Summit Examines How To Enforce Proposed Data Center Ban

SUMMIT, NJ — Before Summit officials decide whether to move forward with a proposed ban on data centers, the city’s Planning Board is examining how the restrictions would work, including how the facilities would be defined and how potential loopholes could be addressed.

During a June 29 meeting, the Planning Board reviewed proposed revisions related to data center regulations, including changes aimed at clarifying what types of facilities would be prohibited and how the rules could be enforced.

The discussions come as the Common Council considers an ordinance that would add data centers to Summit’s list of prohibited land uses under Chapter 35 of the city’s Development Regulations. The Council is scheduled to discuss the proposal on July 7, with a public hearing set for July 28.

Data centers are large facilities that house computer servers and digital infrastructure used for cloud computing, artificial intelligence systems, and other technology services. Communities across the country have been debating how to regulate them due to concerns about energy use, infrastructure demands and long-term land use impacts.

During the Planning Board meeting, planners discussed how limiting data centers fits into Summit’s broader development goals, including the use of the city’s limited commercial space.

Planner Joe Burgess said data centers can require significant construction work but generally provide fewer permanent jobs once they begin operating.

“While data centers can generate a lot of construction jobs, once that’s built, there’s no jobs,” Burgess said.

Burgess told the board that data centers generate fewer ongoing jobs compared with other commercial uses. He said data centers generate about one job per 5,000 square feet, while office buildings support more employment opportunities per square foot.

Because Summit has limited commercial property available, Burgess said the city must consider how land is used and whether future developments provide long-term economic benefits.

“The loss of a site to AI clearly is not a winner,” Burgess said.

The Planning Board also reviewed changes designed to prevent companies from structuring a facility in a way that could avoid the proposed restrictions.

One revision would remove the word “primarily” from the definition of a data center. Officials said the change would make the definition clearer and prevent a facility from arguing that it should not be considered a data center because it also contains another use, such as office space.

The board also discussed smaller server rooms that would still be permitted for businesses that need computer equipment as part of their regular operations.

The original proposal allowed accessory server rooms up to 15,000 square feet or 20 percent of a building’s total floor area. After discussion, the board agreed to reduce that maximum size to 12,000 square feet.

Officials also discussed a potential scenario where a property owner could create multiple smaller server rooms across several buildings on the same property to avoid the size restriction. Proposed revisions would apply the limit across connected building areas to prevent that type of workaround.

Another part of the discussion focused on how zoning officials could identify whether a proposed project qualifies as a data center.

Planner Augusto Dal’Maso said the goal was to create standards that could be applied during the normal zoning review process.

“We’ve been looking at this thing entirely from the perspective of a zoning officer having to see the criteria and reasonably determine what is falling inside of the ban,” Dal’Maso said.

The proposed restrictions will now move forward for consideration by the Common Council. If introduced, residents will have an opportunity to comment during the July 28 public hearing before any final vote is considered.