Zoning

Data center ordinance

Summary not yet generated for this topic.

Community sentiment

Supportive (2)Concerned (1)

At a glance

Public comments
3
Last 30 days
3

Discussed at 1 meeting in the last 60 days; most recently Nov 10, 2026.

Public comments (5)

ConcernedEric KesslerNov 10, 2026

Kessler pushed for bonding on decommissioning, said the 100,000 sq ft building cap is too small, urged cutting impervious coverage to 60% and building height to 40 feet near residential areas.

Board of Supervisors Agendas - Nov 10, 2026 · 1:33:13 →
OpposedEric KesslerNov 10, 2026

Kessler called the 300-foot setback 'ridiculous,' demanded at least 1,000 feet, and questioned how a 200-foot loading zone fits within the setback.

Board of Supervisors Agendas - Nov 10, 2026 · 1:36:10 →
OpposedSarah WrightNov 10, 2026

Wright backed the 1,000-foot setback and proposed requiring data center applications five to ten years before groundbreaking; the solicitor explained MPC deadlines make that unworkable.

Board of Supervisors Agendas - Nov 10, 2026 · 13:45 →
SupportiveJulie LoberNov 10, 2026

Lober praised the work and asked the township to add an e-waste management plan so failed servers don't end up in landfills.

Board of Supervisors Agendas - Nov 10, 2026 · 1:41:21 →
SupportiveDerek LyonsNov 10, 2026

Lyons thanked the board for being proactive, asked where the overlay district sits (the one neighborhood design district off Wenrick Street), and suggested adding tonal noise limits, backup generator restrictions, a peak-shaving ban, and setbacks for generators and cooling equipment.

Board of Supervisors Agendas - Nov 10, 2026 · 1:42:33 →