University of Oregon



Writing Technical Memos & Reports

PPPM 613: Planning Analysis

Characteristics of Efficient Documents

Content that makes the document worth reading

Organization that shows the logic and provides emphasis

Style that is economical and clear

Visuals that show data, concepts, and relationships

Format that is accessible and appealing

Some Examples…

Non-Technical vs. Technical Writing

The eagle is the noblest bird. This large and awesome creature perches on the highest cliffs, scanning the earth below. Against the sun, he presents a dignified and formidable silhouette, in full command of his world from his solitary perch. The eagle’s majestic demeanor, independence, pride, and spirit symbolize American values.

Or

The bald eagle, Haliaeetus leucocephalus, is named for its snow-white head. One of the sea eagles, it nests along fresh or salt waters in polar regions of the northern hemisphere. In recent years, the number of bald eagles has been much reduced, and they are now most numerous in Alaska. The adult is blackish brown, with a snow-white head and tail.

Poor Technical vs. Effective Technical

At this point in time, we are presently waiting an on-site inspection by vendor representatives relative to electrical utilization adaptations necessary for the new computer installation. Meanwhile, all staff are asked to respect the off-limits designation of said location, as requested, due to liability insurance provisions requiring the on-line status of the computer.

Or

Hardware consultants soon will inspect our new computer room in order to recommend appropriate wiring. Because our insurance covers only an operational computer, this room must remain off-limits until the computer is fully installed.

Taken from: Technical Writing, John M. Lannon, 1986.

Non-Active vs. Active Voice…

Non-Active Voice

Labor costs for this project were underestimated.

If our claim is not settled by May 15th, the Better Business Bureau will be contacted, and their advice on legal action taken.

U.S. Census data were used to develop and indication of several housing trends in the area. Several indicators were chosen for our analysis. These indicators included number of units, housing value, and housing condition. These data led to conclusions about housing trends.

Active Voice

I underestimated labor costs for this project.

If you do not settle my claim by May 15, I will contact the Better Business Bureau for advice on legal action.

We used 1990 U.S. Census data in our analysis of housing trends in the Eugene area. More specifically, we analyzed (1) number of units, (2) housing value, and (3) housing condition. Our conclusions are based on these data.

Some Technical Writing Tips…

Stay away from planning jargon

“Delbecq” group meeting

“Nominal Group Process”

Mix the length of your sentences

Use simpler….smaller words when possible

aggregate = total

demonstrate = show

optimum = best

subsequent to = after

utilize = use

in order = to

Eliminate useless words or phrases

an analysis was conducted that was designed to solicit opinions from people who visit the area in Suttle Lake

Or

we surveyed people who visited the Suttle Lake area

Write in the active voice

Mix formats (text, lists, graphics, indentations, fonts, shading, etc.) to emphasize or clarify points

Edit…revise…edit…revise… (all good writers do this)

Graphical Displays Should…

Show the data

Induce the viewer to think about the substance rather than about methodology, graphic design, the technology of graphic production, or something else

Avoid distorting what the data have to say

Present many numbers in a small space

Make large data sets coherent

Encourage the eye to compare different pieces of data

Reveal the data at several levels of detail, from a broad overview to the fine structure

Serve a reasonably clear purpose: description, exploration, tabulation, or decoration

Be closely integrated with the statistical and verbal descriptions of a data set

Things to Avoid in Graphical Display…

← Data distortion:

1. The representation of numbers, as physically measured on the surface of the graphic itself, should be directly proportional to the numerical quantities represented.

2. Clear, detailed, and thorough labeling should be used to defeat graphical distortion and ambiguity. Write out explanations of the data on the graphic itself. Label important events in the data.

Size of effect shown in graphic

Lie Factor = --------------------------------------

Size of effect shown in data

← Design and data variation

← Lack of context

← Chart junk

Principles of Graphical Integrity…

← The representation of numbers, as physically measured on the surface of the graphic itself, should be directly proportional to the numerical quantities represented

← Clear, detailed, and thorough labeling should be used to defeat graphical distortion and ambiguity. Write out explanations of the data on the graphic itself. Label important events in the data.

