Preferred route and reference design
Community webinar, 27 October 2026
Disclaimer: This publication may be of assistance to you but VicGrid and its employees do not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence which may arise from you relying on any information in this publication. This transcript has been lightly edited for readability and clarity. Edits are limited to minor grammar, punctuation and formatting changes, and do not alter the meaning or intent of the original discussion.
[Jenni Forrester]
Good evening, everyone. Thanks for joining this webinar tonight on the preferred route and reference design for the Gippsland offshore wind transmission project. Thank you for joining us tonight. My name’s Jenni Forrester. I’ll be your facilitator for this evening’s webinar, and we appreciate you taking the time to join.
Acknowledgement of Country
I would like to acknowledge and pay respect to the Gunaikurnai people as the original custodians of Gippsland’s land and waters, and their unique ability to care for Country and deep spiritual connection to it. We honour Elders past and present, whose knowledge and wisdom have ensured the continuation of culture and traditional practices.
Welcome and evening program overview
We have a full program for the next hour, including an update on the preferred route and reference design for the Gippsland offshore wind transmission project.
First, we'll hear from two presenters. Dave Kristy from VicGrid will provide a recap on the project’s purpose and works to date. Pauline Malolepszy from VicGrid will provide an overview of how the project’s changed from the draft preferred route to the preferred route, and how feedback has informed these changes.
We will then move into a question-and-answer session for the second half of the session. During this session, two additional VicGrid team members will join us. Jen Comber from the Land Planning and Environment team and Walter Makoni, an engineering lead with VicGrid.
At any time during tonight's session, you can use the Q&A function to ask a question or share feedback. We will answer your questions during the Q&A session at the end of the presentation, when you’ll be able to hear responses directly from the presenters. We ask that you keep all questions respectful, all questions will be visible and the session will be recorded.
[Dave Kristy]
Thanks, Jenni, and thanks to everyone for joining us tonight. Before getting into the route itself, we thought it would be worthwhile to take a minute to explain who VicGrid is for those who do not know.
Who is VicGrid?
VicGrid was set up by the Victorian Government in 2021 with three main jobs.
The first is policy: we advise government and develop the policies that help Victoria move towards renewable energy in a well-planned and orderly way.
The second is planning: we plan and develop the state’s energy grid and renewable energy zones.
The third is projects: we oversee the procurement and delivery of the transmission projects that Victoria needs as part of the transition to renewable energy. This is what we are presenting on tonight.
Sitting underneath these three jobs is engagement. This means working with industries to make sure that they have the commercial certainty and capability to invest in the projects that are coming to Victoria. It means working with communities like yours, so we deliver real social and economic benefits and keep the impacts as low as we can. It also means working with governments, so the right laws and regulations are in place for us to do our job.
Connecting offshore wind to the grid
That takes us to the next slide, which is about connecting offshore wind to the grid. This slide gives a good visual representation of how power gets from the wind turbines out at sea to the homes and businesses across Victoria.
There are two government bodies that are involved here. Offshore Wind Energy Victoria (OWEV), which is part of the energy team at the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action (DEECA). They are coordinating the development of Victoria's offshore wind industry.
You might have heard recently that Australia's first offshore wind option opened in August this year. That’s for the projects off the Gippsland coast to bid for contracts to deliver the first 2 GW (gigawatts) of offshore wind, which is enough to power 1.5 million homes and businesses across the state.
The successful wind projects would build everything up to the terminal station. VicGrid, together with our delivery partner, who we will appoint eventually, will build the terminal station and the transmission line that carries the power into the Loy Yang switchyard, which is part of the existing shared network.
From there, the local distribution networks carry power out to homes and businesses.
Key milestones
Now, I will walk you through how we got to where we are today. Back in early 2024, we mapped out a study area that was from 3 km to 12 km wide and included options to run alongside existing infrastructure like Basslink and the Saline Wastewater Outfall Pipeline (SWOP), to reduce impacts.
Then, in October last year, we narrowed the study area down to a corridor and a draft preferred route. That brought the number of affected private properties in the study area down from 267 to 24. This refinement was informed by what people told us through engagement and consultation.
We ran alongside existing infrastructure where we could. We prioritised public and plantation lands, avoided native vegetation and sensitive habitats, and tried to limit impacts on homes and farming operations.
That brought us to where we are now: we identified a preferred route and reference design in October 2025.
These are two different things, which I will touch on briefly. The preferred route and the indicative easement within it are where the transmission line could go.
The reference design is about what's involved in building the transmission line.
The preferred route is about 200 m wide and 60 kmlong. This is the defined area where the final easement will sit.
