Parks & Recreation 2025 Master Plan - Appendixa
D
a
•
.40
•
1 3�
0
APPENDIXA: RELATED PLANNING EFFORTS
There are several plans, studies and reports that influence the direction of
the Parks Plan 2025. This summary of the planning efforts reviewed
during the information and analysis stage of the process describes the
purpose of these documents and how they relate to the Plan.
CITY-WIDE PLANS AND REPORTS
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (1994)
Lake Oswego's Comprehensive Plan provides guidance for community
decision making. Like all Oregon cities, the mandated plan must conform
to the statewide planning goals.
Goal 5, Open Space, Historic and Natural Areas provides specific goals
that relate to the City's parks, recreation and natural areas. Goals
include:
• Preserve and restore environments which provide fish and wildlife
habitat.
• Protect and restore the community's wooded character and
vegetation resources;
• Protect, maintain, enhance and restore wetlands;
• Protect, restore and maintain stream corridors to maintain water
quality and to provide open space and wildlife habitat.
• Protect the natural resource, energy, aesthetic and recreation
values of Oswego Lake; and
• Preserve the historical, archaeological and cultural resources of the
community.
Goal 8, Parks and Recreation is also relevant. Goals include:
• Plan, acquire, develop and maintain a system of park, open space
and recreation facilities, both active and passive, that is attractive,
safe, functional, available to all segments of the population and
serves diverse current and long range community needs.
PARK & RECREATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (2002)
The most recent park and recreation plan builds on the efforts of the
previous 1990 Comprehensive Parks and Recreation Master Plan. The
2002 Plan process began in 2000, concurrent with the planning for the
City's Open Space Plan. The 2002 Plan looks primarily at inventory and
A-1
forecasts demand for park and recreational facilities. Similar to the Open
Space Plan, the 2002 Plan is based on late 90s data and 2000 US Census
data. The plan identified a total need for $34 million in park and
recreation improvements and projects. Key recommendations of the plan
are provided below.
• Park Land: Provide an additional 16 acres of park land for resource
activities, linear trails, recreation centers and pool and special use
facilities.
• Sport Fields: Upgrade four baseball/softball fields and one soccer
field for competition play, and develop four new baseball/softball
fields and seven new field over the next 15 years of the Plan's
adoption.
• Sport Courts: There is a need for additional indoor tennis courts,
but further analysis is needed.
• Playgrounds and Picnicking: Provide 10 new playgrounds, 83
additional picnic tables and 11 picnic shelters.
• Trails: Acquire a total of 2 acres of new trails including 12.8 miles
of park trails, 22.3 miles of walking trails, nine miles of biking/off-
road trails and 3.4 miles of equestrian trails.
• Recreation Center: There is a need for a new indoor recreation
center, with a total approximate land need of two acres.
OPEN SPACE PLAN (2001)
The City adopted its most recent Open Space Plan in 2001. Much of the
plan is based on analysis and outreach conducted in the mid to late 90s,
including the 1995 Sensitive Lands Inventory and 2000 US Census data.
The Plan focuses on Open Space issues and was prepared in coordination
with the Lake Oswego Recreation Plan. Recommendations presented in
the Plan focus on the following six elements.
• Scenic resources: retain and improve scenic sites, viewpoints, long
vistas and scenic corridors.
• Water access: enhance physical and visual access to the major
water bodies, celebrating the region's history and its place in the
larger ecosystem.
• Heritage landscapes: increase stewardship of historic structures,
landmarks or unique natural features in sites such as Oswego Lake,
Luscher Farm, Cooks Butte and Marylhurst College.
• Natural resources: Carry out Goal 5, by expanding and connecting
resources, and categorizing resources based on their sensitivity and
capacity for public access and use.
A-2
• Green neighborhoods: Create new programs and incentives to
encourage private landowners to plant native or near -native trees
and landscaping, as well as green boulevards that have enhanced
vegetation.
• Regional connections: Create regional connections in the form of
greenways and trails, and close gaps in existing corridors.
TRAILS AND PATHWAYS MASTER PLAN (2003)
The City's Trails and Pathways Master Plan establishes a vision for a city-
wide trail system. The Plan provides goals, objectives and
recommendations to achieve the vision, and includes design guidelines for
different types of trails and crossings. Since 2003, the City is also working
in partnership with Portland Metro to develop a regional trail system
through the Intertwine: an ever-growing network of integrated parks,
trails, and natural areas. Goals of the Trails Master Plan that are most
related to the Parks Plan 2025:
• Developing multi -use trails and pathways that access significant
environmental features, public facilities and parks;
• Locating trailheads and related improvements at or in conjunction
with park sites, schools and other community facilities; and
• Enabling 75 percent of all residents to reach their desired local
destinations by trail.
The Plan also establishes project priorities and phasing for new trail
projects. These include:
• Regional trails: connect neighboring jurisdictions or regionally
significant attractions;
• Community Connectors: link important land uses and areas of
interest, the region and the regional trail system; and
• Local Trails: connect surrounding neighborhoods to parks and
schools, including sidewalks on local streets and trails located
within parks.
STATE OF THE URBAN FOREST REPORT (2009)
The Report provides quantitative information about the size and condition
of the City's urban forest and the function it serves, including detailed
data about street trees. Based on US Forest Service data, the estimated
value of benefits provided by the City's street trees is nearly $3 million
per year. One of the key findings is that the species of street trees
exceeds the acceptable percentage of diversity to create a healthy forest.
Many street trees are small, and nearly 14% of trees are in fair condition.
English Ivy is the most pressing threat to the City's tree canopy.
A-3
URBAN & COMMUNITY FORESTRY PLAN (2007)
The Forestry Plan supports tree stewardship on both public and private
property, with an approach that looks at trees as vital infrastructure. The
City has a long history of managing its trees, resulting in a large degree
of public support and interest in tree conservation. Specific Plan measures
related to the Parks Plan 2025 include:
• Set and implement goals for increasing tree canopy in open space;
• Identify opportunities to increase canopy cover on public property;
• Develop and implement best management practices for tree
maintenance;
• Integrate invasive plant removal in park management;
• Incorporate park master plans and management plans into the
Urban and Community Forestry Program; and
• Investigate the feasibility of new funding mechanisms.
SUSTAINABILITY PLAN (2007)
The City has adopted sustainability goals each year since 2002. The
Sustainability Plan is the result of the City Sustainability Steering
Committee established in September 2006. The Plan is founded on ten
guiding principles to ensure effective and sustainable decisions. The
primary component of the plan centers on Sustainability Action Areas.
This includes recommendations for projects, goals and milestones and
performance measures to track progress in four action areas: energy and
transportation; water conservation; procurement; waste reduction and
recycling. Sustainable goals and milestones that relate to the Parks Plan
2025 are identified below.
• Install water -efficient irrigation systems for parklands and turf
areas, and landscape and City beautification sites;
• Use turf area maintenance practices to reduce irrigation needs;
• Explore opportunities and partnerships for composting operations
and use of materials recycling;
• Manually remove invasive species from natural areas and parks
using volunteers; and
• Use park maintenance practices that lessen the need for toxic
pesticides, fertilizers and herbicides.
A COMMUNITY VISION FOR AGING IN LAKE OSWEGO
The vision document (2006) establishes a set of goals and
recommendations for improving services for Lake Oswego's older adults.
The report suggests that the demand for services for older adults has
A-4
increased. Specifically, the Adult Community Center has experienced a
dramatic increase in demand for social services and a shift in the types of
programs and activities residents participate in. To support healthy aging,
the report recommends evaluating and identifying opportunities to
increase cultural, educational, recreational, and health programming to
support the physical and mental well-being of residents.
POPULATION BASELINE ANALYSIS (2010)
In preparation for the City's Comprehensive Plan update, the Population
Baseline Analysis provides a detailed analysis of demographic and housing
data, as well as long-term population baseline forecasts for the Lake
Oswego Urban Service Boundary (USB). The report finds that younger
and older households tend to support new funding measures for parks,
and the investment results in a "legacy project." The report also presents
future policy considerations related to parks, including the need for
continued investment for parks and community facilities in locations with
greater population levels.
HISTORIC PROTECTION PLAN (1989)
While over 20 years old, the Historic Protection Plan provides a framework
for rational, consistent decision making in the management of cultural
resources. The document series as the basis for establishing measures for
local and National Register designation, and development of protective
and promotional measures for significant resources. The project included
the first intensive survey and inventory of cultural resources in the City.
CLEAN STREAMS PLAN (2009)
Based on state and regional requirements, the Clean Stream Plan sets
forth a program that addresses public education, water quality, flooding,
maintenance and other issues related to storm and surface water
management. The plan outlines specific sustainability and stormwater
best management practices. Techniques that relate to parks and natural
areas include capturing and reusing stormwater, environmental site
design and implementation of best management practices for
sustainability, such as considering energy needs and cost efficiency.
A-5
SITE OR FACILITY SPECIFIC PLANS
MASTER PLAN FOR LUSCHER FARM (1997)
The Master Plan for Luscher Farm provides documentation from the
Luscher Farm Ad -Hoc Task Force findings, as well as from the project
design team and the public. Recommendations of the plan include use of
adjoining properties as multipurpose recreational/cultural/historic complex
with an historic farm, and active and passive use recreational space.
Specific recommendations of the plan include:
• A vehicular system that accommodates safe and clear circulation to
and from the site including signalization, a pedestrian pathway and
pedestrian overpass;
• Maintaining and enhancing the cultural and historic integrity of a
mid -20th Century farm as a community resource for education and
leisure opportunities, as well as applying for listing on the National
Historic Register; and
• Active recreation space with sports fields, sport courts, restrooms
and parking.
GOLF AND TENNIS FEASIBILITY STUDY (2009)
In 2008, the City conducted a feasibility study to assess future needs of
the municipal golf course and the potential new indoor tennis center. The
study recommends operating the golf course through the City's General
Fund; completing basic upgrades to the course; and eventual relocation of
the driving range to Luscher Farm. As an alternative, the development of
a new facility on the existing site was considered.
PROPOSED LAKE OSWEGO COMMUNITY CENTER STEERING
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION REPORT (2007)
The Report presents recommendations provided by the 20 -member
citizens' steering committee on a multi -generational community center.
Recommendations include a set of program and activity spaces, a plan for
special layout, architectural design and preliminary costs and budget for
the center. Proposed spaces include community activities, aquatics, indoor
recreation and fitness and outdoor recreation and activities. Specific
elements of the facility identified in the report include:
• Community Family Room and
Hearth
• Community Hall
• 50+ Adult Lounge and
Multipurpose Room
• Youth Activity Center
• Technology Center
• Small Meeting Rooms
• Special Event Room
• Kitchen and Cafe • Skateboard/BMX Park
• Child Watch Area • Children's Play Area
• Recreation, Therapy and Lap • Paths and Interpretive
Pools Area
• Gymnasium with indoor jogging
track
PARK AND RECREATION FACILITY SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT
(2004)
During Fall 2004, the City of Lake Oswego conducted a facility survey to
identify park and recreation facilities and activities desired by the
community for a 20 -year planning horizon. The Parks and Recreation
Department used a statistically valid survey to assist in the analysis. The
process also assisted in developing priorities for capital improvement and
land acquisition. Key findings and recommendations outlined in the report
include:
• The public is generally well aware of the department and its
programs, yet the department is struggling to keep up with
mounting expenses;
• The most popular activities in Lake Oswego include adult sports,
swimming, cultural arts, tennis, and youth sports. The survey also
found an increase in interest for senior activities; and
• Development of several short-term (0-5 years) projects that
include a multi -generational center, trail enhancement, land
acquisition and golf course analysis, as well as new athletic fields
within 5-10 years.
GEORGE ROGERS PARK MASTER PLAN (2002)
The Master Plan establishes a vision for the popular City park and historic
landmark. Based on extensive public input, the Master Plan retains
existing uses, making improvements in function and aesthetics with a few
significant overall site development changes. These changes include
vacating the Furnace St. right-of-way with a green street loop.
Improvements include the integration of art in the park and its structures,
a set of comprehensive design guidelines, use of interpretive displays and
enhancement of the parks natural areas. Other specific recommendations
include improvements to park facilities and structures.
A-7
SPECIAL DISTRICT PLANS
There are also several special district plans, or neighborhood plans for
Lake Oswego neighborhoods. The plans detail goals and policies that
define each neighborhood, providing recommendations to accomplish the
neighborhood residents' unique vision. Each of the plans addresses parks,
recreation and natural areas to some degree, as summarized below.
• Evergreen Neighborhood: seek a new neighborhood park at the 3rd
and Evergreen site; protect and restore the neighborhood's wetland
area; and improve consistent communication between the
neighborhood and the City.
• Glenmorrie Neighborhood: protect of the Willamette River
Greenway, stream corridors, tree groves, wildlife habitat and other
significant mature trees.
• Lake Forest Neighborhood: preserve the neighborhood's natural
resources and wooded character and maintain existing parks, while
providing new parks that are safe and that provide active and
passive recreation opportunities to meet the needs of the
neighborhood and surrounding residents.
• Lake Grove: preserve the neighborhood's natural resources and
wooded character.
• Lakewood Bay Bluff Area: provide visual access to Lakewood Bay
and/or pedestrian access to view decks, plazas or paths oriented to
the bay and open to the public.
• Marylhurst Area: preserve and enhance the geophysical assets
(trees, Willamette River, drainage courses, land contours and
scenic views) and develop and implement an open space plan to
protect unique natural areas, provide recreational opportunities and
help shape development patterns.
• Old Town Design District: assure protection and compatibility of all
land uses including... park, open space and historic sites.
• Waluga Neighborhood: preserve and protect Waluga
Neighborhood's natural resources and wooded character. Expand,
improve and maintain Waluga Park for active and passive activities,
providing attractive, safe, functional and available access to all
segments of the neighborhood population.
• First Addition Neighbors and Forest Hills: acquire additional open
space within the neighborhood to be used for passive uses, such as
a community garden and picknicking. The plan also lists distinctive
natural areas and trees.
A-8
• Palisades Neighborhood: maintain, enhance and develop access to
public facilities that address Palisades neighbors' recreational
needs; and promote conservation of natural resources by using
sustainable practices throughout the neighborhood.
COUNTY AND REGIONAL PLANS
CLACKAMAS COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The Clackamas County Comprehensive Plan guides land use,
transportation, and development within Clackamas County which includes
unincorporated areas of Lake Oswego. Similar to the Lake Oswego
Comprehensive Plan, the County's comprehensive plan addresses goals
and policies based on the Oregon State-wide Planning Goals. Major
elements of the plan related to parks, recreation and natural resources
are Chapter 4, Land Use; Chapter 7, Public Facilities and Services; and
Chapter 9, Open Space, Parks and Historic Sites. Specific goals include:
• Protect the open spaces resources of Clackamas County;
• Improve the environmental quality of the northwest urban area;
• Provide land, facilities and programs which meet the recreation
needs of County residents and visitors;
• Establish an equitable means of financing parks and recreation
facilities and programs;
• Preserve the historical, archaeological and cultural resources of the
County;
• Maintain and improve the quality of streams, lakes waterways and
groundwater;
• Improve fish habitat and support recovery of aquatic species;
• Efficiently use public services including transportation, transit,
parks, schools, sewer and water;
• Protect the significant natural features and systems of the County
for the enjoyment of all residents and visitors;
• Protect a network of open space to balance development within the
urban area and provide needed contrast in the urban landscape;
and
• Provide opportunities for needed recreation facilities.
Within Chapter 4, the Plan also defines several goals and policies that
relate to the Luscher Farm site under the Agricultural land use definition.
A-9
Goals for agricultural uses include preserving agricultural use of
agricultural land, conserving scenic views and open space, and protecting
wildlife habitats.
METRO 2040 REGIONAL FRAMEWORK PLAN (2005)
The Regional Framework Plan unites all of Metro's adopted land use
planning policies and requirements based on the planning horizon through
the year 2040. Under the Metro Charter and state law, cities and counties
within Metro's boundaries (Lake Oswego) are required to comply and be
consistent with Metro's adopted plans and policies.
A-10
Appendix B: Recreation Trends
APPENDIX B: RECREATION TRENDS
Across the country, park and recreation providers are reinventing their
programs and service delivery to meet the demands of the 21st
Century American lifestyle. These changing trends affect needs for
recreation programs and other opportunities provided by Lake
Oswego. To forecast recreation needs, this section discusses major
trends that are anticipated to affect program demand in Lake Oswego.
LOCAL TRENDS
Key findings from the community involvement process, conducted as
part of the Parks Plan 2025 planning process, highlight a number of
local trends in recreation. Summarized in the Public Input Summary
Report, January 2011 (available under separate cover), these findings
support the following local trends:
Important Programs
According to the results of the online questionnaire, fitness and
environmental programs are extremely important. Aquatic
programs/swimming (26%); adult sports (23%); youth sports (20%);
fitness (19%); and environmental programs (18%) were the programs
that respondents thought were most needed or should be expanded.
