Northfield Park District

Northfi eld Park District Comprehensive Master Plan

Prepared by Hitchcock Design Group Heller & Heller Consulting Leisure Vision January 2014 Acknowledgements Hitchcock Design Group would like to thank the Northfi eld Park District Board of Commissioners and Staff Members for the opportunity to assist with the planning for the district’s parks, programs and facilities.

Park Board Park Staff Jennifer Trimble George Alexoff President Executive Director

Kevin Coyle Jennifer Sweeney Vice President Superintendent of Recreation

Ed Morrell Bill Byron Treasurer Facilities Supervisor

Buggie O’Grady Neal Barron Commissioner Athletic Supervisor

Lenny Zaban DeDe Kern Commissioner Recreation/Communications & Marketing Manager

Martin Head Xochitl Guillen Commissioner Bookkeeper

Steve Bickford Chris Prouty Commissioner Registrar

Adelbert Spaan Commissioner Consultants Hitchcock Design Group Landscape Architect/Planner

Heller & Heller Operations and Programming Consultant

Leisure Vision Community Input Survey Consultant

GIS Data Sources: Village of Northfi eld Cook County Assessor Hitchcock Design Group

© Northfi eld Park District 2013 Table of Contents Chapter One: Introduction Chapter Three: Park Inventory Planning Area Summary...... 6 Neighborhood Park Inventory...... 46 Context Map ...... 7 Plat of Survey...... 48 Structure of the Document ...... 8 Title/Deed ...... 49 Aerial Map ...... 9 2012 OSLAD Master Plan...... 50 Northfi eld Park District Profi le...... 10 Community Park Inventory...... 54 Related Planning Documents...... 11 Plat of Survey...... 56 Title/Deed ...... 57 2012 OSLAD Master Plan ...... 61 Chapter Two: Inventory and Analysis Chapter Summary...... 62 Existing Conditions ...... 14 Inventory Map ...... 15 Northfi eld Park District Demographics...... 16 Chapter Four - Needs Assessment Background...... 64 Natural Resources...... 18 Trends...... 64 Natural Resources Map ...... 19 Needs Input Phase...... 71 Trail and Greenway Linkages ...... 20 Recreation Programs Assessment...... 85 Trail and Greenway Linkages Map ...... 21 Park Facility Needs...... 94 Park Classifi cation Criteria...... 22 Facility Comparison - Existing Parks and Population...... 94 Park and Facility Matrix ...... 23 Facility Needs Assessment ...... 95 Park and Facility Matrix ...... 23 Facility Comparison - Projected Population...... 96 Level of Service ...... 24 Facility Needs Assessment - Projected ...... 97 Level of Service- Planned Parks and Projected Summary of Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment...... 98 Population ...... 24 Level of Service- Existing Parks and Current Population ...... 24 Equity Mapping Analysis...... 25 Chapter Five: Strategies and Recommendations Planning Areas...... 26 Community Center Recommendations...... 100 Planning Area Map ...... 27 Master PLan...... 100 Service Area Mapping...... 28 Districtwide Recommendations...... 101 Level of Service- Neighborhood Parks ...... 28 Existing Asset Strategies ...... 102 Neighborhood Park Service Area Map ...... 29 Recreation Programs Recommendations...... 106 Level of Service- Community Parks ...... 30 Summary of Plan Recommendations...... 108 Community Park Service Area Map ...... 31 Overall Parks Service Area...... 32 Level of Service- Planned Parks and Projected Chapter Six - Implementation Population ...... 32 Planning Actions for the Next 5 Years ...... 110 Level of Service- Existing Parks and Current Important Dates...... 110 Population ...... 32 Planning Timeline ...... 111 Overall Service Area Map ...... 33 Planning Timeline...... 112 Recreation Programs Inventory & Analysis ...... 34 Chapter Summary...... 44 Chapter Seven: Appendix Defi nitions and Abbreviations...... 116 IDNR Useful Life Criteria...... 117 Stakeholder Topline Tally...... 123 Brochure Off erings...... 140 Program Demand...... 141 4 Northﬁ eld Park District Executive Summary 1 Introduction Chapter One: Introduction Goals of the Process The goals for this Comprehensive Master Plan include: • Inventory and assess the existing park district assets and determine what improvements, changes or additions should be made to existing parks and facilities • Assess the current program off erings and participation • Assess the needs of the current population • Develop a prioritized list of goals, targeting an initial fi ve-year implementation period

Planning Process The planning process began in early 2013 with an extensive inventory and analysis of the District’s land holdings, facilities, and social and economic context. Next, the Park District Board, staff , and community provided insight on the issues and needs facing the Northfi eld Park District through stakeholder and focus group meetings and a community-wide survey. Visioning sessions and charrettes helped the team develop the master plan recommendations and, after input and review from Board and staff , prioritize the action items for the fi ve-year implementation plan.

How the Document Should be Used This master plan document should be used by the Park District’s staff and park board as a guide for policy and planning over the next fi ve years. The plan should be thought of as a “working list” and items should be checked off once they have been completed. The action plan should be reviewed annually and revised to address the ever-changing district context.

Planning Area Summary The Planning Area for the Northfi eld Park District is approximately 2.8 square miles. The Park District boundary is surrounded by adjacent recreational agencies and county forest preserves. The following agencies share boundaries with the Northfi eld Park District: • Glencoe Park District • Winnetka Park District • Wilmette Park District • Glenview Park District • Northbrook Park District • Forest Preserve District of Cook County

6 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter One Context Map A R G V AN E RD ER C H C HICAGO RIV Sunset Ridge Village of ER Woods Glencoe

¦¨§I-94 SKOKIE RIVER Village of Northbrook Skokie Lagoons SKOKIE RIVER

SUNSET RIDGE RD Village of AY Winnetka TOWER RD

FOREST W Sunset Ridge Country Club

WAUKEGAN RD HAPP RD

SKOKIE RIVER

EDENS EX WILLOW RD OLD WILLOW RD

PRESSWAY

«¬IL 43 WILLOW RD

NORTHFIELD RD

DLE

R K NOR ¦¨§I-94

GE RD BRAN

CHIC

WAGNER RD WAGNER AGO

SUNSET RID RIVER WINNETKA RD WINNETKA RD

Watersmeet WEST

FORK NORTH BRANCH CHICAG

K Woods

A H B WAUKEGANW RD R Northfi eld Park District A N CH N C ContextH Map ° IC A G O RIVER Village of Wilmette R VillageVVillllageagg ofofGfGl Glenview GGlGlenvie i w S CHESTNUTT AAVEVE IV District Boundary Park District or KOKIE RIV E R ER Municipality 1 inch = 2,000 Feet RIVER CAGO 0 500’ 1,000’ 2,000’ THE CHI F

O CH The Wilmette

RAN

TH B

O Golf Club

Introduction Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 7 Structure of the Document Chapter One: Introduction Provides a summary of the planning area and adjacent agencies. Documents the relevant history of the Northfi eld Park District. References other relevant planning documents used during the development of this plan.

Chapter Two: Inventory and Analysis Provides a detailed map identifying all parkland, open space, park facilities, schools, trails and relative adjacent land uses. Classifi es all of the Northfi eld Park District’s parkland based on standards, size, location, and amenities. Documents the Park District’s level of service for park and open space acreage. Provides equity mapping exhibits of park and open space areas.

Chapter Three: Park Inventory Catalogues individual parks and natural areas documenting observations on each property’s natural resources and environmental conditions, site design and aesthetics, health, safety, and compliance, and users and context. Provides aerials and site photographs.

Chapter Four: Needs Assessment Documents the park, facility, and recreation needs of the community, based on the results from the stakeholder meetings, focus groups, and community needs survey. Park Board discussions, staff recommendations, and local trends are also included.

Chapter Five: Parks and Open Space Plan Recommendations Identifi es specifi c projects and improvements for the following categories: • Districtwide Strategies • Existing Parks, Open Space and Indoor Facilities • New Parks, Open Space and Indoor Facilities • Recreation Programming

Chapter Six: Implementation Identifi es action items directly related to the plan recommendations and short term (1-5 years), ongoing, and long term (5+ years) priorities. Provides important dates for grants and other applicable funding sources. Time-sensitive action items are outline in a proposed timeline to aid the implementation process.

Chapter Seven: Appendix Provides raw information from community needs assessment, meeting summaries, Planning Process and excerpts from other planning documents.

8 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter One Aerial Map

MIDDL

E FORK

FRONTAGE RD SKO NOR

KIE R KIE TH

B I RA VE

NCH C R

HICAGO

RIVER Sunset Ridge Woods

¨¦§I-94 SKOKIE RIVER

SKOKI RD Skokie Lagoons E RI V ER

RIDGE

SUNSET

ST WAY TOWER RD E

FO Sunset Ridge Country Club

W H AUKEGAN A P P RD

Willow Park SKOKIE RIVER

EDE

WILLOW RD OLD WILLOW RD

NS EXPRESSWAY !

! Fox Meadow Park «¬IL 43 WILLOW RD

NORTHFIELD RD

Clarkson MID

LE Park FORK NORTH ¨¦§I-94

D Valley Lo B RA

NCH CHIC

NER R

Club SET RIDGE RD

WAG A G O

SUN

RIVE !

R WINNETKA RD WINNETKA RD

Legend D ° Northfi eld Park District1 INCH = 600 FEET Watersmeet W ES Northfield Park District N T FORK Aerial Map 0300 600 1,200 ° Woods N OR District Boundaries UKEGAN R NPD Park TH BRANC District Limits NPD Park Municipal Boundaries WA Forest Preserve

H C HI LocalVillage Trails Limits Golf Course School C AG O Proposed R Local Trails Park by Others SKOKI CHESTNUT AVE IV PlannedE Park Forest Preserve E R RIVER Forest Preserve Trails Local School 1 inchWater = 2,000 Feet School by Others Other Park District Open Space

Church R 0 500’ 1,000’ 2,000’ Non-Park District Open Space AGO IVER THE CHIC

N The Wilmette

BRA Golf Club

NORTH

Introduction Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 9 Northfi eld Park District Profi le Geographic Location The Northfi eld Park District is located in Cook County, Illinois. Its boundaries lie along Mission Statement along Voltz Road to the north, generally along the Edens Expressway to the east, along “The Northfi eld Park District strives Winnetka Avenue to the south, and along Waukegan Road to the west. Much of the to serve the community faithfully Village of Northfi eld boundaries and Park District boundaries overlap. The Village of by developing and maintaining Northfi eld is 3.21 square miles according to the latest Census data. Glencoe, Winnetka, quality facilities, open spaces; Wilmette, Glenview, and Northbrook are all neighboring communities. and recreational, educational, and cultural opportunities. To that History of the Park District end the District shall, at all times The Northfi eld Park District was created in 1957 with help from Mr. Jim Clarkson. provide responsive and courteous Clarkson, while teaching physical education and art at Sunset Ridge School, developed service; exercise fi scal prudence; a proposal to start a Park District. He was instrumental in the initial purchase of land for and manifest environmental the District, and his own home served as the headquarters during the 1970s. Clarkson awareness. Where possible, the not only housed District equipment and facilities at his home, but also installed a Park District shall cooperate with separate phone line specifi cally for District calls. other community organizations and In 1980, Clarkson retired from teaching and became the full-time director for the agencies to enrich further the lives of District. He eventually hired a full-time assistant and expanded the District’s off erings Northfi eld residents.” and services. As the District expanded, the need for a more permanent and centralized Northfi eld Park District offi ce became more apparent. The District moved fi rst to a 10 foot by 12 foot offi ce in Park Board Sunset Ridge School and then to Middlefork School from 1987 to 1997. Adopted 2008

In 1998, the District moved to Northfi eld Community Center where it is still currently housed. The Community Center was built with the unique cooperation and fi nancial involvement of three entities—the Northfi eld Park District, Village of Northfi eld, and Sunset Ridge School District #29. The Park District owns the Community Center and the School District owns the gymnasium, but both share access. Along with the facilities, the District programs have expanded throughout the years from nearly 40 programs in the 1980s to over 200 today.

10 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter One Related Planning Documents Planning documents and other reports that relate to the Northfi eld Park District’s Comprehensive Plan were studied for information and guidelines relevant to the master plan goals and objectives. The following documents were reviewed as a part of the process:

• Northfi eld Park District Comprehensive Plan (2009) • Village of Northfi eld Comprehensive Plan (1999) • Forest Preserve District of Cook County Trail Plans • Chicago Metropolitan Agency of Planning (CMAP) Trail and Bikeways Plan • CMAP GoTo2040 Comprehensive Regional Plan • Adjacent communities’ parks and open space plans • Adjacent communities’ trails and bikeways plans

Northfi eld Park District Comprehensive Plan (2009) Northfi eld Park District completed many of the goals and objectives of this plan with notable exceptions or continuing goals including: Outside partnership for Swimming, Trail connections, Annual Affi liates Meeting, Tree Inventory / Database, Community Center Expansion, Citizen Advisory Committee / Friends organization

Village of Northfi eld Comprehensive Plan (1999) The overall goals of the Village’s Comprehensive Plan are centered around fi ve key themes-- Village Image, Design and Identity; Village Center; Community Facilities and Services; Transportation; and Natural Environment. The plan notes numerous objectives that could be completed in cooperation with the Park District including developing a thematic approach to design image and appearance, developing pocket parks, developing pedestrian and bicycle routes, and protecting environmentally sensitive areas. This plan also identifi es additional open space opportunities. According to the Action Agenda, these are the projects or actions the Village hopes to pursue with the help of the Park District: • Work with property owners, school districts, and park districts, to maximize the public facilities potential of the Missionary Sisters Property for a combination of recreational uses • Identify locations for and develop pocket parks throughout the community • Establish signalized pedestrian crosswalks along the Willow Road corridor • Implement bicycle improvement recommendations • Continue the use of special local ‘way fi nding’ signage for the identifi cation of key community facilities and institutions • Proactively work toward the development of the Missionary Sisters site in accord with the recommendations of the Vision Plan • Undertake corridor image and enhancements improvement program

Introduction Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 11 12 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter One 2 Inventory and Analysis Chapter Two: Inventory and Analysis Purpose The purpose of the Inventory and Analysis phase of the project was to develop a better understanding of the Park District and individual park facilities. This chapter documents the existing conditions of the Park District. This chapter holds a wealth of information, including maps of the District that display locations of parks, schools, private open space, publicly-owned land, forest preserves, and trails; maps illustrating natural features and systems present within the District; and tables identifying all parkland, open space, and amenities. This chapter also includes the equity mapping analysis that was completed to evaluate the distribution of park and open space and to review the degree which the Park District and it’s systems are serving residents.

Existing Conditions The Northfi eld Park District boundary encompasses 2.79 square miles or 1,785 acres, Willow Park much of which is occupied primarily by residential and commercial land uses. The Park District boundary includes three parks; Willow Park, Clarkson Park, and Fox Meadow Park. The Park District encompasses a portion of the Skokie Lagoons Forest Preserve and is adjacent to numerous other Forest Preserve areas including; Sunset Ridge Woods and Watersmeet Woods. The largest private open space facility--Sunset Ridge Country Club-- is located in the northwest corner of the District.

The primary commercial and industrial corridor runs along the west edge of the Eden’s Expressway with some service commercial located along Waukegan Road/IL-43, near the intersection of Willow Road.

Northfi eld is served by Sunset Ridge School District #29 including Middlefork (K-3) and Sunset Ridge (4-8) schools as well as New Trier Township High School District #203. Middlefork school is physically connected to the community center with multiple Clarkson Park shared use arrangements in place. Most schools are located centrally within the District; however, New Trier High School is outside of the District limits.

The Eden’s Expressway, also known as Interstate I-94, passes through the eastern side of the Park District, marking a clear divide between the east and west sides of of the District. The Union Pacifi c railroad runs nearly parallel to the Expressway, and together the two routes create a somewhat isolated area within the District. However, because most of these properties are commercial, industrial, or part of the Skokie Lagoons , these parcels are not negatively infl uenced from a park service and distribution standpoint.

Fox Meadow Park

14 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Two Inventory Map

MIDDLE FO

RK FRONTAGE RD SKO NOR

KIE R KIE TH

B I RA VE

NCH C R

HI CAGO

RIVER Sunset Ridge Woods

¨¦§I-94 SKOKIE RIVER

VOLTZ RD

SKOKI RD Skokie Lagoons E R IV ER

RIDGE

SUNSET !

ST WAY TOWER RD E

FOR Sunset Ridge Safe Haven School Country Club

W H AUKEGAN A P P RD RD Hyde Park Day School

Willow Park SKOKIE RIVER Middlefork Primary Sunset Ridge School School

EDE WILLOW RD OLD WILLOW RD NS EXPRESSWAY

! !

! Fox Meadow Park «¬IL 43 College of American WILLOW RD NORTHFIELD RD

! ! Pathologists

! Christian Heritage Academy Clarkson MID

LE Glenview Montessori School Park FORK NORTH ¨¦§I-94

D Valley Lo B RA

NCH

NER R

CHIC Club SET RIDGE RD

WAG A G O

SUN RI

! VE

R WINNETKA RD WINNETKA RD

N N LegendLegend °° New Trier 1 INCH = 600 FEET Watersmeet W NorthfieldES Northfield Park Park District District T FO 0300 600 1,200 High School RK Woods N OR District Boundaries UKEGAN RD NPD Park DistrictTH BRANC Boundaries NPD Park Municipal Boundaries WA Forest Preserve MunicipalH C Boundaries Forest Preserve HI Water Golf Course C AGO LocalR Trails Park by Others SKOKIE CHESTNUTWater AVE IV Golf Course ER RIVER Forest Preserve Trails Local School Local Trails Park by Others School by Others Forest Preserve Trails Local School Church RIVER HICAGO THE C

School by Others OF

N The Wilmette 1 inch = 2,000 Feet

BRA Church 0 500’ 1,000’ 2,000’ Golf Club

NORTH

Inventory and Analysis Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 15 Northfi eld Park District Demographics The demographics review utilized the Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) Business Analyst Software to gather the necessary, up-to-date demographics needed to gain a strong understanding of the District. ESRI is the largest research and development organization dedicated to geographical and information systems, including population projections and market trends.

Population Summary According to 2010 Census numbers, the Northfi eld Park District’s population was 4,166. Current estimates indicate 4,290 residents living within the District boundaries. There are currently 1,621 households at an average size of 2.61 people per household. Median income is $130,734. The District’s population is an older demographic with the median age at 50.1. The Northfi eld Park District is primarily Caucasian with small percentages of Asian (5.6%) and Hispanic (2.9%) residents.

Local Population Trends 2010: 4,166 2012 (estimate): 4,290 2017 (projection): 4,454

Household Income Distribution (2012) Median Household Income: $130,734 Average Household Income: $138,791 Per Capita Income: $68,704

Population by Race and Ethnicity (2012) 92.5% Caucasian / 0.4% Black / 0.0% American Indian / 5.6% Asian / 0.4% Other / 1.0% Two or more Races For the Census and thus, ESRI, Hispanic or Latino origin is asked as a separate questions. Thus in addition to races, respondents must categorize themselves as “Hispanic or Latino” or “Non-Hispanic or Latino”. According to ESRI, 2.9% of the Northfi eld Park District considers themselves of Hispanic or Latino origin.

Population Trends by Age ESRI projections indicate the age distribution of the Northfi eld Park District will begin leaning towards an older population into 2017. The preschool, school age, and working age populations will remain somewhat consistent with only a slight decrease. The 65 and older population; however, will increase by 2.45%, resulting in 27.5% of the total population being of retirement age.

Local, State, and National Population Trends According to ESRI, the Northfi eld Park District’s population is expected to increase by a higher annual rate than both the State of Illinois and the nation. The number of households, families, owner-occupied housing units, and median household income will also increase at a higher rate than the State of Illinois and the nation from 2012 to 2017.

Estimates for 2017 (2012 estimates) Population: 4,454 (4,290) Households: 1,697 (1,621) Families: 1,333 (1,279) Owner-occupied Housing Units: 1,591 (1,515) Median Household Income: $138,791 ($130,734)

16 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Two Local Population Trends 6,000 5,420 5,470 5,500 $130,734 5,000 median household income 4,454 4,166 4,290 4,000 $138,791 $68,704 average household income per capita income 0 $75,000-$99,000 $50,000-$74,000 2010 2012 2017 10.2% 6.7% $35,000-$49,000 7.0% +2.9% $100,000-$149,000 $25,000-$34,000 2010-2012 25.1% .4% 2.3% 5.6% Other $15,000-$24,000 Asian 1.0% 3.4% .4% Two or More Races <$15,000 Black 2.5%

$200,000+ 2.9% 27.7% Hispanic $150,000-$199,000 or Latino 15.1% any race Race 92.5% Caucasian

16 $

by age by 2012 14 2017

8 Percent 6

Population 0 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75-84 85+

Age National 3 State 2.8 Area Local 2.6 State USA 2.4 Trends 2.2 2 1.8 +1.2% 1.6 +.92% +.98% 1.4 +.75% +.83% 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 Annual Rate (in percent) 0.4 0.2 0 Population Households Families Owner HHs Median HH Income

Inventory and Analysis Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 17 Natural Resources The Park District is rich in natural resources. As part of a large watershed with numerous riparian corridors and jurisdictional wetlands, Northfi eld Park District has an important role in conservation and environmental management. This section of the plan inventories these natural resources along with the topographical characteristics of the District.

Watersheds & Riparian Corridors Watersheds are drainage basins, where water drains from land surfaces downhill into a body of water. The Park District is located within the Middle Fork Watershed of the North Branch Chicago River Watershed and the Chicago River system. This watershed has a total drainage area of 24.6 square miles and consists primarily of residential areas and forest preserves. The forest preserve areas occur from the I-94/Edens Expressway across to the Sunset Ridge Road crossing and also from Winnetka Road to the confl uence with the Skokie River.

The Middle Fork is the second tributary in the North Bank Chicago River Watershed and is 20.9 miles long. This river passes from northeast to northwest within the Park District as seen on the map to the right. The Skokie River, though not within the District boundaries, is another major stream within the context of the District as it serves as a tributary to the North Branch of the Chicago River. This river is considered impaired for aquatic life due to stream vegetation, sedimentation, toxins, and nutrient impairments. This information may direct the District to more comprehensively address stormwater management, erosion control, and pollution in and around the areas of the river that are within their parks.

Flood Plain The Federal Emergency Management Agency through the National Flood Insurance Program produces Flood Hazard Boundary maps for areas prone to fl ood hazards. The 100-year fl ood plain associated with each of the riparian corridors are shown in blue on the Natural Resources Map. The 100-year fl ood plain denotes the area potentially impacted by the level of fl ood water expected to be equaled or exceeded every 100 years on average or have a 1% chance of being equaled or exceeded in any single year. These areas are restricted from development in Northfi eld. This fl oodplain protection has created the opportunity for natural and built connections along these corridors throughout the Park District.

Wetlands Wetlands are lands saturated with water; this saturation impacts the soil character, the plant and animal communities, and the surface condition of the land. Wetlands are regulated under the Clean Water Act and require special provisions and permitting in regards to planning and development thus making them an important feature to identify during the planning process. Wetland data from the National Wetlands Inventory conducted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is depicted in the Natural Resources Map. Most of the identifi ed wetlands in the Park District are emergent wetlands located along creek corridors. Other wetland types found in the Park District are forested wetlands and open water.

Topography Topographic data obtained from U.S. Geological Survey maps was used to identify high points as well as low points within the Park District. The land does not appear to have signifi cant grade changes or topographic features. However, the gradual change present across the site contributes to a grade change of 30’ across the Park District. High points have been identifi ed in the Natural Resources Map to note areas where signifi cant views may be present within the Park District. Low points are also depicted and appear to follow the stream corridors and drainage patterns of the Park District.

