WASHINGTON STATE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Don Hoch
Acting Director
STATE OF WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON STATE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
1111 Israel Road S.W. • P.O. Box 42650 • Olympia, WA 98504-2650 • (360) 902-8500
TDD (Telecommunications Device for the Deaf): (800) 833-6388
www.parks.state.wa.us
January 27, 2022
Item E-5: 2023-2025 Grant Requests - Requested Action
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This item asks the Washington State Parks and Recreation
Commission to approve a list of projects for which staff will seek grant funding from the
Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO). This item advances nearly all the
Commission’s strategic plan goals and is most closely aligned with: Customer Experience –
Provide exceptional recreation, cultural and interpretive opportunities that all visitors enjoy and
support.
SIGNIFICANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Recreation and Conservation
Office (RCO) is a small state agency established in 1964. The agency manages and administers
state and federal grants in 35 different categories that fund recreation, conservation, and salmon
recovery efforts statewide. They partner with federal, state, local agencies, Native American
Tribes and non-profit organizations. RCO supports the work of two boards: Recreation and
Conservation Funding Board (RCFB) and Salmon Recovery Funding Board (SRFB). State Parks
has applied in several different grant categories and been successful in receiving grant funding
through RCO since the mid-1960’s.
In past biennia, the Commission has approved the Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program
(WWRP) State Parks category project list only. Beginning last biennium, staff brought forward
all projects proposed in a variety of different grant categories administered by RCO. Staff’s
intent is to show the full extent of requested grant-funded capital projects and land acquisitions
and to better inform the Commission of potential implications and impacts on the agency’s
operating budget. This agenda item covers proposed grants with applications due in spring 2020.
Several additional grant sources administered by RCO are submitted in the fall. Those items will
be brought for Commission consideration later this year.
Importantly, opportunities typically arise during the biennium to submit for other state and
federal grants and small foundation grants. Staff believes the Commission should delegate
authority to the Director to apply for these grants as opportunities arise per current practice.
Recreation Conservation Funding Board Grant Categories
Staff has summarized below State Recreation and Conservation Funding Board grant programs
and categories for which staff proposes to submit grant requests for the 2023-25 biennium.
1Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program, WWRP
In 1989, business, political, and environmental leaders formed the Washington Wildlife and
Recreation Coalition (WWRC). This group enlisted former governors Dan Evans and Mike
Lowry as co-chairs to lead an effort to create in statute the Washington Wildlife and Recreation
Program (WWRP). Former State Parks commissioners Joan Thomas and Russ Cahill were
among the founding board members of the WWRC. Today, the WWRC consists of a coalition of
250 organizations representing conservation, business, farming, labor, and recreation interests
who advocate for state funding for the WWRP.
The WWRP provides funding for a broad range of land protection and outdoor recreation
projects, including land acquisition and development, habitat conservation, farmland
preservation, and construction of outdoor recreation facilities. The program was envisioned as a
way for the state to accomplish two goals: acquire valuable recreation and habitat lands before
they are lost to other uses; and develop recreation areas for a growing population.
By statute, the WWRP includes three accounts, Habitat Conservation Account (HCA), Outdoor
Recreation Account (ORA), and Farm and Forest Account. State Parks is eligible to apply in
several of the Outdoor Recreation and Habitat Conservation Accounts, which include twelve
grant categories for funding. The ORA and HCA each receive 45% of the total biennial WWRP
appropriation approved by the legislature, and the Farm and Forest Account receives 10% (see
Appendix 1). The categories proposed for application in the 2022 grant round are described
below.
WWRP-Outdoor Recreation Account
• State Parks Category- Thirty percent of the ORA is distributed to a State Parks category
dedicated entirely to land acquisition and development of state parks. By statute, at least forty
percent, but no more than fifty percent of funds in the State Parks category must be used for
land acquisition. State Parks is the only recipient of WWRP funding with its own dedicated
category. The WWRP State Parks category funds cannot be used for restoration or renovation
of existing facilities and infrastructure, only for acquisitions or new developments.
• Trails Category- Twenty percent of the ORA is distributed to a Trails category to provide
funding to acquire, develop, or renovate statewide, regional, and community-oriented
recreational trails that provide linkages between communities or other trails, or provide
access to destinations of interest to recreationists. This category must be for non-motorized
use and cannot be part of a city street or county road.
WWRP- Habitat Conservation Account
• State Lands Restoration- Ten percent of the HCA is distributed to State Lands Restoration
category to provide restoration or enhancement of existing habitat and natural area lands
owned by State Parks and Recreation Commission, The Department of Fish and Wildlife or
the Department of Natural Resources.
State Parks is also eligible to apply in WWRP- Water Access, WWRP-Critical Habitat, WWRP-
Riparian Protection and WWRP-Natural Areas, but are not proposing projects in those categories
this grant cycle.
2The amount of WWRP State Parks category funding the agency receives each biennium is a
function of the total legislatively approved capital appropriation for the WWRP. In past biennia,
the total WWRP appropriation has ranged from $35 million to $100 million (see Appendix 2).
Since the first WWRP appropriation in 1990, the State Parks category has received nearly $129.4
million. In addition to the State Parks category, the agency can receive additional funding from
other WWRP categories if projects rank high enough.
Other RCFB grant categories that are offered in the spring for which State Parks is eligible
include the Aquatic Lands Enhancement Account (ALEA), Land and Water Conservation Fund
(LWCF), and the Boating Infrastructure Grant (BIG), both of which are federal sources of
funding. Staff does not anticipate seeking grant funding from these sources during the current
cycle.
Salmon Recovery Funding Board Grant Categories
Staff summarized below the State Salmon Recovery Funding Board grant programs for which it
proposes to submit grant requests for the 2023-25 biennium.
Salmon Recovery and Puget Sound Acquisition and Restoration (SRFB and PSAR)
Salmon recovery grants are used to restore degraded salmon habitat and protect existing, high-
quality habitat.
Estuary and Salmon Restoration Program (ESRP)
This program provides grants and technical assistance for projects that restore and conserve near-
shore areas in Puget Sound. The goal is to ensure Washington's estuaries, bays, and shorelines
are intact, functioning, and resilient to climate change.
Brian Abbot Fish Barrier Removal Board (BAFBRB)
In 2014, the Washington State Legislature established the BAFBRB through the WA State
Department of Fish and Wildlife to identify and remove impediments to salmon and steelhead
migration.
