Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Heat. Heat. High Lou. Data. D.

La. la. La. Hallelujah. Hello. La.

Okay. I call to order the Lynchburg Planning Commission meeting for Wednesday, April 22nd, 2026. Our first order of business is the approval of the April 8th minutes. Anybody have any changes or motion to approve? Second. All right. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. We have one abstension. A second order of business to welcome our new um new planning commissioner. So, thank you for coming and serving with us. Glad to be here.

We're now going to have a discussion and this is not a public hearing. This is a work session discussion about possible amendments to section 35.2 2 of the Lynchburg City zoning ordinance for data centers. So, we have a PowerPoint.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and members of planning commission. Um, just to refresh our memories on on why we're doing this, uh, planning commission had directed staff to look into possible ordinance uh, updates for data centers last fall. Um, a lot of localities are seeing these uses come into their communities and learning how to regulate them. Certainly, some more uh, you know, more so than others. You may be aware or you've probably heard that Virginia is the data center capital of the world and there are hundreds of data centers uh, across a few Northern Virginia counties. Um, but Lynchburg has not had specific inquiries or proposals for a data center at this time. Um, you know, typically data centers are being located where there are large flat parcels of undeveloped land. Um, Lynchburg as a city does not have that available land area that counties do. And you know, to put that into perspective, we're 50 square miles where our surrounding counties are between like 400 and 700 square miles. So, um, this is not something that we think is necessarily imminent or on Lynchberg's doorstep, but the industry continues to grow and evolve. Demand for data centers is not slowing down. Um, smaller data centers are generally, you know, not that popular because they're less efficient and more expensive, but, you know, things things happen that could change. Uh, or, you know, demand could drive it so that, you know, they they could pursue those more. um there is potential that we could get a request for one of these facilities in the future and we just want to be prepared for that. So I'll also preface this discussion with I am not a data center expert. I am learning along with some of you throughout this process and we'll also keep in mind that you know there's legislation about these facilities that is ongoing and in progress I think even as of this week at the state level. So whatever our discussion is today, you know, we'll just bear that in mind that these things are happening and uh you know, could

impact some of what we're talking about and we're doing our best to keep up. Uh so, you know, kind of starting with the basics when we think of data centers, how might we want to regulate them and and what comes to mind? Uh utility consumption is uh is a big one. Um power and water consumption play a big role for a data center. Um there are also impacts on land use and surrounding properties uh noise, visual impact, air quality, things like that. Uh you know through the use of gas powered generators um and the compatibility of adjacent land uses as well. There are also other factors like uh you know considering that these facilities do not create typically as many jobs as uh as other industrial users. You know they take up a lot of land and generally don't employ that many folks. So, what are other localities doing? Um, I remember that was something that the commission was interested in uh when we first kind of kicked this off. Uh, so we reached out to some communities to find out what they're doing and and how they're regulating data centers. Most of the ones that we spoke to uh allow them in some form, some don't. And uh there's a mix of who allows these facilities by right and those that allow them through special use permit or what we call a conditional use permit. Um that is summarized here. Um we won't go line by line but it is kind of interesting to see the different approaches that localities are taking towards this.

Sure. How would you like us to engage with you through this uh presentation? Um well so there are some specific areas that I've kind of highlighted for where I'm seeking planning commission input but you know if there's something that we feel like I mean this is more of an informal discussion less of me just talking at you. So um what what is the commission's pleasure I guess?

Oh I mean I hopefully we could ask some clarifying questions along the way. Yeah. Okay. Um just one from a contextual perspective when we talk about data centers um and like I think I think a lot of people have in mind that these are these massive um they have these massive footprints but I'm just curious what is there a how we're defining it. Yeah. Yes. So, um, I'll I'll cover kind of what we define it as now and then a proposed definition and then you all can tell me if you feel differently. We were just talking about that a few minutes ago. Eric is probably if you're up there near the space museum. I mean, these are some massive buildings,

right? I mean, multiple football field sizes and they're just kind of empty shells with nothing but the servers just for miles and miles and miles. It seems like as you're driving along, whatever interstate it is right up there. But these are massive buildings. So, I wouldn't think the city would be like up for a a data center just the sheer size that they would need. I mean, we like we said, we're only 50 square miles. So, I mean, there's only so much space left. Yeah. I guess I'm just trying to get in my head. Could like a data center go into like a warehouse off of Murray Avenue or Murray Plaza? Big enough. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

Well, let's I was just going to say I mean I think I think you all are in the right headsp space. Um let's kind of keep going and then put a pin in it and Yeah. No, I welcome the questions. So

on that it just brings up the question because the size of these things almost by definition it excludes most of Lynchberg which brings up an earlier question I think Tom had mentioned. Uh it's more of maybe a regional question that I see we found to Campbell, Ammerst and Bedford in this have they I'm looking at Campbell's and heavy industrial okay by right given a current definition agricultural zoning seems a little strange with a special use permit. Do they actually have policies on these things or are they just kind of winging it like we've been? Uh, so it varies from locality to locality. I mean, if you want me to look specifically at our surrounding counties to to look more closely at what they're doing, um, we can do that.