18 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Two Natural Resources Map

MI DDL 629 E 645 645 630 FORK

650 FRONTAGE SKO NO 652 630 630 RTH B KI 664 E 667 R 632

644 I R VE ANCH 640

R 666 652 642 641 RD 670 684 CHICAG

688 665 661 O 661 671 RI 668 VER Sunset Ridge 664 644 642 675 675 672 665 Woods 633 677 677 646 639 676 656 646 637 680 648 639 638 651 SKOKIE RIVER 679 676 671 659 ¨¦§I-94 674 647 638 637

680 681 VOLTZ RD 631 660 655 649 641 639 637 649 636 666 664 636 629 641 636 639 642 642 635 652 651 636 Skokie Lagoons SKOKIE RIVER 641 636 637 631 640 672 640 670 667 664 635 641 637 637 655 642 638 633 SUNSET RIDGE RD 639 660 643 646 637 641 666 630 659 654 640 649 648 663 641 642 660 637 WAY 637 628 634 646 TOWER RD 657 659 652 645 638 641 664 661 FOREST 657 657 643 644 655 649 643 636 656 660 Sunset Ridge 640 630 650 641 641 644 654 654 639 640 641 653 Country Club 647 630 639 648 WAUKEGAN RD 649 639 640 638 638 629 635 HAPP RD 646 643 637 636 629 638 629 631 652 645 635 638 628 637 669 634 639 639 630 649 663 653 636 631 635 649 628 635 628 SKOKIE RIVER 639 648 644 668 634 628 634 628 638 634 646 661 651 638 638636 628 630 634 632 631 629 628 627 633 637 635 EDEN 632 637 667 670 WILLOW RD 652 648 644OLD WILLOW RD 628 630 628 634 627 657 S EXPRESSWAY 656 641 633 657 645644 628 634 652 674 650 636 656 648 644 648 632631 657 636 «¬IL 43 661659 639 636 634 631 630 630 WILLOW RD 630 650 635 N 646 O 645 628 627 625 R 652 THFIELD 659 655 652 650 641 638 636 636 634 634 634 630 631 629 659 M 658 653 635 IDDLE F RD 650 641 628

O 652 635 629 632 RK §I-94 NO ¨¦ 655 642 640 639 639 637 657 656 654 648 645 631 RTH 656 639 629 Valley Lo RD B 644 RANCH CHIC 655 657 656 654 634 632 GNER 626 Club SET RIDGE RD 640 632628

643 N WA A 650 652 653 646 643 G O RIVE 656 SU 643 627 645 653 652 647 ! 651 656 R 648 655 656 653 647 WINNETKA RD 642 642 641 637 635 634 632 629 WINNETKA RD 646 634 648648 641 639 638 Legend N 648 ° 631 Legend N Northfield Park District D ° R Watersmeet 1 INCH = 600 FEET W ESNorthfield Park District T F 06001,200300 OR DistrictK NO Boundaries Local Trails Woods District Boundaries Local Trails R UKEGAN TH BR Municipal Boundaries ForestWA Forest Preserve Preserve Trails Trails MunicipalANCH CHICAGOBoundaries Spot ElevationsSpot Elevations NPDNPD Park Park CHESTNUT 1'AVE CountoursR Forest Preserve SKOKI IV E RIV 1' Countours ER Forest Preserve E Water Golf Course R Water 100 Year Floodplain ParkGolf by Course Others 500 Year Floodplain Park by Others RIVER 100 Year Floodplain HICAGO 629 THE C Wetlands F Wetlands O The Wilmette 1 inch = 2,000 Feet 627 0 500’ 1,000’ 2,000’ Golf Club

NORTH BRANCH 624 624 624 631

Inventory and Analysis Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 19 Trail and Greenway Linkages Trails and greenways not only link important features to each other, making a community more walkable and pedestrian friendly, but they also bring a vast range of benefi ts to a community when they are implemented. According to the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning’s Northeastern Illinois Regional Greenways and Trails Plan, trails off er the following benefi ts: • Habitat protection and biodiversity preservation • Water, soil, and air quality improvement • Flood and stormwater management • Cultural and historic resources • Environmental awareness • Recreational opportunities • Transportation opportunities • Regional identity and awareness • Economic development Shared Roadway

The North Branch Trail is the main trail system in and around the Northfi eld Park District. This is a paved trail system. Other trails, not annotated in GIS fi les, are rough or non-paved trail systems.

The “Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities” recommends the following four bike facility types:

Shared Roadway: A roadway which is open to both bicycle and motor vehicle travel. This may be an existing roadway, street with wide curb lanes or road with paved shoulders. Signed Shared Roadway: A shared roadway which has been designated by Signed Shared Roadway signing as a preferred route for bicycle use. Bicycle Lane: A portion of a roadway which has been designated by striping, signing and pavement markings for the preferential or exclusive use of bicyclists. Shared Use Path: A bikeway physically separated from motorized vehicular traffi c by an open space or barrier and either within the highway right-of-way or within an independent right-of-way. Shared use paths may be used by pedestrians, skaters, wheelchair users, joggers and other non-motorized users.

Bicycle Lane

Shared Use Path

20 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Two Trail and Greenway Linkages Map

M IDDLE

FORK NORTH BRAN

FRONT S

KIE RI

AGE RD

R CH C

H ICA GO RIV Sunset Ridge ER Woods

¦¨§I-94 SKOKIE RIVER

S RD Skokie Lagoons KOKIE RI

VER

RIDGE

UNSET

WAY TOWER RD

FOREST Sunset Ridge Country Club

WAUKE HAPP RD

G AN RD

Willow Park SKOKIE RIVER

WILLOW RD OLD WILLOW RD EDE

NS EXPRE !

! SSWAY Fox Meadow Park «¬IL 43 WILLOW RD NORTHF

LD RD Clarkson M I

FO Park RK N ¦¨§I-94

RD TH

BRAN Valley Lo RD

RIDGE C H C Club H I CAGO RIVER

WAGNER

UNSET

S ! WINNETKA RD WINNETKA RD

N Legend °

RD Watersmeet NorthfieldWEST F Park District OR Woods K NOR District Boundaries N NPD Park Legend TH ° 1 INCH = 600 FEET Northfield Park BRAN District WAUKEGAN MunicipalCH C Boundaries06001,200300 Forest Preserve HICAGO RIVER District Boundaries NPD Park CHESTNUTWater AVE Golf Course SKOKI Local Trails Forest Preserve E RIVER Forest PreserveLocal TrailsTrails Golf Course Park by Others Proposed Local TrailsPark by Others Local School RIVER Local School CAGO Forest Preserve Trails School by Others THE CHI School by Others H OF The Wilmette

1 inch = 2,000 Feet ANC Church Church BR 0 500’ 1,000’ 2,000’ TH Golf Club

NOR

Inventory and Analysis Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 21 Park Classifi cation Criteria As a part of the planning process, we reference the guidelines outlined within the National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA) - Park, Recreation, Open Space and Greenway Guidelines Manual. NRPA recommends creating a park classifi cation system to serve as a guide for organizing an agency’s parks. Mini Parks, Neighborhood Parks and Community Parks are the three diff erent park types recognized by NRPA. The Northfi eld Park District has Neighborhood and Community Parks. The park classifi cation table identifi es the criteria for determining the class for each of Northfi eld’s parks.

Park Classification

Classification General Description Location Criteria Size Criteria Neighborhood Park Neighborhood park remains the basic unit of the park system and 0.25 to 0.5 mile distance and uninterrupted by 1 to 5 acres in size is typical. serves as the recreational and social focus of the neighborhood. Focus non-residential roads and other physical is on informal active and passive recreation. barriers. Community Park Serves broader purpose than neighborhood park. Focus is on meeting Determined by the quality and suitability of As needed to accommodate community based recreation needs, as well as preserving unique the site. Usually serves two or more desired uses. Usually a landscapes and open spaces. neighborhoods and 0.5 to 3 mile distance. minimum of 20 acres.

Table from NRPA's Park, Recreation, Open Space and Greenway Guidelines.

Neighborhood Parks Neighborhood Parks remain the basic unit of the park system and are generally designed for informal active and passive recreation and community gathering spaces. These parks generally range from 1 to 5 acres in size. Elements in these parks often include playgrounds, picnic areas, play areas, community centers and trail systems. Neighborhood parks or land acting in a neighborhood park capacity located in the Northfi eld Park District include: • Clarkson Park • Fox Meadow Park

Neighborhood Parks are located in residential areas and serve neighborhoods within 0.25 mile to 0.5 mile or a ten-minute walk. Though the primary transportation mode is walking, some Neighborhood Parks provide limited parking spaces. Neighborhood Typical Neighborhood Park site Park service areas do not include residents that must cross an impassable pedestrian boundary (i.e. major highway, railroad corridor, extreme natural features). In a residential setting, 2.0 acres of open space designated as a Neighborhood Park is preferred for every 1,000 people.

Community Parks Community Parks are generally designed for active recreation and focus on meeting community-based recreation needs. These parks preserve unique landscapes and open space, and often serve the community as gathering and general team sport spaces. Elements in these parks include playgrounds, pavilions, trail and path systems and sport court and fi eld complexes. Community Parks located in the Northfi eld Park District include: • Willow Park

Community Parks tend to serve residents at a regional scale--in this case the Park District as a whole. Community Parks are viewed as destination parks and require vehicular transportation for preferred programmed recreation. Thus, these parks include adequate parking. Community parks have a service area of one to three miles. Typical Community Park site Typically, 7.5 acres of open space designated as a Community Park is preferred for every 1,000 people.

22 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Two Park and Facility Matrix The table below refl ects the current inventory of the Park District’s park acreage, uses and amenities. Each park was classifi ed and grouped based on NRPA park classifi cation standards. The park amenities were tabulated in order to understand the Park District’s total recreational off erings.

Northfi eld Park District is composed of neighborhood and community parks, totaling 33.78 acres of park space and managed land.

Park and Facility Matrix

TRAILS AND DAY USE WATER BASED ACRES FACILITIES SPORTS FIELDS AND COURTS FITNESS STATIONS FACILITIES FACILITIES

Northfield

Park District (Owned) Acreage (miles) Trails Multi-Use Nature / Interpretive Trails (miles) (Stations) Fitness Trails Physical Restrooms Concessions Picnic Shelter Picnic Area Playground Baggo Basketball Baseball Batting Cages Bocce Disc Golf (holes) / Rugby Football Horseshoes Hockey Roller Skate Park Soccer Softball Tennis Volleyball allowed Fishing / Dock Pier Fishing Skating Ice Pool Swimming Pad Splash Neighborhood Parks Clarkson Park 2.10 2 1 221 1 Fox Meadow Park 9.15 2 1 111 1 Total Neighborhood Park Acreage 11.25

Community Parks Willow Park 22.53 0.50 3 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 4 Total Community Park Acreage 22.53

Total Land Holdings 33.78 0.500.03 6 2 4420021000000324000100 Acreage (Owned) Acreage (miles) Trails Multi-Use Nature / Interpretive Trails (miles) (Stations) Fitness Trails Physical Restrooms Concessions Picnic Shelter Picnic Area Playground Baggo Basketball Baseball Batting Cages Bocce Disc Golf (holes) / Rugby Football Horseshoes Hockey Roller Skate Park Soccer Softball Tennis Volleyball allowed Fishing / Dock Pier Fishing Skating Ice Pool Swimming Pad Splash TRAILS AND DAY USE WATER BASED ACRES FACILITIES SPORTS FIELDS AND COURTS FITNESS STATIONS FACILITIES FACILITIES

Inventory and Analysis Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 23 Level of Service The Level of Service (LOS) guidelines are ratios representing the minimum amount of recreation facilties needed to meet the demands of a community. The LOS analysis is an integral step in determining a community’s recreation needs and estimating how well an agency is serving the residents. According to National Recreation and Parks According to the 2013 Association, the LOS should: PRORAGIS Special District • Be practicable and achievable Report, similar agencies have a • Provide for an equitable allocation of park and recreation resources throughout a community; there must be equal opportunity access for all median of 12 acres of land per citizens 1,000 population. • Refl ect the real-time demand of the citizens for park and recreation opportunities

Parks & Open Space The NRPA’s population ratio method (acres/1,000 population) emphasizes the direct relationship between recreation spaces and people and is the most common method of estimating an agencies Level of Service for parkland and open space. The baseline standard according to this method is 10 acres/1,000 population. The following tables calculate the existing and proposed Level of Service for the Northfi eld Park District using this ratio.

Conclusions By NRPA standards, the Northfi eld Park District is defi cient in park land by over 9 acres. While they exceed Neighborhood Park space by .53 acres, they are almost 10 acres short in Community Park space. The NRPA recommended Level of Service for Community Park space is 32.18 but the District has a total of 22.53. While this may seem signifi cant, it is important to note that these standards are meant to be a starting point for park and recreation space planning. Park Districts must respond to their individual context, desires, and needs. It is also important to note that there are more than 500 acres of forest preserve land adjacent to the District. Level of Service- Existing Parks and Current Population Population: 4,290

Level of Service - Owned and Leased

NPD Existing IAPD/NRPA IAPD/NRPA Recommended Acreage NPD Acreage Classification Level of Service Recommended Level of Service deficiency / (Total) (acres / 1,000 population) Acreage (acres / 1,000 population) surplus (acres) Neighborhood Park 11.25 2.62 10.73 2.50 0.53 Community Park 22.53 5.25 32.18 7.50 -9.65 Total Parks 33.78 7.87 42.90 10.00 -9.12 Recommended acreage is based off the existing population of 4,290

Level of Service- Planned Parks and Projected Population Population: 4,454

Level of Service - Owned, Leased, Natural Areas

NPD Existing IAPD/NRPA IAPD/NRPA Recommended Acreage NPD Acreage Classification Level of Service Recommended Level of Service deficiency / (Total) (acres / 1,000 population) Acreage (acres / 1,000 population) surplus (acres) Neighborhood Park 11.25 2.53 11.14 2.50 0.12 Community Park 22.53 5.06 33.41 7.50 -10.88 Total Parks 33.78 7.58 44.54 10.00 -10.76 Recommended acreage is based off the projected population of 4,454

24 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Two Equity Mapping Analysis Not only is the quantity of park and open space important, but the location and geographic distribution of the parks themselves also off er an indication of how well a District is serving it’s residents. By understanding where the parks are located in relationship to residential development, we are able to understand who, if anyone, is under served. This exercise may reveal the need for acquisition in under served areas of the District, or may reveal that the District is serving the residents well and should shift their focus into maintenance and development of existing parkland.

Methodology Planning Areas are used for analysis, proposed land acquisition, and redevelopment of new park facilities. Planning Areas are delineated by impassable pedestrian boundaries including major roads or highways, railroad corridors and extreme natural features.

Once the District was divided into Planning Areas, these areas and their boundaries were used to analyze the the distribution of the parks and open spaces. First, a service area buff er--illustrated in the maps as an orange or light yellow circle--was created around each individual park. The size of the service area is dependent on the park classifi cation. The table to the left notes the various service area distances for both Neighborhood and Community Parks.

Next, the service area buff ers for Neighborhood Parks were clipped to the Planning Area boundaries in which the park is located. This is done because these boundaries are seen as impassible or nearly impassable by young pedestrians. For Community Parks the boundaries were simply clipped to the overall District boundaries instead of Planning Area boundaries because these parks are seen as drive-to destinations.

Finally, the service area maps and other related maps were overlaid and analyzed to determine what areas are most and least served by the park system. The most served areas are illustrated by the dark orange while the least served areas are illustrated by the lack of orange. The orange service area buff ers overlap to form a gradient that illustrates the degree to which residents are served. The darker the orange, the more service areas overlap. This represents that those residents who fall within the darker orange area are served by multiple parks and their amenities.

Inventory and Analysis Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 25 Planning Areas Planning Area 1 is bounded by Volz Road on the north, the Union Pacifi c Railroad and I-94 on the east, Willow Road on the south, and IL 43/Waukegan Road on the west. This Planning Area has some commercial zoning, but is primarily residential. Willow Park is located within this Planning Area boundary.

Planning Area 2 is bounded by the District boundaries on the north and east, and I-94 on the south and west. The Planning Area is primarily forest preserve and does not encompass any parks.

Planning Area 3 is bounded by Willow Road on the north, the District boundaries on the east, Winnetka Road on the south, and IL-43/Waukegan Road on the west. The east portion surrounding Northfi eld Road is primarily commercial development, but the remainder of the Planning Area is residential. This Planning Area contains both Neighborhood Parks -- Clarkson Park and Fox Meadow Park.

26 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Two Planning Area Map

MI D DLE FORK NORTH BR

FRONTAGE RD SKO

KIE RIVE KIE

A NCH CHICA R

G O RIV Sunset Ridge ER Woods

¨¦§I-94 SKOKIE RIVER

SK Skokie Lagoons OK IE RIVER

SET RIDGE RD

R RD ST WAY TOWE E

FOR Sunset Ridge Country Club !1 !2 W H AUKEGAN APP RD

R D

Willow Park SKOKIE RIVER

WILLOW RD OLD WILLOW RD DENS EXPR ! E ! SSW

AY Fox Meadow Park «¬IL 43 WILLOW RD NORT

HFIELD

Clarkson M I RD

DDLE FORK NO Park 3 ¨¦§I-94 ! RTH

B Valley Lo RD R ANCH CHICAGO

AGNER Club RD RIDGE SET

SU RIV ! ER WINNETKA RD WINNETKA RD

Legend N ° Watersmeet W NorthfieldEST FO Park District RK N Woods Legend Planning NORTH B Areas °NPD Park 1 INCH = 600 FEET RANCH WAUKEGAN RD Northfield Park District 0300 600 1,200 District CHICBoundaries Forest Preserve

A Planning Areas GO NPD Park CHESTNUTMunicipal AVE Boundaries RIVER Golf Course SKOKI District Boundaries Forest Preserve E RIVER LocalWater Trails Golf Course Park by Others Forest Preserve Trails Park by Others Local Trails Local School RIVER Local School ICAGO THE CH Forest Preserve Trails School by OthersSchool by Others CH OF The Wilmette 1 inch = 2,000 Feet AN Church

Church H BR 0 500’ 1,000’ 2,000’ Golf Club ORT

Inventory and Analysis Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 27 Service Area Mapping Neighborhood Parks The purpose of the Neighborhood Park service area study is to determine which Planning Areas are underserved by the Park District’s existing Neighborhood Park land holdings. Northfi eld Park District’s Neighborhood Park acreages range from two to nine acres. Currently the Park District has two existing Neighborhood Parks--Clarkson Park and Fox Meadow Park

The Neighborhood Park Service Area Map illustrates a 0.5 mile service radius (shown in orange) around each existing and planned Neighborhood Park. This plan also illustrates a service area (shown in light orange) for Community Parks as these parks can also serve the function of a neighborhood park. NRPA’s Park, Recreation, Open Space and Greenway Guidelines recommend that Neighborhood Parks with active recreation amenities be centrally located within their service areas and encompass a 0.5 mile radius.

According to this map, the existing distribution of Neighborhood Parks in the Northfi eld Park District is concentrated in Planning Area Three with slight defi ciencies in the south-central portion of the Planning Area. Planning Area Two lacks any parks, but is primarily forest preserve land and does not encompass any residential development. Planning Area One contains the community park, which can serve the function of a Neighborhood Park for residents within a half-mile service area radius from the park but overall, Planning Area One is noticeably defi cient in the north and west portions. Planning Area One also contains Sunset Ridge Country Club, over 135 acres of private open space.

Level of Service- Neighborhood Parks Population: 4,290

Level of Service - Neighborhood Parks

Neighborhood Park 11.25 2.62 10.73 2.50 0.53

28 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Two Neighborhood Park Service Area Map

M IDDLE

FORK NORTH BRAN

FRON S

T RI AGE RD

VER

CH C

H ICA GO RIV Sunset Ridge ER Woods

¦¨§I-94 SKOKIE RIVER

SKOKIE RI RD Skokie Lagoons

VER

RIDGE

UNSET

WAY D TOWER R

FOREST Sunset Ridge Country Club !1 !2 WAUKE HAPP RD

G AN RD

Willow Park SKOKIE RIVER

WILLOW RD OLD WILLOW RD EDE

NS EXPRESSWAY !

! Fox Meadow Park «¬IL 43 WILLOW RD NORTHF

LD RD Clarkson M I

FO Park RK ¦¨§I-94 3 NO ! R

RD TH

BRAN Valley Lo RD

RIDGE C H C Club H I CAGO RIVER

WAGNER

UNSET

S ! WINNETKA RD WINNETKA RD

N Legend ° 1 inch = 2,000 Feet

RD Watersmeet NorthfieldWEST F Park District 0 500’ 1,000’ 2,000’ OR Woods K NORNeighborhood Park Service Area NPD Park TH

WAUKEGAN PlanningBRAN Areas Forest Preserve CH C HICAGO RIVER District Boundaries Golf Course CHESTNUT AVE SKOKIE RIVER Municipal Boundaries Park by Others Water Local School RIVER CAGO Local Trails School by Others THE CHI

H OF The Wilmette

Forest Preserve Trails Church ANC

RTH Golf Club

Inventory and Analysis Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 29 Community Parks The purpose of the Community Park service area study is to determine which residential areas are under served by the Park District’s existing Community Park land holdings. Northfi eld’s sole Community Park, Willow Park, is more than 25 acres. Willow Park is located in Planning Area one, on the northwest corner of Northfi eld’s main commercial development.

The Community Park Service Map illustrates a one-mile service radius (shown in orange) around each existing Community Park. This analysis yielded a geographic defi ciency in the northwest corner of Planning Area One. The NRPA’s Park, Recreation, Open Space and Greenway Guidelines recommend that Community Parks with active recreation amenities have a one-mile service area radius.

The acreage of Community Parks per 1,000 population does not meet the Level of Service goal as recommended by the NRPA. Again, the hundreds of acres of forest preserves that residents have access to may off set this defi ciency. While the acreage defi ciency is slightly signifi cant, it may be more important to note that the Northfi eld community has one single active recreation and athletics destination. If it is a priority for the Park District to become a primary provider of active recreation and team sport programming, this may result in scheduling issues. However, if the District plans to rely on outside organizations, agencies, and facilities for this type of programming and recreational off erings, having a single active recreation and athletics destination may be suffi cient.

Level of Service- Community Parks Population: 4,290

Level of Service - Community Parks

Community Park 22.53 5.25 32.18 7.50 -9.65

30 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Two Community Park Service Area Map

M IDDLE

FORK NORTH BRAN

FRON S

T RI AGE RD

VER

CH C

H ICA GO RIV Sunset Ridge ER Woods

¦¨§I-94 SKOKIE RIVER

SKOKIE RI RD Skokie Lagoons

VER

RIDGE

UNSET

WAY D TOWER R

FOREST Sunset Ridge Country Club !1 !2 WAUKE HAPP RD

G AN RD

Willow Park SKOKIE RIVER

WILLOW RD OLD WILLOW RD EDE

NS EXPRESSWAY !

! Fox Meadow Park «¬IL 43 WILLOW RD NORTHF

LD RD Clarkson M I

FO Park RK ¦¨§I-94 3 NO ! R

RD TH

BRAN Valley Lo RD

RIDGE C H C Club H I CAGO RIVER

WAGNER

UNSET

S ! WINNETKA RD WINNETKA RD

N Legend ° 1 inch = 2,000 Feet

RD Watersmeet NorthfieldWEST F Park District 0 500’ 1,000’ 2,000’ OR K NOR N Woods Community Park Service Area NPD Park Legend TH ° 1 INCH = 600 FEET Northfield Park BRAN District WAUKEGAN PlanningCH C Areas 0300 600 1,200Forest Preserve HICAGO RIVER Community Park Service Area NPD Park CHESTNUTDistrict AVE Boundaries Golf Course SKOKIE RIVER Planning Areas Forest Preserve DistrictMunicipal Boundaries Boundaries Golf Course Park by Others LocalWater Trails Park by Others Local School RIVER Forest Preserve Trails Local School CAGO Local Trails School by Others THE CHI School by Others H OF The Wilmette Church ANC Forest Preserve Trails Church BR

RTH Golf Club

Inventory and Analysis Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 31 Overall Parks Service Area The Overall Service Area Map illustrates comprehensively how well the Northfi eld Park District parks and open spaces serve their residents. This map combines the previous two maps of Neighborhood and Community Park Service Areas in order to see who is most and least served throughout the District. The orange service area buff ers overlap to form a gradient that illustrates the degree to which residents are served. The darker the orange, the more service areas overlap. This represents that those residents who fall within the darker orange area are served by multiple parks and their amenities.

From this map, we conclude that Planning Area Three is the most-served Planning Area. Planning Area One is served by the Community Park at both a Community Park and Neighborhood Park functional level; however, at the overall Neighborhood Park level, over two-thirds of the District lacks access to a park. Planning Area Two is a non- issue, as the land use is solely forest preserve. The northwest corner of Planning Area One is defi cient.

Equity mapping is only one step in the analysis a Park District’s parkland and open space and we must consider the District geographic, economic, and social context as well. We must not forget to take into account the over 500 acres of forest preserve land Northfi eld Park District resident have access to, or the 135 acres of private open space at the Sunset Ridge Country Club. These facilities; however, are drive-to destination facilities, and some space--specifi cally the golf course--require membership or fees. The social context of the District is also important to note. As the population continues to age, a focus on safe and walkable destination may become a priority.

Level of Service- Existing Parks and Current Population Population: 4,290

Level of Service - Owned and Leased

Level of Service- Planned Parks and Projected Population Population: 4,454

Level of Service - Owned, Leased, Natural Areas

NPD Existing IAPD/NRPA IAPD/NRPA Recommended Acreage NPD Acreage Classification Level of Service Recommended Level of Service deficiency / (Total) (acres / 1,000 population) Acreage (acres / 1,000 population) surplus (acres) Neighborhood Park 11.25 2.53 11.14 2.50 0.12 Community Park 22.53 5.06 33.41 7.50 -10.88 Total Parks 33.78 7.58 44.54 10.00 -10.76 Recommended acreage is based off the projected population of 4,454

32 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Two Overall Service Area Map

M IDDLE

FORK NORTH BRAN

FRON S

T RI AGE RD

VER

CH C

H ICA GO RIV Sunset Ridge ER Woods

¦¨§I-94 SKOKIE RIVER

SKOKIE RI RD Skokie Lagoons

VER

RIDGE

UNSET

WAY D TOWER R

FOREST Sunset Ridge Country Club !1 !2 WAUKE HAPP RD

G AN RD

Willow Park SKOKIE RIVER

WILLOW RD OLD WILLOW RD EDE

NS EXPRESSWAY !

