patching...
Update: Love Matawan-Aberdeen Patch? "Like" us on Facebook »
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Matawan Passes Resolution Opposing Construction of BRSA's Wind Turbine

They are the fourth bayshore municipality to formally oppose the wind turbine

 

The Matawan Borough Council joined several other bayshore municipalities by passing a resolution that opposes the construction of a wind turbine in Union Beach at the Bayshore Regional Sewerage Authority's (BRSA) Wastewater Treatment Facility.

According to Resolution 11-09-36, which was passed 7-0 at the council meeting Tuesday night, Matawan Borough, "shares the concerns expressed by the residents and governing body particularly in light of what appears to be at best a limited effort by BRSA to reach out to residents of the Bayshore and a lack of transparency in this matter."

The BRSA is a government agency that handles the raw sewage of Union Beach, Holmdel, Keyport, Hazlet, Keansburg, Matawan, Aberdeen and parts of Marlboro, by transporting, treating and disposing it. The BRSA did not return phone calls asking for comment, however a video and documents posted on their website promote wind turbines as a safe and effective green energy source.

The resolution cites multiple reasons for opposing the construction, including "health and safety concerns, lack of protection for community roads and infrastructure, noise concerns and diminished property values."

Matawan Borough Mayor Paul Buccellato expressed concerns over unknown effects of decibel levels and the turbine's close proximity to homes. Buccellato is also worried that the transportation of the wind turbine components will destroy roads and infrastructure, as they plan to travel through Matawan to reach Union Beach. The components were delivered to Newark earlier this month.

Bart Sutton, a Union Beach resident and the president of the Union Beach Environmental Trust, attended the council meeting and thanked the borough for taking a stance against the turbine.

"I would like to thank the mayor and council for passing this. From all the medical research and peer review coming out about the turbnines, there is a definite danger of health risks to people when they are too close to these things," said Sutton.

So far, the Monmouth County Board of Chosen Freeholders, Keyport, Hazlet and Holmdel have shown their support of Union Beach's fight against the wind turbine by passing similar resolutions opposing the construction.

Paul Smith, the mayor of Union Beach, expressed gratitude toward municipalities who passed ordinances opposing the construction.

"It's going to be an uphill battle," Smith said. "We've put up with a lot in forty years. [The BRSA] has done their best to correct other problems, like odors, but we put up with too much with very little compensation."

"We're not opposed to green energy. [The turbine] is just too close to the homes and the majority of people in town just don't want it," Smith said.

Aberdeen, Marlboro and Keansburg have not taken any formal action, however Aberdeen Mayor Fred Tagliarini said Aberdeen Township is researching the issue.

"At this time we would have to be against any wind turbine that exceed the decibel levels safe for residents," Tagliarini said. "Our biggest concern right now is whether or not our roads can handle this weight."

The BRSA is still awaiting permits from the state and county levels to allow transport of the turbine components through the area.

Related Topics: BRSA, Matawan, Union Beach, Wind Turbine, and bayshore regional sewerage authority

Anita D.

6:15 am on Friday, September 23, 2011

THANK YOU MATAWAN for doing the right thing. It's still inconceivable to me that the BSRA has gotten this far with their plans to put a 40-story industrial machine in the heart of a densely populated quite (at least for now) residential community. Plus, the fact that the BSRA wants to truck it in and build it on the advise of their lawyer Granata is astounding. The Appeals Court still has to decide if the land the BSRA is using is subject to Union Beach's zoning and land use laws. As of now, they don't have the legal right to build it. They are just hoping that if they truck the monstrosity in - seven days of trucking oversize loads weighing as much as 84 tons over local roads - that no court will make them remove it. In other words, the towns and the ratepayers be damned! If they do this and lose, they will either be forced to disassemble it and remove it, or they'll have to pay huge fines - all at ratepayer expense.

