Hills of Gold Wind Farm.

I would like to start by making it clear that I still object to the proposed Hills of Gold Wind Farm and further to my original submitted objections I have found the recently submitted amendments by Engie to be worse, by far.

Please see below my comments and questions to these updated amendments:

Appendix G LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL ASSESSMENT ADDENDUM, 5.0 Assesment of Additional Hardstand Areas for Ancillary Infastructure, page 26. (Figure 11).

I strongly reject the use of the “Governor's Shelf" being used for the optional Substation/ Batching / O & M facility / BESS on the NorthWestern side of the project near WTGs 4,5,6,7

The Landscape and Visual Assesment Adendum fails to address the curtilage of Crawney/Nundle and the significant impact this infastructure will have on residents and visitors traveling to and staying at the Teamsters Rest Camp ground.

The Teamsters Rest camp (area) is the first and last natural lansdcape experience to visitors and residents traveling to and from the Nundle/Crawney area. As a tourist destination like Nundle this area is not only a visual community asset but it is one of the very few free natural bush recreational areas accessbile to the public and this beauty and tranquility must be protected for generations to come.

The infrastructure proposed in the Amended DA compromises the Crawney Pass National Park Management Plan and its goals to increase passive recreation in the park to encourage appreciation and care of native flora and fauna.

The installation of this scale infastructure, above Teamsters Rest is a complete step backwards in any attempt to rectify the visual impacts of the Hills of Gold Wind Farm on Crawney/Nundle.

No amount of rehabilitation or vegetation screening will detract from the enormous areas that will have to be cleared to introduce the hard stands and access routes for the batching stations, substation, BESS, O+M facilities and Western Connector Road.

The simple fact that no illustrations of double circuit steel towers, poles, substation infastructure (typical of a wind farm), Battery storage system were not used in the photomontaging in the Ancillary Infastructure illustrations is deceptive and would suggest an attempt to downplay the visual impact of this kind of infastructure in this area.

The Amended DA does not adequately recognise the Visual and Transport impact to The DAG Sheep Station, which is an important, nationally recognised, cultural tourism venue for country music singer songwriting and performing, as well as weddings based on the high scenic natural beauty and tranquility of the setting.

4.0 ASSESMENT ALTERNATE TRANSPORT ROUTE TO PROJECT AREA, PAGE 25, IMAGE 02-View from Crawney road near NAD_21.

This photo location is 2.2km's from NAD_21.

NAD_22 is next door and NAD_34 are closer.

Is this an attempt to have a receptor (non-associated dwelling) appear to not be visually impacted from the project in the visual assesment or a gross error in property identification?

4.0 ASSESMENT ALTERNATE TRANSPORT ROUTE TO PROJECT AREA, PAGE 24, Figure 10

"Vegetation will screen views to the proposed road from Crawney road". This is an incorrect allocation and the NOTE is pointing to OPTION C Access Route by mistake, surely?

APPENDIX A UPDATED PROJECT DESCRITION, 3.2.7 INTERNAL ACCESS ROADS, PAGE A20, OPTION C ACCESS ROUTE

Doubling the size and replacing (the brand new) Teamsters Bridge on Crawney Road along with widening the access route to 8.5 mtrs wide (including 1.5m road shoulders) inorder to accept wind farm infastructure in a High Conservation Valued reserve would change this High Conservation Valued reserve and the Teamsters Rest Camp ground and its main entrance, forever.

The natural and attractive features of this part of the road reserve and entrance to a significant (free) visitor camp ground should not be altered or be touched in any way. The immediate area is also an established and posted Bird Route.

APPENDIX A-UPDATED PROJECT DESCRIPTION, 3.3.8 Resouce Requirements page A.33

"...There are a number of exisiting quarries located within approximately 80km's of the project area...Crawney road.

What quarries on Crawney road?

The movement of quarry material and use of heavy trucks on Crawney road would have an incredibly negative effect on the road condition and generate an unhealthy amount of dust for dwellings close to the road, NAD_22, NAD_21.

No mention of colaboration or funding to Tamworth City Council to maintain roads during construction.

There is no mention in APPENDIX C-UPDATED MITIGATION MEASURES for the use of dust suppresents during construction on Crawney road and the impacts that these Polymers might have on the Endangered Burlong frog communities found along the Crawney Road.
Dust from increased project traffic on Crawney road will impact domestic water supplies and air quality for Crawney resdients that live clsoe to the road, NAD_21, NAD_22.

No mention in the amendments that currently, articulated vehicles are not allowed on Crawney road due to the tight winding roads, not to mention the naturally restrictive width of the road between the DAG Sheep Station and the Crawney Pass South of Nundle.

No mention of heavy vehicle traffic coming from the South on the Crawney road and trust that quarry material for the proposed project will not be coming from the SOUTH of Nundle and originating from the STONECO TIMOR QUARRY (P.O BOX 708 SCONE, NSW).

