On the agenda: Castle Pines View/Download Agenda — Data Center (Oct 20)

`

MARTIN MUNICIPAL-REGIONAL
CALLED PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
FOR
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 20, 2026
5:15 P.M.
POLICE DEPARTMENT COURTROOM

1. Call to order and determination of quorum.
2. Citizens Comments.
3. Rezoning Request – Scott Olds & Sherry Rister (933 University Street) & Rick
Wilson (111 Courtright Road).
4. Discussion on potential zoning regulations governing Data Centers.
5. Staff Planner.
6. Any other business.
7. Adjournment.

MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:

Martin Municipal/Regional Planning Commission
Donny Bunton, Community Planner
September 30, 2026
STAFF PLANNER’S REPORT ON AGENDA ITEMS

1. Call to order and determination of quorum.
2. Citizens Comments.
3. Rezoning Request – Scott Olds & Sherry Rister (933 University Street) &
Rick Wilson (111 Courtright Road)

Wilson Property

Background. A request was submitted (in June) to rezone properties located at
933 University Street and 111 Courtright Drive from R-1 (Low Density
Residential) to B-2 (Intermediate Business). The properties are owned by Scott
Olds & Sherry Rister and Rick Wilson, respectively. 933 University Street is
approximately 19,250 square feet in size, while 111 Courtright Drive is
approximately 41,000 square feet in size. There are existing residences located on
both properties
The Wilson property was added to the request in between the June and July
Planning Commission meetings. The request, featuring only the Olds/Rister
property, was discussed but tabled during the June Planning Commission meeting.
Both of these properties had requested the same rezoning in 2020. At that time, the
request received a positive recommendation from the Planning Commission but did
not receive approval of the City Board.
After the request was positively recommended to the City Board in July, in
September it was referred back to the Planning Commission (by the City Board)
for further consideration. In particular, it was requested that the Planning
Commission consider rezoning the subject properties B-1 (Local Business), rather

than B-2. This was based on a citizen’s suggestion, during the September City
Board meeting, that the B-1 district would be less impactful to neighboring
residential properties because it has a shorter list of permitted uses (than the B-2
district does).
Analysis. In favor of the rezoning request, the properties lie across the street from
an existing B-2 district and can be easily connected to said district without creating
spot zone concerns. Also, the properties are designated for future commercial
growth according to the City’s future land use map (which is a component of the
City’s adopted land use plan). Also, the properties front on Courtright Road which
already accommodates commercial traffic and features commercial level water and
sewer mains.
As a negative the properties abuts a residential subdivision and feature limited
screening or buffering around their periphery. If the requested rezoning were to be
approved, adequate screening along the boundaries of the properties (with the
adjacent residences) should be required during the site plan approval process.
This paragraph will address the proposed revision to the proposal so that the
properties are rezoned to a B-1 designation (rather than a B-2 designation). This
type of revision seems doable to the staff planner. While this would somewhat have
the appearance of a spot zone, it technically would be considered such because the
permitted uses are so similar between the B-1 and B2 districts. Also, placing the
subject properties in a B-1 designation would create an (almost) buffer between the
existing B-2 zoning district and the residential subdivision.
Recommendation. The staff planner recommends approval of the request with a
B-1 designation.
4. Discussion on potential zoning regulations governing Data Centers.
Discussion will continue on potentially regulating Data Centers through the
Zoning Ordinance. These types of uses have been known to use a large amount of
water and electricity, to also generate a persistent audio footprint.
During the August meeting, the staff planner presented a draft proposal for zoning
Data Center Regulations. In September a lengthy discussion was held on the
matter, with further action deferred to this meeting.
The primary hallmarks of these regulations would be:
•

Data Centers would be separated into two categories: Data Centers and
Hyperscale Data Centers.

•

All Data Centers and Hyperscale Data Centers would be limited to location in
M-2 (Heavy Industrial) districts.

•

Data Centers would have a required buffer of 500 feet from residential
districts and uses, while Hyperscale Data Centers would have a required
buffer of 1,000 feet from residential uses.

•

Data Centers would have a minimum lot size of 5 acres, while Hyperscale
Data Centers would have a minimum lot size of 20 acres.

•

In addition to screening and buffering requirements already required by the
Zoning Ordinance, a noise study, traffic analysis, utility impact study, and
lighting plan would also be required as part of the site plan approval process.

Since the last meeting, the staff planner has added the following provision (under
the Site Plan Review section):
If all of the above site plan criteria are not met, and/or if the information provided
by the Noise Study and Utility Impact Analysis do not seem satisfactory (to the
pertinent reviewing governing agencies), the subject site plan shall be disapproved.

5. Staff Planner.
6. Any other business.
7. Adjournment.