In addition to the grant programs mentioned above, State Parks is also eligible in the Washington
Coast Restoration and Resiliency Initiative. However, State Parks is not proposing projects in the
spring in this category.
Project Selection
Prospective projects, appropriate for grant funding are identified by staff through a collaborative
process that includes region and headquarters staff in both Operations and Parks Development
divisions. This effort begins in July of odd years with a statewide, cross-divisional grant kick-off
and brainstorm meeting. At this meeting, staff from RCO provide an overview of grant
programs, eligibility requirements, and examples of successful projects. Then, staff from the
Real Estate, Planning, Stewardship, Trails, Winter Recreation, Clean Vessel programs, along
with region parks planners, stewards, and operations staff propose an array of projects gathered
from their respective areas for consideration. Through a charrette process the group develops a
list of potential acquisition and development projects, matches them with appropriate grant
programs, and advances them for additional scoping and prioritization.
3The prioritization process involves an evaluation in each region, by region managers, planners,
and stewards to individually vet and prioritize projects in relation to the following general
considerations: agency strategic plan, Commission and Director priorities, the Commission’s
Acquisition and Development Strategy, interested partners, legislative interests, and review of
the agency’s ten-year capital development plan. Planning Program staff in headquarters then
assembles projects from regions into a unified list and selects projects and project alternates to
advance to the Commission for consideration. This selection is based on grant writing staff
capacity and funding levels anticipated in the various grant programs.
RCO Project Evaluation
Following Commission approval of the list of proposed projects for grant funding, staff then
submits applications electronically through RCO’s online grant management database. Because
of the need to present fully vetted, ranked project lists to the legislature in advance of the
legislative session, the grant process, from application to grant award, can span from 9-18
months depending on the grant category. Typically, applications are submitted in even-numbered
years and funding is realized in odd-numbered years.
Projects are evaluated and scored by an advisory committee or technical committee against a set
of criteria adopted by the Recreation and Conservation Funding Board (RCFB) or the Salmon
Recovery Funding Board (SRFB). The evaluation process and criteria for each grant category
vary depending on the intent of the grant funding. Evaluation can be either in-person or a written
process.
In addition to the advisory committee scoring, the WWRP State Parks category has one question
that is scored by the Commission at its July, even-year meeting. The Commission is asked how
well each project implements the Commission’s priorities. Each commissioner then ranks the
projects from highest to lowest. The advisory committee’s and the Commission’s scores are then
combined to create a ranked list of projects. Both boards, RCFB and SRFB, considers and
approves the ranked lists at one of their open public meetings. The lists are then submitted to the
governor. The ranked lists normally include alternate projects for each category. These projects
are then eligible for funding if additional funds become available. The governor may remove
projects from the ranked lists but may not re-rank or add projects to the lists.
Projects funded by the legislature are intended to be completed within that biennium, but project
lists are active until all the funding is used or until there are no remaining feasible projects on the
list. If a biennial list is completed and funds remain, they may be awarded to legislatively
approved alternate projects in future years. See Appendix 4 for the 2021-23 ranked list of
WWRP-State Parks category projects.
Staff anticipates bringing a second round of projects for Commission consideration at its July
2022 meeting for grant categories that are administered through RCO with a winter submittal
timeline. Grant categories included in the second round are the Boating Facilities Program
(BFP), No Child Left Inside (NCLI), Firearm and Archery Range Program (FARR),
Nonhighway Off-road Vehicle Activities Program (NOVA), and Recreational Trails Program
(RTP).
4WWRP-State Parks Category Evaluation Criteria
The State Parks evaluation criteria is included for reference in Appendix 3. There are proposed
updates to the criteria intended to reference current strategic plans, and include diversity, equity,
and inclusion language for evaluation which are in shown in red text with strikeouts and
underlines. The proposed updates will be considered by the Recreation and Conservation
Funding Board at its January 25, 2022 meeting.
Operating Budget Impacts
Proposed land acquisition projects for the 2023-2025 biennium do not initiate the creation of any
new, stand-alone state parks. Instead, projects seek to acquire properties that are:
• Within or adjacent to existing state parks
• Within delineated long-term park boundaries adopted by the Commission as part of
public outreach and planning efforts
• Within or adjacent to undeveloped park properties undergoing initial property assembly.
Impacts, both positive and negative, on park operations and the agency operating budget
necessarily result from both land acquisition and development projects. Staff intends to assess
these costs during the detailed project scoping and preparation of grant materials. Identified
costs, depending on their scope, will then be reflected in the agency’s operating budget request
or consciously absorbed.
Staff believes that incurring operating costs because of land acquisition or facility development
is appropriate in some circumstances, particularly where these projects demonstrate the value of
the park system to all Washingtonians, and therefore help build support for the agency through
advocacy, partnerships, volunteerism, and other forms of support.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Appendix 5 lists new grant proposals for Commission consideration. More detailed information
on each project is listed by funding board in Appendices 6 and 7.
Staff recommends that the Commission approve the land acquisitions, development projects and
restoration projects as described in Appendices 6 and 7. If approved, staff will prepare detailed
project scopes, cost estimates, construction timelines, and other detailed information in support
of each grant application.
The project scopes and cost estimates provided to the Commission at this time are preliminary
and conceptual and have only been developed to the extent necessary to determine whether they
are serious grant candidates. The projects in Appendix 5 are unranked and listed in alphabetical
order within their respective proposed grant program and category.
It should also be noted that staff may not ultimately have the capacity to submit applications for
all the recommended projects. Through scoping, staff may determine that a project is better
suited to a different grant category, or that it is not feasible at this time. Staff therefore
recommends that the Commission authorize the Director to defer applications for specific
projects or pursue funding for projects through other grant categories.
5The list in Appendix 5 and as described in Appendices 6 and 7 also includes alternate projects. If
any of the recommended projects are deferred, then a replacement project from the alternates list
may be selected. Staff recommends that the Commission authorize the Director to substitute
projects from the alternate list if any of the recommended projects must be deferred. Finally,
staff recommends that the Commission delegate authority to the Director to apply for private
foundation grants, federal grants, and other time-sensitive grants as opportunities arise during
this grant cycle per current practice.
