Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Remington Turbine topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission recommends denial of private turbine yard at Remington Technology Park
Summary
The Fauquier County Planning Commission voted 3–2 to forward a recommendation of denial to the Board of Supervisors for a rezoning amendment that would allow a private natural‑gas turbine yard at Remington Technology Park, citing noise, air‑quality and permanence concerns. The applicant requested an indefinite postponement before the commission ultimately recommended denial.
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Remington Turbine topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Fauquier County Planning Commission voted 3–2 on March 18 to recommend denial of a rezoning amendment (REZN‑25‑025515) that would allow an on‑site private natural‑gas turbine yard to support a proposed data center campus in the Remington area. A commissioner who moved the denial said, “A private power plant is not — we do not need to be the guinea pigs for this new technology,” and cited evidence of noise and air pollution at smaller private plants nearby.
The applicant, Colin Klitsch, CEO of 0.1 Data Centers, asked the commission to postpone action so the company could revise proffers, saying, “Our goal is to simply build the project that was approved in 2020.” Staff described the proposal as a temporary, on‑site turbine yard occupying up to 4.5 acres with a maximum capacity of 215 megawatts (typical operations 88–138 MW), an initial design of 13 simple‑cycle turbines, setbacks, screening and proffers that would limit NOx emissions to 100 tons per year and increase a parks and recreation contribution to $10,000,000. Commissioners and residents questioned the temporary nature of the facility, the lack of a date‑certain decommissioning trigger, and whether Dominion Energy can or will deliver the grid capacity needed.
The commission kept the public hearing open earlier in the meeting while the applicant requested time to revise proffers, but later a motion to forward the application to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation of denial passed 3–2. The recommendation now goes to the Board for final action; the commission did not adopt specific conditions beyond its motion to recommend denial.
