RIDGEFIELD — The 39th annual Clark County HomeStreet Bank Parade of Homes, presented by DeWils, officially kicked off at the Carty Road Estates in Ridgefield this morning.
Put on each year by the Building Industry Association of Clark County (BIA), the Parade of Homes is considered “southwest Washington’s finest home show” by many experts in the building industry and community members who tour the homes. This year’s show is being held at Carty Road Estates in Ridgefield, described as a “unique gated community featuring acreage home sites” in this year’s Parade of Homes guide.
Above Video
The 2016 Parade of Homes continues until Oct. 2, and is closed on Mondays and Tuesdays (Sept. 19 and 20, and Sept. 26 and 27). Regular hours are 10 a.m.-7 p.m. Admission is $12 for adults and free for children younger than the age of 12. The ticket office closes at 6 p.m. every evening, tickets can also be purchased online at https://www.tickettomato.com/event/3745. A coupon for $2 off general admission can be found by going tohttp://clarkcountyparadeofhomes.com/info-and-directions/.
This year’s show features four custom country estates that “showcase the finest craftsmanship on the market today,” according to the BIA. These four homes include Timbercrest by Everest Construction, The Westfall by Quail Homes, The Aerius by Cascade West Development and The Ascension by Cascade West Development.
The 2016 Parade of Homes will include several special days and events, including:
- Half-price Wednesdays — Sept. 21 and 28, sponsored by Berkshire Hathaway and First American Title. Get all of the inspiration at half the price. Enjoy the annual Parade of Homes Show for $6, no coupon required.
- Builder/Realtor Day — Sept. 22, sponsored by Umpqua Bank. Builders and realtors can enjoy the Parade of Homes show for free courtesy of Umpqua Bank. Networking reception will be held from 4-6 p.m. Present business card and photo ID for entry. RSVP by Sept. 19.
- Hero Day — Sept. 24, sponsored by Wells Fargo Home Mortgage. The BIA would like to show appreciation for first responders and military personnel who keep communities safe. Any medical, police, fire and inactive military with ID will receive a $3 discount on admission. Anyone with active military ID will receive free admission.
- Family Day — Sept. 25, sponsored by HomeStreet Bank. Bring the whole gang down to this family friendly event. Activities are geared towards the show’s youngest guests from 11 a.m.-2 p.m. No strollers or backpacks are allowed in the homes.
- Color & Design Tour — Sept. 29. Reserve a spot in the guided tour hosted by Parade of Homes interior designers and decorators. Hear first-hand about the inspiration for each project. Pick up tips and trends to style your own home. Each tour group is kept small for a personal experience. Space is limited, reserve a spot today at https://biaclarkcounty.webconnex.com/cdtour.
Parade of Homes attendees are asked to remember that strollers, high-heeled shoes and backpacks are not allowed in the homes. Do not bring food or drinks in the homes. No smoking is allowed anywhere on the premises. Attendees may be asked to remove their shoes, or to put shoe covers on, before entering each home. No pets are allowed on the event grounds.
In order to get to Carty Road Estates from I-5 Northbound, take the Battle Ground Exit (Exit 11) and head east. Turn left on Northeast 10th Avenue, follow 10th Avenue about a mile to Carty Road. Turn left (west) and follow Carty Road about half a mile to the development/ Carty Road Estates is on the left side of the road. Follow the same directions on I-5 Southbound.
Contact the BIA at (360) 694-0933 or email events@biaofclarkcounty.org. More information on the 2016 Parade of Homes can be found atwww.clarkcountyparadeofhomes.com.
Check back on the ClarkCountyToday.com Facebook page next week for a more in-depth look at each of the four houses featured in this year’s Parade of Homes.
What is the “need” for light rail? How many bus trips are there daily over I-5 Bridge?
IBR written presentations to the cities and county council (twice) in 2025 have not included transit ridership data, although the program has spent $10,377,973 on transit planning and engineering. What is the justification?
of $7.5 Billion currently estimated for IBR I-5 Bridge, $2 Billion is allocated to Light Rail, How many people ride the buses to Portland daily? Ridership?
“We will provide an update as this process moves forward and when there is more information to share.” Feb.26 Clark County Council presentation
Over half Interstate Bridge proposal allocated to transit, pedestrians and bicyclists
https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/news/over-half-interstate-bridge-proposal-allocated-to-transit-pedestrians-and-bicyclists/
IBR, ” “We want to accommodate folks who do not drive.” How many folks take transit buses, walk, Bike, or use a mobility device over I-5 Bridge?
What about freight? service and commercial vehicles? Emergency vehicles? Vehicles? motorcycles? How many freight vehicles cross I-5 daily?
Purpose per DSEIS, a primary purpose of IBR is to” improve highway freight mobility and address interstate travel and commerce needs in the Program area;”
“Truck-hauled freight movement over the I-5 Columbia River crossing is critical for industrial centers, for employment, and for the regional and national economies”
Whatever happened to the freight lane? Apparently it was replaced with light rail, which seems to be top priority for IBR.
.
If I could, I’d click on the ” + ” to give you a thumbs up on your comment. But CCT has evidently taken away that feature.
This bridge boondoggle, unless checked, will result in a massive tax burden for Clark County residents for generations to come.
Hi Susan, I’ve fixed that feature. Thank you!
