The document outlines the master plan process for Bridgeport's parks and recreation system. It includes an introduction and sections on assessment, community need, the future vision, project schedule, stakeholder groups, previous planning efforts, a needs assessment, and potential scenarios for the future. The process involves stakeholder interviews, an inventory and needs assessment, developing concepts and scenarios, and creating a final master plan and implementation strategy. It analyzes areas like parks spending, operations, and access and identifies needs such as more neighborhood parks and accessible waterfront. Three potential scenarios will be developed to envision how Bridgeport's parks future might unfold.
2. Project Schedule
4 5
1: Framework 2: Concepts 3: Master Plan
• Kick-off & Stakeholder Interviews • Develop 3 Scenarios • Final Master Plan
• 2011 Parks Inventory • Plan Refinement • Implementation Strategy
• Needs Assessment • Draft Action Plan
• Existing Conditions Analysis • Launch Public Outreach
• Community Survey Development
APRIL MAy JUNE JULy AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER
Community
Public
Survey
Meeting #1
Public Public
Meeting #1 Meeting #2
#1
Kick Off Client Parks Board Stakeholder Client Stakeholder Client Stakeholder
Review WorkSession Review Worksession Review Worksession
3. Client Leadership Stakeholder Group
6 7
• Mayor Bill Finch • Board of Parks Commissioners
• Charles Carroll, Parks Director & Public Facilities Director • Public Facilities-Charles Carroll + Ted Grabarz
• Ted Grabarz, Sustainability Director & Deputy Director of • Parks Manager-Andy Valeri
Public Works
• Recreation Superintendent-Luann Conine
• Steve Hladun, Project Coordinator
• Tree Warden/Urban Forester-Steve Hladun
• Mike Nidoh, Director of Planning
• Planning & Economic Development-Bill Coleman; Donald
• Board of Parks Commissioners: James Brideau, James Giles, Eversley, Director of Planning and Economic Development
Banjed Labrador, Mark Marko, Frank A. Mercaldi, Ann E. Owens,
• Neighborhood/NRZ Coordination-Angie Staltero
Rosa, Cruz
• Downtown Special Services District-Rick Myers
Sasaki • Bridgeport Regional Business Council-Paul Timpanelli
• Historic Preservation Commission-Stuart Sachs
• Jason Hellendrung-Managing Principal
• Small and Minority Business Resource Office-Deborah Caviness
• Gina Ford-Design Principal
• Lighthouse Program, Office of Education and youth-Tammy Pappa
• Brie Hensold-Project Manager, Planner
• Greater Bridgeport Regional Business Council-Brian Bidolli
• Eamonn Hutton-Landscape Architect
• City Council-Lydia Martinez, Martin C. McCarthy, Susan Brannelly,
• Stephen Gray-Urban Designer Denese Taylor-Moye, Anderson Ayala, Robert S. Walsh, M. Evette
Brantley, Howard Austin, Sr., Thomas C. McCarthy, Michelle
Lyons, AmyMarie Vizzo-Paniccia, Warren Blunt, Richard Bonney,
Heller & Heller Angel M. DePara, Jr., Carlos Silva, Manuel Ayala, Richard M.
Paoletto, Jr., Robert Curwen, James Holloway, Andre F. Baker
• Barbara Heller-Parks & Recreation Planner
4. Previous Planning & Ongoing
8
Projects 9
Master Plan of Conservation and Development (2008) BGreen 2020
Waste,
Green Energy Greenfields & Water Businesses
downtown Jobs Neighborhoods Education Infrastructure Environment Green Spaces Materials & Marketing
& Buildings Green Wheels resources & Jobs
recycling
New Parks Amenities 2011 Parks
and Improvements Master Plan
New Signage
7 NRZ Plans Schools Renovations Complete Streets Complete Streets
Knowlton Park
Potential Downtown “Surprise, it’s Bridgeport”
Black Rock & South End Bike Paths
Playground
CDBG Public Park
Glenwood Tennis
Improvements: Svirha, Washington Park and
Court Improvements
Waterview, McGovern Knowlton Park Funds
5. Community Survey
66 67
• 114 online responses to date
• Top 3 parks for improvement - Seaside, Pleasure Beach, Veteran’s
Memorial Park
• Popular future amenties - playgrounds, splash pads, picnic
shelters, swimming facilities
7. 2011 Inventory Assessment
32 33
Standards Parks Inventory
• 2011 Parks data updated through consultations with Client, site
visits, GIS and other data
Need Z - X Parks Classification
• Based on MP Conservation and Development: Mini-parks,
neighborhood, community, regional, and special use parks
X y Z
System Benchmarking
BPT NRPA SA/HH • Park acreage for system and types benchmarked against peer cities
(similar population) and aspirant, large systems nationally
NPRA standards adjusted for Park Assessment
Bridgeport’s specific needs
• Park types compared against national standards and
recommendations by consultant team
National Parks and
