Frequently asked questions

No. Data infrastructure is part of how modern life and the economy work, and we're not asking Ireland to stop building it. Our objection is to scale and location: a cluster of six gas-powered, hyperscale data halls sited within metres of established housing, drawing on grid and water systems that are already under acknowledged strain. There are plenty of locations in Ireland better suited to development of this intensity than a residential edge of Naas.

P1 (Herbata) was granted permission by Kildare County Council in August 2025, but it has since been appealed to An Bord Pleanála by both the developer and third parties - so it isn't fully final. More importantly, this campaign is primarily about P2, the neighbouring site backing onto Primrose Garden, where no application has been lodged at all. See P1: Herbata and P2 & The Ask.

Yes - though it's less common than a change happening through a scheduled Development Plan or Local Area Plan review, and it isn't easy. Under both the Planning and Development Act 2000 and the 2024 Act, a planning authority can vary a Development Plan (and by extension a Local Area Plan) at any time, provided it follows the statutory process: public consultation, environmental screening - and Strategic Environmental Assessment or Appropriate Assessment where relevant - a Chief Executive's report, and a vote of elected members.

There is real precedent for mid-cycle variations: councils around Ireland have used this mechanism to zone additional residential land to meet housing targets, facilitate strategic employment lands, accommodate major transport projects, deliver Urban Regeneration and Development Fund projects, and respond to new national planning policy. Cork City Council, for example, has proposed a variation to rezone land on the city's outskirts outside its normal review cycle.

It isn't a rubber stamp. Councillors are rightly cautious, because ad hoc rezoning can increase land values, invite perceptions of favouritism, draw objections, and require environmental assessment. Planning authorities generally want a clear, evidence-based justification - not simply a response to one landowner's or one group's request. That's precisely why our case leans on genuine, documented changes since 2021 (grid capacity policy, water resilience, tightened carbon budgets) rather than a change in local sentiment alone. See For Councillors for the full argument.

Source: informal legal research compiled for this campaign (Nov 2025), citing the Planning and Development Act 2000 and Planning and Development Act 2024, and the example of Cork City Council. This is background research, not a solicitor's opinion - if you're relying on this point in a formal submission, it's worth having it checked.

Data centres are not large local employers once built - estimates put permanent staffing at around 28 people per facility, mostly security and facilities roles, with the larger employment impact concentrated in the temporary construction phase. Removing the "P - Data Centre" zoning wouldn't sterilise the land; it would open it to a broader range of employment uses - advanced manufacturing, engineering, research, life sciences and other enterprises - that may deliver more sustainable long-term local employment.

We don't think proximity is a trivial concern when a development sits metres from people's homes - that's a legitimate planning consideration, not just a feeling. But we've deliberately built our public case on things beyond proximity: national grid capacity constraints, legally binding carbon budgets, water resilience, and genuine changes in national policy since 2021. Those arguments apply whether or not you live near the site.

The land stays reserved exclusively for data centre use for the remainder of the current Local Area Plan (through 2027, and likely longer in practice given how these things run). Given a developer already has permission next door at P1, we think it's realistic that an application for P2 could be lodged within the next couple of months - after which the objection process starts, following broadly the same path P1 took.

Objecting to an individual application only lets you argue points specific to that design - you can't argue "this land shouldn't be used for this at all." P1's objections included serious, well-argued submissions (from An Taisce and others) and the application was still granted. Changing the underlying zoning is the only way to stop this land being offered up for data centre use in the first place, rather than fighting the same battle design-by-design.

Primarily Kildare County Council's public planning register for application 2460787 (Herbata), submissions made to that application by An Taisce and others, the CSO's data centre electricity statistics, EirGrid capacity figures, and briefings from Friends of the Earth Ireland and An Taisce. Key documents we've cited by name are also mirrored on this site, so most citations link directly to the actual document and page. We've flagged on The Facts page where a figure comes from a campaign estimate rather than an official statistic.

Email your Naas Municipal District councillor using the template on Take Action. It takes about two minutes and councillors do count and weigh constituent correspondence ahead of votes.