This transcript is from a **Farmington Planning Commission** meeting. Based on the context provided and the dialogue within the recording, I have identified the speakers, including the Commission Chair (Rody), City Staff (Tony), the Applicant’s representatives, and various residents. [0:03] [Music] [0:18] [Music] [0:35] **Chair Rody:** All right, we'll call the meeting to order. On behalf of the Planning Commission, I'd like to welcome our residents and viewers to this regular meeting of September 10th, 2024. In addition to our planning staff with us tonight is our economic development director and our City attorney. On tonight's agenda, we have one public hearing and one discussion item. Before we get into the public hearing, we have one housekeeping item: that would be the minutes of our August 14th regular meeting. Are there any corrections or additions to those minutes? If not, is there a motion? [1:10] **Commissioner Winshuttle:** Motion to approve. [1:12] **Chair Rody:** We have a motion. Is there a second? [1:13] **Commissioner Tesky:** Second. [1:14] **Chair Rody:** Motion and a second. All in favor say "Aye." (Group: Aye). Minutes are approved. [1:20] **Chair Rody:** With that, we're going to open the public hearing first. This is a two-part application. The first part is a preliminary plat and a preliminary PUD development for the Farmington Technology Park. The second part of the application is for the rezoning of two parcels of land including the Fountain Valley Golf Course and the property formerly known as the Angus property from Highway business residential, Park and open space, and agricultural to mixed-use commercial and residential. The applicant for both is Tract. I just wanted the residents to know that the Commissioners did receive the petition dated August 7th, 2024, along with letters from several residents that would be included in the public record. Before we send to City staff, our City attorney has something to comment on AUARs. [2:05] **Leah Koch (City Attorney):** Yes, thank you Chair and Commission. Hello all, my name is Leah Koch, I'm the City attorney for the city of Farmington. Just briefly, there's been some confusion about AUAR in this process. Just wanted to let you all know that it's not uncommon for the AUAR process to run concurrently with some of these preliminary decisions. For those that don't know, AUAR is Alternative Urban Areawide Review, which is required by the Environmental Quality Board of the state of Minnesota. That is running separately from this process that's here today. We're not in a position to address each and every environmental concern today as a part of this step of the process, but we will have the results of the AUAR before final approvals are issued. Thank you. [2:51] **Chair Rody:** Thank you, Leah. Tony, you going to start out the hearing then? [2:55] **Tony (City Staff):** I am. All right, thank you. Right, thank you Mr. Chair, Commission members. As Chair Rody had mentioned, this is kind of a two-part public hearing, with the first being a preliminary plat, preliminary planned unit development for what is termed the Farmington Technology Park, and that is the developer, Tract. And then rezoning of the Fountain Valley Golf Course and property formerly known as the Angus property from B1, R1, R2, R3, Park and open space, and A1 to MUCI, which is our mixed-use commercial industrial. I do want to mention that as the commission is aware, you did review this rezone back several months ago and did table this item. I do want to mention that after that particular public hearing, the developer did listen to a lot of those concerns that were addressed at that time or brought up at that time. And since then, they have voluntarily applied for what's called the Planned Unit Development (PUD), along with the plat, in order to try to address some of those concerns and have some of that information that wasn't readily available at that initial public hearing available with the preliminary plat and PUD. [4:24] **Tony (City Staff):** So, as far as the surrounding land uses: the property is at the very southeast corner of town. There's agricultural uses to the north, a low-density residential and agricultural uses to the east (those being in Castle Rock Township), industrial and low-density residential to the west, and then agricultural uses to the south. Again, anything south would be in the township as well. The preliminary plat consists of three lots and that's spread over just over 340 acres of land. There would be, again, three lots: Lot 1, Block 1, which is 155.25 acres—that's in the very northwest corner of the plat. That lot would be deeded to the city for utility purposes. And then Lot 1, Block 2, which is the southern portion of the site—the School District site or what's formerly known as the Angus site—is 185.54 acres. And again, that