Good afternoon and welcome to today's Cobb County Board of Commissioners work session this Tuesday, July 28th of 2026.

Today we have three presentations before the Board of Commissioners.

The first is to provide an update on the American Rescue Plan Act.

The second is to have information and updates regarding housing in Cobb County.

And finally, to receive information regarding data centers.

For our first presentation, we have Bill Volkman, our deputy county manager, and I will turn things over to him for this presentation.

Thank you.

And good afternoon, Chairwoman, Commissioners, County Manager.

We are going to give you a ARPA update.

And I just want to share with you some of the progress that has been made through the ARPA program to date, as well as kind of what our next steps are as we move to the final close out.

So with that, we're going to touch on the ARPA award, the original award, but also the additional revenues that this generated and the total allocation that has been made to date.

And then finally, we're going to close out on the ARPA watch list.

Any projects that were kind of falling a little behind the spend program and kind of talk to you about what that may look like and then hit on the final summary and then open it up for any QA.

So with that, uh the county received 147 million dollars of ARPA direct award, and we went through an extensive community-involved process to determine how that would be allocated out.

But in addition to the original grant award, this program has earned $19.6 million of interest to date that has also been used to allocate out to programs for this ARPA project.

So to date, we've allocated out 167.3 million dollars.

And again, focusing on those key areas.

And if you remember when we did this back, I think the original allocation, you really had one specific agenda item came forward for those pillars, and we identified all the subrecipients within those pillars that we were serving.

Okay.

So food, housing, and shelter, we've touched over 800,000, 819,000 individuals through those programs, public health 224,000, education and careers, 34,000, safety and legal, 28,000, transportation and infrastructure, 9,000, and then other uh 840.

So overall, this program has touched over 1.1 million dollars of participants.

So that's pretty big impact over the last few years.

And we'll continue to update update these as we get through the final closeout.

We'll bring back the final list of the impacts that we received.

And yes, you're I think uh just to let you know, this is not individual.

So if an individual received you know food and housing, it didn't mean they couldn't be eligible for public health.

So this is individually how these programs have broken down over a million 1.1 million dollars of participants who have received some sort of funding or benefit.

So, for example, chairwoman, I see kind of how that's formulating.

So, for example, somebody could have seen received food assistance program, but then they could have also received a rental assistance program.

So they could have been in the pipeline for a variety of programs, but each program we wanted to count the participants that were served under those those various buckets.

Does that make sense?

Yes, so the number on the right indicates individuals that receive service under that category.

Okay.

And I do want to pause here because I think this is a very important stat of one over 1.1 individual people who have received some sort of assistance through these various programs, and just want to see if there's any questions from the board before I move off of this slide.

Yes, Commissioner.

But in there, even if they received food and then they received housing, they were still counted once for each.

Yes, that is correct.

Any other questions?

Okay, very good.

All right, so this is going to get into more of the spend.

So we just want to share with you of the 160 plus million dollars that we have allocated to date.

123 million has been spent to date.

47 programs have been 100% exhausted.

And that this is important as we're getting close to that September 30th dial that September 30th deadline.

We have 31 programs out there that are between 90 and 99 percent spent, and then as we move down 80 to 89 percent spent, we have 11 programs, and we have 10 programs that are below 80 percent spent.

And we're gonna show you the breakdown of those programs, and that is going to be really our area of focus over the next month or two to kind of walk through the plans and strategies to really talk about how we get to that full spend, and for any programs that we can't get to that full spend, we've been working with our partners in Deloitte as well as any program who has received 100% spend.

If there's any dollars that can be reallocated to them for a quick one-time purchase or to meet the original program criteria that they identified, we would go ahead and bring those forward as well.

And we have been doing that throughout the process, so this isn't a last-minute knee-jerk reaction to say, hey, this is kind of where we are, and Deloitte and through our partners uh through our partners in Deloitte, they've had monthly or if not weekly check-ins with some of the programs on this list just to make sure we can clearly identify how they're gonna meet that mark.

Any questions on the spend before we get into the 10 programs?

Very good.

Okay, so these are in spend percentage order, but just kind of want to walk through these and then we're gonna spend some time talking about some of the key themes here.

As you kind of walk down this list, you're gonna see Cobb Douglas Board of Health on here several times.

We now have a weekly or a bi-weekly meeting with them, and we are working through the final spend spend for each of these programs.

So we do anticipate they will hit their mark, and we are working through that strategy with our deployment partners at Deloitte.

But as we kind of walk down this list, we have some large capital purchases.

I'm gonna go to the Habitat for Humanity.

That is uh already approved project, and they are gonna go through the bill process, so they are looking some some large capital purchases for housing.

So that is in the works, and we feel confident that they're gonna move forward.

We had a little bit of delay with some zoning and questions as we move through that because it is a mixed development of habitat homes versus another developers building some of traditional homes in there as well.

So we're working through that process, but that project is moving full steam ahead.

And I know where we have the economic strategic plan up there.

That was one that was kind of late to the party on our our part, um, but that is moving full steam ahead there at 70% spend.

So we anticipate a few more invoices coming in and no issues anticipated there as well.

Uh, rental assistance continues to be a need again.

Center for family resources is our number two from the top.

Um, that continues to spend down as we continue to see that need throughout our community.

Okay.

This last part is our kinds of right rounds out our top 10, and again, you're gonna see Cobb Douglas Public Health in here several times.

The one that we do want to draw your attention to is the South Cobb Health Complex.

So what we are going to do is begin walking the halls with each of the commissioners to talk about our strategy.

We have met, like I said, routinely with Cobb Douglas Board Public Health.

There were some delays in federal funding, and then we have brought all the contracts for the board for consideration.

We're working towards the GMP working with our facilities folks.

We don't anticipate much of the ARPA spend taking place, but one of the things that we want to look at is how we shift dollars around because as we said, the the are the interest dollars that we have previously allocated are unrestrictive and do not have that time frame of September 30th, and we have used those for existing capital infrastructure projects, so we may need to look at how we shift those dollars around to better better utilize those and still meet the funding need.

Cobb Douglas Board of Health is also doing the exact same thing that we're doing.

They're looking to see how they can contribute to this project in addition to the ARPA dollars because they know the time frame as we walk through that.

So the all in spend for that project that we have on the books for ARPA is 9.7 million.

We South Cal Health Complex has about 8.5 million left on their ARPA bucket list, and between uh the county and the board of Cobb Douglas Board of Health, we do anticipate covering that with Board of Health dollars as well as interest dollars and not asking the board for any additional dollars to come forward, no general fund dollars, no property tax dollars, none of that.

This can all be contained within the ARPA program and the ARPA interest program.

So I just want to share that with you, but we're gonna be walking through over the next couple weeks of the strategy that we'd like to bring forward for you to consider as we kind of move through that to again to close out the ARPA program by September 30th and still meet this funding requirement that the board has approved.

Any questions on this slide?

Absolutely.

Yes, so the ones that are driven by clients, which would be the vision care for school children, yes, rental assistance, public health for infants, um septic system repairs.

Is there a path forward for how they will be able to have sufficient outreach to utilize the rest of their funding?

Yes, absolutely.

So that is part of our strategy that we've been working on since probably we did the 90% spend assessment in March to kind of work through that.

So anybody who's been on this watch list has made significant progression through that list.

The only one that we're again struggling with is the South Cow Health Complex, but do have a strategy to bring back for the board for consideration on that one.

Uh we do anticipate that everybody will hit that mark or be very close to that mark.

And if there was any leeway in their spending plan to say, hey, we just simply cannot hit that mark.

We've already brought those back for de obligation and reallocation to other participants who we received 100% funding.

So right now there's no we don't have any big red flags saying, hey, we don't think we're gonna hit that mark based on the strategies that have been approved through our partners and Deloitte to kind of walk through that.

The only one that we are very cautious about, and again want to walk through that with the board is gonna be the health complex.

