Test.

Okay, we're good.

Welcome everyone to Elizabeth Town City Council Planning Commission joint meeting for July 14th, 200 and 26.

And I would ask if you would bow your head for invitation.

Heavenly Father, we thank you so much for everything that you give to us every day.

We thank you for this beautiful community and all of our citizens that inhabit it.

And if you would join me in the Pledge of Allegiance, I pledge allegiance to the blood of the United States of America.

It's one, too.

All right, very good.

I want to introduce you all to Corey Blunt.

He's our newest or was getting ready to be our newest planning commission member.

I'm very proud to swear him in.

He's been uh in our community for some time now.

Nice young man with a great family that wanted to be involved and contacted me multiple times.

He was on our civil service commission.

But uh every time I spoke to him, he always told me, hey, find me something with a larger purpose, something that I can be more involved in.

So I found him one.

And this is this is quite the commission, as you all know.

We I appoint to several boards, but this is one of our very most important, and uh we look forward to having him on this team, and we know he'll do a great job.

But before he can do that, I have to swear him in.

So that's what we're gonna do right now.

So if you would raise your right hand.

No, yeah, that this day came Corey Blunt, who was duly sworn to the oath of office of member of Elizabeth Town Planning Commission by being administered the oath of section 228 of the Constitution of Kentucky in words as follows.

I do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the constitution of this Commonwealth and be faithful and true to the Commonwealth of Kentucky, so long as I continue as citizen thereof, and that I will faithfully execute to the best of my ability the office of AfroSet according to law.

And I do further solemnly swear that since the adoption of the present constitution, I being a citizen of this state, have not fought a duel with deadly weapons within the state nor out of it, nor have I sent or accepted a challenge to fight a duel with deadly weapons, nor have I acted as second in carrying a challenge, nor aided or assisted any person thus offending, so help me God.

I do.

Appreciate you.

So now you're official.

Yes, sir.

Councilmember Bishop.

Here Fulkerson here, Isaacs, Jones, Springsteen here, Tyler, Mayor.

You have a quorum.

Thank you very much.

And we will get started as soon as Aaron tells me that he's ready.

Thanks.

So Aaron Hawkins, I will introduce you to him.

He is our planning director, and he is going to address both bodies.

All right, good afternoon, everybody.

Um quick background of why we're doing this educational training today.

Um earlier this year, planning commission passed a resolution uh directing staff to do some research on data centers and how those are currently regulated in the city of Elizabeth Town versus some potential regulation changes with how we look at data centers in the future.

So staff and um administration sat in on a KLC uh training session via webinar back in June, and um two of the leaders of the planning industry in the state uh held that training and talked about both what the what the different jurisdictions are seeing in terms of data centers um in terms of requests and then also what their current regulations are, but then also uh nationwide, because as you know, data centers is a hot topic right now in terms of uh mostly because of utility usage and then also noise and environmental impact.

So it's a concern nationwide, but uh one of the reasons why it's been such a hot topic in the state of Kentucky, primarily is multiple reasons.

One is mainly uh because statewide for a lack of regulations.

So the regulations data centers or on data centers is not very strong throughout the state.

So that along with cheap utilities overall and cheap land cost have been uh have made Kentucky as a attractive place also because of proximity to transmission lines when it comes to electricity, uh, and then a lot of water availability.

So all those factors um combined have made Kentucky a target for data centers.

Um we have per KLC or per the research done.

There are currently, I think it was 37 data centers in the state of Kentucky.

Um and Jefferson County alone, I want to say made up around 20 to 23 of those data centers.

So those obviously vary in size.

What you mostly see in the news are these hyperscale data centers, you know, million square feet that uh consume vast amounts of resources.

Uh, but that's not the only types of data centers that are um in our communities in the state.

So having said all that, planning commission did pass a resolution directing staff to do some research.

The way data centers are currently defined in our ordinance is on the first page of the packet that you have.

It's a data processing facility.

And this was put in the ordinance over 20 years ago.

So if you can imagine data centers 20 years ago are vastly different than what they are today and what their needs are.

But we have it defined as a facility where electronic data is processed by employees, including without limitation, data entry, storage, conversion, or analysis, subscription and credit card transaction processing, telephone sales and order collection, mail order and catalog sales and mailing list preparation.

So as you can see, it's a pretty outdated definition of what a data center is and how they operate and function today.

In terms of where those are allowed currently as a permitted use by right, those are allowed in a C2 commercial neighborhood uh neighborhood commercial designation, in the regional commercial C3 designation, in the C5 downtown uh mixed use zoning classification in the I1 industrial general um designation, in the I2 regional industrial designation, and then also in the MAZ municipal airport overzone.

Um so those are the zones where data centers as they are defined are allowed today.

Having said that, if a and not saying that any have because we have not had an application submitted, I want to make that clear.

Um there's nobody that's talked to our staff about data centers.

Um, but in theory, if somebody came in today and said, I want to put a data center, a million square foot data center in C3, we would have to allow them to do that because those are permitted uses by right in C3.

So what we did as staff was we came up with some uh proposed text changes that we can look at um in terms of regulating these uses.

And this is just a starting point.

So, and I know we are capped with time today, so I'll do my best to stay on track and go through this at a decent clip, but um, but these this again, this is just a starting point, so not by any means no actions being taken on on these today.

Um, this is more of just to get discussion and give staff feedback if we need to make changes, if we need to do any alterations of these proposed changes.

Um, we're looking for what you all think so we can go back and get this ready to present to planning commission at a public hearing for a text change.

So um the first page is just what our proposal for a definition of a data center, and that's just a generic definition of a data center, more in line with today and how they are used.

Um it's all or a portion of a facility used primarily for data services, including the storage, processing, management, and distribution of data through the use of computer systems, servers, networking equipment, and related components.

We added an entire section proposed of use specific standards just for data centers, and that's really where most of the teeth come in in terms of the regulations.

Um we added in the definition that all data centers must abide by the data center, uh, use specific standards is found in section 1540 throughout the state.

And then if you do your reason if you do additional research, data centers are traditionally broken up into four subtypes.

Those are co-location, enterprise, edge, and hyperscale.

This is kind of where we want some of the feedback.

Um as with any regulations, somebody has to enforce those regulations.

So the more regulations we place on this, I don't want to say the more burden it puts on the staff because that's our job, and we're happy to do that.

But we, you know, obviously our staff is limited, so we just want to keep you aware that the more regulations and the more complicated the regulations are, sometimes the harder it is for us to enforce and to look through those.

But for instance, with these subtypes, um of the input I would like to see today or over email or a phone call or in a conversation later with you all is uh do we need subtypes, or do we just want to handle a generic definition of a data center and then maybe use square footages in certain zones to allocate what type of data center or how large it can be?

Uh because between an enterprise and an edge data center, those are fairly similar in scope, but they are different.

But if somebody comes in this year and says, I want to put an edge center in in C2, and then they come in later and for the reason, their definition of how they operate changes to an enterprise.

Well, that's not permitted in C in C2.

So we we would have to determine how we can figure out when they change because they would not be required to come in and say, I mean, they would be required, but we have to know that they're changing to that specific type, and that that specific type is now in operation.

So the question that you know we would typically ask of you all is is it more efficient to just do uh based on square footages or um do we want to have those subtypes to where it has a specific defined use of those subtypes?

But um in the C2 zone, what we are proposing is based on how it's written to just allow data edge data centers, and those are um you can read the definition in your packet.

But um in the C2 zone, the reason why we just said edge data centers is because we have a provision in the ordinance that says in C2, no single building can be greater than 10,000 square feet in floor area.

So that would encompass and regulate that in and of itself.

So any data center cannot go greater than 10,000 square feet in this specific zone.

However, in commercial zones, we do allow multiple buildings on a specific lot on a single lot.

So we added the provision at the end of that that says more than one data center per lot or parcel shall not be permitted.

So by saying that and then capping it at 10,000, we're saying you can have a data center, an edge data center, but it cannot be greater than 10,000 square feet in floor area.

And then also they have to abide by the specific use specific standards in section 154076.

So to give you an idea of why that was in C2, um, I'm sure many of you are familiar with the building on Dolphin Drive.

It was the former CSI when it was constructed.

Uh now it's north-south consulting.

Uh, but essentially that building operated as a data center when it was initially built.

So that building's 13,000 square feet in floor area.

So it's just over the 10,000.

So if it was built today, it would not be allowed because it's greater than 10,000.

But that gives you an idea of scale of what we're talking about when in C2 we're capping it at 10,000.

So it C2 is a neighborhood commercial use.

Now, over the years, Dolphin Drive has convert has been transitioned more into a commercial corridor as a neighborhood corridor.

However, um that property is zone C2.

So that is the type of building at this scale based on these current regs that would be allowed in the C2 zone.

Um in the C3 zone, we are proposing to allow the edge data centers and the enterprise data centers.

Um then if you go down at the end in the special provisions of this section, um, we do say that no data center development shall be greater than 50,000 square feet in a floor area.

And the way we came up with that is we looked at a majority of structures in the C3 zone, what their square footages are, because what you don't want is have uh right now we don't have a maximum building size in this in the C3 zone.

In theory, if you want to put a 500,000 square foot building in C3, you could do that as long as you comply with the lot standards and setbacks.

Um to give you an idea of what a 50,000 square foot building would look like, that's Publix.

Publix is about 53,000, 54,000 square feet in floor area.

So if you imagine a building the size of Publix as a data center, that would be what would be permitted in C3.

Um that would be the only stipulation that at this time is proposed to be added onto those uses.

C4 is our general service commercial, so it's more of an intense commercial type zone.

Um think of um heavy commercial uses that are kind of similar more to light industrial uses.

Um that's typically what is constructed in the C4 zone.

Uh so similar to C3, proposing edge and enterprise data centers with a cap at 50,000.

So C4 and C3, in our opinion, should look the same because those are mostly along uh major roadways.

Um so we didn't think there was a need to regulate those any different.

Um C5 is our downtown mixed use, and again, they are permitted by right today in the C5 zone.

So what we are proposing, because people probably don't realize there with uh with Windstream's office in our downtown zone, they have a room basically that's full of servers, and so essentially they have a small data center.

Now that's not the primary function of their building, it's also their headquarters here in their office.

So what we are proposing is if a bank wanted to come into downtown and have a small room to all to do um a small data center just for their use, we don't think that's unreasonable.

So what we are uh proposing is to make those accessory uses.

So as an accessory use, it has to have a principal use that's a permitted use by right on that property, and this can be only accessory to that principal use.

So in this case, like a bank, if a bank wanted to have a room in their building that's dedicated as a data type center, they could do that.

So what we are proposing with that is to do edge data centers, enterprise data centers, and co-location data centers.

So co-location, kind of like cell towers, where it encourages multiple companies to utilize one data center to take up less less developable area.

And so that's those would be all permitted uses by right.

If you go further, um, because it is industrial, and this is what bowling green has done.

Bowling Green uh did the same thing because they have two industrial zones in their lighter industrial, they actually made hyperscale data centers, which are the very large ones, those are the ones that generate all the news on that we see today.

Those would be a conditional use in the I-1 zone.

So if you had an I1 property and you wanted to put in a hyperscale data center, you would have to go through the board of zoning adjustment uh to get a conditional use permit to allow that.

We did add the stipulation that in the I-1 zone, they shall not exceed more than 150,000 square feet of floor area.

Um so that would cap those data centers at that specific um specific floor area.

