[0:05] All right, good evening everyone. Thank you so much for being here. We really

[0:09] appreciate you spending some of your evening and your time to engage on this

[0:15] important community topic. My name is Corin Manning. I'm the

[0:19] director of the department of planning and development services for the city of

[0:23] Tucson. And I want to introduce some of the team who will be here tonight to

[0:27] present on this topic. Um, we have Carver Stru, principal planner with

[0:32] planning and development services, Nicholas Martell, our long-range

[0:36] planning section manager, Dan Bersik, planning administrator, as well as

[0:40] Tonnie Robertson, our facilitator for this evening, here to support the

[0:45] conversation and dialogue. Uh, so tonight's meeting is about regulations

[0:51] for largecale data centers. Um, this is a really important topic that's

[0:56] generated a lot of community conversation. So, we're really here to

[1:00] share information and have an opportunity for feedback and discussion

[1:03] tonight. Um, so data centers are a rapidly evolving technology. They're

[1:08] really new emerging use and our responsibility as a city is to make sure

[1:13] that our land use regulations keep pace with emerging trends in a way that

[1:18] reflects our community's values and priorities. So that's really what we're

[1:22] trying to do with these proposed regulations.

[1:32] Okay. So how tonight will go, what we are here to do. We're going to explain a

[1:37] little bit of background um why we're here, how we got here in terms of

[1:42] developing these regulations, talk a little bit about some existing city

[1:45] policy um and existing regulations.

[1:49] um talk about the process so far to develop regulations for large scale data

[1:54] centers um including our technical advisory committee and then share an

[1:58] overview of the proposed regulations for large scale data centers um and have

[2:03] opportunity for feedback along the way. So tonight's meeting is really about

[2:07] sharing some information about what's proposed and then most importantly

[2:13] hearing from all of you. So there's going to be opportunity for feedback

[2:16] throughout the presentation and then at the end we do want to have time for

[2:21] questions and answers. So we do ask that during the presentation um we limit

[2:27] questions and comments to just clarifying questions um so that at the

[2:32] end we can have some dialogue and Q&A about this topic.

[2:37] Um and there's also going to be there's um comment cards and other ways to get

[2:42] input as well. Um, we have already gotten a lot of input and feedback on

[2:47] this topic. Um, and we've started developing a Q&A FAQ uh, form that some

[2:53] of you may have gotten when you came in. So, we've really tried to take a lot of

[2:57] the key questions and comments that we're getting and start responding to

[3:01] those and we will be building out that FAQ as we go through this process and

[3:05] get additional questions and comments. So all of your feedback is being

[3:09] reviewed by staff and uh responded to and integrated into the process.

[3:16] So how we got here? Um we are here based on direction from our mayor council to

[3:22] establish guardrails for our community related to large scale data centers.

[3:27] Following the consideration of the project blue proposal, mayor and council

[3:32] gave us direction to establish guard rails for our community to develop a

[3:38] regulatory framework for the for the use uh of large scale data centers to

[3:45] protect Tucson and our resources and to develop standards for this new use as

[3:51] well as a review process. So throughout the discussion of project

[3:55] bloom, we heard a range of questions and concerns about large scale data centers.

[4:00] We heard from residents about issues such as water, energy use, noise, visual

[4:05] impacts, whole range of community concerns and issues um which are very

[4:11] important topics and a conversation that really affects our whole community and

[4:15] quality of life. That's why we're here today to engage in this dialogue and

[4:19] have more conversation about the impact of this use and how we can ensure that

[4:23] we have appropriate regulations in place to regulate um this emerging use. As we

[4:30] were going through the project blue discussion, we found that our zoning

[4:33] code does not currently have data centers as a clearly defined land use.

[4:38] So we don't have regulations for this type of use. This creates a lack of

[4:43] clarity for our community, creates uncertainty for neighborhoods, for our

[4:47] policy makers, um, and for potential applicants. So, what we're trying to do

[4:52] now is take a more proactive approach to develop these regulations and guard

[4:56] rails. Um, so rather than reacting to a specific proposal, we're here trying to

[5:03] establish clear and enforceable guidelines um, in advance of future

[5:08] proposals. So what we're trying to do is create clear standards that protect our

[5:13] neighborhoods, our natural resources, and provide predictability so that if a

[5:19] data center facility is proposed, we have an appropriate set of land use

[5:23] regulations and standards to evaluate a proposed development.

[5:29] Based on the direction from mayor council, we have done a quite a bit of

[5:33] research into data center regulations in other communities as well as the impact

[5:37] of data centers in other communities and we established a technical advisory

[5:41] committee to help inform the proposed standards that we're creating. We also

[5:46] developed a large quantity water users ordinance in the city. That was actually

[5:50] something that was in progress um prior to the project blue discussion and that

[5:54] has been adopted by the city um and is being refined now based on public input.

[6:00] That ordinance is meant to work in parallel with these proposed zoning

[6:04] regulations for large scale data centers and we'll share a bit more about that a

[6:08] little later on. So again, tonight's meeting is not to discuss a specific

[6:11] proposal. The discussion tonight is about setting guard rails and

[6:16] establishing standards for our community so that if a proposal comes forward, we

[6:20] have conditions and a process in place to evaluate any proposals.

[6:26] So, I want to talk a little bit more about zoning regulations because zoning,

[6:31] which is what we're here to talk about tonight, is just one piece of a larger

[6:35] picture in terms of regulations that affect large scale data centers. So

[6:40] there's other local regulations that could shape where and how large scale

[6:44] data centers are developed. That includes things like the large quantity

[6:48] water user ordinance that I mentioned as well as economic development policies

[6:53] and other city policies. Um there's also federal and state regulations that come

[6:58] into play such as state economic incentives and the Arizona Pooperation

[7:03] Commission's regulation of our utilities. So tonight's discussion is

[7:08] really focused on zoning and land use regulations.

[7:13] Zoning is a uh zoning is a set of regulations that focus on where

[7:20] development can occur, where different uses can be located, how those uses are

[7:25] built, what specific conditions apply to different types of land uses. um that

[7:30] could be conditions, development standards like buffers, setbacks,

[7:33] screening, height limits, c certain standards like that that can be applied

[7:38] to specific types of uses. Um so zoning does not regulate water

[7:45] use, energy portfolios or energy infrastructure decisions. um those are

[7:52] valid and important topics of discussion, but those rest with other

[7:57] review bodies and other entities that have purview in those areas. So

[8:01] tonight's discussion is really going to focus on what is within the city's

[8:05] control and what is before us at this time, which is zoning or land use

[8:09] regulations to provide appropriate standards and regulations for large

[8:13] scale data centers in Tucson. So let's get into that conversation. I

[8:20] want to thank you again for being here tonight, for being part of this

[8:23] important conversation. And I'm going to ask Tonnie to walk us through the

[8:29] process and ground rules for tonight.

[8:34] Good evening. Good to see you all. Uh my name is Tony Robertson with Southwest

[8:39] Decision Resources and I just have two slides. [snorts]

[8:44] Meeting format. I think we've seen several of you were in the last meeting

[8:49] or two. So, good to see you again. Um, so your feedback is going to be

[8:55] collected in writing in these meetings via online survey which you'll be seeing

[9:02] a QR code and you can use your phone to get access to that website. Um, the

[9:08] paper form, the green form on the clipboard is the same questions. So

[9:13] either option works and you can take uh provide your comments during the meeting

[9:18] or after the meeting. I believe it'll be open through this month through the end

[9:22] of March. Um and then the sticky notes on the posters in the lobby. All of that

[9:27] feedback is being compiled and the city team is reading through everything very

[9:31] carefully. They did create the FAQ document that was in the registration

[9:36] table like Corin mentioned and they'll be adding more questions as they go. Um

[9:43] again, all written feedback will be made publicly available and shared with both

[9:47] the planning commission and mayor and council. Uh conversation and additional

[9:52] written feedback are encouraged with city staff before and after the

[9:56] presentation um we will have a like the last inerson

[10:01] meeting at Pua High School will have a Q&A session here in the main in this

[10:06] room. Um, we're going to be asking that people keep their comments to under a

[10:11] minute so that more people can have a chance to speak. We had a number of

[10:14] people that wanted to be able to ask a question or make a comment last time.

[10:19] Um, this the website has all of the links,

[10:22] all of the information and uh we ask that everybody respect each other's time

[10:27] and refrain from disruption.

[10:32] And again, so in this room is the presentation.

[10:36] Um, we have different presenters from the city that are going to be walking

[10:40] you through the different components of the proposed zoning code and giving you

[10:45] a chance as you go to make comments in the uh online survey or the written

[10:51] survey. Um feedback again can be submitted in both both of those formats

[10:58] in and then the the uh the Q&A afterwards in the lobby is the dialogue

[11:03] opportunity directly with city staff. You're not restricted to any particular

[11:07] amount of time. There's posters that have all the same information that's

[11:10] going to be in the presentation. Again, this is about this proposed zoning uh

[11:16] code, but you a lot of you have feedback beyond that and we're gathering all

[11:21] feedback. So, I will turn it over to Parker.

