Summary
- Alphen aan den Rijn approved a data centre assessment motion by 31 votes to five on 15 October.
- The municipality will investigate legally defensible criteria for assessing new facilities and expansion proposals.
- Existing permissions have not been revoked, and the motion does not impose an immediate moratorium.
The municipal council of Alphen aan den Rijn in the Netherlands has backed a proposal to establish clearer assessment rules for data centre developments, following concerns about electricity requirements, land use and the limits of existing planning controls.
A motion entitled Afwegingskader datacentra was approved during the council meeting on 15 October, with local reporting recording 31 votes in favour and five against. The proposal calls for a legally defensible framework through which the municipality can assess future data centre developments and expansion requests.
The motion was submitted by representatives from several political groups, led by local party PRO. It followed debate about a previously permitted data centre on Boerhaaveweg, where councillors questioned whether the municipality had sufficient powers to control large electricity users.
The decision establishes a policy development process rather than immediately introducing new restrictions. It does not revoke the existing permission, amend the municipality’s environmental plan or prohibit data centre applications while the framework is being prepared.
Planning permission and electricity availability
The Boerhaaveweg development provided a concrete example of the challenges facing local authorities. During the council discussion, the electricity requirement attributed to the permitted project was compared with the connection needs of approximately 25,000 households.
That comparison was made by a councillor during the meeting. It is not an independently verified measurement of the proposed facility’s electricity consumption, and the available council reporting does not provide enough technical detail to calculate its annual energy use.
The municipality’s ability to refuse a development depends on the planning rules applicable to the site. Where a proposed facility conforms to the existing environmental plan and satisfies the relevant legal requirements, authorities may have limited grounds for refusing permission based on broader political objections.
PRO has argued that the municipality needs greater control over developments that occupy substantial land and seek large electricity connections. The party wants future applications to be evaluated consistently against the effects on residents, businesses and the surrounding environment.
The council’s discussion also exposed the distinction between granting planning permission and allocating electricity network capacity. Municipalities decide land use matters within their legal responsibilities, while network operators manage connections and determine what reinforcement is needed to supply additional demand.
A permitted data centre may therefore still face delays securing electrical capacity. Conversely, a network connection application does not automatically provide the necessary planning rights to construct the corresponding buildings.
Where electricity infrastructure is already constrained, proposed developments may compete with other potential users for access to additional capacity. Housing, industrial activities, public infrastructure and commercial facilities can all depend on the same programme of network expansion.
Developing enforceable local criteria
Alphen’s proposed framework will need to operate within the legal powers available to Dutch municipalities. A general political preference for reducing data centre development is not necessarily sufficient to justify rejecting an otherwise compliant application.
Alderman Schotanus indicated that the municipality would examine the legal possibilities for additional controls. The council has not published a completed framework specifying acceptable electricity demand, site size, cooling requirements or other numerical thresholds.
The absence of those criteria means that the practical effect on future applications remains uncertain. Any eventual requirements would need to be expressed through the relevant planning instruments and supported by the legal and factual considerations applicable to development decisions.
The Dutch environmental planning system allows authorities to regulate land use and the effects of development. However, electricity connection decisions and the allocation of scarce network capacity involve responsibilities that extend beyond the municipal planning process.
Recent national debate has underlined that distinction. Dutch electricity network operators have asked the government to make clearer decisions about where major consumers should be accommodated, arguing that substantial network investments must reflect long-term spatial and economic priorities.
Further advice published by the Dutch Council for Public Administration in October emphasises the importance of making strategic planning decisions before attempting to allocate scarce electricity network capacity. The advisory body identifies limits on political intervention in individual connection decisions under the applicable regulatory framework.
Those considerations provide a wider context for Alphen’s local initiative. Municipalities can influence where development is allowed, but they cannot simply assume responsibility for the network operator’s decisions about the physical availability of electricity.
DataCentral has previously reported on Westland’s amended rules restricting new data centres. The Alphen motion is at an earlier stage, with the municipality still determining what legally sustainable controls it can establish.
The two developments illustrate different stages of local planning intervention. Westland has published amended restrictions, while Alphen has voted to develop a framework whose detailed provisions have not yet been determined.
The next milestone will be the municipality’s examination of the legal options and preparation of the assessment criteria. Until those provisions are developed and formally adopted, existing planning requirements remain the operative basis for individual applications.
