Aurora staff proposes 180-day moratorium on data centers and warehouses to study noise, energy and environmental impacts

City staff presented a proposal to the Aurora City Council on Sept. 23 to impose a 180‑day moratorium on new data center and warehouse approvals so the city can study community and environmental impacts and craft new regulations. The presentation was given by John Curley, chief development services officer, and Lisonbee Lindberg, director of sustainability.

Why it matters: Residents have filed complaints about ongoing noise and generator testing at existing facilities, and staff said rapid increases in data center interest require updated zoning and operational rules. Staff and several aldermen said the moratorium period would give the city time to research best practices used elsewhere and draft regulations that address noise, traffic, energy demand, water use and air quality.

Staff outlined the issue and the proposed moratorium during the mayor's report. “We are seeing an increased number of data centers and warehouse development requests,” Lindberg said in presenting the item. Under current Aurora zoning, staff said, data centers are treated as a subtype of “warehouse distribution and storage service facility” and are permitted in a range of industrial districts and some planned developments. Staff told council members they want time to separate data centers from the general warehouse category and adopt distinct requirements.

City staff identified two categories of impacts they plan to study: community impacts (noise, traffic and higher electricity use) and environmental impacts (water use, air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions). Lindberg described noise as a recurring complaint: “The constant noise that's occurring at data centers is the cooling systems,” and she noted neighbors have also reported noise and vibration during emergency generator testing. On energy, staff cited estimates that data center electricity demand is rising nationally and noted single buildings can draw tens of megawatts at peak.

Staff proposed the moratorium last week to allow formation of a working group that would include internal and external partners, conduct technical study, and return to council with recommendations. The draft moratorium described a 180‑day pause with a possible 30‑day extension, a 90‑day preliminary report to council, hardship exceptions (described in the posted agenda’s Section 8), and a conditional processing option that would allow applicants to submit materials but require compliance with any new rules adopted after the moratorium. Lindberg summarized those elements and told council the ordinance language includes a hardship test and limited exceptions.

Council members asked staff for regional coordination and more detail about impacts and timing. Alderman Nunez asked, “How close are we following the development over there, and what are some initial findings that we've taken away from that?” Staff said the city is working with neighboring municipalities and the Metropolitan Mayors Caucus to take a regional approach but has not yet drawn firm conclusions from nearby cases. Alderman Bade said temporary moratoria are a tool the city has used before to allow ordinances to catch up with development trends and called the request reasonable.

Staff emphasized there was no final council vote on the moratorium at the Sept. 23 meeting. Instead, they said the council would consider the ordinance at a special council meeting later in the week; staff also announced a Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing scheduled for the following day. Staff committed to return preliminary findings to council in 90 days and to bring formal recommendations for any ordinance changes.

Discussion versus decision: Staff described the proposed moratorium and the technical reasons for it (discussion and direction). The council did not adopt the moratorium at this meeting; staff said a special meeting is scheduled to consider formal action (no formal action recorded at this meeting).

Next steps: staff will convene a working group, study noise/energy/water/traffic/land‑use issues, present preliminary findings to council at 90 days, and return with recommended ordinance language for council consideration. The Planning & Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing before council action. Staff also encouraged aldermen to submit questions to staff ahead of the special meeting.

Ending: The city framed the moratorium as a temporary pause to allow research and stakeholder engagement. If council adopts the moratorium, staff said it will include hardship provisions and conditional processing to reduce impacts on applicants already deep in the approval process.