Flagstaff directs staff to draft data center zoning code with conditional-use and prohibition options

6 00008 which is the data c center's land use and I will turn to staff to hi speak Tiffany Antel zoning code manager here today to talk about a zoning code amendment for data center land use. Um, just as a precursor as to the why we're doing this, recently we were asked as part of a survey just generally going throughout the state, the league had asked us how we regulated data centers um, and you know whether they were permitted, what kind of permits or or code we applied to.

As we were answering that survey, we realized, you know, we probably had a bigger hole in our code than we wanted to leave open. So, right now, when you look um for land uses, I'm going to go to the next slide just really quickly and I'll come back to this. When you look at the list of uses in a zoning district, any use that's generally not listed would not be permitted. However, there are a series of land uses that are very broad and encompass many uses, especially in our industrial zones.

when we would look to so as when we are as staff when we're asked to apply a specific land use if we don't see it immediately listed we look to see if it falls within the parameters of another land use.

When doing that research, we determined that data center would fall under the land use of heavy general industrial, which is our current definition is construction, manufacturing transportation and public utilities and those uses that may have severe potential for negative impact on any uses located relatively close to to them. differs from light industrial uses and that it includes uses that require unenclosed structures that are large, tall, and unsightly such as concrete batching plants.

These uses also have the potential for generation of dust, noise, and odor and may involve large amounts of exterior storage. Because of their scale, they are unlike they are likely to have a regional impact. This term specifically includes but is not limited to the following uses of which one of those uses is utility production or processing facilities but not offices or transmission or distribution.

So it's easy to see that if somebody came forward with a data center they could easily try to fit under this definition. uh understanding that we had this um so again going back to uh we do not have any applications currently for a data center. This came as a request for us to answer a survey question and realizing that we probably had a bit bigger gap than we wanted to.

Um, and like I said, it is generally the case that any land use not listed is not permitted, but I just don't want anybody to assume here that there aren't these broader categories of land use. And it always takes a a second look, right? So, I think there is some misinformation out there that we currently don't allow data centers and that is not correct. So, uh, data centers are currently allowed.

um they would be allowed as a permitted use under that heavy general industrial land use in the heavy industrial zone and the heavy industrial open zone and they would be permitted with a conditional use permit in the late industrial zone. There are also no specific use standards to apply to a heavy industrial land use. So it's hard to apply specific to use standards when you conglomerate or group large amounts of of uses together.

However, our conditional use permit process does require a series of it's really three findings that's broken into about actually 26 different findings for land use. So, our conditional use permit findings are pretty good in in um in most cases in dealing with or mitigating what are considered impacts.

Um, I would also point out that in general, the heavy industrial zoning district encompasses about five total parcels in Flagstaff is a very limited number of parcels of which the vast majority have already been developed. So with that, um, the lack of specific use standards for heavy general industrial uses can make it challenging to ensure that all potential impacts are properly mitigated.

Staff's goal is to permit land uses and zones appropriate to their intensity and to apply standards that address and offset potential impacts. It's not our intention to outright ban uses. staff is concerned that an outright prohibition on data centers may increase the risk of future state level preeemption. We know that the reason that the league was looking at this is because there's likely going to be state legislation. There's a lot of general conversation around the state about data centers.

Um so we just want to make sure that we're on top of this and that we regulate it in regards to our existing goals and policies in our regional plan. with that the proposal. I'm going to start with the latter part of the code. The latter part of the code would be the definition. The only part of this that would be defined in the definitions is that data center. I pulled up this exceptions piece because I think it's really important to see the exception to understand the definition.

The definition of data center, a facility or portion of a building used to house computer systems, servers, and associated infrastructure for the storage processing management or distribution of digital data. Data centers may include equipment for power distribution, backup power generation, cooling, fire suppression, and security.

The exception would be data centers that are ancillary to another primary land use are permitted by right in all zones if they occupy no more than 10% of the building footprint are used to serve the enterprise functions of the primary land use and are not housed in a separate standalone structure on a parcel. For example, we have a server room in this building that is technically a data center.

So we have to be able to allow NAU, NAH, Gore, the city hall, we all have ser we all have data centers located on site for the purpose of the users of this building. Uh the next section would be to add this land use to the table of allowed uses. So it would only be a conditional use permit in the heavy industrial and heavy industrial open zone. So how does that change? It becomes more restrictive.

So it would not be allowed at all in the light industrial zone with a conditional use permit and would not be permitted by right in any zone. Would only be a conditional use permit in the heavy industrial and heavy industrial open. I need to apologize. There is a small typo in my staff report. It's about the third time I reference a zoning district.

So, out of the 10 times I referenced the industrial zoning district, I had a hold over from the staff report I cut and pasted from that let references the public facility zone. I want you to know that's a typo. In no way, shape, or form are we considering data centers in the public facility zone. If anybody ever has a concern about a typo in a staff report, please feel free to reach out and contact me. Happy to address that those questions directly. Um, next up is the specific to use standards.

So, we would be adding specific to use standards for data center. Um, those would include the following and I'm just going to go through these one by one. The general requirements would be that development site shall be designed in accordance with all of our site planning design standards. Generally, industrial developments are exempt from these standards. But in this case, we would want the this particular land use to meet these standards. This includes store uh how parking lots are arranged.

This includes um just generally how buildings are oriented on a site. Uh it's a broad breath brush of requirements. Buildings shall be designed to reduce perceived mass through architectural architectural articulation, variation in facade materials or modulation of building planes as required in the architectural design standards. Again, industrial uses are not typically required to meet architectural design standards, but in this case, we would want them to.

Mechanical, electrical, and cooling equipment shall be fully enclosed or screened from view from rights of ways or adjacent properties. Outdoor storage of equipment or materials shall be prohibited except during permitted construction or maintenance activities. Perimeter fencing, if provided, shall be decorative and integrated with site landscaping.

Noise generated by all on-site operations, including cooling equipment and generators, shall not exceed a maximum DBA of 72 during the daytime and 65 dBA during the nighttime at the property line. Generator and generator use must be in compliance with all applicable state and federal regulations. If a data center uses diesel generation generators, only tier four or newer generators are permitted.

Backup generators shall be used solely for emergency operations, testing, and maintenance and shall not serve as a primary power source. Generator testing shall be limited to daytime hours and scheduled to minimize impacts on adjacent uses. General uh continuing with general requirements, fuel storage and handling shall require shall comply with all applicable fire building environmental regulations.

Cooling towers, chillers, and related equipment shall be screened and designed to minimize noise, plume visibility, and visual impacts. Hazardous materials shall be limited to those necessary for operation and shall be stored and handled in accordance with applicable regulations. Data centers shall not emit smoke, dust orders or vibration detectable beyond the property boundary except during emergency generation generator operation.

And next up would be a series of requirements for conditional use permits. Again, we like to try to make the code as clear and concise for all including the applicants as well as those reviewing them. So there's an additional level of information knowing that the big baseline concerns that fall through about data centers, they generally are about energy use, about noise, about design, and about water use.

Um the a baseline noise study establishing existing noise levels prior to project construction and a noise contour exhibit depicting the anticipated noise levels to be generated by the data center would be a requirement of that conditional use permit. One of the heavy industrial land pieces we have is a directly adjacent to a residential subdivision. In a beautiful magical world, I would change that scenario, but unfortunately I cannot.

Um, and so that is of utmost concern knowing that that there is that vulnerability in our community. Can you tell us where that's located? It's it it's basically adjacent to smoke rise. An assessment of current and future en energy needs for the site would need to be provided. Identification of the energy sources for the proposed data center and documentation from the utility providers affirming sufficient power exists to serve the site.

