Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Data Center topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press city over proposed data center and annexation; council says traffic and noise studies are under way
Summary
Residents at the Hobart meeting urged the council to reject or better regulate a proposed data‑center development tied to a 6.66‑acre annexation, raising concerns about traffic, noise, groundwater and emergency response; councilors said studies, off‑site parking plans and required filings are being prepared.
Corey (resident) and other speakers used the public‑comment period at the March 18 Hobart meeting to press elected officials on a proposed data center linked to a voluntary annexation of about 6.66 acres near I‑65 and 37th Avenue.
"I say absolutely no data center at 61st And 69th Avenue," said Corey (Resident), who also recounted a delayed ambulance response at a family emergency and asked whether the city could guarantee replacement wells if municipal or private wells failed.
The annexation itself was introduced earlier in the agenda by Richard Anderson, who described the site as "coming in as, M 1" industrial and said the parcel was about "6.66 acres," and staff noted an updated Baker Tilly fiscal plan reflecting a small correction to the acreage. Council moved to set the annexation for a public hearing, which staff said would be scheduled if the council so directed.
Residents repeatedly raised traffic and noise concerns. Jean Clausen (Resident) asked whether the project had off‑site parking and warned that construction check‑in procedures could back traffic up onto nearby arterials: "Where's the off‑site parking drive?" she asked, and pressed council members to meet directly with New Carlisle officials and project representatives.
Council members and staff said traffic studies, site‑specific parking plans and mitigation concepts are in progress. The presiding official said the city has "traffic study after traffic study" and expects to evaluate peak hours, parking and off‑site shuttling to limit roadway backups.
Health and environmental questions were also raised. A resident referenced a physician's opinion that the development could worsen respiratory problems; speakers asked whether dewatering for construction would change concentrations of preexisting farm chemicals in groundwater. Council and staff replied that the developer had submitted soil and site tests required for permits and that stormwater and silt controls are part of the construction filings, and agreed to follow up on detailed groundwater baseline testing requests.
On noise, residents urged lowering the city’s residential noise thresholds for new construction; council members acknowledged the concern but said a city‑wide ordinance change would have broad consequences that require study and possible exemptions for institutions such as hospitals. Officials pointed to engineering mitigations (plantings, shielding, directional lighting) and noted other municipalities have pursued data‑center specific standards.
The mayor and staff offered to continue direct follow‑up with residents, to confer with the physician named by speakers, to share technical files on site testing and to provide additional public meetings. No final land‑use decisions were made during the public‑comment exchange; the annexation remains scheduled for future public hearings and formal review.
Looking ahead, staff said project documents and permitting filings are on the public record and that the council will consider formal testimony and studies at the public hearing stage.
