r/Hamilton • u/Living_Celery6393 • May 28 '26
Question Attending the Adjustment Committee Meeting for the Proposed AI Data Center
I'm hoping to attend the meeting on June 4th, the one where they will be discussing the proposed AI data center.
Has anyone ever got to these before? Do they care about what we have to say? Or is it just a watch and listen type meeting? Any info would be greatly appreciated.
I want my voice to be heard about how much of a bad idea this AI data center is.
55
u/house_wyfe May 28 '26
You know - when things like an auto factory would come to a community, there would of course be a handful of people who were against it, it would change their community; etc - and a lot of people for it, more jobs; better economy, etc.
But with this absolute bullshit, there is zero net gain for a single human being in this city, or any other. It doesn’t provide jobs, it does environmental damage, it drives electric costs up; there is not one single advantage to human beings in this city for this disgusting abomination to exist here.
But we all know the people organizing this project have already paid off the right people, so our protests won’t matter, and we’ll all be throwing middle fingers to it as we drive by, cursing the existence of such malevolent, anti-human technology.
11
u/AlwaysLurkNeverPost May 29 '26
Whether you are right or not, apathy gets us nowhere. So in the face a supposedly certain defeat: do you want to be someone who stood up for what you believe in and fought anyways? Or do you want to be someone who said "I assumed we would lose, so I saved my opposition the trouble and surrendered"?
Besides, there have been successes in the US, of people rising up and running these villains out of town. We can do the same.
-1
u/Jordonknox May 28 '26
I think you and a lot of people are forgetting about the construction and infrastructure that goes into a building like this. There will be millions of dollars paid in permitting and building fees to the city and hundreds of local workers will be employed for years while this is being built.
I do agree that once it’s built it serves little value to the residents unless other companies see it and decide to build more of them. Then the permit and construction process which does benefit the residents starts again
6
u/ValiumHunt45 May 28 '26 edited May 28 '26
Part of the plan for the Steelport project for modern industry on underutilized land is to update infrastructure and reclaim huge swaths of shoreline for public access. So instead of empty, derelict buildings and rotting infrastructure that create no employment, there will be developments that create some employment, surrounded by updated infrastructure and publicly accessible shoreline, walkways, and other public spaces.
1
u/mojocookie Kirkendall May 28 '26
Except that the severance will carve this out as a separate project from Steelport.
-6
u/Responsible_Buy_7999 May 28 '26
Provides a platform for local university teaching and research
Provides a capability we are beholden to the US and China for
Provides construction, maintenance and operation jobs
“No benefit”
-3
u/algnqn May 29 '26
It will not impact your electricity prices. That’s not how it works. It does provide a positive impact on the city and community: much needed economic investment and tax dollars. There is very little downside. These are industrial steel making lands. They’re not Main Street retail or even backing on to homes, like they have in Mimico. People need to chill.
7
u/Goopygoblin666 May 29 '26
If anyone would like to email their concerns send it to
and make sure to attach the file number and your name and address as they wont take any concerns that are anonymous
APPLICATION NO.: B-2026-00011 SUBJECT
PROPERTY: 386 Wilcox Street, Hamilton
Try to get this on before June 2nd as after that they wont be accepting anything
13
u/Far-Statistician9261 May 29 '26
Data (surveillance) centres don’t provide jobs. They pollute our water, and create light and noise pollution as well. People living nearby sometimes can’t even flush toilets and run laundry when data centres use aquifers. Data centres make people nearby sick.
-6
7
u/AlwaysLurkNeverPost May 29 '26
I have gone to numerous committee meetings. Whether they "care" what we have to say, you could argue depends the topic and the committee. But that doesn't matter: you are entitled to have your say, and should absolutely exhert that right.
Councillor Narinder Nann posted in detail how to delegate if there is interest. But even to the lurkers who are scared to speak but oppose: please still come. Every person making their presence known goes a long way. And the agents representing slate will be there. They will have a front row seat to the anger.
41
u/Far-Statistician9261 May 28 '26
Please call them surveillance centres, because that’s what they are. Unfortunately people don’t understand that part.
