Board asks staff to research data centers and county attorney to prepare deferral language

The board shifted to data centers late in the meeting. Speaker 1 opened the topic and asked whether the board preferred a ban, restrictions, or further research. Speaker 2 recommended staff return with definitions, size categories, examples and zoning approaches used by other jurisdictions before any code changes, saying: “My recommendation would be that we come back to the board with information about data centers.”

Several participants agreed a deferral ordinance would be prudent while staff compiles information. Speaker 2 noted the county code does not contain a specific “data center” use and recommended time to study the implications (power, water, setbacks, building size) and how other localities regulate them. Speaker 2 also told the board the county attorney is preparing draft language: “the county attorney is gonna be working on that. So, I think that protects us in the meantime.”

Participants discussed examples from other jurisdictions. Speaker 3 pointed to Loudoun County and Dulles-area clustering as a model of deliberate siting along highways and buffers. Speakers noted that data centers can range from very large, high-power campuses to much smaller facilities and that prohibiting all varieties could be unnecessarily broad. The general direction from the board was to proceed with research and to have staff and the county attorney prepare deferral language so the county is not reactive should an application be filed.

Ending: Staff will return with a report defining data-center typologies, examples of zoning approaches used by peer counties, and recommendations for size thresholds or site restrictions; the county attorney will prepare deferral ordinance language for the board to consider.