NORTH MANKATO — The North Mankato City Council unanimously approved the alternative urban areawide review for a potential 4 million square foot development site during its Monday meeting, but not before residents and others raised questions about the review being a gateway to development of a large data center.
Luke Norquist, an attorney representing the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, spoke during the public comment portion of the meeting and argued that the environmental review process lacked transparency and specificity.
“There’s the matter of transparency in public process. We were looking back at the timeline for the AUAR, and the first required step for these developments is the scoping process for development. But because the AUAR was framed in a way of being an industrial development, a technology park, because it never mentioned the words ‘data center’, it wasn’t clear to the public what was being developed, and so you kind of shut the door on public process when you have that lack of clarity,” Norquist said.
Norquist told the Free Press the environmental review process, typically used for municipal planning of smaller projects, is being applied to large-scale data center developments across the state. Norquist noted that recent amendments to AUAR rules were designed to require more precise project descriptions, a standard he believes the current review does not meet.
The review process included 30-day public comment periods and agency reviews.
As the review was conducted, public commenters were generally opposed to future development and some cited their concern for what might be developed.
“Scenario 1 is listed as a Technology center. This is confusing to citizens as it gives the impression that it might be some educational facility rather than what it actually is …a data center.” public commenter Thomas Hagen sent in an email to the city.
During the meeting council member Billy Steiner said he hopes “this is not a lead up to a data center, which I have stated all along I am opposed to.”
City officials emphasized the document serves as a planning tool to understand site suitability and does not represent approval of any specific project.
“This study that was being conducted is, in my opinion, just good planning for the future,” Community Development Director Mike Fischer said. “It could be a data center, it could be a warehouse, it could be manufacturing. It can be a lot of things. And I’ll state here that we don’t have a proposal for a data center. We don’t. This is an attempt to study this piece of land that’s in our comprehensive plan.”
Public commenters also cited concerns with environmental impacts, size, water and energy consumption, noise pollution and jobs.
“This is unacceptable and irresponsible. The energy consumption equally irresponsible. The southern region of Minnesota is growing by leaps and bounds, we cannot build recklessly and irresponsibly. We all have a stake is preserving our environment. You have the chance of shaping this region, please do not ruin this beautiful area!” said Delia Avila, a Minnesota State University professor and Mankato resident.
The study area lies within the Minnesota River Watershed and is currently under a Drought Watch designation. Industrial pumping of the Mt. Simon aquifer — North Mankato’s primary municipal water source — is currently prohibited. Increased demand on this aquifer is expected due to climate change and growing regional water needs.
The completed AUAR review identified and assessed the environmental impacts and mitigation measures associated with the North Mankato Industrial Development Study Area. Covering approximately 679 acres, the project site is located north of U.S. Highway 14 and west of County State Aid Highway 41.
Provided by engineering consultant agency Kimley-Horn, the 80-page report outlines the development, and includes two prospective buildout scenarios — a technology park, scenario 1, or a combination of office and warehouse facilities, scenario 2. Initial construction is projected to begin in 2026 or 2027, with the first phase lasting three to five years and continued development anticipated over the next 10 to 20 years.
The study analyzed environmental, transportation and infrastructure considerations for the proposed development area. Key findings included future zoning changes, water resource limitations and recommendations for future environmental assessments.
Under scenario 1, the project would explore the implementation of a rapid infiltration basin to manage industrial cooling water discharge. However, this scenario assumes a non-water-cooled system due to restrictions on accessing additional water from the Mt. Simon aquifer and limited municipal water availability. Any use of water-cooled systems would require a new water source, with estimated seasonal water demand ranging from 5 to 30 million gallons per day.
The report includes a list of at least 33 permits required from local, state and federal agencies to move forward with any potential development.
The report outlines that climate resilience measures were reviewed across categories such as project design, land use, water resources, contamination risks and ecological impacts. The development would be expected to integrate design and construction practices that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve sustainability.
“The purpose of an AUAR is really a planning tool,” Kimley-Horn consultant Leila Bunge said. “This is not meant to approve or deny any specific project, but a lot of proposers use this tool as a way just to study to see if this is a suitable location for a project.”