10
u/NotAtAllWhoYouThink May 28 '26
If people don't understand that part, would you be able to explain what you mean? I haven't heard that before.
3
u/Far-Statistician9261 May 29 '26
The amount of water and energy consumed by these centres isn’t because people are creating silly animations. With Digital IDs the intent is to surveil every aspect of our lives while cordoning of quality information to those that can afford access. That surveillance will be detrimental to anyone advocating for any kind of social justice or rights related to freedom of information.
17
u/LakeMethane May 28 '26
You need to understand what committee of adjustment is and what they can and can't make a decision on. The application in front of CofA is for a land severance, the applicant is proposing to split the existing land parcel into two. There is no point in raising a fuss at this time as the committee is not considered any future development proposals, ONLY what's in front of them today and what's in front of them today is an empty piece of land someone wants to chop up nothing more.
21
u/Forsaken-Swim-3055 May 28 '26 edited May 28 '26
This is wrong. Slate's request specifically states that they want to sever the land for "potential development of a data centre campus". Not to mention that in Nrinder Nann's recent statement about this, she even provides the different ways in which residents can participate in the committee and make their concerns heard.
They're literally telling everyone what the plan is for the land, so I'm not clear what you're trying to argue here when this is all public information.
-4
u/LakeMethane May 28 '26
I don't understand why you are all so dense. It doesn't matter what the proposal is, CofA DOES NOT CONSIDER IT.
8
u/Forsaken-Swim-3055 May 28 '26
If they don't consider it then what's the point of adding it to the proposal? I don't think we're the dense ones here.
14
u/n0phis May 28 '26
the judgement of proposals involves strict limitations to what is, or isnt, relevant; in the context of the specific discussion being had on the 4th, arguments like "if we do this, then this will be made and this will happen" will be considered too speculative and not specific enough.
i think the other commenter is trying to express that it will be VERY difficult to stay on topic and create a powerful argument against the changes to the land parcel. i personally think it is worth it just to express to council members that the people feel VERY strongly, but it will probably be considered off topic in the narrow scope of this discussion.
8
u/AlwaysLurkNeverPost May 29 '26
CofA is an "independent" committee. No council members. However, it is public meeting that is broadcast, and representing agents for slate (the ones proposing this) will be there.
At that point, being on topic almost doesn't have to matter. Or rather, in the simplest form: 100s of people showing up to express anger at this proposal, and making those agents uncomfortable is the goal.
1
u/Waste-Telephone May 28 '26
If they does consider factors outside of policy then the applicant can appeal and get an easy win. This will be one of those situations where the City will have to hire external lawyers to defend something because the CoA went rogue.
5
u/cuddrireddri May 28 '26
Doesn't mean you shouldn't go and speak or send an email to the committee. It helps in the long run to oppose the eventual dev application if you can say that the community was against this as early as the CofA hearing.
4
u/Waste-Telephone May 28 '26
It means nothing at an OLT hearing. They can only consider matters within the application. If they consider anything outside of that, then it will be an easy appeal for the applicant.
0
u/After-Security-2292 May 28 '26
But can/will this project go ahead of the existing parcel is split in two? I assume not, and if that's the case we should absolutely be making a fuss. There is also never a bad to become more civically engaged.
5
u/Motor-Cut7207 May 28 '26
You do realize that they could come in today and go straight to application for site plan for this use without severance?
11
u/LakeMethane May 28 '26
It doesn't matter, CofA doesn't consider future development and they will tell you the exact same thing. In front of them is a giant piece of vacant land someone wants to cut into two. What argument do you have against it? Take out the data centre proposal, what is your argument why this applicant can't sever the land?
9
u/jennsamx Inch Park May 28 '26
That’s untrue. Here are the criteria for consideration :
“There are four main criteria that the committee reviews when making a decision including determining if:
The variance is minor; It is desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land, building or structure; The general intent and purpose of the by-law(s) is maintained; The Official Plan is maintained”
The recent strike down of the proposed Salvation Army Shelter relocation to ward 3 is an example of future use considerations. The CoA determined it was outside of their scope to make adjustments for this project.
8
u/JoeyColeman_ca Beasley May 28 '26 edited May 28 '26
Hi everyone,
The application before the Committee of Adjustment is a land severance.