Okay.

You talked about possible use of interest income.

Have we utilized interest income prior to today?

Absolutely.

So we've brought several agenda items back in the past where we have allocated interest income to other programs within this project list as well as county infrastructure projects.

Uh we've created a county infrastructure contingency as well as we've utilized it for water projects, which we're eligible as well under the ARPA program.

So we've we have brought those back forward in the past, and those continue to be siphoned well, not siphoned, allocated from the interest uh interest that is earned monthly into those buckets.

And one of the things we want to do is look at how we could better utilize that to close out the ARPA program.

So the last one I think we did was to say we were gonna use ARPA interest to pay for Deloitte as an eligible expense for our last closeout.

I think uh Mr.

Geezy brought that back forward when we said we're doing the final contract with Deloitte to get us through close out of ARPA.

We are using interest dollars to do that.

It is also eligible under the ARPA grant program.

So again, shifting our focus on how we look at those and to maximize our grant dollars.

Do you know how much interest revenues left over?

Um, we have allocated all of today because it does go automatically, but we have earned 19.6 million.

Okay.

So just shifting how we focus those dollars to make sure we're utilizing grant dollars first would be our recommendation.

But again, want to walk through that the methodology with y'all.

Okay, thank you.

You're welcome.

Commissioner, sorry.

Go ahead.

Um, so these the ones that are under 100 percent complete.

Yes.

Um hit that water water mark.

We're having weekly check-ins with them on spend.

They actually have a since the 90 percent spend, they have a monthly spend target that they have to hit, and they we make sure that if they fall behind, we've already brought some of those items back for reallocation.

Okay.

And if and then sorry, go ahead.

The money that comes back.

Um, where are we as far as our departments like DOT or water that were on the list that may have expended all theirs?

Yes.

Um how can we redirect that we want to walk through?

So again, they're going to be bringing agenda item for their board to consider to allocate some of their additional dollars to that project.

And then we're looking at how we can better utilize interest money to make up that difference.

So again, and but to your point, at the end of the yeah, can what does it require construction to begin by then?

It does not.

Not interest has no uh restrictions tied to it.

So if and it if you recall, actually, this project was part of the 22 SPLOSS program.

So as we go begin to close this out, we will be shifting dollars to the 22 SPLOSS program, which is where the project will actually take place.

So as long as we're using interest dollars, we have an extended time frame.

If we the only the only restrictions are on the ARPA grant dollars, which we're gonna propose to better utilize those.

Sorry.

Okay.

No, if you're still continuing, please finish.

I'm good.

I'm good.

You sure?

I just don't understand always okay.

Wait a minute, then let's provide clarity.

She's saying she doesn't understand all that.

That's can you help provide additional absolutely?

Let me try to walk it through this way.

This the 16 million dollars that we have earned from interest from ARPA, has no restrictions, no time frame tied to it.

The only thing that has to be spent by September 30th is the grant dollars.

Projects correct.

So what we're gonna do is what we're gonna propose the board consider is shifting those the grant dollars to eligible projects that have expenses that are eligible that have not been reimbursed for yet, and using interest dollars that we actually paid for those expenses for to this program.

That way you're you're taking that off and you're saying, okay, so for example, I'm gonna give you an example.

If we have a water project that is eligible, water has paid for that project, or interest has paid for that project, but we could use ARPA dollars to pay for that project, so that would free up the interest dollars, which could now go to the the complex, right?

And has no restrictions, no time frame to it, and it actually helps us meet our spend requirements for the grant.

Does that make sense?

Right.

But there still are they're still on the list originally.

They are and that's a critical component.

Everything that we're proposing has to be on the original list.

We cannot add a new project.

We can't say, hey, we would like to do something that was not proposed, these have to be on the original project list.

So you are absolutely correct, Commissioner.

Okay, so the interest will all that go to Cobb Douglas health.

No, not all 16 million.

No, definitely not.

We've actually spent that on other programs as well.

So we're gonna we're shooting for somewhere in the ballpark of seven time frame with the interest dollars.

So yes, that is absolutely what we're asking.

Are we saying today that we won't send one dollar back of grant dollars?

No, we're trying to work with our recipients to make sure that we maximize those grant dollars, but also free up interest dollars that can be used for this project.

Right.

So we want to materials for the homes.

So that we anticipate that seeing a big uptick in the next month.

So we we're feeling pretty good about that.

The rental assistance one we're continuing to work through and make sure we're accounting for all the invoices.

So those are kind of the big two that we have out on this page.

Um 75 is pretty is pretty good.

We're moving forward in that direction as well for the vision care for schools, children.

So I so we again if they while you're working with them now, yes, if they know they can't complete them by September 30th.

Is that money coming back for us to approve to redistribute somewhere else and with 30 days, 60 days left?

If if they can identify there's a big chunk of money or a chunk of money that they will not spend, we have already brought that forward for you.

So this is the the spend pattern that you have here, they have a approved spend projection per month to meet that target of 100 percent right now.

So we're monitoring that every month as we move forward, so that's one of our big asks.

So as we've had somebody come back and say, look, you're not hitting your mark.

We've asked them to de- out we've de obligated funds and already reallocated that out.

These are ones that are on the list that we feel that we can hit very close to the 100% spend, and it's gonna come down to invoice timing, when is something delivered, something small of that nature.

So we don't anticipate a large return of any of the funds here.

We do anticipate they hit that mark.

And if they don't, for example, if if one of these don't, that money will stay with Cobb County, and then we will send it back to Treasury and say sorry, we could not spend this fund in time.

But our goal is to spend the grant funds 100% or as close as possible because we don't want to have funds left on the table that somebody could have otherwise utilized.

Right, right.

So that has been our projection as we move forward.

Commissioner, I'm sorry, Commissioner Allen, then Commissioner Gambros.

One one more follow-up for clarification.

On the the interest, the interest funds do not have do they have to be obligated to a specific project that was ARPA related.

They do not.

Okay, so that's why I wanted to make sure we were clear on that because those can be used for wherever we see fit.

Those are our now interest dollars that we can reallocate.

So I I will say the board has taken two two steps of actions on that.

They have allocated interest dollars for ARPA eligible projects.

Absolutely have.

I just want to make sure that this is gonna look at it.

It is it is unrestricted funding, unrestricted money that can be used for any project that the board so choose.

Right.

We would just have to bring that as an agenda item, and then we can allocate that money wherever we prioritize it.

Absolutely be agenda item.

Go ahead, Commissioner Gamble.

Okay, buddy, close your ears.

It's essentially close them.

No, it's a shell game.

Because as Bill said, we've already allocated the funds.

Yeah.

So now what we're gonna do is we're gonna bring them back because they're unrestricted.

And use those.

And and put this back towards that.

So Commissioner.

I know buddy hates that word.

So you you you are correct that we are simply choosing how we utilize funds.

I mean, that is absolutely the case.

But the catch is is whatever we allocate to ARPA has to be ARPA eligible.

So that that that is the only requirement.

There's two requirements.

Has to be RPA eligible, it has to be spent by September 30th.

That's what we have to live by.

So as long as we meet those requirements, and that is something that we are triple checking with our friends at Deloitte, and be like, hey, this sounds good, but nobody wants to get in trouble, so let's make sure these are 100% eligible and that it can meet that all the criteria, and that is our first step before we take any action.

So we will not bring you a recommendation that would have anything that would create any concern there.

So we have triple checked anything that we're gonna bring you to make sure that it is ARPA eligible and then it is an easy transition while still trying to meet the needs of the approved projects.

Yeah.

Well, that's why I was saying they have to be on the project list, the original project list, but that's for these that are under spent that have it spent.

But you're saying that the interest can be utilized anywhere.

Yes, you're correct, Commissioner.

The the grant program, the grant dollars have to only can only be utilized for projects that were previously approved.

