I live adjacent to the area affected by the proposal, and I am a member of several groups who donate their time to clean and care for the Cook's River. The river has been abused by industry and governments since settlement started and it is still polluted. This is a large area of over 18 hectares with beautiful trees of medium height and a long access to the riverbank which is in need of remediation. It has significant habitat for water birds and birds generally and other native marsupials/flying foxes and invertebrates, all of which will be destroyed by this development. I would hope that the council can consider this loss of biodiversity when they consider this proposal and know you will therefore be responsible for this further destruction of Sydney open space.

Residents of this area were promised additional parkland as a result of West Connex at the end of the St Peters interchange. This was never forthcoming as the land proved so contaminated that it is currently fenced off with no plans of opening it. This development at Kogarah therefore should include significant, useful, open and green spaces for local residents. To this end those responsible must conduct rigorous environmental assessments BEFORE the development starts and not try and deceive the public to avoid similar failures. To this end I would like to see included within this proposal:
1. More community consultation. I heard about this only this week with only a few days for comment. This is not transparent and does not allow sufficient time for all communities to know what is happening and have some input.
2. Appropriate environmental assessment of impact and harm to animals, birdlife and other animals as a loss of the trees and space
3. Appropriate water harvesting and generation of solar power if a data centre is to be located here - such a centre should not be taking resources from people and communities nor should we as taxpayers be expected to pay for their usage.
4. Include significant parkland (as per NSW governments (Chis Minns) promise to maintain and protect green space) including an opportunity to link with existing bike paths going to the CBD and to Botany Bay as currently these include sections on extremely busy roads which are not wide enough for bikes and pedestrians
5. Contribution by developers and government to ensure this section of the river foreshore is remediated with plantings of habitat and mangroves. This should not be a one-off exercise but an ongoing commitment and acceptance of responsibility over many years
5. Contribution by developers and governments to clean up the pollution of the river and continue to undertake activities that will add to the water quality of the river
6. Access to the river and adjacent lands and no locked gates and high fences near the river. The river was unnaturally altered for the airport
7. Consideration of flooding as this is river flood plane
8. The airport and associated industries already dwarf this area of Sydney. This development should not add to this overdevelopment in such a small space
Thank you for the opportunity to comment although this has been rushed due to a poor consultation process

Sharon Parker

I am writing to formally declare my strong objection to the State Significant Development Application (SSDA) for the Kogarah Golf Club Redevelopment (SSD-84467726). As a resident living at 908/26 Levey Street, Wolli Creek, my apartment directly faces and interfaces with the northern and eastern boundaries of the proposed development zone. 

While the initial scoping phases mooted lower building heights, the current exhibition proposal seeks an excessive envelope of up to 70 metres across five building blocks. This scale represents a severe overdevelopment of a sensitive low-lying riverside site. It will permanently degrade the liveability of surrounding residential blocks. 

The specific grounds for my objection are detailed below:
1. Excessive Height, Bulk, and Scale
The proposed building heights of up to 70 metres are entirely incompatible with the surrounding context. 
Visual Domination: A 70-metre multi-level logistics and industrial complex will completely loom over the adjacent Cooks River foreshore and the residential precinct of Wolli Creek. 
Destruction of Views: The massive vertical scale creates an unbroken wall of industrial built form that completely blocks the existing open clear views currently enjoyed by high-density residential towers along Levey Street.

2. Severe Loss of Sunlight and Overshadowing
The alignment and height of the proposed blocks will cause detrimental environmental impacts on my apartment and neighboring homes.
Overshadowing: Buildings of this magnitude will block critical natural winter sunlight from penetrating the south-facing and river-facing apartments of Wolli Creek.
Loss of Daylight: Natural daylight will be heavily restricted, forcing residents to rely more heavily on artificial lighting and heating, running completely counter to modern Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD) principles. 

3. Ecological Destruction and Impact on Wildlife
The former Kogarah Golf Club site acts as a critical green buffer zone for local urban biodiversity. 
Impact on Birds and Insects: The site supports essential local ecosystems, including native birds and insects that rely on the open vegetation and riparian corridors of the Cooks River. Stripping this green environment for vast concrete footprints will decimate these urban habitats. 
Failure to Protect Local Fauna: Introducing high-intensity, 24/7 industrial logistics and data center operations will disrupt wildlife through continuous light pollution and acoustic disturbance. 