Okay. Um, but yeah, this is just a very high level of do they or don't they allow it. And then there's um layers, you know, in their zoning ordinance of of setbacks and um other special requirements or things they need to meet in order to do it. Um, so it's not necessarily just that it's outright, yeah, go wherever in so and so county. It's um it's difficult to distill all of it to um um to this chart, but yeah,

but so for you know, like I said, not to go line by line, but um different places are doing this differently. Um we are kind of basing what we've uh proposed here off of Frederick counties just because they had uh a good starting point and structure we felt like for you know how our ordinance is structured it kind of makes sense. Um the reason we didn't send out you know all the research to you guys is if you all latched on to a different um ordinance and said I like Ammerst and I like Henriiko and I like it would just be really hard to bring that all back together. But you know there we we can kind of pick and choose but we've used the structure mainly from from Frederick County. Uh so what are we currently doing with data centers in our ordinance? These fall under the definition of data processing and management hosting and related services web hosting computer data storage uh imaging etc etc. These are allowed by right in all business districts, all of our industrial districts and the institutional two district um which is for larger campuses. Uh there are also no specific land use standards for data centers in our ordinance. Um so no extra buffering or setbacks. It would just be the base uh district that applies. Um so bearing all that in mind kind of what are we trying to do with this? This is what came to mind for me. Um, planning commission, you, you know, feel free to, to add on to this as well, but I think in thinking about how we should regulate these, we should think about mitigating impact to our residents and the surrounding land uses. Um, preserving our commercial or business district for commercial or business uses as opposed to industrial. Uh, and evaluate data center proposals on a

case-byase basis in a more limited set of districts. So, how would we do that? Um, possible updates include adding a specific data center definition. Um, refining the other category that it currently falls in to distinguish it from other business operations. Uh, change the allowable uses from making it a byite in several districts to by cup only in a few districts. Um we would also want to set specific land use standards and establish the process um for submittal on these things. Um so the definition that we've proposed and you know feel free to uh you know add on or give feedback on this. um a premises in which the majority of the use is occupied computers and/or telecommunications and related equipment for processing, storing or transferring information. Uh also including these sort of ancillary components like utility sub substations, power generators and other supporting equipment. So that's kind of where we would set a new definition for data center rather than lumping it in with something else. Um, and as I mentioned, the most substantial change that we're we're talking about possibly doing is amending these uses from the byite in the business industrial and IN2 districts to by cup only in some industrial districts. And this map, uh, I know it's hard to see, but it shows this change. Currently you see uh the commercial uses which are sort of the red to brown color um industrial which is gray, purple and pink and IN2 which is an institutional too. Um again it's by right in these areas right now which means that it's

allowed without council approval. The proposed ordinance would um this is a you know could see it go from lots of areas to fewer areas. Um it would take out those commercial and business districts and the IN2 district and allow them only by conditional use permit in industrial. Um and so you know like I said I've kind of highlighted some areas that I thought especially needed planning comm I mean we're we're welcome to discuss it all but um highlighted some areas where I thought could be a good discussion point for the commission. Um you know are these the right districts? So our industrial districts again a lot of text um but listed the purpose of each industrial district here. IN1 is our limited industrial in2 or sorry I2 is light industrial and then I3 is heavy industrial. So one two three they go from less intense to more intense. Um and you can see that I1 and I2 have some descriptions that may not align with the data center. I1 specifically says that these areas may be located in close proximity to residential areas. So that may not be the best fit there. Um I2 says that uh it should have relatively low levels of smoke, smell, noise, dust, light, and other nuisances. Uh which I think data centers probably fall into. But it also mentions that they should not involve nuisances discernible at the property line, which there is potential for with noise and light. Um, so this is something I wanted to to bring to call out to the commission to see if you think it's appropriate to allow in those districts or maybe just I2 and I3 or just I3 or maybe just pause for discussion here.

So I I have a question because you showed a slide that we don't have. Um, under draft updates, you included IN2. Um, in my draft update looks like There you go. Um, I don't have that one. Yeah. So, it's an animation. Sorry.

No, it's fine. But, but I'm I'm just wondering I was only wondering because, you know, it seems like with in 2, particularly with Liberty, they really have flexibility to do a lot of what they want anyway. Is that why you kind of have that in there? Um, so the IN2 district was largely based on our general business district, so B5. Um, so if we weren't going to do it in D5, I thought it logical to take it out of in2 as well. Um, and granted, you know, we haven't had a specific discussion with Liberty about whether they foresee a data center. Um, this is just

mainly us talking to see if we're in the right direction on the code update. And then you know based on kind of what we talk about here today are we you know are we are we are we going with this direction and if so like what else do we need to explore? That's that's why I asked because if it my recollection of IN2 like we don't really have a lot of say on what they do anyway it seems like. So, wouldn't it be logical to include that? They do have a lot of land along 460 that they might say, "We're going to" And it would have to be taxed. You know, it's also taxable.

Um, if they did that, um, like the mall, but but would it be wise just to keep that in there if you're going to do that? I don't know. I'm just thinking. It kind of brings to mind maybe a caveat in the definition because you can have a a standalone data center that serves a business like Amazon or something some of the utility whereas Liberty may require its own right that's why its services right it its own functions in which case if we put the conditional use permits on it it might be fine

but but to me just backing up a little bit here one like the three Uh I3. Uh where are you? If uh page eight. No. Uh page 10 one to refine data center definition. Okay. So standalone serving maybe what it does because I saw the inclusion of utility substations in there. And if we lump those in, then we're liable to start having to limit which we do anyway. Those go anyway, but they're two different things. A utility substation versus a prime IT processing center. Two very different things.