The interest, we have taken a couple different approaches, so you're absolutely correct.

Okay, but for capital, yes, we have one-time project.

It could be used for any capital project you want, as long as the board approves that.

So then we get into sustainable in the budget.

It's a one should be a one-time expense.

Use for one time.

It can use one time spending.

One time expense.

It doesn't have to be per capital.

Okay, for initiative.

Any one time expensive.

It doesn't have to be a project, it can be something that's one time expense.

Sure.

Yeah.

Should be one time.

Yeah.

Okay.

All right.

Okay.

Any other questions on the watch list?

Because that's really the focus I wanted you to have today.

Is that of 99 projects that the board has allocated funds to, you have 10 that have made the watch list as we get to basically two months out from the closure date.

And we have a strategy of these 10 of how we want to move forward.

And the biggest one I want to be on your radar is the SouthCalf Health Complex, and we have a strategy that we would like to bring to you for consideration of how we can still meet that obligation.

Okay.

Okay.

So that's that's the key is that as we saw this coming, we didn't want there to be any sense of panic that hey, this is a project that we committed to that we can't hit that watermark.

Yes, we can.

We just want to walk through that strategy with you and make sure we better utilize as Commissioner Allen said, we're going to use the grant funds first, interest earnings second, again to meet all the approved projects that the board has already laid out.

Okay.

Beyond this list, we have allocated additional funds to those who've already spent down their funds.

Absolutely.

How will we be monitoring that and being mindful that those that were allocated additional funding will also spend down their funding?

So they're part of our 99 projects that we've awarded to, whether you got one award or you received an additional allocation based on de obligation funds, those all fall into this bucket.

So most of those that well, no, I'll say this differently.

All of those that received additional funds had already previously hit the 100% watermark.

So theirs are going to fall into the 90 to 99% watermark on this graph here today.

And again, they still have to submit a new spend plan when they get additional funds to say this is my plan to spend these funds by the deadline, and this is what I'm going to do with those funds.

The key part of that is still has to meet the original criteria of the project, the original scope that was submitted.

It's just going to allow them to extend that scope or project a little bit longer than they had funding for.

Okay.

Okay, thank you.

You're welcome.

All right.

And questions.

Yes, that's it.

Thank you.

You beat me.

Just again, reminder, September 30th, but that I just want to see if you had any questions, but again, of 123 million you spent, you've served over 1.1 million dollars of individuals with that money.

Okay.

Thank you.

Appreciate you providing this update of where we are with this program.

Thank you very much.

You're welcome.

That now takes us to our next presentation, which we'll hear from Jessica Gwynn, our community development director.

She will be providing information and an update regarding housing in Cobb County.

Good afternoon, Jessica Glenn, Cott County Community Development Director.

Happy to be here with you all today to talk about a couple things.

Housing initiatives first, and then we're going to talk after that, of course, about data centers will be the next item.

Stephen is handing out right now a copy of our presentation about housing.

He's also handing you a white paper that he's put together on housing, and Steven Gonzalez just joined us.

You'll be hearing from him in a moment.

He's our planner three who's just joined our planning team at community development back in March, so pretty recent addition.

Stephen brings a lot of great experience, background working in the housing and redevelopment space.

So he's working with us on those areas and has already jumped right in with Phil Westbrook and his team and on the comprehensive plan.

You guys have had the opportunity to come to some of our meetings, so I appreciate seeing you all at those meetings.

But in addition to the comprehensive planning efforts, we've been taking a look at this.

And so what we wanted to do today, you see it says the housing toolbox, is just to provide sort of a 30,000-foot look at sort of a menu of things that we could consider.

As you'll recall, the Board of Commissioners adopted the Cobb County Strategic Plan.

There were several housing items that were in there.

I'm not going to read through all these, but there were there were three key success indicators that were identified.

So adequate quality and availability of housing types, increased attainable and quality housing options, and preventing and addressing homelessness.

So today, what we wanted to do is just kind of walk through some of the things that could be done.

Some of the things that were even specifically called out in the strategic plan include tools like land banks, looking at our zoning policies and those sorts of things.

So what I've asked Stephen to do is to take a look at some things, provide some options for the board to consider some things that are sort of lower hanging fruit, things that could be done, relatively low cost, and a relatively short time frame, some things that are a little bit longer play, some things that may require a little bit more investment that may require additional time, and that's some things that would even be further down the road.

So we're not going to get very in-depth into any of it today.

We're going to hit the high points, and then you've got this document.

We'll be happy to sit down and talk with you all later down on down the road if you'd like to go into a little bit more detail.

Some of them are probably tools that you haven't even heard of before, so it's just very introductory.

But we wanted to kind of get a feel from the board.

Um what are the what are the items that you'd like to give legs to and investigate a little bit further?

So all that being said, I'm gonna go ahead at this point and turn it over to Steven to walk through some of those ideas, some of those tools in the toolbox, and then after that, we'll be happy to answer any questions and hear any feedback that you have initially.

Steven.

Thank you, Jessica.

Hello.

All right.

Hi Stephen, it works.

Good afternoon, chairwoman and commissioners.

Good afternoon.

Um, I have control.

All righty.

So I would like to introduce what the planning team is calling the development toolbox.

The purpose of the presentation is not to make recommend specific housing policies or ask support to adopt every tool presented today.

The goal is just to provide the board a framework or a menu of options that can be considered over time as a housing need and community priorities evolve.

The key point is that there's no single policy that solves every housing challenge.

Different communities use different tools based on their goals, market conditions, and available resources.

To help organize these options, the team grouped the tools into three three phases as you see on the presentation.

The first phase is quick wins.

So these are tools that could potentially be explored and implemented within the next two years.

They focus on removing barriers and improving processes to encourage private investment with limited public resources.

The second phase is building the toolbox.

These are tools that could potentially uh these are tools that require more coordination, partnership, or resources.

They give the county additional ways to support redevelopment when the private market alone may not achieve county goals.

And the final phase is building the system.

These are long-term strategies that combine multiple tools to support growth, redevelopment, and preservation in select areas.

This slide provides another way of looking at the tools.

So instead of organizing them by timeline, this matrix looks at two factors.

How complex the tool is to implement and the potential impact it could have.

Some tools are relatively straightforward and can have meaningful impacts, while others require more coordination, resources, and partnerships, but provide additional capabilities over time.

The purpose of this matrix is to help prioritize these conversations.

And it recognizes that the county does not need to pursue every tool at the same time.

So looking at the matrix in the upper left quadrant includes market-based tools.

These focus on reducing barriers and encouraging private investment rather than relying on county resources.

The lower right quadrant includes tools focused on building capacity and partnership, such as transfer of development rights and community land trusts.

These require more planning and coordination, but they do provide the county with additional tools to implement implement future redevelopment.

So now we're going to dive into some of these select policies and tools.

Stephen, can I just jump back and get some clarification on that prior matrix?

Can you define or differentiate greatest potential impact and supporting impact?

Correct.

So for the greatest potential impact, those were looking at or when tackling some of the uh implementing some of the tools to remove barriers or looking at some different process flows.

It could speed up the process or help incentivize development.

Um rather not said incentivize, but kind of just encourage development.

While for supporting impacts, it's kind of looking more at complimentary tools that work with these other tools.

So for one of them, it's uh fee waivers, which can be utilized with expedited permitting or density bonuses to encourage developers to complete county goals.

Thank you, appreciate that.

You have another question, Commissioner Burrell?

Yes.

So how are these implemented?

What or conflicting with the UDC, which we don't have yet?

Or how do we know what's gonna be different?

I'll touch on really quickly.

So, Commissioner, today we're we're talking really specifically about some tools that are available.

If there are things that the board wants to pursue, we can incorporate those into the UDC.

A lot of them are not even tools that are necessarily code.

Um, not all of the answers are in legislation.

