Neighbors, advocates press council on Thistle Landing data-center impacts — energy, water and permitting questioned

Public commenters at Thursday's Phoenix City Council meeting raised detailed concerns about a large data‑center development at East Thistle Landing, urging the council and permitting staff to enforce review processes and address environmental and neighborhood impacts.

Shannon Brown, speaking as a member of the Awatuki Community Alliance, said an interview with a data-center executive suggested the facility could draw as much energy as “257 Walmart super centers” and raised questions about water use and the handling of wastewater and chemicals from closed‑loop cooling. Brown said residents worry about proximity to homes and a nearby preschool and pressed the council over what she described as secrecy and use of nondisclosure agreements in parts of the permitting dialogue. “They create pollution. They should not be near neighborhoods,” she said.

Other speakers elaborated on related concerns: Jenny Pelner recounted statewide and county permitting changes and emphasized that modern data centers are subject to special use permits, water‑use agreements, and air‑quality scrutiny; Kathy Monk said construction activity in her neighborhood has begun before 5 a.m. and alleged permit‑hours violations with measured decibel levels she described as exceeding allowable limits. Bill Monk and James Milner provided a zoning history of the parcel and argued that the site’s 1996 Commerce Park stipulations were intended for corporate office uses and not heavy industrial processing, and they wrote that recent stipulation modifications allowed conversion to a high‑tech campus.

Speakers called for clearer public engagement and for staff enforcement of noise, water and permitting rules. The council did not take an immediate action item on the project during the meeting; public comment concluded and the meeting adjourned. Planning staff were referenced in testimony and commenters cited recent city and county code changes that would apply to cooling architecture and special permits, but no planning‑department response to the claims appears in the public‑comment record for this meeting.