3-minute read
The developer behind a controversial proposal to build a data center in west Lakeland has withdrawn its application and canceled a key city review meeting that had been scheduled for Wednesday.
The application code-named “Project Swan” is now marked withdrawn in the city’s online iMS system. The proposal called for a 600,000-square-foot data center on land near Old Tampa Highway and Wilkinson Road.
“This afternoon, legal counsel for the developer canceled the meeting for tomorrow,” Lakeland Communications Director Larry Little said.
The move came one day after more than 50 residents attended a City Commission meeting to oppose the project — and the same day the developer received a 13-page review containing comments from 15 city departments and specialties.
City code doesn’t currently allow data centers
Among the most significant findings was Executive Planner Audrey McGuire’s analysis that Lakeland’s land development code does not specifically allow data centers.
“The City of Lakeland Land Development Code (LDC) does not specifically list Data Centers as a permitted use,” McGuire wrote. She said that means they “are presumed to be a prohibited use” unless the applicant successfully argues that they are “essentially the same as another permitted use.”
McGuire also concluded that “data centers are not permissible” under the current planned unit development governing part of the property.
Existing approvals don’t provide a path forward
Part of the site already carries industrial land-use and zoning approvals tied to a fertilizer-processing facility that was proposed more than a decade ago in conjunction with the adjacent West Lakeland Wastewater Reduction Facility.
But McGuire cautioned that those approvals “should not be interpreted as a justification for expanding or allowing more intensive Level III Industrial uses in the area.”
She also wrote that data centers “are not major employment/business center uses and may result in negative impacts to surrounding residential uses.”
Multiple land-use changes could be required
The review indicates the project could require a lengthy list of approvals before moving forward.
Potential requirements include annexing county land into the city, changing residential and business park land-use designations to industrial, creating new Planned Unit Development zoning on some parcels, and substantially modifying existing PUD approvals on others.
Each step would require public hearings and votes.
City staff also requested extensive third-party studies and technical information before any future application could proceed.
Studies sought on noise, pollution, and utilities
McGuire wrote that the studies should include, but not be limited to:
- Noise impacts
- Water quality and pollution
- Air pollution
- HVAC systems
- Cooling fans and chillers
- Electrical transformers
- Backup generators
- Vibration impacts
The city also requested detailed information about water consumption, wastewater demand, cooling systems, and electrical needs.
Traffic and infrastructure questions remain
Other reviewers raised concerns about transportation, flooding, drainage, and utilities.
Transportation staff said they were concerned about increased commercial traffic using Wilkinson Road bridges and navigating sharp curves east of the site. A major traffic study would be required.
Water Utilities staff noted that “The wastewater system in this area has a limited amount of capacity available” and requested detailed demand estimates before determining whether service could be provided.
Engineering reviewers also identified floodplain, wetland, and stormwater issues that would require extensive analysis and permitting.
Project could return later
Despite the withdrawal, city officials say the proposal is not necessarily dead.
“The applicant has already received these comments from the Development Review Team,” Little said. “This doesn’t end the process. There’s no final decision. … Right now, it just puts the ball in their court.”
The application could remain inactive indefinitely while the developer weighs its options.
“There is no timeline on the applicant responding to the DRT comments,” Little said. “This can sit here for six months. It can sit here for three years.”
latest news
Something went wrong. Please refresh the page and/or try again.
