    [From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

    PASSAIC RIVER RESTORATION MASTER PLAN:

         EAST RUTHERFORD/WALLINGTON

                   DRAFT

           PASSAIC RIVER COALITION

        An Urban Watershed Association
            246 Madisonville Road
       Basking Ridge, New Jersey 07920

                 l!. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
                 COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
                 2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
                 CHARLESTON, SC 29405-2413

                September 1984

                  Property of CSC Library

                          ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

    This report was prepared under contract with the New Jersey

    Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Coastal

    Resources, Bureau of Coastal Planning and Development with the

    financial assistance of the U.S. Department of Commerce,

    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office 6f

    Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, under the provisions of

    the federal Coastal Zone Management Act, P.L. 92-583, as

    amended.

    Preparation of the Restoration Master Plan for the Boroughs of

    East Rutherford and Wallington is by Daniel J. Van Abs, Technical

    Director of the Passaic River Coalition, with the assistance of:

                The Citizens Advisory Committee for
                      East Rutherford and Wallington

                Councilman Edward Lisovicz, Wallington

               Mrs. Lillian Sesselmann, East Rutherford

                Passaic River Restoration Project Steering Committee
                      Robert J. Myers, Chairman
               Raymond Gadomski, Historian, Wallington
               Stanley John Lacz, AEP Associates
                Cartogrphy - Mary Marinaro
                             Robert Pergolizzi
                            Daniel Van Abs

                           PAkSSAIC RErVE CCLITTON

    2,9  MADtSONVILLE RMOAD.  AS(ING RIIDGE. N J O7P20 * PWONIE (201) 16-.755sC

                                      Board of Trustees

                                           1983-84

          Chairman:                          Robert J. Myers, North Arlington;
                                           Chairman, Passaic River Restoration Committee

          First Vice Chairman:               Jo-Ann C. Dixon, Glen Ridge; Director Alumni
                                           Relations, New Jersey Institute of Technology

          Second Vice Chairman:              Eon. John E. Ewing, New Jersey Senate, Peapack

          Secretery:                         Betty A. Little, Basking Ridge:  Coordinator,
                                           Fund Raising, Passaic River Coalition

          Treasurer:                         Joseph J. Filippone, Basking Ridge; Manager,
                                           Quality Control, Associated Technology, Inc.,
                                           Clifton

          At Large:                          Herbert J. Cannon, P.E., Chatham Borough
                                           Engineer; Chairman, Passaic Valley Ground Water
                                           Protection Committee

                                          Andrew L. Cobb, III, Madison

                                           Ella F. Filippone, Ph.D., Basking Ridge;
                                           Executive Administrator, Passaic River Coalition

                                          Donald W. Haberstroh, Chatham Borough

                                           Prof. Frank S. Kelland, West Caldwell; Depart-
                                          ment of Earth Sciences and Geography, Montcilair
                                           State College, Upper Montclair
                                           Arthur F. Loux, CLU, CDC, Applications Systems
                                           Manager, Mutual Benefit Life Ins, Co., Newark

                                           Alfred Porro, Jr., Esq., Lyndhurst

                                           Donald A. Rudy, Ph.D., Berkeley Heights; Bell
                                           Telephone Laboratories, Whippany

                                           Kermit Von der Beiden, Millington; Regional
                                           Vice President, First National State Bank of
                                           South Jersey

           Attorney:                          Walter Dewey, Esq., Paterson

           Bank:                              First National State Bank of South Jersey,
                                           Basking Ridge

          Accountant:                        Morristown Accounting Services, Inc., P.A.,
                                           22 Maple Avenue, Morristown, N.J. 07960

           Incorporated:  1971; 501 (c) 3 corporation
           IRS Tax Exemption Number: 22-1945455

                           CONTENTS

    Chapter I:  Introduction                                   5
           II:  Planning Principles                            9
          III:  Historical Overview                           15
           IV:  Special Zoning                                30
           V: Projects
                 The Pathway                                 34
                 Park Facilities                             43
                 Design Planning                             49
                 Project Phasing 49
          VI: Permitting and Licensing
                 State                                       52
                 Tideland Statutes                           61
                 County                                      63
                  Federal                                     64
         VII:  Costs                                         66
        VIII:  Funding                                       69

    Appendix A: Consistency with Coastal Resource and
                 Development Policies
            B: Narrative Discussion of the Riverfront Area
             C: Riverside Property Owners and Values
            D: Recreational Inventory
            E: Marina Design
             F: Pathway Corridor Design
             G: Permit Application Forms
            H: Wildlife Studies
            I: Green Acres
            J: National Endowment for the Arts
            K: Project Maps

                           I NTRODUCTI ON

    Introduction
         The Passaic River Restoration Project came about as the result
    of an effort by the Passaic River Coalition and the municipalities
    of Rutherford, Lyndhurst, North Arlington and Kearny to prevent
    further degradation of the Lower Passaic Basin. In the surnmer
    of 1980, because of a ruptured interceptor line, the Passaic Valley
    Sewerage Commissioners sought and obtained permission from the
    State of New Jersey to discharge approximately 29 million gallons
    per day of raw sewage into the Passaic River at Paterson. Efforts
    by the Coalition to prevent the sewage discharge from taking place
    failed, and two facts became clear. First there appeared to be
    a belief by some of the participants in the hearings that the Lower
    Passaic should be written off and that no one cared what was done
    to it. Second, very few members of the public attended the hear-
    ings to protest what was about to happen.

         The Passaic River Coalition is an urban watershed association
    that concerns itself with the environmental well being of the
    Passaic River Basin. It has been in existence since 1969 and
    counts among its members the municipalities of Wallington, East
    Rutherford, Rutherford, 'Lyndhurst, North Arlington, Kearny and
    Harrison. Located in Basking Ridge, the Coalition has been an
    effective voice in the environmental affairs of the 935 square
    mile basin.

         Shortly after the Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners com-
    pleted their repairs on the interceptor, the four municipalities
    of Rutherford, Lyndhurst, North Arlington and Kearny, sought
    the assistance of the Passaic River Coalition in developing a
    strategy that would discourage further insult to the Lower
    Passaic River.  The Coalition helped the municipalities to obtain

                                 -5-

    a planning grant from the New Jersey Department of Environmental
    Protection, Division of Coastal Resources. The grant was to be
    used, for the planning of a recreational corridor that would
    extend from Rutherford to Kearny and would be centered around a
    trail that could be used by bicyclists, joggers and walkers.
    The trail was to be laid out along the river wherever possible,

    and was to provide public access to the river. It was to be the
    central feature of a Restoration Master Plan (RMP). The RMP
    was completed in November of 1982 and was accepted by the four
    municipal ities soon thereafter. Since that time, efforts in these
    towns have focused on developing detailed designs for parks,

    fundraising and implementation.
         In 1983 a uiumber of additional communities requested that

    the Passaic River Restoration Project be extended to include
    their areas, and that the Passaic River Coalition assist in plan-
    ning and implementation efforts. May 7, 1983, was declared
    Passaic River Restoration Day by the Governor and Legislature.
    On that day, Harrison, East Rutherford and Wallington officially
    joined the PRRP. While Harrison had completed most of its
    planning phase, the Passaic River Coalition sought planning funds
    to extend the Restoration Master Plan north of Rutherford through
    East Rutherford and Wallington. In late 1983, the New Jersey
    Division of Coastal Resources indicated that a second grant would
    be made to the Passaic River Coalition for that purpose.

         The contract for East Rutherford and Wallington was signed
    with the State by the Passaic River Coalition in the spring of
    1984. The first phase of work was the data collection phase,
    which involved mapping the area and delineation of the Division
    of Coastal Resources area of jurisdiction as well as the areas
    of special interest, such as wetlands, floodplains, historical
    sites and so on. In addition, A lot by lot analysis of the
    existing land use was done and a narrative report analyzed the
    suitability of the area for the planned project. (Appendix B).

                                 -6-

                During this period and throughout the remainder of the pro-
           ject, frequent meetings were held by the Coalition staff with a
           committee of citizens who had expressed a desire to be a part

           of the planning process. With the help of this committee a
           preliminary route for the pathway was planned and proposals for
           the acquisition and development of parks were developed.

                During the summer of 1984, the Coalition continued to work
           on the final Master Plan, developing maps which showed the trail
           routing, as well as areas for possible acquisition, landscaping
           possibilities and various special projects that might further
           enhance the restoration of the riverfront. At each step, the
           Citizens Committee has been brought into the planning process
           to the maximum extent possible. The exchange has been mutual.
           Members of the committee have advised us of local activities
           that may affect the plan.

           Plan Features
                Projects within the plan are organized as discrete elements
           located about a multi-purpose trail designed to encourage access
           to the river. The trail also serves as a unifying factor in
           the overall plan. Each of the projects is described in some
           detail in a subsequent chapter, but a brief description of the
           general classes of projects is appropriate here.
                Pocket parks are planned in Wallington in several locations.
           In some cases the pocket parks may involve the acquisition of
           land; in other cases the land is already publicly owned. In
           virtually all cases a greater or lesser degree of landscaping is
           required to beautify and screen the proposed park. Pocket parks
           are meant to be places for passive recreation -- small, quiet
           areas for reflection and observation of the riverine environment.

    0                                     -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7-

    The designs will tend to discourage the use of the parks for play-
    grounds and picnic areas for large groups. Thoughtful landscape
    architecture will be employed to screen out the noise and business
    of the urban background. Public safety and security will be a
    factor in each design.
         A Marina is planned in East Rutherford, with a smaller boating
    facility proposed for Wallington. In both instances land acquisition

    will be~-necessary. In the case of East Rutherford, the acquisition
    of a facility that was formerly a marine facility is suggested.
    Adequate landscaping and parking will be planned into the projects.
    The smaller marina will be little more than a ramp with one or
    more floating docks and adequate turn-around and parking space.
    The East Rutherford facility is larger and can include more
    extensive facilities that are conducive to or consistent with the
    recreational use of the land.
         The second stage of the study involved the selection of the
    individual projects, the plotting of the trail and the design
    of various facilities. In addition, during this phase, attention
    was given regulatory problems, permitting and the interface with
    federal a-ad county agencies, notably the Army Corps of Engineers,
    the Bergen County Planning Board, and the Bergen County Parks
    Department. Contact with the Army Corps of Engineers resulted
    from the probable requirement for bulkheading and bank stabilization
    at various points along the shoreline. Contact with the Planning
    Board and the Public Works Department dealt with the utilization
    of the county highways as a temporary part of the bikeway.
         Maps showing the principal features of the plan and some
    alternative routes for the trail were prepared from previously
    submitted base maps, and became a part of the second stage work
    product. These and the draft Restoration Master Plan were sub-
    mitted to the N~. J. Division of Coastal Resources in July, 1984.
    This marks the present stage of development of the RMP.

                 Chapter II           PLANNING PRINCIPLES

                      The Restoration Master Plan (RHIP)was developed under a set
                 of controlling assumptions. First, a desirable goal is to draw
                 attention to the value of the entire river and its adjacent lands
                 as a community resource by encouraging use of the river and its
                 lands in specific areas over a'time horizon of many years.

                      Second, present uses, detrimental to the river and its pro-
                 cesses must be eliminated over some period of years, and no
                 aspect of the Restoration Master Plan can be detrimental to the
                 river.

                      Third, some form of public and private collaboration is
                 required to realize the restoration of the lower Passaic, and
                 municipalities, individuals and business concerns must act in
                 concert to provide the means of accomplishing the restoration.

                      Given these general assumptions, the planners operated
                 under eleven (11) Principles of Planning. They are;
                      1. The Passaic River will be the focus of the Restoration

                         Master Plan (RMP);
                      2. No project will be recommended in the RM? if it poses
                         a threat to the river or its processes;
                      3. Projects that are reliant on the river will be given
                         priority;
                      4. The river will be viewed as an entire system as will
                         the Restoration Project;
                      5. Implementation of the RMP will be incremental, with some
                         steps feasible immediately, others on two-, five- and
                         ten-year time horizons;
                      6. The RM? is open ended because changing circumstances and
    *                    ~~~~~~needs may change the products of the plan;

                                               -9-

        7. Public access to the river will be encouraged and in
           any new development provision will be made for public
           access;
         8. The linear nature of this PMP, that is, the linking of
            modes of interest by a walkWay/bikeway, is an essential
           feature of the plan;
        9. Park furniture and plantings will be employed to enhance

           open land for viewing areas;
        10. The ecological integrity of the land, the water and the
           zone where they interface will be preserved; and
        11. Existing facilities and spaces will be used initially

           wherever possible, and the acquisitions of property con-
            sidered a long-term strategy.

    1.) The Passaic River will be the focus of the RM:P.
              The degradation of the lower Passaic has been, at
         least in part, the result of the belief that no one cares

         about this area. Because this portion of the river is
         tidal, materials from above and below the area may be
        deposited in the study area or may be transported back and
         forth several times. One of the factors that led to the
         initiation of the Restoration Project was the summer of
         1980's discharge of more than a half billion gallons of
         sewage into the Passaic River at Paterson.
              By drawing attention to the river, demonstrating in

         a tangible way that communities on the lower Passaic do care
         about their river and are investing in the waterfront as
         a community resource, more pressure can be brought to bear
         for the cleaning up of the river in other locations. The
         RMP takes as its guiding principle, therefore, a turning
         of attention to the river. It is after all, the original
         linear element that links together the parts of the study
         area. The river is still the unifying element.

                                  -10-

    2.)  No project will be recommended in the RM  if it poses a
         danger to the river or .its processes.
              This principle is consistent with the primacy of the
         river as a focal point of the RMP-and with the Clean Water
         Act. Each project recommended. in the Master Plan will be
         evaluated on the basis of its effect on the river and
        weighed against its value to the community. If a project

        will damage ecologically sensitive areas fauna, or will tend
         to further degrade the river, it will not be recommended.
         Structural modifications to the riverbank will not be
         encouraged in the RKP.
    3.) Projects reliant on the river will be given priority.
             Wherever possible, projects that involve the active
         or passive use of the river itself will be given priority
         in the Master Plan. Active uses include boating and
         fishing. Viewing is a passive use as would be attending
         a riverside performance, etc. Wherever possible, on each
         time horizon, those projects directly involving use of
         the river will be given priority in the RMIP.
    4.) The river will be viewed as an entire system, as will the
         restoration project.
              Since viewing the river can be an attractive pass time
         if the opposite bank is attractive and if the water flowing
         by is aesthetically pleasing. The RMP will include measures
         to attain these objectives through public participation.
        We will, in addition, seek to motivate other communities
         to undertake restoration projects similar to this one.
         Since projects encompassed within this plan will not
         further degrade the river and may in fact tend to improve
         the river quality, the Restoration will afford some pro-

         tection for downstream communities.

              Similarly, the projects that are considered in the plan
         are designed to serve the municipalities, and each of the
         parts is designed as a piece of an integrated whole. They
         are designed to serve all municipalities as part of a
         recreational and cultural system.
    5.) Implementation of the FMP will be incremental with some
         steps feasible immediately, others on two-, five- and ten-
         year time horizons.
              The plan calls for the implementation of several
         projects. Some of these tan be accomplished within a very
         short time horizon; others may require a great many years
         for completion. Placing of signs delineating the walkway/
         bikeway could be done in a matter of a few months, where
         the trail coincides'with an existing paved area or public
         street. On the other hand, acquisition and development of
         a major piece of private property might take many years.
         Completion of the walkway/bikeway might take 10 years or
        more.
    6.) The RM? is open-ended because changing circumstances and
        needs may change the products of the plan.
             While currently the RM? is made up of many projects,
         new projects may be added or substituted for those presently
         in the plan. This technique is consistent with the concept
         of the river as a "living" system that changes over the
         years. What is agreed upon now in the RMIP should be con-
         sidered a starting point with the capacity to change to meet
        new circumstances.
    7.)  Public access to the river will be encouraged and in any
        new development, provision will be made for public access.
             Public access to the river is a key element in the
        RMP not only for public areas such as parks and marinas,
         but also where new commercial, industrial or public service
         facilities will be developed in the future.

                                -12-

    0              ~~~~8.')  The linear nature of the RNP, that is the linkage of N.odes
                        of interest by the walkway/bikeway, is an essential feature
                        of the RH?.
                             A principle objective of the RH? is to provide a route
                        by which one can enjoy walking, running or bicycling near
                        the river. In some instances there may be several routes,
                        where, for example, the terrain is appropriate for walking
                        but not for bicycling. In some instances, in order to
                        bypass an area where bicycling is not permitted or is not
                        appropriate for other reasons, the bicycle trail may depart
                        some distance from the river, but will always return to
                        the river at a site where there is access to the water's
                        edge. Where we believe that there is a safety hazard and
                        no suitable alternative route can be used, the RHP may
                        recommend that the trail be discontinued until a route can
                        be arranged.
                   9.) Park furniture and plantings will be employed to enhance
                        open space for viewing areas.
                             Viewing areas will be equipped and landscaped in such
                        a way as to focus attention on the river. Each area will
                        have a somewhat different'theme, but in all cases, the river
                        will serve as the unifying theme. Where interesting vege-
                        tation, geomorphological features or historic sites are
                        present or nearby, appropriate signs will be provided.
                  10.) The ecological integrity of the land, water and their
                        interface zone will be preserved.
                             With any kind of development, there may be a negative
                        or positive impact on the ecology of the area. A basic
                        planning principle of the RM? is that negative impacts will
                        be minimized. Stands of unique or unusual vegetation will
                        be preserved. Areas inhabited by or frequented by water-
                        fowl will be preserved. Each prospect will be weighed as

                                                -13-

       to its value to the community, its possible impact on the
      riverine ecology and the availability of suitable alterna-
       tive sites. Landscaping will be used to improve the ecolo-
      gical values of open spaces.
    11)Existing facilities and open spaces will be utilized wherever
      possible, and the acquisition of property will be considered
      as a long-term strategy.
           Many paved paths, parks, and publicly-owned spaces
       exist that can serve as the sites for viewing areas,
      recreational facilities and as segments of the walkway/
       bikeway. Other pieces of property are privately held and
      would make useful additions to the project. Strategies
       for the acquisition of these properties are included in
       the R14P as are plans for their development. It will be
       recommended that each municipality alter its official map
       to show those properties that the municipality may wish
       to acquire. Condemnation is not considered to be an
       appropriate strategy except in the most extreme circumstances.

                               -14-

    Chapter III:

                       HISTORICAL SUMMARY()

    Native Americans and the Dutch
         The earliest inhabitants of the Passaic River's east bank
    were Delaware Indians. The Delaware were a subgroup of the great
    Algonquin linguistic family whose tribes settled most of the
    northeastern United States. The Delaware populated the area
    between present-day New York State and Delaware. In their own
    language, they were the Lenape, or "original people."~

         Three major subdivisions of the Lenape settled in New Jersey.
    Northernmost were the Minsi, the group which lived along the
    lower stretches of the Passaic. The Lenape were further divided
    into sachendoms. The Hackensack Indians were a Lenape sachendom

    which inhabited the lands just west of the Hudson River. One of
    their leaders, Oratamn, was instrumental in making peace with the
    Dutch in the middle of the seventeenth century.

