Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Code Data Centers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ames planners define 'data center,' adopt 100,000 ft² threshold for major review and ask Council for standards guidance
Summary
The Planning and Zoning Commission approved a new, broad definition of "data center," limited the use by right to GI and II industrial zones, and set a 100,000 ft² threshold to trigger major site review and public hearings; commissioners also asked City Council for guidance on additional standards such as utility impacts and sustainability.
The Ames City Planning and Zoning Commission adopted a zoning-text amendment to define "data center" and established a two-tier review system that treats facilities larger than 100,000 square feet as major projects subject to public hearings.
City staff said the current code's reference to "data processing" dates from earlier decades and does not capture modern, large-scale facilities, so staff proposed a new, inclusive definition covering hyperscale campuses and smaller edge or regional centers. "We're proposing a fairly expansive definition ... and we would also snag cryptocurrency, bitcoin mining types of activities," the planning director said during the presentation, explaining staff's goal was to address different scales and potential resource impacts.
Staff recommended limiting the use by right to General Industrial (GI) and Intensive Industrial (II) zones so data centers are sited where industrial scale is already anticipated and few residential uses abut those districts. Commissioners worried smaller "edge" facilities could be approved administratively without public input and proposed a two-tier system so larger projects would require hearings. A 100,000 ft² threshold was proposed and commissioners argued it is a clear cutoff that would capture hyperscale facilities while leaving typical regional or co-location centers to the minor (staff-level) process.
Commissioners raised concerns about utilities and local impacts such as electricity and water consumption, noise from cooling systems and long-term job counts. Several commissioners suggested the Council should consider whether the city should require or incentivize on-site measures such as water recirculation or renewable energy, while staff noted legal and practical limits on mandatory solar and emphasized the difference between zoning standards and incentive-based economic-development tools.
The commission approved the staff definition with the added 100,000 ft² threshold (motion passed by voice vote) and then approved a second motion asking the City Council to provide direction on long-term standards for data-center development (including whether to explore Article 13 special standards). The amendments make data centers a permitted use in GI and II and prohibit them in other districts unless a major review in II is authorized for projects above the threshold; Council review was requested to further study standards on utilities, noise, sustainability and siting.
Next steps include forwarding the commission recommendation to City Council for consideration and any code updates beyond the definition and tiered review.
