Project Taurus appeal heads to City Council over data center design and noise controls
A Sept. 17 hearing will consider appeals of the proposed data center, whose approved plan depicts 100 megawatts of capacity while its conditions limit utility use to 50 megawatts without further approval.
The Colorado Springs City Council is scheduled to hear appeals of Project Taurus on Sept. 17, after the Planning Commission upheld the project with conditions governing utility use, noise monitoring and reporting.
The project would convert a 442,468-square-foot industrial building at 1615 High Tech Way into a data center. The approved development plan depicts two 50-megawatt data halls, 72 air-cooled chillers and 60 generators.
The plan’s two data halls total 100 megawatts of designed capacity. The Planning Commission’s July 23 action, however, limits utility use to 50 megawatts unless the commission later approves an increase. The appeal materials do not explain how that condition would apply to the full design.
The City Council meeting record schedules the special meeting for 9 a.m. Sept. 17 at the Pikes Peak Center for the Performing Arts, 190 S. Cascade Ave. The council will consider the appeals after the commission rejected them in a combined vote while modifying the underlying approval.
In a supplemental filing, appellants Katherine Kent, Ron Graham-Becker and others argue that the city used the wrong approval procedure. They say the city should have identified the original development-plan approval and followed the same procedure for the project’s major modification. They cite older City Council actions and development-plan records that they say show the property’s earlier approvals were handled through public hearings rather than administrative review.
The appellants also argue that the city failed to reconcile earlier conditions, including a 2000 decision they say contained seven conditions. Those claims are allegations in the appeal, not findings by the City Council or a court.
The appellants further contend that the city’s capacity and noise reviews used a smaller configuration than the one shown in the approved plan. They say portions of the analysis addressed 36 chillers, 30 generators and an approximately 50-megawatt load, rather than the plan’s 72 chillers, 60 generators and two 50-megawatt data halls. They also challenge the analysis of equipment counts, operating assumptions and low-frequency sound.
City planning materials say an independent consultant found the analysis and proposed mitigation appropriate. The city’s review projected noise levels below its stated residential limits after mitigation.
The sound-monitoring plan requires Raeden to establish a baseline before construction. At least three Class 1 monitoring stations must operate continuously for at least 10 consecutive days along the southern property line next to Chelsea Glen, with results reported to the city and made public.
After construction, monitoring must continue for one year during full-load operations and generator testing. Project Taurus must provide data to the city monthly and post monitor readings on a public project webpage; the city also must publish the information through the project’s entitlement record.
Residents within one mile may submit noise complaints through the city’s Neighborhood Services Division. If the city verifies a violation or a noise increase of more than 5 decibels above approved projections, the project must notify the city and nearby properties within 1,000 feet and submit a city-approved remediation plan within 30 days.
The development agreement makes the monitoring obligations binding for 10 years and requires $1 million in financial assurance. The city may withhold permits or other land-use approvals, terminate the agreement or recover costs if the developer defaults.
The city has said the appeals stay the Planning Commission’s decision and that the City Council will make the final decision. Correspondence cited in the appeal materials says the hearing will be conducted de novo, allowing the council to consider the major-modification criteria.