Skip to main content
Back to Main Project

SSD Modifications

Determination

MOD 1 - Panel Height Increase

Greater Hume Shire

Current Status: Determination

Interact with the stages for their names

  1. Prepare Mod Report
  2. Exhibition
  3. Collate Submissions
  4. Response to Submissions
  5. Assessment
  6. Recommendation
  7. Determination

Modification to increase the solar panel height from 4 m to 4.85 m and revision to HV access route for construction of substation.

Attachments & Resources

Modification Application (3)

Response to Submissions (3)

Agency Advice (3)

Additional Information (3)

Determination (3)

Consolidated Consent (1)

Submissions

Filters
Showing 1 - 20 of 67 submissions
Name Withheld
Support
CULCAIRN , New South Wales
Message
I support the modification request of this already approved agri-solar development and is a reasonable request due to unforeseen circumstances during these unprecedented times.

The old “prime agricultural land” argument has been already addressed by the IPC and the land classification and grazing under panels remains the same.

It could been viewed that the same negative voices (objecting farmers alongside NSW Farmers) forgot that they lobbied for the implemented “Right to Farm”policy/ legislation and that no one “owns” a (neighbouring) view.

I look forward to seeing this project completed!
Matt Hicks
Support
JINDERA , New South Wales
Message
This is a simple change that will have no impact on anyone at all. the amount of time this project and others have taken is an embarrassment to the planning system in NSW. Don't muck around holding things up any longer. get on with the job.
Name Withheld
Object
walla walla , New South Wales
Message
this is outdated project solar is not the way to go , scrap it full stop, money making hair brain rubbish,
nuclear is the future not solar to fill landfill in the future and destroy our productive farm land for food .
stop this crap!!!!
Name Withheld
Object
Walla Walla , New South Wales
Message
I strongly object to the Walla Walla Solar Farm Project and Modification 1 SSD -9874- Mod 1. Increasing the maximum height of solar modules from 4m to 4.85m: Surely FRV knew this before approval given. If technology progresses so quickly, surely these will outdate too over the years. What happens then? This is too risky a project, taking up valuable farmland. The increased height will effect the views of all close neighbours. Mr Schulz speaks in today`s Border Mail paper, as he is the owner of a rented home 80 metres from the project site and 210 metres from the panels. The increased height also effects the screening as plants planted will take longer to outgrow the panels. In the Development Consent, no construction is to begin before all the plants are planted and views need to be minimized from receivers R1a, R1b, R2 and R5a within 3 years of commencing operations. These will take at least 10 years to grow to cover the panels. FRV said multiple times in their report that they would grow plants as screening to overcome problems! They would water each one and replace any that died. Here are 700,000 panels each being .85m higher. There is nowhere to recycle these panels. They come from China. Australia has recently updated their foreign policy, because of Chinese aggression. Very risky! What if China don`t supply the panels? Lately, I notice that other forms of energy are being looked at. I read an article nearly 12 months ago, that said there is so much roof top solar, beyond expectations, that large scale solar is not needed.
2. Increasing the maximum height of substation transmission towers from 21m to 36m: I can`t understand that FRV and Transgrid did not realize this before final plans done and consent given. They have said they are both experts in their fields, yet did not realize this??? That is such a huge difference! Six 30m poles and two 36m poles! FRV said in a general email on August 11th that TransGrid said the height must be increased to allow safe clearances that align with Australian standards. Have the standards changed? So that means there wasn`t safe clearances before the project was determined? As the power station is planned to be built before the solar panels, what if FRV`s planned solar project doesn`t go ahead? The power station will be sitting there doing nothing. Does FRV have their power sold? Is FRV connected into the grid? I have heard many times the transmission line is full anyway. As R2 is closest to the powerstation, I know this has been a major concern for them and they have consistently objected to the location because there are 3 transmission towers within the development footprint. Why wasn`t the powerstation put near the other towers which would have much less impact on R2? Transgrid said if they won the tender to install the substation, they would speak with R2 and review the location. This has not happened. Nothing should go ahead till this consultation takes place. This powerstation would effect the value of their property. There are also health risks. FRV said,`Health effects likely to be negligable' and `Health risks unlikely." How vague is that! With the poles being a massive 15m higher, there is an increased health concern with increased Electro Magnetic Radiation. Also, regarding the view from R2, the photo montages are not true of the view, so the true visual impact is not known.
3. Amending the construction access and transport route associated with the substation construction: I find this hard to understand as the approval was given to FRV where FRV made changes so the close neighbours amenity is protected. FRV did this to make it better for neighbours. The main entrance being 1.4 kms from the nearest dwelling. Now FRV want to change it back to how it was! Why is this? FRV said that the main access point and internal access roads would not be available for substation construction access, as internal roads would not yet be constructed at the planned start of construction of the substation. What is the rush??? Wait till the internal roads are built! I am concerned about the extra 10 heavy vehicles and 15 light vehicles per day using Benambra Rd. for six months. Council also raised concern regarding the poor condition of the unsealed section of Benambra Road. FRV , as part of the conditions of consent, have to maintain the condition of Benambra Road throughout the construction process and restore the road after the completion of construction. But will FRV do this??? I certainly have lost my trust with FRV! They said in a submission that Walla Walla is basically a dying town with a major business closing, and school numbers low, so we need an injection of a solar project! This is NOT true! I also have reservations about the dust and noise impacts being addressed by existing mitigation measures.

