Julius Avenue Data Centre

See attached PDF

I have attached a file with my Submission re the Julius Avenue Data Centre.

I am a local resident and interested in the protection of Lane Cove National Park. I frequently visit Lane Cove National Park for recreational purposes (walking on the Great North Walk). I also actively do volunteer bush regeneration in the Lane Cove National Park.
On my frequent walks in the Lane Cove National Park I pass near the new data centre located on Apollo Place the other side of the Lane Cove River at Lane Cove West. I am of the impression that the proposed data centre at Julius Avenue has similarities to the Apollo Pace data centre including numerous cooling towers and generators. I am dismayed by the continuous hum from the Lane Cove West data centre clearly audible from the Great North Walk. If this is replicated at Julius Avenue it will impact mine and others enjoyment of the natural area. Goodness knows the impact of noise on native fauna including bats and Powerful Owls. The EIS information does not provide any tangible details of noise mitigation that will be installed for the cooling towers. Approval should be subject to mandated low-noise design specifications, including fan speed modulation, acoustic louvres, and enclosure performance ratings. I am also disappointed that the EIS does not consider the National Park as a sensitive receiver in terms of noise.
The proposed data center requires the permanent clearing of native forest. The scale is not one or two trees; it calls for the clearing of over one hectare of valuable bushland. I do not believe that there has been adequate assessment of the bushland proposed to be cleared. There is a complex ecosytem established over millennia, even more than the hundreds of trees that will be removed. The EIS should include consideration of alternative sites on land that have already been cleared.

I have seen firsthand the resilience of our native bush. Areas that contained invasive weeds have with appropriate bush regeneration techniques transformed into high functioning habitat for a range of native flora and fauna. The EIS does not appear to recognize the value of the remanent bushland. A more detailed biodiversity study should be conducted with professionals experienced in this unique and complex bushland.
There is no apparent link between constructing the data centre and caring for Lane Cove National Park. At a minimum, with all the storm water runoff from the data centre into the National Park and disturbance from running electrical supply, the proponent should be required to provide annual funding to Lane Cove National Park so they can engage and manage professional bush regenerators into perpetuity to care for the downstream disturbance.

It is absurd that you plan to chop down 500+ trees for an ugly data centre that guzzles energy and water for Days. the SD6 data center in ma park is already consuming enough to induce water scarcity in local neighbourhoods

My name is Heidi and I live in Ingleside, and I believe the building of a data centre in the heart of Lane Cove, near the North Ryde metro station, and located adjacent to the Lane Cove River would have detrimental adverse effects on the local environment, as well as implications for those living in the area. It has been determined by Semenov et. al. (2021) that data centers on average produce annual emissions which can vary from 5,168.4 to 7,008t CO2 per 1 MW of datacenter power. This implies severe release of greenhouse gases, and exacerbation of Australia’s climate crisis. Ngata et. al. (2025) additionally outlines the ‘local socio-environmental consequences—such as health impacts, water usage, noise pollution, infrastructural strain, and economic burden’ brought on by the development of data centres in urban and suburban areas. Ferreira et. al. (2019) estimates that due to the rise in prevalence and intensity of data center operations, CO2 emissions may increase between 9% and 27% by 2030. There is no doubt that this would have an extreme effect on climate change and natural disasters, as seen in Australia over the past few years. Those living next to data centres which have being established in the US have stated that they “..can't drink the water." (Fleury et. al., 2025), due to the residue present due to contamination from the data centre. The proposed date centre is approx. less than 500m away from an early learning centre, a similar distance to the reports of water contamination from the BBC. This same article outlines how local water systems such as rivers are contaminated by water run-off from data centres, which would be of extreme concern at Julius Avenue, due to its proximity the the Lane Cove River.
As a 17 year old who has watched the development of climate change in Australia, including unforeseen flooding, soaring temperatures, natural disasters etc., as well as the slow accumulation of data and research within recent years into the consequences of data centres on the environment and economy, as correlated with the rise in AI systems, I warn that the development of such infrastructure in suburban Lane Cove would have minimal to no benefits for the local community. Alongside this it would exacerbate environmental concerns through excessive water use for cooling, emission of toxic waste, and release of greenhouse gases into the local atmosphere. There would be high risk of water contamination of both local water systems and domestic groundwater systems. I would implore that the government reevaluate the necessity of this infrastructure, specifically in regards to its proposed location.

