DOCSLIB.ORG

Community Parkand Recreation Planning

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Community Parkand Recreation Planning A GUIDE TO COMMUNITY PARK AND RECREATION PLANNING FOR OREGON COMMUNITIES March 2019 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This 2019-2023 SCORP appendix is a modified version of the original publication, A Guide to Community Park and Recreation Planning for Illinois Communities, Second Edition, March 2001, developed by the Illinois Department of Natural Resources. The state of Oregon and the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department gratefully acknowledges the Illinois Department of Natural Resources' permission to use their publication. 1 Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................... 4 The Planning Process........................................................................ 5 Getting Started ................................................................................ 7 Steps in Preparing a Community Park and Recreation Plan Step 1: Organize the Planning Team .................................................. 9 Step 2: Agree on a Planning Process and Schedule ............................. 10 Step 3: Develop a Public Participation Strategy ................................. 11 Step 4: Collect and Display Basic Information ................................... 12 Step 5: Identify Needs and Issues ...................................................... 14 Step 6: Focus on the Highest Priority Needs and Issues ..................... 17 Step 7: Develop a Vision .................................................................. 17 Step 8: Formulate Goals and Objectives............................................ 18 Step 9: Identify Strategies .................................................................. 19 Step 10: Prioritize Strategies and Develop an Action Program ........... 21 Follow-up ....................................................................................... 24 Sources of Planning Information and Assistance ................................ 25 Checklist for the Planning Process ..................................................... 6 Forms Form 1: Resolution in Support of Planning ...................................... 27 Form 2: Interview Questions for Community Leaders ..................... 28 Form 3: Interview Questions for Park Board Members .................... 29 Form 4: Public Meeting Questionnaire ............................................ 30 Form 5: Parkland Inventory ............................................................ 31 Form 6: Site Inventory .................................................................... 32 Form 7: Community Inventory ....................................................... 34 Form 8: Community Parklands LOS Analysis ................................... 36 Form 9: Community Facilities LOS Analysis ..................................... 37 Form 10: Accessibility Checklist ........................................................ 38 Form 11: Socio-economic Information ............................................. 39 Form 12: Participation in Outdoor Recreation Activities .................. 40 Form 13: Priorities for the Future .................................................... 41 Form 14: Resolution to Adopt the Plan ........................................... 42 2 Appendices Appendix A: Accessibility Mandates ............................................................43 Appendix B: Community Map ....................................................................44 Appendix C: Oregon Parkland Classification System and Suggested Level Of Service Standards ...................................................................45 Appendix D: User Occasions and Participation in Outdoor Recreation Activities, Oregon Residents, 2017 .......................................................56 Appendix E: Percent of Population Participating in Outdoor Recreation Activities, Oregon Resident Demographic Groups, 2017 .......................59 Appendix F: Percent of Population Participating in Outdoor Recreation Activities, Oregon, Demographic Groups by Community Type, 2017 ...63 Appendix G: Priorities for the Future Within Communities, Oregon, Demographic Group, 2017 ...................................................................75 Appendix H: Priorities for the Future Outside Communities, Oregon, Demographic Group, 2017 ...................................................................76 Appendix I: Priorities for the Future Within Communities, Oregon Demographic Group by Community Type ...........................................77 Appendix J: Priorities For the Future Outside Communities, Oregon Demographic Group by Community Type ...........................................83 Appendix K: SCORP Needs Assessment .......................................................89 Appendix M: Group Brainstorming Technique ............................................96 Appendix N: Example of a Vision Statement ...............................................98 Appendix O: Potential Funding Sources ......................................................99 Appendix P: Oregon Population Data .........................................................134 3 Introduction This guide is provided to assist units of local government in Oregon (cities, counties, special districts, ports and regional districts) with a small staff, or no permanent staff at all, in preparing a park and recreation plan for their jurisdiction. The guide is designed to be easily followed by local agency staff and/or a designated group, such as an appointed planning team, given the responsibility for preparing a plan. Although reference is made throughout