Douglas County hears Clarion diagnostic recommending future land-use map, infrastructure standards; data centers loom as policy choice

Clarion Associates presented a diagnostic review of Douglas County's zoning and subdivision regulations to the Board of County Commissioners on July 15, urging the county to develop a more detailed future land-use framework for unincorporated areas and to align development with infrastructure capacity. The presentation prompted extensive commissioner questions about priorities, gravel-road access, and how the county should approach data centers.

The review, given by Elizabeth Garvin and Gabby Hart of Clarion Associates, framed the report as a "diagnostic" rather than a set of code changes. "This is the beginning of a conversation," Garvin said, emphasizing the study aims to identify strengths, weaknesses and practical next steps. Hart told commissioners the review is organized around five focus areas, including a future land-use map for the unincorporated county, infrastructure and service standards, updates to zoning and development standards, improvements to review procedures and making regulations more user-friendly.

The consultants said a conceptual future land-use map would make decisions more predictable for property owners and staff and reduce the need to address fundamental land-use questions parcel by parcel. "A more detailed future land use framework could provide clear direction about the types and the intensities of development that may be appropriate in different locations in the unincorporated area," Hart said.

Commissioners pressed for a method to prioritize the report's many recommendations. Clarion recommended a triage approach in some cases, but advised starting with a conceptual future land-use map because it would clarify where rezoning, conditional use permits or administrative reviews are appropriate. As Clarion summarized, a clear map and policy framework would make subsequent regulatory changes — such as revised use tables, landscaping standards and site-plan review procedures — more effective and administrable.

Members raised questions about impacts on existing businesses on gravel roads. A commissioner worried that limiting higher-intensity uses to paved-road locations could create hardships for family businesses in rural districts. Clarion replied that code changes typically affect future development; existing lawful uses would often remain legal but could become "nonconforming." The consultants said targeted, context-sensitive tools and, in some cases, funding solutions would be required where infrastructure — road surfacing, drainage, water and fire protection — is a limiting factor.

Data centers and battery-energy storage prompted the most pointed exchanges. Commissioners asked whether Clarion's report recommends specific prohibitions or moratoria. Garvin and Hart said the diagnostic does not prescribe policy on particular uses; instead, it identifies tools the county could use, including a prohibited-uses table or explicit infrastructure thresholds. "You would need policy guidance first," Garvin said, "and then you would draft regulations." County staff added that battery-energy storage has been prioritized for follow-up research because parts of that regulatory work are already in draft form; data-center policy will require a broader policy discussion.

Public commenter John noted that the City of Lawrence approved a two-year moratorium on data centers the night before and urged commissioners to consider consistent regional approaches. County staff later clarified that Douglas County's current code does not expressly allow data centers in unincorporated areas, meaning there is no application intake for such projects until the board decides otherwise.

Zoning and codes director Tanya Voigt and other staff told the board the diagnostic validated daily operational challenges and suggested beginning with smaller, high-impact changes that can be implemented quickly — for example, explicitly tying infrastructure expectations to rezones and certain applications. Staff recommended a follow-up work session in roughly 60–75 days so commissioners can identify priorities and help scope phase-two drafting work.

The board did not take formal action on code changes at the July 15 meeting; commissioners directed staff to schedule additional work sessions and to return with more research and implementation options. Staff and consultants said any code updates would require extensive public engagement and coordination with incorporated cities on edge-area planning.