Survey respondents prefer pond over in-ground pool
By Bert Lehman
The Clintonville Parks and Recreation Committee recommended the Clintonville City Council pursue a swimming pond instead of an in-ground pool for the city’s shuttered outdoor aquatic facility.
The recommendation came at the May 30 Parks and Recreation Committee meeting.
Prior to the discussion, Committee Chairman Steve Kettenhoven said: “We as a committee in my opinion need to make a decision as to the route that we’re going to recommend to council so that whether the money is there or not, we can find the money if we have to. But we have to make a decision because this has gone too long.”
Kettenhoven said he assumed the committee favors a pond, but he said the committee needed to make a recommendation one way or the other to the city council.
“After talking to people and researching what I can, I’m becoming to think (a swimming pond) would be good for the community,” committee member Carol Metzger said. “Originally I really wanted to see our pool replaced.”
She said she has concerns about bacteria in swimming ponds.
“But I guess they have (swimming ponds) all over,” Metzger said.
“In my opinion, if you’ve got those types of facilities in larger communities – and I’m sure they have concerns about bacteria and so on as well – I don’t think these types of units would survive if there was that much of a concern over that,” Kettenhoven said. “People just wouldn’t use them, but these are being used.”
Kettenhoven said the city could downsize the original swimming pond plan that was presented to the city.
“We certainly don’t need a big sports park inflatable system, I don’t believe, at this point,” Kettenhoven said. “I’d just like to get the facility itself in there so that we’ve got something for our community to use.”
A play area with inflatable items could be added in the future, Kettenhoven added.
Clintonville City Administrator Sharon Eveland shared with the committee survey results from 100 respondents in and outside the city of Clintonville.
Forty-eight percent of respondents said they preferred a swimming pond while 29% preferred a concrete swimming pool.
Asked if they were willing to see their taxes increase to pay for an aquatic facility, 71% said yes while 29% said no. Seven percent said they would be willing to pay whatever it takes to get an outdoor aquatic facility, Eveland said.
“I do think it’s important to take some of that into account, but like I said, it is a small amount, but it does at least give you a little bit of insight,” Eveland said.
Eveland said she is a proponent of a swimming pond, and cost has to be a major consideration.
She added rehabilitating the existing pool, which would include a new bath house, could cost $3 million.
“Even if you take that $1.5 million out (for the buildings) you’re still going to be at almost $1.5 million. And we can do the aquatic park, the swimming pond, for $1.5 million, and that’s with everything. … You’re looking at significantly more to do the pool than to do the pond,” Eveland said.