Pennsylvania’s data center market is expanding fast. This Lunch & Learn panel brought together civil, legal, design, and construction leaders to talk about what that growth means on the ground — especially when projects meet local zoning realities and community concern.
Panelists
- Moderator: Elaine Asal, Gensler
- Civil: Keith Ottes, Langan
- Legal: Richard T. Wells, Archer & Greiner
- Construction: Jeff Sturla, Wohlsen
The Big Picture
Data centers are driving major investment, expanded infrastructure, and regional job creation. But panelists stressed that development only works long-term if municipalities and residents understand why projects are needed, how they’re regulated, and what their real impacts are.
A recurring theme:
Communities aren’t just reacting to projects — they’re reacting to uncertainty, and sometimes misinformation.
What Communities Worry About (Most Often)
Panelists walked through the concerns they’re hearing again and again across Pennsylvania:
- Power and energy demand
- Residents often assume data centers will raise local electric costs or overwhelm grids.
- Water use
- Especially in rural or suburban settings, people fear wells and aquifers will be depleted.
- Noise and generators
- A major misconception is that generators run constantly rather than intermittently.
- Traffic and construction duration
- Operational traffic is low, but construction can last 5–10 years on large campuses.
- “Why here?” skepticism
- Many people think data centers could be built far away with no downside.
Pennsylvania’s Local Zoning Reality
Several speakers emphasized that PA’s fragmented local structure makes permitting uniquely challenging:
- 2,500+ municipalities
- Each one is its own Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ)
- ~800 municipalities have no zoning at all
- Many ordinances don’t even mention — let alone define — data centers
Result: project teams often have to help towns build the rulebook while running the race.
Case Study Spotlight: Lancaster
A large portion of discussion centered on a Lancaster adaptive-reuse project and the lessons learned when growth moves faster than public awareness.
What happened
- Project secured approvals “by right” and moved quickly into construction.
- Public reaction exploded after broader political/public announcements.
- Team had to rebuild trust while already in motion.
Key lesson
Even when a project is fully legal and permitted, speed can look like secrecy if the public isn’t brought along early.
Community Benefits Agreements: Helpful, Complicated
Lancaster’s Community Benefits Agreement (CBA) became a live example of how financial commitments can be both a solution and a flashpoint.
What CBAs can do well
- Address environmental commitments clearly
- Fund education / workforce programs
- Support local stewardship initiatives
What can go wrong
- Residents may assume approvals were “bought.”
- Big project numbers make even large contributions feel “small.”
- Money can become a proxy for broader fears about quality of life.
Strategies the Panel Recommended
Practical advice from the room fell into a few clear categories:
1. Start stakeholder mapping early
Know who is likely to:
- support
- oppose
- sit in the persuadable middle
…and tailor your approach to each group.
2. Educate with proof, not promises
Bring studies and specialists early:
- environmental and species studies
- sound / acoustics modeling
- fiscal benefit analysis
- infrastructure impact reviews
Even brief expert testimony can shift a room.
3. Help municipalities shape ordinances
Working with towns to craft data center zoning is legitimate, public, and often necessary.
4. Offer independent third-party review
Let municipalities hire their own experts (often at developer cost).
This reduces the “you’re paid to say that” narrative.
5. Use open-house forums over podium hearings
Open-table formats prevent meetings from becoming a disruption stage and allow real Q&A.
What Resonates With the Public (and What Doesn’t)
Panelists noted that economic messaging has limits.
Often works
- clear local tax benefit breakdown
- visible infrastructure improvements
- third-party confirmation of impacts (sound, water, environment)
Often doesn’t
- broad “job creation” claims without specifics
- studies aimed at people who are firmly opposed
- technical answers without basic context or translation
Final Takeaway
This panel reinforced that data centers are becoming a permanent part of Pennsylvania’s development story — but projects succeed fastest when community education and municipal partnership are treated as core design inputs, not afterthoughts.
Thanks to all speakers and attendees for a candid, detailed discussion that reflected what teams are seeing across the state right now.