! Fox Meadow Park «¬IL 43 WILLOW RD NORTHF

LD RD Clarkson M I

FO Park RK ¦¨§I-94 3 NO ! R

RD TH

BRAN Valley Lo RD

RIDGE C H C Club H I CAGO RIVER

WAGNER

UNSET

S ! WINNETKA RD WINNETKA RD

Legend °N Northfield Park District

RD Watersmeet WEST F Neighborhood Park Service Area NPD Park OR Woods K NOR

CommunityTH Park Service Area Forest Preserve

BRAN WAUKEGAN Other ServiceCH C Area Golf Course HICAGO RIVER Park by Others CHESTNUTPlanning Areas AVE SKOKIE RIVER District Boundaries Local School Municipal Boundaries School by Others RIVER Water Church CAGO THE CHI

Local Trails H OF The Wilmette

1 inch = 2,000 Feet ANC Forest Preserve Trails BR

0 500’ 1,000’ 2,000’ RTH Golf Club

Inventory and Analysis Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 33 Recreation Programs Inventory & Analysis This assessment includes an analysis of the Northfi eld Park District’s program and service off erings. The report off ers a detailed perspective of recreation programs and events and helps to identify the strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities for future program direction. It also assists in identifying core programs, program gaps within the community, and future program off erings for residents based on community input and trends. • Core Program Identifi cation • Program Mix • Lifecycle Analysis • Age Segment Analysis • Marketing Approaches and Program Guide Review

Core Program Identifi cation The ability to align program off erings according to community need is of vital importance to successfully delivering recreation services. At the same time, it is also important to deliver recreation programs with a consistent level of quality, which results in consistent customer experiences. Core programs are generally off ered each year and form the foundation of recreation programs. In assessing the categorization of core programs, many criteria are considered. A list of the criteria include:

• The program has been provided for a long period of time • Off ered three to four sessions per year or two to three sessions for seasonal programs • Wide demographic appeal • Includes 5% or more of recreation budget • Includes tiered level of skill development • Requires full-time staff to manage the program area • Has the ability to help solve a community issue • High level of customer interface exists • High partnering capability • Facilities are designed to support the program • Evolved as a trend and has resulted in a “must have” program area • Dominant position in the market place • Great brand and image of the program, based on the District’s experience of off ering the program over a period of time

Core programs, by defi nition meet at least the majority of these criteria. The establishment of core programs helps to provide a focus for program off erings. This focus, in turn, creates a sense of discipline for quality control of these program areas and helps to reduce variation of service for the program participants. It must be noted that the designation of non-core programs does not suggest they are unimportant. It just means there may be less focus and fewer programs compared to core programs. A HHC Core Program Assessment is attached as a tool to use in determining future core program areas.

During discussions with staff and reviewing the core programming criteria, the following programs were identifi ed as core program areas: • Adults/Seniors • Fitness • Rentals • Special Events • Summer Camp • Youth Athletics • Youth General

34 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Two Program Mix The program mix or the distribution of types of programs off ered should represent the programming needs of the residents. Therefore, this should be evaluated annually through an assessment process. In addition, the program off erings should include emphasis on the delivery of core programs. In reviewing program off erings listed in the 2012 fall, 2013 winter, spring and summer Program Guide, the list of core programs and number of activities off ered included: • Adult/Senior: 11 • Camp: 7 • Fitness: 8 • Rentals: no statistics provided • Special Events: 20 • Youth Athletics: 45 • Youth General: 23

Core Program Categories

Adults/Seniors 9.6%

Camp 6.1%

Fitness 7%

Special Events 17.5%

Youth Athletics 39.5%

Youth General 20.2%

0 1020304050 Number of Program Offerings from fall 2012 - summer 2013

Lifecycle Analysis The program assessment included a lifecycle analysis of the core programs selected for review. This assessment helps to determine if the Northfi eld Park District needs to develop newer and more innovative programs, reposition programs that have been declining, or continue the current mix of lifecycle stages. This assessment was based on staff members’ opinions of how their core programs were categorized according to the following areas. • Introduction Stage (Getting a program off the ground, heavy marketing) • Growth Stage (Moderate and interested customer base, high demand, not as intense marketing) • Mature Stage (Steady and reliable performer, but increased competition) • Decline Stage (Decreased registration)

The percentage distribution of programs according to lifecycle categories includes: • Introductory programs: 5.7% • Growth programs: 28.5% • Mature programs: 44.2% • Decline programs: 21.4%

The recommended standard for percentage distribution (according to other agency benchmarks) is 60% of programs should be in introduction and growth stages, and 40% in the maturation and decline stages. For Northfi eld Park District, the percentage is 34% introduction/growth and 66% maturation/decline, which are not consistent with the benchmark. As can be seen from the charts above, some program areas such as youth athletics and special events have higher percentages of off erings in the mature and decline stages. The 60/40 split should be reviewed system-wide, but is also a good measure for individual core program areas.

Inventory and Analysis Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 35 Program Life Cycle Stages – Adults/Seniors Introduction Growth Mature Decline Getting a program off Interested customer base, high Steady performer, reliable Signs of tailing off, the ground, heavy demand, not as intense success increased marketing marketing competition Karate Fitness Memberships Adult Open Gym Senior Trips/Days Personal Training Gentle Yoga CPR Golf Jump Start the Morning

Program Life Cycle Stages – Camp Introduction Growth Mature Decline Getting a program off Interested customer base, high Steady performer, reliable Signs of tailing off, the ground, heavy demand, not as intense success increased marketing marketing competition Counselor in Training Bears Football Camp Sports Camp Extended Camp Boys Lacrosse Camp Trailblazers Explorers Giggle Gang Girls Lacrosse Camp

Program Life Cycle Stages – Fitness Introduction Growth Mature Decline Getting a program off Interested customer base, high Steady performer, reliable Signs of tailing off, the ground, heavy demand, not as intense success increased marketing marketing competition Fitness Memberships Gentle Yoga Personal Training Jump Start the Morning

Program Life Cycle Stages – Rentals Introduction Growth Mature Decline Getting a program off Interested customer base, high Steady performer, reliable Signs of tailing off, the ground, heavy demand, not as intense success increased marketing marketing competition Clarkson Lodge CC Multi-Purpose Room Community Center Gym Clarkson Pavilion Willow Baseball/Softball Fields Fox Meadow Soccer Fields Willow Soccer Fields Outdoor Tennis Courts

36 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Two

Program Life Cycle Stages – Special Events Introduction Growth Mature Decline Getting a program off Interested customer base, high Steady performer, reliable Signs of tailing off, the ground, heavy demand, not as intense success increased marketing marketing competition Daddy/Daughter Date Night Boo Bash Children’s Concert Series Magic Class Glitzy Girls Daddy/Daughter Date Night Egg Hunt Marriot Trip Holiday Winter Fest Flag Football Tournament Mom/Son Date Night Kids Dog Show Teens of New Trier Kite Fly Winter Carnival State Fair

Program Life Cycle Stages – Youth Athletics Introduction Growth Mature Decline Geƫng a program oī Interested customer base, high Steady performer, reliable Signs of tailing oī, the ground, heavy demand, not as intense success increased marŬĞƟng marŬĞƟng compeƟƟon Karate Coach Pitch Tball Boys Lacrosse 1st- 2nd Basketball Kind. Super Sports Girls Lacrosse 1st- 2nd Super Sports st rd Tiny Tot Tball Holiday Open Gym 1 - 3 Baseball nd th Inst. Basketball 2 -4 Flag Football Dodgeball Inst. Soccer Flag Football Open Gym Floor Hockey Tiny Tot Basketball K-2nd Floor Hockey Tiny Tot Soccer

Tumbling Ultimate Sports

Program Life Cycle Stages – Youth General Introduction Growth Mature Decline Geƫng a program oī Interested customer base, high Steady performer, reliable Signs of tailing oī, the ground, heavy demand, not as intense success increased marŬĞƟng marŬĞƟng compeƟƟon Runaway Circus Drawing Birthday Parties High Touch, High Tech Young Chefs Middlefork Improvement Days

Inventory and Analysis Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 37 Any program area in decline should be targeted for repositioning or deletion. Mature programs should be monitored closely in order to prevent decline in registrations. Some agencies, in order to develop accountability for an increased percentage of introductory programs, establish a performance measurement indicating new programs initiated by each staff member. Additionally, it’s important to continuously monitor customer expectations and requirements as a way of determining how to reposition programs.

Age Segment Analysis Park and recreation systems should strive for an equitable balance of off erings for various age segments, including: • Youths 5 and under • Youths 6-12 • Youths 13-18 • Adults 19-59 • Seniors 60 and over

The percentage of program off erings in each age category should closely match community demographics.

The following chart shows the age segment percentages of program off erings. This information was calculated by reviewing the 2012 fall, 2013 winter, spring and summer Program Guide and counting the number of programs off ered for each segment. Programs and events off ered for all ages, such as family special events, were not included in the list. The age distribution of programs is as follows:

• Youths 5 and under: 16 19% • Youths 6-12: 40 48% • Youths 13-18: 13 16% • Adults 19-59: 7 8% • Seniors 60 and over: 7 8%

15 fall 2012 - summer 2013 fall 2012 - summer 10 Percentage of Program OfferingsPercentage of Program 5

0 Youths 5 and Youths 6-12 Youths 13-18 Adults 19-59 Seniors 60 and under over Age Segment Analysis

This distribution refl ects that programs are most geared toward individuals ages 6-12 with 48% of programming in this area. Adding the youth category ages 5 and under increases the total program percentage to 67%. This is a better distribution of youth programs as compared to other agencies in the Heller and Heller database, as agencies average 70-80% of program off erings toward youth 12 and under. Northfi eld should continue its performance in this area. It is important to have balance among age groups, aligned with community demographics.

38 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Two Marketing Approaches and Program Guide Websites are becoming progressively more important as a marketing tool and identifi cation of brand, image, mission and vision. Staff commented that the look of the Website has recently been updated. This update may have helped increase traffi c and online registrations.

Opening the Website, one’s eyes are immediately drawn to the scrolling photos and cloud-background. The design is simple and concise. The colors used portray an earthy feeling with greens and blue. There is also a playful font directing visitors to register online. The scrolling pictures with a description are a nice feature. Not all pictures had a description and the pictures tend to scroll rather quickly. A suggestion would be slow down the scrolling and add a link so customers could click on the photo or description to receive more information, rather than searching the site to locate.

Along the top are tabs with major category drop-down menus. A suggestion is to place the tabs in order of importance to the Park District as people tend to read left to right. Currently the Winnetka Golf and Platform is the second tab from the left. Although this may be of signifi cant importance to the community, this is not a program of the Northfi eld Park District. When scrolling over the tabs, all but “home” has a drop down menu. Navigating through these pages, they are clear and direct.

The program tab only includes Program Guide links. A suggestion is to include core program options so the reader does not have to open the pdf Program Guide to view this information. In addition to the drop-down menu for Facility Rentals, an enhancement would be to include a “take a tour” video and links to Google maps for both facilities and parks.

On the left in dark green are upcoming events. At the time of review, the only event was the June Park Board Meeting. A review of the Program Guide shows that there are not any events until the end of June. Below upcoming events are important camp dates and community center hours.

In the middle of the Website is Northfi eld Park District News. Currently it shows information on camp registration and payment plans. Below are camp calendars for the summer participants. There are also logos and links for Facebook and Northfi eld Parks Foundation.

Certain pages had unusual characters. For instance the Agency Profi le page had separate characters after many sentences. Compatibility with how information is posted should be reviewed.

The mission of the park district could not be located. Reinforcing the mission is important for the community. Also, including a message from the Director or Board President would enhance the welcoming feel to the user.

Over the next few years, the projected number of users using smart phones and tablets to access Websites will increase greatly. In order to maximize outreach to its target market, the Park District has developed a WAP (wireless application protocol) enabled Website which can be easily viewed by potential users on smart phones or tablets and allow them to make online reservations. The District has also adapted to the increasing amount of social media sites that are available to all users. All of these allow the community to be more informed and connected to the City. These available opportunities can be a great way to promote and market the Northfi eld Park District.

The introduction of all of the social media techniques listed above results in additional staff time dedicated toward marketing. The Park District has recognized this and now has a staff person whose responsibilities include marketing responsibilities.

Inventory and Analysis Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 39 Registration Currently, the District uses RecTrac software for processing program registration. It would be helpful to use this registration information and link it with GIS for a more thorough demographic analysis with the use of visual maps. The City of Arlington, Texas is currently using GIS to gather information such as the top percentage of spenders, most recent customer, most frequent customer, and where these customers are located and how far they are traveling to for programs and services. Additionally, using GIS, staff would be able to develop targeting marketing and advertisement to specifi c areas.

Program Guide The Program Guide is distributed to households by mail three times per year, with a separate summer camps guide. A pdf version is also available on the Website. The cover of the current spring/summer guide features one large picture of a previously off ered program, online registration information, Website address, district logo and camp registration deadline date. The inside front cover promotes the season’s major special event. Typically the cover, inside cover, back page and inside back page are made of the highest quality material and full color. Utilizing these four pages to promote important events or programs is an easy tactic to maximizing advertising.

The second page lists District information including facility and parks, board of commissioners, administrative staff and mission statement. A Director’s or Board President’s message is a good idea to highlight district information, park or facility projects, program/special event updates and emphasize the benefi ts of community parks and recreation. Although there is an index in the back, it would be a good idea to include a table of contents within the fi rst few pages.

Overall the Program Guide is simple and concise. Changing the font for both the descriptions and headers can be an easy way to add a catchy new look. A fresh look is an enhancement for marketing programs and events. Consolidating and deleting unnecessary white space, can add room for additional photos and information. Cutting down on the number of pages can also save money so the savings can be used to provide a full-color guide.

Most photos used look professional, however, increasing the amount of photos from actual programs can generate more interest from potential customers. The top headings appear very large on various pages. Consistency of font, size and location will help make it easier to locate information. On several pages the way “am” and “p.m.” are used are not always consistent. Consistency is key in refl ecting the District’s professional brand and image.

The Registration Information page is very informative. Registration dates are currently not located in the guide, other than camp deadlines. Including all registration dates will help improve communication with customers.

Additional information that may be included on the Policies and Information page are photo/social media release, code of conducts (if applicable) and information for if a resident has moved or changed their personal information.

Customers generally look at price fi rst, and then program title and description to determine whether or not to register for a class. Therefore, creating creative program titles are important to catch their interest. Descriptions should include features, attributes and benefi ts. Certain titles already state what the participant will be doing in the class. Some of the text in the description is informational, rather than promotional. Identify the “hook” that will entice people to register. A suggestion is to keep program descriptions brief and no longer than six or seven lines, as readers may lose interest if they read too long. A good example is on page 16 of the winter 2013 Program Guide. The program Jump Start the Morning off ers a catchy title while the description captures the interest of the reader with the important information of what the participant will achieve from the class. 40 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Two Other descriptions are lengthy and do not create an incentive for the reader to be interested. Duplicating in the description information that is also listed below is unnecessary. An example is page 11 in the winter 2013 Program Guide. The Little Dribblers Basketball class lists the location of the program in the description, while this is also listed below on the page.

The Facility Rental pages currently have descriptive information and rates/fees. The spring/summer Program Guide does not include photos like the fall 2012 and winter 2013 did. As a great source for revenue, including colorful photos from successful rentals can help draw potential customers.

In addition to the spring/summer Program Guide, a summer camp guide is available. Both guides provide camp information. Rather than mailing an additional guide, some parks and recreation agencies add a special camp section in their guides that is bounded in, mostly smaller sized pages to distinguish the diff erence. Some of the camp information could be taken out and only placed on the Website. Directing users to the Website is a marketing advantage for online registration.

Pricing and Cost Recovery rates Northfi eld Park District relies heavily on non-resident participants. Therefore, some programs have only one fee. If there is a non-resident fee, it is very minimal, which is appropriate given the reliance on non-resident participation. Staff commented that there are small discounts for residents. There is not currently a revenue policy for the recreation department. Programs are priced to earn a net profi t, except for senior programming and special events that are tax supported. Because the staff feels the perception of the community would prefer contractors for instructing programs, a 70%/30% contract is used when hiring an outside company. Athletic programming is mostly staff ed by Northfi eld Park District employees. Most athletic programs are priced at $13 per class. Of the surrounding park districts, Northfi eld’s programs are priced similarly or lower than the others.

Inventory and Analysis Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 41 Revenue/Net Revenue Trends A Financial Performance measurement for 2010, 2011 and 2012 provides the following data:

Adult/Seniors: In 2012, revenue decreased 25.4% from 2010. Although expenses saw a similar decrease, net profi t increased 79.8% from 2010. This is an example of “doing more with less.”

Youth Athletics In 2012 revenue decreased 15.1% from 2010. However, revenue in 2012 had increased 1.4% from 2011. Although there was an increase in revenue from 2011, expenses also increased by 17.6%. Therefore, net revenue decreased by $4,694.

Youth General Revenue in 2012 had decreased by 15.5% from 2011 and 6.8% from 2010. Net profi t decreased by 14.9% in 2012 from 2011. This is an area of concern as youth general makes up 20.2% of programs off ered by Northfi eld. Staff did mention recently enrichment program participation is going great.

Summer Camp In 2012, Summer Camp saw a net profi t increase of 8.1% from 2011, while expenses decreased 4.6%. This is a good example of raising revenue while cutting expenses. Because camp is such a well-received program by the community, fi scal responsibility should continue to be monitored by staff .

Special Events Special events are mostly tax supported and do not make a profi t. Although revenue in 2012 increased by 35.2% from 2011, expenses also increased by 19%. Staff had commented that some events have reached a mature or decline stage. Implementing changes and enhancements to events are a way show commitment to a popular service and to build trust from the community.

Fitness Fitness and wellness programs continue to have participation growth. Revenue in 2012 increased 36.4% from 2011. The net profi t decreased by 11% in 2012. Perhaps the increase in expenses is related to contractual agreements with personal trainers and/or instructors. If staff continues to off er wellness programs, revenue will increase.

Rentals Northfi eld’s rental revenue increased by 25.1% in 2012 from 2010. It was noted by staff that travel teams have played an important role in fi lling empty fi elds and rental rates have increased due to market research.

42 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Two Inventory and Analysis Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 43 Chapter Summary The purpose of the Inventory and Analysis phase of the project was to develop a better understanding of the factors impacting the Park District and individual park facilities.

In this chapter, we documented the many natural resources of the Northfi eld Park District including the Middle Fork of the North Branch Chicago River Watershed. Also noted was the North Branch trail system, a regional trail that connects the Northfi eld Park District to the many neighboring Park Districts and forest preserves.

After classifying parks based on NRPA standards, we completed a matrix that inventoried the Park District’s individual park and total acreage, uses, and amenities. These classifi cations were used to evaluate the parkland Level of Service based on total acreages. Through this it was revealed that the District is suffi cient in Neighborhood Park acreage, but defi cient by more than 9 acres in Community Park acreage. Although these facts could support acquisition, the presence of more than 500 acres of adjacent forest preserves and over 135 private open space that may mitigate this defi ciency.

Level of Service acreage analysis led us to our equity mapping exercise, or the analysis of the geographic distribution and service areas of existing parks. This study revealed that the parkland within the District according to the primary park classifi cation standards is well-distributed. It is important to note; however, that the Community Park service area accounts for much of the District’s serviced area. Simply mapping the Neighborhood Parks reveals a gap in service for the northwest portion of the District.

We must remember though, that equity mapping is only one step in the analysis a Park District’s parkland and open space. We must consider the District geographic, economic, and social context as well. As the population continues to age, a focus on safe and walkable destinations may become a priority.

Parks, Open Space and Facilities Inventory The planning team performed a site visit and evaluation for each of the Northfi eld Park District’s park properties to determine the opportunities and/or potential recommendations for improvements. Each site was visited and photographed, and staff provided information on how the park is used and any issues with the site or site amenities. The planning team also gathered aerial photography, acreage, property boundaries and fl oodplain information. Each park was evaluated on the following criteria: • Natural Resources and Environmental Observations • Site Design and Aesthetics • Health, Safety, and Compliance • Users and Context The following pages summarize the inventory for each park. The inventories are grouped by park classifi cation: Neighborhood Parks and Community Parks.

44 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Two 3 Park Inventory Classifi cation Neighborhood Chapter Three: Park Inventory Acres 2.1 Tax Number 04244030010000, 04244050010000, Neighborhood Park Inventory 04244050220000, 04244050080000 Clarkson Park Acquired June 3, 1969 1950 Willow Road (Willow Road & Bristol Street) Quantity Year Built Observations Trails-Multi-Use (miles) Natural Resources and Environmental Observations Trails-Nature(miles) • The park is located in a fl oodplain. Trails-Fitness (stations) • The park does not currently utilize best management practices for storm 2 2004 Restrooms water management. 2 2004 Concessions • Park landscape is composed of turf, mature shade trees, and accent Maintenance landscaping. 2 1997 Picnic Shelter 2 2004 Picnic Area Site Design and Aesthetics 1 2004 Playground • Park includes a playground with 2-5 and 5-12 year composite play Baggo structures, independent play pieces, a tire swing, and four belt and four Basketball tot swings. Park also includes a sand play area with a sand and water table Baseball and scoop. Park includes a sunken turf area on the north that functions as Batting Cages a skating rink during the winter. Bocce • Site furnishings includes picnic tables (21), donor benches, and trash Disc Golf (holes) receptacles. Many of the tables and benches are located on turf. Football • Park includes a community building with restrooms, a drinking fountain, Horseshoes and concession stand. Other structures include a storage shed, wood Roller Hockey gazebo, and a lit picnic shelter that has donor paving and is sponsored by Skate Park the Lions Club. Soccer Softball • The park is well maintained and free of litter. Tennis • Park identifi cation signs are present. Volleyball • Parking is provided along Bristol Street. Fishing Health, Safety, and Compliance Fishing Dock 1 1970 Ice Skating • Park has street frontage on all sides and is highly visible. Swimming Pool • Park has pedestrian-scale lights. Splash Pad • Rules and age appropriate signs are not present. 20 1972 Parking (village owned) Users and Context • Playground is heavily used and receives drop-in users from adjacent residential development. • Park is situated among residential development and is adjacent to Willow Park.

Water 100 Year Floodplain Wetland Floodway Neighborhood Park

46 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Three Willow Road

Park Signage Churchhill Street Churchhill Street Bristol

Lions Club Shelter

Aerial Photo of Clarkson Park 1 inch = 150 feet Storage Shed Feet 08016040 NORTH

Playground

Park Inventory Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 47 Plat of Survey Neighborhood Park

48 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Three Title/Deed

Park Inventory Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 49 2012 OSLAD Master Plan Clarkson Park Detail Plan Existing lodge and patio Graded and smoothed Existing Playground Sand play area New shelter Splash pad lawn area Baggo Plaza k

D e t a i l

P l a Bristol Street Churchill Street Dickens Street n SC S SCALE SCALE: 1”=30’ CAL CALE A AL 1”= : 1”= 1”= ”= ” 30’ 30 3 0’ 0 IDOT sidewalk realignment Paving for extension ADA / signalized pedestrian Drainage adjustment Sand volleyball court Asphalt path 8’ crossing access Existing play environment Existing warming lodge w/ rubber play surfacing New 2-5 age spinner Existing gazebo within ice rink Drainage adjustments planter seatwalls Raised Existing sand play area Splash pad chairs, and umbrellas Patio area with tables, with terrace Picnic shelter (28’x40’), (2) Baggo courts feature New rocks and ropes play

New Willow Road Wagner Road Interpretive nodes with Native plantings Council ring Bird house seating Bird Sanctuary Detail Plan Bird Sanctuary Bird Sanctuary Detail Plan BirdB Sanctuary i r d

S a n c t u a r y

D e t a

i l Road Willow Old

P l River overlook Park materials storage area Drainage Adjustment Outcropping stone steps Pedestrian bridge Drainage Adjustment Vehicular bridge Council Ring SCALE: 1”=30’ SC ALE : 1 ” = 30’ Neighborhood Park

50 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Three Park Inventory Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 51 Classifi cation Neighborhood Fox Meadow Park Acres 9.15 444 Fox Meadow Drive (South Side of Willow Road) Tax Number 0423201045, 0423201047, 0423201046 Observations Acquired 2000 Natural Resources and Environmental Observations • The park is not located in a fl oodplain. • The park does not currently utilize best management practices for storm Quantity Year Built water management. Trails-Multi-Use (miles) • Park landscape is made up of mature shade trees, native grasses and Trails-Nature(miles) wetland plants, and turf. A berm is located on the southwest edge of park. Trails-Fitness (Stations) • Some drainage issues occur on the west edge of the turf area along 2 2002 Restrooms 1 2002 Concessions Waukegan Road. 1 2002 Maintenance Site Design and Aesthetics 1 2002 Picnic Shelter • Park includes a play structure that features a slide, climbing bars, and 1 2002 Picnic Area swing with two belt and two tot seats. Park also includes a large open 1 2002 Playground Baggo turf area that functions as multi-use, soccer, and lacrosse fi elds. Turf area Basketball includes an irrigation system. Baseball • Park includes a wood gazebo structure with a boardwalk that functions Batting Cages as an overlook to the wetland, and a restroom facility with a drinking Bocce fountain and storage. Disc Golf (holes) • Site furnishings include benches, trash receptacles, and movable Football spectator bleachers. Park also includes a lightning detection system. Horseshoes • A chain link fence borders the site on the north and west sides while a Roller Hockey wrought iron fence borders the site on the south. Single family residences Skate Park are separated from the park through various means of fencing and 1 2002 Soccer vegetative buff ers. A gate in the south wrought iron fence provides Softball access to the school. Tennis • The park is well maintained and free of litter. Volleyball • Park identifi cation signs are present; however, the sign is obstructed by Fishing vegetation. Park rules sign is not present; however, signs prohibiting dogs Fishing Dock on the site are present. Ice Skating • Northfi eld entry gateway is located on the northwest corner of park. Swimming Pool • Parking is provided. The lot appears in good condition with minor Splash Pad cracking and wear. Parking islands consist of decomposed granite. 102/2 2002 Parking

Health, Safety, and Compliance • Site has street frontage on both Waukegan and Willow Roads. • Playground appears compliant with ASTM and CPSC standards. • Playground access is non-compliant with ADA accessibility standards and guidelines. • Park does not have security lighting. • Park has an internal path system; however, the accessible route to the gazebo is located far from the ADA parking spaces and restrooms.

