Nishuane Well Project Gets Backlash from Vocal Residents

This is the second article of two covering the meeting about Nishuane Park well project on Wednesday night.


This is the second part of a two part story about the Nishuane Park water well project. Click here to read part one.

The proposed construction of a water well in the 4th Ward is roiling nearby residents who turned out Wednesday to criticize and object to the project. 

More than 80 residents crowded into the conference room in the municipal building yesterday to condemn the township's plan to place a water treatment facility on a half acre of protected open space in Nishuane Park. 

“It is one of the last vestiges of beautiful parkland left in Montclair ... and all of us use it,” said resident Dr. Jason Slosberg. “We don’t want this to happen. ... I want that park to stay there.”

This project is like having “a bridge to no where in Montclair,” said Alan Clark, who has lived in Montclair for more than 60 years and resides across the street from the proposed project. 

A 38- by 41-foot water treatment facility has been proposed to be built over the unused well, in addition to an access road leading onto High Street and a temporary workspace. The entire project will take up less than a half acre. However, the land is protected by the state Green Acres Program, and would need approval for the construction. 

But many residents were there that evening to ensure no approval would eventually be bestowed for the well. 

One after another, dozens of residents stood up and denounced the plan. The primary issues brought up throughout the three hour meeting were:

  • Noise from the building
  • Air and ground pollution from the chemicals treating the well water
  • Loss of parkland and recreational space
  • Effect on property values
  • Over-development, particularly in the 4th Ward

Not one resident stood up in favor of the project.

Many also found fault with how the township publicized the information about the meetings. Council Renee Baskerville, the only councilor to stay the duration of the meeting, said the township usually gives a notice to all households within 200 feet of a proposed development -- which it did not do for Wednesday’s meeting. 

However, the township did post Wednesday’s meeting on its website on Dec. 19 and Thursday’s meeting on Dec. 17. In addition, signs were posted around Nishuane Park about the meetings. 

The second meeting about the project is tonight, Jan. 17. 

In addition, many residents harshly criticized Mayor Robert Jackson and many of the councilors for their absence from the meeting. In addition to Baskerville, Councilor Rich McMahon was at the meeting, but he left soon after the meeting began. 

“The mayor doesn’t have the courage to be here and speak to the people that elected him. ... He is absolutely on board with this,” said resident George Bennett.

Baskerville also vehemently questioned her colleagues’ decision to skip the public hearing about an issue that will “effect the fabric of a whole community.” 

“I’ve never seen in my years of being active in this community,” said Baskerville, “... a notice for a public hearing where only one council person wants to come. Why aren’t they here to hear these questions?

“I have concerns that the things that are going on here are not felt to be important enough to other people for them to give us the time of day and respect for a regularly scheduled public hearing in the manner we are accustomed to,” noting that the council chambers would have better accommodated the large crowd.

Options to Building in Nishuane Park

There were few other options to placing the water treatment facility in Nishuane Park, according to Mike Heenehan, an environmental consultant working on the proposal.

Heenehan said the option of doing nothing was not recommended due to the township’s expected development in the coming years. 

“We have a [township] master plan that anticipates redevelopment and additional development in the town,” Mike Heenehan, “and we do not have an ability to serve those needs.” 

In addition, there are limited other locations to build a facility nearby and divert the water from the Nishuane Park well there. The potential of expanding the water facility in Glenfield Park was also suggested, but that would also divert parkland and not be as productive as the Nishuane well is expected to be. 

Baskerville Calls to Residents the Block the Proposal 

Fourth-Ward Councilor Baskerville joined the other residents in strongly opposing the well project. 

“It has not satisfied me yet that we have a [water] need just for our Montclair township needs,” said Baskerville. 

Baskerville called on residents to “flood” the state’s Department of Environmental Projection and Montclair officials with letters, emails and petitions to oppose the project.

frank rubacky January 18, 2013 at 01:03 AM
This is still NIMBY. Montclair is increasing its water capacity by 25%, from 4MM to 5MM. Obviously, the fire dept does not need that this. We have a capacity restriction from NJDWSC! Since the well water cost more than NJDWSC water, the well needs to be subsidized...or all of Montclair will vote this TC out when they see the water bill increases. Bottom line is we voted for development and now we have it. Next time you hear someone toss out the phrase Smart Growth, be a little cynical. Just build the well and move on.
Jinx January 18, 2013 at 02:40 AM
From a presentation from the Montclair Water Bureau: ‘Montclair’s primary water source is from the North Jersey District Water Supply Commission (NJDWSC). Montclair is a partner in the NJDWSC, which owns and operates the 30 billion gallon Wanaque Reservoir and the 7 billion Monksville Reservoir. Additional water is obtained from three wells within the township: Glenfield Well, Lorraine Well, and Rand Well. The Montclair Water Bureau is responsible for the operation and water treatment of these local wells.’ Montclair’s water and sewer charges have been rising precipitously over the past 10 years - faster than even our property taxes. Why are these charges going up so much? Do we know? What is the breakdown of increases? Is it in the charges for the water supply from the NJDWSC? Our own management costs for our operations of the NJDWSC supply? Or the management and operations of our local wells? What do we charge our customers (Glen Ridge, etc.)? Does it cover our own costs? Who is overseeing this? It may make sense to develop local wells and water supply but I’d like to see the business case before we decide that we need to invest in additional wells, treatment facilities and operations.
frank rubacky January 18, 2013 at 03:14 AM
What the Montclair Environmental Commission should have said was: If each household & business used 2 gallons less each week, we wouldn't need the well. A measly 2 gallons/week. Oh yeah.
frank rubacky January 18, 2013 at 01:59 PM
Oops! Billion, million, smillon.
thewayitis January 19, 2013 at 01:10 AM
Please sign this petition to help save Nishuane Park from the proposed water well. Thanks. http://www.change.org/petitions/david-smith-n-j-department-of-environmental-protection-deny-the-application-for-a-water-well-on-green-acres-land-at-nishuane-park?share_id=CZdXxnuOAF&utm_campaign=mailto_link&utm_medium=email&utm_source=share_petition


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »