Speaker numbers apply only to this recording.
The Planning and Zoning Committee held a special meeting on October 27, 2026 from 1:04 PM to 2:21 PM to discuss three key aspects of proposed data center regulations: zoning classifications and the conditional use permit (CUP) process, separation from special uses, and size distinctions including maximum square footage and setbacks. The meeting focused on comparing the Planning Commission's recommendation to allow large data centers in M1 industrial districts with a CUP versus the Kentucky Resources Council's (KRC) recommendation to create a new data center-specific zoning district. No public comments were heard, and no votes were taken; the pending legislation (O-251-26) remained held in committee.
Zoning Classifications and Conditional Use Permit Process: Brian Davis of the Office of Planning explained that the Planning Commission recommendation allows large data centers (over 50,000 square feet) in M1 (light industrial) districts with a CUP. This approach effectively forces most large-scale data centers to seek a rezoning because only about 250 acres of M1 exist countywide, dispersed in small parcels. The KRC recommendation would create a new data center zoning district, requiring a rezoning anywhere in Jefferson County. Committee members debated the pros and cons: the M1+CUP approach provides flexibility for alternative uses if a data center ceases operation, while a dedicated zone ensures every proposal goes through a full rezoning process (Laura Ferguson, County Attorney's Office).
Separation from Special Uses: The Planning Commission recommendation includes separation requirements from sensitive uses (homes, hospitals, schools) and between data centers to prevent overconcentration. Joe Haberman clarified that separation from sensitive uses is measured structure-to-structure, while data center-to-data center separation is parcel-to-parcel. Relief from separation standards can be requested during the CUP process. Councilman Piagentini questioned whether separation between expansions of the same owner under 500,000 square feet should be required, arguing it might discourage smaller expansions and incentivize applicants to build the maximum size.
Size Distinctions and Maximum Square Footage: Brian Davis explained the 500,000 square foot cap for the largest category, based on typical data center footprints (200,000–250,000 sq ft per building) and comparisons with existing industrial buildings in Louisville (over 120 buildings exceeding 250,000 sq ft). Square footage was chosen as the metric because power load regulation is likely beyond local authority. Committee members discussed potential loopholes, such as building multiple stories with high ceilings; staff noted that white space (server areas) is defined, and floor area counts, but a ceiling height definition could be added.
Health Impact Statement: Committee Member Parrish-Wright proposed including a health impact statement, citing overburdened communities in industrial areas. Brian Davis noted that a noise and vibration study is required, but not a full health impact statement. Councilman Piagentini argued that no other industrial use requires a health impact statement, and such a requirement should be consistent. Laura Ferguson stated that the council could request example language from other communities via an amendment.
Map Analysis: Joe Haberman presented maps showing M1, M2, and M3 zoning. The M1 map (pink dots) showed limited, dispersed parcels; most are developed or too small to accommodate large data centers, reinforcing that a rezoning would likely be needed for any significant data center. Councilwoman Hawkins noted the Campground Road proposal (150 acres) is on split M1/M3 zoning and is the only large hyperscale proposal; existing data centers are under 100,000 square feet and located in other districts.
Legal Considerations: Laura Ferguson explained that if the council creates a new data center zoning district, existing data centers would have non-conforming rights, but expansions or new uses would require rezoning. A moratorium is in place until January/February 2027; if no new regulations or extensions are passed, the previous code (allowing telecommunications hotels in C3 and industrial districts) would apply.
So here we go. All right. So welcome to special meeting of the Planning and Zoning Committee. It's Tuesday, October 27th. It's one oh four PM. This meeting is being held pursuant to KRS sixty one dot eight two six and council rule five A. I'm Andrew Owen. I'm the chair of the committee. I'm joined virtually by Scott Reid, the vice chair, joined by committee member Shemika Parish Wright, committee member Josie Raymond, committee member Stuart Benson, committee member uh Khalil Bethan, committee member Betsy Ruy, uh, and we're joined by Councilman uh Piagentini, and let's see. Oh, Councilman Hudson has an excused absence. So this is great. I we have a quorum. I was concerned because of a special meeting that we wouldn't have a lot of people here, but I'm glad people were able to make it. So that's great. So the reason one of the reasons we created a special meeting for this particular um topic, this these topics in this conversation, I think these are some of the most critical um pieces of this legislation that we're going to be discussing. And so just as a refresher, we're going to be discussing zoning classification and the CUP process. We're going to be discussing discussing separation from special uses, and we're going to be discussing size distinctions, including maximum square footage and setbacks. And then perhaps uh provide maybe a little bit of distinction from the difference between what we have and and KRC. Is that something you guys could do for us pretty fairly easily? Brian, you can do that off the top of your head, can't you? I feel like I've been doing it my whole life now. My apologies for not being there in person, uh, zooming in from uh Massachusetts. Um, so um, just to kind of summarize what we have in the draft, uh, and then um if Joe has anything else that he wants to add once I'm finished, then we'll we'll do that. Um in terms of zoning classifications and and conditional use permits, um, in the current draft, uh, and I I'm going to speak solely about like our our largest category of the data centers. I won't get into the finer details about the other categories, but in terms of the largest ones, uh, the recommendation that came from the planning commission was to uh allow the use in our M1 industrial districts, uh, with a conditional use permit. Uh, and so what that means is that in order for a uh a larger data center to um, you know, make a make a request to for to locate on a property, then they would need to uh not only have the M1 zoning, but uh as but they would also have to get the conditional use permit. So uh well uh as part of our evaluation of where to um recommend uh what district we would like to see you know data centers potentially be located in. Um, you know, we went, we initially started out with M3, which is our heaviest industrial district, but then wound up settling on M1. Uh one of the reasons is because we have 50 times more M3 than we do M1 throughout the county. Uh and so um the the likelihood of um of there being a large enough parcel uh for M1 uh where they a data center could purchase the property uh establish the use uh and only need a conditional use permit is pretty slim. Uh and so the thought behind that was that with by requiring uh or allowing them an M1 use, then in most scenarios where a data center developer was wanting to come and locate a larger facility, uh they would be required to get a a um a rezoning which would go before the planning commission. Uh the planning commission would also be able to take action on the conditional use permit since the rezoning would be involved, uh, and then that recommendation would would be made to um we'll just talk in terms of Metro Council for for final approval uh of that uh recommendation. So let me so that's great. Let me stop you there. We'll go one by one at a time, actually, and we'll start and we'll start with zoning cap uh classification. So let me kind of try to put that. I have a couple people in the queue, but before I get there, let me try to put that into a little bit of context. And I think this is why this discussion is so critical, because there are very much positives and negatives to both what what is proposed by the planning commission that Brian just described to us, but then also what is proposed in the KRC uh model regulations. And so what so what what Brian just said is if we are requiring data centers to locate in M1 classifications, then there are very few places that M1 exists. And Brian, is it true? I know M3 is kind of very heavily located in west and southwest Louisville. Is that true of M1 or is M1 more broadly spread out throughout the county? I think the the statement about M3 being, you know, there being a disproportionate amount in in West and Southwest Louisville is correct.