One month ago, my son and I attended a public meeting in my community on data center development. Notice on Facebook from my neighborhood came just a few hours earlier so only about 20 people showed up to hear a lawyer and the developers sharing vague conceptual plans about needing to rezone farmland located about 2 miles from our home. Although I’ve been following the energy and water demands of data centers, I’ve learned so much more in this past month by participating in about a dozen meetings with neighbors and Town of Apex counsel meetings.
Here’s a great review of the proposal and our community response as captured by Adam Whitaker in The Peakway newsletter. At first our group adamantly opposed the data center obtaining over 2000 people signing a petition and some gave donations online. However, we’ve desperately needed and so far been unable to find free legal support. About 120 people showed up in red shirts at the first open forum Town council meeting and we coordinated efforts with the speaker Doug Stewart to deliver a wonderful 9 minute speech. After the initial enthusiasm, the emphasis of the small group is shifting from No Data Centers to advocating for “Responsible Growth.”
Yesterday, I attended a planning meeting, with by about 15 town employees, 4 people representing the developer and about 5 citizens including myself. Again I’m surprised that they plan to send review comments to the developer two business days after the meeting! I sent the Apex planning department an email which is posted at the end of this blog.
Many in the small group do not think we can oppose or prevent Big Tech data centers coming to every town in America. They are trying to develop regulatory compliance standards for the town for getting the best possible data center. Data server farms have existed for many years and typically use less than one megawatt (MW) of power. The Digital Campus being proposed in my neighborhood is about 300 MW! That’s about one-third of the power produced by the Sharon Harris Nuclear Power Plant. Power and water, about 500,000 to one million gallons per day, are needed for cooling fans so they proposed to use effluent treated wastewater. In addition, back up diesel generators are needed for an independent power supply which produces air pollution. So I’m still opposed to the plan to allow data centers coming to our area while our group is proposing some of the following standards. We’ll see if adding extra ‘red tape’ can be effective along with the red shirts we’re wearing in public. I added the text on the first wish list as well as needing additional work in the application such as numerical modeling:
Data Center Policy & Developer “Wish List” – Apex, NC
Our first wish is the No Action Alternative that the land remains zoned as R-30 residential. The developer is focused on rezoning to industrial use then selling to a Big Tech company which will provide the specifications for data center requirements. Town of Apex may consider supplemental standards for data centers. We can emphasize the need for impact studies (e.g. models).
Our second wish is that, if re-zoned, that the town of Apex NOT classify this as “industrial light” but rather, develop a new category in the town UDO for data centers and similar builds/industries expected to use substantial utility resources, as was recently done by the state of Georgia. Data centers, with respect to power and water usage, far exceed that of which are used by those considered “industrial light”, such as gas stations.
Land Use & Zoning
• Height, Setbacks & Buffers: Cap building height (e.g., 65–80 N) and mandate at least 150 N
vegetated buffers from property lines or adjacent homes. Require screening vegetation, berms,
and architectural façade treatment to reduce visual impact.
Air, Noise, Lighting & Visual Impact
• Model anticipated air emissions to ensure quality standards can be met.
• Noise Cap: Limit noise at property line to ≤55 dB(A) at all hours; require a noise impact study with decibel modeling at permit stage.
• Generator Placement: Require 300 ft separation or building shielding for backup generators; use the quietest feasible HVAC/cooling systems.
• Lighting Standards: All fixtures fully shielded, downward-facing, no uplighting. Require lighting plan approval and post-installation inspections.
Groundwater models
• Provide surface water-groundwater transient models simulating before and after development to estimate changes to infiltration, water levels, storage, and runoff including onsite and impacts to community wells.
• Evaluate impacts from construction sediments on surface and groundwater water quality for site and community water supply wells.
• Green Infrastructure: Mandate landscaping that mimics pre-development hydrology based on hydrologic modeling.