The applicant must include an estimate of annual annual energy consumption over all phases of the project, expected peak demand, and the percentage of energy demands that will be met by carbon-f free energy during each year of project operations.

The use of 100% renewable energy for all data center energy needs is preferred and is attainable through methods including but not limited to on-site generation, virtual power purchase agreements, and purchasing rerecks through electric utility providers. If we could require it, we would. We cannot. An estimate of peak day and annual water consumption and water waste water discharge for the site would be required. This is typical. We do require whiss for most developments.

A whissa is a water sewer impact analysis. Uh in that we would include identification of the source of water for the proposed data source and documentation from the water utility provider affirming sufficient water resources to serve the data center. A water and sewer impact analysis must be approved by the water services division. The use of 100% non-pottable and/or recycled water for all data center needs is preferred. Six, identification and concentration of constituents and waste water.

And I did have to learn constituents does not refer to people. It is actually contaminants and the wastewater stream that may have a negative uh effects on the publiclyowned treatment facility. and a narrative that describes how the proposed devel data center will comply with each of the requirements of this section. Um, with that, that's the sum total of the synopsis of the why we're doing this text amendment and what the proposed text amendment does.

Um, this this is our schedule for public hearing process. So, March 11th is today. This is our work session. We'll be back in two weeks for a public hearing. No typos this time. And uh we will have our potential council public hearing on April 7th with a potential city council public hearing which would be second read of ordinance and possible adoption on April 21st. Um these are the required findings that need to be met for a zoning code text amendment.

It needs to be in conformance with the general plan. At the next time around, I will provide you with all of the goals and policies from the regional plan, and that will be the 2030 plan that support um this text amendment. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare. And the proposed amendment is internally consistent with other applicable provisions of the zoning code.

And with that, I'm happy to answer any questions, comments, or take any suggestions you have on this amendment. Okay. So, I'm going to start with a question and then I'll go to other commission members. So, other than the um where are all the heavy industrial and heavy industrial open zones? So, the heavy industrial pieces that I can list off the top of my head, there is the parcel that is adjacent to the smoke r. It's like a there's a a newer subdivision off of smoke rise.

It's called the Trail N subdivision. And then there is a piece of uh heavy industrial land located there. Um the sheriff's facility located near um the sheriff's and the city's leaf is another area where there's heavy industrial. Again, those land areas are used. Uh there is a piece of heavy industrial that we maybe we saw soils restoration. It's out near the city's uh wastewater treatment facility out by um Picture Canyon. That's the big sum total of heavy industrial land in the city.

But if necessary, I can come back with a map that shows I I've done this I've done this calculation before in terms of heavy industrial. is very limited because that that's why we actually put a heavy industrial land use as a conditional use permit in the industrial because there were land uses that need to be um accommodated that we couldn't potent we couldn't accommodate it previously because of the land base of heavy industrial so limited. Okay. Thank you. Um Commissioner Maher.

Uh thanks Tiffany. Um so on that question right I I I get the sense that um the um property the the zoning code type is really driven by a matter of scale with these um data centers. Um so that's why we're heading towards the heavy industrial type use. I can envision a type of development that may fit the criteria within um a light industrial um zone, you know, if they meet all the other conditions, noise and and size requirements, what have you.

Um why are we excluding the light industrial category? Sure. Uh thank you so much for that question. Um technologies are ever changing. Uh there is a lot of concern or public concern for data centers. Um and the fact that there are large heavy water and energy users especially um noise would probably I think be third on the list for most. It it depends on who you are and how close you live to them.

Our industrial zoning our light industrial zoning districts are vast and widespread and they tend to intermix more commonly with regular commercial and residential land uses. And the concern would be um it would be harder to mitigate the potential of a much larger selection. Now, as technologies change and people come forward, I could see there absolutely being a need to come back in and have this conversation again because I think that's the expectation.

As more and more places are sort of narrowing in on this land use and the concerns that this land use generate, more and more of these land uses are being brought about with recycled water, with um reduced energy uses. And so those may change our minds in terms of how we want to proceed with managing these land uses in Flagstaff. Thank you for that. So that gets to my second question.

Um so understanding that there is a case where um where this heavy industrial does intersect um with residential use uh and knowing that these data centers can hum constantly. Uh so what is the would the city's plan be to monitor and ultimately enforce um some noise that does extend beyond um the the property itself? Thank you so much. So our goal would be to create a baseline of what that noise coming from the site is at the beginning.

We set a standard of what we expect that noise level to be at the property line and then we ask the developer to also project what their ongoing noise would be so that it could be evaluated as part of that conditional use permit. Um if then that gives clear indication to a developer that if they can't meet those standards that that site might not be the right site for them.

Um and then from there if they're in violation of the code or any of the conditions applied to a conditional use permit we would proceed with code compliance. I I think we would not want to be in that situation though. You don't want to go you don't want to have somebody come to the extent of building a facility and then saying you're a problem. That's why we're trying to be proactive here. Thank you for that. I'll have another some more questions, but I'll let the other commissioners weigh in.

Okay, Commissioner Norton. First of all, thanks for addressing sort of the origin story of why this is here. Um, because [clears throat] at a base level, I wonder why this use would even be consistent with our general plan and our regional plan. um because it wouldn't certainly meet any of the goals, policies, or the priorities that are set.

Which also brings me to if we were to wait and to adopt this after the brand new regional plan was adopted, it might give us some more backing and more meat behind it that such a thing would not meet our regional plan, not meet our general plan. It it really disappoints me that we're not able to say this is a use that is not compatible within city limits. Um so be it becomes an if then for me if that has been exhausted. If we have no other choice, we cannot forbid it.

We cannot say it's just not a compatible use within city limits. um then yes, this I'm glad to see that the the conditional use process and the metrics that they would have to meet has been beefed up.

Um [clears throat] because what I have what I take issue with is conditional use permits and and this has sort of been how it's been presented as long as I've been on this commission which is four years is CUP's come they say well it's a public process it's a it's guard rails it'll work but then when one comes to us we're reminded that it's a permitted use and it's really hard to disprove to you and say no to a conditional use permit.

My other concern as we trickle down that rabbit hole is we here and PNZ are the ones that grant conditional use permits. We're volunteer advisory unelected people that could be anywhere from four to seven of us sitting here at any given time with a varying degree of expertise, knowledge, interest, and commitment. That concerns me.

I would hope that something this major, regardless of whatever decision PNZ put forward, if a data center were to come forward um and need a P a C, that council would pick it up one way or the other and continue to to to discuss it. Um so this whole process um makes me very uncomfortable that we don't have a lot to stand on. Um, so I want to clarify in no way, shape, or form do I mean to to say that you can't preclude a land use. I mean, we don't have to do this.

We don't have to do this text amendment. However, if we don't do this text amendment, data centers are still allowed under the current zoning code. So, what we're telling you is we've already found a vulnerability in terms of our zoning code in this land use. Um, and that we want to create some very specific standards. We believe that as staff prohibiting the land use would end us up in a worse place than we are today.

So if a data center does approach us, we would still have to work with that data center, right? We do have folks that show up with land uses all of the time that don't fit perfectly into the zoning code and we need to work with those folks, right? Anybody can come in and request a zoning code text amendment. they can do all kinds of there's all kinds of ways that something could eventually come through the door. Um this is a first sort of stepping stone.

Uh the the more I think we're workable with this land use in light of the current um political climate, it may be in our best interest to not be fully exclude the land use and then be dealt a preeemption that may that mandates this land use. So already having if you're ahead of the game, you can be better in a much better position if a preeemption comes down the line. Depends on how those legislative rules are written. But again, we can delay until the next regional plan.