would be the southern portion of the data center campus. Do want to mention that they are showing a 75-foot wide drainage and utility roadway and trail easement, specifically along the eastern boundary of what is Lot 1, Block 1, and this is to preserve a future corridor for Biscayne Avenue, which would be a future County Road. At this time, it would not be constructed as part of this development; it would be constructed if and when the County decides to move forward with that project. [6:20] **Tony (City Staff):** The representative site plan included in your packet is a site plan—and I call it a representative site plan in that it gives an idea of how the site could be ultimately developed. This site plan is subject to change as the end user has not yet been secured or identified for the campus. Do want to mention that individual site plans will have to be approved by this Commission prior to any data center building or an ancillary use being constructed on site. Design standards are being proposed as part of the planned unit development; all site plans would have to be in compliance with those standards if and when approved. What is shown here is the campus as a whole; the one on the left shows the north campus and the one on the right is the south campus. The gray areas are essentially the proposed buildings. For reference, the plan does provide for up to 12 data center buildings; that would be six on either campus, along with two administrative buildings, again one on each campus. Between the north and south campuses, the square footage of the data centers on the north campus site is 1.6 million square feet. With the southern campus, that would be just over 900,000 square feet. [8:02] **Tony (City Staff):** Building setbacks will be substantially greater than generally allowed under our mixed-use commercial industrial district. Just for reference, the MUCI setbacks that are allowed under that specific zoning district: the front yard is a zero setback, side yard zero, and rear yard 20. What's being proposed as far as the design standards for this would be a minimum of 250 feet from properties adjacent to residential uses, and that would be from the property line, and 150 feet from any property line adjacent to a non-residential use. The applicant is proposing a 40-foot wide natural buffer in addition to those expanded setbacks. This would be around the majority of the perimeter of the site, and the intent of this buffer is to retain as many of the existing healthy trees that are on-site as practical. There will be additional berming—potentially 10 feet and or higher—will also be placed within the natural buffer area to provide additional screening and some visual aesthetics as well. Do want to note that perimeter fencing up to 14 feet in height will also be provided. This will be located outside of the natural buffer area, so it will be further than 40 feet from the property line just so the commission is aware. The other thing to note with the 14 feet in height: that type of fencing does require a building permit. [9:56] **Tony (City Staff):** So what we have here is basically the buildable portion of the properties. Everything in brown meets those setbacks. This does show the buffer area along with where the flood plane is located on Lot 1, Block 2 in the South. There is about 69 acres of that site that is encumbered with flood plane. So as far as transportation and parking, there are four anticipated accesses for this campus. The Northern campus includes one off of Highway 50 (or 220th Street) and one off of 225th Street on the southern end of the northern campus. The southern campus includes an access off of 225th Street and then the second one would be off of Biscayne Avenue. The proposed development standards would require one parking space for each 1,000 square foot of office space. The way the development standards are written now, or proposed, parking spaces would not be required for the designated data hall areas or the data centers themselves. [11:15] **Tony (City Staff):** So Parks, trails, and sidewalks: with this particular plat, the City would be looking to take cash in lieu versus land dedication. A future trail will be constructed in that 75-foot wide drainage and utility roadway and trail easement, and again that would be constructed if and when the County decides to move that project forward. As I had mentioned, Tract is proposing to develop this project as a planned unit development and have suggested certain development standards be established and include language on the following: 1. **Setbacks:** Provides a minimum of 250 feet from any property line adjacent to residential uses, 150 feet from non-residential uses, and a 40-foot setback from the right-of-way at 225th Street. 2. **Natural Buffers:** Provides for that 40-foot wide natural buffer along the majority of the perimeter. 