Um and then just the general um at the end of that chapter or that section, the general stat or status that all data centers must abide by the use specific standards.

I2, which is our regional industrial uh zone, that is our most intense industrial zone.

So that one we did put all four data center types as permitted uses by right, and there are no size restrictions.

So, you know, that's the zone where we have our largest manufacturing plants.

You have Metalsa, you have Altec, um AGC.

So all those larger manufacturing and industrial uses, those are in our I2 zone.

So we would not propose any additional requirements other than having to abide by those use specific standards.

And then in the MAZ zone, so that's the municipal airport zone.

Um essentially those are um uses that help supply either the airport or um are common in terms of uses for that.

Um there are height provisions within within that zone.

Obviously, if you're in the air path, you can't have a certain height, but um in the in the MAZ zone, what we did was we just said edge and enterprise data centers since data centers are currently allowed.

Um be comparable to your C3 and C4.

Um, but there are no there are no area square footage requirements with that.

So that's where these uses would be permitted and what type of uses.

So again, I guess one of the main questions is do we want to keep those subtype definitions, or do you think it would be more effective if we had floor area requirements in each zone.

So each zone would say a data center is a permitted use by right, but in the C5 zone, it can it has to be accessory.

And I think that's reasonable in the C5 to make it only accessory and not make it a permitted use by right, but all the other ones we would be more than happy to dig a little more and say come up with a specific threshold of of what these um what these can do in terms of square footage.

Um to us, the teeth that we have again on the the regulations are the use specific standards.

So if you go to the bottom of that section, uh it's it's item E, and that's the four data centers.

So we have 14 specific use um standards, and again, so those are for instance, like item one, any data center greater than 50,000 square feet in four areas shall be a minimum of 2500 feet away from any resident residentially zoned property, residential structure, church, school, or park.

Um basically what we're saying is we just you don't want we have setback requirements in you know in each zone, but these are just an additional setback requirement in order to provide as much buffer and distance as possible from those certain uses.

Um and then item two, any data center greater than 50,000 square feet shall provide a minimum setback of 200 feet from all perimeter property lines.

So again, not only do you have to be 200 2500 feet away from a structure or residential zone, instead of just doing a 75-foot um rear setback, we're recommending a 200-foot all-around.

Um you can read through those.

Um, I don't know that I'm gonna read every single one.

I did have a conversation with uh Matt Hess, and he did point out a couple of things.

One is on item five.

Um any data center requiring upgraded public utilities in order to operate shall pay the cost associated with set upgrades.

Um he likes that, but he he asked if we could add the following um item at the end of that specific number, and that's that it says such that any um any um data center development shall not diminish utilities capacity to serve uh non-data center customer service.

So essentially we're saying not only does the data center have to um have to pay for any upgrades to the utility that are required, their use in and of itself cannot diminish that utility's ability to serve the existing customers.

Um so I I would agree that that would be a good item to add to it.

Um the other one is on number seven.

Um bowling green did this, they put in a requirement that any data center, and and they had a square footage, I don't remember off the top of my head, but we're saying anything over 50,000 square feet shall be required to utilize a minimum of 50% renewable energy produced on site.

The question is, is that prohibitive?

I mean, is that even attainable 50%?

So as you know, these generate lots of electricity, they generate lots of water use.

Is it even possible for a use to generate 50 half of that in renewable resources?

That's that's a question.

Um and we can have a discussion on that, but uh like I said, bowling green used the 50 percent.

So that's that's where we took that.

But um, but yeah, so I mean, any questions you have on these um use specific standards, I'd be happy to answer, or we can have a discussion or or whatnot.

So uh currently with a downtown, you do not have that as a uh accessory, right?

It's not in here proposed as accessory, but you wouldn't be opposed to that if we keep the different sub categories, right?

So in downtown, currently a data processing center is a permitted use by right, so it would be able to be on a lot by itself and a function as a data center.