The reference design shows one way in which the project could be built. It shows the indicative tower locations, indicative access tracks, and likely construction activities.
This gives the Environment Effects Statement (EES) something concrete to assess. It can assess likely impacts and how to avoid, reduce, or manage them. That is the key part of the EES process.
As you can see on this slide, none of this is locked in yet. The final easement, tower locations, and construction methods will all be refined during the detailed design phase. This means we will need to do more technical investigations and have more conversations with landholders and the community, which is the next phase of the project.
The preferred route
That takes us to the preferred route. You can see the preferred route on this map. It is around 60 km long and 200 m wide. It runs between Loy Yang Power Station switchyard and the proposed terminal station in Giffard, near the coast.
We identified indicative tower locations and an indicative easement to give people a sense of where it could go. This is what is going to be assessed in the EES and shown publicly as part of the public exhibition of the EES.
If you would like to take a closer look at this map, we have an interactive map on our website which shows the preferred route, the indicative tower locations, and the indicative easement. You can zoom in and out to get a better view of any of those elements of the project.
Identifying a preferred route
Now, I will take you through how we identified a preferred route.
We spent a lot of time talking with landholders along the draft preferred route. We also heard from the broader community about what matters to people, and looked at everything from how land is used and existing infrastructure, to biodiversity values and the views that people value. We heard from landholders, community members, Traditional Owners, asset owners, and local businesses.
We considered all of that feedback alongside environmental, cultural heritage, and technical factors, as well as the principles you can see on screen, which include:
Minimising impacts on landholders, communities, and the environment as far as possible, and respecting and protecting First Peoples' cultural values.
Keeping costs down for energy consumers where practical.
Reducing engineering challenges and clashes with existing infrastructure. In some areas, technical environmental requirements limited how much we could move the line. While we couldn’t always move it as much as we wanted, we have worked hard to find the best possible outcome.
This slide also shows how much engagement we have had since October last year. We have held 33 community events with 450 people attending. We had more than 130 meetings with landholders. We had 14 survey responses via Engage Vitoria and more than 1,100 downloads of our corridor and draft preferred route summary, which was available on our website.
I will now hand over to Pauline. She will take you through what we have heard and what has changed as a result of the feedback from the draft preferred route to the preferred route.
[Pauline Malolepszy]
What we have heard – and what we did in response
Thanks, Dave. Before we dive into each section of the preferred route, I want to summarise what we heard.
As Dave mentioned, we went out to landholders at the end of last year with the draft preferred route. We heard feedback from landholders and community members on land use and farming practices, local plants and animals, ground conditions, important places and scenic viewpoints, locations of homes, sheds, and farming structures, and also information on local drainage and flooding.
We also heard from the local community that the route should stay as close as possible to local infrastructure, so Basslink and the Saline Wastewater Outfall Pipeline (SWOP) are within our corridor. Community also wanted us to prioritise public and plantation land for the route, rather than impacting private properties or sensitive habitats and native vegetation.
As a result of all that feedback, we moved our line closer to the existing Basslink transmission line in several areas, where we could. We also worked within plantation areas where possible.
A key outcome of our refinement process is that we reduced the number of directly impacted private properties from 24 to 20.
Giffard to Stradbroke
In the first section, Gifford to Stradbroke, the transmission line begins at the proposed terminal station near Gifford. This is where the offshore wind developers will connect their infrastructure. We will share more information about that proposed terminal station as the project progresses.
As a reminder, the yellow line is the draft preferred route we released at the end of last year and the pink line is the preferred route.
In this section, as part of the refinement process, we adjusted the route to minimise fragmentation within plantation land and aligned it more closely with Basslink.
Stradbroke to Willung
In the next section, Stradbroke to Willung, we had to balance many constraints. We had Stradbroke Flora and Fauna Reserve and Basslink to the south and private landholders in the Willung community to the north.
A key change in this section was to minimise fragmentation impacts within plantation land. We realigned our route closer to the boundary between the forestry land and the reserve. You can see this change between the draft preferred route and the preferred route.
This section is also where the route crosses Basslink. We are currently engaging with APA on the best method to do this. The preferred option is to cross overhead with taller towers, up to 83 m tall, to maintain a safe clearance between both transmission lines.
Willing to Hiamdale
The next section is Willung to Hiamdale. This is the central section of the route, where most changes have occurred.
