Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everybody. I'd like to welcome everybody to the September 15th Planning Commission meeting. If you'd please silence your phones, that would be appreciated. I'd like to recognize Christine, I'm sorry, Bob Sievert, Township Attorney, Jonathan Palin, Township Planner, Ava Miller, and Joe Baum from Gibbals-Webster,

and with that it's now seven o'clock and would you please stand for the pledge of allegiance i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice

Would like to take roll call Kathy Bosberg Eric Heider Alton James Kevin who's tech here Rick LaBelle here Brian Carr Yeah, Mark. We know Carl Leonard's here and rich brokart is excused I I'd like to make a motion to approve the minutes from the last meeting, which was the date September 1st.

Support.

Motion by Carl, support by Mark. Are there any questions? Seeing there's no questions, all in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. I'd like to make a motion to approve tonight's agenda as submitted. Motion by Carol supported by Kevin. Any questions? There's no questions. All in favor. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Uh, tonight we just have, uh, I won't skip to that. We do have just one item on the agenda tonight. It's a public hearing. Uh, there's public comments. If you'd like to talk about anything, whether it's on the agenda or not on the agenda, please come up, sign in, state your name, and you have three minutes.

So please feel free to come on up. What's that?

And you'll have time during the agenda for that public hearing. But if you have anything else you'd like to talk about, now's the time. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Um, my name is Sherry dance me. I'm a Chesterfield resident and I have questions, uh, regarding the proposed language for data centers that I would, um, like to raise and would appreciate, um, remarks regarding those if there's time. Oh, one question is, has Chesterfield received any request for data centers? Um, or do you expect to in the near future? Um, also in the proposed language, I believe it said that the distance from residential zones would be 1000 feet. So I'm wondering if that means that a data center could potentially be 1000 feet from Residential home or just the zone so just requesting clarification on that Those are my comments or questions, thank you so much for your questions when we When we get into the actual public hearing

Um, that is some of the things that are going to be talked about as well. So if any, if there's any more questions about the actual, the agenda item, you should probably wait until the public hearing, but we'll address those two questions when that public hearing has been open. Thank you so much.

I would like to make a motion to open. Uh, was there anybody else? Sorry. Anybody else want to come up? No. Okay. like to make a motion to open the public hearing. motion by Carol supported by Kathy to open up public hearing.

Um, so with that, Carl, did you have to close the public hearing? I'm sorry.

I'm sorry.

Did you have to make a motion to close the public hearing? The comments that the public comments? No, no, no, no.

It's just open, open comments. Um, yeah. Uh, all in favor. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Mr. LaBelle has something to add to the opening comments.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. First of all, I'd like to recognize three letters that the township received. One from Brandon Nelband. We received that. It's dated September the 14th. One from Matthew Calabrese. He's from T-Mobile, which was also dated on September the 14th. And the last one is from Kenneth Baker from Selfridge, your National Guard base, which was received on September the 15th. And I just like to make one statement as well is tonight's agenda item. The public hearing is to discuss the proposed ordinance changes, the proposed ordinance for a data center. At this time, we don't have, to my knowledge, we don't have any request. Nobody's requested to put a data center in Chesterfield township. We're just preparing if in fact it does happen. And that's what this is. Tonight's tonight's. That's what tonight's proposed agenda is. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. LaBelle. Um, with that, I believe Joe bomb's going to, uh, speak on this, uh,

