Overview
25ha site, up to seven buildings and a substation, about £5bn in phases. Over 1,200 objections lodged by July 2026. Fife Council screened out an EIA; the Scottish Government later overturned that.
The developer's case
Presents Cato as the first of three 'Stoics' campuses: run on renewable power, adding long-term demand for Scottish renewables, with skills and apprenticeship plans and a community benefit fund. ILI Group IT Brief UK
Developer website ↗Economic report ↗
Claim Construction: About 9,660 job-years across Scotland during construction, 1,450 in Fife IT Brief UK
Jobs in context
Permanent jobs claimed120
At the 1.6 per MW study averageabout 960for 600 MW
Claimed jobs per MW0.20
This scheme's claim0.20
Industry modeltechUK, based on older, smaller sites8.5
Planned UK sitesVerdant study of 20 schemes, 20261.6
QTS Cambois, Northumberland720 MW, about 400 jobs0.56
Permanent jobs per megawatt of capacity. This claim is below the study's average for planned sites.
Construction jobs are real but temporary. Figures for "job-years", "jobs supported" or "indirect" jobs count work elsewhere in the economy, not people on site. The per-MW measure comes from the think tank Verdant; techUK says it misses jobs supported outside the site, and the UK Government calls it misleading. The Next Web Resultsense
Claimed benefits
| Investment | Developer estimate £5bn Data Centre Review |
|---|
| Local spend | Not stated |
|---|
| Economic value (GVA) | Modelled estimate £1.8bn for the Scottish economy across all three Stoics sites, from a report the developer commissioned ILI Group |
|---|
| Community benefit | Promise only Community benefit fund proposed; size not given IT Brief UK |
|---|
| Skills and training | Promise only Exploring skills, training and apprenticeship opportunities IT Brief UK |
|---|
- Developer estimate The developer's own figure for what it plans to spend. Not a commitment.
- Modelled estimate Comes from an economic model the developer paid for. Not checked independently.
- Promise only Not yet written into a legal agreement (Section 75) or a planning condition, so it cannot be enforced.
- Secured Written into a signed legal agreement or planning condition.
None of these benefits is secured yet for any scheme we track. GVA (gross value added) is the economic output a scheme is modelled to add.
Site and design
| Land | Farmland (Camilla Farm) |
|---|
| Power supply | Claim Curtailed renewables; Gate 2 grid offer Data Centre Review |
|---|
The opening lines summarise in our own words how the developer presents the scheme. Items marked Claim are the developer's own figures, not independently checked.
The objectors' case
Objectors say a campus of this size does not belong on farmland beside a small village. In their own words, the most common concerns are water use, the character of the village, energy use and health. The community council has said it will oppose the scheme. STV News
formal objections1,579
petition signatures10,817
Most raised in objections
- 61% Water use
- 57% Village and community character
- 53% Energy use and the grid
- 48% Health and wellbeing
- 47% Landscape, scale and visual impact
Share of sampled objections written in people's own words that mention each issue. See Public response below for the method.
Petitions and campaigns
Claims checked
| Claim | What we found |
|---|
| Campaign claim About the height of six double-decker buses and the length of 100 football pitches change.org petition | Partly matches In area, the council's site boundary (about 69 ha) is roughly 96 football pitches, so the comparison works for area rather than length. Building heights are not checked here. |
| Campaign claim An estimated 20% of Scotland's energy would be consumed change.org petition | Partly matches The developer's own figure of 4,000 GWh a year at full use is about 18% of Scotland's electricity, but about 3% of all the energy Scotland uses, including heating and transport. |
Worth knowing: About three-quarters of comments use one shared template. That shows how organised the response is; it does not make the concerns right or wrong.
The opening lines summarise in our own words how objectors present their case. Campaign claims get the same checks as the developer's figures. Petition signatures are not verified as local and are not formal objections to the council.
Planning
Where it stands: PPP validated 21 May 2026 · pending.
