Project Mars Data Centre

PLANNING OBJECTION SUBMISSION
Proposed Data Centre Development – Lane Cove West Reference: Lane Cove Council Planning Application
Project Name: Mars Data Centre, Lane Cove
Project Number: 82052708

SUBMITTED TO: Lane Cove Planning Authority 2nd may 2026
SUBMITTER: Peter Edington, Lane Cove NSW 2066

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This submission formally objects to the proposed development of five computer data centres in Lane Cove West, specifically those proximate to Blackman's Park, Johnston Crescent, and residential zones. The proposal fails on three fundamental grounds: resource sustainability, environmental health, and planning integrity. Each objection below requires specific response from the applicants.

I. WATER CONSUMPTION AND RESOURCE ALLOCATION
A. Quantitative Impact
• Lane Cove's population: approximately 42,594 residents
• Average household water use: approximately 480 litres per day
• Total residential consumption: approximately 20.4 million litres daily
• Single data centre consumption: 1.1 to 1.9 million litres per day
• Five data centres would consume 5.5 to 9.5 million litres per day
B. Comparative Analysis
One data centre would use, every day, as much water as 2,000 to 4,000 households. Five facilities would consume water equivalent to half the residential population of our municipality.
C. Required Applicant Response
1. Can the applicant confirm total daily water consumption figures for all five proposed facilities?
2. Can the applicant provide drought contingency plans for water allocation during restriction periods?
3. Can the applicant demonstrate how treated drinking water will be prioritised between residential users and commercial cooling systems?
4. Can the applicant give detail any alternative water sources (recycled, greywater, desalinated) and their feasibility?

II. ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE AND DIESEL GENERATOR THREATS
A. Generator Proximity
• Emergency diesel generators placed close to residences
• Proposed centres within 50 metres of homes
• Proposed centres within 150 metres from a junior school
B. Pollution and Noise Concerns
• Continuous noise pollution during monthly testing (30 minutes at 30% load)
• Extended operation during emergencies with no federal time limits
• Air pollution from particulate matter and nitrogen oxides
• Fuel storage risks for spill contamination
C. Cumulative Effect
Five facilities mean five sets of generators operating simultaneously during grid failures, creating sustained industrial noise in a residential neighbourhood.
D. Required Applicant Response
1. Can the applicant provide detailed noise assessment including all emergency generator testing schedules?
2. Can the applicant specify maximum decibel levels at property boundaries during emergency operation?
3. Can the applicant detail air quality impact assessments for particulate matter and nitrogen oxides?
4. Can the applicant explain fuel storage containment measures and spill response protocols?
5. Can the applicant address cumulative noise impact of five simultaneous generator operations?

III. LOCATION COMPATIBILITY AND ZONING
A. Proximity to Protected Areas
• Blackman's Park serves as a sports ground and nature reserve
• Centres placed within 50 metres of residential properties
• Centres placed 150 metres from a junior school
B. Community Character
Lane Cove has transformed from an older residential suburb into a thriving, expanding community. Any planning approvals should enhance residential amenity, not degrade it through industrial intensification.
C. Precedent Concerns
Lane Cove West now has five data centres built, approved, or in planning. This is systematic industrialisation of residential fringes, not organic growth.
D. Required Applicant Response
1. Can the applicant justify why this location is compatible with residential zoning classifications?
2. Can the applicant explain why alternative industrial or commercial zones were not considered?
3. Can the applicant address how this development aligns with existing community character protections?
4. Can the applicant detail mitigation measures for visual and physical intrusion on Blackman's Park?

IV. CLIMATE RESILIENCE AND ENERGY PARADOX
A. Heatwave Vulnerability
As we face increasingly frequent 40-degree-plus heatwaves, the cooling load for these facilities will skyrocket. Evaporative cooling will demand maximum water extraction precisely when reservoirs are lowest.
B. Diesel Dependency
While rhetoric touts "green" credentials, the backup reality is five massive diesel engine networks in a residential pocket. In a grid stressed by extreme weather, these generators will likely run for extended periods.
C. Required Applicant Response
1. Can the applicant provide climate modelling for water demand during projected heatwave scenarios?
2. Can the applicant detail renewable energy integration and percentage of non-diesel backup capacity?
3. Can the applicant explain how this development aligns with NSW and Federal climate commitments?
4. Can the applicant address whether evaporative cooling systems will be replaced with air-cooled alternatives?

V. SECURITY AND RISK MANAGEMENT
A. Single Point of Failure
Clustering five high-value data centres within a few square kilometres violates the fundamental principle of risk management: never store all backups in one place.
B. Vulnerability Assessment
• Wildfire risk: a single wildfire could disable the entire network
• Coordinated attack: a terrorist attack could render significant state infrastructure offline simultaneously
• Industrial accident: localized incidents could cause cascading regional failure
C. Residential Safety
Placing critical assets within 50 metres of residential dwellings and 150 metres of a school is a security liability. Critical national infrastructure deserves secure, isolated locations.
D. Required Applicant Response
1. Can the applicant provide independent security risk assessment for clustered infrastructure
2. Can the applicant detail emergency evacuation plans for surrounding residential areas
3. Can the applicant explain how this clustering aligns with national critical infrastructure protection standards
4. Can the applicant address whether dispersal of facilities across multiple locations was considered

VI. PRECEDENT AND SYSTEMATIC INDUSTRIALISATION
A. Cumulative Impact
Each approval normalises the next, creating a precedent that treats our community as expendable infrastructure land. Five data centres already exist, are approved, or are in planning in Lane Cove West.
B. Displacement of Existing Industry
The displacement of existing industry in Johnston Crescent compounds the problem.
C. Required Applicant Response
1. Assess cumulative impact of all five data centres in the area
2. Explain how this development improves jobs and earnings in the longer term for residents
3. Detail consultation with existing industrial businesses on Johnston Crescent

CONCLUSION AND REQUESTS
This proposal fails on three fundamental grounds:
1. Resource Sustainability: Water consumption incompatible with drought-prone region
2. Environmental Health: Diesel generator proximity threatens residential and school environments
3. Planning Integrity: Industrial infrastructure scheme of a scale incompatible with residential character and protected reserves
4. Security: Placing highly targetable infrastructure in a densly populated suburb of any capital city
I request:
1. Immediate rejection of this development
2. Formal response to each objection point outlined above
3. Independent third-party assessment of water, noise, and security claims
4. Public hearing to allow community testimony on cumulative impacts
Alternative locations exist that do not compromise residential amenity, school safety, or water security. Lane Cove deserves better than to become a sacrifice zone for computational infrastructure.
Respectfully submitted,
Peter Edington, Lane Cove NSW 2066
2nd May 2066

Submission regarding 12 Mars Road
I would like to raise an objection to the proposed Project Mars Data Centre.
Location and proximity to homes, school and community spaces
The proposed data centre sits within the Mars Business Park, which is zoned E4 General Industrial under the Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan (2009). The intent of this zoning includes minimising impacts on surrounding land uses, ensuring good landscaping, and recognising the close proximity to residential areas by reducing potential conflicts.
While data centres are permitted in E4 zones (with consent), the specific location at 12 Mars Road raises serious concerns. The site sits right on the edge of the industrial zone and directly borders a community nursery and residential properties (R2 Low Density Residential) to the east. It is also next to Blackman Park—a well-used recreational and environmental space—to the south, and only around 160 metres from a public primary school to the north-east. The closest home is less than 50 metres away.
Unlike other data centres in Sydney, there are no major roads or consistent background noise sources separating this site from nearby homes. Streets like Banksia Close, Avalon Avenue and Wood Street are quiet suburban streets, so any ongoing noise from a 24/7 facility will be far more noticeable.
Putting a large, continuously operating industrial facility right on the boundary of the zone doesn’t really align with the intent of the E4 zoning. It creates clear issues around visual impact, potential emissions, and especially constant noise. From personal experience walking near the AirTrunk facility on Mars Road and the NextDC site at Artarmon, noise from these types of centres can still be heard from more than 100 metres away, further when its quiet.
The eastern side of the Mars Road business park currently coexists reasonably well with nearby homes and schools because the existing uses—mainly warehousing—are relatively low impact. A data centre is very different in terms of scale, appearance, environmental footprint, and noise.
In similar situations, NSW planning has supported the use of buffer zones between industrial and residential areas to reduce conflict. Clear separation distances provide certainty for both industry and the community. There should be broader planning consideration of minimum distances between data centres and homes—particularly to manage risks (including security risks noted in the Social Impact Assessment), protect amenity, reduce pollution from backup generators, and limit continuous noise exposure. Other jurisdictions are already looking at buffer zones of 200–300 metres, and NSW should be doing the same.
Even Data Centres Australia acknowledges that developments near residential boundaries can impact local communities and need to be handled carefully. In this case, the site is simply too close to sensitive uses to be appropriate.

