Laserfiche WebLink
the sample, while Ward Four was twenty-four percent. <br /> <br />Quality of Life: <br /> <br />Elk River citizens were again generally contented with their community. Eighty-nine percent <br />approved of the quality of life there; thirty-two percent, strongly so. This level of approval was <br />somewhat above the current Metropolitan Area norm of eighty-six percent. <br /> <br />When asked what they liked most about the community, residents pointed to two aspects: <br />"location" was mentioned by twenty-eight percent, while "small town ambience" was key to the <br />same number of respondents. Twelve percent each cited "nice people" and "rural areas." <br />"Quiet/Peacefulness" was key to seven percent, while "strong neighborhoods" was posted by <br />five percent. It was also the future protection of these values which provoked the most <br />unrest in the citizenry. <br /> <br />When asked what they liked least about Elk River, thirty-one percent mentioned "growth," up <br />thirteen percent since the 1989 study. Eight percent mentioned "high taxes," while seven percent <br />each cited "lack of shopping," "city services," and "traffic congestion." "Lack of shopping," <br />however, had dropped from an earlier level of fifteen percent. Smaller numbers pointed to <br />"schools," "location of the community," "lack of restaurants," "crime," and the "lack of things to <br />do." "Boosters" -- those who dislike "nothing" about the community -- were thirteen percent, a <br />five percent decrease since the 1989 study, but still ahead of the Metropolitan Area norm. <br /> <br />Park and Recreation Facilities and Activities: <br /> <br />When asked to rate the park and recreational facilities in the community, fifty-six percent felt <br />they were "excellent" or "good," while thirty-eight percent deemed them "only fair" or "poor." <br />Positive evaluations have declined by fourteen percent since 1989. Similarly in comparison with <br />the Metropolitan Area norm, favorable evaluations in Elk River proved to be twenty-four percent <br />lower than the average. <br /> <br />Usership patterns varied from facility to facility. Seventy-six percent of the households reported <br />visiting Orono Park during the past year, down ten percent from the 1989 study. Sixty-three <br />percent had visited Lions Park, down three percent, and thirty-six percent had gone to Handke <br />Outdoor Ice Rink, a decrease of five percent during the interim. Twenty-two percent had visited <br />Woodland Trails Park, doubling the ten percent usership figure from 1989. Fifty-four percent of <br />the households reported using the outdoor facilities located at the schools, while seventeen <br />percent had gone to Oak Knoll Park. Park users were asked for an evaluation of the upkeep and <br />maintenance of the park facilities: seventy-one percent rated it favorably, while eighteen percent <br />were more critical. <br /> <br />Page 2 <br /> <br /> <br />