Page 1 of 1

wind towers proposed for Bald and West Mountains

PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2007 2:59 pm
by davidk
At the October Newton Commissioners work session a representative of Global Winds Harvest discusssed a proposal involving the building of wind turbine towers on Bald and West Mountains.
This is the same company that built the controversial towers down in Bear Creek.

www.globalwinds.com

There would be 14-15 towers involved running from Bald Mountain all the way across the ridges to West Mountain behind the Cherry Ridge development.
According to the rep there is at least on property owner who is interested in allowing access.

This project has ramifications far beyond the landowners on the mountain tops or even immediate areas. These towers, if built, will be visible, day and night, throughout the county and surrounding areas. Stop and think about how many different places in the township as well as city, you can see the current radio towers that are already on the ridges. The wind towers will be even larger and stretch much further.

The word about this proposal needs to be spred as far and wide throughout the township and county as possible.
We must tell the Newton supervisors as well as all other local officials ow we feel about the idea. The sooner the better.
There is a regularly scheduled meeting Monday October 8 at 7:30 PM.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:52 pm
by davidk
I was at the meeting tonight to specifically ask about the wind tower situation.
I was told that there was a rep from Global Winds Harvest at the work session but that it was not a formal presentation. More of a feeler from the company.
There are test towers on the mountain, but it was not stated on who's property.
The number of towers would be 15-20 and each would require 60 - 100 acres.

PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 12:41 am
by JoeP
Thanks Dave for the update.  I wouldn't trust anything this gang of 5 says - remember the garbage debacle?  They snuck it in the back door.  These guys are tricky.

Now, in the quest to seek energy independence the zealots of renewable energy are willing to rape the country side with ugly machines that do more harm than good to the pristine forests and animal habitats.  And for what?  They can only produce a fraction of the power of a nuclear reactor power plant.

You want cheap renewable energy, go nuclear.  We have the resources, technology and it's made in America quality.  And for those folks who still hold on to the Three Mile Island argument, you need to remember the Three Mile Island reactor worked as advertised.  The meltdown was totally contained as it was designed to do.  Nuclear technology has come a long way in 28 years and it is time to embrace it, not fear it.

Want to save some energy?  How about turning off the lights on all the billboards that litter our highways in and around Scranton.  The Electric City is fast becoming the Billboard City.

PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:03 am
by Sal
Hey, Windmills may not be a bad idea. :wink:

With the joint zoning nonsense, Newton will not have business or industry to generate tax revenue and everyone’s property tax will go sky high.

If we have big windmills on the mountains and enact an ordinance that requires every landowner and all homes to have at least one windmill, we could become the windmill capital of the world.

People would come from all over the world to see the windmills and we could change the name.

Welcome to Newt Holland. :shocked:

PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:25 pm
by davidk
The supervisors passed an ordinance regarding various facets of wind towers to be built in the township. The ordinance was based upon other ordinances already in effect across the state and elsewhere.

Now, suddenly, the Supervisors are holding a public hearing on amending the ordinance in favor of those who would build such towers. The height allowance is being increased and distance from property lines decreased.
These new towers will dwarf the proposed power lines, which in turn will dwarf the existing towers.

The hearing is set for August 5 at 7:00 PM at the township building with the regular monthly meeting to follow, at which the Supervisors plan on voting on the issue.
Note that the regular monthly meeting is being moved from the second Monday to what would normally be the work session night.

The question that need sto be raised, and I plan on doing just that, is who in Newton Township requested this amendment and why?
If it is not a Newton resident or property owner why is the matter even being addressed?

Please, attend the hearing and meeting and spread the word on the matter as it will effect most residents since the towers will be clearly visible from throughout the area since they will be on the second highest ridgetop in the entire county.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:19 pm
by davidk
I was mistaken when I posted that the regular August meeting was moved to the 5th, instead of the 10th.
According to a legal ad in today's July 26, Sunday Times there will be yet another public hearing in Newton on August 10, this time concerning the sewage ordinace changes.
The hearing will be at 7:00 with the regular meeting to follow at 7:30.
My apologies for any confusion.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 26, 2009 9:35 pm
by husky
So the windmill meeting will be on the 10th?

Who would benefit by the windmills being installed?

PostPosted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 8:06 pm
by davidk
No, the windmill hearing and vote on the changes is on the 5th. That is Wendsday night. The Hearing and vote on the sewer ordinace is on the 10th which is the following Monday and is the regular monthy meeting. The only people who are to benefit from the wind towers are the comany that builds them and sells the juice and whoever may own the land that is leased. However, there is no one in Newton that I know of, who is interested in leasing their land for such. There may be a landowner in Ransom, but that should have no bearing on what our supervisors do, since the landowner does not won anything in Newton.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 08, 2009 9:39 pm
by davidk
The supervisors (Koldjeski and Pardue, Martenson was absent) held the hearing and after testimony by several people (all but two were against the proposed changes, one of which was the developer) decided to table the issue.