June 2020 Carty Road Subarea Final ReportCARTY ROAD SUBAREA PLAN
Planning a Vision that Works for the Community.
Respect
the rural and
agricultural heritage
of the area by protecting
existing land uses and
conserving open
space.
Summary
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
City of Ridgefield City Council
Don Stose, Mayor
Rob Aichele
Sandra Day
Jennifer Lindsay
Ron Onslow
Lee Wells
Dana Ziemer
City of Ridgefield Planning Commission
Patrick Flynn, Chair
Jerry Bush
Jason Carnell
Judy Chipman
Stan Okinaka
Gary Rightenour
Paul Young
Project Team
City of Ridgefield
Steve Stuart, City Manager
Claire Lust, Acting Community Development Director
Bryan Kast, Public Works Director
Brenda Howell, City Engineer
Consultant Team
Don Hardy, Project Manager, WSP
Nicole McDermott, Deputy Project Manager, WSP
Sam Jones, Landscape Architect, WSP
Sam Rubin, Planner, WSP
Emma Johnson, Planner, WSP
Reah Flisakowski, Transportation Engineer, DKS Associates
Eric Hovee, Economist, ED Hovee and Company
Table of Content
Summary
CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report – June 2020 i
SECTION PAGE
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................... 1
Planning Process ............................................................................................................................................ 1
Subarea Planning Process .............................................................................................................................. 1
Visioning and Outreach .......................................................................................................................................... 3
Vision Statement ........................................................................................................................................... 3
Guiding Principles .......................................................................................................................................... 3
Analysis .................................................................................................................................................................. 5
Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................................................ 5
Fiscal Impact ................................................................................................................................................. 6
Conceptual Planning .............................................................................................................................................. 8
Concept A ..................................................................................................................................................... 8
Concept Plan B .............................................................................................................................................. 9
Preferred Alternative Plan ............................................................................................................................ 10
Design Guidelines ........................................................................................................................................ 13
Implementation .................................................................................................................................................... 15
Development Code Amendments ................................................................................................................ 17
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Land Use Capacity Comparison …………………………… .................................. …………………………………….11
Table 2. Trip Generation Estimate …………………………… ........................................... …………………………………….11
Table 3. Implementation Measures …………………………… .......................................... …………………………………….15
Table 4. Development Code Amendments …………………………… ............................... …………………………………….17
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Vicinity Map …………………………… ................................................................ …………………………………….1
Figure 2. Community Open House …………………………… ............................................. …………………………………….3
Figure 3. Existing Zoning …………………………… ............................................................ …………………………………….5
Figure 4. Constrained Lands …………………………… ...................................................... …………………………………….6
Figure 5. Concept Plan A …………………………… ........................................................... …………………………………….8
Figure 6. Concept Plan B …………………………… ........................................................... …………………………………….9
Figure 7. Preferred Plan …………………………… ............................................................ …………………………………….10
Figure 8. Carty Road Minor Arterial …………………………… .......................................... …………………………………….12
Figure 9. Residential Local A …………………………… .................................................... …………………………………….12
Figure 10. Proposed Comprehensive Plan Map …………………………… ........................ …………………………………….16
Figure 11. Proposed Zoning Map …………………………… .............................................. …………………………………….16
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A. Public Involvement Summaries
Appendix B. Existing Conditions Analysis
Appendix C. Fiscal Impact Assessment
Appendix D. Estimated Trip Generation and Transportation Improvement Costs
Summary
CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report – June 2020 1
SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION
Purpose of the Subarea Plan P 1
Subarea Planning Process P 1
Introduction
Summary
CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report – June 2020 1
Introduction
The Carty Road subarea consists of approximately 266 acres
of land located in the southern portion of Ridgefield. The
subarea is located directly east of the intersection of
Northwest Hillhurst Road and South Royle Road and west of
the Interstate 5 (I-5) corridor. Northwest Carty Road functions
as the southern boundary for a portion of the subarea, and
the entire subarea is located outside of city limits within the
city’s urban growth area (UGA), in unincorporated Clark
County (see Figure 1).
Planning Process
Ridgefield continues to be the fastest growing city in the
state according to 2019 population projections conducted by
the Washington Office of Financial Management. The city is
projected to continue experiencing substantial growth and
development over the next 20 years. Ridgefield City Council
has been petitioned by several property owners within the
subarea to consider annexation of the area adjacent to Carty
Road. At the same time, other property owners and residents
in the area have expressed concerns over the city’s rapid
growth and frustration at the loss of rural areas within and
surrounding Ridgefield.
In order to develop a plan for this area, the City Council
initiated the subarea planning process prior to considering
annexation. The Carty Road subarea plan establishes future
land uses and identifies the appropriate intensity of
development, as well as required transportation and utility
infrastructure improvements.
Subarea Planning Process
The subarea plan provides the City with a better
understanding of the community vision and opportunities
and constraints related to future development. The planning
process consisted of the following elements.
Visioning and Outreach
• Property owner and stakeholder survey
• Stakeholder interviews
• Project advisory committee meetings
• Community open house
• Vision statement and guiding principles
Analysis
• Existing conditions analysis, including land use,
transportation, utility, and environmental conditions
• Fiscal impact assessment
Conceptual Planning
• Draft concept plans to address property owner and
stakeholder feedback
• Preferred alternative concept plan consistent with
subarea guiding principles
• Design guideline recommendations
Implementation
• Implementation action plan
• Recommended policy refinements and development code
amendments
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Affected Environment, Impacts, Mitigation
2 CITY OF VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON | The Heights District Plan | Draft Environmental Impact Statement
SECTION 2
VISIONING AND
OUTREACH
Vision Statement P 3
Guiding Principles P 3
Visioning and Outreach
CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report – June 2020 3
Visioning and Outreach
The vision and outreach process began with an online
survey sent to all property owners within the subarea
boundary. Survey responses provided initial information on
resident values and desires for the future of the area. The
survey also identified individuals that wanted to stay
involved in the planning process through a stakeholder
interview and/or participation on a project advisory
committee. Following the survey, the project team
conducted stakeholder interviews with 11 property owners
or stakeholders in the area.
The goal of the stakeholder interviews was to have a more
in-depth discussion of the assets and potential constraints
that exist in the subarea. A consistent theme emerged in the
survey results and stakeholder interviews ― stakeholders
understand that development is likely within the
community given the speed with which surrounding areas
are developing, but there is a desire to maintain the privacy,
seclusion, and rural and natural character of the subarea.
Stakeholders were generally interested in working with the
City of Ridgefield to ensure future development respects
property rights, existing single-family homes and
agricultural uses, and retains open space.
To build on the framework established through the survey
and stakeholder interviews and to guide the remainder of
the subarea planning process, a project advisory committee
(PAC) was convened. The PAC met twice during the project.
During the first PAC meeting, the group provided input on a
vision and guiding principles for the Carty Road subarea.
The vision and guiding principles were then refined during
the second PAC meeting and with input from the
community at an open house. The final vision and guiding
principles are as follows.
Vision Statement
Stakeholders and residents of the Carty Road area
understand that Ridgefield is growing, but even as the city
evolves, the Carty Road area is unique and stands as a good
example of Ridgefield’s rural and agricultural heritage.
The rural character is reflected in residential development
and transportation options that respect privacy, property,
and safety. Development in this community protects both
the natural areas along Gee Creek and the citizens that live
and work in the community, now and in the future.
Guiding Principles
Future development in the Carty Road subarea will:
• Respect the rural and agricultural heritage of the area by
protecting existing land uses and conserving open
space.
• Create quality design through design standards and
landscaping requirements.
• Respect existing development patterns in the Carty Road
area.
• Protect natural areas and buffers along the Gee Creek
corridor.
• Provide transportation options that promote the safety
of all users (motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians) and
improve emergency vehicle access and evacuation
options.
• Provide a range of development options for landowners
that allow flexibility to retain existing uses and meet
development regulations and state land use laws.
Summaries of all outreach activities, including the survey,
stakeholder interviews, PAC meetings, and community open
house, are included in Appendix A.
Figure 2. Community Open House
Affected Environment, Impacts, Mitigation
4 CITY OF VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON | The Heights District Plan | Draft Environmental Impact Statement
SECTION 3
ANALYSIS
Existing Conditions P 5
Fiscal Impact Assessment P 6
Analysis
CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report – June 2020 5
Analysis
The analysis phase of the subarea planning process included an existing conditions analysis and fiscal impact assessment. These
elements are further described below
Existing Conditions
The existing conditions analysis (Appendix B) identified existing land uses and zoning; parks, trails, and open spaces; critical areas;
utility (water and sewer) infrastructure and capacity; and the current transportation network and planned improvements. The
subarea is currently characterized by a rural development pattern with single-family residential homes on lots ranging in size from
approximately 1 to 28 acres with an average lot size of approximately 6 acres. Existing uses in the subarea include residential uses,
wedding venues, stained glass studios, and family farms. The entirety of the subarea is within the County and includes single-
family residential (R1-6, R1-7.5, R1-10) zoning designations. Some of the land in the Carty Road subarea is in use as farmland;
however, the area is zoned for single-family residential (Figure 3).
Figure 3. Existing Zoning
The subarea includes approximately 133 acres (or 50 percent of the land area) of critical areas (Figure 4). The critical areas include
steep slopes and riparian habitat corridors associated with Gee Creek, which runs through the center of the subarea, and several
unnamed tributaries that drain to Gee Creek.
As part of the existing conditions analysis, DKS Associates evaluated the existing transportation network, including pedestrian
and bicycle facilities, current traffic volumes, and planned transportation improvements. Carty Road is classified as a minor arterial
with approximately 700 daily trips. The only planned road improvement in the area in the Ridgefield transportation CFP (2018) is
the upgrade of Carty Road to an 80 foot right-of-way. The analysis noted a lack of pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the area.
Water and sewer infrastructure does not currently exist in the subarea and will be required with future development. The existing
conditions analysis indicated there are no significant capacity concerns with future water or sewer service. There is a planned 8-
inch sewer line in Carty Road and a pump station near the intersection of Carty Road and Northwest 24th Avenue. Additional
sewer and water infrastructure will be required to serve individual developments.
Analysis
6 CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report – June 2020
Figure 4. Constrained Lands
Fiscal Impact
The fiscal impact assessment (Appendix C) provides a preliminary review of existing property valuation and fiscal considerations
as part of the Carty Road subarea planning process. The assessment includes a brief subarea profile based on Clark County
assessor data and an assessment of potential future development (or build-out) capacity based on existing County zoning,
valuation potential, tax rate considerations, and notes regarding utility provisions. Development potential in the assessment is
based on current Clark County zoning but assumes the availability of urban services.
Based on anticipated buildout under existing County zoning, the subarea could reach an assessed valuation of $344 million, an
increase from approximately $24.4 million in 2019. As noted in the Preferred Alternative section of this report, the number of
allowed units under proposed City zoning would be less than those currently allowed under County zoning. Therefore, the
potential valuation of the preferred plan would be less than the valuation identified in the preliminary fiscal impact assessment.
At present, the property tax rates within the city are approximately five percent less than the current rates in the county. For the
average priced home in the subarea (approximately $504,500), this equates to a property tax savings of about $263 per year.
Conceptual Planning
CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report 7
SECTION 4
CONCEPTUAL
PLANNING
Concept Plan A P 8
Concept Plan B P 9
Preferred Concept Plan P 10
Design Guidelines P 13
Conceptual Planning
8 CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report – June 2020
Conceptual Planning
Two concept plans were developed based on the subarea vision and guiding principles identified above, as well as the
information collected through the existing conditions analysis. Each concept plan includes land use, transportation, and
recreational improvements. The primary distinction between the two concepts is the proposed residential zoning designations.
Concept A (Figure 5) includes two residential zones (RLD-4 and RLD-6) and Concept B (Figure 6) includes three residential zones
(RLD-4, RLD-6, and RLD-8). The concept plans were evaluated by the PAC at their second meeting, as well as by the community at
the open house and by the Ridgefield City Council at a Council Workshop. Based on the feedback received during those outreach
efforts, a preferred concept plan was prepared.
Concept A
• Two residential zones – RLD-4 and RLD-6
• Community/Civic – provide an opportunity for community-oriented uses
• Heritage Overlay – protect and enhance historic character
• Community Supported Agriculture Overlay – allow limited commercial activity related to special events or agriculture
• Trail connectivity through existing critical areas and a new multiuse path on Carty Road
• Transportation improvements on Carty Road, NW 24th Avenue, and entering the subarea from Royle Road1
Figure 5. Concept Plan A
1 The intersection improvement included on Royle Road is intended to show access to the western portion of the subarea from Royle Road rather than Carty Road
in order to avoid a stream crossing. An analysis of the potential roadway alignment extending from the proposed intersection improvement on Royle Road would
be required at the time of development.
Conceptual Planning
CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report – June 2020 9
Concept Plan B
• Three residential zones – RLD-4, RLD-6, and RLD-8
• Allows for greater density on the edge of the subarea
• Community/Civic – provide an opportunity for community-oriented uses
• Heritage Overlay – protect and enhance historic character
• Community Supported Agriculture Overlay – allow limited commercial activity related to special events or agriculture
• Trail connectivity through existing critical areas and a new multiuse path on Carty Road
• Transportation improvements on Carty Road, on a portion of NW 24th Avenue, and entering the subarea from Royle Road; no
improvement to intersection of Carty Road and NW 24th
Figure 6. Concept Plan B
Conceptual Planning
10 CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report – June 2020
Preferred Alternative Plan
Many of the comments received during the outreach process indicated a desire to retain large lots and minimize density to the
greatest extent possible within the requirements of the Growth Management Act2. Based on this feedback, the preferred concept
plan (Figure 7) includes one low-density residential zone (RLD-4). One zoning designation became the preferred approach based
on community input from stakeholders and council members and to better reflect the vision of the subarea. The entirety of the
area (approximately 266 acres) is proposed as RLD-4. In addition to baseline zoning densities, the preferred concept includes
recommended text amendments to the Ridgefield Development Code that implement the plan. One recommendation is to allow
developments in the Carty Road subarea to achieve an average density of four units per acre with an approved master plan. This
provision would allow the development of larger lots than otherwise allowed in the base zones while maintaining the overall
required densities.
Figure 7. Preferred Plan
2 The Growth Management Act (GMA) is a series of state statutes, first adopted in 1990, that require fast growing cities and counties to develop comprehensive
plans and enact development provisions to implement 13 planning goals. The goals are intended to encourage development in urban or urbanizing areas, reduce
sprawl, provide for efficient multimodal transportation systems, provide for affordable housing, and the protection of environmentally sensitive areas. See RCW
36.70A.020 for a complete list of the GMA planning goals.
