Springfield officials want to draw a firm line around where data centers can go in the city, proposing zoning changes that would confine the energy-hungry facilities to Industrial A districts and force any developer to secure a special permit from the City Council. The plan also tackles a long list of other zoning fixes, from riverfront building standards to sign sizes to where residents can park a dumpster. But councilors weren't ready to sign off this week, pushing the vote to later in November.
According to MassLive, one of the biggest changes on the table is a plan to formally define data centers in the city's zoning ordinance and restrict them to Industrial A districts, with a City Council special permit required before one could be built. Deputy Planning Director Philip Dromey told the council that some of the proposed changes correct oversights from the city's 2013 zoning ordinance overhaul, while others are meant to address emerging land uses the current rules never anticipated.
Dromey said the data-center provisions would give the city protection as interest in such facilities grows statewide, even though he reported receiving few recent inquiries from companies looking to build one in Springfield. The city isn't starting from zero on the issue: a small data center was built around 2010 on Elliot Street that houses state records and serves as a backup for the primary data center, the report notes.
Springfield Joins a Statewide Wave of Caution
Springfield's move lands amid a broader Massachusetts backlash against data centers. As of October 15, MassLive had found 18 communities statewide that had already enacted or approved a data-center moratorium, ban or restriction, with at least 17 more actively discussing similar proposals — a tally that grew to more than 30 communities considering or adopting such measures. The state has more than 40 data centers already, according to a separate MassLive count cited by The Boston Globe.
Other cities have taken varied approaches. Lowell and Westfield have approved outright moratoriums on new data centers, the Globe reports, while Salem Mayor Dominick Pangallo has proposed banning large AI data centers altogether. New Bedford's pending proposal would require a zoning board special permit plus mayoral approval, and Mansfield has capped potential projects at 2 megawatts of power while issuing five-year permits. In Boston, one councilor has floated banning data centers in every zoning district outright, with carve-outs for telecommunications, research and educational facilities, since the city's existing code already requires Zoning Board of Appeals approval for data centers in industrial areas, per a separate MassLive report.
A September 8 Massachusetts executive order described rising demand for data storage and computing as driving the expansion of these facilities across the state, warning that such energy- and resource-intensive projects can require major investments in grid infrastructure and power generation, and can affect energy affordability, water resources, noise levels, land use and public health if not properly planned.
Riverfront Zone Gets a Fix Near the Hall of Fame
Beyond data centers, Springfield's proposal would add dimensional standards for property in the riverfront zone, an area that covers the land around the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame. Dromey said the absence of those standards had been an oversight in the current ordinance. The riverfront zone includes the York Street Jail site, described in the proposal as the zone's largest potential redevelopment opportunity — a property the city has put out to bid several times without attracting a buyer.
The jail site has a long and frustrated redevelopment history. The old jail was demolished in 2008, and the 2.5-acre parcel near Riverfront Park sat vacant for years afterward. In 2021, the city sought developers for a regional sports complex there, after a previous proposal for a $37 million hotel was scrapped because of COVID-19, according to earlier MassLive reporting.
Signs, Dumpsters and Other Zoning Cleanup
The proposal also wades into more mundane but contentious territory: sign rules. Residential signs would be capped at six square feet and non-residential signs at 20 square feet, but councilors balked at a proposed limit of one temporary sign per residential property and two per non-residential district. Councilor Jose Delgado said he wanted further discussion and clarification about what signs would ultimately be allowed.
Councilor Kateri Walsh raised concerns that political campaigns might view limits on sign numbers as a violation of their rights, noting that political signs are protected under the First Amendment. Councilor Malo Brown said he agreed with concerns about political signage and didn't want the rules to end up preventing advertising for fairs and festivals.
Other proposed changes include requiring dumpsters to be fenced and kept in backyards, after Dromey said some group homes have been placing dumpsters in front yards instead of using trash cans; the previous ordinance had allowed some leeway for dumpsters at single-family and two-family homes. The proposal would also expand storage rules to cover travel trailers alongside recreational vehicles, boats and mobile homes, correct an accessory dwelling unit rule that conflicts with the city's setback requirements, and clarify that owners of home day centers must actually live in the home. With the vote now pushed to later in November, the full package — data centers, riverfront standards and all — remains unresolved for now.