Harry

6:53 am on Friday, September 23, 2011

The real story here is that the BRSA Director went on record that they will build and ignore the appellate courts. This begs the questions if that is their stance why force Union Beach to spend so much money defending themselves by suing the host town? Why are they ignoring the towns and county and trying to go forward, and why is our Governor not stepping in as he did in Sea Girt and put an end to this obvious Authority run amuck? Could it be that omly the Assblywoman Amy Handlin stood to support her constituency? Not a peep from Kyrillos. Yet in Sea Girt their elected officials backed up their towns and fought for them.

Bill Heller

6:54 am on Friday, September 23, 2011

I sincerely thank the mayor and council for having the wisdom and courage to pass this resolution. Industrial wind turbines should never be sited close to homes. It's creating problems the world over, and it's not right for New Jersey. The BRSA has played dirty from the start. When they secured ARRA stimulus funds for the turbine well before owning the required land and having all zoning and variance issues in place, that was a big warning sign. The fact that they are pushing real hard to truck the turbine to the plant and build it before and if they win in court is unconscionable. The six commissioners, especially the two from Union Beach, have forgotten that they were appointed to represent their towns and work in the town's interest, not the BRSA's. Even Governor Christie has referred to the BRSA as a shadow government without oversight. The BRSA needs to undergo an outside audit. Outside audits recently brought to light the fiscal malfeasance at the Passaic (major corruption) and Rahway ($30 mil misspent on methane recapture) sewage facilities, and that might very well happen at the BRSA.

talk vent

9:08 am on Friday, September 23, 2011

This is the right thing. I have worked on making sure that wind turbines are not built near people for 3 years. The environmental damage is now just starting to be understood. In California the golden eagle and Condors are being killed faster than they reproduce! That is extinction in action. These massive wind turbines and their harm to the environment is just coming to light. The low frequency drone caused by the blades have an effect like bad seasickness. Does science understand that? We are making a huge mistake throwing these turbines all over the place. Get educated on this disaster in action. www.windaction.org!

Marco Oldhafer

9:49 am on Friday, September 23, 2011

WoW more smart people this time the council in Matawan ! Good job sticking together. I can not figure out why the BRSA is so determined to place a 400ft industrial turbine in a residential neighborhood when 5 towns and the monmouth county freeholders all oppose this! If you ask me this stinks of corruption but then what else is new :(

Barbara

10:35 am on Friday, September 23, 2011

Thank you Matawan mayor and council for passing this.
Maybe you could talk to our mayor and council in Ocean Gate and let them know that putting even the EW50 turbines 75 feet from the closest residences is not a good thing.

Bob

10:38 am on Friday, September 23, 2011

"Each of us has a natural right, from God, to defend his person, his liberty, and his property." Frederic Bastiat The good people from the surrounding towns and county have spoken that they do not want an industrial wind turbine destroying their lives and property to satisfy the greed of a few crony capitalists and the BRSA!

John Curran

2:11 pm on Friday, September 23, 2011

The DEP required only a Level 2 Environmental Assessment for this project and the DEP issued Permits. However, the data submitted by the BRSA was based on Wind Industry claims, but the DEP failed to subject these claims to a: 1) Comprehensive, 2) objective, 3) independent, 4) transparent, and 5) empirical based assessment. We believe the DEP had the responsibility to ask for genuine scientific proof?”

What the BRSA says about their wind project sounds good, but, the BRSA wind-to-energy project has not had a thorough technical, economic and environmental assessment to determine whether claims made and the data provided, by the BRSA, in the Level 2 Environmental Assessment for this project are accurate or not. Before we continue to have taxpayers and ratepayers pay for this, we need to see apply sound science methodology to establish proof that the project will be an effective cost-benefit solution which is technically, economically, and environmentally safe and effective. If it is not, then we should not be wasting citizens’ resources on them.

John Curran
Hazlet Area Quality of Life Alliance

Herky

7:09 pm on Friday, September 23, 2011

No way do the Parts pass through Matawan A political stunt to apease Union Beach. Get yor facts together Paul before making such statements. Matawan OLD Guard still living in the 18th Century, supporting no progress. Do they realize they will keep paying higher sewage fees for such opposition??

