KENT, Conn.—The Parks and Recreation subcommittee charged with mapping the future of Emery Park has planned a meeting for Wednesday, Nov. 5, at 1:30 p.m. to further discuss a proposal for repairs to the town’s swimming pond.
Members will meet with Chris Elkow, senior landscape designer at Kent Greenhouse & Gardens, who recently outlined a design for the pond, which has been closed since before Covid.
Elkow reviewed options for the reconstruction of the natural pool that would cost the town between $561,000 and $1,034,000. The Nov. 5 meeting will be to receive more focused numbers, with the goal of reducing spending to the $500,000 in funding currently available.
Variables affecting the price include whether the bottom of the pool is to be lowered to increase the depth; possible demolition of portions of the pool’s shell, redirection of the inflow from the feeder pond to the shallower end; dredging the feeder pond, whether a retractable aerator would be recessed in the bottom of the pond, and the use of boulders as stairs to enter and exit the pond.
Elkow said the existing swimming pond and its beach need repair and suffer from varying degrees of degradation. He suggested demolishing as much as is needed of the retaining walls, pouring a gunite surface for the pool and upgrading the patio around the pond, either by refreshing the concrete surface or installing finished stone.
The subcommittee discussed at length concerns about the depth, with Elkow suggesting it could be a safety hazard for people jumping into the pool if it is too shallow. Members concluded that the accepted standard of five feet in depth should be sufficient as diving would not be allowed.
They also expressed hope that the shallower pool would be warmer. The water flows into the pool from surrounding hills and patrons have complained that it is cold. “The biggest concern I’ve heard is the temperature,” said subcommittee member Melissa Cherniske.
Elkow agreed that the water might be warmer but added that the cold temperatures help to keep the water clean. He said an aerator recessed in the floor would also help to keep the water clean, but Parks and Rec Director Matt Busse said the town already has a new portable aerator purchased before Covid that can be employed.
The feeder pond would need yearly maintenance after dredging but might not need to be fully dredged again for 20 years, Elkow said.
Members asked if the work could be done in stages to lessen the financial impact, but Elkow advised against it. If dredging the feeder pool is delayed, for instance, doing it in the future might disrupt previously completed improvements.
The group discussed whether the existing fence surrounding the pool could be used, but all agreed that it would be better to enlarge the enclosure. Busse said a chain link fence might not be as attractive as other options, but added that having a clear view of the pool area is of paramount importance.
Subcommittee members asked if the pool could be used for winter skating and Elkow said it would be possible.
The subcommittee expressed a desire to reopen the swimming area by next July and Elkow said the project could be completed over the winter and spring, with a July opening date. But it was noted that the project would have to go before the Inland Wetlands Commission because it is within 200 feet of a watercourse “and that alone is a 60-day process.”
The subcommittee has already received one quote for the work and members were unsure whether they would need to formally go out to bid after receiving two estimates. Busse said he would investigate the matter.
The subcommittee decided to ask the full Parks and Recreation Commission to reallocate the $100,000 currently designated for the playground project at Emery Park to help fund the swimming pond improvements, with the suggestion that the amount for the playground be replaced in the five-year capital plan. It also recommended $80,000 be designated in the five-year plan for the proposed patio.
I commend Kent for continuing to consider a swimming area for the town. However I do not believe that Emery Park is the right spot. It served the town pretty well for a number of years but it has seen better days. A few reasons:
* The site is too shady
*It is unsafe for kids to bike or walk to. Always was but even more so with people driving so fast.
* The water is fresh,but it’s cold and legendary for snakes, snapping turtles and frogs.
*The site is not for Seniors! Walking up and down that path would not be easy for many. And what if you don’t drive?
For these reasons and more I would suggest an in town pool. $500,000- $1,000,000 is a lot of money to spend on something that will not likely be widely used. Perhaps the developers of the soon to be built housing project in town would be interested in collaboration to benefit both parties. If not, there are some other locations worth considering.
Bruce Adams- former Kent resident and First Selectman
Thanks, Bruce. Well put.
I totally concur with Bruce’ assessment and suggestions. Valid points!
Small children having swim lessons at Emory pool years ago would emerge blue and shivering from the ice cold water. Occasionally a shriek was heard, when a frog or turtle, or snake would share the water. And, walking up and down to the pool wasn’t easy, not only for seniors.
Therefore, a town pool would serve the community far better than pouring money into restoring the old Emery Park Pool.
I appreciate Bruce’s comments … and affirm that a large in ground pool would be an ideal if a decent location could be identified, easily accessible to youth and seniors. Before investing in this renovation, it would be worth while to hear the discussion on December 11th on the proposed new series of condos and apartments being planned along with the pool option. This would involve perhaps greater maintenance and organization but would add value to those considering Kent. Why not a heated pool for year round use?