2010 ILLINOIS COMMUNITY ECREATION FACILITIES & · PDF filedata received by ORPR was coded and entered into Microsoft Office Access. ... Paved Surface 274.53 308.11 957.75 ... Village

2010

ILLINOIS COMMUNITY

RECREATION FACILITIES & PARK TRENDS

INVENTORY

Prepared by

Robin Hall & Yung-Kuei Huang

Office of Recreation and Park Resources

University of Illinois

Prepared for

Illinois Department of Natural Resources

Grants Administration Division & Realty and Planning Division

i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

A special thanks is given to all the park districts, cities, villages and counties that participated in

this study. This would not have been done without their help and support.

Also, thanks to IDNR staff members Dick Westfall and Marla Gursh in the Planning Division.

Also thanks to Tom DiLello, Mick Rosenthal, and Steve Gonzalez (retired) in the Grants

Division.

Thanks to Dr. Ted Flickinger, Peter Murphy and Cindy Deiters at the Illinois Association of

ParkDistricts, and Larry Frang and Rebecca Turner at the Illinois Municipal League.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................... 1

A. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1

B. PROCESS................................................................................................................... 1

C. RESPONSE ................................................................................................................ 2

D. RESULTS – ANALYSIS OF SELECTED RETURNS ............................................ 2

1. POPULATION ANALYSIS ............................................................................................... 2

2. OPERATING BUDGETS .................................................................................................. 3

3. COMMUNITY OUTDOOR RECREATION LANDS ...................................................... 3

4. COMMUNITY OUTDOOR RECREATION FACILITIES .............................................. 4

II. APPENDIX A: SURVEY RESULTS .......................................................................... 5

III. APPENDIX B: SURVEY INSTRUMENTS ......................................................... 81

A. COVER LETTER .................................................................................................... 82

B. SURVEY .................................................................................................................. 83

1

Illinois Community Recreation Facilities and Park Trends Inventory

A. Introduction

The Office of Recreation and Park Resources (ORPR) at the University of Illinois, under contract with the State of Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR), Division of Planning and Division of Grant Administration, conducted a survey of city park and recreation departments, park districts, and county forest preserve and conservation districts in the State of Illinois. The information collected in the survey is used in several ways.

(1) The information gathered in the survey is used by the Planning Division of IDNR in the development and update of their statewide comprehensive outdoor recreation plan (SCORP). It is also used in other aspects of their planning.

(2) The data is used by the Grant Division in their review processes. Any city, park district or county agency that submits a completed survey and applies for an OSLAD grant receives extra credit in their grant review process.

(3) The information helps the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, the Illinois Association of Park Districts (IAPD), the Illinois Municipal League (IMC), and the Illinois Park and Recreation Association (IPRA) develop a more complete inventory of community park and recreation facilities in Illinois.

(4) The survey results provide some information the IAPD Research Committee has identified as being of value to cities, park districts and practitioners.

(5) The results also help identify topics for further and more detailed study that would be of value for departments, agencies, planners, and administrators.

This year’s survey asked for some information that was not included in the 2008 inventory, i.e. boat and canoe launch ramps and more detailed information concerning trails and paths. IDNR and ORPR are also interested in identifying cities and park districts that provide “natural areas.” For the purpose of this student, “natural areas” are defined as space specifically preserved for the functions of habitat restoration/preservation, species biodiversity, public health and appreciation of native plants and wildlife.” (Barry). The inventory also asked for information about different types of larger facilities a city or agency may provide, i.e. museums, nature/environmental centers, arboretums etc. In addition, cities and park districts were asked about the provision of a fitness center and formal relationships with health or medical agencies.

B. Process

In the spring of 2010 ORPR staff developed a survey instrument in cooperation with IDNR staff. ORPR staff also reviewed the document with staff from the Illinois Association of Park Districts (IAPD) and members of IAPD’s Research Committee. After IDNR staff approved the survey instrument, it was pretested with approximately ten practitioners from departments or agencies of different sizes and delivery types. Staff from these agencies were asked to critique and offer suggestions concerning the survey. IDNR staff gave a final review and approval of the revised inventory form. Then, ORPR started the data collection process. A copy of the survey instrument is included in Appendix B. The Office of Recreation and Park Resources working with IDNR and IAPD identified 482 incorporated areas and/or census designated places in the State that have requested grant assistance from the IDNR. These agencies were used as potential survey participants. All of these agencies were mailed a cover

2

letter explaining the purpose of the survey and a copy of the survey. A copy of the cover letter is included with this report in Appendix B. The letter explained the purpose of the survey and it also explained that an agency could go to the ORPR website and fill out the same survey online. A follow-up mailing was sent to the non-responding agencies approximately three and one-half weeks after the first mailing. If email addresses were available, non-respondents were also contacted by that method. A few weeks later, some non-respondents were called to encourage their participation. The data received by ORPR was coded and entered into Microsoft Office Access.

C. Response Of the 482 agencies/departments contacted, a total of 309 agencies responded. That is a total response rate of 64%. The survey was sent to 289 park districts and 179 responded. The response rate for park districts is 62%. The survey was sent to 174 cities/villages and 115 responded. The response rate for cities/villages is 66%. More responses were received in both categories in 2010 than 2008. In 2008, the park districts, cities and villages responding to the survey served approximately 74% of the Illinois population (9,474,069/12,852,548). This year the agencies responding represented approximately 81% of the state’s population. (10,471,158/12,910,409). If the population served by the Chicago Park District is removed from the reported population of 10,471,158, the municipal population is reduced to 7,575,142.

D. Analysis of Selected Returns

1. Population Analysis

Agency Type

Forest Preserve/Conservation

District & County Department

City/Village & Park District

City/Village Park

District

City-Level Agencies

w/o Chicago

N of Agencies 15 294 115 179 293

Population 9,051,760 10,471,158 2,088,174 8,456,184 7,575,142

Percentage of Total State Population 70.1% 81.1% 16.2% 65.5% 58.7%

Note. State Population = 12,910,409

3

2. Operating Budgets Analysis

(1) County Analysis

Number of County Forest Preserve Districts/Departments

Total Budget Population Per Capita by

Response Population

Per Thousand

15 154,060,654.00 9,051,760 17.02 17,019.97

13a 86,139,033.00 3,759,105 22.91 22,914.77

13b 88,574,433.00 3,050,105 29.04 29,039.80

a. Without the counties of the smallest (Byron Forest Preserve District) or largest population

(Forest Preserve District of Cook County)

b. Without the counties of the smallest (Lake County Forest Preserve District) or largest

budgets (Forest Preserve District of Cook County)

(2) City-Level Analysis

Agency Type Number of Agencies

Total Budget Population Per Capita by

Response Population

Per Thousand

City/Villages & Park Districts

267 1,911,394,253.04 10,471,158 182.539 182,538.96

City/Villages 97 425,460,402.00 2,088,174 203.748 203,747.58

Park Districts 170 1,485,933,851.04 8,456,184 175.722 175,721.56

Chicago Park District 1 391,853,640.00 2,896,016 135.308 135,307.83

City/Villages & Park Districts (No Chicago Park District)

266 1,519,540,613.04 7,575,142 200.596 200,595.66

Note. Exclude cities/park districts that did not provide budget data

3. Park Trends/Natural Areas Analysis

County City/Village Park District Totals

Number of Park Sites 687 1,085 4,448 6,220

Acres 201,211.39 28,563.45 88,970.04 318,744.88

Natural Area Acres 164,129.39 10,135.86 22,998.14 197,263.39

Leased Acres 2,678.30 990.50 5,781.17 9,449.96

4

4. Community Outdoor Recreation Facilities

County City/Village Park District Totals

Water-Based Facilities

Fishing Piers/Docks 71 100 261 432

Outdoor Swimming Pools/Aquatic Centers 3 57 206 266

Spray Grounds 2 17 305 324

Boat Launch Ramps (Motorized) 24 53 70 147

Canoe Launch Ramps (Non-motorized) 42 33 97 172

Trails

Miles of Trails in Parks 1,164.05 347.04 1,008.51 2,520

Miles of Trails outside Park Boundaries 6.50 567.15 956.18 1,530

Bike Trail, Paved Surface 274.53 308.11 957.75 1,540

Bike Trail, Crushed Limestone Surface 433.90 92.25 168.88 695

On-Road Bike Trail 8.15 191.85 190.39 390

Mountain Bike Trail, Natural Surface 202.00 31.50 16.50 250

Walking Path, Natural or Paved Surface 788.60 443.53 851.86 2,084

Interpretive Trails, Natural or Paved Surface 223.35 76.44 123.61 423

Hiking Trails, Natural Surface 858.40 127.50 253.32 1,239

Equestrian Trails 432.90 46.00 100.90 580

Snowmobile Trails 83.50 14.15 145.00 243

Sports Courts and Fields

Outdoor Basketball Courts 4 343.50 2,099.50 2,447

Number of Baseball Fields 11 440.00 1,907.00 2,358

Number of Softball Fields 16 345.00 1,338.50 1,700

Number of Soccer Fields 4 365.00 1,537.00 1,906

Number of Football Fields 0 71.00 399.00 470

Facilities

Number of Picnic Shelters 431 678 1,549 2,658

Number of Playgrounds 69 734 3,158 3,961

Number of Dog Parks 18 13 62 93

Number of Disc Golf Courses 0 23 68 91

Number of Skate Parks 1 44 113 158

Number of Archery Ranges 2 2 16 20

Number of Environmental/Nature Centers 26 9 47 82

Number of Museums 10 19 87 116

Number of Botanic Gardens/Arboretums 12 12 35 59

Operation Questions

Number of Agencies Having Fitness Center

15 91 106

A Written Agreement for Collaboration

10 23 33

5

Appendix A: Survey Results

6

I. Response Rates

Response Rate City/Village Park District City + PD County Total

Respondents 115 179 294 15 309

Non-Response 59 110 169 4 173

Total 174 289 463 19 482

Response Rate 66% 62% 63% 79% 64%

Note. Clark County Park District was categorized into the group of “Park District.”

