December 2015 Ridgefield Junction_subarea_plan_council_finalCity of Ridgefield
Ridgefield Junction
Subarea Plan
December 2015
MIG | SvR Design
Dave Rodgers, Principal
Lauren Squires
Annie Alsheimer
Project Team
Community Attributes Inc.
Chris Mefford, Principal
Mark Goodman, Project Manager
Yolanda Ho
Elliot Weiss
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
City of Ridgefield City Council
City of Ridgefield Planning Commission
Larry Rasmussen
Jerry Bush
Mark Burton
Juanita Wertz
Jason Carnell
Victoria Haugen
James Sheppard
City of Ridgefield
Steve Stuart, City Manager
Jeff Niten, Community Development Director
Ron Onslow, Mayor
David Taylor
Lee Wells
Don Stose
Darren Wertz
John Main
Sandra Day
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND VISION
Public Engagement
Vision and Goals
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Planning Overview
Market Overview
Planning Implications
CONCEPT PLAN AND IMPLEMENTATION
Design Framework
Comprehensive Plan Context
Implementation Plan
5
7
11
12
18
19
20
33
41
43
44
53
59
5Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Planning for Sustainable Growth
Increased economic activity in the Portland-Vancouver
metropolitan area is spurring substantial growth in sur-
rounding communities, such as Ridgefield. In order to plan
for this influx of new residents, the City of Ridgefield has
initiated a variety of planning efforts that seek to sustain
the livability and aesthetic appeal of the community while
also positioning the city to capture a share of the region’s
anticipated employment growth.
Ridgefield Junction, approximately 1,400 acres flanking the
Interstate 5 and Pioneer Street interchange, is envisioned
to be the city’s employment hub, supporting a variety of
industrial and commercial businesses as well as a couple of
important institutional landowners - PeaceHealth and Clark
College. This subarea plan provides a community-based
vision for the Junction, helping the City with long-term
planning by providing guidance for future infrastructure
investment, zoning regulations and urban design as well as
a strategy for implementation.
Community Engagement, Vision and Goals
The consultant team, in collaboration with City of Ridgefield
staff, solicited feedback from a variety of stakeholders and
the general public during different points in the planning
process. Phone interviews, two stakeholder roundtables,
a public open house and an online survey gave residents,
landowners and business representatives opportunities to
shape the plan’s vision and goals as well as the design con-
cept. Based on input from stakeholders and City staff, the
following vision and goals were developed.
Vision
Ridgefield Junction is a mixed-use destination that provides
an attractive, distinctive gateway to Ridgefield and serves
as an important employment and commerce center for the
city and region. Key institutions and industrial anchors are
the foundation for the Junction’s vitality, and new develop-
ment reinforces Ridgefield’s aesthetic appeal and capitalizes
on its scenic setting.
Goals
•Honor Ridgefield’s commitment to livability, sustain-
ability and design excellence in new development
•Provide critical infrastructure and amenities for anchor
tenants and key institutions
•Develop a range of commercial centers that comple-
ments the city’s historic downtown
•Create unique gateways and districts in Ridgefield Junc-
tion that reflect community character
•Promote opportunities for live/work lifestyles
•Increase and diversify the City’s tax base by attracting
new development and greater employment
Ridgefield Junction Today
Much of Ridgefield Junction is undeveloped and retains its
pastoral character, though the land is largely zoned for em-
ployment-generating activities, such as commercial, office
and industrial uses. The Junction accounts for around 80%
of Ridgefield’s total employment capacity, based on Clark
County’s Vacant Buildable Lands Model analysis. Two major
institutions own large tracts of land in the subarea - Clark
College is exploring specialty program options for its new
campus that will also offer core courses and, nearby, Peace-
Health has a master plan that includes retail, office and light
industrial uses.
The Union Ridge Master Plan is another important factor in
planning for the subarea. Approved by the City as an Em-
ployment Mixed Use Overlay (EMUO) district in 2006, the
master plan pertains to two separate sets of property, one
at the northwest corner of the I-5 and Pioneer interchange
(Union Ridge North) and the other at the southeast corner
of the subarea (Union Ridge South). The EMUO gives devel-
opers more flexibility than permitted under typical zoning
regulations, allowing limited residential use on office and
industrial zoned lands, for instance. Union Ridge South has
experienced substantial industrial and commercial devel-
opment. However, Union Ridge North is still undeveloped
and represents a unique opportunity to create a distinctive
presence for Ridgefield along I-5.
Critical areas and their buffers, particularly east of I-5,
present both limitations and opportunities for future devel-
opment in the subarea. In the Parks & Recreation Compre-
hensive Plan (Parks Plan), a number of stream corridors are
proposed to become recreational amenities that will increase
multimodal connectivity within Ridgefield. Endangered
Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
6 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
migratory waterfowl habitat, located in the eastern portion
of the subarea, is likely to impact development potential to
those properties. Infrastructure, or the lack thereof, is an ad-
ditional consideration for future development. The opening
of the Discovery Corridor Wastewater Transmission System
(currently under construction) will be a much-needed infra-
structural upgrade that will support growth in the Junction.
Design Concept & District Identities
The conceptual design framework proposes: an expansion of
the road network to facilitate both vehicular and non-mo-
torized circulation and support new development in the
Junction; creation of a robust trail and park network that
augments the Parks Plan; and the establishment of five dis-
tricts within the subarea, defined by their primary land use
activities and anchor landowners, where applicable.
District One and District Five (Union Ridge South) are home
to the current concentrations of industrial activity and are
expected to continue in these roles. District Two (Union
Ridge North and adjoining parcels) has the potential to
serve as a gateway to Ridgefield and, based on communi-
ty input, the plan envisions a high-quality lifestyle center,
hosting a mix of retail, office and residential uses. Building
upon the two institutional landowners’ plans, District Three
will support office and retail activity, with complementary
residential development. District Four, which is the most
encumbered by critical areas and has the least infrastruc-
ture, is designed to attract industrial users and associated
businesses interested in local production activities, such as
smaller scale manufacturers, breweries, viticulture and ur-
ban farming.
Key Implementation Strategies
Realizing the vision for the Junction will require the im-
plementation of a variety of strategies, including updating
the comprehensive plan and development code as well as
branding and marketing. Below are some of the key imple-
mentation strategies:
Policy Updates
•Amend Parks & Recreation Comprehensive Plan to in-
clude open spaces and corridors as proposed
•Align comprehensive plan policy with vision and goals
of the subarea plan
Proposed New Zones
•Junction Mixed Use (JMU): supports high intensity
mixed use development, promotes a pedestrian-friendly
environment and contains provisions for public open
space in District Three
•Industrial Mixed (IM): supports a variety of uses associat-
ed with local production activities (e.g. food processing,
urban farming, viticulture, artisan goods production)
and creates development that complements Ridgefield’s
rural character in District Four
Increase Potential for Housing
•Increase maximum residential density above 16 dwelling
units per acre to promote vertical mixed use in Junction
Mixed Use (JMU), Office (OFF) and Neighborhood Busi-
ness (CNB) zones
•Allow for horizontal mixed use and cottage housing in
the CNB and OFF zones
•Add senior housing as a complementary use in the OFF
zone, anticipating PeaceHealth’s development; only al-
low when other amenities become available nearby
•Consider negotiating with Union Ridge to revise exist-
ing master plan so that it supports mixed use develop-
ment in Union Ridge North
Development Regulations and Infrastructure
•Continue high development standards (e.g. building and
landscaping requirements) for commercial development
•Support low impact development (LID) techniques to
treat stormwater onsite
•Review infrastructure and utility planning to ensure
that it can accommodate development as proposed in
the subarea plan
7Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
INTRODUCTION
RIDGEFIELD JUNCTION
Ridgefield Junction, in the City of Ridgefield, straddles the
I-5 interchange at Pioneer Street and is roughly bounded by
NW 279th Street at its farthest point north, N 85th Avenue
to the east and NW Timm Road to the south; its far western
border is about a third of a mile from S 56th Place (Figure 1).
It encompasses a mix of commercial and industrially zoned
land in contrast to the primarily residential uses that dom-
inate most of the city. Already a hub of industrial and retail
activity, this area is anticipated to become an even larger
employment center in the city. Future uses in the Junction,
such as a new college campus and a medical complex, could
be major job generators and would help diversify the city’s
economic base.
The Portland-Vancouver metro area is currently experienc-
ing rapid growth, and Ridgefield has an opportunity to cap-
ture a share of this increase in the region’s population and
employment. While the city has seen a substantial amount
of residential development in recent years, it also hopes to
create more high-quality jobs, allowing residents the oppor-
tunity to live and work in Ridgefield. Two major institution-
al land owners – Clark College and PeaceHealth – could be
catalysts for major development activity, while other small-
FIGURE 1. Ridgefield Junction Subarea and City of Ridgefield land use
er-scale commercial developments could contribute to the
overall vitality of the area.
Other important considerations for development in the
Junction are plans for nearby competing commercial cen-
ters. A couple of retail/mixed-use projects have been pro-
posed about five miles south near the Clark County Event
Center at the Fairgrounds, though plans have stalled since
the recession. Closer in proximity to the Junction are on-
going plans for the 134,000 square foot Cowlitz Casino, a
little over two miles north along I-5. This development, set
to break ground in early 2016, will also feature a hotel and
shopping center.
Given current growth trends and its prime location on the
I-5 corridor, Ridgefield Junction will inevitably experience
an influx of development. Lacking an overall plan for the
entire area, new development may occur in a manner in-
compatible with the community vision for the Junction.
This subarea plan will help the City by encouraging and
directing new development that will achieve Ridgefield’s
long-term vision for the Junction.
Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
8 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
PLANNING CONTEXT
This plan is one of several ongoing efforts to plan for future
growth in Ridgefield. A separate consultant team is conduct-
ing a subarea plan for 45th and Pioneer, immediately to the
west of the Junction, which is primarily characterized by
residential and local commercial uses. The City has another
consultant team working on a citywide multimodal plan. In
addition, the City has been working in conjunction with an
environmental engineering consultant on a plan for proper-
ties in its historic downtown and waterfront, both of which
have required or will require substantial remediation to be
ready for development.
This plan seeks to align with the 2014 Parks & Recreation
Comprehensive Plan as well as Ridgefield’s current Com-
prehensive Plan goals, identifying relevant policies to be
integrated into the 2016 Comprehensive Plan update to
support the subarea plan’s vision. Together, these plans will
influence future development in the Junction.
SUBAREA PLAN PURPOSE
Community Attributes Inc. (CAI), along with its subconsul-
tant MIG/SvR Design, were tasked with leading develop-
ment of the subarea plan with a focus on further developing
the area’s identity and potential as an economic engine for
the city. The Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan focuses on
further developing the area’s identity and potential as an
employment and commerce center. The intent of this doc-
ument is to:
•Provide guidance for future infrastructure investment,
zoning regulations and urban design
•Serve as an implementation plan that City leaders and
staff can leverage
9Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
PROCESS AND APPROACH
As Ridgefield’s primary location for future employment
growth, the Ridgefield Junction subarea has the potential to
not only serve its local Ridgefield community but also the
wider region within Clark County. Thus, this subarea plan
involved not only traditional land use planning analysis but
also a data-driven design approach to assess local and re-
gional market conditions to formulate its recommendations.
Data-Driven Design
Data-driven design is a process that uses rigorous data an-
alytics to inform physical planning and urban design con-
cepts. A detailed data profile is essential to understand the fa-
vorable uses in local market conditions, spatial implications
of demographic and economic trends and opportunities for
new development. This data profile is the cornerstone of
CAI’s approach to planning and urban design.
•Assemble a data profile
•Identify goals, opportunities and constraints
•Translate data in design strategies
•Draft action plan to guide implementation
The profile, however, is primarily quantitative and tells only
part of the story about Ridgefield, and a more qualitative
understanding of the subarea is critical to a comprehensive
perspective. Therefore, the data profile is supplemented by
outreach to key stakeholders and the community at large.
Public Outreach and Engagement
In partnership with City staff, the consultant team identi-
fied stakeholders for Ridgefield Junction and engaged these
individuals as well as the general public at key points during
the planning and design process. Engagement took several
forms, as briefly described below:
•In-depth interviews – individuals identified by City
staff as stakeholders were interviewed via phone
•Stakeholder roundtables – City staff invited stakehold-
ers to attend two roundtables to discuss a shared vision
and guiding principles for the plan, the existing condi-
tions assessment and proposed design concepts for the
subarea
•Public open house – the City hosted a public open
house featuring content from all the planning processes
underway to inform the community about each project
and solicit feedback
METHODOLOGY
A variety of data sources were used in the preparation of
this plan, including:
•Clark County Assessor
•Clark County Vacant Buildable Lands Model
•City of Ridgefield Municipal Code
•U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey
•Washington Employment Security Department
•CoStar
•Hoovers
PLAN LIMITATIONS
This document provides general planning guidelines and
recommendations intended to help the City of Ridgefield
prepare more specific policy documents. It is not an assess-
ment of land value or development feasibility and does not
constitute binding code. The analysis provided applies to a
large area and may not be appropriate for decision-making
at the parcel level.
To move from this subarea plan to adopted policy, the city
will need to gather additional and more detailed data to ver-
ify constraints and opportunities presented herein.
Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
10 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
11Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND VISION
This chapter details the efforts by City staff and the
consultant team to engage stakeholders and the
general public during the subarea planning pro-
cess. Ridgefield Junction has a critical role to play
in the future of Ridgefield, and this plan is intended
to provide the City with guidance on how it should
channel public investments and tailor land use and
development regulations. Ridgefield residents as
well as businesses and land owners in the Junction
could potentially be affected by proposed changes.
The engagement process offered stakeholders and
the public multiple opportunities to provide feed-
back so the plan could take into account as many
perspectives as possible.
12 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
Phone interviews, stakeholder roundtables and comments
received during the public open house provided insight into
the challenges and opportunities for Ridgefield Junction and
the city as a whole as it seeks to accommodate projected
growth while retaining Ridgefield’s high quality of life and
unique character. This section provides a summary of the
information gathered from stakeholders through the vari-
ous engagement techniques and concludes with the vision
and guiding principles for the Junction subarea plan.
PHONE INTERVIEWS
Conducting in-depth phone interviews with Junction
stakeholders was identified as an important first step in
the subarea planning process. Interviewees were selected
by the City of Ridgefield and all participants represented
either landowners and/or businesses located within Ridge-
field Junction. Below is a summary of interview feedback,
grouped by topic.
Vision
The following remarks relate to both the historical and fu-
ture vision for the Junction subarea and greater role within
the City.
•Interviewees supported the growth of industrial uses
in Ridgefield Junction and would like to see those uses
continue in the future, which will help the city become
an employment center.
•The original intent of the Junction was to act as an indus-
trial base to provide tax revenue for schools and other
public investments. Some respondents felt strongly that
the Junction should serve as a hub of manufacturing ac-
tivities that would complement plans for Clark College’s
proposed advanced manufacturing training center.
•Almost all interviewees would like to see more com-
mercial activity in the Junction and saw the potential
for Ridgefield to evolve into a retail center.
•While stakeholders seemed to welcome new develop-
ment, they were concerned about losing the commu-
nity’s rural character that attracted them to Ridgefield
initially.
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
OVERVIEW
Below is an overview of the outreach and engagement ef-
forts conducted during the subarea planning process.
Phone Interviews – June and July 2015
Key stakeholders, primarily landowners and business rep-
resentatives, were asked about their vision for the Junction
and the opportunities/challenges for various types of land
use activities.
Roundtable 1 – August 6, 2015
Based on feedback received during the phone interviews
and in response to City input, the consultant team devel-
oped an initial vision and goals for the subarea. Stakeholders
were invited to a roundtable discussion about the vision and
goals, findings from the existing conditions assessment and
proposed districts within the subarea.
Roundtable 2 – September 17, 2015
At the second roundtable, stakeholders responded to pre-
liminary design concepts, including circulation, land use
activities and open space.
Open House – September 23, 2015
City staff hosted a public open house with presentation ma-
terials from the various planning efforts underway. Attend-
ees provided written comments that were shared with the
consultant teams.
Online Survey – October 2015
Following the open house, City staff created an online sur-
vey that included questions related to each of the planning
efforts. Survey results were compiled and shared with each
consultant team.
13Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
Land Uses/Economic Activity
The following responses offer perspectives on the type, po-
tential and suitability of various land use categories and/or
economic activities.
Retail
•Almost all respondents indicated they would like more
retail options at the Junction, specifically a grocery store,
shops and restaurants, both full and limited service.
•One stakeholder felt an outlet mall would not be an
appropriate type of retail for the area.
Industrial/Office
•Two interviewees expressed an interest in attracting
more manufacturing to the Junction, such as food pro-
cessing and metal fabrication. Creating a concentration
of these activities would help foster a neighborhood of
businesses with similar needs that can share resources.
In contrast to warehousing and distribution activities,
manufacturing involves greater employment density
and more living wage jobs.
•One interviewee was concerned about housing or retail
uses possibly dominating the Junction, weakening its
ability to serve as a robust employment center.
•Another felt that promoting more mixed-use office/
light industrial uses in the Junction would provide flex-
ibility for developers to respond to market conditions
and help attract more high-density development.
•One business representative noted that the company’s
location was ideal with excellent access to I-5 and no
potential for conflicts with residences, which was a
problem in their previous location in another city.
•A business located in Union Ridge felt the master plan
works well, though development has been slower than
expected.
•All business owners and representatives said their cur-
rent facilities were larger than necessary, so they do
not foresee requiring any more property or additional
development to expand operations.
Institutional
•Of the two major institutional property owners, Clark
College suggested it was more likely than PeaceHealth
to develop its land in the short term.
•Clark College’s proposed development is intended to be
a commuter campus that offers core programs in addi-
tion to an advanced manufacturing standalone program
that would be unique to Ridgefield.
•The college also envisions establishing a maker space
and fermentation school, both of which would have
commercial uses.
•Interviewees responded positively to the planned Clark
College facility, seeing it as an opportunity to spur addi-
tional development, though one person noted the devel-
opment timeframe on such a project could be very long.
Parks
•A few stakeholders voiced an interest in having more
space for active recreation in the Junction.
•One idea was to create a recreation facility that would
draw users and visitors from the region, which would
attract customers to future retail establishments.
•Another stakeholder would like to see the Junction con-
nected to other parts of the city through a greenbelt/
trail system.
Residential
•One stakeholder mentioned the concern amongst cur-
rent Ridgefield residents about the imminent develop-
ment of row homes along Pioneer.
•While Clark College would not develop student-type
housing, students attending classes in Ridgefield and its
WSU Vancouver location might be interested in living
in the Junction.
•Another interviewee did not think housing east of I-5
was viable.
Hotel
•A couple of interviewees saw the potential for hospital-
ity activities in the subarea, though they would like to
see more than a standard roadside motel.
•Those interested in having a hotel in the Junction felt
that higher quality retail and greater density could re-
sult in a nicer hotel development.
Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
14 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
Transportation and Infrastructure
The following comments summarize transportation and in-
frastructure concerns expressed by stakeholders.
•While most of those interviewed had no concerns about
infrastructure, a few voiced concerns about the capacity
of roads and utilities to accommodate expected growth,
both residential and commercial. Development will in-
crease trips between downtown and the Junction along
Pioneer, which could lead to congestion.
•Interviewees recommended the City explore widening
Pioneer and/or providing additional routes between
downtown and the Junction.
•Stakeholders mentioned sewer and water have histor-
ically been problematic, but no businesses mentioned
any problems with either.
Design Elements
Most interviewees had no clear thoughts on what types of
design elements they would like to see in the Junction. The
following are the few ideas stakeholders mentioned.
•One stakeholder would like building design in the
Junction to be distinctive, not generic tilt-up types.
The Junction should have a distinct character, conveyed
through architecture and urban design that would be
apparent from the highway.
•Another suggested there should be strong standards for
elements like signs and lighting to create a more unified
sense of place.
•Development standards should consider what types of
outdoor storage, fencing and building materials are ap-
propriate in the long term.
Business Climate
Several respondents offered perspectives on working with
the City, listed below.
•While businesses seem relatively satisfied with the
business climate in Ridgefield, a couple of interviewees
mentioned it can be difficult for outsiders to gain trac-
tion within the community.
•One interviewee mentioned downtown and the Junction
business communities feel completely disconnected.
•Interviewees generally viewed the City positively, citing
its helpful communication in regards to road construc-
tion as well as responsiveness to various issues.
•They also felt the development process was reasonable
with no major problems.
Challenges and Opportunities
The following are comments that addressed challenges and
opportunities for development in the Junction.
•One stakeholder saw the fragmented ownership in the
Junction as a challenge to creating a cohesive plan.
•It was also noted a big box retailer would likely want to
locate at the Junction, which might reduce the attrac-
tiveness of the area as a gateway.
•One business owner felt the recent adoption of more
stringent stormwater regulations at the state level was
likely to be cost-prohibitive for many companies look-
ing to develop anywhere in Western Washington.
•Several interviewees suggested the City be more pro-
active about attracting desired development by taking
steps to reduce development time and costs, such as
providing utility connections to create “shovel ready”
conditions. Such upfront costs can force developers to
choose a location that is better prepared to receive de-
velopment.
15Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
STAKEHOLDER AND PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
Roundtable 1
The first stakeholder roundtable discussion was framed
around the existing conditions assessment, draft vision and
goals and the proposed districts within the subarea (Figure
2). Below is a summary of key takeaways, considerations and
discussion items.
Study Area-wide
•Where can parks and recreation space be located in the
Junction?
•What is the role of multifamily housing and what will
the character of that housing be?
•Where can assisted/senior housing fit?
•Consider the east/west divide of the City
•Growth on Native American lands to the north will im-
pact the study area
District One
•Support the role of the Port of Ridgefield and its lands
•Continue support of existing businesses and growth of
employment in this area
District Two
•This area will define Ridgefield from the freeway
-Major role for retail but in what form?
-There is interest from a mix of retail types
-Desire a high-end character (Bridgeport Village)
-Limit impacts of uses like car dealerships
•There is a sense of urgency to capture future retail de-
mand
•Where and what types of hotels may develop here
FIGURE 2. Subarea Districts
District Three
•Support higher density housing around college
•Clark College
-Large property for the institution’s needs
-Possibility of other uses (retail, housing)
-Long term need for parks and rec space on campus
-Potential for mixed use development in long term
•PeaceHealth Property
-Intent is to maintain their existing land use plan that
includes a mix of uses
District Four
•Limited improvements
•This area will be demand-driven
•Required sewer access
•Wetlands are a major factor in this area
•Opportunity for housing to complement adjacent col-
lege and major employers
•Density of this area will impact surrounding housing
•Potential for mixing housing with office and other uses
WORKSHEET Ridgefield Junction
S
t
a
k
e
h
o
l
d
e
r
W
o
r
k
s
h
o
p
8
/
6
/
2
0
1
5
Draft Vision
Ridgefield Junction
i
s
a
m
i
x
e
d
u
s
e
d
e
s
t
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
t
h
a
t
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
a
n
a
t
t
r
a
c
t
i
v
e
,
d
i
s
t
i
n
c
t
i
v
e
gateway to Ridgefi
e
l
d
a
n
d
s
e
r
v
e
s
a
s
a
n
i
m
p
o
r
t
a
n
t
e
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
c
o
m
m
e
r
c
e
c
e
n
t
e
r
f
o
r
the city and region. Ke
y
i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
i
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
a
n
c
h
o
r
s
a
r
e
t
h
e
f
o
u
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
t
h
e
Junction’s vitality, an
d
n
e
w
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
r
e
i
n
f
o
r
c
e
s
R
i
d
g
e
f
i
e
l
d
’
s
a
e
s
t
h
e
t
i
c
a
p
p
e
a
l
a
n
d
capitalizes on its sce
n
i
c
s
e
t
t
i
n
g
.
Draft Guiding Prin
c
i
p
l
e
s
Rank the following
draft guiding principles b
y
i
m
p
o
r
t
a
n
c
e
:
Create a gateway t
o
R
i
d
g
e
f
i
e
l
d
r
e
f
l
e
c
t
i
v
e
o
f
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
Develop a premier
c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
c
e
n
t
e
r
t
h
a
t
c
o
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
t
h
e
c
i
t
y
’
s
h
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
downtown
Promote opportuni
t
i
e
s
f
o
r
l
i
v
e
/
w
o
r
k
l
i
f
e
s
t
y
l
e
s
Increase and diversify
t
h
e
t
a
x
b
a
s
e
Provide critical infrast
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
a
n
d
a
m
e
n
i
t
i
e
s
f
o
r
a
n
c
h
o
r
t
e
n
a
n
t
s
a
n
d
k
e
y
institutions
Honor Ridgefield’s co
m
m
i
t
m
e
n
t
t
o
l
i
v
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
,
s
u
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
d
e
s
i
g
n
excellence in new dev
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Question
What are the top thr
e
e
o
u
t
c
o
m
e
s
t
h
a
t
y
o
u
w
o
u
l
d
l
i
k
e
t
o
s
e
e
result from the
Subarea Plan?
Sample worksheet from first stakeholder roundtable
16 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
Roundtable 2
A variety of stakeholders attended the second roundtable to
review preliminary design concepts for land use, circula-
tion and open space. There was also continued discussion
about the types of uses in proposed districts and the role of
the major institutional land owners. Key discussion points
relevant to development of the subarea plan included:
•Due to regulations and soil conditions, stormwater
management will likely require a great deal of land
•Critical areas as mapped by the County are likely not ac-
curate and provide a very rough approximation; wetland
delineation will have to occur on a site-by-site basis to
determine the true development constraints
•There has been some interest by landowners in develop-
ing housing in the Junction
•Considering potential synergies with proposed Down-
town Ridgefield waterfront development
•Maintaining the potential for light industrial uses in
District Two and allowing for flexibility
•Including senior housing as a permissible use in the
northern portion of District Three; commercial uses
are unlikely in this portion of the subarea due to the
distance from the interchange
•The most northern portion of PeaceHealth’s property
(Area C) is slated for research and development uses,
though this should be understood as a very long term
plan
•Clark College plans to offer core courses at its campus as
well as a specialty program, to be determined based on
community interest; currently, it is considering an ad-
vanced manufacturing program, which would require
industrial uses on its property
•While Clark College is seeking community input on its
potential program, the City, residents and businesses are
looking to the college to decide what type of program
it will establish
•District Four still needs infrastructure, so development
timeframe is longer term; in the interim, recreation
uses are potentially viable
•The City might consider setting up a wetland mitigation
bank in District Four, given that it appears to be sub-
stantially encumbered by critical areas
Open House
About 100 people attended the City’s public open house to
learn more about the multiple planning efforts underway,
including the downtown circulation plan, citywide multi-
modal plan and the subarea plans for Ridgefield Junction
and 45th and Pioneer. Attendees provided written feedback
on a wide range of topics relevant to the Junction subarea
plan, summarized below:
•Provide abundant open space corridors and paths for pe-
destrians and cyclists to connect neighborhoods/points
of interest within Ridgefield as well as areas beyond city
boundaries
•Prevent sprawl as the city’s population grows and en-
sure new development (housing and commercial) is
high-quality with excellent landscaping
•Encourage a grocery store, possibly a specialty grocer,
and other general retailers to locate either in the Junc-
tion or 45th and Pioneer subareas
•Provide for assisted care facilities and other retirement
options so that Ridgefield can be a lifelong community
•Discourage discount, big box retailers
•Improve signage within key points of the Junction to
direct more people downtown
•Smaller shops and restaurants should be located down-
town to maintain the historic character
Sample of public open house comment sheets received
17Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
Online Survey
Following the public open house, City staff developed an
online survey to solicit additional community feedback.