Comment_arrow

John Curran

11:31 pm on Friday, September 23, 2011

Herky:

You need to practice what you preach...you've got the facts all wrong and confused about the politics involved and the future ratepayer savings alleged by the BRSA gang. You speak from emotions; not from knowledge. I suggest you take a deep breath, roll up your sleeves, and start doing the objective research into all of the facts. The politics at work here are about an autonomous Bully Authority making promises it can never keep and forcing its rekless will to carry out this thoughtless project on a small working-class town!

To help you get started on the path to the truth in this matter: Here are the "facts" about the planned turbine parts delivery route which runs through Cliffwood, Matawan, Keyport, Hazlet, and into Union Beach.

Route – SR 35 to Cliffwood Ave to Matawan Ave to High Street South to CR 516 (Maple Place) to CR 45 (Main St) to SR-36 to Union Ave to Front St to Florence Ave to 9th St

John
HAQLA

Bill Heller

12:16 am on Saturday, September 24, 2011

Herky, you are wrong sir. The 3 tower sections would pass right through Matawan. They’d be trucked down 35, right turn on Cliffwood Ave., left on Matawan Ave., right on High St., left on Main St., and down to Maple Place where they would cross 35 again into Keyport. Extra-long and tall loads, the heaviest weighing 84 tons, would travel this route over 3 days, one per day. Matawan is financially responsible for its infrastructure such as sewer lines and storm drains, even along county roads, and it will be at risk. Even if BRSA bonds for damage, they’ll likely want to prorate damage costs due to aging infrastructure. Matawan and the other towns can ill afford to pay the difference. As for higher sewage fees, this boondoggle will only drive them up. BRSA Chairman Coligas (at the time) stated in a video on the Holmdel Patch that GE will prohibit them from operating it below 36 degrees for fear of destabilizing the 118' blades with homes so close by - and so not much power generated in winter. In summer there’s little or no wind, especially on the hottest days at peak demand. The turbine uses grid power for its own systems like control, lighting and cooling, even when it’s not spinning. The budget fails to adequately consider maintenance (very expensive) and remediation costs when the turbine dies, which will be in 20 years or less. They'll worry about it then long after most of the commissioners are pushing up daises. It was a really, really dumb idea from the start.

Danny

3:15 am on Saturday, September 24, 2011

This should just be Union Beach's problem, but now it's our problem too. I certainly don't want that thing coming by my house and I don't want to hear it when the town has to come up with tens of thousands of dollars when the sewer people crush a storm drain and they say they are only paying for half the replacement cost because that's all that stretch of sewer was worth. Why don't they guarentee the sewer lines because they are the sewer company?

Herky

9:20 pm on Saturday, September 24, 2011

The parts WILL Not pass through Matawan, Why would the leave HWY#35 at Cliffwood Ave then come back on Hwy# 35 from County road 516 a mile down from where exitted at Cliffwood Ave Just to go through ?? Matawan over bridges unsafe for such a load on HIGH Street?

Herky

9:23 pm on Saturday, September 24, 2011

BILL Heller: One part weighing 84 Tons?? Really?

John Curran

12:30 am on Sunday, September 25, 2011

Herky:

Up to this point; you are grasping at straws in the dark...Both versions of the route are derived from the BRSA contractor, the Conti Group. At some point Cinti made a minor change within the Keyport borders only, but, the deliveries will still pass through Matawan. You should go to the next BRSA public meeting and get the plan directly from Fischer, Wells, DeSanti, and Conti. You are way off track regarding Paul, Bill, and myself, about the politics involved with this project...Instead; you should ask “Boss” Wells about the politics he is playing and the lawsuits he is endorsing against his own town and about his own personal political agenda...or do you already know the answer to that? Somehow, you seem to be stuck in the past...and/or...in some very unsound, unrealistic speculation. You should reconsider your own motives behind this discussion and what you think you are accomplishing with your misguided comments.

