Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 - City of Vancouver

Vancouver Comprehensive Plan2011-20302011 AcknowledgementsMAYOR Tim LeavittVANCOUVER CITY COUNCILJeanne HarrisJeanne StewartLarry SmithPat CampbellJack BurkmanBart HansenCITY MANAGER Eric HolmesVANCOUVER PLANNINGCOMMISSIONEsther B. Schrader, ChairRobert Haverkate, Vice ChairLisa F. WillisDave MoriuchiJohn S. LeeMario RaiaErik PaulsenCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENTLaura Hudson, Community Development DirectorMatt Ransom, Manager, Long Range PlanningBryan Snodgrass, Project Manager, Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030Jennifer CamposChad EikenMarian LahavBryan MonroeSandra TownePhil WuestCity of Vancouver Long Range Planning415 W. 6th St, Vancouver, WA 98668-1995, PO Box 1995www.cityofvancouver.us/compplanwww.cityofvancouver.us

ContentsPreface..............................................................................................................................i, ii, iiiChapter 1 Community DevelopmentText..........................................................................................................................................................1-3Policies..................................................................................................................................................1-14Chapter 2 Economic DevelopmentText..........................................................................................................................................................2-3Policies....................................................................................................................................................2-7Chapter 3 HousingText..........................................................................................................................................................3-3Policies....................................................................................................................................................3-8Chapter 4 EnvironmentText..........................................................................................................................................................4-3Policies..................................................................................................................................................4-10Chapter 5 Public Facilities and ServicesSummary Text..........................................................................................................................................5-3Transportation.........................................................................................................................................5-6Transit....................................................................................................................................................5-18Airport....................................................................................................................................................5-21Public water...........................................................................................................................................5-22Sanitary sewer.......................................................................................................................................5-25Stormwater............................................................................................................................................5-29Parks and recreation.............................................................................................................................5-32Fire and emergency services ...............................................................................................................5-39Police ....................................................................................................................................................5-42Schools..................................................................................................................................................5-46Library services.....................................................................................................................................5-50Solid waste facilities and services ........................................................................................................5-51General government ............................................................................................................................5-53Public Facilities and Services Policies..................................................................................................5-55Chapter 6 AnnexationText..........................................................................................................................................................6-3Policies....................................................................................................................................................6-5Chapter 7 ImplementationText..........................................................................................................................................................7-3Policies....................................................................................................................................................7-5AppendicesAppendix A: Community Framework Plan and Growth Management Act GoalsAppendix B: Vancouver Shoreline Management Master Program GoalsAppendix C: Growth AssumptionsAppendix D: Capital Facilities Funding SummaryAppendix E: Other Plans and Documents Adopted by ReferenceVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030Table of Contents

PrefaceVANCOUVER’SVISIONBirthplace of the Pacific Northwest, Vancouver is the heart of southwest Washington,connecting people and places throughout the region. The mighty Columbia River is thelink to our past and a key to our future. We are a friendly city for all ages, incomes,abilities and backgrounds, with proud, unique neighborhoods. We are dedicated topreserving our heritage and natural beauty while welcoming the opportunities changebrings to our lively metropolitan community. We are the most livable city in the PacificNorthwest. Residents and businesses across our city are passionate about building asafe, thriving and sustainable community together.”- Vancouver Strategic Plan Community Vision, adopted in 2008Vancouver is one of the oldest inhabitedareas in the Pacific Northwest. NativeAmerican presence along the ColumbiaRiver dates back more than 10,000 years.The first permanent European settlement inthe Northwest was Fort Vancouver, established in1825. The City of Vancouver developed around thefort and continued to grow throughout the nineteenthand twentieth centuries. There were rapid,temporary population influxes with the arrival ofindustrial workers during the First and SecondWorld Wars. Steadier growth occurred in thepost-war years, spurred by the construction ofInterstate 5 (I-5) in 1965 and I-205 in 1983.During the 1990s, the population almost tripledfrom in-migration and the annexation of CascadePark, the largest annexation in state history.Vancouver in 2011 is a thriving and diversecommunity with a population of 162,00o persons,covering approximately 50 square miles.Vancouver’s comprehensive planVancouver’s first comprehensive plan under theWashington Growth Management Act was adoptedin 1994. It established a vision of a livable urbanarea with growth tied to the ability to provideservices, and a range of residential options,including more intensive development in urbancenters. The Vancouver Comprehensive Plan wascompletely rewritten in 2004, following an extensivepublic process involving Clark County, localcities, stakeholders, and the community at large.A more modest update was completed in 2011.The next major update is anticipated in 2016.The intent of the comprehensive plan is to presenta clear vision for Vancouver’s future over the next20 years—a vision that can be easily understood,evaluated, and implemented. The plan containspolicy direction relating to growth and development,environmentally sensitive areas, historicVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030Preface | i

20-year planning period, andwill become subject to theVancouver comprehensiveplan if and when this occurs.The Vancouver comprehensiveplan is intended tocoordinate development andto smooth the transition ofservices between the incorporatedand unincorporatedurban areas as annexation isconsidered.How the comprehensiveplan relates tolocal and state plansand lawsplaces, public services, and other issues. Planpolicies are implemented through subarea plansand provisions of the Vancouver Municipal Codeand other local standards.The jurisdiction of the Vancouver ComprehensivePlan is the land within Vancouver’s city limits (seemaps; above and on page 1-12). Unincorporatedareas in the Vancouver Urban Growth Area (UGA)are governed by Clark County. Vancouver UGA landsare anticipated to be annexed to the City over theGrowth Management ActThe Vancouver comprehensiveplan is consistent withthe requirements of theGMA, adopted in 1990 andsince amended. The GMArequires counties and citiesmeeting certain populationand growth criteria to adoptand maintain comprehensiveplans. Among other requirements,plans must ensurethat projected growth inurban areas between beaccommodated through arange of urban densities, thatcapital facilities keep pace with the growth, andthat critical environmental areas are protected.Community Framework PlanThe Community Framework Plan, adopted byClark County and its cities in 1993 and updated in2000 and 2001, provides guidance to local jurisdictionson regional land use and service issues. TheVancouver comprehensive plan is consistent with theconcepts put forward in the Community FrameworkPlan that development will occur at varyingii | Preface Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

densities throughout the region, and that moreintensive development will occur at various centersor nodes.Vancouver Strategic PlanUpdated by the Vancouver City Council in 2008,the Vancouver Strategic Plan contains policyobjectives in six areas of strategic commitment:A Healthy, Livable and Sustainable Vancouver;Transportation Mobility and Connectivity;Financial Health and Economic Vitality; A Safeand Prepared Community; Accountable, ResponsiveCity Government; and an Active and InvolvedCommunity. The Vancouver Comprehensive Planis consistent with the relevant portions of theVancouver Strategic Plan.Vancouver Zoning CodeUnder state law, the direction set by Vancouver’scomprehensive plan must be implemented inrelated City standards contained in the VancouverMunicipal Code (VMC). Chapter 20 of the VMCcontains the Vancouver Zoning Code.What’s in the comprehensiveplan?Chapter 1, Community Development, describesthe vision for land use and development of thebuilt environment.Chapter 2, Economic Development, describeswhat will be done to enhance job growth andretention.Chapter 3, Housing, describes what will be doneto ensure that adequate housing will be availablefor all economic segments of the community.Chapter 4, Environment, describes how sensitiveenvironmental resources will be protected.Chapter 5, Public Facilities and Services, describeshow roads, water, sewer, parks, and otherpublic facilities and services will be provided.Chapter 6, Annexation, guides potential growth ofthe City into surrounding unincorporated areas.Chapter 7, Implementation, describes how thecomprehensive plan will be implemented andupdated.The comprehensive plan also contains a glossaryand five technical appendices.• Appendix A contains the Community FrameworkPlan and the base planning goals of the GrowthManagement Act.• Appendix B lists the goals of Vancouver’sShoreline Master Program.• Appendix C explains the growth forecasts andunderlying assumptions used in this comprehensiveplan.• Appendix D contains a detailed summary offunding for the capital facilities plan described inChapter 5.• Appendix E lists other, separately bound documentsthat are adopted by reference as part ofthe comprehensive plan.Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030Preface | iii

CHAPTER 1Community DevelopmentThe Community Development chapter is the central partof the Vancouver Comprehensive Plan. The buildings andstructures that make up the built environment are wherepeople live, work, shop, and interact. Ensuring that differentland uses work together to form compatible and cohesiveneighborhoods, business districts and subareas is essentialto community livability, and to Vancouver’s ability to provideefficient public services. This chapter describes currentland uses, development patterns, and neighborhoods inVancouver, and directs how future development shouldoccur over the next 20 years.Specifics Vancouver in 2011 Neighborhood Associations Recent demographic trends Growth capacity estimates Enhancing centers and corridors Facilitating connected neighborhoods and communities Planning for an aging population Public health and sustainability Comprehensive plan land use designation map Community development policiesVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Community Development | 1-1

Vancouver’s land use in 2011AAs of 2011, the City of Vancouver had apopulation of 162,300 persons, living in anarea of approximately 50 square miles.Original Native American settlement inthe area dates back to prehistoric times. Currentdevelopment patterns reflect the past 150 years andhave been greatly influenced by the access providedby the Columbia River, and Interstates 5 and 205.Downtown Vancouver and the adjacent Vancouverbarracks and reserve are the historical heart of thecity, and have enjoyed a renaissance in recent yearsled by the adoption of the Esther Short RedevelopmentPlan. Additional public improvements andcontinued commercial, residential, and institutionalrevitalization are planned with a goal of establishinga vibrant, diversified downtown. West and northwestof downtown along the Columbia River are amix of larger industrial properties, including Port ofVancouver facilities and environmentally sensitivelowlands areas near Vancouver Lake. East of downtownalong the Columbia River are new waterfrontresidences, mixed commercial and residential uses,and governmental facilities. Larger homes front theriver farther to the east.The newest and fastest growing areas in Vancouverare east of I-205, much of which was annexed to theCity in 1997. Mill Plain Boulevard and 164th and192nd Avenues, the primary transportation corridorsin the eastern area, are lined with commercialand multi-family housing developments. A range ofnew public and private investment is anticipated inthese areas. East of 162nd Avenue are a number ofrecently planned residential and mixed-use neighborhoodsnear the former Hewlett-Packard andColumbia Tech Center light industrial campuses,and in the Riverview Gateway subarea.Vancouver is a city of neighborhoods (SeeFigure 1-1) . The City of Vancouver formallyrecognizes 64 neighborhood associations thatinclude almost 90 percent of the city’s population.Most neighborhoods have developed NeighborhoodAction Plans (NAPs), identifying issues of localconcern such as public safety, traffic, housing, andland use and recommending solutions. NAPs arenot formally adopted as part of the comprehensiveplan, but they are consistent with the plan’sdirection and are submitted for review andacceptance by the Vancouver City Council.A mix of uses are found along Main Street, St.Johns Road, and Fourth and Mill Plain Boulevards.Fourth Plain Boulevard is home to agrowing number of businesses servingresidents of different ethnicities.Near State Route 500 and Interstate205 is a major commercial and residentialactivity center, including theWestfield Mall complex, other largeretail and commercial users, andapartments. Burnt Bridge Creek, runningeast-west through the center ofthe city, contains the Lettuce Fieldsand extensive open spaces and recreationaltrails. Farther to the southand east are established single-familyresidential neighborhoods.Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Community Development | 1-3

Figure 1-1. Recognized neighborhood associations in the City of Vancouver. Source: City of Vancouver GIS.1-4| Community Development Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Table 1-1. City of Vancouver demographics.Tables 1-1 to 1-3 provide a statistical snapshot ofCategory 2000 2010local demographics and land use indicators.White 80.3% 76.2%Table 1-1 highlights Vancouver demographics,Hispanic 6.3% 10.4%and illustrates trends towards a more diverse, andAfrican-American 2.5% 2.8%older population. Table 1-2 compares 2011 landAsian 4.5% 5.0%Native American 1.0% 0.8%consumption and density data for the City ofPacific Islander/Hawaiian 0.5% 0.9%Vancouver and the unincorporated VUGA. TheOther 4.9% 3.9%city and Vancouver Urban Growth Area (VUGA)Under 18 years 26.7% 24.0%are similar in size, but the city has been developedOver 64 years 10.8% 12.7%Single-person households 27.6% 29.6%more densely, and has less remaining undevelopedSource: US Census., American Community Surveyland. More of the VUGA is zoned for residentialdevelopment, particularly single family housing.Table 1-3 compares recentTable 1-2. 2011 Vancouver City and UGA land use and densityresidential densities amongCategory City of Vancouver UnincorporatedVancouver UGAlocal jurisdictions. It indicatesthat Vancouver developedSize 50 square miles 56 square miles more densely than other ClarkPopulation 162,300 persons 141,100 persons County urban areas during theJobs 74,000 jobs 29,200 jobslate 1990s, but less denselyGross Density 3,310 persons per square mile 2,331 persons per square milethan the Portland region.Land Use Area Gross Vacant and Area Gross Vacant andInventories Zoned Underutilized Zoned UnderutilizedIt also indicates that theLandsLands unincorporated portion of theSingle Family 17,109 acres 1,024 acres (20%) 20,799 acres 6,372 acres (61%)ResidentialVancouver UGA has developedconsiderably less densely thanthe City.Multi-Family 3,325 acres 466 acres (10%) 2,641 acres 1,188 acrs (11%)ResidentialCommercial,3,398 acres 579 acres (11%) 2897 acres 1,599 acres (15%)Industrial,,,6,407 acres 2,928 acres (59%) 4,335 acres 1341 acres (13%)Other (PublicFacilities, 3,986 acres _ 5,301 acres _Open Space)Sources: Clark County and Vancouver GIS; Washington OFM; Vancouver Long Range PlanningTable 1-3. Comparing Densities in nearby JurisdictionsCity/Area Overall Percentage of AveragePopulation per new units from density ofsquare mile 2007-11 that new singlearesingle-family familyhomes home lotsCity of Vancouver 3,310 50% 6.8 units/acreUnincorporatedVancouver UGA 2,331 92% 5.7 units/acreOther Clark CountyCities 1,775 75% 3.0 unit/acreCity of Portland 4,015 28%* N.A.* 2000-2010Source: Washington OFM; Clark County permit summaries, City of PortlandVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Community Development | 1-5

Direction for the futureMaintaining and enhancing livabilityLivability involves balancing protection of openspace and environmental resources, with promotingefficient development patterns that can beserved by a range of transportation options. It alsoinvolves making full and efficient use of availableland before expanding into undeveloped areas.The Vancouver comprehensive plan emphasizespreserving or enhancing the unique character andfunction of individual neighborhoods, commercialdistricts and other places which make Vancouvera special place to live. The community developmentpolicies, listed at the end of this chapter, areintended to help maintain and enhance thelivability of Vancouver during the inevitablechanges the City will undergo. Planning for change,rather than reacting to it, is one of the plan’sunderlying principles.Table 1-4. 2011 population and employment and projected future capacity (within 2011 boundaries)2011 2030Population Employment Population EmploymentCity of Vancouver 162,300 persons 74,000 jobs 202,300 persons 139,200 jobsUnincorporated VUGA 141,100 persons 29,200 jobs 227,700 persons 72,900 jobsTotal VUGA 303,400 persons 103,200 jobs 430,000 persons 212,100 jobsSources: Vancouver Long Range Planning calculations based on County VBLM inventory, County and City VBLM assumptions,Washington OFM and ESD base data. Employment includes jobs covered in Washington Employment Security Department inventories.Non-covered jobs are estimated to account for approximately 3-4% of covered totals. Projected growth in population andemployment includes long term redevelopment capacity in downtown Vancouver, Section 30, Riverview Gateway, and other identifiedsubareas and development nodes. See Appendix C for details1-6| Community Development Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Planning for growthVancouver and the region will continue to growover the 20-year planning period. Although somechanges will occur throughout Vancouver, mostnew growth will be focused in identified urbancenters and corridors rather than spread uniformlythroughout the city.Table 1-4 estimates existing Vancouver populationand employment in 2011, and capacity for additionalgrowth through 2030. As of 2011 there wereapproximately 162,000 persons and 74,000 jobsin the City of Vancouver, and capacity to accommodatean additional 41,000 persons and 65,000jobs. Approximately half of this capacity is throughlong term development of vacant or underutilizedlands, and half through anticipated redevelopmentof built areas.The unincorporated portion of the VUGA has moreavailable residential land than the city, and greaterpopulation growth capacity. Together the existingVUGA and City have an estimated land capacity toaccommodate 430,000 persons by 2030, approximately15% more than the long term allocationadopted by Clark County for these areas in 2007.For information on the assumptions used todevelop growth capacity estimates, see Appendix C.Annual rates of growth are likely to vary widelyfrom year to year depending on economic conditionsand other factors.Enhancing urban centers and corridorsImplementation of this plan will focus on areas inor near urban centers and corridors. These areasare expected to contain a mixture of employment,housing, and cultural opportunities, as many ofthem do now. The type and intensity of activitiesand development at each will vary depending onlocal circumstances. As Vancouver changes, theseareas can serve as community focal points, buildingon the unique characteristics of individual districts.The areas can also provide opportunities for growthwhere services can be provided more efficiently.The City will involve local citizens and businesses indeveloping focused subarea plans for these areas asthe comprehensive plan is implemented.Figure 1-2 highlights centers and corridors in theCity of Vancouver where subarea planning hasoccurred, or is planned. The areas shown are notintended to depict the precise boundaries of centersand corridors – those are established throughsubarea planning.Completed subarea plans include:• Vancouver Central City Vision Plan (2007),• Fourth Plain Corridor Subarea Plan (2007),• Central Park Plan Update (2008),• Lower Grand Employment Area Subarea Plan(2008),• Riverview Gateway Subarea Plan (2009),• Section 30 Urban Employment Center SubareaPlan (2009),• Fruit Valley Subarea Plan (2010), and the• 112th Avenue Subarea Plan (2011).These subarea plans are adopted as part of theComprehensive Plan by reference. Copies areavailable digitally at the Vancouver CommunityDevelopment Department, Long Range PlanningDivision website, or may be requested in hardcopyform from the Long Range Planning offices. MasterPlans have also been approved for future developmentof the former Evergreen Airport, and theColumbia Tech Center.Centers and corridors identified for future subareaplanning include areas near the Westfield (Vancouver)Mall, MacArthur Blvd, the Southwest WashingtonMedical Center (SWMC), Upper Main St,St Johns Blvd, lower 164th Avenue, and theColumbia Business Center. The timelines shown forfuture planning efforts are approximate and subjectto adjustment as market conditions and otherfactors evolve.Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Community Development | 1-7

Figure 1-2. Comprehensive land use map showing designated types and intensities of land use allowed throughout the City of Vancouver. Source: Cityof Vancouver GIS.1-8| Community Development Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

In the unincorporated portion of the Vancouver residents that use them, and a network of roads,Urban Growth Area, Clark County has completed sidewalks, and bike paths to reach these destinationseasily. This concept is also known as thea subarea plan for the Highway 99 corridor immediatelynorth of Vancouver city limits and is in “20-minute neighborhood”, and is based on thethe process of developing additional subarea plans idea is that encouraging more accessible publicin the surrounding Three Creeks special planning and private amenities nearby can help maintainarea. These areas are not anticipated to be annexed or enhance the convenience, livability and distinctivenessof individual neighborhoods. It can alsoto the City of Vancouver until approximately 2020or later.provide a wider range of transportation choicesincluding shorter drives, walking, transit, or otherDevelopment within centers and corridors thatoptions, and can generally promote opportunitieshave existing services is generally more efficientfor community interaction and social cohesion.and cost effective than elsewhere, and can in turnsupport additional service investments. For transit Data for this concept is available at the websiteservice, the Institute of Traffic Engineers manual Walk Score, which calculates the proximity ofand C-Tran recommends that housing densities stores and other land use destinations to housing,of at least 7 units per acre are needed to support Vancouver’s citywide score in 2011 is estimatedservice every ½ hour, or at least 80-200 employees at 50 on a scale of 0 to 100, slightly ahead of theper acre in non-residential areas. To support serviceevery 10 minutes, 15 housing unit per acre or (48), and the scores for the cities of Battle Groundaverage for midsize and larger Washington cities200-500 employees per acre is recommended.(49) and Camas (36). The City of Portland receiveda score of 67. Walk Score reflects proximity of variousland uses, not sidewalk condition or measuresFacilitating connected neighborhoods andcommunitiesof connectivity. A score below 50 indicates mostThe Comprehensive Plan envisions Vancouvertrips require a car. Figure 1-3 illustrates how Walkneighborhoods that have restaurants, stores, public Scores vary within Vancouver. Green areas withfacilities, and employment opportunities near the mixes of land use that are most conducive to walkingor short drives areFigure 1-3. Areas in Vancouver with land use mixes conducive to walking (100 best)in downtown andareas to the north,near portions ofFourth Plain Blvd,and portions ofMill Plain Blvd eastof I-205.Source: Walk Score (http://www.walkscore.com/WA/Vancouver)Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Community Development | 1-9

Promoting public healthFostering sustainabilityRecent scientific research has highlighted how the built Sustainability, generally defined as meeting today’senvironment influences the health of local residents. needs without compromising the ability of future generationsto meet their’s, is one of the City’s core strategicLow-density, single-use communities with limitedwalking options have been shown to have higher levels commitments. The 2009 Creating a more Sustainableof obesity than more compact, walkable areas, evenVancouver Plan includes a range of goals and strategieswhen other factors are accounted for (Salis; Anderson & directed at City operations and the community at large toSchmidt). Almost two-thirds (64%) of Vancouver adults reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), and facilitatewere obese or overweight in 2011 according to the Clark efficient energy and resource use. Following the SustainableVancouver Plan, inventories were completedCounty Public Health Department. The Growth ManagementAct was amended in 2009 to require land use elementsof local comprehensive plans to promote physical emissions in Vancouver at 3.2 million metric tons ofin 2007 which estimated total annual private and publicactivity. The Vancouver Comprehensive Plan contains Carbon Dioxide Equivalent. Approximately 1/3 of thesepolicies encouraging commercial and public services to were attributed to local energy consumption; 1/3 frombe located near housing, with appropriate sidewalk connectionsand paths to encourage walking.1/3 from the outside production and transport of goodslocal transportation activity, primarily auto traffic, andand food that are then consumed locally. (http://www.The importance of nearby grocery stores or other sourcesof fruits, vegetables or fresh meat has also been the CommunityInventory-6pager-010810-final.pdf)cityofvancouver.us/upload/images/PublicWorks/CoVsubjectof health studies. Neighborhoods lacking theseoptions have been shown to have higher levels of obesity.Similarly, areas with high concentrations of fast food individual buildings, based on the materials used, andSustainability can be promoted in the construction ofhave been shown to contribute to obesity, particularly provisions made for energy usage and production duringin children. Figure 1-4Figure 1-4. Areas in Vancouver further than ½ mile from nearest source of healthy foodshows Vancouver “fooddeserts”, areas that aremore than ½ mile fromthe nearest supermarketor smaller source offresh food. The VancouverComprehensivePlan promotes therecruitment and retentionof supermarkets orother fresh food storesin areas lacking them,and encourages growingfood at home, or incommunity gardens.Source: Clark County Public Health Department1-10 | Community Development Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

the lifetime of the building. In 2009 the City of Vancouverpartnered with Clark County and the Cascadia senior safety considerations. Figure 1-5 shows the areasroad and sidewalk design, signage and lighting addressRegion Green Building Council to identify and remove in Vancouver with the highest proportion of seniors.regulatory barriers to construction of affordable andsustainable single family housing. The ComprehensivePlan adopts and incorporates these plans and studies by The comprehensive plan land use mapreference, and provides additional policy direction.Figure 1-6 is a simplified version of the Vancouvercomprehensive plan land use map, which officiallydesignates the type and intensity of land uses allowed onPlanning for an aging populationindividual properties throughout the City of Vancouver.Vancouver, like other communities, faces significant Designations applied by Clark County in the unincorporatedVUGA are also indicated. Poster-sized copies ofdemographic shifts during the next twenty years. In2011, the first year that baby boom generation seniors the comprehensive plan land use designation map showingactual designations on all properties are availablewill become eligible for retirement, one in six Vancouverresidents was 65 years or older. Over the next 15 years from the City’s Website (www.ci.vancouver.wa.us).the number of residents 65 years or older countywide isprojected to grow three times as fast as the overall population,and the number of residents 85 or older is projectedto grow twice as fast. In response, the VancouverComprehensive Plan and implementing zoning standardsstrive to ensure opportunities are provided for adequatesenior housing for arange of age, income Figure 1-5. Areas in Vancouver with higher proportion of seniorsand health needs, andto ensure opportunitiesfor appropriateconventional housingas needed to accommodateseniors.Provisions are alsoneeded to help seniorsage in place inexisting homes.Beyond housingissues, the ComprehensivePlan shouldfacilitate integratedcommunities wherecommercial, medical,social and otherservices used byseniors are locatednearby, and thatSource: Clark County Public Health DepartmentVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Community Development | 1- 11

1-12 | Community Development Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030Figure 1-6. Comprehensive land use map showing designated types and intensitities of land use allowed throughout the City of Vancouver.Source: City of Vancouver GIS

Table 1-5. Vancouver comprehensive plan land use designationsComprehensive Corresponding General IntentPlan designation ZoningResidentialUrban Lower Density R-2, R-4, R-6, Predominantly single-family detached residential development, with someR-9 allowances for duplexes, townhouses, and single-family homes on smalllots using infill standardsUrban Higher Density R-18, R-22. Predominantly apartments and condominiums, with some allowance forR-30, R-35, MXattached housing (such as duplexes, townhouses, and small-lot singlefamilyhomes) and mixed useCommercialCommercial and CN Neighborhood Small scale commercial uses and services primarily for nearby residences.Mixed Use Commercial Designated areas are typically less than 2 acres in size. These areasprovide services within walking distance for the frequent needs of thesurrounding residents and are generally small areas designed to becompatible with the surrounding residentially zoned neighborhoods.IndustrialCC CommunityCommercialCG General CommercialCX City CenterintensityWX WaterfrontMixed UseCPX Central ParkMixed UseMX Mixed UseRGX RiverviewGateway (1)Medium scale commercial uses and services, typically serving more thanone neighborhood. Designated areas are typically between 2 and 10 acresin size, located near collector or arterial street intersectionsMedium to larger commercial use and services serving large sectionsof urban areas and beyond. Designated areas are typically in urbanactivity centers or along major travel routes connecting activity centers.General Commercial areas provide a full range of goods and servicesnecessary to serve large areas and the traveling public. These areas aregenerally located at interchanges, along state highways and interstates,and adjacent to major and minor arterial roadways.Specific to downtown Vancouver. A mix of generally higher commercial,residential, institutional uses envisionedA mix of residential, commercial, office and recreation uses along theColumbia RiverSpecific to Vancouver Central Park. A mix of open space, recreation,educational, governmental, and public service uses developed accordingto policies and guidelines contained in the master plan document “APark for Vancouver: A Concept Plan” (as amended).A mix or residential, commercial, office and recreation usesSpecific to the Riverview Gateway subarea at the intersection of 192ndAvenue and SR-14. A mix of residential, mixed use, office, and lightindustrial usesIndustrial OCI Office-Campus- Combination of light industry, office, & limited supporting commercial usesIndustrialOtherIL Light IndustrialIH Heavy IndustrialA AirportLight manufacturing, research, warehousing, and industrial services,with provisions for office uses. Generally clean uses not involvingoutdoor storage, noise or odors or use of rail or marine transport.Intensive industrial manufacturing, service, production or storage ofteninvolving heavy truck, rail or marine traffic, or outdoor storage andgenerating vibration, noise and odors.General Aviation airports and accessory usesOpen Space P Park, GW Greenway, Areas intended for parks, greenways and natural areasNA Natural AreaPublic Facilities All zones Areas developed with schools, fire stations, colleges, hospitals and otherlarge facilities serving the public(1) RGX Riverview Gateway is also consistent with Low Density and High Density Residential, and Industrial Comprehensive Plan designationsVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Community Development | 1-13

Community DevelopmentpoliciesThe City of Vancouver adopts the following policiesto guide land use and development in the city overthe next 20 years. These policies are consistentwith and implement Policy Sections 1.0, 2.0, and12.0 of the Community Framework Plan, adoptedby Clark County and local jurisdictions, and planningpolicies 36.70.A.020(1), (2)and (13) of theWashington Growth Management Act (see AppendixA).CD-1 Citywide land suppliesEstablish land supplies and density allowancesthat are sufficient to accommodateadopted long-term City of Vancouver populationand employment forecast allocations.CD-2 Efficient development patternsEncourage efficient development throughoutVancouver to ensure achievement ofaverage density of 8 units per acre set bycountywide planning policies. Encouragehigher density and more intense developmentin areas that are more extensivelyserved by facilities, particularly transportationand transit services.CD-3 Infill and redevelopmentWhere compatible with surrounding uses,efficiently use urban land by facilitatinginfill of undeveloped properties, and redevelopmentof underutilized and developedproperties. Allow for conversion of single tomulti-family housing where designed to becompatible with surrounding uses.CD-4 Urban centers and corridorsAchieve the full potential of existing andemerging urban activity centers and the corridorsthat connect them, by:(a) Promoting or reinforcing a unique identityor function for individual centers andcorridors(b) Planning for a compact urban form withan appropriate mix of uses(c) Working with stakeholders to developflexible standards to implement the visionfor that center or corridor(d) Encouraging innovative, attractiveprivate development that efficientlyuses available land and resources(e) Establishing connectivity within eachcenter and to other areas to provideaccessibility(f)Providing a range of transportationoptions(g) Investing in public facilities and amenitiesto enhance livabilityCD-5 Mixed-use developmentFacilitate development that combines multipleuses in single buildings or integrated sites.CD-6 Neighborhood livabilityMaintain and facilitate development ofstable, multi-use neighborhoods that containa compatible mix of housing, jobs, stores,and open and public spaces in a wellplanned,safe pedestrian environment.CD-7 Human scale, accessible development,and interactionFacilitate development that is human scaleand encourages pedestrian use and humaninteraction.CD-8 DesignFacilitate development and create standardsto achieve the following:(a) Increased streetfront use, visual interest,and integration with adjacentbuildings(b) Improved pedestrian connections andproximity of uses within developments(c) Enhanced sense of identity in neighborhoodsand subareas(d) Publicly and/or privately owned gatheringspaces facilitating interactionCD-9 Compatible usesFacilitate development that minimizes adverseimpacts to adjacent areas, particularlyneighborhoods.CD-10 Complementary usesLocate complementary land uses near oneanother to maximize opportunities for people1-14 | Community Development Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

to work or shop nearer to where they live.CD-11 Archaeological and historic resourcesProtect and preserve cultural, historic andarchaeological resources. Promote preservation,restoration, rehabilitation, andreuse of historically or architecturally significantolder buildings. Continually increaseknowledge and awareness of historic andarchaeological resources, further developingthe city’s identity and allure. Work with ClarkCounty to maintain state Certified LocalGovernment Status.CD-12 Integrated area planningPromote cohesive, integrated planning ofareas and sites through use of subareaplanning, master planning, and planneddevelopments, or other methods.CD-13 Land use reassessmentAssure consistency of overall land useand capital facilities plans by reevaluatingVancouver’s land use plan if funding is inadequateto provide necessary public facilitiesand services to implement the plan.CD-14 Connected and integrated communitiesFacilitate the development of completeneighborhoods and subareas containingstores, restaurants, parks and publicfacilities, and other amenities used by localresidents.CD-15 Public Health and the built environmentPromote improved public health throughmeasures including but not limited to thefollowing:(a) Develop integrated land use and streetpatterns, sidewalk and recreationalfacilities that encourage walking orbiking(b) Recruit and retain supermarkets andother stores serving fresh food in areasotherwise lacking them. Discouragesupermarkets and fresh food stores thatdo relocate from using non-competeclauses that prevent timely replacementof similar uses. Encourage stores thatlocate near sensitive populations orunderserved areas to offer healthy foodchoices(c) Assess and promote opportunities forgrowing food in home or communitygardens. Consider guidelines forservice provision levels.(d) Coordinate with Clark County PublicHealth to better integrate health impactsand land use and public facilitiesand service planningCD-16 SustainabilityFacilitate sustainable land use developmentthough measures including but not limited tothe following:(a) Develop integrated land use patternsand transportation networks that fosterreduced vehicle miles traveled andassociated greenhouse gas emissions(b) Develop individual buildings thatminimize energy and resourceconsumption. Encourage home basedefficiencies such as insulation retrofits,efficient water and air heating systems,and use of solar panels or other formsof energy capture.(c) Implement recommendations of theVancouver-Clark County SustainableAffordable Residential DevelopmentReportCD-17 Aging PopulationsUpdate policies, standards, and practicesas necessary to accommodate anticipatedaging of the local population, thoughmeasures such as:(a) Develop integrated land use patternsand transportation networks that facilitateshorter vehicular trips, walking, oruse of public transportation(b) Review standards for specialty housingto ensure they are consistent with anticipatedage-related housing needs(c) Review standards and designationsof conventional single and multi-familyhousing to ensure they are consistentwith anticipated needs, including provisionsfor aging in placeVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Community Development | 1-15

(d) Review standards for roads and sidewalkdesign, signage, and lighting toaddress senior safety issuesTracking the Comprehensive Plan• As of 2008, 14% of existing Vancouver housingunits were located within ½ miles of a fullservice grocery store, 47% within ½ mile ofa convenience store, 69% within ½ mile ofa park, 35% within ½ mile of a school, and 72%within ½ mile of a bus stop• From 2007 to 2011, new Vancouver single andmulti-family housing averaged a total densityof 8.8 units per acre in city limits, and 6.1 unitsper acre in unincorporated portions of theVancouver UGA. Single family units accountedfor 50% of new units in city limits,and 8% in the VUGA.For more information:The Clark County Comprehensive Plan contains policy guidancefor the unincorporated VUGA. Clark County alsomaintains comprehensive plan and zoning maps regulating theunincorporated area. Contact Clark County Long RangePlanning or visit Clark County’s Web site http://www.clark.wa.gov/planning/comp_plan/index.html• The Community Framework Plan contains policy guidancefor regional growth issues in Clark County. See Appendix A.• The Vancouver Comprehensive Plan Implementation MonitoringReport (2010) contains information on recent localtrends and existing conditions. Clark County also tracksdevelopment data at http://www.clark.wa.gov/planning/comp_plan/monitoring.html• The 2009 Creating a Sustainable Vancouver Plan is availableat (http://www.cityofvancouver.us/upload/images/PublicWorks/VancouverSustainabilityPlanFINALWeb_090109.pdf)• Code and Regulatory Barriers to the Living Building Challengefor Sustainable, Affordable, Residential Developmenthttp://www.cityofvancouver.us/upload/images/Planning/Sustainability/CTED_Grant/Report_1_only.pdf• As of 2010, 74.5 of Vancouver residentssurveyed reported that overall livability in theCity was high or very high1-16 | Community Development Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

CHAPTER 2Economic DevelopmentEconomic development is one of the cornerstones of theVancouver comprehensive plan because it is a centralfactor in a community’s ability to sustain itself. A strong anddiverse economy provides employment and a tax base thatsupports public services and a livable community. Althoughmost economic activity is in the private sector, local government’srole is to establish parameters for private markets,provide necessary services, and participate in economicdevelopment in some circumstances.This chapter describes Vancouver’s economy in 2011 andwhat direction the city’s economic development should takeduring the next 20 years.Specifics Data on the composition of the Vancouver economy Economic indicators: unemployment, poverty, income, andsales levels Available land for commercial and industrial development Vancouver’s economic development tools and programs Economic development policiesVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Economic Development | 2-1

