{"id":372358,"date":"2026-05-20T19:12:22","date_gmt":"2026-05-20T09:12:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/southburnett.com.au\/news2\/?p=372358"},"modified":"2026-05-20T19:22:19","modified_gmt":"2026-05-20T09:22:19","slug":"council-votes-down-kingaroy-bess","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/southburnett.com.au\/news2\/2026\/05\/20\/council-votes-down-kingaroy-bess\/","title":{"rendered":"Council Votes Down Kingaroy BESS"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>
FLASHBACK: Looking down on the Kingaroy Solar Farm in 2023 from the hill on the northern side of the site … objectors believe the addition of BESS units could increase risks of fire and water run-off from the property<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

May 20, 2026<\/strong><\/p>\n

South Burnett councillors have unanimously rejected an initial recommendation from Council staff to approve a Development Application for a Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) at the Kingaroy Solar Farm.<\/p>\n

Councillors voted to deny approval despite noting the applicant could well challenge this decision in the Planning Court.<\/p>\n

However, they may be hoping this legal pathway could be avoided if the State Government decided to “call in” the project, something which has occurred at a number of other BESS projects in Queensland so far this year.<\/p>\n

This would remove decision-making from Council to rest solely with State Development Minister Jarrod Blejie.<\/p>\n

At their May meeting, South Burnett councillors voted to “lay the matter on on the table” to investigate other options after staff recommended they approve a Development Application by M Renewables Australia Developments, subject to a number of conditions.<\/strong><\/p>\n

M Renewables sought a Development Permit for Material Change of Use and Reconfiguring a Lot (lease exceeding 10 years) at 397 Kingaroy-Barkers Creek Road, Kingaroy (ie. the existing Kingaroy Solar Farm).<\/p>\n

The company wants to build a BESS with a nominal capacity up to about 100MWh within the footprint of the existing project.<\/p>\n

The existing landscape screening would be retained as well as existing parking and access to Kingaroy-Barkers Creek Road.<\/p>\n

Council staff concluded “the proposed development generally complies with the assessment benchmarks, or it can be conditioned to comply. Where the applicant has not provided sufficient information, conditions have been imposed to ensure compliance. It is therefore recommended that the development application be approved subject to the above conditions”.<\/p>\n

However, local residents and other concerned citizens lodged a raft of objections to the development, with most citing construction noise, alleged health impacts, possible increased flooding on Kingaroy-Barkers Creek Road, hazards (including fire, “thermal runaway”, toxic gas dispersion, battery faults, rupture and equipment failure), and end-of-life management of the infrastructure.<\/p>\n

At Wednesday’s meeting, councillors elected to reject the Council staff’s initial recommendation, emphasising the number of objections they had received.<\/p>\n

Instead, they voted on an alternate motion, moved by Cr Heath Sander and seconded by Cr Deb Dennien, to refuse the Development Permit.<\/b>.<\/p>\n

Cr Sander said the location was close to town, on good agricultural rural land, and Council had received multiple complaints from people in the area.<\/p>\n

“It’s not in the best interests of the community and we have got an expectation to represent our community,” Cr Sander said.<\/p>\n

Cr Dennien said she had received more “pushback” about this project than any other item during her time on Council.<\/p>\n

She also suggested the size of the BESS “flew under the radar” of recent legislation.<\/p>\n

Cr Dennien said the visual amenity of the solar farm was “clearly unacceptable” and had “very much devalued” nearby properties so it would be wrong to allow it to develop more.<\/p>\n

“I understand there will be ongoing concerns with that … I don’t want to put our community at a greater cost if this ends up being problematic but I still have to support what my community said to me, which is they do not like it and they don’t want it to expand,” Cr Dennien said.<\/p>\n

Mayor Kathy Duff said this project was under the amount which would require it to provide a community benefit so the developer would not have to do anything for the community.<\/strong><\/p>\n

“The community has absolutely spoken and they are not happy,” Mayor Duff said.<\/p>\n

Cr Linda Little said the applicants were “sneakily” putting in a smaller BESS so they did not have to work with the community or Council about any community benefit for “this eyesore”.<\/p>\n

“I am concerned that if we are going to go down the whole Planning Court route there are going to be some costs incurred and our ratepayers will have to bear the costs of that but I think with the community sentiment that it is a good decision for us to make,” Cr Little said.<\/p>\n

Council CEO Mark Pitt said the applicant would have a period in which they could lodge an appeal to the Planning Court.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The other submitters against the application would also be advised if it went to the Planning Court so they could join the matter.<\/p>\n

There would be mediation ordered by the court, and if it could not be sorted out at this stage, it would go to a hearing and judgment.<\/p>\n

Cr Dennien asked if there was any chance of Minister Blejie “calling in” the project.<\/p>\n

“That would be a discussion that would have to be had but not for the decision-making process here,” Mr Pitt said.<\/p>\n

NB. Renewables Australia Developments is a subsidiary of Metlen Energy & Metals (formerly known as Mytilineos), the constructors and owners of the Kingaroy Solar Farm. The initial application linked to this solar farm, by then-developer Terrain Solar, was rejected by the SBRC in 2018. Terrain challenged this in court and in 2019 an agreement was reached between the parties which allowed the project to proceed with Planning Court approval and Council incurring legal costs.<\/em><\/p>\n

Related articles:<\/strong><\/p>\n