HomeMy WebLinkAbout20241126 Environmental Board Packet CombinedMeeting guidelines on reverse side.
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD AGENDA
Tuesday, November 26, 2024
Broadcast on Cable TV Channel 16
and northmetrotv.com/lino-lakes-stream
ADVISORY BOARD MEETING, 6:30 P.M.
Council Chambers (televised)
1. Call to Order and Roll Call
2. Pledge of Allegiance
3. Public Comment (sign-in prior to start of meeting per Rules of Decorum)
4. Setting the Agenda: Addition or Deletion of Agenda Items
5. Approval of Minutes: October 30, 2024
6. Action Items
A. Distribute for public comment North Oaks Mixed Use Development EAW
B. Peltier Ponds PUD Concept Plan Review
7. Discussion Items
A. Project Updates
EAB Extension through 2026
B. Recycling Updates
ADJOURNMENT
CITY OF LINO LAKES
ADVISORY BOARD MEETING GUIDELINES
Advisory boards are fact-finding bodies established to aid the City Council in specific areas. The
decisions of any board are considered advisory only and all final decisions rest with the City Council.
Board meetings shall operate in accordance with the procedures established by the City Council.
The following meeting guidelines are derived from the City Council Rules of Decorum.
Members of the Audience – No person in the audience shall engage in disorderly or disruptive
conduct such as audible commentary during a meeting, hand clapping, stamping of feet, whistling,
using profane language, yelling and similar demonstrations, which conduct disturbs the peace and
good order of the meeting.
Public Comment– Comments from the public will be accepted on any matter, whether on the
agenda or not. Comments will not be accepted during specific agenda items unless a Public Hearing
has been noticed. Please remember to be courteous and respectful and abide by the f ollowing
guidelines:
• Sign-in prior to the start of the meeting
• Step up to the microphone when recognized by the Presiding Officer (Chair or Vice-Chair)
• State your name and address for the record
• State the subject to be discussed
• Limit comments to 4 minutes
• Address comments to the board as a whole, not any specific member
• No question may be asked of a board member or staff member without the permission of
the Presiding Officer (Chair or Vice-Chair)
• Elect a spokesperson for a group of persons who wish to address the board on the same
subject
Public Hearing – A public hearing is a separate item of business on the agenda. It gives the public
an opportunity to comment on the topic identified. Please remember to be courteous and
respectful and abide by the guidelines outlined for public comment (although no sign-in required).
Typically, a public hearing proceeds as follows:
1. The Presiding Officer (Chair or Vice-Chair) will announce the agenda item and staff will
present their report.
2. Board members have the opportunity to ask staff questions about the item.
3. The Presiding Officer (Chair or Vice-Chair) opens the public hearing and will recognize those
who want to speak.
4. The Presiding Officer (Chair or Vice-Chair) shall close the public hearing.
5. The Board will then discuss the item. No further public comments are allowed.
6. The Board will make a recommendation and/or decision.
After a motion has been made or a public hearing has been closed, no member of the public shall
address the board from the audience on the matter under consideration. The Presiding Officer
(Chair or Vice-Chair) shall maintain strict order and etiquette at all meetings.
Environmental Board
October 30, 2024
Page 1
CITY OF LINO LAKES
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
Chair Sullivan called the Environmental meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. on
Wednesday October 30, 2024.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. PUBLIC COMMENT (sign in prior to start of meeting per Rules of Decorum)
Nobody was present for the public comment period.
4. SETTING THE AGENDA: Addition or Deletion of Agenda Items
Chair Sullivan made a motion to approve the October 30, 2024 agenda. Ms.
Nelson seconded. Motion carried 5 – 0.
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: September 25, 2024
Chair Sullivan made a motion to approve the September 25, 2024 minutes. Ms.
Nelson seconded. Motion carried 5 – 0.
6. ACTION ITEMS
A. Lino Retail 2.0 Preliminary Plat, Rezoning, CUP, Site and Building
Plan Review and Street Vacation
Mr. Grochala presented the staff report.
DATE: October 30, 2024
TIME STARTED: 6:30 p.m.
TIME ENDED: 7:48 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: John Sullivan, Shawn Holmes
Julia Nelson, Jonathan Parsons
Lindsay Buchmeier
MEMBERS ABSENT: Alexander Schwartz
STAFF PRESENT: Michael Grochala, Thomas Hoffman
Clarissa Grilley, Marissa Ertel
Environmental Board
October 30, 2024
Page 2
DRAFT MINUTES
The applicant, Java Companies, LLC, is proposing to plat and develop three (3)
commercial lots near Lake Drive, Marketplace Drive, and 77th Street. 77th Street
is proposed to be vacated between Maryland Drive and Lake Drive. A new street
(Marketplace Drive) will be dedicated as part of the plat and constructed to
replace 77th Street.
The City has been planning for the relocation of 77th Street since the Market
Place development was approved in 2002. 77th Street was limited to a right-
in/right out access at Lake Drive as part of the Marketplace intersection signal
improvements as that time. The City purchased the property at 7685 Lake Drive
in 2019 in preparation for the
improvements.
Java Companies has entered into a purchase agreement with the City for
acquisition of the City’s two lots north of existing 77th Street and a remnant of the
7685 Lake Drive property.
Java Companies, LLC, will be responsible for replacing all trees that are removed
per City landscape requirements.
B. Community Gardens
Ms. Buchmeier inquired if there is an opportunity to identify a new location for the
community gardens.
Mr. Grochala stated the City is working on identifying a new location for the
Community Garden program.
Chair Sullivan made a motion to approve the recommendations by staff. Mr.
Parsons seconded. Motion carried 5 – 0.
7. DISCUSSION
A. Recycling Updates
Clarissa Grilley, Recycling Intern, presented her staff report.
Ms. Grilley tracked around 230 cars for the October Recycling Saturday.
1st Choice Document Destruction reports 2000 pounds of paper that has been
shredded.
The organics drop off program has increased this year. Seventeen residents
have signed up for drop off this year, seven of those were from October alone.
Environmental Board
October 30, 2024
Page 3
DRAFT MINUTES
B. Project Updates – Wilkinson Lakes Development
Mr. Grochala provided project updates.
There is a potential BMP project outside of the development. This would be a
partnership between the City, VLAWMO and North Oaks Co.
The team is currently looking for options on how to reduce sediment and nutrient
loading. The cost of the project would be split three ways, between the City,
VLAMO and North Oaks Co. The City share would be covered by Surface Water
Management Fund.
Mr. Sullivan would like to see plans presented to the Board as more information
becomes available.
C. Emerald Ash Borer Injections
Thomas Hoffman, Environmental Coordinator, spoke about the EAB injections
that have been occurring since 2001. The City is looking to extend the contract
through 2026. The plan is to treat fewer trees each year and use treatments as a
bridge to avoid removing all trees at once due to the cost of removal.
D. Otter Lake Road Extension Project – Open House
Mr. Grochala stated there is a planned open house for the Otter Lake Road
Extension Project will be held on Thursday November 7th from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30
p.m. at the Laborers Training Center.
8. ADJOURN
Chair Sullivan made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:48 p.m. Motion was
seconded by Ms. Nelson.
Motion carried 5 – 0.
Respectfully submitted,
Marissa Ertel – Office Specialist
1
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD
AGENDA ITEM 6A
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Tom Hoffman
MEETING DATE: November 26, 2024
REQUEST: Distribute for Public Comment
North Oaks Mixed Use Development
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
APPLICANT: North Oaks Company, LLC
BACKGROUND:
North Oaks Company, LLC (Developer) is proposing a mixed-use development project
on approximately 120 acres abutting Centerville Road and Ash St in the southcentral
quadrant of the City. The property is guided for low, medium and high density
residential uses in the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The Environmental Board
reviewed a development concept plan for part of the property in September of this year
for Wilkinson Waters
Due to the proposed number of residential units and commercial real estate, preparation
of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is required by Minnesota Rules.
The process operates according to rules adopted by the state’s Environmental Quality
Board (EQB). The EAW document is designed to provide a brief analysis and overview
of the potential environmental impacts for a specific project and to help the City, referred
to as the Responsible Government Unit (RGU), determine whether an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) is necessary. The questions contained within the document are
established by the EQB.
The EAW is not meant to approve or disapprove a project, but is simply a source of
information to guide other approvals and permitting decisions. In fact it is one of the
advantages to larger scale development projects. Preparation of the EAW will help
inform the design of the project before the submittal of a formal development
application.
The information provided in the EAW was prepared by the development team and
reviewed by City Staff and the City’s Engineer WSB and Associates and determined to
be complete. The next step in the process is for the City Council to authorize
distribution of the document for public comment. A notice of the documents availability
will be published in the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) Monitor and notification sent
to specified public agencies. The document will be available on the City website for
review. The public comment period lasts for 30 days. During that period all interested
parties may submit written comments to the City. At the end of the 30 day period, the
2
City reviews all of the public comments, as well as the content of the EAW to determine
whether the project needs further changes or analysis. The City will prepare a written
response to all substantive comments received during the public comment period.
Once completed the City Council will determine if potential impacts of the project are
significant enough to require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement. If
not, the Council will adopt a finding of no significant impact and the environmental
review process ends. The developer may then begin to prepare the design of the
project and the land use application information.
A representative from WSB and Associates will be present at the meeting to provide an
overview of the EAW document and address any questions from board members.
Again, the decision to distribute the EAW for public comment or any future decision
regarding the need for an EIS is not an approval or disapproval of the project.
ENVIRONMENTAL DIRECTION:
Recommend distribution of the document for public comment.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. EAW
Page 1
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
This most recent Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) form and guidance documents are
available at the Environmental Quality Board’s website at: https://www.eqb.state.mn.us/ The EAW
form provides information about a project that may have the potential for significant environmental
effects. Guidance documents provide additional detail and links to resources for completing the EAW
form.
Cumulative potential effects can either be addressed under each applicable EAW Item or can be
addressed collectively under EAW Item 21.
Note to reviewers: Comments must be submitted to the RGU during the 30-day comment period
following notice of the EAW in the EQB Monitor. Comments should address the accuracy and
completeness of information, potential impacts that warrant further investigation and the need for an
EIS.
1. Project title: North Oaks Mixed Use Development
2. Proposer: North Oaks Company LLC 3. RGU: City of Lino Lakes
Contact person: Lauren Grouws Contact person: Katie Larsen
Title: VP Development Title: City Planner
Address: 5959 Centerville Road, Suite 200 Address: 600 Town Center Parkway
City, State, ZIP: North Oaks, MN 55127 City, State, ZIP: Lino Lakes, MN 55014-1182
Phone: 253.312.6913 Phone: 651.982.2426
Fax: Fax:
Email: Lauren@northoaks.com Email: klarsen@linolakes.us
4. Reason for EAW Preparation: (check one)
Required: Discretionary:
EIS Scoping Citizen petition
Mandatory EAW RGU discretion
Proposer initiated
If EAW or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category subpart number(s) and name(s):
MN Rules 4410.4300, Subp. 19
5. Project Location:
County: Anoka
City/Township: Lino Lakes
PLS Location (¼, ¼, Section, Township, Range): Secs 34 & 35, T31N, R22W
Watershed (81 major watershed scale): 20 – Mississippi River – Twin Cities
GPS Coordinates: 45° 7'33.52"N, 93° 4'16.09"W
Page 2
Tax Parcel Number: 34-31-22-34-0001, 34-31-22-43-0006, 34-31-22-43-0007, 34-31-22-43-0008, 34-
31-22-43-0010, 34-31-22-44-0001, 34-31-22-44-0006, 34-31-22-44-0008, 35-31-22-33-0002.
At a minimum attach each of the following to the EAW:
County map showing the general location of the project; (See Appendix A – Figure 1)
U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map indicating project boundaries (photocopy
acceptable); (See Appendix A – Figure 2)
Site plans showing all significant project and natural features. Pre-construction site plan and
post-construction site plan. (See Exhibit A)
List of data sources, models, and other resources (from the Item-by-Item Guidance: Climate
Adaptation and Resilience or other) used for information about current Minnesota climate trends
and how climate change is anticipated to affect the general location of the project during the life
of the project (as detailed below in item 7. Climate Adaptation and Resilience).
6. Project Description:
a. Provide the brief project summary to be published in the EQB Monitor, (approximately 50
words).
The North Oaks Company LLC is proposing construction of a mixed-use development
located in the City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota. The project will include the
construction of senior housing, market-rate apartments, affordable housing, commercial
space, and single-family lots.
b. Give a complete description of the proposed project and related new construction, including
infrastructure needs. If the project is an expansion include a description of the existing facility.
Emphasize: 1) construction, operation methods and features that will cause physical
manipulation of the environment or will produce wastes, 2) modifications to existing equipment
or industrial processes, 3) significant demolition, removal or remodeling of existing structures,
and 4) timing and duration of construction activities
The Project will consist of the construction of a new mixed-use development. This will consist of a
combination of single family residential homes, townhomes, apartment complexes, senior living, and
retail space.
1) Construction activities that will manipulate the environment will include tree removals,
site preparation and earthwork, utility installation, and the construction of new
structures including housing units and retail stores as well as the construction of roads,
walks/trails, and stormwater ponds. See Appendix B for the current site plan of the
project. Construction wastes will be generated during the project construction.
2) N/A, there are no existing equipment or industrial processes located within the project
area.
3) N/A, there are no existing structures located within the project area.
4) Site preparation work is anticipated to begin as soon as spring 2025. Site construction
is anticipated to take place over the course of multiple phases which will occur over the
course of several years dependent upon market conditions.
Page 3
c. Project magnitude:
Description Number
Total Project Acreage 120.0
Linear project length N/A
Number and type of residential units Single Family: 71 Lots (71 Units)
4-Plex: 5 Buildings (20 Units)
6-Plex: 6 Buildings (36 Units)
Apartment: 2 Buildings (200 Units)
Senior Living: 1 Building (100 Units)
Residential building area (in square feet) 38.2 Acres
Commercial building area (in square feet) 4.1 Acres (178,596 SF)
Industrial building area (in square feet) 0.00
Institutional building area (in square feet) 0.00
Other uses – (in square feet) 0.00
Structure height(s) Apartments = 40’
Townhomes = 35’
Single Family Home = 35’
Retail = 30’
d. Explain the project purpose; if the project will be carried out by a governmental unit, explain the
need for the project and identify its beneficiaries.
The purpose of this project is to create new housing opportunities within the City of Lino Lakes, as
well as the construction of new retail opportunities. This project is not being carried out by a
governmental unit. The need for this project is demonstrated by the following goal of the Housing
Plan laid out in The City of Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan (November 9, 2020), hereinafter
referred to as The 2040 Plan: “Improve availability of affordable and life-cycle housing”.
Development of this project would help the city meet these goals by providing new housing
opportunities for existing and future residents of Lino Lakes looking for single-family or multi-
family housing options.
e. Are future stages of this development including development on any other property planned or
likely to happen? Yes No
If yes, briefly describe future stages, relationship to present project, timeline and plans for
environmental review.
Construction of this project will occur in phases. Additionally, one ghost plat is included in
the project area that may or may not end up as part of the project (See Concept 1 within
Appendix B). This EAW is covering the project as a whole and includes the ghost plat area in
order to incorporate all potential future impacts.
f. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? Yes No
If yes, briefly describe the past development, timeline and any past environmental review.
N/A
Page 4
7. Climate Adaptation and Resilience:
a. Describe the climate trends in the general location of the project (see guidance: Climate
Adaptation and Resilience) and how climate change is anticipated to affect that location during
the life of the project.
Climate trends in Minnesota have included warmer temperatures and increased rainfall.
According to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) climate trends
webpage1 between 1895 and 2020 average temperatures have warmed by 3.0 degrees
Fahrenheit and annual precipitation has increased by an average of 3.4 inches. The local trends
within Anoka County have been consistent with the statewide trends as evidenced from the
graphs below. These upward trends in average temperature and precipitation are expected to
continue at the project site over the life of the Project. Projected climate graphs are included
below.
1 https://arcgis.dnr.state.mn.us/climateexplorer/main/historical
Page 5
Page 6
b. For each Resource Category in the table below: Describe how the project’s proposed activities
and how the project’s design will interact with those climate trends. Describe proposed
adaptations to address the project effects identified.
Resource
Category Climate Considerations Project Information Adaptations
Project Design Development may
negatively affect
urban heat island
conditions in the area.
Climate change risks and
vulnerabilities identified
include:
Roofing materials
and asphalt will
absorb heat during
the day and radiate it
at night, which
increases the urban
heat island effect
Landscaping and
greenspace will
reduce heat island
effect.
Land Use Land use
conversion will
increase the
amount of
impervious
surface area.
Climate change risks and
vulnerabilities identified
include:
Approximately 18
acres of impervious
surface will be
created from the
project.
The project includes
nine stormwater
ponds designed to
store and treat
stormwater
generated from the
site.
Page 7
Water Resources Address in item 12 Address in item 12 Address in item 12
Contamination/
Hazardous
Materials/Wastes
Waste
materials will
be generated
from the
construction of
the Project.
Climate change risks and
vulnerabilities identified
include:
Wastes generated
from construction
will likely include
solid waste and
washout water.
Any hazardous waste
products generated
or stored within the
project area during
construction will be
properly contained
and disposed of.
Fish, wildlife,
plant
communities, and
sensitive
ecological
resources (rare
features)
Address in item 14.
Address in item 14. Address in item
14.
8. Cover types: Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after
development:
Cover Types Before
(acres)
After
(acres)
Wetlands and shallow lakes (<2 meters deep) 44.1 43.4
Deep lakes (>2 meters deep) 0.0 0.0
Wooded/forest 11.2 8.3
Rivers/streams 0.0 0.0
Brush/Grassland 8.1 10.6
Cropland 55.6 0.0
Livestock rangeland/pastureland 0.0 0.0
Lawn/landscaping 1.0 27.1
Green infrastructure TOTAL (from table below*) 0.0 0.0
Impervious surface 0.0 25.9
Stormwater Pond (wet sedimentation basin) 0.0 4.7
Other 0.0 0.0
TOTAL 120.0 120.0
*Existing land cover can be seen in Appendix A – Figure 3. Proposed land cover can be seen in Appendix A
– Figure 4.
Page 8
Green Infrastructure* Before
(acreage)
After
(acreage)
Constructed infiltration systems (infiltration
basins/infiltration trenches/rainwater gardens/
bioretention areas without underdrains/swales
with impermeable check dams)
0.0 0.0
Constructed tree trenches and tree boxes 0.0 0.0
Constructed wetlands 0.0 0.0
Constructed green roofs 0.0 0.0
Constructed permeable pavements 0.0 0.0
Other (describe) 0.0 0.0
TOTAL* 0.0 0.0
Trees Percent Number
Percent tree canopy removed or number of
mature trees removed during development 25% Undetermined at
this time
Number of new trees planted
N/A Undetermined at
this time
9. Permits and approvals required: List all known local, state and federal permits, approvals,
certifications and financial assistance for the project. Include modifications of any existing permits,
governmental review of plans and all direct and indirect forms of public financial assistance including
bond guarantees, Tax Increment Financing and infrastructure. All of these final decisions are prohibited
until all appropriate environmental review has been completed. See Minnesota Rules, Chapter
4410.3100.
Unit of Government Type of Application Status
U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE)
Clean Water Act
Section 404 Permit To be Submitted
Minnesota Department
of Health (MDH) Watermain Extension Permit To be Submitted
Minnesota Department
of Natural Resources
(MnDNR)
Water Appropriation Permit (Construction
Dewatering) To be Submitted, if necessary
Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency (MPCA)
National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES)/State Disposal System
(SDS) General Permit
To be Submitted
Sanitary Sewer
Extension Approval To be Submitted
Section 401 Water Quality Certification or
Waiver To be Submitted
Page 9
Unit of Government Type of Application Status
Rice Creek
Watershed District
Wetland Conservation Act Delineation
Boundary Concurrence Approved
Wetland Mitigation Plan To be Submitted
Stormwater Management Permit To be Submitted
Erosion and Sediment Control Plan To be Submitted
Floodplain Alteration Permit To be Submitted
Wetland Alteration Permit To be Submitted
Anoka County
Access Permit(s) To be Submitted
Right-of-Way Permit(s) To be Submitted
City of Lino Lakes
Rezoning To be Submitted
Plat To be Submitted
Municipal Water
Connection Permit To be Submitted
Sanitary Sewer
Connection Permit To be Submitted
Grading Permit To be Submitted
Building Permit To be Submitted
Stormwater Management Permit To be Submitted
Erosion and Sediment Control Plan To be Submitted
Floodplain Alteration Permit To be Submitted
Cumulative potential effects may be considered and addressed in response to individual EAW Item Nos.
10-20, or the RGU can address all cumulative potential effects in response to EAW Item No.22. If
addressing cumulative effect under individual items, make sure to include information requested in EAW
Item No. 21.
10. Land use:
a. Describe:
i. Existing land use of the site as well as areas adjacent to and near the site, including parks
and open space, cemeteries, trails, prime or unique farmlands.
Existing land use of the site consists primarily of cultivated agricultural fields and wetland
areas. The Existing Land Use Map within The 2040 Plan has the Project site mapped as
Agricultural and Open Water (Appendix C). Existing land cover on site can be seen in
Appendix A – Figure 3.
Page 10
Adjacent land consists primarily of similar land uses, such as agricultural, open
water/wetland areas, rural residential lots, as well as single family residential to the south.
The Project site as well as adjacent farmland to the west, include mapped soils considered
prime farmland. There are no parks and open space, cemeteries, trails located adjacent to
the Project site.
ii. Plans. Describe planned land use as identified in comprehensive plan (if available) and any
other applicable plan for land use, water, or resources management by a local, regional,
state, or federal agency.
The Future Land Use Plan within The 2040 Plan has portions of the Project site listed for
primarily residential land use. This includes areas of low, medium, and high density residential
(Appendix C). These are defined within The 2040 Plan as 1.6 to 3, 4 to 6, and 6 to 8 dwellings
per acre respectively.
A portion of the Project site was also mapped as a Signature Gateway District. This district is
defined in The 2040 Plan as follows: “The Signature Gateway District is reserved for high
visibility, high traffic corridors serving as an entrance to the Community. The district allows
residential at a density of 8.0 to 10.0 units per acre with 15 units per acre allowed if the project
meets the City's housing goals. The district allows for development of multiple complementary
uses on a single site including a combination of higher density residential, commercial services,
and employment opportunities. This district incorporates planning parameters estimating the
ratio of the residential and commercial mix. These ranges are flexible and may change based
on a specific development proposal.”
iii. Zoning, including special districts or overlays such as shoreland, floodplain, wild and scenic
rivers, critical area, agricultural preserves, etc.
The Project site is currently zoned as R – Rural per the City of Lino Lakes Zoning Map (January 5,
2023). There are areas of FEMA Zone A Floodplain mapped within the project site (See FEMA
FIRM in Appendix C). There are no wild and scenic river segments, critical areas, agricultural
preserves, or airport safety zones located within or adjacent to the project site.
iv. If any critical facilities (i.e. facilities necessary for public health and safety, those storing
hazardous materials, or those with housing occupants who may be insufficiently mobile)
are proposed in floodplain areas and other areas identified as at risk for localized flooding,
describe the risk potential considering changing precipitation and event intensity.
The are no critical facilities currently located within the Project site or proposed to be
constructed as part of the project.
b. Discuss the project’s compatibility with nearby land uses, zoning, and plans listed in Item 9a
above, concentrating on implications for environmental effects.
There are no identified compatibility conflicts between the proposed project and nearby land uses or
any local or regional plans. The existing zoning, however, is not compatible with the proposed land
use.
Page 11
c. Identify measures incorporated into the proposed project to mitigate any potential
incompatibility as discussed in Item 10b above and any risk potential.
The Project site will be rezoned with the City of Lino Lakes to bring it in line with the
Future Land Use Map (Appendix C) within The 2040 Plan. Impacts within the
floodplain will be permitted through the City of Lino Lakes and the Rice Creek
Watershed District.
11. Geology, soils and topography/land forms:
a. Geology - Describe the geology underlying the project area and identify and map any susceptible
geologic features such as sinkholes, shallow limestone formations, unconfined/shallow aquifers,
or karst conditions. Discuss any limitations of these features for the project and any effects the
project could have on these features. Identify any project designs or mitigation measures to
address effects to geologic features.
Minnesota Geological Survey data within the Project site lists the bedrock geology as St. Peter
sandstone and Prairie du Chien Group. Depths to the bedrock ranged from approximately 90 to 180
feet. There are no known or mapped sinkholes, shallow limestone, shallow aquifers, or karst features
identified within or near the project area.
Karst features are illustrated on Appendix A – Figure 5.
b. Soils and topography - Describe the soils on the site, giving NRCS (SCS) classifications and
descriptions, including limitations of soils. Describe topography, any special site conditions
relating to erosion potential, soil stability or other soils limitations, such as steep slopes, highly
permeable soils. Provide estimated volume and acreage of soil excavation and/or grading.
Discuss impacts from project activities (distinguish between construction and operational
activities) related to soils and topography. Identify measures during and after project
construction to address soil limitations including stabilization, soil corrections or other
measures. Erosion/sedimentation control related to stormwater runoff should be addressed in
response to Item 12.b.ii.
NRCS soil classifications with the Project Site and are illustrated on Appendix A – Figure 6, soils unit
characteristics are provided in the following table.
Map
Symbol Soil Unit Name Slopes
(%) HEL* Hydrologic
Group**
Hydric
Rating***
Farmland
Classification
AnC Anoka loamy fine
sand 6-12 NHEL A Non-Hydric Not prime
farmland
Bm Blomford loamy fine
sand - NHEL B/D Predominately
Hydric
Not prime
farmland
BtB Braham loamy fine
sand 2-6 NHEL A Predominately
Non-Hydric
Farmland of
statewide
importance
Cb Cathro muck - NHEL B/D Hydric Not prime
farmland
Page 12
Map
Symbol Soil Unit Name Slopes
(%) HEL* Hydrologic
Group**
Hydric
Rating***
Farmland
Classification
Du Dundas loam - NHEL B/D Predominately
Hydric
Prime farmland
if drained
HdB Hayden fine sandy
loam 2-6 NHEL B Predominately
Non-Hydric
All areas are
prime farmland
HdC2 Hayden fine sandy
loam, eroded 6-12 PHEL B Non-Hydric
Farmland of
statewide
importance
Iw Isanti fine sandy
loam - NHEL A/D Predominately
Hydric
Not prime
farmland
Kr Kratka loamy fine
sand - NHEL B/D Hydric Not prime
farmland
Lb Lake beaches - NHEL A/D Predominately
Non-Hydric
Not prime
farmland
Lw Loamy wet land - NHEL B/D Hydric Prime farmland
if drained
Ma Markey muck,
occasionally ponded 0-1 NHEL A/D Hydric Not prime
farmland
Mc Marsh - NHEL A/D Hydric Not prime
farmland
NeA Nessel fine sandy
loam 1-4 NHEL C Predominately
Non-Hydric
All areas are
prime farmland
Rf Rifle mucky peat - NHEL A/D Hydric Not prime
farmland
SoA Soderville fine sand 0-3 NHEL A/D Predominately
Non-Hydric
Farmland of
statewide
importance
ZmB Zimmerman fine
sand 1-6 NHEL A Predominately
Non-Hydric
Not prime
farmland
ZmC Zimmerman fine
sand 6-12 NHEL A Predominately
Non-Hydric
Not prime
farmland
*Highly Erodible Land **Infiltration Rate ***Percent Hydric Rating
HEL: Highly Erodible Land A: >0.30 in/hr Hydric: 100%
PHEL: Potentially Highly Erodible Land B: 0.15-0.30 in/hr Predominately Hydric: ≥ 67% & <100%
NHEL: Not Highly Erodible Land C: 0.05-0.15 ins/hr Partially Hydric: ≥ 33% & <67%
D: <0.05 in/hr Predominately Non-Hydric: ≤ 1% & <33%
Not Hydric: 0%
The erosion capabilities of the soils are susceptible as described by the NRCS Soil Erodibility (Kw) Factor
rating which ranges across the site from 0.10 to 0.32. Construction activities will temporarily expose
soils to an increased risk of erosion from wind and precipitation. Appropriate erosion and sediment
control best management practices (BMPs) will be selected based on current site conditions and
maintained through the duration of each construction phase to reduce the potential of sedimentation
occurring to surface water resources or migrating offsite. Temporary BMPs will be inspected and
maintained (per the NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit) until permanent vegetation and
stabilization has occurred. Permanent BMPs will be incorporated into project design to minimize
erosion during routine operational activities (post-construction).
Page 13
A geotechnical evaluation of the site has been completed which included 16 soil borings across the site.
A map of the boring locations and detailed description of the soils observed at each is included in
Exhibit D – Geotechnical Report. Recommendation provided within the report for design and
consideration have been taken into account including performing soil corrections during subgrade
preparation and performing dewatering during excavations.
Topography of the Project site, collected via LiDAR, is illustrated on Appendix A – Figure 7. Site
elevations were shown ranging from 894 to 932 msl. Site topography generally slopes northwest
towards Cedar Lake within the western half of the site and south toward Wilkinson Lake within the
eastern half. Some areas of steep slopes (12% or greater) are present within the site.
NOTE: For silica sand projects, the EAW must include a hydrogeologic investigation assessing the
potential groundwater and surface water effects and geologic conditions that could create an
increased risk of potentially significant effects on groundwater and surface water. Descriptions of
water resources and potential effects from the project in EAW Item 12 must be consistent with the
geology, soils and topography/land forms and potential effects described in EAW Item 11.
12. Water resources:
a. Describe surface water and groundwater features on or near the site in a.i. and a.ii. below.
i. Surface water - lakes, streams, wetlands, intermittent channels, and county/judicial ditches.
Include any special designations such as public waters, shoreland classification and
floodway/floodplain, trout stream/lake, wildlife lakes, migratory waterfowl feeding/resting
lake, and outstanding resource value water. Include the presence of aquatic invasive species
and the water quality impairments or special designations listed on the current MPCA 303d
Impaired Waters List that are within 1 mile of the project. Include DNR Public Waters
Inventory number(s), if any.
There are two DNR Public Waters Basins, Cedar Lake (02001200) and Wilkinson Lake (62004300)
located partially within the project area. Cedar Lake is located within the western half of the
Project site and continues offsite to the north; Wilkinson Lake is located within the east half and
continues offsite to the south. There are no DNR Public Waters watercourses, designated wildlife
lakes, migratory waterfowl feeding/resting areas, trout streams/lakes, MPCA or MDNR listed
calcareous fens, outstanding resource value waters, and county or jurisdictional ditches within or
adjacent to the project area.
Ten wetland areas have been delineated within the Project site totally approximately 44.1 acres.
These wetlands include 2, 3, and 6 wetlands with Wet Meadow, Shallow Marsh, and Shrub-carr
plant communities as well as Type 1 farmed wetland areas.
Prominent water features located within 1 mile of the project site include the aforementioned
Cedar and Wilkinson Lakes, fourteen additional DNR Public Waters Basins, as well as one DNR
Public Waters Watercourse. Refer to the table below for a list of the waterbodies.
Page 14
Waterbody
Name
PWI
Label
PWI
Number
Distance
from Site
Shoreland
Classification Impairments
Cedar Public Water
Basin 2001200 0.00 Mi Natural
Environment None
Wilkinson Public Water
Basin 62004300 0.00 Mi Natural
Environment Nutrients
Amelia Public Water
Basin 2001400 0.06 Mi NE Natural
Environment None
Unnamed Public Water
Watercourse M-053.5-006 0.36 Mi S None None
Otter Public Water
Basin 2000300 0.46 Mi E Recreational
Development Hg-F
Unnamed Public Water
Wetland 2056400 0.52 Mi NW None None
Deep Public Water
Basin 62001800 0.53 Mi SW Recreational
Development None
Unnamed Public Water
Wetland 2056300 0.76 Mi N None None
Unnamed Public Water
Wetland 62009302 0.81 Mi S None None
Unnamed Public Water
Wetland 62009100 0.82 Mi SE None None
Unnamed Public Water
Wetland 62009301 0.84 Mi S None None
Unnamed Public Water
Wetland 2056200 0.93 M NE None None
Unnamed Public Water
Wetland 62009200 0.94 Mi S None None
Unnamed Public Water
Wetland 2055500 0.95 Mi N None None
Unnamed Public Water
Basin 2056500 0.96 Mi NW None None
Unnamed Public Water
Wetland 62009000 0.98 Mi SE None None
Unnamed Public Water
Wetland 2057000 0.99 Mi NE None None
There are two MPCA Section 303d listed impaired waters located within a 1-mile radius of the
project site. This included a deep-water portion of Wilkinson Lake mapped outside of the Project
site as well as Otter Lake. Wilkinson Lake was listed for Aquatic Recreation due to Nutrients while
Otter Lake was listed for Aquatic Consumption due to Mercury in Fish Tissue (Hg-F).
Surface water resources located within and adjacent to the Project site are illustrated on Appendix
A – Figure 8.
Page 15
ii. Groundwater – aquifers, springs, seeps. Include: 1) depth to groundwater; 2) if project is
within a MDH wellhead protection area; 3) identification of any onsite and/or nearby wells,
including unique numbers and well logs if available. If there are no wells known on site or
nearby, explain the methodology used to determine this.
1) The depth to ground water appears to vary greatly across the site. During the geotechnical
evaluation of the site 16 soil borings were completed across the site. Water tables, when
they were observed, ranged from 894.9’ to 919.1’ MSL. A map of the boring locations and
boring logs documenting water tables observed is included in Appendix D – Geotechnical
Report.
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Cooperative Groundwater Monitoring
Website maintains data on ground water levels. The closest, actively read, observation
well to the Project site is DNR Observation Well #02012 (MDH #208573), which is located
approximately 2 miles north of the Project site. The water level in the most recent data
record (September 27, 2024) was measured at 890.57’ MSL.
2) The Project site is not located within any Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA). However, the
Project site is located within close proximity to the Lino Lakes East WHPA. The boundary
of the Lino Lakes East WHPA is illustrated on Appendix A – Figure 9.
Per the City’s 2015 Wellhead Protection Plan, the Project site is located within the
moderate vulnerability portion of the City’s 2020 Drinking Water Supply Management
Area (DWSMA) Evaluation that incorporated Well No. 6, which will appear in the City’s
next Wellhead Protection Plan update around 2025.
3) According to the Minnesota Department of Health – Minnesota Well Index, there is one
identified well located within the Project site. This was Well #420603, a domestic well.
Groundwater resources located within and adjacent to the Project site are illustrated on
Appendix A – Figure 9.
b. Describe effects from project activities on water resources and measures to minimize or mitigate
the effects in Item b.i. through Item b.iv. below.
i. Wastewater - For each of the following, describe the sources, quantities and composition of
all sanitary, municipal/domestic and industrial wastewater produced or treated at the site.
1) If the wastewater discharge is to a publicly owned treatment facility, identify any
pretreatment measures and the ability of the facility to handle the added water and
waste loadings, including any effects on, or required expansion of, municipal
wastewater infrastructure.
The Project site is located within the City of Lino Lakes’ Sewer District 4. Per The 2040 Plan,
future improvements within this district will discharge to the White Bear Township trunk
sanitary sewer in Centerville Road, then to the Metropolitan Council Environmental
Services (MCES) regional interceptor collection system, and ultimately to the MCES
Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP).
Page 16
Construction of new sanitary sewer lines will be required to service the project. The
projected wastewater flow rate for the site following construction is an average flow rate
of 88,800 gallons per day with a peak flow rate of 199,700 gallons per day. The City of Lino
Lakes and White Bear Township will execute an agreement for the utilization of a portion
of the capacity in the White Bear Township trunk sanitary sewer. The proposed residential
and retail land uses are expected to generate wastewater of typical domestic strength and
character.
The location of the Metro WWTP and existing interceptors are illustrated on Appendix A –
Figure 10.
2) If the wastewater discharge is to a subsurface sewage treatment systems (SSTS),
describe the system used, the design flow, and suitability of site conditions for such
a system. If septic systems are part of the project, describe the availability of septage
disposal options within the region to handle the ongoing amounts generated as a
result of the project. Consider the effects of current Minnesota climate trends and
anticipated changes in rainfall frequency, intensity and amount with this discussion.
N/A. Currently none of the parcels that comprise the project site utilize subsurface sewage
treatment systems (SSTS). Several of the adjacent properties currently utilize a SSTS. These
properties will be unaffected by the Project.
The locations of the adjacent properties with existing SSTS are illustrated on Appendix A –
Figure 10.
3) If the wastewater discharge is to surface water, identify the wastewater treatment
methods and identify discharge points and proposed effluent limitations to mitigate
impacts. Discuss any effects to surface or groundwater from wastewater discharges,
taking into consideration how current Minnesota climate trends and anticipated
climate change in the general location of the project may influence the effects.
N/A
ii. Stormwater - Describe changes in surface hydrology resulting from change of land cover.
Describe the routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the project site (major
downstream water bodies as well as the immediate receiving waters). Discuss environmental
effects from stormwater discharges on receiving waters post construction including how the
project will affect runoff volume, discharge rate and change in pollutants. Consider the
effects of current Minnesota climate trends and anticipated changes in rainfall frequency,
intensity and amount with this discussion. For projects requiring NPDES/SDS Construction
Stormwater permit coverage, state the total number of acres that will be disturbed by the
project and describe the stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), including specific
best management practices to address soil erosion and sedimentation during and after
project construction. Discuss permanent stormwater management plans, including methods
of achieving volume reduction to restore or maintain the natural hydrology of the site using
green infrastructure practices or other stormwater management practices. Identify any
receiving waters that have construction-related water impairments or are classified as special
as defined in the Construction Stormwater permit. Describe additional requirements for
special and/or impaired waters.