VVancouver’s economy in 2011ancouver’s economy is broadlydiversified, with minor concentrationsin health care, retail trade, K-12education, and manufacturing. As of2010, there were an estimated 74,000 jobs withinthe City of Vancouver covered by unemploymentinsurance and an estimated 2,800 additionaluncovered jobs, primarily corporate officers oremployees of private schools and religious organizations.There were also an estimated 29,000additional jobs in the unincorporated portion ofthe Vancouver Urban Growth Area (VUGA). TheCity of Vancouver and VUGA together account for83% of all jobs in Clark County.Table 2-1 illustrates the share of jobs by economicsector in Clark County, and how these changedsince 2000. Most sectors maintained a consistentshare of the economy during the previous decade.Manufacturing declined with the closing of HewlettPackard, the Vanalco aluminum smelter, and lossof other electronics jobs. Construction job losseswere particularly heavy following the 2008 recession.Health care employment increased withexpansions at the Southwest Washington MedicalCenter and the new Salmon Creek hospital, whilegovernment employment grew primarily due tonew and expanded schools. In the near future, localmanufacturing employment is projected to continueto decline slowly through 2018, while increasesare anticipated in health care, and professional andbusiness services sectors. Table 2-1 also includeslocal wage data. Current pay in most sectors iscomparable to the Vancouver median householdincome of $45,701, except wholesale trade which ishigher, and retail trade and leisure and hospitalitywhich are considerably lower.Table 2-2 lists major individual employers in theVancouver area as of 2010. Most are located inVancouver or the Vancouver UGA. These largerbusinesses, however, represent only a smallportion of local firms, which are primarily small tomid-sized. In 2008 three-quarters of businessescountywide had fewer than 10 employees, and 95%had fewer than 50 (US Economic Census). Smalland mid-sized employers have largely driven previouseconomic expansion in the region. (PortlandInstitute of Metropolitan Studies, 1999.The redevelopment Vancouver’s economy is linkedto the larger global, national, and state economies,and especially to the Portland area and SouthwestWashington region. Approximately 70,000 ClarkCounty workers, 1/3 of the local labor force, areemployed in Oregon. Many work in transporta-Table 2-1. Percentage of jobs by economic sector in Clark CountyManufacturingConstructionandminingTransportationandutilitiesWholesaletradeRetailtradeFinanceinsurance,and realestateProfessionalandbusinessservicesHealthCareLeisureand hospitalityGov’t2000 14.8% 8.1% 2.9% 3.8% 11.6% 4.2% 10.7% 10.8% 9.8% 17.0%2010 9.0% 6.1% 3.0% 4.2% 11.7% 4.6% 11.7% 14.8% 9.5% 19.6%Projected -0.5% 0.5% 1.5% 1.8% 1.1% 0.8% 2.6% 3.1% 1.5% 1.3%Annual JobGrowth Rateto 2018Annual local $51,062 $47,348 $41,724 $60,334 $26,434 $47,226 $50,109 $46,256 $16,521 $46,463wage (2010)Taxable $16.5 $169.9 $4.9 $70.9 $53.1 $30.8 $42.5 _ $133.7 _Sales million million million million million million million million(2010)Source: Washington Employment Security Division (ESD)Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Economic Development | 2-3

Table 2-2. Largest Vancouver Area Employers, 2010Company Location Employees Product/ServiceVancouver School Distrct Vancouver 3,412 Pre K-12 educationEvergreen School District Vancouver 3,224 K-12 educationSouthwest Washington Medical Cntr Vancouver 2,625 HospitalHewlett-Packard Vancouver 1,800 * Inkjet printer R&D andClark County Vancouver, VUGA 1,600 Local governmentFred Meyer Stores Countywide 1,405 Grocery and retailCity of Vancouver Vancouver 1,100 Local governmentBattle Ground School District Battle Ground 1,006 K-12 educationWaferTech Camas 950 Silicon wafer fabricationWells Fargo Vancouver 942 BankS E H America Inc. Vancouver 842 Silicon wafer fabricationLegacy Salmon Creek Vancouver UGA 830 HospitalSafeway Inc. Countywide 775 GroceryVancouver Clinic Vancouver 767 Medical officesClark College Vancouver 748 Higher educationCamas School District Camas 654 K-12th grade educationKaiser Permanente tal Vancouver 624 HospitalDick Hannah Dealerships Vancouver 545 Auto dealershipsGeorgia-Pacific Corp. Camas 501 Pulp and paper manufacturingFrito-Lay Vancouver 500 Potato chipsNorthwest Natural Products Vancouver 437 Dietary supplements and vitaminsColumbia Machine Inc. Vancouver 415 Concrete, palletizing equipmentRS Medical Vancouver 400 Electrical stimulatorsCarlisle Interconnect Vancouver 338 Wire and cable interconnectionsNautilus Inc. Vancouver 300 Fitness EquipmentSources: CREDC, 2009 City of Vancouver Comprehensive Annual Financial Report*2009 datation and warehousing industries near the Portof Portland, Portland Airport, and Swan Island.Approximately 12,000 Oregonians work in ClarkCounty (Washington ESD). Economic activityis also linked, as an estimated 1/3 of retail salespurchases by Clark County residents are made inOregon to take advantage of the lack of a sales tax.Conversely, the absence of income taxes in Washingtonhas also attracted some relocation of higherincome Oregon residents. Portland and southwestWashington are also linked by a range of commoninterests and resources. Both areas are served bythe I-5 and I-205 freeways and bridges, and thePortland International Airport, and the implicationsfor freight transportation as well as personalmobility that these involve. In a global and nationaleconomic setting, both are perceived as parts of asingle region, with opportunities for joint economicdevelopment and branding.Vancouver and the region were particularly impactedby the global recession beginning in 2008. 7%2-4| Economic Development Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

of nonfarms jobs in Clark County were lost, similarto statewide loss rates but worse than the nation.Local jobs continued to be lost after employmentimproved nationally in 2010. Construction and development-relatedindustries were particularly hardhit, as well as lower paying jobs in all sectors of thelocal economy. Table 2-3 shows comparativeeconomic performance indicators.Table 2-3. Local, regional, and state economic performance indicators.Indicator Vancouver Clark City of WashingtonCounty PortlandUnemployment rate(February 2011)Percentage ofresidents belowpoverty (2009)Median householdincomeTaxable Retailsales per capita(2010 Q4)13.4% 12.9% N.A. 9.2%15% 12% 16% 12%$45,701 $56,074 $50,203 $56,548$3,794 $ 2,536 N.A. $3,985Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics; American Community Survey; WashingtonESD and Dept. of Revenue.*2009 dataTable 2-4 shows a breakdown ofgross vacant and underutilized commercialand industrial land in theVancouver area (See Chapter 1, CommunityDevelopment, for more onproposed land uses and developmentcapacity.) The City Vancouver areahas a disproportionate share ofvacant industrial land in ClarkCounty and the larger bi-stateregion. Almost half of the Vancouverindustrial inventory is located in theColumbia Gateway area of the PortEconomic development toolsand programsEconomic development is largely drivenTable 2-4. Gross vacant and underutilized commercial and industrialland for Vancouver and the VUGA for 2011.Land use City of Unincorporated Total VUGAcategory Vancouver Vancouver UGACommercial 579 acres 1,599 acres 2,178 acresby private market conditions, but can beinfluenced by local government in severalways. In addition to providing overallIndustrialTotal2,928 acres3,507 acres1,341 acres2,940 acres4,269 acres6,447 acrespolicy guidance in the ComprehensivePlan, the City of Vancouver strives toSources: CREDC, 2009 City of Vancouver Comprehensive Annual FinancialReport *2009 dataprovide adequate overall land suppliesfor new economic development, to protect industrialor other targeted lands from conversion toother development, and to provide for a timely andcost-effective permitting processes. Vancouver alsosupports economic development through provisionof roads, utilities, and other infrastructure and services,and by maintaining a high quality of life.of Vancouver. Permitting timelines for commercialor industrial developments in the City of Vancouverin 2010 averaged 78 days from receipt of a completeapplication to land use approval decision orpublic hearing. Economic development is alsosupported by business recruitment, creation,expansion and retention, and assistance in theVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Economic Development | 2-5

development review process. The City of Vancouverhas an Economic Development Services division,and directly supports the Columbia River EconomicDevelopment Council (CREDC). The Cityalso partners with the Greater Vancouver Chamberof Commerce, and other groups in their efforts torecruit and retain businesses. Vancouver is also amember of the Regional Economic DevelopmentPartners with other jurisdictions from the Portlandmetropolitan area. The City of Vancouver also coordinateswith outside agencies and organizations toprovide economic development grants or financingto the extent available under state law. Washingtondoes not allow Tax Increment Financing (TIF) orcomparable property tax redistribution programsas extensively as Oregon or other states.Limited TIF legislation was passed in2002, and supplemented by Local InfrastructureFinancing Tool (LIFT) programin 2006 and the Local RevitalizationFinancing (LRF) program in 2009.Concentrated economic development is alsoplanned in the section 30 and Riverview Gatewaysubareas in eastern Vancouver. Both areas areformer mining sites served by recent constructionof 192nd Avenue and existing major roadways. Theplans envision a mix of employment and housingwhen completed. 5,400 and 3,100 new jobs areprojected respectively. Significant capacity for longterm job growth also exists in the Fourth Plainsubarea , and at the Southwest Washington MedicalCenter, Port of Vancouver, Columbia Tech Center,Columbia Business Center, and former EvergreenAirport sites. See the Community Developmentchapter of this document for further informationsubarea planning in identified centers and corridors.These economic developmentactivities are applied in targeted areasas well as citywide. The revitalization ofdowntown Vancouver began with theEsther Short Redevelopment Plan andPlanned Action ordinance which providedzoning and environmental clearance,and also supported substantial public investments.These included the renovationof Esther Short Park, street and utilityupgrades, and the Hilton Hotel development andother public-private partnerships. These regulatoryand economic development assistance actions werethen extended southward to encompass the formerBoise Cascade complex and adjacent riverfrontlands through adoption of the Vancouver CentralCity Vision Subarea Plan in 2006. The plan envisionsdevelopment of residential, mixed use andoffice construction, resulting in an additional 8500downtown jobs when the area is fully developed.Direction for the futureEconomic development is one of the cornerstonesof the Vancouver Comprehensive Plan. The goal isto increase jobs, particularly family wage jobs, forlocal residents, and to reduce the number of residentswho commute to Oregon for work, shopping,and entertainment. The City would like to providea ratio of at least one local job for every Vancouverhousehold. Providing land and public services thatare adequate for job growth is an important partof the strategy. The City must be a good steward ofland designated for job growth, which includes2-6| Economic Development Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

using the land efficiently and limiting conversionto other uses. The City must also ensure the timelypermitting of family-wage jobs and other priorityeconomic development projects. A sound economywill also provide revenues for the City to supportfacilities and services desired by residents (parks,trails, police protection, fire protection, etc.).Vancouver will work with local organizations andagencies to further economic development,including implementation of the Columbia RiverEconomic Development Council’s (CREDC) ClarkCounty Economic Development Plan. Areas ofemphasis will include establishing Vancouver andClark County as an information technology growthcenter; expanding the economic development influenceof local higher education institutions; makingthe area a hub for international investment in thePacific Northwest; investing in infrastructure andamenities needed to attract new businesses andemployees; and continued targeting of recruitment,expansion, and entrepreneurship efforts.EC-2 Family-wage employmentPromote the formation, recruitment, retentionand growth of businesses that provide awide range of employment opportunities,particularly family-wage employment.Prioritize family-wage employment in landuse policies and practices.EC-3 Public revenue enhancementPromote development that enhancesrevenue generation for public services.EC-4 Industrial and business park sanctuariesProvide an adequate supply of industrial and/or business park areas with opportunitiesfor family-wage employment and revenuegeneration.EC-5 No net loss of employment capacityRestrict zone changes or legislative land useapprovals that would lessen long-termcapacity for high-wage employment unlessaccompanied by other changes within thesame review cycle that would compensatefor the lost capacity or unless the proposedchange would promote the long-termeconomic health of the city.EC-6 Efficient use of employment landMaximize utilization of land designated foremployment through more intensive newbuilding construction and redevelopment andintensification of existing sites.Economic Development policiesThe City of Vancouver adopts the following policiesto increase the number of jobs for local residentsand reduce the need for residents to commute toOregon for work, shopping, and entertainment.These policies are consistent with and implementPolicy Section 10.0 of the Community FrameworkPlan, adopted by Clark County and local jurisdictions,and planning policy 36.70.A.020(5) of theWashington Growth Management Act (seeAppendix A).EC-7 Regional focusWork with the larger Portland-Vancouverregion to leverage opportunities, unique siteavailability, and marketing to promote theregion nationally and globally to attract newbusiness.EC-8 Small business supportSupport the growth of new and expandingsmall business through efficient permitting,incentives, and communication.EC-1 Jobs-housing balanceIncrease the ratio of jobs to residents in theCity of Vancouver and the region.Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Economic Development | 2-7

Tracking the Comprehensive Plan• As of 2009, the median household income inthe City of Vancouver was $45,701. 15.1% ofVancouver residents had incomes below thefederal poverty level (American CommunitySurvey)• As of 2011, there was approximately 1 job per2.2 persons in VancouverFor further information:• The Columbia River Economic Development Council(CREDC) provides business services, and economic anddemographic data. The Greater Vancouver Chamber ofCommerce also provides business services. ConsultCREDC or the Chamber of Commerce directly or visittheir Web sites (www.credc.org and www.vancouverusa.com).• The Clark County Comprehensive Plan (2007) providesinformation and policies on economic development issuesfor unincorporated Clark County. Information aboutpotential costs and job growth implication of developingspecific subareas is contained in the Clark County FocusedPublic Investment Report (2003). Contact Clark CountyLong Range Planning or visit the Clark County Web site(http://www.co.clark.wa.us/longrangeplan/review/reviewinfo.html).• For information about City of Vancouver economic developmentprojects and programs, contact the VancouverEconomic Development Staff or visit the City’s Website (www.ci.vancouver.wa.us/vancmo/econ-dev/downtown.shtm).2-8| Economic Development Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

CHAPTER 3HousingAdequate, safe, and affordable housing for all residentsis essential to the health of a community. This chapterincludes inventories of Vancouver housing in 2011, andan assessment of future needs.Specifics Existing Vancouver housing stock, types, and conditions Housing tenure and affordability in Vancouver and the region Housing costs by zoning district Constrains on housing production Housing programs and plans to provide adequate housing Housing policiesVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Housing | 3-1

Vancouver’s population,households, and housing in 2011PopulationVancouver is home to 162,300 persons as of2011. The city continues to grow, althoughmore slowly in recent years because of theeconomic recession and relative scarcity ofland as the city fills out within its borders. Futuregrowth is anticipated through the development ofremaining vacant land, redevelopment of built orpartially built areas, and annexations in the unincorporatedVancouver Urban Growth Area (VUGA).HousingTypes of housing. Because people need differenttypes of housing at different stages of their lives,it is important to provide a variety of types of housing—apartments for young people just startingout on their own, single-family homes for familieswith children, townhouses and apartments for activeretirees not interested in maintaining largehomes, and assisted living for the elderly. As thebaby boom generation ages over the next 20 years,there is likely to be a greater need and demand forsmaller units, retirement homes, and assistedliving. Table 3-1 depicts the range of housing typesin the City of Vancouver. Single-family housing isthe most common type, accounting for the 57% ofall units in 2010. Table 3-1 does not include groupquarters housing, such as nursing homes, otherTable 3-1. Vancouver housing stock in 2011Housing Type Units Vacancy Persons perRate (2009) householdSingle-Family 40,008 (57%) 6% 2.72-unit multi-family 4,625 (7%) 8% 2.63-4 unit multi-family 3,831 (5%) 7% 2.25+ unit multi-family 19,969 (28%) 10% 2.1Manufactured 1,918 (3%) 7% 1.9housingTotals 70,351 6% 2.5Source: OFM Census, City of Vancouver permit records.American Community Surveycare or correctional facilities, or dormitories. Theseaccounted for approximately 2,080 residents in2010. See Figure 1-2 in the Community Developmentchapter for generalized locations of single andmulti-family housing in Vancouver.Housing condition. Three-quarters of Vancouverhousing units were built after 1970, and mostare structurally sound. Approximately one percentlack complete plumbing or kitchen facilities, whileslightly less than 2% lack telephone service. 2.3% ofresidences are occupied by more than one personper room, an indication of overcrowding (AmericanCommunity Surevey, 2009). According to theClark County/Vancouver Consolidated Housingand Community Development Plan, 2000-2004,7.1 percent (7,660 dwelling units) in Clark Countywere in fair or badly worn condition in 1999. Threecensus tracts located in north-central Vancouver(410.05, 417 and 418) were identified as low-incomeareas and as having high concentrations ofhousing in need of repair or replacement. Housingthat is more than 25 years old usually needsnew roofs, mechanical and electrical repairs, andcosmetic improvements such as new paint andwallpaper. Households with low incomes have themost trouble keeping up with maintenance andrepairs.Housing Tenure. In 2009 47 percent of housingunits in Vancouver were owner-occupied. Vancouverhomeownership levels are below Clark County’soverall (64%) and the City of Portland’s (53%).Home ownership can stabilize neighborhoods andDRAFT Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Housing | 3-3

communities, and allow individuals and familiesto build wealth over time. However, for some overleveragedhouseholds, ownership can represent afinancial risk, and can limit the ability to relocate inresponse to changing labor markets or other needs.A majority (54%) of Vancouver households, bothrenters and owners, have lived in their homes forfewer than 5 years, a turnover rate that is similar toPortland, and slightly higher than in Clark County.(American Community Survey) A household isdefined as an individual or group living together ina singe housing unit, whether related or not.Housing Costs and Affordability. Housingaffordability remains a significant problem facingVancouver and other jurisdictions, as increasingnumbers of local citizens face housing costs beyondtheir disposable incomes. Table 3-2 indicates thatalmost half of Vancouver households spend morethan 30% of their income on owning or rentinghousing, a threshold level recognized by the stateand federal government as overly burdensome, andrequiring households to cut back on other essentialssuch as health care, transportation, or food.Table 3-2 also illustrates how affordability problemsare not locally unique. The share of Vancouverhouseholds paying more than 30% of their incomefor housing is similar to the Clark County, Portlandand Washington state estimates, and local povertylevels are similar to Portland.Table 3-3. Compariative housing affordabilityThe Growth Management Act requires local jurisdictionsto demonstrate that regulations allow andencourage housing for all economic segments of thecommunity. Table 3-3 provides a breakdown oflocal households by income ranges, and the generalshare of Vancouver housing they can afford to buyor rent without having to spend more than 30% oftheir income. Housing affordability is a challengefor middle class households and the working pooras well as at the lowest income levels. Only one infive Vancouver homes were affordable to own forhouseholds earning the median annual income of$45,701 or less, which by definition is half of allVancouver households as of 2009. A householdearning the moderate income level of $36,560 orless could only afford one in 10 local owner-occupiedunits, or 58% of rental units. Almost 40% oflocal households were at or below this income levelin 2009. A couple earning minimum wage wouldeach need to work over 40 hours each per week toachieve this income. The Table 3-2 statistics onlycompare annual incomes and housing costs, and donot account for the additional challenge to homeownershipof making the initial downpayment.At the poverty level, defined as $22,050 in annualincome for a family of four in 2009, only about3% of Vancouver owner-occupied units and 14%of rental units were affordable. 10% of Vancouverfamilies and 15% of individuals were at or belowthis level in 2009. Female-headed households werethe most likely to be in poverty.City of Clark City of WashingtonVancouver County Portland StatePercent owned 47% 64% 54% 64%Median Assessed Value (owner occupied units) $234,200 $260, 600 $296,100 $287,200Share of owner-households paying 30% or 42% 42% 41% 41%more of income for housingGross rent $842 $869 $867 $911Share of renter households paying 30% or 49% 54% 52% 50%more of income for housingMedian household income $45,701 $56,074 $50,203 $56,548Individuals in poverty 15% 12% 16% 12%Source: American Community Survey, 20093-4 | Housing PUBLIC COMMENT DRAFT

Table 3-3. Vancouver household income ranges and affordablehousingHousehold Share of Share of Local Share of localIncome Vancouver owner occupied rental housingRange households housing they can they can affordafford*Median ($45,701) 50% 21% 77%Middle 47% 18% 75%(95% of median)Moderate 40% 10% 58%(80% of median)Low 22% 3% 14%(50% of median)Extremely Low 11% 1% 4%(30% of median)Source: American Community Survey, 2009* Based on 30% of incomeTable 3-4 illustrates the relationship betweenaffordability of middle income single family housingand zoning requirements. In the City of Vancouverand the Vancouver UGA, homes are largerand more expensive in zones requiring larger minimumlot sizes, particularly in the zones with 10,000and 20,000 square foot minimum lot sizes. Thenational recession beginning in 2008 impactedVancouver housing markets significantly. Fromthe beginning of 2005 to the beginning of 2007,median sales prices of Vancouver homes and condominiumsrose from approximately $190,000 toTable 3-4. Size and cost of newer single family housing byzoning districtCity of VancouverMinimum Lot Median Median HouseSize Required Assessed SizeValueR-9 5,000 s.f. $217,336 1,947 s.f.R-6 7,500 s.f. $225,444 1,986 s.f.R-4 10,000 s.f $263,232 2,341 s.fR-2 20,000 s.f. $443,423 3,286 s.f.Vancouver UGAR1-5 5,000 s.f. $208,760 2,084 s.f.R1-6 6,000 s.f. $210,689 2,126 s.f.R1-7.5 7,500 s.f. $244,617 2,325 s.f.R1-10 10,000 s.f $303,437 2,665 s.f.R1-20 20,000 s.f. $378,200 2,876 s.f.Source: Clark County Assessor Data of single family housing built since2000$260,000, only to decline back to $190,000as of the end of 2010. (City-Data.com). Thepace of new housing construction in Vancouverdeclined from 880 units permittedin 2007 to 193 units in 2010. As of 2010,local foreclosure rates were improving butremained high. In Clark County 3,867 homescountywide were in foreclosure, the thirdhighest rate among Washington counties.(Columbian)Constraints on housing production.There are relatively few constraints to productionof the housing needed to accommodateanticipate population growth inVancouver and Clark County, but much new housingis unlikely to be affordable to middle to lowerincome households. Basic building materialsand construction labor are readily available.Local land costs rose significantly during the1990 and early 2000 high-growth years, but landcost remains a relatively small portion of overallhousing cost. Land availability has decreased,particularly in the relatively higher density singleor multi-family zoning districts, which allow formore affordable housing. In 2011 as the economyslowly recovers from a recession, overall housingproduction remains challenged by economicuncertainty and difficulties in obtaining developmentproject financing. Table 3-5 estimates thebreakdown of cost components of a typical local1,500 square foot single family home. Land andinfrastructure cost shares have likely risen sincethe data was originally compiled.DRAFT Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Housing | 3-5

Table 3-5. Major cost percentages of building singlefamilyhousing.CategoryCostMaterials and labor 52%Developer overhead 13%Land 10%Infrastructure 8%Permits and fees 7%Profit 10%Total 100%Source: County/City of Vancouver ConsolidatedHousing and Community Development Plan, 2000-2004Housing Programs and PlansAlmost all housing in Vancouver is privatelydeveloped, but influenced by local governmentpolicies and standards. Local land supplies andzoning standards partially determine the amount,general type, and density of new housing construction,and building codes help to ensure housingsafety and durability.Community Development Block Grant(CDBG) ProgramThe City of Vancouver manages a local grantprogram to allocate approximately $1 millionannually in federal Housing and Urban Developmentfunds targeted for assisting low andmoderate income populations. Local CDBGprogram activities related to housing includeneighborhood revitalization, affordable housingassistance, and assistance to homeless residents.Specific housing-related actions include propertyacquisition, demolition, or relocation; housingrehabilitation, limited public facility or serviceconstruction or provision; energy conservationactivities.HOME Investment Partnership (HOME)The City of Vancouver also annually allocatesfederal funds to create affordable low-incomehousing under the HOME program. Projectsinclude assistance with home buying or renting,housing rehabilitation loans, or direct developmentof affordable rental housing.Providing housing affordable to low to moderateincome households and special needs populationstypically requires direct subsidies and involvementby public or non-profit sectors. Major agencies andprograms in Vancouver include the following:Vancouver Housing Authority (VHA)VHA has served as the designated public housingprovider in Clark County since 1942, andin 2010 provided rental housing and housingassistance to approximately 12,500 residentscountywide. VHA owns or manages approximately1,000 units, provides voucher assistanceto for private rental of 2,300 units, and provides1900 units of workforce housing for families.VHA also owns or manages 300 special needsunits for assisted living, shelters, or persons withmental illness.Housing Rehabilitation ProgramVancouver also operates an owner-occupiedhousing rehabilitation program providing up to$25,000 to moderate income homeowners, andan emergency repair grants of up to $5000 forlow income mobile homeowners.Non-profit OrganizationsLocal non-profit organizations involved in lowincome or special needs housing provision orassistance include: Affordable CommunityEnvironments; Columbia Non-Profit Housing;Community Housing Resource Center; Councilfor the Homeless; Evergreen Habitat forHumanity; Janus Youth; Second Step Housing;Share.2009-2013 Housing and CommunityDevelopment Consolidated PlanTo guide local housing provision and set priori-3-6 | Housing PUBLIC COMMENT DRAFT

ties for local expenditure of federal CDBG andHOME funds, the City of Vancouver periodicallyproduces a Consolidated Housing Plan. The2009 Plan provides an analysis of communityneeds and establishes priority objectives andlong-range strategies to guide the allocation ofhousing and community development resources.It is updated annually through an “Action Plan”with information on projects and funding for theupcoming year, and supported by an annualperformance report.2007 10-Year Homeless PlanPursuant to state requirements to develop plansto end homelessness, in 2007 Vancouver, ClarkCounty and area non-profit organizationsadopted a 10-year homeless plan. The planrequires completing annual one-day counts ofhomeless persons. As of January 2011 therewere 650 sheltered homeless persons in ClarkCounty, 187 unsheltered persons, and 834 personsliving temporarily with family or friends.Direction for the futureVancouver will work with public agencies, nonprofitorganizations and private housing developersto provide a range of housing types for local residentsin safe, livable neighborhoods. This willinvolve working to provide adequate low-incomeand special needs housing, striving to improveoverall housing affordability and neighborhood andcommunity livability. Vancouver will coordinatewith other jurisdictions in Clark County to provide afair share of low-income and special needs housing.There is an estimated long term capacity for approximately16,500 additional housing units in theCity of Vancouver, and for approximately 34,500new units in the unincorporated Vancouver UGA asof 2011, based on existing land supplies and anticipatedredevelopment opportunities. Multi-familyunits account for slightly more than half (54%) ofthis capacity within city limits, and slightly morethan one-third (39%) in the remainder of theVancouver UGA. See the Land Capacity Analysisin Appendix C, for details. This capacity is fullysufficient to accommodate projected total populationgrowth, and there are a range of zoningdesignations that allow for different densities andhousing types.DRAFT Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Housing | 3-7

Housing policiesThe City of Vancouver adopts the following policiesto ensure an adequate supply of housing for all economicsegments of the community. These policiesare consistent with and implement Policy Section2.0 of the Community Framework Plan, adopted byClark County and local jurisdictions, and planningpolicy 36.70.A.020(4) of the Washington GrowthManagement Act (see Appendix A).H-1 Housing optionsProvide for a range of housing types anddensities for all economic segments of thepopulation. Encourage equal and fair access tohousing for renters and homeowners.H-2 AffordabilityProvide affordable housing by formulating innovativepolicies, regulations and practices,and establishing secure funding mechanisms.Target affordability programs toward householdswith incomes below the median.H-3 Housing improvementEncourage preservation, rehabilitation andredevelopment of existing housing stock. Supportneighborhood based improvement efforts.H-4 Innovative zoningEncourage innovative housing policies thatprovide for affordable housing and maintainneighborhood character.H-5 Housing placement near services and centersFacilitate siting of higher density housing nearpublic transportation facilities and in designatedcenters and corridors.H-6 Special needs housingFacilitate housing for special needs populationsdispersed throughout Vancouver and theregion. Such housing may consist of residential-carefacilities, shelters, group homes, orlow-income housing, and should be locatednear transportation and other services such ashealth care, schools, and stores.H-7 Home ownershipPromote opportunities for home ownership andowner occupancy of single- and multifamilyhousing.H-8 Public-private partnershipsFacilitate enhanced partnerships betweenpublic, private, and non-profit sectors toaddress affordable housing.H-9 Funding for housingPursue funding mechanisms to support affordablehousing involving local, state, and federalagencies.Tracking the Comprehensive Plan• As of March 2011, the median home value inVancouver was $164,000, 8.9% lower thanone year before (Zillow)• As of 2009, a Vancouver household with amedian annual income of $45,701 couldafford to own 21% of local owner-occupiedhomes, and rent 77% of local renter occupiedhomes without paying more than 30% of theirincome (American Community Survey)For further information:• The City of Vancouver Consolidated Housing andCommunity Development Plan, 2009–2013 containsinformation and policy guidance for housing. http://www.cityofvancouver.us/upload/images/Planning/CDBG/UPDATEDVancouverConPlan.pdfContact City of Vancouver Community Services forinformation on this document or City housing andneighborhood programs. http://www.cityofvancouver.us/cdbg.asp?menuid=10461&submenuid=18584• The 2007 Clark County Comprehensive Plan providesinformation and policies on housing in unincorporatedClark County, including the Vancouver UGA. ContactClark County Long Range Planning or visit ClarkCounty’s Web site• Contact the Vancouver Housing Authority for informationon Vancouver area affordable housing projects(www.vhausa.com)3-8 | Housing PUBLIC COMMENT DRAFT

CHAPTER 4EnvironmentThis chapter contains a basic description of Vancouver’snatural environment, and recommendations for protectingand enhancing it while contributing to a growing economyand a livable city.Specifics Description of water, earth, landscape, habitat, and airshed asof 2011 Environmental regulations and programs Future direction Environmental policiesVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Environment | 4-1

VIntroductionancouver’s natural environment consistsof water, air, earth, and the range ofanimals, plants, fish, birds, and otherorganisms that inhabit these areas. Howwell these components interact determines thehealth of the local environment, and impactsVancouver’s economy and quality of life.One example of the way components interact ishow exhaust from cars and trucks affects the restof the environment. While the ability that peoplehave to move about in motorized vehicles contributespositively to the economy, exhaust from thevehicles affects the environment negatively inseveral ways. Toxic substances in the exhaustdirectly harm humans, animals and plants. Killingor damaging plants reduces the amount of oxygenthey release. The toxic substances settle on surfacesand are carried by rain into lakes, streams andwetlands, harming fish and other water creatures.Wetlands that are degraded by the substances losesome of their natural ability to filter pollutants outof incoming water. The environmental degradationcreates economic costs.Vancouver’s naturalenvironment in 2011Water resourcesVancouver has an abundance of waterresources typical of Western Washington.Major water bodies, floodplains, andwetlands are shown in Figure 4-1. Majorsurface waters include the ColumbiaRiver, Vancouver Lake and the adjacentlowlands, and Burnt Bridge Creek. Significantwetlands include the Water ResourcesEducation Center Wetlands along the ColumbiaRiver, the restored wetlands in the Burnt BridgeCreek Greenway, and those near Vancouver Lake.Water quantity and quality is important for fish andwildlife habitat, and human recreation and health.All Vancouver drinking water comes from localgroundwater.Urban development inevitably involves replacementof some forests, grasslands, or wetlands withimpervious surfaces such as buildings, roads, andparking lots which do not allow rainwater to passdirectly through to the ground. Increasing impervioussurface areas increases flooding, and decreasesreplenishment of groundwater. Urban stormwaterrunoff from impervious surfaces picks up toxicsubstances and bacteria, which can then damagegroundwater, lakes, rivers, and streams. Vancouverarea water bodies exceeding state water qualitystandards are tracked by the Washington Departmentof Ecology, and noted in Table 4-1 at the endof this chapter. Much of the pollution comes fromactivities on surrounding land. Wastes from pets,wild animals, and failing septic systems contributebacteria. Soil from erosion and fertilizers contributephosphorus and nitrogen, both of which causeexcess growth of plants and microscopic animals.Vancouver’s natural environment istypical of an urban area west of theCascade mountains. Much of the area hasbeen altered by development, but valuablestreams, lakes, shorelines, wetlands, andforested areas remain.Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Environment |4-3

Priority species in the Vancouverarea include bald eagles, westerngrey squirrel, chum salmon,chinook salmon, coho salmon,steelhead, great blue heron,peregrine falcon, purple martin,and leopard dace. Bull Trout,along with chum and coho salmonand steelhead, are also listedunder the federal EndangeredSpecies Act (ESA). The ColumbiaRiver, Lake Vancouver, BurntBridge Creek and their shores arethe primary habitat for mostlisted species.The organisms use oxygen from the water, reducingthe amount available for salmon and other nativeanimals. Toxic metals from street runoff cling tosoil particles that can be carried into the waterbodies.Other pollutants, such as motor oil, aretransported by stormwater. Although the City hassubstantially improved the greenway along BurntBridge Creek there are still stretches of banks thatlack sufficient vegetation and shading, which canlead to increased water temperatures and diminishedwater quality.Fish and wildlife habitatMost typical urban wildlife in Vancouver has adaptedto living in the tree canopy, parks and otheropen spaces, and in wetlands, streams, rivers andlakes. Priority habitats and species have been identifiedand mapped by the Washington Departmentof Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) to ensure protectionand management. (http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/phs/).Priority habitats in Vancouver includeriparian areas (any areas adjacent to streams, riversand lakes), freshwater wetlands, oak woodlands,and other areas that are biologically diverse, importantto fish or wildlife with mostly native vegetation,or have relatively undisturbed or unbrokentracts that connect habitat areas.Vancouver also includesimportant migration habitat. TheVancouver Lake Lowlands and areas further northare within the Pacific flyway, and local ColumbiaRiver floodplains and wetlands are part of thelarger Lower Columbia region fish migration route.These support migrating fish, and wintering waterfowl,neotropical birds, and shorebirds.LandscapeTrees help beautify Vancouver in addition toimproving air and water quality, conserving energyby providing shade, and providing habitat for manyspecies. Vancouver’s landscape is a reflection of theeffort to preserve existing trees and other vegetationand to add new vegetation. Historic trees inthe city help preserve its character. Vancouver wasnamed a “Tree City USA” for the 21st time in 2010.1,161 trees were planted in 2010 as part of the City’sCanopy Restoration Program, which are estimatedto intercept over 800,00 gallons of stormwater peryear and absorb over 11,000 pounds of airbornepollutants when they mature. Tree canopy currentlycovers 19% of Vancouver’s citywide surface area.The program goal is 28% (201o Vancouver UrbanForestry Program Annual Report).4-4 | Environment Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Figure 4-1.Vancouver’s major water resources. Source: Clark County GIS.Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Environment |4-5

