← City-DBQ_Data-Center-Presentation_2026-08-13.pdf

Rebuilt HTML — PaddleOCR-VL (Baidu)

Content placed at each item's bbox to mirror the original PDF layout (font sizes are estimated). overlay · view JSON

DATA CENTER REGULATION
Considerations for the City of Dubuque
City Council Briefing — Options, Research, and Community Input
Prepared for Council discussion • August 2026
Can We Ban Data Centers — Completely and Forever?
LEGALLY POSSIBLE
but it is the riskiest legal path available to Council
Why an Outright, Permanent Ban Carries Real Legal Exposure
Litigation precedent: Communities that have pursued outright prohibition (e.g., voter-enacted bans) have faced sustained legal challenge and years of contested proceedings. Takings & due process exposure: A total, permanent prohibition on a lawful use is far more vulnerable to a regulatory-taking or substantive due process claim than a use-specific, standards-based ordinance. Loss of negotiating leverage: A ban forecloses the City's ability to negotiate siting, size limits, buffers, and community benefits — tools a standards-based ordinance preserves.
Takings & due process exposure: A total, permanent prohibition on a lawful use is far more vulnerable to a regulatory-taking or substantive due process claim than a use-specific, standards-based ordinance.
Loss of negotiating leverage: A ban forecloses the City's ability to negotiate siting, size limits, buffers, and community benefits — tools a standards-based ordinance preserves.
State preemption trend: Several states have moved to limit local authority over data center siting; an aggressive ban invites the kind of conflict that accelerates preemption efforts. Iowa has not preempted local action to date but HAS adopted specific incentives for data centers based on sizing. See Iowa Code and Iowa Dept of Revenue info in supplemental research info.
Recommendation: Rather than an outright ban, staff recommends a thoughtful, standards-based ordinance that gives the City real control over siting, size, utilities, and community impact among other items.
Two Regulatory Approaches or a Blend
Communities generally choose one of two structures, or blend both
Zoning Ordinance Amendment Regulate through existing zoning code
Standalone Data Center Ordinance A dedicated chapter outside zoning
Combined Approach (Hybrid) Zoning trigger + standalone standards
Adds a “data center” definition and permitted-use table entries
Purpose-built standards: noise, water use, energy, decommissioning
Zoning code flags the use and sets a size threshold that triggers review
Applies existing district standards: setbacks, height, lot coverage
Can apply City-wide regardless of underlying zoning district
Standalone chapter supplies the detailed operational conditions
Fastest to adopt — builds on a code Council already administers
Easier to update as technology and impacts evolve
Lets Council calibrate scrutiny to project size (e.g., small vs. hyperscale)
Best fit when impacts resemble other industrial/commercial uses
Best fit when data centers pose issues zoning code doesn't address
Most common approach among peer communities reviewed
Types of Data Centers & Size as a Trigger
Types of Data Centers: https://heli.law.uiowa.edu/projects/datacentersiniowa/iowa-data-center-decision-tool-resources-and-tools
Edge Data Centers Small facilities close to end users (Telecommunications infrastructure, smart cities)
Enterprise Data Centers Built and used by a single organization (University systems, hospitals, banks, manufacturers)
Colocation Data Centers Built to house equipment for multiple customers (City of Dubuque Data Center has capacity to lease space to others)
Hyperscale Data Centers Very large, supporting massive computing needs (Major tech firms – Amazon, Google, Meta, Microsoft)
Sizing as a trigger: Several peer ordinances scale requirements to facility size — e.g., a square-footage or power-draw threshold that separates routine server rooms (no extra review) from large or hyperscale facilities (special exception, conditional use permit, or full standards-based review).
How Other Communities Across the Country Have Approached This
CommunityApproachKey Mechanism
Tippecanoe County, INZoning amendment2025 passage. Size threshold (10,000 sq ft) separates “data center” from “large data center”; smaller operations permitted to continue in certain zoning areas, larger facilities need special exception and have limited zoning areas in which to locate
Valparaiso, INMoratoriumMoratorium passed August 10, 2026 Originally proposed ordinance to allow upon issuance of a special use permit required for any data center in a heavy industrial area.
