Action Alert: 9/10 City Council Resolution 20-637

Updated: Sep 11, 2020

Meeting begins at 6pm

Regarding the City’s announcement to move forward with Phase I of construction at the Reservoir...

This project has either moved forward with poor planning, poor communication, or both. In either case, to award a contract for construction is premature. We are demanding the following before our City Council Representatives vote on Resolution 20-637:

  • All relevant and updated documents to the City’s plans for Reservoir #3 to be uploaded to the Open Data resource- this includes not only Phase I but future phases

  • Provide a public presentation with advanced notice and opportunity for feedback of (1) the results and any remediation recommendations from the Environmental Assessment of Reservoir #3 (2) the results of the Archaeological Assessment of Reservoir #3 (3) the design by the architect(s) of the pedestrian trail and perimeter fence installation

Only following these opportunities for public feedback and when your constituents are satisfied that the site will be sensitively and adequately preserved should this Resolution be put to vote. Anything else is irresponsible and puts the site at risk as well as taxpayer dollars at risk.

How You Can Help

Please contact your City Council representatives by midday 9/10 and ask them to postpone the vote on Res. 20-637 (Item 10.32) awarding a contract until the above demands have been met.

  • Council President Joyce E. Watterman: 201-547-5134/5108

  • Councilman at Large Rolando R. Lavarro, Jr.: 201-547-5268

  • Councilman at Large Daniel Rivera: 201-547-5319

  • Ward A Councilwoman Denise Ridley: 201-547-5098/5060

  • Ward B Councilwoman Mira Prinz-Arey: 201-547-5092/5101

  • Ward C Councilman Richard Boggiano: 201-547-5159/5172

  • Ward D Councilman Yousef J. Saleh: 201-783-5552

  • Ward E Councilman James Solomon: 201-547-5315

  • Ward F Councilman Jermaine D. Robinson: 201-547-5338/5361

You can find the Council Meeting agenda using this link.

If you would like to make a public comment regarding this Resolution, please apply to the City Clerk using the this request form.

To listen in tonight, access their virtual meeting on Microsoft Teams or through your browser here.

For the details of our 9/6 Public Feedback Meeting, click here.

More Details....


The City is mistaken when it asserts that it met multiple times with the Reservoir Alliance about the work. The City may be confusing several discussions we had about opening the Reservoir this season.

There were only two meetings, one with a single Reservoir Alliance board member and one with two board members. Both were after the planning for the renovations were complete- one when the project was being put out to bid and one when the bid was already slated for tonight’s City Council meeting. In both meetings we had believed that the City would honor our wishes for a delay.

This is very much counter to the long-standing belief in Jersey City that whenever there is a community group actively involved with parks and other open space, that group should be involved in developing plans for that space. It also disregards another long-standing local idea that once plans for open space are developed, there needs to be a well publicized public presentation about those plans.

We've all just been through a serious threat to sideline Friends of Liberty State Park in its mission to safeguard and promote the best development of that incredible open space, so the City's neglect and confusion over involving the Reservoir Alliance and public in planning for another very special open space is disturbing.


Because we were not involved in the development of the plans for the Reservoir, and because there was no public presentation, we don't know if the work the City is about to hire a contractor to do to the Reservoir is the best thing. Worse, we don't know if there are some problems the City's designer has not considered.

In the past when the City has involved community groups and the public in helping to develop plans for parks, those plans have invariably been improved. And mistakes or omissions have been spotted because of community input.

And needless to say, spotting mistakes saves money by helping to avoid expensive change orders during construction.

This must be done for the Reservoir.

Right now, the Alliance and public has received from the City only a handful of the known pages of drawings/plans. And we don't have any material specifications at all.

Our concerns are heightened by the fact that when the Reservoir Alliance representative noted that there did not seem to be detailed plans for the pathway that is to be constructed at the top of the berm along the entire perimeter of the Reservoir -- a representative of the City's division of Architecture indicated that you don't really need detailed plans for a pedestrian trail. That may be true for a simple sidewalk, but nothing about a complex site like the Reservoir is so simple.

Among the many questions that are unanswerable right now:

  • What materials will be used to make the trail that will run completely around the Reservoir atop the berm? We have been informed that it is crushed stone, but part of the contract discusses concrete paving.

  • One of the two pages of plans we have shows ramps going up to the top of the berm on either side of Jefferson Avenue gate. This will be a fairly major construction -- but there are no detailed construction plans. How will this be constructed?

  • The Reservoir isn't just a beautiful and historic space, it's an ecologically sensitive wetland. What safeguards will the contractor be required to make to ensure their activities don't inadvertently pollute or otherwise damage the wetland?

  • Has the entire path of the proposed walkway been checked in terms of its existing conditions? The plan doesn't seem to indicate serious variations in those conditions, but it seems likely there are some areas that will require reinforcement, re-configuration or other special attention. There is no indication of consideration for the archaeologically sensitive locations found frequently along the trail. How will any such needs be addressed? Who will design them? Will they cost extra?

  • The plan calls for generators to be used to power walk lights. Has a noise/decibel standard for them been specified? And why generators? Even if quiet, they pollute- and that seems hardly appropriate for the Reservoir. Was consideration given to the kind of electric utility drop service that is used at major construction sites or to solar power?

The Danger Now

The City is about to approve a contract with a contractor to carry out this work in the Reservoir without these and other questions being answered and without the Reservoir Alliance's and public's input. Once the contract is approved, we're all stuck with whatever is built regardless of the damage it might cause and also with expensive change orders that may be needed to address problems.

The City should hold off on authorizing the contract for a few weeks to have time to go over the plas with the Reservoir Alliance and then get public input.

If the plans are well thought out already, there won't be much of a delay following the public presentations. But if problems or better ideas come, delay won't be a bad thing. And while the city says it's rushing to get the work started, it's never a good idea to start a major outdoor construction project with winter looming.

Let’s do this right the first time.


Recent Posts

See All

Reservoir #3 GPS

113-116 Central Avenue

Jersey City, NJ 07306

JCRPA Mailing

P.O. Box 7833

Jersey City, NJ 07307

Signup for our mailing list!

Click here to stay up to date.

© 2018 All rights reserved. The Jersey City Reservoir Preservation Alliance is an IRS Section 501(c)3 not for profit organization. EIN 743-136-496