document thank you yes thank you thank you mr. chair thank you everyone Jill Bain with Giffles Webster tonight we have a slideshow and if you've been watching before if you've attended a meeting you may have seen part of this overview. So it's a little bit of an overview of what data centers are, um, why we're seeing requests. Although as Mr LaBelle noted, we have not seen any requests or applications for data centers here, but why we need to be prepared for them. Um, and there's been a lot, a lot of discussion on data centers and just rapidly evolving, um, needs and, um, conditions and issues across the country. ON THESE DATA CENTERS. SO WHY DO WE NEED THEM? THEY REPRESENT A STORAGE AND OPERATIONS FOR ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, CLOUD COMPUTING. THERE'S THINGS THAT WE USE EVERY DAY LIKE SMARTPHONE APPS, LIKE BANKING, LIKE EMAIL AND SOCIAL MEDIA. BUSINESSES USE THEM. THEY USE FOR OPERATIONS, LOGISTICS. We use them for navigation, for mapping, for entertainment, for media streaming, healthcare, emergency services, and really what's becoming very evident. I think to most people is that everything is connected. So in everyday terms, we see this as very, very rapidly growing technology. In fact, I just updated this slide today looking at the electricity, the second bullet. But essentially, this is the data, the streaming, the services, the cloud computing, the AI, it's always on 24-7 behind the scenes, every text, video call. Payment and stream runs through them. Right now, these data centers are using including cryptocurrency and this transaction is the cloud computing and all of that, about 2% of the world's electricity. It's about 6% of the U.S. total of all of our electricity. That is set to triple by 2030, and this was a new update between 9 and 17% of the U.S. electricity. That one was from an analysis group called the Energy Systems and Climate Analysis Group. They are a research group for the energy industry. and utilities. They noted that that electricity demand was 60% higher than prior scenarios. So again, and these are just scenarios. These are them trying to predict and help the utilities and the energy providers anticipate the needs that are coming. There's a 50 to 5 million gallons of water a day, and that depends on the size of the facility. A smaller facility, one that maybe is co-locating with something else, could use on the lower end where a hyperscaler like Google might use one over a million gallons a day. The footprint of the largest data centers can reach 10 million square feet. These are very, right now, there are a few of them across the country, but there's a lot of investment that needs to happen to make developments of that scale and size. Really, what we probably have been hearing more recently is the share of the global capacity of these data centers. The Americas and that South America, Central America, and North America have 50% of the share of data centers across the world and represent 60% in local employment activity, primarily activity regarding construction, but certainly other jobs that are associated with these. The objectives of the data centers, they're trying to do three things in the data center. So the first thing is latency. And what that means is they are trying to reduce the amount of time it takes to store, transmit, and process data. So the faster we can get data, the better service we will get. And so that means that we want to make sure that we are along the lines being able to service these things between the people who need this computer data. Redundancy, we want to ensure seamless, uninterrupted service through the number and strength of backup systems in place. So many of the data centers are maybe duplicates of other things and other data stored elsewhere. And then security. And this is both physical security and electronic security. So data centers are very mindful of both cyber security, cyber threats, people coming in and damaging things, but also to the physical structures themselves and the physical pieces of hardware themselves. So we have several different types of data centers that are available to be built. You'll see co-location or retail data centers that might serve multiple businesses in a shared environment. So there are some examples of these. They tend to be smaller in size, and it might be something where multiple doctor's offices are sharing a data center storage capacity for their medical records or things like that. An edge data center, they're smaller data centers located near the end user, so the people who are using the data, they process data locally. So they can be between 5 and 50,000 square feet and be between 5 and 20 megawatts of capacity or electrical power available to the data center. So when we're talking about data centers, we frequently hear not only the size, but we're talking about their electrical capacity or the load that they need. Enterprise systems operated by a company for its own use for internal operations. So that might be someone like Costco or a larger business where they're going to have their own internal operations and everything will be run through that. They can be larger if we thought of maybe a distribution center of some kind. They could run between 50 and 100,000 square feet and between 20 and 50 megawatts of capacity. and then the hyperscale. These are the larger, the Amazon, the Googles, any data center, the Metas, any data center type can be hyperscale. It's really relating to the energy usage and size of the center. So over 100,000 square feet to a million square feet and a hundred or more megawatts of capacity. We may also hear the term cloud providers and It's an interesting term because it's not really in the cloud. It's actually in a physical building. But those would be things like Amazon Web Services, Google Cloud, IBM Cloud, things that are using that for both consumer storage as well as business storage too through the internet. So where do the data centers want to be? They want to be where there is electricity, where they're near a utility that can produce and transmit required power for current and future demand. They would like to see good connectivity, where fiber routes are available and connected, cooling, which is very important for the equipment, sufficient water or coolant is available, natural hazards, so minimizing risk, particularly from flooding, but certainly other kinds of natural hazards. storms and things of that nature, and compatibility. So many look for areas with similar uses that produce noise vibration and diesel fumes from generators. They understand what they have and their needs are. I also updated this map from the last time that we showed it, and it looks like I didn't delete the one behind it. But there is an industry database called the Data Center Map, and you can look at that, datacentermap.com. And this still holds true that over 4,000 data centers built and under development, a third of them are located in the three states of Virginia, Texas, and California. There they're attracted to the availability of power, land, and network access. Many states want their construction jobs, the local tax revenue, and future business opportunities. So we have this and then we can zoom in a little bit more closely in our area on the right there in Southeast Michigan. So you can see more of them in the Western Macomb, Oakland County, Wayne County areas. So in Michigan there are about 70 to 80 data centers of varying sizes. The state of Michigan offers tax incentives tied to the size and value of larger centers bring. There is a sales tax exemption for qualified data center equipment and that is a long-term sales tax exemption for $250 million in digital infrastructure and 30 jobs at 150% of the area median income. So the state is looking for good paying jobs and a significant investment into a local community. Those incentives are intended to keep the resulting property tax revenues in the local community. There are two other components that the state of Michigan has. The Michigan Affordable and Responsible Growth Action Plan. Governor Whitmer asked the legislature to adopt data center safeguards of the Michigan Public Service Commission. So these are rules that the Michigan Public Service Commission has for users of the electrical and utilities in the state related to the minimum billing demand, contract termination fees, minimum contract terms. credit and collateral requirements and other efforts to ensure data centers are paying the full cost of putting on the system. So again, these are standards that the MPSC already has, but the legislature has been asked to adopt these into law. And then there's the Michigan Affordable and Responsible Growth Pledge, which is a package of commitments. And this is a contract between Anthropic, Google, Microsoft, OpenAI, Oracle, and Veris. These are the ones that have so far agreed to a certain set of standards, good paying jobs, ensuring companies pay for their own costs including water and energy. And that is something that primarily I think is related to the larger companies with the larger investments. One of the concerns that people rightly have is over energy usage. Data centers use a lot of energy. Most of the energy is for the computer chips that perform trillions of calculations every second. And the cooling systems that prevent the servers from overheating are the next major draw of electricity. So the US data centers consumed 183 terawatt hours of electricity. This is 4% of the total energy consumption. That's a different figure than the one that I had earlier. I didn't update the slide, but you can assume that that's more. Well, that was two years ago, the 2024. So by 2030, the amount is going to grow significantly. Still geographically, with Virginia having 26% of their total electricity supply going to data centers, And then next is North Dakota. In 2024, most of the electricity came from natural gas, 40%, followed by renewables at 24%, and then nuclear and coal. And that is likely to change and increase in each one of those categories as the demand continues to rise. So for the cooling