Part 6 of 13 in Thirteen Records. The long article, Data Centers Don’t Have an Environmental Record. They Have Thirteen of Them., rates thirteen kinds of environmental complaint against data centers. This series takes them one at a time.
I work at a local ISP in Northern Illinois and co-founded FD-IX, an internet exchange. I have no customer, vendor, or interconnection relationship with any facility or developer named here and no financial position in any of them beyond broad-market index funds. My industry grows with infrastructure investment in a general way, which is an indirect interest; the full disclosure is at the top of the complete article.
Noise is the complaint Virginia’s own auditors found behind most data center disputes, and it is the one Yorkville’s staff heard first when they called Loudoun County for advice. [4][11w] It is also the category that holds the widest spread of claims in this series: a documented siting failure in Chandler, Arizona, a developer’s promise made under oath, a resident’s health warning built from general material, and a mechanism, inaudible infrasound, that has no evidentiary basis at all.
What makes noise different from the other twelve records is that Yorkville wrote the test into its approvals. Continuous monitors, a final study on measured data for the actual equipment, mitigation on any exceedance. Whether neighbors hear these campuses will be a measured fact. This post rates five noise claims, reads Project Steel’s own acoustic study, which found the base design over both the city code and the state limits, and explains why a water concession usually arrives with a noise cost attached.
How the ratings work. Each complaint below is stated the way it usually arrives at a hearing and rated on the scale the full article uses. Systemic: documented at compliant facilities across multiple geographies. Regional: real, but only under specific geographic or operational conditions. Isolated: documented at one or few facilities due to misconduct or atypical design. Exaggerated: the concern is real but the figures are permit ceilings or worst cases, not operating norms. Selective: a legitimate concern applied only to data centers, not to comparable land uses. Misattributed: the harm is real but the source, geography, or cause is wrong. Contested: a plausible mechanism exists but causal documentation at compliant facilities does not. Fabricated: no credible evidentiary basis exists. Where I say I found no record of something, that means a search of public sources through October 2026, not paid databases or records requests.
Noise
Claim: Data centers are loud. Tier: Regional. Depends on cooling design, climate, and distance.
Virginia’s JLARC study, the only state-level examination of the question I located, found that “a large majority of data centers do not generate noise complaints because of their location or design,” that whether noise carries past the property line depends on design and cooling type, and that the noise behind resident complaints measured roughly 40 to 59 decibels, “rarely loud enough to violate noise ordinances.” The complaint is the constancy, not the volume. [4] Complaint counts are not measurements, so the finding supports something narrower than “data centers are quiet”: complaint-level noise is not inevitable. DeKalb’s city manager said in August 2026 the city has had no complaints about noise or any other pollution from Meta’s campus, roughly a mile from the nearest homes. [10d] Air-cooled facilities run fans continuously, and in hot climates they run at or near full speed for long stretches. Variable-speed fans, barriers, berms, and setbacks in the hundreds of feet are available mitigations, and I found no survey of how widely they are deployed. One vendor reports a 97.5% reduction in tonal fan noise from impeller redesign, a result it published itself rather than one independently verified. [14]
Claim: Chandler shows data centers make neighborhoods unlivable, and Chandler is coming to Yorkville. Tier: Misattributed.
Chandler’s noise problem was real. In early 2019, residents near Dobson and Queen Creek roads described the hum from a CyrusOne campus’s 24 chillers as “a blender on steroids,” and one said she had not slept a full night in about two and a half years. CyrusOne said it complied with the city’s ordinances. [36b] The cause was a zoning framework with no data center provisions applied to a facility of this scale near homes: city staff later wrote that the lack of rules “has caused confusion for both the data center industry and Chandler residents,” and the council adopted a data center zoning amendment, Ordinance No. 5033, in December 2022. It sets no decibel limit. It requires a third-party sound study at the nearest residential property line before the first neighborhood meeting, mitigation so operation does not exceed the ambient level that study found, post-construction studies at peak operation annually for five years, an on-site liaison for noise complaints, and generator testing on weekdays between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. with 24 hours’ public notice. [36a] That is a siting failure answered with a measurement, not a property of the building type.
Carrying it to Yorkville also skips the climate. Northern Illinois has far more cool-weather hours than Phoenix, which changes the cooling load and the fan speed for much of the year, though the economizer inputs that would quantify it are not public for any proposal here. It does not settle Yorkville the other way: Project Steel is air-cooled, and an air-cooled campus here still runs at full output on hot, humid days. Chandler’s record cannot stand in for design-day sound levels at a Yorkville property line. Only the applicant’s acoustic data can.
Claim: Neighbors “are not going to hear this campus.” Tier: Contested. A promise the conditions will test.