63%

37%

City/Village + Park District Response Rate

Respondents

Non-Response

79%

21%

County Response Rate

Respondents

Non-Response

7

II. Community Information (Descriptions of Population & Operating Budgets)

A. Agency Type & Population Size

Population N of

Cities/Villages

N of Park

Districts

N of County

Agencies

Total Number

of Agencies

< 2,500 23 17 0 40

2,500~5,000 16 16 1 33

5,000~10,000 22 26 0 48

10,000~25,000 33 45 1 79

25,000~50,000 13 45 0 58

50,000 + 8 30 13 51

Total 115 179 15 309

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

23

16

22

33

13

8

17 16

26

45 45

30

0 1 0 1 0

13

Fre

qu

ency

Population Size

Number of Agencies - Population Size

N of Cities/Villages

N of Park Districts

N of County Agencies

8

B. Agency Type & Operating Budget

Operating Budget N of

Cities/Villages

N of Park

Districts

N of County

Agencies N of Agencies

<100,000 9 16 1 26

100,000~ 1,000,000 33 28 3 64

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 17 31 1 49

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 14 26 4 44

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 5 13 0 18

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 5 18 2 25

10,000,000 + 14 38 3 55

Unknown 18 9 1 28

Total 115 179 15 309

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

9

33

1714

5 5

14

1816

2831

26

13

18

38

9

13

14

02 3

1

Fre

qu

ency

Operating Budgets

Number of Agencies - Size of Operating Budgets

N of Cities/Villages

N of Park Districts

N of County Agencies

9

III. Parks Information

A. Park Sites

1) Preliminary Analysis of Park Sites – Agency Type

Agency Type N of Agencies

w/ Park Sites

Avg. N of Park

Sites

Min. N of

Park Sites

Max. N of

Park Sites

County 12 57.3 4 320a

City/Village 114 9.5 1 69b

Park District 179 24.8 1 578c

Park District (No Chicago

Park District) 178 21.7 1 174

d

City/Village + Park District

(No Chicago Park District) 292 17.0 1 174

Note. Agencies that did not report data or reported 0 acres were excluded.

a. Forest Preserve District of Cook County

b. Elgin Parks and Recreation Department

c. Chicago Park District

d. Rockford Park District

2) Park Sites - Community Population Size

Number of Park Sites Average N of Park Sites

Population City/Village Park District City/Village Park District Overall Average

< 2,500 46 29 2.0 1.7 1.9

2,500~5,000 83 74 5.2 4.6 4.9

5,000~10,000 148 222 6.7 8.5 7.7

10,000~25,000 457 579 13.8 12.9 13.3

25,000~50,000 117 1,215 9.8 27.0 23.4

50,000 + 234 2,329 29.3 77.6 67.4

Total 1,085 4,448 9.5 24.8 18.9

10

3) Park Sites – Operating Budgets

Number of Park Sites Average N of Park Sites

Operating Budget City/Village Park District City/Village Park District Overall Average

<100,000 16 33 1.8 2.1 2.0

100,000~ 1,000,000 232 170 7.0 6.1 6.6

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 187 382 11.0 12.3 11.9

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 204 368 14.6 14.2 14.3

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 58 246 11.6 18.9 16.9

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 56 547 11.2 30.4 26.2

10,000,000 + 235 2,603 18.1 68.5 55.6

Unknown 97 99 5.4 11.0 7.3

Total 1,085 4,448 9.5 24.8 18.9

4) Distribution of Agency – Park Sites

City/Village Park District

Number of Park Sites Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

0 1 1% 0 0%

1~10 82 71% 76 42%

11~25 21 18% 50 28%

26~50 8 7% 35 20%

51~100 3 3% 13 7%

>100 0 0% 5 3%

N/A 0 0% 0 0%

Total 115 179

0

20

40

60

80

100

1

82

21

83 0 00

76

50

35

135

0

Nu

mb

er o

f A

gen

cies

Number of Park Sites

Number of Agencies By Number of Park Sites

City/Village

Park District

11

B. Land Acres

1) Preliminary Analysis of Land Acres – Agency Type


w/ Lands

Avg. Land

Acres Min. Acres Max. Acres

County 15 13,414 700 68,825a

City/Village 112 255 0 3,800b

Park District 176 506 1 9,052c

Park District (No Peoria

Park District) 175 457 1 7,624

d


(No Peoria Park District) 287 378 0 7,624



b. City of Litchfield

c. Peoria Park District

d. Chicago Park District

2) Land Acres – Community Population Size

Number of Acres Average N of Land Acres


< 2,500 325.57 580.50 14.8 36.3 23.8

2,500~5,000 3,796.90 673.15 237.3 48.1 149.0

5,000~10,000 6,186.06 2,803.23 294.6 107.8 191.3

10,000~25,000 10,719.42 14,502.72 335.0 322.3 327.6

25,000~50,000 3,732.08 21,780.07 287.1 484.0 439.9

50,000 + 3,803.42 48,630.37 475.4 1,621.0 1,379.8

Total 28,563.45 88,970.04 255.0 505.5 408.1

3) Land Acres – Operating Budget

Number of Acres Average N of Acres


<100,000 143.00 369.50 17.88 26.39 23.30

100,000~ 1,000,000 9,454.19 2,207.85 286.49 78.85 191.18

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 5,948.20 11,156.30 349.89 359.88 356.34

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 4,268.15 5,792.37 304.87 222.78 251.51

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 1,013.00 6,416.35 202.60 493.57 412.74

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 1,293.25 9,552.66 258.65 530.70 471.56

10,000,000 + 4,171.98 52,289.01 298.00 1,376.03 1,085.79

Unknown 2,271.68 1,186.00 141.98 148.25 144.07

Total 28,563.45 88,970.04 255.03 505.51 408.10

12

4) Distribution of Agency – Land Acres


Total Land Acres Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

0 1 1% 1 1%

0~10 16 14% 12 7%

10~100 47 41% 61 34%

100~1000 43 37% 85 47%

1000~5000 6 5% 16 9%

5000~10000 0 0% 2 1%

N/A 2 2% 2 1%

Total 115 179

0

20

40

60

80

100

1

16

4743

60 21

12

61

85

16

2 2

Nu

mb

er o

f A

gen

cies

Acres

Number of Agencies By Number of Land Acres

City/Village

Park District

13

C. Acres of Natural Areas

1) Preliminary Analysis of Natural Areas – Agency Type

Agency Type N of Agencies w/

Natural Areas

Avg. Acres -

Natural Areas

Min. Acres -

Natural Areas

Max. Acres -

Natural Areas

County 15 10,941.96 500 54,000a

City/Village 68 149.06 1 1,050b

Park District 128 179.67 1 4,532c

Park District (No Peoria

Park District) 127 145.40 1 2,100

d

City/Village + Park

District (No Peoria Park

District)

195 146.68 1 2,100



b. Highland Parks and Recreation Department

c. Peoria Park District

d. Clark County Park District

2) Natural Areas – Community Population Size

Acres of Natural Areas Average Acres of Natural Areas


< 2,500 65.00 244.00 9.29 48.80 25.75

2,500~5,000 384.00 214.55 38.40 26.82 33.25

5,000~10,000 4,768.00 365.00 298.00 18.25 142.58

10,000~25,000 3,688.20 4,948.92 167.65 159.64 162.96

25,000~50,000 518.00 6,223.20 86.33 172.87 160.50

50,000 + 712.66 11,002.47 101.81 392.95 334.72

Total 10,135.86 22,998.14 149.06 179.67 169.05

14

3) Natural Areas – Operating Budgets

Acres of Natural Areas Average Acres of Natural Areas


<100,000 50.00 98.00 25.00 19.60 21.14

100,000~ 1,000,000 5,580.20 480.25 293.69 34.30 183.65

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 1,697.00 4,628.50 141.42 201.24 180.73

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 773.66 1,281.50 64.47 67.45 66.30

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 173.00 2,944.30 86.50 267.66 239.79

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 70.00 2,059.39 35.00 128.71 118.30

10,000,000 + 793.00 11,341.20 99.13 306.52 269.65

Unknown 999.00 165.00 90.82 55.00 83.14

Total 10,135.86 22,998.14 149.06 179.67 169.05

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

30%

63%

73%67%

46%

88%

29%

50%

77%69%

80%

93%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g

Ag

enci

es

Community Population Size

Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Natural Areas -


Cities/Villages That Report

Having Natural Areas

Park Districts That Report

Having Natural Areas

15

4) Distribution of Agency – Acres of Natural Areas

Acres of Natural

Areas


Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

0~10 14 12% 33 18%

10~100 37 32% 52 29%

100~1000 15 13% 40 22%

>1000 2 2% 3 2%

Total 68 128

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

22%

58%

71%

86%

40% 40%

57%61%

31%

50%

74% 73%

85%89%

97%

33%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies

Operating Budgets Size

Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Natural Areas -

Operating Budget Size

Cities/Villages That

Report Having Natural

Areas

Park Districts That

Report Having Natural

Areas

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0~10 10~100 100~1000 >1000

14

37

15

2

33

52

40

3Nu

mb

er o

f A

gen

cies

Acres

Number of Agencies By Acres of Natural Areas

City/Village

Park District

16

IV. Land Dedication Ordinance

Land Dedication

Ordinance No Ordinance Total

City/Village 34 81 115

Park District 67 112 179

Total 101 193 294

V. Water-Based Facilities

-

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Fishing

Piers/Docks

Outdoor

Pools/Aquatic

Centers

Spray Grounds Boat Launch

Ramps

(Motorized)

Canoe Launch

Ramps (Non-

motorized)

100

57

17

53 33

261

206

305

70

97

71

3 224

42

Nu

mb

er o

f F

aci

liti

es

Water-Based Facilities

City Department

Park District

County

17

A. Fish Piers/Docks

1) Preliminary Analysis of Fish Piers/Docks – Agency Type

Agency Type

N of Agencies

w/ Fish

Piers/Docks

Avg. N of

Fish

Piers/Docks

Min. N of

Fish

Piers/Docks

Max. N of

Fish

Piers/Docks

County 14 5.1 1 11a



Park District (No Sterling Park

District) 76 3.0 1 26

d

City/Village + Park District (No

Sterling Park District) 117 2.8 1 26

Note. Agencies that did not report data or reported 0 were excluded.