Stormwater, Drainage & Site Management
• Enhanced Stormwater Controls: On-site retention/infiltration sized for 100-year storms; use bioswales and pre-treatment of runoff.
• No Direct Discharge: Prohibit direct drainage into public streams; require developer-funded off-site drainage improvements if necessary.
Water Use & Conservation
• Usage Disclosure: Require projected and annual reporting of water usage.
• Reclaimed Water: Prioritize reclaimed/recycled water for cooling; No potable water
• Utility Capacity Funding: Developer funds or builds any needed water/wastewater capacity expansions.
Energy Infrastructure & Ratepayer Protection
• Developer Pays for Grid Upgrades: All substaVons, transformers, and line extensions
funded by the developer (escrow or pre-payment).
• On-site Renewables & Storage: Incentivize or require a percentage of power from on-site
solar/battery or microgrid; encourage clean backup power (natural gas, renewable diesel).
• Backup Power Limits: Cap diesel generator runtime (≤50 hours per year); require Tier 4 or burner engines and spill containment basins.
Transparency & Community Oversight – For the Town
• Impact Statement: Developer submits a comprehensive, publicly-available impact statement covering air, power, water, noise, emissions, traffic, and emergency services before approval.
• Public Registry: NCDEQ and Utilities Commission maintain a public portal of all data-center permits and emissions.
• Tax Incentive Disclosure: Any local or state tax abatements publicly disclosed and approved via hearings.
• Post-Approval Audit: Verify actual jobs, tax revenue, and resource use vs. projections.
Emergency & Safety Planning
• Fire/Spill Response Plans: Approved plans for fire protection, hazardous materials, diesel fuel, and battery storage.
• Joint Exercises: Annual emergency drills with Apex Fire & EMS.
• Battery Standards: Redundant detection and suppression systems meeting NFPA 855.
A 300 MW data center would not be classified as "light industrial" due to its massive energy consumption, scale, and operational impacts. Hyperscale data centers of this size are instead considered heavy industrial, akin to major factories or power plants. Why a 300 MW data center is not light industrial:
Extreme power demand: A facility requiring 300 megawatts (MW) uses a city-scale amount of electricity. For comparison, 300 MW is as much power as about 30,000 homes would use. Light industrial facilities typically consume far less power, often measured in kilowatts or low megawatts.
Large-scale infrastructure: To support its power needs, a 300 MW data center requires extensive infrastructure, including substations, massive power lines, and backup generators. This is a level of infrastructure consistent with heavy industry, not light manufacturing or warehousing.
Significant environmental impact: The scale of the power demand and the necessary backup generation systems create notable environmental impacts, including noise pollution and air emissions from generators. Light industrial is often defined by impacts that do not extend beyond the site boundary.
Zoning challenges: In locations across the U.S., large-scale data center projects have faced pushback from communities and been classified as heavy industrial zoning (I-2) rather than light industrial. Developers sometimes try to misclassify them as light industrial to secure less restrictive zoning approval.
Data centers in the industrial classification system
Industrial use: Data centers are recognized as industrial facilities, with their energy-intensive nature, round-the-clock operations, and need for specialized infrastructure aligning with industrial classifications.
A matter of scale: While some zoning codes may permit small data centers in light industrial districts, the 300 MW scale is the critical factor that pushes the classification into the heavy industrial category.
Unique category: Some jurisdictions have addressed the unique nature of large data centers by creating new, specific zoning categories or requiring special use permits for these facilities to allow for stricter review processes and conditions.
From PowerMag.com article Power Demand from Data Centers:
“Coal plants will have an extension of their life due to data center demand,” said Tim Echols, a commissioner and vice-chair of the Georgia Public Service Commission.”
The Unpaid Toll: Quantifying the Public Health Impact of AI
A review by The Peakway states, “Researchers at the University of California, Riverside, and Caltech found that data centers nationwide could contribute to 600,000 cases of asthma-related symptoms by 2030, with public health costs exceeding $20 billion. People living near data centers have also complained about constant noise, chemical smells, and worsening asthma, with some noting that the noise runs 24/7 and disrupts their sleep.”
