Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Residents urge Durham council to impose long moratorium on hyperscale data centers
Loading...
Summary
At a Durham work session, dozens of public commenters and some council members urged a lengthy moratorium on hyperscale data centers, citing water, environmental and community impacts; petitioners presented 735 signatures and asked for a 32-month pause while the city studies policy options.
Public comment at a Durham City Council work session focused heavily on a proposed temporary moratorium on approvals for hyperscale data centers and related high-impact data processing facilities.
Several speakers pressed the council to adopt a long moratorium to allow study of environmental and community impacts. Leslie St. Dre (S18) of Community Land and Power and the Stop Data Centers in Durham Coalition said the group delivered a petition of 735 signatures and urged a 32-month moratorium — "That's what's held up in courts before for development moratoriums," she said — and requested that the city use the pause to pursue stronger, permanent protections.
Other commenters echoed concerns about water and ecological impacts, arguing that large data centers can strain utilities and harm biodiversity. Jayna Sims (S3) said Durham should "take our time" and avoid being an early adopter of facilities whose long-term effects are not yet proven. An entrepreneur speaking in support (S20) argued that the infrastructure "throws our water system in jeopardy" and called the land take for AI centers a "land grab."
On the agenda the mayor read an item described as an "ordinance imposing a temporary moratorium on development approvals for data centers, cryptocurrency mining, and related high impact data processing facilities within the city of Durham"; the mayor also said speakers who signed up for the public hearing on that item would be moved to general comment because the moratorium would be a public hearing matter at the next meeting.
Council members said they wanted time to refine policy language and suggested moving the resolutions and related items to the general business agenda for more detailed discussion. The city manager noted the moratorium item will be a public hearing at the next meeting and staff will provide supporting analyses.
No council vote on the moratorium occurred during the work session; the item was listed for public hearing and further consideration at the next meeting. Commenters and council members asked staff for data on water use, land impacts and best-practice regulatory language in other jurisdictions.
The work session transcript records petition and public comment details and the council’s procedural direction to place the moratorium before a public hearing; specific moratorium language and any vote will appear at the subsequent hearing.