In closing, I am very concerned about the Walla Solar Project and the three modifications presented. This stems from the fact that this project ( and Jindera and Culcairn) were all given development approval without proper investigation. Look at all the submissions! The ones against have such deep concerns and those for it are so weak eg. we need solar for our future. The other reason is that since development approval, there have been many changes in the world. Countries that have gone all renewables, are realizing that is not giving reliable power and there are blackouts eg England. China recently was after all the coal they could get as they were having blackouts. Australia needs to learn a lesson here. STOP all solar and wind projects and think about what Australia`s energy should be. We are one of the lowest emitters in the world, yet we are being targeted to stop emissions. China emits more greenhouse gases in 18 days than Australia does in a year, yet we sell all our good quality coal to China for all their coal fired stations and they are building more. China is not in the Paris Agreement. We need to WAKE UP! There needs to be a full investigation in our area. We only had zoom meetings with the IPC which wasn`t fair as only a few people could participate. Also, the same two Commissioners made the decision for each project. If it was a public meeting, more people would know about it. There were over the minimum numbers needed for objections so a public meeting should have been held for each project. I have said to FRV just having an email to let people know things is not good enough. Most people wouldn`t even know what is happening. A public meeting is needed. Please don`t rush these modifications through. They need a thorough examination.
LeRoy Currie
Object
Leeton , New South Wales
Message
Australia has 6% of its total land mass available for arable agriculture. This and many other solar projects are destroying this food production land-
We get platitudes that it is good for the environment - NO! it is not! - the total energy required to create the farm will never be recouped in the productive life of the farm
The soil is contaminated by heavy metals from the panels forever - heavy metals that enter the food chain if the land is ever able used for food production in the future
The impact on local businesses is a direct attack on local employment - solar farms do NOT increase local income, local security or local employment and overall has a disastrous s effect on the local area - they may be a short term "feel good" for Australia but a complete disaster for the local economy and adding even more negatives to the local mental health.
Attachments
Beth White
Object
BEN LOMOND , New South Wales
Message
Department of Planning
05/10/2021

D.Crinnion
Dear Sir,

Objection to the Walla Walla Solar Project modification

I lodge my objection to the project based on two main of many important criteria.
1.)Genuine Social Licence
‘Genuine Social Licence’ based on genuine community equity and expectations, based on
real community acceptance and inclusion within ‘top down-bottom up decision making’,–based on real
benefit sharing for the community and respect for the physical and mental wellbeing of the community.

There are a set of protocols developed for the Responsible Energy Development in New England. As such the broad definitions like Genuine Social Licence apply to Renewable energy development across the nation.
Protocol 1 refers to genuine social licence.
My well-considered view is that the prospectors for Walla Walla Solar project have adopted a widely utilised strategy to selectively inform residents, hosts, and neighbours to effectively split the community. Once the community is fractured they proceed to selectively inform individuals of ‘select’ information that has no real basis of truth. Therefore the subsequent information is in conflict to the original advice and information between residents, is flawed, inconsistent and disempowering. We understand how debilitating these actions are on individuals, causing stress, distress and a whole range of mental health issues for constituents.
The degree of mental health impact imposed upon the residents within the Walla Walla project is indicative of fabrication, bullying and misrepresentation of the truth facilitated by a lack of conclusive research to reveal the real outcome over the lifetime of the project. Policy clearly says the infrastructure is to be placed where it is accepted. It cannot be accepted on the basis of lies and lack of evidence as a substitute for genuine approval.

2. Prime agricultural land is not made any more. There is what there is and we need it for food production. There are alternate sites for electricity generation and transmission – not many alternatives for food production. I object to the site selection for this project. To prioritise energy over food production is a convenience mitigated by the existence of transmission capacity.

3.The conflict of interest in Rob Beckett transferring from recent employment with the NSW Department of Planning to become manager of the project decimates the real opportunity to legitimately evaluate the conflicting values between energy generation and food production. The bias and insider experience he brings to the role diminishes the opportunity for genuine unbiased consultation. That alone is ground enough for objection to the project.