Oak woodland areas are identified by the state asa priority habitat. Douglas fir forest, although notdesignated as priority habitat, also supports sensitivenative species.Topography and earthThe Columbia River and ancient glacial floodinghave sculpted much of Vancouver’s topography(landform) by depositing clay, silt, sand, and gravelonto its banks over tens of thousands of years.Most of Vancouver is generally flat or terraced,although areas of steep slopes exist along portionsof the Columbia River, Burnt Bridge Creek,and Vancouver Lake. Figure 4-2 shows potentialgeologic hazard areas in Vancouver. Landslide anderosion areas include steep slopes, defined as thosegreater than 25%.Air and climateVancouver is located in a regional airshed boundedon the south by Eugene, Oregon, on the north byChehalis, Washington, on the west by the CoastRange, and on the east by the Cascade Mountains.Regional air quality has improved over the past twodecades, as new emissions controls have generallykept up with impacts of growth. However, ongoingscientific research highlighting risks from variousmaterials has resulted in tightened standards. As of2010, Clark County ranked in the top 2 percent ofcounties nationwide in overall air pollution exposureaccording to the Washington Department ofEcology. Diesel exhaust, primarily from trucks, busesand small engines has been identified by Ecologyas the most harmful airborne source of pollution tohuman health. Car emissions are also a significantsource. In terms of individual pollutants, fine particulatematter standards were exceeded for 6 daysin 2007 and 2 in 2008. Vancouver has not exceededstandards for ozone or carbon monoxide on anydays since 1999.Vancouver has wet, mild winters and warm, drysummers. The US Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA) projects that Washington temperaturescould increase an average of 4-5 degrees overthe next 100 years due to global climate change,along with a 10% increase in winter precipitationlevels, and more frequent unusually hot summerdays. Car and truck use is the primary local sourceof greenhouse gasses that contribute to globalwarming. A detailed inventory of local sources isavailable at http://www.cityofvancouver.us/upload/images/PublicWorks/CoV-CommunityInventory-6pager-010810-final.pdf.Environmental managementMost of Vancouver’s environmental decisions areinfluenced by state and federal regulations, includingthe Washington Growth Management Act(GMA), Shoreline Management Act, (SMA), WaterPollution Control Act (WPCA and State EnvironmentalPolicy Act; and the federal Clean Water Act(CWA) Endangered Species Act (ESA), and CleanAir Acts (CAA).The GMA requires the City to designate and protectcritical areas: wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat,aquifers (groundwater), geologically hazardousareas such as steep slopes, and areas that flood frequently.The GMA also requires the City to protectthe functions of these areas that are beneficial tothe environment and to public health and safety.The Shoreline Management Act (SMA) requireslocal governments to adopt and implement localShoreline Management Programs to protectvarious shoreline functions. The Clean Water Actrequires that pollution of lakes, streams and riversbe controlled so these bodies of water are safe forswimming and fishing. The Endangered Species Act(ESA) prohibits harm, including habitat degradation,to threatened and endangered species. TheClean Air Acts (CAA) regulate air quality at theregional level.Vancouver’s efforts to protect the environmentinclude acquiring and restoring sensitive areas.Much of the area adjacent to Burnt Bridge Creek,in the Vancouver Lake Lowlands, and in the Water4-6 | Environment Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Figure 4-2. Vancouver’s geologic hazard areas. Source: Clark County GIS.Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Environment |4-7

Resource Education Center Wetlands is owned bythe City. The City adopted the Lettuce Fields SubareaPlan to protect and restore about 250 acres ofwetlands, improve stormwater management, andprovide public access and environmental education.The plan has been implemented and the BurntBridge Creek Greenway is now a restored wetlandarea with public trails providing access to the openspace. Vancouver has worked with WDFW, theColumbia Land Trust and property owners toobtain easements protecting the Wood’s Landingarea. Just upriver from the I-205 bridge, Wood’sLanding is the largest Columbia River chum salmonspawning site between the river’s mouth andBonneville Dam.Several City departments work together and withcitizens and other agencies to provide innovativeenvironmental education to the public. The WaterResources Education Center carries out manyprograms to increase people’s knowledge aboutwater. The Vancouver Urban Forestry Commissionand the City implement the “NeighborwoodsProgram” to develop citizens’ understanding of thevalue of trees in protecting air and water qualityand neighborhood livability. The City of Vancouverpartners with Clark County, Clark College, ClarkPublic Utilities, the Vancouver and EvergreenSchool Districts and the Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife to provide educational opportunitiesat the Columbia Springs campus and surroundingopen area.In addition to the protection provided by the StateEnvironmental Policy Act (SEPA), the City hasdeveloped regulations to protect wetlands, streams,lakes, and shorelands, waterbodies, groundwater,surface water, fish and wildlife habitats, and treesand other vegetation (VMC Titles 20 and 14). Theregulations include a requirement that floodplainsand steep terrain be evaluated for potentialhazards. Implementation of the regulationsincludes development review, inspection,enforcement and education.Direction for the futureEnvironmental quality is an essential element ofthe city’s livability. By integrating the naturaland built environments, Vancouver will create asustainable urban environment with clean air andwater, habitat for fish and wildlife, and comfortableand secure places for people to live and work.Vancouver is committed to protecting andenhancing the environment as the City meets itsother community, economic development, housingand infrastructure goals. In decisions and actions,Vancouver will seek to balance various goals, notjust make tradeoffs, and identify ways to meetmultiple objectives. The goals are to providehealthy ecological communities with a richbiodiversity and to protect public health and safety.ImplementationEnvironmental protection and enhancement, basedon the “Best Available Science” (as defined in theGMA), are important factors in Vancouver’s landuse planning, zoning and development regulations.Development that cannot reasonably avoid criticalareas must minimize and mitigate potentialimpacts to prevent a net loss of environmentalfunction. The GMA requires critical area regulationsto be updated as necessary to maintain consistencywith state law. In 2005 the City consolidatedand streamlined its critical areas regulations in theCritical Areas Protection Ordinance which provides4-8 | Environment Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

a holistic approach to reviewing developmentimpacts to critical area functions and streamlinesthe development review process. In 2007, theCritical Areas Protection Ordinance was incorporatedinto the Shoreline Management Program.The SMP is currently being updated for consistencywith the Department of Ecology’s 2003 guidelines,and the City’s Critical Areas Protection Ordinancewill continue to be incorporated into the SMP,maintaining consistency in critical areas protectionthroughout the City.Incentives, education, acquisition, and restorationare important tools in achieving environmentalquality. Vancouver will seek ways to provide incentivesfor protecting and enhancing the environment.Various City agencies including Parks, PublicWorks, Planning, and especially the Water ResourcesEducation Center will continue to provideeducation on how to care for and make wisedecisions about the City’s environmental assets.The City will continue to protect and restore sensitiveareas. The City’s own operations will reflectenvironmental stewardship.Air and water quality and vegetationProtecting air and water quality and vegetation willhelp protect habitats for fish, wildlife, and people.Transportation choices will help protect airquality. Source control (keeping pollutants out ofthe environment) and water treatment (removingpollutants from the water) will protect ground- andsurface water quality. Water conservation andinnovative substitutions for impervious surfaceswill protect the quantity of groundwater. Surfacewater management willhelp reduce the impacts ofdevelopment on surface water quality and quantity.Preserving and planting native plants and removinginvasive plant species will help protect andenhance vegetation.Habitats and speciesVancouver will protect priority habitats, locallyimportant habitats, and priority species. Vancouverwill protect salmon and work with others in theregion to develop and implement recovery plans forthreatened salmon species.Endangered Species ActVancouver will avoid harming ESA-listed speciesand their habitat. The City will work with others inthe region to plan and implement actions in orderfor listed species to recover again.Shoreline managementVancouver will continue to implement its ShorelineManagement Program (SMP) to protect shorelineresources, the environment, water-dependent andwater-related economic development, and publicaccess and recreation. The SMP is currently beingupdated for consistency with the Department ofEcology’s 2003 Guidelines. The 2003 Guidelinesrequire that the SMP together with a RestorationPlan and other local, state, and federal plans, programs,and regulations at least maintain existingecosystem-wide processes and shoreline ecologicalfunctions and potentially increase them over time.This is known as the “no net loss” requirement.The City’s Critical Areas Protection Ordinance willcontinue to be incorporated into the SMP, maintainingconsistency in critical areas protectionthroughout the City and helping to achieve no netloss of shoreline ecological function.Public health and safetyVancouver will help protect public health and safetyfrom flooding, landslides, and earthquakes.Maintaining clean groundwater and improvingthe quality of surface water will also protect publichealth and safety.Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Environment |4-9

CoordinationVancouver will coordinate environmental policiesand programs among City departments, otheragencies, the private sector, and citizens. The Citywill continue to take advantage of opportunities toconsolidate and ensure consistency among environmentalregulations. Vancouver will work withstate and federal regulatory agencies to achievecompliance in a way that is resource-wise, both interms of financial and environmental resources.SustainabilityVancouver will work to implement the the 2009Creating a more Sustainable Vancouver Plan toprovide for the needs of its residents withoutsacrificing the needs of future generations. The Citywill consider economics and the environment as itmanages water, energy, land and natural resources.Vancouver will promote sustainable public and privatedevelopment practices and patterns, buildingdesign, energy conservation, water-use reduction,and waste reduction. The City will incorporate greenbuilding (environmentally friendly) principles andpractices into the design, construction, and operationof all City facilities, City-funded projects, andinfrastructure to the fullest extent possible.Environmental policiesThe City of Vancouver adopts the following policiesto protect and enhance the environment whilemeeting its other community, economic development,housing, and infrastructure goals. Thesepolicies are consistent with and implement PolicySection 11.0 of the Community Framework Plan,adopted by Clark County and local jurisdictions,and planning policy 36.70.A.020(10) of the WashingtonGrowth Management Act (see Appendix A).EN-1 Environmental protectionProtect, sustain, and provide for healthy anddiverse ecosystems.EN-2 StewardshipDemonstrate and promote environmentalstewardship and education.EN-3 Energy ConservationPromote and facilitate energy conservationand alternative energy sources and generation.EN-4 Restoration and enhancementPromote and facilitate ecosystem restorationand enhancement.EN-5 Environmental coordinationCoordinate environmental policies andprograms. Continue to consolidateenvironmental regulations.EN-6 HabitatProtect riparian areas, wetlands, and otherfish and wildlife habitat. Link fish and wildlifehabitat areas to form contiguous networks.Support sustainable fish and wildlife populations.EN-7 Endangered speciesProtect habitat for salmonids and other listedspecies and facilitate recovery. Encourageand support actions that protect otherspecies from becoming listed.EN-8 Water quality and quantityEnhance and protect surface water, stormwater,and groundwater quality from septicdischarge, impervious surface runoff, improperwaste disposal, and other potentialcontaminant sources. Ensure safe and4-10 | Environment Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

adequate water supplies and promote wiseuse and conservation of water resources.EN-9 Trees and other vegetationConserve and restore tree and plant cover,particularly native species, throughout Vancouver.Promote planting using native vegetation.Protect historic and other significanttrees. Work towards the Vancouver UrbanForestry Program goal of covering 28% ofVancouver’s surface area with tree canopy.EN-10 Air qualityProtect and enhance air quality, in coordinationwith local and regional agencies andorganizations.EN-11 Hazard areasManage development in geologicallyhazardous areas and floodplains to protectpublic health and safety.Tracking the Comprehensive Plan• As of 2008, the following Vancouver waterbodies not meeting Washington DOEstandards for various parameters:• As of 2010, tree canopy covered 19% ofVancouver’s citywide surface area• Vancouver exceeded National Ambient AirQuality Standards (NAAQS) for fine particulatematter on 2 days in 2008 and 6 days in 2007.Vancouver has not exceeded standards forozone or carbon monoxide on any days since1999.For further information:• Vancouver’s Critical Areas Ordinance regulations thatidentify and protect wetlands, habitat, floodplains, andgeologically hazardous areas are contained in VancouverMunicipal Code (VMC), Title 20.740 http://www.cityofvancouver.us/MunicipalCode.asp?menuid=10462&submenuID=10478&title=title_20&chapter=740&VMC=index.htmlDevelopment regulations protecting groundwater are containedin VMC Title 14. Standards for implementing the StateEnvironmental Policy Act standards are contained in VMCTitle 21.• Vancouver’s Shoreline Management Program is availableonline at http://www.cityofvancouver.us/upload/images/Planning/CAO/Vancouver_WA_SMP_Effective_April_9_2007%20.pdf• Information about water quality standards can be obtainedfrom the Washington State Department of Ecology’s WaterQuality Program (http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/wqhome.html).Table 4-1. Vancouver area waters not meeting state water qualitystandards• Information about air quality standards can beobtained from the Southwest Clean Air Agencyhttp://www.swcleanair.org/Water bodyBurnt Bridge CreekVancouver LakeColumbia River(WRIA 27/28)Salmon CreekPeterson DitchKleinline PondWashington DOE parameters listedFecal coliform, temperature exceedance,pH, dissolved oxygenFecal coliform, total phosphorus (water);PCB, Toxaphene, TCDD, Dieldrin (fish tissue)Fecal coliform, temperature, dissolved oxygen,dieldrin (fish tissue and water), PCB (fish tissueand sediment), dioxin (fish tissue and water)Fecal coliform, temperature, dissolvedoxygen, pH (water)Temperature, fecal coliformInvasive Exotic Species (water)• The 2009 Creating a Sustainable Vancouver Planis available at http://www.cityofvancouver.us/up-load/images/PublicWorks/VancouverSustainability-PlanFINALWeb_090109.pdfSource: Washington DOE Section 303d list (2008)Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Environment |4-11

CHAPTER 5Public Facilities and ServicesUrban communities must be supported by a range ofpublic facilities and services, including transportation,water, sanitary sewer, stormwater, parks, fire, police, solidwaste, schools, and libraries. This chapter summarizesVancouver’s infrastructure and capital facilities and howthey will serve growth anticipated over the course of theComprehensive Plan.Specifics Citywide capital facilities overview Transportation and transit Public sewer, water and stormwater services Police and fire Parks Schools Solid waste services Policies related to provision of servicesVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-1

5-2| Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

TIntroductionhe Growth Management Act (GMA)requires growth to occur first indeveloped areas already served by publicservices and utilities, and second inundeveloped areas needing new services. Publicservices must be provided in a timely and efficientmanner to support planned growth and existingusers. Extension of the services must be coordinatedwith adopted land use and growth plans, and capitalfacility investments should be targeted and cost-effective.The Vancouver Urban Growth Area (VUGA)includes the incorporated City of Vancouver andportions of unincorporated Clark County surroundingVancouver shown in Figure 1-6 (Chapter 1,Community Development). All of the VUGA mustreceive appropriate levels of urban service tosupport planned urban development during theplanning period. This chapter focuses on infrastructureprovision within city limits, and areas in theunincorporated VUGA served by City providers suchas sewer, water, and fire services. Because of uncertaintiesover annexation, unincorporated Vancouverurban area capital facilities and services outsideof City districts are addressed in the Clark CountyComprehensive Plan.For City service areas, this chapter describespublic infrastructure and service needs, andprojected improvements with their associated coststo adequately serve long-term growth at adoptedservice standards. As required by GMA, thischapter includes a policy requiring thatland use plans be revisited if probablefunding falls short of meeting those needs.The analyses in this chapter focus onthe first six years of the planning period.Infrastructure and service needs for the20-year planning period are more speculative,so the review is more generalized. Thereview is limited to capital facilities andmajor physical infrastructure related togrowth, not all government services. Theinformation in this chapter is drawn fromspecific service area plans, such as the VancouverTransportation System Plan (2004), VancouverTransportation Improvement Program (2011-16),Vancouver-Clark Comprehensive Parks, Recreation,and Open Space Plan (2009), and otherservice provider capital plans and budgets. Formore detail, please consult these plans.Table 5-1 lists the providers of public services inthe City of Vancouver and the VUGA. Services areprovided by the City of Vancouver, Clark County,and private utilities or service districts. Someproviders serve areas within the city limits, whileothers have larger, regional service areas. The Citycoordinates with providers and considers of howservice area boundaries may change (for example,through annexation). The GMA identifies citiesas generally the appropriate provider of urbangovernmental services.Table 5-2 is a summary of projected public capitalfacilities needs and funding sources from 2011 to2016. The projects that make up the summary aredescribed in greater detail in the separately boundVancouver Capital Facilities Project List. Local capitalfacilities projects are financed and constructedthrough a variety of local, state and in some casesfederal sources, depending on the type of facility.Providing adequate services in the face of growth,increasing service demands, and static or decreasingfunding sources is one of the central challengesfacing Vancouver and other jurisdictions. Consis-Photo by Ed VidinghoffVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-3

Table 5-1. Vancouver’s public facility and service providers.Facility/serviceTransportationTransitWaterSanitary sewerStormwaterParksFire protectionPolice protectionSolid wastePublic schoolsLibrariesGeneral governmentProvider• City of Vancouver• Clark County (unincorporated urban area)*• Washington Department of Transportation (I-5, I-205, SR-14)• Port of Vancouver*• Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad*• C-TRAN• City of Vancouver• Clark Public Utilities (unincorporated urban area)*• City of Vancouver (within city and eastern and northern unincorporated urban area)• Clark County (sewage treatment facilities in unincorporated urban area)*• Clark Regional Wastewater District (western unincorporated urban area)*• City of Vancouver• Clark County• Vancouver-Clark Parks and Recreation Department• City of Vancouver, including Fire District #5 (eastern unincorporated urban area)• Clark County Fire District #6 (western unincorporated urban area)*• City of Vancouver• Clark County Sheriff’s Department (unincorporated urban area)*• Waste Connections, Inc.(Waste and Recycling Collections throughcontract in Vancouver and through WUTC Franchise in VUGA)• Columbia Resource Company (Recycling Materials Processing, Transfer Station/Transport/Landfill operations)• Vancouver, Evergreen and Camas School Districts (within city limits and portions ofunincorporated urban area)• Battle Ground, Ridgefield and Hockinson School Districts (within portions ofunincorporated urban area)*• Fort Vancouver Regional Library System*• City of Vancouver (Administrative Offices, Support Facilities)• Clark County (unincorporated urban area, urban correctional facilities, law enforcementand emergency response support services)**See the Capital Facilities Plan element of the Clark County Comprehensive Plan for more detailed information.tent with the Growth Management Act, cost estimatesin this document focus on new or expandedcapital facilities, not maintenance costs, which arerecognized as substantial expenses in providinggovernmental services to serve existing and futurepopulations. During the 2011-30 planning period,maintenance costs for city public facilities representa substantial need in order to ensure efficientoperations of urban infrastructure systems.ConcurrencyThe GMA requires that communities “ensure thatfacilities and services necessary to supportdevelopment shall be adequate to serve the developmentat the time the development is availablefor occupancy and use without decreasing currentservice levels below locally established standards”(RCW 36.70A.020.12). This concept is identified as“concurrency” and requires local governments toadopt level-of-service (LOS) standards and to testindividual land use proposals to ensure they will notexceed those standards. Proposed developmentsthat would cause these standards to be exceededcannot be approved unless necessary mitigationis provided. The Vancouver Comprehensive Planrequires concurrency for transportation, water andsewer services, and identifies these as “Tier I” publicfacilities and services. See individual service areaanalyses in this chapter for further information.Formal establishment of LOS standards is notrequired for Tier II capital facilities, includingstormwater management, schools, parks, libraries,police, and fire facilities. As a result, individuallyproposed developments do not have to demonstrate5-4| Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Table 5-2. Summary of planned six-year capital facilities costs 2011-2016.Service Major Capital Projects Estimated Total Funding SourcesTransportation • 2012-16 Construction Projects $56,561,000 $65,928,000 Impact fees, state and federal grants,• 2011 Design Projects ............... $9,367,000City REET, state gas tax, developercontributions, public agency partnerships,street fund reserves, reserves forfunded projects, General FundTransit* • New High Capacity Transit $161,490,000 Grants, local revenue, voter approved• Replace/add buses, support facilitiesfunding measuresWater * • Standby power facilities at water sources $36,662,000 System development charges, operating• Station 1 improvementsrevenues, grantsSanitary sewer* • Sewer connection incentive program $32,121,000 System development charges, operating• Wastewater treatment facility maintenancerevenues, grantsand replacement• Development improvements (pump stations,force mains)Stormwater • Regional facilities $5,645,000 Stormwater Fund, GrantsParks • Urban Park Acquisitions ..................... $5,713,284• Urban Park Development ................... $1,405,000 $8,268,284 REET, grants and donations, impact• Urban Park Improvement and repair....$1,150,000fees,Fire & EMS* • New fire stations land acquisition, design, $28,427,000 Cash, new undetermined fundingconstruction .................................... $24,810,000• Existing station seismic upgrade…..... $1,366,000• New logistics warehouse land acquisition,design, construction .......................... $2,251,000Police • New Firing Range…..……………........…$250,000 $250,000 Federal GrantsGeneral • Central operations center ................ $12,000,000 $14,500,000 State grants, water ulitlty fundgovernment • West Artillery Barracks……................ $2,500,000Solid waste • No Major capital facilities needed. Existing None User fees, grantstransfer and recycling facilities have sufficientcapacity through 2030Schools* • 6 new schools (3 elementary,1 middle, 2 high) $157,000,000 Bonds, impact fees, state matchincluding land acquisition• 2 remodeled/expanded elementary schools• Support FacilitiesLibraries • Headquarters building consolidation and $1,300,000 FVRLD reserves for funded projects.remodel…………………….................. $1,000,000• Vancouver Mall library remodel or relocate…………………………………................ $300,000City ofVancouver Total $191,801,284Non-municipal $319,790,000Agencies Total* Includes project and costs outside Vancouver city limitsData is summarized from individual facility and service summaries that follow. See Clark County Capital Facilities Plan for more detailon county and regional facility plans and costs.that they would meet formal concurrency standards,although other City standards or state lawdo require varying levels of review to ensureservices are provided.Service standardsService standards are quantifiable measures of theamount or quality of public facilities and servicesthat are provided to a community. These measureshelp identify current and future capacities of capitalfacilities. They are also useful for identifying projectedgaps or deficiencies and the improvementsneeded to serve new growth while maintainingadopted service levels. Service standards areVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-5

specified in the individual sections of this chapter,where applicable.TransportationThis section summarizes the Vancouver TransportationSystem Plan (TSP), which is adopted by referenceand supplemented with updated transportationanalysis, proposed system improvements, plan references,and capital facility funding needs and estimates.Refer to the TSP for more information aboutVancouver’s existing transportation system and howit relates to regional systems, or the vision for thefuture of transportation within Vancouver reference.(http://www.cityofvancouver.us/upload/images/Transportation/TSP_2004.pdf)Regional coordination andconsistencyRegional coordination and consistency are integralto Vancouver’s transportation program. Regionalpartnerships are maintained with Clark County, theSouthwest Washington Regional TransportationCouncil (RTC), C-TRAN (regional transit agency),WSDOT, the Port of Vancouver, and other cities inClark County. Vancouver also works with the City ofPortland, Metro (Portland’s Regional Government),the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT)and the Port of Portland. RTC is the region’s designatedMetropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)and Regional Transportation Planning Organization(RTPO).The transportation system is the largest and mostvisible component of local government infrastructure.It is used daily to get people where they want togo, to bring goods to and from the community, andto connect people to the services they need. It definesthe character of neighborhoods and communities,and affects local quality of life, economic efficiencyand the City’s long-term fiscal health. The transportationinfrastructure is the City of Vancouver’s singlelargest asset and its efficiency can affect the price ofgoods and services by increasing or decreasing thetime it takes people and goods to get around.Vancouver’s transportation system has a varietyof components, including river and rail freight(through the Port of Vancouver and on BurlingtonNorthern Santa Fe trains), Pearson Field Airport,state highways (managed by Washington State Departmentof Transportation [WSDOT]), local streets,sidewalks, bicycle paths, and the C-TRAN publictransit system. Components cross or overlap jurisdictionalboundaries. For example, C-TRAN paysfor and runs the buses in Vancouver but relies onVancouver’s roadway and signal systems to supportthese services. These components are illustratedhere in Figure 5-1, the Metropolitan TransportationPlan for Clark County – Regional TransportationSystem map.The RTC maintains and runs the travel demandforecast model for all jurisdictions in Clark Countybased on a common land use geographic informationsystem and growth forecast developed in acooperative planning process under the GrowthManagement Act and Clark County’s CountywidePlanning Policies. This ensures consistency in landuse and transportation planning among neighboringjurisdictions. RTC certifies Vancouver’s transportationelement for consistency with the regional MetropolitanTransportation Plan (MTP) and with theplans of jurisdiction responsible for transportationplanning within Clark County.The comprehensive plan includes, and adopts hereinby reference, for the purposes of regional consistencyand coordination the Metropolitan TransportationPlan for Clark County (MTP), as amended. TheMTP identifies the regional transportation systemfor arterials, highways, air and marine, and listsregionally coordinated transit levels of service forC-TRAN, as well as regionally adopted levels of servicefor all Highways of Statewide Significance (HSSsystem) and for Regional Highways of StatewideSignificance (non-HSS). The MTP also identifieslong-terms deficiencies to and planned improvementsfor the state highway system. The MTP alsoincludes the regional strategy for jurisdictional5-6| Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

compliance with the Commute Trip ReductionEfficiency Act and related transportation demandmanagement strategies. The MTP also identifies theregionally coordinated system for transportationsystem management / intelligent transportationsystem infrastructure and documents theTransportation System Management andOperations (TSMO) Plan.Figure 5-1. Metropolitan Transportation Plan for Clark County – Regional Transportation SystemVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-7

Vancouver’s transportation systemin 2011The Vancouver Transportation Plan Vision establishesthe framework for improving the city’stransportation system and is supplemented bythe updated Transportation Analysis (2011) andregionally coordinated with the MTP and ClarkCounty Transportation Resource Document(2002). The Transportation Analysis (2011) andreference plans provide extensive informationabout the transportation system conditions, forecasttravel demands and patterns, and correspondingtransportation system improvement needs.The city’s proposed transportation system improvementprojects are summarized in the maps in thischapter. Figure 5-2 shows the existing network ofarterial streets as of 2011, and Figure 5-3 showsproposed arterial improvements through 2030.Figure 5-4 shows existing and proposed bicycleroutes, and Figure 5-5 shows existing andproposed pedestrian systems. Planning for the railsystem, airports and water transportation throughthe Port is the responsibility of other agencies.Their connection to Vancouver’s transportationsystem is described in the TSP and in the MTP andClark County Comprehensive Growth ManagementPlan (2007).In addition to Vancouver’s transportation infrastructure,the Washington State Department ofTransportation (WSDOT), CTRAN (Clark County’sPublic Transportation Benefit District), and thePort of Vancouver build and maintain transportationinfrastructure in Vancouver. The WashingtonTransportation Plan 2007 – 2026 and the WashingtonState Highway System Plan 2007-2026 areadopted here by reference and includes an inventoryair, rail, and ground transportation along withan assessment of existing and future needs. (See,http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/planning/wtp/ for moreinformation). CTRAN’s adopted Transit SystemDevelopment Plan identifies existing and neededtransit facilities in Clark County and is also adoptedbelow by reference. (See, http://www.c-tran.com/assets/20_Year_Plan/C-TRAN_20_Year_Plan-Adopted_June_8__2010.pdffor a complete copy). Finally,the Port of Vancouver details its existing and futurefacilities on its website at http://www.portvanusa.com/sitemap. Each of the agencies mentioned aboveparticipate in the regional transportation planningprocess through the RTC, and the future facilitydevelopment plans are included in the adoptedMTP. Including all regional transportation facilitiesin the MTP ensures consistency of the plans ofvarious jurisdictions because all facilities areincluded and analyzed in the future regional traveldemand model.Transportation Level of ServiceFor City arterial corridors that have not reachedultimate capacity, transportation level of servicestandards are set consistent with the HighwayCapacity Manual 2000 for Urban Arterial Roadways.Additional considerations are also made forthe multi-modal attributes and demand managementstrategies along each corridor. Urban streetlevel of service standards are based on the averagethrough-vehicle travel speed for an entire corridoror a corridor segment. Specific corridor standardsare identified in Table 5-3.Where a corridor has been constructed to ultimatecapacity, where it is built to full urban standardwith sidewalks, bike lanes, travel lanes appropriateto its designation, intersection capacity consistentwith the roadway cross section and state of the arttraffic control, The Vancouver City Council maydesignate that corridor has reached ultimate peakcapacity. Once a corridor is designated as havingbeen constructed to ultimate capacity, the focus oftransportation development review turns to safety,access management and circulation, and transportationdemand management.Transportation Program need. The transportationimprovements and program initiativesproposed in this section and in the TSP are basedon the growth forecast in Chapter 1, CommunityDevelopment and supported by the Transportation5-8| Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-9Figure 5-2. Existing Arterial Network

Figure 5-3. Proposed Arterial Improvements5-10 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-11Figure 5-4. Existing and Proposed Bycicle System

Figure 5-5. Existing and Proposed Pedestrian System5-12 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Table 5-3. City of Vancouver Arterial Standards.FacilityLevel of service (LOS)standard: Average peakhour travel speed (mph)Andresen RoadMill Plain to SR-500 11SR-500 to Padden Parkway 15Burton RoadAndresen Rd to 112th Ave 12NE 28th St112th Ave to 138th Ave 10138th Ave to 162nd Ave 12Mill Plain BlvdF o u r t h P l a i n B l v d t o I - 5 * 1 0I-5 to Andresen Rd 12Andresen Rd to I-205 12I-205 to 136th Ave 10136th Ave to 164th Ave 10164th Ave. to 192nd Ave. 10164th AveSE 1st St to SR-14 10162nd AveSE 1st St to Fourth Plain Blvd 10192nd AveSR 14 to NE 18th St 10Fourth Plain BlvdPort of Vancouver to I-5 12I-5 to Andresen 10Andresen to 117th Ave (SR-503) 10117th Ave (SR-503) to 162nd Ave 10Ft Vancouver Way / St. Johns BlvdFourth Plain Blvd to SR-500 12St. Johns Blvd. / St. James BlvdSR-500 to NE 63rd Street 12NE 18th St112th Ave to 138th Ave 12138th Ave to 162nd Ave 12NE 112th AveMill Plain Blvd. to 28th St 1228th St to SR-500 12NE 136th AveMill Plain Blvd To 28th St 1228th St. to Fourth Plain Blvd 12Other Principal and Minor Arterials 12* This portion of Mill Plain Blvd. is also SR-501, a Highway ofStatewide Significance with a regionally established LOS D.Analysis. The improvements and programs outlinedbelow will improve connectivity and accessthroughout the community, encourage alternativetransportation choices, and support and encouragedevelopment as outlined in the Vancouver comprehensiveplan. The planned improvements will increaseaccess to goods and services throughout thecommunity for drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists, andtransit riders and will help to preserve the qualityof life that makes Vancouver special.Beyond the capital investments the City and regionmake in the transportation system, there are avariety of other programs and regulations thatimpact how the transportation and land usesystems develop in Vancouver. The TSP includes adescription of some of the most important ones—for example, the Neighborhood Traffic ManagementProgram, the Transportation DemandManagement Program, and the Vancouver AreaSmart Trek program and Transportation System-Management and Operations plans which seek toupgrade the Intelligent Transportation Systemscapabilities of the city. Vancouver is also planningto accommodate various types of electric vehiclesby providing regulations for installing chargingstations cooperating with Clark County on policiesto accommodate Neighborhood Electric Vehicles(NEVs). These programs, along with developmentregulations and development review to ensureon- and off-site pedestrian, bicycle, and transit connectivity,each have a large impact on the character,convenience, safety and mobility of Vancouverneighborhoods.Vancouver has an active Transportation DemandManagement program, with several key components.In addition to managing the regional commutetrip reduction program for state-designatedCTR employers in Clark County, Vancouver runsa variety of local programs and promotions toencourage commute trip reduction for non-CTRemployers (the state CTR law and program appliesonly to businesses with 100 or more employees).Vancouver has also adopted two Growth andVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-13

Twenty-year transportation need.Traffic projections derived from the populationand employment growth forecastsclearly indicate that auto, truck, andtransit trips will all increase significantlyin Vancouver over the next 20 years.That means that traffic congestion willworsen.Transportation Efficiency Centers, one in thecentral business district and one in the east-sideemployment center at Columbia Tech Center.These programs include participation in regionalefforts for trip reduction, such as car pool matching,bike-to-work, and CTR promotions with prizes foremployees that use non-SOV modes to reach work.Vancouver also participates in the regional VancouverArea Smart Trek (VAST) program throughthe Regional Transportation Council. This efforthas helped Vancouver install millions of dollars ofupgrades to state of the art traffic systems managementtools. For example, Vancouver, in cooperationwith CTRAN is preparing to test a transit signalprioritysystem to increase transit efficiency andreliability. Vancouver has also recently participatedin development of the Traffic System Operationsand Management (TSMO) Plan update withthe RTC. The TSMO plan identifies projectsand strategies to improve system efficiencyas growth continues and establishes the city’smaster plan for signal system fiber communicationsand related signal system upgrades.Increased operational efficiency of existingcapital infrastructure is a key transportationgrowth management strategy for Vancouver.Figure 5-2 shows the master plan ofthe arterial street system. The improvementsrecommended in the comprehensiveplan should help alleviate the worstproblems. The plan supports growth inVancouver by building and managing amulti-modal system designed for urbantraffic conditions. The City’s transportationsystem is not currently, nor will it ever be,based solely on the automobile.To accommodate growth expected over the 20-yearplanning period, many more improvements to thetransportation system will be needed. Plannedprojects include major roadway projects, minorstreet projects, signal systems projects, pedestrianprojects, bike projects, and trails. Partnerships willalso be undertaken with the responsible agenciesto provide system improvements that support andcomplement the area’s transit services and highwaysystems.Table 5-4 is a summary of the projects neededfrom 2011 to 2016 and more generally from 2017to 2030. It is important to note that the 20-yearprojected needs include projects that will be imple-5-14 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

mented in one to six years. Figures 5-3, 5-4 and5-5 depict arterial, bicycle and pedestrian systemsthat will be needed to support expected growthduring the 20-year planning period. Building thefull transportation system of the comprehensiveplan will provide a diverse multi-modal systemsupportive of residents mobility needs and will noteliminate all traffic congestion.The comprehensive plan supports the City ofVancouver’s vision statement (see Preface) andpresents a process for implementing workabletransportation solutions to promote mobility andaccessibility. The Vancouver transportation systemneeds analysis assumes that major improvementsplanned by the Washington Department of Transportation(WSDOT), Clark County and local citieswill be made. However, these outside agencyimprovements are not included in Vancouver’scapital cost and revenue estimates. State and regionalplans contain specific information. WSDOTfacilities in Vancouver include portions of I-5 andI-205, and State Routes 14, 500 and 503.High-capacity transit. The planning process forhigh capacity transit in Vancouver is well underwayand is described in detail in the adopted MetropolitanTransportation Plan in Chapter 5 (http://www.rtc.wa.gov/reports/mtp/Mtp2008ch5.pdf). In additionto the MTP, high capacity transit planning for ClarkCounty has been completed in a special RTC highcapacity transit study and in C-TRAN’s twenty yeartransit development plan. (http://www.rtc.wa.gov/Table 5-4. 20-year CFP project cost summary.Years Project Cost Funding2011 to 2016 Construction Projects $56,561,000 $56,561,000Design Projects $9,367,000 $9,367,000Subtotal Years 1 to 6 $65,928,000 $65,928,0002017 to 2030 Street and intersection projects $337,046,000 $337,046,000Pedestrian projects $19,979,000 $19,979,000Bicycle projects $7,038,000 $7,038,000Subtotal Years 7 to 20 $364,063,000 $364,063,000Total 20-year CFP $429,991,000 $429,991,000hct/ and http://www.c-tran.com/assets/20_Year_Plan/C-TRAN_20_Year_Plan-Adopted_June_8__2010.pdf).In addition to planning efforts, two projects arein process. C-TRAN has initiated an AlternativesAnalysis for high capacity transit on Fourth PlainBoulevard to evaluate implementation of a busrapid transit system for operational enhancements.The Columbia River Crossing Project is planningfor a new multi-modal river crossing on the I-5corridor that will include connecting light rail intoOregon through a route in downtown Vancouver toClark College. Improving transit service and streetconditions along major transit corridors (HCT andTier 2) will enhance the public transit system andincrease the total suite of transportation serviceswithin the city. Major improvements such as theplanned high capacity transit lines support thegrowth goals and mode share strategies of the Planas well as growth center plans for the VancouverCity Center Vision and other identified centers.Funding needed improvements. Funding fortransportation improvements comes from a varietyof sources. The federal government provides fundsto states for construction of state highways andmajor facilities that support interstate commerce.The state in turn distributes the funding to localgovernments for specific improvements. The stateitself funds improvements to state highways linkingcommunities.At the local level, the City has a road fund dedicatedto maintaining andupgrading city streets. Fundscurrently dedicated to transportationcapital upgradesinclude: state collected motorvehicle fuel tax, real estateexcise transfer taxes, impactfees, which are supplementedby state and federal grants,developer contributions, andlimited bonding. Pursuant toVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-15

funding strategy is based on four principles: (1)existing revenues should be used before asking formore, (2) new revenues should be based on benefitsto users, (3) there should be a time limit on theduration of authority for new revenue sources, and(4) new revenues should be a small fraction of thecommunity’s willingness to pay. The principleswere used to identify the strategy for increasesrevenues within the 20-year period, as appropriate.RCW 35.77.010, the City of Vancouver must adopta six-year Transportation Improvement Program(TIP) each year. The TIP contains a coordinatedtransportation program and an explanation of howthe money for transportation improvements willbe spent. The TIP is based on the policy directionin the TSP. Table 5-5 lists transportation fundingsources and amounts for the 2011 to 2016 period,and more generally, for 2017 through 2030.In addition to city investment, developers of landconstruct roads when they build new subdivisionsand may contribute funds to construct improvementsto surrounding roads to mitigate impacts oftheir development. Property developers also pay atraffic impact fee (TIF) based on the number of vehicletrips the development will add to the system.TIF funding must be used for the specific projectsidentified in the impact fee program, which are asubset of the City’s transportation capital facilitiesplan. Typically, TIF funds are spent to improve designatedarterial roadways that are included on theproject list included in the City’s Traffic Impact FeeProgram Technical Document.Transportation finance summary. The transportationcapital project list is divided into two categories:(1) projects programmed and budgeted fordesign and/or construction, and (2) capital facilitiesplan projects that are needed to serve growth.Project cost by category are presented in Table 5-4.Funding principles. Vancouver’s transportationFunding plan. The funding plan addresses how thetransportation capital facility plan will be implemented.The funding plan is divided into two initialphases. Phase I is a six-year plan and is scheduledfor 2011-2016. Phase II covers 2017 to 2030. PhaseII will be funded using the same baseline revenuesbut will require reauthorization and new funding.Requesting regular public reauthorization allowsfor periodic checks to ensure that the new money isbeing spent according to the plan.The City can finance the transportation capital programby forming a transportation benefit district,selling bonds (voted or non-voted), by reinstatingthe business and occupation tax, by increasingtraffic impact fees, by increasing the sales tax andbusiness license fee surcharge, or by using anycombination to address funding needs beyondPhase I. Additional information on transportationfinancing is available in Appendix D, Capital FacilitiesFunding Summary. Future transportation revenuesare projected to match costs, but will requireactivation of additional authorized funding sourcesnot currently in use. Policy CD-13 of this comprehensiveplan (see page 1-15) commits the City tomaintaining balance between land use and facilitiesplanning. Should planned funding fall short ofexpectations, Vancouver will initiate a re-assessmentof essential balance between adopted levels ofservice, planned growth, and the cost of the capitalfacilities plan. One strategy the City will likelyemploy is included in the transportation concurrencysection above. The City’s concurrency policyallows for designation of transportation corridors5-16 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Table 5-5. Estimated future transportation revenues.Incremental improvements to existing infrastructureSource 2011 to 2016 2017 to 2030are often more efficient thanTotal Impact Fees $10,872,000 $10,827,000 large capital investments, and more efficientlyState and federal grants $21,743,000 $21,654,000use scarce resources. ImprovementsCity REET – 1st 1 / 4% – $2, 514,000 $25,377,000 should also support all modes of travel.Pavement ManagementState gas tax $18,766,000 $ 50,803,000 Create livable streets. Most people whoDeveloper contributions $1,500,000 $4,500,000live in Vancouver view the community’sReserves for funded projects $14,700,000 _streets as more than simply concrete andBonds/Loans $10,700,000 _General Fund support $9,361,000 $36,047,000 asphalt. Streets affect the way people live,City REET — 2nd 1/4% $600,000 $1,690,000 work, and play. Streets should be viewed asNew Funding — TBD $5,771,000 $319,664,000 part of a dynamic, integrated land use andTotal $96,527,000 $470,562,000 transportation system. Street treatmentsNote: revenue forecast includes street pavement preservation programs (paving type, sidewalks, lighting, streettrees, signs, and furniture such as benchesthat have reached “ultimate capacity.” Once a corridoris built to ultimate capacity, the City’s focusand trash cans) should address the needs ofregular users and the surrounding area.changes from providing additional peak-hourthrough put for additional vehicles to trip reduction.Direction for the futureHave good connections throughout. Connected,continuous street systems make activities of dailyliving easier to accomplish. Vancouver’s early developmentwas based on a grid street system. AsPromote accessibility, not just mobility. Accessibilityensures that all users of the transporta-development moved east, a grid based on majorcorridors was established, but many of the connectionshave not been completed. In many areas, contionsystem have equal access to safe and qualityfacilities, regardless of transportation mode. Basicnectivity for auto travel, pedestrians, and bicycliststransportation access to obtain goods and servicesis lacking. This means that even simple errands-likeand engage in social activities is an essential needgoing to the store or visiting a friend-require significanttravel.that must be met. Motorists, pedestrians, bicyclistsand transit riders should all be able to usethe transportation system in a safe, efficient, anduniform way. Transportation is a means to an end,seldom an end in itself. By focusing on accessibilityrather than mobility, the critical issue becomes oneof how people can accomplish daily activities moreefficiently, rather than how they can get from pointSupport all travel modes. Vancouver residentsand businesses support and expect the developmentof a multi-modal system—one that providesa range of travel choices. This will require planningand providing facilities for automobile, bus transit,high-capacity transit, pedestrian, and bicycle travel.A to point B more rapidly. Furthermore, focusingon accessibility recognizes the relationship betweenland use and transportation systems.Help build a truly walkable community. Nearlyeveryone walks and does so every day. Vancouverresidents and businesses have indicated theyBe efficient. Money for transportation improvementsis scarce, even as demand for new and betterfacilities increases. Consequently, strategies thatmake do with less and maximize existing investmentsare a high priority. Improvements to thetransportation system must address efficiency.equate a walkable community with a high qualityof life. In addition, citizens have made it clear thatVancouver’s streets need to be more accessibleand safer for pedestrians. Especially important aredowntown and neighborhood streets, minor neighborhoodarterials, and routes along major bus lines.Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-17