The article abstract states: “The surging demand for AI has led to a rapid expansion of energy-intensive data centers, impacting the environment through escalating carbon emissions and water consumption. While significant attention has been paid to AI's growing environmental footprint, the public health burden, a hidden toll of AI, has been largely overlooked. Specifically, AI's lifecycle, from chip manufacturing to data center operation, significantly degrades air quality through emissions of criteria air pollutants such as fine particulate matter, substantially impacting public health. This paper introduces a methodology to model pollutant emissions across AI's lifecycle, quantifying the public health impacts. Our findings reveal that training an AI model of the Llama3.1 scale can produce air pollutants equivalent to more than 10,000 round trips by car between Los Angeles and New York City. The total public health burden of U.S. data centers in 2030 is valued at up to more than $20 billion per year, double that of U.S. coal-based steelmaking and comparable to that of on-road emissions of California. Further, the public health costs unevenly impact economically disadvantaged communities, where the per-household health burden could be 200x more than that in less-impacted communities. We recommend adopting a standard reporting protocol for criteria air pollutants and the public health costs of AI, paying attention to all impacted communities, and implementing health-informed AI to mitigate adverse effects while promoting public health equity.”
A Harvard University article cites the same article above calling for more research:
“Air pollution is the most acute concern. Fossil-fueled power plants and diesel backup generators that power data centers emit hazardous pollutants such as nitrogen oxides and fine particulate matter, increasing rates of respiratory diseases, cardiovascular conditions, and elevating cancer risk in nearby communities. A recent model indicates that the U.S. data centers in 2030 could contribute to nearly 1300 deaths annually, resulting in a public health burden of more than $20 billion.”
My email on 9/18/25 to Apex Planning Department c/o Amanda Bunce and Bruce Venable
Hello Amanda and Bruce:
Good to meet you both at the Planning meeting today. Sounds like you're on a very quick turnaround to review the Natelli Investments data center application by Monday so I will make this email as brief as possible. I'm an environmental scientist with 40+ years of experience and live about 2 miles from the site so I'm very troubled by the potential for a huge data center(s) to be built next to our neighborhoods as are over 2000 neighbors who signed a petition that was provided to the Town Council. Here’s a great review of the proposal and our community response as captured by Adam Whitaker in The Peakway newsletter.
Rezoning from R-30 residential to light industrial cannot possibly include 300 MW data centers as shown in the photo below from Northern Virginia where data centers were built after and next to housing developments. Have you visited these sites or seen videos - I can share some videos and contacts if needed?
The application is not transparent with specifics and provides many misleading statements. For example,
Page 13/62 "Landscape buffering will maintain an attractive appearance." Landscaping will not hide 75 foot tall buildings each the size of a football field or larger. The developer's presentation said the layout is a concept so they didn't provide specifics on numbers and sizes of buildings because that would be determined later in the process.
Page 13/62 "Relative low number of employees at the Data Storage Facility." News reports vary between 50 to 500 full time jobs after construction which is generally promoted as a major motivation for these facilities.
Page 13/62 "The New Hill Digital Campus will not be a risk to health, safety or welfare."
This is obviously not true as there is risk in everything we do. Risk = Probability x Consequence:
We need quantification of the probability of events occurring, like lithium ion fires, and the consequence of having to evacuate our homes. Likely low probability and high consequence events still must be considered: Here's a report documenting 22 data center fires: https://dgtlinfra.com/data-center-fires/
"These fires are caused by factors including electrical failures, overheating lithium-ion batteries, inadequate maintenance, and human error."
The fire department places fire-proof blankets over Tesla vehicle fires so how will the Apex Fire Department be prepared to respond to a potential data center fire?