Uh, so a lot of them are other policies and programs that the board could explore and direct staff to move forward with.

So that's kind of what we're going to talk about, and then I'm happy after we get through these to talk a little bit about how those might be incorporated into our existing codes or how they might be incorporated into future UDC or other other future codes.

Okay, are there any other questions?

Proceed.

So jumping into the first tool is uh accessory dwelling units.

So this is the first set of tools that are quick wins or administrative improvements to encourage private investment.

So an initial ADU code ordinance was brought forward to the BOC in 2024.

Uh the county does have some existing language, but this is a topic that we can revisit if the board decides.

For those not familiar with ADUs, they are small secondary residences located on the same lot as a primary home.

Uh common examples include garage apartments and also detached backyard cottages.

Potential outcomes of this tool could include more housing choices for young adults and seniors, and as well, it allows homeowners additional flexibility or even supplemental income.

Moving on to the second tool is density bonuses.

So, unlike regulatory mandates, density bonuses are voluntary incentives.

The county will allow a developer to build just a little bit more than the zoning will normally permit.

In exchange, the developer must provide a public benefit.

And this is to the county's choosing.

It could be attainable housing, it could be a park, it can even be transportation improvements.

So implementing a density bonus program will require one, establishing the criteria.

So who can qualify for this program?

Identify appropriate locations, where does this program apply in the county?

Defining what public benefits the county wants to encourage, like previously mentioned, we can encourage parks, we can encourage transportation improvements, and lastly, creating a process to ensure long-term compliance.

So most costs involve staff administration and program monitoring rather than direct county investment.

And the advantage of this program is once again it encourages private investment while helping the county achieve its goal by directing growth to the appropriate locations.

Now I'll move over to expedited permitting.

So this tool does not reduce development standards nor building codes.

Instead, it creates a faster and more predictable review process for projects that qualify for this program.

So many communities have used this tool to encourage projects that support their priorities, such as building community facilities, uh creating tenable housing and other public benefits.

So similar to the density bonuses for this program, the program would involve establishing an eligibility eligibility criteria.

Once again, what projects qualify, uh, create a streamlined review process, coordinate between county departments, and as well track permit timelines and program monitoring.

The cost will primarily involve staff time along with potential technology or workflow improvements.

And the benefits include more predictable review timelines for developers, lower costs for developers by reducing permitting delays, and as well improve the customer service.

If there are no questions on that one, I will move over to land banks.

So the next tool represents a transition from regulatory reforms into now strategic investments.

So a land bank is designed to acquire, hold, and return underutilized properties to productive use.

This often includes blighted tax delinquent, foreclosed, and abandoned properties.

But it is important to note that a land bank does not have imminent domain authority.

Georgia law provides a framework for creating a land bank, and under the state law, a county must partner with at least one municipality.

A governing board of five to eleven members must be established, and policies must be adopted for property acquisition, maintenance, and also disposition.

Compared to previous tools, this requires greater investment, such as organizational startup, property acquisition funds, legal services, and as well ongoing administration.

But the primary benefit is that it gives the county a way to reduce blight and support strategic redevelopment in areas where the private market may not invest in its own.

We also don't have to start from scratch.

Several neighboring counties, including Cherokee, Bartow, and Floyd have already established land banks that we can learn from.

And I'd also like to thank Cherokee County for welcoming our team and sharing their experience as we research this tool.

And the last policy that we'll be talking about today is transfer of development rights.

This is often called TDR.

It's a much more complex tool, but it's another market-based approach focusing on balancing growth and preservation.

So it allows development rights to be transferred from areas that the county wants to preserve to areas which additional growth is appropriate.

Property owners are compensated by selling their underused development rights to developers.

Implementing a TDR program includes first identifying those preservation areas, second, identify the receiving areas where additional development is appropriate, updating the zoning ordinances, and as well as establishing a tracking system.

Costs are largely administrative unless the county chooses to create a development rights bank.

And all that bank does is to buy and hold credits until development is ready to commence.

So the benefit of TDR program is that it helps preserve important land while encouraging development in areas that can accommodate growth.

And in closing, uh, once again, this is intended to provide the board with a toolbox.

Some of these initiatives could be considered in the near term, while others require additional capacity partnerships and resources before they can be implemented.

With that, I will open up for any questions.

Thank you.

Yes, just immediately thank you for taking time to describe the various options that are available to the board for our consideration and for us looking at different factors for consideration.

My only concern is that there are many more tools that you presented in the toolbox, and I'm only seeing a description for four.

And so I particularly have interest in some of these strategies that are listed in building the toolbox and in building the system that I would love to also see fleshed out.

Yes, ma'am, we can actually uh include those and provide those additional information and resources.

Okay, thank you.

Even going back to quick wins, I was looking at some particularly in that middle column.

But what is a strategic zoning update?

We know we've talked about reduced parking requirements, density bonuses, we know it reduced permitting fees are expedited permitting was explained, so we're ADUs, but what are you considering to be strategic zoning updates?

Well, as we talk about strategic zoning updates, um that is just looking at our our current zoning codes that we have in place, and that's something that's a process happening through the UDC already.

Um as we've done UDC presentations, we've talked about bringing back the RMR and RHR zoning districts to allow to be our RM24 and RM60, so retooling those to support higher density and the regional activity centers again, only with approval of a rezoning request by the board of commissioners.

Um the UDC also contemplates a cottage court product that would be uh a small development with smaller homes centered around a courtyard, a central courtyard.

Um so that's something that would is also included as something that we could look at.

Even thinking about things, and again, this is another thing.

Stephen already mentioned the ADU code that we brought forward in 2024, um, and did not move forward at the same time as your recall, we brought forward an additional code amendment that would um allow for one more additional unrelated adult and one more additional vehicle to be outside at the um at the single family property.

So it didn't move forward.

And I did ask John just in just for the board's reference, you know, because you see a lot of those land use permit request.

Um if we were if the board were to decide to explore that if the board wanted to increase um the number of unrelated adults, and or even we also talked at the time about maybe changing the difference their definition of family because at this point under our current code, cousins, aunts, and uncles are not related.

Um so even looking at that, um, if the board were were to consider that, you know, currently since 2023, as of you know, the the most recent LUPs that came to the board of commissioners in June, 76% of the requests for LUPs for additional adults or additional parking have been approved by the board of commissioners.

Um we've also seen, and I'll let John correct me if I'm wrong, but um we had a significant number whenever you look at the district by district breakdown.

Um District one had three of four in that time approved, two of three in district two were approved in that time, nine of fourteen were approved in district three during that time, and twenty of twenty-four approved in district four.

But keep in mind, of course, now then a significant chunk of the requests that we're hearing from district four are now in the city of Mapleton.

So we have seen that those LUP requests have tapered off.

Um, just 2026 so far, there's been three that have been brought to the board of commissioners.

Um so that said, again, that those are the types of strategic zoning things that we can do that are kind of low-hanging fruit, if that is the policy direction that the board would like to take.

Okay, Commissioner Burl has a question.

And how many of those were a result of code enforcement complaints from neighbors or surrounding properties?

Right, I would expect and Don probably has yeah, most of them because as you know exactly.

That's why they come in for a look because they've been cited by code enforcement because some money complained and they went out there.

Um on the other things on here for the uh density bonuses, things like that.

Um this all affects zoning.

And that's why I asked the question prior about how this conflicts or complements or whatever with UDC, because we have RSL, which gives a bonus for density if it's age restricted, 55 and older.

We have OSC, which is um open space communities that give a density bonus based on um what?

No, the OSC, the density bonus was removed in 2017.

RSL is up to five units, right?

With the caveat that it does not impact or have precedence on then adjacent developments.

Right.

So but we do have a we do have some that are already give a bonus for density in the zoning codes.

But I I guess this would add more.

And then we know what happened with ADUs a couple years ago.

So I think some more research on that needs to be done or more public um outlet out.

