HumeLink

We are property owners located on the Pejar Dam between Goulburn and Crookwell.
Our property is located within a Conservation Zone (C3) which severely limits what we can construct on our farm in order to protect the visual amenity of the Pejar Dam and its surrounds. The dam is a major drawcard for locals and visitors alike. The dam is unique in that only non-motorised vessels are able to be used. This yet again shows the significant value of peace and serenity placed on the area.
The Humelink 500kva line is to cut the dam in half and rise up and over the exposed hills on our farm. How can such a monsterours project be able to simply tear through a place that is meant to be protected for such developments.
To make matters worse, in order avoid the Crookwell 2 windfarm, the Humelink transmission line has to deviate significantly from parallelling the 330kva line. This impacts our property and the aesthetics of the dam and surrounds greatly. The obvious solution is to put Humelink underground through (between the windfarm) and maintain parallel with the existing 330kva line.
Dealing with Transgrid and their property valuation firm Knight Frank has been extremely traumatic and stessful for our family. We were given an extremely low initial offer and eversince they have downplayed the impact this project will have on our property value and its future uses.
We were planning to build our dream home overlooking the dam but all hopes of that are now dashed.
The whole process is one sided and landowners and communties are at the bottom of the heap even though their lives and livelyhoods are most impacted.
We have been observing the grazing pattern of our livestock lately and have noted that they preferentially graze at a distance from 330kva lines (even when grass is of better quality in closer). This is likely due to the sounds (crackle/hum) emitted from high voltage lines and possibly EMF's which animals are sensitive to.
This project needs to be halted and reassess the feasibility of undergrounding. Route refinement also needs to be reconsidered. This will leave a lasting impact on the environment and must be done correctly.

i know approvemement need to implemented in order to make life easier and safer for the community there fore we did not object or made it harder on The Hume link and accepted their offer but we were never told that we were might be impacted with such huge change in regards to the awful noise the power lines was going to create for us and would have never accepted their offer and would have planned it differently as the powerlined will be so close to where we are and would make our lives miserable not mentioning the cost of reducing the noise created by whatever is going to be present
hope we will not be affected and not be caused heart aches
it is so distressing knowing we will be much worse devaluating our lot
if we to be offered extra compensation to be able to move or build another shed far way from the noise then we will may be consider depending on the offer

I am concerned about the impact of traffic in the construction phase of the Gugaa substation as access will be via Livingstone Gully Rd. This is a dirt road and my family is concerned that they extra heavy vehicle traffic will damage the road surface and drainage (this area of the road typically floods after rain). Livingstone Gully Rd is our main access road to Wagga and we have a P plate driver (car and motorbike) and will have a learner driver on the road in 2024. Thankyou.

Please see attachment for details

see letter attached

OBJECTIONS • 1: Increasing the risk with bushfires by undermining ground and aerial firefighting options and potentially starting fires;
• 2: Impeding agricultural operations – prohibiting:
o machinery over 4.3m;
o spray irrigation;
o aerial operations (spraying/fertilising);
o the use of drones; and
o precision agriculture.
• 3: Undermining tourism;
• 4: Destroying visual amenity;
• 5: Exposing communities to noise – the noise from HumeLink, in certain weather conditions, will exceed NSW Noise Guidelines night time criteria at 65 dwellings;
• 6: Undermining regional development by taking the liveability, workability and beauty from impacted regions;
• 7: Causing the loss of biodiversity (HumeLink is significantly impacting matters of national environmental significance) by taking critically endangered habitat from critically endangered species];

Please note that we are not supportive to what is happening in our community regarding the sub station and the more than likely resulting renewable energy infrastructure that will result following the location of this substation. It is sad but according to the science and facts, necessary. I will not protest its development. I JUST WANT FAIRNESS AND TRANSPARENCY FOR ALL OUR LOCAL GREGADOO EAST COMMUNITY.

We have lived at 580 Gregadoo East Road Gregadoo for the past 28 years, actually if you think about it apart from my elderly Neighbour Stan Warren to the North and near Neighbour's, Gillard's, to the West, we are the second longest stayers in the immediate community, a testament to the location and quality of productive agricultural land. Far enough away from the night light glows of Wagga but close enough to enjoy the benefits a great regional city has to offer. We actually named our property 'Copenwelle Springs'. The Irony now is too much!!

Sadly, life sometimes gets in the way and Natalie and I are as from 12 months ago have been attempting to sell our property.