← Show data variation, not design variation

← In time-series displays of money, deflated and standardized units of monetary measurement are nearly always better than nominal units

← The number of information carrying (variable) dimensions depicted should not exceed the number of dimensions in the data

← Graphics must not quote data out of context

Attractive displays of statistical information…

← Have a properly chosen format and design

← Use words, numbers, and drawing together

← Reflect a balance, a proportion, a sense of relevant scale

← Display an accessible complexity of detail

← Often have a narrative quality, a story to tell about the data

← Are drawn in a professional manner, with the technical details of production done with care

← Avoid content-free decoration, including chartjunk

Accessible Complexity: the friendly data graphic…

|Friendly |Unfriendly |

|Words are spelled out, mysterious and elaborate encoding avoided |Abbreviations abound, requiring the viewer to sort through text to decode |

| |abbreviations |

|Words run from left to right, the usual direction for reading occidental |Words run vertically, particularly along the y-axis; words run in several |

|languages |different directions |

|Little messages help explain data |Graphic is cryptic requires repeated references to scattered text |

|Elaborately encoded shadings, cross-hatching, and colors are avoided; |Obscure codings require going back and forth between legend and graphic |

|instead, labels are placed on the graphic itself; no legend is required | |

|Graphic attracts viewer, provokes curiosity |Graphic is repellent, filled with chartjunk |

|Colors, if used, are chose so that the color-deficient and color-blind can |Design insensitive to color-deficient viewers; red and green used for |

|make sense of the graphic |essential contrasts |

|Type is clear, precise, modest |Type is clotted, overbearing |

|Type is upper and lower case, with serifs |Type is all capitals, san serif |

Guidelines for Tables & Graphs…

Use Only When Needed to Illustrate Key Points

(i.e., it would be difficult to present in text form or the reader could best understand the data through a table or graph)

Include Standard Information in Titles

table or figure #

title (short and accurately descriptive)

subtitle (if necessary…time frame, clarifying phrase, etc.)

axis titles in graphs

footnotes to clarify data if necessary

settle on font style and stick to it

Present Information Within Table or Graph Clearly

readable font size

right justify or decimal align numbers

shading to highlight column titles

appropriate column widths

reasonable number of bars

Table 3

U.S. High School Participation

(four most popular boys sports)

|Sport |1981 |1991 |AAGR1 |

|Soccer |190,495 |350,1002 |6.3% |

|Baseball |422,310 |419,015 |-0.07% |

|Football |937,901 |918,499 |-0.2% |

|Basketball |977,270 |903,446 |-0.7% |

Source: National Federation of State High School Associations.

1 Average Annual Growth Rate

State Trends

According to the Soccer Industry Council, about 450,000 Oregonians (11th nationally) were involved in soccer as players, administrators, coaches, or referees in 1992. Oregon is one of 28 states where both soccer and football is played in the fall. Table 4 shows how soccer and football participation has changed in Oregon’s high schools since the 1985-86 academic year. Participation in high school soccer in Oregon increased by about 32 percent from 1985-85 to 1993-94.

Table 4

Oregon High School Soccer and Football Participation1

|Sport |1985-86 |1993-94 |AAGR |

|Football |12,545 |11,280 |-1.3% |

|Soccer |2,880 |3,810 |3.6% |

Source: National Federation of State High School Associations.

1 Oregon is one of 28 states where both sports are played in the Fall.

According to the Oregon Youth Soccer Association, participation in their program increased by about 5,000 people (from 35,000 to 40,000) from 1990 to 1994. Table 5 shows youth, adult , and prep soccer participation in the Portland area from 1974-1994. Since 1980, total participation has eased an annual rate of about 7.8 percent. The highest annual growth has been in the adult segment (14.7 percent).

Table 5

Soccer Participation in the Portland Area

|Year |Youth |Adult |Prep |Total |

|1974 |1,565 |450 |na |2,015 |

|1976 |4,608 |654 |na |5,262 |

|1977 |4,705 |na |2,400 |7,105 |

|1980 |13,000 |685 |2,700 |16,385 |

|1990 |26,026 |1,584 |3,820 |31,430 |

|1994 |35,522 |4,686 |6,600 |46,808 |

|AAGR (80-90) |7.45 |14.7% |6.6% |7.8% |

Source: Oregon Youth Soccer Association, Greater Portland Soccer District adult leagues, varsity high school soccer.