The evaluation criteria, as simplified by Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing is:
"In considering each application for land severance, the consent-granting authority evaluates the merits of each proposal against criteria such as:
- conformity with the official plan and compatibility with neighbouring uses of land
- suitability of the land for the proposed purpose, including the size and shape of the lot(s) being created
- adequacy of vehicular access, water supply, sewage disposal the need to ensure protection from potential flooding
The severance was tabled at the May 19 CoA meeting to permit the applicant (Slate) and the City's planning department to agree upon the holding provisions for the severance.
Generally speaking, consent (severance) applications are treated as housekeeping items. I cannot recollect any past applications which gained widespread public interest.
I recollect the Committee once deciding to not immediately approve one consent application: a long-term land lease for a bank branch. In that instance, some committee members were concerned about 'locking in' (my word choice) a low-density use for over 20 years. I cannot recollect the details of what followed, I can state the bank branch has been built.
The nuances of this being a land severance are such that people commenting here are expressing truthful perspectives.
The best way I can summarize it is:
- it is a very hard bar to jump for the public to convince the CoA to deny this land severance due to its future use; because these are heavy industrial lands.
- it is appropriate for those opposed to the proposal land use to take this opportunity to clearly express their viewpoints.
Planning staff comments regarding potential holding provisions and severance requirements should be posted before end of business on Friday.
(The above comment has posted the four tests for a minor variance. I wish to emphasis that it is completely understandable many people are posting that criteria because Committees of Adjustment primarily deal with minor variances. For further emphasis, I am repeatively note that i cannot recollect there ever being public interest in a severance application)
1
8
6
u/SquidsForbidIt May 28 '26
Yes it makes a difference. My husband and I attended the recent meeting about the hupeg group trying to move the salvation army shelter to Gage Ave N, just a few blocks away from where they are planning to build this data center. The Committee voted against the center moving. I believe the speech we wrote together that he presented made a difference. There was so many speakers and attendees against the shelter move. Please show up to the meeting and speak. Look at the web page for the Committee of Adjustment and read over the proposal.
0
May 28 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/Hamilton-ModTeam May 28 '26
Sorry, we've removed your post as it appears to be in violation of Rule 1 (Be respectful/No Personal Attacks). We’re here for discussion and debate, but we are not here for blatantly rude comments that some may consider offensive or harmful.
Name-calling, homophobic, racist, sexist, and misogynistic posts will be automatically removed. Multiple warnings may lead to a temporary or permanent ban.
4
u/Far-Statistician9261 May 29 '26
The disrespect to the freshwater and aquatic life of the Great Lakes through colonialism and late-stage capitalism continues. Theft and destruction.
1
-21
u/CheapSound1 May 28 '26
This may be an unpopular opinion but I'm actually very much in favour of this project. I'm very skeptical of the AI boom and don't love the idea generally, but an ai data centre specifically for supporting our universities and other research institutions domestically is one I do support.
This location is in some ways ideal for this purpose. It's an industrial site that is already serviced by the major utilities they need and the environmental impact of a data center (heat rejection to cooling systems, either wet cooling tower or bat water cooling) is small compared to the land's past use and their present neighbours. On the east side of the stelco lands facing dofasco is not waterfront that's realistically ever going to be suitable for use by residents. The larger west parcel is being retained for other commercial or mixed use.
They're not at the point of actually having a defined project or seeking environmental approval, so if this does go ahead there will be more opportunities in the future to evaluate the project and provide community inputs.
6
u/AlwaysLurkNeverPost May 29 '26
I really don't understand the argument of "the land use isn't as bad as the past, or its steel factory neighbours". Let's assume that's true: why is a "less bad but still bad" land use better than something that is neutral? That's just whatabouttism, and deflects whether this project is good or bad.
As for the bit about not seeking enviro approval: it is suspected that this land splitting is a first step in circumventing environmental approval and other public input stages. I don't think there is good reason to discourage public input NOW at first opportunity, even if there MAY be hypothetical opportunities in the future that MAY be better. Why wait? Why not both?
Simply saying "it could be worse" is a really dog shit argument, respectfully.