But again, today we're just really trying to hear from the board what it what are the things you'd like for us to research more and do some public outreach for because it you know we certainly don't want to spin our wheels if there's not the appetite for the board from the board and exploring those things.

Um, you know, as you'll recall, and of course, that was 2024, and we can be happy to provide.

I know since that time there's been a lot more discussion about housing and ADUs as a possible tool.

Kennesol has been working on ADU ordinance.

Um, Marietta already had one.

So there are a lot of number of places that in that time have adopted ADUs even by right, and that's not what we proposed back in 2024.

What we proposed at the time was to allow them as a slump so it would still come to the board of commissioners with a lot of guardrails that we proposed to put in place that would make it less attractive to use those as rental units or um you know to really truly uh let them be intended for multi-generational housing.

Yes, as far as I'm concerned, I again I appreciate the description of some of the tools.

I'm looking for a description of all the tools because I can't tell you what my preference is until I see clarity on these, and while some of these are quite creative, um for instance the transfer of development rights, some of these other things we've discussed, but we just didn't see fleshed out as the others.

So I would appreciate having the full menu for us to consider.

I do have a housing town hall meeting planned for September.

I would love to have a similar presentation at that time, see these tools shared more broadly.

When I say more broadly, more in depth, so that we don't have just coverage of four of them, but of all of them, so that people know what are all the various options available to the board, and considering the conversation that we just had on strategic zoning updates, you just provided a list of what some of those considerations are.

So perhaps providing a menu of what those low-hanging fruit options are under there would also be helpful.

Thank you.

Just just to add to that, uh I hate to give a lot of work.

If if we don't define these, then the public will define them themselves and we'll have even more of a challenge.

So I agree with the chairwoman of making sure that there's some type of guidance of what these mean for Cobb County.

Um, and the second piece is like you did with the land bank, talking about Cherokee and other counties around us that are doing that.

If for each of these you can also reference where these have been successfully implemented in other areas, uh that gives us a place to start with research and kind of looking at what the success or lack thereof has been.

So sorry for more homework, but I think that'll be I just worry about looking at these as bullet points.

There are people that'll be watching today that'll start getting anxious about the wording and not having the definition to back it up, is just a recipe for chaos.

So it'll be helpful.

Commissioner Gambrill, thank you, Commissioner.

Well, just adding on to your recipe for chaos, especially when the UDC has been touted that it is not changing our existing zoning, it's just an update.

So to kind of couple this at the same time that you're trying to do the UDC again is is gonna cause the chaos to begin right there.

But in addition to you know, giving us better definitions of what each of these means, there is a cost associated with each of these.

So I would like to know if this cost is expected to be bore by the county, whether it's you know, we lose revenue because of reduced permitting fees, or if it's to the developer, because the first thing I thought of when you were explaining the transfer of development rights, I'm like, okay, somebody is gonna have to pay a property owner to not develop their land, but then they're gonna have to pay to develop the land they want to, their development costs just doubled.

So if it's if it's about achieving affordable housing, how does this get us there when you're putting more burden on the developer to you know, transfer of development rights?

So again, as Commissioner Allen said, um, I'd like to see where these have been used, and I want to see actual dollar amounts tied to those two.

So commissioner, to your point about the transfer of development rights, and that was one that's like definitely a much longer term play because there's a lot a lot of work that goes into that, but your district specifically, as we had the conversation about the Northwest area, and we talked about sewer capacity and those sorts of things and the areas out there that want to be preserved.

I just think there are a lot of areas in your district specifically that potentially could make some sense as sending areas.

But you're yes, absolutely, we're happy to dig into that a little bit more, just planting the seed.

Um, and again, I mean, I know you're probably having my whole Northwest district cheer right now with those comments.

But again, there's a cost to that.

Right.

And what is that cost and who bears that cost, yes?

So thank you.

Thank you.

And I think one of the things that we are trying to be mindful of as we look at this, and Steven mentioned that you know, a lot of these are are market-based solutions, um, just recognizing that you know the the resources that we have in COP for housing initiatives are are different from what other places have available and are doing.

So really trying to identify those tools that could be at a relatively uh low financial cost, at least to the county.

So trying to be good stewards of the public dollars there.

Well, thank you all for your feedback.

We really appreciate it, and we will continue working on this and and get you some more information, some more details, and look forward to having future conversations with you.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Our final presentation will be an update to the board with respect to data centers.

And I see our zoning manager also approaching for this presentation.

Yes, and and John's gonna talk about the the um data centers, he's done some good research there, uh looking to see you know what are some best practices in terms of addressing data centers, of course, that being something a use that we didn't have when our zoning code was adopted in 1972.

Um we do have a moratorium, and and I'll turn it over to John in just a second.

But as you know, we do have the moratorium that the board adopted, which expires at the end of August.

So we will be bringing forward um a request to extend the moratorium at the first meeting of August, so that way we can incorporate whatever we do with data centers into a code amendment.

Um but today John wanted to give you guys an overview of you know some of the best practices that he's seen and his recommendations for what we could include to better um manage and and address data centers if they were to come to unincorporated cop.

Thanks, John.

Good afternoon, board.

For the record, my name is John Peterson.

I'm the zoning division manager.

Uh and I'm gonna be giving y'all an update on uh the data centers, and uh you know, there's better been a lot of interest in these in the public in the last few months.

So one thing we're gonna answer is what is a data center?

You know, the current zoning code does not define what it is, so we can't tell you what it is.

You know, if one were to come in, we would just put under private utility.

And right now we're under a moratorium, so we don't have to do that, thank goodness.

So we worked with the consultant and we came up with a definition for what a data center is.

A data center is a is a facility containing one or more large-scale computer systems used for data storage and processing for off-site users.

Typical supporting equipment includes backup batteries, power generators, and cooling units, uh, and enhanced security features.

And we had the consultant put this in probably near the end of 2024 is when we asked them to put it in.

So the first time they showed up in the UDC documents was in March of 25 when it was introduced into the staff uh copy, and then the public copy, it came out in November 2025.

So this definition is in there, uh, it's clear, it's uh it captures what data centers are and what they do, and uh we have a permitted use for it.

And with that, uh the consultant also gave us a uh a chart with with where data uh data centers are, and they're only allowed in light industrial and heavy industrial with a special landings permit.

So currently they're allowed in land industrial or have industrial by uh a use by right.

So this will help uh steer some of the data centers to where they're appropriate.

Sorry, John, can you state that again?

Yeah, it would be steered to what category?

So they're allowed in uh L I and HI with a special annual permit.

So they're gonna be steered to the industrial areas, hopefully away from residential schools, uh daycares and things like that.

Okay.

John, before you go on, one other question.

What does PD stand for?

So it's L I H I and then there's PD.

P D um is a zoning district that the consultant is recommending you put back in the code.

We had PED a long time ago, back in the 80s as a plan development.

So they're they're suggesting it be put back in the code.

And all PDEs are gonna be zoned to a side plan with stipulations.

So unless it's it's stated in the conditions that they're gonna have a data center, then they then they can have one.

If it's not stated, then they cannot have one.

John on the on the definition, um, and maybe we'll we'll get to this later.

I I struggle, I struggle with the definition only because we have a lot of corporate citizens in Cog County that may have one or more large scale computers for outside use.

That's a their IT team.

Um that we do, but I wouldn't consider what we have downstairs a data center.

Um so I I think it's this is a very broad that could impact a lot of people, um, especially our larger corporate partners who have IT teams with multiple computers inside of their corporate offices.

I totally understand what you're saying, Commissioner Allen.

You know, in our building, we have the server center for Cobb County, and out back there's eight AC units and a diesel generator.

Yeah, so you know, we can work on on refining that down, it may be based on square footage or megawatts or things like that.

I think that'll be because like I said, I just don't want people getting caught up in now they've got a data center when they just have an IT team.