4. Violation of Planning Intent and Zoning Expectations
The scale of this development shifts far beyond reasonable planning expectations for the precinct.
Inconsistent Evolution: The original strategic vision for Cooks Cove focused on a low-to-medium scale technology and trade park framework. Transitioning the site into a massive logistics and 70-metre data center precinct completely alters the zone's operational intensity. 
Overwhelming Footprint: The extreme density and gross floor area proposed are an abuse of the SP4 Enterprise zoning rules, prioritizing industrial yield over the residential amenity of Wolli Creek. 

Proposed Alternative Mitigations
To minimize the severe adverse impacts on local residents, I request that the Department enforces the following modifications prior to any determination:

1. Relocate Built Mass to the Airport, Cooks River, and M5 Side: The tallest building envelopes and heavy industrial functions must be pulled entirely away from Marsh Street, as this side sits too close to the high-density residential blocks along Levey Street. Instead, the heavy built mass should be relocated to the far opposite end of the site—closer to the airport side, adjacent to the Cooks River and the M5 Motorway corridor. This area is already heavily characterized by major infrastructure and will maximize the buffer distance from established residential apartments. 

2. Minimize the Overall Footprint: The total building footprints and site coverage must be heavily restricted to preserve more contiguous green open spaces, allowing local birds, insects, and natural ecosystems to survive.

3. Enforce Strict Height Reductions: Scale back the maximum permissible height from 70 metres closer to the originally discussed baselines to ensure the development does not break the skyline or block daylight to Wolli Creek towers. 

Thank you for considering the serious concerns of the local community. I urge the Department to reject the concept scheme in its current oversized configuration.

I am resubmitting another individual's comments on this project, but I wholeheartedly agree with the contents of this submission, and the author gave permission for it to be reused. Please see below. I implore you to consider this carefully. The site can be developed but the Cooks river is a significant waterway and needs protecting and improved public access . No development should go ahead without significant contribution and consideration to these goals.

To whom it may concern,
I am writing regarding the proposed redevelopment of Kogarah Golf Course.
As someone who values the Cooks River, I recognise this is a significant opportunity for Sydney. I am not opposed to redevelopment of the site. However, I believe a project of this scale should leave the Cooks River healthier than it found it.
This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to demonstrate that economic development and environmental restoration can go hand in hand.
I encourage the Department to strengthen the proposal by including the following:
1. A meaningful contribution towards restoring the Cooks River
At approximately $2.9 billion, this is one of the largest developments proposed on the Cooks River.
Many major developments contribute towards local community infrastructure. A development of this scale should include a dedicated contribution towards restoring and enhancing the health of the Cooks River.
I encourage the establishment of a Cooks River Legacy Fund, supported through a meaningful developer contribution, to invest in long-term improvements to the river.
Such a fund could support initiatives including:
● Establishing a Cooks River Keeper or similar stewardship organisation to coordinate restoration and long-term management.
● Regular intensive river clean-up and maintenance programs.
● Removing ageing sheet piling with naturalised riverbanks.
● Restoration of saltmarsh, mangroves and other important habitats.
● Water quality improvement projects and stormwater treatment.
● Improved walking, cycling and paddling access.
● Community education and environmental monitoring.
This development should leave a positive environmental legacy for future generations.
2. A minimum 40 metre riparian corridor
A continuous minimum 40 metre riparian corridor should be provided along the full river frontage.
This would improve biodiversity, strengthen climate resilience, provide greater flood protection, improve water quality and create a far more attractive public waterfront.
3. Proper naturalisation of the river edge
The river should not be treated as the back boundary of an industrial development.
The development should include a commitment to naturalise the riverbank, replacing hard engineered edges with vegetation and habitat wherever feasible, while improving public access and ecological health.
4. Deliver public benefits first
Cycleways, walking paths, open space and public access to the river should be delivered early in the project rather than being deferred until the final stages.
Communities should begin benefiting from the development from the outset.
5. Better community and stakeholder engagement
I was surprised to learn that only 22 people participated in the stakeholder engagement sessions for a project of this scale.
The Cooks River catchment is home to hundreds of thousands of people and is used every day by walkers, cyclists, paddlers, birdwatchers, anglers and local families.
The next stages of planning should include more meaningful and ongoing engagement with the community, Traditional Owners, environmental organisations, recreational user groups, councils and local residents. Good engagement should continue throughout the detailed design and delivery of the project, not finish once the concept is approved.
6. Design excellence
Finally, I encourage the Department to ensure the development reflects the importance of its riverfront location through:
● High-quality architecture and urban design.
● Increased tree canopy.
● Buildings that address and celebrate the river rather than turning their backs on it.
● Active public spaces along the waterfront.
● Safe and attractive walking and cycling connections.
● Opportunities for people to access and enjoy the river.
Conclusion
Major developments should leave the places they touch better than they found them.
This proposal has the potential to become a benchmark for river-sensitive urban development in Sydney. I encourage the Department to strengthen the proposal so that it delivers lasting environmental, recreational and community benefits alongside economic development.
Thank you for considering my submission.