________________________________________
Concerns with the Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment
There are a number of issues with the Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment prepared by SLR Consulting that make it difficult to be confident that the impacts have been properly assessed.
To begin with, the selection of monitoring locations seems limited. Additional residential receivers should have been included on the western side of Wood Street and further south along the same street. Given the local topography, these areas could experience greater noise impacts, and relying on a single point (L03) does not seem representative.
Secondly, the area around the Lane Cove River and Blackman Park is known to experience temperature inversions, particularly in autumn and winter. These conditions can significantly amplify noise and carry it further than expected. The report suggests weather impacts would be minimal, but it is unclear whether these inversion conditions have actually been considered.
Thirdly, the baseline noise monitoring itself may not be reliable. During the periods when monitoring was undertaken, there were extensive infrastructure works by Interflow Pty Ltd involving road cutting, heavy vehicles, excavation and construction, often occurring both day and night. These works were a major source of noise, yet there is no mention of them in the EIS or how they may have influenced the baseline results. This raises concerns that the existing noise levels used in the assessment may not reflect normal conditions.
On top of that, the report makes it clear in several places that key equipment—both operational plant and mitigation measures like louvres—are only indicative and will be finalised later during detailed design. Approving a project of this scale, so close to homes and other sensitive uses, without being able to properly assess the final noise impacts is not appropriate.
This is particularly concerning when it comes to annoying noise characteristics, which are a major issue for a facility operating 24/7. The report itself notes that mechanical plant details will only be confirmed later once tenant requirements are known.
There are real-world examples of why this “build first, verify later” approach is risky. Recent reporting has shown that the AirTrunk data centre in the same business park is exceeding night-time noise limits by around 11 dB(A) at the nearest receivers—and those properties are over 150 metres away, much further than homes near this proposed site. In that case, even early stages of the project were already operating louder than predicted due to differences between assumed and actual equipment performance.
This highlights the limitations of relying on assumptions rather than detailed design when assessing compliance. A 24/7 data centre located immediately next to a quiet residential area presents an unacceptably high risk of ongoing noise impacts and associated health effects.
________________________________________
Air quality and diesel generator concerns
Backup diesel generators are another major concern. These generators produce pollutants such as fine particulate matter (PM2.5), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and other harmful emissions during testing and emergency use.
These emissions can contribute to respiratory and cardiovascular issues, particularly when released in short but intense bursts. Given the proximity of the site to a primary school, childcare centre, and residential areas, this is especially concerning. As someone with children attending Lane Cove West Public School, the potential health impacts during generator testing or emergency use are worrying.
________________________________________
Visual amenity issues
The Visual Impact Assessment also appears to understate the true impact of the development.
The building height is generally referenced as 28.3 metres in the EIS, which already exceeds the 18-metre height limit by 57%. However, the Architectural Design Report notes a maximum height of up to 33 metres—an 83% exceedance.
The assessment relies heavily on existing vegetation in its visual representations to suggest limited impact. However, it does not properly account for the removal of 90 mature trees identified in the Arboricultural Impact Assessment. Importantly, 39 of these trees would take more than 10 years to replace.
Without factoring in this tree removal, and by using only a limited number of viewpoints, the assessment does not fully capture the visual impact on the surrounding area. Key locations appear to have been overlooked, including:
• The corner of Avalon Avenue and Banksia Close, used daily by many families and schoolchildren
• Areas within Blackman Park such as the skate park and tennis courts
• Views from backyards and upper levels of homes on Wood Street and Banksia Close
Overall, the scale of the visual impact has not been adequately assessed.
________________________________________
Cumulative impacts, infrastructure and planning
There are also concerns about the cumulative impact of multiple data centres being clustered in the Mars Road business park. Recent reporting suggests that up to four facilities could be proposed in this area, yet there appears to be little strategic consideration of the combined effects.
Clustering facilities increases risks—whether environmental, health-related, or even security-related—and amplifies the impact on the surrounding community.
The Air Quality Impact Assessment itself acknowledges that in an emergency scenario (such as a power outage), the combined operation of multiple facilities could result in significant air quality impacts. Given that outages are not uncommon, this type of scenario may not be as rare as suggested.
The only mitigation measure proposed—simply notifying neighbouring properties—seems clearly inadequate given the scale of potential emissions, particularly if hundreds of diesel generators are operating at once.
There are also real-world examples of the infrastructure burden these facilities create. Residents and the local school community have already experienced more than 18 months of disruption from construction works to upgrade water infrastructure for the AirTrunk facility. Even though that facility is located further from homes, it has still had a significant impact.
It is unclear whether additional upgrades to water, electricity, or other infrastructure would be required if more data centres are developed in the area.
________________________________________
Conclusion
In summary, this proposal is not appropriate for its location and should be rejected. The site is far too close to homes, a school, and community spaces, and the potential impacts—including noise, air quality, visual amenity, and environmental effects—have not been adequately addressed.

I am writing to formally lodge my OBJECTION to the proposed Project Mars Data Centre. While I recognise the growing need for digital infrastructure, the specific scale and location of this development present significant concerns regarding local amenity, environmental impact, and community character. I live at the edge of Blackman Park, which I visit nearly every day. My home is within short walking distance to the proposed site. Yes we need digital infrastructure, but not in densely populated suburban areas.

1. Scale and Visual Amenity
The proposed bulk and scale of the data centre are inconsistent with the existing local landscape. Data centres are often industrial-scale "black boxes" that offer little architectural integration.
- Visual Impact: The height and massing of the structures will create a dominant industrial presence that overshadows neighbouring residential areas and Blackman Park.
- Lighting: The new data centre will contribute to significant light pollution, disrupting the local environment and nocturnal wildlife.

2. Acoustic Impact and Vibration
Data centres require massive cooling systems and backup power generators that operate continuously.
- Constant Noise: The low-frequency hum will is unacceptable in a suburban areas, and will directly lower the quality of life for me and my family.
- Testing Protocols: I understand these will create severe noise and vibration disturbances for me and other local residents.

3. Energy Consumption and Sustainability
The sheer energy demand of Project Mars places an immense burden on the local electrical grid, in an area where we’ve already had blackouts.
- Grid Reliability: I am concerned that such a high-energy consumer will impact reliability of power
- Heat Island Effect: The discharge of hot air from the cooling towers can contribute to a localised "urban heat island" effect, raising temperatures in the immediate vicinity. Are we, the local residents, expected to accept this and live with it?
- Water Usage: Data centres use significant quantities of water. In times of drought, will the data centre keep drawing all our water while we, the local community, go into severe water restrictions?

The proposed Project Mars development represents an over-development of the site that prioritises industrial utility over community wellbeing. In the short term this development will pose significant problems to people like me and my family who live nearby, and in the long term it will be disastrous to our community. Suburban areas with parkland are NOT suitable for data centres. I urge the Department to recommend a REFUSAL of this application.

Thank you for considering this submission.

Dear Planning Committee,

I am writing to formally object to the proposed construction of five large-scale data centres in Lane Cove West, near Blackman's Park and Johnston Crescent. While digital infrastructure is important, this proposal is fundamentally incompatible with a residential community.

The water consumption alone should disqualify this site. A single enterprise data centre consumes between 1.1 and 1.9 million litres of potable water per day for cooling. Five facilities would require up to 9.5 million litres daily, equivalent to roughly a quarter of Lane Cove's entire residential water usage. In a drought-prone region, committing this volume of treated drinking water to machine cooling while residents face restrictions is indefensible.

The proximity to homes and a primary school is equally unacceptable. These industrial facilities would sit within 50 metres of residences and 150 metres of a school. Emergency diesel generators, the loudest equipment on site, emit particulate matter and nitrogen oxides, and could run simultaneously across all five sites during grid failures caused by the very heatwaves that also peak water demand. This is not a theoretical risk; it is a predictable consequence of siting industrial infrastructure in a residential area.

Clustering five high-value data centres within a few hundred metres of each other also creates a dangerous single point of failure. A bushfire, industrial accident, or deliberate attack could disable a significant portion of the state's digital infrastructure at once. Dispersal, not concentration, is the basic principle of resilient infrastructure planning.

I urge the Planning Authority to reject this application and direct the developer to alternative locations that do not compromise the water security, air quality, or safety of a residential community and its school.

Yours sincerely,
James Crisp

I am writing to formally object to the proposed Project Mars Data Centre. While I recognise the State’s designation of this project as “Critical Infrastructure” and the importance of digital infrastructure to the modern economy, this status does not remove the proponent’s obligation to comply with common law principles or the requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

I am concerned that the current proposal does not adequately address the potential impacts on nearby residents, particularly in relation to noise, vibration, and overall amenity. Should the development proceed without effective and enforceable mitigation measures, I believe it will have an unacceptable impact on the surrounding community.

1. Private Nuisance Considerations
The classification of the project does not negate the risk of private nuisance. If the facility generates persistent low-frequency noise or vibration that interferes with the reasonable enjoyment of nearby properties, this may give rise to legal consequences. As a resident located approximately 500 metres from the site, I am particularly concerned about the potential for ongoing acoustic disturbance.

2. Reliability of Acoustic Modelling
Based on recent experiences in Lane Cove West, where other facilities have exceeded permitted night-time noise levels, I have limited confidence in developer-prepared acoustic modelling. The assumptions underpinning these assessments should be treated with caution.

I strongly recommend that independent, third-party acoustic verification be required, both prior to and following construction. In addition, real-time noise and vibration monitoring, accessible to the public, should be installed at key locations, including near residential areas and community spaces such as Blackman Park.

3. Protection of Blackman Park
Blackman Park is an important recreational and community space. Any degradation of its acoustic environment would significantly reduce its value to residents. The proposal should include robust design measures to minimise operational noise, including full enclosure of major noise-generating infrastructure such as cooling systems and backup generators, rather than relying solely on external barriers.

4. Cumulative Noise Impacts
The Department should carefully consider the cumulative acoustic impact of existing and proposed developments within the Lane Cove West Business Park. Approval of this project without a comprehensive assessment of the combined noise environment would represent a failure to properly account for the broader planning context.

5. Expectations for Residential Amenity
As a nearby resident, I expect that the operation of this facility will not result in any noticeable change to the acoustic or environmental conditions of my home. This should be a minimum standard, supported by enforceable conditions of consent and ongoing monitoring.

In summary, I urge that this proposal not be approved unless it incorporates stringent, independently verified measures to eliminate or fully mitigate impacts on surrounding residents and community assets. The protection of local amenity must be treated as a priority throughout the assessment and, if approved, the operational life of the project.

This submission is made on behalf of the Sydney Knitting Nannas and Friends, a group of mature citizens who peacefully campaign for climate action and the protection of Australia’s precious water and native species and habitats. With many of us being grandparents, our greatest concern is to ensure a healthy future for the generations that come after us. We are committed to non-violence and are not aligned to any political party.

We know that the next few years will be critical for the planet because of climate change, which is already causing immense harm in this country and many others. Without decisive action by governments and communities, climate change will seriously threaten our security and livelihoods.

In light of the above, we would like to make the following submission regarding the proposed Erskine Park data centre development.

NSW is experiencing rapid growth in the development of data centres, which are intensive users of both water and energy and generate much heat, contributing to our sweltering cities. It is therefore essential that data centre developments are managed responsibly and sustainably, and that their benefits are assessed objectively and shared equitably with the communities where they are located.

We support the eight Public Interest Principles for Data Centres outlined by an alliance of civil society groups and unions, namely that to maximise public benefit and reduce public harm all new data centre developments must:

• Be powered by 100% additional renewable energy
• Strengthen grid stability
• Be appropriately sited to minimise impacts on nature and land use
• Minimise embodied emissions and maximise efficiency and circularity
• Use water resources responsibly
• Operate with transparency
• Commit to earning and delivering ongoing social licence
• Support the training and upskilling of the workforce

The water and energy usage of data centres are of particular concern to us.

It is unacceptable that vast amounts of clean drinking water are diverted for industrial use, putting pressure on water supply and prices. Data centres should be required, by strong regulation/legislation, to a) provide clear data on their expected water usage and b) use maximally water-efficient, closed-loop cooling technology or recycled waste or storm water instead of precious drinking water. Unfortunately, Sydney Water does not currently have the infrastructure for recycling waste water, and it is therefore essential that the development be required to use water-efficient technology.

The NSW Climate Commission has clearly stated NSW is failing its Paris Agreement targets and therefore its promises to the NSW electorate. The proposed scale of data centre developments will add pressure to the state’s existing energy demand, and there is a risk that without proper planning and new renewable energy capacity, the use of fossil fuels will be extended to meet these increased energy demands. Decisions to prolong the use of fossil fuel-powered energy plants, made at least partly to support data centre growth, will not only have detrimental effects on electricity costs for consumers, but will also impact the state’s climate goals. For example, The Climate Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC) has warned that, without significant new renewable energy and storage, data centre growth could lift NSW wholesale prices by 26% and increase grid emissions across the National Electricity Market by 14% (6 million tonnes of CO2 annually). This is even more concerning in light of the intensified cost-of-living pressure caused by the war in the Middle East.

The Government must therefore ensure that digital growth does not threaten its climate agenda. It must mandate new renewable energy sources and storage for every data centre development to ensure that they do not absorb the capacities built elsewhere in the economy. It must also examine data centre applications with particular care, as NSW Planning is the sole regulator. We note with great concern that the regulator has failed to enforce its own requirements regarding environmental plans and reports for data centres (noise verification reports, long-term environmental management plan) in other developments, in particular in Lane Cove, at the detriment of local residents. It is therefore all the more important that these large developments are assessed diligently.