Support transportation and land use improvements.A large majority of residents supportmixed-use developments in at least some ofVancouver’s centers and neighborhoods. Mixed-useareas are often favorite places with lots of activityeasily accessible by different transportation modes.Streets with an attractive and interesting street atmosphere,where land uses and the transportationsystem are mutually supportive, create a vital andinteresting focus for the community. In addition, byoffering a mix of housing, employment and servicesnear each other, the areas benefit the transportationsystem by reducing the total number of tripsand trip length, and by keeping them off the majorhighway system.TransitVancouver’s public transit in 2011C-TRAN has provided public transit service in ClarkCounty since 1981. C-TRAN’s mission is to providesafe, efficient, reliable mobility choices. Vancouverarea services include 30 fixed bus routes, commutervanpool, and ADA (Americans with Disability Act)paratransit. A detailed description of C-TRAN’sservices, facilities, and equipment is included inits 20-Year Transit Development Plan, entitledC-TRAN 2030, which is incorporated here by reference.(http://www.c-tran.com/20_Year_Plan_Update2.html). Locations for current fixed routes are availablefrom C-TRAN at http://www.c-tran.com/systemmap.html.Existing major Vancouver area transit facilitiesshown in Figure 5-6 of this chapter include threetransit centers (Fisher’s Landing, 99th Street atStockford Village, and Vancouver Mall) and sixpark and ride lots (Andresen, BPA Ross Complex,Evergreen, Fisher’s Landing, 99th Street at StockfordVillage, and Salmon Creek). These park andride lots provide a total of 2,170 parking spacessystemwide, primarily used by commuter express,carpool, and vanpool passengers. Most of thesefacilities include shelters and benches as well asbicycle racks or lockers. All fixed route buses areADA accessible and have onboard bike racks. Transitcenters at Fisher’s Landing and 99th Street offerpublic restrooms. A total of about 260 shelters andbenches are maintained throughout the fixed routesystem.Direction for the futureSix-year plan: 2011-2016. C-TRAN fixed route,paratransit, and vanpool services totaled 369,800operating hours in 2010, providing over 6.5 millionpassenger trips. C-TRAN has been affected by theeconomic downturn that continues in Clark County.Sales tax revenues, C-TRAN’s local funding, arerecovering, but still well below pre-recession levels.5-18 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-19Figure 5-6. Transit System

Table 5-6. Operating Hours and Ridership, 2005-20102005 2010 Increase ChangeOperating Hours 330,603 369,800 39,197 11.8%Ridership 5,812,417 6,552,570 740,153 12.7%C-TRAN has implemented a variety of strategies tomaintain service levels. In 2011, C-TRAN expectsto seek voter approval for additional sales tax fundingthat would be used to preserve and expand thetransit system, implementing Phase I of the 20 yearplan. Without additional funding, C-TRAN willneed to reduce operating hours to match reducedincome levels.C-TRAN will continue its investments in technologyto help improve safety and operating efficiency.Project priorities for 2011 include improvements tobus stops and amenities, opening a relocated parkand ride, maintaining a state of good repair at transitfacilities, providing accessible customer information,and expanding the vanpool program.C-TRAN 2030C-TRAN 2030 outlines a plan for growth andinvestment in the transit system over the next20 years. Investments include two new bus routesin east Vancouver, increased frequency onlocal routes, two new park and ride facilities withincreased commuter service, service to meet thegrowing paratransit demand, and C-TRAN’sfirst bus rapid transit (BRT) route along theFourth Plain corridor. The 20-year plan alsosupports the development and operation oflight rail’s extension into downtown Vancouveras included in the Columbia River Crossingproject. Implementation of C-TRAN 2030 is contingenton voter approval of additional funding forC-TRAN.High Capacity TransitC-TRAN 2030 includes the first project in the ClarkCounty High Capacity Transit System, the FourthPlain BRT. Expansion of the BRT system to otherarterial corridors is beyond the scope of currenttransit plans, but consistent with C-TRAN’s 50 yearvision. Extension of light rail to Vancouver’s centralbusiness district is in planning through the ColumbiaRiver Crossing project. Ensuring intermodalconnections that facilitate travel for Clark Countyresidents is a priority for C-TRAN throughout theseprojects. Vancouver’s plan anticipates these improvementsand depends upon transit investmentsand operations to support future mobility.During 2011, C-TRAN is beginning the AlternativeAnalysis study of transit improvement alternativesin the Fourth Plain corridor, building on the previousHCT Study recommendation for a BRT projectto meet the need for improved transit to servegrowing ridership demand. C-TRAN and its partnersincluding the City of Vancouver and RTC willengage the community in a process to explorealternative service proposals, leading to adoptionof a locally preferred alternative in the summer of2012. Once a locally preferred option is adopted,C-TRAN will seek funding for construction. At thistime, construction is anticipated during 2013, withthe BRT being completed and open in 2014.5-20 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

AirportThe City of Vancouver operates Pearson Field,a general aviation airport as an enterprise fund,which requires the airport to be self-supporting.Pearson Field (International Designation “VUO”)primarily serves general aviation aircraft that arecomprised primarily of propeller driven aircraftwith wingspans less than 49 feet and weighing lessthan 12,500 pounds. Pearson Field has a 3,275 footlong, 60 foot wide, hard surfaced runway andparallel taxiway system. The airport has an estimated50,000 annual operations, 175 based aircraft,12 reserved tie-downs and 10 transient tie-downs.Pearson Field is one of 138 public use airports inthe state of Washington and is identified within theWashington State Aviation System Plan and theNational Plan of Integrated Airport Systems as animportant regional, state and national transportationfacility. In addition to being the nation’s oldestoperating airport, the airport was named amongthe country’s 100 most needed airports accordingto a list prepared by the National Air TransportationAssociation.Under the Growth Management Act, Pearson FieldAirport is an essential public facility, and must beprotected from adjacent incompatible land usesand/or activities that could impedethe safe operation of the airport. In2001, an airport master plan wascompleted that included a capitalimprovement program (CIP) for atwenty-year planning period (2000-2020). A master plan update will becompleted in 2012. In addition to themaster plan update, the 2005 businessplan is undergoing a strategicupdate with a completion date scheduledfor late 2011.Pearson Field is a gateway to the Vancouver-Portland area for business, commerce and tourismdue to its location with easy access to downtownVancouver and Portland. Over 60% of the operationsare commerce related, and the airport is aprimary location for emergency operations, searchand rescue and other public services. Pearson hasa Fixed Base Operator (FBO) that provides a fullrange of aviation services including major aircraftand avionics repair and maintenance, flight training,aircraft sales and rentals, aviation fuel, andscenic flights.The City of Vancouver owns 61.8acres of the 134-acre airport site withthe remaining 72.6 acres owned bythe National Park Service. PearsonField is the only airport in the nation that operateswithin the boundaries of a national historic reserve.Current and future operation and management ofPearson Field is defined through multiple agreementsestablished between the City, National ParkService, National Historic Reserve Trust andFederal Aviation Administration.Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-21

Public waterThe City of Vancouver Public Works Departmentprovides potable water to the City of Vancouverand the eastern portion of the Vancouver UrbanGrowth Area (VUGA) north of the city limits Acomplete facility inventory, analysis of capacity andneed, and capital facilities program is provided inthe adopted 2007 City of Vancouver Water SystemComprehensive Plan.Clark Public Utilities (CPU) serves the western portionof the VUGA north of the city limits. Regionalwater policy isguided by theClark CountyCoordinated WaterSystem Plan(CWSP), andoverseen by theWater Utility CoordinatingCommittee(WUCC),which is composedof managers and technical officials from localjurisdictions.Vancouver’s public water supply in 2005capacity of these reservoirs is 24 million gallons.Water quality is ensured by ongoing monitoringand treatment of groundwater prior to delivery tothe distribution system.Table 5-7 summarizes current production andfuture demand for the water system. The averagedaily system demand in 2005 was 26.2 milliongallons (MGD), which is a daily water use ofapproximately 125 gallons per person based on anestimated service area population of 209,527.Pipeline and system maintenance efforts along withconservation programs have resulted in an increasein the average daily demand (ADD) for water ofonly 5% despite an almost 43 percent increase inserved population. Since most changes to reducewater loss have been completed, ADD is likely toresume increasing as the City population grows.The City presently has 40 groundwater wells.Vancouver has a total annual water right forwithdrawal of 15.8 billion gallons per year, or anannual daily average of 43.4 MGD. Maximuminstantaneous withdrawal allowed is 108.07 MGDat 75,000 gallons per minute. Ideal design practicerecommends that the source of supply be able toInventory. Figure5-7 showsthe Vancouverpublic water supplysystem. Allwater in the localsystem comesfrom groundwatersources. Water isstored in tenreservoirs ortowers to maintainsystem pressureand provide forpeak flow, fireflow, and standbyflow. The totalTable 5-7. Water production and projected demand.Category 1996* 2005 2012 2026(actual) (actual) (projected) (projected)Service area population (includes incorporated City 146,184 209,527 228,779 272,664and adjacent unincorporated areas)Average Daily Demand (ADD) in 24.9 26.2 35 45millions of gallons per day (MGD)ADD/person, in gallons 165 125 144* 150*Peak day demand in MGD 50 52 66 82Number of wells 36 40 40 TBD**Reliable well capacity in MGD 53 89 89 TBD**Storage capacity in MG 24.5 24 24 TBD**Primary water rights, annual daily average in MG 43.41 43.41 43.41 TBD**Primary water rights in billions of gallons per year 15.8 15.8 15.8 TBD***The increase in ADD is attributed to assumed increases in industrial and wholesale demand.**To be determined5-22 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-23Figure 5-7. Existing Public Water Sysem

per the latest adopted version of the InternationalFire Code and Vancouver Municipal Code.Photo by Pat Easleyserve the maximum day demand (MDD), allowingstored water to be used for the daily peakingrequirements of the system. Currently, the totalpeak reliable well capacity is 89 MGD, but otherlimiting factors such as treatment restrict the totalusable capacity to 80.6 MGD. The peak day systemdemand was 52 million gallons in 2005, or 248 gallonsper person. It is estimated that the averagedaily demand will increase to 150 gallons perperson by 2026 and that the peak day demand willincrease to 300 gallons per person due to anincrease in industrial and wholesale demand.When operated continuously, existing waterproduction facilities are sufficient to meet currentand projected future (2026) demands.Fire flows. A water system is required to have asupply, storage, and distribution system grid withsufficient capacity to provide firefighting needswhile maintaining maximum daily demand flows toresidential and commercial customers. Because firefighting requires a large amount of water in a shorttime, fire flow requirements typically determinethe minimum size of water lines needed to serve anarea, as well as the amount of storage needed.The City of Vancouver’s water delivery systemprovides fire hydrants and water distribution mainsin neighborhoods and business areas throughoutthe water service area. Development requires newwater mains and hydrants to serve new buildings,Service standards. The Washington StateDepartment of Health requires the water systemto provide flows to satisfy peak hourly demandswith pressures at no less than 30 psi (pounds persquare inch) at all points in the distribution system(measured at any customer’s water meter or at theproperty line if no meter exists), except for fire flowconditions. It is usually desirable to have pressuresabove 40 psi.Direction for the futureFuture demand. Although water production issufficient, there is a geographical separationbetween the productive water sources in thesouthwest and the growing population and waterdemands in the northeast. Therefore, the City willcontinue to construct a backbone of transmissionand booster pump improvements to move waterfrom the southwest to northeast.To improve system water supply reliability,particularly in the event of a power failure or otheremergency operations, Vancouver plans toconstruct standby power facilities at multiple watersources. Specifically, the City created a Master Plandirected exclusively at its largest and most importantsource, Water Station No. 1. The plan identifieddesired improvements, including replacementwells, new standby power facilities, replacementof all storage at the site due to seismic concerns,consolidation and expansion of pumping systems,and creation of secure operator support facilities.Vancouver is not in immediate need of new waterrights, but will apply for additional rights in orderto make adjustments between source locations,withdrawal rates, and to meet its projected longtermannual demands. The Salmon-Washougal andLewis Watershed Management Plan was approvedin 2006. The plan prefers that new water supplies5-24 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

e withdrawn from the Columbia River, adjacentlowland reaches of tributaries subject to tidaleffects, and/or associated groundwater, rather thanfrom flow-limited reaches of streams that havesensitive aquatic habitat. These areas include waterprolific areas such as the Vancouver Lake lowlandsand the Steigerwald Wildlife Refuge. Future regionalwater supplies are likely in these areas to meetlong term demands.rates current and proportional to capital facilityimprovement and maintenance needs.Sanitary sewerAdditional improvements may include sourceimprovements (new wells, pumps, or water treatmentsystems), improvements to existing boosterstations, new or improved water storage facilities,and extension or upgrade of pipelines. A detaileddescription of current capital improvement projectsis provided in the Vancouver Water SystemComprehensive Plan (2007).Sanitary sewer systems consist of neighborhoodsewer lines that take waste from pipes servingindividual properties, trunk lines that collect wastefrom these lines within individual drainage basins,and interceptors that receive flow from severaldrainage basins and route it to treatment facilities.Pump stations and force mains augment the system.Sanitary sewer service is a Tier I concurrencyservice in the City of Vancouver. For more detailSix-year funding and projects. Table 5-8provides information about costs of plannedrefer to the City of Vancouver, WashingtonGeneral Sewer Plan.projects and funding over the next six years andlonger to maintain or improve levels of service toVancouver water customers.Vancouver’s sanitary sewer system in 2011The City of Vancouver provides wastewater serviceswithin city limits and in a portion of the unincorporatedurban areas north and east of theTable 5-8. Water system capital projects and funding, ongoingcity limits, such as the east Minnehahaand planned, 2011 to 2016.area and the Orchards and Sifton areas,Year Total Costs Available fundsas indicated in Figure 5-8. The Vancouver2011 budgeted $9,172,907service area includes several major2012 budgeted $4,235,000wastewater drainage basins. The Clark2013 $5,350,000Regional Wastewater District serves the2014 $5,230,000northwest portion of the unincorporated2015 $5,850,000VUGA that straddles I-5. The City of2016 $6,825,000Vancouver sewer system comprises moreTotal 2011–2016 More than More thanthan 700 miles of pipe. The gravity mains$36,662,907 $39,000,000range in size from 6 to 60 inches inSources: City of Vancouver Public Worksdiameter. Wastewater flow is treated atAnalysis of revenue and expense indicates there areadequate operating reserves to fund ongoing facilityreplacement needs. System development chargerevenues will be used to partially fund expansionprojects. Biannual review of utility rates willprovide appropriate management review to keepthe Westside Water Reclamation Facility (WWRF)and the Marine Park Water Reclamation Facility(MPWRF). The WWRF also serves a City-ownedindustrial pretreatment lagoon. Sterilized ash fromincineration of solids is trucked to a solid wastelandfill in Boardman, Oregon.Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-25

5-26 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030Figure 5.8 Existing Sanitary Sewer System. Source: Vancouver Public Works Department

Some of the residential and commercial wastewaterflows can be shifted between WWRF andMPWRF, depending on available capacity. In additionto treating Vancouver wastewater WWRFtreats wastewater from the southwest portion of theClark Regional Wastewater District. Both treatmentplants release treated water into the ColumbiaRiver. The WWRF also serves a City-owned industrialpretreatment lagoon handling food-processedwastewater. Ash from incineration of solids istrucked to a solid waste landfill in Boardman,Oregon.buildout flows under this storm the wastewater collectionsystem will need minor upgrading.Service standards. The existing sewer systemmeets all federal and state standards and has adequatecapacity for existing and future demand.The sanitary sewer system is monitored by instrumentation,computer modeling, and trackingdevelopment trends so that sewer projects can beimplemented before the mains reach capacity. Preventivemaintenance keeps problem areas clean tominimize unexpected blockages.Completion of the Sewer Connection Incentive Program(discussed below) will increase total systemusage demand by approximately 1.2 MGD. Totalprojected buildout peak dry weather flow, includingnew flow from the septic elimination program, is25.4 MGD, well below the current capacity of 44.3MGD average daily flow capacity.On-site systems (septic tanks). At the end of2010 there were approximately 6,000 onsite sewagetreatment or septic systems in the Vancouversewer service area, serving 16,200 people and dischargingover 1.2 MGD of effluent into the groundfor treatment. Because most of the systems aremore than 30 years old and reaching the end oftheir expected life spans,failures are increasing. SepticTable 5-9. City of Vancouver treatment facilities, capacity, and flows in 2010system failures may go undetected,Facility Average daily Average Maximumallowing contami-flow capacity daily flow average dailynation of nearby streams,(in MGD) (in MGD) (in MGD)lakes, or shallow drinkingWestside Water 28.3 10.4 14.5Reclamation Facility (WWRF)*water wells. Septic systemsMarine Park Water 16.0 10.7 14.9 can also cause an increase inReclamation Facility (MPWRF)Industrial pretreatment 3.2 1.52 2.6nitrates in groundwater. TheSewer Connection Incentive*Pretreatment flow is included in the flow data for the WWRF.Source: Vancouver Public Works Department, 2011.Program (SCIP) has beendeveloped to protect waterresources from failing septicThe hydraulic model for the major wastewatercollection system was refined as part of the Cityof Vancouver, Washington General Sewer Plan todetermine whether the network of pipes, manholes,pumps, and other physical facilities were adequateto convey estimated flows under storm conditions.The results indicate that the system is capable ofconveying flows resulting from a nearly one-intwenty-five-yearsystems and to help homeownerseliminate unreliable septic systems. Cityordinances and County Health Department rulesprohibit new septic systems except for in extenuatingcircumstances. The program extends sanitarysewers into areas served by septic systems, andprovides affordable financing to homeowners toallow them to connect to the system.recurrence interval storm underDirection for the future. Table 5-10 shows2008 conditions without compromising wastewaterplanned sewer system improvements throughtreatment. However, to accommodate projected2030, grouped into categories of basin improve-Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-27

ments, sewer connection incentive program,replacement/preservation, roadway coordination,development improvements, and wastewatertreatment improvements. The treatment facilityprojects are all in the maintenance/replacement/preservation category as there is sufficient capacityfor the expected growth. The City is currentlyservicing debt generated from past expansion ofthe two wastewater treatment facilities. As the Cityretires this existing debt there is sufficient fundingfrom system development charges and rates tocover the costs of the all proposed projects. Rateincreases will continue to be sought to coverescalating operating costs associated with inflation.are extended into existing neighborhoods currentlyserved by septic systems to provide the homeownerssewer service, so it is available for homeownersto connect to when existing septic systems fail. (SeeCity of Vancouver General Sewer Plan for moreinformation on SCIP Program).Replacement/Preservation. This program replacessubstandard mains—typically these have beenolder mains that are nearing the end of their lifecycle. Unless remedial action is taken they usuallyrequire extensive preventive maintenance. Remedialsteps taken at appropriate times reduce maintenancedemands and potential backups. Sometimesold mains are replaced when roads are improved toreduce cutting new pavement. The City is embarkingon a comprehensive Asset Management Planthat will refine this program by performing coordinatedcondition assessments. This work will allowthe City to better prioritize the replacement andpreservation efforts.Roadway Coordination. When the City, County,or State constructs a new roadway the plans will bereviewed and sewers may be installed or extended toprovide service to adjacent parcels. Sewer replacementsbased upon age and/or maintenance historycan be accomplished during roadway constructionas well. Sewers are less expensive to install when anexisting road is being reconstructed. Also, thiscoordination prevents cutting of the new pavementin the short-term for sewer installation later.Basin Improvements. These are projects that areplanned basin improvements or that relieve capacityconcerns identified by the City’s state of the arthydraulic sewer model.Sewer Connection Incentive Program. SewersDevelopment Improvements. Outside of the SCIPprojects developers extend most of the sewers inthe City’s system. This includes needed pump stationsand force mains. The City may grant SystemDevelopment Charge credits for any pump stationsor force mains that are considered system improvements.Wastewater Treatment Improvements. Asmentioned above these are projects to maintain,replace, or preserve the existing wastewatertreatment facilities.5-28 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Table 5-10. Vancouver sanitary sewer capital programs and projects, 2011–2030.Program/ 2011-2012 2013-2014 2015-2016 2017 to 2023 2024 to 2030 TotalProjectBasin Improvements $ 543,000 $ 70,000 $ 387,000 $ 6,320,000 $ 0 $ 7,320,000Sewer Connection $ 6,000,000 $ 6,000,000 $ 6,000,000 $ 21,000,000 $ 11,000,000 $ 50,000,000Incentive ProgramReplacement / $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 4,000,000 $ 14,000,000 $ 19,500,000PreservationRoadway $ 0 $ 915,000 $ 600,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 0 $ 3,515,000CoordinationDevelopment $ 1,950,000 $ 1,950,000 $ 1,950,000 $ 6,825,000 $ 6,825,000 $ 19,500,000Improvements As needed As needed As needed As needed As needed As neededWastewater $ 1,206,000 $ 972,000 $ 2,088,000 $ 40,900,000 $ 13,400,000 $ 58,566,000TreatmentImprovementsTotal $ 10,199,000 $ 10,407,000 $ 11,525,000 $ 81,045,000 $ 45,255,000 $158,401,000Costs are presented in December 2010 dollarsSource: Vancouver Public Works Department, 2011.StormwaterThe City of Vancouver’s overall goal is to promotestormwater drainage designs that help maintainor improve surface and groundwater quality. Increasedurbanization can make this challenging, asincreasing impervious surfaces (roadways, parkinglots, driveways, and sidewalks) increases theamount of runoff from storms, thereby increasingthe potential for stormwater to transport pollutantssuch as petroleum contaminants, eroded sediments,and chemicals. These pollutants can end up insurface waters or infiltrate and threaten groundwaterresources.Table 5-11. Storm drainage infrastructure in the City ofVancouver and the VUGA.Open ditches6 milesStorm sewers336 milesOutfalls (estimate) 177Catch basins (estimate) 12,893Detention facilities* 29Retention facilities*NoneTreatment facilities* 456Regional facilities 6Public infiltration facilities (infiltrationbasins or dry wells) 50 %Connections to WSDOT facility: SR-500 at I-5, I-205 atAndresen Road, at Thurston, and SR-14 at I-205*Estimated number operated by MS4Vancouver’s preferred approach to stormwatermanagement is to require property owners to retainstormwater on site and treat it, usually by running itthrough vegetated areas where plants filter out andabsorb pollutants, prior to its release into the groundor nearby surface water. This approach also reducesthe risk of flooding along streams by regulating flowinto the stream during storms. Table 5-11 summarizesthe existing stormwater management systems(both piped and natural) in Vancouver.The City’s surface water utility was created in themid-1990s. Master planning efforts have resultedin several plans based on the drainage basins inVancouver: the Columbia Slope Plan and the BurntBridge Creek (BBC) Watershed Plan. The ColumbiaSlope Plan was developed when the City’s utilitywas established. The City’s budget addresses manyof the projects and property acquisitions for thesurface water utility.Managing stormwater on-site means much of thestormwater system is private, which makes measuringtotal system capacity difficult. What is known isthat the geology for most of the City of Vancouverallows for stormwater to infiltrate on site, so newVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-29

5-30 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030Figure 5-9. Vancouver’s existing stormwater properties and facilities.

development typically is able to provide waterquality treatment and to discharge to stand-aloneinfiltration systems. However, in the unincorporatedVancouver UGA the groundwater table is highand the hydric soils are saturated, which limits theability of stormwater to infiltrate and constrainsthe capacity for on-site management.The City has completed improvements to the BBCGreenway. The project enhanced fish and wildlifehabitat, provided trails for recreational access, andimproved stormwater treatment before draining toPublic Involvement and Participation – SWMprovides programs to promote public participationin stormwater issues.Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination –A business and industry inspection programhelps insure compliance with Water Protectionregulations. Staff maintains an extensive anddetailed database of local businesses and industriesto facilitate the inspection process. Mappingof the City’s storm system is another keycomponent of illicit discharge detection andelimination.Controlling Runoff from New Development,Redevelopment and Construction Sites – Allconstruction projects that include ground disturbingactivities must have an erosion controlplan that is reviewed and approved by SWMstaff. An erosion control specialist inspectsproject sites before and during construction toinsure storm systems and water ways are protectedfrom erosion. Following construction theCity continues to inspect stormwater treatmentand flow control facilities to verify maintenancestandards are met.the creek. The Surface Water Management divisioncontinues evaluating storm drainage rates and providesupdated inventories and maps of stormwaterpipes, drainage facilities and treatment.National Pollutant Discharge EliminationSystem Phase II Stormwater Permit TheDepartment of Ecology issued Vancouver its firstPhase II NPDES Stormwater Permit in 2007.A new permit will replace it in 2012. Permitmeasures include the following main categories:Public Education and Outreach – SWM provideseducational programs and distributes informationalmaterials to the community aboutthe practices that lessen impacts.Pollution Prevention and Operation andMaintenance for Municipal Operations – TheCity’s O&M program establishes maintenancestandards, initiates facility inspections, andincorporates staff training in practices that canhelp reduce pollutant runoff from municipaloperations.Other essential Surface Water Managementservices The following programs and servicesare not mandated by the NPDES permit but areconsidered essential:Capital Planning/Projects – SWM staff workswith consultants on larger capital projects byreviewing and guiding their efforts. Smallerproject are planned and designed by staff.Operations Support – SWM staff works withoperations staff to plan and design solutions todrainage problems throughout the city.Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-31

Utility Billing – Stormwater fees are basedon impervious surfaces on a parcel. Customersfrequently inquire about their fees andstaff researches and verify fees that are beingcharged.Reviewing Transportation Projects – Transportationprojects usually include stormwatercollection systems. SWM engineeringstaff reviews these projects for compliancewith city standards and to insure ease ofmaintenance for operations staff.Public Response/Support – SWM staffanswers calls from the public concerningdrainage issues on both private and publicproperty.Endangered Species Act – SWM staff providestechnical assistance to Community DevelopmentServices efforts to protect endangeredspecies.Recreational – SWM owns many large parcelsof land that are adjacent to Burnt Bridge Creek.These open space parcels are used as nativevegetation buffers for the creek. Where possible,the public has been allowed access to thesenatural areas with formal and informal trails.These areas have become open space assets tothe public.Future directionVancouver will continue to work with privateproperty owners to enhance the functioning offloodplains and riparian areas throughout the Cityand in the extended stormwater service area.Increased plantings of native vegetation andremoval of impervious surfaces will also enhancestormwater management.Capital Project NeedsCapital facilities needed through 2016 aresummarize in Table 5-12.Table 5-12. Stormwater Capital Facilities 2011-2016Project Category Cost FundingSourcesWDOT projects $1,200,000 Surface WaterConstruction FundSCIP $1,167,000 Surface WaterConstruction FundStormwater Capacity $508,000 State GrantsOther $2,770,520 Surface WaterConstruction FundTotal $5,645,520Sources: City of Vancouver Public WorksParks and RecreationParks, trails, greenways, and other park and recreationfacilities in Vancouver and unincorporatedClark County are managed by the Vancouver-ClarkParks and Recreation Department (VCPRD), a jointagency encompassing the previously separate Cityand County parks departments. VCPRD owns andoperates six different types of parks: neighborhoodparks, community parks, regional parks, naturalareas and open space, trails and greenways, andspecial use areas. VCPRD also owns and operatestwo community centers (Firstenburg andMarshall), a senior center (Luepke), and theVancouver Tennis Center. The 13 member Vancouver-ClarkParks and Recreation AdvisoryCommission serves as an advisory body to theCity of Vancouver and Clark County on planning,acquisition, development and operation of theparks system. Direction is also provided by theVancouver-Clark Comprehensive Parks, Recreation& Open Space Plan adopted in 2007.Urban ParksPark Impact Fee DistrictsExisting parks, trails, and open spaces are shown inFigure 5-10. For purposes of planning and fundingparklands, the City of Vancouver and VancouverUrban Growth Area are divided into ten parkplanning and impact fee districts (See figure 5-11).The program establishes level of service standardsfor urban parks, including neighborhood and com-5-32 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

munity parks and urban open space, and assessespark impact fees on new residential development tooffset the cost of providing these parks. The acquisitionstandard for the urban park system (neighborhoodparks, community parks, and urban openspace combined) is 6 acres per 1,000 people. For2016, the estimated population for the City ofVancouver and its Urban Growth area is 339,955.The amount of urban parkland, including neighborhoodparks, community parks and urban openspace, needed to meet the adopted urban standardis 2040 acres. With the current inventory, thisreflects a need of an additional 423.5 acres.Neighborhood ParksNeighborhood parks provide access to basic recreationopportunities for nearby residents, enhanceneighborhood identity, and preserve neighborhoodopen space. These parks are generally two to fiveacres in size and primarily serve residents withina half-mile radius. Sites may vary in size dependingupon unique site characteristics, opportunitiesand land availability. Elementary school sites havebeen included under the neighborhood parklandclassification, since they often have neighborhoodpark elements and serve some of the neighborhoodpark needs. At the present time, the VCPRDprovides neighborhood parks within the City ofVancouver and its Urban Growth Area (UGA). Theacquisition standard is 2 acres/1,000 people with atotal of 74.5 additional acres needed within the Cityand UGA.Community ParksCommunity parks provide a focal point and gatheringplace for broad groups of users. Usually 20to 100 acres in size, community parks are used byall segments of the population and generally serveresidents from a one-to three-mile service area.Community parks often include recreation facilitiesfor organized activities, such as sports fields, skateparks, community gardens and play courts as wellas programming such as the amphitheater at EstherShort Park. Community parks may also incorporatepassive recreation space and community facilities,such as community or senior centers. Because oftheir large service area, community parks requiremore support facilities, such as parking and restrooms.Some middle and high school sites are includedin the community parkland inventory, sincethese facilities can serve some of the communitypark needs. The acquisition standard is 3 acres per1,000 people, or a total of 278.5 additional acresneeded.In urban areas where an adequate or suitablecommunity park site is no longer available, orwhere areas are poorly served by a communitypark, VCPRD considers the modification of neighborhoodpark standards to compensate for the lackof a community park. Specifically, considerationis given to increasing site size and type of developmentof neighborhood parks to allow for increasedrecreation opportunities. In addition, where denseexisting neighborhoods may preclude the acquisitionof typical acreage for neighborhood parks,VCPRD has acquired and developed small urbanparks to address the need for public park spaces incompact urban environments.Other Parks & TrailsRegional ParksRegional parks are recreational areas that serveresidents from throughout Clark County andbeyond. Regional parks are usually larger than 50acres in size and provide opportunities for diverseVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-33

5-34 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030Figure 5-10 Existing parks and recreation facilities. Source: Vancouver Clark Parks and Recreation Department

Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-35Figure 5-11. Park planning and impact fee districts. Source VCPRD

ecreational activities. Facilities may include sportsfields, extensive trail systems, or large picnic areas.In addition, regional parks often include significantnatural areas or access to lakes or rivers. Becauseof their large size and broad service area, regionalparks typically require more support facilities, suchas parking and restrooms. These parks are usuallydesigned to accommodate large numbers of people.The acquisition standard for regional parks is 10acres/1,000 people, for a total of 2,605.1 additionalacres needed county-wide.Natural Areas and Open SpaceNatural areas and open space are primarily undevelopedspaces, which are managed for boththeir natural, ecological value and for light-impactrecreational use. These areas can range in size andmay include wetlands, wildlife habitats, or streamcorridors. Natural areas and open space provideopportunities for nature-based recreation, suchas bird-watching and environmental education.Where appropriate, natural areas may allow foropportunities to walk, run, bike and hike. Thesespaces can provide relief from urban density andmay also preserve or protect environmentally sensitiveareas, such as endangered animal habitat andnative plant communities.the plan:• Regional, multi-use trails, which provide themajor access networks across the County;• Local trails, which provide access from neighborhoodsto regional multi-use trails;• Rustic trails, which are smaller in scale than thelocal trails and are intended to provide accessto natural features and loop trail opportunities;• Semi-primitive trails, which are intended forrural or forest settings; and• Bike lanes and pedestrian walkways, which arelocated on City, County, and State road rightof-ways.Figure 5-12. Existing and potential open space corridorsin and around Vancouver UGA. Source: Vancouver GISWithin the Vancouver Urban Growth Area (UGA),natural areas are typically referred to as urban openspace. Within the VCPRD planning area but outsidethe UGA, these spaces are referred to as naturalareas or conservation areas. Within the urban area,VCPRD has an adopted acquisition standard of oneacre of open space /1,000 people, for a total of 70.5additional acres needed.The current trail inventory estimates 60 miles oftrails within the County. VCPRD pursues an acquisitionand development program consistent withthe Regional Trails and Bikeways System Plan,in conjunction with transportation, public works,and other departments to promote an interconnectedsystem of trails and greenways throughoutthe County.Trails and GreenwaysThe City and County have completed a comprehensiveRegional Trails and Bikeways System Planwhich defines trails as any “path, route, way, rightof-way,or corridor posted, signed, or designatedas open for non-motorized travel or passage by thegeneral public.” Five trail types are identified inGreenways are corridors that follow linear featuressuch as streams, abandoned railroad rights-of-way,or power lines. Greenways often contain trails andmay also include viewpoints, seating areas, and interpretivedisplays. Greenways provide publicaccess to trail-oriented activities, including walking,biking, or running, and preserve open space.5-36 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Greenways along streams can also help protectwater and habitat quality. Figure 5-12 conceptuallyidentifies major open space corridors within andaround the Vancouver UGA, consistent with GMArequirements of RCW 36.70A.160Special Use Areas and FacilitiesSpecial use areas are stand-alone facilities suchas community centers, aquatic centers, sportscomplexes, or skate parks that provide space fora specialized activity. Since special use areas varywidely in function, there is no minimum size, butspecial use areas must be large enough to accommodatethe intended use. Support facilities, suchas parking and restrooms, are often included.Development StandardsThe application of the neighborhood and communitypark development standards differs across theincorporated and unincorporated areas. In the Cityof Vancouver, the standard is 4.25 acres/1,000 populationof developed urban parkland. In the UrbanUnincorporated Area, neighborhood and communityparks are acquired and immediately developedto a Level 1 standard which secures the site in a safebut unimproved condition. Within the unincorporatedarea, priority is given to acquiring, reserving,and making available sites for future neighborhoodand community park development.Development at a Level 2 standard of urban parkswhich would include recreational amenities andbasic landscaping occurs only after maintenancefunds are secured. The Level 3 development standardfor UGA urban parks is intended to provide agreater level of recreational amenities and naturalarea enhancement, and may be possible if additionalcapital and maintenance funds are available.For Urban Open Space/Natural Areas, no developmentstandard is applied as sites should remainmostly in a relatively natural condition. Currently,VCPRD has 619 acres of developed park land and1520 acres of undeveloped land in the City ofVancouver Table 5-13 summarizes existinginventory of parks by type in the city.Recreation FacilitiesExisting facilities include the Firstenburg Center,Marshall Community Center, Luepke SeniorCenter, and Vancouver Tennis Center.Table 5-13. Number of parks by type in VancouverPark Type Developed Undeveloped TotalNeighborhood 52 15 67Community 12 0 12Urban Natural Area 0 18 18Regional 2 0 2Special Facility 3 1 4Regional Natural Area 0 2 2Trails & Greenways 3 0 3Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-37

Capital Facilities PlanTable 5-14. VCPRD Capital Facilities Plan for Vancouver City and UGA, 2011-2016City of Vancouver 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 TotalUrban ParkAcquisitions $1,780,000 $1,445,650 $453,142 $1,145,903 $135,061 $753,528 $5,713,284Urban ParkDevelopment $755,000 $650,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,405,000Urban ParkImprovement $550,000 $0 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $1,1150,000& RepairTrail Planning,Acquisition & $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0ImprovementSpecial FacilitiesDevelopment & $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0ImprovementPlanning $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0City Total $3,085,000 $2,095,650 $603,142 $755,000 $285,061 $903,528 $8,268,284Vancouver UGAUrban ParkAcquisitions $4,453,633 $1,442,000 $4,147,839 $2,659,195 $0 $0 $12,702,667Urban ParkDevelopment $1,647,771 $558,624 $0 $0 $8,138,354 $4,687,519 $15,032,268Trail Acquisition -GCPD $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Trail Planning,Acquisition & $20,000 $40,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $20,000 $170,000ImprovementUrban ParkImprovement & $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0RepairSpecial FacilitiesDevelopment & $7,470,795 $750,000 $0 $0 $0 $289,819 $8,510,614ImprovementPlanning $0 $51,500 $0 $0 $0 $231,855 $283,355VUGA TOTAL $13,592,199 $2,842,124 $4,177,839 $2,689,195 $8,168,354 $5,229,193 $36,698,904Sources: VCPRD5-38 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Fire and emergency servicesVancouver’s fire and emergency servicesin 2010The Vancouver Fire Department (VFD) providefire protection and emergency services withinthe Vancouver city limits and the eastern two-thirdsof the unincorporated VUGA. This unincorporatedarea is currently in Clark County Fire District #5,which contracts with VFD to provide fire andemergency services. The western remainder of theVUGA is served by Fire District #6, which is addressedin the Clark County Capital Facilities Plan.Beginning in 1994, the VFD and Fire District #5consolidated operations, with Vancouver contractedas lead agency for the provision of all fire fighting,fire prevention, emergency medical response,and other fire department services, throughoutthe 91-square-mile area of both districts. Thisconsolidated fire department is the largest in theregion and fourth largest in the state, serving over249,000 people, mostly within the VUGA. Inaddition to traditional fire suppression services,the consolidated operation provides basic andadvanced emergency life support medical services,code enforcement, hazardous materials anddisaster response, plan review, and public education.District #5 also operates the regional firetraining center.The consolidated fire department currently hasten fire stations staffed by full-time personnel.Vehicular equipment includes trucks (with laddersand equipment), engines (pumps and hoses), andPhoto by Mick Foysupport vehicles such as command cars and watertanker trucks. During 2010, emergency medicalcalls accounted for approximately percent of thetotal emergency call responses in the VFD servicearea, up from percent from 2002 (Table 5-15).These services are supplied by fire fighters who arecross-trained as emergency medical techniciansand paramedics as well. Non-emergency andcritical care transport of the sick and injured isperformed by private ambulance providersregulated by Clark County.Service standardsDemand The Vancouver Fire DepartmentComprehensive Plan (1997) established that theaverage response time to an emergency call shouldbe five minutes or less for at least 90 percent ofVancouver’s population. The current servicestandard for fire protection and emergency medicalservices (EMS) is based on:• response time and call volume• number and location of fire stationsTable 5-15. Fire and EMS calls per stationStation Sta Sta Sta Sta Sta Sta Sta Sta Sta Sta Other Total1* 2 3 4 5* 6 7 8 9 10 JurisCalls/Station 2,738 2,036 2,890 1,539 3,181 1,424 339 2,051 1,953 _ 593 18,7442002Calls/Station 2,644 2,474 3,521 1,842 3,339 2,133 854 2,598 1,946 1,350 412 23,1132010*Stations 1 and 5 have two emergency response units each.Sources: 2002 VFD/FMS Data, 2010 VFD/Firehouse DataVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-39

5-40 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030Figure 5-13. Location and service areas of fire districts and stations. Source: City of Vancouver GIS.

• number and location of emergency responsevehicles• number of trained personnel• traffic patterns and vehicle or pedestriancongestion• type of structure or emergencyIn projecting future need, fire and EMS providersconsider a variety of factors. In station areascurrently served by career firefighters, 3,500 callsper engine company annually is the standard bywhich the need for additional engine companieswithin existing station areas is measured. Table5-17 lists minimum staffing requirements. TheWashington Survey and Rating Bureau rates fireprotection services using a variety of criteria includingstaffing levels, equipment, training, andresponse times. The insurance industry uses therating to determine premiums. On a scale of 1 to10, with 1 being the best, Vancouver currently has aClass 4 rating.Response TimesA high number of emergency calls was the mostsignificant cause of response delays during 2010,with traffic congestion and traffic calming devicesalso contributing to delays. In addition, the level ofequipment and staffing was reduced with the loss oftwo quick response EMS units although 2010 alsosaw the opening of the 10th fire station staffed withan Engine. Coordinated EMS standards adoptedby both the City (VMC 5.84) and the County (CCC5.48A), and implemented through interlocal agreements,established response time goals for emergencymedical responses in urban, suburban, andrural areas. Additional vehicle, facility and staffingenhancements, as identified in the VFD BusinessPlan (2008), coupled with planned improvementsto the transportation system, are focused on achievingthe 90 percent standard in the future. Table5-17 lists fire and EMS response time standards.Direction for the futureThe VFD estimates a 3.5 percent increase per yearin fire calls and a 6 percent increase per year inemergency calls between 2010 and 2030 in itsservice area, including Fire District #5. The numberand type of calls received from a specific area isinfluenced by several factors:• increases in population and density• number of aging structures that have not hadongoing maintenanceTable 5-16. Minimum staffing requirements for fire emergency response vehicles.Engine (pumper)Truck (ladder)1 company officer and 2 firefighters, one of whom is also a paramedic1 company officer and 3 firefighters, one of whom is also a paramedicAll company officers and firefighters are certified to at least the EMT level; many are certified as paramedics. 2010Table 5-17. Fire and EMS response time standards.Percentage meeting response time goalService Geographic Area Response time goal 2002 2010 2016 2030(projected) (projected)Fire Urban Within 5 minutes 54% 27% 90% 90%Suburban Within 6 minutes 43% 27% 90% 90%Rural Within 8 minutes 63% 63% 90% 90%EMS Urban Within 5 minutes 51% 52% 90% 90%Suburban Within 6 minutes 38% 52% 90% 90%Rural Within 8 minutes 60% 75% 90% 90%Source: Vancouver Fire Department/CRESA System Dispatch Times, 2010Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-41

• lower income levels thatrestrict the ability of residentsand owners to maintainand repair their homesand businesses, resultingingreater fire risk• number of senior, nursingand skilled carefacilities• increasing age of the babyboomer generationTable 5-18. VFD service statistics and projections including District #5.2002 2010 2016 est. 2030 est.Total calls (fire and medical) 18,744 23,113 27902 37225EMS calls 14,839 18,793 22,880 31,269EMS percentage of all calls 82% 81% 82% 84%Total calls per 1,000 people 86 89 106* 122*Total calls per square mile 203 255 308 411Average response time in minutes 4:57 5:37 Under 5:00 Under 5:00Professional fire personnel 159 165 190 250Calls/professional staff 118 140 145 172Volunteer firefighters 10 16 0 0ISO Fire Insurance Rating (1 is best) 4 4 Goal = 2 Goal = 2Sources: 2002 VFD/FMS Data, 2010 VFD/Firehouse DataPopulation density, number* Preliminary estimate until 2010 US Census is released in late 2011.of emergency calls per stationarea, response times, andnational standards developed by the InsuranceServices Offices, Inc. (ISO) and the US Fire Administrationare used to decide when to staff firewould expand the combined service area. A 4.5of Vancouver of areas outside of District #5, whichstations with career personnel, and when andpercent total growth rate was assumed to accountwhere to build new fire stations. The need for additionalresponse units (engines, trucks, etc.) isfor growth from both population and annexation.based on the same factors and on the number of Emergency response vehicles.emergency calls per response unit. Table 5-18 displaysboth historical and projected activity, based on information regarding age, condition, and mile-Vehicles are replaced between 5 and 20 years basedon growth estimates within existing service areas, age. The fire department sets aside money eachand assumptions about population aging, increased year for the eventual replacement of each vehicle.urban densities, and future annexations to the CityTable 5-19. Projected Capital Facilities Needs.Projects 2011-16 Costs Funding Sources• Fire Station 1 land acquisition, design, construction • $5,280,000• Fire Station 2 land acquisition, design, construction • $2,956,000cash, undeterminednew funding• Fire Station 3 design, construction • $3,536,000• Fire Station 8 seismic upgrade • $1,366,000• Fire Station 6 land acquisition, design, construction • $2,976,000• Fire District 5 design, construction • $10,062,000• Logistics warehouse, land acquisition design • $2,251,000constructionTotal $28,427,000Source: Vancouver Fire Department5-42 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

PoliceVancouver’s police services in 2010The Vancouver Police Department (VPD) providespolice protection and other law enforcement serviceswithin Vancouver’s city limits. In 2010 thepolice department consisted of 192 sworn officersand 22 non-sworn support staff. The departmentis divided into two precincts, four districts and 16patrol beats.Vancouver Police provides a range of services:• 911 emergency response and law enforcement• major criminal investigations• traffic enforcement and serious collision investigations• computer forensic examinations and digitalevidence processing• canine officers• collateral duty assignments for special responseneeds include SWAT, hostage negotiators,tactical emergency medical services, explosivedevice investigation and disposal, crisis interventionresponse, public information, and more• internal support services include training, evidence,case management, finance, volunteercoordination, hiring and background investigations,professional standards, homelandsecurity planning, crime analysis, and precinctsupportstate routes throughout Clark County and its cities,and takes the lead on traffic enforcement and collisioninvestigations on state highways. Clark CountySheriff’s Office deputies patrol the unincorporatedareas outside city limits, with the exception ofVancouver Lake Lowlands areas indicated in Figure5-14, which by agreemment are served by Vancouver.Vancouver contracts with Clark County Sherifffor service on to rivers, lakes and waterways insidethe City of Vancouver. Clark County also providespolice records under contract for Vancouver thatincludes a computerized police reporting systemand information technology support, records storageand processing, and 24x7 records staffing forcriminal records checks, warrants, court orders,and other support.Clark County maintains Courthouse and Jail facilitiesand services. Offices for multiagency taskforcesare leased as needed, and include the Clark-SkamaniaDrug Task Force, the Clark County Arthur D.Curtis Children’s Justice Center, and the DomesticViolence Prosecution Center. Clark Regional EmergencyServices Agency (CRESA) is a regional publicsafety communications center established by interlocalagreements for Clark County and its citiesto provide 911 calltaking and public safety dispatchservices. CRESA also coordinates disaster preparedness,emergency management and homelandsecurity planning; emergency medical service over-VPD participates in regionalmulti-disciplinary problemsolvingteams to address childabuse, domestic violence, careercriminals, gang crime, and drugenforcement and investigation.Interlocal agreements for mutualaid allow all public safety agenciesin Clark County to providebackup for other jurisdictions inemergencies. Washington StatePatrol has police jurisdiction onVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5- 43

sight; and operation and maintenance of regionalradio services, telephone systems, and computernetworks to support public safety agency response.Table 5-20 summarizes statistics regardingVancouver’s police department staffing, crime rates,and response times for 1996 and 2010.The Vancouver Police Department currently hasEast and West Precinct buildings, a headquartersbuilding, and a secure evidence processing andstorage facility. Locations throughout the City areService standards Although police staffing increasesare often driven by population growth, communityresidents and business owners generallyprefer areas with comparatively lowTable 5-20. VPD staffing, 911 response and crime rates for 1996 and 2010. crime crates. Crime rates are closelyCategory 1996 2010 Change related to population density, ageand gender distribution, neighborhoodcharacteristics and economicPopulation served 67,450 165,800 146%Commissioned Staffing – includes Chief 115 193 +68%of Police, Commanders, Detectives,conditions. In 1996, there were 1.7Patrol Officers, etc. (Budgeted totalFTEs, not actual filled positions)Officers per 1,000 citizens 1.70 1.16 -32%officers per 1,000 citizens, but in2010 this dropped to 1.16 as theeconomy worsened. The current FBIOfficer responses 59,986 103,077 +72% standard is 1.6 for urban areas andVPD response time to top 6:36 7:44 -18% cities of Vancouver’s size. The City’sPriority 1-2 calls in min:sec (13% of (6% ofcurrent goal is to maintain a staffingratio of 1.2 officers per 1,000(from 911 call to police arrival) calls) calls)VPD response time to Priority 3-5 calls 22:57 14:42 -36%in minutes:seconds (from 911 call to (87% of (94% ofcitizens.police arrival) calls) calls)FBI – Index Crimes Reported*Priority 1-2 = Imminent threat to life5,015 7,263 +45% Direction for the futureVancouver Police works with Financeand City leaders to plan for**The FBI collects data on certain types of crimes each year: Homicide, rape,robbery, assault; burglary, larceny, motor vehicle theft, arson. This is only an indexand does not include most crimes that are reported every day.the future public safety needs of ourcommunity. The most recent VPDBusiness Plan was posted in 2010set up with phone and computer access so officerscan meet with citizens or write reports while stayingin their patrol districts.As land is annexed into the City, the responsibilityfor law enforcement in the formerly unincorporatedareas will transfer from the Clark County Sheriff’sOffice to the Vancouver Police Department. Muchof this land has already been developed into residential,retail, or mixed use commercial centers.Law enforcement staffing projections take into accountto outline the additional staffing, equipment, andfacilities that are needed to serve Vancouver as thepopulation and service areas continue to grow. Theprocess includes community growth, call volume,crime trends, service changes, community needs,neighborhood issues, demographic data, school districts,economic factors, and long range communityplanning data. The Business Plan has been integratedinto the City’s Strategic Plan, Biennial Budget,and other community planning processes.population growth and density, demographiccharacteristics and call volume and crime rates,emergency response capability, vacant buildableland by zoning type, and traffic impacts. Vancouver’spopulation has more than doubled since 1996,from 67,450 to approximately 162,300 in 2011.Table 5-21 shows estimated capital facilitiesneeds, based on projected staffing and programneeds identified by Police and City Leaders. Generalfund dollars are generated from property taxes andsales taxes for capital and operating budgets. The5-44 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-45Figure 5-14 Vancouver Police Facilities and Beats

Table 5-21. Vancouver Police Department Capital Facilities Plan.Year Description Amount Funding source2011-16 New firing range $250,000 Federal Grants2017-30 New headquarters building land $5,000,000 Cash, undeterand constructionmined new fundingSource: Vancouver Police Departmentprimary cost in providing police services is personnel.The Vancouver Police Department reliesincreasingly on state and federal grants for start-upprograms, officer staffing and unfunded equipmentneeds, but to date new grant funding sources havenot been identified for capital facilities.SchoolsEducation in Vancouver is provided by public andprivate schools. The Vancouver, Evergreen andCamas Schools Districts provide K-12 education inthe city limits, while the Battle Ground, Ridgefieldand Vancouver School Districts serve the northernunincorporated Vancouver UGA. Clark College andWashington State University at Vancouver (WSU-V) provide higher education. Vancouver is alsohome to the Washington School for the Deaf andWashington School for the Blind. All are affected byCity population growth and land use decisions.Vancouver’s schools in 2011Figure 5-15 shows the public school districts andpublic school facilities (including colleges and universities)serving the VUGA. Table 5-22 comparesenrollment and number of schools in 2011 and 2017(projected).The GMA includes schools in the public facilitiesand services category. School districts have adoptedcapital facilities plans to satisfy the requirementsof GMA and to identify additional school facilitiesnecessary to meet the needs of anticipated growthin student populations planned for their districts.School districts plan on a six year cycle andupdate their six-year facility plans on a one or twoyear cycle, addressing change in enrollment, facilityneeds or educational programming. State fundingfor school construction, when provided, is calculatedby state law for each district. State funding doesnot cover the full cost of new or remodeled schools.Eligibility for state funding for new schools isdependent on increased enrollment and unhousedstudents.To determine the capacity of school facilities andneed for expansion, each district sets planningstandards that reflect both local goals and statemandates. School facility and student capacityneeds are dictated by the types and amounts ofspace required to accommodate each district’seducational program. The components that affectspace needs include grade configuration (K-5 vs.K-6, for example), optimum facility size for differenttypes of schools, class size (which can beaffected by union contracts), types of educationalprograms (some require special facilities), andneeds of the population (e.g., handicapped, non-English-speaking). Some factors are beyond thecontrol or influence of the district.Table 5-23 shows the classroom size planningstandards used by the three school districts in theirsix-year capital facilities plan to accommodateprojected enrollment growth during this period.Classroom size could change in the future, however,based on the factors discussed above.Colleges and universitiesClark College is a community college providingtwo-year transfer degree studies, technical trainingand basic skills classes for as many as 16,000full-time and part-time students each quarter. As5-46 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-47Figure 5-15 Existing School Districts and School Locations

Table 5-22. School enrollment and facilitiesProject Enrollment Vancouver Evergreen Camas2011 22,011 students, 36 schools 26,871 students, 35 schools 5,883 students, 9 schools2017 22,007 28,500* NA2030 23,774 NA NASources: 2011 data provided by each school district.Other: Special education, advanced learning, resource rooms, learning support centers, and music, art, and dance programs. Allschools have computer training.Table 5-23. Targeted classroom size, 2011 to 2017.Vancouver Evergreen CamasKindergarten to 5th grade 23 23 246th to 8th grade 28 25 309th to 12th grade 30 25 30Sources: 2011 data provided by each school district.of 2011 it is the second largest college in the Washingtonstate system of 34 technical and communitycolleges. A majority of the Washington studentsattending Clark reside in the college’s service districtwhich includes Clark, Skamania, and westKlickitat counties. Clark’s main campus is locatedon 101 acres in Vancouver’s Central Park area eastof the I-5 freeway and north of the Fort VancouverNational Historic Site. Classes are also offered atClark College at Columbia Tech Center in easternVancouver; Clark College at Town Plaza, locatedtwo miles east of the main campus, and Clark Collegeat Washington State University Vancouver inSalmon Creek.Washington State University at Vancouver.WSUV offers upper-level (junior and senior) coursetowards baccalaureate and graduate degrees inseveral fields on a 350-acre campus in the SalmonCreek area of the unincorporated Vancouver UrbanGrowth Area. Approximately 3,000 students wereenrolled in 2011. many students transfer from ClarkCollege to complete their college education.Other institutionsWashington School for the Deaf. WSD provideseducational services to Washington studentsages 3 to 21 who are deaf or hard-of-hearing. WSDoperates from a 17-acre site with an adjacent11-acre playing field. Enrollment at WSD fluctuatesannually between 100 and 200. In 2001-2002, theenrollment was 113. WSD provides both residentialand day programs for deaf and hard-of-hearingstudents from around the state. WSD is in theprocess of redesigning its aging facilities to meetcurrent needs. New residential cottages werecompleted in 1999 and the renovation of ClarkeHall (an older dormitory) was completed in 2002.In 2009, Kastel Hall opened.Washington State School for the Blind.WSSB is a fully accredited residential K-12 schoolfor blind and partially sighted students from allover Washington. This state-supported institutionis located on East 13th Street near Clark Collegeand the Southwest Washington Medical Center.WSSB provides assistance, advice and best practicesfor educators in other school districts withblind or partially sighted students as well as providingeducation to the over 1,400 students enrolled atthe Vancouver campus.Direction for the futureK-12 public education. All three districts expectto continue to grow and will therefore need to addnew facilities. To facilitate the provision of schoolsthat are necessary to serve forecast growth, eachdistrict has asked the cities they serve and Clark5-48 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

County to impose school impact fees, as allowedunder the GMA and local implementing ordinances.The maximum allowable impact fee is calculatedaccording to an adopted formula. All three districtsrequest impact fees in amounts reflected in theiradopted six-year capital facilities plans.As more development takes place in the VUGA,large parcels of land available for schools will becomeincreasingly scarce. School districts try to purchaseland in advance, based on growth trends, butthis is sometimes difficult to do with limited funding.As a result, districts renovate and make moreefficient use of existing facilities when possible.Vancouver School District. In 1988, the VancouverSchool District embarked on a long-rangeplanning process for capital improvement projects.The improvements were grouped into three phases.Phase I (1990 bond issue of $45 million), PhaseII (1994 bond issue of $135 million) and Phase III(2001 bond issue of $87.7 million) improvementsassociated with the long-range plan have been completed.The district anticipates continued growthand needs to construct additional elementaryschool capacity to serve the forecast growth. Fundingin the form of bonds and state matching fundshas not been secured yet. As funds are secured thedistrict will also look at making upgrades and improvementsat other schools. Forecast growth at themiddle and high school for the next six years willbe served in existing school facilities. The districtestimates the cost for the new elementary schooland needed facility ugrades is $26.6 million.Evergreen School District. Evergreen SchoolDistrict completed construction of new schools thatwere funded with a $167 million dollar bond thatwas approved in 2002. The district is continuingto grow and needs to build additional schools toserve forecast growth. In the next year the districtwill construct a 500 student Bio and Health ScienceAcademy that will increase high school capacity.The district also needs to build at least one additional600 student elementary school and oneadditional 800 student middle school. Funds forthe elementary and middle school have not beensecured yet. The forecast cost for the school facilitiesthat are needed over the next six years is $87.8million.Camas School District. The Camas School Districtis finishing construction of school facilitiesthat were funded with a $113 million bond in 2007.The district constructed two replacement elementaryschools and the Hayes Freedom AlternativeHigh School. The district is continuing to grow andis in the process of adding capacity at Camas HighSchool and Fox Elementary School. The districtalso will be constructing a new elementary school(beginning construction in the summer of 2011)will make improvements at other school facilities.The estimated cost to complete facilities funded bythe 2007 bond is $42.5 million.Colleges and universitiesClark College. In anticipated of continuedgrowth in its service area, Clark College adopted a2007 master plan for facility development, whichgenerally envisions the need to add the equivalentTable 5-24. School District Capital Facilities Needs, 2011 to 2017.Vancouver School District Evergreen School District Camas School DistrictFacilities New or expanded elementary New elementary school, new 1 new elementary school, 1school and site, middle school, new magnet expanded elementary school,high school, additional portables 1 expanded high school,expanded support facilitiesCost $26.7 million $87.8 million $42.5 millionFunding Future bonds, state match, Bonds, state match, impact fees Bonds, state match, impactSources impact fees feesSources: 2011 data provided by each school district.Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-49

of 1.7 new 70,000 sq. ft. buildings by 2020 justto maintain current service levels, in addition toplanned improvements such as development of the7-acre triangle property at the intersection of FourthPlain Blvd and Fort Vancouver way. See http://www.clark.edu/about_clark/master_plan/documents/f_master_plan.pdf for further information.Washington State University at Vancouver.WSUV completed a master plan in 2007 to guidegrowth and development of the campus in theSalmon Creek area of the VUGA, northeast of theI-5/I-205 interchange. The plan envisions a 2023campus buildout to 1,200,000 gross square feet ofdevelopment to serve an enrollment of 14,000 FTE.See http://admin.vancouver.wsu.edu/capital-planning-and-developmentfor further information.Center in December 2009. At 24,175 square feet,it is about ten times larger than its 2,495 squarefoot predecessor. The new Vancouver CommunityLibrary, which opens in July 2011, is an 83,000square foot library replacing the 36,000 squarefeet of library space in its previous location at MillPlain Boulevard and Fort Vancouver Way. VancouverMall Community Library is in its third Malllocation since opening in 1983. The lease on this7,200 square foot space expires in January 2012.Enhancements called for in the bond measure willbe delayed until the future of the Mall Library isdetermined. The fourth library in the Vancouverarea is the Three Creeks Community Library. It islocated outside Vancouver City Limits, but withinthe VUGA. This 13,000 square foot library openedin 2002 in the Fred Meyer complex on Tenney Road.Other institutions.Enrollment at both the Washington School for theDeaf and the Washington State School for the Blindis expected to remain at about current levels for thenext six years.Library ServicesVancouver’s library services are provided by theFort Vancouver Regional Library District (FVRLD),which serves all of Clark County (except Camas),plus Skamania and Klickitat Counties and the Cityof Woodland and Yale Precinct in Cowlitz County.With 13 libraries, three bookmobiles, a Vancouverheadquarters building, Internet access and electronicservices, FVRLD provides library servicesand community and cultural events for a populationof about 455,000 in its 4,200 square milemulti-county service area. In 2006, Vancouver voterspassed a $43,000,000 bond measure to fundthree library projects within the City of Vancouver:a new Vancouver Community Library, a new CascadePark Community Library, and technologyenhancements in the Vancouver Mall CommunityLibrary. The project was supplemented by a $5 millionanonymous donation. The new Cascade Parklibrary opened adjacent to Firstenburg CommunityService StandardsA general standard for public library space is 0.5square feet per capita. Prior to opening the newCascade Park library, FVRLD had 45,710 squarefeet of library space within the city limits and58,710 in the VUGA. The new Cascade Park andVancouver libraries boost the total to 114,390square feet of library space within the city and127,390 within the VUGA. Based on a city populationestimate of 162,300 and a VUGA populationof 292,800, space per capita has increased to0.7 square feet within the city and 0.4 within theVUGA.5-50 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Future DirectionThe FVRLD Board of Trustees approved a LongRange Facility Plan in April 2010. This plan recognizesthe significant strides made in Vancouverwith the passage of the bond measure in 2006. TheFVRLD is now much better equipped to meet thelibrary needs of Vancouver residents due to the newfacilities. As a result, facility needs in other partsof the district will be given a higher priority for theforeseeable future. While the future of the Malllibrary is unknown at this time, it is the intent ofthe FVRLD to maintain a library in the vicinity ofWestfield Vancouver Shopping Center.According to the Facilities Plan, priorities for thenext 10 years include consolidation and remodelof the headquarters building (located in the oldVancouver Community Library), a larger library inthe vicinity of Ridgefield junction (approximately15,000 square feet), another in the Orchards area(approximately 15,000 square feet and likelywithin the VUGA), and replacement of the old andundersized Woodland Community Library (approximately7,000-10,000 square feet). While costestimates and funding plans have not been developedfor these facilities, they will very likely requirea combination of local funding, FVRLD funding andpossibly voter-approved funds.In addition, the Facilities Plan calls for explorationof Focused Service Outlets. These are smaller unitsof service ranging from book vending machines tostorefront locations. The purpose is to bring libraryservice closer to smaller population centers that arenot in close proximity to an existing larger library.Solid waste facilities and servicesCities and counties in the State of Washington arerequired by RCW 70.95 to have coordinated comprehensivesolid waste management plans, to determinethe type and source of solid waste streams, toestablish strategies for the handling and disposalof solid waste, and to identify waste reduction andseparation programs.By interlocal agreement, Vancouver and other localcities delegate responsibility for solid waste transferand disposal planning to Clark County through2016. The adopted Clark County ComprehensiveSolid Waste Management Plan (CSWMP) of 2008is updated regularly and reviewed by the CountySolid Waste Advisory Commission. The City ofVancouver is responsible for managing collectionservices within its boundaries.Clark County and the City of Vancouver enteredinto a 20-year contract with Columbia ResourceCompany (CRC) in 1992 to recycle solid-wastematerials collected and delivered to transfer andrecycling stations, with the remaining non-recycledwastes transported for final disposal to CRC’s FinleyButtes Landfill 180 miles upriver in MorrowCounty, Oregon. The Contract was updated in 2006and provides opportunity for specified facility upgradesand extensions through 2026.The two existing in-county transfer and recyclingstations that are primarily utilized for managingVancouver wastes (Central Transfer and RecyclingStation and West Vancouver Materials RecoveryCenter) are designed to handle a maximum of676,000 tons of solid waste per year. Waste deliveredto these facilities is compacted into inter-modalcontainers and transported upriver by privatebarge, then trucked to the landfill. A third transferstation in Washougal was opened in 2009, increasingsystemwide capacity by approximately 50,000tons per year. Waste delivered to this station istrucked to the Wasco County Landfill in Oregon.In 2005, approximately 311,000 tons of waste werehandled through the Central Transfer (60%) andWest Vancouver (40%) facilities. A portion of thismaterial was supplied from collection routes whichWaste Connections operates in the Portland Metroregion. Since 2005 and 2006, the tons of inboundVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-51

waste received at the transfer stations have decreasedby nearly 20% due largely to the economicdownturn. Original design capacities for the twotransfer stations indicated they could handle up to438,000 tons per year of solid waste.Vancouver’s solid waste collection in 2009Local garbage pickup service in Vancouver is providedby a private company, Waste Connectionsunder a long-term contract with the City. Thisexclusive contract covers commercial and industrialwaste collection services as well as residentialgarbage and recycling collection services. Everyother-weekcurbside recycling is provided on thesame day that garbage is picked up for residences.Curbside yard debris collection is available everyother week as an optional service for residents.The County’s recycling rate in 2009 was estimatedto be 46 percent — from a total of 526,000 tons ofsolid waste, 242,000 tons were recycled. This figuredoes not include diversion of wood waste, usedmotor oil, tires, aggregate, and so on, which are notincluded under Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) methodology. Total county diversion ratefor 2009 is estimated to be 55.9 percent.In a regional environmental protection effort, theCounty and cities accept up to 25 gallons of householdhazardous wastes (solvents, paints, pesticides,herbicides, fertilizer, batteries and other chemicals)free of charge on two designated days each weekat both the Central Transfer and the West VanCenters, and on limited days each month at theWashougal Transfer Station.Service standardsIn 2009, daily waste generation per person in ClarkCounty was 6.66 pounds, approximately 45% ofwhich was landfilled, 45% recycled, 10% recovered.Though the county’s population has steadilybeen increasing, over the last five years, due to theeconomic dowturn the latest pounds per capitawaste generation rates are at 2003 levels.5-52 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Ongoing efforts to educate the public about reducingwaste may help minimize the rate of waste generation,but nationally, until the recent recession,the per capita rate was steadily increasing. Currentper capita waste generation nationally is about1 ton per person per year (including residential,commercial, and industrial disposed and recycledwaste), but appears to be about 20-40% higher inthe Clark County region. It is difficult to determineClark County’s overall waste generation rate becauseof the proximity to the Portland metro areaand its disposal facilities and recycling plants, someof which are operated by the same firms that servethe County.If County facilities reach capacity, the County mayhave the option to limit some metro waste that isbeing delivered to the County’s transfer stations.Direction for the futurethe City’s main administrative and public hearingfacility. The building was remodeled in 2011 and issized to accommodate future growth, allowing fora centralized consolidation of several local governmentactivities previously housed in separate buildings.The Operations Center at 4711 Fourth PlainBlvd houses vehicles, equipment and staff involvedin the maintenance of City transportation, water,sewer, and stormwater infrastructure.Most other Vancouver capital facilities are primarilyassociated with specific public services or agencies,and are addressed elsewhere in this chapter orin related plans. The Vancouver-Clark ParksDepartment owns and operates the FirstenburgCommunity Center, Luepke Senior Center,Marshall Center, and the Vancouver Tennis Center.The Vancouver Public Works Department ownsthe Marine Park Engineering and Water ResourceEducation Center facilities.Together, the Central Transfer and West Vancouvertransfer and recycling facilities have sufficientcapacity to handle the volume of waste projectedto be generated within Clark County over the next20 years. In fact, either facility is designed tohandle the entire projected year 2011 flow ofmunicipal solid waste produced in Clark County inthe event an emergency such as a flood shuts downone facility. In 2010 a countywide contingency planwas developed to address potential future disruptions,and it proved effective in utilizing alternativesites when Columbia River locks were out of servicein 2011. However, in the interest of the long-termhealth of the system, the City will continue todevelop waste reduction measures and encourageadditional recycling.General governmentThe main general government facilities providinglocal public services in Vancouver in 2011 in arethe new Vancouver City Hall in downtown and thecentral Operations Center. Vancouver City Hall islocated adjacent to Esther Short Park, and serves asClark County owns and operates the Clark CountyPublic Services Building in downtown Vancouver,as well as operations centers at 4700 NE 78thStreet. These provide administrative and operationssupport for public services primarily to theunincorporated Vancouver UGA and elsewhere inClark County.Figure 5-16 shows locations of major existinggeneral government facilities in Vancouver thatprovide local services. The City of Vancouver alsoowns and manages Pearson Airport and nearbyhistoric properties, as well as various parking lotsand structures primarily in the downtown area.The City of Vancouver General Service Departmentmaintains complete listings of city-ownedproperties.Table 5-25 lists the major capital needs foradditional general government facilities to servegrowth during the Comprehensive Plan period.Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-53