this guide to a community plan, the planning process described can apply to any agency-wide park and recreation plan of a unit of local government. Evidence of sound park and recreation planning is a critical factor considered by the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department (OPRD) in evaluating requests for the grant funding available annually to units of local government for the acquisition of public open space and development of recreation facilities. OPRD believes park and recreation planning encourages: provision of recreational opportunities in an effective and efficient manner, conservation of open space and natural and cultural resources, community quality of life, environmental education, sensible community growth, and economic development, especially recreation related tourism. Regional planning commissions or local planning departments, planning consultants, faculty at local educational institutions and others may be able to help you develop a plan. This guide is not intended to replace professional planning expertise that may be obtained by your community. The information and material in this guide can either supplement such assistance or provide enough guidance to enable a local agency to develop a basic park and recreation plan where such expertise is not available. 4 The Planning Process Why should you plan? First, understand that everyone plans. In our personal life, we plan our day's activities, the itinerary for a trip, and how to complete work assignments on time. Some of our plans are longer range such as those for sending our children to college and ensuring financial security for our retirement. Having a plan does not ensure success, but neglecting to plan often leads to failure. It has been said that, "Failing to plan is planning to fail." In organizations and agencies of government the need for planning is even more important because: Success usually depends on the efforts of a number of individuals, working together to meet the needs of many other people, including those within the organization. Defining success is often complex. Plans usually must be longer range. Public bodies, answerable to voters, have special responsibilities, for example, for the wise use of public funds and to fulfill legal mandates. The public must be provided opportunities for input in the planning process and expressing their opinions. For these reasons, it is critical that all members of an agency: (1) are working toward the same outcomes, and (2) agree on how to pursue these outcomes. If an agency has not agreed on where it is going, its members are likely to find themselves working toward different goals. Even if all agree on what the agency's goals are, without agreement on how to achieve these goals, staff will again find themselves working at cross- purposes. Developing a park and recreation plan does not have to be complicated and costly. The planning process presented is basically a common sense approach for identifying and deciding how to meet the recreation and open space needs of your community. Planning involves: looking at where a community stands today, envisioning where it wants to be tomorrow, and determining how to best move from today's situation to the desired future. 5 There are Plans, and Then There are Plans. There are many types of plans: comprehensive, strategic, master, site, etc. Unfortunately these labels are sometimes used inconsistently, and plans are sometimes mislabeled. In many cases, plans combine aspects of more than one type of planning. Using the planning process in this guide will result in what is usually called a community master plan for parks and recreation that combines aspects of both strategic and comprehensive planning methods. A park and recreation master plan provides an overall framework to guide the provision of park and recreation services in a community. It should be consistent with the general plan of the community. The general plan is a multi-purpose community
Load more

Recommended publications
  • District Background
    DRAFT SOUTHEAST LIAISON DISTRICT PROFILE DRAFT Introduction In 2004 the Bureau of Planning launched the District Liaison Program which assigns a City Planner to each of Portland’s designated liaison districts. Each planner acts as the Bureau’s primary contact between community residents, nonprofit groups and other government agencies on planning and development matters within their assigned district. As part of this program, District Profiles were compiled to provide a survey of the existing conditions, issues and neighborhood/community plans within each of the liaison districts. The Profiles will form a base of information for communities to make informed decisions about future development. This report is also intended to serve as a tool for planners and decision-makers to monitor the implementation of existing plans and facilitate future planning. The Profiles will also contribute to the ongoing dialogue and exchange of information between the Bureau of Planning, the community, and other City Bureaus regarding district planning issues and priorities. PLEASE NOTE: The content of this document remains a work-in-progress of the Bureau of Planning’s District Liaison Program. Feedback is appreciated. Area Description Boundaries The Southeast District lies just east of downtown covering roughly 17,600 acres. The District is bordered by the Willamette River to the west, the Banfield Freeway (I-84) to the north, SE 82nd and I- 205 to the east, and Clackamas County to the south. Bureau of Planning - 08/03/05 Southeast District Page 1 Profile Demographic Data Population Southeast Portland experienced modest population growth (3.1%) compared to the City as a whole (8.7%).