Why has the entirety of Morrison Gap Road been gazetted to be sealed and only a commitment to partialy seal Crawney road post construction, up to the access point? THE PROPONENT ONLY MEASURES TO OPTION A. PUBLIC ROAD MODIFICATIONS AND DILAPIDATION PAGE 16.
I think its safe to say that although the proponent says that no significant project traffic will be coming from the South of Nundle, they actually will. Especially the sub contractors coming from the Hunter Valley and Newcastle areas. In which case, Crawney road has not been properly assessed or mitigated during and post this project.

Speed enforcement or additional speed sign posting for traffic coming down Crawney mountain is not specifically mentioned and will make Crawney road incredibly dangerous. Several parts of Crawney road North of the Crawney Pass are single lane traffic only, making Crawney road unsuitable for accessing the project area.

In the Traffic and Transport Assessment in 2020 was a vehicle count conducted on the Crawney road for the EIS? This would create a benchmark for current car and truck movments on Crawney road and indeed determine if project associated vehicles are sticking to the ammended Traffic Management Plan.

Did this report determine and expose that non-articulated vehicles are not meant to travel on Crawney road currently from the OLD WALLBADAH ROAD turn off, onwards? Currently sign posted to this effect.

APPENDIX H: TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORT ASSESMENT ADDENDUM 2 FIGURE 8: LAYBY LOCATIONS

UPDATED PROJECT DESCRIPTION F3-21d SHOWS LAYBYS NORTH OF THE DAG DRIVEWAY. THIS REDUCES THE VISUAL AMENITY OF RESIDENTS AND VISITORS AND RESULTS IN A CHANGE IN CHARACTER. IT DOES NOT ASSESS THE NOISE FROM THE STOPPING, STARTING AND IDLING OF VEHICLES OR THEIR LIGHTS.

A large majority of the locals do not support the project and this has led to the division of the community. Both Tamworth Shire Council and the Traditional owners do not support the project. I think this project is trying to be good but they have taken the easy path. The one landowner that owns much of the range has bought out properties, cleared the range (damaging wildlife before a wildlife survey was taken), and built roads then offered it to the proponents, making the project look desirable. When in fact the range is not the right place for a wind farm, just because someone is willing to give up their land for renewable energy does not mean it is the right place for the project. The proponents should be looking at the optimal place for a wind farm, and a steep mountain range is not the place for them!

The proposed development fails to address a number of ecological concerns.

I recall the heyday of Nundle when Chaffey Dam was built and look forward to the following when the Windfarm project begins:
*most importantly, jobs for locals
*upgraded roads (Tamworth Council admits no capital for road repair)
*more volunteers for community functions
*school numbers would grow, more teachers employed
*local clubs would again flourish
*local business houses would benefit from shopping locally
*Windfarm would become a sightseeing “destination”

I object to the Hills of Gold Wind Farm as it will destroy our town with the proposed route to carry the turbine towers and propeller blades.
As they are far too long to go through our town the proposed route means that several houses would be removed and some lovely Crown Land would be destroyed to get the blades up to their location.
Besides removing several houses, our roads will have to be widened and routes changed and this will destroy the beauty of our town.
Also the wind farm will destroy the beauty of our town’s views and as a tourist town this will be devastating.
Please note my objection.

I object to the Hills of Gold Wind Farm for the following reasons.
There has been a lack of consultation with the community and the project has been designed with lack of appreciation of the community's needs. Community's should have a voice in the planning of such large projects that impact all the community.
I object to the biodiversity impacts. The clearing of 447ha of vegetation including valuable koala habitat should not be allowed. The threat to birds and bats has not been resolved in the EIS.
The visual amenity of this countryside should not be destroyed by an industrial project.
There are alternative projects that are being planned in other areas that have community support. Wind farms that affect so many people outside involved landowners should only proceed where there is community support. There are other areas where the affect on wildlife and native flora will not have such an enormous impact and these areas are more suitable for an industrial project.
I object to this project and would not like to see it proceed.
Thank you.

This is an objection to the project.
Please see attachments.

I objec to the Hills of Gold Wind farm, as it is contrary to the needs of the local community, and contrary to the health of the local ecology. The developement requries the clearing of 132 Ha of native vegetation, and 36 Ha of Koala habitat for the construction of turbines over the footprint of the project. This destructive activity is contrary to the lofty ambitions of "renewable energy developement", and does not provide an ecological benefit over currnet forms of energy generation. Added to this, the project will negatively impact an (industrially speaking) undisturbed area of productive agricultural land, that until now, has supported a regional community that has chosen to live in this peaceful and natural environment, not in an industrial landscape.

My name is Alex Burr and I am a 12 year old boy that has lived my entire life in Nundle. Like many of my neighbours and our family we have a gorgeous view of the Hanging Rock mountains and I would not like to open my eyes each morning to see a giant ugly stick poking out of the ground on that beautiful mountain range.

There are many reasons that we should not have this Wind Farm around Nundle, or any town for that matter. I would be fine for them to be in any other part of Australia where towns and villages like Nundle cannot see them or have to live under them. Secondly, they are extremely unreliable as an energy source, I have read about them in other locations not working 100% of the time. Having them around Nundle and Hanging Rock would cause more havock and trouble for the Community, and you the Government would be to blame. I don't want all of those trucks driving past our property everyday, they will be noisy and I wouldnt be able to ride my bike on Crawney Rd into the Village or to see my family or friends.