3. **Landscaping:** Provides for types of planting and allows for rock/gravel mulch as accent material for maintenance areas and provides standards for parking lot landscaping. 4. **Easement for future County Road:** Provides language on how that easement would be utilized. 5. **General design standards:** Includes facade standards and screening requirements; requiring the use of at least two design elements like changes in building height, projections, or materials. This also covers screening for ground-level utilities and mechanical equipment. 6. **Building Height:** The maximum building height requested is 80 feet, however, the maximum height at the building setback line is proposed at 50 feet. It allows for a step-back approach: for each one foot of increase in building height, the building must be stepped back an additional 2 feet. Accessory structures are capped at 50 feet. 7. **Fence Height:** Max height of 14 feet. 8. **Electric Utility Lines:** Language on their construction as part of the overall project. 9. **Noise:** All noise generated shall meet the requirements established by the MPCA. It provides language that a noise study will be prepared at the time of site plan to demonstrate compliance. It requires physical sound attenuation measures on mechanical equipment located within 1,200 feet of any adjacent residential use. 10. **Parking:** One space for each 1,000 square feet of office use. 11. **Substations:** Exempt from standard MUCI design regulations but must be fenced and screened. 12. **Private Communication Towers:** Permitted up to a maximum height of 80 feet. 13. **Maximum Lot Coverage:** No maximum lot coverage for all uses built in the designated developable area (the brown area). [16:09] **Tony (City Staff):** Now, the second part of the request is regarding the rezoning of those specific parcels. The first one is the Angus property owned by the School District. These parcels were annexed into the city on April 24th of this year, at which time they were automatically zoned A1 (Agricultural). The request is to rezone these to MUCI. The second is the rezone of the Fountain Valley Golf Course located at 2830 220th Street West. This is currently a mixture of B1, R1, R2, R3, and Park/Open Space. The request is to rezone that to MUCI as well. I do want to note that data centers are a permitted use in the MUCI zoning district. Regarding the Comprehensive Plan update: the City began this process well over a year ago. It is a citywide mid-cycle update that aims to address areas brought into the city via annexation. The rezonings and PUD will need to be contingent upon approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment by the City Council and ultimately the Metropolitan Council. [18:30] **Tony (City Staff):** Therefore, the action as requested this evening is to recommend approval of the following applications and forward the recommendation onto the City Council contingent upon approval of the mid-cycle Comprehensive Plan amendment: (1) Preliminary plat and preliminary PUD for the Farmington Technology Park, (2) Rezone the Angus/School District properties from A1 to MUCI, and (3) Rezone the property at 2830 220th Street West from B1, R1, R2, R3, Park and Open Space to MUCI. [19:16] **Chair Rody:** All right, thank you Tony. Is there anything else from staff, either Deanna or Leah? Nothing. All right. I did want to mention because it was asked of me by one of the residents: if you are interested in speaking, you can speak to either one of the two parts of the application or you can speak to both. Again, I ask you to be respectful, limit your time, we have a number of people here. And while others are speaking, please be respectful with your phones and anything else and just be a good neighbor. With that, then, I remind you: when you want to speak, you're going to have to come up to the podium, state your name and address for the record. Before we do that, I guess I'm going to ask: does the applicant have anything to add to the staff report? [20:25] **Jacob Steen (Larkin Hoffman, for Tract):** Yes, all right, thank you. Thank you Chair, Commissioners. My name is Jacob Steen with Larkin Hoffman and we represent Tract, the applicant. First, I want to say thank you to staff for that presentation. This is not an uncomplicated project; this is not a small project and we appreciate all of their due diligence and hard work on this. We are seeking rezonings, the preliminary plat, and the planned unit development. You had previously seen this project as part of a rezoning application where Tract was seeking a "straight" rezoning. But we heard this body, we heard the community, and we heard staff. We went back and voluntarily opted into the Planned Unit Development procedure. This provides some protections for the city and additional oversight, and it provides us