Guidelines Committee Page 8 Recommendations to City Council between the Refuge and downtown through programs such as a wayfinding system, information kiosks, and touring routes, as well as thematic connections such as wildlife - themed art in downtown. • Port of Ridgefield: Partner in previous downtown/waterfront integration planning work and future partner as the waterfront develops and connections linking downtown and the waterfront evolve. • Ridgefield 4`'' of July Committee: Coordinates largest annual event in downtown Ridgefield, drawing thousands of visitors to the district. • Ridgefield Art Association: Supports the arts throughout the community, including organizing art exhibits and events downtown. Could be a partner for developing future public art program. • Ridgefield Business Association: Supports business efforts throughout the city; future work could include downtown -specific business initiatives. • Ridgefield Community Center: Hosts range of civic and community events, drawing a significant number of event organizers and visitors to downtown. • Ridgefield Farmers Market: Hosts market every summer Saturday in the downtown parks; soon to relocate to Overlook Park. • Ridgefield Garden Club: Maintains downtown planters and provides holiday decorations; previous projects have included downtown amenities such as the clock and water fountain outside of City Hall and the community garden on Sargent Street. Raises funds through annual plant sale and coordinates volunteer effort • Ridgefield Lions Club: Provides financial support to a range of community initiatives, such as park amenities and school projects; could become a partner in sponsoring street furniture installation. • Ridgefield School District: Supports education, community recreation, and community events at its Union Ridge/View Ridge campus downtown. Consider partnering on future events as well as initiatives that involve students in downtown improvements, such as art installations. The City remains a strong champion for downtown, and will work to coordinate planning efforts, funding, and other support on downtown priorities. Directly, the City has the ability to fund and maintain downtown streetscape improvements. Additional City strengths include addressing downtown issues through governmental bodies such as City Council, Planning Commission and the Parks Board, as well as convening downtown -specific planning efforts between community stakeholders. Future support could also include administrative support for projects such as a Business Improvement District, and increased maintenance responsibility. Future Downtown Streetscape Priorities The committee's top recommendation is to focus next on downtown street lighting, in order to achieve both aesthetic and safety improvements. The committee recommends developing a downtown street lighting district, implementing standards for both auto- and pedestrian -oriented street lighting throughout downtown that fits with the community. Engineering Standards currently require streetlights but do not specify models for downtown. (Vol. 1, Section 2.26) Street lights Downtown Accessory Guidelines Committee Page 9 Recommendations to City Council would also need to be dark -skies compliant to comply with RDC 18.715. Related considerations should include banners on the light poles and installing mounting hooks for flower baskets. J The DAG Committee's top recommendation for future downtown streetscape improvements is to develop downtown street lighting standards, integrating distinctive light styles, such as streetlights in downtown Troutdale which date back to the original Columbia River Gorge Highway (far left). Streetlights must also be dark - skies compliant to reduce light pollution and impacts to wildlife (see example at left). Additional priorities for future consideration are based on the committee's discussions and action items identified in the 2002 Guidelines for Downtown Ridgefield and the Downtown/Waterfront Integration Project—Action Plan. In no particular order, ideas include: Review Planting and Maintenance Standards for Street Trees: Current standards identify the Dwarf Capital Pear for planting in downtown, and both the engineering standards and zoning code provide guidelines for tree planting, but do not require it for all downtown locations. Additional standards apply to placement, spacing, and maintenance. Future work could revisit the identified species, planting plans, installation specifics such as size of tree wells and use of tree grates, and ongoing maintenance plans. Revitalize Flower Basket Program: There are mounting hooks for hanging flower baskets installed in some downtown locations and flower baskets have been provided in years past. Develop partnership with the City, Garden Club, and downtown businesses to install and maintain flower baskets during the growing season. Install additional mounting hooks as needed. Flower baskets are a relatively low cost improvement with a significant impact, and should be prioritized. Bicycle Parking and Orientation: Identify bike rack styles for downtown and provide for bicycle parking throughout downtown. Could complement mapping and designation of local bike touring routes. Undergrounding of Overhead Wires: Undergrounding is required by the City Engineering Standards for new development and redevelopment, but there is not likely going to be enough development activity on the main downtown streets to complete the undergrounding through developer -funded site improvements. Securing a combination of public and private development funding will likely be necessary to complete undergrounding downtown. Clark Public Utilities will be an essential