Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

to them the respect that you ask us to. You're beautiful in all of your ways. In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Please join us for the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.

Thank you. Thank you, Pastor Ross. It takes us to adoption of the agenda. Planning Commissioners, is there a motion to adopt the agenda?

So moved.

Is there a second? Second. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed, likewise? And we have an agenda. Item five is appointment of John Bishop as Secretary of Planning Commission. First, I'd like to congratulate Mr. Bishop on his appointment as Director of Planning and Development for Frederick County. Congratulations, sir. Thank you. Now we need to make him responsible for taking all our notes. Okay. I'll be glad to accept the motion to appoint Mr. Bishop as Secretary of Planning Commission. Second. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed, likewise? Congratulations again, Mr. Bishop. I'd also like to congratulate Dr. John LaManna, who recently completed our Certified Planners course. For those of you that don't know, if you're on the Planning Commission, you're expected to go to and participate in a course that Virginia Commonwealth University puts on. There's two days at the beginning of the course and two days at the end, and it goes on for four months. It's where we learn about the laws in Virginia and basic land planning and a lot of the things that you hear us talk about up here, some of the terms that we throw around. So Dr. Lamont recently finished that course, and sir, we congratulate you. Is there anything you'd like to say about the course that might be beneficial to others contemplating it? Attorney Michael.

Thanks. Very beneficial. When I was appointed to this commission, it wasn't exactly what my background was. And a lot of the language and the details were somewhat beyond me. It was I didn't know what I didn't know. And the two-day workshop and the three months work at home really gave me the awareness that I think that I needed to at least know what questions I need to ask. And I think that's very important when you're serving on a panel of this nature. The other plus of it as well, and I might say, is the interaction between other commissioners. There was a board of supervisors, city council people, executives down there as well. And that intermingling and that understanding of what's happening in the state and what they're being challenged by also was very helpful. The only thing that was two tests that we had to deal with was the planning commission guide, zoning 101, and, of course, the comprehensive plan. And it was also very interesting that all of the commissioners down there were involved in either developing or revising their plan. So that was interesting as well. So I would say it was very beneficial for me. Very good.

Thank you, sir. That leads us to item six, meeting minutes. We have meeting minutes from our, let's see, meeting minutes from our May 6th meeting. Any edits necessary for that? Not to be glad to accept a motion for adoption as presented. So moved. Is there a second?

Second.

Any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed likewise? Okay, that brings us down to committee reports number seven. Any committee reports to my right?

I'll start, Mr. Chairman. So the DRRC Development Review and Regulations Committee met on August 27th and reviewed several proposed ordinance updates, two of which are on our agenda tonight and a few are in the future. The first one was Phase 1 Ordinance Amendments. Reviewed policy related updates to the zoning and subdivision ordinances recommended through the Berkeley group to provide modernization efforts There was an effort to update legislative updates reviewed proposed amendments to Long County ordinances with recent changes to the Code of Virginia and We discussed a proposal to remove data centers as a permitted use in all zoning ordinances and as a conditional use permit. We reviewed a proposal to eliminate and remove the TM, technology manufacturing zoning ordinance. And then the final item was battery energy storage systems. We discussed what that looks like and discussed whether we would allow battery storage facilities in Frederick County. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Kearns? Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Historic Resources Advisory Board, HRAB, met on Friday, August 21st. There was one rezoning that we took a look at. That was the Gibson Properties rezoning down on Route 277, Fairfax Pike, and 522. There were a couple of properties involved in that, and the applicant, I think, was talking about removing one of the three parcels that they had talked about. So I think there's going to be some changes to that as it comes along, but it's from rural to M1. We did talk about that. I don't think there was anything significant with historic resources related with that property. We also looked at a number of comprehensive plan amendments. One of those was for some land around the airport and then two properties over next to kind of where the Walmart is on 522, or sorry, on 50, back up behind there. Those were all kind of related to the Shenandoah Valley Battlefield Foundation and their uses of those properties. And then finally, there was a comprehensive plan amendment request by Karmus, Lyman, Stone for their property up by their existing quarry, and there were no historic resources that were found up there either. Thank you, sir. Thank you.

Any other committee reports to my right? To my left, committee reports. Okay. Mr. Markert.

The Conservation Easement Authority, CEA, met on the 27th also and talked about, one of the things was about budgeting and coming up with some funding to pay for their operations and education and that's dealing with the finance committee. So they're looking for that to get resolved. They talked about the transmission corridor had a discussion about the taking of land and what to do about it. And they've begun drafting an opposition resolution to the taking of land relative to these transmission corridors. They also discussed the access to the website. The website is being improved, and it will include a portal to enhance the access to it and the content. And finally, the committee was given a briefing on the comprehensive plan and related preservation for the comprehensive plan drafting. involved in it. So that's it. Very good. Thank you, sir. Mr. Potthoff?

Yes. Frederick Water met in both July and August. I've got about five highlights. Rainfall continues to be problematic. We've had a couple days of significant rain, but many areas have just seemed to localize storms. However, Frederick Water remains in good position to weather the continued lack of rain. On August 18th, Frederick Water had a meeting with Wiley Wilson and Burns McDonald to give us a presentation on Phase 2, a portion of the East Pit Initiative. This will allow Frederick Water to use the East Pit that's capable of holding 1.7 billion gallons of water. The next meeting next week, we will have a meeting to hear the final maximum guaranteed price and be asked to authorize the project. Contractors are working with the county obtaining necessary permits for the phase one, which involves the construction of the intake line and pipeline from Opecan Creek over to the East Pit. Pheretic Water this summer has finished three bulk filling stations for anybody needing potable water. These are located at Deal and Anderson at Sunnyside Plaza. There is a credit card reader, and you can purchase as low as 100 gallons in increments of 100 gallons at a time. And there are two connections, a 5-inch water hose and a 2.5-inch hydrogen connection. And finally, the board authorized sending a comment letter opposing two locations of the Valley Link power lines. The northern route crosses directly over Frederick Water property, where we will have a treatment plant in the future. And the southern route passes right next to the elevated storage tank on 277.

Thank you, sir. Any other committee reports to my right? I have two I'll share. Transportation Committee has met twice since we last met. The first time was on July 27th, where we talked about the SmartScale leveraging a fund. There are seven projects that the county put forward in SmartScale. These are... Exit 307 bridge replacement and interchange upgrades, Route 50 safety improvements, the Siler Road intersection, Route 50 west at Stony Hill Road, Route 522 improvements at Route 37, Apple Pie Ridge Road, Route 7 gateway area upgrades, Route 7 and Greenwood Road intersection upgrades. And if you want to know more about any of those projects, you can find info on the county's website in the transportation section. The Board of Supervisors, it was recommended to the Board of Supervisors that the county proceed with its current stance, and that is providing a 20% funding commitment to these projects. There was also discussion about through truck restrictions on Jones Road and Kogel Road. VDOT will be doing a study of traffic counts to see what's going on there as far as trucks and determine what may be needed. On August the 24th, Transportation Committee met again. Aside from things that I just mentioned, there was a concerned citizen who came forward concerned about pedestrian movements and e-bikes on Fort Collier Road and some of the way these things are operating out in traffic. The sheriff's deputy said this is a problem not just on Fort Collier Road, but several places. So that's going to be reviewed by the sheriff's department and VDOT. The second thing I want to report on is on July 23, we had a joint meeting with the Board of Supervisors, the Planning Commission, to review the comprehensive plan update work, a joint working session. There were a variety of things. There is a video of that meeting that's available. One of the things I wanted to highlight, though, a poll was taken of the participants in that meeting. And that poll asked several questions that were provocative. One of them was, do you support removing current alignment of Route 37 eastern bypass? This is the one that's been on the map for 30-plus years or however long, since Moby Dick was a minnow. And that was unanimous that, yeah, we need to get that off of there because it doesn't make sense anymore. We can't afford it. Another one was, do you support... Should the plan update and specify a new regional park amenity to include indoor elements such as pool, recreation center? Again, unanimous, yes, we need to do that with one no vote. And then the number one priority to be addressed in this plan came out as economic development and providing opportunities for the future. With that, I'll turn it over to Winchester's Planning Commission. We have the chairman, Mr. Bucurell, with us this evening. Good evening, sir. Good evening.

Quick update. The Winchester Planning Commission is going to have a retreat. It's our first retreat ever later this month. We're excited about planning that. Most of this month was batch tax amendments that are made necessary under state law. We've got to update it. Some items are discretionary, where we're handling some updates to neighborhood design districts. And lastly, we're examining ways of streamlining the process of applications for individuals. Right now, there's many processes related to work session, planning commission, you know, all these other items, and we're really excited about streamlining the process, offering waivers, and try to get people approvals if they do deserve them as quickly as possible and eliminate a lot of the rigmarole.

That's it. Thank you very much, sir. We also have our dynamic duo from the Board of Supervisors with us this evening, Mr. Goodremont, and he thinks that's funny. Okay. Dr. Orndorff, good evening, sir.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Commissioners, I'll be brief. Just a few items from the August 12th Board of Supervisors meeting. Conservation Easement Authority, there are three reappointments for three-year terms. Philip Haynes, Diane Kearns, and I was appointed liaison for another three years. Also under actions by the board, the Ordinance amendment subdivision and zoning ordinance updates phase one companion amendments was sent forward to public hearing. The legislative update, again, ordinance amendment sent forward to public hearing. And then the ordinance amendment on data center removal as an allowed use was sent forward to public hearing as well. With that Mr. Chairman, that concludes my report.

Thank you very much, sir. That completes our committee reports. That moves us to item eight, citizen comments. This is a time for individuals who are welcome to address the Planning Commission about any matter that's not on our agenda this evening as a public hearing. If you'd like to speak to the Planning Commission, please come forward and state your name, your magisterial district, and limit your comments to three minutes or less. Would anybody like to address the Planning Commission?

We have two signed up, Mr. Chairman, beginning with Teresa Ostertag and followed by Mr. Nicholas Edwards. Teresa? Okay.

And who was the second? I'm sorry, I didn't hear what you said. She'd like to be added to the ordinance list. The ordinance amendment? Yeah, she put her name on the wrong list. Certainly.

We'll take care of that. The next name after hers was Mr. Nicholas Edward. Mr. Edward?

Good evening, sir. Good evening. I'm Nicholas Edward of the Gainsborough District. I just wanted to say that I think that we're going to hear a lot of information today about data centers and their impact. And I'm not going to speak directly to that, but I do live on Old Baltimore Road, which is one of the areas that's about less than half a mile from the proposed Valley Link Next Era energy transmission lines, which will be seriously affected. Living in that area, I have a special appreciation over the last 17 years since my family and I have purchased a historic house in that area of the remarkable character that we have preserved in this county for the last roughly 300 years of settlement and farming and roughly the last 400 years of settlement here in Virginia, the historic character the beautiful rural character of our farms, our pastures, our historic spaces, our architecture, and the general aesthetics that we enjoy. And I think that as we look at data centers as such an important industrial element that is coming into our communities all over the country, but especially here in Virginia and Northern Virginia, that this is an opportunity to look at what the future of the county should be. Should we have aesthetic, beautiful areas? Should we have development that we know is going to happen? We are a fast-growing area. But should we have development that is sympathetic to our historic, aesthetic, and rural character that looks like Virginia for the next two, three, four hundred years that we might be here? I think that we should. I think that we should have architectural standards, aesthetic standards that speak to our history, our culture, and our identity as a specific people. We have lots of examples from across the Commonwealth, from places like Williamsburg, James City County, Henrico County, Chesterfield County. even in Northern Virginia, where development has been so rampant for decades, of beautiful, sympathetic architectural styles and of aesthetic standards that have gone through, even in industrial centers and industrial buildings. You only need to take a trip down Route 29 to see the difference between our beautiful rural Route 50 that runs all the way through places like Upperville, Middleburg, even out here to Winchester, and the difference over on Route 29 between 40- and 60-foot tall concrete block structures that block out the sun. And I don't know how tall they are, but I fear that I might find out these hundreds and hundreds of megavolt transmission lines that may come through as well. But not just for data centers, but for all development that there is, we should make sure that what comes into the area is sympathetic to us. We deserve it as citizens, as people of Virginia, to live in a beautiful area, an area that we would be happy to have our children grow up in, our grandchildren and future descendants. We do not deserve to have ugly structures, ugly development, and unsympathetic development that does not fit in with our transportation, our industrial, or even our economic designs. We should be building what works for us, and if that means that more people need to get involved, more people need to help out or assist the board in any way that they need, I know that I would be happy to work with any of you, because I think that we all need to work together and cut through any rancor that there may be in order to have a more prosperous future for Frederick County. Thank you.

I'm Penny Smith from Opecan District, and I just have two or three sentences. They are these. I live in Lake Frederick. and I'm aware of the Gibson application. And my distress is not that that land would be developed, but to go from rural to industrial is a drastic change. If it was developed for business, I could understand that. Across from 277 would be the Madison. And I've been informed that Valley Health will also put some sort of health aspect in there. So it's a natural to flow into business. There's two horse farms that would be within infrasound range, which goes five miles. They're within two miles, two horse farms. There's cows all along. before Lake Frederick, after up past the solar farm, and that's Clark County rural. There's probably 6,000 or more people, 3,000 plus Lake Frederick, Madison, I don't know, 2,000. There's the trailer park. There's a community. So I am extremely concerned. People retain, people band together, class action or whatever you would call it, group legal counsel, when it's high density. We would have at least 6,000 people there. We were informed by John Joel May 18th at Lake Frederick that it would be for a data center. And then the application has come in. Let's see. Warehouse with storefront. Many... warehouse applications have evolved to a data center. I'm concerned about pollution, noise, farming, rural, density, infrasound. Thank you.

Mr. Smith, at our next meeting, we will be having a work session on that particular rezoning request. So you're welcome to join us then. I believe that's the 16th, if I'm not mistaken.

Thank you very much for telling me that. I will be there. Thanks.

Anybody else wish to speak? Ms. Spencer.

My name is Leslie Spencer. I live in Gainesboro. Good evening. After the joint work session and hearing the comprehensive plan survey results, I keep thinking about the bigger picture of where we are headed. Sometimes we look at other counties and what they have done and assume that that's where we're headed to. But maybe it isn't. Frederick County is unusual. We still have farmland, forest, water, historic landscapes, and this incredible fertile valley around us. We also have major amenities, markets, and highways, but we haven't lost our charm. And it feels as though we're trying to grow even more of it through revitalization by small businesses. That's so special. That's why I keep calling us a unicorn. And I think the comprehensive plan survey results, it's telling us that people here recognize that too. They're asking us to think bigger, to think harder. Take housing. I don't think we should build and build until prices fall, especially while people are moving here from expensive, heavily developed data center counties. We could chase that demand across our county and still not solve affordability. The housing infrastructure industrial revenue cycle has to go. We need a local housing plan for the people and workforce we want to keep here, which should include our community, which should include community land trust, our own community land trust. And our county doesn't have to provide every kind of industrial growth America needs. We'll always need food, and our soil is rich for that here. Our next chapter could be smaller businesses, B1 and B2 uses, offices, rural tourism stores and food markets, event venues, fun places, alongside healthy high-wage campuses and tourism. As more of the world becomes industrialized and developed, what we've managed to keep becomes more valuable, not less. Before expanding the UDA and SWASA again, let's see what's possible with the land we've already designated and even outside, you know, rural things. Once those green spaces on the east side are gone, we can't build them back. They are luxury spaces. This valley has value. 300 years ago, its food, water, soil, and living systems could be just as valuable 1,000 years from now. We may not find another county that's done exactly what we're trying to do. We may have to invent it. We should and deserve to be particular about the final development plans on the east side and ask what really helps everyone thrive. I really want to help think about this 20-year comprehensive plan in a healthy, creative, award-winning, and even luxurious way. Frederick County is worth it. I hope you'll join me. Thank you.

Anybody else? Sir, come up here.

Basically.

Can you give us your name and magisterial district?

Well, my name is Arthur Christian. I'm actually from Winchester, which is like right over there. One of the things that I'm kind of dismayed about is the courthouse is no longer ADA compliant because they closed off one of the doors so that you have to actually, in my case, walk clear around the building. That should never have been done. I don't know who thought of that, but secondly, these are now allowed in the courthouse. This is technically now a medical device. It monitors my heart rate and other fun stuff, so it can't leave me. I had that argument with one of the security guards at the courthouse. And they allowed me to keep my phone with me, mostly because I turned it off so the alarms would only come to me and nobody would hear. But those are the two major things that I have. Finally, I'd like to see some public transportation from this area to, like, Laurel Ridge, although we do have sort of a thing through Winchester, which unfortunately I've never been able to actually ride. And I live there. So that's all I have.

Thank you, sir. Anybody else? Seeing none, I'm going to close the public comments, citizen comments. I've already closed this, sir. I'm sorry.

This leads us to public hearings.