So what we're saying is um we'd be okay with saying as an accessory use, it's okay in the downtown zone.

Um, just not as a use in and of itself.

But currently is as you've given us it does not stake that way, right?

I didn't see it stayed that way.

Um yeah, it's it's as an accessory use.

Um the page behind where C5 starts, that's where accessory uses start.

There's um it should be at least yeah, it just says the edge part.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Edge.

So we're that that's as it states, we're just saying edge only.

And those are meant for in end of line, so to help um with reduced latency and stuff.

So to me, that's more like how windstream is functioning.

Um, not as a Google's a bad example, but as a data center that's storing data and then using it for other companies externally.

So again, if we did square footage, it would just say data center and not edge if we got rid of the subtypes.

They have televisions or a data.

Uh bowling green, um, they do not have subtypes, they just have the to the definition of data center.

Um Louisville has subtypes, they don't list all four of these, but they do have um, I think it was three subtypes.

So bowling green did not, Louisville has so many the definitions, I mean co-location data center typically a certain range of the sort of that that's the hard part because when you look into these things, it typically tells you a co-location data center can range from 10,000 to 125,000 square feet.

It it really doesn't give you any direction on um what a co-location should be anything from 50,000 to 70, like a reasonable to me that when you have that large of a range, I mean it's yeah, that's that's a massive difference.

So it sounds like it's safer to put square footage.

Square footage is easier on staff to enforce because we require development plans and development plans have to have that information on it saying how large of a floor area you have.

So it's easier for us to say you're showing 75,000 square feet, so you have to be in I1 and I2, as opposed to saying, Yeah, you can do because you might be a co-location or you might be an enterprise, so you can be in C3.

Well, like you said, call yourself an N shape center, but they're just they have seen with the square footage be kind of liable, like if you said that's not data, they're not putting the buildings.

That that's a question.

So um to me, in commercial zones, we would I I would recommend capping it at one structure.

If you're in an industrial zone and you create a campus, that's different because industrial buildings and developments have campuses, and that's what actually our comp plan and zoning ordinance recommends and encourages our campus-like developments in the industrial zones.

So I don't think that's unreasonable to have a campus like development in an industrial zone.

But if we're talking about in commercial zones, specifically uh C3 and C4, I think um, I think it's worth looking into about capping it at one structure and just doing the floor area in total.

So but um what's the but I mean I mean, if you come in and say we and and I'm just throwing a hypothetical out.

I mean, if you come in and say I have you know a large lot and I want to put in four eight thousand square foot buildings, I mean it's not if you can design it to where it looks um attractive, and the site is not anything different than what you would see on any other commercial lot.

So I mean, four eight thousand square foot buildings on a lot in C four, right?

I mean, they still have the setbacks, they still have the environmental requirements and the everything else that you have in here.

So a building that small would only have to abide by the the zone lot criteria, so those setbacks.

So again, the the increased setbacks and buffering is only for the larger buildings, so and that's not set in stone.

So again, we can I mean we can come up with alternative numbers for you all to look at and consider.

Um we tried, I mean, bowling greens everything we talked about internally, bowling greens was probably um the most similar to kind of what our vision was and what our direction was.

So we try to use bowling greens as much as possible.

Um for what it's worth.

So we I mean, we look in, we looked at bowling green, Louisville, Lexington, um Barron County uh joint planning commission also had um some that we did some research on, and then we looked at out of state, you know, Virginia has a lot of these popping up in Virginia.

Um there's a lot of communities that have started enforcing these more restrictively.

Um so we did we looked at some communities in Virginia, also Ohio, um, just to get a sense of what it's not just in Kentucky but nationwide, what's going on?

So what's uh what was that Virginia's probably one of the most popular Virginia?

It it's probably the most, I think one of the most in the country.

Any of this being conditional use situation, I think what this current draft would have is in a light industrial, it could be a condit, it would be a conditional use.

If they're not asking for a zone change, that means the board of zoning adjustment is thumbs up or thumbs down on a data center.