This is the developer’s claim, made under oath by Project Cardinal’s representative at the July 2025 hearing: “They are not going to hear it during operation, they are not going to hear it during generator testing.” [11y] The neighboring project’s own consultant shows why that needs measuring. Prologis’s study for Project Steel measured average baseline (L90) levels of 39 to 42 dBA and found the base design would put 49 to 65 dBA on nearby homes, over both the city code and the state limits that govern the unincorporated residences around the site. [11d] Quieter chillers and sound walls bring it within the city’s 60 dBA day and 50 dBA night limits; for the state’s roughly 44 dBA nighttime limit, the study claims only “substantial compliance,” and only with the lowest-noise equipment. [11d][11s] Those state limits are the Illinois Pollution Control Board’s octave-band ceilings for sound crossing onto residential land, such as 61 dB at 63 Hz and 35 dB at 1,000 Hz by night from a commercial source; they apply everywhere in Illinois, including where no city ordinance reaches, and they are enforced by complaint after the fact. [41a] CyrusOne’s study for its 228-acre Yorkville campus projected 30 to 45 dBA at nearby homes at night against background levels of 38 to 41 dBA: within code, and at the top of that range, above the existing background. [11q] And CyrusOne’s older Aurora campus, approved around 2017, drew enough complaints, mainly about rooftop fans, that Aurora wrote new rules. [11q][11t][11u]
Yorkville wrote the test into the approvals. Steel’s agreement puts city-chosen continuous monitors in at the start of each construction phase for the life of the project, sets the city code with a 10 dBA penalty for tonal noise as the limit, requires mitigation on any exceedance, and requires the final study to use measured sound data for the actual equipment. [11s] CyrusOne’s amended agreement requires continuous monitoring and a reviewed noise study with each building permit, and records that the city’s ordinance exempts emergency generator operation. [11q] Cardinal’s carries continuous monitoring and a report within 60 days of each building going live. [11x] Whether neighbors hear these campuses will be a measured fact, which is the point.
Claim: A data center this size “could cause significant noise pollution in this area to residents, causing neurological and mental health stressors in addition to medical issues and complications.” Tier: Contested.
That is the Yorkville resident’s March 2025 claim, supported with general material on noise and diesel exhaust rather than anything about this site. [11w] The measurable question is the level and duration of sound at the home, which the Yorkville conditions now require someone to measure. Whether a given level at a given home harms health is not something the sources reviewed for this series settle, and it is not something a general article about noise can settle for a specific campus either.
Claim: Data centers harm health through infrasound you can’t hear. Tier: Fabricated.
The claim is that facilities emit sound below 20 Hz, below the threshold of hearing, that causes headaches, insomnia, nausea, and anxiety through an inaudible mechanism. The mechanism is where it fails. Infrasound becomes audible at high levels, about 97 dB at 10 Hz and 107 dB at 4 Hz for a typical young adult [32a], and a review of the literature found “no reliable evidence that infrasounds below the hearing threshold produce physiological or psychological effects.” [32a] I found no facility-specific measurement showing sub-20 Hz levels anywhere near the hearing threshold at a residential setback. A 2019 NIOSH health hazard evaluation, citing a 1982 review, reported no evidence of hearing threshold shifts from continuous exposure at 118 dB or less for 24 hours. [32]
The closest population evidence comes from wind turbines, and it is comparison evidence only: turbines are a different source, and the study related health outcomes to calculated turbine noise levels, not to infrasound measured on its own. Health Canada’s study of 1,238 households near 399 turbines, published in peer-reviewed form in 2016, found self-reported illness, including migraines, tinnitus, dizziness, and poor sleep, unrelated to calculated turbine noise, and found the objectively measured outcomes, hair cortisol, blood pressure, resting heart rate, and actigraph-measured sleep, unrelated to it as well. Annoyance did rise with exposure: each 5 dB increase raised the odds of being highly annoyed by a factor of 2.6. [31][31a] Residents raising infrasound are usually responding to something real, audible low-frequency noise or the fair worry that a decibel reading misses something. That is answered with octave-band measurements before and after construction, not with the infrasound claim.
What to ask for. Measure first. Require a pre-construction acoustic baseline at the property line and at the nearest residences, a final study on measured sound data for the actual equipment, and continuous monitoring from the start of construction, which is what Yorkville’s Ordinance 2025-53 and its three approvals now require. [11b][11s][11q][11x] Ask for the applicant’s cooling design and the resulting sound power levels, and for disclosure of changes to either after approval, because air cooling rejects the same heat with fans and runs them hardest on the hot, humid days when windows are open. Aurora’s ordinance shows a stricter form: 57 dBA by day and 47 at night at the facility’s own property line, rooftop chillers at least 1,500 feet from homes, and annual property-line noise reports the city publishes. [11t][11u] Ask also whether the state’s octave-band limits, enforced by complaint after the fact, are the only protection for unincorporated homes around the site, since Project Steel’s study claims only “substantial compliance” with the nighttime limit. [11d][41a]
On infrasound. Residents raising it are usually responding to something real: audible low-frequency noise, or a fair worry that a single decibel reading misses it. The answer is octave-band measurements before and after construction, not a mechanism no study supports. A claim that fails on evidence costs the room the real concern should have won.