We commissioned Sally Douglas from Nutrien Ag solutions to put our small farm to auction in November 2022. Sally was and is still impressed with our lovely home, garden and productive pastures producing high quality beef cattle and hay production. Given a lifestyle property such as ours to sell Sally was confident of a result for us both to move on with our lives.
We passed the property in on the day of the auction but didn't lose faith as quality, sensibly priced real estate should sell, we will just have to wait. The right person will come along!
This is true, actually 3 correct people came along, all coming back for second inspections and highly complementary of our place, ticking more boxes than not but always falling at the last hurdle, which I am now more than convinced is the proposed Gugga substation that Transgrid bombed on our community at the start of September, the ones that should have BEEN INFORMED a long time ago, the actual local residents who live here all day every day only found out in early September 2023!! IMO that is disgusting, NON TRANSPARENT poor form from all levels of government and their relevant contractors. We are the ones that should have been consulted. US THE LOCAL RESIDENTS!!.
Why should one family be set to make millions and live several kilometers from the proposed substation, and I can bet if the situation were reversed would be jumping up and down as we all are. Whilst we are left with now would appear to be an unsalable or very much reduced property value. This in my opinion IS NOT FAIR. WINNERS and LOOSERS!! Sure when the dust settles from the 100 odd trucks that will pass our front gate every day while Transgrid are building & not to mention the 100's of light vehicles every day will then, and only then, prospective buyers see for themselves and make a more informed decision, but sadly that won't be for years!!
I asked a question to a relevant contractor, 'so we just have to cop this one on the chin?' 'Afraid so' was the reply.
I ask myself the question how many times had they and the likes driven past our for sale sign at the front entrance to our farm knowing full well of what was going to unfold... non transparent almost smelling of corruption!! Another contractor when I stated my opinion on why our property hadn't sold said with as much sympathy as a wet rag "well can you prove it" !! Public relations 101!!
There is no doubt that Transgrid's proposed substation has had a negative impact on the sale of our property and property values in our immediate location. We demand compensation in order for our lives to move forward and we demand compensation for the others directly affected by this project.

I strongly believe in rural and regional Australia and its natural characteristics of land and landscapes. It is and has been the main inspiration for my Art for the past 28 years.

Regional Australia, in the past, is as unique as you can get, loaded with strong characters, highly productive and clever world class agriculture, stunning natural landscapes, flora & fauna. The bird life on our little place is a great example and we get much pleasure of sharing the space with them.
I believe we all have to "take one for the country" not just a few.
The Albanese government, in my opinion, needs to take their foot of the pedal, think about the fair way to do this so our beautiful regional landscapes and communities are brought together and not split down the middle like is exactly what is happening all over regional NSW and I would suspect Australia.

John and Natalie, Amelia & Georgie Wood
580 GREGADOO EAST ROAD.