Cost Burden

Table 16

Median Housing Value

Owner-Occupied Units, 1970-1990

| | | |% Change |

|Region |1970 1 |1990 |1970-1990 |

|North Valley | $36,372 | $87,227 |139.8% |

|Central Valley | $34,025 | $67,990 |99.8% |

|South Valley | $37,001 | $75,265 |103.4% |

| Total | $35,912 | $80,797 |125.0% |

Source: U.S. Census, 1990.

11970 housing value was adjusted to 1990 dollars using a CPI factor of 2.27

Table 17

Median Rental Cost

Renter-Occupied Units, 1970-1990

| | | |% Change |

|Region |19701 |1990 |1970-1990 |

|North Valley | $ 224 | $ 552 |146.8% |

|Central Valley | $ 190 | $ 389 |104.8% |

|South Valley | $ 211 | $ 376 |78.1% |

| Total | $ 215 | $ 423 |96.9% |

Source: U.S. Census, 1990.

11970 housing value was adjusted to 1990 dollars using a CPI factor of 2.27

Table 18 shows housing cost as a percentage of gross monthly income for the Willamette Valley in 1990. Comparable figures for 1970 and 1980 are not available from the U.S. Census of Housing and Population.

The data show that renters are twice as likely to experience cost burden than owners. Cost burden is defined as a household spending more than 30 percent of its income on housing. Severe cost burden is defined as a household spending more than 50 percent of its income on housing.

Table 7. Mode of Transportation to Work

Workers 16 Years and Older, 1990

| |North |Central Valley |South |Total/ |

|Variable |Valley | |Valley |Average |

|Workers 16 Years and Over |603,176 | 219,892 |126,571 |949,639 |

| Percent Drove Alone |72.8% |72.8% |73.4% |72.9% |

| Percent in Carpools |12.4% |14.3% |11.4% |12.7% |

| Percent Using Public Transportation |6.1% |8.0% |2.4% |6.0% |

| Percent Using Other Means |1.5% |2.6% |3.9% |2.1% |

| Percent Walked or Worked at Home |7.2% |9.3% |8.9% |7.9% |

| Mean Travel Time to Work (minutes) |21.9 |19.5 |18.1 |20.8 |

Source: U.S. Census, 1990.

In February, 1994, the Public Transit Section of the Oregon Department of Transportation published a document titled State of the Commute in Oregon in 1990 and Possible Scenarios for 2015. The document describes commuter patterns in Oregon in 1990 and presents possible future conditions based on scenarios where commuting becomes more auto-oriented, more alternative mode oriented, or remains the same. Because the projections were based on statewide employment forecasts, we extrapolated estimates based on employment projections for counties in the Willamette Valley.

Table 8 shows projections of means of transportation to work in the Valley between 1990 and 2012. The projections are based on employment forecasts for Valley counties developed by ODOT. The table indicates that total employment in the Valley will increase at a rate of 1.7 percent annually between 1990 and 2012. Under the base case projection, the modal split will not change between 1990 and 2015.

Table 8. Modal Split for Work Trips

Willamette Valley, 1990-2012

| |Base Case |5% Shift Towards Alternative Modes |5% Shift Towards Drive Alone |

| |Drive |Alternate Modes | |Drive |Alternate Modes| |Drive |Alternate | |

|Year |Alone | |Total |Alone | |Total |Alone |Modes |Total |

|1990 | 689,976 | 257,736 | 947,712 | 689,976 | 257,736 | 947,712 | 689,976 | 257,736 | 947,712 |

|2000 | 826,882 | 308,876 |1,135,758 | 804,167 | 331,591 |1,135,758 | 849,597 | 286,161 | 1,135,758 |

|2012 | 997,295 | 372,533 |1,369,828 | 937,023 | 432,805 |1,369,828 | 1,057,567 | 312,261 | 1,369,828 |

|AAGR |1.7% |1.7% |1.7% |1.4% |2.4% |1.7% |2.0% |0.9% |1.7% |

Source: State of the Commute in Oregon in 1990 and Possible scenarios for 2015, ODOT Public Transit Section; Willamette Valley figures extrapolated by Community Planning Workshop.