Conceptual Planning
CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report – June 2020 11
Land Use Capacity and Trip Generation
The maximum allowed dwelling units and potential population under existing and proposed zoning designations are outlined in
Table 1. The number of vehicular trips associated with these dwelling units are outlined in Table 2. Additional details on trip
generation and cost estimates for transportation improvements are included in Appendix D.
Table 1. Land Use Capacity Comparison
Zone Net Acres1
Max. Density
(Dwelling Unit
(DU)/Acre)
Max. Allowed DU2 Population3
Existing Clark County Zoning Designations
R1-10 27 4.4 119 352
R1-7.5 55 5.8 317 938
R1-6 35 7.3 254 752
Existing Zoning Total 690 units 2042 people
Proposed City Zoning Designations
RLD-4 116 4 464 1373
Proposed Zoning Total 464 units 1373 people
1Net acres equals gross acres with a 50% deduction for critical areas and 12.5% deduction for infrastructure. For example, net acres for RLD-4 is
calculated as follows: 266 gross acres - 50% (133 acres) for critical areas = 133 acres - 12.5% (12.5 acres) for infrastructure = 116 net acres.
2Maximum allowed dwelling units includes an existing 44 units within the subarea boundary that are assumed to remain with future development.
2Based on average household size of 2.96 per the City’s 2016 comprehensive plan.
Table 2. Trip Generation Estimate
Zone ITE Land
Use
Max. Allowed
Dwelling
Units
Daily Trips
A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
In Out Total In Out Total
Existing
Clark
County
Zoning
Single-
Family
Detached
Housing
690 6,448 126 379 505 426 250 676
Proposed
City
Zoning
Single-
Family
Detached
Housing
464 4.380 85 258 343 289 170 459
Net Change in Trips1 -2,068 -41 -121 -162 -137 -80 -217
1Net Change in Trips equals the change in trips from proposed zoning versus existing zoning.
Source: ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) manual, Trip Generation, 10th Edition.
Conceptual Planning
12 CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report – June 2020
Connectivity Improvements
To address connectivity within and beyond the subarea, which stakeholders identified as a key consideration, the preferred
concept plan uses existing critical areas to provide off-street trail connections and includes recommended transportation
improvements. Improvements include connecting Northwest 24th Avenue to South 20th Way/Northwest Timm Road, a new road
and intersection improvement from South Royle Road to access the western edge of the subarea, improvements to Carty Road
with a new separated multiuse path, and intersection improvements at the intersections of Northwest Carty Road and Northwest
Hillhurst Road and Northwest Carty Road and Northwest 24th Avenue. See Figure 8 and Figure 9 for proposed cross sections.
Figure 8. Carty Road Minor Arterial
Figure 9. Residential Local A
Conceptual Planning
CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report – June 2020 13
Design Guidelines
Design guidelines establish an aesthetic framework to implement the design principles discussed through the planning process.
The following design guidelines were prepared with input from the PAC and are intended to provide additional details on the
visual elements that are important to consider for future development in the Carty Road subarea. These guidelines are
recommendations and must be implemented through development and design standards in the Ridgefield Municipal Code.
Subarea-Wide Guidelines
• Allow agricultural uses and the keeping of livestock for private or commercial purposes.
• Provide a minimum 30-foot-wide perimeter/compatibility landscape buffer (dense shrubbery, ground cover, and trees at least
20 feet on center) between existing and new uses.
• Provide minimum setbacks as follows.
− Front: 20 feet; Side: 15 feet; Rear: 15 feet (additional setback standards provided for the Heritage Overlay zone).
• Vary lot sizes in new developments to mimic existing development patterns ― minimum and maximum lot sizes based on
applicable zone.
• Consider views from public rights-of-way and parks to protect view sheds.
Natural Areas and Trails
• Encourage the preservation of native soils, existing tree cover, and topography to the greatest extent possible.
• Limit buffer width averaging and buffer width reduction in critical areas to preserve the natural features and character of the
Carty Road subarea.
• Provide a multimodal trail network to provide transportation and recreation options throughout the subarea and connect to
the larger regional trail system.
Community/Civic Zone
Encourage the establishment of community-oriented uses, such as a community center, historical museum, or other community
destinations and open spaces for community gatherings.
Community-Supported Agriculture Overlay
Encourage the creation of limited commercial uses or event facilities in tandem with residential uses that support the selling or
promotion of agricultural or ancillary products.
Heritage Overlay
• Encourage the preservation and continued use of historic properties and structures.
• Require design review for development within the Heritage Overlay to ensure compatibility with historic elements.
• Encourage the listing of properties and structures on local and national historic registers.
• Provide a minimum 30-foot front setback.
Right-of-Way
• Maintain the rural character of Carty Road with two 12-foot travel lanes, natural drainage swales, and detached multimodal
trail.
• Maintain the rural character of local public roads in residential areas throughout the subarea with 10-foot travel lanes shared
with bicycles, natural drainage swale, and detached sidewalk.
• Natural drainage swales should be landscaped with native, mowable plant materials and street trees approximately 25 feet on
center.
• Split-rail fencing should be placed along the public right-of-way
Conceptual Planning
14 CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report – June 2020
Im
SECTION 5
IMPLEMENTATION
Implementation Measures P 15
Development Code Amendments P 17
Implementation
CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report – June 2020 15
Implementation
The following implementation measures establish the regulatory framework that will support development in the Carty Road area
compatible with the vision and guiding principles.
Table 3. Implementation Measures
Implementation Item Action Priority (short- or
long-term)
Planning
Subarea Plan Adoption
• Adopt the Carty Road subarea plan by reference into the Ridgefield Urban
Area Comprehensive Plan. See Figure 10 for proposed comprehensive plan
designations.
• Review existing comprehensive plan goals and policies to reflect the Carty
Road subarea vision.
Short
Ridgefield Development
Code Amendments
• Amend the Ridgefield Development Code to codify recommended zoning
amendments (see Table 2, Development Code Amendments) and establish
recommended overlay zones. See Figure 11 for proposed zoning
designations.
• Implement recommended design guidelines to ensure future development
reflects the Carty Road subarea vision.
Short
Annexation
• Evaluate annexation petitions ― annexation can occur in phases or the
entire subarea can be annexed at one time.
• Apply proposed zoning and overlay designations in conjunction with
annexation.
Short to Long –
depending on
annexation requests
Removal of the Urban
Holding Overlay District
(UH-10)
• Amend the zoning map to remove the UH-10 overlay designation following
annexation and certification of adequate capital improvements.
Short to Long –
phased as capital
improvements are
installed
Infrastructure (Utilities and Transportation)
Expanded Water and
Sewer Service
• Confirm planned infrastructure improvements will support subarea
development and are financially viable based on planned densities.
• Review timing of infrastructure improvements in conjunction with
annexation petitions and development applications.
Short to Long
Expansion of Franchise
Utilities
• Confirm franchise utilities can be provided to support future development.
• Expand franchise utilities in conjunction with development. Short to Long
Roadway Improvements
• Identify specific roadway alignments in conjunction with development
proposals.
• Review and update engineering standards consistent with proposed cross
sections.
• Ensure future roadway improvements are consistent with the Carty Road
subarea vision and provide multimodal transportation options.
Short to Long –
based on timing of
development
proposals
Parks and Trails
Park and Trail
Improvements
• Update the City Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Plan to incorporate
park and trail locations proposed in the Carty Road subarea plan.
• Refine park and trail locations in conjunction with future development
proposals.
Short to Long
Implementation
16 CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report – June 2020
Figure 10. Proposed Comprehensive Plan Map
Figure 11. Proposed Zoning Map
Implementation
CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report – June 2020 17
Development Code Amendments
The following development code amendments are recommended to implement the Carty Road Subarea Plan.
Table 4. Development Code Amendments
Existing Code Recommended Amendments
RDC Chapter 18.205 – Uses. The City’s Master Use Table
(18.205.020-1)
• Amend the City’s master use table to define uses
permitted in the three newly established overlays for the
Carty Road subarea: Carty Road Community-Supported
Agriculture (CR-CSA) overlay zone, Carty Road Heritage
(CR-H) overlay zone, and the Carty Road Critical Areas (CR-
CA) overlay.
• Create a category for community-supported agriculture
uses for the CR-CSA overlay, allowing for commercial uses
or event facilities in tandem with residential uses that
support the selling or promotion of agricultural or ancillary
products.
• Create a community/civic use category for the CR-H
overlay, including community centers, historical museums,
or other community destinations and open spaces for
community gatherings.
• Uses in the CR-CA overlay zone must comply with RDC
18.280, Critical Areas Protection, and no amendments to
the Master Use Table are needed to implement this
overlay.
RDC Chapter 18.210 – Residential Low Density Districts
• Add a subsection to the Residential Low Density chapter
of the RDC to provide special provisions for the Carty Road
subarea, including development standards and overlay
zones.
• Design guideline recommendations are outlined in
Section 6.0 of this report and include requiring varied lot
sizes in new developments to mimic existing development
patterns; requiring a 30-foot-wide perimeter/compatibility
landscape buffer (dense shrubbery, ground cover, and
trees at least 20 feet on center) between existing and new
uses; and protections for view sheds.
• Include a provision that allows developments in the Carty
Road subarea to achieve an average density equal to four
or six dwelling units per acre (depending on the base
zone) with an approved master plan.
• Density averaging would be allowed with a master plan
for developments greater than 10 lots.
• Master plan provisions would include minimum lot size of
7,500 square feet in RLD-4 zone; and a requirement to
disperse smaller lots throughout the development.
RDC Chapter 18.280 – Critical Areas Protection
• Amend the critical areas ordinance to limit the use of
buffer width averaging and buffer width reductions within
the Carty Road subarea.
Implementation
18 CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report – June 2020
Existing Code Recommended Amendments
RDC 18.401 – Planned Unit Developments
• Amend the PUD ordinance to include special provisions
for the Carty Road subarea. Include limitations on the
modification of standards. Do not allow a reduction in
building setbacks, landscape requirements, or density
increases. Only allow lot size reduction in conjunction with
a master plan as identified above to allow density
averaging.
RDC Chapter 18.725 – Landscaping
• Amend Chapter 18.725 – Landscaping to identify
perimeter landscaping consistent with the intent of the
subarea: 30-foot-wide perimeter/compatibility landscape
buffer (dense shrubbery, ground cover, and trees at least
20 feet on center) between existing and new uses.
• Amend Table 18.725.050-1 Landscaping, Screening, and
Buffering Matrix to accommodate the above provisions.
.
Implementation
CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report – June 2020 19
APPENDIX A
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
SUMMARIES
Online Survey
Stakeholder Interviews
Project Advisory Committee Meeting 1 and 2
Community Open House
94.44%17
5.56%1
Q1 Do you live within the study area boundaries shown on the map?
Answered: 18 Skipped: 0
TOTAL 18
Yes
No
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
1 / 6
City of Ridgefield: Carty Road Subarea Plan - Property Owner Survey
16.67%3
27.78%5
72.22%13
44.44%8
5.56%1
61.11%11
16.67%3
Q2 What do you value most about the Carty Road study area? Select all
that apply.
Answered: 18 Skipped: 0
Total Respondents: 18
#PROVIDE DETAILS ON YOUR CHOICE OR LIST OTHER OPTIONS.DATE
1 Nice community, as well as proximity.12/15/2019 8:10 PM
2 Selusion, we see no other houses from our home, that's why we purchased it.12/2/2019 7:29 PM
Proximity to
downtown...
Proximity to
I-5 corridor
Rural Character
Agricultural
land
Mix of land
uses
Natural Areas
Provide
details on y...
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Proximity to downtown Ridgefield
Proximity to I-5 corridor
Rural Character
Agricultural land
Mix of land uses
Natural Areas
Provide details on your choice or list other options.
2 / 6
City of Ridgefield: Carty Road Subarea Plan - Property Owner Survey
27.78%5
5.56%1
0.00%0
50.00%9
61.11%11
27.78%5
Q3 How would you like to see the area improved? Select all that apply
and provide details in the space provided.
Answered: 18 Skipped: 0
Total Respondents: 18
#PROVIDE DETAILS ON YOUR CHOICE OR LIST OTHER OPTIONS.DATE
1 Carty road has no shoulder, dangerous curves!12/15/2019 8:10 PM
2 I just want my complete parcel added in the subarea plan. Driveway is not the property line. 12/14/2019 12:40 AM
3 Sewer and water 11/18/2019 2:02 PM
4 Keep the area the way it is. Too much growth equals Ridgefield loosing its identity 11/16/2019 6:39 PM
Roadway
improvements...
Off-road paths
and trails.
Access to
recreation a...
Preservation
of natural...
I don't want
any...
Provide
details on y...
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Roadway improvements ( sidewalks, bike lanes, etc.)
Off-road paths and trails.
Access to recreation and parks.
Preservation of natural areas.
I don't want any improvements.
Provide details on your choice or list other options.
3 / 6
City of Ridgefield: Carty Road Subarea Plan - Property Owner Survey
44.44%8
55.56%10
Q4 As part of the planning process, the City will form a project advisory
committee. The committee will meet twice over the next 6 months and will
assist with the development of a vision and guiding principles for the
Carty Road study area. Would you like to participate on the committee?
Answered: 18 Skipped: 0
TOTAL 18
#IF YES, PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR NAME AND PREFERRED CONTACT INFORMATION
(EMAIL OR TELEPHONE NUMBER).
DATE
1 12/18/2019 2:47 AM
2 12/15/2019 8:10 PM
3 12/14/2019 12:40 AM
4 12/2/2019 10:18 PM
5 12/2/2019 7:29 PM
6 I am against the development so you wouldn't want me on your committee.12/2/2019 3:44 AM
7 11/24/2019 12:47 AM
8 11/17/2019 12:09 AM
Yes
No
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
4 / 6
City of Ridgefield: Carty Road Subarea Plan - Property Owner Survey
Contact information redacted for privacy
50.00%9
88.89%16
11.11%2
16.67%3
27.78%5
Q5 In addition to the project advisory committee, there will be regular
project updates and other opportunities to participate in the project. What
do you think are the best ways to keep everyone informed about these
updates and opportunities? Select all that apply.