I, you know, in terms of regional plan, I think that there are a lot of goals and policies that talk about water use and but they're all about mitigating. And again, the zoning code is a tool to implement the regional plan. It reflects what the regional plan and those goals and policies are and the elements of the code are meant to mitigate those things. Lastly, conditional use permit is a permitted use.

The conditional use permit process is meant to deal with uses that need a higher level of review that probably need a higher level of mitigation. This use land use falls perfectly within that category. The conditional use permit process for the most part is reviewed by the planning and zoning commission. However, the city council can upon request within 10 days review any conditional use permit that they choose that they would like to review.

So that should try to take some of the alleviation of right because every conditional use permit if it got ran through council we would slow down a de a a chain of development process pretty substantially and for a lot of things that maybe council isn't interested in seeing but council always have that has that choice and if something was pretty contentious or concerning I'm sure council would have its ears and eyes on that particular application. So that should try to alleviate that concern.

But again, if if your if your suggestion to council is to just, you know, it could be a not do anything or change the code to be more prohibitive, you know, that you can absolutely make that recommendation. Staff is just saying that it might put us in a more difficult spot. That's all.

Then on on that line on the C process, um what I what I see sometimes is obviously in an undeveloped area or a green field area, let's say all these new parts of the city come to be developed, obviously somebody could ask for a resoning. Um so that's a red flag to me. Um and it's harder to take issue with some of the things in the cup checklist when they have no neighbors at the time. They're coming in and there's nobody around them to be affected.

I think the cup process and the guidelines as they are, not even with the the additional suggestions that you're making today, um you know, they work for infill projects. They don't necessarily work um for undeveloped areas, which is kind of which was why I took issue like with a golf course that we approved two months ago. Um, it's hard to say it's a problem when there's nobody around to be affected by it because it's the first to go in.

Well, somebody could come in and buy land, reszone it, and be the first in the area and it's a data center. Um, and then um I I'll I'll stop there. I I have some more more um zoned in u points with regard to under the requirements under the new C, but I'll let the others make their comments. Commissioner Shei, Madam Chair, staff, um I'm of the opinion that to be proactive with our current legislature in Phoenix is the way to go.

Um considering what they've done with a lot of the other regulations, which I've been here for 45 years doing this stuff, and I had never seen the legislature get so involved in zoning um cases. So, I think it is good to be proactive and appar um do some research. I read the Arizona Republic every day and other communities in the Phoenix metro area are redoing their zoning codes and they probably got the same survey you did.

and um Chandler, which is interesting, which is much more um um industrial oriented as well. You know, for the newer technologies, they have a fairly strict ordinance and they I think did what we did. I couldn't find a lot of information and they're only allowed in heavy industrial with the conditional use permit. So, it sounds like, you know, when you're doing a new ordinance, what are other people doing? What's going on? So, I was happy to see some of that.

Now, it was interesting some of the other things, and you may have considered it, but I wondered um some of the other requirements in Chandler and I think it was Gilbert. I couldn't find that article that I read, but um just a general Google search, it came up with some of the other requirements. One was mandatory sound attenuating walls.

Um the other was large setbacks from industrial 500 to a,000 feet and that may be the buildings themselves which might mitigate um like smoke rise and some of that if the buildings go in you still have to have large setbacks. The third thing was they're requiring closed loop cooling water systems and I think that goes back into the recirculation. I'm not sure exactly what that entails, but apparently that's one of the conditions that some of people are looking at.

And the third thing was, which surprised me, was decommissioning these plants. I don't know what happens at the end of the day, but some cities are looking at that. So, um, those are just the general comments I had on this. I agree. Once you get into um prohibiting uses, you get into legal challenges, all kinds of stuff. And you're right, anybody can come in, file a zoning case to reszone something with a use. So, um granted, we can look at some of the conditional use permit requirements.

I would agree with that and see there might be some more stringent things we can do, but at least that gives you another level of um review. That's all I had right now. Thank you, Commissioner Luki. Thank you for that report. It was really, I thought, very thoughtful. Um hopefully we're going to see a change in 2026.

I mean, I I see what you're saying that we're concerned with the legislature because of what they've done with the zoning codes and forcing us to do forplexes in residential neighborhoods and forcing us to take Airbnbs and all that. So, I can see where that question is coming from, but there are actually two bills already proposed this session about power plants on site for these types of facilities.

So that I mean that that is the legislature does preempt us in lots of different ways and it's not just about the middle housing or ADUs but just already on the table this year there are there is some legislation being considered. Well, so and with with that thought then I can see the strategy is to um cover our bases as much as possible and and come up with these uh things.

So I think what you were talking about some of the things I'd want us to look at as a city would be the staffing for enforcement um you know for these noise and everything. Say that again. The sta who who in the staff would be the enforcement for some of these things. our code compliance division and we have enough people. Well, we currently have four code compliance positions.

I believe there's a budget request this year for another, but it I mean I wouldn't expect that one data center would take away all of the work of one or of the entire staff. Okay. And then the other thing is of course for me the water contracts. Um, now I mean depending on what they're using, if it's potable water or if it's the recycled water, I know we do contracts. If it was recycled water, if they got to that point, I'd want it limited as much as possible. You know what I'm saying?

So, I think that would be another [clears throat] deterrent if they don't have a consistent uh water thing. So, I guess all those things I'm just bringing up and I'm sure the attorneys working with you guys and trying to figure out the best strategy and that's what I really see at this point. It's a strategy game, right? And you have to remember as a utility we're also as a water utility we're also regulated by the corporation commission as well. So, there's another interesting layer.

[snorts] So Tiffany, um thank you again for the report that you gave and um Mike, I do have a concern because you know the heavy you you said the smoke rise trail end area is close but I think the sheriff and city police was one of the places you said and that seems to be close to um Oh yeah to residents but it's developed.

So the difference is the the facility located close to smoke rise it while it's sort of developed it's like a rock crushing it's a contractor yard it it that one could be much more easily or readily redeveloped.

redeveloping the leaf and the jail and the court facilities that are within that village is unlikely and they also are owned by um city county entities which also limits their land use and then the you said near the wastewater plant by picture canyon correct and that concerns me too because if that you know the noise and I mean people are just enjoying Picture Canyon now um in the last what five years since it's or maybe it's more than five but since it's been open.

Um so that does concern me as well um that all those locations are near residents or where residents are highly visiting. Um, but I like Commissioner Shehi's um maybe additions to this that of the research that she did and maybe including some of those conditions as well. I I do like that if we can try to put some of those conditions in there. Um, yeah, I think that's all I have and I'll go to Commissioner Maher. Uh thank you chair.

So on the topic of water, the uh closed loop system aside, um when the code says that non-portable water is preferred, it feels a little squishy to me. Um so under what specific circumstances would the city approve a cup that uses quotable water? Well, I mean, we would have to we would have to be able to show that we have we would have to know first of all what the water consumption use would be from a facility.

So, what the proposed water consumption use and whether or not we have water resources available to serve that. So, a lot of times, for example, when we're working with a subdivision or new development, um they may have to bring we may need to bring new wells online in order to serve that use. um we may need to put additional storage facilities online to renew that use.

Um I you know one of the suggestions so Morirana for example does actually have a prohibition that says um you can't use city water and that one is a lot tougher. Uh the legalities of some of those things and I'm I'm not a lawyer is a little bit tougher. Again, like I said, mandated by the corporation commission. So really what it does comes down to is, you know, do we have the water to serve that facility?