In addition to these, one of the activities with the highest latent
demand (where respondents would participate more frequently if they
could) reflects the community's desire to participate in lifelong learning
opportunities: education/special interest classes.
Special Events
The online questionnaire noted activities with the greatest unmet
demand—the different between current levels of participation and
desired participation if time, facilities, and resources were available.
Two of the activities with the highest latent demand reflect the
community's desire to attend more special events: concerts, festival
and special events and arts/culture.
Nature -based Programs
The online questionnaire noted activities with the greatest unmet
demand—the different between current levels of participation and
desired participation if time, facilities, and resources were available.
Three of the activities with the highest unmet demand are water
based. These include rowing, canoeing, kayaking, fishing and
swimming.
Self-directed Activities
According to questionnaire results, recreation participation is strong in
Lake Oswego. Residents participate most frequently in self-directed,
unprogrammed recreation activities. The top 12 recreation activities in
Lake Oswego are noted below based, ranked by how frequently people
participate in the related activities.
1. Walking for exercise
2. Walking for pleasure
3. Dog walking/dog parks
4. Gardening
5. Jogging/running
6. Nature walks
7. Tennis
8. Bicycling
9. Volunteer activities
10. Swimming
11. Golf
12. Yoga/Pilates
As indicated in the list, the responses reflect a desire for activities that
support exercise and fitness, nature experiences in nature, and to a
lesser extent, specialized recreation opportunities.
Program Participation Obstacles
The biggest obstacle for increasing recreation participation is related to
our busy lives. Online questionnaire respondents reported that lack of
time most frequently prevented them from participating more in
programs provided by the Parks and Recreation Department.
STATE TRENDS
In addition to these local trends in recreation, the State of Oregon
documents key trends relating to parks and recreation in its 2008-
2012 Oregon Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan
(SCORP). As they relate to Lake Oswego, two of the most significant
trends are described below:
Health and Recreation Connection
The 2008-2012 Oregon Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation
Plan (SCORP) recognized the connection between accessible recreation
activities and health. Nationwide, the U.S. is experiencing an obesity
crisis, and Oregon is no exception. Obesity and overweight increases
the risk of chronic diseases, including heart disease, diabetes, and
cancer. Physical activity reduces the risk of these chronic diseases,
regardless of weight. Providing accessible recreation opportunities has
been shown to increase activity levels and promote health. To respond
to this trend, the Parks and Recreation Department can continue to
emphasize programs that are conveniently located and provide a
diversity of activity types, and ensure that information about these
programs and recreation facilities that support active use are readily
available.
Connect Children with the Outdoors
The need to connect youth with the outdoors was one of the key
findings of the 2009-2012 Oregon Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor
Recreation Plan and is a concern nationally. The Oregon Outdoor
Children's Bill of Rights is a statewide effort sponsored by the Oregon
Recreation and Park Association that encourages recreation providers
and families to offer opportunities for children and youth to participate
in outdoor recreation activities. These activities can be incorporated as
part of the City's recreation program, as well as through the
integration of recreation opportunities in natural areas where they can
be incorporated without adversely impacting habitat and natural
resources.
NATIONAL TRENDS
In addition to state and local trends, a variety of national trends have
emerged in park and recreation planning. Many of these are similar to
the local trends noted through community involvement activities
conducted as part of this planning process.
Programs for Children
One of the greatest challenges cities nationwide are facing is how to
retain and support families in the urban environment. This challenge
includes fostering child development—including physical, social and
cognitive development—for children and youth of all ages from birth to
young adults. It also includes supporting and fostering family
connections. Programs that support child and youth development and
family interaction address these trends.
Outdoor Programs
According to the Outdoor Industry Association, 159 million people over
the age of 16 participate in outdoor activities in America today. These
activities promote wellness, social interaction, and a connection to the
outdoors. Not surprisingly, the Baby Boomer generation (people aged
42-60) and the millennial generation (ages 27 and younger) are the
largest segments driving this new outdoor lifestyle trend. People are
looking for ways to be outdoors in urban areas. Due to time demands
of family and jobs, convenience and accessibility are critical. Cities that
can deliver programs that include compelling, close -to -home outdoor
activities will have a competitive advantage in retaining and attracting
residents.
Technology and Programming
Technology is offering parks and recreation providers improved
opportunities for program outreach and enrollment. Use of the right
technology can improve affordability, accessibility and efficiency of
community facilities and services. Finding the right balance and
B-3
appropriate use for technology has become a focus of many recreation
program departments. The City of Lake Oswego already relies on
technology to help administer recreation programs and offer
technology based activities. Currently, 74 percent of those enrolling in
recreation programs register online allowing staff to manage programs
more efficiently. Websites and social media are also used for
marketing programs and events.
Senior Programs
One of the strongest trends throughout the United States and the
region is the aging of our population. This trend requires that parks
and recreation providers consider and develop facilities and programs
that will serve older adults who possess a variety of needs and
interests. Seniors can no longer be lumped into a single category and
be effectively served. With healthier lifestyles, people live longer and
have more active lives than ever before. Parks and recreation
providers need to consider seniors' diverse interests and multiple life
stages. Programs must provide for:
• Developing new skills;
• Learning new activities;
• Engaging in volunteerism;
• Helping those with some health issues and access concerns;
• Providing passive and contemplative activities;
• Offering intergenerational interactions; and
• Providing affordable activities.
Community Events
Nationally, over 90% of park and recreation providers offer performing
arts, cultural festivals and community events (NRPA, 2009). These
events appeal to a range of age groups and income levels, build
community, and attract residents, visitors and tourists. Naming rights,
space for vendors, and other advertising options provide additional
opportunities to generate revenue. Lake Oswego has already benefited
from these events by building on event themes and through increased
sales that result from attracting more people to business districts. The
City also has a Special Events Division devoted to promoting a range
of community events throughout the year.
Alternative and Challenge Sports Programs
Indoor or outdoor alternative and challenge sports, such as lacrosse,
skateboarding, rock climbing and mountain biking, have growing
appeal, especially for teens and younger adults. Because these
B-4
activities have limited availability, they generally have a regional draw.
Many of these activities require expert instruction at different skill
levels which can be provided through programming. Continuing to
accommodate these activities, and providing updated facilities and
programs in this area are ways that Lake Oswego can capitalize on this
trend while encouraging healthy activity among teens and young
adults.
Indoor Programming
Multi -use community, recreation and wellness centers that satisfy a
broad range of needs, such as classroom space and meeting rooms,
fitness classes, aquatics, social services, child care and senior services,
are the current trend. With the growing popularity of multi -use
centers, many communities have steered away from free-standing,
age-specific facilities, such as senior or youth centers. Often these
facilities are solely operated by a city, a non-profit organization, or in
partnership with a commercial fitness provider. The goal of these
facilities is to serve the entire community and all ages by balancing
low or no cost services with revenue generating programs and fees.
A multi-purpose community center has long been envisioned for the
City. If support for funding or a partnership was obtained, a
multipurpose community center could provide opportunities for
increased program stability and expanded programs desired by the
community in Lake Oswego.
Program Participation Obstacles
With today's families balancing many roles—parent, worker, and family
member—lack of time has emerged as a major barrier to recreation
participation. It is the primary reason why residents in Lake Oswego
do not participate in recreation programs. To counteract this trend,
park and recreation agencies are adopting new program formats,
including drop-in activities, short term programs, and on-line
programs, to facilitate participation.
B-5
DIA Ho
a
9
APPENDIX C: PUBLIC INPUT SUMMARY
To determine community desires and needs, an extensive
community involvement process was initiated as part of
Parks Plan 2025. Approximately 1,800 community members
were involved in the planning process. Parks Plan 2025
public input activities were timed to allow close integration
with the City of Lake Oswego's Comprehensive Plan update
"We Love LO."
PARKS PLAN 2025
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT PROCESS
The community involvement process included more than
fifteen events as well as an on-line questionnaire and a
community priority survey. The design of this process
ensured that Lake Oswego community members had
multiple, varied opportunities to respond to questions and
learn about how this process will shape the park, recreation
and natural areas system. Each public involvement activity
completed is described below.
• On-line Questionnaire: An on-line questionnaire was
widely promoted and provided an opportunity for all
residents to participate in the planning process. A total of
1110 responses were received to the questionnaire.
■ Community Intercept Events: Residents had an
opportunity to provide input for the Parks Plan 2025
during three community events held in August 2010,
including a community concert, a movie in the park and
the Lake Oswego Farmers Market. Over 150 residents
provided input at these events.
• Community Open House: An open house was held in
December 2010 to provide an additional opportunity for
all residents to participate in the planning process.
Approximately 30 residents participated in this event.
■ Focus Groups: A series of focus groups were held to
obtain input from specific user groups, including business
community leaders, natural resource interests,
neighborhood association representatives, recreation
program users, team sports representatives, and City
Advisory Board and Commission members. Over 50
individuals participated in the focus groups.
• Stakeholder Interviews: Several one-on-one or small
group interviews were conducted, including interviews
C-1
Youth Workshop: Lake Oswego Staff and Teen Lounge
participants organized and executed a workshop targeted
at Lake Oswego youth. This workshop included a
facilitated discussion, board exercises and a questionnaire
developed and executed by the teens. Eighteen teens
participated in the workshop and 12 responses were
received to the questionnaire.
Steering Committee, PRAB, NRAB and City Council: A
citizen steering committee, the Parks and Recreation
Advisory Board, the Natural Resources Advisory Board,
and City Council are providing oversight and guidance
throughout the Parks Plan 2025. Each individual on these
boards and committees is contributing many hours of
valuable time during this process.
Staff Workshop: Recreation program and maintenance
staff participated in a workshop to identify needed
improvements for parks, recreation and natural areas.
Community Priority Survey: Project team member DHM
Research completed a statistically valid phone survey to
confirm direction and identify priorities. The full report of
these results is presented in Appendix H.
Several themes have developed during the public input
process and the key findings are divided to discuss the
following topics.
• What are the key benefits that parks, recreation, and
natural areas provide to the City of Lake Oswego?
■ What is the desired character of local, neighborhood -
serving parks?
• What recreation opportunities should be provided close to
home for all Lake Oswego residents?
• What activities currently have the greatest level of
participation in Lake Oswego? What additional activities
are desired?
■ What types of recreation program improvements are
desired?
■ What improvements to parks, recreation and natural
areas are viewed as the highest priority by residents?
• What other issues were important to residents?
M
KEY BENEFITS
Protecting important places (habitats, historic sites, etc.),
enhancing health and well-being, and bringing neighbors and
people together were the benefits of parks, recreation and
natural areas that residents thought were most important:
■ Nearly all intercept event and community open house
participants thought that parks, recreation and natural
areas are very important to quality of life in Lake Oswego.
• The most important benefits to these participants were:
protecting important places (habitats, historic sites, etc.),
enhancing health and well-being, and bringing neighbors
and people together.
• About 54% of respondents to the on-line questionnaire
indicated that parks, recreation and natural areas are
very important to quality of life in Lake Oswego.
Removing those who did not answer this question raises
this number to 80%.
■ The most important social/community benefits were:
health and fitness (48%); positive activities and fun
environments for youth (36%); and places for
neighborhood and family gathering (27%). Making the
city aesthetically appealing (42%), protecting important
habitats (40%), and providing hands-on interaction with
nature (32%) were the most important environmental
functions and benefits cited by participants'.
DESIRED CHARACTER
For local parks, most residents desired a hybrid park
character, that provides both natural and developed
features, or an entirely natural character:
■ According to on-line questionnaire respondents, residents
would most like parks closest to their home to have an
integrated character (activities and features intermingled
with the natural environment) (32%) or a mostly natural
park character (26%). Only 11% wanted a mostly
developed park character.
■ Community open house participants favored a natural
character for local parks. The hybrid park types that
' Totals for many of the questions on the online questionnaire add
up to more than 100% because respondents were allowed to
choose more than one response.
C-3
include both natural and developed features (side-by-side
and integrated character) were more popular than a more
developed character.
• Neighborhood focus group participants were satisfied with
the diversity of activities available and thought the site's
existing features, such as topography and existing
vegetation, should be considered when determining
future park character.
CLOSE -TO -HOME AMENITIES
Residents identified the need for children's play,
opportunities to experience nature and opportunities to
exercise most frequently as the amenities needed close to
home:
• Intercept event participants identified the following as the
most important recreation opportunities to have within
walking or biking distance to every home: experience
nature; group gatherings; and play for children and
exercise.
■ Open house participants identified the following as the
most important recreation opportunities to have within
walking or biking distance to every home: experience
nature; exercise; group gatherings; and getting involved
(gardening, volunteering, etc.).
• According to on-line questionnaire respondents, the
following activities are most important to have close -to -
home: experience nature (38%); exercise (37%); play
sports (34%); and play for children (32%).
• Participants in the teen workshop and survey emphasized
gathering spaces and indicated that they typically go to
parks to hang out with friends or attend special events.
RECREATION PARTICIPATON
■ According to the on-line questionnaire results, the
recreation activities with the greatest participation among
Lake Oswego residents are:
1. Walking for exercise
2. Walking for pleasure
3. Dog walking/dog parks
4. Gardening
CA
5. Jogging/running
6. Nature walks
7. Tennis
8. Bicycling
9. Volunteer activities
10.Swimming
11.Golf
12.Yoga/pilates
■ Six of the 12 activities with the highest participation
levels could be supported by trails: walking for exercise,
walking for pleasure, dog -walking, jogging/running,
nature walks and bicycling.
• According to the on-line questionnaire results, activities
respondents would like to be doing more often than they
currently are include (in order of demand): concerts,
festivals and special events; education/special interest
classes; rowing, canoeing, kayaking; fishing; arts/culture;
golf; nature education; and swimming.
RECREATION PROGRAMS
Overall, residents appear satisfied with the recreation
programs offered in the community. Swimming was
frequently mentioned as a need in Lake Oswego as well as
the need for major facilities to support recreation programs,
such as an aquatic center, community center and the
implementation of the 2009 Golf and Tennis Feasibility Study
recommendations. Findings include:
• On-line questionnaire respondents most frequently rated
current programs provided by the City as very good
(39%) or satisfactory (21%).
■ Aquatic programs/swimming (26%); adult sports (23%);
youth sports (20%); fitness (19%); and environmental
programs (18%) were the programs that on-line
questionnaire respondents thought were most needed or
should be expanded.
• On-line questionnaire respondents reported that lack of
time (32%) and inadequate facilities (22%) prevented
their participation in Parks and Recreation Department
programs and activities.
• Intercept event participants selected aquatic programs
and swimming; special events; and adult sports (with a
special interest in tennis) as the most needed recreation
programs in Lake Oswego. Fitness programs,
C-5
• The teen workshop and survey echoed the programming
desires of other public input, including aquatics and
special events.
■ Community open house participants selected aquatic
programs and swimming; fitness programs and
environmental programs as the most needed recreation
programs in Lake Oswego. Youth sports and special
interest classes were also perceived as a need.
• Focus group participants saw the need to increase
information about programs and activities provided to the
community.
• Focus group participants identified the following as
recreation program needs: services for the 55+
community, younger families, young children and middle
school children; drop-in programs with childcare; and
volunteer activities.
HIGHEST PRIORITY IMPROVEMENTS
Maintaining existing parks, developing major new indoor
facilities, expanding trails and restoring natural areas were
frequently mentioned as high priority improvements in
multiple community involvement venues:
• According to on-line questionnaire respondents, the top
priorities for improving parks, recreation and natural
areas in Lake Oswego are: repair and maintain existing
parks and facilities (40%); add major new indoor facilities
(pool, community center, tennis center, etc.) (37%);
expand the trail network (25%); and restore or protect
creeks, forests and hillsides (23%).
• Focus group participants identified the following as the
highest priority improvements:
11 Improving trails and connections
El Developing an intergenerational community
center
El Developing an aquatics center
El Providing services for the growing aging
population
El Maintaining existing parks and restoring natural
areas
13 Implement the 2009 Golf and Tennis Feasibility
Study
13 Addressing the use of waterfronts on rivers and
lakes
13 Developing additional dog parks
OTHER THEMES
The following other issues were identified as themes from
focus groups and other community involvement events:
• Improve sustainability, e.g., reducing unnecessary turf,
reducing energy use, creating living buildings, etc.
• Provide adequate funding for parks and recreation.
• Improve trail access and amenities to make Lake Oswego
a 20 -minute city - where most destinations can be
accessed in 20 minutes by walking or biking.
• Develop soft -surfaced jogging paths adjacent to hard -
surfaced trails.
■ Develop a high quality rowing facility in partnership with
the current rowing club.
• Improve athletic opportunities by providing equitable
distribution of fields, improving communications and
enhancing relations with the School District.