Responses aligned well with feedback gathered from oth-
er community engagement efforts. More than 100 people
responded to the survey, which covered the subarea plans
for Ridgefield Junction and 45th and Pioneer as well as the
downtown circulation plan. Responses to questions regard-
ing the Ridgefield Junction subarea plan are summarized
below.
When asked to envision the desired character for the Junc-
tion over the next 10 to 20 years, respondents’ top three
choices (out of the eight options provided) were:
•Fits with small town/rural Ridgefield character
•Convenient to places to shop and work
•High quality of development
When asked to rank a list of 10 planning objectives for the
subarea, the weighted average of the responses resulted in
the following prioritization:
1.Master planning that both protects and complements
wetland/critical areas as an amenity for high-quality
development
2.Protection of existing wetlands and other critical areas
from development
3.Clear separation and buffering between residential and
commercial developments
4.Opportunities for non-auto circulation such as walk-
ing and bike trails
5.Opportunities for larger scale retail development
6.Smaller parks clustered near residential and existing
natural areas
7.Mixed use neighborhoods with some medium density
residential located side by side with neighborhood re-
tail services
8.Single large park area
9.Opportunities for industrial and business park devel-
opment that complements existing uses
10. Primary reliance on auto circulation within the subar-
ea and to the rest of Ridgefield
4.20%6
10.49%15
56.64%81
53.15%76
35.66%51
40.56%58
62.24%89
21.68%31
Q1 How would you describe yo
u
r
v
i
s
i
o
n
o
f
the desired character of Rid
g
e
f
i
e
l
d
J
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
as it develops over the next
1
0
-
2
0
y
e
a
r
s
?
(check your top three choic
e
s
)
Answered: 143 Skipped: 0
Total Respondents: 143
#Other (please specify)
Date
1 save rural land, keep farms, stop th
e
s
u
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
10/12/2015 6:52 PM
2 Education/Employment Center
10/8/2015 2:17 PM
3 Make sure you attract a Trader Joe's !
10/6/2015 7:59 AM
Offering
diverse hous...
Affordable
Convenient to
places to sh...
High quality
of development
Walkable
Readily
accessible t...
Fits withsmall...
Neighborly
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Answer Choices
Responses
Offering diverse housing choices
Affordable
Convenient to places to shop and work
High quality of development
Walkable
Readily accessible to open space and t
r
a
i
l
a
m
e
n
i
t
i
e
s
Fits with small town/rural Ridgefie
l
d
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
Neighborly
1 / 22
City of Ridgefield Sub Area Pla
n
n
i
g
S
u
r
v
e
y
SurveyMonkey
Q2 What are the most important
p
l
a
n
n
i
n
gobjectives for this sub-area that
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
eaddressed as part of the 201
6
u
p
d
a
t
e
t
o
Ridgefield’s Comprehensiv
e
P
l
a
n
?
(
p
l
e
a
s
e
rank all items numerically with
1representing your highest pri
o
r
i
t
y
)
Answered: 127 Skipped: 16
20.83%
20 11.46%
11 15.63%
15 12.50%
12 7.29%
7 7.29%
7 7.29%
7 5.21%
5 2.08%
2 10.42%
10
9
6
6
.
6
4
5.38%
5 15.05%
14 5.38%
5 9.68%
9 10.75%
10 8.60%
8 11.83%
11 9.68%
9 11.83%
11 11.83%
11
9
3
5
.
1
9
Clearseparation a...
Mixed useneighborhood...
Opportunities
for...
Opportunitiesfor industri...
Primaryreliance on...
Opportunitiesfor non-auto...
Protection of
existing...
Masterplanning tha...
Single largepark area
Smaller parksclustered ne...
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
0
T
o
t
a
l
S
core
Clear separation and
buffering betweenresidential and
commercialdevelopments
Mixed useneighborhoods with some
medium densityresidential located side-
by-side withneighborhood retail
services
3 / 22
City of Ridgefield Sub Area Plannig S
u
r
v
e
y
SurveyMonkey
Online survey summary excerpts
Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
18 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
VISION AND GOALS
The vision and goals for Ridgefield Junction served as a guide for the subarea planning process. Planning and design deci-
sions are informed by the vision, and the goals, which also act as design principles, ultimately become criteria by which
design concepts are judged. In addition to influencing the subarea’s physical design, the goals serve as Comprehensive
Plan policies that guide City investment and other actions. An initial version of the vision and goals was developed based
on an understanding of the City’s priorities for the Junction as well as stakeholder interview findings. The draft versions
were presented at the first stakeholder roundtable and further refined to incorporate the feedback received. Below are the
finalized vision and goals.
RIDGEFIELD JUNCTION VISION
Ridgefield Junction is a mixed use destination that provides an attractive, distinctive gateway to Ridgefield and serves
as an important employment and commerce center for the city and region. Key institutions and industrial anchors are
the foundation for the Junction’s vitality, and new development reinforces Ridgefield’s aesthetic appeal and capitalizes
on its scenic setting.
GOALS
Honor Ridgefield’s commitment to livability, sustainability and design excellence in new development
Provide critical infrastructure and amenities for anchor tenants and key institutions
Develop a range of commercial centers that complements the city’s historic downtown
Create unique gateways and districts in Ridgefield Junction that reflect community character
Promote opportunities for live/work lifestyles
Increase and diversify the City’s tax base by attracting new development and greater employment
EXISTING CONDITIONS
This chapter presents a sophisticated understand-
ing of the Junction, Ridgefield’s residents and the
city’s economy, as well as the greater region in
which it participates socially, economically and eco-
logically. It includes an assessment of planning con-
siderations, such as land use and infrastructure, in
relation to market conditions for future residential
and industry development in the Ridgefield Junc-
tion. Based on this analysis, the chapter concludes
with a summary of implications for subarea plan-
ning by major land use type.
20 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
FIGURE 3. Current Land Use, 2014
Source: Clark County, 2015
DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS AND LAND USE
The Ridgefield Junction subarea encompasses approximately
1,400 acres and is currently mostly undeveloped, with agri-
cultural uses dominating in the east. Figure 3 illustrates the
current land use by parcel in the Junction. Due to the large
amount of agricultural land, it is mostly vacant. Retail uses
are located along Pioneer Street and industrial uses are clus-
tered in the southern section of the subarea. Site photos in
Figure 4 show the rural, aesthetically appealing character of
Ridgefield as well as the range and quality of development,
particularly the high-quality industrial buildings and roads.
PLANNING OVERVIEW
Ridgefield’s land use, development regulations and physical
features, such as rolling hills and wetlands, are essential el-
ements to consider when envisioning future development
in Ridgefield Junction. This section presents an overview
of key factors that influenced development of the subarea’s
concept plan.
21Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
FIGURE 4. Ridgefield Junction site photos, June 2015
Source: CAI, 2015
22 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
FIGURE 5. Key Properties and Land Use Types, 2015
Source: Clark County, 2015; City of Ridgefield, CAI, 2015
The following section provides a detailed breakdown of the
existing regulatory and zoning environment in the Junction
study area as well as Comprehensive Plan policy language
regarding land uses applicable to the subarea. This includes
an overview of critical areas and developable lands as en-
vironmental constraints impact the type and intensity of
development that can occur. Figure 5 maps the Junction’s
current land use types as well as the locations of key prop-
erties in the subarea, owned by PeaceHealth, Clark College
and the Port of Ridgefield. Selected development standards
for zoning in the Junction are presented in Figure 6.
ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
Comprehensive Plan Policy
The City of Ridgefield’s 2013 Comprehensive Plan broadly
supports the City’s vision for the Junction, anticipating that
the recent improvements to the Interstate 5 interchange at
Pioneer Street “will facilitate extensive employment growth
in the immediate vicinity and land to the north and south
of the interchange.” The Comprehensive Plan identifies and
describes the objectives of the following land use types in
the Junction:
•General Commercial (GC) – provide for business and
commercial activities to meet local and regional demand
•Neighborhood Commercial (NC) – create opportunities
for low-intensity business service uses to serve proxi-
mate residential neighborhoods
•Office Park/Business Park (OP) – provide for business
and office uses serving regional market areas with sig-
nificant employment opportunities supported by limit-
ed commercial uses
23Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
Employment Districts
The vast majority of the Junction’s zoning falls within
Ridgefield’s Employment Districts designation, which are
the industrial and office zones. The City has identified these
as important regional employment resources, with limita-
tions on retail, commercial and residential development
(RDC 18.240).
Permitted uses in these two zones are:
•Industrial District (IND) – light manufacturing and pro-
cessing, wholesale trade and warehousing, research and
corporate offices and supporting activities; retail that
serves the general public and similar uses with high
parking demands are expressly prohibited
•Office District (OFF) – similar to the Industrial District,
with the same prohibition on retail; differs in that it has
a greater emphasis on employment-intensive uses and
restrictions on businesses with high nuisance factors
Commercial Districts
Following the two Employment District zones, commercial
zoning is the most prevalent in the Junction. Most of this
falls into regional business zoning immediately to the east
of I-5 and the Pioneer Street corridor leading to downtown.
A much smaller section of community and neighborhood
business is located at the far eastern portion of the subarea.
Permitted uses in these three zones are:
•Regional Business (CRB) – mix of business and office
uses that serve regional markets and offer significant
employment opportunities; zones require access to ma-
jor transportation corridors, allow for taller buildings
and exclude residential uses
•Community Business (CCB) – various business uses, in-
cluding retail and office, that cater to local and regional
markets; also allows limited residential in mixed-use
developments
•Neighborhood Business (CNB) – low-intensity neigh-
borhood serving office, business, retail and service uses
located on or near arterial streets; also allows limited
residential development
Employment Mixed Use Overlay
The City also offers the option of creating a master planned
mixed use site through the EMUO. The intent is to create a
combination of compatible uses, including light industrial,
service, office, retail and residential, in specific areas within
the IND and OFF zones to increase employment opportuni-
ties. This option makes possible retail and residential uses
that would otherwise be prohibited by underlying zoning.
Those seeking an EMUO designation are required to meet
certain provisions, as described in RDC 18.240.110. Selected
requirements for developing a master plan for EMUO con-
sideration are:
•Minimum of 40 gross acres under ownership or control
of applicant
•Multimodal circulation plan
•Noncontiguous parcels are allowed as long as they are
40 gross acres or larger and within a mile of other areas
within the master plan
•One residential unit is permitted for every net devel-
opable acre in the master plan site unless the units are
provided above employment uses, in which case an ad-
ditional unit per net developable acre is allowed
•Minimum average residential density must be 10 units
per net developable acre within the master plan site,
with a maximum of 16 units per net developable acre
•Maximum of 20% of net developable acres can be dedi-
cated to commercial uses
Additionally, the City has identified five possible zones with-
in an EMUO – destination retail/high impact commercial,
low impact commercial, office, industrial and residential
– all of which have associated permitted/conditional uses
and development standards. Multifamily housing with com-
mercial uses on the ground floor are either a permitted or
conditional use in all zones. EMUO development standards
are presented in Figure 7.
•Light Industrial (ML) – provide for industrial and man-
ufacturing uses that create significant regional employ-
ment opportunities
•Public Facilities (PF) – provide for essential public uses
such as education, medical and infrastructure facilities
necessary to serve city or regional residents
•Park/Open Space (P/OS) – preserve open land for recre-
ational use and environmental protection
The plan also mentions special overlay districts, including
the Employment Mixed Use Overlay (EMUO), which is
intended to “provide a mix of compatible light industrial,
services, office, retail and residential uses.”
24 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
Source: City of Ridgefield, 2015
FIGURE 6. Selected Ridgefield Zoning and Development Standards, 2015
FIGURE 7. Employment Mixed Use Overlay Development Standards, 2015
Source: City of Ridgefield, 2015
view corridors, creation of pedestrian pathways and
trails, signage and other related design elements should
be of a consistent, high quality, thematic design.
•Ensure the site planning, architectural, landscape ar-
chitectural and civil engineering design is compatible
with the natural landscape character of the Ridgefield
vicinity.
•Encourage outdoor recreation and social interaction
among Union Ridge users through the development of
the Union Ridge open space and pedestrian trail system.
•Allow the assigned retail spaces within Union Ridge to
be easily accessed by auto and to provide a pedestri-
an-oriented, urban style experience when possible.
