Planning Commission recommends denial of zoning changes

By Katie Northcott

Changes in data center zoning took center stage at the Loudoun County Planning Commission’s Dec. 12 public hearing and work session.

The Loudoun County Board of Supervisors began discussions about changing data center zoning ordinances in the spring of 2022. At its Feb. 6, 2024, business meeting, the Board approved the project plan for a joint Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPAM) and Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOAM). The project plan split the project into two phases. The Data Center Standards and Locations CPAM and ZOAM, which was discussed at the Commission’s Dec. 12 meeting, is part of phase one of the plan.

The amendments would make it more difficult for developers to obtain approval for new data centers. Data centers would be designated as a conditional use in three place types where they are currently a core use and as a special exception use in three place types where they are currently a permitted use by-right.

At a Planning Commission public hearing on Sept. 24, commissioners heard 27 public speakers. According to a planning and zoning staff memorandum, some speakers supported the amendments while others expressed opposition. 

Those opposed cited concerns “that adoption could negatively affect existing and pipeline data centers, hinder data center campus expansions, create uncertainty within the development industry, and drive data center projects to other jurisdictions.” 

“Business investment is the foundation of Loudoun’s thriving economy, and data centers have been pivotal to this success” said Matt Leslie, Senior Planning and Development Manager at Bowman Consulting. “The amendments before you tonight will not only impact the data center industry but will also reverberate across all sectors of Loudoun’s industry.”

Those in favor expressed sentiments that “the amendments would help the County address resident concerns on the impact of data centers on residential neighborhoods.”

“I don’t see data centers as the harmless and risk-free money tree that some people seem to suggest that they are,” Loudoun resident and climate advocate Chris Tandy said. “Data centers are gobbling up huge amounts of land and going into places where people don’t want them, like near residential areas, near malls, along Route 7, and I even saw one application that would be near the metro station.”

After discussions with Supervisor Michael Turner (D-Ashburn), Executive Director of the Department of Economic Development Buddy Rizer, the county attorney’s office, and planning and zoning staff, the Commission decided, on Dec. 12, to recommend denial of the proposed amendments. In the resolution, the Commission explained that its denial is due to the limited scope of the Board’s direction and sent its resolution of denial with six recommendations for the Board’s consideration.

“I think having some substance as to why we’re not approving what they wanted is a better way of communicating to [the Board],” Commissioner Dale Polen Myers (At-Large) said.

The first two recommendations concern a grandfathering resolution that would be effective if the Board chooses to ignore the Commission’s denial resolution and pass the amendments anyway. 

The Commission recommended establishing the Board’s public hearing date as the effective date for the grandfathering resolution. This would mean that development applications submitted and formally accepted before the effective date would be reviewed under the current zoning ordinance.

Commissioner Mark Miller (Catoctin) opposed the grandfathering recommendations.

“I think grandfathering is a political decision, not a planning decision. In general, I don’t believe it’s our role to recommend how and when to adopt grandfathering,” he said.

The third recommendation concerned adding footnotes to the General Plan to provide flexibility to already existing data centers that would become subject to a special exception use. The Commission does not believe the Board intended to keep existing data centers from expanding. 

Similarly, the fifth recommendation is that a footnote or future amendment provide specific criteria for when a special exception would not be required. The Commission thought the Board should prefer adding footnotes over pursuing another amendment through a Resolution of Intent to Amend (ROIA).

“The concern is today, when this gets approved, and you have an existing site plan and you need to plot that building and stuff. How do you do it?” Myers said. “This says that the Board should consider a future ROIA, which means it’s not going to help anybody that’s there now.”

The fourth recommendation was that the Board add language to the proposed CPAM to provide guidance in evaluating data centers as conditional uses. Additionally, the Commission recommended that long-term language be added to guide redevelopment of urban employment areas with already existing data centers.

The Commission’s sixth recommendation supported proposed changes to place type maps of Goose Creek Club and Arcola area, but not to metro station areas.

The commissioners expressed that they would like to become involved earlier in the second phase of the data center zoning ordinance changes.

“We would hope that when we get into phase two—that is 14 months but we get it for a month, and it’s through December again—that they would give us some substance time, so that we would have time to work with it,” Myers said.

Ultimately, the commissioners voted to pass the resolution 6-2-1 with Commissioner Ad Barnes (Leesburg) and Chair Michelle Frank (Broad Run) opposed, and Commissioner Robin-Eve Jasper (Little River) absent.

“I don’t think this is what the supervisors wanted. We told them, but they’re going to do it the way they want to do it,” Barnes said.

Frank opposed her own motion, citing concerns over the grandfathering policy, guidance for further changes to the general plan, and criteria for when special exceptions would not be required. She said that adopting a list of specific criteria had created headaches with the 2019 General Plan as these criteria tend to either create loopholes or unattainable criteria.

“I think this use can be in harmony with other uses and our residents if it’s done properly, but I just don’t see this set of recommendations getting us where we need to be to create that harmony,” she said. “I think it’s a little too far to one side.”

The other commissioners felt that they had to compromise on which of their concerns were expressed, but that it was a fair compromise.

“I think this is a good product. We could probably have come up with some better stuff if we had more leeway to do it,” Myers said. “But I’m very pleased with the outcome of where we’re at.”