This is part 6 of 13 in Thirteen Records, a series that takes the long article Data Centers Don’t Have an Environmental Record. They Have Thirteen of Them. one topic at a time. Previous: cooling wastewater. Next: construction, the impact neighbors meet first and, on a ten-year campus, live beside longest.
Cover photo: Rsparks3 / Wikimedia Commons, CC0
Citations
[4] Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission, “Data Centers in Virginia,” Report 598 (House/Senate Document RD206), December 9, 2024. Summary findings: generators “make up less than 4 percent of regional emissions of nitrogen oxides” in Northern Virginia (p. vi); “One-third of data centers are currently located near residential areas” (p. vii); “a large majority of data centers do not generate noise complaints because of their location or design” (p. viii). Chapter 5: 2023 actual emissions “only 7 percent of what permits allowed, with most emissions coming from maintenance testing”; emissions “unlikely to adversely affect regional air quality”; generators’ “intermittent use makes their impacts difficult to model”; regional monitoring “does not effectively capture localized effects”; DEQ three-year monitoring study (p. 59). “General Assembly could incentivize use of generators with lower emission rates”; Tier 4 engines or SCR reduce nitrogen oxides and particulate matter “reportedly by up to 90 percent”; “only one uses Tier 4 generators” (p. 60). Permits “issued per data center site, rather than per building or generator”; worst case “where all data centers in Northern Virginia reach their maximum allowed emissions” would emit “over 9,000 tons of nitrogen oxides in the region,” “about half of what has typically been emitted annually in Northern Virginia by all sources” (p. 60). Chapter 6: noise “is not loud enough to damage nearby residents’ hearing and rarely loud enough to violate noise ordinances”; audibility past the property line “depends on its design and its type of cooling system”; complaint noise “ranges from an estimated 40 to 59 decibels” (p. 75). “Almost one-third (29 percent) of operational data center properties in Virginia are within 200 feet of residentially zoned properties” (p. 77; Table B-1, p. 103). https://jlarc.virginia.gov/pdfs/reports/Rpt598.pdf (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261025155822/https://jlarc.virginia.gov/pdfs/reports/Rpt598.pdf). Legislative repository copy: https://rga.lis.virginia.gov/Published/2025/RD206 (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20260908164522/https://rga.lis.virginia.gov/Published/2025/RD206)
[10d] Ben Howell, WGLT/NPR Illinois, “How Aurora and DeKalb residents are dealing with data centers,” August 3, 2026: City Manager Bill Nicklas said “the city has not had to deal with complaints about the center due to noise … or any other pollution issue”; the campus sits “roughly a mile from the nearest homes.” https://www.nprillinois.org/illinois/2026-08-03/how-aurora-and-dekalb-residents-are-dealing-with-data-centers (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261025160423/https://www.nprillinois.org/illinois/2026-08-03/how-aurora-and-dekalb-residents-are-dealing-with-data-centers)
[11q] United City of Yorkville, City Council Packet, July 14, 2026, item PZC 2026-03 & EDC 2026-30, First Amendment to the Planned Unit Development Agreement with C1 Yorkville, LLC (CyrusOne CHI-11, approximately 228 acres): water allocation reduced from 500,000 to 40,000 gallons per day with closed-loop cooling; Section on mechanical screening and noise: noise study by Trinity Consultants “reviewed and accepted by the City’s 3rd party review engineer (Soundscape Engineering)”; “The Developer agrees to be responsible for the continuous noise monitoring”; project “subject to the requirements of the City’s Noise Ordinance, Title 4, Chapter 4”; “the City’s ordinance exempts the emergency operation of generators from regulation”; final noise study with each building permit “consistent with the standards set forth on Exhibit H,” presented to the City Council. Exhibit G, Trinity Consultants, CyrusOne Yorkville AHJ Noise Study, May 21, 2026: long-term background measurements September 3 to 4, 2024 (nighttime L90 38 to 41 dBA); projected nighttime data center levels of 30 to 45 dBA at receivers against a 60/50 dBA day/night code limit. Exhibit H, Soundscape Engineering, “Recommended Guidelines for Data Center Noise Impact Studies Submitted with Permit Applications, Rev. 1,” July 14, 2026: octave-band sound power data, measured data preferred; tonality assessment; reasonable worst-case conditions; routine generator testing; updated ambient survey optional but recommended. https://www.yorkville.il.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/6824 (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261025162615/https://www.yorkville.il.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/6824) and https://www.yorkville.il.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/6827 (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261025162621/https://www.yorkville.il.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/6827). Adoption: Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the City Council, July 14, 2026 (as reproduced in the July 28, 2026 council packet): Ordinance 2026-50, Exhibit H amendment 7-0, main motion 7-0; Alderman Marek on noise issues at CyrusOne’s Aurora campus; CyrusOne attorney Russ Whitaker that the Aurora campus “was approved around 2017, prior to the predictive modeling and noise standards they follow now.” https://www.yorkville.il.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/6839 (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261025162729/https://www.yorkville.il.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/6839)