The NSW Government should also mandate that data centres must fund new energy generation and storage, either co-located with the data centre itself or in partnership with new generation elsewhere. New network infrastructure costs should be met by the data centre operators and their partners – data centre applications that do not commit to funding new infrastructure should not be approved.

We, the Sydney Knitting Nannas, request that this State Significant Development be considered in line with the NSW Government’s climate goals, fair responsibility for the operational costs of data centres, and the sustained integrity of our energy and water systems. We also request that, if approved, appropriate regulations are imposed and enforced to monitor compliance.

I strongly object to the building of a Data Centre at 12 Mars Road Lane Cove West.
This extremely large ,noise producing, energy guzzling and water devouring development will cause great destruction to the local environment including the large number of residential houses it will impact.
I am a local resident who lives two houses and a local community council nursery away from my boundary to the proposed site .
I have heard the noise that Data Centres make and I can only think Goodbye silence.
I have ,as stated lived near the Lane Cove West industrial estate,
and am happy to state that it is usually quiet at night time and during the day except for the movement of cars and trucks. The data centre works all day and all night and every day and night of the year. There is no break to the constant noise that it will emit. This indeed would be classified as a health issue, and no doubt follow onto mental health problems. Constant noise in the privacy of your own home seems like a punishment to the occupier.
I understand that this data centre requires an enormous amount of water each day to cool itself. Or the past 16 months we have had new water pipes being laid under our roads, which have caused countless problems for residents trying to exit their properties and just get out of their streets.
we were told originally that these new pipes were for the benefit of Lane Cove residents, however we have since learnt that it was for the new Data Centres built in Apollo place, and of course for any new centres I.e. 12 Mars Road. INterflow , the workers, were still here last week trying to resolve some issue with the pipes.
I understand that the water needed to generate cool air must be perfectly clean, and cannot be recycled. How can one Data centre be allowed access to such a commodity important to every city for drinking water etc. With climate change such a big environmental crisis, how can it be directed into single entities for keeping data cool.
Our energy grids will suffer under the strain of usage by Data centres.Storing Diesel fuel and lithium batteries on the site of 12 Mars road would be considered a fire hazard, as the whole area is surrounded by parkland, other warehouses and of course residential homes.
The building of the project at 12 Mars road apparently will involve a time frame of about 3 years, and involve a lot of tradies to be on site.As there is limited parking in the industrial park, one can only assume they would park on the residential streets. This would impact the parents who drop off and collect their children from the local primary school. On Sports days and the many football and soccer games that are using Blackman Park , would also create much confusion.
The area on which Blackman park stands is a wonderful community site for many and varied activities,and it is surrounded by magnificent trees, and many native wildlife.
Removal of up to 90 trees is apparently in the plans, and most of the trees in this area are old and of significance to the area.
I understand that progress must be made with many Data centres being approved, however the site of the proposed Data centre amongst a residential community must be sited as too unsafe and therefore must be stopped.

I am writing to formally lodge my strong objection to the proposed Project Mars Data Centre at 12 Mars Road. As a local resident, I am deeply concerned that the scale and nature of this development, when considered alongside the existing and proposed data centre clusters in Lane Cove West, will cause irreversible harm to our local environment, community health, and infrastructure stability.

1. Cumulative Impact and Urban Planning
The proposal represents a reckless concentration of hyperscale infrastructure in an area that is already reaching capacity. With several data centres now existing or proposed within this immediate precinct, the cumulative impact—rather than the impact of this single facility in isolation—must be the primary lens of assessment. The current planning framework has failed to provide a strategic assessment of how this "digital hub" configuration affects local land use, urban heat island effects, and long-term community amenity.

2. Noise Pollution and Community Health
Data centres operate 24/7, creating a continuous acoustic footprint that is incompatible with the surrounding residential and educational environment.
• Persistent Noise: The hum of cooling fans and air chillers creates a low-frequency noise profile that is notorious for penetrating residential structures, causing sleep disturbances, anxiety, and health impacts for residents.
• Proximity Risks: Given the close proximity to Lane Cove West Public School, the potential for constant acoustic interference—which can impede learning environments and concentration—is unacceptable. The proposal fails to provide sufficient evidence that its noise mitigation strategies can guarantee ambient levels consistent with a sensitive residential/educational zone during all operating conditions.

3. Ecological Impact, Green Space, and Wildlife
The site’s proximity to protected bushland and the Lane Cove River corridor makes it a high-risk location for ecological degradation.
• Habitat Disruption: The removal of significant trees and green space diminishes critical urban canopy. This not only exacerbates the urban heat island effect but also displaces local wildlife that rely on these corridors for transit and foraging.
• Low-Frequency Sensitivity: Wildlife is particularly susceptible to low-frequency vibration and sound emitted by industrial cooling systems. This ongoing disruption can lead to the abandonment of local habitat areas by native fauna, further degrading the biodiversity of our protected reserves.

4. Air Quality and Public Health
The reliance on diesel backup generators for emergency power presents a tangible health risk.
• Emissions Profile: Diesel generators emit fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and nitrogen oxides (NOx), both of which are linked to respiratory illness, asthma, and cardiovascular disease.
• Vulnerability: Given the high density of children at both Lane Cove West Public School and the nearby Blackman Park, placing such infrastructure in this location exposes our most vulnerable populations to potential air quality spikes during testing cycles or power grid disruptions.

5. Utility Strain and Infrastructure Stability
The unprecedented power and water demands of an 81MW-90MW facility place an unfair burden on local infrastructure.
• Grid Pressure: The rapid aggregation of hyperscale loads in one location creates localized strain on the electricity grid, potentially impacting the reliability and cost of supply for existing residential and small-business customers.
• Lack of Transparency: There has been no transparent, public-facing assessment demonstrating that the local utility network can sustain this level of demand without requiring major capital upgrades that may ultimately be borne by the community.

Conclusion
The rapid industrialization of Lane Cove West via hyperscale data centres is occurring without adequate consideration for the "lived experience" of the residents who call this area home. I urge the Department to reject this application in its current form and require a comprehensive cumulative impact assessment that prioritizes the health of our children, the stability of our local environment, and the long-term viability of our neighborhood.

I object to this project for the below reasons;

Noise – equipment operating 24/7. Was the noise assessment undertaken using confirmed plant and equipment specifications that accurately represent the likely operational reality of the site, including worst-case scenarios and future scalability?

The Noise Assessment states that the mechanical plant details are only “indicative,” meaning the community is being asked to rely on modelling based on speculative rather than confirmed equipment. Why has a full assessment not been undertaken using finalised plant specifications?

Why is Blackman Park classified only as an “active recreation” receiver and treated similarly to industrial/commercial receivers within the acoustic assessment? Why were the park’s highly sensitive uses — including children’s recreation, passive recreation, school activities and community use — not properly recognised in the assessment methodology?

AirTrunk SYD2 data centre in Lane Cove West has reportedly experienced noise levels significantly above what was originally predicted . What assurance can the developer provide that the 12 Mars Road project will not experience the same compliance failures?

Will Noise Verification Reports , a Long Term Environmental Management Plan, following completion of a Site Audit and a Back-up Generator Log be required for the Mars Rd data centre?

Residents at 150 Epping Road are reportedly already experiencing impacts from nearby data centre operations. What consultation has been undertaken with these residents and how have their lived experiences informed this proposal?

Air pollution and diesel generator emissions – the Air Quality Impact Assessment acknowledges NOx emissions could exceed Clean Air Regulation 2022 limits by 5–10 times under emergency operation exemptions. How can these emission levels be considered acceptable given the close proximity to homes, parks and a primary school?

The application lacks a cumulative impact assessment and treats the proposal in isolation. Why has no cumulative air quality and noise study been undertaken considering the concentration of existing and proposed data centres within Lane Cove West, including simultaneous diesel generator testing scenarios?

Loss of approximately 90 trees, green space and wildlife habitat, including impacts to the endangered Powerful Owl and Large Pied Bat. What independent ecological studies have been undertaken regarding habitat fragmentation and species displacement, and what specific biodiversity offsets are proposed?

Water and electrical infrastructure capacity remain unclear, while the facility is expected to rely on Sydney’s potable drinking water supply. What guarantees can be provided that residential water and electricity security will not be negatively impacted by this development?

The Preliminary Site Investigation acknowledges that low-density residential properties are only 16 metres from the site. Why is this proposal considered appropriate given the immediate interface with residential homes?

There are significant concerns regarding electricity and data infrastructure:
1) historical outages,
2) future outages caused by increased demand pressures, and
3) the classification of data centres as State Critical Infrastructure, potentially prioritising these facilities over residents during shortages or emergencies.

How will the developer ensure local residents are not adversely impacted by increased pressure on essential infrastructure?

Risk of pollution to the Lane Cove River has not been adequately addressed in the EIS. What measures will be implemented to prevent contaminated runoff, chemical spills, firewater discharge or thermal pollution entering the river system?

The proposal is located approximately 16 metres from the nearest home and 160 metres from Lane Cove West Public School. Why is this considered an appropriate buffer distance for a large-scale industrial data centre operating continuously?



The proposed building height is 28.3 metres, significantly exceeding the 18-metre height control. What is the planning justification for such a substantial variation and how is it considered compatible with the surrounding area?

Fire and Rescue NSW (FRNSW) has raised concerns regarding lithium-ion battery risks, data centre fires and emergency response preparedness. What detailed emergency management and evacuation plans will be implemented and publicly disclosed?

Reports suggest there is currently limited oversight or enforcement relating to operational compliance issues at the existing AirTrunk facility. What independent compliance monitoring, auditing and enforcement mechanisms will apply to this development?

There appears to have been inadequate community consultation, with many local residents reportedly not receiving notification regarding community information sessions or submission opportunities. What steps were taken to ensure all affected residents were properly informed and consulted?

