Oregon SCORP. Assessing Recreation Demand & Supply

Similar documents
Provide and maintain sufficient public parks, recreation facilities, and open space to meet the recreational needs of County residents and visitors.

PARTF Scoring System for Grants

PARKS. Chapter Introduction

Overview of Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission s (SPC) 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP)

PARKS AND RECREATION

RECREATION, OPEN SPACE AND GREENWAYS ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES

Comprehensive Park System Master Plan

City Council March 27, Parks, Recreation, and Trails Master Plan

EL DORADO COUNTY GENERAL PLAN PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMENT PRINCIPLE INTRODUCTION STATE AUTHORIZATION

Appendix 4 Park, Trail, and Recreation Facilities For more information, call the Park Planning and Stewardship Division at

RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT

RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE VISION

1. Parks & Recreation Neighborhood Parks Community Parks Special Use Sites 2. Open Space 3. Trails

Comprehensive Plan ADOPTED APRIL 2014

The City shall enhance and improve the accessibility of parks and recreational facilities while protecting their quality. by:

Mark Greenig Recreation and Land Use Planner CH2M Hill

10.0 Open Space and Public Realm

PARK AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN UPDATE

CHAPTER 1 Introduction

DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW. Game Plan for a Healthy City

SCORP THE 2019 STATEWIDE COMPREHENSIVE OUTDOOR RECREATION PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Arlington, Virginia is a worldclass

RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES

City of Missoula and Missoula County Open Space Planning Open House

Draft Stillwater 2030 Comprehensive Plan- Goals and Policies

Support the implementation of Cape Coral's Comprehensive Plan. Protect and utilize the unique natural resources in the City.

Location. Need GOAL 14 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY. Urban Planning in Oregon 7/8/2015

Courthouse Planning Area

SECTION FOUR: MISSION STATEMENT, GOALS & OBJECTIVES

PARK & RECREATION. Project Summaries

Parks, and Recreation & Cultural Arts Master Plan Update

City of Nogales General Plan

M-NCPPC Park System in

Errol Heights Park and Community Garden Frequently Asked Questions March 22, 2018

Office of Greenways & Trails Providing Statewide Leadership and Coordination. Southeast Greenways and Trails Summit October 1-3, 2017

SOUTHEAST SPORTS COMPLEX MASTER PLAN

Emerson Park Master Plan Update. Public Meeting III August 27, 2014

process of the Land Development Code to assure regional parks are available County-wide.

The Economic Value of Protected Open Space in Southeastern Pennsylvania

Great Rivers Greenway CLEAN GREEN CONNEC TED T RAILS

SECTION 1 Introduction...1. SECTION 2 Regional Context Criteria for Planning Districts Description of Planning District...

PARKS & RECREATION SUBCOMMITTEE. Oct. 1, 2015

CHAPTER 1 Background Information

Winter Island Park Public Meeting #1 Salem, Massachusetts

Open Space and Recreational Facilities

City of Talent Capital Improvements Plan

Promoting Economic Development Through Upfront SEPA Review: Lessons from South Downtown Tacoma

Focus Groups. 8 Focus Group meetings including 2 with staff, 1 with seniors, and 1 with students

Citizen s Advisory Committee

What We Heard Public Engagement - Stage 1

Making Transit Oriented Development Work For Boonton, NJ

Little Neck Planning Area

CAL POLY MASTER PLAN UPDATE, March 2015

July 23, 2014 Wilson School. Working Group Meeting #3 Preliminary Site Analysis School Siting Considerations Guiding Principles

BeltLine Corridor Environmental Study

City of Fredericksburg, Texas

Minto-Brown Island. November 18, City of Salem, Parks & Transportation Services

METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 390 North Robert Street, St. Paul, MN Phone (651) ; TDD (651)