b. City of Mattoon

c. Sterling Park District


2) Number of Fish Piers/Docks – Community Population Size

Number of Fishing Piers/Docks Avg. N of Fishing Piers/Docks


< 2,500 6 0 2.0 0.0 2.0

2,500~5,000 11 13 2.2 2.6 2.4

5,000~10,000 16 16 2.0 2.3 2.1

10,000~25,000 38 79 2.7 4.4 3.7

25,000~50,000 14 53 2.8 2.2 2.3

50,000 + 15 100 2.5 4.3 4.0

Total 100 261 2.4 3.4 3.1

18

3) Number of Fish Piers/Docks – Operating Budgets

Number of Fishing

Piers/Docks Avg. N of Fishing Piers/Docks

Operating Budget City/Village Park District City/Village Park District Overall

Average

<100,000 1 0 1.0 0.0 1.0

100,000~ 1,000,000 26 19 2.6 3.8 3.0

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 11 63 1.8 4.8 3.9

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 22 22 3.1 2.2 2.6

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 6 17 6.0 2.4 2.9

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 4 26 2.0 2.4 2.3

10,000,000 + 21 103 2.3 3.8 3.4

Unknown 9 11 1.8 2.8 2.2

Total 100 261 2.4 3.4 3.1

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

13%

31%36%

42%38%

75%

0%

31%27%

40%

53%

77%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Fishing Piers/Docks -



Having Fishing Piers/Docks


Having Fishing Piers/Docks

19

4) Distribution of Agency – Fish Piers/Docks

N of Fishing

Piers/Docks



1~3 33 80% 51 66%

4~6 7 17% 15 19%

7~9 1 2% 7 9%

10 & above 0 0% 4 5%

Total 41 77

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

11%

30% 35%

50%

20%

40%

64%

28%

0%

18%

42%38%

54%61%

71%

44%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Fishing Piers/Docks -



Report Having Fishing

Piers/Docks

Park Districts That

Report Having Fishing

Piers/Docks

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1~3 4~6 7~9 10 & above

33

7

1 0

51

15

74N

um

ber

of

Ag

enci

es

Fishing Piers/Docks

Number of Agencies By Number of Fishing Piers/Docks

City/Village

Park District

20

B. Outdoor Pools/Aquatic Centers

1) Preliminary Analysis of Outdoor Pools/Aquatic Centers – Agency Type

Agency Type

N of Agencies

w/ Outdoor

Pools/Aquatic

Centers

Avg. N of

Outdoor

Pools/Aquatic

Centers

Min. N of

Outdoor

Pools/Aquatic

Centers

Max. N of

Outdoor

Pools/Aquatic

Centers

County 1 3.0 0 3

City/Village 44 1.3 1 4

Park District 109 1.9 1 52

Park District (No Chicago Park

District) 108 1.4 1 6




2) Number of Outdoor Pools/Aquatic Centers – Community Population Size

N of Outdoor Pools/Aquatic

Centers Avg. N of Outdoor Pools/Aquatic Centers

Population City/Village Park District City/Village Park

District

Overall

Average

< 2,500 3 3 1.0 1.0 1.0

2,500~5,000 9 3 1.1 1.0 1.1

5,000~10,000 13 13 1.2 1.1 1.1

10,000~25,000 13 33 1.1 1.1 1.1

25,000~50,000 7 48 1.8 1.3 1.4

50,000 + 12 106 2.0 4.1 3.7

Total 57 206 1.3 1.9 1.7

21

3) Number of Outdoor Pools/Aquatic Centers – Operating Budgets

N of Outdoor Pools/Aquatic

Centers Avg. N of Outdoor Pools/Aquatic Centers


Average

<100,000 0 5 0.0 1.3 1.3

100,000~ 1,000,000 16 11 1.1 1.0 1.1

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 11 13 1.2 1.1 1.1

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 13 19 1.6 1.1 1.3

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 1 13 1.0 1.2 1.2

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 2 22 2.0 1.4 1.4

10,000,000 + 8 119 1.3 3.5 3.2

Unknown 6 4 1.2 1.0 1.1

Total 57 206 1.3 1.9 1.7

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

13%

50% 50%

36%31%

75%

18% 19%

46%

64%

80%87%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Outdoor Pools/Aquatic

Centers - Community Population Size


Having Pools/Aquatic Cent.


Having Pools/Aquatic Cent.

22

4) Distribution of Agency – Outdoor Pools/Aquatic Centers

N of Outdoor Pools/Aquatic Centers City/Village Park District


1 35 79.5% 79 72%

2 6 13.6% 19 17%

3 2 4.5% 6 6%

4 & above 1 2.3% 5 5%

Total 44 109

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0%

42%

53% 57%

20% 20%

43%

28%25%

39% 39%

65%

85%89% 89%

44%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g

Ag

enci

es


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Outdoor Pools/Aquatic

Centers - Operating Budget Size


Report Having

Pools/Aquatic Cent.

Park Districts That

Report Having

Pools/Aquatic Cent.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1 2 3 4 & above