Answered: 18 Skipped: 0
Total Respondents: 18
#OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE
1 Email 12/15/2019 8:10 PM
2 email mailing list 12/14/2019 12:40 AM
3 Direct email.12/2/2019 7:29 PM
4 emails 11/17/2019 12:09 AM
City projectwebsite
Postcard
mailers
Social media
(Twitter,...
Public notices
in The...
Other (please
specify)
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
City project website
Postcard mailers
Social media (Twitter, Facebook)
Public notices in The Columbian and The Reflector
Other (please specify)
5 / 6
City of Ridgefield: Carty Road Subarea Plan - Property Owner Survey
47.06%8
52.94%9
Q6 Is there anything else you would like to add?
Answered: 17 Skipped: 1
TOTAL 17
#COMMENT DATE
1 Why does Carty subarea require additional planning, when there's all this other construction go-
ahead? For example: at the bottom of Royle Rd, there's construction in what appeared to be a
wetland? I would love to be able to subdivide like everyone else. Thank you!
12/15/2019 8:10 PM
2 Please keep some of our rural/natural areas intact! Thank you 12/2/2019 10:18 PM
3 If this has nothing to do with annexation, why isn't this process a county effort?12/2/2019 7:29 PM
4 The schools and the roads can NOT handle any more people. The main people benefiting from
annexation are the developers, who get their pockets lined and leave it to the taxpayers to build
schools and improve the infrastructure. I move here 28 years ago to live on acreage in a rural
setting.
12/2/2019 3:44 AM
5 Ridgefield needs to deal with the current growth that's already started 11/27/2019 2:06 AM
6 Please annex us in 11/18/2019 2:02 PM
7 I didn't know there was a meeting in Oct. I feel being left out because of my opinion and we have a
neighbor who is pressuring for this without telling all the facts
11/17/2019 12:09 AM
8 There’s no doubt that a few people will make a lot of money. The rest will have to give up their
rural living.
11/16/2019 6:39 PM
No Comment
Comment
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
No Comment
Comment
6 / 6
City of Ridgefield: Carty Road Subarea Plan - Property Owner Survey
WSP USA Suite 300 210 East 13th Street
Vancouver, WA 98660-3231
+1 360-823-6100
WSP.com
CARTY ROAD SUBAREA PLAN
STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEW SUMMARY
The City of Ridgefield is initiating a subarea planning process for the Carty Road subarea. The
process will connect the City with Carty Road study area property owners to create a vision,
establish the appropriate scale of development, and identify policy recommendations and action
items for implementation. To solicit input, the City’s consultant, WSP, conducted a series of
stakeholder interviews in late January 2020. Interviewers posed a total of 11 questions seeking to
understand individual and community perspectives. A summary of interview responses is
provided below.
1.How would you describe the Carty Road subarea? Are there site attributes that you
would like to see retained through the subarea planning process?
Stakeholders described the Carty Road subarea as a unique place that was secluded from
surrounding development and provided a rural and agricultural lifestyle within close proximity to
other amenities, such as downtown. Stakeholders commented on having great neighbors that
were made better by having distance between them.
Stakeholders acknowledged the rapid growth they have seen in the city surrounding the subarea
and remarked that the Carty Road area was special because it wasn’t cookie-cutter development.
The rich history of agriculture and the ability to raise animals on private property was a common
element that was expressed as a great attribute of the area. The following are some specific
responses from interviewees.
Secluded
Rural
Agricultural
Great neighbors
Close to amenities
Private
Quiet
Can have animals
Heritage - history of agricultural uses
It’s what makes Ridgefield attractive
Not cookie cutter
2.What do you like about your neighborhood? What do you wish was better about your
neighborhood?
Similar to the first question, stakeholders shared that what they liked about their neighborhood
was the rural and agricultural components. Privacy, property rights, and ability to operate and
sustain a business were all elements that stakeholders valued. The rural character of the subarea
results in an abundance of wildlife and ability to see the stars at night.
Stakeholder Interview Summary
January 2020
Page 2
Elements that stakeholders wish were better about their neighborhood were access for emergency
services and potential for fire hydrants. Several interviewees remarked at the substantial increase
in vehicle traffic along Carty Road and having to wait for extended periods to turn off of private
roads. Utilities, including water and sewer, were amenities that several interviewees wished
could be provided to the area. Internet service within the subarea is poor and often unusable.
Some private roads in the subarea have very steep grades and substandard creek crossings that
could be improved. There is a lack of pedestrian-scale access to the nearby schools, which could
be improved. Specific responses included the following.
Ability to operate a business
Good neighbors
Privacy
Good school district
Quiet
Wildlife
Ability to see the stars
Desired improvements:
Regulations to protect open space and agricultural uses
Private road and stream crossing culvert quality
Trails/parks
Fire hydrants/emergency access
Internet service
Pedestrian-scale connections to schools
3.What type/scale of development would you like to see in the subarea? If your
neighborhood was to develop, what are the elements that you would like to have
(parks, streetscapes, design standards, sidewalks, etc.?).
There was no unanimous consensus on what type and scale of development stakeholders wanted
to see because some wanted zero development, while others were open to some development.
Stakeholders valued private property rights and some were interested in being able to build
second homes on larger lots to support extended family. Density requirements for the area were
one element where there was agreement ― larger lots resembling one to four units per acre or
two units per 5 acres were two examples that were provided. The Wishing Well Subdivision and
the gated community on Northwest Third Drive were cited as two good examples of the type of
density that was liked.
Other elements that stakeholders expressed an interest in were shared spaces for farmers to sell
produce, parks and trails, and open space. A common element was that regardless of the
development that may occur, the preservation of farm land and its uses and keeping open space
was desired. Specific responses included the following.
Stakeholder Interview Summary
January 2020
Page 3
Large lots
One to four dwelling units per acre
Wishing Well Subdivision as a good example
Private subdivision on Northwest Third Drive as a good example
Carty Road too narrow
No development is preferred
Safety issues on Carty Road
Grandfather in farming/agricultural land
No farming restrictions
Open space
Trails
Parks/dog parks
Density restrictions
Property-owner rights
Signal/roundabout at Carty Road and Northwest Hillhurst
Access to city sewer and water
4.Do you have any future plans for your property that you are willing to share?
Most respondents indicated that they did not have any substantial plans for their property and
wished to continue their current uses of raising animals, farming, or renting land to use for
agricultural purposes. Some respondents indicated that they and their neighbors were interested
in looking at subdividing land into lots to sell off and/or building a second home for family
members. Some respondents saw subdividing land and connecting to city services (water/sewer)
as potential improvements to properties if the area was annexed in the future.
Specific responses included the following.
Nothing
Keep wooded buffer
Raising animals
Rent property for agricultural purposes
Connect to city sewer/water
Build houses for family members
Sell off lots to reduce mortgage
Neighbors want to subdivide
5.Are there areas of Clark County, Ridgefield, or other areas that you like?
Areas that stakeholders liked were typically rural or agricultural settings that had either large
minimum lot sizes or distinct agricultural uses. Subdivisions like Wishing Well and the private
development on Northwest Third Drive in Clark County were nearby examples of projects
stakeholders liked. Leavenworth was also cited as an example of good design standards. Historic
Stakeholder Interview Summary
January 2020
Page 4
Ridgefield with low-density development and large lot sizes was another example of the type of
development some stakeholders liked. Specific responses included the following.
Oregon State as a whole and their approach to preserving/protecting farmland
Wishing Well
Subdivision on Northwest Third Drive in Clark County
Leavenworth
Kalispel, Montana
Historic Ridgefield
6.Although annexation is not part of this subarea planning process, what are your
thoughts on future annexations to the city? Are you supportive and why?
Stakeholders were divided on being supportive of any future annexation to the city. Those that
were supportive indicated it would allow them to subdivide their property and connect to city
services. Stakeholders that were not supportive expressed concerns that are addressed in
Question 7 below.
7.Do you have specific questions or concerns in regards to annexation that you would
like addressed in the subarea plan?
Stakeholders had many questions on what annexation would mean for their property that they
would like to see addressed in the subarea plan. The following questions and comments were
asked.
What would be the density restrictions of future development?
What are the financial impacts of connecting to city services? When would properties be
required to connect to services?
Do properties need to connect to services when sold?
Would a new pump station be required?
Afraid of dense development pushing out farming and agricultural uses; how can those uses
be preserved?
How can we ensure that farming and agricultural land uses are not restricted?
Preservation of property rights.
What would be the financial impacts on taxes? How could seniors not be pushed out?
How can stormwater be managed with increased development? The creek already floods
from impacts of adjacent development.
Property owners/stakeholders need to be treated fairly during the process.
How can light pollution be minimized?
Stakeholder Interview Summary
January 2020
Page 5
How can Carty Road be made to be safer?
How and which private roads will become city roads (24th/30th Court)?
Will there be additional access routes into the subarea, potentially from the north?
From a larger perspective, how is Ridgefield and this subarea connected to larger planning
efforts like the Columbia River bridge replacement and light rail expansion?
8.If the stakeholder is not supportive of annexation – Would anything alleviate your
concerns and help you support annexation?
Generally, the most common concerns that could be addressed through the subarea planning
process were maximum density standards and regulations to preserve open space and agricultural
land uses. Another common concern was the lack of information on the financial impact of
annexation. Having more information available on these elements could help alleviate concerns
with annexation.
9.The subarea planning process will address street and utility infrastructure, as well as
management of wetland, riparian, and other critical areas. Do you have suggestions as
to how these are addressed ― either with respect to your property or the full
subarea?
Stakeholders had strong opinions about keeping or enhancing protections for critical areas
located in the subarea, including creeks, wetlands, and riparian corridors. Stormwater
management and flood prevention was another component that interviewees indicated needed to
be considered with any future development. In regards to street infrastructure, it was commented
that adding more lanes would increase the speed of traffic. Installing a traffic light or roundabout
at Northwest Hillhurst Road and Carty Road was offered as one option to address traffic
congestion at that intersection. Specific responses included the following.
Stormwater management
Protection of riparian corridors
Protection of critical areas
Leaving creeks and wetlands alone
Not creating a transportation system focused on having more lanes and faster traffic.
10.Are you planning to continue participating in the process as a member of the
stakeholder advisory group?
All of the stakeholders interviewed were planning to participate in the advisory committee
meetings.
11.Is there anything else you’d like to add?
Stakeholder Interview Summary
January 2020
Page 6
Responses to this question reiterated previous responses and have been incorporated into the
responses for Questions 1 to10 above.
Stakeholder Interview Participation
Stakeholder interview participants were selected in several ways, including:
Indicating they were interested in participating through the online survey distributed to
property owners within the subarea boundary.
Responding to the mailer distributed by the City indicating they would like to participate.
Reaching out directly to the City to be included.
Stakeholder participants included people that worked and lived within the subarea. The eleven
interview participants were:
Sherry Poole
Gail Golden
Roger Green
Ralph Greear
Rich Young
Steve Mukensnabl
James McPhee
Carina Nebdal
Sue Buck
Betsy Heidgerken
Dave Tanner
WSP USA
Suite 300
210 East 13th Street
Vancouver, WA 98660-3231
+1 360-823-6100
WSP.com
Memorandum
Date: February 18, 2020
Subject: Carty Road Subarea Plan
Project Advisory Committee Meeting No. 1 – Visioning and
Guiding Principles
From: Sam Rubin and Nicole McDermott
To: Claire Lust, Ridgefield Planner
Route To: Project Advisory Committee, (sign-in sheet attached)
WELCOME AND PROJECT INTRODUCTION
The first meeting of the Project Advisory Committee (PAC) was held on January 30, 2020 at the
Ridgefield Outdoor Recreation Center. Attendance included PAC members (sign-in sheet is
attached) composed of Carty Road project area property owners and stakeholders, consultant
team members from WSP, Claire Lust (Planner, City of Ridgefield), and Louisa Garbo
(Community Development Director, City of Ridgefield). Claire welcomed the group and noted
the purpose of the meeting was to facilitate a collective community vision and gather input for
guiding principles to be used in developing the Carty Road subarea plan. After a round of self-
introductions, Claire turned it over to Don Hardy, WSP, to provide a project overview.
Don provided an overview of the project’s milestones and timeline, noting that the project work
began with WSP preparing an existing conditions memorandum and conducting stakeholder
interviews in December 2019 and January 2020. A draft plan is expected in April 2020, followed
by public hearings, and final adoption of the plan is expected in May 2020. The PAC will meet
one more time during the process in order to review the draft concept plans, vision, and guiding
principles prior to adoption by the City.
Following an overview of the timeline and project steps, Don introduced Nicole McDermott and
Sam Rubin to review the existing conditions of the subarea, initial feedback through stakeholder
interviews, and describe the visioning process planned for the remainder of the meeting. The
WSP team led a discussion with property owners and stakeholders at the meeting, discussing
what made the Carty Road area special and recording initial visions and ideas for the future of
Carty Road.
MEMO: Carty Road Subarea Plan
Project Advisory Committee Meeting No. 1 – Visioning and
Guiding Principles, January 30, 2020
Page 2
ADVISORY COMMITTEE GROUP DISCUSSION OF SUBAREA
VISION AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Nicole shared an overview of the existing conditions of the Carty Road subarea boundaries and
reminded attendees that the purpose of the meeting was to get initial ideas for a draft vision and
guiding principles for the area. The discussion started with each of the attendees sharing what
they thought was unique about the Carty Road area and their experience there. The following
sections summarize common themes expressed by the PAC: Overall, the committee members
valued the rural character and agricultural history of the area, specifically the abundance of
wildlife, trees, and privacy. The committee also expressed the sentiment that property owners
should be able to manage their property as they desired while sharing the belief that development
should be contextual to the area and its history (agricultural uses and residences on large lots).
The committee sees the Carty Road area as a place that preserves the natural areas and protects
designated critical areas to the highest standard in order to maintain the presence of wildlife and
connection to the natural landscape. Landscaping requirements and required tree plantings for
future development is seen as one tool to ensure the natural aesthetic of the area. The committee
strongly focused on having less density and a different style of development than recent nearby
residential development. The committee envisions a safer transportation system that provides
greater access for emergency vehicles, while also providing for safe options for pedestrians and
cyclists.
While discussing the group’s vision for the community, Nicole solicited committee feedback on
guiding principles for the subarea plan. The discussion is organized into four categories: land
use, environmental, transportation, and parks and trails.
Land Use: There was general consensus that the Carty Road area is unique and one of the last
places in Ridgefield that continues to have a rural and agricultural feel. The main environmental
corridor that bisects the study area should be protected and development density should fan out
and increase the further it is removed from that corridor. Low density residential development
should be the predominant land use in the area. Discussions included:
Maintaining large lots (1- to 2.5-acre minimums) through zoning (the Wishing Wells
subdivision, adjacent northwest of the project area, was given as a positive example).
