Board approves two data‑center campus expansions amid resident concerns

The Prince William County Board of County Supervisors unanimously approved rezonings on separate motions that will allow data‑center campus expansions at Manassas Corporate Center and at Iron Mountain’s Wellington Road campus.

The board voted to approve REZ2024‑00025 for a CloudHQ data center at the Manassas Corporate Center site, a roughly 22.5‑acre parcel within the county’s Data Center Overlay District. The board later approved a rezoning for Iron Mountain’s proposed building on an 18.9‑acre parcel on Wellington Road within an existing data‑center campus. Both proposals were presented by applicants and reviewed and recommended for approval by county planning staff and the Planning Commission.

Why it mattered: Both sites are in areas the county’s comprehensive plan designates for industrial and technology‑flex uses (I‑3) and within the Data Center Overlay District, but each project drew public concern because of proximity to existing residences. Supervisors and county planners emphasized design, landscaping and noise mitigation measures proposed by the applicants to address those concerns.

Staff and applicant presentations: Planning staff described each application’s floor‑area ratio, proposed building heights and open‑space commitments and noted that both proposals are consistent with the I‑3 land‑use designation. For the Manassas Corporate Center site, staff described a proposed 235,200‑square‑foot building with a 70‑foot top height and related proffers including a $243,100 contribution for pedestrian connectivity and additional RPA reforestation. For the Iron Mountain site, staff noted a 341,068‑square‑foot building footprint (270,780 sq. ft. within the rezoned parcel) and significant landscape buffering commitments along Wellington Road, plus rooftop‑mechanical sound attenuation and eight sustainability measures proffered by the applicant.

Public comments and concerns: Residents and neighborhood representatives voiced concerns during public hearings and the public‑comment period about noise, light pollution, water use, visibility and the adequacy of buffers where data centers abut residential areas. Rachel Ellis, a Gainesville resident and frequent public commenter, urged supervisors to “say no to more” data centers sited next to homes, saying developers should build in more appropriate locations. Kevin Parker, a local conservation volunteer, urged the applicants to avoid glass reflections that attract birds and to limit lighting toward the adjacent wetlands mitigation bank. Others urged stricter assurances on noise studies and on the durability of proposed plantings.

Applicant responses and mitigation: Both applicants described proffers intended to reduce community impacts. The CloudHQ proposal includes a sound study requirement and landscaping commitments; the Iron Mountain proposal includes supplemental landscape areas along Wellington Road, the proffer of sound attenuation for rooftop equipment that faces residential properties, a construction‑management plan that forbids construction traffic from using nearby apartment streets, and a commitment to plant higher‑caliper trees (up to 2‑inch caliper, approximately 6 feet tall at installation) where feasible. Applicants and staff said they would coordinate with Dominion and other easement holders where utility easements affect planting locations.

Board discussion: Supervisors acknowledged the projects sit in locations the county anticipates for data‑center growth but said proximity to housing makes mitigation important. Several supervisors said they supported approval because the rezoning outcomes would place the buildings farther from nearby apartments than if the properties were developed by‑right without the proffers. Others urged continued attention to design and ongoing dialogue with residents and utility companies about easement placement and planting survivability.

What’s next: County staff will apply the approved proffers to the site plans and monitor subsequent site‑plan stages, building permits and any required sound or environmental studies. Residents asked for continued communication and the opportunity to review final site‑plan details.

Ending: The two rezoning approvals were among multiple land‑use and administrative items the board addressed in the meeting; several attendees used the public‑comment period to renew calls for stronger zoning protections where industrial uses and residences abut.