I'm sorry. Public hearing leads us to 9A, Conditional Use Permit 0426 for D&S Investments, LLC. Ms. Feltner.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the Planning Commission. I'm sorry. This is a conditional use permit for a general store without fuel sales. The property is located at 5387 Wardensville Grade in the Back Creek Magisterial District. The property locator map provides the location in red. It is located in the southwest area of the county adjacent to and near Star Tannery. The property is located at the intersection of Wardensville Grade, Back Mountain Road, and Mountain Falls Road. The structure closest to Mountain Falls Road and Wardensville Grade intersection is the proposed general store. These are the applicant's proposal and not conditions. The applicant proposes to operate a general store without fuel sale inside an existing 1,860 square foot structure. Hours of operation are from 6 a.m. until 9 p.m. daily. Three full-time employees with an average of 65 customers daily, 500 weekly. This is the sketch plan provided by the applicant showing the new entrance on Mountain Falls Park and the parking area improvements. A general country store without fuel sale is permitted in the RA with an approved conditional use permit. The zoning ordinance provides for additional regulations. It requires the use shall adhere to the B2 general business dimensional standards. A retail floor area cannot exceed 3,500 square feet. It cannot include accessory fuel sales. A site plan is required to be submitted and approved by Frederick County prior to the establishment of the use. Any expansion of the use shall require a new conditional use permit. Should the Planning Commission find this use to be appropriate, staff would recommend the following conditions. All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times. A site plan shall be submitted to and approved by Frederick County and all improvements completed prior to the establishment of the use. All parking shall have a gravel or hard surface. Hours of operation are from 6 a.m. until 9 p.m. daily. Any expansion or change of use shall require a new conditional use permit. This item is presented as a public hearing. Staff is seeking a recommendation from the Planning Commission to forward to the Board of Supervisors.

Thank you. Any questions for Ms. Feltner? Is the applicant here to speak?

The applicant is here to answer any questions. He does not have a presentation.

Are there any questions for the applicant?

Yes, Mr. Kearns. Just real quick, could you explain a little bit better into the general store and what is allowed and what isn't? I'm just cautious of this turning into a vape shop or a liquor store. What are the parameters to prevent that from happening?

The ordinance does define a general store and it focuses in on retail. It doesn't distinguish between the products for sale. I can let the applicant speak to that if that would be okay.

Yes. Okay. Good evening, sir. Can you give us your name and magisterial district?

My name is Daniel Kelly. I'm, I guess, Bicross Junction. No, we have no intention of that. It's like bread, milk, beer, cigarettes, no vape shop, none of that. It's just like an old-time general store. That's our intentions.

All right, that was all. Thank you. Thank you, sir. OK, this is a public hearing. Anybody who'd like to address this rezoning request is welcome to do so. As you come to the podium, state your name and magisterial district, and please limit your comments to three minutes or less. Would anybody like to speak? I'm sorry. This is a CUP. It's not a rezoning. Thank you, sir. Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing. This is Bat Creek. I'd like to just go ahead and make a motion to approve Conditional Use Permit 0426 for DNS investments. We have a motion. Is there a second? Second.

I second.

We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? OK. Let's take a vote. Dr. LaMonna, can you start us off, please? Yes.

Brumback, yes.

McKay, yes. Pottdorf, yes. Sneddon, yes. Margaret, yes. Thomas, yes.

Kozo, yes.

Kern, yes. DeHaven, yes. Crane, yes. Whitaker, yes. Chairvice, yes. The motion carries. This will go to the Board of Supervisors on September the 23rd. Thank you, sir. This will lead us to Item 9B, Conditional Use Permit Number 0326 for Winchester Gateway LLC.

Mr. Klein. Good evening, sir. Yes, good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the Planning Commission. This is Conditional Use Permit 03-26 for Winchester Gateway LLC. You all will recall that you all held a work session on this item on June 9th, and this is the applicant returning to seek a recommendation from you. We are at the maximum extent of the clock that is enabled to the Planning Commission, so this evening you are being requested to provide an action. this is a request for a conditional use permit on 71.85 acres of property that is presently zoned m1 light industrial and the applicant is seeking to establish a data center campus on this property that is located at the intersection of apple valley road and middle road in the back creek magisterial district many of you sitting here this evening will recall rezoning 0623 for winchester gateway which was approved in 2024 That rezoning sought to rezone the property from RA and M1 to M1 for the establishment of industrial uses and actually at the time of that rezoning the data center was contemplated as a potential use because data centers were enabled by right in the M1 zoning district at that time. So many of the proffers that were approved without rezoning contemplated a data center including noise and sound attenuation. For the purpose of the presentation this evening, I'll be covering doing a very high-level overview. I think you all are well versed on this project at this point, and I'll be focusing mainly on the changes that were made since the work session and also the conditions of approval. This is your countywide locator map showing the subject property highlighted in red. It's between the city of Winchester and Route 37. This is your zoning and location map showing that 71-acre industrially zoned property, which is bound by Apple Valley Road, Middle Road, and Route 37 to the west. It adjoins areas of significant industrial development, including those areas around the Shady Elm Road. It also adjoins existing suburban-style residential, rural residential, a church, and Kernstown Battlefield, which is a significant historic resource for both the city of Winchester and Frederick County. This is your adopted long-range land use plan that is contained in your comprehensive plan. Again, that subject property is outlined in purple. It is designated blue. That reflects the existing zoning of the property, but it has been planned to be an industrial site far longer than has been rezoned for industrial. So since your June 9th work session, the applicant has made changes to their application to address stated concerns from the Planning Commission. In your packet this evening, you were provided supplemental elevations, conceptual building renderings, and a modified viewshed analysis looking at the buildings from various viewpoints around the county. You've been provided an amended sketch plan and site layout. They're proposing, again, three buildings totaling 800,000 square feet. Within that revised sketch plan, they have increased the height of the berm along Apple Valley Road from 10 feet to 14 feet, and they've also added a pollinator preservation area on the site. In their with the environmental noise study you were provided a height addendum which sought to i sought to evaluate two various height scenarios and how the impact to noise would be on the surrounding properties whether that be at 45 feet as being currently conditioned by staff or 60 feet as proposed by the applicant staff would note that both the applicant sound study or sorry the applicant sound engineer and the county's noise consultant BOTH BELIEVE THAT THE IMPACTS DECREASING THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING ARE FAIRLY MINIMAL AND NOT IMPACTFUL GIVEN THE ADJOINING EXISTING NOISE ON THE SITE PRIMARILY DRIVEN BY ROUTE 37 YOU'VE BEEN PROVIDED AN AMENDED ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SUMMARY OF THE SIGNIFICANT COMMUNITY OUTREACH THE APPLICANT HAS DONE SINCE THE WORK SESSION AND THE APPLICANT PROVIDED A SUMMARY MEMO TO ALL OF YOUR COMMENTS I'M SURE MR. LAWSON WILL COVER MOST OF THESE ITEMS IN HIS PRESENTATION This is that revised site layout again, three buildings totaling 800,000 square feet with generator areas between the buildings along Apple Valley Road, which is at the top of the screen is that significant 200 foot buffer that was proffered with the rezoning and the 14 foot tall berm is there as well. So in summary for your consideration this evening, we provide positives and concerns as we do for every application. Staff would note for positives, the existing zoning of the property M1 aligns with the planned future land use contained in your comprehensive plan. Industrial, as does the proposed conditional use data center. The application checks many of the boxes in regards to plan policy and providing commercial and industrial opportunities in the areas of the county designated for those opportunities. The proposed use is expected to result in a substantial reduction in traffic impacts to the transportation network compared to other M1 uses, including those that are currently allowed on site through that rezoning and those approved proffers. And staff would note that the noise generated by the operation of the data facility at this site during most hours of the day is comparable to or less than the baseline noise currently in the vicinity of the project. Again, Route 37 is a significant driver of that noise. and the noise generated by the facility is less than the noise currently being generated by Route 37. So it's important to point out that piece of the environmental noise study, which is the key part of that study that was required for the conditional use permit. No application is without concerns. The facility is proposed in an area of the county that is identified for core battlefield that includes the Kernstown Battlefield and the Battle of Second Winchester. And the project has the potential to impact significant historic and cultural resources and tourism in the vicinity of the project. And staff would note that your Historic Resources Advisory Board, which is an advisory body of the Board of Supervisors, recommended denial of the conditional use permit request. The view shed impact concerns from the proposed building height and massing despite the increased setbacks, enhanced buffers and screening is incredibly significant and has the potential to negatively impact adjoining properties. Staff believes that many of these concerns may be mitigated through the recommended conditions of approval. And finally, I think the most significant issue that was raised during the work session is there remains considerable uncertainty in the applicant supporting documentation regarding the existing substation and overhead utilities in the facility of the site and if they're able to provide the megawatts needed to support a data center at this site. The total facility megawatts needed has not been stated in the application material. While we did reach out to the Shenandoah Valley Electric They stated that they could serve the project, but they provided no information about if existing lines joining Route 37 or in the vicinity would support the project or if they would need to site new lines or make additional upgrades. And the application materials provided post work session do not provide any clarity on if the existing infrastructure can support those, the megawatts needed or upgrades will be required. So we do have a fairly extensive list of conditions of approval, which I will summarize for you. Again, the intention of conditions of approval is to mitigate potential impacts of the site should the Planning Commission find these to be appropriate and would like to make a recommendation of approval. condition number one pertains to historical resources we are recommending phase one archaeological survey be performed for the site and those sites that were identified in the phase one study that was provided with the application that a copy of that phase two study be provided to frederick county prior to site plan approval and that no land disturbing activities including grading or above or below ground utilities shall be occur within those features that were identified in the phase one study and that all land disturbance activities would occur outside of those areas that were delineated in the phase one Condition number two pertains to site access. We would limit the site to one full movement entrance on Apple Valley Road, and the entrance would not be directly across from any residential homes along Apple Valley Road as to maintain a contiguous buffer and berm along the frontage for sound attenuation and view shed mitigation purposes. We would permit a second entrance if required by the fire marshal as part of the site plan review. The location of the site entrance should be reviewed and approved by VDOT prior to the site plan approval. Condition number three pertains to construction management that prior to site plan approval for each phase of development, a construction mitigation plan would be submitted to planning for review and consideration. The plan would address at a minimum construction traffic control measures, including but not limited to mitigation measures to implement during weekday AM and peak travel times and school bus travel times along those construction routes, and that the plan would be approved by the zoning administrator for each phase of development. continuing construction management that a public liaison would be designated and a phone number and email be provided to the applicant's website but also to the county's public information officer for where there would be concerns about construction related activities that they could be clearly communicated to both the county and the applicant and that any resolution of that would be handled in a timely manner. And then if requested by the county, the applicant would participate in a joint construction traffic reaction team, which would include the county staff and the sheriff's office to address construction-related traffic concerns for the project, and that any pavement road damages would be prepared within 120 days of notice from the county. Condition number four pertains to public utilities. Public water consumption by the subject property would be limited to 35,000 gallons per day or less. This was the number that the applicant supplied to Frederick Water, and they agreed to serve that no groundwater resources via private wells or other methods shall be used for the operation of the primary or accessory uses on site, and that prior to site plan approval, the sanitary discharge methods shall be reviewed and approved by Frederick County. Condition number five pertains to noise and noise monitoring that the maximum noise generated by the operation of the data center should not exceed 65 dB ANC during daytime hours and 60 dB ANC during nighttime hours measured in accordance with the Frederick County zoning ordinance section what 70501 and that mechanical equipment installed on the property shall be rated to produce noise that is equal to or less than the equipment that was studied in the environmental noise study prepared by salis o'brien and dated november 24 2025 and that testing of generators shall be limited to weekdays between 8 30 a.m and 5 p.m Condition number seven pertains to power generating facilities. The power generation for the use shall be limited to backup generators in accordance with condition six and or the use of solar panels. Condition number eight pertains to building height, design, and architecture. The maximum height of the principal structure, including all rooftop, or sorry, roof-mounted mechanical equipment and parapet wall screens shall not exceed 45 feet in height. That the building shall include a main entrance feature, which must easier project or recess from the main building space and be differentiated from the remainder of the facade by a change in building material. that the design of the building facade shall include fenestration of two or more of the following materials comprising approximately 30% of the facade, concrete block, stone, brick, glass, metal, or architectural precast concrete, that at least two neutral earth tone or natural color pallets shall be used in the building facade, that the maximum length of any exterior wall facing Apple Valley Road without modulation should not exceed 100 feet, and the minimum modulation depth would be two feet, and the minimum modulation width would be 20 feet, and the final building elevations and renderings would be provided to the county for review and accepted with the above conditions prior to the issuance of the first building permit. Condition number nine pertains to buffering and screening, that a category C type full screen buffer shall be installed along the property frontage with Apple Valley Road, Middle Road, and Route 37. And unless otherwise modified below, the buffer area shall fulfill the minimum distance and opaque screening element requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance Part 802. And that along the front of the Apple Valley Road and Middle Road, the buffer distance would be a minimum of 200 feet in width and include a minimum of a 14 foot tall earthen berm plus a landscape screen. The minimum plant size at the time of planting for the landscape screen for all buffer areas shall be an inch and a half caliber deciduous tree, a six foot tall evergreen tree, and a minimum 36 inch tall evergreen shrub. that the planting species would be reviewed and approved at the time of site plan. They would include a mix of species, including at least one Virginia native variety of deciduous tree, one Virginia native variety evergreen tree, and at least one Virginia native variety of shrub. That in addition to the minimum 10 foot wide landscape easement described above along Apple Valley Road, there should be an additional double row of evergreen trees. The evergreen tree screen shall include at least two different varieties of plantings, one of which should include a Virginia native. It should be bald and burlapped and be a minimum of eight feet in height at the time of planting. And that the double row of evergreen trees shall be planted within the limits of that 200 foot buffer and that the planting shall be spaced appropriately within the inactive portion of the buffer to allow for regular maintenance and mowing. Condition 10 is in regard to signage. They would be permitted one freestanding monument sign along Apple Valley Road not to exceed 50 square feet in sign area and not to exceed 12 feet in height, that the base of the sign and the sign face shall be of material in a color palette that is complementary to the building facade materials, and that building and wall-mounted and electronic messaging signs would be prohibited on site. Condition 11 is your standard condition that is included with all conditional use permits, that any change in the use for which the conditional use permit was granted shall require a new conditional use permit. So we are at the public hearing stage for this request this evening, and following your public hearing, staff would be seeking a recommendation from the Planning Commission to forward to the Board of Supervisors. As noted at the start of the presentation, we are at the maximum extent of the time allocated to the Planning Commission by the state, by the Code of Virginia, so tonight is your night to provide a recommendation. And following your recommendation, a Board of Supervisors public hearing will be held on September 23rd, 2026. I'm happy to answer any questions from the Commission. Ty Lawson is here representing the applicant, and he has a brief presentation. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Klein. Any questions for Mr. Klein on my right? Any questions to my left? Thank you very much, sir. Mr. Lawson? Thank you. Just click right there, sir. Awesome. And you're all set. Thanks very much.