■ Expand fields for younger players and consider more
artificial turf fields.
• Provide covered facilities, such as playgrounds and
basketball courts, for year-round play.
• Remove the barriers to volunteer activity and expand site
stewardship programs.
• Recognize the unique combination of elements at Luscher
Farm to attract residents and visitors - programs, urban
agriculture and historic elements.
• Recognize the potential of historic tourism as an economic
development tool, such as the Iron Trail currently under
development.
• Utilize recreation programs to attract residents and
visitors to downtown and other retail areas, such as
special events and packaged experiences.
■ Consider expanding use or reuse of School District
facilities.
• Improve signage and wayfinding.
C-7
�TiT1if r►!7
e
Appendix D: Park Inventory and Assessment
Park Inventory
CP iy wy d yy y
cP
C 0� C� w m" Q 0 0 Q O
Site Size
y aF
Recommended y y wm F w y°i c F �y p r io wm �m
Park Sites (Acres)
Scale
Character Qpm Q Q hry ppm 3� 1 3� mm a(�� aam Q� Q Q� yam �� Qo Notes and Unique Facilities
Property Restriction
Developed Character
Millennium Plaza Park 2.43
City -Wide
Developed
5
1
1
1
Plaza, large pergola/shelter, fountain
Sundeleaf Plaza 0.49
City -Wide
Developed
Plaza, views of Oswego Lake
Westlake Park 12.09
City -Wide
Developed
1
X
X
2010
1
3
1
1
2
1
1
1 1
Athletic field complex
Greentree Park 0.38
Local
Developed
1
X
1999
1
Hideaway Park 0.22
Local
Developed
1
X
X
2004
Pinecone Park 0.53
Local
Developed
1
X
2004
Rossman Park 0.55
Local
Developed
1
X
2006
0.5
X
1
1
Westridge Park 2.01
Local
Developed
1
X
X
1996
28,288 square foot facility; 4 indoor
Indoor Tennis Center 1.75
Special Purpose
Developed
tennis courts
Kincaid Curlicue Corridor 3.78
Special Purpose
Developed
Asphalt walking path
pro shop and 4,650 square foot
Lake Oswego Public Golf Course 38.91
Special Purpose
Developed
clubhouse and maintenance shop
Skate Park 0.78
Special Purpose
Developed
1
Modular skate features
Lake Oswego Parks, Recreation and Natural Area System Plan Appendix D
Appendix D: Park Inventory and Assessment
Lake Oswego Parks, Recreation and Natural Area System Plan Appendix D
y C
O
2 2 h
yy L CP iy yy
m m
Q y y
Site Size
r or
Recommended y y *`� F
Park Sites (Acres)
Scale
Character Qpm Q Q hry Q`m S�� �� 3 mm A°i �� ALS QJ Q.� a2 S1m 4o Notes and unique Facilities
Property Restriction
Hybrid Characters
East Waluga Park 23.97
City -Wide
Side By Side
1
X
X
1994
2
1
1
1
West Waluga Park 23.79
City -Wide
Side By Side
1
X
X
2010
1
1
Wetlands
Aspen Park (Palisades Reservoir) 3.96
Local
Side By Side
1
X
2003
Located on top of a water reservoir
Freepons Park 8.27
Local
Side By Side
1
X
1996
X
Glenmorrie Park 2.81
Local
Side By Side
1
X
2004
X
McNary Park 2.32
Local
Side By Side
1
X
2000
Located on top of a water reservoir
Southwood II 0.88
Local
Side By Side
X
Foothills Park 8.56
City -Wide
Integrated
1
1
1
1
1
Riverfront access and viewing, boat dock
Riverfront access, swimming beach,
George Rogers Park 23.90
City -Wide
Integrated
1
X
X
1995
2
1
2
X
2
1
1
2
historic iron furnace, concession building
Iron Mountain Park 50.99
City -Wide
Integrated
X
Pilkington Park 5.25
City -Wide
Integrated
1
Picnicking
Roehr Park 14.43
City -Wide
Integrated
1
X
2007
X
1
1
1
boat dock
Tryon Cove Park 6.86
City -Wide
Integrated
Natural area and limited development
Natural area and limited recreational
Woodmont Park 6.70
City -Wide
Integrated
development
Southwood Park 4.10
Local
Integrated
X
Undeveloped
Adult Community Center 2.79
Special Purpose
Integrated
12,974 square foot facility
the Willamette River, boat access, not
Charlie S. Brown Water Sports Center 0.81
Special Purpose
Integrated
1
designed for swimming
Iron Workers Cottage - Historic 0.11
Special Purpose
Integrated
Historic home
surrounded by a pier, small lifeguard
Lake Oswego Swim Park 0.20
Special Purpose
Integrated
1
1
office
Swimming for Lake Oswego youth
Luscher Area Properties
City -Wide
Integrated
Brock Property 26.15
City -Wide
Integrated
Undeveloped
Crowell Property 12.49
City -Wide
Integrated
Undeveloped
Farr Property 6.91
City -Wide
Integrated
Undeveloped
Open space, and minor recreational
Firlane Farm 22.03
City -Wide
Integrated
Undeveloped
development
fencing for baseball/softball play, 2 dog
Hazelia Field at Luscher Farm 12.47
City -Wide
Side By Side
1
X
X
2007
1
1
1
parks, maintenance building
Farm complex, community gardens,
A portion of this property is a
Luscher Farm 42.11
City -Wide
Integrated
X
1
urban farming, special purpose facilities
designated historic site
Rassekh Property 9.58
City -Wide
Side By Side
Undeveloped
picnicking, perimeter landscaping,
Stevens Meadow 20.12
City -Wide
I Natural
X
safety lighting.
Lake Oswego Parks, Recreation and Natural Area System Plan Appendix D
Appendix D: Park Inventory and Assessment
Site Size
Park Sites (Acres)
Scale
y C
O
yy L CP iy 2 2 yy h
m m
Q r y y or
F y
Recommended y y1
Character Qpm Q Q hry Q`m S��ALS QJ Q.� a2 S1m 4o Notes and unique Facilities
Property Restriction
Natural Character
Bryant Woods Park 28.51
City -Wide
Natural
X
1
Entry Kiosk
Canal Acres 27.08
City -Wide
Natural
X
Cooks Butte Park 42.81
City -Wide
Natural
X
River Run I and II Park 11.92
City -Wide
Natural
X
1
Limited access to Tualatin River
Springbrook Park 50.49
City -Wide
Natural
X
No development per City Charter
Sunnyslope Open Space 14.81
City -Wide
Natural
Open space only
Cornell Natural Area 3.29
Local
Natural
Open space only
Glenmorrie Greenway 3.99
Local
Natural
Hallinan Natural Area 3.72
Local
Natural
Open space only
Kelly Creek Park 3.67
Local
Natural
X
Open space only
Kerr Natural Area 10.00
Local
Natural
Open space only
Lake Garden Park 0.62
Local
Natural
Pond
Open space only
Lamont Springs Natural Area 3.50
Local
Natural
X
Open space only
Pennington Park 2.43
Local
Natural
Open space only
South Shore Natural Area 8.95
Local
Natural
Open space only
Campbell Native Garden 0.61
Special Purpose
Natural
X
Ellen R. Bergis Nature Reserve 0.25
Special Purpose
Natural
216.66
Lake Oswego Parks, Recreation and Natural Area System Plan Appendix D
Appendix D: Park Inventory and Assessment
Natural Area Condition
Park and Facilities Condition
Lake Oswego Park, Recreation and Natural Area System Plan Appendix D
Site Size
(Acres) Scale
�0
y
�y
i
m69 im
O Q S�
Condition
Issues/ Observations
Observed Condition
Ranking
Comments
City -Wide Parks
Brock Property
26.15 City -Wide
X
Poor
Invasives, need to mow to
control weed spread
Poor
Equestrian barn in poor shape, no other facilities
Bryant Woods Park
28.51 City -Wide
X
X
X
X X
Good
English Hawthorne
Good
New kiosk, additional comments in natural area assessment
Canal Acres
27.08 City -Wide
X
X
X
X X
Good
Isolated patches of invasives
N/A
Cooks Butte Park
42.81 City -Wide
X
X
X
Fair
Fire risk, trail erosion
(rennovation project completed
in 2010 after site visit)
N/A
Crowell Property
12.49 City -Wide
Poor
Invasives, need to mow to
control weed spread
N/A
Undeveloped
East Walu a Park
23.97 City -Wide
X
X X X
Poor
Invasives, particularly ivy
Fair
Shelter roof in poor condition, aging play equipment and concession building
Farr Property
6.91 City -Wide
X
Poor
Invasives, especially blackberry
N/A
Undeveloped, limited access; existing home
Firlane Farm
22.03 City -Wide
Poor
Invasives, need to mow to
control weed spread
N/A
Undeveloped, existing home and outbuildings
Foothills Park
8.56 City -Wide
X
X
Fair
Ivy
Good
New construction 2006, in very good shape
George Rogers Park
23.90 City -Wide
X
X
X
Poor
Heavy invasives, including ivy
and knotweed
Fair
Shelters, play area, and maintenance building in need of upgrade
Hazelia Field at Luscher Farm
12.47 City -Wide
X
Good
Restored wetland established
Good
High quality, highly developed faciltiies; new construction 2007
Iron Mountain Park
50.99 City -Wide
X
X
X
Fair
Invasives
N/A
Trails in need of repair
Luscher Farm
42.11 City -Wide
X
X
Good
Mostly developed for agricultural
and historic interpretation uses
Fair
Limited, unorganized parking and access
Millennium Plaza Park
2.43 City -Wide
N/A
Good
Very high quality materials, very functional space
Pilkin ton Park
5.25 City -Wide
X
N/A
Good
Minimally developed, limited access points
Rassekh Property
9.58 City -Wide
X
X
X
Fair
N/A
Undeveloped
River Run I and II Park
11.92 City -Wide
X
X
X X
Poor
Heavy invasives
N/A
Roehr Park
14.43 City -Wide
X
X
Fair
Aging cottonwoods
Good
No observed issues; bathrooms and boat dock in good shape
Springbrook Park
50.49 City -Wide
X
X
X
Poor
Erosion, Invasives
N/A
Stevens Meadow
20.12 City -Wide
X
X
Poor
Mowed field
N/A
Sundeleaf Plaza
0.49 City -Wide
N/A
N/A
Under construction
Sunnyslope Open Space
14.81 City -Wide
X
Poor
Holly & ivy
N/A
Tryon Cove Park
6.86 City -Wide
X
X
Poor
N/A
West Waluga Park
23.79 City -Wide
X
X
X
X X X
Fair
Wet prairie maintenance
Good
Shelter and play area recently rennovated
Westlake Park
12.09 City -Wide
N/A
Good
New covered play area; bathrooms and picnic shelter are in good condition
Woodmont Park
6.70 City -Wide
X
X
X X
Poor
Hawthorne & blackberry
N/A
Undeveloped
City -Wide Parks Total
506.961
17
10
12
5 6 8
Local Parks
Aspen Park (Palisades Reservoir)
3.96 Local
X
X
Poor
Heavy invasives
N/A
Cornell Natural Area
3.29 Local
X
X
Poor
Ivy, poor access
N/A
Freepons Park
8.27 Local
X
X
X X
Poor
Invasives
Good
Glenmorrie Greenway
3.99 Local
X
X
Poor
Heavy ivy
N/A
Glenmorrie Park
2.81 Local
X
X
X
Poor
Heavy ivy
Good
New construction 2007
Greentree Park
0.38 Local
N/A
Good
Hallinan Natural Area
3.72 Local
X
X
X
X X
Fair
Crowding, ivy
N/A
Hideaway Park
0.22 Local
N/A
Good
New construction 2005
Kelly Creek Park
3.67 Local
X
X
Good
Maintenance
N/A
Kerr Natural Area
10.00 Local
X
Poor
Headwater of a creek, heavy
invasives, potential hazard tree
N/A
Lake Garden Park
0.62 Local
Good
No access, pond located with a
cul -du -sac
N/A
Lamont Springs Natural Area
3.50 Local
X
X
X
Good
Root rot
N/A
McNary Park
2.32 Local
X
X
Good
Dense growth around perimeter
of park
Good
Pennington Park
2.43 Local
X
X
X
Good
good creek gravels
N/A
Pinecone Park
0.53 Local
N/A
Good
New construction 2005
Rossman Park
0.55 Local
N/A
Good
South Shore Natural Area
8.95 Local
X
X
X
Fair
Oak crowding
N/A
Southwood II
0.88 Local
N/A
Open field over a reservoir
N/A
Undeveloped; turf in fair condition
Southwood Park
4.10 Local
X
X
X
Poor
Blackberry
Good
Minimal facilities
Westridge Park
2.01 Local
Poor
Extensive ivy
Good
Local Total
66.191
12
9
7
4 3 0
Lake Oswego Park, Recreation and Natural Area System Plan Appendix D
Appendix D: Park Inventory and Assessment
Natural Area Condition
IPark and Facilities Condition
Other Public Open Space
Site Size
(Acres) Scale
� r
m m
cy Q
�
�m
w
Q �y
Om
° 4.
Q Condition
Issues/ Observations
Observed Condition
Ranking
Comments
Special Purpose
I
JPoor
Small and isolated
N/A
Baycreek 3&4 Tract A Open Space (1)
1.26 Other public ope
X
X
Adult Community Center
2.79 Special Purpose
X
Baycreek 3&4 Tract A Open Space (2)
0.04 Other public ope
N/A
X
Good
Building will be assessed independently
Campbell Native Garden
0.61 Special Purpose
X
X
X
X Fair
Ivy
Good
Minimal facilities
Charlie S. Brown Water Sports Center
0.81 Special Purpose
X
Poor
Poor access, potential for
connectivity
N/A
Boones Ferry Open Space 35
N/A
Building will be assessed independently
Ellen R. Ber is Nature Reserve
0.25 Special Purpose
X
X
0.19 Other public ope
Poor
Essentially inaccessible,
extensive ivy
N/A
Indoor Tennis Center
1.75 Special Purpose
0.10 Other public opE
I
IN/A
Small and isolated
Good
Building will be assessed independently
Iron Workers Cottage - Historic
0.11 Special Purpose
Poor
N/A
Deerfield Court Open Space 4
Good
Building will be assessed independently
Kincaid Curlicue Corridor
3.78 Special Purpose
Potential connection to
Southwood Park
N/A
East Country Club Open Space (15)
N/A
X
Good
Poor
Lake Oswego Public Golf Course
38.91 Special Purpose
X
0.20 Other public open sace
N/A
Good
Greentree Open Space 31
Lake Oswego Swim Park
0.20 Special Purpose
X
Poor
Adjacent to private open space,
extensive ivy
N/A
Heather Estates Open Space (32)
Fair
Minor replacement of equipment needed (water cannon), minimal supporting
facilities (for example: portable restrooms)
Skate Park
0.78 Special Purpose
Adjacent to canal
N/A
Kerr Open Space (12)
N/A
X
Fair
Modular ramps are not a preferred amenity, constrained site
Special Purpose Total
49.99
4
2
1 0
1 0
Poor
Potential connection to
Southwood Park
N/A
Kruse Creek Tract B Open Space 5
1.78 Other public opE
X
X
Poor
Associated with creek
N/A
Laurel Street Open Space
0.57 Other public opE
Other Public Open Space
Bayberry Wetlands (19)
0.04 Other public ope
X
I
JPoor
Small and isolated
N/A
Baycreek 3&4 Tract A Open Space (1)
1.26 Other public ope
X
X
Poor
Potential connection to
Southwood Park
N/A
Baycreek 3&4 Tract A Open Space (2)
0.04 Other public ope
X
X
Poor
Potential connection to
Southwood Park
N/A
Boca Ratan Open Space (17)
0.26 Other public op
X
Poor
Small, nearly connected (through
abandoned pump station to Tryon
Creek State Park
N/A
Boones Brook tract A Open Space (8)
2.08 Other public op
X
X
Poor
Poor access, potential for
connectivity
N/A
Boones Ferry Open Space 35
0.59 Other public op ens ace X
Poor
N/A
Bullock Street Open Space (23)
0.19 Other public ope
X X
Poor
N/A
Commons West Tract A Open Space 14
0.10 Other public opE
X
Poor
Small and isolated
N/A
Daimondhead 16
1.07 Other public ope
X
Poor
Connected to privately owned
pond/marsh
N/A
Deerfield Court Open Space 4
0.46 Other public op
X
X
Poor
Potential connection to
Southwood Park
N/A
East Country Club Open Space (15)
0.76 Other public op
X
Poor
Small and isolated
N/A
Former Sunningdale Reservoir 20
0.20 Other public open sace
Poor
N/A
Greentree Open Space 31
1.39 Other public ope
X
X
Poor
Adjacent to private open space,
extensive ivy
N/A
Heather Estates Open Space (32)
0.58 Other public ope
X
Poor
Adjacent to canal
N/A
Kerr Open Space (12)
1.06 Other public ope
X
X
Poor
Poor access, potential for
connectivity
N/A
Kruse Creek Tract A Open Space (3)
1.11 Other public ope
X
X
Poor
Potential connection to
Southwood Park
N/A
Kruse Creek Tract B Open Space 5
1.78 Other public opE
X
X
Poor
Associated with creek
N/A
Laurel Street Open Space
0.57 Other public opE
X
X
Poor
Potential for connectivity along
creek
N/A
Laurel Street Open Space (25)
0.16 Other public ope
X X
Poor
Small and isolated
N/A
Lost Dog Creek Open Space (29)