         The Lenape are classified as a "semi-nomadic"' people.
    However, under normal circumstances they remained in permanent
    village settlements for years at a time.  2Cliff overhangs and
    rack formations along the banks of rivers and streams often pro-
    vided the Lenape with shelters. More permanent settlements
    consisted of one-family wigwams centered around a community
    Big House.

         Although much archaeological evidence may have been obscured
    by intensive development, a map illustrating known Le~nape village
    archeological sites suggests that few permanent settlements

    existed between the Passaic and Hackensack Rivers.  3Semi-permanent
    shelters may have lain along the Passaic itself, but the Hackensack
    marshes prohibited more permanent construction in that area.

                               -15-

         The Lenape were a peaceful farming people. Widespread
    burning of woodlands around the villages created irregularly

    patterned fields for cultivation of crops.  4The primary crops
    were maize, beans and squash. Other agricultural foodstuffs

    may have included grapes, plums and maple sugar. 5The Lenape
    supplemented their farming with hunting and fishing. Stone
    fishing traps were used along the Passaic River near Wallington,

    with Indians in canoes driving fish to the traps during high
    tide by beating the water.6

         First contact between the Dutch and the ILenape occurred
    soon after Henry Hudson's voyage of 1609. Still, little con-tact,,
    commercial or otherwise, occurred between the two people, as the
    Dutch showed little interest in New Jersey during the early years

    of New Amsterdam. Though survey parties were dispatched, no real
    attempt was made to settle eastern New Jersey until the establish-
    ment of the p-atroonships in 1629. A community was established by
    the Dutch at Bergen, but the lack of a good port and the Indian
    massacres of 1638-45 prevented the development of strong town
    centers. Political instability and the inability of the Dutch
    to get along with the Lenape outweighed the economic advantages
    of eastern New Jersey. Ironically, it was not until the English
    gained control of the region in 1664 that the Dutch became a
    major force in the growth and settlement of New Jersey. What
    became Bergen County was largely settled by the Dutch in its
    early years.7

    The English Colony
         When New Jersey passed into English hands, the Duke of York
    deeded the state to two proprietors, Lord John Berkeley and
    Sir George Carteret. These proprietors immediately parcelled
    out land under their control a-ad began the slow development of
    New Jersey. Colonization of the Passaic River basin spread
    northward from the English settlement at Newark, and westward
    from the Dutch communities at Bergen, Pavonia, and Communipaw.

                                -16 -

    The land from Kearny to Rutherford was deeded to William Sandford
    of the West Indies, with a portion patented in trust for Major
    Nathaniel Kingsland also of the West Indies.8 Their heirs
    established major plantations along the river, in what they
    called New Barbadoes Neck.

         North of the Sanford and Kingsland properties, approximately
    10,000 acres was owned by Captain John Berry of Hackensack, a
    man of prominence in the colony. He sold his property to Walling
    Van Winkle, one of two progenitors of the Van Winkle families in
    present-day Bergen and Passaic Counties. The tract included
    "nearly all of East Rutherford, Carlton Hill and Wallington."9

    He later purchased more land up to Lodi. Van Winkle constructed
    a small, stone house on Paterson Plank and River Roads. His
    great-great-grandson, Michael Van Winkle, built a large home on
    the same site in the 1870's. At his death, the Van Winkle land
    of two centuries passed to the Anderson Lumber Company. Walling
    Van Winkle, grandson of the first Walling and the person for
    whom Wallington is named, earlier erected a large house at the
    County (Gregory Avenue) Bridge. This was purchased by David I.
    Anderson in the mid-1800's and became known by his name. At the
    turn of the century this home became a hotel.

         The history of Wallington and East Rutherford along the
    Passaic River is largely tied to that of the City of Passaic,
    which for well over a century was known as Acquackanonk or
    Acquackanonk Landing. Acquackanonk was settled early on, with
    sizeable port facilities, the area's first church, and generally
    a more developed setting. Wallington had yet to be named as such
    toward the end of the seventeenth century, and the Van Winkle
    farmstead was the major structure.

                              - 17 -

         The Proprietors of Eastern New Jersey described the area in
    glowing terms:
         "quote from Life of the Settlers."
         "'the country is plentifully supplied with springs, rivulets,
    rivers, and creeks, which abound with fish and water fowl.  Oak,
    chestnut, walnut, poplar, ash, fir and cedar timber abound. Soil,
    fertile, producing plentiful crops, also good flax and hemp, which
    is spun and manufactured into linen cloth. The country is well
    stocked with wild deer, conies (i.e. rabbits), and wild fowl of
    several sorts, as turkies, pigeons, patridge, plover, quails,
    swans, geese, ducks in great plenty. It produces a variety of
    good and delicious fruits, as grapes, plums, mulberries and also
    apricots, peaches, pears, apples, quinces and watermelons." 10

    The early plantations became known as Wallington, Carlton Hill
    and Lodi. Carlton Hill later became a portion of East Rutherford.
    Roads became established starting in 1707, first on the Acquackanonk
    side and then on the eastern shores. Two of the earliest
    converged at the County Bridge by Anderson's Lumber Yard, the
    major industrial concern of the area in the late 1800's with
    300 feet of landings in Wallington and close to a mile in
    Acquackanonk. The first road ran south through Carlton Hill
    (probably now Carlton Avenue). The second ran through Lodi to
    Hackensack. Another major route was the easterly extension of
    the Paterson and Hamburgh Turnpike to the Hackensack River.
    This extension, and ultimately the entire road, became known as
    the Paterson Plank Road (now Paterson Road).11 An early map of
    the Wallington/East Rutherford area is shown.

    The Acquackanonk Bridge originally crossed from Wallington to
    Acquackanonk somewhat upstream of the current County (Gregory
    Avenue) Bridge. The early bridge was apparently for foot
    passengers only. Later improvements were made. On 21 November
    1776, Washington's army moved across the bridge on its way from
    Hackensack to Newark, being pursued by the British troops of
    General Lord Cornwallis. Washington's soldiers and local
    citizens partially destroyed the bridge to prevent the British

    from closing.  The bridge was later rebuilt in 1793, damaged,
    rebuilt in 1795 and destroyed by ice in 1811. A new bridge was
    built in 1835, replaced in 1865, again replaced in 1890, and
    finally replaced with the current structure in 1904. This bridge
    is listed in the Bergen County Historical Survey.

    Growth of the Area
         Because the industries in Passaic were chiefly responsible
    for Wallington's growth, it is important to include the City of
    Passaic in a Wallington history. Wallington was once known as
    "Passaic Park". The two bridges, Eighth Street and Market Street
    or Second Avenue as it was known then, were constructed mainly
    to entice area residents to purchase land in Wallington, thus
    developing the town as we know it now.

         The river had played it's role in supplying food and
    transportation, as well as sport for the Indians. It proved to
    be a main artery, for the White Man, in the settlement of "New
    Barbadoes". The river provided food and transportation for
    these early settlers. Later the power of the river was harness
    to the manufacturing plants in Garfield, Passaic, and Wallington.

         The early farmers i.e. Tades, Van Winkle, Stagg,Sip, Goetschus,
    all relied on the spring freshets to moisten and fertilize the
    soil. The area north of Main Avenue extending to the river was
    once full with well manicured gardens and fruit groves. These
    mostly Dutch farmers and well to do business-men had very large
    homes and often competed for the most prestigious looking pro-
    perties. Their home was called a "Manse".

         It was not until the 1880's that Wallington experienced
    the first devastating flood. The late Michael Van Winkle gave
                 12
    this account:

                               - 19 -

                       "Every now and then I would pick up a book on floods and
                       freshets in different communities of our Bergen and Essex
                       Counties. I wish to say, here and now, the cause of the
                       floods and freshets are due to the building of the new
                       Dundee Dam in 1859.

                       Before this Dam was built we had freshets, but very mild
                       ones, and floods if you can call them floods, slightly
                       over it's banks hardly touching the lawn of the David I.
                       Anderson Homestead, for his is practically in the lowest
                       section of our hamlet."

                  Michael Van Winkle continues to write:

                       "In 1878 the onrushing waters of the Passaic River went
                       on a rampage, we could see the waters churning violently,
                       the rushing river would make your blood run cold, for the
                       Passaic 'River really went over it's banks again and into
                       our living room, parlor, dining room and kitchen. Still
                       we suffered slight property, damage.

                       But on January 6, 188.1, the banks of the Dundee Canal
    *                  ~~~~~~collapsed due to a heavy rain fall.

                       It was like the ride of Paul Revere, men on horses in the
                       terrific rain were shouting, the dam is busting in
                       different villages.

                       In the meantime the men tried desperately to close the
                       water gates of the Dundee Dam, it failed, our whole
                       village was under water.

                       The damage is done and the Dundee Dam is to blame for it
                       allI."

                       As noted earlier, it was Michael Van Winkle who sold his
                  properties to Anderson, thus making way for the largest, and

                  most industrial use of the river.

                       Passaic and It's Environs; W. W. Scott

                  Exerpt:

                                             -20-

         "In 1885, S. L. Nickeron, who for twenty years had been a sea
         captain, entered into partnership with W. S. Anderson and built
         the original factory on the Wallington side. Anderson had
         operated his business in Passaic for years.

         "This building afterwards receiving additions, has a one hundred
         and fifty horse power engine, while about fifty men find constant
         employment in manufacturing all kinds of packing cases, and every-
         thing pertaining to wood work for a home."

         In 1870 W. S. Anderson divided a tract of land in Wallington into
    several lots. Six years later Levi R. Alden sub-divided additional lands.
    These developments did not meet with immediate success, though the row
    homes of Park Row were built on the Alden tract. In 1874, Hugh
    McCleery (who is mostly remembered for coining the name of Wallington)
    anticipated the movement of craftsmen to Wallington when he purchased
    a small parcel of land from Anderson and built a blacksmith shop and a
    small house; the latter still exists.

         Developers, both New Yorkers and early settlers, used elaborate
    sales brochures to entice new residents. Most of these promotions did
    not fare well. An 1876 map shows only forty houses in Wallington. Not
    until 1900 did Wallington expand greatly. The construction of the
    Wallington Avenue and Eighth Street bridges, plus the 1894 trolley car
    service to Carlton Hill and Passaic linked the new town to surrounding
    areas. On January 1, 1895, Wallington was incorporated as a borough.,

         Many of the new residents worked at the Anderson Lumber- Yard,
    Garfield Manufacturing, Prescott, and Manhattan Belt Company. They were.
    often immigrants from Poland, Hungary and Germany. With long work
    hours, they had little time to improve their land like the early,
    wealthy settlers. This situation made the area less attractive to
    the landed gentry, resulting eventually in the subdivision and sale
    of most lands, which once were the sites of great farms and orchards.
    The subdivisions resulted in a more residential and commercial develop-
    ment, giving rise to a self-supporting community. Population in 1890
    was 1,812 and by 1910 it grew to 3,448.

                                   -21 -

         From approximately 1890 - 1910, the Van Winkle family sold most
    of its holdings between Rutherford and Wallington along the Passaic
    River.  The railroad station at Carlton Hill became the location of
    a large manufacturing plant. The brick buildings extended from the

    p~resent Carlton Avenue to the river, eliminating the old road at the
    river's edge. At the same time., the remainder of the Carlton Hill
    section sprouted one and two family homes, mostly for residents of
    Slavic and German descent. The residents soon developed their own
    town government, community facilities, churches, schools and businesses.

         During World War 11 and the Korean Conflict, both towns proudly
    sent many young men to the military. Wallington's V.F.W. chapter once
    boasted the largest number of servicemen in the nation with overseas
    duty. A soldiers and sailors monument was erected between the two
    towns at the intersection of Paterson Avenue and Union Boulevard in
    honor of the servicemen.

         By 1920, Wallington was the fourth largest borough in Bergen
    County with a population of 5,715. Mostly Polish, German, Russian
    and Ukranian, the ethnicities were very similar to the Dundee section
    of Passaic. By 1940 most of the people who owned land in Wallington
    were of Polish descent. Property and land is often passed on to new
    generations of existing families. The rapid pace of growth resulted
    in a haphazard pattern of development, with intermixed residences and
    industry. With the removal of the railroad tracks and station on
    Main Avenue in Passaic, and the closing of the Carlton Hill Station
    in East Rutherford, the railroad bridge crossing the Passaic River
    was removed. The industrial complex in Carlton Hill still stands and
    is occupied mostly by Starr Industries.

    Resources and Recreation - The Passaic River
         Despite the growth of industry in the latter half of the nineteenth
    century, the land on the Passaic River retained most of its country
    landscape and served as a recreation ground for the area. The Passaic

                                   -22

    was particularly attractive to fishermen, who caught shad, eel and

    sturgeon, and gathered mussels, (One history records that a 7-foot,
    500 pound sturgeon was caught off the shores of Lyndhurst.)13

         "Bass, perch, trout, carp and other fresh water fish were in
         abundance as well as fresh water-mussels and eels. Shad by the
         thousands ran up the river to spawn. Farmers from far away
         came to the river with barrels and salt to buy and clean fish,
         pack them in barrels and cart them home for consumption and sale.

         "The river 100 years ago was a delight to swim in. Bathing
         beaches were abundant and popular with rowboats and canoes avail-
         able for rental.",14

         The beaches along the river were popular meeting places for the

    fun lovers in Wallington. There were perhaps three beaches, one
    located about 500 feet north of the Acquackanmonk (Gregory Avenue)
    Bridge that faced west, and another along lHatheway Street that faced
    east. The third and probably the prettiest was at the intersection
    of the Passaic and Saddle Rivers. Most long-time residents would
    agree that the rivers were clean, full of fish and a source of enjoy-
    ment and recreation. The Roaring Twenties were a prime period for
    river recreation.

         One of the most detrimental events concerning the natural Passaic

    River took place in the late fifties. The course of the river was
    changed to provide an aligh-ment for Route 21, through Passaic County.
    As a result, Wallington gave up an entire street (once Scott Street)
    and several families were relocated. The river is now bordered by
    concrete embankmnents to the Market Street Bridge.

         Industrial pollution gradually destroyed both the fishing and
    boating by the end of the nineteenth century. Both activities did
    see a brief revival during the 1920's. In the 1930's, the Army Corps
    of Engineers deepened the Passaic River channel and put the dredged
    spoils along the shores. The boating clubs went out of business, many
    of their facilities being converted to commercial uses and eventually
         15
    lost.

                                   -23-

                 ~Historic Sites

                      All of the bridges in the project area are on the Bergen County
                 Historical Survey list, primarily due to their age and interesting
                 engineering. The site of the Anderson Lumber Company is likewise
                 listed, at the corner of Paterson and Main Avenues. An old tavern
                 near the Wallington Avenue bridge is listed, as well as the original
                 Wallington borough hall across from the Eighth Street Bridge.
                 Suggestions that the building be purchased and renovated for public
                 use have been made. A site not listed on the Historical Survey is in
                 the linear park across from the Wallington High School. This is the
                 site where Michaelin Tades landed, the first white man to set foot in
                 and develop Wallington land. The confluence of the Passaic and Saddle
                 Rivers was the site of the Zabriskie grist mill as well as the location
                 of a bloody battle between Hessian and Continental soldiers.

                      The sole site in the project area on the State and National
                 Registers of Historic Sites is the Wallington High School, on Main
    *            ~~~~Avenue just north of the Eighth Street Bridge.

                                               -24-

    0             ~~~~Conclusion
                      For many years, local residents have turned their backs on the
                 foul smelling, unsightly Passaic River. Wha t was once an artery of
                 life, has been forgotten.

                      Some long term residents tell stories of fishing and swimming,
                 and enjoying the river. One can read, and see pictures, and accounts
                 in this outline of the old Passaic River. Now we are turning our backs
                 on degrading uses, and looking for cleaner and more enjoyable uses for
                 the river. We must remember, and learn from the past., 'Perhaps the
                 new use may be the history for ages to come. A birth, in a sense, like
                 the Indians used it. Their use was simple, to use and enjoy a body of
                 water in harmony with mankind.

                      *This chapter is drawn from three major resources. "Native
                 Americans and the Dutch," and "Resources and Recreation"~ are primarily
                 excerpts from the Restoration Master Plan for Kearny, North Arlington,
                 Lyndhurst and Rutherford, Chapter III, by Christina M4. Mason. "Growth
                 of the Area", "The Early 20th Century" and "Conclusion" were prepared by
                 Raymond Gadomski, a local historian of Wallington, with the aid of
                 Marilyn Sudol and Anthony Gadomski, his father. The remaining text is
                 drawn from W. J. Pape and W. W. Scott, 1899, The NEW'S History of Passaic,
                 the NEW'S Publishing Company. The photographs are by the late Stanley
    0           ~~~~F. A. Kopack, and provided through the courtesy of his family.  These
                 latter materials were also compiled by Raymond Gadomski.

                                                 -25-

                        A BRIDGE OF MANY NAMES

    The Gregory and Main Avenue Bridge is a well preserved example of an early
    20th century swing span. To date, it is the only known Owego Bridge Co.
    bridge in New Jersey.

    This bridge is the seventh bridge across the Passaic in its immediate
    vicinity. The first bridge predated 1741. The 1766-68 wood bridge with
    iron work was destroyed in the Revolutionary War. It was known as the
    Acquacknonk Bridge and was destroyed by Washington's army on November 21,
    1776 after they crossed it. The 1793 bridge was located 100 feet north of
    the present bridge. Subsequent bridges were at this site from 1835-65,
    1865-90, and 1890-04.

                                 - 26 -

     ~z:-, -�  . ::: -.  :  :           .: ; :  ; �:  : ,  : . ,:

    Many barges, like this one, passing thru the open "County Bridge" pro-
    vided means for transporting materials to and from the industrial
    complexes along the river. This barge is preparing to dredge the
    canal, and form a levee.

    8th Street Bridge. This bridge and the Market St. Bridge were constructed
    primarily for residents and transportation of materials to and from
    Dundee Section of Passaic.  It was a short walk to work in those days.

                           - 27 -

        Pleasure4/  and fishing bo         a     t 2oored   at   a455  maiaaogVnikeAeu.5
    T   h     e s e 544.>445,44                                  p hto are4'<4  fro the 1930. s.

