New Page 1

The Jersey Journal Jan. 29,2001

Waterpark plan draws wrath at public hearing

By Journal staff, Plans for an aquatic center in Liberty State Park were dealt a sharp blow on Saturday during public hearings over the future of a 40-acre swath of land that has been at the center of a raging debate for months. The meeting, which drew hundreds of local residents and elected officials, was held by the state Department of Environmental Protection for people to voice their opinions about three options currently on the table for the area, from Audrey Zapp Drive and Freedom Way along the perimeter to Zapp and Phillip Drive. While the main speakers addressed a crowd of about 300 in an auditorium at the Liberty Science Center, more than 300 others had to listen to the speeches from another room via an audio link. The afternoon hearing was seen by many as essentially a referendum on the controversial waterpark plan, known as "alternative 3." That proposal, which calls for a "high-activity feature" with "water games, rides, sand play and other recreational activities" for an 18-acre soil mound on the park's perimeter, was endorsed by Jersey City Mayor Bret Schundler. But Schundler, who stepped onto the stage to a chorus of boos despite having brought two busloads of supporters to the event, told the crowd that he was not in favor of building a waterpark. "This has never been about a commercial waterpark," Schundler said. "I don't see any need to build a commercial waterpark. The park doesn't need to be self-funded, it doesn't have to raise revenue." "Alternative three" allows for a "public/private partnership" to develop recreational sites and mentions the aquatic center, an ice-skating rink and horse riding facilities as possibilities. It also calls for a series of trails to run around the perimeter. The second plan, "alternative 2," which is supported by the Friends of Liberty State Park, calls for more passive recreation, such as open fields for picnics or playing sports without structured athletic fields, as well as the trails. The other plan, endorsed by the Audubon Society and known as "alternative 1," allows for biking trails but little else, emphasizing the preservation of natural habitats. After Schundler's disavowal of a private waterpark - which he maintained he had never endorsed - no other speakers came out in support of such a facility. During his brief address, Schundler told the emotional crowd that it was the Liberty State Park Development Corp. - which oversees private development in the park - that wanted a waterpark and that opponents of the plan had "mischaracterized" his own views. Critics of Schundler and the Development Corporation's Ylvisaker said the two had changed their positions due to a public outcry against thepark, a charge both men denied. "This is the first I've ever heard of Peter Ylvisaker backing away from private development," said Sam Pesin, president of the Friends group. "And I'm glad that the mayor has retreated from his support for a commercial waterpark." Pesin, who said his group and statewide allies scored a victory with the likely defeat of the waterpark, said he would be amenable toward a public pool or skating rink, provided admission prices were as low as possible. With Schundler and Ylvisaker both agreeing that a waterpark was not advisable, the differences in opinion among the major players in the debate became more difficult to discern. Most of the government officials who spoke seemed to endorse some form of "alternative two," encouraging passive recreation without allowing private development. A public pool or a skating rink met little opposition from those who said they supported that plan. Whatever the shape of the eventual plan, which the committee is expected to present within about a month, most agreed that the waterpark idea was dead. "The main thing that's happened is that the privatized waterpark should be off the table after this meeting," Pesin said.