0.05 Other public ope.
Poor
Potential for connection to
Greentree Open Space
N/A
Lost Dog Creek Open Space (30)
0.07 Other public ope
X
Poor
Potential for connection to
Greentree Open Space
N/A
Maple Street Open Space
0.42 Other public ope
X
X
Poor
Potential for connectivity along
creek
N/A
Maple to Lakefront Path (28)
0.11 Other public open space
Poor
No particular habitat value,
extensive ivy
N/A
McVey Open Space/ Pump Station 27
0.10 Other public open sace
Poor
Small and isolated
N/A
Meadowcreek Tract A&B Open Space (6)
0.67 Other public opJ
X
X
Poor
Associated with creek
N/A
Oak Street Open Space
0.24 Other public op
X
X
Poor
Potential for connectivity along
creek
N/A
Sara Hill Open Space 33
0.18 Other public op ens ace
Poor
Small, isolated
N/A
Sherbrook Place at Boones Ferry Rd. 11
0.05 Other public opE
X
X
Poor
Poor access, potential for
connectivity
N/A
S rin brook Creek Open Space #2 10
0.25 Other public op
X
X
Poor
Poor access, potential for
connectivity
N/A
S rin brook Creek Open Space 9
1.29 Other public opE
X
X
Poor
Poor access, potential for
connectivity
N/A
Lake Oswego Park, Recreation and Natural Area System Plan Appendix D
Appendix D: Park Inventory and Assessment
Natural Area Condition
Park and Facilities Condition
Lake Oswego Park, Recreation and Natural Area System Plan Appendix D
0 �y
�0 i
Site Size
Cy 4 �'� Q my im
Observed Condition
(Acres)
Scale O Q S� Condition
Issues/ Observations
Ranking
Comments
Connected to Tryon Creek State
Tryon Creek Open Space (21) 0.11
Other public ope
X Poor
Park, steep
N/A
No access (surrounded by private
Tualatin Open Space Detention Pond (34) 0.46
Other public ope
X Poor
property)
N/A
Unknown 24 0.15
Other public ope
X Poor
Small and isolated
N/A
Upper Drive Open Space (36) 0.66
Other public open space X Poor
N/A
West Country Club Open Space 13 0.94
Other public open sace Poor
Small and isolated
N/A
Connected o Uak Creek
Westbrooke Tract B Open Space (7) 2.59
Other public ope X X Poor
Elementary
N/A
Other Public Open Space Total 22.05
1 29 4 16 0 0 0
Lake Oswego Park, Recreation and Natural Area System Plan Appendix D
Field Conditions/Capabilities/Utilizations
Site Name
�` Q O �` �.`� �C O� GjJ
O�
��
ON,
``ate
°
�� Notes
Diamond Fields
East Waluga Park
1 LL
Parks
No
Yes
60
200 Grass
Good
1
East Waluga Park
2 JrBB
Parks
No
Yes
90
330 Grass
Good
1
Geor e Ro ers Park
1 LL/SB
Parks
No
Yes
65/7
270 Grass
Good
1
George Rogers Park
2 LL
Parks
No
Yes
60
170 Grass
Good
1
Hazelia Field at Luscher
1 LL
Parks
Yes
Yes
60
180 Synthetic
Good
1
Westlake Park
1 LL
Parks
No
Yes
60
200 Grass
Good
1
x
Westlake Park
2 LL
Parks
Yes
Yes
90
330 Grass
Good
1
x
Westlake Park
3 LL/SB
Parks
Yes
Yes
65
300 Grass
Good
1
x
Bryant ES
1 LL
LOSD
Yes
No
65
300 Grass
Good
1
Bryant ES
2 LL
LOSD
Yes
No
60
200 Grass
Good
1
Forest Hills ES
1 LL
LOSD
Yes
No
60
170 Grass
Poor
0
x
Hallinan ES
1 T -Ball
LOSD
Yes
No
60
200 Grass
Poor
0
x
Lake Grove ES
1 LL
LOSD
Yes
No
60
200 Grass
Good
1
x
Lake Oswego HS
1 BB
LOSD
No
Yes
90
300 Synthetic
Good
1
Unavailable: School Use
Lake Oswego HS
2 SB
LOSD
N/A
Yes
60
200 Synthetic
Good
1
Unavailable: School Use
Lake Oswego JH
1 LL/SB
LOSD
Yes
Yes
65
300 Grass
Good
1
Lakerid e HS
1 BB
LOSD
No
Yes
90
300 Grass
Good
1
Unavailable: School Use
Lakerid e HS
2 BB/JrBB/SB
LOSD
No
No
90
300 Grass
Good
1
Unavailable: School Use
Uplands ES
1 LL
LOSD
No
No
60
150 Grass
Good
1
x
Waluga JH
1 LL/JrBB
LOSD
Yes
Yes
90
300 Grass
Good
1
x
Waluga JH
2 LL/SB
LOSD
Yes
Yes
60
200 Grass
Good
1
x
Waluga JH
3 LL/SB
LOSD
Yes
Yes
60
200 Grass
Good
1
x
Westrid e ES
1 T -Ball
LOSD
Yes
No
60
200 Grass Average
1
Field Conditions/Capabilities/Utilizations
Site Name
�` Q O �` �.`� �c O� GjJ O�
��
ON,
``ate
°
�� Notes
Rectangular Fields
George Rogers Park
1 Soc
Parks
Yes
Yes
150
225 Grass
Good
1
Hazelia Field at Luscher
1 Soc/Lx
Parks
Yes
Yes
210
330 Synthetic
Good
1
Pilkington Park
1 Soc
Parks
No
No
150
225 Grass
Good
1
Practice Only
Westlake Park
1 Soc/Lx
Parks
Yes
Yes
210
330 Grass
Good
1
x
Bryant ES
1 Soc
LOSD
Yes
No
210
330 Grass
Good
1
Forest Hills ES
1 Soc
LOSD
Yes
No
150
225 Grass
Good
1
x
Hallinan ES
1 Soc
LOSD
Yes
No
150
225 Grass
Good
1
x
Lake Grove ES
1 Soc
LOSD
Yes
No
150
225 Grass
Good
1
x
Lake Oswego HS
1 FB/Soc
LOSD
No
Yes
210
330 Synthetic
Good
1
Limited Use
Lake Oswego JH
1 Soc
LOSD
Yes
Yes
210
330 Grass
Good
1
x
Lakeridge HS
1 FB/Soc
LOSD
No
Yes
210
330 Synthetic
Good
1
Lakerid e HS
2 Soc/Lx
LOSD
No
Yes
210
330 Synthetic
Good
1
Oak Creek
1 Soc
LOSD
No
No
150
225 Grass
Poor
1
Palisades
1 Soc/Lx
LOSD
No
No
210
330 Grass
Good
1
x
River Grove ES #1
1 Soc/Lx
LOSD
No
No
210
330 Grass
Good
1
x
River Grove ES #2
1 Soc/Lx
LOSD
No
No
150
225 Grass
Average
1
x
Practice Only
Uplands ES
1 Soc/Lx
LOSD
No
No
90
120 Grass
Average
1
x
Walu a JH
1 Soc
LOSD
Yes
Yes
210
330 Grass
Good
1
x
Waluga JH
2 Soc
LOSD
Yes
No
210
330 Grass
Good
1
x
Westrid e ES
1 Soc
LOSD
No
No
210
330 Grass
Good
1
x
Other School District Amenities
Name
Site Size (Acres)
Scale
Q�
.
S
mm°
�Site
/Notes and Unique Facilities
Bryant Elementary
Incl. with Waluga JHS
Elementary
1
Play shed
Forest Hills Elemetary
5.28
Elementary
1
1
1
Hallinan Elemetary
8.76
Elementary
1
1
Lake Grove Elemetary
10.19
Elementary
1
1
Oak Creek Elemetary
8.39
Elementary
1
2
1
Palisades Elemetary
9.78
Elementary
1
2
1
Rivergrove Elemetary
9.28
Elementary
1
1
Westridge Elemetary
9.78
Elementary
1
1
Volleyball Court
Uplands Elementary
Incl. with Lake Oswego JHS
Elementary
1
Lake Oswego JH
30.65
Junior High
2
Waluga Jr High
29.76
Junior High
2
1
Overlay fields
Lake Oswego High
34.18
High School
6
3
Indoor Pool
Lakeridge High
41.16
High School
6
2
Lake Grove Swim Park
1.23
Special Purpose
School District Property Total
198.451
9
5
1
14
15
Park Natural Areas
Management & Maintenance
(Presented to City Council, Nov.6, 2010 by MIG, Inc.)
Meeting Goals
Present preliminary findings on natura
resource management issues in Lake
Oswego parks.
o Examine current management and
maintenance efforts.
Present approaches to improved
management and maintenance.
Parks & Natural Areas
11 4-V
rJ
{.
T T �
C '
"Ili ' ' � ~_, _ •�•.T Y dy a .. 'Y
iA. �- may •
urrent Natural Area Status
375-400 acres of park natural areas.
1.5 regular FTE; .8`easonal FTE.
"Responsive" mainte-ftance vs. planned.
Management is based on "Protect the
Best" philosophy.
Lack a natural area management strategy
that prioritizes & guides desired outcomes.
Park Natural Areas
What Lake Oswego has:
•About 375-400 acres of semi -natural to natural areas
•Includes upland forests, riparian woodlands, oak groves, wetlands
• Well distributed across community
• Highly variable in size, from 1 /1 Oth of an acre to over 130 acres
hon Mountain
Pennington Park
Park Natural Areas
%pes of natural resources in Lake Oswego Parks
�e.
Old growth fir at Cornell NA
40.
Lamont Springs
Rare yew trees at Cornell NA
Park Natural Areas
es of natural resources in Lake Oswego Parks
Riparian woods at Roehr Park River, beaches, rocky coves @ G. Rogers Grassland @ Stephens Meadows NA
Ash -sedge wetland @ Walugo Emergent wetland @ River Run
Management issues: Park Natural Areas
Invasive species
Public safety
o Habitat enhancementJ.
Restoration—
o Stewardship
A Me
� • ,. w T
' ' �'.�':- •. € s e Wood placement in creeks for salmon
�ff7F.4s.i'= �� .-:F' .. •��...' � �! K .ems •.
Restoration
Volunteer with usl
Snag creation for bird nesting
Fire hazard at Iron Mt
Park Natural Areas
inagement issues: Invasive species
Takes continuous attention, knowledge, priority setting
Lake Oswego has a serious ivy problem
of Lake O
Porfuegese laurel: a looming Threat Blackberry: Not worth the sweetness
.4
Reed -canary: wetland monoculture Scotts broom: loves the
Park Natural Areas
nagement issues: Good stewardship
Erosion & unauthorized use problems
Need well designed & maintained trail system
Park Ranger program to discourage
inappropriate use id problems `
Gully above bridge Q
r_` 1-I Springbrook
Park Natural Areas
Management issues: Safety
Wildfire risk: Note that most Lake Oswego natural areas are
inherently low fire risk
Higher risk is where dry grass fires can spread into flammable
woodlands & climb into canopy (Iron Mountain)
Take selective actions to reduce risk (FEMA support)
gency Companso►
*Lake Oswego spends approximately $60,000 annually for contracted services to
remove hazard trees.
** Forest Park comprises 5,000 acres.
anagement framework:
-Improve Safety
-Stabilize ecosystems to prevent decline
-Improve rare & high priority sites
• Work towards restoration over long term
-Monitor & adapt
• Integrate park system within wider ecosystem service
framework
M
safety—bff¢e—. Restore
hash worstnhante
mow Fire6reakj.&eeds
best remove 6r
tchS�.tehes cribed fire�dllnatives
remove hazar+ I:� sbest &n
M e mast ptrees
ular mowing regular mowing reduce mowing monitor & adapt
lln..r�n m
—IL
ositiorKlarfire
full
7dV1.ed!9te r..JJposition
IL
Remove
encroaching
ular mowing regular mowing reduce mowing monitor & adapt
monitor &
monitor &adapt monitor&adapt adapt
Management Framework:
o Create long range goals (25-50 year outlook)
o Conduct detailed NA inventory
o Rank sites by quality & rarity
o Establish conservation priorities
o Create 5 year & 1 year objectives for priority sites
o Build stewardship program (staff, partners, contractors)
o Begin systematic stewardship within available budget
o Monitor & adapt approaches over time (annual review, 5 year audits)
Setting priorities:
• Protect the best
• Restore the rare
• Bigger is usually better
• Enhance linkages and
networks
in for gradual, continuous progress
wards goals
jSettle
.. _
- yyy •fir ,..�
Lamont Springs among The best
Oak groves among rare
Molly Creek shows progress
Park Natural Areas
anagement ideas:
Hire expert field -oriented staff to oversee & coordinate
Train & engage maintenance staff & extend their mandate
Explore MOUs with neighboring agencies to gain synergies
Contract stewardship for short term gains
Nurture volunteer -based stewardship for long term gains
Build stewardship network of city, neighborhood, & private
Landowners
7/13/2012
7/13/2012
WC
Recommended Next Steps
Completion of conditions assessment
Return in early 2011 with:
Strategies & Goals
Prioritization matrix & identified priorities
Options & costs for implementation
(managing, maintaining, restoring identified
priorities)
a
y {
� 3 L
lw�
APPENDIX E: PARK MAINTENANCE TIERS
Lake Oswego's different park settings require different levels of
maintenance. While developed parks require routine maintenance of
sports fields, courts and related facilities, natural areas in parks
require a different scale and type of maintenance all together. The
application of different maintenance levels should reflect the amount of
maintenance needed at each site, rather than the amount of funding
available.
Because each park and natural area is different, the City should
evaluate maintenance needs for various parks and park types,
customizing the level of maintenance based on recommended
maintenance levels. Heavily -used sites and sites with the most
valuable built or environmental resources should be maintained at a
higher level whenever feasible.
DEVELOPED PARK CHARACTER
There are three levels of maintenance for the City's developed parks
and developed areas within hybrid parks: basic, standard and
enhanced.
Basic
The basic level of maintenance for Lake Oswego's developed parks and
portions of developed park areas includes routine monitoring and
inspection of recreation facilities. It also involves trash pick-up,
mowing, repair of facilities for safety (playground inspections,
damages to benches and other park amenities), and irrigation
management. The sites do not have floral displays that require intense
maintenance nor intensively planted botanical areas. In addition,
irrigation is reduced in the summer at these sites first as required to
achieve water conservation. As a result of the reduction in watering,
lawns may become more stressed at these sites. This level of
maintenance is generally provided at developed or hybrid local parks
that are not highly used, such as Greentree and Pine Cone Parks. At
this level, the City provides sufficient maintenance for health and
safety, but not for asset protection. Under this level, because the level
of maintenance is not sufficient to keep up with problems as they
arise, capital maintenance needs are accelerated.
Standard
These sites are typically city-wide parks which are larger and more
heavily used than sites receiving basic maintenance. These sites often
include heavily used facilities such as group picnic facilities, sport
fields, etc. These site receive the types of maintenance provided at
"basic" maintenance sites on a more frequent basis, including trash
E-1
pick-up, mowing, repair of facilities for safety (playground inspections,
damages to benches and other park amenities), and irrigation
management. These sites also require more intensive repairs, such
backstop repair, infield repair, fencing upgrades, building repairs,
etc.). Some limited floral areas may be provided. Other botanical
displays are kept at a minimum. Irrigation at these sites also is
reduced during water conservation periods in some park areas, but not
throughout the entire site. Irrigation is not reduced for ball fields,
picnicking areas, and turf play areas. Parks in this category include:
Hazelia Field at Luscher Farm, East Waluga Park, West Waluga Park,
Westlake Park, etc.
Enhanced
These are sites that are highly visible and heavily used. There are only
a few parks in this category: Millennium Plaza Park, Foothills Park, and
George Rogers Park. These sites are maintained at the highest level
and receive priority during the growing season for weeding, botanical
plantings, and watering. These site receive the types of maintenance
provided at "basic" and "standard" maintenance sites on a more
frequent basis. During periods of drought, floral and botanical areas in
these parks continue to be watered at lower levels to maintain health.