The Economy

Introduction

Oregon has experienced significant economic change since 1970. Oregon’s economy continues to diversify, while at the same time, real incomes lag behind the national level and the manufacturing sector continues to lose jobs. The Willamette Valley accounts for nearly three-quarters of the state’s non-agricultural employment.

The 1972 Willamette Valley Choices reviewed two economic indicators: employment and income. Figure 4 shows the actual total employment (agricultural and non-agricultural) figures for the Willamette Valley from 1970 to 1990 as well as total employment projections described in the 1972 Willamette Valley Choices. Actual employment has grown at an annual rate of 2.6 percent, about 0.5% more than was projected by the 1972 Willamette Valley Choices.

[pic]

With respect to personal per capita income, the 1972 report projected per capita income would increase at an annual rate of 4.7 percent between 1970 and 1990. According to Bureau of Economic Analysis data, per capita income actually increased at a rate of 7.7 percent annually during this period.

We use the following variables in our analysis in this section:

Employment - estimates are developed by a number of sources including the Oregon Employment Department. Employment forecasts were developed by ODOT in 1992.

Income - data are available from the Oregon Employment Department and the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

Unemployment - we gathered unemployment estimates from the Oregon Employment Division.

Road Mileage

Figure 6 shows road mileage for the Willamette Valley in 1993 by jurisdiction. The data show that about 29,000 miles of road existed in the Willamette Valley in 1993. This is remarkably close to the 1972 Willamette Valley Choices’s estimate of 30,442 miles for 1990.

[pic]

Our conversations with ODOT officials suggested that little expansion of the state and interstate highway system will occur in the Willamette Valley in the future. They indicated that most of the increase in road miles will probably be as a result of urban development.

Highway Funding

Adequate highway funding is crucial in maintaining the existing road system and expanding capacity to meet future demand. A 1993 report by the Oregon Department of Transportation titled Forward Oregon: Roads in a New Context presents a detailed analysis of highway funding in the state. The report states:

Nearly one-third of Oregon’s road miles are in poor condition, and 785 of its bridges need structural repair. Traffic exceeds capacity on many urban and rural roads, and vehicle miles traveled are increasing at a faster rate than increases in population or employment warrant. Inflation threatens to overwhelm the static revenue sources. The long-term outlook for roads, under current funding authorizations, is bleak.

The study estimates Oregon’s total road and bridge needs for the next 20 years are $48.8 billion in 1991 dollars. A revenue shortfall of $23.7 billion is forecast in the study—over 40 percent of the needed revenues.

The majority of road funding in Oregon is generated through user fees such as motor fuel taxes, weight distance charges, and license fees. These sources comprise the principal funding source of the state highway trust fund.

CHAPTER 2

THE MARKET FOR NEW AND EXPANDED FACILITIES AT THE LANE COUNTY FAIRGROUND

ICE ARENA

The Lane County Ice Arena is an important facility to local residents. As has been greatly exhibited by numerous previous research, there is the strong possibility that large potential demand for some additional space at the Ice Arena (specifically a second sheet of ice) exists at this time. The research has also indicated that second sheet of ice has the important market potential to allow the Ice Arena to provide services to a larger portion of the public and attract significant numbers of regional ice and non-ice events. Following the preliminary analysis that was conducted previously, the Consortium requested a very detailed analysis of the potential demand for additional ice facilities at the Lane County Ice Arena.

In order to effectively analyze the latent potential demand, a number of steps were taken. These steps included: distribution of a survey to a statistically valid sample of representatives of groups who use the Ice Arena to solict various opinions, attendance at a Delbecq meeting of those who use the Ice Arena, and analysis of the current market for ice related activities.

SUPPLY OF ICE FACILITIES

The existing arean is very large comparatively. It consistes of a 192’ x 85’ ice rink that is bordered on two sides by bleacher seating that can accommodate about 3,800 persons. The arena also has locker rooms, restrooms, a concession area, a rental office, a storage area on the south end of the building, and meeting and storage space on the second floor. Research shows that the Ice Arena is the only ice facility in Eugene and is the only ice facility open to the public between Eugene and Portland. Including the Lane County Ice Arena, there are about eight ice rink facilities in Oregon and Washington. The nearest competitors to the Lane County Ice Arena are located in Portland.