systems, again, the servers and equipment generate significant heat. Water is one of the most efficient ways to remove the heat. Right now we see closed loop water systems where there's a water or water glycol mix that circulates through in a sealed loop and it's reused. It's the highest cost to install and maintain and it does generate higher electricity usage. But that's opposed to the open water loop system where water is exposed to the air and evaporates to remove the heat, requires a constant replenishment of fresh water and it does use less energy. As I said at the beginning, this is an evolving technology and rapidly changing that it's very likely that we'll see more technology advances using reclaimed water sourcing, hybrid systems, and other systems to address water usage for cooling. With site design, this is another area that we were looking at that's different from other kinds of industrial type uses. Again, with the security issues, there's high security facilities requiring fencing and cameras. Building heights tend to increase for mechanical equipment. Lighting must support security without creating glare and spillover. There isn't a need for excessive parking. When they are regulated, they should align with the staffing needs of the facility. But another important thing to think about are phasing plans, including plans for parking of construction workers. Also, if there's going to be a campus scenario and there are going to be multiple data centers, it's good to be aware of that and be planning for that up front. so now we get to the township regulations so why is chesterfield considering making some amendments we know we haven't had any data center applications yet but it's currently not a listed use and we want to be ahead of the head of the game if you will michigan law states that zoning ordinances shall not have the effect of totally prohibiting the establishment of a land use which means that we can't just prohibit them outright rather looking at districts where they seem to make the most sense, where they fit, and then addressing other standards that go along with those. So we have uses that are permitted by right, which means they simply satisfy ordinance standards, and then we have other uses in the zoning ordinance which are permitted especially in uses, and those are uses that we say are generally okay in that district, but they may require a little bit more attention and special consideration requiring a public hearing. So if we think about what a similar use would be, we think about what does it do? What are the other characteristics? What kind of buildings? What kind of traffic? What kind of parking demand and customer interaction? it seems like a warehouse might be similar it's a very large storage facility minimal customer foot traffic and then focus our regulations on mitigating the impacts of those uses that we anticipate including noise water usage and discharge public safety concerns noise and other uses nuisances impacts from generators and cooling equipment so the township has in its general code section on noise standards and then the zoning ordinance also has performance standards and actually in multiple places in the zoning ordinance limiting noise levels along with other nuisance categories. So part of what we have been discussing is how to update these standards and we'll talk about that in a second. There are currently township parking standards for industrial and warehouse. A 50,000 square foot building at our five space to 500 square feet of floor area would require about 105 spaces, which seems excessive. GIVEN THE SMALL NUMBER OF PEOPLE WORKING IN THE DATA CENTER ONCE IT'S CONSTRUCTED. BUILDING HEIGHT, WE TALKED ABOUT THE EXISTING INDUSTRIAL STANDARDS LIMITING THE HEIGHT TO 35 FEET. WE DIDN'T REALLY MAKE ANY MODIFICATIONS TO THAT SECTION. AND THEN BUILDING DESIGN, AND THE ZONING ORDERS DOES INCLUDE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS AS WELL. SO WHERE SHOULD THEY GO? CONVERSATION HAS BEEN OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS AREN'T REALLY APPROPRIATE DUE TO HEIGHT AND POTENTIAL NUISANCE CONCERNS FOR SOME OF OUR LARGER SCALE DATA CENTERS THAT WE WERE DISCUSSING EARLIER. INDUSTRIAL USES MAY HAVE USES WITH SIMILAR IMPACTS, THINKING ABOUT THE NOISE, MAYBE THE LIGHTING, SOME OF THE OTHER CONDITIONS AND HOURS OF OPERATION. And before we get into what the proposed standards are, I think it's helpful to look back at the timeline of the 2026 planning commission meetings. And I'm sorry that the site is so slow or small. Um, but you can see that there've been 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, including nine tonight meetings with the planning commission has had this slide show. You've all seen the planning commission seen this slide show probably four times. as we've gone through this process. Um, we've talked about ordinance outline. We've talked about, um, updating different parts of the ordinance. We've also included the fire department and the department of public works presenting and answering questions to the planning commission, um, as well as the township hired a noise consultant and acoustician, uh, to talk about noise regulations. And that's resulted in, uh, two sets of standards, uh, that will be updated. And so tonight is the public hearing on that draft. The draft's been available. Essentially, I'll just boil these down to the smaller things, and then we can answer questions as they come up. Adding definitions, we did not have in the township zoning ordinance any standards for battery energy storage systems. We thought that would be useful in anticipating the energy needs and demands of these types of uses. data centers, high intensity industrial development. So we've included this because we are recognizing that there are potentially other uses that also have potential negative impacts and trying to accommodate that as well, not singling out one particular use, the data center, but actually noting that there could be other uses that have some of the same characteristics. And then nameplate capacity, as I mentioned, the term that explains the energy output of a facility. So where to allow data centers? Accessory data centers is also a term that we've defined, and that would be something that's within a building. So for example, we have an example here of Michigan Medicine. in Ann Arbor, they brought a data center in-house. So they said that with this they allow for better security and control of their own data. Their website notes that the data included, and this was their comparison, about 72 million filing cabinets full of information. So an accessory data center would be, there's a limit on the size, no energy storage is permitted on site, The access is from inside the principal use and all the mechanical equipment is fully enclosed. For the higher intensity industrial uses, an increase for screening and setbacks from certain uses, a note about public safety requirements for public safety, fire and emergency response plans, prohibiting hazardous contaminants into our water discharge, requiring the data centers demonstrate an ability to update their systems as new technologies make water more EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE. ENERGY USAGE, DEMONSTRATE ENERGY IS AVAILABLE, ALL SOURCES ARE REQUIRED TO BE IDENTIFIED, WHETHER THEY'RE DRAWING DIRECTLY FROM A HIGH TENSION LINE OR IF THEY'RE USING MULTIPLE SOURCES, THE TOWNSHIP IS GOING TO REQUIRE THAT BE IDENTIFIED. um requiring that outside agency approvals are required there are some things that the township does not have control over but asking for evidence that other agencies and entities are approving the project and then decommissioning returning the buildings to a usable state we do have some standards on better battery energy storage systems we have the new siting law from 2023 that allows communities some different options is how they're going to permit these are the large scale the the projects that exceed 50 megawatts the township could adopt a compatible renewable energy ordinance at CREO or allow or create their own standards, workable zoning regulations, or just defer to the state for the Michigan Public Service Commission approval for that. This draft ordinance is largely compatible with the state law. The standards address setbacks, screening, lighting, stormwater management, fire and emergency response plans and decommissioning. And just showing the two dramatically different sizes, the 2024, that's a rendering of a project in Trenton from DTE. And then compared to the bottom where we may start to see more residential battery storage systems. The performance standards, enhancing and adding to standards already in place, so things like odor, vibration, airborne matter, dust, and things like that, just enhancing those. Those are standards that already existed in the ordinance and applied to a variety of things. These will continue to apply to a variety of things. but also noting that the noise standards have been consolidated and then the general code provisions have been updated as well. So the public hearing won't address the general code provisions. That'll go right to the township board. There's additional provisions that were added, requirements for development impact statements for like related to the environment, environmental impact statements, traffic impact statements, which the township didn't have previously so these may be useful for other circumstances like rezoning requests or plan unit development helping the planning commission know and applicants know when they may be required to submit a traffic impact statement so these are good things to also include and then the phasing plan standard so again requiring review and approval for construction that's phased over a multi-year period So our next steps, we are right now at the second bullet, holding the public hearing. When the Planning Commission is comfortable with this language, they will make a recommendation to the Township Board, and the Township Board takes final action and adopts the new ordinance standards. Oh, great, I just beat the buzzer.