Turf areas also are watered to accommodate public events and heavy
use. Picnicking and field areas are watered per the "standard" level.
Because these parks require higher maintenance levels, each park is
staffed with a maintenance person who attends to maintenance
throughout the day.
NATURAL PARK CHARACTER
Much of the City's park land is dedicated natural areas. Currently, the
City has 2.5 FTE devoted to these parks. This allows the City to
perform limited maintenance, such as trash pick-up, hazard tree
removal, encampment removal, and some invasive species removal.
Staff also coordinates with Friends groups who perform volunteer
maintenance. This maintenance level has been primarily due to the
intensity of use and lack of developed features. However, a higher
level of maintenance in natural areas is critical to sustain or restore
these sites. As such the three levels of maintenance for the City's
natural areas are presented based on stewardship and restoration.
Limited (To Be Phased Out)
At the limited level, smaller natural areas or sites in poor condition
generally receive less maintenance. Sites at the limited maintenance
level either have a low level of invasive species present, or may
include sites which the City defers needed maintenance into the future.
Limited maintenance provides routine monitoring and periodic litter
removal. Yet this level of maintenance is not sufficient enough for long
E-2
term stewardship and conditions may worsen without additional
attention. Kruse Creek Open Space is the type of park that receives
limited maintenance.
Stabilize
The basic level of natural area maintenance applies to parks that are
classified to be in fair or good condition, or sites that the City has
prioritized for improvement. Maintenance at this level involves periodic
invasive species removal, erosion control and wildfire reduction
projects. This level promotes stewardship to ensure that site
conditions do not deteriorate over time. Rated in fair condition, Cooks
Butte Park serves as an example of the type of park that requires a
basic level of maintenance.
Restore
Restoration of natural areas is at the most advanced end of the natural
area maintenance spectrum. Several of Lake Oswego's natural areas
can be prioritized as sites that require restoration. This is an advanced
stage of maintenance that focuses more on site management. This
level of maintenance requires a clearly guided management plan or
"action plan" to address the range of potential projects and
maintenance needs related to restoration. Canal Acres is an example
of the type of site that may require restoration.
Table E-1 provides an overview of these different types of
maintenance. The table shows levels of maintenance for developed
character and natural character parks. Hybrid character parks may
require a combination approach to address their developed and natural
characters. The table also provides examples of park types that would
receive the related level of maintenance.
E-3
Table E-1: Lake Oswego Park and Recreation Maintenance Levels
E-4
Maintenance Needs
Routine
Periodic
Maintenance Level
Park Example
Developed Character
Basic
Monitoring and
Park amenity
Greentree
inspection
repair and
Pine Cone
• Litter removal
replacement
• Irrigation and
water
conservation
Standard
As above on a
More amenity
East Walluga
more frequent
repair
West Walluga
basis
■ Some water
conservation
Enhanced
Highest level with
Replacement of
Millenium
on-site personnel
major facilities
George Rogers
■ Floral and
Foothills
botanical
plantings
• Irrigation
maintained during
conservation
periods
Natural Character
Limited
Monitoring
Litter removal
Kruse Creek Open
■ Hazard tree
Space
removal
Stabilize
Monitoring
Invasive species
Cooks Butte Park
■ Litter removal
control
■ Wildfire risk
reduction projects
■ Erosion control
Restore
Invasive species
Invasive species
Canal Acres
removal
control
■ Stabilize
Tree thinning
ecosystem
Habitat
enhancement
■ Native tree
plantings
■ Wildfire risk
reduction projects
■ Erosion control
E-4
9
el 1 m odge
9
APPENDIX F: RECREATION PROGRAM REVIEW
Changing recreation trends, results from the community involvement
activities, and the technical analysis of existing recreation program
together suggest a variety of needs and opportunities for recreation
programs provided by the Parks and Recreation Department. As
addressed in Section I, the recreation questionnaire served as an
effective means to gauge public interest in recreation programs. A
statistically significant survey may be needed in the future to verify
the relevancy of key recreation trends and outcomes of the
questionnaire.
CURRENT PROGRAM AREAS
As noted in the Existing Conditions Summary Report, the City of Lake
Oswego supports six existing program areas:
• Adult and Senior Programming (Adult Community Center)
• Sports and Fitness
• Tennis (Indoor Tennis Center)
• Golf (Golf Course)
• Cultural and Specialized Activities
• Special Events
Needs in each of these program areas are discussed below, followed
by program needs in areas not currently provided by the Parks and
Recreation Department.
ADULT PROGRAMS
Lake Oswego has one of the largest 65+ populations in the region, and
this population is expected to grow from 14% to 24% of the total
population in the UGB during the next 25 years. The Adult Community
Center is one of the largest program areas provided by the Parks and
Recreation Department, providing more than three times the number
of participant hours of Sports and Fitness; the 2nd largest program
area. Its diverse services help older adults continue to live
independently, provide access to basic health needs, and promote
social interaction and intellectual stimulation. It also offers a
substantial volunteer program.
Given the anticipated growth of the older adult population in Lake
Oswego, this age group must continue to be a community priority.
However, nationally park and recreation agencies are steering away
from providing separate age specific facilities and focusing on
providing more flexible and cost effective multi-age facilities. Given
this trend, the City might consider providing these services as part of a
multi-age community center if one is developed in Lake Oswego in the
future.
SPORTS AND FITNESS
Enhancing health and well-being is one of the most important benefits
of parks and recreation to residents. The sports and fitness program
area will continue to be very important in the future. Based on public
involvement findings, there are several key areas for program
expansion, including:
• Activities for 55+ ranging from modified activities to competitive
activities;
• Trail -related activities and special events, such as walk-a-thons,
races, and regular trail exercise groups;
• Self-directed trail opportunities and equipment, such as interpretive
hikes, par courses, and outdoor exercise equipment;
• Other fitness -related special events and drop-in activities;
• Adult and youth sports; and
• Fitness classes.
INDOOR TENNIS CENTER
Tennis opportunities enhance health and well-being—one of the most
important benefits of parks and recreation to residents. In most
communities, tennis typically does not appear in the top 15 activities
for greatest recreation participation. In Lake Oswego, tennis is the 7th
most popular activity in terms of participation. Lack of facilities limits
further program expansion. The 2009 Golf and Tennis Feasibility Study
noted that tennis participation also increased nationally by 43% from
2000 to 2008. The Lake Oswego tennis program was noted for its
highly progressive, well-designed programs. The Tennis Center is self-
supporting and regularly returns excess funds to the City's general
fund. Its demand for court time and programs exceeds capacity.
The Feasibility Study recommended the development of a new 8 -court
indoor tennis center which would serve both local residents and the
region. The implementation of these recommendations was supported
by Parks Plan 2025 public involvement findings.
GOLF COURSE
Golf programs can provide the valued community benefit of enhancing
health and well-being. In most communities, golf typically does not
appear in the top 15 activities for greatest recreation participation. In
Lake Oswego, golf is the 11th most popular activity in terms of
F-2
participation. The Golf Course programs and events emphasize youth,
families, women, and older adults. The 2009 Golf and Tennis
Feasibility Study noted that although golf courses are not doing well
economically on a national level, Lake Oswego is in a relatively good
market position due to its higher income residents and greater
percentage of older residents who often frequent golf courses. It
recommended that the Golf Course be transferred back to general fund
support, and that several facility renovations be completed, including a
new driving range and golf education center. Expanding youth
programs was recommended as a positive activity for youth and to
help develop potential future customers.
Implementing the recommendations of the Feasibility Study is
supported by the Parks Plan 2025 public involvement findings to
address golfing needs.
SPECIAL EVENTS, CULTURAL AND SPECIALIZED ACTIVITIES
These program areas provide two benefits of parks, recreation and
natural areas that are most important to residents: enhancing health
and well-being; and bringing neighbors and people together. Needs
include:
• There is a high demand for more concerts, festivals and special
events which are often organized by Cultural and Specialized
Activities. Some of these activities could continue to focus on
downtown and other business areas to help support the economic
vitality of the City.
• Other packaged "experience" programs, such as cultural tourism or
local foods programs, could serve both residents and the region.
• Arts and cultural activities also have unmet demand.
• There is additional demand for outdoor activities, including nature
walks and fishing activities. Expanding outdoor activities for
children and youth, which respond to the goals of the Oregon
Children's Outdoor Bill of Rights, would help counteract the trend of
youth spending less and less time outdoors.
• Classes that build health and wellness, such as those offered a
Luscher Farm that promote healthy nutrition, could be expanded.
• There is additional unmet need for special interest classes.
OTHER PROGRAMS NOT PROVIDED BY THE CITY
There is unmet demand for swimming which supports the need for
future development of an aquatic center. There also is additional
unmet demand for rowing, canoeing, and kayaking, which would
support the need for access to local waterways and improvements at
F-3
the Water Sports Center. Water sports programs are currently
provided by Lake Oswego Rowing in partnership with the City.
RECREATION PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
In addition to needs for recreation opportunities and programs,
community feedback and national, state, and local trends also suggest
several needs for the provision or delivery of recreation services.
Ongoing Program Evaluation
The Parks and Recreation Department has a system in place to
evaluate recreation programs, and all programs are regularly
evaluated. The City currently relies on a variety of different evaluation
tools. The Department has set cost recovery goals for each program
area which has resulted in program cost recovery that is average or
above when compared to other similar agencies. Program cost
recovery is limited by market competition and the City's lack of a
premier program facility. In addition, performance measures are being
developed which will be tied to the City's performance based budgeting
process.
Based on an assessment of the existing system, there is a need for an
ongoing standardized evaluation process across all program areas.
Standardized evaluation tools for both youth and adults programs are
needed to measure the achievement of annual recreation program
goals as well as to collect data specific to certain programs. Evaluating
Lake Oswego's many community events can also ensure that needed
staff time and funding do not exceed available resources. Such
evaluation tools should be tied to cost recovery goals and performance
measures.
Entrepreneurial Approach
With increased competition for general fund dollars and higher cost -
recovery requirements, parks and recreation professionals are
becoming more entrepreneurial. In addition to expanding sponsorship
opportunities and increasing partnerships, agencies are exploring ways
to generate dollars. For example, the Lake Oswego Tennis Center
generates revenue that consistently returns funds to the City's general
fund in excess of its costs.
Other public agencies also are operating facilities specifically to
generate revenue. Examples of revenue -generating public facilities in
Oregon include a miniature golf course operated by Willamalane Park
and Recreation District in Springfield and a sports complex operated by
the City of Medford. Other examples include the development of
additional rental facilities for picnics and weddings.
FA
In the future, Lake Oswego will need to develop more revenue -
generation opportunities to increase revenue and become more self-
supporting. Many opportunities exist, including the development of
revenue generating opportunities as part of the new Luscher Farm
Master Plan, such as rentable greenhouses, wedding sites, food
service, or gift shop opportunities.
Partnerships and Resource Sharing
Many government services are increasingly relying on partnerships to
provide facilities, services and programs to residents. Agencies are
finding that no one agency can do it all. Potential partners include the
private sector, other public agencies, and non-profit organizations. For
example, Lake Oswego has a joint use agreement with the School
District in place that provides City access to recreational and
educational facilities when they are not in use for school activities and
functions. In addition, the City provides maintenance for some school
district facilities. The partnership with the School District should be
expanded to provide greater public access to school district facilities,
such as gymnasiums, meeting space, and swimming facilities.
The City needs to continue to consider ways to strengthen existing
partnerships and develop additional partnerships. For example, the
private sector could provide certain programs, such as bicycle
maintenance or gymnastics, or sponsor programs or special events.
Non-profit organizations could provide volunteer or program support.
Both non-profit and private organizations have collaborated with local
government agencies in other communities to provide major facilities,
such as health and wellness facilities, senior centers, sports
complexes, and community centers. Lake Oswego could consider such
as partnership as a possible means of funding major facility
development in the future.
Program Promotion and Awareness
The City of Lake Oswego currently advertises its programs and events
on the City website, as well as seasonal program guides, flyers and
posters. Yet input from the community indicated a need to increase
information about available programs and activities offered by the
City. Continued use of the City's website to promote programs can be
coupled with other tools such as public broadcast media (TV, radio and
newspapers), displays at community events and other highly visible
activities. Such a campaign should rely on a consistent theme, or
branding that is easily identifiable.
F-5
mendix G' Geographic Analysis C
Shaded cell indicates it meets all three essential services
CP = City -Wide Park, LP = Local Park
Park
Class
Play For
Children
Exercise/
Sports
Experience
Nature
Developed
Foothills Park
CP
x
x
x
Greentree Park
LP
x
x
Hazelia Field
CP
x
x
x
McNary Park
LP
x
x
x
Millennium Plaza Park
CP
x
Pilkington Park
CP
x
x
Rossman Park
LP
x
x
Sundeleaf Plaza
CP
Westlake Park
CP
x
x
Westridge Park
LP
x
x
Integrated
George Rogers Park
CP
x
x
x
Hideaway Park
LP
x
x
Luscher Farm
CP
x
x
x
Pinecone Park
LP
x
x
Roehr Park
CP
x
x
West Waluga Park
CP
x
x
x
Side-by-side
Aspen Park (Palisades Reservoir)
LP
x
x
Freepons Park
LP
x
x
x
Glenmorrie Park
LP
x
x
x
East Waluga Park
CP
x
x
Natural
Brock Property
CP
Bryant Woods Park
CP
x
x
Canal Acres
CP
x
x
Cooks Butte Park
CP
x
x
Cornell Natural Area
LP
x
Crowell Property
CP
Farr Property
CP
Firlane Farm
CP
Glenmorrie Greenway
LP
x
Hallinan Natural Area
LP
x
Iron Mountain Park
CP
x
x
Kelly Creek Park
LP
x
Kerr Natural Area
LP
Lake Garden Park
LP
Lamont Springs Natural Area
LP
x
x
Pennington Park
LP
x
Rassekh Property
CP
River Run I and II Park
CP
x
x
South Shore Natural Area
LP
x
x
Southwood II
LP
Southwood Park
LP
x
x
Springbrook Park
CP
x
x
Stevens Meadow
CP
x
Sunnyslope Open Space
CP
x
Tryon Cove Park
CP
x
Woodmont Park
CP
x
x
Shaded cell indicates it meets all three essential services
CP = City -Wide Park, LP = Local Park
Appendix H: Community Priority
Survey Report
dhm
RESEARCH
November 28, 2011
To: MIG and City of Lake Oswego Parks and Recreation
From: Davis, Hibbitts & Midghall, Inc. (DHM Research)
Re: Lake Oswego Parks and Recreation Master Plan Survey Results
I. INTRODUCTION & METHODOLOGY
Davis, Hibbitts & Midghall, Inc. (DHM Research) conducted a telephone survey of Lake
Oswego residents to assess support for the 2025 Park Plan Goals, developed through a
planning and public involvement process, as well as resident priorities within each of the
goals. All participants in the survey were over 18 years of age and lived in the City of Lake
Oswego.
Research Methodology: Between November 14 and 17, 2011, DHM Research conducted a
telephone survey of 400 residents in Lake Oswego that took an average of 13 minutes to
administer. The sample size is sufficient to assess residents' opinions generally and to
review findings by multiple subgroups, including age, gender, zip code, income, and
households with children.
Residents were contacted through Random Digit Dialing (RDD), targeted, and wireless (cell
phone) lists for a representative sample. In gathering responses, a variety of quality
control measures were employed, including questionnaire pre -testing and validations. To
achieve a representative sample, DHM Research set quotas for age, gender, and area of the
city based on the total population of residents ages 18 and older living in the city.
Statement of Limitations: Any sampling of opinions or attitudes is subject to a margin of
error, which represents the difference between a sample of a given population and the total
population (here, Lake Oswego residents). For a sample size of 400, if respondents
answered a particular question in the proportion of 90% one way and 10% the other, the
margin of error for that question would be +/-2.6%, at the 95% confidence level.' If they
answered 50% each way, the margin of error would be +/-4.9%. When response
categories are relatively even in size, each is numerically smaller and thus slightly less able
on a statistical basis to approximate the larger population.
DHM Research: DHM Research has been providing opinion research and consultation
throughout the Pacific Northwest and other regions of the United States for over three decades.
The firm is non-partisan and independent and specializes in research projects to support public
policy making. www.dhmresearch.com
'The plus-minus error margins represent differences between the sample and total population at a confidence
interval, or probability, calculated to be 95%. This means that there is a 95% probability that the sample taken for
this study would fall within the stated margins of error if compared with the results achieved from surveying the
entire population.
II. SUMMARY AND OBSERVATIONS
There is strong support for maintaining natural areas and recreational facilities in
Lake Oswego, and residents are generally satisfied with this service.
• Survey results reflect residents' widespread use of and satisfaction with Lake
Oswego's natural areas and recreational facilities. A large majority (81%) had
visited natural areas in Lake Oswego within the past year, and an even larger
number had visited parks (93%). With such extensive use, support is strong for
maintaining these local amenities.
