Cologno Monzese City Council in Lombardy, Italy, has unanimously rejected an 80MW data center proposed by Officine Mak and 2C Sviluppo Immobiliare Spa at the former Torriani industrial site. The project, which was expected to generate €12 million ($13.4 million) in council fees, included two data center buildings and supporting infrastructure on Via Guzzina, near Brugherio. In a September 24 resolution, the council cited concerns over water and electricity consumption, land use, and technological waste, saying the project conflicted with the municipality's environmental and strategic objectives.
The council resolution, reported in II Giorno, stated that the submitted proposal "does not fully comply with the requirements of the PGT [territorial government plan]." It added that strategic objectives require leading Cologno Monzese toward "an eco-sustainable, circular and intelligent city, focused on the regeneration of existing buildings, energy efficiency, protection of water resources, and the structural expansion of biodiversity and urban forests." The rejection comes amid rapid data center growth in Lombardy, particularly the Milan metropolitan area, where 2GW of new capacity is expected over the next five years due to AI demand.
The decision aligns with a pattern of local opposition to large data center projects in the region. A proposed 240MW facility in Magenta faced backlash this summer, and plans for a 120MW data center in Travagliato were withdrawn last month. The Cologno Monzese rejection suggests that municipalities are increasingly weighing environmental and land-use concerns against the economic benefits of data center development, even when projects promise substantial council fees.
What remains unknown is whether Officine Mak and 2C Sviluppo Immobiliare Spa will revise the proposal, appeal the decision, or pursue the project elsewhere. The dossier does not specify the timeline for any potential next steps, nor does it detail the specific water and electricity consumption figures that informed the council's concerns. The single source also does not indicate whether the developers had addressed environmental objections before the September 24 resolution.