State Significant Development
Hills of Gold Wind Farm
Tamworth Regional
Current Status: Recommendation
Interact with the stages for their names
- SEARs
- Prepare EIS
- Exhibition
- Collate Submissions
- Response to Submissions
- Assessment
- Recommendation
- Determination
A wind farm and associated infrastructure located 50 km south-east of Tamworth and 8 km south of Nundle, comprising up to 70 wind turbines, battery storage and grid connection.
EPBC
This project is a controlled action under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 and will be assessed under the bilateral agreement between the NSW and Commonwealth Governments, or an accredited assessment process. For more information, refer to the Australian Government's website.
Attachments & Resources
Notice of Exhibition (2)
Request for SEARs (7)
SEARs (2)
EIS (41)
Response to Submissions (17)
Agency Advice (15)
Amendments (52)
Additional Information (19)
Recommendation (6)
Submissions
Name Withheld
Support
Name Withheld
Message
Name Withheld
Support
Name Withheld
Message
Name Withheld
Support
Name Withheld
Message
Warren Trevor
Support
Warren Trevor
Message
1. Australia has an abundance of wind and sunshine, that if suitable projects are placed appropriately and managed responsibly, can supply our power needs well into the future.
2. Existing coal fired Power Stations, such as Liddell (due for closure in 2022) and Bayswater (approx 2035) need to be replaced with environmentally friendly and sustainable alternatives such as this, in combination with other existing and proposed solar/wind projects.
3. This project has the strong support of those most affected, namely a large number of surrounding and adjoining neighbours.(Admittedly, benefiting financially)
4. The project fits in beautifully with the existing rural usage of these properties, which is primarily cattle production.
5. The project is extremely well located along a mountain ridgeline away from town and is close to the existing 330kv power transmission line from Liddell to Tamworth.
6. Despite some very vocal and negative outlooks from a small segment of the Nundle area community, there are such considerable long term financial. tourist and social facility benefits for the whole area that could be realized if the project proceeds.
6. Nundle is stagnant, with a declining school population that will, in time, lead to loss of teaching staff and possible school closure. The area (like so many rural communities) needs a long term shot in the arm. Employment is stagnant, with timber mills and Council facilities having been curtailed and reduced in recent years. The local population is ageing, with no facilities such as aged care and retirement homes to cater for the needs of the ageing population.
7. The project is NOT on the doorstep of the local town. The nearest turbine will be approx 8km away and will be visible from some rural areas but still in the distance. Ironically, there is a much sought after rural subdivision with many new and expensive homes built at a place called Muscle Creek, just south of Muswellbrook and yes , only 8km from Liddell and Bayswater Power Stations. These residents seem happy enough, even though they must suffer from a polluted atmosphere caused by emissions from these power stations. The smoke pall can be clearly seem on most days in the area. I know, as I work at Muswellbrook and have done for 18 years.
8. Sure, there will be challenges to be faced getting plant, materials and personnel to site via local roads. Just as there were challenges when Chaffey Dam, (not far from Nundle) was constructed and upgraded. But the community benefitted from the increased traffic and workers that stayed in the area while construction was undertaken. This project will still retain a number of personnel who will all live and settle locally and will support local businesses and schools.
9. The project itself, I am sure will boost and provide an additional major tourist attraction for the area, drawing people from far and wide who will stay and support the local economy.
10. The benefits of this project proceeding,not only support Nundle/Hanging Rock in so many ways, but also the surrounding areas such as Tamworth, Quirindi, Willow Tree, etc. Materials and labour will flow from these areas into the Nundle area.
11. The very negative and untrue remarks made by people from Sydney and elswehere, eg 2GB radio, Sky News, etc, are just as a result of being fed nonsense and not fact by those who oppose any form of change. Many people have made comments without either ever visiting the area or visiting the area once (Eg, Ben Fordham - Radio 2GB)
These people are in the main, not long term residents having grown up in the Nundle/Hanging Rock area. When they get older, they will return to Sydney or the coast where they came from, leaving no legacy for the local area
12. In conclusion, I have read the environmental, heritage and all of the items in the government submission and I find that the important aspects of the project appear to have been very carefully covered. I strongly support the project being approved.