And we can make that determination as part of the conditional use permit through a water sewer impact analysis, but it is calling out to the applicant that recycled water would be the preferred scenario. um trying to call out the exact systems can be sometimes limiting. I'm totally fine with adding or including that language. Um again, because technology changes and you have to change code anyway to adjust the technology.

So if the closed loop loop system is what's best, I'll come from go from here and I'll check with water services. Um you know, water services was a great assist in helping to draft this. Uh, you know, we looked at what different water companies were doing in terms of the water with um the corporation commission and just even trying to determine what large water users are and there's nothing really definitive across the state that's really helpful.

Um, but a lot of a lot [snorts] of water service providers have worked with the corporation commission to come up with individual I just I don't have that framework and it's falling outside of the zoning code. So what we can deal with is telling people that per you know recycled or non-pottable would be our preferred. It's not saying that we won't. I mean different decisions can be made on different days. So sure.

So it seems you don't have wouldn't have that same sort of lever to pull on the energy side but this very similar language on the energy side in terms of uh renewable energy. Um so can you talk a little bit about what conditions Sure. how what the process might be with with that process as well. Sure. Uh so that utility provider falls outside of our jurisdiction and our authority specifically.

So first and foremost is reaching out to that utility provider and ensuring that they have the resources to adequately service that facility um within that vicinity. Right? It could mean bringing additional transmission lines. Um, in some locations they're actually installing power plants themselves. Um, so there's a lot that goes into the energy production of this. Um, you know, supporting this with renewable energy as our preferred that is in alignment with our goals and policies in the city.

Um, and trying to manage what sort of the energy needs are across the city. Um so you know if something taxes or overburdens the system in one location how c how do we manage how do we prevent some of the conditions that happen in other locations when energy demands that one is a little bit harder for us and a little bit nebulous because we don't manage that utility.

So, we will ultimately have less control, but we're looking for um our other local utility providers to give us feedback on whether or not they can serve or how much infrastructure would have to be added in order to service a particular data center if one was requested. Okay. So let's say the uh utility the the utility provider would could provide you know 80% renewable um with the 20 other 20%.

So so if they're if they're if they're securing their renewable energy directly from utility would it still meet the uh qualifications? Would it would it satisfy staff in this regard? So we tried to give um alternatives here in the language, right? It could be the production of renewable on-site. It could be um that virtual power purchase agreement. So we do that as the city, right?

Um you choose to buy green energy, you pay at a premium to to do that or the purchasing of Rex, um which is also very similar. So, um, it's it's basically paying and ensuring that you're putting back into the system energy that's coming from renewable sources. And if it helps, I can have sustainability here when we do the next round of the text amendment. Drafted this language. Thank you. Okay. And and we can't make that required instead of preferred. So, requiring renewable energy.

We can't do that. We would do that all of the time, wouldn't we? [laughter] We can't require a project to be all electric is is the state man. I'm you know can have any of these data centers been um do do any data centers have solar as their number one energy provider. Yes. And wind. I don't know about wind. You might use wind and energy wind and solar together.

um because they tend to produce at different I mean no matter what you're gonna you're solar is never going to provide your entire load at any one time but it's meant to offset the impact of what that particular use is needing. Okay. And Commissioner Norton's next. Yeah. I'm going to revisit the water thing too.

I mean, if for the non-potable or or reclaimed, you know, and we listened to cases just recently with regarding water contracts, they were pretty much 100% contracted during the summer for reclaimed water in the city. Everything going out was purchased. Um, so, you know, that I mean, if that results in being able to say there's no water to for you to purchase, we are already contracted out. Well, then maybe that solves the problem there. I don't know. But I mean, that that does concern me.

Um that, you know, we're offering non, you know, reclaimed water, but we really at this point in time don't have any to offer. Um [clears throat] and then on on um energy sources, one of the things that I read about um as an aside, you know, I really appreciate that some of the public that put out onto various platforms that this was coming up because it gave gave me a few more days to do my homework and do some research.

Um, and as far as power, um, there were some recommendations that, you know, they have contracts with the power provider that requires that they're paying a certain rate or they're paying so that none of it bleeds over onto businesses and residential. That's talking about the rerecks. Talking about the what? The the rerecks. The the so purchasing those wrecks. So, it's a power purchase agreement through the utility company. So, we're giving you the wide variety of ways.

So, I'm trying to explain this. Um, so it's unlikely that I mean it's unlikely that a data center I I don't know, right? Because I I don't know this. We're talking about something that's imaginary and I don't have in front of me and I don't have a specified energy use. But if say if you came in with a facility that required more energy than you can prod produce on site, there are other ways to purchase renewable energy that isn't generated on your site.

And these other two or that virtual power purchase agreement or the wreck is another way to go about you saying you're you're paying for renewable energy even though it's not produc like you can't see the physical wind or solar happening on site if that makes sense. Yeah. Now, I think what what I'm trying to get at is with regard to APS, I mean, I've already there's we have issues with them wanting to raise rates significantly.

If they're saying, "Yes, we can bring power to Flagstaff to generate, you know, this this data center," at what point does it bleed over into the cost to residents and businesses? How do we protect that?

just to give this update because it is kind of a sort of separate conversation um in terms of what APS can provide and what their rates are and those kinds of things because again, you know, it's a lot of that is outside of our um ability to regulate and they're regulated by the corporation commission. Uh there will be a presentation upcoming at city council on a work session. Um and I believe there is a presentation by APS that talks about these large energy users. So stay tuned. Okay.

And actually speaking of APS, I noticed on the council agenda for next Tuesday night, they're going to be talking about the ability for APS to do shutdowns during wind events to prevent fire risk similar to what they do in California. So when a data center cannot lose power, that's why they have the diesel backups. They have the diesel backups, a gas backup, a battery backup, you know, whatever. But um to me that that was a red flag.

But um the most um I think disturbing research that I came across was with regard to noise. Um and and it's not so much the audible noise, but there's the noise that they call infran noise that's below 20 dB. That's those low-level vibrations that cause people to not feel well. and that there there are lots of lawsuits and issues going around throughout the country with with regard to that and um that those those low-level infra noise sound waves travel very slowly. They travel long distances.

They can go hundreds of miles through obstacles. We're our city is 66 square miles and maybe 10 or 15 miles, you know, in width here or there. Anybody living in Flagstaff is potentially going to feel that infr noiseise. And I think the the decibb that are acceptable to me are are too are too high.

Um when I when I did some research as to okay what what does you know uh 65 to 72 is classified at and it's classified as moderate to very loud sits on the border of annoyance and generally considered unsafe for short-term and harmful for extended terms. So that's that's our maximum that we're allowing which I think is is too high. But I'm also really concerned um with the new information that's coming out and it needs to be more studied.

There is info out there um independent investigators kind of thing that are measuring sound levels at these data centers throughout the United States and it's that lowle um that really can't be heard um but can only be felt and makes people feel unwell. Um have you found regulations that control that? Not not not yet. Not that I have found, but I mean that's where they're people are taking issue with with these. Do you have sound levels you would prefer to see?

I don't you see I I don't feel qualified to say like what would be a sound level, but I mean even to consider that there is this low-level hum that's not heard but felt is a concern, you know. Um so I just wanted to throw that throw that out there.

Um it's available on Google and actually the people in my circle um and uh family friends who are in it and um who I said reached out to and said tell me what you feel about data centers and yes it's a sort of a necessary part of our technology these days but every single one of them said I certainly wouldn't want to live by one and then they're the ones that said check out infrasound and these sorts of things and so I don't know how we deal with that and that um but I think it needs to be you know part of the conversation in in some way.

