What it could mean for the region, and what is yet to be determined
Rock Flat is being investigated as a potential large-scale Digital Infrastructure & Energy Precinct near Cooma, New South Wales, and the questions that matter most to the people who live here come first: local jobs, skills and businesses, community energy, and the regional projects a precinct could be asked to support. The technical and investment questions follow, and separate what is established from what remains subject to feasibility.
Community and regional benefit
What a precinct could mean for Cooma and the Snowy Monaro, including the regional projects it could be asked to support. Nothing is promised, and nothing has been agreed.
What could a project of this scale mean for Cooma and the Snowy Monaro region?
Potentially, a long-term employer and purchaser in a region whose economy already includes a large energy operator, a substantial visitor economy and agriculture. The areas it could touch are employment, skills, procurement, community energy, community infrastructure and digital connectivity. What it will mean depends on what a partner commits to and what the community asks for, and neither is known. No figures for jobs or economic contribution are stated on this site.
Which regional community projects have stalled, and could a precinct help?
Several have been publicly reported: the Cooma and Bombala pools, closed since works began in June 2025; the Monaro Rail Trail, funded for only a short section near Bombala; the cancelled arts and innovation centre in Bombala’s former infants school; and a 2024 proposal to stop maintaining some low-traffic roads. A precinct could be asked whether it would support some of them, through a voluntary planning agreement or a community fund, if one proceeds. Which projects, and how much, would be for the council and the community to decide. Nothing has been offered or priced.
Could a precinct help reopen the Cooma and Bombala pools?
Not in the near term. Snowy Monaro Regional Council ended the main upgrade contract in April 2026, took the work in house and has committed further funds, and its 9 July 2026 update says the pools are unlikely to reopen in 2026. A precinct has no role in that and has no approval. The longer-term question is what keeps pools open once they are built: operating support, and solar and battery systems to reduce running costs, could be examined, guided by the council’s region-wide aquatic strategy, which it expects to adopt by March 2027.
Could a precinct help fund the Monaro Rail Trail?
It could be asked. The trail is envisaged along the disused Queanbeyan to Bombala line, but only 3.5 to 5 km near Bombala is funded, with a $1 million federal grant, and it still awaits Transport for NSW approval. The council voted 6 to 5 in February 2026 for that section, and councillors have raised the cost and liability of holding the corridor lease. A partner could be asked whether it would co-fund stages beyond the first, and the fibre a precinct needs could be tested against the same corridor, subject to the rail owner and Transport for NSW. Neither is assumed.
How would community benefit be decided and kept honest?
By being written down, and decided with the community rather than for it. Mechanisms to explore include a voluntary planning agreement with Snowy Monaro Regional Council and a community-governed fund. A local precedent is the Boco Rock wind farm’s Community Enhancement Fund, assessed by a committee of community members, councillors and the operator, which awarded more than $280,000 to 35 Snowy Monaro groups in 2025. The principle is that commitments are written down and reported. Nothing has been agreed.
Would a precinct pay for anything before it is approved?
No. Contributions of this kind follow a project that is approved and proceeds, and they are secured through the planning process, a voluntary planning agreement or a partner’s own commitments. Rock Flat has no approval and no partner yet, and no contribution, fund or project has been offered, agreed or priced. The purpose of describing the possibilities now is so the community can say what it wants before a feasibility program is designed, not after.
Would community benefit replace what councils and governments already fund?
It should not. The test of a host-community model is whether it adds to what the region can fund, rather than standing in for core services. Snowy Monaro Regional Council’s financial position is constrained: the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal approved a 2023 rate rise only in part, and the council has been advised it could lose about $5.1 million of federal financial assistance from 1 July 2027. A precinct cannot substitute for core funding, and no amount is stated. Whether it adds anything is for the model to demonstrate in negotiation with the council and the community.
What types of jobs could be created?
Construction roles across civil, electrical, mechanical, telecommunications and transport trades, spread over the years a staged build would take; then permanent operational roles in facility management, electrical and mechanical systems, network operations, security and site services, plus the operation of any on-site generation and storage. How many, and how many could be filled locally, are for a partner’s workforce plan.
Would local contractors have opportunities?
The intent is that they would, through a local-procurement approach with early notice of work packages and packages sized so regional firms can compete. Civil works, electrical, transport, accommodation, maintenance, security, landscaping, professional services and hospitality are the categories that most often suit regional suppliers. Whether Snowy Monaro businesses win the work depends on capability, price and the partner’s procurement rules.
