Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Data Center topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press council with water, noise and safety questions about proposed limestone-mine data center
Summary
Multiple residents and a written letter urged Norton officials to study aquifer impacts, low-frequency noise from chillers, potential pollutant discharges, and safety risks tied to a proposed data center in a local limestone mine.
Residents urged Norton City Council to require detailed studies and faster answers from the developer of a proposed data center in the limestone mine near Norton and Barberton, raising questions about groundwater, noise, chemical discharges and safety.
A letter from Karen Lynn Miller, read into the record, asked whether studies exist on how drilling several wells would affect the aquifer and nearby private wells within a one‑mile radius; she said the pond behind her home has dropped about three feet during a dry summer. Miller also asked whether the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has authorized release of used antifreeze to Hudson Run and questioned potential on-site storage of LNG, the risk posed by train derailments and whether the mine could ever be used for hazardous materials such as nuclear waste. Her letter estimated the project could affect roughly 47,000 people in Norton and Barberton.
Michelle Yasco, a Norton resident who said she lives roughly 500 feet from the site of a proposed chiller yard, described low-frequency, continuous noise produced by air-cooled chillers used in data centers. Yasco told council that low-frequency sound carries farther and can pass through walls while sometimes registering poorly on high‑decibel meters. She said the current plan calls for multiple collocated cooling plants, each with up to 11 air-cooled chillers, and cited Norton Codified Ordinance 648.13’s definition of noise nuisance in urging officials to consider the ordinance’s protections.
Karen Sabore (transcribed as Sabore/Saborie), a resident with an ongoing neighbor complaint, said she will use the city’s new OpenGov complaint portal to refile a long-standing code-enforcement issue.
Council members acknowledged the public concern and said they are seeking information. Councilor Towsley said the project’s proposed building height—reported in public materials as between 110 and 115 feet—would be “10-plus stories” and visible from major public venues including the Ciderfest grounds and neighborhood parks. Towsley said he wanted answers about whether Norton is prepared to manage a facility of that size and stressed the city’s obligation to protect residents.
Council members and staff said they have requested a frequently asked questions (FAQ) document from the developer and that, as of the meeting, they had not received full answers. Mr. Lukens asked for decibel figures and specific water‑use information, saying residents want to know whether their drinking water will be affected and how fuel and other hazardous materials would be transported and stored.
Council staff and the mayor encouraged residents to continue attending meetings, submitting written comments and pressing for answers; council members said the Planning Commission will be the formal review point once the applicant files an application. Several residents in the council chamber raised their hands to register concern during the public-comment portion.
No planning application for the data center had been filed with the Planning Commission at the time of the meeting, and no formal council action on the project occurred during this session.