The River Canoe Club of NSW objects to the proposed Kogarah Golf Club redevelopment in its current form and asks that it be refused.

The River Canoe Club has been based on the Cooks River since 1955. Our members paddle, train, volunteer and gather along the river throughout the year. We know this waterway closely, not only as a place for recreation, but as a living blue green corridor that supports biodiversity, public access, community connection and environmental recovery in a heavily urbanised part of Sydney.

Our primary concern is the impact of the proposal on the Cooks River, the natural environment and the community’s relationship with the river.

This is a $2.9 billion development along a large foreshore of the Cooks River, with five development blocks up to 70 metres tall amd bulky. It is proposing an industrial wall shadowing the river rather than opening it for the community to enjoy. A proposal of this scale should repair the Cooks River, not entrench past harm.

The Cooks River has already been significantly affected by decades of urban development, pollution, stormwater runoff and loss of natural habitat. That is precisely why this site deserves stronger protection and restoration. The river should be treated as a public and environmental asset worth investing in, not as an industrial edge condition or afterthought.

We are concerned that the planning material appears to treat this stretch of the Cooks River as being of low environmental or public value. That view fundamentally misunderstands the role of the river as one of southern Sydney’s most important blue green corridors, with significant potential for ecological restoration, recreation and community connection.

Blue green corridors such as the Cooks River are essential community assets. They provide habitat, shade, cooling, flood mitigation, active transport links, public recreation and places where people can connect with nature and each other. As Sydney becomes denser and hotter, these spaces become more important, not less.

This proposal also risks cutting across the substantial work already being undertaken by local councils, the Cooks River Alliance, Sydney Water, community organisations and volunteers to restore the health of the Cooks River.

The River Canoe Club sees every week how much the community values this river. Through Paddle Against Plastic, the monthly Mullets river clean ups, the Cooks River Classic and other community events, local people regularly give their time and energy to care for and enjoy the river. These activities demonstrate that the Cooks River is not a neglected backwater. It is a valued public place, an environmental corridor and a community asset that many people are working hard to restore.

We are particularly concerned by the apparent lack of meaningful stakeholder engagement with river users and community groups.

The proposal appears to rely on two community drop in sessions and a survey, with only 22 people participating. That is plainly inadequate for a $2.9 billion State Significant Development with 47 EIS attachments, five development blocks up to 70 metres, major flood and earthworks, active transport impacts, possible data centre uses and long term impacts on the Cooks River.

The Cooks River is used by residents, paddlers, cyclists, walkers, runners, sporting clubs, environmental volunteers, schools and community groups. The River Canoe Club is directly affected by changes to river access, water quality, construction impacts, safety, amenity and foreshore design. Other local groups and river users are also clearly affected.

A preliminary scan suggests 30 to 40 sporting, recreation, paddling, cycling, walking, environmental and community groups use the Cooks River corridor or adjoining open spaces. It is unacceptable if these groups were not identified and directly engaged.