Users and Context • The park is situated between heavy commercial development on the north across Willow Road, low density single-family residential development on the east, educational institutions/special use on the south, and medium to high density residential development on the west across Waukegan Road. • The park has pedestrian connections to the east single family residential area; however connections to the north, south, and west are not present. • Park is cooperatively shared with New Trier High School. Water 100 Year Floodplain • Fields and parking lot are maintained by New Trier. Wetlands and playground by Northfi eld Park District. Wetland Floodway Neighborhood Park

52 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Three Willow Road

Playground

Gazebo Overlook S Waukegan Road S Waukegan

Park Signage Aerial Photo of Fox Meadow Park 1 inch = 300 feet Feet 017034085 NORTH

View from soccer fi elds

Park Inventory Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 53 Community Park Inventory Classifi cation Community Acres 22.53 Willow Park Tax Number 04242090140000 401 Wagner Road (Wilow and Wagner Roads) Acquired 1957 Observations OSLAD 2008 Natural Resources and Environmental Observations Quantity Year Built • The park is located in a fl oodplain. .5 2008 Trails-Multi-Use (miles) • The park currently utilizes wetlands and detention areas for stormwater Trails-Nature(miles) and fl ood management. Wetlands and detention areas have exposed 3 2008 Trails-Fitness (Stations) piping for overfl ow. 2 2008 Restrooms • Park landscape is composed of turf and mature shade trees. Concessions 1 2008 Maintenance Site Design and Aesthetics 1 2008 Picnic Shelter • Open street frontage allows for strong presence within neighborhood. Picnic Area • Park includes two baseball fi elds, batting cages, soccer fi elds, and four Playground tennis courts. Park also includes a half-mile looping trail with fi tness Baggo stations and a fi shing station with undermined outcropping stone. Basketball • Site furnishings include benches and trash receptacles. Paths are lined 2 2008 Baseball with granite boulders - a diff erent character than the other two parks. 1 2008 Batting Cages Park also includes an empty pay phone booth. Bocce • The park is well maintained and free of litter. Trash collection area is open Disc Golf (holes) and exposed. Football • Park identifi cation signs are present. Horseshoes • Parking is provided for both the Community Center and park. Parking on Roller Hockey the northwest side of park has permeable paving. Skate Park 2 2008 Soccer Health, Safety, and Compliance 2 2008 Softball • Park does not have security lighting. 4 2008 Tennis • Rules signs are present Volleyball Fishing Users and Context Fishing Dock • Park shares the site with the Middlefork School Ice Skating • School-owned playground receives drop-in users from adjacent Swimming Pool residential development as well as users from the adjacent elementary Splash Pad school and Community Center. • 2000 Parking, west edge • Park is located adjacent to Clarkson Park.

Water 100 Year Floodplain Wetland Floodway Community Park Community

54 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Three Donor Bridge to Open Space

Tennis Courts

Fitness Station Aerial Photo of Willow Park 1 inch = 400 feet Feet 0225450112.5 NORTH

Baseball Field

Park Inventory Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 55 Plat of Survey Community Park Community

56 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Three Title/Deed

Park Inventory Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 57 58 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Three Park Inventory Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 59 60 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Three 2012 OSLAD Master Plan Clarkson Park Detail Plan Existing lodge and patio Graded and smoothed Existing Playground Sand play area New shelter Splash pad lawn area Baggo Plaza k

D e t a i l

New Willow Road Wagner Road Interpretive nodes with Native plantings Council ring Bird house seating Bird Sanctuary Detail Plan Bird Sanctuary Bird Sanctuary Detail Plan BirdB Sanctuary i r d

S a n c t u a r y

D e t a

i l Road Willow Old

P l River overlook Park materials storage area Drainage Adjustment Outcropping stone steps Pedestrian bridge Drainage Adjustment Vehicular bridge Council Ring SCALE: 1”=30’ SC ALE : 1 ” = 30’

Park Inventory Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 61 Chapter Summary Neighborhood: 11.25 Currently, the Northfi eld Park District has 11.25 acres of Neighborhood Parks and Community: 22.53 22.53 acres of Community Parks for a total of 33.78 acres of park space. Total Acreage: 33.78

All parks have restroom and shelter amenities and two parks - Fox Meadow Quantity Year Built and Clarkson have playgrounds. Willow Park is Northfi eld Park District’s major .5 Trails-Multi-Use (miles) sports hub with baseball, soccer, and tennis. Fox Meadow is the main soccer fi eld destination with three soccer fi elds on site. Trails-Nature(miles) 3 Trails-Fitness (Stations) 6 Restrooms 2 Concessions 1 Maintenance 4 Picnic Shelter 4 Picnic Area 2 Playground Baggo Basketball 2 Baseball 1 Batting Cages Bocce Disc Golf (holes) Football Horseshoes Roller Hockey Skate Park 3 Soccer Softball 2 Tennis 4 Volleyball • Fishing Fishing Dock 1 Ice Skating Swimming Pool Splash Pad • Parking Planned Parks

62 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Three 4 Needs Assessment Chapter Four - Needs Assessment Background This chapter summarizes the Park District’s issues and needs at the time of this plan. With this data, the planning team determined park and open space recommendations needed to fulfi ll the goals of the Northfi eld Park District. The issues and needs were identifi ed during various input sessions as well as by analyzing the Level of Service information, service area maps, growth projections, demographic characteristics and national and local trends.

Trends National Trends Understanding park and recreation trends is critical to comprehend the future demands for park and recreation services and amenities and to begin planning for these demands today. Recreation trend reports were compiled from well-known, credible sources to explore what trends were being seen at the national level. Trends in park agency functions, such as responsibilities, staffi ng and volunteers, budgeting, programming, and operations and maintenance are also described.

In 2012, the Sporting Goods Manufacturer’s Association (SGMA), now known as the Sporting & Fitness Industry Association, commissioned a statistically valid survey of over 38,000 Americans to fi nd out what physical activities they participate in - both indoor and outdoor. The report measured participation in 119 sports and activities and weighs the results against a total population of 283,753,000 ages six years and up. The following variables were used: gender, age, income, household size, region, and population density.

According to the survey, the rate of inactivity continues to increase and now sits at 24%, or 68.1 million Americans; however, the survey also reveals that 76% percent of Americans have participated in at least one activity in the last four years. While inactivity fell for those 6-17, it continues to rise for adults. Notably; however, the State of Illinois ranks 10th among the most active states in the nation at 53.6%.

64 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Four 2008 2010 2009 2011

“An outdoor lifestyle must be reinforced as not just an American value, but also as a 6-12 family value.” Outdoor Recreation Participation Report 2012 13-17

18-24

25-34 Age 35-44

45-54

55-64

55+

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Inactivity Rate Categories of participation analyzed in this survey are, in particular, individual sports, racquet sports, team sports, outdoor sports, winter sports, water sports, and fi tness sports. The chart below reveals that while individual, racquet, team, and winter sports have seen a slight decrease, outdoor, water, and fi tness sports have held steady. 2008 2010 2009 2011 70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20% Participation Rate 10%

0% Individual Racquet Team Outdoor Winter Water Fitness Sports

Needs Assessment Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 65 As a nation, most active Americans do not plan to spend money on sports and recreation. Of those who do spend money on sports and recreation, they plan to increase their future spending. Increased spending will likely be seen in lessons, instruction, and camps (24.5%); individual sporting events (23.1%); and team sports at school (22.8%).

In general the SGMA/SFIA Topline Report revealed: • Participation in outdoor sports, like camping and hiking, saw an increase in overall participation, and indoor fi tness sports, like yoga and boot-camp style classes remained the most popular fi tness activity with a participation rate of 60%. • Activities that remain signifi cant opportunities to engage inactive populations are swimming, working out with weights, working out with machines, and biking. These four activities remain the most popular “aspirational sports” for ages 6-45. Aspirational activities are those that respondents show a desire or demand to participate in the following year. • There is an expressed desire to increase the amount of travel done for participation in favorite sports and recreational activities.

The SGMA / SFIA Topline Report revealed that one of the best ways to increase activity and participation later in life is to encourage casual play at the younger ages and in school through Physical Education. The survey points out that an adult who participated in Physical Education while in school is four times more likely to participate in a racquet sport and about three times more likely to participate in team, outdoor, winter and golf. Through the institution of more opportunities for casual play, there is strong correlation that it translates the casual play into a core activity later in life.

In particular, the survey examined the diff erence between Generation X and Generation Y population. Generation Y (born 1980-1999) are twice as likely to take part in team sports then Generation X (born 1965-1979). Although much is explained by the age diff erence, the psychological tendency of Generation Y is more positively disposed to team sports than their Generation X predecessors who are more individual in nature. Generation Y are also more social in their interactions in terms of: • The way they play (gravitating towards team sports) • The way they exercise (including a tendency to participate in group exercise) • The way they communicate (Social Networking, Facebook, Twitter)

Fitness sports remained the most popular physical activity. The participation rate has held steady at 60% over the last 4 years. There are also opportunities to engage the inactive populations. Swimming ranks as a popular “aspirational sport” for inactive participants ages 6 to 12 and 45 and older. Working out with weights and fi tness machines are the top “aspirational sports” for inactive participants ages 13 to 44.

The economy has also had a slight impact on sports and recreation spending. While many active people are still not spending money on sports and recreation, more people spent the same amount or increased spending, rather than spending less.

In order to increase participation, knowing the trends and what various users groups are interested in participating is crucial. Signifi cant changes in specifi c activities (both increases and decreases) over the past 2 years are summarized and listed below. This data in extracted directly from the PAC study, 2012, SGMA Participation Topline Report “Community parks and school playground respond to the most basic human need © 2012 SGMA Research. for natural experiences in the outdoors, contributing to communities’ quality-of-life. “

Illinois Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan 2009-2014

66 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Four Team Sports Over the last 2 years, there has been a slow but steady decrease in team sport participation. These include decreases in baseball, football, softball, and wrestling. Trending growth in the newer more evolving transplant sports like Lacrosse continue to grow at signifi cant rates.

Baseball -6.0% Basketball -1.4% Football (tackle) -11.0% Ice Hockey 5.6% Lacrosse 19.1% Gymnastics 22.1% Softball (Fast Pitch) -3.1% Softball (Slow Pitch) -14.9% Soccer (outdoor) -2.1%

General Fitness Class based fi tness and exercise programs like Zumba continue to drive positive participation performance for these types of fi tness activities. Group cycling continues its rapid growth as the younger fi tness enthusiasts embrace this high performance group exercise activity as well as program variations to attract the beginner participant are developed. For most age groups, swimming for fi tness or weight training are the most 2 frequently mentioned activities that people indicate they would like to participate in.

While Pilates has shown an incredible 10 year growth trend, the past 2 years have seen a decline in participation. Perhaps participation migrated to Yoga, as participation is up across all levels for the year. Yoga is more class based while Pilates is more of an individual activity. The Gen Y fi tness participants are showing a higher propensity to go with group oriented programs. Running and Walking for Fitness continue to show strong and consistent growth. Running is up 17% year/year growth.

Aerobics (High Impact) 23.4% Aerobics (Low Impact) 4.1% Elliptical 14.8% Running/Jogging 17.8% Stationary Cycling (Group) 29.2% Treadmill 5.7% Walking for Fitness 1.7% Abdominal Machine -4.9% Pilates -3.0% Stretching -4.4% Yoga 16.8% Home Gym 1.8% Weight/Resistance Machines 1.2%

Individual Sports Much like the trends for individual fi tness participation, sports are showing signifi cant declines across most levels of participation.

Billiards/Pool -20.0% Golf -5.2% Martial Arts -24.2% Scooter Riding -15.7% Skateboarding -16.7% Trail Running 10.9% Triatholon (Road) 46.9% Table Tennis 1.7% Tennis -4.2%

Needs Assessment Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 67 Outdoor Sports Compared to previous years, outdoors sports and seen a signifi cant increase in participation. BMX has seen the greatest growth with an increase of over 30% in the last two years.

Bicycling – BMX 5.4% Bicycling (Road) 1.8% Fishing (fresh) -4.4% Bow Hunting 7.5%

The Outdoor Foundation, in association with the Outdoor Industry Association, produces an annual report - The Outdoor Recreation Participation Report-- that tracks American outdoor recreation trends with a focus on youth, diversity, and the future of the outdoors. The 2012 report is based on an online survey of over 40,000 Americans, covers 114 diff erent outdoor activities.

According to the report, nearly 50% of Americans, or 141.1 million people, participated in outdoor recreation in 2011. Almost half of all outdoor participants made an outing at least once a week, while 29% made outings two or more times a week. Outdoor recreation reached the highest participation level in fi ve years, adding more than three thousand participants. Charts of the full participation data summarized below can be found in the appendix.

The top fi ve outdoor activities for all Americans, ages 6 and older by number of total outings are: • Running, Jogging, Trail Running • Road Biking, Mountain Biking, and BMX • Bird watching • Freshwater, Saltwater, and Fly Fishing • Hiking

Although more youth ages 6-17 are participating in outdoor activities (one percentage point more per age group from 2010), youth still do not spend enough time outdoors. Forty percent take part in outdoor activities less than twice a month and the average outings per youth participant is down from 98 average outings per year to 81. This suggests youth are not getting the recommended 60 minutes of physical activity every day. The top 5 outdoor activities for American youth, ages 6-17, by number of outings are: • Running, Jogging, and Trail Running • Road Biking, Mountain Biking, and BMX • Skateboarding • Freshwater, Saltwater, and Fly Fishing • Camping

Although young adults made one billion fewer outings than youth--1.6 billion compared to youth’s 2.6 billion-- each participant averaged 16 more annual outings than youth participants (97 compared to youth’s 81). The top 5 outdoor activities for American young adults, ages 18-24, by number of outings are: • Running, Jogging, and Trail Running • Road Biking, Mountain Biking, and BMX • Freshwater, Saltwater, and Fly Fishing • Bird watching/Wildlife Viewing • Hunting

68 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Four The National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) released their 2013 Parks and Recreation Database Report, a report summarizing trend information derived from their online PRORAGIS application. PRORAGIS is a tool designed to assist park and recreation leaders in their need to continually examine and communicate the value of parks to their communities. The report is derived from an online database of information provided by park and recreation professionals about their respective district, departments, or organizations. In all, 383 agencies represent this data.

Based on the information they received over the past three years, the following trends were concluded: • Areas of increased park and recreation agency responsibility include conducting special events, maintaining public jurisdiction areas, and administering community gardens. • Area of decreased park and recreation agency responsibility include managing major aquatic complexes and providing environmental education and natural history programs. • Staffi ng and hiring, while still lower than 2010 numbers, is increasing while volunteer numbers are continuing to decline. • November 2012 saw the largest number of park and recreation capital ballot referendums since 2008. In general, they passed with about 67% of electoral support. This indicates an improved public confi dence in the future economy and their support of park and recreation services. • While attendance at programs, classes, and events is rebounding from past decline, the actual number of program off erings has declined in every major category since 2010.

Needs Assessment Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 69 State of Illinois Recreation Trends and Needs According to the 2009-2014 Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP), while other states in the Midwest, have been experiencing fl at population growth or even loss of population, Illinois has consistently gained residents. Especially in the state’s urban areas, many of these new residents are more ethnically diverse and have diff erent outdoor recreation preferences. Planning must consider their needs. Other segments of the population that will require attention include those with disabilities and lower incomes.

There are more than 1.4 million acres of outdoor recreational land in Illinois ranging from federal and state lands to schools and private commercial lands. City/Village and Park District outdoor recreation lands totals an estimated 146,000 acres, resulting in a supply of 11.35 acres per 1,000 population. Statewide supply of regional recreation is 52.69 acres per 1,000 population, or 216,000 acres. This includes county and state lands.

For the 2009-2014 SCORP, The Illinois Department of Natural Resources conducted a survey that provides a snapshot of the attitudes toward selected outdoor activities within the state. Taken by over 1,500 Illinois residents in both urban and rural areas, the survey shows that most residents participate in some outdoor activities and most believe they are important and should be available, even if they do not participate in them. Key fi ndings of the survey include: • The most popular outdoor activity across the state was pleasure walking, with 83% of respondents participating in the last year. Picnicking, bird watching, swimming, and using a playground were also the most popular activities. The least popular activities included trapping, snowmobiling, cross-country skiing and sailing. • Activities that experienced the most growth in rural counties were fi shing and hunting, while activities that expected growth in urban counties were walking and biking. • Most respondents (35%) indicated the state government was the most important provider of outdoor recreational amenities, followed by local (31%), county (20%), federal (9%), and the private sector (6%). • Most residents reported being satisfi ed with outdoor recreation facilities in the state. Nearly half said the facilities have remained the same as previous years, while about one-third believed they have improved. • Nearly half (43.5%) of respondents indicated activities they would like to start or start doing more often. Indicating Illinois residents are interested in outdoor activities.

Based on outdoor recreational land supply and demand and the information derived from the survey, eight basic principles were developed to help guide the Land and Water Conservation Fun (LWCF) and the Open Space Lands Acquisition and Development (OSLAD) grant evaluation process. These priorities are: • Conservation of Natural Resources • Children in the Outdoors • Greenways and Trails • Revitalized Lands • Water Resources • Special Populations • Healthy Communities • Interagency Cooperation and Coordination

70 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Four Needs Input Phase Community Focus Group Input Public solicitation was prepared inviting community members to take part in one of two focus group discussions about the future of the Northfi eld Park District. Specifi cally we asked: What priorities should be included in the Northfi eld Park District’s 5-year master plan? Each participant was given the opportunity to add 3-5 ideas to the discussion. Participants were then given the opportunity to share any other comments that may not have been represented by the posted ideas. Participants were then asked to vote on their priorities. The results have been listed in raw and summarized form below.

Focus Group #1 Summary:

Focus Group #2 Summary

Needs Assessment Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 71 Community Stakeholder Input Community stakeholders met with the planning team to provide feedback on how they are using Northfi eld’s parks and the improvements they would like to see made in the future.

Stakeholders included participants from: • Village of Northfi eld • Park Board of Commissioners • Chamber of Commerce • Sunset Ridge School District #29 • Northfi eld Parks Foundation • North Suburban Special Recreation Association • Illinois Baseball Academy • Kenilworth-Winnetka Baseball Association • Illinois Girls Lacrosse Association • Northfi eld Community Nursery • Faith Community • Garden Club

Key points from the stakeholder input sessions can be seen below Northfield Park District – Comprehensive Master Plan Stakeholder Interview Key Takeaways

•Considerincreased gymnasiumspace •Provideparentprogram offeringsalignedwith curriculum •Improveconnections Comments withChamberof commerce/businesses Reinforced •Considermoreattention totheriver •Improve/increase •Increaseopengym beforeandafterschool availability •Strengthensharing/ relationships with like programming •Fewerkidsareplaying minded agencies •Considerartificialturf multiplesports •ParkDistrict perception • Fieldconditionsarehigh •Considercommunity is positive quality gardenplots •Providemore passive •Considerpaddletennis •Restoretennistoformer space •Staffare supportive / glory(courts,lights, positive / professional / removebattingcage) positiverelationship •Consideraquatics •Strengthen communication/ Commentswith portrayalofbrand Consensus Comments Repeated

72 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Four Community Input Survey With the help of Leisure Vision, Northfi eld Park District produced a community input survey geared at obtaining an overall look at the community’s perspective and opinion on key district issues. The following tables display the results from key questions in the survey.

Q1. Q1. From the following list of Northfield Park District parks, The majority of respondents (66%) use please check ALL the PARKS you and members of your Clarkson Park, followed by Willow Park household have used during the past year. (61%). 21% of respondents have not by percentage of respondents (multiple choices were accepted) used the parks, or chose not to answer the question. Clarkson Park 66%

Willow Park 61%

Fox Meadow Park 19%

None chosen 21%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

Q2. Q2. Overall, how would you rate the physical condition of ALL The majority of respondents (83%) the Northfield Park District parks you have visited? rated the physical condition of by percentage of all respondents Northfi eld Park District’s parks as excellent or good. Excellent 36%

Don't Know 13%

Fair Poor Good 3% 1% 47%

Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

Needs Assessment Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 73 Q3b. How would you rate the overall quality of our programs in which you or members of your household have participated? by percentage of all respondents who answered “yes” Q3. The majority of respondents (83%) Excellent rated the overall quality of programs 31% of Northfi eld Park District’s parks as excellent or good. This is positive as it suggests residents are pleased with the quality of instructors, locations, and activities of existing programs. This is just slightly lower than the national average of 87%. Don't Know Poor 4% 1% Good 52% Fair 12%

Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

Q4. From the list below, please indicate ALL the reasons you Q4. and members of your household have not participated in For residents who do not participate in programs or do not participate in programs more often. Northfi eld Park District programs, the by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be made) reason chosen most often (22%) was because they use another agency. The Use othe agency 22% other top reasons include the program Program not offered 15% is not off ered, they don’t know what’s Don't know what's offered 15% off ered, or the time of the program Times not convenient 14% is inconvenient. 44% of respondents Lack of programs 10% gave “other” as their reason for not Fees too high 7% participating in park district programs. Waiting list 2% Security Insufficient 0% Poor Customer Service 0% None chosen 17% Other 44% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

74 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Four Q6. From the following list, please check ALL the organizations that you or members of your household have used for indoor Q6. and outdoor recreation activities during the last 12 months. The top two indoor and outdoor by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be made) recreation activity providers for Northfield Park District 42% Northfi eld Park District residents are Private clubs (tennis, swimming, etc.) 36% private clubs and the Northfi eld Park Other Park Districts 33% District Cook County Forest Preserve 29% Sunset Ridge School District 29 21% New Trier High School District 203 19% Faith-based facilities 16% North Shore Senior Center 15% AYSO 12% Private sponsored preschool 10% Private sponsored youth camps 10% New Trier Extension 9% KWBA 5% Trevian Soccer Association 5% Homeowners Association 4% Trevian Softball Association 0% None Chosen 19% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

Q7. For each of the age groups shown below, please indicate Q7. which TWO organizations listed in Question #6 you or your Northfi eld Park District is the top household USE THE MOST for parks and recreation programs choice for programs and services for and services. almost 4% of households with children by percentage of households with children of ages 0-5 ages 0-5. Northfield Park District 6% Private sponsored preschool 4% Other Park Districts 4% Private clubs (tennis, swimming, etc.) 3% AYSO 1% Faith-based facilities 1% Homeowners Association 1% Cook County Forest Preserve 1% Trevian Soccer Association 0% Sunset Ridge School District 29 0% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8%

Top Choice Second Choice

Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

Needs Assessment Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 75 Q7a. For each of the age groups shown below, please indicate which TWO organizations listed in Question #6 you or your household USE THE MOST for parks and recreation programs Q7a. and services. Northfi eld Park District is the fi rst by percentage of households with children of ages 6-12 choice for programs and services for Northfield Park District 7% 5% of households with children ages Sunset Ridge School District 29 5% 6-12. AYSO 5% Other Park Districts 4% Private clubs (tennis, swimming, etc.) 2% Cook County Forest Preserve 2% Trevian Soccer Association 2% Private sponsored preschool 1% Private sponsored youth camps 1% New Trier High School District 203 1% Homeowners Association 0% Faith-based facilities 0% KWBA 0% New Trier Extension 0% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8%

Top Choice Second Choice

Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

Q7b. For each of the age groups shown below, please indicate which TWO organizations listed in Question #6 you or your Q7b. New Trier High School is the top choice household USE THE MOST for parks and recreation programs for programs and services for almost and services. by percentage of households with children of ages 13-17 4% of households with children ages 13-17. Northfi eld Park District is the New Trier High School District 203 6% top choice for 2% of households with Sunset Ridge School District 29 4% children ages 13-17. Northfield Park District 2% Private clubs (tennis, swimming, etc.) 2% Faith-based facilities 1% AYSO 1% Private sponsored youth camps 1% KWBA 1% New Trier Extension 1% Homeowners Association 0% Cook County Forest Preserve 0% Trevian Soccer Association 0% Other Park Districts 0% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8%

Top Choice Second Choice

Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

76 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Four Q7c. For each of the age groups shown below, please indicate which TWO organizations listed in Question #6 you or your Q7c. household USE THE MOST for parks and recreation programs Northfi eld Park District is the top and services. choice for programs and services for by percentage of adulta ages 18-40 almost 5.5% of adults ages 18-40. Private clubs (tennis, swimming, etc.) 6% Private clubs are the top and second Northfield Park District 6% choice for over 6% of adults. Cook County Forest Preserve 5% Other Park Districts 4% New Trier High School District 203 3% Faith-based facilities 1% Sunset Ridge School District 29 1% Trevian Soccer Association 0% New Trier Extension 0% Trevian Softball Association 0% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8%

Top Choice Second Choice

Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

Q7d. For each of the age groups shown below, please indicate Q7d. which TWO organizations listed in Question #6 you or your Northfi eld Park District is the top household USE THE MOST for parks and recreation programs choice for programs and services for and services. households with children ages 0-5. by percentage of adults ages 41 years old and older

Private clubs (tennis, swimming, etc.) 16% Cook County Forest Preserve 15% Northfield Park District 14% Other Park Districts 8% North Shore Senior Center 8% Faith-based facilities 5% Homeowners Association 2% New Trier Extension 2% New Trier High School District 203 2% Sunset Ridge School District 29 1% Trevian Soccer Association 0% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20%

Top Choice Second Choice Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

Needs Assessment Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 77 Q8. Please indicate if YOU or any member of your HOUSEHOLD has a need for each of the parks and recreation facilities listed below. Q8. by percentage of respondents who indicate “yes” Northfi eld Park District residents Walking and biking trails 67% Nature center, nature trails and green space 57% indicated that walking and biking Beach access 49% trails, nature facilities, beach access, Small neighborhood parks 44% Indoor fitness and exercise facilities 41% small neighborhood parks, and indoor Outdoor aquatics facility 36% fi tness are the top fi ve items they Indoor running/walking track 36% Playground equipment 35% need. Outdoor tennis courts 33% Indoor lap lanes for exercise swimming 32% Off-leash dog beach 27% Indoor tennis 24% Youth soccer fields 23% Outdoor basketball courts 22% Paddle Tennis courts 21% Indoor basketball/volleyball courts 21% Outdoor sprayground 20% Outdoor hockey 20% Youth baseball and softball fields 17% Youth football/soccer/lacrosse fields 17% Indoor sports fields (baseball, soccer,etc.) 15% Adult softball fields 5% Other 8% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