So thank you. Yeah, it's sort of reminiscent of the EMF conversation too with wireless communication towers and again you know a lot of times it's it becomes outside of our control to regulate those right so a lot of them are now just permitted by right and right ofways we can't restrict. So that's the the tough part with those sort of frequencies that are hard to measure.

But you're right though as far as and then maybe this is where you added in at least on the baseline noise study is that the baseline noise study includes recording and and uh keeping track of what the infrasound levels were before it goes in. because that's where sometimes people have a problem with um you know a a lawsuit against a data center is there wasn't a measurement before it went in. So um not only audible sounds but at those lower below 20 decel readings.

So your suggestion would be to add infrasounds into into at least into the at least that baseline. Okay. And I agree with that. As someone who has tenitis 247, I don't want anybody else to have to go through what I go through 247. Most of the time, like right now, it's very low. The other night, I told my husband, I think I was going crazy because it was really loud. So, um, it's a big concern because it just if you have that going on all the time, you kind of go crazy.

Um, just telling you because I know I have it all all the time. So, and I want you to all be prepared if any of you have your phones with you from here on out your all of your social media is going to pop up with data centers because they they're all hearing you [laughter] talk. That's probably true. So, um, Commissioner Shehi, Madam Chair, staff, um, Tiffany, I just wanted to clarify. I only saw this, um, closed loop cooling, water cooling system as a step.

I don't know whether it's a good thing or bad thing or exactly what it involves. No, I'll definitely dig in. So, the other stuff, you know, setbacks, all that was pretty obvious, but um, it's interesting.

I have had experience with noise level issues and when I did code enforcement with some zoning ordinances and stuff like that as well as when I worked in the um phone indust in the cell phone industry you know where you're getting near the towers people are concerned and what was interesting is and I can't remember what it stands for anie I think it's the American Institute of they have standards for um noise emanation from cell towers, transmission lines.

So maybe they're more up to speed on some of this with the new data centers. Um, the other thing I remember when I worked in one municipality, the noise level in the downtown area, people called constantly complaining and code enforcement couldn't enforce it because it was the bass sounds. The bass never met their minimum noise standards.

So there are these nuances that you can clearly if someone pulls up next to you and you hear boom boom boom you hear the bass but it will not trigger um you know breaking a requirement. So I think it's a valid thing that we probably should look into. That's it. Thank you Commissioner Luki. This is more a comment and um you know there are very few things that I think it's worth going to the mat on and putting our legal counsel out there but this is one of them.

Um I I don't agree with the text amendment. Of course when we get to the public hearing I'll keep an open mind and listen to what our people are saying but I really think it's like Commissioner Norton said in the beginning this is an incompatible use with our city. And so that's where I'd like to see the council go with it. I have a question. Is the county looking at similar uh similar propos or not that I'm aware code amendment? Not that I'm aware of. Okay. Thank you. Yes.

You know, I Yes, that was going to be one of my comments is, you know, whatever the city does with with this, I hope the county is taking it up. And um next Friday night there's actually a presentation at NAU about the effective data centers on native lands. So um and it's yeah it's a it's a a speaker series. Um so I mean it is coming to the forefront here as it should um obviously with the data center that is land has been sold to for in page.

So, I mean, it it's a concern not just within our city limits, um, certainly within county and on native reservation lands. Any other comments or questions from commissioners? All right, then I'm going to open it up to the public. If you filled out a card, I have two cards in front of me, but if you would like to make a comment and fill out a card, you can bring it up to the front.

So, I'm um you have three minutes to speak and if you would say your name and whether or not you're a city resident um when you come up to speak, I'd appreciate that. No, no need to give your address anymore, but just if you're a city residence or not. [snorts] Um I'm going to call first Marilyn Weissman. Hi commission commissioners. Marilyn Weisman. I'm a city resident and I want to thank you for all your great comments.

It's really made me have to say less, but I do want to say um CJ, your comment about the legal issues and where where do you draw the line? I mean, we're facing this in the city with the issue of ICE coming to town. You know, the I think the comparable thing when it comes to preeemption would be the plastic bag issue.

But I guess the question I would ask if I was speaking to a lawyer is at what point can you challenge the state and say you can't keep doing this to us or you can't do it to us on this level because we have rules like Puma County is saying that about uh ICE on on county property. That's our property. We get to say what can be there and you can't tell us any different. Whether that stands up in court, I don't know. But going to the mat means going to court.

And so I understand the city's concern about that. But I think there's a lot of loopholes in this. For example, the preeemption can simply be you can't deny it on light industrial that you can't just limit it to heavy industrial. And so um you know that just takes takes that away that that uh that effort because I feel like for most of us we want this not to come to our town. We don't want it to come to the county. I mean I I feel like that's the goal. So we're trying to make it ownorous.

That's what it feels like to me. And the main ownerous thing I think is the noise that we can actually put a measure on that. But it's disappointing to me that when it comes to the electrical use and the water use, it's just like, oh, we'll drill another well because that's what you were talking about when you were talking about um mitigation. That that's what the CUP is about. It's not about, oh, we can't do this because we don't like it.

It's like, well, we'll have to mitigate it by doing this. So I I feel like my goal is to make it so that these data centers, detention centers, all these things that we don't want in our community don't come here. And so that's how I look at these things. And I want more assurances from the city that this is foolproof in a in a way that, you know, we can't just come and mitigate it, you know, with walls. It's not going to be reclaimed water. We know that is not enough.

And so it's going to be using our potable water. And if we're going to allow that, I mean, don't we don't allow golf courses to use our p potable water. Why would we allow a heavy water use industry into our town? So, those are just my thoughts. Thank you. Next up would be um Kira Russ Russo. Timer set. Uh, hi uh, commissioners. Um, uh, first off, I'd like to thank you for your service and, uh, my name is Kyro Russo. I am a citizen of Flag Staff and I'm a political scientist.

Uh, my my main focus is water diplomacy and environmental diplomacy. Uh, so I'd like to give a little context to this discussion. And, um, just reminding you where the legislation from this came from. Originally the legislation federally came through the Biden administration the last month of his administration and um and the idea was to fasttrack AI data centers and using renewable energy.

the Trump administration uh rescended that order and then that uh that particular uh order was sort of reinstituted as a fasttrack on AI data centers and um the idea being that uh the fasttrack would also make sure that environmental obstacles, environmental legislation obstacles could be uh overcome such as uh not necessarily really needing to comply with NEPA and uh Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act. So looking at things from the federal level, I think that's very important.

Um I I would also like to say that our water managers in Flag Staff are we have some of the best uh in the country. I've I've uh looked at water management obviously around the world and we have done an excellent job of water management. That said, uh a small data center and keep in mind that most of these are funded through the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy and um so even a small data center uses about 360,000 gallons of water per day.

So that comes out to uh somewhere around 131 million gallons of water per year. uh that is an amount of water that is um is very difficult to uh uh to come up with. You know, we have had we have spent a great deal of time in the field of water management making sure that our our residents come first and uh and so to try to add that amount of water usage into uh into our into our regular uh usage is very very difficult to try to justify.

Um, I'd also like to say that uh and and sort of going along with the last speaker's comment uh that we might not want to comply in advance. Court cases are just court cases. That's all they are, you know, and uh and we have good legal counsel. We have good people here. Oops. Sorry. That's that's is that me to stop? Okay, [laughter] I'll stop right there and thank you. Thank you very much. Okay, next up is Daniel Davis. And again, if you'll just state your name and if you're a city resident.