I will summarise the preferred alignment from left to right. It mostly follows Basslink and the Saline Wastewater Outfall Pipeline to stay away from homes near Gormandale-Stradbroke Rd and Willung. A portion remains within plantation land, and we have realigned with the plantation to minimise fragmentation. It then follows Flemings Rd to the west and crosses Gormandale-Stradbroke Rd. Then, to the north, at the end of this section, it crosses Merriman Creek, west of Willung and re-enters plantation land into the next section.
The key changes in this section include:
Aligning more closely with Basslink in response to landholder feedback and reducing land use impacts
Realignment near Bayliss Gully through HVP plantation to avoid fragmentation
Realignment north and south of Gormandale-Stradbroke Rd
In the south, we shifted the route left of Flemings Road
In the north, we realigned to reduce property fragmentation and land impacts
At Merriman Creek, we realigned on both sides to minimise environmental impacts.
Hiamdale to Flynns Creek
In this section, Hiamdale to Flynns Creek, the preferred route runs solely through plantation land. Feedback for this section was to minimise impacts on plantation land by reducing fragmentation and aligning more closely with Basslink, which is what we have done.
Flynns Creek to Loy Yang Power Station
The final section is Flynns Creek to Loy Yang Power Station. This is where the transmission line enters the Loy Yang Power Station switchyard. The primary changes in this section have been realigning a short section closer to Basslink after discussions with local landholders.
This slide also shows our connection point to the grid at Loy Yang Power Station. Here, we will build two new 500 kV switch bays, which will be connected to the existing switchyard.
Reference design
The reference design is an early version of the project. It is not the final design.
Our EES will use this reference design to assess environmental, social, economic, and cultural impacts, and show how they can be avoided, reduced, or managed.
We have Jen Comber on the line for any questions about the EES or the EES process.
Our reference design includes an indicative easement and indicative towers within that 200-meter preferred route. It also considers and includes likely access tracks and construction areas. This allows the community to see potential impacts and mitigation measures while maintaining flexibility for our development partner to progress detailed design within the guardrails of the EES.
Transmission towers
Our reference design has considered steel lattice towers, specifically towers that can support our overhead 500 kV double-circuit transmission line. This means two independent electrical circuits on the same tower, each carrying three phases, with four subconductors per phase.
The different tower types that we have considered for our reference design include:
Suspension towers – the most common across our transmission line. They are typically located between tension and angle towers.
Tension towers – act as anchor points between spans of the transmission line. They are designed to hold the full tension load of the conductors.
Angle towers – these are where the transmission line’s alignment changes direction sharply and at terminal points. These towers are heavier than other tower types and may require larger foundations.
All three towers will look quite similar. Our reference design considers towers between 58 and 83 m tall and spaced 300 to 500 m apart.
How the project will be built
The reference design identifies construction activities that are likely to be needed to build a transmission line. Construction will be delivered in stages, including preparation, site establishment, construction, and post-construction activities.
Final construction methods will depend on further landholder engagement and environmental and technical studies. For example, geotechnical studies will assess ground conditions around tower locations, and that will further influence ongoing design development and construction planning.
ACCIONA is our new development partner
Our recently appointed development partner, ACCIONA, will undertake further engineering, technical studies, and landholder engagement to inform the final design before construction.
As you may have heard, we have recently appointed ACCIONA as our development partner to work with us during the next stage of development. ACCIONA will work alongside VicGrid on design, procurement, and project management to help prepare the project for delivery.
They will support us with planning, cultural heritage, and other statutory approvals, as required.
ACCIONA was selected through a competitive tender process that began in 2024. It required bidders to demonstrate how they would work collaboratively with landholders, Traditional Owners, and communities throughout project delivery.
Over the next few months, ACCIONA will begin mobilising its team to work alongside VicGrid. As they become more involved, we will introduce them to how we work with communities and stakeholders.
From early 2027, ACCIONA will become more embedded in our work as we continue to develop the design.
Public Works Order amendment
We also have an update on the Public Works Order Amendment. In September, the Minister for Planning approved an amendment to the Public Works Order. The amended order was then published in the Victorian Government Gazette on the 7th of October.
That amendment adds two activities to the excluded works. Both are within the existing Loy Yang Power Station Precinct, where we will connect the power line.
Those two activities are installing new switchyard equipment, including two new 500 kV bays and associated connection works within the existing Luoyang switchyard, and setting up a temporary construction compound and laydown area within the broader existing Loy Yang Power Station Precinct. That work may include ground prep, access tracks, drainage works, side sheds, amenities, fencing, and minor utility connections.
The amendment also makes minor wording changes to describe parts of the project more clearly, and those changes don't materially change the project's scope.
To summarise, the Minister is satisfied that these works don't have a significant effect on the environment and can proceed, subject to other relevant approvals, before the EES process is complete.