Yours sincerely
(Mrs) Beth White
Name Withheld
Object
GLENCOE , New South Wales
Message
Whilst not against renewable energy, I do wish to make the following submissions against the proposed Walla Walla Solar Electricity Major Project 42341:-
Location
1. This large proposed solar farm on prime productive agriculture land utilised for mixed farming purposes. With approximately 30% of the world population facing hunger shouldn’t this prime productive agriculture land remain as is?
Believe it or not, we do not have it in our power to create more prime productive agriculture land, yet we do have the capability to relocate this proposal to an unproductive area where it would have little impact on the production of our food – Australia has a large inland area extremely suitable for solar and not considered prime productive agriculture land.
2. Proposal being too close to diversified family rural businesses, e.g. farm stay cabins and wedding venues. Not only do these rural families employ people they have also worked very hard to create and establish their diversified businesses which blend in with ecotourism and give city people the benefit and enjoyment of learning rural life.
Solar farms have become a dime a dozen and are a far cry from a tourist attraction, some 900000 panels glaring in the sun will not be an ecotourist attraction and these businesses will fold and the employed become unemployed.
Solar Problems
1. We are told to look after the environment, to put a halt to climate change we must look at alternate power sources yet solar farms are known to create a photovoltaic heat island effect irrespective of increased height, warming surrounding areas, thereby potentially influencing wildlife habitat, ecosystem functions, human health, causing drying conditions to surrounding land with the potential increased risk of bushfires. What research has been done on photovoltaic heat island in Australian conditions?
2. During the construction stage how much of the packaging is recyclable? How much of the packaging is contaminated and will finish up in landfill. Where will this landfill be – on prime agriculture land?
Decommissioning and even during the alleged lifetime of the panels (there will be some panels that won’t make the distance), what will happen to all of the non recyclable contaminated components? Again, where will this landfill be – on prime agriculture land or are we going to export to South Africa like Germany has done/is doing with disused wind turbine blades?
Jess Torrens
Support
Walla Walla , New South Wales
Message
My husband Mark and I live in the Walla area close to the proposed solar farm. We are in full support of the project and can see it bringing only positives to the local and broader community. The overwhelming benefits of clean, green solar energy nullify any of the arguments presented by objectors. The walla solar farm will provide environmental benefits, local employment and is a positive step towards the increasing demand and requirement for green, sustainable energy production. In 2021 sustainability is of critical importance. We hope to see the Walla walla solar farm proceed.
Danny Phegan
Support
WALLA WALLA , New South Wales
Message
I support the project and its amendments
Name Withheld
Support
DUNDEE BEACH , Northern Territory
Message
This project needs to go ahead.
Dylan Pumpa
Support
GOULBURN , New South Wales
Message
I believe it’s a good project for the community
Tamara McLean
Support
ALBURY , New South Wales
Message
I support the changes.
Peter Hodgkin
Comment
Mitta Mitta , Victoria
Message
I support the project I think solar is the best in sustainable energy
Liz Broughan
Support
EAST ALBURY , New South Wales
Message
I support this
Name Withheld
Support
TABLE TOP , New South Wales
Message
I fully support this project and its amendments
Name Withheld
Support
Table Top , New South Wales
Message
Large amounts of Solar Energy will be needed in the near future. As this project is away from the township of Walla Walla it will not interfere with the greater part of the community, which will benefit form the efficiency created by the increase in height of transmission towers and solar modules; and the transport routes will not be a problem in the area.
Name Withheld
Support
KILMORE , Victoria
Message
Green energy is important!
Name Withheld
Support
CONDER , Australian Capital Territory
Message
I support this project as I think it will be great for the environment
Name Withheld
Support
ALBURY , New South Wales
Message
The most recent changes/ amendments to the already approved Walla Walla Solar Farm won’t affect the neighbours. The lengths the proponent has gone to to protect the amenity is astounding and this development is going to bring great hope and community benefits to all the surrounding rural townships. Please approve because the NSW government is pushing in the right direction to give future generations a more sustainable and cleaner environment. A little more height. A no brainer…. APPROVE and get it started.
Name Withheld
Support
EAST ALBURY , New South Wales
Message
It is a great idea, we should encourage more solar power

Pagination

Project Details

Application Number
SSD-9874-Mod-1
Main Project
SSD-9874
Assessment Type
SSD Modifications
Development Type
Electricity Generation - Solar
Local Government Areas
Greater Hume Shire
Decision
Approved
Determination Date
Decider
Executive Director

Contact Planner

Name
Dominic Crinnion