35

62 1

79

19

6 5Nu

mb

er o

f A

gen

cies

Outdoor Pool/Aquatic Center

Number of Agencies By Number of Outdoor Pools/Aquatic Centers

City/Village

Park District

23

5) Age of Outdoor Pools/Aquatic Centers – Community Population Size

N of Outdoor

Pools/Aquatic

Centers

Age of Outdoor Pools/Aquatic Centers Total

Community

Size

Under 3

Years

3~10

Years

10~15

Years

15~20

Years

20~25

Years

25 Years &

Above

< 2,500 5 2 1 0 0 3 11

2,500~5,000 0 1 0 3 1 6 11

5,000~10,000 3 0 1 3 0 13 20

10,000~25,000 2 7 4 2 3 15 33

25,000~50,000 1 11 6 4 1 12 35

50,000 + 0 12 6 5 3 11 37

Total 11 33 18 17 8 60 147

Community Size Avg. Age of Outdoor Pools/Aquatic Centers

< 2,500 16.09

2,500~5,000 37.09

5,000~10,000 32.05

10,000~25,000 25.71

25,000~50,000 21.23

50,000 + 20.00

Overall Average 24.04

6) Age of Outdoor Pools/Aquatic Centers – Operating Budgets

N of Outdoor

Pools/Aquatic Centers Age of Outdoor Pools/Aquatic Centers Total

Operating Budget Under 3

Years

3~10

Years

10~15

Years

15~20

Years

20~25

Years

25 Years &

Above

<100,000 0 0 0 1 0 3 4

100,000~ 1,000,000 7 5 3 3 1 10 29

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 0 2 0 1 0 10 13

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 2 6 3 4 1 14 30

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 0 2 0 1 1 3 7

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 1 4 4 1 1 2 13

10,000,000 + 1 14 7 6 3 12 43

Unknown 0 0 1 0 1 6 8

Total 11 33 18 17 8 60 147

24

Operating Budget Avg. Age of Outdoor Pools/Aquatic Centers

<100,000 46.75

100,000~ 1,000,000 23.48

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 38.77

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 23.15

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 30.14

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 12.85

10,000,000 + 19.00

Unknown 37.00

Overall Average 24.20

C. Spray Grounds

1) Preliminary Analysis of Spray Grounds – Agency Type

Agency Type

N of Agencies

w/ Spray

Grounds

Avg. N of

Spray

Grounds

Min. N of

Spray

Grounds

Max. N of

Spray

Grounds

County 2 1.0 1 1



Park District (No Chicago Park

District) 60 1.5 1 14

City/Village + Park District (No

Chicago Park District) 74 1.4 1 14


2) Number of Spray Grounds – Community Population Size

Number of Spray Grounds Avg. N of Spray Grounds

Population City/Village Park

District City/Village

Park

District

Overall

Average

< 2,500 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

2,500~5,000 1 2 1.0 1.0 1.0

5,000~10,000 1 2 1.0 1.0 1.0

10,000~25,000 5 16 1.0 1.1 1.1

25,000~50,000 3 24 1.5 1.1 1.2

50,000 + 7 261 1.4 12.4 10.3

Total 17 305 1.2 5.0 4.3

25

3) Number of Spray Grounds – Operating Budgets

Number of Spray Grounds Avg. N of Spray Grounds

Operating Budget City/Village Park District City/Village Park

District

Overall

Average

<100,000 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

100,000~ 1,000,000 2 1 1.0 1.0 1.0

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 5 8 1.3 1.0 1.1

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 2 10 1.0 1.3 1.2

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 1 9 1.0 1.1 1.1

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 1 14 1.0 1.4 1.4

10,000,000 + 6 261 1.5 10.9 9.5

Unknown 0 2 0.0 1.0 1.0

Total 17 305 1.2 5.0 4.3

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

0%6% 5%

15% 15%

63%

0%

13%8%

33%

47%

70%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g

Ag

enci

es


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Spray Grounds -



Having Spray Grounds


Having Spray Grounds

26

4) Distribution of Agency – Spray Grounds

Number of Spray

Grounds



1 12 86% 48 79%

2 1 7% 8 13%

3 1 7% 2 3%

4 and above 0 0% 3 5%

Total 14

61

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

0%6%

24%

14%20% 20%

29%

0%0%4%

26%31%

62%56%

63%

22%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g

Ag

enci

es


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Spray Grounds -



Report Having Spray

Grounds

Park Districts That

Report Having Spray

Grounds

0

10

20

30

40

50

1 2 3 4 and above

12

1 1 0

48

8

2 3Nu

mb

er o

f A

gen

cies

Spray Grounds

Number of Agencies By Number of Spray Grounds

City/Village

Park District

27

D. Boat Launch Ramps (Motorized)

1) Preliminary Analysis of Boat Launch Ramps – Agency Type

Agency Type

N of Agencies w/

Boat Launch

Ramps

Avg. N of Boat

Launch Ramps

Min. N of Boat

Launch Ramps

Max. N of Boat

Launch Ramps

County 8 3.0 1 5



City/Village +



2) Number of Boat Launch Ramps – Community Population Size

Number of Boat Launch Ramps Avg. N of Boat Launch Ramps

Population City/Village Park District City/Village Park District Overall

Average

< 2,500 4 1 2.0 1.0 1.7

2,500~5,000 4 8 2.0 2.7 2.4

5,000~10,000 23 4 2.3 1.3 2.1

10,000~25,000 12 17 1.5 1.9 1.7

25,000~50,000 8 15 1.3 1.9 1.6

50,000 + 2 25 2.0 3.1 3.0

Total 53 70 1.8 2.2 2.0

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

9%

13%

45%

24%

46%

13%

6%

19%

12%

20%18%

27%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Boat Launch Ramps -



Having Boat Launch Ramps


Having Boat Launch Ramps

28

3) Number of Boat Launch Ramps – Operating Budgets

Number of Boat Launch Ramps Avg. N of Boat Launch Ramps


<100,000 0 1 0.0 1.0 1.0

100,000~ 1,000,000 19 5 2.4 1.7 2.2

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 4 16 1.3 2.0 1.8

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 12 2 1.7 1.0 1.6

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 3 5 3.0 2.5 2.7

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 1 9 1.0 2.3 2.0

10,000,000 + 5 27 1.3 2.7 2.3

Unknown 9 5 1.8 2.5 2.0

Total 53 70 1.8 2.2 2.0

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

0%

24%

18%

50%

20% 20%

29% 28%

6%

11%

26%

8%

15%

22%26%

22%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Boat Launch Ramps -



Report Having Boat

Launch Ramps

Park Districts That

Report Having Boat

Launch Ramps

29

4) Distribution of Agency – Boat Launch Ramps

N of Boat Launch

Ramps



1 15 52% 14 44%

2 10 34% 10 31%

3 2 7% 2 6%

4 & above 2 7% 6 19%

Total 29

32

E. Canoe Launch Ramps (Non-Motorized)

1) Preliminary Analysis of Canoe Launch Ramps – Agency Type

Agency Type

N of Agencies w/

Boat Launch

Ramps

Avg. N of Boat

Launch Ramps

Min. N of Boat

Launch Ramps

Max. N of Boat

Launch Ramps

County 13 3.2 1 9a


Park District 53 1.8 1 15b

City/Village + Park

District 77 1.7 1 15



b. Chicago Park District

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1 2 3 4 & above

15

10

2 2

14

10

2

6

Nu

mb

er o

f A

gen

cies

Boat Launch Ramps

Number of Agencies By Number of Boat Launch Ramps

City/Village

Park District

30

2) Number of Canoe Launch Ramps – Community Population Size

Number of Canoe Launch

Ramps Avg. N of Canoe Launch Ramps


< 2,500 4 2 2.0 1.0 1.5

2,500~5,000 4 1 2.0 1.0 1.7

5,000~10,000 4 8 1.0 1.1 1.1

10,000~25,000 14 17 1.3 1.3 1.3

25,000~50,000 3 21 1.0 1.4 1.3

50,000 + 4 48 2.0 3.2 3.1

Total 33 97 1.4 1.8 1.7

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

9%

13%

18%

33%

23%25%

12%

6%

27%29%

33%

50%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Canoe Launch Ramps

- Community Population Size


Having Canoe Launch Ramps


Having Canoe Launch Ramps

31

3) Number of Canoe Launch Ramps – Operating Budgets

Number of Canoe Launch

Ramps Avg. N of Canoe Launch Ramps


Average

<100,000 0 1 0.0 1.0 1.0

100,000~ 1,000,000 10 5 1.4 1.3 1.4

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 4 14 1.0 1.8 1.5

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 7 12 1.4 1.1 1.2

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 3 4 3.0 1.3 1.8

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 1 11 1.0 1.8 1.7

10,000,000 + 5 49 1.7 2.6 2.5

Unknown 3 1 1.0 1.0 1.0

Total 33 97 1.4 1.8 1.7

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

0%

21%24%

36%

20% 20% 21%

17%

6%

14%

26%

42%

23%

33%

50%

11%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Canoe Launch Ramps

- Operating Budget Size


Report Having Canoe

Launch Ramps

Park Districts That

Report Having Canoe

Launch Ramps

32

4) Distribution of Agency – Canoe Launch Ramps

N of Canoe Launch

Ramps



1 16 67% 37 70%

2 7 29% 8 15%

3 1 4% 5 9%

4 & above 0 0% 3 6%

Total 24 53

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1 2 3 4 & above

16

7

1 0

37

85

3Nu

mb

er o

f A

gen

cies

Canoe Launch Ramps

Number of Agencies By Number of Canoe Launch Ramps

City/Village

Park District

33

VI. Trails

-

200.00

400.00

600.00

800.00

1,000.00

1,200.00

Trails in Parks Trails Outside Park

Boundaries

City Department 347.04 567.15

Park District 1,008.51 956.18

County 1164.05 6.5

Mil

es

Miles of Trails

34

-

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

700.00

800.00

900.00

1,000.00

Bike Trail, Paved Surface

Bike Trail, Crushed

Limestone Surface

On-Road Bike Trail

Mountain Bike Trail, Natural

Surface

City Department 308.11 92.25 191.85 31.50

Park District 957.75 168.88 190.39 16.50

County 274.53 433.9 8.15 202

Mil

es

Miles of Bike Trails

-

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

700.00

800.00

900.00

Walking Path, Natural or

Paved Surface

Interpretive Trails, Natural

or Paved

Surface

Hiking Trails, Natural Surface

Equestrian Trails

Snowmobile Trails

City Department 443.53 76.44 127.50 46.00 14.15

Park District 851.86 123.61 253.32 100.90 145.00

County 788.6 223.35 858.4 432.9 83.5

Mil

es

Miles of VariousTrail Types

35

A. Miles of Trails in Parks

1) Preliminary Analysis of Miles of Trails in Parks – Agency Type

Agency Type

N of Agencies

w/ Trails in

Parks

Avg. Miles of

Trails in Parks

Min. Miles of

Trails in Parks

Max. Miles of

Trails in Parks

County 12 97.0 18 313.75a

City/Village 74 4.7 0.25 80b

Park District 136 7.4 0.13 59c

Park District (No Rockford

Park District) 135 7.2 0.13 59


(No Rockford Park DIstrict) 209 6.3 0.13 80



b. City of Loves Park

c. Naperville Park District

2) Miles of Trails in Parks – Community Population Size

Trail Miles Avg. Miles of Trails

Population City/Village Park

District City/Village Park District Overall Average

< 2,500 7.25 7.50 1.2 1.9 1.5

2,500~5,000 25.95 19.00 2.9 2.4 2.6

5,000~10,000 48.10 46.06 2.8 2.4 2.6

10,000~25,000 182.84 178.35 7.0 5.0 5.8

25,000~50,000 50.07 330.98 5.6 8.1 7.6

50,000 + 32.83 426.62 4.7 15.2 13.1

Total 347.04 1,008.51 4.7 7.4 6.5

36

3) Miles of Trails in Parks – Operating Budgets

Trail Miles Avg. Miles of Trails


Average

<100,000 5.00 2.50 2.5 0.8 1.6

100,000~ 1,000,000 66.84 54.48 2.7 3.6 3.0

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 41.50 165.77 3.8 6.4 5.6

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 44.32 84.19 4.0 4.0 4.0

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 6.25 80.79 0.8 7.3 5.9

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 6.00 107.01 1.5 6.3 5.4

10,000,000 + 54.33 490.77 6.8 13.6 12.4

Unknown 122.80 23.00 13.6 2.7 8.2

Total 347.04 1,008.51 4.7 7.4 6.5