[11:40] » All right. Good evening. Uh my name is Carver Stru. I'm a principal planner

[11:44] here with the City of Tucson Department of Planning and Development Services and

[11:48] I'm going to talk a bit about the proposal that that we are here to

[11:52] discuss tonight. Um as was mentioned earlier, this relates specifically to

[11:57] zoning and regulating largecale data centers. One of the first things that

[12:02] you want to do if you are going to regulate a land use is to define what it

[12:07] is that you're regulating. And so what we've put forward Oh, I'm sorry. Let me

[12:12] back up. Um going going a little ahead of myself. Uh I want to start talking

[12:17] first about what is a large-scale data center. So what is it that we're talking

[12:21] about before we start discussing regulating it? So a large scale data

[12:25] center is a warehouse filled with thousands of computers working 24/7 to

[12:30] store, process, and deliver digital services and data. uh data centers house

[12:36] computer equipment, networking equipment, storage devices. These are

[12:40] the items that power all of the digital infrastructure that we use.

[12:47] Most data centers have a number of different key components. Um these

[12:50] include server racks uh that house and organize servers, networking equipment

[12:56] uh which moves the data or processes the data, storage systems to store data, uh

[13:01] power infrastructure which obviously powers the equipment and cooling systems

[13:06] to remove the heat that is created by a data center.

[13:13] So really when we're asked to regulate data centers, the the purpose there is

[13:18] to set clear rules and standards for their location and design. The intent of

[13:24] this is to protect senate sensitive areas. Address impacts such as noise,

[13:29] scale, and other impacts early on in the process. Develop a process that ensures

[13:34] public input as data center proposals are developed. and be proactive in terms

[13:40] of what standards should be in place versus uh reacting to a specific

[13:46] proposal as it comes forward. So the city currently has very limited

[13:55] standards related to how we regulate data centers. Traditionally as data

[14:01] centers were being developed is they were small relatively small they were

[14:05] viewed as storage uses um these were you know it made sense you're looking at it

[14:11] kind of like as a warehouse but for data and so they were regulated as such.

[14:17] However, as we saw new large scale and hypers scale data centers emerge as a

[14:23] land use that has never existed before, we started to look at it differently.

[14:28] And the city zoning administrator determined that a large-scale data

[14:32] center would be classified under the city's zoning code as a utility

[14:38] generating system use. As such, it could only be reviewed as a planned area

[14:44] development or a planned community development.

[14:48] Um, so this is really just defining what it would be as a stop gap measure and

[14:54] deciding what process could be used to review a proposal for a data center.

[15:00] Under the current code, it's very clear that we really don't have any existing

[15:05] standards to regulate their development or place guard rails on their

[15:09] development. As such, it's really at this point in time under the code

[15:14] largely up to a specific applicant to propose how they would like to develop a

[15:19] data center. Uh so with additional standards as we're going to be

[15:23] discussing tonight uh mayor and council can provide limitations or guard rails

[15:29] on how data centers would be developed which could reflect values of Tucson.

[15:35] So this next slide really just shows what is currently in place under the red

[15:41] box which is essentially just a process for reviewing a data center proposal and

[15:47] then proposed standards that we are putting forward in this proposed zoning

[15:54] amendment and seeking your feedback on related to any number of things. you

[16:00] know, defining a data center, establishing where and how they would be

[16:03] allowed. Um, being establishing a clear and transparent public review process

[16:09] for specific data center proposals, requiring that a data center demonstrate

[16:14] access to water and power and disclose the energy mix in such a proposal. Um,

[16:22] prohibit the use of portable water for cooling if not subject to the large

[16:27] water user ordinance. requiring additional setbacks which would relate

[16:31] to noise impacts or other impacts on the community setting clear noise

[16:36] limitations any number of different items and we'll be going through these

[16:40] in in subsequent slides but I really just want to make the point that this

[16:44] demonstrates where we are looking at establishing regulations for where none

[16:49] currently exist other than that simple process.

[16:54] So as we talk about zoning, uh any authority to regulate land through

[17:00] zoning by a city or town in Arizona is given to them by the state. State law

[17:05] decides what can be regulated through zoning and is very specific that that

[17:10] the cities or towns can regulate land use, building size, shape, height,

[17:15] materials and purpose, site dimensions, setbacks, lot coverage, what percentage

[17:21] of the lot would be covered by a structure and the location and use of

[17:25] buildings. However, we are limited through zoning on what can be regulated

[17:31] related to water and energy use. Uh, however, there are other provisions as

[17:36] as Corin had mentioned, zoning is simply one component of the entire process to

[17:42] regulate data centers. Um, and as mentioned earlier, uh, it's critical to

[17:47] define a data center when you are looking to regulate it. Additionally,

[17:52] due to the processes in place as well as the process being proposed, any data

[17:57] center proposal would need to comply with plan Tucson 2025, our new general

[18:04] plan.

[18:07] So the process for reviewing and considering and developing reviewing and

[18:14] considering a ordinance for uh zoning regulations for large-scale data centers

[18:20] is is outlined here. Um it begins with mayor and council direction where Marin

[18:26] council requested that city staff develop this code proposal. Uh we then

[18:32] formed a technical advisory committee which is an advisory committee made up

[18:37] of volunteer subject matter experts across a broad array of areas related to

[18:42] data centers who provided information and best practices on regulating data

[18:48] centers. From there we moved into our community meetings. This is the fourth

[18:54] of four community meetings that we have scheduled. two in person and two virtual

[18:59] to receive community feedback on the proposal. Now, for those of you who have

[19:04] been to the previous meetings, the the rest of this is a little bit different.

[19:08] Um, we've received some guidance that mayor and council would like us to uh go

[19:14] before them in April for a study session to brief and council on what we have

[19:19] heard in these community meetings and receive feedback. And so, that is the

[19:23] next step in the process that that will be forthcoming. that is not a vote on

[19:27] anything. That is simply a study session to brief them. Um, as we go through that

[19:33] process, we'll continue to gather community feedback. The survey will

[19:37] remain open and then based on feedback we received. Uh the next steps in the

[19:42] process are a planning commission study session at a time yet to be determined,

[19:47] a planning commission public hearing where the public will be invited to

[19:52] speak specifically on this proposal yet to be determined and then mayor and

[19:56] council consideration. So more to come on that and certainly as we have more

[20:00] information on the specifics, we will be updating our web page on that.

[20:06] So, as we're considering developing these regulations, we are really looking

[20:11] at guidance from other plans and policies that are currently in effect

[20:16] within the city. These are plans and policies which have either been ratified

[20:20] by the voters in the case of plan Tucson or adopted by mayor and council as

[20:25] official policy. These include, as I mentioned, plan Tucson, uh the Tucson

[20:30] resilient together, which is our climate action plan, the city's comprehensive

[20:34] economic development strategy, the one water 2100 master plan, the large

[20:40] quantity water user ordinance, building codes, as well as other provisions

[20:45] within within the unified development code, which is our zoning code. uh

[20:50] things related to items such as rainwater harvesting or um other

[20:54] development standards that would be applicable for a structure like a data

[20:59] center just like they apply already to any other structure uh within the city.

[21:05] So the one item that I mentioned there is the large quantity water users

[21:08] ordinance and we've got Scott Shadweller here who is going to speak a little bit

[21:14] about that from Tucson water. >> All right. Thanks Carver. Good evening

[21:19] everybody. As Cover mentioned, my name is Scott Schwab. I'm deputy director at

[21:22] Tucson Water. Uh, similar to this ordinance, um, we developed a large body

[21:27] water user ordinance. Um, last year, uh, it was put in place because we didn't

[21:31] have any guardrails up. We didn't have any, um, guidance on thresholds for

[21:36] water use. So, when a new developer, a new development, um, came to Tucson

[21:40] looking for water, looking to develop, um, we worked out the engineering piece,

[21:44] we worked out the hydraulics and whatever infrastructure was required. um

[21:48] you know we move forward with that if uh if applicable. So the large quality of

[21:53] water users ordinance was approved by mayor and council in August of 25. Uh it

[21:58] is in place today. Um it really sets the guardrails for um establishing what uh

[22:04] you know defining what a large water quantity user is. And that threshold was

[22:09] set at 10,000 ccf or that was the equivalent of about 7.4 7.5 million

[22:16] gallons per month. That's an annual average. Uh so they could use a little

[22:20] bit more one month or a little bit less one a month, you know, taking into

[22:23] account for weather, things like that. Um just to put that into context, our

[22:28] average residential user uses about 8 CCF. Um so this is the equivalent of

[22:33] about 1,200 single family homes or so. We do not have any portable customers on

[22:38] our system right now that use 10,000 ccf or more. We do have some on the reclam

[22:42] system, but those are mostly tied to large uses such as golf courses or

[22:48] whatnot. Um, so this ordinance applies to any large water user. In fact, this

[22:53] ordinance does not specifically call out data centers. It does not mention them

[22:57] um by name at all. It is any large water user that comes. So, any potential

[23:02] manufacturer um any other type of user that would use this much water. It

[23:06] applies to any new development uh that comes in. So from the ground up uh it

[23:10] would also apply to anybody who wants to upgrade their facility. Uh for example,

[23:14] if they want to expand services and go from uh you know a certain meter size up

[23:19] to above 10,000 ccf, they would have to comply with this ordinance as well. Um

[23:25] what is required by this policy? Uh any large water users would have to submit a

[23:29] sustainable uh water service application which includes a conservation plan uh to

[23:34] Tucson Water for review. Uh this includes things like defining how

[23:38] they're going to use the water, what they're going to use, what their

[23:40] conservation policies are. Um is it being done in the most efficient way? Uh

[23:46] if deemed complete by Tucson Water, it will be put before mayor and council for

[23:50] their ultimate approval. Um where it will be presented. So that ultimately

[23:54] this is each large water unit does need to be approved by mayor and council. Uh

[23:59] similar to this ordinance as well, we did have a technical advisory committee

[24:04] uh that finished up just recently. We have stakeholders from the community

[24:07] from the economic development uh side, the environmental uh stakeholder groups.

