Site Screening Walkthrough
How a data center site gets screened before serious spend begins.
Walk a hypothetical 300-acre site near Ashland, Nebraska from intake to executive brief — before legal, consultant, utility, and political spend compounds.
Sample output based on real Nebraska zoning frameworks and comparable case data. All outputs labeled illustrative.
The Problem
What site screening looks like today.
Current Reality
Timeline
4-8 weeks from first call to a committee-ready brief
Cost
$40K-$80K across outside counsel, consultants, and utility engineering
Sources
Scattered attorney notes, broker conversations, a weekend of Googling
Community risk
Discovered at the first public hearing, when 200 residents are already holding signs
Comparables
None systematic. Your team learns about Google Indianapolis from a trade publication after your LOI is signed
Go/no-go meeting
VP asks "What's the source for this?" Nobody knows. The brief gets sent back
With RealClear
Timeline
Cited-review queue targets a delivery window confirmed at acceptance of the completed property submission; complex or thin-record sites can take longer
Cost
A fraction of the attorney and consultant fees your team currently absorbs
Sources
Key claims tied to specific documents: zoning resolution, board minutes, utility report
Community risk
Opposition profiled before your team makes a single phone call
Comparables
Cross-referenced against 36 documented data center fights across 16 states
Go/no-go meeting
Site memo with material constraints, approval path, and open questions. VP decides, not guesses
Stop 1 of 5
Create a site.
Three fields open a site file. Where, what, and how big. Everything else is derived from public records.
New Site Analysis
Used by
Development associate or acquisitions lead
Decision unlocked
Is this site worth screening?
Stop 2 of 5
Site file.
Score, key constraints, approval path, open questions, and document summary in one view.
Site File
~300 Acres Near Ashland, NE
Hyperscale Data Center · 200 MW initial · Stage: Screening
(illustrative)
Zoning review
Reading...
Approval path review
Reading...
Community risk review
Reading...
Comparable outcomes review
Reading...
Site memo build
Reading...
Material Constraints
- AG zoning, no DC use
- Platte River setback
- No industrial precedent
Approval Path
- Full rezoning AG → I-2
- Planning Comm → Board vote
- Simple majority (4 of 7)
Open Questions
- OPPD large-load policy?
- Comp plan industrial areas?
- Adjacent county alternative?
Source documents behind this site file
Used by
Development desk, deal team
Decision unlocked
Kill, hold, or advance to deeper diligence
Stop 3 of 5
Approval path and parallel utility risk.
Zoning and utility approvals run simultaneously, and both can kill the deal. RealClear maps them in parallel so your team sees every veto point before committing budget.
Entitlement Path
Base Zoning
AG (Agricultural)
Data Center Use
Not listed in permitted or conditional uses
Required Action
Full rezoning to I-2 (Heavy Industrial)
Decision Bodies
Planning Commission (advisory) → County Board (final, 4 of 7 majority)
Public Hearings
2-3 (commission + board, possible continuance)
Overlay
Platte River floodplain buffer — reduces usable acreage
Power & Utility
Provider
OPPD (Omaha Public Power District) — public power
Requested Load
200 MW initial, 500 MW full build
Interconnection
New substation + transmission upgrades likely required
Regulatory Path
No PUC approval needed (public power), but OPPD board must approve large-load contracts
Rate Structure
Public power rates historically lower than investor-owned
Comparable
Oracle Stargate’s 1,383 MW required MPSC special contracts and attracted AG intervention
Parallel Gating Risk
- OPPD board approval is a separate political gate from county rezoning — both must pass
- Large-load policy is evolving — OPPD has not publicly addressed 200 MW+ single-customer commitments
- Timeline misalignment: if rezoning takes 8-14 months but interconnection takes 18-36 months, the zoning approval expires before power arrives
Comparable Outcomes
| Dimension | This Site (NE) | Google Indy | Nobles County | Microsoft Caledonia |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Approval path | Full rezoning | Full rezoning | Ordinance change | CUP |
| Agricultural land | Yes, ~300 acres | Yes, ~468 acres | Yes, rural county | Yes, ~1,000 acres |
| Opposition | High (projected) | Near-unanimous | Commission opposed | 40 of 49 opposed |
| Utility complexity | Medium (OPPD public) | High (AES rate fight) | Low | Medium |
| Outcome | Under analysis | Withdrawn | Denied | Cancelled |
| Score | 38/100 | 2/100 | 15/100 | 1/100 |
This Site (NE)
38/100Google Indianapolis
2/100Nobles County
15/100Microsoft Caledonia
1/100Source documents
Used by
Development lead, utility engineer, outside counsel
Decision unlocked
What is the timeline, and where are the veto points?
Stop 4 of 5
The source-cited site memo.
The memo your VP takes into the go/no-go meeting. Key claims tied to sources. Every constraint documented. Export the released PDF for the go/no-go meeting.
RealClear Site Memo
~300 Acres Near Ashland, Sarpy County, NE
Hyperscale Data Center · 200 MW initial · Illustrative sample
(illustrative)
Executive Summary
This site requires a full agricultural-to-industrial rezoning with no local precedent for data center approval. Comparable Midwest agricultural conversion fights show structural opposition patterns. The power path through OPPD is structurally simpler than investor-owned utility markets but presents its own board-level approval gate for large-load contracts.
Material Constraints
- AG zoning with no data center use classification — full rezoning required
- Platte River floodplain buffer reduces usable acreage
- No industrial rezoning precedent in Sarpy County — this is a first test
Development Gate
DO NOT ADVANCE TO SITE-CONTROL EXTENSION.
Do not advance to site-control extension until board composition, comprehensive plan posture, and OPPD large-load pathway are confirmed. If board composition analysis reveals 4+ commissioners representing agricultural districts, evaluate Lancaster County (Lincoln metro) as a lower-opposition alternative before committing further capital.
Open Questions
- OPPD’s position on 200 MW+ single-customer interconnection timeline
- Whether Sarpy County’s comprehensive plan designates industrial growth areas
- Adjacent Lancaster County as a fallback with different political dynamics
Sources cited in this brief
Used by
Deal team at the go/no-go meeting, outside counsel
Decision unlocked
Commit deeper budget or walk
Stop 5 of 5
Released, cited delivery.
The bounded-v1 customer product delivers the released memo — a one-time, source-cited recommendation — with its cited source set and its PDF.
What is available today
Explicit product boundary
Released memo with recommendation and cited findings
Exact source documents cited by that release
Downloadable PDF of the same release
Used by
Development manager, deal team, outside counsel
Decision unlocked
Can the team verify the released recommendation?
That was a hypothetical site in Nebraska. Bring us a real one.
The zoning frameworks, utility structures, and comparable outcomes are real. The opposition patterns come from 36 documented data center fights across 16 states.
Now bring us a real one.
We confirm the delivery window when we accept your completed property submission. Complex or thin-record sites may require more research.
Once invited, your team submits one property and completes intake in the workspace. RealClear researches and reviews the memo; your team still makes the decision.