The Lanecove National Park and Surrounding bushland are a rare gem in Urban area of Sydney.
I do not know of any other major cities that have such amazing bushland in middle of the town.
As such it requires unique approach, and certainly a considerate approach to any irrevocable damage to this fragile echosystem and its Basin.

Many years of volunteers time have gone into preserving the bushland and the mature trees that take decades to grow and provide shelter for native wildlife, and it should not be wiped in hundereds by just a decision to build yet another Datacentre in vicinity of such rare gem.
the decision should be reviewed with the two questions
can this datacentre be built somewhere else with no meaningful difference in its purpose?
Can the developement be more relevant to its location and mindful of the 500 trees that is exposed to risk of lopping due to this work.

I think that it is a wonderful thing to bring some employment back to the area. For way too long, buisness has been sqeezed out of the area by the incessant overrunning by residential get-rich-quick schemes.
So many buisnesses have suffered in that area in particular since the relocation of CSIRO.
Wonderful project (as long as it is not a Chinese owned data centre)

Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission regarding the data centre proposed within an area containing sensitive habitat and bushland and abutting to the important Lane Cove River habitat corridor. This development should be stopped or considerably reduced in size and scope to minimize its impacts.

This development needs to take into account the threatened flora and fauna and minimize its impact. Of importance is the obvious lack of concern and lack of measures to minimize the impacts on the surrounding sensitive areas.

This proposal will cause a significant loss of habitat and loss of important rocky outcrops and cave habitat areas for threatened microbats - Large Bent-wing Bats, Little Bent-winged Bats
and Large-eared Pied Bats.

There are threatened plant species in this area including Darwinia biflora, Deyeuxia appressa, Hibbertia spanantha and Rhizanthella slateri which are irreplaceable. There will be flow on impacts to a significant heritage area – Fairyland and Lane Cove National Park and habitat corridor. Also note the impact of loss of connectivity, habitat, the cooling effect of over 500 trees marked to be removed and importantly the loss of breeding hollows and the understory habitat for small native birds and other fauna.

Offsets do not compensate for local losses of habitat, fauna and flora which are irreplaceable. Providing funds to improve other habitat elsewhere does not replace species that are lost and gone forever. Native, quality bushland cannot be reconstructed – once lost it is gone forever.

Please reconsider allowing this data centre in this sensitive area.

The Julius Avenue Data Centre proposal has the following negative impacts:
1/Environmental Impacts:
Loss of Vegetation and Habitat: the clearing bushland for a data center destroys native vegetation, including potential habitat for threatened species. This can disrupt local ecosystems and reduce biodiversity.
2/Excess Water Usage and Wastewater:
Data centers require significant amounts of water for cooling, which can strain local water resources, especially in areas with limited water availability. The disposal of wastewater, potentially containing contaminants, also poses risks to waterways.
3/Noise and Light Pollution:
Data centers can generate noise from cooling systems and backup generators, and light pollution can disrupt nocturnal wildlife and affect the surrounding environment.
4/Contamination Risks:
There's a risk of soil and groundwater contamination from accidental spills of chemicals or fuel used in the data center.
5/Increased Traffic and Congestion:
Construction and operation of a data center can lead to increased traffic, impacting local roads and potentially causing congestion. That area is already congested with light industrial traffic.
6/Community and Planning Concerns:
Lack of Consultation: There has been insufficient consultation with the local community and environmental groups can lead to a lack of transparency and public trust.
7/Overdevelopment:
Data centers can be large structures, and their placement in bushland areas can be perceived as overdevelopment, disrupting the natural landscape and character of the area.
8/Future-proofing:
There should be consideration of the data center's long-term impact, including future-proofing for repurposing or site remediation in case of redundancy.
9/Inadequate Screening and Landscaping:
The development lacks sufficient screening and landscaping to minimize visual impact and protect the surrounding bushland. It remains an eyesore for decades to come, destroying agricultural and natural habitat.

