1 | Page - City of Washougal

1|Page
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
3
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
4
1.1
MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW
5
1.2
PLANNING PROCESS
5
1.3
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
6
1.4
PLAN ORGANIZATION
7
CHAPTER 2: DEMAND AND NEEDS ASSESSEMENT
9
2.1
OVERVIEW
10
2.2
PLANNING CONTEXT
10
TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF EXISTING PARK LAND
13
TABLE 2: OTHER PUBLICLY OWNED RESOURCES
15
TABLE 3: SUMMARY OF EXISTING PUBLIC SCHOOL
FACILITIES
16
2.3
KEY PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT FINDINGS
18
2.4
NEEDS ASSESSMENT
20
TABLE 4: LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS
22
TABLE 5: EXISTING AND FUTURE RECREATION FACILITY
NEEDS
22
CHAPTER 3: GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
23
3.1
OVERVIEW
24
3.2
VISION FOR THE FUTURE
24
3.3
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
24
CHAPTER 4: PROVISION OF SERVICE RECOMMENDATIONS
29
4.1
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
30
4.2
ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT
31
4.3
FINANCE AND BUDGETING
33
4.4
PARK PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
34
4.5
MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS
36
4.6
RECREATION PROGRAMS
38
CHAPTER 5: PARKS AND FACILITIES RECOMMENDATIONS
40
5.1
RECOMMENDED PARK SYSTEM
41
5.2
PARKS AND OPEN SPACE RECOMMENDATIONS
41
5.3
RECREATION FACILITIES RECOMMENDATIONS
58
5.4
OFF-STREET TRAIL SYSTEM
62
CHAPTER 6: PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
69
6.1
OVERVIEW
70
6.2
CAPITAL PROJECTS
70
TABLE 6: CAPITAL PROJECTS LIST
6.3
IMPLEMENTATION PRIORITIES
6.4
CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDING
TABLE 7: WASHOUGAL PARKS DEPARTMENT 2013
DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: PUBLIC PARK SPORTS FACILITY
INVENTORY
APPENDIX B: DESIGN GUIDELINES
APPENDIX C: REVIEW OF POTENTIAL FUNDING
SOURCES
APPENDIX D: RESULTS OF THE PARK COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN UPDATE PUBLIC SURVEY TAKEN IN 2010
APPENDIX E: FORMATION OF A METROPOLITAN PARK
DISTRICT
TABLE 8: FUNDING COMPARISON: METROPOLITAN
PARK DISTRICT AND CURRENT CITY FUNDING
MAP APPENDICES
WASHOUGAL PARKS: EXISTING FACILITIES & PARK
SERVICE AREAS
COMPREHENSIVE PARK & RECREATION PLAN
WASHOUGAL RIVER WATER TRAIL
2|Page
71
73
73
74
78
79
80
89
94
105
106
109
110
111
112
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The City of Washougal appreciates the efforts and input of the numerous Washougal
residents who added information to this Park Comprehensive Plan. The following
officials and staff contributed to the development of the plan.
2013 CITY COUNCIL
Sean Guard, Mayor
Caryn Plinski, Parks Board Liaison
Brent Boger
Connie Jo Freeman
Paul Greenlee
Joyce Lindsay
Jennifer McDaniel
Dave Shoemaker
2013 CITY STAFF
David Scott, City Administrator
Trevor Evers, Public Works Director
James Dunn, Assistant Public Works Director
Suzanne Grover, Parks, Cemetery, & Facilities Manager
Shane Ernst, Parks Department
Pat King, Public Works Department
Meagan Morris, City Accountant
Lance Smith, 2010 Staff Intern
2013 PARKS BOARD
Barbara Curry, Chair
Mike Norris, Co-Chair
Janice Ferguson
Dianna Gordon
Shirley Scott
2005 PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR THE ORIGINAL
DOCUMENT
Jerry Acheson, City of Camas Park and Recreation Manager
Janice Ferguson, Park Board Member
Mike Hanson, Park Board Member
Lee Partain, Park Board Member
Kelly Putney, Vancouver-Clark Parks
Deborah Rorabough
Shirley Scott, Park Board Member
Stacee Sellers, Washougal Mayor
3|Page
CHAPTER ONE:
Introduction
4|Page
1.1
MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW
This Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan identifies a vision for Washougal’s park
system, and presents recommendations for achieving that vision. The plan identifies and
evaluates existing park and recreation areas; assesses the need for additional parkland,
open space and recreation facilities; establishes goals and objectives for the City’s leisure
services; and offers specific policies and recommendations to achieve these goals and
objectives. The intent of the master plan is to provide a logical, comprehensive blueprint
for further development of the City’s park system and services.
1.2
PLANNING PROCESS
The planning process for this master plan was divided into four phases, as detailed below.
Spring 2005
Summer/Fall 2005
Winter 2005
Winter/Spring 2006
[Subsequent Update of Washougal Park Comprehensive Plan: Springs of 2010 and 2013]
Figure 1: Washougal Comprehensive Park and Recreation Master Planning process
•
Phase I - Analysis: In the initial stage of the project, a complete inventory of park
and recreation resources in the Washougal planning area (defined as the Urban Growth
Area or UGA) was compiled. This information – along with more general data about the
community such as demographics, population projections, natural resources, climate and
land use – was analyzed and compared with neighboring communities in Clark County.
•
Phase II - Needs Assessment: Public input was gathered by surveying the
community, by giving citizens the opportunity to attend a meeting with the Planning
Advisory Committee (PAC), and by encouraging citizen participation in a City-hosted
“public visioning” workshop. Other public input was sought by contacting local
organized sports groups, among other sources. The input from these sources assisted in
establishing a community-wide demand for park and recreation facilities and services.
Combining community input alongside a level-of-service analysis resulted in a statement
of need. Comparing this need in conjunction with existing resources, a clear picture of the
current and future needs of the community emerged.
•
Phase III - Plan Development: During Phase III, the planning team used policy
directions determined in Phases I and II and worked with the PAC and City staff to
identify major directions for the plan. The consulting team synthesized all of the
information to formulate goals, objectives and specific recommendations into a
framework for a plan. This led to the subsequent development of an Administrative Draft
Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan for PAC and staff review.
•
Phase IV - Plan Approval: After the planning team refined the Administrative
Draft based on PAC and City staff comments, the Draft Comprehensive Park and
Recreation Plan was to be reviewed by the Planning Advisory Committee, the Parks
Board, the Planning Commission, and City Council. City Council held a public hearing
5|Page
on April 3rd 2006, and the plan was adopted by Council in the same month.

Phase V – Comprehensive Park Plan 2010 Update: In the Spring of 2010, an
updated survey was sent to residents for the update of the Comprehensive Plan. In 2013,
the final revisions were added and approved through the Park Board, Planning
Commission, and City Council.
1.3
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
The City of Washougal recognizes that community insight and input into the master
planning process is essential if future park development is to enhance the existing urban
fabric and be used and embraced by the public. Community input for this
Comprehensive Master Plan was initially gathered in four primary ways: formation of
and consultation with a Planning Advisory Committee, conducting adult and youth
surveys, contacting organized sports groups, and a public visioning workshop. These
public involvement methods are summarized in-depth below.



A sample of the March 2010
Parks Survey conducted by
the City of Washougal.

Planning Advisory Committee: The Planning Advisory
Committee (PAC), composed of the Washougal Parks Board and
additional representatives, was tasked with representing the
opinions of the community. The PAC also reviewed Discussion
Papers, survey results, and the needs-assessment findings. The
PAC also refined the goals and objectives, and set the capital
project priorities.
Community Recreation Survey: A self-administered survey was
conducted in Washougal in August/September 2005. This survey
was sent to a randomly selected sample of Washougal residents.
The statistically-valid results provided important insight into
community priorities and needs.
Organized Sports Group Questionnaire: A questionnaire was
distributed to local organized sports groups to find out about team
sport participation patterns, field use, and needs in Washougal.
Public Visioning Workshop: A public visioning workshop, held
in June 2005, allowed citizens to express their ideas about the
future of Washougal’s park system.
In addition to the public involvement opportunities during the first three phases of the
planning process, a public hearing provided additional opportunities for public
involvement during the plan adoption phase.
6|Page
In March 2010, the City Of Washougal updated and distributed 6,500 surveys to the
citizens of Washougal in a mass postal mailing. This survey sought to update the
pertinent information regarding the implementation of the Comprehensive Parks Plan,
and more accurately reflect the most recent preferences of Washougal citizens.
1.4






PLAN ORGANIZATION
Chapter 1: Introduction: Chapter 1 provides an overview of the document
organization, planning process and public involvement effort.
Chapter 2: Demand and Needs Assessment: Chapter 2 describes the physical and
political characteristics that form the framework for recommendations made in this
Plan – the Plan Context. Characteristics described in the Plan Context include
Washougal’s regional context, climate, natural resources, demographics and planning
issues. Key findings from the Community Survey, the Planning Advisory Committee
and the Sports Group Questionnaire are also presented to offer insight into
community priorities. Finally, a demand-and-needs analysis is provided. This analysis
includes an inventory of existing park, open space and recreational areas in the
Washougal area, as well as an analysis of recreation programs offered by the City and
its park and recreation services costs. It also explains the methodology used to assess
and quantify park and facility needs in Washougal, along with a summary of the
City’s future park and facility needs.
Chapter 3: Goals and Objectives: Chapter 3 presents Washougal’s vision for the
community park system and the goals and objectives to achieve that vision.
Chapter 4: Provision of Services Recommendations: Chapter 4 gives
recommendations for providing leisure services in Washougal, addressing topic areas
such as administration and management, finance, maintenance, and recreation
programs.
Chapter 5: Park and Facility Recommendations: Chapter 5 offers
recommendations and policies for the development or redevelopment of parks,
recreation facilities, trails and open space.
Chapter 6: Plan Implementation: Chapter 6 identifies the cost of all capital projects
listed in the plan, suggests a financing strategy, and recommends a six-year capital
improvement plan.
In addition to the main body, the Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan contains four
appendices (and one Map Appendix) that provide additional technical and detailed
information about Washougal’s park system, the planning process and implementation.
These are:
Appendix A: Sports Field Inventory
Appendix B: Design Guidelines
Appendix C: Review of Potential Funding Sources
Appendix D: Survey Results for the 2010 PCP Survey Update
Appendix E: Formation of a Metropolitan Park District
7|Page
Map Appendix:
 Existing Parks and Facilities Map
 Park and Facility Plan Map
 Washougal River Public Water Trail Map
Supporting Documentation
During the planning process, discussion papers were prepared to present and evaluate the
critical demographic, physical and social factors that impact the decision-making process.
These discussion papers included:
 Discussion Paper #1: Community Profile
 Discussion Paper #2: Existing Park and Recreation Resources
 Discussion Paper #3: Community Recreation Survey
 Discussion Paper #4: Community Needs Assessment
 Discussion Paper #5: Plan Framework
 Discussion Paper #6: Park and Operations Maintenance
These discussion papers (and the original bibliography) are available under separate
cover from the City of Washougal.
8|Page
CHAPTER TWO:
Demand and Needs
Assessment
9|Page
2.1 OVERVIEW
This chapter summarizes the background information and technical analysis that form the
basis for this plan. It describes the planning context, summarizes the existing park and
recreation resources, presents key findings from the public involvement process, and
discusses findings on park and recreation needs.
2.2 PLANNING CONTEXT
Physical and Demographic Context
Washougal, a fast growing community in Clark County, is part of the
Portland/Vancouver metropolitan area. Figure 2 shows Washougal’s location in relation
to other communities.
Figure 2: Washougal Planning Context Map
Washougal sits framed between two landmark rivers, the Washougal and the Columbia.
Washougal is crossed by several significant creek drainages creating wooded draws and
steep topography, offering both opportunities and challenges to park and residential
development. The City’s moderate climate provides suitable temperatures for outdoor
recreation during much of the year; however, the rain and Columbia Gorge winds in the
winter create a need for indoor or covered space. Washougal’s physical features offer
both opportunities and challenges to park and residential development.
10 | P a g e
Washougal’s many long-time residents work in local industries, such as the Pendleton
Woolen Mills and Georgia Pacific. Washougal experienced a growth spurt in the last 10
years, with new residents drawn to natural beauty, affordable housing sites, and the
accessibility to the Portland/Vancouver metropolitan area. This trend echoes the growth
of Camas and other Clark County communities closer to the metropolitan core. At a
population of 13,509 (est. 2008), current estimates of population growth in Washougal
forecast an increase to 18,760 by 2023.
Washougal’s park system offers a variety of sites and recreation opportunities, serving
different needs in the community. As the City grows, both in population and
geographically, the existing park system must expand and change to serve the needs of
this active community.
Existing Park Resources
Washougal’s parks have been classified according to their function, as described below.
Neighborhood Parks are a combination playground and park, designed primarily for
non-supervised, and non-organized, recreation activities. They are generally small in size
and intended to serve nearby residents, with a service area of approximately one-half mile
radius. Typically, facilities found in a neighborhood park include a children's
playground, picnic areas, pathways, open grass areas for passive use, outdoor basketball
courts, and multi-use sport fields for soccer, softball, and baseball. Size generally ranges
between 1 and 5 acres.
Opportunities to improve existing neighborhood parks should be considered. Such
improvements include acquisitions of adjacent properties to expand public access and
improve trail connectivity. Natural areas contained within neighborhood parks may
benefit from native plant material enhancements or invasive species removal. In order to
streamline and reduce maintenance costs, unused areas of these parks may be reverted to
natural areas to build habitat for wildlife. The City of Washougal should consider cultural
enhancements of art and/or education for habitat or historical interpretation.
Community Parks are planned to provide active and structured recreation opportunities,
as well as passive and non-organized opportunities for individual and family activities.
Community parks generally include facilities that attract people from a larger geographic
area and require more support facilities, such as parking and restrooms. Community
parks often have sport fields or similar facilities as the central focus of the park. Their
service area is roughly a 1-2 mile radius. Size ranges from 5 acres to 20+ acres, with an
optimal size of at least 10 to 15 acres.
Special Use Areas are miscellaneous parklands or stand-alone recreation sites designed
to support a specific, specialized use. Some of the facilities in this classification are sports
field complexes, community centers, community gardens, aquatic centers, or linear green
spaces. Specialized facilities may also be provided within a park of another classification.
11 | P a g e
Waterfront Parks are distinguished by their function of providing access to large bodies
of water such as rivers and lakes. These parks are generally designed to support
enjoyment of active and passive water-related activities, such as swimming, fishing,
boating, and bird or wildlife viewing. Facilities often include boat launches, docks,
viewpoints, picnic areas, trails, and pathways. While other types of parks may contain
rivers, lakes, or waterfront as part of a range of amenities, the primary purpose of
waterfront parks is to provide water access.
Natural Parks are undeveloped lands primarily left in a natural state with passive
recreation use as a secondary objective. This type of land often includes wetlands or steep
hillsides. In some cases, environmentally sensitive areas include wildlife habitats, stream
and creek corridors, or unique and/or endangered plant species. Frequently, Natural Parks
possess restrictions on the deed or plat that govern perpetual use of the property. Natural
Parks may serve as trail corridors; however, structures such as playgrounds, pavilions and
restrooms are not typically allowed uses.
Undeveloped Open Space is land throughout the city which may be designated on
subdivision plats as “open space”. The City of Washougal owns several such parcels that
were dedicated through the platting process; although, there are several properties within
the city limits still owned and managed by Home Owners’ Associations (HOA) or
developers. Properties owned by HOA’s or developers are considered private property
and not open for public use. Undeveloped Open Space often includes wetlands, steep
hillsides, or other similar spaces. In some cases, environmentally sensitive areas are
considered as open space and can include wildlife habitats, stream and creek corridors, or
unique and/or endangered plant species. While adhering to the requirements and
procedures of city and state laws pertaining to “critical lands”, open space areas may
serve as sites for passive recreation, such as trail corridors or wildlife observation. It is in
the interest of the city to remain alert to how private open space may enhance city assets
and recreation goals. For example, a private HOA land may sit between city properties,
making the acquisition attractive for trail corridor connectivity. An ideal example of this
is the Rolling Meadows 5 property, offered to the City of Washougal by the HOA. This
property bridges a gap between the Eldridge Park Complex and another City of
Washougal owned parcel and joins 40 acres together for future trail development.
Considering these properties are not maintained to park standards, oftentimes the site
conditions leave room for improvement. Undeveloped, city-owned open spaces may
provide opportunities for rehabilitation. Such restoration includes removal and continued
control of invasive species and replanting these areas with native plant species. Grants
and the implementation of “mitigation banking” supply funding vehicles for restoring
neglected properties back to native habitat. Community volunteers often provide
necessary labor to manage larger scaled projects. Refer to parcel plat for maintenance and
development.
The Existing Parks and Facilities Map (located in the Map Appendix at the back of this
document) depicts the locations of Washougal’s parks. Park inventory data are
summarized on the following pages. For additional detail, a site by site park inventory is
contained in Chapter 5.
12 | P a g e
Table 1
Summary of Existing Park Land
Table 1 shows Washougal’s existing park inventory by classification. In addition to
developed park sites, this inventory includes undeveloped and planned sites.
Existing Park Land
Neighborhood Parks
River Bend Park (0.5 acres)
Elizabeth Park (1.8 acres)
Beaver Park (0.17 acres)
Riverview Park (0.46 acres)
Hartwood Park (7.0 acres)
Oak Tree Park (2.7 acres)
Community Parks
Hamllik Park (4.5 acres)
Hathaway Park (15.8 acres)
Waterfront Parks
Steamboat Landing (1.6 acres) (4.8 acres*)
Sandy Swimming Hole (0.9 acres)
Natural Parks
Campen Creek Park (4.5 acres)
Eldridge Park (15.5 acres)
Mabel Kerr Park (13.7 acres)
Look Out Ridge Park (1.1 acres)
Special Use Area
Reflection Plaza (0.25 acres)
Angelo Park (4.2 acres, leased)
George Schmid Memorial Fields (4 acres)
Stevenson Off-Leash Park (7.0 acres
leased)
Main Street Pocket Park (0.07 acres) (0.11
acres*)
Open Space
85.75 acres (92.83
acres)
12.63 acres
20.3
2.5 acres (5.7
acres*)
34.8 acres
15.52 acres (15.56
acres*)
Not calculated for
the 2010 Park
Comprehensive
Plan update
*Indicates acreage figure inclusive of ROW and other jurisdiction property that the City
of Washougal maintains in association with these properties. This figure is shown for the
purpose of demonstrating the additional maintenance burden.
13 | P a g e
A variety of additional recreational and open space resources are owned by other public
entities within the City of Washougal. Table 2 lists the other publicly owned resources in
or adjacent to the City of Washougal.
14 | P a g e
Table 2
Other Publicly Owned Resources
Resource
Owner
Camas/Washougal Skate Park
Washougal Memorial Cemetery
Steigerwald Lake National Wildlife
Refuge
William Clark Regional Park
City of Camas
City of Washougal
US Fish and Wildlife
Port of Camas/
Washougal Marina
Heritage and Marina Parks
Cooperative ownership and
maintenance between the
following agencies: City of
Vancouver, Clark County,
Port of Camas/Washougal, the
City of Camas, and the City
of Washougal
Port of Camas/Washougal
Port of Camas/Washougal
Acres
0.5 +/12.0
627.0*
85.0
1.5
0.3
*
Only 67 acres of the Steigerwald refuge lies within Washougal’s UGB
15 | P a g e
School Sites
Schools are an important resource for recreation facilities such as sports fields,
playgrounds, and gymnasiums. The Washougal School District is the primary public
school organization serving Washougal. While the City of Washougal has the option to
work with the school district regarding facility rental and use, the school population has
first priority to use these facilities. Consequently, the Parks Department is limited in its
ability to partner with the school district, although in certain circumstances the possibility
remains an option.
Table 3
Summary of Existing Public School Facilities
School Facility
Elementary Schools
Cape Horn-Skye Elementary*
Facility
Gause Intermediate
1 Gym (not regulation size for basketball); 1
Multi-purpose field
1 Gym (1 court); 3 Soccer Fields
Hathaway Elementary
1 Gym (1 court); 1 t-ball field
Mount Pleasant Elementary*
1 Gym (1 court); 1 Multi-purpose field
Middle Schools
Canyon Creek Middle
School*
Jemtegaard Middle School
High Schools
Washougal High School
Excelsior High School
*
1 Gym (1 court); 2 Multi-purpose fields
1 Gym (1 court); 1 Football field; 1 Track; 1
Wrestling room; 2 Multi-purpose fields
1 Gym (2 full courts); 5 Tennis courts; 1
Football/Soccer field; 1 Track; 2 Baseball
fields; 2 Softball fields; 1 Wrestling room; 1
Soccer field (overlaid in outfield of one
baseball and one softball field)
No Facilities
*Schools outside of the Washougal Urban Growth Area
The school sites offer a wide variety of recreation resources. Most of these sites are
exclusively used by the School District during daytime hours throughout the school year.
16 | P a g e
School sports programs have priority for the use of sports fields and gymnasiums on
District property. Other users, such as the Camas/Washougal Soccer Club and East
County Little League, are required to obtain permission and schedule use of fields on a
site-by-site basis. User fees may apply to School District fields. Other than identification,
this Washougal Parks Comprehensive Plan does not calculate School District properties
under “needs” or “assets.”
17 | P a g e
2.3 KEY PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT FINDINGS
As chapter 1 summarized, the City of Washougal offered residents a variety of
opportunities for public input during the planning process. The key findings are
summarized in this section.
2005 Community Survey & 2010/2013 Update
A statistically-valid survey, designed to elicit information about
recreation interests, behavior, attitudes, and participation was
conducted in Washougal between August 2005 and September 2005.
This community-wide survey included a random sampling of
households within Washougal’s Urban Growth Area. Each randomly
selected household was mailed two questionnaires, one for adults
and one for youth, with a postage-paid envelope to facilitate return.
Three weeks after the initial mailing, a follow-up mailing was sent to
households that had not yet responded. The 2005 survey yielded a
total of 409 adult and 74 youth questionnaire responses. In March
2010, an update survey canvassed the entire population of
households in the City of Washougal (approximately 6,500 surveys
were sent out). The 2010 update yielded a total of 246 adult and 51 youth questionnaire
responses. The key results, along with relevant comparison of trends and contrasts
between both sets of surveys, are summarized below:








18 | P a g e
Most respondents use parks. In 2005 the top reasons adults used parks were
for picnics and general leisure, exercise, and to enjoy the outdoors. The 2010
update placed exercise (walking or biking) and enjoying the outdoors as the
top reasons for enjoying the parks.
Hathaway Park was the City’s most visited park in 2005 and remained in the
top spot according to the 2010 update. Sandy Swimming Hole came in a close
second.
Respondents in 2005 wanted to see more parks and more facilities in existing
parks as a top priority. In 2010, respondents placed a greater emphasis on
maintaining parks rather than developing new parks in the short term.
More river access is a consistent theme in both surveys, with a high level of
interest in active uses. Trails, swimming access, and viewpoints were the most
desired facilities.
More than 90% would like more trails in both surveys. Top reasons for
building trails were for exercise and recreation, and nature trails.
There is interest in more natural areas with public use, such as trails.
Residents in both surveys would like the City to offer recreation programs.
The 2005 respondents wanted special events and aquatic programs. The 2010
respondents preferred programs geared towards arts/activity classes, senior
activities, and sports classes.
In 2005, more than 75% of respondents believed that a recreation center was
needed in Washougal. In 2010, this number increased to 90% of respondents
supporting the creation of such a facility in the future (either jointly with the
City of Camas or solely through the City of Washougal).