LEGAL AUTHORITY:
RCW 79A.05.030 Powers and duties - Mandatory
RCW 79A.15.050 Outdoor recreation account - Distribution and use of moneys
SUPPORTING INFORMATION:
Appendix 1: WWRP Categories and Funding Allocations
Appendix 2: Past WWRP Appropriations
Appendix 3: WWRP State Parks Category Scoring Criteria
Appendix 4: 2021-2023 WWRP State Parks Category Project Funding
Appendix 5: 2023-2025 Proposed Projects at a Glance
Appendix 6: Recreation Conservation Funding Board (RCFB) 2023-2025 Proposed Projects
Appendix 7: Salmon Recovery Funding Board (SRFB) 2023-2025 Proposed Projects
REQUESTED ACTION OF COMMISSION: That the Washington State Parks and
Recreation Commission:
1. Authorize the Director or designee to seek funding from the Recreation and Conservation
Office in the 2023-2025 biennium for the projects listed in Appendix 5.
2. Authorize the Director or designee to defer applications for specific projects or pursue
funding for projects through other grant categories if needed.
3. Authorize the Director or designee to make necessary project scope and cost changes as
project applications are prepared.
4. Authorize the Director or designee to substitute projects in the alternates list in Appendix 5
for projects that are found to be infeasible through the detailed scoping process.
5. Authorize the Director or designee to pursue small foundation grants, federal grants, and
other time-sensitive opportunities that may arise through the 2023-2025 biennium.
6Author(s)/Contact: Laura Moxham, Parks Planner (360) 902-8649
laura.moxham@parks.wa.gov
Reviewer(s):
Jessica Logan, SEPA Review: Following review, staff has determined that the action proposed
for the Commission by staff is exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) pursuant
to WAC 197-11-800 (14)(d).
Van Church, Fiscal Impact Statement: The fiscal impact on the operating budget will be
assessed and identified as the projects are more fully developed. Operating costs will be
identified, and if needed, funding will be requested through the budget request process.
Andy Woo, Assistant Attorney General: Reviewed January 6, 2022
Peter Herzog, Assistant Director
Approved for Transmittal to Commission
___________________________________
Don Hoch, Acting Director
7APPENDIX 1
WWRP CATEGORIES AND FUNDING ALLOCATIONS
State Parks
30%
Local Parks
30%
Outdoor Recreation Account Trails
45% 20%
State Lands Development
10%
Water Access
10%
Critical Habitat
35%
Natural Area
25%
WWRP Appropriation
Habitat Conservation Account Riparian
45% 15%
Urban Wildlife
15%
State Lands Restoration
10%
Farmland
90%
Farm & Forest Account
10%
Forestland
10%
8APPENDIX 2
PAST WWRP APPROPRIATIONS
BIENNIUM WWRP STATE PARKS
1990 $53 M $6.4 M
1993 $60 M $7.0 M
1995 $65 M $7.4 M
1997 $45 M $6.0 M
1999 $45 M $6.0 M
2001 $48 M $6.1 M
2003 $45 M $6.0 M
2005 $45 M $6.0 M
2007 $50 M $6.1 M
2009 $100 M $10.5 M
2011 $70 M $7.9 M
2013 $42 M $5.9 M
2015 $65 M $7.4 M
2017 $55 M $6.5 M
2019 $80 M $10.4 M
2021 $85 M $11 M
2023 $100 M $12.9 M
TOTAL $1,053 M $129.4 M
Note: 1990 thru 2011 State Parks portion is based on a formula from RCO.
9APPENDIX 3
PROPOSED WWRP STATE PARKS CATEGORY SCORING CRITERIA
For approval by the Recreation and Conservation Funding Board at its January 2022 meeting.
Evaluation Criteria Summary
The following shows the proposed changes to the criteria. Changes are in red text and with strikeouts and
underlines.
State Parks Criteria Summary
Maximum
Points
Score By # Question Project Type Possible Focus*
Advisory Public Need and Need
1 All 5 State
Committee Satisfaction
Advisory
2 Project Significance All 15 Agency
Committee
Advisory Threat and Impact Acquisition 10
3 State
Committee Acquisition Priority Combination 5
Advisory Development 10
4 Project Design Technical
Committee Combination 5
Sustainability and
Advisory
5 Environmental Resource All 10 State
Committee
Stewardship
Advisory
6 Expansion/Phased Project All 15 State
Committee
Advisory
7 Project Support All 10 Agency
Committee
Advisory
8 Partnership or Match All 5 State
Committee
Advisory
9 Readiness to Proceed All 10 Agency
Committee
State Parks
10 Commission Priorities All 6 Agency
Commission
RCO Staff 11 Proximity to People All 1.5 State
County Population
RCO Staff 12 All 1.5 State
Density
Total Points Possible 89
10Advisory Committee Scored
1. Public Need and Need Satisfaction. What is the need for the proposed project? To what extent
will the project satisfy the need? Consider whether the project is cited in an agency, regional, or
local plan. the following:
• Whether the project is cited in an agency, regional, or local plan, for example:
○ Cited in a Classification and Management Plan (CAMP), if one exists.
○ Identified in a park master plan or other approved planning document.
○ Included in the current State Parks’ 10-year capital plan.
○ Consistent with State Parks’ strategic plan.
• Whether the project or property is suited to serve the state need.
Point Range: 0-5 points
0 points Not included in a plan.
1-2 points Not included in but consistent with a plan.
3-4 points Included in and consistent with state, regional, or local plans, and
implements the mission.
5 points High priority in state, regional, or local plan.
Revised April 2016. Recreation and Conservation Funding Board Resolution 2016-20.
Updated April 2020, per Delegation Authority, Resolution 2020-10.
112. Project Significance. Describe how this project supports State Parks’ strategic goals. Does it
support one or more of the following goals of State Parks’ Statewide Acquisition and
Development Strategy.
• Places to Be: Connecting people with Washington’s iconic landscapes
• Stories to Know: Engaging people in authentic Washington stories
• Things to Do: Providing Washington’s recreation mainstays
• Ways to Grow: Inviting novices to experience Washington’s outdoors
• Something for Everyone: Improving the quality of life for all Washingtonians
Point Range: 0-5 points, which are multiplied later by 3
0 points Does not directly support any of the goals
1-2 points Indirectly supports one or two goals
3-4 points Directly supports at least one goal
5 points Strongly and directly supports multiple goals
Revised January 2014, Recreation and Conservation Funding Board Resolution 2014-07
Updated April 2020, per Delegation Authority, Resolution 2020-10.
