East Orange Parks Master Plan 2013/09/04

the east orange parks master plan

City of East Orange

Open Space and Recreation Element Update

Adopted by the City of East Orange Planning Board

September 4, 2013

The East Orange Parks Master Plan:City of East Orange, Open Space andRecreation Element Update,Adopted by the City of East Orange Planning Board September 4, 2013.

The Parks Master Plan effort was led by the City of East Orange Department of Policy, Planning, and Development.

The consultant team was led by Wells Appel, with the Nishuane Group, Toole Recreation Planning, Langan Engineering and Environmental Services, and VJ Associates.

Joseph Sikora, RLALandscape Architect, New JerseyLicense #21AS00095400

Michèle S. Delisfort, P.P., A.I.C.PNew Jersey Professional PlannerLicense #33LI00615500

Table of Contents

03 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

07 INTRODUCTION

11 THE SURROUNDINGS: THE REGIONAL CONTEXT OF EAST ORANGE

21 THE CITY AND ITS PARKS: THE EAST ORANGE PARK SYSTEM

29 WHO IS USING THE PARKS?: DEMOGRAPHICS IN EAST ORANGE

39 WHAT DOES THE COMMUNITY THINK? COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: PROCESS, ISSUES, AND IDEAS

55 BIG IDEAS: SYSTEM-WIDE RECOMMENDATIONS

63 THE CITY’S PARKS: WARD 1 (SOVEREL PARK)

79 THE CITY’S PARKS: WARD 2 (MEMORIAL + ROWLEY PARKS)

99 THE CITY’S PARKS: WARD 3 (ELMWOOD PARK + WASHINGTON PLAYGROUND)

127 THE CITY’S PARKS: WARD 4 (EAST ORANGE OVAL + FRANCIS HAIRE PARK)

155 THE CITY’S PARKS: WARD 5 (HOFFMAN PARK + COLUMBIAN PLAYGROUND)

175 A PLANTING PALETTE FOR EAST ORANGE

197 A MATERIAL PALETTE FOR EAST ORANGE

215 ART AND COMMUNITY IN EAST ORANGE

219 HOW MUCH PARK DO WE NEED?: ASSESSING PARK NEED IN EAST ORANGE

227 HOW CAN WE ADD PARK SPACE?: OPPORTUNITY FOR PARKS IN EAST ORANGE

241 ORGANIZATION + MANAGEMENT

261 PROGRAMS + SERVICES

271 INVESTING IN PARKS + RECREATION

283 PRIORITIES + BUDGET ESTIMATES FOR PHYSICAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS

293 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

301 BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDIX 1 STORMWATER, CULTURAL + ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS

APPENDIX 2 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SURVEY AND DETAILED NOTES FROM NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS + FOCUS GROUPS

APPENDIX 3 DETAILED EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANS FOR EACH PARK

APPENDIX 4 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION ON PARKS ORGANIZATION + MANAGEMENT

APPENDIX 5 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION ON INVESTING IN PARKS + RECREATION

APPENDIX 6 DETAILED BUDGET ESTIMATES FOR EACH PARK

READER’S GUIDE: This document is intended to be a refer-ence manual and is not intended to be read straight through from cover to cover. There may be some rep-etition across chapters, but this is intentional to en-sure clarity. The Appendices are bound under sepa-rate cover.

Table of Contents, continued

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS >>> 3

List of Illustrations

FIGURE C1: LOCATION PLAN AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES

FIGURE C2: REGIONAL HYDROLOGY & WATERSHEDS

FIGURE C3: REGIONAL CHANGE IN ELEVATION

FIGURE C4: REGIONAL CONTEXT

FIGURE D1: OVERALL CITY PLAN

FIGURE D2: PARK AMENITIES

FIGURE E1: RACIAL MAKEUP OF EAST ORANGE

FIGURE E2: POPULATION DENSITY

FIGURE E3: RESIDENTS UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE

FIGURE E4: RESIDENTS OVER 65 YEARS OF AGE

FIGURE E5: MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME

FIGURE G1: A VISION FOR THE NEW SECOND RIVER AT SOVEREL PARK

FIGURE G2: SOVEREL PARK PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS PLAN

FIGURE G3: WARD 1 CONTEXT PLAN

FIGURE G4: SOVEREL PARK EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN

FIGURE H1: A VISION FOR THE NEW MEMORIAL PARK.

FIGURE H2: MEMORIAL PARK PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS PLAN

FIGURE H3: WARD 2 CONTEXT PLAN

FIGURE H4: MEMORIAL PARK EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN

12

14

15

16

22

24

30

35

36

37

38

64

66

74

76

80

82

92

94

4 >>> LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

FIGURE H5: ROWLEY PARK EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN

FIGURE I1: A VISION FOR ELMWOOD PARK.

FIGURE I2: ELMWOOD PARK PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS PLAN

FIGURE I3: WASHINGTON PLAYGROUND PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS PLAN

FIGURE I4: WARD 3 CONTEXT PLAN

FIGURE I5: ELMWOOD PARK EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN

FIGURE I6: WASHINGTON PLAYGROUND EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN

FIGURE J1: A VISION FOR THE EAST ORANGE OVAL.

FIGURE J2: THE OVAL PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS PLAN

FIGURE J3: FRANCIS HAIRE PLAYGROUND PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS PLAN

FIGURE J4: WARD 4 CONTEXT PLAN

FIGURE J5: EAST ORANGE OVAL EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN

FIGURE J6: FRANCIS HAIRE PLAYGROUND EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN

FIGURE K1: HOFFMAN PARK PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS PLAN

FIGURE K2: COLUMBIAN PLAYGROUND PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS PLAN

FIGURE K3: WARD 5 CONTEXT PLAN

FIGURE K4: HOFFMAN PARK EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN

FIGURE K5: COLUMBIAN PLAYGROUND EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN

FIGURE O1: PARK ACRES/1,000 FOR SIMILARLY DENSE CITIES

96

100

102

106

120

122

124

128

130

134

148

150

152

156

158

168

170

172

219

List of Illustrations, continued

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS >>> 5

FIGURE O2: TOTAL PARK ACREAGE FOR EAST ORANGE

FIGURE O3: PARK AREA PER 1,000 PEOPLE, SELECTED CITIES

FIGURE O4: PARK SIZE AND DISTRIBUTION PATTERNS, SELECTED CITIES

FIGURE O5: WALKING DISTANCE TO PARKS

FIGURE O6: WALKING DISTANCE TO PARKS AT STREET LEVEL

FIGURE O7: GREATEST PARK NEED

FIGURE P1: POTENTIAL AREAS FOR NEW PARKS

FIGURE P2: PARK CONNECTOR STREETS

FIGURE P3: NEIGHBORHOOD POCKET PARK

FIGURE P4: TREE CANOPY COVERAGE RECOMMENDATIONS

FIGURE Q1: EXISTING ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE RELATED TO PARKS + RECREATION

FIGURE Q2: PROPOSED PARKS + RECREATION DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

FIGURE Q3: PARK MAINTENANCE MODES

FIGURE Q4: MANAGEMENT IMPACT STATEMENT TOOL

FIGURE Q5: POTENTIAL ORGANIZATION FOR PARK FRIENDS GROUPS

FIGURE U1: PARKS & RECREATION YEAR ONE SCHEDULE

FIGURE U2: PARKS & RECREATION IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE

FIGURE U3: SAMPLE CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS

220

221

222

224

225

226

230

231

232

233

245

252

254

256

259

296

298

300

List of Illustrations, continued

INTRODUCTION: THE EAST ORANGE PARKS MASTER PLAN >>> 7

introductionThe East Orange Parks Master Plan

The purpose of this plan is to update the City of East Orange 2006 Comprehensive Master Plan, provide a roadmap for improving parks and recre-ation in the city, and provide a resource for pursu-ing additional funding and grant opportunities.

Parks and recreation in East Orange once held a place of prominence in the country and was widely regarded as a model for its innovative management and investment in urban parks and recreation. Offi-cials from other municipalities would make the trek to East Orange to learn from its approach and tour its parks. The quality of life in the city was so great that in 1921, the population was projected to climb to 122,000 by 1971. Today’s population hovers near 70,000.

The parks are a vehicle for change in East Orange. Investing in parks and recreation will have an enormous impact on the quality of life in the city. Residents will be happier, healthier, and take more pride in their city; property values will increase; air quality will improve; stormwater will be better managed; communities will be brought closer to-gether; and new residents and businesses will be drawn to the city.

Economically, studies have shown that quality of life comes right after location and availability of

workforce as a key factor in determining where to open a business. Parks and recreation are a major quality of life component.

MAJOR ELEMENTS OF THE PLAN

• Improvements to all existing parks to make them precious valued public spaces to be used and trea-sured by people of all ages for many generations yet to come.

• Development of strategies for the design, planning, maintenance and programming of parks to ensure their long-term sustainability.

• Use of creative place making techniques to reflect the community in the parks.

• Reunification of the city through park connector streets, gateways, public art, and a new deck park over Interstate I-280.

• Strategies to increase usable park and recreation space without reducing tax rateables and build un-derstanding that great parks foster economic devel-opment.

• Identification of alternative methods of supporting parks and recreation through partnerships, sponsor-

8 >>> INTRODUCTION: THE EAST ORANGE PARKS MASTER PLAN

ships, civic engagement, and private revenue gen-eration.

• Suggested reorganization of the management and administration of parks and recreation.

• Generate public consensus for park revitalization and a call to action for citizens to become engaged in park stewardship.

• Delineation of a phased implementation strategy with budget cost estimates for parks and recre-ation improvements.

PREVIOUS PLANNING DOCUMENTS

This Parks Master Plan amends the City of East Orange 2006 Comprehensive Master Plan, which was adopted April 5, 2006. The last study related to the development of the parks was completed in December 1945, entitled East Orange Schools and Recreation.

THE PLANNING PROCESS

Many partners were involved in the development of this plan. Civic engagement was the hallmark

of the planning process. Focus groups, interviews, and public meetings generated valuable input from the people of East Orange, community organizations, and key stakeholders. The information and communi-ty perspectives were used to develop the initiatives and recommendations in this plan. It reflects a broad consensus of public opinion and user needs.

The Department of Policy, Planning, and Develop-ment in the City of East Orange spearheaded the effort. In 2011, the city selected a consultant team led by Wells Appel (landscape architects), with the Nishuane Group (community planners), Toole Recre-ation Planning (parks and recreation planners), Lan-gan Engineering and Environmental Services (civil engineers), and VJ Associates (construction cost estimating). The project commenced in January 2013 and was substantially complete by July 2013.

The consultant team conducted in-depth research, analyzed existing conditions, and explored national trends and ideas that could take root in East Orange.

THE MASTER PLAN

The Master Plan is a comprehensive set of recom-mendations for the revitalization of East Orange’s parks and recreation facilities. The recommenda-

INTRODUCTION: THE EAST ORANGE PARKS MASTER PLAN >>> 9

tions are put into a context that will lead to the establishment of a system that will organization-ally and physically connect them through effective management, programming and maintenance.

A LIVING DOCUMENT

The Master Plan is a guide for future implementa-tion projects that will be necessary for the City of East Orange to achieve the goals established in this plan. While there may be different views about specific recommendations or projects, the goals were arrived at through extensive public involve-ment and represent core principles and community consensus.

The challenge is to build momentum for implement-ing the plan. Every success, no matter how small, is a step forward in returning the parks of East Or-ange to their former glory and renown. The plan and its recommendations should be reviewed annually in light of changing needs and opportunities. The key is to keep moving forward in harmony with the core principles and goals established by the com-munity in the East Orange Parks Master Plan.

the surroundingsThe Regional Context of East Orange

THE SURROUNDINGS: THE REGIONAL CONTEXT OF EAST ORANGE >>> 11

the surroundingsThe Regional Context of East Orange

LOCATION

East Orange is located in Essex County, in the up-per half of New Jersey. Downtown Newark is a close 10 minute drive or 5 minute train ride to the east, while New York City is about a 30 minute drive or less than an hour by train.

The city is situated between the Watchung Moun-tains to the west and Newark Bay and the Atlantic Ocean to the east.

The city is largely a bedroom community with many residents commuting to Newark, New York, or other areas within Essex County for employment. As such, the city is well connected to the region through New Jersey Transit train lines and bus routes. Interstate 280, running east and west, and

the Garden State Parkway, running north and south are the primary vehicular connections between the city and points throughout the region.

PHYSIOGRAPHIC CONTEXT

New Jersey is divided into four broad physiographic regions: the Ridge and Valley, Highlands, Piedmont, and the Coastal Plains. These regions help describe terrain texture, rock type, geologic structure and his-tory and are illustrated in Figure C1.

East Orange is situated within the Piedmont section, which occupies about 20 percent of the land area of New Jersey. This section slopes gently southward from about 400 feet above sea level to sea level at Newark Bay. It is flat in some areas, but in general is slightly rolling terrain, with mostly gentle slopes.

THE VIEW FROM EAGLE ROCK RESERVATION ON WATCHUNG’S FIRST MOUNTAIN LOOKING OVER EAST ORANGE TOWARD NEW YORK AND NEWARK

12 >>> THE SURROUNDINGS: THE REGIONAL CONTEXT OF EAST ORANGE

��

��

��

��

��

��

� ��

��

��

�

FIGURE C1: LOCATION PLAN AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCESEast Orange Park Master Plan


This tends to result in highly developable land, which is certainly the case in East Orange, where the majority of land has been developed.

Within the Piedmont section, several ridge forma-tions rise high above the surrounding lowlands. One formation is directly west of East Orange and is composed of the three Watchung Mountains (850, 650, and 350 feet high). These formations are made of lava material—diabase and basaltic rocks, which are much harder than the sandstone of the Piedmont. Therefore, these have resisted erosion, while the less resistant shale and sandstone have worn away and produced lower elevations (Collins and Anderson 39).

Because of the ways the land has been shaped over time, there are a variety of recreational oppor-tunities within a short trip from East Orange, from mountains to lowlands to the Atlantic Ocean.

Figure C2 illustrates the regional network of open water as well as broad watershed boundaries. The only remaining water course in East Orange that has not been buried is the Second River, which runs through the northwest section of the city. This eventually joins with the Passaic River, which joins the Hackensack River in Newark Bay, to make its way out to the Atlantic. The northern side of East

Orange belongs to the Hackensack-Passaic Water-shed, while the south lies within the Sandy Hook-Staten Island Watershed. The southern portion of the city drains to the Elizabeth River, which travels southeast to make its way to Newark Bay.

Many watershed organizations exist in New Jersey and may be able to assist with watershed improve-ments that will improve the life of all waterways downstream of East Orange. The Watershed Institute offers guidance on available grants as well as lists of watershed organizations in the region. Improvements to a watershed can include installation of raingar-dens and vegetated swales, reduction of impervious surface, installation of permeable paving in place of impermeable paving, increase in tree canopy cover-age, and riparian plantings along the Second River. In short, any improvements that improve stormwater runoff quality or decrease stormwater runoff volume are watershed improvements.

Figure C3 illustrates the topographic change in ele-vation from the mountains to the west of East Orange down to Newark Bay in the east. It is easy to see that the city rests within a relatively flat area between more dramatic rises in elevation between mountain, river, and ocean.


��

��

��

��

�

��

� ��

��

��

��

� ��

��

� ��

FIGURE C2: REGIONAL HYDROLOGY & WATERSHEDSEast Orange Park Master Plan


FIGURE C3: REGIONAL CHANGE IN ELEVATIONEast Orange Park Master Plan

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

� ��

��

��

��

� ��

��

� ��


T

T

T

T

T

T

T

T

T

T

TT

T

T

T T T

T

T

T

T

T

T

T

TT

T

TT

T

WEST ORANGE

BLOOMFIELD

SOUTH ORANGE

IRVINGTON

NEWARK

UNION

CITY OF ORANGE

EAST ORANGE

HARRISON

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

UPPER ROSEVILLE

BELLEVIEW

FAIRMOUNT

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

T

��

��

��

��

��

��

FIGURE C4: REGIONAL CONTEXTEast Orange Park Master Plan


REGIONAL CONTEXT: PARKS AND RECREATION

Figure C4 situates the city within its regional con-text. The major connections via highway or train line are shown, as are the major surrounding mu-nicipalities. Also illustrated are a number of parks within the surrounding area.

This parks master plan proposes detailed im-provements to the parks and recreation offerings within East Orange itself, but so many opportuni-ties exist regionally that it makes sense to provide a brief overview of the major parks closest to the city. Since park space is at such a premium with-in the city and immersion within nature difficult, residents and the city’s recreational programming should take advantage of the many parks within the region.

BRANCH BROOK PARK

The closest large park is the historic Branch Brook Park, accessible by train and bus. This 360 acre county park, designed by the Olmsted Brothers and initially built in 1896, offers a broad range of passive recreation opportunities such as strolling, bird watching, cycling, fishing, and jogging. Athlet-

ic offerings at Branch Brook Park include:

• Baseball: 2 Fields • Softball: 3 Fields • Cricket: 2 Pitches • Soccer/Football: 1 Field • Youth Soccer: 1 Field • Basketball Courts • Bocce Courts • Roller Skating Center • Tennis Courts: 16 Hard and 4 Clay Courts

The park has over 4,000 cherry trees, making it the largest collection of Japanese cherry trees in one place in the United States. Its cherry blossom fes-tival is extremely popular and draws visitors from all over the region. The park also contains an intricate system of open water, spanned by 19 bridges.

The Branch Brook Park Alliance website is an in-spiring representation of what is possible in a pub-lic/private partnership aimed at improving parks and recreation.

T

T

T

T

T

T

T

T

T

T

TT

T

T

T T T

T

T

T

T

T

T

T

TT

T

TT

T

WEST ORANGE

BLOOMFIELD

SOUTH ORANGE

IRVINGTON

NEWARK

UNION

CITY OF ORANGE

EAST ORANGE

HARRISON

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

UPPER ROSEVILLE

BELLEVIEW

FAIRMOUNT

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

T

��

��

��

��

��

��

CHERRY BLOSSOMS AT BRANCH BROOK PARK


SOUTH MOUNTAIN RESERVATION

Just to the west of East Orange, and situated be-tween the first and second ridges of the Watchung Mountain range, this county park has been largely preserved as a large natural area. It contains large wooded areas, creeks, streams, waterfalls, and ponds. On visiting, Frederick Law Olmsted, the famed “father of landscape architecture”, regard-ed it as some of the most beautiful terrain he had ever seen.

Also within the park boundaries are the Turtle Back Zoo and the Richard J. Codey Arena, which offers year-round public ice skating, a summer camp for

figure skating, and lessons. It is also the official training facility of the Stanley Cup Champion New Jersey Devils. In terms of facilities, the park offers:

• Turtle Back Zoo • 2 Indoor Ice Skating Rinks • 10 Picnic Areas • 46 Miles of Trails and Carriage Roads • Archery Range • Fishing • Off-leash Dog Park

HEMLOCK FALLS AT SOUTH MOUNTAIN RESERVATION

CANOE BROOK AT THE EAST ORANGE GOLF COURSE


THE EAST ORANGE GOLF COURSE

Owned by the City of East Orange, the Golf Course is located in Short Hills, New Jersey, about 25 min-utes west of the city by car, but is not accessible by train or bus. The 18 hole golf course is currently undergoing a series of improvements by the city as the result of a recent master plan. It lies within over 2,300 acres of land making up the East Orange Water Reserve. It is adjacent to Canoe Brook Res-ervoirs No. 1 and No. 2 and with its range of eco-systems, provides many potential opportunities for passive recreation and ecological restoration, as well as the opportunity for golf.

EAGLE ROCK RESERVATION

Located to the northwest of East Orange, about ten minutes away by car, is the Eagle Rock Reserva-tion, another Essex County Park. This 408 acre park is located on the crest of Watchung’s First Moun-tain and is primarily preserved, undeveloped land laced with hiking and equestrian trails. Also de-signed by the Olmsted firm, the park is famous for its unrivaled views of New York and Newark. The Eagle Rock Reservation Conservancy is another public-private partnership devoted to the mainte-nance, preservation, and restoration of the park.

OTHER ESSEX COUNTY PARKS

In 1895, Essex County created the first county park system in the United States. Today, 27 parks and reservations exist in the system, and most were de-signed by the Olmsted Brothers. A few of the larger parks close to East Orange have been described in this section, while the two county parks that directly serve the city, Watsessing Park and Monte Irvin Or-ange Park, are covered in the next section. With such an extensive and inclusive system of parks close to the city, activated by a robust events calendar and park program offerings, Essex County provides East Orange residents with a priceless amenity.

the city and its parks

The East Orange Park System

THE CITY AND ITS PARKS: THE EAST ORANGE PARK SYSTEM >>> 21

the city and its parksThe East Orange Park System

OVERVIEW OF THE CITY

The City of East Orange is roughly 4 miles square and houses close to 70,000 residents, making it one of the densest municipalities in the country. It is served by two train stations on the New Jersey Transit Gladstone and Morristown train lines and by an extensive system of bus routes.

The city is sharply divided into north and south right across its center by Interstate 280, and into east and west by the Garden State Parkway.

City Hall and the majority of civic buildings are lo-cated near the center of the city, close to the in-tersection of the interstate and the parkway, and adjacent to one of the city’s train stations.

Five distinct wards make up the city and a strong spirit of friendly competition exists among them. Each ward has a unique character and its own set of concerns and issues.

East Orange is a city on the upswing. Within its history, it has experienced a long period of great economic prosperity and investment in public in-frastructure and amenities, followed by the flight of the gentry and the loss of a significant amount of tax revenue. Today the city is working hard to el-evate the quality of life for its existing residents,

and to attract new residents to East Orange. The city is striving to make East Orange a place where people want to live, work, and play. The improvement of the city’s parks and recreational offerings would go a long way in accomplishing the city’s goals. A city’s park system is a highly visible quality of life indica-tor, and a powerful tool in attracting new residents.

In terms of existing parks and open space, there are a total of 9 municipal parks throughout the city, com-prising a total of 45 acres. Figure D1 illustrates the parks and other open space within the city. Wash-ington Playground is currently a Board of Education property, but is being treated as a municipal park for the purposes of this study.

Two major Essex County parks also serve East Or-ange: Watsessing Park to the north and Monte Irvin Orange Park to the east. Both are large parks, just under 70 acres and 50 acres, respectively. Watsess-ing houses playgrounds, football, softball, cricket, and lacrosse/soccer fields, a bowling green, basket-ball courts, a dog park, and a senior citizen recre-ation building. Orange Park offers football, soccer, and softball fields, a jogging path, a fishing pond, a basketball court, and a playground. Like all Essex County Parks, Watsessing and Orange Parks were designed by the famed landscape architects, the Ol-msted Brothers.

T

T

L

H

H

L

L

L

FIRST WARD

SECOND WARD

THIRD WARD FOURTH

WARD

FIFTH WARD

��

COLUMBIAN PLAYGROUND

EAST ORANGE OVAL

SOVEREL PARK

ROWLEY PARK

HOFFMAN PARK

MEMORIAL PARK

FRANCIS HAIRE PLAYGROUND

ELMWOOD PARK

WASHINGTON PLAYGROUND

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

HL

T

*��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

22 >>> THE CITY AND ITS PARKS: THE EAST ORANGE PARK SYSTEM

FIGURE D1: OVERALL CITY PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan


The City of East Orange Board of Education also operates Robeson Stadium (formerly Martens Park) and the grounds of the East Orange Campus High School. The Stadium offers track, football with stadium seating, and baseball, while East Or-ange Campus High School houses tennis, softball, track, and a football field. However, it is expensive, difficult, and sometimes impossible for residents to use Board of Education facilities. These ameni-ties are illustrated in this study only as a means of demonstrating what publicly funded facilities could be available to residents if it were feasible.

The distribution of park amenities is illustrated in Figure D2, and captures the municipal parks as well as the county and Board of Education parks.

The majority of municipal parks contain a field-house and most were originally designed with one. Soverel Park is the largest municipal park, at over 11 acres, followed by Elmwood Park, at just under

9 acres, and the East Orange Oval, at just under 8 acres. Five of the parks are between 2.5 and 4.5 acres, with one park just over half an acre.

Amenities in the parks encompass swimming, bas-ketball, baseball, tennis, volleyball, handball, play-grounds, swimming pools, and a spray park. Program offerings are covered in a separate section of this report.

Rowley Park was recently renovated by the City and reopened in November of 2011. It contains a new fieldhouse, an informal grass field, a spray park, and basketball courts. Reception of this park by the com-munity has been great and the park won a state parks and recreation award in 2013. Situated within an area of the city with the greatest need for quality parks and open space, the renovation of Rowley Park rep-resents a significant step forward for the city.

Overall, the remaining municipal parks in the city are in various states of disrepair and are in need of major renovation. One major finding is that there is very little opportunity to experience nature within the parks (or within the city as a whole). Also, many resi-dents expressed feeling unsafe in the parks, despite evidence that crime has dropped considerably. There should also be more opportunities for all genera-tions and ages to enjoy the parks. It was found that

“Ridges and valleys were topographical features of the landscape, and brooks and partly inundated lands existing in every part of town.” - HISTORY OF THE ORANGES TO 1921

T

T

L

H

H

L

L

L

FIRST WARD

SECOND WARD

THIRD WARD FOURTH

WARD

FIFTH WARD

��


EAST ORANGE OVAL

SOVEREL PARK

ROWLEY PARK

HOFFMAN PARK

MEMORIAL PARK


ELMWOOD PARK


��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

HL

T

*��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��


SOVEREL PARK ��

��

��

��

��

BOARD OF EDUCATION PARKS

WATSESSING COUNTY PARK

ROWLEY PARK


MEMORIAL PARK

ELMWOOD PARK


ORANGE COUNTY PARK

EAST ORANGE OVAL



HOFFMAN PARK


��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

VALISBURG PARK


FIGURE D2: PARK AMENITIESEast Orange Park Master Plan

SOVEREL PARK ��

��

��

��

��


WATSESSING COUNTY PARK

ROWLEY PARK


MEMORIAL PARK

ELMWOOD PARK


ORANGE COUNTY PARK

EAST ORANGE OVAL



HOFFMAN PARK


��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

VALISBURG PARK


the parks do not reflect the diversity of the current population of the city, and do not reflect their com-munities. For more information on findings gleaned from the community engagement process, refer to the chapter on community engagement. Specific existing conditions analysis findings are also pre-sented for each park later in this study.

EAST ORANGE BACKGROUND AND HISTORY

The boundaries for East Orange were laid out in 1863, and encompassed just under four square miles, roughly the same size as today. The land at that time was largely unimproved except for farm-ing purposes. The population in 1863 was about 3,000 (Pierson 536).

Road improvements began six years later, in 1869 at Main Street and were followed by the installation of gas lamps in 1873. At that time, there were report-edly numerous springs, brooks, woods, and bog lands scattered throughout East Orange. However, by 1921, the city plan reported that “East Orange contains no ponds and only three small streams, two of which are already being covered...the wood-ed tracts have almost entirely disappeared...There is scarcely any natural scenery left in the commu-nity” (City Plan Commission). Today, the only re-maining open water is the channelized segment of

the Second River flowing along Soverel Park.

1886 saw the city laid out into four wards, with the fifth added in 1892. By 1899, in just 36 years, the city’s population had grown from 3,000 to 30,000.

Trolley cars along Central Avenue began running in 1904 and opened up the development of unoccupied land in the southern half of the city (Pierson 544). Central Avenue became known as “the Fifth Avenue of the Suburbs”, due to its high-end department stores (Hart Images 65).

1904 also saw the newly created Shade Tree Com-mission plant its first tree (Hart Images 28). The first city arborist was William Solataroff, who literally wrote the book on urban trees, under the title “Shade Trees in Towns and Cities”, which was heavily used for many years (Hart Postcards 121). It was noted that the city spent a sum of $13,000 in 1920 (equiva-lent to $151,472 today) to maintain and plant shade trees throughout the city (Pierson 545). Since at least 1921, the city has maintained its own nursery - it was noted that at one time over 4,000 trees were under cultivation. The commission also gave free advice to citizens on the care and maintenance of trees on their properties (Pierson 559). Today the East Orange Shade Tree Division still exists and works to main-tain the street trees in the city. The existing trees


throughout the city are a treasure that should be carefully maintained and streets with gaps in the tree canopy should be planted anew.

In 1907, the mayor of East Orange recommended the “immediate laying out of playgrounds for use by the children of the city”. Elmwood Park, which at the time was being used as an ash dump, was pro-posed to be converted to a playground. The Oval was purchased in 1907. Today’s Robeson Stadium was purchased by the Board of Education in 1905, and in 1919 the land for Columbian Playground was purchased (Pierson 562-563).

The 1920s and 1930s saw significant investment in the city’s parks and public amenities, led by the Board of Recreation Commissioners. Soverel Park was purchased in 1922; significant improvements were made at the Oval and Elmwood; and Memorial Field was completed in 1930.

In 1931, the city was aware of the very real ability of parkland to draw new residents to East Orange. In the 1931 Annual Report from the Board of Recreation Commission-ers, it is stated that “the East Orange Oval, directly across from the Grove Street Sta-tion, and Memorial Field, just west of the East Orange Station, within easy view of all Lackawanna [train] passengers, so long

as they are well kept and largely used, are a splendid advertisement. Those seeking a home in the subur-ban section are quite naturally impressed with the fact that East Orange is a good place to rear a fam-ily” (Board of Recreation Commissioners 13). This same attitude about the value of urban park space is a driving force behind the current parks master plan.

Skipping ahead to the 1960s, Interstate I-280 was constructed, and as happened in many urban cen-ters, a good portion of the tax base in the city moved farther out into the suburbs. This was encouraged by the Newark riots of 1967, the culmination of years of social unrest.

Today, the city is making great strides towards a return to stability and prominence. The importance of the park and recreation system in improving the quality of life in the city cannot be overstated. The East Orange of today is a diverse city with residents

LONDON PLANE TREES ALONG MELROSE AVENUE


from all over the world, especially the Caribbean, South America, and Africa.

The city has a rich history athletically, with its im-portance within the history of the Negro Baseball Leagues, and the presence and interest of athletic stars such as Althea Gibson, major league base-ball players, and professional football and basket-ball players.

Arts and culture are just as important to residents of the city. A number of artists have come out of East Orange and contributed funds for schools and other public improvements. There are many oppor-tunities within the park and recreation system for public art, arts programming, outdoor performance spaces, and other ways to use creative and innova-tive strategies to reflect what makes East Orange unique. For more detail on these ideas, see the chapter on Art and Community in East Orange.

who is using the parks?

Demographics in East Orange

WHO IS USING THE PARKS?: DEMOGRAPHICS IN EAST ORANGE >>> 29

who is using the parks?Demographics in East Orange

The City of East Orange is fortunate to have a di-verse population of citizens who are highly cre-ative, passionate, bold, forward-looking, and inter-ested in the future of their city. No park system can be successful without an understanding of its us-ers, and support and input from the community are essential. While the demographic overview that follows is useful in many ways, it is of the utmost importance that ongoing community engagement must be carried forward to ensure the parks meet the needs of their communities.

TEENAGE PARK USERS AT ELMWOOD PARK, APRIL 2013

POPULATION DENSITY

One striking characteristic of the city is its popula-tion density. According to the 2010 US Census, the population of East Orange is just under 65,000 indi-viduals. Independent studies undertaken by the City and based on sewage use and garbage collection indicate the population may be closer to 72,000. The city occupies a mere 3.9 square miles—meaning that the population density using the US Census number comes to over 16,000 people per square mile. Using the number arrived at by the city, the density comes

to over 18,000 people per square mile! Population density for Es-sex County is only 6,212 people per square mile, while New Jer-sey comes in at only 1,196 peo-ple per square mile.

The State of New Jersey ranks 1st in the country for popula-tion density, and East Orange ranks 12th out of 566 municipali-ties in the State. In other words, there are a lot of people living in this 3.9 square mile city and it’s one of the densest cities in the country. The importance of park space in any city cannot be

30 >>> WHO IS USING THE PARKS?: DEMOGRAPHICS IN EAST ORANGE

overstated, but the need is amplified the denser a city becomes. This issue is covered in more depth in the section on assessing park need in East Or-ange.

RACE, ETHNICITY, AND ANCESTRAL HERITAGE

Many bits of census data combine to numerically represent what makes East Orange unique, but one data set speaks volumes about the city. The diverse race and ethnicity of its citizens is special and sets it apart from other cities and the state. While only about 13% of New Jersey is African American, 86% of East Orange is African American. And within

this number, a whole range of diversity resides. Re-garding ancestral origins, the population contains citizens from Haiti (3,400 individuals according to the US Census), Jamaica (3,400) Guyana (2,900), Trinidad and Tobago (1,200), Ghana, Nigeria, Liberia, and many others. The hispanic and latino population of the city hails from Puerto Rico (1,980), Brazil, and many oth-ers. We also recognize that these US Census num-bers are most likely not accurate and that the num-bers of individuals from these different backgrounds are probably much higher than reported.

The State of New Jersey ranks 1st in the country for population density, and East Orange ranks 12th out of 566 municipalities in the State.

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

FIGURE E1: RACIAL MAKEUP OF EAST ORANGEEast Orange Park Master Plan


HISTORIC CHANGES IN THE MAKEUP OF THE CITY

Interestingly, the 1922 City Plan for East Orange estimated the 1971 population would be 122,500 ac-cording to the growth projections reviewed at that time. In 1920 the population was just under 51,000. The fact that the population of the city is currently around 70,000 is due in large part to a few events that combined to drastically alter the makeup of the city forever. The first was the installation of Interstate 280, which occurred in the mid 1960s. This interstate cut the city directly in half and created a physical and emotional dividing line right through the heart of the city. This, along with the rest of the growing interstate system, encouraged what is known as the ‘flight of the gentry’ - the great migration of many members of the middle and upper class from urban centers

GUYANA’S 46TH INDEPENDENCE ANNIVERSARY5TH ANNUAL FLAG RAISING CEREMONY, JUNE 2012(PHOTO: DENZEL THOMPSON)

to suburban communities.

Also of note, the same 1922 City Plan states that the small population of minorities resided at that time in the center of the City.

The Newark riots of 1967 also changed the makeup of the City forever. This social unrest encouraged many

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

SOME OF THE MAJOR ANCESTRAL ORIGINS OF EAST ORANGE RESIDENTS


YOUNG PARK USERS AT SOVEREL PARK, SEPTEMBER 2011

members of the middle and upper class to move out of densely populated cities and into the suburbs, where safety was perceived to be greater.

In spite of the troubles it has faced, the City has made great strides to improve its economic and social standing, and to improve the quality of life for its citi-zens. As part of these improvements, the City’s park system plays a vital role as a vehicle for positive change within this unique community.

DEMOGRAPHICS MAPPING

To help determine whether specific parks are meeting the needs of their adjoining communities, this study in-cluded a look at where population den-sity is highest; how the senior popu-lation is spread throughout the city; how the under-18 population is spread throughout the city; and what median incomes are.

POPULATION DENSITY: A look at population density indicates that the US Census block with the highest density is locat-ed in Ward 4, and is closest to Memo-

In 1921, the population of East Orange was projected to climb to 122,000 by 1971. Today’s population hovers around 70,000.


rial and Elmwood Parks, indicating the importance of these 2 existing parks.

Two other areas of high population density are seen in Ward 2 (closest to the newly renovated Rowley Park) and Ward 3 (closest to Elmwood Park and Washington Playground).

DISTRIBUTION OF YOUTH: For the city as a whole, those 18 years and under make up about 25.7% of the popu-lation, compared to 24.5% in Essex County.

The youth of the city is at its highest concentration towards the center of the City - primarily in Ward 2, and closest to Rowley and Memorial Parks. The lowest concentrations are in the area directly sur-rounding Soverel and Watsessing Parks, and Elm-wood Park and Francis Haire Park.