[11d] Shiner Acoustics, LLC, “Project Steel Environmental Noise Assessment,” SA project 1250506, Revision C, September 19, 2025, prepared for Prologis, in the United City of Yorkville City Council Packet, March 24, 2026, PDF pp. 807 onward (Summary, p. 809): average baseline L90 sound levels of 39 to 42 dBA; Yorkville limits 60 dBA day and 50 dBA night; Illinois limits for unincorporated residences about 55 dBA day and 44 dBA night; base design predicted at “49 to 65 dBA at residential receivers” with standard-noise chillers and generators, “which exceeds both noise codes.” https://www.yorkville.il.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/6695 (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20260409172641/https://www.yorkville.il.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/6695)
[11s] United City of Yorkville, Ordinance No. 2026-32, approving a Planned Unit Development Agreement with Prologis, L.P. (Project Steel), passed March 24, 2026, executed copy (scanned; read by text recognition of the page images, October 25, 2026): Section 2.1, entitlements “fully vested and protected from amendments and changes to City ordinances, codes, or regulations for a period of twenty (20) years from the Effective Date,” provided the project commences within three years; Section 2.2, “Section 10-4-10 of the UDO is reserved for additional regulations applicable to Energy Industrial Uses. The Developer has requested and the City hereby agrees that, for a period of fifteen (15) years from the Effective Date, any standards adopted to further regulate Energy Industrial Uses shall be waived and not applicable to the Subject Property”; Section 2.3, construction over a twenty-year period in three phases; Section 3.3 noise terms as below; Section 3.4, water usage “governed by the terms of the Utility Agreement”; Exhibit H, the Shiner Acoustics initial noise study. https://www.yorkville.il.us/DocumentCenter/View/13598 (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261025160732/https://www.yorkville.il.us/DocumentCenter/View/13598). Packet version: City Council Packet, March 24, 2026 (Project Steel approval). Planned Unit Development Agreement between the United City of Yorkville and Prologis, L.P. (Project Steel), Section 3.3, Noise Studies and Noise Monitoring: “At the onset of each phase of construction, Developer shall install continuous noise monitoring devices recommended by a sound engineer chosen by the City”; devices “maintained throughout the life of the Project,” with City access to data on request; on notice of an exceedance, Developer “shall investigate the source of the noise and identify and implement one or more means to mitigate”; final noise study based on “actual sound level measurements of that specific equipment … and not on interpolated, extrapolated, or otherwise calculated sound levels,” with a mitigation plan meeting local limits “which includes the penalty for tonal equipment.” City presentation in the same packet: daytime limit 60 dBA and nighttime 50 dBA, “10 dbA penalties to those limits for tonal noise (i.e. limit of 50 dbA daytime / 40 dbA nighttime).” Shiner Acoustics, Project Steel noise evaluation, September 19, 2025: baseline L90 39 to 42 dBA (measured June 23 to 27, 2025); Illinois limits for commercial to residential about 55 dBA day and 44 dBA night; base design predicted at 49 to 65 dBA at residential receivers, “which exceeds both noise codes”; with lower-noise chillers and sound walls “predicted to achieve compliance with the Yorkville limits”; for the Illinois limits, “substantial compliance” with “the lowest-noise chillers and low-noise generators.” https://www.yorkville.il.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/6695 (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20260409172641/https://www.yorkville.il.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/6695)
[11t] City of Aurora, Illinois. Ordinance O26-022, Legistar 26-0112 Exhibit A-FINAL, Zoning Ordinance Section 49-104.3(c)(25), data center facility conditional use: “A baseline pre-development sound study with minimum and maximum dB (A) levels measured for a continuous weeklong period”; Noise Modeling Study by a third-party acoustical engineer; “Evaporative chillers utilizing potable water are prohibited”; roof-mounted chillers not within 1,500 feet, ground-mounted chillers and generators not within 1,000 feet of any residential, hospital or educational use; “Roof-mounted generators are prohibited”; generators to comply with Public Act 104-0458 “including but not limited to Tier 4 emission standards in 415 ILCS 5/39(a)”; noise “must not exceed the following constant-minimum noise thresholds as measured at the facility property line: Daytime hours 57 dB (A) weighted 7am-7pm; and Nightime hours 47 dB (A) weighted 7pm-7am”; continuous vibration monitoring; PUE no more than 1.2; “Water Usage Effectiveness of no more than two tenths (0.2),” potable building