Q8a. If YES, please rate if the needs of the following parks and recreation FACILITIES of this type are being met. Q8a. by percentage of all respondents Over 50% of residents indicated their Youth soccer fields 56% 29% 7%2%7% needs are being met by the existing Youth baseball and softball fields 65% 14% 12% 9% soccer, baseball and softball fi elds, Outdoor tennis courts 52% 21% 8% 4%4% 11% Playground equipment 39% 33% 8% 7% 3% 9% outdoor tennis courts, and playground Adult softball fields 33% 25% 17% 8% 17% equipment. Small neighborhood parks 34% 24% 15% 5% 6% 15% Walking and biking trails 33% 20% 23% 7% 5% 12% Indoor basketball/volleyball courts 30% 20% 17% 9% 15% 9% Nature center, nature trails and green space 30% 17% 24% 11% 11% 8% Outdoor hockey 28% 18% 14% 14% 16% 10% Outdoor basketball courts 18% 27% 15% 7% 20% 13% Indoor fitness and exercise facilities 19% 15% 17% 18% 19% 14% Paddle Tennis courts 15% 11% 4%4% 51% 15% Indoor sports fields (baseball, soccer, etc.) 5% 19% 16% 11% 38% 11% Indoor tennis 12% 10% 5% 8% 51% 15% Beach access 15% 2% 14% 7% 49% 13% Outdoor sprayground 6% 10% 20% 10% 45% 10% Indoor running/walking track 9% 7% 12% 9% 54% 9% Off-leash dog beach 9% 5% 9% 9% 54% 15% Outdoor aquatics facility 9% 4% 7% 9% 60% 11% Indoor lap lanes for exercise swimming 6% 6% 6% 8% 64% 10% Other 10% 5%5% 55% 25% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

100% Meets Needs 75% Meets Needs 50% Meets Needs 25% Meets Needs Does Not Meet Needs Don't Know

Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

78 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Four Q9. Top FOUR of the parks/facilities from the list in Question #8 are most important to your household? Q9. by percentage of all respondents Walking and biking trails 44% Walking and biking trails are by far Nature center, nature trails and green space 22% the most important facilities for Outdoor aquatics facility 21% Beach access 19% Northfi eld Park District residents. Indoor fitness and exercise facilities 17% Other important facilities include Small neighborhood parks 17% Playground equipment 16% nature facilities, outdoor aquatics Indoor running/walking track 15% facilities, beach access, indoor fi tness Indoor lap lanes for exercise swimming 13% Youth soccer fields 12% and exercise facilities, and playground Outdoor tennis courts 11% equipment. Off-leash dog beach 11% Indoor tennis 8% Youth baseball and softball fields 6% Outdoor hockey 6% Indoor basketball/volleyball courts 6% Paddle Tennis courts 5% Outdoor sprayground 5% Youth football/soccer/lacrosse fields 4% Outdoor basketball courts 3% Indoor sports fields (baseball, soccer, etc.) 3% Adult softball fields 0% Other 5% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 1st Choice 2nd Choice 3rd Choice 4th Choice Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

Q10. Please indicate if YOU or any member of your HOUSEHOLD has a need for each of the sports and recreation programs listed Q10. below. 46% of households indicated a by percentage of respondents who indicate “yes” need for adult fi tness and wellness Adult fitness and wellness programs 46% programs follow by 40% of households Special events; i.e. concerts, movies, race 40% Adult continuing education programs 27% indicating a need for special events. Nature programs/environmental education 27% Before school programs and programs Youth sports programs 26% Adult programs for 55 years and older 25% for people with disabilities were Golf lessons and leagues 24% Youth summer camp programs 22% ranked as the programs of least need. Youth art, dance, performing arts 22% Tennis lessons and leagues 21% Trips and travel programs 20% Youth Learn to Swim programs 19% Birthday parties 19% Adult sports programs 19% Youth fitness and wellness programs 18% Paddle Tennis lessons and leagues 17% After school programs 16% Adult art, dance, performing arts 15% Programs for teens 13% Preschool programs 12% Programs for people with disabilities 9% Before school programs 8% Other 4% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

Needs Assessment Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 79 Q10a. If YES, please rate if the needs of the following parks and recreation PROGRAMS are being met. by percentage of all respondents Q10a. Youth summer camp programs 39% 20% 14% 9% 13% 5% Northfi eld Park District residents Youth sports programs 27% 27% 17% 9% 8% 12% Birthday parties 31% 22% 16% 12% 6% 12% indicated their needs are being met Preschool programs 29% 13% 13% 16% 16% 13% in terms of youth summer camp Before school programs 21% 11% 5% 26% 26% 11% After school programs 21% 8% 21% 18% 28% 5% programs, youth sports programs, and Special events; i.e. concerts, movies, race 10% 18% 21% 17% 16% 18% birthday parties. Youth fitness and wellness programs 9% 17% 17% 26% 15% 15% Programs for people with disabilities 9% 14% 5% 14% 32% 27% Adult fitness and wellness programs 9% 11% 20% 14% 18% 28% Youth art, dance, performing arts 13% 5% 23% 16% 29% 14% Adult continuing education programs 12% 6% 13% 13% 25% 32% Nature programs/environmental education 12% 6% 22% 12% 23% 26% Adult programs for 55 years and older 11% 5% 8% 10% 29% 37% Youth Learn to Swim programs 10% 4% 6% 8% 61% 10% Golf lessons and leagues 12% 2%10% 18% 38% 21% Trips and travel programs 6% 6% 4% 18% 32% 34% Programs for teens 6%3% 22% 19% 28% 22% Tennis lessons and leagues 6%4% 15% 11% 44% 20% Paddle Tennis lessons and leagues 9% 7% 19% 51% 14% Adult art, dance, performing arts 3%5% 16% 5% 37% 34% Adult sports programs 4%2% 10% 17% 38% 29% Other 11% 44% 44% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

100% Meets Needs 75% Meets Needs 50% Meets Needs 25% Meets Needs Does Not Meet Needs Don't Know

Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

Q11. Top FOUR of the parks/programs from the list in Question #10 are most important to your household? by percentage of all respondents Q11. Adult fitness and wellness programs 29% The most important programs for Special events 21% Adult programs for 55 years and older 20% district residents are adult fi tness and Adult continuing education programs 19% wellness programs, special events, Youth sports programs 16% Youth summer camp programs 14% programs for adults over 55 and Nature programs/environmental education 13% continuing education programs. Adult After school programs 13% Youth Learn to Swim programs 12% fi tness and wellness programs are Golf lessons and leagues 10% noted as the most important programs Youth art, dance, performing arts 10% Tennis lessons and leagues 10% and the programs most residents have Paddle Tennis lessons and leagues 9% a need for (see question 10). From Trips and travel programs 8% Adult art, dance, performing arts 8% question 10a we can also conclude Before school programs 6% these programs are also the programs Preschool programs 6% Programs for teens 4% where resident needs are not being Youth fitness and wellness programs 4% met. Birthday parties 4% Adult sports programs 3% Programs for people with disabilities 3% Other 3% 0% 10% 20% 30% 1st Choice 2nd Choice 3rd Choice 4th Choice Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

80 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Four Q14. Please rate your satisfaction with the following parks and recreation services provided by the Northfield Park District. Q14. by percentage of all respondents (excluding “don’t know”)

Park District residents are most Maintenance of parks 52% 33% 11%2%2% satisfi ed with the maintenance of Quality of outdoor athletic fields 48% 30% 18% 2%2% parks, quality of athletic fi elds, number Number of multi-purpose fields (football, soccer , 41% 32% 23% 4%1% of multipurpose fi elds, and customer Customer assistance by staff at facilities 43% 28% 26% 2% Number of baseball/softball fields 45% 25% 27% 2%1% service Customer assistance by staff over the phone 37% 32% 27% 4%1% Ease of registering for programs 42% 26% 24% 6%1% Rental of parks, gyms, or meeting rooms 37% 24% 34% 2%3% Quality of walking/biking trails 26% 34% 28% 8% 4% User friendliness of website 28% 31% 37% 3%2% Quality of youth programs 26% 31% 28% 13% 3% Other programs; i.e., services, trips and special 22% 32% 33% 9% 4% Fees charged for recreation programs 26% 26% 37% 7% 5% Number of trails 25% 25% 32% 12% 6% Other programs; i.e., services, trips and special 23% 20% 36% 13% 8% Number of nature conservation areas 23% 18% 37% 13% 9% Quality of indoor fitness areas 13% 24% 35% 21% 6% Quality of adult programs 18% 13% 49% 13% 8% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Very Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Neutral Somewhat Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

Q15. Top Three Services that Should Recieve the Most Attention from the Northfield Park District Q15. by percentage of all respondents While residents noted they are pleased Quality of walking/biking trails 23% with the maintenance of parks, Maintenance of parks 22% question 15 indicated they believe Quality of youth programs 17% the park district should continue Number of trails 16% their current maintenance eff orts, as Quality of adult programs 15% Quality of indoor fitness areas 13% maintenance of parks is listed as the Availability of info. about programs and facilities 11% second service overall of those that Number of nature conservation areas 9% should receive the most attention. Other programs 6% Quality of outdoor athletic fields 6% Fees charged for recreation programs 4% Number of multi-purpose fields 3% Rental of parks, gyms, or meeting rooms 3% Ease of registering for programs 3% User friendliness of website 3% Customer assistance by staff over the phone 2% Customer assistance by staff at facilities 2% Number of baseball/softball fields 2% 0% 10% 20% 30% 1st Choice 2nd Choice 3rd Choice Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

Needs Assessment Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 81 Q16. Satisfaction With the Overall Value Your Household Receives from the Northfield Park District. by percentage of all respondents (excluding “don’t know”) Q16. 63% of residents indicated they are somewhat or very satisfi ed with the Very Satisfied overall value they receive from the 27% Northfi eld Park District. This is the same as the national average of 62%. Somewhat Satisfied 36%

Very Dissatisfied 6%

Somewhat Dissatisfied 7%

Neutral 25%

Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

Q17. How supportive would you be of the following improvements to the parks and recreation system in Northfield? Q17. by percentage of all respondents (excluding “don’t know”) Most residents (61%) are in favor of improving existing parks. 57% are in

Improve existing parks 35% 26% 28% 11% favor of improving the community center and 49% are in favor of land Improve Northfield Community Center 31% 26% 31% 13% acquisition for park space.

Purchase land or open space for recreational use 29% 19% 31% 21%

Availability of open gym time 21% 19% 46% 14%

Improve parking lot at Northfield Community Center 19% 22% 37% 22%

Install synthetic turf athletic fields 6% 9% 33% 53%

Other 45% 1% 45% 9%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Very Supportive Somewhat Supportive Not Sure Not Supportive

Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

82 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Four Q18. Which TWO of the following actions would you be most willing to fund with your Park District tax dollars? Q18. by percentage of all households Similar to question 17, this question indicated residents are in favor of Improve existing parks 34% improving existing parks and the community center and would be Improve the Community Center 27% willing to fund these improvements with their tax dollars. Residents are Purchase land or open space for recreational use 26% not; however, interested in installing a synthetic turf fi eld at this time. Improve parking lot at the Community Center 14%

Availability of open gym time 10%

Install synthetic turf athletic fields 4%

Other 10%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Top Choice Second Choice

Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

Q19. Approximately 3.3% of your property taxes go toward the Northfield Park District. Do you think this amount is: Q19. by percentage of all respondents Most residents (73%) believe their 3.3% tax rate is reasonable. Too High 12%

Don't Know 7%

Too Low 8%

Reasonable 73%

Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

Needs Assessment Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 83 Q20. How willing would you be to pay some increase in taxes to fund the types of parks, trails, recreation, and sports facilities that are most important to you and your household? Q20. by percentage of all respondents Most residents (67%) are either unsure or not willing to pay an increase in Somewhat Willing Very Willing taxes. 26% 7%

Not Willing 37%

Not Sure 30%

Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

Q21. Have you used the online registration system? by percentage of all respondents Q21. Only 24% of residents use the online registration system. From this question we can conclude that there may be Yes 24% issues with the online registration system or awareness of the system that the District must resolve in order to increase usership.

Don't Know 2%

No 74%

Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (May 2013)

84 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Four Recreation Programs Assessment Introduction This assessment includes an analysis of the Northfi eld Park District’s program and service off erings. The report off ers a detailed perspective of recreation programs and events and helps to identify the strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities for future program direction. It also assists in identifying core programs, program gaps within the community, and future program off erings for residents based on community input and trends.

Program fi ndings were based on comments from the statistically valid Community Survey results, public input process, a review of program information, program assessment worksheets completed by staff , and interviews and meetings with the staff . In addition, marketing materials such as the Program Guide and the Website were reviewed.

The content of this section is organized as follows: • 2013 Community Survey results relating to programs • Current Program Assessment • Future Programs • Marketing Approaches and Program Guide • Registration Trends

Survey Results Relating to Recreation Programs As part of the Comprehensive Parks and Recreation Master Plan, a Community Survey was developed and administered by Leisure Vision. The survey has signifi cant relevancy to recreation program off erings and future positioning and marketing of programs. Leisure Vision has compiled a national and Illinois database of survey results. The database is referenced in several result areas for Northfi eld.

Some of the highlights of the 2013 Community Survey included: • Thirty-one percent of households participated in recreation programs during the last year. This is just under Leisure Vision’s national database of 34% of households that participate in programs. The Illinois benchmark is 39%. • Of those households participating, 72% participated in more than one program, which is much higher than the national database of 53%. • In assessing how households fi nd out about programs and services, the program guide is the most relied upon, as 76% of households fi nd out about activities from the program guide and 32% from the Website. The Illinois benchmark for awareness in the agency program guide is 78%, Website 25%. • In assessing why households do not participate, the top three reasons include: use other agencies, programs are not off ered, and do not know what programs are off ered. • Eighty-three percent of households feel program quality is either excellent or good. This is slightly under the national average of 87% satisfaction. • The satisfaction with overall value off ered by the Park District (those households expressing somewhat or very satisfi ed) is 63%. The national average for satisfaction toward value is 62%. This is an area for identifying ways to provide more information about value of services in Northfi eld. • For all households surveyed, the Northfi eld Park District is the number one provider of recreation services as 42% of households have used indoor and outdoor recreation activities during the last 12 months. The second most frequent response was 36% of households use of private clubs for their recreation needs.

Needs Assessment Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 85 □ Many households have an unmet need in a variety of program areas (defi ned as a household’s need being met by 50% or less). The three program areas with the greatest unmet need are: youth learn to swim, tennis, and paddle tennis. This does not suggest the Northfi eld Park District is solely responsible for fulfi lling the need, as it isn’t feasible for a district the size of Northfi eld to be able to satisfy all needs. Partnering is critically important as a result. As an example, the District is now partnering with the Winnetka Park District for paddle tennis lessons and leagues.

Analyzing these results will help provide suggestions for future programming and/ or how to improve upon current program off erings. Realizing who is using services and the reasons why they may not, will also provide invaluable leads to marketing strategies as well as service placement. References to the survey results are noted throughout the following sections of the Assessment.

Current Program Assessment The Northfi eld Park District staff members were asked to complete program assessments that included detailed information for a variety of program areas. The assessments requested information about market segments by age group, program description, pricing mechanisms, fi nancial and performance measures, and information about similar providers of services. The staff also went through an interview process regarding questions about their recreation programs. The following section includes general comments about individual core programs, the assessments and interviews.

Program Guide The program off erings in the Program Guide represent a variety of activities. Only youth athletics and youth general program off er a number of programs.

The lifecycle analysis suggests the need to target the programs that are in the decline stage, thus repositioning or deleting them. A number of the programs in the decline stage are age specifi c. Researching grade school population statistics will assist in repositioning those programs to be off ered in the future.

During the last three years, program registrations have shown a decline of 10.6%: 2010: 2,471 2011: 2,302 2012: 2,208

Participation in all but fi tness programming has decreased over the past three years. Fitness memberships have been consistent and personal training participation increased 108% in 2012 from 2011.

Adults/Seniors During the recreation program interview session it was noted that seniors are either choosing to attend the North Shore Senior Center or getting too old. This is consistent with current national trends of decreasing senior and adult participation among programs. In the last fi ve years, adults are now working longer, spending is more conservative and there are additional less expensive opportunities from competitors for recreation. There is no need to duplicate services with the North Shore Senior Center, but there may be opportunities for the District to expand partnering opportunities with the Center, particularly in the area of younger seniors, in the active adult group of individuals in their 50’s and 60’s (or some individuals beyond 60’s that remain physically active).

86 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Four A possible solution to increase participation of active adults is to create a task force, or launch group, with residents to help determine program ideas while creating a community connection. Trends and applications in lifestyle programming for active adults include several areas of interest. Findings are categorized in six dimensions of human wellness that infl uence optimal health, well-being and quality of life. These program areas include: 1) Physical, 2) Social, 3) Intellectual/Creative, 4) Emotional, 5) Vocational and 6) Environmental. Active adults are vitally interested in the social program area, which can include walking and biking clubs. The adult/senior program area already has mostly fi tness related programs being off ered. Fitness programs continue to be a nationwide trend. Increasing off erings for fi tness programs is recommended due to recent personal training successes and the ability to reach all age groups.

Another fresh trend is a Website named “meetup.com.” The concept for meetup.com is for individuals to search already formed special-interest groups that “meet up” in the area that is searched. There are currently several groups within a fi ve-mile radius of the Northfi eld/Winnetka area. Utilizing this Website may be a tool to build adult programming or increase rental opportunities at the Northfi eld Park District. Another growing area for active adults is sports leagues for 45+, 55+ and older. It was noted by staff that fi elds are not large enough for adult leagues; however, the sizes of the fi elds may be suitable for active adults and neighboring park districts may want to partner to off er this activity.

According to the 2013 Community Survey question related to household need for various programs, households that have a need for sports and recreation programming, adult fi tness and wellness programs, adult continuing education and adult programs for 55 years and older were among the top six highest frequency of response.

Camp Summer Camp is a popular program for the community of Northfi eld. Camp programs are off ered for ages three through ninth grade. Half day and full day options are available and participants can choose from one to eight weeks of summer fun. There is an extended camp for a ninth week in August. According to fi nancial reports, over the past three years, revenue has increased while expenses have decreased.

For 2013, the separate Summer Camp Program Guide advertises staff has revamped all of their summer camps to off er the camper more options, more fl exibility and a more enjoyable summer. With participation on a slight decline, implementing change to an existing successful program is a great way to show commitment to the growth of a popular service. An option to build participation and revenue is to off er a before camp and/or after camp option for parents who want or need an extended day for their children.

In reviewing the Registration Policies page in the Summer Camp Program Guide, the amount of dates, deadlines and fees can be confusing and a potential deterrent for new users who are unsure of services needed for the summer.

According to the 2013 Community Survey question relating to household need for programs, 22% of households have a need for youth summer camp programs. Of the 22%, 39% stated that youth summer camp programs meet their needs 100%. Youth summer camp programs are rated number one in the program area that has the highest percentage of need being met.

Needs Assessment Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 87 Fitness Fitness and wellness tends to be the most popular type of program across the United States. The age range in fi tness programming at Northfi eld Park District is 18 to 65-plus with most programs geared towards adults aged 45-64. According to annual registration totals, personal training sessions in 2012 had the largest increase in registration from the previous year of any core program area. Fitness Center memberships have remained consistent, as well. Fitness and wellness programming continue to be a nationwide trend not only for adults, but also children. A wellness program for children is an area for potential growth. There are an increasing number of grant opportunities to assist in programming to help youth become more physically fi t.

Increasing off erings in fi tness and wellness is recommended due to recent registration successes, multiple age segments that are targeted, and revenue opportunities.

According to the 2013 Community Survey, 16% of households have used the Northfi eld Community Center Fitness Center. Among the 16% of households, 58% reported the overall quality of the Fitness Center to be in excellent or good condition. Northfi eld Park District is the number one (42%) provider for indoor and outdoor recreation activities in the last twelve months. Private clubs is rated second at 36%. Since there is a large percentage of the community who belongs to private clubs, more than likely they are receiving fi tness activities included in their membership.

Rentals Rental revenue, including ball fi elds, has increased 25.1% since 2010. During the Recreation Program Interview Questions, it was noted rental rates have increased due to market research by staff . Also, ball fi elds are in demand with out of town travel teams requesting time. Other than seasonal outdoor sports fi elds/courts and picnic shelters, most rental spaces are available to users of all ages during the year, including gym space, multi-purpose room, board room, a lodge and a pavilion.

According to the 2013 Community Survey 61% of respondents are somewhat or very satisfi ed with the rental of parks, gyms or meeting rooms.

Special Events According to staff , special events are a staple in the Northfi eld community with 65% of them being tax-supported. Events make up about one-quarter of all programs off ered by the Northfi eld Park District. One major event, for all ages, is planned for each season including Northfi eld State Fair in the fall, Winter Carnival, Egg-Stravaganza in the spring and Fourth of July Parade in the summer. Smaller events are off ered during the year, as well. Other than the Fourth of July Celebration, staff remarked the other main events are either in the mature or decline stages. Financial results of Special Events for the last two year are:

2011 Special Events Revenue: $26,307 2011 Special Events Expenses: $44,823 2012 Special Events Revenue: $27,050 2012 Special Events Expenses: $48,262 These numbers show a cost recovery of 59% in 2011 and 56% in 2012, which is similar to other park district special event programs, as the cost of managing events typically exceeds the amount of revenue generated. There is a signifi cant diff erence between the total revenue and expense totals for events as the accounting for the Golf Chamber Outing was recorded diff erently between the two years.

88 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Four During the Recreation Program Interview session, staff commented the Halloween event had become stagnant and changes were made to enhance the event. The recommendation for staff is to do the same for the State Fair, Winter Carnival and Egg-Stravaganza. Special events are an important off ering for the community. Implementing changes and enhancements to events are a way show commitment to a popular service and to build trust from the community.

If events are becoming routine and static, forming a task force of residents/staff for community events is a great way to create new ideas. As mentioned earlier, 40% of households have a need for special events. Of the 40%, only 28% of all respondents surveyed stated special events meet their needs 75% or greater.

Youth Athletics Youth athletic programs make up 39.5% of all programs off ered by the Northfi eld Park District and are off ered to participants aged three through eighth grade. Sports programming has generally been popular, however, has continued to decline for the past two years according to staff . Reviewing the program assessment worksheet, 36% of youth athletic programs are in the decline stages. It was commented by staff that second and third grade athletics have decreased.

During the youth league season, not-for-profi ts groups AYSO soccer and the Kenilworth/Winnetka Baseball Association (KWBA) off er leagues for the Northfi eld youth. The Trevian Soccer Association is a private soccer provider that has contributed funds, along with KWBA, to the Willow Park renovation project. In return these groups receive contracted timeslots for fi eld use. During the summer only one sports program will be off ered for 2013.

Looking at the winter Program Guide, youth lacrosse is heavily marketed. Staff stated lacrosse groups are growing and are going to more elite groups. Northfi eld works with surrounding park districts to off er lacrosse as Northfi eld would not have enough participation on its own.

According to the 2013 Community Survey question ten, 26% of households have a need for youth sports programs. Youth sports programs are among the top fi ve. Of the 26% of households, 54% of them have their needs being met at least 75% or greater. By percentage of all respondents 27% are ages 19 and under. This correlates to a continued need for youth programming.

Youth General Youth General Programs make up 20.2% of programs off ered. Programs are geared towards the preschool through middle school age segment. These programs are only off ered during the fall, winter and spring months. Birthday Parties and Open Gym are off ered year-round. Staff commented that off ering too many programs causes competition among participation. Enrichment or specialty programs are generally diffi cult programs to operate with minimal participation. If programs are cancelled due to low enrollment, generating additional cooperative agreements with surrounding park districts is a way to gain revenue while increasing program off erings to the community at in-district rates.

Registrations had increased in 2011 (403) and decreased in 2012 (309). This registration total in 2012 was less than 2010 (339). Reviewing the program assessment worksheet, most Youth General programs are in the growth stage. Staff did mention recently enrichment program participation is going great.

According to the 2013 Community Survey relating to program need, 22% of households have a need for youth general programs that includes art, dance and performing arts. Nineteen percent have a need for birthday parties. Of the 19% that have a need for birthday parties, 53% have their needs being met 75% or greater.

Needs Assessment Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 89 Recreation Program Best Practices A key to developing consistent services is the use of service and program standards. Several program standards have been put in place, however the majority of these standards deal with the certifi cation of instructors.

Having standards provides a more consistent service environment. As program growth continues, and as staff time permits, additional standards can be put into place throughout the entire recreation program system, such as customer requirements, instructor standards, and program consistency.

In addition to standards, eff orts should be made to develop a listing of key customer requirements for core program/membership areas. Key customer requirements are defi ned as those areas of the program purchasing process that are most important to registrants. For example, an adult softball player’s key requirements may include: cost of the league, quality of athletic fi eld maintenance, cleanliness of restrooms, quality of the umpires, game times and location of the facility. Identifying key requirements is vitally important for staff to deliver well in the items most important to the customer.

Key requirements should be identifi ed by customers and can be included as part of an importance/performance matrix. This determines how important a requirement is to the customer and how the Northfi eld Park District is performing.

Program registration reports should be reviewed by core program or facility area and set up as cost centers in order to determine overall expense and revenue for the key areas. These reports should be done on a quarterly basis and condensed to a higher level of detail.

