Gloucester Planning Commission Grapples with Public Opposition to Data Center Zoning
Community Town Hall Recap and Survey Details reveal concerns about environmental and character impacts
A Gloucester Daily contributor produced this post using AI and the following sources:
Gloucester County Planning Commission Meeting on June 5, 2025
"Creating a Technology Overlay District" survey results
"Data Centers 101 Public Education and Input Meeting" presentation materials
The Gloucester County Planning Commission on Thursday, June 5, 2025, reviewed community feedback regarding the potential establishment of a Technology Overlay District (TOD), a proposed zoning mechanism intended to attract data centers to the county, particularly in the Glenns area. This discussion followed a recent public outreach meeting and highlighted significant public apprehension about the concept.
The review of the Technology Overlay District, listed under Old Business, centered on a recap of the "Data Centers 101 Public Education and Input Meeting" held on May 28, 2025. Staff presented information about the town hall, which aimed to educate the public on data centers and gather feedback on the potential TOD concept. According to the survey results shared with the Commission, 212 people responded to key questions about the TOD.
Survey indicates public opposition to data centers
The survey revealed a strong majority of respondents were not in favor of creating a Technology Overlay District. Out of 212 responses, 82.1% (174 individuals) indicated they were not in favor. Only 9% (19 individuals) were in favor, and 9% (19 individuals) were not sure or had no opinion.
Opposition commentary
Reasons for opposing the TOD and attracting data centers were varied but often centered on environmental impacts and changes to the county's character. Some of the sentiments against allowing data centers are summed up by quotes such as:
"Data centers use enormous amounts of electricity and water, consume open space, destroy fish and wildlife habitat, generate noise, and provide relatively few long-term jobs. They change the character of rural areas...".
"Too detrimental to our environment. We are a farming community with local watershed, including the Dragon Run. Most of us are on well water. Please, no more machines or solar panels. Data centers are run by people who could care less about Gloucester. What is the life expectancy and how will it be disposed of? Traffic, light, noise are harmful to humans and wildlife!".
"Will drive up electricity cost for local residents. Dominion Energy passes on infrastructure costs to the little people. 105 decibel generators... Exhaust and noise. The county will not regulate a Billion dollar Corporation.".
"Data centers are not consistent with the rural character of northern Gloucester County. They would be a significant negative for residents who live there specifically because of the rural nature of that area".
"Economic strength cannot be gained while destroying the very resources that make Gloucester County unique and attractive to residents and visitors".
Proponents’ commentary
Those in favor, a smaller group, highlighted potential economic benefits. Some of their comments included:
"Gloucester needs growth in every sector. We need more businesses. More retail. More restaurants so that our community dollars can be kept in our own community...".
"It’s a great way to utilize the land and bring revenue to the County in a way that is not overly disruptive or intrusive".
"We desperately need the tax base. While there are ecological downsides, they will exist wherever the data centers are located, and we will all share the downsides whether or not Gloucester reaps the benefits".
"We need to generate revenue. The county should provide tax benefits to companies looking to build data centers".
Next steps for data center planning
Staff noted that the purpose of the town hall was to get public input before developing a recommendation or an ordinance regarding the TOD. The next step for the Planning Commission is to work with staff to determine how to proceed with the concept in light of the public feedback received.
Also on the agenda for the June 5th meeting was a Public Hearing for the Marsh Hawk Villas Joint Application, proposing the reclassification of parcels to permit the development of 34 condominium units and 2 single-family lots. The Commission was tasked with receiving public comments and providing separate recommendations on the rezoning and conditional use permit components of this application to the Board of Supervisors.
The meeting also included standard agenda items such as approval of minutes, public comments on non-agenda items, and updates on applications expected in July.