Residents press Norton City Council to block proposed data center; council plans moratorium

Dozens of residents packed the Norton City Council chamber on Oct. 20 to oppose a proposed data center sited near a former limestone mine and to press city officials for more vetting and stricter zoning protections.

The most immediate demand from speakers was that the city halt future data-center permits. "They're gonna be running 24/7 — that means they're gonna be running while we're asleep at night...it's gonna make a lot of us, older people ... lose a lot of sleep," said Edward E. Stevens, a Barberton resident who said he lives within a half-mile of the property under consideration.

Why it matters: Speakers said the proposed site — described in the public comments as a roughly 92-acre parcel that touches several backyards and sits over an old mine — presents potential noise, safety and land-use risks for neighborhoods in Norton and nearby Barberton. Several residents urged council to require stronger vetting of developers and to increase setbacks in industrial zoning to keep large 24-hour operations away from homes.

Council response and next steps

City administration told residents it intends to prepare a moratorium on permits for new data centers in the affected zoning classification and have it ready for the next council meeting. "We plan to have that ready for the next council meeting," said a city administration representative. He clarified that a moratorium would not affect a pending application that already is in the review queue; it would only bar future applications in the zone.

Council members repeatedly disputed social-media claims that the council had already approved a data center. "There was never a vote to approve," a council member said during the meeting. Council leadership also stated that any agreement to release the mine property would require a council vote and that, at the meeting, they did not intend to release the mine.

Concerns from residents

Speakers reported several specific worries and requests: - Noise and vibration: Edwards Stevens and others described low-frequency noise and vibration from large motors, saying 24/7 operation could disrupt sleep. - Developer transparency: Several speakers said they could not find reliable information about the developer or its "silent partners" and urged background checks and financial vetting. Michelle Yasko cited an email from the investment team saying it would "engage a new development team" and "align with our values of integrity and candor." - Land use: Lisa Pelton and others suggested alternate uses for the 92-acre property — including parks — and called for rezoning or larger buffers so industrial uses cannot be sited immediately adjacent to homes.

Process and legal limitations

City staff and council members walked the audience through zoning and permitting mechanics. Officials said the property is in an I-2 (industrial) zone, which includes a broad set of permitted uses; because of that classification, a conditional zoning permit was not required for the company’s planned use, and neighbors did not receive conditional-use notice in advance. City staff said the company has submitted a zoning application and has reached preliminary site-plan approval in the planning process, but that the application still needs council action for certain agreements to proceed.

What residents asked the council to do

Residents urged four steps: (1) immediately draft and adopt a moratorium on new data-center permits for the zoning classification, (2) require stronger background and financial vetting of developers, (3) consider rezoning or larger setbacks for industrial uses near residences, and (4) refuse to release mine property without explicit council vote and public process.

What the council pledged

Council members told the audience they heard their concerns and pledged additional steps: drafting moratorium language for the next meeting, re-examining zoning rules and considering legislation to protect the mine property from release. Several council members also emphasized they had received harsh online accusations (including claims of bribe-taking), which they denied on the record and said they found hurtful.

The next procedural step is the administration’s drafting of moratorium language for introduction at the next council meeting; the planning commission’s pending actions and any developer-submitted agreements may continue under existing rules unless council adopts changes that affect future filings.

The meeting record shows wide public opposition and a clear set of requests for changes to the city’s zoning and vetting rules; council members said they would not accept an automatic release of mine property without formal council action and promised to present proposed moratorium legislation at the next meeting.