water (liters) per IT equipment kilowatt-hour. https://www.aurora.il.us/files/sharedassets/mainsite/v/1/environment/documents/o26-022.pdf (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261025155804/https://www.aurora.il.us/files/sharedassets/mainsite/v/1/environment/documents/o26-022.pdf). Ordinance O26-021, Legistar 26-0092, Chapter 50, Aurora Responsible Data Center Ordinance, applicable to all data centers in city limits: generator testing “regardless of whether installed before or after March 25, 2026, may only occur between the hours of 9:00 am and 5:00 pm Monday through Friday, and not on holidays. No more than two (2) generators may be tested simultaneously”; annual ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager energy and water report and “Third party tested noise level reports … during both daytime hours and nighttime hours at the property line,” made publicly available by June. https://www.aurora.il.us/files/sharedassets/mainsite/v/1/environment/documents/o26-021.pdf (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261025155729/https://www.aurora.il.us/files/sharedassets/mainsite/v/1/environment/documents/o26-021.pdf). City pages: “New Data Center and Warehouse Regulations,” https://www.aurora.il.us/Property-Business/Zoning-and-Planning/New-Data-Center-and-Warehouse-Regulations (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261010000331/https://www.aurora.il.us/Property-Business/Zoning-and-Planning/New-Data-Center-and-Warehouse-Regulations); “City Council Approves Regulations on Data Centers,” March 25, 2026 (moratorium enacted September 25, 2025; ordinances approved March 24, 2026), https://www.aurora.il.us/News-articles/City-Council-Approves-Regulations-on-Data-Centers (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20260511095055/https://www.aurora.il.us/News-articles/City-Council-Approves-Regulations-on-Data-Centers); “CyrusOne Noise Mitigation Updates,” April 23, 2026: “a permanent solution to the noise complaints that have affected the area,” https://www.aurora.il.us/News-articles/CyrusOne-Noise-Mitigation-Updates (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20260424002055/https://www.aurora.il.us/News-articles/CyrusOne-Noise-Mitigation-Updates)
[11u] Ben Howell, WGLT / Illinois Newsroom, “In data center hubs Aurora and DeKalb, two different approaches to setting restrictions,” August 11, 2026. CyrusOne Aurora campus drew “consistent complaints from nearby residents,” mainly about rooftop cooling fans; DeKalb City Manager Bill Nicklas on metered water at Meta and on the newer facility “not using water for cooling.” https://ipmnewsroom.org/in-data-center-hubs-aurora-and-dekalb-two-different-approaches-to-setting-restrictions/ (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261024145913/https://ipmnewsroom.org/in-data-center-hubs-aurora-and-dekalb-two-different-approaches-to-setting-restrictions/)
[11w] United City of Yorkville, City Council Packet, June 10, 2025 (ArchiveCenter Item 6268). Written public comment correspondence, packet pp. 234 to 236: resident email of March 25, 2025 (“could cause significant noise pollution in this area to residents, causing neurological and mental health stressors in addition to medical issues and complications”) with links to Washington Department of Ecology, EPA DERA, American Cancer Society, and California Air Resources Board diesel pages, and City Administrator Bart Olson’s replies of March 27 and 31, 2025: that none of the data centers nearer the resident’s home will use well water, “neither their own or the City wells,” and “They are not anticipated to begin operation until well after we have converted to the Lake Michigan source”; “We have spoken with our government counterparts in Loudoun County Virginia, which is the data center capital of the world. They have spoken a bit about noise complaints being the most frequent issue cited by neighbors, but they tended to downplay the severity of it compared to your assertion of medical issues and complications.” Staff memorandum, Sara Mendez, Planner I, to the Planning and Zoning Commission, May 7, 2025, “PZC 2025-05 Data Center Development Standards, Text Amendment,” packet pp. 394 to 410, comparing Loudoun County, Prince William County, and Chandler standards (“While Yorkville is not looking to adopt Loudoun County’s standards exactly, it aims to implement similar best practices tailored to the City’s specific needs”); Loudoun generator testing hours as tabulated in the memo: May 1 to September 30, 5 to 7 p.m.; October 1 to April 30, 11 a.m. to 5 p.m.; table of twelve data center projects with nearest distance to a residential property line: Cyrus One ~2,230 feet; Prologis (Project Steel) ~3,500 feet; Daniels (South) ~130 feet; Daniels (North) ~98 feet; Green Door 50 acres ~4,300 feet; Green Door-Hagemann ~7,300 feet; Green Door-Kelaka ~1,500 feet; Green Door-Meyer ~0 feet; Hamman-Kelaka ~0 feet; Magnolia Hill Partners ~2,600 feet; Pioneer (Project Cardinal) ~460 feet; PGP Development ~650 feet. Draft ordinance, packet pp. 389 to 393, adopted as Ordinance 2025-53 on June 24, 2025 by a 7-0 roll call (draft minutes of the June 24, 2025 City Council meeting, in the July 22, 2025 City Council Packet, ArchiveCenter Item 6360, p. 20). https://www.yorkville.il.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/6268 (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20251030032646/https://www.yorkville.il.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/6268) and https://www.yorkville.il.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/6360 (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261025162554/https://www.yorkville.il.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/6360)