• Mentions of more specific items like sports fields, courts, or pools were much less
frequent, and more common among households with children than in the population
generally.
Residents have a moderate level of priority for the four goals associated with the
Park Plan - very likely because they are generally satisfied.
• Residents tended to assign a medium level of priority to most items associated with
the Park Plan Goals. The absence of urgency may indicate residents' broad
satisfaction with the city's recreational resources.
• Upkeep of the parks and facilities, and clean restrooms were the highest priority for
residents.
• The lowest priorities were building a skate park and adding more dog parks - a
common result found in many communities.
Maintenance versus expansion projects takes priority for residents.
• The largest amount given during a budget building exercise was toward keeping
parks, playgrounds, sports fields and courts up-to-date and maintained. Almost $36
out of $100 was assigned to this maintenance goal.
• The next highest amount was $28 for another maintenance goal - maintaining and
managing more natural areas in Lake Oswego.
2
DHM Research I Lake Oswego 2025 Parks Plan, November 2011
III. FINDINGS
A. Park Usage and Overall Satisfaction
More than nine in ten families (93%) reported visiting a Lake Oswego park in the past year,
eight in ten (81%) had visited a natural area, and three quarters (74%) had used a trail
(Q1 -Q5, Table 1). Fewer families, but still a majority, reported using athletic centers and
sports fields: 56% had gone to the Tennis Center, Adult Community Center, West End
Building, or Lake Oswego Golf Course, and 52% had used a sports field or court.
Table 1
Lake Oswego Park Usage
Demographic differences: Visits to parks (Q1) were more common among 18 to
34 year-olds (100%) and 35 to 54 year-olds (96%) than those over 55 (88%). Park
visits also trended up with income: 97% of those earning more than $100,000/year
had been to the park in the past year compared to 84% of those earning under
$50,000, 98% of households with children under age 18 had been to the park during
the past year compared to 90% of households without children.
Visits to natural areas (Q3) were more common among residents living in the 97034
zip code (89% compared to 72% in 97035) and among households with children
(87% vs. 77%). Residents over age 55 and those earning under $50,000/year were
less likely than their counterparts to have visited a natural area, with about a quarter
in each category saying they had not done so during the past year.
Use of trails (Q2) followed similar age and income patterns, with 35 to 54 year-olds
the most frequent users among the age groups (81% versus 67% of those over 55),
and those earning less than $50,000/year the least frequent users among income
cohorts (40% had not used a trail versus 13% and 23% in the top two income
groupings).
Use of the Tennis Center, Adult Community Center, West End Building, and Lake
Oswego Golf Course was most frequent in the higher income groups and in
households with children. 64%-68% of the groups earning more than $75,000/year
had used one of these facilities, compared to 35%-43% among those earning under
$75,000/year. Similarly, 68% of households with children had used these facilities,
versus 47% of their counterparts.
3
DHM Research I Lake Oswego 2025 Parks Plan, November 2011
Don't
Response
..
1.
Gone to a park
93%
7%
0%
2.
Visited a natural area
81%
16%
3%
3.
Used a trail
74%
25%
1%
4.
Gone to the Tennis Center, Adult Community Center,
56%
44%
0%
West End Building, or Lake Oswego Golf Course
5.
Used a sports field or court
52%
46%
1%
Demographic differences: Visits to parks (Q1) were more common among 18 to
34 year-olds (100%) and 35 to 54 year-olds (96%) than those over 55 (88%). Park
visits also trended up with income: 97% of those earning more than $100,000/year
had been to the park in the past year compared to 84% of those earning under
$50,000, 98% of households with children under age 18 had been to the park during
the past year compared to 90% of households without children.
Visits to natural areas (Q3) were more common among residents living in the 97034
zip code (89% compared to 72% in 97035) and among households with children
(87% vs. 77%). Residents over age 55 and those earning under $50,000/year were
less likely than their counterparts to have visited a natural area, with about a quarter
in each category saying they had not done so during the past year.
Use of trails (Q2) followed similar age and income patterns, with 35 to 54 year-olds
the most frequent users among the age groups (81% versus 67% of those over 55),
and those earning less than $50,000/year the least frequent users among income
cohorts (40% had not used a trail versus 13% and 23% in the top two income
groupings).
Use of the Tennis Center, Adult Community Center, West End Building, and Lake
Oswego Golf Course was most frequent in the higher income groups and in
households with children. 64%-68% of the groups earning more than $75,000/year
had used one of these facilities, compared to 35%-43% among those earning under
$75,000/year. Similarly, 68% of households with children had used these facilities,
versus 47% of their counterparts.
3
DHM Research I Lake Oswego 2025 Parks Plan, November 2011
Use of sports fields and courts (Q5) varied by age (73% of 35 to 54 year-olds vs.
27% of those over 55) and income (67% among earners over $100,000/year vs.
23% of earners under $50,000), but especially by whether or not there were minor
children in the household. Eighty-four percent (84%) of households with minor
children had used a sports field or court in the past year compared to 32% of
households without children.
Overall satisfaction with the services offered by the Lake Oswego Parks and Recreation
Department was high (Q6): two-thirds (67%) reported being very satisfied with services
and another quarter (25%) said they were somewhat satisfied, for an overall of 920/0 (Chart
1). Only 5% said they were "not too" (3%) or "not at all" (2%) satisfied.
Chart 1
Satisfaction Ratings
Somewhat
Satisfied
2 5%
Not too
Satisfied
3°l0
Not at all
Satisfied
Very Satisfied pont know 2%
67%
3%
Source: DHIA Research, Nov 2011
Demographic differences: Satisfaction was higher among residents in zip code
97034 (96% very/somewhat satisfied) vs. 97035 (88%) and slightly stronger among
women (73% very satisfied) than men (61%) though combined satisfaction was
similar across gender (94% for women and 91% for men).
Responses to other questions in the survey validated that residents enjoy a high level of
satisfaction with Lake Oswego's Parks and Recreation. When asked what the Department
could start doing to better serve residents' recreation needs (Q27A), two in ten referred to
maintenance and upkeep, another two in ten said they were satisfied with existing
resources, and 16% had no comment. All other responses earned mentions from 6% or
fewer residents (Table 2).
4
DHM Research I Lake Oswego 2025 Parks Plan, November 2011
Table 2
Ways to Better Serve Residents' Recreation Needs
Response..
-00
Satisfied with existing resources
20%
Maintenance/upkeep
20%
Sports field
6%
Swimming pool
6%
Take care of natural habitat/trails
5%
Walking paths
5%
Better tennis courts
4%
Upgrade facilities
4%
Budgeting money wisely
4%
Water ways/ponds/boating
3%
Exercise rooms
3%
All other responses
2% or less
None/Nothing
16%
Don't know
4%
Demographic differences: Statistically significant differences were few among the
responses presented in Table 2. It is worth noting, however, that 11% of
households with minor children mentioned sports fields, compared to 2% of their
counterparts.
When asked what the Parks and Recreation Department should stop doing to better serve
recreation needs (Q27B), half of the sample (49%) had nothing to suggest and another
10% expressed satisfaction and no complaints. One in ten said to stop wasteful spending,
5% wanted to stop acquiring land and adding parks, and 4% asked for less focus on sports
fields.
B. Importance of Goals and Allocation of Funds
We asked residents how important each of four main Parks and Recreation goals were to
them (Q7 -Q10, Chart 2). The strongest support came for keeping parks, playgrounds,
sports fields and courts up-to-date and maintained: 95% of respondents said this goal was
very (69%) or somewhat (26%) important to them.
The two goals of 1) restoring, maintaining, and managing natural areas for resident use and
habitat benefit, and 2) offering a diverse variety of recreation programs and facilities for
residents of all ages, won overall support from nine in ten respondents, with slightly
stronger support for the former goal. Six in ten said that management of natural areas was
very important, compared to just over half (51%) who thought a diversity of recreational
programs was very important.
Of the four goals presented, making sure that everyone in Lake Oswego has access to
recreation resources within a half mile of their home met with the weakest support. 75%
5
DHM Research I Lake Oswego 2025 Parks Plan, November 2011
overall thought this goal was important (33% very/42% somewhat), while 23% found it less
so (15% not too important/8% not at all important).
Chart 2
Importance of Goals
Keeping parks, playgrounds, sports fields
and courts up to date, and make sure they
receive repairs when necessary
Restoring, maintain, and manage more
natural areas in LO, both for residents and
benefit of natural habitat
Offering a diverse variety of recreation
facilities for LO residents of all ages
Making sure that everyone in LO has access
to recreation resources within 1/2 mile from
their home
ant
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
■very ■ Somewhat Not too ■ Not at all Don't know
Source: DHIA Research, Nov 2011
Demographic differences: Households with minor children were more likely than
those without to think it very or somewhat important to keep parks, playgrounds and
fields up to date and maintained (80% said it was very important vs. 62% among
households with no minor children). Twenty eight percent (28%) of residents living
in Lake Oswego for 10 years or more felt it was not important to provide recreational
access within a half mile of their home, compared to 10% of 6-10 year residents.
Overall results about recreation goals were further validated when we asked participants to
build a budget for the Parks and Recreation Department (Q26, Chart 3). We gave residents
$100 in dedicated parks funding and asked how they would divide this money among the
four overall goals. Participants assigned the most to keeping parks, playgrounds, fields and
courts up-to-date and in good repair and to restoring, maintaining, and managing natural
areas—also reflected in Q7 -Q10 above. Specific budget amounts are in Chart 3.
6
DHM Research I Lake Oswego 2025 Parks Plan, November 2011
Chart 3
Budget Allocation
Keeping parks, playgrounds, sports fields
and courts up to date, and make sure they
receive repairs when necessary
Restoring, maintain, and manage more
natural areas in LO, both for residents and
benefit of natural habitat AN
Offering a diverse variety of recreation $20.
facilities for LO residents of all ages
flaking sure that everyone in LO has access
to recreation resources within 1/2 mile from 16.00
their home WE* �
.50
$- $10 $20 $30 $40 $50
Demographic differences: Residents of zip code 97035 gave more money to keeping
parks, playgrounds, and sports fields up to date and in good repair: $38.40 vs. $32.90
in the 97034 area.
C. Priorities within Goals
We probed residents' views about the priority of particular items falling within each of the
four main goals (Q11 -Q25). As a general observation, residents tended not to regard any of
the items as an urgent priority, nor even particularly high. The highest priority was cutting
grass, picking up trash, and cleaning park restrooms, while the lowest was building a new
skate park.
1. Goal: to keep parks, playgrounds, sports fields and courts up-to-date,
and make sure they receive repairs when necessary (Chart 4).
The highest priority of the three items within this goal was replacing aging and worn out
facilities, like playgrounds and sports centers (43% combined urgent and high priority).
Improving and upgrading sports fields was next with 28%, followed by restoring aging
picnic shelters at 21%.
7
DHM Research I Lake Oswego 2025 Parks Plan, November 2011
Chart 4
Priorities Within Goals
Replacing aging and worn Out
facilities, like playgrounds and sports
courts
Improving and upgrade sports fields
Restoring aging picnic shelters
Urgent Priority E ' Low Priority
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
■ Urgent ■ High Medium ■ Low ■ Don't know
Source: DHM Research, Nov 2011
Demographic differences: Families with minor children rated this goal more highly
than their peers without children (43% urgent or high vs. 19%).
2. Goal: to restore, maintain, and manage natural areas in Lake Oswego
for both the use of residents and the benefit of the natural habitat
(Chart 5)
The highest priority of the three items falling under this goal—and the highest priority
overall of those tested—was cutting grass, picking up trash, and cleaning park restrooms
(combined urgent and high priority at 66%). Stabilizing and enhancing natural areas came
next at 39% urgent/high, followed by offering educational programs, interpretive signage,
and volunteer programs in natural areas at 18%.
Chart 5
Priorities Within Goals
Urgent Priority E Low Priority
Cutting grass, picking up trash, and
cleaning park restrooms
Stabilizing and enhancing natural
areas
Offering educational programs,
interpretive signage, and volunteer
programs in natural areas
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
■ Urgent ■ High Medium ■ Low Don't know
Source: DHM Research, Nov 2011
DHM Research I Lake Oswego 2025 Parks Plan, November 2011
100%
E:
Demographic differences: Women felt natural areas was a higher priority than
men: 36% vs. 25%.
Households without minor children viewed offering educational programs,
interpretive signage, and volunteer programs in natural areas as a higher priority
than did households with children (26% urgent or high vs. 9%).
3. Goal: to offer a diverse variety of recreation programs and facilities
for Lake Oswego residents of all ages (Chart 6).
We tested eight items under this goal. Residents felt that adding pathways and trails was
the most pressing task in the category (urgent/high 35%). Except for adding paths and
trails, all of the items under this goal scored lower than the six items associated with the
two goals noted above.
Chart 6
Priorities Within Goals
Urgent Priority Low Priority
Adding pathways and trails 1�
Adding more river access for 77 77
. ,
boating, fishing, swimming 1180/0 380/a
Increasing the number of recreation
programs offered
Adding more community gardens
Adding sports fields
Adding community gathering areas
for special events
Adding more dog parks
Building a new skate park
■ Urgent . High
Source: DHM Research, Nov 2011
160/0 470/0
340/0
180/0 35% 45%
____
14% 32% 490/0
____
110/0 45% 43%
____
9%
____
29% 590/0
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Medium ■ Low Don't know
Demographic differences: Households with minor children were more likely than
their counterparts to mention sports fields as a priority (28% urgent or high vs.
10%).
A larger percentage of residents over age 55 viewed adding more community
gardens as a high priority (24% compared to 8%-15% of younger residents). Men
were more likely than women to see this item as a low priority (55% vs. 36%).
9
DHM Research I Lake Oswego 2025 Parks Plan, November 2011
Higher income groups and households with minor children were more likely than
their counterparts to think adding a skate park was a low priority (63%-72% among
those making more than $50,000/year and 70% among households with children,
compared to 40% and 59% among their respective counterparts).
4. Goal: to make sure that everyone in Lake Oswego has access to
recreation resources within a half mile from their home, such as a
park, natural area, play area, or a place to exercise.
We explored this goal as an open-ended question, asking survey participants what
recreation resources were important to have within half a mile from home (Table 3). We
recorded up to three responses.
Table 3
Recreation Resources Close to Home
Response..
-00
Walking trails/trails in general
29%
Park
20%
Nothing/no comment
18%
Satisfied with existing resources
17%
Natural areas
11%
Sports fields (baseball, soccer, football, etc.)
9%
Swimming pools
7%
Playgrounds
7%
Bike trails
4%
Tennis courts
3%
Exercise rooms
3%
Dog park
3%
Water ways/ponds/boating
3%
All other responses
2% or less
Don't know
2%
Demographic differences: Households with minor children were more likely than their
counterparts to favor parks (28% vs. 16%), sports fields (17% vs. 4%) and playgrounds
(12% vs. 4%). Men favored fields (13% vs. 5% among women) while women were
slightly more likely to mention trails (34% vs. 24%) and swimming pools (11% vs. 4%).
10
DHM Research I Lake Oswego 2025 Parks Plan, November 2011
Lake Oswego Parks and Recreation 2025 Plan
November 14-17 2011; N=400 General Population (land line + wireless)
13 minutes; margin of error +/-4.9%
DHM Research
INTRODUCTION
Hi, my name is and I'm calling from DHM Research, a public opinion research firm in
Oregon. I'd like to ask you about important issues in your community; I'm not trying to sell
you anything.
SCREENING
S1. Are you 18 years of age or older? (If no, ask for another member of household)
S2. What is your zip code?
kesponse Lategory14
97034 52%
97035 48%
Other (Terminate)
SATISFACTION
In the past year in Lake Oswego, have you or has anyone in your family... (Randomize)
11. The Lake Oswego Parks and Recreation Department provides and maintains parks,
trails and natural areas, and offers many recreation programs in the city. In general,
how satisfied are you with these services: very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, not too
satisfied, or not at all satisfied?
Response..
-00
Very satisfied
Don't
Response ..
25%
Not too satisfied
3%
6. Gone to a park
93%
7%
0%
7. Used a trail
74%
25%
1%
8. Visited a natural area
81%
16%
3%
9. Gone to the Tennis Center, Adult Community Center,
56%
44%
0%
West End Building, or Lake Oswego Golf Course
10. Used a sports field or court
52%
46%
1%
11. The Lake Oswego Parks and Recreation Department provides and maintains parks,
trails and natural areas, and offers many recreation programs in the city. In general,
how satisfied are you with these services: very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, not too
satisfied, or not at all satisfied?
Response..
