Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ordinance Section 10 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Leaport County director proposes Section 10 to require performance standards, disclosures for data centers
Summary
Staff introduced a proposed Section 10 ordinance to add water-resource stewardship and performance standards for high-technology uses (including data centers), asking for third-party verification of pre-development baselines, water-reuse disclosures and PFAS information; the draft is in committee with a July 10 meeting scheduled.
Leaport Countys storm water director introduced a proposed addition to the countys storm water ordinance — referred to in meeting materials as Section 10 — that would impose water-resource stewardship and performance standards on high-technology uses such as data centers.
The director said the draft would require several elements that developers of large, water-intensive facilities should disclose and meet: independent third-party pre-development baseline hydrology studies, performance standards to ensure net-positive hydrology, low-impact development and treatment designed to meet a water-quality volume standard, and disclosures about water reuse and consumption. The director also said the draft addresses construction dewatering authorizations and would require developers to disclose PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) information where relevant.
To protect county flood-control capacity and local mitigation, the draft would require that any wetlands providing flood control and receiving mitigation remain mitigated within the county rather than being mitigated in another jurisdiction. The ordinance language, as described to the board, also would require long-term operations and maintenance agreements that run with the land, inspection access easements, annual reconciliation and clear authority for county drainage review extending 75 feet from the bank of a drain.
The director said he had worked with plan-review staff and outside counsel on the draft and expected the plat committee to review it on July 10; if advanced, it would proceed to the plan commission for consideration. No formal vote or adoption of the ordinance occurred at the June 25 meeting; the director presented the policy idea for committee review and public vetting.
Board members and staff discussed the policy language and review plan but did not take a formal action to adopt the ordinance at the meeting. The proposed measures aim to provide a consistent, verified baseline and enforceable long-term obligations so that water-resource impacts and mitigation are transparent and remain effective over time.