Some areas closely track fi nancial performance, while others do not. A robust measurement system generally includes a more comprehensive set of measures, including: • Program capacity rate (ratio of total maximum enrollments for number of spots fi lled) • Number of programs per age segment • Customer satisfaction toward the registration system • Facility utilization rate • Program success rate (or cancellation rate) • Cost recovery rates by core program area • Number of new programs off ered annually • Household percentage of program participation • Percent of programs in introduction and growth stage • Market penetration by age group • Customer retention, repurchase intent, and referral

Future Program Ideas During the Master Plan public input process, several residents mentioned having the need to travel to other communities to fulfi ll their recreation needs. While large systems can off er a multitude of programs, smaller communities have diffi culty getting suffi cient numbers of participants in more specialized program areas such as youth performing arts. Furthermore, the current design of Community Center program spaces is not ideally suited for additional program off erings.

The District is in a challenging position in making determinations about program off erings, given the small population base. The District cannot aff ord to be all things to all people, and it cannot be successful off ering many programs that do not attract suffi cient registration numbers. Residents desiring a specifi c program may not understand why the District does not off er a program area that other larger districts off er.

90 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Four It may be helpful to have a paragraph of information in the program guide that emphasizes the District’s eff orts in desiring to fulfi ll community need, but the limitations of off ering more programs that do not have a suffi cient level of interest. Emphasizing partnerships with other agencies and spotlighting those relationships in the program guide may also be valuable. The Community Survey results will also assist in the development of quantitative information that reinforces why the District off ers the programs it does.

The Recreation Program Assessment process included an interview session with representatives from the Glencoe and Winnetka park districts and the Alliance for Early Childhood. The park districts work collaboratively in program areas such as teens, lacrosse, and adult programming. The recommendation is to continue this approach. One specifi c area for collaborative expansion may be the addition of active adult and senior athletic leagues and programs, in order to gain a greater number of participants. This was mentioned as a desire by Winnetka. Though only 19% of households in Northfi eld have a need for adult sports programming, this number will increase as the population ages.

There may be an opportunity for shared web platform with these districts in which residents can sign up for programs off ered by other districts. There is an example of a consortium of agencies in the Seattle area that have a shared Web platform. Another opportunity is to have a programming workshop with the other districts on an annual basis and identify market areas for each district, identifying core program areas of each district, programs that have demand that exceeds individual agencies ability to off er the program. A program that comes to mind is youth performing arts. There may not be suffi cient demand for each district to off er these types of programs. However, if one district specializes in the off ering for all the neighboring districts, there may be greater success in the program’s viability. This is also true for the North Shore Senior Center. Neighboring park districts may be able to focus on sports and fi tness activities for more active adults.

According to the 2013 Community Survey, 46% of residents of Northfi eld Park District have a need for adult fi tness and wellness programs. Special events followed second at 40%, followed by adult continuing education programs at 27%, nature programs/ environmental education at 27% and youth sports programs round out the top fi ve at 26%. These survey results shall direct Park District staff for future programming ideas.

The following information includes a listing of all of the programs in the Community Survey related to recreation program household need. The table shows a ranking of programs according to three variables: • Q10 Respondent Households that have a need for various sports and recreation programs • Q10a Estimated Number of Households whose needs for sports and recreation programs is being met by 50% or less • Q11 Sports and recreation programs most important to households

The programs have percentages of program rankings listed relative to each other. Their total rankings are then listed in the far right column to designate the level of importance and priority for individual programs. The rankings refl ect the percentage of household need, the percent of need that is unmet, and the importance of the program to the household.

The following chart shows recreation program priorities based on the Community Survey results. The chart shows the relative ranking of three of the survey questions: 1) the identifi ed household need (percent of households that have a need for a programs), 2) how well the need is being met (percent of households whose need is being met 50% or less and 3) the importance of the program to the household.

Needs Assessment Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 91 g Based on 253 households Key: High Priority Medium Priority Low Priority

2013 North eld Household Survey Total Q10 Q10a. Q10a. Q11 Rank Program Q10% Rank Number Rank Q11% Rank Score

Adult tness and wellness programs 46% 1 52% 15 29% 1 17 Special Events 40% 2 54% 13 21% 2 17 Nature programs/environmental education 27% 3 57% 11 13% 7 21 Adult continuing education programs 27% 3 51% 16 19% 4 23 Youth learn to swim programs 19% 12 75% 2 12% 9 23 Tennis lessons and leagues 21% 10 70% 3 10% 10 23 Youth art, dance, performing arts 22% 8 68% 6 10% 10 24 Golf lessons and leagues 24% 7 64% 8 10% 10 25 Adult Programs for 55 years and older 25% 6 47% 18 20% 3 27 After school programs 16% 17 69% 4 13% 7 28 Paddle Tenn is lessons and leagues 17% 16 77% 1 9% 13 30 Youth Sports programs 26% 5 34% 21 16% 5 31 Youth summer camp programs 22% 8 36% 20 14% 6 34 Trips and travel programs 20% 11 54% 13 8% 14 38 Adult sports programs 19% 12 65% 7 3% 21 40 Adult art, dance, performing arts 15% 18 58% 9 8% 14 41 Programs for teens 13% 19 69% 4 4% 18 41 Youth tness and wellness programs 18% 15 58% 9 4% 18 42 Before school programs 8% 22 57% 11 6% 16 49 Birthday parties 19% 12 34% 21 4% 18 51 Preschool programs 12% 20 45% 19 6% 16 55 Programs for people with disabilities 9% 21 51% 16 3% 21 58

Q10 Respondent Households that have a need for various Sports and Recreation Programs

Q10a. Estimated Number of Households in the North eld Whose Needs for Sports and Recreation Programs are only being 50% met or less

Q 11 Sports and Recreation Programs that are Most Important to Respondent Households

As can be seen by the information on the spreadsheet, program area priorities for the future include: adult fi tness and wellness, special events, nature programs, adult continuing education, youth learn to swim, tennis lessons and leagues, and youth arts, performing arts, and dance. These programs have a combination of the greatest household need, the greatest percentage of unmet need, and the highest level of importance to families. While programs for people with disabilities ranked low, this is a result of a much smaller household need for the program area. It is not suggesting this program area is unimportant. Reiterating a previous comment, the District is not realistically able to fulfi ll the household needs for all program areas. Therefore, partnering opportunities are vitally important to continue.

92 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Four Marketing Approaches and Program Guide Websites are becoming progressively more important as a marketing tool and identifi cation of brand, image, mission and vision. Staff commented that the look of the Website has recently been updated. This update may have helped increase traffi c and online registrations. The 2013 Community Survey reported 32% of households learn about the Park District from the website. The Program Guide is the number one way the community learns about the Park District at 76%

Although the basic information is presented and the site user friendly, there are opportunities for improvement. Once the Program Guide has been mailed, the Website is the second best option as a marketing tool. Technology has given us endless opportunities to promote agencies. A process should be put into place to constantly assess the Website, at least on an annual basis, as this is the fi rst introduction of the Park District to new residents and potential users. An assessment should include a review of the following items: • Accessibility • Content • Customer Usage • Internal Support • Maintainability

The assessment should also include external customer feedback, commonly through focus groups. In addition to full-time and part-time staff , contractual instructors should review the site and provide feedback and suggestions for areas of improvements.

Program guides are typically the most important marketing technique used by park and recreation agencies. According to national information, 53% of residents in communities across the country fi nd out about programs from their guides. For Northfi eld residents it is 76%. Creating a virtual or fl ipbook style guide online, other than the pdf version, would be more visually appealing and easier to read. These types are also more easily available to read on smart phones and tablets. Creating links directly on the virtual style guide where a customer can click and it takes them directly to the online site would help increase online registration.

Registration Trends Participation in all but fi tness programming has decreased over the past three years. Fitness memberships have and been consistent and personal training participation increased 108% in 2012 from 2011. Staff commented sports programs have had decreasing participation recently, specifi cally second and third grade athletics. Another reason for the decline is affi liate groups have lowered the age requirement for participation. Teen programs and senior participation is also declining.

Results from the Community Survey shows that 69% of respondents have not participated in any recreation programs in the past twelve months. When asked what are the reasons as to why they have not participated, “other” was selected the highest at 44%. These reasons include mostly their kids have grown, not interested, or no time. Although it may be diffi cult to capture this audience, continuing to communicate the benefi ts of recreation is important, particularly health, wellness and fi tness. Respondents also stated the usage of private clubs for their recreation needs, which is common in an affl uent community.

Needs Assessment Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 93 Park Facility Needs A critical part of the planning process to understand both the park land holdings of a park district as well as the facilities each park has to off er. Comparing this information with national, state, and local participation trends helps paint a better picture of how the Park District compares to its context as well as how they are responding to the local needs and expectations of the district’s residents.

The table to the right was derived from the Illinois Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP). It compares the estimated supply of recreational amenities provided within the state of Illinois to the number of amenities provided by the Northfi eld Park District on a 1,000 population basis for the existing population of the District. The Illinois Department of Natural Resources uses this table to evaluate and prioritize grant funding assistance based upon how the District compares to the state and national averages, as well as how the District responds to the eight priorities described in the 2009-2014 Illinois Statewide Comprehensive Recreation Plan. The National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA) has also established standards for facilities per 1,000 population that are illustrated in the last two columns of the table.

Facility Comparison - Existing Parks and Population The line items highlighted in the red boxes are amenities the Northfi eld Park District is defi cient in compared to the state and/or national averages. Items in the green boxes meet or exceed the state or national averages. These are items the IDNR will prioritize for grant funding. This table is based on the current 2012 population of 4,290.

According to this table, the Northfi eld Park District is defi cient in the listed recreation facilities not including: • Picnic Shelters • Playgrounds • Tennis Courts • Baseball Fields • Softball Fields • Soccer Fields • Ice Rinks

This chart, along with the needs assessment, market potential, and community opinion may help display strong support for amenities in a master plan and grant application.

94 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Four Facility Needs Assessment

Population: 4,290

Northfield Park District Illinois Facility Average NRPA Standards Existing # Existing # of IL Average # of Total # of NRPA # of NRPA # of Total # of of Facilities Facilities per 1000 Facilities per 1000 Facilities needed facilities per Facilities per 1000 Facilities needed population population to meet IL capita population to meet NRPA Average Standards WATER BASED FACILITIES Fishing Pier/ Docks / Access 0.00 0.41 1.8 0.0 Boat Launch Ramps / Access 0.00 0.12 0.5 0.0 Marina Slips 0.00 0.27 1.2 0.0 Swimming Pools 0.00 0.03 0.1 1 per 20,000 0.05 0.2 Swimming Beaches (linear ft.) 0.00 16.94 72.7 0.0 HUNTING FACILITIES Public Hunting Allowed (acres) 0.00 54.18 232.4 0.0 Water Fowl Blinds 0.00 0.23 1.0 0.0 OVERNIGHT FACILITIES Developed Campsites (full/partial) 0.00 5.32 22.8 0.0 Primitive Campsites 0.00 0.94 4.0 0.0 Equestrian Campsites 0.00 0.15 0.6 0.0 Cabins 0.00 0.31 1.3 0.0 Lodges 1 0.23 0.06 0.3 0.0 TRAILS Multi--Use Trails (Miles) 0.5 0.12 0.16 0.7 0.0 Hiking Trails 0.00 0.46 2.0 0.0 Bicycle Trails 0.00 0.10 0.4 0.0 Horseback Trails 0.00 0.19 0.8 0.0 Physical Fitness Trails (Stations) 0.00 0.22 0.9 0.0 Nature/Interpretive Trails (Miles) 0.00 0.05 0.2 0.0 Off-road Vehicle Trails 0.00 0.01 0.0 0.0 Cross-Country Trails 0.00 0.40 1.7 0.0 Snowmobile Trails 0.00 0.11 0.5 0.0 DAY USE FACILITIES Picnic Shelters 4 0.93 0.21 0.9 0.0 Picnic Tables 0.00 12.12 52.0 0.0 Playgrounds 2 0.47 0.40 1.7 0.0 Interpretive Centers 0.00 0.01 0.0 0.0 SPORT COURTS & FIELDS Tennis Courts 4 0.93 0.49 2.1 1 per 2,000 0.50 2.1 Basketball Courts 0.00 0.25 1.1 1 per 5,000 0.20 0.9 Volleyball Courts 0.00 0.17 0.7 1 per 5,000 0.20 0.9 Baseball Fields 2 0.47 0.26 1.1 1 per 5,000 0.20 0.9 Softball Fields 2 0.47 0.14 0.6 1 per 5,000 0.20 0.9 Football Fields 0.00 0.05 0.2 1 per 20,000 0.05 0.2 Soccer Fields 3 0.70 0.18 0.8 1 per 10,000 0.10 0.4 Golf Courses (Holes) 0.00 0.01 0.0 18 per 50,000 0.36 1.5 Archery Ranges 0.00 0.02 0.1 1 per 50,000 0.02 0.1 Rifle Pistol Ranges 0.00 0.01 0.0 0.0 Running Tracks 0.00 0.05 0.2 1 per 20,000 0.05 0.2 Ice Rinks 1 0.23 0.04 0.2 0.0 Horseshoe Pits 0.00 0.24 1.0 1 per 5,000 0.0 Bocce Court 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 Shuffleboard courts 0.00 0.05 0.2 1 per 5,000 0.0 Canoe only access areas 0.00 0.04 0.2 1 per 5,000 0.0 Ski Trails 0.00 0.18 0.8 1 per 5,000 0.0 Dog Parks 0.00 0.01 0.0 1 per 5,000 0.0 Frisbee Golf 0.00 0.01 0.0 1 per 5,000 0.0 Skate Park 0.00 0.02 0.1 1 per 5,000 0.0 Spray Grounds 0.00 0.03 0.1 1 per 5,000 0.0 Badminton 0.00 1 per 5,000 0.20 0.9 Handball 0.00 1 per 20,000 0.05 0.2 Combo Skeet/Trap Field 8 stations 0.00 1 per 50,000 0.02 0.1 Field Hockey 0.00 1 per 20,000 0.05 0.2 Golf Driving Range 0.00 1 per 50,000 0.02 0.1 Multiple Use Court 0.00 1 per 10,000 0.10 0.4 Ice Hockey (Indoor) 0.00 1 per 100,000 0.01 0.0

Needs Assessment Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 95 Facility Comparison - Projected Population As indicated in the table to the right, as population increases and additional parks develop, it is important that the parks provide facilities for active recreation. The line items highlighted in green are amenities the Park District will be defi cient in compared with state and/or national averages. This is based off the projected population of 4,454.

According to this table, the Northfi eld Park Distric is defi cient in the listed recreation facilities not including: • Picnic Shelters • Playgrounds • Tennis Courts • Baseball Fields • Softball Fields • Soccer Fields • Ice Rinks

96 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Four Facility Needs Assessment - Projected

Population: 4,454

Northfield Park District Illinois Facility Average NRPA Standards Existing # Existing # of IL Average # of Total # of NRPA # of NRPA # of Total # of of Facilities Facilities per 1000 Facilities per 1000 Facilities needed facilities per Facilities per 1000 Facilities needed population population to meet IL capita population to meet NRPA Average Standards WATER BASED FACILITIES Fishing Pier/ Docks / Access 0.00 0.41 1.8 0.0 Boat Launch Ramps / Access 0.00 0.12 0.5 0.0 Marina Slips 0.00 0.27 1.2 0.0 Swimming Pools 0.00 0.03 0.1 1 per 20,000 0.05 0.2 Swimming Beaches (linear ft.) 0.00 16.94 75.5 0.0 HUNTING FACILITIES Public Hunting Allowed (acres) 0.00 54.18 241.3 0.0 Water Fowl Blinds 0.00 0.23 1.0 0.0 OVERNIGHT FACILITIES Developed Campsites (full/partial) 0.00 5.32 23.7 0.0 Primitive Campsites 0.00 0.94 4.2 0.0 Equestrian Campsites 0.00 0.15 0.7 0.0 Cabins 0.00 0.31 1.4 0.0 Lodges 1 0.22 0.06 0.3 0.0 TRAILS Multi--Use Trails (Miles) 0.5 0.11 0.16 0.7 0.0 Hiking Trails 0.00 0.46 2.0 0.0 Bicycle Trails 0.00 0.10 0.5 0.0 Horseback Trails 0.00 0.19 0.8 0.0 Physical Fitness Trails (Stations) 0.00 0.22 1.0 0.0 Nature/Interpretive Trails (Miles) 0.00 0.05 0.2 0.0 Off-road Vehicle Trails 0.00 0.01 0.0 0.0 Cross-Country Trails 0.00 0.40 1.8 0.0 Snowmobile Trails 0.00 0.11 0.5 0.0 DAY USE FACILITIES Picnic Shelters 4 0.90 0.21 0.9 0.0 Picnic Tables 0.00 12.12 54.0 0.0 Playgrounds 2 0.45 0.40 1.8 0.0 Interpretive Centers 0.00 0.01 0.0 0.0 SPORT COURTS & FIELDS Tennis Courts 4 0.90 0.49 2.2 1 per 2,000 0.50 2.2 Basketball Courts 0.00 0.25 1.1 1 per 5,000 0.20 0.9 Volleyball Courts 0.00 0.17 0.8 1 per 5,000 0.20 0.9 Baseball Fields 2 0.45 0.26 1.1 1 per 5,000 0.20 0.9 Softball Fields 2 0.45 0.14 0.6 1 per 5,000 0.20 0.9 Football Fields 0.00 0.05 0.2 1 per 20,000 0.05 0.2 Soccer Fields 3 0.67 0.18 0.8 1 per 10,000 0.10 0.4 Golf Courses (Holes) 0.00 0.01 0.0 18 per 50,000 0.36 1.6 Archery Ranges 0.00 0.02 0.1 1 per 50,000 0.02 0.1 Rifle Pistol Ranges 0.00 0.01 0.0 0.0 Running Tracks 0.00 0.05 0.2 1 per 20,000 0.05 0.2 Ice Rinks 1 0.22 0.04 0.2 0.0 Horseshoe Pits 0.00 0.24 1.1 1 per 5,000 0.0 Bocce Court 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 Shuffleboard courts 0.00 0.05 0.2 1 per 5,000 0.0 Canoe only access areas 0.00 0.04 0.2 1 per 5,000 0.0 Ski Trails 0.00 0.18 0.8 1 per 5,000 0.0 Dog Parks 0.00 0.01 0.0 1 per 5,000 0.0 Frisbee Golf 0.00 0.01 0.0 1 per 5,000 0.0 Skate Park 0.00 0.02 0.1 1 per 5,000 0.0 Spray Grounds 0.00 0.03 0.1 1 per 5,000 0.0 Badminton 0.00 1 per 5,000 0.20 0.9 Handball 0.00 1 per 20,000 0.05 0.2 Combo Skeet/Trap Field 8 stations 0.00 1 per 50,000 0.02 0.1 Field Hockey 0.00 1 per 20,000 0.05 0.2 Golf Driving Range 0.00 1 per 50,000 0.02 0.1 Multiple Use Court 0.00 1 per 10,000 0.10 0.4 Ice Hockey (Indoor) 0.00 1 per 100,000 0.01 0.0

Needs Assessment Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 97 Summary of Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Participation in outdoor activities continues to increase, with nearly 50% of the nation’s population participating in some outdoor activity in the past year. The most popular and frequent recreational activity nationally, statewide and locally is trail usage. The importance of pedestrian facilities, connection to parks and other popular destinations and community gathering areas cannot be overstated. Focus Group and Community Survey results indicate that walking and biking trails are a high priority for residents. Completing local and regional trail connections, adding trails and walkways within parks, and providing safe crossings should continue to be a priority for Park District Board and Staff .

Program participation (34%) is higher than the national average (32%), but lower than the Illinois average (39%). Most residents do not participate because they are unaware of what is off ered; however, of those who do participate, 83% rank the program quality as either excellent or good. Adult fi tness and wellness programs rose to the top as a high priority need for programming. Other needed programs are special events, adult continuing education, and adult 55+ programming. While limited in indoor space, Northfi eld has the opportunity to form continued partnerships with adjacent agencies in order to satisfy these needs.

Not only are more people going outdoors for recreation, but the national results show that attendance at programs, classes, and events is also rebounding from past decline. Indoor fi tness sports, like yoga and boot-camp style cardio classes, remain the most popular fi tness activity. Signifi cant opportunities to engage inactive populations are swimming, working out with weights, working out with machines, and bicycling.

National, statewide, and local results show people are also increasingly supportive of park and recreation services. November 2012 saw the largest number of park and recreation ballot referendums since 2008. Locally, Northfi eld Park District residents who use District facilities and services are satisfi ed with the overall value of the District (53%). This number; however, is lower than the national average of 62%. Northfi eld Park District residents do not support a tax increase for parks and recreation spending. They do; however, support spending their tax dollars on park and community center improvements.

98 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Four 5 Strategies and Recommendations Chapter Five: Strategies and Recommendations The Strategies and Recommendations Chapter contains the goals and recommendations necessary for the Northfi eld Park District to meet the recreational needs of the Park District community. These recommendations are the synthesis of the Inventory and Analysis and Needs Assessment data documented in the previous chapters. Through internal charrettes and staff and Board workshops, initiatives were discussed, outlined, and prioritized resulting in the strategies set forth in this chapter.

The recommendations are grouped into three categories: • District-wide Recommendations • Community Center Recommendations • Existing Asset Strategies • Neighborhood Parks • Community Parks • Recreation Programs and Services

Community Center Recommendations Priority Type Justification Initiative Initiative initiative Initiative term Time Ͳ

Capital Inventory&Analysis NeedsAssessment Ongoing Staff Primary Secondary Long

Rank Initiative Expenditure COMMUNITYCENTERRECOMMENDATIONS

Planforadditionalcourtandfitnessspaceforindoor 46%ofsurveyrespondentsindicateaneedfor 1 XX recreationprogramming adultfitnessandwellnessprograms,with80% Northfieldcurrentlyoperatesalimitedindoor indicatingtheirneedsarebeingmetonly50% recreationandfitnesscenter. orlessforadultfitnessandwellnessprograms 2Expandthefitnesscenter XX leavinganopportunitygapforfitness& wellnessprogrammingandfacilities. 3Expandcourtspace XX 4Planforimprovedsiteandparking X Siteobservationsrevealedtheparkinglot Improveimmediatesiteandparkingforimproved 5 XXlacksADAaccessibility facility

100 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Five Districtwide Recommendations Priority Type Justification Initiative Initiative initiative Initiative term Time Ͳ

Capital Inventory&Analysis NeedsAssessment Expenditure Primary Secondary Long Rank Initiative Ongoing Staff DISTRICTWIDERECOMMENDATIONS

LOSforNeighborhoodParksismorethanthe NRPArecommendedaverage,buttotalpark Commentwasreinforcedatcommunity spaceislessthantherecommendedaverage stakeholderinterviews.48%ofsurvey Exploreacquisitionofneighborhoodparksin by9acres.Parkdistributionisunevenly respondentsaresupportiveofpurchasingland 1 XXX planningarea1 concentratedinthesoutheastcornerofthe oropenspaceforrecreationaluse,26%said District.Seepage29.VillageComprehensive theywouldbewillingtofundacquisitionwith Plansindicatesaneedforadditionalpocket ParkDistricttaxdollars. parks

Trailswerelistedasapriorityatbothfocus groups.67%ofsurveyrespondentshavea Basedonobservationsduringparkandfacility needfortrails,47%ofrespondents’needsare Exploreopportunitiesforexteriorconnectionsto sitevisits,allparkscouldimprovelooptrails 2 XXX beingmet50%orless.44%ofrespondents parks aswellasconnectionstothesurrounding saidtrailswereimportant(topchoice).50% neighborhoods. ofrespondentsareneutralordissatisfiedwith ParkDistricttrails.

Focusgroupinputsuggestedbeforeandafter schoolprogramsandcampscouldusetrend Improveandimplementbefore/afterschoolcare CampandYouthGeneralprogramsare based/extendagegroupupdating. 3 XX programs consideredacoreprogram. Continuingtodevelopbeforeandafterschool programswasconsideredacommentwith consensusfromstakeholderinterviews.

Focusgroupinputsuggestedbeforeandafter schoolprogramsandcampscouldusetrend CampandYouthGeneralprogramsare based/extendagegroupupdating.22%of WorkwithDistrict29inthedevelopmentofan consideredacoreprogram.Mostcamp 4 XX surveyrespondentshaveaneedforsummer EducationalCampprogram programsareconsideredtobeinthegrowth campswith59%ofrespondentsneedsbeing ormatureprogramlifecyclestages. met.17%saidyouthprogramsshouldreceive themostattentionfromtheDistrict. 22%ofsurveyrespondentslistednature center,naturetails,andgreenspaceasmost Developnatureprogramingandsupportfacilities, Previousmasterplancallfornaturalizedareas importanttotheirhousehold.27%indicateda 5 XX balancedwithpartnershipswithotherorganizations inWillowParkandClarksonPark. needfornatureprogrammingand57% indicatedaneedfornaturecentersand facilities.

37%ofsurveyrespondentsareunsureornot willingtopayincreasedtaxes.However, ComparedtootherDistricts,Northfield’s basedonsurveyresultstheydodesire Continuetoevaluateandbalanceresidentandnon 6 XX programsandrentalsarepricedsimilarlyor increasedandimprovedservicesandfacilities, residentuserfees lowerthanothers. someofwhichrequireadditionalrevenue. Someinterestwasexpressedinmoreopen gymandfieldspaceaccess.

