03-25-2002 Council Work Session - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Dicision Resources, Ltd,September, 19H joggioSt at 63%; bintwatchiog* at 54%; motor boating, at 33%; bicycEng, at 31 %; hiking, at 30%; nature walks, at 28%; and, swimming in lakes, at 27%. 21% of the households in Orono also reported participating or observing softball/basd)all games at least weddy during the season. 80% of the residents felt the cuneat mix of parks and recreational funlities in and around the. community met the needs of their households. 18% disagreed and suggested more trails, more parks, playground equipment, more ballfields, an ice arena, or tennb courts. 66% felt the City of Orono already had adequate park fmilides for city residents, while 26% felt the City should develop a more extensive park system. The chief priority for City park and recreational develq)ment was deemed to be "preserving more natural land areas, such as wetlands, scenic (pen spaces, and wildlife habitats* by 42% of die samjde. 23% would prioritize 'developing additional passive pork facilities, such as walking trails and flower gardens,” while 13% opted for "developing additional active park facilities, such as ball Adds and playgrounds. * 15 % would support a combination approach. The average resident in Oiono would support a $25.20 increase in their yearly property taxes to fund the preservadon of open qiace or die devdopment of parks and recreational facilities. But, 36% would support no increase for this purpose. Majorities of residents supported a property tax increase for: (1) nature preserves, 62%-33%; (2) nature walking and bicycling trails, 61%-35%; (3) playground equipment for children, 56%*38%; (4) paved walking and bicycling trails, 53%*43%; and, (5) nanire observation areas, 51%>43%. Th^ opposed: (1) public water access for boats and/or canoes, 26%'68%; (2) outdoor basketball courts, 28%-65%; (3) outdoor tennis courts, 28%-6S%; (4) outdoor volleyball courts, 31%*62%; (5) playfidds for soccer, football, softball,- and baseball, 35%-59%; (6) picnic areas and shelters, 39%-56%; and, (7) swimming beaches, 40%'54%. The average Orono reddent would drive at least 16.2 minutes to a park or recreational facility of interest to them. 64% supported the charging of a user fee for city-owned and operated park and recreational focilities; 30% opposed the use of user fees to underwrite and recover the cost of constructing and operating City park and recreational facilities. The average percentage of the costs that residents would hope to recover through user fees was 43.8%. 58% favored in concept a trail system linking parks and recreational facilities within the community; but, only 36% still fovored it if a property tax increase were required to.devdop the system. If a citywide trail system were built, foougb, 87% felt it should serve both pedestrians and bicyclists. 57% favored in concep t the develc^ment of additional trails in Orono going *cross-couoty* rimilar to the Luce Line; 32% opposed it But if a property tax Increase were leqoired to devdep tiiese trails, support dropped to 37% of the reqwndents. Among those supporting Ais irafl oooeQrt 74% ind«<^*gd Aey would continue to support it even if Ae trail were to run by Aetr prop^. Rage 2