The master plan is divided into two different sections – one
at the northwest corner of the Pioneer and I-5 interchange
and the other, much larger area, in the southeastern portion
of the Ridgefield Junction subarea. The northwest section
is mostly planned for destination retail uses, whereas the
larger area in the southeast is mainly planned for office/
industrial uses with some destination retail to the west, near
I-5.
Union Ridge Master Plan
The Union Ridge Master Plan, approved in 2006, is currently
Ridgefield’s only development with an EMUO. Union Ridge
has its own development standards and design guidelines as
well as an Architectural Review Committee, separate from
the City’s approval process, to evaluate design proposals.
These standards and guidelines are intended to provide the
following:
•Create a high-quality business community with a sense
of place relating to the Ridgefield Junction area by set-
ting a theme of landscape materials and forms, signage
detailing and mixed-use amenities.
•Consistency of landscaping with the overall concept
design for Union Ridge while promoting ease of pedes-
trian movement and vehicular circulation both within
the individual parcels and to street and trail systems.
•Development of visual continuity in the massing and
proportions of buildings as well as continuity with the
scale, color, size and bulk of adjacent buildings and
landscaping.
•Conformance of architectural design with the site de-
velopment concept in terms of horizontal and vertical
alignment. Perimeter site presentation, relationship to
Use Max Height (ft)Max. Impervious Residential Density
Setbacks (ft)Landscape Buffer (ft)
Front (Min)Front (Max)Side/Rear (Min)Abuts diff. zone Abuts same zone
Destination Retail 60 85%N/A 20 0 0 - 20 20 10
Low Impact Commercial 60 85%N/A 0 10 0 - 20 0 - 10 10
Office 60 100%N/A 0 - 20 100 0 - 20 0 - 10 10
Industrial 60 85%N/A 20 100 0 - 20 20 10
Residential 60 100%16 du/ac 0 - 10 100 0 - 20 10 10
Zone Max Height (ft)Max. Impervious
Max. Residential Density
Setbacks (ft)
Front Side/Rear (OFF/IND)Side/Rear (residential)Side/Rear (other)Side/Rear (ROW)
Office (OFF)65 90%16 du/ac*10 0 20 10 10
Industrial (IND)65 85%NP 10 0 20 15 10
Regional Business (CRB)65†90%NP 0 - 10 0 20 0 0
Community Business (CCB)60 85%16 du/ac*0 - 10 0 20 0 0
Neighborhood Business (CNB)35 85%16 du/ac*0 - 10 0 10 0 0
Public Facilities (PF)35 N/A NP 20 20 20 20 20
Parks/Open Space (P/OS)N/A N/A NP 10 10 10 10 10
*In the CNB, CCB, and OFF zones, residential uses are allowed conditionally. Residential uses are limited to upper stories and shall achieve aminimum density of 8 dwelling units per acre and a maximum density of 16 dwelling units per acre.†Hospital uses max. height = 180 ftNP = not permitted
25Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
Source: Clark County VBLM, 2014
Source: Clark County, 2015
Source: Clark County VBLM, 2014; CAI, 2015
DEVELOPABLE LANDS
Clark County’s Vacant Buildable Lands Model (VBLM) uses
generalized zoning and critical areas information to pro-
vide an estimate of potential development capacity for its
Urban Growth Areas. Figure 8 contains Ridgefield’s total
development capacity for the three major zoning types
generated through the 2014 model assumptions. Due to the
large amount of employment-focused zoning in the subarea,
the Junction is critical in terms of job capacity for the city,
accounting for over 80% of Ridgefield’s total employment
capacity (Figures 9 and 10).
Land Use Developable Net Acres Housing Units / Jobs
Residential 1,046 7,257 units
Commercial 434 8,689 jobs
Industrial 356 3,206 jobs
Employment Subtotals 790 11,895 jobs
FIGURE 8. Current Developable Land Capacity (City
and UGA), City of Ridgefield, 2014
Land Status/Designation Developable Net Acres Employment Capacity
Built w/Critical Areas 0.0 0
Built 0.0 0
Commercial Vacant w/Critical Areas 181.4 3,630
Commercial Vacant 148.7 2,970
Industrial Vacant w/Critical Areas 131.2 1,180
Industrial Vacant 198.6 1,790
Residential Vacant 0.1 0
Residential Vacant w/Critical Areas 1.1 0
Total 661 9,570
FIGURE 9. Current Developable Land Capacity Estimate, Ridgefield Junction, 2015 (based on 2014 model)
FIGURE 10. Ridgefield Junction Vacant and Buildable Lands, 2015
26 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
Future development in Ridgefield Junction will be impacted
by critical areas and their associated buffers, which, togeth-
er, are estimated to impact around 788 acres of the subarea,
based on Clark County data. The following sections discuss
the different types of critical areas in greater detail.
FIGURE 11. Ridgefield Junction Habitat Areas, 2015
Source: Clark County, 2015; MIG|SvR, 2015
Ridgefield Junction - Habitat Areas
Junction Study Area
Road
Stream
Water Body
Bird Migratory Area
Water Body Rating
Fish Bearing
Non-Fish Bearing
Wetland Type
Open Water
Type A
Type B
Forested Wetland
¯0 0.25 0.50.125 Miles
Critical Slopes
The topography of the subarea varies from 0-40% slopes.
Figure 12 shows the majority of the topography falls in the
5-10% slope range, and the steeper slopes near the waterway
corridors.
Soil Type
According to the Soil Survey Geographic Database (SSURGO),
the predominant hydrologic soil group in the area is classi-
fied as type C-Sandy Clay Loam, with an infiltration rate of
0.05 to 0.15 in/hr. This low infiltration rate is present in flat
marsh lands where agriculture is the predominant land use.
In areas where water bodies are present, there tends to be
soil type D-Clay Silty Loam, which has an infiltration rate
of 0 to 0.05 in/hr, allowing water to stay in low points and
create ponds for agricultural or ecological functions. Figure
13 shows an approximated soil survey from SSURGO GIS.
CRITICAL AREAS
Habitat Areas
Waterways and waterfowl habitat are the major type of
critical areas in the subarea which are shown in Figure 11.
The predominant buffers are associated with the Washing-
ton Department of Fish and Wildlife’s identified seasonal
bird migratory pattern areas in the agricultural marshlands,
and these areas are required to be protected or mitigated, as
appropriate. Various wetlands are scattered throughout the
area in the low points and near the waterways. Depending
on the wetland type, different buffer widths and mitigation
schemes are used for proposed development in the area.
27Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
FIGURE 12. Ridgefield Junction Critical Slopes, 2015
Source: Clark County, 2015; MIG|SvR, 2015
Ridgefield Junction - Soil Groups
Junction Study Area
Road
Stream
Water Body
Hydrologic Soil Infiltration Rates
A = > 0.3 in/hr
B = 0.15 - 0.3 in/hr
C = 0.05 - 0.15 in/hr
D = 0 - 0.05 in/hr
¯0 0.25 0.50.125 Miles
Source: Clark County, 2015; MIG|SvR, 2015
FIGURE 13. Ridgefield Junction Soil Types, 2015 290260 2702402
2
0
250 230190 180
170280210
300
20016
0
14
0
150130 280230200
180
22
0
280200270
2
6
0
240290240210
260
230230
280220 280
26
0
250
280
2
5
0 250290260
270260
270280290 280240270
270
23
0
200 250240250250
290
240 220
2
3
0
270
260
270220270260280260
280
300260
290250
2
50
270
280
280
280230240280
240
130
240
290
250250
280230240
24
0 290
250
25
0
25027026
0
260270270
220
260260260290
210
250
24
0
28
0
270260
210170 260270
250
300
240
250
280
270260
300270
270
280
26026023
0
260
280
260260240 280290
250230280
210
230
230230
270
270270 280
220230270 230260200230300250
26
0
280
26
0 280240260 3
0
0
240280
270280270
27022027
0
300
290
230 28030
0 270260250270
290280280
250
280
24021021025
0
250
180270
230
23027
0 220290250
200
270
2
5
0
230 260220
280240230 270260190
27
0
2
7
0
260230260260
260
270300
260
250
280
220
22024
0 2702802602702802702
5
0
270200
250250
270 30027
0
270
270
240190 240280
270
220 27024026
0
250280230
260
260300240250260
160 250220260240 290270
220
2
5
0
25
0 240280290
230
270260270270240210
280260
240260 290260240 270250
2
5
0
260280230 2502
3
0
270
280260260
240
260
270270270
280
260
280270260 280280260260
300
2
5
0 260240280230
270230
2
5
0
270190260250
250240270280
23
0
2
80
260270240
230
28
0
300250
230 220220
2702
70
25
0
220230250270
27028
0
29
0
230
26
0
230
2
1
0 290
240
270 270
260 28029027025025
0
280270260 290
250
260
240270
280
280
260
260
280
260 27023
0
2
80
260280
3
0
0
2802502
6
0
2502902
6
0
270
270
24
0
260
250
25
0
270
2
5
0
280
270
280
2202
8
0
270260
250
260
280
28
0
23
0 2702402
7
0
260250260260
240
260
240
21
0
250 230260
290
26
0
210
270
240280230270
2
7
0
280250
280250
270
260 280270300280250 280270
25
0 27027
0
260
26
0270
260280250
260 290270
26
0
270280
290 2902602
9
0
260260
250280 280220260280270
21
0
220260240
24
0
250260
260
2
6
0
28
0250270270250230260
260290270270230
270
250
26
0
25
0260
28025
0
280
200 280290 280270240 270270
250260 280300260290260210260220 280270
260
250
25
0
280
270260
260
24
0
280270
28
0
250
270260270270270
25
0
240
260 29027028
0 2902
4
0 300280250260
240260270280240230
2
7
0
260 270250
260
270
240
290260
230230
280
28
0 280260 23027
0
270290
270240260280
240260280260
270
28
0
2
7
0250
2502
90
270
290
300
290
270
2
5
0
22
0
200
270
280
29
0
260260
270
26
0
250
280250
260
260270250
260 290250250
2
7
0
300290
270
280270230
2
8
02602
2
0
270270260
25
0
280280270
290
2
7
0
27027
0270
260
270 290240260230240
280260
260
27024
0 230280
28027
0
250270280Ridgefield Junction - Critical Slopes
Junction Study Area
Road
Stream
Water Body
10 Ft Contour
SLOPES
40 - 100%
25 - 40%
15 - 25%
10 - 15%
5 - 10%
0 - 5%
¯0 0.25 0.50.125 Miles
28 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
The following is a brief overview of Ridgefield’s existing util-
ities and infrastructure, along with related planned capital
investment projects from the City’s capital facilities plans.
Water
Clark County relies on groundwater aquifers as its primary
source of potable and non-potable water. Washington State
Law requires that all water service providers must work
with the Department of Ecology to obtain a water right per-
mit before creating any new water withdrawals from the
limited groundwater resources. For Ridgefield Junction, the
City of Ridgefield is the water service provider for incor-
porated areas and Clark Public Utilities for unincorporated
areas.
Ridgefield has four wells that serve the entire city at a pump-
ing capacity of 1,165 gallons per minute. However, current
development is reaching the limits of existing source capac-
ity. Ridgefield has an intertie agreement with Clark Public
Utilities for an additional 1,875 gpm from regional water
resources during peak demand. A new well is currently be-
ing installed to address the current development demand,
UTILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
Source: City of Ridgefield Comprehensive Plan, 2013
FIGURE 15. Current and Proposed Water Facilities, 2013
but additional wells and treatment facilities will be needed
to accommodate future development.
Fireflow is distributed throughout the Junction area by fire
hydrants off of the water service mains. A one million gallon
reservoir is in construction (as of July 2015) east of I-5 to
aid in future development fireflow capacity. Figures 15 and
16 present Ridgefield’s current and planned investments in
water facilities.
Capital Facility Project Type Number of Projects Cost (mil, 2010 $)Funding Sources
Reservoirs and
Booster Stations
1 $1.82
Distribution and
Transmission
8 $1.84
Source of Supply 4 $6.76
Total 13 $10.42 Water rates,
connection fees
FIGURE 14. Ridgefield Water Service Capital Facilities
Plans Summary 2010-2016
Source: City of Ridgefield Comprehensive Plan, updated 2013
29Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
Wastewater
The City of Ridgefield uses a centralized sewer system in ad-
dition to septic systems. All sewer services are provided by
the Clark Regional Wastewater District (CRWWD). Existing
infrastructure includes gravity pipelines with force mains,
which direct sewage to Ridgefield Wastewater Treatment
Plant (WWTP). The capacity of Ridgefield WWTP is at 0.7
million gallons per day, but with future growth, additional
sewage will be directed to Salmon Creek WWTP via the Dis-
covery Corridor Wastewater Transmission System (DCWTS).
Phase 1 of the DCWTS will be online in early 2016 according
to CRWWD, see Figure 18 for the different phases of the
DCWTS. In the subarea, the DCWTS passes through the west
side of the Junction and connects to the I-5 alignment at S
6th Road continuing south toward the Salmon Creek WWTP
(Figure 17).
Currently, much of the Junction residential area uses septic
systems. Septic systems are vulnerable to failure that can
cause contamination of surface waters and groundwater.
The City plans to eliminate septic systems with the new
installation of the DCTL, and use the Ridgefield WWTP and
Salmon Creek WWTP for future development.