Whoever doesn't like that decision, they appeal it to circuit court.

They don't go to the planning commission, they don't go to city council, and those would be public hearings on any application that the board of zoning adjustment would do on the conditional.

So as it stands with Aaron Square changes, they would not be conditional use.

Right.

It's a conditional use.

Only only only for hyperscale for hyper.

So again, if we transition to more of the square footage, um that yeah, you could drop the conditional use and just make it square footage, and they're all it's permitted use by right, but uh the thought was the other three, which are less intensive, um would be permitted by right, and then in the I1 zone, the hyperscale would be conditional.

That was kind of our line of thinking when we wrote this, but I don't like that thumbs up, thumbs down.

Yeah, that's I think the process is better if it's through planning commission and through the council.

I would yeah.

So so again, I mean, and if they are permitted by right, then they would just come to staff and submit a development plan.

And again, we would just have to check to make sure it complies with these use specific standards, and if they do, and all the other components of the zoning ordinance, they we would have no choice but to approve it, and they would be on their way and for all any size in that zone up to the size amount if it's a permitted use by right.

So, but again, that and and there I guess the difference is if we did make it a hearing, at least we would be sending notice to the adjoining property owners and then uh giving people the ability to come before a body to at least give their thoughts as opposed to just changing the text.

Now we are doing a hearing, and that would be the text hearing, but that's just one hearing and not for every individual property.

So I mean, there are merits to doing there's a merit to doing these as conditional uses in every zone because then any time they come in, you've got to go through.

And I mean, if you're just doing a 5,000 square foot data center to help a bank out in the C3 zone, nobody should really have an issue with that.

But again, so I mean they're positives and negatives to both.

But is this what we want?

I would probably rather I mean we're we're talking about regulations here for super hyper data centers.

Is that is that what we want?

So that brings regulated or do we want hyperscale data?

Do we want them?

I know.

Yeah, I mean, I think that's the question we gotta answer answer first of all before we go down this road is first of all, what is it we want what is it we don't want, and the ones that we want, then we gotta do regulations on.

I mean, I think keeping the hyperscale conditional, so there has to be some sort of process would make a lot of sense.

The smaller ones can be, I mean, smaller ones are they're also limited, but I mean we already have basically a very small data center in the bottom of the horizon building.

Right.

So I mean, there's different square footage, but I think it's the hyperscale that gets the most press and it has the largest name impact.

So do we not want those?

We we can we not say we do not want those.

I mean, do you but that's a question for the we we we can how you doing uh we can allow data centers, and if you want to say we don't want any data center greater than a hundred thousand square feet in four area in the city of Elizabeth Town, I mean that's again that's a question for Matt and Ken to answer if we can legally exclude them out.

But that was gonna be my question is do we need to cap the square footage on all the plane area and so like we we we want our existing businesses to be successful, and if they need a data center to operate, right?

We don't want to say no, you can't do that.

It's it's at what scale do we want?

That's the question.

It's a scale question for me, right?

Correct, yeah.

I mean well, that's where I would have to have some advice and some knowledge planning to go.

This is what it would take for a bank to be able to do this, and this is would um take in the wind stream building, and and this is what a need would be for similar for a business to come in versus just to be simply the data center, because I think in these situations that we have currently, they are accessories, are they not since the ones that we the ones that we know about, yes, they're typically more accessory in nature than they are standalone.

Now there may be some that are operating that I I don't we don't know that that's what they do inside the building, but but the ones that we don't know about aren't turning out water and waste not not to the level that right resources either, so they're obviously not on all processing right.

Um it's the publication large scale, right?

So yeah, that's my question.

Can we cap square footage?

I could read those and like I said, and that it sounds like I mean that's the direction.

So we'd be happy to come up with those what we find, you know, what a bank or uses or what a um internet provider uses in terms of square footage on a data center, um, and and bring that to you, and then we can say, okay, this is what we found.