Allowing multiple residences on 5-acre parcels in order to facilitate creating residences for
family members
Creating a community gathering place (communal farmers’ market venue).
Providing reasonable City services as development occurs.
Retaining agricultural uses and minimizing conflict between other adjacent land uses.
Creating design standards and landscaping requirements to ensure contextual development
and retain privacy.
Environmental: Gee Creek and the surrounding wildlife corridor includes significant critical
areas, and future development must protect natural features.
Protect natural landscapes and regulated buffers in the area.
MEMO: Carty Road Subarea Plan
Project Advisory Committee Meeting No. 1 – Visioning and
Guiding Principles, January 30, 2020
Page 3
Preserve rural feel by preserving trees.
Use design standards and landscaping requirements to ensure the area maintains the feeling
of being rural.
Promote preservation of trees and wildlife
Locate lower density development closer to critical areas.
Minimize the extent to which critical areas can be reduced to accommodate development and
limit or prohibit the use of off-site mitigation.
Transportation: Overall, the committee focused on making the existing transportation network
safer, but acknowledged that Carty Road traffic has steadily increased as surrounding
development has occurred.
Carty Road has existing limitations on future improvements (right of way, topography,
vegetation)
Need to improve connectivity in the northeast.
Need safe bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. Potentially separated facilities from Carty
Road to make it safer to drive.
Need to improve access for emergency vehicles and evacuation routes.
Parks and Trails: The City does not have any planned trail or greenway expansions on their six-
year capital facilities plan, but the Ridgefield Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Plan has
identified the Gee Creek area as a potential trail corridor. PAC members were interested in
preserving the existing park-like qualities of the subarea over designating new locations for
parks. Committee members expressed some concern regarding safety with trail expansion into
the subarea.
Design safe trails (location, lighting, and access).
Locate trails in areas that reduce private property encroachment
Nicole concluded the discussion on guiding principles and stated that the subarea planning
process is separate from any future potential annexation process, but the subarea plan would be a
guiding document regardless. The subarea planning process will allow the people most impacted
as owners to help shape the future of this distinctive neighborhood. Nicole then asked Claire to
share the next steps in the process.
NEXT STEPS
WSP will use input from the group to develop a draft Vision Statement and Guiding Principles,
as well as a Subarea Concept Plan. The drafts will be sent to the PAC before the next meeting,
and input on the draft vision and guiding principles via email will be requested. WSP will use the
vision and principles to develop and present the draft Subarea Concept Plan (showing natural
areas, new and improved roads and pathways, and general land use densities) at the next PAC
meeting (planned for early March).
MEMO: Carty Road Subarea Plan
Project Advisory Committee Meeting No. 1 – Visioning and
Guiding Principles, January 30, 2020
Page 4
In closing, the group was told they would be contacted regarding the scheduling of the next PAC
meeting.
SGR:llt
February 18, 2020
WSP USA Suite 300 210 East 13th Street
Vancouver, WA 98660-3231
+1 360-823-6100
WSP.com
Memorandum
Date: March 9, 2020
Subject: Carty Road Subarea Plan
Project Advisory Committee Meeting No. 2 – Concept Plans
From: Sam Rubin and Nicole McDermott
To: Claire Lust, City of Ridgefield
Route To: Project Advisory Committee (sign-in sheet attached)
WELCOME AND PROJECT INTRODUCTION
The second meeting of the Project Advisory Committee (PAC) was held on March 4, 2020 at the
Ridgefield Outdoor Recreation Center. Attendance included PAC members (sign-in sheet is
attached) composed of Carty Road project area property owners and stakeholders, consultant
team members from WSP USA, and Claire Lust (interim planning director of City of
Ridgefield). Claire welcomed the group and explained that the purpose of the meeting was to
review the work completed to date and to provide feedback on the vision statement, guiding
principles, and concept plans that would be presented. Claire turned the meeting over to Sam
Rubin, WSP, to provide a project update on the vision and guiding principles.
Sam welcomed the PAC members and presented the draft guiding principles and vision
statement. The guiding principles were developed with input from the PAC members, online
survey, and stakeholder interviews. The guiding principles then provided the framework for
creating the draft vision statement for the subarea. Sam also noted that the draft guiding
principles and vision statement were used to develop the draft concept plans that would be
reviewed later in the meeting. The group broke into two small groups and worked with WSP
staff to brainstorm, review, and edit the draft guiding principles and vision statement.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE GROUP DISCUSSION OF DRAFT SUBAREA
VISION STATEMENT AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES
The PAC members broke into two small groups and reviewed the draft vision statement and
guiding principles prepared for the subarea. Overall, both of the groups liked the drafts but
provided input and clarification on several elements. Some stakeholders that were present for the
second meeting noted that they largely were not in favor of annexation. Attendees did comment
that although they may not be in favor of potential annexation the subarea plan could provide
regulatory guidance on how they would like to see development occur if it were to take place.
MEMO: Carty Road Subarea Plan
Project Advisory Committee Meeting No. 2 – Concept Plan Review, March 4, 2020
Page 2
Vision Statement
The PAC members provided feedback on the draft vision statement and requested that it be
updated to reflect the idea that the stakeholders understand the area will change but the subarea
plan is a tool to help protect what makes the area special.
Guiding Principles
Update guiding principle language to be more direct
Edit guiding principles to say “Respect existing development patterns in the Carty Road
Area”
Edit guiding principles to include preservation of viewsheds
ADVISORY COMMITTEE GROUP DISCUSION ON CONCEPT PLANS
Nicole McDermott, WSP, introduced Concept Plan A and Concept Plan B to the PAC members
and reviewed the key differences between the two concepts; she highlighted how the concept
plans drew from the vision statement, guiding principles, existing development patterns, and
natural features in the area. Nicole also introduced the draft design guidelines, which will be
included in the subarea plan as a recommended implementation measure.
Nicole indicated the PAC members do not need to select a concept plan they preferred but
instead discuss both of the concept plans and identify the elements they like, which would be
incorporated into a preferred concept. As the group reviewed the concept plans, they were asked
to think about whether the plans reflected the vision statement and guiding principles. Similar to
the discussion of the vision statement and guiding principles, the group broke into two groups to
have detailed discussions of the concept plans and design guidelines. Both concept plans offer
several new zoning categories, overlay districts, trails, and transportation improvements that
were discussed in the break-out sessions.
Concept Plan A
Concept Plan A proposes three base zoning designations (Community/Civic, Low-Density
Residential, and Medium-Density Residential) and three overlay zones (Open Space, Community
Agriculture, and Heritage). Concept Plan A proposes two residential zones that provide for
densities of four dwelling units per acre (Low-Density Residential) and six dwelling units per
acre (Medium-Density Residential).
Concept Plan B
Concept Plan B shares many similarities with Concept Plan A but includes an additional
residential zoning category, Medium-High Density at eight dwelling units per acre.
PAC Discussion
The two break-out groups primarily focused on the discussion of densities, design standards,
trails, and transportation improvements. In general, the PAC members wanted to have as low a
density as possible but understood the regulatory constraints of the Growth Management Act.
Cyclist, pedestrians, and trail safety and privacy were also issues that were discussed during the
meeting.
Key takeaways and questions from the concept plan discussions included
MEMO: Carty Road Subarea Plan
Project Advisory Committee Meeting No. 2 – Concept Plan Review, March 4, 2020
Page 3
How to protect private properties when trails are adjacent to the property?
Is density averaging across the subarea possible?
What does the Community/Civic zone entail and is that better captured through an overlay
compared to a zone designation?
How will existing commercial uses be incorporated into the zoning regulations?
How do you regulate quality of design?
Will accessory dwelling units be allowed in the subarea?
Is it possible to have the area remain the same and not be developed?
General feedback on the design guidelines included
Proposed 30-foot minimum setback throughout the subarea
Height restrictions and viewshed protections
Color palette regulations
Limiting light pollution through materials and design
Limitations on neighborhood associations
Preservation of old growth and significant trees
Prohibition of sound walls
Residential home design standards and variability
Nicole concluded the PAC meeting thanking participants for their engagement with the project
and outlining the next steps in the process and how their input would be incorporated into the
preferred concept plan and subarea report.
NEXT STEPS
The PAC meeting was immediately followed by a community open house. WSP will gather the
input received from the PAC and open house and present it, together with the vision statement,
guiding principles, concept plans, and draft design guidelines, to the Ridgefield City Council at a
workshop on March 12. WSP will consolidate all feedback from the PAC, open house, and City
Council and prepare a revised vision statement and guiding principles, a preferred concept plan,
and subarea plan report, including revised design guidelines. Revised materials will be circulated
to the PAC for comments via email.
SGR:nb
March 9, 2020
Attachment
MEETING SUMMARY
WSP USA Suite 300 210 East 13th Street
Vancouver, WA 98660-3231
+1 360-823-6100
wsp.com
PROJECT NAME Carty Road Subarea Plan
PROJECT NUMBER 31600114
DATE March 4, 2020
TIME 6 p.m. to 8 p.m.
VENUE Ridgefield Outdoor Recreation Complex (RORC)
SUBJECT Community Open House
1.0 PURPOSE
This community open house is for the Carty Road Subarea Plan. The event gave interested community
members, residents, and stakeholders the opportunity to review the draft concept plans, ask questions one-on-
one with subject matter experts on the project team, and provide their comments and feedback related to two
concept plans, road cross sections, and design guidelines. The event was facilitated by the City of Ridgefield
and consultant staff members, as follows.
2.0 PROJECT TEAM ATTENDANCE
Claire Lust, City of Ridgefield, Interim Planning
Director
Brenda Howell, City of Ridgefield, Engineer
Bryan Kast, City of Ridgefield, Public Works
Director
Reah Flisakowski, Transportation Engineer, DKS
Nicole McDermott, Planner/Public Involvement,
WSP
Don Hardy, Project Manager, WSP
Sam Jones, Landscape Architect, WSP
Sam Rubin, Planner, WSP
3.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND
The City is developing a subarea plan for the Carty Road area. Following several annexation petitions within
the area, Ridgefield City Council directed City staff to prepare a subarea plan and identify a community vision
for the area prior to further annexation discussions. Ridgefield is a fast-growing city that has seen increases in
traffic and housing demand. The Carty Road subarea is unique and represents a rural development pattern more
reflective of Ridgefield’s agricultural heritage. The subarea is located outside the city limits, within the city’s
urban growth area. The subarea plan will evaluate existing traffic and environmental conditions, gather input
from the community to craft a vision, and recommend land use and transportation improvements through a
concept plan and implementation measures.
MEETING NOTES: Carty Road Subarea Plan
March 4, 2020
Page 2 of 7
4.0 EVENT OVERVIEW
The community open house for the subarea plan was held at the Ridgefield Outdoor Recreation Complex on
Wednesday, March 4, 2020 from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. An open house announcement was mailed to all residents
with the subarea boundaries. Approximately 30 community members attended, including several members of
the City Council. When they arrived, attendees were asked to sign in and view the project boards. Team
members were available at all stations to discuss the materials presented and answer questions from attendees.
Five stations were set up and staffed by team members to discuss and answer questions
1.Welcome and Sign in
2.Project Introduction, Vision Statement, and Guiding Principles
3. Concept Plans and Cross Sections
4.Design Guidelines
5.Comment Drop Box (not staffed)
5.0 COMMENTS
There were no written comments submitted at the open house. Verbal discussions and comments are described
below.
Many of the open house attendees had questions regarding the implementation of the project. Team members
elaborated on the process and emphasized that the transportation improvements, trail and path additions, and
zoning regulations would be further defined through implementation and driven by future development. Other
attendees asked for more information on the various zoning designations and overlay districts and how the trail
and paths would connect to the broader trail system. These items will be further addressed in the subarea report
and through implementation. Other specific concerns or suggestions from open house attendees are noted
below.
Consider adding a design guideline for viewshed protection
Consider street lighting standards to minimize/prevent light pollution
Consider noise protection around higher intensity land uses – RORC is loud and attendees noted any
additional noise sources in the area should include noise mitigation
Consider the impact of additional people on local schools and infrastructure
6.0 NEXT STEPS
The project team will present the input received at the open house to the Ridgefield City Council on March 12,
2020. Following Council review, the project team will prepare a subarea report including a preferred land use
concept plan, zoning recommendations, and design guidelines. The report will be presented to the Ridgefield
Planning Commission and City Council for adoption in April.