Could training and apprenticeship programs be established?
That is one of the partnerships to explore with TAFE NSW, schools, universities and training providers, covering electrical trades, renewables, battery systems, fibre networks, mechanical and cooling systems, cyber security, data centre operations and AI infrastructure. A precinct built in stages over years is a training opportunity as well as an employer. Programs, providers and funding would be agreed with a partner and government.
What community benefits could be considered?
A community or regional infrastructure program covering areas such as emergency services, recreation, education, telecommunications, community facilities and environmental initiatives; community energy concepts; and the employment, skills and procurement measures above. How they would be secured, whether through the planning process, a voluntary planning agreement or a partner’s own commitments, is for negotiation. Nothing has been agreed.
Could the project contribute to local energy initiatives?
If the precinct adds generation and storage, there are mechanisms through which the community could share in that value: community energy programs, household energy support, community batteries, solar for community facilities and energy-efficiency programs. They depend on what is built and how it connects, so they are a design question for the energy architecture and a concept for consultation, not a commitment.
Could telecommunications investment improve regional connectivity?
Possibly. A hyperscale campus needs high-capacity, diverse fibre, and building it may create the opportunity to improve digital connectivity in the district along the same routes. That depends on what telecommunications feasibility finds about carriers, routes and capacity, none of which is established.
How would noise, visual impact and traffic be assessed and managed?
Through the State Significant Development process. The environmental impact statement must assess noise against the nearest sensitive receivers, visual impact from defined viewpoints including the Monaro Highway, and traffic in a transport study with a construction traffic management plan. Mitigation, siting, height, landscaping and operating conditions come out of that assessment. The current 9 m height control on the land means building height is itself a planning matter.
Would the community be consulted?
Yes. Consultation is a requirement of State Significant Development assessment, and the community’s response is part of what the NSW Government weighs. The intent here is to begin earlier than the rules require, alongside feasibility, with Snowy Monaro Regional Council, neighbours and community organisations.
How could local businesses participate?
Through procurement during construction and operations, through the accommodation, hospitality and services a workforce needs, and through the supply of the region’s existing capabilities in energy, construction and land management. The mechanism to make that real is a local-procurement plan agreed with a partner, and interested businesses are welcome to make themselves known through the enquiry form now.
The opportunity
What Rock Flat is, where it is, and what is being proposed.
What is Rock Flat?
Rock Flat is a rural landholding of up to 837.7 hectares (about 2,070 acres) on the Monaro Highway near Cooma, in south-eastern New South Wales, Australia. It is being investigated as a potential Digital Infrastructure & Energy Precinct: staged data centre development of about 50 to 300 MW alongside the generation, storage and infrastructure a campus of that scale needs.
What makes it worth investigating is the infrastructure that already crosses or adjoins the holding: 132 kV and 66 kV electricity lines, the Eastern Gas Pipeline, Telstra optical fibre marked at the boundary and a State highway through the middle. Each is present. What each can supply is the feasibility question this site keeps asking.
Where is Rock Flat located?
At 7845 Monaro Highway, Rock Flat NSW 2630, in the Snowy Monaro Regional Council area, at about 36.28° S, 149.16° E. By road it is about 10 km south of Cooma, 126 km from Canberra, 406 km from Sydney and 630 km from Melbourne. The holding sits at roughly 850 to 900 m above sea level on the Monaro high plains, inland from the Tasman Sea coast.
Nothing of the town of Cooma lies within 4 km of the holding. The nearest airport with scheduled passenger services is Canberra; Cooma airport has a 2,120 m runway and no scheduled flights.
How large is the landholding?
Approximately 837.7 hectares across eleven lots as supplied. The figure is the total of the lot polygons from NSW Government mapping, not a surveyed title area, and it includes 17.9 hectares of highway road reserve; about 819.8 hectares remain once that is set aside. About 642 hectares lie clear of all three energy corridors, before easements, setbacks and environmental constraints are applied.
A separate commercial property dataset records a smaller area across a different lot schedule. The conflict is noted on the interactive plan rather than resolved in favour of the larger figure. The developable footprint for any use remains subject to site, environmental, planning and engineering assessment.
What scale of data centre is being considered?
About 50 to 300 MW of data centre development, potentially delivered in stages and potentially as more than one campus. The range describes the scale of opportunity being investigated, from a first stage in the tens of megawatts to a precinct at the upper end over time.
It is not a statement of confirmed electrical capacity, and it is not a development approval. Achievable capacity at each stage depends on grid connection studies, the energy architecture, planning and commercial feasibility, none of which is complete.