____________________________________________________________________________________
3. Threat and Impacts Acquisition Priority (acquisition and combination projects only). Describe
why it is important to acquire the property now. Consider the following:
• Does the acquisition satisfy the described need?
• Does the acquisition expand access and provide opportunity for people of all races, tribal
affiliations, ethnicities, national origins, gender, sexual orientation, abilities, religions,
veteran status, incomes, ages, and more?
• Is there an immediate threat to the property that will result in a loss in quality or
availability of habitat or future public use?
• Is the acquisition needed to adapt to climate change?
Point Range: 0-5 points, which are multiplied later by 2 for acquisition projects
0 points No evidence the property addresses the considerations above.
1-2 points The property addressed some of the considerations above.
3-5 points The property addresses most or all of the considerations above
Updated April 2020, per Delegation Authority, Resolution 2020-10.
124. Project Design (development and combination projects only). Is the project well designed?
Describe your project in detail. Consider the following:
• Does the design satisfy the described need?
• Where are you in the design process (e.g., concept, schematic, detailed, completed
construction documents)?
• Does this property support the type of development proposed? Describe the attributes:
size, topography, soil conditions, natural amenities, location and access, utility service,
wetlands, etc.
• How have the potential impacts to or from climate change been considered in your
design? How has climate change been incorporated into the project?
• How does this project exceed current universal accessibility requirements and provide
equal access for people with disabilities?
• How does the project design address the needs and desires of the state’s diverse
population? What specific improvements or features are designed to serve people of all
races, tribal affiliations, ethnicities, national origins, gender, sexual orientation, abilities,
religions, veteran status, incomes, ages, and more?
• Does the design appeal to diverse populations of the state?
• Does the nature and condition of existing or planned land use in the surrounding area
support the type of development proposed?
• Is the project permittable? Are there likely to be environmental permitting complications
that will need to be overcome with this project? What, if any, are the mitigation
requirements?
• Describe how the project will integrate sustainable elements such as low impact
development techniques, green infrastructure, environmentally preferred building
products, or reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
• Is the cost estimate realistic?
Point Range: 0-5 points, which are multiplied later by 2 for development projects
0 points Design does not or address few of the considerations above.
1-2 points Design addresses some of the considerations above.
3-4 points Design addresses several of the considerations above.
5 points Design and addresses all elements of the question very well, addresses
most or all of the considerations above.
Updated April 2020, per Delegation Authority, Resolution 2020-10.
135. Sustainability and Environmental Resource Stewardship. What techniques or resources are
proposed to ensure the project will result in a quality, sustainable, recreational, heritage
preservation, or educational opportunity, while protecting and/or improving the integrity of the
ecological resources environment? Describe how the project will protect and/or enhance natural
and cultural resources and integrate sustainable elements such as low impact development
techniques, green infrastructure, or environmentally preferred building products, or reduce
greenhouse gas emissions.
Point Range: 0-5 points, which are multiplied later by 2
0 points No or little stewardship elements.
1-2 points Contains stewardship elements and avoids impacts to natural or cultural
resources. Consistent with State Parks’ Sustainability Plan and goals.
3-4 points Numerous stewardship elements, protects, enhances, or restores natural
or cultural resources. Implements many of State Parks’ sustainability
goals.
5 points Maximizes natural or cultural resource protection, enhances or restores
natural or cultural resources, and contains innovative and outstanding
stewardship elements. Implements many of State Parks’ sustainability
goals.
Revised April 2016. Recreation and Conservation Funding Board Resolution 2016-20.
Updated April 2020, per Delegation Authority, Resolution 2020-10.
146. Expansion/Phased Project (no change). Does this project implement an important phase of a
previous project, represent an important first phase, or expand or improve an existing site?
Consider the following:
• Is the project part of a phased acquisition or development?
• To what extent will this project advance completion of a plan or vision?
• Is this project an important first phase?
• What is the value of this phase?
• How does the project complement an existing site or expand usage, preservation, or
education within a site?
Point Range: 0-5 points, which are multiplied later by 3
0 points Neither a significant phase or expansion, nor a distinct stand-alone
project
1-2 points Project is a quality or important phase or expansion
3-4 points Project is a key first phase or expansion or moves a project significantly
towards realizing a vision
5 points Project is a highly important first phase, final (or near final phase),
moves a project a great deal towards realizing a vision.
Revised April 2016. Recreation and Conservation Funding Board Resolution 2016-20.
157. Project Support. What statewide, community, and user groups were consulted and what support
has been demonstrated for this project? How has your organization informed and engaged people
about the project including those whose interests have been historically marginalized or
excluded? the public (statewide, community, or user groups) about the project and how has the
public shown support for the project?
• Describe the extent of your organization’s efforts to identify and contact all parties, (i.e.
an outreach program to local, regional, and statewide entities).
• Describe the extent of the project support. Broadly interpret the term “Project Support” to
include, but not be limited to, the following:
ο Voter-approved initiative
ο Public participation and feedback
ο Endorsements or other support from advisory boards and user and friends groups
ο Media coverage
Point Range: 0-5 points, which are multiplied later by 2
0 points No evidence presented.
1-2 points Marginal community support. Opportunities for only minimal public
involvement (i.e. a single adoption hearing), or little evidence that the
public supports the project.
3 points Wide support and adequate opportunity presented for participation.
4-5 points The public has received ample and varied opportunities to provide
meaningful input into the project and there is overwhelming support; or
the public was so supportive from the project’s inception that an
extensive public participation process was not necessary.
Revised April 2016. Recreation and Conservation Funding Board Resolution 2016-20.
168. Partnerships or Match. Describe how this project supports strategic partnerships or leverages
secured matching funds. Consider the following:
• Does the project help form strategic partnerships with other agencies, tribes, community-
based organizations, or nonprofits? (A strategic partnership is one that ultimately is
expected to offset expenses, leverage investments, or stimulate activity that directly or
indirectly generates a financial return.)
• Does the partnership facilitate a key State Parks’ goal or objective?
• Does the project have a match of cash, grants, or in-kind services?