In 2005 almost 58% of respondents went to Camas for parks and recreation
purposes. This number increased to nearly 70% of respondents in the 2010
update. A majority on both surveys supported partnering with Camas on
future Parks and Recreation issues.
 Youth surveys indicated a desire for an indoor swimming pool and for more
places to hang out with friends.
Appendix D holds the statistical data collated for the 2010 Update Survey. It is
located at the end of this document.
Planning Advisory Committee
The original Planning Advisory Committee consisted of the Parks Board and
additional members. This group met at key decision points in the planning process to
provide guidance to the plan. The Planning Advisory Committee indicated and
clarified issues in many areas, including:

The vision and concept for Washougal’s park system;

A vision for a Washougal River greenway;

Approach to providing parks in residential developments;

Standards for design and maintenance;

Key acquisition opportunities with a limited supply of land;

Potential trail alignments and connections to other systems;

New recreation facilities; and

A long range goal for a recreation center.
The guidance of the Planning Advisory Committee was a key part of the planning
process.
Sports Group Questionnaire
In order to assess the supply and demand of sports fields in the Washougal area, each
major sports organization was contacted and asked to submit data on league and team use
on Washougal facilities for the 2005 version of the PCP. The results provided
information about the use of Washougal’s fields throughout the year and contributed to
the needs assessment for athletic fields. This data was subsequently updated for the 2010
PCP Update.
Reporting by the East County Little League for the 2010 season is outlined below:
 East County Little League sponsors 28 teams: 6 Tee ball, 15 baseball, and 7
softball.
 60% of ECLL participants are City of Washougal residents, 2% Camas, 22%
Clark County, and 16% Skamania County.
 The East County Little League makes extensive use of the private Pendleton
Fields and Goot Park in Camas.
19 | P a g e
Reporting by the Camas/Washougal Soccer Club for the 2009 season is outlined below:
 2,006 total players (Male and Female) distributed through 190 teams.
 540 participants were from Washougal, 1,119 participants from Camas, 309
participants from Vancouver; and 38 participants from “Other” areas.
Reporting by the Clark County Youth Football for the 2009 season is outlined below:
 Clark County Youth Football fielded 60 youth football players. Two of these
players were Washougal residents.
 CCYF works with the Washougal School District to schedule games and practice,
mostly utilizing Fishback Stadium at the High School. CCYF indicated a
sufficient number of fields for their use.
The following information was generated during initial research of the 2006 Parks
Comprehensive Plan and was NOT updated for the 2010 PCP Update:
There are no basketball leagues operating in Washougal.
2.4 NEEDS ASSESSMENT
As part of the planning process, a detailed assessment was completed to define in
quantifiable terms the need for park land and recreation facilities in Washougal. The
process for completing the Needs Assessment included the following:

Inventorying and assessing the existing park and recreation resources;

Evaluating public input on park and recreation needs;

Analyzing parks and facilities using a
combination of methods to determine
a recommended level of service
(LOS); and

Applying the LOS standards to
determine current and future park and
facility needs.
Key findings of the Needs Assessment are listed
in this section. The full “Community Needs
Assessment” document (dated October 2005) is
available under separate cover from the City of Washougal.
Parks


20 | P a g e
The City of Washougal has a shortfall of 16.87 acres of Community Parks. T he
recommended level of service for community parks is 2.68 acres per 1,000
residents, which translates into one more community park.
The City of Washougal has a shortfall of 5.27 acres of Waterfront Parks. The
recommended level of service for waterfront parks is 0.56 acres per 1,000
residents, which translates into one or two more waterfront parks. It is
recommended that Washougal seek to acquire more land along the Washougal
River, due to high demand by Washougal citizens.



Three (3) areas of Washougal’s urban growth area are not served by existing
neighborhood or community parks. The rapidly growing areas in the north and
east portions of the City are the least served for both neighborhood and
community parks. The combination of limited land availability and steep
terrain makes locating parks in the northwest of the City difficult.
Washougal should seek additional acreage to establish trail connections
needed for a citywide trail system.
While these park acreage shortfalls appear acceptable for the current
populations; in consideration of the Urban Growth Boundary, it remains
critical to engage in active planning for capacity to meet the recreation needs
of future residents.
Recreation Facilities




Local sports leagues for softball, baseball, and soccer serve both Washougal
and Camas, and the football league serves a broader community. Camas has a
larger share of participants, and is a more significant supplier of fields.
Washougal’s parks, however, host only a small portion of the sports events of
the joint leagues. Most of the events held in Washougal are held on leased
sites or at School District facilities
There are currently no organized basketball or volleyball leagues operating in
Washougal.
There is interest in more water access facilities, such as river access trail
heads, swimming and fishing access points, observation decks or viewpoints,
boat launches, and docks.
The analysis indicated a need for additional specialized facilities, including
community gardens, water playgrounds, off-leash dog areas, and indoor
recreation space.
Recreation Programs
While Washougal does not currently offer recreation programs, the community
indicated interest in these services. Based on recreation participation results for
Washougal, program areas to consider for the future include outdoor and
environmental programs, special events, and general interest classes.
21 | P a g e
Summary Tables
Table 4 identifies the proposed level of service (LOS) standard for park land and
summarizes existing and future park land needs for each park type in the Washougal
planning area. Table 5 identifies the inventory guideline for each facility type. Both
tables are based on the 2009 estimated population of 13,870, and the forecasted 2023
population estimate of 18,760 (forecast in 2006).
Table 4
Level of Service Standards
Park type
Neighborhood Parks
Community Parks
Waterfront Parks
Natural Parks
Special Use
Total
City inventory per/1,000 residents
Recommended LOS per/1,000
0.91
1.46
0.18
2.5
1.12
6.17
0.61
2.68
0.56
1.91
0.65
6.41
Table 5
Existing and Future Recreation Facility Needs
Park Type
Existing
Parks
(# of sites)
Existing
Acreage
Total Current
Need
Net Current
Need
Total Need at
Planning
Horizon
Net Need at
Planning
Horizon
Neighborhood
Parks
Community
Parks
Waterfront
Parks
Natural Parks
Special Use
6
12.63
8.46
0
11.44
0
2
20.3
37.17
16.87
50.3
30
2
2.5
7.77
5.27
10.5
8
4
5
34.8
15.52
26.49
9.02
0
0
35.83
12.2
1.03
0
22 | P a g e
CHAPTER THREE:
Goals and Objectives
23 | P a g e
3.1
OVERVIEW
The vision, goals and objectives described in this chapter define recommended park and
recreation services for Washougal. These elements were derived from input received
throughout the planning process, including City staff and officials, the Planning Advisory
Committee, community members, and other service providers. The vision, goals, and
objectives in this chapter provide a framework for the Comprehensive Park and
Recreation Plan.
3.2 VISION FOR THE FUTURE
The public outreach efforts during the comprehensive park planning process provided
feedback from a variety of City residents regarding their vision, needs, and preferences
for parks and recreation services (the most recent of these outreach efforts being made in
2010). Through these efforts, a vision for the future emerged:
Washougal envisions a livable and interconnected community with a park system that:

Preserves and maintains park land and open space to provide for community
growth;

Incorporates waterfront access to take advantage of the opportunities offered
by Washougal’s water resources;

Provides a system of trails to connect parks, open space, schools,
neighborhoods, downtown, and regional destinations;

Includes facilities and programs that are responsive to community needs.
This vision provided the foundation for all goals, objectives, recommendations, and
guidelines in the following chapters within this plan.
3.3 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Goals and objectives form the framework for the Comprehensive Park and Recreation
Plan. A goal is a general statement describing an outcome the City wishes to provide.
Goals typically do not change over time unless community values or economic conditions
make it necessary. Objectives are specific and measurable statements that describe a
means to achieving goals. Objectives may change over time. Recommendations are
specific implementing actions intended to help achieve goals and objectives, and are
contained in subsequent chapters of the plan.
24 | P a g e
Goals and Objectives
Through the planning process, eight goals were identified for the City of Washougal’s
park and recreation system. Following each goal are the complimentary objectives for
achieving those goals:
Goal 1: Provide well-designed, accessible and safe parks, recreation facilities, and
natural open space areas.
1A.
Provide a variety of recreational opportunities within the Washougal park system.
1B.
Develop a park system with locations convenient to most residents in Washougal.
Where feasible, provide a park within ½ mile walking distance of residents.
1C.
Provide opportunities for indoor and covered recreational activities, such as a
gymnasium, indoor recreation center, or covered playground areas.
1D.
Meet the needs for athletic fields based on the demand created by the population
of Washougal.
1E.
Adopt and follow park design and development guidelines.
1F.
Accept only those parks and facilities that are consistent with the City’s
Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan.
1G.
Incorporate interpretation of local history, culture, and the environment into the
park system.
Goal 2: Maximize opportunities for public enjoyment of waterfront access.
2A.
Recognize the Washougal and Columbia Rivers as unique local recreation
resources.
2B.
Acquire riverfront property or easements whenever the opportunity exists. The
long-range objective is a riverfront park and trail system along the Columbia and
Washougal Rivers.
2C.
it.
Provide opportunities for public access to the waterfront where conditions permit
2D.
Geographically distribute waterfront parks and access points as practical as
possible to provide greater park access throughout the City.
2E.
Provide a range of waterfront recreation experiences, from more passive to more
active.
25 | P a g e
Goal 3: Connect neighborhoods with parks, schools, natural open space areas,
downtown, and waterfronts. Establish partnerships to expand connectivity through the
region.
3A.
Develop an interconnected pedestrian and bicycle system that connects downtown
and neighborhoods with parks, schools, and other features.
3B.
Connect the City’s pedestrian and bicycle system with the Camas and Clark
County regional systems.
3C.
Develop a network of off-street trails using natural open space areas, parks, utility
corridors, and other features. Supplement this network with on-street connections where
necessary.
3D.
Provide trails along the Columbia and Washougal Rivers.
Goal 4: Meet the park and recreation needs of Washougal’s growing community.
4A.
Secure adequate parkland in developing areas to serve future residents.
4B.
Preserve areas with critical or unique natural features, such as stream corridors,
wildlife habitat and wetlands.
4C.
Evaluate partnering with the Washougal School District to maximize public use
of recreation facilities on school sites, especially for athletic fields.
4D.
Establish mechanisms so that new development is responsible for providing or
paying for the park and recreation facilities needed to serve increased population.
Goal 5: Ensure that a program of recreation services is available for community
members of all ages and abilities.
5A.
Encourage collaboration among local artists, businesses, and volunteers to
increase awareness through education, tourism, City beautification, and recreation
opportunities.
5B.
Coordinate with private and non-profit providers (such as organized sports
leagues), to ensure they have adequate facilities and space to provide recreation services.
5C.
Work with the business community to offer special events to serve residents and
support downtown revitalization efforts.
26 | P a g e
5D.
When it benefits the community, provide space and opportunity for private groups
and commercial interests to conduct recreational programs. However, the City should not
subsidize the operating costs of private providers.
5E.
Provide recreational programs when staffing levels, facilities, and resources
permit (e.g., dance, day camps, fitness classes).
Goal 6: Provide efficient and high quality maintenance of parks, facilities, and natural
open space areas.
6A.
Maintain park and recreation facilities in a manner to make them safe, attractive,
and a positive part of the neighborhood and City.
6B.
Develop maintenance frequency protocols that maximize the life of the City’s
park and recreation assets.
6C.
Maximize efficient use of the maintenance budget.
6D.
Consider the maintenance costs and staffing levels associated with acquisition,
development, or renovation of parks or natural open space areas. Adjust the annual
operating budget accordingly for adequate maintenance funding of the system expansion.
Goal 7: Be an efficient and effective provider of the parks and recreation services
desired by the community.
7A.
Maintain an operating budget that reflects what the community needs and can
afford with regard to park and recreation services.
7B.
Maximize operational efficiency to provide the greatest public benefit for the
resources expended.
7C.
Provide better tracking of the costs of maintaining City-owned facilities by their
function, including public buildings, infrastructure, parks and natural areas, and the
cemetery.
7D.
Tailor services and operating hours to community needs, so that policies, work
schedules, and administrative direction support public use of parks and services.
7E.
Develop staff growth by encouraging participation in professional organizations,
educational classes and training seminars.
27 | P a g e
Goal 8: Encourage public involvement in park and recreation issues.
8A.
Support the Park Board as the forum for public discussion of parks and recreation
issues.
8B.
Provide public review opportunities in park planning and design decisions.
8C.
Establish publicity efforts to inform citizens of the recreational and volunteer
opportunities available in local neighborhoods and Citywide.
8D.
Periodically review local park and recreation preferences, needs and trends.
8E.
Encourage citizen involvement and participation in maintaining and restoring the
quality of parks (such as adopt-a-park programs, sports group partnerships, and Scout
projects).
28 | P a g e
CHAPTER FOUR:
Provision of
Service
Recommendations
29 | P a g e
4.1 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The City of Washougal experienced significant growth between 2000 and 2010. As a
result, there has been an increase in population and a subsequent increase in demand for
parks, facilities, and recreation programs. Washougal’s Public Works Department
performs park and recreation services and maintenance in this jurisdiction.
This plan anticipates an expansion of the City’s responsibilities in providing park and
recreation service to respond to the increased demand. In general, the City’s role should
include:




Assessing park and recreation needs in the community;
Developing and maintaining a quality park system;
Coordinating service delivery efforts with organizations in the community;
Providing a level of recreation programs and services that meets the needs not
filled by other leisure service providers.
The recommendations in this chapter are designed to build capacity within the City to
increase services. These are organized into five service areas:





30 | P a g e
Administration and management;
Finance and budgeting;
Park planning and development;
Maintenance and operations;
Recreation programs.
4.2 ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT
The Public Works Department in Washougal currently manages City parks and facilities,
as one of many Department responsibilities. Parks Department staff members also
manage the buildings, facilities, and Washougal Memorial Cemetery. This plan
envisions a transition to a Parks and Recreation department or division. The following
recommendations are aimed at providing an organizational framework to make that
transition.
A.
Hire a Recreation Program Director. Survey results showed that recreation
programming is desired by the community, and demand for these services will
likely continue to increase as new residents move to Washougal. In addition,
recreation programs provide more service per unit of cost than any other type
of park or recreation activity because a percentage of the cost of providing the
programs is recovered through fees. Cost recovery for recreation programs
can range from as low as 20% to 100% or higher, depending on the programs
offered.
B.
Move toward establishing a Parks and Recreation Department or
Division. This plan recommends an increase in services to meet future
community demand. As a result, the City should consider the most efficient
and effective internal organization to provide those services. Currently, the
Parks, Cemetery and Facilities Division of the Public Works Department
covers a wide range of responsibilities in addition to park maintenance and
development. The City does not provide recreation programs, a direction this
plan recommends pursuing. Many cities find that a single department or
division addressing all aspects of parks and recreation allows for better and
more efficient services and operations. Washougal should transition to a
parks and recreation department or division, (similar to the structure in the
neighboring City of Camas), to facilitate parks and recreation services. This
would allow for better coordination with other providers, and improve cost
tracking.
C.
Responsibilities of the Parks Board. The Parks Board functions as the
review body for all parks-related issues and policies in Washougal. The Board
makes recommendations to the City Council, similar to the relationship of the
Planning Commission and City Council. The Parks Board makes
recommendations on policies related to parks and recreation, reviews park
designs, and provides a key role in the development and evolution of the parks
and recreation system. The Parks Board is a critical element for implementing
this plan, and serves as an instrumental piece in moving the City’s park and
recreation services forward.
D.
Establish an annual work program and performance goals. Each year, an
annual “Work Program and Performance Goals” document should be
developed for parks and recreation in Washougal. The Parks Board and staff
31 | P a g e
should participate in setting the priorities and specific work tasks a year in
advance. At the end of the year, an evaluation should be made to measure
performance.
E.
Prepare a parks and recreation policy manual. As Washougal increases
its park and recreation services, a policy manual should be prepared that
defines procedures, policies. This manual should also identify how the City
reacts to given issues. This will help maintain a level of consistency and help
staff render uniform and dispassionate decisions. For example, policies should
be documented on park hours of operation, restroom hours of operation, and
facility rentals, etc.
F.
Develop customer service policies as part of the policy manual. The
policy manual should include specific customer service policies that provide
methods for collecting complaints, methods for seeking public input (such as
evaluation forms for recreation classes), policies on refunds, and standards for
response time to complaints. These policies should include ways to solicit
positive comments, as well as complaints. The policies should spell out a
specific procedure to notify the appropriate staff of maintenance-related
comments, including standards for response time. A work order system
provides an appropriate tool to convey information on necessary repairs and
improvement requests.
G.
Expand publicity efforts. Washougal should expand its efforts to publicize
its park and recreation services and operations. To increase awareness of
parks and facilities available, the City should continue efforts to update its
website with current information. The City should also consider developing a
brochure identifying parks and facilities available to Washougal residents.
When programs are added, the City should increase its outreach efforts to
build interest in programs and services and gain more support through various
forms of media including The Post Record and The Columbian newspapers.
H.
Maintain RCO compliance. Maintain compliance Recreation and
Conservation Office (RCO) so that Washougal remains eligible for grant
funding.
I.
Provide volunteer opportunities. Volunteerism has many benefits.
Volunteers offer the ability to supplement paid staff in maintaining and
improving the park system and may provide resources for recreation programs
and events. For some community members, volunteer opportunities provide
the satisfaction of a recreation activity. In addition to adult volunteers, a
variety of parks projects are suitable for completion by youth, such as Boy and
Girl Scouts, Eagle Scouts, high school students in need of community service
hours or Senior projects, etc. Specific opportunities should be identified, and
publicized on the web site and in any City publications. A staff person should
be assigned responsibility for coordinating volunteers.
32 | P a g e
J.
Establish an Adopt-a-Park or Adopt-a-Trail program. To foster a greater
sense of ownership and pride in local parks, the City should initiate an
“Adopt-A-Park” Program. In this type of program, agreements are made with
private citizens, neighborhood groups, or service clubs to assume and perform
certain responsibilities and duties at specific park sites. Typically, volunteers
will provide limited maintenance tasks, such as litter pick-up, watching for
and reporting vandalism or other inappropriate behavior, or hosting
neighborhood activities.
K.
Utilize Corrections Crew Work Force. Continue to employ the services of
correction crews through Clark County or the City of Camas in areas of labor
intensive work or where larger numbers of workers are necessary for the task
at hand.
4.3 FINANCE AND BUDGETING
As Washougal increases its park and recreation services, careful attention to finance and
budgeting will ensure that the City meets community recreation needs while maintaining
a solid financial footing. The recommendations below are supplemented by additional
budgeting and finance recommendations in the areas of Maintenance and Operations, and
also in Recreation Programs.
A. Improve cost and revenue tracking for parks and recreation services. One of
the most important items in controlling costs and producing revenue is a good
budget reporting system. At minimum, the City should be able to review the cost
of maintaining its parks, trails, and natural open space areas on a per acre and per
Full Time Equivalent employee (FTE) basis. As
recreation programs are added, program costs and
revenues should be tracked by major program areas (e.g.,
sports, general recreation, aquatics, seniors, and
outdoor/environmental programs, etc.). Good budget
tracking of program costs will allow the City to make
management, marketing, or programming improvements.
As an added benefit, accurate cost tracking also provides
information for budgeting and for planning future
facilities.
B. Update impact fees. The City should review its impact fees to ensure that they
reflect the cost of developing park and recreation facilities to accommodate new
development. The fee schedule should undergo regular evaluation according to
increases in costs, and also in analyzing elevated or depressed economic markets.
C. Build revenue-generating capability. To sustain level of services within budget
constraints, it is recommended that the City seek to build its revenue-generating
33 | P a g e
capability. Tight economic times automatically stimulate cost cutting measures;
however, increasing revenue can have the same net result while providing
additional resources to park and recreation services. The planning process
indicated a need for increased park and recreation services. The City currently
provides a basic level of service primarily consisting of maintaining parks, with
capacity to provide little, if any, revenue. As more comprehensive services are
offered, revenue can be generated through rental fees, user fees, program fees, and
sponsorships. While increased services may result in a bigger budget, the net
financial cost to the taxpayer may be nearly the same.
An example of a much larger City in the next phase of Parks Department
operations is the City of Edmonds, WA. Edmonds has a significantly larger
population than Washougal and a different socio-economic makeup on the
periphery of Seattle; however, Edmonds remains a good example of how an
efficient Parks Department can function with a larger population base. Edmonds
has a large budget for parks and recreation, with a full range of services. The
revenue rate (operating costs minus revenues generated) for the entire Parks and
Recreation Department is 60%. This means that for every dollar budgeted, it only
costs the City approximately $0.40 to provide extensive services.
4.4 PARK PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
Washougal established the baseline for development and operations of
Parks in 2006 with the first Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan.
The City updated this data with the 2010 survey to create a more
accurate look at the current wants and needs of citizen respondents.
With the ongoing residential growth in Washougal and Clark County,
park planning and development will require particular oversight,
infused with the following critical development recommendations:
A. Update the Comprehensive Plan policies to be consistent with
the Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan.
B. Consider plan vision, goals and guidelines before acquiring
new park sites. Evaluate opportunities to acquire property by
the vision, goals and guidelines identified in this Plan. Properties that offer a unique
function or feature should be considered for acquisition according to the needs of the
community. Accept only those parks and facilities that are consistent with the
Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan.
C. Involve parks staff into the planning process so the maintenance requirements are
considered during the site selection and development negotiation stage. When recreation
programs are added in the future, the staff responsible for these should also be included
so that programming requirements are addressed.
34 | P a g e
D. Increase the role of the Parks Board in reviewing plans for public parks. The
Parks Board should review public parks and recreation facility designs, including review
of planned public parks proposed by developers. The Parks Board’s role should be to
ensure that developer-proposed parks are consistent with this Master Plan, meet the
City’s design and development guidelines, and will serve the needs of Washougal
residents.
E. Follow the design and development guidelines contained in this plan. The Design
and Development Guidelines are contained in Appendix B. These guidelines are intended
to ensure that appropriately sized and scaled parks provide different recreation
opportunities, and that the right amenities and facilities are provided in the right places
within the park system.
F. Ensure that private neighborhood parks meet the design and development
guidelines for public neighborhood parks contained within this document. This can be
accomplished through the planning and development review process. Private parks are
sometimes turned over to City governments for operations and maintenance if a
development chooses to relinquish liability and maintenance responsibilities. Campen
Creek Park is an example of this. If the private park does not meet public park standards,
the City should not acquire the property as it would assume ownership of a site requiring
substantial capital investments (e.g., lacking new playground equipment, heavy invasive
weed infestation, accessibility improvements, etc.) among other long-term problems. This
is a developmental issue and should be carefully planned during the conceptual design
phase of the private neighborhood park to bring it in line with specific needs suggested in
this document.
G. Implement the recommended park improvements and new facilities
recommended in this plan. Detailed recommendations on improvements at existing
parks and facilities, development of new parks and facilities, and establishment of a trail
system are contained within Chapter 5, with recommended implementation phasing in
Chapter 6.
H. Incorporate citizen input into park and facility designs. Designs for parks and
facilities should be tailored to needs of the neighborhood and park users. Opportunities
for citizen input should be incorporated into the design process, though the use of
workshops, public open houses, questionnaires, and other techniques. The most recent
opportunity for public input came in the form of the 2010 survey update.
I. Consider maintenance requirements of the design. Labor-saving devices such as
mow strips, “natural” areas, appropriate path layout, time-activated locks, and other
features should be incorporated into parks to facilitate maintenance in a more efficient
manner.
35 | P a g e
4.5 MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS
In the area of park and recreation, Washougal’s main focus has been on maintaining parks.
However, the parks are maintained as part of the Public Works Department’s overall
workload. The recommendations below are intended to help Washougal manage
maintenance.
A. Consider scheduling staff for coverage during weekends and during other heavy
park use times. This will ensure that parks, facilities, and restrooms are clean and
available during peak use times, and keep up with trash disposal.
B. Budget at least $4,000 per acre per year for the maintenance of developed park
acreage. Over time it can be expected the City budget will have its shortfalls. One of the
first services usually cut is park maintenance. While cuts to maintenance can occur for a
short duration, extended reduced maintenance results in the eventual degradation or even
loss of assets and infrastructure. The cost to bring property back to an acceptable level
then becomes a significant expense. The City should establish a
minimum threshold for park maintenance services at $4,000 for
each developed acre. After several years, the actual cost can be
re-evaluated. This figure is exclusive of major capital renovation
and repairs.
C. Use one FTE for each 15 developed acres as a guideline
for maintenance staffing. This standard should be evaluated
periodically, as it does not account for alternative maintenance
arrangements (corrections crews, volunteers, contractors, etc.).
D. Establish detailed task tracking for employees. Staff time should be tracked by
major maintenance tasks and by site. The City of Washougal’s planned upgrades to
computer software will simplify the process of project tracking on timecards. This
information can be used in the maintenance management plan and to formulate budgets.
E. Establish performance standards. Performance standards should be established for
every basic park maintenance task. This will clarify what tasks are expected and the
general amount of time required. This is an effective tool when budget cuts occur so that
everyone knows what level of maintenance will occur in the future.
F. Establish a park maintenance management plan. A park maintenance management
plan is a management approach where maintenance and time standards are established
and yearly projects prepared. This plan also clearly identifies each task and each park by
priority. This system establishes a public relations guideline to manage requests or
complaints in the event of budget cuts. By approaching park and facility maintenance on
a systematic basis, crisis maintenance can be reduced, the quality of maintenance
improved, and work tasks spread out more evenly over the year. This type of plan also
helps the City track and compare maintenance costs of each park and pertinent tasks.
Accurate evaluation of maintenance levels and costs result in informed judgments
36 | P a g e
regarding paring costs. The City should implement a maintenance management plan
within the next few years.
G. Consider alternative maintenance arrangements to
maximize efficiency and cost-effectiveness. Seasonal
employees and interns provide an alternative way of maintaining
parks during peak seasons. A larger ratio of seasonal employees
can help meet the increase maintenance demands in a more cost
efficient manner. Other opportunities exist with multijurisdictional partnerships such as General Equipment
Maintenance (GEM), utilizing organizations such as Americorps,
and/or continuing the use of corrections crews and volunteers as
previously mentioned.
H. Separate cemetery operations from park operations for
better budget tracking. Washougal owns and operates the
Washougal Memorial Cemetery. The workload for the cemetery
varies depending on the volume of headstone settings and burials.
A maintenance review in September 2005 indicated that the
cemetery may be impacting the City’s park maintenance capacity.
The following recommendations are intended to address the cost
of the cemetery and avoid subsidy of the cemetery by the parks
department budget.

Track time spent on the cemetery operations. Staff
time spent on cemetery operations should be tracked
with more precision. In addition to maintenance,
cemetery administration and other cemetery-related
tasks should be tracked.

Investigate
funding options.
The City should
investigate
options for
resolving funding
shortfalls in the
cemetery budget
that impact the
Parks and other department budgets. Of these options, the City may choose to
dedicate a subsidy for the cemetery through the General Fund or create a
cemetery district to supplement the cemetery’s irregular revenue from sales
and services.

37 | P a g e
Evaluate the Perpetual Fund. The Perpetual Fund should be evaluated to
determine whether it is growing sufficiently to support the existing level of
service in the future. The City could consider reducing operations costs to a
level supportable by the future Perpetual Fund or swell the Fund by increasing
fees.

Consider a merger. Investigate the possibility to merge the Cemetery into
the Parks Department under the general fund. The Parks Department budget
would require additional funding to cover maintenance costs. Considerations
may be necessary for the cemetery’s Perpetual Care Fund under state law;
however, full understanding of legal issues may reveal that absorption by the
Parks Department is a logical maintenance tactic.
4.6 RECREATION PROGRAMS
The City of Washougal does not currently offer any recreation programs as part of its
services. The Community Recreation Survey results (both in 2005 and also in the 2010
update) indicated a desire for programming beyond what is currently offered by private
groups. For this reason, adding a recreation director to coordinate programming is
recommended. The following recommendations are intended to provide high level
guidance for a recreation director or coordinator.
A. Coordinate with existing providers to maintain current services.
Senior programming and organized sports programming are currently available in
Washougal through other providers. The City should coordinate with these providers to
maintain these recreation options for Washougal residents.
B. Make additional programming available in Washougal, especially in program
areas where the 2010 survey update indicated the most interest. The program areas
with the greatest latent interest were swimming, exercise, outdoor activities (trail-use,
wildlife observations, biking, etc.), sports (gymnasium sports and other outdoor sports),
general education classes, and senior activities.
C. Revise programming as needed to meet community demand. Recreation interests
change over time. As the community demographics change, programming should respond
to these trends.
D. Provide a variety of options: programs for different ages and abilities, a range of
program formats, and an array of program types. Programming should meet the
needs of Washougal residents, and there should be a diverse range of options to
accommodate differing interests, time availability, and abilities.
E. Establish a fees-and-charges philosophy. Develop a fee schedule for programs.
The fees-and-charges philosophy will guide the setting of fees, as well as the cost
recovery goals. In general, fees for programs that provide high individual benefit and
low community benefit are set to recover all costs or even turn a profit, programs with
high community benefit are highly subsidized. In addition, the fees-and-charges
philosophy should address scholarships and affordability to ensure access.
38 | P a g e
F. Establish cost recovery goals for each major program area. Cost tracking of
recreation programs provides data to inform management, marketing, or programming
improvements, while ensuring that Washougal is meeting community recreation needs
while maintaining a solid financial footing. As an added benefit, accurate cost tracking
also provides information for budgeting and for planning future facilities. To evaluate
programming based on costs, Washougal should establish a cost tracking system that
accurately reflects the costs of services offered and the revenues generated by each
service area. The revenue and costs can then be compared to assess performance of
recreation programs. Costs that should be attributed to each program area include direct
costs (supplies, etc.), the fees for the contractor who provides the program, room rental,
facility or field maintenance, recreation coordinator, and the Recreation Division
administration. Some agencies charge a share of administration time to different program
areas as part of identifying the actual cost of services.
G. Once programs are provided, institute program evaluation protocols. Programs
should be evaluated in terms of cost, revenue, participation levels, and user feedback.
User evaluation methods should be developed (questionnaires offered after classes,
internet comment forms, etc.) and implemented, and the results should be reviewed
regularly. Participation should be tracked, and participation rates should be reviewed
regularly so that programming can be adjusted to meet demands. Cost and revenue
generation of each major program area should be reviewed annually.
39 | P a g e
CHAPTER FIVE:
Parks and Facilities
Recommendations
40 | P a g e
5.1 RECOMMENDED PARK SYSTEM
This chapter provides detailed recommendations for Washougal’s future park system as a
companion to the recommendations on providing services in Chapter 4. The park system
recommendations are designed to respond to the vision, goals, and objectives presented in
Chapter 3.
The recommendations address parks, open space, recreation facilities, and trails.
Improvements to Washougal’s existing parks are recommended to meet the needs of
current residents. All parks should be considered for improvements to allow residents
with disabilities access to enjoy parks. In addition, because of the projected growth, a
strong emphasis is placed on acquiring or securing adequately sized future park sites in
advance of development, before acquisition becomes difficult. Finally, a citywide trail
network is proposed as part of the park system. As development proposals are made, land
dedications or easements should be secured for trails to provide a network of bicycle and
pedestrian links to parks, schools, neighborhood, and other destination points.
5.2 PARKS AND OPEN SPACE RECOMMENDATIONS
Park and Facility Plan
The park and open space sites listed in this section are referenced to in the Park and
Facility Plan Map (located in the Maps appendix at the end of this document). This map
is a graphic representation illustrating the overall concept for where future parks should
be located in Washougal. Some important notes about the Park and Facility Plan Map
include:

Park Identification System: Each existing and proposed park site is identified
with a reference number on the Facility Plan, such as NP-1. These identifying
numbers are incorporated into the recommendations discussed on the following
pages, as well as in the capital project cost tables in Chapter 6. The letter at the
beginning denotes the park type, and the numbers are sequential. The letter
abbreviations are:
NP
CP
WP
NT
SU
OS

Neighborhood Park
Community Park
Waterfront Park
Natural Park
Special Use
Undeveloped Open Space
Proposed Park Locations: On the Park and Facility Plan Map, colored asterisks
identify proposed park sites. The asterisk indicates the general vicinity for a
particular park. The actual location will be determined based on land availability,
41 | P a g e
acquisition cost, park development standards, and the property owner’s
willingness to negotiate.

Proposed Trail Routes: On the Park and Facility Plan Map, proposed trail routes
are identified. The general route alignment is shown on the plan, but the actual
alignment or right-of-way will be determined based on land availability.
Site-Specific Recommendations
Neighborhood Parks
River Bend Park (NP-1)
River Bend Park, located at the west boundary of
town, offers a viewpoint of the Washougal River.
The park currently contains picnic tables and
benches, but no other neighborhood park
amenities. River Bend Park serves as a
neighborhood park for nearby residents. With
planning assistance from a landscape design
professional, River Bend Park offers potential as
an important link in the Washougal River Trail
system.
Recommendations for River Bend Park include:









Keep options open for land acquisitions to provide river front access. If an
acquisition occurs, create a safe passage to the riverfront with a trail system.
Without the acquisition, consider fencing the top portion of the park along the
hillside limiting unwanted access to private riverfront property.
Incorporate a deck system (similar to the Sandy Swimming Hole) at the north end
of the lawn for sunbathing and picnicking.
Add playground equipment.
Provide at least one accessible picnic table.
Include an ADA accessible path through the site.
Added or improved park elements may require the creation of a parking facility
within the property.
Manage noxious weeds and restore the riparian area to native plant species.
Establish a mitigation banking program for natural areas.
Consider incorporating an educational/interpretive element.
Consider adding a bicycle rack.
42 | P a g e
Elizabeth Park (NP-2)
Elizabeth Park serves older established neighborhoods on the west side of town between
“E” Street and the Washougal River Road. Although access to the park does not meet
design and development guidelines, the site serves an important need in the community
for playgrounds and open space. Site development with a landscape design professional
may transform this neighborhood park into a viable trail and recreation link in this
portion of the City.
Recommendations for Elizabeth Park include:
 Increase visibility of the park through
additional signage and improved access
paths from surrounding street right-of
way.
 Upon playground equipment
replacement, revise layout to provide
more visual interest.
 Consider adding a cover to the play area
and a picnic shelter to increase year
round use of the park.
 Keep options open to acquire adjacent properties to provide additional access into
the park for increased public use and trail linkage possibilities.
 Convert patchy lawn areas into “no-mow zones” by removing sod and seeding
with a shade wildflower mix.
 Establish a tree-planting program and planting plan.
 Consider adding a community garden in this park.
 Identify areas for community art or educational displays pertinent to geological or
historical features.
 Consider adding or renovating the basketball court to include all-weather netting,
adding a full court, painting the lines, etc.
 Consider adding a bicycle rack.
Beaver Park (NP-3)
A neighborhood park is needed to serve residents in the area of the City south of the
Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) rail system and west of Washougal River Road.
Although classified as a neighborhood park, Beaver Park lacks the size and amenities
normally associated with such a designation. Due to
population densities and minimal undeveloped land
in these older neighborhoods, there are limited
options in this area for a true neighborhood park.
Properly planned, the Beaver Park development
could be a wonderful park asset occupying a
relatively small space.
Recommendations for Beaver Park include:
43 | P a g e





Implement the 2009 design for Beaver Park that incorporates SR-14 Tunnel
Mitigation plantings.
Coordinate volunteers to construct the design where feasible and as soon as
funding becomes available.
Upon completion of the gazebo designed in the master plan, generate a
community workday to embellish the structure frame with cob construction. Gear
the event toward involvement with children and residents with disabilities.
Seek additional grant funding to supplement the Parks Foundation of Clark
County grant for $4,271 (won in April, 2010) to complete the park construction.
Consider adding a bicycle rack.
New Neighborhood Park (NP-4)
The city should seek a new neighborhood park just north of city limits, potentially in
conjunction with other City of Washougal property near Lehr Road.
Recommendations for NP-4 include:



The City should follow the neighborhood park recommendations in Appendix B
for site selection and design program, as well as timing of park development.
A site of approximately 2-3 acres should be acquired. Once a site is acquired, a
master plan should be prepared to guide the future development of the site.
The City should link the proposed bikeway/off-street trail system to this park site
as shown on the Park and Facility Plan map.
Riverview Park (NP-5)
This neighborhood park serves the area north of
Washougal Memorial Cemetery between
32nd/Stiles Road and Campen Creek to the East.
This park was a residential lot, partially donated
by Riverview Community Bank for the purpose of
encouraging outdoor recreation. Electric, water,
and sewer utilities are included on the site.
Located partially under the Bonneville Power
Administration Easement, the Riverview Park
design must thoughtfully plan for playground equipment, picnic facilities, and an open
grassy area for play in a tiny space. The site location also offers an opportunity to
connect a neighborhood park along a trail system.
Recommendations for Riverview Park include:
 Coordinate forums to involve the public in park development for the benefit of all
the neighborhoods.
 Develop a master plan for the site that takes into account the storm-water
concerns and impacts to adjacent neighbors. At a minimum, the park should
include playground equipment, picnic facilities, and an open grass area to serve
44 | P a g e





neighbors. This site requires a retaining structure on the south boundary of the
property to manage erosion and surface water run-off.
Provide a link to a continuous trail system between Campen Creek and 32nd/Stiles
Road.
Develop “no-mow” zones incorporating wildflowers into the design to conserve
resources and ease maintenance requirements.
Plan areas designated for community art or educational illustration.
Consider creating an off street parking facility at this park.
Consider adding a bicycle rack.
Hartwood Park (NP-6)
This neighborhood park serves the northeast side of Campen Creek, in the vicinity of SE
49th Street. While this site sits adjacent to the other City of Washougal “natural parks”
(Campen Creek, Eldridge, et), Hartwood Park is designated to
allow playground equipment and other park structures typical of a
neighborhood park. The City of Washougal acquired this
property in 2011 with Park Impact Fees, Washington Wildlife
and Recreation Program – Recreation and Conservation Office,
and Legacy Lands - Clark County Conservation Futures grant.
Recommendations for Hartwood Park include:
 Seek grant funding for acquisition and development as
opportunities arise.
 Develop a master plan for the site that includes
playground equipment, picnic facilities, restrooms, an off-street parking facility,
and pedestrian trail.
 Provide trail linkages to other City of Washougal properties.
 Develop “no mow” zones with tall grass or by incorporating wildflowers into the
design to conserve resources and ease maintenance requirements.
 Plan areas designated for community art or educational illustration.
New Neighborhood Park (NP-7)
A new neighborhood park is needed north of 32nd /Stiles Road to serve growing
residential development.
Recommendations for NP-7 include:
 Acquire a site approximately 2 to 3 acres in size, consistent with the site selection
guidelines in this plan.
 Develop a master plan for the site that is consistent with the design guidelines.
 Provide local linkages between the park and the citywide trail system
development of the site.
 Implement the master plan as the area develops.
 Ensure the property is viable for playground and restrooms, pertinent to critical
lands and purchase contract agreements.
45 | P a g e

