Consideration for development of technology overlay district targets data center development

It’s no secret that data centers and the state of Virginia have become very familiar with each other. For New Kent County, they are now getting their first look of a battle within their borders.

A presentation by New Kent Director of Community Development Josh Airaghi to the New Kent Planning Commission for proposed regulations for a technology overlay district went before commissioners in a draft form.

The fight for placement of data centers have been an ongoing topic in several neighboring counties in New Kent. Recently, Charles City, Henrico, and Hanover have all shot down proposals from companies wanting to create data centers in locations where citizens argued that it would hurt the land’s aesthetics and use county resources.

Airaghi said he did not have all the answers but wanted commissioners to have an idea on what a technology overlay district would look like. He opened up by saying that New Kent has not received a proposal nor an application for a data center but wanted to set standards and expectations for interested companies. Airaghi emphasized that a process could help the county stay on top of situations if an application is received and prevent the county from being caught off guard.

Airaghi said the county has land and resources in an existing industrial corridor. He also said that smaller, long-term traffic impacts associated with data centers will exist, but those places will create higher paying jobs that give people the ability to live in New Kent.

“During construction, there is traffic and we’re not going to deny that,” he told the planning commissioners.

But Aigaghi commented said that long-term impacts are far less. Referencing the process that started with county leaders in April 2025, Aigaghi met with consultants as they were brought in to look at the possibility of data centers in New Kent County. Consultants studied parcels of land in the county, ranking them based on suitability and impact. Site visits to Louisa and Culpeper County were made this past January as part of the study. Those visits provided insight and feedback comparisons for the study. In total, 11 of the sites studied were ranked ideal for data center development, with 42 other spots having high favorability.

“We did not want to cherry pick properties across the county because they ranked higher than ideal,” Airaghi said when discussing the rankings.

During the process, one of the ideas identified for a possible technology overlay district was down the Route 33 corridor. A plot of land that spans 1,260 acres was considered suitable as a site. That would account for roughly 0.9 percent of suitable land owned by the county.

One of the more controversial topics discussed when it comes to data centers is the noise impact. Airaghi strongly proposed a series of restrictions on data centers in the overlay district. Under his recommendation, it would limit noise levels to 65 decibels during daylight hours and 60 decibels at night. He also recommended the need for buffers applied to the exterior and at intersections as part of standards to be set in the technology overlay district.

There would be a development review committee meeting prior to any type of development. These meetings would be internal meetings, giving reviewers the ability to look at plans. The submission of applications and site plans would be the next step.

Submittal requirements include an administrative conditional permit application, conceptual master plan, architectural elevation package, noise impact assessment, water use analysis, site plan, and supporting documents and contents governed by existing county code.

Airaghi said the plan would need a public hearing and vote by commissioners as well as the county Board of Supervisors. However, data center applications would not require a conditional use permit under the proposal.

Commissioner Patricia Townsend voiced concerns about data centers potentially not needing a conditional use permit to construct in areas designated as technology overlay districts.

“You said that once this was ever approved, that they [developers] would never come back to the planning commission?” she asked Airaghi.

“Yes,” Airaghi responded, pointing to the need of not having a public hearing on the issue. He said that if the data centers conformed to the standards of the overlay district, they would not need to go to the process. He said he knows it’s a huge deal and did not expect the commission to take any action on the proposal.

Several members of the public have voiced their disdain about data centers not needing a conditional use permit, saying it prevents public input and overlooks concerns of the citizens, essentially providing the developer a “by right” opportunity to avoid public hearings on the project itself if approved to construct in an overlay development.