-00
Very satisfied
67%
Somewhat satisfied
25%
Not too satisfied
3%
Not at all satisfied
2%
Don't know
3%
11
DHM Research I Lake Oswego 2025 Parks Plan, November 2011
IMPORTANCE OF 2025 GOALS
The Lake Oswego Parks and Recreation Department have four main goals for improving
parks, trails, natural areas, and recreation opportunities in the city. How important is each
of the following goals: very important, somewhat important, not too important, or not at all
important? (Randomize Q7 -Q10)
PRIORITIES WITHIN 2025 GOALS
Now, I would like to ask you about your priorities for services for each of the four goals.
Let's start with... (Randomize Section 1:Q11, Section 2: Q12 -Q14, Section 3: Q15 -Q22, and
Section 4: Q23 -Q25)
12
DHM Research I Lake Oswego 2025 Parks Plan, November 2011
Very
Smwt
Not ..
Not at all
Don't
Response Category, N-,-,:400
important
important
important
important
know
• Making sure that
everyone in Lake Oswego
has access to recreation
resources within a half
33%
42%
15%
8%
1%
mile from their home,
such as a park, natural
area, play area, or a place
to exercise.
12. Keeping parks, playgrounds,
sports fields and courts up-to-
69%
26%
3%
2%
0%
date, and make sure they
receive repairs when necessary.
13. Offering a diverse variety of
recreation programs and
51%
38%
7%
3%
0%
facilities for Lake Oswego
residents of all ages.
14. Restoring, maintain, and
manage natural areas in Lake
Oswego for both the use of
61%
29%
5%
4%
1%
residents and the benefit of the
natural habitat.
PRIORITIES WITHIN 2025 GOALS
Now, I would like to ask you about your priorities for services for each of the four goals.
Let's start with... (Randomize Section 1:Q11, Section 2: Q12 -Q14, Section 3: Q15 -Q22, and
Section 4: Q23 -Q25)
12
DHM Research I Lake Oswego 2025 Parks Plan, November 2011
Section JL: ... the goal to make sure that everyone in Lake Oswego has access to recreation
resources within a half mile from their home, such as a park, natural area, play area, or a
place to exercise.
15. What are important recreation resources you would like to have a half mile from your
home? (Open; record up to three responses)
Response..
-00
Park
20%
Walking trails
19%
Satisfied with existing resources
17%
Natural areas
11%
Trails - General
10%
Sports fields (baseball„ soccer, football etc)
9%
Swimming pools
7%
Playgrounds
7%
Bike trails
4%
Tennis courts
3%
Exercise rooms
3%
Dog park
3%
Water ways/ponds/boating
3%
All other responses
2% or less
None/Nothing
18%
Don't know
2%
Now let's talk about...
Section 2: ... the goal to keep parks, playgrounds, and sports fields and courts up-to-date,
and make sure they receive repairs when necessary.
In your opinion, Is each of the following park maintenance or upgrades an urgent, high,
medium, or low priority? Remember, with limited budgets try not to say urgent for each.
(Randomize Q12 -Q14)
13
DHM Research I Lake Oswego 2025 Parks Plan, November 2011
Now let's talk about...
Section 3:... the goal to offer a diverse variety of recreation programs and facilities for
Lake Oswego residents of all ages.
Is each of the following additions or improvements to parks, recreation facilities, and
recreational programs an urgent, high, medium, or low priority? Remember, with limited
budgets try not to say urgent for each. (Randomize Q15 -Q22)
Now let's talk about...
Section 4:.. the goal to restore, maintain, and manage natural areas in Lake Oswego for
both the use of residents and the benefit of the natural habitat.
Is each of the following aspects of restoring, maintaining, and managing natural areas in
Lake Oswego an urgent, high, medium, or low priority? Remember, with limited budgets try
not to say urgent for each. (Randomize Q23 -Q25)
14
DHM Research I Lake Oswego 2025 Parks Plan, November 2011
Don't
Response Category, N=400
Urgent
High
Medium
Low
know
15. Adding sports fields
3%
14%
32%
49%
1%
• Adding more dog parks
2%
9%
29%
59%
1%
• Adding more community gardens
2%
18%
35%
45%
0%
• Building a new skate park
2%
7%
26%
63%
2%
• Adding community gathering areas
1%
11%
45%
43%
1%
for special events
• Adding more river access for
4%
18%
38%
39%
1%
boating, fishing and swimming
• Adding pathways and trails
4%
33%
34%
28%
0%
• Increasing the number of recreation
2%
16%
47%
34%
1%
programs offered
Now let's talk about...
Section 4:.. the goal to restore, maintain, and manage natural areas in Lake Oswego for
both the use of residents and the benefit of the natural habitat.
Is each of the following aspects of restoring, maintaining, and managing natural areas in
Lake Oswego an urgent, high, medium, or low priority? Remember, with limited budgets try
not to say urgent for each. (Randomize Q23 -Q25)
14
DHM Research I Lake Oswego 2025 Parks Plan, November 2011
BUDGET ALLOCATION & FUNDING
19. Now that you have learned a bit more about the four Lake Oswego Parks and Recreation
goals, I'd like you to build a budget on how the parks and recreation budget should be
spent. Let's say $100 dollars you pay in city taxes is dedicated to parks and recreation.
How would you like that $100 spent across the four parks goals? You can assign any
dollar amount for each goal, but the overall total for the four goals needs to equal $100.
(Randomize Options)
Response Category
N=400
Keep parks, playgrounds, and sports fields and courts
20%
up-to-date, and make sure they receive repairs when
$35.50
necessary.
6%
Restore, maintain, and manage natural areas in Lake
6%
Oswego for both the use of residents and the benefit
$28.00
of the natural habitat.
5%
Offer a diverse variety of recreation programs and
$20.50
facilities for Lake Oswego residents of all ages.
4%
Make sure that everyone in Lake Oswego has access
4%
to recreation resources within a half mile from their
$16.00
home, such as a park, natural area, play area, or a
3%
place to exercise.
2% or less
Total
$100
27A. What would you like the Lake Oswego Parks and Recreation Department to START
doing to better serve your recreation needs? (Open; probe for three specifics)
Response..
-00
Satisfied with existing resources
20%
Maintenance/upkeep
20%
Sports field
6%
Swimming pool
6%
Take care of natural habitat/trails
5%
Walking paths
5%
Better tennis courts
4%
Upgrade facilities
4%
Budgeting money wisely
4%
Water ways/ponds/boating
3%
Exercise rooms
3%
All other responses
2% or less
None/Nothing
16%
Don't know
4%
15
DHM Research I Lake Oswego 2025 Parks Plan, November 2011
27B. What would you like the Lake Oswego Parks and Recreation Department to STOP doing
to better serve your recreation needs? (Open; probe for three specifics)
Response..
-00
Wasteful spending
10%
No complaints/satisfied
10%
Acquiring land/adding more parks
5%
Less focus on sports fields
4%
All other responses
2% or less
None/Nothing
490/(
Don't know
8%
DEMOGRAPHICS
These last few questions are for statistical purposes only..
28. What is your age?
Response Category
N=400
18-24
7%
25-34
13%
35-54
40%
55-64
20%
65+
19%
Refused
2%
29. Gender (By observation)
Response.. 00
Male 48%
Female 52%
30. Which of the following categories best represents your household income before
taxes in 2011? Just your best estimate is fine.
Response..
00
Less than $50,000
14%
$50,000-$75,000
11%
$75,000-$100,000
17%
$100,000-$150,000
22%
More than $150,000
24%
Refused
12%
16
DHM Research I Lake Oswego 2025 Parks Plan, November 2011
31. How many chi
Idren under age 18 are living at home? (Record NL
Response.. -i0
None
61%
1
13%
2
20%
3
6%
4
1%
32. How many years have you lived in Lake Oswego? (Read list)
amber)
17
DHM Research I Lake Oswego 2025 Parks Plan, November 2011
12%
76-10years
16%
10 years
71%
Refused
1%
amber)
17
DHM Research I Lake Oswego 2025 Parks Plan, November 2011
u * 3
•
old
9
Appendix I: Maintenance Cost Model (Example)
Lake Oswego Parks, Recreation and Natural Areas System Plan
Maintenance
Cost:
Maintenance
Maintenance
Maintenance
Maintenance Tier:
Developed
Tier:
Cost: Natural
Cost: Total
Developed
Acres
Natural
Acres
Acres
o
=
O
V
a
W
CL
a
-�
07
O
O
2
U.
N
d
Site Size
Recommended
07
o
f0
z
V
U,
fC
=
U_
M
t
I.
,�
i
O
Z
L
-W
y
Park Sites (Acres)
Scale
Character
o
o
ca
m
M
(A
W
o�G
M
�
o�G
Example Parks
$ 980,050
$ 88,475
$ 1,068,525
Park A 2.50
Local
Developed
100%
0%
X
2
$ 32,500
$ -
$ 32,500
Park B 7.00
City -Wide
Developed
100%
0%
X
$ 77,000
$ -
$ 77,000
Park C 15.00
Special Purpose
Developed
100%
0%
X
3
$ 210,000
$ -
$ 210,000
Park D 1.00
City -Wide
Side By Side
25%
75%
X
$ 1,750
X
$ 375
$ 2,125
Park E 25.00
City -Wide
Integrated
100%
0%
X
$ 175,000
$ -
$ 175,000
Park F 50.00
City -Wide
Natural
10%
90%
X
1
$ 60,000
X
$ 67,500
$ 127,500
Park G 5.00
Local
Natural
0%
100%
$ -
X
$ 2,500
$ 2,500
Park H 2.00
Local
Developed
100%
0%
X
$ 14,000
$ -
$ 14,000
Park I 2.00
City -Wide
Integrated
50%
50%
X
1
2
$ 36,000
X
$ 1,500
$ 37,500
Park J 4.00
City -Wide
Side By Side
20%
80%
X
2
$ 18,800
X
$ 1,600
$ 20,400
Park K 40.00
City -Wide
Developed
75%
25%
X
$ 270,000
X
$ 15,000
$ 285,000
Park L 10.00
Special Purpose
Developed
1000/0
00/0
X
1
$ 85,000
$ -
$ 85,000
Lake Oswego Parks, Recreation and Natural Areas System Plan
Maintenance Model Inputs
Scale and Maintenance Tier Developed Acreaqe Natural Acreaqe
Developed Acres Modifier to adjust for Integrated and side-by-side hybrid sites.
100% = fully developed, 0% = fully natural
Restroom Add -On
Sports Field Add -On
Bonus maintenance resources (annually) to recognize the additional cost of
5,000 a restroom on site
Bonus maintenance resources (annually) for the additional cost of
10,000 maintaining a competitive field
Basic
Standard
Enhanced
Stabilize
Restore
Local
$
5,000 $ 7,000
$ 9,000
$ 500
$ 1,500
City -Wide
$
71000 $ 9,000
$ 11,000
$ 500
$ 1500
Special Purpose
$
8,000 $ 10,000
$ 12,000
$ 500
$ 1,500
Developed Acres Modifier to adjust for Integrated and side-by-side hybrid sites.
100% = fully developed, 0% = fully natural
Restroom Add -On
Sports Field Add -On
Bonus maintenance resources (annually) to recognize the additional cost of
5,000 a restroom on site
Bonus maintenance resources (annually) for the additional cost of
10,000 maintaining a competitive field
Appendix J: Athletic Field Requirements
Update: Executive Summary
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
Athletic Field Requirements Study
Update 2011
Executive Summary
Introduction
The City of Lake Oswego is a community of distinction. The City enjoys a reputation of excellence
for its schools, top-ranked library, charming downtown, diverse recreational offerings, and beautiful
parks. The City's planning and development efforts are committed to maintaining the City's history
and vitality, enriching the quality of life of its residents, and carefully planning for its future.
SPORTS FIELDS NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Providing quality community facilities and maintaining a sufficient inventory of facilities to meet the
needs of the community are strategic objectives of the Parks and Recreation Department. With a
heavily engaged and active population, the City has experienced challenges in providing a sufficient
inventory of facilities to meet the needs and interests of its citizens. Providing sufficient field space
and time for youth and adult sports is one of the challenges the City of Lake Oswego faces.
In 2001 the City of Lake Oswego commissioned a study to inventory sports fields, assess demand,
identify either the oversupply or deficiency of fields to meet the demand for practice and game fields
at that time of the study, and to make recommendations. The findings were reported in the 2001
Athletic Field Requirements Study — Summary of Technical Findings.
In 2011, the field study was repeated, with staff capturing the same data points as the previous study.
The information was captured and reported in the 2011 Athletic Fields Data Summary. In October
2011, The Sports Management Group was engaged to analyze data from the 2001 and the 2011
study to determine if there are significant changes in the supply, demand, and utilization of athletic
fields and identify any existing deficiencies and/or oversupply.
Methodology
The Sports Management Group analyzed the two sets of data provided by staff— the 2001 Athletic
Field Requirements Study - Summary Technical Findings and Implications Study and the 2011 Athletic
Field Data Summary. The analysis applies the same assumptions used in the 2001 study regarding
fields. Like the 2001 study, it does not assess current field conditions, field maintenance schedules, or
the status of joint use agreements with other public and/or non-profit field facility providers. In the
2001 study tournaments and summer camps were not considered as a factor in field demand and for
consistency not considered in 2011. However, tournaments and camps impact field demand and use.
Athletic Field Requirements Study 1
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
Athletic Field Requirements Study
Update 2011
The field inventory and existing field conditions are based on information provided by City of Lake
Oswego. The information was gathered from interviews with team sport organizations and the Lake
Oswego School District. The studies measure demand and field use by the number of "slots". A slot
represents the typical length of time required for a practice or the time required for a game.
The Sports Management Group analyzed community demographics, using historical and current
population data, and analyzed demographic trends to the year 2025, as forecast in the Lake Oswego
Population Baseline Analysis. Local, regional and national trends in recreation and sports were also
analyzed and applied to projections of future demand. The findings of the detailed analysis are
reported in the Analysis of Base Data 2001-2011 section of this report.
The study also projects future demand, based on a series of assumptions. This information is
presented in a section that asks the question, "The population is changing, so why build more fields?"
The final section of this report provides short-term and long-term recommendations to address field
deficiencies. Supporting data used in this analysis are provided in the Appendix.
Summary of Findings
The City of Lake Oswego Parks and Recreation Department is maximizing the use and
provision of available sports fields. The Department employs an effective multi -use strategy
that reconfigures fields for different sports depending upon the sport season, primary need,
field conditions, and use policy.
The 2001 study found sufficient supply of softball/baseball fields for the demand at that time.
The study noted only slight capacity for growth (5 slots during peak time) of the largest
ballfield (65' x 300'). (See Athletic Field Summary Requirements on page 1 of the Appendix.) In
2001 there were two (2) lighted 65' x 300' fields and in 2011 there are three grass fields of
which two (2) are lighted. By 2011 the demand for the fields grew significantly. Although
there is greater capacity, the demand has surpassed capacity. During the June peak there is
an 80 -slot capacity and a 120 -slot demand. Two (2) additional 65'x 300' fields with lights
are needed to meet the current demand.
In 2011 there are seven (7) less softball/Little League fields than existed in 2001. During
this period the demand for T -Ball, which uses a 60' x 150' field ' has also declined. There is a
current shortage of one (1) 60' x 180' Little League Field needed to meet demand.
1 Field size refers to maximum baseline paths
Athletic Field Requirements Study 2
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
Athletic Field Requirements Study
Update 2011
The 2001 study identified a significant shortage of soccer/football fields to meet the demand
at the time. The study identified the immediate need to "buy and develop more soccer fields".
Two (2) synthetic turf fields have been added to the inventory since 2001. One field was
constructed at Lakeridge High School and is available for community use on Sundays only.
Hazelia Field was constructed in Luscher Farm Park and is available for community use
throughout the week and weekends. A small grass practice field was developed at Rivergrove
Elementary School. Despite the increase in the number of fields, there continues to be
deficiencies in the number of fields to meet the current demand for youth and adult sports.
Adult sports are not able to use fields for practice during the youth sport seasons. Field space
is only available for adult co-ed soccer games. Field space is not available for adult lacrosse
or adult football practice or games.
■ Field space for game slots are available only for adult softball once the season begins.
Youth practice times are scheduled until lopm weekday evenings in order to
accommodate demand.
Recommendations to Address Deficiencies
The Sports Management Group developed short-term and long-term recommendations to address
the deficiencies in sports fields.
SHORT-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS (1 — 5 YEARS)
Sports Field Service Standards
1. Recommend the Parks and Recreation Department work with the community, School
District, and stakeholders to establish service standards for sports fields. Level of service
standards are the expression of the minimum acceptable facilities for the community,
provides a guideline to determine land requirement, is a basis for relating recreational needs
to spatial analysis, and articulates the service level the City desires to provide its citizens or
service area. The purpose of establishing level of service standards for recreation facilities is
to ensure adequate provision of facilities and acceptable levels of opportunity for residents.