Seek granting funds for acquisition as opportunities arise.
New Neighborhood Park (NP-8)
A new neighborhood park is needed west of the Washougal River, in the north end of the
City to serve residential development.
Recommendations for NP-8 include:
 Acquire a site approximately 2 to 3 acres in size, consistent with the site selection
guidelines in this plan.
 Develop a master plan for the site that is consistent with the design guidelines.
 Provide local linkages between the park and the citywide trail system
development of the site.
 Implement the master plan as the area develops.
 Ensure the property is viable for playground and restrooms, pertinent to critical
lands and purchase contract agreements.
 Seek granting funds for acquisition as opportunities arise.
Oak Tree Park (NP-9)
As a part of the “Look Out Ridge” subdivision
development, the developer created a two-plus acre
park in exchange for impact fee credits. Oak Tree
Park overlooks the western edge of the City of
Washougal, the Columbia and Washougal Rivers,
the mouth of the Columbia River Gorge, and views
Mt. Hood. Designed by Walsh & Associates, Oak
Tree Park showcases native Oregon White Oak
throughout the site. Site amenities include an
asphalt path, picnic tables, benches, and a
playground.
Recommendations for Oak Tree Park include:
 Incorporate “no-mow” zones in the yet undeveloped areas of the park.
 Provide linkages between the park and the citywide trail system.
 Implement community art into the existing design or develop a means to infuse
educational or interpretive elements to the park
 Consider incorporating a covered shelter with water, electrical service, and/or
restrooms to expand services in this neighborhood.
 Consider adding a bicycle rack.
46 | P a g e
Community Parks
Hathaway Park (CP-1)
Hathaway Park consistently ranks as Washougal’s most
visited park because of its place of prominence in the
center of the community and how it fronts the
Washougal River. Hathaway Park possesses the widest
variety of amenities of all the City of Washougal parks
in the system. Many of the elements in the park are
older and may be in need of capital investment.
Recommendations for Hathaway Park include:
 The 2007 Hathaway Park Master Plan by MIG should
be consulted prior to effecting any changes or
improvements to the park. Implement those changes as
funding becomes available or grants acquired.
 Acquire adjacent or in-holding properties to expand
services to the public. Properties should be considered
for acquisition that complete trail links, increase public
open space, improve frontage property to streets and
the Washougal River
 2010 was the first year of community gardens in Hathaway Park. Consider
adding permanent fencing around the community gardens in this park.
 Incorporate cob construction on structures throughout the park. This construction
form could embellish a bench, gazebo, fence, or other building structure.
 Replace the boat launch and other aging structures based on the comprehensive
plan.
 Remove, replace, or reconfigure the tennis courts. With declining use of the
tennis courts, several smaller scale games could be designed in this space with
public involvement (e.g. Pickle ball, etc.)
 Create “no-mow” zones to ease maintenance costs and improve habitat for
winged wildlife.
 The following ideas were generated through the Comprehensive Park and
Recreation Plan process and should be considered in the master plan process:
o Renovate or replace the park restrooms.
o Add a more extensive path system, including an ADA accessible route
through the park and a river-view path along the bank in upper Hathaway
Park.
o Include more and better amenities, including picnic tables, barbecues,
bicycle racks, water fountains, benches, and trash cans. Improve the
condition of the Lower Park river side trail, and continue extending the
trail east from the parking facility to potential future public waterfront.
This project encounters private property negotiations.
o Improve the existing picnic shelters.
o Athletic field improvements.
o River access.
47 | P a g e

o Playground accessibility improvements.
o Spray ground.
o Tree replacement plan to ensure continued tree canopy.
o Parking area improvements.
o Better connection between the tennis courts and the remainder of the park.
Once the master plan is in place, use it to guide replacement of assets at the park,
as well as capital improvements.
Hamllik Park (CP-2)
Hamllik Park is a small community park on the
southeast side of Washougal that also serves an
important neighborhood park function. Because
nearest park is Stevenson Off-Leash Dog Area,
Hamllik is particularly important for nearby
residents.
the
Recommendations for Hamllik Park include:
 Develop a master plan for the site with the assistance of a design professional. As
part of this effort, hold a design workshop with neighbors to come up with a list
of improvements for the site and create a conceptual master plan.
 2009 was the first year of the community garden for residents who live in nearby
apartments and residences. Permanent fencing was installed on the east boundary
to allow for garden expansion to the west. Complete the garden expansion and
install fencing around the perimeter of the community gardens.
 Consider adding an area for community art or educational piece.
 Create “no-mow” zones to ease maintenance costs and improve habitat for
winged wildlife.
 The following ideas were generated through the Comprehensive Park and
Recreation Plan process and should be considered in the master plan process:
o Renovate or replace the restrooms at the park. Optimum siting of these
facilities should also be considered in the master plan.
o Create accessible routes into and through the park. This work entails
installing ramps and sidewalks compliant with ADA.
o Install more and better amenities, including picnic tables, barbecues,
bicycle racks, water fountains, benches, and trash cans.
o Improved picnic shelters.
o Athletic field improvements.
o Make playground improvements, including providing a cover to the
playground.
o Improve the landscaping, especially by adding trees.
o Install new sport facilities, such as a basketball court or trailside athletic
pieces.
o Consider adding a spray park element.
o Consider adding a bicycle rack.
48 | P a g e
New Community Park (CP-3)
The City should develop a community park on the East side of the Washougal River in
the vicinity of Stiles Road and “Q” Street. If a bridge is developed, this neighborhood
park can also serve neighborhoods to the west of the Washougal River.
Recommendations for CP-3 include:
 The City should follow the neighborhood park recommendations in Appendix B
for site selection and design program, as well as timing of park development.
 The City of Washougal should seek out properties on the Washougal River. Such
river access may change the park designation to “waterfront.”
 A site of approximately 15-20 acres should be acquired. Once a site is acquired, a
master plan should be prepared to guide the future development of the site.
 The City should link the proposed bikeway/off-street trail to this park site as
shown on the Park and Facility Plan map.
New Community Park (CP-4)
A new community park should be developed north of the current City limits and west of
the Washougal River.
Recommendations for CP-4 include:
 A site of approximately 20-25 acres should be acquired. Once a site is acquired, a
master plan should be prepared to guide the future development of the site.
 The City should link the proposed bikeway/off-street trail to this park site as
shown on the Park and Facility Plan map.
 The City should follow the community park recommendations for site selection
and design program, as well as timing of park development.
 If possible, this park should provide trail connections to the Washougal River,
citywide trail systems, and regional trails through Clark County.
Waterfront Parks
Steamboat Landing (WP-1)
Steamboat Landing is a waterfront park that offers a
panoramic view of the Columbia River. The dock is
heavily used for fishing, especially during shad season.
The new SR-14 Pedestrian Tunnel provides direct access
between the downtown district and Steamboat Landing,
making this park a highly visited focal point of
Washougal.
Recommendations for Steamboat Landing include:
 With the assistance of a design professional, develop a master plan that showcases
the scenic views from the observation deck and improves mobility throughout the
site
49 | P a g e







Provide accessibility improvements between the parking lot and the main dock.
Provide an ADA accessible connection between the overview deck and the
parking area by way of the U.S. Corps of Engineers levee trail.
Incorporate community art or educational displays for public interest or
interpretation.
Increase seating elements throughout the park.
Improve parking facilities at the park.
Consider replacing the wooden dock surface with a “fish friendly” alternative to
allow light through to the water.
Consider adding a bicycle rack.
Sandy Swimming Hole (WP-2)
Sandy Swimming Hole is a heavily visited park that
provides swimming access to the Washougal River.
This waterfront park has a large deck overlooking the
river.
Recommendations for Sandy Swimming Hole
include:
 With the assistance of a landscape
professional, prepare a master plan for the site.
 This park receives heavy usage by youth and access by bicycle should be
encouraged. Provide additional bicycle parking located on a paved surface closer
to the parking lot.
 Improve the sunbathing lawn area adjacent to the river. Provide a better transition
between lawn areas and surrounding vegetation by creating an edge and providing
a landscape plant transition zone using native riparian vegetation.
 Improve the retaining system that supports the parking facility to reduce erosion
caused by the Washougal River and people scaling the bank. This retaining
system could incorporate stairs or an ADA path.
 Consider adding a location for community art, an educational element, or
mitigation banking system at Sandy Swimming Hole.
 Provide sidewalk, bike, or off-street trail improvements along Shepherd Road to
improve safety and access to Sandy Swimming Hole.
 Consider making a property acquisition to meet parking demands during peak
park use. Providing additional off street parking will improve safety along
Shepherd Road.
 Consider development of a pedestrian bridge that spans from Sandy Swimming
Hole or Shepherd Road to the river island to River Bend Park.
 Consider adding a bicycle rack.
50 | P a g e
New Waterfront Park (WP-3)
The City should actively seek to acquire property along the north bank of the Washougal
River to provide waterfront access between Sandy Swimming Hole and Hathaway Park.
Recommendations for WP-3 are:
 Monitor riverfront sites listed for sale, particularly those in the setback areas and
floodplains.
 Purchase one or more sites fitting into this designation.
 Look for properties with potential to make pedestrian trail connections.
 Select waterfront property that provides suitable access for watercraft, such as
drift boats, kayak or rafts.
Natural Parks
Campen Creek Park (NT-1)
Campen Creek Park was acquired by the City of Washougal through quitclaim from the
neighboring Homeowners Association in 2004. Campen Creek Park is accessible only
from a narrow right-of-way path located between two
homes. While a neighborhood park is needed in this area,
Campen Creek Park is not well suited for this function due
to its lack of visibility, topography, and poor access.
However, the parcel connects with Eldridge Park and it has
great potential to become part of a Campen Creek trail
corridor.
Recommendations for Campen Creek Park include:
 Develop a trail connection to link Campen Creek
Park to the adjacent Eldridge Park, expanding the
proposed Campen Creek corridor trail. This connection will include the
replacement of the existing degraded bridge, building a new bridge across
Campen Creek, and boardwalks spanning wetlands.
 Combine Campen Creek and Eldridge Park natural open space areas with a single
reference name: Eldridge Park Complex. Retain the name “Campen Creek Park”
as a trailhead designation.
 Continue the trail system through to the southern property line for access to “Q”
Street and across the southern property line.
 Continue to maintain the picnic tables in Campen Creek Park. As connectivity
through the parks improves, the City of Washougal anticipates these units will
receive more use.
 Consider removing turf grass and re-vegetating with native plants. Use
appropriate areas of the site for mitigation banking.
 Look for acquisition opportunities to expand Campen Creek Park and the
Eldridge Park Complex for improved access and parkland variety.
 Incorporate art and/or educational pieces throughout the site.
 Consider developing this site into a disc golf course to encourage people to walk
actively for recreation.
51 | P a g e

Consider adding a bicycle rack.
Eldridge Park (NT-2)
Eldridge Park is an undeveloped site that connects into
the Campen Creek corridor. Because of deed
restrictions, this park must remain in a natural state for
passive recreation and must retain the name of Dr.
Eldridge.
Recommendations for Eldridge Park include:
 Develop a trail connection through the site
from 49th Street connecting into the proposed
Campen Creek corridor trail; including access to Campen Creek Park, “W” Street
via the waterline extension project and Rolling Meadows to the south. This trail
connection project includes the construction of bridges and boardwalks.
 Deem Eldridge as a mitigation-banking site.
 Incorporate art and/or educational pieces throughout the site.
 Develop “no-mow” zones with vegetation to attract wildlife.
 Consider developing this site into a disc golf course to encourage people to walk
actively for recreation.
 Look to acquire adjacent properties for purposes to expand open space and trail
connectivity. For example, in 2011 the city assumed ownership of Rolling
Meadows 5 property, offered to the City of Washougal by the HOA. This
property bridges a gap between the Eldridge Park Complex and another City of
Washougal-owned parcel and joins 40 acres together for future trail development.
 Consider adding a bicycle rack.
Mable Kerr Park (NT-3)
“Kerr Park” is located to the north of the Washougal School
District Administration building and George J. Schmid
Memorial Fields. Campen Creek delineates the boundary
between the park and Orchard Hills Golf & Country Club.
Since 2007, Washougal Parks Department personnel and
volunteers have worked diligently to clean the site of
invasive ivy and blackberries. Volunteers planted over 500
trees and constructed almost ¾ of a mile in trails. Kerr Park
trail provides two trailheads: The east at Sunset View Road
and the west at Gifford Place.
Recommendations for the Kerr property include:
 Complete the last section of trail loop on between Campen Creek and the
unnamed tributary.
 Incorporate nature friendly art displays or interpretive features into the site.
 Install resting points along the existing trail.
52 | P a g e







Improve the Sunset View Road frontage for safer trail connectivity.
Continue to work toward weed removal and native habitat restoration for the
benefit of wildlife and quality of visitor experience.
Look to acquire adjacent unused properties belonging to either the Washougal
School District or the Golf Course. Improve access into the property through
easements and additional trailheads.
Consider installing fencing between the residents or School District and the park
to improve safety and limit unwanted vehicular activity in the park.
Consider passive recreation opportunities such as disc golf or other habitat
friendly recreation.
Consider an agreement with the School District to share opportunities for such
activities as disc golf, mitigation banking, continued trail development, and/or
outdoor learning environment.
Consider adding a bicycle rack.
Look Out Ridge Park (NT-4)
Look Out Ridge Park consists of 1.1 acres of wetland
and mitigation planting in the “Look Out Ridge”
subdivision. The property has a small trail and bench
to overlook the Columbia River. The site offers
panoramic views of the Columbia River Gorge mouth,
Mount Hood and Oregon. Because the site’s purpose is
to protect a wetland, the City of Washougal has no
plans to install additional amenities. Extension of the
trail through to the sidewalk remains the only
improvement currently planned for this site.
Special Use Parks
Reflection Plaza (SU-1)
Reflection Plaza is a newly remodeled square in
downtown Washougal. A 2010 improvement to
the park installed a living Christmas Tree on the
northeast corner of the property. The only
recommendation involves transforming the
abandoned Christmas Tree well in the center of
the plaza into a canvas for rotating art displays. The well is fitted with electricity to
provide lighting of pieces and the structure lends a foundation for a moveable base.
53 | P a g e
Angelo Park (SU-2)
Angelo Park, leased by the City on a month-tomonth basis, provides interim use for soccer until
the property owner develops the site. The City
should continue to lease Angelo Park for soccer;
however, no additional City-funded
improvements should be made at this site, without
securing a long-term lease agreement can be
secured.
George J. Schmid Memorial Fields (SU-3)
George J. Schmid Memorial Fields develops and
operates under an inter-local agreement between the
Washougal School District and the City of Washougal.
The School District owns the land and provides the
first line of maintenance. The City of Washougal
provides the funding for ball field development
through grant funding assistance. In 2006, baseball
field #1 construction preceded the 2009 baseball field
#2, constructed with funds acquired by a Youth
Athletic Facility grant through the Recreation and
Conservation Office.
Recommendations for George J. Schmid Memorial Fields include:
 Complete the third softball field and all outstanding requirements of this sports
complex project (landscaping, restrooms, etc)
 Seek grants to defray development costs of the final field and appurtenances.
 Work with the School District to provide trail connectivity to Mable Kerr Park at
the north boundary of the property.
 Consider adding a bicycle rack.
Stevenson Off-Leash Dog Area (SU-4)
This seven-acre site was acquired in 2009 through
lease agreement with the Stevenson family for the
purpose of an off-leash dog park. The City of
Washougal partnered with Dog Paw, a local dog
advocacy group, to develop the park and maintain
it. The City of Washougal cleared the land of
blackberries, purchased the fencing supplies and
administers maintenance of the grass and waste.
The City of Washougal should limit additional
expenditures to the site in consideration of the nature of the lease. The property is high
value commercial land and there are no guarantees for long-term use of the property. No
recommended changes are proposed for this site by the City of Washougal.
54 | P a g e
Camas/Washougal Skate Park
The Cities of Camas and Washougal pooled funding to provide the Camas/Washougal
Skate Park. Both cities should promote transportation projects near the Skate Park to
improve the safety and ease of access for users. Because this site rests inside the City of
Camas and Camas fully maintains the property, no recommended changes are proposed
for this site by the City of Washougal.
Main Street Pocket Park (SU-5)
This linear park is a very small pedestrian corridor with
seating elements. No recommended changes are proposed for
this site by the City of Washougal.
Open Space
The City of Washougal owns several properties that do not
function as parks. These properties consist of remnants left
over from subdivision developments, “Dedicated to the City of Washougal” because of
tributaries and associated riparian zones. The City has many open space areas that are
potential candidates for rehabilitation under Parks Department management. Some of
these future projects may require a plat alteration in order for any proposed project to go
into construction. These areas are desirable for the City because of their connectivity
opportunities. Appropriate Open Space Areas could be developed into a variety of public
uses including trails, playgrounds, future parks, wildlife observation areas, etc.
Easements hold great possibility for connecting larger City trail systems together. A more
thorough analysis of the useable easements would reveal this potential. These suggestions
are starting points in the discussion on how open spaces could be used in the future.
Open spaces sites are not identified specifically in the 2010 Park Comprehensive Plan
update.
Other Park Sites
Washougal benefits from a wealth of park and recreation resources under ownership by
other agencies. These sites provide a variety of opportunities for Washougal residents,
and contribute to the City’s park system.
Goot Park
Goot Park, a City of Camas park, provides a ball field used by many Washougal residents
through the East County Little League. Located on the Washougal-Camas boundary, this
site benefits residential neighborhoods not served by other Washougal parks. Washougal
should consider participating in future capital improvements at this site, particularly if
Washougal residents are included in the planning process and benefit from improvements
55 | P a g e
made there. As of 2010, the City of Camas is considering creating an off-leash area near
Goot Park. This site may replace the Stevenson Off-Leash Area in the future, should
Washougal terminate the ground lease with the Stevenson family.
Washougal River Greenway
The City of Camas developed the Washougal River
Greenway, a natural open space area along the
Washougal River. The Camas/Washougal Skate Park,
located on the edge of the Greenway, begins the
trailhead at the Washougal/Camas boundary. The
Greenway offers a trail corridor that is used by
Washougal residents, and is a wonderful recreation
asset for both communities. Washougal should
connect future trails into the Washougal River
Greenway to expand on this recreation resource.
Captain William Clark Park
Captain William Clark Park is a joint venture of
multiple local agencies, including the City of
Washougal. Washougal should continue to be a
partner in this important regional site, working with
Vancouver-Clark Parks and Recreation on
implementation of the Phased Master Plan. In the
mean time, the City should monitor its expenditures
related to the site and ensure that its contributions to
the joint effort are equitable and as called for in the
Maintenance and Operations Agreement.
Steigerwald National Wildlife Refuge
The City of Washougal supports the 2009 implementation of the Wildlife Refuge master
plan, and looks forward to construction of a planned environmental education center.
Washougal supports federal funding and implementation of the master plan for Steigerwald,
including implementation of the trails. The regional trail system through William Clark Park
provides linkages into the Steigerwald trail system, so that Washougal residents can best
experience the natural resources at Steigerwald. The Refuge is available by a parking
facility via SR-14.
Home Owners Association Parks and/or Open Space
There are a variety of open space parcels and private parks built as part of residential
subdivisions in Washougal. These parks are owned and maintained by the Home Owners
Associations (HOAs). While these parks provide important local recreation sites in the
areas throughout the City, private parks are generally not built to City standards. The
City should recognize these preexisting private parks as important resources, institute
56 | P a g e
policies so that future private parks are built to public park standards, and should avoid
taking ownership of HOA sites unless they are consistent with the recommendations in
this plan. It does not prove beneficial for the City of Washougal to acquire properties
that are landlocked, difficult to maintain, or heavily encumbered by regulations. The City
of Washougal should move to accept/acquire only open spaces providing an opportunity
to expand the city-wide trail system, provide a recreational benefit to the community, or
protect a specific feature of historical, community or environmental significance.
Pendleton Baseball Fields
Two heavily used baseball fields are located on property owned by the Pendleton Woolen
Mills. Organized sports groups use these fields with permission from Pendleton
management. Pendleton Woolen Mills may choose to commercially or residentially
develop this property in the future. Should development include residential uses, a
neighborhood park should be created to serve residents.
Fishback Stadium
The City of Washougal is seeking greater use of the stadium through an inter-local agreement
with the Washougal School District. However, the field surface needs to be replaced, which
is a significant capital improvement that the City could assist with through the use of Park
Impact Fees. The School District would continue to own the land and provide maintenance
of the facility.
57 | P a g e
5.3 RECREATION FACILITIES RECOMMENDATIONS
Washougal’s existing recreation facility inventory consists primarily of athletic fields.
The City has one indoor space: the Civic Center. The Civic Center is part of the
Washougal City Hall complex and primarily used by local senior citizens. The following
recommendations address athletic facilities, other outdoor recreation facilities, and indoor
facilities to meet Washougal’s growing recreation needs:
Athletic Programs
Sports are important recreation activities in Washougal. Private organizations offer
athletic programs on City, School District, and private facilities. Based on standards
established during the 2006 Park Comprehensive Plan, the following recommendations
address current and future needs.
Provide Functional Athletic Fields: The most functional types
of athletic fields are those adequately developed and specifically
designed to serve particular functions. Often times, sport
facilities are used for activities for which they were not
designed. The following standards provide Washougal with
guidelines for new athletic facilities or retro-fits of existing
facilities:
 Regulation baseball field dimensions: 320’+ outfields,
90’ baselines, grass infield; permanent backstop and
support facilities.
 Youth baseball field dimensions: 200’+ outfields, 60’ baselines, dugouts. Grass
infield not required; permanent backstop and support facilities.
 Softball field dimensions (Slow-pitch): 250’ minimum outfield - women, 275’
minimum outfield - men, 60’ baselines; (Fast pitch) 225’ outfield, 60’ baselines;
skinned infield; permanent backstop and support facilities.
 Youth softball field dimensions: 200’+ outfields, 60’ baselines, dugouts. Skinned
infield; permanent backstop and support facilities.
 Regulation soccer field dimensions: 195’ to 225’ by 330’ to 360’; grass or all
weather surfacing; adequate perimeter space; permanent or portable goals.
 Youth soccer field dimensions: Varies according to age: U14 (60 yds. x 110 yds.)
- U6 (20 yds. x 30 yds.); permanent or portable goals.