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

26%

56%

77% 79%

69%

88%

24%

50%

73%

80%

91% 93%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Trails in Parks -



Having Trails in Parks


Having Trails in Parks

37

4) Distribution of Agency – Miles of Trails in Parks


Trail Miles Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

0~5 53 72% 68 50%

5~10 16 22% 45 33%

10~15 1 1% 8 6%

15~25 2 3% 5 4%

25~50 1 1% 8 6%

50 & above 1 1% 2 1%

Total 74 136

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

22%

76%

65%

79%80% 80%

57%50%

19%

57%

84% 81%85%

94% 95%

67%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Trails in Parks -



Report Having Trails in

Parks

Park Districts That

Report Having Trails in

Parks

0

20

40

60

80

0~5 5~10 10~15 15~25 25~50 50 & above

53

16

1 2 1 1

68

45

8 5 82

Nu

mb

er o

f A

gen

cies

Miles of Trails in Parks

Number of Agencies By Miles of Trails in Parks

City/VillagePark District

38

B. Miles of Trails Outside Park Boundaries

1) Preliminary Analysis of Miles of Trails Outside Park Boundaries – Agency Type

Agency Type

N of Agencies

w/ Trails

Outside Parks

Avg. Miles of

Trails Outside

Parks

Min. Miles of

Trails Outside

Parks

Max. Miles of

Trails Outside

Parks

County 4 1.6 1 2

City/Village 37 15.3 0.9 100a


Park District (No Metro East

P & R) 60 13.4 1 141

c


(No Metro East P & R) 97 14.2 0.9 141


a. City of Colona

b. Metro East Park and Recreation District


2) Miles of Trails Outside Park Boundaries – Community Population Size

Trail Miles Avg. Miles of Trails Outside Parks


< 2,500 6.40 0.00 1.3 0.0 1.3

2,500~5,000 27.00 23.00 9.0 7.7 8.3

5,000~10,000 125.50 31.94 20.9 6.4 14.3

10,000~25,000 140.45 116.40 10.8 6.8 8.6

25,000~50,000 195.95 335.90 39.2 14.6 19.0

50,000 + 71.85 448.94 14.4 34.5 28.9

Total 567.15 956.18 15.3 15.7 15.5

39

3) Miles of Trails Outside Park Boundaries – Operating Budgets

Trail Miles Avg. Miles of Trails Outside Parks


<100,000 12.00 0.00 12.0 0.0 12.0

100,000~ 1,000,000 198.85 14.50 24.9 3.6 17.8

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 27.00 189.65 9.0 17.2 15.5

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 40.65 94.15 6.8 9.4 8.4

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 16.00 101.74 5.3 12.7 10.7

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 44.50 76.40 14.8 9.6 11.0

10,000,000 + 105.15 428.74 13.1 25.2 21.4

Unknown 123.00 51.00 24.6 17.0 21.8

Total 567.15 956.18 15.3 15.7 15.5

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

22%19%

27%

39% 38%

63%

0%

19% 19%

38%

51%

43%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Trails Outside Parks -



Having Trails Outside Parks


Having Trails Outside Parks

40

4) Distribution of Agency – Miles of Trails Outside Parks


N of Trail Miles Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

0~5 11 30% 22 36%

5~10 7 19% 13 21%

10~15 9 24% 11 18%

15~25 4 11% 6 10%

25~50 3 8% 5 8%

50 & above 3 8% 4 7%

Total 37 61

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

11%

24%

18%

43%

60% 60% 57%

28%

0%

14%

35%38%

62%

44% 45%

33%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Trails Outside Parks -



Report Having Trails

Outside Parks

Park Districts That

Report Having Trails

Outside Parks

0

5

10

15

20

25

0~5 5~10 10~15 15~25 25~50 50 & above

11

79

4 3 3

22

1311

6 5 4

Nu

mb

er o

f A

gen

cies

Miles of Trails Outside Parks

Number of Agencies By Number of Miles of Trails Outside Parks

City/Village

Park District

41

VII. Sports Courts & Fields

A. Outdoor Basketball Courts

1) Preliminary Analysis of Outdoor Basketball Courts – Agency Type

Agency Type

N of Agencies

w/ Basketball

Courts

Avg. N of

Basketball

Courts

Min. N of

Basketball

Courts

Max. N of

Basketball

Courts

County 4 1.0 1 1

City/Village 95 3.6 0.5 33a

Park District 154 13.6 0.5 896b


Park District) 153 7.9 0.5 82

c


(No Chicago Park District) 248 6.2 0.5 82


a. Orland Park Recreation and Parks Department


c. Fox Valley Park District

-

500.0

1,000.0

1,500.0

2,000.0

2,500.0

Outdoor

Basketball

Courts

Baseball

Fields

Softball

Fields

Soccer Fields Football

Fields

City Department 343.5 440.0 345.0 365.0 71.0

Park District 2,099.5 1,907.0 1,338.5 1,537.0 399.0

County 4.0 11.0 16.0 4.0 0.0

Nu

mb

er o

f C

ou

rts/

Fie

lds

Sports Courts & Fields

42

2) Number of Outdoor Basketball Courts – Community Population Size

Number of Basketball Courts Avg. N of Basketball Courts


< 2,500 22.0 11.0 1.2 1.6 1.3

2,500~5,000 23.0 25.5 2.1 2.0 2.0

5,000~10,000 62.0 66.5 3.3 2.9 3.1

10,000~25,000 115.5 188.0 4.8 4.6 4.7

25,000~50,000 39.5 332.0 4.4 7.9 7.3

50,000 + 71.5 1,476.5 8.9 52.7 43.0

Total 343.5 2,099.5 3.6 13.6 9.8

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

83%

100%

86%

73% 69%

100%

41%

81%

88% 91% 93% 93%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Outdoor Basketball

Courts - Community Population Size


Having Basketball Court


Having Basketball Court

43

3) Number of Outdoor Basketball Courts – Operating Budgets

Number of Basketball Courts Avg. N of Basketball Courts


Average

<100,000 9.0 15.0 1.1 1.5 1.3

100,000~ 1,000,000 79.5 51.0 2.7 2.4 2.6

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 50.0 123.0 3.6 4.9 4.4

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 76.0 117.0 6.3 4.7 5.2

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 7.0 79.0 3.5 6.6 6.2

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 20.5 125.0 5.1 6.9 6.6

10,000,000 + 69.5 1,548.5 5.8 41.9 33.0

Unknown 32.0 41.0 2.5 6.8 3.8

Total 343.5 2,099.5 3.6 13.6 9.8

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100% 89% 91%

82% 86%

40%

80% 86%

72%63%

75%81%

96%92%

100% 97%

67%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Outdoor Basketball

Courts - Operating Budget Size


Report Having Basketball

Court

Park Districts That

Report Having Basketball

Court

44

4) Distribution of Agency – Outdoor Basketball Courts


N of Basketball Courts Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

0~2 55 58% 46 30%

3~5 24 25% 41 27%

6~10 11 12% 33 21%

11~15 4 4% 16 10%

16~25 0 0% 7 5%

26~50 1 1% 8 5%

51 & above 0 0% 3 2%

Total 95 154

B. Baseball Fields

1) Preliminary Analysis of Baseball Fields – Agency Type

Agency Type

N of Agencies

w/ Baseball

Fields

Avg. N of

Baseball Fields

Min. N of

Baseball Fields

Max. N of

Baseball Fields

County 5 2.2 1 3

City/Village 89 4.9 1 36a




c




a. Orland Park Recreation and Parks Department


c. Springfield Park District

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0~2 3~5 6~10 11~15 16~25 26~50 51 & above

55

24

11

40 1 0

4641

33

16

7 83

Nu

mb

er o

f A

gen

cies

Basketball Courts

Number of Agencies By Number of Basketball Courts

City/Village

Park District

45

2) Number of Baseball Fields – Community Population Size

Number of Baseball Fields Avg. N of Baseball Fields


< 2,500 18 26 1.3 2.0 1.6

2,500~5,000 41 28 2.6 2.3 2.5

5,000~10,000 65 86 4.1 3.9 4.0

10,000~25,000 161 244 6.4 6.0 6.1

25,000~50,000 54 405 5.4 9.2 8.5

50,000 + 101 1,118 12.6 38.6 32.9

Total 440 1,907 4.9 11.8 9.4

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

61%

100%

73%76% 77%

100%

76% 75%

85%91%

98% 97%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Baseball Fields-



Having Baseball Fields



46

3) Number of Baseball Fields – Operating Budgets

Number of Baseball Fields Avg. N of Baseball Fields


<100,000 11 21 1.6 1.8 1.7

100,000~ 1,000,000 92 68 3.7 2.8 3.3

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 91 139 6.1 5.0 5.3

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 95 154 7.9 6.4 6.9

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 12 79 4.0 7.2 6.5

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 25 231 6.3 12.8 11.6

10,000,000 + 67 1,186 6.1 31.2 25.6

Unknown 47 29 3.9 4.8 4.2

Total 440 1,907 4.9 11.8 9.4

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

78% 76%88%

86%

60%

80% 79%

67%75%

86%90% 92%

85%

100% 100%

67%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Baseball Fields -



Report Having Baseball

Fields



47

4) Distribution of Agency – Baseball Fields


N of Baseball Fields Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

0~2 37 42% 44 27%

3~5 14 16% 29 18%

6~10 25 28% 39 24%

11~15 11 12% 21 13%

16~25 1 1% 14 9%

26~50 1 1% 12 7%

51 & above 0 0% 2 1%

Total 89 161

C. Softball Fields

1) Preliminary Analysis of Softball Fields – Agency Type

Agency Type

N of Agencies

w/ Softball

Fields

Avg. N of

Softball Fields

Min. N of

Softball Fields

Max. N of

Softball Fields

County 6 2.7 1 8





c




a. Village of Vernon Hills / Community Development


c. Rockford Park District

0

10

20

30

40

50

0~2 3~5 6~10 11~15 16~25 26~50 51 & above

37

14

25

11

1 1 0

44

29

39

21

1412

2Nu

mb

er o

f A

gen

cies

Baseball Fields

Number of Agencies By Number of Baseball Fields

City/Village

Park District

48

2) Number of Softball Fields – Community Population Size

Number of Softball Fields Avg. N of Softball Fields


< 2,500 12 18.0 1.5 1.6 1.6

2,500~5,000 36 21.0 2.8 1.5 2.1

5,000~10,000 45 62.0 2.8 2.8 2.8

10,000~25,000 149 255.5 6.0 6.1 6.0

25,000~50,000 43 291.0 5.4 6.8 6.5

50,000 + 60 691.0 7.5 25.6 21.5

Total 345 1,338.5 4.4 8.4 7.1

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

35%

81%

73% 76%

62%

100%

65%

88% 85%

93% 96%90%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Softball Fields-



Having Softball Fields



49

3) Number of Softball Fields – Operating Budgets

Number of Softball Fields Avg. N of Softball Fields


<100,000 4 20.0 1.3 1.8 1.7

100,000~ 1,000,000 70 50.0 3.2 2.2 2.7

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 74 137.5 5.3 4.9 5.0

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 45 148.0 3.8 6.4 5.5

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 17 71.0 4.3 5.5 5.2

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 25 109.0 8.3 6.4 6.7

10,000,000 + 66 767.0 7.3 21.3 18.5

Unknown 44 36.0 4.0 4.5 4.2

Total 345 1,338.5 4.4 8.4 7.1

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

33%

67%

82% 86% 80%

60%64% 61%

69%

82%90% 88%

100%94% 95%

89%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Softball Fields - Operating

Budget Size


Report Having Softball

Fields



50

4) Distribution of Agency – Softball Fields


N of Softball Fields Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

0~2 31 40% 46 29%

3~5 26 33% 51 32%

6~10 15 19% 36 23%

11~15 5 6% 13 8%

16~25 1 1% 7 4%

26~50 0 0% 4 3%

51 & above 0 0% 2 1%

Total 78 159

D. Soccer Fields

1) Preliminary Analysis of Soccer Fields – Agency Type

Agency Type

N of Agencies

w/ Soccer

Fields

Avg. N of

Soccer Fields

Min. N of

Soccer Fields

Max. N of

Soccer Fields

County 1 4.0 4 4



Park District (No Rockford


c


(No Rockford Park District) 212 7.8 1 83


a. Orland Park Recreation and Park Department


c. Rockford Park District

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0~2 3~5 6~10 11~15 16~25 26~50 51 & above