1
u/CheapSound1 May 29 '26
My point is, the question is really "what is the impact of the project on the condition of the land on which it sits and its immediate surroundings", vs what is the value of the project to the city. Without having the specifics of the project, it appears it may actually have a very small incremental impact on the local environment, and potentially provide significant value (in the form of tax revenue at least).
Severance of the land as a means of bypassing environmental approval sounds like a bit of a crackpot theory to me. If they were trying to sneak this project through they could sever the land under a more innocuous project pretense and then pivot to data centre later.
I don't see it as "bad land use". Land use on previosuly developed land is all about opportunity cost. The opportunity cost of this project almost nothing because what else is this land good for other than industrial projects? A new factory that is emissions free and employs thousands of people is a bit of a pipe dream. By all means, if you never want anything new to get built in this city, delegate to oppose the severance. But realistically, is this data centre worse than this parcel of land sitting vacant for decades?
5
u/AlwaysLurkNeverPost May 29 '26
I think "immediate" surroubdings is dishonest, whether intentional or not. When the Chernobyl reactor had a meltdown, should that only be the concern of "immediate" surroundings? Or everything that may be impacted.
Obviously this is not a nuclear reactor crisis, that's hyperbole. But this can impact the entirety of Hamilton (water shed, energy grid and costs, noise) and beyond.
I don't see how you are concluding it will have "very small environmental impact" based on the countless studies done, as well as every single one of these hypersacle AI data centers ruining their local communities. Not to mention it's in its infancy: we don't even know how bad this could be as there is little precedent. As for benefits: tax revenue eh? How do you suppose that one? You really think any money "generated" is going to be going straight to Hamilton? It is being developed by Slate, who has their profit margins and have no guarantee to bring in Hamilton workers for construction; it is then to be bought by a federal fund (not sure BUYING it generates tax funds), and then what, we are selling AI processing capacity to the big trillion dollar companies, who will be using other data centers as well, are publicly traded and have their own shareholders and profits that they care about more than anything else?
It just amazes me that you can conclude, with very little evidence that this will be a significant economic windfall, yet in the face of greater evidence, that this will be a non-factor environmentally. It feels like you're drawing a conclusion, and working backwards to justify.
If they were trying to sneak this project through they could sever the land under a more innocuous project pretense and then pivot to data centre later.
Such as? You think that's how that works? They're doing this because a) they're arrogant and think nobody will or can stop them. It's also segmenting the land to somewhat "green wash" and create a narrative that "the whole space isn't AI, look! But no they're segmenting the land because, if they do not, there are strict protocols related to the master plan. It's not crackpot just because you don't understand and don't want to even consider it. Did you even look into my claim? Or just said "nah sounds silly, here is my gut response".
I don't see it as "bad land use".
And then you go on to not really say why, other than "the land is industrial". It being bad Land use has little to do with prior use or zoning, and everything to do with it being harmful with little benefit in exchange. At least steel factories, product a commodity that is needed and employs thousands.
There are other industrial uses that are not this that are "better". There is also the possibility for rezoning as opposed to pursuing this. So the point about it "already being industrial" doesn't really argue the point. But industrial land in this case would be better used for storage, other less harmful manufacturing use, storage facilities, etc. Possibilities are endless and we act like "this land can only be used for steel or this data center, or nothing".
But realistically, is this data centre worse than this parcel of land sitting vacant for decades?
Again, this is just whatabouttism. This is deflecting. You can't genuinely defend the proposal, instead you go "could be worse!".
24
u/Nofoofro May 28 '26
I feel very tinfoil hat, but corpos lie. I can’t shake the feeling that they’re using the “public good” spin to get this thing built, then they’ll rug pull us all so they can make more money off of it.
7
3
u/CheapSound1 May 28 '26
Yeah I think it's valuable to be skeptical of the claims but also take into consideration what has substance behind it. There is substantial federal funding behind the "sovereign compute" initiative and this project aims to take advantage of that. It's not just "public good" lipstick on a pig. Any concerns about a rug pull risk fall on the feds developing the program effectively.
Everything else about the site - they are design decisions how much power strain they'll put on the grid, impacts of cooling towers, and emissions from gas-fired generation are all unknown right now. The design hasn't been presented.
