—parcels could host a data center today under the draft's 200 ft rule
—parcels qualify once lawful lot splits are counted, because the draft's rule moves when lot lines are redrawn
—homes would sit within 1,000 ft of a possible data center site
These are zone-compatible parcels: the sites where the geometry
allows a data center under the draft ordinance. Every site still requires
a Board of Zoning Appeals special exception, plus noise, vibration,
environmental, and utility-capacity review before anything is built.
The map
Where the draft would let one go
Pick a methodology, drag the setback, and see what qualifies. Every
layer is computed from the city's own GIS data by
published scripts.
Setback200 ft
Layers
I-2 zoning Buildable patch Building envelope Strict-eligible parcel Eligible parcel (building-based) City-counted parcel City-counted, but no building fits Your address
Your address
How close could a data center be to your home?
The city's numbers
The city counted 27 eligible parcels. Twelve of them can't actually host one.
The city published parcel counts without naming the parcels. Its totals
are a fingerprint, though, and working backward from the city's own
arithmetic this site identified all 27. Under the ordinance's own
50 ft yard setbacks, 9 of them
cannot hold a building of any size. Three more have no spot 200 ft
from the homes the city's measurement skipped. One is an active rail
corridor. The single parcel the city reported at 500 ft could hold
a building of about 26 by 26 feet.
27 parcels identified12 fail the draft's own test9 can't hold any building0 could put a building 1,000 ft from residential
Raise it to 600 feet. Better: 1,000 feet, measured to the building.
I am asking the Commission to amend §6.20.3.2.I in one of two ways.
At minimum, raise the property-line separation from 200 to
600 ft. Preferably, change what gets measured:
run the separation to the data-center building itself
and set it at 1,000 ft. The building-based rule
is the stronger protection and the cleaner law, and it still leaves
— viable industrial sites, named
below with their buildable envelopes.
The preferred rule fixes the eligible set.
The — qualifying sites are
knowable and publishable before a single application is filed.
Redrawing lot lines can't add or remove one, because the test runs
to the building's location, not to a boundary a developer can move.
Under any property-line rule, 600 ft included, the set moves
whenever lines are redrawn.
The distance is real.
1,000 ft measured to the building itself, verifiable at
permit review. For comparison, the draft's 200 ft property-line
rule guarantees only 250 ft between a data-center building and
the nearest residential property line; the 600 ft version
guarantees 650 ft.
No subdivision loophole.
Under a property-line rule, a developer can qualify a
non-compliant parcel by drawing a new lot line at the setback
contour. At 600 ft, — of the
— eligible parcels qualify only
through that maneuver. The building-based rule ends it.
Neither ask bans the use.
600 ft leaves — eligible
parcels; 1,000 ft to the building leaves
—. Compare a 1,000 ft
property-line rule, which would leave
— and invite a challenge that the
ordinance prohibits the use outright. Measuring to the building is
the only way to get 1,000 ft of protection with sites left
over.
Draft: 200 ft to the property line
Ask: 600 ft to the property line
Preferred: 1,000 ft to the building
Eligible parcels, existing lots
–
–
–
Eligible parcels, with lot splits
–
–
–
Lot splits change the count
Yes
Yes
No
Guaranteed distance, building to nearest residential line
250 ft
650 ft
1,000 ft
The six sites that survive the preferred rule
These are the parcels where a data-center building could stand at
least 1,000 ft from every residential use and district. Publish
the list in the ordinance record and there is nothing left to
litigate about where one can go.
Site
Owner
Parcel
Compliant building area
What it means for homes
Under the draft as written, — homes
would sit within 500 ft of a possible data-center site and
— within 1,000 ft. To compare the
draft and both asks fairly, the table below uses one yardstick for all
three: the distance from each home to the nearest spot a data-center
building could lawfully stand under that rule.
Homes within…
…draft (200 ft to the property line)
…ask (600 ft to the property line)
…preferred (1,000 ft to the building)
Distance from each of the city's —
dwelling address points to the nearest place a data-center building
could lawfully stand under each rule: eligible I-2 land after the
ordinance's own 50 ft yards and that rule's separation test,
including lots a developer could lawfully carve. Lower is better;
zeros are by construction, because under each rule no lawful building
spot can be closer to a home than the rule allows. Computed by
scripts/ask_exposure.py from the city's
address layer against the published eligibility geometry.