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 coherent internal memo
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 memo gets sent back
With RealClear
Timeline
Source-backed intelligence brief by close of day
Cost
A fraction of the attorney and consultant fees your team currently absorbs
Sources
Every claim cited to a specific document: zoning resolution, board minutes, utility report
Community risk
Opposition profiled before your team makes a single phone call
Comparables
Cross-referenced against 23 documented data center fights across 14 states
Go/no-go meeting
Scored brief with fatal blockers, approval path, and open questions. VP decides, not guesses
Stop 1 of 5
Create a site.
Three fields create a durable site workspace. 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 workspace.
Score, fatal blockers, approval path, open questions, and evidence summary — all in one view. Every claim is source-backed.
Site Workspace
~300 Acres Near Ashland, NE
Hyperscale Data Center · 200 MW initial · Stage: Screening
(illustrative)
Zoning Reader
Reading...
Pathway Mapper
Reading...
Community Sentinel
Reading...
Comparable Analyst
Reading...
Report Generator
Reading...
Fatal Blockers
- 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 backing this workspace
Used by
VP of Development, development manager
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 scored intelligence brief.
The internal decision artifact your VP takes into the go/no-go meeting. Every claim cited. Every blocker documented. Export to PDF, slides, or share internally.
RealClear Intelligence Brief
~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.
Fatal Blockers
- 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
VP in go/no-go meeting, counsel for first review
Decision unlocked
Commit deeper budget or walk
Stop 5 of 5
Monitoring.
The analysis does not end at the brief. After site control or acquisition, RealClear monitors the jurisdiction, the parcels, and the regulatory environment — so your team knows when the ground shifts under an active site.
Alerts & Monitoring
New since last week
County Board agenda posted for April 2 — includes zoning ordinance discussion
Adjacent parcel listed for sale — potential land assembly signal
OPPD board meeting minutes mention large-load policy review committee formation
Nebraska Legislature SB-412 introduced — statewide data center siting framework
Used by
Development manager, monitoring team
Decision unlocked
Is the ground shifting under an active site?
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 23 documented data center fights across 14 states.
Now bring us a real one.
Single-site screen, portfolio pilot, or design partnership. Your team still decides. RealClear gives them a stronger first read.
© 2026 RealClear Systems, Inc. · Made in California