So PLEASE DO NOT put these giant sticks in the ground near us or near any town.

Please See Attachment

I strongly oppose this project.
I have read countless submissions and supporting documents and it is clear that there has been a lack of communication and consultation throughout this period, the project has a finite life and the expected environmental impacts far outweigh any benefits.
We have heard that this project will create numerous more jobs and will inject needed funds into the community, yet we see organisations outside the projects LGA excited that it will create jobs for them, we hear that the town needs a boost but lacks infrastructure to support this growth which would impact the image the town has. We hear how this project has been in the pipeline for 10+ years and that it will result in additional tourist and tours, yet not sure why these tourist opportunities aren't offered now to show people the beautiful scenery and picturesque views. I read submissions from government authorities which state that there has been no discussion with them around exactly what crown land will be utilised and impact statements or impact of Bush Fire plans or natural disaster plans and the impact it will have on the community accessing aerial support or ground support, and given the past few years this is an event which we need to say when will it happen not if it will happen. Additionally I have not seen any planning or provisioning for emergency services including ground and aerial medical treatment, are we to believe that priority given to infrastructure over the people in the communities well-being.
I've lived in this community for 20+ years and continue to support the community and can say that this project will result in a FIFO situation where workers will only be there for work and will return back to their communities to inject the money else where not back into the community as stated.
It's quite upsetting that this project has been in the pipeline for 10+ years but only known to the community in the past 2-3 years, shows the lack of community consultation had.
In conclusion this project has and will only create more issues both environmental, physically and socially should it be approved and I ask that weighing be placed on how much of a toll it will take on such a small community for something that will cause more damage than good it may create

ATTACHED IS MY WRITTEN OBJECTION

Please find Tamworth Regional Council's reply to the amended proposal received November 2022.

I object to the proposed project, Nundle is the quiet town we have always lived in, please do not spoil our landscape, roads, community etc for the greed of others.

I have lived in Nundle all my life.
I object to the Hills of Gold Wind Farm and Amendments because it would be an eyesore straight away. Knocking down a house for a temporary road is ridiculous.
Nundle will get no benefit whatsoever compared to the profit for the company.
It will wreck the environment on the range, particularly endangered species of flora and fauna.
The turbines only have a lifespan of 25 years and then go into landfill.
It is also a threat to our water quality.

please attached

I object to the wind farm that is proposed to be built in hanging rock because it will affect my quality of life due to noise and light pollution. I fear it will interfere with my sleep and mental health whilst I am staying on my grandfather's property. I'm afraid it will affect my sleep at night because of the constant flickering lights, this will affect me mentally and cause sleep deprivation. We go up there as a family to my grandfather's property. To enjoy the serenity and untouched beauty we do not have in sydney. My grandfather has owned this property for nearly 40 years and it makes me sad to see this proposal that will destroy the landscape and the beauty that surrounds us, i do not want to see the loss of fauna and flora that i am lucky to see everytime i go up there, i hope this proposal does not go through.

Attachment

Attachment

There are major biodiversity and environmental objections to this Project but in this message I want to object to failures in App G LVIA.

Most of the LVIA obfuscates, obscures and obliterates the visual impact by fragmenting questionable data into “Figures” and “Tables” and “Overviews”. Unfortunately the LVIA fails to recognise the the Project will have a MAJOR visual impact on the surrounding district irrespective of viewing points at specific dwellings - NDAs and DAs - because views of the project are not just from fixed, static locations. The Hills of Gold ridge line is a dominant feature of the Nundle landscape and the presence 64 extra large WTGs will completely transform the skyline. Visibility will certainly be “likely’ as the Moir LVIA report often suggests. Visibility won't be just "likely" - rather visibility of the Project will be very real, unforgettable and haunting. Views of the Project will become an indelible and permanent part of everyday life for the people of Nundle, Hanging Rock, Morrisons Gap, Crawney and Timor.

The App G LVIA prepared by Moir for the Amended DA is a sham. It is certainly confusing and grossly inconsistent. I have to object to Low, Moderate and High classifications because these ratings are purely subjective. Along Morrisons Gap Road, NADs and ADs closest to the project with high number of WTGs are rated Low while those further away with fewer visible WTGs are Moderate.

For Example, are you able to get your head around the following comparisons on a "bare ground scenario"? Refer to Pages 16-17 App G LVIA.
NAD11 at 1.07km (very close) with 19 turbines (15 at hub 4 at blade tip) WTGs is rated as Low but AD23 at 2.54km with 17 turbines (15 at hub 2 at blade tip) is rated Moderate
In other words, the one that is further away by 1.47km views 2 fewer turbines yet the visual impact is assessed as greater. Does that make sense? Not to me.
NAD18 at 2.68km with 18 turbines (18 at hub) is Moderate but NAD12 at 1.80km with 21 turbines (21 at hub) is Low. NAD12 is closer by 1.3km, views 3 more WTGs but is Low compared to Moderate at NAD18. Again this fails to make sense. No wonder my head spins each time I try to interpret the LVIA report.
On visual impact alone this Project should be rejected. It's simply in the wrong location.