Why is the site being considered for data centre development?
Because an unusual number of the things a large data centre needs sit within or beside one holding. Electricity infrastructure at 132 kV and 66 kV crosses Lot 1. The Eastern Gas Pipeline crosses the same lot, and its owner, Jemena, has confirmed it is there. Telstra’s own markers place optical fibre on the boundary. The Monaro Highway runs 3.9 km through the holding. The climate is cool, the land is open grassland at about 900 m, and the nearest town is 10 km away with none of it within 4 km.
Most sites have some of these ingredients. Rock Flat potentially brings almost all of them together, which is why serious feasibility is justified. It does not mean any of them has been proven to supply what a campus would need.
What does “Digital Infrastructure & Energy Precinct” mean?
A precinct in which data centre capacity and the energy system that supports it are planned together, rather than a data centre that simply draws on a network built for other purposes. In practice that means investigating on-site solar, battery storage, connection to regional renewable generation, gas-supported resilience and the electrical infrastructure to tie them together, alongside the compute load.
The phrase describes an intent and a scale of land, not a capability. Each element of the energy system is a feasibility item, and the site name, the Rock Flat Data Centre, AI & Energy Precinct, names what is being investigated and not something approved or built, which every page that carries it says.
Could the project be developed in stages?
Staging is the working assumption. A first stage in the tens of megawatts is a credible thing to ask the network about, and the planning, energy and commercial work would be structured around stages rather than a single build. The land allows a first campus to be laid out with room for later stages, substations, storage and generation without those later stages competing for space.
What each stage could be, and when, follows the grid and energy feasibility rather than a fixed program. No timetable is stated.
Could the precinct accommodate multiple campuses or operators?
Potentially. Up to 837.7 hectares, with about 642 hectares clear of the energy corridors before constraints, is enough land to investigate more than one campus, and a precinct model with shared energy and network infrastructure serving several operators is one of the structures worth testing. Whether it is the right structure depends on the connection capacity available, the planning pathway and the commercial interest of operators. It is a question for feasibility, not a plan.
What makes Rock Flat different from a conventional data centre site?
Two things. The first is convergence: electricity, gas, fibre, road, climate, separation and scale on one holding, where a conventional site typically has land and one or two of the rest. The second is the opportunity to bring the infrastructure with the project. Transgrid advised in August 2026 that capacity to connect in the Sydney basin is largely exhausted; a precinct that adds generation and storage alongside its demand is a different proposition from one that competes for what is left.
Neither of those is a confirmed capability. They are the reasons to spend money finding out.
What does “confirmed” mean on this site?
That an asset is present, on the evidence of its owner or a government source. The Eastern Gas Pipeline is confirmed present because Jemena said so in its Before You Dig response and has marked it on the ground. The 132 kV line is confirmed by Essential Energy’s asset plates on the poles. “Confirmed” never means that capacity, connection, supply or cost has been established. Where those are unknown the site says so, and this FAQ is where most of those statements live.
Electricity and energy
The lines that exist, and the capacity that does not yet.
What electricity infrastructure currently exists?
Two lines cross Lot 1 in the same corridor. Essential Energy’s 132 kV feeder 97R, which runs from Cooma towards Bega, crosses the lot for about 1,467 m on steel poles carrying asset plate CE 253562. A 66 kV line runs about 1,516 m inside the same lot; its owner and function are recorded from mapping and have not been confirmed with the network. Both appear on the Essential Energy plan in the Before You Dig response and both were photographed on site.
There is no substation or connection point on the holding. The lines pass through it.
Does Rock Flat have a confirmed 300 MW electricity supply?
No. 300 MW is the upper end of the development scale being investigated. No electricity capacity of any size has been confirmed, requested or offered for this site. No rating, utilisation or available capacity is published for feeder 97R, and a 114 MW wind farm, Boco Rock, already exports on it. A load of 200 to 300 MW would be a transmission-level proposition involving Transgrid as well as Essential Energy.
Anyone quoting a supply figure for Rock Flat is quoting something this site has never said.
What does the 132 kV infrastructure mean for the project?
It means a sub-transmission line of the kind a large load would connect to is already on the land, which is an unusually strong starting point for connection feasibility: no new line has to be built to reach the site. The poles are built for two circuits with one strung, a corridor advantage that may reduce the cost and difficulty of augmentation if the network agrees to it.
