1998 Residential Survey - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

wauld be on a site free of other commercial purposes. Summary and Conciusions Ro�evil�e residents wcre remarkably well-informed about their park and recreation system, and vicwed it very positively as weIl. Seventy-four percent fclt either "very well informed" or "somewhat informed" about the Roseville Park and Recreation System and facilities. On the other end, twenty-six percent rated themselves as "not too wcll informed" or "not at all informed." A very high ninety percent rated the park and recreation facilities in t:�e City as "exceilent" or "good," while eight percent felt they were "only fair." Scventy-eight percent reported they or households members had used the Neighborhood Parks during the past year. Seventy-six percent had visited Central Park. Seventy percent each had used the City's trails. These three components were the underpinning of the system. Other facilities reglstered more limited appeal. Forty-two percent had visited the Harriet Alexander Nature Center. Thirty-five percent rcported using the Roseville Activities Center. Twenty-six percent used the Roseville Skating Center, whilc twenty-four percent ha�� visited Cedarholm Golf Course. Only seven percent cach had used the Gymnastics Center at the Roseville Area High School or gymnasiums at Brim Hall and Central Elementary Schools. Sixty-five percent, virtually unchangcd from the 1990 study, favored the construction of a new City of Roseville Community Center. Twenty percent opposed it, down eight percent from the 1990 study, while fifteen percent werc unsure. The typ�cal resident would supgort a propert}� tax increase of $27.20 annually to support the construction and partial operation of the facility. Residents would idealiy prioritize three facilities for inclusion in a Community Center. Forty- two percert wanted an indoor swimming pooL Nine percent supported a fitness room, and seven percent would include a cammunity room. Support for each of twelve specific facilities in the center varied. At the highest level, seventy- nine percent supported "an indoor swimming pool." Seventy-�ive peccent favored "an aerobics, exercise, and fitness room," while seventy-two percent each favored "an indoor running-walking track." Seventy percent supported "a teen center," and sixty-eight percent approved of "a banquet r�am for community meeting and rental purposes." Sixty-six percent favored "group meeting rooms," while sixty-five percent supported "a gymnasium," and sixty-four �crcent approved ot: "a relocated senior citizens center." Sixty-two percent fa�ored "day care and pre- school"space," and sixty percent supported "an arts and crafts raom for instructional programs and classes." Fifty-six percent favored "an indoor playground." But, sixty-eight percent opposed "an additionai indoor ice sheet." Residents were also asked to consider variations on the traditional community center model, typified by both the Shoreview and Maplewood facilities. By a f fty-six percent to twenty-one percent judgment, residents were more likely to support a Rosevi�le Community Center if it were built in a partnership with private sector businesses to decrease construction costs. While, by a 86