3126

15

51 0 0

4651

36

13

74 2N

um

ber

of

Ag

enci

es

Baseball Fields

Number of Agencies By Number of Softball Fields

City/Village

Park District

51

2) Number of Soccer Fields – Community Population Size

Number of Soccer Fields Avg. N of Soccer Fields


< 2,500 5 11 1.3 2.2 1.8

2,500~5,000 34 14 3.4 1.8 2.7

5,000~10,000 39 80 2.4 4.4 3.5

10,000~25,000 160 239 6.2 6.1 6.1

25,000~50,000 54 387 6.8 8.8 8.5

50,000 + 73 806 10.4 28.8 25.1

Total 365 1,537 5.1 10.8 8.9

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

17%

63%

73%79%

62%

88%

29%

50%

69%

87%

98%93%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Soccer Fields-



Having Soccer Fields



52

3) Number of Soccer Fields – Operating Budgets

Number of Soccer Fields Avg. N of Soccer Fields


Average

<100,000 2 6 2.0 1.2 1.3

100,000~ 1,000,000 72 53 3.1 3.1 3.1

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 78 146 6.0 6.3 6.2

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 78 141 6.5 5.6 5.9

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 11 70 2.8 5.8 5.1

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 15 155 7.5 8.6 8.5

10,000,000 + 66 943 8.3 24.8 21.9

Unknown 43 23 5.4 5.8 5.5

Total 365 1,537 5.1 10.8 8.9

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

11%

70%76%

86%80%

40%

57%

44%

31%

61%

74%

96%92%

100% 100%

44%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Soccer Fields - Operating

Budget Size


Report Having Soccer

Fields



53

4) Distribution of Agency – Soccer Fields


N of Soccer Fields Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

0~2 34 48% 35 25%

3~5 17 24% 29 20%

6~10 10 14% 38 27%

11~15 4 6% 18 13%

16~25 5 7% 11 8%

26~50 1 1% 9 6%

51 & above 0 0% 2 1%

Total 71 142

E. Football Fields

1) Preliminary Analysis of Football Fields – Agency Type

Agency Type

N of Agencies

w/ Football

Fields

Avg. N of

Football Fields

Min. N of

Football Fields

Max. N of

Football Fields

County 0 0.0 0 0





c




a. City of Breese



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0~2 3~5 6~10 11~15 16~25 26~5051 & above

34

17

10

4 5

1 0

35

29

38

18

119

2

Nu

mb

er o

f A

gen

cies

Soccer Fields

Number of Agencies By Number of Soccer Fields

City/VillagePark District

54

2) Number of Football Fields – Community Population Size

Number of Football Fields Avg. N of Football Fields


< 2,500 3 0 1.0 0.0 1.0

2,500~5,000 3 3 1.0 1.5 1.2

5,000~10,000 15 4 1.5 1.0 1.4

10,000~25,000 30 52 1.8 1.7 1.7

25,000~50,000 8 63 1.6 1.8 1.7

50,000 + 12 277 2.0 12.0 10.0

Total 71 399 1.6 4.2 3.4

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

13%19%

45%52%

38%

75%

0%

13%15%

69%

80%77%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Football Fields-



Having Football Fields



55

3) Number of Football Fields – Operating Budgets

Number of Football Fields Avg. N of Football Fields


<100,000 1 1 1.0 1.0 1.0

100,000~ 1,000,000 13 6 1.3 1.0 1.2

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 9 25 1.5 1.6 1.5

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 14 28 1.8 1.8 1.8

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 3 15 1.5 1.5 1.5

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 3 29 1.5 1.9 1.9

10,000,000 + 19 291 2.4 9.7 8.2

Unknown 9 4 1.3 2.0 1.4

Total 71 399 1.6 4.2 3.4

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

11%

30%35%

57%

40% 40%

57%

39%

6%

21%

52%

62%

77%83%

79%

22%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Football Fields - Operating

Budget Size





56

4) Distribution of Agency – Football Fields

N of Football

Fields



1 34 77% 50 52%

2~3 8 18% 36 38%

4~5 2 5% 6 6%

6 & above 0 0% 4 4%

Total 44 96

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

1 2~3 4~5 6 & above

34

8

20

50

36

64

Nu

mb

er o

f A

gen

cies

Football Fields

Number of Agencies By Number of Football Fields

City/Village

Park District

57

VIII. Facilities

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

Picnic Shelters Playgrounds Dog Parks Disc Golf

Courses

Skate Parks

678 734

13 23 44

1,549

3,158

62 68 113

431

69 18 0 1

Nu

mb

er o

f F

aci

liti

esFacilities - 1

City Department Park District County

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Archery Ranges Environmental/Nature

Centers

Museums Botanic

Gardens/Arboretums

2

9

19

12 16

47

87

35

2

26

10 12

Nu

mb

er o

f F

aci

liti

es

Facilities - 2

City Department Park District County

58

A. Picnic Shelters

1) Preliminary Analysis of Picnic Shelters – Agency Type


Picnic Shelters

Avg. N of Picnic

Shelters

Min. N of Picnic

Shelters

Max. N of Picnic

Shelters

County 15 28.7 3 183a



Park District (No


d

City/Village + Park

District (No Chicago

Park District)

260 7.6 1 67



b. Village of Swansea



2) Number of Picnic Shelters – Community Population Size

Number of Picnic Shelters Avg. N of Picnic Shelters


< 2,500 40 34 2.0 3.1 2.4

2,500~5,000 77 42 5.1 3.5 4.4

5,000~10,000 89 104 4.9 4.2 4.5

10,000~25,000 272 232 9.7 5.4 7.1

25,000~50,000 84 374 8.4 8.7 8.6

50,000 + 116 763 16.6 26.3 24.4

Total 678 1,549 6.9 9.5 8.5

59

3) Number of Picnic Shelters – Operating Budgets

Number of Picnic Shelters Avg. N of Picnic Shelters

Operating Budget City/Village Park District City/Village Park District Overall Avg.

<100,000 18 36 2.3 3.0 2.7

100,000~ 1,000,000 160 84 5.3 4.0 4.8

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 87 174 6.2 6.0 6.1

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 102 166 10.2 6.6 7.7

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 81 92 16.2 7.1 9.6

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 37 213 9.3 11.8 11.4

10,000,000 + 132 740 11.0 19.5 17.4

Unknown 61 44 4.1 6.3 4.8

Total 678 1,549 6.9 9.5 8.5

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%87%

94%

82% 85%77%

88%

65%

75%

96% 96% 96% 97%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Picnic Shelters -



Having Picnic Shelters



60

4) Distribution of Agency – Picnic Shelters


N of Picnic Shelters Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

1~5 53 54% 87 53%

6~10 29 30% 40 25%

11~15 9 9% 19 12%

16~20 3 3% 6 4%

21~50 3 3% 8 5%

51 & above 1 1% 3 2%

Total 98 163

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100% 89% 91%82%

71%

100%

80%86% 83%

75% 75%

94% 96%100%100% 100%

78%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Picnic Shelters -



Report Having Picnic

Shelters



0

20

40

60

80

100

1~5 6~10 11~15 16~20 21~50 51 & above

53

29

93 3 1

87

40

19

6 83N

um

ber

of

Ag

enci

es

Picnic Shelters

Number of Agencies By Number of Picnic Shelters

City/Village

Park District

61

B. Playgrounds

1) Preliminary Analysis of Playgrounds – Agency Type


Playgrounds

Avg. N of

Playgrounds

Min. N of

Playgrounds

Max. N of

Playgrounds

County 10 6.9 2 21a



Park District (No


d

City/Village + Park

District (No Chicago

Park District)

277 12.2 1 88


a. Winnebago County Forest Preserve District

b. Orland Park Recreation and Parks Department


d. Fox Valley Park District

2) Number of Playgrounds – Community Population Size

Number of Playgrounds Avg. N of Playgrounds


< 2,500 34 27 1.7 2.1 1.8

2,500~5,000 65 51 4.1 3.2 3.6

5,000~10,000 83 149 4.6 6.0 5.4

10,000~25,000 304 471 9.8 10.5 10.2

25,000~50,000 72 867 6.0 19.3 16.5

50,000 + 176 1,593 22.0 54.9 47.8

Total 734 3,158 7.0 18.3 14.0

62

3) Number of Playgrounds – Operating Budgets

Number of Playgrounds Avg. N of Playgrounds

Operating Budget City/Village Park District City/Village Park District Overall Avg.