Point Range: 0-5 points
0 points No partners or match
1-2 points One partner or up to 10 percent match
3-4 points Two partners or 10.01-24.99 percent match
5 points Three or more partners or 25 percent or more match
179. Readiness to Proceed. Describe the project’s timeline. Is the project ready to proceed? Consider
the following:
• For development projects, is it fully designed and permitted?
• For acquisition projects, is there written documentation indicating a willing seller?
• For acquisition projects, is there a written sales agreement or option with the property
owner?
• Are there any significant zoning, permitting issues, or encumbrances?
Point Range: 0-5 points, which are multiplied later by 2
0 points Not ready, business case not evident.
(Acquisition) No agreement with landowner and fiscal impact will be
substantial.
(Development) No construction drawings.
1-2 points (Acquisition) Willing seller identified.
(Development) Construction drawings less than at or near
60 percent complete.
3-4 points (Acquisition) Property (purchase) secured in some way by legal
instrument to include a letter of intent or being held in trust or by a non-
governmental organization (for example).
(Development) Construction drawings at or more than
60 percent complete.
5 points (Acquisition) State Parks has a purchases and sales agreement or option
signed and the purchase will be made within its existing term.
(Development) Plans completed and all permits in hand.
No changes are proposed to Commission scored question 10 or to RCO Staff scored questions 11
and 12.
18APPENDIX 4
2021-2023 WWRP STATE PARKS CATEGORY PROJECT FUNDING
19APPENDIX 5
2023-2025 PROPOSED PROJECTS AT A GLANCE
Project Grant Category Project Name Cost Grant
Type Manual
Recreation and Conservation Funding Board 2023-25 Proposed Projects
Acq WWRP-State Parks Inholding and Adjacent Properties $1.5 million WWRP-ORA
2022 Manual
Acq WWRP-State Parks Green River Gorge- Icy Creek $2.7 million WWRP-ORA
Phase 2 Manual
Acq WWRP-State Parks Klickitat Trail-Swale Canyon $1 million WWRP-ORA
Manual
Acq WWRP-State Parks Little Spokane- Robinson $700,000 WWRP-ORA
Property Manual
Acq WWRP-State Parks St. Edwards-Arrowhead Property $1.66 million WWRP-ORA
Manual
Acq WWRP-State Parks Willapa Hills Trail- South Bend $1 million WWRP-ORA
Trailhead Manual
Acq-Alternate WWRP-State Parks Alta Lake- Schleneger Property $530,000 WWRP-ORA
Manual
Acq-Alternate WWRP-State Parks Hyak Trailhead $1.434 million WWRP-ORA
Manual
Acq-Alternate WWRP-State Parks Spring Bay- 40-acre upland $1.006 million WWRP-ORA
Manual
Acq WWRP-State Total proposed $8.56 million
Parks
WWRP-State Total proposed including $11.53 million
Parks proposed alternate acquisition
project
Dev WWRP-State Parks Cape Disappointment Mia Lin $1.5 million WWRP-ORA
"Three Waters Trail" Connection Manual
Dev WWRP-State Parks Nisqually-Mashel Overlook and $2.37 million WWRP-ORA
Trail Manual
Dev WWRP-State Parks *NW Region Multi-Site $1 million WWRP-ORA
Playground Development Manual
Dev WWRP-State Parks Anderson Lake- Trailhead and $2 million WWRP-ORA
Trail Connection to the ODT Manual
Dev WWRP-State Parks Riverside State Park Bowl and $650,000 WWRP-ORA
Pitcher Manual
Dev WWRP-State Parks Willapa Hills Trail- Pacific $1.5 million WWRP-ORA
County Surfacing Manual
Dev-Alternate WWRP-State Parks Fort Casey-Admiralty Head $1 million WWRP-ORA
Lighthouse-ADA and Manual
Interpretation
Dev-Alternate WWRP-State Parks Lake Sammamish Esplanade $2 million WWRP-ORA
Manual
Dev-Alternate WWRP-State Parks Mt Spokane- Selkirk Lodge re- $2.5 million WWRP-ORA
development and parking- Manual
Alternate
20Project Grant Category Project Name Cost Grant
Type Manual
Dev-Alternate WWRP-State Parks *SW and/or ER Regions Multi- $1-2 million WWRP-ORA
Site Development Playground Manual
Replacements
Dev WWRP-State Total proposed $9.02 million
Parks
WWRP-State Total proposed including $16.52 million
Parks proposed alternate development
projects
*Multi-site development is currently not eligible in State Parks category. This is pending an update to the WWRP
grant program through RCO expected in January 2022.
Dev WWRP-Trails PTCT- Creating A Connection $1.5 million WWRP-ORA
Between Rock Lake and Malden Manual
Dev WWRP-Trails Total proposed $1.5 million
Restoration WWRP-SLR Hope Island Bald and Forest $120,000 WWRP-HCA
Restoration Manual
Restoration WWRP-SLR Leadbetter Point Coast Dune $130,000 WWRP-HCA
Restoration Phase II Manual
Restoration WWRP-SLR Ragged Ridge restoration $150,000 WWRP-HCA
Manual
WWRP-SLR Total proposed $400,000
Salmon Recovery Funding Board 2023-25 Proposed Projects
Planning SRFB/PSAR/ESRP Saltwater- McSorley Creek $3.3 million
Shoreline and Estuary Project
SRFB/PSAR/ESRP Total proposed $3.3 million
SRFB/PSAR/ESRP Total proposed including $3.3 million
proposed alternate restoration
project
Restoration BAFBRB Lewis and Clark State Park Fish $200,000 BAFBRB
Barrier Removal Manual
BAFBRB Total proposed $200,000
BAFBRB Total proposed including $200,000
proposed alternate restoration
project
Total Proposed Requests $22.98 million
21APPENDIX 6
RECREATION AND CONSERVATION FUNDING BOARD
2023-25 PROPOSED PROJECTS
WASHINGTON WILDLIFE RECREATION PROGRAM - OUTDOOR RECREATION
ACCOUNT
WWRP-State Parks Category Projects
Proposed State Parks Category Acquisition Projects
Inholdings and Adjacent Properties 2022 $1.5 million
This project will purchase small or low-cost properties within or adjacent to the boundaries of
existing state parks. It is intended to be a flexible source of funding for opportunities that present
themselves through the biennium. This grant will allow State Parks to act quickly to purchase
inholdings as they come on the market, and it will facilitate the purchase of smaller properties
that might not score well as individual competitive grants, but that are nonetheless essential to
park operations. This project supports the Acquisition and Development Strategy by infilling
long-term park boundaries, or by supporting the other strategy goals. The specific goals will
vary, depending on which properties are acquired.
