New Search
My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
New Search
2006 PROS Plan - Legal Appeals
COE
>
PW
>
POS_PWM
>
Parks
>
POS Director
>
2006 PROS Plan - Legal Appeals
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/3/2014 12:14:45 PM
Creation date
5/30/2014 8:48:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PW_Operating
PW_Document_Type_ Operating
Correspondence
PW_Division
Parks and Open Space
Document_Number
2006 PROS Plan Legal Appeals
External_View
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
68
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
Among these agencies and districts, a wide variety of parkas and recreation programs, <br />encompassing those previously mentioned, are provided for the residents they serve. <br />In addition, the park and recreation agencies and the metropolitan school districts <br />have combined their resources and coordinated efforts to provide open space and <br />parks and recreation facilities in conjunction with the schools. <br />Also, in recent years, private recreational facilities, such as swimming pools and <br />tennis and racquetball courts, have been developed. Several private golf courses have <br />been in .operation in the community for a number of years. <br />Findings <br />Increases in leisure time, income, transportation energy costs, and projected <br />population growth indicate that there will continue to be a significant demand for a <br />diversity of park and recreational opportunities in the metropolitan area. <br />2. Regardless of what standard is used, it is becoming increasingly difficult for local <br />park agencies to meet the demands and needs of the community for parks and <br />recreation facilities. The major problems include: <br />a. Areas developing without park and recreation facilities available for the <br />residents. <br />b. Competition for limited available financial resources between the need to <br />purchase park land to meet future demands (before the land is no longer <br />available) and the need to develop existing park land to meet current demand. <br />C. Competition for limited financial resources to provide the diversity of park-and <br />recreational programs demanded by the community's citizens. <br />d. Land suitable and available for park and recreation facilities often competes <br />with other land use activities and needs in the metropolitan area. <br />3. For the purposes of the Metropolitan Area General Plan, the existing level of parks <br />and recreation facilities in this community were compared to the standards of the <br />National Recreation and Park Association (based on acres or facilities per thousand <br />population). When compared to NRPA standards, there is a gap between the overall <br />supply and demand for part: and recreation facilities in this community. This gap is <br />projected to increase unless additional part: land and recreational facilities are <br />provided. <br />a. Based on NRPA standards, there are sufficient gross acres of regional - <br />metropolitan part: land to meet a future metropolitan population of 246,000. <br />But gross acreage does not accurately reflect the adequacy of regional - <br />Ivietrc liar k eniacc men: sac: V � `�. 20 ' <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.