Cannon Falls planning commission backs PUD, variances and preliminary plat tied to proposed TRAC data center

The Cannon Falls Planning Commission on Oct. 13 recommended the City Council approve a planned unit development (PUD), three variances and a preliminary plat connected with a proposed TRAC data center and introduced a development agreement laying out water, wastewater and infrastructure commitments.

The recommendations would let the TRAC project proceed to the council with conditions that include phased approvals, limits on water use and developer-funded infrastructure. City staff told commissioners the full, phased development would be allocated up to 43,000,000 gallons of water per year, and the developer has agreed to pay toward a new water storage tower and plant improvements.

Why it matters: The project would change land use on the north end of Cannon Falls and add industrial-scale water and sewer demand. Planning commissioners and public speakers pressed for more public review, and staff emphasized provisions intended to protect city water and sewer capacity while requiring the developer to pay for most new infrastructure.

Public comment and concerns

Two registered speakers addressed the commission. Ann Beschick Buzenmeyer, of Cannon Falls, asked the commission to delay action and give residents more time to review financial benefits presented at a recent work session, saying, “Let the citizens decide the trajectory of Cannon Falls.” Nora Felton, a local farmer, said her primary concern was water and whether treated wastewater could be reused to recharge the aquifer: “My concern is the water, wastewater treatment plant that, where it's gonna the water is gonna get treated and whether that water can come back to recharge our aquifer,” she said.

Planning commission discussion and motions

Staff reiterated that the PUD establishes development specifics such as setbacks, landscaping, building height and architectural standards and that the current PUD draft includes two changes: requiring 25% of trees to be planted prior to site development and a clarification on rooftop solar exemptions so rooftop solar remains an option but is not required where mechanical equipment prevents it.

Commissioners discussed public concerns and infrastructure timing but largely supported forwarding the item to council. Commissioner Novak moved to recommend approval of Resolution 2025-09 (PUD); Commissioner Fox seconded. The motion carried.

Commissioners also considered three variances tied to phased development (deferring final architectural drawings, deferring final engineering plans until site plan review for each phase, and extending the one-year construction commencement requirement to match long-term phasing). Staff said the variances are requested because equipment lead times and phased construction do not align with the city’s standard submission schedule. The commission voted to send Resolution 2025-10 (variances) to council for approval.

The preliminary plat considered creation of two developable lots plus an outlot to be dedicated to the city for a future water storage tank and to enable preliminary design and construction of off-site water and wastewater facilities. Staff noted conditions from the city engineer and comments from the Dakota County plaque commission would be included as conditions in the resolution. The commission voted to recommend approval of Resolution 2025-11 (preliminary plat); the motion was moved by Novak and seconded by Hillbach.

Development agreement and infrastructure commitments (information only)

Staff presented a memorandum and described terms that were added since the prior land-use hearings. The development agreement was introduced for information only; no action was required at the meeting. City staff said the agreement clarifies allocation requests, phasing, who pays for improvements and timing. Key points staff emphasized:

- Water allocation: Staff said the “final number for a full phased out development is 43,000,000 gallons a year.” Staff and developer representatives told the commission that the project would likely use a hybrid cooling system (a mix of water and dry cooling) and that the maximum figure represents a worst-case scenario under full build-out. Staff also said the allocation is within regional appropriations — approximately less than 1% of appropriated use within a six-mile radius at full capacity — and that the project’s typical timeline to reach such capacity would be long (staff cited a 10-year-plus horizon).

- Emergency well use and DNR oversight: Staff said that the developer could in limited cases seek emergency use of an on-site well, but any change of use or extended pumping would require approvals from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). Staff also said the city retains contractual remedies, including fines and the ability to discontinue service, if allocations are exceeded.

- Water tower and payments: The developer will dedicate land for a city water storage tower; staff said the parties agreed the city would receive $5,000,000 toward the tower to be paid when a building permit is filed. Staff described the tower as a city-wide distribution asset that will primarily serve the north/industrial zone and improve fire-protection redundancy.

- Sewer plant contribution: Staff said the city’s assessment determined plant improvements are required and that the developer would contribute a capital improvement charge; staff cited a total amount of $1,600,000 to be allocated toward sewer upgrades, with the timing and payment schedule to be finalized in the development agreement.

- Park dedication fee: The developer agreed to pay an industrial park dedication fee per the city ordinance; staff cited the fee total as $494,000 in lieu of dedicating parkland.

Infrastructure timing and sequencing

Commissioners questioned project sequencing. Staff clarified there are two separate projects related to sewer and road upgrades: a city-led Fourth Street project (to be publicly bid and upsized now to accommodate potential future demand) and a developer-funded extension project; the two projects have different schedules, which staff said is intentional. Staff pointed to milestone dates in agreement exhibits (one referenced Fourth Street upgrades by Jan. 1, 2030, and other gravity sewer or service extensions by Aug. 19, 2029) and explained how those dates reflect separate scopes and funding sources.

Votes at a glance

- Resolution 2025-09 (PUD): Motion to recommend approval moved by Commissioner Novak; seconded by Commissioner Fox; outcome: approved by the commission.

- Resolution 2025-10 (variances): Motion to recommend approval; mover and seconder not specified on the record; outcome: approved by the commission.

- Resolution 2025-11 (preliminary plat/dedication for water tower): Motion moved by Commissioner Novak; seconded by Commissioner Hillbach; outcome: approved by the commission.

Next steps

The commission will forward its recommendations and the introduced development agreement to the City Council for consideration. Staff noted the next planning commission meeting is scheduled for Nov. 10 if further review is needed.

Ending

The development agreement will appear before the City Council next; the commission’s recommendations and the agreement’s funding and allocation terms — particularly the 43 million-gallon allocation cap, the $5 million water-tower contribution and the $1.6 million sewer contribution — frame the fiscal and infrastructure commitments that the council will evaluate.