Census data also indicates that a high percentage of single mothers live in the city. Of householders in East Orange, 16.5% are female without a husband and with children (the state’s percentage is 6.9%)

DISTRIBUTION OF SENIORS: Seniors make up about 12% of the city’s population, about the same proportion as Essex County. The highest concentration of seniors (aged 65 and over) by far is in Ward 5, closest to the tiny Hoffman Park and Columbian Playground. The next highest concentration is in Ward 3, closest to

Washington Playground and Orange County Park.

MEDIAN INCOME: A look at median household income in the city helps show which areas have the least per-sonal resources at their disposal—meaning the low-er the income, the higher the need is for public park space. The assumption is that if a family has less resources, they cannot necessarily afford the cost in money or time to travel to parks outside of their communities. The areas of lowest median income are located in Wards 1, 2, and 4 and nearest Soverel, Rowley, Memorial, and Francis Haire. The most af-fluent communities are located in Ward 1 and Ward 3, closest to Watsessing and Orange County Parks, Soverel Park, and Washington Playground.

The percentage of people living below the poverty line in East Orange between 2007 and 2011 was 19.4%, compared to 9.4% in the State, and 14.9% in Essex County. The Census information also indicates that East Orange has a much lower rate of home owner-ship (26.4%) than the State (66.6%) or the County (46.8%), evidenced by the continued high amount of multi-unit buildings and the high population density.


SENIOR PARK USER AT ELMWOOD PARK, SEPTEMBER 2011

THE PARKS ARE HEAVILY USED BY ATHLETIC TEAMS, SEPTEMBER 2011

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

*

��

FIRST WARD

SECOND WARD

THIRD WARD FOURTH

WARD

FIFTH WARD

10

1

9

8

3

2

6

115

4

7

12


FIGURE E2: POPULATION DENSITYEast Orange Park Master Plan

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

*

��

FIRST WARD

SECOND WARD

THIRD WARD FOURTH

WARD

FIFTH WARD

10

1

9

8

3

2

6

115

4

7

12


FIGURE E3: RESIDENTS UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGEEast Orange Park Master Plan

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

*

��

FIRST WARD

SECOND WARD

THIRD WARD FOURTH

WARD

FIFTH WARD

10

1

9

8

3

2

6

115

4

7

12


FIGURE E4: RESIDENTS OVER 65 YEARS OF AGEEast Orange Park Master Plan

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

*

��

FIRST WARD

SECOND WARD

THIRD WARD FOURTH

WARD

FIFTH WARD

10

1

9

8

3

2

6

115

4

7

12


FIGURE E5: MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOMEEast Orange Park Master Plan

what does the community

think?Community Engagement:

Process, Issues and Ideas

WHAT DOES THE COMMUNITY THINK? COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: PROCESS, ISSUES + IDEAS >>> 39

what does the community think?Community Engagement: Process, Issues and Ideas

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In Spring 2013, the Parks Master Plan consultants talked with more than 100 East Orange residents, government employees, and representatives of nonprofit and recreation groups in the city. We con-ducted a survey that received 86 responses, most of them from children, teens and older adults; the types of residents most likely to use local parks. We also made a lot of observations. The following describes what was heard and learned:

* EAST ORANGE’S PARKS ARE IMPOR-TANT TO RESIDENTS.

The parks provide places to play and relax, however physically, they could be improved. For ex-ample, residents expressed an interest in increased exercise equipment, a skate park, and more basketball courts with improved access to basketball equipment for younger chil-dren.

Additionally, park safety was a key concern amongst residents.

Most of the surveyed residents reported that they felt less than half of their neighbors would agree that daytime security is not a major issue. Alternatively, most respondents don’t feel comfortable going into their local park after dark. Despite assurances from City officials about crime going down, a number of parents and teens told us they feel the parks are dan-gerous. Better lighting -- and more supervision-- can help a lot.

PARTICIPANTS DISPLAY THEIR SKETCH FOR COLUMBIAN PLAYGROUND

40 >>> WHAT DOES THE COMMUNITY THINK? COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: PROCESS, ISSUES + IDEAS

We also learned that the Parks should be more at-tractively landscaped and offer more amenities for relaxing, such as benches, tables and water foun-tains. The asphalt tracks should be replaced with rubberized surfaces, such as those found in parks of other communities. The parks should also bet-ter reflect the visual preferences and population of their respective neighborhoods. Not only should the parks be more attractive and feel safer; there should be murals, sculptures or other symbols identifying residents and what they aspire to be.

The field houses are great resources that are unde-rutilized, in need of rehabilitation, and should offer plenty of programs. The field houses can become significant park features that could be used for us-ers in need of refreshments, restrooms, security or refuge. Additionally, the parks should offer a broader range of athletic and outdoor programming including, but not limited to, music, performing arts and nontraditional sports (in addition to bas-ketball, football and baseball). Participants also repeatedly expressed a desire for neighborhood community centers that could offer after school recreation programs for children.

Despite the articulated challenges, people inter-viewed mentioned that, in its existing condition, their local parks cater to the needs of their neigh-

borhood. However, nearly 93% of the surveyed popu-lation said that having a better park would make a big difference in their neighborhoods.

The City has many opportunities to make the parks better for residents and the communities they live in. However, the City also has major challenges its lead-ers and representatives should address. Our recom-mendations include:

* ESTABLISH AND COMPLETE A PILOT PROJECT WITHIN THE FIRST YEAR.

While we were hearing many ideas, we also heard skepticism about whether the City was committed to improving the parks. Achieving visible results will help build confidence in the City’s commitment and patience for achieving larger results. We also learned that the burning of the new playground equipment had a deep impact on residents. It led some to question whether improvements to the parks can be protected. (i.e. Residents questioned whether it is worth putting the time, money and effort into improving the parks, if residents are going to be disappointed, and why the burned equipment with its smell remains in place?). We believe the pilot projects should demonstrate how the City and the community can work together to achieve results the community can stand behind. The pilot project should be substantial enough that


it does not appear as a ‘band-aid’ fix to a park, but represents a true renovation.

* FIND BETTER WAYS TO CONNECT TO AND ENGAGE RESIDENTS AND INFLUENTIAL GROUPS IN THE CITY.

Despite holding six community meetings and four focus groups -- and doing outreach through flyers and Facebook -- only about a quarter of the antici-pated attendants participated. Not a single rep-resentative of a community based organization or religious institution attended the focus group and only one businessperson attended the focus group for merchants. Three other meetings had two participants or fewer. The City conducted out-reach for the meetings via flyers, press release, word of mouth, direct mail, email, and phone, but found that response was generally low. Some par-ticipants at meetings expressed skepticism that anything would result from the community engage-ment meetings. This may help explain why turnout was low. The consultant team also observed that it would be great for the Department of Recreation and the Library to be involved in outreach efforts. Both entities interface with the community every day and have a great network of potential partici-pants. Re-connecting to the community will es-tablish increased human capital, cultivate trust and productive synergy between the City and its

stakeholders, and the requisite support and capac-ity required to revitalize the parks and surrounding neighborhoods.

* HELP BUILD EFFECTIVE PARTNERSHIPS TO MAKE LASTING IM-PROVEMENTS TO THE PARKS BY NURTURING “FRIENDS OF THE PARK” AND PARK CONSERVANCY GROUPS THROUGHOUT THE CITY.

Great parks have good friends. The City provides space, security, equipment and maintenance, and programming for its parks. Engaged residents, busi-nesspeople, and leaders of community-based organi-zations can bring even more: a sense of stewardship, so the City knows faster where and when it needs to be more involved; political and social support; and resources. There are several models for park sup-port organizations in smaller parks and cities. They include Save the Park At Riverbank (SPARK), which supports Newark’s Riverbank Park, the Friends of Ely Park in Lambertville; and in Pennsylvania, the Friends of Allentown Parks in Allentown and the Riverfront Parks Committee of Wilkes-Barre.

Dozens of residents told us they would be interested in joining a “friends of the parks.” Seventy-six out of 86 respondents to our survey said the same things, and provided contact emails and phone numbers. Several representatives of City agencies said they would be willing to support these groups by meet-


ing with them regularly. The newly created Open Space Advisory Committee could play a leading role in organizing the group and building the capac-ity of East Orange stakeholders to take on leader-ship roles. When this committee includes residents (one from each Ward) as planned, it will truly be a great step in the right direction.

We also learned things about East Orange’s history that could be addressed in the future of its parks and open spaces. The first is that I-280 and the Garden State Parkway divided the city in ways that make its parks seem far away from one another and make the city as a whole feel disconnected. The second is that East Orange has a history of greatness in basketball and baseball. Oval Park hosted Negro League games, and saw the likes of Josh Gibson, Monte Irvin, Satchel Paige, Minnie Minoso and the New York Cuban Giants. The basketball court at Elmwood Park has hosted informal pickup games among some of the National Basketball Associa-tion’s greatest players. The third is that while East Orange recognizes its history in its parks through sculptures, the names of parks, and plaques, it is the heritage of people who, for the most part, have left the city. There are many opportunities for the City to recognize and reflect the greatness of to-day’s communities through the parks.

* BUILD STRONGER PARTNERSHIPS BETWEEN CITY AGENCIES AND THE BOARD OF EDUCATION.

Through our interviews and observations, we dis-covered that collaboration among leaders and staff throughout the city could be greatly improved for the benefit of the city as a whole. In terms of parks and recreation, school facilities provide an attrac-tive and logical partner for the existing city park sys-tem. We found that currently, school facilities that could be used for community recreation are regularly locked, made unavailable, or the “red tape” required to gain access is too onerous for most people. We also found that the Recreation Department has an effective working relationship with the Board of Edu-cation and consequently would recommend encour-aging this relationship even more. During this park planning process, the Department of Policy Plan-ning & Development organized a focus group with representatives from city agencies. While not every department attended, it was easy to see that getting different departments around the table was fruitful and positive for everyone involved. We would rec-ommend that these types of collaborative meetings continue on a more frequent basis to help foster a holistic approach to making the city better. To make lasting improvements in the City, it is imperative that different departments and offices work to strengthen healthy, collaborative relationships.




BACKGROUND

To help East Orange residents and stakeholders guide the Parks Master Plan, a team of consultants from Nishuane Group, Toole Recreation Planning and Wells Appel conducted extensive public en-gagement within the East Orange community.

Six community sessions were held -- at least one in each ward. There were small group conversa-tions with seniors, youth and representatives of local government agencies, as well as represen-tatives of city-wide community and social service organizations and city agencies. More than 50 in-dividual interviews were held with park users, city park staff, the Recreation Department, the Library, non-profit organizations, faith-based institutions, sports leagues, participants in city recreation pro-grams and after school programs, and others with a strong knowledge of city parks. Residents were also asked in surveys about their preferences and perceptions about their parks. The surveys were conducted electronically, in-person, and during community meetings.

More than 100 people participated in the various sessions, including more than 35 teenagers and children. While this is not a large sample size, the participants and respondents were residents and

stakeholders of the city and represent a variety of ages and interests. Also, because the team heard many of the same concerns and ideas from different people throughout East Orange, we feel confident that the key issues and ideas presented below are citywide.

KEY ISSUES AND IDEAS RAISED BY RESIDENTS

As might be expected from such a diverse commu-nity, residents raised dozens of issues and offered many ideas for improving the parks. There were several issues that were important to residents and raised at various meetings and focus groups:

FIELD HOUSES IN THE PARKS ARE UNDERUTILIZED AND DO NOT MEET THE NEEDS OF RESIDENTS. Residents generally saw a lot of potential in their local field houses being used for games, arts, and health programming, or just as a quiet space to rest. Another popular idea is hav-ing concession stands in the field houses. There was also interest in being able to use the field houses for parties, or to rent them for private events. Gener-ally, residents complained about the condition of all buildings and structures within the parks, especially regarding restroom facilities and pool houses. There were many complaints that the field houses in gen-eral are too small.


Though the parks have less crime, some residents are still wary and want to have A GREATER SENSE OF SAFETY AND SECURITY IN THE PARKS. In fact, in interviews and at one of the focus groups, some participants stated that they are too afraid to use the parks be-cause they feel they are too dangerous. Primarily younger girls expressed this opinion. The consul-tant team heard from the city and a representative of the police that there are very few actual inci-dents of crime in the parks these days, but that the perception of crime may still be strong. In terms of park use, the perception of danger is enough to de-ter people from enjoying the parks.

THE PARKS DO NOT SEEM TO BE THE KIND OF SHARED SPACES THAT RESIDENTS EXPECT. Teenage boys said they felt harassed by police when they were in the parks. Children complained about being forced away from basketball courts and other open areas by teenag-ers. Teenagers and adults both said that there was too little equipment for their interests, compared to the new equipment and spaces focused on chil-dren. There is a strong interest in making the parks multi-generational. There was the idea that by at-tracting seniors and families specifically, the parks would be safer. The parks need to be ADA acces-sible and the walking tracks improved for seniors. Providing more shaded areas to sit and relax, as

well as gathering areas for families, would go far in accomplishing this.

Residents want their parks to have MORE ATTRACTIVE LANDSCAPING AND FURNITURE. They mentioned having more colorful plantings, areas planted more natu-rally, trees, benches, picnic tables, and game tables (such as chess or checkers). Additions such as these would also help attract seniors and families to the parks. Many complained about the condition of existing trees, lawn, and other existing planting.

There is a strong interest in REPLACING THE EXISTING TRACKS WITH RUBBERIZED TRACKS. There seems to be two main reasons for this request: rubberized tracks are easier on the feet of runners, joggers, and seniors, and parks in other, more prosperous communities have rubberized tracks.

There is a strong interest in having MORE SPORTS PRO-GRAMMING AND MORE BASKETBALL COURTS. Children in the meetings asked for basketball courts with shorter hoops, so they wouldn’t have to compete with teen-agers for space to play. There is a strong interest for a more diverse sports experience to include cricket, lacrosse, soccer, roller hockey kickball, etc. There was also an interest in providing more programming for teens. There is a desire for a small skate park fa-cility and for areas to bike.


There is a strong need for MORE AFTER SCHOOL PRO-GRAMS FOR CHILDREN. The after school programs have waiting lists.

There is a strong interest in having MORE ORGANIZED PROGRAMMING AND FACILITIES RELATED TO ARTS AND CULTURE. Some ideas include providing space for concerts in the parks, re-using the Elmwood Park field house for community theater, and providing arts and cul-tural programming.

While we heard a lot of great specific ideas on how to improve the parks, comments from partici-pants indicated they felt in general that the parks just need to be renovated, updated, and invested in. THERE IS IN AN OVERALL FEELING THAT PARK FACILITIES AND PLANTINGS ARE PAST THEIR LIFESPAN AND NEED TO BE RE-PLACED. They cited other parks outside of East Or-ange that city residents use because they like the programs as well as the quality of facilities.

RESIDENTS WANT TO SEE SOME SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENTS HAPPEN QUICKLY TO THE PARK AS A DEMONSTRATION OF THE CITY’S COMMITMENT TO MAKING THEM BETTER.

RESIDENTS WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN THE PLANNING PROCESS FOR PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES AND SERVICES.

HOW EAST ORANGE RESIDENTS USE AND THINK ABOUT THEIR PARKS: FINDINGS FROM QUESTIONNAIRES.

From mid-March to late April 2013, the consultant team surveyed East Orange residents at community meetings, focus groups, and online. There were 86 responses from throughout the city. Most respon-dents answered all but a few questions. This section discusses the results from all respondents and high-lights responses from teens and children, young and mature adults, and older adults. It should be noted that many respondents received the questionnaires at the community engagement meetings. Therefore, this is not intended as a report of a scientific, statis-tically pure nature – it is admittedly biased toward people who currently use the parks.

OVERVIEW OF RESPONDENTS

Of the 86 residents who responded to the survey, 47 (55%) are teenagers or children and 13 (17%) are 55 or over. Twenty-five are adults between 19 and 54 and 1 did not specify his or her age. While this does not ex-actly reflect the overall population in the city (about 21% of residents were between 5 and 19 in 2010, and 22% were at least 55 years old), based on our obser-vations of who uses the park, the survey respondents were more reflective of park users.

HOW OFTEN RESPONDENTS USE THEIR PARKS

Residents were asked how often they used their lo-


cal parks, what time of day they usually went, and how they usually got to their local parks. For vis-its and ways of getting to the parks, respondents could choose more than one answer.

Most respondents (64%) visited their local parks at least a few times a week. More than a quarter (26%) reported going every day or every other day. The afternoons are the most popular times to visit the park (46%), but almost half (40%) go any time of the day, or in the afternoons.

The vast majority (92%) said they walk to their lo-cal parks, but almost a third (31%) may also drive to their local park. Less than 14% ride bicycles there.

Among teens and children who responded, more than half (59%) said they visit their local park at least a few times a week, and 32% said they go to the park every day or almost every day. About 44% said they go to the park in the afternoon, and 49%

said they go anytime of day.

The vast majority of young and mature adults (83%) said they visit their local park at least a few days a week. Most go in the afternoon (56%) or after work (40%). But significant percentages of them go dur-ing the morning (24%) or at anytime (32%). Mature adults said they are less likely to visit the park regu-larly. Only 3 of 9 who responded said they visit their

local park at least a few times during the week.

Not surprisingly, almost all teens and children (98%) said they usually walk to their local park, but few (16%), said they ride bicycles to the park. More (21%), said they drove or get driven to the park. The vast majority of young and mature adults (17 of 19, or 90%) said they usually walk to their local park, but about half (52%) said they drive. Seven out of 10 old-er adults said they usually walk to the park.

PARKS MOST OFTEN VISITED

Respondents were asked what parks they visited most often. Most respondents identified at least two parks.

The East Orange parks most often visited by respon-dents are Elmwood (36), Oval (27) and Columbian


(23), then Rowley (13) and Soverel (10). Several parks outside of East Orange are also mentioned. The most frequently visited are Watsessing (22), Orange (20), and Branch Brook (7)

Because residents would be expected to most often visit the parks closest to them, the responses may not be representative of the concentration of users in each park. Also, because few adults with young children responded to the survey, playgrounds may be underrepresented in this survey.

But the results show that respondents are familiar with many of the parks in the city, as well as those in nearby communities.

MOST POPULAR REASONS FOR GOING TO THE PARK

Respondents were asked to identify the reasons they go to their local park. They were given 24 choices, ranging from passive activities such as relaxation to intensive team sports, such as rugby and basketball. Respondents were also invited to

add any activities they didn’t see listed, and they could check as many answers as they liked.

The three most popular reasons to go to an East Orange park are to play bas-ketball (36%), walk (34%) or just to re-

lax (34%). Less popular, but significant reasons include taking children to a local playground (18%) and exercising (14%).

Many of the same activities are popular with teens and children. About 56% said they play basketball, 31% go to relax, 22% go to play football, and 20% go to walk in the park. Another popular reason to go to the park is to exercise (18%).

For young and mature adults, the most popular rea-sons to go to their parks were to walk (36%), so their children can play (36%) and to relax. For older adults, the most likely reasons to go to their local park are to walk (8 of 9 respondents) or to relax (4 of 9 respon-dents).

THOUGHTS ABOUT THEIR PARK

To find out how East Orange residents feel about their parks, we offered a series of statements and asked them to indicate whether they agreed or disagreed with the statement (or didn’t know or didn’t have an


opinion), and to what extent. Only the responses which show a consensus are discussed below.

Most respondents (74%) feel their local park is safe during the day, but not at night (only 35% said they would feel safe going into the park after dark). In-terestingly, only 54% said their neighbors would also feel safe in the parks during the day, which implies that a significant number of East Orange residents may feel the parks are unsafe.

Most respondents are unsatisfied with the amount of lighting or equipment for children and adults. Only 13% said there is enough lighting in their local parks and only 27% are satisfied with the spaces and equipment provided to adults in the park. More people, but not most -- only 37% -- are satisfied with the play spaces and play equipment for children.

On the other hand, most respondents (61%) said that there are enough places in their local park to enjoy nature and fresh air.

Barely half of respondents (51%) said that their lo-cal park, in the condition it is in, is good for their neighborhood. But an overwhelming amount, 93%, said that having a better park would make a big dif-ference in their neighborhood. These two survey statement received among the least number of “I

don’t know” responses, which indicates that respon-dents have strong feelings about their local park.

Teens and children look at their parks more favor-ably, but their responses are similar to that of their older neighbors.

A large majority (83%) said their parks are safe in the daytime and most (56%) think their neighbors feel the same way. But only 20% feel their parks are safe at night.

Like adults, teens and children are generally unsat-isfied with the lighting and equipment in their parks. Only 17% said there was enough lighting and 40% said they are satisfied with the equipment provided for adults. On a more positive note, nearly half (46%) said they are satisfied with the play spaces and play equipment provided for children, and 75% said there are enough places in their local park to enjoy nature and fresh air.

Most teens and children (64%) said that their park is good for their neighborhood. A large majority (89%) said that having a better park would make a big dif-ference for their neighborhood.

Most young and mature adults (68%) said they feel safe in their local park during the day, and most (61%) said their neighbors would feel the same way.


While the adults were divided about whether they would feel safe in the park at night, more than half (54%) said their neighbors would feel unsafe.

Young and mature adults are largely dissatisfied with lighting and equipment in the park. The vast majority (86%) said there was not enough lighting, 65% said they were unsatisfied with the play spaces and equipment for children, and an even larger percentage (75%) said they were dissatisfied with spaces and equipment for adults.

A strong majority of young and mature adults (76%) said that their local park, as is, is not good for their neighborhood, but 96% said that having a better park would make a big difference for their neighborhood.

Older adults tended to have a more negative view of their parks as they are now, though they unani-mously agree that having a better park would make a big difference for their neighborhood. Though 7 of 13 said they feel safe in their park during the day, only 2 said their neighbors would also feel safe.

Eight of 13 people said they were unhappy with the lighting in their park, 7 with the play equipment pro-vided for children, and 9 with the spaces and equip-ment provided to adults. Mature adults are divided about whether there are enough places in their local park to enjoy nature and fresh air.

WHAT WOULD MAKE THE PARKS BETTER

Respondents were asked what they would suggest to make their local parks better, if they were unsatisfied with them. As the word cloud below shows, the most common requests were for more or better equipment, basketball courts and lighting. Residents also sug-gested improvements to local fields and field hous-es, as well as having more security.

WILLINGNESS TO SUPPORT PARKS

An overwhelming number of people surveyed said they would be willing to get involved to support parks


in East Orange. Forty-three of 47 teens, 21 of 25 young and mature adults, and 11 of 13 older adults said they would be interested in helping make their local parks better.

KEY OBSERVATIONS FROM THE CONSULTANT TEAM

To provide a fuller understanding of the issues that may affect what East Orange should do and when, we are sharing not just what we heard, but also what we observed. Several observations are men-tioned above. This section of the report goes more in depth on some of them.

PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT ISSUES

We were told early on that public engagement would be a challenge in East Orange. Many peo-ple do not come to community meetings, and few respond to surveys (this is actually true for many communities). We were surprised by how uneven the participation was -- especially in focus groups to which the participants were invited individually.

While two of the community meetings attracted 20 to 35 people, two others brought in less than four adults each. Several teens came to the meeting at the Elmwood Park Field house and several children to the East Orange Public Library. Only one per-son came to a focus group for merchants whose

businesses were near parks, and no representative of a community-based organization came to a focus group for civic organizations. It should be noted that the City encouraged the consulting team to hold a business focus group with the local Chamber of Com-merce at one of its regular meetings. But because many of its members did not represent businesses with direct connections to local parks, and the focus group model of public engagement works best when it is not part of another meeting, we chose to hold a stand-alone, invitation only focus group.

The timing of the public engagement may have had a significant impact. Because of the project schedule, the community meetings and focus groups were held during an unusually cold spell in March and April 2013. Summer, when people are more likely to be using and thinking about their parks, might be a more effective time to do public engagement for parks planning. In some cases, the focus group participants had less than two weeks notice to participate. All of the com-munity meetings and focus groups were concentrat-ed in a five-week period, making it difficult for “buzz” about the project to get around the community.

It was not all negative. In fact, we were pleasantly surprised with the number of teens who participat-ed. At the community meeting in the Elmwood Park field house, more than a dozen teens that were in the


park were asked to participate by a recreation staff person who happened to look in on the meeting. Though they may not have thought about attend-ing the meeting beforehand, they were actively en-gaged and generated a number of interesting ideas over an hour and a half. Later, a focus group with teens brought in nearly 30 young people -- twice as many as we had expected. The teens were from the Cicely Tyson School and a Mayor’s youth advisory committee. Most stayed for an hour and a half, and about 10 stayed for at least two hours.

WHY SO MUCH INTEREST IN RUBBERIZED TRACKS

One of the most concrete ideas offered by residents at community meetings was replacing the asphalt tracks in local parks with rubberized tracks. This would especially help seniors, as well as runners and athletes who do track and field events. Yet, few people in meetings or in their surveys said they jog or do track and field activities. Many respondents walk in their parks, but the asphalt surfaces are similar to those of streets and sidewalks.

But the request was not just to make it easier on residents’ feet and legs. Several residents talked about how they knew about or enjoyed rubberized tracks in nearby communities with what they felt were better park facilities.

We believe the request for rubberized tracks is as much symbolic as it is practical. Having such tracks may give more residents confidence that the City is willing to make investments in its parks and to give its communities some of the same amenities found in wealthier towns.

APPROACH TO PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT

The consultant team partnered with the East Orange Planning Department to conduct public outreach. Several strategies were used:

• Six community meetings were held between mid March and mid April. One meeting was held in Wards 2 through 5, while two were held in Ward 1. Because of inconsistent information provided to the public, the Ward 1 meeting was repeated. The community meetings were in the following locations:

o Ampere Library

o Elmwood Park Field house

o East Orange Library

o Fellowship Civic Center

o East Orange Campus High School


o Five small group conversations (also known as focus group-style meetings) were held to hear from the following interest groups:

o Representatives of East Orange public agen-cies

o Representatives of community and faith-based groups

o Senior citizens

o Teenagers

o Residents who had attended earlier com-munity meetings. (The members of this group were invited to review some early suggestions from the consultant team.)

• A Facebook page for East Orange parks. The page describes the plan, provides photos of events, and identifies dates and locations of meet-ings. As of July 14, 2013, the page had received 70 likes. The page can be found at https://www.facebook.com/pages/The-East-Orange-Parks-Plan/303698343092892

• A survey, which was provided both online and in-person at meetings.

Refer to the Appendix for a copy of the Questionnaire that respondents completed online. The same types of questions were asked when the surveys were con-ducted in-person, but there were some small modi-fications to keep the survey to two pages. For ex-ample, regarding the question about activities within the park, instead of giving in-person respondents a list of 24 choices, we made that an open-ended ques-tion and connected the open-ended answers to any of the choices. If an open-ended answer did not re-flect an existing choice, it was inputted as an open-ended answer in the online format.

SurveyMonkey was used for the online survey. The only people who had access to the survey, besides the author, were the members of the consultant team.

big ideasSystem-Wide Recommendations

BIG IDEAS: SYSTEM-WIDE RECOMMENDATIONS >>> 55

big ideasSystem-wide Recommendations

PASSIVE RECREATION + GATHERING AREAS

More opportunities for strolling through planted areas should be provided. Comfortable seating ar-eas and picnic areas in the shade should be provid-ed for small gatherings of family or friends. Games tables could be scattered throughout the parks.

MORE NATURE!

More naturalistically planted areas should be in-cluded in the parks. The palette should be primarily native plants, but other non-invasive species could

be used selectively for ornamental value. The Sec-ond River should be celebrated as a resource for the city. Nature and children’s play areas could be inte-grated for an exciting way to bring children closer to nature.

MULTI-PURPOSE, SYNTHETIC TURF ATHLETIC FIELDS

Using synthetic turf will enable more continuous use of the fields. The fields should be multi-purpose, allowing for a more flexible range of sports. These fields cannot be driven on and must be fenced or en-closed.

OUTDOOR GAME TABLES, WASHINGTON SQUARE PARK, NEW YORK CITY.

MULTI-PURPOSE, SYNTHETIC TURF FIELDS.

56 >>> BIG IDEAS: SYSTEM-WIDE RECOMMENDATIONS

PLAY AREAS TO STIMULATE

The plan envisions a more robust play experience for children. This could include play equipment themed to relate to the community; integration of natural elements into play areas; outdoor mu-sical equipment; small motion-activated water features; as well as more areas of unprogrammed, open lawn.

CLOCKWISE FROM LEFT: PLAY FOR ALL ABILITIES PARK, ROUND ROCK, TX; CENTENNIAL HILLS PARK, LAS VEGAS; RIVERPLAY DISCOVERY VILLAGE PLAY-GROUND, EUGENE, OR; AN OUTDOOR MUSICAL IN-STRUMENT.


SAFETY + SECURITY

Lighting, additional cameras, and potentially emer-gency call boxes could be used to help make users feel secure. Encouraging inter-generational use of the parks will also help.

SPORTS + PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING

Pedestrian scale lighting and athletic court / field lighting should be installed to help park users feel safe and to make the parks usable during the hours between sunset and the park closure.

REPLACE ALL CRACKED COURTS

Much of the paving throughout the courts is past the point of fixing. Replacement is required, and must be accompanied by the resolution of all poor-ly draining areas.

SIGNAGE + MARKETING + COMMUNICATION

Directional signage that is well designed and care-fully placed within the neighborhoods would go far in helping residents get the most out of their parks and to instill a sense of coherency throughout the park system.

Park entrance signs for each park should be attractively designed to welcome visitors.

Each park should have a community bulletin board to announce programs or for the community to use.

PEDESTRIAN LED LIGHTING AT ALL PARKS AND MORE SPORTS LIGHTING.

ABOVE, ‘WALK PHILADELPHIA’ WAYFINDING SIGNAGE IN USE; RIGHT, WAYFINDING SIGNAGE IN ALEXANDRIA, VA INCLUDES HISTORIC IN-FORMATION.


PARK CONNECTOR STREETS

The plan will include ideas for enhancing the streetscapes between the parks to include new paving, planting, directional signage to the parks, public art, and bicycle lanes. These connector streets will link each park to the others and with both train stations.

INTER-GENERATIONAL USE

The parks should be more inviting for seniors and families. This can be accomplished by improving ADA access, upgrading all walking surfaces, pro-viding more shaded sitting areas and picnic areas, and more planting.

RUBBERIZED TRACKS WHERE APPROPRIATE

Rubberized tracks will be provided where feasible. These surfaces will encourage the safe use of walking tracks by both seniors and athletes. How-ever, these surfaces cannot be driven on. Where required, it may be necessary for police to switch to foot patrols of parks rather than driving on the tracks. In some areas, park users currently drive on tracks for events. This will need to be pre-vented with physical deterrents such as bollards and appropriate

loading / unloading ar-eas provided.

PROVIDE FITNESS ZONES

These areas could be complete with innova-tive outdoor fitness equipment that looks like it be-longs in a gym. These types of fitness zones have been successfully installed in other municipalities and would include equipment appropriate for all

SAFE PEDESTRIAN ROUTES ON CONNECTOR STREETS.

RUBBERIZED PAVING IS EASI-ER ON WALKERS’ JOINTS.


ages, (including se-niors). It would es-pecially benefit community members that cannot afford gym memberships.

FURNISHINGS

The furniture used throughout the parks should be comfortable and allow use by individuals or small groups of families or friends.

INCLUDE OPPORTUNITIES FOR DONOR RECOGNITION

Pavers, bench plaques, and wall plaques could all be used to honor donors to the park system, while

also encouraging a feeling of ownership of the park within the community.

PUBLIC ART

Conducted in partnership between artists and com-munities, public art and art activities will enhance parks and park connector streets. These cost-ef-fective installations can create a powerful sense of pride and stewardship for the parks.

THE PARKS SHOULD REFLECT THEIR COMMUNITIES

The park system should reflect the communities that live in East Orange today. This could be achieved through material and plant selection, color palettes, the names of parks, and of course the programs and activities offered in each park.

There is an opportunity to allow the community to express itself in the design of the park. A graffiti / art wall, fences with laser-cut panels designed by students, murals, and mosaics could all be used to-wards this end.

O U T D O O R F I T N E S S

OPPORTUNI-TIES FOR PARK BRANDING AND ART.

OUTDOOR FIT-NESS EQUIPMENT.


UPGRADE ALL FIELD HOUSES

All field houses should either be renovated or replaced. A field house at Memorial Park should be installed.

PROVIDE OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT + PERFORMANCE SPACE

Within the existing parks, spaces will be pro-vided for enjoying outdoor concerts or per-formances. Longer term, if new park space were built over the interstate, there may be an opportunity to construct a large outdoor per-formance space that could become a regional draw.

Located adjacent to the East Orange Train Sta-tion, this park could be-come a regional draw, attracting people to the city and becoming a driver for economic de-velopment.

CREATE A DECK PARK OVER THE INTERSTATE

A long term vision for the parks master plan could include the cre-ation of a new park that bridges across Inter-state 280 from City Hall and creates a large civic space right in the center of the City. This could include a large, contem-porary bandshell and an expansive lawn for host-ing outdoor performanc-es and concerts.

A LARGE, CENTRAL GATH-ERING SPACE FOR CITY EVENTS AND PERFOR-MANCES.

HIGHWAYS CAPPED FOR PARK SPACE: MILLENNIUM PARK IN CHICAGO ABOVE AND NORTH END PARK IN BOSTON TO THE RIGHT.


ELEVATE THE STANDARD OF DESIGN FOR THE PARKS

Park design should not only meet the needs of the community, but should also express a level of in-novation and sophistication that will inspire resi-dents and visitors alike.

RESOLVE STORMWATER ISSUES

The fields and courts will have a much lon-ger life span if they are properly drained.

There is also an opportunity to manage stormwater in a way that can be beautiful, with natural vegetated swales and raingar-dens.

SUSTAINABILITY

Using energy efficient LED lighting, renovating field houses for insulation and efficiency, increas-ing the availability of both litter and recycling re-

ceptacles and installing spray parks that re-circulate water will conserve resources, reduce the negative impact of the parks on the surrounding environment and enhance the long-term sustainability of the en-tire park system.

SUPPORT COMMUNITY GARDENS + FARMER’S MARKETS

Community involvement in individual vegetable or ornamental garden plots can be a simple and cost effective way to encourage a diverse range of park users on a daily basis. Farmer’s markets could be

hosted in many of the parks and in the covered area be-neath the East Or-ange Train Station, activating the area between City Hall and the Public Li-

brary.

STRATEGIES TO INTERCEPT STORM-WATER FROM PARK-ING LOTS, ROADS, AND ROOFTOPS.

WEEKLY FARMER’S MARKETS COULD TAKE PLACE IN THE PARKS.

COMMUNITY GARDEN PLOTS.

the city’s parks: ward 1

Soverel Park

WARD 1: SOVEREL PARK >>> 63

the city’s parks: ward 1Soverel Park: Past, Present, and Future

A VISION FOR SOVEREL PARK

To celebrate the most unique feature of this park, the master plan envisions a wide riparian corridor along the Second River that would be lushly plant-ed with native plants. This natural swath of plant-ing would include a meandering path, which would take visitors through a soft landscape and up to the river’s edge. An open air pavilion and seating ter-races cut into the slope would encourage educa-tional opportunities as well as formal and informal gatherings. This provision for more passive recre-ation opportunities within a more natural setting would provide residents with an experience miss-ing from today’s park system. As a longer term goal, the plan also recommends installing a pedes-trian bridge across the channel to provide a link to the other side and to allow users a unique view of this feature of the park. This bridge connection could tie into a linear park along the abandoned rail corridor leading to Watsessing Park.

The master plan also envisions a vis-ible stormwater collection and convey-ance system made of a series of veg-etated swales and raingardens. This system would intercept surface flows coming off adjacent properties, allow stormwater to infiltrate, and finally

outlet to the Second River. In this way, stormwater is intercepted before it has a chance to damage the park, and it is also celebrated as an amenity—a natu-ral water feature supplied by a renewable source.

Since the grandstand requires a lot of renovation to make it fully usable, and because it exhibits signifi-cant cracking, the plan proposes its demolition. Its current placement is such that it is located on the short end of the field for both football and soccer. A new fieldhouse outside the 100-year floodplain is proposed to provide changing rooms for the athletic teams, as well as updated restroom facilities with showers. The plan also recommends renovating the existing fieldhouse. It is currently within the 100-year floodplain, so no new additions will be allowed.

