Hobart residents press board to delay fill permit tied to proposed data-center; determinations moved to next Board of Works meeting

A surge of public comments at the Hobart City Redevelopment Authority meeting centered on a contested fill permit tied to a proposed data-center development, with residents and landowners urging the board to require full engineering, independent groundwater testing and stronger erosion and drainage protections before irreversible grading proceeds.

Speakers including Barbara Telles, Elizabeth Scagliardi and Eric Morris said the fill permit is an early step that enables mass grading across a large parcel and argued the record lacks the site-specific engineering needed to assess drainage, dewatering, traffic routes and long-term impacts. "This fill permit is just one step in the final building of the data center," Barbara Telles said, warning the project would be "adversely affected" for residents who live across the street from proposed pads. "I don't find evidence property values won't be impacted," she added.

Elizabeth Scagliardi, owner of Excelsior Equestrian Center, told the board she and other farm owners are part of the local aquifer and asked for protections before the city allows large-scale earthmoving. "Our well is 50 to 60 feet deep," Scagliardi said, and she described concerns about dewatering, sediment moving into nearby ditches and the feasibility of tying a farm operation into municipal water. She urged independent baseline testing and monitoring and asked whether the city or applicant would compensate homeowners if dewatering or contamination harmed wells or property.

Eric Morris, representing nearby property owners, called for a complete engineering record before approving mass grading. He said the permit appears to authorize work on roughly 605 acres while acknowledging that final site plans, access points and traffic routing remain unresolved. "These determinations are untimely given the stage of the engineering review," Morris said, urging independent stormwater and groundwater study, no-net-increase runoff standards, escrow or bonding to cover corrective grading, and baseline well surveys with monitoring.

A separate commenter raised procedural concerns, pointing to inconsistent public notices and conflicting municipal code citations and arguing that site-plan review and required stormwater details should have come before a fill permit. Another speaker urged the city to require hydrogeologic assessment and a specialized suite of baseline water tests, including nitrates and other contaminants, and to make results publicly available because many neighbors rely on private wells.

City staff confirmed the appeals of the plan commission's February decision are before the board and told petitioners written determinations will be provided. The board did not render final determinations on the appeals at the meeting; instead, members voted to consolidate the appeals for decision at the next Board of Works meeting (the board indicated that meeting would occur on the 18th). The board also advised petitioners that executive-session consultations with legal counsel would be available prior to final determinations if needed.

Votes at a glance: the board approved routine items earlier in the meeting — acceptance of minutes and claims, several downtown vendor agreements extending through Oct. 31, a $43,000 design/bid agreement recommendation for engineering work on street projects, and a daytime film shoot request for March 22–25 — and set an unsafe-building order at 312 North Canton Street over to the April 1 meeting to allow compliance work. These routine approvals were taken by voice vote during the session.

What happens next: petitioners who appealed the plan commission's fill-permit approval will receive written findings and the board is scheduled to consider final determinations at the Board of Works meeting on the 18th. Several residents asked the city to obtain independent baseline groundwater testing, a hydrogeologic assessment of dewatering impacts, enforceable stormwater and grading guarantees, and a performance bond or escrow to cover corrective measures if post-construction drainage or groundwater harms adjacent properties.

—

Sources and attribution: quotes and claims in this report come from the meeting transcript and are attributed to speakers who either identified themselves on the record (for example, Elizabeth Scagliardi, Barbara Telles and Eric Morris) or were introduced by staff during the proceedings. Statements of scientific or technical effects (for example, the potential impacts of dewatering or pollutant mobilization) are reported as concerns raised by speakers and not as independently verified findings.