Thank you very much. Is there anything else being added by us? If not, we can take some questions from the audience. Step up, state your name, and sign in, and hit the little red button in the corner. Thank you.

Hi, my name's Carolyn Smith, and I am a resident of Chesterfield. I'd like to ask you all a question before I say anything else. How many of you have actually done any physical research other than this? No one? you've done extensive research, then you know that some of these figures are off.

Excuse me, ma'am. What we're going to do is, any questions you have?

Yes, I want to know if you...

Excuse me. Any questions you have, you can put them out to us, and then when it comes back to the board, then we'll answer those. We're not going to go back and forth right now.

Have you...

Thank you.

What are you going to do about the toxic waste these things create?

It's all noted, and it will be addressed when you're done. Thank you.

Hopefully you don't approve this.

Anyone else like to come up, please.

Again, my name is Sherry dance. We are also a Chesterfield resident and I have a few questions. Um, Within the proposed language, I did not see anything regarding cost containment for water or energy. And I'm wondering if that will be added or if it could be considered. Also, is there a maximum size in terms of what types of data centers could be uh... approved in terms of wattage enter in terms of energy use or in terms of the land size that could be approved for a data center and i thought that there are impact assessments but i didn't see uh... assessments specifically for in public safety, and I'm also wondering if that could be required annually if data centers are approved of the data center operators to basically continue to prove that their assessments are still accurate. And those are all of my questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Hello. Hi. If you could state your name and sign in, please.

Yeah. Hi. My name is Kathleen . I live in Chesterfield. I first heard about this meeting about two hours ago when my friend dropped off a paper saying you were having this meeting. my question is before you make any decision on anything like this the general public should be notified on it in an unfashioned where people know about it because with only five people here for this is a huge deal from what i understand like in Lenox Township, I go there all the time to see my daughter, and there's signs all over the place saying, no data, no data, no data. So it's not a popular thing, obviously. There's a lot of concerns. So I guess my question is, will the general public be notified by Facebook or something that people utilize? There's not that many people read newspapers anymore, so. And are you thinking about doing this now or you're just doing the research or are you really thinking about taking property and doing this? And if so, we're at. So that's what my questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else?

Just sign this, sir.

Yes, please.

GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS BRANDON. I'M A CHESTERFIELD TOWNSHIP RESIDENT. AS YOU NOTED, I PROVIDED SOME DETAILED WRITTEN COMMENTS REGARDING THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR TONIGHT. I DON'T WANT TO SPEND TIME GOING BACK THROUGH ALL THE THINGS I NOTED IN THE COMMENT THERE, BUT I DID JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT TWO ISSUES I BELIEVE DESERVE CONSIDERATION BEFORE ANYTHING GOES TO THE TOWNSHIP BOARD. FIRST, WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE ELECTRICAL INFRASTRUCTURE COMES BEFORE OR IS LOCATED AWAY FROM THE DEVELOPMENT, IT ULTIMATELY SUPPORTS. THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE ADDRESSES ADDITIONAL SUBSTATIONS NEEDED TO SUPPORT HIGH INTENSITY DEVELOPMENTS, SPECIFICALLY THOSE LOCATED ON-SITE OR ADJACENT. BUT SUBSTATIONS SERVING LARGE DEVELOPMENTS AREN'T NECESSARILY ON-SITE OR ADJACENT. THERE ARE DOCUMENTED EXAMPLES. I GAVE THEM. I don't know if those get put into a record somewhere if I need to go through my chem, but there's two specific ones I highlighted where properties had substations that were off-site three miles, five miles away from the data center. Those examples don't tell us anything about what is happening here in Chesterfield. They simply demonstrate that physical proximity isn't necessarily what determines whether electrical infrastructure supports a particular development. THIS IS ESPECIALLY RELEVANT TO ME BECAUSE WHEN TOWNSHIP BOARD INITIATED THIS ORDINANCE REVIEW WITH TRUSTEE JOSEPH IN JANUARY, HE RAISED HIS CONCERNS ABOUT RELYING ON DTE TO NOTIFY CHESTERFIELD BEFORE A POTENTIAL DATA CENTER PROJECT MATERIALIZED, INCLUDING THE POSSIBILITY OF PROPERTY BEING ACQUIRED BEFORE A FORMAL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL REACHED THE TOWNSHIP. IF WE'RE TRYING TO GET AHEAD OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS, WE ALSO NEED TO GET AHEAD OF THEIR SUPPORTING INFRASTRUCTURE. AND MY SECOND CONCERN IS WHAT HAPPENS IF A SUBSTATION THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE DATA CENTER IS PROPOSED. SO DTE OWNS APPROXIMATELY FOUR ACRES OF PROPERTY BEHIND MY HOME IN KING'S POINT SUBDIVISION. THEY PURCHASED THAT PROPERTY IN JANUARY OF 2022, AND BEFORE THAT PURCHASE, THEY HAD A GRID PLAN ALREADY IDENTIFIED LEGITIMATE CAPACITY CONCERNS IN THE NEW BALTIMORE AND CHESTERFIELD AREA, AND IT'S CLEAR THAT we need to improve the electrical capacity in the township. But in 2024, township officials informed me about the tentative plans at the property. More recently, substantial vegetation clearing has occurred on the property. I spoke with planning director Palin and he informed me that DT has not informed the planning department of the extent or timeline of its plans. So I just want to be very clear that I have obviously no evidence that there's a data center BEING PROPOSED IN THIS PROPERTY HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THAT. AND LET'S ASSUME IT ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT. BUT IT RAISES AN IMPORTANT QUESTION. WHAT PROTECTIONS APPLY TO THE ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD NEXT DOOR IF A NEW SUBSTANTIALLY EXPANDED SUBSTATION IS CONSTRUCTED THERE? WE ALREADY HAVE ORDINANCE PROVISIONS ADDRESSING TRANSFORMER SUBSTATION, SCREENING, TREE PRESERVATION, LANDSCAPING AND SITE PLAN REVIEW. I'm asking the commission and township and the township attorneys to determine how those provisions apply to modern electrical infrastructure. Uh, immediately that might cut off. Okay.

Thank you very much. Anyone else? Please state your name and sign in.