John Wood
WOOD IRON DESIGN
Architectural & Sculptural Metalwork
Ph: 0437 393 623
www.johnwood.com.au
ABN: 43 706 677 115
TransGrid (TG) failure to communicate and engage with the impacted landholders and the wider community re: Gugaa substation and the Gregadoo Road Compound (C06) Vol.3, pp.24-9 and pp.27-3
Biosecurity risks during construction Vol.2, pp.11-35
Negative Impacts of new 500kV Transmission lines to Agricultural production re: no aerial applications of sprays and fertilizers and impacts to electric fencing. Vol.2, pp.11-44. TG state that the impacts of this are “minimal due to the small area affected relative to the total size of enterprises within the LGA”, this direct TG statement shows the arrogance and contempt which they have shown to landholders during the entire “consultation” process
Reduced farmland values within Gugaa substation area (industrialisation of farmland, refer EIS Vol.2, pp.11-42). Also refer to Vol.2, pp.13.21 table TG states “operational impacts on livelihoods within the social locality could arise in land use, loss of agricultural land and impacts on property values for land within the project footprint” but should state the wider community area not just the project footprint.
TG intentions NOT to rehabilitate cleared old remnant yellow box sp. (EIS Vol.2, pp.11-47) – We’ve been advised by our Land Access Officer TG will NOT be replacing the trees they clear on our farm which is clear contradiction of their statements on pp.11-47
Visual impact & amenity of farmland – (EIS Vol.2, pp.13-21) 90 dwellings will have high visual impact from views of Gugaa and TG has not consulted with landholders re: screening that is promised in the EIS
Increased Bushfire Risk – Gugaa is being placed less than 2km from WWCC zoned Bushfire Prone Land, Mt Flakney. Vol.3, pp.19-5 to 19-6. TG states “There are a range of ignition sources within the project footprint that are a potential risk to starting fires….this may subsequently increase bushfire events that have the potential to negatively impact the community”
Long term exposure to Electric and Magnetic Fields not disclosed or studied in the area – Vol.3, pp.19-19 (Table 19-4)
Moderate Rural valleys landscape character zone changes and the introduction of a large-scale construction activity at Gugaa & Mt Flakney – EIS Vol.2, pp.14-35
Visual Impact Assessment re: private dwellings in relation to Gugaa substation – EIS Vol.2, pp.14-49. TG does not state how they could have mitigated this high-moderate impact by moving site further south.
Visual Clutter – EIS Vol.2, pp.14-53 to pp.14-59 (Grainy and unclear photomontage of proposed Gugaa substation view from Livingstone Gully Rd)
Noise Pollution Levels - EIS Vol.2, pp.15-19 to 15-22 and in particular pp.15-28 re: substation operational noise levels at night
Water Quality & Erosion – EIS Vol.3 pp.17-17
Gugaa Substation FLOODING - No TG environmental surveys/investigations done on the impact to Big Springs creek (runs adjacent to the Gugaa substation) in consultation with the impacted landholders. TG study by Lyall & Associates indicates Gugaa substation site will “obstruct the existing overland flow from the south…increasing flood levels to the South-West boundary of the site” EIS Vol.3, pp.18-12
False information re: alteration of waterflow at Gugaa Vol.3, pp.17-23, 5th paragraph
Impacted Groundwater Levels & Contamination of aquifers at Gugaa substation site. Vol.3, pp.17-24 to 25 (2nd paragraph)
Construction Road Traffic – Gugaa SS specifically pp.Vol.3, pp.20-8 to 20-12 (up to 102 Heavy Vehicles DAILY and 190 Light Vehicles)
Air Quality impacts from above – Vol.3, pp.21-5
False information re: Biodiversity offsets. These offsets should be located ON the properties where clearing is going to occur so that TG is ACCOUNTABLE for the destruction of biodiversity at a local level, not by purchasing carbon credits elsewhere. Vol.3, pp.27-10, (27.7.4)
No environmental surveys have been completed in the EIS footprint area (SWANS) for Gugaa substation as per map shown Vol.1, pp.3-17. EIS is false on Vol.4, pp.B-9, section Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and Biosecurity Act 2015
TG failure to meet their own EIS Community Engagement Objectives Report – Vol.4, pp.6. Again NO information has been given to the Gregadoo/Big Springs wider community about the Gugaa substation proposal before release of the EIS

While I understand this is a large project, if the local impacts cannot be properly assessed there are significant and potentially devastating impacts to the community of the Yass Region. I don't believe enough micro level consultation has been done/is being done to ensure the project minimises the impact on our farming community or the environment.

The entire concept that you can produce the quantity of energy produced by wind and solar to meet our and the worlds energy demands is flawed!
The laws of physics will not allow the renewable concept of wind and solar to be a practical solution and the cost of producing and efficiently using the hydrogen dream is a long way off – Japan has been working on hydrogen production for the last 20 years – storage being one of the biggest problems - hydrogen can even seep through glass and takes massive amounts of energy to produce, not withstanding that currently most hydrogen is produced from fossil fuels – Twiggy Forrest laughs all the way to the bank with the current “gift” of one billion dollars!
The energy expended in the creation of renewable is not recoupable in the life of the renewable project

The renewable “hypocrisy” industry currently supports human atrocities in China by the their use of slave labor or next to it and other human rights such as child labor abuses in other countries mining the rare earths required by the renewable industry.
In the event of local or international hostilities, the control systems are easily hacked and/or the installations are very vulnerable to attack and repair is not quick, We are a nation becoming ever more defenseless!

The pollutants created from mining, manufacturing, the life of the project and the final disposal are a far larger problem than nuclear waste. These wastes created by the renewable pollutants such as expired turbines and blades and heavy metals leaching into our food producing water and land invading our food chain.

