Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Data Centers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission split after hours of testimony on Giga Land data center; recommendation recorded 4–1
Summary
After a multi‑hour public hearing with dozens of speakers for and against, the Planning Commission recorded a 4–1 vote on a recommendation regarding the multi‑application Giga Land data center proposal (rezoning, comprehensive plan amendment, special exceptions and waivers). Speakers raised questions about comprehensive plan conformity, water supply and quality, building height, visual impacts, power infrastructure and county policy; the commission debated competing motions to forward for approval and to recommend denial.
The Planning Commission finished a lengthy public hearing on the Giga Land proposals — a comprehensive plan amendment, rezoning, special exceptions for data center buildings and utility facilities, and associated waivers — and recorded a divided recommendation (4–1) to send the package to the Board of Supervisors for final action.
Staff framed the application as a request to reclassify roughly 202 acres along Lucky Hill Road for a business‑park/data center campus that would include up to seven buildings totaling about 2,200,000 square feet, building heights up to 80 feet (65 feet to the roof plus a parapet), four electrical substations, a water treatment facility, two new wells and an above‑ground water storage tank. Staff noted the application would move approximately 156 acres within the service district from low‑density residential to light industrial and employment center, and that 46 acres outside the service district would be used for water and utility facilities;
Applicant cofounder Art Lykounis described outreach efforts and argued the site is appropriate because it adjoins existing electrical and industrial uses and can deliver community benefits including water infrastructure, public safety equipment and tax revenue. "We shake a lot of hands and kiss a lot of babies to get to know the people," he told the commission while listing outreach and proffers the applicant says it will offer.
Opponents and advocacy groups — including Citizens for Fauquier County, Protect Fauquier, the Piedmont Environmental Council and many residents from across the county — argued the application does not conform to the Fauquier comprehensive plan and the county’s data center policy, warned of landscape and visual impacts, questioned the adequacy of water supplies and groundwater impacts, and raised concerns about the need for new transmission lines and substations. Speakers urged the commission to honor the comprehensive plan and the county's data center policy and not expand data centers beyond the two areas the plan designates.
Supporters — including many Remington residents — said the project would bring badly needed water infrastructure, recreational and parks funding, volunteer fire/rescue equipment funding, and local tax revenue; a number of residents said previous data center approvals had been imposed without local engagement and that this applicant has engaged with the community.
Commissioners heard technical presentations, extensive public comment and robust questioning about water supply (hydrogeological studies, well capacity, water tower height), transportation and construction impacts (truck trips and road improvements), energy and transmission needs (four 300‑MW substations were described in staff materials), and conformance with the county’s comprehensive plan and newly adopted data center policy. Several commissioners cited the plan and policy in arguing for denial; others emphasized potential mitigation and community benefits.
The planning commission entertained two competing motions at the end of the hearing: a motion by the chair to forward the package to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation of approval, and an alternate motion by another commissioner to recommend denial because the application is not consistent with the comprehensive plan or the county’s data center policy. The commission recorded a 4–1 result in the hearing room."