I am writing as a local resident to lodge my strong and unequivocal objection to the proposed data centre development on Mars Road. The proposal is fundamentally incompatible with the residential, educational, environmental and recreational character of this part of Lane Cove West, and I respectfully urge the assessing authority to refuse the application.
My objection is based on the grounds set out below. Each, on its own, raises serious concerns. Taken together, they demonstrate that this site is the wrong location for a development of this nature, scale and intensity.
1. Unacceptable noise impacts on a residential and school environment
Data centres are not passive buildings. They run continuously, twenty-four hours a day, every day of the year. The cooling plant, chillers, air-handling units, transformers and back-up generators that support such facilities generate persistent low-frequency noise that is well documented to disrupt sleep, concentration and amenity in nearby homes.
Mars Road sits in close proximity to established residential dwellings and to a local primary school. The constant hum of industrial-scale cooling, periodic generator load testing, and ongoing HVAC operation will fundamentally alter the acoustic character of this neighbourhood. Even with engineering controls, attenuation and acoustic enclosures, the cumulative effect of round-the-clock noise emission cannot be reconciled with quiet enjoyment of homes or with a learning environment for young children. Once a noise source of this nature is approved, it is virtually impossible to remove. Residents and school children should not be asked to live with that outcome in perpetuity.
2. Excessive consumption of water and electricity
Data centres are among the most resource-intensive forms of infrastructure ever constructed. Even mid-sized facilities can consume many millions of litres of water each year for evaporative cooling, and draw electricity at a scale equivalent to thousands of households. At a time when New South Wales continues to face pressure on water security and on the reliability and affordability of the electricity grid, and when households and businesses are routinely asked to reduce their own consumption, it is neither appropriate nor equitable to approve a single private development that will draw down these shared public resources at industrial scale.
The community will bear the consequences in the form of strained utilities, and reduced reliability — while the operator alone captures the commercial benefit. Generic assurances about renewable energy procurement, power-usage-effectiveness targets or water recycling do not adequately offset the sheer scale of consumption that a facility of this kind represents. The local distribution network and water mains were never designed for this load, and upgrading them imposes further cost, disruption and risk on the surrounding community.
3. Destruction of mature trees and loss of native wildlife habitat
The Mars Road site supports established trees and remnant natural habitat that have taken many decades to mature. Among the most concerning impacts of this proposal is the threat it poses to native owl populations that are known to roost and forage in this area. Owls are highly sensitive to habitat disturbance, light spill and noise. They are also widely recognised as indicator species — their decline signals broader deterioration in ecosystem health.
Once mature, hollow-bearing trees are cleared and the surrounding habitat fragmented, native owls do not simply relocate. They disappear from the area.
Lane Cove and its surrounding bushland corridors are part of a fragile urban ecology that has already been substantially eroded over many decades. We cannot afford another major clearance, particularly one driven by an industrial use that has no functional connection to the natural values of the area and could equally be located on a more appropriate site.
4. Inappropriate proximity to homes and a primary school
Data centres are heavy industrial facilities. They properly belong in dedicated industrial precincts with appropriate buffer distances from sensitive uses. The Mars Road location places this facility in unacceptable proximity to residential homes (within 50 meters) and to a local primary school.
Children are particularly vulnerable to environmental stressors, including chronic noise exposure, diesel exhaust from generator testing and emergency operation, and the visual and amenity impacts of large industrial structures and security infrastructure. Construction itself will subject residents and students to many months — more realistically, years — of dust, vibration, heavy vehicle movements, road closures and disruption. Once operational, the facility will impose a permanent industrial presence on the daily lives of children and families. This is precisely the kind of land-use conflict that the planning system exists to prevent.
5. No meaningful local employment benefit
A common justification offered for industrial developments of this kind is local employment creation. Data centres do not deliver this benefit. Once construction is complete, ongoing operational staffing typically numbers only in the low tens of personnel, most of whom are specialist technicians who are not necessarily drawn from the local community. There are no shopfronts, no customer-facing activity, no broader trade catchment created by the use.
By contrast, the same site, used for purposes more appropriate to its location — residential, mixed-use, recreational, light commercial, or simply retained as natural habitat — would generate far greater long-term social, economic and amenity value for Lane Cove. The community is being asked to absorb every disadvantage of this development — noise, environmental loss, congestion, traffic, power and water demand — in exchange for almost nothing in return. That is not a fair or reasonable bargain to ask of any neighbourhood.
6. Cumulative construction impact — the community has already had enough
The community has already endured more than twelve months of road works associated with another nearby data centre development, and those works show no sign of imminent completion. Residents face daily delays, detours, frustration and disruption simply to navigate their own neighbourhood. Buses are delayed. School drop-off and pick-up routines have been thrown into disarray. Local businesses have lost trade. Emergency vehicle access has been compromised at times.
Approving a second data centre on Mars Road will compound these impacts substantially. Facilities of this kind require extensive trenching for fibre optic cabling and high-voltage power feeds, road reinstatement works, sustained heavy construction traffic, and ongoing service vehicle movements once operational. The notion that the community should simply absorb another multi-year construction program on top of one that has not yet finished is unreasonable on its face. The cumulative effect of two major data centre projects in the same small area, back-to-back, has not been properly considered or assessed.
7. Traffic and safety concerns — Blackman Park is already at capacity
The area already operates under significant traffic pressure, particularly on weekends, evenings and during organised sporting events at Blackman Park. Blackman Park is one of the most heavily used recreational facilities in the Lane Cove area, drawing junior and senior sporting participants, families, dog walkers and visitors throughout the year. Parking, pedestrian movement and traffic flow on and around Mars Road are already strained at peak times.
Adding a major industrial development — with its associated construction traffic, employee vehicles, contractor and service vehicles, deliveries, security patrols and heavy plant movements — will produce unacceptable congestion and safety risks. Of greatest concern is the safety of children and pedestrians moving to and from the sporting fields, the school and surrounding homes. A serious incident on this stretch of road would be entirely foreseeable, and entirely preventable, by refusing this application.
8. Conclusion and request
The Mars Road site is the wrong location for this development. It is too close to homes. It is too close to a primary school. It is too close to a heavily used recreational facility. It will harm a sensitive natural environment that supports native owls and other wildlife. It will consume water and electricity at industrial scale during a period of constrained supply. It will deliver no meaningful local employment in return. And it will compound disruption from an existing data centre development that has already taxed the community’s patience to the limit.
I respectfully but firmly urge Council, and any other assessing authority involved, to refuse this application in its entirety. The proposal is fundamentally incompatible with the residential, educational, recreational and environmental character of the area, and no package of conditions or mitigation measures can adequately address the issues raised above.
I would be grateful if my objection could be formally recorded and considered as part of the assessment of this application, and I would welcome the opportunity to address Council in person should a public hearing or meeting be convened in relation to this matter.

I write as a local resident to lodge my strong objection to the proposed data centre development on Mars Road. The site is fundamentally unsuitable for a heavy industrial facility of this kind, and I respectfully urge the assessing authority to refuse the application.
1. Unacceptable proximity to residential homes
The proposed facility would sit as close as 50 metres from existing homes. That distance is wholly inadequate for a heavy industrial use that operates twenty-four hours a day, every day of the year. Data centres belong in dedicated industrial precincts with substantial buffer zones — not against the back fences of family homes.
The impact on the nearest residents is permanent and irreversible. They cannot move their houses, and they cannot move the data centre once it is built. Property values will be directly and lastingly affected, and the use and enjoyment of backyards, bedrooms and outdoor spaces will be diminished from the day the facility is energised. The site is also in close proximity to the local primary school, which compounds the problem — children will be exposed throughout their school day to a heavy industrial neighbour at a stage of life when they are most sensitive to environmental stressors. This single fact — 50 metres to homes, with a primary school next door — should on its own be sufficient grounds to refuse the application.
2. Unacceptable noise impacts
Data centres generate persistent, low-frequency noise from chillers, cooling towers, air-handling units, transformers and back-up generators. That noise does not stop. It runs through the night, through weekends, and through school holidays.
At 50 metres, even well-engineered acoustic treatment cannot reduce that noise to a level consistent with quiet enjoyment of a home or with a learning environment for nearby primary school children. Low-frequency noise in particular is notoriously difficult to attenuate; it travels further, penetrates building fabric more easily, and is widely documented to disturb sleep, impair concentration and elevate stress over the long term. Periodic generator load testing — typically a regulatory requirement — and emergency operation during grid outages make the problem materially worse, often at the worst possible times. Once a 24/7 industrial noise source of this kind is approved and built, it is virtually impossible to remove or meaningfully reduce. Residents and children should not be asked to live with that outcome in perpetuity, particularly when more appropriate sites exist elsewhere.
3. Cumulative construction impact
The community has already endured more than twelve months of road works associated with another nearby data centre, and those works show no sign of imminent completion. Approving a second data centre on Mars Road will compound this disruption substantially — more trenching for fibre and high-voltage power, more road reinstatement, sustained heavy construction traffic, and ongoing service vehicle movements once operational. Asking residents to absorb another multi-year construction program on top of one that has not yet finished is unreasonable.
4. Traffic, Blackman Park and child safety
Mars Road is already busy, particularly on weekends and during organised sport at Blackman Park. The park is one of the most heavily used recreational facilities in the area, drawing junior and senior sport, families and visitors throughout the year. Adding construction traffic, employee vehicles, contractors, deliveries and heavy plant movements will produce unacceptable congestion and real safety risks for children and pedestrians moving to and from the sporting fields and the local primary school.
5. Destruction of trees and native owl habitat
The site supports established trees and remnant habitat that have taken decades to mature, including habitat for native owls that roost and forage in the area. Owls are highly sensitive to habitat loss, light spill and noise, and they do not relocate when their habitat is cleared — they disappear. Replacement plantings cannot meaningfully compensate for the loss of mature canopy and tree hollows.
6. Excessive water and power consumption
Data centres consume water and electricity at industrial scale — many millions of litres of water per year and power equivalent to thousands of households. At a time when households are routinely asked to reduce consumption, it is neither appropriate nor equitable to approve a single private development that draws down these shared resources at this scale.
7. No meaningful local employment
Operational data centres typically employ only a handful of specialist technicians, who are not necessarily drawn from the local community. The community is being asked to absorb every disadvantage of this development in exchange for almost no local employment benefit.
Conclusion
The Mars Road site is the wrong location for this development. It is as close as 50 metres to homes, next to a primary school, beside Blackman Park, on top of habitat that supports native wildlife, and adjacent to a community already worn down by twelve months of unfinished road works from the last data centre. I respectfully but firmly urge Council to refuse this application in its entirety, and would welcome the opportunity to address Council in person should a public hearing be convened.

SUBMISSION TO THE PLANNING AUTHORITY
Subject: Formal Objection to Proposed Data Centre Development in Mars Road Lane Cove West
Submitted by: Paula Davis
Postcode:2066
Date:3rd May 2026
Dear Planning Committee,
I am writing to you today not as an activist, but as a resident who has called Lane Cove home for 33 years. I chose this suburb for its quiet streets, its proximity to Blackman's Park, and the sense of community that defines our neighbourhood. It is with deep regret that I must formally object to the proposal to construct five large-scale data centres in Lane Cove West, particularly those sites bordering Johnston Crescent and the park.
Having lived here over a quarter of a century, I have watched our community evolve. But this proposal does not represent evolution; it represents an industrial takeover of a residential sanctuary. The scale of this development is fundamentally incompatible with the character of our area, and the risks it poses to our daily lives are unacceptable.
1. The Destruction of Our Quiet Lifestyle
I bought my home because I love Lane Cove. The proposal places these massive industrial facilities within 50 metres of homes and a mere 150 metres from a junior school. This is not a minor inconvenience; it is a fundamental alteration of our living environment.
The development relies on emergency diesel generators, which are standard practice but rarely discussed in terms of their daily impact. These units are placed within metres of residences.
• Noise: They are the loudest equipment on site, requiring frequent testing (30 minutes at 30% load) and running for extended periods during grid failures.
• Cumulative Impact: With five facilities proposed, we are looking at five sets of generators potentially roaring to life simultaneously.
• The Reality: Imagine a heatwave causing a grid failure. Suddenly, the quiet of our street is replaced by the sustained roar of industrial machinery, just blocks from a school playground.
For a resident of 33 years, the prospect of this constant industrial noise is a deal-breaker. It devalues our properties and destroys the amenity we paid for.
MANDATORY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT:
• Can the Data Centre company provide a detailed acoustic model showing the decibel levels at the nearest residential boundary (50m) during a simultaneous emergency run of generators?
• If we are forced to have these installations, can the Data Centre company guarantee in writing that no generator testing will occur between 8:00 PM and 8:00 AM, and that emergency runs exceeding 4 hours will trigger an automatic notification to the Council and immediate neighbours?