Yeah. So it would be a utility substation associated with a data center, not necessarily its own

substation. Okay. I I think I think what you're getting at and it's good discussion maybe um we could work that out in the definitions um where it's main primary primary purpose is to uh you know do the data processing and and telecommunications and that sort of thing. Which brings me to point two. In your list of possible updates to the code, to me the definition would be center front center and then item three change from by right in business industrial to industrial 2 and possibly three to by cup only in industrial district. To me, those two items would probably solve most of the relevant issues because those two things, the accountability by right, it has to appear before this committee. it has to go before city council uh and the definition fits a specific thing would really solve most of the issues that we're even talking about debating right there. So

yeah. Yeah. Yeah. If you could sorry go back to that definition just to follow up on Chuck's comment. I think a real simple insertion associated infrastructure right would clean that up. Associated infrastructure such as Okay. And that way it's not a standalone substation. And I think that's an important distinction. Just want to say two things real quick. So right now as it stands B4 would be by right be able to come in. Correct. B4. Yes.

Um right here next to us 901 Main Street. The owner is named the Vault Data Centers LLC. I'm not sure what their plans are. I don't know if anybody's heard anything or or who was calling making any statements. Um as it is as it is right now, it would if I guess if they were to move quick, they could establish a data center right next to city hall. Yeah. Right next to city hall. Um I printed off on I played around on parcel viewer and and tried to find some stuff. So it's going to be a good addition to this planning from tell

and on my side of things the the tax side you guys had mentioned right now Virginia there's a whole big debate on the tax side things. So Virginia offers a major data center retail sales and use tax exemption which goes through June 30th of 2035. Could you say that first part again? Virginia offers This is for taxes. Oh for Northern Virginia. It applies to the whole state. Well, it's it applies. It's Virginia offers a a major data center retail sales and use tax exemption through June 30th, 2035. So, what that does cover is the like the business personal property, like your equipment, all the servers, all that stuff.

Cuz right now, as a business, you get taxed on your business personal property, all of your equipment that is in use. But right now, for the data centers specifically, that's not taxable. So that's I don't know if you guys have you might have heard that throughout the state talk and everything else going on but that's a thing possible in Virginia which is why we've got 600 of these things here right you know I wonder it's interesting so going back looking at Charlottville Charlott does not have developable land but they have this by right and I I do wonder if there are smaller footprints that we're going to see coming up

that that we haven't really you know we're thinking these things these massive Lowden county, but you know, like if Liberty wanted a data center, it would probably be a smaller footprint and if you had one downtown, it' be a smaller footprint. So then my question is, well, what if these were small footprints? Uh, things change. Can we come back and revise this? Would that conditional use permit be enough for us to go back? But also, would we lose out opportunity um by putting heavy restriction because we're thinking of these massive units that are really loud and maybe there's some use like the one downtown that might be I mean there's no benefit for us if they don't pay tax. That's just the reality. But the use does

well not in these other districts. I'm talking about in other districts. There's nothing to stop someone coming and requesting reszoning right to industry. Yeah. if they wanted the data center, right? So, it just it would be another extra step in the process because they anyone can come in and request reszoning. So, if we if that happened, they could come in and request reszoning downtown industrial just like anything else and we could we could or do you just do a conditional use permit and stay before? What's the concern with data center? like there's we have a we have a I mean we're not um clearly we can't have a lot of these data centers like in Northern Virginia. I mean there's just like we've said there's just not the much that much land.

They consume huge amounts of electricity. They have massive amounts of building needs. They take up a lot of space if you have not that's well okay so they don't hire a lot of people that but the but the resource issue is not necessarily the city's problem or or the zoning. Now what happens is when you draw that much current from the grid, it tends to raise local rates. Well, it can be a concern for the city in terms of water resources. Um, you know, because I mean they're generally they're using portable water.

Is that is that what is that? Well, and not I think not not in all cases like for the cooling. I mean you can you could build a cooling tower or you could have evaporative coolers or something like that without those are very special. But um but uh nevertheless though, is there an issue that we're trying to prevent or trying to keep them out of the city? Yeah. They're just they consume land and they're just Yes. utility hogs. I think our step here is not to prohibit them completely, but just to put more restrictions in place so that people can't just come in. Right. That's it. If it's a solid project and they've addressed all these concerns, they're going to get to CU. Hence the liberty question, right? You know, but Eric,

but right now we don't have to we don't have to address it, right? And putting a rain on it like that, putting a bridal on it, there's nothing wrong with that, you know. But Eric brings up an interesting point. Why would they name this building where they can put this by right next door data center, whatever LLC, all data centers? Yeah. I mean, it could just be a holding company. I mean there's they have not I don't as far as I know they've not approached the city about

doing anything there. Um, but I think this is good discussion and and to to the point of um, you know, going to the conditional use permit being required allows for these things to be worked out um, and for us to make informed decisions and recommendations as as we're presenting things to council and so that they can make an informed decision on, you know, is this the right land use in the in the right place? So

I mean obviously as as a real estate oriented person I I always think of the land owners in these these cases I have biases personally not going to hide it against these things but not to restrict them. I understand there functions whereby these things are necessary and I think we're we're trying to make a directed effort to address those as they would come up if they were for specific needs like by something like Liberty or some local corporation need to put these things in. You know, that being said, if if you are to answer Mark's question, imagine owning 10 acres out in the county and you're expecting subdivisions to go and then suddenly one day, no questions asked by right, a two00 foot long by 2500 foot long building goes up right next to your property and nobody knew it was coming in. It wasn't. It was by right.