Recreation standards
Park Element Assessment
• Park Elements compared against national standards and
Existing condition in recommendations by consultant team
Bridgeport Today
8. 34
45+ parks
1,346 acres
Park System
Mini parks
speCial Use
regional parks
CoMMUniTY parks
neigHBorHooD parks
Lawrence Miami
City Comparisons
Lowell Lawrence
National Standards
Hartford Providence
Waterbury Lowell
Providence Baltimore
Bridgeport Buffalo
96
Miami Bridgeport
BPT
1,436
Worcester Boston
Buffalo Hartford
Oakland
totAl ACreAge
New Haven
totAl ACreAge
Pittsburgh Pittsburgh
NRPA
ACreS / 1,000 reSIDentS
1,442
Oakland Worcester
Baltimore Waterbury
Minneapolis Washington, DC
Boston Minneapolis
SA/HH
1,442
Washington, DC New Haven
0
0
10
20
8,000
4,000
35
9. Parks Diversity
36 37
• Mini-park <1%
• Neighborhood Park 6%
• Community Park 22%
• Regional Park 65%
• Special Use Park 7%
% of total Acreage
Mini
Special Use Neighborhood
COMMUNITy
REGIONAL
5 Park types regional parks
CoMMUniTY parks
neigHBorHooD parks
Mini parks
speCial Use
10. Park Type Assessment
38 39
Mini-park
• Strategic interventions
67 NA 203 Neighborhood Park
216 289
• Highest need for more neighborhood parks
86
72
4.4 bPt nrPA SA/hh
Community Park
bPt nrPA SA/hh
• Full city is within the service radius of a community park, but
mInI-PArK neIghborhooD PArK
totAl ACreAge totAl ACreAge additional need exists due to dense population base
regional Park
• Minor need for additional regional park space
Special use Park
286 1,082 26
286 1,082 • Recommendations will vary according to opportunity and
577 577 community input
291 551
bPt nrPA SA/hh bPt nrPA SA/hh
CommunIty PArK regIonAl PArK
totAl ACreAge totAl ACreAge
12. 44
Park Need
“ Nearly half of City neighborhoods
are underserved (under 10% land
area for parks)—Black Rock, Boston
45
Ave/ Mill Hill, Brooklawn/St. Vincent,
Population Density
Downtown, East Side, Hollow,
Reservoir/ Whiskey Hill, West End/
West Side.
” -2008 Master Plan
Car Access
Needs Assessment
• 6.8 acres of open space per 1000 residents vs. the regional average
of 8.5 / 1000
• 12% of the population does not live within a 10-minute walk of any
Diversity open space.
• Only approximately 4 of its 22 miles of waterfront are currently
publicly accessible.
Income
13. Access and Need
46 47
BGreen 2020, Need Assessment
14
5
30
1
16
23
36
Access to 20
35
Parkland
Within
2 15
the City 6
8
4
37
Bridgeport Parks Depart- 19
ment, US Census, RPA 22
24
33 10 12 7 38 18
3
25
27
17
26
39
40
29
41
11 28
21
13
32 Parcels Park Need
31 within a 1/3-mile walk of a park 0 – 20
Bridgeport Parks 20 – 40
40 – 50
within a 1/3-mile walk of a school
60 – 80
Bridgeport Public Schools 80 – 100
*Park need is a composite index of income, race/ethnicity, age,
9 residential density, and auto ownership, based on census data.
BGreen 2020 • A Sustainability Plan for Bridgeport, Connecticut 31
15 minute walk HIGH
LOW
14. Parks Spending & Revenue Operations/Staff
58
• Parks spending is low as measured against peers and other cities • Parks Maintenance Staff-14
59
• Revenues largely come from the Golf Course, with other revenues • Recreation Staff-3
from checkpoints, rentals, and annual stickers
• Best Practice Maintenance Standard -1 employee / 15 acres
$25,000
$300 • Usual Maintenance Standard-1 employee / 18-22 acres
$12,500
$150
$1,530 $14
0 0
Washington, DC
Minneapolis
Boston
Oakland
Miami
Baltimore
Pittsburgh
New Haven
Hartford
Waterbury
Bridgeport
Buffalo
Washington, DC
Minneapolis
Boston
Oakland
Miami
Baltimore
Pittsburgh
New Haven
Hartford
Waterbury
Bridgeport
Buffalo
SPenDIng Per ACre oF PArKS SPenDIng Per reSIDent on PArKS
20
$2.5 M
$2 M
$1.5 M
reCreAtIon 3
$1 M
GOLF COURSE
mAIntenAnCe 14 22 47 63
0.5 M BPT NATL. USUAL STND. BEST
COMPS PRACTICE
OTHER
0
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
totAl AnnuAl revenueS
15. tHE FuturE
oF PArK CItY
3 Potential Scenarios for
Bridgeport Parks & Recreation
16. 3 Plan Scenarios Scenarios
70 71
• Stories about how Bridgeport’s future might unfold
• A method for finding appropriate movements down each path
Needs Assessment
Stakeholder Interviews
Community Input & Refinement
Community Survey
Client Direction
17. Connect
Connect by Water
• Pequonnock River & yellow Mill Creek
• Pleasure Beach link & Captain’s Cove / South End access
Connect by Infrastructure
• Implement bike lanes, complete streets, sidewalks maintenance
• Focus on east-west connections
Connect with New Parks
• Create a linear park system east-west across the city and the
Pequonnock River
LINEAR PARK ALONG INFRASTRUCTURE (COMMONS PARK, DENVER)
18. HELEN ST
Yellow Mill Creek Today...
