Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Community representative urges Planning Commission to reject data center next to proposed high‑rise housing (PD25‑013)
Summary
A community representative told the San Jose Planning Commission that option B of site development proposal PD25‑013 would place three 29–30‑story residential towers beside an eight‑story data center, creating noise, pollution and an underused downtown block; the commission heard the concerns during public comment.
A community representative told the San Jose Planning Commission that the proposed PD25‑013 development would pair three 29–30‑story residential towers with an adjacent eight‑story data center and that the combination is inappropriate for the downtown block bounded by San Carlos, San Salvador, 2nd and 1st streets.
"The proposal, option B in particular, calls for the construction of three high rises, residential towers of 29 to 30 stories," said Sharad Lin, who introduced himself as representing community groups. Lin said the plan also includes an eight‑story data center with a reported 22‑megawatt power load and "22 1‑megawatt backup generators," and that its roof cooling equipment would make the data center nearly as tall as the towers.
Lin warned of proximity and environmental impacts, saying the nearest residential tower would sit roughly 43 feet from the data center and that that distance would create "noise, there's pollution" when generators operate and would leave an empty block not suitable for downtown retail and residential uses. "It's just inappropriate to locate this data center next to these residential towers," he said.
The remarks were delivered during the meeting’s public comment period; commissioners did not take a formal position on the proposal at the meeting. Staff did not provide a response on the record to Lin’s technical claims about generators or cooling equipment. The commission’s role on rezonings and general plan amendments is advisory to the San Jose City Council; appeals and final decisions would be made by the council, which the deputy director said will consider related items in August.
What happened next: the chair thanked the speaker and the meeting proceeded to the consent calendar. Any technical details Lin cited — including the 22‑megawatt figure, the description of backup generators and the 43‑foot separation — were reported as claims by the public commenter and were not verified on the record by staff during this meeting.
Next steps: PD25‑013, and any rezoning or approvals tied to that site, would follow the city’s public hearing process and ultimately be considered by the City Council; members of the public may raise issues at subsequent hearings or in writing as specified by municipal code.