64 >>> WARD 1: SOVEREL PARK

FIGURE G1: A VISION FOR THE NEW SECOND RIVER AT SOVEREL PARK


��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� * ��

��

��

SOVEREL PARK

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

The plan also recommends rebuilding the tennis and basketball courts, as well as the baseball and football fields. The plan envisions an artificial turf field surrounded by a new track. This field would be multipurpose and lit with upgraded sports lighting. The consultant team heard from members of the athletic community that this field is highly used and that during football practices, most of the fields are used.

Entrances to the park are rendered more inviting and appealing. Signage is improved and pedestrian lighting is provided. Upgraded lighting is provided at all courts and pedestrian lighting is provided throughout the park.

New tree, shrub, and perennial plantings are pro-posed throughout the park, and especially at en-trances. Soverel could even accommodate an or-namental garden, as well as community gardens.

Finally, the vision for the future of this park provides many comfortable opportunities for small gather-ings of families, the elderly, and children through picnic areas, seating, and games tables.

FIGURE G2: SOVEREL PARK PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� * ��

��

��

SOVEREL PARK �

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��


MAP OF THE SITE OF SOVEREL PARK FROM ATLAS OF 1874 (Board of Recreation Commissioners, 56)

SPRINGDALE LAKE ONCE COVERED ALMOST ALL OF TODAY’S SOVEREL PARK (Photo: Hart, Images 12).


from adjacent Bloomfield, citing lower tax rates as an incentive. The demographic analysis indicates that this ward is home to less residents under the age of 18 than other wards, and also has one of the lower population densities.

Historically, the area was known as Doddtown, and in 1921 it was noted that “there are more owners of homes in the First Ward than in any other part of the city, and under the banner of the First Ward Lo-cal Interest Club there is a live, intensive interest in its welfare” (Pierson 547). This spirit of community building helped improve the open space and recre-ational opportunities that exist in the First Ward.

The Second River also invited many industrial uses. The making of hats was an important industry for the city and survived into the 1920s. “The water courses, chiefly the east branch of the Rahway river running through the Orange Valley and the Second river, in the Doddtown section, were utilized by the manufac-turers, their factories being erected on the bank and sometimes over the stream. The water furnished was ideal for washing the headgear, a necessary part of

COMMUNITY BACKGROUND AND HISTORY

The first ward contains only one municipal park—Soverel Park—but also contains the southern end of Watsessing Park, which is an Essex County Park. Residents reported using both parks. This ward is also home to Manufacturer’s Village, a creative post-industrial complex which has been repurposed as a home for artisans, photographers, sculptors, painters, and small businesses. This ward is also home to many schools and religious institutions, including East Orange Campus High School. Paul Robeson Stadium is also located in this ward, and is the only stadium in the city. The first ward is also home to the only open water in the city—the Second River (also labelled on some maps as Wigwam Brook). This river is channel-ized through the city and continues in its channel through Watsessing Park and on into Belleville Park in Newark and Belleville, ultimately making its way to the Passaic River, then to the Hudson River, and out to the Atlantic Ocean.

The community in the first ward is home to one of the most affluent populations in the city. However, one of the four census blocks within this ward in-dicates the lowest range of median household in-come as well. The consultant team also heard that many people are beginning to move into this ward

A MARBLE TOURNAMENT AT SOVEREL, 1927 (Hart, Images 104).


the manufacture” (Pierson 638). Aside from hat making, the making of cider was also very important in the area, and contributed to the planting of many ap-ple orchards (Hart, Images 15).

At the site of today’s Soverel Park, in 1854 a resident named Matthais Soverel expanded an existing lake by flooding the land with water from the Second River for his ice business. In time, Springdale Lake covered almost the entirety of to-day’s park. He found that residents were using the lake for ice skating, which he worried would con-taminate his ice. As a result, he constructed a pond for ice skating in the southwest corner of the site for use by the public. The harvesting of ice stopped in 1888. A few years later, the lake was drained and filled with earth and ashes.

In 1922, the City purchased the property and used it as a waste dump for about 4 years in order to save on hauling costs. In 1927, the tract was turned over to the Recreation Commission, and with a sum of $135,000 ($1.8 million in today’s dollars) developed the land as a public park. At this time, the grand-stand, with its dressing rooms, toilets, tool room, and storage was constructed, and could seat about 750 spectators. By 1931, if not sooner, the park contained 5 drinking fountains, 7 tennis courts, 1

WET AND CRACKED COURTS

POORLY DRAINING FIELDS

AD HOC FITNESS EQUIPMENT


THE SECOND RIVER LOOKING WEST: HAPHAZARD FENCING, UNSIGHTLY AND UNINVITING SPACE

THE SECOND RIVER LOOKING EAST: ERODED SLOPES AND DEBRIS

ERODED, BARE SLOPES; UNSIGHTLY FENCING

THE GRANDSTAND


ed, which encourages stormwater to puddle on the surface, rather than soaking into the ground. Third, over half the park is within the 100-year floodplain of the Second River. Finally, a considerable amount of stormwater flows into the park from adjacent lots on Springdale Avenue and Brighton Avenue. For the complete Stormwater Management Report, refer to the Appendix.

running track, 1 senior baseball diamond, 1 junior baseball diamond, 1 football field, 2 basketball courts, handball, a wading pool with a concrete pergola, and children’s play equipment (Board of Recreation Commissioners, 59-60).

The Schools and Recreation Report of 1945-1946 states that Soverel “has a modern grandstand and community building, seven clay tennis courts, ex-cellent planting and provisions for both active and passive recreation and is only slightly hampered by its isolation caused by lack of street frontage which if present, would add to the appearance of the city” (City Planning Board, 12). Today, the park is in a state of disrepair, but this is the chance to return this park to its full potential, for the benefit of the city as a whole.

SOVEREL PARK TODAY

While the park has a lot of great potential, many is-sues exist that need to be addressed. Simple repairs will not suffice; significant renovation is required. Two of the main problems are soggy fields, areas of standing water, and the cracking of all the courts. A number of factors contribute to the drainage is-sues. For one, many areas of the fields and courts do not have positive drainage, due to slopes being less than 1% overall. The soil is also very compact-

NEW PLAY EQUIPMENT

UNINVITING SIGNAGE


When Springdale Lake was filled in, and when the city used the land as a dump, significant amounts of fill were used. It has been noted that it may be as deep as sixteen feet in some areas (Board of Rec-reation Commissioners, 59). For the State Fill Map of Soverel, refer to the Appendix. These settling fill soils have contributed significantly to the poor condition of the courts and lawn areas throughout the site.

The edge of the filled area of the park slopes steep-ly to the Second River, and exhibits severe erosion. This contributes to silting in the water channel in heavy rains. There are areas of weedy growth that are very unattractive and undesirable views from the park to the houses on the other side of the river. The fence along the channel is damaged and dis-continuous. A significant amount of vegetative and rocky debris litters the channel.

There are also issues of visibility in the park. The parking lot and entrance to the park have poor vis-ibility from the street, as do the tennis courts and east entrance.

All hard courts are cracked and need replacement. Some of the tennis courts are located too close to the river and exhibit severe cracking. Some of the light poles are leaning downslope.

THE SOVEREL PARK FIELDHOUSE TODAY

The grandstand is painted annually, but does exhibit visible substantial cracking. The space below is now used only for storage, the restrooms and other rooms not fit for use.

There is an ad hoc fitness equipment area near the Park Street entrance - while serviceable, it is rela-tively unattractive. Also in this area, the paths and fences are awkwardly laid out. This entrance is also hampered by an unsightly mechanical building and outdoor storage area for athletic equipment.

On a positive note, the play area was recently in-stalled and is in great condition. There are also many beautiful mature trees scattered throughout the park, including a Blue Atlas Cedar, Magnolia trees, and Oaks.


��

�

��

��

��

WATSESSING PARK

SOVEREL PARK

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

FIGURE G3: WARD 1 CONTEXT PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan


��

�

��

��

��

WATSESSING PARK

SOVEREL PARK

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��


LP

LP

SOVEREL PARK

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Mis-matched excercise stations

Undesirable Views

Courts are too close to edge of

river

Nice Cedar Tree

Entrance needs an update



Field is soggy and compacted; does

not drain

Court needs to be replaced

Asphalt path is uneven and doesn’t

make a loop

Uninviting and unsafe river edge

Stormwater sheet flows from parking

into park

Stormwater sheet flows from adjacent

lots into park


lots into park

Aban

doned R

ail

Corridor

To Watsessin

g

100-year floodplain

FIGURE G4: SOVEREL PARK EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan


LP

LP

SOVEREL PARK

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Mis-matched excercise stations

Undesirable Views

Courts are too close to edge of

river

Nice Cedar Tree




Field is soggy and compacted; does

not drain

Court needs to be replaced

Asphalt path is uneven and doesn’t

make a loop

Uninviting and unsafe river edge


into park


lots into park


lots into park

Aban

doned R

ail

Corridor

To Watsessin

g

100-year floodplain


Memorial + Rowley Parks

WARD 2: MEMORIAL + ROWLEY PARKS >>> 79

the city’s parks: ward 2Memorial and Rowley Parks: Past, Present, and Future

A VISION FOR MEMORIAL PARK

This park is key for the city since it lies within the planned Transit Village and serves the populous city center, with its high numbers of children and low median incomes. This park could become a great civic space in a highly visible location.

To activate this park and provide a more diverse and watchful set of users, the master plan for Me-morial envisions a strong physical and program-matic connection between the library and the park. The plan proposes an outdoor terrace at a new en-trance to the library that would transition to a park plaza and then into the park itself. At the time of this master plan, the Main Library had completed a design study showing this additional entrance. To accomplish this, the library’s employee parking lot has been shifted to the south. With the park sys-tem and library working together, this park would

become an example of a fruitful collaboration among city agencies, and create a new type of park—the community library park.

The master plan also envisions a new fieldhouse to replace the one that was removed due to water dam-age.

When speaking to young park users, the consultant team heard the need for a basketball court with lower hoops that teens would not be able to use, as well as a spray park, and a larger lawn area for unpro-grammed play.

The plan also envisions a small bandshell set into a corner of the park that would enable park visitors to sit on the lawn and watch small performances. The location of this park in the center of town lends itself to such a use.

Between the adjacent lots and the park, the plan pro-poses a more natu-ralized planted buffer as well as a system of vegetated swales to intercept runoff before it can damage the lawn areas.

Gathering spaces for

VIEW FROM TODAY’S MEMORIAL PARK LOOKING TOWARD CITY HALL

80 >>> WARD 2: MEMORIAL + ROWLEY PARKS

FIGURE H1: A VISION FOR THE NEW MEMORIAL PARK.


��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��MEMORIAL PARK

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

FIGURE H2: MEMORIAL PARK PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��MEMORIAL PARK

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��


families are also provided, as well as new seating, and a new pedestrian circulation system.


The Second Ward contains an area of the city that may be in the most need of quality open space and recreational programming. This is due to the fact that this area contains the densest population, very high numbers of residents under the age of eigh-teen, and low median household incomes. There are also many renters in this ward, and many sin-

CHILDREN RACING SAILBOATS IN THE WADING POOL AT MEMORIAL, 1937 (Hart, Images 96)

gle parents supporting young children. The senior population is lower in the Second Ward than in other wards.

This ward is physically divided into north and south by Interstate 280, which cuts right across the center of the ward. The busy commercial corridors of Main Street and Central Avenue run through this ward, and Brick Church Station and the Brick Church shopping center are also located here. The large performing arts school, the Cicely L. Tyson Community School


of Performing and Fine Arts, makes its home in this ward, as does the East Orange Main Library, and the newly completed Bowser Senior Center.

Prior to the construction of Interstate 280 in the 1960s, Memorial Park was on the interior of the block, surrounded by other lots, and with narrow street frontages on Walnut Street and Lenox Av-enue. It was more than twice the size it is today, before the interstate and Freeway Drive East took over much of its space.

The land for the park was purchased by the City in 1926 for $225,000 (close to $3 million today). In 1929, the park began construction with $94,000, and opened to the public in 1930. It was noted that “like

THE ORIGINAL MAIN ENTRANCE 1931; LOOKING SOUTH FROM WHERE I-280 IS TODAY(Board of Recreation Commissioners 62)

three other playgrounds in the City, this one was con-structed on a plot that had been a neglected, marshy, unattractive place for many years” (Board of Recre-ation Commissioners 61).

The design of the park was intended primarily for pas-sive recreation and intentionally lacked programmed sports facilities. “This field, being small in size and situated in a large volume residential district, has not been developed as the other larger fields, i.e., to cover a full range of activity for children of all ages. On this field will be found no baseball diamonds, no basketball courts, no play equipment for older boys and girls. In their place will be found a restful field, a park, providing only for the younger children and adults” (Board of Recreation 61). Interestingly, in the


PONDING ON PATHWAYS; LOOKING TOWARDS THE LIBRARY

SOGGY, UNUSABLE LAWN AREAS


ward meeting for this park, the majority of partici-pants were children under the age of 13, who com-plained about teenagers and adults using the park. They also expressed their love of the open, unde-fined grassy area in the park and requested it be made larger.

The park was intended as a memorial to veterans who fought in World War I, and contains a statue which reads, “To Honor Those Who Kept the Faith 1917-1918”. It originally contained lush and colorful plantings, a rose garden, a large concrete and wood pergola, walks for strolling, a wading pool 40 feet in diameter, children’s play equipment, a horseshoe pit, and other small games.

MEMORIAL PARK TODAY

Today, Memorial Park has a lot of great potential, as it is adjacent to the East Orange Main Library and is in the civic heart of the city. It has great views

towards City Hall and the East Orange Train Station and it has excellent street frontage (rare for the city’s parks). The sidewalk along Freeway Drive East is heavily used by the community.

The park also has many problems that require substantial renovation. As is the case in many of the city’s parks,

stormwater and poor drainage are major issues that lead to ponding and soggy, unusable areas. There is a low point in the center of the park (where the wading pool used to be and where the statue is cur-rently located) that receives a high volume of storm-water. Soils are very compacted. The tennis courts are cracked and do not drain. Significant amounts of stormwater flow into the park from adjacent proper-ties and parking lots.

An employee parking lot for the library separates the library from the park. In discussions with library personnel, the consultant team ascertained that the library would be open to moving this parking lot fur-ther south in order to foster a real connection be-tween the park and library.

There is an excessive amount of unsightly chain link fence throughout the park, and in some places is even doubled up. Many areas of fencing are very damaged

PONDING AT THE BASKETBALL COURT


or have large holes cut in them.

The grassy area is fragmented by un-necessary paving and by the large stat-ue in the center of the park. The paving frequently has standing water in places after a rain event.

Entry into the park is somewhat confus-ing in that the gate off Walnut Street is kept locked, as is one of the gates off Freeway Drive East. This is compound-ed by the fact that the areas near the open entrances are plagued by stand-ing water.

The recently installed playground was burned in 2012 and still has not been re-moved. The odor of burnt rubber mulch lingers at the site.

Handball and tennis courts require complete renovation to be usable, and all entrances to the park need improve-ment. Memorial Park used to contain a fieldhouse, but the structure was re-moved in the last few years due to wa-ter damage.

UNINVITING STREET FRONTAGE

THE BURNED PLAYGROUND

UNINVITING, OPPRESSIVE ENTRANCE


ROWLEY PARK

The recently completed, award-winning renova-tion of Rowley Park represents a great first step in the advancement of the city’s park system. Completed in 2011, the park has been extremely well received by the community. The consultant team heard it repeatedly used as a standard or comparison for improvements that could happen at the city’s other parks.

The park was originally dedicated in 1967 and was named after Lincoln E. Rowley, Secretary of the Board of Recreation Commissioners in the city in the 1930s (Gerrish and Goode).

THE EAST ORANGE UNIFIED MARCHING BAND AT ROWLEY (photo, Gerrish and Goode).

THE SPRAY GROUND AT ROWLEY


It contains a small practice field, attractive plant-ings, 2 new basketball courts, a spray ground, a new fieldhouse, a walking track, public restrooms, and a small parking lot.

There have been some complaints of litter and of plantings being stolen. One possible criticism of the improvements heard by the consultant team was the removal of a graffiti wall, reportedly dated to 1995.

THE GRAFFITI WALL THAT EXISTED AT ROWLEY BORE MESSAGES SUCH AS “JAZZ”, “AFRICAN PRIDE”, “KNOWLEDGE IS THE KEY,” “EAST ORANGE PRIDE,” AND “HIP HOP” (Gerrish and Goode).

All in all, this park is a great accomplishment. One recommendation would be to nurture a “Friends of Rowley Park” group to help this park continue on successfully. It is also critical to protect the city’s in-vestment by ensuring sufficient maintenance funds are in place.


A NUMBER OF TREES AT MEMORIAL ARE IN GREAT SHAPE


��

��

��

��

�

MEMORIAL PARK

ROWLEY PARK

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

FIGURE H3: WARD 2 CONTEXT PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan


��

��

��

��

�

MEMORIAL PARK

ROWLEY PARK

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��


HP

LP

LP LP

MEMORIAL PARK

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Soggy area

Courts are cracked and do

not drain Broken-up and mis-matched

paving

Entrances closed

No access from library to park

Sidewalk adjacent to busy traffic

Poorly drained,

compacted soils

FIGURE H4: MEMORIAL PARK EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan


HP

LP

LP LP

MEMORIAL PARK

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Soggy area

Courts are cracked and do

not drain Broken-up and mis-matched

paving

Entrances closed

No access from library to park

Sidewalk adjacent to busy traffic

Poorly drained,

compacted soils

ROWLEY PARK

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

New spray park is popular Marching band

uses field for practice often

Nice new basketball courts

Interesting Plantings and

attractive landscaping

Lost an existing grafitti

wall here

Plenty of parking

Casual Track

Gates are Open

FIGURE H5: ROWLEY PARK EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan

ROWLEY PARK

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

New spray park is popular Marching band

uses field for practice often

Nice new basketball courts

Interesting Plantings and

attractive landscaping

Lost an existing grafitti

wall here

Plenty of parking

Casual Track

Gates are Open


Elmwood Park +

Washington Playground

WARD 3: ELMWOOD PARK + WASHINGTON PLAYGROUND >>> 99

the city’s parks: ward 3Elmwood Park and Washington Playground: Past, Present, and Future

A VISION FOR ELMWOOD PARK

According to many residents, Elmwood Park is the most popular and best-loved park in the city. The vision for Elmwood returns this park to its former glory by celebrating its role as an active center of community celebration, pride, and history.

As the centerpiece of the park, the field house should be renovated to alleviate deferred main-tenance issues. Restroom facilities should be re-turned to an optimal condition. A new guardrail should be installed on the porch and a new shade awning could be fabricated to fit the existing hard-ware. Restoring the field house porch would bring the building back to life on hot summer days. The

THE ELMWOOD PARK FIELD HOUSE TODAY

plan also recommends a kiosk near the field house that could be rented out to food vendors. This would further activate the park and bring in some revenue.

The plan also envisions an expanded pool deck and renovated poolhouse. There may also be opportunity for a small area containing spray features.

The master plan also envisions installing sidewalk around the entire perimeter of the park, and moving the fence line inward to accommodate this improve-ment. Since the fence needs to be reset anyway in order to make it plumb, this is a great opportunity to make this park safer and more inviting.

The plan also creates a new basketball court on the corner of Rhode Island Avenue and Oak Street, where

100 >>> WARD 3: ELMWOOD PARK + WASHINGTON PLAYGROUND

FIGURE I1: A VISION FOR ELMWOOD PARK.


*

*

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

*

��

��

��

�

��

ELMWOOD PARK

FIGURE I2: ELMWOOD PARK PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan

*

*

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

*

��

��

��

�

��

ELMWOOD PARK


one used to be located. While this master plan was underway, the City partnered with Coca-Cola and Shoprite and installed the newly renovated basket-ball court at the corner of Elmwood and Oak, dedi-cated to basketball legend and East Orange native Harry James. This new court was unveiled in July of 2013 and cost about $40,000. To highlight the bas-ketball history that permeates this corner of the park, commemorative pavers or a mural could be used along the streetscape, either in the sidewalk, or on a low seatwall that could also accommodate spectators.

The plan also proposes a rubberized track in place of today’s asphalt track. To accomplish this, police surveillance would have to switch to pedestrian patrols, as vehicular access on the rubberized track would be prohibited. The police department was amenable to this idea. For loading and unload-ing during events, the plan shows two areas for this purpose off Oak Street and on the other side of the park off Freeman Avenue. Vehicular access on the interior of the park would be prohibited. These could be accomplished with removable bollards installed at entrances to the parks. Maintenance staff could temporarily remove the bollards for maintenance vehicles only.

The master plan also proposes the entire oval of

the field be regraded and reseeded, with an underd-rain installed. Alternatively, an artificial turf field could be used, but the heavy use of this space for non-athletic events may discourage this. Lighting of this field is also recommended.

The tennis courts and associated fences and walls should be replaced. While the tennis courts are shorter than regulation size, it was noted in inter-views that this is not a problem for users.

Large drifts of shrub and perennial plantings are rec-ommended for this park, as are new furnishings and pedestrian lighting. Smaller activity nodes are envi-sioned throughout the park as well—picnic tables, games tables, and exercise equipment.

Entrances to the park would be renovated. The en-trance off Rhode Island Avenue presents a great op-portunity to replace the missing row of sculptures with new public art that is relevant to today’s East Orange.

Finally, visual examination of the 7-foot wide pipe containing the original brook is recommended to de-termine the condition of this piece of infrastructure. Today, this can be accomplished with cameras to help determine if repairs are required.


A VISION FOR WASHINGTON PLAYGROUND

For Washington Playground, the master plan pro-poses a more organic and informal shape for the field. Surrounding this field is an informal walking circuit, planted with shrubs and flowering perenni-als.

New entrances are proposed for the park, as are new site furnishings and pedestrian scale lighting.

The plan recommends replacing the existing play equipment with two new, adjacent play areas—one for older children and one for younger. This new equipment would remove some of the burden placed on the existing playground at nearby Elm-wood Park.

A dog park is also proposed, as well as a small ex-ercise equipment area, and a skate park. The field house is replaced with a new building that con-tains functioning restroom facilities and storage for equipment.

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��


��

��

��

��

��

FIGURE I3: WASHINGTON PLAYGROUND PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��


��

��

��

��

��



The Third Ward contains what many believe to be the centerpiece of the city’s parks: Elmwood Park. It also abuts Orange County Park to the west and includes Washington Playground, currently a Board of Education prop-erty with a vacant school building occupying the eastern portion of the block. This section of the city has a census block on its western edge with high median incomes and a high number of resi-dents over 65. The rest of the ward has a median income right in the mid-dle of the range—neither high or low. The numbers of residents under 18 is high, but not the highest in the city and population density tends toward the higher end.

This ward is largely to the west of the Garden State Parkway, but does contain an isolated area of housing nestled between the Parkway and Holy Sepulchre Cemetery. This ward also includes the

ELMWOOD PARK AFTER FREEMAN’S IMPROVEMENTS OF 1919-1920 (Recreation Commissioners 47)

southern side of busy Central Avenue and smaller commercial areas on Sanford Street, Tremont Ave-nue, and South Orange Avenue. The Third Ward also contains a number of schools, both public and char-

ter schools. However, a few large schools have been abandoned and sit empty. The VA Medical Center is located in the southwest corner of this ward. There are also many important religious institutions, in-cluding Elmwood United Presbyterian, a few blocks west of Elmwood Park.


This section of the city really came into its own after the trolley cars began running on Central Avenue in the early 1900s, in the days before the automobile changed cities forever. “Trolley cars running along Central Avenue were the open ses-ame, as it were, for the development of unoccupied land, bringing homesteaders and adding to the tax-able valuations of the city. The Elmwood section, in its highly populous state of 1920, justifies the City Council’s action” (Pierson 544).

Elmwood Park itself was donated to the City by the Elmwood Home Association on April 2, 1855 and consisted of about 9 acres of swampland (Hart Postcards 66).

It was then used as a dump for many years and at one time to house small pox patients, when there was a mild epidemic in the town.

In 1891, improvements were suggested via petition, but nothing was done. Between 1897 and 1903, the City attempted to transfer the tract to the Essex County Park Commission, but again, nothing hap-pened.

Between 1903 and 1908, a brook running through the tract was dammed for ice skating each winter, but “each year the skating area being less and less be-

cause of the dumping by the City” (Recreation Com-missioners 45). The park ceased use as a dump in 1910 (Hart Postcards 66).

Improvements were begun in 1910 for a sum of $5500 with grading, seeding, walks, trees and shrubs, a run-ning track, tennis courts, and for play equipment.

In 1916, the park came under the control of the Board of Recreation Commissioners and more improve-ments were made.

Like many historic natural watercourses running through our cities, the brook running through Elm-wood became an open sewer due to the use it was

“THE ALTAR OF DEMOCRACY” USED TO STAND AT THE RHODE ISLAND AVENUE ENTRANCE (Hart, Images 105)

“No men are foreigners to me; of one blood are all nations.”


put by residents and industry. In 1917, a private resident by the name of Mr. Alden Freeman made it clear he would donate money to complete Elmwood Park if the City would eliminate the open sewer (Recreation Commissioners 46).

This water course was consequently buried in a seven-foot wide, 1600-foot long concrete pipe, the Elizabeth River Valley Drain, for a cost of almost $40,000 (Pierson 562 and Recreation Commission-ers 46).

THE FIELD HOUSE AT ELMWOOD IN THE 1930s (Hart, Images 109)

With this work complete, Mr. Freeman invested about $150,000 of his own funds into the park. A large part of this sum was used for a series of sculptures dedicated to his father and entitled, “The Shrine of Human Rights”, by the sculptor Ulric H. Ellerhuson. These sculptures were located at the Rhode Island Avenue entrance to the park and centered around the theme of equality and human rights, a very hot topic at this time in American history. The main sculpture read “No men are foreigners to me; of one blood are


all nations”. There were four sculptures marching along the walk, one from each major continent and meant to represent a human rights figure. There were Pocahontas, Columbus, Confucius, and Fred-erick Douglass (Pierson 563). Today, only Confu-cius remains along this walkway.

The dedication of the improved park occurred Oc-tober 12, 1921 and a huge crowd of 6,000 turned out to celebrate.

The fieldhouse was erected in 1928 for about $65,000 and was the pride of the Recreation Commission.

The ornamental fence was installed in 1931 to pro-

tect children from vehicular traffic. It was noted that no gates were installed in order to keep the park as publicly accessible as it always was (Recreation Commissioners 50).

The Little Theater of East Orange began operating out of the Elmwood Park field house in 1935. “With the depression in full swing, Francis H. Haire, recre-ation superintendent, had an idea that an adult Little Theater might help the community” (Hart, Images 109). The idea was well received and the theater op-erated all the way through the 1950s, when the the-ater moved to the Elmwood School in 1958. The Little Theater ceased operation in the early 1960s due to decreasing audiences.

According to inter-views conducted by the consultant team, the basketball courts at Elmwood have hosted informal pick-up games attended by some of the National Basketball Associa-tion’s greatest play-ers. The court at the corner of Oak Street and Arlington Avenue has a lot of special significance to the community.

THE ELMWOOD FIELD IS HEAVILY USED BUT IS FREQUENTLY SOGGY


THE ORIGINAL ENTRANCE WALLS ARE CHARMING BUT DO NOT PROVIDE A GREAT USE

EXISTING ASPHALT PATH IS IN FAIR SHAPE, BUT EXHIBITS SOME PUDDLING

EDGE CONDITION AT LAWN IS POOR

MANY TEMPORARY OR ERODED PATHWAYS AT ELMWOOD


THE BASKETBALL COURT EXHIBITS DAMAGE FROM TREE ROOTS AND DOES NOT DRAIN PROPERTY

CRACKED TENNIS COURTS, WALLS, AND FENCES NEED REPLACEMENT

EXISTING PLAY EQUIPMENT IS HEAVILY USED

THE FIELD HOUSE TODAY


ELMWOOD PARK TODAY

As is the case with all of the city’s parks, stormwa-ter management is a problem for today’s Elmwood Park. Slopes are very shallow, soils are highly com-pacted, and poor drainage is the result. The large oval in the center suffers the most, with areas of ponding and sogginess.

There are also no sidewalks on the park side of the street for the entire perimeter of the park, which creates dangerous situations. The consultant team heard during interviews that the intersections along Rhode Island Avenue at Freeman Avenue and Oak Street are particularly dangerous. There are ADA accessible ramps with detectable warning surfac-es at the Elmwood Avenue corners of the park, but these only connect with a worn-in dirt path.

Within the park, a number of ad hoc asphalt ramps have been installed, presumably to provide some ADA access. These are often very steep and cracked.

The basketball court at the corner of Elmwood Av-enue and Oak Street shows damage from the roots of the adjacent London Plane trees. Incidentally, these two trees are some of the nicest in the park. All athletic courts show significant cracking. This is

probably due to the lack of positive drainage, as well as settling fill soils beneath the courts. The retaining walls and fences surrounding the tennis courts show significant damage and should be replaced. The ten-nis walls are surfaced in plywood, creating a main-tenance issue. In spite of the poor condition of the tennis courts, these are reportedly the most heavily used tennis courts in the city.

The ornamental iron fence at the edges of the park should be repainted, with rust removed, and posts reset. Some sections of fence are no longer plumb, and a few need to have pickets straightened. A num-ber of the gates are chained and padlocked closed. There are many sections of chain link fence in the park, some of which are duplicated and unneces-sary.

Some areas of paving could be removed, especially around the field house. Today, the field house is com-pletely surrounded by asphalt.

The entrances to the park are dismal, with unwel-coming signage and a lack of quality vegetation. Many of the mature trees are in excellent condition, while many of the smaller, flowering trees are in poor condition. There are very few shrubs or perennials in the park. The existing shrubs are all pruned into round shapes.


The field house requires renovation to make the bathrooms completely functional once more. The hardware for the shade awning is still in place, but the awning is no longer there. Most planters around the field house have been filled in with asphalt. The railings at the field house porch are not tall enough to meet code. The International Building Code re-quires 42” guardrails.

The pool is in great condition, but the poolhouse needs significant renovation.

The existing playground is heav-ily used and very popular. The only request the consultant team

heard from the community was to enlarge the play area to relieve some of the heavy use. Sculptural remnants of the older play equipment still exist in the south corner of the site. These do not appear to be used by today’s children, but are interesting in their own right.

The ad hoc exercise equipment installed by maintenance staff is very popular, but could be replaced with sturdier equip-ment.

Site furnishings are old and uncomfort-able. However, the existing retaining walls provide informal seating opportu-

nities, as do the steps leading up to the field house.

A MOTHER AND CHILD WALK IN THE STREET TO GET TO THE PARK

PARK ENTRANCES ARE UNINVITING; THE “ALTAR OF DEMOCRACY” USED TO BE AT THE END OF THIS ENTRANCE


AREAS OF UNNECESSARY PAVING COULD BE REMOVED

THE ‘BONES’ OF ELMWOOD ARE GREAT AND THE PARK HAS SOME BEAUTIFUL TREES


A LARGE AREA OF CRACKED UNNECESSARY PAVING

WASHINGTON PLAYGROUND HISTORY

The Washington School was constructed in 1912 as the Washington Academy of Music to relieve over-crowding at other city schools. It was expanded in 1920 (Gerrish and Goode, Centennial 5).

As noted previously in this report, the idea of com-bining outdoor school facilities and neighborhood parks is not new for East Orange. A Schools and Recreation Report published by the City Planning

Board in 1945 identified Washington Playground as a great opportunity. “Washington School and its playfield can be utilized without site changes as an adequate center for this neighborhood. It would be desirable to plan to provide a community cen-ter and library space in the present building” (City Planning Board 23).


WASHINGTON PLAYGROUND TODAY

Today, Washington Playground is in need of much renovation, but still possesses a lot of potential as a great neighborhood park.

The school has been empty for some time, but there may be plans to reopen it in the future.

A large volume of stormwater sheet flows off adja-cent properties to the west of the park and onto the field, exacerbating poor drainage issues. The field itself is small and compacted.

Along the fence lines at the west side of the park, poison ivy and other weeds are a problem.

The existing basketball courts are cracked. The consultant team heard that these are not used today because of their poor condition. The field house is too small and does not meet the needs of the park.

Both entrances are unwelcoming and are sized for large vehicles. There is no signage.

The children’s play equipment is still serviceable, if a little dated. It is also not ADA compliant. The play surface needs to be redone. There is one remnant of concrete 1960s play equipment that is sculptural and interesting.

The asphalt ramps leading up to the field are not handicap accessible and sections of the surrounding retaining walls are in need of replacement.

There are several mature honey locust trees around the basketball courts that are in great condition.


UNINVITING ENTRANCE AND STREET FRONTAGE

EXISTING WALLS NEED REPLACEMENT

EXISTING FIELD IS SOGGY AND COMPACTED

OLDER PLAY EQUIPMENT AND SAFETY SURFACE SHOULD BE REPLACED


��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��


ELMWOOD PARK

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

FIGURE I4: WARD 3 CONTEXT PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan


��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��


ELMWOOD PARK

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

LP

LP

LP

LPHP

HP

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

ELMWOOD PARK

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Fences doubled-up

Court damaged by tree roots

Field is soggy and compacted; does not drain

Older play equipment Fence damaged,

entrances not open

Courts are cracked and aren’t draining

properly

ADA crossing, but no sidewalk; unsafe condition

Old statue remnant

No sidewalks on Park side of street; unsafe condition

Former Basketball

Court

Great opportunities for field house steps

Pool recently rennovated Excercise

equipment is popular, but ad hoc

Excercise equipment is

popular, but ad hoc

Entrance needs to be spruced up

Ornamental fence needs to be repainted and posts reset

Chain link fence needs to be replaced/repaired


properly

Retaining walls need to replaced

Poolhouse and fieldhouse need some

renovation

Historic decoration on outside of fieldhouse; awning mechanism still in place on front

Original walls, steps, and copings needs some repair

FIGURE I5: ELMWOOD PARK EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan

LP

LP

LP

LPHP

HP

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

ELMWOOD PARK

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Fences doubled-up

Court damaged by tree roots

Field is soggy and compacted; does not drain

Older play equipment Fence damaged,

entrances not open


properly

ADA crossing, but no sidewalk; unsafe condition

Old statue remnant

No sidewalks on Park side of street; unsafe condition

Former Basketball

Court

Great opportunities for field house steps

Pool recently rennovated Excercise

equipment is popular, but ad hoc

Excercise equipment is

popular, but ad hoc

Entrance needs to be spruced up

Ornamental fence needs to be repainted and posts reset

Chain link fence needs to be replaced/repaired


properly

Retaining walls need to replaced

Poolhouse and fieldhouse need some

renovation

Historic decoration on outside of fieldhouse; awning mechanism still in place on front

Original walls, steps, and copings needs some repair



�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Field is under-sized and

compacted

Field House doesn’t meet

the need

Play equipment could be replaced

Benches and paving are damaged

Courts are crackedPoison Ivy

and weeds along fence

Few street trees

Asphalt ramps are not

accessibleUninviting entrances


into park

Stormwater sheet flows from park

into street

Uninviting entrances

FIGURE I6: WASHINGTON PLAYGROUND EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan



�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Field is under-sized and

compacted

Field House doesn’t meet

the need

Play equipment could be replaced

Benches and paving are damaged

Courts are crackedPoison Ivy

and weeds along fence

Few street trees

Asphalt ramps are not

accessibleUninviting entrances


into park


into street

Uninviting entrances


East Orange Oval +

Francis Haire Park

WARD 4: EAST ORANGE OVAL + FRANCIS HAIRE PARK >>> 127

the city’s parks: ward 4East Orange Oval and Francis Haire Park: Past, Present, and Future

A VISION FOR THE OVAL

The centerpiece of the proposed master plan is a fully restored field, surfaced in artificial turf, and functioning for baseball, soccer, or football.

Surrounding this field is a proposed rubberized track with a true oval form to replace the existing track that has lost its oval over the years.