Franklin County, PAStandalone chapterMay 20, 2026 passage. Added to the Subdivision & Land Development Ordinance ahead of any pending project, following two public hearings
St. Louis, MOHybridPublic Comment through August 31, 2026 Zoning text amendment built from a review of multiple peer ordinances, tailored to local siting and community concerns
Monterey Park, CABallot IssueJune 2, 2026 Ban on data centers
Eagan, MNTemporary moratoriumFebruary 2026 passage. One-year pause adopted to allow time to study and adopt permanent standards before new applications proceed. City sued by data center owner, lawsuit pending.
How Other Communities Across Iowa Have Approached This
CommunityApproachKey Mechanism
Linn CountyHybrid18-month moratorium on Large Scale Data Centers through January 1, 2028 Ordinance adopted February 18, 2026. New zoning district (EU-3), water study required, water use agreement, economic development agreement required, noise limits, setbacks, light pollution limits, waste management plans, mitigation of infrastructure impacts (roads, emergency response)
Des MoinesZoning AmendmentNew use definition/size threshold within existing commercial use category
Johnson CountyMoratorium1-year moratorium in November 2025, new zoning ordinance to be drafted during moratorium
Allamakee CountyZoning• Micro Data Centers limited to A-1, C-1, I-1, I-2 zoned areas • Large Data Centers prohibited except as permitted by Conditional Use in I-2 districts • 5-mile distance between micro data centers, 20-mile distance required between large data centers • Regulation on cooling methods, height, setbacks, fencing, landscaping, signage, noise, back-up power. • Additional requirements for large data centers: lighting, water quality protections, viewshed limitations, economic development agreement required, fire safety plan, emergency operations plan, roads, decommissioning
PaloZoningExclusive Data Center Use District Regulation on lighting, noise, road use, emergency response plan, economic development agreement required, setbacks, street access, parking, off-street loading, buffers, sewer and water connections, avoidance/mitigation of damage to public infrastructure, studies required
City of Dubuque | Data Center Regulatory Framework
How Other Communities Across Iowa Have Approached This, Continued.....
CommunityApproachKey Mechanism
ClintonHybridAdds definitions, creates new Data Center section, allows data centers in M-1, M-2, and M-3 Industrial Districts subject to standalone standards, plan submission required, setbacks, screening, orientation, development agreement may be required, water use, cooling, & protection, lighting, noise/vibration, traffic, access, & road use, emergency response, environmental, decommissioning, airport protection/FAA compliance
Dubuque CountyMoratorium12-month moratorium
Wapello CountyTBDAugust 11, 2026 -- work session
Jefferson CountyOrdinance & MoratoriumAugust 11, 2026 -- adopted ordinance and 1-year moratorium
Jackson CountyMoratoriumThrough August 4, 2027
Floyd CountyMoratoriumThrough March 2, 2027
Research Base & Common Themes Across Ordinances
Research Materials Consulted
Themes Common to Most Ordinances
• National League of Cities – Fact Sheets. Understanding Data Centers, Data Centers & Environmental Considerations, and Community Strategies to Address Data Center Development & Operation• Urban Land Institute – Local Guidelines for Data Center Development• Iowa College of Law, Hubbell Environmental Law Initiative: Iowa Data Center Decision Tool – Helping communities prepare for data center discussions• Georgia Tech EPI Center — Data Center Ordinance Hub (comparative review of 180+ Georgia jurisdictions' land-use standards & materials from across the country)• Additional materials provided (Ordinances, Articles, Studies) • Setback / buffer distances from residential uses and sensitive sites• Water and energy consumption studies, disclosures, limits• Noise standards tied to nearby zoning districts• Façade, screening, and aesthetic requirements• Decommissioning and site restoration obligations• Size threshold that seals the level of review
Size threshold that scales the level of review
Community Input Survey & Engagement Sessions
Mailed & Online Resident Survey
Mailed to every residence in Dubuque. (31,000)
Available online for anyone to complete.