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Message
Cheryl-Anne Hill
Support
Cheryl-Anne Hill
Message
Another possibility is reduced electricity costs or solar panels provided to everyone in the area.
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Message
Whilst I support renewable energy options, I am very concerned about the impact of the Hills of Gold Wind Farm DA/EIS on the natural scenery and landscape of Nundle and the surrounds. The wind farm as currently proposed would have a significant (and in my view, negative) impact on the natural landscape of this part of NSW.
Brett Miller
Object
Brett Miller
Message
We have experienced these similar projects when living in other parts of the country eg Western Australia & central New South Wales, the negatives of these farms very much outweigh the positives especially when wildlife & the bushland are affected. The minimal amount of power that is produced for the damage created is a joke, the power & energy required to produce, transport & maintain these wind farms is enormous. From our first hand knowledge these wind turbines only spin 50% of the time, either due to no wind or the wind is to strong, also when these turbines do turn the noise becomes very disturbing particularly at night.
We are not against renewable power but not to the detriment to the existing environment, wildlife & people.
We believe this project would be a backward step & irresponsible.
Regards,
Brett Miller & Family
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Message
William Van Egmond-Jones
Support
William Van Egmond-Jones
Message
Eve Campese
Support
Eve Campese
Message
rory O'callaghan
Support
rory O'callaghan
Message
Name Withheld
Support
Name Withheld
Message
I'm a resident in Hanging Rock and have lived here since 2012, having moved from Coolah. I have lived in Europe and grew up with turbines. They are a peaceful addition to the landscape and have a calming affect.
We understand projects like this and in particular bring jobs for the future and clean energy which in NSW we need. Australia is more exposed to climate change as evidence by recent droughts and fires. Other countries are doing their bit and have been for a long time. This is a technology and a project that has acceptable impacts for the benefits it brings communities like mine in Nundle and Hanging Rock.
We think tourists will continue to see the beauty in the area and the existing attractions that wont be affected by the wind farm. If anything we expect that this will be an additional point of interest for people to learn about and there may be more tourists visit the area as a result.
We already follow trucks associated with forestry and understand the impacts of this project to us. These are acceptable.
Someva has consulted us about the project and we feel informed.
Thank you for the opportunity and your time in reading my support.
Meg Worley
Object
Meg Worley
Message
I object to this windfarm as 6 turbines fall within less than 2 km of our new dwelling. They should not be there.
I object to this proposal as it will forever decimate my traditional lands and industrialise it so I can no longer enjoy the connection with the land that my ancestors had.
I object to this proposal due to the massive number of traffic movements that will occur throughout the construction period and the danger they will put all people in. The transport study does not tell the entire truth nor include all factors. The bus times are wrong, they have limited the logging truck movements for the study-there are many more.
I object to this proposal as the Aboriginal Heritage Study was done during the period of Covid. An ad was placed in one newspaper for a once off asking people to apply to take part in the study. Many people missed this and were not able to take part. There are traditional people living well beyond the local area who return regularly. They had no opportunity for input. This is unfair and unethical.
Nundle is not a town that should have to be burdened with a second renewable project. The area already hosts a pine plantation which has again decimated the native environment. This development will further impact the native flora and fauna in a very fragile area. Th Pine Forest is substantial and its logging is changing our landscape.
Bob Worley
Object
Bob Worley
Message
I have an approved DA and have started to build my residence. WEP were made very much aware of this. My residence is less than 2 km from the turbines. There are around 17 turbines that will impact significantly on my residence. The visual montage only shows a small portion of the area containing turbines. The cumulative effect of these turbines in such close proximity is going. It will destroy the visual amenity of my property and it will destroy the capacity for me to conduct my primary production business.
The visual impact of the turbines will significantly reduce the value of my land. The land on which I am building is a 600 acre block of land. I currently use it for primary production purposes. The spreading of fertilizers by aerial means is going to be completed restricted to impossible. The aviation study does not make any allowance for this nor offer solutions outside of making operators aware. This will significantly reduce the ability of the land to be productive and therefore reduce my ability to produce an income.
