The Glynn County Commission is set to vote Thursday on new zoning ordinances that include, deep within the 235-page document, a controversial new section permitting data centers.
The county’s communications director, Brittany Dozier, said that Glynn has not received any proposals for data center development, but the county wants to take a proactive stance in case of future industry interest, amid a once-in-a-generation process to update the regulations governing industrial and residential standards.
But a wide group of residents and environmental groups believe the language embedded in the document is vague and offers weak protections against what many see as the threat of data centers: enormous energy and water use, with minimal job or tax benefits.
“The County is looking to expand its industry portfolio, but has not done the necessary planning work to ensure data centers will act as good neighbors to residents,” said Kat Montgomery, South Coast Advocate at One Hundred Miles.
Glynn’s permissive zoning language bucks a trend in Georgia. Recently, Bulloch, Decatur and Monroe counties have imposed moratoriums on data center development, increasing to 11 the number of counties with such positions. A statewide moratorium failed to pass in the state legislature this session.
The controversy in Glynn surrounding data centers came to a head at the Joint Planning Commission on March 18. Members of the Islands and Mainland Planning Commissions voted unanimously to recommend that the Board of Commissioners set the data center ordinance aside from the planned vote on Thursday. Instead, they urged a 120-day moratorium to allow a working group to strengthen the ordinance.
Read the full draft zoning ordinance document here.
The ordinance proposes that any data center seeking to come to the county would have to apply for a special use permit, meaning the application would require additional approval by the county commission. The section of the ordinance that has sparked more controversy covers buffer and setback requirements.
The current setback requirement for data centers defined by the ordinance is 50 feet, but it is generally recommended that the setback range from 200 feet to 500 feet from a residential property or zoning district. The ordinance also lacks guidance for noise levels, water and power usage, and stormwater management.
The ordinance most plainly lays out the minimum lot size of 50 acres for any future data center, suggesting that rural areas of the county would likely be most affected by any potential project.
The county believes that the complaints about data centers have come at the eleventh hour, saying that it has adequately promoted the ordinance.
“Data center provisions were first introduced in the Nov. 3, 2025, draft and have been refined through subsequent public drafts, including the Feb. 17 and March 11, 2026 iterations,” said Dozier.
Montgomery and One Hundred Miles disagree, saying the county did not discuss data center regulations in any of the four town halls in December and January to discuss zoning issues.
Montgomery from One Hundred Miles says county residents would benefit from more in-depth discussions about the natural resources and electricity usage data centers need, and whether residents, rather than businesses, will end up paying an unfair cost.
“To think it through, a thoughtful ordinance should clarify: What is the plan in a state of emergency, and who will get power first – our people or the data centers? If upgrades to our infrastructure are required to operate data centers, who will pay for those expansions, where will they take place, and how will they impact the rest of our county?” she added.
You must be logged in to post a comment.