[24:13] Um they all provided comments that information was presented to mayor and

[24:17] council uh last month uh for their review. So that is that's information

[24:21] that they are uh looking over right now. And if they do deem uh you know any

[24:26] updates or any modifications of the policy necessary, that's something I'll

[24:30] come back for in future months. That'll turn back over.

[24:43] » Thank you, Scott.

[24:48] So Scott mentioned a technical advisory committee for the large quantity water

[24:52] users ordinance. Uh I want to clarify that there was also a technical advisory

[24:56] committee formed for the data cent's zoning code amendment. They are two

[25:02] different bodies. So just just to clarify that they're comprised of of two

[25:06] different groups of people. However, the technical advisory committee for data

[25:10] centers uh was established based on direction that we received from mayor

[25:15] and council. Uh its purpose was to share knowledge and expertise and discuss key

[25:20] issues related to land use environmental concerns, resource consumptions,

[25:25] particularly water and power as well as infrastructure needs for data centers.

[25:30] The committee was formed to uh help us all learn about and provide input or on

[25:35] best practices, new technologies and approaches that were undertaken in

[25:40] other cities or jurisdictions. Uh the TAC was asked to advise on options to

[25:46] regulate large-scale data centers and recommend topics and standards for the

[25:51] proposed zoning amendment. I want to be clear that the TAC is not a

[25:55] decision-making body. They were simply advisory that were providing input into

[26:00] the proposed standards. Uh there there was a desire for consensus, but it

[26:06] wasn't always achieved. And so it we aren't necessarily saying that every TAC

[26:11] member agreed with everything that um came out of the recommendations but they

[26:16] did provide advisory input. So the TAC uh includes 13 members from

[26:23] various groups. Uh they range from watershed management to TE. So really we

[26:28] tried to get as many different groups as we could involved in the committee to

[26:32] provide their input. Um, additionally, we have uh had support from city staff

[26:39] across multiple different departments. Uh, they were not members of the TAC,

[26:43] but they did provide input uh related to uh sustainability, energy use, uh, water

[26:48] resources, economic development, um, just across multiple areas to ensure

[26:53] that multiple different viewpoints were considered when when developing uh, some

[26:58] of the proposed components. Um and again these these the members of the TAC

[27:03] included environmental resources, power supply, energy equity, people also

[27:08] involved in data consent data center construction as well as people involved

[27:13] in the operation of data centers locally within Tucson.

[27:20] Uh we also looked at uh what the TAC thought was important at the very

[27:25] beginning of the process. uh we surveyed TAC members on what components were of

[27:30] greatest concern to them individually. Uh the feedback we received um was that

[27:36] water and energy consumption were of greatest concern which is something we

[27:41] certainly are aware of. Um air quality concerns also came ranked fairly high as

[27:47] did noise concerns and that was also really closely related to setback from

[27:53] adjoining land uses. uh so that and location so that they could be in areas

[27:59] that that were not already heavily developed. Uh concerns were also

[28:03] expressed about heat impacts uh provision of wildlife amenities,

[28:08] generator operation which certainly also relates back to noise and air quality

[28:13] glare design aesthetic screening vibration which also relates to noise

[28:18] and design features. Uh this is not ultimately the category of items that a

[28:24] category list of items that we came up with but during the process of kind of

[28:28] establishing where the concerns were it was a useful exercise of the TAC. Uh all

[28:34] tech materials related to the meetings including meeting notes and presentation

[28:39] slides are available on the city's website uh which we will have a QR code

[28:44] for later in the presentation uh if you would like to review those.

[28:50] So now we're going to shift gears a little bit and talk about the actual

[28:53] zoning proposal that that we would like to get your feedback on this evening.

[29:00] So when we developed these proposed standards for large scale data centers

[29:06] uh we we essentially divided them into five specific categories which we're

[29:10] going to talk about individually and then poll feedback on. These include the

[29:15] definition, review process and location proposal for large-scale data centers,

[29:21] energy and water use and sourcing to the extent that we can regulate it through

[29:26] zoning setbacks, environmental compatibility, landscaping and parking

[29:32] standards and noise and generator use.

[29:38] So during the these presentation slides, uh we're asking or providing the

[29:45] opportunity for you to provide feedback on each of these proposals. Uh this can

[29:50] be done either through a QR code which will be up on the screen um in just a

[29:55] little bit or the paper sheets that some of you have as well. If you'd rather

[29:59] provide that information that way, we'll certainly accept it as well. I want to

[30:04] emphasize that both of those are the same sets of questions. They will go

[30:09] into the same set of documented responses that will be posted on the

[30:14] website and also provided to mayor and counsel and the planning commission as

[30:20] feedback that we've received on this um on this proposal. Uh there will also be

[30:25] the question and answer comment period and then additional time in the lobby

[30:29] for uh people to provide further feedback.

[30:34] So uh the next slide is really for those of you who want to get into the survey.

[30:41] This is the QR code that links to the survey. It's a series of questions that

[30:46] we'll go through section by section. Um, if you don't want to do the survey

[30:51] online, but you want to provide information, feel free to raise your

[30:54] hand. We've got some people out here who can provide paper forms as well if you'd

[30:59] rather do that. The first two questions on the online survey are name and email

[31:04] address. You are welcome to provide that if you want. We do not require that as a

[31:09] required question. If you don't want to provide that, we can simply move to the

[31:14] next questions as we get through the process. But that's what you should be

[31:19] seeing if you're getting online. Okay. Now, we're going to talk about the

[31:24] definition of a proposed large scale data center. Uh, as I mentioned earlier,

[31:30] » that slide to accommodate people with disabilities that may not be quick

[31:34] enough to get QR code. >> Certainly.

[31:36] » Thank you. >> And the QR code will also be posted at

[31:39] each set of survey questions. So, if you're unable to capture it here, we can

[31:43] capture it at each survey question as well. It's the same QR code.

[31:48] Has everybody had the opportunity to capture the QR code?

[31:54] Okay.

[31:57] So, the next item is the definition of a proposed large-scale data center. As I

[32:03] mentioned earlier, defining a large-scale data center is key to

[32:06] regulating them. Uh currently we looked at how large the data centers are that

[32:12] we have within the city of Tucson and saw a natural break at around 30 to

[32:18] 40,000 square ft. And we're looking at those are the smaller data centers that

[32:24] we've just seen develop throughout time in the city. And so we wanted to

[32:29] establish standards for the larger scale ones that we are seeing being proposed

[32:34] elsewhere. And so we established a proposed 50,000 square foot threshold

[32:40] where a data center above 50,000 square feet would be classified as a

[32:45] large-scale data center. In the definition, we also included a general

[32:50] description of equipment and use of the site. We also included language about

[32:56] ownership and uh it being part of a facility or multiple facilities um

[33:03] establishing this under contiguous ownership. So it's to avoid people

[33:07] trying to essentially circumvent the definition of a large scale data center

[33:11] by building a whole bunch of smaller data centers in in a line. And so the

[33:16] intent of this again proposed language is to uh establish something that would

[33:21] allow us to regulate large-scale data centers as they were developed. And we

[33:26] will have a question on that on the survey uh once we get through a couple

[33:30] of additional slides.

[33:35] So in addition to the definition, we would need to figure out where these

[33:40] might be permitted within the city. We [snorts] looked at our zoning code and

[33:45] determined that our existing I2 industrial zone would be the appropriate

[33:50] zoning district for a large scale data center. [clears throat] This is really

[33:55] the zoning district that is most intense and it's intended to be for those land

[34:00] uses that would provide the greatest impacts uh around the community. As

[34:06] such, these are the areas that are located, as you can see on the map, in

[34:09] areas with very little development that are far away from the urbanized areas of

[34:14] the city. So, we are proposing that data centers be permitted through a specific

[34:20] process called the Marin Council special exception, and I'll talk a little bit

[34:24] more about that within the I2 zone. So, this would be something that is not by

[34:29] right, meaning that somebody could not simply come in and say, I want to build

[34:33] a data center. Here's my build. You have my permit application. Approve it. It

[34:38] would be a process where there would be a public hearing before our zoning

[34:43] examiner who is the uh um quasi judicial reviewer. There would be a neighborhood

[34:48] meeting and there would be consideration by mayor and council. So there would be

[34:53] steps in the process that would be public for public input on any proposal

[34:57] for a data center. Um this is essentially the highest level of review

[35:02] that we have for any land use. It's it's kind of very similar to a reszoning that

[35:08] would take place within a community. So in addition to doing a merit council

[35:13] special exception uh within the I2 zone, we would also consider permitting data

[35:20] centers through a planned area development or a planned community

[35:23] development which are also very similar to a resoning where there would be the

[35:29] neighborhood meeting, zoning examiner review and merit council consideration.