3,777 total responses received (2,577 online, 1,200 paper) Questions addressed:
Questions addressed:
What are the most important topics a data center ordinance should address? (From 1 = very important to 3 = not important)
As the City considers rules for future data centers, which potential benefits are most important to you? (From 1 = most important to 7 = least important)
Which statement best matches your current opinion? I would support a data center in Dubuque. I would support a data center if certain requirements are met. I would not support a data center in Dubuque. I am not sure and need more information. In-Person Roundtable Discussions
In-Person Roundtable Discussions
July 21 and 27
Approximately 400 attendees
Questions addressed:
What are the most important topics a data center ordinance should address? (14 table discussion categories)
Deep dive into topic of most interest to residents to explore specific concerns and potential ordinance language.
What community benefits should the City consider or prioritize?
Is there any other feedback you'd like to share? (open text box) • July 21 and 27
6
Survey Results
Survey Results
Which statement best matches your current opinion?
Would Not Support 🔥 Support W/ Certain Requirements 🔥 Unsure/Needs More Information 🔥 Would Support ☐ (Blank)
Survey Results
...Most Important Topics, "Very Important" Total
Survey Results
...Potential Benefits, #1 Most Important Total
Response Option
Survey Results
Is there any other feedback you'd like to share? (Open-Ended)
Roundtable Results
Approximately 400 people attended. Of those who provided personal information:
Which Issues Are Most Important To You?
Environmental Impact: Pollution, wildlife disruption, harm to farmland, water, human health 6. Jobs & Economic Benefits: permanent jobs created for local residents, short-lived economic benefits
Location & Land Use: Distance from residential areas, farmland, environmentally sensitive zones, airport, schools, low-income neighborhoods
Noise & Light Pollution: impact on birds, sleep patterns, health, property values 7. Ongoing Monitoring & Accountability: Distrust in self-reporting, concerns that enforcement must be robust and public
Water Use & Quality: Consumption, contamination, wastewater, stormwater runoff. Can City's infrastructure support?
Power & Energy: Increased rates, strain on the power grid, reliance on non-renewable energy sources 8. Community Process & Transparency: Transparency, Non-Disclosure Agreements, information accessible to the public
Jobs & Economic Benefits: permanent jobs created for local residents, short-lived economic benefits
Ongoing Monitoring & Accountability: Distrust in self-reporting, concerns that enforcement must be robust and public
Community Process & Transparency: Transparency, Non-Disclosure Agreements, information accessible to the public
Recurring Solutions & Ordinance Rules Proposed
Strict Siting & Zoning Rules: Industrial zoning, buffer zones, no annexation/rezoning of farmland 6. Enforcement & Accountability: Forced shutdowns for non-compliance, not fines. Upfront bonds to cover future costs.
Environmental Protections: Baseline assessments before construction, 3rd party monitoring, water protections
Noise & Light Regulation: Use World Health Organization and Dark Sky guidelines, public reporting 7. Community Benefits: Should be shared equitably with priority for those most affected.
Power & Utility Rules: Self-generation, renewable energy, rate freezes for residents, no reduced rates or incentives for data centers
Job & Economic Requirements: mandates for local workers, permanent jobs with livable wages, local unions. No incentives or subsidies.
Enforcement & Accountability: Forced shutdowns for non-compliance, not fines. Upfront bonds to cover future costs.
Community Benefits: Should be shared equitably with priority for those most affected.
Direction Needed from Council
1 Ordinance: Yes or No
3 Sizing (if applicable): Should there be a size threshold that triggers heightened review? If yes, what size?
4 Timeline: Target schedule, depends on City Council Direction. See Next Slide
If yes, then Structure:
Moratorium
Ban
Standalone Ordinance
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Combined Approach
Scope: If moratorium, for how long? If standalone, zoning, or combined approach, should regulation apply city-wide, or only to specific zoning districts?
6
Direction Needed from Council
4 Timeline: Target schedule, depends on City Council Direction.
For Example:
Standalone, Zoning, or Hybrid Ordinance:
November 2, 2026, Draft presented for Council discussion & feedback
November 4, 2026, Zoning Commission Review & Consideration (IF APPLICABLE)
November 16, 2026, First Reading
December 7, 2026, Second Reading
December 21, 2026, Final Reading
Moratorium: September 8, 2026
Ban: September 8, 2026
6