Mr. Chairman, members of the Planning Commission, Ty Lawson here on behalf of Winchester Gateway. And I also have a bunch of folks to my right who are experts in engineering process, mechanical engineering, sound, financial experts, and the like. So we're here to respond to any questions. But as Mr. Klein started us off, we do have a brief presentation and then we look forward to responding to your questions and if there are and we expect there will be comments from the public to respond to that as well. But at the end of the day, I think we're all looking forward to your recommendation. This is our site. It is a 71 acre site and it is the property, as Mr. Klein pointed out, that is already zoned M1. It is confirmed by the comprehensive plan or directed by the comp plan to be M1, and he made a great point. It was called for that long before, actually, this site was rezoned. It was actually been rezoned several times. It was rezoned once, half of the property was zoned 2015 along with the balance of the property that adjoins it. And then again in 2023, And as was correctly pointed out at the time, it was moving in the direction contemplated to be a data center. So a lot of the buffering that was proffered at the time, the screening, the sound attenuation and so on was built in. And that is the site as we are here today. Zoned M1, I believe we eliminated two uses. One is a prison, and the other is fast food with drive-through, outside drive-through. Everything else is allowed under the M1 uses. And we do have some fairly significant screening for typical M1, over and above what would be required under the ordinance. But of course, and as it's said today, what we are proposing is a data center, which is allowable under M1, under a conditional use permit, And we of course have heaped additional conditions on this site to allow for that opportunity. M1, as we pointed out, what's allowed as we sit here today is various heavy manufacturing warehouse flex. In fact, Apple Valley has significant road improvements on it because of the traffic impact analysis which came with our with our rezoning, that remains. We're not allowed and not proposing to change any of that. Office and commercial, transportation, utilities, and generally an industrial park. The one thing is the square on the right, which requires a conditional use permit, and that is for the data center. And I think it's important to point out What brings us here? And we've been distinguished from other sites, which are rezoning. They're trying to change ag to more intense use and so on. We are not. What we are is asking for a conditional use permit to reduce all of our by-right M1 uses to one. And that is the M1. And as is in your report, the code Frederick County Zoning Ordinance is cited, which says conditions shall be reasonably related to the proposed use and reasonably necessary to address the impacts of that specific application. In this case, it's the impacts of a data center. And then we all get that power as we do for everything from the Commonwealth, because we're Dillon Law State, and it comes from the Virginia Code, which provides that a locality zoning ordinance may include reasonable regulations for the granting of that special exception under suitable regulations and safeguards. And I thought what was important, because we're all following the law here, the Supreme Court spelled out what all that means. And it says that although the uses in such special exception categories are permissible under the ordinance, such permission is to be granted subject to such limitations and conditions as public officials may oppose in order to reduce the impact of the use upon neighboring properties and the public to the level which would be caused by those uses permitted as a matter of right. So as we all sit here today, the matter of right, the uses of right are all those M-1 uses with the exception of the two. No prison and the impacts that come from that, and then a drive-through. Everything else, and as we proceed tonight, our conditions have to be measured against the level which would be caused by those uses permitted as a matter of right. This is our data center land plan. It's the three buildings. It shows the berming, the sound walls that we have worked through with you all and also with staff. And it does have some key features. Number one, they are 60-foot tall buildings, and of course, that's the zoning height that was granted in 2015, and then also with the subsequent proffered rezoning a couple of years ago. And we're not going any higher. We're staying consistent with that impact with a lot of other things associated with it. 200-foot setback. We have now raised the berms to 14 feet. Heavy landscaping. Mr. Klein walked through some of those conditions and the rows and trees and the calipers and all those things are as a result of our working with staff To load it up if you will and I'll show you in the view sheds later as to as to what we get from that in terms of benefits and then on-site ponds and delineated wetlands are preserved We've been asked about, what's this thing going to look like? And we have some renderings. And these are intentionally designed to mock and mimic the development on site. Apple Valley, for example, and the residential across the street. The church is further to the right. Of course, Route 37 is in the back, and the ponds are on the left. living wall concepts. We've agreed to put that in as a condition. That's as a result of your comments and others. And then views from the neighborhood, we did, and Mr. Klein pointed out that there were comments about that. What's this going to look like? What are we going to see from the various vantage points, looking from across the street, from 37, from up on the hill where Shenandoah Valley Battlefield Foundation has property, or across the way where Kernstown Battlefield has its property and view ads. And we went ahead and prepared a very detailed viewshed analysis. This was subsequent to the HRAB meeting. And these points, I'm going to show you this as we go through it, are very intentional. The engineers are here to show you how they did what they did. But they are able, in scale and in true scale, to show what the berms would look like with landscaping on them and then the building behind it. There was discussion about colors and try to paint the buildings in a certain way so that they're less visible, which is somewhat of a contrast to our neighbors. Those are all very bright white. We've agreed to those earth tones and I'll go ahead and jump. It shows you what you see from the view sheds or what you, in some cases, will not see because of the way the buildings are placed, because of the way existing woods and other vegetation are there. And then, of course, especially as you look down to the lower two photographs, that's intentional. That's the berms with the landscaping on it all to scale. And we've heard from our neighbors. They have concerns about views. And to be blunt, we've delivered. And we have obscured this site. And I can't help it, and I'll say it again, compare that to By-Rite Industrial. I mean, this is mitigating a perceived impact significantly. This is where we are in a by-right status, the industrial plan. We had actually done this early on in the process, and folks had asked us to compare. This is what it is. The square footage of the buildings are significantly greater. than what we're proposing and agreeing to limit ourselves with our conditions, and it does show the two entrances. There were comments about that. We proffered two entrances. It was as a result of agency comments. For the record, we have no problem with going down to one, but we do believe that Fire and Rescue will want two entrances, and of course our design has it coming in at an angle for that second entrance. So you can still accomplish the emergency access, but it does two things. It blocks the visual, because you're going diagonally through the landscaping and the berms, and then also it helps with sound attenuation. So there are benefits that come from that. But this is the side-by-side of, frankly, what was in the approved rezoning significant landscaping, barming, way above what is typically seen in an M1 proffered rezoning, and we did that on purpose. And then with the CUP, we've loaded it up even more, starting with the base of the 14-foot berms and landscaping on it. And with that, be happy to respond to any questions. We were asked to get through the presentation so we could respond. And we do have other reference materials in the deck, so folks may refer to that depending on your questions.

Thank you, Mr. Lawson. Any questions for Mr. Lawson to my right? Mr. Whitaker?

Yes. You have a topo you can pull up for us? The what? A topo. Topo map.

Topo?

Topo.

Now, how do I go back to doing this thing? Do you want to see of the data center, the by-right, or both?

Well, I wanted to see where all the watershed coming off the building and everything will run to.

Okay. The stormwater features for both are building off the existing ponds. And as I said before, Mr. Whitaker, we have several engineers here. If you'd like to talk to the civil engineers about their design.

Okay. Yes, about the runoff directly to the ponds. Josh?

Yes, sir.

So what's the question, sir? In the event of any of the cooling systems, I imagine you're cooling this with machinery on top of the building?

Yes, sir.

Okay. In the event of any of those leaking, how is that contained and prevented from going into those wetland areas?

That may be more of a question for the mechanical engineer, for the plumbing engineer for the building. Just stick around. I don't know if you can watch it. Christian Mitchell, we've met last time. So the air-cooled equipment, chillers on the roof, will fill up the whole roof with piping and everything that'll be within the sound enclosures and the screening. There's going to be a cistern that'll be built into the project where stormwater will go into first before leaving the cistern and then going out of the building onto the property there.

So what the cistern doesn't contain, it just runs over and heads down?

That's what's coming off the surface of the tops of the buildings.

All right. So there's no mechanism in there to prevent any kind of toxin from getting into the wetland area?

So the cistern itself, so there's going to be in combination, we mentioned this last time, is leak detection along the piping as well would be one of the requirements. which is actually not normal. That's something we've talked about. It's just an added cost to provide all that additional leak detection. The piping is insulated, and then it's wrapped in aluminum jacketing. And then below that jacketing, you have another layer with leak detection. That's your early prevention. And then there will be also emergency response measures with absorption materials, training, administrative procedures, so quick response to be able to mitigate any sort of large, significant leaks. Small leaks could be captured by the leak detection, wouldn't even make it to the roof drains.

Okay. In the event that the wetland area does get contaminated, who has to pay for that cleanup?

That'll be the owner of the property. or the owner of the building facilities. So if, let's say, propylene glycol were to get out and it's deemed to be a finable offense by the authorities, then they would be responsible for that. Now, the good news is there's secondary and tertiary measures to mitigate it getting outside the property line.

Well, if the cost was so bad that it forced you into bankruptcy, then who gets stuck with the bill?

I don't know how to answer that question. Thanks. Yeah.

Any other questions to my right? Questions to my left? Okay. Thank you very much, sir. This is a public hearing. I will open the public hearing for this, CUP03-26, Winchester Gateway LLC. If you'd like to speak, I would ask you to come to the podium, state your name, magisterial district, limit your comments to three minutes or less. Look, good evening. As we open the public hearing, I want to acknowledge that we've received a lot of e-comments online, okay, from the following people. Justin Platt, Stacey Haga, Kristen Kearns, Michael Roma, Christopher Bradford, Wanda Jenkins, Jean Lombardo, Jennifer Moy, John Netzel, Anna Bradford, Charlotte Lombardo, Lawrence Weiss, Ted McFadden, Holly Harrington, meredith davis and randy leach and if you're here and intend to speak in addition to your e-comments i ask that you please you're welcome to do so but we ask you please allow those who have not submitted e-comments to first speak in the interest of time and that you limit your statements to new information that you haven't provided previously included in your written comments so with that said i will open the public hearing and mr bishop

Thank you. The first, the big winner for tonight is Vicki Michaels, followed by, forgive me, sir, if I mispronounce your name, Arthur Christensen. Thank you.

They got me out of a speeding ticket because they dispelled my name.

Good evening, Commissioners. My name is Vicki Michaels, and I live in the Stonewall District. While Gateway plans to use a closed-in loop system, the saga and that of the data centers in Frederick County seems more like a dead-end loop, never ending. On page 6 of 16 of the CUP executive summary, the conditional use shall be in harmony with and shall not adversely affect the use and enjoyment of surrounding properties, I could end right now and have gotten my point. From August 18th, 26, under proposed use, the proposed building and block massing as proposed by the applicant up to 60 foot, excluding any rooftop mechanical equipment, and I'd like to know how much height that adds. may have a significant impact on area view sheds, particularly from neighboring historic resources and single family residences in the project vicinity. Planning staff have proposed a maximum structure height not to exceed 45 feet. And I believe that was a condition on here. But this revised application still costs for three buildings of 60 feet high. April 20th, 2026, the HRAB recommended denial due to the impact on historical resources. Noise study, 11-24-25, while the nighttime levels exceed the ambient noise levels during quiet hours, because they are also steady, they serve to mask the traffic noise. Really? The applicant also has a study regarding the 60 foot building being quieter than the requested 45 foot. Not surprising, a third party examiner has some concerns on how that study was technically conducted. Why aren't the number of generators listed anywhere on this CUP? And am I the only one that has a problem with the fact that we are building a data center right next to a Native American site that predates any contact? I have a little bit thrown off in my notes because I've just read the new agenda, the new paper that you handed out today, so I had to change what I was saying. But at the 12th, August 12th Board of Supervisors meeting, numerous county residents, including myself, asked our supervisors to ensure the ordinance to remove data centers as permitted and or a conditional use in certain zoning districts be free of loopholes. requesting that they define a data center and state that they are not permitted in all zoning districts rather than removing references to data centers and definitions. Based on the information that I just now read on the August 31st legal memorandum, I just want to say that I am trust, I don't know how three minutes went by because I timed this and I had my time. But I just want to say that we are trusting you all to act in a manner that your constituents have shown you what we want and for the good of the people. I don't know how you can vote on something or approve it when the phase two has not yet been completed. So you're gonna be voting on something to pass it through when the archeological survey has not gone through. Thank you.

Thank you.

Next we have Arthur Christian, followed by Randy Leach. And, folks, if you could, if you're next beyond the person who's speaking, you don't have to get up in their hip pocket, but if you could kind of queue up behind them just to help everybody move along. Thank you.

I would also ask if you could please hold your applause until the end. I know this is an item that folks are passionate about, but we're trying to move along. We've got 27 speakers, 27 folks who want to speak. And I know some of you have kids you need to get to school tomorrow. You've got to go to work tomorrow. I understand that. Thank you. Yes, sir.

So I'm going to try to be short. My name is Arthur Christian. I'm from Winchester, over that direction. One, I noticed no geological study whatsoever in anything here. Two, this is an earthquake zone. that we had an earthquake in Mineral, Virginia that ran up 522. I felt it in my house. So that tends to break pipes. And so all of a sudden, you break pipes, giant water pipes. Guess what you get in a limestone area? Sinkholes. That whole area is a giant sinkhole waiting to happen. Shouldn't build anything on there whatsoever. Finally, I'm looking at the increase in my electric bill, because I'm with Shenandoah Valley Electric, and the increase of my water bill. Winchester has one of the highest water bills in the area. It's going to go up. So I object to this. Finally, cybercrime. If I was a cyber hacker, Guess where I go? Right to the data center, right to the electric company. The electric company does not protect itself. I'm here to tell you that because I commented to their board. saying, you need to do something about your cybersecurity. I am a cybersecurity expert. I have several diplomas and I have a master's degree and all of that. So, you know, I'm just saying we need to really, really think about a lot of stuff here. So I'm asking that you vote no on this. It's just too much of a problem. And that's all I have for this.

Thank you, sir. Next, we have Randy Leach followed by Mr. Jay Martz.

That was one of the e-comments. Did you want me to wait till the end or?

If you have anything new, yes, sir.

Yeah, I'll see how it goes in here.

After Jay Martz, we have Ms. Jennifer Smith.

Excuse me. Good evening. I'm Jay March from the Gainesboro District. Chairman Stowe, hello to my Gainesboro reps, Mr. Crane and Mr. Vaughn, and the rest of the commissioners tonight. I appreciate the opportunity to petition the local government on potential land use decisions. These public policy issues under consideration will have long-term ramification for our county and most are irrecoverable. I couldn't say that. Once the shovel hits the ground, the property rarely reverts to what it once was. You set the path to turn a farm into an industrial park, where orchards once blossomed, cattle grazed, tractors plowed, and food grew. We will now have industrial parks, strip malls, condos, and townhouses. Additionally, too much traffic causing delays and accidents, increased demand on our power grid, and most important, our water resources. This contributes to the overcapacity of our schools and the increased burden on the first responder network. We have a beautiful piece of geography here in the top of Virginia. You know, I moved my entire family, three kids and three grands, here to enjoy, grow, and prosper in the northern Shenandoah Valley. We left Fairfax, avoided Loudoun, and settled here. We are all pleased with this decision. We just hope it was the right one. I generally have confidence in this Commission. You are all professionals in the work of land management, and especially now that John LaManna has graduated. I want to call upon you to sequester intensive land development to only those areas that are already designated for that purpose. Stop rezoning rural areas. Point developers to properties that may have a mutual redevelopment option. Sell Sunnyside or show me a plan. Now to the subject at hand. The Winchester Gateway project is M1. You have done the appropriate work to ensure compliance. This is evident by the changes made by the developer. This property will eventually be developed by Wright. I would suggest that perhaps you try to entice a flock camera manufacturing facility to move in. You'll probably have as good a luck as you do with data centers. So vote appropriately. You are not directly accountable to the electorate. Pump this to the supervisors, and then we, the voters, will decide who represents us. The consequences of decisions will manifest themselves on November 3rd. Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you. Next, we have Jennifer Smith, followed by Leslie Spencer. Good evening.

Good evening. Jennifer Smith from the Stonewall District. I'm back again. I'd like to talk about the comprehensive plan a little bit because that seems to be kind of what they seem to talk to, the lawyers, and, you know, it meets your requirements and everything like that. But I want to speak to your vision statement, and it starts with to ensure the quality of life for all Frederick County citizens. And when we come to these meetings and we show you what we want for our quality of life, it seems to be... overlooked that the impact of these facilities will have on the people who live here. A lot of these people who showed up for this are probably not residents in our community. They have, we're meeting your demands. We're going to put bees on the property, Virginia native plants, and all these fine things to meet your requirements, but they don't live here and they're not going to have to deal with it. So if there's a leak, they say they, oh, We've made adjustments. We have things in place. But there's a long history of multimillion-dollar, billion-dollar companies coming into rural communities, stripping natural resources, poisoning the water, poisoning the land, and the residents are left dealing with it, and nothing ever happens to these companies. And the problem is, is that once you let them in, you can't get rid of them. You can't fix what they do, and there's no compensation for the health and security and the well-being of the folks who live here. So my concern is that we did not choose this. We did not let this happen. We did not open the door to data centers. The community never voted for that. that was brought by the board. And we have never wanted this. And we have continued to bring this to the board meetings, to the planning commission. And we have continually stated our guidance. And we vote for you all. And you all are supposed to represent us. Our taxes pay for that. And we vote for that. And every time we show up and we tell you what we think, Your votes should reflect the people that you represent, the people who live here, the people who will have to deal with this. Good planning and your comprehensive plan is to protect the rural preservation of this community and planning the community in a proper way. Putting data centers across from historical locations and in neighborhoods is not good planning. We have industrial parks and we have places that they could have better suit, but instead that is being ignored at the benefit of large corporations and at the detriment of the people who live and work here. And we are the ones who are dealing with the aftermath of this. And you should think about that when you set your vote. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. We have Leslie Spencer followed by Gary Shepard.

Is there a Leslie in the room?

I think perhaps I'm reading. It's fairly loopy writing. I'll take it, though. And I saw the Leslie. Well, if there's Leslie out there that signed up and I haven't called your name and you were on our first page, then that's probably what. I see a big L and a big S, but the rest is a little difficult for me.

I'm going to take it, then. You got it. Okay. Good evening, Leslie Spencer from Gainesboro. Thank you for your dedication and thank you to all the voters for showing up for your neighbors tonight. Frederick County deserves clarity, foresight, and strong leadership. And these land use changes will create real health, ecological, and economic risk over many miles. So do we truly know the value of what we risk losing? This is a conditional use permit. You have the discretion to decide whether this particular use is appropriate in this particular location and compatible with the surrounding community. Are we properly evaluating the cumulative long-term impacts at and beyond the immediate property lines? VA Bill SB 94, passed July 1st, gives us reason to pause right now and ask that question. This bill also allows a locality to require that a site assessment examine the effect of the proposal facility on the ground and surface water resources, agriculture resources, parks, registered historic sites, and the forest land on the high energy use facility sites or immediately contiguous lands. Also, this location sits besides the homes and the Kernstown Battlefield along major tourism corridor. Our comprehensive plan reminds us that first impressions often set the tone for the visitor's experience. This is an extraordinary intensive industrial use. Frederick County needs real transitional zoning between uses of this intensity and the people who already live here. And then there is energy. Before we approve a Frederick County high energy use facility, we need to ask where will its power come from and what new generation and transmission will be required to serve it. Also, there's a new bill, VAHB 284, says that energy flexibility program where, and the main feature of data centers, will run on a flexible schedule where peak electricity is low so that the noise, is that going to be noise at night? What other energy bills have we all been studying? What don't we see right now? I do not think that Frederick County should approve massive new energy loads while Virginia and PJM are still struggling to solve the energy crisis already in front of us, especially for another data center. I'm also worried about what comes next. If we approve a high energy use facility today, will Frederick County eventually be expected to host the generation needed to power it tomorrow, especially for a data center? We should all know that answer before we say yes. We can ask for better. There are American tech companies already doing this overseas. It makes me sad and angry that they will not do that here, and I will never say yes, and I will never trust them until they show me that they will. Let's plan carefully, protect Back Creek District, our historic Fertile Valley, our state, and preserve the irreplaceable beauty of Frederick County. Thank you.