Page 17
The quality of existing stormwater runoff from the project is typical of agricultural land.
Stormwater runoff flows from upland areas to lower elevations on site as sheet flow where it
generally gets conveyed into either Cedar or Wilkinson Lake.
Up to approximately 60 acres of land are expected to be impacted during construction. A
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be developed for the project to ensure
protection of water resources during construction. Due to the adjacent Wilkinson Lake, an
impaired water, the special provisions for impaired waters included within the Minnesota
Construction Stormwater General Permit will be included within the SWPPP. Temporary erosion
and sediment control best management practices (BMPs) will initially be installed (per the project’s
SWPPP), maintained/repaired, and amended throughout the construction phases as required to
remain compliant with the applicant’s NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit. BMPs may include
(but are not limited to) silt fence, bio-rolls/filter logs, rock construction entrances, mulch/hydro
mulch, and permanent native seeding or turf seeding in appropriate areas.
The quality of stormwater runoff from the project post construction will be typical of an urban land
use with impervious surfaces and lawn/landscaping generally generating higher concentrations of
total suspended solids and total phosphorus. Stormwater runoff is proposed to be conveyed into
permanent constructed stormwater treatment infrastructure (e.g. infiltration basins, filtration
basins, holding ponds, vegetated swales, etc.) across the site for treatment prior to discharge.
These features will be designed to reduce flows to receiving waters and to accommodate for the
increased precipitation projected to occur based on climate trends. Flow reductions will be
calculated and included within the required stormwater management permits.
iii. Water appropriation - Describe if the project proposes to appropriate surface or
groundwater (including dewatering). Describe the source, quantity, duration, use and
purpose of the water use and if a DNR water appropriation permit is required. Describe any
well abandonment. If connecting to an existing municipal water supply, identify the wells to
be used as a water source and any effects on, or required expansion of, municipal water
infrastructure. Discuss environmental effects from water appropriation, including an
assessment of the water resources available for appropriation. Discuss how the proposed
water use is resilient in the event of changes in total precipitation, large precipitation events,
drought, increased temperatures, variable surface water flows and elevations, and longer
growing seasons. Identify any measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate environmental
effects from the water appropriation. Describe contingency plans should the appropriation
volume increase beyond infrastructure capacity or water supply for the project diminish in
quantity or quality, such as reuse of water, connections with another water source, or
emergency connections.
No appropriations of surface waters are proposed as part of the Project. Water will be sourced
from the City of Lino Lakes’s existing public water supply system (PWS # 1020023) and/or the White
Bear Township existing public water supply system (PWS # 1620025). The Lino Lakes PWS is
currently sourced from five groundwater wells (MDH #s 240171, 559373, 554207, 722629, and
767887). Construction of new watermains will be required to service the project. . The projected
water demand for the site is an average flow rate per capita of 88,800 gallons per day with a peak
flow rate per capita of 199,700 gallons per day.
Page 18
Short-term temporary construction dewatering of surface or ground waters may be required at
the time of construction (depending on current field conditions) to facilitate construction activities
(e.g., utility installation, etc.). If dewatering is anticipated to exceed 10,000 gallons per day or
1,000,000 gallons per year, the contractor will be required to obtain a Water Appropriations Permit
from the Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) Division of Waters prior to initiating such
activities. Measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate the environmental effects from construction
related to dewatering are unknown at this time, and therefore will be determined when developing
the dewatering plan as required by a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan amendment of the
NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit.
iv. Surface Waters
a) Wetlands - Describe any anticipated physical effects or alterations to wetland
features such as draining, filling, permanent inundation, dredging and vegetative
removal. Discuss direct and indirect environmental effects from physical modification
of wetlands, including the anticipated effects that any proposed wetland alterations
may have to the host watershed, taking into consideration how current Minnesota
climate trends and anticipated climate change in the general location of the project
may influence the effects. Identify measures to avoid (e.g., available alternatives that
were considered), minimize, or mitigate environmental effects to wetlands. Discuss
whether any required compensatory wetland mitigation for unavoidable wetland
impacts will occur in the same minor or major watershed and identify those probable
locations.
Approximately 44 acres of wetland are located throughout the Project site. The site was
field delineated in 2022 by Kjolhaug Environmental Services.
Wetland impacts were avoided to the extent possible during the preliminary design phase
of the overall site plan (Appendix B). The final design will attempt to avoid and/or minimize
impacts to the extent possible. Should unavoidable impacts remain, the proper permitting
processes will be followed in accordance with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act
(WCA) and/or Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as applicable. This process would involve
applying for a replacement plan potentially requiring compensatory mitigation. The area
of wetland impact and jurisdictional status of the wetlands will be determined by the
proper governmental agency during the permitting process following conclusion of the
environmental review process.
b) Other surface waters- Describe any anticipated physical effects or alterations to
surface water features (lakes, streams, ponds, intermittent channels, county/judicial
ditches) such as draining, filling, permanent inundation, dredging, diking, stream
diversion, impoundment, aquatic plant removal and riparian alteration. Discuss direct
and indirect environmental effects from physical modification of water features,
taking into consideration how current Minnesota climate trends and anticipated
climate change in the general location of the project may influence the effects.
Identify measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate environmental effects to surface
water features, including in-water Best Management Practices that are proposed to
avoid or minimize turbidity/sedimentation while physically altering the water
features. Discuss how the project will change the number or type of watercraft on
any water body, including current and projected watercraft usage.
Page 19
No other surface water features (lakes, streams, intermittent channels, or
county/jurisdictional ditches) will be physically or indirectly altered during the construction
or operation of the proposed project. Cedar and Wilkinson Lakes were avoided during the
preliminary design phase of the overall site plan (Appendix B).
Temporary erosion and sediment control best management practices (BMPs) will initially
be installed (per the project’s SWPPP), maintained/repaired, and amended throughout the
construction phases to avoid indirect impacts to water resources. BMPs may include (but
are not limited to) silt fence, bio-rolls/filter logs, rock construction entrances, mulch/hydro
mulch, and permanent native seeding or turf seeding in appropriate areas. Following
construction, permanent constructed stormwater treatment infrastructure (e.g.
infiltration basins, filtration basins, holding ponds, vegetated swales, etc.) will help protect
and provide storage and treatment to waters prior to discharging into water resources.
13. Contamination/Hazardous Materials/Wastes:
a. Pre-project site conditions - Describe existing contamination or potential environmental hazards
on or in close proximity to the project site such as soil or ground water contamination, abandoned
dumps, closed landfills, existing or abandoned storage tanks, and hazardous liquid or gas
pipelines. Discuss any potential environmental effects from pre-project site conditions that would
be caused or exacerbated by project construction and operation. Identify measures to avoid,
minimize or mitigate adverse effects from existing contamination or potential environmental
hazards. Include development of a Contingency Plan or Response Action Plan.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) records do not indicate any current or former
contamination sites within or immediately adjacent to the project area. The MPCA’s What’s In My
Neighborhood database of known sites within proximity of the project area is illustrated on Appendix
A – Figure 11. There were two documented petroleum leaks within close proximity to the project site.
These leaks occurred at the Biolab Corporation and Holiday Stationstore #3567 sites, both of which
were located approximately 0.07 miles southeast of the project site. The Biolab site had a release
documented on March 6, 1990, which was issued regulatory site closure on January 15, 1991. The
Holiday site had releases documented on October 11, 2007 and April 7, 2017. These releases were
issued regulatory site closures on July 7, 2008, and December 21, 2017 respectively.
The project proposer anticipates a minimal risk of encountering contaminated materials or
groundwater during construction based on the lack of past land uses and due to geographic location
of the listed leak sites in relation to the project area. Project construction and operation is not expected
to cause or exacerbate a pre-project contaminated condition(s); therefore, no measures are planned
to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects from existing contamination or potential environmental
hazards.
If potentially contaminated materials (or other environmental hazards) are discovered during
construction activities, the project proposer/contractor will immediately cease activities in the area,
then take appropriate and reasonable actions to contain and reduce the human health/environmental
risk prior to contacting the State of Minnesota Duty Officer, Anoka County, and project proposer’s
representative. The development of a Contingency Plan or Response Action Plan will be initiated if
analytical results characterize the discovered materials as a regulated contaminated waste.
Page 20
b. Project related generation/storage of solid wastes - Describe solid wastes generated/stored
during construction and/or operation of the project. Indicate method of disposal. Discuss
potential environmental effects from solid waste handling, storage and disposal. Identify
measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from the generation/storage of solid
waste including source reduction and recycling.
Solid and liquid wastes generated from construction materials and equipment are expected in minimal
amounts during periods of active construction. Wastes may include sediment laden construction
dewatering or typical construction debris associated with residential development (lumber, siding,
roofing materials, etc.). The contractor will be required to immediately haul offsite and/or temporarily
store and dispose (or recycle) of all waste in accordance with MPCA regulations and the NPDES
Construction Stormwater Permit.
c. Project related use/storage of hazardous materials - Describe chemicals/hazardous materials
used/stored during construction and/or operation of the project including method of storage.
Indicate the number, location and size of any new above or below ground tanks to store
petroleum or other materials. Indicate the number, location, size and age of existing tanks on the
property that the project will use. Discuss potential environmental effects from accidental spill
or release of hazardous materials. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse
effects from the use/storage of chemicals/hazardous materials including source reduction and
recycling. Include development of a spill prevention plan.
Hazardous materials (portable fuel tanks and lubricants) may be used for equipment operations during
construction and temporarily placed onsite in sealed containers (at all times) and under secured
restricted access during non-working hours. These materials will only be used during active
construction for refueling and maintenance of construction equipment. To ensure that fuel spills do
not contaminate surface and ground waters, construction and maintenance activities would occur at
reasonable distances from surface waters and steep sloped areas. The contractor will be required to
abide by the Pollution Prevention Management Measures (Part IV.F.2) of the NPDES Construction
Stormwater Permit. All hazardous materials will be removed from the Project site upon completion of
construction.
d. Project related generation/storage of hazardous wastes - Describe hazardous wastes
generated/stored during construction and/or operation of the project. Indicate method of
disposal. Discuss potential environmental effects from hazardous waste handling, storage, and
disposal. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from the
generation/storage of hazardous waste including source reduction and recycling
Hazardous waste storage and disposal associated with construction activities will comply with the
NPDES Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan during periods of construction. Following construction,
the development is not anticipated to generate significant volumes of hazardous wastes.
14. Fish, wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological resources (rare features):
a. Describe fish and wildlife resources as well as habitats and vegetation on or in near the site.
Page 21
Ecological land units for the project area have been mapped and defined in the Ecological Classification
System (ECS), which has been adopted by the Minnesota DNR. The project location occurs in the St.
Paul Baldwin Plains and Moraines subsection (222Md). The St. Paul Baldwin Plains and Moraines
subsection largely consists of the eastern half of Twin Cities metropolitan area and is dominated by
urban land use.
The Project site itself largely consists of agricultural and wetland areas. Wetlands comprise
approximately 44 acres of the site. This includes multiple wetland plant communities including Type 1
– Seasonally Flooded Basin, Type 2 – Fresh (wet) Meadow, Type 3 – Shallow Marsh, and Type 6 – Shrub-
carr.
b. Describe rare features such as state-listed (endangered, threatened or special concern) species,
native plant communities, Minnesota Biological Survey Sites of Biodiversity Significance, and other
sensitive ecological resources on or within close proximity to the site. Provide the license agreement
number (LA- ) and/or correspondence number (MCE ) from which
the data were obtained and attach the Natural Heritage Review letter from the DNR. Indicate if any
additional habitat or species survey work has been conducted within the site and describe the
results.
There were no mapped Minnesota County Biological Survey (MCBS) Sites of Biodiversity Significance
or native plant communities located within the Project site. MCBS Sites of Biodiversity Significance and
native plant communities are present adjacent to the Project site within Wilkinson Lake. This included
the North Oaks Natural Area MCBS site which has biodiversity significance rating of Outstanding.
Within this MCBS site were two MnDNR mapped native plant communities, a Marsh system and a Wet
Meadow/Carr system. These were mapped approximately 80’ to the south of the Project site. MBS
sites and Native Plant Communities are illustrated on Appendix A – Figure 12.
Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS) data for Anoka County has been obtained by ISG via a
license agreement with the Minnesota DNR (2023-018). A review of the database identified 1 rare
feature within the Project site that could have the potential to be adversely affected by the proposed
project. This rare feature was the Blanding’s Turtle. The were two mapped element occurrences of the
Blanding’s Turtle that overlapped with the Project site.
An official NHIS Review of the project was completed (MCE-2024-00460). A copy of the review letter is
included within Appendix C. In addition to the Blanding’s Turtle this letter identified the Forster’s tern
and tricolored bat in the vicinity of the Project site.
A U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Official Species List for the Project site, generated from the Information
for Planning and Consultation (IPaC)2, listed one federally listed endangered species, the Rusty Patched
Bumble Bee (RPBB). There was one species, the Salamander Mussel, listed as Proposed Endangered,
one species, the Western Regal Fritillary, listed as Proposed Threatened, as well a one Candidate
species, the Monarch Butterfly. There was one additional species listed, the Whooping Crane, which
had a designation of Non-essential Experimental Population. There were no critical habitats mapped
within the project site. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Official Species List can be seen in Exhibit C.
2 https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/
Page 22
c. Discuss how the identified fish, wildlife, plant communities, rare features and ecosystems may be
affected by the project including how current Minnesota climate trends and anticipated climate
change in the general location of the project may influence the effects. Include a discussion on
introduction and spread of invasive species from the project construction and operation. Separately
discuss effects to known threatened and endangered species.
Existing plant communities will be affected by the change in land use. The prominent land use that will
be converted is active agricultural land which provides poor habitat for wildlife. Impacts to more
sensitive natural areas including Wilkinson and Cedar lakes were avoided and minimized to the extent
feasible. An approximate 0.7 acres of unavoidable permanent wetland impacts are anticipated to
occur as a result of the construction of the Project. Wetland impacts were limited to currently farmed
wetland areas. Additionally, approximately 2.9 acres of wooded land will be removed.
The habitat of the RPBB varies throughout the year. Per the DNR NHIS Letter “April through October
this species uses underground nests in upland grasslands, shrublands, and forest edges, and forages
where nectar and pollen are available. From October through April the species overwinters under tree
litter in upland forests and woodlands.” Due to several of these habitats being present within the
Project site, it was determined that the project will result in a “May Effect” for the RPBB.
Monarch butterfly’s live in a variety of habitats but need nectar sources for food and can only lay eggs
on milkweed plants. There is potential for Monarch Butterfly to be located at the Project site. Due to
this, it was determined that the project will result in a “May Effect” for the Monarch butterfly.
Salamander Mussels inhabits rivers, streams, and in some cases lakes with natural flow regimes. None
of these habitats will be impacted by the Project. As a result, it was determined that the project will
result in a “No Effect” determination to the Salamander Mussel.
Measures to prevent the spread of invasive species during construction include working in non-infested
areas first before moving to infested areas, thoroughly cleaning equipment after working in infested
areas and before mobilizing to a different portion of the project site or a different project and
revegetating disturbed areas as soon as possible after construction is completed in an area.
d. Identify measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate the adverse effects to fish,
wildlife, plant communities, ecosystems, and sensitive ecological resources.
Unavoidable wetland impacts will be minimized to the greatest extent feasible, considering the site
constraints of each proposed wetland impact and surrounding area (such as special considerations per
MN Rules 8420.0515).
Wetland impacts were avoided to the extent possible during the preliminary design phase of the overall
site plan (Appendix B). The final design will attempt to avoid and/or minimize impacts to the extent
possible. Should unavoidable impacts remain, the proper permitting processes will be followed in
accordance with the WCA and/or Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as applicable. This process would
involve applying for a replacement plan potentially requiring compensatory mitigation.
The area of wetland impact and jurisdictional status of the wetlands will be determined by the proper
governmental agency during the permitting process following conclusion of the environmental review
process.
Page 23
Recommendations and requirements provided by the DNR within the NHIS review letter will be
implemented into the project. This includes preparing a Blanding’s Turtle Avoidance Plan, which will
be submitted to the NHIS team for review and approval, avoiding initial disturbance to wetland area
between April 15-July 15, and avoiding tree removal between June 1-August 15. Additional
consultation will be held with the USFWS regarding the Rusty Patch Bumble Bee.
15. Historic properties:
Describe any historic structures, archeological sites, and/or traditional cultural properties on or in
close proximity to the site. Include: 1) historic designations, 2) known artifact areas, and 3)
architectural features. Attach letter received from the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO).
Discuss any anticipated effects to historic properties during project construction and operation.
Identify measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to historic
properties.
An Official Minnesota Historical Society State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) review of the project was
requested. The following response was received: “Due to limited staff and resources, the Minnesota State
Historic Preservation Office is no longer able to provide formal responses to technical assistance requests”.
A review of the Minnesota’s Statewide Historic Inventory Portal (MnSHIP) in lieu of the formal review, was
recommended within the SHPO correspondence. No known historic features were mapped within the
Project site. The entirety of the Project site was within an area mapped as “Restricted” with a Historic
Inventory Number of AN-LKC-00013.
In addition, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and Minnesota Office of the State Archaeologist
(OSA) Portal were reviewed with no known historic or archaeological features mapped within the Project
site. No impacted to any historic structures, archeological sites, and/or traditional cultural properties are
anticipated to occur as part of the project. A copy of the SHPO correspondence can be seen in Appendix F.
MnSHIP and NRHP resources are illustrated on Appendix A – Figure 13.
16. Visual:
Describe any scenic views or vistas on or near the project site. Describe any project related visual
effects such as vapor plumes or glare from intense lights. Discuss the potential visual effects from
the project. Identify any measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate visual effects.
There are portions of Cedar and Wilkinson Lakes located within the Project site. These water bodies are
currently landlocked within private property and is not visible to the public from existing Rights-of-Way.
Development of the Project will avoid impacting these areas to the extent feasible and will provide scenic
views of the water body within the future neighborhood from roads, sidewalks, homes, and yards.
The completed Project will not create any significant visual nuisances such as intense light pollution or
vapor plumes. Visual impacts will consist of nighttime lighting consisting of streetlamps and yard lights
typical of residential development and required for public safety reasons.
Page 24
17. Air:
a. Stationary source emissions - Describe the type, sources, quantities and compositions of any
emissions from stationary sources such as boilers or exhaust stacks. Include any hazardous air
pollutants, criteria pollutants. Discuss effects to air quality including any sensitive receptors,
human health or applicable regulatory criteria. Include a discussion of any methods used assess
the project’s effect on air quality and the results of that assessment. Identify pollution control
equipment and other measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects
from stationary source emissions.
The Project is not anticipated to result in any temporary or permanent stationary sources of air
emissions. There are no existing permitted air facilities or sensitive receptors within the vicinity of the
proposed Project.
b. Vehicle emissions - Describe the effect of the project’s traffic generation on air emissions. Discuss
the project’s vehicle-related emissions effect on air quality. Identify measures (e.g. traffic
operational improvements, diesel idling minimization plan) that will be taken to minimize or
mitigate vehicle-related emissions.
The project will result in an increase to local traffic. This will result in an increase to local vehicle air
emissions. A number of recommended improvements to the public roadway network have been
included within the Traffic Impact Analysis Report. Examples include adding dedicated turn lanes to
intersections and reevaluating posted speed limits to aid in traffic circulation and reduce stationary
idling times. The Traffic Impact Analysis Report is included in Appendix H – Traffic Impact Study.
c. Dust and odors - Describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities, and intensity of dust and
odors generated during project construction and operation. (Fugitive dust may be discussed
under item 17a). Discuss the effect of dust and odors in the vicinity of the project including nearby
sensitive receptors and quality of life. Identify measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate
the effects of dust and odors.
Dust common to construction and earth moving practices is expected (in the form of fugitive dust)
during periods of dry weather. Dust will be visually monitored and recorded in conjunction with the
NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit inspections. Appropriate dust control best management
practices (such as soil wetting, misting/water vapor, and hydraulic additives) may be implemented
(upon inspection or public complaint) by the contractor as necessary to control dust from leaving the
Project site during all phases of construction. Specific dust control best management practices will be
determined based on severity, weather conditions (i.e. wind speed), and current site conditions.
Dust and odors caused from vehicles parked within driveways and along streets will vary depending
on the number and types of vehicles actively moving in one area and current weather conditions.
Pollutants generated from vehicle exhausts may concentrate and linger (possibly where vehicles
congregate) which may cause a short-term odor that eventually dissipates.
Page 25
18. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions/Carbon Footprint
a. GHG Quantification: For all proposed projects, provide quantification and discussion of project
GHG emissions. Include additional rows in the tables as necessary to provide project-specific
emission sources. Describe the methods used to quantify emissions. If calculation methods are
not readily available to quantify GHG emissions for a source, describe the process used to come
to that conclusion and any GHG emission sources not included in the total calculation.
Two phases of the project need to be quantified, the construction phase and the operation phase.
Greenhouse gases (GHGs) commonly include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide
(N2O), fluorinated gases (chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons
(PFCs), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3)). There are three types of emissions:
Scope 1, 2, and 3. All estimated/projected GHG emissions are provided on an average lifetime (50-
year) annualized basis using the CO2 equivalent (CO2eq).
Construction Emissions
GHGs emitted during the construction phase are primarily from mobile equipment (passenger cars,
trucks, and construction equipment). The U.S. EPA’s Emission Factors for GHG inventories was used to
calculate emissions from ‘mobile sources’ during the construction phase. It was assumed the
construction would last for approximately 72 weeks (6-day weeks). Emissions were divided by the
project timeline (50 years) to get annualized emissions.
Operation Emission – Mobile Sources
A total of 3054 trips per day are estimated to be generated by the project (See Appendix H). This
included 1527 trips entering and leaving. To estimate traffic emissions, it was assumed that this was
1527 unique passenger vehicles. It was assumed each vehicle travels 12,000 miles per year or 33 miles
per day. The fuel efficiency of said vehicles was estimated at 25 miles per gallon (based on the average
for model year 2015 and 2020 to incorporate varying vehicle ages). It was also assumed future
residents drive gasoline-powered, light duty vehicles.
Off-site Electricity Production
Emissions from electricity production offsite were based on the U.S. EPA’s Emission Factors for GHG
Inventories based on the upper Midwest (MRO West) Emissions and Generation Resource Integrated
Database (eGRID) subregion. To estimate annual energy usage, data from the Minnesota Energy Data
Dashboard was utilized. Specifically, the electric demand per single family residential unit of
800KWh/month and the demand per apartment unit of 550KWh/month.
Off-site Waste Management
Emission factors from U.S. EPA’s Center for Corporate Climate Leadership (CCCL) GHG Emission Hub
were utilized to provide estimates of offsite waste management emissions. According to the U.S. EPA,
in 2018 292.4 million short tons of municipal solid waste was generated (4.9 pounds per person per
day). With 327 living units with an estimated 2 persons per unit, as well ass 100 senior living units a
total of 754 persons was estimated for the site
GHG calculations were conducted using the ISG Greenhouse Gas Emissions Calculator (ISGHG). The
ISGGHG is similar to the EPA’s Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (SGEC) and is based on the Revised
Environmental Assessment Worksheet Guidance (EQB, 2022). Refer to Appendix G for GHG
calculations.
Page 26
The following tables are examples; other layouts are acceptable for providing GHG quantification results.
Construction Emissions
Scope Type of
Emission
Emission
Sub-type
Project-related CO2e
Emissions
(tons/year)
Calculation method(s)
Scope 1 Combustion Mobile
Equipment 4.62 ISGHG
Scope 1 Land Use Conversion N/A N/A
Scope 1 Land Use Carbon Sink N/A N/A
TOTAL 4.62 ISGHG
Operational Emissions
Scope Type of
Emission
Emission
Sub-type
Existing
facility CO2e
Emissions
(tons/year)
Project-
related CO2e
Emissions
(tons/year)
Total CO2e
Emissions
(tons/year)
Calculation
method(s)
Scope 1 Combustion Mobile
Equipment 0 6,829.24 6,829.24 ISGHG
Scope 1 Combustion Stationary
Equipment 0 0 0 N/A
Scope 1 Combustion Area 0 0 0 N/A
Scope 1 Non-
Combustion
Stationary
Equipment 0 0 0 N/A
Scope 1 Land Use Carbon Sink 0 0 0 N/A
Scope 2 Off-site
Electricity Grid-based 0 1,577.82 1,577.82 ISGHG
Scope 2 Off-site Steam
Production
Not
applicable 0 0 0 N/A
Scope 3 Off-site Waste
Management Area 0 386.34 386.34 ISGHG
TOTAL 0 8,793.40 8,793.40 ISGHG
b. GHG Assessment
i. Describe any mitigation considered to reduce the project’s GHG emissions.
Due to the minimal emissions that will result from the project (<25,000 TPY CO2e Emitted) no
mitigation measures were deemed necessary. However, tree plantings will be a part of the project
which will provide carbon sequestration.
ii. Describe and quantify reductions from selected mitigation, if proposed to reduce the
project’s GHG emissions. Explain why the selected mitigation was preferred.
N/A.
Page 27
iii. Quantify the proposed projects predicted net lifetime GHG emissions (total tons/#of years)
and how those predicted emissions may affect achievement of the Minnesota Next
Generation Energy Act goals and/or other more stringent state or local GHG reduction goals.
Utilizing ISGHG the projected annual CO2e emissions from the operation of the project was
8,793 tons/year. With a projected project life of 50 years the net CO2e emissions are 439,670
tons. This represents a very small amount when compared to state-wide GHG emissions and
would have minimal effect on the State of Minnesota’s or the local area’s GHG reduction
goals.
19. Noise
Describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities, and intensity of noise generated during project
construction and operation. Discuss the effect of noise in the vicinity of the project including
1) existing noise levels/sources in the area, 2) nearby sensitive receptors, 3) conformance to state
noise standards, and 4) quality of life. Identify measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate
the effects of noise.
1) Existing noise in the Project area includes vehicle traffic from adjacent roads.
2) Sensitive receptors located within proximity to the project site include adjacent residential homes.
3) Exterior noise while construction is taking place may range from 65-95 dBA. Post-construction
exterior noise is anticipated to be generated from intermittent traffic and recreational activities.
All exterior noise is expected to be less than the State of Minnesota noise rules in a residential land
use setting (<65 dBA daytime & <55 dBA nighttime).
4) Nearby residential homes may experience a temporary increase in noise duration and frequency
during construction; however, these noises will be conducted during restricted hours. Post
construction noise will be typical of surrounding residential areas and will not exceed the State of
Minnesota statutory limits for residential receptors (NAC 1), Minnesota Rules 7030.0040,
therefore, any noise anticipated from standard operations and construction activities will not
result in a decreased quality of life.
20. Transportation
a. Describe traffic-related aspects of project construction and operation. Include: 1) existing and
proposed additional parking spaces, 2) estimated total average daily traffic generated, 3)
estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated and time of occurrence, 4) indicate source of
trip generation rates used in the estimates, and 5) availability of transit and/or other alternative
transportation modes.
1) Currently the site has no designated parking stalls. Post construction there will be, 803
parking stalls across the site. Additionally, street parking will be available across much of
the rural residential portions of the site.
2) The estimated total average daily traffic generated is approximately 3,790 vehicle trips
per day. A detailed breakdown of site traffic is available in the Traffic Impact Analysis
Report included in Appendix H – Traffic Impact Analysis.
Page 28
3) The project is estimated to generate 279 vehicle trips at peak hour of adjacent street
traffic on weekday mornings (7:30 AM to 8:30 AM) and 519 vehicle trips at peak hour of
adjacent street traffic on weekday afternoons (4:15 PM to 5:15 PM). See table below for
reference.
4) Estimates were generated utilizing the ITE Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition).
5) Alternative methods of transportation include public transportation via Anoka County’s
Travel Transit Link, a regional service connecting customers from Lino Lakes to fixed-route
transit services. Additionally, trails are proposed as part of the upcoming intersection
reconstruction project for the intersections of CSAH J / Ash Street, CSAH 21 / Centerville
Road, and CSAH 32 / Ash Street.
b. Discuss the effect on traffic congestion on affected roads and describe any traffic improvements
necessary. The analysis must discuss the project’s impact on the regional transportation system.
If the peak hour traffic generated exceeds 250 vehicles or the total daily trips exceeds 2,500, a
traffic impact study must be prepared as part of the EAW. Use the format and procedures
described in the Minnesota Department of Transportation’s Access Management Manual,
Chapter 5 (available at: http://www.dot.state.mn.us/accessmanagement/resources.html) or a
similar local guidance,
The project will result in an increase to local traffic. Recommended improvements to the roadway
network have been included within the Traffic Impact Analysis Report, including adding sidewalks or
shared use paths to the development roadway network and ensuring highway easements are planned
within the development for future roadway realignment. Below, is a summary table showing the
difference in delays between the build and no build scenarios for the PM 2045 Design Year. The Traffic
Impact Analysis Report is included in Appendix H – Traffic Impact Analysis.
c. Identify measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate project related transportation
effects.
Total New Trips Entering Exiting
Weekday AM (AM Peak Hour of Adj Street Traffic) 279 107 172
Weekday AM (AM Peak Hour of Generator) 408 164 244
Weekday PM (PM Peak Hour of Adj Street Traffic) 519 282 237
Weekday PM (PM Peak Hour of Generator) 608 344 264
Weekday 3790 1895 1895
Intersection 2045 No Build 2045 Build
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH J/Ash St 11.9 17.8
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St 9.2 10.2
CSAH 32/Ash St & Monarch Way 0.5 1.1
CSAH 32/Ash St & Rapp Farm Blvd 0.8 0.7
CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Drive N 1.5 1.5
Wilkinson Lake Blvd & South Access Wilkinson 0 2.5
Design Year PM Delay (sec)
Page 29
Recommended improvements to the roadway network have been described within the Traffic Impact
Analysis Report, including adding sidewalks or shared use paths to development roadways and
ensuring the highway easements are planned within the development for future roadway realignment.
CSAH 32/Ash Street suggest a need for roadway geometry changes between Monarch Way and CSAH
21/Centerville Rd, and a suggested design speed of 45 MPH. The Traffic Impact Analysis Report is
included in Appendix H – Traffic Impact Analysis.
21. Cumulative potential effects: (Preparers can leave this item blank if cumulative potential effects are
addressed under the applicable EAW Items)
a. Describe the geographic scales and timeframes of the project related environmental effects that
could combine with other environmental effects resulting in cumulative potential effects.
Site preparation work is anticipated to begin as soon as the Spring of 2025. Site construction will take
place over the course of phases which may last up to multiple years dependent upon market conditions.
Construction activities will include tree removals, site earthwork, utility installation, and the
construction of housing units, roads, walks/trails, and stormwater ponds.
It is estimated that the project may result in up to approximately 0.7 acres of permanent wetland
impacts that will occur as a result of construction of the Project including the ghost plat areas. This
includes the following:
Wetland impacts were avoided to the extent possible during the preliminary design phase of the overall
site plan (Appendix B). The final design will attempt to avoid and/or minimize impacts to the extent
possible. Should unavoidable impacts remain, the proper permitting processes will be followed in
accordance with the WCA and/or Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as applicable. This process would
involve applying for a replacement plan potentially requiring compensatory mitigation. The area of
wetland impact and jurisdictional status of the wetlands will be determined by the proper
governmental agency during the permitting process following conclusion of the environmental review
process.
An estimated 2.9 acres of wooded land will be cleared to allow for construction of the Project. A tree
preservation plan will be submitted to the City of Lino Lakes for approval prior to commencing
construction.
b. Describe any reasonably foreseeable future projects (for which a basis of expectation has been
laid) that may interact with environmental effects of the proposed project within the geographic
scales and timeframes identified above.
Reasonably foreseeable future projects that may interact with environmental effects of the proposed
Project potentially include adjacent residential developments. The City of Lino Lakes Comprehensive
Plan projects the city to experience consistent population growth through the year of 2035. The
growing population will result in an increased need for housing. Properties adjacent to the Project site
are currently zoned for single-family residential use and as a result will likely be looked at as potential
sites for development. Due to the lengths of planning and design any adjacent developments likely will
not occur during the same timeframe as the construction of the Project.
Page 30
c. Discuss the nature of the cumulative potential effects and summarize any other available
information relevant to determining whether there is potential for significant environmental
effects due to these cumulative effects.
Following construction, the Project is not anticipated to contribute to any additional environmental
effects resulting in cumulative potential effects. Therefore, the Project is not anticipated to contribute
to any significant environmental effects due to cumulative effects.
In addition to the potential environmental impacts addressed by items 1 to 20, the economic and
sociological impacts of the project were considered. The economic and social impacts of the project on
the local community are anticipated to be beneficial by bringing additional housing opportunities and
property/sales tax income following construction.
22. Other potential environmental effects: If the project may cause any additional environmental
effects not addressed by items 1 to 21, describe the effects here, discuss the how the environment
will be affected, and identify measures that will be taken to minimize and mitigate these effects.
There are no other known or potential environmental effects that were not discussed in EAW items 1 to
21.
Page 31
RGU CERTIFICATION. (The Environmental Quality Board will only accept SIGNED Environmental
Assessment Worksheets for public notice in the EQB Monitor.)
I hereby certify that:
The information contained in this document is accurate and complete to the best of my
knowledge.
The EAW describes the complete project; there are no other projects, stages or components
other than those described in this document, which are related to the project as connected
actions or phased actions, as defined at Minnesota Rules, parts 4410.0200, subparts 9c and 60,
respectively.
Copies of this EAW are being sent to the entire EQB distribution list.
Signature Date
Title
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning EAW
Appendix A – GIS Figures
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning EAW
Appendix B – Site Plan
1
0
0
U
N
I
T
A
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
2
4
1
2
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
12
2
9
1
0
2
0
9
19
10
5
6
-
P
L
E
X
1
1
,
2
5
6
S
Q
.
F
T
.
6
-
P
L
E
X
1
1
,
2
5
6
S
Q
.
F
T
.
6
-
P
L
E
X
1
1
,
2
5
6
S
Q
.
F
T
.
3
6
-
P
L
E
X
1
1
,
2
5
6
S
Q
.
F
T
.
6
-
P
L
E
X
1
1
,
2
5
6
S
Q
.
F
T
.
4
-
P
L
E
X
7
,
8
4
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
4
-
P
L
E
X
7
,
8
4
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
4
-
P
L
E
X
7
,
8
4
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
9
16
6
-
P
L
E
X
1
1
,
2
5
6
S
Q
.
F
T
.
3
6
RETAI
L
9,100 SQ. F
T
.
R
E
T
A
I
L
9,
1
0
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
R
E
T
A
I
L
1
0
,
8
5
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
31
32
1
0
0
U
N
I
T
S
E
N
I
O
R
L
I
V
I
N
G
4
-
P
L
E
X
7
,
8
4
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
4
-
P
L
E
X
7
,
8
4
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
WILKINSON LAKE BLVD
100 UN
I
T
A
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
15
2
9
11
26
16
17
2
1
1.47 mph
Fastest Line Entry Speed too large
South Leg (South)
West Leg (West)
North Leg (North)
Ash / Centerville Roundabout
STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT POND
APPROX = 2.3 ACRES
S
T
O
R
M
W
A
T
E
R
M
A
N
A
G
E
M
E
N
T
P
O
N
D
A
P
P
R
O
X
=
.
9
A
C
R
E
S
STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT POND
APPROX = .3 ACRES
BENCHMARK HYDRANT
TNFH = 919.06
G
U
U FO
FO
U
FO
FO
U
UFO
MB
OHLVOHL
O
H
L
O
H
L
V
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
FBO
FBO
F
B
O
F
B
O
F
B
O
F
B
O
F
B
O
F
B
O
F
B
O
F
B
O
F
B
O
R=911.71
I=894.95?
EX SAN MH
I=907.79
I=908.98
EX SB-st
R=919.88
I=893.60?
EX
EX SB-aet
U
EX SB-st9
EX SB-st5
EX SB-st3
EX SB-
EX SB-
EX GGV G
G
U
T
V
U
T
V
UT
V
F
B
O
FBO
G
U
T
V
OHL OHL OHL OHL
G
GG
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
EX SB-st-13
I=901.82
I=901.80
U
U
G
I=914.67U
U
U GU
G
U
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OHL
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL
OHL
OH
L
OHL
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL
OHL OHL OHL OHL
OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHL
V
G G
WILKINSON LAKE BLVD
C
E
N
T
E
R
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
ASH STREET
W
W
W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
E
T
W
E
T
WET
WILKINSON LAKE
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
<II<II<II<II<II<II<II<II<II
<II
<II
<II
<II
<II<II<II<II<II
<II
<II
EX SAN MH
R=912.07?
I=896.35?
