Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hobart planning board tables large rezoning requests after residents raise traffic, pipeline and infrastructure concerns
Summary
At a Hobart City Redevelopment Authority meeting, developers seeking to rezone two large parcels from R-2 to M-1 for industrial use presented plans; heavy public comment on traffic, pipelines and potential data-center use prompted the commission to table both petitions pending traffic studies and infrastructure commitments.
The Hobart City Redevelopment Authority on Wednesday opened public hearings on two rezoning petitions seeking to change residentially zoned parcels to M-1 industrial and then tabled both after sustained public concern.
Jason Simon, founder of Wiley Capital, told the commission he was asking for the change "This evening, we are requesting a rezoning change from r 2 to m 1" to make the sites suitable for industrial and logistics users and to attract corporate investment. Simon said conceptual plans showed extensive setbacks, wetlands and buffers and that water and sewer could be extended to the sites as part of future construction.
Residents and business owners pressed the board on traffic, pipeline safety, drainage and the possibility the sites could be used for data centers rather than warehouses. "I've been here for almost 60 years. Had nothing but peace and quiet," said Robert Wright, a Clay Street resident, who warned about noise, lights and property-value impacts. Another resident urged the commission to require a traffic study before permitting warehousing: "I would hope that you would get a traffic study done before you permit, warehousing," a commenter said during public testimony.
Several commissioners said rezoning ahead of infrastructure planning risks leaving the city to pay for road and utility upgrades. One commissioner argued the board should seek a planned-unit development or a development agreement so that responsibilities for road widening, sewer and water extension and property acquisition would be defined and funded before zoning changes take effect.
After discussion, commissioners moved to table both petitions (26-02 and 26-03). The board cited the need for traffic studies, clearer infrastructure commitments and greater detail on permitted uses before making a recommendation to the city council. The tabling does not reject the requests; it postpones action until applicants return with the studies and agreements the commission requested.
The petitions will return to the planning board after the developer supplies traffic analysis and infrastructure commitments and after staff can verify how sewer, water and pipeline restrictions will be managed.
