Page planning commission reviews proposed citywide data‑center overlay ordinance

The Page Planning & Zoning Commission held a special work session to review a proposed text amendment, TX‑2026‑02, that would create a citywide data‑center overlay district and establish permitting standards for prospective data‑center projects. The session was structured as a citizen review: staff, the city’s consultant and legal counsel presented the draft rules and answered questions from commissioners and the public. No formal action was taken.

Jen, a planner with Logan Simpson who helped draft the language, described the overlay as a tool to allow data centers only where infrastructure exists. "They're the physical facilities where our Internet lives," she said, explaining typical footprints, equipment and impacts. The draft restricts eligible sites to business‑park or industrial zones near at least 115 kilovolt transmission lines and adds requirements including a mandatory pre‑application meeting, development agreement, site and building design review, and enhanced public notice (mailed mailers within 0.5 miles plus standard publication).

Staff emphasized the overlay is rule‑making, not approval of any project. "Approving the text amendment doesn't approve a data center in those zones," said Sylvia Shaffer, the city's development services director. The overlay would require applicants to supply studies documenting electrical and water supply, baseline acoustical and vibration studies, fire‑suppression and emergency‑response plans, and a decommissioning and electronic‑waste plan before the city would consider rezones or site approvals. The commission scheduled the draft for continued discussion at its regular meeting next week, followed by a council hearing later in the process.

Why it matters: the overlay would change how Page evaluates large industrial internet infrastructure by setting specific performance and study requirements up front. Proponents say it provides a clear, defensible path for review and public input; opponents warned the draft may not fully protect local water and noise interests and pressed for stronger mitigation and enforcement provisions. The public Q&A produced detailed follow‑up items staff said they would consider ahead of next week's vote.