03-25-2002 Council Work Session - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Decision Resourca, Ltd,Septaabert.1994 73% fated the foainteiiance of Oiono park and recreadottal facilities as *excellent* or "good,* only fifteen percent saw it as *only fair* or *poof.* This rating was lower than the Metropcditan Area suburban average of 89% a^ravaL Most’residents saw no need for better maintenance or inq>rovemeot of each on a short list of park facilities. The only facility showing a q>lit in perc^tiona of need was "restrooms,* where 48% saw a need for improvements and 52% did not . 47% of the sample reported contacting the Ci^ of Orono to seek information, get services, or^ lodge complaints; this level of contact was twice as hi^ as the Metropolitan Area suburban norm. Among those contacting the City, 68% were satisfied with the service they received, while 27% were dissati sfied. Most dissatisfaction stemmed from results, rather dian process or treatment. 46% visited City Kali during the past year; the Metropolitan Area suburban norm was 30%. Among visitors, high levels of satisfaction was reported: 74% rated the coovenienoe of City Hall hours as "excellent ” or "good;” 18%, as "only fair" or *poor;” 81% rated the waidng dme for service positively, while 12% rated it lower; 84% rated the oounesy of the staff as "excellent* or "good,* while 11% saw it as "only or "poor;* and, 72% rated the efficiency of the staff posidvdy, while 19% were more critical in judgment. Residents primarily relied upon local newspapers as their prinripal source of information about event and activities transpiring in Orono. 74% mentioned either newspapers in general or a specific publication. The "grapevine" was crucial for nine percent of the sample. Newsletters and mailings were relied upon by eight percent, while three percent depended on school district materials. Conduxionsi • A majority of residents do not see the need for the development of a more extensive park and recreation system in Orono. • Residents expressed support in concept and in commitment eftax dollars to preserving more natural land areas, such as wetlands, scenic open spaces, end wildlife habitats, in the community. • While majorities favor more extensive trails in Orono in concept, majorities did not favor increasing taxes for a system linldng parks and recreational facilities nor one ”cross«country." • In recreational planning for the cooununity, residents placed an accent on recreatiooal pursuits revolving around trail*related activities — such as hikmg, walking, and bicycling — and lake-related activities - such as swimming and boating. • Residents supported tax increases for recreational facilities related to passivt Idsurt time pursuits — nature preserves, trs^, playground equipment, and nature observation areas ~ as opposed to active leisure-time pursuits. • Users fees were viewed as an appropriate means of underwriting the construction and operating costs of recreatiooal facilities. Pages « ;<