[11x] United City of Yorkville, Ordinance No. 2025-77, approving the Planned Unit Development Agreement for Project Cardinal, passed November 10, 2025 (7-0), signed by the mayor November 13, 2025, published November 14, 2025; city-posted executed copy, mayor’s signature and clerk’s attestation dated November 13, 2025, Pioneer Development signature and date lines blank. Section 2.1: vesting applies “Upon commencement of the Project within three (3) years of the Effective Date.” Section 2.2: “Section 10-4-10 of the UDO is reserved for additional regulations applicable to Energy Industrial Uses. No new or amended standards, code provisions, or special regulations for Energy Industrial Uses shall apply to the Subject Property during the twenty (20) year vested term from the Effective Date of this Agreement, unless Developer agrees in writing or to the extent required by state or federal law.” No reference to Ordinance 2025-53. Section 2.14: “seventy-eight (78) feet, inclusive of any rooftop mechanical equipment or appurtenances.” Section 3.5: water obligations “addressed exclusively in the Utility Agreement.” https://www.yorkville.il.us/DocumentCenter/View/13587/Ordinance-2025-77—record?bidId= (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261025151237/https://www.yorkville.il.us/DocumentCenter/View/13587/Ordinance-2025-77—record?bidId=). Annexation agreement, Ordinance No. 2025-78: https://www.yorkville.il.us/DocumentCenter/View/13588/Ordinance-2025-78—record?bidId= (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261025151421/https://www.yorkville.il.us/DocumentCenter/View/13588/Ordinance-2025-78—record?bidId=). Packet version: City Council Packet, November 10, 2025 (ArchiveCenter Item 6499), Planned Unit Development Agreement between the United City of Yorkville and Pioneer Development, LLC (Project Cardinal), packet pp. 272 to 290. Section 2.1: entitlements “fully vested and protected from amendments and changes to City ordinances, codes, or regulations for a period of twenty (20) years from the Effective Date.” Section 2.2: “No new or amended standards, code provisions, or special regulations for Energy Industrial Uses shall apply to the Subject Property during the twenty (20) year vested term from the Effective Date of this Agreement, unless Developer agrees in writing or to the extent required by state or federal law.” Section 2.3: approximately ten-year build-out; Phasing Plan “advisory only and non-binding.” Section 2.4: “All data center buildings shall be at least five hundred feet (500′) from the nearest residential or commercial structure outside the boundaries of the Subject Property,” measured “from existing, occupied, residential or commercial buildings as of the date of PUD approval.” Section 2.10: 100-foot Transition Zone Type D buffer with a 12-foot berm facing residential properties and 8 feet elsewhere; “No additional berms or landscape requirements shall be imposed unless Developer agrees in writing.” Section 2.11: “the most appropriate location for Mechanical Equipment is on the rooftops; therefore, whenever practical, mechanical equipment shall be placed on the rooftops”; project subject to the City Noise Ordinance “as it existed when the PUD application was approved by the City Council.” Section 2.14: 78-foot maximum height including rooftop equipment. Section 2.17: “all primary power used for the data center campus on the Subject Property will be delivered from the Commonwealth Edison power grid” unless the City Council approves otherwise. Section 3.4: continuous noise monitoring devices at the onset of each construction phase, a preliminary report within 60 days after each building is operational, devices maintained for the life of the project. Section 3.11: operational testing of generators “during the hours of 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and not on any Holidays.” https://www.yorkville.il.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/6499 (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261025154939/https://www.yorkville.il.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/6499)
[11b] United City of Yorkville, Ordinance No. 2025-53, data center standards, passed June 24, 2025 (7-0), published June 27, 2025, replacing Unified Development Ordinance Section 10-4-10 in its entirety: https://www.yorkville.il.us/DocumentCenter/View/13005/Ordinance-2025-53?bidId= (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261025151332/https://www.yorkville.il.us/DocumentCenter/View/13005/Ordinance-2025-53?bidId=). As codified, UDO Section 10-4-10, history note “(Ord. No. 2025-53, effective 06/27/2025)”: initial noise study with baseline measurements and predictive modeling; final study on “actual sound level measurements”; mitigation plan “including the penalty for tonal equipment”; annual monitoring by the city’s consultant for three years or, alternatively, continuous monitors from the onset of construction; rooftop HVAC or mechanical units “shall require the approval of City Council”; 