Jackson County commissioners table decision on proposed Spragueville modular data center after hours of public comment

Jackson County zoning officials on Jan. 20 postponed a decision on a conditional-use request to place a modular, air-cooled data center on a two-acre parcel near a Spragueville substation, saying they needed more time to review technical and community concerns raised during a two-hour public hearing.

The proposal, made by AUR Spragueville LLC and represented by John Paul Barrick, would place four modular buildings, two storage containers and ancillary site work on land described in county materials as being north of Preston and adjacent to an electric substation. Laurie, a county staff member, summarized the application at the start of the public hearing and described the site plan and the applicant’s stated intent that the facility would operate as a demand-response load resource to help smooth local power demand.

The zoning commission’s decision was delayed after residents and county commissioners pressed the applicant on noise, drainage and emergency response. The applicants and a land agent for Warren Capital Ventures, identified in the hearing as Charlie, told the commission the facility would be air-cooled, oriented so fans exhaust away from the nearest houses and would use the local cooperative’s existing substation capacity.

Barrick, identified at the hearing as an applicant and representative, said the proposed site would be “about half” the size of the company’s smallest existing facility: “Our smallest one is 5 megawatts, so this will be half of that size,” he said. At other points he and company representatives described the load they expected to add to the substation as roughly 2.3–2.5 megawatts and said operations at full load would have two full-time on-site employees and generate roughly $60,000 a year in sales tax on energy use.

Company representatives also cited noise readings from other sites and told the commission the closest residence to the proposed site would experience roughly 46 decibels from the equipment; they offered the range of measurements they had provided: 52 decibels at 490 feet in front of exhaust fans and 44 decibels measured at 370 feet on the opposite side. Charlie, the land agent, said the firm would use landscaping, barriers and other mitigation if necessary and emphasized the company’s stated long-term investment in the site.

Opponents who spoke at length included Rhonda and Randy Rowan, who said their house is the closest residence and that they did not want the facility located within several hundred feet of their home. “We don’t want this 500 foot from our house,” Rhonda Rowan said during the hearing, adding that the family purchased their property for the “peace and quiet of living in the country.” Neighbor Erin Toney cited an Environmental Protection Agency guideline saying 45–55 decibels can cause activity interference and annoyance and said that level could affect sleeping and conversation for people near the site.

Residents also pressed the applicants on stormwater and drainage — several speakers said a 40-acre drainage area flows through the parcel — and on fire and hazardous-material risks. Barrick and other company witnesses said the modular buildings are metal pods and that the proposed site would have only typical office HVAC units inside an enclosed work trailer; they said there would be no industrial coolants or large battery banks at the site. The applicants acknowledged a past fire at a different facility and said that incident involved an ancillary structure and a suspected space heater, not a coolant release; they said local fire departments would use standard water suppression for a metal-structure fire and that the site would include a locked gate and a fire-access box.

Commissioners and staff debated how to handle a new use that is not explicitly listed in the county’s current zoning ordinance. Laurie told the commission that, because the ordinance does not spell out this kind of facility, the board must first decide which zoning district and what conditional-use or special-exception requirements would apply.

After public comment concluded and commissioners discussed possible zoning districts and conditions — including suggested noise limits and other mitigations raised during the hearing — the commission voted to postpone action to the next monthly meeting to allow staff to assemble additional information and draft possible conditions. The motion to delay carried after a roll call; one commissioner, Tom O’Sakins, recorded an opposed vote.

The commission also completed routine business before and after the public hearing, including approving minutes from its Jan. 20 meeting and opening and then closing the public hearing on the Spragueville site.

The matter will return to the commission at a future meeting with supplemental materials and potential conditions for review; the commission asked staff to gather more data and examples from other counties’ ordinances and to provide clearer technical documentation on noise, drainage and emergency response for commission members to consider.

Details in the record: the applicant described the project as a modular, air-cooled data center with fans oriented away from residences; the applicants stated a planned added load of roughly 2.3–2.5 megawatts at the substation; the company said it would employ two full-time on-site staff and pay state and local sales tax on energy use; residents raised concerns about noise, drainage from a nearby 40‑acre watershed, fire response and property values. The commission did not grant or deny the conditional-use request and took no binding land-use action beyond tabling the matter for further review.