The engagement failure undermines the evidence base for the Social Impact Assessment and the Environmental Impact Statement. If obvious river users, recreation groups, environmental volunteers and community organisations were not properly identified, the social and environmental impacts have not been properly understood.

The applicant should be required to publish who was identified, who was invited, how many people participated, what issues were raised, what changed as a result, and what remains unresolved.

Before any determination, the Department should require revised stakeholder engagement and a revised Social Impact Assessment. Engagement should include affected residents, river users, recreation groups, environmental organisations, schools, Traditional Custodian and Aboriginal organisations, Cooks River Alliance, Bayside Council and local communities along the Cooks River catchment.

If the proposal is not refused, the River Canoe Club believes it must be substantially redesigned and subject to strong conditions that reflect the value of the Cooks River as a blue green corridor, not simply as the edge of an industrial estate. At a minimum, any approval should require:

A 5% developer contribution dedicated to the rehabilitation, restoration and long-term management of the Cooks River.
This should support riparian restoration, water quality improvements, stormwater treatment, litter prevention, habitat creation, monitoring, maintenance and community stewardship.
A minimum 100 metre riparian corridor from the high water mark along the full length of the river frontage. This should be treated as an absolute minimum for this riverfront site and should incorporate climate resilience measures, including planning for tidal inundation, sea level rise, flooding and future ecological adaptation.
A fully naturalised riverbank along the development frontage. The proposal should move beyond cosmetic landscaping and deliver genuine riverbank restoration, including habitat protection, mangrove and saltmarsh protection, fish habitat improvements and measures to respond to future tidal impacts.
Reorientation of Pemulwuy Park and public open space towards the riverfront. Public space should connect meaningfully with the Cooks River and the wider riparian corridor, rather than being separated from it by built form, roads or back-of-house industrial uses.
Early delivery of public access, open space, active transport and river access infrastructure. Foreshore paths, cycleways, open space, shade, seating, lighting, landscaping, riverfront amenity and safe launch infrastructure, such as a pontoon for kayaks and other small craft, should be delivered early and not deferred to final occupation or the last stages of development.
Independent peer review of flooding, stormwater, water quality, biodiversity and climate resilience impacts. Binding protections for Green and Golden Bell Frog habitat, wetlands, mangroves, saltmarsh and fish habitat, including long-term public monitoring.
Ongoing and meaningful engagement through a Community and River Corridor Reference Group or such like, with an independent chair, published minutes, a live issues register and representation from local community and river user groups.

A development of this scale should not further diminish green space, harden the river edge or miss the opportunity to improve habitat, access and amenity along the river.

Decisions made on this site will shape the river corridor for generations. The public interest should be measured in long-term river health, climate resilience, biodiversity, public access and community wellbeing, not only short-term development yield. This is a once in a generation redevelopment beside one of Sydney’s most important urban waterways. It should leave the Cooks River healthier, greener, more accessible and better protected than it is today.

In its current form, we do not believe the proposal meets that test. The River Canoe Club of NSW asks that the proposal be refused. If it is not refused, it should be substantially redesigned and subject to strong conditions that protect and restore the Cooks River.

I object to the proposed redevelopment of the Kogarah Golf Club site.

This proposal would replace a valuable greenfield site on the banks of the Cooks River with a large-scale data centre and set of logistics warehouses. Once this open space is lost, it cannot be replaced.
A data centre and logistics warehouse precinct is not an appropriate use for this inner-city location.

The data centre would offer little benefit to the surrounding community, and be better suited to industrial areas where its impacts can be better managed. It would also generate noise and vibrations that could affect properties within a 500m radius, which is unacceptable given the nearby high-rise residential area.

Given the site’s close proximity to the airport and nearby train stations, it would be far more suitable for a museum or other cultural facility that could attract visitors, support the local economy, and make better use of the area’s accessibility and connectivity.

A data centre on the site would also place additional pressure on the electricity grid through its very high energy demand and would require significant amounts of water for cooling. At a time when we should be improving the resilience of our essential infrastructure, this is not an appropriate location for such an intensive use. The data centre would also be too small to rely on its own roof solar to power it so it would draw from the grid and drive up prices and reduce capacity for local residents.

