Jefferson County committee reviews draft rules for data centers, eyes strict buffers, noise and water controls

Jefferson County staff on Monday presented a comprehensive draft of regulations intended to govern data centers proposed in the county’s unincorporated areas, stressing the rules are proactive and would not apply inside the cities of Festus or Pacific.

Mitch, the county staff presenter, told the Economic Development and Ordinance Committee the draft places data centers in Planned Business and Planned Industrial zoning as ‘‘per approved plan’’ uses that would require a development plan, a public hearing before the planning commission and legislative approval by the county council. ‘‘There is no project. There is no application. This is being done proactively,’’ he said.

The draft would set minimum performance standards for new data centers, require an environmental and community-impact analysis with each application, and adopt NAICS definitions so ‘‘there is no question as to what a data center is.’’ Mitch said the draft includes a series of design and operational controls—buffers and setbacks, landscaping with native Missouri species, lighting limits that meet Illuminating Engineering Society standards, and facade treatments facing parking areas.

On buffers and setbacks, staff showed examples for 10-, 50- and 100‑acre sites and recommended a common foundation of a 100‑foot landscape buffer and a 200‑foot structure setback for uses adjoining residential property. The draft already reduces some buffer elements where a data center adjoins nonresidential uses; staff proposed codifying that reduction so the standard is consistent across buffers and setbacks.

Noise and low-frequency limits are a central feature. The draft sets daytime and nighttime decibel caps, separate limits for low-frequency (DBC) components, and requires emergency diesel generators to be in sound‑attenuating enclosures. Mitch said the ordinance includes post-construction compliance testing and continuous sound monitoring at property lines where the adjoining use is residential; ‘‘if there’s an exceedance, it’s a corrective action,’’ he said.

The draft also addresses energy and air quality. Staff proposed a ‘‘tier 4’’ energy approach that would require developers to demonstrate use of battery energy storage systems (BESS) and staff suggested a 40 percent on-site renewable contribution target (for example, solar) tied to operational demand, subject to council direction. An air‑quality impact assessment by a qualified professional would be required to model diesel emissions, refrigerants, construction-phase emissions and relevant pollutants, with semiannual reporting and the county’s right to third-party audits.

Water protections were emphasized. The draft requires connection to public water and sewer; private wells would not be allowed absent a deviation request. Developers must disclose cooling technology and maximum daily water demand and demonstrate sufficient capacity from the supplying public water district and no adverse aquifer impacts. Committee members pressed staff to prohibit once‑through cooling and to prefer closed‑loop or other low‑evaporation systems.

The ordinance would require site‑closure and decommissioning plans with financial assurances—performance bonds or escrow—that survive ownership transfers. Staff recommended updating cost estimates every five years and providing the county the right of entry for inspections during remediation.

Staff also put forward a template for community benefit agreements (CBAs). Under the draft, a CBA would begin at first building permit and run for the life of the facility or 30 years, whichever is longer; it would require an annual community benefit payment indexed to a regional CPI and allow eligible uses such as parks, roads and public safety. Mitch said the CBA should be flexible enough for project-level negotiation but include minimum protections for residents.

Workforce provisions attracted extended discussion. The draft sets an aspirational goal that at least 50 percent of construction labor hours be performed by Jefferson County residents and that remaining hours come from the St. Louis metropolitan region, with reductions allowed if the goal proves unattainable after a good‑faith effort; registered apprenticeships are required where available. Mitch said the county will encourage partnerships with Jefferson College and local high schools to build capacity.

Residents and outside experts who addressed the committee during public comment urged stronger protections in several areas. Alan Leaderbrand asked for larger setbacks—500 feet for rezoned parcels—and stiffer, enforceable fines, saying ‘‘penalties need to be established’’ so large corporations cannot treat small fines as a cost of doing business. Clarissa Eaton called for independent, third‑party impact studies and continuous monitoring of emissions; she said companies ‘‘got the money, they need to pay it.’’ Other speakers raised concerns about long‑term expansion oversight, utility reliability, and whether CBAs create stakeholder groups that would advocate for projects because they benefit from them.

The committee asked staff to tighten language on adjacency reductions, clarify emergency‑use limits for generators, refine water‑use language (including a prohibition on once‑through cooling), and specify enforcement and fines. Mitch said staff will revise the draft and bring additional detail back to the committee; members agreed to schedule a follow-up meeting for Wednesday, Feb. 18 at 3 p.m. The committee voted by voice to set that date and then adjourned.

No ordinance was adopted at the meeting; the draft will be revised and re‑posted for further committee consideration and the planning commission public hearing schedule described by staff.