    [Show full text]
  • Our Tuesday and Thursday Series of Day Hikes and Rambles, Most Within Two Hours of Lake Oswego
    Lake Oswego Parks & Recreation Hikes and Rambles Spring/Summer 2015 Calendar of Hikes/Rambles/Walks Welcome to our Tuesday and Thursday series of day hikes and rambles, most within two hours of Lake Oswego. Information is also available at LO Park & Rec Activities Catalog . To recieve weekly News email send your request to [email protected]. Hikes are for hikers of intermediate ability. Hiking distance is usually between 6 - 10 miles, and usually with an elevation gain/loss between 800 - 2000 ft. Longer hikes, greater elevation gains or unusual trail conditions will be noted in the hike description. Hikes leave at 8:00 a.m., unless otherwise indicated. Rambles are typically shorter, less rugged, and more leisurely paced -- perfect for beginners. Outings are usually 5-7 miles with comfortable elevation gains and good trail conditions. Leaves promptly at 8:30a unless otherwise noted. Meeting Places All hikes and rambles leave from the City of Lake Oswego West End Building (WEB), 4101 Kruse Way, Lake Oswego. Park in the lower parking lot (behind the building) off of Kruse Way. Individual hike or ramble descriptions may include second pickup times and places. (See included places table.) for legend. All mileages indicated are roundtrip. Second Meeting Places Code Meeting Place AWHD Airport Way Home Depot, Exit 24-B off I-205, SW corner of parking lot CFM Clackamas Fred Meyer, Exit 12-A off I-205, north lot near Elmer's End of the Oregon Trail Interpretative Center, Exit 10 off I-205, right on Washington Street to EOT parking lot by covered wagons Jantzen Beach Target,Exit 308 off I-5, left on N Hayden Island, left on N Parker, SE corner JBT Target parking lot L&C Lewis and Clark State Park.
    [Show full text]
  • Past Projects Capital and Maintenance Projects
    Past Projects Capital and Maintenance Projects Baseball Diamond Renovations Project completed in 2015: Repaired baseball fields in Fernhill, Glenhaven and Pier Parks. Thank you to Friends of Baseball for major support. Bill Naito Legacy Fountain completed in 2009: Completion of the Bill Naito Legacy Fountain. Thank you to the Naito Family for major funding. Climbing Walls completed in 2014: Installed 6 permanent bouldering walls in East Portland, Southwest, Mt. Scott, St. Johns, Hillside and University Park Community Centers, and purchased 2 mobile climbing walls. Colonel Summers Project completed in 2014: Built a futsol court in collaboration with Operation Pitch Invasion. Thank you to the Portland Timbers for major funding. Couch Park Project completed in 2011: Added play equipment, soft playground surfacing, and handicapped access for children with disabilities. Dawson Park Project completed in 2013: Built an interactive water feature as part of the historical park renovation. Thank you to the Legacy Emmanuel for major funding. Director Park completed in 2010: Built Director Park and Teachers Fountain in downtown Portland. Thank you to Jordan Schnitzer and Tom Moyer for major funding. Grant Park Project completed in 2008: Repaired irrigation system in Grant Park. Holly Farm Park Project completed in 2007: Built Holly Farm Park in collaboration with the Trust for Public Land and Oregon State Parks. Thank you to the Joyce N Furman Memorial Trust for major funding. Hoyt Arboretum Project completed in 2012: Installed interpretive and way-finding signage in Hoyt Arboretum. Thank you to the Joyce N Furman Memorial Trust for major funding. Lownsdale and Chapman Squares Project completed in 2013: Restored historic downtown squares.
    [Show full text]
  • Requested Budget Fiscal Year 2014-15
    South Park Blocks, 1910 REQUESTED BUDGET Fiscal Year 2014-15 South Park Blocks, 2013 Portland Parks & Recreation FY 2014-15 Requested Budget Finance Department Jeff Shaffer, Finance Manager The Portland Parks & Recreation FY 2014-15 Requested Budget is a complex and enormous project which takes many disciplines throughout the bureau, as well as critical public input. I personally want to thank the following people who contributed throughout this budget process toward the development of this budget. Budget Advisory Committee Communications Team Portland Parks Board Members Margaret Evans Joan Hallquist Andy Nelson, Parks Board Chair Warren Jimenez Mike Alexander Elizabeth Kennedy-Wong Judy Bluehorse Skelton Colleen Keyes Mary Anne Cassin Jeff Shaffer Kathy Fong Stevens Jennifer Yocom Nick Hardigg (member ex-officio) Dion Jordan BRASS Team Jim Owens Dennis Choquette - Lead Meryl Redisch (member ex-officio) Bryan Aptekar Linda Robinson Karen Birt Shelli Romero Doug Brenner Bob Sallinger Kim Calame Christa Thoeresz Kristine Canham Sue Van Brocklin Terri Davis Mauricio