Figure 5-16 Major General Government Facilities5-54| Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Table 5-25. General Government Capital Facilities NeedsFacility Cost General General FundingTimeline SourcesWest Artillery Barracks $2.5 million By 2016 State GrantsCentral Operations Center $12 million By 2016 Water Utility FundEast Side Operations $35 million By 2030 Water Utility FundCenterfacilities, based on service capabilities,local land use designations and nationallyrecognized standards. Use LOS standardsto encourage growth in designated centersand corridors.PFS-3Impact feesEstablish and maintain policies and regula -tions, including traffic, park and schoolimpact fees, to ensure that new developmentpay for a proportionate share. Impact feesshould be reduced or eliminated forlow-income housing developments.Public facility and service policiesThe City of Vancouver adopts the following policiesto efficiently and cost effectively provide adequatetransportation, sewer, water, and other capital facilitiesand public services for existing and new development.These policies are consistent with and implementpolicy sections 6.0, 7.0, and 8.0 of the CommunityFramework Plan, adopted by Clark County and localjurisdictions, and planning policies 36.70.A.020(3), (9),and (12) of the Washington Growth Management Act(see Appendix A).PFS-1Service availabilityConsider water, sewer, police, transportation,fire, schools, storm water management,and parks as necessary facilities andservices. Ensure that facilities are sufficientto support planned development.PFS-4PFS-5Transportation systemDevelop and maintain an interconnectedand overlapping transportation system gridof pedestrian walkways, bicycle facilities,roadways for automobiles and freight, transitand high-capacity transit service. Includesupport programs such as traffic operations,transportation demand management,neighborhood traffic management, andthe regional trails program. Work towardscompleting and sustaining individual componentsand programs to ensure successof the entire system.System balanceAllocate resources to balance transportationchoices. Promote development of abroader range of transportation optionsincluding pedestrian, bike, and transitsystems, rather than focusing all resourceson satisfying peak commuting demand withroadway capacity alone.PFS-2Service standardsEstablish service standards or planningassumptions for estimating needed publicPFS-6Transportation safetyEnsure high safety standards for motorists,pedestrians, and bicyclists through theVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-55

PFS-7PFS-8PFS-9development and capital improvementprocesses. Allocate city capital resources tohigh risk and collision locations for motorists,bicyclists, and pedestrians.Transportation financeDevelop recurring and dedicated fundingfor a complete transportation program,including system operation and maintenance.Leverage local funding with innovativeand aggressive finance strategies includingpartnerships, grant development, efficientdebt, and fee-based funding resources.Transportation circulation and systemconnectivityDevelop a transportation grid that providesgood connections to surrounding land usesand activity centers and allows for multiplecirculation routes to/from each location.Close gaps and complete system connectionsthrough the development and capitalimprovement processes.Land use and transportation integrationDevelop and implement innovative transportationinvestment, design, and programincentives to achieve the urban environmentenvisioned in the Comprehensive Plan.PFS-10 Livable streetsDesign streets and sidewalks and managevehicular traffic to encourage livability, interaction,and sense of neighborhood or districtownership in linkage with adjacent land uses.Encourage multi-modal travel, and provideaccessible, human scale opportunities fortransferring between travel modes.PFS-11 Transportation accessibilityBuild an accessible transportation systemfocused on inter-model connectivity andremoval of barriers to personal physicalmobility.PFS-12 Transportation system efficiencyInvest in and improve efficiency of the transportationsystem with multi-modal design,advanced traffic management and operationstechnologies, demand management strategies and high-frequency transit service.PFS-13 Neighborhood trafficProtect and enhance neighborhoods with anactive program that focuses on safety, saferoutes to school, traffic calming, education,and enforcement.PFS-14 Transportation regional and metropolitancoordinationCoordinate Vancouver’s transportation plans,policies, and programs with those of otherjurisdictions serving the greater Metropolitanarea to ensure a seamless transportationsystem. Focus particularly on cooperationwith the Southwest Washington RegionalTransportation Council, Washington StateDepartment of Transportation, Clark Countyand C-TRAN.PFS-15 Transit serviceMaintain transit service at no less than 2003levels.PFS-16 Economic developmentIn order to support the continued economicvitality of Vancouver, major transportationsystem investments should facilitate freightmobility, job creation, regional competitiveposition, and revenue growth.PFS-17 Vehicle miles traveledUse transportation and land use measuresto maintain or reduce single occupant motorvehicle miles traveled per capita to increasesystem efficiency and lower overall environmental impacts.PFS-18 Street designDesign city streets to achieve safety andaccessibility for all modes. Arterial streetsshall provide facilities for automobile, bike,pedestrian and transit mobility, and shallinclude landscaping and adequate lighting.PFS-19 Parking standardsAdopt coordinated parking standards whichmaintain neighborhood integrity, promote theuse of a multi-modal transportation system5-56 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

and efficient utilization of limited land, andencourage desired economic developmentand growth throughout the entire urban area.PFS-20 AirportsDiscourage incompatible uses from locatingadjacent to general aviation airports.PFS-21 Wastewater reclamationEliminate health hazards from domestic andindustrial wastewater and return clean waterto the environment.PFS-22 Sewer serviceProvide sewers and sewer service to everyVancouver home, business, and industry atan affordable and equitable cost. Discouragedevelopment and use of on-site sewagetreatment systems. Encourage existingdevelopment using septic systems toconnect to public sewer as soon as available.Ensure that the infrastructure to supportsewer service is in place prior to or at thetime of development.PFS-23 Water serviceProvide safe, clean, quality drinking waterto every Vancouver home, business, andindustry. Discourage development and useof private drinking water wells. Provide waterpressures and volumes necessary to supportfire suppression hydrants and sprinklersystems. Ensure that the infrastructure tosupport water service is in place prior to or atthe time of development.PFS-24 Sewer and water service extension:Public sewer and water service should notbe extended outside the Vancouver urbangrowth area except to(a) Remedy a threat to public health orsafety, or to water resources;(b) Provide service to public facilities withinthe urban reserve district if they are requiredto be served; or(c) Support the type and density of developmentenvisioned in that location in a jurisdiction’scomprehensive planWater service extensions should may beextended if they are consistent with the ClarkCounty Coordinated Water System Plan anddo not increase density beyond the adoptedComprehensive Plan. The existence orextension of sewer or water service shouldnot be used to justify changes to thecomprehensive plan.PFS-25 Stormwater managementManage storm water to safely pass floodwaters,maintain and improve water quality ofreceiving streams, lakes, and wetlands,protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat,promote recreational opportunities, andenhance community aesthetics.PFS-26 Solid wasteImplement the 2008 Clark CountyComprehensive Solid Waste and ModerateRisk Waste Management Plan. Reduce theproduction of waste, recycle waste that isproduced, and properly manage anddispose of waste that is not recycled. Provideeducation and outreach to businesses andthe public on benefits and opportunities ofwaste reduction and recycling.PFS-27 Essential public facilitiesCoordinate with Clark County, the state andspecial districts to identify future needs forregional and statewide facilities, such asairports, state education facilities, state orregional transportation facilities, state andlocal correctional facilities, solid wastehandling facilities, and regional parks.Essential public facilities may be located inall zones as a conditional or permitted use asper VMC 20.855. Facilities that generatesubstantial travel demand should be sitedalong or near major transportation and/or public transit corridors.PFS-28 SchoolsWork with local school districts to facilitate anadequate supply of schools and associatedfacilities. Facilitate timely and efficient sitingprocesses which allow for assessment andmitigation of impacts.Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Public Facilities and Services | 5-57

PFS-29 Higher educationWork with state institutions of highereducation to ensure that City residents haveaccess locally to the education needed towork for knowledge- and skill basedindustries.PFS-30 Open spaces and parksProvide and maintain parks, open spaces,and recreational services for all segmentsof the community consistent with adoptedlevel-of-service standards. Facilities andservices should support recreationalactivities, environmental or historical resource protection, and should preserve andenhance neighborhood identity and function.PFS-31 TrailsProvide a system of trails linking public andprivate open spaces, parks, recreationaluses and transportation facilities within andbetween jurisdictions. Encourage use ofgreenspaces and riparian corridors aspedestrian and nonauto-oriented linkageswithin the urban area, in balance withhabitat protection.PFS-32 Parks coordinationPlan for parks, trails, open spaces andrecreational services in coordination withother local and regional public agenciesand private entities. Facilitate provision oflands and/or impact fees for parks as partof the development review process.Tracking the Comprehensive Plan• As of 2011, 54% of the total length of Vancouverarterial roadways were rated good or betterunder the industry-wide Pavement Rating Index,which measures road pavement condition.(Vancouver Public Works)• As of 2010, 56% of Vancouver citizens surveyedwere satisfied or very satisfied with the conditionof neighborhood streets, while 52% weresatisfied or very satisfied with the condition ofmajor streets. These are comparable withresponses elsewhere in the northwest, whichreported satisfaction with 55% for both neighborhoodand major streets. (2010 VancouverDirectionFinder Survey) (http://citynet/Finance/Documents/PerformanceAnalysis/Surveys/External%20Surveys/2010%20Vancouver%20Final%20Report_April%2020.pdf see documentpage 68)• Vancouver residents averaged 21 vehicle milestraveled (VMT) per day driving in 2010, up slightlyfrom the 2005 average of 20 miles per day. Theseare comparable with Washington residents statewide,who averaged 23 miles per day in 2007.(SW Regional Transportation Council and WDOT)• During the typical weekday evening peak travel in2007, drivers countywide cumulatively experienced1035 hours of vehicle delay. (2007Metropolitan Transportation Plan)PFS-33 Parks fundingDevelop dedicated funding for a completepark system that includes acquisition,development, maintenance and operationof parks, trails, open space, and recreationprograms to serve City residents.PFS-34 Parks educationProvide public education on the uses andbenefits of parks, open spaces, habitatprotection, and recreational services.5-58 | Public Facilities and Services Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

CHAPTER 6AnnexationAnnexation is the process by which cities add land to theirboundaries to accommodate growth and provide municipalservices. The Growth Management Act anticipates thatdesignated urban growth areas will become part of citiesover the 20-year planning period, and that cities are generallythe appropriate provider of urban services. This chaptercontains policies intended to facilitate an orderly and smoothtransition of property currently in the Vancouver UrbanGrowth Area into the Vancouver city limits.SpecificsState and local legal frameworkAnnexation procedureVancouver’s annexation historyFuture direction and annexation policiesVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Annexation | 6-1

AAnnexation in 2011nnexation may occur through various meansunder state statute and local regulations.The State of Washington’s Growth ManagementAct of 1990 (GMA) requirescounties to establish 20-year Urban Growth Area(UGA) boundaries to accommodate for projectedgrowth, and encourages cities to annex lands withinthe UGA and provide urban-level services to theseareas. Lands outside the UGA cannot be annexed.The Community Framework Plan (Appendix A)adopted by Clark County, Vancouver, and other localcities also encourages annexation of lands in theUGA. In 2007 Clark County and the City adoptedan Interlocal Agreement and 20-year AnnexationBlueprint guiding annexations in the VancouverUGA. The Community Framework Plan establishesCounty support for such annexations as long as theyare consistent with the annexation elements adoptedby Vancouver in the City of Vancouver10-Year Annexation Blueprint (Blueprint).The Blueprint was adopted by the City ofVancouver in 1993 and updatedin 1995, 1997 and 2007. It isintended to provide opportunitiesfor the City, County andspecial service districts to assesspotential impacts, includingfiscal impacts. The Blueprintprioritizes areas in the UGAto be annexed, while definingconceptual timelines. Annexationof these areas can occur asset out in the Blueprint. Largeror smaller annexations can alsobe processed depending on thelevel of support available.Annexations can be initiatedby property owners or cities.When an annexation is initiatedby a city, local support is required.This support is generallyprovided through an election orpetitions. The election methodrequires approval of the majority of voters in theannexation area, or 60 percent if the proposalincludes the assumption of indebtedness. Thepetition method requires petitions signed by landownersrepresenting the majority of the marketvalue acreage in the annexation territory. Thedouble majority method requires petitions signedby landowners representing the majority of theacreage and also by the majority of registered votersin the area if there are any. Other methods formunicipal annexation are available for specificcircumstances but are rarely applicable.Annexation has been an ongoing process in thethe City of Vancouver, with over 160 annexationoccuring since the City was incorporated in 1857,primarily through the petition method. The 1990swere a particularly active period, with the Cityannexing 29 square miles in the Vancouver Malland Cascade Park areas. The 1997 Cascade Parkannexation was the largest in state history, andadded almost 60,000 persons to the City. As of2011, Vancouver’s city limits encompassedapproximately 50 square miles, and theVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Annexation |6-3

Figure 6-1. Potential annexation areas in unincorporated VUGA. Source: City of Vancouver GIS.6-4 | Annexation Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

unincorporated Vancouver Urban Growth Area(VUGA) about 56 square miles. Most of theunincorporated VUGA is characterized by existingurban development, and provided with eitherCity of Vancouver or non-municipal sewer andwater services.Direction for the futureFigure 6-1 shows the anticipated sequence andtimelines for annexation of areas in the unincorporatedVUGA to the City of Vancouver. The 2007Interlocal Agreement and Annexation Blueprintdocuments provide further detail on potentialannexation subareas, and strive to facilitatebalanced annexations areas containing residentialand non-residential lands. The City of Vancouversupports annexation to provide a full range of urbanservices and efficiencies to developing and developedurban areas. The Interlocal Agreement andBlueprint establish overall City and County supportfor annexation in the VUGA, and support forchanges to state law to improve the annexationprocess. The City will also work closely with theCommunity and service providers to determineannexation issues that exist in specific areas, andto develop and implement annexation plans.Vancouver will require annexation or agreementsto annex as a condition of extending municipalsewer and water services.Annexation policiesThe City of Vancouver adopts the following policiesto ensure orderly urban transition and efficientdelivery of urban services. These policies areconsistent with and implement Policy Section 9.0 ofthe Community Framework Plan, adopted by ClarkCounty and local jurisdictions, and planning policies36.70.A.020(2), (11) and (12) of the WashingtonGrowth Management Act (see Appendix A).A-1 Coordination with Clark CountyWork with Clark County to Implement the 2007Interlocal Agreement and Annexation Blueprint,to facilitate future annexation of lands withinthe unincorporated VUGA, to facilitate infrastructuremaintenance prior to annexation, andto advance Vancouver as a provider of urbanservices and Clark County as a provider of regionalservices.A-2 Annexation before service extensionsTo receive City-provided urban services, developingor developed unincorporated areasshould annex or commit to annexation.A-3 Annexation sequenceUnincorporated subareas should be annexedin the general sequence identified in the City ofVancouver 20-Year Annexation Blueprint.A-4 Responsive annexation timelinesAnnexation timelines should be responsive tothe interests of citizens and Vancouver’s abilityto provide services, and consistent with theoverall direction of the Annexation Blueprint.A-5 Large annexations encouragedAnnexation of large areas should be encouraged,although individual property ownersshould not be prevented from pursuing annexation.Annexations should include both sides ofstreets and roads, including rights-of-way.A-6 Service transitionExplore creative ways to facilitate the transitionof government services, particularly publicsafety, transportation, parks, utilities, and landuse review.Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Annexation |6-5

Tracking the Comprehensive PlanThe following areas have been annexed to the Cityof Vancouver since adoption of the 2007 AnnexationBlueprint. These total 508 acres, approximately5 % of the area anticipated by the Blueprint to beannexed in its first five years.Annexation Title Location and Size Existing orIntended UseLittle (2009) 1 acre at St Johns CommercialRd/49th St.Lake View B-Port 29 acres north of Open space(2009) Lower River Rd.Alcoa (2009) 148 acres south of IndustrialLower River RdColumbia River 330 acres at Mixed use north of(2010) 192nd Ave/SR-14 192nd; Residentialand industrialsouth.For more information:• The City of Vancouver-Clark County Vancouver Urban AreaAnnexation Blueprint 20-year Plan establishes Vancouverannexation priorities and conceptual timelines.• The Community Framework Plan (Appendix A) containsregional annexation policies in its Annexation and IncorporationElement.6-6 | Annexation Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

CHAPTER 7ImplementationThe Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011–2030 providesa vision for how Vancouver will grow and evolve overa 20-year period. It was produced with a wide range ofcommunity input. This chapter provides a roadmap for howthe vision and policies of the comprehensive plan will becarried forward in City codes and standards, and throughcoordination with other agencies and groups.Specifics Implementation through City codes and standards Coordination of the unincorporated Vancouver UGA Provisions for updating the comprehensive plan Community outreach Implementation policiesVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Implementation | 7-1

TImplementing and updatinghe direction of the Vancouver ComprehensivePlan is intended to be implementedin City standards and actions in severalways. The policies and map designations ofthe plan are to be implemented in greater detail byrelated City development standards, particularly thedevelopment code and zoning map in Chapter 20 ofthe Vancouver Municipal Code. Individual land useproposals, such as applications for housing subdivisionsor commercial site plans, must then complywith the development standards. City service plansfor transportation, parks, sewer, water and stormwater must also be consistent with the direction ofthe comprehensive plan. The plan is also intendedto inform City construction or other activitiesrelated to land use or the environment. Lastly, thepolicies of the comprehensive plan are used toevaluate site-specific requests to change mapdesignations and related development proposals.The comprehensive plan is initially adopted tocover a 20-year period but is reviewed and updatedperiodically during that timeframe. The City willmonitor growth, development patterns and publicprograms and other indicators to determine howwell plan goals and policies are being achieved,using the metrics identified in each chapter. Thefrequency of future comprehensive plan updates isgoverned by state law and City of Vancouver policy.Table 7-1 outlines the requirements for reviewingand updating. More details are listed in the policiesat the end of this chapter and in Section 20.285 ofthe Vancouver Municipal Code.Table 7-1. Updating the comprehensive plan.Type of change Frequency General Criteria for changeZoning code or zoning mapchanges, not involving acomprehensive plan changeAs needed• Consistency with comprehensive plan policies• Consistency with standards of Vancouver Municipal CodeComprehensive Plan privateproperty map change applicationsDuring City-initiated periodicreview• Consistency with comprehensive plan policies• Consistency with VMC 20.285Other Comprehensive Plan changes,including adoption of servicearea capital facilities plans or othersatellite documents incorporatedinto the Comprehensive PlanNot more than once a yearunless excepted by State law• Consistency with comprehensive plan policies• Consistency with VMC 20.285Periodic review and update of theoverall comprehensive plan for GMAconsistencyAt least every eight years, oras otherwise specified byState law• Consistency with GMA and Community Framework Plan• Consistency with comprehensive plan policy directionReview and update of regionalgrowth forecasts and UGAboundariesAt least every eight years, incoordination with Clark County• Consistency with GMA and Community Framework Plan• Consistency with countywide growth forecasts• Consistency with comprehensive plan policy directionVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Implementation | 7-3

Coordination with other governments, particularlyClark County, is a key part of implementing theVancouver Comprehensive Plan. Clark County willmanage the unincorporated VUGA until it is annexedby Vancouver. Residents and businesses inthose areas may continue to use City roads andother City services, influencing Vancouver’s economyand spending priorities. The Vancouver comprehensiveplan establishes standards to ensureorderly urbanization, annexation, and delivery ofurban services in the VUGA, in cooperation withClark County. Coordination with other governmentsand service districts in the county and themetropolitan region will also be important in addressingregional transportation, public service,housing, economic and environmental concerns.In 2007 the City of Vancouver and Clark Countyadopted an Interlocal Agreement, which adoptedthe Vancouver Annexation Blueprint, and policiesfor coordination in the areas of annexation,development of common standards, and futureComprehensive Plan updates. Vancouver willstrive to update and strengthen the CommunityFramework Plan (Appendix A) and other regionalplans and agreements, and the relationships thatsupport them.The Vancouver Comprehensive Plan was developedwith extensive help from community, and continuedcommunity involvement is perhaps the mostimportant factor in a successful implementationof the plan. The City of Vancouver will continue towork with citizens, stakeholder groups, and otheragencies as the comprehensive plan is implementedand updated in the future.Implementation policiesThe City of Vancouver adopts the following policiesto guide Comprehensive Plan implementation overthe next 20 years. These policies are consistentwith and implement policies of the CommunityFramework Plan, adopted by Clark County andlocal jurisdictions, and planning policies under36.70.A.020 of the Washington Growth ManagementAct (see Appendix A).IM-1 Public participationProvide for broad public participation inthe development and implementation ofthe comprehensive plan, including sub-areaplans for centers and corridors, andimplementing development regulationsand programs.7-4 | Implementation Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

IM-2 EducationIncrease awareness and understanding ofthe city’s policies, land use planning,operations, historic and cultural resources,infrastructure, economic development,environmental resources, and parks andopen spaces.IM-3 Incentive measuresUse education and incentive measures in additionto regulatory approaches where appropriateto ensure achievement of plan goals.IM-4 Internal policy consistencyUpdate development regulations as necessaryto implement the policy direction of thecomprehensive plan.IM-5 Plan monitoringRegularly review progress towards implementationof the Vancouver ComprehensivePlan goals and policies using the metricsidentified in each chapter.IM-6 Funding implicationsUse comprehensive plan policy direction toinfluence city budget and funding decisions.IM-7 Vancouver urban area coordinationWork with Clark County to achieve each ofthe following measures for the City ofVancouver and UGA:(a) Increase consistency of City and Countyurban development standards, serviceprovision standards, and permittingprocesses consistent with the 2007Vancouver-Clark County IntergovernmentalAgreement.(b) Increase consistency of City and Countylegislative review processes, includinguse of joint or combined PlanningCommission review when possible.(c) Establish protocols for enhancedconsultation between jurisdictions ondevelopment proposals, capital facilityprojects, and legislative changes thatimpact each other.(d) Where appropriate, use Urban Holdingzoning or other implementation strategiesIM-8IM-9to adequately plan for newly addedUGA areas, and defer urbanization untilannexation can occur. Vancouver UGAareas developed prior to annexationshould be urbanized in an orderlysequence, and developed at efficient longterm urban densities.Future comprehensive plan updatesPeriodically update the Vancouver ComprehensivePlan as follows:(a) Annually, or otherwise as allowed by law,consider needed amendments to theComprehensive Plan, including changesto documents adopted by reference.(b) At least once every eight years or asotherwise specified by State law, comprehensivelyreview and as necessaryupdate plan policies and map designationscitywide consistent with GMArequirements, and coordinate with ClarkCounty for similar review in the existingunincorporated Vancouver UGA. Reviewprivate comprehensive plan plan mapchange applications during this periodicreview.(c) No more than once every eight years,work with Clark County to adopt newlong-term growth forecasts and associatedpotential changes to the UGA boundaryand comprehensive plans.Urban reserve areasWork with Clark County County to designateand define lands outside the Vancouver UGAas Urban Reserves and Rural Reserves, soas to provide clarity as to which lands arelikely to be brought into the Vancouver UGAin future Comprehensive Plan update, andwhich are likely to remain outside. Work withClark County to ensure that lands immediatelyoutside the Vancouver UGA that areappropriate for long-term future urbanizationbe maintained in large lot sizes and appropriateuses to ensure that the areas are ableto develop efficiently and at urban densitiesand intensities when brought into the UGA.Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Implementation | 7-5

IM-10 Future UGA expansionsEncourage urban-level development withinthe City of Vancouver by generally restrictingVUGA expansions.IM-11 Service coordinationPursue interagency coordination in waysincluding but not limited to the following:(a) Participate in cooperative interagencyinfrastructure planning processes at theregional, bi-state, and state levels.(b) Support federal, state and local programsand policies that explore, maintain orexpand the level of air, water, road,transit and rail transport service to andfrom the region.(c) Encourage coordination and wherefeasible consolidation of serviceproviders in order to minimize duplication,coordinate facility siting, and maximizeeconomies of scale.For more information:• The Clark County Comprehensive Plan contains policyguidance for the unincorporated VUGA. Contact ClarkCounty Long Range Planning or visit the Clark CountyWeb site http://www.clark.wa.gov/planning/comp_plan/index.html.• The Community Framework Plan (Appendix A of thisdocument) adopted by Clark County, Vancouver, and localcities contains policy guidance for regional growth issues.• The Washington Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A)establishes the legal framework for local comprehensiveplans. Visit the state Web site http://www.commerce.wa.gov/DesktopModules/CTEDPublications/CTEDPublicationsView.aspx?tabID=0&ItemID=6413&MId=944&wversion=StagingIM-12 Interjurisdictional coordinationWork with local jurisdictions and serviceproviders to achieve the following:(a) Establish clear regional policy expectationsthrough the Community FrameworkPlan, and implement Community FrameworkPlan and Countywide PlanningPolicies.(b) Facilitate development patterns focusingurban growth first in areas characterizedby existing urban development andservices, second in undeveloped orunserved areas.(c) Achieve an equitable distribution ofeconomic development and affordablehousing among Clark County urbanareas.IM-13 DiversityConsider demographic trends and impactsto all segments of the Vancouver Communityfor planning issues such as public outreachand communication, environmental justice,housing and economic policies.7-6 | Implementation Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

AppendixesAppendix AAppendix BAppendix CAppendix DAppendix ECommunity Framework Planand Growth Managment Act GoalsVancouver Shoreline ManagementMaster Program GoalsGrowth Capacity AssumptionsCapital Facilities Funding SummaryOther Plans and DocumentsAdopted by ReferenceVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Appendixes | 9-1

APPENDIX ACOMMUNITY FRAMEWORK PLAN AND GROWTHMANAGEMENT ACT GOALSAdopted by Clark County, City of Vancouver andother local cities in 1993 to provide regional guidancefor local comprehensive planning. Updated in2000 and 2001.A. COMMUNITY FRAMEWORK PLANThe Community Framework Plan encourages The CommunityFramework Plan encourages growth in centers,urban growth areas, and rural centers, with each centerseparate and distinct from the others. These centersof development are of different sizes; they may containdifferent combinations of housing, shopping, andemployment areas. Each provides places to live andwork. The centers are oriented and developed aroundneighborhoods to allow residents the ability to easilymove through and to feel comfortable within areas thatcreate a distinct sense of place and community. In orderto achieve this, development in each of the urban areaswould have a higher average density than currently exists,approximately 4, 6, or 8 units per net residentialacre depending on the specific urban area. No more than75 percent of the new housing stock would be of a singleproduct type (i.e., single family detached, residential).This would not apply to the Yacolt urban growth area dueto wastewater management issues.Each urban growth area would have a mix of land useswith housing, businesses, and services appropriate to itscharacter and location. For example, the Westfield ShoppingtownVancouver area would continue to be a retailcenter, downtown Vancouver will continue to be a centerof finance and government, Brush Prairie and Hockinsonare to be rural centers with community commercial areas,and the Mount Vista area will be a center of medicalresearch and education (with the Washington State Universitycampus as the center). Residential developmentappropriate to the needs of the workers and residentsin these areas would be encouraged nearby. A primarygoal of the plan is to provide housing in close proximityto jobs resulting in shorter vehicle trips, and allowsdensities along public transit corridors that support highcapacity transit, either bus or light rail.Outside of urban areas, the land is predominantly ruralwith farms, forests, open space, and large lot residences.Shopping or businesses would be in rural centers. Urbanlevels of public services would generally not be providedin rural areas. Rural residents are provided levels ofservice appropriate to their areas. These areas are, bydefinition, more rural in nature and residents are moreself-sufficient, often relying on private wells and septicsystems. Most of northern Clark County would remain asit is today, in resource industries or rural use.To implement the Community Framework Plan, theCounty, towns and cities would have to amend certainland use and development policies in their 20-year comprehensiveplan process. The framework policies to guidefuture detailed policies are discussed in the next section.B. POLICIESIn order to achieve the vision of Clark County, as a collectionof distinct communities surrounded by open space,agriculture, and forest uses, Clark County and each ofthe cities will adopt certain types of policies. The generalframework policies are outlined below by element ofthe Comprehensive Growth Management Plan (20-Year plan). The process-oriented county-wide planningpolicies which were adopted by the County in August1992, and amended in 2000, are listed first (in italics),followed by the framework policies to guide implementationof the vision of Clark County’s future preferred bymany of its residents. The policies provide a frameworkwithin which the County can bridge the gap between thegeneral land use concepts presented in the CommunityFramework Plan and the detailed (parcel level) ComprehensiveGrowth Management Plan (20-Year) requiredby the State Growth Management Act. Supplemental tothe Community Framework Plan, the County and eachjurisdiction, can develop more specific policies for theirrequired 20-year time frame, in order to ensure that theresulting plans will work to achieve the overall vision ofthe future for Clark County.1.0 LAND USEThe Land Use Element for 20-Year comprehensiveplans determine the general distribution and locationand extent of the uses of land, where appropriate, foragriculture, timber production, housing, commerce,industry, recreation, open spaces, public utilities, publicfacilities, and other uses. The Land Use Element includespopulation densities, building intensities, and estimatesof future population growth. The land use element is toprovide for protection of groundwater resources, andwhere applicable, address drainage, flooding, and run-offproblems and provide for coordinated solutions.The following policies are to coordinate the efforts of theCounty and cities in designating land uses, densities, andintensities to achieve the pattern described above in theirrespective Comprehensive Growth Management Plans(20-Year).1.1 Countywide Planning Policiesa. The County, municipalities and special districtswill work together to establish urban growth areaswithin which urban growth shall be encouraged andoutside of which growth may occur only if it is noturban in nature. Each municipality within the Countyshall be included within an urban growth area.An urban growth area may include territory locatedoutside of a city if such territory is characterized by

urban growth or is adjacent to areas characterized byurban growth.b. Urban growth areas shall include areas anddensities sufficient to permit the urban growth thatis projected to occur in the County for the succeeding20-year period.c. Urban growth shall be located primarily inareas already characterized by urban growth thathave existing public facility and service capacities toadequately serve such development, and second inareas already characterized by urban growth that willbe served by a combination of both existing publicfacilities and services that are provided by eitherpublic or private sources. Urban governmental servicesshall be provided in urban areas. These servicesmay also be provided in rural areas, but only at levelsappropriate to serve rural development.Urban governmental services include those serviceshistorically and typically delivered by cities, andinclude storm and sanitary sewer systems, domesticwater systems, street cleaning services, fire andpolice protection, public transit services, and otherpublic utilities not normally associated with nonurbanareas.d. An urban growth area may include more than asingle city.e. Urban growth is defined as growth that makesintensive use of land for the location of buildings,structures, and impermeable surfaces to such adegree as to be incompatible with the primary use ofsuch land for the production of food, other agriculturalproducts, fiber, or the extraction of mineralresources.f. The County and cities shall review, at least everyfive (5) years their designated urban growth area orareas in compliance with RCW 36.70A.215. The purposeof the review and evaluation program shall beto determine whether Clark County and its cities areachieving urban densities within the Urban GrowthAreas. This shall be accomplished by comparing thegrowth and development assumptions, targets andobjectives contained in these policies (and in Countyand City comprehensive plans) with actual growthand development that has occurred.1) Each municipality within Clark County shallprovide to the County information on landdeveloped or permitted for building and development,and a parcel specific buildable landsinventory to conduct a residential/commercial/industrial land capacity analysis for UrbanGrowth Areas in Clark County. The County andmunicipalities shall follow the guidelines specificin the Plan Monitoring Procedures Reportfor the collection, monitoring, and analysis ofdevelopment activity and potential residential/employment capacity.2) Clark County, in cooperation with themunicipalities, shall prepare a Buildable LandsReport every five years, with the first reportcompleted by September 2002. The report willdetail growth, development, capacity, needs,and consistency between comprehensive plangoals and actual densities for Clark County andthe municipalities within it.3) The County and municipalities shall use theresults of the Buildable Lands Capacity Reportto determine the most appropriate means toaddress inconsistencies between land capacityand needs. In addressing the consistencies, theCounty and municipalities shall identify reasonablemeasures, other than adjusting urbangrowth areas, that will be taken to comply withthe requirements of RCW 36.70A.215.g. Population projections used for designatingurban growth areas will be based upon informationprovided by the Office of Financial Management andappropriate bi-state/regional sources.h. Interagency CooperationThe County and each municipality will work together to:1) establish Partnership Planning Subcommitteesto develop an ongoing coordinationprogram within the urban growth area;2) provide opportunities for each jurisdictionto participate, review and comment on theproposed plans and implementing regulationsof the other;3) coordinate activities as they relate to theurban growth area;4) coordinate activities with all special districts;5) seek opportunities for joint efforts, or thecombining of operations, to achieve greaterefficiency and effectiveness in service provision;and,6) conduct joint hearings within the urbangrowth areas to consider adoption of ComprehensivePlans in the Partnership PlanningProcess.a. Coordination of land use planning and development1) The County and each municipality shall cooperativelyprepare land use and transportationplans and consistent development guidelines forthe urban area.2) Comprehensive Plans must be coordinated.The comprehensive plan of each county or city

shall be coordinated with, and consistent with,the comprehensive plans adopted by othercounties or cities with which the County or cityhas, in part, common borders or related regionalissues (ESHB 2929; Section 10). The city andthe County shall play partnership roles in theproduction of plans which provide the opportunityfor public and mutual participation, reviewand comment.3) Urban development shall be limited to areasdesignated by the urban growth boundary.1.2 Framework Plan Policies1.2.0 Establish a hierarchy of activity centers,including both urban and rural centers.Hierarchy of Centers:All planning should be in the form of complete andintegrated communities containing housing, shops,work places, schools, parks, and civic facilities essentialto the daily life of the residents. Community sizeshould be designed so that housing, jobs, daily needsand other activities are within easy walking distance ofeach other.a. URBAN GROWTH AREAS have a full rangeof urban levels of services and can be dividedinto three main categories:Vancouver Urban Growth Area MajorCenters are now or will be activity centers witha full range of residential, commercial, andindustrial uses, high-capacity transit corridors,schools, major cultural and publicfacilities. Major urban areas centers, have or willhave, urban densities of development of at least8 units per net residential acre as an overallaverage. Areas along high capacity transit corridorsand priority public transit corridors mayhave higher than average densities, and otherareas would have lower densities (e.g. establishedneighborhoods and neighborhoods onthe fringes of the urban area). Regional institutionsand services (government, museums, etc.)should be located in the urban core.Urban Growth Areas of Battle Ground,Camas, Ridgefield and Washougal SmallTowns and Community Centers have a fullrange of residential, commercial, and industrialuses, schools, neighborhood, community, andregional parks, and are within walking distanceto HCT corridors or public transit. Theseareas will have employment opportunities andlower densities than major urban area centers,averaging at least 6 units per net residentialacre. Higher densities occur along transit corridorsand in the community center, with lowerdensities in established neighborhoods and onthe outskirts of the community. These UrbanGrowth Areas, small towns and community centersshould have a center focus that combinescommercial, civic, cultural and recreationaluses.La Center Urban Growth Area will bea Neighborhood Centers are located inpredominantly residential areas with at least4 housing units per net residential acre withpedestrian-oriented commercial uses, schoolsand small parks. A mix of residential uses anddensities are or will be permitted. Neighborhoodsare to have a focus around parks, schools,or common areas.b. Outside of urban growth and urban reserveareas, RURAL ACTIVITY CENTERS providepublic facilities (e.g., fire stations, post offices,schools) and commercial facilities to supportrural lifestyles. Rural centers have residentialdensities consistent with the surrounding ruralminimum lot sizes and do not have a full rangeof urban levels of service.Urban Areas1.3.0 Establish consistent regional criteria to determine the size of urban growth areas for the20-year comprehensive plans that:• utilize natural features (such as drainages,steep slopes, riparian corridors, wetlandareas, etc.);• conserve designated agriculture, forest ormineral resource lands;• ensure an adequate supply of buildableland;• have the anticipated financial capability toprovide infrastructure/services needed forthe 20-year growth management populationprojections; and,• balance industrial, commercial, and residentiallands.1.3.1 Establish consistent regional criteria for urbangrowth area boundaries for the 20-year comprehensiveplans that consider the following:• geographic, topographic and man-madefeatures;• public facility and service availability, limitsand extensions;• jurisdictional and special districtboundaries; and,