some flexibility and assurances as to how the future development gets phased. Specifically, the guarantees related to screening, setback, noise mitigation, and other development standards would be built into the development contract with the developer. [22:04] **Jacob Steen:** Our request tonight is not to review and recommend approval of the *final* development; what we're asking for is for the rezoning, the preliminary plat, and the PUD framework. That framework is going to set forth the process and the standards by which the actual development will be reviewed. Every phase will include site plan review by the Planning Commission, it will include noise mitigation and noise studies, and it will outline this all in a contractual process. I'm not going to go through all of the individual standards; we're happy to answer any questions. We have the entire Tract team here, including our engineers, and we're happy to address those or we can wait until the end of the public comment. [24:15] **Chair Rody:** All right, thank you Mr. Steen. We come to the citizens' portion. Do you want to start, sir? [24:32] **Robert Jones:** Robert Jones, I live on 12th Street. I have previously been on the Northwest Regional Planning Commission in Wisconsin. For you guys, this is about tax revenue. Unless you guys want to take a pay cut, you need to have the tax revenue. I support this project 100% with some concerns. I know nothing about the history of Tract—have they done this somewhere else? Are they here for 1 year, 3 years, 10 years? Or once the paycheck is paid, are they going to turn it over to somebody else who may or may not be bound by all of these promises? And the future County road and the trail—can you depend on the County to do that within the next 50 years? [27:32] **Robert Jones:** If they believe that a 40-foot additional setback and a 10-foot berm is required, then let's put it in the contract. Let's look at the noise issues—40 or 60 Hz motors for fans and pumps. What about water usage? Are they going to be drawing more from the city water system than they believe today? What about monitoring and enforcement? Do you as a Planning Commission have the authority right now to enforce all of these things if Tract moves on? If they put up 40-foot towers with clear lights that shine into my bedroom, I'm not going to be happy with that. Is the design of the building going to affect my lifestyle? I want to sit on my deck and look at the Northern Lights without interruption. [32:15] **Chair Rody:** Mr. Jones, please start wrapping it up. [32:20] **Robert Jones:** Okay, yeah. Bottom line is: the squirrels and the turtles really don't care what the building looks like. I do. Thank you. [33:00] **Chair Rody:** Thank you, sir. Mr. Steen, did you want to respond to any of his questions or wait until the end? [33:14] **Jacob Steen:** I can certainly save a list of comments and address those at the end. But in terms of addressing this gentleman's comments: we are absolutely in agreement that the intent is a contract that holds any future end-user to the standards that are in this PUD. That is why we will have both a development contract at this phase as well as at every subsequent phase. [34:15] **Chair Rody:** Thank you. Other comments or questions? [34:27] **David Pallo:** My name is David Pallo, I live on 224th Street South, just west of this rezone area. I did 14 years active duty Air Force, seven combat deployments. I returned back to Minnesota—I'm a St. Cloud native. We mentioned the 2040 Comprehensive Planning process. The guiding principles talked about providing a variety of well-maintained housing choices and creating neighborhoods that are connected and provide a sense of community. I recommended the committee to deny this rezoning request because I do not understand why we would replace R1, R2, R3 that is already there, flanked on both sides by residential areas. Why are we trading that residential area for mixed-use when our own guide says that we should create communities and meet this housing demand? Maybe we should keep the "farm" in Farmington. Thank you. [38:24] **Denise May:** My name is Denise May, I live at 22265 Bearing Avenue in Farmington. Mayor, Council, Planning Commission: please do not rezone the Fountain Valley Golf Course property. My husband Dan and I live next to the golf course; we share a property line. Our house is only about 150 feet from the property line. A data center on that property would drastically change the quality of life for hundreds of people. You’ve received signed petitions with almost 300 signatures of residents who oppose the rezoning. We are not objecting to a Technology Park in Farmington—we object to the proposed location. [39:56] **Denise May:** Tract said noise from data centers cannot exceed the DBA on adjacent residential property. But what noise standards