Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission denies proposed Centerville Turnpike data center after public concern over noise, location
Summary
The Planning Commission voted 6–1 to deny a proposed 349,000 sq ft data center near Centerville Turnpike and Laurel Ridge, citing incompatibility with nearby residential uses and unresolved concerns over noise, water and power impacts that residents raised during multiple hearings.
The Chesapeake Planning Commission on Tuesday denied a proposed data center project near Centerville Turnpike by a 6–1 vote after a lengthy public hearing in which residents, commissioners and staff weighed potential impacts from noise, equipment, water use and proximity to homes.
The proposal would have placed a large, concrete‑walled data center — approximately 349,000 square feet — on a site that abuts Laurel Ridge and other residential areas. The applicant, a local developer, said the site benefits from fiber, gas and power capacity and that proffers and screening would limit visual and audible impacts. The developer also presented two technical noise studies modeling sound levels at residences and proposed post‑construction monitoring and mitigation proffers.
Concerns raised: Commissioners and many speakers from adjacent neighborhoods questioned whether the project could meet residents’ expectations for low noise and preserve residential character. Several residents and commissioners expressed worry about low‑frequency vibration and “hum” complaints reported in other localities, possible effects on property values, and the longevity of mitigations. Commissioners also discussed siting alternatives and whether the size of a single building could be reduced or reconfigured to lower impacts.
Planning staff said they had evaluated the application against ordinance standards and recommended approval with proffers and noise monitoring conditions after consulting with other localities that have regulated similar facilities. A staff representative told commissioners the application included a proffer limiting building height to 35 feet plus five feet for rooftop screening and side‑path trail commitments along Centerville Turnpike.
Commission deliberations and procedural history: The commission considered motions to continue the item for further study. A motion to continue for up to 120 days failed 2–5. Commissioners debated indefinite versus date‑certain continuances; staff said an indefinite continuance would require the applicant’s concurrence. After discussion and public remarks, Commissioner Escuela moved to deny the application on land‑use compatibility grounds (noting that a reasonable economic use exists under current zoning); the motion carried 6–1.
Outcome and next steps: The Planning Commission’s denial is a recommendation to the City Council (the commission is the recommending body). The applicant may request rehearing, submit revised plans, or pursue a zoning route consistent with council processes. Commissioners and staff suggested the city could use this review to study standards for utility‑scale data centers, including noise standards that address low‑frequency impacts.
Why it matters: The commission’s decision reflects rising local scrutiny of large data facilities and signals that commissioners expect robust evidence of mitigations for noise, water and visual impact where projects abut homes. The vote will likely shape subsequent council and staff work on potential regulatory responses.