>
I
I I I I I I
I
I I I
I
I
WE
T
WET
WE
T
WE
T
WET
WET
W
E
T
WET
W
E
T
WET
WE
T
WET
W
E
T
WE
T
W
E
T
WET
WET
WET
WET
W
E
T
W
E
T
WE
T
WE
T
W
E
T
W
E
T
W
E
T
W
E
T
W
E
T
WE
T
W
E
T
W
E
T
WE
T
WE
T
I
I
I I I I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I I I I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
0
0
0
'
S
H
O
R
E
L
A
N
D
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
100
0
'
S
H
O
R
E
L
A
N
D
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
(
W
I
L
K
I
N
S
O
N
L
A
K
E
)
(
A
M
E
L
I
A
L
A
K
E
)
1
0
0
0
'
SH
O
R
E
L
A
N
D
OV
E
R
L
A
Y
WILKINSON LAKE ORDINARY HIGH WATER LINE
2
3
1
4
5
6
7
8
100
0
'
S
H
O
R
E
L
A
N
D
O
V
E
R
L
A
Y
LOT 3
LAND USE CLASSIFICATION R-4 : HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
LOT AREA:5.2 AC
LOT WIDTH:835'
MIN LOT AREA:0.5 AC
MIN LOT WIDTH:100'
LOT 1
LAND USE CLASSIFICATION R-4 : HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
LOT AREA:12.4 AC
LOT WIDTH:1051'
MIN LOT AREA:0.5 AC
MIN LOT WIDTH:100'
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning
DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 LINO LAKES DEVELOPMENTMASTER P-LINO LAKES MN\30671 PRODUCTION FILES\30671 CIVIL 3D\PRODUCTION DWGS\PUD CONCEPT PLAN\30671 C3-SITE.DWG SAVED BY: SCOTT.KLINKEL
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN N0
SCALE IN FEET
80 160
DEDICATION - INTEGRITY - STEWARDSHIP - COLLABORATION - CREATIVITY
3
DEVOTED AREA
TOTAL SITE AREA:75.9 AC
AREA DEVOTED TO NON-RESIDENTIAL USES:56 AC
AREA DEVOTED TO RESIDENTIAL USES:19.9 AC
AREA DEVOTED TO RESIDENTIAL USE BY BUILDING OR
STRUCTURE TYPE OR USE TYPE (PROPOSED RANGE OF
INDIVIDUAL BUILDING SIZES):
TOWNHOUSE:7,480 SF - 11,256 SF
APARTMENT / SENIOR LIVING:41,014 SF - 45,895 SF
COMMERCIAL:9,100 SF - 10,850 SF
AREA DEVOTED TO COMMON OPEN SPACE:0.0 AC
AREA DEVOTED TO PUBLIC OPEN SPACE:49.7 AC
AREA DEVOTED TO STREETS:2.2 AC
AREA DEVOTED TO COMMERCIAL USES:4.1 AC
AREA DEVOTED TO INDUSTRIAL OR OFFICE USES:0.0 AC
32'
32'
2
4
'
2
4
'
18'
2
4
'
18'
18'
2
0
'
26'
24'
2
4
'
2
4
'
24'
24'
2
4
'
24'
24'
24'24'
2
4
'
24'
24'
PROJECT PHASES
PHASE 1A LOT 1
PHASE 1B LOT 1
PHASE 2 LOTS 4-7
PHASE 3 LOT 3
PHASE 4 LOT 2
ISG PROJECT NO. 24-30671
WILKINSON WATERS DEVELOPMENT
LINO LAKES, MN - 08/12/24
60'
R.O.W.
60'
R.O
.
W
.
LOT 2
LAND USE CLASSIFICATION GB : GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
LOT AREA:4.1 AC
LOT WIDTH:682'
MIN LOT AREA:0.5 AC
MIN LOT WIDTH:100'
LOT 4
LAND USE CLASSIFICATION R-4 : HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
LOT AREA:0.6 AC
LOT WIDTH:151'
MIN LOT AREA:0.5 AC
MIN LOT WIDTH:100'
LOT 5
LAND USE CLASSIFICATION R-4 : HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
LOT AREA:0.7 AC
LOT WIDTH:208'
MIN LOT AREA:0.5 AC
MIN LOT WIDTH:100'
LOT 6
LAND USE CLASSIFICATION R-4 : HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
LOT AREA:0.7 AC
LOT WIDTH:208'
MIN LOT AREA:0.5 AC
MIN LOT WIDTH:100'
LOT 7
LAND USE CLASSIFICATION R-4 : HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
LOT AREA:0.9 AC
LOT WIDTH:216'
MIN LOT AREA:0.5 AC
MIN LOT WIDTH:100'
LOT 8
LAND USE CLASSIFICATION OPEN SPACE
LOT AREA:49.7 AC
LOT WIDTH:N / A
MIN LOT AREA:N / A
MIN LOT WIDTH:N / A
WE
T
WE
T
WET
W
E
T
W
E
T
W
E
T
WET
WET
W
E
T
W
E
T
WET
W
E
T
W
E
T
WE
T
WE
T
W
E
T
WE
T
WE
T
WET
WET
WET
WET
WE
T
WET
WET
W
E
T
W
E
T
W
E
T
W
E
T
G
G
I=895.23
I=895.22
OH
L
OH
L
STM
STM
STM
STM
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
WET
WET
WET
WET
WET
WET
WET
WE
T
WE
T
WE
T
WET
WET
W
E
T
WET
WE
T
WET
WE
T
WE
T
WET
WET
W
E
T
WET
WE
T
W
E
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I I I I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I I I I I
5
0
'
C
I
T
Y
O
F
S
T
.
P
A
U
L
W
A
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
R
O
W
5
0
'
W
H
I
T
E
B
E
A
R
T
O
W
N
S
H
I
P
W
A
T
E
R
A
N
D
S
E
W
E
R
E
A
S
E
M
E
N
T
NORTH OAKS FARMS INC
34-31-22-43-0008
NORTH OAKS FARMS INC
34-31-22-43-0010
SHEAREN, WILLIAM R
34-31-22-43-0013
BURNS, KEVIN
34-31-22-43-0012
EDDY, ROGER B
6097 ASH ST.
34-31-22-34-0003
EDDY, VICTORIA A
34-31-22-43-0002
ROGALLA, SARA R
6063 ASH ST
34-31-22-34-0006
HANSON, SCOTT B
34-31-22-34-0005
NORTH OAKS FARMS INC
34-31-22-34-0001
10
0
'
60'
60
'
80'65'
130'
60
'
60'
60
'
65
'
80'
130'
ISGInc.comArchitecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning
DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 LINO LAKES DEVELOPMENTMASTER P-LINO LAKES MN\30671 PRODUCTION FILES\30671 CIVIL 3D\NON PRODUCTION DWGS\CONCEPTS-EXHIBITS\NORTH OAKS FARMS\30671 NORTH OAKS FARMS CONCEPT 1.DWG SAVED BY: LOGAN.HARMS
ISG PROJECT NO. 24-30671
NORTH OAKS FARMS DEVELOPMENT
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA - 10/02/24
CONCEPT 1 N0
SCALE IN FEET
80 160
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning EAW
Exhibit A - Site PlanAppendix C – Zoning and Land Use
Figure 2-17� 2017 Existing Land Use
2-17
Baldwin Lak e
Rondeau
Lake
Bald
Eagle
Lake
Wilk inson
Lake
Otter Lake
Amel ia
Lake
Reshanau LakeRice Lake
Centerville
Lake
Marshan Lake
George
Watch
Lake
Peltier Lake
Cedar Lake
Li la c
S t
20th Ave S
456721
456749
456721
456749
456714
456754
456714
456723
456721
456721
456714456714
20th
Ave
20th Ave
§¨¦35E
§¨¦35W
")153
")140
")84
")84
Lake
Dr N
M ai n
St
Main
St
M ai n S t
Cedar
St
Hodgson
Rd
Lake Dr
Elm St
Birch St
Birc h St
Lake Dr
Sunset Ave
Rondeau
Lake Dr E
As h St
Oak Ln
Apollo Dr
62nd St N
Ash St
Rondeau
Lake Rd W
Cente
rvi
lle
Rd
Holl
y
Dr
4th Ave
Holly Dr E
Birch St
80th St E
64th St
White Bear Township
City of
Blai
ne
City of Circle Pines
City of Columbus
City of Hugo
City of North OaksCity of Shorevi ew ´
Figure 2-17
201 7 Existing La nd U se
Legend
City of Centerville
Agricultural
Rur al Re sidential
Single -Family Residen tial
Mu lti-Family Re si dential
Commercia l
Ind ustrial
Utility
Cou nty Park and Recreation
City Park and Recreati on
Open Sp ace and Co nservation
Public/Semi-P ublic
Private Airfield
Vacant-Commercial
Vacant-Industrial
Vacant-Residential
Vacant-Rural Residential
Open Water
Rig ht-of-Wa y
Municipal Boundary
Parcels
Streams
3,500 0 3,5001,750 Feet Date: 2/6/2 018Project Site
3-6
Figure 3-2� 2040 Future Land Use
Baldwin Lak e
Rondeau
Lake
Bald
Eagle
Lake
Wilkinson
Lake
Otter Lake
Amel ia
Lake
Reshana u LakeRice Lake
Centervil le
Lake
Marshan Lake
George
Watch
Lake
Peltier Lake
Cedar Lake
Li la c
S t
20th Ave S
456721
456749
456721
456749
456714
456754
456714
456723
456721
456721
456714456714
20th
Ave
20th Ave
§¨¦35E
§¨¦35W
")153
")140
")84
")84
M ai n
St
Main
St
M ai n S t
Cedar
St
Hodgson
Rd
Lake Dr
Elm St
Birch St
Birc h St
Lake Dr
Sunset Ave
Rondeau
Lake Dr E
Ash St
Oak Ln
Apollo Dr
62nd St N
Ash St
Rondeau
Lake Rd W
Cente
rvi
lle
Rd
Holl
y
Dr
4th Ave
Holly Dr E
Birch St
80th St E
64th St
City of
Blai
ne
City of Circle Pines
City of Columbus
City of
Hugo
City of North OaksCity of Shoreview White Bear Township ´
Fig ure 3-2
2040 Fu ture L an d U se
Legend
City of Centerville
Permanent Rural
Urb an Rese rve
Low Den sity Reside ntia l
Low Den sity Mixed Residential
Me dium De nsity Resid ential
High Den sity Reside ntial
Plann ed Resid ential / Commercial
Office Residentia l
Signa tur e G ateway District
Commercia l
Town Center
Business Campus
Ind ustrial
Civic and In stitutional
Parks and Open Sp ace
Private Airfield
Rig ht-of-Wa y
Open Water
Municipal Boundary
Parcels
Streams
3,500 0 3,5001,750 Feet Date: 2/4/2 01911/9/2020Project Site
Lacasse Court
Cedar St W
Lacasse
Circle
Killdeer
Drive
D e li n aCircle
Pony Court
Glen
Circle
Albert
Court
R
e
d
Hawk
Trail
Velvetleaf Lane
L a m o t t e D r
Shadow Court
A qua
C
ir
P intoLa
n
e
Elmcrest
Ave
N
Fox Cove
Behm
Lane
KellySt
Oakvie w C o urt
Mustang Court
Arabian
Circle
Teckla Court
Black Duck Court
Eva
St
Trap p e r s C o u r t
G r a yHeron
Drive
Muskrat Run
Joseph
Court
HighlandCourt
W o o d D u c k T r ail
CoyoteCourt
M alla r d L a n e
Stageco achTrl
T
a
r
t
Court
Carpenter Place
Town Center P arkway
Gladstone Circle
PeregrineCir c l e
Fl o r a C o u rt
Sio u x L ane
Palomino
La
n
e
South
Glen Trail
CassiopeiaC ourt
Lea
Court
Caribou
Circle
Terra
Co
u
r
t
Appaloosa Court
ParkCt
Oak
C
ourt
Tele
Lane
20th
Ave
S
SnowOwlCircle
R
i
ceCourt
TimberwolfTrailB
lack
DuckCircle
81stStW
Pondv iew C i r c le
Apo
llo
Ct
Tra
p
p
e
r
s
C
rossingS
James Street
Post Road
Sunflower Lane
Partridg
e
Court
Lois Lane
Gordon
Avenue
N
C
entury
Trl
S
h
etland Ln
Painted
TurtleRoad
Egret La n e
BloomCourt
Linda Court
DurangoPoint
Northern LightsBlvd
Ch
o
ke cherry Road
Rohavic Lane
Heather
Cour
t
N
Schlavin Court
4th
Ave
2nd
Avenue
Antelope
Drive
Shelia
Ave
Mourning
Dove
Road
OakH ollow Lane
Kingfisher
Court
Sherwood Lane
Glenview Avenue
Buckthorn Lane
Parkview Drive
Danube
Street
Elm Street
Sunrise
Road
Fox Road
Diane Street
Cheroke
e
T
r
a
il
OspreyCourt
Deer Pass Trail
StellaLane
Ric
e
L
ake
Court
BeaverC
ircle
Ravens Court
Royal
Pines Place
Tomahawk
Trail
Beaver Trail
Totem
Trail
Barbara Lane
4th
Ave
A rt h u r Ct
Merganser
Court
LanternLane
Whitetail
Trail
MorganLn
Canfield Road
Oakwood
Drive
Tamarack Lane
Wo o d chuck Court
Lois Lane
Prairi
eFlower Road
Greenwood Lane
Red
BirchCourt
WhiteBirc h C o u r t
Praire View Place
Lantern C ir cl e
HollyDriveN
Black
Duck
Drive
S
Meadow
Court
O
akwoodLane
Pine St
Elm Street
Elmcrest
Ave
N
Red Clover Lane
IversonCou rt
Smoketree Lane
Wildflower Drive
Bradley Street
Century Trl
Fairmont Drive
MainSt
74th Street
RuffedGrou
s
e
Road
Tele Drive
2nd
Avenue
Blue H eron Drive
Aspe n L a n e
Palomino Lane
Gladstone Drive
Te
alC o urt
Glenview Drive
P
eltier
Lake
Drive
H
ollow
Lane
Jon
Avenue
Connie Lane
Highland Tr ail
Nordin
St
Hudson Tr ail
Laurene
Avenue
Birch
Court
W a r e R oad
Rondeau Lake Rd W
Forsham LakeDrive
BlackDuckDrive
Wild
Turke y Trail
64th Street
Pa rtridgePlace
Stella
Circle
Holly Drive E
White Owl
Drive
Cedar St E
Sherm
a
n
Lake
Road
S
iouxL o o k o u t
Coyote Trail
77th Street W
Marcia Lane
65thStreet
Blackbi
r
d
Lane
LakotaTrl
C h i p pewaT rail
79thStreetW
Lacasse
D
r
iv
e
Myrtle Lane
River BirchPla c e
Carl Street
Molitor Dr
Ru stic Lane
Cripple Cree kPass
Andall Street
MustangLan
e
TrappersXing
N
W
o
o
d
s
Edge
Blvd
F
a
wnLa
n
e
Ware
Road
F o x t a il Court
Ho
k
a
h
D
rive
H ighlandDrive
CountryLane
Arlo Lane
W
o
o
dchuck
Circle
Glenview
Lane
Lamotte Cir
Gaage
Lane
Kelly St
Oak Lane
ShadowLake
Drive
W
Whit e OakRoad
Lone s o m e Pine Trail
ElbeStreet
N
E
Sunrise
Road
Reili n g Road
Bluebill
Lane
Baldwin
Lake
Rd
San
d
h
i
ll
Dr
i
ve
Lilac St
Timberwolf Trail
Green Briar Drive
SargentCourtN
TartLake Ro a d
Maple St
Ulmer Drive
Hokah Drive
Linda Avenue
Cle
a
r
w
a
t
e
r
C
r
e
e
k
Dr
MarshanLane
FoxtailDrive
Pheasant
Run
S
62nd St
Hunters Ridge
Deerwood
Lane
Orange St
KnollDrive
81st St E
Linda Lane
A
u
g
u
st
C
ircle
Ojibway
Pa
Red Maple L ane
AenonPlace
F o x R oad
Talle
Lane
P
h
easant
H
ill
s
Drive
Evergreen Trail
F
ox
Circle
Arrowhead Drive
BaldEagleBoulevard
N
a
ncy
Driv
e
County Rd J
V illi a g e D riv e
12th
Ave
S
AppaloosaLane
White Pine Road
Karth Road
ClearwaterCreek
D
r
D eerwood La ne
Jeanne
Drive
81st St E
77thSt re e t W
Olive St
PattiDrive
MarilynDrive
Lakeview
Drive
Jane
Ave
Sunrise
Drive
Linden Lane
Phelps Road
Nottingham
Lane
Lakeview
Drive
WhippoorwillLane
HickoryP
la
c
e
C ry stal C o u rt
Vicky Lane
Rondeau
Lake
Rd
W
Thomas Street
Otter Lake Drive
Henry Lane
Stallion Lane
Snow
Owl
Lane
4th
Ave
W o o d l a n d D ri v e
Pelican
Place
Elle nC
o
urt
BaldEagleBoulevard
Count r y L a k e s D r i ve
Woodridge
L
a
n
e
Timothy
Ct
2
n
d
A
v
e
n
u
e
Ware
Road
Meadowview
Trail
Carole Drive
Lin d a Circle
Ronde a u L a k e R d E
Market Pla c e Drive
Red F o x R d
Robinson Dr
She r m anLakeRoad
S
h
a
d
o
w
L
a
k
e
D
riv
e
W
StoneybrookDriv e
Pine St
Black
Duck
Drive
RollingHillsD riv e
Rondeau LakeRdE
LangerLane
Leonard
Avenue
Rice
Lak
e
Lane
Rice
Lake
Drive
Diane Court
Holly Court E
Apollo Dr
Service Road
Marvy Street
Joyer
Lane
Hawthorn Road
Rehbein Street
77th Street E
ShadowLakeDriveE
Oak Lane
Old Birch Street
62nd St N
Elmcrest
Ave
N
County
Rd
53
4th
Ave
Vaughan
Court
W
o
o
d
D
u
c
k
T
r
a
il
S h a d o w Lake Drive W
Holly
Drive
N
4th
Ave
Holly Drive E
Aqua Ln
Mead
o
wv
iew
Cour
t
Meadowlark
Court
GoldenrodCircle
Woodrid g e C o u rt
Sunfish
Court
Quarter
Horse
Court
Broken Oak Court
Clydesdale
Circle
Wolf Cir cle
Grey
Squirrel
Road
S a n dpiperDrive
CrippleCreekCourt
Sed geCourt
R u ffedG r o u s e C o u r t
Tomaha
w
k
C
o
u
r
t
Timberwolf Ci
r
c
l
e
Shadow
Lake
Court
E
Whitetail
Ridge
MineralP o i nt
County Rd J
D eerw ood Circle
HighlandCircle
Killdeer Court
H
artford
Circle
LangerCircle
Clearwater Creek Circl
Arro
w
head
C
ourt
IronwoodCircle
20th
Ave
N
Ash St W
80th St E
Sunset
Ave
Main St
20thAveS
Goiffon
R
d
Sunset
Ave
Main St
LakeDrNE
CentervilleRd
Lilac St
Main St
Lilac St
Birch St
North Rd
20th
Ave
S
Ash St Ash St
H
o
d
g
s
o
n
Rd
Birch St
Hodgson
Rd
Apollo Dr
LakeDrNE
LakeDr
Centerville
Rd
20thAveN
A p olloDr
L a k e Dr
County Rd J
Sunset
Ave
Birc h S t
OtterLake Drive
O tt e r L a k e D riv e
Main St
Ash St
Main St
Birch St
Sn
o
w
G
o
o
s
e
T
r
a
i
l
Marshan Ct
Sav. Ct
RICE
C
R
E
E
K
C
H
A
I
N
O
F
L
A
K
E
S
R
E
G
I
O
N
A
L
P
A
R
K
R
E
S
E
R
V
E
Cit
y
o
f
Ce
n
t
e
r
v
i
l
l
e
RONDEAU LAKE (2-15)
FIRM BFE 888
FIS BFE 887.6
OTTER LAKE (2-3)
OHWL 911.5
FIRM BFE 913
FIS BFE 912.7
BALD EAGLE LAKE (62-2)
OHWL 911.0
FIRM BFE 913
FIS BFE 912.5
AMELIA LAKE (2-14)
OHWL 908.1
FIRM BFE 910
FIS BFE 910.2
BALDWIN LAKE (2-13)
OHWL 883.1
FIRM BFE 887
FIS BFE 887.0
RESHANAU LAKE (2-9)
OHWL 883.5
FIRM BFE 887
FIS BFE 887.0
RICE LAKE (2-8)
OHWL 883.1
FIRM BFE 887
FIS BFE 887.0
CENTERVILLE LAKE (2-6)
OHWL 885.0
FIRM BFE 888
FIS BFE 887.9
MARSHAN LAKE (2-7)
OHWL 883.3
FIRM BFE 887
FIS BFE 887.0
PELTIER LAKE (2-4)
OHWL 884.7
FIRM BFE 888
FIS BFE 887.7
WARDS LAKE (2-10)
OHWL 883.7
CEDAR LAKE (2-12)
OHWL 892.9
WILKINSON LAKE (62-43)
OHWL 895.2
SHERMAN LAKE (2-11)
GEORGE WATCH LAKE (2-5)
UNNAMED (2-1)
Ord. 11-95
Ord. 22-97
Ord.
08-95
Ord. 17-03
Ord.
04-04
Ord.
09-88
Ord.
12-03
Ord. 93-10
Ord.
08-90
Ord. 94-14
Ord.
08-02
Ord.
01-14
Ord.
12-04
Ord.
07-16
Ord.
92-15
Ord. 04-16
Ord.
05-18
Ord. 08-99
Ord.
12-18
Ord. 20-03
Ord.
14-99
Ord.
09-99
Ord. 06-14
Ord. 06-91
Ord.
02-14
Ord. 16-01
Ord. 03-05
Ord.
05-03Ord.
26-04
Ord.
03-00
Ord.
06-18
PSP
PSP
PSP
PSP
PSP
GI
LI
LI
GB
GB
GB
R-6
R-4
R-3
R-3
R-3
R-2
R-1X
R-1X
R-1X
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-X
R-X
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
PSPOrd. 12-99
456721
456749
456754
456723
456749
456714
456754
456723
456721
456721
456714456714
")53
")153
")140
")84
")84
§¨¦35E
§¨¦35W
6300
6400
6600
6500
7100
6700
8400
8300
6800
8200
8100
6900
7600
7700
7500
7300
7800
7400
7900
7000
7200
8000
6100
6700
7100
6300
6500
8400
6600
8300
8200
6200
6900
7800
6000
6800
6400
8100
7600
7700
7500
7300
7400
7900
7000
7200
8000
90
0
12
0
0
13
0
0
14
0
0
15
0
0
16
0
0
70
0
11
0
0
40
0
10
0
0
60
0
50
0
80
0
17
0
0
18
0
0
19
0
0
20
0
0
30
0
21
0
0
20
0
0
22
0
0
10
0
23
0
0
24
0
0
24
0
0
22
0
0
21
0
0
19
0
0
17
0
0
16
0
0
14
0
0
12
0
0
10
0
0
80
0
60
0
40
0
30
0
20
0
10
0
0 23
0
0
20
0
0
18
0
0
13
0
0
11
0
0
90
0
70
0
50
0
Zoning Map of Lino Lakes
Lino Lakes
Community Development
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, Minnesota 55014
Phone (651) 982-2400
City of Shoreview City of North Oaks White Bear Township
City of Columbus
Ci
t
y
o
f
B
l
a
i
n
e
Ci
t
y
o
f
H
u
g
o
:
Legend
ZONING
R Rural
R-X Rural Executive
R-1 Single Family Residential
R-1X Single Family Executive
R-2 Two Family Residential
R-3 Medium Density Residential
R-4 High Density Residential
R-5 High Density Residential and Business
R-6 Manufactured Home Park
NB Neighborhood Business
LB Limited Business
GB General Business
LI Light Industrial
GI General Industrial
BC Business Campus
PSP Public Semi-Public
PUD Planned Unit Development
Maps are for illustrative purposes only.
Recent changes may not be included.
Land Use and Zoning Information
should be verified with City Staff.
0 2,000 4,0001,000
DRAWING SCALE IN FEET
Ci
t
y
o
f
C
i
r
c
l
e
P
i
n
e
s
Updated Through Ord. No. 08-22
Effective January 5, 2023
Coordinate System: Anoka County NAD83 Feet
Lambert Conformal Conic
od
d
ev
e
n
odd
even
HOUSE NUMBERING SYSTEM
Anoka County Parcel Data: April 2023 Release
Project Site
Project Area
Project Area
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning EAW
Appendix D – Geotechnical Report
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Report
Proposed Wilkinson Waters Development
Southwest of County Road J and Centerville Road
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
Prepared for
North Oaks Company LLC
Professional Certification:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report
was prepared by me or under my direct supervision
and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer
under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
John T. Carlson, PE
Senior Engineer
License Number: 20633
August 22, 2024
Project B2402335
Braun Intertec Corporation
AA/EOE
Braun Intertec Corporation
11001 Hampshire Avenue S
Minneapolis, MN 55438
Phone: 952.995.2000
Fax: 952.995.2020
Web: braunintertec.com
August 22, 2024 Project B2402335
Ms. Lauren Grouws
North Oaks Company LLC
5959 Centerville Road, Suite 200
North Oaks, MN 55127
Re: Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Proposed Wilkinson Waters Development
Southwest of County Road J and Centerville Road
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
Dear Ms. Grouws:
We are pleased to present this Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Report for the proposed Wilkinson
Waters development located in the southwest quadrant of County Road J and Centerville Road in Lino
Lakes, Minnesota. Please see the attached report for a detailed discussion on the field exploration results
and our recommendations. The report should be read in its entirety.
Thank you for making Braun Intertec your geotechnical consultant for this project. If you have questions
about this report, or if there are other services that we can provide in support of our work to date, please
contact John Carlson at 952.540.7248 (johcarlson@braunintertec.com).
Sincerely,
BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION
John T. Carlson, PE
Senior Engineer
Henry Vloo, PE
Senior Engineer
c: Mr. Joseph Westphal, Braun Intertec
Table of Contents
Description Page
A. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1
A.1. Project Description .............................................................................................................. 1
A.2. Site Conditions and History ................................................................................................. 3
A.3. Purpose ................................................................................................................................ 4
A.4. Background Information and Reference Documents .......................................................... 4
A.5. Scope of Services ................................................................................................................. 4
B. Results .............................................................................................................................................. 5
B.1. Geologic Overview .............................................................................................................. 5
B.2. Boring Results ...................................................................................................................... 5
B.3. Groundwater ....................................................................................................................... 6
B.4. Laboratory Test Results ....................................................................................................... 7
C. Recommendations ........................................................................................................................... 8
C.1. Design and Construction Discussion ................................................................................... 8
C.1.a. Building Subgrade Preparation .............................................................................. 8
C.1.b. Reuse of On-Site Soils ............................................................................................. 8
C.1.c. Effects of Groundwater .......................................................................................... 8
C.1.d. Additional Evaluation ............................................................................................. 9
C.2. Site Grading and Subgrade Preparation .............................................................................. 9
C.2.a. Building Subgrade Excavations ............................................................................... 9
C.2.b. Excavation Oversizing ........................................................................................... 10
C.2.c. Excavated Slopes .................................................................................................. 11
C.2.d. Excavation Dewatering ......................................................................................... 12
C.2.e. Engineered Fill Materials and Compaction .......................................................... 12
C.2.f. Special Inspections of Soils ................................................................................... 13
C.3. Spread Footings ................................................................................................................. 14
C.4. Below-Grade Walls ............................................................................................................ 14
C.4.a. Drainage Control .................................................................................................. 15
C.4.b. Configuring and Resisting Lateral Loads............................................................... 16
C.5. Interior Slabs ..................................................................................................................... 17
C.5.a. Moisture Vapor Protection .................................................................................. 17
C.5.b. Radon ................................................................................................................... 17
C.6. Frost Protection ................................................................................................................. 17
C.6.a. Frost Heave Mitigation ......................................................................................... 17
C.7. Pavements ......................................................................................................................... 19
C.7.a. Pavement Subgrade Preparation ......................................................................... 19
C.7.b. Pavement Subgrade Proofroll .............................................................................. 19
C.7.c. Design Sections .................................................................................................... 20
C.7.d. Bituminous Pavement Materials .......................................................................... 20
C.7.e. Concrete Flatwork ................................................................................................ 20
C.7.f. Subgrade Drainage ............................................................................................... 20
C.7.g. Performance and Maintenance ........................................................................... 21
C.8. Utilities .............................................................................................................................. 21
C.8.a. Subgrade Stabilization .......................................................................................... 21
C.8.b. Corrosion Potential .............................................................................................. 22
C.9. Stormwater........................................................................................................................ 22
Table of Contents (continued)
Description Page
C.10. Additional Considerations ................................................................................................. 23
C.10.a. Below Grade Pool ................................................................................................. 23
C.10.b. Equipment Support .............................................................................................. 23
C.10.c. Additional Soil Borings and Piezometers ............................................................. 23
D. Procedures...................................................................................................................................... 23
D.1. Penetration Test Borings ................................................................................................... 23
D.2. Exploration Logs ................................................................................................................ 24
D.2.a. Log of Boring Sheets ............................................................................................. 24
D.2.b. Geologic Origins ................................................................................................... 24
D.3. Material Classification and Testing ................................................................................... 24
D.3.a. Visual and Manual Classification .......................................................................... 24
D.3.b. Laboratory Testing ............................................................................................... 24
D.4. Groundwater Measurements ............................................................................................ 25
E. Qualifications .................................................................................................................................. 25
E.1. Variations in Subsurface Conditions .................................................................................. 25
E.1.a. Material Strata ..................................................................................................... 25
E.1.b. Groundwater Levels ............................................................................................. 25
E.2. Continuity of Professional Responsibility .......................................................................... 25
E.2.a. Plan Review .......................................................................................................... 25
E.2.b. Construction Observations and Testing ............................................................... 26
E.3. Use of Report..................................................................................................................... 26
E.4. Standard of Care ................................................................................................................ 26
Appendix
Soil Boring Location Sketch
Log of Boring Sheets ST-3 through ST-16
Descriptive Terminology of Soil
A. Introduction
A.1. Project Description
This Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Report addresses the design and construction of the proposed
Wilkinson Waters development located in the southwest quadrant of County Road J and Centerville
Road in Lino Lakes, Minnesota. The Wilkinson Waters development is in the design phase and grading or
building plans with proposed floor grades and building foundation loads is not yet available. The project
will include the construction of 2 apartment buildings, 1 senior living building, 3 retail buildings, and
11 townhouse buildings, with associated underground utilities, stormwater management, and
bituminous drive lanes and parking lots. Tables 1 through 4 provide a summary of project details. The
attached
Table 1. Apartment and Senior Living Buildings Description
Aspect Source Description
Below grade levels Assumed 1
Above grade levels Assumed 3
Finished floor elevation Assumed 930 feet
Lower-level floor elevation Assumed 920 feet
Maximum Column loads Assumed 300 kips
Wall loads Assumed 6 to 8 kips/ft
Nature of construction Assumed
The buildings will be constructed
with precast planks and wood
framing with typical cast-in-place
concrete footings and bearing
walls.
Site Grading Assumed
We anticipate that general exterior
site grades will be raised about
5 to 10 feet during grading.
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 2
Table 2. Retail Buildings Description
Aspect Source Description
Below grade levels Assumed 0
(Slab-on-Grade)
Above grade levels Assumed 1
Finished floor elevation Assumed 930 feet
Maximum Column loads Assumed 100 kips
Wall loads Assumed 2 to 4 kips/ft
Nature of construction Assumed
The buildings will be slab-on-grade,
constructed with wood framing,
with cast-in-place concrete
footings and bearing walls.
Site Grading Assumed
We anticipate that general exterior
site grades will be raised about
5 to 10 feet during grading.
Table 3. Townhouse Buildings Description
Aspect Source Description
Below grade levels Assumed 0
(Slab-on-Grade)
Above grade levels Assumed 2
Finished floor elevation Assumed 930 feet
Maximum Column loads Assumed 50 kips
Wall loads Assumed 1 to 2 kips/ft
Nature of construction Assumed
The buildings will be slab-on-grade
and constructed with wood
framing with typical cast-in-place
concrete footings and bearing
walls.
Site Grading Assumed
We anticipate that general exterior
site grades will be raised about
5 to 10 feet during grading.
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 3
Table 4. Site Aspects and Grading Description
Aspect Description
Pavement type Bituminous drive lanes and parking lots with exterior
concrete flatwork
Pavement loads Light Duty = 50,000 ESALs (assumed)*
Heavy Duty = 200,000 ESALs (assumed)*
Stormwater management 4 stormwater ponds with 2 in the west, 1 in the north
and 1 in the south Retail area.
*Equivalent 18,000-lb single axle loads based on 20-year design.
The proposed site layout is shown on the attached Soil Boring Location Sketch.
A.2. Site Conditions and History
Currently, the site exists as cultivated fields or wetlands with some brush and trees around the margins
of the site. The west portion of the site is a wetland associated with Wilkinson Lake. Based on the boring
locations, current site grades range from about 904 to 929 feet Mean Sea Level (MSL) and generally
slopes down to the west to the wetland area.
The following recent aerial Photograph 1 shows the current site conditions.
Photograph 1. Aerial Photograph of the Site
Photograph obtained from Google Maps.
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 4
A.3. Purpose
The purpose of our preliminary geotechnical evaluation is to characterize subsurface geologic conditions
at selected exploration locations, evaluate their impact on the project, and provide geotechnical
recommendations for the design and construction of proposed Wilkinson Waters development.
A.4. Background Information and Reference Documents
We reviewed the following information:
Concept plan 5 dated June 12, 2024, prepared by ISG.
Aerial photographs of the project area using Google Earth®.
The Surficial Geology Map for Anoka County prepared by the University of Minnesota. The
map is denoted as Atlas C-27, Plate 3, Surficial Geology, and is dated 2010.
We have described our understanding of the proposed construction and site to the extent others
reported it to us. Depending on the extent of available information, we may have made assumptions
based on our experience with similar projects. If we have not correctly recorded or interpreted the
project details, the project team should notify us. New or changed information could require additional
evaluation, analyses and/or recommendations.
A.5. Scope of Services
We performed our scope of services for the project in accordance with our Proposal QTB192060 dated
March 18, 2024. The following list describes the geotechnical tasks completed in accordance with our
authorized scope of services.
Reviewing the background information and reference documents previously cited.
Staking and clearing the exploration location of underground utilities. We selected and
staked the new exploration locations. We acquired the surface elevations and locations with
GPS technology using the State of Minnesota’s permanent GPS base station network. The
Soil Boring Location Sketch included in the Appendix shows the approximate locations of the
borings.
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 5
Performing 16 standard penetration test (SPT) borings, denoted as ST-1 to ST-16, to nominal
depths of 14 1/2 to 21 feet below grade across the site. Borings ST-1 and ST-2 were not
drilled due to soft ground conditions.
Performing laboratory testing on select samples to aid in soil classification and engineering
analysis.
Preparing this report containing a boring location sketch, logs of soil borings, a summary of
the soils encountered, results of laboratory tests, and preliminary recommendations for
structure and pavement subgrade preparation and the design of foundations, floor slabs,
exterior slabs, utilities, stormwater improvements and pavements.
B. Results
B.1. Geologic Overview
We based the geologic origins used in this report on the soil types, in-situ and laboratory testing, and
available common knowledge of the geological history of the site. Because of the complex depositional
history, geologic origins can be difficult to ascertain. We did not perform a detailed investigation of the
geologic history for the site.
B.2. Boring Results
Table 5 provides a summary of the soil boring results in the general order we encountered the strata.
Please refer to the Log of Boring sheets in the Appendix for additional details. The Descriptive
Terminology sheet in the Appendix includes definitions of abbreviations used in Table 5.
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 6
Table 5. Subsurface Profile Summary*
Strata
Soil Type -
ASTM
Classification
Range of
Penetration
Resistances Commentary and Details
Topsoil SM, ML N/A
Encountered at the surface of all 14 boring locations and
consisted of silty sand and sandy silt.
Thicknesses at boring locations about 1/2 to 1 1/2 feet.
Brown to dark brown in color.
Moisture condition generally moist.
Alluvium SP-SM, SM,
CL, CH
2 to 15 blows
per foot (BPF)
Encountered below the topsoil in most of the borings.
Alluvium varied and extended to depths from about 7 to
greater than 14 1/2 feet below grade.
Mostly silty sand and sand with lesser amounts of lean
clay and fat clay.
Brown, dark brown, and gray in color.
Moisture condition generally moist to wet.
Glacial Till CL, SC, SM,
SP-SM 4 to 17 BPF
Encounter below the topsoil and/or alluvium at Borings
ST-5, ST-7, ST-9, ST-10 through ST-12, ST-15, and ST-16.
Generally clayey sand and sandy lean clay with lesser
amounts of sand and silty sand.
Brown and gray in color.
Moisture condition generally moist to wet.
*Abbreviations defined in the attached Descriptive Terminology sheet.
B.3. Groundwater
Table 6 summarizes the depths where we observed groundwater; the attached Log of Boring sheets in
the Appendix also include this information and additional details.
