Stop destroying rural landscapes and our environment with this dangerous infrastructure.
This project will destroy a small and beautiful rural community. given this, i do not believe that the project should go ahead. Small communities need to be supported, not divided by projects like this. These projects carry significant fire risk.

i object to this project. solar power is unreliable and not a suitable source of energy to power NSW. why are rural communities being destroyed in order to power NSW? rural communities did not ask for this, so we should not have to accommodate such projects. this will also have ugly consequences on the landscape. We need food security for Australia and destroying agricultural land is opening our nation up for trouble.

Keep this out of Gundary and rural NSW. We don't want them. They will destroy our small communities, businesses, homes and ways of life. They are an absolute monstrosity on the landscapes and a major concern when they catch fire. They are intermittent, unreliable and totally useless.

The Planning Application should be denied and the EIS rejected as the EIS fails to meet expectations for a project of this scale, including but not limited to:

1. Our property is identified as being impacted in the EIS as an existing residential property. We have a significantly raised Mountain Ash Road view facing towards the Project area with potential visual impacts from the Project. We have not been directly approached by the Project to further investigate the view point. Our property is identified in section 6.8.3 as not needing assessment, but due to its elevation, our property should have been assessed (but wasn't). Our property is not reflected in Figure 6.12 and it should be. This demonstrates a failure of the Project to fully engage.
Also I note that Photo 6.4 in the EIS couldn't be further away from parts of the Mountain Ash Precinct that are closest to the Site and does little to show the visual from the closest parts of the Mountain Ash area to the Site.

2. With close proximity to bushland, there is an EXTREME fire risk to nearby residents, particularly noting the severity of winds experienced over the majority of days during the year. Any claim that the proposed Site is anything less than an EXTREME Fire risk is incorrect. There is also an Extreme fire risk to protected flora and fauna, including risks to the Bungonia township and also the Bungonia National Park in the case of a large-scale catastrophic summer event caused by the site. The EIS, states "A Final Hazard Analysis, Fire Safety Study and Emergency Plan will be developed as the Project design progresses toward completion." This is negligent and forms ground alone to reject the EIS.

3. based on the EIS, there is inadequate compensation to nearby households that have already experienced significant loss in value/interest of residential property in the area. This is in part due to an 'under-classification' of visual impact to surrounding residences.

4. there is a failure to align to State and Local Government planning instruments; specifically,
a. The Project Area is wholly located within land zoned as RU1 Primary Production and the Project, which is only permissible with consent. To my understanding, this consent has not been provided and local residents continue to lobby Council (and the NSW Government) to reject this Project.
b. A large portion of the Project Area is identified as being within the ‘subject land’ on the Goulburn Regional Cities Map.
The EIS states "The consent authority is required to consider whether the Project is located to avoid significant conflict with existing or approved residential or commercial uses of land surrounding the Project and is unlikely to have a significant adverse impact on Goulburn’s capacity for growth, or scenic quality and landscape character." The consent authority cannot ignore that this project will negatively impact all of these criteria noting the Gundary Plains is an area of agricultural and environmental significance.

5. There are inadequate levels of local community employment forecast - both during and following construction. There are no mandated numbers of local employment, which means the measly 5% target will simply not be enforced or reached,

6. Zero benefit to reducing power bill costs to the people of the Southern Tablelands, particularly Goulburn residents,

7. No community benefits program, instead a single one-off payment is proposed to only a small number of residents, which are also grossly inadequate in terms of amounts,

8. No compensation to 'low impact' residents in respect to the long-term visual impacts of the site,

9. Despite claims made in the EIS, the proposed traffic routes will create significant disturbance (and damage) to Local and State Roads. Traffic congestion at the intersections of Sloane Street and Braidwood Roads in particular will cause major congestion during the construction phase of the project. The intersection will require stregthening and/or remediation works with 140 heavy movements per day at the construction peak. Instead, the construction of new on/off ramps from the Hume highway directly onto Windellima Road should be considered.

10. Risks to the Sydney drinking water catchment are identified, however are not adequately addressed in the EIS. Additional modelling during the detailed design stages does not appropriate mitigate the risk identified in the EIS. Sydney Water should strongly object to this component of the EIS. In addition, long-term testing should also occur during the life of the project, not just during the construction phase. Leakage contamination is a risk to manage over the life of the project.

11. The Economic Impact Study predicts 'regional' impacts and targets, instead of direct impacts to the Goulburn community. Goulburn will simply not benefit from this Project if it is constructed.

We support the project in principle but with the conditions outlined in the attachment.

The Gundary Rural Fire Brigade has concerns about the scale and potential increased risk of a fire starting within or near the solar farm. Below are some of the concerns:
1. Limited access to the site - Only 2 access points into the whole solar farm.
2. Due to the potential safety risks with electricity and other hazards associated with solar photovoltaic systems such as toxic and flammable gasses, it is highly unlikely we would send crews into the solar farm if there was a fire. This has the potential for the fire to escalate in size and make it harder to control when it comes out the other side.
3. If a fire was to start in or near the solar farm, the fire has the potential to cut off Kooringaroo Rd which is a dead end road. This may limit the ability of residents to evacuate the area in catastrophic fire conditions.
4. The Gundary Rural Fire Brigade has had one meeting on site with Lighsource BP. The information given around electrical, bush and grass fire management was vague and there has been no correspondence since that meeting.
5. A large lithium-ion BESS has the potential to be extremely hazardous if it were impacted by fire or damaged by some other means.
6. Without an emergency response plan being prepared prior to potential approval, it is difficult for the Gundary Rural Fire brigade to get a full understanding of the on ground practicalities around fighting a fire within or near the solar farm site.

Projects like this are no good for rural communities in NSW and in this case, Gunnery. Keep Renewable Energy projects and infrastructure out of rural Australia and put them closer to the cities. We need to protect our landscapes, wildlife and lifestyles!
I object to the overall destruction this solar farm project will cause.

Why are renewable energy projects being dumped on rural landscapes? Why are rural communities left to fend for themselves as a result of bad governance and poor decision making? I object to this project because I do not believe that Gundary should house a solar farm. Not only is this a ghastly and permanent sight on the landscapes, but this would be a disaster when it catches alight due to fire. The toxic implications as a result of this would be of such a significant level and not only the community, but the wildlife will suffer as a result.

This toxic solar panel factory is of a major fire risk and will put significant strain on local and rural firefighting services. These local firefighting services are not equipped with the resources or man-power to manage emergency fires for when they do break out at this site. Why should the community risk their lives and step up to fight fires for infrastructure that they never wanted there in the first place?