Oldham County board denies three appeals of planning directors private-utility ruling as moot

The Oldham County Board of Adjustments and Appeals on a voice vote denied three separate appeals that challenged the planning directors classification of a proposed data center as a "private utility," concluding the application those appeals targeted had been withdrawn and therefore the appeals were moot.

The appeals concerned a proposed hyperscale data center originally linked to 3557 North Highway 53 in LaGrange. Anna Barge, senior planner, told the board the appeals filed by Robert Houchins, Nana (Nana/Nate) Lampton, and Nathan and David Oberg (We Are Oldham County) all referenced the Highway 53 location and AG-1 zoning; staff later noted Western Hospitality Partners had withdrawn the 53 application and filed a new Technical Review and conditional-use application for a different parcel (DW Griffith Lane). Barge summarized staffs position that the withdrawal left the three appeals untimely or irrelevant to a live application.

Why it matters: The planning directors classification would determine whether a proposed data center is processed as a conditional use (requiring public hearings and conditions) or otherwise treated. Appellants argued the planning directors interpretation was unlawful because the zoning code does not expressly list "data centers" and because a private utility historically denotes services regulated or provided to the public. Western Hospitality Partners and planning staff argued the director applied the countys existing definitions in good faith and that the appeals were untimely given the public notice and community awareness earlier in the spring.

What the board decided: After argument from attorneys and testimony from experts and residents, the board voted to deny each appeal as moot because the conditional-use/technical-review application tied to 3557 North Highway 53 had been withdrawn. The three docket numbers referenced in the hearing materials (appeal dockets listed as OC25-020-21 and OC25-020-22 in the staff materials) were each denied on that basis. Board discussion also recognized the practical result: a new or amended application for a different parcel would restart notice deadlines and hearings and could be subject to fresh appeals.

Key arguments presented: - Appellants: Attorneys for the appellants and expert witnesses argued the countys zoning ordinance requires conditional uses to be "specifically named," cited Kentucky zoning statutes and case law, and said data centers are not a public-service utility regulated by the Public Service Commission and therefore should not be shoehorned into the "private utility" category without a legislative zoning amendment. Appellants additionally asserted they filed appeals within 30 days of receiving notice (they cited discovery by open-records and published filings in early May) and argued the directors verbal February determination (made in a private meeting, they said) did not constitute formal public notice. - Planning director and proponents: Planning Director Ryan Fisher described his research and outreach to other planning officials, federal/state guidance and industry definitions, and concluded the "private utility" definition in the Oldham County ordinance best fit the proposed data center and would place the project in the conditional-use process (not permit it by right). Counsel for Western Hospitality Partners and for the director urged the board to dismiss the appeals as untimely or moot and emphasized that the conditional-use process would allow public hearings and conditions.

Public comment: More than a dozen residents spoke during the public-comment portion, with most opposing the proposed data center and urging stricter local regulation. Speakers raised concerns about local land use compatibility, water and fuel storage, noise and environmental impact, property values, and a desire that the issue be handled by elected legislative bodies through zoning text amendments rather than by administrative interpretation.

Outcome and next steps: The board denied the three appeals as moot. Board members and staff noted the county is pursuing a zoning text amendment process to define and regulate data centers (see related coverage). If Western Hospitality or another applicant re-files for the same or a different parcel, that application would be processed on its merits under existing procedures and any new appeals would be governed by the notice deadlines and appeal rules once a new application is posted and accepted.