83%ofsurveyrespondentsweresatisfiedwith Sitevisitsandobservationsrevealedparksand ParkDistrictmaintenanceefforts,and22% 7 Continuecommitmenttoparkmaintenance XX facilitieswerewellmaintainedandfreeof (rankedsecond)feelmaintenanceshould litter. receivethemostattentionfromthePark District

Partnershipswerelistedasahighpriorityfor focusgroupandstakeholderinterview participants.42%and36%ofsurvey respondentsstatedthey’veusedParkDistrict Exploreadditionalprogrammingpartnership 8 XX andPrivateClubsrespectivelyinlasttwelve opportunities months.WhiletheParkDistrictisthetop providerforages0Ͳ12,thereare opportunitiesforpartnershipstoincrease parkDistrictusageforages13andolder

9 ContinuetoaddressADAcompliance XX

Artificialturfwasacommentwithconsensus atstakeholderinterviews.Mayallowfor 10 Considerartificialturf/premierefield XX morefieldaccessforDistrictresidents.Desire formoreaccesswasexpressedinbothfocus groupsandstakeholderinterviews.

Plan Recommendations Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 101 Existing Asset Strategies The following tables outline the strategies and recommendations for all existing park and open space. Justifi cation for each recommendation is given, tieing the strategy back to the information gathered during the inventory and analysis and needs assessment phases. Along with the table of strategies and justifi cation, a diagram of the site notes location of potential improvements and implementations. Clarkson Park Recommendations Priority Type Justification Initiative Initiative initiative Initiative term Time Ͳ

Capital Inventory&Analysis NeedsAssessment

Rank Initiative Secondary Long Expenditure Primary Ongoing Staff CLARKSONPARKRECOMMENDATIONS

Focusgroupinputsuggestedbeforeandafter 1ConsiderexpandingcampactivitiesintheLodge XX schoolprogramsandcampsneedrefreshing.

Accordingtoourfacilityneedsworksheet/ Planforandimplementthe2012masterplan 2 XXanalysis,theDistrictisdeficientinthe OSLADmasterplanwasdevelopedwith including: followingamentiies communityinput.Somefacilitiesarebeyond theirusefullifeandreadyfortrendbased AShelterarea XX updating.Accordingtothesurvey,27%of B Baggo,Horseshoes&Sitefurniture XX respondentsindicatedaneedfornature CPlayenvironmentupdates XX programs. DSplashpad XX E Landscapeimprovements XX Throughsiteobservations,ADA FADA&accessimprovements XX noncompliancewasnoted.

Focusgroupinputsuggestedenhanced amenitiesareneededtosupportbeforeand Accordingtoourfacilityneedsworksheet/ afterschoolprogramsandcamp 3Improvecampfacilitiesincluding XXanalysis,theDistrictisdeficientinthe opportunities.Improvingbeforeandafter followingamentiies schoolprogramswasconsideredacomment withconsensusfromstakeholderinterviews. 22%ofsurveyrespondentshaveaneedfor summercampswith59%ofrespondents A Outdoorclassrooms X needsbeingmet.17%saidyouthprograms shouldreceivethemostattentionfromthe B Interpretiveelements X District.

Site Program 1. Splash Pad 2. New Shelter 3. Outdoor Classroom 4. Improved access to skating rink 5. Seating Area near 4. Splash Pad 3. 6. Horseshoes 2.

1. 6.

102 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Five Fox Meadow Park Recommendations Priority Type Justification Initiative Initiative initiative Initiative term Time Ͳ

Capital Inventory&Analysis NeedsAssessment Rank Initiative Primary Secondary Expenditure Long Ongoing Staff FOXMEADOWPARKRECOMMENDATIONS Throughsiteobservations,ADA 1ADA&accessimprovementsatplayground XX noncompliancewasnoted.

44%ofrespondentsstatedtrailsweremost Trailinventoryandanalysisconcludedthere importanttotheirhouseholds.67%stateda 2Constructlooptrailconnection XX wasalackoftrailamenities. needfortrailsand47%statedtheirneedsare beingmet50%orlessbyexistingtrails.

22%ofsurveyrespondentslistednature center,naturetails,andgreenspaceasmost importanttotheirhousehold.27%indicateda 3Considerparkfornatureprogramming XX needfornatureprogrammingand57% indicatedaneedfornaturecentersand facilities.

Focusgroupinputsuggestedenhanced amenitiesareneededtosupportbeforeand afterschoolprogramsandcamp opportunities.Improvingbeforeandafter schoolprogramswasconsideredacomment 4Expandcampactivities XX withconsensusfromstakeholderinterviews. 22%ofsurveyrespondentshaveaneedfor summercampswith59%ofrespondents needsbeingmet.17%saidyouthprograms shouldreceivethemostattentionfromthe District.

22%ofsurveyrespondentslistednature center,naturetails,andgreenspaceasmost Enhanceboardwalk&naturebasedplay/learning importanttotheirhousehold.27%indicateda 5 XX interpretivestations needfornatureprogrammingand57% indicatedaneedfornaturecentersand facilities.

ADADA Nature Programming Expand Camp activities

Trail / boardwalk Trail

Plan Recommendations Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 103 Willow Park Recommendations Priority Type Justification Initiative Initiative initiative Initiative term Time Ͳ

Capital Inventory&Analysis NeedsAssessment Expenditure Primary Secondary Long Ongoing Rank Initiative Staff WILLOWPARKRECOMMENDATIONS

OSLADmasterplanwasdevelopedwith Accordingtoourfacilityneedsworksheet/ communityinput.Groupsindicateddesirefor Planforandimplementthe2012masterplan 1 XXanalysis,theDistrictisdeficientinthe lights,screening,andrelocatingthebatting including: followingamentiies cages.Accordingtothesurvey,27%of respondentsindicatedaneedfornature programs.Trailswerelistedasapriorityat bothfocusgroups.67%ofsurveyrespondents ANaturearea/BirdSanctuary XX haveaneedfortrails,47%ofrespondents’ BTrailconnections&riveroverlooks XX needsarebeingmet50%orless.44%of respondentssaidtrailswereimportant(top CStreamcrossingsandbridges XX choice).50%ofrespondentsareneutralor dissatisfiedwithParkDistricttrails. DDrainageImprovements/landscaping XX

Enhancingandexpandingcampswaslistedas 2Planforimprovementstotennisfacilitiesincluding: XX ahighpriorityforresidentsparticipatingin focusgroupsandstakeholderinterviews.17% ofsurveyrespondentsstatedthequalityof youthprogramsshouldreceivethemost A Landscaping&screening XX attentionfromtheParkDistrictand14% statedyouthcampsweremostimportantto B Lighting XX theirhousehold.

Focusgroupinputsuggestedenhanced amenitiesareneededtosupportbeforeand Planforimprovementstocamprelatedamenities after school programs and camp 3 XX including: opportunities.Improvingbeforeandafter schoolprogramswasconsideredacomment withconsensusfromstakeholderinterviews. 22%ofsurveyrespondentshaveaneedfor A Teenchallengecourse XX summercampswith59%ofrespondents needsbeingmet.17%saidyouthprograms B CommunityGarden XX shouldreceivethemostattentionfromthe C Outdoorclassrooms XX District.

Site Program 1. 1. Bird 6. Sanctuary community 2. gardens 2. Nature Programming 3. Drainage Improvement

4. 4. Trails 5. River 5. Overlook 3. 6. Stream Crossings / Bridges

fi tness 7. expansion

104 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Five Plan Recommendations Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 105 Recreation Programs Recommendations Overall Recreation Program Recommendations • According to survey results, there is a need to increase the percentage of households who express being very satisfi ed or somewhat satisfi ed from 53%. • While the number of program needs are not being met is high, the ability of the District to off er more programs in all of these areas is unrealistic. Therefore, it is important for the District to continue cooperative programming with other neighboring Districts and agencies. • Educate the public about eff orts in partnering with other agencies to assist with fulfi lling community need. Residents may think you should be off ering many more programs that match their needs, but it isn’t realistic for you to off er multiple new programs. • Host an annual programming summit with other neighboring park districts (Glencoe and Winnetka) and non-profi ts to discuss future programming direction of each agency and how best to strategically partner on programs. It would be helpful for the other neighboring districts to identify their most signifi cant household need for program areas as Northfi eld has done. Then, the districts could potentially focus on diff erent areas for programs that have signifi cant unmet needs. • Augment opportunities for fulfi lling needs by continued use of contractual programs. • An industry trend is off ering classes such as Tai Chi and yoga in park locations during the warmer months of the year. • Complete a lifecycle analysis of programs on an annual basis to determine if programs in the decline life cycle should be repositioned or deleted. • Develop standards, as appropriate, for service and quality experience and identify key customer requirements for core programs. • Develop key performance indicators of performance. • Continue the survey process approximately every fi ve years to determine progress being made toward strengthening the recreation program process. • Development of a program capacity measurement process would help identify the percentage of actual number of registrants compared to the potential number of registrants available by core program areas. This can assist in the decision making process of repositioning decline stage programs. • Program growth areas include: adult fi tness and wellness, special events, nature programming, adult continuing education, youth learn to swim, tennis lessons and leagues, and youth arts and dance. Program off erings in these areas should be a priority. • Work with other districts to research ways to engage active adults in programs. A suggestion is to initiate a “launch group” of active adults to assist with programming direction and to provide connection to the active adult community.

106 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Five Website Recommendations • Slow down the scrolling on the website and add a link so customers could click on the photo or description to receive more information, rather than searching the site to locate. • Place the tabs in order of importance to the Park District as people tend to read left to right • Include core program options so the reader does not have to open the pdf Program Guide to view this information • Include a “take a tour” video and links to Google maps for both facilities and parks. • Including a message from the Director or Board President would enhance the welcoming feel to the user

Program Guide Recommendations • Include a Director’s or Board President’s message is a good idea to highlight district information, park or facility projects, program/special event updates and emphasize the benefi ts of community parks and recreation • Provide individual phone numbers for staff • Improve consistency in font style, size, and locations on website and program guide. Be consistent in verbiage and style. • Consolidate and delete unnecessary white space. This can add room for additional photos and information • Additional information that may be included on the Policies and Information page are photo/social media release, code of conducts (if applicable) and information for if a resident has moved or changed their personal information • Create creative program titles • Create links directly on the virtual style guide where a customer can click and it takes them directly to the online site would help increase online registration.

Plan Recommendations Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 107 Summary of Plan Recommendations The plan recommendations section identifi ed specifi c projects and implementation strategies for existing and new parks, open space and parks facilities. This chapter also explored district-wide recommendations. As identifi ed in the plan recommendations map, the focus for the Park District over the next fi ve years is the continued development the community and fi tness center as well as revising and implementing the OSLAD master plans for Clarkson Park and Willow Park.

108 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Five 6 Implementation Chapter Six - Implementation This chapter lists the specifi c action items identifi ed in the plan recommendations from Chapter Five. These items have been prioritized and targeted for action over the next fi ve years. They are listed not only by the priorities revealed in the previous chapters, but also according to the typical timeline for grant funding opportunities and project progression. These items should be reviewed each year and adjusted as needed to react to changes within the community, funding opportunities, and other Park District needs. The lower priority recommendations for specifi c park improvements should be reviewed and planned for annually as budget allows and to coordinate with higher priority park improvements.

Planning Actions for the Next 5 Years Priority Group A Priority Group C □ Master Plan Community Center □ Revise Master Plan for Willow and Renovation Clarkson Parks □ Design & Engineer Community □ Apply for Grant for Willow and Center expansion Clarkson Park improvements □ Master Plan Fitness Center parking □ Expand programming at improvements Community Center □ Explore nature programming partnership opportunities Priority Group D □ Design & Engineer Community Priority Group B Center parking improvements □ Bid & Construct Community Center □ Design & Engineer Willow and expansion Clarkson Park improvements □ Explore nature programming and support facilities Priority Group E □ Bid & Construct Community Center parking improvements □ Bid & Construct Willow and Clarkson Park improvements □ Implement preliminary nature programming at Fox Meadow Park

Important Dates Trail Grants • March 1st OSLAD Grants • Submitted between May 1st and July 1st • Awards typically announced December-January PARC Grants • Submitted between October and November, on two year cycles. • Currently inactive Illinois Green Infrastructure Grant • Deadline announced July 1, 2014

110 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Five Planning Timeline JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

Master Plan Community Center expansion Master Plan Community Center parking improvements Design & Engineer Community Center Expansion Explore nature programming partnership opportunities

Bid & Construct Fitness Center expansion Explore nature programming and support facilities

Revise Master Plans for Willow & Clarkson Parks Apply for OSLAD Grant for Willow & Clarkson Parks Expand programming at expanded Community Center

Design & Engineer Community Center parking improvements Design & Engineer Willow & Clarkson Park improvements

Bid & Construct Community Center parking improvements Bid & Construct Willow & Clarkson Park improvements Implement preliminary nature programming at Fox Meadow Park

Legend Explore Plan Design & Engineer Bid & Construct Fund

Implementation Guidelines Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 111 Priority Group A Planning Timeline Engage consultant Plan for additional fi tness space for indoor recreation Engage consultant programming Plan for grading and ADA Determine initial costs improvements and additional parking stalls

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

Master Plan Community Center expansion Master Plan Community Center parking improvements Design & Engineer Community Center Expansion Explore nature programming partnership opportunities

Contact appropriate agencies Engage consultant for partnership opportunities Complete design development Begin initial program and construction documents planning and organization Finalize costs

Priority Group B Complete bidding, Evaluate Fox Meadow Park negotiation, and construction for nature programming possibilities Work with partners to determine sites for programming

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

Bid & Construct Fitness Center expansion Explore nature programming and support facilities

Priority Group C Engage consultant Clarkson Park Willow Park Revise master plans based on • Shelter area • Trail connections & river overlooks • Play environment updates • Natural area / bird sanctuary comprehensive plan results • Splash pad • Stream crossings and bridges (see right) • Landscape improvements • Drainage improvements / • Outdoor classrooms landscaping • Interpretive elements • Teen challenge course • Community garden

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

Revise Master Plans for Willow & Clarkson Parks Apply for OSLAD Grant for Willow & Clarkson Parks Expand programming at expanded Community Center

Engage consultant Begin scheduling and Deadline: 7/1 programming new gym and fi tness center once construction is complete

112 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Five Priority Group D Engage consultant Complete design development and construction documents Engage consultant for grading and ADA Complete design development improvements and additional and construction documents parking stalls for improvements

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

Design & Engineer Community Center parking improvements Design & Engineer Willow & Clarkson Park improvements

Priority Group E Engage consultant Complete bidding and negotiation Engage consultant Construction Complete bidding and negotiation Construction

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

Bid & Construct Community Center parking improvements Bid & Construct Willow & Clarkson Park improvements Implement preliminary nature programming at Fox Meadow Park

Work with partner agencies

Implementation Guidelines Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 113 114 Northﬁ eld Park District Chapter Five 7 Appendix

AppendixAppendix Districtwide ComprehensiveComprehensive Master Plan 115115 Chapter Seven: Appendix Defi nitions and Abbreviations

Community Park - focus on meeting community based recreational needs, as well as preserve unique landscapes and open space. They are typically 50 or more acres in size, with 70 plus acres being ideal.

IAPD - Illinois Association of Park Districts - Distinguished Park & Recreation Ac- creditation Standards. IAPD recommends creating a park classifi cation system to serve as a guide for organizing an agency’s parks.

IDNR - Illinois Department of Natural Resources.

Level of Service (LOS) - a ratio representing the minimum amount of open space and park land needed to meet the recreation demands of the community as recommended by NRPA.

Mini Park - used to address limited, isolated, or unique recreational needs and is usually between 2,500 SF and 1 acre in size.

NRPA - National Recreation and Parks Association - Park, Recreation, Open Space and Greenway Guidelines Manual. NRPA recommends creating a park classifi cation system to serve as a guide for organizing an agency’s parks.

Neighborhood Park - focus in on informal active and passive recreation and are typically between 5 and 10 acres in size.

OSLAD - Open Space Lands Acquisition and Development Grant.

Planning Areas - Planning areas are used for analysis, proposed land acquisition and redevelopment of new park facilities. Planning areas are delineated by impassable pedestrian boundaries, including major roads or highways, railroad corridors and extreme natural features.

SCORP - Illinois Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan - compares the estimated supply of recreational amenities provided within the state of Illinois to the number of amenities provided by the Lombard Park District on a 1,000 population basis.

Service Areas - the area served by an existing park facility, usually a coverage based upon a standard distance. Service area studies are used to understand those areas served or under served by existing parks.

Special Use Facility - Areas for specialized or single purpose recreational activities. Generally designed for active recreation and focus on meeting community based recreation needs.

116 Manhattan Park District Chapter Seven IDNR Useful Life Criteria

Appendix Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 117 118 Manhattan Park District Chapter Seven

Meeting Summary

Date: April 10, 2013 Time: 3:00 PM Location: Northfield Park District, Northfield, Illinois Attendees: Northfield Community Members Barbara Heller, Heller and Heller Consulting Bill Inman, Hitchcock Design Group (HDG) Eric Hornig, Hitchcock Design Group

RE: Northfield Park District Comprehensive Plan Project: 04-0787-003-01-03

Purpose of Meeting: Focus Group meeting #1 - Public solicitation was prepared inviting community members to take part in a focus group discussion about the future of the Northfield Park District. Specifically we asked: What priorities should be included in the Northfield Park District’s 5- year master plan? Each participant was given the opportunity to add 3-5 ideas to the discussion. Participants were then given the opportunity to share any other comments that may not have been represented by the posted ideas. Participants were then asked to vote on their priorities. The results have been listed in raw and summarized form below.

Summary of priorities after group polling: Votes

Partnerships/IntergovernmentalCooperation Add/ImproveTrails LightsatTennisCourts Surveillance/Security ImproveMaintenance(alongriver,fields,and… LockerRoomShowers ExpandMarkettoAdjacentCommunities RevenueGeneration/Concessions SiteAmenities(PaddleTennis/ClimbingWalls) AddOutdoorRestrooms InteriorSpaceManagement/OpenGym Childcare/AfterSchoolCare AcquisitionofLand

01234567

J:\Projects\700's\0787-Northfield Park District\003-Comp Plan\B Correspondence\Stakeholder Meetings 20130409\sum 20130409 focus group #1.docx Appendix Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 119

Page 2

Items Discussed: 1. Acquisition a. Investigate vacant land for possible bike trail – 1 star 2. Childcare a. Workout childcare 3. Interior Space Management a. Longer hours for gym 4. Revenue Generation– 1 star a. Opportunistic concessions b. NFPD logo gear 5. Surveillance / security a. Enlarge workout center and improve lighting b. Fitness room surveillance – 2 stars 6. Partnerships / IGA – 3 stars a. Beach pass / access b. Joint agreement with Winnetka for beach access c. Reciprocity with Winnetka park district d. Collaborate with neighboring park districts on programming e. Park district to couple with chamber to help new projects and vending – 3 stars 7. Expand Market to Adjacent Communities – 1 star a. Extend practical boundaries or outreach to “other” NPD residents 8. Add lights to tennis courts a. Lights on tennis courts b. Tennis lights – 4 stars c. Lighted outdoor hoops – 1 star 9. Restrooms a. Restrooms outside 10. Site features a. Paddle courts b. Water fountains c. Paddle tennis d. Climbing (bouldering) wall 11. Indoor improvement a. Locker room showers – 1 star b. Indoor track 12. Trails – 5 stars a. Old railroad convert to trail b. Rails to trails c. Focus on pedestrian access i. Walk don’t drive 13. Maintenance – 1 star a. Maintenance of parks and facilities b. Flood protection of fields c. Parking

120 Manhattan Park District Chapter Seven

Meeting Summary

Date: April 10, 2013 Time: 6:00 PM Location: Northfield Park District, Northfield, Illinois Attendees: Northfield Community Members Barbara Heller, Heller and Heller Consulting Bill Inman, Hitchcock Design Group (HDG) Eric Hornig, Hitchcock Design Group

RE: Northfield Park District Comprehensive Plan Project: 04-0787-003-01-03

Purpose of Meeting: Focus Group meeting #2 - Public solicitation was prepared inviting community members to take part in a focus group discussion about the future of the Northfield Park District. Specifically we asked: What priorities should be included in the Northfield Park District’s 5- year master plan? Each participant was given the opportunity to add 3-5 ideas to the discussion. Participants were then given the opportunity to share any other comments that may not have been represented by the posted ideas. Participants were then asked to vote on their priorities. The results have been listed in raw and summarized form below.

Summary of priorities after group polling: Votes

RefreshPrograms/Camps/AfterSchool/ BeforeSchool

NonͲstructured(butsupervised)OpenPlay

ImproveLodgeFacilities/Frequencyofuse

SiteAmenities(DogPark,PocketParks)

Add/ImproveTrails

HostmoreSpecialEvents

ImproveCommunications

Partnerships/Intergovernmental Cooperation

012345678

J:\Projects\700's\0787-Northfield Park District\003-Comp Plan\B Correspondence\Stakeholder Meetings 20130409\sum 20130409 focus group #2.docx Appendix Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 121

Page 2

Items Discussed: 1. Program a. Programs grade 4-8 b. Variety of programs c. After-school program d. Offer more adult programs e. Theater program and space for performances f. Consistent before and after school programming – 3 stars g. Variety of programming – 4 stars i. Athletic v non-athletic ii. Within sessions and year to year h. Concentrate on grades 4-6 i. Not outsource NPD space – use for NPD programs j. Evening programming i. “theme nights” ii. Special events iii. Dance party iv. Movie nights k. Various programming for ages K-6 2. Partnerships / IGA a. Access to Winnetka beaches b. Coordinated programs with other districts 3. New Parks / Amenities – 1 star a. Pocket parks b. Dog park c. Build an outdoor sports park 4. Open Play, Safe! – 2 stars a. Safe after-school hang out space i. Homework club b. Park supervision c. More open gym – 2 stars d. Safe crossing to Clarkson 5. Communications a. Marketing i. Through the school b. E-newsletters c. Branding d. Outreach 6. Facilities – 1 star a. Use Clarkson Lodge more frequently b. Youth center 7. Special Events a. More special events like the Rib Fest – 4th of July i. Bingo 8. Trails a. Pave the trails on North Happ

122 Manhattan Park District Chapter Seven Stakeholder Topline Tally

Suggestion ColColColColColColColColColColColColumn20 Evaluaterevenuegeneratingrightswithpartners 1 Considerapracticetracksurface 1 Improvetechnologyofferings 1 Evaluatesummercamppartnerships 1 Pushtheenvelopewithprogramming 1 ConsiderakitchenintheClarksonParkwarminglodge 1 ConsiderPartneringwithSRAforofficespace 1 SRACommitmentisstrongandpositive 1 Reduceuserfees/ceaseincreasesforcontributingaffiliates 1 Increasetaxallocationforrecreation 1 IncreaseuseforcommunityKidsvs.travelleagues 1 Reflectontrueparkdistrictmission 1 Continuetobeautifytheproperties 1 Considerbridgeprogramming 1 Considermoviesonthelawn 1 Campofferingsneedupdating 1 AddkitchentoClarksonwarminglodge 1 Considerteambuilding(ropes,obstaclecourse) 1 Improveteenofferings 1 Considermoremusic/artsprogramming 1 Improvefitnessfacilities 1 Considerdropin"PlayLeaders" 1 Providepocketparks 1 Consideradogpark 1 Consider2Ͳyearoldcamp 1 Addsurveillanceinfitnessarea 1 Considerincreasedgymnasiumspace 1 2 Provideparentprogramofferingsalignedwithcurriculum 1 2 ImproveconnectionswithChamberofcommerce/businesses 12 Considermoreattentiontotheriver 12 Increaseopengymavailability 12 Fewerkidsareplayingmultiplesports 1 2 Considercommunitygardenplots 12 Restoretennistoformerglory(courts,lights,removebattingcage) 12 Consideraquatics 12 Strengthencommunication/portrayalofbrand 1 2 Strengthensharing/relationshipswithlikemindedagencies 1 1 3 ParkDistrictperceptionispositive 1 1 3 Providemorepassivespace 1 1 3 Improve/increasebeforeandafterschoolprogramming 111 4 Considerartificialturf 111 4 Fieldconditionsarehighquality 111 4 Considerpaddletennis 1 1 1 4 Staffaresupportive/positive/professional/positiverelationship 111111 7

Appendix Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 123

Meeting Summary

Date: April 9, 2013 Time: 1:00 PM Location: Northfield Park District, Northfield, Illinois Attendees: Heather Burns, Northfield Community Nursery Barbara Heller, Heller and Heller Consulting Eric Hornig, Hitchcock Design Group (HDG)

RE: Northfield Park District Comprehensive Plan Project: 04-0787-003-01-03

Purpose of Meeting: Stakeholder meeting

Items Discussed: 1. Only private preschool program in Northfield 2. 78 families 3. Parent board 4. Traditional part time preschool 5. Worked with Halloween party 6. April 2014 – celebration / NEF 7. Meeting set 8. Include info in newsletter 9. Want to continue to support and collaboration 10. Utilize own playground and church field 11. Will utilize for disaster recovery plan 12. Verify safe crossing to park 13. Align preschool timing / drop off 14. Might provide before / after school care a. Might not be possible 15. They plan to run a gap camp 16. Communications with staff have been organized, pleasant 17. Feedback heard has been positive 18. Need higher profile in community 19. Preschool camps serve nursery 20. Consider 2 year old summer camp 21. Joint programming / events desirable a. Art exhibits b. Drop in things c. Crafts 22. Concession / 3rd place in building 23. Early childhood alliance – park promotion 24. Nature focused / community garden

J:\Projects\700's\0787-Northfield Park District\003-Comp Plan\B Correspondence\Stakeholder Meetings 20130409\sum 20130409 childcare-library.docx 124 Manhattan Park District Chapter Seven

