Garner council hears two development previews as members press for data‑center protections

Two development teams presented early‑stage plans to the Garner Town Council April 28, and councilmembers used the work‑session format to press for protections against data centers, fiscal data, and stronger buffering for adjacent neighborhoods.

The first preview (Village at Big Branch) is a tier‑2 conditional rezoning for roughly 55–57 acres at Auburn Church Road and East Garner Road. Staff said the original application proposed about 226 units but the applicant revised the plan to reduce density and propose a mixed approach that would keep residential on the south portion and incorporate flex industrial uses on the north. Collier Marsh, attorney for the applicant, described the developer’s preferred mixed‑use option and said a fallback R‑4 residential plan (predominantly duplex and single‑family products) is available if council prefers a lower density residential outcome.

Council members repeatedly raised two themes: first, the town’s vulnerability to tax‑exemption strategies (the mayor referenced a recent local case and state action to close what he called a "Blue Ridge loophole"); and second, the potential to inadvertently allow data‑center or hyperscale uses in industrial or mixed zones. Councilmember Singleton said he would not support residential rezonings that risk tax‑exempt status until the loophole is closed; others urged staff and applicants to craft recordable deed restrictions or voluntarily proffered conditions that prevent data‑center conversion.

The second preview, the Garner Innovation Park, was presented by GEDC representatives and Greg Sanroiter, who described a 77‑acre business park. Presenters emphasized flex industrial and light manufacturing to retain locally owned companies; they said developer‑funded infrastructure (road, water and sewer extensions and a donated lot to GEDC) would remove costs from GEDC and help market the site. The team said NCDOT signaled comfort providing a traffic signal after staff showed a traffic analysis indicating a roughly 25% reduction in peak‑hour trips for the industrial scenario compared with a residential plan. Greg Sanroiter told council his team would include an ‘‘ironclad prohibition’’ on data centers for the site.

Council members pressed staff for a cost‑of‑services analysis, clearer tax and utility impact numbers, and enforceable zoning language. Councilmember Dellinger also voiced disappointment that an earlier concept that included hundreds of affordable housing units was replaced by a purely industrial model on GEDC property; he asked how the town would replace the lost affordable units. Staff and applicants said they would return with more detailed fiscal analyses, buffering plans, and proposed enforceable conditions.

No formal vote was taken — both items were previews meant to gather early feedback. Applicants were told to return with refined plans and supporting analyses for future hearings.