The attached submission is on behalf of Friends of Lane Cove National Park. While not having an in-principle objection to a Data centre development on this site we believe that the current proposal is a major over development of the site and note that the proponent is asking for almost double the height allowed in the Ryde LEP for developments in this area, which will have serious over shadowing effects on important native habitat in the Laner Cove National Park.
The submission details our concerns and details suggestions to make this development compatible with its location adjacent to a National Park.

I am writing to express my strong objection to the proposed Julius Avenue Data Centre at 6–8 Julius Avenue, North Ryde. I work as a data and insights professional and appreciate the critical role data centres play. However, this project’s environmental impacts - particularly on Lane Cove National Park and the habitat corridor adjoining the site - are unacceptable and contrary to the public interest. Specifically,

- The development is directly beside Lane Cove National Park (LCNP), a key bushland corridor in metropolitan Sydney. The proposal would remove around 509 mature trees (as stated on page 9 of EIS - Julius Avenue Data Centre 240625), severing an important habitat link vital for the movement of native wildlife and which buffers the park from urban heat, light, and noise impacts.

- The Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR) identifies impacts on habitat for at least three threatened animal species and four threatened plant species. Loss of tree hollows, increased light and noise, and greater weed and pathogen spread will all harm sensitive species. I am an avid bushcarer at Fairylands and a regular visitor to Lane Cove National Park. Years of bushcare and regeneration efforts have produced measurable gains such as weed suppression and improved habitat connectivity. Clearing hundreds of trees at this edge will likely set back those gains and degrade both habitat and the community’s experience of the park.

- People’s experience visiting LCNP, including those of bushwalkers on the popular Great North Walk, will be diminished. Loss of tree buffers will increase visible and audible intrusion from the urban edge, raise local temperatures on walking tracks, and reduce the park’s sense of natural seclusion.

As a regular visitor to the area, avid bushwalker, and participant in LCNP bushcare, I feel very strongly about preserving this important part of mature bushland, which most visitors wouldn’t even consider not being part of the park.

Industrial-scale data centres bring constant mechanical plant, heat rejection, diesel backup generators, and lighting, all operating 24/7. These are not compatible with a site directly adjoining a national park. Biodiversity offsets cannot replicate the function and cooling benefits of a mature, connected corridor. Avoidance of corridor clearing should be the priority.

Based on the above, I request that the Department refuse consent to SSD-80018208.

Kind regards

I object to the large number of mature trees that are proposed to be removed for this application. There is sufficient cleared space to build the data centre on that site without needing to remove further vegetation.

Please see attached Julius Avenue Data Centre Submission (SUB-91339456)

The size of the construction footprint and the environmental destruction posed by the Project is excessive and objected to strongly.
An extension of exhibition time is requested.
An alternative - substantially smaller footprint proposal is requested.
Please note this Objection to the Data Centre proposal in it current form and scale.

I am writing to formally lodge my submission in response to the proposed Julius Avenue Data Centre development. As a long-term resident of the area and a regular user of Lane Cove National Park, I am deeply concerned about the environmental, cultural, and community impacts of this project.

The proposal involves large-scale vegetation clearing, extensive diesel generator infrastructure, and proximity to ecologically sensitive bushland and heritage sites. In my view, the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) fails to adequately justify the project’s need, assess its cumulative impacts, or propose enforceable mitigation measures.

My submission outlines specific concerns across biodiversity, air quality, noise, cultural heritage, and planning justification. For each issue, I have included “Matters Raised” and “Comments/Requests” to assist the Department in its assessment.

I respectfully urge the Department to reject the proposal in its current form and require a significantly revised application that prioritizes ecological preservation, strategic planning alignment, and genuine community engagement.