It does not mean capacity. What 97R can deliver at this point, with Boco Rock exporting on it, is a question for Essential Energy’s and Transgrid’s network studies.
What does the 66 kV infrastructure mean for the project?
A second line in the same corridor, at a voltage suited to a first stage in the tens of megawatts rather than a full precinct. Its ownership and role are not yet confirmed with the network, and the Essential Energy planning report records about 5 MW of hydro generation on the 66 kV system. It is a line to ask about for a first stage, not a capacity.
Has grid connection capacity been confirmed?
No. No connection enquiry has been lodged and no capacity has been offered. This remains to be established through feasibility: a connection enquiry and preliminary assessment with Essential Energy, and for a load above what the distribution network can carry, a transmission connection process with Transgrid. The site publishes what the networks publish, including that Transgrid’s upstream line 97D has a design rating of 225 MVA, and does not infer capacity from it.
Would network augmentation be required?
Almost certainly, for anything beyond a modest first stage. A precinct at the upper end of the range would need new substation capacity and, in all likelihood, transmission-level works. The unstrung second circuit on the 132 kV poles is one possible element. What is required, what it costs and who pays are outputs of the network studies, and the NSW Guidelines expect a proponent to meet the costs its connection imposes rather than pass them to other consumers. No cost estimate is stated on this site.
Could the precinct generate some of its own electricity?
That is one of the things the land makes possible to investigate. On-site solar at scale, battery storage, and gas-supported resilience using the pipeline that crosses Lot 1 are all candidates for an integrated energy architecture in which the compute load and its supply are designed together. None is committed and no capacity is stated for any of them. Whether on-site generation could carry a meaningful share of the load, and at what cost, is the energy feasibility question.
What role could battery storage play?
Firming, peak management, demand flexibility, grid support and resilience. The NSW Guidelines expect storage and flexible demand from a campus of this kind, and land here allows a battery to be designed in from the first stage rather than fitted in later. Its size follows the engineering and the policy rules that apply at each stage; where this site shows a battery in a visualisation, it is drawn at the envelope the Guidelines’ rules would imply, not as an engineered design.
Gas
A pipeline that crosses the holding, positioned as resilience rather than baseload.
Does the Eastern Gas Pipeline cross Rock Flat?
Yes. The Eastern Gas Pipeline, owned and operated by Jemena, crosses Lot 1 for about 1,348 m. Jemena confirmed its presence in its Before You Dig response of 26 August 2026, and its own signage, a cathodic protection test point and a marker post were photographed on the holding on 5 September 2026. The pipeline runs between Victoria and Sydney, and Cooma is already a delivery point on it.
Is Rock Flat currently connected to the pipeline?
No. There is no offtake, meter or connection on the holding. The pipeline passes through it. A connection would need Jemena’s agreement and its own engineering and commercial process, none of which has begun.
Has gas capacity been confirmed?
No. No connection, pressure, capacity, cost or commercial terms have been requested or offered. What is published is pipeline-wide: a 450 mm main with a normal operating pressure range of 3,000 to 16,550 kPa, and a northbound capability of about 350 TJ a day since the pipeline became bidirectional. Those are the pipeline’s specifications, not conditions at this site, and they remain to be established through feasibility with Jemena.
What could gas be used for?
Resilience and firming: emergency and back-up generation, and firming for periods when renewable supply and storage cannot meet the load. It could also be relevant to other future energy applications on the precinct, which would be for feasibility to define. The site does not propose gas as the primary energy source, and does not propose diesel: a design principle of the precinct is to investigate gas-supported resilience so that routine diesel storage on site can be avoided.
Would gas be the primary source of electricity for the data centre?
No. The proposition is a renewable-led architecture: regional wind, on-site solar and battery storage, with the grid connection and gas as resilience. The arithmetic on the energy page shows why gas at baseload scale is not the proposition; it is there to argue against that reading, not for it. Gas is positioned as an option for firming and emergency capacity, subject to what Jemena can supply and on what terms.
Could gas provide emergency or firming capacity?
Potentially, and that is the case worth investigating. A pipeline on the land creates the option of gas-fired back-up and firming generation that would otherwise be met with diesel. Whether it can, at what capacity, and whether it fits the emissions and planning expectations that apply to the project are questions for Jemena, the energy engineers and the planning process. Nothing is committed.
Renewable energy
Wind that already runs on the line, and solar and storage to investigate.
What renewable energy resources exist in the region?
