Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Data Centers Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board urges aldermen to impose moratorium on data centers while rules are refined
Summary
After a prolonged discussion of proposed UDO language for data centers, the Southport Planning Board voted to request a moratorium (up to 15 months) from the Board of Aldermen and directed staff to continue work with technical experts on operational and environmental standards.
The Southport Planning Board on July 16, 2026, unanimously voted to ask the Board of Aldermen to impose a moratorium on data‑center‑related industries for up to 15 months while the planning board and staff, in coordination with energy providers, water utilities and the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, refine draft Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) standards.
Staff introduced proposed UDO language that would add data centers as a regulated use. Board members and committee participants raised a range of technical and public health concerns: electromagnetic fields (EMF/milligauss) and the need for ongoing monitoring; potential PFAS/PFOA issues tied to process liquids and water disposal; energy and rate impacts on local customers; water use and drought planning; decommissioning and performance bonds to avoid 'white elephant' sites; and how to capture crypto‑mining operations in the definition.
One board member who said they hold information security certifications urged stricter operational monitoring and extended separation distances from residences, and recommended input from electrical providers and peer communities that operate data facilities. Other members recommended adding an environmental monitoring requirement during operation, defining qualifications for engineers who prepare plans, and requiring performance or decommissioning bonds to ensure proper site closure.
Faced with three options—approve the draft as written, send the draft back to the subcommittee for further work, or ask the Board of Aldermen for a moratorium—the chair said he favored a moratorium while the board develops a thorough record justifying any local restrictions. A motion to ask the Board of Aldermen to adopt a moratorium of up to 15 months passed on a hand count reported as 6–0. The Planning Board also adopted a separate motion directing the Planning Board and staff to continue refining the draft UDO language with outside expertise.
Board members emphasized that any moratorium would need statutory justification (public health, safety, infrastructure impacts) and that the Board of Aldermen would set the final scope and duration. Staff noted that conditional zoning and public hearings provide additional tools, and that the moratorium period could be extended by the Aldermen if necessary.
Next steps: staff will coordinate outreach to utilities and state agencies, continue subcommittee drafting, and forward the moratorium request to the Board of Aldermen for consideration.