2. The Water Paradox in a Drought-Prone Region
We have lived through the Millennium Drought and the bushfires. We know the value of water. Yet, this proposal ignores the harsh reality of our climate.
A single data centre consumes between 1.1 and 1.9 million litres of potable water daily. Five centres would consume 5.5 to 9.5 million litres every day.
• To put this in perspective: The average Lane Cove household uses about 480 litres a day.
• One data centre uses as much water as 2,000 to 4,000 families every day.
• Five centres would consume a volume of water equivalent to nearly a quarter of our entire municipal population.
It is indefensible to approve a development that prioritizes the cooling of servers over the hydration of our community, our gardens, and our local environment, especially during drought conditions when restrictions are already in place.
MANDATORY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT:
• Can the Data Centre company confirm whether the proposed water intake will be classified as "essential" during Stage 3 or Stage 4 water restrictions, and if so, on what legal or statutory basis?
• Can the Data Centre company provide a binding commitment to switch to 100% recycled or non-potable water sources within 24 months of operation, and what specific infrastructure upgrades are required to achieve this?
• Can the Data Centre company detail the exact volume of water extracted per megawatt of IT load, and demonstrate how this figure compares to the NSW Government's "Water Efficiency Guidelines" for industrial users?
3. Safety and the "Single Point of Failure"
From a security standpoint, clustering five high-value data centres in one small pocket of Lane Cove West is a dangerous oversight. In an era of climate volatility and geopolitical instability, critical infrastructure should be dispersed, not concentrated.
By placing five facilities within a few hundred metres of each other, we create a single point of catastrophic failure. A single wildfire, a localized industrial accident, or a coordinated attack could knock out a significant portion of the state's digital infrastructure at once. Placing such critical assets next to homes and schools is a security liability, not a prudent planning decision. We are inviting disaster into the heart of a family suburb.
MANDATORY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT:
• Can the Data Centre company provide an independent security risk assessment that specifically evaluates the "cluster risk" of five facilities within a 1000-metre radius?
• Can the Data Centre company confirm whether the NSW Government has been consulted on the placement of this critical infrastructure within 150 metres of a junior school, and if so, what specific safety protocols were mandated?
• Can the Data Centre company outline the emergency evacuation plan for the surrounding residential area in the event of a fire or chemical spill at one of the five sites, and how this plan integrates with local fire brigade response times?
4. The Slippery Slope of Industrialisation
Lane Cove West is already seeing a pattern of systematic industrialisation. With five centres now built, approved, or in planning, we are witnessing the erosion of our community character. This is not "organic growth"; it is the gradual conversion of a residential fringe into a sacrifice zone for computational needs.
I have watched this happen slowly, and now the final piece is being proposed. If this is approved, the precedent is set. The quiet streets I have enjoyed for 33 years will be gone, replaced by the hum of servers and the smell of diesel.
MANDATORY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT:
• Can the Data Centre company explain how this development aligns with the Lane Cove Council's Local Environmental Plan (LEP) regarding the protection of residential character and the separation of industrial and residential zones?
• Can the Data Centre company provide a cumulative impact assessment that considers the visual, noise, and traffic effects of all five data centres (existing and proposed) combined, rather than assessing this site in isolation?
• Can the Data Centre company confirm whether any alternative locations in industrial zones were considered and rejected, and if so, provide the justification for choosing a residential fringe over an established industrial precinct?
Conclusion
This proposal fails to balance the needs of the digital economy with the rights of the community. It ignores the water scarcity of our region, endangers the peace and safety of our children, and creates a dangerous security bottleneck.
I urge the Planning Authority to reject this application. There are alternative locations for this infrastructure that do not require us to compromise our water security, our air quality, or the safety of our schools. Lane Cove deserves better than to become a sacrifice zone.
Sincerely,
Submitted by: Paula Davis
Postcode:2066
Date:3rd May 2026

I am a local resident and parent of a 10-month-old child who will attend Lane Cove West Public School in coming years. Having reviewed the EIS prepared by Urbis on behalf of Goodman Property Services, I submit a strong objection on the following grounds.

1. PROXIMITY TO LANE COVE WEST PUBLIC SCHOOL (160m)
The school is only 160 metres from the site yet receives no dedicated health impact assessment. Three risks are unaddressed:
Diesel emissions: 49 rooftop diesel generators will be tested 122.5 hours per year, with all 49 running simultaneously during emergencies. The EIS (Section 6.8) concedes NO2 exceedances would occur during emergency scenarios. Diesel exhaust is a WHO Group 1 carcinogen. No 160m buffer is adequate when 49 generators operate at rooftop level near a primary school. The applicant relies on a regulatory exemption designed for single generators in isolated settings — not 49 clustered generators adjacent to a school.

Noise: The EIS acknowledges 24/7 operational noise from cooling and mechanical plant. Chronic noise exposure impairs children’s reading, memory and attention (WHO Environmental Noise Guidelines, 2018). No school-specific noise assessment or school-hours monitoring commitment is proposed.

Electromagnetic fields: Community consultation raised EMF concerns (Section 5.3) which the EIS does not address with any technical assessment. An 81MW facility with substations and dense server infrastructure demands an independent EMF assessment as a condition of consent.

2. UNSUSTAINABLE WATER CONSUMPTION
The facility will consume approximately 510,000m3 of water annually for cooling (Section 3.8.2.2) — equivalent to the daily water use of approximately 9,000 Sydney households, every single day. No binding recycled water commitment exists. The EIS states only that “conscious selection of cooling towers will help minimise potable water consumption” — an aspiration, not a condition. Sydney Water is engaged as a stakeholder yet no Water Efficiency Agreement or recycled water target is proposed. The Department should require a binding commitment to source a minimum percentage of cooling water from recycled sources before operations commence.

3. UNJUSTIFIED HEIGHT EXCEEDANCE
The building reaches 28.3m against an 18m LEP maximum — a 57% exceedance requiring a Clause 4.6 variation. This is not minor or incidental; it is structurally driven by 49 rooftop generators. Approving this variation sets a precedent that operational requirements routinely override democratically established planning controls. It also causes overshadowing of the adjacent community nursery and C2 Environmental Conservation zoned land. The public benefit — only 26 permanent jobs from a $798M facility — does not justify the planning concession sought.

4. INADEQUATE EMPLOYMENT AND COMMUNITY BENEFIT
The $798M development will create only 26 permanent operational jobs (Section 3.1.1). The EIS does not disclose how many jobs are currently supported by the existing warehouses, making net employment impact impossible to assess. No Voluntary Planning Agreement is proposed despite the significant planning concessions sought. The Lane Cove West Industrial Area is identified as a key employment precinct in the Local Strategic Planning Statement 2020 — replacing active warehouse uses with a highly automated facility undermines this strategic objective.

5. ENVIRONMENTAL AND CONTAMINATION RISKS
Tree removal: 90 trees are proposed for removal including 7 high-value Category A trees. A replacement ratio of 1.15:1 is inadequate — mature trees take decades to replace. The biodiversity offset of only 3 credits appears disproportionately low given proximity to C2 conservation land and the Lane Cove River catchment.

Contamination: The site has documented asbestos, underground storage tanks and heavy metals. The RAP proposes in-situ containment rather than full remediation, while adding 8 new underground diesel tanks. Groundwater flows toward the Lane Cove River — a threatened ecological waterway. No contamination plume modelling is provided. Independent hydrogeological assessment and binding groundwater monitoring should be required.

6. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS NOT ADEQUATELY ASSESSED
The EIS identifies multiple nearby data centres including a 45MW facility at 1 Sirius Road (approved October 2025) and a 170MW proposal at North Ryde. Adding 81MW creates cumulative impacts on water supply, air quality, noise, diesel deliveries and the Lane Cove River corridor that are not independently assessed. An independent cumulative impact assessment of the precinct should be required before determination.

REQUESTED CONDITIONS IF CONSENT IS GRANTED
      •     Independent air quality monitoring at the school during all generator testing, with automatic shutdown protocols during school hours if exceedances occur
      •     Independent noise monitoring with enforceable school-hours limits
      •     Independent EMF assessment
      •     Binding recycled water agreement with Sydney Water (minimum 50% recycled within 3 years)
      •     Refusal or substantial reduction of the Clause 4.6 height variation
      •     Disclosure of jobs displaced from existing warehouses
      •     Voluntary Planning Agreement delivering tangible community benefits
      •     Independent hydrogeological assessment and public groundwater monitoring
      •     Independent cumulative impact assessment before determination
      •     Binding timeline for conversion of all generators to HVO or hydrogen fuel

I urge the Department to refuse this application.

Beyond the specific technical issues raised, this proposal represents an unacceptable risk to the health and wellbeing of children and the local community. A large-scale industrial facility operating 24/7 — with associated emissions, noise and infrastructure — should not be located in such close proximity to homes and a primary school.

This is not a temporary or occasional exposure. It is continuous, long-term exposure during critical developmental years for young children. The absence of a comprehensive, school-specific health assessment makes this even more concerning.

It is reasonable to ask whether decision-makers would consider this level of risk acceptable for their own children to live and attend school next to. If not, it is difficult to justify why it should be acceptable for families in this community. Planning decisions must apply a consistent and precautionary standard where children’s health is concerned.

Re Project Mars Data Centre Lane Cove West (SSD-82052708)
I am writing this submission to express serious concern regarding the proposed data centre development at 12 Mars Road in Lane Cove West and its impacts on the local community including schools and sporting clubs, riverside environment, and wildlife.
One data centre would be a danger, but planning to CO-LOCATE FIVE in close proximity amounts to environmental vandalism and represents wilful disregard to the local communities amenity by these companies, with the support of the State Government. The irony is that in 2026, LANE COVE was AGAIN voted the most liveable local government community in Australia (see attached item from LANE COVE COUNCIL WEBSITE)

The safety, and wellbeing of our community are at risk with the proposed construction of a large‑scale data centre at 12 Mars Road, Lane Cove West — in close proximity to homes, Lane Cove West Public School, and Blackman Park home to multiple sporting codes and recreational groups. While data centres are important pieces of digital infrastructure, this proposal raises significant planning, environmental, and community‑impact concerns that require careful and transparent assessment.
Data centres operate 24/7 and typically involve substantial energy and water use, heat output, mechanical plant, and diesel backup systems. I am extremely concerned that we have not been given sufficient information and consultation. How are we to understand how these elements affect surrounding residential and educational environments through noise, traffic, visual bulk, and air quality impacts?

