9.5. SR 05-18-2015 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Chapter 3: The System Today 18 T O D A Y Finally, a small but growing minority population in Elk River may bring additional desires and uses to the parks and recreation system. Peer Communities Assessment As part of the evaluation process, Elk River’s parks and recreation system was compared with parks systems in Cottage Grove, Red Wing, Rosemount, Inver Grove Heights, South St. Paul, Andover, and Shakopee. These peer communities were chosen for their similarities to Elk River including: • Urban/Rural mix • Riverfront • Population (Current and Projected) • Geographic Size • Environmental Assets When compared with other communities, Elk River fares well in terms of the per capita number of total parks, the number of neighborhood parks, and the amount of acreage devoted to parks per capita. The city also offers unique facilities for activities such as mountain biking, biathlon, and high quality cross country skiing that are not found in most of its peer cities. Conversely, Elk River’s paved trail system is smaller than the trail system in many of its peer communities. Elk River also relies much more on the school system for athletic facilities and courts than peer communities. A chart of the data can be found in Appendix A. Neighborhood Park Access The majority of neighborhood residences within Elk River’s urban service area are within a half-mile of either a neighborhood park or a community park with neighborhood park features (such as a playground). The most significant area lacking access to neighborhood park facilities is between the railroad tracks and the Elk River/Lake Orono. This area is already developed, and there is very limited land available for a neighborhood park. Access to the neighborhood park facilities in Meadowvale Heights Park and Orono Park could be improved if connectivity across the railroad tracks and across Highway 10 could be improved. See the Neighborhood Park Access Map on the following page for more detail.