Sure. And now where are you? You know that the at a minimum these things should be reviewed by just because of of their impact, their sheer size of impact. They should be reviewed by the city and by the have the residents a chance to speak about it and that's really kind of all

and and I don't think there's any debate about that for me. like I think it should be, you know, with the um the proposed rule where we say conditional use permit and we say I I2 I3. I I think that's perfect. But um I think I think it would just be good to understand like where we're kind of where we're going with this rule and regulation. Um because like for example is the Verizon building on Turk Street is that a data center because the definition says it is uh telecommunications and related equipment. There you go. So we got one. So we already have question. Yeah.

Yeah. And that goes back to why I was saying like this it's easy to think about these big things but let's say the building downtown. I would just want to make sure that let's say they come in that company comes in and they say we want to have a data center um specific for some some reason. I don't want us to have to say you can't have it downtown. It doesn't matter no matter what. And I feel like doing this we're we are restricting that permanently. We can't you can't go into downtown and do that. So,

well, the comm the the commission always does have the option to revisit the ordinance at any point. Um, like I said, smaller scale going vertical with data centers is not super common right now um because of all the specialized cooling equipment and whatnot. got a great big one right down. I mean, I don't know if our development pressure is that bad in New York, but um

yeah, I think Commissioner Cox brings up a good point. Um you know, typically if and we can look into that. That's a that's a good question. um you know if there is anything that's going to be non-conforming typically the use can continue um as long as it keeps on kind of a grandfathered status is what some people call it I'm just just saying that yeah by this definition you mentioned Frederick County particular tidbits out of Frederick County that you liked that should be mirrored

yeah so um I've got them throughout the presentation Um the definition is is one place we started with their their ordinance. Um but yeah so is there any I I know commissioner sorry the chair had said you know he may want to look at other business districts. You know I think downtown is it's it's its own animal because of the nature of you know kind of that more urban character. um we want um kind of active ground floor uses and that sort of thing. Um so I don't know that going forward we would want more data centers downtown um just because it doesn't really kind of fit with the fabric of downtown um in some ways. Um, but any other thoughts on this specific question about the districts we would want to look at? Do we want to take I1 out because it talks about being close to residential?

I I think I agree with Chuck. Well, if it's an I1 and and noise is an issue, size is an issue, sight lines are an issue, we can debate that if someone does want to do an I1. Okay. Just leave it leave it all industrial. Yeah, there might be some I1's that it's fine, you know, and then other That's true. I mean, we don't have a ton of I1 as you can see. Um, but it's more thinking for the future. They've got Okay. Right. Yeah. Eric, you guys had something in here regarding a buffer couple SL in a couple slides. We haven't gotten to it yet. Yeah.

Um, so I think we're we'll get to the buffer zone and everything else. I just want to clarify something real quick. I think I misspoke about the business personal property. It is the sales tax exemption. So when you're buying these servers and all this equipment, these u data centers are exempt from that 5.3% sales tax. Oh, so they still pay personal property. So it says here Virginia misses out on an estimated 1 6 billion annually from allowing data centers to opt out of paying that 5.3%. Isn't there legislation that's that's the whole thing that's up right now that we're kind of hearing just evolving way too fast for us to make some long long-term decisions here. I I and I just I just think you know

the the picture that everybody has in their mind of data centers right now or like Eric said u you know they're couple football fields long. I think in 10 years they're going to be like on main the building on Main Street, you know, like all the all the uh all the efficiencies that'll be gained and that sort of thing. And I think that's what we need to be thinking of as data centers for this conversation personally. But um you know, I mean that's going to be most beneficial to to what what we have facing us in Lynchburg because like we just we just don't have the land that the counties have.

Agree with you and supplement. I think going back to to me, same thing still applies. the definition of what they are. Uh we can tweak that. And second, so long as it's subject to some kind of public review. Yeah. Large or small. You know, conditional use permit isn't prohibitive. It's just a review process, right?

Yeah. Yeah. Um that's one of the issues that has come up in you know some of the northern Virginia counties is that you know data centers were literally built being built right across the street from residences. Um and so while we can't foresee you know how exactly the techn is going to evolve or um you know what petitions we might get I think what we can do now is kind of try to get ahead of it so that we don't have um those same issues with uh you know incompatible land uses being right adjacent to each other um that other localities are having. I mean, even though like like we've been talking about, you know, it's not the it's not necessarily the football field size buildings that we're going to get. Um, but you know, if

by right, right? So, if it's by right, we don't we don't have the oversight. So, that's and and again, if if in 10 years everything looks completely different, it's just a totally different landscape. Um, but we can do we can go back to the the drawing board on our ordinance, but at least we will have something in place to um, you know, to work with for the time being. Commissioner Prop will still be on. I'm just kidding. I have a question. Have you talked to anybody in water resources? it. I I remember when Fredo Lelay built here and that was one of the they were really actively involved in

recruiting and working with them because I think our water resources they like to sell water. Um have you talked with them about this? Like is this an attractive thing to