[35:34] um those are very sort of project specific where there's a little bit more

[35:39] flexibility in the process but also the opportunity for additional community

[35:43] benefits. But it's really key to note in in those instances again that there

[35:48] would be a public process and mayor and council review.

[35:55] As I mentioned earlier, the process either through a Marin council special

[36:00] exception or a PAD or a PCD, planned area development or planned community

[36:04] development would require a neighborhood meeting. A neighborhood meeting is a

[36:09] public meeting where the public is invited to come to hear about the

[36:15] proposed data center project or whatever the project is um and ask questions of

[36:22] the developer at that point in time. Under our current zoning code,

[36:27] neighborhood meetings are required for any Marin Council special exception, any

[36:32] PAD or any PCD development. It is part of our process that is baked into all

[36:37] land use change. Under the current code for any of those, there's a notice

[36:43] requirement of 400 ft from the property line that property owners be notified of

[36:48] the neighborhood meeting and the proposed change as well as notification

[36:53] of all neighborhood associations within one mile.

[36:58] We are looking at propo or we are proposing extending that notification

[37:03] area due to the impacts of large-scale data centers as well as their potential

[37:09] location in largely rural areas. We're looking at extending that from 400 ft to

[37:14] half a mile and also requiring notification of all neighborhood

[37:19] associations within 2 miles. And so it's really

[37:23] seeking to have a broader notice area for the proposal than we would have for

[37:28] for any other type of land use change within the city

[37:33] » and the lovely property owners. >> That is correct under the current code.

[37:37] But if there's feedback on that, that is certainly feedback that that we would uh

[37:41] like to receive from you as well. >> You mean renters don't get notified

[37:45] under the current code? >> They do not. That is correct.

[37:48] » So they would not be notified under this code. the the property owner would be

[37:53] notified and the neighborhood associations would be notified and they

[37:56] would have the opportunity to notify their tenants or not. But that is how

[38:01] the code is currently structured. >> What about the schools?

[38:04] » Schools are property within the notification area and they would be

[38:07] notified.

[38:16] So the next slide before we get to the survey is the proposed procedure for

[38:21] data center review. This is something I've already talked about, but I just

[38:25] want to lay it out in a uh diagram because I know it's it's a complex

[38:30] process and there are a lot of steps and steps sound similar. So I can certainly

[38:34] appreciate um trying to to really wrap your head around what all those steps

[38:40] are. But the first one is the neighborhood meeting and that is the

[38:43] public meeting where the developer of the proposal would meet with the public

[38:48] to provide property owners and neighborhood associations and anyone

[38:52] else who comes to the meeting with feedback on the proposal. Uh from there

[38:58] an applicant would uh meet with city staff and then submit an application.

[39:05] Um there would be again public notice of a zoning examiner public hearing that is

[39:10] fully public notice and a public hearing would occur with our zoning examiner who

[39:16] is a again a quasi judicial person who reviews zoning cases and then makes

[39:21] recommendations to mayor and counsel. Zoning examiner would make that

[39:25] recommendation and then mayor and counsel would consider the proposal.

[39:30] Mayor and council could approve, deny, or modify a proposal based on feedback

[39:36] received. >> Is any of this required to be bilingual

[39:40] or interpreted through ASL? >> Certainly any ADA compliance would would

[39:45] be met and um certainly bilingual translation is available just like it is

[39:50] through all other city processes. >> Is the neighborhood meeting required to

[39:55] be in person? in the neighborhood meeting for project blue with just two

[39:58] people from the county, one person from the state, and a lawyer for project blue

[40:02] because that's the only people who are living anywhere near the area.

[40:07] » I really don't know about the neighborhood meeting that took place for

[40:10] project blue because it was in the county and so it was not a city process

[40:15] that was followed. But that really speaks to our intention to expand the

[40:20] notice area in the proposal for exactly that reason because if there's nobody

[40:24] that lives within the area, we want to notice a larger area to ensure that.

[40:33] Okay. Um so the next slide is back to the survey. If you'd like to provide

[40:41] feedback on the next section of questions, these relate specifically to

[40:47] the definition of large scale data centers and our notice requirements. And

[40:52] I can come back to the definition slide for a minute or so if people would like

[40:58] to review that again and provide any feedback whether you believe this

[41:03] definition um essentially goes far enough or needs to go further. And if

[41:08] you have any written feedback on this definition, uh that will certainly help

[41:12] us to receive that as well.

[41:32] » Oh, certainly. Yeah. Hold on. Here we go.

[41:39] Have you considered expanding the notification

[41:43] range because the sound profile of data centers is so much different and and

[41:48] propagates so much farther especially in this particular climate to capture more

[41:53] people that are affected. >> I think that's certainly something that

[41:56] we consider and I would encourage you to place that in the comments as well if if

[42:00] you believe that that is important.

[42:04] Back to your definition of large scale, have you considered putting an upper

[42:09] limit to this definition? So then you know we

[42:14] don't have a medium acre data center. I

[42:19] » think that's something again please provide feedback on that that will be

[42:22] very helpful for us to receive as well.

[42:32] Okay.

[42:36] » So, the next question really goes back to the the process for allowed zones and

[42:43] also the review process. Uh, so we certainly ask for feedback on the review

[42:48] process of the proposal of notifying to half an half a mile property owners as

[42:53] well as two miles to neighborhood associations. Do you feel that's

[42:58] adequate? If you have any other feedback to provide um please write it in the

[43:02] survey or on the sheet um so that we can document that as well.

[43:18] » Certainly >> go back to the one where it says 50,000

[43:22] square feet. So if they build something 49,000 square feet, they don't have to

[43:28] go through this process. >> That would be correct. It wouldn't meet

[43:31] the definition of a large scale data center, but that's part of the reason

[43:35] why we are looking at 50,000 square feet and we weren't looking at 100,000 square

[43:40] feet or something like that because

[43:44] » we we certainly looked at that as well and and there there are challenges from

[43:48] a zoning standpoint of regulating that, but please provide that feedback as

[43:52] well. Oh, we will >> again and again and again.

[43:59] » Are answers to the survey going to be made public?

[44:01] » Yes, they will all be posted online on the PDSD website, provided to mayor and

[44:06] council and provided to the planning commission.

[44:11] » So, the input that we provide, questions and clarification that are requested, we

[44:18] indicated that a committee or a group are going to compile it to the convey it

[44:24] to the mayor. Is there going to be any representation from someone outside of

[44:32] the city um group included in conveying that? Because there could be a conflict

[44:39] of interest. Um we don't really have representation as to how the data is

[44:44] manipulated or conveyed. So actual verbatim comments for

[44:50] everything that we received will be conveyed. We may provide an overview of

[44:55] the number of comments received or even categories but the actual if you will

[45:00] metadata of every single specific comment that we receive whether it's

[45:05] through the survey through comments in the registration through post-it notes

[45:09] that were posted out in the lobby through chat comments that we've

[45:13] received from the online meetings. Um, it's any other comments that we receive,

[45:18] emails, those will all be provided to mayor and council in a single document

[45:23] as well as the planning commission.

[45:34] People uh have an opportunity to answer the survey questions specific to this.

[45:39] I do want to say also that the survey will be left open for some time. So, if

[45:44] you don't get it tonight, you can come back and provide additional feedback as

[45:47] well.

[45:52] » Yeah. At this point, I'm going to turn it over to Dan Versk, who's going to

[45:55] talk about energy and water use.

[46:07] » Great. Um, thank you, Carver. Thank you everyone for joining us today. Really

[46:11] appreciate it. I do want to point out one quick thing um that might make it a

[46:16] little easier for people who are following along using the QR codes. So

[46:19] this QR code goes to uh the survey, but it's the same QR code every single time.

[46:25] So if you keep that page open, you're able to kind of follow along. So you can

[46:30] potentially if I go to the next slide, you could put it in your comments as I'm

[46:35] speaking. Um, and it'll keep you keep us from having to jump back and forth and

[46:39] having to remember kind of what we're going going over the specifics of it.