So yeah, yes, Commissioner.

I I would my personal opinion, I think they should only be considered in HI, not LI.

And we'll take that under consideration, Commissioner Burrell.

You know, there's a lot of discussion on where they should go, you know, in more rural parts of the state, they're putting them in in agricultural zones because that's what they have the land that's uh very uh very cheap to build on.

Um but but we can talk about that in the city.

But there's very few areas in the Cobb County which is actually zone heavy industrial.

I mean, there's a big area on the south side of Chastain where the the uh Rockware is.

There's a little bit on Kent Road, and there's a big blob down by Dobbins uh in Lockheed.

And that's probably the only three locations where one wouldn't be able to go based on this code.

Well, we definitely take note of that.

Well, in Alma, it should be based on their a smaller footprint or something that's not as intense as heavy industrial.

And we could further define that, Commissioner Burrell, because I know the data center that's on hold right now in Marietta, it's actually in a commercial area.

It used to be a paced warehouse, so it's a 90,000 square foot building that they're putting uh servers in, probably about 80,000 square feet of the building.

So we're so we'll definitely take a look at that and and find something more concrete to put into the code.

Yeah, and I think that's where because when you hear people talking data centers, what they're they're not talking about what we have downstairs, they're talking about the size of a football field.

And I don't think I think we're we have to be real careful of how we lump everything in, and you know, to to what John is saying about being in these zones, there may be a situation where something is per perfectly appropriate for LI because of the size, the footprint, the requirements, the power needs, the water needs, all of those are not the extremes of what we hear about in in data centers, and I just want to make sure we're being very careful, not sending a signal to a lot of our corporate partners that you can't come operate here because your IT team can't have servers in the basement, and we've got to be really careful about that.

Okay, I understood.

Gotcha.

Moving into the presentation, um, the things we've heard from the public.

You know, we've heard this in the news on social media regarding the two data centers that are here in Marietta.

You know, the public's concerned about power consumption, uh, water consumption, noise, view shed, heat dissipation, and land use.

Uh and all those are valid concerns uh chair and board, and you know, with the code section we're proposing, I think we take care of most of those, if not all of those concerns, and help reduce the negative impacts of the neighbors.

And as a result of all these uh six things, uh the board did put in a place a moratorium back in February that's gonna expire near the end of August.

And I believe there's gonna be an agenda item at the beginning of August to reinstate the moratorium or extend it for another six months until we get our code um put in place.

And you know, this code section is probably gonna come about in the fall time, probably September, October.

You know, we were trying to wait to do all the zoning code amendments with the UDC, uh, but that process is has been kind of slow because it's so complicated.

So for these critical code amendments, we're gonna try to get them done in the fall time.

Okay.

All right.

Moving on to the and I I gave the board a uh a draft copy of what the staff's proposing, uh, what the code should be for data centers.

And it's uh I believe it's uh 14 point uh code section, and these are the 12 of the most important ones that are up on the slide right now.

Uh and uh Commissioner Allen, that uh that picture is the service center behind our building.

So that that that's kind of what they look like on a smaller scale.

Um first thing we're gonna do is we're gonna look at building design.

Um, you know, we're gonna make sure that the the building is painted uh in earth tone so it doesn't stand out, and um as a result of it being a special language permit, uh all the buildings, the design, the way it looks, is got to be approved by the board of commissioners as part of a special language permit hearing.

Uh number two, um, we're gonna regulate the maximum floor area ratio.

You know, this is a mathematical equation of building to square foot on a lot.

So the 0.75 staff suggesting is the same FAR that they have for self-storage facilities, 0.75.

And just by way of uh contrast, uh retail has an FAR of 0.25, office has a re uh FAR of 0.5.

So this is a little bit higher, but it's it's equal with self-storage facilities, which are probably gonna be the same size scale buildings as far as lot goes.

Uh next, we're gonna uh regulate the uh minimum and maximum lot size.

Staff is suggesting that the minimum size be five acres with the maximum size being 30 acres.

You know, we really don't see a lot of opportunity for these big campus type facilities they have out in South Georgia and East Georgia and West Georgia.

You know, these are gonna be smaller type facilities.

All right.

Uh next one we're gonna regulate is building uh building height.

Maximum building height is gonna is proposed to be 50 feet, which is the maximum height in HI anyway, and uh with the height that's gonna include anything else that's on the property, such as HVAC units on the roof, water towers, conveyor belts, or anything else, and that's also gonna be subject to approval by the board as part of a special lane's permit.

Uh next item we're gonna regulate is building setbacks, and this is the one that uh was the most interesting to look at.

You know, we did look at the Georgia Tech site that had uh best practices and model codes and actual codes uh for data centers throughout the state.

So the staff landed on suggesting uh for this first draft that the building setback be 300 feet from uh residential church park school daycare, and from any other non-residential use, the setback would be 50 feet off the property line for uh commercial uses or other industrial uses.

You know, in that we also have um a requirement that the data centers um would also be separated from residential uses that are not residential in nature, such as uh government facilities, uh I think I said churches, schools, and things like that.

So the building setback right now is 300 feet for residential and 50 feet for non-residential, and of course that that's a beginning point, and we can go up or down from there depending on what the board uh wants us to do.

Okay, um, just to kind of interject because Commissioner Allen just said 500, but um I'm kind of sitting here thinking if the minimum is five acres, you now take three or five hundred feet.

You don't have much left to build on so but but that's if it's adjacent to a residential district, and you know, mostly it's gonna be in in uh in uh industrial areas.

But you know, in our research uh commissioners, uh, you know, we saw setbacks as great as a thousand feet, but those are for more of the rural areas that have these acre, hundred-acre, 200-acre plus uh campuses of data center buildings.

So we thought 300 was a good starting point.

John, what are considerations in the application for the um data center?

Are they required to put in something about energy load, how much water they are anticipating and consuming?

And and that's not in the draft yet for energy load.

I'm still working through that, uh, Madam Chair.

Okay, you know, I did talk to one of the power companies, and the power usage for data centers that varies greatly.

That there's there is no average.

Uh, you know, the one that the city of Marietta is holding right now, I believe that one is 15 megawatts uh of power, which is not a lot, but it's it's still enough to power uh several thousand houses.

Yes and and this is where I think some complexity is entered into the development of code because there are other partners that can help us or should help us understand what the broader impact and implication could be think of the water authority and how much water that they have and how much water that they're anticipating their customers using is there a part of the application that goes to them for them to be able to approve or provide some recommendation based on their capacity.

Yeah and and actually um the very last item we're suggesting number 14 in this draft code uh package it it does address the water infrastructure so there are five things in there that they're going to do and I'll cover those in in just a couple minutes.

Okay great and then you know getting back to the energy usage there are very real concerns broader than just the county about how it can impact um all users when it comes to energy and there's been articles from Georgia power and other states about the impact that data centers can have on being able to provide energy to all users and I don't know where Georgia power is on this have they provided some type of report are they working with jurisdictions and how they can look at load to see how this is going to impact the system for all users.

I did talk to a representative from Greystone power and you know she stated that they do not pass on the the cost to their consumers to to the residential customers.

Okay.

You know the the data centers pay for their own uh loads and and rates okay so great because I think that is fair there's paying for it but then there just is the capacity to provide which can still ultimately impact users irrespective of how it's being paid for it.

Right and chairwoman just like we do um whenever we're looking at zoning we talk about you know what's the water and sewer capacity I think that's something that we also need to have and it's something that a lot of data center ordinances are including is uh a requirement that just like you submit the letter that says the whether or not there's adequate water and sewer infrastructure and capacity whether or not there's adequate electrical utility capacity and it's really going to be something that's done on a very case by case basis.