On the west side of the new field are concrete ris-ers set into the slope for spectator seating. A new field house would be built at the top of the slope and would house public restrooms, changing rooms for players, and concessions.

The plan also envisions a memorial commemorat-ing the Negro Baseball League, or a mural on the wall of the New Jersey Transit Train line.

The plan also recommends acquiring three lots on the southeast corner of the block to allow the Oval to fill in this corner. In one scenario, this cor-

ner could be used as an entrance to the park and as parking for the Civic Center. This would enable a very strong connection between the Civic Center and the Oval. In a second scenario, parking for the Civic Center could be moved onto a portion of Hollywood Plaza. This would open up the whole southeast cor-ner of the Oval block as additional park space with a new park entrance and would also foster a strong connection between the park and the Civic Center.

The basketball courts are all relocated to the east side of the park, while the existing play area on the south is shown to remain. The play area to the north (close to Grove Place) is shown as being renovated.

A spray park is also proposed on the north side of the park.

A large area for picnics and small gatherings is lo-cated at the north side of the park surrounding an open lawn area, and encircled with lush new plant-ings. There is also a more informal strolling path

that winds around the perim-eter of the path, through more natural planted areas and with tables and benches scattered throughout.

A system of vegetated swales, raingardens and subsurface detention is proposed to in-tercept stormwater as close to the park edges as possible, be-fore it can damage the park.EAST ORANGE OVAL TODAY

128 >>> WARD 4: EAST ORANGE OVAL + FRANCIS HAIRE PARK

FIGURE J1: A VISION FOR THE EAST ORANGE OVAL.


��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

EAST ORANGE OVAL

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

EAST ORANGE OVAL

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

FIGURE J2: THE OVAL PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan


It is also recommended that a feasibility study be completed to replace the Fellowship Civic Center with a modern facility that meets the needs of to-day’s citizens. A partnership with the YMCA could be explored to the mutual benefit of both the YMCA and the City.

A VISION FOR FRANCIS HAIRE PARK

Ideally, the relationship between Dionne Warwick Elementary School and the park would be improved so that the school grounds and the park could flow together and share resources for the benefit of both sets of users. In today’s climate, the master plan proposes renovations solely within the boundaries of the existing park.

Instead of the swimming pool, a new sprayground is proposed, with a safer and more accessible equip-ment area. The pool could be left in place and filled in, with the spray ground built within it.

The plan also proposes re-orienting the park so that it is clearly organized around a new, clearly de-fined entrance off Grove Street, adjacent to the bus stop. An urban plaza with seating would welcome visitors to this park and provide a small gathering space.

A new field house is proposed at the west side of

the property with the spray ground in front. This field house could be designed with an attached shade structure or pergola with vines so that parents can gather under shade to watch their children play in the water.

The little league field is proposed to be regraded and reseeded, with an underdrain. New trees are pro-posed around the outside edges, to help define this space and provide much needed shade.

The plan also proposes a creatively designed bus stop with seating that could visually connect to the park, and eliminate an unsafe existing situation.


THE FIELD AT FRANCIS HAIRE TODAY

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��


��

��

��

��

��

FIGURE J3: FRANCIS HAIRE PLAYGROUND PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��


��

��

��

��

��



The Fourth Ward is the only ward divided into quarters by I-280 and the Parkway, leading to some fragmentation in this area of the city. It is further divided by the on- and off- ramps of the highways, and by the New Jersey Transit commuter rail line.

This ward also contains the civic heart of the city right at the intersection of the highways—City Hall, the Municipal Court building, the Fellowship Civic Center, and other civic buildings, along with the East Orange Train Station. From the perspective of the consultant team, this ward is the one in most

1911 MAP ILLUSTRATING THE ORANGE (ORATON) PARKWAY PRIOR TO IT BECOMING THE GARDEN STATE PARKWAY. THIS MAP ALSO SHOWS THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE OVAL TO THE AT-GRADE TRAIN STATION.

THE PARK FRONTS ON AN AT-GRADE TRAIN STATION

THAT HAS ASSOCIATED GREEN SPACE

THE PARKWAY IS GENEROUS, AT-GRADE

AND HAS LARGE AREAS OF GREEN SPACE


need of reclaiming its identity from the infrastructure that cuts through it.

The portion of this ward south of I-280 has a low median income, while the portion to the north appears to have median incomes in the center of the range (neither very high or low). As a whole, this ward has the largest area of census blocks at the lowest median income. How-ever, it also has the lowest popula-tion density south and east of I-280 and the Parkway. West of the Park-way, it has the highest population density and north of I-280, it has density in the middle-high range, as compared to the rest of the city.

Near City Hall, this ward appears to have high number of residents under 18. But in the rest of the ward, these numbers are in the low-middle range as compared to the rest of the city. The numbers of seniors appears to be in the low-middle range.

EATON PLACE AT THE NOW CLOSED GROVE STREET STATION, PRIOR TO THE ELEVATION OF THE TRACKS

THE FLAG IS FLYING IN THE OVAL PLAYGROUND

THE OVAL IN 1915 HOSTING A BOY SCOUT RALLY (Hart, Images 126).

ORIGINAL PARK SIGNAGE WAS INVITING AND UNIQUE

1908 FLAG RAISING CEREMONY AT THE NEWLY COMPLETE OVAL PLAYGROUND. THE ORIGINAL GRANDSTAND CAN BE SEEN IN THE BACKGROUND (HART, IMAGES 117).


Historically, the image of a Parkway was very different than it is today. The Oraton Parkway, which was located where the Garden State Park-way currently runs, was a cel-ebrated arterial that added to the beauty of the city. The 1945 Schools Report notes, “Park Avenue and Oraton Parkway are parts of the County Park System... Oraton Parkway lends an attractiveness and openness to the city which is a real asset” (City Planning Board 13). Unfortunately, the Parkway merely divides the city today, and does not con-tribute to a sense of place. The construction of the Garden State Parkway in the 1940s and 1950s and the elevation of the train line in 1922 altered the city forever, especially in the Fourth Ward.

Prior to the elevation of the train line, the East Orange Oval had great front-age directly linked to a busy train sta-

1898 STATE CHAMPIONSHIP BASEBALL TEAM AT THE OVAL (Hart, Images 50).

THE NEW YORK CUBANS PRACTICED AT THE OVAL IN THE 1940S, ALONG WITH MANY OTHER NEGRO LEAGUE PLAYERS (Martin 25).

THE BLANK WALL OF THE ELEVATED TRAIN HIDES THE PARK, BUT ALSO PRESENTS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ART


tion. This made it easy for out of towners to visit the city for games or other events.

In 1907, the land for the Oval was purchased by the City for a sum of $52,000. For an investment of about $70,000, the City constructed a wood grandstand for 1,800 spectators, a field house, tennis courts, walks, a running track, a baseball diamond, play equipment, pavilions, and other amenities.

In 1923, the existing field house was replaced with an updated facility for a sum of $12,750. This fieldhouse looked very similar to the one that still stands at Soverel. The clock on the field house was donated by a private citizen and the bell in the tower by the East Orange Baseball As-sociation.

In 1925, the wood grandstand was destroyed by fire. That same year it was replaced by a concrete and steel covered stand seating 2,000 people for a cost of $75,000.

Baseball has a long and impressive history at the East Orange Oval. From its beginning, the park has been known for baseball. The 1898 State Champions practiced here, and important games were held throughout the twentieth century. The

ENTRANCES ARE UNINVITING AND IN DISREPAIR; THE

ORIGINAL FENCES REMAIN AND CAN BE RESTORED

NO STRONG CONNECTION BETWEEN THE FELLOWSHIP

CIVIC CENTER AND THE OVAL


1945 Schools and Recreation Report states that the Oval has “a modern grandstand and dressing room facilities, a shelter building, softball diamonds, a running track and six tennis courts...The baseball diamond provides the home grounds for a semi-professional baseball team whose games are at-tended to the full capacity of the grandstand during the summer months” (City Planning Board 12).

The park also holds an important place in the his-tory of the Negro Baseball Leagues. “It was used by the New York Cubans from 1941-1947, and the Ne-gro National League from 1940-1948. The field was also used by the Negro American League from 1949 -1950, and it served as a neutral site for the Newark Eagles from 1936-1948...Such great black ball play-ers as Josh Gibson, Satchel Paige, John Henry “Pop” Lloyd, Oscar Charleston, Chino Smith, Judy Johnson, and many others played at this facility [the Oval]” (Martin, 25).

THE OVAL TODAY

Today, the park is still heavily used for baseball even though its condition is far from optimal. Soc-cer is also very popular here and football teams use the field for practicing.

Perhaps the most limiting part of today’s East

Orange Oval is the fact that it is hidden behind the raised train line. The other three sides of the park are surrounded by other lots so that the park is on the interior of the block, like many of the city’s parks.

Entrances to the park are uninviting and dismal, though they still retain vestiges of their former glory,

SIGNIFICANT PONDING ON THE GRAVEL TRACK

THE FIELD HOUSE DOES NOT MEET THE NEEDS OF THE PARK


SOGGY FIELD

NEWER PLAY EQUIPMENT

SOME UNSIGHTLY VIEWS INTO ADJACENT LOTS; NO BUFFER


such as the original fence and the lampposts. The lampposts are not in good condition, but the fence is certainly worth restoring. The adjacent schoolyard has gates onto the park, but no clear connection.

At the southeast corner of the block, there are a few lots between the park and Greenwood Av-enue that currently support auto body repair and small storage/garage space. The lots are disor-derly and unsightly and impede the use of this corner as a gateway into the park and the Fellow-ship Civic Center.

Currently, there is no strong connection between the Oval and the Fellowship Civic Center, which is currently the only municipal recreation center in the city.

There is parking on Eaton Place for the Oval, though the consultant team heard a need for ad-ditional parking, especially during popular sum-mer months, when people reportedly come from all over the region to watch games. There is also a strange set of double curves in the middle of Ea-ton Place that run perpendicular to the direction of travel. When driven over, they seem to function as speed bumps.

WALL ON THE WESTERN EDGE IS OVERTURNING

UNUSED UPPER COURTS

UNSAFE ACCESS TO UNUSED UPPER COURTS


There are a number of stormwater issues that need to be resolved in the park to ensure long term suc-cess. The field itself is very poorly drained, with compacted soils. A large volume of stormwater runs onto the park from adjacent properties all around the park. A large parking lot in the north-west corner of the park sheds stormwater into the back of the retaining wall at that edge of the park. The wall itself is in very poor condition. Similarly, there is a retaining wall on the west side of the park that appears to be overturning. This may also be due to the stormwater building up behind it.

The track is currently surfaced with loose gravel. Because of the amount of stormwater directed onto this path, there are many areas on the track where ponding occurs. Also, the gravel becomes rutted easily, especially in muddy conditions. The consultant team heard many complaints about this particular track.

The two basketball courts on the west side of the park exhibit significant cracking and should be re-placed. The basketball court on the east side of the park is newer and has a painted “Nets” logo, though it too exhibits some cracking. There is a large unused paved court in the northwest corner of the park. The access stairs up to this court are in poor condition, as are the associated retaining

walls. There is also a steep asphalt ramp into this court.

It was also noted that park maintenance tends to mow the field into a circular shape, rather than the standard diamond.

The fencing in the park is in poor condition and in places may be too high. For instance, the outfield fence adjacent to the school is 20 feet high. Other portions of fence may be unnecessary, especially be-tween the park, the school parking lot, the back of the field house, and the community center.

The Oval is fully lit with more recent sports field lighting. There are also some unused concrete light footings around the edge of the field.

Finally, the field house is too small to meet the re-quirements of the park. It was noted that the bath-rooms are functional but do not meet the needs of the park. Portable toilets are brought in during events. More storage, changing rooms, and upgraded public restroom facilities are needed, as well as potential space for concessions.

FRANCIS HAIRE PARK HISTORY

Ms. Francis Haire was the first full-time recreation director for the city and was appointed in 1925. Ac-


cording to the 1964 Centennial History of East Or-ange, she initiated and organized high standards of leadership qualification and numerous special programs. Francis Haire Park is named for her and represents joint planning between the school board and the recreation department. The Centen-nial History describes this park in this way: “Its construction introduced creative and imaginative play equipment. A horse and wagon, a fort and tree climber were blended with the more traditional play swings and slides” (Stuart and Boutillier 47).

FRANCIS HAIRE PARK TODAY

Today, the relationship between the adjacent Di-onne Warwick Elementary School and the park is not ideal. The school has its own play equipment close to the building. Otherwise, the school’s lot is completely covered in asphalt. This lot does drain to inlets at the center of this paved lot, but still ac-counts for a significant amount of impervious area. There is also chain link fence installed between the park and the asphalt lot.

It should also be noted that use of this park may increase due to the new condos under construction nearby.

The park has good frontage along Grove Street,

where a heavily used bus station is also located. However, proximity to this busy arterial requires fencing and may require some visual screening from passing vehicles.

The field is deliberately undersized, but is lit and heavily used. There have been issues in the past with balls going into Grove Street. Today, tee ball and kickball are played on this field, but not baseball. The field does not drain properly due to shallow slopes and compacted soils.

Unlike other city parks, stormwater does not flow from adjacent lots into the park, but the opposite is true. Stormwater from the north side of the park is flowing onto adjacent residential lots.

The play equipment is large and recently installed, but has been burned in places. The burned pieces have not been replaced.

The field house at this in a state of substantial disre-pair and should be replaced.

The pool is in good condition, but the pool equipment vault is dangerous and requires maintenance staff to climb down into a pit. The field and the pool are both surrounded by an unwelcoming 14’ high chain link fence.


UNWELCOMING, LOCKED

ENTRANCES

SCHOOL IS SURROUNDED BY

ASPHALT WITH NO RELATIONSHIP TO THE

PARK

UNNECESSARY PAVING


BUS STOP IS TOO SMALL AND OFFERS

NO SHELTER; OPPORTUNITY TO

BE INCLUDED IN THE PARK

GRADING ISSUES AND RAMPS

FRAGMENT THE PARK


There are some flowering trees located within this park, but they are generally in poor condition and should be replaced.

The main entrances off Grove Street appear to be locked most of the time. During one daytime visit made by the consultant team, all entrances to the park were closed.

There is an area of unnecessary paving and the foundation of an old building in the northwest cor-ner of the site.


��

��

��

��

�


EAST ORANGE OVAL

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

FIGURE J4: WARD 4 CONTEXT PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan


��

��

��

��

�


EAST ORANGE OVAL

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

LP

LPLP

LP

HP

LP

EAST ORANGE OVAL

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

LP��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

Courts appear un-used

Courts are cracked

Field has soggy areas, is poorly

drained and compacted

Open space not utilized

Track is made of a loose material

Asphalt Ramps

Retaining wall is in disrepair

Undesirable Views

Plenty of Parking

Original Fence and Lamp-posts

need repair

Field has full lighting

Stormwater sheet flows from large parking lot into

back of wall


lots into park

Ornamental fence needs to be repainted and repaired

FIGURE J5: EAST ORANGE OVAL EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan

LP

LPLP

LP

HP

LP

EAST ORANGE OVAL

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

LP��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

Courts appear un-used

Courts are cracked

Field has soggy areas, is poorly

drained and compacted

Open space not utilized

Track is made of a loose material

Asphalt Ramps

Retaining wall is in disrepair

Undesirable Views

Plenty of Parking

Original Fence and Lamp-posts

need repair

Field has full lighting

Stormwater sheet flows from large parking lot into

back of wall


lots into park

Ornamental fence needs to be repainted and repaired


��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Field is under-sized, compacted,

and does not drain well

Fence between park and sidewalk

Mis-matched paving

Mis-matched paving

Asphalt ramp

School parking lot


onto adjacent lots

FIGURE J6: FRANCIS HAIRE PLAYGROUND EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan


��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Field is under-sized, compacted,

and does not drain well

Fence between park and sidewalk

Mis-matched paving

Mis-matched paving

Asphalt ramp

School parking lot


onto adjacent lots


Hoffman Park +

Columbian Playground

WARD 5: HOFFMAN PARK + COLUMBIAN PLAYGROUND >>> 155

the city’s parks: ward 5Hoffman Park and Columbian Playground: Past, Present, and Future

A VISION FOR HOFFMAN PARK

The master plan envisions a small, lushly planted pocket park with winding pathways and small seat-ing areas. Plant species would be selected that could be easily maintained and would stay rela-tively low to keep sightlines open. Colorful shrubs such as azalea would be used to provide pops of color. A large open lawn would occupy the center for informal play space.

At one end of the park, a small water feature an-chors a corner and provides a small gathering space. The water feature would be a reference to the historic Boiling Spring below the surface, and might even contain a graphic and narrative of this piece of history.

The plan also envisions a new bus shelter at the north end of the park that could be integrated into the park’s design. There may also be the opportuni-ty for a piece of educational, interactive sculpture that could relate to the area’s industrial importance in the fields of electronics and motorization.

A VISION FOR COLUMBIAN PLAYGROUND

The vision for Columbian Playground includes a newly restored natural turf multi-purpose playing field, with areas for spectator seating on either side.

A full circuit walking path is provided encircling the field and winding through naturalistic planting. Plen-ty of shaded seating and picnic areas are scattered throughout for small gatherings or for resting during a walk.

The deck around the pool is expanded and the field house is renovated.

The children’s play equipment is replaced and sur-rounded with lawn, shaded benches and picnic tables for family gatherings. Elements of natural play and outdoor musical equipment could also be included.

The basketball court is replaced and new spectator seating provided. A small skatepark is also provided, at the request of community participants.

Pedestrian lighting would be added throughout the park, as well as buffer plantings between adjacent residential lots and the park.

Stormwater is intercepted between the adjacent lots and the park and channeled safely into below-grade detention/infiltration beds.

New tree, shrub, and perennial plantings are pro-posed throughout, along with community gardens and improved entrances.

��

��

*

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

HOFFMAN PARK

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

FIGURE K1: HOFFMAN PARK PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan


THE AZALEA GARDEN IN PHILADELPHIA’S FAIRMOUNT PARK INSPIRES THE VISION FOR HOFFMAN PARK

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��


��

��

��

��

��

��

FIGURE K2: COLUMBIAN PLAYGROUND PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��


��

��

��

��

��

��

160 >>> WARD 5: HOFFMAN PARK + COLUMBIAN PLAYGROUND


The Fifth Ward is a very stable area of the city. It contains mostly single family housing and can boast about having one of the few neighborhood associations in the city, if not the only one. Resi-dents are extremely proud of their part of the city.

According to the demographics analysis, this area has the largest concentration of seniors (especially surrounding Hoffman Park), but also has very high numbers of residents under 18 (especially around Columbian Playground). The high numbers of both groups contribute to the multi-generational nature of this section of the city.

In terms of income, the Fifth Ward is right in the center of the range of median income compared to the rest of the city—neither low or high. However, there is one census block west of the Parkway and closest to Rowley Park that has lower median incomes and a higher population den-sity.

Population density in the

Fifth Ward tends to the middle range compared to the rest of the city, due to the high number of single family houses.

This area of the city is divided by a New Jersey Tran-sit Rail line that is elevated above most roadways, such as Springdale Avenue, Rutledge Avenue, and North Grove Street. However, the rail line is sunken below Park Avenue and Arlington Avenue.

Historically, the Fifth Ward was the last to be added. This ward was added to the city in 1892, six years af-ter the creation of the original four wards. The area was known as Ampere, and the 1921 history notes “Ampere, which includes the larger part of the Fifth

“BOILING SPRING”, THE CITY’S ORIGINAL WATER SUPPLY SHOWN ON AN 1890 MAP


Ward, is practically a city by it-self, its interest being quite lo-cal, though its loyalty to the city as a whole is as consistent as those living in other sections” (Pierson 546).

In the early part of the twentieth century, a number of factories and plants existed in this area of the city relating to electric mo-tors, devices, automotive start-ing systems, and light fixtures. The proximity to Edison, New Jersey enabled this area of the country to flourish within this in-dustry. According to the 1921 history, “the Edison Lamp Works, a branch of the General Electric Com-pany, is located at Nineteenth Street and Spring-dale Avenue, East Orange. Incandescent lamps are turned out in large numbers every year by the 466 employees making up the working force of the plant” (Pierson 644).

Interestingly, not far from the site of today’s Hoff-man Park, was the original source of the City’s wa-ter, a source named Boiling Spring. The 1890 Rob-inson Atlas depicts a large area of land (including Hoffman Park) as being owned by The Orange Wa-


ter Company. On this map can be seen the location of one of the wells close to what looks like the city limits. “Borings had revealed a large underground current of water suitable for domestic and other purposes...Three artesian wells were drilled and an open well twenty-four feet in diameter was exca-

vated, another fifty feet in diam-eter, another of one hundred fifty feet in diameter, then two wells of twenty-seven feet and one of fifty feet in diameter, all connected by an underground water gallery 700 feet long, ten feet wide and twenty feet deep, also five addi-tional artesian wells” (Pierson 550). Work began in 1882 and was completed in 5 months. At the

end, there was a public demonstration that illustrat-ed the water pressure from these wells by throwing a stream from the corner of Prospect and Main over the top of Brick Church (Pierson 550)! The source was abandoned as the growth of the city spread east and the city feared contamination of the water. The Boiling Spring source was turned off in 1905.

It is unknown when Hoffman Park was added to the City’s park system, but it appears it was the result of the 1945 Schools and Recreation Report. The report noted, “a small beauty spot and relaxation area be-tween the Lackawanna Railroad and Hoffman Boule-vard north of Rutledge Avenue should be acquired to serve the isolated northeast sector of the city” (City Planning Board 21).


HOFFMAN PARK TODAY

Today, Hoffman Park is a relatively un-known little park in the triangle formed by Hoffman Boulevard, Ampere Parkway, and Rutledge Avenue.

However, it is the only park without set programming such as athletic courts or playgrounds and therefore has a lot of potential to showcase what a neighbor-hood pocket park can be.

It has recently installed ADA ramps with detectable warning strips at the sidewalk intersections and has great street front-age along Hoffman Boulevard.

Currently, it contains asphalt walkways, a few shrubs planted by neighbors, a small flagstone patio, lawn, and trees.

The eastern edge of the park backs up to residential lots. There is an old chain link fence in-stalled along the line, but no low buffer plantings. The small flowering trees are in poor condition, but several of the mature deciduous trees are in great shape. There is a weedy area along the north end of the park.

COLUMBIAN PLAYGROUND HISTORY

When the Columbian School (named after Chris-topher Columbus) opened in 1893, “dairy farms surrounded the school and only three houses were standing north of Springdale Avenue. A pastureland extended southerly...and open fields stretched west-erly to Arlington Avenue” (Pierson 575).

COLUMBIAN PLAYGROUND IN 1922; “The playground had no fieldhouse

as it was run in cooperation with the school” (Hart, Images 104).

COLUMBIAN PLAYGROUND IN 1931


The playground was created in 1919, when the City purchased land from the school. Fields and play equipment were added and the playground dedi-cated in 1922. Later on, a real boat dock and boat were added for inclusion in the children’s play area (Hart, Images 104).

COLUMBIAN PLAYGROUND TODAY

Columbian School today is vacant, but there may be plans to reopen it as a school in the near future. The park is separate from the school, divided from it by an asphalt driveway.

The pool seems to be in good condition and is very popular. The pool equipment is in great shape. The community conveyed that the pool deck is too small and gets overcrowded.

The field house within the park is partially used by the local Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) chapter and the American Legion. The restrooms and kitch-en need renovation, though the structure in gener-al appears to be in good condition. The community noted that the field house as it is does not meet the needs of park users.

The basketball courts do not drain and exhibit cracking. They should be replaced.

SIGNIFICANT PONDING AT BASKETBALL COURTS

UNINVITING ENTRANCE

OPPRESSIVE ENTRANCE WITH BURNED PLAYGROUND BEYOND


CROWDED POOL DECK

LOOSE MATERIAL IN WALKING TRACK CREATES AN UNSAFE CONDITION


LARGE, BURNED PLAYGROUND; BROKEN PAVING LEADING TO IT

UNNECESSARY PAVING AND AD HOC SOLUTIONS TO GRADING ISSUES


Park entrances are uninviting and the play equip-ment was burned in the fall of 2012. The community expressed a lack of faith in the city to make park improvements when this burned equipment was not at least removed. Fencing and gates near park entrances are in poor condition and should be re-placed.

The walking track is currently composed of a loose material that is unstable and unsafe. The track also does not make a complete circuit. It ends at the pool area, where pedestrian circulation is interrupted.

The field itself ponds in areas and is compacted.

Stormwater sheet flows onto the park from adjacent lots on the south and west sides. Stormwater also

sheet flows off the large parking lot for the school, contributing to ponding issues within the park.

There are significant grade changes in the park that should be addressed. A few ad hoc solutions to these grading issues were installed over time (such as asphalt ramps and retaining walls) and should be replaced with more permanent solutions. The exist-ing retaining walls are in poor condition.

In the play area, there are uneven surfaces, broken paving, and unused footings that should be removed or replaced. The play area currently does not drain, though there is an inlet in the northeast corner of the park.

THE FIELD AT COLUMBIAN PLAYGROUND


��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�


HOFFMAN PARK

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

�

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

FIGURE K3: WARD 5 CONTEXT PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan


��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�


HOFFMAN PARK

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

�

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��


HOFFMAN PARK

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Some flowering trees in poor condtion

Shrubs planted by the community

Former bus stop shelter


onto adjacent lots

Compacted soils

Weedy

Large electrical box

New ADA Ramp

New ADA Ramp

FIGURE K4: HOFFMAN PARK EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan


RESIDENTIAL HOUSING NEAR HOFFMAN PARK



��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Courts do not drain properly,

0-1% Slopes

Uneven surfaces and broken concrete

Ad hoc solutions to grading problems to be correctedWalking path

does not make a loop

Entrance needs more impact

Great mature trees

Field House is home to the VFW and

American Legion


lots into park


into park

Compacted soil; areas of ponding

Play area does not drain

FIGURE K5: COLUMBIAN PLAYGROUND EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANEast Orange Park Master Plan



��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Courts do not drain properly,

0-1% Slopes

Uneven surfaces and broken concrete

Ad hoc solutions to grading problems to be correctedWalking path

does not make a loop

Entrance needs more impact

Great mature trees

Field House is home to the VFW and

American Legion


lots into park


into park

Compacted soil; areas of ponding

Play area does not drain

a planting palette For East Orange

A PLANTING PALETTE FOR EAST ORANGE >>> 175

This planting palette suggests attractive, hardy and low-maintenance plants for six different plant-ing conditions found throughout the parks:

ENTRANCE AND FEATURE PLANTS

LANDSCAPE PLANTS

GROUNDCOVERS AND CLIMBING PLANTS

UNDERSTORY AND ORNAMENTAL TREES

PARK TREES AND STREET TREES

STORM WATER MANAGEMENT AND RIPARIAN BUFFER PLANTS

The suggested plants have a proven ability to with-stand standard urban stresses and many are native to New Jersey. Plants that are considered invasive or aggressive in this region are not included and should not be used within the parks system. Plants were chosen for year-round interest.

While this palette was chosen to perform well un-der most circumstances and to be readily avail-able at most nurseries, it is not intended to be a complete list. Designs for new plantings should be free to incorporate other selections where needed, provided they will work well with the soils, sun, pro-gram, and design concept of the site.

New trees, and especially street trees, should be a minimum caliper size of 2.5-3”, as trees of at least this size can better withstand urban stresses af-ter planting. Newly planted trees should always be watered weekly until established, at least the first 2 years.

Where possible, northern New Jersey native plants have been included in the plant list. Native plant com-munities found in the natural areas surrounding East Orange inspired the palette. Using native plants will help to support local wildlife and will reduce the need for intensive maintenance, since these plants are adapted to live in similar areas and in similar condi-tions. Known invasive plants should not be used and should be removed from the parks where present, as these plants will cause further maintenance issues as long as they are present in the parks.

Due to a yearly need to re-plant, annuals are not in-cluded in this palette. In certain beds where commu-nity members or ‘Friends of the Parks’ groups would like to maintain annual beds for flowers and/or vege-tables, these could be chosen on an as-needed basis by current nursery availability and design concept.

a planting palette For East Orange

176 >>> A PLANTING PALETTE FOR EAST ORANGE

ENTRANCE AND FEATURE PLANTS

ABOVE: SEVERAL EXAMPLES OF FEATURE PLANTINGS THAT REQUIRE ONLY MODERATE MAINTENANCE. A DRIFT STYLE ENSURES A BOLD, COLORFUL EFFECT.

Entrances, planters, and areas of special interest will showcase color and remain attractive year-round with this group of low maintenance plants. In these areas, shrubs should be planted in large drifts. A “drift” style of planting will create bolder bands of color and will simplify maintenance pro-

cedures. Each year, perennials are cut back to the ground and debris is removed from the beds. Beds are re-edged and a new layer of mulch is added every 2-3 years. The shrubs should be pruned using a ‘thin-ning’ technique rather than ‘heading back’, to retain a more natural shape.


1. KNOCK OUT ROSE

2. PEACH DRIFT ROSE

Drift Rose and Knock Out Rose are readily available at New Jer-sey nurseries. Both species bloom throughout the summer and do not require heavy prun-ing like many traditional rose species. Knock Out Rose grows to 4’ high x 4’ wide, while drift rose stays lower to the ground. 3. ‘CORAL BELLS’ AZALEA

4. ‘PINK GUMPO’ AZALEA

Both dwarf varieties, these aza-leas bloom profusely in spring. 5. ‘RUBY SPICE’ CLETHRA

This deciduous shrub is native to New Jersey and has a sweet scent while blooming from July to August. 6. SMOOTH HYDRANGEA

7, 8. P.J.M. RHODODENDRON

Semi-evergreen foliage turns a deep purple color in the fall, with purple blooms in spring.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8


1, 2. ‘AUTUMN JOY’ STONE-

CROP

Stonecrop is well adapted to dry conditions. 3. ‘AMERICAN DREAM’ CORE-

OPSIS

4. LANCE LEAF COREOPSIS

5. ‘MOONBEAM’ COREOPSIS

Coreopsis is a hardy and long blooming perennial to fill flow-er beds. All these cultivars are readily available at nurseries. 6, 7. YARROW

Gray green fern like foliage and colorful blooms in yellow or pink throughout the summer. 8. PURPLE CONE FLOWER

9. WHITE SWAN CONE FLOW-

ER

10. BLACK EYED SUSAN

Cone Flower and Black Eyed Su-san are long blooming - June to August, and do well in harsh conditions.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10


1. NEW ENGLAND ASTER

Blooms in fall.2. HARDY GERANIUM

A good, low growing filler, best in areas of partial sun. 3. CAT MINT

4, 5. ‘MAY NIGHT’ SALVIA

Both Cat Mint and Salvia bloom throughout the summer and grow well with minimal mainte-nance in flower beds. 6. ‘PARDON ME’ DAY LILY

7. ‘ROCKET CITY’ DAY LILY

Day lilies are great to grow in large groups and create at-tractive drifts even before they bloom. Many great varieties are readily available at nurseries. 8. FEATHER REED GRASS

9. FOUNTAIN GRASS

Both these ornamental grasses create a nice contrast to flow-ering perennials and shrubs. Feather reed grass grows in an upright, column-like shape, while fountain grass is more of a clump. Some species can be quite large, so be sure to check the size of the cultivar before planting.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9


LANDSCAPE PLANTS

ABOVE: LANDSCAPE PLANTS FOR LARGE BEDS WILL SOFTEN THE EDGES OF PATHS AND WALLS IN THE PARKS AND HELP TO DEFINE SPACES AND PARK PROGRAM ELE-MENTS.

To be used in planting beds within the parks, these hardy shrubs and perennials will create colorful and attractive drifts year-round with minimal main-tenance. In general, these selections will not grow

much taller than 30”, reducing the need for regular pruning. Each year, perennials and shrubs will be cut to the ground and debris removed from beds. Every 2-3 years, these beds are re-edged and a new layer of mulch is added.


1, 2. GRO-LOW FRAGRANT SU-

MAC

A low-growing New Jersey na-tive shrub with brilliant fall color and a soft spice scent.3,4. DWARF OAK LEAF HY-

DRANGEA

Blooms white in the spring and turns a rust color in the fall. 5, 6. DWARF RED-TWIG DOG-

WOOD

Blooms white in spring and has bright red twigs in winter.7, 8. LOWBUSH BLUEBERRY

This fruit-bearing shrub is native to the east coast. Blueberries bloom in early spring, produce berries in mid-summer, and have red foliage in fall.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8


LANDSCAPE PLANTS, CONTINUED

1. KNOCK OUT ROSE

2, 3, 4. DRIFT ROSE

Knock Out Rose is a tried and true hardy garden shrub which grows to about 4’ height. Drift roses grow closer to the ground and also bloom throughout the summer. 5, 6. ‘OTTO LUYKENS’ CHERRY

LAUREL

A compact shrub with shiny evergreen foliage, blooms in spring.7, 8. HOOGENDORN HOLLY

A dense, compact evergreen shrub.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8


1, 2. ‘HAMELN’ GRASS

Forms dense green clumps with feathery seed heads in autumn. 3, 4. ‘LITTLE SPIRE’ RUSSIAN

SAGE

5. CAT MINT

Both of these fragrant perennials bloom throughout the summer. 6. BLACK EYED SUSAN 7, 8. ARKANSAS BLUE STAR/

AMSONIA

The billowy foliage of this peren-nial creates spring to fall impact. Amsonia blooms April-May, dis-playing bright golden foliage in the fall.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8


GROUNDCOVERS

GROUNDCOVERS for SUN:1, 2. NO-MOW FESCUE MIX3. LIRIOPE4. RUSSIAN ARBOVITAE5., 6. SWEET BOX

1

2

3

4

5

6


GROUNDCOVERS for SHADE:1. HAY SCENTED FERN2. PENNSYLVANIA SEDGE3. GOLDEN GROUNDSEL4. CREEPING PHLOX

CLIMBING PLANTS FOR PERGOLAS5. BOSTON IVY6, 7. CAROLINA YELLOW JASMINE

1

2

3

4

5

6

7


UNDERSTORY AND ORNAMENTAL TREES

LEFT: FLOWERING DOG-WOODBlooms in early spring. Cultivars such as Cherokee Princess are prized for their fall color and dis-ease resistance. RIGHT: STAR MAGNOLIA AND JANE MAGNOLIAThese magnolias can be pur-chased as single stem trees or multi stem shrubs depending on the area where they will be used. Blooms in early spring.

For areas of special significance, these trees are smaller than shade trees and provide excellent or-namental qualities.


LEFT: CRAPE MYRTLEProlific white, pink or red blooms in summer and attractive branch-ing and bark in the winter. Fau-riei varieties are hardy enough to withstand northern New Jersey winters. RIGHT: 1, 2. IRONWOODIronwood has a graceful branch-ing habit and smooth bark for win-ter interest.4. REDBUDBlooms in early spring.

1

2

3


UNDERSTORY AND ORNAMENTAL TREES, CONTINUED

LEFT: SERVICE BERRYA New Jersey Native with spring flowers and berries in early fall.RIGHT: FRINGE TREEFragrant blooms in spring.


LEFT: OKAME CHERRYA bright pink spring bloom and or-ange fall color.RIGHT: HIGAN CHERRY Blooms in April, with several culti-vars blooming again in the fall.


PARK TREES AND STREET TREES

1. RED MAPLESeveral hardy cultivars, includ-ing ‘Sunset,’ will produce great fall color.2. WILLOW OAKWith willow-like leaves, this tree has a much finer texture and a more dappled shade than red oak. 3,4. LACEBARK ELMThis tree does well in areas of excessive heat, such as parking lots, and it has attractive bark. 5. TULIP POPLAR

This group of trees will enhance the diversity of open park areas and street tree plantings. Adding to the abundance of mature trees already grow-

ing in East Orange’s parks will ensure that the parks have plenty of shade well into the future.