Next we have Gary Shepard followed by Rachel Keller or Richard Keller. Good evening, Mr. Shepard.

Good evening. I'm Gary Shepard, president of the Kernstown Battlefield Association. As I look at you, I sort of wonder how many of you have even visited the Kernstown Battlefield. Three-fifths of our property is in the Back Creek District of Frederick County. We have, and we're opposed to these data centers. Our concerns are many. We have three wells. We have over 80 head of cattle on our property. The health of our neighbors on Apple Valley. The ignored low frequency emission health risk, and I'm talking about at the 35 decibel and lower level, which these generators are going to be generating. All that is being ignored, as well as our view shed and the history impact that these data centers will have. The Kernstown Battlefield property was settled in 1735 and composes 35 acres of historic property in the Back Creek District. That includes 315 acres on our main property and 38 acres up on Sandy Ridge. Our southern border ends at Apple Valley Road directly across from the proposed data center. On March 23, 1862, during the First Battle of Kernstown, Union Colonel Nathan Kimball stood on Pritchard's Hill and watched the Confederates come out of Barton's Woods, where this data center is going to be, directed by a guy named Stonewall Jackson to attack Pritchard Hill. Before they got to Pritchard Hill, 80 Confederates were dead or wounded from the artillery that was on our hill. The battle then moved to Sandy Ridge and Rose Hill, and this was the first and only battlefield defeat by Jackson. Then on July 24, 1864, at the Second Battle of Kernstown, Union General George Crook stood on the same hill and was looking south with his whole division across the front of our property, from Valley Pike all the way up on the Sandy Ridge. He sent that division forward. to get rid of the Confederate bushwhackers that were in the field between us and where the data center is going to be. Once they got 600 feet out into the fields, the Confederates unleashed their attacks coming out of Barton's Woods, coming out of where the warehouses are now. They were hit in three different places. It was a complete route crook. There was a final The final stand was at the Stonewall. Crook ends up going back up into Maryland. Wrap it up, sir. Kimball and Crooks stood on Pritchard's Hill looking south at the majestic Massanutten Mountain, which divides the valley into two valleys. The 40-foot high warehouses that are there have very little impact on this view and pose no health risk to the local area and battlefield. However, the proposed 60-foot high data center with allowable additional height, which could go up to 75 feet, will certainly have an impact on that view shed that we have. The solution for the data center is to build this unnatural 14-foot berm and plant taller trees. All that does is further distract from the natural historic view from Pritchard's Hill. For 25 years, the KBA has worked very hard to preserve the 290-year history of this property. Our 44,000 visitors each year come for the history and the views, not to look at a data center. We are asking you as county officials to be responsible, protect historic property and its citizens from health risks coming from this data center. Regional jurisdictions are now taking stronger stands against data centers. Join the club. Deny the permit. Thank you.

Richard Keller, followed by Mary Margaret Barb. Richard. Mary Margaret. You're up. After Mary Margaret, we have Bob Curd.

Mary Margaret Barb, Kernstown Back Creek District. My efforts to be well-informed about data centers have included attending county information sessions, a meeting at Trump and Vine, meeting with Gateway reps, and participating in a Loudoun County tour organized by Winchester Gateway. The tour was to visit two campuses, a best and worst case, where we could hear for ourselves what data centers sound like. The first campus utilizes latest technologies. We found noise levels unconcerning. The birds were actually louder. The second campus is powered by gas turbines. Viewed next to homes, the center could be heard, but was only background to heavy traffic and planes. It was explained that we could expect the sound of gas turbines to be more noticeable on the second side of the building away from the homes. Truthfully, the noise there wasn't significantly different from the first. The sound level measured 55 to 65 decibels, and we were advised that was a worst-case scenario. In the 10 minutes we spent next to each of those, if the 10 minutes that we spent next to each of those buildings was truly representative of data center operations, the Loudoun County Economic Director, Buddy Riser, would not have said to me what he did. Immediately prior to our tour, we sat down for a discussion with our guide, Mr. Reiser. I expressed my concerns regarding data centers next to housing. Mr. Reiser's response was surprisingly swift and emphatic. Don't do it. Don't build data centers next to housing. He acknowledged numerous complaints from homeowners, admitting it had been a mistake for Loudoun to permit data centers next to homes. Now that I knew where to go, I later drove myself to those same locations. I found the noise level to be similar to what it had been the day of the tour, until I explored further. Buildings have four sides, and the tour had only taken us to one or two of them. Circling, I found loud cooling fans at one location and high-pitched whining machinery at the other. I readily admit that the Gateway Complex is not expected to operate winding turbines, and there is something to be said for the fact that noise levels are not identical on all sides. But the many unhappy neighbors in Loudoun suggest that it isn't the entire story, and the examples we were presented of what data centers sound like were misleading. Despite my efforts to look at this issue with an open mind, I still don't know with any certainty that hyperscale data centers can be built in a way that won't negatively impact neighboring homes. What is clear to me is that Gateway is doing their best to put lipstick on a pig and convince us it's a unicorn. That leaves me with no choice but to believe Director Riser when he advised don't build data centers next to housing. I respectfully ask that you also believe him and deny the Winchester Gateway permit. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you, ma'am.

We have Bob Curd followed by Julie Curd.

My name is Bob Curd. I'm back Greek district. I'm a licensed civil engineer. I have degrees from MIT and UCLA. I'm also a certified vibration analyst. But I'm not a specialized karst geologic engineer. Frederick County Ordinance 123 requires that a specialized karst geologic engineer examine the land that is proposed for any large structure. Excessive heavy structures on top of karst land are strongly discouraged. So what am I talking about? What is karst land? Karst landscapes are characterized by sinkholes, sinking streams, springs, and caves. Frederick County almost defines what karst land is. Underneath most of our county are caves, sinkholes, and underground rivers. These were formed slowly over centuries by water dissolving limestone and dolomite. In fact, there's an enormous sinkhole measuring 150 yards in diameter that is on the property.

Well, they've taken the drawing away.

And there are many close neighbors whose homes have been damaged by the settling of their houses into hollow sinkholes under their houses. In fact, I helped put special plastic foam under a large floor slab in the Toray factory south of here. We had to raise the floor that had settled. We had to raise it by filling the sinkholes underneath it with foam plastic. There are other concerns as well. There is actually a fault called the Apple Pie Ridge Fault that runs across the property. And there are springs bubbling up on the west side of the property. Karst aquifers cannot filter contaminants. Polluted water travels miles through underground conduits directly to wells and springs, so karst make industrial-scale groundwater consumption uniquely catastrophic. A data center here would discharge industrial-grade wastewater directly above the same aquifers that supply private wells and the Shenandoah River. Another big concern is how to construct a data center. Dewatering has to be done prior to building large heavy structures. Engineers drilled numerous deep wells and pump out the underground water before establishing a base. That will be almost impossible with the existing springs on the property. Dewatering would destabilize the entire karst flow of water. Heavy construction and high volume groundwater pumping are known triggers for new sinkhole formation. Thank you.

We have Julie Curd followed by Jay Banks.

Good evening. I love that guy. We're here tonight talking about zoning and planning. What is zoning and planning to me? It's a board and a government That helps me preserve my property values. I'm not seeing a whole lot of... I'm not feeling that right now, that that's going to happen to me if this data center is built. I'm surrounded here tonight with a lot of my neighbors, and we've got a lot to lose because we're like a lot of other people in that a lot of our assets are tied up in our real estate property. We have... a goal and a duty to protect our real estate values, and you, as our leaders, should be cheering us on in that. You know why? Because property taxes come from our property values. If our property values go down, you don't receive the taxes. Not only that, the tax money that you're generating from the property values, a lot of it is going to purchase school bonds to build new schools. If our property tax values go down, your revenues go down, and then who's going to pay for the new schools that everybody's always shouting that we need so much? So if there's nothing to back the school bonds, you see that this can create a terrible, vicious cycle that is just going to deteriorate the viability of a county. It's estimated there's about 98% of the counties in the United States are in this vicious cycle. Draw your own conclusion. No property values. No tax revenue. Let this group here destroy our property values. We've got a big, big problem. We can't let that happen. Just recently, the Supreme Court of the United States has agreed to hear a case on property taxes. Are they constitutional? Gentlemen and ladies, this is just the beginning of what's going to happen with this vicious cycle. Let's not start it here. These guys, they don't have an end user. That means in three years from now when they get done and they don't have, there's no data center business going on, how are they going to get an end user that's a data center? By then, they're going to start putting data centers in space. They're not going to be on the ground. And therefore, we've got a problem. Thank you, Ms. Curry. Vote no to this. Thank you.

Jay Banks, followed by, pardon me, ma'am, Rebecca B. from Stonewall. Good evening, Jay.

Evening. The very next day, after my public comments to this committee, I got a call from a county staff member, which was very intimidating. But I will not be silent, and I will continue to come before you and speak. As a certified arborist, I look at the plans for your buffer, and it's a joke. They're a failure in this community. And don't take my word for it. You can just go out to the approved sites where the solar farms are and look at those plantings that are deteriorating and falling apart. They're not screening a thing. So when they're saying they're going to put enhanced landscaping, it's for naught. And those poor people that are living across the street, they're going to see the same six foot tall tree for the next 25 years because it's not going to be maintained. There's nothing that this county has done to make developers maintain the required buffer yards. There should have been conditions on this. that bring to bear the responsibility to maintain the plantings. They're willing to put them in, but they won't maintain them. And again, I draw your attention to the buffer yards that are failing. Earlier this year, they planted sections of the buffer yards for the solar farms. Over half of that is already dead. So what they're gonna put in is just gonna be more dead material. When you're talking about a 14-foot berm, It's going to be nothing but vegetation that is dead at a taller level. That's all. Because you cannot build a berm because it has to be a structure that will not erode. The state will not let you build something that's going to erode. So erosion and sediment control is very important. So they're going to track in dirt from somewhere. It's going to be probably the consistency of concrete and poke a hole in it and try to plant a tree. It doesn't work. And I've got over 30 years in municipal government that I've inspected sites with this type of landscaping proposed. And I can tell you, if you have nothing that's going to hold their feet to the fire, Those poor people across the street are going to be looking at this building for the rest of their duration. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Sir.

Rebecca B from Stonewall Fire, followed by Tom Fulmsby.

Hi, I'm Rebecca Bronson. I live in the Stonewall District. First of all, thank you all for the opportunity to speak here tonight. and to voice our concerns over this particular project. I'd also like to thank all of our many citizens who are so eloquent and have come out and had so many helpful things, concerns to express. We're standing at a precipice here. We might not be dealing with the Valley Link issue had Northern Virginia had the information that we're now privileged to get about data centers. So why do we want to continue down that path? And I realize, you know, we might just be tilting at windmills here because this project has been in development for a very long time. And that's, you know, you have to follow the law. But we are standing at a precipice. And for that reason, I would like to ask you all to decline this petition. Thank you very much.

Thank you, ma'am.

Todd Fulmsby, followed by Mark Steffler.

Good evening, Mr. Chairman and members of the Planning Commission. My name is Todd Fulmsby. I live in Frederick County in the Opequon District. I'm here alongside my neighbors to ask this commission to recommend denial for the conditional use permit for Winchester Gateway LLC. In reviewing the applicant's August 19th letter, I believe it's a masterclass in legal misdirection. The developer's entire argument hinges on a threat that if you don't give them the CUP, they're going to build massive square feet of buy-right industrial blights instead. Do not be bullied by this false choice. No buy-right warehouse demands the massive power infrastructure. environmental destruction or 24 7 noise pollution that a data center does the truth is winchester gateway is racing against the clock they know the local and state regulatory frameworks that we have are desperately lagging behind the explosive growth of data center development they know our current ordinances are not yet robust enough to protect these citizens from the unique threats that these facilities pose if you look at tonight's agenda you're voting on an ordinance amendment to remove data centers from our county code entirely The applicant is rushing this project forward to exploit the system, trying to slip to the gate early before the county finishes updating the governance to protect its people. Let's address the specific hollow claims. They tout a municap report promising vast tax revenue and good-paying jobs. This is an industry-wide illusion in data centers. They are dark, automated hulls that employ a minimal skeleton crew, often brought in from out of town, while permanently depressing surrounding residential property values. the claim that the noise will be lower than ambient levels, which is a road. A persistent 24-7 low-frequency mechanical drone from cooling systems, and 39, Train car size generators cannot be compared to normal community noise. No rooftop buffers are going to silence that reality for the families that live 330 feet away. They mock our intelligence by calling their cooling chemicals food grade substance found in lipstick. It doesn't matter if it belongs on lips. We are talking about massive commercial volumes sitting on sensitive karst landscape with a known sinkhole. If the system leaks into our groundwater, No amount of earth-tone paint or a 14-foot dirt berm is going to protect our local water security of the 11 acres of wetlands that are getting destroyed. Finally, they bragged the funding power upgrades were already planned by SVC along Route 37, and they're going to fund them. What they hide is the sheer scale of infrastructure they are forcing into our county. They are hyper-accelerating transmission line expansions while keeping the county legally blind to the actual power draw that's going to be required. This developer is trying to exploit a lagging regulatory framework to secure a permanent destructive foothold in our community. Do not let them protect our homes, our history, and our water. Please recommend denial of this application. Thank you. Thank you, sir.

Mark Steffler, followed by Penny Smith.

Ladies and gentlemen, I know that you guys are underpaid. You're barely making money. You love this county, and that's why you're here, and we impressed you with the outcome. And so far, you've done a great job for us, and we just want to thank you for that. Pauses on this, pretty small list. $8 million, they say, when this gets going, against a $400 million budget. So maybe that's like... Under well under 2%. It's going to go down to 1% as this county grows. There's not going to be any more data centers after this one anyway, if we can help it, if you already approved it. But I trust you're not going to. So $8 million is not worth it. There's nothing in the county for this. It's only destruction, death, and sinkholes. We're actually doing a favor of not building this building because the sinkholes are going to cave it in. And when it does cave in, then you're going to have a water problem, and then the karst is going to get involved, and it's going to be a disaster for the county. It's going to happen. It's going to be an accident. No one wants it. They don't want it. No one wants it. It's going to happen. The other thing is the sinkhole. So the negatives are along this. Most of them have been covered. I wanted to focus on one thing. We had an invocation tonight, a prayer. When God created this world, he said that he created man just a little bit below angels. What matters is people. Yeah, they want money. They worship money. That's their idol. That's fine. But you and we as a community have to care about people, human beings. And I want to focus on just the noise. My wife and I lived in Ashburn. got surrounded by data centers. In fact, our neighborhood, the Regency, will become the one that we left six years ago to become this fantastic county that I love. I feel more at home in this county than I've felt anywhere in my entire life. Love the county. I defend it, you know, and invest in it left and right. So the noise is going to kill these people. And there's not just the ones across the street. I took a field trip and went out to the property today, and I talked to a couple people, just, you know, took a, made some measurements, noise measurements. There's a warehouse just down the street. The noise measurements there at the warehouse were the same as in front of the people's homes where they're going to, you know, these ones that are right on Apple Valley. But there's another, about another, I estimate 300 homes within a 2,000 foot of the border. Now, they're saying 65 decibels, that's DBA. DBC, the low-level stuff, there's not three minutes is enough time to educate you if you don't know, but please go Google it. These wavelengths, these low frequencies travel much longer, and the air doesn't absorb them. And so when they leave the thing, it's DBA, it could be 70 or 80 dB of C. And so that's the one that's injuring people, causing them not to sleep, get sick, cardiovascular problems. Just Google it. It's all here. It's all out in the open. But do your homework on that and care about the people, and I think you will. I appreciate you guys. Thank you, sir.

Penny Smith, followed by Gregory Hubert. Good evening, Ms. Smith. Thank you.

