The draft plan for the redesign of College Gardens Park is available here and here as a set of PDF files.
Summary of September 21 SWM / Park Meeting
About 100 people attended the City-run meeting. This includes about 10 City
Staff and 3 Contractors. The contractors in attendance were from John Slater
Associates (park design) and Tim Scheuler, CPJ Associates (SWM pond design).
The meeting was opened by Marylou Berg, Assistant to the City Manager. She
introduced members of the SWM / College Gardens Park Task Force. Marylou then
introduced John Slater, the park designer.
Mr. Slater enumerated his experiences in designing outdoor spaces of all kinds
including parks. He and his associate Steve, ran through a computer presentation.
First there were Power Point slides showing pictures of the College Gardens
Park, then slide shows showing park amenities and then pictures of other similar
Storm Water Management / Park facilities, mostly in and around Columbia, Maryland.
Throughout this part of the presentation, he used the pictures to analyze
the College Gardens Park from a design perspective, keeping in mind the design
and layout of the SWM pond. He related three rules of designing an outdoor
space: (1) water runs down hill, (2) water runs down hill, and (3) pay attention
to the first two rules in your park design.
Mr. Slater then displayed the proposed park design. He ran through a Computer
Assisted Design (CAD) presentation of the proposal. This was a very effective
way to present the design because he could zoom in and out to show detail
or to show overview, as he needed. He showed two kinds of views: (1) a from-above
view, and (2) elevation views. (Note: Both these views are available from
the City Website and the CGCA website as PDF files. You can use the Acrobat
reader to zoom in and zoom out. They are each about 1Mb each to download.)
The audience allowed Mr. Slater to go on for a while, but then asked many
questions. Some of the questions challenged part of the design (or reasons
behind part of the design) and some questions were for clarification. Mr.
Slater, Tim Scheuler, and City Staff fielded the questions. A question was
asked about budgeting, mainly how much is it going to cost, and who is going
to pay for it. Burt Hall, head of the City's Recreation and Parks Department
estimated the total cost between $500,000 and $1,000,000. A good part of it
would be paid by the SWM fund the City has, part by the school system contribution
in return for their use of the SWM pond, and the remainder by the City Capital
budget.
Another question was about the length of disruption to the park. There were
several parts of the answer: basically it takes 2 months to physically build
a new SWM facility, but it would take about a year to totally redo the park.
For example, the City would want to reseed the grass, and would have to keep
people off of it for a while.
Towards the end of the meeting, Marylou Berg closed the questioning and very
briefly talked about the remaining process. This involved remaining design,
permitting process, and getting the project in the next city budget. She noted
that people should send in their comment forms by October 1 that were available
at the meeting. (Note: As of the time of this writing, September 23, 2006,
the link on the City's website for the comment form, was not working properly.
A message has been sent to the City.)
Mark Pierzchala, President of the College Gardens Civic Association then spoke
briefly. He noted that the neighborhood was caught by surprise in December
2005 when the use of the park for a SWM facility was once again brought forward.
He also noted that sometimes you just have to get over these things and get
on with the process. Pierzchala related how everything was revisited by the
Task Force including creative solutions in the park, the use of the forest
preserve, doing everything, and doing nothing. The SWM consultant was hired
to in part to reevaluate the work of the Watts Branch Study that was finished
in 2001. Through potential designs and cost analyses, the conclusion was without
question: a SWM pond in the park is by far the most effective in terms of
stormwater control and is by far the least expensive per unit of control.
He then noted that there was another part of the equation, which is with the
park itself, which was the subject of this very meeting. He praised the work
of John Slater and Associates, and said they did a wonderful job. Pierzchala's
conclusion was that we can get stormwater management and a better park at
the same time.
The response from the attendees seemed to be overwhelmingly positive to the
new park design, and that the City and consultants have accommodated the residents'
desires as expressed through the park surveys, number one of which is to maintain
as many trees as possible. It is impossible to relate the visual aspects of
the designs in this summary. You should download the PDFs to get a better
idea of the proposal. If you have concerns, please put them down on the comment
sheets and send them in.
Summarized by Mark Pierzchala, President, College Gardens Civic Association
Return to CGCA Home Page