Villarreal Gregory Dubay Labor Partners Josh Green Scott Gibson (PP&R Park Services) - DCTU Tim Hammock Tim Haberman (PP&R Recreation) - Local 483 Abbe MacFarlane Gerry Verhoef (PP&R Engineering) – COPPEA Amie Massier Heather McKillip Coalition/Community Representatives Jeff Milkes Angela Moos, North Portland Neighborhood Services Sally Noble Amy Lewin, Southeast Uplift Neighborhood Office Robi Potter Brenda McSweeney, East Portland Neighborhood Office Kym Randolph Carol Chesarek, Neighbors West/Northwest Shawn Rogers Joshua Shirley, Central Northeast Neighbors Nancy Roth Paul Anthony, Northeast Coalition of Neighbors Jamie Sandness Phil Kalberer, Downtown Business Community Devra Staneart Sokho Eath, IRCO/Asian Family Center Craig Vanderbout Steve Mullinax, Southwest Neighbors Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Download the PDX Celebrate It’S Two Year Anniversary on June 7 at 6:30 Pm
    Our Where’s Growing Early 28th Ave. Q Revolution Newspaper Year Page 14 Page 8 Page 3 JUNE SOUTHEAST EXAMINER 2017 southeastexaminer.com “Your Neighborhood News Source” Vol 28 No 6 Portland, OR Infill on Steroids Gains State Traction: Riles Residents BY MIDGE PIERCE and old. But opponents say the Oregon A bill known as a “Build Baby Build” Home Builders Association (OHBA) legislative bill under the idea of addressing and others twisted it into a bill that over- emergency housing statewide is fueling rides local zoning and undermines city what critics call a widespread assault controls. The bill would allow building to on Oregon cities’ self-determination maximum density and heights potentially and livability. Adding insult, the bill is disregarding critical local planning tools barreling through the state legislature like discretionary design reviews. without adequate public hearing. As outrage mounted last month at House Bill 2007 would essentially an informational meeting in Salem, House Overview of the proposed cascading soaking pools between reservoirs 5 and 6. eliminate single family residential Speaker Tina Kotek slammed opponents as Designed by Jennifer Moran neighborhoods by making multi-plex infill racist NIMBYS. Arriving late to advocate housing mandatory across the state. The for the “high-yield” housing bill she Mt. Tabor Park Thermal Baths bill would permit duplexes and ADUs sponsored, she condemned “race-based everywhere in cities and towns of at least housing policies” and said opposition is An Idea for Preserving the Reservoirs, Creating 2500 residents. “grounded in Nimbyism” by well-heeled Energy, and Raising Revenue Critics call it a stealth bill that is residents using discriminatory practices Infill inflation modeled after Portland’s that restrict others from building wealth BY AMY PETERSON PSU SCHOOL OF ARCHI- in 2006, the city cannot use the open controversial Residential Infill Project and power.
    [Show full text]
  • Watershed Restoration for Native Fish Populations Clackamas Partnership
    Watershed Restoration for Native Fish Populations Clackamas Partnership Strategic Restoration Action Plan July 2018 Strategic Restoration Action Plan Table of Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 1 Clackamas Partnership ............................................................................................................................................... 1 Fish Populations and Geographic Focus ..................................................................................................................... 3 Restoration and Conservation Emphasis.................................................................................................................... 7 2. Ecological Outcomes: Restored Aquatic Habitat and Watershed Processes ...................................................... 9 2025: Targeted Restoration Outcomes .................................................................................................................... 11 3. Scope, Vision, and Guiding Principles ............................................................................................................ 15 Geographic Scope ..................................................................................................................................................... 15 Partner Geographic Coverage .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Family -Friendly Spots to Live, Play And