water resources is uh one of our kind of stakeholders on this um ordinance update um internally anyway um because we've been mainly talking internally just to see what we even want to do. So, um, uh, yes, we have spoken with with them. Um, and it's a it's an evolving thing for them as well. Um, you know, I I think the scale is a big piece of it. The fact that we probably aren't getting the massive ones, I I don't think we're going to, you know, run out of uh, you know, water capacity anytime soon. Um, but you know, it may be something where in this part of town or on this street, the capacity is less because that's just how the network works. Um, but having a conditional use permit in place allows us to kind of evaluate all these things. What is the projected energy usage? What are the noise levels? How much water do we think we're going to be needing for this? If there are upgrades, who's going to pay for that? That sort of thing. So this the conditional use permit I think is a great solution to um kind of figure out that stuff on the front end versus allowing it by right and then oh we're stuck with this what do we do now? Um again not that we're getting proposals but it it could happen. So

is there a scenario where there's a business that's that is active that is um that is that is doing everything right and then and then there's some scenario where they decide that they need u a data center um as a part of their facility and is I'm just looking at the definition which says where majority of the use is occupied by computers or telecommunic I just do You want to look at this through the lens of um through the lens of um um bear with me one second. You have it in here. Through I I guess energy output or or or energy use as a part of the definition.

Um I hadn't considered that. Um I'm not saying it's a great idea. I'm just trying to get my head.

It could change. Um, you know, I think I think right now like 36 megawatts is a big number. Like that's maybe standard or a common size. Um, but you know, in two years it could be 50, you know. So, um, I think kind of what we talked about with adding the the distinction on the definition to say associated infrastructure including utility substations blah blah blah. In addition to defining data center itself, we can also uh maybe define in the definition it's currently falling under that you know if this is accessory to right for you know for use primarily only by the primary user um

the do question are you going to be selling these services to somebody else or is this for your own use? Yeah. So I mean if we put that in the definition then it I mean you've got to what prove or something you're making assumptions about what it's for. Mhm.

Right. Whereas a conditional use it's again it's back to the review process. I mean if we don't want these things just as selling it's a simple question. Are you selling these services? Are you putting it in for yourself? And if you're putting in like if Liberty needed one again then if they needed one to process data or students they're fine you know then maybe it's fine depending on where they want to put it you know but if they want to build one that they want to sell Amazon type services to the CIA or something well it might be a different question so

right so yeah we this is good discussion and um we can kind of take it and digest it and see how we can you know possibly allow um you know a campus type setting like hospital, larger university, whatever, you know, if they need these smaller facilities to serve themselves and not Amazon or whoever hospitals and medicine,

I think that could be a by right um you know, if we can figure out how to word it correctly so that um you know by right any anything conditional use, you you know, if you're going to change a zoning, you come planning commission or you know, whatever city council If if you need a data center, you if it's a good reason, there's no reason to deny it, right? The conditional use permit. All all it does is give the residents, city residents an opportunity to speak to the matter. I agree. I would say start out conservatively. If they need it for the reasons we discussed, we're going to approve it,

right? And if it becomes the trend that that's what's happening, then we revisit it. But I think starting starting right now, not not leaving things out of the loop because we don't know what's coming down the pipe. So capture everything now and then if we need to, we can That's an easy solution. Yeah. Yeah. And Rachel, this data center definition here, is this from like Frederick County or from another? Yeah, it's based I think I tweaked it a little bit, but it is based on Frederick counties. Okay. And that's in their code right now. Yeah. They updated theirs, I believe, last year. So Okay. pretty recent. Okay.

Um let's kind of keep keep pushing forward just so that we can kind of cover everything and then we can always discuss at the end. Um setbacks already came one up once, but these are a common component of data center ordinances among other localities. Um this would propose an additional setback when adjoining residential properties. Um I've highlighted the number. I'm not sure exactly what that is. you know, we maybe don't want to be overly restrictive, but these uses can have a negative impact on residential homes. So, um, does anyone have any thoughts on that first um, highlighted portion?

I think the 10,00 will exclude all the based on our previous meeting, I think the 10,00t excludes pretty much all the residential. Yeah. Yeah. Uh, so um, yeah, you're right. I don't we I don't think anybody knows what the number is right now but um yeah maybe I think it also depends on the size of the data center and what kind of uh features it has and what you know what what infrastructure it requires

you know I think that would kind of play like into the conditional use permit sort of decisions. Yeah, my thought was just do you want to at least establish a baseline of 100 feet, 200 feet, that sort of thing. Um, and as part of the CU if if they have additional setbacks because it is particularly large facility or something like that. Yeah, that could be taken into consideration if we have if we have to start with a number like I'd propose the 500 ft. I think that that's the um as we learned I think that's the largest distance uh in in the code right now. for offsets for for certain other other activities. But

put them downtown. For example, if they wanted to put one in like that Verizon building over here and somebody else wants to develop the building next door to an apartment building, you know, well, that would automatically exclude one or the other. Well, so in that case, uh downtown being B4, um it's not techn although it does allow residential use, it's not a residential district. So, right. Um yeah. Yeah, it feels like he's putting a he was kind of getting ahead of the game to to put a setback on it at this point because somebody pointed out we're we don't know I mean we we know the tech is going to get smaller so what would something like that actually look like you know

yeah I'm curious so if we go to Tomahawk I think Tom Hawk Industrial Park might be industrial but there's houses all around it and what are the setbacks there And I'm just thinking if you know these these facilities are are loud, but they're not probably loud on all four corners, you know. So to me, I think I think that uh I would want to look and see what the current setbacks are in in industrial areas and and I would