1

2

3

4

5


1. HONEY LOCUSTThe fine textured foliage creates dappled shade. 2. AMERICAN BEECH Smooth gray bark. 3. AMERICAN LINDENA good tree for dense shade. 4. SWEET GUMNon-fruiting cultivars should be used.5. TUPELO6, 7. RIVER BIRCHInteresting exfoliating bark.

ADDITIONAL RECOMMEND-ED TREES: Red Oak

White Oak Chestnut Oak Shagbark Hickory Sugar Maple Black Cherry Little Leaf Linden Japanese Katsura

1

2

3

4

5

6

7


GRASS AND GRASS-LIKE PLANTSThese selections can be planted in and among showy rain garden flowers as filler, reducing competition from weeds and making for a lush, functional rain garden. 1. COMMON RUSH Best for the wettest areas of rain gar-dens. 2. ‘THE BLUES’ LITTLE BLUESTEMThis native wetland grass should be planted alongside flowering perennials such as Joe Pye Weed or Bee Balm so it doesn’t flop over. 3. FOX SEDGEThis bright green, fine textured plant only grows to 2’ high. 4. PANIC GRASS The ‘Shenandoah’ cultivar has red col-ored foliage and grows between 2-3’.

PLANTS FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND RIPARIAN BUFFERSIn areas of stormwater management and those im-mediately adjacent to waterways, planting areas provide the opportunity to install locally adapted,

native species. Plants in this area provide important ecological services and will have high wildlife value, providing food and habitat to wildlife.

1

2

3

4

ABOVE: A VEGETATED SWALE FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT


FLOWERING PERENNIALS1. BUTTERFLY WEED2. ‘HELLO YELLOW’ BUTTERFLY WEEDA great butterfly attractor, But-terfly Weed blooms from June to August. 3. PURPLE CONE FLOWERTolerates drought and heat with a long bloom season.4. ‘OCTOBER SKY’ ASTERThis aster blooms prolifically At the end of the season. 5. ‘GATEWAY’ JOE PYE WEEDThis wetland native plant grows to 3’ high and should be planted with plenty of room. 6. ‘LORD BALTIMORE’ HIBISCUS Large crimson-red blooms from July to September for bold a tropical look.7. ARKANSAS BLUE STAR FLOWERLight blue flowers From April to May. This plant is prized for its billowy foliage throughout the growing season. 8. BEE BALMThis showy late summer bloom-er attracts hummingbirds and butterflies.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8


1, 2, 3. SPICE BUSHA northern New Jersey Native, spice bush has interest in mul-tiple seasons.4, 5. WITCH HAZELBlooms early spring and has great fall color.6, 7. ‘HUMMINGBIRD’ CLE-THRAA dwarf, sweet-smelling variety.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

PLANTS FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND RIPARIAN BUFFERS, CONT’D


1. ARROWWOOD VIBURNUM2, 3. MAPLE LEAF VIBURNUMVibunum’s berries are great for wildlife. 4, 5. SWEET BAY MAGNOLIAThis multi-stem tree does well in moist areas. 6. STEEPLEBUSH

1

2

3

4

5

6

a material palette For East Orange

A MATERIAL PALETTE FOR EAST ORANGE >>> 197

a material palette For East Orange

A consistent palette of materials for the East Or-ange Parks system will raise the profile of the city parks as a whole. Through site furnishings, light-ing, signage, fencing, and other site elements, the parks will develop a cohesive image. Each park can include custom elements that will reflect that indi-vidual park’s unique character and neighborhood.

New materials used in the parks should have a mod-ern and urban look, which will raise overall design standards and work well with restored historic ele-ments.

CASE STUDY

Bryant Park in New York City has a memorable and cohesive park look which is achieved through consistent hardscape materials, signage, um-brellas, trash receptacles, movable chairs, and even staff uniforms. Ele-ments are both historic and modern, but they hang together through a con-sistent palette of color and material. Anywhere you are in the park, it looks and feels like Bryant Park.

198 >>> A MATERIAL PALETTE FOR EAST ORANGE

LIGHTINGFeature lighting, pedestrian lighting, sports field, and sports court lighting.

MODERN FIXTURES

The light fixtures shown to the left have a more pared down and modern look to work well with historic fixtures already used in East Orange. By keeping a simple silhouette, the styling for lights can be kept consis-tent throughout all park lighting elements—street lights, path lights and area lights—creating a cohesive collection. A wide va-riety of styles are available, from very simple to cutting edge. Re-gardless of the specific style, the lights should have an urban aesthetic and respond well to site furnishings being used else-where.


FEATURE LIGHTING

In significant areas, feature lights can be used to highlight the unique elevated design character-istics of these spaces as seen to the left. Light poles are a great place to install signage or ban-ners for city events.


SITE FURNITURE By choosing a customizable furniture collection or keeping a cohesive palette of materials, furniture can reflect the character of the neighborhood and

the park—modern for parks like Memorial, Oval and Francis Haire and traditional for historic parks like Elmwood.



PLAY EQUIPMENT

1. OUTDOOR MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS

Tuned drums from Freenotes Harmony Park.2. CENTENNIAL HILLS PARK, LAS VEGAS

3, 4. PLAY FOR ALL ABILITIES PARK, ROUND ROCK, TX

5, 6. RIVERPLAY DISCOVERY VILLAGE, EUGENE, OR

Natural elements, such as sand and boulders, can be at home in a play area and allow for creative play.

Non-traditional play equipment can help stimulate the senses and create a unique experience. Musi-cal instruments, interactive elements, natural ma-

terials, and themed playgrounds could be a good fit for East Orange Parks.

1

2

3

4

5

6


1, 2, 3. WATER ELEMENTS

Different scales and a variety of opportunities for interactive and imaginative play are provided.4. BAIN DE BEAUPORT

Bold, whimsical straws spray water at this public park in Que-bec.

1

2

3

4


ATHLETIC EQUIPMENT AND FITNESS ZONES

1, 2, 3. FITNESS ZONES

Elliptical Runner, Arm Press, Ski Machine from Geenfields Out-door Fitness.4. ELLIPTICAL RUNNER

From Norwell Fitness5, 6. CHEST PRESS AND LEG

PRESS

From Landscape Structures 7. A FULL FITNESS ZONE

Modern styling in a pop color from the Great Outdoor Gym Company

CASE STUDY

Los Angeles, California has installed 41 fitness zones throughout the city as a way to combat obesity. The free equipment is durable, easy to maintain, and heavily used.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7


1, 2, 3. SYNTHETIC TURF

Installation at Hunting Park in Philadelphia.4,5. COVERED SPECTATOR

SEATING

6. RUBBERIZED WALKING

PATH

1

2

3

4

5

6


PAVING AND MATERIALS

BASIC PAVING MATERIALS:

1, 2. ASPHALT AND CONCRETE

As basic paving materials, as-phalt and concrete can be com-bined in a number of ways to create an upgraded look. The combination of two different concrete treatments highlight a street corner. Asphalt gets an upgrade with a concrete band. SPECIAL PAVING MATERIALS:

3. ASPHALT BLOCK

Durable and easy to maintain, asphalt block gives the look of pavers. 4. BRICK

As an upgraded material, brick highlights special areas such as around field houses and en-trances. At cross walks, it can enhance visibility in busy areas. 5. DYED CONCRETE

6. PRE-CAST, EXPOSED AG-

GREGATE CONCRETE PAVERS

Exposed aggregate concrete has extra texture.7. STAMPED CONCRETE

8. FEATURE BRANDING

Paving is a good opportunity for branding, to highlight the unique character of a neighborhood, or for donor recognition.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8


POROUS AND PERMEABLE

PAVING MATERIALS:

1. POROUS ASPHALT PARKING

STALLS

In selected areas, such as the parking area in Soverel Park, porous parking stalls may be a good choice to aid in stormwa-ter management.2. POROUS ASPHALT IN A

CHILDREN’S SPRAY PARK

The surface of this porous as-phalt can be finished in a variety of bright colors. 3, 4. POROUS PAVING FOR

WALKWAYS

5, 6. POROUS PAVERS

These pavers are installed with a porous material in the joints to allow water to soak through.

1

2

3

4

5

6


SIGNAGE

WAYFINDING SIGNAGE:

1,2,3. WALK PHILADELPHIA

Wayfinding signs illustrating downtown attractions, including city parks and commercial districts.4. URBAN GREENWAY TRAIL MARKERS

5. INFORMATION SIGNS

Maps and historic information included on the same sign.

Signs at park entrances, within the parks, and in strategic locations throughout the city will raise the profile of the park system and create a cohe-sive image for the city parks. Signs should be in-

formative and inviting, using multiple signs of differ-ing styles in one location should be avoided. As the parks each have their own character, the signs could vary to reflect unique features.

1

2

3

4

5


PARK SIGNAGE:

1. MODERN POLE MOUNTED SIGN

2. CUSTOM LONDON PARK SIGN

3, 4. PARK BRANDING AT JULIUS M. KLEINER PARK

Each park sign has its own character, but relates to other parks.5. NYC PARKS

All park information consolidated on one sign.

1

2

3

4

5


FENCING

1, 2. BLACK STEEL OR ALUMI-

NUM FENCING

As the main fencing material used, a simple black fence will work well with other site fur-nishings, restored historic fenc-es, and athletic fencing. These fences aren’t used for security, rather they define spaces and di-verse park uses and add a deco-rative element. 3, 4. RESTORED HISTORIC

FENCES

Restoring existing historic fenc-es will bring character into the parks that cannot be achieved with all new fences. 5, 6, 7. BLACK CHAIN LINK ATH-

LETIC FENCES

To contain each sport, black chain link fences should be used. These have a smaller mesh than regular chain link and the black color coordinates with other site features and makes the fences disappear. Doubling up two tall fences beside one another does not use space efficiently and should be avoided.8. DOG FENCES

These fences should match ath-letic fences or area fences and include an ‘air lock’ to minimize escapes.

Simple uniform fencing will tie park elements to-gether, but feature fencing is an opportunity to ex-

pand the overall branding of the parks, incorporate art, or help to define areas for children.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8


ORNAMENTAL FENCES:

1,2. CUSTOM PLAY AREA PANELS

Color and art to contain play areas.3,4,5,6. CUSTOM ART FENCE PANELS

Custom art panels to be incorporated into basic fences.

1

2

3

4

6

7


KIOSKS, SHELTERS, AND OTHER STRUCTURES

1,2. FOOD KIOSKS

A designated place for event concessions.3,4. PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE

For crossing the Second River.

Food kiosks, transit shelters, field houses, and bridges will add another level of interest to the parks and should be evaluated on an individual ba-sis. These structures are an opportunity to elevate

the design quality of the parks, respond to neighbor-hood character, activate the parks, and even provide a small source of revenue through vendor rentals.

1

2

3

4


BUS SHELTERS:

1. BUS SHELTER

And an art feature.2. BUS SHELTER

With integrated seating.3,4. TEMPE, ARIZONA TRANSIT SHELTER

1

2

3

4

art and community

In East Orange

ART + COMMUNITY IN EAST ORANGE: CREATIVE PLACEMAKING IN THE PARK SYSTEM >>> 215

art + community in east orangeCreative Placemaking in the Park System

THE IMPORTANCE OF ART IN THE PARKS

Public art and arts activities can be powerful, sub-tle and cost-effective tools for enhancing parks and connecting streets.

Public art—murals, sculptures, decorative fencing —can:

• Help people navigate in the community and parks, making them feel more comfortable about walk-ing around. This can help put more “eyes on the street,” making parks and streets feel safer.

• Help residents and businesses feel more con-nected to their communities, if the art reflects the culture and aspirations of the people living there.

• Help shape how residents and visitors feel about a place. Just as historic monuments can help peo-ple remember and think about the past, art that is whimsical and colorful can affect feelings about the environment. The more comfortable they feel in a place, the more likely they are to spend time and money, and to help protect the place.

• Be big, small, vibrant or subtle. In short, pub-lic art can fit almost anywhere there are spaces or walls.

Public art should:

• Be done as a partnership between artists and com-munities. The traditional approach to public art is that of a single artist representing his or her own ideas in a visible setting. The challenge is that communities choose what they preserve, and they are more likely to preserve art that they have helped design. This is a key to the success of murals in Philadelphia and other cities.

• Celebrate local communities and reflect their be-liefs and aspirations. This can lead to a greater sense of belonging, pride and stewardship of place. It is important to recognize the contributions of past residents and previous cultures. But public art in a community should be an ongoing conversation be-tween the past, present, and hoped-for future.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PUBLIC ART IN EAST ORANGE

• At the East Orange Oval: On the wall of the NJ Transit tracks, paint a mural that features the Negro League players who were known to have played there. Have markers or sculptures commemorating the original sites of home plate and the pitchers’ mound.

• At Elmwood Park: Repaint the play sculptures in the

216 >>> ART + COMMUNITY IN EAST ORANGE: CREATIVE PLACEMAKING IN THE PARK SYSTEM

park (this could be a regular neighborhood event). Replace the sculpture walk that once existed along the Rhode Island entrance with new scupltures representing important figures that have impacted the city.

• In all parks: Use decorative fencing that helps present themes or ideas about the park. For exam-ple, fencing in Soverel Park could include graphic elements inspired by the natural world. Fencing in other parks might be more playful or culturally-specific.

• Along bridges and park connector streets: Here, public art should be used as landmarks and bea-cons, and as ways to encourage people to walk more. Develop art that is fun, whimsical, and re-flects colors and shapes in the surrounding area. The more that art reflects the aesthetics of resi-dents in the community, the more comfortable they will feel with it.

• Underneath the NJ Transit overpasses, especially by the Brick Church station. Develop art that is bright, colorful and reflective to help activate the space. Use decorative lighting to make the spaces feel more like plazas after dark.

• Near the basketball courts in Elmwood Park: Have

a mural or sculpture that celebrates the professional basketball players who played pickup games there.

• Consider a public art exhibition in which the field-houses in each park are lit every night for six months with decorative lighting (or even more if neighbors enjoy the lighting). The art can be connected to a public engagement effort to get resident input about how they would want their fieldhouses to be used.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ARTS PROGRAMMING AND EVENTS

• Engage the New Jersey Theater Alliance and area theater directors to explore how the Elmwood Park Fieldhouse can be reused as a community theater.

• Hold talent shows, pageants and art fairs that cel-ebrate local talent and creativity.

• Park planners should work with the city’s arts com-mittee to engage residents about their preferences for arts and culture programming.

ART + COMMUNITY IN EAST ORANGE: CREATIVE PLACEMAKING IN THE PARK SYSTEM >>> 217

TOP AND BOTTOM: EXAMPLES FROM PHILADELPHIA’S MURAL ARTS PROGRAM

how much park do we need?

Assessing Park Need In East Orange

HOW MUCH PARK DO WE NEED? ASSESSING PARK NEED IN EAST ORANGE >>> 219

how much park do we need?Assessing Park Need in East Orange

PARK AREA STANDARDS

A number of different methods exist to try to quan-tify whether a City’s park system is sufficient for its inhabitants. The 2006 Master Plan looked at the National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) Standards to come up with a standard of 8.375 acres/thousand people. This would mean East Or-ange is short 377 park acres! However, since every community is different, it may not make sense to use the same standards regardless of population density. After all, a less urbanized municipality will have more land available for park space.

It is also important to note that New Jersey’s State-wide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) sets the standard for open space at 3%

of the developable land mass. This would translate to about 75 acres required for East Orange. According to this standard, the city is short about 30 acres.

Another way to evaluate whether a City has enough parkland to support its communities is to look at the amount of parkland available per person and then compare that to other cities of similar density. Fig-ure O1 illustrates how East Orange compares to oth-er dense urban areas.

It is easy to see from the table that of these six cit-ies, only Boston is close to the 8.375 acres/1,000 people. This supports the idea that a standard, pre-scribed acreage does not really work on a practical level within the complex, built up environment of a dense city. However, the table clearly demonstrates

City Population Density 2

(Persons/Sq. Mile)Acres of Park/1,000 People 3

East Orange, NJ 1 16,378 2.5 acres1

Newark, NJ 11,458 2.9 acresChicago, IL 11,864 4.2 acresJersey City, NJ 16,736 6.8 acresPhiladelphia, PA 11,457 7.5 acresBoston, MA 12,752 8.3 acres

1 Source for East Orange Parks Acreage: Area takeoffs from the digital plan of the City, plus the published acreage for Orange and Watsessing County Parks. 2 Source: 2010 US Census. The population recorded in the 2010 Census has been used here (64,365); the actual population is most likely higher than this, based on sewer use and trash collection data collected by the City. 3 Source: Center for City Park Excellence, The Trust for Public Land.

Figure O1: Park Acres/1,000 for Similarly Dense Cities

220 >>> HOW MUCH PARK DO WE NEED? ASSESSING PARK NEED IN EAST ORANGE

that compared to cities of a similar density, East Orange is on the low end in terms of park space. It has a higher population density than most of the other cities and the least amount of parkland.

In order to be as fair as possible, the complete acreage for the adjacent Essex County Parks have been included to arrive at the total acreage for

park space in East Orange. However, since the Golf Course is not easily accessible for most residents and is not within the city proper, that acreage has not been included. Figure O2 provides a summary of park acreage included in this calculation.

In Figure O3, the green circles indicate the parkland available per 1,000 people, while the orange circles indicate the total area of city land per 1,000 people. The diagram clearly illustrates that while East Or-ange is extremely dense, it also has the least amount of parkland available for residents.

Figure O4 serves to illustrate the size and distribu-tion of parkland in the same selected cities. The same area of land is shown at the same scale to render an accurate comparison among the cities. The pres-ence of large water bodies in all the cities most likely helped in the establishment of parkland. Again, it is easy to see that East Orange lacks the park distribu-tion of the other cities and also lacks the presence of any large parks.

East Orange is a unique place with its own set of constraints. Since it is almost completely devel-oped, finding creative ways to maximize existing open space and natural resources and identifying new ways to provide additional recreational space are key.

Figure O2: Total Park Acreage for East Orange

Park Acres

Soverel Park 11.3

Memorial Park 3.7 Rowley Park 3.3 Elmwood Park 8.8Washington Playground 2.4East Orange Oval 7.9Francis Haire Park 2.6Columbian Playground 4.4Hoffman Park 0.6Subtotal: Municipal Parks 45

Watsessing County Park 69.7Orange County Park 47.6Subtotal: County Parks 117.3

Grand Total: 162.30

Among cities with similar population densities, East Orange has the least amount of parkland per person, even counting the entirety of Watsessing and Orange County parks.

��

��

��

��

��


FIGURE O3: PARK AREA PER 1,000 PEOPLE, SELECTED CITIESEast Orange Park Master Plan

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��


FIGURE O4: PARK SIZE AND DISTRIBUTION PATTERNS, SELECTED CITIESEast Orange Park Master Plan


WALKING DISTANCE TO PARKS

Another tool to evaluate park coverage is to look at the time it takes for someone to walk to the parks. This can be a little problematic since everyone walks at different speeds. An elderly person us-ing a walker would take a lot longer than a healthy teenager to walk somewhere. However, a distance of a quarter mile has been used for the purposes of this study, which is about the distance an average human can walk in 5 minutes.

Figure O5 depicts a number of circles overlaid on the parks. Each circle has a radius of a quarter mile, representing a 5-minute walk. However, since these circles are overlaid ‘as the crow flies’, it is a little deceptive. Figure O6 shows the same dis-tance from each park, but on the street level. It is clear where park coverage falls short based on this study. There are large areas throughout the city that are without park space within a quarter mile, especially in the first and second wards.

AREAS OF GREATEST PARK NEED

Rather than attempting to apply a one-size-fits-all standard to East Orange, this study attempts to ob-jectively look at the city to determine where quality parks and open space are most needed. Five fac-

tors were used to arrive at this map: areas of the city with the most seniors; areas with the most children and teenagers; areas with the highest population densities; areas with the lowest median incomes; and areas not within a 5-minute walking distance to a park.

Figure O7 illustrates this mapping, with the darkest colors indicating areas with the most overlap among the five factors mentioned above. According to this study, there is great need for quality parks and open space in the center of the city, and to the areas di-rectly south and west of the center. The city center has the greatest numbers of children and teenagers, coupled wtih the lowest median household incomes. The second ward appears to be in the greatest need of quality parks and open space, with its high number of children and teenagers, dense population, and ar-eas not within a 5-minute walk to a park.

��

�

Park

5 Minute Walk-Aerial Circle

*

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

FIRST WARD

SECOND WARD

THIRD WARD FOURTH

WARD

FIFTH WARD

1

9

8

3

2

6

11

5

4

7

12

10


FIGURE O5: WALKING DISTANCE TO PARKSEast Orange Park Master Plan

��

Park

Park Entrance

5 Minute Walk on the Ground

5 Minute Walk-Aerial Circle

*�

*

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

FIRST WARD

SECOND WARD

THIRD WARD FOURTH

WARD

FIFTH WARD

1

9

8

3

26

115

47

12

10


FIGURE O6: WALKING DISTANCE TO PARKS AT STREET LEVELEast Orange Park Master Plan

FIRST WARD

SECOND WARD

THIRD WARD FOURTH

WARD

FIFTH WARD

10

1

9

8

3

2

6

115

4

7

12

��

�

*

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��


FIGURE O7: GREATEST PARK NEEDEast Orange Park Master Plan

how can we add park space?

Opportunity for Parks in East Orange

HOW CAN WE ADD PARK SPACE? OPPORTUNITY FOR PARKS IN EAST ORANGE >>> 227

how can we add park space?Opportunity for Parks in East Orange

WHY ADD MORE PARK SPACE?

For over 100 years, the parks in East Orange have been important to the physical and aesthetic qual-ity of the City as a whole as well as each ward. But a new, broader view of the importance of parks beyond recreation alone is emerging nationwide. This new view showcases how parks serve as valu-able contributors to important public policy issues such as capturing businesses, job creation, public health, youth development, and community build-ing.

The parks and open space system in a city is a highly visible and powerful quality of life indica-tor, as well as a vehicle for change. Not only will a more extensive park system directly benefit exist-ing residents, but a visitor to East Orange will be a lot more likely to make the city their home if it has numerous, visible, high quality parks easily acces-sible to all.

New parks can act as catalysts for change within the community, especially when used to transform vacant or contaminated lots. New and renovated parks have been proven to increase the property values of surrounding lots and attract new resi-dents.

Environmentally speaking, additional park space will help clean the air, reduce overall temperatures in the city, and provide more space for birds, butterflies, and other wildlife. Overall, the health and long-term sus-tainability of the city will be proportionally increased as additional park space is added.

As discussed in the previous section, East Orange lags behind other similarly dense cities in the amount of parkland available to its residents.

Since the majority of the city is developed, a stra-tegic, creative approach to adding park space is re-quired, based upon the research that demonstrates that parks stimulate the local economy and lead to a vibrant, thriving community where people and busi-ness owners want to live, work and play.

POCKET PARKS

Small, ‘pocket parks’ that occupy undersized lots could contain small areas of native planting and seating. If there is a small available vacant lot in an area with lots of children, it could contain only play equipment and seating for parents. One plan view example of what could be accomplished in a small space is shown in Figure P3. A small unused piece of land abutting the elevated train line could be used for a few game tables and a few trees.

228 >>> HOW CAN WE ADD PARK SPACE? OPPORTUNITY FOR PARKS IN EAST ORANGE

SMALL URBAN PLAZAS

Within existing commercial corridors, such as on Central Avenue, small urban plazas would certain-ly be considered park space. The existing urban plaza space on Old Sanford Street off Central Av-enue would be a fantastic spot for a contem-porary urban plaza, complete with seating, game tables, and new planting.

TRAIN STATION PARKS

The importance of the trains to East Orange cannot be overstated. The spaces below and

around the East Orange and Brick Church Train Sta-tions are highly visible and heavily used centers of activity that should be celebrated as public urban spaces. This could be accomplished with new plant-ings, gathering spaces, paving treatments, furnish-ings, regular farmer’s markets, and public art. The spaces today are uninviting and provide a poor first impression of the city for a visitor.

PARTNER WITH THE BOARD OF EDUCATION

Partnering with the Board of Education to better uti-lize existing school property for the public is another method to increase public park space without impact-ing existing rateable lots. This has been suggested in past park master plans for the city and is also sug-gested here. While it is a site with complicated en-vironmental issues, the property at the center of the city adjacent to Cicely Tyson, would be a great site to showcase a collaboration with the Board of Educa-tion. This space is currently underutilized and could become an important part of the civic core.

“The city, like most similar cities, has grown up compactly without preserving enough land area for school, park and play space. Acquisition of sufficient area at any time will be expensive; delay in acquisition will be more costly, because inadequate open space is one of the factors contributing to neighborhood decline and decay.”

- 1946 EAST ORANGE SCHOOLS AND RECREATIONREPORT, CITY PLANNING BOARD

THE ASPHALT LOT OF DIONNE WARWICK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IS ADJACENT TO THE CITY’S FRANCIS HAIRE PARK AND PRESENTS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR A MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL PARTNERSHIP.

THE SPACE BELOW THE EAST ORANGE TRAIN STATION COULD BE TRANSFORMED INTO AN EXCITING URBAN PLAZA WELCOMING VISITORS AND RESIDENTS TO THE CITY.


New York has successfully begun a shared school-yard park program in partnership with the Trust for Public Land (TPL), the Department of Education, the Department of Parks and Recreation, and pri-vate funders (including MetLife, Credit Suisse, and others). The grounds are owned by the Department of Education and the renovation work is overseen by the Department of Parks and TPL. The schools are locked and fenced during school hours and opened to the public during hours set by each com-munity. In some cases the school holds the key, while in others, a neighborhood organization holds the key to the locks. The completed parks are then maintained by the schools (Harnik 113-114).

PARTNER WITH LIBRARIES

The master plan for Memorial Park envisions a di-rect connection to the East Orange Main Library, but there are other opportunities throughout the city as well. At the Ampere Library for instance, there is currently unused lawn bisected by con-crete sidewalk. This area could be redesigned as a library park with natural plantings, seating, games tables, and public art.

“School gardens are an essential feature of the best-equipped schools. They are not to be found here; yet nature study cannot be properly carried on without them, and they should be provided as soon as they can be. ”

- 1912 REPORT OF THE EXAMINATION OF THE SCHOOL SYSTEM OF EAST ORANGE

CREATE A LINEAR PARK ALONG THE ABANDONED RAIL CORRIDOR NORTH OF SOVEREL PARK

Shown in Figure P1, the vacant rail corridor could connect Soverel Park with Watsessing Park, and pro-vide residents with a walking/jogging/cycling path through natural plantings, terminating in great parks at either end. The trail would cross over the Second River as it enters Soverel Park, adding another point of interest along the route. This corridor would add about 5 acres to park space within the city.


FIRST WARD

SECOND WARD

THIRD WARD

FOURTH WARD

FIFTH WARD

10

1

9

8

3

2

6

11 5

4

7

12��

��

��

�

*

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

FIGURE P1: POTENTIAL AREAS FOR NEW PARKSEast Orange Park Master Plan


FIRST WARD

SECOND WARD

THIRD WARD FOURTH

WARD

FIFTH WARD

10

1

9

8

3

2

6

11 5

4

7

12

��

�

*

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

FIGURE P2: PARK CONNECTOR STREETSEast Orange Park Master Plan


��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

FIGURE P3: NEIGHBORHOOD POCKET PARKEast Orange Park Master Plan


FIGURE P4: TREE CANOPY COVERAGE RECOMMENDATIONSEast Orange Park Master Plan

��

��

�

*

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

FIRST WARD

SECOND WARD

THIRD WARD FOURTH

WARD

FIFTH WARD


HOLLYWOOD PLAZA

At the eastern entrance to the city, and visible from the New Jersey Transit train lines, from the off-ramp of the Garden State Parkway, and from Dr. Martin Luther King Boulevard, Hollywood Plaza presents a great opportunity to create a gateway to East Or-ange. This parcel of land is currently used by the Department of Public Works as a dumping ground for vegetative debris, especially af-ter storms. During the course of this master planning effort, it was determined that there is no feasible loca-tion within the city that could be used for this purpose. It may be fea-sible to redesign the space so that a large portion of it could be used as a public park. One corner of the site is also a very busy bus stop, and the Plaza is just on the other side of the train line from the East Orange Oval.

HOLLYWOOD PLAZA AS SEEN FROM THE OFF RAMP OF THE GARDEN STATE PARKWAY. SUCH A PROMINENT SPACE SHOULD ADVERTISE A GREAT QUALITY OF LIFE IN THE CITY. THE TOP IMAGE SHOWS THE HUGE POTENTIAL OF THIS LOT.


CREATE A DECK PARK OVER I-280

Bridging over the interstate with a new park would be an enormous step in stitching the north and south sides of the city back together. The new park could add about two acres to the city’s park space, but more importantly, it could become a highly ef-fective vehicle for positive change. If programmed and marketed effectively, an outdoor venue such as

this could draw visitors from all over the region, ex-posing potential residents to what East Orange has to offer. The new park would be directly adjacent to the East Orange Train Station and is located within the Transit Village. By no means an inexpensive im-provement, the situation is eased somewhat by the fact that the interstate is already depressed and the city’s street grid travels over it.

AERIAL VIEW SHOWING A SUGGESTED DECK PARK LOCATION TO CONNECT CITY HALL AND THE EAST ORANGE TRAIN STATION WITH THE NEW DECK PARK, MEMORIAL PARK AND THE EAST ORANGE PUBLIC LIBRARY.


CASE STUDY: KLYDE WARREN PARK, DALLAS, TEXAS

Recently opened in October 2012, the new Klyde Warren Park in Dallas is a 5.2 acre public park built over a sunken freeway. It boasts hundreds of trees

and shrubs, thousands of peren-nials, a large children’s park with water features, a dog park, a bo-tanical garden, a grand plaza, per-formance pavilion, and large pub-lic sculptures and water features.

The project cost a total of $110 million dollars: $20 million from the City of Dallas, $20 million in highway funds from the state and federal government, $50 million in private donations, and $16.7 mil-lion in federal stimulus funds.

The park is privately operated and managed by the Woodall Rodgers Park Foundation, which also main-tains a comprehensive website de-voted to the park and its events.

For East Orange, there may be some environmental justice jus-tification for a deck park. Since 1994, federal policy has focused on improving environmental justice. This generally has two dimen-sions: eliminating the long-stand-ing practice in communities of concentrating polluted and toxic

environments near low-income and minority commu-nities, and giving those communities the same ac-cess to open space and nature as white and wealthy communities receive.

TOP AND BOTTOM: KLYDE WARREN PARK, DESIGNED BY THE OFFICE OF JAMES BURNETT, WAS BUILT OVER A FREEWAY AND RECONNECTS DOWN-TOWN DALLAS (PHOTOS: MEI-CHUN JAU).


When I-280 was built, it destroyed a portion of Me-morial Park, reducing access to parkland for down-town-area residents. Rowley Park was provided to compensate for the loss of Memorial Park. But be-cause the highway is such a strong barrier to resi-dents, it is a poor substitute for the lost parkland.

PARK CONNECTOR STREETS

Streetscape treatments along selected streets could visually connect the parks to each other and “expand” park space within the city. Improve-ments could include improved perennial and tree plantings between street and sidewalk, distinctive paving treatments, new street furnishings such as benches and games tables, bicycle lanes, di-rectional signage to the parks, and public art. The Complete Streets initiative is aimed at ‘complet-ing’ the country’s streets so that they can be used by everyone, including walkers, joggers, wheelchair users, bus riders, business owners, and anyone else using a public way. The National Complete Streets Coalition provides a wealth of information on adopting a Complete Streets policy, technical assistance, news, and advocacy. In 2012, Newark adopted a Complete Streets policy and has com-pleted or designed improvements for Irvine Turner Boulevard, Ferry Street, Broad Street, and Mount Prospect Avenue.

Figure P2 illustrates one scenario for these Park Connector streets. These streets cover the whole city and connect all municipal parks. Also shown is a civic loop which would enable strollers, joggers,

or cyclists to complete a loop that connects City Hall, the Main Library, the East Orange Train Station, Elm-wood Park, and the potential future deck park.

STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS IN NORMAL, ILLI-NOIS, DESIGNED BY HOERR SCHAUDT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS.

THE COMPLETE STREETS CONCEPT PROVIDES FOR ALL USERS OF PUBLIC WAYS.


VACANT LOTS AS COMMUNITY GARDENS

One program that has been successful in other cit-ies is the conversion of vacant land into spaces for community gardens. Newark has implemented an “Adopt-a-lot” program where residents improve city owned vacant lots by planting flowers, mowing lawns, or installing community gardens.

Philadelphia also has a strong interest in commu-

nity gardening. With so many vacant lots throughout the city, these spaces have been truly transformed to the benefit of the whole community.

One organization based in Philadelphia, The Cam-paign to Take Back Vacant Land, supports this move-ment and selects “Best/Worst Lots” throughout the city to encourage transformation. The Campaign’s website states: “The Campaign to Take Back Vacant Land is a coalition of Philadelphia community, faith and labor groups that have joined together to pass a law that gives communities control of vacant land in their neighborhoods. Its membership is growing ev-ery day.”

According to the New Jersey Association of County Tax Boards, there were 360 vacant lots in East Or-ange as of September 2012. These lots are shown in Figure P1.

URBAN TREE CANOPY

Figure P4 illustrates a broad look at the city’s tree can-opy coverage and makes recommendations for areas where the street tree coverage could be increased. Maintaining and extending the tree canopy within ur-ban environments can dramatically decrease the ur-ban heat island effect, help clean the air we breathe, intercept stormwater, and make our cities healthier overall. There are many existing mature trees lining streets throughout East Orange, but additional plant-ings would make a huge impact. Planting street trees

A COMMUNITY GARDEN IN SOUTH PHILADELPHIA IN A SMALL FORMER VACANT LOT.


PART OF THE OVERSIZED PARKING LOT AT MANUFACTURER’S VILLAGE COULD BECOME A SMALL COMMUNITY PARK.

THE EXPANSE OF ASPHALT AND LACK OF VEGETATION CON-TRIBUTE TO AN UNINVITING SPACE.

along Freeway Drives East and West would be a great and highly visible improvement, and would help to soften the divide between the north and south sides of the city.

PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARKS

Another idea for the creation of public parks would be to partner with private landowners in the city to

use part of their property as park space. Creation of park space could be a requirement of new develop-ment, tax incentive, or lead to zoning concessions. In New York City, for example, the zoning laws since the early 1960s have provided for zoning concessions for real estate developers in exchange for public space. Today, there are over 520 such parks, ranging from parks to arcades and plazas.

One example of a great space to explore is the large parking lot adjacent to Manufac-turer’s Village. Whether or not this would be a feasible project for partnership, a small park and enhanced streetscape would transform this area. Currently, the parking lot appears to be oversized and extends all the way to the sidewalk. Glenwood Place is a heavily travelled street used by many students walking to and from East Orange Campus High School and by residents in the area. The large amounts of asphalt and the concrete plant across the street create a dismal, uninviting environment that could be vastly improved.

organization + management

ORGANIZATION + MANAGEMENT >>> 241

organization + management

Effective and efficient management is the key to success in public parks and recreation. Manage-ment brings together all resources in orchestrating actions to reach the vision and goals set forth by the community. Essential management functions for parks and recreation include planning, direct-ing, controlling, and evaluating operations.

CITY OF EAST ORANGE GOVERNMENT

East Orange was incorporated into a city in 1909. The City operates under a Mayor-Council form of government. The City Charter defines the scope of municipal government and is an act of incorpora-tion of East Orange. East Orange derives its author-ity from enabling laws of the State of New Jersey. These laws authorize the City to manage its affairs in fiscal operation, tax levy, care and protection of public property and to punish for violation of ordi-nance.

Office of the Mayor

The Mayor is the executive officer, responsible for enforcement of laws and supervision of depart-ments. He/she has the power to approve or veto resolutions and city ordinances. He/she also has

the power to veto actions of some boards and com-missions. The Mayor recommends legislation and delivers annual messages to the City Council on the general state of the City government and its financ-es. He/she does not participate in Council meetings.