    Vote for your favorites! PDX Parent Picks 2021 for the long days and short years theCity Guide FamiFamilyly- friendly spotspotss to live, play and eat PDXPARENT.COM PORTLAND | VANCOUVERpdxparent.com | JANUARY | January 2021 1 pdxparent.com | January 2021 3 4 January 2021 | pdxparent.com contents ERIN J. BERNARD BONCHRON DENISE CASTAÑON NATALIE GILDERSLEEVE PORTLAND PARKS AND RECREATION PDX Parent’s City Guide Take a deep dive into family-friendly neighborhoods across the quadrants and beyond. Find family-tested places to eat and play; housing costs; transit, walk and bike scores; and much more. North: BONUS STORIES RESOURCES St. Johns neighborhood ..........................................................8 Editor’s Note ..........................................................................6 City Guide Listings Northeast: A helpful directory to find Friendly Neighborhoods King neighborhood .......................................................................12 for LGBTQ+ Families ....................................................9 everything your family needs — from dentists to dance Southeast: Supporting Local Black-owned .......................................................................10 Sellwood-Moreland neighborhood ............................16 classes. Businesses .............................................................................13 School Open Houses ............................... 31 Southwest: GreatSchools.org: .................................................20 Maplewood neighborhood Ratings Aren’t the
    [Show full text]
  • The Boring Volcanic Field of the Portland-Vancouver Area, Oregon and Washington: Tectonically Anomalous Forearc Volcanism in an Urban Setting
    Downloaded from fieldguides.gsapubs.org on April 29, 2010 The Geological Society of America Field Guide 15 2009 The Boring Volcanic Field of the Portland-Vancouver area, Oregon and Washington: Tectonically anomalous forearc volcanism in an urban setting Russell C. Evarts U.S. Geological Survey, 345 Middlefi eld Road, Menlo Park, California 94025, USA Richard M. Conrey GeoAnalytical Laboratory, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, Washington 99164, USA Robert J. Fleck Jonathan T. Hagstrum U.S. Geological Survey, 345 Middlefi eld Road, Menlo Park, California 94025, USA ABSTRACT More than 80 small volcanoes are scattered throughout the Portland-Vancouver metropolitan area of northwestern Oregon and southwestern Washington. These vol- canoes constitute the Boring Volcanic Field, which is centered in the Neogene Port- land Basin and merges to the east with coeval volcanic centers of the High Cascade volcanic arc. Although the character of volcanic activity is typical of many mono- genetic volcanic fi elds, its tectonic setting is not, being located in the forearc of the Cascadia subduction system well trenchward of the volcanic-arc axis. The history and petrology of this anomalous volcanic fi eld have been elucidated by a comprehensive program of geologic mapping, geochemistry, 40Ar/39Ar geochronology, and paleomag- netic studies. Volcanism began at 2.6 Ma with eruption of low-K tholeiite and related lavas in the southern part of the Portland Basin. At 1.6 Ma, following a hiatus of ~0.8 m.y., similar lavas erupted a few kilometers to the north, after which volcanism became widely dispersed, compositionally variable, and more or less continuous, with an average recurrence interval of 15,000 yr.
    [Show full text]
  • Sub-Area: Southeast
    PARKS 2020 VISION OUTHEAST Distinctive Features Studio in the Laurelhurst Park annex is a satellite of the Montavilla Community Center. I Aquatic facilities include Sellwood, Mt. Scott, Description: The Southeast sub-area (see map at the Buckman, Montavilla and Creston. end of this section) contains many of the city's older, I established neighborhoods. This area is a patchwork of The Community Music Center is in this sub-area. older, mainly single-family neighborhoods divided by I The Southeast sub-area has three Community linear commercial corridors. The Central Eastside Schools and 45 school sites. Industrial District, which borders the east bank of the I There are lighted baseball stadiums at Willamette, separates some residential neighborhoods Westmoreland and Lents Parks. from the river. Resources and Facilities: Southeast has 898 acres Population – Current and Future: The Southeast of parkland, ranking third in total amount of park sub-area ranks first in population with 154,000 and acreage. Most parks are developed, well distributed, is projected to grow to 157,830 by 2020, an increase in good condition, and can accommodate a range of of 2%. recreational uses. I Southeast has the City’s largest combined acreage DISTRIBUTION OF SUBAREA ACRES BY PARK TYPE of neighborhood and community parks. I Southeast has a variety of habitat parks, including Oaks Bottom Wildlife Refuge, Tideman Johnson Park, and Johnson Creek Park that are popular sites for hiking, birding, walking, and general recreation use. I This sub-area includes part of the I-205 Bike Trail and about 4.6 miles of the Springwater Corridor, a 195-acre 16.5 mile-long regional trailway that includes many natural resources.
