Laserfiche WebLink
Park System Facility Support Oppose • <br /> Rehabilitation of"Handke Pit" 49% 30% <br /> Development of Riverwalk Trail 59% 32% <br /> Purchase of Additional Land 55% 33% <br /> Significant majorities were willing to support a tax increase for the following projects: <br /> • Permanent restrooms and shelters at the larger community parks <br /> • Swing sets, playground equipment, and hard surfaced courts for neighborhood parks <br /> • An OUTDOOR swimming pool, containing a gradual depth entry, slides, and diving <br /> board <br /> • Development of the Riverwalk Trail in the Downtown Area <br /> • Purchase of additional land for parks and trails <br /> • Paving of neighborhood trail links across the community <br /> Several proposals, though, proved to be much more controversial: <br /> • A park for skate boarding and in-line skating <br /> • Outdoor ice skating and hockey rinks <br /> • A mountain bike trails system for Hillside Park <br /> • An Interpretive Center at Woodland Trails Park <br /> • <br /> Predisposition toward a Bond Referendum: <br /> While eighteen percent would "vote against almost any tax increase for park and recreational <br /> facilities development," eleven percent would be inclined to "vote for a tax almost any tax <br /> increase." Sixty-three percent were "persuadable," depending upon the "justification of the <br /> need," "size of tax increase," "inclusion of trails,"and "development of more parks." The typical <br /> Elk River residents was willing to increase their property taxes by $22.00 yearly to fund park and <br /> recreational facilities development. <br /> Impact of a Good Park and Recreation System: <br /> Fifty-five percent agreed with the assertion that"a good Elk River park and recreation system <br /> will increase the value of my property." Thirty-three percent disagreed with this statement. <br /> There has been a decline in the perceived impact of park and recreational facilities since the 1989 <br /> study: in that previous survey, seventy-four percent agreed with the assertion. The "indirect <br /> impact on property values" argument for park improvements will not prove to be as effective an <br /> argument as it is in other communities. <br /> Page 4 • <br />