First of all we've got a few different power providers here but you know ultimately we all kind of know where it comes from but also just thinking about uh Commissioner Allen's point just the the different scales and types of data centers that there are is there's not really a one size fits all um I think and you know one of the things that we've seen is we've been working on the comprehensive plan and and I'll let Phil correct me if I'm wrong on the numbers but I believe it's like 0.6% of the land an unincorporated cop is on is currently industrial zone 0.6%.

Future lands okay in the future landies um before Mapleton incorporated it was closer to like six seven percent six or seven percent so we lost a significant portion of our our industrial area when Mapleton incorporated so all that being said I think um you know and as John shared we don't really have the opportunity here for the large scale data center farms but we are more likely I think is Cobb County to be impacted by what's happening in the cities and with our neighbors and Pauling and Bartow and Cherokee um so I I think that's something that you know maybe there needs to be a better regional approach to yeah that's just a consideration then there's interesting of there's been some philosophical and then some perhaps market considerations where some data centers have even considered their own power generation and then there is a monetization of that because then they can sell that data I mean they could sell that power to then the residents nearby and it there's just some larger implications of it which gets to my final point that I know our zoning police power allows us to consider the health safety welfare and morals of a decision but the town hall meeting I had in district two I was just taken back because residents are looking for us to be the moral gatekeeper of something that they see possibly taking over how they exist in the workforce and that's something that I never put on myself until I heard the weight in the voices of a couple of people that spoke about just this larger philosophical consideration of what data centers are doing and no that's not part of again something that we generally consider and factors of land use are you know zoning does consider health safety welfare and moral and I've just never looked at it data centers in that way I think perhaps we may look at some noxious uses in the community in that respect.

And though that's not part of again, something that we generally consider and factors of land use are you know, zoning does consider health, safety, welfare, and morals, and I've just never looked at it data centers in that way.

I think perhaps we may look at some noxious uses in the community in that respect.

That's a larger argument.

But I can't sit here and be immune to that, even though I'm just looking at land and what the resources are to create it.

And just to address uh one of your comments, uh Madam Chair.

The very first item in here, number one, you know, states that all power for data centers comes from off-site sources.

Okay.

So they can't have on-site power generators or power stations.

Okay.

Um, there's actually a data center that's under a stop work order now in Covington where they caught caught building up their own private power station.

Okay.

And they can't do that because there are certain EPA and EPD rules that they have to follow as far as emissions.

So that one's on stop right now.

Okay, interesting.

Thank you for sharing that.

So I similar to the other conversation we just had about, you know, because we don't define things well, we get the hysteria out there.

So one one of the things I think that would help is if we could somehow put in here not just what's allowable in a data center, but what's not allowed.

Because most of these issues that people are bringing up are in these massive facilities that have we don't even have the available land, as we just talked about in Cobb County to build something that requires its own water system and its own power.

Um, you know, district two, I get this a lot because people talk about data centers and always in in my frame of not being a lazy leader, telling people we already have people with infrastructure inside of District 2.

Um, I could look at all of the corporate logos as you drive through, and I can guarantee you all of them have an IT team with the data center.

It now because we're we're we're not defining it appropriately.

I can say it's it's an IT data center.

We here in the building have an IT data center.

What we have to make sure people understand is we are not going to be, in my opinion, we should not be opening Cod County up for facilities the size of a football field for data centers.

That's that's not reasonable.

I I don't think anywhere within the county.

So as we do this, is it's important not to just talk about what our criteria would be, but what's specifically not going to be allowed.

So, Commissioner Allen, if I can hearing the definition needs to be refined.

Definition is is critical in this situation.

Okay.

Commissioner Gambrill.

But in listening to you, part of the definition could be just that, you know, the data center is specific to that organization, not to the general public.

But let me so that's where we can get into trouble because Home Depot's data center is not for them.

It's for their website for people in the general public to go buy something to go do.

So it it can't be confined just to our data center is not just for Cobb County.

It it's for us to communicate out to the broader.

This right now is being streamed because of the servers we have downstairs.

So it's on site.

It's on their own.

I'm concerned about us conflating servers.

That's what the data is.

But for their own use, for us to be utilizing this terminology right now and saying we have a data center is quite inflammatory based on the public sensitivity to it.

And I would want to hear from IT directly on the distinction between what is generally servers contained in a site and what is a data center, so that there is not mass hysteria that Cobb County has been hiding its own data centers, and we have all these commercial properties with data centers, and they've somehow I'm saying because we don't have a definition, those things that that that's what I'm trying to get.

That's that's my point.

Is right now a way to do that, maybe.

I don't want them to feel hoodwinked by us in what we're doing.

That this are grandfathered in, but I when I think of a data center, I think of a free standing standalone building on however many acres that's like a hub for multiple servers um throughout the area, like a grid would be for Georgia Power or something to supply power or data centers free standing, not in the basement of a corporation that is for their own use.

That's not what you're saying.

So I'm looking, I'm saying that's what I think of as a data center of building standalone building just for storage and all, but it is gonna be serving multiple companies, residents, whatever.

But a Home Depot who has storage in a county who has a data center within their building that's already is for their use, even though their customers may be online ordering stuff, or we are yes com we are communicating with uh residents and businesses in in the county.

That's not to me.

The definition the definition does state for off-site users.

So Cobb County is using its data center, if we want to call our servers data center for its own use, yes.

So we're not selling our our service.

Look, we're I think I think of data centers as the cloud, like that cloud, that's it where it sits.

Yeah, it's a place.

But if it says data centers for off-site users, I mean, these corporations that have their stores just like we do, and like this picture right here, that's not all that's not it's on their site.

So if a company like a Home Depot or a big box store comes and applies for rezoning, and they're gonna have a customer service and a um in house data center, are they gonna be subject to this with the rezoning a building?

I mean, building a new building.

Yeah, and and and and I hear what you're saying, Commissioner Burrell.

I think the way to address the board's concerns is to is to revise this and put in some guardrails with square footage and megawatts use for the site, and that would but that way we can weed it out a lot better.

Correct.

I'm just doing some cursory uh online searches, and what Commissioner Gambrel and our county attorney has shared is correct, looking at internal usage versus external, and what's the primary purpose of the building?

Is the data center a supportive use of the other functions of that facility?

That is more of a server.

Is that be is that building being built for the purpose of providing data and service and then that's that's distinct because that's its sole purpose, that's its primary purpose.

So just however that definition is uh and I think we're all drafted, it's going to help to mitigate some of this other concern and noise about where is a true data center in Cobb County.

And we work on our own revias not to clarify that it's for the big data centers.

Yeah, and I would I would say I I think we're in agreement because my my concern was when we when I read what he says the definition of a data center, the working, it says a facility containing one or more large-scale computer systems.

I'm not I don't know where this right here.

Okay, I'm looking at the draft ordinance.

So if you say a facility containing, that doesn't it it needs to be explicit, like Commissioner Burl and Chairwoman said, of the primary use, not just a building containing a computer system.

To me, that's extremely broad.

Well, I I if it's contained in the building and for that company or government center's use only, I mean in its own site.

We just need to we just need to clean up that because we we have people who are not on site in this building that are using the systems.

That's that's what that's all I'm saying.

I'm not saying we're agreeing.

What I'm saying is that there are we have to make sure we're clear because a lot of people could get tangled up in this language if we're not explicit about the the use of a primary function.

That this is not just the system a facility containing, it is a facility built with a primary function of housing computers.

That is not what this definition says.

That's just my concern.

And we'll take another look at that, Commissioner Allen.

Yeah.

Senate to legal.

So there's look, I think it's for one thing.

Thank you for helping us have some starting point for consideration.

There is a moratorium that's coming up so that we can continue to have time to weigh all of these things.

I appreciate the board's diligence.

There's subject matter experts, there's other resources.

I think that it's important to make sure that all of those resources are engaged so that we have a tight ordinance.

And I think it's also helpful that Cobb County has very limited HI and LI space, so we can even craft a more tighter code that just really looks at what's realistic for Cobb County versus what could be another areas.

