New Castle County committee debates draft data-center rules after heated public comments on retroactivity, noise and water

Councilman Carter, sponsor of ordinance 25-1-01, presented a draft zoning standard for hyperscale data centers to the New Castle County Land Use Committee on March 10, describing a package of changes intended to balance community protections and feasibility for developers.

Carter summarized the draft’s substantive shifts: the ordinance removes detailed, prescriptive noise controls and “reverts back to using the existing noise protections under Chapter 22,” tightens lighting by reverting to a roughly 0.1 foot‑candle standard at property lines with downward‑directed fixtures, drops a proposed power‑use benchmark in favor of LEED certification, and creates a default 1,000‑foot residential buffer that could be reduced to 500 feet if an applicant supplies an approved noise‑attenuation study. He also said he removed formal interagency coordination language from the code and expects staff to work with state agencies using an informal checklist.

The sponsor’s retreat from including the pending‑ordinance (retroactivity) clause prompted sustained debate among council members. Several members said removing retroactivity would allow projects already in the pipeline to escape the new rules; others, including the sponsor, said he had committed on the floor not to include retroactivity in his draft and that any retroactive change should be attempted as a floor amendment next Tuesday.

David Culver, general manager of the Department of Land Use, told the committee that the typical interpretation of the ordinance language is that it applies to land‑use applications submitted after the adoption date and is not retroactive to plans already under review: “Our interpretation is this only applies to any new plan that would come in after the date of adoption.” He added that conversions that constitute a change of use — for example, converting approved warehouse space into a data center — would be treated as a new use and thus subject to the new standards.

Public comment stretched more than an hour and featured a large number of residents, environmental advocates and labor representatives. Opponents pressed for retroactivity and additional safeguards. Dale Swain of the Citizens Alliance for Responsible Land Use told the committee: “We had about 400 people screaming, we don’t want any freaking data centers in Delaware, period,” and urged the pending‑ordinance doctrine be restored. Other speakers cited potential impacts on water supplies, the electric grid and public health from generator emissions and constant low‑frequency noise.

Supporters and pragmatic voices urged carefully measurable standards and predictability. Jordan Siemens of Harvey Hanna & Associates recommended “objective performance standards that allow projects beating those standards proceed predictably,” warning that stacking requirements can drive projects away. Department staff and several council members pointed to closed‑loop cooling as a water‑use mitigation measure the draft addresses; Culver said closed‑loop systems can reduce water use “by 70 to 80%” compared with older approaches, and that DNREC permits and sewer pretreatment would govern any wastewater concerns.

The meeting did not produce a formal vote on the ordinance. Council members and staff agreed to continue the discussion; the sponsor said he expects the ordinance to return to the full council next Tuesday and that retroactivity — if pursued — would be proposed as a floor amendment. The committee adjourned after public comment.

Why it matters: New Castle County is weighing how to regulate very large data‑center projects that residents and some members of council say could alter local utilities, noise exposure and land use across districts. The specific choices about setbacks, noise measurement methods, water protections and whether rules apply to projects already pending will determine how future proposals are reviewed and what obligations developers must meet.

What to watch next: The draft is expected back before the full council next Tuesday; members signaled they may seek floor amendments on retroactivity, setback distances and technical monitoring requirements.