Guidelines: Use the following guidelines for sports field and indoor court
provision:
o
o
o
o
58 | P a g e
1 baseball/softball field per 2,050 residents
1 soccer field per 1,689 residents
1 football field per 9,000 residents
1 indoor court per 2,300 residents

Field Upgrades: As part of the recommended park improvements, the fields at
Hathaway and Hamllik Parks should be improved. During the master planning
efforts at both sites, alternative field configurations should be evaluated.

George Schmid Ball Field Complex: Continue development of the fields at
Schmid Complex.

New Fields in Community Parks: Sports fields should be provided in each of
the proposed new community parks to meet public needs for these facilities.
Multiple fields should be provided at each site, with the field mix determined
based on the guidelines listed above, with consideration given to geographic
dispersal of athletic facilities in the community.

Pendleton Fields: Privately owned Pendleton Fields is a major supplier of field
time in Washougal and is very important to the East County Little League
community. The City of Washougal should remain responsive to shortages in
fields due to commercial development and removal of the ball fields on this
property.

Danielson Fields: The City should consider contributing to this site with
whatever means capable, which will serve Washougal’s growing population.
Ideally, the site can hold a complex of 4 full-sized irrigated turf grass fields.
Restrooms would need to be provided in proximity to the fields to support the use.
In addition, supplemental parking may be needed in addition to the parking
available at the Middle School. As a guideline, about 50 spaces per field will be
needed to provide parking for peak demands.

School District Partnerships for Athletic Fields and Indoor Courts:
Coordinate with the school district on development of new school sites to make
sports facilities and gymnasiums available to the general public at the new
schools. Washougal should consider making a financial contribution toward each
of these sites in exchange for use. This will become particularly important if the
City adds recreation programming, because schools can provide cost-effective
programming space, particularly if designed with public use in mind.

Outdoor Basketball Courts: Outdoor basketball courts should be provided in all
community parks. Full or half courts should be provided in neighborhood parks
where the park configuration allows.

Outdoor Tennis Courts: Outdoor tennis courts should be provided at new
community parks.

Outdoor Volleyball Courts: Washougal currently has no outdoor volleyball
courts. These should be considered for inclusion in future community parks.
59 | P a g e

Skateboard/BMX Facilities: Washougal should continue to partner with Camas
on the popular Camas/Washougal Skate Park. No specific capital improvements
are recommended at the skate park at this time. The City should consider
incorporating small-scale skateboard/BMX features at community park sites.
Other Outdoor Recreation Facilities
During the planning process, community members expressed interest in a variety of other
outdoor recreation facilities. Washougal’s parks currently have traditional recreation
amenities such as playground areas, but lack other recreation facilities that have become
increasingly popular. The following recommendations
address providing additional outdoor recreation
facilities in Washougal:
Spray grounds: Spray grounds are water play features
that are very popular and provide a means of
integrating aquatics into parks at a relatively low cost.
Washougal should provide at least two spray grounds
in community parks, one south of the Washougal River
(preferably at Hathaway Park) and the other in the
north end of the City.
R.V. Parking: The City should consider constructing spaces for R.V. parking within the
City limits. The addition of functional R.V. spaces would allow for greater access to
Washougal for travel or vacation, and benefit local community businesses. Currently the
only zoned area for implementing RV parking is located near the Columbia River on Port
of Camas/Washougal land. The City could work with the Port to develop such a facility.
Another suggestion includes changing local zoning code to allow development in areas
throughout the City. The planning and site choice for this addition should be made in the
near future to take advantage of available land.
Off-Leash Dog Area: An off-leash dog area provides a location where residents can
exercise and interact freely with their dogs. The City should consider incorporating one
or more off-leash dog areas into new community parks. Ideally, an off-leash area should
be at least five acres in size, fenced with a double-gated entry, have nearby parking, and
include amenities such as water, benches, and trashcans. The site should not be isolated
visually or physically for safety. Noise impacts on neighbors should be considered and
special attention should be paid to the potential impact of a dog park on the sensitive
environments and habitats surrounding the site.
In 2009, the Stevenson Off-Leash Area was acquired under a lease agreement. The City
of Washougal partnered with Dog Paw to develop and operate the site. Stevenson’s ideal
location next to, and in partnership with, Bi-Mart Corporation provides ample off street
parking. The generous 7-acre site is split into large and small dog areas and offers an
information kiosk, walking trails, benches, and ample waste bins.
60 | P a g e
Should the lease be lost with the Stevenson family, the City of Washougal should
consider partnering with the City of Camas or seek out other properties for a separate
park. As of 2010, the City of Camas is considering creating an off-leash area near Goot
Park.
Community Gardens: Community gardens provide a location where community
members can grow plants and vegetables on individual plots, usually for a small fee.
Establishment of community gardens should serve a trial period of at least three years.
Several of Washougal’s neighborhood and community parks have potential for
community garden use. The site selected should have:
 At least six hours of sunlight per day;
 Access to water;
 A means of vehicular access so that soil, mulch, and other materials can be
brought into the site.
In 2009, the Hamllik Park Community Garden began serving citizens in the Washougal
community. 24 plots are available in the initial design and interest has remained high to
continue with this program. This garden has the space to expand in all directions with
elevated interest from the area residents. Hamllik Park possesses the capability of
doubling or tripling the plot numbers without reducing other functions of the park. The
downfall remains that the off-street parking sits at the opposite side of the site and onstreet parking is limited.
2010 was the first year of the Hathaway Park Community Garden east of the tennis
courts. This garden is currently restricted in size to 16 plots. There is ample off-street
parking available in this area.
Whitewater Park: Explore the possibility of providing a whitewater park in Washougal.
This type of recreation facility uses natural materials to provide a whitewater course with
permanent rapids adjacent to the river. If there is
community interest in this type of recreation activity,
the
City should conduct a feasibility study on the longterm costs of operating such a facility prior to making
a
decision.
Indoor Recreation Facilities
A great need for both indoor recreation space and a
senior center were identified during the planning
process of the 2005 survey and its 2010 update.
Indoor Recreation Center:
More and more communities in the Northwest are
offering multi-use recreation centers because of the
region’s inclement winter weather and the multiple
opportunities possible in an indoor facility. If designed
correctly, recreation centers can offer a wide variety of
community activities at a reasonable cost. Most
61 | P a g e
progressive community centers now provide rooms for receptions, meetings, and large group
gatherings, as well as gymnasium and recreation space. The community would benefit from
a multi-functional building combining the functions of both an indoor recreation center
and a senior center. A feasibility study would assess the options and form the
groundwork in the long-term planning of such a community resource. Preliminary
investigation would also identify an appropriate site and building program that is the best
fit for the City’s financial goals. Many communities plan recreation centers to maximize
revenue generation and minimize operating subsidies to meet financial goals.
The following facilities should be considered for an indoor recreation center to meet
community needs according to the 2005 and 2010 surveys:
 Gymnasium (at least 1 full-sized courts)
 Multipurpose room for special events, receptions, and dance classes.
 Catering kitchen
 At least two classrooms/meeting rooms to accommodate various sized
groups.
 Exercise room (aerobics, dance, fitness classes, etc.)
 Fitness center
 Support facilities, including lobby,
restrooms, office space for staff,
locker rooms, storage space, etc.
 Arts and crafts room
 Concessions/vendor space such as
a coffee kiosk or snack bar
 Potentially a youth center and/or a
senior center
In recreation surveys completed in Washougal and Camas,
members from both communities strongly supported partnerships between the two
cities and also very strongly identified a need for a community center. In 2005, Camas and
Washougal investigated building a joint facility near the City lines. The project costs
were too high at the time. Without a significant partner such as the City of Camas
Washougal would likely not be able to support a significant community center. The two
communities should keep options open and look for opportunities to support a major
recreation center, even potentially including an indoor pool, a facility desired by many
Washougal residents.
Hybrid or “New” Recreation Uses:
The city should remain open to expanding hybrid recreation uses that develop from the
merger of other recreation activities. The city might investigate requests for adding
hybrid recreation by surveying the needs and specifications of the activity. Those criteria
should be measured for compatibility against appropriate park spaces or vacant
city/private properties. Of the things to consider in planning for hybrid or “new”
recreation uses:
 Is the activity a fad or proved as a long-term use?
 Has the activity changed periodically, requiring frequent updates of facilities?
 Does the community support this activity?
62 | P a g e


What are the impacts to the site or other recreation activities?
Are the facilities adequate to handle the demands of increased or different
visitation such as parking, foot traffic, wear and tear, etc...?
 How does the activity benefit/degrade the community in any way?
 How effectively has the activity been managed in other jurisdictions?
 Does the activity promote the goals of the Park Comprehensive Plan, as
recommended by the Parks Board?
 Does a strong user group accompany the activity for possible joint maintenance
or improvement agreements?
Some examples of Hybrid or “New” Recreation Uses include:
Disc golf: This activity uses a Frisbee type disc on a course that blends a traditional golf
with basket ball style goal. Disc golf has become popular in larger parks that span several
acres. Currently, existing nearby disc golf courses include Leverich Park in Vancouver
and Shady Oaks in North Bonneville. Washougal properties that have been discussed or
may be suitable for disc golf include: the Eldridge Park Complex, Mable Kerr Park, the
city owned, property at 352nd Avenue, William Clark Park, etc.
Pickle-ball: This activity blends ping-Pong, tennis, and badminton, resulting in “mini
tennis”. This game has been played since 1972 and can utilize any concrete or asphalt
space measuring 20’x44’. Currently the closest formalized indoor courts are located at
Marshall Elementary School, Firstenburg Community Center, and L.A. Fitness in
Vancouver. Extensive discussion has occurred about permanently converting the existing
Hathaway Park tennis courts into pickle-ball courts. Washougal should also consider
these types of courts in future park development projects.
Should an appropriate site be found for Hybrid or “New” Recreation Uses that fits the
goals of the Park Comprehensive Plan, the vision of the Parks Board, and compliments
the Parks Department, the City of Washougal may implement such facilities utilizing
Park Impact Fees, budget appropriation, donations, and other funding measures as
appropriate. The City of Washougal shall seek partnerships with other jurisdictions,
districts, or user/activist groups when possible to implement Hybrid or “New” Recreation
Uses.
63 | P a g e
5.4 OFF-STREET TRAIL SYSTEM
The recommendations provided in this section establish an off-street trail system for
Washougal that provides east-west and north-south linkages throughout the City.
Off-Street Trail System Concept
Washougal envisions a Washougal River trail as part of
its off-street trail system. The interim strategy for the trail
system is to develop a river-oriented trail using existing
parks and on-street connections (sidewalks) in existing
right-of-ways. Washougal’s trail system will connect all
parts of the city to each other, with linkages to downtown
and important recreation facilities. The off-street trail
system focuses on recreation opportunities, while also
serving non-motorized transportation needs. Natural open
space parks feature trail linkages to existing privately
owned trail systems. Wherever possible, linkages
between individual developments and the citywide trail
system should be encouraged. The City should provide
on-street transportation linkages in areas of deficiency. In
addition, the City should continue to develop trail
systems and link with the regional network of Clark
County.
Proposed Trail Corridors
The proposed off-street trail system is depicted on the
Existing Park and Recreation Map, located in the Map
section at the end of this document. The trail corridors
depicted on this map represent conceptual linkages, not
specific trail alignments.

Columbia River Trail: The Columbia River
Trail provides an important east-west connection in Washougal from the
Columbia River Gorge to the Camas City limits, as well as viewing opportunities
along the Columbia River. Washougal should seek opportunities to increase
access at points along the levee and improve trail spurs that currently exist. In the
summer of 2010, the SR-14 pedestrian tunnel opened to allow a seamless access
between the downtown core and the Columbia River. The City of Washougal
aims to create a pedestrian connection from Steamboat Landing west to the Port
of Camas/Washougal Marina. This trail plan prioritizes direct riverside properties
as “the most preferred” trail opportunities and off street properties not directly
associated with the river as “acceptable”. Sidewalks and street-scape trails shall
be implemented only when necessary to continue trail connectivity.
64 | P a g e

Central Washougal Rails with Trails Linkage:
Providing an off-street connection in central Washougal will be challenging,
because the area is already developed. The City should use on-street
connections to provide an east-west linkage, such as the planned E Street
sidewalks and bike lane or develop paths through existing neighborhoods.
The 2006 Park Comprehensive Plan recommended implementing a “rails with
trails” concept to provide an east-west connection using an existing corridor.
A “rails with trails” corridor provides an off-street trail in an active rail
corridor, differing from a “rails to trails” concept where an unused railroad
right-of-way is converted to trail use. While there are many considerations in
developing a trail in an active rail corridor, this has been accomplished in
other areas of the United States.
Washougal’s 2009 “quiet zone” program eliminated any possibility of
creating a “rails with trails” program. The “quiet zone” requires that citizens
remain outside of the railroad right-of-way except at approved crossings.
Should a person be inside the right-of-way, a passing train must sound its horn
– defeating the concept of the “quiet zone”. This excerpt remains for future
possibilities.

Washougal River Trail:
An ideal vision for the Washougal River Trail is a trail adjacent to the river,
similar to the trail in the Washougal River Greenway in Camas. Due to
private property and topography issues, a trail connection paralleling the river
on surface streets provide an alternative. Existing parks and easements may
connect to segments of this riverfront trail.
The following actions detail the short-term strategy:
o The City of Washougal should actively
seek properties suitable for waterfront
parks or easements that provide trail
opportunities along Washougal River
frontage.
o Include a riverfront trail in the new
master plan for Hathaway Park.
o Look to acquire an easement or park
site and develop a Washougal River
crossing to bridge the Washougal River
Road area with 32nd Street.
o Actively seek waterfront easements and property. Seek easements or
land dedications in new development along the river.
o Acquire riverfront land or secure riverfront easements when the
opportunity arises. In particular, secure land outside existing city limits
and potentially north of the UGA before it is developed and the
opportunity is lost.
65 | P a g e

North Side Bonneville Power Administration Utility Easement Trail:
An east-west connection is also needed in northern Washougal, where there
are a number of constraints due to topography development patterns. Sitting
outside the City limits, a utility easement in northern Washougal has potential
for providing an east-west connection in an area likely to grow. This utility
corridor should be used to develop the northernmost east-west connection,
connecting to the Washougal River north of existing city limits. This river
crossing connects to other planned trails east of the Washougal River, such as
the Campen Creek Corridor Loop.

West Side Utility Easement Trail: Washougal residential development has
been occurring in the northern hills. A north-south utility easement running
from the Washougal River Greenway to the peak of the hill could potentially
link these areas to the historic downtown, Washougal River and the North
Side Utility Easement Trail in the future.

Steigerwald Route: The City of Washougal should keep options open to link
to the Steigerwald National Wildlife Refuge and the trail system there. A
partnership with Clark County, Washington State Department of
Transportation, and the US Fish and Wildlife Service must be forged to create
this connection.

Campen Creek Corridor Loop: The east side of town provides an extensive
opportunity for off street trails through City of Washougal parks and open
space. Kerr Park and the Eldridge Park Complex provide trail hubs for the
Loop. Several spur trails could be established to connect systems inside the
City and outside in the county. The Loop possesses deficiencies on street
sidewalks necessary to complete the connections. 39th Street and Sunset View
Road are two of these systems in need of pedestrian and bike improvements.

Other Corridors: Washougal should consider connections within existing
street rights of way to provide additional pedestrian and bicycle corridors.
Options may include: 1) A north-south connection along the Washougal
River Road up to Woodburn Road; 2) A connection between Gause
Elementary School and Hathaway Park; 3) A continuous connection from all
parks to an on-street path.