The EES process will still continue to assess the broader project, and these excluded works won't pre-empt that EES outcome. You can read the amended order and the Minister's reasons on the Department of Transport and Planning website.
I will now hand back it back to you, Dave.
[Dave Kristy]
What’s next?
Thanks, Pauline. In terms of what’s next. We are continuing to talk with landholders that are inside or nearby the preferred route. We will continue to get feedback from these landholders, particularly as it relates to the reference design.
This feedback won’t change what is in the reference design. The existing reference design is what will be assessed as part of the EES. However, any further feedback will be considered as part of the next stage of design development, the detailed design.
We will continue site investigations to prepare for the environmental assessments which are part of the EES.
We have appointed a development partner for this phase who will work alongside VicGrid on the detailed design. They will also undertake their own investigations as part of the detailed design phase.
In early 2027, we will publicly exhibit the EES for a minimum of 30 business days. During the public exhibition, everyone will get a chance to review the chapters and technical reports and make a submission. If there is a public inquiry, they will also be able to present to the inquiry panel to support their submission.
[Jenni Forrester]
Questions?
Thanks, Dave and Pauline. There was quite a bit of information to get through, and you moved fairly quickly. Participants, you may need a few moments to collect yourselves and think about any further questions.
We'll use our remaining time to answer questions we've been receiving in the Q&A tool. You can continue posting questions during the time we have left.
We might group some questions. We've only got 3 questions at the moment. There could be some more come through. If we have similar questions, we might group them; otherwise, we'll try to get through all the questions.
We have a key question about the purpose of the offshore wind transmission project, and a question about what sort of energy generation projects can connect to it.
Emma has asked:
Is this transmission line intended to service just offshore wind projects or both onshore and offshore developments?
[Dave Kristy]
The shoreline REZ is different from other renewable energy zones. Other REZs are designed to host onshore wind, solar, and battery storage projects. The shoreline REZ isn’t designed to host those projects – it’s a designated planning area for offshore developers to run their underground cables from the shoreline to the grid.
However, it does not restrict onshore projects, such as onshore wind, battery, or solar, from seeking to develop in the area. These projects would be required to apply for a grid impact authority under the Victorian Access Regime and demonstrate that their project is unlikely to disrupt generation supplied by the offshore wind projects.
[Jenni Forrester]
Thanks, Dave. Jen [Comber], this is possibly a question for you. Dave and Pauline both spoke about the EES process. This is a question about impacts and when impact assessment information will become available:
How many hectares of native forest and plantation will be cleared for the transmission line, terminal station, and access roads? And when will this information be available through the EES process?
[Jen Comber]
Thanks, Jen. We do not yet have the final number for the hectares of native vegetation that will be cleared. Approximately a third of the transmission line will go through plantations and two thirds generally through farmland.
There are native vegetation impacts. These will be exhibited as part of the EES, in the biodiversity chapter. The EES will hopefully be exhibited around March or April 2027. The biodiversity chapter will include specific statistics and clarify what is and isn't impacted.
We have not yet been able to determine which roads will be impacted. We can only determine this once we complete the next-level, detailed design. In the EES, we have considered the worst-case scenario for road impacts.
[Jen Forrester]
Thanks, Jen.
A question has come up about nuclear siting investigations, which are not being done by VicGrid. The question is:
Is a party scouting for nuclear development sites?
Dave, could you confirm the project's purpose and comment on the possibility of nuclear development?
[Dave Kristy]
I can’t comment on nuclear energy. It is not VicGrid’s purpose, and it is not what we are here to deliver. This project's purpose is to deliver the transmission needed to connect energy generated from offshore wind to the grid. We are focusing on generating the first 2 GW of offshore wind energy for Victoria.
[Jenni Forrester]
Thanks, Dave, that is clear. The purpose of the project is for offshore wind transmission and generation.
Pauline, this may be a question for you or Dave.
This project is providing 2 GW of offshore wind generation. The question is:
Will the preferred route accommodate future growth or needs for greater transmission capacity?
[Pauline Malolepszy]
Our project is the first project connecting the first two gigawatts of offshore wind energy. The Victorian Transmission Plan has also outlined a second radial line between Driffield and Woodside and a loop tie from Woodside to Giffard. Those projects would allow us to reach the full 9 gigawatt target.
Our first project includes flexibility to accommodate future renewable targets.
[Jenni Forrester]
Thanks, Pauline. Jen, we have a question on the Minister for Planning’s public works decision:
If the Minister’s Decision acknowledged environmental impacts, why have preliminary works been approved before the EES process has progressed?