• location of designated natural resourcelands and critical areas.Urban Reserves1.3.2 Establish criteria for new fully containedcommunities to ensure that the appropriatepublic facility and services are available. Largescale residential only developments are notconsidered as fully contained communities.1.4.0 The County and jurisdictions within the Countyare to define urban reserve areas (land reservedfor future development after 20 years), whereappropriate, to allow an orderly conversion ofland adjacent to designated urban growth areasto urban densities, as demonstrated by the needto expand the developable land supply or byregional industrial or public facility needs.1.4.1 The County, cities and towns are to workcooperatively, to develop policies governingtransition of urban reserve areas between theurban growth area set by the 20-Year ComprehensiveGrowth Management Plans and theurban areas conceptualized by the longer-termCommunity Framework Plan. Such policies areto:• encourage urban growth in cities andtowns first, then in their urban growthareas, and finally in the urban reservearea;• ensure that any development permittedis consistent with the level of urbanizationof the adjacent areas;• identify major capital facilities andutilities, provide locational and timingcriteria for development of thesefacilities and utilities;• include a mechanism to ensure thatmajor capital facilities and utilities areconstructed when needed; and• establish criteria for determining theneed and procedures for amending theurban growth area boundary.1.4.2 Develop criteria for uses within urban reserveareas to allow a reasonable use without preemptingfuture urban growth area designations.Techniques that enable the urban reserve to be maintainedinclude but are not limited to:• transfer development rights;• conservation easements;2.0 HOUSING• tax assessments;• pre-planning of lots and the clustering ofunits; and• other innovative techniques.The Housing Element is to recognize the vitality andcharacter of established residential neighborhoods andidentify sufficient land for housing to accommodate arange of housing types and prices. The goal is to makeadequate provision for existing and projected housingneeds of all economic segments of the community. Thesepolicies are intended to coordinate the housing policiesof Clark County and its jurisdictions to ensure thatall existing and future residents are housed in safe andsanitary housing appropriate to their needs and withintheir means.2.1 County-wide Planning Policiesa. The County and each municipality shallprepare an inventory and analysisof existing and projected housing.b. The Comprehensive Plan of the County andeach municipality shall identify sufficientland for housing, including, but not limitedto, government-assisted housing,housing for low-income families,manufactured housing, multifamilyhousing, and group homes and foster carefacilities. All jurisdictions will cooperateto plan for a “fair share” of the region’saffordable housing needs and housing forspecial needs population.c. Link economic development and housingstrategies to achieve parity between jobdevelopment and housing affordability.d. Link transportation and housing strategiesto assure reasonable access to multi-modeltransportation systems and to encouragehousing opportunities in locations that willsupport the development of publictransportation.e. Link housing strategies with the locationsof work sites and jobs.f. Link housing strategies with the availabilityof public facilities and public services.g. Encourage infill housing within cities andtowns and urban growth areas.h. Encourage flexible and cost efficient land

use regulations that allow for the creationof alternative housing types which will meetthe needs of an economically diversepopulation.2.2 Framework Plan Policies2.2.0 Communities, urban and rural, should containa diversity of housing types to enable citizensfrom a wide range of economic levels and agegroups to live within its boundaries and toensure an adequate supply of affordable andattainable housing. Housing optionsavailable in the County include single familyneighborhoods and mixed-use neighborhoods(e.g., housing above commercial storefronts,traditional grid single family neighborhoods,townhouses, multi-family developments,accessory units, boarding homes, cooperativehousing, and congregate housing).2.2.1 Establish density targets with jurisdictions inthe County for different types of communities,consistent with the definitions of Urban andRural Centers.2.2.2 Provide housing opportunities close to places ofemployment.2.2.3 Establish maximum as well as minimum lotsizes in urban areas.2.2.4 All cities, towns and the County share theresponsibility for achieving a rationaland equitable distribution of affordable housing.2.2.5 Coordinate with C-TRAN to identify and adoptappropriate densities for priority transitcorridors. Ensure that the developmentstandards for these areas are transit andpedestrian friendly. Transportation andhousing strategies are to be coordinated toassure reasonable access to a variety oftransportation systems and to encouragehousing opportunities in locations thatsupport development of cost effective andconvenient public transportation for allsegments of the population.2.2.6 Encourage infill development that enhances theexisting community character and provide a mixof uses in all urban and rural centers. All citiesand towns are to encourage infill housing as thefirst priority for meeting the housing needs ofthe community.2.2.7 Encourage creative approaches to housing design to:• accommodate higher densities attractively;• increase housing affordability;• ensure that infill development fits withthe character of the existing neighborhood;and• develop demonstration projects to assistthe private sector to achieve infill goals.2.2.8 Housing strategies are to be coordinated withavailability of public facilities and services,including human services.2.2.9 All cities, towns and the County are to providefor a variety of housing types and designs tomeet the needs of people with special needs(for example those with physical, emotional, ormental disabilities), recognizing that not allhousing will become accessible to specialneeds populations.2.2.10 Establish a mechanism for identifying andmitigating adverse impacts on housing productionand housing cost which result fromadoption of new development regulations orfees.2.2.11 Encourage and permit development of intergenerationalhousing, assisted living options,and accessory units in order to allow peoplewith special needs and senior citizens to liveindependently as possible and to reducethe need for (and cost of) social services.2.2.12 All cities, towns and the County are to provideincreased flexibility in the use of new andexisting housing development to increase thepotential for re-use, preservation of existingaffordable housing, shared living quarters, useof accessory structures as housing, etc.2.2.13 Housing strategies are to be coordinated withthe financial community and are to beconsistent with public and private financingmechanisms.3.0 RESOURCE LANDSThese policies are to ensure the conservation of agricultural,forest, and mineral resource lands, and protectthese lands from interference by adjacent uses whichaffect the continued use, in the accustomed manner, ofthese lands for production of food, agricultural products,or timber, or the extraction of minerals.3.1 County-Wide Planning Policiesa. The County and each municipality shallcooperate to ensure the preservation andprotection of natural resources, critical

areas, open space, and recreational lands withinand near the urban area through adequate andcompatible policies and regulations.3.2 Framework Plan Policies3.2.0 The County and its jurisdictions as a minimumare to consider agricultural land based onWashington Administrative Code (WAC) 365-190-050.3.2.1 The County and its jurisdictions as a minimumare to consider forest land based on WAC 365-190-060.3.2.2 The County and its jurisdictions as a minimumare to consider mineral resource lands based onWAC 365-190-070.3.2.3 Identify agricultural land on parcels currentlyused or designated for agricultural use andprovide these parcels special protection.3.2.4 Identify forest land on parcels currently usedor designated for forest use and provide theseparcels special protection.3.2.5 Encourage the conservation of large parcelswhich have prime agricultural soils for agriculturaluse and provide these parcelsspecial protection.3.2.6 Establish standards for compatible land useson land designated for agriculture, forest, andmineral resource uses.3.2.7 Review cluster residential development onagriculture or forest land to ensure thesedevelopments continue to conserve agricultureor forest land.3.2.8 Develop a range of programs (such as transferor purchase of development rights, easements,preferential tax programs, etc.) to provideproperty owners incentives to maintain theirland in natural resource uses.3.2.9 Mineral, forestry, and agricultural operationsare to implement best management practices tominimize impacts on adjacent property.3.2.10 Establish buffers for natural resource lands(agriculture, forest, or mineral lands) and urbanand rural uses to lessen potential impacts toadjacent property.3.2.11 Establish right to farm or harvest ordinances toprotect the continued operation of naturalresource uses.3.2.12 Public facility and/or utility availability are notto be used as justification to convert agricultureor forest land.4.0 RURAL LANDSThe Rural Lands Element contains policies governing theuse of lands which are not reserved for agriculture, forest,or mineral resources, nor are they designated for urbandevelopment. Land uses, densities, and intensities of ruraldevelopment are to be compatible with both adjacenturban areas and designated natural resource lands.4.1 County-wide Planning Policiesa. The County shall recognize existing developmentand provide lands which allow ruraldevelopment in areas which are developed orcommitted to development of a rural character.4.2 Framework Plan Policies4.2.0 Rural areas should meet at least one of thefollowing criteria:• opportunities exist for small scale farmingand forestry which do not qualify forresource land designation;• the area serves as buffer between designatedresource land or sensitive areas;• environmental constraints make the areaunsuitable for intensive development;• the area cannot be served by a full range ofurban levels of service; or,• the area is characterized by outstandingscenic, historic or aesthetic values whichcan be protected by a rural designation.4.2.1 Recreational uses in rural areas should preserveopen space and be environmentally sensitive.4.2.2 Commercial development of appropriate scalefor rural areas is encouraged within ruralcenters.4.2.3 Establish large lot minimums for residentialdevelopment appropriate to maintain thecharacter of the rural area.4.2.4 Develop a program for the transfer or purchaseof development rights (TDR) or similarprograms to encourage implementation of theserural lands policies.4.2.5 New master planned resorts are to meet the following criteria:• provide self-contained sanitary sewersystems approved by the SouthwestWashington Health District;• be served by public water systems withurban levels of fireflow;• preserve and enhance unique scenic or

cultural values;• focus primarily on short-term visitor accommodations rather than for-sale vacationhomes;• provide a full range of recreationalamenities;• locate outside urban areas, but avoidadversely impacting designated resourcelands;• preserve and enhance sensitive lands(critical habitat, wetlands, critical areas,etc.);• housing for employees only may beprovided on or near the resort; and,• comply with all applicable developmentstandards for master planned resorts,including mitigation of on and off-siteimpacts on public services, utilities, andfacilities.4.2.6 Encourage the clustering of new developmentwithin a destination resort or a designated ruralcenter (village or hamlet). All new developmentshould be of a scale consistent with the existingrural character.4.2.7 Revise existing development standards andhousing programs to permit and encouragedevelopment of affordable housing for peoplewho work in resource-based industries in ruralcenters.5.0 TRANSPORTATIONThe Transportation Element is to implement and beconsistent with the land use element. The CommunityFramework Plan envisions a shift in emphasis of transportationsystems from private vehicles to public transit(including high-capacity transit and light rail), and nonpollutingalternatives such as walking and bicycling. Thefollowing policies are to coordinate the land use planning,transportation system design and funding to achieve thisvision.5.1 Countywide Planning Policiesa. Clark County, Metropolitan Planning Organization(MPO) and the Regional TransportationPlanning Organization (RTPO), state, bi-state,municipalities, and C-Tran shall work togetherto establish a truly regional transportationsystem which:1) reduces reliance on single occupancyvehicle transportation through developmentof a balanced transportation systemwhich empha sizes transit, high capacitytransit, bicycle and pedestrian improvements,and transportationdemand management;2) encourages energy efficiency;3) recognizes financial constraints; and,4) minimizes environmental impacts of thetransportation systems development,operation and maintenance.a. Regional and bi-state transportation facilitiesshall be planned for within the context ofcounty-wide and bi-state air, land and waterresources.b. The State, MPO/RTPO, County, and themunicipalities shall adequately assess theimpacts of regional transportation facilities tomaximize the benefits to the region and localcommunities.c. The State, MPO/RTPO, County, and themunicipalities shall strive, through transportationsystem management strategies, to optimizethe use of and maintain existing roads to minimizethe construction costs and impact associatedwith roadway facility expansion.d. The County, local municipalities and MPO/RTPO shall, to the greatest extent possible,establish consistent roadway standards, level ofservice standards and methodologies, andfunctional classification schemes to ensureconsistency throughout the region.e. The County, local municipalities, C-Tran andMPO/RTPO shall work together with thebusiness community to develop a transportationdemand management strategy to meet the goalsof state and federal legislation relating totransportation.f. The State, MPO/RTPO, County, localmunicipalities and C-Tran shall workcooperatively to consider the development oftransportation corridors for high capacitytransit and adjacent land uses that support suchfacilities.g. The State, County, MPO/RTPO and localmunicipalities shall work together to establisha regional transportation system which isplanned, balanced and compatible with plannedland use densities; these agencies and localmunicipalities will work together to ensurecoordinated transportation and land useplanning to achieve adequate mobility andmovement of goods and people.

h. State or regional facilities that generatesubstantial travel demand should be sited alongor near major transportation and/or publictransit corridors.5.2 Framework Plan Policies5.2.0 The regional land use planning structure is to beintegrated within a larger public transportationnetwork (e.g., transit corridors, commercialnodes, etc.).5.2.1 Encourage transportation systems that providea variety of options (light rail, high-occupancyvehicles, buses, autos, bicycles or walking)within and between and rural centers.5.2.2 Street, pedestrian paths, and bike paths areto be a part of a system of fully connectedand scenic routes to all destinations. Establishdesign standards for development to promotethese options, and work cooperatively withC-TRAN to ensure that programs for improvementsin transit service and facilities as wellas roadway and pedestrian facilities arecoordinated with these standards.5.2.3 To reduce vehicle trips, encourage mixed landuse and locate as many other activities aspossible to be located within easy walking andbicycling distances from public transit stops.5.2.4 Encourage use of alternative types of transportation,particularly those that reduce mobileemissions (bicycle, walking, carpools, and publictransit).5.2.5 Establish residential, commercial and industrialdevelopment standards including road andparking standards, to support the use ofalternative transportation modes.5.2.6 Establish connections between Urban and RuralCenters through a variety of transportationoptions.5.2.7 Establish regional level-of-service (LOS)standards for arterials and public transportationthat ensure preservation of the region’s(rural and urban) mobility while balancing thefinancial, social and environmental impacts.5.2.8 Encourage a balanced transportation systemand can be maintained at acceptable levels ofservice.5.2.9 Establish major inter-modal transportationcorridors that preserve mobility for interstatecommerce and freight movement (Promoteinter-modal connections to port, rail, truck, bus,and air transportation facilities. Preserve andimprove linkages between the Port of Vancouverand other regional transportation systems).5.2.10 Coordinate with C-TRAN, WSDOT, and SWRTCto allow park-and-ride facilities along regionaltransportation corridors.5.2.11 Encourage the development of smaller,community scale park and ride facilities in ruralcenters as the gateways to public transportationin non-urban areas.6.0 CAPITAL FACILITIESThe Capital Facilities Element will identify the needfor capital facilities (such as libraries, schools, policefacilities and jails, fire facilities, etc.) to accommodate expectedgrowth and establish policies to ensure that thesefacilities are available when the development is occupied.The following policies are to coordinate the work of thecities and towns and special districts.6.1 County-wide Planning Policiesa. The County, State, municipalities and specialdistricts shall work together to developrealistic levels of service for urban governmentalservices.b. Plans for providing public facilities and servicesshall be coordinated with plans for designationof urban growth areas, rural uses, and for thetransition of undeveloped land to urban uses.c. Public facilities and services shall be planned sothat service provision maximizes efficiency andcost effectiveness and ensures concurrency.d. The County, municipalities and special districtsshall, to the greatest extent possible, agree uponpresent and future service provision within theurban area.e. The County, municipalities and special districtsshall agree on a full range of services to meetthe needs of the urban area, including sewer,water, storm drainage, transportation, police,fire, parks, etc.f. The County, its municipalities and specialdistricts shall work together to ensure that theprovision of public facilities and services areconsistent and designed to implement adoptedcomprehensive plans.g. Local jurisdictions shall establish a processto re-evaluate the land use element of theircomprehensive plans upon its determinationthat the jurisdiction lacks the financingresources to provide necessary public facilitiesand services to implement their plan.h. General and special purpose districts should

consider the establishment of impact fees as amethod of financing public facilities required tosupport new development.i. The County, its municipalities, and specialdistricts will work together to develop financialtools and techniques that will enable them tosecure funds to achieve concurrency.j. The Comprehensive Plan of the County and eachmunicipality shall include a process foridentifying and siting essential public facilitiessuch as airports, state education facilities andstate or regional transportation facilities, stateand local correctional facilities, solid wastehandling facilities, and regional parks.k. When siting state and regional public facilities,the County and each municipality shall considerland use compatibility, economic and environmentalimpacts and public need.l. The County shall work with the State, eachmunicipality and special districts to identifyfuture needs of regional, and state wide publicfacilities. This will ensure county-wideconsistency and avoid duplications ordeficiencies in proposed facilities.6.2 Framework Plan Policies6.2.0 Major public and private expenditures onfacilities and services (including libraries,schools, fire stations, police, parks, andrecreation) are to be encouraged first in urbanand rural centers.6.2.1 Establish level of service standards for capitalfacilities in urban and rural areas.6.2.2 Coordinate with service providers to identifythe land and facility requirements of each andensure that sufficient land is provided in urbanand rural areas to accommodate these uses.6.2.3 Establish standards for location of publicfacilities and services in urban growth areas,urban reserve areas, and rural areas.7.0 UTILITIESThe Utilities Element is to provide for the extension ofpublic utilities to new development in a timely manner,and to ensure that utility extensions are consistent withthe land use plans of the County and cities and towns.7.1 Countywide Planning Policiesa. The County, municipalities, special districtsand Health District will work coopera-tively to develop fair and consistent policiesand incentives to: eliminate private waterand sewer/septic systems in the urbanareas; and to encourage connection topublic water and sewer systems.b. Within Urban Growth Areas, cities andtowns should be the providers of urbanservices. Cities and towns should notextend utilities without annexation orcommitments for annexation. Exceptionsmay be made in cases where humanhealth is threatened. In areas where utilitiespresently extend beyond city or town limits,but are within Urban Growth Areas, thecity or town and the County should jointlyplan for the development, with the Countyadopting development regulations whichare consistent with the city or townstandards.c. Plans for providing public utility servicesshall be coordinated with plans for designationof urban growth areas, rural uses,and for the transition of undeveloped landto urban uses.d. Public utility services shall be planned sothat service provision maximizes efficiencyand cost effectiveness and ensuresconcurrency.e. The County, municipalities and specialdistricts shall, to the greatest extentpossible, agree upon present and futureservice provision within the urban area.7.2 Framework Plan Policies7.2.0 Public sanitary sewer service will be permittedonly within urban areas, except to serve areaswhere imminent health hazards exist.7.2.1 Public sanitary sewer service should beextended throughout urban areas. It is recommendedthat cities and towns and other sanitarysewer service purveyors adopt policies thatspecify the circumstances under which residentslocated within urban growth areas but outsideof incorporated areas would be required toconnect to a sanitary sewer system once itbecomes available.7.2.2 Adequate public water service should beextended throughout urban areas. (An“adequate” public water system is one thatmeets Washington State requirements andprovides minimum fire flow as required by theFire Marshal. Various levels of public waterservice are considered adequate, dependingupon the specific land uses and densities ofdevelopment being served.)

7.2.3 When it is appropriate to provide public waterservice in rural areas, the level of service maybe lower than that which is provided in urbanareas. However, public water service in ruralareas must meet the minimum requirements foran adequate public water system, given thespecific land uses and densities being served(see 7.2.2).7.2.4 Construction of new private wells in urban areasshould be discouraged. New private wells willbe considered only on an interim basis, until adequate public water service becomes available toan area.7.2.5 Construction of new subsurface sewage disposalsystems within urban areas should be discouraged.It is recommended that cities and townsand the County adopt policies that specify thecircumstances under which the constructionof new subsurface sewage disposal systemswould be permitted, if they are permitted underany circumstance within urban areas. If newsubsurface disposal systems are permitted, itis suggested that these systems be consideredonly as an interim measure, until public sanitarysewer system becomes available.7.2.6 Support the Southwest Washington HealthDistrict’s efforts to establish a mandatorysubsurface sewage disposal system inspectionand maintenance program for pre-existing andnew systems located in areas that need specialprotection from an environmental healthperspective, as determined by the HealthDistrict.7.2.7 Ensure compliance with Washington Staterequirements which call for a proposeddevelopment to provide proof that thereexists a source of public or private domesticwater which produces sufficient quantity andquality of water to meet minimum requirementsbefore a development permit may be issued.7.2.8 New wells may be constructed in rural areas,but only to serve developments on rural lotsthat are without practical access to existingpublic water systems. Existing public waterpurveyors should be given an opportunity toserve a new development. The first opportunityto serve a development should be given to theutility provider designated to serve the area inwhich the development is proposed. If thedesignated utility cannot serve the development,an adjacent utility should be given theopportunity to serve the development. If anexisting utility cannot serve the development,construction of a new private or publicwell may be permitted. This procedure is setforth in the Clark County Coordinated WaterSystem Plan Update, which was adopted byClark County and the Washington StateDepartment of Health in 1991.7.2.9 The availability of public sanitary sewer andwater services with capacities beyond thosewhich are minimally required to meet the needsof an area will not presume or justify approvalof a development that is inconsistent with theCommunity Framework Plan.7.2.10 The Clark County Coordinated Water SystemPlan is designed to be responsive to the County’sComprehensive Plan and other local comprehensiveplans, and land use regulations intendedto implement the Comprehensive Plan.Public water system plans must be consistentwith the Coordinated Water System Plan andthe Comprehensive Plan, as provided underWAC 248-56.8.0 PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACEAlthough this element is not required by the GrowthManagement Act, Clark County and several cities andtowns intend to include a Parks, Recreation, and OpenSpace Element in their plans because provision of thesefacilities is essential to the livability of the urban area.The policies listed below are to coordinate the planningfor parks facilities, recreation programs, and open spacesto ensure that they are appropriately sited given expectedgrowth patterns.8.1 County-wide Planning Policiesa. The County and each municipality shallidentify open space corridors, importantisolated open space and recreational areaswithin and between urban growth areas,and should prepare a funding andacquisition program for this open space.Open space shall include lands useful forparks and recreation, fish and wildlifehabitat, trails, public access to naturalresource lands and water, and protection ofcritical areas.8.2 Framework Plan Policies8.2.0 Provide land for parks and open space in eachurban growth area and rural centers consistentwith adopted level-of-service standards.Wherever possible, the natural terrain,drainage, and vegetation of the communityshould be preserved with high quality examplescontained within parks or greenbelts.8.2.1 Use environmentally sensitive areas (criticalareas) for open space and where possible use

these areas to establish a well defined edgeseparating urban areas from rural areas.8.2.2 Regions should be bounded by and provide acontinuous system of open space/wildlifecorridors to be determined by naturalconditions. Where appropriate connect openspaces to provide corridors, consistent with theMetropolitan Greenspaces Program.8.2.3 Coordinate with jurisdictions to establishconsistent definitions of park types and level ofservice standards for parks within urban areas.8.2.4 Coordinate the planning and development ofparks and recreation facilities with jurisdictionswithin the urban areas.8.2.5 Establish a county-wide system of trails andbicycle paths both within and betweenjurisdictions for recreational and commutertrips. Coordinate this trail system with those ofadjacent counties and Oregon jurisdictions.9.0 ANNEXATION AND INCORPORATIONThe intention of the Growth Management Act is thaturban development occur within cities or areas that willeventually be cities -- either through annexation or incorporation.Currently in Clark County, large unincorporatedareas are developed at urban densities. The transitionof these areas to cities is a process that will require thecooperation of staff and elected officials from the County,cities and towns, and special districts. The following policiesare to set the framework for discussion of the detailswhich will be included in the 20-Year Growth ManagementPlans for these jurisdictions.9.1 County-wide Planning Policiesa. Community Comprehensive Plans shallcontain an annexation element. In collaborationwith adjacent cities, towns, and ClarkCounty, each city and town shall designateareas to be annexed. Each city and townshall adopt criteria for annexation and aplan for providing urban services andfacilities within the annexation area.Policies for the transition of services shallbe included in each annexation element.All cities and towns shall phase annexationsto coincide with their ability to provide afull range of urban services to areas to beannexed.b. No city or town may annex territory beyondits urban growth area.c. Developing areas within urban growth andidentified annexation areas should annexor commit to annex to adjacent cities inorder to receive a full range of city-providedurban services. Unincorporated areas thatare already urbanized are encouraged toannex to the appropriate city or town inorder to receive urban services. Incorporationof new cities and towns is a legaloption allowed for under Washington law.Incorporation may be appropriate if anadequate financial base is identified orannexation is impractical.d. The County shall encourage and supportannexations to cities and town withinUrban Growth Areas if consistent with thepolicies contained within the annexationelement.e. No city or town located in a county in whichUrban Growth Areas have been designatedmay annex territory beyond an urbangrowth area.f. An inter-jurisdictional analysis and processwhich assesses the fiscal and other impactsrelated to annexation on the County, thecity or town, and special purpose districtsshall be developed consistent with thepolicies contained in the annexation.10.0 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTAlthough an Economic Development Element is notrequired in the Comprehensive Growth ManagementPlan, Clark County will include this element in order toensure that there is a balance of economic and populationgrowth in the County, and that the type of economicdevelopment which occurs contributes to maintainingand improving the overall quality of life in the County.10.1 County-wide Planning Policiesa. The County and the municipalities willdemonstrate their commitment to longtermeconomic growth by promoting adiverse economic base, providing opportunity for all citizens, including unemployed and disadvantaged persons. Growthwhich helps to measurably raise the averageannual wage rate of community citizens,and preserves the environmental qualityand livability of our community, is viablegrowth and will improve the lifestyle ofClark County citizens.b. The County and the municipalities willdemonstrate their commitment to theretention of those enterprises which have

created the economic base of the County,and promote their continued growth in apredictable environment, which encouragesinvestment and job growth.c. The County and the municipalities willencourage long-term growth of businessesof all sizes, because all are importantfactors in overall job growth in the Countyand the municipalities.d. The County and the municipalities willpromote productivity and quality amongits businesses to meet world and marketstandards for their products and services.e. The County and the municipalities willencourage the improvement of theparticipation rate of residents in highereducation, and the measurable performanceof high school graduates comparedwith other counties in the state.f. The County and the municipalities may givepriority assistance to employers who willincrease the standard of living in thecommunity.g. The County and the municipalities willplan for long-term economic growth whichenhances the capacity of existing air shedfor job-generating activities.h. The County and the municipalities willprovide for orderly long-term commercialand industrial growth and an adequatesupply of land suitable for compatiblecommercial and industrial development.i. The County and the municipalities willencourage the recruitment of newbusiness employers to absorb the increasinglabor force, and to supply long-termemployment to a portion of the County’sresidents who are currently employedoutside of the County.j. The County and the municipalities willwork together, to the greatest extentpossible, to establish specific commonbenchmarks that will measure thecommunity’s overall economic viability.These benchmarks will be included in theCounty’s Comprehensive Plan and areencouraged to be included in each jurisdictionscomprehensive plan.k. Encourage use of a multi-modal transportationsystem that facilitates the reduction oftravel times and the need for additionalroad construction within the region.10.2 FRAMEWORK PLAN POLICIES10.2.0 Encourage a balance of job and housingopportunities in each urban center. Providesufficient land for business as well as homes.Businesses within the community shouldprovide a range of job types for the community’sresidents.10.2.1 Encourage industrial uses in major urbancenters, small towns and community centers.10.2.2 Revise commercial and industrial developmentstandards to allow for mixed use developmentsand ensure compatibility with nearby residentialand public land uses.10.2.3 Encourage businesses which pay a family wageto locate in Clark County.10.2.4 Encourage appropriate commercial developmentin neighborhoods and rural centers thatsupport the surrounding community.10.2.5 Develop transit-friendly design standards forcommercial and industrial areas. Encouragebusinesses to take responsibility for traveldemand management for their employees.10.2.6 Establish incentives for the long-term holdingof prime industrial land. Encourage localjurisdictions to and special districts to holdprime industrial land for future development.11.0 CRITICAL AREASAll of the jurisdictions in Clark County have adopted interimmeasures to protect identified critical areas withintheir boundaries. These measures must be reviewed and,if necessary, revised to implement the ComprehensiveGrowth Management Plan. The following policies are toensure a coordinated approach to preservation of identifiedsensitive lands. The goal is to preserve significantcritical areas as a part of a system of such areas, not asisolated reserves, wherever possible.11.1 County-wide Planning Policiesa. Urban growth areas shall be establishedconsistent with the protection of theenvironment and the enhancement of thestate’s high quality of life, including air andwater quality, and the availability of water.The establishment of urban growth areasshall also be done in a manner consistentwith the preservation of land, sites andstructures that have historical or archeological significance.

11.2 Framework Plan Policies11.2.0 New developments are to protect and enhancesensitive areas and respect natural constraints.11.2.1 Protect and improve the County’s environmentalquality while minimizing public and privatecosts.11.2.2 In the long-term, all jurisdictions should worktowards compatible classification systems forwetlands.11.2.3 Vulnerable aquifer recharge areas are to beregulated to protect the quality and quantity ofgroundwater in the County.11.2.4 Establish development standards for uses, otherthan natural resource uses, on sensitive lands(e.g., 100-year flood plains, unstable soils, highvaluewetlands, etc.).11.2.5 Wetlands and watersheds are to be managed toprotect surface and groundwater quality.11.2.6 The County and jurisdictions are to workcooperatively with the Washington StateDepartment of Wildlife to develop programs andareas that promote the preservation of habitats.12.0 COMMUNITY DESIGNImplementation of the Community Framework Plan willrequire attention to the details of design if it is to succeedin encouraging a sense of community and getting peopleto use alternative means of transportation. The followingpolicies are intended to focus the design policies of eachjurisdiction on certain key issues which must be coordinatedin order to be effective.12.1 County-wide Planning Policiesa. The community design element shall helpconserve resources and minimize waste.b. The County’s community design standardsshall be appropriate to the region, exhibitingcontinuity of history and culture andcompatibility with the climate, andencourage the development of localcharacter and community identity.12.2 Framework Plan Policies12.2.0 Develop high quality design and site planningstandards for publicly funded projects (e.g., civicbuildings, parks, etc.).12.2.1 Encourage the establishment of open spacebetween or around urban centers. These areascould be public greenways, resource lands, wild-life habitats, etc.12.2.2 Encourage urban and rural centers to providean ample supply of specialized open space in theform of squares, greens, and parks whosefrequent use is encouraged through placementand design.12.2.3 Establish development standards to encourage mixed use developments in urban and ruralcenters, while providing buffering for each usefrom the adverse effects of the other.12.2.4 Establish development standards for higherdensities and intensities of development alongpriority and high capacity transit corridors thatencourage pedestrian, bicycle, and public transitusage.12.2.5 Encourage street, pedestrian path and bike pathstandards that contribute to a system of fullyconnectedand interesting routes to all destinations.Their design should encourage pedestrianand bicycle use and be defined by buildings,trees and lighting, and discouraging high speedtraffic.12.2.6 Establish standards that use materials andmethods of construction specific to the region,exhibiting continuity of history and culture andcompatibility with the climate, to encourage thedevelopment of local character and communityidentity.13.0 HISTORIC PRESERVATIONClark County has a long and varied history, and manystructures and sites remain which were a part of thathistory. These structures and sites define the uniquecharacter of the County and its communities. The followingpolicies are to ensure a coordinated approach to theirpreservation.13.1 County-wide Planning Policiesa. The County and each municipality shouldidentify cultural resources within urbangrowth areas and the County.13.2 Framework Plan Policies13.2.0 The County, cities and towns are to identifyfederal, state and local historic andarchaeological lands, sites or structures ofsignificance within their jurisdictions.13.2.1 Encourage owners of historic sites or structuresto preserve and maintain them in goodcondition, consistent with their historiccharacter.

13.2.2 Develop financial and other incentive programsfor owners of historic properties to maintaintheir properties and make them availableperiodically for public education.13.2.3 Establish county-wide programs to identifyarchaeological and historic resources, protectthem, and educate the public about the historyof the region.13.2.4 Establish criteria for the identification ofarchaeological and historical resources, andestablish a process for resolving conflictsbetween preservation of these resources anddevelopment activities.C. Growth Management Act Planning GoalsThe Vancouver Comprehensive Plan is consistent withthe requirements of the Washington Growth ManagementAct (GMA). The following are the base GMA planninggoals of RCW 36.70.A.020:1. Urban growth. Encourage development in urbanareas where adequate public facilities andservices exist or can be provided in an efficientmanner.2. Reduce sprawl. Reduce the inappropriateconversion of undeveloped land into sprawling,low-density development.3. Transportation. Encourage efficient multimodaltransportation systems that are based onregional priorities and coordinated with countyand city comprehensive plans.4. Housing. Encourage the availability of affordablehousing to all economic segments of thepopulation of this state, promote a variety ofresidential densities and housing types, andencourage preservation of existing housingstock.5. Economic development. Encourage economicdevelopment throughout the state that isconsistent with adopted comprehensive plans,promote economic opportunity for all citizensof this state, especially for unemployed andfor disadvantaged persons, promote theretention and expansion of existing businesseand recruitment of new businesses, recognizeregional differences impacting economicdevelopment opportunities, and encouragegrowth in areas experiencing insufficienteconomic growth, all within the capacities ofthe state’s natural resources, public services,and public facilities.owners shall be protected from arbitrary anddiscriminatory actions.7. Permits. Applications for both state and localgovernment permits should be processed in atimely and fair manner to ensure predictability.8. Natural resource industries. Maintain andenhance natural resource-based industries,including productive timber, agricultural,and fisheries industries. Encourage theconservation of productive forest lands andproductive agricultural lands, and discourageincompatible uses.9. Open space and recreation. Retain open space,enhance recreational opportunities, conservefish and wildlife habitat, increase access tonatural resource lands and water, and developparks and recreational facilities.10. Environment. Protect the environment andenhance the state’s high quality of life, includingair and water quality, and the availability ofwater.11. Citizen participation and coordination. Encourage the involvement of citizens in the planningprocess and ensure coordination betweencommunities and jurisdictions to reconcileconflicts.12. Public facilities and services. Ensure that thosepublic facilities and services necessary tosupport development shall be adequate to servethe development at the time the developmentis available for occupancy and use withoutdecreasing current service levels below locallyestablished minimum standards.13. Historic preservation. Identify and encouragethe preservation of lands, sites, and structuresthat have historical or archaeologicalsignificance.6. Property rights. Private property shall not betaken for public use without just compensationhaving been made. The property rights of land

APPENDIX BVANCOUVER SHORELINE MANAGEMENT MASTERPROGRAM GOALS(MARCH 2011 DRAFT)2.1 General Shoreline GoalsThe general goals of this Shoreline Master Program areto:• Use the full potential of shorelines inaccordance with the opportunities presented by their relationship to the surroundingarea, their natural resource values, andtheir unique aesthetic qualities offered bywater, topography, and views; and• Develop a physical environment which isboth ordered and diversified and whichintegrates water and shoreline uses whileachieving a net gain of ecological function.2.2 Shorelines of Statewide SignificanceDesignated shorelines of state-wide significance (SSWS)are of value to the entire state. In accordance with RCW90.58.020, shorelines of statewide significance will bemanaged as follows:1. Preference shall be given to the uses thatare consistent with the statewide interest insuch shorelines. These are uses that:a. Recognize and protect the statewideinterest over local interest;b. Preserve the natural character of theshoreline;c. Result in long term over short termbenefit;d. Protect the resources and ecology of theshoreline;e. Increase public access to publicly ownedareas of the shorelines;f. Increase recreational opportunities forthe public in the shoreline; andg. Provide for any other element asdefined in RCW 90.58.100 deemedappropriate or necessary.2. Uses that are not consistent with thesepolicies should not be permitted on shorelinesof statewide significance.3. Those limited shorelines containing unique,scarce and/or sensitive resources should beprotected.4. Development should be focused in alreadydeveloped shoreline areas to reduce adverseenvironmental impacts and to preserveundeveloped shoreline areas. In general,preserve shorelines of state-wide significancefor future generations and restrict orprohibit development that would irretrievablydamage shoreline resources. Evaluatethe short-term economic gain or convenienceof developments relative to the longtermand potentially costly impairments tothe natural shoreline.2.3 Shoreline Use and Development2.3.1 GoalThe goal for shoreline use and development is to bothpreserve and develop shorelines in a manner that allowsfor an orderly balance of uses. Resulting land use patternswill be compatible with shoreline designations andsensitive to and compatible with ecological systems andother shoreline resources. To help with this balance,shoreline and water areas with unique attributes forspecific long term uses such as commercial, residential,industrial, water, wildlife, fisheries, recreational andopen space shall be identified and reserved.2.4 Economic Development2.4.1 GoalThe goal for economic development is to create andmaintain an economic environment that can coexist harmoniouslywith the natural and human environment.2.5 Conservation2.5.1 GoalThe goal of conservation is to protect shoreline resources,important shoreline features, shoreline ecological functionsand the processes that sustain them to the maximumextent practicable.2.6 Restoration2.6.1 GoalThe goal of restoration is to re-establish, rehabilitateand/or otherwise improve impaired shoreline ecologicalfunctions and/or processes through voluntary and incentive-basedpublic and private programs and actions thatare consistent with the Shoreline Management ProgramRestoration Plan and other approved restoration plans.2.7 Flood Prevention and Flood DamageMinimization2.7.1 GoalThe goal for flood hazards is to promote public health,safety, and general welfare, and to minimize public and

private losses due to flood conditions in specific areas.2.8 Archaeological, Historic, and CulturalResources2.8.1 GoalThe goal for archaeological, historic, and cultural resourcesis to preserve and prevent the destruction of ordamage to any site having historic, cultural, scientific, oreducational value. Such sites include those identified byaffected Indian tribes, the Department of Archaeologyand Historic Preservation, Clark County Historic PreservationCommission, and other appropriate authorities.2.9 Public Access and Recreation2.9.1 GoalThe goal of public access and recreation is to increasethe ability of the general public to enjoy the water’s edge,travel on the waters of the state, and to view the waterand the shoreline from adjacent locations.2.10 Transportation, Utilities, and EssentialPublic Facilities2.10.1 GoalThe goal for transportation, utilities, and other public facilitiesis to provide transportation systems and essentialpublic facilities in shoreline areas without adverse effectson existing shoreline use and development or shorelineecological functions and/or processes.2.11 Views and Aesthetics2.11.1 GoalThe goal for views and aesthetics is to assure that thepublic’s opportunity to enjoy the physical and aestheticqualities of shorelines of the state, including views of thewater is protected to the greatest extent feasible.2.12 Shoreline Modification and Stabilization2.12.1 GoalThe goal for shoreline modification and stabilization is toavoid or minimize the need for shoreline armoring alongshorelines of the state, and when it is necessary, achieveit in a way that best protects ecosystem processes, shorelinefunctions, and downstream properties.