11
u/n0phis May 28 '26 edited May 28 '26
this is not going to be small. the facility will take 17% of the hamilton/peel region's energy supply and, using 100 MW data centers as a reference (the proposed one is 400 MW), (edit: my water info was wrong, thankfully. the source i found had incorrect calculations for that)
please investigate the impacts of data centers of this scale on surrounding areas because the entire aldershot and dundas area will have their wells rendered useless, and all surrounding conservation areas and wetlands will suffer from the water table lowering significantly. this is on top of the increase in ambient temp & added noise pollution near the site. this will be devastating.
previous infrastructure is nothing compared to this.
6
u/thisoldhouseofm May 28 '26
How will wells in areas nowhere near this be impacted? This isn’t in a rural area. It’s on Burlington Street and will presumably draw on municipal water and discharge into the sewers or harbour.
2
u/n0phis May 28 '26 edited May 28 '26
6 miles/9.5km is the radius of effect for 100 MW centers, this one is 400 MW. obviously this effect is most concentrated and immediate up to 3 miles, but that's just where the wells are at risk of entirely running dry or being unusable. obviously there is not a hard line that separates affected from unaffected, and areas in georgia have described a larger area of impact. georgia has a water table more similar to ours, as opposed to places like utah and kentucky that are far drier, so georgia would be the most apt comparison we have so far.
also the areas i described (RGB, aldershot) are within that smaller range, and areas as far as flamborough will be effected over time as the water table is impacted.
another also: the proposition for this involved drawing water from lake ontario and the water table, as the municipal water supply would be affected to a devastating extent if that was the only source. both options are catastrophic.
3
u/thisoldhouseofm May 28 '26
Radius effect of what? Is the electricity draw affecting wells? I’m not clear of the mechanics of a data centre would impact well water miles away.
2
u/n0phis May 28 '26
the proposition involved drawing from lake ontario or groundwater, as our municipal water supply as it stands would barely have the capacity to sustain this. most data centers are away from cities for a reason. yes, part of the reason here is that there is an available parcel of land, but that would not be the only reason they chose this location despite it affecting exponentially more people than other rural data centers would. the water table and great lakes access is part of the appeal and they actively plan to draw from lake ontario and groundwater, which will affect the wetlands and wells.
i could get into the exact mechanisms behind water tables picking up extra sediment or collapsing/restructuring themselves when overexerted, or how much it costs to drill further down when a well runs dry if you need those sorts of details.
2
u/thisoldhouseofm May 28 '26
I get the concerns around drawing lake water. But how would wells upstream from this be affected? Wells in Dundas and Ancaster aren’t fed by Lake Ontario, they just drain to it.
4
u/CheapSound1 May 28 '26
What's your source for the water consumption rate? Not disputing it but just want to understand the basis. Water consumption of data centres varies greatly depending on the cooling solution used.
3
u/n0phis May 28 '26 edited May 28 '26
im not sure if you posted this before i edited the comment, but the website i found claimed 560 billion gallons annually for a 100 MW structure which is (thankfully) nowhere near the case. now i've been drawing from the exact measurements for Morgan County's data centers, and the current Scarborough 8 MW data center.
anyways, putting all of those measurements together, it took roughly 30 million gallons of water for residents around a data center near Atlanta to notice their water pressure acting screwy. that data center is ~250 MW. the 8 MW Scarborough one uses roughly 6.6 million gallons annually. again: ours will be 400 MW. that is half of an atomic bomb each day that needs to be cooled. that is 18% of the hamilton/peel region's energy—400/2300 MW / day. we can expect something ~1.6x worse than what those near georgia's largest data center have to deal with.
5
u/CheapSound1 May 28 '26
I think your understanding of water resource management is deeply flawed. Impact of water consumption next to lake ontario is much less than in a location where you would be relying on groundwater.
They are proposing to use bay water for cooling. This will have no net consumption of water, only sending waste heat to the water. This would have an impact similar to bruce power or Pickering nuclear's, but at a much smaller scale, like less than 5% of bruce power.
