Sue Data Centers

Data Center Registry

Project Ruby (Upatoi Data Center Campus)

Columbus, Muscogee County, Georgia

ProposedOpposedRecord updated September 10, 2026

Project Ruby (Upatoi Data Center Campus) is a proposed data center in Columbus, Georgia (Muscogee County), operated by Undisclosed end user (site pursued by Choose Columbus / Development Authority of Columbus). The public record puts it at 600 MW planned, 865 acres, a reported $5.2 billion investment. It faces documented, organized local opposition.

Every line on this page traces to a public source listed at the bottom. Where a figure was looked for and not found, the row says so. A blank is never a zero.

Facility record

Proposed

Operator
Undisclosed end user (site pursued by Choose Columbus / Development Authority of Columbus)
Facility type
Data center
Location
Columbus, Muscogee County, GA
Coordinates
32.5488, -84.7399 (approximate)
Power capacity
600 MW planned
Land
865 acres
Investment
$5.2 billion
Announced
Not established from a public source
Utility
Not established from a public source
Cooling
Not established from a public source
Water use
Not established from a public source
Jobs
Not established from a public source
Public subsidy
Not established from a public source
Community reception
Opposed
Source confidence
Reported by at least one credible outlet or filing

Timeline from the record

Newest first. Record entries come from the filings and reports the registry cites. Coverage entries are headlines from publisher feeds we monitor daily, linked to the outlet; last checked September 14, 2026.

  1. June 16, 2026
    Proposed
    Columbus Council voted 6-2 to create a technology overlay district in the Unified Development Ordinance. A separate rezoning request for the site has not been submitted, and a DRI review is still required. Source

Opposition and litigation at this site

Yes. Organized local opposition to Project Ruby (Upatoi Data Center Campus) in Columbus, Muscogee County, Georgia is documented in the public record, without a lawsuit on file in the sources we track. About 5,000 residents signed an online petition against the project, citing environmental, property-value, health and safety concerns; the council vote creating the overlay district was 6-2.

How the community has taken it

Reception is a sourced signal, not an editorial judgment: opposed means documented, organized local opposition is the dominant signal on record.

About 5,000 residents signed an online petition against the project, citing environmental, property-value, health and safety concerns; the council vote creating the overlay district was 6-2.

Source

Notes on the record

865 acres in northeast Muscogee County (Upatoi), $5.18 billion, 600 MW, a draw exceeding current power usage for all of Columbus. Columbus Water Works is named as the treated-water supplier. The overlay-district vote is a zoning tool, not project approval. Coordinates are approximate to Upatoi.

What the record does not establish, and the document that would

In every fight on our tracker the decisive fact came out of a public records request. These are the requests for this site.

  • Cooling method and water use
  • Tax abatements or other public subsidy
  • Permanent jobs promised
  • Which utility serves it
Which document closes each gap
Cooling method and water use
The water service agreement, any groundwater appropriation permit, and the mechanical narrative in the site plan.
Tax abatements or other public subsidy
The abatement, PILOT, or development agreement approved by the county, city, or development authority, and the state's data center sales tax exemption certificate if one was issued.
Permanent jobs promised
The economic development application or incentive agreement, which usually states a job commitment and a clawback.
Which utility serves it
The electric service agreement or the utility's filing with the state public utility commission.

Have one of these documents? Send it to us and we will add it to the record with attribution.

Questions people ask about this site

Is there opposition to the Project Ruby (Upatoi Data Center Campus) in Columbus?

Yes. Organized local opposition to Project Ruby (Upatoi Data Center Campus) in Columbus, Muscogee County, Georgia is documented in the public record, without a lawsuit on file in the sources we track. About 5,000 residents signed an online petition against the project, citing environmental, property-value, health and safety concerns; the council vote creating the overlay district was 6-2.

Has anyone filed a lawsuit over the Project Ruby (Upatoi Data Center Campus)?

No lawsuit over Project Ruby (Upatoi Data Center Campus) appears in the record we track as of September 10, 2026. Residents most often reach a lawyer over water supply, well drawdown, noise from cooling plant, property value, or a rezoning approved without the notice the ordinance required. If any of that is happening near this site, it is worth a review whether or not a case has been filed yet.

How much water does Project Ruby (Upatoi Data Center Campus) use?

No water withdrawal figure for Project Ruby (Upatoi Data Center Campus) is on record here. Water use is rarely published voluntarily; it usually surfaces through a utility service agreement or a state withdrawal permit, both of which are public records. We leave the number blank rather than estimate one.

Who operates Project Ruby (Upatoi Data Center Campus), and how big is it?

Undisclosed end user (site pursued by Choose Columbus / Development Authority of Columbus) is the operator on record. Capacity on record is 600 MW. The site is recorded at 865 acres.

How to cite this page

SueDataCenters.org Data Center Registry, "Project Ruby (Upatoi Data Center Campus)," updated September 10, 2026, https://suedatacenters.org/data-centers/project-ruby-upatoi-muscogee-ga.

Facility data from Compute Atlas (E. Kubiak), version 1.32.0 (September 7, 2026), licensed CC BY 4.0, record https://www.compute-atlas.com/facilities/project-ruby-upatoi-muscogee-ga, retrieved September 14, 2026.

Corrections with a public source are welcome at the Compute Atlas record or through our contact page. The whole registry is available as CSV and JSON under CC BY 4.0.

Sources for this record

As compiled and cited by Compute Atlas, with our own reporting appended. Archived links are used where the original has moved.

  1. 1.Columbus Council votes on rules to allow any hyperscale data center in Muscogee County · retrieved September 10, 2026

Is a data center disrupting your home?

Tell us what is happening. We will connect you with an independent attorney who handles data center cases in your state, free and with no obligation. These cases are commonly taken on contingency, so there are typically no upfront fees.

  • Free case review
  • Independent attorneys
  • No obligation

Attorney or law firm handling data center matters? Speak with us