# AVAIO Project Leo Data Center Floor Plans The architectural floor plans for the two data-center building types AVAIO will use at Project Leo — a **40 MW** building and a **60 MW** building. Kimley-Horn transmitted them to Pulaski County on 2025-03-06 so the county could compute parking requirements from the office (administrative) square footage. They are the corpus's first building-level design records for a hyperscale data center. ## What's inside - `40MW-OverallFloorPlans.pdf` — overall floor plans, Levels 01 and 02, of the 40 MW building type. - `60MW-OverallFloorPlans.pdf` — overall floor plans, Levels 01 and 02, of the 60 MW building type. Both were attached to a 2025-03-06 Kimley-Horn email (Devin Randall, P.E.) to the county; see [[Pulaski County Planning Correspondence on Project Leo]] (`email 031025.pdf`). ## Key takeaways - **Two standardized building types.** Kimley-Horn told the county *"Attached are the floor plans for the two building sizes we will be utilizing for the Site"* (`email 031025.pdf`). The federal permit application confirms the program as **one 60 MW structure and four 40 MW structures** — see [[Project Leo Engineering and Environmental Permits]]. - **The 40 MW building.** The Level-01/02 plan tallies **~319,300 SF total** — Mechanical/Electrical/Plumbing (MEP) space ~282,600 SF, administrative space ~23,900 SF, common space ~12,800 SF — across two levels plus generator buildings (`40MW-OverallFloorPlans.pdf`, pp. 1–2). - **The 60 MW building.** The larger type tallies **~454,600 SF total** — MEP space ~417,900 SF, administrative ~23,900 SF, common ~12,800 SF — and shows "DATA SUITE 200" (~25,760 SF), "FUTURE DATA SUITE" bays, a "DATA HALL CORRIDOR," six electrical rooms, north and south equipment galleries, and three generator buildings (`60MW-OverallFloorPlans.pdf`, pp. 1–2). - **Built-to-suit for a tenant.** Both plans label rooms **"AVAIO IDF"** and **"TENANT IDF"** and large "TENANT OFFICE" areas (10,585 SF and 4,238 SF in the 60 MW plan), indicating AVAIO builds the shell and a separate tenant occupies the data halls — the wholesale/colocation model. The occupying tenant is not named. - **Why the county wanted them.** The plans exist in this file for a mundane reason — parking math. The county required *"an architectural floor plan for each of the buildings laying out the mechanical square footage and the office square footage"* to apply parking at 1 space per 600 SF of office use rather than per total floor area (`email 031025.pdf`). The data center's overwhelmingly mechanical floor area (a 40 MW building is ~88% MEP space) means very little parking is required — the county and Kimley-Horn settled on roughly 40 spaces per building. ## People and orgs mentioned - [[Brianna Covington]] — Kimley-Horn; corresponded with the county on the floor-plan parking question. Devin Randall, P.E. (Kimley-Horn, Tulsa) transmitted the plans. - [[Van McClendon]], [[Jim Cranor]] — Pulaski County Planning and Development; reviewed the plans for parking. - [[Kimley-Horn]] — architect/engineer of the plans. [[AVAIO Digital Partners]] — developer; "AVAIO IDF" rooms are labeled throughout. ## Concepts invoked - [[Site plan review]] — the floor plans were submitted to resolve a parking-standard question within the review. ## Events documented - These plans were submitted during the 2024–2026 site plan review; see [[2024-12 Pulaski County Conditionally Approves the Project Leo Site Plan]]. ## Cross-references - The 40 MW / 60 MW types correspond to the *"one 60-megawatt (MW) structure and four 40-MW structures"* in [[Project Leo Engineering and Environmental Permits]] (`AVAIO_NWP_PCN_Application.pdf`). - These building-level figures are the most concrete capacity data in the corpus for [[AVAIO Digital Partners|Project Leo]], against the public "150 MW contracted, up to 1 GW" framing. ## Open questions / follow-ups - The plans are CAD drawings; extracted text captures room labels and area tallies but not the drawn layout. Cite the raw PDF page images for the building geometry. - "40 MW" and "60 MW" are the building-type designations used throughout the file; the plans themselves do not state the electrical or cooling load behind those labels, or the cooling-system type. - The occupying tenant ("TENANT OFFICE," "TENANT IDF") is not identified in this production.