                       <~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  ?i~~.4.4 5 <...,,    55  .'                     .             4 ~�v.~"z~~; ~      .    ;....   :..~

     Folks>'                      ice5>K,   sktn o n 45445

                                       444~~~~~~~~.                   ~ ;.;: ',.~:..:~,  5  ,: '<.'j  .44,  47
        Aparmens. .                     ~           "

               44445  4                     45                    4  44,- 58                -

                               REFERENCES

    1Peter O. Wacker, Land and People (New Brunswick: Rutgers University

        Press, 1975), p. 57.

     Norman F. Brydon, The Passaic River: Past, Present, Future (New
        Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1974), P. 42.

    3Brydon, p. 40.

    4Brydon, pp. 42 - 43.

    5Wacker, p. 66.

     W. J. Pape and W. W. Scott, The NEW'S History of Passaic (The NEW'S
        Publishing Co., 1899).

    7W. J. Pape and W. W. Scott.

     Brydon, p. 51.

    9W. J. Pape and W. W. Scott.

    0W. J. Pape and W. W. Scott.

    "W. J. Pape and W. W. Scott.

    W. W. Scott, Passaic and It's Environs.

    13
     W. Woodford Clayton, ed., History of Bergen and Passaic Counties,
        New Jersey, (Philadelphia: Everts and Peck, 1882), p. 305;
         and the Township of Lyndhurst, 1917 - Township of Lyndhurst -
         1967, Historical Essay (1967), p. 21.

    14Unknown author, History of Lyndhurst (Lyndhurst, N. J.: Township

         of Lyndhurst, 1974).

    15Brydon, p. 172.

                                 - 29 -

    Chapter IV

                      SPECIAL ZONING STANDARDS

         One important element of the RMF is that a Special Waterfront
    Area be established by the two municipalities. We recommend that

    the general provisions of the Waterfront Area be consistent.

         At the very minimum, the riverfront area should be delineated

    (defined) and recognized as a special area in the municipalities'

    M~aster Plans and in the zoning ordinances.

         Perhaps the simplest approach is to retain the existing zoning
    but to condition development in a way that provides public access
    and landscaping amenities. In addition, State requirements for
    Waterfront Development Permits and Flood Plain Development Permits

    could be incorporated selectively, by reference, or by adding
    any conditions to State permits as conditions to the local approval.

    This is the approach recommended to the Borough by the Citizens

    Advisory Committee.

    Generally Acceptable Uses
         The entire study area from the bulkhead line inland to one
    block east of the first public street should be considered as the

    waterfront area. All new construction within the zone should be
    obligated to meet performance standards consistent with the
    Pl~anning Principles and should provide for passage of the multi-

    purpose trail and provide public access to the waterfront.
    Acceptable uses may include:
         apartment and single family residences
         boat sales, rentals, repairs, ramps, docks and marinas

         waterfront-dependent industrial users
         marine supply retail outlets
         offices,, engineering., professional and high technology offices

                               -30-

         permeable surface parking areas
         recreational, social and cultural facilities, educational
              uses, parks, open spaces
         restaurants, outdoor eating facilities
         specialty shopping facilities (art, gift, antique, import,
              health and natural foods, leisure activity shops, sport-
              ing goods,marine hardware, marine furniture,
         health spas, gymnasiums
         department stores

         Of the above uses, those that are waterfront dependent are
    encouraged by the Coastal Resource and Development Policies. All
    uses must provide for public access to the waterfront where at all
    practicable.

    Prohibited Uses
         Any use not compatible with the intended use, purpose or
    function of the waterfront or which does not fit into the desired
    pattern of activity. Certain uses, such as automobile junkyards
    or salvage businesses, may be specifically prohibited.

    Siting Requirements
         Set-back requirements should be i(1) uniform for all structures
    on the block; (2) designed so as to provide adequate passage way
    for pedestrians and, where appropriate, bicyclists; and (3) not
    less than 20' from the bulkheading, proposed bulkheading, or, if
    there is no bulkheading, from the mean high water mark. In
    special cases where a 20" set-back is not feasible, a minimum of
    14' may be set. The river set-back should provide for passage of
    the trail.

         Building height, bulk and alignment should be defined so as
    to maximize view of the river from the landward side of the build-
    ing. No building should be more than 30' in height. Public
    access to the river should be clearly marked.

         State flood plain development regulations also should be
    reflected in the standards.

                            - 31 -

    Landscaping
         Landscaped open space should be provided so as to enhance
    development and improve the overall area. Landscaped areas on
    adjacent lots should be continuous, and landscaping should be
    coordinated so as to provide a unifying effect. Any area between
    a building and the river that is not used for loading and unloading
    on the river should be screened with landscaping. Standards for
    landscaping should be determined by the Planning Boards in consul-
    tation with a landscape architect, and coordinated among the
    two municipalities.

    Zoning Standards
         Rather than a special zone with prohibited and permitted uses,
    the Citizens Advisory Committee suggests the use of performance
    standards. In this kind of ordinance, attention is given to the
    side effects of a development, and any acceptable use is per-
    mitted in the zone if the prescribed standards are met. In the
    case of the Restoration Project, the standards might take account
    of stress placed on the infrastructure and natural resources, as
    well as providing public access and trail right-of-way. Performance
    zoning may be used in conjunction with conventional zoning laws.

         As an alternative, incentive, or bonus zoning offers trade-
    offs to developers in exchange for public benefits or amenities.
    For example, public access and special landscaping might be
    sought from developers in exchange for greater density or more
    floor area per unit space. This 'kind of zoning offers a compro-
    mise between rigid zoning and the performance standards described
    above. Limits on what can be traded off are set by zoning
    ordinance.

                               -32-

    Conclusion
         The municipalities should consider an overall waterfront

    area that will permit each to maintain the distinctive charac-
    teristics of its waterfront. Each could keep to the present

    condition, but by coordinating with the other municipalities

    could assure that Restoration proceeds in a balanced way. The

    institution of special waterfront standards, is, in addition,
    a tangible expression of the municipalities' commitment to the

    Restoration Master Plan.

                                 -33-

    0               ~~~~~Chapter V              PROJECTS

                                            The Pathway

                        A river is linear, and forces development and road systems
                   into patterns which match the river. In the project area, the
                   county roads generally parallel the Passaic, leaving room for
                   little or no development. Only in Wallington, where the river
                   describes a sinusoidal shape, is the pattern of development
                   different.

                        The pathway is envisioned as a multipurpose trail accommodat-
                   ing pedestrians, joggers and bicyclists, which will follow
                   closely to the river wherever possible. Where development or
                   other right-of-way problems exist, the trail may move away from
                   the river for some distance. In all cases, however, proposed
                   parks will be linked with the pathway in some manner. In most
    0              ~~~~cases the pathway will be 10 feet wide.

                        As with any heavily urbanized area, the routing of the
                   pathway in the project area encounters numerous obstacles.
                   Though open space exists, most of it is privately owned at present.
                   Some industrial/commercial properties have sufficient space for
                   a pathway, but it will be necessary to purchase or lease ease-
                   ments. Residential development completely blocks any river-
                   side route in places, while traffic creates routing problems
                   along the county roads.

                        Therefore, the RMP suggests two routes in some reaches of
                   the project area. One route would maximize riverside access,
                   but will require extensive land and easement purchases. This
                   route can only be developed over the long term. In places,
                   an interim route is proposed, generally along existing roadways,
                   for use in the short term.

                                               -34-

    Linking Rutherford & East Rutherford:   The current RMP for
    Kearny through Rutherford calls for a northern terminus for the
    path in Rutherford Memorial Park. The Rutherford and East Ruther-
    ford boundary is a railroad spur serving the neighboring industrial
    park in East Rutherford. Although rarely used, the spur is

    active. The path cannot go over the spur itself, due to safety
    concerns and the high gradient.

         Two possible links exist. One is to extend a walkway from
    Rutherford Memorial Park over a stormwater outlet channel to the

    industrial park, which is the most direct route, following the
    river. It would require an alignment and easement in the indus-
    trial park.

         The other option is to bring the path along the spur embank-
    ment foot or along Monona Avenue, in Rutherford, to Jackson
    Avenue, cross into East Rutherford, and turn toward the river
    along Morton Street and Van Winkle Street to River Street. This
    route reduces construction costs and eliminates the need for
    crossing the industrial park. However, it is circuitous and
    involves travelling along Jackson/Carlton Avenue, a busy thorofare,
    for approximately five blocks. Also, placing the path along the
    spur embankment would be difficult along the baseball field north
    of Darwin Avenue, though possible with a slight loss of area
    from the playing field. The eastern portion of Morton Street
    has a five foot sidewalk along an industrial area, for two blocks.
    The remainder of Morton Street to Van Winkle Street is good
    quality residential with narrow (3') sidewalks. It is unlikely
    that a 10' path could be developed here other than by partition-
    ing off one side of Morton Street. East Rutherford may close
    Morton Street to traffic from Carlton Avenue, which would improve
    opportunities for the pathway.

                               -35-

        Although a path link into the industrial park is possible,
    there are constraints in linking to Van Winkle Street. Parking
    stalls exist on the river's edge, and constitute the only avail-
    able parking for the building -nearest the river. It should be
    possible to relocate this parking to the opposite curb alongside
    the building, leaving free space along the bulkhead for the path.
    From there the path could swing away from the river to River
    Street, or could jump the stormwater channel at the north side
    of the industrial park to Lot 13 C of Block 6. (A great deal

    of non-floatable debris has been left along the stormwater
    channel).

         Gates and new locks in the industrial park indicate a level
    of security which must be taken into account. The industrial
    park itself is light industry and should pose no health or

    safety threat other than from maneuvering vehicles.

    Van Winkle Street to Carlton Avenue: Van Winkle and River Streets
    are back streets with minimal traffic. Van Winkle Street has
    no sidewalks, and limited sideyards on either side. River
    Street is slightly wider but also lacks sidewalks. The long
    front yards of the residences along the river, and the River
    Renaissance Condominiums, could allow for path construction.
    The Sea-Land Operation on the corner of River Street and
    Carlton Avenue has parking along River Street which could be
    utilized for the path.

         Aesthetically, the preferred alternative is to continue
    from the industrial park along the riverbank. Public access
    might be possible from River Renaissance, and the condominium
    owners might favor a pathway linking them directly to other
    recreation areas. Cutting a path riverward of the trucking

                               -36-

    facility may be difficult, though East Rutherford is considering

    a purchase of that property. The alternative is to travel along
    Carlton Avenue for 150 feet.

    Carlton Avenue to Main Avenue: The "~marina" along Carlton Avenue

    is an excellent prospect for bringing the path back to the river,
    though much work would be necessary to improve the site. North

    of the marina, the path must swing to Carlton Avenue past Bahr
    Auto, Eastern Motors Used Cars, and Russo's Diner. These three
    establishments occupy the narrow strip of land along the river

    and Carlton Avenue, between Paterson Avenue and Main Avenue.
    There may be sufficient space available along Carlton Avenue for
    a 10' path. Carlton Avenue is a well-traveled thorofare.

    Main Avenue to Wallington Avenue: North of Main Avenue, the

    path could comfortably continue along the river behind the Jade
    Garden Restaurant and the Clifton Clothing Company. As an alter-

    native, there is ample space for a 10' path along Van Winkle Avenue
    on the west side, to Mercer Street. After one residence on the
    left (past Mercer Street) Van Winkle Avenue deadends at the

    river's edge. There is a very narrow right-of-way between a
    fence and the river, from Mercer Street to the end of Van Winkle
    Avenue, which is too narrow for the path. At the end of

    Van Winkle the path could easily cut through to a small river-
    side park at the end of Lester Street. After leaving the park
    at Lester Street, the narrow river right-of-way continues, but
    it is probably too narrow for the path. Therefore, the path
    would follow Lester Street to Anderson Avenue and turn left.
    There is a small pocket park at the corner of Anderson and
    Lester. Both are residential back streets with minimal traffic

    and standard concrete sidewalks.

                                 -37

         Anderson Avenue deadends to the north. The river right-
    of-way is approximately 12' from fence to river directly oppo-
    site the Dundee Canal outlet. It continues at approximately the
    same width to the end of Parkway, where an emergency boat ramp
    cuts through to the river. A locked gate closes the boat ramp
    to general public use. The Tuck Tape parking lot begins on the
    north side of the boat ramp and continues to Wallington Avenue.

         A 6' walkway could be constructed on the river right-of-
    way, between the fence and. the river. A bikeway is inadvisable
    there due to space limitations and safety concerns (the
    river's edge is a steep concrete embankcuent, quite dangerous
    for cyclists). The bikeway would follow Lester Street from the
    small park to Maple Avenue and north to Parkway and the former
    Tuck Tape lot. The walkway would have to negotiate the boat
    ramp to reach the Tuck Tape parking lot. This could best be
    done by relocating the boat ramp to within the parking lot
    (assuming access is available through a public or public/private
    use of the property) and reconstructing a flat bank at the
    current boat ramp site, or by moving the gate landward to allow
    the path to pass by.

         The Tuck Tape parking lot holds major promise as a public
    park or a combination public/private facility with public access
    to the entire riverfront.

    Wallington Avenue to 8th Street: Wallington Avenue is a major
    access route to the City of Passaic, over a bridge at this loca-
    tion. Heavy traffic is experienced during peak hours, and enough
    traffic exists at other times to endanger path users. On the
    other hand, vacant land exists on both sides of the bridge. The
    path should swing out to Parkway (due to the high gradient to

                               -38-

            Wallington Avenue nearer the river) and cross Wallington Avenue
            at a hand operated traffic light. This light would allow safe
            passage for pedestrians and cyclists.

                 North of Wallington Avenue, the path would continue through
            two parcels of land apparently owned by the New Jersey Department
            of Transportation, or Bergen County, which are currently vacant.

            Exiting to Halstead Avenue on either side of Milosh Carbide
            Tool Company (though preferably the south side, due to the high
            gradient to the road near the river), the path would follow
            'Halstead Avenue to Lester Street and from there to Hatheway
            Street.

                 Halstead and Le~ster-are residential streets, with local
            travel only on Halstead Avenue (a dead end) and more traffic on
            Lester Street. 'Hatheway Street is bordered by light industry,
            residences, two non-profit organizations (Knights of Columbus
            and Veterans of-Foreign Wars)  - and borough property (park,
            Public Works Department and library). Traffic is somewhat
            heavier here, with large trucks, at times.

                 There is little opportunity to place a 10' path on any of
            the three streets, though some wider sections are possible along
            portions of Hatheway Street.

                 At the northern terminus of Hatheway Street to the east
            between the street and the river, by the Janitorial Supply Company,
            a wooded and grass lot exists which could serve as a pocket
            park for the area between Wallington and Main Avenues and the
            river, to the northeast. Access to the river is also possible
            along the eastern right of way of Lester Street, which is
            unpaved east of Eatheway Street.

    0                                  -~~~~~~~~~~~~39-

                 The path would follow the easter~n side of Hatheway Street
            to avoid conflicts with the residences along the western side
            and to link with the Borough park by the river.

                 Space exists for the path to continue from the park along
            the river behind the  Veteraas. of Foreign Wars,      the Gulf
            Station, and the Italian Subs concession. As an alternative,
            a double-width sidewalk exists along the street by the Overseas
            Veterans Association, and a wide asphalt area exists in front
            of the Gulf Station. The advantage is that many piles of fill
            behind the Gulf Station would not need to be moved. The dis-
            advantage is the traffic in and out of the Gulf station across
            the path. In either case, the path would swing behind the
            Italian Subs concession and continue to the 8th Street Bridge
            along the linear strip of land between a fence and the river,
            or along the existing sidewalk area between Main Avenue and
            the fence. The land behind the fence is owned by Car Bar Ltd.
            The 8th Street Bridge experiences heavy traffic at times. The
            Borough supplies a crossing guard before and after school hours.

            8th Street Bridge to Midland Avenue: After crossing 8th Street,
            the path would travel along Main Avenue in-front of the Exxon
            station, and then continue along the long, narrow strip of
            borough property adjacent to the river. This strip is currently
            too narrow in one stretch, just north of the Exxon station and
            across from Wallington High School, for a 10' path. A short
            (200') section of narrow pathway with warning signs may be
            required. North of the narrow section, a 10' width is possible.

                 From Park Row north along Main Avenue for 500' a new town-
            house development (Riverview Estates) will have sufficient space
            available along Main Avenue for perhaps a 7-8' wide path. A
            standard width concrete sidewalk is currently in place, setback

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~40

                   15' from the road and 2' from the curb. According to the N. J.
                   Division of Coastal Resources, Riverview Estates has a Waterfront
                   Development Permit conditioned upon the development of a 10'

                   wide path along the top of the riverbank.

                        A commercial section completes this reach. Curb cuts are
                   in place for a sidewalk but no sidewalk exists. The first lot

                   has parking stalls to the curb, while the second through fourth
                   lots have considerable customer traffic across the normal side-

                   walk location. Traffic is heavy in this area. Crossing the
                   street to the opposite sidewalk would involve hazards to pedes-
                   trians and would force them to negotiate the difficult inter-
                   section at Main Avenue and Midland Avenue.

                        The path could run behind the commercial area along the river-
                   bank which is steep in this location and offers some good views
                   of the opposite riverbank.   Behind the structures, the first
                   lot north of Riverview Estates has excess inventory from a used
                   appliance dealer; the second has a number of trucks; and the
                   third has piles of sand and construction debris. The fourth
                   (Wallington Exchange) has a wedge of open space 20-30' wide
                   between the parking lot and the riverbank.

                   Midland Avenue to the Saddle River: The First National State
                   Bank has an office at the corner of Main and Midland Avenues.
                   The path could continue along the street side, or could occupy
                   a portion of the parking lot to the rear. The parking lot is
                   far oversized for the bank, but is used by the Wozniak Funeral
                   Home, adjacent to the north. As the funeral home is fairly
                   close to the river and is in part a residence, the bicycle path would
                   run along Midland Avenue north of the First National State
                   Bank, in front of the funeral home. There is minimal room
                   for the path directly in front of the funeral home but the
                   opposite side of the street is more restricted. Safety con-
    0              ~~~~siderations are important along this section due to the heavy
                   traffic along Midland Avenue. The land behind the funeral home

                                             -41 -

    is apparently owned by the owner of the next property north
    (Watson). It may be possible to run a walkway behind the funeral
    home on this property, as well as providing a different river
    experience, by moving down the bank and then back up to the crest

    north of Wozniak's.

         North of the funeral home for 300' or more, a section of
    land between Ilidland Avenue and the river is in green space with
    varying widths of flat ground and generally steep banks. With

    some alterations of the guardrail location and some regrading,
    the path could follow the riverbank. Minimal tree removal would
    result, as the path location presently contains small, herbaceous
    vegetation.