Mike Wharton. The biggest aspects of what is going to happen with the continuous application of data centers around the entire country, but particularly in rural communities or suburban communities such as this one, is the bottleneck it creates in a multitude of different things. We're talking about the fact of You cite the facts and figures in the slideshow regarding how minimal usage of resources are applied with data centers on a national scale, but this isn't taking into consideration isolated data center applications within communities. And it's made worse by the current geopolitical climate, where you have shortages of oil. And what we haven't felt yet, which we will in the wintertime, is natural gas. A lot of natural gas has been lost in the Middle East. And this will create a massive problem when it gets cold here, as people are using it not just for electricity, but for warming their homes. And that's going to add to the bills. with this, you know, we have to start asking ourselves the question, are we willing to put in a data center or two to add to those problems when we are already dealing with resource failings here at home? This isn't the same as say like 2019 where, you know, like electrical rates were pretty reasonable and cheap and we had had like stability for about two decades throughout the 2000s and 2010s regarding energy usage and overall data consumption. But in the 2020s, we've been dealt a double blow of this massive rise in data centers and a critical lack of energy that we need in here in 2026 because of the conflicts, because of tariffs, because of the trade wars, because of a multitude of different factors. Furthermore, something that hasn't really ever been discussed regarding all of this is how a lot of this stuff lines up almost perfectly with about 26, 27 years ago. And if, uh, I know I was just a kid at the time when it was happening, but a lot of people don't remember something called the dot com bubble. And during this, Tech companies were overinflated with a multitude of capital injections because of people wanting to get rich quick from the dot coms. This led to a massive surge, hundreds of billions of dollars from private and public investment into things like fiber optic cables and a multitude of other technological advances. This was also fueled by the Y2K conversion and everything of that nature. After 2000, 2001 kind of happened, all that fell apart. All these companies fell apart because they were all based on actual no-profit capabilities. And a lot of this could also be the same hype for AI. There's no proven profitability from a lot of this stuff, and we're building up the infrastructure that could eventually be left with us paying for it and not benefiting from it. So err on the whim of caution when developing all of these centers.

Thank you. Thank you very much. Is there anyone else that would like to come up?

No?

Seeing as everybody's come up that wanted to, I'm going to bring it back to the board. Well, do we is do we a reply to a closed public hearing first? I'm gonna make a motion to close the public hearing that support Motion to close the public hearing by Carl supported by mark all in favor aye opposed motion carries so with that uh... will bring it back up to the board and kathy would you like to get started okay thank you mister chair

I would like to address a few of the, some of the comments that were, questions that were asked. And I think every member of this board has researched quite a bit and has read a lot And also some of us have visited a data center to see what, what, um, how it operates, the noise level, things like that. So, um, we, we've, as that one slide showed since the beginning of the year, we've been, um, talking about it. We've been getting information about it. We've been sharing information. Sometimes we even send each other articles and things like that. So we have been looking at that, and we have been, I think, educating ourselves. And just today we got some additional information, so we continue to be educated on that. and um and regarding questions about are we considering setting aside property for a data center i that's not something the township would do as you recall in the um one of the slides said that the state state statute we can't we can't eliminate we can't tell certain businesses they may not be here but we can provide zoning for that which is what this is part of and we're our planning we're making changes to our our planning ordinances and they It's the property owners who would actually be approached by a company that might want to put in a data center and they would They to sell their property or to rent their property or whatever that would come Through an application to the planning department. So that's that's all for now. I

Thank you. Eric?

Yeah, just to expand on what Kathy said is we're not here to design data centers or prove actually data centers. We're here to make sure that we're ready for our ordinance if it ever does come. Thank you.

Alton?

Yes, firstly, I want to thank public comments and questions. Very much appreciate it. One of the things that I want to raise for discussion or for consideration for the board moving forward is I know one of the questions was regarding water usage. That's one of the things that I'm concerned about the most. I would love if we could. potentially mandate a closed loop system or any future technologies that are water mitigating technologies, if that's going to be utilized for a coolant system, if we can make any type of provisions around that. The other thing that I would love to address, because one of the questions from the public came up regarding are there any size restrictions for these facilities? And I think a great provision would be something along the lines of a certain percentage of their power usage has to come from renewable energy or something that's not going to be draining township resources, especially since people raised the concern about DZE's capacity. One gentleman was talking about substations and their Lack of proximity maybe to the primary building, those are things that I think are important to call out and to address as well, that the aggregate utilization of resources from a particular center. And one of the other things that I want to call out, there's some inconsistencies, I think, between the master plan or some of our other language regarding battery storage. I was trying to ask a colleague here what... Were there any reasons as to why there was any type of rules against battery storage? From my vantage point, as long as they're adhering to fire safety and everything, I think that that's a good utilization because a blanket, non-use of battery storage could be problematic. I mean, even as small as something like an uninterruptible power supply, which most of you guys probably use in your offices. It's connected to your computer, so if the power goes out, your computer doesn't crash. I would like to see maybe the language changed around that, but I don't want to take up too much time. I'll pass it on to the rest of the board.

Thank you. Mark, you have anything to add?

Just a couple things. One, I did send a list of what I felt were needed corrections to Jonathan last night. I'm assuming those were received by Joe. Okay, thank you. Because I'd love to see some of those things addressed. We had a couple conflicts in the draft as it was listed. And then getting the additional letters, I want to evaluate those. There seem to be some good points and valid points that we need to take into consideration when trying to establish our settings for this. But then the other question I had was, do we have any idea, it looks like we're wanting to limit it to the M1, M2 districts. How many of those actually exist in the township again? I forget.

we can look it up for you and get back.

Yeah, I was just curious. I didn't recall how many of those, um, how many of those are actually in there. So cause that would also play into this as well because between the fact that they have to be a thousand feet from residential and how many of those are actually out there, there may be a very limited number of sites that actually would qualify for Chesterfield. So something to keep in mind. So thank you. Thank you. Uh, Kevin,

Thank you, Mr. Chair. First of all, I want to thank everybody for coming out tonight and sharing your thoughts and your ideas on this topic. This has definitely been quite a journey since February of 2026 this year. I am fairly new to this commission, but I am fully caught up on all the work that had happened previously. And then in my professional life, I have a lot of experience with just technologies and understanding where data centers are headed. So aside from this, I've had an opportunity to tour several data centers and look at the different types that exist. The one that was displayed from Switch out in Grand Rapids, I got to walk through that one. A lot of my fellow colleagues already mentioned things that I was going to bring up, One of the most important things to me too is with the water, just if we can find a way to really lock it into a closed loop system. And then I am interested about some of these items that were raised with the electrical infrastructure that might be on adjacent properties. The one thing I did notice, there was a few little I think just copy and paste errors. I noticed there wasn't any time listed for any of the noise ordinances, but, um, I'm sure that just wasn't put in here. Um, otherwise I think what I wanted to cover has already been covered. So at this time, thank you.

Thank you. Uh, Brian.

