Durham commissioners weigh targeted moratorium, ordinance for hyperscale data centers

Durham County commissioners spent substantial time discussing a proposed policy response to recent interest in large data centers, focusing on whether to adopt a temporary moratorium and how to craft a joint city–county ordinance that would define and limit hyperscale facilities while preserving business and institutional needs.

Vice Chair Lum asked staff when applications identifying data centers as a use case were filed and noted the county’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) does not currently list data centers as a specific use. She argued a moratorium would give staff time to amend the UDO to define data centers and the relevant scope—distinguishing tenant or enterprise backup facilities from large hyperscale data centers that consume substantial energy and water.

Chair Lee said he could not support a blanket moratorium that would bar smaller business or institutional data centers. Instead, he and other commissioners favored a targeted approach that would focus on large or hyperscale facilities, with clear exceptions, and suggested practical thresholds built on proxies such as acreage or building square footage rather than direct megawatt measures that planning staff cannot readily verify at application intake.

Several commissioners — including Commissioner Jacobs and Commissioner Burton — emphasized the need for a data‑driven, time‑bounded process. Planning staff said an ordinance adoption process typically takes roughly four to five months and that, including research, stakeholder input and joint city–county review, staff is comfortable completing an ordinance in about 12 months. Staff also noted the city already has a moratorium in place, and that joint resources are prioritized to draft the county’s ordinance.

Board members discussed the central concerns driving the policy: potential large water withdrawals, infrastructure impacts (water and electricity), air emissions and the fiscal consequences when private development requires new utility infrastructure. Commissioners asked staff to develop proposed moratorium and ordinance language that: targets hyperscale facilities, includes narrowly drawn exceptions for medical, educational and existing institutional data centers, and uses enforceable land‑use proxies (acreage, square footage) rather than megawatt thresholds.

Several commissioners requested regular check‑ins as staff develops proposed language; Manager Hanger and counsel were asked to confirm timing with the county attorney. The board agreed staff should prepare proposed moratorium language and ordinance options to consider at an upcoming June meeting. No moratorium ordinance was adopted at the work session; staff will return with proposed language and a recommended schedule.