The two data center proposals that have taken over the conversation in Bradley County this fall are about a five-minute drive apart. They face very different rules. According to Local 3 News, the developer of a 306-acre site in the Hiwassee Industrial Park has sued over a county rule that it says leaves almost nowhere to build. On Lower River Road, the team behind a roughly 850-acre campus took another route, which WTVC NewsChannel 9 reported. It asked the City of Cleveland to annex the land and write custom zoning for it.
The difference comes down to one line on the map. If you're weighing acreage or a rural home anywhere around Cleveland, the city limit and the way it can move now tell you more about what might be built nearby than the zoning label on the parcel next door.
The County Drew a 3,000-Foot Circle in April
Until this spring, Bradley County's zoning didn't mention data centers at all. District 7 Commissioner Josh Rogers told Local 3 News that without new rules, "a facility like this could potentially come in under existing commercial or industrial zoning without the level of oversight this community expects." The County Commission passed a zoning amendment unanimously on April 20, 2026.
The text in the Bradley County Zoning Resolution is strict:
- Data centers and cryptocurrency mining are permitted only in the I-2 Special Impact Industrial District.
- A site must be at least 5 acres and cannot sit within 3,000 feet of FAR, R-1 or R-2 districts, existing residences, churches, schools or other public gathering places.
- Sound is capped at 60 decibels at the property line, verified with County Planning and Inspections.
- Before a permit is issued, the electric utility must confirm it can safely carry the proposed load.
The setback is the provision that matters. A 3,000-foot radius is a little more than half a mile. In a county where farms, houses and churches sit along almost every rural road, that radius leaves very little land that qualifies.
Project Midspan Is Testing That Rule in Court
The developer SDCL bought 306 acres in the Hiwassee Industrial Park in 2024 for a data center called Project Midspan. The nearest proposed building would be about 1,700 feet from Walker Valley High School, inside the county's 3,000-foot buffer.
SDCL has sued Bradley County and is asking a court to declare the April amendment invalid. According to Local 3 News, the company argues that the process Tennessee law requires was not followed in the April vote, and that the only property meeting the county's requirements is the landfill. The same report says SDCL pointed to a commissioner's remark at the April 20 meeting that the rules make development "99.9% impossible."
At the Oct. 5 commission meeting, Mayor Gary Davis said the county's insurer had denied its claim for help with the defense, so the county will have to pay for it out of its own budget. He said he has asked the county attorney to keep fighting the case. He also said no commission votes are pending on either Project Midspan or Project River.
For now, the county rule stands, and a court will decide whether it holds. That puts the outcome in a courtroom, outside of any zoning hearing.
Project River Went Around the Circle
The Wright family's proposal, led by Wright Brothers Construction, would put an $11.3 billion industrial campus on Lower River Road with its own power plants. The campus could host a data center, a robotics plant or a semiconductor plant. Coverage has described the power plants in different ways. The Cleveland Daily Banner has reported a 1,000-megawatt natural gas plant paired with a 500-megawatt plant that would turn wood chips into a synthetic gas.
The land is in unincorporated Bradley County, and WTVC NewsChannel 9 reported that the April county rules would make Project River "difficult or impossible to build there as currently proposed." So the developers asked to be annexed into Cleveland, where the city has been drafting a custom zoning ordinance called PUD 77.
The annexation request relies on T.C.A. § 6-58-118. As published on Justia, that state law lets a city expand its urban growth boundary to annex a tract without reconvening the county coordinating committee and without approval from the county or other cities, as long as three conditions are met. Mayor Davis put the result plainly to Local 3 News: "Like it or not, we don't have any say in whether they annex or not once it's requested."