Um, well, I mean I, I did write down questions. I'm sure Mr Bell will answer some of them as well. First, I'll try to answer at least the ones that I wrote down. Hopefully I captured most of them, but I think we already covered any requests. So that's been covered that we don't currently have any requests. There's another question on the 1,000-foot setback to residential. That is to the property line of the nearest residential lot. So not to the actual residence, but to the property line. So that should answer that. You also asked about if we could put some cost constraints for the utilities. I'm not aware of how that would actually work. Again, we can't. All we can do is put requirements in place to make sure that they've done their due diligence, that they do come into our community. So they're going to have to do an actual utility study with each of the respective utilities to make sure that there is enough usage or there's enough availability for the intended use and they're going to provide if they do ever come they'll have to provide this board all that backup from the utility company directly stating that that's been coordinated this is their intended use they'll have you know a verification or validation from the utility that that those utilities are available without any impact to the community the maximum size of the data center uh... for both the land or the energy use i think they're occurred the energy use that'll be validated by each public utility that is uh... within that district uh... the size of the data center should be based on the size of a lot uh... once if you go to your kids wants it tells uh... tell them their bill to a lot size the record easements on each side of that property line and then that'll tell them they're buildable area uh... so that'll uh... limit house what size they can actually built to The assessment of public safety, I thought that was something different. We have talked about public safety, but I don't think we have anything really to cover that right now. That's something that we can think about. And then I know it was already mentioned about the ordinance. Again, legally we can't restrict a development of a data center. by law. So what we're trying to do as a township is to get ahead of it, uh, by, because we'd be worse off if we had nothing in place. And so we're trying to get ahead of it. So as we said, there's no current open requests, but we want to get ahead of it. And, um, if we're ahead of it, that allows us to be as restrictive or not restrictive as we want as a community. Um, so that those provisions of protections are in place so that we get the right development if and when it ever comes. Um, so this is actually a great thing that our board had asked us to do in advance to, to get ahead of it. So I think that was a great thing that our board did, um, earlier this year when they've asked us to, to develop an ordinance. So, um, and then the last question was the, uh, public notification, whether the proper notifications went out and, uh, I thought maybe Jonathan, you can just speak to that. Like what, how it works and what was done.

Yeah, the public hearing notice is required to go in the local paper, not less than 15 days and not more than 30 days prior to the public hearing. It was published in the Macomb Daily on August 31st.

Very good. So hopefully that... Well, I mean I can't really speak to that, but we do the minimum required by legal requirements.

so but we won't but if I could add to that just real quick there's actually actually for those that are participate and pay attention to this these are actually maintained on the township website you can also sign up for notification so you're notified when these meetings take place and I get text messages every week about the township planning zoning and planning is coming up zoning Board of Appeals and things like that you can sign up for those notifications as well if you're interested

Thank you. And then the rest of my comments are just comments on this. Should I just kind of ask questions? Is that all right? Or should I just give you comments later? What's the best way to do it?

comments that require discussion or are they just like corrections and cross-referencing and things?

Well, just, so again, I guess maybe some of the questions are, so for instance, the building height, are we just going with the building height that's in the current M1, M2 district?

We haven't changed that. So yes.

So it's 35 feet. Okay. Because, yeah, I didn't see any special provisions for this. We didn't change any of those. Okay, so that's it. And then the setbacks, I didn't see any clear setbacks. I saw the one graph on page 4 and page 5, but those are setbacks from streets. Other than the comments where I see just below that on page 5 where it says it looks like 100 feet from property lines. Is that supposed to be all four sides or something?

From all property lines, yes.

So it's 100 feet on any property line other than a road. And if it's a road, it goes to that that chart. Correct.

Correct. Unless they're next to one of the sensitive uses that we identified.

And then, well, the only, yeah.

And that's the residential buffer.

So that's the thousand feet, the thousand. Correct.

And that's there from the, um, the property line to the nearest building structure or activity area. Okay.

So, yeah, I just wanted to make sure it was clear. So it is the 100 feet and then that standoff from that. Okay, so I understood that. On page 8 under screening, I assume the same thing here. Screening didn't change from what was currently in the ordinance. We're just going to use the same screening. We're not going to require higher fencing or anything like that.

Well, you already allow higher fences. I don't think you have a limit.

Page 8. Is it eight feet? I think there's usually six is our standard.

It's higher than six. I think it allows it to be high.

I think that's eight.

So we, okay. So we're sticking to what's currently in the standard. We're not changing it.

Yes.

All right. And then, um, and then under decommissioning plans, uh, item four, uh, subset a, the last three words if left abandoned uh... are we actually okay with just leaving things abandoned i thought the whole idea of a decommissioning plan was we'd want them to remove it all so i think the board should think about if we want to leave anything abandoned so i just wanted to highlight that um... the other thing i think we should make some type of a note about hazmat like no hazmat should be remaining on site so i didn't see anything regarding hazmats but i think we do need to make a comment on that as part of the decommissioning plan is to make sure that

If any has been is identified during the decommissioning process that it is removed from the site I think it isn't there it talks about in the plan contents and 4b a description of the proposed methods for deactivation removal recycling reuse or disposable disposal of equipment and materials including fuels batteries coolants oils chemicals and other regulated substances Is that what you meant?

Uh, yeah, I guess the other regularly substances is the, I guess is the catchall, right?

Yep.

So, okay. Uh, so yeah, as long as that language is, I guess, strong enough, then, uh, then yes, that's what I was, that's what I was talking about. Um, I think the assessments from the public utilities, I think that's a good thing. So I think that satisfies that one. Um, and same thing with the, you know, like a confirmation from all utilities. I think I had read that somewhere, or I made a note of that. I think we asked them to work with the utilities, correct? And we also asked for a confirmation, though, right, that the utilities are, right? Yes. Okay. And then the last thing I had was around the generator test hours. I was... I was thinking, you know, again, open to this, the board for conversation is just, is designating those test hours and not leave it up to, um, you know, them. But if we could define when we would allow the generators to be tested. So I was thinking we can expand on that language. I don't know if you've seen that before.

Um, you could, you also could that could be something that depending on the location uh... where the if you do get an application and you're going through there could be a condition of approval that you for that times testing generators yes just those were things i was doing you know my re research site that was just one of the things that you can have any you feel like everybody should have the same yeah well you just see him the window that we know is going to be least impactful to the committee

you know, and just set those hours, um, just so it's more defined of a window rather than being subjective to the board. You know, that way we're not, uh, we're being consistent. That was just, again, that was just a comment that I had that we could think about. That's everything that I had. Thank you, sir.

Thank you, Brian.

