Oldham County technical review raises questions on proposed 'Project Lincoln' hyperscale data center

Developers presented technical plans for a proposed hyperscale data center called Project Lincoln during the Oldham County Technical Review Committee meeting on May 21, 2025, prompting extensive agency and public questions about stormwater, on-site sewage, backup power fuel storage, noise mitigation and emergency access. No permit decisions were made at the meeting; the proposal remains subject to local permitting and an appeal scheduled with the Board of Adjustments.

The site under review is a 267-acre property along Kentucky 53, of which the applicant said 143 acres are before the committee for a conditional use permit. Presenters said roughly 65 acres of the 143-acre area would be impervious surface, leaving about 200 acres of retained green space. Applicant representatives said the site was chosen for access to high-voltage power lines that run through the parcel, nearby fiber, water service and Highway 53 access.

Why it matters: committee members and multiple agencies said the project’s scale and technical components create multiple permit pathways and potential public-safety and environmental impacts. Staff requested plan corrections and additional studies; several residents and property owners sought more detail on generator fuel storage, air emissions, traffic during construction and operations, and potential impacts to nearby creeks and wildlife habitat.

Key technical points and agency concerns

- Power and backup power: Applicant technical testimony said each emergency generator on site would be about 2 to 4 megawatts and that diesel fuel would be stored in double-wall "belly" tanks with leak detection. Applicant testimony said individual generator tanks might be about 10,000 gallons. The applicant described the site as adjacent to 345-kilovolt transmission lines owned by Louisville Gas & Electric (LG&E). LG&E submitted a letter saying it owns infrastructure that could serve the site and that the utility will study any new load; LG&E declined to send staff to the TRC meeting.

- Cooling and water: The applicant said the data center would use a closed-loop chilled-water system with air-cooled chillers, which the presenter said does not require continuous makeup water for normal operation. County staff and the health department asked for clarification on maintenance and any occasional drain/refill requirements; the Oldham County Health Department said a preliminary soils evaluation (conducted March 11, 2025) found soils "provisionally suitable" in many areas but said final on-site sewage disposal locations and system designs will require further, site-specific testing once building footprints and utilities are staked.

- On-site sewage and soils: Charlie Ward of the Oldham County Health Department said preliminary test holes had been dug in limited areas and that some portions of the property could accommodate conventional subsurface septic systems while other areas had shallow restrictive horizons; sinkholes were identified in county geologic mapping and may impose setbacks of about 70 feet for lateral fields. Ward said final septic design and location would require further field work once site details are fixed and that several smaller satellite systems for different buildings were likely rather than a single large cluster system.

- Stormwater, drainage and floodplain: County engineering staff said the applicant’s preliminary plan shows proposed detention basins intended to throttle post-development flows to pre-development rates. The applicant described four detention basins mostly located on the south side of the development. Oldham County staff and the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC) both noted that any proposal altering drainage to or across the state right-of-way will require a hydrologic analysis (25-year and 100-year storms) and potentially state permitting. The county’s stormwater and floodplain rules and Kentucky Division of Water/Army Corps permitting were repeatedly cited as likely requirements for any encroachment or wetland impact.

- Traffic: The applicant’s traffic consultant said the site entrance would operate at level-of-service B; the consultant said volumes at the entrance did not meet warrants for turn lanes and that, under Oldham County thresholds, no mitigation for roadway capacity would be required. County engineering noted trip-generation uncertainty for facilities of this scale and recommended further scoping with KYTC, including construction-phase traffic impacts.

- Fire, emergency response and hazardous materials: LaGrange Fire Department representatives said they had received no pre-application coordination from the developer, and they asked about fire suppression type, hydrant locations and diesel and battery storage. Fire staff said the department’s tallest ladder truck is 105 feet and that mutual aid from neighboring departments would be the typical response arrangement. The applicant said buildings would use predominantly water-based pre-action systems for data halls, with mist systems only if required for certain fuel or generator-related exposures. Questions about spent fire suppression water and how it is routed into detention basins were raised by county engineers.

- Environmental reconnaissance and habitat: The applicant said RES conducted site reconnaissance that identified waterways (ephemeral and perennial streams) and habitat areas. County staff noted some discrepancies between RES conclusions and public USGS mapping and asked for finalized environmental and stream delineation work to support permit applications.

Public concerns and appeals

Neighbors and property owners repeatedly raised concerns during the public comment portion. Questions included how much diesel fuel would be required during a prolonged outage, the number of tanker trucks needed to refill on-site storage, potential emissions and particulate pollution from extended generator use, possible impacts on local drinking water and aquatic habitat, wildlife impacts (participants named bald eagles and bat species), and overall emergency response capability.

One attorney representing landowners, Hank Graddy, notified the committee that an appeal of the conditional-use review had been filed and would be heard by the Board of Adjustments; he argued in public comment that "hyperscale data center" is not expressly listed in county zoning regulations and questioned whether the private-utility classification applies. Planning staff responded that challenges to use and zoning interpretation would be addressed in the Board of Adjustments hearing.

Staff directions and next steps

No permits were approved at the meeting. Planning staff provided a written list of corrections and items to add to the preliminary plan (dates, tree and landscape details, setbacks around a cemetery identified on the property, clarifications on addresses and ownership on adjacent parcels, zoning labels and required parking calculations). Multiple agencies asked the applicant to revise and resubmit plans for TRC review and to coordinate specific studies with the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, the Kentucky Division of Water and other state agencies as necessary. The applicant said it will provide additional materials on its website and respond to written questions; county staff said the application will follow the standard hearing and permitting path and that public notices and updates will be posted.

What remains unresolved

County staff listed outstanding items including final wetland/stream delineation and permitting needs, more detailed hydrologic analysis for 25- and 100-year storms if state right-of-way is impacted, final on-site sewage locations and septic sizing, a clearer inventory of fuel storage and fueling logistics, and a finalized trip-generation scope that accounts for construction traffic and multiple shift operations. The Board of Adjustments appeal regarding use classification remains scheduled as part of the county’s separate review process.

The Technical Review Committee will post agency comments and contact information on the county TRC page. The application will return to the county review process with updated plans and supplemental studies; regulatory approvals will depend on the outcomes of county, state and federal permitting reviews and on the Board of Adjustments determination about permitted uses under the zoning ordinance.