Table 2.1

Supply of Ice Facilities

|Ice Facility |Size |Seating Capacity |Ownership |Ice Activities a |

|1. Eagles Arena (Spokane) |85x200 |1,200 |Private |F, H, P |

|2. Riverfront Park (Spokane) |85x185 |NA |City |F, H, P |

|3. Riverfront Park (Wenatchee) |NA |1,100 |City |F, H, P |

|4. Sno-King (Lynwood) |85x200 |1,000 |Private |H, P |

|5. Beaverton |NA |NA |Private |NA |

|6. Lloyd Center (Portland) |NA |NA |Private |F, H, P |

|7. Clackamas |NA |NA |Private |F, H, P |

|8. Lane County Ice (Eugene) |85x192 |3,800 |County |F, H, P |

Source: Property Counselors, 1989.

a F = Figure Skating P = Public Skating

H = Hockey

General Planning Report Structure…

Cover page

Table of contents

List of tables & figures (optional)

Executive summary

Introduction

Individual chapters

Conclusions & recommendations

Appendices

Bibliography

Other….

Willamette Valley Futures

An Evaluation of Key Indicators of Livability

In The Willamette Valley, 1970-2010

Prepared by:

The University of Oregon

Community Planning Workshop

and

The Institute for a Sustainable Environment

Prepared for:

The Oregon Progress Board

December 1994

Table of Contents

Page

Summary of Findings ii

Introduction 1

Population and Land Use 4

Congestion and Mobility 10

The Economy 16

Infrastructure 21

Housing Affordability 25

Parks and Open Space 34

Farm and Forest Land 40

Air and Water Quality 45

Appendix 52

References 58

Summary of Findings

Purpose

According to the U.S. Census, approximately 70 percent of Oregon's population lived within the Willamette Valley in 1990. A large portion of the state's best agricultural land is found within the Valley and much of Oregon's economy is driven by activities that take place in the counties that comprise the Valley. Because of the Valley’s importance to Oregon, great care must be taken in planning its future. Such planning requires gaining an understanding of past trends, current conditions, and possible futures.

In 1972, Lawrence Halprin and Associates, working with the Executive Department of the State of Oregon, considered the impacts of humans on the livability of the Willamette Valley and published Willamette Valley--Choices for the Future (hereafter referred to as the 1972 Willamette Valley Choices). Described as an "environmental primer" for the residents of the Valley, the 1972 Willamette Valley Choices begins with a brief history of development in the Valley, followed by a discussion of several indicators of livability (e.g., air and water quality, parks and open space, and traffic congestion).

Twenty-two years have passed since Halprin's work was published and development within the Willamette Valley has continued. In some cases, as Halprin had forecast, in other cases, not. The Oregon Progress Board, which produced Oregon Benchmarks, is interested in evaluating historical trends with respect to selected livability indicators in the Valley and the future that these trends may suggest. As such, the Progress Board contracted with two University of Oregon Programs (Community Planning Workshop (CPW) and The Institute for a Sustainable Environment (ISE)) to evaluate trends affecting livability in the Valley. This report presents the results of our analysis.

Method

This report describes, where possible, (1) historical trends and (2) future projections for the nine indicators of livability listed below:

Population Growth Housing Affordability

Land Use Patterns Parks & Open Space

Congestion & Mobility Farm & Forest Land

Economic Trends Air & Water Quality

Infrastructure

These indicators were chosen for this analysis because of their similarity to those used in the 1972 Willamette Valley Choices, and because they describe major areas of concerns addressed by livability benchmarks identified by the Oregon Progress Board. Many of these indicators directly correspond to those evaluated in the 1972 Willamette Valley Choices. In other cases, we have included new indicators; largely because of new data that was not available to Halprin in 1972. For purposes of this study, we have defined the Willamette Valley as consisting of ten counties. We aggregated this county data into three geographic categories:

North Valley: Columbia, Multnomah, Clackamas, and Washington counties;

