Six years in the making, the Yass Valley Wind Farm, located 17km west of Yass, has been under development since 2009 by Australian proponents Epuron. When first conceived, the project included more than 150 wind turbines.

Due to the significant visual impacts on neighbouring properties the Department has recommended the eastern half of the project not be approved.

Independent member of the Wind Farm Committee and previous mayor Nic Carmody said the announcement on Monday was a day of mixed emotions for the residents.

“For the involved landholders, the decision to referring the application to the Planning Assessment Commission (PAC) has been three years in the waiting,” he said.  

“For other involved landholders who are against the project it is probably a day they didn't want to see.”

In January of last year the proposal was rejected by the department giving cause to some members of the Yass community to celebrate. They gathered on the oval in Bookham with champagne.

Member for Goulburn Pru Goward stepped down as Minister for Planning in 2015. The current Minister, Rob Stokes, and the department re-reviewed the application and this week announced a recommendation for approval.

“There will be a chance for the community to discuss the proposal with the PAC in the near future,” he continued.

The landowners involved in the proposed Yass Wind Farm formed a group and elected a committee to negotiated as a collective.

“We are naturally disappointed for those members of our group who will miss out as the Final Report recommends that the Marilba and Conroy’s Gap precincts should not be approved,” spokesperson Tony Reeves said.  

“However the recommendation that the Coppabella precinct should be approved is a win for the involved landowners, local businesses, the 167 people who will gain employment during construction and the 34 people who will be employed permanently during the operating phase.

“It is also a win for the local communities who will receive $197,500 per annum in funding for local projects.”

Mr Reeves said the department considered issues raised by members of the community and in its final recommendation, comprehensively dealt with each one.

“It has addressed the issues of noise, health, visual impacts, low frequency noise, property values and aerial agricultural activities. Where necessary the department has recommended conditions be imposed to deal with these matters,” he continued.

The recommendations include the requirement to offer visual mitigation measures to any residence within five kilometres that has views to the wind farm.

They also require compliance with noise criteria, implementing an aviation impact management plan, implementing a bird and bat adaptive management plan and avoiding areas where endangered plants and animals live, and offsetting impacts where they cannot be avoided.

A spokesperson for the department said it had carefully considered the views of the local community, and found the removal of the eastern precinct would greatly reduce the overall impacts of the proposal.

“The project will generate enough power for 75,000 homes, and save about six hundred thousand tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions each year,” the spokesperson said.

“The project would also provide flow-on benefits to the region through job creation, capital investment, and contributions of almost $200,000 a year to local councils that can be used to fund community infrastructure and services.”

Councillor Ann Daniel who also sits on the Wind Farm Committee is troubled by the recommendations.

“I think wind farms are a great thing in the right area,” she explained.

“As long as the project doesn’t infringe on people's homes and affect the value. As a councillor we don’t have a say on the project, just the roads that may be affected.”

Although cr Daniel said she would have liked to have seen more compensation for landowners she believed the recommended approval was inevitable as it meets the guidelines.

“I have an acute sense of helplessness  in the face of this decision,” she continued.

“Those who are adversely affected aren't getting compensated, so they don't have any legal standing, only a moral case.

“However, the people immediately affected are generally people who live on large properties, it is an assured income and is completely understandable for farmers. I just hope that our community stays banded and doesn’t split over this, there’s nothing to be done about it.”

The PAC is expected to provide a response early this year.