Water Trails: To capitalize on Washougal’s unique water resources, the City
should develop a water trail for non-motorized watercraft on the Washougal
River. The link could provide information on launch points, site facilities, and
points of interest for the river visitors. Improving floater and kayak access to
the Washougal River is a key step in developing usable water trails. While
several internet websites currently offer water trail maps for the Columbia
River, information regarding public access points for the Washougal River has
been difficult to find until 2010. The Washougal River Water Trail Map
66 | P a g e
details this important information and is available for reference in the Map
section at the end of this document.
Trail Planning and Design
Policy statements and design guidance for trail planning and design are contained in
this section. These guidelines are intended to assist the City in developing an offstreet trail system that is user friendly and functional.
Planning
 During the planning phase, require a dedicated right-of-way for
recreational trails shown as on the City’s Park Master Plan map.
 A recommended 25’ wide right-of-way should be secured for trails, with
44’ to 50’ optimum.
 Whenever possible, recreation pathways and trails should be separated
from the roadway.
 Additional trail easements or dedications should be sought to complete
missing trail segments, link parks, and expand the overall trail network
into areas that are already developed. If no other means can be found to
provide missing links, on-street trail links should be used.
 Local trails should be required in residential subdivision planning and
should connect to the City’s trail system and neighboring local trails. Trail
locations can be determined during the land use review process.
 Trail alignments should take into account soil conditions, surface drainage
and other physical limitations that could increase construction and/or
maintenance costs.
Design
 Multi-use trails are the preferred trail type for Washougal, because they
have the potential to serve the broadest spectrum of the public, including
walkers, hikers, runners, and cyclists. Multi-use trails can even serve
equestrian users in certain areas. Trails should be planned, sized, and
designed for multiple uses except where environmental or other
constraints preclude this goal.
 An 8-12’ paved width should be developed, with 2’ wide unpaved
shoulders on each side. Approximately 16’ should be provided from the
shoulder to each neighboring property line, if the trail runs adjacent to a
private property. The diagram on this page provides a schematic crosssection of a multi-use trail. If the trail runs adjacent to the Washougal
River or another sensitive area, it should be located at least 20’ away
unless a larger buffer is recommended by an environmental scientist.
 Trails should be located and designed to provide a diversity of challenges.
Enhance accessibility wherever possible, with high priority being loop or
destination opportunities on portions of trails near staging areas.
 Where routes use existing streets, the pathway should be designed to
minimize potential conflicts between motorists and trail users.
67 | P a g e


68 | P a g e
Centralized and effective trailheads areas should be provided for trail
access. These sites should include parking, orientation and information
signs, and any necessary specialized unloading features. Primary
trailheads should have restrooms and trash receptacles, while secondary
trailheads might only have some parking and signage. Secondary
trailheads may have 3-8 parking spaces, whereas primary trailheads may
have 20 or more parking spaces. Trailheads can be incorporated into
community parks in some cases.
Way finding and orientation signage should be provided to facilitate trail
users. Signage should be provided at each major intersection and trail
entrances, and should include route and mileage information.
CHAPTER SIX:
Plan Implementation
69 | P a g e
6.1 OVERVIEW
This chapter identifies an implementation strategy for funding the improvements
recommended in the Parks Comprehensive Plan. It includes a list that details all the
capital projects recommended in the Master Plan and a short-term, 6-year Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP) for implementation. The 6-year CIP is based on a financial
projection, also described in the chapter. Finally, the formation of a metropolitan park
district is reviewed as a potential financing mechanism. Appendix C includes a matrix of
potential sources for capital project financing to supplement this chapter.
6.2 CAPITAL PROJECTS
Below is a list of all projects identified in the Plan, along with their project costs (Table
6). This list of projects was developed from the recommendations presented in Chapter 5.
Project costs were developed based on 2010 dollars and can be used for planning and
budgeting purposes. Land acquisition costs are projected at a cost of $210,000 per acre
inside the Urban Growth Area (UGA) and $100,000 per acre outside the UGA.
Three categories of projects are shown in Table 6:



Parks: These projects include improvements at existing sites, as well as
acquisition and new park development.
Special recreation facilities: These projects are recreation facilities to be
developed at parks or other publicly owned sites.
Trail improvements: These are improvements to establish Washougal’s offstreet trail network, but does not include land acquisition or the development of
trails within park sites.
*The land value for acquiring property is based in 2010 dollar figures. The estimates on
park developments and improvements remain the same as they were originally estimated
in 2006.
70 | P a g e
Table 6: Capital Projects List
Type
Other
Existing
New Park
Project Description
Preliminary Project
Cost
Parks and Open Space
NP-4 New
Neighborhood
Park
NP-4 New
Neighborhood
Park
NP-4 New
Neighborhood
Park
NP-5 Riverview Park
NP-5 Riverview Park
NP-6 Hartwood Park
NP-7 New
Neighborhood
Park
NP-7 New
Neighborhood
Park
NP-7 New
Neighborhood
Park
NP-8 New
Neighborhood
Park
NP-8 New
Neighborhood
Park
NP-8 New
Neighborhood
Park
CP-1 Hathaway Park
CP-3 New
Community
Park
71 | P a g e
Acquisition of a 2 to 3 acre
site
X
$630,000
Master plan
X
$20,000
Construction of
Neighborhood Park NP-4,
including a share of the
Turtle Terrace Washougal
River
Conceptual master plan
Allowance for park
improvements
Construction of playground,
picnic, trail amenities
Acquisition of a 2 to 3 acre
site
X
$1,750,000
X
$630,000
Master plan
X
$20,000
Construction of
Neighborhood Park NP-7
X
$1,250,000
Acquisition of a 2 to 3 acre
site
X
$630,000
Master plan
X
$20,000
Construction of
Neighborhood Park NP-8
X
$1,250,000
Master plan
implementation. Additional
projects may be identified in
the master plan requiring
additional funding. Master
Plan by MIG completed in
2007
Acquisition of 15 to 20
acres
X
X
$10,000
$200,000
X
$200,000
X
X
$4,000,000
$2,000,000
CP-3 New
Community
Park
CP-3 New
Community
Park
CP-4 Northwest
Community
Park
CP-4 Northwest
Community
Park
CP-4 Northwest
Community
Park
WP-1 Steamboat
Landing
WP-2 Sandy
WP-2 Swimming
Hole
Sandy
Swimming
Hole
WP-2 Sandy
Swimming
Hole
WP-3 New
Waterfront
Park
WP-3 New
Waterfront
Park
SU-3 George J
Schmid
Memorial
Fields
Other William Clark
Park
Master plan
X
$100,000
Construction of Community
Park CP-3
X
$4,000,000
Acquisition of 20 to 25
acres
X
$2,500,000
Master plan
X
$100,000
Construction of Community
Park CP-4
X
$4,000,000
Design and construction of
accessibility improvements
Acquisition
Master plan
Design and construction of
minor improvements and
off-site parking
Acquisition of 2-3 acres
Allowance for planning and
development of trail and
signage improvements
Implementation of master
plan phases for field #3 and
supporting system
Installation of tent camping
and RV facilities
Parks and Open Space
Subtotal
X
$650,000
X
X
$200,000
$5,000
X
$500,000
X
$630,000
X
$250,000
X
$2,500,000
X
$750,000
$28,795,000
Notes on the Preliminary Capital Projects List
1. Preliminary project costs are planning level costs and will be further refined after City review of,
and comment on, project list.
2. Construction projects include design and construction documents as well as construction costs in
the project cost.
72 | P a g e
6.3 IMPLEMENTATION PRIORITIES
The following criteria are recommended for prioritizing projects in the Capital
Improvement Plan. These criteria are the community priorities that emerged through the
planning process. The criteria are not listed in order of priority.






Serving underserved areas. Analyzing distance and location of local park
resources, and identifying areas lacking in these facilities and experiences.
Developing trails. Trail-related activities were some of the most sought after
resource in the community survey (both in 2006 and in 2010).
Improving river access. Acquisition of riverfront land or easements, access
improvements, and riverfront trails are important for Washougal residents and for
promoting riparian stewardship.
Contributing to partnership opportunities. Washougal residents are supportive
of partnering with Camas and others to improve recreation access for the
community.
Upgrading or developing existing parks. Results of the community survey
indicated that residents place a high priority on improving existing parks and
currently undeveloped park sites.
Acquiring land. Looking towards future growth of the City’s population and
acquiring property that will serve these expected needs.
6.4 CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDING
Washougal has not historically had dedicated parks capital project funding, and capital
project funding has varied from year to year. With more than $45 million in capital
projects over the lifetime of this plan, the City needs a financing strategy for its park
improvements and acquisitions. The revenue available from many potential sources
depends on community growth and development, with impact fees tied to the amount of
new development. Appendix C includes a matrix of potential sources for capital project
financing to supplement this chapter.
The table (Table 7) on the following page highlights the priorities of the Washougal
Parks Department as of July 2010, along with their total cost of development.
73 | P a g e
Table 7: Washougal Parks Department
2013 Development Priorities
Site
Project Description
NP-6 Hartwood Park
CP-1 Hathaway Park
CP-3
CP-3
CP-3
WP-1
New Community Park
New Community Park
New Community Park
Steamboat Landing
WP-2 Sandy Swimming
Hole
WP-2 Sandy Swimming
Hole
WP-2 Sandy Swimming
Hole
Construction of playground, picnic, trail
amenities
Master plan implementation. Additional
projects may be identified in the master plan
requiring additional funding. Master Plan by
MIG completed in 2007
Acquisition of a 15 to 20 acre site
Master plan
Construction of Community Park CP-3
Design and construction of accessibility
improvements
Acquisition
Master plan
Design and construction of minor
improvements and off-site parking
Subtotal Parks
Preliminary
Project Cost
$200,000
$4,000,000
$630,000
$20,000
$1,750,000
$650,000
$200,000
$5,000
$500,000
$7,955,000
Other
Senior Center
Indoor Recreation
Center
Indoor Recreation
Center
William Clark Park
SU-3 George J Schmid
Memorial Fields
Fishback Stadium
Design and construction of a new 5,000 s.f.
senior center,
Feasibility study.
$2,250,000
Design and construction of a new 20,000 s.f.
facility. No land acquisition cost assumed. No
pool. Cost may change based on feasibility
study findings, or due to partnership with
Camas to provide a larger facility.
Installation of tent camping and RV facilities
Implementation of master plan phases for field
#3 and supporting system
$6,000,000
Contribution to field replacement
Subtotal Special Recreation Facilities
$50,000
$750,000
$2,500,000
$10,000
$11,560,000
Trail Improvements
East side Power Line
74 | P a g e
Gravel trail connecting 32nd Street to 49th Street
$500,000
Easement Trail
Campen Creek
Corridor Loop
Columbia River Trail
(5,000 feet). Does not include Campen Creek
crossing.
Linkages connecting Park land including street
sidewalks
Improved path surface and trail amenities from
the dike west through the Port zone
Subtotal Trail Improvements
$1,000,000
$250,000
$1,750,000
Total
1.
Notes on the CIP Projects List: Hathaway Park improvements are partially funded.
6 -Year Funding Strategy: Acquisition and Development Scenarios
In 2006, Moore Iacofano Goltsman Inc. outlined a 6-year financial strategy in the original
version of the Comprehensive Parks Plan. While the 2006 numbers calculated an
optimistic financial picture, the economic and financial outlook needs to be updated with
more recent 2010 economic and revenue forecasting estimates.
For accurate estimates regarding policy development and implementation of this plan,
there are three estimated scenarios that would allow the Parks Department to fulfill more
or less of this Parks Comprehensive Plan, depending on numerous factors. These
acquisition and development scenarios, along with the Park Department achievable goals
for each funding level as of July 2010, are outlined below. These projects and figures
were reviewed and updated in April 2013:
Scenario A: Strong City Support / Strong Revenue Growth
Revenue Forecast / Generation (Per Year)
Park Impact Fees Estimated Growth:
$100,000
General Fund Allocation:
$100,000
Current PIF Balance:
$572,000
Grant Monies Estimate:
$100,000
Donations
$10,000
2010 Ending Fund Balance / REET Dist.
$600,000
Total Revenue Generated/Allocated for Park
Development
Goals Achievable with Scenario A:
 Development of Hartwood Park
 Acquisition and design of CP-3
 Development of Columbia Trail
75 | P a g e
Total Revenue Generated
(Over 6 years)
$600,000
$600,000
$572,000
$600,000
$60,000
$600,000
$3,032,000
Summary of Scenario A: Scenario A is the highest level of foreseeable involvement by
the City and other revenue generating sources for park development. With this scenario in
place, the Parks Department could develop and implement a significant amount of park
improvements over the course of 6 years. This option would be most beneficial to the
citizens of Washougal, and would give local residents more opportunities to enjoy and
experience local parks and recreation. This scenario demonstrates a strong investment in
Washougal’s Park, trail, and recreation future.
Scenario B: City Support / Average Revenue Growth
Revenue Forecast / Generation (Per Year)
Park Impact Fees Estimated Growth:
$100,000
General Fund Allocation:
$50,000
Current PIF Balance:
$572,000
Grant Monies Estimate:
$50,000
Donations
$5,000
2010 Ending Fund Balance / REET Dist.
$300,000
Total Revenue Generated/Allocated for Park
Development
Total Revenue Generated
(Over 6 years)
$600,000
$300,000
$572,000
$300,000
$30,000
$300,000
$2,102,000
Goals Achievable with Scenario B:
 Development of Hartwood Park
 Acquisition, design, and development of the Sandy Swimming Hole
addition.
 Design and construction of Steamboat Landing accessibility
 Development of Columbia Trail
Summary of Scenario B: Scenario B combines a lower General Fund allocation of Park
development funds alongside more modest PIF growth estimates. This scenario also
scales down grant monies, as there are less matching funds to match fewer grants
received. Similarly, there are fewer donations as there are fewer projects to fund. This is a
compromise scenario between the extremes of zero City financial involvement and robust
General Fund allocation with implementation of the Parks Comprehensive Plan. While
allowing for the acquisition and development of new parks, some of the larger-scale
projects would not have enough resources to be completed within the 6 year forecast.
This scenario reflects a middle-of-the-road compromise that would keep Washougal Park
Development moving forward.
76 | P a g e
Scenario C: No City Support / Slow Revenue Growth
Revenue Forecast / Generation (Per Year)
Park Impact Fees Estimated Growth:
$66,667
General Fund Allocation:
$0
Current PIF Balance:
$572,000
Grant Monies Estimate:
$25,000
Donations
$5,000
2010 Ending Fund Balance / REET Dist.
$300,000
Total Revenue Generated/Allocated for Park
Development
Total Revenue Generated
(Over 6 years)
$400,000
$0
$572,000
$150,000
$30,000
$300,000
$1,452,000
Goals Achievable with Scenario C:
 Development of Hartwood Park
 Acquisition and design of the Sandy Swimming Hole addition.
 Development of Columbia Trail
Summary of Scenario C: Scenario C is the most devastating to Washougal park
development. It is an austerity measure that combines no financial support from the City
with a very slow growing economy, thereby limiting building and lowering impact fees
brought in. This plan would put at risk the goals established in the Parks Comprehensive
Plan to meet the needs and expectations of the community.
Conclusion:
These scenarios allow flexibility for the City of Washougal to weigh the benefits and
consequences of pursuing different policy decisions during periods of varying economic
growth. These financial scenarios should be updated every few years.
77 | P a g e
APPENDICES
78 | P a g e
Appendix A
Public Park Sports Facility Inventory
Below is a list of City owned and maintained sports fields and facilities. This information
is up to date as of April 2013.
Field Type
Location
Ownership
Softball/multi-use
50/70 baseball/multiuse
Softball (field #1)
Baseball (field #2)
T-Ball Fields
Basketball Court
Hamllik Park
Hathaway Park
City
City
# of
Fields
1
1
City
2
Soccer Fields
George J. Schmid Memorial
Fields
Hathaway Park
Elizabeth Park
Hathaway Park
Angelo Park
1
0.5
0.5
1
Tennis Courts
Hathaway Park
City
City
City
City Lease
City
79 | P a g e
2
Appendix B
Design Guidelines
In this section, design and development guidelines are provided for:
 Neighborhood Parks;
 Community Parks;
 Special Use Areas;
 Waterfront Parks; and
 Natural Park
 Open Space
The guidelines provide information about size, layout, recommended amenities, and other
park planning and development issues. Guidelines for parks are organized as follows:
Description: A definition is presented to describe the park type.
Land Use and Site Selection Guidelines: Criteria to consider include location, site size,
and site access guidelines.
Amenities to Provide: These amenities should be provided in every new park in this
category.
Amenities to Consider: These elements are appropriate for the park classification and
should be considered during the master planning and design process.
Amenities to Avoid: These elements are not compatible with the park classification.
NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS
Neighborhood parks are a combination playground and park, designed primarily for nonsupervised, non-organized, recreation activities. They are generally small in size and
intended to serve nearby residents, with a service area of approximately one-half mile
radius. Typically, facilities found in a neighborhood park include a children’s
playground, picnic areas, pathways, open grass areas for passive use, outdoor basketball
courts, and multi-use sport fields for soccer, softball, and baseball. Size generally ranges
between 1 and 5 acres.
Land Use and Site Selection Guidelines
Size:
Under most conditions, new neighborhood parks should be no smaller than about two
acres in size, with the maximum developed area of 5 acres or less. At least 50% of the
site should be flat and usable, providing space for both active and passive uses.
80 | P a g e
Location:
The site should be reasonably central to the neighborhood it is intended to serve. Walking
or bicycling distance to the park should not exceed one-half mile from the neighborhood.
The site should be visible from adjoining streets to promote safety.
Access:
Access to the site should be via a local residential street.
The park should front a public street on at least three sides and have at least 200 feet of
frontage along each street.
Access routes should minimize physical barriers, such as highways and water bodies, and
the crossing of major arterials.
If located on a busy street, the site design may need to include buffers or barriers to
reduce vehicular hazards.
If residential uses abut the park site, additional access points from the adjoining
neighborhood should provided. These should be at least 25 feet wide.
Amenities to Provide:






Site identification signage
Appropriate site furnishings (picnic tables, benches, bike racks, drinking
fountains, trash receptacles, etc.) for the intended scale and use of the park
Open turf area for unstructured play
General landscape improvements (including tree planting)
Playground equipment for tot and youth
Accessible pathway connecting park elements
Amenities to Consider









Small picnic shelter and barbecue
Basketball court (full or half court)
Interpretive signage or art displays
Natural Area (if present on site)
Multi-purpose sports fields
Other neighborhood compatible sports facilities
Skate features
Community gardens
Permanent restrooms determined by volume of visitors, nature of park attraction,
and request
Amenities to Avoid
81 | P a g e

Off-street parking, except in unique circumstances
COMMUNITY PARKS
Description
Community parks are planned to provide active and structured recreation opportunities,
as well as passive and non-organized opportunities for individual and family activities.
Community parks generally include facilities that attract people from a larger geographic
area and require more support facilities, such as parking and restrooms. Community parks
often have sport fields or similar facilities as the central focus of the park. Their service
area is roughly a 1-2 mile radius. Size ranges from 5 acres to 20+ acres, with an optimal
size of at least 10 to 15 acres.
Land Use and Site Selection Guidelines:
Size:
Community parks should average about 25 acres in size, with 30-40 acres preferred. If
limited sites are available, the minimum size for a community park should be 15 acres,
not including reservoirs and other infrastructure. At least two-thirds of the site should be
available for active recreation use. Adequate buffers should separate active use areas
from nearby homes.
Location:
The site should be reasonably central to the area of the community it is intended to serve.
Walking or bicycling distance to the park should not exceed one to one and a half miles
from the areas the park is intended to serve.
The site should front a public street.
Access:
Access to the site should be via a collector or arterial street.
Amenities to Provide:







Site identification signage
Appropriate site furnishings (picnic tables, benches, bike racks, drinking
fountains, trash receptacles, etc.) for the intended scale and use of the park
Open turf area for unstructured play
General landscaping improvements (including tree planting)
Playground equipment for tot and youth
Accessible pathway connecting park elements
Picnic Shelters and barbecues
82 | P a g e



Designated sports fields for scheduled baseball, softball, and soccer. Fields may
be in complexes within the park
Permanent restrooms
Off-street parking, approximately 5 spaces per acre of developed park area
Amenities to Consider
















Basketball courts
Tennis courts
Volleyball courts
Other sporting facilities (horseshoe pits, lawn bowling, croquet, bocce, etc.)
Group picnic facilities (available for rentals) – accommodating groups of 50+
Field lighting
Community scale skate park
Spray-ground
Off-leash dog area
Community gardens
Interpretive signage or art displays
Natural areas
Indoor recreation centers or facilities
Shrub and landscaping beds
Off-street parking for athletic fields. If scheduled fields are provided, consider
providing 50 spaces per field
Storage, maintenance, or utility buildings: If visible, these should be
architecturally compatible with other park elements. Any exterior work areas
should be screened from view by a solid fence or wall (not chain link or slatted
chain link) and landscaping
Amenities to Avoid

Regional-scale facilities
SPECIAL USE AREAS
Definition:
Special use areas are miscellaneous park lands or stand-alone recreation sites designed to
support a specific, specialized use. Some of the facilities in this classification are sports
field complexes, community centers, community gardens, aquatic centers, or sites
occupied by buildings. Specialized facilities may also be provided within a park of
another classification.
It is recommended that the City generally seek to locate any specialized facilities in the
planned community parks. This recommendation should not preclude the City from
83 | P a g e
evaluating and taking advantage of any unforeseen unique opportunities that may arise in
the future.
If special use areas are added to house specialized facilities, the guidelines, criteria, and
standards below should be followed.
Land Use and Site Selection Guidelines:
Size:
Appropriate size depends on the intended use, but the size should be adequate to
accommodate the special use and any necessary support facilities.
Access:
Access should be provided via a collector or arterial street.
A feasibility study for the special use will determine any locational criteria, which may
vary depending on the use.
Amenities to Provide:








Site identification signage
Appropriate sign furnishings (picnic tables, benches, bike racks, drinking
fountains, trash receptacles, etc.) for the intended scale and use of the park
Open turf area for unstructured play
General landscaping improvements (including tree planting)
Special use facility
Permanent restrooms
On-street or off-street parking to accommodate the planned use of the site
Accessible pathway connecting site elements
Amenities to Consider:


Amenities compatible with or that support the primary special use, such as the
following:
o Playground equipment or compatible creative play environment
o Open turf area for unstructured play
o Courts for basketball, volleyball, or tennis if compatible with special use
and space permits
o Sports facilities (disc golf, bocce, horseshoe pits, etc.)
o Looped pathway system
o Picnic shelters
o Water playground or water features
o Natural area
Interpretive signage or art displays appropriate for the special use.
Amenities to Avoid:
84 | P a g e