Central Valley: Yamhill, Linn, Marion, Benton, and Polk counties; and

South Valley: Lane County

Table 1

Summary of Livability Indicators

|Indicator |Trends |Expected Future |

|Population & Land Use |

| Population Growth |The Valley’s population increased by about 500,000 from 1970-90, |Recent projections developed by ODOT predict an increase of about 700,000 |

| |resulting in an annual growth of about 1.5%. |residents in the Valley by 2012, resulting in an annual growth rate of about |

| | |1.4%. |

| |According the U.S. Census, the percentage of the Valley’s population | |

| |living in rural areas decreased from 22% in 1980 to 20% in 1990. |The North Valley is expected to show the largest annual growth rate (1.6%) during|

| | |this period. Population is expected to be increasingly attracted to urban areas.|

| |The 1972 Willamette Valley Choices slightly overestimated population | |

| |growth (+100,000) in the Valley from 1970-90. | |

| Land Use |Based on remote sensing data, total urban acres in the Valley |Based on projected population increases discussed above, and assumptions about |

| |increased from about 240,000 to 460,000 from 1970-90, an increase of |the location and density of future development, we expect the number of urban |

| |about 91%. |acres to increase about 60% from 460,000 acres in 1990 to about 730,000 acres in |

| | |2012. |

| |Between 1970-90, total agricultural land decreased by about 50,000 | |

| |acres (-3%) and mixed farm and forest land decreased by about 575,000|Our estimates also indicate that agricultural land will decrease by about 170,000|

| |acres (-43%). Forest land actually increased by about 500,000 acres |acres (-13%), and mixed farm and forest land will decrease by about 83,000 acres |

| |(+14%) during this period. |(-12%) from 1990-2012. Forest land will decrease by about 20,000 acres (-.05%) |

| | |during this period. |

| UGB Expansions |About 1,800 acres were added to Valley UGBs from 1987-93. These |While difficult to predict (especially without doing local analyses) specific |

| |1,800 acres represent only about 0.39% of all acres within UGBs in |future expansions of UGBs in the Valley, if future development occurs at |

| |the Valley. |historical densities, additional UGB expansions are inevitable in the Valley |

| | |during the next 20 years. |

| |About 880 of these acres, or 48 percent, were on lands zoned for | |

| |agricultural uses. Not that most of these 880 acres were in the | |

| |South and Central Valley. Few additions were made to UGBs in the | |

| |North Valley. | |

Introduction

Purpose

According to the U.S. Census, approximately 70 percent of Oregon's population lived within the Willamette Valley in 1990. A large portion of the state's best agricultural land is found within the Valley and much of Oregon's economy is driven by activities that take place in the counties that comprise the Valley. Because of the Valley’s importance to Oregon, great care must be taken in planning its future. Such planning requires gaining an understanding of past trends, current conditions, and possible futures.

In 1972, Lawrence Halprin and Associates, working with the Executive Department of the State of Oregon, considered the impacts of humans on the livability of the Willamette Valley and published Willamette Valley--Choices for the Future (hereafter referred to as the 1972 Willamette Valley Choices). Described as an "environmental primer" for the residents of the Valley, the 1972 Willamette Valley Choices begins with a brief history of development in the Valley, followed by a discussion of several indicators of livability (e.g., air and water quality, parks and open space, and traffic congestion).

Twenty-two years have passed since Halprin's work was published and development within the Willamette Valley has continued. In some cases, as Halprin had forecast, in other cases, not. The Oregon Progress Board, which produced Oregon Benchmarks, is interested in evaluating historical trends with respect to selected livability indicators in the Valley and the future that these trends may suggest. As such, the Progress Board contracted with two University of Oregon Programs (Community Planning Workshop (CPW) and The Institute for a Sustainable Environment (ISE)) to evaluate trends affecting livability in the Valley. This report presents the results of our analysis.

Method

This report describes, where possible, (1) historical trends and (2) future projections for the nine indicators of livability listed below:

Population Growth Housing Affordability

Land Use Patterns Parks & Open Space

Congestion & Mobility Farm & Forest Land

Economic Trends Air & Water Quality

Infrastructure

These indicators were chosen for this analysis because of their similarity to those used in the 1972 Willamette Valley Choices, and because they describe major areas of concerns addressed by livability benchmarks identified by the Oregon Progress Board. Many of these indicators directly correspond to those evaluated in the 1972 Willamette Valley Choices. In other cases, we have included new indicators; largely because of new data that was not available to Halprin in 1972.