Meeting Summary

Date: April 9, 2013 Time: 9:30 AM Location: Northfield Park District, Northfield, Illinois Attendees: Adelbert Spaan, Park Commissioner Buggie O’Grady, Park Commissioner Scott Malanbach, Winnetka-Northfield Chamber Terry Dason, Winnetka-Northfield Chamber Barbara Heller, Heller and Heller Consulting Eric Hornig, Hitchcock Design Group (HDG)

RE: Northfield Park District Comprehensive Plan Project: 04-0787-003-01-03

Purpose of Meeting: Stakeholder meeting

Items Discussed: 1. Winnetka/Northfield Chamber merged with same zip 2. Could partner with Northfield Park District and Village 3. ULI Study – Regional cooperation indicated as needed 4. Users share boundaries 5. Could reach out to sponsors 6. Disconnect between businesses 7. Winnetka Golf Club outing / resident rates 8. Teens are underserved a. Drop-off after 3rd grade 9. More music / arts 10. Summer camps are important – look forward 11. Population decline coming at kindergarten 12. Adult programming 13. Fitness facilities / boot camps coming 14. Piece meal facilities a. Challenges b. Interior space and exterior space is an issue 15. Park leaders – for drop in guests 16. 12-17 year old target 17. Camps are solid, good price, flexible 18. High level of maintenance 19. Consider multipurpose field 20. Paddle tennis a. Glenview / Winnetka 21. Country club competition 22. Pool 23. Connectivity is good / important

J:\Projects\700's\0787-Northfield Park District\003-Comp Plan\B Correspondence\Stakeholder Meetings 20130409\sum 20130409 commissioners-chamber.docx Appendix Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 125

Meeting Summary

Date: April 9, 2013 Time: 11:30 AM Location: Northfield Park District, Northfield, Illinois Attendees: Lisa Senuta, St James Episcopal Church Duayne Meyer, Northfield Community Church Barbara Heller, Heller and Heller Consulting Eric Hornig, Hitchcock Design Group (HDG)

RE: Northfield Park District Comprehensive Plan Project: 04-0787-003-01-03

Purpose of Meeting: Stakeholder meeting

Items Discussed: 1. Artificial turf soccer 2. Don’t hear good things about camp a. Bored b. Not dynamic enough 3. 4th of July was fun 4. Robust activity 5. Children enjoyed working here 6. Renovation to willow great 7. Lights on tennis 8. Evaluate structured vs passive open space 9. Fox Meadow Fields are beat up 10. Lacrosse beats up field 11. Clarkson good – could use a kitchen 12. Safety valve for inclement weather 13. Store parking 14. Booth sponsor 15. Nursery school 16. Childcare is needed a. Before / after school care 17. No all day option – set up option 18. Public perception is generally good 19. Team building a. Ropes b. Open gym 20. Iconic a. 4th of July b. Ribfest c. Ice Rink 21. Norman Rockwell / Mayberry 22. Worried about road at Willow 23. Competition for summer programs a. High XXX sports b. Sports camp c. Steve + Kathy – flexible

J:\Projects\700's\0787-Northfield Park District\003-Comp Plan\B Correspondence\Stakeholder Meetings 20130409\sum 20130409 faith community.docx 126 Manhattan Park District Chapter Seven

Page 2

d. Northbrook / Wilmette e. Less for 2 – 5 age available 24. Staff a. Helpful b. Pleasant c. Professional d. George – great job

Appendix Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 127

Meeting Summary

Date: April 10, 2013 Time: Location: Northfield Park District, Northfield, Illinois Attendees: Northfield Community Members Barbara Heller, Heller and Heller Consulting Bill Inman, Hitchcock Design Group (HDG) Eric Hornig, Hitchcock Design Group

RE: Northfield Park District Comprehensive Plan Project: 04-0787-003-01-03

Purpose of Meeting: Additional notes – other ideas

Items Discussed: 1. More gym time for children 2. Outreach 3. More park supervision 4. More open gym hours 5. Rec center staff oversight 6. Marketing open gym 7. Consistent early childhood programs 8. Exclusive facility 9. Hangout / lounge 10. Safe afterschool hang outs 11. Encourage free activities 12. In house programming not renting space 13. Park district priority to schools 14. Different classes 15. Safe parks 16. Use Clarkson Lodge more – teen nights 17. Not outsource 18. Programs 3rd up 19. Before / after care 20. Flooding at Clarkson 21. Movie nights – gym – theme nights 22. Heavy sports 23. Classes – priorities 24. Gymnastics class 25. Add underpass to Clarkson Park 26. Sports park 27. Not serving our children in middle school 28. Add a park in the field just north of the school at old Willow and Wagner – or a gathering spot 29. More girl programs 30. More grades 4-8 programs

J:\Projects\700's\0787-Northfield Park District\003-Comp Plan\B Correspondence\Stakeholder Meetings 20130409\sum 20130409 focus group additional notes.docx 128 Manhattan Park District Chapter Seven

Page 2

31. Ice skating 32. Theater class and arts a. Acting, musical theater, pottery 33. Dance – hip hop 34. Archery 35. Fencing 36. Grade 4-8 a. Volleyball b. Softball c. Table tennis 37. Golf – drive kids to Winnetka golf course 38. Knitting – crochet 39. Lessons – guitar, piano, voice 40. Movie nights 41. After-school program 42. After-school activities a. Archery, golf at Winnetka Golf Course, theater, pottery, hip-hop, open gym – gymnastics 43. Branding 44. 3d animator class for older kids 45. Basketball for girls 46. Shower 47. Trail link 48. Rails to trails 49. Buckthorne 50. Willow road – safety, drainage 51. Winnetka park district 52. Reciprocity 53. Paddle tennis 54. Collaboration 55. Tennis 56. Investigate bike trail on land of former rail road 57. Enlarge exercise room – improve lighting 58. State fair is great 59. Indoor track 60. Hiking trails / bike path 61. Larger workout room 62. Don’t rent out fields 24/7 63. Outdoor hoops (lighted) 64. Lighting for tennis courts 65. Longer hours for workout room 66. Climbing / bouldering wall 67. Better cell phone service inside building 68. Showers near gym 69. No pool 70. Restrooms at east side of park 71. Joint agreement with Winnetka for discount beach passes 72. Drinking fountains near fields / courts 73. Programs generally excellent / particularly for children 74. Misc activities for seniors – aging population 75. Collaboration 76. Maintain high quality facilities

Appendix Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 129

Page 3

77. Consider expanding fitness center 78. Emphasize safety 79. Parking can be an issue 80. Maintain open space / trees 81. Pedestrian linkage / Clarkson – old willow 82. Walking trails 83. Retain small scale / intimacy 84. Outside restroom addition 85. Park district couples with chamber of commerce to help new projects / vending 86. Add lights to tennis courts 87. Halloween / holiday party / Easter 88. Expand program to older grades also 89. More variety in programming 90. Ice rink really worth it? 91. Community building stuff – pool 92. Running trails 93. Deliberate scheduling of K programs 94. Childcare opportunities 95. Homework center 96. The park district should have a booth each week at the farmers market and have fun activities, branding & advertising

130 Manhattan Park District Chapter Seven

Meeting Summary

Date: April 9, 2013 Time: 1:30 PM Location: Northfield Park District, Northfield, Illinois Attendees: Jennifer Trimble, Park Board Sue Civgin, Garden Club Janet Hagen, Garden Club Barbara Heller, Heller and Heller Consulting Eric Hornig, Hitchcock Design Group (HDG)

RE: Northfield Park District Comprehensive Plan Project: 04-0787-003-01-03

Purpose of Meeting: Stakeholder meeting

Items Discussed: 1. Garden Club a. Longstanding club b. Serves as women’s club c. 50 – 75 people d. Come and stay e. Last one was 1999 2. Messy projects are done here or at Clarkson 3. Good staff relationships 4. Use meeting spaces 5. Priority of beautification is appreciated 6. Assisted / aligned beautification 7. Community gardening interest a. Raised beds b. ComEd property 8. Think outside of box a. Resource sharing 9. Swimming pool a. YMCA is Middleford b. Partner with Winnetka 10. Program offerings fell off after 5-6th grade 11. Tennis a. Screen more – arborvitae b. Lit c. Batting cage is loud d. Not as nice as before 12. Tennis leagues 13. Paddle tennis 14. Well received brand a. Clean b. Responsive c. Consistent d. Lives a little bigger than size

J:\Projects\700's\0787-Northfield Park District\003-Comp Plan\B Correspondence\Stakeholder Meetings 20130409\sum 20130409 garden club.docx Appendix Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 131

Page 2

15. New moms / adult program 16. Bridge returning 17. Groundhog day events 18. Local, no travel 19. Movies on lawn 20. Sleep out 21. Path is good 22. More environmental / stream

132 Manhattan Park District Chapter Seven

Meeting Summary

Date: April 9, 2013 Time: 8:30 AM Location: Northfield Park District, Northfield, Illinois Attendees: Chris Beacom, Illinois Baseball Academy Barbara Heller, Heller and Heller Consulting Eric Hornig, Hitchcock Design Group (HDG)

RE: Northfield Park District Comprehensive Plan Project: 04-0787-003-01-03

Purpose of Meeting: Stakeholder meeting

Items Discussed: 1. IBA a. Run Illinois Baseball Academy b. KWBA (Kennilworth Winnetka Baseball Association) parent organization c. Northfield Baseball fields play a critical role d. Serves 8-14 youth baseball 2. Don’t need more space / it’s adequate a. Could use indoor option / Gym has limited access 3. Batting cage is nice 4. Lights are helpful 5. Fields are in good shape / well maintained 6. Satisfied with facilities 7. Targeted skill training and expertise 8. The Yard facility / 5,000 sq ft / cages 9. Wilmette, Glenview, Rosemont (140,000 sq ft) baseball and softball 10. Teacher, blue jays organization 11. Staff is responsive, positive experience 12. Works through KWBA 13. Big picture a. Artificial turf would be helpful b. Or 140,000 sq ft dome 14. Winnetka has field turf coming 15. Attendance trends a. Fewer kids are playing multiple sports b. Grade 1, 2, 3 are good c. Grade 10, 11, 12 house league numbers are reduced 16. Traditional programs are all available 17. Public perception is positive

J:\Projects\700's\0787-Northfield Park District\003-Comp Plan\B Correspondence\Stakeholder Meetings 20130409\sum 20130409 il baseball academy.docx Appendix Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 133

Meeting Summary

Date: April 9, 2013 Time: 3:30 PM Location: Northfield Park District, Northfield, Illinois Attendees: Derek Chatterton, KWBA Barbara Heller, Heller and Heller Consulting Eric Hornig, Hitchcock Design Group (HDG)

RE: Northfield Park District Comprehensive Plan Project: 04-0787-003-01-03

Purpose of Meeting: Stakeholder meeting

Items Discussed: 1. KWBA a. 1974 b. 16 member board c. Promote baseball d. View as an extension of them e. Non-profit, no one is paid f. Trevian (200K salary – +/- 2,500 / season) g. Faced with increasing cost 2. Worried about marginal kids 3. Worried about increased costs 4. Field quality is good 5. Attendance follows demographics 6. +/- 1,000 kids / 600 unique players 7. $250K given – 15 year a. $6 in 2006 b. $15 in 2012 c. Math does not work 8. Relationship is good 9. Not enough of tax money going to recreation 10. Need community use availability without use fees 11. Reflect on park district mission 12. Open gym availability needed 13. Keep rates low 14. Access and affordability to the residents

J:\Projects\700's\0787-Northfield Park District\003-Comp Plan\B Correspondence\Stakeholder Meetings 20130409\sum 20130409 kwba.docx 134 Manhattan Park District Chapter Seven

Meeting Summary

Date: April 9, 2013 Time: 3:00 PM Location: Northfield Park District, Northfield, Illinois Attendees: Lynn Merrill, Illinois Girls Lacrosse Association Barbara Heller, Heller and Heller Consulting Eric Hornig, Hitchcock Design Group (HDG)

RE: Northfield Park District Comprehensive Plan Project: 04-0787-003-01-03

Purpose of Meeting: Stakeholder meeting

Items Discussed: 1. Lacrosse a. Cooperation with Glencoe / Winnetka / Northfield b. Winnetka game space c. Northfield / Glencoe practice d. Sunday afternoon / natural grass e. Artificial turf in future 2. League – non profit a. 1 of 25 practice locations b. In NE Indian 3. Rec – feeder a. 1 – 2 clinic b. 3 – 8 league i. High school / lakeshore c. Parent volunteer coaches i. High school varsity paid player d. 5 administrators IGLA girls i. Partner with Northwestern ii. Need field space iii. Fox Meadow in spring iv. Willow in fall e. 3rd – 4th – 5 teams * 12 girls f. 5 – 6 – 2 teams * 12 girls g. 7 – 8 – 2 teams * 12 girls 4. Quick scores – online scheduling service 5. Jennifer is good / organized / responsive 6. Field conditions – nice than other locations, goals

J:\Projects\700's\0787-Northfield Park District\003-Comp Plan\B Correspondence\Stakeholder Meetings 20130409\sum 20130409 lacrosse.docx Appendix Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 135

Meeting Summary

Date: April 9, 2013 Time: 2:00 PM Location: Northfield Park District, Northfield, Illinois Attendees: Craig Culp, NSSRA Candice Cunningham, NSSRA Barbara Heller, Heller and Heller Consulting Eric Hornig, Hitchcock Design Group (HDG)

RE: Northfield Park District Comprehensive Plan Project: 04-0787-003-01-03

Purpose of Meeting: Stakeholder meeting

Items Discussed: 1. Obtain facilities through SRA programs 2. Inclusion with companions 3. Home for indoor court gator programs 4. Camp at Clarkson park 5. Willow Park Fieldhouse in Glenview 6. Straight forward easy to work with staff 7. HPD commitment to SRA is really strong 8. Summer camp and court space is critical and appreciated 9. Trainings / orientations 10. Great support by staff and leadership 11. Planning a new home for SRA office a. Looking for a partner / host site 12. Need early commitment a. For entire school year 13. Gracious / advocate for program 14. Adult day programming is growing a. 9 – 3 indoor during week 15. Collaboration with center for enriched living (riverwoods) 16. ELCA – program partner / competitor 17. Take up lots of space 18. Overserved by NPD thanks 19. Good team of professionals 20. A trusted partner 21. Borrow bus 22. Jennifer and George mentioned in high regard

J:\Projects\700's\0787-Northfield Park District\003-Comp Plan\B Correspondence\Stakeholder Meetings 20130409\sum 20130409 nssra.docx 136 Manhattan Park District Chapter Seven

Meeting Summary

Date: April 9, 2013 Time: 3:30 PM Location: Northfield Park District, Northfield, Illinois Attendees: Marc Christman, Mesirow Financial Kirk Bennett, Bennett Brothers Barbara Heller, Heller and Heller Consulting Eric Hornig, Hitchcock Design Group (HDG)

RE: Northfield Park District Comprehensive Plan Project: 04-0787-003-01-03

Purpose of Meeting: Stakeholder meeting

Items Discussed: 1. Foundation founded in 2001 2. Helped build Clarkson 3. Fund raisers 4. Bank funded at 0% 5. Able to see progress 6. Kirk has P & Z history 7. Police hat 8. Good school / village / park district collaboration 9. Annual campaign / 8 – 10 people 10. Husband and wife members 11. Lobbying for money (non-discretionary) 12. In program catalog 13. Work with chamber of commerce 14. Golf – with chamber 15. Put in kitchen in warming hut 16. Utilizing property to its fullest 17. Unsure about tennis success 18. Clean up river

J:\Projects\700's\0787-Northfield Park District\003-Comp Plan\B Correspondence\Stakeholder Meetings 20130409\sum 20130409 parks foundation.docx Appendix Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 137

Meeting Summary

Date: April 9, 2013 Time: 10:00 AM Location: Northfield Park District, Northfield, Illinois Attendees: Edward Strange, Sunset Ridge School District #29 Linda Vieth, Sunset Ridge School District #29 Debbie Pappas, Sunset Ridge School District #29 Barbara Heller, Heller and Heller Consulting Eric Hornig, Hitchcock Design Group (HDG)

RE: Northfield Park District Comprehensive Plan Project: 04-0787-003-01-03

Purpose of Meeting: Stakeholder meeting

Items Discussed: 1. Connected physically, spillover is common 2. Community center a. Shared b. Times are working according to plan 3. Some baseball + practice + game 4. Music / theater performance 5. Sunset ridge shared by park district 6. Minor reminders needed 7. Building principal schedules a. Small gym here is more difficult to coordinate 8. Frustrations on occasion 9. Security is concern a. Recent steps have been taken 10. Unique and wonderful relationship 11. Schools a. Financial restrictions b. Define common understanding / solidify c. Maintenance d. Revenue rights 12. No summer school – one is pending 13. Potential competitors – evaluate 14. Plowing 15. Track surface to practice 16. Before and after school programming a. Here and sunset ridge is increasing 17. Technology or curriculum support 18. Align parent growth with child 19. Communications partnering – weekly / monthly 20. Great programming – tried and true 21. Evolution a. Pushing the envelope b. Cutting edge 22. Steve + Kate is camp

J:\Projects\700's\0787-Northfield Park District\003-Comp Plan\B Correspondence\Stakeholder Meetings 20130409\sum 20130409 sunset ridge.docx 138 Manhattan Park District Chapter Seven

Meeting Summary

Date: April 9, 2013 Time: 9:00 AM Location: Northfield Park District, Northfield, Illinois Attendees: Stacy Sigman, Village of Northfield Steve Gutierrez, Village of Northfield Bill Lustig, Village of Northfield Michael Nystrand, Village of Northfield Barbara Heller, Heller and Heller Consulting Eric Hornig, Hitchcock Design Group (HDG)

RE: Northfield Park District Comprehensive Plan Project: 04-0787-003-01-03

Purpose of Meeting: Stakeholder meeting

Items Discussed: 1. Obtain Village’s comp plan 2. Protecting open space / large lots 3. Push for more pocket parks 4. Two park districts a. Northfield / Winnetka b. Glenview 5. Resident / Non-resident rates 6. Connectivity to forest preserves with trails 7. Dog park, off leash, no county resource 8. Confusion between Village and Park District 9. Three townships, different school districts 10. Police for park district 11. Add video cameras in building including workout room 12. Coordination of traffic for festivals 13. Issues where residential meets public 14. Working relationship is good with board and George 15. Partner on chipper, salting, deicing, general labor, fire 16. State is in disarray, Springfield a. Locally picking up gaps where State has cut 17. Good citizen participation / physical and financial 18. Regional bike trail a. Glencoe, Wilmette, Skokie b. Along ComEd c. Fitness trail 19. Strong bike group / traffic issues / strong lobby 20. Consider pool / paddle tennis 21. Nature conservancies – passive recreation

J:\Projects\700's\0787-Northfield Park District\003-Comp Plan\B Correspondence\Stakeholder Meetings 20130409\sum 20130409 village.docx Appendix Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 139 Brochure Off erings

2012/2013 (Fall2012ͲSummer2013) BrochureOfferings Revenueor Class AgeGroup Category Season(s) TaxSupported RunawayCircus 4yrsͲ1stGrade GeneralYouth Fall/Winter Revenue Children'sDrawing 4yrsͲ3rdGrade GeneralYouth Fall/Winter/Spring Revenue HighTouch,HighTech KͲ3rdGrade GeneralYouth Fall/Winter/Spring Revenue YoungChef's KͲ3rdGrade GeneralYouth Fall/Winter/Spring Revenue Tumbling 3yrsͲ2ndGrade GeneralYouth Fall/Winter Revenue BirthdayParties 3yrsͲ3rdGrade GeneralYouth Fall/Winter/Spring Revenue SchoolImprovementDayEvents KͲ3rdGrade GeneralYouth Fall/Winter/Spring Revenue FamilyOpenGym 3yrͲ3rdGrade&Adult GeneralYouth Winter TaxSupported OpenGym AllAges GeneralYouth Fall/Winter/Spring TaxSupported TinyTotTball 3Ͳ4yrolds YouthAthletics Fall/Spring Revenue LittleDribblers 3Ͳ4yrolds YouthAthletics Winter Revenue TinyTotSoccer 3Ͳ4yrolds YouthAthletics Spring Revenue CoachPitchTballl 4Ͳ6yrolds YouthAthletics Fall/Spring Revenue Inst.Soccer 4Ͳ6yrolds YouthAthletics Fall/Spring Revenue Inst.Basketball 4Ͳ6yrolds YouthAthletics Fall/Winter Revenue FloorHockey 4Ͳ6yrolds YouthAthletics Fall Revenue KindSuperSports Kindergarten YouthAthletics Fall/Winter/Spring Revenue KͲ1stHoops KͲ1stGrade YouthAthletics Winter Revenue PeeWeeLacrosse KͲ1stGrade YouthAthletics Spring Revenue Golf KͲ2ndGrade YouthAthletics Fall/Spring Revenue DodgeBall KͲ2ndGrade YouthAthletics Fall Revenue FlagFootball 1stͲ2ndGrade YouthAthletics Fall Revenue Basketball 1stͲ2ndGrade YouthAthletics Fall Revenue 1/2SuperSports 1stͲ2ndGrade YouthAthletics Fall/Winter/Spring Revenue GirlsLacrosseClinics 1stͲ2ndGrade YouthAthletics Spring Revenue PlayBall 1stͲ3rdGrade YouthAthletics Spring Revenue 2ndͲ3rdHoops 2ndͲ3rdGrade YouthAthletics Winter Revenue UltimateSports 2ndͲ3rdGrade YouthAthletics Fall/Winter/Spring Revenue FlagFootball 2ndͲ4thGrade YouthAthletics Fall Revenue BoysLacrosse 2ndͲ8thGrade YouthAthletics Fall/Spring Revenue GirlsLacrosse 3rdͲ8thGrade YouthAthletics Fall/Spring Revenue BoysTravelLacrosse 4thͲ8thGrade YouthAthletics Spring Revenue TravelBaketball 3rdͲ8thGrade YouthAthletics Winter Revenue CoͲEdVolleyball 5thͲ8thGrade YouthAthletics Fall ProgramrunbyWinnetkaPD,butofferedtoNF GirlsHouseLeagueSoftball 3rdͲ8thGrade YouthAthletics Spring ProgramrunbyWinnetkaPD,butofferedtoNF BaseballLessons 4yrsͲ8thGrade YouthAthletics Fall/Winter/Spring/Summer Revenue Karate 4yrsͲFamily YouthAthletics Spring Revenue NewProgram Yoga Adult Adult Fall/Winter/Spring/Summer Revenue Seniors Adult Adult Fall/Winter/Spring TaxSupported JumpStartintheMorning Adult Adult Fall/Winter/Spring/Summer Revenue PersonalTraining Adult Fitness Fall/Winter/Spring/Summer Revenue FitnessMemberships Adult Fitness Fall/Winter/Spring/Summer Revenue GiggleGangCamp 3Ͳ5yrolds Camp Summer Revenue TrailblazerCamp 1stͲ4thGraders Camp Summer Revenue SportsCamp 1stͲ5thGraders Camp Summer Revenue ExplorersCamp 5thͲ8thGrade Camp Summer Revenue CounselorInTraining 6thͲ9thGrade Camp Summer Revenue GirlsLacrosseCamp 3rdͲ9thGrade Camp Summer Revenue BoysLacrosseCamp KͲ8thGrade Camp Summer Revenue WinntekaGolfClub AllAges Fall/Spring/Summer WinntekaPDFacility,butofferedtoNF WinnetkaPaddleClub AllAges Fall/Winter/Spring WinntekaPDFacility,butofferedtoNF NorthfieldStateFair AllAges SpecialEvent Fall TaxSupported Dad/SonEvents KͲ3rdGrade&Dad SpecialEvent Fall Revenue GlitzyGirls KͲ3rdGrade SpecialEvent Fall/Winter Revenue FlagFootballTourney KͲ3rdGrade SpecialEvent Fall Revenue BooBash 3Ͳ8yrolds&Parents SpecialEvent Fall TaxSupported T.N.T.(TeensofNewTrier) 5thͲ8thGrade SpecialEvent Fall/Winter/Spring TaxSupported MagicClass(1day) 5Ͳ12yrolds SpecialEvent Winter Revenue HolidayWinterFest 2Ͳ8yrolds&Parents SpecialEvent Winter TaxSupported SantaLetters 2Ͳ10yrolds SpecialEvent Winter TaxSupported Mother/SonDateNight KͲ3rdGrade SpecialEvent Winter Revenue Dad/DaughterDateNight 4yrsͲ4thGrade SpecialEvent Winter Revenue OutdoorRink AllAges Winter TaxSupported EggHunt 2Ͳ8yrolds&Parents SpecialEvent Spring TaxSupported KiteFly 1stͲ3rdGrade SpecialEvent Spring TaxSupported Children'sConcertSeries AllAges SpecialEvent Summer TaxSupported 4thofJulyEvent AllAges SpecialEvent Summer TaxSupported KidsDogShow AllAges SpecialEvent Summer TaxSupported

140 Manhattan Park District Chapter Seven Program Demand required programs of was handful a registration only 8th Ͳ where 4th events grade, 3rd special Ͳ 3yrs includes *Primarily *Only 543 553 516 418 687 709 723 626 193387 190 225 149 245 197 464 181 143 136 129 Grade Grade* GradeGrade 310 43 476 380 50 349 55 52 up up & & 8th up up 100 97 85 55 8th 8th 4th Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ & & yrs yrs yrs 16 Training 16 Events* 3yrs Memberships Athletics 3yrs General 3yrs Youth Camp 3 Personal CategoryAdult Ages 18 2009 2010 2011 2012 Seniors 60 Special Youth Fitness Demand 2012 Ͳ Registration 2009 Program

Appendix Districtwide Comprehensive Master Plan 141