The public can attend hearings this week on the proposed well at Montclair’s Nishuane Park.
In advance of those hearings, Montclair Environmental Commission chair Imke Oster released the following statement:
Montclair has long prided itself on providing excellent water to its residents. The majority of Montclair’s water supply comes from the Wanaque Reservoir and the Monksville Reservoir, but we also have three separate municipal wells (one in each of the three pumping zones).
These resources have generally been sufficient for our town’s needs, but the addition of hundreds of new residential units over the last decade predict a stretching of Montclair’s water generating capacity. The construction of additional buildings at Montclair State University (who purchase their water from us), our sales to Glen Ridge (and possible sales to other towns in the future), new developments (Montclair Residences, Bay Street Commons, the Montclair Nursing and Rehabilitation Center, and the Sienna) as well as the planning of the CentroVerde complex, all make the acquisition of new water sources an urgent priority. An additional well is needed in order to make certain that with Montclair’s growth our town will continue to meet its water obligations.
Fortunately, we will not have to dig a new well because a nearly completed facility already exists on the grounds of Nishuane Park. This well was authorized and dug in the early 1980′s, but was not finished and has remained nonoperational until today. The completion of this well will
increase Montclair’s ability to serve current and future water needs, enhance the water pressure of numerous Montclair residents, offer better fire protection capability for our town, and also provide a low-cost alternative to the construction of a brand-new well.With a sustainable future in mind, we encourage residents to conserve water wherever possible and we ask the Water Bureau to provide educational campaigns to inform residents of simple measures that could ease the increased water need on the town’s water supplies.
For those concerned about the impact on the recreation areas of Nishuane Park, the Montclair Water Bureau has put funds aside for the revitalization of the surrounding park area (removing invasive species and diseased and decaying trees/shrubs and replanting native trees/shrubs) and is making the well building as aesthetically pleasing as possible.
The Montclair Environmental Commission thereby declares its full support for the immediate completion of the Nishuane Well Facility.
Baristanet also asked Montclair Township’s Director of Utilities for Water and Sanitary Sewer, Gary Obszarny, whether the well facility is also a potential revenue source. Obszarny responded:
“By allocating portion of the Nishuane well water to customers outside of Montclair, the Township will be able to meet our existing and future needs and reduce the cost to residents for the well through increased rates charged to outside customers.”
Obszarny elaborated:
1. The well is not for revenue generation but for sustainability, demand, pressure/flow, and water quality. The well will have some outside generation of revenue, but that is not its reason for its existence.
2. This is still under public comment and Green Acres still needs to make its decision, then Council, so NOTHING is definite nor do we believe this is a “done deal’.
3. The Township has a few interested parties for the additional water. This is only interest due to the above.
4. The Water Bureau would need counsel approval on a few issues to make the plan a reality IF #2 happens.
a. Ordinance to only sell Nishuane Well water (not physical water but allocation of well) to outside Montclair boundaries so that higher priced Nishuane Well allocation is sold. (Keeping lower priced i.e. non debt ridden water) within the boundaries of Montclair.
b. Enter into agreements for the selling of said water (agreements should terminate without future water allocation promises.)
c. Water rate structure is for the above “outside” sales.
I’ve not been following this issue all that closely, but I did find the statements above helpfully informative. I’d read previous commentary that claimed a lack of need for additional water sources given a shrinking town population. However, the above text mentions growth in our “water user base” which does provide at least some justification for additional sourcing.
I am curious, though, how much additional capacity will be added by this well and how it compares to a reasonable estimate of the growth in use discussed above (an example being the new residences at MSU).
…Andrew
I’m not sure why the MEC is coming out and supporting the placement of the well at that particular site. It’s not like they gave an environmental justification that this site is better than another site.
I would much rather see the MEC take a position on the remediation of Edgemont Pond.
What Frank said.