[46:44] So, just a little tip. Um, might help with some of the logistics of the

[46:49] survey. Um, but as well you also have the opportunity for the the written ones

[46:54] which is exactly the same. >> Excellent. Great. So, um, wanted to talk

[46:59] a little bit about energy and water. Um as uh Corin and Carvin Carver had

[47:05] mentioned earlier um these are two items that um zoning really um is very limited

[47:11] in what um can be regulated through these which is part of the reason why

[47:16] you know we're looking at things like the large water uh large quantity water

[47:19] use ordinance and other methods in order to really try to address these things as

[47:24] we know they are very important to the community and very important to to the

[47:27] city of Tucson. And so um related to energy consumption and sourcing um we do

[47:34] have um some regulations and things that we are proposing related to this. We

[47:40] definitely want to get your feedback on this. Um, but the idea here is to

[47:44] provide information, public information that would be part of the application,

[47:49] part of the materials that make its way through through the review and to mayor

[47:53] and counsel so our mayor and council can make really the best decision possible

[47:58] and have all the information that they need in front of them. And so the idea

[48:02] here is that every applicant that if they were to come in, there are no

[48:07] applicants that have currently come in that are in um but demonstrate access to

[48:12] adequate energy supply at the time of the application. And so they have to

[48:16] show that through disclosure um that they have adequate energy um supply at

[48:22] the time of application. It's not something to where there is an adequate

[48:26] supply and then all of a sudden infrastructure has to be created leading

[48:29] to rate increases and things of that sort. Additionally, um the applicant

[48:34] must disclose proposed amount of energy, energy mix including renewables and

[48:39] application materials related to this. So again, you're providing all of that

[48:43] information so you can make that decision. Um again, mayor and council,

[48:47] this is part of their decision-m process. Um they don't have to approve

[48:51] this. They can approve this, deny this. they could uh ask for additional

[48:55] conditions uh related to that based off that information. So again, putting the

[49:00] information in front of the public and front in front of our mayor council so

[49:04] they can make that decision. Um related to kind of water use um we have a little

[49:09] more leeway on this one um as far as what we can regulate and what we can do.

[49:14] Um but it's just not necessarily within zoning. Um, so what pretty much anything

[49:22] that any applicant that comes in must comply with the city's large quantity

[49:25] water user ordinance um if a Tucson water um customer and Scott had talked a

[49:30] little bit about this earlier, but it requires a water conservation plan. Um

[49:34] recycling water requirements impossible um and really require it and requires

[49:38] monitoring and compliance. um if they don't comply with it, there are um

[49:44] pretty steep penalties um as far as related to this um and and

[49:50] and for that. Um so if they don't fall within that however um which would be

[49:56] that 10,000 CFS that's got talked about um they would be um required or actually

[50:04] we would it'd be required to meet that the the the standard that is basically

[50:09] prohibiting the use of portable water. So they wouldn't be able to utilize

[50:12] portable water for data center cooling um if they weren't subject to the large

[50:17] quantity water use ordinance. Additionally to this um similar to the

[50:21] energy um they would be required to demonstrate access to water supply at

[50:26] the time of application as well. So yeah bringing all that information making

[50:30] sure that all that information makes it in front of mayor and council so they

[50:33] can make um a decision and understand kind of what's in front of them. All

[50:37] that information would be public. It would be submitted at the time of

[50:40] application early on in the process. So it's available to the public. It's

[50:43] available to the zoning examiners. It's available to staff. It's available to

[50:46] everyone. Um, we have a couple questions. I'm

[50:50] going to hold up for a second. Um, hopefully. Yes.

[50:55] » Will there be a requirement that they have some percentage of renewables

[51:01] or recycled water usage? >> Um, so there it's a great comment and a

[51:10] good one to submit and let us know. Um, as of now in the proposal, there are not

[51:15] a requirement for a percentage of renewable or or a percentage necessarily

[51:19] of recycled water. Um, they aren't allowed to use utilize portable water.

[51:23] Um, if they're under that and then that would be probably part of the water

[51:27] conservation plan if they were to do a large quantity of water user ordinance,

[51:30] right? >> Why not?

[51:33] » Um, >> that is that is why we are in front of

[51:36] you to get feedback related to that. So, that's that that is helpful. We

[51:39] appreciate it. Um,

[51:41] » you mentioned state penalties. Could you elaborate on that? How big of

[51:47] a second?

[51:50] » Um, related to that, I and and Scott and Chris.

[51:57] You know what we'll do? We'll look it up and then when we're doing Q&A, I'll make

[51:59] sure that we respond to that. Um, and make sure that, you know, it's it's

[52:02] pretty steep and it gets it multiplies as you have more less and less

[52:08] compliance over time. I can get those numbers

[52:10] » dollars. How are you going to They just cut you a check. How you going to How

[52:14] you going to counter that when somebody has millions of dollars will just be

[52:16] cutting your check? It's already happening across the country.

[52:20] » Anyway, so um I'm going to have to move on, but we will have Hold on one second.

[52:24] I'm going to I will let >> Chris will come up and talk real quickly

[52:28] about this because he has the details related to it and then then we'll have

[52:33] to move on. >> Just to clarify, if they're using more

[52:36] than 7.8 million gallons per month since they can use more portable water.

[52:41] » Um, it would be a part of their water conservation plan. In general, they have

[52:46] to offset all of that water use, but

[52:52] » my name is Chris Ary. I work at the Tucson City Attorney's Office. I'm going

[52:56] to answer the question about water use penalties in the large quantity water

[53:01] user ordinance that's been adopted by mayor council. There are of course some

[53:06] u financial penalties that occurred to folks who violate the slaughter

[53:11] conservation plan that they submit as part of the large quantity water user

[53:15] ordinance. But at the end stage of that there is the ability of the city to um

[53:21] enact flow restrictions or to restrict the water use manually and there's no

[53:26] amount of money that can um stop that. So I just want to point that out. Um, as

[53:32] far as offsets, again, what we're asking for in the large quantity water user

[53:37] ordinance is for applicants to demonstrate the most efficient use of

[53:41] water for the technology that they have and to also site their uh facilities in

[53:49] areas where there's proximity to reclaimed water if possible and to use

[53:54] as much reclaimed water as they can. Um, there are different perspectives about

[53:58] that and we'd love to hear your comments about whether you think

[54:02] these large facilities should use portable water or reclaim water or both.

[54:06] » Can you tell us where that valve is? We won't tell anyone. You told us

[54:09] [laughter]

[54:12] » which I did not understand that question.

[54:18] » Who gets to decide when the water gets shut off if a large water user goes too

[54:23] far? So the the language in the large

[54:27] quantity water user ordinance doesn't talk about shut offs. It talks about

[54:31] flow restrictions. So they ask a large quantity water user will be submitting a

[54:36] water use plan and if that plan is not met then we will meter the usage so that

[54:42] it complies with that plan. >> Who determines how much reclaimed water

[54:46] they should be using? Who decides what what's the best? There are a set of

[54:50] recommendations that are made on that in that respect by the city of Tucson water

[54:55] department director and some of that is related to proximity to the reclaim

[54:59] system but ultimately it's a mayor council decision.

[55:07] » Great. Thank you Chris. I appreciate it. Okay. Um moving on and we will have Q&A

[55:11] at the end. Just want to let everyone know um where we'll have the opportunity

[55:14] to be able to uh provide comments, ask questions, etc.

[55:18] Um so talk a little bit about proposed setbacks and this is something we've

[55:23] gotten a lot of feedback on so far and we do really appreciate a lot of the

[55:27] feedback um especially related to kind of noise impacts and things of that

[55:31] sort. So um in the proposal that is in front of you the one we've that we've

[55:35] that we've put in front of you um we have a required 400t setback from data

[55:41] center use uh to urban residential areas and noise sensitive uh areas such as

[55:46] schools. Um and additionally we have uh a required 200 foot setback um from data

[55:54] center use to commercial or office use is just understanding that the

[55:58] incompatibility of these of these facilities um really related to

[56:03] commercial or related to office especially related to residential um is

[56:06] not there and so this is intended to make sure that it's set back. We've

[56:10] seen, you know, a lot of situations up in um the Phoenix area where they didn't

[56:14] have regulations in place um for this and we have data centers right across

[56:19] the street from a lot of residential neighborhoods. Um they've measured you

[56:23] know heat impacts and noise impacts and things of that sort and this is really

[56:26] intended to um to mitigate some of that. Um we've had we've had several comments

[56:31] related to uh you know whether this is enough or not. Um we do really

[56:36] appreciate that. It's something we will be looking at. um as far as looking at

[56:40] potential revisions to um as we move forward um with this proposal. Um so

[56:45] that that's the current proposal um uh that we have kind of in front of you um

[56:50] related to proposed setbacks um as well for this

[56:55] um related to that uh there is a question in there related to that

[56:58] whether it's um appropriate or not um as well as you know open-ended question to

[57:04] be able to provide your comments. Huh? >> Two questions. How come the slide

[57:09] doesn't have the same amount of stuff on it as the sheet? The sheet has two more

[57:13] items, landscaping. >> Oh, yeah. We're uh we'll be talking

[57:17] about that in a second.

[57:21] » We're already within the times for community questions. It's 7:30.

[57:24] » Yeah, we're we we're almost there. Okay, we'll be there. Okay. No, we

[57:29] » How come the notification thing is is so large, but that setback is only 400 ft?