FIGURE 16. Discovery Corridor Wastewater Transmission System Location, Ridgefield Junction, 2015
Source: Clark Regional Wastewater District, 2015
FIGURE 17. Discovery Corridor Wastewater
Transmission System Project Phasing, 2015
Source: Clark Regional Wastewater District, 2015
30 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
Stormwater
The City of Ridgefield has adopted the Stormwater Man-
agement Manual for the Puget Sound Basin and the 2005
Department of Ecology’s Western Washington Stormwater
Management Manual as its stormwater management guide
for all development. In 2008, the City of Ridgefield hired
Gray and Osborne Engineers to develop a Comprehensive
Stormwater Management Plan. In the plan, there is a map
of current stormwater infrastructure, drainage basins and
existing and potential problems throughout the City. This
plan also provided recommendations for the City’s Storm-
water Capital Improvement Plan. All of the recommended
projects addressed drainage problems in the central core of
Ridgefield, near downtown. The City intends to update the
2008 plan in 2016. The City primarily uses a stormwater
conveyance system that consists of a combination of open
ditches, hard piped runs, culverts and sheet flow. With pro-
jected urban growth, the City will need to meet WA De-
partment of Ecology water quality requirements to protect
natural systems by using green stormwater strategies such
as infiltration onsite and/or flow control structures.
The topography of the Junction creates different drainage
basins, each managed by different stormwater mitigation
approaches. Figure 19 shows the subarea’s drainage basins.
The western portion of the Junction discharges to Lake Riv-
er. The eastern portion discharges to Gee Creek and then
both basins ultimately discharge to the Columbia River.
Proper stormwater management protects properties from
flood damage and groundwater surcharge, promotes the
viability of aquatic life.
FIGURE 18. Stormwater Regional Basins, Ridgefield Junction, 2008
Source: Gray & Osborne, 2008
31Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
TRANSPORTATION
Motorized
Highways in and around Ridgefield Junction are main-
tained by Washington State Department of Transportation
including I-5 and Pioneer Street/SR-501. Ridgefield’s local
roads are maintained by Clark County. Programming and
planning is conducted by Southwest Washington Regional
Transportation Council, and rail freight is maintained by the
Port of Ridgefield. Figure 20 shows Ridgefield’s most recent
functional road classifications and key projects from the
Comprehensive Plan. The main arterial off of I-5 that leads
to historical downtown Ridgefield is Pioneer Street, which
has a high average daily traffic loading of about 20,000 east
of 45th Avenue. The Comprehensive Plan indicates that in
order to alleviate congestion caused by future population
growth, and provide a safer route for non-motorized trans-
portation modes, more east-west route alternatives should
be established through Ridgefield Junction.
The City has street design standards for the new roads illus-
trated in City of Ridgefield Engineering Standards, Chapter
3—Streets (updated in 2008). For new roads, the right-of-
way widths range from 48’ (residential road) to 100’ (major
arterial).
Non-Motorized
Currently, due to Ridgefield Junction’s largely rural charac-
ter, there is minimal presence of sidewalks and bike lanes,
with the exception of new development in Union Ridge
South and the industrial area southwest of I-5.
Source: City of Ridgefield Comprehensive Plan, 2013
FIGURE 19. Functional Road Classifications and Key Projects, 2010
32 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
Source: City of Ridgefield Parks & Recreation Comprehensive Plan, 2014
FIGURE 20. Proposed Trail System Plan Map, 2014
TRAILS, PARKS AND OPEN SPACE
¹º
¹º
¹º§¨¦5
§¨¦5
Flume Creek (Clark Co)
NP-6
CP-5
ABRAMS PARK
HAYDEN PARK
LARK
OVERLOOK PARK
DAVIS PARK
CROW'S NEST
ROSE HOMESTEAD PARK
COLUMBIA HILLS
COYOTE CREST
COMMUNITY PARK
MARSH PARK
EAGLE'S VIEW
COLUMBIA HILLS OPEN SPACE PARKCANYON RIDGE #1 (Unnamed)
GOLDFINCH PARK
CEDAR RIDGE / HORN FAMILY
I-5
S
B
I-5
N
B
CARTY
289TH
5TH 10THPIONEER
HI
L
L
HUR
S
T
279TH
MAIN65TH45TH15TH
TIMM
229TH
HERON 31ST3RDROYLE
11TH
259TH
TOUR ROUTE
234TH
6TH
DOLAN20TH
24TH
HALL
P
L
A
C
E
280TH
35TH40THMILL
SEVIER 78TH8TH 56TH1ST
249TH50TH
4TH9TH253RD
DIVISION
REFUGE
51STUNION
R
I
D
G
E2ND
MAPLE C
R
E
ST
EAST
W
E
S
T 32NDSMYTHE
85THREIMAN246TH74TH 14THLARK
OAK 21ST67THMAPLE
29THFALCON
43RDDUSKY
57
T
H
19
TH
224T
H23RD25TH7TH 16THRAI
N
B
O
W
EC
K
L
U
N
D
CORNET
T
239TH77TH61ST287TH
290TH
34THHALL
ME
U
L
L
E
R55TH 18TH
33RD
TAV
E
R
N
E
R
17THRAILROADELM
235TH
ASH 38THGREAT
B
L
U
E66TH
22ND
30TH47THTIT
A
N
COOK
SHOBERTSIMONS
277TH
OSPREY
26TH44THONTO
I
-
5
NB
256TH
DEPOT
RAVEN
39THCEMETERY 41ST13
TH
ALLEN CREEK
236THHELENS
VIEWNISQUALLY36THABRA
M
S
P
A
R
K
OLD PIONEER BERTSINGER
NATU
R
E
V
I
E
W
CORNELL
PH
O
E
B
E12TH KAREN
SUNSET NORTHRIDGEPI
O
N
E
E
R
S
T
EN
T
E
R
T
O
I
-
5
N
B
240TH
I-5
SB
EX
IT
TO
GEE
C
R
E
EK
RA
WHI
S
P
E
R
I
N
G
W
I
N
D
S
GEE
C
R
E
E
K
R
E
S
T
A
R
E
AGEE CREEK
PI
O
N
E
E
R
S
T
E
N
T
E
R
T
O
I
-
5
S
B
HIGHLAND
2ND
19TH 1ST
9TH
19TH
2ND
5TH
30TH16TH8TH
35TH21ST31ST13TH
8TH 2ND8TH7TH
10TH20TH35TH20TH10TH
2ND
16TH
1ST
9TH
31ST
236TH
36TH1ST7TH
1ST
15TH 30TH289TH
51ST18THRAILROAD11TH253RD4TH7TH14TH4TH
2ND16TH9TH 1ST23RD
229TH31ST14TH
3RD
9TH
5TH
5TH
1ST
3RD
5TH3RD11TH31STMAPLE 11TH289TH
2ND
38THTOUR ROUTE9TH15TH10TH
23RD
9TH
1ST17TH 6TH8TH
5TH
234TH 20TH51ST15TH10TH
9TH
10TH
32ND74TH10TH
20TH6TH18TH
17TH
6TH8TH 3RD 5TH1ST 19TH1ST
16TH
15TH5TH5TH
24TH7TH11TH
11TH9TH
20TH21STRAILROAD Legend
Major Park Devel. Areas
Potential COM Park Areas
Potential NH Park Areas
1/4-mi Walkshed to Park
1/2-mi Walkshed to Park
City Park
City Natural Area
HOA Parks
Other Parks
Private Open Space Tracts
Ridgefield Parcels
Other Public Lands
Flume Creek (Clark Co)
Cemetery
¹ºSchool Sites
School Parcels
Port of Ridgefield Parcels
Critical Lands
taxlots
zoning
Commercial
Industrial
Roads
Railroad
Water E
RIDGEFIELD
WILDLIFENATIONAL
REFUGE
Ridgefield Parks & Recreation Comprehensive Plan
Proposed Park System Plan Map
0 0.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles
D
E
H K
F
J G
B
A
N
L
O
P
C
I
M
There are no trails nor parks currently in the Junction area.
There are a few parcels in the southeast part of the Junction
that are classified open space, though they are being used
for stormwater management. The City of Ridgefield’s Parks
& Recreation Comprehensive Plan (2014) identified a level of
service standards for community parks, neighborhood parks,
trails, greenways and trails and other specialized recreational
facilities. A 6-year Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) was proposed
to aid in the anticipated population growth and shows a $30.7
million investment in parks and trails, prioritized based on
community feedback. Planned near-term investments in or
near the Junction will be for the Commerce Center Loop
Trail (T-17), Allen Creek Trail (T-13) and McCormick Creek
Trail (T-20). Efforts will involve securing trail access rights
and design and construction for the Commerce Center Loop
Trail. Only one park is proposed for the Junction, which has
not been selected to receive any funding in the CFP. The City
will rely on Park Impact Fees, Real Estate Excise Tax and
general funds to finance these individual programs. Figures
21 and 22 show the Parks Plan’s proposed trail corridors and
parks, respectively.
FIGURE 21. Proposed Park System Plan Map, 2014
33Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
POPULATION, HOUSING AND EMPLOYMENT GROWTH
Ridgefield is forecasted to experience substantial growth
within the next 20 years, gaining more than 19,100 people
(Figure 23). Figure 24 shows how housing growth in recent
years has jumped substantially. This growth is expected to
continue as development increases to keep pace with de-
mand. Compared to other communities in the region and
Clark County, housing in Ridgefield is dominated by single
family dwellings with very few multifamily units (Figure
25). Current development continues to be primarily single
family detached housing, though the city is starting to see
some multifamily development in the form of townhomes.
As the number of residents increases, the City also hopes
to generate more opportunities for employment locally and
set a target of 1 local job for every 1.2 people in its 2013
Comprehensive Plan.
MARKET OVERVIEW
Market considerations, like regional trends in employment
and real estate, influence the type and amount of develop-
ment that is possible for the Junction over the next 20 years.
This section provides a snapshot of key indicators regionally
and locally that were used to inform the subarea’s concep-
tual design.
FIGURE 22. Ridgefield Population Growth, 2000 - 2020
FIGURE 23. Housing Growth, City of Ridgefield, 1980-
2014
Source: OFM, 2015
Source: City of Ridgefield, 2015
FIGURE 24. Housing Mix, 2013
Source: US Census ACS 5-year estimates, 2013
96%89%91%
67%72%
1%10%5%
25%23%
3%1%4%8%5%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Ridgefield Camas La Center Woodland Clark County
Unit Type (%)
Multifamily
Other
Single Family
1,062 6,400
25,523
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030
1980-2014 CAGR5.2%
2015-35 CAGR
7.2%
Population
403
781
2,138
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
1980 1988 1996 2004 2012
Housing Units
2004-14 CAGR10.3%
34 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
DEMOGRAPHICS
The most recent data available show Ridgefield’s households
have higher incomes than its surrounding communities
and the county. Over half of Ridgefield’s households have
incomes greater than $75,000, with a large segment falling
into the $75,000 to $149,999 bracket (Figure 27). Though
Ridgefield has a large proportion of high-income house-
holds relative to the county and nearby cities, educational
attainment for its residents is similar to the county average
(Figure 28). This is likely due to the large share of residents
employed in the industrial sector (Figure 29), which typi-
cally does not require as much formal education as other
sectors, such as professional services.
FIGURE 25. Household Income Brackets, 2013
FIGURE 26. Educational Attainment, 2013
Source: US Census ACS 5-year estimates, 2013
Source: US Census ACS 5-year estimates, 2013
EMPLOYMENT
Figure 29 shows that most of Ridgefield residents are em-
ployed in either the industrial sectors, professional services
or education/health care, which together account for nearly
70% of residents’ employment. Workers in Ridgefield are
predominately employed in the industrial sector, with rela-
tively few in retail and services (Figure 30). As illustrated in
Figure 31, the vast majority of Ridgefield’s workforce works
outside the city, with almost half of its residents commuting
to jobs in Portland or Vancouver.
FIGURE 27. Employment by Industry for Ridgefield Residents, 2013
FIGURE 28. Employment by Industry for Ridgefield Workers, 2013
Source: LEHD, 2015
Source: LEHD, 2015
1%4%8%11%9%14%12%12%
17%19%
29%31%35%
43%35%
47%32%
40%
24%
29%
10%20%
6%5%9%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Ridgefield Camas La Center Woodland Clark County
HH Income Bracket (%)
More than $150,000
$75,000 to$149,999
$35,000$74,999
$15,000 to$34,999
Less than$15,000
23%24%27%
47%35%
32%23%29%
29%
29%
16%
12%
11%
10%
10%
28%40%33%
14%26%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Ridgefield Camas La Center Woodland Clark County
Educational Attainment (%)
Bachelor's degreeor higher
Associate's degree
Some college, nodegree
High school degree or less
24%
23%
22%
16%
8%7%
Industrial
Finance,Insurance, Real
Estate & Services
Education/HealthCare
Retail
Construction/Resource
Government
61%13%
9%
8%
7%2%
Industrial
Education/Health Care
Finance, Insurance, Real
Estate & Services
RetailConstruction/ResourceGovernment
35Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
FIGURE 29. Place of Work for Ridgefield Residents, 2011
Source: LEHD, 2015
36 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
INDUSTRIES
Figure 34 provides insight into Clark County’s areas of
sector specialization compared to Washington state. It also
includes average growth rates between 2004 and 2014, with
bubbles scaled by total employment. A location quotient of
1.0 indicates the county and state have the same level of spe-
cialization in a given sector. Across the county, Education &
Health Services is the largest and strongest employment sec-
FIGURE 30. Net Change Employment by Industry,
Clark County, 2005-2013 FIGURE 31. Employment by Industry for Clark County and Ridgefield Workers, 2013
Source: Washington Employment Security Department, 2014 Source: LEHD, 2015
tor, with a high location quotient and high 10-year growth.