Table 6. Groundwater Summary
Location
Measured Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Measured Depth to
Groundwater
(feet)
Corresponding
Groundwater Elevation
(feet)
ST-3 905.4 9 896 1/2
ST-4 917.5 6 911 1/2
ST-5 905.8 9 1/2 895 1/2
ST-6 915.2 7 908
ST-7 920.9 2 919
ST-8 923.8 5 918 1/2
ST-9 903.9 9 895
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 7
Location
Measured Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Measured Depth to
Groundwater
(feet)
Corresponding
Groundwater Elevation
(feet)
ST-10 924.1 5 919
ST-11 923.8 5 918 1/2
ST-12 924.1 5 919
ST-13 904.1 8 1/2 895 1/2
ST-14 917.7 7 1/2 910
ST-15 925.3 7 918
ST-16 929.6 Not Observed ----
At Borings ST-3, ST-5, ST-9, and ST-13 performed in the west portion of the site adjacent to the wetland,
groundwater was encountered between depths of about 8 to 9 feet, which correspond to elevations of
about 895 to 896 feet. At Borings ST-4, ST-6 through ST-8, ST-10 through ST-12, ST-14 and ST-15
performed in the central and east portions of the site, groundwater was encountered between depths of
about 2 to 7 feet, which correspond to elevations of about 908 to 919 feet.
The site is situated between Wilkinson Lake (OHW 895.2 feet) and Amelia Lake (OHW 908.1 feet). The
ordinary high water (OHW) levels were obtained from the MN DNR Lake Finder website.
Based on the results of the borings, it is our opinion that some of the groundwater encountered in the
borings in the higher portion of the site is perched groundwater within granular alluvial soil layers
overlying less permeable clayey glacial till soils. We anticipate that seams or zones of perched water will
be present at variable elevations across the site and should be expected during construction.
Because the apartment and senior buildings will likely have below grade parking as well as an in-ground
pool, we recommend that additional soil borings be completed in which we can install piezometers. The
piezometers can measure groundwater levels over an extended period of time to assist in establishing
low floor grades. Project planning should expect groundwater will fluctuate seasonally and annually.
B.4. Laboratory Test Results
We performed mechanical analyses through a #200 sieve (P200) and moisture content tests in
accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) procedures on samples recovered
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 8
from the SPT borings. The P200 and moisture content tests are shown on the Log of Boring Sheets
included in the Appendix, across from the associated soil sample.
C. Recommendations
C.1. Design and Construction Discussion
C.1.a. Building Subgrade Preparation
The preliminary plans indicate the proposed development will contain 2 apartment buildings and
1 senior living building that will all contain below grade parking levels, 3 slab-on-grade retail buildings and
11 slab-on-grade townhouse buildings. Based on the results of the borings and the anticipated finished
floor elevation of 930 feet for the buildings, we anticipate a soil correction will be required for the
buildings with fills up to about 10 feet required to establish grade. We anticipate the soil correction will
involve removing the topsoil, existing fill and soft/very loose soils. Also, any relic buried structures – such
as old pavements, wells, cisterns, utility lines, floor slabs or foundations, etc., should be removed from
building pads and paved areas.
Any areas of loose or disturbed sands in the excavation bottoms should be moisture conditioned, if
necessary, and surface compacted to increase the density and uniformity of the sands prior to footing or
fill placement.
C.1.b. Reuse of On-Site Soils
The on-site native soils, free of organic materials and debris, appear suitable for reuse as engineered fill.
Some of the on-site soils will likely require moisture conditioning (drying or wetting) prior to reuse and
compaction. However, the higher moisture content lean clay and the fat clay should not be used as
structural fill. Any materials to be used as engineered fill should be tested and approved by the
geotechnical engineer prior to placement.
C.1.c. Effects of Groundwater
Groundwater was encountered in 13 of the 14 soil borings during drilling. At the 4 borings performed in
the west portion of the site adjacent to the wetland, groundwater was encountered between depths of
about 8 to 9 feet, which correspond to elevations of about 895 to 896 feet. At 9 of the 10 borings
performed in the central and east portions of the site, groundwater was encountered between depths of
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 9
about 2 to 7 feet, which correspond to elevations of about 908 to 919 feet. The attached Log of Boring
sheets in the Appendix also include this information and additional details.
The groundwater levels were highly variable; therefore, it is our opinion that some of the groundwater
observed in the borings is perched in permeable sand layers overlying slower draining clay layers.
Excavation trenches for utility installation will likely intercept some of these permeable layers creating
difficult backfilling conditions. Once the site grading and utility construction is complete, we expect some
of the perched water conditions of the site may change.
The contractor should immediately remove any collected water within the excavations to facilitate
construction and proper backfilling. Project planning should include temporary sumps and pumps for
excavations in low-permeability soils, such as clays and silts. Dewatering of high-permeability soils
(e.g., sands) from within the excavation with conventional pumps has the potential to loosen the soils,
due to upward flow, and we recommend that well points or dewatering wells be used in these areas.
To further evaluate the groundwater conditions on this site, additional soil borings should be completed
and piezometers should be installed and monitored. This additional groundwater data would assist in
establishing the below grade parking levels of the apartment and senior living buildings. It will also assist
with designing the below-grade pool.
C.1.d. Additional Evaluation
This draft report assumes that the buildings will be supported by spread footing foundations designed for
a maximum net allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf). As design of the
development progresses and the building floor grades and building loads are established, we recommend
completing additional soil borings to determine if a higher soil bearing pressure is feasible.
C.2. Site Grading and Subgrade Preparation
C.2.a. Building Subgrade Excavations
We recommend soil corrections to remove any unsuitable materials from the building footprint and oversize
area prior to construction. We define unsuitable materials as any existing fill, frozen materials, topsoil,
organic soils, existing utilities, building debris, pavements, and/or soft or very loose soils. Table 7 shows the
anticipated soil correction excavation depths and associated bottom elevations for each of the borings. We
have assumed that structures will be constructed at each boring location. If structures are not planned at
individual boring locations, the depth of soil correction work could be reduced.
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 10
Table 7. Anticipated Soil Correction Excavation Depths
Location
Measured Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Anticipated
Excavation
Depth (feet)
Anticipated
Excavation Bottom
Elevation
(feet)
ST-3 905.4 1** 904 1/2
ST-4 917.5 1/2 917
ST-5 905.8 9 897
ST-6 915.2 1/2 914 1/2
ST-7 920.9 1 1/2 919 1/2
ST-8 923.8 1/2 923
ST-9 903.9 1 903
ST-10 924.1 1 923
ST-11 923.8 1 923
ST-12 924.1 1 923
ST-13 904.1 1 903
ST-14 917.7 1 916 1/2
ST-15 925.3 1 924 1/2
ST-16 929.6 1 928 1/2
** - Recommend moisture conditioning and surface compacting upper looser sands.
Note - Borings ST-1 and ST-2 not drilled.
Excavation depths will vary between and away from the borings. Portions of the excavations may also
extend deeper than indicated by the borings. A geotechnical representative should observe the
excavations to make the necessary field judgments regarding the suitability of the exposed soils and to
evaluate for additional subcuts are warranted.
The contractor should use equipment and techniques to minimize soil disturbance. Loose or disturbed
sands should be moisture conditioned, if necessary, and surface compacted to increase their density and
uniformity prior to engineered fill and/or concrete placement.
C.2.b. Excavation Oversizing
When removing unsuitable materials below structures or pavements, we recommend the excavation
extend outward and downward at a slope of 1H:1V (horizontal:vertical) or flatter. See Figure 1 for an
illustration of excavation oversizing.
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 11
Figure 1. Generalized Illustration of Oversizing
The design team should evaluate that adequate oversizing of soil corrections can be achieved. Additional
consideration of this adjacent to the existing building is provided in Section C.4. If adequate oversizing
cannot be achieved, we should be consulted as additional recommendations may apply.
C.2.c. Excavated Slopes
Based on the borings, we anticipate on-site soils in excavations will generally consist of sands and silty
sands. These soils are typically considered as Type C Soil under OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health
Administration) guidelines. OSHA guidelines indicate unsupported excavations in Type C soils should
have a gradient no steeper than 1 1/2H:1V.
1. Engineered fill as defined in C.2.e.
2. Excavation oversizing minimum of 1 to 1
(horizontal to vertical) slope or flatter.
3. Engineered fill as required to meet pavement
support or landscaping requirements as
defined in C.2.e.
4. Excavation Backslope to OSHA requirements.
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 12
An OSHA-approved qualified person should review the soil classification in the field. Excavations must
comply with the requirements of OSHA 29 CFR, Part 1926, Subpart P, “Excavations and Trenches.” This
document states excavation safety is the responsibility of the contractor. The project specifications
should reference these OSHA requirements.
C.2.d. Excavation Dewatering
We recommend removing groundwater from the excavations. Project planning should include temporary
sumps and pumps for excavations in low-permeability soils, such as clays and silts. Dewatering of high-
permeability soils (e.g., sands) from within the excavation with conventional pumps has the potential to
loosen the soils, due to upward flow, and we recommend that well points or dewatering wells be used in
these areas.
C.2.e. Engineered Fill Materials and Compaction
Table 8 below contains our recommendations for engineered fill materials.
Table 8. Engineered Fill Materials*
Locations
To Be Used
Engineered
Fill Classification
Possible Soil Type
Descriptions Gradation
Additional
Requirements
Below
foundations
Below interior
slabs
Structural fill SP-SM, SM, SC 100% passing 3-inch sieve
< 25% passing #200 sieve
< 2% Organic
Content (OC)
Plasticity Index
(PI) <20%
Any structural fill
greater than 8 feet
(from slab grade)
Deep Structural
fills SP, SP-SM 100% passing 3-inch sieve
< 12% passing #200 sieve < 2% OC
Drainage layer
Non-frost-
susceptible
Free-draining
Non-frost-
susceptible fill
SP
100% passing 1-inch sieve
< 50% passing #40 sieve
< 5% passing #200 sieve
< 2% OC
Behind below-
grade walls,
beyond drainage
layer
Retained fill SP-SM, SM, SC 100% passing 3-inch sieve
< 2% OC
Plasticity Index
(PI)
< 4%
Pavements Pavement fill SP-SM, SM, SC, CL 100% passing 3-inch sieve < 2% OC
PI < 20%
Below landscaped
surfaces, where
subsidence is not
a concern
Non-structural fill SP-SM, SM, SC, CL,
OL 100% passing 6-inch sieve < 10% OC
*More select soils comprised of coarse sands with < 5% passing #200 sieve may be needed to accommodate work occurring in
periods of wet or freezing weather.
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 13
We recommend spreading engineered fill in loose lifts of approximately 8 to 12 inches thick. We
recommend compacting each lift of engineered fill with a full size, vibrating, sheepsfoot compactor, or
similar in accordance with the criteria presented below in Table 9. The project documents should specify
relative compaction of engineered fill, based on the structure located above the engineered fill, and
vertical proximity to that structure.
Table 9. Compaction Recommendations Summary
Reference
Relative Compaction,
percent
(ASTM D698 – Standard
Proctor)
Moisture Content Variance from Optimum,
percentage points
< 12% Passing #200 Sieve
(typically SP, SP-SM)
> 12% Passing #200 Sieve
(typically CL, SC, SM)
Below bulding pads,
less than
10 feet of fill
98 ±3 -1 to +3
Below bulding pads,
more than 10 feet of fill 100 ±2 -1 to +2
Within 3 feet of
pavement subgrade 100 ±2 -2 to +1
More than 3 feet below
pavement subgrade 95 ±3 -1 to +3
Below landscaped
surfaces 90 ±5 -1 to +5
The project documents should not allow the contractor to use frozen material as engineered fill or to place
engineered fill on frozen material. Frost should not penetrate under foundations during construction.
We recommend performing density tests in engineered fill to evaluate if the contractors are effectively
compacting the soil and meeting project requirements.
C.2.f. Special Inspections of Soils
We recommend including the site grading and placement of engineered fill within the building pad under
the requirements of Special Inspections, as provided in Chapter 17 of the International Building Code,
which is part of the Minnesota State Building Code. Special Inspection requires observation of soil
conditions below engineered fill or footings, evaluations to determine if excavations extend to the
anticipated soils, and if engineered fill materials meet requirements for type of engineered fill and
compaction condition of engineered fill. A licensed geotechnical engineer should direct the Special
Inspections of site grading and engineered fill placement. The purpose of these Special Inspections is to
evaluate whether the work is in accordance with the approved Geotechnical Report for the project.
Special Inspections should include evaluation of the subgrade, observing preparation of the subgrade
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 14
(surface compaction or dewatering, excavation oversizing, placement procedures and materials used for
engineered fill, etc.) and compaction testing of the engineered fill.
C.3. Spread Footings
Table 10 below contains our recommended parameters for foundation design.
Table 10. Recommended Spread Footing Design Parameters
Item Description
Maximum net allowable bearing pressure
(psf) 3,000
Minimum factor of safety for bearing capacity failure 3.0
Minimum width
(inches)
Strip footing – 24
Column footing – 36
Minimum embedment below final exterior
grade for heated structures
(inches)
42
Minimum embedment below final exterior grade for
unheated structures or for footings not protected from
freezing temperatures during construction
(inches)
60
Total estimated settlement
(inches) Less than 1 inch
Differential settlement Typically, about 2/3 of total settlement
C.4. Below-Grade Walls
Foundation walls or below grade (basement) walls will have lateral loads from the surrounding soils
transmitted to them. Designs should also consider the slope of any fill and dead or live loads, including
equipment and materials, placed within a horizontal distance behind the walls that is equal to the height
of the walls. Our recommended values also assume the wall design provides drainage to prevent water
from accumulating behind the walls. The construction documents should clearly identify the material
properties of the soil the contractor should use for wall fill.
The project documents should indicate if walls need bracing prior to filling and allowable unbalanced fill
heights.
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 15
C.4.a. Drainage Control
We recommend installing drain tile to remove water behind the below-grade walls, at the location shown
in Figure 2. The below-grade wall drainage system should also incorporate free-draining, engineered fill
or a drainage board placed against the wall and connected to the drain tile.
Even with the use of free-draining, engineered fill, we recommend general waterproofing of below-grade
walls that surround occupied or potentially occupied areas because of the potential cost impacts related
to seepage after construction is complete.
Figure 2. Generalized Illustration of Wall Engineered Fill
The materials listed in the sketch should meet the definitions in Section C.2.e. Low-permeability material
is capable of directing water away from the wall, like clay, topsoil or pavement. The project documents
should indicate if the contractor should brace the walls prior to filling and allowable unbalanced fill
heights.
1. 2-foot wide area of Free-
Draining Engineered Fill or
Drainage Board.
2. Retained Engineered Fill.
3. 1-foot of Low-Permeability
Soil or Pavement.
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 16
As shown in Figure 3, we recommend Zone 2 consist of retained engineered fill, and this material will
control lateral pressures on the wall.
C.4.b. Configuring and Resisting Lateral Loads
Below-grade wall design can use active earth pressure conditions, if the walls can rotate slightly. If the
wall design cannot tolerate rotation, then design should use at-rest earth pressure conditions.
Rotation up to 0.002 times the wall height is generally required for walls supporting sand. Rotation
up to 0.02 times the wall height is required when wall supports clay.
Table 11 presents our recommended lateral coefficients and equivalent fluid pressures for wall design of
active, at-rest and passive earth pressure conditions. The table also provides recommended wet unit
weights and internal friction angles. Designs should also consider the slope of any engineered fill and
dead or live loads placed behind the walls within a horizontal distance that is equal to the height of the
walls. Our recommended values assume the wall design provides drainage so water cannot accumulate
behind the walls. The construction documents should clearly identify what soils the contractor should
use for engineered fill of walls.
Table 11. Recommended Below-Grade Wall Design Parameters – Drained Conditions
Retained Soil
Wet Unit
Weight
(pcf)
Friction Angle
(degrees)
Active
Equivalent Fluid
Pressure
(pcf)
At-Rest
Equivalent Fluid
Pressure
(pcf)
Passive
Equivalent Fluid
Pressure*
(pcf)
Clayey soil
(CL, SC) 125 26 50 70 320
Silty Sand
(SM) 130 30 42 62 390
Sand
(SP, SP-SM) 120 34 35 55 N/A
*Based on Rankine model for soils in a region behind the wall extending at least 2 horizontal feet beyond the bottom outer
edges of the wall footings and then rising up and away from the wall at an angle no steeper than 60 degrees from horizontal.
Sliding resistance between the bottom of the footing and the soil can also resist lateral pressures. We
recommend assuming a sliding coefficient equal to 0.3 between the concrete and on site soil.
The values presented in this section are un-factored.
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 17
C.5. Interior Slabs
C.5.a. Moisture Vapor Protection
Excess transmission of water vapor could cause floor dampness, certain types of floor bonding agents to
separate, or mold to form under floor coverings. If project planning includes using floor coverings or
coatings, we recommend placing a vapor retarder or vapor barrier immediately beneath the slab. We
also recommend consulting with floor covering manufacturers regarding the appropriate type, use and
installation of the vapor retarder or barrier to preserve warranty assurances.
C.5.b. Radon
We recommend installing a radon mitigation system in accordance with local building code. Our certified
and licensed radon mitigation professionals can assist in this design, at your request.
C.6. Frost Protection
A mixture of clay, silty sand, and sand will underlie exterior slabs (i.e., sidewalks, stoops, etc.). We
consider the clay and silty sands to be moderately to highly frost susceptible. Soils of this type can retain
moisture and heave upon freezing. In general, this characteristic is not an issue unless these soils become
saturated, due to surface runoff or infiltration, or are excessively wet in situ. Once frozen, unfavorable
amounts of general and isolated heaving of the soils and the surface structures supported on them could
develop. This type of heaving could affect design drainage patterns and the performance of exterior slabs
and pavements, as well as any isolated exterior footings and piers.
Note that general runoff and infiltration from precipitation are not the only sources of water that can
saturate subgrade soils and contribute to frost heave. Roof drainage and irrigation of landscaped areas in
close proximity to exterior slabs, pavements, and isolated footings and piers, contribute as well.
C.6.a. Frost Heave Mitigation
To address most of the heave related issues, we recommend setting general site grades and grades for
exterior surface features to direct surface drainage away from buildings, across large, paved areas and
away from walkways. Such grading will limit the potential for saturation of the subgrade and subsequent
heaving. General grades should also have enough “slope” to tolerate potential larger areas of heave,
which may not fully settle after thawing.
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 18
Even small amounts of frost-related differential movement at walkway joints or cracks can create
tripping hazards. Project planning can explore several subgrade improvement options to address this
condition.
One of the more conservative subgrade improvement options to mitigate potential heave is removing
any frost-susceptible soils present below the exterior slab areas down to a minimum depth of 4 feet
below subgrade elevations or to the bottom of adjacent footing grades. We recommend filling the
resulting excavation with non-frost-susceptible fill (i.e., clean sand). We also recommend sloping the
bottom of the excavation toward one or more collection points to remove any water entering the
engineered fill. This approach will not be effective in controlling frost heave without removing the water.
An important geometric aspect of the excavation and replacement approach described above is sloping
the banks of the excavations to create a more gradual transition between the unexcavated soils
considered frost susceptible and the engineered fill in the excavated area, which is not frost susceptible.
The slope allows attenuation of differential movement that may occur along the excavation boundary.
We recommend slopes that are 3H:1V, or flatter, along transitions between frost-susceptible and non-
frost-susceptible soils. Figure 3 shows an illustration summarizing some of the recommendations.
Figure 3. Frost Protection Geometry Illustration
Another option is to limit frost heave in critical areas, such as doorways and entrances, via frost-depth
footings or localized excavations with sloped transitions between frost-susceptible and non-frost-
susceptible soils, as described above.
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 19
Over the life of slabs, cracks will develop and joints open, which will expose the subgrade and allow
water to enter from the surface and either saturate or perch atop the subgrade soils. This water intrusion
increases the potential for frost heave or moisture-related distress near the crack or joint. Therefore, we
recommend implementing a detailed maintenance program to seal and/or fill any cracks and joints. The
maintenance program should give special attention to areas where dissimilar materials abut one
another, where construction joints occur and where shrinkage cracks develop.
C.7. Pavements
C.7.a. Pavement Subgrade Preparation
We recommend the following steps for pavement and exterior slab subgrade preparation. Note that
project planning may need to require additional subcuts to limit frost heave.
1. Strip unsuitable soils consisting of topsoil, organic soils, and vegetation from the area, within
the proposed pavement subgrade area.
2. Have a geotechnical representative observe the excavated subgrade to evaluate if additional
subgrade improvements are necessary.
3. Slope subgrade soils to allow the removal of accumulating water.
4. Scarify, moisture condition, and surface compact the subgrade with at least five passes of a
large roller with a minimum drum diameter of 3 1/2 feet.
5. Place pavement engineered fill to grade and compact in accordance with Section C.2.e. to
bottom of pavement section. See Section C.6 for additional considerations related to frost
heave.
6. Proofroll the pavement subgrade as described in Section C.7.b.
C.7.b. Pavement Subgrade Proofroll
After preparing the subgrade as described above and prior to the placement of the aggregate base, we
recommend proofrolling the subgrade soils with a fully loaded tandem-axle truck. We also recommend
having a geotechnical representative observe the proofroll. Areas that fail the proofroll likely indicate
soft or weak areas that will require additional soil correction work to support pavements.
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 20
The contractor should correct areas that display excessive yielding or rutting during the proofroll, as
determined by the geotechnical representative. Possible options for subgrade correction include
moisture conditioning and re-compaction, subcutting and replacement with soil or crushed aggregate,
chemical stabilization and/or geotextiles. We recommend performing a second proofroll after the
aggregate base material is in place, and prior to placing bituminous or concrete pavement.
C.7.c. Design Sections
Our scope of services for this project did not include laboratory tests on subgrade soils to determine an
R-value for pavement design. Based on our experience with similar silty sand soils anticipated at the
pavement subgrade elevation, we recommend pavement design assume an R-value of 30. Note the
contractor may need to perform limited removal of unsuitable or less suitable soils to achieve this value.
Table 12 provides recommended pavement sections, based on the soils support and traffic loads.
Table 12. Recommended Bituminous Pavement Sections
Use Light Duty Heavy Duty
Minimum asphalt thickness
(inches) 3 1/2 4
Minimum aggregate base thickness
(inches) 8 12
C.7.d. Bituminous Pavement Materials
Appropriate mix designs are critical to the performance of flexible pavements. We can provide
recommendations for pavement material selection during final pavement design.
C.7.e. Concrete Flatwork
Subgrade preparation for concrete flatwork (aprons, dumpster pads, etc.) should be consistent with
those recommendations provided for exterior slabs and bituminous pavements. We anticipate traffic
loads on sidewalks will be limited to primarily pedestrian foot traffic. Given the assumed subgrade
parameters and loading conditions, we recommend design of concrete flatwork include a minimum
5-inch concrete section over 6 inches of aggregate base.
C.7.f. Subgrade Drainage
Given the abundance of native silty sands at or near pavement subgrades, we recommend installing
perforated drainpipes throughout pavement areas at low points, around catch basins, and behind curb in
landscaped areas. We also recommend installing drainpipes along pavement and exterior slab edges
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 21
where exterior grades promote drainage toward those edge areas. The contractor should place
drainpipes in small trenches, extended at least 8 inches below the aggregate base material.
C.7.g. Performance and Maintenance
We based the above pavement designs on a 20-year performance life for bituminous. This is the amount
of time before we anticipate the pavement will require reconstruction. This performance life assumes
routine maintenance, such as seal coating and crack sealing. The actual pavement life will vary depending
on variations in weather, traffic conditions and maintenance.
It is common to place the non-wear course of bituminous and then delay placement of wear course. For
this situation, we recommend evaluating if the reduced pavement section will have sufficient structure to
support construction traffic.
Many conditions affect the overall performance of the exterior slabs and pavements. Some of these
conditions include the environment, loading conditions and the level of ongoing maintenance. With
bituminous pavements in particular, it is common to have thermal cracking develop within the first few
years of placement and continue throughout the life of the pavement. We recommend developing a
regular maintenance plan for filling cracks in exterior slabs and pavements to lessen the potential
impacts for cold weather distress due to frost heave or warm weather distress due to wetting and
softening of the subgrade.
C.8. Utilities
C.8.a. Subgrade Stabilization
Earthwork activities associated with utility installations located inside the building area should adhere to
the recommendations in Section C.2.e.
For exterior utilities, we anticipate the soils at typical invert elevations will be suitable for utility support.
However, if construction encounters unfavorable conditions such as soft clay, organic soils or perched
water at invert grades, the unsuitable soils may require some additional subcutting and replacement
with sand or crushed rock to prepare a proper subgrade for pipe support. Project design and construction
should not place utilities within the 1H:1V oversizing of foundations.
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 22
C.8.b. Corrosion Potential
Based on our experience, the sandy soils encountered by the borings are moderately corrosive to
metallic conduits, but only marginally corrosive to concrete. We recommend specifying non-corrosive
materials or providing corrosion protection, unless project planning chooses to perform additional tests
to demonstrate the soils are not corrosive.
C.9. Stormwater
Based on laboratory tests run on selected samples from the borings we estimated infiltration rates for
the soils we encountered, as listed in Table 13. These estimated infiltration rates represent the long-term
infiltration capacity of a practice and not the capacity of the soils in their natural state. Field testing, such
as with a double-ring infiltrometer (ASTM D3385), may justify the use of higher infiltration rates.
However, we recommend adjusting field test rates by the appropriate correction factor, as provided for
in the Minnesota Stormwater Manual or as allowed by the local watershed. We recommend consulting
the Minnesota Stormwater Manual for stormwater design.
Table 13. Soil Infiltration Rates
Soil Type Hydrologic Soil Group
Infiltration Rate *
(inches/hour)
Sands
(SP-SM) A 0.8
Silts, very fine sands, silty or clayey
fine sands
(ML, SM, SC)
C 0.2
Sandy clay, silty clay, lean clay, fat
clay
(CLS, CL-ML, CL, CH)
D 0.06
*From Minnesota Stormwater Manual. Rates may differ at individual sites.
Fine-grained soils (clays and silts), topsoil, or organic matter that mixes into or washes onto the soil will
lower the permeability. The contractor should maintain and protect infiltration areas during
construction. Furthermore, organic matter and silt washed into the system after construction can fill the
soil pores and reduce permeability over time. Proper maintenance is important for long-term
performance of infiltration systems.
This geotechnical evaluation does not constitute a review of site suitability for stormwater infiltration or
evaluate the potential impacts, if any, from infiltration of large amounts of stormwater.
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 23
C.10. Additional Considerations
C.10.a. Below Grade Pool
Because of the potential for higher perched groundwater on this site, it may be necessary to design the
below grade pool to resist buoyancy that could be caused by groundwater, especially if the bottom of the
pool is less than 3 feet from groundwater.
C.10.b. Equipment Support
The recommendations included in the report may not be applicable to equipment used for the
construction and maintenance of this project. We recommend evaluating subgrade conditions in areas of
shoring, scaffolding, cranes, pumps, lifts and other construction equipment prior to mobilization to
determine if the exposed materials are suitable for equipment support or require some form of subgrade
improvement. We also recommend project planning consider the effect that loads applied by such
equipment may have on structures they bear on or surcharge – including pavements, buried utilities,
below-grade walls, etc. We can assist you in this evaluation.
C.10.c. Additional Soil Borings and Piezometers
When the final site concept plan has been established, we recommend additional soil borings to further
define the site soil conditions. Piezometers could then be installed in several of the additional soil borings
to further define the site groundwater conditions.
D. Procedures
D.1. Penetration Test Borings
We drilled the penetration test borings between March 25 and April 15, 2024, with an all-terrain-
mounted core and auger drill equipped with hollow-stem auger. We performed the borings in general
accordance with ASTM D6151, taking penetration test samples at 2 1/2- or 5-foot intervals. The boring
logs show the actual sample intervals and corresponding depths.
We sealed penetration test boreholes meeting the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH)
Environmental Borehole criteria in general accordance with MDH procedures.
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 24
D.2. Exploration Logs
D.2.a. Log of Boring Sheets
The Appendix includes Log of Boring sheets for our penetration test borings. The logs identify and
describe the penetrated geologic materials and present the results of penetration resistance and other
in-situ tests performed. The logs also present the results of laboratory tests performed on penetration
test samples and groundwater measurements.
We inferred strata boundaries from changes in the penetration test samples and the auger cuttings.
Because we did not perform continuous sampling, the strata boundary depths are only approximate. The
boundary depths likely vary away from the boring locations, and the boundaries themselves may occur as
gradual rather than abrupt transitions.
D.2.b. Geologic Origins
We assigned geologic origins to the materials shown on the logs and referenced within this report, based
on: (1) a review of the background information and reference documents cited above, (2) visual
classification of the various geologic material samples retrieved during the course of our subsurface
exploration, (3) penetration resistance in-situ testing performed for the project, (4) laboratory test
results, and (5) available common knowledge of the geologic processes and environments that have
impacted the site and surrounding area in the past.
D.3. Material Classification and Testing
D.3.a. Visual and Manual Classification
We visually and manually classified the geologic materials encountered based on ASTM D2488. When we
performed laboratory classification tests, we used the results to classify the geologic materials in
accordance with ASTM D2487. The Appendix includes a chart explaining the classification system we
used.
D.3.b. Laboratory Testing
The exploration logs in the Appendix note the results of the laboratory tests performed on geologic
material samples. We performed the tests in general accordance with ASTM procedures.
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 25
D.4. Groundwater Measurements
The drillers checked for groundwater while advancing the penetration test borings, and again after auger
withdrawal. We then filled the boreholes, as noted on the boring logs.
E. Qualifications
E.1. Variations in Subsurface Conditions
E.1.a. Material Strata
We developed our preliminary evaluation, analyses, and recommendations from a limited amount of site
and subsurface information. It is not standard engineering practice to retrieve material samples from
exploration locations continuously with depth. Therefore, we must infer strata boundaries and
thicknesses to some extent. Strata boundaries may also be gradual transitions, and project planning
should expect the strata to vary in depth, elevation and thickness, away from the exploration locations.
Variations in subsurface conditions present between exploration locations may not be revealed until
performing additional exploration work or starting construction. If future activity for this project reveals
any such variations, you should notify us so that we may reevaluate our recommendations. Such
variations could increase construction costs, and we recommend including a contingency to
accommodate them.
E.1.b. Groundwater Levels
We made groundwater measurements under the conditions reported herein and shown on the
exploration logs and interpreted in the text of this report. Note that the observation periods were
relatively short, and project planning can expect groundwater levels to fluctuate in response to rainfall,
flooding, irrigation, seasonal freezing and thawing, surface drainage modifications and other seasonal
and annual factors.
E.2. Continuity of Professional Responsibility
E.2.a. Plan Review
We based this preliminary report on a limited amount of information, and we made several assumptions
to help us develop our preliminary recommendations. We should be retained to review the geotechnical
North Oaks Company LLC
Project B2402335
August 22, 2024
Page 26
aspects of the designs and specifications. This review will allow us to evaluate whether we anticipated
the design correctly, if any design changes affect the validity of our recommendations, and if the design
and specifications correctly interpret and implement our recommendations.
E.2.b. Construction Observations and Testing
We recommend retaining Braun Intertec to perform the required observations and testing during
construction as part of the ongoing geotechnical evaluation. This will allow us to correlate the subsurface
conditions exposed during construction with those encountered by the borings and provide professional
continuity from the design phase to the construction phase. If we do not perform observations and
testing during construction, it becomes the responsibility of others to validate the assumption made
during the preparation of this report and to accept the construction-related geotechnical engineer-of-
record responsibilities.
E.3. Use of Report
This report is for the exclusive use of the addressed parties. Without written approval, we assume no
responsibility to other parties regarding this report. Our evaluation, analyses and recommendations may
not be appropriate for other parties or projects.
E.4. Standard of Care
In performing its services, Braun Intertec used that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under
similar circumstances by reputable members of its profession currently practicing in the same locality.
No warranty, express or implied, is made.
Appendix
ELEC
KINSON LAKE
>
>
>
>
>
I
I
I I I I
I
I
I
I
I
>
>
>
<II
<II<II<II
<II<II<II
>>
>
>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
I I I
I
I I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE OE OE OE OE
I
I
I
WET
WET
WET
WE
T
WE
T
W
E
T
WET
W
E
T
W
E
T
W
E
T
W
E
T
G
G
G UT
V
UT
V
UT
V
UT
V
UT
V
UT
V
UE
G
G
UT
V
UT
V
OHL OHLOHL
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
OHL
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
F
B
O
F
B
O
OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL
G
GG
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
OHL
OHL
OHL
OH
L
OHL
OHL
OH
L
OHL
OHL
OH
L
OHL
OHL
OHL
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OHL
OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL
OHL
OHL
OHL
OHL
OH
L
OHL
OHL
OH
L
OHL
OHL
OH
L
OHL
OHL
OH
L
OH
L
OHL
OHL
OHL
OHL
OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL
OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL
OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHL
OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL
G G G G
X
WILKINSON LAKE BLVD
C
E
N
T
E
R
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
ASH STREET
W W
W
W
W
W
W
WET
WET
KINSON LAKE
AMELIA LAKE
V
V
V
G
U
U FO
FO
U
FO
FO
U
UFO
MB
U
EX GGV
U
U
G
U
U
U GU
G
U
24
1
2
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
12
29
10
2
0
9
19
10
5
6
-
P
L
E
X
1
1
,
2
5
6
S
Q
.
F
T
.
6
-
P
L
E
X
1
1
,
2
5
6
S
Q
.
F
T
.
6
-
P
L
E
X
1
1
,
2
5
6
S
Q
.
F
T
.
3
1
0
0
U
N
I
T
A
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
6
-
P
L
E
X
1
1
,
2
5
6
S
Q
.
F
T
.
6
-
P
L
E
X
1
1
,
2
5
6
S
Q
.
F
T
.
4
-
P
L
E
X
7
,
8
4
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
4
-
P
L
E
X
7
,
8
4
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
4
-
P
L
E
X
7
,
8
4
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
3
5
6
-
P
L
E
X
1
1
,
2
5
6
S
Q
.
F
T
.
1
0
0
U
N
I
T
A
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
9
3
1
3
1
19
11
15
21
17
8
RETAI
L
9,100 S
Q
.
F
T
.
R
E
T
A
I
L
9,
1
0
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
R
E
T
A
I
L
1
0
,
8
5
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
1
3
31
3
2
1
0
0
U
N
I
T
S
E
N
I
O
R
L
I
V
I
N
G
0.9 AC
0.7 AC
0.7 AC
0.6 AC
4.15 AC
5.1 AC
12.4 AC
4
-
P
L
E
X
7
,
8
4
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
4
-
P
L
E
X
7
,
8
4
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
WILKINSON LAKE BLVD
ST-1 ST-2
ST-3
ST-4
ST-8
ST-7
ST-6
ST-5
ST-9
ST-14
ST-12
ST-11
ST-16
ST-10
ST-13
ST-15
AMELIA
LAKE
F:
\
2
0
2
4
\
B
2
4
0
2
3
3
5
\
C
A
D
\
B
2
4
0
2
3
3
5
.
d
w
g
,Ge
o
t
e
c
h
,6/
2
7
/
2
0
2
4
7
:
5
6
:
5
0
P
M
braunintertec.com
952.995.2000
Minneapolis, MN 55438
11001 Hampshire Avenue S
Project No:
B2402335
Drawn By:
Date Drawn:
Checked By:
Last Modified:6/27/24
Drawing No:
Project Information
Drawing Information
B2402335
JAG
3/19/24
JTC
Proposed Lino Lakes
Development
320 Acres Southwest
of Ash Street W. and
Centerville Road
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
Soil Boring
Location SketchN
DENOTES APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
STANDARD PENETRATION TEST BORING
0
SCALE:1"= 200'
200'100'
Elev./
Depth
ft
904.7
0.7
890.9
14.5
Wat
e
r
Le
v
e
l
Description of Materials
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-USACE EM
1110-1-2908)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, with roots,
dark brown, moist (TOPSOIL)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, contains
lenses of Poorly Graded Sand, brown, moist to
wet, very loose to loose (ALLUVIUM)
END OF BORING
Boring then backfilled with auger cuttings
5
10
15
20
25
30
Sa
m
p
l
e
Blows
(N-Value)
Recovery
2-2-2
(4)
3-4-6
(10)
3-5-4
(9)
2-3-3
(6)
2-3-3
(6)
qₚ
tsf
MC
%
15
Tests or Remarks
Water observed at 9.0 feet
while drilling.
LOG OF BORING
See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations
Project Number B2402335
Geotechnical Evaluation
Proposed Wilkinson Waters Development
County Road J & Centerville Road
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
BORING:ST-3
LOCATION: Captured with RTK GPS.
DATUM:NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN Anoka (US Feet)
NORTHING:133590.8 EASTING:552777.4
DRILLER:S Hull / A Tross LOGGED BY:J Carlson START DATE:04/15/24 END DATE:04/15/24
SURFACE
ELEVATION:905.4 ft RIG:7505 METHOD:3 1/4" HSA SURFACING:Field WEATHER:Sun, 60°F
B2402335 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:08/22/2024 ST-3 page 1 of 1DRAFT
Elev./
Depth
ft
917.2
0.3
907.5
10.0
903.0
14.5
Wat
e
r
Le
v
e
l
Description of Materials
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-USACE EM
1110-1-2908)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, trace roots,
dark brown, moist (TOPSOIL)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, trace Gravel,
with lenses of Poorly Graded Sand, brown,
moist to wet, loose (ALLUVIUM)
LEAN CLAY (CL), with lenses of Poorly Graded
Sand and Silty Sand, brownish gray, moist,
medium to stiff (GLACIAL TILL)
END OF BORING
Boring then backfilled with auger cuttings
5
10
15
20
25
30
Sa
m
p
l
e
Blows
(N-Value)
Recovery
1-2-4
(6)
16"
3-4-5
(9)
16"
3-4-6
(10)
14"
4-3-3
(6)
16"
5-6-8
(14)
16"
qₚ
tsf
MC
%
13
Tests or Remarks
Water observed at 7.5 feet
while drilling.