Look, folks like the idea of light rail.It doesn’t use petroleum products to operate and it’s quiet. So the enthusiasts feel everybody will be happy paying for it. Wrong. CTRAN has no jumbo slush fund to pay for the operations. Their next budget projection has them using their income from sales taxes and fares to pay for what they’re doing now. So Saying CTRAN can help fund light rail means they need to get more$ from our sales taxes. I read somewhere that the legislature is thinking about letting tolls help repay the bonds which help pay cost of light rail- which will never be self supporting. So if we get light rail the tax payers and toll payers will be supporting it forever.
There’s an unconsidered impact on Oregonians considering visiting our new waterfront development. Let’s see. You get to pay toll both ways, increased sales taxes,and a less than great pay parking garage. Can somebody explain any real benefit of light rail to the vast % of us who will never use it?
There is no net positive. The bums will have an easier time getting up to Vancouver’s downtown and waterfront district.
Sounds like the new Vancouver mayor is getting kickbacks for pushing this project. Classic corruption from our elected officials.
On Monday evening, the Battle Ground City Council voted to reject light rail on the IBR.
They also object to paying for any aspect of TriMet’s operations and maintenance.
The city council of La Center has also spoken against the light rail component and funding TriMet O&M costs.
Our small cities are all coming out against the proposed light rail and spending taxpayer dollars to pay for TriMet’s MAX light rail.
Will Vancouver pay attention to the representatives of our many small cities, and the majority of Clark County voters?
To preface, I have no qualms whatsoever about due diligence and ensuring that our taxpayer dollars are being spent wisely and well. Nor do I take issue with you presenting your arguments for how we should think about those issues.
With that being said, this article is objectively not “News” – it belongs in the “Opinion” section. You are an elected official who campaigned extensively on this very issue. Every quote is from a person aligned with your position. There is no representation of the opposing viewpoint whatsoever, nor any indication that you sought any.
With due respect to the editorial staff, this should never have been categorized as “News.”
Kudos to Rep. John Ley for sharing his findings with the public. I agree with his proposal to Audit the IBR, as the CRC was audited and found to be wasteful. Other candidates hid their support for light rail on the campaign trail and claimed to support affordable transportation options. $2 Billion currently estimated for Light rail is the most expensive, least flexible public transit option for I-5, and it duplicates existing bus service unnecessarily. Practically, the sensitive overhead electric lines freeze in winter, and over-heat in summer, stopping the trains and the cost to operate and maintain the system is also higher than buses. On a bridge over the Columbia River in winter, light rail could unreliable.
I’ll just point out again, that I think Mr. Ley should be free to share his own opinions of the bridge replacement plans. It just isn’t a news article.
First, because as much as he is obviously dedicated to the issue, there is absolutely no metric by which he could be considered even remotely neutral on the topic.
Second, because I’m sure that, were we to have comments from proponents of the rail, they would have their own perspectives and analyses to share. Alas, we don’t know, because no such person was contacted for comment.
That’s why this isn’t a news article – it’s an opinion piece.
Forthright — I appreciate your perspective. My guess is that most people didn’t know that TriMet lost $6 billion over the past decade.
My guess is that most people didn’t know that their financial projections indicate they will lose an additional $1.1 billion over the next decade. Those huge losses may or may not be “news” to most people. But thank you for reading the article. 🙂
Hi John, I appreciate you weighing in. I think we can safely imagine that there are a great many things that most people don’t know.
We could, for example, wonder from whence you derive your claim of $6 billion in losses over the past decade. It is a curious statement, given that TriMet’s most recent audited comprehensive financial report (FY2024) does not reflect an overall deficit of that magnitude. There is a conveniently formatted “Statement of Net Position, Last Ten Years” section (pages 106-109), but you seem to have missed the additional lines below “operating expenses” in your calculations. If we look at the final totals (called, “Net Position,” down at the bottom), it seems that TriMet is doing just fine.
We have further support for that idea in the form of TriMet receiving yet another AAA bond rating (the highest possible rating) from external auditors in 2024. KBRA (the rating group) specifically cited, “TriMet’s diverse and strong economic base” in support of that conclusion. Quite a curious position for them to take, if we are to believe your statement about their ongoing dramatic losses.
The simple answer is that TriMet, like C-Tran, is not primarily funded by operating revenues, but by tax and grant revenues. By only subtracting operating costs from operating expenses, you have incorrectly excluded the majority of their income. In fact, if we were to apply your method (specifically, “operating revenues minus operating expenses”) to the most recent C-Tran financial report (page 63), then we would be forced to conclude that C-Tran has experienced losses of half a billion dollars over the past 10 years.
I’m assuming that this oversight on your part is a result of your unfamiliarity with how financial reports are written. This is an understandable mistake, as audit documents are highly technical. And though understandable, it has nevertheless led to you make erroneous claims – errors that no doubt could have been avoided had you consulted with individuals more experienced in the field of accounting, for example.
Given, as I hope has been adequately demonstrated above, that you are in error regarding the overall financial performance of TriMet, it stands to reason that your other analyses may contain similar inadvertent mistakes. And again, I don’t at all begrudge the calls for greater oversight and scrutiny of public projects. That said, I do think it’s important for that oversight be conducted in a rigorous and systematic way by folks who are expert in the field – not, with no offense intended, on the back of a napkin.
Happy to provide feedback on some of the other questionable analyses in your article, if that would be helpful to you. Thank you for your interest and investment in our community.