RED BANK ‘SPRAYGROUND’ PLAN UNDER FIRE
A proposal for a water-shooting playground at Red Bank’s little-used Bellhaven Nature Area has raised hackles among environmentalists. (Click to enlarge)
Wednesday night’s meeting of the Red Bank Council could be a water-balloon fight of sorts.
Members of the Environmental Commission, an advisory group, say they were alarmed to learn recently that the borough Parks & Rec department is considering Bellhaven Nature Area, a wetland preserve created just eight years ago, as a possible location for a ‘sprayground,’ a play area that enables kids to get deliriously soaked by nozzles built into fixed apparatus.
Lou DiMento the lone remaining commission member who was involved in the original preservation effort and others say they were shocked to learn that the town might pursue a $250,000 Monmouth County Open Spaces grant, which it would have to match, in order to build the sprayground.
“That stunned us,” especially after the borough government told the commission that it couldn’t come up with a few hundred dollars for a sign to designate the nature area, nestled against the Swimming River at the western end of Locust Avenue, DiMento said.
Memone Crystian, who heads Parks & Rec, said the idea for the sprayground arose as part of an effort to create a new play area in the upper West Side. Many resident children have no access to transportation and no one to accompany them across busy Shrewsbury Avenue to Count Basie Fields, a mile or so away, where they might play, she said.
“I think it’s criminal for kids to grow up on the river but only be able to see it through the reeds,” she said. “I remember being a mother with two young children and a third on the way, and not having a place to go with the children.”
Installing the splashground at Bellhaven, she said, would also bring kids down to the river, enhancing their understanding of nature.
The sprayground, she said, would require the installation of a rubberized platform and fixed tubing from which water would spray. There’s one in Dorbrook Park in Colts Neck, operated by the Monmouth County Parks System, and one in Long Branch, at the eastern end of Broadway.
Crystian distributed an email Monday night asking people concerned about children’s recreation to come out to counter opposition to the plan. She said she’s only looking for a “fair discussion” of the idea.
Proponents of the plan also say it would help drive out drug use, drinking and illicit sex alleged to occur in the nature area. At the August 2 council meeting, during which talk of a grant application first became public, Mayor Pasquale Menna said the area is so overgrown with phragmites that police are unable to easily monitor the site.
But the nature preserve has never gotten the level of maintenance that the borough promised it would give when the area was set aside as an open-air learning center, complete with displays illustrating the workings of tidal basins and such, DiMento said. And the need for maintenance won’t vanish because of the presence of a playground, he said.
The commission’s response to the grant proposal, in the form of a resolution: build it at the former borough incinerator site if and when that West Sunset Avenue location is transformed into a park. Meantime, come up with a clear plan for maintaining Bellhaven.
Here’s the commission resolution:
The EC recommends that the Borough maintains Bellhaven as a nature area with the addition of river access. Maintenance requires a written plan that is regularly implemented to control invasive species within the circular path and at sites along the river for river access and views as well as security. The EC further recommends that the future Sunset Park would be a more appropriate location to include a spray pad for children of the West Side along with other active and passive recreational opportunities.
The spraryground idea has riled not only the environmental community, but others who see it as a waste of taxpayer money. West Side resident Freddie Boynton is organizing a September 13 community meeting to discuss the proposal, among other issues.
“People bringing their kids down here? It’s a damn swamp,” Boynton said Tuesday. “It’s the dumbest damn idea I ever heard.”
Here’s the council agenda: 8-24-11draftagenda
Aug 24, 2011 @ 09:19:54
I like this idea. Ideas like this and the work that the Safe Routes Group has done are going to help make our town more attractive to young families.
Aug 24, 2011 @ 10:43:16
I agree that a spray park is a good idea in theory, but in practice Bellhaven is a poor location. Like a lot of things, the three most important things about a spray park are location, location, location. Compare the locations of the examples site in the article above (Dorbrook Park and Broadway in LB) to the location of Bellhaven. The resident quoted above is correct, it’s a swamp. Well, close enough, it’s “wetlands”. The best use for these wetlands is habitat for animals, and a place for children to learn about the importance of wetland habitats. A spray park would require a much better location.
Aug 24, 2011 @ 11:14:50
Still running this project thru my head but definitely more positives than negatives.
Regarding the “location, location, location” (compared to other towns), such
a sprayground is being targeted for Red Bankers. Dorbook is a county park and all county is invited. Having a less inviting location to those out of towners will keep it more so limited.
Maybe both concepts can be incorporated with signage/environmental education along the perimeter of the spray park along with better maintenance/upkeep.
Let’s put both entities in a room and lay out all the cards, I bet a “win, win” can be proposed and created.