[57:35] I mean, that's nothing. >> Nothing.

[57:37] » That's so tiny. That's not a quarter of a mile.

[57:40] » Yeah.

[57:44] » Good things to comment on. We will take your feedback related, but we are

[57:47] looking at it. So, we appreciate it.

[57:56] » I'll let you know. Okay. A couple of other things that zoning can regulate.

[58:00] Uh, one of them being um noise. >> What's your name?

[58:04] » Regulation. My name is Nick Martell. >> Thank you. Um, so our proposal right now

[58:09] is to require a independent noise study that measures sound levels and tone. Um,

[58:15] that's something that would be in that 5565 decel area when it reaches a

[58:19] property line. So on the outside or the actual property line between um the

[58:24] proposed data center and any other land use. Um the other thing would be to set

[58:29] clear noise limits on that property line like I just said with those decibb um

[58:33] and then require sound walls or roof screening around generators um and then

[58:39] other loud equipment. So that's just to kind of uh a to block some of the uh the

[58:44] uh generators and some of those other visual aspects of it and also to block

[58:48] some sound.

[58:53] Is there any accommodation on that on the decel level for duration? Because

[58:58] even though it's 50 dB, 50 dB at a constant 247

[59:04] pace has a different effect than just checking for a single.

[59:08] » So I believe that would be covered in the sound study that would be required

[59:11] for this. >> What what waiting scale are you using to

[59:16] the sound? a waiting specifically derates the sal of these facilities.

[59:21] » I'd have to get back to you on that one.

[59:26] » Okay. Uh some proposed regulations for generator use. Um so generators are part

[59:30] of data centers in terms of backup power usually. Um so our proposal would be to

[59:35] use cleaner high efficiency generators such as tier 4 or natural gas or dual

[59:40] fuel. Um battery backups would be used first during power disruptions. So if

[59:46] there were a power disruption to use that backup uh battery first before

[59:50] getting into generators. Um there would be no load shifting allowed which is the

[59:54] uh running of generators instead of using grid power. Um and then generators

[59:59] run only during emergencies or required maintenance. Um and then that would be

[1:00:03] non-emergency uh maintenance would only be limited to 9 to5s on weekdays.

[1:00:09] » Who's going to regulate that and and how do you file complaints if they're not in

[1:00:14] compliance? So this would be regulated through our code enforcement. Uh code

[1:00:18] enforcement, you have a website, you can use um 311. There's several ways you can

[1:00:22] call code enforcement. >> Who monitors the load?

[1:00:26] » Sorry.

[1:00:30] » Um that would just be a regulation and if they were out of code with it, then

[1:00:33] they could be issued a violation. >> How would anybody know they were out of

[1:00:37] code? >> That would be up to our code enforcement

[1:00:39] department to enforce. >> Teen will take care of that.

[1:00:43] » All right. I will leave this up for one minute um just in case nobody got it and

[1:00:49] then I'll move on just a second. >> I'm going to go back to the compliance

[1:00:54] thing again. These guys have billions of dollars. So what are you going to do

[1:00:58] when they just keep cutting you a check and they keep violating stuff? You going

[1:01:02] to shut them off? You going to tell them to get the hell out? You can't do

[1:01:05] anything. You don't have the money against these companies. Why are you

[1:01:09] guys not thinking about this? >> Thank you for that feedback. that stuff

[1:01:12] we would love to hear. Okay, moving on to proposed landscaping.

[1:01:18] Um so one of the proposed landscape um items here would be to require an

[1:01:22] enhanced landscaping border of 20 ft. Um that would be around the property line

[1:01:26] that helps eliminate some visual aspects of these data centers. It also um

[1:01:31] provides areas to provide um low water plants um uh desert plants for desert

[1:01:38] landscaping. Um and then to define a minimum parking ratio. That's also one

[1:01:42] of the aspects of zoning. Um a lot of these do not require a lot of parking

[1:01:46] and so we would not be requiring a lot of parking for them to use it. Um kind

[1:01:50] of limiting imperous surfaces at data centers.

[1:01:55] » So there are no jobs.

[1:01:59] » Cool. Thanks. >> Okay. Environmental compatibility. So we

[1:02:04] are going to utilize some of our existing standards. Uh we are not

[1:02:07] proposing any changes to environmental compatibility. Uh we would require

[1:02:11] applicants to adhere to any overlays such as the environmental resource zone

[1:02:16] um the wash overlays the water course amenity safety and habitat zones. They

[1:02:20] would have to utilize commercial rainwater harvesting and hillside

[1:02:23] development standards.

[1:02:27] This includes protection of existing aoyos and washes. Uh the use of low

[1:02:32] water and drought tolerant plants. Uh as well as a requirement of harvesting 50%

[1:02:37] of total landscape water demands. Um just then touching on some of those uh

[1:02:42] desert landscapes that I was talking about. Um and then utilizing an existing

[1:02:45] airport hazard district uh requirements on glare. A lot of our I2 zones are

[1:02:51] pretty close to the airport. So they would have to comply with all airport

[1:02:54] environment zone uh requirements. >> Okay. On that last point, what where

[1:02:59] would I find Can you go back? >> Uh where would I find those standards?

[1:03:04] The state standards. >> These are in our unified development

[1:03:07] code. These would be in the overlay section of the UDC. Um if you would

[1:03:11] like, I can talk to you afterward and show you if you'd like to see them.

[1:03:17] » Okay. Um going to give you another minute if you would like to put any

[1:03:21] feedback in for those landscape parking and compatibility. [clears throat]

[1:03:36] » Then no need to go back to the good

[1:03:52] All right, we just have a couple more slides before we can get to the question

[1:03:56] and answer comment section. U just wanted to emphasize I already covered

[1:04:01] some of this opportunities for further input and discussion. This QR code is

[1:04:06] for the PDSD website where information is going is all posted. Uh, as I

[1:04:12] mentioned earlier, we're looking at probably a mayor and council special or

[1:04:16] a study session in April and then to be determined on planning commission study

[1:04:21] session, planning commission public hearing and merit council consideration.

[1:04:26] Uh, we also have a um FAQ document that we are continuing to

[1:04:33] update and it's posted to the website. Uh, this is again the process uh that we

[1:04:39] outlined earlier. you've already seen that. Um, and so now we're getting set

[1:04:44] up for the Q&A section. Uh, microphone is being set up by Cesar. Uh, please

[1:04:50] line up behind the microphone to speak. Uh, we ask that you please be succinct

[1:04:54] and speak for no more than 60 seconds so that we can ensure that everybody has an

[1:04:58] opportunity to speak wishes to. And your questions during this Q&A uh, session

[1:05:05] will be included on the record of public input. um these are being filmed and

[1:05:10] these will be documented and sent to parent council and the planning

[1:05:13] commission as well.

[1:05:17] » Okay, great. So, we have about 20 minutes for Q&A. Again, no more than 60

[1:05:22] seconds. We want everybody to have a chance their chance to to ask questions

[1:05:26] or speak. >> Can you give us

[1:05:32] » the full 30 minutes? >> Well, spoke pretty slow. So,

[1:05:38] So, um, Colleen is holding going to hold up cards to remind you of your seconds.

[1:05:44] Um, we know that in public hearings, you get three minutes. This is one minute

[1:05:48] because this is not a public hearing and we want more people that have a chance.

[1:05:52] So, um, and Cesar will be making sure that you also know when it's time to

[1:05:58] stop, but we really value your comments. So, go ahead. First, let's hopefully the

[1:06:02] mic is working. >> Yes. Hi. Uh, my name is Vake. I'm a

[1:06:06] member of the no desert data center coalition um can you bring up the slide

[1:06:10] of the map please with the with the I2 zones. Um and while that's happening um

[1:06:15] I encourage everyone here to leave comments that say prohibit large scale

[1:06:20] data centers. I think we've heard tonight that whatever restrictions there

[1:06:23] are incredibly hard to enforce if at all. Um and so please do say just

[1:06:28] prohibit large scale data centers. It's not up to us to explain how to do that

[1:06:32] legally. It's up to our city staff to figure that out. Um so if you do know

[1:06:37] that though, please let them know. Um so this map, the purple area is the large

[1:06:42] is the um heavy industrial area to the south of the airport. If you see that

[1:06:46] little carve out south of that purple area, that's Summit. They have no uh

[1:06:51] representation in the city of Tucson, but they are 80% Latin. And they border

[1:06:55] the largest section of industrial, heavy industrial. You can see the western

[1:06:59] border there is the San Javier district of the Kona nation. So these are folks

[1:07:04] who are disenfranchised by these data centers and that's the heaviest

[1:07:07] concentration right there. This is environmental racism.

[1:07:15] So hi, my name is L. I'm here to represent myself as a geoccientist from

[1:07:18] the University of Arizona and I'm also here as a member of Tucson Red Action.

[1:07:23] Uh our group has made a list of demands and I'm just going to go over that real

[1:07:26] quick. Our first one, a complete dedication to the not one drop policy.