Yeah, I would and I would tend to go lower because of a conditional use permit and the noise. Um, for example, what's the difference between a quiet data center and a warehouse and the warehouse has a hundreds foot setback? What's the difference? Actually, a lot more tax revenue for the city. So, it looks the same and it's quiet. So, I I think like I think maybe there's a little we're getting a little ahead of the game with the setbacks because yeah, some of the ones you hear about a thousand feet might not be enough. I heard about one in Kentucky or West Virginia. they finally had it. They forced it to shut down. It was so loud. Um so yeah, I would I I would probably look and and just use the template that is in the current districts.

So right now um just the base industrial district adjoining a residential district uh is 100 foot 100 foot minimum building setback. Um but I can tell you 100 feet is not a lot. may sound like it but it's really not on the ground. Um so well that's where you discuss in the C the noise issue and and you can actually make you do that can be changed. So what in this case will allow it if it has a 250 foot or a 300 foot setback because of noise

but the applicant can also specify I mean we you specify the the noise level I mean they should be able to answer the question for the noise level. test for this. So, can you get can you get an overlay of that map? What like 200, 500,000 would look like? I know you've done it before. I know it's probably a lot of work, but just to see just to see how that would overlay. We just know a thousand won't leave any square footage left, right? Right. Well, I think we've all seen I think we've seen a thousand. Yeah.

Um, any thoughts on setbacks? Well, I know I know we didn't reach anything there, but you know, there could also be setbacks from commercial or other districts um if we felt like that was important, too. So, maybe a just something to think about. Um we would also want to make sure the buffer would be provided on all sides uh unless they are adjoining other industrial. I think that's important even if it were commercial. It just seems like a good idea. And our industrial districts currently don't have a height limit, but we could set one for data centers if we wanted to. Generally, again, this is all evolving, right? And we just talked about generally it's a large one-story building. Um, but a single story on a data center can be a lot taller, you know, because it is more like a warehouse can be a lot taller than a single story. Um, I think question. What's the buffer for? So, I mean, it's nice to have a vegetative evergreen buffer, but if we're going to get specific about these things, what is it for? Because like you correctly pointed out, these things can be very tall.

If it's to obscure the, you know, sight of it, is it just from the next door property? Is it from the road? Do these things have to be 60 foot trees? What we What are we talking about? It it seems I mean I hate keep harping on this but but to me it just seems like if we get too far down in the weeds about things we don't know anything about a little bit about that we're just getting ahead of the game. Whereas if we have a a definition for what these things are that's acceptable to everyone and we let the relevant city officials and the citizens of Lynburg have a say on what this is going to look like and if it goes in at all. We we've fully addressed it. you know, any we start getting down into the weeds about specifics about things that are hypothetical proposals, you know, we risk, you know, putting restrictions on things we may might be fine, you know, or the opposite of that, you know. I think from the the city's perspective though, this is my guess there, you know, and we talked a little bit earlier about, you know, we want to be more conservative starting out and then we can relax as we learn more. But with the offsets and the the vegetative barriers and that sort of thing, um, you know, you don't want to get into a situation, I think, where we had the opportunity to specify that and it turns out a data center comes and you actually need it. You can't go back and force them to.

Yeah. That's not something I want to sit barbecue about. It's not a hell I want to die at. All I'm saying is that I think for us to put restrictions on things we have no idea what they are is is just getting ahead of the game. Yeah. That's all I'm saying. Yeah. Tell Rachel, don't a lot of these data centers sell the back to what Chuck was asking earlier. Don't they sell their services to a lot of people that are not their company now know Liberty University would be and Liberty could sell theirs to if they had one to an outside corporation, but aren't at least 50% of them selling it to multiple companies?

Capacity process. Yeah, they're not happy about that either. I talked to the water resources guy out there not that long ago. I mean, I I agree. It's it's it's maybe not necessary, but I also think we don't want someone building all the way to the property line. We need to have something. We can adjust the number later. And if we want to call it 100 or 200, fine. But I think we need something. You have like a minimum of let's say 200 minimum at least. Yeah. Yeah. negotiation. Yep. But we need we need some kind of setback. Everything has a setback.

And they can still come back and say, "Hey, this is what it is. We but we want 175 ft." They can still do that and we can different from you suggested what's what's already there in the district or do you want a universal that applies to these specific types of What was the distance you asked about was the answer to that? Uh the normal industrial against residential setback is 100 feet. I think we start with that. So well if if we want to leave it if we want to leave it 100 then we don't even need to address it because it's already in the ordinance. So so we'll just Okay, we can skip that. But then that means that we have to say that the data centers are industrial, right? I mean in order to get that 100 ft. That's probably what we're talking about.