Wind, hydro and solar. The Boco Rock wind farm, 114 MW, operates in the district and exports on feeder 97R, the 132 kV line that crosses this holding; about 5 MW of hydro generation is connected on the 66 kV system. The Snowy Hydro scheme is the region’s defining energy asset, with its head office in Cooma. The Cooma Solar and Battery Project has been approved nearby on rural land. The Cooma-Monaro locality has also been nominated as a candidate Renewable Energy Zone, a nomination rather than a declaration.
Could Rock Flat access regional wind generation?
The wind farm and the line it uses are facts. Whether a future operator could contract for regional wind through a power purchase agreement is a commercial question that has not been asked. No generator has committed supply to this site, and this site does not claim access to any particular generator. What can be said is that the physical relationship, a wind farm exporting on the line that crosses the holding, is unusually direct, and that the NSW Guidelines encourage exactly this kind of arrangement.
Is there enough land to investigate solar development?
Yes. With about 642 hectares clear of the three energy corridors before constraints, the holding has room to investigate utility-scale solar beside the compute load. How much of that land is suitable, how much solar could be built on it and what it would generate are feasibility items; no solar capacity is stated. Electricity generating works are permissible with consent on this rural zone, which the nearby Cooma Solar and Battery Project has relied on.
Could solar and battery storage be co-located with the data centre?
That is the design intent worth testing. Land is the usual constraint on co-locating generation, storage and compute, and here it is not. A layout in which data halls, substations, a battery and a solar field are planned together, with the corridors and setbacks respected, is what the scale of the holding allows. The energy architecture, the sizes and the economics are to be established.
Could additional renewable generation be developed alongside the demand?
That is the central idea of a precinct that brings its infrastructure with it: matching new demand with new generation rather than drawing only on what exists. On-site solar, regional wind under contract and storage are the candidate elements. The NSW Guidelines expect new renewable generation and long-term power purchase agreements from large data centres, and Victoria’s September 2026 action plan asks the same of projects in that state. Whether and how much can be developed here is the feasibility question.
How could a future operator approach renewable power purchase agreements?
In the way operators do elsewhere: by contracting for output from regional generators, existing or new, alongside on-site generation and storage, and by structuring the contracts to meet the NSW Guidelines’ expectations on new generation and contract length. Rock Flat’s contribution is location: a wind farm on the line, a candidate Renewable Energy Zone, and land for on-site generation. The contracts themselves are for the operator to negotiate and none has been.
Fibre and connectivity
Fibre marked at the boundary, with everything about it still to establish.
What telecommunications infrastructure has been identified?
Telstra’s Before You Dig response of 26 August 2026 warned of major cables and/or optic fibre in the area, and NBN Co identified an asset. On the ground, Telstra’s own warning post and a series of numbered cable markers were photographed along the holding’s fence line on 5 September 2026, one reading 3.4 m to cable. A Telecom Australia-era marker records a cable 1.2 m deep, which suggests a long-established route; its role, strand count and capacity remain for Telstra to confirm.
Is Telstra fibre available?
Fibre is present at the boundary on Telstra’s own evidence. Availability, in the sense of capacity an operator could buy, has not been established. Telstra’s response excluded the plan file for its cables and was issued at a quality level that gives location without detail. A capacity and service enquiry with Telstra is the first item of telecommunications feasibility.
Has fibre capacity been confirmed?
No. Capacity, dark fibre availability, carrier options, latency and route diversity are all unknown. This remains to be established through feasibility with Telstra, NBN Co and any other carriers with assets in the corridor.
Is carrier diversity available?
Not established. Two carriers, Telstra and NBN Co, have identified assets, which is a starting point for engagement rather than diversity. Whether other carriers have routes in the corridor, and whether any of them can offer a physically separate path, is for telecommunications feasibility to find out.
Could diverse fibre routes be developed?
Two directions exist in principle: north towards Canberra and Sydney along the Monaro Highway, and east towards the coast. Whether they exist in fibre, with the capacity a hyperscale operator needs, is the open question. Building new diverse routes is possible, and it is one of the items a precinct could bring with it, potentially with benefit to the region. Cost, route and partners are for feasibility.
What telecommunications redundancy would a hyperscale operator investigate?
Typically, at least two physically diverse fibre routes entering the site at separate points, from more than one carrier, with capacity and latency to the relevant Australian data centre markets, and dark fibre or wavelength services rather than managed bandwidth. None of those has been established here. The site lists what is known and stops there.
Is latency to major Australian data centre markets known?