[clears throat] All right. Yeah, my name is Daniel Davis and thank you guys for having this discussion and um essentially trying to get ahead of the curve on, you know, what may be inevitable and what may be coming our way. Um, I wanted to read an email that I sent to um the Cookanino County chair and sorry, I am a county resident. I was born and raised here in Flagstaff and have lived within the city limits most of my life. I own a business here in town with six employees. I'm a husband.

I have two kids, one of who is back there. Um, but I currently live in the county island of uh Pinedell just outside by the fairgrounds. So, uh, but anyways, I sent an email to Cookanino County Chair, um, Patrice Hortzman and board vice chair, uh, Heranimo Vasquez Vasquez. Uh, in my letter, I wrote, I'm writing to ask that you support a moratorum on new AI data center construction in our county.

Artificial intelligence and robotics are creating the most sweeping technological revolution in history in the history of humanity. data centers. Um, the infrastructure powering the AI revolution are popping up all across America. Big tech billionaires like Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk are investing heavily in this technology, not to make working people's lives better, but to make themselves even richer.

Communities like ours are standing up and fighting back against the big tech oligarchs and the data centers they're investing in. AI will likely have a catastrophic impact on the lives of working-class Americans, eliminating tens of millions of blue and white collar jobs in every sector of our economy.

We cannot sit back and allow a handful of big tech CEOs to make decisions that will reshape our economy, our democracy, and the future of humanity without public debate and demographic democratic oversight. Given the extraordinary speed at which AI is progressing and the potential impacts of data centers, we need a moratorum on AI data center construction to ensure that this technology works for working people, not just the big tech billionaires.

I ask that you support a moratorium now for our county. And I believe um this is the best approach in dealing with data centers without making specific code adoptions. I understand the city may want to get ahead of the curve and create regulations for when the day comes. We have a strategy on how to adopt um codes that make sure our community is safe and aligns with the mission of the city of Flagstaff, which is to protect and enhance the quality of life for all.

I don't believe data centers are going to adhere to this mission until they can figure out how to be 100% self- sustaining. Arizona cannot afford how the majority of current data centers are operated with major water consumption, the rise of utility costs. As a result, current noise studies around allowable noise pollution versus infrasound, which is quite unknown. Infrasound is any sound below 20 hertz, uh, not decb, just to make sure that gets corrected. Um, just below the human hearing range.

Um, dang. All right. So much more to say. Thank you. Thanks. Thank you. Can I ask a question? No. I was going to suggest if he has it written that he could email it. That's what I was going to suggest to to the staff at the city. If you can forward that to city staff. Yes. I believe you've already emailed me. Yeah. Yeah. There's also been a whole series of emails that have come into the planning commission email that I didn't get before this meeting, but will transmit before the public hearing.

So, there'll be more. Thank you. Next up is Jeremy Anderson. Again, if you would state your name and if you're a city resident. My name is Jeremy Anderson. I am a city resident. Um, so it seems like what we're discussing here today is adding an amendment in order for us to have the language to be able to defend saying no. I'm not going to say that's what everyone's saying here, but it's what it's uh coming across in layman terms.

My question is is can we utilize this language without having it written down so we can avoid allowing more than we would to deny. Can the language be used in a defense? Let's say when the legislature comes down on us without us giving barrier to entry based off of succeeding by meeting every single one of our expectations. Can we say no? Can we say no now? If the language doesn't allow us to say no now, how will adding these amendments allow us to say no in the future?

Um, I was hoping for that to be more of a question than anything else, not just a statement. Okay. I don't know if staff can reply. I understand what he's saying. Um, we can say no. Uh, the point is is that data centers are currently allowed under our code, right? Um there's also a a proposition called Prop 207 um that we're also all familiar with.

Um anytime we run a risk of adding additional requirements onto something that's already in the code, we run the risk of any property owner currently has that entitlement to apply for what is either a waiver or we have to compensate them financially. So also understand that that is on the table as well. Uh I think like the previous gentleman said in a lot more eloquent words than I will probably say here is uh we shouldn't comply early with any of this.

Um at the end of the day um if it's not serving our city uh I don't understand why we would have to spend our resources in order to support that. Um, I could understand if there was someone who were coming in to develop a new IT firm and that would directly affect the businesses that we have here, something like Executive Tech but expanded, right? Those things directly impact businesses and people in Flagstaff. Um, uh, full transparency, I work at NA and I work in it.

Um, I don't think that this would serve the people of Flagstaff. Um, I don't think ultimately that it's even here to serve the people of Arizona. Um, at the end of the day, we would be allowing some company or some billionaire to set up shop in our city and drain the resources that we have that we could better use for housing for um, you know, more development in general across all of Flagstaff.

Um, if we're struggling with making water availability for our residents right now, when it comes to our future, why would we allow something that's going to take that away? Cool. Thank you. Are there any people online? Can you tell me a name? Ann W, if you want to go ahead and unmute yourself. Okay. Can you hear me now? Yes. Okay. Uh, my name is Ann Whitkkey.

I am a resident of Flagstaff and when the um I forget who was talking about infrasound and uh what um effect would that have on the surrounding areas and I thought well that's a really relevant question [snorts] because basically it's a very low-level vibration um which could rattle loose some of the many fault lines that we have in this area.

Um, and maybe it would keep a big earthquake from happening, but it could facilitate uh movement of the earth, which could affect many of the buried gas lines that we have throughout the city. um you know in making uh little breakages in the lines and um I haven't read up on what effect um infrasound has on the ground um but I think it merits looking into. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else online have any comments? Okay. I want any other commissioners have comments?

Commissioner Norton, there were there were two things that came up in the comments that I just wanted to like maybe ask staff. Um the issue of moratorum. One of the other cities uh I think down south in Arizona has put on in a moratorum. Is that an option and how would that work? And secondly, my other question is you mentioned Prop 207 and land, you know, land rights. We put in a data center and it has a negative effect.

What about the other land owners nearby that now feel that their land is worth less because we allowed a data center, you know, for that nobody wants to live by it, nobody wants to build residential next to it, etc. I mean there's a reverse effect there too. So those would be my my two questions for you. Sure. Um so the first question sorry say the first question again. Uh about moratoriums. Moratoriums. Uh I would say we don't do a moratorum. I would just say we would prohibit the land use.

Um I mean that I mean that that that makes more sense. Moratorium implies that you're going to sort of lift the moratorium at some point. Um and if the concern is um that we just don't want to permit or allow data centers which so at the end of this I do want to get some direction sort of like do you want me to prepare two or one or wherever we want to go but just know that that question is coming back to you. Um my recommendation would be that we don't do it as a moratorum.

just do it as explicit that that the heavy industrial general land use specifically does not allow data centers and then any use not listed and I'll we'll do a review of any of the other land uses and just add does not include data centers. Um and then we'll just include a definition of data centers so that it's very clear what that is. Um, that that's that would be my recommendation I think at this point for how to go to just make it really clear that it's prohibited.

We just need to go through those land uses and and list that it's does not include um the second one in terms of Prop 207. So, I didn't write Prop 207. I didn't actually vote for it because I thought it was a bad idea. Um but you know in a in more of a property rights states that does vote for property rights. Sure.

You know if if you buy so people were astounded when they bought homes adjacent to a vacant heavy industrial piece of land that then it when it had a heavy industrial use that that would be impactful. Yep. I mean, in in all of the world, we would love to um not put heavy industrial directly adjacent to residential land use. It's it's unfortunately not a perfect world, right? It just it is what it is. There are five pieces of land, like I said, with a heavy industrial zoning in Flagstaff.

Um so, I can't I can't help you. I mean, as a property owner, you always have the ability to go and have a civil land use dispute with somebody. You can always sue somebody for their impact on you and your property value. It just may be that the city is not there and involved in that.