Water observed at 6.0 feet
at end of drilling.
LOG OF BORING
See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations
Project Number B2402335
Geotechnical Evaluation
Proposed Wilkinson Waters Development
County Road J & Centerville Road
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
BORING:ST-4
LOCATION: Captured with RTK GPS.
DATUM:NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN Anoka (US Feet)
NORTHING:133672.4 EASTING:553346.0
DRILLER:S Hull / A Tross LOGGED BY:J Carlson START DATE:03/26/24 END DATE:03/26/24
SURFACE
ELEVATION:917.5 ft RIG:7505 METHOD:3 1/4" HSA SURFACING:Field WEATHER:Snow, 30°F
B2402335 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:08/22/2024 ST-4 page 1 of 1DRAFT
Elev./
Depth
ft
905.2
0.5
901.8
4.0
898.8
7.0
896.8
9.0
892.8
13.0
891.2
14.5
Wat
e
r
Le
v
e
l
Description of Materials
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-USACE EM
1110-1-2908)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine to medium-grained,
dark brown, moist (TOPSOIL)
POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT (SP-SM),
fine-grained, brown, moist, loose (ALLUVIUM)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, brownish gray,
moist, medium dense (ALLUVIUM)
FAT CLAY (CH), gray, moist, soft (ALLUVIUM)
POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT (SP-SM),
fine-grained, gray, wet, very loose (ALLUVIUM)
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), trace Gravel, gray,
moist, medium (GLACIAL TILL)
END OF BORING
Boring then backfilled with auger cuttings
5
10
15
20
25
30
Sa
m
p
l
e
Blows
(N-Value)
Recovery
3-4-6
(10)
14"
6-6-7
(13)
16"
1-1-1
(2)
18"
1-2-1
(3)
16"
2-3-5
(8)
16"
qₚ
tsf
MC
%
19
Tests or Remarks
P200=8%
Water observed at 9.5 feet
while drilling.
LOG OF BORING
See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations
Project Number B2402335
Geotechnical Evaluation
Proposed Wilkinson Waters Development
County Road J & Centerville Road
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
BORING:ST-5
LOCATION: Captured with RTK GPS.
DATUM:NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN Anoka (US Feet)
NORTHING:133278.3 EASTING:552843.5
DRILLER:S Hull / A Tross LOGGED BY:J Carlson START DATE:04/15/24 END DATE:04/15/24
SURFACE
ELEVATION:905.8 ft RIG:7505 METHOD:3 1/4" HSA SURFACING:Field WEATHER:Sun, 60°F
B2402335 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:08/22/2024 ST-5 page 1 of 1DRAFT
Elev./
Depth
ft
914.9
0.3
900.7
14.5
Wat
e
r
Le
v
e
l
Description of Materials
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-USACE EM
1110-1-2908)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, trace roots,
dark brown, moist (TOPSOIL)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, trace Gravel,
with lenses of Poorly Graded Sand, light brown
to brown, moist to wet, very loose to medium
dense (ALLUVIUM)
END OF BORING
Boring then backfilled with auger cuttings
5
10
15
20
25
30
Sa
m
p
l
e
Blows
(N-Value)
Recovery
1-2-4
(6)
14"
5-6-7
(13)
16"
4-5-4
(9)
18"
3-3-3
(6)
15"
1-1-1
(2)
16"
qₚ
tsf
MC
%
12
Tests or Remarks
Water observed at 7.0 feet
while drilling.
LOG OF BORING
See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations
Project Number B2402335
Geotechnical Evaluation
Proposed Wilkinson Waters Development
County Road J & Centerville Road
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
BORING:ST-6
LOCATION: Captured with RTK GPS.
DATUM:NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN Anoka (US Feet)
NORTHING:133433.6 EASTING:552989.8
DRILLER:S Hull / A Tross LOGGED BY:J Carlson START DATE:03/26/24 END DATE:03/26/24
SURFACE
ELEVATION:915.2 ft RIG:7505 METHOD:3 1/4" HSA SURFACING:Field WEATHER:Snow
B2402335 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:08/22/2024 ST-6 page 1 of 1DRAFT
Elev./
Depth
ft
919.7
1.2
913.9
7.0
906.4
14.5
Wat
e
r
Le
v
e
l
Description of Materials
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-USACE EM
1110-1-2908)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, dark brown,
moist (TOPSOIL)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, trace Gravel,
with lenses of Poorly Graded Sand, brown,
moist to wet, medium dense to loose
(ALLUVIUM)
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), trace Gravel, gray,
moist, medium to stiff (GLACIAL TILL)
END OF BORING
Boring then backfilled with auger cuttings
5
10
15
20
25
30
Sa
m
p
l
e
Blows
(N-Value)
Recovery
3-7-8
(15)
16"
4-4-2
(6)
15"
1-3-3
(6)
16"
2-3-5
(8)
16"
5-6-6
(12)
18"
qₚ
tsf
MC
%
13
Tests or Remarks
Water observed at 2.0 feet
while drilling.
Water not observed
immediately after
withdrawal of auger.
LOG OF BORING
See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations
Project Number B2402335
Geotechnical Evaluation
Proposed Wilkinson Waters Development
County Road J & Centerville Road
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
BORING:ST-7
LOCATION: Captured with RTK GPS.
DATUM:NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN Anoka (US Feet)
NORTHING:133311.5 EASTING:553301.3
DRILLER:S Hull / A Tross LOGGED BY:J Carlson START DATE:03/26/24 END DATE:03/26/24
SURFACE
ELEVATION:920.9 ft RIG:7505 METHOD:3 1/4" HSA SURFACING:Field WEATHER:Snow
B2402335 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:08/22/2024 ST-7 page 1 of 1DRAFT
Elev./
Depth
ft
923.5
0.3
910.8
13.0
909.3
14.5
Wat
e
r
Le
v
e
l
Description of Materials
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-USACE EM
1110-1-2908)
SANDY SILT (ML), trace roots, dark brown,
moist (TOPSOIL)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, trace Gravel,
with lenses of Poorly Grade Sand, brown to
grayish brown, moist to wet, loose to medium
dense, rust staining (ALLUVIUM)
LEAN CLAY (CL), with lenses of Poorly Graded
Sand, brownish gray, moist, stiff (GLACIAL
TILL)
END OF BORING
Boring then backfilled with auger cuttings
5
10
15
20
25
30
Sa
m
p
l
e
Blows
(N-Value)
Recovery
1-2-3
(5)
16"
4-6-6
(12)
16"
7-6-4
(10)
16"
2-1-2
(3)
16"
2-4-5
(9)
16"
qₚ
tsf
MC
%
14
Tests or Remarks
Water observed at 5.0 feet
while drilling.
Water not observed
immediately after
withdrawal of auger.
LOG OF BORING
See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations
Project Number B2402335
Geotechnical Evaluation
Proposed Wilkinson Waters Development
County Road J & Centerville Road
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
BORING:ST-8
LOCATION: Captured with RTK GPS.
DATUM:NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN Anoka (US Feet)
NORTHING:133396.2 EASTING:553720.9
DRILLER:S Hull / A Tross LOGGED BY:J Carlson START DATE:03/26/24 END DATE:03/26/24
SURFACE
ELEVATION:923.8 ft RIG:7505 METHOD:3 1/4" HSA SURFACING:Field WEATHER:Snow
B2402335 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:08/22/2024 ST-8 page 1 of 1DRAFT
Elev./
Depth
ft
903.2
0.7
899.9
4.0
896.9
7.0
891.9
12.0
889.4
14.5
Wat
e
r
Le
v
e
l
Description of Materials
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-USACE EM
1110-1-2908)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, trace roots,
dark brown, moist (TOPSOIL)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, trace Gravel,
dark brown, moist, loose (ALLUVIUM)
CLAYEY SAND (SC), grayish brown, moist, soft
(ALLUVIUM)
POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT (SP-SM),
fine to medium-grained, trace Gravel, brownish
gray, moist to wet, loose (ALLUVIUM)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, grayish brown,
wet, loose (ALLUVIUM)
END OF BORING
Boring then backfilled with auger cuttings
5
10
15
20
25
30
Sa
m
p
l
e
Blows
(N-Value)
Recovery
4-4-5
(9)
14"
4-2-2
(4)
16"
2-3-3
(6)
16"
2-2-3
(5)
16"
2-3-4
(7)
16"
qₚ
tsf
MC
%
24
Tests or Remarks
P200=11%
Water observed at 9.0 feet
while drilling.
LOG OF BORING
See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations
Project Number B2402335
Geotechnical Evaluation
Proposed Wilkinson Waters Development
County Road J & Centerville Road
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
BORING:ST-9
LOCATION: Captured with RTK GPS.
DATUM:NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN Anoka (US Feet)
NORTHING:132990.8 EASTING:552877.8
DRILLER:S Hull / A Tross LOGGED BY:J Carlson START DATE:04/15/24 END DATE:04/15/24
SURFACE
ELEVATION:903.9 ft RIG:7505 METHOD:3 1/4" HSA SURFACING:Field WEATHER:Sun, 60°F
B2402335 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:08/22/2024 ST-9 page 1 of 1DRAFT
Elev./
Depth
ft
923.4
0.7
917.1
7.0
910.1
14.0
903.1
21.0
Wat
e
r
Le
v
e
l
Description of Materials
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-USACE EM
1110-1-2908)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, trace roots,
dark brown, moist (TOPSOIL)
POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT (SP-SM),
fine-grained, with lenses of Poorly Graded
Sand, brown, moist to wet, loose, rust staining
(ALLUVIUM)
CLAYEY SAND (SC), fine-grained, trace
Gravel, with lenses of Silty Sand, brownish gray
to gray, moist, soft to medium, rust staining
(GLACIAL TILL)
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), trace Gravel, gray,
moist, soft to medium (GLACIAL TILL)
END OF BORING
Boring immediately grouted
5
10
15
20
25
30
Sa
m
p
l
e
Blows
(N-Value)
Recovery
1-3-3
(6)
14"
4-4-5
(9)
16"
2-2-2
(4)
16"
2-2-3
(5)
16"
1-2-2
(4)
17"
2-2-2
(4)
18"
2-3-5
(8)
18"
qₚ
tsf
MC
%
16
Tests or Remarks
Water observed at 5.0 feet
while drilling.
Water not observed
immediately after
withdrawal of auger.
LOG OF BORING
See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations
Project Number B2402335
Geotechnical Evaluation
Proposed Wilkinson Waters Development
County Road J & Centerville Road
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
BORING:ST-10
LOCATION: Captured with RTK GPS.
DATUM:NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN Anoka (US Feet)
NORTHING:133057.2 EASTING:553272.7
DRILLER:S Hull / A Tross LOGGED BY:J Carlson START DATE:03/25/24 END DATE:03/25/24
SURFACE
ELEVATION:924.1 ft RIG:7505 METHOD:3 1/4" HSA SURFACING:Field WEATHER:Snow, Rain, 35°F
B2402335 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:08/22/2024 ST-10 page 1 of 1DRAFT
Elev./
Depth
ft
923.1
0.7
916.8
7.0
911.8
12.0
902.8
21.0
Wat
e
r
Le
v
e
l
Description of Materials
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-USACE EM
1110-1-2908)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, trace roots,
dark brown, moist (TOPSOIL)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, with lenses of
Poorly Graded Sand, brown, moist to wet,
loose (ALLUVIUM)
CLAYEY SAND (SC), fine-grained, trace
Gravel, with lenses of Poorly Graded Sand,
grayish brown, moist, medium (GLACIAL TILL)
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), trace Gravel, with
lenses of Silty Sand, gray, moist, medium
(GLACIAL TILL)
END OF BORING
Boring immediately grouted
5
10
15
20
25
30
Sa
m
p
l
e
Blows
(N-Value)
Recovery
1-3-4
(7)
15"
3-4-4
(8)
16"
1-3-3
(6)
18"
1-3-5
(8)
18"
2-4-4
(8)
18"
3-3-5
(8)
12"
2-3-5
(8)
18"
qₚ
tsf
MC
%
13
Tests or Remarks
Water observed at 5.0 feet
while drilling.
Water not observed
immediately after
withdrawal of auger.
LOG OF BORING
See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations
Project Number B2402335
Geotechnical Evaluation
Proposed Wilkinson Waters Development
County Road J & Centerville Road
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
BORING:ST-11
LOCATION: Captured with RTK GPS.
DATUM:NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN Anoka (US Feet)
NORTHING:133107.1 EASTING:553466.5
DRILLER:S Hull / A Tross LOGGED BY:J Carlson START DATE:03/25/24 END DATE:03/25/24
SURFACE
ELEVATION:923.8 ft RIG:7505 METHOD:3 1/4" HSA SURFACING:Field WEATHER:Snow, Rain
B2402335 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:08/22/2024 ST-11 page 1 of 1DRAFT
Elev./
Depth
ft
923.2
0.8
917.1
7.0
903.1
21.0
Wat
e
r
Le
v
e
l
Description of Materials
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-USACE EM
1110-1-2908)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, trace roots,
dark brown, moist (TOPSOIL)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine to medium-grained,
trace Gravel, with lenses of Poorly Graded
Sand, brown, moist to wet, loose to medium
dense (ALLUVIUM)
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), trace Gravel, with
lenses of Poorly Graded Sand, brownish gray
to gray, moist, soft to medium (GLACIAL TILL)
END OF BORING
Boring immediately grouted
5
10
15
20
25
30
Sa
m
p
l
e
Blows
(N-Value)
Recovery
2-4-4
(8)
15"
4-6-6
(12)
16"
1-1-3
(4)
15"
2-3-5
(8)
16"
1-3-4
(7)
18"
2-2-3
(5)
18"
3-4-4
(8)
18"
qₚ
tsf
MC
%
14
Tests or Remarks
Water observed at 5.0 feet
while drilling.
Water not observed
immediately after
withdrawal of auger.
LOG OF BORING
See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations
Project Number B2402335
Geotechnical Evaluation
Proposed Wilkinson Waters Development
County Road J & Centerville Road
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
BORING:ST-12
LOCATION: Captured with RTK GPS.
DATUM:NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN Anoka (US Feet)
NORTHING:132874.9 EASTING:553426.3
DRILLER:S Hull / A Tross LOGGED BY:J Carlson START DATE:03/25/24 END DATE:03/25/24
SURFACE
ELEVATION:924.1 ft RIG:7505 METHOD:3 1/4" HSA SURFACING:Field WEATHER:Snow, Rain
B2402335 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:08/22/2024 ST-12 page 1 of 1DRAFT
Elev./
Depth
ft
903.4
0.7
895.1
9.0
891.1
13.0
889.6
14.5
Wat
e
r
Le
v
e
l
Description of Materials
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-USACE EM
1110-1-2908)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, trace roots,
dark brown, moist (TOPSOIL)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, contains
lenses of Poorly Graded Sand with Silt, grayish
brown, moist to wet, loose (ALLUVIUM)
POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT (SP-SM),
fine-grained, grayish brown, wet, loose
LEAN CLAY (CL), contains lenses of Silty
Sand, gray, moist, stiff (GLACIAL TILL)
END OF BORING
Boring then backfilled with auger cuttings
5
10
15
20
25
30
Sa
m
p
l
e
Blows
(N-Value)
Recovery
3-4-4
(8)
16"
4-3-4
(7)
12"
5-4-5
(9)
15"
4-5-5
(10)
15"
4-5-7
(12)
16"
qₚ
tsf
MC
%
19
Tests or Remarks
P200=10%
Water observed at 8.5 feet
while drilling.
LOG OF BORING
See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations
Project Number B2402335
Geotechnical Evaluation
Proposed Wilkinson Waters Development
County Road J & Centerville Road
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
BORING:ST-13
LOCATION: Captured with RTK GPS.
DATUM:NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN Anoka (US Feet)
NORTHING:132637.8 EASTING:552901.3
DRILLER:S Hull / A Tross LOGGED BY:J Carlson START DATE:04/15/24 END DATE:04/15/24
SURFACE
ELEVATION:904.1 ft RIG:7505 METHOD:3 1/4" HSA SURFACING:Field WEATHER:Sun, 60°F
B2402335 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:08/22/2024 ST-13 page 1 of 1DRAFT
Elev./
Depth
ft
916.9
0.8
913.7
4.0
910.7
7.0
903.2
14.5
Wat
e
r
Le
v
e
l
Description of Materials
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-USACE EM
1110-1-2908)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine to medium-grained,
trace roots, brown, moist (TOPSOIL)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, contains
seams of Clayey Sand, brown, moist, loose
(ALLUVIUM)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, trace Gravel,
grayish brown, moist, loose (ALLUVIUM)
POORLY GRADED SAND with SILT (SP-SM),
fine-grained, light brown, wet, medium dense
(ALLUVIUM)
END OF BORING
Boring then backfilled with auger cuttings
5
10
15
20
25
30
Sa
m
p
l
e
Blows
(N-Value)
Recovery
2-3-5
(8)
14"
3-4-5
(9)
16"
4-7-7
(14)
15"
4-6-6
(12)
14"
7-7-7
(14)
17"
qₚ
tsf
MC
%
17
Tests or Remarks
Water observed at 7.5 feet
while drilling.
LOG OF BORING
See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations
Project Number B2402335
Geotechnical Evaluation
Proposed Wilkinson Waters Development
County Road J & Centerville Road
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
BORING:ST-14
LOCATION: Captured with RTK GPS.
DATUM:NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN Anoka (US Feet)
NORTHING:132741.4 EASTING:553147.8
DRILLER:S Hull / A Tross LOGGED BY:J Carlson START DATE:04/15/24 END DATE:04/15/24
SURFACE
ELEVATION:917.7 ft RIG:7505 METHOD:3 1/4" HSA SURFACING:Field WEATHER:Sun, 60°F
B2402335 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:08/22/2024 ST-14 page 1 of 1DRAFT
Elev./
Depth
ft
924.6
0.7
918.3
7.0
904.3
21.0
Wat
e
r
Le
v
e
l
Description of Materials
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-USACE EM
1110-1-2908)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine-grained, with roots,
dark brown, moist (TOPSOIL)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine to medium-grained,
with lenses of Poorly Graded Sand, brown,
moist, loose to medium dense (ALLUVIUM)
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), trace Gravel, with
lenses of Poorly Graded Sand, brownish gray
to gray, moist, soft to stiff (GLACIAL TILL)
END OF BORING
Boring immediately grouted
5
10
15
20
25
30
Sa
m
p
l
e
Blows
(N-Value)
Recovery
2-3-4
(7)
16"
4-6-6
(12)
18"
2-2-2
(4)
18"
1-3-5
(8)
18"
4-4-5
(9)
16"
2-3-4
(7)
18"
3-4-4
(8)
18"
qₚ
tsf
MC
%
15
Tests or Remarks
Water observed at 7.0 feet
while drilling.
Water not observed
immediately after
withdrawal of auger.
LOG OF BORING
See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations
Project Number B2402335
Geotechnical Evaluation
Proposed Wilkinson Waters Development
County Road J & Centerville Road
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
BORING:ST-15
LOCATION: Captured with RTK GPS.
DATUM:NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN Anoka (US Feet)
NORTHING:132576.7 EASTING:553608.4
DRILLER:S Hull / A Tross LOGGED BY:J Carlson START DATE:03/25/24 END DATE:03/25/24
SURFACE
ELEVATION:925.3 ft RIG:7505 METHOD:3 1/4" HSA SURFACING:Field WEATHER:Snow, Rain
B2402335 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:08/22/2024 ST-15 page 1 of 1DRAFT
Elev./
Depth
ft
928.9
0.7
915.1
14.5
Wat
e
r
Le
v
e
l
Description of Materials
(Soil-ASTM D2488 or 2487; Rock-USACE EM
1110-1-2908)
SILTY SAND (SM), fine to medium-grained,
trace roots, dark brown, moist (TOPSOIL)
CLAYEY SAND (SC), trace Gravel, with lenses
of Poorly Graded Sand, brown to grayish
brown, moist, medium to very stiff, rust staining
(GLACIAL TILL)
END OF BORING
Boring then backfilled with auger cuttings
5
10
15
20
25
30
Sa
m
p
l
e
Blows
(N-Value)
Recovery
2-3-2
(5)
16"
3-4-4
(8)
16"
3-3-4
(7)
16"
6-6-7
(13)
18"
5-7-10
(17)
18"
qₚ
tsf
MC
%
15
Tests or Remarks
Water not observed while
drilling.
Water not observed
immediately after
withdrawal of auger.
LOG OF BORING
See Descriptive Terminology sheet for explanation of abbreviations
Project Number B2402335
Geotechnical Evaluation
Proposed Wilkinson Waters Development
County Road J & Centerville Road
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
BORING:ST-16
LOCATION: Captured with RTK GPS.
DATUM:NAD 1983 HARN Adj MN Anoka (US Feet)
NORTHING:132841.7 EASTING:553883.6
DRILLER:S Hull / A Tross LOGGED BY:J Carlson START DATE:03/25/24 END DATE:03/25/24
SURFACE
ELEVATION:929.6 ft RIG:7505 METHOD:3 1/4" HSA SURFACING:Field WEATHER:Snow, Rain
B2402335 Braun Intertec Corporation Print Date:08/22/2024 ST-16 page 1 of 1DRAFT
Descriptive Terminology of Soil
Based on Standards ASTM D2487/2488
(Unified Soil Classification System)
Group
Symbol Group NameB
Cu ≥ 4 and 1 ≤ Cc ≤ 3D GW Well‐graded gravelE
Cu < 4 and/or (Cc < 1 or Cc > 3)D GP Poorly graded gravelE
Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravelE F G
Fines Classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravelE F G
Cu ≥ 6 and 1 ≤ Cc ≤ 3D SW Well‐graded sandI
Cu < 6 and/or (Cc < 1 or Cc > 3)D SP Poorly graded sandI
Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sandF G I
Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sandF G I
CL Lean clayK L M
PI < 4 or plots below "A" lineJ ML SiltK L M
Organic OL
CH Fat clayK L M
MH Elastic siltK L M
Organic OH
PT Peat Highly Organic Soils
Silts and Clays
(Liquid limit less than
50)
Silts and Clays
(Liquid limit 50 or
more)
Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor
Inorganic
Inorganic
PI > 7 and plots on or above "A" lineJ
PI plots on or above "A" line
PI plots below "A" line
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and
Group Names Using Laboratory TestsA
Soil Classification
Co
a
r
s
e
‐gr
a
i
n
e
d
So
i
l
s
(m
o
r
e
th
a
n
50
%
re
t
a
i
n
e
d
on
No
.
20
0
si
e
v
e
)
Fi
n
e
‐gr
a
i
n
e
d
So
i
l
s
(5
0
%
or
mo
r
e
pa
s
s
e
s
th
e
No
.
20
0
si
e
v
e
)
Sands
(50% or more coarse
fraction passes No. 4
sieve)
Clean Gravels
(Less than 5% finesC)
Gravels with Fines
(More than 12% finesC)
Clean Sands
(Less than 5% finesH)
Sands with Fines
(More than 12% finesH)
Gravels
(More than 50% of
coarse fraction
retained on No. 4
sieve)
Liquid Limit − oven dried
Liquid Limit − not dried <0.75 Organic clay K L M N
Organic silt K L M O
Liquid Limit − oven dried
Liquid Limit − not dried <0.75 Organic clay K L M P
Organic silt K L M Q
ParticleSize Identification
Boulders.............. over 12"
Cobbles................ 3" to 12"
Gravel
Coarse............. 3/4" to 3" (19.00 mm to 75.00 mm)
Fine................. No. 4 to 3/4" (4.75 mm to 19.00 mm)
Sand
Coarse.............. No. 10 to No. 4 (2.00 mm to 4.75 mm)
Medium........... No. 40 to No. 10 (0.425 mm to 2.00 mm)
Fine.................. No. 200 to No. 40 (0.075 mm to 0.425 mm)
Silt........................ No. 200 (0.075 mm) to .005 mm
Clay...................... < .005 mm
Relative ProportionsL, M
trace............................. 0 to 5%
little.............................. 6 to 14%
with.............................. ≥ 15%
Inclusion Thicknesses
lens............................... 0 to 1/8"
seam............................. 1/8" to 1"
layer.............................. over 1"
Apparent Relative Density of Cohesionless Soils
Very loose ..................... 0 to 4 BPF
Loose ............................ 5 to 10 BPF
Medium dense.............. 11 to 30 BPF
Dense............................ 31 to 50 BPF
Very dense.................... over 50 BPF
A. Based on the material passing the 3‐inch (75‐mm) sieve.
B. If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add "with cobbles or boulders,
or both" to group name.
C. Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols:
GW‐GM well‐graded gravel with silt
GW‐GC well‐graded gravel with clay
GP‐GM poorly graded gravel with silt
GP‐GC poorly graded gravel with clay
D. Cu = D60 / D10 Cc = 𝐷30 2 / ሺ𝐷10 𝑥 𝐷60)
E. If soil contains ≥ 15% sand, add "with sand" to group name.
F. If fines classify as CL‐ML, use dual symbol GC‐GM or SC‐SM.
G. If fines are organic, add "with organic fines" to group name.
H. Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols:
SW‐SM well‐graded sand with silt
SW‐SC well‐graded sand with clay
SP‐SM poorly graded sand with silt
SP‐SC poorly graded sand with clay
I. If soil contains ≥ 15% gravel, add "with gravel" to group name.
J. If Atterberg limits plot in hatched area, soil is CL‐ML, silty clay.
K. If soil contains 15 to < 30% plus No. 200, add "with sand" or "with gravel", whichever is
predominant.
L. If soil contains ≥ 30% plus No. 200, predominantly sand, add “sandy” to group name.
M. If soil contains ≥ 30% plus No. 200 predominantly gravel, add “gravelly” to group name.
N. PI ≥ 4 and plots on or above “A” line.
O. PI < 4 or plots below “A” line.
P. PI plots on or above “A” line.
Q. PI plots below “A” line.
Laboratory Tests
DD Dry density,pcf qp Pocket penetrometer strength, tsf
WD Wet density, pcf qU Unconfined compression test, tsf
P200 % Passing #200 sieve LL Liquid limit
MC Moisture content, %PL Plastic limit
OC Organic content, %PI Plasticity index
Consistency of Blows Approximate Unconfined
Cohesive Soils Per Foot Compressive Strength
Very soft................... 0 to 1 BPF................... < 0.25 tsf
Soft........................... 2 to 4 BPF................... 0.25 to 0.5 tsf
Medium.................... 5to 8 BPF .................. 0.5 to 1 tsf
Stiff........................... 9 to 15 BPF................. 1 to 2 tsf
Very Stiff................... 16 to 30 BPF............... 2 to 4 tsf
Hard.......................... over 30 BPF................ > 4 tsf
Drilling Notes:
Blows/N‐value: Blows indicatethe driving resistance recorded
for each 6‐inch interval. The reported N‐value is the blows per
foot recorded by summing the second and third interval in
accordance with the Standard Penetration Test, ASTM D1586.
PartialPenetration:If the sampler could not be driven
through a full 6‐inch interval, the number of blows for that
partial penetration is shown as #/x" (i.e. 50/2"). The N‐value is
reported as "REF" indicating refusal.
Recovery: Indicates the inches of sample recovered from the
sampled interval. For a standard penetration test, full recovery
is 18", and is 24" for a thinwall/shelby tube sample.
WOH: Indicates the sampler penetrated soil under weight of
hammer and rods alone; driving not required.
WOR: Indicates the sampler penetrated soil under weight of
rods alone; hammer weight and driving not required.
Water Level: Indicates the water level measured by the
drillers either while drilling ( ), at the end of drilling ( ),
or at some time after drilling ( ).
Moisture Content:
Dry:Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch.
Moist: Damp but no visible water.
Wet: Visible free water, usually soil is below water table.
5/2021
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning EAW
Appendix E – Ecological Resources
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Division of Ecological & Water Resources
500 Lafayette Road, Box 25
St. Paul, MN 55155-4025
June 21, 2024
Kelly Herfendal
ISG
RE: Natural Heritage Review of the proposed North Oaks Mixed Use Development,
T31N R22W Sections 33-35; Anoka County
Dear Kelly Herfendal,
For all correspondence regarding the Natural Heritage Review of this project please include the project
ID MCE-2024-00460 in the email subject line.
As requested, the Minnesota Natural Heritage Information System has been reviewed to determine if
the proposed project has the potential to impact any rare species or other significant natural features.
Based on the project details provided with the request, the following rare features may be impacted by
the proposed project:
Ecologically Significant Areas
The Minnesota Biological Survey (MBS) has identified a Site of Outstanding Biodiversity
Significance in a wetland immediately south of the proposed project. Sites of Biodiversity
Significance have varying levels of native biodiversity and are ranked based on the relative
significance of this biodiversity at a statewide level. Sites ranked as Outstanding contain the best
occurrences of the rarest species, the most outstanding examples of the rarest native plant
communities, and/or the largest, most intact functional landscapes present in the state. There
are mapped examples of two Native Plant Communities in this Site. They are Northern Mixed
Cattail Marsh (MRn83), which has a state conservation rank of Imperiled (S2), and Willow –
Dogwood Shrub Swamp (WMn82a), which has a state conservation rank of Secure (S5). The DNR
recommends that the project be designed to avoid impacts to these ecologically significant areas.
Actions to avoid or minimize disturbance include, but are not limited to, the following
recommendations:
o As much as possible, operate within already-disturbed areas.
o Retain a buffer between proposed activities and the MBS Site.
Page 2 of 5
o When possible, conduct work under frozen ground conditions.
o Use effective erosion prevention and sediment control measures.
o Inspect and clean equipment prior to operation and follow recommendations to prevent
the spread of invasive species.
o Revegetate disturbed soil with native species suitable to the local habitat as soon after
construction as possible.
o Use only weed-free mulches, topsoils, and seed mixes. Of particular concern are birdsfoot
trefoil (Lotus corniculatus) and crown vetch (Coronilla varia), two invasive species that are
sold commercially and are problematic in prairies and disturbed open areas.
MBS Sites of Biodiversity Significance and DNR Native Plant Communities can be viewed using
the Explore page in Minnesota Conservation Explorer or their GIS shapefiles can be downloaded
from the MN Geospatial Commons. Please contact the NH Review Team if you need assistance
accessing the data. Reference the MBS Site Biodiversity Significance and Native Plant Community
websites for information on interpreting the data. To receive a list of MBS Sites of Biodiversity
Significance and DNR Native Plant Communities in the vicinity of your project, create a
Conservation Planning Report using the Explore Tab in Minnesota Conservation Explorer.
• If the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) is applicable to this project, please note that native plant
communities with a Conservation Status Rank of S1 through S3 or wetlands within High or
Outstanding MBS Sites of Biodiversity Significance may qualify as Rare Natural Communities
(RNC) under WCA. Minnesota Rules, part 8420.0515, subpart 3 states that a wetland replacement
plan for activities that modify a RNC must be denied if the local government unit determines the
proposed activities will permanently adversely affect the RNC. If the proposed project includes a
wetland replacement plan under WCA, please contact your DNR Regional Ecologist for further
evaluation. Please visit WCA Program Guidance and Information for additional information,
including the Rare Natural Communities Technical Guidance.
State-listed Species
• Blanding’s turtles (Emydoidea blandingii), a state-listed threatened species, have been
documented in the direct vicinity of the proposed project. Blanding’s turtles use upland areas up
to and over a mile distant from wetlands, waterbodies, and watercourses. Uplands are used for
nesting, basking, periods of dormancy, and traveling between wetlands. Factors believed to
contribute to the decline of this species include collisions with vehicles, wetland drainage and
degradation, and the development of upland habitat. Any added mortality can be detrimental to
populations of Blanding’s turtles, as these turtles have a low reproduction rate that depends
upon a high survival rate to maintain population levels.
This project has the potential to impact this rare turtle through direct fatalities and habitat
disturbance/destruction due to excavation, fill, and other construction activities associated with
Page 3 of 5
the project. Minnesota’s Endangered Species Statute (Minnesota Statutes, section 84.0895) and
associated Rules (Minnesota Rules, part 6212.1800 to 6212.2300 and 6134) prohibit the take of
threatened or endangered species without a permit. Given the project details and the potential
for a take of a Blanding’s turtle, an avoidance plan is required.
We do not currently have a template for avoidance plans. The plan needs to:
o Provide a description of the project activities and construction methods,
o Identify measures that will be taken to avoid take and minimize disturbance to the
species, and
o Include a map of disturbance areas. This can include a map of potential Blanding’s turtle
summer, winter, and nesting habitat overlayed with timing of project impacts.
Measures to avoid or minimize disturbance include, but are not limited to, the following:
o Avoidance of suitable habitat,
o Timing the impacts to avoid incidental take,
o The recommendations listed in the Blanding’s turtle fact sheet,
o Training for construction crew.
Please submit the completed avoidance plan to the NH Review Team
(Reports.NHIS@state.mn.us).
• Forster’s tern (Sterna forsteri), a bird species of special concern has been documented nesting in
the vicinity of the proposed project. Forster’s terns are found in wetlands with a mixture of
emergent vegetation and open water. They nest in colonies on floating vegetation or muskrat
houses. Potential concerns include construction disturbance during the breeding season and loss
or degradation of habitat. The DNR recommends that initial disturbance to suitable habitat is
avoided from April 15-July 15.
• The tricolored bat (Perimyotis subflavus), state-listed as a species special concern, has been
documented in the vicinity of the proposed project. During the active season (approximately
April-November) bats roost underneath bark, in cavities, or in crevices of both live and dead
trees. Tree removal can negatively impact bats by destroying roosting habitat, especially during
the pup rearing season when females are forming maternity roosting colonies and the pups
cannot yet fly. To minimize these impacts, the DNR recommends that tree removal be avoided
from June 1 through August 15.
• Please visit the DNR Rare Species Guide for more information on the habitat use of these species
and recommended measures to avoid or minimize impacts.
Page 4 of 5
Federally Protected Species
• The area of interest overlaps with a U.S Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Rusty Patched Bumble
Bee High Potential Zone. The rusty patched bumble bee (Bombus affinis) is federally listed as
endangered and is likely to be present in suitable habitat within High Potential Zones. From April
through October this species uses underground nests in upland grasslands, shrublands, and
forest edges, and forages where nectar and pollen are available. From October through April the
species overwinters under tree litter in upland forests and woodlands. The rusty patched bumble
bee may be impacted by a variety of land management activities including, but not limited to,
prescribed fire, tree-removal, haying, grazing, herbicide use, pesticide use, land-clearing, soil
disturbance or compaction, or use of non-native bees. If applicable, the DNR recommends
reseeding disturbed soils with native species of grasses and forbs using BWSR Seed
Mixes or MnDOT Seed Mixes.
To ensure compliance with federal law, please conduct a federal regulatory review using the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's online Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) tool.
Please note that all projects, regardless of whether there is a federal nexus, are subject to federal
take prohibitions. The IPaC review will determine if prohibited take is likely to occur and, if not,
will generate an automated letter. The USFWS RPBB guidance provides guidance on avoiding
impacts to rusty patched bumble bee and a key for determining if actions are likely to affect the
species; the determination key can be found in the appendix.
Environmental Review and Permitting
• The Environmental Assessment Worksheet should address whether the proposed project has the
potential to adversely affect the above rare features and, if so, it should identify specific
measures that will be taken to avoid or minimize disturbance. Sufficient information should be
provided so the DNR can determine whether a takings permit will be needed for any of the above
protected species.
• Please include a copy of this letter and the MCE-generated Final Project Report in any state or
local license or permit application. Please note that measures to avoid or minimize disturbance
to the above rare features may be included as restrictions or conditions in any required permits
or licenses.
The Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS), a collection of databases that contains information
about Minnesota’s rare natural features, is maintained by the Division of Ecological and Water
Resources, Department of Natural Resources. The NHIS is continually updated as new information
becomes available and is the most complete source of data on Minnesota's rare or otherwise significant
species, native plant communities, and other natural features. However, the NHIS is not an exhaustive
inventory and thus does not represent all of the occurrences of rare features within the state. Therefore,
ecologically significant features for which we have no records may exist within the project area. If
Page 5 of 5
additional information becomes available regarding rare features in the vicinity of the project, further
review may be necessary.
For environmental review purposes, the results of this Natural Heritage Review are valid for one year;
the results are only valid for the project location and project description provided with the request. If
project details change or the project has not occurred within one year, please resubmit the project for
review within one year of initiating project activities.
The Natural Heritage Review does not constitute project approval by the Department of Natural
Resources. Instead, it identifies issues regarding known occurrences of rare features and potential
impacts to these rare features. Visit the Natural Heritage Review website for additional information
regarding this process, survey guidance, and other related information. For information on the
environmental review process or other natural resource concerns, you may contact your DNR Regional
Environmental Assessment Ecologist.