No. No latency figure is published on this site because none has been measured or offered by a carrier. Road distances are a poor proxy for fibre path length, and this site does not use them as one. Latency to Sydney, Canberra and Melbourne is a feasibility output.
Water and cooling
The least resolved item, and the design principle that follows from it.
How could a data centre at Rock Flat be cooled?
The design base case for investigation is closed-loop or hybrid cooling rather than evaporative towers, taking advantage of a cool climate at about 900 m where the annual mean maximum temperature is 19.4 °C. Air cooling, closed-loop liquid systems, hybrid systems and, for AI loads, direct liquid cooling are all candidates. Which architecture, and how it performs, are engineering questions; no efficiency figure is claimed.
How much water would it require?
It depends on the cooling architecture, and no figure is stated for this project. The site publishes indicative demand ranges by stage drawn from Infrastructure Australia and the water industry, with an upper bound about seven times the lower, and says plainly that those ranges should not automatically become this project’s requirement. The aspiration is to design at the low end.
Is a water source secured?
No. No large-scale water supply has been demonstrated at the site. There is no recycled water network here, and the watercourses that cross the holding are non-perennial and not a supply. This remains to be established through feasibility, and it is the least resolved item on the site.
Could the project avoid potable water for routine cooling?
That is the aspiration, and the NSW Guidelines point the same way: they expect recycled water or a utility agreement, drought-period reduction and no adverse effect on agricultural water. The approaches to investigate are closed-loop and hybrid systems that use little water at all, and non-potable sources such as captured rainwater or recycled water for what is needed. Whether routine potable use can be avoided entirely is for the water strategy to show.
Why is Rock Flat’s climate relevant?
Because cooling is where a data centre spends much of its energy and water, and cool air makes both easier. Bureau of Meteorology averages for Cooma give an annual mean maximum of 19.4 °C at the Visitors Centre station and 18.2 °C at the airport, a mean minimum of 4.2 °C and a July mean minimum of minus 2.6 °C. That may support cooling architectures that use less energy and less water than warmer markets need. It is a climate advantage to investigate, not a performance claim.
What cooling technologies could be investigated?
Air-side economisation using the cool climate, closed-loop liquid cooling, hybrid dry and adiabatic systems, and direct-to-chip liquid cooling for high-density AI loads. Evaporative cooling towers are not the base case because of their water use. The right combination depends on the load, the density and the water strategy, and is an engineering output.
Could recycled or treated water be considered?
Yes, and it should be. There is no recycled water network at the site today, so the options are a supply from Cooma’s treatment system if a utility agreement could be reached, on-site treatment and reuse, and captured rainwater from the very large roof areas a campus creates. Each is a feasibility item with Snowy Monaro Regional Council and the water engineers. None is secured.
Land, planning and development
The zoning step, the State Significant Development route, and the constraints to map.
What planning zone applies, and does it permit a data centre?
The land is zoned RU1 Primary Production under the Snowy Monaro planning instruments, with minimum lot sizes of 400 and 80 hectares. RU1 is not one of the zones in which the State planning policy permits a data centre with consent, so a planning pathway is required: a planning proposal or rezoning, alongside the State Significant Development route that applies to data centres above 15 MW. The energy elements are in a different position: electricity generating works are permissible with consent on this rural zone. A specialist planner will reach this point within an hour, and the site says so.
How much of the 837.7 hectares is developable?
Not yet known. About 642 hectares lie clear of the three energy corridors, but that is before easements, setbacks from the corridors and the highway, riparian setbacks along the two non-perennial watercourses, bushfire, biodiversity, heritage and other constraints are applied. The developable footprint is an output of the site and environmental investigations and is listed on this site under what must be proven.
Has a data centre development application been submitted?
No. No application, planning proposal or scoping report has been lodged. This site is a pre-feasibility presentation of the opportunity. The first planning document for a State Significant Development would be a scoping report, and an outline of one is in the data room.
Is planning approval in place?
No. Nothing on the holding is approved for data centre use, and nothing on this site should be read as a permission. What exists is a described pathway: State Significant Development assessment for a data centre above 15 MW, the zoning step that must be taken, and a policy framework that offers a faster assessment to proposals that meet the NSW Guidelines.
What environmental investigations are required?
Those the Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements set for the project, which typically include biodiversity, Aboriginal and historic heritage, water and soils, noise, visual impact, traffic, bushfire, hazards, and social and economic effects. The property report records the land as bushfire prone in the grassland vegetation category, notes an exploration licence overlapping three lots, and the holding carries two non-perennial watercourses. None of these has been investigated yet; they are the environmental part of the feasibility program.