Penny Smith, Opecan. So we're all well aware that two criteria must be met to do an approval for tonight, the county code or the zoning, and does it measure up to the requirements for the land? So I'm just going to list off why it doesn't. The large sinkhole, the flowing stream, the wetlands point to karst land. The lack of certified karst attorney to evaluate that land per state code. There are ghosts here, the American Indians, Our forebears that died there, that's extremely important. Drought, it was disingenuous for the water board to say there's enough water and the next week to say conserve water. We've been in a drought for three years. More than that, the global warming prediction states it will get much worse here. I'm sorry, farmers who are advocating. So you must think long term. The battery park. Battery park has severe risk. Fire and thermal, toxic emissions, explosions, grid security, cider. I don't want to take my time. Too close to residential areas. Presenter says the battery park is insufficient for their energy needs. Would that mean generators all the time? Gas generators? How would they make it up? And then I wrote a little skit. I call my person I'm talking to IO. It's personification. It's an Adamant Object or data center. The setting is extreme drought. I say to IO, IO, we need water. It hasn't rained for a long time. For contractual agreements, I get 35,000 gallons of water a day. But we are thirsty. We are living. We can't live without water. I need to be cool. Your water company promised us water. But we are living. We need water. For contractual agreements, I get 35,000 gallons. We're contaminated now. I thought your company said the affluent would be taken away. To where? There's nowhere to take it. But you said you'd truck it somewhere else. Well, you can take it somewhere if you can find a place. We're thirsty, contaminated. Have you no mercy? What's mercy? I see into the homes nearby. I hear a six-year-old cry out, Mommy, I can't sleep. It's so noisy and my head hurts. There's another child with an asthma attack. Asthma can be severe in small children. Mommy, I can't breathe. I'll get you an healer. Jim, get the oxygen. He's really bad tonight. Jim, call 911. He's turning blue. These are the reasons. These are all related to this plot of land. It's an inappropriate build. Deny it.

Thank you, Ms. Smith.

Gregory Hubert followed by Peggy Reed.

Good evening, sir. My name is Gregory Hubert. I'm a business owner here in Winchester. I have two locations. The primary argument I heard from the applicant's representative was that the M1 zoning has a right of construction and that their proposed use is better than that of a proposed industrial use. They spoke of the studies they've done for concerning noise, view sheds, wetlands, but I didn't hear anything about what good comes with this giant 72-acre data center. Not counting the 60-foot height, including the machinery on top, 42 Class IV diesel generators that, as stated previously, are the size of locomotives. Just in testing, monthly, they will burn 85,000 gallons of diesel fuel over two years. 72 acres of core battlefield land getting turned into a giant electromagnetic eyesore is not something that Frederick County needs. Walmart Supercenter uses about 5 million watts yearly. It's about 200 to 300 homes. This place is going to use about 80 million. That's 60,000 homes worth of power. Their proposal says that they will use 35,000 gallons of water a day equal to that of 175 homes daily. The power and water bills of my two shops and that of my 20 employees has increased on average 21 to 23% since 2022. Aren't we already in a fight against a high voltage passageway that they're trying to take through the northern part of the county? I think we've joined a large suit against that. The city of Winchester has. What's the point of allowing something of this size to grow in the south part of the county? I wish that you vote no. Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you, sir.

Peggy Reed, followed by Tom Ruth.

Hi, I'm Peggy Reed, and I am resident in Back Creek, also one of the communities closest to where this data center might be built. We're hearing everybody speak about all the concerns and the fears about the resources and the environment here in our beautiful Frederick County. I haven't heard anybody say this tonight, but I think we all also say, we don't want to be a Loudoun County. But I come originally from New York City. And I'd like to also share other things that I don't think we want to be. And nobody is really talking about the fact that we already are an M1 light industrially zoned area. We don't want to be where there are abandoned warehouses like I saw in New York City. And we don't want to be where I lived for 18 years in Connecticut, in a small town where factories closed and the young people moved away and the older people could not afford higher taxes, schools were underfunded, and property values were impacted. What was the bailout for that community? You don't want to have here. It was an Amazon distribution center. While I lived in Connecticut, I worked at a data center, one I think all of you would actually have said you'd be proud to support. We supported the design and build of the nation's submarines and tanks. And we did it in North Connecticut with no negative impact to the environment. The company coexisted. In 2004, I had the blessed opportunity to move to this beautiful community. I worked for a company whose main job is to find and provide health care across states and the federal government. But guess what? That company in Reston has its own data center right on premises. So whether we're talking about one data center here, one, that might support many companies or many companies who might move into this area with their own data centers, we are talking about real resource requirements. Your job is very complex. Your job should be devoid of any political fallout. You need to tell us if this county has the resources that we need to support industry, any industry, because whether it's a data center or any other one, they are going to use water, they are going to use electricity, and if they are multiple companies using data center type things, it's going to fall under the radar and the resource use is probably going to be worse. Thank you.

Ma'am, thank you. Tom Ruth, followed by Elizabeth Ehler.

Good evening. My name's Tom Ruth. I'm a Back Creek District resident. I live in Kernstown, and I am one board member of the Kernstown Battlefield Association. And I appreciate very much the work that you people do. I reluctantly recognize the need for data centers. However, I strongly believe that they do not belong in residential areas or in certain historic view sheds. Rather, they should be located in brownfield or industrial sites. Very disturbing was the information in April 12, 2024, a Winchester Star article titled, Frederick's Supervisors Approve More Light Industrial Development Near Kernstown. In the article, it reads, in a vacant 72-acre property, 37 acres were already zoned M1, the developer, which is Winchester Gateway, wants to change the remaining 34 acres from rural to M1. Most importantly to many of us here, the same article reads, according to the county documents, the 34 acres had remained rural while the other 37 acres rezoned to M1 to serve as a buffer between existing residential uses and the Kernstown battlefield to the east. It appears before being rezoned in April 2024, the county recognized the need for this rural buffer area. It was not until Winchester Gateway's instigation of the zoning change that was changed from rural to M1. The same article reads, the zoning was approved despite uncertainty about how the property would be developed. It is certainly reasonable to believe that in April 2024, Winchester Gateway knew the end use would be a data center. I have a copy of the article if you'd like to have it. I respectfully ask for the denial of this CUP. Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Elizabeth Ehler, followed by David Dixon.

Hey, y'all. Elizabeth Ehler, Back Creek. I'm just going to speak to you in my expertise, which is as a mother. And a pollinator garden... and a neighbor of this beautiful community. My children lay their heads right across the street from this data center. They go to school right down the street from this data center. And they play football and baseball right across the street from this data center. Every single angle affects my children and their health. It affects my animals. It affects our pollinators. It affects our history. It affects our culture. I speak as a mother that has worked her whole life through to the bone, blood, sweat, and tears to get where I am in my life, in middle age, finally getting stability, and a lifetime, decades, of having to struggle economically, with education, Moving around, housing crisis is just crisis after crisis after crisis. And every time I turn around, it's someone trying to take from us. It's someone trying to come into our rural lands, disrupt our way of life, and affect my private property and my privacy. Okay, I have friends across the street from this data center. Victory Church feeds people out of their food pantry. They've developed a sports program for the kids. They're some of the best people on the earth, and they have to function with all of their beautiful community looking at this data center humming their lives away. Reports are coming out across the country that kids are getting brain cancer. And elementary schools live next to these low frequencies that Mark and the rest of the people had talked about. Seeds aren't germinating. Water resources, car slime stone that Bob talked about, Julie with the taxes. I mean, these are my people. And no offense, guys, you're coming in to develop our land, and then you're selling it to who? Someone that can, what, bomb us? What is going to be going through this data center? This is my life. This is my life. You know, I'm a Virginian through and through, and I just ask you all to have common sense as we continue to plan and develop our strategies in order to weave in good partnerships. You know, they spoke about putting a prison in, Ty, threatening us with a prison, or putting in a manufacturing, or putting in a data center. Come on, y'all. There's infinite ways we can develop this if we work together, Darius. We can sit here, we can build community that is extraordinary. We can weave things like Leslie's plans with incredible new business models. We can create partnerships that have longevity and sustainability that could go for decades. Why don't we do creative things? We can make this extraordinary. And if we think thoroughly and infinitely in the possibilities of how we want to explore all these beautiful things. So I beg of you, have mercy on me. I am just a poor woman that just wants to raise her children and sit in the backyard and look at the fireflies and look at the stars. And please protect me because I need protection. And I need you all to stand up for us. Thank you.

Thank you.

david dixon followed by pardon me last name is anderson from shawnee district david dixon stonewall district now these engineers can correct me if i'm wrong last i checked the entire sfac region average load is 275 megawatts and this one data center is 160 megawatts If I'm correct, the message is clear and simple. Data centers have no place in Frederick County, period. Our beautiful county is known for rich agriculture, sprawling land, tourism, and the beloved Apple Blossom Festival. just to name a few things you cannot and will not put a price tag against our resolve that our precious resources specifically our water electricity and land belong solely to the county and the residents hearing as to the noise ordinance proposal This county has long supported a culture of raising farm animals and fowl, and it should continue to be a welcome way of life. This culture is a God-given right. Any restrictions on that threaten the livelihoods of many. Residents of the Stonewall District near the quarry deserve to be prioritized with adequate buffer zones, since we're talking about buffer zones. and to protect their land and their livelihood. Clark County has been statistically fighting the installation of power lines through privately owned land. I move that Frederick and Clark Counties join in the united front to forward off the threats to our treasured neighboring communities. Together we'll be stronger and it needs to start now. We need your leadership.

Ms. Anderson followed by Aaron Fox.

My name is Charlene Anderson. I'm from the Shawnee District. Although I currently reside in the Shawnee District, I was born, raised, and lived in Back Creek, specifically along Middle Road. I can't say any more than what the rest of the people here have said. That is a beautiful area, rural area, history area. The data center does not need to be built near subdivisions, houses, in the rural community. Please find someplace else to put it or deny it altogether, but keep our country, our county, beautiful and in spot. Thank you. Thank you.

Aaron Fox, followed by Kirk Krieger.

You've got to love public speaking. Erin Fox, Back Creek District. I live on 10 acres on Apple Valley Road where the Winchester Gateway Project is proposed. My kids are actually the fourth generation to live there. So thank you all for carefully considering this for those of us with homes nearby. I don't think that this project is appropriate for several reasons. The energy demands, conflict with the comp plan, air quality concerns, the height of the buildings, and history. First, we and you are not allowed to know how much power this data center needs or what it will take to bring that much power to the site. Will it be new lines, larger lines, more substations? None of us can know. What we do know is that our grid is in crisis. We're already having to fight the large Marl and Valley Link lines that aren't even intended to power our county. And this is all happening because of irresponsible local approvals and poor planning in Northern Virginia. Nobody should be able to put such a heavy burden on their neighbors like we're experiencing. As for conflict with the comp plan, it is true that this area is marked for industrial use, so it does align there. But the comp plan is so much more than just the land use maps. It describes how we see the future of our county. It's a reminder of what matters to us. It keeps us responsible and true to our principles as we grow. It holds us accountable, but only if we let it. In the business development section, the comp plan reminds us that, quote, the county should be proactive in ensuring the resources necessary for business development are planned for in a viable way. It asks us to remember that, quote, there is a finite capacity to these resources that must be managed accordingly. It also nudges us back on the right path when we're distracted by tax revenue and less traffic by clearly stating, quote, overall a sound office and industrial business development strategy will result in the conservation of a variety of finite resources, and promote a high quality of life for the citizens. Three times it mentions these standards that matter to us. The power demands alone are in stark contrast. In the Kernstown Area Plan, it mentions twice that the focus of this area is specifically for employment opportunities. If we're going to industrialize prime farmland, push up against residential areas, and use this much power, it should provide plenty of local high-wage jobs. As for the height of the building, 60 feet with rooftop equipment that could add 10 additional feet. It's too tall with our houses right across the street, and it will definitely affect the historic experience. As for air quality, two members of my extended family living on Apple Valley have respiratory issues. One is on oxygen. A recent study out of VCU found that these generators, even when used rarely, threaten local air quality. I've heard they're no worse than all the tractor trailers passing by daily, but I would say, why pile it on us? We've already taken one for the team with Route 37 right there. And finally, the phase one archaeological study found two spots on the property near the spring, one where, quote, the potential for encountering intact features is high, and the other where they found Native American tools and ceramics dating back to before Europeans even arrived. So a second study was recommended to establish national register eligibility, but has not been conducted. So I ask you to please deny your recommendation. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am.

Kurt Krieger, followed by Katherine Compton.

Good evening, members. Kirk Krieger, Back Creek District. I'd like to recognize that I attended the HRAB meeting on April 17th, where this was unanimously recommended that it be unanimously denied. And then I attended the first of the Apple Valley Elementary School open houses on May 11th. So I've taken the time to understand, I think, this. I read the entire 300-page package. And I find three strikes on this proposal. And together, I recommend, strongly recommend that you deny this conditional use permit. The first really turns on the 2023 rezone. Embedded in the 2023 rezone is their Level 1 Archaeological Survey, which concluded on page 45 and 46 that a Level 2 reconnaissance be conducted sufficient to establish national register eligibility. Well, why wouldn't the owner want more information about this site? They're hiding that information. They went to the HREB. The HREB asked for something that was called for three years earlier, and it's still not here today. So you're being deceived. You're only getting partial information about this site. The other deception, strike two, is you've gotten some fairly generic graphic portrayals about what this will look like. It happens to look like summer. Do you notice that there are no leaves on the trees half the year here? So Pritchard Hill is looking at a bank of trees depicted in July. peak foliage season. It's basically a trick to show you that this will blend into the landscape. Staff and the HRAP both attempted to mitigate this with a 45-foot height, which apparently is indifferent. So not only is the property owner, developer indifferent to the historic value of the property, they're indifferent to the overall final appearance of the property. And then third, really the most critical, is public health, safety, and welfare. The other matters are concerns. They're not disqualifiers. But public health, safety, and welfare, the ambient noise, the particulate air pollution are clearly inconsistent with your standards and cause enough for this to be denied. I would note that there is no safe level of particulate emissions from these generators, and that DEQ, especially with regard to the Vantage data center in Sterling, has proven itself not only to be incompetent with regard to public health, but really indifferent. So don't rely on the state to be enforcing a standard. It's up to you to deny this project. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President.

Catherine Compton, followed by Teresa Ostertag.

Hi, my name is Catherine Compton. I live at the village for Harvest Ridge. It's between Middle Road and Cedar Creek grade.

And it was built on a wetland.

It's only about roughly a mile from where this data center is going in. And nearly all of us who live on Mikey Court deal with groundwater coming up in our crawl spaces. We have to have dehumidifiers. We have to have sump pumps. And the neighbor who lives just one development over, all those fellows over there are on well water. Now, I decided since data centers are basically built to support artificial intelligence, that I should ask artificial intelligence whether we should have data centers. And data centers should never be located on karst terrain. That's what artificial intelligence says. It says, locating a data center on karst terrain creates severe environmental and engineering risks related to rapid groundwater contamination, sinkhole activation, and complex underground drainage. Rapid groundwater contamination. Karst topography features sinkholes, fractures, and underground channels that connect the land surface directly to the water table. Fuel leaks from diesel backup generators or chemical spills from cooling systems can enter the drinking water aquifers almost instantly without natural soil filtration. Wastewater issues. Flushing or discharging treated cooling water or construction wastewater can introduce unexpected bacteria or chemical additives directly into delicate subterranean ecosystems. Sinkhole formation and subsidence. Paving large areas and concentrating stormwater runoff into retention basins or drainage wells accelerates the natural dissolution of underlying limestone. Infiltrating water erodes the surface sediments down into bedrock voids, triggering sudden ground collapse or sinkholes underneath heavy industrial infrastructure, which is what a data center is. Fluctuations in local water tables caused by heavy pumping or shifting drainage patterns can destabilize the irregular bedrock-soil boundary. Unpredictable subsurface flow. Underground rivers. Water moves through karst conduits rapidly and turbulently. Sure. Meaning that pollutants can travel massive distances in a very short time. So I would ask that one of the other people here said that you should have a geologist locate, decide whether or not this thing should be built. I don't think that's happened. And I think it's absolutely crazy if you do it.

Teresa Ostertag followed by Cynthia Miller.

I'm from Bat Creek. My name is Teresa Ostertag. Gateway is over 600,000 square feet with 42 generators on the original proffer. It said phase one. I will say Mr. Lawson seemed quite bold to me, hinting at intimidation with what could be built and not even adjusting the height, 60-foot height, without the chillers on top. You had asked for 40 feet in height or to bury it. They offered nothing. Gateway is a problem. It's a problem to me in many ways. My mom is a heart patient, and she's on oxygen. This will not be good for her health. But it's not just my mom. There are three senior subdivisions right across the street with lots of heart patients, people on oxygen, people with fragile health. They matter. They may not be able to be here today, but they all matter. Sometimes they get lost in the shuffle of the busy day to day. Our lives are stressed to the max. I can hardly sleep thinking about this. The grid is so bad right now. There are 371 data centers running as in Virginia right now, but there are 438 more that aren't hooked into the grid. Let's talk about what could change in a month. Our governor could say and mandate it that they can have on-site power generation because of grid issues. What does that do? It could allow Gateway to have on-site power generation, which would create more noise, air pollution, breathing disorders. And if you didn't know, power generation also uses a lot of water. So the people that vote these in do not care if there is clean water or air. People, speaking of on-site power generation, Elon Musk's two hyperscale data centers, Colossus 1 and 2, outside of Memphis, they use gas turbines. The neighbors are allegedly sick and dying of asthma, bronchitis, COPD, pneumonia, and cancer. These are not things that can happen. These are things that can happen. The internet has been cleaned up since a lot of this information came out. But you try putting 40 gas turbines abutted up. I'm not saying that they have 40 gas turbines. You get the idea. Breathing fine particulate matter. And you tell me that's good for your lungs or your projected lifespan? Do not fear a lawsuit. They didn't even attempt to change the height. Quite bold today. That's all I have to say. But I do thank you for listening because there's some great people here that have spoke before me that aren't as nervous as I am. But I know a lot of you take this very seriously. And I also know that you can say no and it's still going to go to the board. That's for everybody behind me to know. You can say no and they can still say yes.