<100,000 14 31 1.6 2.3 2.0

100,000~ 1,000,000 169 105 5.3 4.0 4.7

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 121 262 7.6 8.7 8.3

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 153 305 12.8 11.7 12.1

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 26 167 6.5 12.8 11.4

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 33 391 8.3 21.7 19.3

10,000,000 + 143 1,795 11.0 47.2 38.0

Unknown 75 102 5.0 12.8 7.7

Total 734 3,158 7.0 18.3 14.0

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%87%

100%

82%

94% 92%

100%

76%

100%96%

100% 100%97%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Playgrounds - Community

Population Size


Having Playgrounds


Having Playgrounds

63

4) Distribution of Agency – Playgrounds

N of

Playgrounds



1~5 64 61% 52 30%

6~10 21 20% 37 21%

11~15 10 10% 24 14%

16~20 3 3% 17 10%

21~50 6 6% 34 20%

51 & above 1 1% 9 5%

Total 105 173

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

100% 97% 94%

86% 80% 80%

93%

83%88% 93%

97% 100% 100% 100% 100%

89%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Playgrounds - Operating

Budget Size


Report Having

Playgrounds

Park Districts That

Report Having

Playgrounds

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1~5 6~10 11~15 16~20 21~50 51 & above

64

21

10

36

1

52

37

24

17

34

9

Nu

mb

er o

f A

gen

cies

Playgrounds

Number of Agencies Based on Number of Playgrounds

City/Village

Park District

64

C. Dog Parks

1) Preliminary Analysis of Dog Parks – Agency Type


Dog Parks

Avg. N of Dog

Parks

Min. N of Dog

Parks

Max. N of Dog

Parks

County 7 2.6 1 6


Park District 40 1.6 1 16a




(No Chicago District) 51 1.2 1 3


a. Chicago Park District

2) Number of Dog Parks – Community Population Size

Number of Dog Parks Avg. N of Dog Parks


< 2,500 0 1 0.0 1.0 1.0

2,500~5,000 1 0 1.0 0.0 1.0

5,000~10,000 0 2 0.0 1.0 1.0

10,000~25,000 7 10 1.0 1.0 1.0

25,000~50,000 3 14 1.0 1.2 1.1

50,000 + 2 35 2.0 2.3 2.3

Total 13 62 1.1 1.6 1.4

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

0%

6%

0%

21%23%

13%

6%

0%

8%

22%

27%

50%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g

Ag

enci

es


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Dog Parks -



Having Dog Parks


Having Dog Parks

65

3) Number of Dog Parks – Operating Budgets

Number of Dog Parks Avg. N of Dog Parks


Average

<100,000 1 1 1.0 1.0 1.0

100,000~ 1,000,000 3 1 1.0 1.0 1.0

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 2 6 1.0 1.0 1.0

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 1 4 1.0 1.0 1.0

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 2 4 1.0 1.0 1.0

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 2 5 2.0 1.3 1.4

10,000,000 + 0 41 0.0 2.1 2.1

Unknown 2 0 1.0 0.0 1.0

Total 13 62 1.1 1.6 1.4

4) Distribution of Agency – Dog Parks


N of Dog Parks Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

1 11 91.7% 33 82.5%

2 1 8.3% 5 12.5%

3 & above 0 0.0% 2 5.0%

Total 12 40

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

11%9%

12%7%

40%

20%

0%

11%6%

4%

19%15%

31%

22%

53%

0%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Dog Parks - Operating

Budget Size


Report Having Dog

Parks

Park Districts That

Report Having Dog

Parks

66

D. Disc Golf Courses

1) Preliminary Analysis of Disc Golf Courses – Agency Type

Agency Type

N of Agencies w/

Disc Golf

Courses

Avg. N of Disc

Golf Courses

Min. N of Disc

Golf Courses

Max. N of Disc

Golf Courses

County 0 0.0 0 0



City/Village + Park

District 79 1.2 1 3


a. Springfield Park District

2) Number of Disc Golf Courses – Community Population Size

Number of Disc Golf Courses Avg. N of Disc Golf Courses


< 2,500 2 1 1.0 1.0 1.0

2,500~5,000 4 2 1.0 1.0 1.0

5,000~10,000 3 6 1.0 1.0 1.0

10,000~25,000 5 15 1.0 1.0 1.0

25,000~50,000 3 25 1.5 1.3 1.3

50,000 + 6 19 1.2 1.3 1.3

Total 23 68 1.1 1.2 1.2

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1 2 3 & above

11

1 0

33

52N

um

ber

of

Ag

enci

es

Dog Parks

Number of Agencies By Number of Dog Parks

City/Village

Park District

67

3) Number of Disc Golf Courses – Operating Budgets

Number of Disc Golf

Courses Avg. N of Disc Golf Courses


<100,000 1 1 1.0 1.0 1.0

100,000~ 1,000,000 4 3 1.0 1.0 1.0

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 2 10 1.0 1.0 1.0

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 7 10 1.2 1.0 1.1

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 1 6 1.0 1.2 1.2

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 2 9 1.0 1.3 1.2

10,000,000 + 4 26 1.3 1.3 1.3

Unknown 2 3 1.0 1.5 1.3

Total 23 68 1.1 1.2 1.2

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

9%

25%

14% 15% 15%

63%

6%13%

23%

33%

42%

50%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Disc Golf Courses -



Having Disc Golf Courses


Having Disc Golf Courses

68

4) Distribution of Agency – Disc Golf Courses

N of Disc Golf

Courses



1 19 90.5% 49 84.5%

2 2 9.5% 8 13.8%

3 & above 0 0.0% 1 1.7%

Total 21 58

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

11% 12% 12%

43%

20%

40%

21%

11%6%

11%

32%

38% 38% 39%

53%

22%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Disc Golf Courses -



Report Having Disc

Golf Courses

Park Districts That

Report Having Disc

Golf Courses

0

10

20

30

40

50

1 2 3 & above

19

20

49

8

1Nu

mb

er o

f A

gen

cies

Disc Golf Courses

Number of Agencies By Number of Disc Golf Courses

City/Village

Park District

69

E. Skate Parks

1) Preliminary Analysis of Skate Parks – Agency Type


w/ Skate Parks

Avg. N of Skate

Parks

Min. N of Skate

Parks

Max. N of

Skate Parks

County 1 1.0 1 1



City/Village + Park District 128 1.2 1 8


a.Chicago Park District

2) Number of Skate Parks – Community Population Size

Number of Skate Parks Avg. N of Skate Parks


< 2,500 2 0 1.0 0.0 1.0

2,500~5,000 4 1 1.0 1.0 1.0

5,000~10,000 8 7 1.0 1.0 1.0

10,000~25,000 18 27 1.2 1.1 1.1

25,000~50,000 3 36 1.0 1.2 1.1

50,000 + 9 42 1.5 1.6 1.6

Total 44 113 1.2 1.3 1.2

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

9%

25%

36%

45%

23%

75%

0%6%

27%

56%

69%

87%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Skate Parks -



Having Skate Park


Having Skate Park

70

3) Number of Skate Parks – Operating Budgets

Number of Skate Parks Avg. N of Skate Parks


<100,000 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

100,000~ 1,000,000 10 5 1.0 1.0 1.0

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 8 17 1.1 1.3 1.3

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 7 15 1.2 1.1 1.1

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 0 8 0.0 1.0 1.0

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 2 15 1.0 1.1 1.1

10,000,000 + 14 51 1.4 1.5 1.5

Unknown 3 2 1.0 1.0 1.0

Total 44 113 1.2 1.3 1.2

4) Distribution of Agency – Skate Parks


N of Skate Parks Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

1 32 84.2% 76 84.4%

2 6 15.8% 10 11.1%

3 & above 0 0.0% 4 4.4%

Total 38 90

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0%

30%

41% 43%

0%

40%

71%

17%

0%

18%

42%

54%62%

78%

89%

22%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Skate Parks - Operating

Budget Size


Having Skate Park


Having Skate Park

71

F. Archery Ranges

1) Preliminary Analysis of Archery Ranges – Agency Type

Agency Type

N of Agencies

w/ Archery

Ranges

Avg. N of

Archery

Ranges

Min. N of

Archery

Ranges

Max. N of

Archery

Ranges

County 2 1.0 1 1



City/Village + Park District 15 1.2 1 4



2) Number of Archery Ranges – Community Population Size

Number of Archery Ranges Avg. N of Archery Ranges


< 2,500 0 1 0.0 1.0 1.0

2,500~5,000 0 1 0.0 1.0 1.0

5,000~10,000 1 0 1.0 0.0 1.0

10,000~25,000 1 2 1.0 1.0 1.0

25,000~50,000 0 4 0.0 1.0 1.0

50,000 + 0 8 0.0 1.6 1.6

Total 2 16 1.0 1.2 1.2

0

20

40

60

80

1 2 3 & above

32

60

76

104

Nu

mb

er o

f A

gen

cies

State Park

Number of Agencies By Number of Skate Parks

City/Village

Park District

72

3) Number of Archery Ranges – Operating Budgets

Number of Archery Ranges Avg. N of Archery Ranges


<100,000 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

100,000~ 1,000,000 0 1 0.0 1.0 1.0

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 1 3 1.0 1.0 1.0

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 1 1 1.0 1.0 1.0

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 0 1 0.0 1.0 1.0

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 0 1 0.0 1.0 1.0

10,000,000 + 0 8 0.0 1.6 1.6

Unknown 0 1 0.0 1.0 1.0

Total 2 16 1.0 1.2 1.2

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

0% 0%

5%

3%

0% 0%

6% 6%

0%

4%

9%

17%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Archery Ranges -



Having Archery Ranges



73

G. Environmental/Nature Centers

1) Preliminary Analysis of Environmental/Nature Centers – Agency Type

Agency Type

N of Agencies w/

Environmental/Na

ture Centers

Avg. N of

Environmental/Na

ture Centers

Min. N of

Environmental/Na

ture Centers

Max. N of

Environmental/Na

ture Centers

County 13 2.0 1 6a



City/Village +




2) Number of Environmental/Nature Centers – Community Population Size

Number of Nature Centers Avg. N of Nature Centers


< 2,500 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

2,500~5,000 1 3 1.0 1.0 1.0

5,000~10,000 1 5 1.0 1.7 1.5

10,000~25,000 4 8 1.3 1.0 1.1

25,000~50,000 1 15 1.0 1.0 1.0

50,000 + 2 16 1.0 1.2 1.2

Total 9 47 1.1 1.1 1.1

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

0% 0%

6%7%

0% 0% 0% 0%0%

4%

10%

4%

8%

6%

13%

11%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Archery Ranges -



Report Having Archery

Ranges



74

3) Number of Environmental/Nature Centers – Operating Budgets

Number of Nature Centers Avg. N of Nature Centers


Average

<100,000 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

100,000~ 1,000,000 0 1 0.0 1.0 1.0

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 2 6 1.0 1.0 1.0

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 4 9 1.3 1.3 1.3

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 1 2 1.0 1.0 1.0

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 1 6 1.0 1.0 1.0

10,000,000 + 1 21 1.0 1.2 1.2

Unknown 0 2 0.0 1.0 1.0

Total 9 47 1.1 1.1 1.1

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

0%

6%5%

9%8%

25%

0%

19%

12%

18%

33%

43%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Nature Centers -



Having Nature Centers



75

H. Museums

1) Preliminary Analysis of Museums – Agency Type


w/ Museums

Avg. N of

Museums

Min. N of

Museums

Max. N of

Museums

County 7 1.4 1 3



City/Village + Park

District 80 1.3 1 10



2) Number of Museums – Community Population Size

Number of Museums Avg. N of Museums


< 2,500 3 0 1.0 0.0 1.0

2,500~5,000 2 4 1.0 2.0 1.5