The logistics prencinct would also increase traffic from construction, servicing and ongoing operations, adding to congestion on already busy local roads.

There should be a 5% contribution to the Cooks River Alliance, and any buildings should be set back 40m from the Cooks River foreshore with staggered setbacks rather than a blocky built form.

If the plan goes ahead, the state government should also financially contribute to connect this precinct with Bardwell Valley and Wolli Creek by aquiring land and creating a road link extension to Gertrude Street through the Sutton dealership.

Given the site’s environmental significance next to the Cooks River, the loss of green space, the impacts on electricity and water infrastructure, the additional traffic, and the inappropriate land use for an established urban area, I urge the NSW Department of Planning to refuse this application.

Please do not build a data center in this suburb. The use of AI has staggering environmental impacts. This is also a suburb of young families and the elderly. Please do not add to the air, water, soil, and noise pollution. The heat island it will create in our increasingly hot summers will kill people, and it will overload the power grid. We are all feeling the effects of troubling economic times, and we do not need this data center to add to it. We don't need AI.

Dear Assessment Team,

I am writing as a nearby resident to formally object to the proposed Kogarah Golf Club Redevelopment (SSD-84467726).

I recognise the importance of economic development, employment opportunities and investment in New South Wales. I also acknowledge that the former golf course presents an opportunity for redevelopment. However, I believe the current proposal is excessive in its scale, building height and intensity, and would result in significant and irreversible impacts on neighbouring residents, the local environment and the character of the area.

My objection is not to redevelopment itself, but to the current design and the magnitude of the proposed development.

1. Excessive Building Height

The proposal seeks approval for buildings up to 70 metres in height, significantly exceeding the planning control of 51 metres.

The Environmental Impact Statement argues that this height variation is justified by economic benefits. However, economic benefits alone should not outweigh the substantial impacts on existing residents.

The proposal has not demonstrated that a 37% increase in height is the only reasonable planning outcome.

A development of this scale should respect surrounding residential communities rather than maximise building volume at the expense of residential amenity.

2. Significant Loss of Residential Amenity

My apartment directly overlooks the former Kogarah Golf Club.

One of the defining features of living in this location has always been the uninterrupted outlook across open green space towards the river, airport and surrounding landscape.

The proposed redevelopment would replace this open landscape with multiple large industrial and commercial buildings, fundamentally changing the experience of living in this neighbourhood.

The proposal would result in:

substantial loss of visual amenity;
loss of openness;
increased visual bulk;
reduced sense of space;
an overbearing built form directly opposite existing residential apartments.

Unlike a single building, the proposal introduces a continuous wall of large-scale structures that would dominate the skyline and permanently alter the character of the area.

3. Loss of Views

While I appreciate that planning legislation does not guarantee the preservation of private views, the existing outlook across the golf course forms an important part of the residential amenity enjoyed by many surrounding residents.

The proposal would replace expansive green open space with five large building blocks, significantly diminishing the visual quality of the neighbourhood.

This change extends beyond individual apartments and represents a broader loss of landscape character for the community.

4. Overshadowing and Solar Access

The proposal raises legitimate concerns regarding overshadowing and reduced solar access for nearby residential properties and surrounding public open spaces.

Given the proposed building heights and building bulk, I request that the Department carefully review the Shadow Impact Assessment and ensure that neighbouring residents are not subjected to unreasonable reductions in sunlight, particularly during winter months when solar access is most important.

5. Loss of Urban Green Space and Wildlife Habitat

The former Kogarah Golf Club is far more than an undeveloped site awaiting redevelopment.

For many years it has functioned as one of the largest remaining green spaces within this part of Bayside and has become an important habitat for native birds and urban wildlife.

Every day local residents observe numerous bird species feeding, nesting and resting within the mature trees, open grasslands and waterways surrounding the golf course.

The proposed removal of vegetation and replacement of this landscape with warehouses, logistics facilities, commercial buildings and a data centre would permanently eliminate much of this habitat.

Although replacement landscaping has been proposed, newly planted trees cannot replace mature ecosystems that have developed over decades.