Two Rulebooks Side by Side
PUD 77 is still a draft. City Manager Joe Fivas told the Cleveland Daily Banner in mid-September that "we have not finalized our PUD in any way." Even so, the city's circulated draft timeline shows what a city-side rulebook could look like next to the county's.
| Provision | Bradley County amendment, adopted April 20, 2026 | Cleveland draft PUD 77, September 2026 |
|---|---|---|
| Distance rule | No data center within 3,000 ft of residences, churches, schools, public gathering places, or FAR, R-1 and R-2 districts | Data center buildings set back 500 ft from the property line; power plants 200 ft on the river side and 50 ft on other sides |
| Noise | 60 dB at the property line | 60 dB at the property line, with continuous monitoring |
| Power | Utility must confirm it can carry the load | At least 75% of power used directly must be generated on site |
| Extras | Screening; no cargo containers, railcars or trailers as operating components | 20% green space, 85-ft height cap, closed-loop cooling, a fire/EMS/police site near Exit 33, a Community Benefit Agreement |
Both columns set the same noise limit. Where they differ is distance. The county rule measures from the neighbors. The draft PUD measures from the developer's own property line and then adds conditions written for this one project. The draft also requires on-site water: at least 90% of process water generated on site, and no direct utility connection to the Hiwassee River.
Trucks get their own rules. The draft bars log trucks from city streets and county roads. Fivas named the corridors the city wants kept clear: Lauderdale Highway, North Lee Highway, Ocoee Street, Paul Huff Parkway and 25th Street. The draft also calls for commercially reasonable efforts to move at least half of the timber by something other than truck.
On the money side, Fivas said the city's early estimate is that the project could bring $300 million to $700 million over 10 years to the county, the city and both school systems, along with up to 2,700 jobs. He framed those figures as subject to a later "community conversation."
The Annexation Route Has Its Own Test
Getting the land into the city may be harder than writing the ordinance. On Sept. 18, the Southern Environmental Law Center sent a nine-page letter to Mayor Kevin Brooks, the City Council and the Municipal Planning Commission. The letter argues that the main parcel isn't contiguous with Cleveland and lies mostly outside the city's Urban Growth Boundary.
The SELC letter says the request fails each of the statute's three conditions:
- Contiguity. The main tract doesn't touch a tract under the same ownership that has already been annexed, and the nearby parcels submitted with it don't close that gap.
- Services. Neighbors report that the tract isn't receiving city water and sewer service.
- Consent. A neighboring property holds a recorded easement across the tract, and SELC says its owner has not agreed to the annexation.
These are the arguments of an advocacy group, and no council or court has ruled on them. Still, they show where a project that steps outside the county's rules gets tested. The questions become whether the land can legally cross the line at all and what conditions the city attaches if it does. The 3,000-foot measurement no longer comes into it.
Where Both Projects Stand
- Sept. 15–16: The Wright family said it had accepted the city's proposed PUD. Fivas responded that nothing was finalized, said the city wanted nine studies before final approval, and said it planned community meetings in early October ahead of any fall votes. The draft timeline itself lists ten study and plan items.
- Sept. 18: Wright Brothers Construction asked the city to temporarily delay action while it brings in a third-party team of technical experts to review the project, WTVC reported.
- Sept. 28: Project River annexations were left off that night's City Council agenda.
- Oct. 5: Project River remained paused at the developer's request, and the county said it would fight the SDCL lawsuit.
- Oct. 20: The Cleveland Municipal Planning Commission agenda for its regular meeting did not include Project River.
If the project comes back, the next step would be in front of the Cleveland City Council. The agendas posted on the City of Cleveland's Agenda Center are where an item like this would show up first.
Short Answers
Does the county's 3,000-foot rule cover land inside Cleveland? The amendment is part of the Bradley County Zoning Resolution, and Mayor Davis described it as governing data center development in the unincorporated parts of the county. That is why Project River's route ran through annexation.
Is PUD 77 in effect? No. It is a preliminary draft, and the Wright family's acceptance was tied to a final version that has not been adopted.
Would PUD 77 bind a future owner? The Wright family's statement says PUD 77, if passed, would be a city ordinance with the effect of law, binding on current and future owners and operators of the property.
This post is general information about local ordinances and state law, not legal advice. If a specific parcel is involved, check its jurisdiction and zoning with the county or city planning office and talk with a qualified attorney.
If you're looking at acreage or a home anywhere along the Lower River Road corridor or out toward Charleston, Don Ledford Group can help you pull the zoning, jurisdiction and recent planning history for that exact tract before you commit. Start the conversation, and we'll work through it with you.
