RED OAK – As approved, it will be Red Oak’s third major data center since 2020.
Two others are already under construction.
Several residents are not happy about the situation and are making their voices heard by utilizing signs.
That tactic is being used since when more than 300 people showed up at the recent city council meeting in early May it did no good and resulted in the council voting 4 – 1 to approve the data center anyway.
The lone no vote was Place 5 Jeffrey Smith with the other four council members Willie G. Franklin Jr., Sean Flannery, Ricardo Miller, and Tim Lightfoot voting to approve the necessary agricultural-to-industrial rezoning for the project.
And while signs are common in Red Oak yards, think school signs and political signs, one Red Oak resident received a notice for a “No Data Center” sign.
To add insult to injury, the wrong violation code was cited.
Reportedly the Code Enforcement Officer David Arnold informed the residents they were violating Code 12.2.1, “a person commits an offense if the person erects, repairs, alters or relocates a sign without first obtaining a building permit from the building official and making a payment of the required fee.”
According to the notice, residents must have a permit for the signs, remove the signs or be fined if the matter is not handled by May 31.
Overall, residents of Red Oak were perplexed since no other signs had ever come under such scrutiny.
Red Oak staff later said, “The signs are permitted per our Zoning ordinance. They do not require a permit, but they cannot be placed in the Public ROW [Right of Way].”
Staff also said the notice the residents received had the wrong code cited and should have been code 12.3.1, “a person commits an offense if the person attaches, erects or maintains any sign, including a political sign, over or in public rights-of-way.
“No sign shall be erected in the right-of-way except movement control, traffic-control devices, street signs or directional signs placed by the city or state.”
Red Oak staff said signs are allowed on public property, just not in the right of way per city ordinance.