Sediment analysis proposed for Tenafly pond project

BY MICHAEL OLOHAN
OF NORTHERN VALLEY PRESS

TENAFLY, N.J. —— A representative from Tenafly Nature Center told the Tenafly Council on Nov. 20 that a sediment chemical analysis on Pfister’s Pond should be considered while still moving ahead on the first phase of pond restoration.
[slideshow_deploy id=’899′]
Andrew Mikesh, vice president of the Tenafly Nature Center board of trustees, said that he hopes the working group coordinating the restoration process – composed of the nature center, borough council and borough engineer – meets before the end of the year to consider next steps to move forward.

“I propose we look at some kind of chemical analysis, parallel to that,” said Mikesh, referring to the approved first phase of fixing a deteriorating control structure and dike rehabilitation.

Council members agreed by consensus to approve $50,000—out of $661,000 appropriated Oct. 24 from the Municipal Open Space Fund—to begin only the first phase of pond restoration.

A sediment chemical analysis would reveal whether any heavy metals or possible toxic contaminants are contained in pond sediment. There are no indications that either are present.

Borough Engineer Andrew Hipolit, Maser Consulting, proposed a five-step plan over two years for restoring Pfister’s Pond on Sept. 26. Hipolit said its $661,000 estimate is “the maximum this would cost.”

Borough Administrator Jewel Thompson-Chin said though $50,000 was approved to be used for the first phase, Maser Consulting must still structure how those funds will be spent.

Mikesh told the council that a couple years ago the nature center drafted a sediment analysis proposal but it was not acceptable to the county. He said that drafting such a proposal with Maser Consulting should be done soon. He also said the sediment analysis cost will not be expensive.

Councilman Daniel Park said the county engineer expressed an interest in possibly taking the dredged sediment from Pfister’s Pond as possible fill in Overpeck Park, potentially saving the borough disposal costs.
[slideshow_deploy id=’899′]
‘…take a deep breath’
Before discussions began on agenda item listed as “Pfister’s Pond Management Plan Implementation Schedule,” Mayor Peter Rustin addressed the council.

“I think what was reported in the newspapers scared a tremendous amount of people,” said Rustin. “All they saw out of the article was we’re going to spend $600,000 to redo the pond,” said Rustin early in the council’s brief pond discussion.

“But I think what was resolved…to move forward with the first step and then take a deep breath and figure out where, if anywhere, we want to go after that,” Rustin added. “Am I correct?” he asked.

Council members Maxim Basch and Mark Zinna immediately assured him he was correct.

Rustin was referring to the approval of a resolution by council to appropriate $661,000 for possible use to restore Pfister’s Pond.

“That money is not spent, it cannot be spent unless this government body decides we’re going to spend it,” emphasized Rustin.
[slideshow_deploy id=’899′]