My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-26-88 Agenda & Packet
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Parks, Recreation & Forestry Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1988
>
05-26-88 Agenda & Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/3/2024 1:59:04 PM
Creation date
5/18/2023 12:57:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Parks, Recreation & Forestry Commission
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
� 1 <br /> It <br /> PARKS AND RECREATION ISSUES <br /> •) <br /> Residents were asked a series of questions about the parks <br /> and recreational facilities in Mounds View. The queries centered <br /> upon a set of issues: general rating of existing opportunities, <br /> recreational preferences, facilities usage, support for future <br /> developments, and interest in various options at the proposed <br /> Ramsey County Library. In general , the parks and recreation <br /> evaluations were uniformly strong and reflected a "outdoors- <br /> minded" community . <br /> Evaluation of the Park and Recreation System: <br /> Citizens were asked to rate the park and recreation <br /> facilities across Mounds View: <br /> �• How would you rate park and recrea— <br /> tional facilities in Mounds View — <br /> excellent, good, only fair, or poor? <br /> Eighty-seven percent of Mounds View residents approved of the <br /> current facilities: <br /> EXCELLENT 29% <br /> GOOD 58% <br /> ONLY FAIR 8% <br /> POOR 1/ <br /> DON'T KNOW/REFUSED 4% <br /> More flattering ratings arose from: <br /> * Planning to stay over ten years <br /> * Less than two year residents <br /> * Over $50,000 yearly income households <br /> Only Precinct 3 residents were more critical in their judgments . <br /> In comparison with other suburban communities, the rating is a <br /> very strong show of support for the park and recreation system, <br /> 1 <br /> • on a par with more spacious areas like Eagan and Plymouth . <br /> 72 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.