Wind farm company EPYC has had nearly three years to refine its Tarago district proposal.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
It has bombarded with a volley of objections all the way, yet still hasn’t taken notice.
In an extraordinary move, even the Australian Wind Alliance has objected to the development application being assessed by the NSW Planning Department.
In short, it argues the 88-turbine wind farm will not “sufficiently benefit” the wider community.
“The standard of communication and community consultation has been poor, resulting in a lack of trust and unnecessary hostility towards not only this project, but also other wind farms projects in the area,” the Alliance wrote.
Both Goulburn Mulwaree and Queanbeyan-Palerang councils have also objected, the former on the basis of road impact, “unacceptable” visual impact, amenity, noise, vibration and traffic effects.
They are just some of more than 400 objections.
The Department now has an obligation to listen. It has cracked down once before, rejecting the company’s original environmental impact study. On Tuesday it also advised proponents of the Rye Park wind farm to reduce the number of turbines by 25 to 84 due to the visual impact.
The signs are positive. The massive Jupiter wind farm is a lesson in how not to go about consultation. Residents deserve better than spending endless hours scrutinising complex documents and calling for a clearer line of communication. Councils and the Department must be their voice.
WALK THE TALK
March 8 is an important date on the calendar, marking International Women’s Day, but for a moment this week we wondered if it was in fact already April 1, Fool’s Day.
A news report from Melbourne told us about $50,000 (not taxpayer’s, it said) had been spent to change six pedestrian crossing lights from ‘male’ to ‘female’ figures.
That is, the familiar illuminated walk-don’t-walk green and red stick figures were given a knee-baring skirt, all towards helping reduce “unconscious bias” in people.
Here at the Post we’re pragmatic types, and can’t help but think that $50,000 could be better spent on social support to materially help men and women and children.
And, as journos, we would have gone with a big green tick and a big red cross, but we guess they’re not signs of the times.