Thank you for consulting us on this matter and for your interest in preserving Minnesota's rare natural
resources.
Sincerely,
James Drake
Natural Heritage Review Specialist
James.F.Drake@state.mn.us
Cc: Melissa Collins, Jennie Skancke, Amanda Weise
10/09/2024 15:07:50 UTC
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Minnesota-Wisconsin Ecological Services Field Office
3815 American Blvd East
Bloomington, MN 55425-1659
Phone: (952) 858-0793
In Reply Refer To:
Project Code: 2025-0003787
Project Name: North Oaks Mixed Use Development EAW
Subject:List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
This response has been generated by the Information, Planning, and Conservation (IPaC) system to provide
information on natural resources that could be affected by your project. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) provides this response under the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C.
1531-1543), the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668d), the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(16 U.S.C. 703-712), and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.).
Threatened and Endangered Species
The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as
proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and
may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirement for obtaining a Technical
Assistance Letter from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act
(Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of species, changed
habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations
implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. The
Service recommends that verification be completed by visiting the IPaC website at regular intervals during
project planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be
requested through the IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
Consultation Technical Assistance
Please refer to refer to our Section 7 website for guidance and technical assistance, including step-by-step
instructions for making effects determinations for each species that might be present and for specific guidance
on the following types of projects: projects in developed areas, HUD, CDBG, EDA, USDA Rural
Development projects, pipelines, buried utilities, telecommunications, and requests for a Conditional Letter of
Map Revision (CLOMR) from FEMA.
Project code: 2025-0003787 10/09/2024 15:07:50 UTC
2 of 16
1.
2.
We recommend running the project (if it qualifies) through our Minnesota-Wisconsin Federal Endangered
Species Determination Key (Minnesota-Wisconsin ("D-key")). A demonstration video showing how-to
access and use the determination key is available. Please note that the Minnesota-Wisconsin D-key is the third
option of 3 available d-keys. D-keys are tools to help Federal agencies and other project proponents determine
if their proposed action has the potential to adversely affect federally listed species and designated critical
habitat. The Minnesota-Wisconsin D-key includes a structured set of questions that assists a project proponent
in determining whether a proposed project qualifies for a certain predetermined consultation outcome for all
federally listed species found in Minnesota and Wisconsin (except for the northern long-eared bat- see below),
which includes determinations of “no effect” or “may affect, not likely to adversely affect." In each case, the
Service has compiled and analyzed the best available information on the species’ biology and the impacts of
certain activities to support these determinations.
If your completed d-key output letter shows a "No Effect" (NE) determination for all listed species, print your
IPaC output letter for your files to document your compliance with the Endangered Species Act.
For Federal projects with a “Not Likely to Adversely Affect” (NLAA) determination, our concurrence becomes
valid if you do not hear otherwise from us after a 30-day review period, as indicated in your letter.
If your d-key output letter indicates additional coordination with the Minnesota-Wisconsin Ecological Services
Field Office is necessary (i.e., you get a “May Affect” determination), you will be provided additional
guidance on contacting the Service to continue ESA coordination outside of the key; ESA compliance cannot
be concluded using the key for “May Affect” determinations unless otherwise indicated in your output letter.
Note: Once you obtain your official species list, you are not required to continue in IPaC with d-keys,
although in most cases these tools should expedite your review. If you choose to make an effects
determination on your own, you may do so. If the project is a Federal Action, you may want to review our
section 7 step-by-step instructions before making your determinations.
Using the IPaC Official Species List to Make No Effect and May Affect Determinations for Listed
Species
If IPaC returns a result of “There are no listed species found within the vicinity of the project,” then
project proponents can conclude the proposed activities will have no effect on any federally listed
species under Service jurisdiction. Concurrence from the Service is not required for no
effect determinations. No further consultation or coordination is required. Attach this letter to the dated
IPaC species list report for your records.
If IPaC returns one or more federally listed, proposed, or candidate species as potentially present in the
action area of the proposed project – other than bats (see below) – then project proponents must
determine if proposed activities will have no effect on or may affect those species. For assistance in
determining if suitable habitat for listed, candidate, or proposed species occurs within your project area
or if species may be affected by project activities, you can obtain Life History Information for Listed
and Candidate Species on our office website. If no impacts will occur to a species on the IPaC species
list (e.g., there is no habitat present in the project area), the appropriate determination is no effect. No
further consultation or coordination is required. Attach this letter to the dated IPaC species list report for
your records.
Project code: 2025-0003787 10/09/2024 15:07:50 UTC
3 of 16
3.
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
Should you determine that project activities may affect any federally listed, please contact our office
for further coordination. Letters with requests for consultation or correspondence about your project
should include the Consultation Tracking Number in the header. Electronic submission is preferred.
Northern Long-Eared Bats
Northern long-eared bats occur throughout Minnesota and Wisconsin and the information below may help in
determining if your project may affect these species.
Suitable summer habitat for northern long-eared bats consists of a wide variety of forested/wooded habitats
where they roost, forage, and travel and may also include some adjacent and interspersed non-forested habitats
such as emergent wetlands and adjacent edges of agricultural fields, old fields and pastures. This includes
forests and woodlots containing potential roosts (i.e., live trees and/or snags ≥3 inches dbh for northern long-
eared bat that have exfoliating bark, cracks, crevices, and/or hollows), as well as linear features such as
fencerows, riparian forests, and other wooded corridors. These wooded areas may be dense or loose aggregates
of trees with variable amounts of canopy closure. Individual trees may be considered suitable habitat when
they exhibit the characteristics of a potential roost tree and are located within 1,000 feet (305 meters) of
forested/wooded habitat. Northern long-eared bats have also been observed roosting in human-made structures,
such as buildings, barns, bridges, and bat houses; therefore, these structures should also be considered potential
summer habitat and evaluated for use by bats. If your project will impact caves or mines or will involve
clearing forest or woodland habitat containing suitable roosting habitat, northern long-eared bats could be
affected. For bat activity dates, please review Appendix L in the Range-wide Indiana Bat and Northern Long-
Eared Bat Survey Guidelines.
Examples of unsuitable habitat include:
Individual trees that are greater than 1,000 feet from forested or wooded areas,
Trees found in highly developed urban areas (e.g., street trees, downtown areas),
A pure stand of less than 3-inch dbh trees that are not mixed with larger trees, and
A monoculture stand of shrubby vegetation with no potential roost trees.
If IPaC returns a result that northern long-eared bats are potentially present in the action area of the proposed
project, project proponents can conclude the proposed activities may affect this species IF one or more of the
following activities are proposed:
Clearing or disturbing suitable roosting habitat, as defined above, at any time of year,
Any activity in or near the entrance to a cave or mine,
Mining, deep excavation, or underground work within 0.25 miles of a cave or mine,
Construction of one or more wind turbines, or
Demolition or reconstruction of human-made structures that are known to be used by bats based on
observations of roosting bats, bats emerging at dusk, or guano deposits or stains.
If none of the above activities are proposed, project proponents can conclude the proposed activities will
have no effect on the northern long-eared bat. Concurrence from the Service is not required for No
Effect determinations. No further consultation or coordination is required. Attach this letter to the dated IPaC
Project code: 2025-0003787 10/09/2024 15:07:50 UTC
4 of 16
species list report for your records.
If any of the above activities are proposed, and the northern long-eared bat appears on the user’s species list,
the federal project user will be directed to either the range-wide northern long-eared bat D-key or the Federal
Highways Administration, Federal Railways Administration, and Federal Transit Administration Indiana bat/
Northern long-eared bat D-key, depending on the type of project and federal agency involvement. Similar to
the Minnesota-Wisconsin D-key, these d-keys helps to determine if prohibited take might occur and, if not, will
generate an automated verification letter. Additional information about available tools can be found on the
Service’s northern long-eared bat website.
Whooping Crane
Whooping crane is designated as a non-essential experimental population in Wisconsin and consultation under
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act is only required if project activities will occur within a National
Wildlife Refuge or National Park. If project activities are proposed on lands outside of a National Wildlife
Refuge or National Park, then you are not required to consult. For additional information on this designation
and consultation requirements, please review “Establishment of a Nonessential Experimental Population of
Whooping Cranes in the Eastern United States.”
Other Trust Resources and Activities
Bald and Golden Eagles - Although the bald eagle has been removed from the endangered species list, this
species and the golden eagle are protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty
Act. It is the responsibility of the project proponent to survey the area for any migratory bird nests. If there is
an eagle nest on-site while work is on-going, eagles may be disturbed. We recommend avoiding and
minimizing disturbance to eagles whenever practicable. If you cannot avoid eagle disturbance, you may seek a
permit. A nest take permit is always required for removal, relocation, or obstruction of an eagle nest. For
communication and wind energy projects, please refer to additional guidelines below.
Migratory Birds - The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) prohibits the taking, killing, possession,
transportation, and importation of migratory birds, their eggs, parts, and nests, except when specifically
authorized by the Service. The Service has the responsibility under the MBTA to proactively prevent the
mortality of migratory birds whenever possible and we encourage implementation of recommendations that
minimize potential impacts to migratory birds. Such measures include clearing forested habitat outside the
nesting season (generally March 1 to August 31) or conducting nest surveys prior to clearing to avoid injury to
eggs or nestlings.
Communication Towers - Construction of new communications towers (including radio, television, cellular,
and microwave) creates a potentially significant impact on migratory birds, especially some 350 species of
night-migrating birds. However, the Service has developed voluntary guidelines for minimizing impacts.
Transmission Lines - Migratory birds, especially large species with long wingspans, heavy bodies, and poor
maneuverability can also collide with power lines. In addition, mortality can occur when birds, particularly
hawks, eagles, kites, falcons, and owls, attempt to perch on uninsulated or unguarded power poles. To
minimize these risks, please refer to guidelines developed by the Avian Power Line Interaction Committee and
the Service. Implementation of these measures is especially important along sections of lines adjacent to
wetlands or other areas that support large numbers of raptors and migratory birds.
Project code: 2025-0003787 10/09/2024 15:07:50 UTC
5 of 16
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
Wind Energy - To minimize impacts to migratory birds and bats, wind energy projects should follow the
Service’s Wind Energy Guidelines. In addition, please refer to the Service's Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance,
which provides guidance for conserving bald and golden eagles in the course of siting, constructing, and
operating wind energy facilities.
State Department of Natural Resources Coordination
While it is not required for your Federal section 7 consultation, please note that additional state endangered or
threatened species may also have the potential to be impacted. Please contact the Minnesota or Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources for information on state listed species that may be present in your proposed
project area.
Minnesota
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources - Endangered Resources Review Homepage
Email: Review.NHIS@state.mn.us
Wisconsin
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources - Endangered Resources Review Homepage
Email: DNRERReview@wi.gov
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. Please feel free to contact our office with
questions or for additional information.
Attachment(s):
Official Species List
USFWS National Wildlife Refuges and Fish Hatcheries
Bald & Golden Eagles
Migratory Birds
Wetlands
OFFICIAL SPECIES LIST
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Minnesota-Wisconsin Ecological Services Field Office
3815 American Blvd East
Bloomington, MN 55425-1659
(952) 858-0793
Project code: 2025-0003787 10/09/2024 15:07:50 UTC
6 of 16
PROJECT SUMMARY
Project Code:2025-0003787
Project Name:North Oaks Mixed Use Development EAW
Project Type:Mixed-Use Construction
Project Description:The North Oaks Company LLC is proposing construction of a mixed-use
development located at in the City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County,
Minnesota. The project will include the construction of senior housing,
market-rate apartments, affordable housing, commercial space, and
single-family lots.
Project Location:
The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https://
www.google.com/maps/@45.12605105,-93.06444056335064,14z
Counties:Anoka and Ramsey counties, Minnesota
Project code: 2025-0003787 10/09/2024 15:07:50 UTC
7 of 16
1.
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SPECIES
There is a total of 5 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheries , as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
1
Project code: 2025-0003787 10/09/2024 15:07:50 UTC
8 of 16
BIRDS
NAME STATUS
Whooping Crane Grus americana
Population: U.S.A. (AL, AR, CO, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KY, LA, MI, MN, MS, MO, NC,
NM, OH, SC, TN, UT, VA, WI, WV, western half of WY)
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/758
Experimental
Population,
Non-
Essential
CLAMS
NAME STATUS
Salamander Mussel Simpsonaias ambigua
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical
habitat.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6208
Proposed
Endangered
INSECTS
NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
Candidate
Rusty Patched Bumble Bee Bombus affinis
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9383
General project design guidelines:
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/7E5PWDWKSZFCFNAIJCK3TBXOQU/
documents/generated/5967.pdf
Endangered
Western Regal Fritillary Argynnis idalia occidentalis
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/12017
Proposed
Threatened
CRITICAL HABITATS
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.
YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IF YOUR PROJECT(S) MAY HAVE EFFECTS ON ALL
ABOVE LISTED SPECIES.
USFWS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE LANDS
AND FISH HATCHERIES
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a
'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to
discuss any questions or concerns.
Project code: 2025-0003787 10/09/2024 15:07:50 UTC
9 of 16
1.
2.
3.
THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS OR FISH HATCHERIES WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA.
BALD & GOLDEN EAGLES
Bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act .
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to bald or
golden eagles, or their habitats , should follow appropriate regulations and consider
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below. Specifically,
please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".
The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
There are likely bald eagles present in your project area. For additional information on bald
eagles, refer to Bald Eagle Nesting and Sensitivity to Human Activity
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your
project area.
NAME
BREEDING
SEASON
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain
types of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626
Breeds Dec 1 to
Aug 31
Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain
types of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1680
Breeds
elsewhere
PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental
Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper
Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret
this report.
1
2
3
Project code: 2025-0003787 10/09/2024 15:07:50 UTC
10 of 16
▪
▪
▪
▪
no data survey effort breeding season probability of presence
Probability of Presence ()
Green bars; the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project
overlaps during that week of the year.
Breeding Season ()
Yellow bars; liberal estimate of the timeframe inside which the bird breeds across its entire
range.
Survey Effort ()
Vertical black lines; the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s)
your project area overlaps.
No Data ()
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Bald Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Golden Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Additional information can be found using the following links:
Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management
Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/library/
collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds
Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf
Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/
media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-and-golden-eagles-may-occur-
project-action
MIGRATORY BIRDS
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act .
1
2
Project code: 2025-0003787 10/09/2024 15:07:50 UTC
11 of 16
1.
2.
3.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to
migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below. Specifically,
please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".
The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your
project area.
NAME
BREEDING
SEASON
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626
Breeds Dec 1 to
Aug 31
Black Tern Chlidonias niger surinamenisis
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3093
Breeds May 15
to Aug 20
Black-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus erythropthalmus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9399
Breeds May 15
to Oct 10
Bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivorus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9454
Breeds May 20
to Jul 31
Canada Warbler Cardellina canadensis
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9643
Breeds May 20
to Aug 10
Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9406
Breeds Mar 15
to Aug 25
3
Project code: 2025-0003787 10/09/2024 15:07:50 UTC
12 of 16
NAME
BREEDING
SEASON
Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1680
Breeds
elsewhere
Golden-winged Warbler Vermivora chrysoptera
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8745
Breeds May 1
to Jul 20
Grasshopper Sparrow Ammodramus savannarum perpallidus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions
(BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8329
Breeds Jun 1 to
Aug 20
Henslow's Sparrow Centronyx henslowii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3941
Breeds May 1
to Aug 31
Le Conte's Sparrow Ammospiza leconteii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9469
Breeds Jun 1 to
Aug 15
Lesser Yellowlegs Tringa flavipes
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9679
Breeds
elsewhere
Long-eared Owl asio otus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3631
Breeds Mar 1 to
Jul 15
Pectoral Sandpiper Calidris melanotos
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9561
Breeds
elsewhere
Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9398
Breeds May 10
to Sep 10
Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions
(BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9478
Breeds
elsewhere
Project code: 2025-0003787 10/09/2024 15:07:50 UTC
13 of 16
no data survey effort breeding season probability of presence
NAME
BREEDING
SEASON
Semipalmated Sandpiper Calidris pusilla
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions
(BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9603
Breeds
elsewhere
Short-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus griseus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9480
Breeds
elsewhere
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9431
Breeds May 10
to Aug 31
PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental
Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper
Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret
this report.
Probability of Presence ()
Green bars; the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project
overlaps during that week of the year.
Breeding Season ()
Yellow bars; liberal estimate of the timeframe inside which the bird breeds across its entire
range.
Survey Effort ()
Vertical black lines; the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s)
your project area overlaps.
No Data ()
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Project code: 2025-0003787 10/09/2024 15:07:50 UTC
14 of 16
Bald Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Black Tern
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Black-billed
Cuckoo
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Bobolink
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Canada Warbler
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Chimney Swift
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Golden Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Golden-winged
Warbler
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Grasshopper
Sparrow
BCC - BCR
Henslow's Sparrow
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Le Conte's Sparrow
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Lesser Yellowlegs
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Long-eared Owl
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Pectoral Sandpiper
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Red-headed
Woodpecker
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Project code: 2025-0003787 10/09/2024 15:07:50 UTC
15 of 16
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
Rusty Blackbird
BCC - BCR
Semipalmated
Sandpiper
BCC - BCR
Short-billed
Dowitcher
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Wood Thrush
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Additional information can be found using the following links:
Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management
Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/library/
collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds
Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf
Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/
media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-and-golden-eagles-may-occur-
project-action
WETLANDS
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.
For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers District.
Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to
update our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine
the actual extent of wetlands on site.
FRESHWATER EMERGENT WETLAND
PEM1C
PEM1A
PEM1F
FRESHWATER FORESTED/SHRUB WETLAND
PSS1/EM1C
Project code: 2025-0003787 10/09/2024 15:07:50 UTC
16 of 16
IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION
Agency:ISG
Name:Jeremy Groskreutz
Address:115 East Hickory Street, Suite 300
City:Mankato
State:MN
Zip:56001
Email jeremy.groskreutz@isginc.com
Phone:5073876651
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning EAW
Exhibit A - Site PlanAppendix F – SHPO Correspondence
From: Kelly Herfendal
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 9:27 AM
To: Jeremy Groskreutz
Subject: FW: North Oaks Mixed Use Development - Request for Project Review
From: Kelly Herfendal <Kelly.Herfendal@ISGInc.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2024 11:45 AM
To: Nick McCabe <Nick.McCabe@ISGInc.com>; Paul Marston <Paul.Marston@ISGInc.com>
Subject: FW: North Oaks Mixed Use Development - Request for Project Review
I received this email in response to the SHPO request for the North Oaks EAW: SHPO will no longer
be sending official responses to our project review requests. I emailed
DataRequestsSHPO@state.mn.us to get a different response which has been used previously for
search requests, but this is the response I received:
Thank you for reaching out to the SHPO Research Request Email. Our research request procedures have
recently changed because we have launched the Minnesota Statewide Historic Inventory Portal (MnSHIP)!
Please visit MnSHIP and the OSA Portal to perform research yourself. You can also visit
https://npgallery.nps.gov/nrhp to obtain National Register of Historic Places nominations and information.
If you are a qualified archaeologist requesting other information, please send a new request titled to reflect
your request type. Other information that can be requested from SHPO includes: archaeological site
eligibility status/determinations, survey reports (architecture-history and archaeology), and restricted
property information. You can visit our Research @ SHPO webpage to learn more about how to obtain
information you may need for your research: https://mn.gov/admin/shpo/surveyandinventory/research/
Research requests will now be done ourselves through the provided links.
From: GraggJohnson, Kelly (ADM) <kelly.graggjohnson@state.mn.us>
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2024 6:25 PM
To: Kelly Herfendal <Kelly.Herfendal@ISGInc.com>
Subject: RE: North Oaks Mixed Use Development - Request for Project Review
Due to limited staff and resources, the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office is no longer
able to provide formal responses to technical assistance requests.
Instead, we encourage you to use Minnesota’s Statewide Historic Inventory Portal (MnSHIP), which
is an online tool that can help you identify any previously identified above-ground historic
resources that may be located within your project area. For more information on MnSHIP, please
see this link: Minnesota's Statewide Historic Inventory Portal (mn.gov)
We also encourage you to visit the Office of the State Archaeologist’s online portal to access the
Public Map which may help you identify if there are any previously identified archaeological sites
located in your general project area. Archaeological site information is protected, so detailed
information on archaeological sites is reserved for qualified archaeologists and historic
preservation professionals, tribal historic preservation officers, and the Minnesota Indian Affairs
Council. For more information regarding the OSA portal, please see this link:
https://osaportal.gisdata.mn.gov/
Qualified archaeologists can request additional information from SHPO about archaeological site
eligibility status/determinations, survey reports (architecture-history and archaeology), and
restricted property information. You can visit the Research @ SHPO webpage to learn more about
how to obtain information you may need for your research to identify historic properties that may
be affected by your project: https://mn.gov/admin/shpo/surveyandinventory/research/
It is our understanding that the goal of the EAW is to describe how a proposed project may affect
the environment, which includes historic resources. An archaeological assessment of the project
(a Phase Ia) will help determine whether the project has the potential to affect known or suspected
archaeological sites. A Phase I archaeological survey will provide more information regarding
whether known or previously unknown archaeological sites are located within the proposed project
area. These studies should be developed and structured to best inform the project’s effects on
archaeological resources. For a list of consultants who have expressed an interest in undertaking
such surveys, please visit the website https://www.mnhs.org/preservation/directory, and select
“Archaeologists” in the “Specialties” box.
If the proposed project will use federal funds, occur on federal land, or will require a federal permit
(such as a USACE 404 permit), it may be subject to review under Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act. If the project becomes a federal undertaking, additional consultation
between the federal agency and the SHPO will be necessary in order to define an appropriate area
of potential effect (APE) for the federal undertaking as well as the necessary historic property
identification and evaluation efforts required for a federal review, and this information will be
helpful to help the project move forward.
Kelly Gragg-Johnson (she/her/hers) | Environmental Review Program Specialist
50 Sherburne Avenue, Suite 203
Saint Paul, MN 55155
(651) 201-3285 | kelly.graggjohnson@state.mn.us
Please reference this SHPO Environmental Review Program Update regarding current project review
timelines and staffing changes for the Environmental Review Program.
From: Kelly Herfendal <Kelly.Herfendal@ISGInc.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2024 8:49 AM
To: MN_ADM_ENV Review SHPO <ENReviewSHPO@state.mn.us>
Subject: North Oaks Mixed Use Development - Request for Project Review
Good morning,
Please see the attached request for project review for an EAW for the North Oaks Mixed Use
Development project located in Lino Lakes, Anoka County, MN. Let me know if additional
information is needed.
Thank you,
Kelly Herfendal
Environmental Scientist
Employee Owner
P 507.387.6651
E Kelly.Herfendal@ISGInc.com
W ISGInc.com
You don't often get email from kelly.herfendal@isginc.com. Learn why this is important
This message may be from an external email source.
Do not select links or open attachments unless verified. Report all suspicious emails to Minnesota IT Services Security
Operations Center.
From: Kelly Herfendal
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 9:28 AM
To: Jeremy Groskreutz
Subject: FW: Search Request
From: MN_MNIT_Data Request SHPO <DataRequestSHPO@state.mn.us>
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2024 11:34 AM
To: Kelly Herfendal <Kelly.Herfendal@ISGInc.com>
Subject: RE: Search Request
Thank you for reaching out to the SHPO Research Request Email. Our research request procedures have
recently changed because we have launched the Minnesota Statewide Historic Inventory Portal (MnSHIP)!
Please visit MnSHIP and the OSA Portal to perform research yourself. You can also visit
https://npgallery.nps.gov/nrhp to obtain National Register of Historic Places nominations and information.
If you are a qualified archaeologist requesting other information, please send a new request titled to reflect
your request type. Other information that can be requested from SHPO includes: archaeological site
eligibility status/determinations, survey reports (architecture-history and archaeology), and restricted
property information. You can visit our Research @ SHPO webpage to learn more about how to obtain
information you may need for your research: https://mn.gov/admin/shpo/surveyandinventory/research/
Thank you,
Lucy H.
SHPO Research Requests
Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office
50 Sherburne Avenue, Suite 203
Saint Paul, MN 55155
datarequestshpo@state.mn.us
From: Kelly Herfendal <Kelly.Herfendal@ISGInc.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2024 10:51 AM
To: MN_MNIT_Data Request SHPO <DataRequestSHPO@state.mn.us>
Subject: Search Request
Good morning,
You don't often get email from kelly.herfendal@isginc.com. Learn why this is important
This message may be from an external email source.
Do not select links or open attachments unless verified. Report all suspicious emails to Minnesota IT Services Security
Operations Center.
I am writing to inquire about a database search of any archaeological, historical, or architectural
resources at the site of a proposed housing development. The site is located within Section 34 of
Lino Lakes Township (T31N, R22W) in the City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, MN. I have attached a
shapefile for your reference. Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Kelly Herfendal
Kelly Herfendal
Environmental Scientist
Employee Owner
P 507.387.6651
E Kelly.Herfendal@ISGInc.com
W ISGInc.com
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning EAW
Appendix G – Greenhouse Gas Calculations Appendix G – Greenhouse Gas Calculations
ISGHG Calculator
Verion 0.1
Last Updated: 8/3/22
Project Name North Oaks Mixed Use Development
Reviewer Jeremy Groskreutz
Date 10/14/2024
State MN
County Anoka
Project Lifespan 50
Emission Sources Greenhouse Gases Emitted CO2e TPY Emitted
Stationary Sources -/--/-
Mobile Sources CO2, CH4, and N20 6,829.24
Off-Site Purchased Energy CO2, CH4, and N20 1,577.82
Purchased Steam/Heat -/--/-
Waste Management CO2 386.34
Purchased Gases -/--/-
Mitigation Sources Greenhouse Gases Mitigated CO2e TPY Mitigated
Land-Use Mititgation -/--/-
Renewable Energy Credits -/--/-
Emissions - Mitigations = Total CO2e TPY Emitted
8,793.40
>25,000 TPY CO2e Emitted?No
>100,000 TPY CO2e Emitted?No
Emission Source Project Phase Emissions Scope
Stationary Sources -/--/-
Mobile Sources Operations, , , ConstructionConstructionConstructionScope-1
Off-Site Purchased Energy Operations Scope-2
Purchased Steam/Heat -/--/-
Waste Management Operations Scope-3
Purchased Gases -/--/-
Mitigation Source Project Phase Emissions Scope
Land-Use Mititgation -/--/-
Renewable Energy Credits -/--/-
Known Gases Emitted kg Emitted Yearly Short Tons Emitted Yearly
CO2 7,605,873.41 8,384.08
CH4 244.75 0.27
N2O 49.41 0.05
Stationary Source Emissions
ID Phase Fuel Type Generator Type Hours Operated Fuel Spent Daily mmBtu Output
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
ID Phase kg CO2 Produced kg CH4 Emitted kg N2O Emitted kg CO2e Daily CO2e TPY
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Federal Register EPA; 40 CFR Part 98; e-CFR. Table C-1, Table C-2 (as amended at 81 FR 89252, Dec. 9, 2016), Table AA-1 (78 FR 71965, Nov. 29, 2013).
Total Stationary Source Emissions
Mobile Source Emissions
ID Phase Vehicle Type Fuel Type Year Yearly mi MPG Ga Used (Off-Road)
1 Const.Construction/Mining Equipment Diesel 2019 10,950.00 2.5
2 Const.Heavy-Duty Vehicles Diesel 2019 6,480.00 6
3 Const.Light-Duty Trucks Gasoline 2019 10,950.00 25
4 Op.Passenger Cars Gasoline 2019 12,045.00 25
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
ID # Veh.kg CO2 Emitted kg CH4 Emitted kg N20 Emitted kg CO2e Yearly CO2e TPY
1 62 55,452.55 --55,452.55 61.13
2 9 1,984.82 0.01 0.05 2,000.08 2.20
3 30 2,187.94 0.05 0.01 2,191.80 2.42
4 1527 6,125,141.95 93.80 27.59 6,135,708.56 6,763.50
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Total Mobile Source Emissions 6,829.24
Offsite Purchased Energy Emissions
eGRID Subregion Yrly. Energy Usage kg CO2e Emitted kg CH4 Emitted kg N2O Emitted
MROW (MRO West)3199.23 1,421,106.14 150.89 21.76
kg CO2e Emitted CO2e TPY
1,431,363.64 1,577.82
Offsite Steam and Heat Emissions
mmBtu Purchased Yrly.kg CO2 Emitted kg CH4 Emitted kg N2O Emitted kg CO2e Emitted
CO2e TPY
Waste Management Emissions
ID Waste Type Disposal Method Tons Disposed Yrly CO2e TPY
1 Mixed MSW Landfilled 674 386.34
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Total CO2e TPY
386.34
General/Refidgerative Gases
ID Gas Gas (lb)GWP CO2e (lb)CO2e (Tons)
1
2
3
4
5
100yr GWPs from IPCC 4th Assessment Rerport (AR4), 2007.
Blended Refridgerative Gases
ID Gas Gas (lb)GWP CO2e (lb)CO2e (Tons)
1
2
3
4
5
100yr GWPs from IPCC 4th Assessment Rerport (AR4), 2007.
Tot. CO2e TPY
Land-based Mitigation
ID Restoration Acreage Sequest. Rate (Mton/Acre/Yr)Total Seques. (MTon/Yr)CO2e TPY
1
2
3
4
5
Tot. CO2e TPY
Renewable Energy Credits
Credits Bought eGrid Subregion kg CO2 Mitigated kg CH4 Mitigated kg N2O Mitigated
MROW (MRO West)
kg CO2e Mitigated CO2e TPY Mitig.
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning EAW
Appendix G – Greenhouse Gas Calculations Appendix H – Traffic Impact Study
Ash Street Traffic Impact Study
Prepared by: ISG
Prepared for: North Oaks Company LLC
Submitted to: Anoka County, Minnesota
Project No. 24-30671
October 14th, 2024
PREPARED FOR :
North Oaks Company LLC
Lauren Grouws
VP Development
5959 Centerville Road, Suite 200
North Oaks, MN 55127
Lauren@northoaks.com
PREPARED BY :
ISG
Corona Woychik, PE, PTOE
Project Engineer
201 Main Street, Suite 1020
La Crosse, WI 54601
Corona.Woychik@ISGInc.com
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page i
SIGNATURE SHEET
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THESE CALCULATIONS WERE PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A
DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.
Corona V. Woychik, PE, PTOE
Project Engineer
License No. 59049
Documents covered by this seal:
Ash Street Traffic Impact Study
ISG
201 Main Street, Suite 1020
La Crosse, WI 54601
Ash Street Traffic Impact Study
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
Engineer's Project Number: 24-30671
Dated this 14th day of October 2024
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary, Conclusions, + Recommendations ....................................................................................................................... 1
Summary ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1
Findings .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 1
Conclusions + Recommendations ........................................................................................................................................................ 2
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 1
Purpose of Report ................................................................................................................................................................................. 1
Study Objectives .................................................................................................................................................................................... 1
Analysis of Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................................................................. 1
Location, Zoning, and Land Use ........................................................................................................................................................... 1
Area Roadway System ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2
Existing Traffic Volumes and Analysis Assumptions ............................................................................................................................ 3
Peak Hourly Factor ............................................................................................................................................................................. 10
Crash Analysis .................................................................................................................................................................................... 10
Proposed Development ......................................................................................................................................................................... 11
Site Traffic ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 12
Growth Rate ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 15
Analysis of Future Conditions ................................................................................................................................................................ 20
Capacity and Level of Service at Studied Intersections – AM and PM Peak Hours ....................................................................... 20
Principal Findings ............................................................................................................................................................................... 55
Conclusions + Recommendations ........................................................................................................................................................ 57
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Wilkinson Preliminary Plan and North Oaks Farms Site Concept ...................................................................................... A
Appendix B: Project Location Map ........................................................................................................................................................... B
Appendix C: Intersection Map .................................................................................................................................................................. C
Appendix D: Existing Zoning and Future Land Use Maps .......................................................................................................................D
Appendix E: Existing and Planned Intersection Control Exhibits ............................................................................................................ E
Appendix F: Existing (2024) Peak Hour Turning Movement Volume Diagrams .................................................................................... F
Appendix G: Existing (2024) Synchro Analysis Worksheets ...................................................................................................................G
Appendix H: Map and Crash Detail Report ..............................................................................................................................................H
Appendix I: Internal Capture Charts .......................................................................................................................................................... I
Appendix J: Trip Distribution ...................................................................................................................................................................... J
Appendix K: Trip Assignment .................................................................................................................................................................... K
Appendix L: Future Scenario Peak Hour Turning Movement Volume Diagrams ................................................................................... L
Appendix M: Opening Year No Build (2025) Synchro Analysis Worksheets ......................................................................................... M
Appendix N: Opening Year Build (2025) Synchro Analysis Worksheets ............................................................................................... N
Appendix O: Design Year No Build (2045) Synchro Analysis Worksheets ............................................................................................. O
Appendix P: Design Year Build (2045) Synchro Analysis Worksheets ................................................................................................... P
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page iii
Appendix Q: Right-Turn Warrant Analyses ............................................................................................................................................... Q
Appendix R: Left-Turn Warrant Analyses ................................................................................................................................................. R
TABLE OF TABLES
Table 1: Existing (2024) LOS and Delay for Intersection 1 .................................................................................................................... 4
Table 2: Existing (2024) LOS and Delay for Intersection 2 .................................................................................................................... 5
Table 3: Existing (2024) LOS and Delay for Intersection 3 .................................................................................................................... 6
Table 4: Existing (2024) LOS and Delay for Intersection 4 .................................................................................................................... 7
Table 5: Existing (2024) LOS and Delay for Intersection 5 .................................................................................................................... 8
Table 6: Existing (2024) LOS and Delay for Intersection 6 .................................................................................................................... 9
Table 7: Crash Locations ....................................................................................................................................................................... 11
Table 8: Wilkinson Development Trip Generation for Opening Year 2025 ........................................................................................ 13
Table 9: Wilkinson Development Trip Generation for Opening Year 2025 - Adjusted for Internal Capture ..................................... 13
Table 10: North Oaks Farms Trip Generation ...................................................................................................................................... 14
Table 11: Trip Generation for Design Year 2045 ................................................................................................................................. 14
Table 13: Historical AADT along CSAH 32 / Ash Street ....................................................................................................................... 16
Table 12: Historical AADT along CSAH 21 / Centerville Rd ................................................................................................................. 16
Table 14: Historical Lino Lakes Population Growth ............................................................................................................................. 17
Table 15: Historical Lino Lakes Household .......................................................................................................................................... 17
Table 16: Growth Rate Sources ............................................................................................................................................................ 19
Table 17: Selected Growth Rates ......................................................................................................................................................... 19
Table 18: Opening Year No Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 1 ...................................................................................... 21
Table 19: Opening Year No Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 2 ...................................................................................... 22
Table 20: Opening Year No Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 3 ...................................................................................... 23
Table 21: Opening Year No Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 4 ...................................................................................... 24
Table 22: Opening Year No Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 5 ...................................................................................... 25
Table 23: Opening Year No Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 6 ...................................................................................... 26
Table 24: Opening Year Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 1 ............................................................................................ 27
Table 25: Opening Year Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 2 ............................................................................................ 28
Table 26: Opening Year Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 3 ............................................................................................ 29
Table 27: Opening Year Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 4 ............................................................................................ 30
Table 28: Opening Year Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 5 ............................................................................................ 31
Table 29: Opening Year Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 6 ............................................................................................ 32
Table 30: Opening Year Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 7 ............................................................................................ 33
Table 31: Design Year No Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 1 ......................................................................................... 34
Table 32: Design Year No Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 2 ......................................................................................... 35
Table 33: Design Year No Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 3 ......................................................................................... 36
Table 34: Design Year No Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 4 ......................................................................................... 37
Table 35: Design Year No Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 5 ......................................................................................... 38
Table 36: Design Year No Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 6 ......................................................................................... 39
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page iv
Table 37: Design Year Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 1 .............................................................................................. 40
Table 38: Design Year Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 2 .............................................................................................. 41
Table 39: Design Year Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 3 .............................................................................................. 42
Table 40: Design Year Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 4 .............................................................................................. 43
Table 41: Design Year Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 5 .............................................................................................. 44
Table 42: Design Year Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 6 .............................................................................................. 45
Table 43: Design Year Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 7 .............................................................................................. 46
Table 44: Design Year Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 8 .............................................................................................. 47
Table 45: Intersection 1 Scenario Comparison.................................................................................................................................... 48
Table 46: Intersection 2 Scenario Comparison.................................................................................................................................... 49
Table 47: Intersection 3 Scenario Comparison.................................................................................................................................... 50
Table 48: Intersection 4 Scenario Comparison.................................................................................................................................... 51
Table 49: Intersection 5 Scenario Comparison.................................................................................................................................... 52
Table 50: Intersection 6 Scenario Comparison.................................................................................................................................... 53
Table 51: Intersection 7 Scenario Comparison.................................................................................................................................... 54
Table 52: Intersection 8 Scenario Comparison ................................................................................................................................... 55
Table 53: Left-Turn Lane Warrant Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 56
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 1 of 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, + RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
This study has been prepared in anticipation of two proposed mixed used and residential developments along Ash Street in Lino
Lakes, MN. The proposed sites, 116 acres total, are currently vacant and anticipated to be developed in two major phases. The
sites are located west of Centerville Road along Ash Street between Centerville Road and Holly Drive. The proposed development
will consist of the Wilkinson development and the North Oaks Farms development and will include townhomes, retail, apartments,
senior adult housing, and single-family residences.