        Midland Cycle and Barcelona's Lumber presently utilize the
    area between their buildings and Midland Avenue. Rearranging
    on-lot parking could possibly open up sufficient space for the
    pathway along the street, but the planned widening of Midland

    Avenue will eliminate that space. There is some potential for
    an easement for the pathway along the riverbank area. The
    northwest portion of the Barcelona Lumber property, at the con-
    fluence of the Saddle and Passaic Rivers, is an unused open
    area~. As open space the property could be landscaped as the
    northern terminus to the pathway. Two structures and considerable
    construction debris now render the land unfit for recreational
    use.

         Specifications for bicycle trails may be found in the American
    Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials guide
    for The Development of New Bicycle Facilities (1981), or the
    New Jersey Trails Plan. The trail should (1) have a name,
    (2) be posted with reflectorized signs indicating whether it
    is for walking, bicycling or both, (3) be a minimum of 10' wide
    with 2' clearance on both sides, and (4) provide separate lanes
    for bicyclists and pedestrians.

                                -42-

                          Park Facilities

         East Rutherford currently has no open space along the
    Passaic River for public recreational use. Wallington has public
    riverside land owned by the Borough, the N. J. Department of
    Transportation, and the Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners.
    The Borough has one park for active recreation on Hatheway Street,-
    and a passive park along Main Avenue. Overall, just a few
    recreational uses are possible along the river, for a limited
    number of people.

         The Citizens Advisory Committee for this study developed
    a list of recreational activities which it felt would be appro-
    priate in one or more parcels of riverside open space.
    Suggestions include:

              Boating - Marina, mooring slips, boat launches, *boat
              storage, canoe and rowboat rental.
              Active Recreation - tot lots, ball field, bikeway, other.
              Passive Recreation - Naturalistic areas, benches, picnic
              tables, sitting areas, pocket parks, historical sites
              markers.

         The Committee emphasized the importance of security, and
    of having uses which could be fully controlled (such as the
    marina) or which would not attract great numbers of people (i.e.
    pocket parks). Landscaping is also a high priority, both for
    public and private areas. A major focus is appreciation of the
    river area. Some Committee members suggested that the riverside
    would be much more attractive to local residents once cleanup
    and beautification of the opposite bank is accomplished.   The

    PVSC pumping station across from the western end of Lester Avenue
    is in Wallington but across the river. Landscaping could improve
    the view in that area.

                                -43-

        There are seven potential sites for new parks along the
    study area, aside from the pathway development. Moving from

    south to north, these are:

         1) Block 5, Lots 1 & 2, East Rutherford -- Presently a

            trucking company facility and a former marina. The
           Borough is pursuing Green Acres acquisition of the site.
           Proposed Use: Marina, for power and rowed boats.
         2) Block 12, Lot 26, Wallington -- Off the western end of
           Lester Avenue. Currently an open, lawned area owned by
           N.J. DOT.
           Proposed Use: Picnic area, tot lot, informal lawn use.
         3) Block 10, Lot 1, Wallington -- A parking lot associated
           with the Tuck Tape facility in Passaic. Now under new
            ownership. The Borough is pursuing Green Acres acquisi-
            tion.
           Proposed Use: Multipurpose recreation. Small boats.
         4) Block 7, Lot 25, Wallington -- An open lot of unclear
            ownership (probably N. J. DOT or Bergen County Highway
           Department), across Wallington Avenue from the "Tuck
            Tape" parking lot.
            Proposed Use: Picnic area, pocket'park.
         5) Block 9, Lot 1 (partial), Wallington -- Northern portion
            of the lot with Janitorial Supply Company. Partly open,
            partly wooded.
            Proposed Use: Pocket park, sitting areas.
         6) Block 26, Lots 14 - 16, Wallington -- A linear strip of
            land with larger lot near the 8th Street Bridge. The
            Borough is pursuing Green Acres acquisition.
            Proposed Use: Landscaped area, rest area for pathway
            users, benches, fishing.
         7) Block 26A, Lot 15 (partial) Wallington -- North end of
            the Barcelona Lumber Company property, presently with
            an unused building and considerable debris on site.

                               - 44 -

            Proposed Use:  picnic area, i nformal lawn use, fishing
            area, terminus for pathway.

         The East Rutherford marina site and the parking lot in
    Wallington offer the best opportunities for active recreation
    and general access. The remaining lots, due to their size,
    configuration or limited parking potential, are better suited
    to passive uses.

    East Rutherford Marina
         Figure 1-:,and Appendix E represent a conceptual design for
    the proposed marina. The design incorporates activities suggested
    by the Citizens Advisory Committee, the pathway route, and land-
    scaping. A great deal of concrete debris must be removed from
    the site. Bank stabilization is currently achieved by way of
    the debris. A more aesthetically pleasing and permanent solution
    will be necessary. Overall, a significant amount of work will
    be necessary for construction and landscaping of the marina.
    However, the facility will be highly visible and offers a long
    frontage on the river itself. The marina will be a major asset
    to the community.

    Parkway Park
         There are any number of ways to develop the parking lot on
    Parkway and Wallington Avenue for recreation. Key questions
    include the cost of the land and of the recreational development,
    the availability of all or part of the parcel, and the mix of
    uses.

         The parking lot was recently purchased. Its intended use
    is presently unknown, but development of the property is con-
    strained by its flood plain location. Also, the Waterfront
    Development Law will apply to the site. The Borough should be

                              -45

                               Gardeb

    *   ~Prepared by-                                                                                ATR~LEER)

                          AEPASSOCIATES~                                                                   ?OE~   SUYA~                                                                 ____
                                                                         Fil e #1.470.5~

             485 Notch RO~d;Ult%1ef falls, N.J. 07424 .(21) 256-7575   Ags  3  94

    able to acquire at least some portion of the site along the river.
    The potential exists for acquisition of the entire site. Therefore,
    a series of plans could be developed for the site, ranging from
    a pathway route and some landscaping along the river, to a mixed
    use park occupying the entire property. Figure 2 is a very con-
    ceptual drawing of the property fully developed for recreation.
    The Citizens Advisory Committee has suggested a ball field, small
    boating, passive areas and landscaping as design elements in
    addition to the pathway.

    Pocket Parks

         There are five proposed pocket parks. Two are on public
    land (which would need to be transferred to Borough ownership),

    one is on private property which the Borough proposes to acquire,
    and two are private property not currently contemplated for
    purchase.

         In each case the pocket parks serve as areas for passive,-
    recreation.  Landscaping can range from formal to naturalistic,
    depending on the site and its potential uses. Commom features
    will include sitting areas with an orientation toward the river.
    Designs will generally be simple and relatively inexpensive. In
    most cases, the parks can be constructed using volunteer
    assistance and a minor amount of materials.

    Linear Parks
         Three sections of the pathway will traverse linear parks,
    one of which is already owned by the Borough of Wallington. These
    parks are long, narrow parcels between the river and a parallel
    road. In general, the linear parks are too narrow for more than
    the pathway, some sitting areas, and landscaping. However, they
    are very important as connecting greenspace between the larger
    parks, as well as aesthetic settings for pathway users.

                              -47-

                                                                                                    RIVER

                                                                                                                                                       IN,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

                                                                                                                                                                 conifer Wall
                                                                                                                          Sidewalka0k0    Planter

    File #1.470.5
    August 23, 1984

    Prepared by:_

             AEP ASSOCIATES                                                        PARIQAAY PARK                                                                            1
        Architects / Engineers /Planners
          5tanley John Lacz.                                                       PROJECT  STUDY  AREA                                                                  20   60          100
    485 NOtch Road, Llttle fAlls. N,.j07424   (0)2677
                                                                                                                                                                            I"- 60?

         Figure 3 represents a conceptual plan by AEP Associates
    for the'linear parks. The engineering and landscaping will be
    similar to the linear park planned for Lyndhurst and Rutherford,
    except that there will be no need for fill or pilings in any of
    the path areas along the linear parks. Costs should be minimal
    for non-pathway components.

    Design Planning
         After acceptance of the Restoration M~aster Plan by the Boroughs
    of East Rutherford and Wallington, the boroughs will work with
    the Passaic River Restoration Project in developing detailed
    designs for the proposed facilities. The steps will include:
    (1) an indication of interest from the affected municipality;
    (2) development of a site plan by an engineer or landscape archi-
    tect (depending on the development planned); (3) local approval
    of the design; (4) detailed design, funding and implementation.
    Public participation, as always, will be a major component of
    the planning process.

    Project Phasing
         Three primary considerations will control the phasing of
    projects. First, where local support exists in terms of project
    approval and a funding commitment, a specific project will
    naturally have a high priority. Second, where development
    pressures or other factors are threatening an otherwise viable
    project, it should be pushed forward so that recreational oppor-
    tunities are not lost. Third, projects which are relatively simple
    and inexpensive to implement offer a faster means of improving
    public access to and enjoyment of the river. These also offer
    greater opportunities for hands-on citizen involvement, and
    enhance the public support for river restoration in general and
    the larger projects in particular.

                               -49-

                                  Figure 3

                                                               Steps
                   Sheet Piling Bulkhead

                                                o   �~~~~~~i

                                 Walkway

                        LIP

                             011    Columtnar Maples

                               'P33   Weeping Willows

                                                     Engineer's Sketch Design of
                Prepared by:        ,~~~~~~~TN ~The Linear Park
                IZEI~9Q

     AEP ASSOCIATES
    AM~htects / E~ngineers I Planners  0    50   100   150   200
        SLunk-Y John La"00
                              ~Sca7     .le V
                                      -5

         Obviously, changing priorities and development pressures
    will alter local priorities over time. However, the RMP proposes
    that three priority project types be established. With the
    concurrence of the municipalities and the Passaic River Restoration
    Project Steering Committee, the 1984 through 1986 priorities would
    be:
         1) Acquisition of land for parks as proposed by East
             Rutherford and Wallington in their Green Acres Local
             Program Pre-Applications of 1984, contingent upon
             funding by the N. J. Green Acres Program. Preliminary
             design work should begin immediately upon acquisition.
         2) Secure transfer of Block 12, Lot 26 and Block 7,
             Lot 25 in Wallington to the Borough. Design and
             construct pocket parks in these lots.
         3) Develop pathway segments wherever possible without the
             acquisition of land beyond the current Green Acres
             Pre-Applications. Prevent prime route locations from
             being foreclosed by development, through acquisition,
             easements, State permit conditions, or local develop-

            ment permit conditions.

         Longer term priorities, from 1987 through 1989, include
    construction of the larger parks, acquisition of easements for
    the pathway where possible across private property, and construc-
    tion of the pathway on the easements. By ten years past accept-
    ance of the Restoration Master Plan, all work should be complete
    or nearing completion, except where development of the pathway
    is blocked by long-term constraints.

                   Chapter VI

                                      PERMITTING AND LICENSING

                         This chapter will describe the various federal, state and

                    county permits and licenses that are likely to be required in
                    connection with various RIP projects. Municipal permits and
                    licenses have not been included, since it is reasonable to

                    assume that the municipalities are aware of such needs in their
                   own jurisdictions. Appendix Ii contains more detailed exhibits

                   on each permit type.

                   State
                                       The Master Permit Form

                         The key element in the State permitting process for any

                   project is the Master Permit Form. This form is obtained from

                    and processed by the Office of Business Advocacy (OBA) in the
                   New Jersey Department of Commerce. Through a series of questions

                    (mostly yes-no) the OBA is able to determine the various agencies
                   that have jurisdiction and from whom permits -need to be
                   obtained. In certain areas of the State, permits may be
                   needed from agencies such as the Delaware River Basin Commission,

                    and these would not be considered by the OBA. No permit of this
                    latter type is applicable in the study area. A copy of the Master
                   Permit Form is included as Exhibit I. Forms and information may

                   be obtained from:
                                          Of fice of Business Advocacy
                                          New Jersey Department of Commerce
                                          CN 380
                                          Trenton, New Jersey 08625

                                   Standard Application Form CP-1
                        The next most important element in the permitting process
                   at the State Department of Environmental Protection is the CP-1.
                   This form can be employed to find out if Division of Coastal
    *              ~~~~Resources and Division of Water Resources permits are required.

                                                 -52-

    It is also the form used to apply for those permits as well as permits

    from the Solid Waste Administration and certain air quality permits.

    The form and accompanying instruction book are included as Exhibit 2.

                                -53-

                   WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT PERMIT

                   Department:        Environmental Protection

                   Project Type:      Coastal and Waterfront Development
                                      (Riparian)

                   Statute Number:    N.J.S.A. 12:5-3

                   Purpose:   Require permit prior to the development of waterfront
                              upon any tidal or navigable waterway. Waterfront
                              development means docks, wharves, piers, bulkheads,
                              bridges, pipelines, cables or pilings, dredging or
                              removing of sand or other materials from lands under
                              tidal waters, and limited upland construction in
                              portions of Salem, Gloucester, Camden, Burlington,
                              Mercer, Middlesex, Union, Essex, Bergen, Passaic and
                              Hudson Counties.

                              The minor maintenance and repair of docks, piers and
                              bulkheads is exempt from this requirement.

                              Permit covered by 90-Day Review Law (P.L. 1975, C.232)

                    Submit:    CP-l application form (standard form)
                               Certified legal document establishing applicant's right
                                 to use or occupy riparian land
                               Development plans
                               Location map
                              Permit fee
                               Evidence that notification of application has been made
                                 to required local agencies

                    Contact:   To make an application:
                                    Bureau of Coastal Project Review
                                   Division of Coastal Resources
                                    Department of Environmental Protection
                                    CN 401
                                    Trenton, New Jersey 08625
                                    609-292-0060

                               To find out if a permit is needed:
                                    Bureau of Coastal Enforcement and Field Services
                                    Division of Coastal Resources
                                    Department of Environmental Protection
                                    1433 Hooper Avenue
                                    Toms River, New Jersey 08753

          (1) When a Waterfront Development Permit application is

    filed, this also constitutes an application for Water Quality

    Certification.

                                             - 54 -

    WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION

    Department:      Environmental Protection

    Project Type:    Coastal and Waterfront Development, Dredge and
                     Fill

    Statute Type:    New Jersey Water Pollution Control Act
                     Clean Water Act Amendments of 1977

    Statute Number:  N.J.S.A. 58:10A-1 to 13
                     33 U.S.C. 1251, Section 401

    Purpose:  Requires construction related projects to be
              consistent with New Jersey's water quality standards
              and policies, and that such construction activities
              will not have an adverse impact on the water quality.
              Construction activities include, but are not limited
              to,  docks,  wharves,   piers,  bulkheads,   bridges,
              pipelines, cables or pilings, or dredging and fill or
              removing of sand or other materials from lands under
              water.

    Submit:   CP-1 application form for certification
              Site location map (USGS or DEP Quadrangle)
              Public Notification
              Drawing/Development plans
              Color Photographs
              Dredge Projects - methods of: dredging,
                   turbidity/sedimentation controls, dewatering and
                   disposal.  Also quantity and sites of dredging,
                   dewatering and disposal.

    Contact:  Office of Planning and Standards
              Division of Water Resources
              Department of Environmental Protection
              CN029
              Trenton, New Jersey 08625
              609-633-7026

                              - 55 -

    STREAM ENCROACHMENT PERMIT

    Department:      Environmental Protection

    Project Type:    Flood Control

    Statute Title:   Stream Encroachment Act

    Statute Number:  N.J.S.A. 58:16A-1 et seq.
                    N.J.A.C. 7:8-3.15

    Purpose:  Requires permit for the construction, installation or
             alteration of any structure or permanent fill along,
             in, or across the channel or floodway of any stream.
             Permit also required for any alteration of the stream
              itself (dredging or filling) within the high-water
             mark of 100-year flood as determined by the State.
             The Flood Plain Act, N.J.S.A. 58:16A-50 et seq.,
             empowers the State to control use and development on
              floodway portions of flood hazard areas and flood
              fringe areas.  Until rules and regulations under the
             Act are administered, the review by DEP of permit
              applications for development within this area is being
             administered under the provisions of the Stream
             Encroachment Statute.

              Permit covered by 90-Day Review Law (P.L. 1975, c.
              232)

    Submit:   CP-1 application form for permit (standard form)

             Engineering data sheet
              Location key map
              Drawings showing property lines, contours, profiles,
                   etc.
              Photographs upstream and downstream from proposed
                  projects
              Channel relocation and major fill projects required
                   EIS
              Hydrologic computation based on 100-year flood
              Erosion and sediment control practices
              Application fee
              Evidence that notification of application was made to
                   required local agencies

    Contact:  Stream Encroachment Section
              Bureau of Flood Plain Management
              Division of Water Resources
              Department of Environmental Protection
              CN029
              Trenton, New Jersey 08625
              609-292-4869

                              - 57 -

    NEW JERSEY POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM

    Department:         Environmental Protection

    Project Type:       Point Source Discharge to Surface Water
                       Municipal,    Industrial,     Thermal,    or
                       Pre-Treatment Facility

    Statute Title:      New Jersey Water Pollution Control Act of
                        1977

    Statute Number:     N.J.S.A. 58:10A-l et seq.
                       N.J.A.C. 7:14A-1 et seq.

    Purpose:  Those persons who presently discharge or plan* to
              discharge from a point source to surface waters of the
              State must apply for a NJPDES permit which grants
              approval  for  such  discharge.   Permittees  currently
              holding a federal NJPDES permit are exempt but must
              apply for a new State NJPDES permit six months before
              the expiration of their federal permit.

    Submit:   CP-1, plus supplement sheet NJPDES - WQM-1, and a
                   technical addendum.
              Application to Discharge Wastewaters to the Surface
                   Waters of the State of New Jersey.
              For Pre-treatment, submit the application for permit
                   to discharge wastewater to a domestic treatment
                  works.

    Contact:  Water Quality Management Element
              Division of Water Resources
              Office of Permit Administration
              CN 029
              Trenton, New Jersey 08625
              609-292-5262

    * Those persons planning to discharge must first receive a
    discharge  allocation certificate.   This certificate allocates
    effluent limits which a new facility must meet initially. For
    details contact the above office.

                          - 58 -

    NEW JERSEY POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM

    Department:      Environmental Protection

    Project Type:    Point source discharge to land/groundwater.
                    Land application of sludge and septage; land
                    application of industrial waste residues;
                    landfill wastes; spray irrigation; overland
                    flow; rapid infiltration; surface impoundment;
                    underground injection; any other discharge to
                    land/or groundwaters, as required.

    Statute Title:   New Jersey Water Pollution Control Act of
                    1977

    Statute Number:  N.J.S.A. 58:10A-1 et seq.
                    N.J.A.C. 7:14A-1 et seq.

    Purpose: Those persons who presently discharge or plan* to
              discharge from a point source to the land/groundwater
              of the State must apply for a NJPDES permit which
              grants approval for such discharge.