So in these zones, and and if that's the route we're going, I would almost leave out neighborhood zoning.

And we only put that in C2 because the C the CSI facility was in C2, and it was already listed as a permitted use by right.

But the way C2 is intended to function is for neighborhood type commercial uses to support the neighborhood it's in.

So I would recommend not even having it all on C2.

I agree.

Um, and then go in C3, C4.

Um I still say we make it accessory in C5.

Um, and then I1 I2.

You all go with that directly, the cap.

With with the cat.

Okay, that's good.

Now Kroger is about 12,000 square feet, give or take.

So if you said 100,000 and we just did C3, C4, um, I one and I2 and MAZ, 100,000 square foot building is not going to be out of place in terms of scale and form than what is currently allowed and currently built in those zones.

So I think if you and I'm not taking the the the large size for me is just a plain data center.

Uh for Kruger, that's accessory use.

Yeah.

Well, I'm just saying, I'm just saying, like as it as an idea of how big of a building that would be in the C3 zone, we do allow buildings that big in C3 zone.

So if you wanted to make those a permitted use in the C3 zone, and you said 100,000 square feet from a scale standpoint, it wouldn't be abnormal to see that size building in C3.

But but again, I think you have less concern about the way it looks than the what it does specifically as far as resources as far as but to me Kroger is a retail right that needs a accessory right with additional requirements if you can go 50,000 or if you can react to provide a lot of but but could you not say that the percent that of that building for that that's used for data in that case?

Again, because with Kroger, yes, that whole store has that that many square feet in it, but it's not all data.

They've got apple.

Yeah, and I mean and Kroger, I mean a grocery store is a bad example.

It's just it's a new building that everybody knows, and it's that's the size we're trying to reference.

But I mean, to your point, if you had a an office building that was 80,000 square feet in total size with three floors, and they wanted to have a basement that was a data center for their use.

I mean, that would be an accessory to the office building, but if you had that size building that just wanted to be a data center, that's sounds to me like you all are saying no, you don't want that.

You just want these as accessory uses, or I think that's what accessory okay that's not their current function of the building.

We could talk about size down the resources and budget uses a lot of water, so I think we need to limit the scale of the clear this scale and the accessory that made accessories because the accessory uses don't use the resources like hyperscale super size and with most things technology in five years, this conversation could be completely irrelevant because they may have figured out a way to use a lot less resources to power these, uh, or maybe not even need to have as much space.

You can do the same with a much smaller footprint.

So I mean, we we could always come back and revisit this as technology changes if major breakthroughs were made and we need to take another look at this.

But um right now we're going off what technology is today, so international.

Yeah, I think it's a lot of big sailor multiple times.

Because three years from now it's gonna look way different than right now.

I mean, this all might be done in space, yes.

So I do like the what one standards know what you want to add anything there on the level that was very good.

Yeah, because Corey Bond, our sewer treatment plan operator, he does have concern with our ability to handle the waste from one of these with our sewer treatment plan as it currently stands, even with the expansion that we're working on, it would take up a vast majority.

One single building would take up a vast majority of that ability or capacity.

So Corey did ask if we add something in there, and that's what we did with number um 11 minutes.

Yeah, so cooling systems discharged into the public sewer should be pre-treated at a level approved by the city sewer treatment plan operator, just to give them the ability to have input and some say in that.

So I'm gonna guess the part that we want to or current industrial users in the future to make sure that we do have enough capacity to discharge right.

Because that's a question.

Do you want do you want to take up a majority of your ability to treat sewer by one building that doesn't provide a lot of jobs?

Versus having versus having multiple factories or manufacturing plants that provide a lot of a lot of jobs.

So okay.

Um I think so.

So we'll we'll just access me.

Not so not a principal use with a cap on square footage anywhere.

Is that an accessory use?

That's the question that I'm left with is is what he is what he added.