Office of the City Council

The City Council is the local legislative body re-sponsible for appropriating funds and enacting ordi-nances and resolutions governing the City. The ten Council members represent the five wards with two council members per ward. The City Council reviews and approves the Mayor’s appropriations and annual budget. The City Council reviews and approves the Mayor’s appointments to municipal departments and several Citizen Advisory Boards and Commissions. The City Council Chairperson serves as an ex-of-ficio member of every committee and is liaison to the Mayor, Essex County Freeholder Board, the NJ State Legislature, the United States Congress and the East Orange Parking Authority. The Chair of City Council, appointed by the Council annually, appoints each council member to oversee a standing commit-tee. These standing committees serve as Council liaisons to City departments, public agencies, civic groups and public service organizations.

242 >>> ORGANIZATION + MANAGEMENT

City Administration and Departments

City Administrator

The City Administrator, reporting to the Mayor, serves as the Chief Operating Officer for the City. Responsibilities include day-to-day oversight for the delivery of all municipal services, including planning and economic development, public works/sanitation, recreation and cultural affairs, tax and revenue collection, police, fire, office of emergency management, and health and human services. The Administrator manages a workforce of 1100 em-ployees and directs the development of an annual operating budget of approximately $130 million.

Departments

The City’s organizational structure includes 16 de-partments. The departments most closely related to parks, recreation and open space include the following:

• Public Works maintains the parks as part of its public works responsibilities.

• Recreation & Cultural Affairs serves as a cata-lyst for the delivery of supervised, comprehen-sive, structured and organized forms of recre-ation and cultural programs and oversees the

municipal golf course located in Short Hills.

• Policy, Planning & Development strives to en-hance the quality of life for residents by promoting affordable housing, economic development and revitalization, and innovative community develop-ment. The Department oversees special projects in parks and recreation including special projects, grants and planning.

• Finance ensures fiscal stability, accountability, and integrity through comprehensive financial management.

• Health and Human Services promotes and en-sures the delivery of public health services and education to the residents of East Orange. The Division of Senior Services, among its many ser-vice functions ranging from providing transporta-tion to food centers, includes the oversight of the City’s 16 senior centers.

• Library helps people of all ages meet their infor-mational, educational, and recreational needs by acquiring, organizing, and assisting in the use of print and non-print resources.

• Municipal Courts provides for the fair and just resolution of disputes in order to preserve the rule of law and to protect the rights and liberties


guaranteed by the Constitution and laws of the United States and this State. Many Community Service Workers fulfill their sentences in carry-ing out park maintenance tasks.

• Police Department is committed to the concept of Community Policing and as such is commit-ted to excellence in response to the needs of all our citizens. The East Orange Police Department exists to serve all the people within the commu-nity in a professional and ethical manner.

Board of Education

The Board of Education oversees the public school system of the City of East Orange. The Mayor of East Orange appoints the seven board members. The vi-sion of the School District is to be the educational model of excellence for learning institutions in the State of New Jersey. One of the Board’s goals is to promote community involvement. Although the planning team sought input from the school dis-trict to the parks and recreation plan, none was received. With the low amount of parkland in the City, the Board of Education’s playgrounds are a critically important part of the parks and recreation system. The use of schools for recreation pro-gramming is vitally important. Cicely Tyson Com-munity School of Performing Arts was originally

conceived, funded and constructed as a community school, a model in the State of New Jersey. However, this school appears not to function as a true com-munity school with extended use by the community during non-school hours.

City Advisory Boards & Committees Related to Parks, Recreation & Open Space

• Municipal Open Space, Recreation and Historic Pres-ervation Advisory Board is composed of 14 members. The Board was instituted in 2012 to provide advice on the use of the newly enacted open space tax for parks and recreation capital improvements.

• Arts, Recreation and Cultural Affairs Committee brings together the department heads and admin-istrative staffs of Recreation & Cultural Affairs and the Library with other departments including City Administration; Policy, Planning and Development; and council members to coordinate efforts and proj-ects in this area of public service.

Parks and Recreation Administration

Parks and Recreation administration is distributed among several city departments all under the aegis of the City Administrator. Figure Q1 depicts the cur-


rent organizational structure of parks and recre-ation.

Recreation and Cultural Affairs

The Assistant Superintendent of Recreation and Cultural Affairs is charged with the operation and management of the Department. The position of Director has been left vacant since the previous director’s passing in 2010. The Department holds one of the largest budgets in the City and has with a staff of about 30 workers. The focus of the Depart-ment is on programs and services although in the past, the Director was responsible for major park improvement decisions such as the selection and construction of major playgrounds. The Depart-ment is also responsible for the management of the East Orange Golf Course in Short Hills. A separate study on the golf course undertaken in conjunction with this City Parks Master Plan addresses golf course management. The Director coordinates with the Park Maintenance Superintendent on mainte-nance in the parks related to recreation program-ming. The Director also coordinates with the Board of Education on use of the schools for recreation programs and services. The Department success-fully uses five schools for recreation programming for children and youth: Mildred Barry Garvin, Whit-ney Houston, Langston Hughes, Cicely Tyson and

the Hart Complex.

Public Works

The Department of Public Works is responsible for the maintenance and improvements of the City’s infrastructure as it pertains to streets, drainage, streetlights, traffic signals and city buildings. In 2010, Park Maintenance was transferred from Parks & Recreation to the Public Works Department. While the parks look safe and clean due to the diligence of the staff, park maintenance is a struggle largely directed toward taking care of immediate needs and repairing worn facilities to keep them free of hazard-ous conditions. Park maintenance has been largely deferred over the years leading to the current park conditions that now require major capital investment. Park maintenance has ten workers. In addition, the Department uses Community Service workers sen-tenced by the courts to perform community service.

PARK MAINTENANCE WORKERS IN 1931 AND 2013

1931 2013Number of Park Maintenance Workers

20 10

Cit

y

Cit

y C

ou

nc

il

Cit

ize

ns

of

Ea

st

Ora

ng

e

Ma

yo

r Pa

rks

&

Re

cre

ati

on

P

lan

nin

g

Pro

gra

ms

He

alt

h &

Hu

ma

n

Se

rvic

es

Div

isio

n o

f

Se

nio

r

Se

nio

r C

en

ters

Sp

ort

s

Aft

er

Sc

ho

ol

Pro

gra

ms

Su

mm

er

Re

cre

ati

on

Co

mm

un

ity

Ce

nte

r

Pa

rk

Ma

inte

na

nc

e

Ca

pit

al

Imp

rove

me

nts

Po

ols

& S

pla

sh

Pa

d

Bo

ard

of

Ed

uc

ati

on

Op

en

Sp

ac

e,

Re

cre

ati

on

& H

isto

ric

Pre

se

rva

tio

n A

dvis

ory

Co

mm

itte

e

Ac

tivit

ies

Co

mm

un

ity

Ou

tre

ac

h

Ed

uc

ati

on

C

ap

ita

l P

roje

cts

Gra

nts

Co

mm

un

ity

Se

rvic

e

Pa

rk P

atr

ols

(Ap

po

ints

o

nly

)

Ea

st

Ora

ng

e

Go

lf C

ou

rse

Art

s,

Re

cre

ati

on

&

Cu

ltu

ral

Aff

air

s

Co

mm

itte

e

Po

lic

y,

Pla

nn

ing

&

De

ve

lop

me

nt

Pu

bli

c W

ork

s

(10

Wo

rke

rs)

Re

cre

ati

on

(2

0-3

0 W

ork

ers

)

Lib

rary

P

oli

ce

FIGU

RE Q

1: E

XIST

ING

ORGA

NIZA

TION

STR

UCTU

RE R

ELAT

ED TO

PAR

KS +

REC

REAT

ION

East

Ora

nge

Par

k M

aste

r P

lan


Parks & Recreation Supporting Organizations

Generally the Recreation & Cultural Affairs focus of coordination is with the Board of Education on use of the schools for recreation programs. Out-reach is through fliers and Facebook. The City of East Orange has a number of sports organizations that provide football, soccer, baseball and softball leagues. There are no park friends groups. For the purposes of this plan, the Policy, Planning & De-velopment Department conducted the citizen out-reach component.

PARK AND RECREATION MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS

Public parks and recreation has a broad set of man-dates. These mandates are related to the health, safety, and welfare of the citizenry. Trends and is-sues that have impacted East Orange’s parks and recreation include mandated legal requirements, park safety, the aging of the population, custo-dial care issues of youth participants, obesity as the number one public health issue, limited open space and aging recreation facilities, fiscal chal-lenges, decreased staff, increasing participation in sports, life-time leisure interests beyond sports

alone, natural resource conservation, and the need for planning and formalizing management and infor-mation management systems.

Policy and Operating Procedure Development

Municipal parks and recreation departments are re-quired to develop policies, procedures, and guides that contribute to the professionalism and account-ability of public services in this area. Policies are needed in areas such as fees, charges, revenues, do-nations, sponsorships, and naming of facilities.

Risk Management and Safety

The most effective means to reduce exposure to li-ability is through the establishment of a formalized maintenance management program. At present, park maintenance is conducted without a formalized maintenance management program. A maintenance management program would set forth in writing the policies and procedures to plan, direct, control, eval-uate, monitor, and report all actions regarding park maintenance. Written and filed documentation either manually or through a computer software program serves as the City’s record regarding the action tak-en on park maintenance as well as what remediation was done to correct problems in the parks. A formal-ized maintenance management system provides in-formation on which to make decisions such as staff-


ing, fees and charges, partnership agreements and allocation of human and financial resources. A for-malized system facilitates transitions through the inevitable changes in management, personnel, and elected and appointed officials.

Park safety emerged as a concern during the citi-zen participation process for this plan. There ap-pears to be a difference between actual safety and the public’s perception of park safety. While the Police Department indicated that few incidents of crime occur in the parks, children, parents, and sports coaches expressed concern about how safe the parks are. Part of the concern was not the parks themselves but the access to and from the parks on city streets.

Information Management

Every job, project, and task in parks and recreation involves decision-making. The right information, in the right form, at the right time is needed to make correct decisions in every area of management, programming, maintenance, financing, park plan-ning and design.

Information regarding parks and recreation in East Orange can be one of the system’s greatest as-sets in terms of enhancing public service, reducing costs, increasing efficiency, improving decision-

making, and generating public private partnerships. Unfortunately information management is underuti-lized in parks and recreation as a key management strategy. Records, data, and information are key to planning, directing, controlling and evaluating parks and recreation operations is extremely limited and fragmented. No standards or evaluation systems are in place for any management function including citi-zen satisfaction, programs, services, maintenance, financing, and benefits to the community. While past management practices included an annual report, no annual reports have been developed for many years.

MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS

In this time of economic crisis and increasing ac-countability from all levels of government, decision-makers, staff and citizens alike expect efficient and effective operating systems. The following analysis includes the strengths challenges and opportunities regarding parks and recreation management.

Management Strengths

Accomplishments – East Orange has a long history of successful public service through parks and rec-reation going back for more than 100 years. East Or-ange was once a model of parks and recreation man-agement as cited in the 1931 Parks and Recreation Annual Report. The report mentioned visits by offi-


cials from cities in other states seeking lessons about parks and recreation management here.

Investment – The City of East Orange adopted an open space tax in 2012 signifying its commitment to the importance of parks and recreation.

Parks’ Appearance - The park maintenance staff does as much as they can given the decrease in staffing and budget which leaves them with about 50 percent maintenance capacity and a per acre budget of less than half of other cities across the country.

Recognition of the Importance and Value of Parks and Recreation – The public participation found a ubiquitous theme: all of those interviewed ex-pressed the recognition of the importance and val-ue of parks and recreation to the citizens of East Orange. In looking ahead, they want their city parks and recreation system to be the best possible and that would bring back the glory days of East Or-ange’s outstanding parks and recreation. Instead of traveling to parks in other cities, they want to have outstanding facilities right here and are will-ing to support the City’s efforts to make that hap-pen.

Support Exists Outside the Department of Recre-

ation & Cultural Affairs – Other Departments in East Orange are undertaking important initiatives and programs that could extend to parks and recreation. These departments have expressed interest in work-ing with parks and recreation collaboratively. For ex-ample, Policy, Planning and Development is under-taking a sustainability plan and program that could incorporate recreation facilities as a component that could lead to energy efficiency and cost savings. The Division of Senior Services has potential volunteer support. The Library has a master plan that could provide a joint venture with Recreation & Cultural Affairs regarding the management, security and pro-gramming of memorial Park.

Management Challenges

Organizational Structure – Parks and recreation orga-nization, management and operations are fragment-ed among many diverse city departments. There is no single organizational entity responsible for plan-ning, directing, operating, controlling and evaluation parks and recreation. The Recreation & Cultural Af-fairs Department has been operating without a Di-rector since 2010.

Coordination and Collaboration – Coordination among various parks and recreation providers is lacking. A city parks and recreation department typi-


cally serves in the role of the “convener” of parks and recreation providers and services. Opportuni-ties that are particularly important for coordinating public parks and recreation are with the Library, the Division of Senior Services, and community groups that could emerge as Park Friends groups. Vehicles such as the Arts, Recreation and Cultural Affairs Committee have the potential to be instrumental in coordination when applied strategically.

Information Collection and Management – You can’t manage what you can’t count. The development of a database for parks and is essential for the effective and efficient management of parks and recreation.

Formal Park Maintenance Management System – No system is in place to plan, direct, control, and evaluate park maintenance. Without a formal writ-ten system, responding to emergencies, urgent requests, and individual demands is the norm and more expensive than routine task performance. Workload and equipment costs are not available on which to base decisions and allocate resources effectively. No quality standards for the parks and recreation facilities have been established.

Park Planning – Generally, park planning has been undertaken informally, based upon safety or wear

concerns, without the involvement of key stakehold-ers, a public participation process, and professional qualified consultants early enough in the project. It is not a designated function with defined parameters and requirements under the purview of a skilled pro-fessional with expertise in this area. Major projects go forward without a plan in place that has been de-veloped through a thoughtful and creative planning and design process. Major park projects have not addressed the long-term responsibility for mainte-nance, programming, financial and human resourc-es, potential partners, or alternatives to traditional support by the City of East Orange. It is important to note that Rowley Park captured a state award from the New Jersey Recreation & Park Association in 2013 which is a tribute to the city staff involved in the planning and construction of this new park.

Role of the Open Space, Recreation and Historic Pres-ervation Board - Since the adoption of the open space tax and the establishment of the Board, the roles, re-sponsibilities, visions and mission of this board need to be worked out and fine tuned in conjunction with emerging needs and opportunities.

Communication – Communication tends to be frag-mented and disjointed among Recreation, Public Works, elected and appointed officials and the citi-zenry. No formal communication system is in place.


Program Management Plan – While programs are offered and advertised, an overall program man-agement plan, evaluation system and information database have not yet been put into place. Figur-ing out how best to serve identified client groups could be facilitated through timely data collection, analysis and the implementation of public involve-ment strategies.

Role of the Board of Education in Parks and Rec-reation – Although five schools are used for after school programs for children, the Board of Educa-tion and school administration appear to be discon-nected from all other city functions. The schools represent a vital component of pubic recreation and parks in this City with such limited recreation-al facilities.

Credibility of the City – Citizens expressed concern about the credibility of the City delivering on prom-ises regarding parks and recreation. The selection of pilot projects to demonstrate City commitment to parks and recreation is particularly important. The incorporation of a robust public participation process as part of any park improvement project will be key to its success.

Management Opportunities

The following strategies could increase organiza-tional effectiveness, make the best use of City re-sources, and help to control costs:

• The East Orange Parks Master Plan will provide an organized framework for improving the parks and recreation system.

• The widespread recognition that the recreation system needs improvement will result in public support for future positive changes in operations, services and facilities.

• City has the power to re-organize parks and rec-reation strategically for optimum public service, use of municipal resources and protection of the future capital investment in the parks.

• The Public Works Director is supportive of city efforts to establish the best framework for park maintenance.

• City departments such as City Administration; Policy, Planning, & Development; and Public Works are already working to improve parks and recreation while other departments such as the Library and Division of Senior Services have ex-pressed interest and willingness to collaborate


with parks and recreation.

• The Police Department is vested in community policing and expressed willingness to do what-ever is needed to help parks and recreation. This would include changing patrols from car to foot here needed in parks such as Elmwood when improvements may not be compatible with motor vehicles.

• Citizens and community organizations ex-pressed interest in becoming “Park Friends” during the outreach meetings and interviews for this plan.

• The City recently passed the Open Space tax that will help to improve the public parks and recreation system.

• The newly formed Open Space, Recreation and Historic Preservation Board has the potential to become a very strong advocate for taking the parks and recreation system back to its roots as a model for other cities nationwide.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Re-organize parks and recreation. Refer to Fig-

ure Q2 depicting the proposed future organizational structure. Important aspects of this re-organization include the following:

• Merge parks and recreation under the newly con-figured East Orange Parks & Recreation Depart-ment.

• Establish the chief position as the Director of Parks & Recreation. The Director would be a Cer-tified Parks & Recreation Professional with exper-tise, experience, education and communication skills necessary to establish East Orange’s parks and recreation system as a model of excellence nationwide. Refer to the sample job description in the Appendix.

• Transfer park maintenance from Public Works to the Department of Parks & Recreation. Include park maintenance in all discussions about park planning and capital improvements.

• Create three cabinet level positions: Park Super-intendent, Recreation Superintendent and Part-nerships & Volunteer Coordinator.

2. Provide for the Park Planning Function as an Interim Measure – Until parks and recreation is reorganized, it is important to provide professional park planning services. With this Park Master Plan, the Open Space

Pa

rks

& R

ec

rea

tio

n

Ad

min

istr

ati

ve

Su

mm

er

Cle

rk P

T

Gro

un

ds

Ma

inte

na

nc

e

Bu

ild

ing

s

Ma

inte

na

nc

e

Ch

ild

ren

, Y

ou

th,

& F

am

ilie

s

Se

nio

r C

itiz

en

s

Yo

uth

Sp

ort

s

Pla

yg

rou

nd

s

Co

mm

un

ity

Eve

nts

&

Pro

gra

ms

Fu

n &

Fe

llo

ws

hip

Ac

tive

He

alt

hy

Liv

ing

Se

nio

r C

en

ters

Co

lla

bo

rati

on

Urb

an

Fo

res

try

Sp

ort

s

Na

tura

l

Po

ols

& S

pla

sh

Pa

ds

Co

mm

un

ity

Ce

nte

rs

Cu

sto

dia

ns

Ad

ult

s

& S

pe

cia

l E

ve

nts

Po

lic

y,

Pla

nn

ing

&

De

ve

lop

me

nt

De

pt.

P

ark

,

Re

cre

ati

on

&

Op

en

Sp

ac

e

Co

mm

iss

ion

Pu

bli

c W

ork

s

Lib

rary

Ca

mp

s

Le

arn

ing

th

rou

gh

Pla

y

Yo

uth

Art

s

Fit

ne

ss

&

We

lln

es

s

Ad

ult

Art

s

Ad

ult

Sp

ort

s

Pa

rk

Fri

en

ds

Pa

rks

Su

pe

rin

ten

de

nt

Co

mm

un

ity

Re

lati

on

s

& V

olu

nte

er

Co

ord

ina

tor

Re

cre

ati

on

FIGU

RE Q

2: P

ROPO

SED

PARK

S +

REC

REAT

ION

DEPA

RTME

NT O

RGAN

IZAT

IONA

L ST

RUCT

URE

East

Ora

nge

Par

k M

aste

r P

lan


Tax and the Open Space, Recreation and Historic Preservation Advisory Board in place, the City has the action plan and the means to make major park improvements. These improvements will require additional planning, public involvement, and deci-sion-making. To ensure that highest quality, cost efficient, sustainable design is put into place, the City should secure the services of a professional design and operations team with specific expertise and experience in park planning, design, manage-ment and operation such as a registered landscape architect with support from parks and recreation professionals to oversee the capital improvements and provide assistance in other park changes. These services could be secured on a contract basis such as a retainer for ongoing consultation. The services of a professional park planning team should be required for every park project that costs more than $10,000 and have longevity of more than five years. When the Park and Recreation Depart-ment is established, the Director would function in the role of park planner and use landscape archi-tects on a consulting basis for major capital im-provement projects.

3. Develop a Planned Maintenance Management System. Establish quality standards for the parks using the National Recreation & Park Association

guidelines. Use the guidelines on park maintenance modes shown in Figure Q3 to establish quality stan-dards for the parks and zones within the parks. Not all parks and recreation areas need to be maintained at the highest level.

It is perfectly acceptable to maintain facilities at varying levels based upon use, importance and re-sources available. Establishing standards is the foun-dation for planning a maintenance management sys-tem. Establish a workload-cost tracking system for parks and recreation facilities by beginning to record tasks and time by facility and purpose. Consider cre-ating cost centers for parks and recreation facilities. Cost centers are specific functions or facilities that require labor and materials for operation and main-tenance. Cost centers could include maintenance by park; by maintenance function such as sports fields or grass mowing; specific parks; or program area such as special events like the Mayor’s Picnic. Cost centers help with establishing fees and charges, staffing decisions, and planning. Consider using a computerized software program such as TRIMS for maintenance tracking. Looking to the future, consider the use of programs compatible with Smart Phones to enable data capture in real time. Since 75 percent of the lifetime cost of a park is in maintenance and operations, planning for maintenance whenever a


Modes and Tasks for Park MaintenanceModes and Tasks for Park MaintenanceModes and Tasks for Park MaintenanceModes and Tasks for Park Maintenance

Task Mode I Mode II Mode III Mode IV Mode V Turf Care Mowed every 3-5

working days. Aeration

four times annually.

Weed control to

maintain 99% weed free

turf.

Cut once every 5

working days.

Aeration twice

annually. Weed

control with 5%

weeds. Re-seed

bare spots.

Cut once every 10

working days. Not

aerated. Weed

control with 50%

weeds. Re-seeding

with major bare

spots only.

Periodic mowing to

meet city

requirements.

Weed control only

for noxious weeds.

Not owed except

for parking lots or

along pathways.

Weed control on

noxious weeds.

Fertilizer Adequate supply of

fertilizer applied to

achieve even supply of

nutrients for entire year.

Adequate to insure

turf and plants are

healthy and

growing vigorously.

Only when turf

vigor is low.

None None

Irrigation Sprinkler irrigated. Some type of

irrigation available.

Climate dependent. None None

Litter Control Minimum of once daily

seven days a week.

Minimum of once

daily five days a

week.

2-3 times daily

maximum.

Once a week or

fewer.

Based on visitation.

Pruning Dictated by species for

high quality, well

maintained

appearance.

Once a season. Once every 2-3

years when health

or appearance

warrants.

No regular

trimming. Safety

may dictate

pruning

requirements.

For safety only.

Disease/Insect

Control

Preventive to control

disease so that a

problem is not evident.

Done when disease

is noticeable.

Only on epidemic

or serious

complaint basis.

None except if

epidemic threatens

public or

resources.

Only for safety or

for public use.

Snow Removal Same day after ½”

accumulates

Removed by noon

day after snowfall.

Based on local

requirements

usually within one

day of snowfall.

None except where

major access is

required.

Only for special

purposes related to

safety.

Lighting Repaired as soon as

problem is discovered.

Repaired when

reported as not

working.

When there is a

complaint or an

employee notices.

On complaint or

discretionary basis.

On complaint or

discretionary basis.

Surfaces Sweeping, cleaning and

washing so that at no

time does dirt detract.

Cleaned and swept

when appearance

has notably

deteriorated.

Cleaned on

complaint basis.

When safety is a

concern or budget

is available.

Cleaned on

complaint basis

and if budget is

available.

Repairs Immediately done upon

discovery of the

problem.

When safety,

function or

appearance is in

question.

When safety or

function is in

question.

When safety or

function is in

question.

Same year service

when appearance

is poor.

Inspection Daily. Daily when staff is

scheduled.

Once per week. Once per month. When staff is

available.

Floral

Plantings

Extensive and unusual.

Multiple blooming

seasons.

Some plantings

present. No more

than two blooms

per year.

Only perennials or

flowering trees and

shrubs.

None, just

wildflowers,

perennials, and

flowering trees.

None except at

special locations

like buildings.

Restrooms Multiple servicing daily. At least once per

day. Maybe more in

high use areas.

Minimum of five

times per week.

Seldom more than

once per day.

5 times per week. Geared to visitor

level, once a day

usually. More if

visitation is high.

Special

Features

Highest possible

maintenance for flags,

fountains, art, parking,

etc.

For safety function

and appearance.

Minimum – only for

safety and function.

Minimum – only for

safety and function.

Only when

required for safety

and function.

FIGURE Q3: PARK MAINTENANCE MODESEast Orange Park Master Plan


significant project is undertaken is essential. Refer to Figure Q4 that depicts the Management Impact Statement Tool. Parks and recreation planners can use this tool to determine if the resources from ei-ther City or non-city sources or a combination of both are available to support the improvement long term. If not, it would be advisable not to undertake the improvement or work toward establishing a source of support if it is vitally needed.

4. Establish an Information Management Sys-tem. Begin the establishment of an Information Management System with a needs assessment to determine the types of information needed for decision-making, planning, and departmental op-erations. Prioritize information needs and phase in the collection of information and development of the information management system over the next ten years. Start with the production of an “Annual Parks & Recreation Report” to be used in conjunc-tion with budget discussions and development of an annual work program for the subsequent year. Consider acquiring and implementing a parks and recreation software program to track identified in-formation. Coordinate with the City’s IT Depart-ment.

5. Institute a Five-Year Employee Development Pro-gram. Since the budget shows that personnel is the

biggest expenditure that the City makes in Parks and Recreation, invest in a sound program to make the most use of this most important resource: the people in whose hands the success of the future parks and recreation system rests. Conduct a needs assess-ment about the skills, certifications, and expertise available in all aspects of parks and recreation oper-ations: what is needed, sources of training, and em-ployee development plans for individuals. Prioritize the training components and establish a five-year program of training for both the Department and in-dividuals. Allocate one to two percent of the budget for the Employee Development Program annually. Consider sending two-park maintenance managers to the National Recreation & Park Association Park Maintenance Management School. The school goes for one week in year one and one week in year two in order and upon completion, the participants get a maintenance management certificate and have a network of contacts on which to build.

6. Establish a Park Friends Program. As budgets grow tighter, partnerships have become a way for city parks and recreation systems to accomplish more with less. Most parks look towards their Friends for access to resources that would otherwise be unavail-able. “Friends” refers to the collective group of non-profit entities dedicated to the support of city parks.


MIS Management Impact Statement

Purpose

1. To assess the impact of a significant proposed project or a major program on operations and management. Consider the capital and operating costs including human resources and the effect the project or program would have on other parks and

recreation facilities and services.

2. To use the assessment to make an informed decision about feasibility of the proposed

project.

Method

Determine:

1. Capital cost of the proposed project.

2. Operating costs of the proposed project. Include:

• Number of staff hours required

• Cost of the staff hours

• Cost of materials and supplies

• Miscellaneous costs

• Volunteer support over the long term

3. Impact on other facilities and programs with the implementation of the proposed

project.

• Will the project/service require funds needed for other facilities/programs?

• Will the project/service require staff time needed for other services/programs?

• How will the project impact the quality of service in East Orange?

• Will the project require resources from the community and are they available?

4. Revenue Sources

• Grants

• Donations

• Municipal funds – additional appropriation

• Municipal funds – within current budget

• Non-tax funds to be generated from the project/program

Decision-Making

Based upon the above information, does the City of East Orange have the staff and budget to support the project or program or are alternative means in place to assume the

responsibility for the project or program maintenance and management?

FIGURE Q4: MANAGEMENT IMPACT STATEMENT TOOLEast Orange Park Master Plan


The greatest appeal of these Friends is their ability to fundraise and serve as ad-vocates. Friends groups can conduct ma-jor capital campaigns for special projects and others create endowments for parks to use in perpetuity. However, Friends add more than economic value; they provide community legitimacy and access to key business and political leaders. Friends fundraise, friend-raise and advocate. Given the reality of city budgets for parks, Friends are a vital part of the future suc-cess of urban park systems. Many Direc-tors are now often judged by their ability to partner successfully.

Establishing the Friends groups needs thoughtful consideration. East Orange could work with a group to establish the East Orange Parks Conservancy as a citywide support organization or develop individual friends groups for each park or a combination of both. See Figure Q5 for a potential organizing structure for the city’s Park Friends groups. Starting with an interested group with a champion willing to lead the effort would be a great start such as with Columbian Playground

Common Elements of Successful Park Friends Groups

1. Have the Same Mission and Goals: Long-term planning is

important, as the process of mapping out the mission and vision

of both the park and Friends group ensures that the partners are

working toward mutual goals and are aware of their respective

roles.

2. Trust is Earned over Time: Rome was not built in a day, and

with each successful project, the park staff and the Friends add to

an atmosphere of mutual trust allowing Friends groups to

implement larger and more successful projects.

3. Both Partners Must Contribute to the Relationship: As the

senior partner, parks should promote their Friends at every

opportunity. The park should also allocate resources to help build

the capacity of their Friends. Friends need to help parks develop

projects that meet park needs while having donor appeal.

4. Clear and Constant Communication Leads to

Understanding: Formal communications and agreements should

clearly outline the roles and expectations of each partner. Regular

"check in" meetings create an open atmosphere and keep all

parties moving forward.

5. Both Partners are in Relationship for Long Haul: Efforts

should be made towards institutionalizing the partnership so that

it is sustained beyond staff changes on both sides. Top park

management tends to be transitory, and efforts should be made to

institutionalize the importance of Friends group as part of the

park's long-term strategy. Both partners should have long-term

horizons.

6. Create Culture of Sharing and Collaboration: The Director

must be able to share the control of the park with Friends groups.

This does not mean Friends should be involved in park

management, but rather, they should offer a community

perspective. Also, the Director must create a culture of

cooperation with Friends. Creating park staff "buy in" is often

quite difficult and requires efforts of both the Friends and

management.

7. Mutual Respect is Key: The Director and the Friends group

leader must be able to work together and establish a culture of

openness and communication for their staff and stakeholders.

Even in situations where they disagree, they should retain the

ability to work together out of mutual respect. Partnerships often

function like personal relationships, whereby mutual respect and

trust between the two parties are built over time through equal

contribution and clear communication of roles and expectations.

Source: Center for Park Management. (2005). Friends Group Best

Management Practices. Washington, D.C.: national Parks

Conservation Association. p. 4.


based upon expressed interest in the public meet-ing for this park.

7. Review the Vision, Mission, Roles, Responsibili-ties, and Goals of the Open Space, Recreation and Historic Preservation Board in light of this Park Master Plan and update accordingly. Develop an an-nual work program with the Board. Hold an annual tour of the parks with the Board inviting the Mayor and City Council along. Develop a training program for board members to enhance their knowledge and understanding of parks, recreation and advisory board functions.

8. Join organizations that will increase the exper-tise and knowledge of staff, advisory boards, elect-ed and appointed officials about parks, recreation, trends, issues, and potential revenue sources such as grants, foundations etc. This would include the City Parks Alliance, the National Recreation and Park Association, and the New Jersey Parks & Recreation Society. Share their information with key stakeholders. Consider their training programs and conferences as part of the Employee Develop-ment Program as well as potential venues for board members and volunteers.


Cit

yw

ide

Pa

rks

Te

am

or

Pa

rks

Co

ns

erv

an

cy

Wa

rd 1

Te

am

Wa

rd 2

Te

am

Wa

rd 3

Te

am

Wa

rd 4

Te

am

Wa

rd 5

Te

am

Fri

en

ds

of

So

vere

l P

ark

Fri

en

ds

of

Me

mo

ria

l P

ark

Fri

en

ds

of

Ro

wle

y P

ark

Fri

en

ds

of

Elm

wo

od

Pa

rk

Fri

en

ds

of

Wa

sh

ing

ton

Pla

yg

rou

nd

Fri

en

ds

of

the

Ova

l

Fri

en

ds

of

Fra

nc

is

Ha

ire

Pa

rk

Fri

en

ds

of

Ho

ffm

an

Pa

rk

Fri

en

ds

of

Co

lum

bia

n

Pla

yg

rou

nd

Wh

o sh

ould

be

on w

hich

tea

ms?

• C

ity-

wid

e G

roup

: re

pres

enta

tive

s of

eac

h w

ard,

cit

y st

aff,

city

-wid

e in

stit

utio

ns.

• W

ard

Tea

ms:

Res

iden

ts a

nd b

usin

essp

eopl

e fr

om t

he w

ard

an

d C

ounc

ilmem

ber,

repr

esen

tati

ves

of i

nsti

tuti

ons

in t

hose

w

ards

.

• Par

k Tea

ms:

War

d re

side

nts,

bus

ines

speo

ple

and

org

aniz

atio

n

repr

esen

tati

ves

wit

h s

peci

al in

tere

st in

spe

cifi

c sp

aces

.

FIGU

RE Q

5: P

OTEN

TIAL

ORG

ANIZ

ATIO

N FO

R PA

RK F

RIEN

DS G

ROUP

SEa

st O

rang

e P

ark

Mas

ter

Pla

n

programs + services

PROGRAMS + SERVICES >>> 261

programs + services

The City of East Orange invests over $1.7 million annually in programs and services. The programs are vital to the quality of life in East Orange and the success of the park system. The RAND Corpora-tion completed a study of park use and activity to determine the factors that correlate with park use. They concluded that park programming is the most important correlate of park use and park-based physical activity. They suggested that there are considerable opportunities for facilitating physical activity. The presence of organized and supervised activities was the strongest predictor of park use and physical activity. These activities attract people to parks and include competitive sports where moder-ate and vigorous physical activity is implicit. Events may also have a multiplier effect, as they can at-tract friends, family, spectators, and visitors from across the region. The strongest correlates of the number of people using parks were the park size and the number of organized activities observed. The study found that a variety of factors including neighborhood population density, neighborhood poverty levels, perceptions of park safety, and the presence of a park advisory board were not associ-ated with park use.

While perceptions of low safety have been consid-ered a barrier to park use, perceptions of high safe-

ty do not appear to facilitate park use. Having events at the park, including sports competitions and other attractions, appears to be the strongest correlate of park use and community-level physical activity1.

RECREATION: AN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC SERVICE

Recreation is an important part of a well-balanced lifestyle. People who are engaged in active healthy lifestyles live longer2, are less in danger from heart disease and stroke3, are at significantly reduced risk of cancer4, and have improved chances of combating a wide range of chronic conditions such as diabetes, arthritis, asthma and depression5. Participation in a broad range of leisure activities has the potential to improve physiological and mental health. It contrib-utes to personality development and improves psy-chological well-being by reducing anxiety and stress. Recreation participation increases a sense of well being, deters addictions, and assists in the social learning of tolerance and respect for others. Recre-ation plays an important role in promoting a strong sense of community by providing settings for people to socialize, share common interests and being a ma-jor driver of community interaction and pride. Recre-ation facilities make an important contribution to the physical infrastructure of communities. They provide a social focus for the community and affect people’s perception of their neighborhood. It is widely accept-

262 >>> PROGRAMS + SERVICES

ed that parks and recreation influences how a com-munity looks, feels and functions.

Public recreation is considered to be public health. In 2009, the U.S. Center for Disease Control enlist-ed local communities in the fight against diseases such as heart disease, diabetes, and hypertension by offering easier, plentiful and convenient places and programs that will help citizens to increase physical activity. This will help to reduce national health care costs, one of our country’s most press-ing challenges.

RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES IN THE CITY OF EAST ORANGE

Services also include cultural and art experiences, through ceramic workshops, arts &crafts, Black History, Women’s History, Reverend Dr. Martin Lu-ther King, Jr., Veterans & Memorial Day and other event/holidays. Special initiatives for youth, includ-ing Essay and Goal Poster contests, are geared toward providing youth an opportunity to freely express themselves and celebrate their cultural di-versity.

In the sports arena, the Department of Recreation and Cultural Affairs serves as a feeder program to build strong minds and bodies. The Department’s primary focus is working with city youth, through

various forms of sports, such as baseball, basketball, soccer, track, wrestling, tennis, archery, swimming, cheerleading, and physical fitness.

