Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident warns Hewitt council about nearby proposed hyperscale data‑center project
Summary
A county resident told the council about a proposed Lacy Lake View Data District project he described as a 1.2‑gigawatt hyperscale complex with large water and power demands and potential annexation and eminent‑domain implications, and urged municipal leaders to seek transparency and regulatory safeguards.
During public comment, Sean Terrell of Ross described a proposed project in neighboring Lacy Lake View that he said should concern every city in the county. Terrell identified the developer name in the transcript as "Impre DC Parks" and called the project the Lacy Lake View Data District. He characterized the proposal as a hyperscale industrial complex with roughly 1.2 gigawatts of on‑site gas generation, approximately 1 gigawatt of cooling capacity, and 15–16 million gallons per day of water treatment and reuse — figures he presented to illustrate the proposed project's scale and potential resource impacts.
Terrell, who said he works in data‑center construction and is active with a Ross community group, described the likely multi‑year construction impacts (heavy concrete pours, oversized crane components and sustained truck movements), possible annexation of land beyond current municipal boundaries, and a public‑private model for utilities he described as untested. He warned that the project could strain roads, emergency services and housing during prolonged construction and suggested cities may have limited leverage once annexation and utility easements begin.
Terrell urged the council and other elected bodies in the county to demand transparency, ask questions and participate in county‑level discussions; he offered a website (wacoatcenter.com) for more information and invited council members to a public event planned for Earth Day. Council did not debate the claims during public comment, and no staff response to the factual assertions was recorded on the record during the meeting.
The council did not act on the item; the statements reported here reflect Mr. Terrell’s claims to the council and should be treated as allegations or community concerns rather than established facts. No municipal approvals or formal city actions related to the project were recorded in this meeting.