Uses that conflict with the special use on the site
WATERFRONT PARKS
Description:
Waterfront parks are distinguished by their function of providing access to large bodies
of water such as rivers and lakes. These parks are generally designed to support
enjoyment of active and passive water-related activities, such as swimming, fishing,
boating, and bird or wildlife viewing. Facilities often include boat launches, docks,
viewpoints, picnic areas, trails, and pathways. While other types of parks may contain
river, lakes, or waterfront as part of a range of amenities, the primary purpose of
waterfront parks is to provide water access.
Land Use and Site Selection Guidelines:
Size:
Waterfront parks should be adjacent to a water body. The size depends on the intended
use of the site, but should be adequate to accommodate the desired use and necessary
support facilities.
Access:
Where feasible, access should be provided from a public street to the waterfront park.
Amenities to Provide:



Site identification signage
Appropriate sign furnishings (picnic tables, benches, bike racks, drinking
fountains, trash receptacles, etc.) for the intended scale and use of the park
Accessible pathway connecting site elements
Amenities to Consider:










Boat launches (motorized or non-motorized)
Docks
Boardwalks
Beach Improvements
Fishing Piers
Small picnic shelter and barbecues
General landscape improvements (including tree planting)
Permanent or portable restrooms
On-street or off-street parking to accommodate the planned use of the site
Water oriented special uses (e.g., whitewater park)
85 | P a g e




Interpretive features
Natural area (if present on site)
Interpretive signage or art displays appropriate for the water front park
Non-water-oriented supporting amenities if site size permits, such as the
following:
o Playground equipment
o Open turf area for unstructured play
o Courts for basketball, volleyball, or tennis if compatible with space
permits
o Sports facilities (disc golf, bocce, horseshoe pits, etc.)
Amenities to Avoid:

Uses that conflict with primary water orientation of the site
NATURAL PARKS
Description:
Natural parks are undeveloped lands primarily left in a natural state with passive
recreation use as a secondary objective. This type of land often includes wetlands or steep
hillsides. In some cases, environmentally sensitive areas include wildlife habitats, stream
and creek corridors, or unique and/or endangered plant species. Frequently, Natural Parks
possess restrictions on the deed or plat that govern perpetual use of the property. Natural
Parks may serve as trail corridors; however, structures such as playgrounds, pavilions and
restrooms are not typically allowed uses.
Land Use and Site Selection Guidelines:
Size:
Site size should be determined based on natural park needs, with adequate protection
provided for the resource.
Access:
Where feasible, public access and the use of natural open space areas should be
encouraged through trails and other features, but environmentally sensitive areas should
be protected from overuse.
Amenities to Provide:



Site identification signage
Appropriate site furnishings (picnic tables, benches, bike racks, trash receptacles,
etc.) for the intended scale and use of the park
Interpretive signage
86 | P a g e

On-street or off-street parking; amount is dependent on facilities provided in the
natural area
Amenities to Consider:






Trail and pathway system
Trailhead or entry kiosk
Viewpoints or viewing blinds
Informal interpretive or educational facilities or classrooms (indoor or outdoor)
Amenities provided should be limited to the numbers and types of visitors the
area can accommodate, while retaining its resource value, natural character, and
the intended level of solitude.
Restoration of natural resources
Amenities to Avoid:





Turf areas
Ornamental plantings
Shelters or structures
Seasonal or permanent restrooms
Active use facilities (sports fields, paved courts, etc.)
UNDEVELOPED OPEN SPACE
Description:
Undeveloped Open Space is land throughout the city which may be designated on
subdivision plats as “open space.” The City of Washougal owns several such parcels that
were dedicated through the platting process, although there are several properties within
the city limits still owned and managed by Home Owners Associations (HOA) or
developers. Properties owned by HOA’s or developers are considered private property
and not open for public use. Undeveloped Open Space often includes wetlands, steep
hillsides, or other similar features. In some cases, environmentally sensitive areas are
considered as open space and can include wildlife habitats, stream and creek corridors, or
unique and/or endangered plant species. While adhering to the requirements and
procedures of city and state laws pertaining to “critical lands,” open space areas may
serve as sites for passive recreation, such as trail corridors or wildlife observation. It is in
the interest of the city to remain alert to how private open space may enhance city assets
and recreation goals. For example, a private HOA land may sit between city properties,
making the acquisition attractive for trail corridor connectivity. Considering these
properties are not maintained to park standards, often times the site conditions leave room
for improvement. Undeveloped, city-owned open spaces may provide opportunities for
rehabilitation. Such restoration includes removal and continued control of invasive
species and replanting these areas with native plant species. Grants and the
87 | P a g e
implementation of “mitigation banking” supply funding vehicles for restoring neglected
properties back to native habitat. Community volunteers often provide necessary labor to
manage larger scaled projects. Refer to parcel plat for maintenance and development.
Once the city begins to develop such “undeveloped open space” with trails that bring the
public in to the space; conversion from “undeveloped open space” to “natural park” is a
progressive step. Depending on the site, such properties may also qualify for
“neighborhood parks” or “community parks”.
Land Use and Site Selection Guidelines:
Size:
The size of these properties is typically determined by development and “critical lands”.
Access:
Access should not be forbidden; however, by nature of the property, it will be limited.
Amenities to Provide:

Weed management
Amenities to Consider:




Trail and pathway system
Development into other uses depending on plat notes
Plat amendment to develop the property
Restoration of natural resources
Amenities to Avoid:

All development, trail construction, and ground disturbing activities prior to plat
consultation and/or amendment.
88 | P a g e
Appendix C
Review of Potential Funding Sources
The following are possible funding sources for acquiring, developing and
maintaining parks and other recreational areas in the city of Washougal.
Local Funding Sources:
General Fund
This is the City’s primary source for operating
revenue. Most of this revenue comes from taxes
levied on property and the sale of merchandise
within the City’s boundaries.
General
Obligation
Bond
There are two versions of the GO Bond:
Limited Tax GO Bond: Paid from the City’s
General Fund and subject to the City’s Legal Debt
Limit.
Unlimited Tax GO Bond: Paid from a special
excess tax levy approved by 60% or more of the
voters.
*The money may only be used for capital
improvements.
These bonds are sold and paid for from the revenue
produced from the operation of a facility. The City
currently does not have any recreational facilities
funded in this manner.
The donation of labor, land, or cash by service
agencies, private groups or individuals is a popular
way to raise small amounts of money for specific
projects. One common example is a service club,
such as Kiwanis, Lions or Rotary, funding
playground improvements.
If the City has an excess parcel of land with some
development value, it could be traded for private
land more suitable. There is currently no specific
state law pertaining to these types of transactions,
other than RCW 35.94.040 (which is specifically
property sought to be used for public utility
purposes).
Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) is a tax levied on
all real estate sales and is levied against the full
value of the property. Washougal is allowed under
the statutes to levy 0.5% in addition to the State of
Washington tax. These funds can only be used for
capital projects identified in the Capital Facilities
Plan element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
Revenue
Bonds
Donations
Exchange of
Property
Real Estate
Excise Tax
(REET)
89 | P a g e
Joint Public /
Private
Partnership
Lifetime
Estates
Park Impact
Fees
Certificates of
Participation
Exactions
This concept has become increasingly popular for
park and recreation agencies. The basic approach is
for a public agency to enter into a working
agreement with a private corporation to help fund,
build, and/or operate a public facility. Generally,
the three primary incentives a public agency can
offer are free land to place a facility (usually a park
or other parcel of public land), certain tax
advantages, and access to the facility. While the
public agency may have to give up certain
responsibilities or control, it is one way of
obtaining public facilities at a lower cost.
This is an agreement between the City and a land
owner, where the City acquires the property but
gives the owner the right to live on the site after the
property transfer.
Park Impact Fees are fees imposed on new
development to pay for capital projects required to
accommodate the impacts of development on the
City’s infrastructure.
This is a lease-purchase approach where the City
sells Certificates of Participation (COPs) to a
lending institution. The City then pays the load off
from revenue produced by the facility or from its
general operating budget. The lending institution
holds title to the property until the COPs are
repaid. This procedure does not require a vote of
the public.
Costs of necessary public improvements are passed
onto the adjacent landowners through the
development agreement process.
Public / Government Grant Programs:
The primary source of park and recreation grant funding in the State of Washington is the
Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation (IAC). The IAC is responsible for
administering a wide variety of public funds, and also provides technical assistance,
policy development and prepares statewide plans on trails, boating facilities, habitat
preservation and off-road vehicles. There are some additional grants available through
other programs.
Boating Facilities Program
90 | P a g e
This grant program is funded by boaters’ gasoline
National Recreational Trail
Program
Land and Water
Conservation Fund
Non-highway & Off-Road
Vehicle Activities Program
Washington Wildlife and
Recreation Program
91 | P a g e
taxes and administered by the IAC. Projects eligible
under this program include acquisition,
development, planning and renovation projects
associated with launching ramps, transient
moorage, and upland support facilities. IAC
allocates up to $200,000 for planning projects and
up to $1,000,000 for acquisition, development or
projects that combine planning with acquisition or
development. Grants are distributed on an annual
basis and require a minimum of 25 percent
matching funds by a local agency.
This program is funded from federal gasoline taxes
attributed to recreation on non-gasoline tax
supported roads and administered by the IAC.
Grants fund maintenance and rehabilitation of
recreational trails that provide a “backcountry
experience” and for safety and environmental
protection programs. 20 percent of the funding for a
project must come from the application sponsor in
the form of cash, bond or an approved contribution
of labor and/or materials. IAC contributions to
education programs will be between $5,000 and
$10,000 with other projects funded up to $50,000.
This is a federal grant program that receives its
money from offshore oil leases. The money is
distributed through the National Park Service and is
administered locally by the IAC. In the past, this
was one of the major sources of grant money for
local agencies. In the 1990s, funding at the federal
level was severely cut, but in recent times more
money has become available. In the current
proposed federal budget, a small amount of money
has been allocated to this program. The funds can
be used for acquisition and development of outdoor
facilities and requires a 50% match.
IAC administered grants in this program are funded
by off-road vehicle (ORV) gasoline tax and a small
portion of ORV permits. Funds can be used for
acquisition, development maintenance and
management of opportunities for ORVs, hikers,
equestrians, bicyclists, and other users of nonhighway roads. Maximum grant amounts are
between $50,000 and $100,000, depending on the
type of project.
This program is administered by the IAC. There are
two accounts under this program: 1) Habitat
Youth Athletic Fund
Conservation Futures Open
Space Program
Aquatic Land Enhancement
Account
Community Development
Block Grants (CDBG)
92 | P a g e
Conservation; and 2) Outdoor Recreation. Projects
eligible under this program include acquisition and
development of parks, water access sites, trails,
critical wildlife habitat, natural areas, and urban
wildlife habitat. Applicants must provide a
minimum of a 50 percent non-IAC match. Local
park projects have maximum requests of $300,000
for development and $500,000 for acquisition costs.
There are no maximum request levels in the
following categories: urban wildlife habitat, trails,
and water access.
The Youth Athletic Fund is a grant program
designed to provide funding for new, improved,
and better maintained outdoor athletic facilities
serving youth and communities. This program was
established by State Referendum (RCW
79A.25.800-830) as part of the State Referendum
48, which provided funding for the Seattle
Seahawks Stadium. The program is administered
by the IAC and applicants must provide matching
funds of at least 50 percent. The grant amounts vary
by use from a minimum of $5,000 for maintaining
existing facilities, to a maximum of $150,000 for
developing new facilities.
A land acquisition program intended to preserve
and enhance environmentally sensitive properties.
Projects can be submitted by the County, Cities,
and Towns for review by a citizen based advisory
committee. The Board of Clark County
Commissioners makes final funding decisions
based on the prioritization of this committee. The
program is funded by a 6-1/4 cent per thousand
dollar of property tax assessment in Clark County.
This program is administered by the IAC and
supports the purchase, improvement, or protection
of and access to aquatic lands for public purposes.
Grant applications are reviewed once every two
years for this program. Applicants must provide a
minimum of a 50 percent match.
These grants from the Federal Department of
Housing and Urban Development are available for
a wide variety of projects. Most are used for
projects in lower income areas of the community
because of funding rules. Grants can cover up to
100% of project costs. Since 1985, Clark County
has administered over one million dollars annually
Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation
Equity Act – A Legacy for
Users (SAFETEA-LU)
U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFW)
through a competitive proposal process.
Through the years, Washington has received
considerable revenue for trail-related projects from
this source. Originally called the Intermodal
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA),
this 6-year program funded a wide variety of
transportation related projects. In 1998, it was
reauthorized for another 6 years under the name
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century
(TEA-21). The Act was reauthorized in 2005 under
the name SAFETEA-LU, with similar provisions to
ISTEA and TEA-21. In addition to bicycle,
pedestrian, and trail-related projects, these funds
can generally be used for landscape and amenity
improvements related to trail and transportation
projects. In Washington, most trails-related funds
are administered by the IAC under the National
Recreational Trail Program (described above).
USFW may provide technical assistance and
administer funding for projects related to water
quality improvement through debris and habitat /
vegetation management, watershed management
and stream bank erosion, and sediment deposition
projects.
Other Potential Sources:
Partnerships
Public Land Trusts
Private Grants and Foundations
93 | P a g e
The City could consider developing
partnerships with other jurisdictions,
agencies, or non-profit service providers to
implement projects identified in the plan.
Some potential partners include the
YMCA, Boys and Girls Club, private sport
groups, neighborhood organizations, Clark
County, and the City of Camas.
Private land trusts, such as the Trust for
Public Land, Inc. and the Nature
Conservancy, will acquire and hold land
for eventual acquisition by a public agency.
Private grants and foundations provide
money for a wide range of projects,
targeted to the foundation’s specific
mission. A number of foundations do not
provide grants to governments, and grants
are difficult to find and equally difficult to
secure because of the open competition.
Appendix D
Results of the Park Comprehensive Plan Update Public Survey
Taken In 2010
QUESTION 1: “My age is:” (245 total entries) [1-1; 2-26; 3-47; 4-52; 5-63; 6-56]
Results of those who participated in the survey by age bracket:






18-24 year olds: 0.4%
25-34 year olds: 10.6%
35-44 year olds: 19.2 %
45-54 year olds: 21.2%
55-64 year olds: 25.7%
65+ year olds: 22.9%
QUESTION 2: “What is your gender?” (246 total entries) [1-105; 2-141]
Results of those who participated in the survey by gender type:


Male: 42.7%
Female: 57.3%
QUESTION 3: “How long have you lived in Washougal?”
(246 total entries) [1-40; 2-63; 3-42; 4-41; 5-60]
Results of those who participated in the survey by length of residency:





3 years or less:
4-6 years:
7-10 years:
11-19 years:
20+ years:
16.3%
25.6%
17.1%
16.7%
24.4%
QUESTION 4: “Where do you live? Please check the most accurate response.”
(241 total entries) [1-88; 2-60; 3-93]
Results of those who participated in the survey by location:



North of the Washougal River:
South of the Washougal River:
East of 32nd Street:
94 | P a g e
36.5%
24.9%
38.6%
QUESTION 5: “What are the primary reasons you use parks in Washougal? Please
check your top 2 choices.”
(419 Total Entries) [1-17; 2-27; 3-16; 4-60; 5-127; 6-12; 7-50; 8-112]
Results in Order of Respondent Preference:
5 – “Walk or Bike for Exercise”
(127) [30.3%]
8 – “Enjoy the outdoors or nature”
(112) [26.7%]
4 – “Picnic and general leisure activities” (60) [14.3%]
7 – “Participate in family activities”
(50) [11.9%]
2 – “Use a specific facility at a park”
1 – “Don’t use parks”
3 – “Play Sports”
6 – “Meet Friends”
(27)
(17)
(16)
(12)
[6.4%]
[4.1%]
[3.8%]
[2.9%]
QUESTION 6: “On a scale of 1-5, with #1 being poor and #5 being excellent, please
rate parks and facilities in Washougal in EACH of the following categories: Upkeep
of grass and lawns; Cleanliness and condition of restrooms; Litter free parks,
playgrounds, picnic areas, etc.; Condition of park amenities (sport fields,
playground, picnic shelter, parking lots, etc)”
6A: “Upkeep of grass and lawns:” (219 total entries) [1-3; 2-7; 3-61; 4-81; 5-67]
Average Satisfaction: 3.92 (C+)
6B: “Cleanliness and condition of restrooms:” (193 total entries) [1-11; 2-16; 3-69; 471; 5-26]
Average Satisfaction: 3.44 (D+)
6C: “Litter free parks, playgrounds, picnic areas, etc.” (215 total entries) [1-7; 2-15;
3-43; 4-111; 5-39]
Average Satisfaction: 3.74 (C)
6D: “Condition of park amenities (sport fields, playground, picnic shelter, parking
lots, etc)” (212 total entries) [1-2; 2-18; 3-53; 4-101; 5-38]
Average Satisfaction: 3.73 (C)
95 | P a g e
QUESTION 7: “What type of park is most needed in Washougal? Please check your
top 2 choices.” (419 Total Entries) [1-49; 2-85; 3-75; 4-10; 5-87; 6-81; 7-32]
Results in Order of Respondent Preference:
5 – “Parks with river, creek, or water frontage”
2 – “Large multi-use parks that serve the whole community”
6 – “Linear trail corridors”
3 – “Natural Areas”
1 – “Small parks in my neighborhood”
7 – “No additional parks or natural areas are needed”
4 – “A park consisting primarily of sports fields”
20.8%
20.3%
19.3%
17.9%
11.7%
7.6%
2.4%
QUESTION 8: “If you seldom use the parks in Washougal, what are your reasons?
Please check your top two choices.”
(202 Total Entries) [1-35; 2-18; 3-28; 4-9; 5-32; 6-2; 7-37; 8-29; 9-12]
Results in Order of Respondent Preference:
7 – “Don’t know where they are”
1 – “Not interested / No time”
5 – “Too far away; not conveniently located”
8 – “Don’t know what’s available”
3 – “Lack of facilities”
2 – “Feel unsafe”
9 – “Too crowded”
4 – “Poorly maintained”
6 – “Do not have transportation”
18.3%
17.3%
15.8%
14.3%
13.8%
8.9%
5.9%
4.4%
0.9%
QUESTION 9: “How frequently do you visit the following Washougal parks in
season? For each row, check the column that best describes how often you visit that
park.”
Park:
Users:
Hathaway
Steamboat
Sandy
Reflection
Hamllik
Elizabeth
180
178
103
124
30
26
96 | P a g e
NonUsers
59
61
136
115
209
213
Rare Use
95
89
68
74
24
19
Seldom
Use
59
89
26
38
6
3
Frequent
Use
26
21
9
12
0
4
% who use
(respondents)
75.3%
74.4%
43.0%
51.8%
12.5%
10.8%
Angelo
River B.
Beaver
Kerr
Eldridge
Campen
Oak Tree
Dog Park
22
36
20
37
20
28
28
60
217
203
219
202
219
211
211
179
19
28
16
26
17
19
15
16
3
7
4
9
3
8
9
25
0
1
0
2
0
1
4
18
9.2%
15.0%
8.3%
15.4%
8.3%
11.7%
11.7%
25.1%
QUESTION 10: “What types of pathways or trails are most needed in Washougal?
Please check your top 2 choices.”
(411 Total Entries) [1-54; 2-107; 3-121; 4-10; 5-88; 6-6; 7-25]
Results in Order of Respondent Preference:
3 – Trails reserved for walking and hiking
2 – Off-street paved trails for bicycling, walking, rollerblading, etc.
5 – Multiple use trails shared by bikers, walkers, and equestrian users
1 – On-street commuter bike lanes
7 – Don’t need more trails
4 – Unpaved mountain bike trails
6 – Equestrian Trails
29.4%
26.0%
21.4%
13.1%
6.0%
2.4%
1.4%
QUESTION 11: “What type of trails/pathways should have the highest priority in
Washougal? Please check your top 2 choices.”
(424 Total Entries) [1-94; 2-81; 3-45; 4-46; 5-81; 6-55; 7-22]
Results in Order of Respondent Preference:
1 – Trails that link neighborhoods with community destinations
2 – Nature Trails
5 – Paved trails for walking, biking, etc.
6 – Trails that link with other existing trails
4 – Exercise Trails
3 – Trails that extend long distances (5+ miles)
7 – Don’t need additional trails
QUESTION 12: “What are the primary reasons to develop more trails in
Washougal? Please check your top 2 choices.”
(441Total Entries) [1-75; 2-70; 3-25; 4-145; 5-102; 6-24]
Results in Order of Respondent Preference:
97 | P a g e
22.1%
19.1%
19.1%
12.9%
10.8%
10.6%
5.1%
4 – Exercise
5 – Recreation
1 – Increase non-motorized transportation options
2 – Nature trails
3 – Improve children’s access to school
6 – No additional trails are needed
32.8%
23.1%
17.0%
15.8%
5.6%
5.4%
QUESTION 13: “Do you own a dog?” (240 Total entries) [1-105; 2-135]


