Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Upper Merion adopts data‑center rules after public debate over buffers, water and noise
Summary
The Board of Supervisors adopted a zoning ordinance that defines data centers and establishes conditional-use standards, parking rules, water‑use limits and noise protections; the measure passed 5‑0 after public comments raised legal and siting concerns.
The Upper Merion Township Board of Supervisors on March 12 adopted an amendment to Chapter 165 to classify and regulate data centers, establishing definitions, conditional‑use standards and requirements intended to limit community impacts.
Township Planner Jarrett Lash summarized the ordinance, saying, “This ordinance seeks to define data centers within the township as a unique use,” and explained it creates three district‑specific permit paths, tailored parking standards and certification requirements with local utilities including PECO, Aqua and PA American. The draft requires pre‑ and post‑construction sound studies, prohibits open‑loop water systems in favor of closed‑loop cooling, and requires a public information session and an emergency‑services plan for any proposed data‑center project.
The ordinance sets different size and siting parameters by district: Lash described an SM‑1 standard that limits certain data‑center footprints (he said parcels in SM‑1 are intended to be under 499,999 square feet) and an HI (heavy industrial) standard that limits data‑center area to less than 40% of total building area. The ordinance also includes a one‑thousand‑foot residential buffer for large facilities and other design and decommissioning provisions.
Public commenters pressed the board on both policy and legal risk. Melanie Cichy urged state legislators for a moratorium to allow local rules to catch up. Landowner and neighborhood representative Ed Campbell said the Township had drafted many useful guardrails — including closed‑loop water systems, higher sound‑study standards, and limits on aquifer withdrawals — but warned the ordinance could be challenged if it effectively excluded lawful uses or imposed arbitrary limits. “If there is a lawful use the municipality has to provide for it but can control or regulate where it goes,” Campbell told the board; he urged care so the ordinance would survive legal review.
Planner Lash and board members pushed back that the ordinance intentionally balanced controls with legal constraints, and Lash said there remain multiple parcels in the township where a permitted data‑center could be sited within the ordinance’s parameters. Chairperson Tina Garzillo said the board viewed the ordinance as a “living document” that would be updated as state and county standards evolve; she referenced the state’s Grid Initiative and Montgomery County drafting as additional inputs.
Supervisors voted unanimously to adopt the ordinance (motion by Supervisor Carole Kenney; second by Supervisor Greg Waks). The board also noted that future amendments are likely as state and county policies change.
What’s next: the ordinance takes effect following adoption; the township will require developers to demonstrate compliance with the ordinance’s certification and public‑notification provisions before conditional‑use hearings.
