The construction of data processing centers faces strong opposition from residents of neighboring areas, as seen in the United States. The rezoning of the King Air area in Cape Town has become a test of whether data center developers must disclose information on water consumption, electricity, emissions, and noise before obtaining land use rights.
The phrase 'If you build it, they will come' has become an unofficial investment theme for the AI data center industry. South Africa is actively participating in this trend, accounting for about 70% of the continent's data center capacity, and major companies like Equinix have local regions. However, even proponents are cautious; Equinix is building in Johannesburg in phases and holding land in Cape Town as a 'long-term land bank' until demand is confirmed.
Experts note that many new data centers operate on a tenant turnover model, similar to how shopping malls developed in Gauteng. While the demand for AI is not an illusion—Equinix's first site in Johannesburg was leased ahead of schedule—the scale required for the next wave remains more of a projection than a fact. The Vantage campus in Johannesburg is located in Waterfall City, near the Mall of Africa.
The first hurdle was uncertain demand, and the second arose in Cape Town in the form of neighbors demanding to know how much water and electricity the new facility plans to consume. The rezoning of one area on the outskirts of the airport industrial zone became the first serious test of what the community has the right to know when placing an AI campus with a capacity of over 100 MW. The outcome of this process will be studied by all municipalities in the country. For now, the process is outpacing preparation: rights first, facts later.
Rezoning, not construction
On July 14, the Cape Town municipal tribunal voted 4 to 1 to change the zoning of the King Air Industria land to create a cluster of hyperscale data centers. Equinix was named the operator, and the approval covers approximately 174 MW across two sites. This amount of electricity is sufficient for a small city and was approved with a complete lack of energy consumption data.
An appeal was filed by the Housing Association and the British non-profit organization Foxglove, represented by the Legal Resources Centre, on three very well-founded grounds. The tribunal approved the zoning change without requiring data on water or electricity supply. It postponed questions regarding diesel generators, emissions, and noise to a later date. Furthermore, no one assessed the cumulative impact of the two sites, which cover about 120,000 sq. meters, equivalent to roughly 17 rugby fields.
The city confirmed that the approval is suspended pending a decision by the appellate body, led by executive head Geordie Hill-Lewis, and there are no timelines yet. Meanwhile, Equinix states that it has no immediate construction plans and has not submitted planning applications. But this does not mean everything is fine. That is precisely the problem.
Why this case sets a precedent
Cape Town's local regulation clearly states that the right of use is attached to the land, not the applicant. If the approval stands, this cluster will hold data center rights for any future owner. Equinix's promise to consult the public before construction begins is undoubtedly sincere, but it is not as binding for the next owner as a note on the refrigerator.
This makes King Air a model in three ways. Firstly, it effectively creates a new land-use category for 'data centers,' processed as a routine zoning change. Secondly, it tests the legality of deferring the disclosure of water and electricity information until the transfer of rights. Thirdly, it establishes a standard of proof that, according to the sole dissenting tribunal member, planner Wally Johnstone, was set too low. He stated that the public has the right to know how the approval will affect grid stability and electricity access, which is a radical position.
The city acknowledged this point, as is often the case in cities. Deputy Mayor Eddie Andrews confirmed that Cape Town is developing refined guidelines for large data center applications. What exactly will be required and whether they will apply to existing applications remains unknown. Whatever Cape Town writes, other metropolises will copy, including the typos.
We are not the first to fight this battle
If this offers any comfort, Cape Town is simply catching up with the rest of the world. In the US, Data Center Watch counted 75 contested projects worth about $130 billion in the first quarter of 2026 alone, and the June Heatmap survey showed that at least 70% of Americans would prefer not to have such infrastructure near their homes. Complaints will be familiar to anyone who has opened a South African municipal bill: high electricity prices, water-intensive cooling, generators that never sleep, generous tax incentives, few permanent jobs, and deals made under strict NDAs.
The UK offers a closer parallel. Foxglove, using the Global Action Plan, initiated the first lawsuit against a hyperscale data center in Britain in 2025. The government admitted a 'serious logical error' in January, a phrase officials hope never to sign. The developer insisted until April, when they agreed that mitigating environmental measures should be enshrined in a council contract. This is exactly what the appellants from Cape Town are demanding. This scenario has been tested in practice, and it works.
The overall national picture: a policy gap
At the national level, the reaction is developing at the expected pace. The South African Human Rights Commission's investigation into the data center industry received about 275 written responses. It found no violations but identified obvious systemic human rights issues and significant gaps in the evidence base, directing detailed follow-up questions to participants.
In response to a parliamentary question, the Minister of Communications and Digital Technologies outlined the government's position. The National Data and Cloud Policy 2024 provides investor confidence. dtic provides incentives. Skills and transformations are mainly carried out through Investment Programs equivalent to shares. And investors must provide municipalities with short-, medium-, and long-term forecasts of water and electricity consumption, as well as plans to offset this demand. The latter part is absolutely correct.
However, the same answer confirms that the minister interacted with the Minister of Electricity and Energy but had no contact with the Department of Water and Sanitation. In a city that was within weeks of a 'Day Zero' in 2018, water is the only conversation the national government has not started. And it is the only conversation that Cape Town residents truly want to have.
Get the rulebook right the first time
None of this is an argument against data centers. South Africa needs local AI computing power for sovereignty, low latency, and jobs, and much of the industry is already building responsibly, using closed loops and dry cooling that consumes rather than gulps. The problem is that no one needs to prove this before getting rights. The phrase 'Trust us' is not a planning condition.
A working rulebook should include three elements, none of which are revolutionary. Disclosure before approval: mandatory data on water, electricity, generators, and noise in the protocol. Cumulative assessment: assessing the entire cluster, not each building individually. And enforceable conditions: mitigation measures recorded in the approval or contract so they remain in place when ownership changes.
This will protect communities and give serious investors the confidence promised by the Data and Cloud Policy. Cape Town has a rare opportunity to set the rules once, instead of every metropolis reviewing them independently. So build, if you wish. They might just come. Just put the cart before the horse.
}} , 1. {