Yeah. It's it's a industrial district. So yeah. Okay. So we So um but yes, you're right. So if we left them in commercial districts, then that wouldn't apply. That's right. But if we're only talking about industrial in Did I say commercial? I don't even know what I just said. If we leave them in commercial districts, that 100 foot setback would not apply to those districts. It would only be the industrial. So yeah. So then we would need to specify a setback for uh if we did anything other than industrial. Yeah, that's right. So so we could put a minimum of 100 ft. If you have a minimum, that means there there's no maximum. Yeah. Okay. We've gone from 500 to 200 to 100. Is that what that what we're

keeps it keeps it uniform? No, I don't really I'm just throwing numbers out. Okay. But I'm I'm more saying like if you say minimum, it can't be less than that unless they come in with some specific reason. Okay. That's just my thought. All right. And it sounded like there wasn't an appetite to regulate height or do we want to touch that? Do we have height regulations and other zoning? We do groups. Uh not in industrial though. Not in industrial. Yeah, I know some of it has to do with street width and that sort of thing. Um I don't know.

I was just thinking of that tower at Liberty. Someone might want to make that massive tower. You know, you you might want to regulate it because it would be maybe less impact on neighboring properties, but also you might not want to regulate it because it would encourage people to build out than up. And if we're talking about future technology could allow them to build up more easily, then require them all to be painted green. I mean, theoretically, I mean, this is going to sound like a joke. I know it can't go downtown, but like like Bank of the James, right? I mean, that that theoretically could be I mean that's what in our current ordinance. Yeah. In our current ordinance. Yeah. Yeah.

Did you come across any height guidance on any of the other localities? I would need to go back through um I'm just curious if other people are are addressing the height. I guess one other question really quick about the height is for a one-story building like if you build a warehouse that's 40t tall and you have a concrete slab and then uh like steel mezzanines in there is that still a one-story building or so we don't generally uh regulate by story. We just list a height. Okay. Like 40 feet. Okay. Yeah.

Do we do width too? kind of deal with some solar stuff down in North Carolina. It's it's got to be not only this high, it's got to be a minimum of what 35 feet wide. No, we don't have So you could have a single tree line of redwood trees in this case. So just a quick search says your louden often ranges from 60 to 100 ft in height and then up to 120 ft with a special permit. That's loud. Loud. So that's um the town of Leburg itself does 65 ft in the I1.

Mhm. So that's that's obviously in smaller in town, but uh I would think I definitely think we should look at the height restriction and then anything more up to a certain amount with a special use permit. We want to throw out a number today and I can compare that to what other localities are doing in addition to the louden. I would say 50 feet or 60 feet or 40 feet or I would say 40T but I say that one right see what 40 looks like. Yeah.

Okay. Um some other standards we may want to consider um limiting any generator testing timing to weekdays uh between 8 and 5. Feel like everyone can agree on that. Um mechanical agree equipment should be um out of the setback. So uh it should be screened. Generators should be enclosed or in the structure itself. And then uh any rooftop equipment or anything like that should be screened as well from that would be either from an adjoining property or the street.

So again, not to get too technical, but does roof mounted equipment would that be counted as part of the height or do we I think our ordinance says that height can go an additional five feet if it's screened by a parapit. So that would that would include I don't know that a generator for a facility like this would fall under that. They might need to bring it down if they're going to have rooftop generators. Yeah. Okay. So it says draft updates. What are we current? We don't regulate it at all. Okay. Uh specifically data centers. Um okay.

Um moving on to noise. Uh this kind of says that um you know we would want to set a standard um and follow-up metrics for things like energy usage, noise and water usage levels. Um these things could be uh required at the public hearing phase when they submit the conditional use permit for you know your consideration and and council's consideration. Um, and then as a followup, it's often some some localities have a requirement for a follow-up, typically like a five-year increment to make sure that they are actually, you know, the actual usage reflects what they said it would be during the public hearing phase. Um, so is Sarah um

I prefer one year one year they test water um the water flow valves every year. the city requires it and electrical cooling equipment gets old, bearings get loud and next thing you know in three years something that isn't that loud could be really loud and there's still two years before they have to come back with any report. I don't think it's super expensive, but yeah, whatever. I mean, whatever you guys think. It could be 12 months, it could be 18 months. I don't know how involved these things are, you know, for asking them to pay a million dollars every year. It's, you know, they might it might cause some some stir. But if it's a couple thousand dollars,

can imagine it's a million because it's a lot less intensive than traffic study, but it's going to be more than my water um backflow valve. But I mean, every place in Lynchburg has those tested every year because the city sends the letter out for it and it is expensive for some places. The like item um item two for example up here. Is that consistent with Frederick Frederick County code or that one is? Yes,

it is. Okay. Um, and you know, not everyone is doing everything the same, but um, I don't think they had a water usage reporting, but I I would think we would want to monitor that, too, since we are our own, you know, water authority. Yeah. Yeah. I I was just curious about the water and the electricity. Does um does the city uh place requirements on businesses for how much electricity and water they can consume? Do we already have such a program in place? I believe there are agreements in place for larger facilities like big consumers of water.

Yeah. Like Fredo for example. Um, you know, there's a there needs to be an understanding there of, you know, what they're consuming and the waste water they're discharging and and treating and everything. Um, so it's we don't have a lot to compare it to, you know, because this is kind of its own animal. Um, but yes. Okay. All right. But I guess like electricity, do we have that? Do we have do do we does the city monitor that? I mean, it would seem diffult to me that we do. That was from I think it's Alarl's uh ordinance requires that. So, that I I threw that out there. Again,

this is all kind of maybe seeming wishy-washy, but I'm just trying to get a feel for what the commission wants us to regulate and then go from there. Right. Understand.