The major amount of illegal land clearing by the major landholder has already significantly impact on the flow of water to my property. This illegal clearing has caused major disputes between the majority land owner and his neighbours. Further clearing and disturbance of the flora and the soils in this Class 8 area as defined by the Office of Environment and Heritage will add to the already major impacts which I have suffered. The entirety of the development area is designated as Class 8 soil types. This means it should not be disturbed at all and should only be used for conservation areas. The entirety of the area cleared already and illegal to make way for this proposal should be rehabilitated. Had it not been illegal cleared, there would never have been permission given to devastated the environment in such a manner as has been done.
The proponent handed me a neighbour agreement which was full of mistakes. They have not been back to me with another. The proponent told me to do nothing (Aref) as the development would go ahead. The proponent has not at any stage negotiated the situating of the turbines with me. The proponent has not discussed with me the pecuniary impact on my primary production business and how this may be mitigated.
The biodiversity study was done over the years of the worst drought on record. It does not give a true representation of the reality. The water flow from the area has not been adequately observed. It feeds Nundle Creek which flows through my property and is my water source(already impacted by illegal clearing mentioned above). The proponent completely disregarded my concerns in relation to the interference with the water flow and said that it would all be ok.
I object to the major traffic congestion that will occur in a small village that can not already handle major traffic. The roads are unsafe and the transport study shows that there is no way for emergency vehicles to reach certain parts of the area if there is a major component being transported. The proponent suggests putting up a sign. This will not allow and emergency vehicle to pass, it will simply tell it it can't.
As a long term resident and land owner, I have seen the wanton destruction of the native flora and fauna by the major land holder. I have seen wedgetailed eagle nests pushed over as he has illegally cleared land for this development. (I have photos). I have seen wombat habitat destroyed with bulldozers and seen wombats chased down and killed so they can be removed from the area.
As an Aboriginal man. I also object to the industrialisation of my traditional lands. I live here to be connected with my land and I am on it every day. It is my home and work pace. I should not have to live with a major industrial development diminishing my enjoyment and traditional connection. I did not have an opportunity to contribute to the Aboriginal Heritage study as I did not even know it was being done. I know a number of Aboriginal people who return to the area as part of their connection to country. They also did not have the opportunity to contribute.
The proposed location is absolutely not suitable for this type of development. The environment has already been vandilsed by the major landowner before the proposal was tabled to try and get it over the line. This is a disgrace and should never have happened. This proposal has already divided the community and if it is approved, it will destroy the community.
Christopher Eagles
Object
Christopher Eagles
Message
I strongly object to the submission.
This Wind Farm will destroy the remaining unspoilt environment in the Isis Valley, where we call home. The top of the Escarpment is the last remaining pristine environment in this area, and now this Project will destroy it.
No matter how important renewable energy is to the Australian population, its development should not be at the expense of the small amount of remnant pristine environment.
The area of this development is in the watershed of our River system, upon which we rely.
The Assessment process for this development has been corrupted by NSW government departments turning a blind eye to what otherwise would have been illegal clearing of a pristine forest corridor between the Ben Hall and Crawney Conservation areas. This is a corridor supporting threatened Flora and Fauna species, including Koalas, Wedge Tail Eagles, Sugar Gliders amongst many others.
The subsequent Environmental Impact Statement is using as a baseline an area that was pristine forest, but has now been cleared. If this occurred anywhere else in the state, the owner of the land would have been prosecuted.
Additionally, The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), is biased, misleading and inaccurate. Whilst it is very clear on the Renewable Energy benefits, many of which are overstated, it glosses over the impacts to the Environment and local communities. The widespread community support that it tries to convey is an utter lie. The Environmental studies could have been written by a child. This Environment deserved better.
We can always replace Renewable Energy, but we can’t replace the Environment.
This Project should be thrown out.
Allan Donnelly
Object
Allan Donnelly
Message
David Petroni
Object
David Petroni
Message
I urge this development proposal to be rejected.