70-foot height including rooftop equipment within 1,500 feet of a residence; generator testing 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. weekdays, non-holidays; 50-foot battery setback; 500-foot building separation; 100-foot landscape buffers. No water or well provisions. https://online.encodeplus.com/regs/yorkville-il/doc-viewer.aspx?secid=290 (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261025034754/https://online.encodeplus.com/regs/yorkville-il/doc-viewer.aspx?secid=290). UDO Section 10-7-6.A: “All parcels within a subdivision shall be required to connect to the United City of Yorkville’s Public Water Supply System.” https://online.encodeplus.com/regs/yorkville-il/doc-viewer.aspx?secid=326 (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261025034848/https://online.encodeplus.com/regs/yorkville-il/doc-viewer.aspx?secid=326)
[11y] United City of Yorkville, Planning and Zoning Commission, transcript of the public hearing on PZC 2025-08 (Pioneer Development, LLC, Project Cardinal), July 9, 2025, Vitosh Reporting Service (ArchiveCenter Item 6395, “PZC 7-9-25 Minutes & Transcript”). Sworn testimony of Matt McCarron for Pioneer Development: Ashburn homes “within 500 feet of data center campuses in Ashburn have been appreciated by approximately 70 percent over the last decade” (transcript p. 26); “legacy Ashburn data center campuses are built as close as a hundred, 130 feet from residential property lines. We’re committing to a minimum 500-foot setback” (pp. 26 to 27); generator testing “is only going to occur once or twice a year” and generators “are really never used outside of testing” (p. 25); “all backup generators meet Tier 4 final EPA standards” (p. 29); “if it’s curtailed in an emergency, we would be curtailed first and we would have backup generators. We are not going to cause a brownout” (p. 84). https://www.yorkville.il.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/6395 (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261025162533/https://www.yorkville.il.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/6395)
[14] Industrial Noise and Vibration Centre, “Silencing also improved data center fan noise efficiency by 20 percent,” case study. [Source is the vendor who performed the work; independently published peer review does not exist for this specific result.] https://invc.com/resources/noise-control-case-studies/fans/data-center-fan-noise-attenuation-increases-efficiency-20/ (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20260707112501/https://invc.com/resources/noise-control-case-studies/fans/data-center-fan-noise-attenuation-increases-efficiency-20/)
[31] Health Canada / Statistics Canada, “Wind Turbine Noise and Health Study: Summary of Results,” November 2014. 1,238 participating households; 12 developments in Ontario and 6 in Prince Edward Island with “315 and 84 wind turbines respectively.” Self-reported sleep, dizziness, tinnitus, migraines, high blood pressure, and other illnesses showed no association with wind turbine noise levels; “WTN was not observed to be related to hair cortisol concentrations, blood pressure, resting heart rate or measured sleep”; “In all cases, annoyance increased with increasing exposure to WTN levels,”. The summary called its results preliminary pending peer review; the peer-reviewed papers are [31a]. https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/health-risks-safety/radiation/everyday-things-emit-radiation/wind-turbine-noise/wind-turbine-noise-health-study-summary-results.html (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261011053025/https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/health-risks-safety/radiation/everyday-things-emit-radiation/wind-turbine-noise/wind-turbine-noise-health-study-summary-results.html)
[31a] Michaud, D.S., et al., Health Canada Wind Turbine Noise and Health Study, peer-reviewed results, 2016. “Exposure to wind turbine noise: Perceptual responses and reported health effects,” Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 139(3):1443-1454, DOI 10.1121/1.4942391: “Self-reported health effects (e.g., migraines, tinnitus, dizziness, etc.), sleep disturbance, sleep disorders, quality of life, and perceived stress were not related to WTN levels.” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27036283/ (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261011154040/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27036283/). Annoyance paper, JASA 139(3):1455-1466, DOI 10.1121/1.4942390: “for each 5 dB increase in WTN levels, the odds of reporting to be either very or extremely (i.e., highly) annoyed increased by 2.60.” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27036284/ (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261014135119/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27036284/). Stress biomarkers paper, JASA 139(3):1467-1479, DOI 10.1121/1.4942402: WTN exposure had no apparent influence on hair cortisol, resting blood pressure, or heart rate. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27036285/ (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20250205133304/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27036285/). Sleep paper, Sleep 39(1):97-109, DOI 10.5665/sleep.5326: “Self-reported and objectively measured sleep outcomes consistently revealed no apparent pattern or statistically significant relationship to WTN levels.” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26518593/ (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20260430093401/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26518593/)