Aug 24, 2011 @ 11:29:27
I tried to bring my kid to the nature area there a few times. But really, I felt kind of odd pushing a stroller with a machete in my hand, which is what I needed to chop my way through the paths and actually see the river once I got there. So I stopped going. I don’t care about a splash park either way, but the real problem is the phragmites. If they were somehow eradicated, it would make the place way more inviting. And it does seem to be ideal for a kayak launch.
Aug 24, 2011 @ 13:48:27
As an active environmentalist and a mother i would hope that people would see that Bellhaven should be a natural area where it can be used as a tool for an outside classroom . It is difficult right now to get around out there but with proper control of the invasive species it could be a great place to take primary students to study. A spray ground is a great idea though that particular spot makes absolutely no sense we need to protect the little bit of natural habitats we have left.
Aug 24, 2011 @ 15:49:08
Thank you for posting your thoughts, Laura. I agree wholeheartedly.
I didn’t know about Bellhaven until I read the article here. Then I went down to take a look. It definitely is overgrown with fragmities and wild grape vine, but it was a pleasure to walk the paths, read the educational signs, smell the slight scent of salt in the air, feel the warmth of sun beams filtering through the reeds.
There are a lot of places for recreation now and so little left of the natural world. Preservation of those natural places should take first priority. They give us a chance to reconnect with or stay connected with our environment, to other living creatures, the wind, the water and the earth. They keep us tuned into the rythyms of our natural heritage and give us the chance to learn about and enjoy what nature provides.
Aug 24, 2011 @ 21:10:34
I’d like to see how much of the trail space the sprayground takes up.
The trail seems to take a sharp turn right away.
So if the sprayground is near the street, I’d think you wouldn’t even notice it after walking a few yards along the trail.
Although the park is open to all kids I assume that spot was chosen due to its proximity to the Locust Ave. public housing.
I understand the noise from a sprayground will detract from the enjoyment of this natural area.
But I don’t understand why the wetlands have to be “protected” from it.
It’s clean cold water coming out and not so dirty, soapless water going down a drain.
Will an environmentalist please tell me specifically how a spraypark could damage these wetlands?
Aug 25, 2011 @ 08:13:27
GREAT idea. Make this happen!
Aug 25, 2011 @ 09:10:14
GREAT idea. Make this happen ! …At a different location. Consider the “park” at the corner of Shrewsbury and Drs. Parker Blvd. opposite the church. The nature area should stay a nature area and developed as such.
Aug 25, 2011 @ 14:46:50
I live on the edge of this neighborhood (Bridge Avenue), and I’ve never been down to Bellhaven, but frankly, in my opinion, the entire Locust/Leighton Avenue area has a bad criminal element by which I don’t feel particularly welcome. As such, I avoid the entire area and certainly wouldn’t bring children there…for any reason.
Aug 25, 2011 @ 15:49:38
I have done many “trash clean ups” as a volunteer and the trash that is left at kiddie sites will be an issue. The debris left by parents and children who do not pick up is not insignificant. If the park has not been maintain previously do you really believe trash/littering will be dealt with properly? This will impact the wetland lands negatively as it would any nature area. The noise issue will also have a negative impact on the enviroment. A child focused park is a good idea but at the proper location, out in the open, well monitored and away from any street traffic; all of which the Bellhaven Nature Park-Preserve is not.
Aug 25, 2011 @ 19:44:57
Tamara,
Thanks for you response.
I can see there will be an increase in trash with that use and that would cause a problem.
But a fence should keep most of the trash within that area.
Trash hanging off wetlands flora certainly looks bad, but I don’t think it threatens them.
It’s a dead end so it doesn’t get a lot of traffic.
And Sunset has 2 big problems, it’s not near ready to host this facility. It will also serve fewer children since it’s all single family houses, with no concentrated public housing like Locust has.
If an alternate location is chosen it should be where there’s a heavy concentration of needy kids.
Aug 26, 2011 @ 20:54:22
There is a myrid of articles and factual information out there that clearly states the negative impact of trash on a wetland ecosystem. The following is just a brief synopsis of such negative effects.
-degradation of surface waters and beach areas
-physical injuries to humans and life threatening interference with their activities
-ecological damage due to the presence of plastics and other debris
-alterations to natural ecosystems
-entanglement of birds, fish and mammals
-ingestion of plastics by marine animals (Clean ships, Clean ports, Clean oceans, 1995)
In regards to the park being located on a dead end and therefore the traffic being a non issue you really need to be a resident of the area to fully understand the traffic flow. The traffic which obviously is not as heavy as Shrewsbury or Leighton is still an issue to contend with as there are many residents who traverse Locust Ave. regularly and at full speed.
The Park/preserve on Locust is a preserve – to protect and safeguard. Its purpose is not as a recreational facility but an eduacational facility -period.