What real scrutiny has the planning of this mega centre given to its location? — adjacent to a primary school and key community spaces including sporting facilities (ovals. gig parks, tennis clubs, scout hall, guides hall, skateboard park, children's playground, gym stations, cycle path)?? How are the potential health affects amplified by the proximity to sporting activity which should be promoting not harming health?

I am concerned that the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) currently on exhibition contains several areas where key information is incomplete, based on preliminary inputs, or deferred for later resolution. How can this be acceptable to government? What risk assessment has been undertaken? Some conclusions in the EIS rely on assumptions that have not yet been supported by finalised modelling or confirmed equipment specifications. For a project of this scale and sensitivity, the community is seeking a more robust, evidence‑based assessment before any determination is made.

3 YEARS OF CONSTRUCTION (MONDAY–SATURDAY)
The proposal involves approximately three years of construction, operating six days a week, directly alongside residential areas, the school, and Blackman Park. This is expected to result in:
Ongoing construction noise affecting families, young children, and shift workers
Disruption to learning environments at Lane Cove West Public School
Dust, vibration, and reduced air quality over an extended period
A prolonged reduction in neighbourhood amenity
Parking and traffic impacts are also a major concern. Lane Cove West already experiences significant pressure around the school and park. Construction activity is likely to increase:
Demand for worker parking
Heavy‑vehicle movements
Congestion and safety risks during school drop‑off and pick‑up
Competition for already limited residential street parking
Can these impacts be brushed over? They require clearer assessment and consideration than currently presented.
Proximity and scale - The proposed building height exceeds existing planning controls, and the setbacks to residential boundaries are limited. What consideration has been given to the scale of the centre in this location of the facility and compatibility with surrounding land uses (Sporting, school and recreational use). ?
Noise impacts - Construction noise is expected to be significant. Operational noise modelling is based on draft mechanical designs, meaning final noise levels remain uncertain. With power outages and testing requirements what are the real impacts of the Backup diesel generators and potential low‑frequency noise?
Air quality - The proposal includes diesel generator testing and potential operation during outages. What are the cumulative air‑quality impacts of multiple nearby data centres ? These have not been fully explored.
What real benchmarking has been undertaken on the Infrastructure capacity? Initially and into the future?- Sydney Water and Ausgrid have not yet confirmed service capacity for the development. Key infrastructure requirements remain unresolved in the exhibited material. As a resident of HALLAM AVE, we are concerned about the continuing disruption to our street by the contractors laying the upgraded water pipe for the data centres in the lane Cove Business Park. WE HAVE ALREADY HAD OVER 12 MONTHS OF MAJOR DISRUPTION TO LOCAL STREETS WITH INTERFLOW CONTACTORS INSTALLING A MAJOR WATER PIPELINE ALONG HALLAM AVENUM AND DOWN PAST THE SCHOOL CROSSING. This has been very disruptive and created ongoing traffic hazards that are really dangerous for the children. Many of whom walk to school. The road remains broken and patched, driveways cracked from heavy vehicles turning and machinery parked overnight. What assessment has been undertaken for the high volume water needs of the data centre? What maintenance and risk mitigations have been planed to maintain these huge "water highways" in residential streets backing protected remnant turpentine forests?
Environmental impacts - The proposal involves the removal of 90 trees, reducing natural buffers and affecting local biodiversity. Continuous lighting, heat, and activity may also influence local wildlife. PARTICULAR ATTENTION NEEDS TO BE PAID TO THE ROLE OF THE BUSH CORRIDORS TO THE RIVER AND PROTECTED REMNANT TURPENTINE FORESTS.

Visual and amenity impacts - The visual assessment relies on selected viewpoints that may not fully represent the experience of nearby residents. The scale and massing of the building could significantly alter local character.
Social and economic considerations - The EIS concludes that there will be no significant adverse impacts, but further clarity is needed on potential effects on residential amenity, property values, and community wellbeing.
Noise in particular is a critical issue. Data centre cooling systems run 24/7 and can emit a continuous hum that travels over long distances and penetrates homes. This type of low-frequency noise is not well captured by standard decibel measurements but can have meaningful impacts on both residents and wildlife, including sleep disturbance, stress, and changes in animal behaviour. There are also broader environmental concerns associated with data centres, including their extremely high energy and water demands. Global projections indicate that data centre electricity use is set to more than double by 2030. Some facilities may also consume large volumes of water daily, placing pressure on local resources. How will energy systems manage this additional demand ?
Air pollution linked to data centre energy use has also been identified as a growing concern, with research suggesting potential impacts on public health and environmental quality. What consideration has been given to these cumulative impacts in the context of an already urbanised and environmentally sensitive area such as Lane Cove.

Consultation concerns - Only a small number of community members were consulted, and the exhibition period overlaps with Easter and school holidays, limiting participation from key stakeholders.
Strategic planning context - The proposal is being assessed in isolation despite multiple data centres in the area and an active NSW Parliamentary Inquiry into data centre planning. The outcomes of that inquiry may be relevant to this assessment.
Reliance on future information -Several important elements of the proposal depend on future studies, finalised designs, or post‑approval commitments. A project of this scale should be assessed using complete and verified information.

Please feel free to contact me anytime to discuss further.

Daniel Bolger
39 Hallam Ave
Lane Cove West NSW 2066

I would like to object.
Firstly Backman Park is a critical community asset — and this project threatens it. I will try to make my points brief.
Blackman Park is not an abstract “recreation area” on a planning map. It is one of the most heavily used community spaces in Lane Cove — a place where people exercise, walk their dogs, play sport, meet friends, and decompress.
The EIS claims that visual and noise impacts on the park are “negligible.” For anyone who actually uses the park, this is simply not credible. A 28 metre tall industrial building, with diesel generators and cooling equipment on the roof, will fundamentally change the character of the park. It will feel more industrial, less natural, and far less like a place where people can relax or escape.
The Lane Cove Community Nursery is being dismissed even though it sits 15 metres from the site boundary. It is a quiet, peaceful, volunteer run space — not a “recreation area” and certainly not an appropriate location for industrial noise or diesel exhaust. The impacts of sediment that will run from the construction
Placing generators, cooling towers, and a large industrial façade directly beside it shows a lack of understanding of what this space means to the community and how sensitive it is to noise, air pollution, and visual intrusion. There has been no thought to how impacts will be increased during heat waves and generally this park has been dismissed as an area that requires no particular attention as it is just communal land. This does not make it less valuable and thus easier to abuse.
Noise impacts on young people and sensitive users are ignored
The Noise Impact Assessment repeatedly claims impacts are “negligible,” yet there is:
• No noise measurements taken inside Blackman Park
• No measurements taken at the Community Nursery
• No assessment made of how noise affects children playing sport
• No assessment made of how noise affects concentration at school
• No assessment of low frequency noise, which affects young people more acutely
• No assessment of seasonal variation, despite cooling equipment being far louder in summer and during heatwaves
• No assessment of noise during power outages, when all generators will run simultaneously
The NVIA also inflates background noise levels thereby artificially reducing the predicted impact.
As a young person who studies in quiet environments and uses the park to decompress, I know how disruptive constant mechanical noise can be. The NVIA does not reflect real world conditions.
To make this project economically viable a height variation has been requested. This also is unreasonable and unjustified. A 57% increase is not a minor variation. It is a fundamental change to the built form of the site. The tallest massing is located on the southern edge, facing Blackman Park and bushland — the most visually sensitive part of the site. The proposal report claims the exceedance is “limited to a small portion,” but the diagrams show the opposite. Further, I notice that there is no computer imaging of this viewpoint which is very convenient when you want to hide the true visual impact from the park. This is very unprofessional considering this is the side that is impacted most. The only realistic image is a stylised view from Mars Road.
Finally, if a variation of this scale is approved here, it will set a precedent that undermines the LEP and erodes community trust in the planning system. I have already read of another proposal adjacent to this one that will exceed 38 metres. This business park has height regulations for a reason. Its situation, adjacent to homes and parks mean we need to co-exist. If a data centre needs such physical mass this is not an appropriate site. Greenfield sites would be much better of which I am sure Goodman Group has many.
The engagement process for this project is fundamentally flawed.
It was designed to inform the community, which it has done to a minimal standard. This is not acceptable for a State Significant Development. Considering the livelihoods that will be permanently changed we deserve much more consultation and engagement. In fact this is a requirement. I believe Goodman have refrained from any community engagement since the EIS has come out, or any other public forum where issues could be discussed. I think this is clear evidence that they know this is not a good outcome for anyone except themselves.
The Social Impact Assessment downplays real impacts
The SIA rates almost every impact — visual, noise, environmental values, and Blackman Park amenity — as “negligible” or “low.” Given the scale of the development, this is implausible. It shows that the SIA has been written to justify the development, not give accurate social impact information which is insulting to the very community it is meant to represent. However as the community engagement clearly was so flawed, having such a limited SIA is probably not surprising. In detail, it does not consider young people like myself and the role of green space in community wellbeing. Further it ignores families and even more importantly, the cumulative impact of multiple data centres in the area. It reads as a document designed to minimise impacts rather than assess them. Particularly of note is the lack of detail in an emergency scenario, both noise and air quality when the certainly of all data centres in the area being affected by the same outage is great. We have frequent black outs in this area and that was before the great need for electricity of this proposal.
I note also that the water used is immense. I would like to see detail as to how this infrastructure will be made. I would also like more details regarding the waste water. I am interested in the chemical composition of things and I notice that there is no analysis of the waste water - both the amount and what chemicals are in it before it enters the storm water. Please provide this important information.
The Noise Impact Assessment is flawed and underestimates impacts
The NVIA fails on many accounts. It
• did not measure noise in the park or at the Nursery
• inflated background noise levels
• ignored low frequency noise
• assumed benign operating conditions
• provided generic, unenforceable mitigation measures
• failed to assess noise during heatwaves or outages
• did not consider sleep disturbance for nearby residents
These omissions materially undermine the credibility of the assessment. For me personally, I am extremely concerned with the high level of sound that is considered acceptable. World Health Organization considers 30 decibels to be the highest for sleep and this is exceeded. This is a very quiet area at night and to think that putting a data centre that will run 24/7 for however many decades is both crazy and unfair to the people that live here. I will probably have to move from the area as I am very sensitive to noise. Why should I have to move because of one company who wishes to cash in on the new big thing.

Protecting our future means protecting our green spaces
As a young person, I care deeply about climate change, green space, clean air, and mental health. This project removes trees, increases energy use, adds heat, and introduces diesel pollution next to one of the most important community spaces in Lane Cove. It is not a sustainable development in any way or form.
Blackman Park is not an industrial buffer zone. It is a vital part of our social, environmental, and recreational fabric. Once damaged, it cannot be restored.
This project, in its current form, will significantly and unnecessarily harm the social, environmental, and recreational values of the area. It is not compatible with the surrounding community, and the assessments provided do not adequately reflect real impacts.
I respectfully request that the Department reject the proposal.