Acceptable levels of opportunity typically considers the: (1) quality of the experience;
(2) availability of programs and activities, (3) convenience of access; and (4) suitability for
intended use. Often, standards are expressed in terms of facility type per unit of population.
Facility standards will change over time as the program interests change and demographics
of the community change. Establishing sport service standards will provide a mechanism to
assist the Department in establishing policy to address trends, existing and emerging sport
needs, and the appropriate response to meet those needs. It is also recommended that a
budgetary component of each of these approaches be established to assist in policies
regarding field development and allocation.
Athletic Field Requirements Study 3
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
Athletic Field Requirements Study
Update 2011
Soccer/Football/Lacrosse:
2. There is a significant deficiency in multi -use soccer fields —specifically, the 210' x 330'
field size. Recommend the addition of, at minimum:
■ Two (2) lighted synthetic turf field to address current demand.
Other options to meet the specific demand, based on funding limitations:
■ One (1) lighted synthetic turf field and two (2) lighted grass fields
■ Three (3) lighted grass fields
3. In addition, recommend adding two (2) 150'x 225' grass with lights fields.
4. Also recommend the addition of three (3) 100'x 180' grass fields.
Refer to page 11 for other considerations.
Baseball/Softball:
5. There continues to be a significant deficiency in specific size softball fields. Develop a
minimum of two additional lighted 65' x 300' softball fields to accommodate
existing demand.
6. Recommend a 60 x 180 grass field.
7. Determine if underutilized fields, box 150 and box 170, can be converted to 60 x 180
field size.
8. Continue to work with the School District to obtain time on existing school fields.
Refer to page 11 for other considerations.
LONG-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS (6-15 YEARS)
Soccer/Football/Lacrosse:
1. Three more lighted synthetic turf fields are needed to address near -future demand in
addition to the two listed in the short-term strategy to address peak period.
Options:
■ Two (2) lighted synthetic turf fields and one (1) lighted grass field
■ One (1) lighted synthetic turf field and three (3) lighted grass fields
2. Three more 100 x 180 grass fields are needed to address near -future demand in addition to
the three listed in the short-term strategy.
3. Explore indoor soccer field possibilities.
Athletic Field Requirements Study 4
Appendix K: Park Classification Guide
APPENDIX K: PARK CLASSIFICATION GUIDE
The park classification guide is a tool for identifying the desired
purpose and function of a park. These guidelines provide
recommendations for park design, development and operations
based on park classification.
The park classification guide overview (following page) provides
a summary of the scope and organization of this tool. Existing
parks and new sites are classified by the scale and character to
optimize future design and management. Three types of design
guidelines are provided.
• General guidelines are system -wide recommendations
that should be applied to all sites and situations;
• Scale guidelines identify the optimal size and scale of a
park. Sites should fit within one of the three types of park
scale; and
• Character guidelines identify the desired design and
features of a park. Sites should fit within one of the three
types of park character.
Appendix D describes the recommended scale and character of
each park in the inventory.
W
PARK CLASSIFICATION GUIDE OVERVIEW
GENERAL GUIDELINES
(system -wide)
ACCESSIBILITY SAFETY
AMENITIES
DESIGN
DEVELOPED
MAINTENANCE
SUSTAINABILITY
SCALE AND CHARACTER GUIDELINES
(site specific)
LOCAL— -
Provides an urban or
formalized setting for
intensive use and is intended
for nearby neighbors.
HYBRID
Combines natural areas and
developed park features
and is intended for nearby
neighbors.
I 6:.
CITY-WIDE
SPECIAL USE
K-2
Provides an urban or
formalized setting for
intensive use, intended for
the entire city and beyond.
Provides an urban or
formalized setting for intensive
use, intended for the entire
city and beyond, and offers a
single or specialized purpose.
Combines natural areas
and developed park
features and is intended for
the entire city and beyond.
t i
Combines natural areas and
developed park features,
intended for the entire city
and beyond, and offers a
single or specialized purpose.
NATURAL
Combines protection and/or
enhancement of ecological
systems, and to experience
nature, and is intended for
nearby neighbors.
M
7'n,#
Combines protection
and/or enhancement of
ecological systems, and to
experience nature, and is
intended for entire city and
beyond.
Combines protection and/or
enhancement of ecological
systems, and to experience
nature, intended for the
entire city and beyond, and
offers a single or specialized
purpose.
GENERAL GUIDELINES
General guidelines for all parks include direction for park design,
amenities, accessibility, safety, maintenance and sustainability.
Design
Engage community members of all ages in meaningful
participation in the park planning and design process. Respond
to local conditions, including topography and site context;
support desired uses and activities, and define the park and
create a unique identity.
Amenities
Locate park amenities in context -sensitive locations adjacent to
streets and other uses in order to improve visibility into and
through the site, promote use and enhance user safety.
Accessibility
Connect parks with a circulation system of trails, streets and
bikeways. Design parks using universal access principles to
facilitate use by people of all ages and abilities.
Safety
Design parks to enhance the safety of both park users and the
surrounding neighborhood.
Maintenance
Account for maintenance requirements in the design of parks
and the selection of amenities. Incorporate labor-saving design
elements and innovative technologies into park design.
Sustainability
Balance the needs of nature and humans by designing and
planning activity areas to minimize environmental impacts and
preserve and enhance natural resources. Incorporate natural
areas into new parks, including developed character parks, to
provide green space and promote environmental awareness.
Enhance or preserve the urban tree canopy in parks.
K-3
SCALE GUIDELINES
Local Scale
If the park is intended primarily for the use and enjoyment of
nearby neighbors within a short walk or bike ride, it has a local
scale. Local scale parks are small (less than 10 acre) sites that
provide basic amenities such as a playground, picnic area,
pathway, access to nature or interpretive signage and displays.
City-wide
If the park is intended primarily for the use and enjoyment of
the entire city and beyond, it has a city-wide scale. City-wide
scale parks are larger (10 -acre and greater) sites that provide a
range of amenities, with accommodations such as restrooms,
off-street parking, and convenient access for pedestrians,
bicyclists and transit users.
Special Use
If the park is intended primarily for the use and enjoyment of
the entire city and beyond, AND is intended to offer a single or
specialized purpose, it has a special use scale. Special use parks
vary in size and amenities, but because they have the potential
to draw a large amount of users, these parks may need to
provide similar accommodations as city-wide scale parks.
CHARACTER GUIDELINES
Developed Character
If the site provides an urban or formalized type of park setting
designed for intensive use, the park has a developed character.
Developed parks have landscapes that are extensively altered or
re -designed to support public use. Developed parks can support
greater use than other park types, and should provide adequate
infrastructure to support this use. In Lake Oswego the
community preference is that even the most developed parks
should have natural features and be sensitive to natural
systems.
Hybrid Character
If the site combines natural areas and developed park features,
the park has hybrid character. Hybrid parks have a combination
of developed and natural character that can be integrated
together, or separated side-by-side.
K-4
Natural Character
If the site combines protection of habitat and open space,
enhancement of ecological systems, and provides opportunities
to experience nature, the park has natural character. Natural
parks have landscapes that are mostly undeveloped. Amenities
are limited to supportive features such as trails, paths, signage
and nature play areas, and allow for efforts to restore, enhance
or protect habitat.
USING THE PARK CLASSIFICATION GUIDE
The classification guide is intended to direct the design of parks
in a context -specific manner that enhances connections between
people and their environment. As projects advance and
questions arise, the classification guide also serves as a tool to
frame discussions about the role of a particular site within the
system.
For each scale and character, the guide provides a general
intent statement that will need to be supported by more detailed
design elements. The Parks and Recreation Department will
need to identify the policies and best practices that will be the
reference points for further guideline development. The City
should be very clear in identifying the difference between
requirements (such as those outlined in the Park and Natural
Area Zoning ordinance) and best practices or ideals that should
be targeted.
Three examples of resources that should be considered, but are
not limited to:
• Access Board's ADA Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG)
• Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
(CEPTED) principles; and
• Lake Oswego Sustainability Framework.
K-5
Appendix L: Sustainability
Decision Tool
Each Comprehensive Plan action area provides opportunities to
plan for a sustainable Lake Oswego.
Healthy Ecosystems: About 32% of the land area in Lake Oswego is covered by impervious surfaces
(surfaces that cannot absorb stormwater). All surface water runoff flows to Oswego Lake, the
Willamette River or the Tualatin River through a network of interconnected creeks and storm drains.
Community Health & Public Safety: The City owns Historic Luscher Farm, which boasts a 6,000
square foot organic demonstration garden and 185 organic community garden plots that are always
in use, with a waiting list of eager community members.
A Connected Community: Each year, Americans burn 2.9 billion gallons of fuel without going
anywhere. Idling forjust 10 seconds wastes more gas than turning off and re -starting your engine.
Inspiring Spaces & Places: Abundance of trees and vegetation contribute to Lake Oswego's
,p beauty, sense of place and open space. 44% of Lake Oswego is covered by trees, one of the highest
percentages in the region.
Economic Vitality: Nearly 48% of the Portland region's greenhouse gas emissions are estimated to
vcome from the consumption of goods and food by residents and businesses. Buying locally supports
a healthy environment and strengthens locally owned, independent businesses and jobs.
Complete Neighborhoods & Housing: About 27% of the Portland metropolitan region's
greenhouse gas emissions come from heating, cooling, and powering residential and commercial
buildings and the infrastructure we all depend upon.
Community Culture: Lake Oswego residents are well-connected to nature and opportunities to
recreate. Nearly 77% of residential properties are located with 1/4 mile of a public park or open
space.
Sustainability Resources
City of Lake Oswego Sustainability Program
http://www.ci.oswego.or.us/plan/Sustainability/Default.htm
The Natural Step
http://www.naturalstepusa.org
Sustainable Clackamas County:
http://www.clackamas.us/sustainability/
Metro Regional Government
http://www.metro-region.org/ AA
Visit the Comprehensive Plan update project web site for more information at www.welovelakeoswego.com
A sustainable Lake Oswego is a community that
meets the vital human needs of the present without
compromising our ability to meet future needs. It
is about more than green buildings, green streets,
and recycling. Planning in a sustainable way means
looking at the community as an interrelated system
that includes places around us (the natural and built
environment), people that live and work here, and the
local economy that supports society's needs. Through
this process we will aim to create beneficial outcomes
for all parts of this system.
The diagram above represents the scientific
relationship of the system. The environment, or
earth, forms the basis for this community system
because it provides the air, water and land that we
as people depend on to meet our life-sustaining
needs. Community prosperity is also dependent
upon the services and products the earth provides,
from healthy agricultural soils to abundant water and
reasonably stable climates.
Current demand for the earth's services (clean air,
clean water, food) is increasing, but because of how
we're living and an increasing population, its ability
to provide those services is decreasing. As a result,
we are destroying the system that we, as humans, are
completely dependent upon.
Fortunately, it's not too late. The community has the
ability to change this. Sustainability is a process of
continuous, ongoing improvement, and a realignment
of community goals and practices to grow in a more
responsible and resilient manner.
Planning for a sustainable future means understanding
"sustainability" in practical terms. Like many cities,
organizations, and businesses, Lake Oswego uses The
Natural Step (TNS) framework. The Natural Step is
based on an international scientific consensus about the
conditions needed to sustain life on earth. There are four
Sustainability Principles:
1. What we take does not build up in and harm nature or
people.
2. What we make does not build up in and harm nature
or people.
3. We protect natural systems from degradation.
4. We support people to meet their own needs.
As the community plans for the
future, the following questions
will help to ensure the decisions
we make respond to the
community vision and equally
consider the triple -bottom-line
(people, places, and prosperity)
of sustainability:
1. Does the proposal move Lake Oswego toward the
community vision?
2. Is the proposal consistent with the Sustainability
Principles?
3. Is the proposal a good financial investment?
4. Is the proposal a step on the path toward sustainability?
ti\
WE LO
Planning for People, Places and Prosperity
Updated April 7, 2011
Strategic Questions
To understand potential synergies, barriers, trade-offs, and other constraints or opportunities of a proposal, the following
set of questions provides a framework for evaluation.
Does the proposal move Lake Oswego toward the Community vision?
Is the proposal consistent with the Sustainability Principles?
Sustainability Principle 1: What we take does not build up in and harm nature or people
Reduce and ultimately eliminate our community's dependence on fossil fuels and wasteful use of
scarce metals and minerals. Use renewable resources whenever possible.
• Does it reduce or eliminate use of fossil fuels in buildings or from transportation?
• Does it increase efficiency (energy, water, materials), reliability, or connectivity in essential public infrastructure?
Sustainability Principle 2: What we make does not build up in and harm nature or people
Reduce and ultimately eliminate our community's dependence upon persistent chemicals and wasteful
use of synthetic substances. Use biologically safe products whenever possible.
• Does it encourage use of chemical -free and toxic -free building materials?
• Does it reduce risks to human and environmental health from exposure to toxins?
Sustainability Principle 3: We protect natural systems from degradation
Reduce and ultimately eliminate our community's contribution to new encroachment upon nature
(e.g. land, water, wildlife, forests, soil, ecosystems). Protect natural, life-sustaining ecosystems.
• Does it incorporate designs that respect natural systems such as watersheds and wildlife corridors?
• Does it reflect carrying capacity of natural systems and the community's ability to provide services?
Sustainability Principle 4: We support people to meet their own needs
Reduce and ultimately eliminate conditions that systematically undermine people's capacity to meet
their own needs.
• Does it provide a range of housing choices to meet the diverse needs of the community?
• Does it involve citizens in decision-making in a meaningful way?
• Is the proposal a good financial investment?
• Does it reduce long-term operating and maintenance costs? If so, what is the return on investment?
• What is the level of risk associated with taking the action (or failing to take the action)?
• Will it promote resource sharing between City and another entity or leverage external funds?
Is the proposal a step on the path toward sustainability?
• Is it a first step in phasing in more sustainable approach?
• Is it flexible and adaptable approach to accommodate future innovation?
• Does it involve a financial investment that locks community into an unsustainable situation for many years?
Comprehensive Plan Update
As the City and community develop the following key elements of the Comprehensive Plan update, proposed
amendments will be filtered through the strategic questions at the left. This process is used to evaluate
proposals to determine if they help move the community toward the community vision and sustainability
principles. Economic considerations and future flexibility are also included to provide an integrated assessment.
Draft Community Vision: Describes in words what the community
aspires Lake Oswego to be like in 2035. Structured around seven plan action areas.
Healthy Community A Connected Inspiring Economic Complete Community
Ecosystems Health & Community Spaces & Vitality Neighborhoods Culture
Public Safety Places & Housing
Scenario Options: Depicts in words and generalized maps different ways
that Lake Oswego could implement the vision.
0007
N
to Comprehensive Plan 3 6
A
(:)00*() E
N
Preferred Scenario: Community supported option for how Lake Oswego
will develop in the future. Integrates elements from the seven action areas and E
provides the foundation for updating Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. = N
N
Comprehensive Plan: Updated goals and policies for each of the seven
action areas provide direction on how to implement the vision and preferred scenario. £
To be adopted by City Council.
N
N
0
N
lection Plan: Specific, measurable steps the community will take to implement
he Goals and Policies; includes metrics, indicators, benchmarks, priority level/ £
imeline, responsibility and funding mechanisms for each action. A separate E N
iocument from the Comprehensive Plan. Ln
LAKE OSg oEoO :�?
WEv
LO
�r
Planning for People, Places and Prosperity
Appendix M: Adopting
Resolution 12-44
RESOLUTION 12-44
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO ADOPTING PARKS PLAN
2025.
WHEREAS, residents value the parks, recreation, and natural area system as important to Lake
Oswego's quality of life; and
WHEREAS, to meet community expectations for a high quality park and recreation system, a
comprehensive long-term vision is necessary to identify goals and priorities for delivering
service effectively and efficiently; and
WHEREAS, the Parks & Recreation Department has completed a two year process involving the
community to update the comprehensive long-term vision and plan for parks, recreation, and
natural areas; and
WHEREAS, the resulting plan is called "Parks Plan 2025" and establishes a 10-15 year approach
for managing, maintaining, and developing the City's parks, recreation, and natural area
system; and
WHEREAS, this plan is both long-term and aspirational, adoption of the plan does not indicate
approval of funding for all projects identified; and
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and Natural Resources Advisory Board,
who were instrumental in overseeing development of the Plan, unanimously passed a motion
on July 19, 2012 to recommend City Council adoption of Parks Plan 2025;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego that:
Section 1. Parks Plan 2025 is adopted in the form attached as Exhibit A.
Section 2. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon passage.
Considered and enacted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego on
the 31st day of July, 2012.
AYES: Mayor Hoffman, Gudman, Jordan, Olson, Tierney
NOES: Kehoe
EXCUSED: Moncrieff
ABSTAIN: None
ATTEST:
Catherine Schneider, City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM
jl
David Powell, City Attorney