In Clark County, industrial and FIRES (Finance, Insurance,
Real Estate, Services) jobs made up the majority of new,
post-recession employment from 2011 to 2013, as shown in
Figure 32. Compared to Clark County, Ridgefield has a high
concentration of industrial jobs (60%) and low concentra-
tions of office and retail jobs (Figure 33).
FIGURE 32. Industry Location Quotient, Clark County, 2004-2014
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014
-8,000
-6,000
-4,000
-2,000
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Employment Net Change
IndustrialFIRES
Education/HealthcareRetail
GovernmentConstruction/Resource
7%
61%
8%
9%
13%
2%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Construction/Resource
Industrial
Retail
FIRES
Education/Health Care
Government
Clark County WorkersRidgefieldWorkers
37Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
BUSINESSES
Figure 35 illustrates the approximate locations and the rela-
tive level of employment at those locations in the Junction.
Several distinct employment concentrations exist - smaller
businesses are clustered near the freeway access while sev-
eral larger employers occupy industrial parks in the study
area’s southwest and southeast.
Business in the Junction mostly fall into the services or in-
dustrial sectors, as shown in Figure 36. Together, wholesale
trade and manufacturing account for over 30% of all busi-
nesses in the Junction; these are also the subarea’s largest
employers. Figure 37 identifies some examples of the Junc-
tion’s current businesses by type.
FIGURE 33. Ridgefield Junction Business Concentrations, 2015
Source: Hoovers, 2015
FIGURE 34. Ridgefield Junction Business Mix, 2015
Source: Hoovers, 2015
FIGURE 35. Example Businesses, 2015
Source: Hoovers, 2015
19%
17%
13%12%
10%
10%
9%
5%4%ServicesWholesale TradeManufacturingRetail TradeEducation/Health CareConstruction/Resource
Accommodation & Food Services
FIRE
Government
Sector Examples
Services Solar Escape (Personal care services)North County Animal Hospital (Veterinary services)
Wholesale Trade
United Natural Foods, Inc. (Specialty food distrib.)Pacific Power Group (Industrial machinery/equip.)Dollar Tree Stores (Warehousing & distribution)
Manufacturing Elkhart Plastics, Inc. (Industrial plastics)Corwin Beverage Co. (Commercial beverages)Attbar Plastics (Boats)
38 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
REAL ESTATE CONDITIONS
The following data provide an overview of real estate con-
ditions related to commercial, industrial and multifamily
development in Ridgefield and Clark County. Deliveries,
absorption, lease rates and vacancy rates help to provide in-
sight into recent trends in demand for development types.
In general, low vacancy and high lease rates suggest high
demand, which has the potential for spurring increases in
deliveries and absorption.
Industrial
Prior to the recession, industrial deliveries in Ridgefield ac-
counted for most of the industrial development activity in
the county; post-recession, there has been a slight rebound
in both deliveries and absorption (Figures 38 and 40). Vacan-
cy rates have recovered to pre-recession levels (Figure 39),
and average lease rates remain relatively high, though lower
than the county average (Figure 41).
Commercial
Ridgefield has seen little commercial development since
2006, whereas the county has experienced moderate gains
(Figure 38). Office lease rates are slightly higher than county
average (Figure 45) and vacancy rates are at almost the coun-
ty level (Figure 44), after a marked increase in recent years.
Multifamily
In addition to industrial and commercial uses, the subarea is
an appropriate location for multifamily residential as a com-
plement to commercial development due its proximity to I-5
and the future Clark College campus. Also, increased retail
offerings and other amenities are likely to spur demand for
a greater variety of housing in Ridgefield. Single family uses,
excluding those already existing, are not recommended for
the subarea in order to maximize employment-generating
uses.
Clark County’s multifamily market is showing signs of high
demand, with increasing absorption (Figure 46) and increas-
ing rents (Figure 48). Multifamily deliveries countywide ap-
pear to have picked up since the economic recovery, though
Ridgefield has captured none of this development activity
thus far.
FIGURE 36. Industrial Deliveries, 2015
FIGURE 37. Industrial Vacancy Rates, 2015
FIGURE 38. Industrial Absorption, 2015
FIGURE 39. Industrial Lease Rates, 2015
Source: CoStar, 2015
39Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
FIGURE 40. Commercial Deliveries, 2015
FIGURE 41. Commercial Vacancy Rates, 2015
FIGURE 42. Commercial Absorption, 2015
FIGURE 43. Commercial Lease Rates, 2015
Source: CoStar, 2015
FIGURE 44. Multifamily Absorption, 2015
FIGURE 45. Multifamily Deliveries, 2015
FIGURE 46. Multifamily Rent, 2015
Source: CoStar, 2015
40 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
TRADE AREA AND RETAIL
Taxable retail sales are an important driver of municipal rev-
enues and also provide some indication of how competitive
a city is relative to others in terms of various types of retail.
Compared to Clark County and other nearby communities,
Ridgefield had strong taxable retail sales per capita in build-
ing material and garden equipment, miscellaneous stores
and furniture and home furnishings (Figure 49). Ridgefield’s
relatively weak sales per capita in food and beverage, health
and personal care and general retailers suggest the potential
for increasing the number of establishments in these catego-
ries, particularly as the city’s population grows.
$1
$7
$27
$78
$101
$142
$165
$186
$202
$296
$462
$678
$852
$1,210
$- $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 $3,500 $4,000
Accommodation
Performing Arts & Spectator Sports
Health & Personal Care
Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book & Music
Motor Vehicle & Parts
Clothing and Clothing Accessories
Food & Beverage
General Merchandise
Electronics & Appliance
Gasoline Stations
Furniture & Home Furnishings
Misc Store Retailers, Nonstore Retailers
Food Services & Drinking Places
Building Material & Garden Equipment
Taxable Retail Sales per Capita
Ridgefield
Camas
Woodland
Clark
Retail Type
FIGURE 47. Taxable Retail Sales per Capita, 2014
Source: Washington Department of Revenue, 2015
41Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
This section provides a brief summary of potential for dif-
ferent types of development in Ridgefield Junction based on
data presented in the planning and market overview.
POTENTIAL FOR INDUSTRIAL
•Strong fundamentals in the Clark County and Ridgefield
industrial markets suggest industrial uses represent a
real estate opportunity both regionally and locally
•Quality land is available in existing industrial centers
•High lease rates and low vacancy rates in Ridgefield,
when combined with few recent deliveries indicate
there may be development opportunities for industrial
property in Ridgefield
•Requiring high aesthetic and infrastructural standards
may increase the cost of development
POTENTIAL FOR OFFICE
•Decreasing vacancy rates and moderate rents imply the
office market is rebounding
•Quality of life may offer an incentive for the relocation
of companies
•Anchor institutions like PeaceHealth and Clark College
could, if located in Ridgefield, spur spin-off office devel-
opment and drive employment
•Long distances from traditional office centers isolate
would-be tenants
Market
Supported
Market
Opportunity
Challenging
Conditions
Land Use
Short Term
Outlook
Long Term
Outlook
INDUSTRIAL
Market
Supported
Market
Opportunity
Challenging
Conditions
Land Use
Short Term
Outlook
Long Term
Outlook
OFFICE
FIGURE 48. Summary of Industrial Development
Potential in Ridgefield
FIGURE 49. Summary of Office Development Potential
in Ridgefield
PLANNING IMPLICATIONS
42 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
Market
Supported
Market
Opportunity
Challenging
Conditions
Land Use
Short Term
Outlook
Long Term
Outlook
RETAIL
POTENTIAL FOR RETAIL
•Anticipated high population growth will increase de-
mand for retail and services and will drive the market
for retail space
•Ridgefield offers significant undeveloped land suitable
for retail with good vehicular access and visibility from
Interstate 5
•Available land near the interstate offers opportunity to
develop
•Specific retail segments show leakage in Ridgefield, in-
dicating unmet demand for retail locally
POTENTIAL FOR RESIDENTIAL
•Increasing lease rates and extremely low vacancy rates
suggest unmet demand
•In the long term, a Clark College campus could present
a captive market for multifamily
•Lease rates remain too low to justify urban models of
multifamily buildings; any multifamily development in
Ridgefield will be lower-density and offer surface park-
ing; low land prices offer little incentive for increased
density
•Suburban geography and market characteristics present
challenges to multifamily development
MULTIFAMILY
Land Use
Short Term
Outlook
Long Term
Outlook
Market
Supported
Market
Opportunity
Challenging
Conditions
FIGURE 50. Summary of Retail Development Potential
in Ridgefield
FIGURE 51. Summary of Residential Development Potential in Ridgefield
43Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
CONCEPT PLAN & IMPLEMENTATION
This chapter presents the sitewide design frame-
work for the subarea and details the regulatory
measures and design guidelines needed for each
of the five districts in order to achieve the commu-
nity vision for Ridgefield Junction. As each of the
districts has unique characteristics and constraints,
the extent of changes recommended varies great-
ly. This plan provides the City of Ridgefield with
multiple options for achieving the same goal; for
instance, a new zoning designation may be created
or an existing designation could instead be slightly
altered to allow for more flexibility, depending on
the preference of City staff. This section also con-
tains goals and policy language crafted to support
this subarea plan in the Comprehensive Plan.
44 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
DESIGN FRAMEWORK
The design framework outlines the structures that shape the
subarea’s design concept. These structures may include land
use, streets and infrastructure, networks of open spaces and
other components of the canvas upon which places are built.
Input from stakeholders and City staff, along with technical
analysis from the consultant team, were used to develop this
sitewide framework.
DISTRICTS
The Ridgefield Junction subarea represents a large portion of
the city - about 1,400 acres - and already has some distinc-
tive areas that created the opportunity to divide the study
area into five different districts (Figure 54).
Districts One and Five are currently characterized by indus-
trial uses and will likely continue to attract similar develop-
ment; whereas Districts Two and Three are better suited for
concentrations of retail and office development, particularly
if plans for the PeaceHealth and Clark College properties
move forward as envisioned. District Four, which is most
greatly impacted by critical areas (as identified by the Coun-
ty), is envisioned to have lower levels of development and
could continue to support local production and agricultural
activities.
The district design concepts arise from goals generated in
collaboration with City staff and stakeholders. As each dis-
trict is described in further detail later in this section, the
key considerations used to develop the plan and implemen-
tation strategy are highlighted, along with the associated
goals they address, which are symbolized by the following
icons.SUBAREA PLAN GOALS
Honor Ridgefield’s commitment to livability,
sustainability and design excellence in new
development
Provide critical infrastructure and amenities
for anchor tenants and key institutions
Develop a range of commercial centers that
complements the city’s historic downtown
Create unique gateways and districts in
Ridgefield Junction that reflect community
character
Promote opportunities for live/work lifestyles
Increase and diversify the City’s tax base
by attracting new development and greater
employment
45Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
FIGURE 52. Proposed Districts
Source: CAI, 2015
46 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
LAND USE ACTIVITIES
A large portion of Ridgefield is primarily residential, mak-
ing the concentration of employment-oriented land uses at
the Junction unique. The proposed land use concept for the
subarea (Figure 56) recognizes its critical role in creating
employment opportunities and endeavors to expand the op-
tions for businesses seeking to locate in Ridgefield.
No land use changes are recommended for Districts One
and Five, which are the subarea’s current industrial centers.
Both are functioning as envisioned and are attracting devel-
oper interest with the improving local economy.
District Two is a prime location for retail along the I-5 cor-
ridor and should serve as an attractive gateway to Ridgefield.
To support a major retail development, the land use for this
district is proposed to be entirely commercial, which would
still allow for some light industrial uses. The plan also sug-
gests providing the option of mixed-use residential develop-
ment in this district, allowing for a potential lifestyle center
with a residential component.
In District Three, PeaceHealth and Clark College could alter
the subarea significantly by acting as a catalyst for com-
plementary office and retail uses as well as some limited
multifamily residential uses, either as vertical or horizontal
mixed use. Neighborhood commercial uses will act as a buf-
fer for the existing residential subdivision in the district,
creating a transition from higher intensity commercial uses.
District Four will support a mix of uses associated with local
production activities, such as a variety of industrial activities
and urban farming. The intent of the proposed changes is to
increase the diversity of industrial development and poten-
tially create a regional tourism draw. Together, these land
uses offer developers the flexibility to respond to market de-
mand while also honoring Ridgefield’s intent to generate a
diverse range of employment opportunities in the Junction.
Based on these proposed land uses, the employment and res-
idential capacity were estimated using Clark County’s VBLM
methodology (Figure 55). Relative to its current capacity, the
proposed changes slightly reduce employment capacity and
greatly increase the Junction’s capacity for residential. As
most of the residential uses are envisioned to be in mixed
use developments, the model outputs likely underestimate
the Junction’s actual jobs capacity.