For purposes of this study, we have defined the Willamette Valley as consisting of 10 counties. Map 1 shows the counties included in our analysis.

Organization of This Report

Following this Introduction, we divide our analysis of livability indicators into eight sections. Many of these sections correspond to the type of indicators evaluated the 1972 Willamette Valley Choices. These eight sections are:

Population and Land Use

Congestion & Mobility

The Economy

Infrastructure

Housing Affordability

Parks and Open Space

Farm and Forest Lands

Air & Water Quality

Where relevant, each of these sections begins with a description of variables analyzed in the 1972 Willamette Valley Choices. We then describe trends in these variables (where possible) and other variables we have identified as important. Where relevant, we also present projections (usually through 2012) for the key variables. We end each section with a summary that describes what we feel are the most significant findings. The Appendix presents detailed tables that we summarize throughout the main body of the report.

Where relevant, each of these sections begins with a description of variables analyzed in the 1972 Willamette Valley Choices. We then describe trends in these variables (where possible) and other variables we have identified as important. Where relevant, we also present projections (usually through 2012) for the key variables. We end each section with a summary that describes what we feel are the most significant findings. The Appendix presents detailed tables that we summarize throughout the main body of the report.

Population and Land Use

Introduction

Two important and related variables that can help describe livability in the Willamette Valley are population growth and changes in land use. Population growth and land use can be viewed as being important base indicators of livability. Changes in population and land use activities generally directly affect the other indicators of livability analyzed in this report. For example, one can reasonably argue that increases in population, in the absence of new policies and infrastructure, will increase traffic congestion in urban areas.

Population

Figure 1 shows the population projections for the Valley that were presented in the 1972 Willamette Valley Choices and compares these projections with actual population growth. Figure 1 shows that the 1972 study slightly overestimated the rate of population growth in the Valley between 1970 and 1990.

[pic]

In 1970, approximately 1.48 million people lived in the Valley; this total grew to slightly more than 2 million by 1990. The 1972 study predicted totals of 1.5 million for 1970 and almost 2.1 million for 1990, with the 1990 estimate being about 100,000 more than the actual population total. Population forecasts for the year 2000 differ similarly: The 1972 Willamette Valley Choices predicted a total population of 2.47 million for that year while the most recent ODOT projections anticipate a total of about 2.37 million residents.

.

According to the Oregon Department of Transportation projections, the Valley’s population will continue to increase at a slightly lower rate than experienced between 1970 and 1990. As Table 1 shows, ODOT predicts the population will increase at an average annual rate of 1.43 percent, from about 2 million persons in 1990 to about 2.7 million persons in 2012.

Table 4

Acres Converted from Agricultural Zones to Non-Resource Zones

1987-1993

|County |Commercial |Industrial |Residential |Acres Lost |

|Northern Valley | 8 | 10 | 250 | 268 |

| Clackamas | 3 | 10 | 130 | 143 |

| Columbia | 3 | - | 120 | 123 |

| Multnomah | - | - | - | - |

| Washington | 2 | - | - | 2 |

|Central Valley | 13 | 134 | 289 | 436 |

| Benton | - | 17 | - | 17 |

| Linn | - | 87 | 6 | 93 |

| Marion | 6 | 9 | 18 | 33 |

| Polk | - | 21 | - | 21 |

| Yamhill | 7 | - | 265 | 272 |

|Southern Valley | - | 8 | 51 | 59 |

| Lane | - | 8 | 51 | 59 |

|Total | 21 | 152 | 590 | 763 |

Source: Department of Land Conservation and Development, 1994.

Summary

From 1970-90, the Valley’s total population increased by about 500,000 persons, resulting in an annual growth rate of about 1.5 percent, slightly less than predicted by the 1972 Willamette Valley Choices. The Central Valley grew at the fastest rate during this period (1.8 percent).

ODOT projects that the Valley’s population will grow at an annual rate of about 1.4 percent through 2012, resulting in an increase of about 700,000 residents (for a total of about 2.7 million). The North Valley is expected to grow at the most rapid rate (1.6% annually).

Population growth will likely affect future land use in the Valley, along with the demand for services and infrastructure.

