Residents urge council to block proposed data center, citing noise, traffic and water concerns

Dozens of residents used the public‑comment period at the City of Hobart Common Council meeting on March 18 to press elected officials to halt a proposed data‑center development tied to recent annexation discussions.

Patricia, a resident who spoke during the session, urged the council not to allow the data center near 61st and 69th avenues, said a promised park had not materialized for her neighborhood and described a recent ambulance response that she said was delayed: "I say absolutely no data center at 61st And 69th Avenue," she told the council. The mayor said he would follow up with the fire department and pull call records to determine response times.

Why it matters: Residents framed the dispute as a trade‑off between future tax revenue and immediate community health and quality‑of‑life concerns. Speakers cited possible noise and air impacts from backup generators, construction traffic, the adequacy of off‑site parking and the potential for dewatering to alter groundwater chemistry.

Several commenters asked the council to adopt stricter protections before any major construction proceeds. One speaker, who identified herself on the record as Jean Clausen, asked why she had been denied agenda time at a prior meeting and pressed the council on traffic mitigation and whether developers would provide off‑site parking and bus transit arrangements during construction. Another resident, identifying herself in the record as Jennifer McQuaid, said Ross Township residents felt like a "sacrifice zone" and called for firm protections for water and air.

Council response: Mayor (speaker 1) and staff repeatedly said the city is conducting traffic studies and is developing plans for off‑site parking and bussing to reduce roadway backups during construction. On noise, councilors and residents debated whether to lower the municipal noise limit (residents suggested 55 decibels at the property line). The mayor said noise measurement must account for distance from the property line to residences and that the city would review the data and consider targeted protections for new construction.

On groundwater and dewatering, residents asked for pre‑construction baseline testing. The mayor and staff said developers had filed required soil and stormwater plans; they agreed to review those records and to follow up with more information and, where appropriate, additional testing.

What happens next: The council moved several development items forward during the meeting — including an annexation petition introduced by a project representative — and scheduled additional public hearings in April (dates discussed in the record included April 5 and April 15). Councilors and staff said they expect to continue conversations with residents, to circulate traffic and noise studies, and to follow up on groundwater records and ambulance call‑time data.

The public comment period at the March 18 meeting made clear the depth of local opposition and the specific technical issues — noise limits, traffic routing, groundwater testing and emergency‑response timelines — that the council will need to address before the project proceeds.