COUNTY—Agrowing number of residents are appealing to the Union County Board of County Commissioners to reconsider plans for the Clark Reservoir that opponents say will cause environmental challenges and disrupt the quality of life for nearby communities.

Last week, approximately 15 speakers, many of whom identified themselves as members of an ad hoc citizens’ group called the Clark Reservoir Committee, approached the county’s governing body to ask officials to draft a new, less intrusive plan for the 162-acre property.

“We would like to see the reservoir dredged and aerated so that it doesn’t become a problem in the future,” said Diana Gonzalez, chair of the Reservoir Committee, speaking during a regular meeting of the commissioner board on Wednesday, “and we’re fine with passive recreation options like fishing and kayaking. Anything beyond that feels like a bad fit for a nature preserve and wildlife refuge.”

The committee plans to submit its own proposal for the property to the commissioner board over the coming weeks to help inform the county’s decision, Ms. Gonzalez said, adding that, “a growing number of residents” have approached her with concerns about the project.

Earlier this month, County Manager Ed Oatman joined representatives from CME Associates, the county’s contracted engineering firm, in hosting a public forum in the Clark Township Council chambers about the project. CME Vice President Michael McClelland shared updated details of the plans and informed residents that the completed project would consist of numerous paved walking paths (some of which will be constructed within several feet of private- property lines), pedestrian bridges across the water, boat ramps, a synthetic ice rink, a carousel, an electric train ride, a concession stand, a fishing pier and other amenities.

Approximately 150 residents turned out to participate in the July 2 discussion and share their opinions. And while almost every speaker agreed that the reservoir should be dredged and more properly maintained, none of the residents in attendance at that meeting voiced full support for the project as presented.

On Wednesday, County Counsel Bruce Bergen asked residents to be patient, adding that nothing has been finalized for the property as of yet.

“The county appreciates your attendance and comments at this and at prior meetings. These comments are being taken into consideration,” Mr. Bergen said, adding that the county also has received “numerous” emails and written statements about the project. “We have not been able to respond to these written comments individually, but they are being reviewed,” he stated.

“At this time, the county continues to review the concept plan with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), and we will be providing updated information to the public when that process allows us to do so,” Mr. Bergen said before opening up Wednesday’s meeting to public comment.

Several speakers, including Clark resident Clare Labruno, indicated that the public had not been given an adequate amount of time to review the most recent iteration of the plans before the July 2 meeting.

“The proposal that was presented on July 2 was not on public display before the meeting. While I applaud the county for making updates in response to public comment, and while I appreciate that this is an evolving plan…what I’m guessing was supposed to be a meeting to assuage public concerns, perhaps raised concerns about transparency,” she said.

Garwood resident Bruce Paterson, meanwhile, criticized the members of the Commissioner Board for failing to attend the public forum earlier this month.

“To my dismay, I did not see a single commissioner in attendance at that meeting. You are the decision makers for this issue, and none of you were there to listen to the residents that spoke,” he said. “I support the members of the Clark Reservoir Committee who are here tonight…I hope you are listening to their grievances.”