[1:07:31] This includes uh water and it's been amended to be an airbased project. We

[1:07:36] want to include that also all natural resources including petroleum, gas uh

[1:07:41] etc. Um our second demand uh we want a commitment to the prohibition of any

[1:07:48] data center. Um we demand that the city at every stage if you have spoken that

[1:07:54] you are only able to control this from a building code standpoint. Um all the

[1:07:59] other groups um need to work with you to make sure that no data center can be

[1:08:04] made. Uh and most importantly we want a seat at the table. Uh this TAC board

[1:08:09] lacks proper representation by the people who will be affected most. We

[1:08:14] want energy experts, water experts from nonprivate, non um for-profit

[1:08:20] organizations along with gender and racial tribal voices.

[1:08:24] » Great. >> And I'll just like if you have written

[1:08:29] comments for this this opportunity at the mic, please also submit those in

[1:08:33] writing.

[1:08:36] » Um my name is Reyes or doesn't really matter. Um, but if I go home and I turn

[1:08:41] on the faucets in my house, um, I will be shut off water eventually. So, why

[1:08:46] does this standard not, you know, follow liquid status centers?

[1:08:50] » Y, >> our water is our most precious resource

[1:08:52] in the desert. And they're already talking about cutting us off from the

[1:08:55] Colorado River water. Um, and the second point is the last time I was here that

[1:09:00] your tag group of experts, none of them were explicitly against data centers,

[1:09:05] which you have a bias in there. If you have true expertise, some of them would

[1:09:10] lead to the fact that they don't believe data centers are are a viable option in

[1:09:13] our desert. You're picking first on if these people are pro data center and

[1:09:17] then decide their expertise among them. It's not fair. Um, finally, there needs

[1:09:23] to be a prohibitive uses of this data center. There is obnoxious uses such as

[1:09:27] immigration enforcement and mass surveillance. Um, that needs to be

[1:09:31] [applause]

[1:09:38] My name is Kathy Thompson. Um, I'd like to quantify what an actual need is. We

[1:09:44] don't need a data center. We need schools. We need hospitals. We need

[1:09:48] homes. We need food distribution. We [applause] don't need data center all of

[1:09:53] our use to just sell us more crap. It's going to end up in the landfill. Um

[1:09:59] these companies are rushing to build these data centers because the private

[1:10:03] capital is drying up. Companies like Blue Owl, Apollo, they have seen great

[1:10:08] drops in their stock prices recently. They they are just rushing to just take

[1:10:12] advantage of communities. Um I'd like to also find out if you're going to find

[1:10:17] for excess water use, what are you going to do? Go to the Midwest or the

[1:10:21] Northwest and buy more and ship it here? I mean, the fine doesn't do anything.

[1:10:25] The water is a precious resource for life. It's not for this technology

[1:10:30] behemoth that we're going to look at in 10 years and say, "Who the heck let them

[1:10:34] build that thing?" [applause]

[1:10:42] Hi there. My name is Melissa Westbrook. Um, number one, looking at that panel,

[1:10:46] it looks about white. Uh, [laughter] secondly, um, this thing has grammatical

[1:10:52] and one very glaring numerical error. If you need someone to proofread, I used to

[1:10:56] be a proofreader and editor. Um, I will say to you that again, we do need to

[1:11:02] understand why are we building these things? Why this rush for AI? It's

[1:11:09] dangerous. It's dangerous in our public schools. And that's my area of

[1:11:13] expertise. So, I don't I grew up here. I'm a pr proud wildcat. Water is our

[1:11:21] most precious resource. We are not going to give it away. We don't have it. The

[1:11:28] Colorado River, you guys have got to Somebody's got to put the brakes on. If

[1:11:33] it's all about money, I got you. If it's all about money, hey,

[1:11:40] [applause]

[1:11:46] my name is Aiden. I'm a member of local IU 140 or I local 140. Uh, I just have

[1:11:51] two things to say. one, as far as I can tell, AI has been used to power the

[1:11:56] worst elements in our society just over and over again. I can't see any real

[1:12:00] reason that it would be a benefit to our city to have one of these data centers.

[1:12:03] On a more procedural point, uh I have experience working with a lot of large

[1:12:07] corporations. They're going to violate your policies. They violate policies,

[1:12:11] safety policies, environmental policies constantly and with no regard. And so if

[1:12:16] your first thought is not how are we going to prevent them or stop them when

[1:12:21] they do violate these policies, you're looking at it from the wrong

[1:12:24] perspective, you're you're not going to stop them from using too much water or

[1:12:27] too much power or too much whatever. They do it on a regular basis. They will

[1:12:31] easily put their employees at risk. They'll take the blood out of your veins

[1:12:34] if you let them. And so if you're not looking at them as your enemy, you're

[1:12:37] looking at this wrong.

[1:12:41] » [applause and cheering]

[1:12:43] » HI, MY NAME IS DIANE Rosia and I'm a proud Tucson of 56 years and I'm a

[1:12:48] realtor. So, I house people here in our city. I have a question.

[1:12:54] Since Tucson already has a data center operating within the city limits at

[1:12:59] roughly 40,000 square ft of raised floor space, why wasn't that considered

[1:13:05] sufficient reason earlier to review whether the land use codes should

[1:13:10] address impacts such as setbacks, energy, water use, environmental

[1:13:15] compatibility, noise and generator use, and appropriate zoning before future

[1:13:20] applications arise.

[1:13:24] » [applause] >> have an answer before the next comment.

[1:13:33] » Okay, sorry about that. Um, yes. So, honestly, we hadn't heard any concerns

[1:13:38] related to that and it wasn't until we heard concerns from the public that we

[1:13:43] really needed we needed to go in and actually create regulations related to

[1:13:48] this and look at those attacks. And so that is the reason why those data

[1:13:52] centers were just functioning within industrial areas and it really we hadn't

[1:13:58] had any complaints by neighbors around there or anything else. That's the

[1:14:01] reason why until this point we hadn't.

[1:14:08] » Hi guys, it's April. I wanted to bring up two things. When my neighborhood

[1:14:14] wanted to install a traffic calming device with a grant in our neighborhood,

[1:14:19] we had to get signatures from 60% of the residents on that street.

[1:14:26] And yet, these proposed notifications are actually nowhere near

[1:14:32] the amount that should be compared to something like a community trying to get

[1:14:37] a very real benefit like a traffic calming. Secondly, I know that we know

[1:14:43] as people who have code and write code and deal with code in Tucson, we know

[1:14:48] how to make land uses prohibited. We know how to make it prohibited for

[1:14:55] shelters, for rehabs, for many other actual useful land uses. And that's why

[1:15:00] Mayor Castle just had to declare an emergency around homelessness to get

[1:15:05] over those codes. I encourage you to learn from what you do well already

[1:15:10] [laughter] and apply that to this situation. Thank you.

[1:15:19] » Hi, my name is Reed. Um, I'm I'm tired. I'm tired of this. I'm tired

[1:15:27] of coming to these meetings. I'm tired of saying the same things over and over

[1:15:31] again to the city officials, specifically mayor and council, who do

[1:15:36] not appear to be listening. Why should we expect mayor and council to listen to

[1:15:40] you or to listen to the feedback that we have given you when they were spending

[1:15:46] they spent a couple years before they told anyone about project blue working

[1:15:51] behind the scenes to make it happen? They were meeting regularly with Amazon

[1:15:55] every few weeks. I think 2024, 2025 to get advice from Amazon about Arizona

[1:16:02] water law and they never thought to tell the people of Tucson. These are the

[1:16:06] people you're reporting to. My question for you is, how are you, given that

[1:16:12] betrayal, how are you going to get them to listen to you? How are you going to

[1:16:16] get them to listen to us? Cuz I don't have any faith that they will.

[1:16:21] [applause]

[1:16:26] Hi there, Derek Espalos. I am an accountant, a data analyst, and a

[1:16:30] current candidate for the Arizona Corporation Commission, which I can

[1:16:33] assure you is not going to protect anyone from anything that happens. So, I

[1:16:39] have three questions. I'm just going to throw them out there. Why should we

[1:16:43] trust this process? Because there, as was just mentioned, we've been through

[1:16:48] this process. We keep going through this process and no trust is never

[1:16:52] established. The second question is, are you going to disclose how you're

[1:16:57] scraping and putting together this data? Because having the binary options mixed

[1:17:02] with the comment option leads to a lot of statistical bias. And finally, when

[1:17:08] will [clears throat] Tucson understand that no means no?

[1:17:11] » No.

[1:17:14] » Response before the next. >> Yeah, I want to respond to that question

[1:17:17] and the previous question about the process and where is this feedback

[1:17:20] going? How do you know this is going to be listened to? So, our mayor council is

[1:17:25] very interested in the feedback from the public and the technical advisory

[1:17:29] committee. That's actually why they put a pause on project blue last summer so

[1:17:34] that we could have a broader community conversation about what are the

[1:17:38] safeguards we need to have in place for our community as these uses are

[1:17:41] proposed. So, I think it's exactly in reaction to what they heard from the

[1:17:45] community that they directed staff to make sure we have protections and guard

[1:17:50] rails in place for our community. So, that's their intent with this process.