    Submit:   CP-1, plus supplement sheet NJPDES - WQM-1, and a
              technical  addendum  which  covers  the  activities
              presently conducted or planned, such as, the land
              application of sludge, septage, or compost; land
              application  of  industrial  waste  residues;  landfill
              wastes;   spray  irrigation;   overland  flow;  rapid
              infiltration; surface impoundment; and underground
              injection.

    Contact:  Water Quality Management Element
              Division of Water Resources
              Office of Permits Administration
              CNO29
              Trenton, New Jersey 08625
              609-292-5262

    * Those persons planning to discharge must first receive a
    discharge  allocation certificate.   This  certificate allocates
    effluent limits which a new facility must meet initially. For
    details contact the above office.

                   - 59 -

                       FEDERAL-STATE PERMITS

        Although it is not the intent of this directory to list
    federal permits, the following is noted because State certifi-
    cation is required prior to the issuance of the federal permit.

        At present, certain federal permits, primarily but not
    limited to, Army Corps of Engineers Dredge and Fill Permits, re-
    quire under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (P.L. 92-
    500) certification by the Division of Water Resources, DEP,
    prior to the issuance of the permit by the appropriate federal
    agency.

         In addition to state permit requirements, application for
    the Dredge and Fill Permit must also be made to either - -

        Army Corps of Engineers
         New York District (N.J. north of Manasquan River)
         26 Federal Plaza
        Attention: Operations Division
        New York, New York 10278
         212-264-0185

                      or

        Army Corps of Engineers
         Philadelphia District (N.J. south of Manasquan River)
         Customs House
         Second and Chestnut Streets
         Room 404
         Attention: Permits Branch
         Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
         215-597-2812

                           -60-

    Tideland Statutes
         There are three kinds of tidelands instruments: grants,,
    leases, and licenses. A gran~t conveys full ownership to the

    applicant. A lease conveys use of the property for a fixed
    number of years, and is usually issued for projects involvin~g

    solid fill (such as bulkhead). A license also allows use of
    the property for a fixed number of years (usually 10 or: less),
    and is the type of instrument most commonly used for residential

    docks and piers. If the State of New Jersey claims ownership of
    a piece of land under the Tidelands Statutes, municipalities may

    have to obtain a lease or license to use the land before obtain-
    ing a Waterfront Development Permit.

         In order to obtain a Tidelands grant, lease or license, an

    application must be submitted to the Tidelands Resource Council.
    Prior to submitting an application, a pre-application conference

    with the Division of Coastal Resources, Bureau of Tidelands, which
    serves as staff to the Council, is advisable. The Bureau of
    Tidelands uses two different application forms which vary only

    slightly, one for licenses and one for grants or leases.
         The following items must be submitted with an application:
         1. A current survey, prepared by a licensed surveyor,

             showing the applicant's upland property and the boundaries
             of the tidelands area applied for, the location of the
            mean high water line, the depth of the waterway at mean
             low water, the names of adjoining property owners, and

             a diagram of proposed or existing structures within

             the applied for area; and
         2. A certificate of title signed by an attorney at law or

             representative of a title company demonstrating evidence
             of ownership of the upland property, or of permission of
             the upland owner to apply for the conveyance (State law

             gives the upland owner first right to apply).

                                  -61-

                 A twenty-five dollar fee is required for an application for
            a Tidelands grant only. There is no fee for a Tidelands lease

            or license application.

                 At the time of submission for a Tidelands application, a
            Waterfront Development Permit application must also be submitted
            to the Division's Bureau of Coastal Project Review. A Tidelands
            application will not be considered complete until this is done.
            When the application has been determined complete for review, it
            will be scheduled for discussion by the Tidelands Resource
            Council. The Council's real estate appraiser will evaluate the
            property, and this evaluation will be considered by the Council
            in making its decision. This evaluation represents the annual
            rental in the case of a lease or license, or the full value of
            the property in the case of a grant. If the application involves
            legalizing an existing structure, the value may include back
            rental for past use. If the Council votes to approve the appli-
            cation, it will certify the decision at the next meeting when
            it approves the minutes of the previous meeting. The Commissioner
            of the DEP then receives the minutes for approval or disapproval.
                 For additional information or clarification, contact:
                            Bureau of Coastal Enf-orcement & Field Services
                            Waterfront Region
                            CN 401
                            Trenton, New Jersey 08625
                            (609) 292-8203
                 A complete listing of the applicable State permits and
            licenses is included in Appendix G, Exhibit 1, the Directory of

            State Programs for Regulating Construction. In addition, the
            Directory provides information on the "90 Day Review Mandate",
            the services offered by the Office of Business Advocacy (OBA),
            one-stop permit information and over-the-counter processing.

    *                                   -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~62-

    County
         No county permits are required unless building construction

    is involved in Bergen County, as, for example, the marine center

    if rebuilding were required. Bergen County Planning Department
    officials have stated that in case a Site Plan Review by the

    county is required, the applicant must submit the Site Plan
    Review Application Form, a fee of $50 and six copies of the site
    plan. Any zoning changes must be accompanied by a change in the

    municipalityts Master Plan.

         Although it is a State Department of Agriculture requirement,
    a Soil and Sediment Control Plan Certification must be obtained

    from the County Soil Conservation District (SCD) for projects in

    which more than 5,000 square feet of surface area of land will

    be disturbed.

         For projects not involving a Site Plan Review, officials
    suggest an informal meeting with the county planners. Such a
    meeting is required where a county road is involved. For further
    information contact:

                 Bergen County Planning Department
                 29 Linden Street
                 Hackensack, New Jersey 07601
                 Telephone (201) 634-2896

                 Bergen County SCD
                 389 Main Street
                 Hackensack, New Jersey 97601

                             -63-

    0              ~~~~Federal
                        The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) is the principal
                   agency having jurisdiction over some RMP projects. An ACE permit
                   is required to locate a structure, excavate or discharge dredged
                   or fill materials in waters of the United States or to transport
                   dredged material for the purpose of dumping it into ocean waters.
                   The ACE is responsible for notifying all Federal agencies of a
                   proposed project for review and comment. In addition, if an
                   ACE permit is sought, a New Jersey DEP, Division of Water
                   Resources Water Quality Certification must accompany the ACE
                   application. Contact:

                                Army Corps of Engineers
                                New York District
                                26 Federal Plaza
                                New York, New York 10278
                                Telephone (212-264-0185

                                Office of Planning and Standards
                                Division of Water Resources
                                Department of Environmental Protection
                                CN 029
                                Trenton, New Jersey 08625
                                Telephone (609) 633-7026          Use Form CP-l

                   Federal Consistency
                        If a development project requires a federal permit or is
                   federally funded, and is in, or affects, New Jersey's Coastal
                   Zone, a federal consistency certification from the Division of
                   Coastal Resources must be obtained. This is a requirement of
                   the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act, and can be satisfied by
                   receipt of a coastal permit from the Division.

           *                                   -~~~~~~~~~~~~~64-

    Chapter VII

                           COSTS

         Cost projections in the Restoration Master Plan are rough

    estimates. Landscapelengineering designs and specifications
    must be completed, and necessary permits obtained, before pre-
    cise figures can be obtained. The location of this project
    along the coastal zone increases the number of design constraints,

    and so close cooperation with state and federal agencies will
    be advanta Wous so as to minimize delays, costs and environmental

    impacts.

         In addition, the timing and method of implementation is a
    local decision. Each community must develop a strategy with

    regard to land acquisition and recreational development. The
    cost of fee simple or easement acquisition is mostly unknown
    at this time. Riverfront stabilization will be an additional
    cost in some (though not all) locations. More detailed study

    of this component, including design, cost and permit requirements,
    is needed. Stabilization will require close coordination with

    government regulatory agencies and property owners.

         Costs have been estimated based on similar projects (such
    as in other Restoration Project municipalities) or a standard
    11rule of thumb" for a given project. For example, a standard
    for a trail is $45,000/mile for a park where no paved trail
    exists; $1,700/mile where a trail traverses public streets,
    including signs and lining but no curb cuts; and $70 each for
    signs used to mark the pathway (1982 estimates from the N. J.
    Department of Transportation 'brought to estimated 1985 levels).

                              -66

                          ESTIMATED BUDGET
                                                         Estimated Costs
    Pathway
         Singage                 $3,500                       $235,500
         East Rutherford
           New Path              10,000
           Street Path & Bridge 80,000

         Wallington
           New Path             141,00021
           Street Path            1,000

    Pocket Parks
         Wallington (5)                                       $100,000
              Land Acquisition 40,000
              Improvements       60,000

    Linear Park
         Wallington                                           $ 40,000

    Parkway Park
         Wallington                                           $850,000
              Land Acquisition3 350,000
              Improvements      500,000

    Marina
         East Rutherford                                      $865,000

              Land Acquisition4 365,000
              Improvements      500,000

                               - 67 -

                 'Estimated costs Assume land acquisition of the full parcels
            proposed, no material or labor donations, and improvement of the
            property using contractors rather than municipal personnel. As
            such, the costs represent a high figure which can be reduced
            through grants, donations, innovative financing, etc.

                 2Includes cost of the walk behind Wozniak's Funeral Home,
            as mentioned in Chapter V.

                 3Land Assessed Value X l1.65 Equalization Ratio =Estimated

            Market Value.

                  This property is entirely within the 100 year flood plain
            and also is within the Waterfront Development law jurisdiction.

                 4This estimate was used by East Rutherford in its pre-appli-
            cation to Green Acres.

    *                                    -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~68-

                 Chapter III

                                              FEMIDING

                      The development of a Restoration Master Plan is only the first

                 step toward restoration of the waterfront area. After the REMP is
                 accepted by the affected municipalities and the N. J. Division of
                 Coastal Resources, individual projects as outlined in Chapter V must
                 be implemented, requiring site plans; engineering and landscaping
                 designs; local approval; county, state and federal permits where
                 necessary; funding; and implementation.

                      The implementation steps may range from volunteers working with

                 donated materials, to construction projects involving construction
                 proposals and bids. Some efforts may occur in a phased manner to
                 reduce the annual costs involved in capital projects. Others will
                 be implemented in later stages of the process, as suggested in
    *            ~~~~Chapter V.

                      It is anticipated that the Passaic River Coalition will continue
                 to coordinate the Restoration Project for East Rutherford and
                 Wallington as it has for the other municipalities. Funding for the
                 PRC's administrative, planning and fundraising work will come from a
                 variety of sources, including the Bergen County Community Development
                 Program, private foundations, and local donations.

                       Administrative costs will be substantially less than the antici-
                 pated expenses for landscaping and engineering designs, construction
                  and maintenance. Funding for these aspects of implementation may come
                  from a variety of private, corporate, foundation and governmental
                  sources. The atmosphere for fundraising is highly competitive, and
                  thus the quality of plans and proposals must be high during implemen-
                  tation.

            *                                   -~~~~~~~~~~~~~69-

                 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
                      In June of 1984, the N. J. Department of Environmental Protection
                 instructed the Corps of Engineers to undertake a debris clean-up of
                 the Lower Passaic River from Kearny Point to the Dundee Dam (Newark Bay
                 and the Hackensack River were also included), under funding from the
                 federal/state Waterfront Clean-up Project. The Lower Passaic project

                 was included by the DEP based on the Preliminary Debris Survey prepared
                 by the Passaic River Coalition.

                      All costs of the clean-up are borne by the DEP and the Corps of

                 Engineers. Completion is expected in 2 - 3 years.

                 National Endowment for the Arts
                      The NEA provides s'mall, competitive grants in two categories --

                 Landscape Architecture and Design Arts -- for design work by professionals
                 for public parks and facilities.

    0            ~~~~N. J. Green Acres Program
                      As a result of the 1983 Green Acres Bond Issue, low-interest loans

                 are available to municipalities and counties for the acquisition and
                 improvement of public open space and parks. Grants of 25 per cent are
                 available for the acquisition of park I-and for certain urban areas.

                 N. J. DEP - Division of Coastal Resources
                      Loans may be available to municipalities in the project area for
                 shcre protection work. These funds stem from a recent Shore Protection
                 Bond Act. Small grants, on a 75:25 per cent matching basis may also be
                 available.

                      If funding of the Local Planning Grants program is re-established
                 by Congress, further planning funds may be available through the Division
                 of Coastal Resources. The possibility of funding for the program is
                 highly uncertain at this time.

                                               -70 -

    Local and County Government
         The Passaic River Coalition will work with the municipalities to
    establish and operate a fundraising program for the implementation of
    approved projects. Funds from Bergen County could include appropria-
    tions through the Community Development Program, Parks Commission or
    capital budget. Local appropriations from the capital budget or parks
    and recreation budget are possible. Maintenance costs will be a local
    responsibility for the most part, with some expectation of volunteer
    assistance and local donations. The Bergen County Community Development
    Program has provided administrative/implementation funding from FY1982-3
    to FY1984-5. Further funding is uncertain.

    Non-Governmental Sources

         Successful implementation will depend on the development of
    non-governmental sources. These include local private donations, local

    and regional corporations, and foundations. In each case, best results
    will come from the close cooperation of the Passaic River Coalition and
    the Boroughs of~ East Rutherford and Wallington.

    Fiscal Impacts
         The local fiscal impacts resulting from the implementation of this
    plan are expected to be small. Every attempt will be made to maximize
    private, corporate, foundation and non-local government funding for the
    projects, and to minimize costs through innovative design, volunteer
    involvement and the donation of materials.

                                   -71

                   Chapter IX

                                           PUBLIC MEETING
          0                                ~~~~~~~~~~29 AUGUST 1984
                                       WALLINGTON BOROUGH HALL

                        The Passaic River Restoration Master Plan for East Rutherford and
                   Wallington was presented to the public for review a-ad comment. Passaic
                   River Coalition representatives were: Robert J. Myers, Chairman;
                   Daniel J. Van Abs, Technical Director; and Margaret Chandler, PREP
                   Coordinator. Edward Lisovicz, Wallington Councilman and PREP Steering
                   Committee representative, opened the meeting and introduced Mr. Myers,
                   who discussed the importance of planning to the success of the project.

                        Mr. Van Abs, who developed the Restoration Master Plan, then out-
                   lined the process by which the plan was conceived and recognized members

                   of the Citizens Advisory -Committee which assisted in the planning effort.
                   He presented a slide show on the Restoration Project and the East
                   Rutherford/Wallington riverfront, indicating the proposed pathway route
                   and park locations. After reviewing the proposals on maps of the area,
    *             ~~~~he outlined the process for municipal acceptance of the plan and
                   possible implementation of plan elements.

                        The meeting was then opened to questions from the audience. The
                   audience included residents of East Rutherford, Wallington and Passaic.

                        Questions focused on several topics:

                          1)Whether acceptance of the plan committed either municipality to
                            implementing any or all of the plan or expending local funds

                            for any purpose;
                        2)  How the proposed facilities could be financed;
                        3)  How to control the use of any park facilities (specifically
                            the proposed park on Parkway in Wallington);
                        4)  Whether changes could be made in the plan.
                        5)  The future role of the Passaic River Coalition.

           0                                    -7~~~~~~~~~~~~~2-

                        Other questions and comments noted support for the overall concept

                  of riverside parks, concern about the potential impact of proposed
                   flood control levees along the Passaic River, and the need to beautify
                  the west bank of the river to enhance restoration efforts on the east
                  bank.

                  Questions and Responses
                        1)  Commitment of local funds -- The Borough Councils will be asked
                  to accept the Restoration Master Plan for their communities.  This is
                  hot a commitment to implement or fund the plan or any part thereof.
                  Rather, acceptance indicates an interest by the boroughs in reviewing
                  the plan as a set of recommendations. If the boroughs, individually
                  or together, wish to implement any or all of the recommendations, they
                  may do so at any time. Acceptance of the plans merely closes the con-
                  ceptual planning period, which began when the Borough Councils supported
                  by resolution the Passaic River Coalition's grant proposal to the N. J.
                  Division of Coastal Resources for planning funds. The plan itself is
    *              ~~~~conceptual and has no force in law.

                       However, the PRC hopes that both municipalities will choose to
                  implement most or all of the plan, with modifications to fit the
                  recreational needs and financial constraints which exist.

                        2) Financing plan implementation -- Chapter VIII on Funding
                  outlines possible sources of money for park development. Maintenance
                  responsibilities most often rest with the park owner, though special
                  funds could be established. The Boroughs could pursue funding on their
                  own or in cooperation with the Restoration Project.

                       3) Controlling Park Use -- Any park developed with municipal
                  funds may be controlled so that only local residents have access.
                  If State or federal funds are used, a standard requirement is that
                  access be open to all members of the public. However, controls may be
                  ~placed on the number of users at any one time, the types of use, and
                  the hours of use. In addition, parks can be designed to buffer neigh-
                  boring residences from disturbance, while allowing effective surveillance
                  by law enforcement personnel.

                                               -73-

         4) Alterations of the Restoration Master Plan -- The plan may
    (and most likely will) be changed any number of times, much as the
    plans for Kearny, North Arlington, Lyndhurst and Rutherford have been
    changed. Additions, deletions, changes in scope, new park designs,-
    alternate pathway routes, etc., may occur as a better sense of local
    needs develops. The Restoration Project welcomes proposed changes at
    any time.

         5) Future Role of the Passaic River Coalition -- The PRC
    coordinates the Passaic River Restoration Project, which was established
    to move forward in implementing local goals for parks development and
    restoriwiafor the benefit of the residents. The theme is one of
    cooperation, and the Steering Committee includes representatives from
    Wallington,'I.East Rutherford, Rutherford, Lyndhurst, North Arlington,
    Kearny, Harrison, Nutley and Clifton. The PRC invites and encourages
    the Boroughs of East Rutherford and Wallington to continue their partici-
    pation in the Restoration Project, and to take advantage of PRC
    assistance in fundraising and implementation of any or all of the plan's
    recommendations.

    ~Comments Submitted After the Public Meeting
         One comment-was received subsequent to the public meeting. Mr. Edward

    Lisovicz of Wallington suggested that the Restoration Master Plan be
    revised to recommend acquisition of all riverside properties from the
    proposed East Rutherford Marina to the Gregory Avenue Bridge. This
    would create a bi-municipal linear park in that area. Current land uses
    are two used car lots and a small restaurant.