John

John Curran

12:42 am on Sunday, September 25, 2011

Herky:

Spelling correction to my above comment : The sentence should read...At some point "Conti" made a minor change...

Additionally; your original point was that the turbine parts would not pass through Matawan...and our point was that they will. You obviously don’t believe us, so, go inquire for yourself

John

Patch_comments_icon

Chelsea Naso

10:06 am on Sunday, September 25, 2011

Hi all! The route is intentionally not direct. The company responsible for transporting the components of the turbine has to evaluate each section of road in an attempt to do the least amount of damage to infrastructure.

John Curran

2:08 pm on Sunday, September 25, 2011

This is a response to this related story in the Holmdel PATCH
Special Delivery: BRSA's Wind Turbine Parts Arrive in Newark
September 14, 2011
http://matawan-aberdeen.patch.com/articles/special-delivery-brsas-wind-turbine-parts-arrive-in-newark

For a glimpse at how "Special" these deliveries can look; click the following links to view a few brief videos.
Emergency Management, Police, Fire, and First-Aid responders may be critically delayed... businesses, school busing, and local commuters may be interrupted...and local roads and infrastructure could be damaged. Any unexpected mishap along the transportation route could spell disaster.
Despite the strong opposition being voiced by the Monmouth County Freeholders, the host town of Union Beach, and the neighboring towns of Hazlet, Keyport, Holmdel and Matawan, against this industrial wind turbine project; and with the legal challenges currently pending in the courts; the BRSA is arrogantly willing to take the risks involved with delivery of this Monster. Are you and your town prepared to deal with at least seven of these very disturbing "Special Deliveries"?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-Qm8Ub2fgU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEIiExOBYgs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeImCJKyNqs

John Curran
HAQLA

J. Markowitz, Ph.D.

5:24 pm on Thursday, September 29, 2011

When you point your finger at someone, the remaining fingers on your hand point right back at you. The sad story I see here is that there are only a few complainers pecking away at this project, probably all linked in some way. Why is the Hazlet organization so involved when the thing is going to be in Union Beach? Why didn't all the towns that are customers of that Authority get together and adopt one, single Resolution a few years back - before the project got this far? As a public agency that authority is required by OPMA law to send meeting minutes of their activities out to their customers. It can not be denied every town knew about the project a long time ago. Also, the Bayshore Council of Mayors meet once a month. If Mayor Smith really wanted to, he could have had all the Mayors act as a unit against it. That didn't happen. Another thing that strikes me is, the same persons complaining on the Patch are the same ones writing letters to the editors and the same people thanking each town for their "support." It appears "huge" opposition doesn't exist. When I visit my grandparents in Europe, turbines are all over the place! No noise, no illnesses; they are the norm. America is WAY behind on clean energy. People want it - but not near them. That is selfish. Clearly, pressure is being placed on government officials in a piecemeal fashion. The agenda of a select few. It appears those three fingers are pointing right back HAQLA, Heller, & Sutton.

Comment_arrow

Anthony Ruiz

9:02 pm on Thursday, September 29, 2011

Dr., here's a paper on a study done on wind turbine noise, http://www.maine.gov/doc/mfs/windpower/pubs/pdf/AddressingWindTurbineNoise.pdf . A section of the study was on impact to sleep. The study was on people in a European town.

Herky

6:02 pm on Thursday, September 29, 2011

Sheep are dumb and are easy mislead, That is why a few are complaining , like liitle lost sheep. No common sense , just listen to those who KNOW IT ALL in Quick Chek or Dunkin Donuts!!