Uh, Rick. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, there was a question about, uh, hazardous waste. The young lady brought up about hazardous waste from the site. Um, we are regulated. Our township was regular. All of us are regulated by Eagle, um, for the sake keeping of our environment. Um, our ordinance does reflect the fact that, um, we have to, we have to maintain and satisfy Eagles requirements across the board. So we're, we're already being regulated by that. As far as the sound of the generator, I believe that part of our sound ordinance that is being proposed as well as specific dates and I'm sorry, specific times when generators can be tested or, um, exercise other weekly exercising. The first item that I'd like to ask Ms. Baum and Giffels-Webster, on page one, under definitions, it talks about high-intensity industrial developments, and there's four criteria. If one of these four criteria are met, it's considered a high-intensity industrial development. My first question is the use has the electrical load greater than 500 kilowatts. Can I ask where that came from?

Sorry. Thank you. That's based on the, what we're seeing is the standard breakdowns of data centers by energy load.

Okay. Well, here's where I'm going with that. If we go to subsection 3.21 F3, it talks about, in the blue, it talks about, it includes limitations in the M1 district for equipment and machinery such as automatic screw machines, stamping machines, punch presses, being set back 500 feet from the residential districts. I can tell you that every one of those plants, every one of those shops, would be over 500 kW. So they're going to be considered a high-intensity industrial development, which if you go to in the M2 district, it also makes the same statement. And then if you go to section 4.59 for high intensity industrial uses, it says that there has to be a thousand foot setback for those uses. So to me it's a little ambiguous. Which is it? If you can clarify that. Because quite honestly 500 kW is a little bit more than what a McDonald's would use.

but these are the standards that are for the planning commission to discuss so if you would like to change those limits you may do so it's a starting point and then um... it talks about uh... water usage and discharge what have you

Who is approving or reviewing this, the water usage discharge, the energy usage, what have you? Is there going to be any requirements for a third-party company that the developer would pay for to justify, to prove, to solidify that statement that they're making that it is correct? Or is it going to be up to the township to say, yeah, he's telling the truth, or... Who's going to be responsible for identifying and making sure that what they're proposing is true?

So for the water usage, that's going to be satisfying the requirements of the Great Lakes Water Authority because they are the water provider. And the energy usage would be from the utility. And so those are the two areas that I think those entities will be doing those reviews and then issuing the approvals. And that was what we had included in the other agency and utility approval section.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Everybody did a really nice job with all their comments and questions and pretty much answered anything I would have had. Is there anything else the board, anyone from the board would like to add?

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We received correspondence that was cited earlier in the meeting, at the beginning of the meeting. One of them was from Selfridge regarding a third party, regarding water or anything. Was that perhaps what Mr. LaBelle was getting at? Was that you that brought that up? Do we want... to specify that in there or do we know for a fact that that's part of the great lakes water authorities um obligation to do that do they currently do that now when businesses apply do they assess that there is enough capacity for their water needs does anyone know

I don't think that we have a definitive answer to that question right now. That recommendation came from Selfridge today at 4 o'clock. So I will talk with Township Engineer tomorrow and find out if that's something that's typically handled during the engineering process. I don't think it would be something that would typically be done in the site plan process, but I can get those answers.

Yeah. Excuse me. Just so that we know how that works, because I thought it was a good point that was brought up, but maybe it's not it. or what the Planning Commission does, but at some level in the development of the property. And what was the other thing that Selfridge brought up? It was regarding... Anyway, that item, was that already included in our ordinance, I think? Was the second one? I'm looking here.

Yeah, it was, uh, to do with the, um, energy usage, um, which I think is one covered by the state statute. And then as well as, um, you know, DTS, the provider, not the township.

So, yeah. And I think there are also, uh, there's additional regulations being considered in Lansing to regarding, regarding that, that, um, that if there is an increased cost that is paid for by the user, not spread throughout the municipality. And then there was also consideration requested from T-Mobile. And I'm just wondering, will that Is there a determination that what their concern is does need to be addressed in our ordinance? Or do we have something somewhere else that addresses that?

I do think a lot of what they raised is already addressed in our ordinance through utility, equipment enclosures, utility buildings, telecommunication towers. I think that's already addressed largely in our ordinance. Jill, I don't know if you had any comments or anything to follow up.

No, just that we would make sure that the township stays consistent with state and federal laws regarding telecommunications facilities. So we'll go through it again with those comments. that comment from them and make sure that we're not causing any confusion there.

Thank you. When I was reading it, I thought, I think it's already covered, but I wasn't sure. But these are companies that have concerns. They brought it to us, and I think we ought to them to look at it. So thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else have anything to add?

Yes, thank you all again. I just want to add some reassurance to all of us and remind everyone that we're all residents of the township and we all want to do what's what's best for our friends and families and neighbors. We all live, work and play in the area and I think that's important to keep in mind. I know Mr. Renaud was talking about how we have notifications on the site and sometimes, and I think multiple people have stated we've gotten some notifications from Selfridge and from others kind of last minute, the 11th hour. So I think if we can all work together, whether that's We see things, we put them on Facebook, we talk to our neighbors, but just engage everyone around us to do what's best for us and for our families and just to keep that at the top of the mind of what we're all trying to do because that's what's been said. We legally can't discriminate against data centers, but we have to follow state and federal laws and do what we're going to do in accordance with those. So I just want to keep that in mind as we continue on.

Thank you. Anyone else? Right.

Anybody on my left? Actually, I just one last question. So, Julie, you said you're going to take into account the letters that were received. And then I know some of the recommendations, you know, for Mr. Carr and LaBelle and myself and send us an updated version of that.

What a perfect segue because I was just going to I just turned on my light to say here's what I heard So I'd like to clarify and clean up the references the cross references Review the telecommunications concerns the suffrage concerns I think it would be helpful for the Planning Commission to have the conversation about those four criteria and We can look at some comparisons that look at what the different energy level outputs are and demands. So the 500 kilowatts with a megawatt. What are the similar types of things to ensure that we're not catching up some of the industrial businesses that maybe we already have here in the township? and subject them to some of these stricter standards. And so I think that might help with your conversation about are these the four correct standards? Are they one of these standards? Is it a couple of these standards? So I'd like to do that. And then we'll include a zoning map next time so that you know where the parcels are that have been discussed and where else they could go. think that was it oh and I did want to there was a question about the closed loop system and can we just require that and I want to just touch on it for a second because we considered that and then in the in the interest of not wanting to be quickly outdated with this rapidly changing technology we settled on under water usage and discharge, the applicant shall use the most water efficient and environmentally sound cooling process available that generates the lowest possible impact to the water and wastewater system. We could say, for example, a closed-loop system, I just didn't want to tie us in if something else came along and now we're requiring that someone use old technology and now we have to amend our ordinance to adapt to that. So we're trying to keep it open. But if you feel more confident in closed-loop, we can do that.