         As this project would further the goals of the Restoration Project,

    would allow a more aesthetic setting for the pathway, and would extend
    the unbroken line of park land north of the proposed marina, it is
    hereby recommended for inclusion. The map on the following page shows
    the location of the site. The cost of the linear park is estimated as
    follows:

                                -74-

    Property                                 159,000
         East Rutherford      61,500
         Wallington            97,500

    Improvements                              15,000
                                            174,000

                            - 75 -

                          RESTORATION MASTER PLAN
                      EAST RUTHERFORD-WALLINGTON

                               OVERVIEW

                                                                           o  40Q

                                                                           FE .E T

    innnnPAT"WAV ROUT%

               ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0NAAIL- -am

                     s~~~~~~~~RTEFR

                                                                                                             Appendix A

    0

    0

                                   I
                                     :~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

                  CONSISTENCY WITH COASTAL RESOURCE
                       AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES

         The study area falls within the jurisdiction of the Division
    of Coastal Resources of the New Jersey Department of Environmental'
    Protection. The authority of that agency is granted under the
    Waterfront Development Permit program (N.J. S.A. 12:5-1 et Seq.).
    The purpose of this chapter is to assure consistency between the
    RMP and the Coastal Resource and Development Policies. Considera-
    tion will be given to Special Areas (7:7E-3.1-45), General Water
    Areas (7:7E-4.1-10), General Land Areas (7:7E-5.1-7), General
    Location Policies (7:7E-6.1-3), Use Policies (7:7E-7.1-13), and
    Resource Policies (7:7E-8.1-26). Policies that do not apply
    do not appear in this section.

    Section 7:7E-3.5 Finfish Migratory Pathways
         Comment
         Certain migratory finfish exist in the river, at least one
         in fairly large quantities -- the blueback herring. Immature
         striped bass have been sampled in very small quantities in
         the tributaries to the Passaic River main stem, and eels
         have been reported by fishermen and others. No development
         is proposed that will either impede the movement of fish
         or lower water quality in any way. A commercial fishing ban
         and recreational fishing advisory are in effect for anadro-
         mous fish along the lower Passaic

    Section 7:7E-3.6 Submerged Vegetation
         Comment
         Vegetation in the river is limited to nonexistent. The river
         bed is listed as Riverine-Tidal-Open-UlJnknown bottom in the
         National Wetland Inventory.

    0              ~~~~Section 7:7E-3.7 Navigation Channels

                        Comment
                        The Passaic River from the southern boarder of the study area

                        to the Market Street Bridge is considered to be a navigation
                        channel channel according to the United States Coast Guard,
                        Third District Commander. Aids to Navigation are maintained

                        in the navigation channel. No project proposed by the RMP
                        would result in loss of navigability, and for the present,
                        at least, no dredging of the main channel is proposed.

                   Section 7:7E-3.1Q Marina Moorings

                        Comment
                        No RMP proposed project will detract from recreational boat-
                        ing. One project deals with the creation of a new marina
                        site. No specific dredging permits need be sought at pre-
                        sent, but it is possible that minor dredging will be needed.
                        In that case appropriate permits will be obtained and
                        required turbidity precautions taken. Dredge spoil would
                        be disp osed of as fill along eroding parts of the river
                        bank, possibly at the site of the pocket parks, to level
                        land or create berms.

                   Section 7:7E-3.12 Submerged Infrastructure Routes

                        Comment
                        No project proposed by the master plan will interfere with
                        existing submerged infrastructure, nor with infrastructure
                        underground, as no subsurface work is anticipated.

                   Section 7:7E-3.17 Filled Water's Edge
                        Comment
                        Mut~h o� the study area is characterized by filled waters
                        edge, some of which is already heavily developed. While

                        many of the uses proposed by the RM? are water dependent

         (e.g., public recreation, marinas and so forth) many are not.
         Some of the commercial uses that would exist in any planned
        mixed-use district, will not be water dependent but are an
         integral part of the revitalization of the waterfront.

    Section 7:7E-3.19 Natural Water's Edge-Floodplains
         Comment
        Much of the existing and planned development lies in the
         floodplain (as defined by the NJDEP). Portions of the
         trail, parks, the marina and launching ramps are recreational
         uses and are generally considered to be acceptable uses of
         floodplain land.

    Section 7:7E-3.20 Alluvial Flood Margins
         Comment
         A large portion of the study area has been filled with a com-
         bination of river dredgings, organic waste and rubble. There
         are, according to the Bergen County Soil Survey, no areas
         of alluvial margin (as defined). No project within the RMP
        will conflict with this policy.

    Section 7:7E-3.24 Erosion Hazard Areas
         Comment
         See response to 7:7E-3.33 (Steep Slopes).

    Section 7:7E-3.26 Wetlands
         Comment
         There are no wetlands in the study area according to the
         National Wetlands Inventory, verified by a field survey.

    Section 7:7E-3.27 Wetlands Buffer
         Comment
        As no wetlands exist in the study area, this policy does
         not apply.

    Section 7:7E-3.33 Steep Slopes
         Comment
         3.24 (Erosion Hazard Areas) and 3.30 (Coastal Bluffs) apply
         to coastal areas, not riverine sites. 3.33 (Steep Slopes)
         applies to steep slopes which are not at the waters edge.
        In the RMP Study Area, several steep slopes exist along the
         river, especially in Wallington upstream of the 8th Street
         Bridge. These steep slopes are not directly covered by the
         Coastal Resource and Development Policies. However, the
         three paragraphs noted above have similar restrictions upon
         development in steeply sloped areas. These restrictions should
         be applied to the study area. No project in the RMP will
         conflict with the steep slope policy.

    Section 7:7E-3.35 Historic and Archeological Resources

         Comment
         One site, the Wallington High School, is on the N. J. and
        National Registers of Mistoric Sites. Seven other sites
         are listed in the Bergen County Historic Sites Survey. No
        project proposed in the RMP will conflict with this policy.

    Section 7:7E-3.37 Endangered or Threatened Wildlife or Vegetation
    Species Habitats
         Comment
         Because of existing heavy development in the study area, it
         seems unlikely that any project contemplated by the RMP
        would adversely impact on such habitat. The plan acknowledges
         the policy here and under "Planning Principles". Since the
        DEP treats this policy on a case by case basis, each project
        will be evaluated at the time of application.

    Section 7:7E-3.38 Critical Wildlife Habitats
         Comment
         Because of existing 'heavy development in the study area, it
         seems unlikely that any project contemplated by the RMP!
        would adversely impact on such habitat. The plan acknowledges
         the policy here and under "Planning Principles". Since the
        DEP treats this policy on a case by case basis, each project

        will be evaluated at the time of application.

    Section 7:7E-3.39 Public Open Space
         Comment
         The principles guiding the RM? are designed to maintain or
         increase public open space. Where a development on present
         open space is proposed', it is designed to enhance the use
         of public space.

    0                               ~~~~~~~~~~GENERAL WATER AREAS

        Section 7:7E-4.1Q Acceptability Conditions for Uses
                 ()Boat Ramps
                   Comment
                   Boat ramps scheduled for renovation in the RMP are existing
                   facilities, and no change is anticipated that would alter the
                   existing relationship with the river ecosystem. Where a new
                   ramp is planned, there is no existing facility. In this
                   case, the definition of intertidal flat is not met and the
                   impact on subaqueous vegetation is minimal. Ramps will be
                   constructed of concrete or crushed stone.

              (d)  Docks and Piers (Recreational and Fishing)

                   Comment
                   The proposed marina for East Rutherford may involve docks

                   which are on pilings though floating, removable docks are
                   more likely. No mooring sites or marinas currently exist
                   in the project area, though the proposed site was formerly
                   a marina. The steep banks and concrete bulkheadings provide
                   sufficient fishing areas that no fill or wharves are
                   necessary. All dock and pier designs will comply with this
                   policy.

              (e)  Dredging - Maintenance

                   Comment
                   Maintenance dredging is not specifically provided for in
                   the R~MI, but may prove to be advisable at various sites,-
                   as a result of debris accumulation and siltation near
                   boating facilities.

              (f   Dredging - New
                   Comment
                   No near dredging is anticipated as a result of the RMP.
                   While it is unlikely that any new dredging will be.required,
                   it will be minimal in any case and will satisfy this policy.

    (g) Dredge Spoil Disposal

        Comment
        To the extent that dredging is ever necessary, it will be
        minimal.A s the Passaic River qualifies as a medium river,
        no spoil will be placed in the river area.

    (i) Filling
        Comment
        No filling has been proposed in the RMP.

    (k) Mooring
        Comment
        A small mooring area may be desirable as part of a proposed
        boating facility in East Rutherford, which would be a public
        facility and would be adequately marked.

                          GENERAL LAND AREAS

    Section 7:7E-5.3 Coastal Growth Rating
         Comment
         The area is located in the northern waterfront region.

    Section 7:7E-5.4 Environmental Sensitivity Rating
         Comment
         The area appears to be of "Low Environmental Sensitivity".
        Vegetation is, except for a few isolated spots, not forest
        vegetation, soils are not highly productive as agricultural
         soils. Most soils are urban land or urban land complex,
        with extensive impermeable surfaces and modification.

    Section 7:7E-5.5 Development Potential
         (b) Residential Development Potential
              Comment
              Each site must be evaluated separately but most sites
              in the RMP appear to fit the High Potential classifi-
              cation. No RMP project calls for residential develop-
             ment.
         (c) Major Commercial and Industrial Development Potential
              Comment
              Some project sites meet the qualifications for a High
             Potential Commercial, but of these many are within the
              100 year flood plain.

    Section 7:7E-7.3 Resorts/Recreational Use Policies
         Comment
         Every community involved in the RMP and this project except
        East Rutherford has at least one waterfront park along the
        Passaic River. The net effect of the RMP will be to create
         some new parkland and enhance still more, while providing
        a riverside park for East Rutherford.

         In the area designated for mixed use, the RMP recommends
         a zoning requirement for public access to the river and a
         right-of-way for the proposed trail. Recommendations will
         be made to planning boards as to incorporation of viewing
         areas, etc. in future developments.

         The RMP includes plans for the development of boating areas.
         It is hoped that such facilities will encourage the expanded
        use of the river for boating. The proposed marina will meet
         standards for operations of its type, including pump-out
         facilities.

    Section 7:7E-7.5Transportation Use Policies
         (c) Bicycle and Foot Paths
              Comment
              The proposed trail is consistent with this policy.

         (d) Parking Facilities
              Comment
              Parking facilities will be required for a few projects
              recommended under the RMP. In some cases, parking
              facilities exist, though they are in need of repair.
             Where feasible, if new or replacement facilities are
              required, permeable surfaces are recommended.

    Section 7:7E-7.10 Commercial Facility Use Policies
         (a) Hotels and Motels
              Comment
              Although no motels/hotels are specifically called for
              in the RMP, as the corridor develop   as a recreational
              area, a market for such facilities may develop. Each
              facility will be evaluated individually and in
              accordance with this policy.
         (c) Retail Trade and Services
              Comment
              The mixed-use zone is designed to encourage retail and
              service facilities consistent with the restoration plan.

              Each will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, and
              will be evaluated on the basis of this policy among
              other factors.

    Section 7:7E-7.11 Coastal Engineering
         Comment
         Some bulkheading has been proposed in the RMP. In other
         areas, rip-rap may be employed to retard erosion. In
         certain areas, the structural modification is necessary
         to create a useable park area. Bulkheading would be
         employed to retain existing banks and to facilitate
         access to the water for boating, fishing, etc. No struc-
         tural modifications affect sand transport, and they reduce
         sedimentation due to gullying and bank erosion. No wet-
         lands exist in the planning area and there should be minimal
         ecological impact. The proposed bulkheading appears consis-
         tent with this policy, and will be minimal as most areas
         are already stabilized or will be left in their existing
         condition.

    Section 7:7E-7.12 Dredge Spoil Disposal on Land
         Comment
         Little or no dredge spoil will be developed through imple-
        mentation of the RMP.  Its use will conform to this policy.

                           RESOURCE POLICIES

    Section 7:7E-8.4 Water Quality
         Comment
         No impairment of water quality should result from the pro-
        jects proposed by the RMP. Water quality may improve as
         a result of public awareness of the river as a resource,
         and as a result of reduced sedimentation due to antiero-
         sion measures. The water is not suitable for contact
         recreation at the present time.

    Section 7:7E-8.7 Runoff
         Comment
         Projects proposed by the RMP should not significantly
         increase stormwater runoff. Where paving is involved and
         it is feasible to do so, permeable paving will be used.

    Section 7:7E-8.9 Vegetation
         Comment
         The RMP will result in no significant loss of vegetation,
         and should yield healthier, more valuable' specimens.
         Landscaping will increase the amenity value of both exist-
         ing and new vegetation.

    Section 7:7E-8.13 Public Access to the Shorefront
         Comment
         All proposed RMP projects require public access and the
         proposed zoning provides for public access in all new
         development.

    Section 7:7E-8.14 Scenic Resources and Design
         Comment
         The RMP proposes formation of parks and viewing areas to
         enhance and make accessible man-made and natural land-
         scape amenities.

    Section 7:7E-8.15 Buffers and Compatibility of Uses

         Comment
         Buffer areas will be provided where feasible, and where
         adjacent incompatible land uses abut.

    Section 7:7E-8.17 Energy Conservation

         Comment
         Where required and on a case-by-case basis, an energy plan
         will be submitted.

    Section 7:7E-8.19 Traffic
         Comment
         Projects proposed by the FMP should have negligible impact
         on existing traffic flows.

    Section 7:7E-8.12 Wet Soils
         Comment
         No project of the RM? is inconsistent with this policy.
         Load bearing characteristics of soils will not be a factor
         in proposed projects, but development in the proposed
        mixed-use zone will have to be evaluated on a case-by-case
         basis. Most soils in the study area are not wet soils.

    Section 7:7E-8.23 Flood Hazard Areas
         Comment
        Most projects contemplated by the RMP are open space/
         recreation projects and are completely consistent with this
         policy. In those instances (i.e. mixed-use zone develop-
        ment.), applicable N. J. DEP regulations will be followed.

    Section 7:7E-8.26 Barrier Free Design

         Comment
         Barrier free design will be included in all RMP projects.

    Appendix B

                           Passaic River Restoration Project:

                               East Rutherford /Wallington

                                     Work Product 1:

                                  Narrative Discussion
    *                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~of the
                                     Riverfront Area

                                       I June 1984

                                 Passaic River Coalition
                                  246 Madisonville Road
                            Basking Ridge, New Jersey 07920

                Introduction
    *                ~~~~~The Passaic River Restoration Project was established jointly by

                the Passaic River Coalition and the municipalities of Kearny, North
                Arlington, Lyndhurst, and Rutherford in 1980. Coordinated by the Passaic
                River Coalition and a Steering Committee of municipal representatives,
                the Restoration Project seeks to further the improvement in quality of
                the Passaic River, and to enhance public access to and enjoyment of the
                river and riverbank areas.

                     The Passaic River served the early residents of the Lower Passaic
                Valley as a recreational and commercial resource. Boating was a major

                sport through the late nineteenth century. Increasing pollution from
                sewage and industries led to the decline of most recreational uses of
                the river and the bank area. Parks declined in quality and became
                oriented to non-riverine uses.

                     A Restoration Master Plan for the four municipalities was prepared
                in 1982 by the Passaic River Coalition under a grant from the Division
                of Coastal Resources, N. J. Department of Environmental Protection.
                The Restoration Master Plan, which was accepted by all four municipalities,

                sets forth a phased program for the development and improvement of
                riverside parks and a connecting pathway. Implementation is underway.

                    The municipalities of East Rutherford, Wallington, Harrison,
                Belleville, Nutley, and Clifton have become involved with the Restoration
               Project, and the Counties of Bergen and Passaic have provided support.
               In 1984, a second grant from the N. J. Division of Coastal Resources
               was awarded to the Passaic River Coalition to extend the Restoration
               Master Plan to the Boroughs of East Rutherford and Wallington. This
               document, along with five maps, constitute Work Product I of this latest

               planning effort.

                    As for the first four municipalities (Rutherford through Kearny),
               the Restoration Master Plan in East Rutherford and Wallington will
               recommend a series of actions to improve public access to and enjoyment
               of the Passaic River. Recommendations will include park acquisition
               and beautification, and the phased development of a pathway along or
               parallel to the river linking the riverside parks. The plan is being
               .developed in cooperation with a Citizens Advisory Comittee of local
               citizens and public officials.

         The first phase of this project has been the gathering of data on the
    existing physical attributes of the project area. Special areas as defined
    in the Coastal Resource and Development Policies (1982) were identified and
    delineated (See Appendix A), along with existing land uses and zoning, soils,
    etc. Field surveys have been used to verify published information and develop
    a familiarity with th  region.

    Evaluation of the Project Area
         The riverfront area in East Rutherford and Wallington was divided into

    short sections, or "reaches," to simplify analysis of the area. Each reach
    begins and ends with easily identifiable landmarks, such as streets or bridges.

         A general description is provided for each reach, followed by a f our-
    part analysis of the reaches:
              1.  Suitability for recreational uses;
              2.  Suitability for transportation uses;

              3.  Suitability for development; and
              4. Physical attributes and areas of special concern.
         Recreation, transportation and development are the basic alternatives
    for the use of any parcel of land. The three types of uses are interdependent,
    such as development's dependency on good transportation networks, but also
    may conflict. The first three sections analyze how well the reach can accom-
    modate any existing or future recreation, transportation, or development;
    the extent to which the use conflicts with other uses; and the extent to
    which the physical attributes of the reach may prevent its use for any one
    purpose. Physical constraints may include existing development, steep slopes,
    flood hazards, etc.

         The last section briefly describes information shown on the five maps
    for that reach. The maps are: Land Use; Zoning; Soils; Land Use Jurisidiction;
    and Special Features.

         Jurisdiction of the State of New Jersey under the Waterfront Development
    Law extends a minimum of 100 feet and a maximum of 500 feet from the mean
    high water line, and otherwise to the first property line or public road.
    All development within this area must apply for and receive a Waterfront
    Development Permit prior to development.

         The analyses within this report have been developed by the Passaic River
    Coalition based on existing information and field surveys. The Restoration
    Master Plan will use these analyses as modified by the Citizens Advisory
    Committee and comments of the general public and the N.J. Division of Coastal
    Resources.

         The criteria used in assessing each reach are as follows:

    Recreation
         1. viewshed -suitability
         2. access to river
         3. soil erodability
         4. topography
         5. security
         6. hazards
         7. competing existing or proposed use

    Transportation
         1.  links developed areas
         2. existing corridor
         3. availability of right-of-way
    Development
         1. existing structures
         2. available infrastructure
         3. amenity/asperity value
         4. river dependent

         These criteria are important measures of the suitability or
    unsuitability of a particular reach for each use. The criteria were
    developed in cooperation with the Passaic River Restoration Project
    Steering Committee during the first phase of planning in 1982.

                   REACH: Linking Rutherford and East Rutherford- #11

                   General Description
                        The Restoration Master Plan for Rutherford calls for the multi-
                   purpose path to terminate at the northwestern corner of Rutherford
                   Memorial Field. A Connection between Rutherford and East Rutherford
                   is desirable. The boundary is formed by the right-of-way of a spur
                   line of the Erie Lackawanna Railroad from Carlton Avenue to the Passaic
                   River. All but 200 feet of the right-of-way is occupied by railroad
                   tracks on a steep embankmnent. The remaining area near the river is a
                   materials storage area and a stormwater outlet channel. Light industry
                   occupies the land north of the municipal boundary.

                   Recreation
                        Long term potential -Moderate to poor. There is almost no means
                   of executing a recreational pathway across the border area in a setting
                   that is conducive to recreation and is aesthetically pleasing. The
                   pathway in this location would be mostly a means of travelling across-
    *              ~~~~~the site.

                        Consistency with existing/planned uses - The path segment in
                   Rutherford is fully consistent with Rutherford Memorial Field, a multi-
                   use recreational area. East Rutherford, adjacent to Rutherford, is
                   used aridzoned as light industry and has a railroad line along the border,
                   both of which are incompatible with recreation uses, being intensive land uses

                        Physical constraints - The high gradient on both sides of the rail-
                   road embankmnent and the stormwater outlet channel constitute major im-
                   pediments to recreation.

                   Transportation
                        Use potential - Excellent. The border area is a railroad spur
                   serving the industrial park in East Rutherford. It is used infrequently
                   but on a regular schedule. Jackson Avenue in Rutherford becomes Carlton
                   Avenue in East Rutherford. Traffic is moderately heavy during much of
                   the day.

    Transportation (cont'd)
         Consistency with existing/planned uses - Good. The railroad is
    unlikely to see increased use due to the limited number of firms which

    it may serve in the industrial park.
         Physical constraints - Jackson/Carnton Avenue is the closest
    possible road to the river, due to the high gradient of the railroad
    embankment. The road has limited potential for widening, and the
    railroad crossing creates a gradient and surface which reduces traffic
    velocity at that point.

    Development
         Use potential - Fully utilized. No space exists for new develop-
    ment, though it might be possible to upgrade the industrial buildings
    along the railroad near Carlton Avenue.
         Consistency with existing/planned uses - The zoning matches the
    current uses.
         Physical constraints - The railroad embankment, Carlton Avenue,
    and the stormwater outlet channel make any change in use along the
    border very unlikely.

    Overlay Comments
         Zoning - Recreation and Residential in Rutherford. Light Iidustry
    in East Rutherford.
         Soils - Urban land classification, indicating extensive impermeable
    surfaces.
         Land Use - Transportation rights-of-way along the border. Fully
    developed as public parks, housing and industry on either side.
         Special Areas - The Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners regularly
    sample the river at two stormwater outlets just south and north of
    the industrial park. Much of the site is within the 100-year flood
    plain. Most of the bank is filled.
         Land Use Jurisdictions - State jurisdiction under the Waterfront
    Development Law extends inland from the river to Madison Street. The
    Passaic River is navigable in this area.

               REACH. Van Winkle Street to Carlton Avenue, East Rutherford - #2

    0           ~~~General Description
                    The industrial park is bordered on the north by Van Winkle Street and
               Morton Avenue. Morton Avenue is generally residential, while Van Winkle
               Street directly abuts the industrial park. North of Van Winkle Street along
               River Street to the junction with Carlton Avenue, the area is primarily residential
               with one commercial facility at the corner of River Street and Carlton Avenue.
               No direct access to the riverbank exists.

               Recreation
                    Long term potential - Good to fair. It may be possible to gain access
               to the river along its bank line through a variety of small lots and other
               property, such as the River Renaissance condominiums. Otherwise, there is
               no real potential for recreation other than as passage from one recreation
               area to the next, given existing uses. However, the Borough proposes to
               acquire the commercial facility at Carlton and River Street for conversion
               to recreational uses under the Green Acres Program.
                    Consistency with existing/planned uses - Moderate to poor. Nearly all
               avail-able lots are developed for housing and commercial uses, at low to moderate
               densities.
                    Physical constraints - Other than existing development, only one possible
               constraint exists. A pathway along the river's edge would necessitate a
               bridge across a stormwater outlet channel just north of the industrial park.

               Transportation
                    Use potential - Limited. The roads in question are small, residential
               streets. Morton Avenue has sidewalks, but Van Winkle Street and River Street
               do not. Morton Avenue has ample width for a residential street; the other
               two are narrow. East Rutherford is considering plans to limit truck traffic
               on Morton Avenue by closing its eastern connection with Carlton Avenue.
                    Consistency with existing/planned uses - Good.; The area is almost fully
               developed, and the streets conform to the nature of the surrounding develop-
               ment.
                    Physical constraints - Van Winkle Street has a limited potential for
               widening. The industrial area and residences have minimal sideyards.

    Development

         Use potential -Limited. The 'River Renaissance Condominiums are filling

    the last major area of undeveloped land. Additional development might occur

    on River Street in the long run if existing oversized lots were subdivided.

         Consistency with existing/planned uses - The present and ongoing develop-

    ment matches the zoning.
         Physical constraints - Most of the area is within the 100-year flood

    plain.

    Overlay Comments.
         Zoning - The area is toned as residential in two zones --- single family

    detached and multi-family with multi-family zoning near the -river.

         Soils - Urban land complex soils indicate extensive modification of

    the soil structure.
         Land Use - Primarily residential. One commercial trucking facility.

         Special Areas - Much of this reach is within the 100-year flood plain.

    The bank area is both filled and natural.

         Land Use Jurisdictions - Waterfron Development Law jurisdiction extends

    to River Street in all areas. The Passaic River is navigable along this

    reach.

    REACH: Carlton Avenue, East Rutherford, to Main Avenue, Wallington - #3

    General Description
         Carlton Avenue follows the river north to Paterson Avenue, which continues
    'north along the river to Main Avenue at the Gregory Avenue Bridge. T~vard
    the river from the roads, a boat storage area and two used car dealerships
    use the riverbank, in a generally unintensive manner. Commercial facilities
    north of the car dealers fully occupy the bank area. The opposite side'of

    the road starts as residential but quickly becomes commercial.

    Recreation
         Long term potential - Good. A lengthy section of riverbank is not en-
    cumbered with structuresi:and could eventually be purchased and used as open
    space. The Borough of East Rutherford proposes to do so under the Green
    Acres Program. The remainder has long-term uses, but with small structures
    which only cover fractions of the property.
         Consistency with existing planned uses - Poor/Fair to Good. Compat-
    ibility with existing uses is poor. However, steps could be taken to change
    existing uses to recreation in several lots, leading to increased consistency.
    Traffic along Carlton and Paterson Avenues is heavy at times.
         Physical constraints - In the boat yard, considerable construction rubble,
    concrete pads, and other material should be removed to allow for any recrea-
    tional uses.

    Transportation
         Use potential - Good. The road system is part of the north-south arterial
    system through Wallington and East Rutherford.
         Consistency with existing/planned uses - The roads serve to move traffic
    through the area, and also allow access to commercial uses. Future commercial
    use is compatible with the road system. Any recreational uses must be planned
    around the relatively high traffic volume and the surrounding commercial
    development, allowing ifor parking which does not affect the main roads and
    for pedestrian access.
         Physical constraints - None.

    Development
         Use potential -Fair. Development is a competing use with recreation

    for the underutilized properties. However, the narrowness of the lots and
    the local traffic volume are constraints.
         Consistency with existing/planned uses - Commercial uses-would be consistent.
    Residential and industrial would not be consistent.
         Physical constraints - Lot dimensions, existing rubble, and steep banks
    are major development constraints. Most of the area is within the 100-year
    flood plain.

    Overlay Comments
         Zoning - The southern half is zoned multi-family residential, while

    the northern portion is zoned for light industry.
         Soils - Urban land soils indicate extensive modication of the soil structure
    and impermeable surfaces.
         Land Use - Primarily commercial, with a few residences on the side of
    Carlton Avenue away from the river.
         Special Areas - The Gregory Avenue (Main Avenue) Bridge and the site
    of Anderson's Lumber Company (a major industrial concern of the late nineteenth
    century) are located along this reach. Both are listed on the Bergen County
    Historic Sites Survey,;. but are not on the State or National Historic Sites
    Registers. New Jersey Bell has twenty cables running submferged under the
    Passaic River just south of the Gregory Avenue Bridge. All of the reach
    is within the 100-year flood plain. The bank is filled in most areas.
        Land Use Jurisdictions - Waterfront Development Law jurisdiction extends
    inland to Carlton Avenue and beyond in places to 100 feet inla~fid of mean
    high water, along this reach. The Passaic River is navigable here.

               REACH: Main Avenue to Wallington Avenue, Wallington - #4

    0          ~~~General Description
                    The Passaic River gradually bends to the east as one moves tipgtream, a
               90 degree turn. Its banks are lined with concrete slabs laid during the
               realignment of the river in this area by the N.J. Department of Transportation
               in conjunction with the building of Route 21. Because of the realignment,
               numierous streets deadend at the river. They serve adjacent properties 4nd
               are not available for pocket park development. Several parcels of land are

               owned by the N.J. Department of Transportation which are remnants of pre-
               existing lots. A mix of commercial, industrial, and residential uses exists
               along the river.

               Recreation

                    Long term potential -Good.  The pathway can be placed along the river
               in several areas, and along streets in the rest. The N'.J. Department of
               Transportation property, possibly in combination with new acquisitions, can

               provide neighborhood and community oriented recreation opportunities. The
               purchase or lease of easements-VI-be needed in some areas, along with the
               proposed purchase of the former Tuck Tape parking lot on Parkway through
               the Green Acres Program.
                    Consistency with existing/planned uses - Other than the N.J. Depart-
               ment of Transportation properties, much of the area has existing uses which
               restrict recreation potential. However, the businesses near the Gregory
               Avenue Bridge have excess space near the river, and an unused parking lot
               near the Market Street (Wallington Avenue) Bridge offers recreational potential.
               A narrow right-of-way exists along the river.
                    Physical constraints - The steep concrete embankment presents a potential
               safety hazard for bicyclists.

               Transportation
                    Use potential - Main and Wallington Avenues bound the area, and serve
               as major transportation routes. All of the remaining streets are primarily
               one-way or narrow residential roads. The area is fully developed, so no
               expansion is possible.
                    Consistency wit h existing/planned uses - Good. The road system fits
               the existing uses. The limited traffic an the residential streets will not
               endanger recreational users.

              Transportation (cont'd)

    0              ~~~~Physical constraints - Existing development precludes expansion of the

              roads in most areas.

              Deveomn
                   Use potential - Mostly utilized. The'business uses near Gregory Avenue
              Bridge And the parking lot near Market Street Bridge offer potential sites
              for higher density uses.
                   Consistency with existing/planned uses - The zoning differs from the
              current uses in several areas, especially along Wallington Avenue where resi-
              dential and commercial uses are mixed in a business zone. The parking lot
              is zoned for commercial use near Wallington Avenue and light industry else-

              where. The N.J. Department of Transportation open parcels are zoned for
              single family detached housing.
                   Physical constraints - Most of the area is within the 100-year flood

              plain.

              Overlay Comments
                   Zoning - The lots along Wallington Avenue are zoned for business uses,
              with residential zoning occupying most of the interior land. Two portions
              of light industrial zoning also exist in the area, at Van Winkle and Main,
              and on west side of the Wallington Avenue business zone on the riverside.
                   Soils - Urban land, with extensive impermeable surface and urban land
              complex soils which are extensively modified. The riverbank is primarily
              filled land.
                   Land Use - The land uses generally fit the zoning except as noted above.
              The parking lot is now unused.

                   Special Areas - Much of the reach is within the 100-year flood plain.
              The tavern at 12 Wallington Avenue (c.1900-1920) and the Market Street Bridge
              are in the Bergen County Historical Sites Survey, but not the State or National
              Registers. Public open spaces include two very small parcels owned by the
              N.J. Department of Transportation and Wallington, and a larger parcel off
              of Lester Avenue which is owned by the N.J. Department of Transportation.
              An emergency boat ramp exists at the end of Parkway and has a locked gate.

    Overlay Comments (cont'd)

         Public Service Electric & Gas has submerged lines just north of the
    Gregory Avenue Bridge, while the Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners have
    a trunk line under the river off the end of Lester Street. Passaic Valley
    Sewerage Commissioners also monitor water quality near the location of their
    pump station across from Lester Street.
         Land Use Jurisdictions - Waterfront Development Law jurisdiction extends
    inland to the first road or property line in this reach or a minimum of 100
    feet, creating a disjointed pattern due to the realignment of the river.
    The navigable channel of the Passaic River ends at the Market Street Bridge.

    REACH: Wallington Avenue to 8th Street Bridge, Wallington - #5

    General Description
         Moving upstream, the river turns south in this reach, running in the
    opposite compass direction from the previous reach, and then swings east
    again at the 8th Street Bridge. The effect is similar to a backwards S.
    ,The riverside is mostly commercial property with a small section of resi-
    dential development.

    Recreation
         Long term potential - Fair to good. A few prime pathway possibilities
    exist through this developed area. A few sections of open land and the existing
    borough park offer ggod opportunities for neighborhood recreation. A narrow
    section of open space near the 8th Street Bridge is a possible pathway route,
    which the Borough of Wallington proposes to purchase under Green Acres funding.
    Purchase of a potential pocket park area at the northern end of Hatheway
    Street would also be possible through Green Acres.
         Consistency with existing/planned uses - Existing development generally
    is inconsistent with recreation, except for the borough park and the narrow
    strip near 8th Street Bridge.
         Physical 'constraints - None, other than existing development.

    Transportation
         Use potential - Main and Wallington Avenues bound the area and serve
    as major transportation routes. Most of the remaining streets are residential.
    The exception is Hatheway Street which has several businesses along the east
    side which use large trucks.
         Consistency with existing/planned uses - Fair. Hatheway Street is used
    frequently by tractor-trailer trucks, but is the size of a residential street
    and has residences on the west side. The remaining streets are consistent
    with their uses.
         Physical constraints - Existing development precludes expansion of the
    transportation system through the area.

    Development
         Use potential - Fully utilized, except for one lot near the Market Street
    Bridge which is owned by the N.J. Department of Transportation. The linear
    strip near the 8th Street Bridge is not large enough for significant development.
         Consistency with existing/planned uses - The current uses are in conformance

    generally with the zoning.
         Physical constraints - Most the area is within the 100-year flood plain.

    Overlay Comments
         Zoning - The riverside area along Wallington Avenue is zoned for business

    use. The remainder is zoned for residential, light industry, and public
    open space.
         Soils - Urban land and urban complex soils indicate considerable imper-
    vious surfaces and modifications of the soil structure. The banks are primarily
    filled land.
         Land Use - Along the river, a mix of light industry, residences, a

    borough park, two non-profit organizations, and private open space.
         Special Areas - Much of this reach is within the 100-year flood plain.
    The 8th Street Bridge and the Wallington Municipal Building/Henry W. Plant
    Co. Factory site (1897) just across the street are on the Bergen County Historic
    Sites Survey. Two public open spaces'exist, one developed as a borough park
    along Hatheway Street, and the other an undeveloped parcel owned by the N.J.
    Department of Transportation just east of the Market Street Bridge. The
    Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners have a trunk sewer line under the river
    off of 'Lester Street toward Lodi Street in the 'City of Passaic. Passaic
    Valley Szverage Commissioners also have a water quality monitoring site by

    the 8th Street Bridge.
         Land Use Jurisdictions - Waterfront Law jurisdiction extends inland
    to the first public road from the river.

    REACH:  8th Street Bridge to Midland Avenue3, Wallington -#6

    General Descripti~n-
         From the 8th Street Bridge north, the river turns to the north with
    a wooded bank which rises steeply from the river. Over half of the bank
    top is either publicly owned or undeveloped private land. The remainder
    is commercial or multi-family residential. Two-thirds of the reach is very
    narrow between Main Avenue and the river, until it widens north of Park 'Row.

    Recreation
         Long term potential - Good to fair. The undeveloped bank top from 100
    feet north of the 8th Street Bridge to Park Row is suitable for a pathway
    and sitting areas along much of the property. On the other hand, commercial
    and residential development to the northern end of the reach greatly limits
    recreational uses. Riverview Estates is committed to developing a 10-foot
    wide pathway along the rear of its property as a condition of its Waterfront
    Development permit from the N.J. Division of Coastal Resources.
         Consistency with exist-ing/planned uses - The southern portion of the
    reach, from Alden Street to Park Row, is compatible with recreational uses.
    North of Park Row, existing uses are incompatible with most recreational
    uses other than a pathway.
         Physical constraints - The steep banks of the river offer excellent
    views .f the river but greatly limit access to the w.ater's edge.

    Transportation
         Use potential - Excellent. Main Avenue is a major county road through
    'Wallington.
         Consistency with existing/planned uses - Residential development along
    Miin Avenue causes a conflict between through traffic and residential traffic,
    such as ingress to and egress from driveways. Commercial facilities with
    limited parking also have some difficulties with access during peak traffic
    flows.
         Physical constraints - Widening of Main Avenue could only occur at the
    expense of public open space and comercial frontage.

              Development
    0              ~~~~Use potential - All lots large enough for significant development have
              now been utilized.
                   Consistency with existing/planned uses - Existing uses are generally
              compatible with the zoning of the reach or are in open space.
                   Physical constraints - The steep riverbank and narrow bank top limit
              the development potential for the remaining undeveloped private property.

              Overlay Comments
                   Zoning - This reach is zoned for commercial, multi-family residential,
              and public open space use's. The map indicates zoning as of the 1982 Master
              Plan.
                   Soils - Urban land soils indicate extensive impermeable surfaces. Urban
              land complex soils, such as the Du-nellen-urban land complex soils of this
              area, have been extensively modified by human activity., These range in slope
              from low to high in this reach. The riverbanks exhibit some filling, but
              are mostly natural with a Riverhead Sandy Loam soil.
                   Land Use - Approximately half of the land is developed, and the other
              half is open space.
                   Special Areas - The steep riverbanks limit the extent of the 100-year
              flood plain to a narrow strip along the river. Although Coastal Resource
              and Development Policies exist for 'Et-osion Hazard Areas (3.24), Coastal
              Bluffs (3.30), and Steep Slopes (3.33), none specificallay applies to steep
              slopes in riverine areas. However, the intent of each policy is the same,
              to reduce erosion and safety hazards by strictly limiting development on
              steep slopes. The intent of these policies should also apply here (See Appendix
              A).
                   Wallington High School, north of Alden Street, is listed on the State
              and National Registers of Historic Sites. It will not be affected by the
              project.
                   Lots 2 through 5 of Block 26A are owned and maintained by the Borough
              of Wallington as public open space.
                   Land Use Jurisdictions - Waterfront Development Law jurisdiction extends
              to Main Avenue along this reach.

    REACH:  Midland Avenue to the Saddle River - #7

    General Description
         The commercial development at the north end of the previous reach continues
    for a short distance, then gives way to undeveloped private land where a
    steep riverbank approachbs too close to Midland Avenue to allow for develop-
    ment. As Midland Avenue swings away from the river again, more commercial
    development occupies the bank area to the end of the reach and project area.