In short, the renewable industry in its current form is a taxpayer funded worldwide rip off!
A classic of how caring people can be conned by a few! This shows so well the statement of “repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth” is a law of propaganda, often attributed to the Nazi, Joseph Goebbels

The convenient blind acceptance by the authorities of the presented EIS’s as a “perfect” document, not questioning the validity of the content.
The convenient ignorance of human rights
Enemy attack both physical and cyber
Negative impacts on local industry, by land loss, causing community population decline
Negative impacts on the environment with transmission lines
Negative impacts on the affected communities by the transmission lines
Negative visual impact
National negative impact on GDP with agricultural production loss
Negative effects concerning aerial agriculture, creating even more danger to the industry with overhead lines
The underground option is not a practical option for long distant transmission of power
Divides communities

I note the public exhibition of the proposal closes on 26 Sept 2023. Council will only be able to considered the proposal at its next meeting scheduled for the 28 Sept 2023. The staff report to Council will be availible on Council's Web Site on 22 Spet 2023. Council will provide its submission following consideration at the Council meeting

The EIS is low on specific design details. These are expected to be resolved, in good faith, during future phases. Sufficient conditions and controls ought to be put on Trans-grid during the consent conditions so they cannot bulldoze landowners once the proposal is approved.
In particular, insufficient analysis appears to have been done on visual impact assessment. Residual impacts are also not properly assessed and will be apparent following detailed design. The mechanisms for landowner compensation for these need to be put in place.
Finally, our properties are located on Hillcrest Road. This is a dirt road in relatively poor condition. Transgrid's infrastructure and vehicles will likely deform this road even further. While Transgrid have given verbal assurances about the road's upgrade, we fear TG will perform the minimum work possible that they can get away with. We suggest that the planning department enforce a specific condition of consent that requires Hillcrest road to be upgraded to a double sealed standard and TG are responsible for its maintenance for a period of 12 months post completion of project.

We support the project. We want to make sure NSW Planning Department puts appropriate controls in place on Transgrid.

CASA has reviewed the Aviation Impact Statement (AIA) of June 2022 by Aviation Projects for the Humelink transmission lines and supporting towers.
If the advice, processes, consultation etc. in the AIA by Aviation Projects are implemented, an acceptable level of Aviation Safety should be achieved.
CASA has no specific recommended conditions, although two recommendations in the AIA could be enhanced as follows:
Further to Recommendation 1, Airservices ([email protected]) should verify the any potential infringements of PANS-OPS surfaces by cranes. (Airservices may propose alternative mitigations and advice).

Further to Recommendation 3, it is recommended that the Aerial Application Association of Australia (AAAA) is also provided details of the project, including location and height information of the finalised design of the transmission line and structures. The AAAA may recommend specific markers.


Sundry notes, not expected to be included in conditions, for information only, are as follows:

Further to Recommendation 5, CASA assesses structures infringing an Obstacle Limitation Surface or 100m+ above ground level. Obstacle lighting and marking of the transmission line structures outside or not infringing an OLS would be a decision for the Planning Authority; possibly with advice from the AAAA, ALA users, ALA operators and CASA, for example.

Further to the 12th dot point, CASA will assess the cranes in detail from an obstacle perspective on receipt of a request from Wagga Ragga Aerodrome. It may be that obstacle lighting is not required, unless the cranes intend to work at night.
Further to 3.4.1. ‘Assessment of non-certified aerodromes’; as far as this office is aware, “CASA recommends that an area of interest within a three nautical miles (5.56 kilometres) radius of an ALA” is not official CASA policy.

In summary, CASA has no objections to the proposed Humelink transmission line project.

1) Its unreasonable that the specific design details, impacts, mitigation measures and residual impacts are deferred from this assessment and left to be worked out by Transgrid (or more specifically their contractors under commercial terms) during the detailed design phase, in good faith. Please ensure adequate and enforceable consent conditions are applied.
2) The reliance on 'bespoke' Property Management Plans to address the impacts on landowners applies risk to landowners. Please ensure adequate and enforceable consent conditions are applied to support the actions within PMP's.
3) Residual Impacts will be apparent following detailed design and PMP. The assessment appears to assume that the residual impacts on landowners will be 'made good' with compensation. Transgrid are currently seeking to secure easements based on compensation offers made in isolation to those residual impacts. The assessment almost entirely ignores property devaluation that will apply to unresolved impacts. Please include a mechanism in consent conditions that connects appropriate compensation for loss in land value that results from the projects impacts.
4) We believe the visual impact assessment is inadequate, in particular the assessment of likely visual impacts of the project on surrounding residences. The assessment of a sample of unidentified residences is hardly sufficient. Our dwelling as an example meets all of the criteria for high impact, we have previously requested assessment, yet to our knowledge has not been identified or assessed. The assessment appears to be criteria for 'consideration' of screening or alternative mitigation measures. It would appear reasonable that all affected properties should be identified and assessed.

We are prepared to recognise the greater good of this project, however it is small consolation for us as a small local landholder who is significantly impacted, has limited mitigation options available and relies on a legal negotiation with Transgrid to obtain informed and fair compensation to help offset losses.