There was no shortage of passion at the Oct. 6 city council meeting, where dozens of residents expressed concern, fear and anger related to potential data center development.

Council voted 7-0 to pass an amendment that established a “data center” definition while creating standards and regulations surrounding future data center development.

“We don’t want your data center!” read a sign amid a large crowd that packed city hall, spreading into the hallways of the rotunda.

The bold messaging seemed to represent the roughly 100 residents who were nearly unanimous in their opposition to data center development.

The meeting was largely unrelated to the proposed data center at 2148 Industrial Drive. Boyle Construction’s data center proposal Aug. 13 will not have to adhere to the new restrictions of the amended ordinance.

A public hearing will be held Nov. 12 to address this particular data center.

Boyle Construction has not responded to Press requests for comment, and the highly unpopular proposal may be inevitable at this point.

Among the two dozen speakers was Laurel Chuss, who lives only about 200 feet from the proposed Industrial Drive data center. “I’m heartbroken that regulations come too late to protect my home.”

The amendments have created numerous restrictions and guardrails for data center development. Developers will need to conduct studies that range from environmental impact to energy management to water utilization, light, heat, sewer and noise related to the impact of data centers, and they cannot build data centers within 1,000-feet of homes or schools. Data centers will also be permitted only in the Industrial District by special exception. An applicant thus would need approval from the Zoning Hearing Board at a public hearing.

Council members were thorough in their questions for Director Cathy Fletcher and other Planning Commission members during their presentation.

At times, council members expressed explicit opposition to data center development.

“I’m against data centers,” councilman Bryan Callahan said while suggesting tabling the vote to create even more stringent restrictions. The sentiment in the room was that tabling would create time for big developers to submit data center applications during a vulnerable time.

The additional amendments remain a possibility.

While all council members expressed skepticism towards data center development, Councilwoman Jo Daniels received audible cheers from the anti-data center crowd for her strong stance. “You just gave them a slam dunk to get a data center,” Daniels said, addressing the Planning Commission

While she ultimately voted for the amendments, Daniels expressed deep concern throughout the night, and the need to thoroughly vet and oversee data center developers.