The Wilkinson area, consisting of townhomes, retail, apartments, and senior adult housing, would be the first phase and is
anticipated to be fully operational in 2025. The North Oaks Farms area, consisting of single-family residences, would be the next
phase, and areas would be fully developed by 2045, the Design Year. See Appendix A for a preliminary site plan for the proposed
Wilkison development and a preliminary concept for the North Oaks Farms area.
This Traffic Impact Study (TIS) studied current, projected, and future traffic conditions at several locations in the City of Lino Lakes,
Anoka County, Minnesota. These locations included in the study area are:
• Intersection 1 – The intersection of CSAH 21/Centerville Road and CSAH J/Ash Street
• Intersection 2 – The intersection of CSAH 21/Centerville Road and CSAH 32/Ash Street
• Intersection 3 – The intersection of CSAH 32/Ash Street and Monarch Way / the North Oaks Farms area’s South Access
• Intersection 4 – The intersection of CSAH 32/Ash Street and Rapp Farm Blvd
• Intersection 5 – The intersection of CSAH 32/Ash Street and Holly Drive N
• Intersection 6 – The intersection of Wilkinson Lake Blvd and the Wilkinson area’s South Access
• Intersection 7 – The intersection of CSAH 32/Ash Street and the Wilkinson area’s North Access
• Intersection 8 – The intersection of CSAH 32/Ash Street and the North Oaks Farms area’s East Access
Turning movement traffic count data was collected at Intersections 1-5 above from 6:00AM - 9:00AM, and from 3:30PM – 6:30PM
on Thursday, July 18th, 2024. Traffic was analyzed based on collected data.
Findings
In the existing condition, the southbound approach at Intersection 1 operates at a level of service F. All other movements operate
at a level of service D or better at the study intersections during the Weekday AM and the Weekday PM peak hours. In the existing
condition, all existing major intersections operate as stop-controlled. Reconstruction of major intersections is planned for 2025,
and Intersection 1 and Intersection 2 are proposed to be converted to roundabouts.
Historical traffic volumes in the area have held steady or decreased over the past 20 years; however, traffic forecasts compl eted
in the last 5 years indicate that traffic growth is expected. The proposed developments will account for much of the traffic growth
anticipated over the next 20 years, and growth rates were selected to account for background traffic growth separate from tra ffic
growth attributed to the proposed developments. The assumed average annual traffic growth rates used for the future scen arios
were the following:
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 2 of 2
• 0.5% along CSAH 21/Centerville Road south of Intersection 1,
• 1.0% along CSAH 21/Centerville Road between Intersections 1 and 2,
• 1.0% for CSAH J/Ash Street east of Intersection 1,
• 0.8% for CSAH 21/Centerville Road north of Intersection 2, and
• 0% for CSAH 32/Ash Stret west of Intersection 2.
In the design year, 2045, with construction of the proposed development, all movements are expected to operate at a level of
service C or better for the Weekday AM and Weekday PM peak hours.
From the completed study, it is found that the proposed mixed used and residential developments along Ash Street will increase
vehicular volumes and average delays at the studied intersections, and the planned roadway geometry is able to accommodate
the changes in traffic volumes and distribution patterns. Vehicle queue lengths will generally increase but are not expected to
impact development site circulation.
Conclusions + Recommendations
The proposed residential and mixed-use developments along Ash Street are slated to begin operations by 2025, with full
completion expected by 2045. Currently, traffic conditions on the southbound approach of the CSAH 21/Centerville Rd and CSAH
J/Ash Street intersection are poor, operating at a level of service F. However, planned improvements, including the conversio n to
roundabouts, are anticipated to enhance traffic flow to a level of service C or better regardless of proposed development
construction. While no new right- or left-turn lanes are warranted due to the developments, a left-turn lane at the CSAH 32/Ash
Street and Holly Drive intersection is indicated, although safety data shows no significant need for its construction. Additi onally,
higher-than-average crash rates along CSAH 32/Ash Street suggest a need for roadway geometry changes between Monarch Way
and CSAH 21/Centerville Rd. A proposed realignment should meet AASHTO standards and a suggested design speed of 45 MPH.
Recommended for the proposed developments, sidewalks and shared-use paths should be incorporated within the developments
to enhance pedestrian and bicyclist connectivity. Finally, while the planned intersection geometry and traffic control should
accommodate anticipated traffic demands, re-evaluation is recommended if growth projections change.
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 1 of 57
INTRODUCTION
Purpose of Report
The purpose of this report is to document the methodologies, findings, recommendations, and conclusions of the Ash Street traffic
impact analysis study, including the basis for all assumptions, traffic parameters, and conclusions. This report presents data in a
logical format including tables and figures to convey the data and its meaning accurately and clearly.
Study Objectives
The objectives of this study include the following:
• Identify the impacts to the transportation system and immediate area projected for the proposed development.
• Recommend necessary improvements to the adjacent transportation system to minimize crash risk and maintain a safe
and efficient system.
• Protect the safety and functionality of the transportation system while providing sufficient access for the proposed
development.
ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
Location, Zoning, and Land Use
This report studies the projected impacts of two proposed developments in the City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota.
Preliminary site plans and concepts can be found in Appendix A, and a project location map is included in Appendix B. The site is
currently vacant and will be developed in two phases. Phase 1 consists of Wilkinson development situated northeast of the
intersection of CSAH 21/Centerville Road and CSAH J/Ash Street. Phase 2 includes the North Oaks Farms development located
east of Parcel 3 (Phase 1) between the Wilkinson development and Monarch Way.
Intersections 1 – 8, were studied:
• Intersection 1 – The intersection of CSAH 21/Centerville Road and CSAH J/Ash Street
• Intersection 2 – The intersection of CSAH 21/Centerville Road and CSAH 32/Ash Street
• Intersection 3 – The intersection of CSAH 32/Ash Street and Monarch Way
• Intersection 4 – The intersection of CSAH 32/Ash Street and Rapp Farm Blvd
• Intersection 5 – The intersection of CSAH 32/Ash Street and Holly Drive N
• Intersection 6 – The intersection of Wilkinson Lake Blvd and the Wilkinson area’s South Access
• Intersection 7 – The intersection of CSAH 32/Ash Street and the Wilkinson area’s North Access
• Intersection 8 – The intersection of CSAH 32/Ash Street and the North Oaks Farms area’s East Access
The figure in Appendix C identifies these intersections and shows their location within the City of Lino Lakes, which has a
population of 21,399 (US Census 2020). Surrounding properties are residential (south) and agricultural (north, east, and west).
The proposed sites and surrounding areas are zoned as Rural per the City of Lino Lake’s most recent zoning map (updated January
2023). The proposed sites and surrounding areas are shown as Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, High
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 2 of 57
Density Residential, and Signature Gateway District per the City of Lino Lakes Future Land Use Map from the 2040 Comprehensive
Plan. The Existing Zoning and Future Land Use maps are provided in Appendix E.
Area Roadway System
Through the study area:
• CSAH J/Ash Street functionally classified as a minor arterial
• CSAH 21/Centerville Road classified as a minor arterial
• CSAH 32/Ash Street classified as a minor arterial
• Monarch Way classified as a local street
• Rapp Farm Blvd classified as a local street
• Holly Drive N classified as a minor collector
• Wilkinson Lake Blvd classified as a local street
ROADWAY GEOMETRY
Through the study area, Centerville Road also known as CSAH 21, is a north -south highway with a posted speed limit of 50 MPH.
The typical roadway section is a two-lane undivided roadway with a northbound right-turn lane at the intersection with CSAH J/Ash
Street. It is an asphalt roadway with 7-foot right shoulders and 9-foot left shoulders, and no sidewalk. The existing paved shoulders
are suitable bicycle accommodations as they meet the minimum required width of 8’ for this roadway per MnDOT’s Bicycle Facility
Design Manual.
Within the study area, Ash Street also known as CSAH J, is an east -west street with a posted speed limit of 40 MPH. The typical
roadway section consists of a two-lane undivided roadway with a westbound right -turn lane at the intersection with CSAH
21/Centerville Road. It is an asphalt roadway with 8-foot shoulders on both sides, and no sidewalk. The existing paved shoulders
are suitable bicycle accommodations as they meet the minimum required width of 8’ for this roadway per MnDOT’s Bicycle Facility
Design Manual. Ash Street, also known as CSAH 32, is an east-west street with a posted speed limit of 45 MPH. Similar ly CSAH
J/Ash Street, has a typical roadway section and a two-lane undivided asphalt roadway with 5-foot shoulders on both sides, without
sidewalks or bicycle accommodations.
Wilkinson Lake Blvd is the west approach on the intersection of CSAH J/Ash Street and CSAH 21/Centerville Road, Wilkinson Lake
Blvd is an east-west street local street that continues the CSAH J segment through the city. The typical roadway section consists
of a divided two-lane roadway with variations on the median widths along the segment. It is an asphalt roadwa y with gutters on
both sides, but no sidewalk or bicycle accommodations.
Within the study area, Monarch Way is a north-south asphalt roadway with a typical roadway section of two-lane undivided roadway
with curb and gutter. It serves the residential area south of the development with no sidewalk or bicycle accommodations.
Rapp Farm Blvd is a north-south asphalt roadway serving the residential area south of the development. The typical roadway
section consists of two-lane undivided roadway with curb and gutter. At the intersection with CSAH J/Ash Street, Rapp Farm Blvd
is divided by 17-foot wide median. No sidewalk or bicycle accommodations are provided.
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 3 of 57
Holly Drive N is a north-south roadway with a posted speed limit of 45 MPH. The typical roadway section is an asphalt two-lane
undivided roadway with no shoulders, sidewalk or bicycle accommodations.
TRAFFIC CONTROL
The intersection of CSAH J/Ash Street and CSAH 21/Centerville Rd is all-way-stop controlled. CSAH 32/Ash Street is stop-
controlled at its intersection with CSAH 21/Centerville Road, and a northbound left -turn bypass is provided. Monarch Way, Rapp
Farm Blvd, and Holly Drive N are stop controlled at their intersections with CSAH 32/Ash Street. There are plans to reconstru ct
the CSAH 21/Centerville Rd’s intersections with CSAH J/Ash Street and CSAH 32/Ash Street from stop -controlled intersections
into roundabouts, and this is anticipated to be completed in 2025. The intersection of CSAH J/Ash Street and CSAH 21/Centervi lle
Rd (Intersection 1) will be a single lane roundabout with 10-foot shared use paths providing bicycle and pedestrian
accommodations. The intersection of CSAH 32/Ash Street / CSAH 21/Centerville Rd (Intersection 2) will be a single lane
roundabout with 8-foot and 10-foot shared use paths providing bicycle and pedestrian accommodations. Exhibits showing the
existing and planned traffic control are provided in Appendix E.
VEHICLE CLASSIFICATION
Trucks are expected to use CSAH J/Ash Street and CSAH 32/Ash Street to access the study area, then use the development
driveways to reach the commercial area. Pedestrians and bicyclists, mainly residents in the proposed developments, are
anticipated to use any available pedestrian and bicycle accommodations.
Existing Traffic Volumes and Analysis Assumptions
Traffic count data was collected through video at Intersections 1 through 5 on Thursday July 18th, 2024 from 6:00AM - 9:00AM,
and from 3:30PM – 6:30PM. The actual High and Low temperatures for the collection da y were 55° and 81°. All roadways were
clear and dry. The morning (AM) peak hour of traffic for the study area occurred from 7:30 AM to 8:30 AM. The evening (PM) peak
hour of traffic for the study area occurred from 4:15 PM to 5:15 PM. About 60% higher traffic volumes were observed during the
weekday PM peak hour than the AM peak hour within the study boundary. Some cyclists and no pedestrians were recorded during
the peak hours of traffic. Summary diagrams of the network’s peak hour vehicular traffic counts are provided in Appendix F.
Using Synchro version 11.1, multiple delay computation methods are available, including the Percentile Delay Method, the
Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition methodology, Highway Capacity Manual 2010 Edition methodology, and Highway Capacity
Manual 2000 Edition methodology. To analyze the traffic conditions within the study area for this report, Synchro version 11.1’s
Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition delay method was utilized for all intersections.
Intersections 1 – 5 were modeled. The resulting Synchro analysis worksheets were prepared for the existing conditions and are
provided in Appendix G. Tables 1 – 5 show the existing level of service (LOS) and delay for Intersections 1 – 5 for both peak hour
periods.
In the existing condition, the southbound approach of Intersection 1 operate at a level of service F in both the AM and PM peak
hours and all other movements operate at level of service D or better during the AM and PM peak hours.
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 4 of 57
EXISTING (2024) CONDITION
Table 1: Existing (2024) LOS and Delay for Intersection 1
INTERSECTION 1
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2024 EXISTING
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd &
CSAH J/Ash St Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 1 8 3 97 18 141 13 75 26 356 210 10
Queue (ft) 41 58 46 46 41 187
Mvmt Delay (sec) 12.4 10.8 10.8 8.6
Mvmt LOS B B B A
Delay (sec) 40.5 10.5 11.5 10.3 60.0
LOS E B B B F
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 1
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2024 EXISTING
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd &
CSAH J/Ash St Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 18 30 9 54 13 354 19 238 174 329 189 11
Queue (ft) 40 41 117 86 62 404
Mvmt Delay (sec) 12.8 27 20.2 13.3
Mvmt LOS B D C B
Delay (sec) 57.3 14.2 24.7 17.4 120.3
LOS F B C C F
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 5 of 57
Table 2: Existing (2024) LOS and Delay for Intersection 2
INTERSECTION 2
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2024 EXISTING
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd &
CSAH 32/Ash St Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 25 193 73 139 385 19
Queue (ft) 50 101 75 14
Mvmt Delay (sec) 15.4 13.8 8.7 0.2
Mvmt LOS C B A A
Delay (sec) 4.4 14.0 3.1 0.0
LOS A B A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 2
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2024 EXISTING
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd &
CSAH 32/Ash St Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 51 295 192 405 282 22
Queue (ft) 87 142 70 0
Mvmt Delay (sec) 28.2 13.9 8.5 0.5
Mvmt LOS D B A A
Delay (sec) 5.9 16.0 3.1 0.0
LOS A C A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 6 of 57
Table 3: Existing (2024) LOS and Delay for Intersection 3
INTERSECTION 3
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2024 EXISTING
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Monarch Way Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 200 5 7 80 9 20
Queue (ft) 22 48
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.8 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.1 0.0 0.6 9.9
LOS A A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 3
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2024 EXISTING
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Monarch Way Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 339 14 13 197 6 11
Queue (ft) 29 37
Mvmt Delay (sec) 8.1 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 0.5 0.0 0.5 11.6
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 7 of 57
Table 4: Existing (2024) LOS and Delay for Intersection 4
INTERSECTION 4
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2024 EXISTING
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Rapp Farm Blvd Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 190 18 11 75 35 19
Queue (ft) 8 51 51
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.9 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.9 0.0 1.0 10.5
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 4
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2024 EXISTING
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Rapp Farm Blvd Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 336 32 9 194 14 17
Queue (ft) 13 36 36
Mvmt Delay (sec) 8.3 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 0.8 0.0 0.4 12.0
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 8 of 57
Table 5: Existing (2024) LOS and Delay for Intersection 5
INTERSECTION 5
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2024 EXISTING
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Holly Drive N Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 17 192 107 5 12 26
Queue (ft) 8 53 53
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.5 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.4 0.6 0.0 9.8
LOS A A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 5
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2024 EXISTING
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Holly Drive N Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 79 353 194 16 14 18
Queue (ft) 35 37 37
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.8 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.5 1.4 0.0 12.6
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 9 of 57
Table 6: Existing (2024) LOS and Delay for Intersection 6
INTERSECTION 6
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2024 EXISTING
Wilkinson Lake Blvd &
South Access Wilkinson Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 41 12
Queue (ft) 31
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 7.4 7.3 8.4
LOS A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 6
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2024 EXISTING
Wilkinson Lake Blvd &
South Access Wilkinson Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 43 57
Queue (ft) 41
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 7.9 7.3 8.5
LOS A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 10 of 57
Peak Hourly Factor
For the area roadway system of this report, a single Peak Hourly Factor (PHF) was determined for each intersection with traff ic
count data. PHF was calculated by evaluating the collected traffic counts and comparing the intersection volume during the
busiest 15-minutes of the peak hour with the total intersection volume during the peak hour. The PHF was applied to each
intersection within Synchro 11 for all existing and future scenarios.
Crash Analysis
Crash data was obtained from Anoka County for the study area from 2019 to 2024, with the reports provided in Appendix H. A
total of twenty-six crashes were recorded during this period. Table 7 summarizes these crashes. No crashes were recorded south
of Intersection 2 or west of Intersection 3.
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 11 of 57
Table 7: Crash Locations
Most of the crashes occurred between 10:00AM to 6:00PM and were attributed to a variety of causes, including single vehicle
run-off-road, rear end, other, and angle crash.
The average crash rate for the CSAH 32/Ash Street segment from Intersection 2 to Intersection 3 is 1.52 crashes per MVMT,
which is about 40% higher than the statewide average crash rate Anoka County highways, 1.09 per MVMT (MnDOT Crash Data
Toolkits, Crash rates – CSAH and CR by County). The recorded crash data indicates a current need for geometric changes for
CSAH 32/Ash Street between Monarch Way and CSAH 21/Centerville Rd.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
Existing traffic volumes were projected with the traffic forecast to create an Opening Year No Build (2025) future scenario and a
Design Year No Build (2045) future scenario for the 6:30AM – 9:30AM and the 3:30PM – 6:30PM Weekday peak hours. Then,
the proposed trip generation and trip distribution analyses were applied to No Build models to create an Opening Year Build
(2025) future scenario and a Design Year Build (2045) future scenario for the Weekday AM and Weekday PM peak hours.
Location Date Time Severity Diagram
CSAH 32 (Ash St) & CSAH 21 (Centerville Rd)CSAH 21 2/5/2019 17:30 N Angle
CSAH 21 8/20/2019 16:16 C Other
CSAH 21 2/4/2019 10:16 N Other
CSAH 21 10/1/2020 8:09 N SSO
CSAH 21 9/8/2023 11:57 C Rear End
CSAH 32 10/4/2019 16:00 N SSO
CSAH 32 5/12/2021 15:19 N Angle
CSAH 32 4/11/2022 17:34 N Angle
CSAH 32 9/27/2023 13:03 N Other
CSAH 32 1/28/2019 5:30 N SVROR
CSAH 32 8/10/2019 12:37 N Rear End
CSAH 32 10/4/2019 16:00 N SSO
CSAH 32 5/2/2020 12:30 N Angle
CSAH 32 10/23/2020 0:02 N SVROR
CSAH 32 5/12/2021 15:19 N Angle
CSAH 32 8/7/2021 12:07 C SSO
CSAH 32 12/6/2021 10:20 N SVROR
CSAH 32 12/10/2021 17:18 N SSO
CSAH 32 1/22/2022 16:57 C SVROR
CSAH 32 4/11/2022 17:34 N Angle
CSAH 32 10/25/2022 5:19 N Other
CSAH 32 12/17/2022 10:00 N SVROR
CSAH 32 6/29/2023 20:35 N Other
CSAH 32 9/27/2023 13:53 N Other
CSAH 32 10/31/2023 2:30 N SVROR
CSAH 32 12/9/2023 3:18 N SVROR
CSAH 32 (Ash St) & CSAH 21 (Centerville Rd)
to CSAH 32 (Ash St) & Monarch Way
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 12 of 57
Site Traffic
TRIP GENERATION + SITE ACCESS
Wilkinson Waters
Development for the Wilkinson Waters area is anticipated to be complete in 2025. A preliminary plan has been provided for the
Wilkinson Waters development. The Wilk inson Waters development plan was used to identify proposed access locations and to
estimate trips generated by the parcel. The plan shows six 6-plex townhomes, four 4-plex townhomes, two 100-unit apartment
buildings, one 100-unit senior housing facility, and three retail buildings with floor area ranging from 9,000 square feet to 11,000
square feet for each building. Parking lots are provided on-site for vehicular traffic, but no sidewalks or shared use paths are
indicated in the preliminary and conceptual site plans. Internal development roadways would have low enough traffic volumes to
allow for bicycles to share the roadway without on-street bicycle accommodations.
The traffic generated by the Wilkinson Waters area is expected to be primarily new trips with some internally captured trips. For
this study, a trip is defined as a one-way movement between an origin and a destination. The expected number of trips the
Wilkinson Waters area will generate was estimated using the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. The Wilkinson Area is best
represented by the following ITE Trip Generation Manual’s Land Use Codes:
• 215, Single-Family Attached Housing
• 221, Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) – Not Close to Rail Transit
• 252, Senior Adult Housing – Multifamily
• 822, Strip Retail Plaza
This area would have one access to Wilkinson Lake Boulevard and one access to Ash Street. No access to CSAH 21/Centerville
Road is proposed. The access to Wilkinson Lake Boulevard is aligned to complement existing intersections. The access to Ash
Street is located approximately 730 feet from the t-shaped intersection of Centerville Road and Ash Street / CSAH 32. This access
point does not meet Anoka County’s access spacing criteria; however, due to the lower travel speeds anticipated in this secti on
of Ash street, the presence of environmentally sensitive areas adjacent to the proposed access point, and the lack of desire to
access the more heavily traveled CSAH 21/Centerville Road, the proposed access location is an appropriate location for this
parcel.
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 13 of 57
The number of new trips introduced by the Wilkinson development are summarized in Table 8 below.
Table 8: Wilkinson Development Trip Generation for Opening Year 2025
Internal Capture
Because the Wilkinson development will contain multiple land uses, an internal capture analysis was performed for the Wilkins on
residential and retail land uses. The internal capture rate is the percentage reduction that can be applied to the trip gener ation
estimates for individual land uses to account for trips internally absorbed. The ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 3 rd edition provides
the methodology, and the internal capture rates for the AM and PM peak periods can be found in Appendix I.
The internal capture ratios were applied to the values in Table 8 to create Table 9.
Table 9: Wilkinson Development Trip Generation for Opening Year 2025 - Adjusted for Internal Capture
North Oaks Farms
Development for the North Oaks Farms area is anticipated to be complete by 2045. A concept plan has been prepared for the
North Oaks Farms development, and the concept was used to estimate trips generated by the development. The concept shows
detached single-family residences utilizing two access to Ash Street. The first access would be on the east side of the development
where one new intersection between the two Ash Street 90-degree turns would provide access to 17 residences. The second
access would be on the west side of the development and would add a north leg to the intersection of CSAH 21 / Ash Street and
Monarch Way.
Total New Trips Entering Exiting
Weekday AM (AM Peak Hour of Adj Street Traffic)224 93 131
Weekday AM (AM Peak Hour of Generator)350 149 201
Weekday PM (PM Peak Hour of Adj Street Traffic)447 237 210
Weekday PM (PM Peak Hour of Generator)532 295 237
Weekday 3054 1527 1527
Total New Trips Entering Exiting
Weekday AM (AM Peak Hour of Adj Street Traffic)222 92 130
Weekday AM (AM Peak Hour of Generator)348 148 200
Weekday PM (PM Peak Hour of Adj Street Traffic)343 185 158
Weekday PM (PM Peak Hour of Generator)428 243 185
Weekday 3054 1527 1527
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 14 of 57
The expected number of trips the North Oaks Farms area will generate was estimated using the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th
Edition. The North Oaks Farms area is best represented by the following ITE Trip Generation Manual’s Land Use Code 210, Single-
Family Detached Housing. The traffic generated by the North Oaks Farms area is expected to be all new trips. The number of new
trips introduced by the North Oaks Farms development is summarized in Table 10 below.
Table 10: North Oaks Farms Trip Generation
Combined Trip Generation
The number of new trips introduced by the North Oaks Farms development was added to the Wilkinson development’s new trips
adjusted for internal capture to create a combined trip generation for 2045, summarized in Table 11 below.
Table 11: Trip Generation for Design Year 2045
TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT
It is assumed that the proposed development’s trips would follow similar traffic patterns as the existing traffic within the study
area. Proposed traffic is expected to be distributed similar to the existing traffic distribution with variations between the two
developments. The existing traffic distribution is comparable during both the AM and the PM peak hours for each development
with minor variations. A visual of the anticipated trip distribution for entering and exiting new trips for the developments is provided
in Appendix J.
These trip distributions were applied to the expected traffic generated by the proposed development. A visual summary of the trip
assignment for the Opening Year (2025) and Design Year (2045) is provided in Appendix K. The proposed development is
expected to increase traffic for many left- and right-turn movements at Intersections 1 – 3 and through movements at Intersections
4 and 5.
MODAL SPLIT
Some cyclists and no pedestrians were recorded during the peak hour of traffic. Bicyclists and pedestrians, mainly development
residents, are anticipated to use available bicycle and pedestrian accommodations. Pedestrians and bicyclists who are not
residents of the proposed developments may be attracted the proposed developments in the future if pedestrian and bicyclist
friendly design elements are incorporated into site plans for area development and once a sidewalk or shared use path network
is constructed by the City of Lino Lakes along Ash Street.
Total New Trips Entering Exiting
Weekday AM (AM Peak Hour of Adj Street Traffic)55 14 41
Weekday AM (AM Peak Hour of Generator)58 15 43
Weekday PM (PM Peak Hour of Adj Street Traffic)72 45 27
Weekday PM (PM Peak Hour of Generator)76 49 27
Weekday 736 368 368
Total New Trips Entering Exiting
Weekday AM (AM Peak Hour of Adj Street Traffic)279 107 172
Weekday AM (AM Peak Hour of Generator)408 164 244
Weekday PM (PM Peak Hour of Adj Street Traffic)519 282 237
Weekday PM (PM Peak Hour of Generator)608 344 264
Weekday 3790 1895 1895
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 15 of 57
Growth Rate
Selected growth rates vary by segment. Several sources were considered when selecting the study growth rates, including
historical roadway traffic, historical population growth, historical household growth, and recently completed background grow th
rate calculations for intersection control evaluation reports. These sources are explored below.
ROADWAY HISTORICAL TRAFFIC GROWTH RATE
Average annual daily traffic (AADT) estimates are available through the MNDOT Traffic Mapping Application. Existing AADT counts
from various years between 2003 and 2022 along CSAH 32 and CSAH 21 were analyzed. This data was reviewed for variability
and growth trends. It should be noted that traffic counts reflecting changes related to the pandemic of 2020 were not included in
the analysis.
The growth rate was back calculated using the historical traffic counts along Ash Street in the study area using the following
equation:
Equation 1
𝐹=𝐶(1 +�ℎ)𝑛
𝑤�𝑎𝑟𝑎: 𝐶=𝑟�𝑎 𝑎𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑎𝑙𝑟 𝐴𝐴𝐶𝑇
𝐹=𝑟�𝑎 𝑎𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑎 𝐴𝐴𝐶𝑇
�ℎ=𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑎𝑙𝑟 𝑎𝑟𝑙𝑤𝑟� �ℎ𝑙 𝑎𝑎𝑎�ℎ𝑙𝑎𝑙 𝑎𝑙𝑟𝑙
𝑙=𝑙𝑟𝑙𝑎𝑎𝑟 𝑙𝑎 𝑦𝑎𝑎𝑟𝑟 𝑎𝑎𝑟𝑤𝑎𝑎𝑙 𝐶 𝑎𝑙𝑎 𝐹
The results are shown in bellow in Figure 1 and 2 and Table 12 and 13. In the past 20 years, traffic volumes have varied on both
highways, increasing overall by 0.7% annually along CSAH 21 and decreasing overall by -0.2% annually along CSAH 32.
Figure 1: Historical AADT along CSAH 32 / Ash Street
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
5,500
6,000
6,500
7,000
7,500
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025
AA
D
T
Year
Historical AADT Growth CSAH 32
9,000
9,500
10,000
10,500
11,000
11,500
12,000
12,500
13,000
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025
AA
D
T
Year
Historical AADT Growth CSAH 21
Figure 2: Historical AADT along CSAH 21 / Centerville Rd
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 16 of 57
Table 13: Historical AADT along CSAH 32 / Ash Street
CITY OF LINO LAKES POPULATION GROWTH
The City of Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan for 2040 study reviewed the City of Lino Lake’s population growth for variability and
trends. US Census data, recorded every 10 years from 1990 through 2020, was used to calculate the city's annualized growth
rate, which averaged 1.43% annually between 2000 and 2020. According to the "City of Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan," adopted
in 2020, the population is projected to increase by approximately 3,800 people between 2020 and 2030 and by an additional
4,900 people between 2030 and 2040. Future population estimates vary; however, a conservative future population growth rate
of 1.68% annually is being used by the City of Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan for 2040.
Figure 3. Historical Lino Lakes Population
Year AADT Annualized Growth Year AADT Annualized
2003 6,200 2003 11,200
2005 5,600 -5.0%2005 10,800 -1.8%
2007 5,900 2.6%2007 10,900 0.5%
2009 5,300 -5.2%2009 11,400 2.3%
2011 4,800 -4.8%2011 10,700 -3.1%
2012 5,300 10.4%2012 10,800 0.9%
2014 5,100 -1.9%2014 10,500 -1.4%
2016 5,400 2.9%2016 11,700 5.6%
2018 5,500 0.9%2018 11,100 -2.6%
2022 5,100 -1.9%2019 12,400 11.7%
Average Growth -0.2%2022 10,707 -4.8%
Average Growth -0.2%
CSAH 32 / Ash St (West of Intersection 2)CSAH 21/Centerville Rd (Between Intersections 1 & 2)
Historical AADT Growth Historical AADT Growth
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025
Pe
o
p
l
e
Year
Historical Lino Lakes Population
Table 12: Historical AADT along CSAH 21 / Centerville Rd
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 17 of 57
Table 14: Historical Lino Lakes Population Growth
Population Growth Lino Lakes
Year People Annualized
Growth
1990 8807 6.7%
2000 16791 1.9%
2010 20216 1.0%
2020 22300
Average Growth (1990-2020) 3.15%
Average Growth (2000-2020) 1.43%
CITY OF LINO LAKES HOUSEHOLD GROWTH
The "City of Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan" study also analyzed the household growth. The City of Lino Lakes’ household has
grown about 1.84% annually between 2000 and 2020. Future population estimates vary; however, a conservative future
household growth rate of 2.10% annually is being used by the City of Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan for 2040. According to the
City of Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan and included 2040 Utility Stating Plan, much of the growth will follow sanitary sewer a nd
municipal water service extensions planned along Ash Street within the project area and to the west and along Main Street /
CSAH 14 in the northwest part of the City.
Table 15: Historical Lino Lakes Household
Household Growth Lino Lakes
Year People Annualized Growth
1990 2603 6.4%
2000 4857 2.4%
2010 6174 1.3%
2020 7000
Average Growth (1990-2020) 3.35%
Average Growth (2000-2020) 1.84%
INTERSECTION CONTROL EVALUATIONS
Average annual daily traffic (AADT) estimates and the Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) reports for Intersections 1 and 2 were
provided by Anoka County. In the ICE reports, 2019 traffic was projected to 2040 and then reported as 2045 volumes. The growth
rates for used in the report, calculating using
Equation 1, were selected for study roadways:
• 1.0% for CSAH 21/Centerville Road south of Intersection 1 (Existing AADT: 5,200; Build 2045 AADT: 7,100)
• 1.4% for CSAH 21/Centerville Road between Intersections 1 and 2 (Existing AADT: 12,400; Build 2045 AADT: 17,600)
• 1.4% for CSAH J/Ash Street east of Intersection 1 (Existing AADT: 12,000; Build 2045 AADT: 17,100)
• 0.9% for CSAH 21/Centerville Road north of Intersection 2 (Existing AADT: 7,100; Build 2045 AADT: 9,000)
• 1.5% for CSAH 32/Ash Street west of Intersection 2 (Existing AADT: 5,500; Build 2045 AADT: 8,000)
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 18 of 57
The ICE reports, completed in November 2023, assessed the 2026 construction of roundabouts for each intersection. The reports
attached a traffic forecasts memorandum, which summarizes methodology, assumptions, and daily traffic forecast results for th e
study area’s major roadways. The traffic forecasts were developed based on MET Council’s Activity Based Model. The Wilkinson
and North Oaks Farms developments both lie within Metro Council TAZ 165. Metro Council TAZs 165 and 1755 both influence
the selected traffic growth rate at the intersection of CSAH 32 and Centerville Road. The details of both Metro TAZs are reported
below.
Households Retail Jobs Non-Retail Jobs Total Jobs
TAZ 2018 2040 Change % 2018 2040 Change % 2018 2040 Change % 2018 2040 Change %
165 366 726 98% 0 17 N/A 37 45 22% 37 62 68%
1755 394 352 -11% 0 10 N/A 25 50 100% 25 60 140%
Total 760 1078 42% 0 27 N/A 62 95 53% 62 122 51%
This Metro Council data was compared to the anticipated number of households and retail jobs introduced to the area as a resu lt
of proposed development.
Households
Total Jobs
Metro Council Data
TAZ 165 + TAZ 1755 (Total) 2040 1078 122
After Proposed Development
TAZ 165 + TAZ 1755 (Total) 2018
+ Proposed Development
760 + 427 = 1187 62 + 35 = 97
The proposed development would introduce more households and less jobs to the area than anticipated by the Metro Council by
2045. Much of the traffic growth generated by the proposed development has been captured in the growth rates identified in the
traffic forecast memorandum. This would warrant reducing growth rates reported in the ICE reports, with the most reduction to
the growth rate for CSAH 32 / Ash Street.
SELECTED BACKGROUND GROWTH RATES
The background growth rates for this report is used to add traffic to the roadways. Several sources, including the Comprehens ive
Plan 2040 and ICE reports, considers development of the proposed site in forecasts. The background growth rate was selected
considering all available sources, adjusting where needed when area development has previously been built into forecasts. A
review of available sources is provided in Table 16, and a table of selected growth rates is provided as Table 17 .
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 19 of 57
Table 16: Growth Rate Sources
Source Growth Rate
Historical Traffic Growth
CSAH 21 / Centerville Road (south of Intersection 1) 0.1%
CSAH 21 / Centerville Road (between Intersections 1 and 2) -0.2%
CSAH J / Ash Street (east of intersection 1) 1.9%
CSAH 21 / Centerville Road (north of Intersection 2) -0.2%
CSAH 32 / Ash Street (west of Intersection 2) -0.2%
Comprehensive Plan 2040
Anticipated Population Growth 1.68%
Anticipated Household Growth 2.10%
ICE Reports
CSAH 21 / Centerville Road (south of Intersection 1) 1.0%
CSAH 21 / Centerville Road (between Intersections 1 and 2) 1.4%
CSAH J / Ash Street (east of intersection 1) 1.4%
CSAH 21 / Centerville Road (north of Intersection 2) 0.9%
CSAH 32 / Ash Street (west of Intersection 2) 1.5%
Table 17: Selected Growth Rates
Roadway Growth Rate
CSAH 21 / Centerville Road (south of Intersection 1) 0.5%
CSAH 21 / Centerville Road (between Intersections 1 and 2) 1.0%
CSAH J / Ash Street (east of intersection 1) 1.0%
CSAH 21 / Centerville Road (north of Intersection 2) 0.8%
CSAH 32 / Ash Street (west of Intersection 2) 0%
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 20 of 57
ANALYSIS OF FUTURE CONDITIONS
Capacity and Level of Service at Studied Intersections – AM and PM Peak Hours
The existing traffic was analyzed to estimate the trip distribution of the generated trips for the proposed development, including
pass-by and non-pass-by trips. The expected proposed trip distribution was applied to the anticipated trip generation for the
development. The assigned trips, represented in an exhibit in Appendix K, were added to future No Build scenarios to create future
Build scenarios. Each intersection was analyzed within Synchro (HCM 6th Edition delay method) for capacity and LOS for the
following future scenarios:
• Opening Year No Build (2025)
• Opening Year Build (2025)
• Design Year No Build (2045)
• Design Year Build (2045)
The tables on the following pages summarize the movement volumes, level of service, and delay for each of the above future
scenario. Diagrams of anticipated turning movement volumes for the future scenarios are provided in Appendix L as visual
reference, and Synchro analysis modeling results for each of the above future scenarios are provided in Appendices M – P.