partner in this work, and may be able to assist with obtaining grant funding. Downtown Accessory Guidelines Committee Recommendations to City Council Page 10 General Maintenance: Expand general maintenance plans to ensure downtown looks its best, with an emphasis on clean-ups prior to major community events like the 4`h of July. The City currently contracts for street cleaning on a quarterly basis; look at expanding the frequency of sweeping and eventually purchasing a street cleaner for the City. Organize volunteer work parties to remove weeds and clean sidewalks and curbs on a periodic basis to supplement street cleaning. Public Art Program: Look at ways to incorporate public art into downtown, either in the form of decorative street furniture or stand-alone works of art such as sculptures and murals. Work could include passing a "percentage for art" program to dedicate a percentage of the City's Capital Improvement Project funding to art installations and forming a committee to oversee the selection of artworks.a Holiday Lighting and Decorations: Develop partnership between the City, Garden Club, and downtown businesses to coordinate holiday decorating annually, incorporating plans for use and off-season storage of existing holiday decorations and purchase of new decorations as needed. Consider installing outdoor electrical outlets to support holiday lights. Conclusion The DAG committee's work was a successful process that identified street furniture recommendations for benches, trash receptacles, and planters. Next steps include: • Finalizing street furniture models with input from the Public Works Department. • Incorporating street furniture into the City Engineering Standards. • Initiating a pilot project to install street furniture in front of City Hall. • Developing additional funding options for street furniture installation. • Beginning planning work on a downtown street lighting district and further downtown planning priorities. a See http://www.pps.org/reference/artfunding/ for more funding options. Note that the federal government requires a percentage of funding for public buildings to be used for public art. The state of Washington has a constitutional prohibition against using transportation funds obtained through the gas tax for public art, though Transportation Enhancement grants from the federal government—administered by the state—can be used for public art projects. Downtown Accessory Guidelines Committee Page 11 Recommendations to City Council Appendix A: Public Outreach Results The public outreach event held May 3 to gather community feedback about preferred benches was a success. There were three sample benches available and 116 people participated, providing feedback on bench preferences. The Craftsmen style was the most favorably received, and the comments focused on similar themes such as low -maintenance or comfort. Craftsmen Bench Materials of Sample: Wooden slats, dark green metal. Votes 154 or 47% Reasons for vote: Number and percentage of respondents sel ting this reason Materials 16 30% Comfort 17 31% Design 18 33% "Fits" in Downtown Ridgefield 19 35% Other reasons: Prettiest; looks Ridgefield; on a hot day, no metal to sit on—that's good; traditional style; stays cool in sun; more antique -looking, fits into "Old Town" concept; paint it black; needs to appear more historic; best looking; maintenance; great bench design but needs lumbar support; likes the wood ones, with the curve; favorite color; green with recycled wood is nice looking; like the green metal and gold medallion; like the wide arms for coffee or an arm, but the back is uncomfortable, needs more slope; back is too straight though; looks sturdy; is like Bob's Automotive flag bench; seems durable; great support, good combination of wood and metal; fits town but didn't feel comfortable 1V ote: Kespondents could choose multiple reasons for selecting agiven bench, thus percentages exceed 100% total. Other comments: • Be sure to keep wood nice. • Need wider seat for better comfort. • Care and maintenance might be a problem. • 22 comments to use recycled plastic slats rather than wood. Appendix A Page A-1 Public Outreach Results Broadway Bench Materials of Sample: Recycled plastic slats and red metal Votes 123 or 20% Reasons for vote: Number and percentage of respondents sel ting this reason Materials 10 43% Comfort 11 48% Design 8 35% "Fits" in Downtown Ridgefield 14 17% Other reasons: Once in job is done—no, low maintenance; should be easy care; Long lasting materials; need low maintenance; higher than the other two; recycled/low maintenance would be best; easy to clean, made of recycled material; low maintenance; looks easy to maintain; good feel; more comfortable.. Other comments: • Wood would be high maintenance, like the composite material. • Too frail looking. • Multiple comments in favor of red color. Staff comments: Strong color preference might have swayed votes in favor in this bench. Ease of maintenance also appears to have been a key consideration. Appendix A Page A-2 Public Outreach Results Renaissance Bench Materials of Sample: Black metal Votes 129 or 25% Reasons for vote: Number and percentage of respondents selecting this reason Materials 11 33% Comfort 10 33% Design 13 41% "Fits" in Downtown Ridgefield 7 19% Other reasons: Maintenance; matches light posts; better back; lasts longer; timeless design; it is a classic style and timeless color; upkeep; not mixing metal and wood— feng shui; back slants back a little—great; sturdy, old-fashioned; smash it and it would be perfect; like the looks; easy to maintain; looks good; comfortable to sit on, least maintenance; little or no maintenance with metal -vandalism