My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Res-2020-130 Infrastructure Improvement Program
>
Meetings
>
2020
>
07. July
>
2020-07-07 10:00 AM - Commissioners' Agenda
>
Res-2020-130 Infrastructure Improvement Program
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/15/2020 11:58:06 AM
Creation date
7/15/2020 11:57:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting
Date
7/7/2020
Meeting title
Commissioners' Agenda
Location
Commissioners' Auditorium
Address
205 West 5th Room 109 - Ellensburg
Meeting type
Regular
Meeting document type
Fully Executed Version
Supplemental fields
Alpha Order
l
Item
Request to Approve a Resolution for the 2020 Distressed County Sales and Use Tax Infrastructure Improvement Program Agreement with the City of Ellensburg
Order
12
Placement
Consent Agenda
Row ID
64177
Type
Resolution
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
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).
View images
View plain text
Troil octivities are the top most desired types of recreotion octivities. Given the time, money <br />and transportation, walking and biking for pleasure were the top two activities chosen by <br />respondents as those they would like to do most. <br />Respondents prefer paved trails ond traits thdt link neighborhoods or connect to other traits. <br />Based on the questionnaire, respondents are most int€rested in developing more trails for <br />exercise and to increase non-motorlzed transportation options. A lack of safe trails and <br />connections was also the top reason why respondents aren't currently using tralls. <br />Recreotional troils ore olso populor. Respondents expressed a need to provide natural <br />surface trails for mountain biking and trail running. <br />Recreatlon Programs and Speclal Events <br />There is potential to increase recreatlon program participotlon Although 54% of all <br />respondents responded that their household had used Clty-sponsored recreational programs <br />last year, many respondents were unaware of current offerings. ln addition, a smaller <br />percentage of respondents indicated that members of thelr famlly had used City-provided <br />receational programs in the last year compared to the 2002 survey, <br />There is interest in special interest progrorns. When asked what additionalCity-provided <br />reffeation programs should be offered or expanded, respondents indicated a need for <br />outdoor/environmental programs l37yol and fitness classes (2l/ol,The majority of <br />respondents also indicated they would or would consider paylng more for these types of <br />pro8rams. <br />Respondents expressed a need for more opportunities for children ond fomities. Based on the <br />open-ended responses, many respondents felt that chlldren and famllies are the most <br />underserved by recreation programs. <br />Future lmprovements <br />Respondents prioritized upgroding and malntaining existing pork and factlities. Based on <br />outcomes of the questionnaire,4L%oof respondents indicated a need to upgrade existing <br />parks followed by maintaining existing parks and facllltles (28Yol. Based on open ended <br />responses, examples of facilities with an expressed need for improvement include the <br />Racquet Center, city pool, tennis courts and playground equipment. <br />New troils are the top priortty tf lunding were ovoilable. Prioritizing a citywlde trailsystem <br />was the top ranked option according to guestionnaire outcomes, <br />There is lnterest in o multi-purpose community focitity. The second most popular response <br />for prioritization if funding were available was a multi-purpose community facility. ln <br />addition, respondents preferred several types of features to include in such a faclllty, tennis <br />or racquet courts. <br />Though respondents volue porks and natural areas, adding or developing new pork and <br />notural areas are not os prioritized.li%tor developing new parks and only 13% of <br />respondents indicated that acquiring land for future parks was a desired future <br />improvement. <br />Respondents prefer thdt funding ond maintenance for par/c and recreotion ts a shared <br />responslbility. Outcomes highlighted that funding should stem mostly frorn tax dollars and <br />some user fees. ln addition, respondents prefer that prlvate groups continue to share sports <br />field maintenance with the city. Fewer indicated that no fees should be charged or that the <br />city should develop and maintain sports fields and leagues without support. <br />Aly of eileftsbuto Pa*t & AQcrcolron Syttam Coo,p4deottt€ PEa UNak tAtG <br />Page 231
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.