Residents urge Hays County to investigate Cloudburst AI data center proposal near York Creek; ask for environmental and water-use details
Loading...
Summary
Two residents raised environmental and infrastructure concerns about a proposed Cloudburst AI data center and onsite natural‑gas power plant on Francis Harris Lane in the county’s unincorporated area, calling for public hearings and answers on water use, runoff, floodplain work and historical/archaeological protections.
Two residents told the Hays County Commissioners Court on March 25 that they are worried about a proposed Cloudburst AI data-center campus and associated natural‑gas power plant on a 95‑acre property at 2955 Francis Harris Lane, a parcel with a New Braunfels mailing address that lies inside both Hays and Guadalupe counties and outside municipal limits.
Abigail Lindsey, who identified the site’s location and described a working farm on the property with century‑old oaks and York Creek running through the lower section, said Hays County Development Services received a development application on Jan. 26, 2025 and Guadalupe County’s fire marshal also had an application on file. Lindsey said residents found no public notice from the company and that state, county and city leaders did not have advance knowledge of the company’s intent. She asked the court to require a public hearing and to seek answers about water use, stormwater discharge, runoff protections for York Creek, the extent of construction in the floodplain, noise and lighting, archaeological notification and public‑health protections.
Gina Fleming, who also addressed the court during public comments, said Cloudburst’s publicly stated plans describe an aggressive data‑center expansion and that AI‑focused data facilities typically use more water and energy than conventional centers. Fleming told commissioners she was concerned about the company’s local partner for power — Transfer Energy LP — citing news reports of prior criminal charges and investor litigation in another state. Fleming asked the court to schedule a public conversation and to require engagement by the company with local communities.
What residents want: Public hearings and greater transparency. Speakers asked the commissioners to place the item on an upcoming agenda, demand clearer disclosures from Cloudburst about water-usage estimates (including whether public drinking water would be used and where discharge would be sent), require environmental‑impact assessments, and impose protections for York Creek and dark‑sky lighting.
County staff notes: Lindsey said Hays County Development Services received a development application on Jan. 26, 2025 and that Guadalupe County had also received an application; she reported no permits had been issued as of March 21, 2025. The property contains York Creek and a floodplain/floodway in the lower portion of the parcel, she said. Commissioners did not take formal action during public comment but several indicated interest in placing the matter on a future agenda for review.
What it does not show: No permit approvals or county engineering reviews were recorded during the public‑comment period. Commissioners emphasized that no formal action can be taken during public‑comment time; staff said applications are being assigned to inspectors.
Ending note: Commissioners indicated they intend to follow up through staff if additional formal agenda consideration is requested, and residents asked for a dedicated public hearing so county staff can present environmental, drainage and permitting details and the company can respond to community questions.