[32] National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. 2019-0119-3362, “Evaluation of Low Frequency Noise, Infrasound, and Health Symptoms at an Administrative Building and Men’s Shelter,” October 2019. Citing Johnson (1982): the review “did not find evidence of hearing threshold shifts from continuous exposures to levels of 118 dB or less for 24 hours”; “The frequency-specific or overall sound levels we measured are not known to cause adverse health effects.” https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/hhe/reports/pdfs/2019-0119-3362.pdf (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20260909192039/https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/hhe/reports/pdfs/2019-0119-3362.pdf)
[32a] Leventhall, G., “Low Frequency Noise. What we know, what we do not know, and what we would like to know,” Journal of Low Frequency Noise, Vibration and Active Control, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 79-104, 2009. Median hearing threshold about 97 dB at 10 Hz and about 107 dB at 4 Hz (Table I, p. 80); quoting Berglund and Lindvall, “There is no reliable evidence that infrasounds below the hearing threshold produce physiological or psychological effects” (p. 92). Reprint: https://scispace.com/pdf/low-frequency-noise-what-we-know-what-we-do-not-know-and-zeeq9a7cmr.pdf (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20250520182235/https://scispace.com/pdf/low-frequency-noise-what-we-know-what-we-do-not-know-and-zeeq9a7cmr.pdf)
[36a] City of Chandler, Arizona, Ordinance No. 5033, Zoning Code amendment PLH22-0053 adding Chapter 35, Section 35-2214 (Data Centers), and Council Memo dated December 8, 2022 (Planning and Zoning Commission October 19, 2022, 7-0; introduced and tentatively adopted December 5, 2022). Memo: potential impacts “primarily from unwanted noise”; “As these data centers have developed closer to the urbanized area of Chandler, including residential areas, the potential for noise compatibility issues has increased”; “an industry migration from water-cooled to electrically-cooled facilities”; the lack of rules “has caused confusion for both the data center industry and Chandler residents.” Ordinance 35-2214(3) to (7): on-site liaison for noise complaints; pre-construction “sound study performed by a third-party acoustic engineer” at “the property line of the nearest property”; mitigation to prevent noise “from exceeding the ambient noise levels that were observed in the baseline study”; post-construction study “during peak operation of the Data Center mechanical equipment” and annual studies for five years; generator testing announced 24 hours in advance and limited to 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. No decibel limit. https://www.chandleraz.gov/sites/default/files/departments/development-services/PLH22-0053-Ordinance-No-5033-Data-Center.pdf (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261012204157/https://www.chandleraz.gov/sites/default/files/departments/development-services/PLH22-0053-Ordinance-No-5033-Data-Center.pdf) and https://www.chandleraz.gov/sites/default/files/departments/development-services/PLH22-0053-Council-Memo.pdf (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261010000250/https://www.chandleraz.gov/sites/default/files/departments/development-services/PLH22-0053-Council-Memo.pdf). City release, “Chandler’s data center ordinance now in effect,” January 11, 2023 (effective January 5, 2023): https://www.chandleraz.gov/news-center/chandlers-data-center-ordinance-now-effect (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261010004135/https://www.chandleraz.gov/news-center/chandlers-data-center-ordinance-now-effect)
[36b] ABC15 Arizona, “Loud hum consuming Chandler neighborhood,” February 26, 2019. Residents near Dobson and Queen Creek roads; noise attributed to 24 chillers at a CyrusOne data center; CyrusOne statement that it continues to comply with Chandler’s ordinances; council discussion of enforcing the noise ordinance. https://www.abc15.com/news/region-southeast-valley/chandler/loud-hum-consuming-chandler-neighborhood (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20260218122654/https://www.abc15.com/news/region-southeast-valley/chandler/loud-hum-consuming-chandler-neighborhood)
[41a] 35 Ill. Adm. Code 901.102, Sound Emitted to Class A Land (Illinois Pollution Control Board noise regulations, Part 901, with Part 900 definitions and measurement procedures). Allowable octave-band sound pressure levels from Class B land (commercial and service uses) to Class A land (residential), nighttime: 63 dB at 31.5 Hz, 61 at 63 Hz, 55 at 125 Hz, 47 at 250 Hz, 40 at 500 Hz, 35 at 1,000 Hz, 30 at 2,000 Hz, 25 at 4,000 and 8,000 Hz; daytime: 72, 71, 65, 57, 51, 45, 39, 34, 32; Class C (manufacturing and industrial) sources have higher limits; measurements “at least 25 feet from the property-line noise source” at any point within the receiving Class A land. https://ilga.gov/ftp/JCAR/AdminCode/035/035009010001020R.html (archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20261025154950/https://ilga.gov/ftp/JCAR/AdminCode/035/035009010001020R.html)