Green River Gorge – Icy Creek Phase 2 $2.7 million
This project is the second part of a phased acquisition of 16 parcels, totaling approximately 105
acres, in King County near Black Diamond. The number of parcels acquired will depend on
appraised value, but ideally, this phase can purchase 9 parcels totaling approximately 62 acres.
The Washington State Legislature established the Green River Gorge Conservation Area in 1969
(RCW 79A.05.705) and directed the State Parks and Recreation Commission to begin acquiring
property along the river. The State Parks plans for the Conservation Area include a trail along the
south rim of the gorge, from Kanaskat-Palmer State Park to Flaming Geyser State Park. The
parcels in Icy Creek Ridge are some of the last needed before trail development will be possible.
The current landowner has platted the area into 14 building sites and has already developed roads
for future residential development. Purchase of these parcels will prevent this development, and
the existing road will provide good access for a future trailhead for the South Rim Trail. This
acquisition will also protect habitat corridors between the Green River and properties in King
County's Bass Lake Complex to the south. These parcels are within the designated long-term
park boundary, and the landowner is a willing seller. Acquisition of the parcels in Phase 1 is
underway. This acquisition will make significant progress toward realizing the vision State Parks
has been pursuing for over 50 years. This property supports the Acquisition and Development
Strategy goals of Places to Be and Things to Do.
22Klickitat Trail- Swale Canyon Properties $1 million
This project will purchase different properties between Klickitat and Warwick along the Klickitat
Trail in Klickitat County. The properties identified will focus on protection of rare habitat,
restoration, and water quality improvement. The Yakama Nation have been an active partner in
this project and support this moving forward. This project supports the Acquisition and
Development Strategy by infilling long-term park boundaries and providing Places to Be, Things
to Do and Something for Everyone.
Little Spokane – Robinson Property $700,000
This project will purchase an 8.2-acre inholding in Riverside State Park- Little Spokane Natural
Area Park boundary. This property offers direct water access to the Little Spokane River along
with facilities that could be used for park housing. This property supports the Acquisition and
Development Strategy goals of Places to Be and Things to Do.
St. Edward – Arrowhead $1.66 million
This project will purchase a 6.5-acre property that is adjacent to the northern boundary of Saint
Edward State Park and includes almost 300 feet of shoreline along Lake Washington. It is
located within King County’s designated “Heron Habitat Protection Area” which is designed to
provide essential feeding, nesting, and roosting habitat for identified great blue heron rookeries.
The land is within the Commission-approved long-term boundary of the park and has been
identified by State Parks as an important wildlife corridor to undeveloped properties to the north
along with an ideal location for additional trails serving the Park. It will need to be acquired in
multiple phases. Forterra is partnering with State Parks to make this project feasible. This
property supports the Acquisition and Development Strategy goals of Places to Be, Things to Do
and Something for Everyone.
Willapa Hills State Park Trail—South Bend Trailhead Acquisition $1 million
This project will purchase a 2.22-acre Pacific County located within the City of South Bend. The
purpose of the land acquisition is to construct a trailhead to provide access to the western
terminus of the Willapa Hills Trail. The City of South Bend will link the trailhead with a one
half-mile extension of the Willapa Hills Trail. In addition, the City of South Bend would acquire
two other adjacent parcels to create a park and hiker/biker campground at the trailhead. Situated
on the scenic Willapa River, this acquisition will allow State Parks to partner with the city to
enhance access, draw visitors closer to food and hotel overnight services, while also providing
much needed overnight camping facilities on-site to be operated by the city of South Bend. To
formalize the process, State Parks and South Bend are currently drafting an MOA to outline the
project officially and to clearly identify roles and responsibilities. Finally, State Parks can make
this acquisition as a stand-alone project if needed and build a fully functional parking lot,
regardless if the other two parcels are acquired as planned by city. This property supports the
Acquisition and Development Strategy goals of Things to Do, Ways to Grow and Something for
Everyone.
23Alternate-Acquisition Projects
Alta Lake-Schleneger $530,000
This project will purchase approximately 100 acres on the northeast side of Alta Lake in Chelan
County. The CAMP was recently completed in November of 2019 and identified this property in
the long-term boundary for the purposes of viewshed protection and trails. This development
supports the Acquisition and Development Strategy goals of Places to Be, Things to Do, and
Ways to Grow.
Hyak Trailhead $1.43 million
This project will purchase a 17-acre parcel located on heavily traveled I-90 at Snoqualmie Pass.
It provides access to the Palouse to Cascades State Park Trail (PTCT). Due to its short distance
from the Seattle area, it is an extremely popular destination for winter recreation. The parcel is
adjacent to the existing Hyak Sno-Park which is heavily used year-round. The subject parcel
would provide additional capacity for winter activities such cross-country skiing and
snowshoeing as well as year-round access to the PTCT. The Winter Recreation Advisory
Committee, the entity that advises State Parks on winter facilities and sno-parks, recommends
acquiring this property and has allocated $150,000 as match towards its purchase. This
development supports the Acquisition and Development Strategy goals of Places to Be, Things
to Do, and Ways to Grow.
Spring Bay- 40-acre upland $1 million
This project will purchase 40 acres next to Obstruction Pass State Park on Orcas Island in San
Juan County. The land will allow for trail connections and is the first phase in acquiring the
entire property. The remaining 15 acres (2nd phase) include low-bank access to the shoreline that
in the future would enable State Parks to provide access for visitors to walk to the water.
Currently, that is not available to park visitors as all the shoreline in Obstruction State Park is
high bank. The Park is an 80-acre park with parking, about 3.5 miles of trails, nine primitive
campsites, one Cascade Marine Trail campsite, three restrooms, mooring buoys, and more than 1
mile of publicly owned saltwater shoreline. This property supports the Acquisition and
Development Strategy goals of Places to Be and Things to Do.