reduced; design and style fit the early 1900-1940 architecture. Other comments• • Love the bench, most comfortable but may get too hot. • Classic "Ironworks." Staff comments: Bench did feel warm by mid-afternoon on a hot, sunny day, but not unbearable. Appendix A Public Outreach Results Page A-3 Greenway Bench Materials of Sample: Recycled plastic version installed in Davis Park; picture provided at event. Votes 16 or 5% Reasons for vote: Number and percentage of respondents sel cting this reason Materials 2 33% Comfort 2 33% Design 4 67% "Fits" in Downtown Ridgefield 1 17% Other reasons: No metal to get hot; best material. Other comments: None. Staff comments: Few people made the trek to Davis Park to check out the existing bench, so this bench likely wasn't a serious contender. Appendix A Page A-4 Public Outreach Results Additional Observations General comments from public: • Height makes a difference—makes it better for retired folks. • Place benches with thought and purpose and usefulness. • Please try and find local vendor. • One color throughout the downtown creates a cohesive look. • Install at least 4 or 5 along Pioneer and 1". • Would like to see them installed. • No metal. • We need more benches for our seniors and disabled. • Add picnic tables—at least three—to Davis Park. • Change colors throughout the town. • The more benches around town the better. • Towers to hang full flower baskets. • Thank you. There were an additional 4 (3%) Undecided/Other responses. Location: On the map of downtown Ridgefield, respondents marked locations primarily along Main and Pioneer streets, and at the parks. Colors: Although respondents were not specifically asked about color preferences, many respondents commented on colors they would like to see: • Red: 13 mentions • Black: 9 mentions • Green: 4 mentions • Purple: 2 mentions • Orange: 1 mention • Blue: 1 mention Appendix A Page A-5 Public Outreach Results RI GL I LLD Welcome to Downtown Ridgefield New Business Checklist Welcome Prospective Business Owner, We are glad that you are interested in locating your business in Ridgefield's historic downtown and hope that you will find our downtown is the perfect fit for your business endeavors. This checklist has been created to assist you through the process of opening a new business in downtown. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact City Hall at (360) 887-3557. LAND USE & BUILDING ❑ Identify a potential location for your business. ❑ Contact our planning staff at (360) 887-3557 to confirm that your planned use is consistent with current land use zoning. Completion of a Planning Inquiry Form in advance may expedite the process. ❑ If you plan to build a new structure, convert an existing structure from a residential use to a commercial or a shared w (commercial/residential) use, or perform significant improvements, it is likely that you will have to obtain building permits for �— Cn the construction/conversion. Please contact our Building Official at (360) 887-8610 to schedule a meeting to identify which permits may be required. To facilitate your project, the City completes all coordination with the Clark County Fire Marshal's office. Impact fees and/or system development charges may also apply, please contact our Public Works Director at (360) 887-8251 to schedule a meeting to determine if infrastructure impacts apply. ❑ If you plan to construct a new building. please fill out a Water/Sewer Availability Request form to determine if there is water and sewer serving the site. The cost to perform a water/sewer availability analysis is $50.00. C14 SECURE THE LOCATION 0 - LU ❑ Negotiate a purchase & sale or lease agreement with the owner. N OBTAIN APPLICABLE CITY LICENSES & PERMITS The following licenses and permits may be required and can be obtained at City Hall (230 Pioneer Street): ❑ BUSINESS LICENSE. Ridgefield's annual business license is a flat fee of $50.00. ❑ BUILDING PERMITS. If applicable, a variety of building permits may be required pursuant to your planned construction or improvements. Permit fees are required in accordance with the City's Master Fee Schedule, which is available on the City's website (www.ci.ridgefield.wa.us). M ❑ CHANGE OF OCCUPANCY PERMIT. Locating a new type of business in an existing building requires a change of Lu occupancy permit, which can be obtained at City Hall. The change of occupancy permit is a flat fee of $100.00, however co impact fees or system development charges may also apply. ❑ SIGN PERMIT. Ridgefield Municipal Code Chapter 18.710 regulates the types of signs allowed in the City. Since signage is a key part of your business' success and consistency of Ridgefield's vision, we suggest you meet with City staff prior to making any signage decisions. A sign permit may be obtained at City Hall; the permit fee is 1 % of the value of the sign, but not less than $25.00. ❑ UTILITY ACCOUNT SET-UP. The City operates water. sewer and storm water utilities. Staff at City Hall would be happy to assist you with setting up your account for these services. YOU'RE COMPLETE! Congratulations and we wish you and your business much success! Following is additional information that may assist you in starting your business: zz 0 Electricity: Clark Public Utilities (360) 992-3000 or www.clarkpublicutilities.com P 0 Garbage: Waste Connections (360) 892-5370 or www.wcnx.org 0 Natural Gas: NW Natural (360) 571-5465 or www.nwnatural.com z0 Ridgefield Business Association (360) 887-3600 or www.ridgefieldwash.com 10 To maintain the character of our downtown, the community has developed 14 Essential Guidelines for Downtown Ridgefield, which is available on the City's website (www.ci.ridgefield.wa.us)