I've read reports nationwide of people living near large data centers dealing with all kinds of health issues including air pollution from diesel generators, loss of power due to unstable loads, loss of drinking water in wells and loss of sanitary systems due to sedimentation during construction, noise vibrations, smells, to name just a few. I and several neighbors have health issues including asthma making these issues even more concerning. Please let me know if you would like more information.
Hope you're finding good information on municipal requirements. Here's a short list:
Environmental & Energy Efficiency (California):
Mandates compliance with California's Title 24 of the Energy Code, focusing on energy efficiency, renewable energy use, and carbon footprint management.
Requires participation in Demand Response programs to balance the power grid.
Zoning & Land Use (Virginia):
Loudoun County: Restricted new data center construction to specified zones from September 2022.
Fairfax County: Approved a revised zoning ordinance to impose strict regulations on data center development.
Noise & Community Impact:
City of Chandler, Arizona: Requires a sound study, noise mitigation measures, and community notification protocols for data center construction.
Water Management:
Many municipalities in water-scarce regions are requiring detailed water usage projections, long-term water management plans, and commitments to water recycling.
Apex, NC UDO Standards:
https://www.apexnc.org/DocumentCenter/View/538/Development-Approvals-PDF?bidId=
The advisability of amending the text of this Ordinance or the Official Zoning District Map is a matter committed to the legislative discretion of the Town Council and is not controlled by any one factor. In determining whether to adopt or disapprove the proposed amendment to the text of this Ordinance or the
Official Zoning District Map, the Town Council shall consider the following factors:
1. Compatible with surrounding uses. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land.
The proposed data center is not compatible with residential neighborhoods, schools, parks, and agricultural land. The Sharon Harris nuclear power plant has a much larger buffer zone than is being proposed for the data center.
2. Changed conditions. Whether and the extent to which there are changed conditions that require an amendment.
The planning department should not define or allow 300 MW data centers to be included in the definition of "light industrial" due to many factors of resource demands and environmental impacts.
3. Effect on natural environment. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment, including but not limited to water, air, noise, storm water management, wildlife, vegetation, wetlands, and the natural functioning of the environment.
The Natelli Investments application falsely claims the New Hill Digital Campus will not be a risk to health, safety or welfare. It does not describe the environmental impacts which are numerous and widely publicized at other locations including in VA and GA. We request studies and numerical models be developed including:
• Model anticipated air emissions to ensure quality standards can be met.
• Provide surface water-groundwater transient models simulating before and after development to estimate changes to infiltration, water levels, storage, and runoff with potential for flooding including onsite and impacts to community wells.
• Evaluate impacts from construction sediments on surface and groundwater water quality for site and community water supply wells.
• Developer submits a comprehensive, publicly-available impact statement covering air, power, water, noise, emissions, traffic, and emergency services before rezoning request is considered.
• Fire/Spill Response Plans: Approved plans for fire protection, hazardous materials, diesel fuel, and battery storage.
4. Community need. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment addresses a demonstrated community need.
Apex does not need 300 MW data centers. A better location is in Chatham County next to the FedEx facility. Duke Power should provide a load assessment before considering rezoning is granted in favor of the applicant could require expanding the nuclear power plant. Adding additional nuclear power could require increasing cooling water lake levels resulting in flooding Harris community park as one of many unintended consequences.
5. Development patterns. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern and not constitute spot zoning.
We're concerned by rezoning and allowing one data center to be built that many more will be coming as has happened in other locations including northern Virginia.
6. Public facilities. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in development that is adequately served by public facilities (roads, potable water and sewage, schools, parks, police, and fire and emergency medical facilities).
The Town of Apex is not equipped to enforce existing or more stringent regulations such as for police complaints of noise or adequate fire protection.
7. Consistency with 2045 Land Use Map. Consistency with the 2045 Land Use Map.
A heavy industrial, 24/7 data center at the scale of 300 MW would be one of the largest in the United States and is not consistent with the current R-30 residential zoning or rezoning to light industrial due to the massive scale and impacts.
Thank you,
Bill Dam