I guess I'm thinking um as an example all of this green field land like south of the 40 a lot of it you know is owned by residential developers and let's say another piece of state land comes open and somebody buys it and they reszone it to heavy industrial with the idea that they I'm not aware that the regional plan even indicates that any of those areas are designated for heavy industrial are there well no they would have to be reszoned well no but I mean you have to reszone in conformance with the regional plan.

Did are you seeing No, no, I'm giving a a what if, you know, I'm just concerned about like if somebody came in with a data center and then all of this residential land that was intended for residential use, it's owned by residential developers and they're like, well, we can't we're not going to be able to sell homes here because now there's going to be a data center next door. So, I'm just thinking our housing issue. Likely there's also a regional plan amendment then as well. Likely.

So I mean the regional plan works both ways, right? It's why we look at that and we try not to program the residential uses directly adjacent to the industrial. So are are you is your concern that the regional plan doesn't give that protection in terms of reszoning? I'm yeah I'm I'm just looking for any protections possible because I mean you know we our crisis is in climate and housing. So that's what we're seeking to protect. So that we just think of all of those whatifs, you know. Yeah.

I mean, just like anybody could come in too and propose a text amendment, just like you can come in and propose a reszoning. So, I mean, if if you if you prohibit, you know, a a land use, what we find is then generally somebody comes in and makes that request for you to accommodate and then you just have continue to have that discussion. Yep. And that doesn't mean that it'll be approved. Correct. So, Commissioner Shehy, um, I just wanted to respond to Commissioner Norton.

It's called demunition and value. Yes. Um, in real estate, and they're very hard claims to prove, even with the Prop 207. And as everybody knows, when you buy a piece of property, there's um, a real estate report and you have to initial every page. And if there's industrial property next to it, you have to acknowledge that you saw that. So then to come back and claim something, it's like almost impossible. So you know, and I've heard a few cases like this and it's come up.

I was a hearing officer and people tried to do that with pawn shops and all this other stuff. It just didn't work. So um I think that in a property rights state people are are should be aware you know that if you build a house next to an vacant industrial land something could happen. So um I but I along those ideas that we've been discussing um I would like to hear something or at least some information from economic development. You know, throughout history, people didn't like cell towers.

We all have cell phones. They didn't like cars because they all rode horses. You know, I mean, through history, we've had all kinds of technical advancement. People are afraid when they're not familiar with it. And I myself, I don't know a lot of who benefits from the data centers, why they're put where they are. Are we limiting ourselves by not allowing them?

Before we start doing moratoriums or trying to prohibit them, I would like a little more context as to who benefits from them, why they're being built, what's happening, and how that um could or could not impact Flagstaff for economic development, for future jobs, etc. Because I'm not as familiar with these facilities. I know people don't like them, but I don't really know a lot about them.

And I definitely want to let you know that, you know, had worked internally with those divisions and I and I think they're good representatives also worked with our internal IT staff as well. Um, so I can bring a lot more of those folks to the public hearing to try and and we'll pre-prep them. Yep. Definitely. Um, so but be like I don't want to interrupt your questions, but I do I do have questions for you on how to move forward to the next step. Okay. Before that, Commissioner Norton. Yeah.

Thank you, uh, Chair, I just wanted to add on to the economic development issue, um, what I found is that Arizona has hefty tax incentives for these data centers currently that are in place. They were renewed in 2021 and are in place until 2033. Yes, Governor Hobbes is trying to roll those back because now Arizona is one of the top 10 states for data center. So, yes, it worked, but now we're feeling the ill effects. I don't know where that sits right now.

I couldn't find like is it actually going to be turned over or what, but if that's part of the economic information for us, whether you know the city would get any benefit from having them. I mean, are they just here to take our resources in our land and we get nothing is where I'm going with this, which is, you know, problematic.

Um, not to say that, you know, an increase in whatever they might pay in taxes would be worth it either, but I just that that information would be part of it as how the states uh and federal tax uh tax credits affect this whole this whole thing. All right. Thank you. So, I have the list of folks that I'm going to bring back for the public hearing, but in light of that, in light of the discussion tonight, so I definitely have some things to add into the existing draft.

But as a as a side, you would also like me to prepare an a sort of another draft that basically prohibits the land use. And is that I would like that. In general, same. I I would rather not honestly. I know I I think that you know a lot of this discussion has been you know folks echoing concerns about uh prematurely complying. I I'm my concern is about prematurely recruiting.

you know, knowing that we're working in an environment um of rapidly changing and rapidly evolving technology, I don't know that data centers will always be the boogeyman that they are now. And so my concern would be entertaining the notion of of doing away with data centers very very prematurely.

I think that folks have this vision in their head about what uh what they see with with these mass scale data centers that are acres and acres just huge structures and that of course is not going to be compatible um in in Flagstaff because we don't have that land within our city boundaries, right? What what's the acreage on that property that we're discussing out by uh Picture Canyon? Oh, um Smoke Rays and Picture Canyon. What's the acreage out there?

My best friend is going to look it up for me. The the one by Picture Canyon is partially it's it's partially owned by the state. So, it's state land. Uh it's currently under lease, I believe, to Restoration Soils. Um, and so they do it have it I can check and see how long of a term of a lease they have it under. Um, but they do soil composting and other wood product composting. Is that the the plant that takes from why you can't cinder mountain? Uh, no. They they're private.

They're they there's they do mold. Yeah, it's like mulch. There's a landscaping company involved, but they take that smaller wood product from like from thinning and other thing like the small wood and they're basically turning it into a soil product. So yeah, they had a case come through here. I don't now I can't remember off the top. I did the prezoning. I can't remember. Yeah. So I mean yeah because we reszoned it to heavy industrial for them and Alex looks like she has an answer.

So the parcel itself is about 24 acres but not the entire parcel is zoned hi heavy industrial. I would say it's probably half if so I feel comfortable saying 12 acres of of heavy industrial. Do you want me to look up the one on smoke rays? Near smoke rays. And Tiffany, while she's looking that up, you mentioned five last time, but you only gave three when we were talking. You said the I think there's multiple parcels.

I'll come back with the exact total, but the when I talk about the sheriff leap, that's multiple parcels in there. Can you provide a map with our next meeting for our next meeting? Thank you. And then I was just going to say, you know, as far as noise level in the city, if you're ever online and you're like, people are posting, what's that noise? cuz you we're pretty quiet community so we don't have a lot of airplane noise, helicopter noise. I don't know what you're talking about.

I live in your neighborhood. We get helicopters all day long. Well, helicopters, especially during the summer that, you know, I guess I train whistles don't bother me because I've lived here long enough. Um I think that's the thing, right, is noise is also one of those really subjective things. Yeah. So what one person can hear and see and feel is is different, right? It's different people have different levels of tolerance for things.

What some of us we grow used to the train noise where it's and it's also like entering the dark skies too, right? A lot of people when they first get to Flagstaff are like, "Whoa, um could you turn on some lights?" And we're like, "No." Uh so you know, it again it's all about sort of what your experience is. And I was buying time for Alex to answer us. So, so that area of heavy industrial to the east of Smoke Rise, to the west of Picture Canyon is a number of different parcels.

I would say it's about 120 acres. This is also that cinder hill. So, is not at all like a big flat site to develop on. It is a a mountain of cinders. It's a cone. And does that include I you probably don't know this answer like what adjacent county land might be um zoned that. Do we have buildings that are well that's a um city county that go over each area? Is there anything like any buildings that have been built that are on city and county land both?