RIDGES TO RIVERS OPEN SPACE NETWORI< OF THE MID-COLUMBIA DRAFT ACTION PLAN

PREVIOUS PUBLIC PARTICIPATION BRIEF October 2014

ANCHORAGE PARK REPORT CARD Assessing A Park s Appearance, Function, & Condition

Recreation, Open Space, Greenway Plan & Smart Agriculture Initiative

REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTER

Montgomery Parks THEN AND NOW A TIMELINE OF PUBLIC PARK PLANNING

(ALL TIMES LISTED ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE. )

CITY OF ANN ARBOR // Parks + Recreation. Hillary Hanzel Park Planner + Landscape Architect

Visioning Committee Kick-Off Meeting

Finish Roanoke River Greenway from Green Hill Park to the Blue Ridge Parkway Regional Surface Transportation Program Application

Appendix H: Easement cross sections

Proposed Walkability Ordinance for City of Knoxville (6/16/17)

RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES

Kempsville Planning Area

G. RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT. The following summarizes the Recreation and Open Space Element:

Urban Park Guidelines

Chapter 5: Recreation

CHAPTER 13 RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT

Sustainably Repositioning Greyfield Sites. Greyfield Sites Anywhere

Mississippi Skyway Preliminary Engineering Report

Recreation Resources

2019 Legislative Priorities

Silverdale Regional Center

Mariposa Lakes. Planned Community. Project Overview. Stockton, CA

BURTON STATION STRATEGIC GROWTH AREA PLAN UPDATE PUBLIC MEETING 3/26/18

SCC PRD (2016) COUNTY PARK MASTER PLAN

Hastings Park-PNE Public Board Meeting March 4, 2019

NEW MODELS AND METRICS FOR PARKS SYSTEM PLANNING Wednesday, January 31st, 11:45 am - 1:00 pm. David Barth, PhD, AICP, CPRP, RLA

City of La Center Park, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan. March 2016 Draft

Concord Community Reuse Project Goals and Guiding Principles. Overarching Goals (OG)

The urban parks in Charlottesville include Jackson Park, Lee Park, and McGuffey Park.

Parks, Trails, and Open space Element

Woodburn Comprehensive Plan Growth Management Goals and Policies

I. STAFF POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS. The following RMP policy strategies are proposed by staff in support of a Scenic Resource Protection Program:

RE-Imagining the Downtown Colorado Springs Master Plan

The Illinois Department of Transportation and Lake County Division of Transportation. Route 173, including the Millburn Bypass

APPENDIX D2: PARKS AND TRAILS

City of Tacoma Planning and Development Services

Dowdy Park. Concept Plans TOWN OF NAGS HEAD NORTH CAROLINA. Developed by: Albemarle & Associates, Ltd VHB/ Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc.

City of Pigeon Forge

CITY OF GAINESVILLE PARKS, RECREATION AND CULTURAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT VISION 2020

POPS Advisory Committee Meeting May 31, 2018

Transcription:

2013-2017 Oregon SCORP Assessing Recreation Demand & Supply SORP Conference: April 13, 2015

2013-2017 Oregon SCORP Supply/Demand Planning Components A County-Level and Regional Planning Approach Oregon Outdoor Recreation Resource/Facility Inventory Oregon Outdoor Recreation Survey Recreation Needs Assessment Guidelines For Park System Planning Integration Of Need In OPSP Scoring Criteria

2013-2017 Oregon SCORP County-Level Data Collection SCORP Planning Regions In 2002, data was gathered at the state and regional levels (11 planning regions). Local recreation providers stated that region scale results were too broad for local planning. 36 Oregon Counties A decision was made to invest in collecting results at the county level.

2013-2017 Oregon SCORP Statewide Resource Inventory Collected information from 1,771 public & private providers. Included federal, state, county, municipal, special park and recreation district, ports, Tribes, public schools, utilities, and private-sector providers. Overall response rate of 91%.