N AVE
BOSTO
REMINGTON ARMS
DAMS DISRUPT FISH MIGRATION (GLENWOOD PARK) LACK OF PUBLIC ACCESS ALONG CREEK CORRIDOR CHANNELIZED WATER CORRIDOR
19. Imagine Yellow Mill Creek...
80 81
N AVE
BOSTO
REMINGTON ARMS
DEVELOPMENT SPURRED ALONG RESTORED CREEK PUBLIC RECREATION AND ACCESS UNIQUE LANDSCAPE
20. ‘Sliver by the River’ Today...
R
WATE BUS STATION
TRAIN STATION
‘SLIVER By THE RIVER’
95
RD
F O
AT
R
ST
FUTURE RELATIONSHIP TO KNOWLTON PARK POTENTIAL BOATING ACCESS ADJACENT TO MULTIMODAL TERMINAL
21. Imagine ‘Sliver by the River’...
84
WATERFRONT PARK 85
RD
DESTINATION PLAy
F O
AT
R
ST
WATERFRONT AMPHITHEATER
PROM
ENAD
E
ACCESSIBLE WATER’S EDGE INFORMAL AMPHITHEATER DESTINATION PLAyGROUND
22. 90 91
ENHANCE
... Restore and transform the
Bridgeport Parks System
23. Enhance
92 93
Seek Big Wins
Renaturalized large parks
Renaturalized water’s edge
Buffered highway/train corridors and infrastructure
Hyper Parks serve high need areas
Durable materials and a high number of family and child-oriented
park amenities
Low Maintenance small parks and infill
DURABLE PLAy FIELD, BROOKLyN
24. MAIN
Old Mill Green Today...
OKS
BRO
LAKEVIEW CEMETERy
D
HAR
ORC
BO
STO
N AV
E
KE
BRO
PEM
N
HELE
LUIS MUNOZ MARIN
OPEN, UNDERUTILIZED PARK SPACE DIFFICULT TO ACCESS DUE TO TRAFFIC PATTERNS HISTORIC TREE CANOPy
25. MAIN
STREET CLOSING
Imagine Old Mill Green...
SK
AT
96 E PA
97
RK
OKS
BRO
IMPROVED CROSSWALKS DO
G P
AR
K
LAKEVIEW CEMETERy
D BA
HAR
SKE
TB
ALL
ORC
BO BA
STO SKE
KE
N AV TB
ALL
BRO
E
PEM
PLA STREET CLOSING
y F
IEL
D
N
HELE
LUIS MUNOZ MARIN
DOG PARK, COLORADO PLAy ACTIVITIES DESTINATION PLAy GROUND
26. Beardsley Today...
MAIN
ZOO
NO
BL
E
8 / 25
BUNNELLS POND
GLENWOOD
OPEN LAWNS ARE MAINTENANCE-INTENSIVE NATURAL FEATURES STREET AND TRAIL CONNECTIONS
27. Imagine Beardsley...
100 101
MAIN
ZOO
NO
BL
E
8 / 25
BUNNELLS POND
GLENWOOD
NATURALIZED LANDSCAPE, MA TRAILS PROVIDE ACCESS MINIMAL MOWED EDGES
28. 106 107
ExPANd
... Network and partner to find new
opportunities and more efficient
maintenance
34. Expand - Website &
122
Communications 123
Increase website user’s access to information with increased San Francisco worked access to information out successfully -
LIN
organization and a more accessible interface many links are available but a strong visual hierarchy makes
DEN
sorting through them easy
AV
WAL
E
D
EME
R
E AV
E
VE
R K A
PA
ACCESS TO TOO MUCH INFORMATION CAN BE OVERWHELMING FOR A USER HAVING A PREDICTABLE LAyOUT MAKES READING THROUGH A WEBSITE ENJOyABLE
35. The Branded System
126
Freshkills Park NYC 127
Examples of a complete branded identity system including product
packaging, website/newsletter, signage, and advertising billboard.
36. 3 Scenarios for Bridgeport’s
Parks & Recreation System
CoNNECt ENHANCE ExPANd