I I’m writing to object to the plan to remove >500 of mature trees on the property next to the Lane Cove River and replace them with 700 small native trees. This area is one of our region’s most important natural corridors, and removing these trees would seriously harm its biodiversity and ecological health.
Why Mature Trees Matter
The mature trees along the river are vital. They provide shade, nesting hollows, help keep the area cool, and support a wide range of wildlife—including nesting birds, possums, insects, and even the ospreys that live just across the river. Their roots help reduce erosion.
Young trees simply can’t do all this. It takes decades for them to grow and offer the same benefits. Removing the mature trees would leave a big gap in the ecosystem that can’t be quickly fixed.
A Home for Wildlife
The Lane Cove River is a rich and diverse habitat, home to many native and even threatened species, such as the powerful owl. The tall tree canopy helps animals move safely through the area and connects patches of bushland. If these trees are removed, it will break those connections and make it harder for wildlife to survive. It also increases risks from predators, noise, and light.
Problems with the Replacement Plan
Planting small native trees might sound like a good idea, but it doesn’t make up for the loss of mature habitat. Young trees are fragile—they can die from drought, disease, or vandalism, and they need a lot of care to survive. The scale of this tree removal would change the landscape dramatically, and not just in how it looks—it would affect the whole ecosystem.
Please Rethink This
I ask that you reconsider this proposal and look for ways to protect the existing mature trees. They are not just part of the scenery—they are essential to the health of the river and the life it supports.
object to the large number of trees that will be removed from the wildlife corridor adjacent to the river. While the developer is proposing to plant even more trees, the mature canopy is not able to be replaced. The developer should find a way to retain the majority of the mature trees