Land use changed substantially from 1970-90. Total urbanized acres in the Valley increased about 91 percent from 1970-90 and total agricultural acres decreased by about 3 percent during this period. Farm and forest land decreased dramatically during this period, about 43 percent. Interestingly, forest land actually increased by about 14 percent from 1970-90.

Based on historical trends, we expect the number of acres dedicated to urban uses to increase 63 percent from 460,000 acres in 1990 to 730,000 acres in 2012. Our estimates also indicate that agricultural land will decrease by about 170,000 acres (-13%), and mixed farm and forest land will decrease by about 83,000 acres (-12%) from 1990-2012. Forest land will decrease by about 20,000 acres (-.05%) during this period.

Appendix

This Appendix presents detailed tables that were summarized in the main body of the report. The tables are organized by livability indicator.

Population Growth

Table A-1

Willamette Valley--Choices for the Future Population Projections

| | | | | |AAGR 1970- |AAGR 1990- |AAGR 1970- |

|Region |1970 |1980 |1990 |2000 |1990 |2000 |2000 |

|North Valley |880,675 |1,022,000 |1,232,000 |1,480,000 |1.69% |1.85% |1.75% |

|Central Valley |399,615 |444,499 |525,402 |620,612 |1.38% |1.68% |1.48% |

|South Valley |215,401 |274,340 |325,610 |374,041 |2.09% |1.40% |1.86% |

| Total |1,495,691 |1,740,839 |2,083,012 |2,474,653 |1.67% |1.74% |1.69% |

Source: Willamette Valley--Choices for the Future, 1972. p. 102.

Congestion and Mobility

Table A-2

Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled

Willamette Valley, 1990-2012 (in 1,000s)

| | | |1975-1990 |

|Year |Constrained |Unconstrained |Trend |

|1990 | 42,461 |42,461 |42,461 |

|2000 |51,481 |51,481 |63,016 |

|2012 |54,538 |61,227 |96,821 |

|AAGR 1990-2012 |1.1% |1.7% |3.8% |

Source: Oregon Department of Transportation.

References

1972 Clean Water Act.

Department of Environmental Quality, Air Quality Division. 1993 Oregon Air Quality Report, 1994.

Department of Land Conservation and Development, DLCD Land Use Database, 1994

Department of Land Conservation and Development, Exclusive Farm Use Report 1992-1993, 1994.

Gabriel, John T., A Modified Synoptic Analysis of Oregon’s Willamette Valley Wetlands, 1993.

Housing Division, Department of Commerce Oregon Building Permit Summary and Mobile Home and Condominium Reports, January 1980-December 1982.

Johnson, Daniel, et. al. Atlas of Oregon Lakes. Oregon State University Press

Lane Regional Air Pollution Authority. 1993 Lane Regional Air Pollution Annual Report, 1994.

Lawrence Halprin & Associates. Willamette Valley Choices for the Future. Autumn 1972.

National Resources Inventory, Soil Conservation Service, 1994

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. 1990 Water Quality Status Assessment Report. 1991.

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Water Quality Division. Willamette River Toxics Study 1988/1991,

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. 1992 Oregon State Material Recovery Survey, 1993.

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. 1992 Water Quality Status Assessment Report. 1993.

Oregon Department of Forestry, History of Oregon’s Timber Harvests and/or Lumber Production, 1994.

Oregon Department of Justice, Report of Criminal Offenses and Arrests, 1993.

Oregon Department of Revenue, Oregon Property Tax Statistics, Tax Year 1984-85 to Tax Year 1993-94

Oregon Department of Transportation, Public Transit Section. State of the Commute in Oregon in 1990 and Possible Scenarios for 2015. February 1994.

Oregon Department of Transportation, Transportation Development Branch. July 1993. 1992 Oregon Mileage Report,

Report Writing Tips

Develop detailed outline early….get PM to sign-off

Understand section goals before writing

Research is writing

Write for direct inclusion in report

Fully document research

Balance description vs. Analysis

Put detailed data in appendix

Emphasize key points…give reader direction

Edit yourself…eliminate useless words/sentences

Adapt to organizational style

Accept the iterative process

Delay final formatting until text is finished

Keep chapters in separate files

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download