[1:17:54] Um, and we will be taking all of this feedback to mayor and council in the

[1:17:58] next month or so um to give them an update on what we've heard so far and

[1:18:04] give them an opportunity to provide additional feedback and direction.

[1:18:13] Hi, my name is Leilani. Um, a comment and then a question. Um, under the

[1:18:19] location and design section, I believe there was a bullet that said the

[1:18:25] applicant would propose the regulations. I find that comical. Why would we afford

[1:18:32] the applicant the right to propose the regulations? I don't know if you're

[1:18:38] looking for feedback on how we should incorporate or mandate the process as

[1:18:46] well as the feedback on the impacts. Um, and then also with regards to the

[1:18:53] penalties that have been assessed, I'd like to know over the last 10 years what

[1:18:59] the financial penalties that have been assessed. He didn't mention, Chris did

[1:19:04] not mention uh and because we know there no one's

[1:19:08] monitoring it. Um and that would show that it would support that no one's

[1:19:14] monitoring it. So the financial penalties I'm curious what that amount

[1:19:18] is. Um yeah, I know. But um >> you're good.

[1:19:24] » Okay. >> Yeah. Okay. Um with regards to the

[1:19:29] applicant demonstrating the access to energy Okay. Okay. Go ahead and respond.

[1:19:35] » I'll get back in line if there's still by the way I'm happy to speak and talk

[1:19:40] through the details of some of those. I'm not entirely sure about the um

[1:19:45] applicant proposing. Um I will say related to the large quantity water use

[1:19:49] ordinance. It was just put in place in August and as Scott has mentioned

[1:19:53] previously um existing there are no uh large quantity water people that would

[1:20:01] actually qualify for that that are on the portable system and the only ones

[1:20:04] that are really in the in the city. There's only a handful and they're on

[1:20:07] the reclaimed system as of now. And so that kind of gives you an understanding

[1:20:12] of how large of the that threshold is, but it also gives you an understanding

[1:20:16] of kind of the reason why there wouldn't be any penalties because no one is

[1:20:19] actually a part of that program at this point.

[1:20:26] » Good evening. Thank you for taking my question. My name is Albert. I am a

[1:20:31] retired uh environmental biology teacher. And

[1:20:35] one of the things I used to teach my students when it became the topic of

[1:20:40] water was the concept of water mining. And most people don't understand what

[1:20:46] water mining is. So I'm going to address you guys. That is when you take more

[1:20:51] water out of the ground than reflections. There's nothing in a hole

[1:20:55] and pumping water. Just water was limited by 2025 by law to stop water

[1:21:02] mining. And that's why we started blending cap water. Any development in

[1:21:08] town has to be a guaranteed 100year water supply. How is billions of gallons

[1:21:15] a month going to guarantee that this data center will will have enough water

[1:21:22] supply for a 100 years. And how are we going to do that without water mining?

[1:21:28] That would be my question perhaps for the lawyer of Susan. Thank you. I think

[1:21:34] the [applause] change

[1:21:39] 2030 used to be 2025.

[1:21:46] [clears throat] >> All right.

[1:21:49] » So to help answer that question, one of the requirements of the large quantity

[1:21:53] water users policy was that they do have to fall within our assured water supply.

[1:21:57] So that is one of the requirements that we would look at to make sure that we're

[1:22:00] not going above and beyond. Um so that is one of the things that we have that

[1:22:04] much water in the desert. >> We have that much water.

[1:22:09] » We have a very resilient supply as of right now.

[1:22:18] » Okay. I want to let you know we have our hard stuff at 8 because we have to leave

[1:22:23] this room. It will continue in the lobby and staff will stick around for at least

[1:22:27] a half an hour and can talk individually with all of you. So, let's continue. We

[1:22:32] can get in hopefully three more people. >> Hi, Elena native Tonan. Um, I want a

[1:22:38] future in Tucson, which is why I'm here. Um, I just want to add my voice to the

[1:22:44] many voices here who are asking to see more prohibitive zoning that would

[1:22:48] actually prohibit hypers scale data centers in the city t of Tucson limits.

[1:22:53] Um, I see some of the efforts in the proposed code to mitigate harms um from

[1:23:00] this development. I appreciate that and frankly it's just not enough. Um, I

[1:23:05] think we're still seeing that communities are facing disproportionate

[1:23:09] harms while we don't really get to see any of the benefits, frankly, of these

[1:23:13] projects. Um, I have major concerns about enforcement and monitoring. Who

[1:23:18] does this? Is this sufficient? Particularly, as folks have mentioned,

[1:23:22] for companies that are making billions of dollars. Um, you seem to imply in

[1:23:26] some of your answers and some of what I saw written that it's up to the public

[1:23:29] to like call in. Um, so anyway, I want to understand the enforcement and the

[1:23:33] monitoring mechanisms. Um, how do data centers fit into plan Tucson and how

[1:23:40] you're prioritizing economic development in the city? A plan Tucson general plan

[1:23:46] is a reflection of a city's values. Is like, do we value this? Is this within

[1:23:51] our values? Is this something

[1:23:57] [applause]

[1:23:59] about us? Hi. Um, I am not an expert in anything

[1:24:03] unfortunately. Um, I just had a couple of like facts that I just kind of

[1:24:07] Googled really quickly. Um, so that's a quick quick Google search. Um, you can

[1:24:11] see that AI in 2025 used about give or take 3 312 to 764 billion water liters

[1:24:19] of water this year, last year alone. And it's projected that in Phoenix um, data

[1:24:24] centers could consume up to 3.8 billion gallons of water per year. Tucson

[1:24:28] doesn't have that kind of water. Do we want the water to go to people in

[1:24:32] communities or do we want it to go to data centers here? Yep. [applause]

[1:24:39] » Hi, my name is Brandon. This might be normally where I take do the courageous

[1:24:43] thing and thank you for hosting this meeting, but we're not thankful that we

[1:24:46] have to keep coming out to these meetings and talking to you guys. Last

[1:24:49] summer, we told you we don't want a data center in the desert. It does not make

[1:24:52] sense for us. no matter what regulations you put on the screen, um it's just not

[1:24:56] right for the desert. It doesn't make any sense here. Um and instead of

[1:24:59] listening to us, you guys have jumped to this inevitability that the data center

[1:25:03] has to be here. So, let's just go ahead and figure out how we're going to

[1:25:05] regulate that. >> They're not inevitable.

[1:25:07] » They're not inevitable. That's what we're here to tell you. We don't have to

[1:25:10] have a data center in the desert. It doesn't make sense to do it. The first

[1:25:13] question on your frequently asked questions flyer is, can we prohibit a

[1:25:16] data center from being here? >> Yeah.

[1:25:18] » Instead of answering that, you've just told us what a data center is. If you

[1:25:21] look at that, the question should be, "What is it actually?" You didn't answer

[1:25:23] the question. Um, but I think in one of your slides, you maybe did because it

[1:25:27] says that the city is able to control land use.

[1:25:30] » Yeah. >> So, instead of having these regulations

[1:25:32] and these conversations, how about we stop stop and talk about how we're going

[1:25:36] to not have a data center here. It does not make sense.

[1:25:41] [applause] We'll take the last question, but I

[1:25:44] think it should be noted that there's a complete error in the response to the

[1:25:48] first question. That's not actually the response. They just discovered this.

[1:25:52] Final question for comments. >> Hi, my name is Lee and my question is

[1:25:57] why was TEP allowed on the technical advisory committee when they have a

[1:26:01] vested interest in building data centers? [applause]

[1:26:05] The for-profit company, the Canadian company that owns TP said they plan to

[1:26:09] spend$ 1.5 to2 billion on additional generation. So, it seems like we

[1:26:14] shouldn't have someone with a vested interest guiding this. Um, I also want

[1:26:17] to know if you're looking at all about the connection of this map and

[1:26:20] environmental racism cuz these seem like the communities like on the southside

[1:26:25] that have been poisoned for generations and generations. So, if you're not going

[1:26:28] to put one in the foothills, I don't think you should put a data center

[1:26:31] anywhere in the final question. Why is there so many

[1:26:35] police here? This is a community meeting. It feels like to have a whole

[1:26:39] line of police here. So, >> yeah, I would really like to look at

[1:26:43] facts to include environmental justice and the history of of pollution in

[1:26:47] Tucson. Thank you. [cheering]

[1:26:51] [applause]

[1:26:54] » We really need all the feedback. Thank you for sharing your concerns,

[1:26:58] questions, and input in this process. It is definitely going to shape what we

[1:27:02] take to Mayor Council and where this process ultimately goes for our

[1:27:06] community. So, thank you all for being here tonight. We will be around um in

[1:27:10] the lobby for more questions and discussion if folks have more time and

[1:27:14] more questions that you want to ask. Um but we do need to leave the auditorium

[1:27:17] now so that uh Ringcon High can close up for the evening. Thank you very much to

[1:27:22] Ringcon High for hosting us and thank you all for being here.

Community Meeting on Large-Scale Data Centers Zoning March 5, 2026

Transcript