Having now done further reading of the proposal, I wish to lodge additional comments regards objection to the proposal as it stands.
You may not be aware of the history of the site development and contions that were placed on CSIRO through the "Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works report
relating to the proposed
CSIRO DIVISION OF BUILDING
CONSTRUCTION AND ENGINEERING
DEVELOPMENT WORKS AT
RIVERSIDE CORPORATE PARK,
NORTH RYDE, NSW
(Ninth Report of 1999)
https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Completed_Inquiries/pwc/northrydeblg/ncpindex
The following section on environmental issues is significant:
Issues
Environmental Impact
73. When the CSIRO first proposed its redevelopment of North Ryde, it sought
an environmental clearance for its plans from the then Department of Arts,
Sport, the Environment, Tourism and Territories (DASETT), in accordance
with the requirements of the Environment Protection (Impact of Proposal) Act
1974. DASETT determined that neither a public environment report nor an
environmental impact statement was required to satisfy the objects of the Act,
but recommended that the CSIRO consult with its own Division of Wildlife
and Ecology and the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service regarding the
protection of native fauna.22
18 CSIRO, Transcript of Evidence, p. 263.
19 CSIRO, Transcript of Evidence, p. 264.
20 CSIRO, Transcript of Evidence, p. 267.
21 CSIRO, Transcript of Evidence, p. 266.
22 Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, Report relating to the CSIRO
Redevelopment: North Ryde, NSW. AGPS, Canberra, 1992, p. 26.
74. In December 1992, the CSIRO Division of Wildlife and Ecology released a
report on the flora, fauna and soils at the proposed redevelopment site in
North Ryde which concluded that redevelopment without posing a threat to
flora and fauna was possible '…provided that detailed work and landscape
plans are developed and adhered to and that there is adequate on-ground
supervision during construction work to avoid accidental or incidental
impacts on vegetation and isolated trees'.23 The report also cautioned that the
largest remaining patch of natural vegetation in the southeast corner of the
site should be retained in an undeveloped state.
75. The CSIRO's submission to the Committee identified the major
environmental issues on the site as being:
…the protection of the remnant bushland, and the topography of the
site on its eastern and southeastern sides where it slopes towards the
Lane Cove River, having implications for run-off and sedimentation,
water quality management, landscape and habitat. 24
76. The CSIRO does not expect its proposed development to impact adversely on
the environment, but nevertheless will be monitoring impacts on an ongoing
basis and continuing to consult and liaise with State Government authorities
on these matters. CSIRO's submission notes that it has been consulting with
the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) on matters concerned with
waste generation, plant noise and facility emissions. Discussions with Sydney
Water have centred on trade waste and sewerage connections.25 The
Committee is aware that the CSIRO is currently preparing, in consultation
with the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, an environmental
management plan specific to this project.26 The comprehensive plan will
address, in particular, issues of water run-off and control which were raised
by the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service in a submission on this
Inquiry.27 The Committee has been advised that the management plan will be
completed by October 1999.
77. The CSIRO's submission to the Committee identified the following 'specific
actions' which are to be implemented as part of the proposed development:28
„ appropriate tree planting and landscaping adjacent to the facilities;
23 Doherty, M.D., Braithwaite, L.W., and Tongway, D.J., Proposed Redevelopment of CSIRO Property
at North Ryde, Sydney: Survey of Flora, Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna and Soils. CSIRO Division of
Wildlife and Ecology, December, 1992, p. 25.
24 CSIRO, Submission, p. 12.
25 Ibid., pp. 12–13.
26 CSIRO, Transcript of Evidence, p. 255.
27 NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, Submission, p. 2.
28 CSIRO, Submission, p. 13.
„ filtering and control of all stormwater run-off to prevent any potential
pollutants from reaching the Lane Cove River;
„ sound attenuation and vibration isolation within the new facilities to
maintain acceptable noise and vibration limits on the site;
„ maintenance of air quality at the site and surrounding areas in
accordance with best management practices;
„ dilution and treatment of non toxic, liquid waste prior to discharge to
sewer;
„ collection of any wastes such as solvents, potentially flammable liquids,
oils and toxic liquids at the point of use in waste containers. The
containers will be collected for disposal by a licensed industrial waste
collector;
„ storage of hazardous goods, chemicals and gases in accordance with
respective codes; and
„ installation of pollution control equipment to treat and control
emissions arising from research and testing programs.
78. On 12 August 1999 the Committee was advised by the CSIRO29 that the
following additional initiatives would be implemented in the Riverside
Corporate Park development site. Some of the additional measures are
designed to address concerns raised by the Department of Land and Water
Conservation (Sydney/South Coast Region) about soil erosion and sediment
control:30
„ retention of bushland in the southeast corner of the Park adjacent to
Lane Cove National Park as part of the CSIRO's commitment to
minimise loss of remnant vegetation;
„ replacement of trees lost within building lots with suitable canopy
planting;
„ retention, where possible, and replacement of trees along the Delhi and
Epping Road frontages, supplemented with additional buffer planting
of locally indigenous species and native species already existing on the
site;
„ bush regeneration programmes where sewer and stormwater
infrastructure works have affected the remnant natural bush;
29 Mr George Harley, General Manager, CSIRO Corporate Property, letter dated 12 August 1999.
30 Concerns about these had been raised by the Department of Land and Water Conservation –
Sydney/South Coast Region in their Submission, pp1–2.
„ stormwater collection and discharge via sedimentation ponds and a
wetland watercourse to reduce the impact of stormwater which
previously discharged from a piped system overland through the Lane
Cove National Park into the Lane Cove River;
„ replacement of an old sewer pumping station system with a gravity
sewer under Epping Road, significantly reducing the risk of untreated
effluent discharging into Lane Cove River; and
„ landscape maintenance activities to eradicate and control weed
infestation.
Please refer to sections 74 and 75 regarding the retention of the remnant bushland.
It should also be noted that the Ryde Council 1999 State of the Environment noted the following:
Riverside Corporate Park at North Ryde has impacted on bushland, including a protected species, Darwinia biflora. National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) is preparing a general Recovery Plan for all Darwinia biflora in the Sydney area. The North Ryde Residents Group and Ryde-Hunters Hill Flora and Fauna Preservation Society will submit a report to the Parliamentary Standing Committee to recommend preservation of the remaining remnant bushland at Riverside Corporate Park.
It would seem that the developer is either not aware or chose to ignore the above history and intended restrictions on bushland clearing and the impact to a protected plant species.
I also note the lack of reference to the existing Riverside walking track, including the entry next to 14 Julius Ave, amd the interpretive signage that has existed since the early 2000's. Why build mew trails that further remove the remnant bushland, ignoring the existing tracks? I have been unable to find any wildlife studies of the area in the application documents. On recent visits to the site I witnessed wallabies and echidnas?
The placement of the substation and generator facility seems to be an afterthought. Surely this can be i degraded into the site footprint, and negate the significant impact to bushland?
The access road placement seems to be very poor, with significant rock and spol removal, as it cuts through some 30m of elevation?
I include a photo from 2005 that shows the extend of the site clearing as per CSIRO agreement. I also include some of the existing signage.
I do not object to development as such, but it needs to reasonable, and following intent of site usage.
As some background, I am a local resident and worked at the CSIRO site throughout its redevelopment

