Loudoun supervisors mull data center moratorium

The elected officials of the data center capital of the world are considering hitting the brakes on new data center development, but questions remain about whether Virginia law allows them to do so.

Last week, the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors voted 6-1 to direct staff to prepare an item for its Sept. 15 meeting that would place a temporary moratorium on new data center applications while the county completes the next phase of developing its data center standards and regulations. Supervisors also directed the County Attorney’s Office to provide a legal analysis on whether such a pause is permissible under Virginia law.

Several Loudoun supervisors said this summer that the county is home to about 250 data centers, with more than 100 additional projects in the development pipeline.

Supervisor Juli E. Briskman introduced the motion on July 22 to explore a pause.

“As the community has been getting more and more upset about the number of data centers we have in the county, I’ve heard from residents across the county that they want data center growth significantly constrained or stopped entirely,” Briskman said. “They are tired of the visual impacts, the noise impacts. They’re concerned about the continued expansion of the energy infrastructure, rising utility costs, and they’re actually starting to be worried about the air that they breathe.”

She emphasized that the motion would not immediately enact a data center moratorium, but would instead have county staff prepare an item for consideration. She said the community has been “begging” the county to pause the applications and that the wait would allow supervisors to establish appropriation policies and regulations.

In March 2025, supervisors approved major changes to the county’s data center regulations, requiring future projects to obtain board approval through the special exception process rather than being approved administratively by right. The board also grandfathered certain pending applications submitted before the zoning changes.

An additional second phase of data center regulations is expected to be considered by the board in early 2027. Phase two will consider standards on data centers regarding setbacks, power usage, height, noise levels, emissions controls and emission standards.

County Attorney Leo Rogers said he does not believe the board has the legal authority to impose a moratorium on new data center applications. He pointed out that Virginia follows the Dillon Rule, which limits local governments to powers granted by the General Assembly, as well as a 1975 Virginia Supreme Court decision that invalidated Fairfax County’s attempt to issue a moratorium on site plans and subdivision plats.

Rogers said a locality would need a specific legal justification to impose a moratorium and suggested Virginia courts have recognized only narrow exceptions, such as temporary restrictions tied to an identifiable public emergency. At the board’s request, Rogers said he will consult with other Virginia localities considering similar measures and return in September with a legal analysis.

Supervisor Laura TeKrony said she supported Briskman’s measure because she said the county’s electric grid and community “are at a breaking point.” She said she believed a temporary pause could be legal if tied to something specific, such as the county first completing its data center standards regulations or an electrical infrastructure plan.

“I believe our residents are suffering because, you know, we have not been able to catch up, frankly, and I think we can do better to protect the quality of life of our residents,” TeKrony said. “Loudoun is oversaturated with data center development, and I think we do need to take a pause.”

Briskman said she was looking to “test the waters” about what the county could legally do on the matter, noting the county was “in a crisis on many levels” regarding data centers and that there could be legal justification. Chair Phyllis Randall said, “I’ve been voting against data centers before it was popular to vote against data centers.”

Ultimately, Randall, Briskman, TeKrony and Supervisors Mike Turner, Sylvia Glass and Koran Saines voted in support of the motion. Supervisors Caleb Kershner and Matt Letourneau were absent. Supervisor Kristen Umstattd was the sole dissenting vote.

“I will not support this particular motion tonight, as I suspect we would have a hard time defending it in court if it got that far,” she said.

Also at the meeting, the board unanimously passed a motion brought by TeKrony that directed staff to study options for decommissioning data centers.

“So eventually, data centers will be obsolete the way they are today with new technologies and innovations,” she said. “We don’t need the large footprint that we have now in the future. I’m convinced that we will have other solutions for our data needs. So, looking ahead in the next 20 or 30 years, I believe we need requirements for a decommissioning plan.”

Throughout Virginia, numerous localities have been grappling with ways to rein in data centers. Virginia Beach City Council recently directed staff to draft an ordinance prohibiting large-scale data centers and hyperscale facilities within city limits, while the Frederick County Board of Supervisors is exploring prohibiting data centers as an allowed use in all of the county’s zoning districts.

Meanwhile, Chesapeake City Council last week voted to pause consideration of data center applications for up to eight months, or until the city adopts regulations governing data centers, whichever comes first. Chesapeake City Attorney Catherine Lindley doesn’t characterize the city’s eight-month pause as a moratorium, saying she views a moratorium or a ban as “a total wipeout of one specific use.” She said Chesapeake instead is temporarily pausing certain data center applications while it updates its zoning ordinance.

Lindley said the city believes the approach is permitted under Virginia law because it applies to discretionary land-use applications, such as rezonings and conditional use permits. She said the Virginia Supreme Court’s 1975 Board of Supervisors of Fairfax County v. Horne decision addressed administrative applications, including subdivision plats and site plans, rather than discretionary rezonings and conditional use permits.

She added Chesapeake’s legal position relies in part on Virginia Code § 15.2-2286, which requires counties to act on rezoning applications within a reasonable time not to exceed 12 months. Lindley said the statute requires cities to act within a reasonable time but does not define that period, so Chesapeake has long operated under the assumption that courts would view the 12-month limit specified for counties as a reasonable standard for cities as well.

“We’ve done extensive research, and we have a lot of case citations, and so we feel very confident in our position,” she said.