Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Data Center topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents raise environmental, noise and utility concerns over proposed multi‑building data center in Appling
Summary
A resident told commissioners that a proposed data-center campus in Appling could span dozens of buildings, require multiple substations and use glycol-based cooling; county staff said a Development of Regional Impact (DRI) was filed and returned to the county with limited external comment so far.
At the June 3 Columbia County meeting, a resident raised questions about a proposed data-center development in Appling, saying the project filing describes dozens of buildings and large power and water needs and warning of potential environmental and noise impacts.
Susan Warren, who said she lives in Appling, said the developer (identified in her remarks as "Camel Crowe," spoken in the meeting) estimates an $11 billion project with 29 buildings and called the proposal an 8,100,000-square-foot development. "This means that it would take 6 electric substations to... give them the power that they're gonna need," Warren said, and she raised concerns about glycol-based cooling leaks into nearby creeks and continuous noise from HVAC and generators.
County staff explained the project triggered a Development of Regional Impact (DRI) review and that the county had circulated the DRI to neighboring jurisdictions; staff told the board they received acknowledgment from Lincolnton but otherwise no substantive responses from adjacent agencies so far.
Why it matters: Large data-center campuses can require substantial electric infrastructure, water and cooling systems, and generate continuous noise from mechanical systems; residents asked whether utility upgrades and environmental protections will be paid by the developer or by taxpayers.
What county staff said: Planning staff confirmed the DRI process was completed and circulated to nearby agencies. Staff advised residents to request the rezoning and DRI narrative under records procedures and offered to provide submitted materials to interested citizens.
What was not decided: No board decision on the project occurred at this meeting; the remarks were public-comment and planning staff noted the DRI and circulation status. The county did not yet report substantial external feedback on the DRI from neighboring jurisdictions.
Ending: Planning staff invited residents to submit follow-up information requests and said they would share the DRI materials with interested parties under public-records procedures.