MEETING NOTES: Carty Road Subarea Plan
March 4, 2020
Page 3 of 7
7.0 FIGURES
Figure 1. Mailer Announcement (front)
Figure 2. Mailer Announcement (back)
MEETING NOTES: Carty Road Subarea Plan
March 4, 2020
Page 4 of 7
Figure 3. Welcome Board
Figure 4. Vision Statement and Guiding Principles
MEETING NOTES: Carty Road Subarea Plan
March 4, 2020
Page 5 of 7
Figure 5. Existing Conditions
Figure 6. Proposed Street/Road Cross Sections
MEETING NOTES: Carty Road Subarea Plan
March 4, 2020
Page 6 of 7
Figure 7. Draft Concept Plan A
Figure 8. Draft Concept Plan B
MEETING NOTES: Carty Road Subarea Plan
March 4, 2020
Page 7 of 7
Figure 9. Design Guidelines (1 of 2)
Figure 10. Design Guidelines (2 of 2)
Implementation
20 CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report
APPENDIX B
Existing Conditions
Analysis
Existing Conditions Analysis
Carty Road Subarea Ridgefield, Washington
Submitted to Claire Lust, Planner City of Ridgefield Ridgefield, Washington
March 2020
Submitted by WSP USA 210 East 13th Street, Suite 300 Vancouver, Washington 9866903231
31600114
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page i of ii
EXISTING CONDITIONS ANALYSIS Carty Road Subarea Ridgefield, Washington TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ..................................................................................... 2
2.1 Land Use and Zoning .............................................................................. 2
2.2 Parks, Trails, and Open Spaces ............................................................. 4
2.3 Critical Areas and Archaeological Risk ................................................. 5 2.3.1 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas ............................ 6 2.3.2 Wetlands ........................................................................................ 7 2.3.3 Geologically Hazardous Areas ..................................................... 7 2.3.4 Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas .................................................. 7 2.3.5 Frequently Flooded Areas ............................................................ 7 2.3.6 Archaeological Risk ...................................................................... 8
2.4 Utility Infrastructure and Capacity ......................................................... 8
2.5 Transportation Network and Capacity ................................................. 10 2.5.1 Roadway Classifications ............................................................ 11
2.5.2 Street Spacing Guidelines .......................................................... 13 2.5.3 Planned Improvements ............................................................... 13
2.6 Annexation ............................................................................................. 15
3.0 REGULATORY CONTEXT AND PLANNING FRAMEWORK ........................... 15
3.1 Ridgefield Urban Area Comprehensive Plan ....................................... 15
3.2 Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Plan ........................................ 18
3.3 Ridgefield Development Code .............................................................. 20 3.3.1 Zoning Code (RDC 18.210, 18.220, and 18.235) ........................ 20 3.3.2 Urban Holding Overlay District (RDC 18.270) ........................... 21 3.3.3 Planned Unit Development Ordinance (RDC 18.401) ............... 22 3.3.4 Density Transfers (RDC 18.280.070) .......................................... 22
4.0 KEY CONSIDERATIONS FOR SUBAREA PLAN ............................................. 22
5.0 NEXT STEPS ..................................................................................................... 24
6.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 24
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Residential Zone Development Standards ................................................... 3
Table 2. Traffic Volume Summary (2017 and 2018) .................................................. 10
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page ii of ii
Table 3. Key Study Area Facility Characteristics ..................................................... 12 Table 4. Capital Facilities Plan Transportation Projects .......................................... 14 Table 5. Parks and Recreation Facilities Level of Service Standards .................... 18 Table 6. Uses by Zone ................................................................................................. 21
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Carty Road Subarea Boundary .................................................................... 1 Figure 2. Comprehensive Plan Designations ............................................................. 4 Figure 3. Zoning Designations ..................................................................................... 4 Figure 4. Existing Parks and Trails .............................................................................. 5 Figure 5. Constrained Lands ........................................................................................ 6 Figure 6. Existing Utilities and Proposed Water System Plan .................................. 9 Figure 7. Comprehensive General Sewer Plan ......................................................... 10 Figure 8. Recently Approved Development .............................................................. 11 Figure 9. Functional Classification ............................................................................ 12
Figure 10. Planned Transportation Projects ............................................................. 14 Figure 11. Proposed Trail System Plan Map ............................................................. 19 Figure 12. Proposed Park System Plan Map ............................................................. 20
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 1 of 25
1.0 INTRODUCTION The Carty Road subarea consists of approximately 266 acres of land located in the southern portion of Ridgefield. The subarea is located directly east of the intersection of
Northwest Hillhurst Road and South Royle Road and is located west of the Interstate 5 (I-
5) corridor. As shown on Figure 1, Northwest Carty Road functions as the southern boundary for a portion of the subarea, and the entire subarea is located outside of city limits within the city’s urban growth area (UGA), in unincorporated Clark County (county).
Figure 1. Carty Road Subarea Boundary
Ridgefield continues to be the fastest growing city in the state according to 2019
population projections conducted by the Washington Office of Financial Management, and is projected to experience substantial growth and development over the next 20 years. City Council has been petitioned by several property owners within the subarea to consider annexation of the area adjacent to Carty Road. At the same time, other property
owners and residents in the area have expressed concerns over the city’s rapid growth and
frustration at the loss of rural areas within and surrounding Ridgefield.
In order to develop a plan for this area, City Council initiated the subarea planning process prior to considering annexation. The subarea plan for the Carty Road area will establish future land uses and identify the appropriate intensity of development, as well as
required transportation and utility infrastructure improvements. The subarea plan will
provide the City with a better understanding of the community vision and infrastructure needs of the area at buildout. Upon completion of the subarea plan, City Council will
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 2 of 25
resume annexation discussions with the property owners who previously petitioned to be annexed.
This report includes an assessment of existing conditions within the boundaries of the
subarea and evaluates the adequacy of Ridgefield’s regulatory framework to support the types of future land uses anticipated for this area. Key considerations for the development of the subarea plan are summarized in Section 4.
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The subarea plan will define a vision and map a route to its realization — in this case, a
vision that celebrates and works to protect the unique rural character of the Carty Road
area even as development occurs. The following sections describe the existing conditions within the subarea, including land use; zoning and development standards; parks, trails, and open spaces; critical areas; and utility (water and sewer) and transportation infrastructure, capacity, and planned improvements.
2.1 LAND USE AND ZONING
The subarea is currently characterized by a rural development pattern with single-family residential homes on lots ranging in size from approximately 1 to 28 acres with an average lot size of approximately 6 acres. Existing uses in the subarea include residential uses, wedding venues, stained glass studios, and family farms.
The entire subarea has a City comprehensive plan land use designation of Urban Low
Density Residential (UL) and is within the Urban Holding comprehensive plan overlay. The subarea is adjacent to other City and County land use designations, including Public Facility (PF), Employment (EM), Urban Medium Density Residential (UM), and Urban High Density Residential (UH); see Figure 2.
The entire subarea is within the City’s Urban Holding (UH-10) overlay district, a
designation applied to land where capital facilities are inadequate to support development under an urban zoning designation. This designation can be removed by the City’s planning director after certification from the City engineer that sufficient capital improvements have been made or are planned to support development. The planned
infrastructure improvements described in Section 2.5 could satisfy the requirements for
capital improvements and support the removal of the UH-10 designation; however, additional analysis will be required as infrastructure improvements are completed and individual properties are proposed for development.
Zoning within and immediately surrounding the subarea is identified on Figure 3 and
includes both Ridgefield and Clark County designations. The entirety of the subarea is
within the County and includes single-family residential (R1-6, R1-7.5, R1-10) zoning designations. Some of the land in the Carty Road subarea is in use as farmland; however, the area is zoned for single-family residential (Figure 2). City and County zoning adjacent to the subarea includes a mix of residential (RLD-4, R-22, RLD-8),
neighborhood commercial (CNB), agriculture (AG-20), public facilities (PF), and
employment (E). The entirety of the subarea is also within the UH-10 zoning overlay.
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 3 of 25
The Ridgefield Municipal Code (RMC) calls for land designated UL by the comprehensive plan to be zoned as residential low-density RLD-4, RLD-6, or RLD-8
(RMC 18.210.015). Therefore, were the subarea to be annexed, it is anticipated zoning in
the subarea would consist of a combination of one or more of these three zones. However, the subarea planning process will identify the zones and zoning overlays that best accommodate the land uses anticipated and preferred within the subarea and additional zoning designations may be recommended.
To provide an overview of the development potential based on existing City zoning
provisions, development standards for the RLD-4, RLD-6, and RLD-8 zoning designations are outlined in Table 1 below.
Table 1. Residential Zone Development Standards
Standard Zone RLD-4 RLD-6 RLD-8 Density (Dwelling Units/Net Developable Acre): Min. Max
4 4
4 6
6 8
Min. Lot Area (SF) 10,890 7,200 5,000
Max. Lot Area (SF)1 150% of Min Lot Area (16,335) 150% of Min Lot Area (10,800) 150% of Min Lot Area (7,500) Min. Lot Width (FT) 50 50 50 Max. Building Coverage 45% 50% 50% Max. Impervious Surface 60% 60% 65% Setbacks (FT) Front yard 15 15 10 Rear yard 10 10 5 Side yard 5 5 5 Street side yard 15 15 10 Max. Building Height (FT) 30 (35 with pitched roof) 30 (35 with pitched roof) 35
1Maximum lot area standards only apply to new lots and do not apply to the remaining parent parcel after a land division or
to lots created for non-residential uses such as parks, trails, utilities, and critical areas.
Flexibility in the development standards identified above is allowed through the City’s
planned unit developments (PUD) ordinance. The PUD process is required for all developments in the RLD zones that include critical areas. The PUD process is further described in Section 3.3.3.
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 4 of 25
Figure 2. Comprehensive Plan Designations
Figure 3. Zoning Designations
2.2 PARKS, TRAILS, AND OPEN SPACES There are currently no existing formal parks, trails, or open spaces identified within the subarea, although there are several adjacent to the area (see Figure 4). The Carty Road
subarea is immediately adjacent to View Ridge Middle School across Hillhurst Road to the southwest and also Ridgefield High School across South Royle Road to the northwest. The Ridgefield Outdoor Recreation Complex is located across Hillhurst Road from the subarea. The complex is a 53-acre outdoor facility with six multipurpose sports fields, a playground, walking trails and open space, and a community building. The site is
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 5 of 25
jointly owned by the City and the School District. The parks comprehensive plan has a goal of partnering with the Ridgefield School District to maximize the use of recreational
facilities on school sites and to link schools through a city-wide trail system.
Conceptual opportunities for additional recreational facilities in the Carty Road subarea were identified in the 2020 Parks, Recreation, & Open Space Plan (Parks and Rec Plan), including a potential trail corridor along Gee Creek. Additional details on planned parks and recreation facilities are included in Section 3.2.
Figure 4. Existing Parks and Trails
Source: Ridgefield Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan (2020)
2.3 CRITICAL AREAS AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RISK Critical areas protected in the city include wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat conservation
areas, geologically hazardous areas (steep slopes, erosion hazard areas, and seismic hazard areas), critical aquifer recharge areas (CARAs), and frequently flooded areas. WSP identified potential critical areas in the subarea using several digital databases and online mapping tools, including the National Wetland Inventory (NWI), Clark County
Maps Online, Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Forest Practices
Application and Review System (FPARS), and Washington Department of Fish and Wildife (WDFW) Priority Habitats and Species on the Web, and SalmonScape. Based on a review of these resources, all five types of critical areas are present within the subarea (see Figure 5).
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 6 of 25
Figure 5. Constrained Lands
Approximately 50 percent (133 acres) of land within the subarea contains critical areas. A detailed critical areas report was not prepared as part of this existing conditions analysis; however, the amount of critical areas contained within the subarea will affect future
development, and the extent of critical areas must be considered as a concept plan for the
subarea is developed. Furthermore, future development in these areas will require the preparation of critical areas reports and compliance with RMC 18.280, Critical Areas Protection, to ensure no net loss of functions and values of critical areas. Compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) will also be required per RMC 18.810,
Environmental Standards.
2.3.1 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas
Streams and Riparian Areas Gee Creek flows from the northwest corner of the subarea to its eastern boundary. Gee Creek has a well-defined bed and bank with multiple contributing unnamed tributaries.
The streams and creeks that flow through the subarea boundary also include riparian
habitat and buffers, as determined by the critical areas ordinance. The buffer widths are determined by the stream’s DNR water type classification. According to DNR’s FPARS web map, Gee Creek is identified as a fish-bearing stream (Type F), which has a riparian buffer width of 150 feet where greater than 5 feet wide or 125 feet where less than 5 feet
wide. The tributaries to Gee Creek are identified as non fish-bearing streams (Type Np or
Ns), which have a riparian buffer width of either 100 feet or 50 feet, depending on their
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 7 of 25
potential for slope failure. Stream conditions will need to be verified on site during future permitting processes, and future development will need to either avoid riparian habitat
and buffers or compensate for impacts. Critical areas reports will be required to
demonstrate no net loss of functions.
Non-riparian habitat A small portion of land on the southern boundary is identified as Adjacent to Species Area by Maps Online. Per PHS on the Web, this buffer is associated with an area to the
south of the subarea, which contains regular concentrations of waterfowl (family
Antidae) in winter. Waterfowls (ducks, geese, swans), are considered a priority species by WDFW, with the exception of Canada geese. Given the small amount of land identified as Adjacent to Species Area (approximately 0.3 acre), it is not expected to significantly affect development in the subarea.
2.3.2 Wetlands
PHS on the Web and NWI identify wetlands within the subarea, primarily freshwater emergent wetlands associated with Gee Creek and its tributaries. Future development in wetland buffers will need to comply with the critical areas ordinance. The width of wetland buffers will depend on the intensity of the proposed land use and the wetland
rating score. Wetland conditions will need to be verified on site during future permitting
processes, and critical areas reports prepared by a professional ecologist or biologist may be required. The report will be required to document how the proposed development will achieve no net loss of wetland or buffer functions.
2.3.3 Geologically Hazardous Areas There are several geologic hazard areas within the subarea. These include landslide
hazard areas (areas of potential instability and slopes greater than 25 percent), severe erosion hazard areas, and seismic hazard areas (liquefaction susceptibility and ground shaking amplification). The steep slopes often correspond with the unnamed tributaries, which flow through areas at the bottom of moderate-to-steep slopes ranging from 5 to 40
percent in grade.
Future development within geologic hazard areas will require geotechnical reports prepared by a registered geotechnical engineer or registered geologist. The reports would include an evaluation of the impacts of the geologic hazard area(s) on the proposed development and provide mitigation measures to protect human health and safety.
2.3.4 Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas There are no wellhead protection areas within the subarea. The entire subarea is within a Category 2 CARA, as is most of Clark County. Given the assumed future land uses in the subarea (low density residential), it is not anticipated that any land uses that constitute a high risk to aquifers would be proposed (e.g., chemical treatment storage). Future
development activities may require hydrogeological assessments in compliance with the critical areas ordinance.
2.3.5 Frequently Flooded Areas Gee Creek cuts across the subarea boundary and includes several smaller streams and tributaries. The bed of Gee Creek is located in the floodway and the associated adjacent
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 8 of 25
riparian areas meander through 100-year floodplain. Adjacent areas are also located within the 500-year flood area (0.2 percent chance of flood). Development within the
floodway or 100-year floodplain, which are defined as the ‘special flood hazard area’ by
the Federal Emergency Management Agency, will require compliance with RMC 18.750, Flood Control, and will require a floodplain permit.
2.3.6 Archaeological Risk Most of the subarea is categorized as high or moderate-high probability of encountering
archaeological resources according to the County’s Archaeological Predictive Model.
Future development will likely require the preparation of archaeological predeterminations and/or surveys and compliance with Washington State law relating to the identification and protection of archaeological resources. Coordination with an archaeologist early in the development process will be essential for moderate-high and
high probability areas. The earlier resources are identified, the sooner these areas can be
protected and planned around.
2.4 UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE AND CAPACITY As shown on Figure 6, public sewer and water infrastructure is located adjacent to the subarea within Hillhurst Road. The subarea is located within the City’s potable water
service area and the Clark Regional Wastewater District (District) sewer service area.
Because the subarea is located within the City’s UGA, development within the subarea has been addressed by previous efforts of City and District utility planning as required by the Growth Management Act (GMA).