is she referring to? The legal limit of 60/65 daytime and 50/55 nighttime? Those levels are far above what we currently experience. We purchased a sound level meter: without the AC, it's 38 dB. With crickets, it's 43 dB. The noise from the data center would be a constant 24/7 hum. What about tonal noise? That low-frequency hum? Studies show it can cause health issues. Tract admitted in a quote that data centers are best located away from residential centers. So why are they requesting to build one right next to residential areas? Please say no to rezoning. [48:27] **Jeff Schler:** My name is Jeff Schler, I live at 22420 Calico Court. I don't need to go on about the negative impacts from the noise—you have heard from many of us privately. This is being protested and picketed in many US cities right now. This property was never intended to be an industrial park until this specific land transaction started. This attempt at rezoning is the very definition of spot zoning. It does not remotely resemble the current Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The only advantage of this project is money. We cannot toss away a well-designed comp plan every time a project pops up that provides tax money. [51:30] **Jeff Schler:** You're putting 50-foot tall buildings under 300 feet from homes. That's crazy. Don't say "up to" a 16-foot berm, because "up to" means 0 to 16 feet. Don't assume we're going to use water cooling—guarantee it. Because the second they find out there's not enough water, they go to air cooling. You can't mitigate that sound. Meta in Rosemount switched to half-air cooling because they don't have enough water. Call Interstate Power Supply of Lakeville; the generators Tract specs out run individually at 100 dB. The second they start one, they violate city code. I hope you acknowledge the residents' voices tonight. [53:52] **Kathy Johnson:** I'm Kathy Johnson. My concerns are called "promises, promises, promises." Track promised they would be good neighbors, and the first tenant of being a good neighbor is not building in a residential area. Tract and the City of Farmington have ignored that rule from day one. Decibel ratings are not the cause of complaints—the tonal hum is the culprit. It's called the "classic data center hum" because they all have it. When you have 12 sources of noise, the sound increases. 12 sources produce 80.5 dB. ThePrediction of 65 dB at the property line is not only grossly underestimated, it's illegal. [59:17] **Kathy Johnson:** According to Minnesota Statute 116, noise cannot interfere unreasonably with the enjoyment of life or property. The minute it opens, it's breaking the law. Tract will sell it out to end-users who will say, "It's not me making that sound, it's that company over there." False promises are part of the reason our city has hired—or our residents have hired—an attorney. It is not incumbent for the residents to sacrifice our lifestyle and home equity to provide the tax base for the city. I ask that you vote no. [1:04:48] **Chair Rody:** Can I see by show of hands how many more people want to speak tonight? Okay, so we still got quite a few. We're going to have to set a time limit now of five minutes. [1:05:37] **Sarah Fry:** My name is Sarah Fry, I live in Executive Estates on Karina Court. The sale of the land was announced as an effort to benefit Farmington's children. But we know low-frequency noise can lead to mood swings, anxiety, and heart disease. Why would we assume that children aren't going to suffer from illnesses related to data campuses in their environment? Children who live near the campus and attend Farmington High School would only be free of that hum on days when they leave South Farmington. District 192 wants to be a "destination district." Placing a data campus in a residential neighborhood won't attract people—it will chase them away. [1:09:27] **Stacy King:** I'm Stacy King, I live in Canova Court. Our neighborhood is a community that always comes together for each other. Setting up this data center will destroy all that. Everybody will leave, the housing market will go down, and the community will be gone. [1:11:03] **Patrick Rug:** My name is Patrick Rug, 201 15th Street. My experience is actually in the semiconductor business. I cannot even understand why this would be considered for rezoning in that area. Environmentally speaking, the water consumption is there—hundreds of thousands of gallons a day. My clients are Intel, Broadcom, Seagate. You got to cool those buildings down to about 68 degrees. Ask the tough questions: how are you doing this responsibly? Your values are going to go down because nobody wants to live there. I'm not against a data center, but there's a right way and a right place. [1:14:56] **Andy Ber:** My name is Andy Ber, I live at 22255 Calhoun Court. This land is completely surrounded by