|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
NEW BEDFORD — An environmental nonprofit said it will appeal a state decision to allow a massive waste transfer facility in the city’s North End and has asked the city Board of Health to delay an upcoming public hearing to consider it.
The Conservation Law Foundation announced Wednesday that it intends to file an appeal on the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection’s site suitability decision with the agency’s Office of Appeals and Dispute Resolution by July 28. It argued that the Board should thus delay the hearing until that process plays out.
The move comes more than three weeks after the state DEP gave its approval for the South Coast Renewables trash transfer facility in the New Bedford Industrial Park.
“The state’s job was simple: decide if this site is suitable for a massive trash facility,” Suhasini Ghosh, staff attorney at the Conservation Law Foundation, said in the release. “It’s hard to believe anyone could look at this neighborhood – surrounded by homes, schools, and ongoing pollution – and say yes. But that’s exactly what happened, and we’re preparing to challenge that decision.”
The $30 million-plus New Bedford project proposed by Parallel Products — doing business as South Coast Renewables — would process up to 1,500 tons of solid waste per day at a site in the New Bedford Industrial Park. It would serve as a transfer site where material is sorted before being sent out for destruction or recycling elsewhere.
The transfer station is intended to give New Bedford a new outlet for its trash, and help replace the Crapo Hill Landfill in Dartmouth, which may reach capacity and close within the decade. The facility would also bring an estimated 75 jobs and $1 million-plus in annual revenue to the City of New Bedford.
“Pushing this project forward while serious questions remain is not only reckless — it’s unjust,” said Ghosh. “We’re calling on local officials to pause this process until the state’s flawed decision can be fully reviewed. Our communities deserve protection, not more pollution.”
Project history
First proposed in 2022, the facility has faced widespread opposition from residents and several elected officials.
In November, residents made their voices heard during a public hearing on the project at the Casimir Pulaski Elementary School. Residents cited fears around traffic, noise pollution, vermin infestation, real estate values, and toxins as reasons not to place the facility at the Industrial Park.
The July 7 determination by the state DEP prompted swift backlash from those in opposition.
“It is almost criminally negligent that the city and MassDEP would think it’s OK to put a facility like that within 1,000 feet of a residential neighborhood,” said Leo Choquette, the Ward 1 councilor whose jurisdiction includes the site, in reaction to that decision. “It is irresponsible and I will publicly state that the MassDEP is irresponsible to the taxpayers of Massachusetts if they pull this stunt.”
Wendy Morrill, a resident and president of SouthCoast Neighbors United, expressed disappointment that day as well.
“It’s going to affect the health and safety and property values of the people who live in close proximity to this,” she said.
Jonathan Darling, a public information officer for the City of New Bedford, said in an email at the time that the city made the best of a less than ideal situation.
“From the outset, Mayor Mitchell has made it clear that adding another municipal waste facility in the Business Park is not in the City’s best interest,” he said. “At the same time, the City’s outside legal experts predicted — correctly in retrospect — that the state would inevitably approve the facility.”
Lawyers for South Coast Renewables, the City of New Bedford, and the DEP did not immediately respond to emails requesting comment.
Contact Kevin G. Andrade at kandrade@newbedfordlight.org
Where should New Bedford’s waste be handled?
Out of town?
And when you bring in more people they make more garbage
Where is the common sense ? ? ? Why would the city and state officials take the chance of creating another future environmental disaster and Superfund cleanup site? Hasn’t this area learned from past EPA Superfund Sites take a few minutes and look them up online (the Aerovox, Atlas Tack in Fairhaven, Parker Street, the Industrial Park, Sullivan’s Ledge, the Re-Solve Superfund Site in Dartmouth and the 18,000 acres in New Bedford Harbor). The health and safety of this city’s residents should be the number one priority and the expansion of Parallel Products or any other company that would have any possibility of becoming the next environmental disaster should not move forward. Our local and state politicians are elected to serve and protect the citizens of this State, Cities, and Towns.
Where should New Bedford’s waste be handled?
Out of town?
Use common sense, over six years ago when Parallel Products tried to expand their waste management facility without notifying the community, they should have worked with the city and the residents to complete a search for a site that would serve the community and protect the environment. This is what should be done now (use common sense).
We humans make a LOT of waste wherever we are. Perhaps technology of some kind will save us, but not yet.
Don’t forget to attend the Board of Health Meeting on Parallel Products to be held on Aug. 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th at the Pulaski Elementary School, 1097 Braley Road, beginning at 6:30 p.m.
SOMEthing is going to have to be done with the trash. If not here, then where?