As widespread data center development accelerates so has public awareness of the potential impact of these facilities on a community and its infrastructure. Data centers bring capital investment, job creation, and broader economic development to a region — all welcome benefits to a community. More recently, however, residents and government officials are often weighing the implications of these large-scale facilities on energy grids, water resources, and land use.

For data center developers and their site selection teams, this shift marks an evolution in how projects need to be planned, communicated, and executed. Community considerations are increasingly shaping decisions at the early stages of site evaluations. Developers and their advisors are being called upon not only to meet technical and operational requirements, but also to articulate project benefits, address infrastructure concerns, and align with local priorities around sustainability and growth.

Business Facilities recently connected with Tracey Hyatt Bosman, Managing Director at Biggins Lacy Shapiro & Company (BLS & Co.), for her insights on this evolving scenario.

Business Facilities: Acknowledging both the acceleration of data center development projects and the coalescing of community awareness on the impacts of these facilities, how is this changing the way your team approaches a data center development project?

Tracey Hyatt Bosnan: We’ve effectively elevated community acceptance to the same level as power availability, site feasibility, and fiber connectivity. What used to be a downstream permitting consideration — and even so it was more about the speed and ease of permitting rather than the likelihood of approvals — is now an upstream screening factor.

In parallel, we’re helping clients treat community engagement as a critical path workstream, not a reactive measure — because opposition can directly impact schedule certainty and, in some cases, project viability.

BF: What questions or project aspects is your team exploring with clients at the outset? What remains the same? What is changing?

Hyatt Bosman: We still collect the same information we always have, including utility requirements, site parameters, personnel requirements, risk avoidance priorities, ramp-up timing, and capital budgets. What has changed is that community support — which in past years could generally be assumed for a data center project — is now a key focal point in the risk avoidance and even feasibility conversations.  

Additionally, as we’re collecting the requisite information on the size and nature of the proposed development, we are doing so to both define technical site requirements and also anticipate how easily the operation is likely to blend with surrounding land uses and existing utility infrastructure.

BF: How is this scenario impacting a project shortlist? Is the list expanding or contracting in the current environment?  

Hyatt Bosman: When we talk about a shortlist, we generally mean we have narrowed the field of contenders to three to five locations.

We continue to target that number of locations on a shortlist, but the universe of locations with the potential to reach the shortlist shrinks with every moratorium passed.  

BF: Looking at the shortlist, what questions is your team asking about those communities? What remains the same? What is changing?

Hyatt Bosman: For the local government, it’s not so much that the questions have changed; rather, the answers and their implications have changed.

What used to be procedural risk is now outcome risk. For example, if a project requires rezoning or discretionary approvals, that introduces a public process, and with that comes the potential for organized opposition. In today’s environment, this can turn what was once a manageable timeline issue into a risk that the project will not be allowed to move forward at all.

Other areas receiving closer scrutiny during the due diligence process are the positions of elected leaders; public reaction to other proposed data center development (or large-scale industrial or infrastructure) projects; and the presence of organized community groups focused on growth, power usage or water.  

There is a new line of questioning we now ask the utilities, particularly the electric company. Namely, how will the proposed data center’s load affect the rates of existing residents and businesses? As loads have grown, the public is shining a light on this question, and, while the answer will vary, it is a key consideration in structuring the overall transaction and communicating it effectively to the general public.

BF: We’re seeing a growing number of local, county, and state governments pursuing policy or legislative changes related to data center development in their jurisdictions. The content and status of these changes may vary by location, but a common thread is to be proactive in addressing the impacts of data center development. How do companies and site selection teams take this into account in the location search?

Hyatt Bosman: Clearly, if a local moratorium has been passed, the location will be removed from consideration for any time-sensitive requirement. If there is active pursuit of a moratorium or strong visible local opposition to data center development, that may disqualify the location, and it will definitely be reflected in the scoring of the location.

This is not a one-time review. From the moment a potential site hits our radar, we are actively monitoring the relevant media channels, looking for emerging policy signals, and tracking proposed legislation. Where the door has not been legislatively closed, there remains opportunity for open, constructive dialogue between data center developers, community leadership, and the public.  

As Managing Director at Biggins Lacy Shapiro & Company (BLS & Co.), Hyatt Bosman develops and executes incentives and location selection strategies for corporate and institutional clients. She has 20 years of professional experience across a range of sectors, including data centers, manufacturing, headquarters, back office and contact center operations, and logistics.