5,000~10,000 3 8 1.0 1.1 1.1

10,000~25,000 9 9 1.1 1.0 1.1

25,000~50,000 0 23 0.0 1.0 1.0

50,000 + 2 43 1.0 2.0 1.9

Total 19 87 1.1 1.4 1.3

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

0% 0%

12%

21% 20% 20%

7%

0%0%4%

19%

27%

15%

33%

47%

22%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Nature Centers -



Report Having Nature

Centers



76

3) Number of Museums – Operating Budgets

Number of Museums Avg. N of Museums


Average

<100,000 1 1 1.0 1.0 1.0

100,000~ 1,000,000 4 5 1.0 1.0 1.0

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 4 6 1.3 1.0 1.1

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 3 6 1.0 1.2 1.1

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 1 8 1.0 1.0 1.0

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 1 11 1.0 1.1 1.1

10,000,000 + 4 44 1.0 1.9 1.8

Unknown 1 6 1.0 1.5 1.4

Total 19 87 1.1 1.4 1.3

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

13% 13% 14%

24%

0%

25%

0%

13%

27%

20%

49%

73%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Museums - Community

Population Size


Having Museums


Having Museums

77

4) Distribution of Agency – Museums


N of Museums Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

1 17 94.1% 53 85.5%

2 1 5.9% 4 6.5%

3 & above 0 0.0% 5 8.1%

Total 18 62

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

11% 12%18%

21% 20% 20%

29%

6%6%

18% 19% 19%

62%

56%61%

44%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Museums - Operating

Budget Size


Report Having Museums


Having Museums

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1 2 3 & above

17

1 0

53

4 5Nu

mb

er o

f A

gen

cies

Museum

Number of Agencies By Number of Museums

City/Village

Park District

78

I. Botanic Gardens/Arboretums

1) Preliminary Analysis of Botanic Gardens/Arboretums – Agency Type

Agency Type

N of Agencies w/

Gardens/Arboretu

ms

Avg. N of

Gardens/Arboretu

ms

Min. N of

Gardens/Arboretu

ms

Max. N of

Gardens/Arboretu

ms

County 5 2.4 1 7a



City/Village +



a. Boone County Conservation District

b. Alton Parks and Recreation Department

c. Fox Valley Park District

2) Number of Botanic Gardens/Arboretums – Community Population Size

Number of Gardens/Arboretums Avg. N of Gardens


< 2,500 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

2,500~5,000 3 0 1.0 0.0 1.0

5,000~10,000 0 1 0.0 1.0 1.0

10,000~25,000 4 6 1.0 1.5 1.3

25,000~50,000 5 6 2.5 1.2 1.6

50,000 + 0 22 0.0 1.5 1.5

Total 12 35 1.3 1.4 1.4

79

3) Number of Botanic Gardens/Arboretums – Operating Budgets

Number of Gardens/Arboretums Avg. N of Gardens


Average

<100,000 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

100,000~ 1,000,000 1 1 1.0 1.0 1.0

1,000,000~ 2,500,000 3 1 1.0 1.0 1.0

2,500,000~ 5,000,000 5 4 2.5 1.3 1.8

5,000,000~ 7,500,000 1 0 1.0 0.0 1.0

7,500,000~ 10,000,000 0 4 0.0 1.0 1.0

10,000,000 + 2 25 1.0 1.6 1.5

Unknown 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total 12 35 1.3 1.4 1.4

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

0%

19%

0%

12%15%

0%0% 0%4%

9%11%

50%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Botanic

Gardens/Arboretums - Community Population Size


Having Gardens/Arboretums


Having Gardens/Arboretums

80

4) Distribution of Agency – Botanic Gardens/Arboretums


N of Gardens/Arboretums Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

1 8 88.9% 21 84.0%

2 0 0.0% 1 4.0%

3 & above 1 11.1% 3 12.0%

Total 9 25

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

0%3%

18%14%

20%

0%

14%

0%0%4% 3%

12%

0%

22%

42%

0%

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

am

e T

yp

e R

esp

on

din

g A

gen

cies


Percentage of Agencies That Report Having Botanic

Gardens/Arboretums - Operating Budget Size


Report Having

Gardens/Arboretums


Having

Gardens/Arboretums

0

5

10

15

20

25

1 2 3 & above

8

01

21

13

Nu

mb

er o

f A

gen

cies

Botanic Gardens/Arboretums

Number of Agencies By Number of Botanic Gardens/Arboretums

City/Village

Park District

81

Appendix B: Survey Instruments

82

Dear Colleague:

The Office of Recreation and Park Resources (ORPR) at the University of Illinois is under contract with

the Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR), Division of Planning and Division of Grant

Administration, to conduct a survey of city park and recreation departments and park districts in the

State of Illinois.

The information gathered in the survey is used by the planning Division of IDNR in the development and

updates to their Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP). The data is also used by

the Grant Division in their review processes. Any city or park district that submits a completed survey

and applies for an OSLAD grant receives extra credit in their grant review process. By filling out the

survey, you also help the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, the Office of Recreation and Park

Resources, the Illinois Municipal League (IML) and the Illinois Association of Park Districts (IAPD) develop

a more complete inventory of community park and recreation facilities in our State.

This year we ask for some information that was not included in the 2008 survey i.e. boat and canoe

launch ramps, campsites and more details concerning trails and paths. IDNR and ORPR are also

interested in identifying cities and park districts that provide “natural areas”. For the purpose of this

study, “natural areas” are defined as “space specifically preserved for the functions of habitat

restoration/preservation, species biodiversity, public health and appreciation of native plants and

wildlife.” (Barry).

A copy of the survey is enclosed. It can also be found at our website www.orpr.uiuc.edu. The survey is

on the homepage under Announcements titled “IDNR Recreation Facilities Survey”. Just click on the link

and follow the instructions to complete it.

We respectfully request that you or an appointed staff member please complete the survey on-line or

the hard copy enclosed.

If you have any questions, please contact Robin Hall through e-mail at [email protected] or by phone at

(217) 244-3891.

Thank you for your consideration and time.

Robin Hall, Director

Office of Recreation and Park Resources

http://www.orpr.uiuc.edu/

mailto:[email protected]

83

ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES CITY/PARK DISTRICT RECREATION FACILITY AND PARK LANDS INVENTORY

I. Community Information A. Agency/Department Name ___________________________________________ B. Population ________________________________________________________ C. County____________________________________________________________ D. Current Total Operating Budget _______________________________________ II. Parks A. Number of sites ____________________________________________________ B. Total acres under your management ____________________________________ C. Leased acres __________________________________________ D. Does your department/agency have a land dedication ordinance? Yes____ No____

E. Acres of natural areas included in II. B________________________ F. Does your department/agency have a staff person(s) responsible for the

development and/or management of natural areas? Yes ____ No ____ G. When deciding about the acquisition or restoration of natural areas, what is the

importance of following factors? Please rank from most important (1) to least important (9). If a factor is not applicable write N/A next to it. a. _____ adjacent property owners b. _____ aesthetics of property c. _____ community support d. _____ cost e. _____ ecological/environmental value of property f. _____ location of property g. _____ recreational values h. _____ watershed/water management values i. _____ wildlife habitat/benefits

III. Water Based Facilities A. Number of Fishing Piers/Docks __________ B. Number of Outdoor Pools/Aquatic Centers __________ C. Ages of Aquatic facilities (if 5 or fewer)_____/_____/_____/_____/_____ D. Number of Spray Grounds __________ E. Number of boat launch ramps (motorized) _________ F. Number of canoe launch ramps (non-motorized)________

84

IV. Trails A. Miles of trails in parks______ B. Miles of trails outside park boundaries_______

The following information relates to segments of the information provided in A and B. C. Number of miles of bike trail, paved surface (asphalt, concrete, or oil & chip) _____________ D. Number of miles of bike trail, crushed limestone surface ____________________ E. Number of miles of on-road bike trail (not bike route), may be connector segments of

a trail or a trail designated entirely on-road__________________________ F. Number of miles of mountain bike trail, natural surface designated specifically for

mountain bike use ____________________ G. Number of miles of walking path, natural or paved surface _____________________ H. Number of miles of interpretive trails, natural or paved surface __________________ I. Number of miles of hiking trails, natural surface _____________________________ J. Number of miles of equestrian trails, designated specifically for horse use or multi-use

trails permitting horses ______________________________________________ K. Number of miles of snowmobile trails, designated specifically for snowmobiles or

multi-use trails permitting snowmobiles ________________________________ V. Sports Courts and Fields

A. Number of Outdoor Basketball Courts __________ B. Number of Baseball Fields __________ C. Number of Softball Fields __________

D. Number of Soccer Fields __________ E. Number of Football Fields __________ VI. Campsites

A. Number of improved campsites__________ B. Number of primitive campsites__________ C. Number of equestrian campsites_________

VII. Facilities A. Number of Picnic Shelters __________ B. Number of Playgrounds __________ C. Number of Dog Parks __________ D. Number of Disc Golf Courses __________ E. Number of Skate Parks __________ F. Number of Archery Ranges __________ G. Number of Environmental/Nature Centers______ H. Number of Museums_______ I. Number of Botanic Gardens/Arboretums_______

85

VIII. Operation questions

A. Does your department/agency have a fitness center? Yes___ No___ B. Does your department/agency have a written agreement with a hospital,

medical center, clinic, etc. that provides for the collaborative delivery of services?

Yes___ No___ IX. Contact Information of person completing this questionnaire A. Name ___________________________________________________ B. Phone Number _____________________________________________ C. Email Address _____________________________________________ D. Mail Address ______________________________________________

Documents

2010 ILLINOIS COMMUNITY ECREATION FACILITIES & · PDF filedata received by ORPR was coded and entered into Microsoft Office Access. ... Paved Surface 274.53 308.11 957.75 ... Village