To whom it may concern:
As a traditional custodian of Dharug Ngurra/Country, being the majority of the Sydney basin, and including Walumada, the area where the proposed Data Centre will be located, and as a citizen of NSW and resident within one of the 7 Councils that function as a neighbour to the Durumbura Dhurabang/Lane Cove River and National Park, I strongly object to the said construction.
Reasons for Objection:
1. Databases are renowned for consuming large quantities of energy to power and cool them, which can be supplied from the nearby water. As such it will have a harmful effect on the marine life of the river. (Whitehead, B., et. al., 2014)
2. It is well known that excessive vibrations and CO2 emissions have a negative impact on marine life. Databases have a vibrational and CO2 emission impact on their surrounds, which includes the marine life of the river, and as such will have a negative impact on the fish and other marine species of the river.
Ref: Salinas, Cristian et al, ‘Seagrass Losses since Mid‐20th Century Fuelled CO2 Emissions from Soil Carbon Stocks’ (2020) 26(9) Global change biology 4772
3. It is known that 509 trees will be cut down in order for the Data Centre to be constructed. As such this will have a seriously negative impact on the wildlife and habitat proximate to that section Lane Cove National Park (LCNP).
4. Destroying the trees and plant life in order to construct the Data Centre will have a negative impact on the soil condition in that area, proximate to the river.
5. Destroying the habitat and its removal will have a negative impact on the strength of the river bank, adding to increased siltation into the river, thus negatively impacting marine life in an estuarine area, e.g. oysters, mussels and various fish and eel species.
Ref: Zhang, Jinlai et al, ‘Dual Impacts of Urbanization and Precipitation on Subsidence in Chongqing Revealed by SBAS-InSAR’ (2025) 84(8) Environmental earth sciences
As stated by Whitehead, B., et. al., "Further approaches exist to assess more holistically the impact of data centres, such as building environmental assessment methods, but none have the capacity to capture fully the interlinked nature of a system, where improvements in one area and to one impact, can adversely affect a totally different area and totally different impacts."
Ref: Whitehead, Beth et al, ‘Assessing the Environmental Impact of Data Centres Part 1: Background, Energy Use and Metrics’ (2014) 82 Building and environment 151
The growing power demand of data centres has led to a heightened awareness of their increasing impact on climate change from greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Comprehensive research into the impact of the whole ICT industry on climate change has been dominated by GeSI [5], [46], but has been strengthened by recent research by Malmodin et al. [47]. Cited in: Whitehead, B., et. al.(2014).
As it is widely acknowledged, First Nations people of this continent have been caring for Country for more than 65,000 years. As such caring for the river, the biodiversity, including marine life has only been under threat since colonisation - a mere 237 years.
Accordingly, based on the historic facts, the current impacts of human-induced climate change, and ongoing efforts by Indigenous and non-Indigenous community carers, it is essential that this proposal be denied in order for sustainable futures to be viable for generations to come. We have a saying in Dharug language:
We must:
Nayana, Ngarra, Wingaru
Breathe, Listen, Think
So that we can be:
Banga baranyiin baribugu
Paddling from yesterday to tomorrow
and:
Yanaladyi budyari gumadawa
Walking together in good spirit
didgurigura,
thank you.
Dharug Community Member.

It's clear from the plans that a substantial amount of clearing away native vegetation is required. Given the significance of the endemic species it is not within the communities interest to remove ecological assets for the construction of a data center which does not seem Commensurate to the full scale of clearing required. Understandably ecological restoration is a better outcome for the space or a smaller building footprint, perhaps where invasive species are over grown.

This data centre is inconsistent with the Govt’s rezoning plans to create housing in North Ryde. Not only will it take up valuable space near the metro station, its scale will also eat away at the ecological habitat around the Lane Cove National Park. The vegetation to the south of the site must be left alone. Also, a data centre with all the diesel, lithium ion and high voltage components can increase risk of bushfire around national park. Surely this is not right!