24Proposed Development Projects
Anderson Lake State Park – Trailhead and Trail Connection to the Olympic Discovery
Trail $2 million
The 140-mile long Olympic Discovery Trail spans the north end of the Olympic Peninsula.
Anderson Lake State Park is located along the trail alignment and agency planning has identified
it as a through-route for the trail and an appropriate location for a trailhead. In 2021 Jefferson
County received grant funds to bring the Olympic Discovery Trail to the northwest boundary of
the park. This project will construct a trailhead hub and 1-mile shared use path within Anderson
Lake State Park, allowing for extension of the Olympic Discovery Trail. This project was
identified in the Park’s Classification and Management Plan (CAMP) and is part of the
Agency10-Year Capital Plan. It is strongly supported by the Peninsula Trails Coalition, the non-
profit entity that coordinates the trail’s 14 federal, state, county, city, and tribal partners. This
development supports the Acquisition and Development Strategy goals of Places to Be, Things
to Do, and Ways to Grow.
Cape Disappointment State Park-Mia Lin Three Water Trail Connection
$1.5 million
This project will complete the vision of Mia Lin at Cape Disappointment State Park, known as
the “Three Waters Trail”. The project would develop approximately a quarter mile of trail
connecting the Columbia River and Pacific Ocean through fresh water of O’Neil Lake and
wetlands. Two segments on either end of this trail are completed, but there is a quarter-mile gap
in the park entrance area. Completion of this final segment of trail will link Lin’s basalt fish
cleaning table and an observation deck on Baker Bay with a cedar circle, boardwalk, and
amphitheater on Waikiki Beach. This project installs a concrete trail with shells embedded into
the surface to integrate aesthetically with existing trail, as originally designed by Lin. It also
constructs a 300-hundred foot boardwalk where the trail will be aligned over wetlands parallel
with the entrance road and terminating near the intersection at Robert Gray Drive. The
boardwalk will rest on diamond pier foundations, include treated wood supports, and finished
with Trex decking. There is a possibility that the Friends of the Columbia River Gateway will
provide match for construction projected for 2023-25. Trail design will be completed with
environmental permitting submitted in 2021-23 for a shovel ready project. This development
supports the Acquisition and Development Strategy goals of Places to Be, Stories to Know,
Things to Do, and Ways to Grow.
Nisqually-Mashel Overlook and Trails $2.37 million
This project constructs a multi-use, ADA trail, 5,900 feet long x 10’ wide paved (with 4’ width
of rock for equestrian’s use) trail to an overlook of the Mashel River Valley and view of Mount
Rainier. Other improvements include benches and interpretive signage. This development
supports the Acquisition and Development Strategy goals of Places to Be, Stories to Know,
Things to Do, and Ways to Grow.
25NW Region Multi-Site Playground Development $1 million
This project will replace playground equipment and surfacing in several state parks within a
region that have playgrounds that do not comply with current safety or accessibility standards.
This development supports the Acquisition and Development Strategy goals of Things to Do,
Ways to Grow, and Something for Everyone.
Riverside Bowl and Pitcher Cabin Phase 2 $650,000
This project will complete the final phase of Bowl and Pitcher Cabin project. Initiated in 2015,
the first phase completed the design of all four cabins and installed two out of the four. This
final phase will construct the final two cabins, providing the park and the greater Spokane area
with desirable cabins in one of the premier locations within Riverside State Park. This
development supports the Acquisition and Development Strategy goals of Places to Be and
Things to Do.
Willapa Hills Trail State Park- Pacific County Surfacing $1.5 million
This project will install 9-miles of compacted gravel and bridge improvements in Pacific County
on the Willapa Hills State Park Trail. The 57-mile Willapa Hills State Park Trail is one of the
longest rail-trails in western Washington and a key segment of the state’s plan for a cross-state
trail network extending from the Idaho border to Willapa Bay near the Pacific coast. Located in
Pacific and Lewis counties, the trail is aligned east to west from the city of Chehalis to South
Bend. This project will surface 19 miles of trail with compacted gravel from Pluvious to Menlo
in Pacific County and improve Bridge 43, a 75’-span that is about 10’-wide, by stabilizing the
structure and installing concrete surfacing and safety rails. Compacted gravel will eliminate
uneven, rocky surfaces caused by railroad ballast. This development supports the Acquisition
and Development Strategy goals of Places to Be, Things to Do, and Ways to Grow.
Alternate-Development Projects
Fort Casey- Admiralty Head Lighthouse-ADA and Interpretation $1 million
This project will modify accessible parking, provide a barrier free route of travel to the
lighthouse, waypoint interpretive hub and an accessible restroom. The interpretive hub will
include a paved plaza with interpretive signage and benches. This development supports the
Acquisition and Development Strategy goals of Places to Be, Stories to Know, Things to Do, and
Ways to Grow.
26Lake Sammamish Esplanade $2 million
This project will complete the work to develop a paved esplanade connecting Sunset Beach to
Tibbetts Beach within Lake Sammamish State Park. When complete, park visitors will be able to
walk just under a mile along the waterfront from the mouth of Issaquah Creek to the mouth of
Tibbetts Creek. This project will develop the 0.4-mile portion of the esplanade near Tibbetts
Beach, including a boardwalk to the mouth of Tibbetts Creek. The portion of the esplanade near
Sunset Beach is underway. Currently, there are paved pathways to Tibbetts Beach, but they are
beyond their useful life and not accessible to people with disabilities. The trail to the mouth of
Tibbetts Creek is muddy and surrounded by blackberries, making it treacherous. This project will
include vegetative restoration around the boardwalk to Tibbetts Creek. This development
supports the Acquisition and Development Strategy goals of Places to Be, Things to Do, and
Ways to Grow.
Mt Spokane-Selkirk Lodge re-development and parking $2.5 million
The Selkirk Lodge is a 4-season facility that supports use year-round. This project would
renovate the existing facility and improve parking. This development supports the Acquisition
and Development Strategy goals of Places to Be, Things to Do, and Ways to Grow.
SW and/or ER-Multi-site Playground Installation by Region $1-2 million
This project will replace playground equipment and surfacing in several state parks within a
region that have playgrounds that do not comply with current safety or accessibility standards.
This development supports the Acquisition and Development Strategy goals of Things to Do,
Ways to Grow, and Something for Everyone.