No, they don't even really let you create parcels that go over cross jurisdictions because they're we're two different taxing entities. Okay. And that's what the parcel numbers are for. Well, I just I think of Sedona and how Sedona parts in Cookanino County, part of it's in Yavapai County, and I don't know if there's I guess there's not anything built that's on both properties. They don't.

So, generally, I can't say never, but generally the rule is they don't allow property or parcels to be created over taxing jurisdiction boundaries of that. Okay? So that somebody couldn't come in and say, "Well, I'm going to take this 120 acres is rather large." And then go out to the county and say, "We want we need another 120 acres and build over both." No. And you can't deanex land from the city either, if that helps.

I mean, we could always annex land from the county, but we can't deanex land from the city. Okay. Thank you. And, uh, Commissioner Norton. Um, yeah. And with regard to the size, I mean, you know, yes, what we think of and what hits the news are these mega centers, but I mean, from what I read, they, you know, they're built in small, medium, large, and mega size. So, you know, we're talking, you know, maybe a small one, maybe a medium one would would want would be interested.

The issues are still the same um as far as, you know, noise, water, power. Um, and I did want to correct and I thank you for the one speaker that that also addressed um, infrasound sound issues and I looked at my notes from the um, YouTube video I watched and it is below 20 hertz. So I wanted to make sure that you had that in in your and just for anybody's reference um, the YouTube video that was recommended to me to watch um, from somebody in it.

Um, the guy's a musician, but he's kind of gotten into the acoustic engineering of things. His name's Ben Jordan, and it talks about data centers. Um, and their acoustic properties and, uh, issues. Um, back to the question that you had for all of us about to I I think that as this moves forward in front of the public and even in front of city council that it may end up warranting a choice of prohibiting or or doing this CUP thing.

Um, and I'm very much in the I came in with the if then thing like I really want to prohibit them as a prohibited use. If we cannot, then this is what we need to do to strengthen it as hard and as we can. Um, so I know that we're going to have to vote though and and if I have to say, you know, have to vote a no against your proposal, then I'm then potentially we don't I'm I'm not able to give, you know, your other alternative.

You know, I imagine city council people are going to watch this and going to continue to follow this through. So they'll hear this this discussion of what we some of us have have said. So, I just I think it's amazing that you can publish an ad in the paper and and reach out to folks. And I not one comment, not one sent to me. Not one. But we did have comments here today. So, yeah. So, I mean, it's great.

I mean, I'm going to do my best to like regroup and address the comments that we heard today. What I would like to know is just where I'm trying to figure out where to to spend my energy at this point because I I think no matter what, we have a hole in the code, right? Like there's something in the code we need to address. And I think that that's probably a general consensus unless you want me to leave the code as is and I'm good.

Um I think we have you know two people who want uh to prohibit two people who say go forward with what you're doing and one person who I can see both sides. So I'm kind of in the middle of what we should do. So you're going to get be the tiebreaker on whether or not I go and draft another version. So you just tell me. I I think that we probably should have a prohibit version as well. Okay. Just um we have a couple of commissioners that aren't here today so that they can look at both.

I I hope that you don't have to spend too much time on a prohibit. I love writing and I love writing for you. So I am all in. Oh, you're so full of it. Um, anyhow, [laughter] no, I'm just hoping I'm for me I'm like, can I can I keep on track of the schedule? And it's okay if we don't, right? You know, we advertise, we spend some money putting in the newspaper. If we don't make it the next round and you don't make a decision, it's not the end of the day.

I'd rather you move forward feeling comfortable that you have what you want or what you need. Um, so if we need to further the conversation after the public hearing is fine. I I think we have somebody here probably from the newspaper, a reporter. No. Nope. I'm not. I might be wrong. I thought that you were a reporter for the newspaper. So, you're taking copious notes [laughter] but I just hope that we've resolved the issue. We're not We're not trying to trying to encourage data centers here.

What? What I was going to say? No, I was just going to say that if it's reported in the paper, we'll probably have more people here the next time rather than just the ad in the paper. Yeah. Yeah. So, that's what I was Well, you know, definitely I've been watching the conversation online and I mean, it was on CF radio and but it's, you know, it's not always the complete story, right? So I I don't I don't know where CF Radio gets their information from. So it's not like anybody reached out to me.

Okay. So if you'll prepare both, we'd be happy to entertain those. I would love to do that. [laughter] Any other comments or questions on this issue? I'm just going to regroup and talk about what I'm going to add. Okay. Thank you. So, I'm going to take a harder look at the sound levels and I'll come back with some examples of what's in those sound decibel ranges and I'll look to see if there are other ranges. Maybe give you a few options.

Um, I'm going to add infrasounds at least to the base level. Um, and look to see if anybody has been successful on regulating infrasounds. Um that's the place I feel is the hardest if I'm being honest to try to truly mitigate. Um and then looking at the mandatory sound walls, the larger setbacks, especially we can create much larger setbacks from residential areas.

Um the closed loop cooling water systems, I'll regroup with w I'm going to regroup with water services tomorrow so I can get them to give me something much more specific. Um and again um and then also decommissioning. Decommissioning is pretty is kind of standard language. We used to do it on cell towers all of the time too. Um it's just you know if but you would all I mean in in light of today's world. I don't know if these buildings could be reused over time.

Um, I think we would want to make sure that there the if the facility is decommissioned that it's secure and safe and, you know, doesn't become like a ghost town data center. [laughter] Just makes me think my kid was out like two guns yesterday and I'm thinking, oh no, we could have like, you know, a ghost station, convenience store, and zoo. Uh, right. So, we don't want that with data centers. So, understand that.

Um, and then lastly, I'm going to reach out to EV, to water services, and our sustainability team and it as well. Um, because those are the people that I worked with internally to help provide answers to the questions and the direction that I received in drafting this. Hey, I have a question too. Perfect. Thank you. I forgot about that. And then I have a really strange question. Has anybody ever built these data centers underground?

Does that I don't know what I'm like is the White House ballroom now, you know, because [laughter] I'm I'm just thinking that you talked about this Cinder Mountain or Cinder Hill, whatever it's called. um has a bad connotation to me because I've lived here long enough that I, you know, got to witness Jennifer Wilson being murdered there and just has a very bad connotation to me. But I could see them like hollowing out the [laughter] like Roden Crater what they've done for the art display. Yeah.

So I don't know. I just give them ideas. Okay. I I don't you know I just was like oh my gosh maybe that's something that they would do. Okay. I'm just I'm done with that. So keep your eyes peeled. Technically my next staff report is due tomorrow. I've got a lot of work to go do. I'm excited. Oh, I can get it done. You just wait. Maybe there won't be perfect and I'll still get What time are you going to be up till tonight? Um anyhow. No, that's it's not tonight. It's 4 o'clock tomorrow morning.

Those are my prime hours. Madam [clears throat] Chair, yes. I just have one question. I'm wondering if someone is a site locator to for a data center. Normally, if you're doing that, you have a list of criteria. Now, granted, we know water, electricity, certain sizes. I mean, are any of our parcels even viable? I don't know what either of their criteria is or if you do know. I don't know much about these things.

I mean, I think the bulk of the information of what I've been able to dig is is that people generally call water services first and then walk away. Thank you for that. Good question. All right. Any other comments or questions? Then we'll Thank you so much, Tiffany. Um, thank you for agreeing to do this. I need more attention. So, the more we can bring people out. Exciting. Next time you'll be tap dancing on the table for that attention. Okay. I'm ready. Let's go. All right.

Um, we'll move on to miscellaneous items to and from commissioner me members. I can't talk anymore and I see nothing and hear nothing. Okay. So, we are adjourned and it is 5:41 p.m. Thank you very much.