Prince William supervisors reject another big data center project

Prince William County supervisors unanimously rejected a comprehensive plan amendment that would have allowed a massive data center campus in the western part of the county, just days after the controversial Prince William Digital Gateway project officially died.

Supervisors voted Tuesday night against approving a change to the county’s comprehensive plan that would designate about 1,930 acres in the Gainesville Magisterial District for industrial use to allow data centers, substations and related infrastructure, which was requested by Warrenton-based lobbying and communications firm LSI 360, also known as LSI Communications.

According to county planning documents, the proposed Dulles South Innovation Center would have allowed up to 43 million square feet of development at buildout. The land is currently designated for low-density residential and agricultural uses and is zoned primarily for agriculture.

County staff recommended that the Board of Supervisors reject the requested amendment, saying that while the project would substantially increase the county’s commercial tax base and create employment opportunities, it also raised significant concerns about infrastructure capacity, environmental and rural character impacts, and compatibility with surrounding agricultural land.

The proposal also drew significant opposition from county residents and local organizations that had opposed the Prince William Digital Gateway, a 23 million-square-foot data center complex planned on 2,100 acres near Manassas National Battlefield Park.

On July 2, one of the two developers of that project, QTS Data Centers, withdrew its petition for the Virginia Supreme Court to overturn a ruling by the Virginia Court of Appeals in favor of a homeowners association and the American Battlefield Trust that voided Prince William supervisors’ rezoning vote in 2023. As the other Digital Gateway developer, Compass Datacenters, and the county had declined to appeal the March 31 ruling, QTS’ withdrawal effectively killed the Prince William Digital Gateway project.

Supervisors on Tuesday repeatedly said the proposal conflicted with the county’s comprehensive plan, represented piecemeal development and was simply too large. Supervisor George Stewart said that the land’s status in the comprehensive plan is how it needs to remain, and any changes must be thoughtfully considered.

“The square footage is absolutely obscene,” Stewart said of the project. “I did some math. We’re dropping 15 Empire State Buildings into a rural area. Make it make sense. I can’t.”

Supervisor Andrea Bailey said while she understands the value of increasing the commercial tax base, she ultimately felt “it’s not the right time” for the project.

Chair Deshundra Jefferson said the county should have worked with its transportation and economic development officials to conduct a holistic study of the area before considering the proposal. She also raised concerns about the county “putting all of our eggs in one basket” by focusing on the data center industry. Jefferson noted the amendment before the board was specifically for data centers and said the county was “ready to move beyond that.”

“I cannot get on board with this,” she said.

Supervisor Kenny Boddye described the failure of the Digital Gateway as “the big, giant, now-dead elephant in the room” that loomed over the Dulles South discussion.

“This proposal leaned on the fact that Digital Gateway still exists,” he said. “It does not, as of a couple days ago. It is dead. We owe this community time to pause, exhale and work together with their supervisor to shape this area’s future holistically. They deserve to have that conversation without another mega proposal looming over their heads.”

The Coalition to Protect Prince William County’s executive director, Elena Schlossberg, on Monday described Dulles South as “nightmare and chaos,” saying she feared it would strain the electric grid, consume large amounts of water and increase the risk of power outages.

On Wednesday, following the vote, Schlossberg said her reaction to the board rejecting the comprehensive plan was “relief” and “hallelujah” and that opposing the project and raising awareness took “relentless effort.” She said Tuesday’s vote proves the success of people being able “to utilize the process to enforce transparency, to demand accountability and to use the ballot box and the rule of law.”

It is unclear whether LSI will pursue the project through other means. The project’s developers and attorney Lee Gleason at Cooley, who represented the applicant, did not immediately return requests for comment.