Yes:
No:
43.7%
56.2%
QUESTION 14: “What should the City of Washougal do in the event of losing the
land lease for the Stevenson Off-Leash Dog Park?” (226 Total entries) [1-37; 2-130;
3-59]
Results in Order of Respondent Preference:
2 – Partner with Camas to build a combined park utilizing
both agencies resources
3 – Seek out property inside the Washougal city limits and
develop a park separate from Camas
1 – Do not develop another dog park in the future
57.5%
26.1%
16.3%
QUESTION 15: “How should Washougal improve its park and recreation services?
Please check your top 2 choices.”
(420 Total Entries) [1-69; 2-26; 3-54; 4-23; 5-32; 6-82; 7-66; 8-68]
Results in Order of Respondent Preference:
6 – Develop more trails
1 – Upgrade existing parks
8 – Add special facilities (pools, water playgrounds, etc.)
7 – Add indoor facilities (gyms, recreation center, etc.)
3 – Acquire natural areas/open space
5 – Provide recreation programs
2 – Acquire and develop new parks
4 – Improve maintenance
19.5%
16.4%
16.1%
15.7%
12.8%
7.6%
6.1%
5.4%
QUESTION 16: “If funding were available, which of the following facilities should
have the highest priorities in Washougal? Please check your top 2 choices.”
(439 Total Entries) [1-36; 2-60; 3-51; 4-19; 5-108; 6-24; 7-29; 8-23; 9-79; 10-10]
98 | P a g e
Results in Order of Respondent Preference:
5 – A citywide trail system
9 – More river access for recreation, swimming, boating
2 – Indoor space for recreation activities
3 – Water playgrounds
1 – Sport fields (e.g., baseball, softball, soccer, rugby)
7 – Community gardens
6 – Off-leash dog area
8 – More outdoor courts for basketball, volleyball, or tennis
4 – More picnic areas
10- Other
24.6%
17.9%
13.6%
11.6%
10.4%
6.6%
5.4%
5.2%
4.3%
2.2%
Other Comments: “swimming pool”; "Equestrian"; "Other boat launch for boats up to
18'"; "Competition Lap Pool"; "Senior Center"; "New library"; "Bike lanes/trails";
"Community Sports Building."; "With Vancouver people using our boat ramp we need
more parking or more ramps!"; "playground"; "outdoor theater or bike trails”;
"Infrastructure improvement and maintenance”; "Skatepark"; "develop walking trail
along Washougal River"; "Firstenberg (but on a smaller scale)” ; "upgrade boat
launches"; "We're fine"; "open space"; "bike lanes on country roads."
QUESTION 17: “Should Washougal seek increased access to the Washougal and
Columbia Rivers? Please check one choice.”
(259 Total entries – some double and triple) [1-95; 2-58; 3-54; 4-52]
Results in Order of Respondent Preference:
1 – Yes, for active use (swimming, boating, fishing, etc.)
2 – Yes, for passive recreation opportunities (viewpoints, nature
walking, etc.)
3 – Yes, for transportation (kayaking, canoeing, riverfront trails, etc.)
4 – No additional access is needed
36.6%
22.3%
20.8%
20.0%
QUESTION 18: “If you answered yes [to Question 17], what facilities would you
like to see? Please check all that apply.”
(550 Total Entries) [1-47; 2-77; 3-126; 4-80; 5-70; 6-82; 7-66; 8-2]
Results in Order of Respondent Preference:
3 – Trails
6 – Swimming access points
4 – Viewpoints
2 – Canoe/Kayak access points
99 | P a g e
22.9%
14.9%
14.5%
14.0%
5 – Fishing access points
7 – Undisturbed natural area
1 – Boat ramp
8 – Other
12.7%
12.0%
8.5%
0.3%
QUESTION 19: “How should future natural areas be used? Please check one
choice.” (253 Total Entries) [1-13; 2-72; 3-28; 4-70; 5-70]
Results in Order of Respondent Preference:
2 – Limited public use (preserved for wildlife habitat)
28.4%
4 – Combination of the above [#1,2,3]
27.6%
5 – Depends on the site
27.6%
3 – Semi-active recreational use (picnicking, playgrounds, etc.)
11.0%
1 – No public use (preserved for wildlife habitat)
5.1%
QUESTION 20: “How important are each of the following areas of responsibility?
Please prioritize these areas by writing a #1 next to your highest priority, #2 next to
your second highest priority, etc.” (936 Total Entries)
Survey Choices:
Maintenance of existing parks and
facilities:
Average
Median
Mode
1.79
1
1
Acquisition of additional land for
parks, facilities, and trails:
2.68
3
3
Development of new parks and
facilities:
3.06
3
4
Preservation of open space:
2.78
3
4
NOTE: The LOWER the number, the HIGHER the priority for respondents (i.e. #1 is the
most important priority to respondents, while #4 is the least important)
QUESTION 21: “Do you travel to Camas to use park and recreation facilities or
services?” (236 Total Entries) [1-163; 2-73]


Yes:
No:
69.0%
31.0%
QUESTION 22: “If you answered yes to the above question [Q21], why did you visit
Camas? Please check all that apply. (290 Total Entries) [1-135; 2-65; 3-54; 4-36]
100 | P a g e
Results in Order of Most Frequent Reason to Visit Camas:
1 – To visit a park
2 – To swim in the pool
3 – To participate in recreational programs
4 – To use sports facilities
46.5%
22.4%
18.6%
12.4%
QUESTION 23: “Would you support partnering with Camas to provide recreation
facilities and services?” (236 Total Entries) [1-208; 2-28]


Yes:
No:
88.1%
11.8%
QUESTION 24: “Is a multi-purpose recreation center needed in Washougal?”
(245 Total Entries) [1-83; 2-138; 3-24]
Those who support the proposal:
* [Yes: 33.8%]
* [Joint Venture with Camas: 56.3%]
Those who do not support the proposal:
90.2%
9.7%
QUESTION 25: “If a recreation center were developed, who should construct and
maintain it? Please check one choice.”
(210 Total Entries) [1-39; 2-134; 3-21; 4-8; 5-8]
Results in Order of Respondent Preference:
2 – Joint venture with other agency/group
1 – Washougal
3 – Park district
4 – City should not build these
5 – Private facility
63.8%
18.5%
10.0%
3.8%
3.8%
QUESTION 26: “The City of Washougal has not offered recreation programming,
such as activities, classes, or special events. Should the city consider offering
recreation programs?” (205 Total Entries) [1-72; 2-133]


No:
Yes (w/preferences)
101 | P a g e
35.1%
64.8%
Preference Comments: "Community indoor pool"; "In most cases family ties are nonexistent, so kids are amuck. Nothing to do except problems.”; "Hawaiian Canoe Club at
Washougal Beach! Great for youths, police and fire dept. workout!"; "Gym for aerobics
classes and working out"; "Indoor sports volleyball and batting cages, etc."; "Indoor
swimming pool, ping pong"; "Arts and crafts"; "Live music at waterfront like last year.";
"Rafting/Kayak/Boating. Indoor shooting. Safety training for those things. Fly fishing
training."; "Bingo, ice cream socials, craft groups, table games, garden club."; "Organized
biking trails with guide all the way to explain nature and history."; "Annual bird
identification flora/fauna/tree identification."; "Soccer, hikes, basketball"; "Motorcycle
safety course like in Vancouver, partnership with schools for outdoor learning."; "Hiking,
bird-watching"; "Sports classes"; "Bike or Canoe Club, exercise classes."; "More family
events."; "Concerts, community, gatherings."; "Fitness, swimming, classes."; "Youth
Activities"; "We need to keep our kids busy and out of trouble."; "exercise, volleyball
leagues"; "Swimming, Dancing"; "Seniors"; "Multiuse facility that offers
swim/fitness/sport."; "Yoga, open air space events, guided nature hikes."; "Swimming,
indoor sports, indoor soccer."; "Basketball, arts and crafts, tennis, kids summer daycamp."; "Activities."; "Pool for youth area tables."; "Washougal does have this: ECCER";
"need recreational center first!"; "Activities for families and children."; "Extreme sports,
arts and culture, swim-water park."; "Wintertime child classes, art, exercising,
swimming"; "All types."; "swim lessons for all WSD kids"; "Arts and crafts, gardening
skills, exercise, dance"; "Swimming pool and Recreation Center"; "Music festival,
community classes."; "Arts / gardening/ ecology/ skate-park”; "outdoor hiking, summer
camp"; "Exercise pool for seniors, dancing classes"; "kids activities"; "summer activities
for kids"; "teach fishing classes"; "Supervised summer programs for kids"; "swimming
lessons, sailing, kids summer camp"; "Continuing education for personal enrichment;
physical fitness activities- kayaking, hiking, basket ball, etc."; "yoga"; "Summer days in
the park for kids."; "City already offers recreation programming with WSD"; "Anything
to support an active community."; "fitness classes, education classes @ rec.
opportunities."; "To get people out mingling"; "Senior activities"; "Washougal River
Swimming."
QUESTION 27: “How many times in a 30 day period do you participate in each of
these activities in Washougal or elsewhere? Please check the appropriate box for
each activity. Assume the activity is in season.”
Activity
Arts/Crafts
Baseball
Basketball
Beach Activities
Biking (BMX)
Bike(Commute)
Bike (Pleasure)
Bird-watching
Boating (Power)
102 | P a g e
1
56
14
21
76
10
9
62
40
32
2
6
4
2
20
3
9
23
17
12
3
5
3
4
8
1
3
9
4
4
4
3
1
2
3
2
1
5
6
3
5
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
17
4
Overall
72
24
31
109
17
23
101
84
55
UI
105
45
55
162
37
45
165
164
100
Boating (Sailing)
Camping (RV)
Camping (Tent)
Canoe / Kayaking
Concerts (attend)
Cultural Events
Dancing (social)
Exercise / Aerobics
Fairs and Festivals
Fishing
Football
Gardening
Golf
Hiking/Backpacking
Horseback Riding
Hunting
In-line Skating
Jogging/Running
Model Airplanes / Cars
Nature Walks
Photography
Picnicking
Playground (visit/play)
Rafting/Tubing
Reading for Pleasure
Rock Climbing
Rowing / Sculling
Skateboarding
Soccer
Softball
Swimming (beach/river)
Swimming (pool)
Target / Skeet Shooting
Tennis
Tours and Travel
Volleyball
Walking for Pleasure
Water Skiing
Wildlife Watching
Wind Surfing / Sailboarding
Other:
103 | P a g e
8
34
54
36
90
70
31
44
112
36
10
46
24
80
9
14
4
30
7
97
52
98
45
42
49
10
3
6
14
8
68
52
16
21
77
7
59
10
62
1
2
4
5
6
9
8
4
19
13
22
2
36
8
26
1
4
1
10
1
39
13
9
20
3
22
1
1
2
4
3
26
16
3
7
10
4
49
2
20
1
1
3
1
2
3
4
2
18
1
6
1
20
5
6
1
4
1
10
1
12
6
7
7
2
15
1
0
1
3
2
8
11
3
2
7
3
29
1
8
1
0
1
2
1
2
2
0
21
1
2
1
18
2
5
3
2
1
9
1
11
5
3
3
3
18
0
1
1
3
0
4
2
0
0
1
0
17
1
8
0
1
1
0
2
0
0
1
19
1
5
1
20
5
7
1
3
1
9
3
6
9
1
4
3
48
1
1
1
3
1
4
7
1
1
3
1
37
2
11
1
12
43
62
47
104
84
38
121
128
71
15
140
44
124
15
27
8
68
13
165
85
118
79
53
152
13
6
11
27
14
110
88
23
31
98
15
191
16
109
4
20
60
75
68
125
106
50
315
150
131
26
350
88
205
31
57
18
161
38
285
161
154
138
81
450
20
14
22
58
25
180
160
36
46
137
29
497
31
213
11
4
3
2
2
5
16
49
Question 27 (Continued): On the same form, circle the 5 activities you would like to
do the most. Assume that you have the time, money, and transportation to do
whichever 5 activities you want.”
Arts/Crafts
Baseball
11
1
Basketball
Beach Activities
Biking (BMX)
Bike(Commute)
3
17
2
2
Bike (Pleasure)
Bird-watching
28
6
Boating (Power)
Boating (Sailing)
Camping (RV)
Camping (Tent)
Canoe / Kayaking
Concerts (attend)
11
2
12
10
15
20
Cultural Events
Dancing (social)
11
10
Exercise / Aerobics
Fairs and Festivals
Fishing
Football
24
15
20
0
Gardening
Golf
Hiking/Backpacking
19
11
18
104 | P a g e
Jogging/Running
Model Airplanes /
Cars
Nature Walks
Photography
Picnicking
Playground
(visit/play)
Rafting/Tubing
Reading for
Pleasure
Rock Climbing
Rowing / Sculling
Skateboarding
Soccer
Softball
Swimming
(beach/river)
Swimming (pool)
Target / Skeet
Shooting
Tennis
Tours and Travel
Volleyball
Walking for
Pleasure
Water Skiing
Wildlife Watching
Wind Surfing / Sail
boarding
Other:
10
3
23
7
8
6
6
15
1
0
1
6
1
11
31
4
6
12
4
41
0
15
2
3
Appendix E
FORMATION OF A METROPOLITAN PARK DISTRICT
Note: The following language, drafted for the 2006 Parks Comprehensive Plan, reflects
an option that the City of Washougal could consider in the future, when population
numbers grow and the Washougal UGA expands. This section was not revised with the
2010 survey and language updates, and remains unchanged.
Washington permits the formation of a metropolitan park district to provide park and
recreation facilities, if the district is approved by voters. Once approved, the district can
establish a permanent tax base. Because of the subsequent taxing authority, formation of
a district is a funding mechanism worthy of exploration in Washougal. This section
reviews the legislation pertinent to metropolitan park districts, provides a projection on
potential revenue from a metropolitan park district in Washougal, and briefly reviews
advantages and disadvantages of such a district.
Legislative Requirements
The Revised Code of Washington (RCW) contains provisions on metropolitan park
districts at RCW 35.61. Formation of a district may be initiated by the local governing
body or by citizen petition. If a proposed district includes multiple jurisdictions, the
governing bodies of each jurisdiction must adopt a resolution. For example, if a district
were proposed that included City of Washougal land and unincorporated Clark County
land, both the City of Washougal and the Clark Board of Commissioners would need to
adopt a resolution submitting a ballot proposition to establish the district. If a district was
proposed that included only City of Washougal land, the Washougal City Council could
adopt a resolution submitting a ballot proposition to establish the district. A citizen
petition is the other option for district formation, but it is not reviewed in more detail.
Since this Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan was initiated by the City and its
officials, district formation by a governing body is the focus of this section and is
discussed in more detail.
When the local governing body adopts a resolution submitting the question of district
formation to the voters, the governing body must also choose a name and specify the
composition of the board of commissioners of the district. The legislation calls for a fivemember board of commissioners, and provides three options for the establishing board
members:
 Selecting the board by election
 Designating the governing body of a City or County to serve as the board; or
 Designating representatives of each jurisdiction in a district composed of multiple
jurisdictions.
If Washougal seeks establishment of a park district, members of the City Council could
be designated to serve as the board.
105 | P a g e
Metropolitan park districts have many of the same authorities as cities. In addition to
taxing authority, a metropolitan park district, like a city, has the right of eminent domain,
can incur indebtedness, and may issue revenue bonds. Park districts are also subject to the
same competitive bidding requirements as other governments.
After a district is established by public vote, the board may levy a tax on property not to
exceed a combined total of $0.75 per $1,000 of assessed value. Additional special levies
may be established, but must be submitted to the voters.
If a park district is established, Washougal would have the option of turning over its park
land to the district, or keeping ownership. The district could have its own maintenance
crews, or could contract with the City to provide park maintenance using city crews.
If a park district contains the entirety of a city, any land that is annexed to the city will
also be annexed to the park district. This means that Washougal could establish a park
district with a boundary that follows city limits, and then the district boundary would be
expanded each time the city boundary is expanded without requiring a special vote.
Potential Tax Revenue Generated by a District
In 2004, Washougal spent just under $160,000 to operate its park system, with some
additional minor capital expenditures. If a park district were established in Washougal,
the district could establish a tax rate between $0.01 and $0.75 per $1,000 in assessed
value without additional voter approval.
Table 8 shows potential revenue from two different park district tax rate scenarios.
Potential revenue is calculated using the total assessed value of $811,446,068, as listed in
Washougal’s Public Safety Bond, and two tax rate scenarios of $0.75 per $1,000 and
$0.50 per $1,000 in assessed value. Table 8 compares these tax revenue scenarios with
Washougal’s 2004 parks expenditures.
Table 8
Funding Comparison:
Metropolitan Park District and Current City Funding
$0.75 per $1,000 (Maximum Rate)
City of Washougal Parks Expenditures (Actual 2004)
Metropolitan Park District Tax Rate of $0.75 per $1,000
Potential Funding Gain
$187,523
$608,584
$421,061
$0.75 per $1,000 (Maximum Rate)
City of Washougal Parks Expenditures (Actual 2004)
Metropolitan Park District Tax Rate of $0.50 per $1,000
Potential Funding Gain
$187,523
$405,723
$218,200
106 | P a g e
While the table above does not take into account underpayment (i.e., there won’t be
100% collection of any tax), both scenarios (the maximum assessment of $0.75 per
$1,000 and the lesser assessment of $0.50 per $1,000) would generate significantly more
revenue than the City currently allocates to parks and recreation (more than 3 times and
more than 2 times as much respectively). The two scenarios shown are only a few of
many possible variations. However, any rate that is established should be sufficient to
maintain parks including preventative maintenance to protect park and facility assets, as
well as provide the recreation services the community has requested. As Appendix D
notes, the City is currently underfunding its parks maintenance compared to other cities
and is not making any capital improvements. Therefore, a tax rate for a park district
should generate more revenue than the current budget allocation.
Based on the calculations in Table 8, it appears that establishing a metropolitan park
district would allow an increase in funding for parks and recreation in Washougal. It is
important to note that as more development occurs and as assessed value increases, tax
revenue for a district would also increase.
Advantages of Establishing a Park District
There are a variety of reasons to establish a metropolitan park district. Major advantages
are briefly reviewed below.



The primary advantage of a Metropolitan Park District over a City-supported park
system is the dedicated funding for parks and recreation. When cities provide park
and recreation services, there are a number of competing priorities for General
Fund resources, including public safety. A park district has a dedicated revenue
stream that can only be used for park and recreation purposes. As Table 8 shows,
Washougal could potentially increase revenue for parks and recreation if a district
were established. A corollary advantage for the City’s overall service provision
needs is that a park district’s dedicated revenue would free up General Fund
resources currently used for parks. This “extra” revenue could be used on service
needs, including public safety, streets, sewer, and water.
A park district is responsible for only one service. This singular focus can help
keep a growing community’s parks agenda on track.
Another advantage of a district is that the tax rate for a park district means that as
a City’s assessed value grows, whether through new development, appreciation,
or annexation, the district’s revenue also grows. The metropolitan park district’s
boundary would increase as the city’s boundary increases. This means that as the
city grows, the district and its tax base would also grow, increasing revenue and
keeping up with the additional service demands of a larger population.
107 | P a g e
Disadvantages of Establishing a Park District
While there are a number of advantages, there are also some potential disadvantages of
establishing a park district:





While a park district would provide stable funding, establishment of a park
district would result in an overall increase in taxes for Washougal residents. For a
$300,000 home, the cost would be $225 annually at a rate of $0.75 per $1,000 or
$150 annually at a rate of $0.50.
A district would also be another layer of government and add an additional
service provider to the mix. While this is not in itself necessarily negative, it does
not mean that there would likely be a need for increased coordination.
Although the singular focus of a park district can be an advantage, it can also be a
disadvantage. If the district’s focus became too singular and it operated too
independently, it could lose track of community priorities. However, if
Washougal’s City Councilors served as the district’s board, there would be less
risk of that occurring.
If park and recreation services are provided by a district, there is potential for
resource conflicts in the future. Currently, Washougal is small enough that the
Council could serve a dual role as Councilors and the District Board. As the city
grows and more park and recreation services are provided, the Council may not be
able to address both roles and an independent district board may be needed. An
independent district may develop priorities that are different from the City’s
priorities, which could result in conflicts over parks planning, financial resources
such as impact fees, or operational issues.
Finally, people like parks. When communities conduct satisfaction surveys, park
and recreation services are frequently viewed more favorably than other city
services. If these services are provided by a second agency, Washougal will no
longer be the provider of popular services and will lose the public relations
opportunity that parks and recreation provides.
108 | P a g e
Map Appendices
109 | P a g e
110 | P a g e
111 | P a g e
112 | P a g e