Yeah, if I can respond. So one of the things that I mentioned was a closed loop system or any other similar comparable water mitigation technology. One of the things that you stated in there was about environmental efficiency. Can you read that back one more time? I just want to capture that.

The applicant shall use the most water efficient and environmentally sound cooling process available that generates the lowest possible impact to the water and wastewater system. And then there's a couple of things that they have to do that are associated with that. And then the third one is provide information on the type of cooling system, open-loose, closed-loop, potable water, reclaimed water, and demonstrate the ability to update the system as more efficient options become available.

Perfect. The one piece I was trying to parse out of there was the environmentally sound piece. And the reason being is because the offset is that those systems use more electricity. And so I want to make sure that there's no legal loophole for them to say, oh, well, it's more environmentally sound, so we're going to use an open system. If that could be buttoned up, that language could be buttoned up a little bit there. So it doesn't allow for a legal loophole. That's my concern there. Thank you, Ms. Baum.

Mr. Chair, could I follow up on that just real quick? Sure. I also had the same note as well, so I'm glad that Jill brought that up. And I think maybe that was part of Rick's question, too, is that during that site plan process, we would distribute that to our engineer, as we do now with site plans. We send that to an engineering department to review. And we do have contracts with four different engineering consultants as well. And when we did... We did RFP for engineering earlier this year, and that was one of the questions I asked her in the interview. What are they seeing with data centers and this issue? And they were all different answers. So this goes back to the point of it's evolving, it's changing, everyone's different. So I do think there's different cases. And the last thing I wanted to, there was one question that was asked about the screening height. Our ordinance does say that fences are six feet, but it does also touch on if there's in the screening requirement. If it's above that, the planning commission allows screening to go above that. just to the height to screen what needs to be screened.

So thank you. Um, well with that, I don't think we're ready to make any recommendations to the board tonight. So what is our board's pleasure?

I think we wait for Jill and company to get us the updates. We'll re review that, read all the updated notes and go from there.

I'd like to make that a motion.

Sure.

So we have a motion by Mark. Anybody want to support that motion by Mark supported by Kathy to postpone a recommendation, uh, until we've had a chance to update, uh, all the language and the things that were discussed tonight. And, uh, do we need to put a time frame on that? So whenever it comes up, um, so with that, uh, all in favor, aye opposed. Motion carries.

Mr. Chair, just real quick. I'm sorry. One thing I wanted to add just so the public is aware. There is a page on the planning and zoning page on the website that had like tonight's presentation is on there. The draft is on there. The draft of the noise ordinance is on there. We will keep that updated. And then also the zoning maps on there too. There were some questions about industrial areas. So all that's on the website. We'll keep that updated. It is available. and the agendas are typically published. I mentioned the public hearing requirements earlier when those get published in the paper, but the agendas get published on the website a week before the meeting.

Thank you. Um, to the, uh, people that showed up tonight, I'd like to thank you for being here and we appreciate all your comments and your concerns or our concerns. Uh, we have many of the same. Uh, there is some Facebook activity out there. We've had people show up at prior meetings that heard about it through a different Facebook, uh, uh, pages. So, um, keep doing that, spread the word, um, and hope to see you here. Again, I think you'll notice that we're pretty thorough up here We don't just jump in the pool and hope that there's water in it We went through the same thing with the cannabis. I brought this up at another meeting We took a lot of time to make sure and if you drive around the township There's only one cannabis store that's visible the rest are all tucked away in and m1 and m2 So there's there is property available for that. There's property available for the data centers and uh we haven't been challenged by the cannabis uh industry i think because we did a pretty good job of we had to put it together because the voters in our township said they wanted it so we couldn't ignore it we had to do it i think this kind of falls in the same lane we have to we have to do it but we're going to do it right and we're going to keep it thorough and informative and there's different ways to hear about it a lot of people just don't bother to you know even check into it they just sit at home and complain so we hope more people get involved and observe what's going on and with that I'll move on there are no regular agenda items tonight there are I don't believe there's any Presentations reports or any other discussion Planning Commissioner comments as three minutes. We'll start with Kathy Thank You mr.

Chair Again, I just want to say thank you to everyone for being here and for the comments that they provided and questions that they had Again, this is not to open the door to a whole bunch of data centers coming in. It's actually to make it an orderly process should there be an application to come in here. And again, if you don't feel like your questions were answered or addressed because some had multiple questions, please talk to one of us. We'll make sure that they get included, answers to that either get to you or the issues are included in the document. So thank you.

Thank you. Eric? All set.

Alton? Just a general comment of wanting us to keep in mind noise, sound, smell, and any type of pollution as we move through this process.

Thank you.

Mark?

I'm all set. Thank you.

Kevin?

All set. Brian? All set.

Rick?

Just one more comment, if you don't mind, Mr. Chair, um, you know, we're, we're all focused on data centers, but this is not only for data centers, it's for any high intensity industrial development that we're trying to, um, to make sure that our residents, so that my family, my grandchildren are safe, um, from the environment of sound vibrations, sites, things of that nature. So it's not only data centers, it can be a very large industrial building. And I think that we're on the right path. And again, thank all of you for coming out this evening. Please give us your input. We want to hear. We appreciate what you talk, when you talk, when you tell us what you think. And have a wonderful evening. Thank you.

Thank you. Um, I just want to mention one thing that, uh, early on somebody mentioned driving around Lennox and there's a bunch of signs, no data centers. Um, we had a couple of people of residents from Lennox come to one of our meetings and, uh, they caught a few of us outside and thanked us for, uh, uh, being thorough and they were, they seemed pretty disappointed in how their, meetings were being handled in Lenox. That's their words, not ours. So that's all I have to say on that. I do want to thank Mark for chairing the last meeting. I was out of state for my son's wedding in 95 degree heat. uh... with the ceremony outside but we got through it and uh... did a great job and uh... i'm glad that my name was still uh... in this position in this chair he did such a good job so thank you and uh... thank the board you guys do a really great job uh... with that we will adjourn this meeting at eight twenty one Anybody's Carl and mark by and supported all in favor opposed motion carries