Recreation Values

Community recreation values were determined through input from the public through the public en-gagement process for this plan. They include the fol-lowing:

• Service for citizens of all ages,

• Opportunities for citizens that are both orga-nized and self-directed,

• A broad range of activities that enable citizens to try out recreation opportunities,

• Partnerships with other public and private enti-ties such as the YMCA, the Library, and the Se-nior Centers (principally through the Division of Senior Services),

• More organization, timely promotion, collabora-tion, responsiveness, improved recreation leader-ship, and innovative programming beyond sports is desired,

• Focus on the broad base of citizenry, especially regarding more programs for adults and senior


citizens, older youth and females.

• Provision for more after school programs for children to serve many people now on wait lists,

• Programming and scheduling of the pools to facilitate use by adults,

• Information about recreation opportunities that is timely and accessible, and

• Facilities that are safe, clean, attractive and ready-to-use.

RECREATION PROGRAM INVENTORY

The program inventory was derived from the bud-get as information on programs was not available from the Department of Recreation & Cultural Af-fairs. The public participation process including focus groups and on-site interviews in the parks and the after school programs provided additional insight.

Programs

Special events and special event program areas in East Orange include the following:

• Farmers Market,

• Winter Celebrations,• Martin Luther King Jr. Day,• Memorial Day, and• Fourth of July.

Jazz on the Plaza is now offered by the Arts Council. In addition, the Mayor and Council members sponsor community festivals. The Mayor’s Community Picnic in Elmwood Park is a major public celebration.

Other programs and venues include:

• Day Camp Program• Swimming Pool Program• Neighborhood Facilities• Golf Course

Unique Opportunities for Self-Directed Recreation

Many people want to participate in a variety of recre-ation activities at their own discretion. These activi-ties include:

• Swimming in the outdoor pools and playing in the Rowley Park Splash Pad

• Using the Community Center and fieldhouses for group activities and parties


• Working out in the Fellowship Civic Center Fit-ness Center and in the parks

• Playing basketball on the iconic basketball court in Elmwood Park

• Playing in city playgrounds

• Resting and relaxing with family and friends outdoors

• Walking on the park paths

• Using the programs and services of related recreation providers such as the Library, Senior Centers and the YMCA.

OTHER RECREATION PROVIDERS

In addition to the Recreation & Cultural Affairs programs and services, other recreation providers offer important recreation opportunities to the citi-zens.

Organized Sports

East Orange is renowned for its organized park and playground based sports leagues. They include soc-cer, football and cheerleading, softball and base-ball. In 2011, the Recreation and Cultural Affairs Division began a successful adult kickball league.

In July of 2013, as part of the renovation of the Elm-wood Park basketball court, the Summer Basketball Leagues were reinstated.

East Orange Library

The East Orange Main Library adjoining Memorial Park is a thriving, vibrant facility that offers a host of recreation and educational programs in addition to books. The Library offers meeting space, programs, events, activities, computer lab, children’s and fam-ily areas and free Wi-Fi service.

The Library and the Recreation Department could have a valuable partnership in recreation program-ming. With its location next to Memorial Park and its plans for facility improvements, the Library and the Recreation & Cultural Affairs Department could forge collaborative partnership with the possibil-ity of demonstrating an advanced way of managing, programming, providing security and community engagement through a joint venture. While “commu-nity school parks” are common, East Orange has the opportunity to be on the cutting edge of a new type of facility: a “community library park” with joint pro-gram planning and management. . The Library Staff has indoor space and facilities while the Recreation Department has programming staff. Joining forces could result in maximizing limited resources and


public service. The Library management team has employed a visionary approach to programming and public service that has made the Library a cen-ter of community life.

East Orange Senior Centers

East Orange has 16 senior centers. The Bowser Family Senior Center is the flagship senior center having recently opened in 2010. This center pro-vides a wide range of services including health and medical care, education, fitness and wellness, rec-reation, trips, camaraderie, performing arts, studio arts, special events, volunteerism, and others. More than 3,000 people are registered with the center. The center offers an opportunity for collaboration with Recreation & Cultural Affairs in terms of program-ming, fitness, volunteerism, community gardening and intergenerational activities and projects.

East Orange Golf Course

The Golf Course is a public recreation facility owned by the City of East Orange but located in Short Hills. Recommendations regarding the Golf Course are included on a separate study undertak-en in conjunction with this plan.

East Orange Board of Education

Recreation & Cultural Affairs uses five schools

for after school recreation programs for children. On-site interviews found these programs to be over-subscribed with waiting lists attributed to lack of facilities and limited staff. The public school system offers the opportunities for expanded recreation op-portunities, but the contentious relationship that ap-pears to be over 100 years old between the Board of Education and the City of East Orange inhibits prog-ress in this area. The past is present in the Board of Education’s Report of 1912 that detailed that the educational efficiency of the school system requires ample attention to playgrounds. Since they were be-ginning to see that physical training is really more important than any mental training, the report recom-mended that the Board of Education make more and better provision for it in any way that they could6.

East Orange YMCA

As the largest YMCA Association in the State of New Jersey, the Metropolitan YMCA of the Oranges is a powerful Association of members, volunteers and staff who are joined together by a shared pas-sion to strengthen the foundation of the communi-ties they serve, including East Orange. The YMCA is dedicated to nurturing the potential of kids, pro-moting healthy living and fostering a sense of social responsibility, which ensures that every individual has access to the essentials needed to learn, grow


and thrive. Serving more than 181,000 members and program participants, the Metropolitan YMCA of the Oranges has the long-standing relationships and physical presence not just to promise, but to deliver, lasting personal and social change.

Due to the small size and unusual configuration of the YMCA building in East Orange and the need for expanded indoor recreational facilities in the City, a partnership to explore a cooperative venture in expanding, managing, and programming a larger indoor community recreation center should be con-sidered.

ANALYSIS

Strengths

The public supports and desires more recreational programs and services. The City of East Orange in-vests more than $1.7 million in programs annually. The Recreation & Cultural Affairs Department in-stituted the practice of charging fees for programs in 2010, which helps the City to recover some of its costs.

Challenges

• There is no program management plan in place.

• No information is collected about programs, goals, objectives, outcomes and benefits.

• There is no information about participation, us-ers and non-users, trends, issues and opportuni-ties.

• Program evaluations are not conducted.

• Negative public perception about the organiza-tion of community recreation programs should be considered and addressed.

• Services are focused primarily on sports and youth with more opportunities for boys than for girls. Programs and activities for adults and se-nior adults are lacking.

• Recreation programming is undertaken as an independent function of Recreation & Cultural Affairs, instead of as a collaborative effort with related providers such as the Library and the Divi-sion of Senior Services.

• Workload and cost tracking is not done. There-fore, effective program planning, decision-mak-ing, and policy development regarding fees and


charges is limited, if not impossible. There are no policies regarding fees and charges and the collection and handling of money.

• Waiting lists exist for afterschool programs that in some locations could easily double par-ticipation.

Recommendations

1. Develop a three-year program management plan. Develop an annual work program for programs pri-or to budget discussions. Use focus groups from targeted client groups to help guide the planning.

2. Develop a formalized program evaluation sys-tem. This should include a mix of methods includ-ing written evaluations during and after programs; focus groups among target client groups; tele-phone interviews; Internet surveys; and informal conversations with program participants and park visitors. Also include non-participants to deter-mine why people are not using the parks or en-gaging in programs. For major programs such as summer camps and playground programs, conduct concise evaluations weekly of both parents and participants in order to gain timely information to make improvements, correct situations, and seize opportunities. The importance of the evaluation system cannot be overstated. Develop a report on

programs after each programming season. Include recreation reporting in the proposed annual report. Strive to focus the report on accomplishments and the benefits of offering the programs rather than just on the staff and budget resources that go into the programs. Be outcome-based.

3. Add programming for adults and senior citizens.

4. Based on the research that found that programs and activities in parks are the single most important factor in increasing park use, include a component in the program management plan that specifically ad-dresses program planning in each park. Set goals for programs in parks in terms of frequency, target audi-ence, and park locations.

5. Program the pools to facilitate use by adults. Con-sider offering fitness activities in the pools for adults before the pools open to the general public.

6. Explore the potential to keep specific parks or rec-reation facilities open after dark at specified times of the year and days of the week especially for youth and families. Work with the Police Department on this and involve key stakeholders from the public in the planning and implementation for the effort. Look for a sponsorship that could cover the extra staffing and security costs. Use Los Angeles’ “Parks After Dark” as a model.


7. Expand nature based recreation op-portunities. Strive to create opportuni-ties to get children and youth to experi-ence the great outdoors.

8. Develop a formalized plan for part-nering with related recreation providers, principally the Library, the Division of Se-nior Services, and non-profit providers of recreation and educational services.

9. Develop a fees and charges policy that is based upon cost recovery, which includes administrative, advertising, and facility costs. This policy should give consideration to the community’s abil-ity to pay. Make provisions for those who cannot afford to pay through partners and sponsors that could help to cover costs.

10. Establish a young teen advisory coun-cil for program planning for this age group. Identify ten great ideas for teen services with them. Select one pilot project to carry out with teen participa-tion, ideally one with the greatest chance of being successfully implemented.

11. Address the waiting list problem for after school programs.

12. Be conscious of the fact that self-directed rec-reation opportunities are key. Advertise these to in-spire citizens to get out and engage in a recreational activity on their own. Use testimonials and photos on the website and other promotional materials to promote involvement with activities in city parks. Provide ideas for walks, bicycle rides and things to do in the leisure-counseling vein to spark participa-tion and engagement in recreation.

Parks After Dark (PAD) in Los Angeles

With a focus on youth and families, PAD will offer extended park

hours and activities on Thursday, Friday and Saturday evenings

from 6 p.m.-10p.m. June 20 through August 17. Activities offered

will include organized sports, classes on such subjects as acting

and film, free concerts and movies, and resource fairs for

residents of all ages.

By providing youth and families with positive recreational

activities in their communities, the initiative plays an important

part in reducing the likelihood of participation in at-risk behaviors.

Initially implemented in three parks as a component of the

County's Gang Violence Reduction Initiative, the program

transforms areas that have been adversely affected by gang

activity into vibrant community centers that provide health and

other resources in locations where residents can feel safe and

secure.

PAD has been highly successful during its first three summers,

resulting in decreased violent crime and high community

participation. Between 2010 and 2012, there were more than 120,000

visits to the PAD parks. A 2012 survey of participants found that

94% would participate in the program again, and 96% felt safe

during the program. Serious and violent crimes in the

communities surrounding the original three parks declined 40%

during the summer months between 2009 and 2012, compared to a

5% increase in serious and violent crime during this period in

nearby communities with parks that did not receive the PAD

program.

"Our department's motto is 'Parks Make Life Better!' and Parks

After Dark is a wonderful example of the important role that parks

play as a safe, unifying hub in our communities," said Russ

Guiney, Director of the Los Angeles County Department of Parks

and Recreation.


ENDNOTES

1 Cohen DA, Han B, Derose KP, Williamson S, Marsh T, Rudick J, McKenzie TL (2012). Neighbor-hood poverty, park use, and park-based physical activity. Social Science Medicine. 75(12):2317-25.

2 Gibbons LW, Macera CA. 1995. Changes in physi-cal fitness and all-cause mortality: a prospective study of healthy and unhealthy men. Journal of the American Medical Association. 273:1093-1098

3 Blair SN, Kohl HW and Gordon NF. 1992. How much physical activity is good for health? Annual Reviews of Public Health. 13:99-126

4 Slattery ML. 1996. How much physical activity do we need to maintain health prevent disease? Dif-ference diseases –different mechanisms. Research Quarterly Exercise and Sport 67(2):209-212 Slattery ML, Potter J, Caan B et al.

5 United States Department of Health and Human Services; Centre for Disease Control and Preven-tion. 1996. Physical Activity and Health: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, Georgia. Glasgow RE, Ruggerio L, Eakin EG et al.

6 Moore, Ernest. (1912). Report of the Examination of the School System of East Orange, New Jersey. East Orange, NJ: Board of Edcuation. P.22

investing in parks + recreation

INVESTING IN PARKS + RECREATION >>> 271

investing in parks + recreation

The two major areas to be considered in financing parks and recreation are the operating budget and capital improvement budget.

• The operating budget supports the daily opera-tion of parks and recreation. The largest catego-ry is personnel, which covers salaries, wages, and benefits.

• The capital improvement budget is used for im-provements that cost more than $10,000 and last more than five years. Such improvements in-clude park and recreation facility development, purchase of major equipment such as trucks, or

the rehabilitation of existing facilities. It also in-cludes land acquisition. Ways to fund capital im-provements include municipal funds, grants and gifts, fundraising, donations, bond issues, part-nerships, mandatory dedication of parkland, and loans.

EAST ORANGE’S PARKS AND RECREATION OPERATING BUDGET

East Orange has three major areas included in the operating budget: Park Maintenance, Recreation & Cultural Affairs, and the East Orange Golf Course.

Table 1 presents the Park Maintenance budget.

Table 1: East Orange Parks Maintenance Budget 2009 - 2013

2013

Requested

2012

Adopted

2011

Requested

2010

Requested

2009

Requested

Parks Maintenance Division

Salaries & Wages 289,879 289,879 226,181 369,565 339,116

Longevity 16,221 15,370 12,668 23,612 25,704

Overtime 47,775 39,200 20,833 40,679 25,000

Park Maintenance Seasonal 9,446 36,720

Sub-total S&W 353,875 344,449 259,682 443,302 426,540

Other Expenses

Prof Training 2,000

Operating Costs of Auto Equip 1,300 1,300 1,300

Materials and Supplies 12,000 15,000 12,000 12,200 15,000

Renovations 26,500 33,000 3,000 10,000

Repair & Maintenance of

Buildings-Fixed 4,500 5,000 5,000 10,000 10,000

Pool Maintenance 60,000 60,000 40,000 37,000 37,000

Miscellaneous & Other Expense 1,200 2,000 2,000 1,500 3,000

CDBG Grant - Multi-park project 50,000

104,200 115,000 113,300 62,000 78,300

Less: CDBG Grant - Multi-park

project (50,000)

Subtotal O/E 104,200 115,000 63,300 62,000 78,300

Total Park Maintenance 458,075 459,449 322,982 505,302 504,840

272 >>> INVESTING IN PARKS + RECREATION

Table 2 presents the Budget for Recreation & Cultural Affairs. It includes four divisions: Director’s Office, Programs, Division of Neighborhood Facilities, and the East Orange Golf Course. Summary budget in-formation for the golf course is only shown because a separate golf course study and report was under-taken in conjunction with this project.


3

Table 2: East Orange Recreation & Cultural Affairs Budget 2009 - 2013

2013

Requested 2012

Adopted 2011

Requested 2010

Requested 2009

Requested

Recreation & Cultural Affairs

Director’s Office

Salaries & Wages 192,329 289,879 167,357 219,243 218,358

Longevity 16,336 15,370 14,481 9,300 10,777

Overtime 0 39,200 - 3,069 2,000

Sub-total S&W Director’s Office 208,665 344,449 181,838 231,612 231,035

Other Expenses

Stationery, Printing & Off Supplies 140 200 200 350 1,000

Convention Expense 540 900 1,000 1,000 4,000

Association Dues 200 600 600 0 1,000

Repair, Maintain & Replace Office Equipment 0 250 500 0 500

Postage 190 300 200 200 300

Professional Training & Staff Development 0 0 300 300 500

Operating Costs of Auto Equipment 3,000 4,000 3,000 4,000 7,000

Materials and Supplies 500 2,000 2,000 1,900 3,500

Rental of Office Equipment 3,367 0 0 0 0

Printing of Newsletter 0 0 0 0 300

Miscellaneous Other Expenses 0 0 1,000 6,339 2,000

Subtotal O/E 7,937 8,250 8,800 14,088 20,100

Total Director’s Office 216,602 352,699 190,638 245,700 251,135

PROGRAMS

Special Events

Farmers Market 350 350 350 350 350

Winter Celebrations 4,500 6,500 10,000 8,000 14,000

Martin Luther King, Jr. Day 500 1,500 2,500 0 2,500

Memorial Day 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500

Fourth of July 20,000 20,000 13,000 24,000 20,000

Jazz @ the Plaza 2,000 0 0 5,000

Misc Other Expenses 1,000 3,000 2,000 1,400 5,000

Sub-total 42,787 50,100 53,950 70,427 95,550

Farmers Market Off Set (75) (75) (75) (75) (75)

Sub-total Special Events 42,712 50,025 53,875 70,352 95,475

Day Camp Program

Salaries & Wages 219,386 269,586 150,817 181,854 146,186

Overtime 0 0 0 0 10,459

Materials & Supplies 10,000 10,000 12,000 12,000 18,000

Bus Transportation 30,000 30,000 27,295 33,825 0

Miscellaneous Other Expenses 5,000 5,000 21,053 1,500 1,500

264,386 314,586 211,165 229,179 176,145

Camp Offset (45,000) (45,000) (60,348) (47,325) (47,325)

Sub-total Day Camp Program 219,386 269,586 150,817 181,854 128,820


4

Table 2: East Orange Recreation & Cultural Affairs Budget 2009 – 2013 (continued)

2013

Requested

2012

Adopted

2011

Requested

2010

Requested

2009

Requested

Recreation & Cultural Affairs

Programs Continued

Instructional and Recreational

Leaders

Salaries & Wages 479,006 416,421 354,553 415,200 447,859

Longevity 35,272 34,350 33,983 36,089 31,042

Overtime 3,640 3,597 15,000 7,300 13,000

Seasonal and Emergency 266,565 311,099 160,902 153,763 109,294

Sub-total S&W Programs 784,483 765,467 564,438 612,352 601,195

Other Expenses

Comprehensive Recreation 10,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000

Umpire & Official Fees 10,000 10,000 11,000 11,300 17,520


CDBG Program for Youth 30,000 30,000 20,000 0 0

Sub-total: Expenses Inst. & Recr.

Leaders 52,000 62,000 53,000 37,900 42,520

TOTAL Programs 836,483 827,467 617,438 650,252 643,715

Swimming Pool Program

Salaries & Wages - - - - -

Longevity - - - - -

Overtime - - - - -

Seasonal and Emergency - - - - -

S&W Sub-total 196,577 191,644 163,888 123,696 105,189

Swimming Pool Revenue Offset (12,973) (17,800) (13,320) 0 0

Sub-total S&W Swimming Pool 183,604 173,844 150,568 123,696 105,189

Other Expenses

Special Events 250 250 250 200 300

Materials and Supplies 500 0 3,000 3,000 1,500

Miscellaneous Other Expenses 1,200 1,200 3,500 0 0

Swimming Pool Program Expenses

Sub-total 1,950 1,450 6,750 3,200 1,800

Swim offset (1,950) (1,450) (6,750) (3,200) 0

Sub-total Swimming Pool Program

Expenses 0 0 0 0 1,800

TOTAL Swimming Pool 183,604 173,844 150,568 123,696 106,989


5

Table 2: East Orange Recreation & Cultural Affairs Budget 2009 – 2013 (continued)

2013

Requested

2012

Adopted

2011

Requested

2010

Requested

2009

Requested

Division of Neighborhood Facilities

Salaries & Wages 166,039 166,039 126,971 126,323 122,559

Longevity 15,845 15,095 14,321 11,543 10,337

Overtime 1,497 1,387 5,000 5,000 13,000

Sub-total S&W Neighborhood Facilities 183,381 182,521 146,292 142,866 145,896

Other Expenses

Stationery, Printing & Off Supplies 0 0 0 0 0

Convention Expense 0 0 0 0 0

Special Projects 500 500 0 365 500

Consumable Supplies 10,000 20,000 1,200 1,100 1,500

Professional and Special Service 2,500 0 0 0 0

Materials and Supplies 5,000 5,000 500 510 1,500

Utilities 1,500 3,000 0 0 0

Other Equipment- new 3,379 7,798 1,200 1,100 10,000

Repair & Maintenance of Buildings -

fixed 5,000 6,760 5,000 9,800 1,000

Cleaning Expenses 2,500 2,000 0 500 120

Machine/equipment Rental 2,000 0 0 0 0


Sub-total Expenses Neighborhood Facilities 35,379 48,058 10,800 16,875 20,120

Total Neighborhood Facilities 218,760 230,579 157,092 159,741 166,016

TOTAL Recreation & Cultural

Affairs 1,719,560 1,906,212 1,322,439 1,433,605 1,394,159

East Orange Golf Course

Salaries & Wages 478,503 487,412 391,222 502,138 567,965

Expenses 340,007 323,278 332,555 571,175 272,150

(2009 Local Aid Stimulus Program) 0 0 0 (225,000) 0

Total Golf Course 818,510 810,690 723,777 848,313 840,115

TOTAL Recreation & Cultural

Affairs & East Orange Golf Course 2,415,184 2,477,792 1,950,541 2,206,731 2,232,265


Table 3 presents the budget for the three main divi-sions of parks and recreation: Park Maintenance, Recreation and Cultural Affairs and the East Or-ange Golf Course.

OPERATING BUDGET FUNDING SOURCES

Funding for public parks and recreation in East Or-ange is primarily derived from the City’s operating budget. In 2013 about 92 Percent of the parks and recreation operating budget is from city funds.

CAPITAL BUDGET

The 2013 Capital Improvement Budget for Parks, Recreation & Cultural Affairs and the Golf Course includes $70,811 for improvements to the Golf Course in 2013 and 2014. The only improvements to the parks and recreation facilities shown are pending costs for stairway improvements at the Fellowship Civic Cen-ter. Although the Capital Improvement Budget is laid out for six years, only 2013 and 2014 are slated for the Golf Course improvements and pending work on the stairs at the Civic Center. The improvements are for safety reasons reflecting the Maintenance Division’s

Table 3: East Orange Park Maintenance, Recreation & Cultural Affairs and Golf Course Budget 2009 –

2013

2013

Requested

2012

Adopted

2011

Requested

2010

Requested

2009

Requested

Maintenance and Recreation & Cultural Affairs

Maintenance 458,075 459,449 322,982 505,302 504,840

Recreation & Cultural Affairs 1,719,560 1,906,212 1,322,439 1,433,605 1,394,159

Sub-total Park Maintenance &

Recreation 2,177,635 2,365,661 1,645,421 1,938,907 1,898,999

Golf Course 818,510 810,690 723,777 848,313 840,115

Total Maintenance, Recreation, &

Golf Course 2,996,145 3,176,351 2,369,198 2,787,220 2,739,114

Table 4: Funding Sources for Parks and Recreation in East Orange

2013

Requested

2012

Adopted

2011

Requested

2010

Requested

2009

Requested

Alternative Revenue Sources

Grants

CDBG 30,000 30,000 20,000 0 0

Offset

Camp 45,000 45,000 80,348 47,325 0

Farmer’s Market 75 75 75 75 0

Swim 1,950 1,450 2,200 3,200 0

Fees & Charges

Swimming Pool 12,973 17,800 13,320 0 0

Day Camp 82,936 62,000 55,280 45,000 0

Total Alternative Revenue Sources 172,934 156,325 171,223 95,600 0

Alternative Revenues as % of Operating

Budget or % of Cost Recovery 7.9% 6.6% 10.4% 4.9% 0


challenges of repairing problems or dealing with emergencies.

Although the Elmwood Park basketball courts were upgraded at a cost of over $40,000, this improve-ment was not included in the Capital Improve-ment Program. Any project over $10,000 with an expected longevity of more than five years should be considered a capital improvement and listed in the program.

BUDGET ANALYSIS

The budget analysis is based upon information provided by the Finance Department. It includes the City’s requested budgets for 2013, 2011, 2010, and 2009 and the City’s adopted budget for 2012. The information provided contains only budget figures and does not include actual expenditures. The revenue sources were derived solely from the provided budget information. However, interviews and work sessions found that there were other rev-enue sources such as for the after school program. These would increase the cost recovery rate for the Recreation & Cultural Affairs operating bud-get. The operating budget analysis includes Park Maintenance and Recreation & Cultural Affairs.

Since the Golf Course was covered under a separate study it is not included here. As a special use facility, it should be considered an enterprise fund, which op-erates as a business separate from the public parks and recreation system.

Annual Per Capita Investment in Parks and Recreation

Based upon a population estimate of 64,270 and the 2013 parks and recreation budget of $2,177,635, the City of East Orange is spending about $33.88 per capita. The national average is $65. The City of New-ark spends about $113 per capita on parks and rec-reation.

Ratio of Parks and Recreation to the City’s Operating Budget

The City of East Orange’s 2013 operating budget of $113,799,223 includes the funds required to operate the City on a daily basis. It does not include the fund-ing for capital improvements or debt service. The $2,177,635 operating budget for parks and recreation equates to 1.9 percent of the operating budget, which is 0.5% lower than the national average of 2.14 per-cent.

Cost Recovery

The Recreation & Cultural Affairs Department re-


covers eight (8%) percent of its operating costs through fees, charges, CDBG funds and offsets. Cost recovery in urban park systems is a chal-lenge. The political realities of instituting fees and charges and public reaction cause concern to elected and appointed officials. Some of the bigger parks and recreation systems offer benchmarks for cost recovery: New York City recovers 22 per-cent and Chicago recovers 30 percent. Most cities are recovering under ten percent of their operating budgets. However, economic pressures are driving cities toward establishing fees and charges poli-cies for the department’s economic sustainability. Current thinking is moving toward putting a value on specialized facilities, programs and services that could generate revenues, put fees and charges into place, and make provisions for those who can-not afford to pay the fees through scholarships and “workreation” programs, in which participants can undertake public service tasks in parks and recre-ation or related city functions in return for partici-pation in programs.

Maintenance Investment

Maintenance investment is averaging about $10,179 per acre. In research conducted by the Trust for Public Land in cities nationwide, the typical cost per acre for city parks is about $22,000. The more

specialized the park or recreation facility, the higher the costs, which can climb into hundreds of thou-sands of dollars per acre for park maintenance.

Challenges

Parks and Recreation provide important public, eco-nomic, social, environmental and health benefits. In-vesting in parks and recreation enhances the quality of life in the City of East Orange. Nevertheless, these are difficult economic times. The public and private sectors are facing major budgetary challenges. The challenges for the City include the following: revenue that will not grow without tax and fee rate increases and expenses that grow based upon the economic forces of inflation, infrastructure aging, personnel costs and service expectations. The City has a long history of providing services for free and the public has come to expect this. The collection of fees var-ies in some of the programs providing inconsistency in administration and public perception. No revenue policy is in place that would address fees and charg-es. This type of policy serves to guide management, financing and decision-making regarding programs and services and special use facilities that require higher levels of maintenance and financial support, such as swimming pools, community centers, and ball fields.


• The park maintenance budget has decreased by 10.2 percent in the last five years. The value of the 2009 budget in 2013 dollars would be $549,429, a difference of $91,354, the equivalent of a full time worker and seasonal staff. In 2009, the park maintenance staff was already down by 10 work-ers from earlier years. The decrease in funding, the loss of staff, the high demand of deteriorat-ing and aging facilities, and a per acre budget of less than half compared to cities nationwide makes park maintenance in East Orange a major challenge.

• In 2013, the budget for Special Events Pro-grams is less than half of that of 2009.

• However, funding for the Day Camp has in-creased by 50 percent and fees help to offset costs.

• Funding for Instructional and Recreational Leaders grew by 30.4 percent. Information on staffing was not available from the Recreation & Cultural Affairs Department to describe the trend and its benefits.

• Swimming pool costs have increased by 88 percent since 2009, mostly in the area of salaries and wages.

• The use of CDBG funds for recreation programs is a major benefit to the community.

• Utilities are now a part of the Neighborhood Fa-cilities budget. In the past, the cost of utilities was covered by the city apart from parks and rec-reation.

• Neighborhood Facilities has a budget 32 percent higher than five years ago due to increases in sal-ary, wage and consumable supplies.

• Even with the increase in the divisions within Recreation & Cultural Affairs, the Department is still operating at a lower cost overall than it was in 2009 in terms of real dollar value due to eco-nomic forces such as inflation and cost of living increases.

• In the last four years, the Recreation & Cultural Affairs Division has increased alternative rev-enue sources by 80 percent. It important to note that five years ago, Recreation & Cultural Affairs was completely subsidized by City funds. This is a noteworthy accomplishment. Working toward increasing this cost recovery rate of eight percent will be important in the future.

• Capital Improvement Planning appears to be relatively minimal, perhaps due to lack of fund-


ing to make the improvements. However, capital improvements are still being made without ben-efit of a Capital Improvement program. Having a five to seven year capital improvement program in place does more than identify projects and costs. It serves as a catalyst for a host of man-agement practices such as public participation, professional design consultation, partnership building, pursuit of alternative funding sources for the project, and so on.

Opportunities

The advent of the Open Space Tax and the adoption of this Park Master Plan will position the City to un-dertake a strategic Capital Improvement Program and Budget. The development of management sys-tems suggested in the section on Organization and Management, increasing outside revenue sources and partnerships, and ensuring that recreation programs strive to recover costs is a winning for-mula. Ways to help enhance this include the follow-ing recommendations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

• Strive to increase the park maintenance budget. Phase in increases over time in conjunction with the park and recreation facility improvements

made in the implementation of this park Master Plan.

• Evaluate programs and services to document the benefits of parks and recreation as a result of the City’s annual investment. Promote these benefits to create heightened public awareness of the eco-nomic, social, individual and environmental ben-efits of Parks and Recreation to the City of East Orange.

• Consider using three methods for gauging finan-cial support increases phased in over time:

- Management Impact Statement. For all capital improvement projects or major additional pro-grams, use the Management Impact Statement to project costs. The goal of this tool is to pro-tect the investment and ensure its long-term sustainability. Budget accordingly and use a mix of public and private support where pos-sible.

- Budget Ratio. Use the benchmark of 2.14 per-cent of the City’s operating budget as a guide for budget development based upon the iden-tification of projects and programs with re-sources needed and the expected benefit to the public. In 2013, that would mean an addi-tional $257,688.

Research shows that for every dollar invested by a city or metropolitan area in parks and recreation has a return of $1.70. 1


- Per Capita Investment. Use the average an-nual per capita investment as a guide for in-creases to be phased in over time. In 2013, the difference between East Orange’s per capita investment of $33 and the national average of $65 would be over $2 million. Re-search shows that for every dollar invested by a city or metropolitan area in parks and recreation has a return of $1.70.1 This con-nection between urban parks and neighbor-hood quality is receiving renewed attention from community developers as they strive to make their neighborhoods more attrac-tive to low-income and, increasingly, middle-income residents. A survey for Community Development Corporations (CDCs)—which were once focused largely on housing and commercial development activities—reveals that about 20 percent of CDCs invest in open-space programs, and that this activity area is undergoing the most rapid expansion.2

• Undertake a Revenue Resources Study. Since the City does not have all the resources that it needs to provide for parks and recreation in-dependently, it is imperative to seek additional revenue sources. The goal should be to under-stand the full spectrum of potential revenue

sources from facilities, programs, and events in the Parks to help sustain the Parks economically. In addition to the Open Space Tax and city oper-ating funding that the Parks currently receive, all available sources of funding should be explored, including: bond issues, gift catalogs, TIFs (Tax Increment Financing), park impact fees, conces-sions, and outsourcing management, such as for the East Orange Golf Course. The study should include concessions, visitor fees, special event fees, the swimming pools, community centers, and all other potential revenue sources. The Ap-pendix includes a list of potential funding sources from grants.

• Create and Adopt a Revenue Policy. A revenue policy spells out the City’s philosophy on gener-ating revenues to support parks and recreation. This is generally from a mix of public and private support. With the City’s history of providing parks and recreation without charge, combined with the public perception that this is a good thing, it is im-portant to establish a strong foundation of policy, public awareness, and promotion of the benefits of parks and recreation in order to help the City provide the kinds of facilities, programs and ser-vices needed. A sample Revenue Policy is includ-ed in the Appendix.


• Develop a Five to Seven Year Capital Improve-ment Program for Parks and Recreation. Use the Criteria for Project Selection proposed in the Implementation Plan section to select projects. Use the Open Space Tax revenue estimates to guide the planning. Strive to leverage the Open Space Tax proceeds with grant money, with a goal of trying to match every dollar generated through the tax.

• Develop a workload cost tracking system for maintenance. Assess software such as TRIMS to support this function. The TRIMS website (www.trims.com) provides a wealth of informa-tion on the capabilities of this software.

ENDNOTES

1 Crompton, John L. (2010). Measuring the Impact of Parks and Recreation Services, Arlington, VA: National Recreation & Park Association. P.37.

2 Walker, Chris. (2004). Beyond Recreation: A Broader View of Public Parks. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute. P.1.

priorities + budget estimates

for physical park improvements

BUDGET ESTIMATES FOR PHYSICAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS >>> 283

priorities + budget estimatesFor Physical Park Improvements

BUDGETING FOR PARK IMPROVEMENTS

The following spreadsheets provide order-of-magnitude budget estimates for the plan improvements shown in each park.

For each park, improvements are divided into low, medium, and high priority improvements. The category an improvement falls under is based on the following:

• Public safety • Most impact per dollar spent • Relative ease of implementation • Public demand

Qualifications for the estimates:

• Pricing is current as of July 2013 • Architectural-Engineering design fees are excluded • Escalation due to inflation is not included (this is usually calculated as 4% per year) • Overtime labor is excluded • Asbestos abatement is excluded • Assumed no rock excavation or dewatering will be required

See Appendix for full cost estimates and for selected design alternates.

284 >>> BUDGET ESTIMATES FOR PHYSICAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS

ELMWOOD PARK

Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL

Replace all sports courts and

add court lighting $ 1,150,000.00 $ 115,000.00 $ 189,750.00 $ 363,687.50 $ 181,843.75 $ 2,000,281.25

Install sidewalk along street $ 150,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 24,750.00 $ 47,437.50 $ 23,718.75 $ 260,906.25

Replace all fencing $ 170,000.00 $ 17,000.00 $ 28,050.00 $ 53,762.50 $ 26,881.25 $ 295,693.75

Remove/prune undesirable

trees/branches $ 50,500.00 $ 5,050.00 $ 8,332.50 $ 15,970.63 $ 7,985.31 $ 87,838.44

Fitness zones $ 45,000.00 $ 4,500.00 $ 7,425.00 $ 14,231.25 $ 7,115.63 $ 78,271.88

Signage $ 15,000.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 2,475.00 $ 4,743.75 $ 2,371.88 $ 26,090.63

Planting at entrances $ 20,000.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 3,300.00 $ 6,325.00 $ 3,162.50 $ 34,787.50

SUBTOTAL $ 2,783,869.69

Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL

Field House renovation $ 550,000.00 $ 55,000.00 $ 90,750.00 $ 173,937.50 $ 86,968.75 $ 956,656.25

Pool House renovation $ 450,000.00 $ 45,000.00 $ 74,250.00 $ 142,312.50 $ 71,156.25 $ 782,718.75

Pedestrian and sports field

lighting $ 420,000.00 $ 42,000.00 $ 69,300.00 $ 132,825.00 $ 66,412.50 $ 730,537.50

Replace all remaining paving

(except rubber track) $ 270,000.00 $ 27,000.00 $ 44,550.00 $ 85,387.50 $ 42,693.75 $ 469,631.25

Demo. Selected walls and

steps; repair ex. Walls $ 105,000.00 $ 10,500.00 $ 17,325.00 $ 33,206.25 $ 16,603.13 $ 182,634.38

All remaining planting and ex.