Statewide Resource Inventory Totals summarized: Statewide SCORP Planning Region County

Statewide Resource Inventory County scale Multnomah County

2013-2017 Oregon SCORP 2011 Oregon Statewide Outdoor Recreation Survey Last statewide outdoor recreation participation survey was conducted in 2002. Examined outdoor recreation patterns for 70 activities of Oregonians in 2011. Survey conducted by Oregon State University (Kreg Lindberg & Randy Rosenberger).

2011 Oregon Statewide Outdoor Recreation Survey Survey Goals Estimate current recreation participation (70 activities). Evaluate opportunities to increase participation. Provide recreation planners across the state with statistically reliable results for use in local and regional planning.

2011 Oregon Statewide Outdoor Recreation Survey Target completions 25 from each of the very low population counties (Gilliam, Sherman, Wheeler) 100 from each of the low population counties (Grant, Harney, Lake, and Wallowa) 240 from each of the other 29 counties

2011 Oregon Statewide Outdoor Recreation Survey Methodology Internet preference approach Mail invitation to complete internet survey. Postage-paid postcard to select mail survey version. Included pre-notice letter, invitation letter, and two reminder letters. Sample drawn from DMV list of driver s license holders 18 & older.

Response Rates: Combined Mailout and Response Rates Number % of Mailed % of Delivered Mailed 50,150 Delivered 46,348 92% Completed 8,860 18% 19% Respondent by Version and Format Online (47%) Paper (53%) Total by Version Participant 88% 3,816 4,004 7,820 Non-participant (12%) 341 699 1,040 Total by format 4,157 4,703 8,860

State scale participation results include: User occasions % of population participating Average # of times per year Average # of household members participating

Regional and county scale participation results include: User occasions % of population participating

County-level participation estimates being used in trails planning effort to estimate economic contributions Non-motorized boater survey included a set of trip-spending questions.

Statewide, non-motorized boating by Oregon residents contributes 1,243 jobs, $38 million in labor income, and $62 million in value added. Table 6.5. Multiplier effects of non-motorized boater trip expenditure, by region; employment in jobs, other measures in dollars Region Employment Labor Income Value Added Output 1 144 4,017,900 6,690,500 10,319,800 2 264 9,807,100 15,241,200 23,147,500 3 61 1,759,100 2,864,400 4,429,600 4 94 2,880,200 4,701,700 7,106,300 5 32 834,000 1,383,100 2,221,100 6 114 3,284,100 5,413,900 8,593,300 8 410 12,463,200 20,591,600 32,282,600 7 & 10 91 2,301,800 3,820,800 6,352,700 9 & 11 34 822,100 1,395,400 2,237,800 Total 1,243 38,169,500 62,102,800 96,690,700

2011 Oregon Statewide Outdoor Recreation Survey COUNTY SCALE HIGHEST 5 WALKING ON LOCAL TRAILS/ PATHS(% OF POPULATION) COUNTY % OF POPULATION PARTICIPATING Baker 74.1% Marion 70.3% Deschutes 69.9% Benton 69.7% Jackson 65.8% Significant differences in walking on local trails. COUNTY SCALE LOWEST 5 WALKING ON LOCAL TRAILS/ PATHS(% OF POPULATION) COUNTY % OF POPULATION PARTICIPATING Wheeler 28.3% Malheur 31.1% Harney 35.2% Yamhill 48.5% Columbia 49.0%

Local needs Plan used two methods to identify local need: Statewide outdoor recreation survey Statewide public recreation provider survey

Local needs Priority need for specific facilities in your community:

State scale highest priority for: Dirt & other soft surface trails & paths (3.8) Pubic access to waterways (3.5) Nature & wildlife viewing areas (3.4) Children s natural play areas (3.3) Picnic areas & shelters for small visitor groups (3.3) Off-street bicycle trails & pathways (3.3)

Priority need also presented at region and county scales:

2011 Oregon Statewide Outdoor Recreation Survey DESCHUTES COUNTY WHEELER COUNTY Need SCORE Need SCORE Dirt/ other soft surface walking trails & paths 3.6 Public access to waterways 3.5 Off-street bicycle trails & pathways 3.3 Public access to waterways 3.7 Picnic areas & shelters for small visitor groups Nature & wildlife viewing areas 3.6 3.4 Differences in top funding need.