Are there residential neighbours nearby?
Cooma, about 6,700 people, is 10 km away by road and none of the town lies within 4 km. Scattered rural dwellings do exist in the district, and they are sensitive receivers for noise and visual assessment that must be mapped. The separation the site offers is from dense residential development, not from all neighbours.
How could buffers be incorporated?
With land. The holding is large enough to set data halls back from the highway, the corridors and the boundaries, to keep generation and storage away from dwellings, and to hold construction compounds inside the site. The Victorian action plan’s 150 m buffer from homes is an example of the kind of rule now emerging; it does not apply in New South Wales, but the holding could accommodate far larger separations. The layout is for the masterplan.
Is there room for substations, batteries, solar and future campuses?
That is the value of the scale: data halls in stages, a second campus, substations, solar, storage, cooling and water infrastructure, setbacks, buffers, construction compounds and expansion could be designed together without competing for space. Whether each fits, once the constraints are mapped, is what the site investigations will show.
How would construction traffic access the site?
From the Monaro Highway, a State road managed by Transport for NSW that runs 3.9 km through the holding. Heavy-vehicle access to the gate is not yet confirmed: the highway is a B-double route with an exclusion through Cooma, and road-train access has not been established. Transformers, modular components and construction traffic would be planned in a traffic and transport study and a construction traffic management plan, with any intersection works agreed with Transport for NSW.
Government policy
How the proposition relates to what governments now expect of data centres.
How does Rock Flat relate to emerging NSW data centre policy?
The NSW Data Centre Policy Framework and Guidelines of August 2026 describe the kind of site the State now wants: regional, away from dense housing, with land for new generation and storage, low-water cooling and early engagement with fibre providers, and they offer a faster, staffed assessment to proposals that meet them. Rock Flat has many of those characteristics. An initial screening against the seventeen performance measures is on the Guidelines page, with its limits stated: it is the proponent’s own judgement, not a compliance rating, and a fit is not an approval.
Why is additional renewable generation becoming important for data centres?
Because large new loads placed on a constrained network either displace other users or raise costs for them. Governments are responding by expecting data centres to match new demand with new generation. The NSW Guidelines expect new renewable generation under long-term contracts; Victoria’s September 2026 plan requires new data centres to bring their own renewable supply and storage. A site with land for generation, and a wind farm already on the line, is better placed to meet that expectation than one without.
Why is energy storage relevant?
Storage lets a large load firm variable renewable supply, shift its demand away from peaks, and support the network rather than stress it. The NSW Guidelines expect storage and demand flexibility from a campus of this kind. Land to build a battery in from the first stage is one of the things Rock Flat offers; its size is an engineering and policy output, not a figure this site states.
Why are governments focusing on data centre water use?
Because evaporative cooling at scale can consume large volumes of potable water in regions where it is scarce. The NSW Guidelines expect recycled water or a utility agreement, drought reduction and no adverse effect on agricultural water; Victoria’s plan requires recycled or non-drinking water for cooling. Rock Flat’s response is a design principle rather than a supply: investigate cooling that needs little water, and non-potable sources for what it needs.
What does avoiding net costs to existing electricity consumers mean?
That the cost of connecting a very large load, including network augmentation, should be met by the project rather than recovered from other customers through network charges, and that the load should not push up wholesale prices by drawing on supply without adding to it. The NSW Guidelines and Victoria’s plan both express versions of this. A precinct that brings generation, storage and its own connection works is the response; what that costs here is a feasibility output.
Why is community benefit becoming more important?
Because regions are being asked to host very large facilities that employ relatively few people once built, and governments are responding by making community outcomes part of the assessment. Victoria’s plan asks for a Local Investment Guarantee and local hiring and training; the NSW Guidelines make regional and community outcomes part of the performance measures. This site treats a host-community model as part of feasibility for that reason.
Does Victorian data centre policy apply to Rock Flat?
No. Rock Flat is in New South Wales and Victorian planning and energy policy has no application to it. The Victorian Government’s Sustainable Data Centre Action Plan of 22 September 2026 is referred to on this site for one reason: as evidence of the direction of Australian data centre policy in the two largest states, which now expects compute, new generation, storage, water and community benefit to be designed together. The primary source is linked wherever it is cited.
Investment and partnership
Who Rock Flat is looking for, and how to engage.
What type of partner is Rock Flat seeking?
