Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Data Centers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County staff backs municipal data‑center zoning language; commission encourages standalone ordinance approach
Summary
Dauphin County staff recommended and the planning commission approved comment letters on multiple municipal data‑center zoning amendments (East Hanover, West Hanover, Middle Paxton, Swatara), advising technical clarifications and recommending that some townships consider a standalone data‑center ordinance to avoid complicating broader zoning updates.
Dauphin County planning staff on July 13 presented reviews of several municipal zoning amendments that add or refine rules for data centers, and the commission voted to approve staff comment letters for each township.
Nick Yingst, representing East Hanover, told the commission his township is “trying to get ahead of this” because they expect a data‑center application may arrive soon. He said East Hanover’s ordinance updates are intended to provide reasonable regulations before applications arrive. The commission approved the staff letter supporting East Hanover’s draft ordinance with staff comments.
County staff reviewed West Hanover’s draft and recommended modest clarifications to definitions and dimensional standards to ensure consistent interpretation during enforcement. The commission approved the staff recommendations by voice vote.
Staff described Middle Paxton’s comprehensive zoning rewrite as a large package that already contains many non‑data‑center updates; staff suggested Middle Paxton consider treating data‑center provisions as a separate ordinance so the broader rewrite is not delayed. Staff warned some data‑center technical standards (sound measurement, setback/acreage thresholds) could unintentionally exclude sites if they are set too restrictively. A commissioner disclosed a property interest and abstained from the Middle Paxton vote; the commission otherwise approved staff comments.
Swatara Township submitted SALDO and text amendments that also include data‑center requirements. Staff found the proposals largely consistent with the county model ordinance but again suggested separating or clarifying data‑center provisions to reduce confusion among applicants and reviewers. The commission approved the staff comments.
Throughout the discussion, staff emphasized the tension between making regulations defensible in the face of potential challenges and setting standards that are not overly restrictive; one staff member recommended careful review of acreage minimums, setback rules and noise/sound measurement methods to avoid unintended exclusion of feasible sites.
Next steps: county staff will send the approved comment letters to each municipality; individual townships will decide whether to adopt the recommended changes or pursue separate, data‑center‑specific ordinances.