Okay. Um so yeah that's that's kind of the overview. I thought you know we could revisit any of those things from earlier. Um in general looking for consensus on is this the correct approach. Um with the cup I think the most important most valuable piece of that is that we get to evaluate the facilities on a siteby-sight basis. Um how far is it from a transmission line? Is there water capacity in this area? Would upgrades be needed? Who's going to pay for those? Um, we can take all that and put it together and then, you know, pass to you for an informed recommendation and to city council so they can make an informed decision. Um, so I'll pause there. See a couple head nods. I mean, I think this is exactly what we were looking for, and I appreciate the work you all put into it. The only question I have in terms of the whole process, this is one of those things where if if we recommend approval and it goes to council, but then they want 200 feet instead of 100 feet, it could go back and forth forever. It and almost would be nice to involve them with this info a little bit ahead of time. So, if they had some ideas, we could incorporate that. But,

well, they'll be briefed um ahead of their public hearing. So, you know, if they've got any big questions or or potential edits, we can look at those then. Um you just hate to do a reset for some minor points. Well, uh, council has the option to, you know, nec if they want to reduce the buffer or increase the buffer. They don't have to send it back to commission. They would just, if it was like, oh, we're not sure about this. Let's see what planning commission thinks. I guess they have the option to send it back to you for another recommendation. No, I would not buy that. But yeah, they can they can edit at their phase, too. Good. What was the Rachel? the definition change that we made

the what the change to the definition of the uh IT centers who are going to change a word in there. Yeah, we were going to add a word to say associated infrastructure such as utility substations, power generators and other supporting equipment may also be included as a data center. Gotcha. Yeah. Are there any other things that we want to regulate in addition to setbacks, screening, that sort of thing? No more. No, I think I Sorry.

to limiting it just to the industrial districts. I mean, you got to admit if if they're planning data centers in some of these business centers right now, you're going to have a lot of citizens that are going to be upset, right? That's that's a good point actually. I think it's easy to just sit back and overlook that, but I mean that's a potential reality right there. And that reducing that size obviously just limits it to how many citizens they could theoretically be around. And it doesn't hurt to add that in. I mean, what difference does it make?

I still think the IN2 should be included as well because like I said, you know, Liberty can have that in their master plan to think and we we have no they can present it to us, but we can't vote it down. So, I think it makes sense and hearing this discussion, we can engage with them as well and say, "Hey, does this give you heartburn u to take it out or do you want us to leave it or uh you know, what are the implications for them?" Um because what they don't want to do is have to if they if they needed it, they can't just reszone their campus to uh industrial, right? Then everything is exactly non-conforming and out the window. So um and we want to follow up with

resone this stuff before or get these things in place before somebody puts it in place because then you can't go back and you know reszone, recup. So yeah, I I mean personally based on what Eric was saying, to me it wouldn't I mean it doesn't it doesn't do any harm to add in other districts where it might be allowed by right, you know, where they could go theoretically. So it does it does no damage to this by adding I mean not that I can see by adding them in.

Okay. Well, we'll follow up on that and uh bring your recommendation. Um, so if you have any um, thoughts after this, you know, if you're eating dinner later and forgot to ask a question or you think of something, um, you can share feedback with us. Um, but the sooner the better. Um, because we are working on the actual code amendments. You know, this was more general uh, descriptions of what we're thinking of. um you know the the text itself is a little more um technical. So we are working on that and the next step for us would be to get you a draft ordinance and schedule a public hearing um and then ultimately city council public hearing and action. So, we would like to bring this back to your next meeting if with a code update if um you know I I think we've got good direction. Um, but if there's if again if there's anything after this that you think needs to be incorporated or whatever and we can still have more discussion at that at that phase with the public hearing, but um

you know it's hard it's harder to edit to reiterate that testing because the story about this place in Tennessee or Kentucky was that they were kind of hamstrung because they were allowed to do this for a period of time and um there's a really interesting story and they're like after three years of complaining, they woke up one morning and everything was gone. Totally quiet. They said they hadn't heard birds in three years and it had been it had been one of these things. They had this long period of testing. They've been complaining for a while and their locality said they can't do anything about it. So,

I think that's one thing that if we're concerned about things like like that, that might be something to put in there every two years, what whatever, but five years is a pretty long period of time. But I appreciate it this work. Yeah. Yeah. Um I I just have one more thing because I want to be clear on the industrial and institutional, right? I mean there's there's I one 123 and institutional one and two at least. Um so like I think Sentra for example is institutional. Is that right? I think they're institutional and two.

Yeah. And so um basically I just I I think that I I don't I don't think we want to I think it would be nice to include the uh institutional okay in in in here as a cup option. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. But um yeah, I think this is uh this is nice work and and appreciate the staff putting that together. That was well done and I think nicely presented.

Okay. Well, we will uh take the feedback you've given us and um like I said, we'd like to try to get this to your next meeting. Um so, we just got to do some some editing and we'll try to get that draft out maybe a little sooner if we can because reading code can be a little dry, but you'll want to go through it um you know, maybe in bits and pieces. Great. Thank you. Thank you guys as well. All right. Well, that's great. Anybody have a motion on the floor here for you? Well, that was two right right away. That's a second. All right.

All right. First down here. Second was Mark. And there's no opposition, so we will depart. Thank you.