Furthermore, I think it is time for NSW Planning to review their planning legislation around industrial land and recognise that there is some industrial land that is simply not suitable or sustainable for data centres. Finally, the NSW government need to think clearly as to what the economic benefits are. I hear a lot of motherhood statements that are meaningless. Sovereignty is one, often quoted but in this case, as the tenants are not confirmed, who know who will use the space. As my friends are being replaced by AI, I only see a net job loss for a large corporate profit. I see construction constraints as workers are being diverted away from housing to data centres. We need housing built, not data centres. The most interesting one, that we get better digital benefits by having a local data centre is frankly laughable. As I struggle to get good internet connection, despite a data centre around the corner I fail to see where this benefit is. These local data centres are mission critical, so who gets prioritised access to all my essential services? Definitely not me. The government are being duped and the net loss, beyond short term construction, is incalculable.

As detailed fully in the attached document, I object to the project on the following grounds:

1. Permanent State
The proposed data centre will cause unacceptable long‑term impacts on residential amenity, the environment, and community assets and is incompatible with its surrounding context.

1.1 Noise
The EIS noise assessment is indicative and unreliable, and real‑world evidence from the existing AirTrunk DC demonstrates that operational noise will significantly exceed acceptable residential thresholds, causing unacceptable loss of amenity.

1.2 Height
The proposal’s excessive height breaches Lane Cove LEP controls and results in unreasonable visual dominance, overshading, and adverse impacts on bushland and public open space.

1.3 Visual Impact
The development represents an abrupt and inappropriate transition from residential and environmental land uses to heavy industry, with insufficient design measures to mitigate its bulk, scale, and visual dominance.

1.4 Impact on the Community Nursery
The proposal inadequately addresses the significant risks posed to the Lane Cove Community Nursery from noise, heat, shading, dust, and proximity of infrastructure, threatening the viability of this important community asset.

1.5 Cumulative Impact
The EIS fails to assess the cumulative impacts of multiple existing and proposed data centres in the Lane Cove West area, despite this representing a material and unacceptable change in character and amenity.

1.6 Removal of Trees
The removal of 90 trees, including mature specimens adjoining bushland and Blackman Park, will result in unacceptable environmental, visual, and habitat impacts that cannot be adequately mitigated.

1.7 Housing
Approving a hyperscale data centre on land immediately adjacent to housing, schools, parks, and transport will permanently prevent future residential opportunities with minimal community benefit.

1.8 Approval Ahead of Policy Determination
The application should not be determined while a NSW Parliamentary Inquiry and active policy reform process into data centres is underway, as approval would be premature and contrary to good planning governance.

2. Temporary State
The extended construction phase will impose severe and prolonged impacts on residents, schools, parks, and local streets that are unacceptable given the site’s proximity to sensitive receptors.

2.1 Noise
Predicted construction noise exceedances of up to 31 dB above background levels over more than three years will cause unacceptable disruption to residents, Lane Cove West Public School, and Blackman Park.

2.2 Installation of New Service Connections (Water)
The EIS fails to identify water servicing requirements, and further utility works would replicate recent prolonged noise and traffic disruption on local streets, rendering construction impacts inadequately assessed and unacceptable

SUBMISSION TO THE PLANNING AUTHORITY
Subject: Urgent Objection to Proposed Data Centre Development – Lane Cove West
Submitted by: Sally Edington
Lane Cove Resident
3rd May 2066

Dear Planning Committee,
I have called Lane Cove home for 25 years. I have watched our community grow, evolve, and thrive. I have raised my children here, and now I watch my grandchildren play in the same parks. I have always believed that our local council protects the unique character of our suburb and prioritizes the health of our families over corporate profit.
Today, I am forced to question that belief.
The proposal to construct up to five massive data centres in Lane Cove West is not "progress." It is a betrayal of our community's future. It is a project driven by the greed of billionaires and global tech giants who view our neighbourhood not as a home, but as a disposable resource for their profiteering. They seek to extract our water, pollute our air, and displace our local jobs, all while hiding behind the label of "digital infrastructure."
I object to this development on the grounds of health, environmental hypocrisy, and economic injustice.
1. A Betrayal of Our Children's Health
My greatest fear is not for my property value, but for the lungs of my grandchildren and the children at the junior school located just 150 metres from the proposed site.
This development places emergency diesel generators within metres of homes. These are not quiet machines. They are the loudest equipment on site, emitting particulate matter and nitrogen oxides.
• The Risk: During the frequent heatwaves we now face, the grid will fail, and these generators will roar to life.
• The Reality: Imagine a classroom of 7-year-olds breathing in diesel fumes because a server farm 150 metres away needed backup power.
• The Hypocrisy: We are told these are "green" facilities. Yet, the backup reality is a cluster of five massive diesel engines in a residential pocket. This is not sustainability; it is a health hazard disguised as technology.
MANDATORY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT:
• Can the Data Centre company provide an independent health impact assessment specifically modeling the exposure of children at the nearby junior school to diesel particulate matter (PM2.5) during simultaneous generator operations?
• Can the Data Centre company guarantee in writing that no generator testing will occur during school hours (8:00 AM – 3:00 PM) and that emergency runs exceeding 2 hours will trigger an immediate health alert to the Department of Health?
• Can the Data Centre company explain why they have chosen a location adjacent to homes, schools and sports facitities for diesel-dependent infrastructure when industrial zones exist that are far removed from schools and playgrounds?
2. The Water Theft: Profiteering Over People
We have lived through the Millennium Drought. We know that water is life. Yet, this proposal treats our water as an infinite commodity for corporate cooling.
A single data centre consumes 1.1 to 1.9 million litres of potable water daily. five centres would drain 5.5 to 9.5 million litres every day.
• The Math: One data centre uses as much water as 2,000 to 4,000 families.
• The Impact: five centres would consume water equivalent to a quarter of the residential population of Lane Cove.
• The Injustice: While families face restrictions and our gardens die, these facilities will continue to guzzle treated drinking water to keep servers cool. This is not development; it is resource theft. It is the prioritization of billionaire profits over the basic human right to water.
MANDATORY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT:
• Can the Data Centre company confirm whether their water intake will be legally exempt from Stage 3 or Stage 4 drought restrictions, and if so, on what statutory basis?
• Can the Data Centre company provide a binding, legally enforceable commitment to transition to 100% non-potable or recycled water within 24 months of operation?
• Can the Data Centre company detail the exact cost of the water they will consume annually, and demonstrate how this cost is justified against the social cost of water scarcity for local residents?
3. Economic Displacement: The Net Job Loss Myth
We are told this development will bring "jobs." This is a lie.
The proposal involves displacing existing, productive industry on Johnston Crescent. These are local businesses employing local people. In their place, we get highly automated data centres that employ a handful of technicians, not the hundreds of workers currently in the industrial estate.
• The Reality: This is not job creation; it is job destruction. It is the replacement of a diverse local economy with a monolithic, automated enclave.
• The Profit Motive: The developers are not here to support Lane Cove. They are here to maximize shareholder value by exploiting cheap land and ignoring the social fabric of the community. They are exporting our wealth and importing pollution.
MANDATORY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT:
• Can the Data Centre company provide a detailed employment impact analysis comparing the number of jobs currently held by potentially displaced businesses on Johnston Crescent versus the number of permanent jobs created by the data centres?
• Can the Data Centre company confirm whether they have consulted with the owners and employees of the businesses currently operating on Johnston Crescent regarding the displacement?
• Can the Data Centre company explain how this development aligns with the Council's economic strategy to support local small business and industrial diversity, rather than replacing it with automated infrastructure?
4. The Security of Our Community
Clustering five high-value assets in one small pocket of Lane Cove West is a security nightmare. It creates a single point of catastrophic failure.
• The Risk: A single wildfire, a coordinated attack, or an industrial accident could knock out a significant portion of the state's digital infrastructure.
• The Liability: Placing critical national infrastructure within 50 metres of homes and 150 metres of a school is reckless. It invites disaster into our backyard.
MANDATORY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT:
• Can the Data Centre company provide an independent security risk assessment that specifically evaluates the "cluster risk" of five facilities within a 1000-metre radius?
• Can the Data Centre company outline the emergency evacuation plan for the surrounding residential area and school in the event of a fire or chemical spill at one of the five sites?
• Can the Data Centre company confirm whether the NSW Government has been consulted on the placement of this critical infrastructure so close to a school, and what specific safety protocols were mandated?
Conclusion
This proposal is a gift to billionaires and a curse to Lane Cove. It sacrifices our water, our children's health, and our local jobs for the sake of corporate profit. It is a project that future generations will look back on with shame.
I urge the Planning Authority to reject this application immediately. There are industrial zones where this infrastructure belongs. Lane Cove is a home, not a sacrifice zone.
Sincerely,
Sally Edington
Lane Cove Resident
3rd May 2066

I am writing to formally object to the proposed Project Mars Hyperscale Data Centre at 12 Mars Road, Lane Cove West (SSD 82052708). While I share the broader community’s concerns about the limited upfront analysis and lack of meaningful consultation, I would like to draw your attention specifically to the significant physical and mental health risks that have not been adequately assessed or addressed.

1. Physical Health Impacts — Respiratory Risk and Air Quality

My family chose Lane Cove West for its proximity to open playing fields and bushland. One member of our household suffers from asthma and chronic respiratory issues, which makes air quality a critical factor in our wellbeing.
The proposal does not demonstrate how the developer intends to protect residents with pre existing respiratory conditions from:
• Airborne pollution during demolition and construction, including dust and potential contaminants
• Toxic emissions from diesel generators, which are known to release harmful particulates and gases
• Cumulative air quality impacts from multiple hyperscale facilities operating in close proximity

To date, there has been no consultation with residents who have respiratory vulnerabilities, nor any mitigation plan tailored to their needs. This is a significant gap in the assessment and an unacceptable oversight for a project of this scale.

2. Mental Health Impacts — Noise, Vibration, and Environmental Stress

Another member of our family lives with severe mental health challenges and has been largely housebound for the past year. They are not alone — many people with mental health conditions are unable or reluctant to speak up, meaning their needs are often invisible in planning processes.
The local geography between the residential area, industrial zone, and parklands creates an amphitheatre effect, amplifying noise. Based on the information provided:
• Construction noise and vibration will be noticeable and disruptive to nearby homes
• Operational noise, including the constant hum from HVAC systems and diesel generators, is likely to disturb sleep and increase stress
• Long term exposure to low frequency noise is known to worsen anxiety, depression, and cognitive function

These impacts have not been meaningfully assessed, and no mitigation strategy has been proposed for residents with existing mental health conditions. Given the scale of this development, this lack of planning is deeply concerning.

3. Request for Developer Action
I am not opposed to progress. However, hyperscale facilities located metres from homes require a far higher standard of transparency, planning, and community protection than what has been demonstrated so far.
I am asking the developer to:
• Conduct a comprehensive health impact assessment that includes respiratory and mental health risks
• Provide clear, evidence based mitigation plans for air quality, noise, vibration, and diesel emissions
• Engage directly with residents who have pre existing health vulnerabilities
• Commit to ongoing monitoring and transparent reporting of air quality and noise levels
• Demonstrate how the project will avoid, minimise, or compensate for health impacts on the local community
Until these matters are properly addressed, the proposal cannot be considered safe or responsible.