Source: Clark County VBLM, 2014; CAI, 2015
Land Status/Designation Developable Net Acres Housing Unit/Jobs
Commercial Vacant 85.0 2,014
Commercial Vacant w/Critical Areas 104.5 1,717
Industrial Vacant 147.0 1,515
Industrial Vacant w/Critical Areas 168.4 1,282
Residential Vacant 1.8 26
Residential Vacant w/Critical Areas 1.1 9
Commercial Mixed Use 53.5 1,071
Comm. Mixed Use w/Critical Areas 52.1 1,041
Residential Mixed Use 15.5 248
Resid. Mixed Use w/Critical Areas 10.5 167
Total Employment Uses 504.9 8,640 jobs
Total Residential Uses 134.4 450 units
FIGURE 53. Proposed Developable Land Capacity, Ridgefield Junction, 2015 (based on 2014 model)
Map2
_Jr=== J
=-I
0.5 mi
I
Legend
� Existing Roads
o"""'Proposed Roads
/ Recommended Connection
• General Commercial
Neighborhood Commercial
Commercial activities, including retail and office, that meet local and regional demand
• Office
Business and office uses with complementary retail uses
• Industrial
Industrial and manufacturing uses with limited retail uses
• Employment
Proposed zoning designation
• Parks/Open Space
Existing zoning designation
r
High Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Existing single·use residential and recommended areas with potential for higher density mixed-use residential uses
• Institution
Recognizes the unique needs of major institutional users and offers greater flexibility in allowable uses
Local Production
Allows urban farming as a complementary use with light industrial I retail uses and supports rural character
: : : Study Area Boundary
[:] City Boundary
Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 201547
48 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
FIGURE 55. Primary Developable Areas
PRIMARY DEVELOPABLE AREAS
Based on Clark County’s critical areas buffer identification
and the proposed road network, Figure 57 provides a rough
estimate of the subarea’s primary developable areas, indicat-
ed by cross hatching. Other areas are possibly developable,
though they may be constrained by environmental regula-
tions. The potential limitations on development due to crit-
ical areas influenced the envisioned intensity and types of
building that could occur in each of the districts.
Source: CAI, 2015
49 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
CIRCULATION
The intent of the proposed road network is to facilitate cir-
culation throughout the subarea (Figure 59). New roads in
Districts One and Four create more land appropriate for in-
dustrial development while those in District Three will im-
prove access for future major institutional users like Clark
College and PeaceHealth.
Roads labeled as “recommended connections” acknowledge
that some sites are subject to master plans, and exact road
alignments will be determined through those designs. The
City’s existing road classifications are assigned as appropriate
for the proposed roads to ensure compatibility with envi-
sioned land uses and associated traffic patterns. Additionally,
these classifications were assigned to provide bicyclists with
logical routes throughout the subarea (Figure 60).
FIGURE 57. Proposed Motorized Circulation and Road Classifications
Source: CAI, 2015
50Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
FIGURE 58. Proposed Bicycle Lanes
Source: CAI, 2015
Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
DISTRICT PLANS
The overall site plan (Figure 61) for Ridgefield Junction in-
corporates the core elements of the sitewide concept, in-
cluding circulation, land use, critical areas/open space and
developable areas.
The following section provides a detailed description of
each district within the subarea. The District Plans provide
an implementation-focused approach, presenting proposed
land use and urban design recommendations necessary to
achieve each district’s unique vision.
FIGURE 59. Ridgefield Junction Conceptual Site Plan
Each District Plan is organized as follows:
•District overview
•Vision
•Key considerations
•Current and proposed zoning
•Recommended development regulations and design
guidelines
Source: CAI, 2015
51
52 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONTEXT
The following are existing comprehensive plan policies that
are related to the Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan vision
and goals. These have been selected to illustrate the City’s
existing vision for the area and highlight the plan’s current
alignment with the City’s goals and policies. Also included
are recommendations that provide guidance for future com-
prehensive plan goals and policies. The section is organized
by major policy topics, similar to those found in Ridgefield’s
2013 Comprehensive Plan.
LAND USE
Land use designations and policies in large part define where
development occurs in the City of Ridgefield. They provide
policy level guidance on the intensity of uses and serve as
the foundation for zoning regulations. Below are land use
policies that currently relate to or support the Junction Sub-
area Plan.
LU1 Citywide land supplies
Establish land supplies and density allowances that are suf-
ficient but not excessive to accommodate adopted long-term
City of Ridgefield population, public facilities and employ-
ment forecast allocations.
LU2 Efficient development patterns
Encourage efficient development throughout Ridgefield.
Encourage higher density and more intense development in
areas that are more extensively served by facilities, particu-
larly by public schools, transportation and transit services.
LU5 Mixed-Use development
Facilitate development that combines multiple uses in sin-
gle buildings or integrated sites. Target areas for mixed use
development include the Lake River waterfront and the
central city core.
LU6 Neighborhood livability
Maintain and facilitate development of stable, multiuse
neighborhoods that contain a compatible mix of housing,
jobs, stores, public schools and open and public spaces in a
well-planned, safe pedestrian environment.
LU12 Complementary uses
Locate complementary land uses near to one another to
maximize opportunities for people to work or shop nearer
to where they live.
LU 14 Commercial development
Provide incentives and establish regulations that facilitate
revitalization of the Downtown and Waterfront and appro-
priately planned commercial development at the Pioneer
Street and Interstate 5 Interchange.
LU 17 Districts
Form neighborhood districts to help guide development of
unique and distinctive neighborhoods. Development in dis-
tricts 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.
Recommended Policy Language
•Support and strengthen existing and emerging land use
concentrations in the Junction Subarea through estab-
lishment of unique districts.
•Allow for a broader mix of uses in selected districts of
the Junction Subarea based on their compatibility with
surroundings uses and potential opportunities to com-
plement or support other established economic activi-
ties.
DISTRICT ONE
District One is located in the southwest portion of the subarea and houses industrial users such as Corwin Beverage, Pacific Trucking, Parr Lumber and Agave Denim. It encompasses roughly 280 acres and currently has a number of smaller vacant parcels suitable for development as well as a large undeveloped area at its southern end. Two new projects by different
developers are currently in the planning stages on parcels north and south of S 11th Street. This district is envisioned to continue serving as a light industrial hub, with complementary office uses and auto-oriented retail along the south side of Pioneer Street. Current development already meets the standards for the high-quality light industrial facilities envisioned, with robust
landscaping buffers, attractive signage and façade modulation. Future development should follow suit. New auto-oriented retail development at the southwest corner of S 56th Place and Pioneer should be compatible with Ridgefield’s vision for an aesthetically appealing, well-designed community. The proposed open space network is anticipated to be a variety of multimodal
trails following the existing waterways and wetlands connected by sidewalks and bicycle lanes. Additionally, LID techniques, such as bioswales, will treat stormwater onsite and help development comply with environmental regulations.
Vision
Proposed roads will increase circulation within the district, increasing the marketability of the land for industrial development, and are designed to facilitate freight movement. These will also connect with the mix of residential, neighborhood commercial,
office and industrial uses planned for the 45th and Pioneer subarea to the west. The concept plan incorporates recommended trails from the Parks Plan, creating the Commerce Center Loop by connecting open space corridors with roads. A spur off of the loop trail could potentially connect to the planned community park located in the 45th and Pioneer subarea.
DISTRICT TWO
District Two is located in the northwest portion of the subarea and is mostly vacant. Much of this district is vested and subject to the development regulations established in the Union Ridge Master Plan, with the exception of parcels to the west and southeast. This approximately 113-acre area is a prime location along the I-5 corridor and is envisioned to serve as a gateway development
to Ridgefield, creating an identity for the city from the interstate. The plan accommodates a range of development types in this district, allowing for uncertainty in the market; regardless, all should be required to comply with Ridgefield’s high standards. Road recommendations are limited in the district due to the preexisting master plan, though the concept plan anticipates a road
off the north end of the roundabout as well as some additional circulation to the west, connecting to residential and commercial uses in the 45th and Pioneer subarea. Recommended open space corridors in this district tie into the Allen Creek Trail, shown in the Parks Plan.
Vision
High-quality retail was identified by stakeholders as the preferred development type for this district. This could be a lifestyle
center, complete with a mix of retail, and office uses that has a more pedestrian-friendly environment and serve as a major regional destination. Or, the development could be solely auto-oriented retail of higher quality. Programmed open space along I-5 would function as both an amenity, buffer and landmark feature. Creating a unique park that complements the commercial
development and is visible from the interstate would be extremely attractive, helping to distinguish Ridgefield from other communities.
DISTRICT THREE
District Three is located centrally in the subarea, immediately east of the Interstate 5 interchange. Current uses include auto-
oriented and strip retail, an RV park and single-family residences. Clark College and PeaceHealth are two major land holders in this 380 acre area, and have the potential to transform not just the Junction, but Ridgefield as a whole. Both projects are expected to be phased in over a long timeframe, so changes will be gradual. Proposed roads in this district increase east-west movement
in the subarea; the east extension off the roundabout will be important for the future Clark College campus and provide additional access to Union Ridge South. The recommended north-south connections are intended to improve access for both institutions, particularly PeaceHealth, which is planning for a wide variety of activities on its property. Because these are both subject to master plans, the exact route and roadway width of these connections will need to be determined by PeaceHealth and Clark College. This district contains part of the McCormick Creek Trail, as recommended by the Parks & Recreation Comprehensive
Plan.
53 Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
Vision
If developed as envisioned, the institutions would create a new center of activity in the Junction that supports a robust mix of complementary uses, including retail, office and residential (both horizontal and vertical mixed use). Due to its prominent
location along I-5, development should be attractive and clearly communicate Ridgefield’s commitment to design excellence. The multimodal trail along McCormick Creek will serve as a central feature and should connect with other open space corridors west of I-5. It also creates a natural barrier that buffers the higher intensity commercial uses from the existing residential
subdivision in the eastern portion of the district.
DISTRICT FOUR
District Four is about 370 acres located in the northeast portion of the subarea and is primarily being used for agriculture along with some residential uses. The substantial portion of County-identified critical areas in this district suggest that the intensity of new development could be curtailed, though the true constraints can only be determined on a site-by-site basis. Utilities and infrastructure are also minimal in the district. Proposed roads for the district are relatively limited because of critical areas. The
intent of the new roads is to increase connectivity to key points in the subarea’s eastern area, including the institutional anchors, I-5 interchange and Union Ridge South. The McCormick Creek Trail ties this district to District Three, running by the futureClark College campus and through a mix of commercial and residential uses.
Vision
This area is envisioned as an area needed for employment and office campus type uses with open areas, parks, and pedestrian
trails. A major feature will be a pedestrian and bicycle path that follows McCormick Creek; this paved trail is envisioned to be naturalistic with small stop-offs at various points of interest. Creating a unique park that complements the employment development would be extremely attractive, helping to distinguish Ridgefield from other communities.
DISTRICT FIVE
District Five is located in the southeast portion of the subarea along Union Ridge Parkway and is subject to the Union Ridge Master Plan, Ridgefield’s only approved Employment Mixed Use Overlay (EMUO). This 300-acre district is currently home to a variety of light industrial and office uses, including warehousing and distribution as well as commercial condominiums developed by the Port of Ridgefield. The district still contains multiple vacant parcels suitable for large facilities and already has the road infrastructure in place to attract developers. Standards set by the EMUO regulations have thus far resulted in high-quality developments with attractive landscaping, screened parking and appropriate setbacks. This plan recommends few changes
to this district as current design review and regulatory processes appear to be functioning as intended. One key recommended road is an overpass to the west, which would connect Union Ridge with the other major industrial center in District One. Additionally, new roads to the north would improve access to the district and help accommodate the increased traffic resulting
from new development.
Vision
Similar to District One, current development already meets the standards for the high-quality light industrial development envisioned, with robust landscaping buffers, attractive signage and façade modulation. Given Union Ridge’s existing guidelines
and design review process, future development will be of similar quality. A recommended park along Union Ridge Parkway would be an added amenity for employees and business owners at Union Ridge, providing them with a convenient location for work breaks. Suggested open space corridors following existing stream channels, would feature restored stream habitat and a
multimodal trail that connects to other parts of the subarea. These corridors can also be used for installation of LID measures, such as bioswales, that will help new development comply with stormwater regulations.
54 Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Ridgefield is part of the Discovery Corridor, which spans the
I-5 corridor from La Center to Ridgefield’s southern end.
This regional effort to boost commercial and industrial ac-
tivity positions Ridgefield as a regional employment center.
Additionally, the Comprehensive Plan has a target ratio of at
least one local job for every 1.2 people.
EC-1 Discovery Corridor
Implement the Discovery Corridor concept along both sides
of Interstate 5.
EC3 Neighborhood Retail
Promote development of service oriented businesses to
serve residents and reduce the need to travel out of the
community.
EC-4 Public Revenue Enhancement
Promote development that encourages revenue generation
for public services.
EC-5 Employment Capacity
Restrict zone changes or legislative approvals which less-
en long term capacity for high wage employment unless
accompanied by other changes within the same annual re-
view cycle which would compensate for the lost capacity, or
unless the proposed change would promote the long term
economic health of the city.
Recommended Policy Language
•Encourage and facilitate a diversity of economic activ-
ities in the Ridgefield Junction Subarea that accommo-
dates industrial, retail, office and institutional users.
•Define the Junction Subarea by its unique districts and
encourage their development and growth as distinct
neighborhoods within the City.
•Encourage and facilitate major institutional users in
District Three of the Junction Subarea.
•Promote synergistic uses amongst districts and major
anchor developments that provide opportunities for lo-
cal entrepreneurship and education.