Previous planning studies include the City’s comprehensive water system plan and the
District’s Comprehensive General Sewer Plan (2017). The utility plans recommend
extending both sewer and water infrastructure through the subarea, as seen on Figures 6 and 7. The identified infrastructure extensions along Hillhurst Road are required to serve regional growth, including development within the subarea. The extension of water and sewer service in Carty Road would further serve the subarea, while additional localized
utility extensions would be required to serve individual developments.
As shown on Figure 6, a 10-inch City water line is located east of the subarea in Northwest Hillhurst Road. The waterline in Northwest Hillhurst Road is complete and now extends to NW 229th Street. The CFP also identifies a new 10-inch City water line (D-2) in South Royle Road from Northwest Hillhurst Road to the northern boundary of
the city limits (Figure 6).
Based on the prior planning studies and identified improvements, the overall water and sewer systems have capacity to support population growth and development in the Carty Road subarea. In the long term, the City will require additional water rights and water source capacity to serve projected populations throughout the City. Furthermore, due to
the topography within the subarea, some property-specific sewer pump stations may be required to connect individual developments to the larger system.
Stormwater is currently managed locally throughout the subarea. Portions of publicly owned stormwater culverts exist at driveways and are scattered throughout the subarea. It
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 9 of 25
is anticipated that future development will include stormwater detention/retention basins sized appropriately to handle stormwater runoff on a development-by-development basis.
Figure 6. Existing Utilities and Proposed Water System Plan
Source: City of Ridgefield Comprehensive water system plan
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 10 of 25
Figure 7. Comprehensive General Sewer Plan
Source: Clark Regional Wastewater District Comprehensive General Sewer Plan (2017)
Electrical service within the subarea is provided by Clark Public Utilities and includes a 3-phase aboveground line along Hillhurst and Carty Road. It is anticipated that this service will be extended in conjunction with development to serve the subarea. Clark Substation is located at the intersection of Carty Road and Hillhurst Road. Overhead transmission and distribution lines in this area will be particularly difficult to
underground due to proximity to the substation. Nevertheless, the City should require development to underground electrical distribution lines within the subarea consistent with its engineering standards and code. The primarily residential development types anticipated for the subarea are not expected to place an unusual burden on electrical service.
2.5 TRANSPORTATION NETWORK AND CAPACITY As part of the existing conditions analysis, DKS Associates evaluated the existing transportation network, including pedestrian and bicycle facilities, current traffic volumes, and planned transportation improvements. Traffic volumes from 2017 and 2018 are summarized in Table 2, including volumes anticipated from approved development
near the subarea (Figure 8). The recently approved development includes approximately 1,240 homes, as well as parks and school facilities.
Table 2. Traffic Volume Summary (2017 and 2018)
Location AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily Daily with Approved Development Carty Road east of Hillhurst 88 68 700 1600
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 11 of 25
Hillhurst Road north of Carty Road 480 376 4,000 12,500
Source: DKS Associates.
Figure 8. Recently Approved Development
Source: City of Ridgefield Development Activity Map (2020)
As shown in Table 2, the addition of trips from nearby approved developments represents a considerable increase to traffic volumes within the subarea. Planned transportation improvements are anticipated to accommodate these increased traffic volumes.
2.5.1 Roadway Classifications The transportation CFP classifies existing and future roadways in the city, as shown on
Figure 9. These classifications will guide the facility cross sections and access spacing standards applied with future improvements.
1 – Cloverhill Phase 1, 63
residential lots
6 – Seven Wells Estates Phase 1, 78 residential lots 8 – Kennedy Farms Phases 1-3, 250 residential lots
9 – Cloverhill Phases 2-10, 392
residential lots 13 – Seven Wells Phases 2-5, 261 residential lots 23 – View Ridge Middle School
24 – Ridgefield High School
Addition 37 – Kennedy Farms East, 341 residential lots
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 12 of 25
Figure 9. Functional Classification
Source: Ridgefield Transportation Capital Facilities Plan (December 2018)
As illustrated, there is a lack of both east-west and north-south facilities in the subarea.
Carty Road is the only continuous east-west facility within the subarea. Hillhurst Road and Royle Road serve as the major north-south facilities on the west boundary of the subarea.
Pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure within the subarea is also limited. Hillhurst Road
has sidewalks and a bike lane on the south side along new development frontage;
however, the remaining facilities have no sidewalks or bike lanes. On Carty Road, pedestrians must use the narrow gravel shoulders, and cyclists must share the travel lane with vehicles. Existing street cross sections require the construction of sidewalks and bicycle facilities in conjunction with future development. Below is a summary of key
characteristics for facilities in the subarea.
Table 3. Key Study Area Facility Characteristics
Facility Number of Lanes Posted Speed Classification
Carty Road 2 lanes none Minor Arterial
Hillhurst Road 2/3 lanes 35 mph Principal Arterial
Royle Road 2/3 lanes 35 mph Minor Arterial
Timm Road 2 lanes none Industrial/Commercial Collector
NW Ecklund Road 2 lanes none Local
Minor Arterial (Carty Road, Planned Project 41)
• 80-foot right-of-way
• Three-lane cross section with center median or turn lane
• Bike lanes
• Wide planter strips
• Sidewalks
Industrial/Commercial Collector (Timm Road, Planned Project 48)
• 70-foot right-of-way
• Two-lane cross section with center median or turn lane
• Bike lanes
• Sidewalks
Rural Minor Collector (Ecklund Road, Planned Project 44)
• 60-foot right-of-way
• Two-lane cross section
• Sidewalks
• No bikes lanes or planter strips
Through the subarea planning process, revisions to these cross sections may be proposed in order to achieve the character desired for streets within the Carty Road subarea.
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 13 of 25
2.5.2 Street Spacing Guidelines A goal of the Ridgefield Urban Area Comprehensive Plan is that future street
construction encourages connectivity. Street sizing for arterials and collectors assumes
that the transportation system will encourage non-motorized transportation. To meet the planning objectives, the City has established a standard of at least eight through streets per mile to allow neighborhood trips on a smaller scale. The City’s objective is to impose a maximum spacing for new streets of 500 feet (a 500-foot maximum grid) within all new
developments and to the limits of the entire parcel of property being developed. The
streets proposed for new development must be able to be extended to the limits of the property and must be located to provide a spacing of 500 feet. These stipulations are intended to make sure future streets in new developments can be extended through adjacent parcels, thereby encouraging connectivity within neighborhoods. These
guidelines are not intended to create a rigid grid, and the guidelines include flexibility so
that roadways can follow topographic features where necessary or desired.
Where topography makes this street spacing requirement not feasible, a 10-foot-wide paved bikeway/multipurpose trail can be substituted for the street if the substitution is approved by the City. The bikeway/multipurpose trail, located in a dedicated 30-foot
easement for pedestrians and bicyclists, must extend to the limits of the property. The
bikeway/multipurpose trail must follow the general grid pattern of the street layout (500-foot grid) and extend from the ends of dead-end streets where the dead-end street cannot be extended to the limits of the property because of topography. To meet these through street planning objectives, streets or bikeway/multipurpose trails must be designed and
constructed to extend to the limits of the property. All costs are to be borne by the
developer of the property without reimbursement by the City.
Street-spacing standards are to be addressed in the development of the subarea concept plan.
2.5.3 Planned Improvements
The Ridgefield transportation CFP (2018) includes several key roadway and intersection projects within the plan area. Planned improvements are shown on Figure 10 and described in Table 4. Transportation projects that are considered capital improvement projects by the City are eligible to be built with Traffic Impact Fees (TIF) or would be eligible to receive TIF credits. Projects that are non-TIF eligible would be built by
developers or funded as a private/public project not involved with the TIF program. Several projects, noted with an asterisk in Table 4, are located partially or fully outside the urban growth area.
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 14 of 25
Figure 10. Planned Transportation Projects
Source: Ridgefield Transportation Capital Facilities Plan (December 2018)
Table 4. Capital Facilities Plan Transportation Projects
* Located partially or fully outside the urban growth area Source: Ridgefield Transportation Capital Facilities Plan (December 2018)
Project ID Project Description From To TIF Eligible
11 Build new east-west collector (2 lanes) Hillhurst Road new rural minor collector roadway
Yes
15 Upgrade Hillhurst Road to principal arterial (5 lanes) Sevier Road UGA/Williams Road Yes
20 Widen S Royle Road to minor arterial (3 lanes) Hillhurst Road S. 15th Street Yes
41 Upgrade Carty Road to minor arterial (3 lanes) Hillhurst Road I-5 No
42* Extend NW 219th Street as rural major collector outside UGA (2 lanes)
I-5 NW 31st Avenue/Hillhurst Road
No
43* Build new north-south rural minor collector roadway outside UGA (2 lanes)
NW Carty Road NW 219th Street No
44* Upgrade Ecklund Road/NW 11th Ave to rural minor collector outside UGA (2 lanes)
NW Carty Road NW 219th Street No
45 Build S 51st Avenue as minor arterial (3 lanes) S 20th Way NW Carty Road No
48 Widen Timm Road to industrial/commercial collector (3 lanes)
S 11th Street S 20th Way No
49 Widen S 20th Way to industrial/commercial collector (3 lanes)
Timm Road S 51st Avenue No
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 15 of 25
2.6 ANNEXATION The entire Carty Road subarea is within unincorporated Clark County and within the
Ridgefield UGA. As Ridgefield is experiencing a significant amount of growth and
development, several property owners within the subarea boundary have previously petitioned the City to be annexed. The City Council has temporarily put those petitions on hold in order to complete the subarea planning process. The current requests for annexation have occurred under the petition method, pursuant to RCW 35A14.120, which
requires proponents of annexation to demonstrate that they have the signatures of
landowners representing 60 percent or more of the assessed property value of the annexation area. An annexation petition requires City Council review and approval in accordance with RMC 13.65.030. Other annexation methods that could be pursued include the Alternative Petition Method (RCW 35A.14.420) and the Election Method
(RCW 35A.14.020 and RCW 35A.14.015).
Following the completion of the subarea planning process, the City may resume review of the previous annexation petitions. While the subarea planning process will not result in annexation, it can provide property owners in the area with the opportunity to shape a vision for the Carty Road subarea and incorporate greater protections for the existing
character should annexation occur in the future.
3.0 REGULATORY CONTEXT AND PLANNING FRAMEWORK
The existing policy and regulatory documents that will affect development within the subarea following annexation include the Ridgefield Urban Area Comprehensive Plan (last updated in 2016), the Parks and Rec Plan (2020), and the RMC, particularly Title 18 – Development Code. Based on the initial stakeholder interviews and discussions with
City staff, it is anticipated that development within the subarea will include primarily
single-family residential development and some allowance to maintain existing agricultural uses. The sections below evaluate the current land use policies and development standards relevant to addressing this type of development.
3.1 RIDGEFIELD URBAN AREA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The policies in the Ridgefield Urban Area Comprehensive Plan (2016) support the
subarea planning process, along with the development of residential uses throughout the city. However, comprehensive plan policy amendments will likely be required to ensure consistency with the anticipated development pattern within the subarea. Some stakeholders have expressed an interest in maintaining the rural character of the subarea
and retaining larger lot sizes. Policy recommendations to support the subarea concept
plan will be included in the final subarea plan report.
In order to further ensure future development within the subarea is consistent with the Ridgefield Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, the comprehensive plan should be updated to incorporate policy amendments, and the Carty Road Subarea Plan should be adopted
by reference into the comprehensive plan.
Relevant existing policies in the comprehensive plan include:
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 16 of 25
Land Use LU-1 – Citywide Land Supplies: Establish land supplies and density allowances that are
sufficient but not excessive to accommodate adopted long-term City of Ridgefield
population, public facilities and employment forecast allocations.
LU-4 – Compatible Development: Facilitate development that minimizes adverse impacts to adjacent areas.
LU-16 – Form neighborhood districts to help guide development of unique and
distinctive neighborhoods. 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 Ridgefield’s land use plan when necessary to ensure adequate
funding to provide necessary public facilities and services to implement the plan.
LU-19 – Property rights: Ensure that property owners within the Ridgefield Urban
Growth Area (RUGA) enjoy the right to use their property in ways consistent with public policy. City land use decisions shall not deny an owner of all reasonable investment-backed expectations in their property resulting in an unconstitutional ‘taking’ of private
property for public use. Critical areas regulations shall ensure an owner of a reasonable
use of their property.
The land use policies for the city generally promote walkable neighborhood environments, which may be at a denser scale than is appropriate for the Carty Road subarea. However, the policies also encourage denser development where most
appropriate (e.g., near existing services) and identify density as a way to reduce impacts
on adjacent areas where density may be less appropriate.
Housing HO-1 – Accommodate Growth: Provide a continuous and adequate supply of residential land to meet long-range multiple-family and single-family housing needs for the City’s
anticipated population growth. The City shall adopt policies and regulations to meet the
following objectives:
• New overall density target of six units per net acre.
• No more than 75% of new houses shall be of a single housing type.
• A minimum density of four units per net acre (10,890 sq. ft. average lot size) for single-
family dwellings in any single development.
HO-2 – 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. However, 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.
The Carty Road subarea plan will support the policy to provide residential land to meet the city’s anticipated population growth; however, amendments to the housing policies may be needed to accommodate larger lots within the subarea.
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 17 of 25
Environment EN-1 – Protect, sustain, and provide for healthy and diverse ecosystems.
EN-10 – Trees and other vegetation: Conserve tree and plant cover, particularly native
species, throughout Ridgefield. Require street tree plantings and minimum landscaping
standards for new development. Promote planting using native vegetation.
The subarea plan will include policies that promote the preservation of environmental resources and the inclusion of landscaping and parks and open spaces consistent with the
desired character of the area.
Public Facilities
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.
This existing conditions assessment identifies the existing public facilities within the
subarea and provides key considerations for improvements moving forward.
Transportation TR-9 Livable streets: Design streets to manage vehicular traffic, and to provide safe and comfortable routes for walking, bicycling, and public transportation, encourage
livability, increase use of alternate modes of transportation, enable convenient and active
travel as part of daily activities, reduce pollution, and meet the needs of all users.
TR-18 – Develop recreational trails as an off-street transportation alternative for pedestrian and bicycle use that connect neighborhoods and provide public access to the Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, the Gee Creek, and the Allen Creek Basins.
Coordinate with Clark County in developing and implementing regional bicycle and
recreational trail plans and systems, through public acquisition, dedication, transferable
development rights, development exactions and other appropriate means.
TR-22 Urban to rural connections: Coordinate with Clark County in developing a collector street master plan, which identifies the general location of planned minor
collector 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 development shall not cause LOS C to be exceeded for any County collector street or arterial street.