SUBMISSION TO THE PLANNING AUTHORITY
Subject: Objection to Proposed Development – Lane Cove West (Mars Road)
Submitted by: Ruth Edington
Suburb: Lane Cove
Date: 3rd may 2026
Dear Planning Committee,
I have lived in Lane Cove since 2009. As a Pilates instructor, my work is built on the principles of balance, alignment, and the strength of the core. I see our community in the same way: a delicate ecosystem where the health of the whole depends on the integrity of every part.
The proposal by the Applicant to construct up to five data centres in Lane Cove West is a fundamental disruption of this balance. It is a project that prioritizes the profit margins of a distant corporation over the wellbeing of our residents, the sanctity of our local environment, and the financial responsibility of our ratepayers.
I object to this development on the grounds of environmental destruction, infrastructure negligence, and social injustice.
1. The Destruction of Our Living Core: Trees and Wildlife
Lane Cove is not just a collection of houses; it is a living landscape. The proposed site includes the removal of 90 mature trees. These are not saplings; they are mature trees that serve as the primary habitat for our local wildlife—birds, possums, and native insects that have called this area home for generations.
To fell these trees is to sever the roots of our local biodiversity.
• The Impact: The loss of canopy cover will increase local heat islands, degrade air quality, and destroy the nesting grounds of protected species.
• The Irony: The Applicant claims to be "green," yet their first act is to clear-cut woodland. This is not sustainability; it is ecological vandalism.
• The Nursery: Compounding this tragedy is the proximity to the Lane Cove Council Garden Nursery, located just a few metres away. This nursery is a community asset, a place where we grow our own greenery. To place a massive industrial complex next to it is to suffocate a symbol of local stewardship with the smoke of diesel generator.
MANDATORY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT:
• Can the Applicant provide a detailed arboricultural report confirming the exact species of the 90 trees to be removed and a binding, funded plan for replanting that matches the ecological value, not just the number, of the lost trees?
• Can the Applicant explain how the construction noise and vibration will impact the breeding cycles of the native wildlife currently inhabiting these trees, and what specific mitigation measures are in place?
• Can the Applicant confirm whether the proximity to the Council Garden Nursery has been assessed for potential contamination (dust, runoff) and how they will guarantee the nursery's soil and water remain unaffected?
2. Infrastructure Negligence: Who Pays for the Damage?
We have already seen the physical toll of this project. Roads in the area have been dug up to install new water mains, and the reinstatement has been poor and uneven. Cracks in the asphalt, uneven surfaces, and damaged verges are already visible.
• The Cost: Who is paying for these new pipes? The Applicant is profiting from the water extraction, but the ratepayers of Lane Cove are left with the bill for the damaged infrastructure.
• The Substation: The proposal includes a new electrical substation to be built directly in front of 10 Banksia Close, a quiet residential street. This is not just an eyesore; it is a safety hazard and a source of electromagnetic and noise pollution for families trying to enjoy their homes.
• The Precedent: This is a pattern of "dig and dump." The Applicant extracts resources and leaves the community to clean up the mess.
MANDATORY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT:
• Can the Applicant provide a full financial guarantee (bond) covering the costs of the new pipes, and substation, and the complete restoration of all roads and verges damaged during construction, including a timeline for completion and a penalty clause for delays?
• Can the Applicant explain why a high-voltage substation is being placed directly in front of a residential property (10 Banksia Close) rather than in a designated industrial zone, and what specific shielding or noise barriers are proposed?
• Can the Applicant confirm whether the Council has been consulted on the long-term maintenance responsibilities for the new water mains, and if the Applicant will be liable for any leaks or bursts that damage private property?
3. Social Justice and the "Green" Lie
This project is a stark example of social injustice. It is a development where the benefits (profits) go to a few billionaires, while the costs (pollution, noise, water theft, tree loss) are borne by the local community.
• The Hypocrisy: The Applicant touts "green" credentials while destroying our trees and relying on diesel generators.
• The Displacement: The displacement of local industry and the destruction of our natural heritage is a form of gentrification that pushes out the very people who make Lane Cove special.
• The Health Risk: For a community that values wellbeing, the introduction of industrial noise and diesel fumes is a direct attack on our physical and mental health.
MANDATORY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT:
• Can the Applicant provide an independent social impact assessment that quantifies the loss of community amenity and the degradation of mental health for residents living close to the site?
• Can the Applicant confirm whether they have actively and properly engaged with the local community groups and the Council Garden Nursery to explore alternative, less destructive methods of water cooling or power generation?
• Can the Applicant explain how this development aligns with the NSW Government's own "Biodiversity Conservation Act" and the Council's "Tree Protection Policy"?
4. The Security of Our Community
Clustering five high-value assets in one small pocket of Lane Cove West is a security nightmare. It creates a single point of catastrophic failure.
• The Risk: A single wildfire, a coordinated attack, or an industrial accident could knock out a significant portion of the state's digital infrastructure.
• The Liability: Placing critical national infrastructure within 50 metres of homes and 150 metres of a school is reckless. It invites disaster into our backyard.
MANDATORY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT:
• Can the Applicant provide an independent security risk assessment that specifically evaluates the "cluster risk" of five facilities within a 1000-metre radius?
• Can the Applicant outline the emergency evacuation plan for the surrounding residential area and school in the event of a fire or chemical spill at one of the five sites?
• Can the Applicant confirm whether the NSW Government has been consulted on the placement of this critical infrastructure so close to a school, and a childcare centre, and what specific safety protocols were mandated?
Conclusion
This proposal is a betrayal of the community we have built in Lane Cove. It sacrifices our trees, our health, and our financial security for the sake of corporate profit. It is a project that future generations will look back on with shame.
I urge the Planning Authority to reject this application immediately. There are industrial zones where this infrastructure belongs. Lane Cove is a home, not a sacrifice zone.
Sincerely,
Ruth Edington
Lane Cove
Date: 3rd may 2026

**Introduction**

This submission supports digital infrastructure development in principle but argues that planning consent for Project Mars must be conditioned upon Goodman Group procuring, developing, or directly underwriting new renewable energy generation capacity sufficient to power the facility's full 90 MW operational load. This position is consistent with national policy settings, electricity market realities, and the reasonable expectations of the community in which this facility will operate.

**The Project and Its Context**

Project Mars proposes two data centre buildings at 12 Mars Road, Lane Cove West, drawing 90 MW of electrical power continuously, equivalent to the average consumption of approximately 75,000–90,000 Australian homes. The AU$1.2 billion investment will replace existing warehouses on the former Transtech Business Park site.

Project Mars does not exist in isolation. Lane Cove West is now subject to multiple concurrent data centre proposals: two existing AirTrunk facilities, a new AirTrunk proposal at 140 MW, Project Mars at 90 MW, and a further facility proposed by Lane Cove DC Alliance at 16-20 Mars Road. Combined, these developments represent well in excess of 250 MW of continuous power demand from the same section of the Sydney electricity network. Project Mars must be assessed in that cumulative context.

**The Energy Problem**

A 90 MW data centre draws power around the clock. Unlike industrial loads with peak and off-peak cycles, data centre demand is entirely additive to the grid. Nationally, data centres consumed approximately 4 TWh of NEM electricity in 2024-25 (around 2% of grid supply). Under AEMO's Step Change scenario, that figure is projected to reach 21.4 TWh by 2034-35, approximately 9% of grid-supplied electricity.

Without commensurate investment in new renewable generation and storage, this growth trajectory will materially increase wholesale electricity prices. Published analysis estimates that data centre demand growth without corresponding clean energy investment could increase wholesale electricity prices by up to 26% in NSW by 2035. That cost will fall on all NSW electricity consumers, households, small businesses, and industries, not on data centre operators alone.

Lane Cove West's electricity network was not designed to carry the load that multiple concurrent data centres will impose. Without dedicated generation investment, the risk of supply failures during peak demand events increases for the entire precinct and surrounding customers.

**National Policy Framework**

On 23 March 2026, the Australian Government released its *Expectations of Data Centres and AI Infrastructure Developers* under the National AI Plan. The Government has stated explicitly that projects not closely aligned with these Expectations will not be prioritised in Commonwealth regulatory assessments.

The five national Expectations require data centres to: (1) prioritise Australia's national interest; (2) support Australia's energy transition; (3) use water sustainably; (4) invest in Australian skills and jobs; and (5) strengthen research and local capability.

The second Expectation is directly engaged here. The Government expects data centres to underwrite new renewable power supply, bear their full share of grid connectivity costs (so those costs are not passed to consumers), and support demand flexibility mechanisms. Granting consent for Project Mars without conditions reflecting these national Expectations would create a direct inconsistency between Commonwealth policy and the NSW planning outcome. The Department has both the authority and the responsibility to align those systems.

**Conditions Requested**

**1. Renewable Energy Obligation**
Goodman Group should be required to procure or underwrite new renewable energy generation and/or storage capacity equal to at least 100% of the facility's 90 MW contracted load on an annualised basis, through: direct ownership of a renewable generation asset; a Power Purchase Agreement with a genuinely new-build renewable project (verified as additional to the grid); a paired Battery Energy Storage System; or a credible combination. Renewable capacity must be operational within 24 months of data centre commissioning.

**2. Grid Connection Costs**
Consistent with national Expectations, Goodman Group should bear the full cost of any distribution network augmentation required to support the 90 MW load, without those costs being socialised through network tariffs or passed to other consumers. Evidence of engagement with Ausgrid should be provided prior to consent.

**3. Energy Efficiency**
The facility should be required to achieve and maintain a Power Usage Effectiveness (PUE) ratio of 1.3 or better, and achieve a minimum 5-star NABERS Energy rating within three years of operations commencing. Annual PUE and energy performance reports should be made publicly available.

**4. Water Use**
Goodman Group should be required to report annually on total water consumption and the proportion drawn from the potable supply, and to progressively transition cooling systems to recycled or non-potable water sources, with a target of at least 50% non-potable water within five years of commissioning.

**5. Cumulative Impact Assessment**
Given the concentration of data centre proposals in Lane Cove West, the Department should require a cumulative infrastructure impact assessment addressing combined electricity demand, water demand, traffic, noise, and amenity impacts across all facilities in the precinct, to be completed prior to the grant of consent.

**The Commercial Case for Renewable Conditions**

Major operators globally are already committing to renewable energy at scale. Amazon's AU$20 billion Australian data centre investment includes 11 renewable energy projects across NSW, Queensland and Victoria. A long-term off-take commitment from a 90 MW facility is commercially valuable to renewable developers and financiers, renewable conditions are an opportunity, not merely a burden. Projects not aligned with the Commonwealth's Expectations also face long-term commercial risk: reduced regulatory prioritisation, community opposition, and potential stranded asset exposure.

**Conclusion**

Project Mars represents an irreversible commitment of critical grid capacity, water resources, and land use. Its approval should be matched by an equivalent commitment to clean energy generation. Planning consent should be granted only subject to conditions requiring: 100% renewable energy underwriting; full grid cost responsibility; a 5-star NABERS Energy rating; recycled water transition; and a cumulative precinct infrastructure assessment.

A data centre that pays the true cost of the generation capacity it requires, not just its electricity bill, is a data centre that can genuinely claim social licence to operate. Project Mars should be held to that standard.

*Please see attached*