    [Show full text]
  • River Plan/South Reach What We've Learned About Riverfront Access
    River Plan/South Reach What We’ve Learned About Riverfront Access, Trails and On‐land Recreation in the South Reach The following summary is based on public input from project meetings and events, presentations at community meetings and the draft River Plan/South Reach Existing Conditions draft report. ACCESS TO THE RIVERFRONT Public access to the riverfront area in south reach is generally good. There are exceptions: Eastside There is no direct access from Brooklyn neighborhood to Springwater Corridor Trail and river – suggest one of 3 possible alignments for access: 1) SE Haig St. 2) Holgate St. where former floating homes existed, and 3) a separated public trail connection along the existing Ross Island Sand and Gravel road down to their trail area parking lot. A pedestrian overpass over railroad corridor like the one in N. Portland (e.g., Wauds Bluff Trail on Swan Island) may be needed for Brooklyn access to riverfront. There is interest in additional access to the Springwater Corridor east of Oaks Bottom Wildlife Refuge. Some concern has been expressed regarding the potential environmental impacts of this access. Steep slope limits river access at SE Linn Street. Access to Ross Island is impossible without getting there by watercraft. Access to Ross Island should not be allowed. Westside Access to Powers Marine and Staff Jennings open space areas are problematic and not ADA accessible. Direct access to Willamette Greenway Trail in Johns Landing and north to South Waterfront is limited. Overall There needs to be more ADA accessibility to the river. RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES – DESIRED IMPROVEMENTS AND CHALLENGES There are numerous public recreational opportunities that can be made even better: Eastside Better utilize and manage parking in the area around Sellwood Riverfront Park and Oaks Amusement Park.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction, Project Description and Sandy River Physical Geography
    Sandy River Riparian Habitat Protection Project Report 2000-2003 The Nature Conservancy, Oregon Field Office Jonathan Soll - Project Manager Doug Kreuzer – Ecological Monitoring Coordinator Brian Lipinski – Outreach, Education, and Volunteer Coordinator Kyle Strauss – Field and River Access Coordinator January 2004 Sandy River Riparian Habitat Protection Project Report 2000-2003 Addendum regarding stem injection of herbicides For the control of Japanese and giant knotweed The stem injection method treatments described in this report were conducted by The Nature Conservancy and Metro Parks and Greenspaces as part of an experiment through an Experimental Use Permit granted by the Oregon Department of Agriculture, and as such we cautioned that the use of stem injection without a special permit was illegal. As of January 30, 2004 however, the Oregon Department of Agriculture received the supplemental label for use of the Monsanto product Aquamaster (53.8% glyphosate; 46.2% water) to control Japanese and giant knotweed by stem injection method. The label reflected the changes requested by the US Environmental Protection Agency. The use of Aquamaster as per the supplemental label directions is approved for use in Oregon. For practitioners in the Pacific Northwest: the Monsanto representative in Vancouver, Washington, Ron Crockett, can be contacted at telephone (360) 892-9884. He, his company or distributors should have the supplemental labels available with all the use directions. We expect a similar approval by EPA for Rodeo (Dow Agrosciences version of the same product) in the near future. Contact the Oregon Department of Agriculture with any questions. Please note that this decision does not affect the legality of this method in any other state.
    [Show full text]
  • 2.2 State Risk Assessment
    Chapter 2: RISK ASSESSMENT | State Risk Assessment | Cultural Resources Summary » Wildfire 2.2 State Risk Assessment Requirement: 44 CFR §201.4(c)(2)(i): The risk assessment shall include… (i) An overview of the type and location of all natural hazards that can affect the State, including information on previous occurrences of hazard events, as well as the probability of future hazard events, using maps where appropriate; The spatial distribution of the facilities within hazard zones is not easily viewed on a statewide map. Therefore, maps depicting hazard zones and facilities within those zones have only been created at the regional scale. Those maps can be found in section 2.3, Regional Risk Assessments. Oregon Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan | September 2020 163 Chapter 2: RISK ASSESSMENT | State Risk Assessment | Coastal Hazards Summary » Wildfire 2.2.1 Coastal Hazards The Pacific Northwest (PNW) coast of Figure 2-29. Erosion at The Capes Oregon is without doubt one of the most Condominiums, Oceanside, Oregon dynamic coastal landscapes in North America, evident by its long sandy beaches, sheer coastal cliffs, dramatic headlands and vistas, and ultimately the power of the Pacific Ocean that serves to erode and change the shape of the coast. It is these qualities along with its various natural resources that have drawn people to live along its narrow shores. However, coastal communities are increasingly under threat from a variety of natural hazards that all come together along the coastal strip. These include wave-induced coastal erosion (both short and long term), wave runup and overtopping (wave-induced flood hazards), inundation Notes: The Capes, a multi-million dollar condominium of homes by wind-blown sand, coastal complex constructed on an old Holocene dune field landslides, earthquakes, and potentially adjacent to Oceanside.
    [Show full text]