We are currently engaged in a Quarry Redevelopment Process. Most members of the public who have spoken out oppose the plan presented at a public meeting on October 24. Some have suggested that the land be acquired and used as open space or a park. It is appropriate, I believe, to revisit the concept plan I designed in 2004 called Quarry Park and Lakeview Village>
At that time I estimated that the post-quarry, residential R-3 zoning would yield 34 lots suitable for building large single family houses. The value of a development right for a single family house was roughly equal to the value of two development rights for upscale townhouses. Therefore, I proposed that the developer have the option to build 68 townhouses. The 2004 concept plan shows townhouses in 4 rows of 17 each.
There have been some topography changes and recent estimates are that R-3 zoning will yield about 40 lots suitable for single family houses. I don’t have any reason to change the 2-for-1 ratio, so I now propose 80 townhouses.
I believe that the current R-3 zoning is not defensible in court. I also believe that, with an option to build townhouses, it is defensible.
The homeowners association for these units will not want the work and responsibility for maintaining the large lake and surrounding land. Therefore, I believe today, as I did in 2004, that the developer will be willing to transfer the lake, land, and maintenance responsibility to the township at no cost. This will become Quarry Park.
Park maintenance will have costs. Because they will use the park and benefit from it, I propose that the homeowners pay half of these costs.
The lake will fill from precipitation. The surface elevation is expected to stabilize at the elevation of the surrounding groundwater table. But circulation of water between the lake and groundwater will be minimal. The lake will be almost a closed system and pose unique challenges.
Knowledgeable people believe that it will be possible to manage this system, and maintain good water quality, via use of aerators and prevention of harmful substances from entering the lake. However, it will be necessary to have an ongoing water testing program and people who will monitor the results and take appropriate actions.
I recommend a Lake Management Advisory Committee (LMAC) modeled after the current Deer Management Advisory Committee on which I served for many years. The LMAC will be composed of volunteers who have a general interest in the environment, or specific interests in lakes or fish, or who just want to serve their community. There follow some examples of its tasks and responsibilities:
- During the rehabilitation hearings representatives of the township and the quarry agreed that the lake will require mechanical aeration to maintain an adequate level of dissolved oxygen (DO). But they did not agree on the size of the aeration pumps. Pumps will be provided as part of the rehabilitation program. LMAC will monitor the DO and make recommendations on what to do if the DO is too low.
- The elevation of the lake is estimated to stabilize at 220 feet, and current thinking is to design lakeside features and facilities for a slightly lower elevation–say 218 feet–, and to pump the extra water to the Passaic River to maintain 218 feet. The LMAC will monitor lake levels and advise on the pumping plan.
- We expect the lake to support a community of fish. Because it will be an isolated water body these fish must be deliberately introduced (aka stocked). The LMAC will monitor the fish and overall biotic community and make recommendations for maintaining and improving its health.
The LMAC will have a small budget, that will be a part of the overall park maintenance budget.
Because the pumps mentioned above do not have to be operated 24/7, they will be excellent candidates to use on-site generated solar power.
I propose a bathing beach and swimming activities that will be managed and self-financed like Pleasant Valley Pool. Think a Beach Commission–like the present Pool Commission– composed of non-paid volunteers, and beach users who will pay annual membership fees.
I propose that the LMAC and Beach Commission be separate agencies, because their responsibilities, and probably their interests, will be quite different. They will, of course, need to cooperate and share information.
In 2004 I thought that public use of the lake for non-motorized watercraft–canoes, kayaks, paddle boards, rowboats for fishing– could be unsupervised, so long as people wore life jackets. I grew up near the Delaware River, and people used it at their own risk.
I have now been persuaded that, in today’s world, boating activity will have to be managed. Therefore, I propose that this work be bundled with the Beach Commission.
Township residents, who pay membership fees, can enjoy active uses inside the lake. Other residents can enjoy fishing from the edge. Or they may walk, run, or bike near the lake or in the rest of the park. Or they may just stand or sit and enjoy the scene.
All above is possible if township government pays half of the annual park maintenance cost.
Critical caveat: The township should not accept transfer of any quarry land before steps have been taken to make it safe for public use and chemical tests have shown that lake water quality will be suitable for fishing and swimming.
Bill Allen, 12-07-17