APPENDIX CGROWTH ASSUMPTIONSVancouver internal projectionsGMA requires local governments to indicate the land useassumptions used to estimate capital facilities and otherneeds. Existing and future growth capacity estimates aresummarized below, with sources listed in parentheses:• Employment includes only jobs covered inWashington Employment Security Departmentinventories. Non-covered jobs are estimated toaccount for approximately 3-4% of coveredtotals.• Employment estimates and projections dependon a wider range of factors than population, andare typically much more speculative.2011 Existing Estimate 2030 Projected CapacityPopulation Employment Population EmploymentCity of Vancouver162,300 persons(2010 US Censusplus Vancouverpermit records)74,000 jobs(WashingtonEmployment.Security Dept)202,300 persons (Existing estimateplus Vancouver internal developmentassumptions applied to base landinventories provided by Clark Countyfrom GIS and assessor records. Seeaccompanying table)139,200 jobs(similar methodologyas population)Unincorp. VUGA141,100 persons(Clark County GIS)29,200 jobs(WESD)227,700 persons (same)72,900 jobs(same)Total VUGA303,400103,200 jobs430,000 persons212,100 jobs• Capacity estimates are projections of realisticlong term growth capacity under existing plans,not policy goals for how much growth is desired.• Capacity estimates are based on existing boundaries,and do not include future City annexationsor future UGA expansions, which arelikely during the planning period and will resultin additional growth• Capacity estimates do not attempt to projectannual growth increments or rates within the20-year period, which is likely to vary widely inindividual years, particularly in areas likeVancouver with significant in-migration.• Growth reflects the net gain in population andjobs, and is very sensitive to land supply as wellas demand. The City of Vancouver, with arelatively lesser land supply, is projected to growmore slowly than the Vancouver UGA, whichhas more available land.• Individual subareas or neighborhoods may growfaster or slower than the City or UGA as a whole.• Projected citywide growth includes long termredevelopment capacity in downtownVancouver, Section 30, Riverview Gateway, andother identified subareas and developmentnodes.Clark County official forecasts for sizing UrbanGrowth Areas (As of 2011)• For purposes of sizing Urban Growth Areaboundaries, GMA requires counties to adopt20–year countywide population and employmentforecasts, and allocations for individualUGAs. The countywide population forecast mustfall within a range provided by the WashingtonOffice of Financial Management. In 2007Clark County adopted an allocation of 376,226persons for the Vancouver UGA, including theCity of Vancouver, through 2024.• The County future growth forecasts function aspolicy inputs as well as predictions. The forecasts, along with development assumptionsdevised by Clark County, are used to establishthe size and zoning of UGAs. The size andzoning of UGAs in turn greatly influences theamount of growth that may occur.• The methodology used by Clark County todetermine necessary UGA sizes from thepopulation and employment forecasts is basedon a GIS based inventory of assessor parcelrecords, subject to various assumptions. It isusually referred to as the Vacant BuildableLands Model (VBLM). Consult Clark County fordetails.

VANCOUVER GROWTH CAPACITY ANALYSIS 2011 through 2030POPULATIONCity of VancouverResidential Base Will not Infra Developable Units PersonsHigh Density Acres Convert Acres AcresVacant 196.4 19.6 49.0 127.8 2044.8 4498Vac Constrained 148.8 81.8 18.5 48.4 774.6 1704Underutilized 54.1 16.2 10.5 27.4 438.1 964Und Constrained 29.6 19.2 2.9 7.5 119.8 264Low DensityVacant 292.6 29.3 72.9 190.4 1332.8 3598Vac Constrained 246.1 135.4 30.7 80.1 560.5 1513Underutilized 264.8 79.4 51.3 134.0 938.1 2533Und Constrained 220.5 143.3 21.4 55.8 390.6 1055Mixed UseVacant 8.4 0.0 2.1 6.3 113.4 249Vac Constrained 16.8 3.4 3.4 10.1 181.4 399Underutilized 1.0 0.0 0.3 0.8 13.5 30Und Constrained 11.0 2.2 2.2 6.6 118.8 261Existing Small (2500-5000 sf) LotsHigh Density 249 base lots 199 438Low Density 384 base lots 307 829Redevelopment 21758TOTAL NEW PERSONS 40095TOTAL EXISTING PERSONS 162300TOTAL BUILDOUT POPULATION 202395POPULATIONUnincorporated Vancouver UGAResidential Base Will not Infra Developable Units PersonsHigh Density Acres Convert Acres AcresVacant 355.0 35.5 88.5 231.0 3696.0 8131Vac Constrained 241.4 132.8 30.1 78.5 1256.6 2765Underutilized 180.1 54.0 34.9 91.1 1458.4 3208Und Constrained 76.3 49.6 7.4 19.3 308.9 680Low DensityVacant 1223.4 122.3 305.0 796.1 5572.5 15046Vac Constrained 1096.9 603.3 136.7 356.9 2498.1 6745Underutilized 2486.3 745.9 482.1 1258.3 8808.2 23782Und Constrained 1565.6 1017.6 151.8 396.2 2773.2 7488Mixed UseVacant 130.9 0.0 32.7 98.2 1767.2 3888Vac Constrained 69.3 13.9 13.9 41.6 748.4 1647Underutilized 87.9 0.0 22.0 65.9 1186.7 2611Und Constrained 47.4 9.5 9.5 28.4 511.9 1126Existing Small (2500-5000 sf) LotsHigh Density 396 base lots 317 697Low Density 461 base lots 369 996Redevelopment 7881TOTAL NEW PERSONS 86689TOTAL EXISTING PERSONS 141100TOTAL BUILDOUT POPULATION 227789DOCUMENTATION1. Base acreage from County GIS 2010 V run (vanyielduga, vanvieldcity, crkyielduga files)2. Will not convert, infrastructure, mixed use density and high density residential density estimates consistent with County VBLM methodology3. Low Density residential density estimates (7 u/a city, 7 u/a VUGA) based on:a Capacity analyses is inherently future-oriented. State Buildable Lands Program Guidelines advise that “likely future trends should be considered”b. Observed local trends point to smaller lots. Average densities of new single family home development in Urban Low designation areas in 2008 was5.8 u/a in city, 5.8 in VUGA, but these are skewed by development on a handful of previously created large lots. (Just four city lots ranging from .7to 4 acres in size lowered citywide average from 7.4 to 5.8 u/a). Median density of newly created lots in Urban Low areas from 2007 through 2009was 7.9 u/a in city, 7.2 in VUGA. 44% of all new city lots created in last three years are 5,000 square feet or less.

VANCOUVER GROWTH CAPACITY ANALYSIS 2011 through 2030EMPLOYMENTCity of VancouverBase Will not Infra Developable JobsCOMMERCIAL Acres Convert Acres AcresVacant 439.1 0.0 109.8 329.3 8233.1Vac Constrained 96.2 19.2 19.2 57.7 1443.0Underutilized 19.4 0.0 4.9 14.6 363.8Und Constrained 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.0MIXED USEVacant 5.6 0.0 1.4 4.2 84.0Vac Constrained 11.2 2.2 2.2 6.7 134.4Underutilized 0.7 0.0 0.2 0.5 10.5Und Constrained 7.4 1.5 1.5 4.4 88.8INDUSTRIALVacant 820.9 0.0 205.2 615.7 6772.4Vac Constrained 718.3 359.2 89.8 269.4 2963.0Underutilized 151.4 0.0 37.9 113.6 1249.1Und Constrained 243.4 121.7 30.4 91.3 1004.0Exempt V 156.1 0.0 39.0 117.1 1287.8Exempt VC 768.6 384.3 96.1 288.2 3170.5Exempt U 50.7 0.0 12.7 38.0 418.3Exempt UC 19.5 9.8 2.4 7.3 80.4Subtotal 27306Redevelopment 32039Government and non-profit jobs on residential lands 2967Home Based Jobs 2967TOTAL NEW COVERED JOBS 65280TOTAL EXISTING COVERED JOBS 74009TOTAL COVERED JOBS AT BUILDOUT 139,289Unincorporated Vancouver UGAEMPLOYMENTBase Will not Infra Developable JobsCOMMERCIAL Acres Convert Acres AcresVacant 481.2 0.0 120.3 360.9 9022.5Vac Constrained 343.3 68.7 68.7 206.0 5149.5Underutilized 282.2 0.0 70.6 211.7 5291.3Und Constrained 266.8 53.4 53.4 160.1 4002.0MIXED USE 0.0Vacant 87.3 0.0 21.8 65.5 1309.5Vac Constrained 46.2 9.2 9.2 27.7 554.4Underutilized 58.6 0.0 14.7 44.0 879.0Und Constrained 31.6 6.3 6.3 19.0 379.2INDUSTRIALVacant 453.5 0.0 113.4 340.1 3741.4Vac Constrained 439.0 219.5 54.9 164.6 1810.9Underutilized 206.7 0.0 51.7 155.0 1705.3Und Constrained 242.2 121.1 30.3 90.8 999.1Subtotal 34844.0Redevelopment 3484.4Government and non-profit jobs on residential lands 3449.6Home Based Jobs 1916.4TOTAL NEW COVERED JOBS 43694TOTAL EXISTING COVERED JOBS 29243TOTAL COVERED JOBS AT BUILDOUT 72937DOCUMENTATION (continued)c. Ongoing outside trends point to smaller lots overall: Recession impacts on future homebuyer purchasing power and credit availability; Agingpopulations; Increase in non-traditional households; Increased gas costs4. Persons per unit estimates (2.2 MFR, 2.7 SFR) from 2009 OFM Vancouver census5. Existing developable residential small lots inventory from assessor inventory based on PT1 codes with taxable amount. 20% assumed not-to-develop6. Vancouver redevelopment estimates based on anticipated population and employment growth at specific sites, primarily downtown Vancouver (VCCV),192nd/SR-14 Quarries, Columbia Tech Center, Columbia Business Center, Section 30, Port of Vancouver, Fourth Plain corridor subarea, EvergreenAirport, SW Medical Center, others.7. Vancouver existing persons estimates based on 4/1/09 OFM census and Tidemark permit records. VUGA estimate based on assessor data.8. Industrial and commercial jobs per acre estimates (25 jobs/acre commercial, 11 industrial) from Clark County 2002 Buildable Lands Report9. Home based work estimate based on 2000 US Census factor upwards to account for technological changes, primarily home computing10. All jobs projections are for covered jobs only. Uncovered jobs estimated to account for additional 5% currently, per WESD Economist Scott Bailey

APPENDIX DCAPITAL FACILITIES FUNDING SUMMARYIntroductionThe Growth Management Act requires the City to identifythe sources of funding for each type of capital facility.This section presents the funding sources for City fundedcapital facilities. Those capital facilities include infrastructurerelated to transportation, water, sewer, stormwater and solid waste utilities, and parks, fire, policeand general government facilities. Additional fundinginformation on these and other capital facilities providedby non-municipal agencies is contained in Chapter 5 ofthis Vancouver comprehensive plan, and in individualservice area plans adopted by reference (see Appendix Efor full list).This section presents an overview of capital facility fundingsources, additional information on selected revenues,a brief explanation of the City’s capital facility fundingprocess and a summary of capital facility funding bycapital facility and funding source.Overview of capital facility funding sourcesThe City’s capital facilities are funded by a variety ofresources including dedicated funding that must be usedfor capital purposes and unrestricted resources that canbe allocated to fund capital projects. Funding comes fromthe City and other sources originating outside the Citysuch as State and Federal grants, and contributions fromother agencies or organizations. Each of these sources isbriefly described below.Impact fees. State law allows the City to collect feesfrom owners or developers as development occurs tofund park acquisition, park development and transportationcapital projects. The fee amount is determined byestimating the appropriate private sector cost of the capitalfacilities that are required to meet expected demandand achieve the established service level standard. Theappropriate private sector cost is allocated to new developmentbased in its estimated impact on demand. Theseimpact fees must be expended on projects located in thearea where they were collected within ten years, fromthe date they were collected and must be matched by theappropriate amount of public funding. For example, it istypical to have a combination of impact fees, State grantsand other City contributions used to fund City transportationcapital projects.Systems Development Charges (SDCs). Like impactfees, SDCs are collected from owners and/or developersas development occurs to fund improvements to thewater and sewer utilities. These funds may be expendedon projects that expand utility system capacity and caneither pay for debt service on bonds or for direct projectexpenditures.Real Estate Excise Tax (REET). State statute authorizesthe City to impose two taxes of ¼% each on thesale of real estate within the city limits. The proceeds ofthe tax must be used for capital purposes as allowed byState law and as directed by the City Council. The Cityhas implemented both taxes. The proceeds from one ¼%REET are dedicated to the City’s pavement managementprogram in Transportation. Proceeds from the other ¼%REET From 2005 through 2009, were split betweenparks and recreation and transportation. A total of 70%of the proceeds was dedicated to parks and recreation,largely funding the debt service for bonds issues toremodel Marshall and build Firstenburg CommunityCenters and the remaining 30% was dedicated to fundingneighborhood traffic safety projects. Beginning in 2009this funding source continues to fund debt service onthe two recreation community centers, but the remainingbalance has been allocated between funding the debtservice on the Waterfront Access Project (20%), reducedin scope neighborhood traffic safety program (6% ofrevenue) and, if any funds remain, parks capital program.Federal and State Grants. The City is very active inapplying for grants from various federal and state agenciesto fund capital facilities. These grants are typicallyavailable for a specific purpose or project. The City hashad the most success in obtaining grants for transportationimprovements, parks and trails, stormwater andwater quality improvement projects, historic preservationand airport improvements. Both state and federalgrants typically require the commitment of local fundingas a match to the grant. Beginning in 2012, minimal localmatching dollars are available for projects in Transportationand Parks capital programs. In addition to grantsfrom state or federal agencies, the City is allocating aportion of its Community Development Block Grantfunding to selected transportation and parks capitalprojects.Other Agencies. The City actively seeks out partnershipswith other federal, state and local agencies to helpfund capital facilities. These partnerships have been usedin a number of programs but are more likely to be used intransportation and parks and recreation capital programs.Participating agencies often include Clark County,CTRAN, the Port of Vancouver and other local governmentsin Clark County.Restricted Donations. Individual residents, localbusinesses and other organizations may also providefunding for specific capital projects. Donations, with fewexceptions are sufficient to cover only small portions ofprojects.General Obligation Bonds. Funding for capital facilitiesprojects may be provided by general obligation bondsissued for specific purposes. General obligation bondswere issued to help fund the City’s transportation capitalprogram and public safety facility construction over thelast several years. The source for repayment of the bondsis either general fund revenue or other revenue sources

City Council dedicates for that purpose. The most recentbond issues were supported by new 2/10 of 1% in salestax for Public Safety and a $50 per employee businesslicense surcharge revenue that Council approvedspecifically to support debt for a number of specific highpriority transportation projects. The maximum amountof non-voted debt the City can issue is limited by statelaw to 1.5% of the City’s assessed value. In 2011 the Cityhas approximately $107 million in available non-voteddebt capacity with a projected amount of $246 million invoted capacity.Water and Sewer Utility Revenue Bonds. Revenuebonds issued by the City’s water and sewer utilities havebeen used to fund specific capital projects for the utilitiesincluding expansion of sewage treatment capacity. Thebonds are repaid from user fees charged to the water andsewer utilities customers and from SDCs (see above).Utility revenue bonds are repaid exclusively from utilityrevenues.Voter Approved Bonds. Voters can approve a propertytax levy to pay for bonds issued to fund capital projects.Any proposed voter approved bond levy requires60% voter approval. The City currently has no voterapproved bonds outstanding.Arterial Street Fund. The Arterial Street Fund is aspecial revenue fund that receives state-shared gas taxTable D-1.revenues that must be used for capital projects on streetsdefined as arterial streets in the City’s TransportationImprovement Plan.Operating Funds. The City may allocate operating orgeneral funds for capital purposes. Operating funds havebeen used in the past to fund capital facility improvementsfor transportation, parks and recreation andPearson Airpark. Operating funds can be used to payfor projects directly or to pay principal and interest onbonds issued to fund capital projects. Excess operatingfunds are also used to fund capital projects for the City’sutilities.Additional information on selected revenuesThe City has a number of general revenue sources thatcould be used to fund its capital facilities. Several of theserevenues are unrestricted and available to fund the needsof general operations and maintenance as well as capitalprojects. In addition, some transportation capital fundingsources are available but cannot be accessed withoutCounty Commissioner or voter approval.Often, general revenues are used to pay the principal andinterest on bonds used to fund capital projects. For reference,the estimated annual debt service on $12 millionin bonds carrying 5.5% interest and repaid over 20 yearswould be approximately $1 million per year. A brief summaryof these revenues is provided in Table D-1.General City TaxesProperty TaxLevy lid lift (voted)Voted excess levy bondsSales Tax (Voted)1/10 of 1% Public Safety local Sales and Use TaxBusiness and Occupation Tax (Council-matic)Re-establish B&O tax at 1992 ratesBusiness License Surcharge (Council-matic)$50/employeeUtility Tax on Privately Owned Utilities (voted)1% increase on electrical, natural gas, telephone, cableLocal Option Transportation Funding Sources, require creationof a Transportation Benefit District Motor Vehicle License FeeLocal Option Vehicle License Fee $100 (voted)Sales TaxSales Tax 2/10 of 1% (voted)Parks and Recreation Revenue Options, require creation of aMetropolitan Parks DistrictProperty Tax$0.50 levy per $1,000 in assessed valuationDollar Amount$1,800,000$3,440,000$2,140,000$9,900,000$2,000,000$2,950,000$10,500,000$4,400,000$3,300,000NotesIncrease in city’s levy up to statutory maxium. The dollaramount represents an amount of collections during a sixyear period, assuming an 8% further reduction in AV in2011 for the 2012 taxes.Amount represents a $0.25 per $1,000 AV in excess levyAssumes City imposing the taxAssumes further AV reductions impact the ability togenerate full $50 per $1,000 AV

Capital Facility Funding ProcessIn recognition of the scarcity of capital funding sourcesthe City has developed a process to assess capital facilityfunding requirements and allocate capital funding toprojects. That process includes department requests, aCity Manager recommendation and City Council considerationKey elements of the City’s capital facility budgetingapproach include:Department submission of capital budget requests. Usinga template provided by City budget staff, the staff inselected City departments submit their capital facilitiesbudget requests. This request includes an update on thebudget, actual expenditures, and projected revenues ofcurrent projects as well as information on new projectsexpected to start in the next biennium. Although a projectmay have costs in future years, if it is scheduled to beginin the upcoming biennium the full cost of the project isincluded in that biennium’s budget appropriation.Balanced Budgets by Project. Each project has to havespecific funding sources identified that must be in balancewith the proposed expenditures.Reasonably Funded Test. Budget staff compares thefunding required for the capital facilities budget requestsin each department to the revenues that are currentlyavailable and reasonably expected to be received in thebiennium. All of the recommended projects are fundedby available capital reserves and projected revenues.Where future revenues are relied upon, departmentrevenue estimates are reviewed and discounted by budgetstaff to determine the amount of funding available tosupport proposed projects.Review with Senior City Management. The City Managerand his Senior Budget Review Team complete a review ofthe recommended capital budget. After their review theappropriate adjustments are made and discussed withdepartment staff.Council Appropriation. The recommended capital budgetis presented to City Council for approval. Approval is inthe form of an ordinance authorizing the appropriation.Budget Monitoring. Once the appropriations are approvedby City Council, capital projects are monitoredby department, budget and accounting staff. Projectexpenses are compared to their authorized appropriationusing a project length schedule and the appropriateproject budget is reflected in the City’s financial system.Budget controls in the City’s financial system restrict aproject from overspending its approved budget. If anadditional appropriation for a specific project is required,the department must demonstrate to budget staff wherethe funding will come from. Any need for additional appropriationmust be presented to City Council forapproval.Table D-2. Estimates for specific sources of funding for each capital facility over 6- and 20-year period.Transportation 2011-2016 2017-2030Total Impact Fees 10,871,782 10,826,945State and Federal Grants 21,743,564 21,653,890City REET - 1st 1/4% - Pvt Management 2,514,052 25,377,634Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax, unobligated 18,766,400 50,803,000Developer Contributions 1,500,000 4,500,000Reserves for funded projects 14,700,000 -GO Bonds 10,700,000 -General Fund Support - Pvt Mgt 9,361,174 36,047,163City REET - 2nd 1/4% 600,000 1,690,000New Needed Undetermined Funding 5,770,699 319,663,881Subtotal Transportation 96,527,671 470,562,514City ParksTotal City Impact Fees 9,406,713 5,842,473Residual REET 750,000 -City REET - 2nd 1/4% - 4,944,612Grants, Donations 11,152,137 -New Desired Undetermined Funding 5,416,571 13,162,390Subtotal Parks 26,725,421 23,949,475

Table D-2 Continued. Estimates for specific sources of funding for each capital facility over 6- and 20-year period.Utilties 2011-2016 2017-2030Water, System Develoment Charges 7,850,000 21,000,000Sewer System Development Charges 8,450,000 22,400,000Utility Operating Revenues for Capital 87,978,182 222,355,232Utility Capital Reserves 39,000,000 -Grants - -Utility Revenue Bonds - -Subtotal Utilities 143,278,182 265,755,232General CapitalREET, - 2nd 1/4%, unobligated 288,400 5,075,527Grants - -Bonds - -Cash Reserves 900,000 -New Needed Undetermined Funding 28,427,000 5,000,000Subtotal General Capital 29,615,400 10,075,527GRAND TOTAL FUNDING SOURCES 295,531,274 770,342,747

APPENDIX E: OTHER PLANS ANDDOCUMENTS ADOPTED BYREFERENCE AS PART OF THECOMPREHENSIVE PLANThe following separate documents, providing technicaldata, analysis, and background information, are adoptedas part of the Vancouver Comprehensive Plan:I. Facilities and Services Plans• Vancouver Capital Facilities 6-year Project List• Transportation Improvement Program – TIP(6-year plan updated annually in June) 2011-2016• Vancouver Capital Facilities Budget 2009-2010• Vancouver Transportation System Plan 2004• SW Washington Regional TransportationCouncil Metropolitan Transportation Plan• Coordinated Consolidated Water System Plan1999• Vancouver-Clark Parks & Recreation ComprehensiveParks, Recreation and Open SpacePlan 2009• Vancouver Urban Parks, Recreation and OpenSpace Plan 2002• Vancouver, Evergreen, and Camas SchoolDistrict Capital Facilities Plans (6-year), 2011• Pearson Airfield Business Plan 2005• Pearson Airport Master Plan 2001• Vancouver Water System Comprehensive Plan2007• Creating a more Sustainable Vancouver Plan,2009• 1990 Clark County Open Space Plan• Vancouver Commute Trip Reduction Plan, July2007• Downtown Vancouver Growth andTransportation Efficiency Center Plan,September 2007.III. Technical Documents• Visual Preference Survey 1994• Clark County Plan Monitoring Report 2007,2009• Clark County Buildable Lands Report 2007• Vancouver Plan Monitoring Report 2010• Code and Regulatory Barriers to the LivingBuilding Challenge for Sustainable, AffordableResidential Development, 2009• Draft and Final Environmental ImpactStatements - Comprehensive Growth ManagementPlans of Clark County, Camas, La Center,Ridgefield, Vancouver, Washougal and Yacolt,2006.• July 2011 Transportation Analysis• Individual City of Vancouver Capital projectlistings, 2011-16.• June 2011 Clark County Public Health RapidHealth Impact Assessment of VancouverComprehensive PlanII. Additional Plans• Vancouver Consolidated Housing & CommunityDevelopment Plan 2009-2014• 2004 Vancouver Walking and Bicycle MasterPlan – Path & Trails Element (Central City LoopTrail amended 2009)• Esther Short Subarea Plan 1998• Fourth Plain Corridor Subarea Plan 2007• Vancouver City Center Vision Plan 2007,Amended 2009• Central Park Plan 2008• Lower Grand Employment Area Subarea Plan2008• Riverview Gateway Subarea Plan 2009• Shoreline Management Master Program, 1997,2007• Urban Forestry Management Plan 2007• Section 30 Urban Employment Center SubareaPlan 2009

GlossaryVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Glossary |10-Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Glossary |10-Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Glossary | 10-1Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Glossary | 10-

10- | Glossary Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Acre A measure of land area containing 43,560 squarefeet.Acre, net An acre of land calculated excluding all unusablespaces, e.g., roads, infrastructure, environmentallysensitive areas.ADD average daily demandAffordable housing Housing is considered affordable toa household if it costs no more than 30 percent of grossmonthly income for rent or mortgage payments, or up tothree times annual income for purchasing a home. Thisis the standard used by the federal and state governmentand the majority of lending institutions.ALS Advanced Life SupportAMI Areawide median incomeArterial A major street carrying the traffic of local andcollector streets to and from freeways and other majorstreets. Arterials generally have traffic signals at intersectionsand may have limits on driveway spacing and streetintersection spacing.Average Daily Traffic The weighted 24-hour total of allvehicle trips to and from a site Monday through Friday.BBC Burnt Bridge CreekBest Available Science Information that is based onexisting professional peer-reviewed scientific researchand applicable to local conditions. See WAC 365-195-900ff.BLS Basic Life SupportBPA Bonneville Power AdministrationCAA Clean Air ActsCapital Facilities Program A local government programthat schedules permanent capital improvements,usually for six years in the future to fit the projected fiscalcapability of the jurisdiction. The program is generallyreviewed annually, for conformance to and consistencywith the adopted Comprehensive Plan.Capital facilities Permanent physical infrastructuresuch as roads, sewer and water lines, police and fire stations,schools, parks, and government buildings.Capital Improvement Program A local governmentprogram that schedules permanent capital facilities, usuallyfor six years in the future to fit the projected fiscalcapability of the jurisdiction. The program is generallyreviewed annually, for conformance to and consistencywith the adopted Comprehensive Plan.CDBG Community Development Block GrantCFP Capital Facilities ProgramCollector A street for traffic moving between major orarterial streets and local streets. Collectors generally providedirect access to properties, although they may havelimitations on driveway spacing.Concurrency Requirement that proposed land uses betested to ensure that public facilities and services necessaryto maintain locally adopted minimum service levelsare provided before or at the time of development. TheGrowth Management Act requires local concurrencystandards for transportation facilities.CPU Clark Public UtilitiesCRC Columbia Resource CompanyCREDC Columbia River Economic Development CouncilCRESA Clark Regional Emergency Services AgencyCritical areas Defined by the Growth Management Act(RCW 36.70A.030[5]) to include wetlands, sensitivefish and wildlife habitat areas, critical recharge areas forgroundwater aquifers, and geologically hazardous areas(such as landslide areas, earthquake fault zones, andsteep slopes), and floodplains.CSWMP Clark County Solid Waste Management PlanCTR Central Clark County Transfer and RecyclingCenterCWA Clean Water ActCWSP Clark County Coordinated Water System PlanDensity For residential development, density means thenumber of housing units per acre. For population, densitymeans the number of people per acre or square mile.Density, gross Density calculations based on the totalVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Glossary | 10-3

acreage of an area, including streets, roads, easements,rights-of-way, parks, open space, and sometimes, otherland uses.Density, net Density calculations based on the actualarea of land used, not including streets, roads, rights-ofway,easements, parks and open space.DEQ Oregon Department of Environmental QualityDNR Washington State Department of Natural ResourcesDOE Washington Department of EcologyEMS Emergency Medical ServiceEPA Environmental Protection AgencyESA Endangered Species ActESD Washington State Employment Security DepartmentFEMA Federal Emergency Management AgencyFamily-wage job A job that pays the current “thresholdcash wage” (as defined herein) and provides a benefitpackage with options that will allow a family of up tothree members to function with a single wage earnerwithout supplemental public assistance.Flood hazard area Lowland or relatively flat area adjoininginland or coastal waters that is subject to a 1 percentchance of flooding in any given year. Also known asthe 100-year floodplain.Floodplain See “flood hazard area.”Floodway The channel of a river or other watercourseand the adjacent land areas that must be reserved in orderto discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasingthe water surface elevation more than one foot.Floodway fringe The area of land lying between theouter limit lines of the floodway and the outer limit linesof the “100-year floodplain.”FEMA Federal Emergency Management AgencyFVRLD Fort Vancouver Regional Library DistrictGMA State of Washington Growth Management Act of1990Groundwater Water that exists beneath a land surfaceor beneath the bed of any stream, lake, reservoir or otherbody of surfacewater. It is water in a geological formationor structure that stands, flows, percolates or otherwisemoves.High occupancy vehicle (HOV) Locally defined as a vehiclecarrying two or more people.Household All persons living in a dwelling unit, whetheror not they are related. Both a single person living inan apartment and a family in a house are considered a“household.”HOME Home Investment Partnerships ProgramHSS Highways of Statewide SignificanceHousehold income The total of all the incomes of allthe people living in a household.HUD U.S. Department of Housing and Urban DevelopmentHuman scale Development that encourages human use,interaction, and pedestrian activity through size, spacing,orientation or other features.Impact fee Fee levied on the developer of a project by acity, county, or special district as compensation for theexpected effects of that development. The Growth ManagementAct authorizes imposition of traffic, school, andpark impact fees on new development and sets the conditionsunder which they may be imposed.Implementation measure Action, procedure, program,regulation, or technique that carries out comprehensiveplan policy.Infrastructure Physical systems and services that supportdevelopment and people including, but not limitedto, streets and highways, transit services, water and sewersystems, storm drainage systems, and airports.ISO Insurance Services OrganizationLand absorption Occurs when vacant land is developedor underdeveloped land is redeveloped.GIS Geographic Information System10- 4 | Glossary Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030

Level of service (LOS) Method of measuring and definingthe type and quality of particular public service suchas transportation, fire protection, police protection, libraryservice, schools/education, etc. Transportation levelsof service are designated “A” through “F,” from bestto worst. LOS A describes free flowing conditions; LOS Edescribes conditions approaching and at capacity; LOS Fdescribes system failure or gridlock.LOS Level of serviceLow-income household Households earning between51 percent and 80 percent of the countywide median income.Median income Midpoint of all of the reported householdincomes; half the households have higher incomesand half have lower incomes than the mid-point.MDD maximum day demandMFSA Maritime Fire and Safety AssociationMG million gallonMGD millions of gallons per dayMMSW mixed municipal solid wasteMPO Metropolitan Planning OrganizationMPTP Marine Park Treatment PlantMSW municipal solid wasteNAP Neighborhood Action PlanNPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination SystemODOT Oregon Department of TransportationOFM Office of Financial ManagementOpen space Any parcel or area of land or water that isessentially unimproved and provides passive recreationalopportunities compatible with resource protection.PMSA Primary Metropolitan Statistical AreaPoverty level An income-based threshold set by theCensus Bureau to define who is poor.psi pounds per square inchRDII Rainfall-Derived Infiltration and InflowREET Real Estate Excise TaxResource lands Under GMA (RCW 36.70A.170), landsthat may be used for commercial forest, agriculture, ormineral extraction industries.Riparian area Lands adjacent to a water body that areinfluenced by or influence the hydrology of that waterbody.RTC Regional Transportation CouncilRTPO Regional Transportation Planning OrganizationSCIP Sewer Connection Incentive ProgramSEPA State Environmental Policy Act (RCW 41.23C), asamended.SMA Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58)STEP Septic Tank Elimination ProgramStormwater Any flow occurring during or following anyform of natural precipitation, and resulting from suchprecipitation, including snowmelt.Surfacewater Water that flows across the land surface,in channels, or is contained in depressions in the landsurface, including but not limited to ponds, lakes, rivers,and streams.SWCAA Southwest Washington Clean Air AgencyTAZ Transportation Analysis ZoneTBD to be determinedThreshold cash wage Clark County’s average annualcovered wage plus 25 percent, based on data availablefrom the Washington Employment Securities Commission.TIF Traffic Impact FeeTIP Transportation Improvement ProgramTSP Transportation System PlanVancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030 Glossary | 10-5

Urban Growth Areas Areas designated by a countypursuant to RCW 36.70A.110 where urban growth will beencouraged.Vancouver UGA Vancouver Urban Growth AreaVCPRD Vancouver-Clark Regional Parks and RecreationDepartmentVFD Vancouver Fire DepartmentVehicle miles traveled Average number of miles traveledby a vehicle in a given area. This is both a measure oftrip length and of dependency on private vehicles.Very low income Households earning less than 50 percentof the countywide median income.VPD Vancouver Police DepartmentVPOC Vancouver Plan Oversight CommitteeVUGA Vancouver Urban Growth AreaWater-quality limited stream Surfacewaters that havebeen identified as not meeting water quality standardsand not supporting identified beneficial uses, as definedin Washington regulations (WAC 173-201A).WDFW Washington State Department of Fish and WildlifeWSD Washington School for the DeafWSDOT Washington State Department of TransportationWSSB Washington State School for the BlindWSU-V Washington State University at VancouverWTP Westside Treatment PlantWUCC Water Utility Coordinating CommitteeWUTC Washington Utilities and Transportation CommissionWWRF Waste Water Reserve Fund10- 6 | Glossary Vancouver Comprehensive Plan 2011-2030