Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pl25132 Data Center topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Widely attended public hearing on proposed data center ends with board delaying decision
Summary
Residents raised water, traffic, notice and property‑value concerns about a 57.4‑acre rezoning for a data center; after extensive testimony the board left the public hearing closed but continued the vote to next month so the absent district supervisor can review constituent concerns.
Get email alerts on the Pl25132 Data Center topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A contested rezoning request to make 57.42 acres near Richmond Highway and Cabinfield Road more flexible for a potential data‑center development drew prolonged, often emotional testimony from dozens of residents and was continued for another month.
Mesh Capital, the applicant, asked the board to remove an outdated proffered site plan so the property (already zoned industrial heavy) could be marketed for modern industrial uses, including a data center. Applicant representatives said no end user had been identified and that the rezoning included new proffer language to limit impacts, including noise mitigation.
Residents told the board they had not been adequately notified, that VDOT access on Cabinfield Road is limited and dangerous for construction traffic, and that data centers demand large quantities of water and electricity — speakers repeatedly cited figures up to one million gallons per day in worst‑case examples. Neighbors also warned of potential emergency‑generator noise, visual impacts, heavy construction traffic, and a precedent effect that could invite more data centers.
Board members debated the adequacy of notice and whether Supervisor Klein — the Concord district supervisor who was absent — should hear neighborhood concerns in person. County staff said the public hearing could be closed while the board delayed the vote; supervisors agreed to continue the matter to next month to allow more time for constituent engagement and to permit the absent supervisor to participate in the decision.
Staff noted that proffers are voluntary and that if the applicant wanted to add proffers at this stage the petition should be resubmitted and remanded to the Planning Commission; the board did not accept any new proffers during the hearing. No final action was taken; the application remains on the board’s docket for the next meeting.