Local needs Public recreation provider needs assessment survey Sample included municipal, special park district, port district, county, state, federal & Tribal recreation providers. Internet survey 219 completions (51% response rate) Separate data collection for providers with majority of lands within & outside UGBs (close-to-home and dispersed settings).

Public recreation provider needs assessment survey Survey Monkey Email lists from grant program administrators

Please rate the importance of funding need. NEED WITHIN UGBs AVERAGE SCORE (1= not needed at all, 5= most needed) Community trail systems 3.60 Children s playgrounds 3.56 Acquisition of trail corridors & ROWs 3.34 Trails connected to public lands 3.34 Public restroom facilities 3.30 Picnicking/ day-use facilities 3.29 Children s natural play areas 3.22 Urban bike routes 3.21 Trails connecting communities/ parks 3.20 Acquisition of parklands 3.19 NEED OUTSIDE UGBs AVERAGE SCORE (1= not needed at all, 5= most needed) Group campgrounds & facilities 3.86 RV/ trailer campgrounds & facilities 3.69 Public restroom facilities 3.69 Tent campgrounds & facilities (car camping) 3.60 Group day-use & facilities 3.55 Acquisition of trail corridors & ROWs 3.46 Picnicking/ day-use facilities 3.43 Trails connecting communities/ parks 3.25 Cabins & yurts for visitors 3.23 Water trail routes 3.23

LWCF Grant Criteria (Local Needs & Benefits): County-level Analysis

2013-2017 Oregon SCORP Guidelines For Park System Planning From past SCORP planning surveys we know that: Many Oregon communities need assistance with park system planning. Many communities (30% of responding communities) do not have a recreation, open space, or management plan to identify recreation need. Of those with existing plans, many (54%) were more than 5 years old.

2013-2017 Oregon SCORP Guidelines For Park System Planning Recommend a parkland classification system for city, county, regional, and state park systems in Oregon. Conduct a parkland benchmarking survey to develop suggested parkland level of service standards for Oregon.

2013-2017 Oregon SCORP Developed 11 Parkland Types PARKLAND TYPES Pocket parks Urban plaza parks Neighborhood parks Community parks Regional parks Nature parks Special use parks Trails, pathways and bikeways Regional sports parks Linear parks Destination parks

Parkland Classification System Community Parks Community parks are typically larger in size and serve a broader purpose than neighborhood parks. Their focus is on meeting the recreation needs of several neighborhoods or large sections of the community, as well as preserving unique landscapes and open spaces. Community parks are typically 15-100 acres, depending on the spatial requirements of the facilities provided and the amount of lad dedicated to natural resource protection. Community parks provide both active and passive recreation opportunities that appeal to the entire community serving an area approximately 15 minutes driving time with off-street parking and restrooms. Potential Community Park Elements Children s Play Areas Sports Fields & Courts Group Picnic Areas & Shelters Gardens Trail or Pathway Systems Community Festival or event Space Green Space or Natural Areas Off-street Parking Public Restrooms Community Park Forest Grove, Oregon

Parkland Benchmarking Survey OPRD conducted an online survey of all municipal, county, special park and recreation district, port district, and Tribal providers in Oregon.

Updated the planning guide with instructions for determining community LOS site and facility standards.

2013-2017 Oregon SCORP Local Needs and Benefits To receive OPSP points, need can be demonstrated through: SCORP needs assessment A coordinated, long-range plan with a minimum of a 5-year planning horizon A substantive public involvement process

2013-2017 Oregon SCORP Assessing Recreation Demand & Supply SORP Conference: April 13, 2015