4.0. SR 06-16-1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Twelve percent of the respondents reported leaving Elk River to use bicycle paths elsewhere, while nine percent did so to use a swimming pool. Six percent reported leaving the community to go to a Community Center, while four percent used another community's playgrounds. But, a high sixty-five percent did not leave the City of Elk River to recreate elsewhere. Forty percent of the households in the community contained members who participated in youth recreational programs during the past year. Similarly, twenty-two percent contained participants of adult recreational programs. Future Plans: No consensus emerged on the top priority for recreational development during the next few years; this finding mirrored the lack of consensus found in the 1989 study. Thirty-three percent would prioritize smaller neighborhood parks, while twenty percent would place larger area parks at the top of the list. Eighteen percent would make trails the top priority, and fourteen percent felt the same way about larger community ballfields. Seventy percent favored the development of a trail system linking neighborhoods throughout the city. In fact, fifty-three percent would support a trail system even if it ran adjacent to their property. Park Bond Referendum: The table below indicates the amount of support and opposition for a property tax increase to fund the development of each recreational facility: Park System Facility Support Oppose Park for Skate Boarding and In-Line Skating 42% 49% Outdoor Swimming Pool 59% 35% Outdoor Ice Skating and Hockey Rinks 45% 48% Swing Sets, Playground Equipment, etc. 7 I% 24% Paving of Neighborhood Trail Links 54% 37% Lighting, etc., for Youth Athletics Complex 51% 36% Mountain Bike Trail System for Hillside Park 45% 43% Permanent Restrooms/Shelters 75% 20% Interpretive Center and Woodland Trails Park 36% 41% Page 3