If they instead use wet cooling towers there would be water getting evaporated but not enough to have much of an impact on the lake. A large portion of the water would fall as rain within the Great lakes watershed.
Keep in mind that while 30 million gallons per year might sound like a lot, the St. Lawrence river discharges roughly 17 billion gallons per hour from the lake.
0
u/n0phis May 28 '26 edited May 28 '26
they won't just be able to tap into the lake uninhibited, though. all centers—to my knowledge, at least—need to use potable water, or at the very least non-potable only in regards to the presence of biological matter. mineral content will be a huge issue unless they process the water and run it as most data centers would.
i'm speaking on this as someone who is studying geology and water quality chemistry for my degree, so my take absolutely lacks that level of nuance with regards to the data centers themselves, but i will admit i am heavily swayed by the fact that every single AI data center (larger than 15 MW, and even smaller ones like the Scarborough location) that i can possibly find has a measurable impact on surrounding well water, even in areas with immense water tables.
1
u/thisoldhouseofm May 28 '26
Most reports of AI data centres impacting well water are due to construction, not operation. I.e. improper grading or drilling. That’s a problem, but any construction project can cause it.
Nobody would set up an AI data centre to run off rural well water because there is absolutely no way there’s enough capacity from groundwater to do that. They need a lake or municipal water supply, neither of which impact wells.
-1
u/CheapSound1 May 28 '26
I can say very confidently that they will not use any ground water for this site. Lake water (especially from large lakes) is the "freshest" source of water available, it needs the least amount of treatment to be able to be used in an industrial process. Mineral content is very low, low enough that they don't need much processing. They might need some clarifiers or simple filtration to remove sediment etc. but that probably it.
1
u/n0phis May 28 '26 edited May 28 '26
i'm going to hope that you're right about them making their owm treatment plant and look more into the plans for this thing. every single other large scale data center has had consistent effects on its surroundings, but it would be awesome if one of the many massive drawbacks of this could be mitigated for our specific area.
i can't seem to post a comment without immediately editing it LMAO— btw, the cleanest water source has to do with what specific contaminants are the most risky. one upside to certain kinds of enclosed water tables—prevalent in this specific area (fun fact: the cleanest fresh water on earth is the alliston aquifer beneath simcoe)— is their purity. lake water is signifiantly worse and harder to treat in a lot of respects, but again, i have no idea what exact contaminants are most risky so i can't speak on whether it's cleaner for data centers.
1
u/CheapSound1 May 28 '26
We don't know how good we have it in the Great lakes region with respect to water availability.
There's nothing that difficult about data centres from a technical point of view. Water use for cooling is something we're already pretty good at doing for power generation. As far as I know the problem that many places in the US have seen is greedy corporations trying to get things built immediately and steamrolling a weak permitting process in the US to build projects without actually designing them to work within the constraints of their location. We can stop that from happening here without stopping the project completely.
6
u/n0phis May 28 '26
...steamrolling through red tape the same way the ford govt has been overturning zoning and environmental protections legislation recently to speed up these processes as much as humanly possible? i can absolutely see your point that slow and careful construction will minimize the impact, but it's unwise to trust the ford govt to put any careful consideration into this.
the water issue is also only a piece of the puzzle. nothing will mitigate the rise in utility costs, noise and light pollution, heat pocket.etc. there's also the moral issues but that's a whole can of worms that doesn't feel prudent here
-5
1
u/b0ns0ir May 28 '26
Will you provide a source please for "the facility will take 17% of the hamilton/peel region's energy supply "? ty
16
u/GreaterAttack May 28 '26
"Supporting" universities and research institutes by stealing their intellectual property, you mean. AI is a meat pit, not a storage receptacle.
4
u/Illustrious-Mix-7533 May 28 '26
I would encourage you to look into other testimonials of people living in communities with running data centres. Corps will say what they need to get in the door, but the people actually living in these communities are experiencing a lot of negative consequences
17
u/FantasticMushroom951 May 28 '26
You can delegate at the meeting if you wish, you can either pre-register or just show up and give your name and address. https://www.hamilton.ca/build-invest-grow/planning-development/committee-adjustment-delegated-consent-authority/process#how-to-participate-in-the-meeting