Wednesday, June 20, 2018

Three Columbia parks might get "facelifts"


Three of the six parks in Columbia Borough might get facelifts in the near future thanks to a study currently underway. Council voted unanimously last month in favor of undertaking a study of Makle Park, Rotary Park, and Janson Park in order to develop a comprehensive plan. The $67,000 study is being carried out by the landscape design firm Yost, Strodoski, and Mears (YSM) and will include initial surveys for each park.

At the May borough council meeting, Pam Williams, chair of the borough's Parks & Recreation Committee, said the completed plan will allow the borough to apply for grants for further development. “In order to apply for grants, we do need the information, to be successful,” she said. Williams added that there will be opportunities for public input to the plan, also. Borough Manager Rebecca Denlinger said a survey similar to one for the Columbia River Park Phase III will be made available to residents. Council President Kelly Murphy said the study will help determine what needs to be improved and added, and what programs will be provided for children and adults of all ages.

On the June 14, 2018 Parks & Recreation agenda, a “kick-off” presentation by Ann Yost of YSM was listed. The presentation was to provide an overview of YSM’s plan and procedure for Rotary Park, Makle Park, and Janson Park.

Currently, the Borough of Columbia owns Makle Park and Rotary Park. Janson Park is run by a foundation affiliated with Holy Trinity Church.

Other parks in the borough, but not included in the study, are:

Glatfelter Memorial Field, run by the Glatfelter Foundation.

Locust Street Park, owned by the Old Columbia Public Grounds Company but leased by the borough for a token fee to allow police to have enforcement powers in the park. The Grounds Company is responsible for park maintenance.

Columbia River Park, owned by Columbia Borough. The borough, along with the Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission (PAF&BC), is responsible for maintenance and management of the park.


Glatfelter Memorial Field

Locust Street Park

Columbia River Park

The Old Columbia Grounds Company

28 comments:

  1. Cole, You might want to research whether Columbia River Park is not actually owned by Columbia Borough. There was a 99 year lease at one time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It says that in the article....

      Delete
    2. Research...Columbia Borough owns Columbia River Park not Old Columbia Public Grounds. There is no lease

      Delete
    3. From the Columbia Borough website: "The Borough of Columbia, under a 99-year lease with the Old Columbia Public Grounds Company, is responsible along with the Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission (PAF&BC) for the management and maintenance of an approximate four acre parcel known as Columbia River Park."

      Delete
    4. Than how come the our highway dept does all the work at the river park I don't see the fish & game cutting the grass or have anything to do with the docks

      Delete
    5. Also, according to the Buchart Horn website: "The project site, which is situated on the east bank of the Susquehanna River immediately south of the Veteran’s Memorial (Route 462) Bridge, is owned by Old Columbia Public Grounds and leased to the Borough for use and maintenance of the park."
      http://bucharthorn.com/projects/river-park/

      Delete
    6. Research...Council agenda/minutes of October 10, 2016 Public Property items 12 d and 12 e. River Park is Borough owned, not leased from OCPG.

      Delete
    7. Thanks Mary, for keeping such meticulous notes and records.

      Delete
    8. Change made. Thanks for the info. The inaccurate information we posted previously came from the borough's website. As the borough manager said recently, "The borough website is broken."

      Delete
  2. Spending more tax payers money

    ReplyDelete
  3. $67K study. I can tell you without that to not invest to much in Makle playground. It will be destroyed, again and again and again!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Agree that $67,000 is a steep price tag for a study on these parks when you generally don't see a lot of kids using them like they used to. Also agree that something needs to be done to curtail damages to Rotary before any additional money is spent there. There is a destructive force there that continue to deface the grounds. Maybe shutting it down and using the area for something more productive is in order.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No kids an us younger adults play basketball at rotary park an would like it to stay. New nets would be nice and replacing the double rims with single rims would work better an maybe fence in the whole court an higher so basketballs don't roll into streets or highway

      Delete
    2. Excuse me I meant Makle Park when commenting above.

      Delete
    3. Who does these over priced studies , is it the same people involved in all these useless OVER PRICED studies?

      Delete
  5. How about turning it into a hotel

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hell for 67,000$ how about the borough studys, a public swimming pool???

    ReplyDelete
  7. Why do we spend $67,000 dollars on a study what to do with the parks can't we think on are own what to do with are parks you don't have to be to smart to do that

    ReplyDelete
  8. The study is already in progress, with out the YES VOTE!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Who wants to spend all that money on a study for playgrounds. Holy Trinity is in charge of Janson's Park under the Janson Foundation. Parks and Rec sure like to spend our money. Lower our taxes and it will make us happy.

    ReplyDelete
  10. How can they do that with out a yes vote back door again

    ReplyDelete
  11. If the boro puts one more penny into Makle park somebody is just throwing money away.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Keep spending!! We need to go all out for “Broke”

    ReplyDelete
  13. Why does Pam think she can run all these parks?

    ReplyDelete
  14. There in lies the problem,doesn't think

    ReplyDelete
  15. 67k for a study? I could rebuild all these parks for 67k or less.

    ReplyDelete