Proposal of application notice25/00552/PAN · PAN Agreed · 13 Mar 2025
EIA screening or scoping25/03079/SCR · EIA Not Required · 01 Apr 2026
Planning application lodged26/01243/PPP · Registered · 21 May 2026
Council decisionAwaiting decision
Council planning record · Fife Council
| Reference | Type | Status | Date | Applicant |
|---|
| 26/01243/PPP | Planning permission in principle | Registered | 21 May 2026 | |
| 25/03079/SCR | EIA screening | EIA Not Required | 01 Apr 2026 | |
| 25/00552/PAN | Proposal of application notice | PAN Agreed | 13 Mar 2025 | |
Rules that apply
- Over 50MW, the council must notify Scottish Ministers within seven days of validating an application (in force since 17 Aug 2026). Scottish Government
- Over 50MW, an Environmental Impact Assessment is now mandatory (Direction of 16 Sep 2026), including for applications already in the system. Scottish Government
- On 16 Sep 2026 MSPs backed pausing planning decisions on large data centres for up to 12 months while national guidance is drafted, expected by December 2026. Resultsense
Search the Fife planning portal for the latest documents, consultee responses and public comments.
Public response
1,579against
6in support
4neutral
100% of comments that took a side were against. From the documents filed on 26/01243/PPP, read 19 Oct 2026. Fife files each comment as a document, so one person may account for more than one. The analysis below reads the published comments themselves.
Petition: change.org petition: 10,817 signatures of a 15,000 goal (20 Oct 2026)
Issues as reported in news and campaign coverage, not a count of comments.
What the objections say
Automated reading of 354 objection documents, a random sample of the 1,579 on Fife Council's file for 26/01243/PPP, read 20 Oct 2026. Shares are accurate to about ±5 points. No names, addresses or quotes are shown.
74% template letter26% own words
74% of sampled objections are near-copies of a shared letter. That letter raises 12 issues at once (noise, energy use and the grid, water use, climate and emissions, landscape, scale and visual impact and more), so it is shown separately below.
Issues raised in their own words (92 individually written objections in the sample)
- Water use61%
- Village and community character57%
- Energy use and the grid53%
- Health and wellbeing48%
- Landscape, scale and visual impact47%
- Wildlife, trees and nature42%
- Noise40%
- Countryside and greenfield land34%
- Climate and emissions26%
- Jobs and employment24%
- Planning process, EIA and consultation21%
- Traffic and construction20%
- Light pollution17%
- Backup generators and air quality15%
- Heritage (Hallyards Castle)9%
- Bills and energy costs8%
- Flooding and drainage5%
- Property values (not a planning matter)2%
How firmly they object
- Asks for refusal34%
- Asks for a pause, EIA or more information12%
- Suggests conditions or alternatives8%
The template letter (262 copies in the sample)
Raises: noise, energy use and the grid, water use, climate and emissions, landscape, scale and visual impact, countryside and greenfield land, wildlife, trees and nature, heritage (hallyards castle), health and wellbeing, jobs and employment, village and community character, planning process, eia and consultation. It asks for the application to be refused, and for a full environmental assessment or a pause until national guidance.
- Median length: 99 words written individually, 544 words for the template.
- 6 supporting comments on file (all read). Topics: landscape, scale and visual impact, health and wellbeing, jobs and employment, noise, energy use and the grid. Too few for percentages.
- 4 general comments on file (all read). Topics: noise, water use, village and community character, energy use and the grid, landscape, scale and visual impact.
- 46 sampled documents had no readable text (likely scanned) and were left out.
Method. Issues and firmness are detected with a published keyword list, so a comment counts if it mentions the issue at all; this shows what people raised, not whether the claims are right. An automated tone score (VADER) was tested and rejected: it rated formal objection letters as positive, so it would mislead. Stance comes from the council's own classification of each comment.
Statutory consultees
15 consulted. Including: SEPA · NatureScot · Health and Safety Executive · Scottish Water · The Coal Authority · Auchtertool Community Council · Built Heritage · Archaeology · Transportation · Trees · Land and Air Quality · Environmental Health