This is a start for us.

Commissioner Burrell, yes.

Just one more thing.

Can we have these presentations electronically?

Yes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

And moving on with the presentation.

Um the next item we're gonna address is parking, and parking is one space per 2,000 square feet, which is similar to our warehouse district.

So that's that's a pretty low number because there's not a lot of people in these facilities.

Uh number nine, we're gonna address uh noise abatement.

And the staff's proposing that the noise be limited to 65 decibels uh in the daytime between 7 a.m.

and 11 p.m.

and 55 decibels uh at night.

And just by way of reference, uh 65 decibels is the amount of noise that two people talk and normally make when they're talking.

So it's not that it's not it's not that much.

Uh you know, I've read things online, I've seen things online about these data centers that they're humming, they're buzzing, they're the generators are going off at all times of the day.

So this is gonna limit that.

Okay.

Uh number 10, buffers.

Uh staff's proposing that adjacent to residential churches, schools, and daycares, and parks, that the buffer be 200 feet uh of a natural buffer, and adjacent to other uses it'd be a hundred foot buffer.

And we're going on here to state that the tension ponds can't be in a buffer, and any utilities that cross the buffer have to be uh perpendicular, can't be parallel.

I think all the district commissioners have experiences where they agree to a zoning buffer, but the drainage using is going parallel through the buffer.

So this has to go as as quickly as it can through the buffer.

Uh number 11, site lighting.

Uh we're suggesting that uh the lights be limited to 20 feet in height, and that the they the that the lights be set back four times the height adjacent to residential use.

So a 20-foot light would have to be set back 80 feet from the property line in a data center use.

Additionally, uh the candle lights at the property line should be no more than point zero five foot candles of power, which is the equivalent of a full moon uh out.

You know, you you can kind of see where you're going, but you can't read do anything else, so it's pretty low.

Uh number 12, fencing.

Uh staff's proposing that there'd be an eight-foot fence around the property, and the fence has to be a decorative metal fence uh without uh anti-climbing devices such as you know, razor wire, barb wire, things like that, uh, unless it's totally hidden uh from public view.

Uh 13 is gonna be an unusual one for the board.

We don't normally see this, but staff's proposing that when the um data centers approved that the developer also give the county a decommissioning bond, and that would ensure that once the data centers have run their life course that there's enough money uh in a bond to tear it down and put it back to where it was before the data center.

We need that for gas stations too.

That's we'll start here.

And gas stations are gonna be one of the ones you see in October, Madam Chair.

Um, and lastly, uh the chair's already touched on this.

Uh we're putting conditions in there regarding your water infrastructure.

So, item A is they're gonna be required to do a study on the amount of water they're gonna use to make sure there's enough infrastructure to provide that water.

Uh item B, they're gonna require be required to do a waste uh water treatment plan to make sure there's enough capacity in our lines to accept their wastewater.

Uh C, uh this is probably the most important one.

Uh the staff is is recommending that all the cooling systems be closed loop.

So that's kind of like the radiator the radiator in your car.

It's a closed loose system, it gets hot, it cools down, it gets hot, cools down.

So that way there's not a lot of uh wastewater generated from the site.

D, uh data centers are recommended to pay 100% of the infrastructure improvements, and this is something that we see with all of the developments.

You know, when you build something, you you're required to build the roads, D cell lanes, water lines, sewer lines, etc.

So we're just putting it in there so they know that if they have to extend a sewer line or a water line a quarter of a mile, it's on there to do that.

And lastly, uh we're gonna make them subject to the industrial pretreatment standards and permitting uh that our water system does under Chapter 122.

So anything that might pollute needs to be declared, and they need to figure out how they're gonna treat it before it goes into the sewer system.

Uh and that does it with my presentation, Madam Chair and board.

Do you have any questions?

Or any more questions?

Yeah, more I have one.

I want just one about water.

I don't know if this is even legal.

So I'll look Debbie too.

But on the water usage, if someone puts on a permit, how much water they're gonna use, is there a way for us to just shut them off when they met that water for period?

That would be a question for the water system directors.

Okay.

I'm not sure about it.

Because I think that's been some of the concern nationally is they'll say, oh, we're only going to use this amount of water, and then you look at their usage over time, and it's ridiculously more than what they're doing.

And there are definitely concerns, you know, but but we're blessed to have two sources of water in Cobb County.

And a lot of the problems that I've seen have to do with well water because they're draining the that the aquifers.

Well, we we've got plenty of sources, we're also in a drought every year.

So we don't know if we can yeah, like right now.

So we we're close, yeah.

So but if that's just something to consider if that's a possibility to but but restrict their usage.

But the fact that they're closed loop systems will will reduce it, and the one that's in holding on Marietta right now is a closed loop system.

Well, it it's in here that they're allowed to do uh uh maintenance on it.

So if they have to change it out or do something, there's a way to do that.

Okay.

Are there any other questions?

Can you talk about next steps with respect to the moratorium that's in place and what we can expect to see?

Yeah, so we'll we'll bring forward uh another agenda item to the August meeting to extend the moratorium for another six months or until the code is adopted, and then this will be included in your Paul Code amendment package.

Very good.

Thank you.

So that way it'll it'll be done, or you know, assuming that the board adopts what we bring forward, um, it would be complete prior to the expiration of the moratorium.

Thank you.

And I'm looking at my calendar and I can't find it immediately.

But representative Mary August 6th, Francis Williams, thank you.

On Thursday, August 6th, there's going to be a data center town hall, which has some experts, I believe, within the field of noise.

And expert actually has a quiet communities website, and they'll be presenting online on August 4th, and then there'll be two PHD experts presenting on August 6th at 6 p.m.

at the Cobb County Civic Center, as there's some other considerations beyond the regular decibel rating that we have that uh people are considering, yes, that may be helpful for us to be aware of.

Yes.

Very good.

Thank you so much for helping to prepare this.

I believe Commissioner Gramble has a parting question.

It's not really a question, but it's more of a statement as we're gonna start having these town halls and speaking with these residents.

I have posed this question and not have gotten a response.

Okay.

But the data centers generate heat, the fans dispel the heat.

How is it impacting the area around there and what kind of temperature increases is it giving that other businesses uses then have to address because it's hotter?

Um, and what impacts does it have on surrounding neighbors besides an increased electric bill for more cooling, but how does the release of the heat impact then the surrounding area temperature-wise long term, and then also what environmental impacts it has when we raise our heat.

And I and I did look at that, Commissioner Gambrill, and I couldn't find an exact number because in the in the one of the things that the citizens are concerned about is heat dissipation.

So I cannot find an exact number, but you know, when you tear down a forest, you put in buildings, parking lot, everything else, you know, that's gonna cause more heat.

So we will we can get you an answer on on what that number might be.

Well, and the I guess if any studies have been done with the existing data centers that have been put in that says you know, the temperature used to be this and now it's this.

Just it's just a fun question, right?

Yeah, and we'll take a look at that, Commissioner Gamble.

Okay.

There are any other comments, Commissioner Burrow.

Um, are we gonna have uh requirements in there that they have to because I've heard they bring in their own water and recirculate it?

And then you said something about they have to maintain that if it replace it or whatever.

For a closed loose system system, uh they don't bring in water every day.

It's uh it's like the radiator in your car, yeah.

Where the water is in there just all the time and it it recirculates and heats and cools.

Uh they are gonna have to get some of their water from from the water system to start the system up, but then after that they shouldn't be using too much on a yearly basis.

Okay.

Thank you.

Any other comments or questions?

Thank you, John, for your presentation.

Um thank you, Jessica and Stephen, for the presentation regarding housing, and thank you, Bill, for the presentation regarding our American Rescue Plan at dollars.

This meeting is adjourned.

Look forward to seeing you back here at 7 p.m.

for our Board of Commissioners regular meeting.

Thank you.