Thank you.

Thank you. Cynthia Miller, and that is the last person you currently have signed up, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

Ms. Miller? Not seeing Ms. Miller. Would any of those who submitted written comments have anything additional they'd like to share? This would be the time to do so. Do you have a few minutes? Yes, sir.

Are you Ms. Miller? My name's Charles Daniels. I'm from Gainesboro District.

I know your name, sir.

Thank you very much for all of you here tonight. We appreciate everything you guys are doing. I know you're not here for the paycheck. One thing I did wanted to add that I have not heard tonight. I've heard a lot, but I've not heard this. 29 years ago was the first data center built in Loudoun County. Today, there's over 200, close to 250 data centers just in Loudoun County. In 29 years, almost 250 data centers. Please do not do that to Frederick County. Don't set a precedent for Frederick County and destroy our county. Turn it down.

Thank you.

My name is Alexander Ritter. I reside in the Apecan District. A CUP allows a use that the zoning ordinance does not permit by right, but specifically authorizes if certain conditions are met. Unlike other states, Virginia considers conditional use permits to be legislative, which grants broad discretion to reasonably deny. When you consider this application, I ask you to consider that the burden of proof is on the applicant to prove that your decision would be clearly unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious, that it bears no reasonable relation to the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare. Allow me to ask you this. If this project requires such strict conditions to avoid any potential impacts, is it that unreasonable to deny? Considering the planning staff have raised concern about the uncertainty regarding the project and the risks it could pose, is it worth it? As Kurt mentioned, you are being deceived. This project is a half-baked scheme from someone who is not a data center developer looking to profit from data center development. I've met him. What does he do? He's a banker and a land speculator. He's also unsuccessfully tried to take over mobile homes and evict them. He's built town homes. I spoke with him at the open house and he couldn't answer a single question without referring to someone else. He had no idea. What data centers have they built? What projects have been built that demonstrated such good quality of the design? His track record shows a lack of transparency and ruthlessness towards others. Operating under the name Crescent Mobile Partners, he purchased a mobile home park. His goal was obviously to get rid of that park, even though residents had been there for years. And when he bought it, he refused to say whether he was going to sell or not. He sent those residents a letter saying that the homes they own will be safe for at least another year after the sale closes. But were they? Well, he didn't even give the residents a means to contact them about updates about what's going on. The email address he provided so residents could receive the emails with future updates was not a working email address, and that was corroborated by the Loudoun Times-Mirror. Luckily, those residents fought with unwavering strength and he backed out. But let me ask you, do we want someone like him developing in our county whose lack of trustworthiness caused those residents with nowhere else to go suffering? Let me ask this, are all those conditions in the proffers? Are all those things that developers promise going to be adhered to? Are they stated as shell and not may? Are any of those requirements going to be addressed in the proffers? Or is it we'll address it in the site plan? Because if it's addressed in the site plan, you may want to reconsider. With all that said, I want to point out that regardless of whether or not it was zoned in one years ago, data centers, as they currently are, were not a contemplated use. A CUP is something our county grants on conditions. They have no right but to adhere to our rules and our values.

Thank you.

I'm Becky Rager, Gainsborough District. I think sitting here, I wasn't going to comment tonight, but I felt like I wanted to know why we're allowing outside development companies to come in and talk to us like this, to talk down to us as if we should be grateful for a living wall or a higher berm, as if you guys don't understand what a conditional use permit is. I recently attended the invite-only ECWIS meeting held at the Clearbrook Fire Center. I was outside because I was not lucky enough to be one of the select few to get the invite. Like this company, ECWIS has also never built a data center before. The only difference is these guys are from Virginia, ECWIS is from Pennsylvania, and ECWIS gave us cookies. But I heard the same argument tonight that I heard on August 25th, which is if we reject this proposal, the land will be developed with a far less desirable project or perhaps a lawsuit. Either way, this is a tactic that residents have heard before, and it's one that attempts to make our planning commissioners, supervisors, and others feel like we don't have any choice here. Yielding to an unwanted development out of fear of a hypothetical alternative or lawsuit undermines our community's involvement and deprives residents of a say in how our county grows. So I'm just here to ask you to please listen to your constituents. Don't bow to outside development forces. Let them threaten you guys. Let them, but do what's right for our community and our future. Thank you. Thank you.

Hello, my name is Jack Tinsley. I'm from the Gainesboro District. I gotta tell you Chairman Stowe, originally I was trying to stand up to tell you all how grateful I am that you listen to us and have back and forth conversation. You share your opinions unlike the board, so that's what I meant to say earlier and I'm not going to take it personally. OK, I know you didn't mean it like that. So, let me skip past that. First off, thank you. The Planning Commission has not been shy about sharing individual opinions about data centers, et cetera. Voting unanimously against recommending ECWIS gave many of us hope and let us breathe a sigh of relief. That was really good. So, we're going to ask you again to recommend a denial for this data center. In June of 2025, this commission sent Gateway application back for various reasons. You had good concerns. I'm just hoping that you all really look to make sure that they are addressing those concerns, which after listening to everyone, I don't think that they have. And honestly, I think it's kind of cringy to be showing up over and over and over again, asking for access. Please let us come hang out at your backyard. We don't want them here. Nobody back here wants them here. No offense. Well, a little bit. We don't want the data centers. That's really what it comes down to at the end of all of this. Something else with my minute and 30 left. There's been a lot of climate-related disaster. I think we just lived through four heat domes in this area. Plus all the droughts, everyone spoke on that. But did you guys see the glacier that fell off in Nepal and caused that huge flood? and then the one in Grand Canyon, and then the one in Indiana, where Gary was out of power for 14 days. I don't know if you all saw all of that, but we have climate devastation happening, and data centers use 25% of Virginia's energy. which is also related to gas use, which increases climate disaster. So you don't really have to listen to me. Just please listen to what everybody else said. Especially Lizzie had a really, really strong argument that I think hit me in my soul. So hopefully that'll touch you all too. But there's something bigger about a CUP that I want on the record. And tonight's one of the last nights that we're going to be able to talk about how this property is offered to be used. So, you're going to be recommending the approval or denial of a building, not a tenant. That's really important because we don't know necessarily who's leasing it, what's going to run inside it, who the customer is going to be, what they're going to do with their data center. And then once it's built, it's not coming back to the public. We don't get to talk to them about how they use what's happening in the data center. Not this commission, not the board of supervisors, and nobody else in this room. It's not like a little thing to hand over to a data center company which harvests all of our data, where we travel, et cetera. I'm going to respect the clock here, but please vote no. Don't recommend approval of this. Thank you.

BRIAN NURRY, Good evening, Commission members, Mr. Chairman. My name is Brian Nury. I'm a resident of the Opecan District. I'm a positive person, and I've heard a lot of people saying no tonight and kind of getting tired of it, so I want to turn the page a little bit. Let's say yes, but in order to do that, we have to turn the clock back to 2019. The Board of Supervisors had a proposal for the Blackburn Farm property, ironically enough, that exact same spot, to put up workforce housing. About 200 units of income control from $35,000 to $49,000 income, small starter family homes. The Board of Supervisors refused to change the zoning in order to maintain industrial. One of their arguments was, well, people drive in and out all the time. What do you think an industrial zone is going to do? So let's, after we've denied this CUP, let's start talking about rezoning that area because I know that I would rather see 200 homes, 200 people building equity, 200 people having the dignity to have their own space than 14 people working in a 100,000 square foot data center. So let's start looking ahead and say yes to better housing in Frederick County. Thank you.

Good evening. I'm Steve Crotchlow, Back Creek District. I didn't prepare any remarks or anything, but I'm actually happy to yield the remainder of my time to anybody from you guys to answer any of the questions or concerns that were brought up tonight, because you spent about 15, 20 minutes talking about berms and trees, and I don't think that that answers anything that people are really concerned about. So, anybody? Got three minutes. It's all yours. Okay. didn't think so and I think that pretty much says I think what sums up I think essentially how we all feel okay we brought up very legitimate concerns over the last several months not just tonight I was at the Board of Supervisors meeting in August I reiterated a lot of this to them as well you know I don't have a whole lot else to say other than I think I don't think there's anything that I can add that hasn't already been said or that you don't already know This is not something that we want. It's very clear. And everybody on this planning commission and the board works for us. So you don't really have much of a choice in this. The choice has been made. That's all I have to say. Thank you.

I appreciate the time. My name is Randy Leach. I'm with the Back Creek District. When this property was up for rezoning, it has so many red flags that it should never have been rezoned to start with. One of the issues is the traffic study, which states an increase of 2,777 additional vehicle trips per day up and down Apple Valley Road. Even VTOT has concerns about this. Apple Valley Road is lined from one end to the other with residential homes and two 55-plus communities. These residents, especially the ones in the 55-plus communities, have worked hard, saved their money, purchased homes here to live out the rest of their golden years in peace and quiet. Yet according to the ordinance document, the Board of Supervisors found that the rezoning to be in the best interest of the public health, safety, and welfare. Seriously, 2,777 additional vehicle trips per day past all these homes and 55-plus communities is in their best interest. This is what you call not being in touch with the people. So I had the opportunity to speak with one of the owners of this property. And we were going back and forth, back and forth about noise issues. So he eventually, he just looked at me and said, well, we're already approved for a 40-bay warehouse. We can just go ahead and put that in place, and then you'll have tractor trailers driving up and down your road 24-7. These are the kind of people we're dealing with. Not to mention that every chance they get, they like to use the traffic numbers as well as what they can build by right as intimidation tactics. They did this over and over again at your June work session. So no matter what gets developed on this property, there needs to be some measures put in place to restrict the amount of traffic on Apple Valley Road. If the comprehensive plan needs to be updated to keep Apple Valley Road to two lanes in order to minimize traffic, that would be a good start. You have to be proactive at this. You have to keep 10 steps ahead of these people at all times. So when it comes to data centers and it comes to developers that like to use exploitation and intimidation tactics against the people of Frederick County in order to get what they want, you need to send them a very strong message. And that is we do not need them here and we definitely do not want them here. That's it. Thank you.

I do not see anyone else queued up to speak, so I will close public hearing. Mr. Lawson, do you care to respond to any of these comments, sir, briefly? Please. Yes, briefly.

I appreciate the comments. One of our slides pointed out and reminded me we actually had seven community meetings and a bus tour and a couple ladies actually spoke about that I really appreciate that so we've heard a lot of comments you all have heard a lot of comments I said at the beginning and I think it's appropriate to wrap up with the talking about industrial is it's not intimidation it's it's what we are it is the standard against which We measure this one proposed use, this conditional use for a data center and understand the comments and I understand discussions and you're gonna have something on your agenda about the future of the county and whether there will be or not data centers. But those aren't the issues that we're faced with here and what we're doing and the standards that we're following. I want to point out that not only is our use significantly less impactful than the M1, objectively, not subjectively, objectively, through measurements, decibels, et cetera, but Mr. Klein did a great job running through the conditions or the staff's recommended conditions, and I believe we're in sync with all with the exception of the height. And what we've done is, and we've taken all kinds of efforts to mitigate the height, but we've kept the height the same. And again, objectively applying standards, we're not going higher than 60 feet. We are at the same level. And so that condition by itself objectively satisfies us. standard. No one talked about it, but we were mindful of comments about power lines across the county and certainly were aware of Valley Link and all of that. We actually added a condition that said we will stay to construct this facility and this runs with the land and yes, these are conditions that are binding on whoever owns this property, that we will stay within the current easement corridors. And we heard you. We don't want you or this thing to create or generate easements, new easements across the county. It will not. And it is a condition that binds this property. Again, we're proud of the work that's been done working with staff and with you all and with board members to assure that the conditions that have been proposed, frankly, we don't just meet the standard of M1. We go well below the impact standards of M1, and we look forward to your recommendation. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Mr. Klein?

Mr. Chairman, this is a conditional use permit request to enable a data center on 71 acres of property that is presently zoned M1. As we noted, there are positives for your consideration this evening, also concerns. Staff has a recommended set of conditions, and we look for your action this evening, and that would conclude my remarks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much.

Okay, planning commissioners, it's our time to discuss this. I will begin to my left. Comments, discussion, anything anyone wants to say? Seeing none, am I right? Nope? Mrs. Batcreek, what would be your pleasure?

Mr. Chairman, I move that we recommend the Board of Supervisors deny Conditional Use Permit 0326.

We have a motion. Is there a second? I second that. We have a second. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none? Okay. A yes vote on this is a recommendation for denial.

Okay?

Yes vote is a recommendation for denial. Mr. Whitaker, can you begin our voting, sir?

Whitaker, yes. Crane, yes.

DeHaven, yes.

Kearns, yes. Kozell, yes.

Thomas, yes.

Markert, yes.

Sneddon, yes.

Hawthorne, yes. Cady, yes.

Brumbach, yes.

Lamont, yes. Chairman, as the motion carries, this will go to the Board of Supervisors to be determined with a recommendation for denial. Thank you very much to all that participated.

What have you done, Liz? Oh, God. Thank you.

Folks, if you could move out in the hall and talk, we would appreciate it. We've got to move on with several more items here.

It's out there. Okay.

Sounds like the fire alarm is under control now. All right, moving on to 9C, ordinance amendment to the Frederick County Code. Mr. Bishop, are you going to lead us through this? Yes, sir. Expediently, sir. Yes, sir.

Unless we get it going on the history of transportation, I'm not too known for my verbosity. As you noted, this is the ordinance amendment to potentially remove data centers from the ordinance should it follow through and be adopted by the Board of Supervisors. This is a proposal to amend Chapter 165 zoning ordinance to remove data centers as a permitted or conditional use in certain zoning districts and to remove other references to data centers. This item was authorized via resolution by the Board of Supervisors on August 12, 2026. The current standard is that data centers are permitted by right only in the TM, Technology Manufacturing Park, zoning district, and they are also allowed as a conditional use in the B3, M1, and M2 zoning districts. There is, of course, a definition of data centers in your ordinance and also supplemental use requirements. Those current requirements for data centers were adopted by the Board of Supervisors in April of 2025. So in summary, the DRRC did discuss this on August 27 and offered comments for consideration by the Planning Commission. Those comments included one committee member noting they would rather see an outright prohibition and another committee member who noted that removing them was probably not a good idea. Other than that, there was fairly little discussion. This item is presented for public hearing this evening. I would also note that County Attorney Fox is here this evening. If we get deep enough into the legal weeds, he will be here to chop those weeds down for us. And further, I would note that he has prepared, in coordination with staff and outside counsel, an assistance memo that tries to address a number of of the questions that were brought up both on August 12th when the board authorized this action to begin and since then in various other conversations that have taken place. That copy of that is at your dais as well as was added to the online agenda and the county's data center portal. We also have copies that were distributed this evening to public that wanted to take them as they came in. We are seeking a recommendation following the public hearing from the Planning Commission to the Board of Supervisors.

Any questions for Mr. Bishop? To my right? To my left? Thank you very much. And Mr. Fox, thank you for your memo. I found it very helpful. The more I read it, after I read it the third time, I was good. Not an attorney. Okay, this is a public hearing. Anyone would like to speak to this matter, this would be the time to do so. We ask you please limit your comments to three minutes or less. State your name, Magisterial District. And I know we did have one person with online comments, Ted McFadden. And there is a sign-up sheet. So, Mr. Bishop, take it away.

First speaker is Mr. Arthur Christian, followed by Jennifer Smith.

Hi. My name is Arthur Christian. I'm from Winchester, that way. I personally am recommending that you say yes to remove this item from the Frederick County Code. And if it wasn't there, we wouldn't have had this whole big discussion in the first place. So that's all I have to say. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir.

We have Jennifer Smith followed by, and I apologize, I'm not making light of your name. I just literally can't read it. I believe your initials are LS, and you are in the Opecan District, and I just want to make sure you have your opportunity. So if you haven't heard your name called and you know you signed up, it's you we're looking for. Jennifer Smith still here?

LS. I know Leslie's going to stand up and claim it's her. I know she is.

I'm Sharon Barchi, actually.

You are next on the sign up, so yes.