So if we're saying just accessory, you have to have a principal use on that property that the data center would would help subsidize and be accessory to.

And so I mean, in that case, the question becomes then do we need square footage caps?

Because once you exceed the square footage of the principal use, the dominant use is the data center.

So yeah, okay.

So it would be that percent of that total building.

So make these make these accessory uses in those zones and then find out, do some more research, find out what the average square footage is for you know, financial institutions and so forth.

Okay.

We can do that.

Do you do you still want to see use specific standards?

Because at that point, like the distances and the buffering.

I mean, if it's an accessory use, I don't think it's gonna matter at that point in time because you put the distance in there to protect from the noise and all the other but the specific restrictions are for a big one test.

Or standalone standalone data center.

That is it, that's what it is, is you've got nothing but yeah.

I mean, yeah, these restrictions are not our accessory use.

Right.

So I don't know that we need that for only gonna do accessory.

Okay.

Yes, kudos.

I'd be happy to take those out.

Sorry, scrap 14 points eight.

Um that would be my problem.

Okay.

That seems to be the consensus.

Okay.

And I agree with Julia, great job putting this together and don't think it's all for naught because they need to see all the options before they can come to the conclusion that makes the most sense.

So great work.

Okay.

Any other questions?

We were buying you lunch.

I will okay.

Thank you, Aaron.

Appreciate that.

But I want to reiterate I want to reiterate that we have had no requests for data centers for those that are watching live stream or have just joined the meeting.

I don't want uh rumor to get out in the community that we're having a hearing because we have all these applications.

We have none.

We have not gotten any.

So make let me make sure we're clear on that.

But it's prudent to make sure that we're prepared when it comes up or the opportunity arises that we do have those applications.

So I appreciate the joint meeting.

I'm definitely appreciate our planning commission willing to be here and and educate themselves as well because like Marty said, I think the right process always comes through those different bodies, and whenever they try to change things like that, I think it just kind of muddies the water a little bit.

So appreciate you too, Matt Hess.

With that, I will open the floor up for just a few minutes.

We do have a planning commission meeting at 6 o'clock, but we've got a few minutes.

If anybody has any public comments that they want to jump up and make for a minute or two, we'd be glad to listen to them.

But I'll also tell you that on July 28th, that we're going to have a public hearing in these same chambers at 6 p.m.

with our planning commission present to answer any questions that the public may have as well.

So I don't want you to think we're only giving you a couple minutes today and cutting you short.

There will be a hearing date, which is July 28th at 6 p.m.

for anybody that has any questions or that wants to discuss anything.

Sure.

Come on up.

If you don't mind, just state your name and your address.

Hi everybody, I'm Marta Martin.

I live at 878 Shelby Avenue in Radcliffe, but work in Etown as well.

Um I just wanted to thank you all for taking this very seriously.

I have seen other places nearby kind of find themselves in a position that they're unprepared for.

Um I did some policy analysis for Louisville Metro's proposed regulations, and I really appreciate the information that was presented today.

Um I think that you guys are taking it seriously.

I just think that means a lot to me as a resident and as a policy analyst.

So I appreciate you listening to your constituents with concerns about hyperscale data centers.

They make bad neighbors, they make bad residents, they pollute our our waters, they pollute our air.

Um, and I just want to reiterate that thank you again for the time here.

That was it.

No, thanks for coming up.

We appreciate it.

And I'm gonna make sure that I tell Mayor Duval that one of his citizens came up and complimented our city.

Anyone else?

Going once.

Okay.

With that, if nobody else has anything that they want to talk about before I close.

Before we adjourn, okay, I will take a motion in a second to adjourn, please.

So moved.

Second.

All in favor?

Opposed.

Seeing none motion carries, we are adjourned.

Thank you everybody for coming out.

And please remember July 28th is a public hearing.

Anybody's welcome to attend and come up and speak, and we'd love to see you.

I think they want to stay for the six o'clock mic.

It's all right.