    Recreation
         Long term potential - Fair to good. The undeveloped land midway along
    the reach could be used for a pathway. There may also be room for the path-
    way behind the commercial buildings at the southern and northern portions
    of the reach. Along the Saddle River at its confluence with the Passaic
    River, half of the lot is used for construction debris and other miscellaneous
    uses. This land could be developed for open spacez if purchased and developed
    through Green Acres or another program.
         Consistency with existing/planned uses - The existing commercial uses
    will make recreational development difficult in most instances and impossible
    in the remaining lots. Vehicular traffic along Midland Avenue also will
    conflict with recreational uses.
         Physical constraints - The steep riverbank will limit public access
    to the water's edge.

    Transportation
         Use potential - Good to excellent. Midland Avenue is a major county
    road for north-south through traffic along the river.
         Consistency with existing/planned uses - The commercial uses in this
    reach have parking available, reduce traffic conflicts. The status of Mid-
    land Avenue as a county road is consonant with the existing uses. There
    are plans by Bergen County to widen Midland Avenue and its bridge over the
    Saddle River to three lanes, with the road reducing to its present tw'o lanes
    175 feet south of the Saddle River. Construction may occur within two years.

    Transportation (cont'd)'
         Physical constraints - Development will limit further widening beyond
    that which is currently planned.

    Development
         Use potential - Mostly utilized. The northernmost property along the
    river is 60 per cent utilized, but the remaining property could support additional
    development.
         Consistency with existing/planned uses - Further commercial development
    would be consistent with existing uses and current zoning.
         Physical constraints - Much of the land near the confluence of the Saddle
    and Passaic Rivers is within the 100-year flood plain. Steep banks and narrow
    dimensions limit the development potential of the remaining undeveloped land.

    Overlay Comments
         Zoning - Commercial zoning predominates in the lower half with a light

    industry zone to the Saddle River.
         Soils - Urban land and Dunellen-urban land complex soils respectively
    indicate extensive impermeable surfaces and soil structures which have been
    extensively modified by human action. The soils range from low to high slopes.
    The riverbank is both natural and filled or slightly filled.
         Land Use - The entire reach is commercial/light industry development

    or undeveloped private land.
         Special Areas - Along much of the reach, steep slopes limit   the 100-
    year flood plain to a narrow bana along the river. At the northernmost
    portion of the reach, much of the property is within the 100-year flood plain
    at the confluence of the Passaic and Saddle Rivers. The steep banks should
    be subject to the same policies as stated for the previous reach.
         The Garfield Woolen Mill (Garfield Manufacturing Co., c. 1895) was the
    largest industrial complex in Wallington. The brick buildings are located
    on the east side of Midland Avenue along the Saddle'River.
         The Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners regularly sample water quality

    at the confluence of the Passaic and Saddle Rivers.

    Overlay Comments (cont'd)

        Land Use Jurisdictions -Waterfront Development Law jurisdiction extends
    to Midland Avenue along this reach.

    0

                                         Appendix C.

    0*

    : :

    Appendix C

                Property Owners and Assessed Values

     JI The attached list shows (from left to right) the block and
    lot numbers, the lot size where known, the name and address of
    the owner and the assessed value. The assessed value is shown
    (from the top down) as land, improvements and the total of the
    two.

         Current equalization ratios in the towns are as follows:

               East Rutherford             86.26

              Wallington                  65

                           EAST RUTHERFORD

    BLOCK, LOT       LOT SIZE       OWNERSHIP                      VALUATION

      5    1-A        0.15 ac       Bahr Auto Sales, Inc.          L  46,400
                                   Carlton & Paterson Aves.       I   6,600
                                   East Rutherford                T  53,000

           1         0.4 ac        Sigerist, Edna                     47,500
                                   T/A Favorite Marina
                                   299 Carlton Avenue                17,500
                                   East Rutherford                   65,000

           2         1.38 ac        C & K Realty                     151,800
                                   P. 0. Box 147                     98,200
                                   Rutherford                       250,000

      3.A. of         4.6 ac        River Street Corp.                  6,000 each
     Sub-Lots                      39 River Street                sub-lot Nov.
                                   East Rutherford                assessment

     6     1       210 x 390        East Rutherford Boro           Exempt

           9A      78 x 282        Pelcher, John                      20,700
                                   46 River Street                   19,000
                                   East Rutherford                   39,700

       9B & 13 C                    Keller Engineering Co.            18,200
                                   River Street                       ---
                                   East Rutherford                   18,200

          13B      53 x 264        Pavell, S.                         20,300
                                   42 River Road                     20,400
                                   East Rutherford                   40,700

          13D                       Carlton Hill Construc. Corp.       1,800
                                   P. 0. Box 28           --
                                   East Rutherford                    1,800

          13E                      Pavell, Steve & Helen               2,800
                                   113 River Street                    ---
                                   East Rutherford                    2,800

    8     1                        Kelways, Inc.                    400,000
                                   1 Madison Street               1,853,000
                                   East Rutherford                2,253,000

                              WALLINGTON

    BLOCK, LOT      LOT SIZE       OWNERSHIP                       VALUATION

      1    1,3      4.5 ac         N.J. DOT                        L Exempt
                                  1035 Parkway Avenue             I Exempt
                                  Trenton, N. J. 08625            T Exempt

           2       0.1 ac         Passaic Valley Sewerage Comm.   Exempt

      3    1        50 x 98       Wallington Boro                    Exempt

           2       71 x 70        Pabin, Joseph & Phyllis            L 15,700
                                  22 Anderson Avenue                I 49,200
                                  Wallington                        T 64,900

           3                      Zwolinski, Vincent & Viola           12,200
                                  20 Anderson Avenue                  33,400
                                  Wallington                          45,600

     4   16, 17   63 x 96         Ejgird, Aleksandra & Richard         17,700
                                  24 Passaic Avenue                   31,600
                                  Hasbrouck Heights, N.J. 07604       49,300

     7    25                      Not listed.Either N.J. DOT
                                  or Bergen County Highways

     7   29, 30   85 x 100        Milosh Carbide Tool Co. Inc.         30,000
                                  8 Halstead Avenue                   23,000
                                  Wallington                          53,000

     8   22, 23   63 x 100        Sudol, Paul & Wanda                  15,400
                                  7 Halstead Avenue                   21,200
                                  Wallington                           36,600

          24, 30   250 x 100      Sasso, Bernice & Harriet             63,400
                                  8 Hatheway Street                  121,600
                                  Wallington                         185,000

     9     1       330 x 215      Petshaft, Sadye G.                 101,000
                                  25 Hatheway Street                  96,600
                                  Wallington                         197,600

    10    1, 2    350 x 200       Tuck Industries, Inc.               226,500
                                  c/o S. Greenberg
                                  1 Lefevre Lane                       ---
                                  New Rochelle, N.Y. 10801           226,500

    11    1-6                     N. J. DOT                          Exempt

    12   17, 18   50 x 92         N. J. DOT                          Exempt

    BLOCK, LOT     LOT SIZE       OWNERSHIP                       VALUATION

      12   19, 20                 N. J. DOT                       Exempt

           21                     N. J. DOT                       Exempt

      19   1       647 x 230      VanWinkle & Mercer Cod.         185,100
                                  80 VanWinkle Avenue             89,900
                                  Wallington                     275,000

           4       120 x 200      Zotos, Timoleon                  69,300
                                  77 Ridgewald Avenue             57,200
                                  Waldwick, N.J. 07463            126,500

      26   1       100 x 225      Van Blarcom, Dorothy             54,400
                                  224 Alden Street                32,300
                                  Wallington                       86,700

           2       100 x 215      Gibello, Raymond F. & Jean M.  58,400
                                  804 Pueblo Drive                51,200
                                  Franklin Lakes, N. J.           109,600

         3' 4                     Not Listed
                                  Mercer St. r.o.w. Used by
                                  adjoining properties

          5        100 x 242      Petrozzello, Donna               86,500
                                  47 Hatheway Street             150,700
                                  Wallington                     237,200

          6        200 x 200      Triolo, Anthony &.Elaine         75,000
                                  61 Hatheway Street              61,200
                                  Wallington                      136,200

          7        100 x 145      Knights of Columbus              Exempt
                                  69 Hatheway Street
                                  Wallington

          8        311 x 122      Wallington Boro                  Exempt

          9                       Wallington Boro                  Exempt
                                  Pump House

         10                       Veterans of Foreign Wars         Exempt
                                  125 Main Avenue
                                  Wallington

         13        280 x 128      Scangorella, John C. & Helen   67,800
                                  133 Main Avenue                 53,200
                                  Wallington                     121,000

         14        165 x 21       Car Bar Ltd.                      8,900
                                  77 Union Avenue                   -
         15        230 x 12       Wallington                        8,900

    BLOCK, LOT    LOT SIZE        OWNERSHIP                      VALUATION

     26    16     100 x 75        Kobczenski, Philip & E           35,100
                                 3 Stein Avenue                   ---
                                 Wallington                       35,100

     26A    1     50 x 190        Kobczenski, Philip & E           52,800
                                                                  50,000
                                                                 102,800

           2-5    729 x 25        Wallington Boro                  Exempt

            6     490 x 127       Imbruglia, Ross & Carolyn       159,100
                                  77 Union Blvd.                    6,800 (Reassess Oct)
                                 Wallington                      165,900

            7     116 x 215       Sudol, Walter & Amelia           43,200
                                  27 Pleasant View Terrace       100,000
                                 Wallington                      143,200
                        c/
            8     58 x 200        Ricci, Rocco & Antoinette        24,500
                                  351 Main Avenue                  33,400
                                 Wallington                       57,900

            9     100 x 224       Giamo, Michael & Sanger, Bruce 54,000
                                  357 Main Street                   9,100
                                 Wallington                       63,100

           10     100 x 247       Peristein, Lester & S.           53,200
                                  336 Tremont Avenue              54,000
                                  Fort Lee, N. J. 07024          107,200

           11     188 x 66        Wozniek, AM, DJ & GJ            110,000
                                  80 Midland Avenue                86,000
                                  Wallington                      196,000

           12     27 x 100        Wozniak, AM, DJ, & GJ            46,300
                                                                  29,300
                                                                  75,600

           13     320 x 65       Watson, Elizabeth M.              40,400
                                  P. 0. Box 40 ---
                                  Garfield, N.J. 07026            40,400

           14     63 x 115        Zaleski, Stanley & Marie         16,200
                                  34 Midland Avenue                38,900
                                  Wallington                       55,100

           15     409 x 140       Sondey, Stanley A.              114,000
                                  2 Midland Avenue                 29,800
                                  Wallington                      143,800
     27     2                     William Mocek                    45,400
                                  20 Thansgiving Ave.              18,900
                                  Clifton, N. J.                   63,300

    Appendix D

    Recreational Facility Inventory

    Appendix D

                  Recreational Facility Inventory

    Existing Parks

         Hatheway Street Park, Wallington --Swings, slides and sand

                                             box.
                                             Children's pool.

                                            Tennis and basketball courts.
                                            'Benches.

        Main Avenue Linear Park, Wallington -- Passive uses. Benches.

    Other Public Open Space

         Block 12, Lot 26, Wallington --N. J. Department of Transportation.

        Block 7, Lot 25, Wallington --Ownership not recorded. Probably

                                       N.J. DOT or Bergen County.

    W

                                           APPENDIX E

                                   EAST RUTHERFORD MARINA DESIGN

    m

                                I'ARAY PP-ARK
                               FROJEC  SUDY AREA

                    21       un       .

                         Zy~~~~t
                                        '~~~~~~.
                                                >I

           ~~~~~~~~~~ -
                             *~~~~~~~~~

      ut                      A   RRD MARINA

         File #1.470.5  4    PROJECT STUDMY A.REA
     August 23, 1984
    O&Prepared by:

            AEP ASSOCIATES     LOCATI ON MAP
           Architects / Engineers / PlannersI
      i h o,~ LStanley John  0cz
         485  Noc  Rod  Litef,1s  .]O 4 4        2 1  2 677

                                         I,.  WEi        l      ee,

                                                   ~~~~ ~~~~~~~)O ~ ~ ~   ~     C~

                  Flower

                Gazebo
            Boat

    ~Prepared by'

      ____AEP ASSOC1ATES   1ES
                    Archtect] Eniners /PlanersFile    1.470.5                                   ROET S U Y   A                    k____________
                    stanley John LaCE        ~~August 23, 19841                                          1                                                                   Ij

                    611 ~     I                                ConcreteFotn

                                   L

    File #1.470.5                        SEAT   DETAIL
    August 23, 1984
    Prepared by:

          0                           ~~       ~~~~~~~~~0  1  2   3

        AEP ASSOCIATES                 Scale 3/4"1 I     0"
      Architects / Engineers / Mlanners
           Stanley John La"

                      6 TConcrete

                                                                                   6x6 Corten
                                                                                   Steel Tube

                   0~~~~~~~~~~~~

                                                                       Concrete Footing

     File # 1.470.5                  BENCH  SEAT  DETAIL
     August 23, 1984
     Prepared by:

                                          0        1        2        3

         AEP ASSOCIATES                 Scale 3/4"   1'  0"
       Architects I Engineers/ I Mnners
            Stanley John LAc
    8 Notch lo~d. ULMYt F*  N4 0741t * (Z  55-7571

                 6x6 Cot6te                                               Concrete~otn

                                                    N. ~ ~ ~  .

    File# 1.470.5
    August 23, 1984

    Prepared by:,PINCTBED                                          AL

                                                  C)       1         2        3

         AEP ASSOCIATESScl3/" 1-0
      Archliects I Engineers I Mtann~ers
            Stardey John LAci

                  Polycarbamte Lens

                     Ornamental Cast Irxi
                     Post

     File # 1.470.5

     Auigust 23, 1984 LAMP & POST DErAIL
     Prepared by:.

                                         00       1        2        3

                                         Scale 3/4" = i - 0"
         AEP ASSOCIATES
      Architcts / Engineers / Planners
           StAney John Lau
    45 Noes &od. Udr F.* NJ. 074Z4  .(Wq Zsa4757

                 Trash Receptacle Insert-                  Locking Metal Lid for Trash
                                                                  Insert Removal

                                                                                 Textured Pre-cast

                                                                                 Concrete

                                         r
                                        ,Z~~~~,

                                  TRASH. RECEPTACLE DETAIL

     File 4 1.470.5

     August 23, 1984
     Prepared by:

                                             0     ~ ~~1    2        3
                                         Scle341         - i
                     \~~C 77

         AEP ASSOCIATES               Sae31i     -0
       Arrhllf-rf~  Ensln~errs / Planners
            S(Arvicy joh" Lhrz
    48-3 N~h R.d Lf"  .N  07424 .OI256-757'

                                 Cap

                 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

                                                                    A l--Lawn, Plantings,
                                                                           or Concrete Walk
                Sheet Piling

                                                           ri'~~ ~

                                                        " IPi          CCanpacted Backfill

              River

     File # 1.470.5
     August 23, 1984     SHEEI   PILING  BULKHEAD  SECTION
     Prepared by:

                                         0        1       2        3

              AEP ASSOCIATES          Scale 3/4" = 1'- 0"
         AE1P ASSOCIATES
      Archftects I Engineers I PlAnners
           StAnley John IAr
    4a5NLo.ch ~LM11. uF r1NJ O~A2A *(2OI3l5.6-7575

                                                                      4" Concrete Slab

                                     I" Cu' e    SI                      ((II  IIe  Pfl1'~t

                                 411 Crushed Stone                         Ccmpacted Backfill
                                                                               or Undisturbed Soil

                                               PAVING DETAIL

     File # 1.470.5
     August 23, 1984
     Prepared by:

                                              0        1 i       2         3

                                              Scale 3/411 I I- oil
         AEP ASSOCIATES
       Architeft, / Englneers / PIfnntrs
            Startlcy John Lacz
    485 Na<t sotd. Lmi.  F-1    0  0 2Ol41   . (zoo)26- ?S75

                                     APPENDIX F
                                     Strip Park Design

    0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

                                              Coluirnar    es 4'   "on center

                                                        Sidewal

    Fishin AreOCaT

                         Ivy onSWall ~    0

                                                                 Columnar Maples

         Ivy on Wall                                             Lawn

         Fishing Area                                            Sidewalk

         Sheet Piling Bulkhead

         Passaic River

                                    CROSS SECTION

     Prepared by:

        ALP ASSOCIATES
      Architects / Engineers / Mlnners  0    10   20   30   40
           St-WY Ichn La= Scale I"' = 20'
    4  N.re~ Sr" Ufte ra  NJ@?,ZU * (20 1 254-T757

    Appendix K
    Project Maps

                           RESTORATION MASTER PLAN

                       EAST RiUTHERFORD-WALLINGTONRP

                                 OVERVIEW

    LEGEND                                                            FE

    PATHWAY ROUTE

    PARK  IR

                                                                                                   \WOODRIDGE

                  PASSA~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~IC

                       T  PARK~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

                                       RC'X _

                                              'I~~~~~~~

            'PARK. A   ~ ~ ~ ~~ RUHEFARD

    MA~~~~~~1i1                           RESTORATION MASTER PLAN
                                          EAST RUTHERFORD-WALLINGTON
                                                LOWER PASSAIC RIVER
                                                 PASSAIC RIVER COALITION
                                                        1984
                                                      CARTOGRAPHICS-MEM RC P
                                    WALLINGTON

                                                                       LEGEND

                                                                   -     PATHWAY ROUTE

                                                                 ...... ALTERNATE ROUTE

                                                                      PARK

       PASSAIC                                            EAST RUTHERFORD

    MAP 2 RESTORATION MASTER PLAN
      EAST RUTHERFORD-WALLINGTON
             LOWER PASSAIC RIVER                                   LN RPR
              PASSAIC FWER COAUTION            LEGEND               POSD

                          1984~ ~~~--- PATHWAY ROUTE7PED
                    CARTOGRAPHICS-MEM a aP

                                         ...... ALTERNATE ROUTE
                                           -PARK

                     100 FEET

                                        PASSAIC                         L

                                                                          z

    'POCKET PAR                             RESTORATION  MASTER  PLAN
                               'I.       EAST RUTHERFORD-WALLINGTON
                                                 LOWER PASSAIC RIVER
                                                 PASSAIC RIVER COALITION
                                                           1984
                                                        CARTOGRAPHICS-MEM f

                        (PROPOPARK

                                                                             WALLINGTON

                                         PASSAIC                                   PARK ROW

              LEGEND                                                               STEIN AVE.
        - --  -- PATHWAY ROUTE

        ........ALTERNATE  ROUTE

       -     ~~PARK

                                                                      LNEAR PARK

                                                                                    IRESERVOIR AVE.

                                             -    -                     ~~~~~~~~~STRONG ST.