Thank you for sticking with us, by the way. I know not everybody did. Mr. Chairman, members of the Planning Commission, I live in the Opequan District. Like you, I've listened to residents' voice concerns about data centers, very real concerns about noise, both audible and inaudible. the kind you cannot hear, excuse me, but is unhealthy nonetheless, the drain on our electric grid, the risk to our water supply, which is already in drought status, the danger to our health, our livestock, our property values, and to our very quality of life. As an aside, I was looking at a study by some scientists from the University of California, and they said that getting a 100-word answer from AI which is what I did several times today, used a bottle of water. Think of that. A bottle of water for a 100-word answer from AI. Imagine the exponential use of water for those data centers. I, too, am opposed to data centers that have been proposed for Frederick County. But frankly, I'm no longer sure who my opposition is. The billionaires funding these data centers without regard to the consequences? China enticing us to compete in the artificial intelligence race? Or is it you, the Planning Commission, who voted against the proposed Clearbrook data center, yet has not explicitly stated in the amended zoning ordinance that data centers are prohibited? Well, I'm glad and grateful for your vote. Without the clarity, I fear developers will find a loophole and work around it to build data centers. Clarity matters. It is essential that Frederick County have a revised zoning ordinance that clearly states its intent and the will of its residents. Simple deletions don't do it. It is equally important that data center be defined. I noticed the data center definition was not present in the amended definition. ordinance. The argument made by the county attorney that would be difficult to craft a definition that was broad enough to encompass all data centers baffles me. Other Virginia municipalities and counties appear to have done so. Perhaps we should borrow from them. This much is clear. There's a great deal of complexity in deciding whether to permit a given data center and or where it should be built. While I respect members of the Planning Commission and members of the Board of Supervisors, how can you possibly make an informed decision at data centers now without considerable study? A clear change in the zoning ordinance will provide time for that much-needed study. You will be able to consult with experts and investigate best practices if or when a data center is built in Frederick County. Commission members will be able to articulate their positions and respond to residents' concerns I'll stop there.

Thank you, ma'am.

Thank you.

Thank you. Next, we have Karen Moreland, followed by Rebecca Bee from the Stonewall District.

I'm Karen Moreland. I am from the Bat Creek District. I support the proposed amendment change to remove data centers from our zoning information. So basically, the whole fight from tonight is we could have had this comment before it. I think it's almost as important as what we just sat through. Removing them completely from the data that every applicant has used to fight against the public Is probably the best way to fight the war against the data centers And so I would hope that you guys look into this further The legalities of it how we can join the other municipalities in the state Thank you.

Thank you Rebecca be followed by Elizabeth Aylor I

Rebecca Bronson, Stonewall District. Once again, you know, I just wanted to reiterate, we just sat through, you know, an hour and a half, two hours of, you know, people laying it out. And I, too, support, you know, removing data centers as a permitted use. Again, because had we known what Loudon knows, you know, we might not be fighting the valley length thing. You know, now we know. And we have the opportunity. to step away from that and to not further, you know, engage, not further endanger our resources, you know, and, you know, we have, wonderful natural history here. You know, lots of people have talked about everything. I mean, there really isn't much left to say that hasn't already been said. But we do stand at the precipice. And I, you know, I'm thrilled that you guys are taking this up. I'm thrilled that this, you know, is a possibility for us to decide. So, you know, let's go ahead and, you know, take these out of the mix because we need the water. We don't need God knows how big of a transmission line coming through here. I mean, we don't need any of that. Do you really need an AI summary of your Washington Post comments for how many gallons of water? That's how many gallons of water that you're not going to flush your toilet with. You might need that someday. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Elizabeth Ehler, followed by Charlene Anderson. I believe I saw her leave, so I'll also mention after her is Theresa Ostertag.

Hey, y'all. Elizabeth Ehler, Back Creek. Firstly, I really love recommending removing it from the ordinance. I know that we keep language intentionally vague in order to mitigate litigation. I think Jack's talked about this before. I'm challenging all of us, the great people of Appalachia and the Shenandoah Valley as Virginians and Americans, not only to declare that we don't want data centers, but to stand up and fight against them. I mean, here's the thing. My friend Jess said about the Great Valley Alliance. We are powerful in numbers. This is not the first thing that's going to come down the pike. We have climate change. We've got wars going on all over the country. We have economic crises. We have almost one in four Americans below the poverty are out of work. We have major issues approaching us as a society, artificial intelligence itself. We talk about industries that we want to bring into our neighborhoods. We have no idea what the future holds next year, let alone 10 years from now. We are the people here. And I think that instead of saying, oh, well, maybe we do this, ambiguous this, leave it out of that, fight. Stand up and fight. Are we afraid of litigation? Are we afraid of these corporate people trying to shake us down and tell us what to do? Are we afraid of inviting these people in partnerships into our communities? We need to be taking aggressive stances together. If we build out solidarity between all of our other counties and work in the Great Shenandoah Valley Alliance, we can protect our sacred land, our sacred honor, our heritage as stewards. of this land. We need to preserve this. We need to convince people to keep our land, to keep our water and our resources. If you're looking around the nation, it's drying out to the bone. Where are they going to come? We have industry we can build off the natural resources itself. We can grow a potato from a potato, and we can honor ourselves. We can honor this land, and we can build solidarity together. I say don't just take it out of the ordinance. I say we stand up and fight together. We build out new opportunities for us to unite and to unify culturally together and to protect our amazing resources and this incredible land and our heritage. Thank you.

Thank you. Charlene Anderson, if you're here, followed by Teresa Ostertag. I don't think she's here. Come on up, Teresa. I don't think she's here. In case I didn't see her, I wanted to make sure I said it.

Back Creek, Teresa Ostertag. So I've got a timeline. Let's start with July 8th. On July 8th, John Jewell drafted the motion to have a public hearing to work on removing the data center ordinance, which made the entire room burst into a standing ovation. What did that do to the movement? It gave people time to breathe and feel safer and more heard. What else did it do? It took a lot of the energy propelling the movement. We were working on getting three of our people elected in November in the Chairman's seat, Gainsborough seat, and Back Creek seat on the board. I think they would call that a job well done because it took your attention off of that and they don't want to lose their seats. but truly don't want to listen to us either because on July 23rd, during a joint work session for the big comp plan update, a planner said, I'm not going to name names, someone directed me to include high energy use facilities on the comp plan, which includes utility corridors, substations, data centers, and tech corridors. On August 12th, A board member said the state may make us add data center ordinance back in, that they won't have control over it. Then he asked the planners if they could add the electrical corridor on the comp plan update by November. To me, what appears to be is they're preparing us for them to add the data center ordinance back in. On the same day, someone said to me, At the end of the day, you don't get a vote. You vote through your board member. The only thing I know to do is to tell you to vote. Vote in November. Tell your neighbors and your friends and your relatives to vote. There are three seats open. Get familiar with what you can and cannot do. Your vote does matter. These videos are on Protect Frederick if anyone wants to see them. Thank you.

Thank you.

That's the end of your sign-ups. Anyone else care to speak?

Hello again. My name is Alexander Ritter, and I reside in the Opecan District. So I'm here today to talk about the August 31st memo. So... I want to briefly mention that earlier last week I have emailed with Mr. Fox on this matter and I felt that his explanation was less than satisfactory and in fact he included things in that email that were not in the current memo. So not satisfied, I decided I wanted to FOIA communications about the ordinance draft To my surprise, one of the documents I received was a legal opinion from Michael Lockaby, outside counsel for Spillman Law Firm, dated August 13th. It was his correspondence. In that email, the outside counsel starts with this statement. There are two types of zoning ordinances, inclusive, which permits only those uses specifically allowed, and exclusive, which prohibits specified uses and permits all others, citing the 1968 case Wiley v. Hanover City. Lockerbie then states that some localities' ordinances utilize both forms and all three, including hybrid ordinances that incorporate both inclusive and exclusive zoning, and are recognized as valid. He then explains that our zoning ordinance contains a uses not provided section that not all ordinances have. He provides an example case, which I brought with me, Madison County versus Gaffney, of how that unlisted use has played out in court, which I believe that he mentioned in the memo. But he also fails to mention that that ordinance, it does not look like our ordinance. It has a specific prohibition clause in it that it's not... Anything that is explicitly not permitted is prohibited. Ours does not say that anywhere. And Lockaby argued that it is not applicable, potentially, because Frederick County's ordinance is not structured similarly. Fox invokes inclusive zoning as a default, but our ordinance is not by default necessarily inclusive. He recognizes this, which is why in that email he pivots to the recitals and whereas clauses, arguing that they were cited by courts and officials to interpret the purpose of legislation. He had come to the conclusion that the intent of the board is clearly to prohibit data centers. But if the intent is to prohibit data centers, why does the word prohibit never appear anywhere in those recitals and clauses? Oh, but removal is the same meaning? It does not say removal from all districts, but from certain districts. Anyway, Fox's argument that it is unambiguous as to the intent in the memo. Anyway. I appreciate it.

Thank you.

Good evening again.

Hello. Jack Tinsley, Gainesboro District. Thank you all for your previous vote just like 15 minutes ago. Really appreciate that. I think everybody did. We all clapped. But I'm here to ask you to recommend removing data centers as a permitted use countywide. And I got some reasons why. So we're not arguing with y'all. We're not arguing with each other. I think we're arguing with private companies that have the federal government in their pocket. And that's the same way every large private company has the federal government in its pocket through lobbying, kickbacks, and outright bribes. I'm going to get a little political. Hopefully that's okay in this political space. Two days ago, the president posted that the only reason a community wouldn't want data centers is if they wanted to end up, quote, backwards and poor. A Republican congressmember from Tennessee responded back to him, I guess I'm backwards and poor. A Fox News poll found 60% of Republicans and 53% of MAGA voters opposed these projects. This is not a left versus right issue. This is a top versus bottom issue. And now I'm going to talk about what the top thinks about us. And I include you all here. I don't know what your economic backgrounds are. But I know Elon Musk. He spent $290 million on the last election. And within months, his people had access to the Social Security Administration systems. Our numbers, medical records, bank info, all of that, his team had. These were teenagers. The Supreme Court let that happen. Another billionaire, the CEO of Shopify, endorsed a voting system that would be based on how much income tax you pay. Zero votes if you pay none, five votes if you pay half a million. He said that retirees on a pension shouldn't vote either. He called them dependents, the same as children. Those are quotes. Nobody in this room voted for either of those people. But those are the kinds of people that would be running servers out of data centers in Frederick County. This has to be categorical. In West Virginia, House Bill 2014 stripped counties of the authority to regulate where data centers go and how they're used. Not environmentalists, not liberals, the legislature for money. Here in Virginia, researchers from the University of Mary Washington found that 25 out of 31 localities with data centers signed NDAs with these companies. That's zero transparency for money. These buildings are where surveillance lives. A Virginia Tech professor whose studies have said that these buildings are used by the federal government, which I don't trust, and its contractors. One of those agencies paid Palantir $30 million for a system that without democratic safeguards can, will, and has been used against U.S. citizens. That software runs in these buildings, and we don't have a say on how it's used. Worse, it's already here. The Frederick County Sheriff's Department applied for a grant with the Department of Justice for automated drones to respond to calls flying over homes and businesses. Winchester City is standing up its own drone program, and that's federal money with none of our say. Last year, I'm sorry, I'm going to go over. Flock built a system that listened for human voices. Any of these tools can be used against any people in the population. And these are tech billionaires and their cronies, again, including our government, If they decide anybody's out of line, they want us in line, jumping, not even asking how high, these are the systems they're going to use to create an authoritarian government to police us. So, thank you. Thank you, Jack. And ahead of time for voting for this. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Linda Harrison and I reside in the Stonewall District. There's a saying that there's a place for everything and everything has its place or something like that. And I personally believe that data centers are a necessary evil. We have just come to that point. And the one that came around today, I thought simply, it's just in the wrong place. There are too many houses there. I grew up out on Middle Road in Jacksonwood Estates. There's too many houses out there. They need to be in places where they won't collide with residences, and they will fit in more with the territory around it. But I just wanted you all to know that I think they are needed. They are. They just have to be in the right place. Thank you.

Thank you.

Leslie Spencer from Gainesboro, thank you very much. I support removing this data center ordinance. I hope that we inspire every county in Virginia to do the same. Enough is enough, and there's too many. And we're carrying a lot, I mean, a lot of the Internet's data. Dear data center investors, you are amazing, and I loved you a lot, but this research really opened my eyes. I thought we were helping nature and saving farmland together, and now I see that you have emerged as the biggest threat to that future. You were born in this great country, became a giant in the state. It's like you grew up and went out into the world and reached your zenith. You need to bring such vanguard innovations back home. In Denmark, you are cooling by heating thousands of homes all throughout Europe. In Paris, the same, plus heating an Olympic pool. In Norway, your sustainability shines with green energy, geothermal cooling, and home to some of the most beautiful data centers ever built. Overseas, there are data centers with open and shared community spaces, cafes, gardens, greenhouses, and even museums. There are some living green walls and roofs here in America, and a few geothermal, too. In Georgia, you are even using treated gray water from outside your sources. But there is mostly just industrial sprawl, where overseas you are often always so much more beautiful and have a much smaller footprint. Why not do all of these things in America? Maybe in old rock quarries by burying yourself in geothermal hills and becoming a grassland for our threatened birds. Maybe near Superfund sites. You must stay far from rural America, clean watersheds, nature, and our food security and farmland. I invite you to work with federal and state committees, conservationists, dreamers, and locals. Collaborate the right way. Dream big. Get creative. Ask kids, but also mature more. I want you to build better when you're ready to become a legend. I want to see American data centers finally on the world's best list, where world leaders come here to see the legacy you've built and inspired the world to do better. When you're ready to give back, save farmland, dark skies, nature, on-site, forever and ever, then you're ready to collaborate and make this work. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Vicki Michaels, and I am in the Stonewall District. I am in favor of a... Oh, boy. I haven't been drinking back there, really. I am in favor very much of a resolution to remove data centers from our comprehensive plan. And I am not an attorney. But I do not trust simply removing all reference to them. It's kind of like tearing down statues. If we don't know what we've done in the past, we're doomed to repeat the past. And I do not trust this, that if we do not have a data center listed and defined and prohibited in the different zones, that there will not be a loophole and we'll be back through this again. I thoroughly appreciate every one of you far more than I ever knew because I'm getting tired of coming out every evening and going to... the historic resources and to the Planning Commission and to the Board of Supervisors. I want my life back. So I want to make sure that whatever you do tonight, make sure there are no loopholes. Make sure that we are not doing something that is going to cause us to be right back in the same place a year from now. And I do appreciate every one of you so much more than I did a year ago, but I'm tired of coming. Thank you.

Okay, I don't see anybody else coming up to speak, so Aaron's going to prove me wrong.

Aaron Fox, Back Creek. I didn't prepare anything for this, and it's like an hour past my bedtime, so I'll do my best. But I do support an ordinance amendment. I do want to see them removed as a use, but I'm also concerned with... If this is airtight or not, again, like Vicki said, I'm not an attorney, but I have been in discussion with someone who's consulting with an outside land use attorney. I've read statements by Mr. Fox. I've talked to planning. It just seems like maybe things are not as clear as they should be. And while I want to see this happen soon, I also don't want us to rush this. So I'm not sure what else to say about that other than to say, please take that into consideration. Thanks.

Thank you. Okay. Seeing no one else, I will close the public hearing. Mr. Bishop, anything you want to add, sir?

No, sir. I have nothing. Of course, we have Mr. Fox here this evening. Should you have any additional details, specifically legal questions, I can try and address from a zoning perspective. I can talk about land use cases if you need me to. But other than that, I think you have everything before you.

Did you want to add anything, Mr. Fox? I'm not sure it's necessary, but I certainly want to afford you that opportunity.

Just to add or to amplify, I think when it comes to land use law, Virginia counties are kind of like cars. They all go on the road from point A to point B, but they're very different in how they're constructed. And I have consulted with an outside attorney. It's the same outside attorney that consulted with the Berkeley group. to overhaul our zoning ordinance. So he's very familiar with our zoning ordinance. He's very familiar with zoning ordinances from other part of the state. And he is absolutely correct when he said there are different types of zoning ordinances and there are different approaches. And there is no such thing as airtight when it comes to land use law and zoning. You know, if there was, frankly, you wouldn't need me here. And you wouldn't need other lawyers. And other people wouldn't need lawyers to argue about it. So we are trying to do what the unambiguous direction of the Board of Supervisors was to do. And we are trying to do it as well as we can. Just yesterday, my colleague in Loudoun County, who's been doing this almost twice as long as I have, and I've been doing it a pretty long time, was directed to basically do the same thing we're doing, but they have over 20 applications in the pipeline, and they're Loudoun County. And he's been given a little over a month to come back and tell them how to do that. It's unusual to remove a use. So we are trying to do everything we can, bringing in outside experts, considering every possibility. We are asking you to move this forward. We're going to continue to work on it, to tweak on it. to tweak it to make it as airtight as possible as we move towards the Board of Supervisors meeting on the 23rd. But there's no question that we are not trying to build any faults into this edifice. We're trying to do it exactly as the Board directed. And I'm happy to answer any specific questions. Thank you very much, sir.

Okay. This leads us to Planning Commission discussion. Mr. Whitaker? Yes.

Yes, so you're saying there is no way possible to remove loopholes?

That would be my legal opinion, sir, yes.

I think if there were no loopholes, we wouldn't need courts or attorneys.

I think we need to do a lot more research on this. I don't believe in the impossible.

Anybody else have a comment? All right, Mr. Kearns.

Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If members of the Planning Commission could humor me, you know that I'm normally very short with my questions, and I try to get to the point. I've done a lot of research on this and a lot of thought on this, and I do have a couple of comments lined up here. So if you could please humor me. I spent a lot of time on this. And this is not a comment that I wanted to make on the previous, on the CUP, because I don't think it was applicable to that. I believe that that is an individual application. That's something that we deal with on an individual basis. That's what the CUP process is there for, and that's what it's doing. This is more on the outright banning of, effectively banning a use. And I bring up, I hesitantly bring up a couple of points, but they're at the national level, but they speak exactly to what we're talking about right now. So I think they're relevant to this. So I do want to bring them up and I'll try to go through them quickly. In July of last year, the President of the United States signed Executive Order 14318, which is titled Accelerating Federal Permitting of Data Center Infrastructure. The purpose of which is stated as, and this is a quote, my administration has inaugurated a golden age for American manufacturing and technological dominance. We will pursue bold, large-scale industrial plans to vault the United States further into the lead on critical manufacturing processes and technologies that are essential to national security. economic prosperity, and scientific leadership. These plans include artificial intelligence data centers and infrastructure that powers them, including high-voltage transmission lines and other equipment. It will be a priority of my administration to facilitate the rapid and efficient build-out of this infrastructure by easing federal regulatory burdens." And then it goes on for six pages with definitions and other things. You can easily look this up. It's on the White House website. In addition, based on numerous online resources that are easily out there, and you can find them on the US military website, they're all out there, the United States military actively uses ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok, Claude, the Maven smart system, and other custom AI tools. In January of this year, the Secretary of Defense for War directed a memorandum to senior military leadership to accelerate America's military AI dominance. To this end, aligned with America's AI action plan, I direct the Department of War to accelerate America's military AI dominance by becoming an AI-first warfighting force across all components from front to back. So now we've laid out... at the federal level, at the presidential level, the importance of AI and the infrastructure to national security and the military. And then Monday of this week, I'm sure we've probably read this, and we just heard a short snippet of that quote, but the president did make this following statement. I think it's directed exactly on communities like we are right here. And this is a direct quote. The only reason the communities throughout the United States should not want data centers is if they want to end up being backwards and poor. If they want to be successful and rich with far lower taxes and jobs all over the place, let data reign. So I bring that up not as a political point in any way whatsoever, but to point out the fact that at the federal level and at the presidential level, data centers, data center infrastructure is a very high priority. And I think that's relevant for this discussion tonight and for the public to understand that. Is that influencing my decision or my stance on this? No, I'm not saying that. I just want everyone to know that that's happening. And this is at the federal level that controls funding and all sorts of things up there. So I just wanted to point that out. My question specifically on this is, down to this level, I feel like we have a mechanism in place that we used 15 minutes ago. And we've used it a couple times now. And I think it's worked great. Yes, it involves a lot of public input, which I think is fantastic. I think it has engaged a lot of people who have never been engaged in government before. I think that's a good thing. I enjoy seeing that. I like people coming out here. I think we have that process in place where we can stop this. There's a mechanism in place, and we've used it. We just used it. It's going to go to the Board of Supervisors. You guys will take that up at the Board of Supervisors level. I think that's in place. I agree that removing the TM zoning is... We don't need that. I think it's superfluous to have that in there. I think that creates another loophole in there. I don't think that should be there. But the CUP process that we have in place right now, I believe, does what it's supposed to do and was engineered to do. I believe that a local government body should act should not act with, should not act with, should not act, sorry, based on fear or emotion. I think they should be proactive. I don't think they should be overreactive. I feel like we were proactive last year in making the CUP process, removing data centers as a by-right use. I think that was a proactive measure. I think we did the right thing. We have got a CUP process in place. I think it works. We've just seen that it works this year. I like that process. I worry that if we overreact and completely remove the use, what are we telling developers? We're telling developers to shut the door. If we leave the door a little tiny bit open, do we have the opportunity then to say, these projects are not good enough? innovate, do better. Right now, they're not good enough. In a year from now, six months from now, I don't know what technology is gonna be. But I feel like if we leave the CUP door open a little tiny bit, that we're saying, we're demanding that you do better. Bring something better to us that's not gonna have these impacts, that's not gonna have these impacts on the water or the electricity. Is it possible? It's possible. I think it's possible. I think it's been done around the world. There's small examples of it. I think there's technology coming that we don't even know about. So that's just my take on it. I know it's probably not of the majority, but I felt like I've done a lot of research on this, and I've done a lot of thinking on this. So anyways, that was all. Thank you, sir.

Yes, I fear that we will get stampeded into a Dekronian action that will result in some statewide or some federal level action that local communities will lose all prerogatives when we start prohibiting something or taking something out of our ordinance that really contributes to the national security of this country. I don't think any of us want China in charge of all of our data. But having said that, I think we need to take this out of our ordinance now and prepare for the future at a later date.

Mr. Whitaker. Yes, I'd like to elaborate. I agree with you. We need to take it out of the ordinance. Data is a national security. I'm not against national security. I'm against where you're putting it. how much easier it is to defend it where our forces are closer to it. Cutting the lines through here to bring energy there, put the energy over there. Why be wasteful and destroy another national security issue? Food. and banding outright banding and leaving out all the loopholes to deny data centers is not shutting the door to other industry thank you mr marker i i agree and obviously i voted yet so i i agree with what we're doing uh i just want to make sure

in my opinion, we need AI, we need data centers. We're gonna have, if we don't do this, all the AI that's gonna be in the commercial marketplace for us to use will be from China with their bias and their back doors and whatever. So it's not realistic to ban data centers. And tonight, this conversation is jumping from denying one data center to banning them all. I don't think it's wise at all to ban them all. The federal government, from what you guys just said in support of that, could very well overturn what we're doing. So we need to be ready with guardrails. We need to be ready if they say, no, Frederick County, you can't do that. You can't deny data centers. It's a national emergency. Okay. Then we need to have a set of ordinances that says they need to be underground. They need to be 5,000 feet from a residence that's occupied. They need to be on competent ground, not this current stuff that we have. And probably a half a dozen other things that we can put in an ordinance that says if we ever have a situation where we're forced to have data centers, we've got a set of rules that makes them good neighbors. If they're a good neighbor, what's a good neighbor? Somebody that's unobtrusive to you, doesn't impact you, helps you when you need help, and contributes to the neighborhood. So, you know, there may well be places in Frederick County that are far enough away where It it will be a good neighbor and and meet the ordinances that we put in place, but we don't have them in place right now.

So like anything else my left quickly please.

I'll go very quickly. I I agree with Mr. Kearns wholeheartedly. I think in the right place in the right siding we do need data centers. Just about every speaker came up to the mic had had a cell phone. Very few people would just had pad, pad and pencil. I think in the right place with. the right infrastructure. We just aren't set for it right now. We don't have the power capabilities to do what was proposed. But again, technology keeps changing, and who knows what's going to power a data center in a year or two. But I do like the CUP process because it does give the public the input as to how they feel about where it's sited.

Thank you. Okay.

Mr. Chairman, can I make a recommendation?

Please.

A motion. A motion. I move to recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve the ordinance modification, which is Item 9C, to remove data centers as permitted. or conditional use and to remove other references to data centers including definitions and additional regulations for specific uses.

Second. We have a motion and a second. Is there any additional discussion? Dr. LaMotta, can you start a voting please? A yes vote is removal of data centers from our ordinance. LaMotta, yes.

Brumbach, yes.

McKay, yes. Authorff, yes. Sneddon, yes. Markert, yes. Thomas, yes.

Kozo, yes. Kerns, no.

Gaben, yes.

Crane, yes.

Whitaker, yes.

Chairvotes, yes. The motion carries. This will go to the Board of Supervisors on September 23rd. Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As a follow-up to that last item, this was also a directive that came from the Board of Supervisors on August 12, 2026, and that is this proposal to amend Chapter 165 zoning ordinance to remove the TM Technology Manufacturing Park Zoning District and other references to the TM Zoning District from the ordinance. which are outlined in your packet, but which I will not try to enumerate here because it is throughout there. The TM district was crafted to provide areas for economic development authority targeted industries, data centers, offices, low impact industrial assembly, and manufacturing uses which do not create significant noise beyond the property line, smoke, dust, or other hazards. This district, I'm reading the intent from the original ordinance, this district designed to function as a business campus-like setting with direct access to major transportation networks and or rail facilities in areas where there is availability and or close proximity to over electrical transmission lines. The current requirements for the TM zoning district were adopted in 2024. It is what became of your former OM zoning district. The requested action this evening is an action recommendation, pardon me, to the Board of Supervisors. The DRRC did discuss this on their August 27th meeting. They did not have any comments on this. The item is presented for a public hearing this evening, after which we seek your recommendation.

Any questions for Mr. Bishop? Am I right? Am I left? Thank you very much, sir. This is a public hearing. If anybody would like to speak to this ordinance amendment, this would be the time to do so. State your name, magisterial district, and limit your comments to three minutes or less. You know we don't have any jurisdiction in Winchester, right?

Yeah, I realize that. But I also take whatever I gain from here over there.

You're welcome to speak.

Don't get me wrong. I just don't want you to be disappointed. Whatever I gain from here. Transports over there, and sometimes I lose, but that's okay. Anyway, my name is Arthur Christian. I'm from Winchester over there. Basically, I'm suggesting that we vote yes to remove these. although I actually take old computers and disassemble them, steal parts off of them, and remanufacture them for other people. So basically, what I'm doing would basically, if this went away, I would be running an illegal operation, although I do it from, you know, like one computer maybe once a month. I keep old TVs, the old tube TVs, mostly because of the tubes inside, but also because those have what I call a shelf on top, where you throw your magazines and stuff that you don't want to lose, like your remote, although I lose those too. I'm also a fan of Doctor Who, who unfortunately the last couple of seasons got hammered for using AI to fix the older versions of Doctor Who. They got slammed by the classic Doctor Who community. I can't even repeat some of the words that were said. But it was not good. Personally, I watch it. My vision sucks. So I don't really care. But having said that, I still think we should vote yes on this. It's along the lines of the other stuff that was. And it's cutting down on loopholes. That's the big item is cut the loopholes. So anyway, thank you very much.

Thank you Next sign up is Jennifer Smith from Stonewall. Sorry Jack She's still here Left after that we have Charlene Anderson who I think we've already confirmed is not here So I think you're up after all Jack attrition is taking its toll. I

Hi, Jack Tinsley, Gainesboro. I'm not trying to break anything. So a couple of things. Executive orders, they come and go with presidents. Don't have to worry about them too much. You got four years. That's one thing. The other thing is the only time you can be brave is if you're afraid. So when it comes to whether or not we're going to let data centers in or not, we have to understand that basically cut everything else away, we are going to survive without the data centers. We're going to do better. We had people talking about, Liz said, you can grow a potato from a potato. You're not growing anything from a data center. The economy is, we're looking at an AI bubble that could burst at any moment. South Korea and Japan's markets are tanking because they're pulling out of the AI game. Between China and Taiwan, something happens there and those microchips become hard to get. We're not making those here. We don't have that. We don't have the rare earth minerals for that stuff. We need to invest in things that we know that are going to keep our families safe. That's what we need to invest in. We don't need to be worried about data centers. And if we do have data centers here, I'm not really worried as much about some foreign country as I am about corporations who have been pouring industrial waste into the ocean on our land and our air for longer than I've been alive. Blair Mountain in West Virginia was a time where coal miners were getting black lung and they were paying for food out of company scrip. and being basically forced into slavery. And when they tried to revolt, the government, along with private businesses, bombed them. That's what happened. That's what I'm worried about with data centers. I'm not worried about some economic sense of what some other country is going to do. I talked with my 401k people today, and I was like, how can I reduce this to 0%? Because I'm so worried about climate catastrophe and the economy, the way it's looking, and all these wars happening all over the place, that I don't think that I'm going to make it to retirement age. I don't have kids because of this. I would love to have a family. But data centers is not going to be the way to get to that. I want to see a prosperous country with people who live long, healthy lives. But it's not going to happen through that. So be brave. Continue doing what you're doing, please. But be brave. You can't be brave unless you're scared. So that's OK. That's all I got. Thank you.

Elizabeth Aylor-Back Creek. I just wanted to comment. I work in the AI industry. I've been onboarding AI technology for a multi-billion dollar company since its inception. I understand how many servers are required to be able to functionally use AI in our economy. It's not being used for that. It's not being used for our economy. It's not being used for our people. There is enough servers, there's enough space, and there's enough data centers throughout our nation to be able to accommodate our needs as American citizens in addition to our militarization packaging. and planning. What I'm saying is these data centers are used to oppress us, not protect us. It's like what Jack said, all of this data, this is what they're going to use to control us. They're building these up throughout the entire nation in order to be able to keep us down, not to keep us safe. Like, you have to see the bigger picture here. Our economy functions on AI, yes. And we have as many data centers. I mean, China only has 400 data centers. And what are they doing? They're dropping them in the ocean. And they're spilling trillions of dollars, not on war, but in building in their infrastructure, with their bridges, with their communities. Everyone has houses. So I'm just saying the juxtaposition is like, yes, I agree. We need technology. I love technology. I onboard. I'm an innovator. I help build these systems. That's why I know so much about them. What I'm saying is that they're building these data centers in order to be using the flock counters, using the surveillance, using the data centers, just like Jack said, with the corporations in order to continue to oppress us to continue to restrict us, continue to restrict our money, drop off the dollar like he's dumping his 401k onto Bitcoin. These are all real things happening. And I know it feels really abstract right now, very Terminator, but the illusion will fall eventually within the months. The AI center, all of these AI companies are about to go public at the same time. They're about to dump the dollar. That's going to happen in the next 12 months. So even though we're a little bit ahead of the game with what we're telling you, this is coming. And it makes it so much more important for us all to band together in Frederick County and keep our sovereignty, to keep our communities solid. Because we can't fix the whole problems of all the worlds. We can't fix the national agendas. And we can't fight against foreign nations by ourselves. But we can protect each other. And that's what we need to do. And I have a fight for you. And thank you for fighting it for us tonight.

Teresa, you want to speak? Yeah. You want to speak? Now's the time to do it.

6G is so real. And it's nothing you can imagine. It's a digital twin of the earth, of the city, of the people, of the birds. And they want it to watch us, everything and every movement every object moving, a digital twin. Flock cameras, real, happening, thousands happening. Drones, activated by the flock. Freedom, lost every day. What do we need? We need food, water, and jobs. 93 million white collar jobs gone by 2030. Elon Musk says, within five years, there will be no emails and no apps and no phones. He had a hard time describing what there will be. The elite that are creating this talk openly about where they're going to get the money to create it, shaking the 401ks openly in their little TED Talks. Don't be disillusioned by federal government scaring you. Yes, we're at war. We don't need 4,000 more data centers, which are due to be built already. Do we need to build them here? Like she said, can we just keep our own little bubble here? Can we try to keep it a little longer? I don't know how much longer we fucking have. Not to be like, I'm very serious. I think we've been down in a different world where you've been here doing this, and we've been over there doing that, and maybe we've seen some things that you don't see, and I know some people work for the government, so you know some things. But I'm just saying, we need to be focused on food, water, jobs, safety, security. Can we do that? Can we be a little bit more sane? Can you look into 6G? There's not a lot of information out there, but I know some people... That's all I'm saying. Take it very seriously. We're not conspiracy theorists. This is real.

Thank you. Thank you. Okay. I don't see anyone else. I'm going to close the public hearing. And any discussion among planning commissioners? Continuation of what we did before? Not to my left. To my right. Nope. Okay. I'll be glad to entertain a motion. This goes out.

Mr. Chairman, I move to recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve the ordinance modification to remove the TM Technology Manufacturing Park Zoning District and other references to the TM Zoning District from the ordinance. And this is item 9D on our agenda.

Second. We have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? Okay, the motion is to remove this from our ordinance. And Mr. Whitaker, will you please start a voting? A yes vote is the removal of TM Manufacture Zoning District.

Yes, sir.

WV, yes.

Whitaker, yes.

Crane, yes. DeHaven, yes.

Kern, yes.

Kozell, yes.

Thomas, yes.

Markard, yes. Sneddon, yes. Boturf, yes.

McKay, yes.

Brumback, yes.

LaMana, yes. Chair Vest, yes. Motion carries. This will go to the Board of Supervisors on September the 23rd. Thank you. Thank you, guys. Man, y'all are endurance kings and queens. Yes. We made it. Okay. Mr. Bishop. Yes, sir. I have an admission for the Planning Commission. I challenge Mr. Bishop to add a five-minute item for our agenda each time we meet of a continuing education type of node, because I'm one who likes to continue to learn.

Really?

At 10.30? So we're going to hold that until next meeting, okay?

That wasn't on your agenda tonight for an actual item either. You'll be hearing from us about it as we work to form a list of items, which we'll plan to bring over a number of meetings.

Very good. With that, I'll be glad to entertain a motion for adjournment. The motion is here. Everybody have a safe trip home. Thank you very much for coming out.

Thank you.