residential. In the meetings I've attended, I have yet to hear anyone come up and support this project besides the tax dollar thing. If this was your house, if you were going from a golf course to looking at a high-school-sized building all day with constant noise—how would you feel? In my professional life, I'm a vendor risk manager. I work with Google, Amazon, Microsoft. They aren't going to care what the City says; they will push every boundary they can to maximize every dollar. Tract is just setting the place map, they are not the ones making the final decisions. Please don't vote for this. [1:19:33] **Jason Fuler:** My name is Jason Fuler, I live at 3015 224th. Typically we'd expect some sort of transition—retail, parks, or open space. Right now, it seems our neighborhood would go straight from residential to industrial. That’s simply not a responsible approach. I've yet to hear anyone from the City acknowledge a single "con" that may come from this project. I hope we aren't seen as collateral damage for the sake of tax revenue. [1:22:45] **Esther Varga:** Esther Varga, 394 225th. Please do not feel sorry for Tract if they need to spend a few million dollars more to move this project. Please feel sorry for us. Thank you. [1:23:44] **Dave Aken:** My name is Dave Aken, I live on Pont Avenue. I'm fifth generation here in town. This area originally was called the "Lake of Many Colors." It's not supposed to be a desert. I have a well at my house. At some point it’s going to fail on its own—we don’t need to help it by taking our water. I’m not opposed to the data center; I’m opposed to this location. [1:26:21] **Ryan Peach:** Ryan Peach, I live on Cambry Way. Would you all be okay with this in your backyard? Would the City Council members be okay with this in their backyard? This is the best location you could come up with? Inside residential neighborhoods? It's ridiculous. [1:27:19] **Drea Dafing:** My name is Drea Dafing, I live on 225th Street. The proposed PUD shows 12 data centers. These pictures are taken from the ground up, not a clear 3D effort of the reality. All this for Tract just to get infrastructure in place and cash in their profits. There is plenty of land for sale on Highway 50 that is more established for industrial than where they want to put it. By the way, Castle Rock Township is going to become a city; I'm officially announcing that tonight. They are in process of reviewing that as we speak. [1:30:54] **David Keller (Attorney for Residents):** My name is David Keller, with the firm of Grannis and Hauge. A Planned Unit Development should consist of mixed uses, open spaces, and environmental preservation. What I see here is a single massive use. It is spot zoning. Regarding the AUAR: it points out that the data center would use up to 2.35 million gallons per day during summer months, whereas the demand for what it is currently zoned for would only be 382,000 gallons per day. The day is coming when water is more important than AI. [1:35:18] **Drew Roach:** My name is Drew Roach, 312 11th Street. In 2023 legislation, we brought forth sustainable energy goals for 2040. My fear is what our energy consumption looks like 15 years down the line. We're going to have rolling brownouts, and the people affected are the homeowners. Tract is not going to have their power shut off, but these homeowners will. [1:37:29] **Ian English:** I'm Ian English, I live up on Crimson Way. The constituency of the Planning Commission is the City of Farmington and its residents. I encourage you to listen to what people are saying and vote the way they want you to vote. [1:38:13] **Chair Rody:** Thank you. Mr. Steen, did you want to respond to some of the comments? [1:38:50] **Jacob Steen:** Our intent is that any future phase requires a noise study considering the exact equipment being proposed. We will not be operating a data center here that is out of compliance with Minnesota law. With respect to water: 65 million gallons sounds like a lot, but the existing site already has a water appropriation permit for 48 million gallons per year. The delta is approximately 17 million. That is less than 2% of the total City’s water system increase. [1:42:04] **Chair Rody:** I have some questions. What type of build construction—is it tip-up or another type? [1:42:43] **Jacob Steen:** We don't know what that specific development looks like today, but you will have an opportunity to review the specific buildings when they come forward. [1:43:08] **Chair Rody:** Phasing of construction? [1:43:15] **Jacob Steen:** Infrastructure starting in 2027, with at least two phases determined by the market. [1:44:00] **Chair Rody:** Construction access? [1:44:15] **Jacob Steen:** Access from both the north and south of that north parcel (225th). There will be turn lanes on both roads and turn lanes on Highway 50. [1:45:30] **Chair