Urban biodiversity should be regarded as an important planning consideration rather than an afterthought.

I respectfully request that greater weight be given to the ecological value of this site and the long-term environmental consequences of its redevelopment.

6. Character of the Precinct

For decades this site has contributed to the identity of the area as an open green landscape along the Cooks River.

The proposed redevelopment represents a dramatic transformation into an intensive industrial and commercial precinct.

The cumulative scale of five large building blocks is inconsistent with the existing residential environment immediately opposite the site.

While redevelopment may be appropriate, the current proposal fails to achieve an appropriate balance between economic development and preservation of neighbourhood character.

7. Better Planning Outcomes Are Possible

Economic growth and environmental protection should not be treated as mutually exclusive.

I respectfully request that the Department require the applicant to investigate alternatives that reduce impacts on surrounding residents, including:

reducing building heights, particularly for buildings closest to existing residential apartments;
reducing overall building bulk;
increasing setbacks from residential areas and the river corridor;
retaining more mature vegetation wherever possible;
strengthening biodiversity protection measures;
undertaking further assessment of visual impacts and overshadowing on neighbouring residential buildings.
Conclusion

I respectfully request that the Department carefully reconsider the current proposal.

If redevelopment is to proceed, it should be redesigned to better balance economic outcomes with residential amenity, environmental protection and the long-term character of the local community.

Development should enhance the places where people live, not diminish them.

Thank you for considering my submission.

The planning documents describe this site as being of "low importance". That assessment fundamentally undervalues one of the last remaining publicly accessible blue-green spaces in southern Sydney with genuine potential for ecological restoration.
It completely laughs in the face of the substantial work already being undertaken by the Cooks River Alliance, local councils and Sydney Water to restore the health of the Cooks River. The river is an asset worth investing in, not an industrial drain.
The Cooks River is the most polluted river in New South Wales, but that is precisely why it deserves greater protection and restoration. It provides vital habitat, walking and cycling connections, recreation, and open space for communities stretching from southern Sydney through the Inner West and beyond. Every opportunity to improve public access and river health should be embraced.
This site is also the gateway to Sydney, adjoining our international airport. Rather than creating an attractive and accessible riverfront that reflects a modern, liveable city, the current proposal would add another large-scale logistics facility and a data centre with limited visual appeal, reducing opportunities for public access and blocking the future potential for riverfront parkland.
We need to restore our rivers. Other former industrial waterfronts are being or have been transformed into thriving public spaces because governments understand that healthy waterways are essential infrastructure that improves community wellbeing, biodiversity and climate resilience. Sydney should be part of this movement.
Nobody disputes that Sydney needs logistics facilities and data centres, however why create one in the heart of a popular, growing urban location (consider the current Arncliffe Estate redevelopment at Arncliffe Estate with 806 new units being built). They are important pieces of infrastructure that support our economy. However, good planning means locating this infrastructure in appropriate places, such as the former refinery at Kurnell, while protecting irreplaceable public green space and riverfront land.
The proposed site is located within a flood-prone area and will face increasing flood risks as climate change intensifies. Decisions made today will shape Sydney for generations, and we should ensure they are based on long-term public benefit.
The Cooks River should be recognised as a protected public asset. This proposal represents one of the last opportunities to restore this stretch of river for public enjoyment and environmental recovery.
I urge the NSW Government to reconsider this proposal and place greater value on the long-term environmental, social and recreational importance of the Cooks River.

The area is a unique ecological habitat and one of the few remaining green areas in the precinct. A large development such as this would have devastating effects on habitat, wildlife and the ecosystem.
It offers no community value, increasing industrialisation of the area and reducing liveablity for residents.
It is also likely to put significant pressure on the energy supply and ageing infrastructure that has not kept up with significant development in the bayside area.

I strongly oppose this project, as I believe it will have unacceptable impacts on the surrounding community. As a resident of Wolli Creek, I am very concerned about the consequences this massive warehouse project will have in such a densely populated area. I do not believe our current infrastructure can meet the energy demands of such a project, and I believe it will have huge implications for the surrounding residents, wildlife and environment.