[Jen Comber]
It is typical for projects to nominate some early works that they will begin before the main project. That is the case on this project. When we first submitted the public works order, we identified some early works that were excluded from the EES.
Later, as we moved into more detailed design, we realised we needed to add additional early works. All these early works are within the Loy Yang Power Station.
To get the public works order approved, we needed to conduct environmental investigations at the Loy Yang site and disclose the potential impacts. That work shows that the works we suggest excluding from the EES have negligible environmental impacts, which is why they can be excluded.
However, the EES must still account for their cumulative impact. So, they will be mentioned in the EES.
[Jenni Forrester]
Thanks, Jen. Dave, there is a question for you about the order of activities.
You and Pauline have discussed key decision points and milestones in the project, including appointing a development partner and choosing the preferred route.
Will the upcoming state election affect the EES process? How does making these decisions ahead of the completed assessment give the community confidence in the EES process? How do the development partner process and the EES process work together?
[Dave Kristy]
It is important to recognise that this is a development phase-only contract. This is not a contract to build, deliver and ultimately run and operate the transmission line. It is part of the early development phase. This process has been running since late 2024. The intent was always to award this contract in 2026. The original timeframe was mid-2026. We extended this slightly to allow for additional landholder consultation and technical investigations.
This timeline is separate from the election timeline. It is important that we keep the process running and get the development partner on board to help us continue through the EES process.
Pauline might want to add to that.
[Pauline Malolepszy]
Our procurement process started in 2024. It was a competitive tender process that happened to culminate a few weeks ago, with the appointment of ACCIONA. Our EES process is not influenced by the tender process and has been continuing in the background.
These processes are not influenced by each other or the election.
[Jenni Forrester]
Thank you both. We have a question about the timing of the project, given the forecast energisation date for offshore wind, which is now forecast for 2034.
Why is VicGrid planning the construction so far ahead of the offshore wind energisation date?
[Pauline Malolepszy]
The transmission takes longer to plan, design, and build. To manage the risk on our project, the preference is to design and build the transmission before the generation comes online. Construction is expected from 2028.
Dave, did you want to add anything?
[Dave Kristy]
Transmission has very long lead times, and connecting new energy generation to the grid is also lengthy. Especially because offshore wind is a new type of generation technology for Australia. We will need to test performance requirements, and they need to be validated over an extended period, to make sure the grid stays reliable and secure.
As Pauline said, we need to de-risk the project so that is it is ready for generation coming online.
[Jenni Forrester]
Dave, we have another question on the upcoming state election.
Could a change of government affect any part of this project?
[Dave Kristy]
This question has come up a lot over the last few weeks. We can't speculate on what a new government policy may or may not bring. We work under the direction of the government of the day, and we will continue to do that.
[Jenni Forrester]
Jen, we have a question about impacts and managing impacts on koala habitats and native wildlife and fauna.
A previous project used thermal technology to track down and relocate wildlife. Will similar technology and expertise be used on this project?
[Jen Comber]
Relocating wildlife is standard best practice on these types of projects, and we will use it as a mitigation measure for this project.
I can't comment on whether we will specifically use thermal technology. We will ensure we meet best practice, and if thermal technology is the best method, I can't see why we wouldn’t use it.
If you are interested what our mitigation measures are, you will be able to view them in the biodiversity report when it is published. If you feel like these measures are insufficient, please reach out and let us know.
However, I do believe the intent is to relocate any wildlife. We are exploring having a wildlife handler on site for any tree felling. They can check each tree to ensure any wildlife is relocated before felling.
[Jenni Forrester]
Thanks, Jen. Here is a question for you, Dave.
How many offshore wind projects will this VicGrid project service, considering the transmission line is only 2 GW? Will additional transmission lines be needed for extra offshore wind projects?
[Dave Kristy]
The line that we are building now is for the first 2 GW. The government has set a target of 7.5 GW to be generated off the coast of Gippsland, so additional transmission lines will be needed. They have been identified in the 2025 Victorian Transmission Plan (VTP), and they will be updated in the 2027 VTP.
[Jenni Forrester]
Thanks, Dave. We just have one further question:
Who introduced the early legislation on offshore wind?
I can take this one. The federal coalition introduced the original offshore wind legislation.
Thank you for your time
We have no further questions, and we have reached the end of our time together.
As mentioned, a recording of the webinar and the transcript from tonight's session will be available on the VicGrid website. If you have any further questions, you can reach out to the VicGrid project team at any time.
Thank you to all our presenters and everyone who tuned in tonight.
Page last updated: 11/11/26