12.C) Ordinance to Amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 165 Zoning - Additions and Revisions to Define and Regulate Data Centers, Including Additional Regulations, Height, and Nuisances and Define and Regulate Power Generating Facilities.
Chapter 165 Zoning,
Article I
General Provisions; Amendments; and Conditional Use Permits
Part 101 – General Provisions
165-101.02 Definitions and word usage
Article II
Supplementary Use Regulations; Parking; Buffers; and Regulations for Specific Uses
Part 201 – Supplementary Use Regulations
165-201.12 Nuisances
Part 204 – Additional Regulations for Specific Uses
165-204.28 – Height Waivers in EM (Extractive Manufacturing), M1 (Light Industrial) and M2 (Industrial General) Districts
Article IV
Agricultural and Residential Districts
Part 401 – RA Rural Areas District
165-401.02 Permitted Uses;
165-401.03 Conditional uses
Article VI
Business and Industrial Zoning Districts
Part 604 – B3 Industrial Transition District
165-604.02 Allowed Uses
Part 605 – TM Technology Manufacturing Park District
165-605.02 Permitted Uses
Part 606 – M1 Light Industrial District
165-606.02 Allowed Uses
Part 607 – M2 Industrial General District
165-607.02 Allowed Uses
Increasing the expectations for appeal/resident/environmental safeguards is good.
I am not in favor of allowing "By Right" data center construction. Rather I believe it is in the best interest of the county, for myriad reasons, to require specific exemptions/approvals/permits for data center construction.
The experience of many of the communities to our east should give us significant caution in welcoming data centers.
Chairperson, Members of the Board I live in the Back Creek district, Kernstown. This topic is extremely important for my family & our community's future.
We live and farm directly across the road from one of the proposed data center sites. We are fortunate to be able to look to the experience of our NOVA neighbors before making decisions that inevitably have a huge impact. This area is on the developmental verge, which way will we go? At this point we are still able to take pause & consider the long term, and not just short term gains. It's not too late.
If we have the courage to be completely honest, what do we all know (and can easily find in research) that sustains the quality of life for everyone? Is it large, noisy, resource-demanding, wildlife-disrupting data centers directly next to homes, historical sites and farmland? I don't think any of us would say that's what improves our quality of life, which is what should be at the forefront of our focus as we make decisions for those in the future generations who cannot. A high quality of life, especially for kids, consists of things like: spending time exploring & exercising or working in the outdoors everyday, living in a community small enough that you truly know and can rely on each other, having healthy locally grown and hunted food, unburdened educational systems & infrastructure so that they can actually serve the individuals and not just barely stay afloat managing the masses, parents & grandparents who aren't stressed by increasing costs and being priced out of the area, etc...
I've even seen the wildlife dwindling on our property in the last decade. Whether you believe in God or Adaptation, thriving ecosystems are necessary for everyone. They give us the clean food, air & water we need.
If development of this sort must happen, let us please have the courage to be honest & sincere about the long term effects. Are there past development decisions you would change, seeing how the effects played out now?
Mr. Chairman, and collective Board Members, I am located in the Opequon district and am a former Loudoun County Supervisor who dealt with the influx of needed data centers when they were first coming into that County. So, I commend you for revising your Ordinance involving data centers and would like to highlight a few items. A 200-foot setback to adjacent common property lines for land zoning of any types is not nearly large enough and I recommend at least a 500-foot setback, and more in some cases, particularly with data center campuses with clusters of data centers. I see you are not requiring a buffer for all zoning types; this can increase security issues for data centers. I do not recommend any zoning type to allow for data centers by-right as there are a number of issues associated with doing so. Natural gas generators are cleaner and produce lower dba levels than diesel powered generators, and multiple generators are typically required for even a small data center so there is a lot of noise even with a small data center. Consider a required implementation timeframe for noise mitigation strategies, improvements, or operational changes. I could not find your lighting requirements as data centers are typically taller than most buildings. I recommend changing the perimeter sound levels from 75 dba to 70 dba, as 70 dba is the most recognized safe sound level. Data centers beside rural areas can also sound louder due to the lack of surrounding buildings. High wattage power transmission lines, power substations and expansion of power substations will occur, that you will have little control over the path and effect on the community about, and is also one of the reasons to not include any zoning to have by-right development of data centers. Essentially support data center growth in an effective way for all.
Redbud District.
Increasing the expectations for appeal/resident/environmental safeguards is good.
I am not in favor of allowing "By Right" data center construction. Rather I believe it is in the best interest of the county, for myriad reasons, to require specific exemptions/approvals/permits for data center construction.
The experience of many of the communities to our east should give us significant caution in welcoming data centers.
Chairperson, Members of the Board I live in the Back Creek district, Kernstown. This topic is extremely important for my family & our community's future.
We live and farm directly across the road from one of the proposed data center sites. We are fortunate to be able to look to the experience of our NOVA neighbors before making decisions that inevitably have a huge impact. This area is on the developmental verge, which way will we go? At this point we are still able to take pause & consider the long term, and not just short term gains. It's not too late.
If we have the courage to be completely honest, what do we all know (and can easily find in research) that sustains the quality of life for everyone? Is it large, noisy, resource-demanding, wildlife-disrupting data centers directly next to homes, historical sites and farmland? I don't think any of us would say that's what improves our quality of life, which is what should be at the forefront of our focus as we make decisions for those in the future generations who cannot. A high quality of life, especially for kids, consists of things like: spending time exploring & exercising or working in the outdoors everyday, living in a community small enough that you truly know and can rely on each other, having healthy locally grown and hunted food, unburdened educational systems & infrastructure so that they can actually serve the individuals and not just barely stay afloat managing the masses, parents & grandparents who aren't stressed by increasing costs and being priced out of the area, etc...
I've even seen the wildlife dwindling on our property in the last decade. Whether you believe in God or Adaptation, thriving ecosystems are necessary for everyone. They give us the clean food, air & water we need.
If development of this sort must happen, let us please have the courage to be honest & sincere about the long term effects. Are there past development decisions you would change, seeing how the effects played out now?
Mr. Chairman, and collective Board Members, I am located in the Opequon district and am a former Loudoun County Supervisor who dealt with the influx of needed data centers when they were first coming into that County. So, I commend you for revising your Ordinance involving data centers and would like to highlight a few items. A 200-foot setback to adjacent common property lines for land zoning of any types is not nearly large enough and I recommend at least a 500-foot setback, and more in some cases, particularly with data center campuses with clusters of data centers. I see you are not requiring a buffer for all zoning types; this can increase security issues for data centers. I do not recommend any zoning type to allow for data centers by-right as there are a number of issues associated with doing so. Natural gas generators are cleaner and produce lower dba levels than diesel powered generators, and multiple generators are typically required for even a small data center so there is a lot of noise even with a small data center. Consider a required implementation timeframe for noise mitigation strategies, improvements, or operational changes. I could not find your lighting requirements as data centers are typically taller than most buildings. I recommend changing the perimeter sound levels from 75 dba to 70 dba, as 70 dba is the most recognized safe sound level. Data centers beside rural areas can also sound louder due to the lack of surrounding buildings. High wattage power transmission lines, power substations and expansion of power substations will occur, that you will have little control over the path and effect on the community about, and is also one of the reasons to not include any zoning to have by-right development of data centers. Essentially support data center growth in an effective way for all.