Rody:** Towers? [1:45:45] **Jacob Steen:** Could be up to 80 feet, but they will be more than a football field away from the property line at a minimum. [1:46:15] **Chair Rody:** Cooling? [1:46:25] **Jacob Steen:** Technology is rapidly developing. In a year, when we put shovels in the ground, we’ll probably be having a different conversation about water vs. electric cooling. [1:47:45] **Chair Rody:** Tony, can you put up the building slide? Where do you think the HVAC positions will be placed? [1:48:25] **Jacob Steen:** Hyperscalers often try to collocate some of this equipment interior to the site. We have lots of flexibility to put it in between buildings. [1:49:50] **Chair Rody:** Photometric study for lighting? [1:50:05] **Jacob Steen:** That will be provided at the time of site plan review. [1:51:18] **Philip Sandino (Tract):** Hi, I’m Phil. Regarding the substation: we're going to take off the transmission system but it will be distributed across the site. It will definitely be looped for redundancy. [1:52:15] **Chair Rody:** Will it impact homeowners' wells? [1:52:25] **Jacob Steen:** No, this project would draw off City wells. [1:54:15] **Chair Rody:** Number of employees? [1:54:25] **Jacob Steen:** About 273 full-time quality jobs at full buildout. About 1,500 construction jobs. [1:55:59] **Commissioner Tesky:** I appreciate the Tract team putting together the framework. Without knowing the end users yet it’s ambiguous, but I appreciate that effort for the neighbors. [1:56:44] **Commissioner Winshuttle:** I think the technology for noise is changing, and that's a valid point for when this gets developed. [1:57:31] **Commissioner Leato:** A lot of people are concerned with property values. Could you address that? [1:58:17] **Jacob Steen:** Generally, data center development results in a net increase in property value because it extends sewer and water to the area. In Loudoun County, Virginia, they have consistently seen residential property values increase alongside data center growth. Also, the $20 billion investment is taxed, which helps subsidize residential housing and blunt future tax increases. [2:01:21] **Commissioner Snowback:** I think it's important to understand that every adjustment will come back through the Planning Commission. It's not a one-and-done. [2:02:53] **Chair Rody:** Are you ready to make a recommendation this evening or would you like this continued? [2:03:30] **Commissioner Winshuttle:** Vote tonight. **Commissioner Leato:** Vote tonight. **Commissioner Snowback:** Vote tonight. **Commissioner Tesky:** Vote tonight. [2:03:55] **Jerry Ristow:** Jerry Ristow, 941 8th Street, former mayor. What is the land—is it a good use? Does it fit in your comp plan? You're changing your zoning. That land isn't suitable to be built on. I've lived here for 70 plus years. Think about it before you vote. Does it make sense? [2:05:59] **Chair Rody:** I visited data centers in Iowa—Apple, Microsoft, and Meta. On a 102-degree day, at Microsoft, we couldn't hear anything through the trees. At Meta, there were residents right across the street. I think if cooling towers are placed appropriately, you won't even hear them. [2:10:38] **Chair Rody:** I'd look for a motion to close the public hearing. [2:10:45] **Commissioner Winshuttle:** Motion to close. **Commissioner Tesky:** Second. (Roll call vote: All Ayes). [2:11:24] **Chair Rody:** Is there a motion for the preliminary plat and rezoning? [2:11:30] **Commissioner Leato:** I’ll make a motion to approve. **Commissioner Snowback:** Second. (Roll call vote: All Ayes). [2:11:59] **Chair Rody:** We will take a five-minute break. [2:18:50] **Chair Rody:** We'll call the meeting back to order. Discussion item: Vermillion Commons Fourth Edition final plat. Tony? [2:19:36] **Tony (City Staff):** This is for 67 single-family lots for Lennar. The access will be 218th Street West to 220th. However, 218th Street will not be extended at this time due to negotiations with the gas company regarding their pipelines. The developer has agreed to construct a temporary bituminous emergency access until that connection through the gas pipelines is made. [2:25:00] **Mr. Trosy (Lennar):** Happy to be back in Farmington. We're excited to move forward with this. [2:26:30] **Mr. Trosy:** Regarding the pipeline: we found out they will be vacating one of the pipes in two or three years. It didn't make business sense to pay a seven-figure sum for a temporary road crossing. We'll put in the temporary road until they vacate that easement. [2:30:21] **Chair Rody:** Is there a motion for the Vermillion Fourth Edition? [2:30:30] **Commissioner Winshuttle:** I'll make a motion. **Commissioner Tesky:** Second. (Roll call vote: All Ayes). [2:31:09] **Chair Rody:** Next regular meeting is October 8th. Motion to adjourn? (Motion made and seconded. Meeting adjourned).