HOUSING
According to the 2013 Comprehensive Plan, there is “a need
to accommodate multifamily attached housing types at
higher densities to meet County policy requirements and
goals.” Limited housing opportunities are allowed in the
Junction Subarea. The plan calls for increasing opportuni-
ties for mixed use housing where appropriate, especially
in locations that complement potential catalyst users like
Clark College. The following policies were selected from the
Comprehensive Plan because they support implementation
of new housing types and locations.
HO1 Accommodate Growth
Provide for an adequate supply of housing meet the City’s
anticipated population growth. The City shall adopt policies
and regulations to meet the following objectives:
•New overall density target of six (6) units per net acre
•No more than seventy five percent (75%) of new houses
shall be of a single housing type
•A minimum density of four (4) units per net acre (10,890
sq. ft. average lot size) for single family dwellings in any
single development
HO 2 Multi-family Development
Encourage multifamily residential development in desig-
nated Medium Density Residential (MDR) areas. Designated
MDR areas shall be located within one half mile of commer-
cial or employment centers, and along existing or planned
transit corridors.
HO 4 Housing options
Maintain a continuous and adequate supply of residential
land to meet long range multiple family and single family
housing needs, as well as all economic segments, within the
RUGA. Urban residential development shall be preceded by
annexation. No single type of housing should comprise over
75% of new development.
Recommended Policy Language
•Encourage higher density housing types within new-
ly designated mixed use, commercial and office zones
within the Junction Subarea.
•Explore zoning regulations in mixed use zones in the
Junction Subarea that maintain commercial and institu-
tional uses as the primary economic activity while al-
lowing multifamily residential as a complementary use.
56 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
ENVIRONMENT
Below are policies related to the environment that currently
relate to or support the Junction Subarea Plan.
EN-1 Environmental protection
Protect, sustain, and provide for healthy and diverse eco-
systems.
EN-5 Habitat
Protect riparian areas, wetlands, and other fish and wildlife
habitat. Link fish and wildlife habitat areas to form contig-
uous networks. Support sustainable fish and wildlife popu-
lations.
EN-7 Water quality and quantity
Protect and enhance surface, stormwater and groundwater
quality. Ensure adequate water supplies and promote con-
servation of water resources.
EN-12 Density transfers
Encourage the use of density transfers from Open Space
(OS) lands to contiguous Low Density or MDR properties,
anywhere within the RUGA. Encourage residential density
transfers to preserve wetland resource areas.
Recommended Policy Language
•Protect existing environmentally sensitive areas in the
greenways.
•Provide greenspace corridors in low areas to encourage
ecological connectivity.
•Provide space for potential mitigation for the greenways.
•Discourage development in environmentally critical ar-
eas including steep slopes and wetland areas.
PUBLIC FACILITIES
Below are policies related to water, sewer and stormwater
that currently relate to or support the Junction Subarea Plan.
PF—Water (PF-W)
PF-W-1 Provide water service
Provide safe, clean, quality drinking water to every Ridge-
field home, business, public facility and industry. Discour-
age development and use of private drinking water wells.
Provide water pressures and volumes necessary to support
fire suppression hydrants and sprinkler systems. Ensure
that the infrastructure to support water service is in place
prior to development.
PF—Sewer (PF-S)
PF-S-1 Provide sewer service
Provide sewers and sewer service to every Ridgefield home,
business, public facility and industry. Encourage existing de-
velopment using septic systems to connect to public sewer
as soon as possible
PF—Stormwater (PF-ST)
PF-ST-1 Stormwater management
Manage stormwater to safely pass floodwaters, maintain
and improve water quality of receiving streams, lakes, and
wetlands, protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat, pro-
mote recreational opportunities, and enhance community
aesthetics.
PF-ST-2 New Construction
All new development shall be designed consistent with the
City’s long-range stormwater management plans and pro-
grams, and shall only occur consistent with the following
provisions:
•Off-site water quality and quantity impacts shall be con-
trolled through appropriate design
•The use of source control and treatment best manage-
ment practices shall be required
•The use of infiltration, with appropriate water quality
precautions, shall be the first consideration in stormwa-
ter management
•Stream channels and wetlands shall be protected
•Erosion and sediment controls for excavations, new de-
velopment and redevelopment projects shall be required
Recommended Policy Language
•New utility lines should be in coordination with other
projects so that the utilities can be placed in new road-
ways during construction.
•Discourage new residential water wells.
•Encourage the use of the Discovery Corridor Wastewa-
ter Transmission System for new development to con-
nect to for their wastewater system and to eliminate the
need for septic systems.
•Encourage or require placement of private onsite storm-
water facilities along the greenways. Stormwater miti-
gated onsite will protect and increase natural habitats,
minimize piped infrastructure, promote recharge to the
groundwater aquifers by infiltration, and it can be more
cost effective for the region.
•Discourage residential and industrial development in
the low areas to prevent localized flooding.
Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
TRANSPORTATION
Below are policies related to transportation that currently
relate to or support the Junction Subarea Plan.
TR-1 Transportation options
Develop and maintain an interconnected and overlapping
transportation system with excellent roadways for auto-
mobiles and freight, pedestrian walkways, bicycle facilities,
and transit service. Include support programs such as traffic
operations, transportation demand management, neighbor-
hood traffic management, and the regional trails program.
Work toward completing and sustaining individual compo-
nents and programs to ensure success of the entire system.
TR-5 Transportation circulation and system connec-
tivity
Develop a transportation grid that provides good connec-
tions to surrounding land uses and activity centers and al-
lows for multiple circulation routes to and from each loca-
tion. Close gaps and complete system connections through
the development and capital improvement processes.
TR-7 Livable streets
Design streets and sidewalks and manage vehicular traffic to
encourage livability, interaction, and sense of neighborhood
or district ownership in linkage with adjacent land uses.
TR-19 System design
Minimize traffic congestion and encourage public safety
in Ridgefield through the following programs and design
techniques:
•Require sidewalks for all new and infill development
unless the benefits of providing sidewalks are signifi-
cantly outweighed by the burden the sidewalk may
place upon critical areas.
•Plan for “grid” street patterns (rather than series of
dead-end streets), to facilitate emergency vehicle access,
avoid overloading arterial streets and encourage access
to local streets wherever possible.
TR-20 Pedestrian and bicycle facilities
Plan bicycle and pedestrian facilities that serve the purposes
of recreation and commuting through the following:
•Coordinate with Clark County in developing and imple-
menting bicycle and recreational trail plans and systems,
through public acquisitions, development exactions and
other appropriate means
•Provide bicycle lanes along arterial and collector streets,
to reduce hazards to bicyclists and the motoring public
•Provide sidewalks for all recognized arterial, collector
and local streets, on one or both sides of local streets, in
accordance with City standards
•Recreational trails shall be provided to connect neigh-
borhoods and to provide public access to the Ridgefield
National Wildlife Refuge, the Gee Creek, and the Allen
Creek Basins
Recommended Policy Language
•As the city grows, creating additional connections and
maintaining resiliency will be important to the success
of the city’s expansion across I-5.
•Utilize the existing roadway crossing locations of low
areas and environmentally sensitive areas.
•Create an additional crossing of the I-5 corridor for east
to west connectivity and resiliency.
•Provide Level of Service Standard “D” for all existing
and proposed.
•Provide non-motorized connections (Bike/Pedestrian)
for commuting and recreation along planned greenways.
PARKS AND RECREATION
Below are policies related to parks and recreation that cur-
rently relate to or support the Junction Subarea Plan.
P-1 Provide Parks
Ensure that park land is acquired, developed, and main-
tained in an economically efficient way to meet the needs of
existing and future residents.
P-3 Regional trail system
Coordinate with Clark County and other applicable juris-
dictions to provide regional trail and bike access and to en-
courage the continuity of trail and bike corridors within and
outside the UGA.
Recommended Policy Language
•Explore locating parks, open space and recreation facili-
ties as indicated in the Junction Subarea Plan.
•Incorporate trails through and along the greenways to
provide recreation and transportation connectivity.
57 Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
58 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
VISION
Ridgefield Junction is a mixed use destination that provides an attractive, distinctive gateway to Ridgefield and serves as
an important employment and commerce center for the city and region. Key institutions and industrial anchors are the
foundation for the Junction’s vitality, and new development reinforces Ridgefield’s aesthetic appeal and capitalizes on its
scenic setting.
GOALS
Honor Ridgefield’s commitment to livability,
sustainability and design excellence in new
development
Provide critical infrastructure and amenities
for anchor tenants and key institutions
Develop a range of commercial centers that
complements the city’s historic downtown
Create unique gateways and districts in
Ridgefield Junction that reflect community
character
Promote opportunities for live/work lifestyles
Increase and diversify the City’s tax base by attracting new development and greater employment
The following matrix provides a framework the City and its stakeholders can use to help implement this vision for the
Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan. The plan works to prioritize key strategies and actions the City can address in both the
short and long term and is organized hierarchically by:
•Objectives that relate to core topics addressed within the subarea plan.
•Strategies that support each objective. As these are informed by the subarea vision and goals, associated goals are indi-
cated for each strategy to illustrate their relationship to the overall plan.
Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
Strategy Short Term Priority Long Term Priority Related Goals
2.1 Incentivize and support catalytic mixed-use and retail projectsin key locations with Districts Two and Three
2.2
Position Ridgefield Junction, particularly District Four, as a
preeminent location for viticulture and related activities as well
as other local production uses
2.3
Maintain Ridgefield Junction as the city’s employment hub and
leverage the area to maintain a balanced jobs to housing ratio
in the city
2.4
Support Union Ridge to ensure that the area remains a major
employment anchor and collaborate with property owners
to revise the master plan to implement the subarea plan,
particularly for District Two
2.5
Support major institutional users in District Three and facilitate
the location of other complementary economic activities with
clear synergies with institutional users
OBJECTIVE 2: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
The following are strategies and actions related to economic development and the role of the Junction Subarea in the local
economy.
Strategy Short Term Priority Long Term Priority Related Goals
1.1
Align comprehensive plan policies to support the goals and
vision of the Junction subarea as well as the subarea district
concept
1.2 Update comprehensive plan land use designations to ensure that they support existing and future land uses in the Junction Subarea
1.3 Align comprehensive plan goals and policies to support the
Junction subarea’s infrastructure needs
1.4 Implement recommended zoning and regulatory changes for each district found within each unique district plan (SEE DISTRICT PLANS SECTION)
1.5 Implement recommended design guidelines for each district to ensure that adopted policy facilitate the development of high-quality commercial space
1.6 Designate tracts fully encumbered by critical areas or used for stormwater management as appropriate (i.e. Public Facilities) to accurately illustrate development capacity
OBJECTIVE 1: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN & ZONING IMPLEMENTATION
The following are key steps and strategies recommended for implementing the Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan as it relates
to the City’s comprehensive planning and zoning policy.
59 Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
OBJECTIVE 4: OPEN SPACE & CRITICAL AREAS
Below are strategies to support future development of parks and open space as protection of the city’s diverse range of
critical habitats.
Strategy Short Term Priority Long Term Priority Related Goals
3.1 Establish and implement gateway and wayfinding plans for the selected districts within the subarea and prioritize such efforts around the city’s entrances from I-5
3.2 Ensure that the city's overall brand is consistent with and reinforces marketing and branding efforts for Ridgefield Junction
3.3 Incorporate Ridgefield Junction, particularly District Four, into
larger city tourism efforts
3.4
Develop a marketing program for the Ridgefield Junction with specific programs tailored to targeted market segments such as: food production, wineries, small and large scale manufacturers, destination retailers
3.5 Aid local and regional entrepreneurs in starting and growing businesses in the Junction through development of a business attraction and retention plan
3.6
Leverage relationships with local employers and educational
institutions to establish a maker space for local entrepreneurs
and small scale manufacturers
3.6
Use the district concept to grow existing and attract new
businesses to Ridgefield, building upon current concentrations
and emerging business clusters
60 Ridgefield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
Strategy Short Term Priority Long Term Priority Related Goals
4.1 Incorporate subarea plan recommendations into the Parks Plan
4.2
Prioritize Junction subarea parks and trail corridors for future
study and ensure alignment with the City's multimodal
transportation plan and Parks Plan
4.3 Study the feasibility of establishing an open space/trail corridorthrough District Four (McCormick Creek Trail)
4.4
Utilizing both the Junction Subarea Plan and the 45th and
Pioneer Subarea Plan, establish pedestrian and non-motorized
corridors and identify potential barriers to such connections
4.5 Prioritize protection of critical areas within the study area, as
required by current regulations
4.6 Identify a site for the proposed community park in DistrictThree/Four (Parks Plan gap area C)
OBJECTIVE 3: BRANDING & ATTRACTION
Below are strategies related to subarea specific and city wide business attraction and branding efforts.
Strategy Short Term Priority Long Term Priority Related Goals
5.1 Review the subarea plan in the context of the TMP beingcurrently updated
5.2 Confirm the water and sewer planned infrastructure cansupport the expansion
5.3 Confirm that the gas, communication and electrical franchisesuppliers can support the expansion
5.4
Private development scope and timing will determine ultimate
phasing of infrastructure in this subarea. Review subarea plan
in context of known and potential redevelopment scenarios
5.5 Review the subarea plan in the context of the current Infrastructure Capital Improvements Plan to identify public and private investment opportunities
Ridge ield Junction Subarea Plan – December 2015
OBJECTIVE 5: INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING
The following are key implementation steps for infrastructure planning.
61