Planning commission holds rezoning and special-exception hearing for proposed Bull Church data center, defers decision for 30 days

The Caroline County Planning Commission on April 24 held a public hearing on a rezoning (RZ 04/2024 referenced in the staff presentation) and a companion special-exception permit (SPEX032025) for a proposed data center campus on approximately 87.53 acres near Bull Church Road and Interstate 95. The commission opened and closed the public hearing and then voted to defer both the rezoning and the special-exception request to the next regular meeting (30-day deferral) so staff and the applicant can refine proffers.

Staff summarized the proposal: rezoning from RP (Rural Preservation) to M‑1 (manufacturing) and a general development plan (GDP) showing three data center buildings, a 10-acre substation along the northern property line and secured access from Bull Church Road. The applicant’s GDP depicted potential future development areas that could allow up to an additional 540,000 square feet of data-center use, plus other industrial kinds of uses, though staff noted such by-right uses could generate more traffic than a data center. Staff said the project would be subject to Chesapeake Bay and stormwater requirements, wetlands and resource protection areas would be minimized, and any extension of water and sewer would require boring under I‑95 (applicant received approval from DDOT to extend lines under I‑95 if approved).

Traffic and utilities were central points of discussion. Staff cited a turn-lane analysis submitted by the applicant that concluded no off-site turn lanes were needed for the proposed data-center use; staff cautioned the analysis accounts only for the data center and not any other by-right uses. VDOT 2023 data show annual average daily traffic of 410 vehicles along the 1.8-mile Bull Church Road segment near the site. The applicant and staff also described a proffered construction mitigation plan addressing delivery times, routes and school-bus conflicts, a roadway condition assessment prior to land disturbance, and commitments to repair any construction-related damage to roads.

Applicant attorney Anne Veil Cosby and owner Jacob Manovich presented the case and defended the site choice as compatible with the county’s regional-business designation around the I‑95 interchange. Cosby said the applicant proffered limits on future uses and square footage, a requirement to submit an emergency action plan and a sound analysis before final site plan approval, and a cap (applicant-referenced) of $100,000 for third-party inspection reimbursement to the county if requested.

During a lengthy Q&A commissioners and neighbors pressed issues including: generator and backup-battery noise, chemical treatment and annual flushing of closed-loop water systems (the applicant estimated roughly 500,000 gallons of water use per building per year), transmission-line routing (a state utility process; Dominion and Rappahannock Electric studies were in progress), wetland delineations (applicant said wetlands delineation accepted by Army Corps of Engineers and proposed buildings are sited outside wetlands), construction traffic coordination with other nearby data-center builds and school-bus schedules, and potential community impacts including e-waste and emergency response. Staff and applicant acknowledged some proffers needed clearer language; staff recommended refinement.

Several residents spoke during the public comment period. Willis Robertson (nearby property owner) said he preferred a data center to more housing or strip-mall development and expressed trust in the applicant’s presentation on noise and pollution. Kevin Collins (Reedy Church District) urged the commission to deny the rezoning, citing concerns about scale and cumulative buildout across the Ladysmith growth area and asking “When is enough?” Mary Hodge (Bowling Green District) urged denial and raised questions about PFAS, electronic waste and potential risks from fires involving batteries and equipment. Linda DiBella (Mattaponi District) said she supported the data centers and emphasized need to fix Bull Church Road.

After discussion, Chairman Rollins moved and the commission seconded to defer both the rezoning and special-exception items to the next regular meeting to allow additional work on proffers and to give staff and the applicant time to address open issues. The motion carried by voice vote; the commission noted a 100-day statutory window for action but said the applicant would continue to work with staff and the commission and that the 30-day deferral to the next meeting was appropriate for additional negotiation.

Why it matters: The proposal would repurpose nearly 88 acres adjacent to I‑95 for high-intensity industrial use (data center) and involves significant utility, traffic and environmental questions. Commissioners and neighbors raised concerns about construction traffic, noise, water use and transmission routes; staff and applicant will return with clarified proffers and additional detail.

What’s next: The commission deferred formal recommendation; the rezoning and special-exception applications will return to the Planning Commission at the next regular meeting for further action.