Total Proposed State Parks Category Acquisition Projects: $8.56 million
Total Proposed State Parks Category Development Projects: $9.02 million
27WWRP-Trails Category Projects
PTCT- Creating A Connection Between Rock Lake and Malden $1.5 million
In 2022 State Parks will complete a project that improves the trail connection between the rural
communities of Rosalia and Malden and construct a new trailhead in Malden. This is a welcome
improvement as much of Malden was destroyed by a tragic fire in 2021. This project will
connect the new trailhead in Malden to Rock Lake located 9 -miles to the west. Rock Lake is the
deepest and largest of all scabland lakes left behind from the Missoula Floods and the Palouse to
Cascades Trail provides some of the most dramatic views. To establish access to these lake
views the project will repair nine trestles and two tunnels and construct a trailhead to create a
one-of-a-kind trail experience. This project was identified in the Park’s Classification and
Management Plan (CAMP) and is part of the agency 10-year Capital Plan. It is strongly
supported by the Palouse to Cascades Trail Coalition, a non-profit entity that advocates for the
trail. This development supports the Acquisition and Development Strategy goals of Places to
Be, Things to Do, and Ways to Grow.
Total Proposed Trails Category Development Projects: $1.5 million
28WASHINGTON WILDLIFE RECREATION PROGRAM- HABITAT
CONSERVATION ACCOUNT
WWRP-State Lands Restoration Category Projects
Hope Island Bald and Forest Restoration $120,000
This project is designed to continue restoration and enhancement of high priority forest and
grassland bald and prairie habitats on Hope Island (Skagit), a part of Deception Pass State Park.
Hope Island, the majority of which is classified as a Natural Area Preserve, boasts some of the
best examples of state and globally imperiled grassland bald and lowland old-growth forests in
the state. From 2018 – 2021 spurge laurel and holly have been removed from the forest
communities throughout the island; this project will address any resprouts or newly introduced
individuals. Restoration of the grassland balds was initiated in 2021. Over 50 native species
have been observed in the balds, including the largest known population of Indian valley
brodiaea (Brodiaea rosea). This species was thought extirpated from Washington until re-
discovered in 2021. This project will continue restoration of these balds primarily through
removal of scotch broom and invasive annual grasses and seeding of native forbs and grasses.
The forested and grassland communities on Hope Island are of high conservation value and the
whole island has been designated a Natural Area Preserve. This project supports the Acquisition
and Development Strategy goal of Something for Everyone.
Leadbetter Point State Park- Coast Dune Restoration Phase 2 $130,000
Coastal dune vegetation and habitats have been degraded and altered by introduction of three
non-native invasive plant species: European beachgrass, gorse and Scot’s broom. This project
will continue restoration of sand dune habitat at Leadbetter Point by removing these invasive
species and shorepine (a native tree species that establishes in dune habitats following invasion
by non-native species). Restoring native vegetation will benefit 2 federally listed threatened
species, 2 state listed threatened species and 3 plant communities of concern. This project will
build on prior efforts to remove European beachgrass and develop a comprehensive restoration
plan. The goals of this project are through implementation of the plan, removing European
beachgrass, gorse, Scot’s broom and shorepine, bringing the area to a manageable condition and
enabling use by the 2 federally listed species and reintroduction of a state listed plant species.
This project supports the Acquisition and Development Strategy goal of Something for
Everyone.
29Ragged Ridge Natural Area Preserve Restoration and Protection $150,000
This project is designed to continue restoration and enhancement of high priority forest and
grassland bald and prairie habitats on Ragged Ridge Natural Area Preserve, a part of Mount
Spokane State Park. Ragged Ridge was the first Nature Area Preserve in Washington. It is the
only above tree line open grass meadow mountain In Spokane County that does not have roads
or other impacts. The 624-acre Ragged Ridge Natural Area Preserve supports a mixture of
mature forests and open meadows. The meadow has been damaged by illegal off-road vehicles
and invasive and non-native species. Restoration of the damaged grasslands is ongoing as well as
closing off of any old access points. The NAP ranges in elevation from 3,200’-4,900’ and
contains a NW-SE mountain ridge (meadow area) flanked by steep, forested slopes. Four WA
Natural Heritage Program (NHP) Element Occurrences1 dominate the RRNAP (three forested
and an Idaho Fescue - Parsnip-flower Buckwheat meadow). This project will continue seeding
and erosion control of eroded area, non-native plant removal, reduce tree encroachment into
meadows and blocking of illegal motorized access points. This project supports the Acquisition
and Development Strategy goal of Something for Everyone.
Total Proposed State Lands Restoration Projects: $400,000
30APPENDIX 7
SALMON RECOVERY FUNDING BOARD
2023-25 PROPOSED PROJECTS
SRFB/PSAR/ESRP
Salterwater- McSorley Creek Shoreline and Estuary Restoration Planning $3.3 million
This project will fund the final design and permitting of the McSorley Creek Shoreline and
Estuary Restoration Project. The project objectives are to restore 1,000 feet of shoreline
and 1 acre of pocket estuary habitat, reduce risk to park structures from coastal erosion
and flooding, increase resilience to sea level rise, and improve user experience for this
regionally-important urban beach park. This project supports the Acquisition and Development
Strategy goals of Things to Do, Ways to Grow, and Something for Everyone.
Total Proposed SRFB/PSAR/ESRP Projects: $3.3 million
Brian Abbott Fish Barrier Removal Board
Lewis & Clark State Park Fish Barrier Removal- Boone Creek $200,000
This fish passage project includes the removal of three fish barriers on Boone Creek within
Lewis & Clark State Park. This project is proposed in conjunction with efforts by Lewis County
to correct two fish barriers also on Boone Creek, directly downstream of Lewis & Clark State
Park. Boone Creek is a tributary to Lacamas Creek which flows into the Cowlitz River; no other
barriers are identified downstream of this project area. This coordinated barrier removal will
provide access to additional upstream habitat to benefit anadromous species such as steelhead,
coho, and chum salmon, as well as resident trout populations. Specific elements of this
restoration project include removal of undersized culverts at two park road crossings and
replacement with fish-friendly culverts, removal of a CCC-era pool, restoration of the stream at
the pool location, and installation of interpretive panels. This project supports the Acquisition
and Development Strategy goals of Something for Everyone and Stories to Know.
Total Proposed BAFBRB Projects: $200,000
31You can also read