Anthony Ruiz

8:45 pm on Thursday, September 29, 2011

Has anyone ever did a study on the environmental impact of what these wind turbines will do to a surrounding community? Here's a video and audio of a 40 story turbine in action. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mablINxg3zE

John Curran

1:50 am on Friday, September 30, 2011

Dr Markowitz:

Where have you been for the past two-plus years? Obviously, you have not involved yourself, to any sincere extent, in objective research; nor, do you have even the slightest grasp of the many scientifically-sound, independent studies which show the negative safety and health risks and impacts to humans and wildlife living in close proximity to onshore industrial wind turbines (IWT’s) and, which, expose the economic inefficiencies, increased electricity rates, and environmental degradation they bring about. Sorely lacking and unprepared; you have hastily injected yourself into a fight; the scope and essence of which you simply comprehend not!

For your enlightenment; in addition to Union Beach, neighborhoods in both Hazlet and Keyport are located within the high-risk radius of this 38-story tall Monster turbine and HAQLA concerns itself with quality of life issues along the entire Raritan Bayshore Region from Sayreville to Highlands,

I suggest you regroup and do your homework first; before making any further claims and accusations.

John M. Curran III
Hazlet Area Quality of Life Alliance

John Curran

1:51 am on Friday, September 30, 2011

Dr Markowitz:

The Hazlet Day Celebration is being held this coming Saturday, October 1st, at Veterans Park in Hazlet, at 11:00 AM. HAQLA will occupy a vendor space there and I cordially invite you to come to the Celebration and stop by the HAQLA table. I/we would be happy to discuss the issues in depth with you in hopes of educating you on the truth regarding onshore (IWT’s) and the BRSA turbine project.

John M. Curran III
Hazlet Area Quality of Life Alliance

John Curran

1:51 am on Friday, September 30, 2011

Here’s to Herky:
Your comments are quirky
And, you sound like a turkey
‘Cause your conclusions are jerky
And, your intentions are murky.

You are also invited to Saturday’s Hazlet Day Celebration and to stop by the HAQLA table to discuss the issues and learn the truth.

John M. Curran III
Hazlet Area Quality of Life Alliance

Marco Oldhafer

6:33 am on Friday, September 30, 2011

Herky and the Doc sound like they work for the BSRA! I only say that because not one person I have meet outside the BSRA circle support's the turbine.

Comment_arrow

Herky

9:21 am on Friday, September 30, 2011

You haven't Heard about anyone supporting this because you hang out at Quick Chek with all the "PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS" and Retired want a be LAWYERS.

Herky

9:30 am on Friday, September 30, 2011

John : You impress me with your childish writing, do you still believe Santa comes down the chimmney at Christmas? , Maybe someone should out there that knows this man could elighten him to the New Real World.

Patch_comments_icon

Chelsea Naso

9:35 am on Friday, September 30, 2011

I'm glad to see so much conversation generated on this topic! I just want to remind everyone to please keep the comments civil and constructive. We're all neighbors here

Comment_arrow

Bruce Sinclair

7:42 pm on Friday, September 30, 2011

From what I have seen here, there are two very vocal camps here – those opposed to the wind turbine and those opposed to those who are opposed to the wind turbine. Neither is likely to change the opinion of the other and their continued use of invective and innuendo is not likely to sway the opinion of any third party – it has certainly not swayed me. The body of outside study and evidence that I have seen is inconclusive – one can cherry-pick scientific studies to support any point of view – but the preponderance of what I have seen suggests that the opponents of the wind turbine have overstated the dangers it presents. Yet I will admit that scientific study continues and the verdict is still out on the matter.

There is a proverb that fits this situation clearly – “Understanding is a three-edged sword”. There is one side, there is the other side, and there is the truth. Truth, as always, lies somewhere in between.

Bruce Sinclair,
Cliffwood Beach

Marco Oldhafer

6:50 pm on Friday, September 30, 2011

HAHA I wish all this conversation would go away with the rest of the BSRA! I will asked JERKY one more question ..... Tell me honestly would you want your home 1000ft away from a 400ft structure that has a moving object the size of a 747 jumbo jet attached to it. GO AHEAD LIE

Herky

7:21 pm on Friday, September 30, 2011

Everyone wants progress , but not near them???

The editor has closed comments for this article.