Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Progress Park Site Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wythe County Approves FluidStac Site Plan and Fencing for Progress Park; Developers Say Water Use Small
Summary
The board authorized Progress Park fencing and approved a developer's site plan for a FluidStac (Archipelago Compute LLC) data‑hall at Lot 35, after a presentation that said the applicant filed for 3,000 gallons/day of domestic water and preliminarily projects noise below the covenant 65 dB limit.
Get email alerts on the Progress Park Site Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wythe County supervisors voted to authorize the use of fencing required by Progress Park covenants and to approve a site plan submission from FluidStac (filed as Archipelago Compute LLC) for Lot 35 in Progress Park.
Developer John Penshorn, a civil engineer with Stantec, told the board that "an application was submitted to the town of Wytheville for water supply, for 3,000 gallons a day" for the site's domestic use, and described the project's two entrances, a substation, retaining walls and screening. Brian Dwyer, FluidStac senior civil engineer, said the company is completing noise modeling and that preliminary results put expected sound levels "well below the 65 decibels mark" required in the Progress Park covenant at 500 feet.
Staff review: County staff said they completed administrative review and returned two rounds of comments to the developer; staff recommended authorization of the specified fencing types (security, crash‑rated gates, and privacy slats) and asked the board to authorize staff to issue the county determination that the site plan conforms with Progress Park covenants. Supervisors approved both the fencing authorization and the site‑plan determination on roll‑call votes.
Outstanding items and conditions: Developers said the closed‑loop cooling system will require occasional top‑offs and that final noise and power reports would be submitted to county staff for review. Supervisors asked for layperson explanations of noise limits and for written follow‑up on final modeled decibel levels and power/load estimates.
The board's action allows the developer to proceed under the Progress Park covenant framework; staff will finalize the site‑plan determination and post the results to the county record.