Plant demo $ 70,000.00 $ 7,000.00 $ 11,550.00 $ 22,137.50 $ 11,068.75 $ 121,756.25

Pool Deck $ 45,000.00 $ 4,500.00 $ 7,425.00 $ 14,231.25 $ 7,115.63 $ 78,271.88

Remove/replace old benches $ 40,500.00 $ 4,050.00 $ 6,682.50 $ 12,808.13 $ 6,404.06 $ 70,444.69

Replace all drain lines and

grates $ 85,000.00 $ 8,500.00 $ 14,025.00 $ 26,881.25 $ 13,440.63 $ 147,846.88

SUBTOTAL $ 3,540,497.81

Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL

New play equipment $ 120,000.00 $ 12,000.00 $ 19,800.00 $ 37,950.00 $ 18,975.00 $ 208,725.00

Regrade and reseed lawn, add

underdrain $ 120,000.00 $ 12,000.00 $ 19,800.00 $ 37,950.00 $ 18,975.00 $ 208,725.00

Rubberized track $ 205,000.00 $ 20,500.00 $ 33,825.00 $ 64,831.25 $ 32,415.63 $ 356,571.88

Spray park $ 100,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 16,500.00 $ 31,625.00 $ 15,812.50 $ 173,937.50

Food Kiosk $ 50,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 8,250.00 $ 15,812.50 $ 7,906.25 $ 86,968.75

Chess and picnic tables $ 35,000.00 $ 3,500.00 $ 5,775.00 $ 11,068.75 $ 5,534.38 $ 60,878.13

Outdoor music equipment $ 20,000.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 3,300.00 $ 6,325.00 $ 3,162.50 $ 34,787.50

SUBTOTAL $ 1,130,593.75

GRAND

TOTAL $ 7,454,961.25

Ranking factors include safety; most impact per dollar spent;

relative ease of implementation; public demand

High Priority Improvements

Medium Priority Improvements

Low Priority Improvements


MEMORIAL PARK

Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL

Replace play area $ 275,000.00 $ 27,500.00 $ 45,375.00 $ 86,968.75 $ 43,484.38 $ 478,328.13

Relocate sculpture and

flagpole $ 8,000.00 $ 800.00 $ 1,320.00 $ 2,530.00 $ 1,265.00 $ 13,915.00

Create new open lawn $ 100,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 16,500.00 $ 31,625.00 $ 15,812.50 $ 173,937.50

Install stormwater swales $ 50,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 8,250.00 $ 15,812.50 $ 7,906.25 $ 86,968.75

Plant evergreen buffer $ 10,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,650.00 $ 3,162.50 $ 1,581.25 $ 17,393.75

Install selected areas of new

paving $ 60,000.00 $ 6,000.00 $ 9,900.00 $ 18,975.00 $ 9,487.50 $ 104,362.50

Fitness zones $ 30,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 4,950.00 $ 9,487.50 $ 4,743.75 $ 52,181.25

Renovate entrances $ 28,000.00 $ 2,800.00 $ 4,620.00 $ 8,855.00 $ 4,427.50 $ 48,702.50

Fencing $ 110,000.00 $ 11,000.00 $ 18,150.00 $ 34,787.50 $ 17,393.75 $ 191,331.25

Signage $ 15,000.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 2,475.00 $ 4,743.75 $ 2,371.88 $ 26,090.63

Selected benches $ 12,000.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 1,980.00 $ 3,795.00 $ 1,897.50 $ 20,872.50

New junior basketball court $ 50,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 8,250.00 $ 15,812.50 $ 7,906.25 $ 86,968.75

Remove selected trees $ 12,000.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 1,980.00 $ 3,795.00 $ 1,897.50 $ 20,872.50

New field house $ 530,000.00 $ 53,000.00 $ 87,450.00 $ 167,612.50 $ 83,806.25 $ 921,868.75

SUBTOTAL $ 2,243,793.75

Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL

Library plaza $ 140,000.00 $ 14,000.00 $ 23,100.00 $ 44,275.00 $ 22,137.50 $ 243,512.50

Relocate library parking $ 75,000.00 $ 7,500.00 $ 12,375.00 $ 23,718.75 $ 11,859.38 $ 130,453.13

Demo. Sports courts $ 80,000.00 $ 8,000.00 $ 13,200.00 $ 25,300.00 $ 12,650.00 $ 139,150.00

Install remaining paving $ 58,000.00 $ 5,800.00 $ 9,570.00 $ 18,342.50 $ 9,171.25 $ 100,883.75

Lighting $ 320,000.00 $ 32,000.00 $ 52,800.00 $ 101,200.00 $ 50,600.00 $ 556,600.00

All remaining planting $ 47,000.00 $ 4,700.00 $ 7,755.00 $ 14,863.75 $ 7,431.88 $ 81,750.63

Replace all drain lines and

grates $ 26,000.00 $ 2,600.00 $ 4,290.00 $ 8,222.50 $ 4,111.25 $ 45,223.75

New full-size basketball courts $ 150,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 24,750.00 $ 47,437.50 $ 23,718.75 $ 260,906.25

SUBTOTAL $ 1,558,480.00

Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL

Bandshell $ 30,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 4,950.00 $ 9,487.50 $ 4,743.75 $ 52,181.25

Spray park $ 200,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 33,000.00 $ 63,250.00 $ 31,625.00 $ 347,875.00

Natural play elements $ 15,000.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 2,475.00 $ 4,743.75 $ 2,371.88 $ 26,090.63

Community gardens $ 40,000.00 $ 4,000.00 $ 6,600.00 $ 12,650.00 $ 6,325.00 $ 69,575.00

Outdoor music equipment $ 15,000.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 2,475.00 $ 4,743.75 $ 2,371.88 $ 26,090.63

Picnic tables, remaining

benches, game tables $ 30,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 4,950.00 $ 9,487.50 $ 4,743.75 $ 52,181.25

SUBTOTAL $ 573,993.75

GRAND

TOTAL $ 4,376,267.50

Ranking factors include safety; most impact per dollar

spent; relative ease of implementation; public demand





SOVEREL PARK

Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL


trees/branches $ 32,000.00 $ 3,200.00 $ 5,280.00 $ 10,120.00 $ 5,060.00 $ 55,660.00

Demo. Sports courts $ 100,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 16,500.00 $ 31,625.00 $ 15,812.50 $ 173,937.50

New Sports courts and

lighting (basketball/tennis) $ 535,000.00 $ 53,500.00 $ 88,275.00 $ 169,193.75 $ 84,596.88 $ 930,565.63

Selected Pedestrian lighting $ 110,000.00 $ 11,000.00 $ 18,150.00 $ 34,787.50 $ 17,393.75 $ 191,331.25

River path, riparian planting,

and guardrail $ 500,000.00 $ 50,000.00 $ 82,500.00 $ 158,125.00 $ 79,062.50 $ 869,687.50

Clean river channel $ 20,000.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 3,300.00 $ 6,325.00 $ 3,162.50 $ 34,787.50

Fitness zone $ 50,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 8,250.00 $ 15,812.50 $ 7,906.25 $ 86,968.75

Stormwater swales $ 280,000.00 $ 28,000.00 $ 46,200.00 $ 88,550.00 $ 44,275.00 $ 487,025.00

Fencing $ 100,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 16,500.00 $ 31,625.00 $ 15,812.50 $ 173,937.50

Signage $ 15,000.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 2,475.00 $ 4,743.75 $ 2,371.88 $ 26,090.63

Planting at Entrances $ 25,000.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 4,125.00 $ 7,906.25 $ 3,953.13 $ 43,484.38

Selected Benches $ 15,000.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 2,475.00 $ 4,743.75 $ 2,371.88 $ 26,090.63

SUBTOTAL $ 3,099,566.25

Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL

Field House renovation $ 260,000.00 $ 26,000.00 $ 42,900.00 $ 82,225.00 $ 41,112.50 $ 452,237.50

New natural turf field $ 380,000.00 $ 38,000.00 $ 62,700.00 $ 120,175.00 $ 60,087.50 $ 660,962.50

New artificial turf field $ 1,750,000.00 $ 175,000.00 $ 288,750.00 $ 553,437.50 $ 276,718.75 $ 3,043,906.25

Sports lighting $ 50,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 8,250.00 $ 15,812.50 $ 7,906.25 $ 86,968.75

Pedestrian lighting $ 160,000.00 $ 16,000.00 $ 26,400.00 $ 50,600.00 $ 25,300.00 $ 278,300.00

Remaining paving $ 360,000.00 $ 36,000.00 $ 59,400.00 $ 113,850.00 $ 56,925.00 $ 626,175.00

Demo. Grandstand $ 125,000.00 $ 12,500.00 $ 20,625.00 $ 39,531.25 $ 19,765.63 $ 217,421.88

Rubberized path $ 70,000.00 $ 7,000.00 $ 11,550.00 $ 22,137.50 $ 11,068.75 $ 121,756.25

Handball and volleyball $ 100,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 16,500.00 $ 31,625.00 $ 15,812.50 $ 173,937.50

Replace drain lines and grates $ 55,000.00 $ 5,500.00 $ 9,075.00 $ 17,393.75 $ 8,696.88 $ 95,665.63

SUBTOTAL $ 5,757,331.25

Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL

New field house $ 680,000.00 $ 68,000.00 $ 112,200.00 $ 215,050.00 $ 107,525.00 $ 1,182,775.00

Line river walls with stone $ 1,000,000.00 $ 100,000.00 $ 165,000.00 $ 316,250.00 $ 158,125.00 $ 1,739,375.00

Flexible lawn $ 38,000.00 $ 3,800.00 $ 6,270.00 $ 12,017.50 $ 6,008.75 $ 66,096.25

Ecology pergola $ 80,000.00 $ 8,000.00 $ 13,200.00 $ 25,300.00 $ 12,650.00 $ 139,150.00


Food kiosk $ 50,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 8,250.00 $ 15,812.50 $ 7,906.25 $ 86,968.75

New parking lot $ 36,000.00 $ 3,600.00 $ 5,940.00 $ 11,385.00 $ 5,692.50 $ 62,617.50

New children's play

equipment $ 100,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 16,500.00 $ 31,625.00 $ 15,812.50 $ 173,937.50

Remaining benches, picnic

tables $ 46,000.00 $ 4,600.00 $ 7,590.00 $ 14,547.50 $ 7,273.75 $ 80,011.25

Remaining planting $ 110,000.00 $ 11,000.00 $ 18,150.00 $ 34,787.50 $ 17,393.75 $ 191,331.25

SUBTOTAL $ 3,791,837.50

GRAND

TOTAL $ 12,648,735.00






EAST ORANGE OVAL

Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL

Remove/prune undesirable trees/branches $ 18,000.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 2,970.00 $ 5,692.50 $ 2,846.25 $ 31,308.75

Resurface (1) existing basketball court and add

(1) new court; new bleachers $ 100,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 16,500.00 $ 31,625.00 $ 15,812.50 $ 173,937.50

Remove and restore ex. Fence $ 16,000.00 $ 1,600.00 $ 2,640.00 $ 5,060.00 $ 2,530.00 $ 27,830.00

Remove chain link (except baseball fence) $ 1,500.00 $ 150.00 $ 247.50 $ 474.38 $ 237.19 $ 2,609.06

Demo. Ex. Retaining walls at unused courts and

regrade $ 35,000.00 $ 3,500.00 $ 5,775.00 $ 11,068.75 $ 5,534.38 $ 60,878.13

New Signs for 3 entrances $ 11,500.00 $ 1,150.00 $ 1,897.50 $ 3,636.88 $ 1,818.44 $ 20,002.81


Rubberized track $ 160,500.00 $ 16,050.00 $ 26,482.50 $ 50,758.13 $ 25,379.06 $ 279,169.69

Majority of new paving and demo. of most ex.

paving (except at ex. Fieldhouse and at existing

lots to acquire)

$ 375,500.00 $ 37,550.00 $ 61,957.50 $ 118,751.88 $ 59,375.94 $ 653,135.31

Remove retaining wall and play area at north

end of park $ 33,000.00 $ 3,300.00 $ 5,445.00 $ 10,436.25 $ 5,218.13 $ 57,399.38

Lighting $ 355,000.00 $ 35,500.00 $ 58,575.00 $ 112,268.75 $ 56,134.38 $ 617,478.13

Replace drain lines and grates $ 42,000.00 $ 4,200.00 $ 6,930.00 $ 13,282.50 $ 6,641.25 $ 73,053.75

Concrete treads for spectator seating $ 52,000.00 $ 5,200.00 $ 8,580.00 $ 16,445.00 $ 8,222.50 $ 90,447.50

Remove and replace existing fieldhouse $ 720,000.00 $ 72,000.00 $ 118,800.00 $ 227,700.00 $ 113,850.00 $ 1,252,350.00

SUBTOTAL $ 3,366,560.31

Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL

Demo. Remaining ex. Paving and install

remaining new paving $ 120,000.00 $ 12,000.00 $ 19,800.00 $ 37,950.00 $ 18,975.00 $ 208,725.00

Demo. Remaining ex. Walls $ 2,000.00 $ 200.00 $ 330.00 $ 632.50 $ 316.25 $ 3,478.75

Artificial turf field $ 2,050,000.00 $ 205,000.00 $ 338,250.00 $ 648,312.50 $ 324,156.25 $ 3,565,718.75

New fencing between park and adjacent lots $ 25,000.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 4,125.00 $ 7,906.25 $ 3,953.13 $ 43,484.38

Majority of planting, including stormwater

features $ 290,000.00 $ 29,000.00 $ 47,850.00 $ 91,712.50 $ 45,856.25 $ 504,418.75

SUBTOTAL $ 4,325,825.63

Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL

Replace benches $ 33,000.00 $ 3,300.00 $ 5,445.00 $ 10,436.25 $ 5,218.13 $ 57,399.38

Picnic tables $ 16,000.00 $ 1,600.00 $ 2,640.00 $ 5,060.00 $ 2,530.00 $ 27,830.00

New parking lot $ 60,000.00 $ 6,000.00 $ 9,900.00 $ 18,975.00 $ 9,487.50 $ 104,362.50

Remove 3 garages on adjacent lots to acquire,

install fence along street, and new paving in this

area

$ 160,000.00 $ 16,000.00 $ 26,400.00 $ 50,600.00 $ 25,300.00 $ 278,300.00

New entrance sign and planting for (1) entrance $ 20,000.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 3,300.00 $ 6,325.00 $ 3,162.50 $ 34,787.50

Install 3rd basketball court $ 75,000.00 $ 7,500.00 $ 12,375.00 $ 23,718.75 $ 11,859.38 $ 130,453.13

Small spray park for children $ 125,000.00 $ 12,500.00 $ 20,625.00 $ 39,531.25 $ 19,765.63 $ 217,421.88

New children's play equipment at north end of

park $ 100,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 16,500.00 $ 31,625.00 $ 15,812.50 $ 173,937.50

SUBTOTAL $ 1,024,491.88

GRAND

TOTAL $ 8,716,877.81




Ranking factors include safety; most impact per dollar spent; relative ease of

implementation; public demand


Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL


trees/branches $ 37,000.00 $ 3,700.00 $ 6,105.00 $ 11,701.25 $ 5,850.63 $ 64,356.88

Remove basketball courts $ 90,000.00 $ 9,000.00 $ 14,850.00 $ 28,462.50 $ 14,231.25 $ 156,543.75

New basketball court with

lighting $ 175,000.00 $ 17,500.00 $ 28,875.00 $ 55,343.75 $ 27,671.88 $ 304,390.63

New perimeter fence $ 84,000.00 $ 8,400.00 $ 13,860.00 $ 26,565.00 $ 13,282.50 $ 146,107.50

Entrance signage $ 12,000.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 1,980.00 $ 3,795.00 $ 1,897.50 $ 20,872.50


Partial new paving $ 145,000.00 $ 14,500.00 $ 23,925.00 $ 45,856.25 $ 22,928.13 $ 252,209.38

Replace drain lines/grates $ 22,000.00 $ 2,200.00 $ 3,630.00 $ 6,957.50 $ 3,478.75 $ 38,266.25

SUBTOTAL $ 1,001,880.00

Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL

Skatepark with lighting $ 1,280,000.00 $ 128,000.00 $ 211,200.00 $ 404,800.00 $ 202,400.00 $ 2,226,400.00

Replace furniture $ 17,000.00 $ 1,700.00 $ 2,805.00 $ 5,376.25 $ 2,688.13 $ 29,569.38

New play areas with custom

fence, sand feature and

boulders

$ 390,000.00 $ 39,000.00 $ 64,350.00 $ 123,337.50 $ 61,668.75 $ 678,356.25

New vehicular paving between

school and park $ 141,000.00 $ 14,100.00 $ 23,265.00 $ 44,591.25 $ 22,295.63 $ 245,251.88


SUBTOTAL $ 3,344,818.13

Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL

Replace fieldhouse $ 522,000.00 $ 52,200.00 $ 86,130.00 $ 165,082.50 $ 82,541.25 $ 907,953.75

Regrade field as open lawn $ 75,000.00 $ 7,500.00 $ 12,375.00 $ 23,718.75 $ 11,859.38 $ 130,453.13

Remaining planting, including

stormwater features $ 58,000.00 $ 5,800.00 $ 9,570.00 $ 18,342.50 $ 9,171.25 $ 100,883.75


Remaining paving $ 32,000.00 $ 3,200.00 $ 5,280.00 $ 10,120.00 $ 5,060.00 $ 55,660.00

Dog Park $ 58,000.00 $ 5,800.00 $ 9,570.00 $ 18,342.50 $ 9,171.25 $ 100,883.75

SUBTOTAL $ 1,348,015.63

GRAND

TOTAL $ 5,694,713.75







Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL


trees/branches $ 45,000.00 $ 4,500.00 $ 7,425.00 $ 14,231.25 $ 7,115.63 $ 78,271.88

Demo. Ex paving, sport courts,

play area, fencing, and

selected light fixtures

$ 195,000.00 $ 19,500.00 $ 32,175.00 $ 61,668.75 $ 30,834.38 $ 339,178.13

New basketball court $ 75,000.00 $ 7,500.00 $ 12,375.00 $ 23,718.75 $ 11,859.38 $ 130,453.13

New large play area $ 370,000.00 $ 37,000.00 $ 61,050.00 $ 117,012.50 $ 58,506.25 $ 643,568.75

Fitness zone $ 21,000.00 $ 2,100.00 $ 3,465.00 $ 6,641.25 $ 3,320.63 $ 36,526.88

Entrance signage $ 10,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,650.00 $ 3,162.50 $ 1,581.25 $ 17,393.75


New paving throughout $ 300,000.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 49,500.00 $ 94,875.00 $ 47,437.50 $ 521,812.50

New fencing $ 75,000.00 $ 7,500.00 $ 12,375.00 $ 23,718.75 $ 11,859.38 $ 130,453.13

Rubber track $ 90,000.00 $ 9,000.00 $ 14,850.00 $ 28,462.50 $ 14,231.25 $ 156,543.75

Stormwater features $ 70,000.00 $ 7,000.00 $ 11,550.00 $ 22,137.50 $ 11,068.75 $ 121,756.25


SUBTOTAL $ 2,257,708.75

Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL

Renovate field house $ 330,000.00 $ 33,000.00 $ 54,450.00 $ 104,362.50 $ 52,181.25 $ 573,993.75

Replace benches $ 26,000.00 $ 2,600.00 $ 4,290.00 $ 8,222.50 $ 4,111.25 $ 45,223.75

Bleachers $ 10,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,650.00 $ 3,162.50 $ 1,581.25 $ 17,393.75

New field lighting $ 50,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 8,250.00 $ 15,812.50 $ 7,906.25 $ 86,968.75


New natural turf field $ 125,000.00 $ 12,500.00 $ 20,625.00 $ 39,531.25 $ 19,765.63 $ 217,421.88


SUBTOTAL $ 1,080,151.88

Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL

Skate park $ 450,000.00 $ 45,000.00 $ 74,250.00 $ 142,312.50 $ 71,156.25 $ 782,718.75

Sand pit and boulders for

children $ 7,000.00 $ 700.00 $ 1,155.00 $ 2,213.75 $ 1,106.88 $ 12,175.63

Outdoor musical equipment $ 15,000.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 2,475.00 $ 4,743.75 $ 2,371.88 $ 26,090.63

Picnic tables $ 12,000.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 1,980.00 $ 3,795.00 $ 1,897.50 $ 20,872.50

Game tables $ 10,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,650.00 $ 3,162.50 $ 1,581.25 $ 17,393.75

Expanded pool deck and new

pool fence $ 37,000.00 $ 3,700.00 $ 6,105.00 $ 11,701.25 $ 5,850.63 $ 64,356.88


New court, skate park, and

pool lighting $ 63,000.00 $ 6,300.00 $ 10,395.00 $ 19,923.75 $ 9,961.88 $ 109,580.63

SUBTOTAL $ 1,433,245.00

GRAND

TOTAL $ 4,771,105.63









Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL


trees/branches $ 9,000.00 $ 900.00 $ 1,485.00 $ 2,846.25 $ 1,423.13 $ 15,654.38

New children's spray park $ 440,000.00 $ 44,000.00 $ 72,600.00 $ 139,150.00 $ 69,575.00 $ 765,325.00

Replace fence $ 75,000.00 $ 7,500.00 $ 12,375.00 $ 23,718.75 $ 11,859.38 $ 130,453.13

Permeable paver plaza with game tables $ 130,000.00 $ 13,000.00 $ 21,450.00 $ 41,112.50 $ 20,556.25 $ 226,118.75

Bus stop improvements $ 5,000.00 $ 500.00 $ 825.00 $ 1,581.25 $ 790.63 $ 8,696.88

New shade trees $ 23,000.00 $ 2,300.00 $ 3,795.00 $ 7,273.75 $ 3,636.88 $ 40,005.63

Replace children's play equipment $ 215,000.00 $ 21,500.00 $ 35,475.00 $ 67,993.75 $ 33,996.88 $ 373,965.63

Majority of new paving $ 135,000.00 $ 13,500.00 $ 22,275.00 $ 42,693.75 $ 21,346.88 $ 234,815.63

Stormwater features $ 20,000.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 3,300.00 $ 6,325.00 $ 3,162.50 $ 34,787.50


SUBTOTAL $ 1,857,652.50


Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL

Replace Field house $ 380,000.00 $ 38,000.00 $ 62,700.00 $ 120,175.00 $ 60,087.50 $ 660,962.50

Lighting $ 85,000.00 $ 8,500.00 $ 14,025.00 $ 26,881.25 $ 13,440.63 $ 147,846.88

Benches and picnic tables $ 30,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 4,950.00 $ 9,487.50 $ 4,743.75 $ 52,181.25

Fitness zone $ 28,000.00 $ 2,800.00 $ 4,620.00 $ 8,855.00 $ 4,427.50 $ 48,702.50

Regrade and reseed little league field $ 20,000.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 3,300.00 $ 6,325.00 $ 3,162.50 $ 34,787.50

SUBTOTAL $ 944,480.63


Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL

Paving under pergola areas $ 105,000.00 $ 10,500.00 $ 17,325.00 $ 33,206.25 $ 16,603.13 $ 182,634.38

Pergola with vines at new fieldhouse $ 175,000.00 $ 17,500.00 $ 28,875.00 $ 55,343.75 $ 27,671.88 $ 304,390.63


SUBTOTAL $ 527,900.31

GRAND

TOTAL $ 3,330,033.44





HOFFMAN PARK

All Improvements

Base costGeneral

Cond. (10%)

Overhead and

Profit (15%)

Design

Contingency

(25%)

Construction

Contingency

(10%)

LINE ITEM

TOTAL


trees/branches $ 6,500.00 $ 650.00 $ 1,072.50 $ 2,055.63 $ 1,027.81 $ 11,305.94

All paving $ 150,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 24,750.00 $ 47,437.50 $ 23,718.75 $ 260,906.25

Lighting $ 60,000.00 $ 6,000.00 $ 9,900.00 $ 18,975.00 $ 9,487.50 $ 104,362.50

Furnishings $ 19,000.00 $ 1,900.00 $ 3,135.00 $ 6,008.75 $ 3,004.38 $ 33,048.13

Entrance signage $ 8,000.00 $ 800.00 $ 1,320.00 $ 2,530.00 $ 1,265.00 $ 13,915.00

All planting $ 37,000.00 $ 3,700.00 $ 6,105.00 $ 11,701.25 $ 5,850.63 $ 64,356.88

Small water feature $ 35,000.00 $ 3,500.00 $ 5,775.00 $ 11,068.75 $ 5,534.38 $ 60,878.13


Replace fence between park and

adjacent lots $ 65,000.00 $ 6,500.00 $ 10,725.00 $ 20,556.25 $ 10,278.13 $ 113,059.38

Custom bus shelter $ 25,000.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 4,125.00 $ 7,906.25 $ 3,953.13 $ 43,484.38

SUBTOTAL $ 567,036.25

GRAND

TOTAL $ 567,036.25

Ranking factors include safety; most impact per dollar spent; relative

ease of implementation; public demand

implementation plan

strategy + timeline

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN: STRATEGY + TIMELINE >>> 293

implementation planStrategy + Timeline

YEAR ONE

• Establish Leadership for Parks + Recreation

The most critical step for the success of this plan is to identify and install the East Orange Parks and Recreation Director. This individual would be ultimately responsible for the implementation of all aspects of this parks master plan—not only the physical improvements, but the operational, programmatic, recreational, marketing, and out-reach improvements as well. Without this clear leadership, simply investing in capital improve-ments in the parks may not be efficient or sus-tainable. The role of this individual is described in the section on Organization and Management, and a job description is provided in the appendix. It is strongly urged that a national search for the right individual be conducted, using the job de-scription provided.

While the search for a qualified professional is underway, a team of qualified park planning and design professionals should be retained to initi-ate the improvements of the parks master plan in a cost efficient, sustainable, and inclusive man-ner. This is also discussed in the section on Or-ganization and Management.

• Make decisions on Organizational Structure

Based on the recommendations given in the Or-ganization and Management section, decisions should be made regarding whether and how to

reorganize the Parks and Recreation functions in the city to ensure quality, long-term, sustainable improvements.

In relation to this restructuring, the mission, vi-sion, roles and responsibilities of the Open Space, Recreation, and Historic Preservation Advisory Committee should be clearly defined.

• Outline a Strategy for Public Involvement

The citizens of East Orange clearly want to be involved in decisions regarding parks and recre-ation. At each community meeting held during this master planning process, over 50 individuals came forward, gave their contact information, and expressed interest in being part of a Park Friends group for their community park. This list of con-tacts is on file in the Planning department.

Continued public engagement is strongly urged for the success of all master plan improvements. The most significant way to bring about revital-ization in parks and recreation is through the or-ganization of citizens serving as advocates for park improvements clamoring for change with the elected officials. The Park Friends groups could be nurtured through effective communication and by being provided meeting space, receiving help and support for initial organization and role definition, a modest administrative budget could be provid-ed, and ideas given for how they can help main-tain, monitor, and build stewardship for the parks. Above all, the Park Friends could offer their insight

294 >>> IMPLEMENTATION PLAN: STRATEGY + TIMELINE

into the specific improvements to the parks go-ing forward. The city could identify someone cur-rently on staff to coordinate and support the Park Friends groups. It could also retain the services of a public engagement professional or an orga-nization such as the Trust for Public Land to help get these groups organized and off the ground.

The Open Space, Recreation and Historic Pres-ervation Advisory Board should assess its vision, mission, roles and responsibilities in light of this Park Master Plan. The Board should develop an annual work program to make the best use of the volunteer time in accomplishing goals. Develop a training program to ensure that members have the kind of information needed to be effective board members and to train new members as the board composition changes.

• Undertake the Pilot Project(s)

It is of the utmost importance that the pilot proj-ect create the momentum and set the stage for how future park improvements are made. It should inspire future success and be inclusive of the surrounding community. The pilot project should also be substantial enough that it does not appear to be a “band-aid” fix to a park. It should help to create a “buzz” about the parks and showcase how responsive the City can be.

Three potential projects stood out as excellent pilot projects for the improvements identified in the master plan:

Elmwood Park: There is consensus in the city that Elmwood Park is the most popular and well-loved park in the city. The high priority improvements at Elmwood would perhaps have more city-wide impact than improvements made at any other park and would create the most “buzz” and ex-citement. Refer to the section on Priorities and Budget Estimates for a list of high priority im-provements.

Memorial Park: Situated in the city center, within the planned transit village and within one of the poorest sections of the city, the high priority im-provements for this park could be a great first step in the transformation of the city’s parks. Refer to the section on Priorities and Budget Estimates for a list of high priority improvements. This proj-ect could demonstrate new and effective ways to expand programming, provide park security, and foster collaboration among city departments, in-cluding the Library, Parks & Recreation and the Division of Senior Services.

Columbian Playground: More than any other park, Columbian Playground exemplifies the problems within the park system for the surrounding com-munity. The high priority improvements for this park would transform a once burned-down play-ground next to a vacant building into a beautiful community park geared toward the inclusion of all generations of users. The community support for this park was also overwhelming. This would be a great opportunity to demonstrate how resi-


dents can become directly involved in the de-sign and decision-making process. There could be a neighborhood planting day where the com-munity helps to install new planting in the park. Refer to the section on Priorities and Budget Estimates for a list of high priority improve-ments.

• Reporting and Data Collection

During Year One, make decisions on what infor-mation and data to track and collect throughout the year. The goal should be to produce the right information at the right time to make decisions about the allocation of resources, capital im-provement projects, programming, staffing, bud-geting, and so on. This information should also be the foundation for the creation of an annual Parks and Recreation report, like those that used to be produced in East Orange.

At the end of Year One, the annual report should be created that not only catalogs all the relevant data related to Parks and Recreation, but also lists the accomplishments of Year One and iden-tifies the emerging needs, opportunities, goals, priorities, and work plan for Year Two. These an-nual reports will guide future planning efforts, increase accountability and transparency, and increase efficiency.

Refer to Figure U1 for a graphic representation of suggested Year One actions.

YEAR TWO AND BEYOND

There are many improvements recommended for parks and recreation. To fully complete all recom-mendations, a twenty-year time frame may be real-istic. All high-priority improvements could be made in the first five years, with medium- and low-priority improvements following.

Refer to the section on Priorities and Budget Esti-mates for a list of recommended high-, medium-, and low-priority improvements for each park, as well as budget costs. Due to its small size, Hoffman Park is not divided into priorities and improvements are listed under one category.

This chapter contains Figure U2, a graphic represen-tation of the suggested timeline for implementing all improvements and Figure U3, a matrix to help evalu-ate the importance and achievability of an improve-ment.

Potential improvements should also be weighed against operating and management impacts. The Management Impact Statement presented in the section on Organization and Management will help assess the impacts of physical improvements.


Action

1 Identify and recruit Department Director

2 Select a qualified team of park planning and

design professionals until a Director is found

and to design and oversee Year One improvements

3 Make decisions on organizational structure

4 Determine information and data to track

5 Outline a strategy for public involvement

6 Determine the Pilot Project

7 Public engagement for Pilot Project

8 Design and construction documentation

for Pilot Project (duration dependent on scope)

9 Pilot Project drawings and specifications issued

for bidding

10 Pilot Project construction

(duration dependent on scope)

11 Prepare and issue Annual Report for Year One

and Work Plan for Year Two

MayApril June

2014

MarchJanuary February November DecemberJuly August September October

FIGURE U1: PARKS & RECREATION YEAR ONE SCHEDULEEast Orange Park Master Plan


Action

1 Identify and recruit Department Director

2 Select a qualified team of park planning and

design professionals until a Director is found

and to design and oversee Year One improvements

3 Make decisions on organizational structure

4 Determine information and data to track

5 Outline a strategy for public involvement

6 Determine the Pilot Project

7 Public engagement for Pilot Project

8 Design and construction documentation

for Pilot Project (duration dependent on scope)

9 Pilot Project drawings and specifications issued

for bidding

10 Pilot Project construction

(duration dependent on scope)

11 Prepare and issue Annual Report for Year One

and Work Plan for Year Two

MayApril June

2014

MarchJanuary February November DecemberJuly August September October


FIGURE U2: PARKS & RECREATION IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULEEast Orange Park Master Plan

Ward Park

1 Soverel Park

2 Memorial Park

2 Rowley Park

3 Elmwood Park

3 Washington Playground

4 East Orange Oval

4 Francis Haire Park

5 Hoffman Park

5 Columbian Playground

Low Priority: $3.8 Million

Limited Improvements




15-20 Years

High Priority: $3.1 Million


Low Priority: $1.1 MillionHigh Priority: $3.4 Million


Medium Priority: $5.8 Million










Imrovements: $0.6 Million



10-15 Years0-5 Years 5-10 Years


Ward Park

1 Soverel Park

2 Memorial Park

2 Rowley Park

3 Elmwood Park

3 Washington Playground

4 East Orange Oval

4 Francis Haire Park

5 Hoffman Park

5 Columbian Playground


Limited Improvements




15-20 Years



Low Priority: $1.1 MillionHigh Priority: $3.4 Million












Imrovements: $0.6 Million



10-15 Years0-5 Years 5-10 Years


FIGURE U3: SAMPLE CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTSEast Orange Park Master Plan

For each capital improvement project under consideration, identify: Project Scope, Capital Cost, Annual Op-erating Cost, Operating Budget Source(s), and Funding Source(s)

Criteria Ye

s (

2)

No

(1

)

Hig

h P

rio

rity

(3

)

Me

diu

m P

rio

rity

(2

)

Lo

w P

rio

rity

(1

)

To

tal

Po

ints

1Does the proposed project respond to public demand

based on community engagement?

2Does the project benefit a majority of the citizens (does

it have city-wide impact)?

3Will the project meet the safety and accessibility needs

of the community?

4 Is the project consistent with the parks master plan?

5Is the project in an area of the community that needs

investment?

6 Is funding available for the project?

7Does a community group support the project or is one

ready to be engaged?

8Are there private or public partners willing to help offset

the construction or maintenance costs?

9Will the City or other provider be able to maintain the

improvement on completion?

10Will the quality of the project enhance the public image

of East Orange?

TOTAL POINTS

1) Mark either ‘2’ for yes or ‘1’ for no.2) Determine whether the project is high priority ‘3’, Medium ‘2’, or Low ‘1’.3) Multiply the yes/no points by the priority points and put this number in the Total Points column.4) Add up the Total Points and write the score in the box at the bottom.5) Use the Total Points to compare one improvement to another.

bibliography

BIBLIOGRAPHY >>> 301

bibliography

Alexander, Garvin. Public Parks: The Key to Liable Community. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2011.

Blair SN, Kohl HW, and Gordon NF. How Much Physical Activity is Good for Health?. Annual Review of Public Health. 1992.

Board of Recreation Commissioners. East Orange: 1931. Twenty-fifth Report. East Orange, 1931.

City Planning Board. East Orange: Schools & Recreation. Fifth Series of Reports. East Orange, 1946.

City Plan Commission. City Plan of East Orange. East Orange, 1922.

Cohen, DA, Han B, Derose KP, Williamson S, Marsh T, Rudick J, McKenzie TL. Neighborhood Poverty, Park Use, and Park-based Physical Activity. Social Science Medicine. 2012.

Collins, Beryl Robichaud and Karl H. Anderson. Plant Communities of New Jersey: A Study in Landscape Diversity. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1994.

Crompton, John. L. Measuring the Impact of parks and Recreation Services. Arlington, VA: National Recreation & Park Association, 2010.

Gerrish, Jim and Frederick Goode. “An Interactive Timeline History of East Orange”. http://eohistory.info/ eotimeline/index.html. 2013.

Gibbons LW, Macera CA. Changes in Physical Fitness and All-cause Mortality: A Prospective Study of Healthy and Unhealthy Men. Journal of the American Medical Association. 1995.

Harnik, Peter. Urban Green: Innovative Parks for Resurgent Cities. Washington, DC: Island Press, 2010.

Hart, William. Postcard History Series: East Orange in Vintage Postcards. Charleston: Arcadia Publishing, 2000.

Hart, William. Images of America: East Orange. Charleston: Arcadia Publishing, 2006.

302 >>> BIBLIOGRAPHY

The League of Women Voters of East Orange, NJ. This is East Orange: A Community Handbook and Map. East Orange, 1965.

Pierson, David Lawrence. History of The Oranges to 1921, Reviewing the Rise, Development and Progress of an Influential Community. New York: Lewis Historical Publishing Company, 1922.

Slattery ML. How Much Physical Activity Do We Need to Maintain Health Prevent Disease? Different Diseases – Different Mechanisms. Research Quarterly Exercise and Sport. 1996.

United States Department of Health and Human Services; Centre for Disease Control and Prevention. Physical Activity and Health: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA, 1996.

Walker, Chris. Beyond Recreation: A Broker View of Public Parks. Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2004.

Documents

East Orange Parks Master Plan 2013/09/04