What did we hear from all the kind folks who shared their time and insights with us?
Mix-and-match the designs
Each design produced a clear favorite for one of the park elements – trails, gathering spaces, water access and art. That means that the park designers will need to bring together parts of all three designs for the next version.
Take the trail over the water, unless…
Of all the elements in the three designs, the most ambitious by far was taking the regional trail out over the river. This elevated pathway would run through the middle third of the park where it is at its narrowest. The design was regularly the favorite, though not overwhelmingly so. It didn’t reach a majority in the survey, for instance.
An over-the-water trail would add a pretty amazing experience to the park, but it would also take a big bite of the budget. We wanted to know if community members thought the extra costs would be worth not having other features.
Here’s the response from the survey:
The two workshops had very different responses to this trade-offs question. In the online workshop we asked participants if they could only have three park elements, which would they choose. Nature trails and a swim and kayak dock were the clear favorites. The over-the-water walkway was low on the list.
At the in-person workshop, a similar exercise put the elevated walkway in second place, after the nature trails.
Ultimately, the over-the-water walkway was seen as a really neat “nice to have,” but it shouldn’t be prioritized at the expense of other park features.
Keep gatherings close to parking
The designs included several types of gathering spaces: a shelter, nature education area, storytelling circle and outdoor classroom. Most folks want these close by the park entrance. That makes these features easier to reach for parents with kids and more accessible for those of us with mobility concerns. Many people also pointed out that clustering these elements would allow more of the nature park to be quiet and nature-focused.
Some, however, liked the idea of the storytelling circle or outdoor classroom (both of which would be fairly simple open spaces) being on the east side of the park, creating a peaceful spot to spend time away from the entrance.
Easy dock access
Reaching the Willamette River, whether to swim, fish or just see the water up close, might be the biggest benefit the future nature park can offer. What the shoreline will exactly look like is the project’s biggest question mark.
Whatever those details end up being, community members have a clear preference for a big dock for swimming and launching kayaks or canoes and a short but not-too-steep path to reach it.
That said, while most conversations about water access in our region usually revolve around getting into or onto the water, we heard, for the second time, that people most often just want to be near the water, to hear it, observe it. Metro will provide opportunities to swim and kayak or canoe at Willamette Cove, but we’ve clearly heard the desire for more chances to simply be close to the river.
Put the nature in nature park
In the first round of community engagement, folks were adamant that nature should be the focus at Willamette Cove. That message repeated in round two.
One survey-taker said, “My priority is habitat. To the extent possible, I'd like to see the areas people will use separated from the habitat areas. I want to see wildlife both in water and on land thrive. The more space we can provide for them without human disturbance, the better.”
Accessibility is for everyone
Throughout the engagement process, we asked for advice on what we could do to go beyond ADA requirements to make each park element more accessible. The insights ranged from general principles to follow to specific products to consider. A key, repeated point, was accessible features make things better for everyone.
Include plenty of benches
Maybe the most common comment was that parks, and especially trails, need far more benches. That was seen as especially necessary for Willamette Cove, where parking is at one end of a long ribbon. This comment on the survey captures the idea: “Put in more benches for sitting along the trail than an able-bodied person finds necessary. Think grandma with a cane wants to go sit in nature and take all day to walk the trail and sit and relax.”
Charge me up
Providing charging stations throughout the park was a regular request. It’s not just for cell phones and e-bikes. It’s for wheelchairs and respirators.
Accessible ≠ paved
A common misunderstanding about accessible design is that it aims to make everything equally accessible to everyone. It’s then imagined that maximizing accessibility means paving everything or removing experiences if some folks can’t access them, which is the exact opposite of accessibility.
There are minimums, like curb height or the slope on a paved path, but what community members and disability rights activists made clear is that information about conditions at the site is a priority. For instance, we need to make it clear on the website what material covers each trail. With that info, a wheelchair user can decide if their chair can roll on that surface, a fact that could change with the seasons.
And that info is good for any park-goer as they pick the right shoes for their visit.
Spread out the artwork
For artwork, which by state law is part of nearly all public building projects, community members want to see the art spread across the site, rather than clumped in one place. We also regularly heard in conversations and comments that many people want to see artwork created by Indigenous artists.
Determining artists, subjects, materials and the rest is not part of the park master planning work. It comes later, and the input from this round of engagement will contribute to that process.