Experienced digital infrastructure, energy and investment partners able to take the proposition through technical and commercial feasibility: data centre developers and operators, hyperscale and AI infrastructure investors, energy developers, and infrastructure funds. The right partner is one for whom an integrated precinct, rather than a bare site, is the attraction.
Is the land being offered for sale?
A long-term ground lease is the preferred structure, with the land retained and the campus developed by others, and acquisition is the second preference. Outright purchase is therefore possible for a party that would rather own the land than lease it. The lots, the area and the terms are open for discussion with qualified parties.
Is a joint venture or development partnership being considered?
Yes. Alongside the ground lease and acquisition, the opportunity could be structured as an option agreement, a development partnership, a joint venture or a land contribution into a larger infrastructure development, depending on the counterparty and the stage at which they wish to engage. No structure beyond the stated preferences has been settled.
Could an operator lease the site?
Yes; that is the preferred structure. A developer or operator would take a long-term lease over the land it needs to build and run the campus, staged as the precinct grows, with area, term and staging open for discussion.
Is Rock Flat seeking an energy partner as well as a data centre operator?
The proposition is a precinct in which the energy system is designed with the data centre, so an energy developer or generator could be a partner in its own right, alongside or ahead of an operator. Whether that is one party or several is a structuring question to resolve with the parties that come forward.
What feasibility work remains?
Most of it. The program set out on this site covers achievable data centre capacity, grid connection, the renewable energy strategy, solar and storage, gas resilience options, telecommunications capacity and diversity, cooling and water, the planning pathway, staging, infrastructure costs, the commercial delivery model and a community benefit framework. A consultants’ brief for the first stages is in the data room.
What information is available to qualified parties?
The full Before You Dig Australia response pack, the Essential Energy asset plan and the 132 kV pole survey, title, lot schedule and cadastral detail, the NSW Planning Portal property report and constraints mapping, and site photography and concept material. Some material is provided under a non-disclosure agreement. The executive summary and its PDF are available without one.
How can interested parties access the data room?
Through the enquiry form. The data room is the private area of this site, holding the executive summary, the government briefing note, the feasibility brief and the scoping report outline. Access is arranged directly with each party once an enquiry is received.
How can a potential partner arrange a discussion?
By using the enquiry form on this site or by contacting Simon Dakin directly at the address and telephone number in the footer. Enquiries are confidential and answered directly.
Ask the question
If a question you need answered is missing, ask it through the enquiry form. Questions of general interest are added to this page, with the same discipline: what is known, what is not, and what would establish it.
It is not an offer, a prospectus or advice, and it does not describe an approved project. It is a pre-feasibility account of a landholding and the infrastructure around it, written so that a reader can tell a verified asset from an opportunity and an opportunity from an unknown. The important notice in the footer applies to every answer.
What rarely sits on one holding, and what each fact does not yet establish
- Land
- up to 837.7 haAbout 2,070 acres across 11 lots as supplied. Room to investigate data halls, solar, storage and setbacks; the developable footprint is still to be established. The site →
- Scale
- 50 to 300 MWThe scale of data centre development being investigated, in stages. Not confirmed grid capacity. The opportunity →
- Electricity
- 132 + 66 kVBoth lines cross the holding on Lot 1, and regional wind already exports on the 132 kV. Available capacity is untested. Power →
- Gas
- Eastern Gas PipelineHigh pressure transmission main crosses Lot 1, confirmed present by Jemena. Pressure, offtake and terms are for Jemena to answer. Energy →
- Data and connectivity
- Optical fibre at the boundaryTelstra’s own fibre markers on the fence line, and an NBN asset identified. Capacity, diversity and carrier options to establish. Connectivity →
- Water
- Designed for low waterA cool climate at about 900 m may support closed loop or hybrid cooling. No supply has been demonstrated. Water →
- Location
- 10 km to CoomaA town of about 6,700 people, none of it within 4 km: potential access to workforce and services with separation from residential areas. Canberra 126 km, Sydney 406 km, Melbourne 630 km by road. Distance from Cooma →
- Renewables
- Wind on the line, solar to investigateBoco Rock wind exports on feeder 97R today. On-site solar and storage are opportunities to investigate; no supply is committed to this site. Energy →
Presence and position only. No electrical capacity, gas capacity, telecommunications service, water supply or planning approval is claimed, secured or offered.
Move from opportunity to feasibility
Rock Flat is seeking engagement with experienced digital infrastructure, energy and investment partners to undertake the next stage of technical and commercial feasibility. Detailed title, infrastructure, utility and commercial information is available to qualified parties.