Proposed transportation improvements, including off-street trails for pedestrian and bicycle use, will be included in the concept plan for the Carty Road subarea. The trails will provide connections within the subarea to Gee Creek and connect to the city’s existing trail system outside the subarea.
Parks and Recreation
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.
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 18 of 25
P-2 Local trail system: Plan for and develop a city-wide interconnected system of trails that link schools, parks, and other public facilities with residential and mixed-use areas.
The subarea plan will identify land to accommodate proposed park and trail facilities. As
previously noted, trails will also be proposed to connect the city’s existing trail system outside the subarea.
Public Involvement PI-1 – Early and continuous public involvement Ensure early and continuous public
involvement in the development and amendments of the Ridgefield Urban Area
Comprehensive Plan, including plans adopted by reference such as subarea plans, and
development regulations in the Ridgefield Development Code to implement the Plan.
Public involvement is an important component of the Carty Road subarea plan. Individual stakeholder interviews were conducted and a stakeholder advisory group was
convened. The group will be involved throughout the planning process to inform the
subarea concept plan and policy recommendations. Additionally, a community open house is planned prior to the subarea plan adoption process.
Annexation The comprehensive plan includes six policies to guide future annexations. The City put
annexation discussions on hold until completion of the subarea plan. Once those
discussions are underway, the City will need to consider the annexation policies.
3.2 PARKS AND RECREATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The 2020 Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan (Parks and Rec Plan) outlines a community vision for Ridgefield that includes an interconnected system of parks, trails,
and greenways to support a variety of recreation opportunities and contribute to the city’s
small-town character. The plan further proposes adjustments to the City’s level of service standards for parks and recreation facilities to achieve community goals. The level of service standards for parks and recreation areas are outlined in Table 5.
Table 5. Parks and Recreation Facilities Level of Service Standards
Facility Type Standard
Community Parks 6 acres per 1,000 people – standard is currently met, but 23 additional acres will be needed to serve future population.
Neighborhood Parks 1.56 acres per 1,000 people – standard is currently met and is projected to continue being met over the next ten years.
Trails 0.75 miles of trail per 1,000 people – standard is currently met, but additional trail corridors are needed to serve future population and improve connectivity (see Figure 11 for proposed trails within the study area).
Greenways 9.5 acres per 1,000 people – critical areas can strengthen and broaden the greenway system. Priority is to acquire land adjacent to City-owned greenways or to accommodate future trail connections.
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 19 of 25
Facility Type Standard
Specialized Facilities (athletic fields) 1 baseball field per 3,000 people; 1 soccer field per 2,000 people; soccer fields will also accommodate football and lacrosse. The City is currently meeting this standard.
The 2017-2022 Parks & Recreation Capital Facilities Plan (Parks CFP) implements the City’s Comprehensive Plan and the 2020 Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan by elevating park priorities based on current needs and available funding sources. While the 2020 Parks Plan has a 10-year horizon and is broad in perspective, the Parks CFP
recommends specific projects and is focused toward a six-year time frame. Figures 11 and 12 show the proposed park and trail system maps from the Parks and Rec Plan.
Figure 11 identifies a potential trail corridor for the South Fork Gee Creek Trail that would bisect the subarea. The trails plan also shows a conceptual trail route across the northwest portion of the subarea.
As shown on Figure 12, potential park facilities envisioned include a potential neighborhood park area (“G”) to the south of the subarea and a potential neighborhood park area (“K”) to the north of the subarea. The previous Parks Plan identified a potential park area west of Hillhurst. This is now constructed as the Ridgefield Outdoor Recreation Complex. Neighborhood parks are generally smaller (2 to 4 acres) and include
unstructured, non-organized play with limited active and passive recreation areas. Community parks are generally 15 to 50 acres and include areas for active and passive recreation.
Figure 11. Potential Recreational Trails Map
Source: Ridgefield Parks, Recreation, & Open Space Plan (2020)
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 20 of 25
Figure 12. Park Acquisition Target Areas Map
Source: Ridgefield Parks, Recreation, & Open Space Plan (2020)
Stakeholders have expressed some interest in trails through natural areas within the subarea, as long as safety on those trail corridors can be maintained. Stakeholders have also expressed an interest in creating a safer transportation system. The idea of having
separated bike and pedestrian paths adjacent to Carty Road was seen as one potential
strategy for improving safety along the corridor. Additional or increased critical area regulations were also discussed as an option to ensure natural areas in the subarea are maintained.
City staff have identified trail and park system connectivity as a high priority throughout
the city. In order to meet this objective, further identification of land to accommodate the
proposed park and trail facilities is anticipated through this subarea planning process. In addition to maintaining natural areas, stakeholders also would like to maintain the rural and agricultural heritage of the area. Policy recommendations on lot sizes, on-site mitigation strategies, critical area regulations, and agricultural overlays to address these
elements will be included in the subarea final report.
3.3 RIDGEFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE The following sections address the adequacy of the Ridgefield Development Code (RDC) to support the types of development anticipated within the subarea.
3.3.1 Zoning Code (RDC 18.210) As noted previously, based on stakeholder interviews and discussions with City staff,
development within the subarea is likely to include large-lot residential development with
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 21 of 25
some kind of overlay for agricultural uses. Limited commercial or medium-density development may be appropriate along the southern and western boundaries along Royle
Road and Hillhurst Road.
The anticipated uses are generally allowed within the existing zoning code with some limitations and conditions. Where anticipated uses are not currently allowed, recommendations for additional zones or overlay zones will be included in the subarea plan report. Use allowance by zone is outlined in Table 6.
Table 6. Uses by Zone
Use Zone
RLD-4, RLD-6, RLD-8 Single-Family Residential (attached) P-L
Single-Family Residential (detached) P
Duplex P Accessory Dwelling Unit L Multi-Family Residential N Home Occupation L Bed and Breakfast C-L General Retail Trade/Services N Artisan and Specialty Goods Production N
Eating and Drinking Establishment N
Park or Trail P
P = Permitted outright C = Conditions apply L = Limitations apply N = Not permitted • Single-Family Residential (attached): units in the Residential Low Density (RLD) zones must also comply with the townhouse standards in RDC 18.220.140.
• Home Occupation: permitted in the RLD zones provided that the home occupation occupies less than 25 percent of a residence (up to 1,000 square feet of combined space) and generates no more than an average of one additional vehicle trip per day.
• Park or Trail: public and private parks and trails are allowed in all zoning districts
and are required to meet the standards of the P/OS zone (RDC 18.265) regardless of the zoning district in which the facility is located.
As a concept plan is developed through this subarea plan process, the limitations and conditions identified above are important to consider. Code refinements may be
necessary to address the allowance of lower-density residential development and the
continuation of agricultural uses. Although not addressed in the use provisions in RDC 18.205, additional uses not permitted outright or conditionally in the underlying zone are
allowed ― on a discretionary basis ― in the RLD zones through the Planned Unit
Development (PUD) process. Additional details on the PUD process are described in Section 3.3.3.
3.3.2 Urban Holding Overlay District (RDC 18.270) As stated previously, the UH-10 overlay district is applied in the city to land where
capital facilities are inadequate to support development under an urban zoning
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 22 of 25
designation. The removal of this designation should be explored through the subarea planning process. While the planned infrastructure improvements described in Section
2.5 could satisfy the capital improvement requirements to support the removal of the UH-
10 designation, additional utility and transportation access analysis will be needed.
3.3.3 Planned Unit Development Ordinance (RDC 18.401) The PUD process is required for all developments in the RLD and Residential Medium Density (RMD) zones that include critical areas within project boundaries while the
process is optional for all other developments. The purpose of the PUD ordinance is to
provide flexibility in design and development standards, while allowing a mix of uses and promoting an interconnected system of open spaces, trails, public rights-of-way, and utility corridors. The requirements and standards set forth in the PUD ordinance encourage well-designed communities that include a mix of single-family and
multifamily residential buildings. Additionally, commercial uses are potentiallyallowed
in the RLD and RMD zones through the PUD process (RDC 18.401.030 B). The maximum ratio of developed commercial acreage to developed residential acreage cannot exceed 1:20 for RLD zones and 1:10 for the RMD zone.
Additionally, the PUD process can allow density increases, creating greater densities than
would otherwise be allowed in the underlying zone. While PUD objectives include
assuring compatibility with adjacent existing neighborhoods (through design, screening, buffering, building setbacks, and other measures), preserving natural landscape features and avoiding steep slopes, and encouraging efficient land use and utilities, the use of the PUD process within the Carty Road subarea could create densities that are not consistent
with the vision for the subarea as expressed during initial stakeholder outreach.
Therefore, the PUD process may not be appropriate for the Carty Road subarea and limitations on the use of the PUD process should be explored through the subarea planning process.
3.3.4 Density Transfers (RDC 18.280.070)
Density transfers are currently allowed by the City’s critical areas ordinance (RDC 18.280). While these transfers are currently only allowed on a property-by-property basis, the City could consider allowing density and/or development right transfers across property boundaries to encourage property owner coordination and allow for greater critical area protection. Approximately 50 percent of land within the subarea contains
critical areas and, therefore, density transfers could prove an important tool in keeping a large portion of the subarea as open space. However, density transfers can only be used to protect critical areas and would not be applicable to the protection of agricultural lands.
4.0 KEY CONSIDERATIONS FOR SUBAREA PLAN A summary of key considerations for the subarea plan, based on the existing conditions analysis, follows below.
Land Use and Zoning
• Adopt the Carty Road subarea plan by reference into the Ridgefield Urban Area Comprehensive Plan in order to ensure future development within the subarea adheres to the goals and objectives established through the subarea planning process.
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 23 of 25
• Maintain the rural and agricultural character of the community and a sense of place
through the development of design standards for streetscapes, lighting, signs, and
architecture.
• As the subarea concept plan is developed, analyze planned capital improvements to address the removal of the UH-10 designation.
• Evaluate the potential for an overlay zone to allow for and maintain existing
agricultural uses.
• Consider limitations on the use of the PUD process to ensure densities are consistent with the vision for the area.
• Consider the use of density and/or development right transfers to encourage property owner coordination and allow for greater critical area protection.
Parks and Open Space
• City staff have identified trail and park system connectivity as a high priority
throughout the city. In order to meet this objective, identify land to accommodate any proposed neighborhood and community parks and trail facilities through the subarea planning process.
• Trail facilities should be adopted into the City’s CFP, thereby incentivizing
developers to complete these improvements.
• Create design and landscaping standards to maintain the feeling of open space and tree canopy in the area.
Critical Areas
• The sub area includes approximately 133 acres of critical areas, including wetlands, riparian habitat conservation areas, steep slopes, and a Category 2 CARA. The amount of critical areas contained within the subarea will affect future development and must be considered as a subarea concept plan is developed.
• In order to ensure no net loss of functions and values of critical areas, development of
properties with critical areas will require a critical areas report prior to development.
• Limiting or prohibiting off-site mitigation as an option for future development would help ensure the natural areas in the subarea are preserved.
• Future development will likely require an archaeological predetermination and/or survey. Coordination with an archaeologist early in the development planning process is critical to preserving sensitive sites.
Utility Infrastructure and Capacity
• There is no significant public sewer and water infrastructure within the subarea. Adopted water and sewer system plans include provisions for serving the subarea as demonstrated on Figures 6 and 7. Stormwater will be handled on site as new development is proposed.
• Due to topography, some property-specific pump stations may be required to connect
individual developments to the larger system as the subarea develops.
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 24 of 25
• It is anticipated that extension of electrical service will occur in conjunction with
development, and the types of residential development anticipated are not expected to
place an unusual burden on electrical service. The City may want to consider requiring development to underground electrical lines within the subarea.
Transportation Network and Capacity
• If annexed, future development will require compliance with the street-spacing
standards, including a maximum block grid of 500 feet. A 10-foot wide bikeway/multipurpose trail can substitute for the street if topographic constraints make street extension impractical.
• Creating a separated bike and pedestrian path is one strategy to make Carty Road
safer while promoting a variety of transportation options.
• Key planned projects for the Carty Road subarea are listed in Table 3. The planned transportation improvements are sufficient to serve the anticipated population increase.
5.0 NEXT STEPS
The existing conditions analysis, together with the vision established through stakeholder
and property owner input, form the basis for the development of the Carty Road subarea plan. This analysis will be used to develop a subarea concept plan to be presented to the Project Advisory Committee (PAC) at their second meeting scheduled for March 5, 2020. The PAC meeting will be immediately followed by a community open house to solicit
input from the broader community. Following the second PAC meeting and the
community open house, WSP will revise the concept plan and develop a preferred plan for the Carty Road subarea. A subarea plan final report will be prepared and presented to the Planning Commission and City Council in the spring of 2020.
6.0 REFERENCES
City of Ridgefield (City). 2020. Development Activity Map. Accessed on 20 February 2020 at: https://ridgefieldwa.us/government/city-planning/development-activity-map/
City of Ridgefield Parks Department. 2020. Existing parks and trails map. Accessed on
20 February 2020 at: https://ridgefieldwa.us/government/city-departments/parks-department/
City of Ridgefield (City). 2018. Transportation Capital Facilities Plan. December 2018.
City of Ridgefield (City). 2017. 2017-2022 Parks & Recreation Capital Facilities Plan.
City of Ridgefield (City). 2016. Comprehensive Plan 2016 Update.
City of Ridgefield (City). 2016. General Capital Facilities Plan 2016 – 2035.
City of Ridgefield (City). 2014. Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan. April 2014.
City of Ridgefield (City). 2020. Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan. January 2020.
City of Ridgefield WSP 31600114 Existing Conditions Analysis – Carty Road Subarea March 2020 Ridgefield, Washington Page 25 of 25
Clark County (County). 2019. Maps Online. Accessed 23 December 2019 at: http://gis.clark.wa.gov/mapsonline/.
Clark Regional Wastewater District (CRWWD). 2017. Comprehensive General Sewer
Plan. December 2017.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2012. Flood insurance rate maps, Clark County, Washington and Incorporated Areas, Panel Number 53011C0212D.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2019. National Wetlands Inventory (NWI)
Wetlands Mapper. Accessed 23 December 2019 at:
http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html.
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2019a. Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) online database. Accessed 23 December 2019 at: http://apps.wdfw.wa.gov/phsontheweb/
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2019b. SalmonScape online
database. Accessed 23 December 2019 at: http://apps.wdfw.wa.gov/salmonscape/
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2008. Priority Habitat and Species (PHS) List, Revised August 2019. Olympia, Washington.
Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR). 2019. Forest Practices
Application Mapping Tool. Accessed 23 December 2019 at:
https://fortress.wa.gov/dnr/protectiongis/fpamt/index.html
Implementation
CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON | Carty Road Subarea Plan | Final Report 21
APPENDIX C
Fiscal Impact
Assessment
E. D. Hovee & Company, LLC
P.O. Box 225 • Vancouver, WA 98666
(360) 696-9870 • (503) 230-1414 • Fax (360) 696-8453
E-mail: ehovee@edhovee.com
Economic and Development Services
MEMORANDUM
To: Claire Lust, City of Ridgefield
From: Eric Hovee
Subject: Preliminary Carty Road Subarea Fiscal Impact Review
Date: April 7, 2020
On behalf of WSP and the City of Ridgefield, this memorandum provides a preliminary review of
existing property valuation and fiscal considerations as part of the Carty Road subarea planning
process. This review begins with a brief subarea profile base on Clark County assessor data –
followed by assessment of potential future development (or build‐out) capacity, valuation
potential, tax rate considerations, and notes regarding utility provision.
Development potential is based on current Clark County zoning but assuming availability of
urban services. This analysis may be refined to reflect planning considerations resulting from
the subarea planning process. A more complete analysis will also include overview market
observations including input from area property owners and stakeholders.
SUBAREA PROFILE
As summarized by the
chart to the right, the
Carty Road subarea
comprises just over 266
acres (on 52 separate tax
parcels). Current tax
assessed market
valuation is $24.4 million
and there are 44
identified residential
units.
As an unincorporated area, current zoning is as applied by Clark County. With three zoning
districts, allowed residential densities range up to 7.3 units per acre (with R1‐6 zoning), but with
actual development to these densities predicated on provision of urban services.
Carty Road Subarea Statistical Profile (2019)
Sources: Clark GIS and WSP. Includes allocation of one tax parcel partially in
the subarea. With exemptions, value subject to property tax is $21.6 million.
R1‐10 61.66 $3,399,596 5 2.9‐4.4
R1‐6 79.50 $5,311,476 10 5.1‐7.3
R1‐7.5 125.07 $15,716,961 29 4.1‐5.8
Total 266.23 $24,428,033 44
Current
Zoning
Assessor
Acres
Tax Assessed
Valuation
Housing
Units
Zoned
DU/Ac
E.D. Hovee & Company, LLC for WSP and the City of Ridgefield:
Preliminary Carty Road Subarea Fiscal Impact Review Page 2
POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY
On a preliminary basis and consistent with current zoning, it is estimated that the Carty Road
subarea could support development of an estimated new 435‐646 residential units at full‐build‐
out – on developable land estimated at 116.5 acres.
Carty Road Tax Assessed Valuation @ Build-out
Sources: E. D. Hovee & Company, LLC based on current zoning and range of allowed residential densities
together with critical area and infrastructure set aside estimates as provided by WSP.
Estimates are preliminary and subject to refinement as the subarea planning process proceeds.
As detailed by the above chart, this estimate is also based on preliminary assumptions that:
An estimated 50% of the Carty Road subarea comprises critical areas as with wetlands
and steep slopes and is therefore assumed as not available for development.
An added 12.5% of net acreage (after deducting for critical areas) is set aside for
infrastructure (as with new and widened road rights‐of‐way).
VALUATION POTENTIAL WITH FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
With a total tax assessed valuation (TAV – before exemptions) of approximately $24.4 million as
of 2019, potential TAV of the Carty Road subarea could increase to as much as $344+ million by
subarea build‐out. As detailed by the chart on the following page, this is predicated on
maximum allowed densities yielding an assumed lot size averaging 8,000 square feet per unit
across all residential zones, home size averaging about 2,750 square feet, residential sale price
in the range of $200 per square foot and taxable valuation at about 90% of market (or sales)
value – with a net addition of up to 646 new subarea homes to area build‐out.
R1-10 R1-7.5 R1-6
Base Assumptions
Subarea Acreage 266.23 61.66 125.07 79.50 Per Clark GIS
Critical Area 50% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0%Assuming evenly distributed
Infrastructure Set‐Aside 12.5% 12.5% 12.5% 12.5%After critical area deduction
Developable Acreage 116.48 26.98 54.72 34.78 Preliminary estimate
A. Minimum Density
Min Density (DU/Acre) 2.90 4.10 5.10 Per current Clark County zoning
Residential Unit Capacity 479 78 224 177
‐ Existing Homes (44) (5) (29) (10)
= Net New Homes 435 73 195 167
B. Maximum Density
Max Density (DU/Acre) 4.40 5.80 7.30 Per current Clark County zoning
Residential Unit Capacity 690 119 317 254
‐ Existing Homes (44) (5) (29) (10)
= Net New Homes 646 114 288 244 Assuming current zoning
Subarea
Total
Development
Factor CommentsDensity Mix per Existing Zoning
E.D. Hovee & Company, LLC for WSP and the City of Ridgefield:
Preliminary Carty Road Subarea Fiscal Impact Review Page 3
Carty Road Potential Tax Assessed Valuation @ Build-Out
Source: E. D. Hovee & Company, LLC based on estimated build‐out capacity and
Zillow sampling of potentially comparable home sale transactions.
Estimates are preliminary, intended for illustrative purposes, and subject to change
as the subarea planning process proceeds. All estimates are in 2019 dollars.
TAX RATE CONSIDERATIONS
Tax rates associated with properties in the Carty Road subarea – as currently unincorporated –
are compared with current rates applicable to properties within Ridgefield’s incorporated city
limits. In addition to property taxes, comparisons are also made with respect to other
assessments and tax rates, detailed by the chart on the following page.
No assumption is made with this review as to whether the subarea can or should be annexed to
the City of Ridgefield or remain as an unincorporated area adjoining Ridgefield. Based on
current property tax rates, there is an estimated 5% difference (or savings) in property taxes
associated with in‐city versus adjoining unincorporated property. This overall difference may
vary from year‐by‐year with changes in jurisdiction‐specific component tax rates.
Other differences in fiscal considerations are noted as having included:
Applicability of other assessments for mosquito control, fire patrol, clean water and
septic operating permits for unincorporated property versus only mosquito control and
fire patrol assessments in Ridgefield.
Higher sales tax rate in Ridgefield than unincorporated Clark County.
No difference in real estate excise taxes (REET) between the jurisdictions.
Description Estimate Comments
Average Per Unit Valuation
Lot Size (sq ft) 8,000
Home Size (sq ft) 2,750
Value per Sq Ft $200
Home Market Value $550,000
Taxable % of Market Value 90%
Taxable Assessed Valuation $495,000 Excluding tax exemptions
Added Valuation with New Development
# of Net New Units 646 Preliminary estimate
Total Added TAV $319,752,050
Total Valuation @ Build-Out (in 2019 $)
Existing Development $24,428,033 Per Assessor data
New Development $319,752,050 As estimated above
Combined Total $344,180,083
Based on preliminary
sampling of homes in
Ridgefield and comparison
of tax assessed to market
values
E.D. Hovee & Company, LLC for WSP and the City of Ridgefield:
Preliminary Carty Road Subarea Fiscal Impact Review Page 4
Tax Rate Comparison – Carty Road Subarea
(as unincorporated and with annexation)
Sources: Clark County Assessment/GIS and State of Washington Department of Revenue.
Information is preliminary and subject to change over time.
Unincorporated
Clark County
City of
Ridgefield Comments
Levy Rate per $1,000 Taxable Value (2019)
WA State Schools ‐ Part 1 $1.8260405825 $1.8260405825 State of Washington
WA State Schools ‐ Part 2 $0.6799951409 $0.6799951409
County General Fund $0.9805015382 $0.9805015382 Clark County
Development Disability $0.0114738818 $0.0114738818 Clark County
Mental Health $0.0114738818 $0.0114738818 Clark County
Veterans Assistance $0.0103264867 $0.0103264867 Clark County
Conservation Future $0.0390985748 $0.0390985748 Clark County
Clark County Roads $1.2283523376 ‐‐Clark County
Roads Diversion $0.1497382054 ‐‐Clark County
Fort Vancouver Library $0.3635801481 $0.3635801481 Regional Library
City of Ridgefield ‐‐$0.8572277279 General Fund
School Debt $1.9512878066 $1.9512878066 Ridgefield School District #122
School M&O $1.5000000000 $1.5000000000 Ridgefield School District #122
Fire Bond $0.1046597532 $0.1046597532 Fire District 12 Bond
Fire General $1.4450362827 $1.4450362827 Fire District 11 General
Port of Ridgefield $0.1717891641 $0.1717891641 General Fund
Total Levy $10.4733537844 $9.9524909693 Levy without exemptions
Levy w/Exemptions $6.2374110837 $5.7165482686 Senior/disabled exempt rates
Annual Property Tax Payment (Residential Properties)
Average Taxable Value $504,500 $504,500 For parcels w/existing homes
Average Tax Payment $5,284 $5,021 For average subarea home
Annexation Savings $263 For typical residence + land
Levy Code 122005 122000
Other Assessments (as consistent with 2017 Gee Creek Subarea Plan Analysis)
Mosquito Control Mosquito Control
Clean Water
Septic Operating
Permit
Sales Tax Rate 7.7% 8.4%On construction + retail Sales
Real Estate Excise Tax 1.78% 1.78%
Same rate for all Clark Co
except Yacolt @ 1.53%
Tax Jurisdiction
E.D. Hovee & Company, LLC for WSP and the City of Ridgefield:
Preliminary Carty Road Subarea Fiscal Impact Review Page 5
UTILITY PROVISION
In the event of future annexation and/or significant development, water service extensions
would be the responsibility of the City of Ridgefield. Sewer extension and service is the
responsibility of the Clark Regional Wastewater District (CRWWD).
Applicability is expected to be similar to analysis as conducted for the unincorporated Gee
Creek Plateau subarea in 2017. While detailed application specific to the circumstances of Carty
Road area individual property owners is not known at this time, information regarding potential
service extension can be summarized on a preliminary basis as follows.
Water Extension. In the event of future annexation, water provision would occur consistent
with the City of Ridgefield’s water system plan. Smaller distribution lines would likely be
necessary as well, served by the line that is the main feed to the area. Connection charges will
be at the City’s standard Water Systems Development Charge (SDC).
Sewer Extension. CRWWD planning typically anticipates that development will conform to
standard District process and practices. Property owners/developers are generally responsible
for construction of the local gravity sewer infrastructure to serve the area.
Permanent pump stations and force mains are considered as ‘general facilities’ and paid for by
the District. For residential pump stations, this is often accomplished as a reimbursement to the
developer who actually provides the easement/tract of land for the station and constructs it.
If the District were to construct gravity sewers, an assessment for the cost of the gravity sewers
would be recorded against the benefitting property(s); which the District terms as a Local
Facilities Charge (LFC). LFC’s are project specific, established by the CRWWD Board and
assessed after completion of a specific project at which time actual costs are known.
Similarly, if another developer or property owner constructs local sewers benefitting nearby
property(s), the developer would be eligible to recover the costs for the portion of the total
project benefit provided to the other properties through a latecomer reimbursement, assessed
after project completion.
Both LFC and Latecomer arrangements are project specific and influenced by development
patterns and project timing. Therefore, it cannot be readily determined in advance whether or
not these charges would be applicable to particular properties in the subarea.
Connection charges typically anticipated include a systems development charge (SDC), local
facilities charge (LFC), latecomer reimbursement, residential permit fee per equivalent
residential unit (ERU), and development review/inspective fees (based on project
requirements).
Next Steps. Further evaluation and updating of water/sewer plan implications in cooperation
with service providers – and as specifically applicable to the Carty Road subarea – may be
conducted as subarea planning proceeds.
APPENDIX D
Estimated Trip
Generation and
Transportation
Improvement Costs
Page 1
Carty Road Sub Area Plan – Estimated Trip Generation and Costs
Trip Generation Estimate
Trip generation is the method used to estimate the number of vehicles that are added to the surrounding
roadway network as a result of a proposed project. The trip generation estimate for the Carty Road Subarea
Plan was based on similar land uses as reported by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)1. The trip
generation estimate was conducted for both the current Clark County zoning designations and the preferred
alternative for the Carty Road Subarea Plan which would apply City of Ridgefield zoning designations.
The current zoning would allow up to 690 residential units. The preferred alternative would allow up to 468
residential units. The potential trip generation for each alternative was estimated for the daily, AM and PM
peak hours using the Single‐Family Detached Housing (ITE Code 210) land use. Table 1 summarizes the
expected trip generation. The proposed change in zoning would result in a reduction in vehicle trips: 2,030
daily trips, 1159 AM peak hour trips and 213 PM peak hour trips.
TABLE 1: TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATE
ZONING
ALTERNATIVE
ITE LAND
USE
SIZE
(UNITS)
DAILY
TRIPS
A.M. PEAK HOUR P.M. PEAK HOUR
IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL
CURRENT COUNTY
ZONING
Single-Family
Detached
Housing
690 6,448 126 379 505 426 250 676
PREFERRED
PLAN CITY
ZONING
Single-Family
Detached
Housing
464 4,380 85 258 343 289 170 459
Net Change in Trips -2,068 -41 -121 -162 -137 -80 -217
Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) manual, Trip Generation, 10th Edition.
1 INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS (ITE) MANUAL, TRIP GENERATION, 10TH EDITION.
Page 2
Planned Improvements
Several roadway, trail and intersection projects were identified within the plan area through the subarea
planning process. The planned improvements with planning level cost estimates are summarized in Table 2.
The cost estimates include contingencies for administration and design costs. The Carty Road project includes
right of way costs. For the remaining projects it was assumed right of way would be dedicated with
development. Environmental costs were estimated with the Carty Road and Neighborhood trail projects.
TABLE 2: SUBAREA TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS
Project Location Description Cost Estimate
Carty Road – Hillhurst Road to Plan Area
east boundary
upgrade existing roadway to new minor
arterial standard, includes multi‐use path,
approx. 4,400‐feet total
$10,500,000
Hillhurst Road/Carty Road Capacity improvements; roundabout control $1,725,000
Carty Road/Meuller Road Capacity improvements; turn lanes $325,000
Carty Road/24th Avenue Capacity improvements; turn lanes $325,000
Royle Road/new neighborhood access Capacity improvements; turn lanes $325,000
Neighborhood Trail Corridors Construct several trail corridors, approx.
7,200‐feet total $4,025,000
TOTAL $16,775,000