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 21 of 57
OPENING YEAR NO BUILD (2025) CONDITION
Table 18: Opening Year No Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 1
INTERSECTION 1
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR NO BUILD
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd &
CSAH J/Ash St Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 1 8 3 98 18 142 13 75 26 360 212 10
Queue (ft) 40 63 46 70
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 7.9 7.4 5.3 5.6 9.6
LOS A A A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 1
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR NO BUILD
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd &
CSAH J/Ash St Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 18 30 9 55 13 358 19 139 175 332 191 11
Queue (ft) 34 79 133 68
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 9.2 6.0 9.0 11.1 8.0
LOS A A A B A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 22 of 57
Table 19: Opening Year No Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 2
INTERSECTION 2
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR NO BUILD
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd &
CSAH 32/Ash St Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 25 193 74 140 388 19
Queue (ft) 78 78 19 48
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 6.1 7.3 4.4 6.4
LOS A A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 2
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR NO BUILD
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd &
CSAH 32/Ash St Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 51 295 194 409 284 22
Queue (ft) 127 127 57 66
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 7.6 7.8 8.3 6.2
LOS A A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 23 of 57
Table 20: Opening Year No Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 3
INTERSECTION 3
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR NO BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Monarch Way Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 200 5 7 80 9 20
Queue (ft) 6 46
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.8 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.1 0.0 0.6 10.1
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 3
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR NO BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Monarch Way Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 39 14 13 197 6 11
Queue (ft) 31 39
Mvmt Delay (sec) 8.1 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 0.5 0.0 0.5 12.0
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 24 of 57
Table 21: Opening Year No Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 4
INTERSECTION 4
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR NO BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Rapp Farm Blvd Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 190 18 11 75 35 19
Queue (ft) 26 52 52
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.9 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.9 0.0 1.0 10.5
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 4
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR NO BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Rapp Farm Blvd Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 336 32 9 194 14 17
Queue (ft) 19 38 38
Mvmt Delay (sec) 8.3 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 0.8 0.0 0.4 12.0
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 25 of 57
Table 22: Opening Year No Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 5
INTERSECTION 5
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR NO BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Holly Drive N Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 17 192 107 5 12 26
Queue (ft) 18 53 53
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.5 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.4 0.6 0.0 9.8
LOS A A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 5
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR NO BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Holly Drive N Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 79 353 194 16 14 18
Queue (ft) 73 44 44
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.8 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.5 1.4 0.0 12.6
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 26 of 57
Table 23: Opening Year No Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 6
INTERSECTION 6
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR NO BUILD
Wilkinson Lake Blvd &
South Access Wilkinson Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 41 12
Queue (ft) 30
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 7.4 7.3 8.4
LOS A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 6
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR NO BUILD
Wilkinson Lake Blvd &
South Access Wilkinson Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 43 57
Queue (ft) 43
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 7.9 7.3 8.5
LOS A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 27 of 57
OPENING YEAR BUILD (2025) CONDITION
Table 24: Opening Year Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 1
INTERSECTION 1
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR BUILD
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd &
CSAH J/Ash St Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 7 59 43 98 55 142 44 75 26 360 212 19
Queue (ft) 41 70 50 74
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 9.3 9.8 6.0 6.8 11.5
LOS A A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 1
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR BUILD
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd &
CSAH J/Ash St Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 48 93 40 55 66 358 70 239 175 332 191 39
Queue (ft) 34 79 133 68
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 12.1 8.3 11.9 15.8 10.3
LOS B A B C B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 28 of 57
Table 25: Opening Year Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 2
INTERSECTION 2
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR BUILD
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd &
CSAH 32/Ash St Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 29 193 74 146 397 20
Queue (ft) 84 84 21 64
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 6.2 7.4 4.5 6.5
LOS A A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 2
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR BUILD
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd &
CSAH 32/Ash St Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 57 295 194 439 312 28
Queue (ft) 127 127 57 66
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 8.1 8.3 8.8 6.6
LOS A A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 29 of 57
Table 26: Opening Year Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 3
INTERSECTION 3
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Monarch Way Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 213 5 7 106 9 20
Queue (ft) 0 45
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.9 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.0 0.0 0.5 10.3
LOS A B A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 3
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Monarch Way Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 384 14 13 224 6 11
Queue (ft) 31 39
Mvmt Delay (sec) 8.2 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 0.5 0.0 0.4 12.7
LOS A A B A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 30 of 57
Table 27: Opening Year Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 4
INTERSECTION 4
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Rapp Farm Blvd Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 190 18 11 75 35 19
Queue (ft) 25 50 50
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.9 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.9 0.0 1.0 10.5
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 4
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Rapp Farm Blvd Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 336 32 9 194 14 17
Queue (ft) 19 38 38
Mvmt Delay (sec) 8.3 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 0.8 0.0 0.4 12.0
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 31 of 57
Table 28: Opening Year Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 5
INTERSECTION 5
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Holly Drive N Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 17 192 107 5 12 26
Queue (ft) 21 58 58
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.5 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.4 0.6 0.0 9.8
LOS A B A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 5
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Holly Drive N Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 79 353 194 16 14 18
Queue (ft) 73 44 44
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.8 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.5 1.4 0.0 12.6
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 32 of 57
Table 29: Opening Year Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 6
INTERSECTION 6
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR BUILD
Wilkinson Lake Blvd &
South Access Wilkinson Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 97 0 41 77 0 12
Queue (ft) 32 32
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.5 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.8 0.0 2.6 8.8
LOS A A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 6
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR BUILD
Wilkinson Lake Blvd &
South Access Wilkinson Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 124 0 43 132 0 57
Queue (ft) 43 43
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.6 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 2.4 0.0 1.9 9.2
LOS A A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 33 of 57
Table 30: Opening Year Build (2025) LOS and Delay for Intersection 7
INTERSECTION 7
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
North Access Wilkinson Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 218 0 1 92 0 4
Queue (ft)
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.7 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 0.2 0.0 0.1 9.5
LOS A A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 7
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2025 OPENING YEAR BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
North Access Wilkinson Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 346 0 6 214 0 6
Queue (ft)
Mvmt Delay (sec) 8.1 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 0.2 0.0 0.2 10.4
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 34 of 57
DESIGN YEAR NO BUILD (2045) CONDITION
Table 31: Design Year No Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 1
INTERSECTION 1
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR NO BUILD
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd &
CSAH J/Ash St Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 1 8 3 120 22 174 14 83 29 439 259 10
Queue (ft) 22 60 60 110
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 10.6 8.8 6.0 6.4 13.5
LOS B A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 1
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR NO BUILD
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd &
CSAH J/Ash St Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 18 30 9 67 16 436 21 264 193 405 233 14
Queue (ft) 40 121 147 106
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 11.9 7.0 11.7 14.8 10.3
LOS B A B B B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 35 of 57
Table 32: Design Year No Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 2
INTERSECTION 2
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR NO BUILD
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd &
CSAH 32/Ash St Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 25 193 90 171 455 22
Queue (ft) 76 76 16 67
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 6.9 8.0 4.8 7.4
LOS A A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 2
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR NO BUILD
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd &
CSAH 32/Ash St Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 51 295 237 499 333 26
Queue (ft) 107 107 56 50
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 9.2 8.5 10.5 7.4
LOS A A B A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 36 of 57
Table 33: Design Year No Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 3
INTERSECTION 3
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR NO BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Monarch Way Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 200 5 7 80 9 20
Queue (ft) 9 44
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.8 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.1 0.0 0.6 10.1
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 3
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR NO BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Monarch Way Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 339 14 13 197 6 11
Queue (ft) 23 51
Mvmt Delay (sec) 8.1 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 0.5 0.0 0.5 12.0
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 37 of 57
Table 34: Design Year No Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 4
INTERSECTION 4
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR NO BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Rapp Farm Blvd Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 190 18 11 75 35 19
Queue (ft) 14 44 44
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.9 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.9 0.0 1.0 10.5
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 4
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR NO BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Rapp Farm Blvd Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 336 32 9 194 14 17
Queue (ft) 13 52 52
Mvmt Delay (sec) 8.3 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 0.8 0.0 0.4 12.0
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 38 of 57
Table 35: Design Year No Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 5
INTERSECTION 5
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR NO BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Holly Drive N Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 17 192 107 5 12 26
Queue (ft) 11 43 43
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.5 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.4 0.6 0.0 9.8
LOS A A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 5
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR NO BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Holly Drive N Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 79 353 194 16 14 18
Queue (ft) 45 41 41
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.8 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.5 1.4 0.0 12.6
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 39 of 57
Table 36: Design Year No Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 6
INTERSECTION 6
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR NO BUILD
Wilkinson Lake Blvd &
South Access Wilkinson Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 46 12
Queue (ft) 33
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 7.4 7.3 8.4
LOS A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 6
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR NO BUILD
Wilkinson Lake Blvd &
South Access Wilkinson Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 51 57
Queue (ft) 44
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 7.9 7.3 8.5
LOS A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 40 of 57
DESIGN YEAR BUILD (2045) CONDITION
Table 37: Design Year Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 1
INTERSECTION 1
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR BUILD
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd &
CSAH J/Ash St Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 7 59 43 120 59 178 45 84 29 452 265 19
Queue (ft) 22 60 60 110
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 13.7 12.5 6.8 8.0 18.3
LOS A B A A C
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 1
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR BUILD
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd &
CSAH J/Ash St Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 48 93 40 67 69 445 72 269 193 414 238 42
Queue (ft) 54 127 133 133
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 17.8 10.4 17.2 24.8 14.8
LOS C B C C B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 41 of 57
Table 38: Design Year Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 2
INTERSECTION 2
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR BUILD
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd &
CSAH 32/Ash St Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 31 212 95 177 464 24
Queue (ft) 76 76 16 67
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 7.1 8.7 4.9 7.6
LOS A A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 2
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR BUILD
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd &
CSAH 32/Ash St Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 58 309 251 529 361 35
Queue (ft) 113 113 79 70
Mvmt Delay (sec)
Mvmt LOS
Delay (sec) 10.2 9.3 11.6 8.1
LOS B A B A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 42 of 57
Table 39: Design Year Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 3
INTERSECTION 3
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Monarch Way Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 6 215 5 7 110 5 9 0 20 17 0 16
Queue (ft) 9 44
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.5 0.0 7.9 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A A A
Delay (sec) 1.8 0.2 0.5 10.4 10.6
LOS A A A B B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 3
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Monarch Way Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 23 390 14 13 226 13 6 0 11 12 0 9
Queue (ft) 9 44
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.8 0.0 8.2 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A A A
Delay (sec) 1.1 0.4 0.4 13.3 14.3
LOS A A A B B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 43 of 57
Table 40: Design Year Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 4
INTERSECTION 4
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Rapp Farm Blvd Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 198 18 11 95 35 19
Queue (ft) 14 44 44
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.9 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.7 0.0 0.8 10.6
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 4
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Rapp Farm Blvd Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 365 32 9 205 14 17
Queue (ft) 14 38 38
Mvmt Delay (sec) 8.4 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 0.7 0.0 0.4 12.4
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 44 of 57
Table 41: Design Year Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 5
INTERSECTION 5
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Holly Drive N Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 17 200 126 6 12 26
Queue (ft) 11 43 43
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.6 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.3 0.6 0.0 10.0
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 5
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Holly Drive N Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 79 381 204 17 15 18
Queue (ft) 50 43 43
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.9 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.5 1.4 0.0 13.2
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 45 of 57
Table 42: Design Year Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 6
INTERSECTION 6
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR BUILD
Wilkinson Lake Blvd &
South Access Wilkinson Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 97 0 46 77 0 12
Queue (ft) 33 33
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.5 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 1.9 0.0 2.8 8.8
LOS A A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 6
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR BUILD
Wilkinson Lake Blvd &
South Access Wilkinson Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 124 0 51 132 0 57
Queue (ft) 43 43
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.6 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 2.5 0.0 2.1 9.2
LOS A A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 46 of 57
Table 43: Design Year Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 7
INTERSECTION 7
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
North Access Wilkinson Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 239 0 1 98 0 4
Queue (ft)
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.8 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 0.1 0.0 0.1 9.6
LOS A A A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 7
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
North Access Wilkinson Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 361 0 6 231 0 6
Queue (ft)
Mvmt Delay (sec) 8.1 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 0.2 0.0 0.2 10.5
LOS A A A B
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 47 of 57
Table 44: Design Year Build (2045) LOS and Delay for Intersection 8
INTERSECTION 8
WEEKDAY AM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
East Access North Oaks Farms Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 4 4 237 2 1 92
Queue (ft) 0 0
Mvmt Delay (sec) 7.8 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 0.3 10.2 0.0 0.1
LOS A B A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
INTERSECTION 8
WEEKDAY PM PEAK
2045 DESIGN YEAR BUILD
CSAH 32/Ash St &
East Access North Oaks Farms Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Volume (veh) 2 3 362 6 4 223
Queue (ft) 0 0
Mvmt Delay (sec) 8.1 0.0
Mvmt LOS A A
Delay (sec) 0.1 11.7 0.0 0.1
LOS A B A A
Source: Data was analyzed using Synchro (HCM 6th Edition) and Sim Traffic (queue).
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 48 of 57
LEVEL OF SERVICE AND DELAY COMPARISON
Table 45: Intersection 1 Scenario Comparison
Intersection 1 WEEKDAY AM PEAK
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd
&
CSAH J/Ash St
Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Existing (2024) Delay (sec) 40.5 40.5 11.5 10.3 60.0
LOS E E B B F
2025 Opening Year No
Build
Delay (sec) 7.9 7.9 5.3 5.6 9.6
LOS A A A A A
2025 Opening Year Build
Delay (sec) 9.3 9.3 6.0 6.8 11.5
LOS A A A A B
2045 Design Year No Build
Delay (sec) 10.6 10.6 6.0 6.4 13.5
LOS B B A A B
2045 Design Year Build
Delay (sec) 13.7 13.7 6.8 8.0 18.3
LOS A A A A C
Intersection 1 WEEKDAY PM PEAK
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd
&
CSAH J/Ash St
Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Existing (2024)
Delay (sec) 57.3 57.3 24.7 17.4 120.3
LOS F F C C F
2025 Opening Year No
Build
Delay (sec) 9.2 9.2 9.0 11.1 8.0
LOS A A A B A
2025 Opening Year Build
Delay (sec) 12.1 12.1 11.9 15.8 10.3
LOS B B B C B
2045 Design Year No Build
Delay (sec) 11.9 11.9 11.7 14.8 10.3
LOS B B B B B
2045 Design Year Build
Delay (sec) 17.8 17.8 17.2 24.8 14.8
LOS C C C C B
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 49 of 57
Table 46: Intersection 2 Scenario Comparison
Intersection 2 WEEKDAY AM PEAK
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd
&
CSAH 32/Ash St
Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Existing (2024) Delay (sec) 4.4 14.0 3.1 0.0
LOS A B A A
2025 Opening Year No
Build
Delay (sec) 6.1 7.3 4.4 6.4
LOS A A A A
2025 Opening Year Build
Delay (sec) 6.2 7.4 4.5 6.5
LOS A A A A
2045 Design Year No Build Delay (sec) 6.9 8.0 4.8 7.4
LOS A A A A
2045 Design Year Build
Delay (sec) 7.1 8.7 4.9 7.6
LOS A A A A
Intersection 2 WEEKDAY PM PEAK
CSAH 21/Centerville Rd
&
CSAH 32/Ash St
Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Existing (2024)
Delay (sec) 5.9 16.0 3.1 0.0
LOS A C A A
2025 Opening Year No
Build
Delay (sec) 7.6 7.8 8.3 6.2
LOS A A A A
2025 Opening Year Build
Delay (sec) 8.1 8.3 8.8 6.6
LOS A A A A
2045 Design Year No Build
Delay (sec) 9.2 8.5 10.5 7.4
LOS A A B A
2045 Design Year Build
Delay (sec) 10.2 9.3 11.6 8.1
LOS B A B A
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 50 of 57
Table 47: Intersection 3 Scenario Comparison
Intersection 3 WEEKDAY AM PEAK
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Monarch Way Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Existing (2024) Delay (sec) 1.1 0.0 0.6 9.9
LOS A A A A
2025 Opening Year No
Build
Delay (sec) 1.1 0.0 0.6 10.1
LOS A A A B
2025 Opening Year Build
Delay (sec) 1.0 0.0 0.5 10.3
LOS A B A B
2045 Design Year No Build Delay (sec) 1.1 0.0 0.6 10.1
LOS A A A B
2045 Design Year Build
Delay (sec) 1.8 0.2 0.5 10.4 10.6
LOS A A A B B
Intersection 3 WEEKDAY PM PEAK
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Monarch Way Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Existing (2024)
Delay (sec) 0.5 0.0 0.5 11.6
LOS A A A B
2025 Opening Year No
Build
Delay (sec) 0.5 0.0 0.5 12.0
LOS A A A B
2025 Opening Year Build
Delay (sec) 0.5 0.0 0.4 12.7
LOS A A B A
2045 Design Year No Build
Delay (sec) 0.5 0.0 0.5 12.0
LOS A A A B
2045 Design Year Build
Delay (sec) 1.1 0.4 0.4 13.3 14.3
LOS A A A B B
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 51 of 57
Table 48: Intersection 4 Scenario Comparison
Intersection 4 WEEKDAY AM PEAK
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Rapp Farm Blvd Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Existing (2024) Delay (sec) 1.9 1.9 1.0 10.5
LOS A A A B
2025 Opening Year No
Build
Delay (sec) 1.9 1.9 1.0 10.5
LOS A A A B
2025 Opening Year Build
Delay (sec) 1.9 1.9 1.0 10.5
LOS A A A B
2045 Design Year No Build Delay (sec) 1.9 1.9 1.0 10.5
LOS A A A B
2045 Design Year Build
Delay (sec) 1.7 1.7 0.8 10.6
LOS A A A B
Intersection 4 WEEKDAY PM PEAK
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Rapp Farm Blvd Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Existing (2024)
Delay (sec) 0.8 0.8 0.4 12.0
LOS A A A B
2025 Opening Year No
Build
Delay (sec) 0.8 0.8 0.4 12.0
LOS A A A B
2025 Opening Year Build
Delay (sec) 0.8 0.8 0.4 12.0
LOS A A A B
2045 Design Year No Build
Delay (sec) 0.8 0.8 0.4 12.0
LOS A A A B
2045 Design Year Build
Delay (sec) 0.7 0.7 0.4 12.4
LOS A A A B
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 52 of 57
Table 49: Intersection 5 Scenario Comparison
Intersection 5 WEEKDAY AM PEAK
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Holly Drive N Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Existing (2024) Delay (sec) 1.4 0.6 0.0 9.8
LOS A A A A
2025 Opening Year No
Build
Delay (sec) 1.4 0.6 0.0 9.8
LOS A A A A
2025 Opening Year Build
Delay (sec) 1.4 0.6 0.0 9.8
LOS A B A A
2045 Design Year No Build Delay (sec) 1.4 0.6 0.0 9.8
LOS A A A A
2045 Design Year Build
Delay (sec) 1.3 0.6 0.0 10.0
LOS A A A B
Intersection 5 WEEKDAY PM PEAK
CSAH 32/Ash St &
Holly Drive N Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Existing (2024)
Delay (sec) 1.5 1.4 0.0 12.6
LOS A A A B
2025 Opening Year No
Build
Delay (sec) 1.5 1.4 0.0 12.6
LOS A A A B
2025 Opening Year Build
Delay (sec) 1.5 1.4 0.0 12.6
LOS A A A B
2045 Design Year No Build
Delay (sec) 1.5 1.4 0.0 12.6
LOS A A A B
2045 Design Year Build
Delay (sec) 1.5 1.4 0.0 13.2
LOS A A A B
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 53 of 57
Table 50: Intersection 6 Scenario Comparison
Intersection 6 WEEKDAY AM PEAK
Wilkinson Lake Blvd &
South Access Wilkinson Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Existing (2024) Delay (sec)
LOS
2025 Opening Year No
Build
Delay (sec)
LOS
2025 Opening Year Build
Delay (sec) 1.8 0.0 2.6 8.8
LOS A A A A
2045 Design Year No Build Delay (sec)
LOS
2045 Design Year Build
Delay (sec) 1.9 0.0 2.8 8.8
LOS A A A A
Intersection 6 WEEKDAY PM PEAK
Wilkinson Lake Blvd &
South Access Wilkinson Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Existing (2024)
Delay (sec)
LOS
2025 Opening Year No
Build
Delay (sec)
LOS
2025 Opening Year Build
Delay (sec) 2.4 0.0 1.9 9.2
LOS A A A A
2045 Design Year No Build
Delay (sec)
LOS
2045 Design Year Build
Delay (sec) 2.5 0.0 2.1 9.2
LOS A A A A
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 54 of 57
Table 51: Intersection 7 Scenario Comparison
Intersection 7 WEEKDAY AM PEAK
CSAH 32/Ash St &
North Access Wilkinson Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Existing (2024)
Delay (sec)
LOS
2025 Opening Year No
Build
Delay (sec)
LOS
2025 Opening Year Build
Delay (sec) 0.2 0.0 0.1 9.5
LOS A A A A
2045 Design Year No Build
Delay (sec)
LOS
2045 Design Year Build
Delay (sec) 0.1 0.0 0.1 9.6
LOS A A A A
Intersection 7 WEEKDAY PM PEAK
CSAH 32/Ash St &
North Access Wilkinson Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Existing (2024)
Delay (sec)
LOS
2025 Opening Year No
Build
Delay (sec)
LOS
2025 Opening Year Build
Delay (sec) 0.2 0.0 0.2 10.4
LOS A A A B
2045 Design Year No Build
Delay (sec)
LOS
2045 Design Year Build
Delay (sec) 0.2 0.0 0.2 10.5
LOS A A A B
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 55 of 57
Table 52: Intersection 8 Scenario Comparison
Intersection 8 WEEKDAY AM PEAK
CSAH 32/Ash St &
East Access North Oaks
Farms
Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Existing (2024)
Delay (sec)
LOS
2025 Opening Year No
Build
Delay (sec)
LOS
2025 Opening Year Build
Delay (sec)
LOS
2045 Design Year No Build
Delay (sec)
LOS
2045 Design Year Build
Delay (sec) 0.3 10.2 0.0 0.1
LOS A B A A
Intersection 8 WEEKDAY PM PEAK
CSAH 32/Ash St &
East Access North Oaks
Farms
Overall
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R L T R L T R
Existing (2024)
Delay (sec)
LOS
2025 Opening Year No
Build
Delay (sec)
LOS
2025 Opening Year Build
Delay (sec)
LOS
2045 Design Year No Build
Delay (sec)
LOS
2045 Design Year Build
Delay (sec) 0.1 11.7 0.0 0.1
LOS A B A A
Principal Findings
As background traffic volumes, calculated using existing traffic volumes and assumed growth rates, increase, delay for most
movements is expected to increase. The construction of the planned roundabouts improves operations at Intersections 1 and 2.
All movements will experience a level of service of C or better at the study intersections in the future scenarios.
RIGHT-TURN WARRANT
NCHRP 457 methodology is utilized for the right-turn bay analysis. The warrant determines the need for a right-turn lane based
on the major roadway speed, the number of travel lanes, the volume along the major roadway, and the total amount of right -
turning vehicles from the major roadway. The need for the following right-turn lanes were evaluated:
• Eastbound right-turn lane at the Wilkinson area’s North Access (Intersection 7)
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 56 of 57
• Northbound right-turn lane at the North Oaks Farms area’s East Access (Intersection 8)
• Westbound right-turn lane at Monarch Way (Intersection 3)
• Eastbound right-turn lane at Monarch Way (Intersection 3)
• Westbound right-turn lane at Holly Drive (Intersection 5)
None of the above additional right-turn lanes are warranted. Right-turn lane warrant figures that plot expected traffic conditions
against warrant curves are provided in the Appendix Q.
LEFT-TURN WARRANT
NCHRP 457 methodology is also utilized for the left-turn bay analysis. The warrant determines the need of a left -turn lane base
on the major roadway speed, the number of travel lanes, the volume along the major roadway, and the total amount of left -turning
vehicles from the major roadway. The need for the following left-turn lanes were evaluated:
• Westbound left-turn lane at the Wilkinson area’s North Access (Intersection 7)
• Southbound left-turn lane at the North Oaks Farms area’s East Access (Intersection 8)
• Westbound left-turn lane at Monarch Way (Intersection 3)
• Eastbound left-turn lane at Monarch Way (Intersection 3)
• Eastbound left-turn lane at Holly Drive (Intersection 5)
The results of the warrant analysis is summarized in Table 53 below, and left-turn lane warrant figures that plot expected traffic
conditions against warrant curves are provided in the Appendix R.
Table 53: Left-Turn Lane Warrant Summary
Existing 2024 Design Year 2045 Build
Westbound left-turn at Intersection 7 N/A Not Warranted
Southbound left-turn at Intersection 8 N/A Not Warranted
Westbound left-turn at Intersection 3 N/A Not Warranted
Eastbound left-turn at Intersection 3 Not Warranted Not Warranted
Eastbound left-turn at Intersection 5 Warranted Warranted
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Page 57 of 57
CONCLUSIONS + RECOMMENDATIONS
The proposed residential and mixed-use developments along Ash Street in Anoka County may start operations as early as 2025
and is anticipated to be fully developed by 2045. The development area, 116 acres total, includes the Wilkinson development
and the North Oaks Farms development. The proposed development will include new accesses to the CSAH 32/Ash Street and
one access point to Wilkinson Lake Boulevard, a private roadway.
In the existing condition the southbound approach to the intersection CSAH 21 / Centerville Rd and CSAH J/Ash Street is opera ting
at a level of service F. All other movements are operation at a level of service D or better during the AM and PM peak hours. With
the planned reconstructions of CSH 21/Centerville Rd’s intersections with CSAH J/Ash Street and CSAH 32/Ash Street from stop-
controlled intersections to roundabouts, level of service improves. Level of service at all approaches in the future scenario s are a
level of service C or better during the AM and PM peak hours.
An eastbound left-turn lane at the intersection of CSAH 32/Ash Street and Holly Drive is warranted in all scenarios, including the
existing scenario. Although a left-turn lane is warranted, there have been no recorded crashes at that intersection during th e time
periods reviewed, and therefore constructing a left-turn lane at the Holly Drive is not required due to safety. No other right- or left-
turn lanes are warranted.
Anoka County is considering Ash Street for realignment. Higher than average crash rates along CSAH 32/Ash Street between
Monarch Way and CSAH 21/Centerville Road indicates a need for roadway geometry changes. Roadway realignment should be
designed with horizontal geometry, vertical geometry, and superelevation meeting standards provided in AASHTO’s A Policy on
Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, current edition. A suggested design speed is 45 MPH to provide a transition between
the 50 MPH posted speed limit section to the west on CSAH 32/Ash Street and the roundabout at the intersection of CSAH 32/Ash
Street and CSAH 21/Centerville Road. This suggested speed limit would also be consistent with the current speed zone per the
Anoka County highway speed zone map. A suggested maximum design superelevation rate (emax) is 6%. Highway easements
should be incorporated into proposed development plans for the County’s future use for roadway realignment.
The proposed developments should incorporate sidewalks and/or shared use paths within the developments to provide
pedestrian and bicyclist connectivity between residences, retail, the planned sidewalk and trail network along CSAH 32/Ash St reet
and CSAH 21/Centerville Rd, and the future CSAH 32/Ash Street roadway.
The planned intersection geometry and traffic control is sufficient to accommodate the opening year and design year vehicular
traffic. After the construction of the development, this report recommends that the study area be re -evaluated if growth projections
change.
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Appendix A
Appendix A: Wilkinson Preliminary Plan and North Oaks Farms Site
Concept
1
0
0
U
N
I
T
A
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
2
4
12
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
12
29
10
20
9
19
10
5
6
-
P
L
E
X
1
1
,
2
5
6
S
Q
.
F
T
.
6
-
P
L
E
X
1
1
,
2
5
6
S
Q
.
F
T
.
6
-
P
L
E
X
1
1
,
2
5
6
S
Q
.
F
T
.
3
6
-
P
L
E
X
1
1
,
2
5
6
S
Q
.
F
T
.
6
-
P
L
E
X
1
1
,
2
5
6
S
Q
.
F
T
.
4
-
P
L
E
X
7
,
8
4
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
4
-
P
L
E
X
7
,
8
4
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
4
-
P
L
E
X
7
,
8
4
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
9
16
6
-
P
L
E
X
1
1
,
2
5
6
S
Q
.
F
T
.
3
6
RETAIL
9,100 SQ. F
T
.
R
E
T
A
I
L
9,1
0
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
R
E
T
A
I
L
1
0
,
8
5
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
31
32
1
0
0
U
N
I
T
S
E
N
I
O
R
L
I
V
I
N
G
4
-
P
L
E
X
7
,
8
4
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
4
-
P
L
E
X
7
,
8
4
0
S
Q
.
F
T
.
WILKINSON LAKE BLVD
>>
>>
>
>
WILKINSON LAKE
INV 894.60
INV 893.98
40"± RCP
ELEC
WILKINSON LAKE
WILKINSON LAKE
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
I
I
I
I
I I I I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
>
>
>
>
<II
<II
<II<II<II
<II
<II<II<II<II
<II
<II
<II
<II
<II<II<II<II<II
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
I
I
I
I
I I I I I
I
I I I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I I I I
I
I I I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE
OE OE OE OE OE OE OE
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
P
O
N
D
N
W
L
=
X
1
0
0
Y
R
H
W
L
=
X
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
WET
WET
WET
WET
WET
WE
T
WET
WET
WE
T
WE
T
WET
W
E
T
W
E
T
WET
WE
T
WE
T
W
E
T
WE
T
WE
T
WE
T
W
E
T
WETWET
W
E
T
WE
T
WET
WET
W
E
T
W
E
T
W
E
T WE
T
WE
T
1.47 mph
Fastest Line Entry Speed too large
South Leg (South)
West Leg (West)
North Leg (North)
Ash / Centerville Roundabout
G
U
U FO
FO
U
FO
FO
U
UFO
MB
V
O
H
L
V
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
G
G
G
G
G
G
F
B
O
F
B
O
F
B
O
F
B
O
U
EX GGV
OHL OHL
G
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
O
H
L
U
U
G
U
U
U GU
G
U
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OHL OHL OHL OHL OHL
STM
STM
exposed storm pipe
OHL OHLOHLOHL OHL OHL OHL OHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHLOHL
V
G
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
WILKINSON LAKE BLVD
C
E
N
T
E
R
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
ASH STREET
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
WE
T
WET
WE
T
WET
WE
T
W
E
T
WILKINSON LAKE
AMELIA LAKE
>
>
>
>
>
<II<II<II<II<II
<II
<II
<II<II<II
<II
EX SAN MHR=912.07?I=896.35?
100 UN
I
T
A
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
15
29
11
26
16
17
2
1
ISGInc.comArchitecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning
DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 LINO LAKES DEVELOPMENTMASTER P-LINO LAKES MN\30671 PRODUCTION FILES\30671 CIVIL 3D\NON PRODUCTION DWGS\CONCEPTS-EXHIBITS\30671 CONCEPT 7A.DWG SAVED BY: JAMIE.STEINBORN
CONCEPT 7A N0
SCALE IN FEET
150 300
ISG PROJECT NO. 24-30671
WILKINSON WATERS DEVELOPMENT
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA - 07/22/2024
60' RIGHT OF WAY
15' PARKING SETBACK
40' BUILDING SETBACK
300' OWL SETBACK
(WILKINSON LAKE)
300' OWL SETBACK
(AMELIA LAKE)
1000' SHORELAND OVERLAY
(AMELIA LAKE)
1000' SHORELAND OVERLAY
(WILKINSON LAKE)
WE
T
WE
T
WET
W
E
T
W
E
T
W
E
T
WET
WET
W
E
T
W
E
T
WET
W
E
T
W
E
T
WE
T
WE
T
W
E
T
WE
T
WE
T
WET
WET
WET
WET
WE
T
WET
WET
W
E
T
W
E
T
W
E
T
W
E
T
G
G
I=895.23
I=895.22
OH
L
OH
L
STM
STM
STM
STM
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
OH
L
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
WET
WET
WET
WET
WET
WET
WET
WE
T
WE
T
WE
T
WET
WET
W
E
T
WET
WE
T
WET
WE
T
WE
T
WET
WET
W
E
T
WET
WE
T
W
E
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I I I I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I I I I I
5
0
'
C
I
T
Y
O
F
S
T
.
P
A
U
L
W
A
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
R
O
W
5
0
'
W
H
I
T
E
B
E
A
R
T
O
W
N
S
H
I
P
W
A
T
E
R
A
N
D
S
E
W
E
R
E
A
S
E
M
E
N
T
NORTH OAKS FARMS INC
34-31-22-43-0008
NORTH OAKS FARMS INC
34-31-22-43-0010
SHEAREN, WILLIAM R
34-31-22-43-0013
BURNS, KEVIN
34-31-22-43-0012
EDDY, ROGER B
6097 ASH ST.
34-31-22-34-0003
EDDY, VICTORIA A
34-31-22-43-0002
ROGALLA, SARA R
6063 ASH ST
34-31-22-34-0006
HANSON, SCOTT B
34-31-22-34-0005
NORTH OAKS FARMS INC
34-31-22-34-0001
10
0
'
60'
60
'
80'65'
130'
60
'
60'
60
'
65
'
80'
130'
ISGInc.comArchitecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning
DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 LINO LAKES DEVELOPMENTMASTER P-LINO LAKES MN\30671 PRODUCTION FILES\30671 CIVIL 3D\NON PRODUCTION DWGS\CONCEPTS-EXHIBITS\NORTH OAKS FARMS\30671 NORTH OAKS FARMS CONCEPT 1.DWG SAVED BY: LOGAN.HARMS
ISG PROJECT NO. 24-30671
NORTH OAKS FARMS DEVELOPMENT
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA - 10/02/24
CONCEPT 1 N0
SCALE IN FEET
80 160
WETWET
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Appendix B
Appendix B: Project Location Map
T31N
R22W
")49
")84
")249
")53
")81
")4A")140
56554
56514
5658
56549
56560
56523
5654
56523
5651
56521
56534
56514
56559
56512
56532
Lino Lakes
§¨¦35
§¨¦35E
§¨¦35W
§¨¦35W
§¨¦35E
123456
7 8 9 10 11 12
131415161718
19 20 21 22 23 24
252627282930
31 32 33 34 35 36
1
12
13
24
25
36
31 32 33 34 35 3636
2345612
6
7
18
19
30
31
31
Anoka
Washington
AnokaRamsey
AnokaAnokaCountyCounty
IsantiCounty ChisagoCountySherburneCounty
WrightCounty
AnokaCounty
Was hingtonCounty
HennepinCounty RamseyCounty
AnokaAnokaCountyCounty
0 0.90.45
Miles ¯Project Location Map
Wilkinson Water Development
Anoka C ounty, Minnesota1 in = 1 miles
Thursday, July 11, 2024
Source(s):
Municipalities (MN DOT, 6/24/2016)
Lakes (MN DNR, July, 2008)
Counties (MN DNR, July 2013)
PLSS (MnGeo/USGS)
Project Number 24-30671S:\Projects\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 Lino Lakes DevelopmentMaster P-Lino Lakes MN\30671 Production Files\30671 GIS\30671 MapDocs\30671 Location Map.mxd
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Appendix C
Appendix C: Intersection Map
H
O
L
L
Y
D
R
N
R
A
P
P
F
A
R
M
B
L
V
D
M
O
N
A
R
C
H
W
A
Y
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CE
N
T
E
R
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CSAH J/ASH ST
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning
ISGInc.com
DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 LINO LAKES DEVELOPMENTMASTER P-LINO LAKES MN\30671 PRODUCTION FILES\30671 CIVIL 3D\NON PRODUCTION DWGS\TRAFFIC\30671 APPENDICES.DWG SAVED BY: ROSANNA.NOVELLINO
ISG PROJECT NO. 24-30671
WILKINSON WATERS DEVELOPMENT
INTERSECTION MAP N
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA - 10/14/2024
1
2
345
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Appendix D
Appendix D: Existing Zoning and Future Land Use Maps
Lacasse Court
Cedar St W
Lacasse
Circle
Killdeer
Drive
D e li n aCircle
Pony Court
Glen
Circle
Albert
Court
R
e
d
Hawk
Trail
Velvetleaf Lane
L a m o t t e D r
Shadow Court
A qua
C
ir
P intoLa
n
e
Elmcrest
Ave
N
Fox Cove
Behm
Lane
KellySt
Oakvie w C o urt
Mustang Court
Arabian
Circle
Teckla Court
Black Duck Court
Eva
St
Trap p e r s C o u r t
G r a yHeron
Drive
Muskrat Run
Joseph
Court
HighlandCourt
W o o d D u c k T r ail
CoyoteCourt
M alla r d L a n e
Stageco achTrl
T
a
r
t
Court
Carpenter Place
Town Center P arkway
Gladstone Circle
PeregrineCir c l e
Fl o r a C o u rt
Sio u x L ane
Palomino
La
n
e
South
Glen Trail
CassiopeiaC ourt
Lea
Court
Caribou
Circle
Terra
Co
u
r
t
Appaloosa Court
ParkCt
Oak
C
ourt
Tele
Lane
20th
Ave
S
SnowOwlCircle
R
i
ceCourt
TimberwolfTrailB
lack
DuckCircle
81stStW
Pondv iew C i r c le
Apo
llo
Ct
Tra
p
p
e
r
s
C
rossingS
James Street
Post Road
Sunflower Lane
Partridg
e
Court
Lois Lane
Gordon
Avenue
N
C
entury
Trl
S
h
etland Ln
Painted
TurtleRoad
Egret La n e
BloomCourt
Linda Court
DurangoPoint
Northern LightsBlvd
Ch
o
ke cherry Road
Rohavic Lane
Heather
Cour
t
N
Schlavin Court
4th
Ave
2nd
Avenue
Antelope
Drive
Shelia
Ave
Mourning
Dove
Road
OakH ollow Lane
Kingfisher
Court
Sherwood Lane
Glenview Avenue
Buckthorn Lane
Parkview Drive
Danube
Street
Elm Street
Sunrise
Road
Fox Road
Diane Street
Cheroke
e
T
r
a
il
OspreyCourt
Deer Pass Trail
StellaLane
Ric
e
L
ake
Court
BeaverC
ircle
Ravens Court
Royal
Pines Place
Tomahawk
Trail
Beaver Trail
Totem
Trail
Barbara Lane
4th
Ave
A rt h u r Ct
Merganser
Court
LanternLane
Whitetail
Trail
MorganLn
Canfield Road
Oakwood
Drive
Tamarack Lane
Wo o d chuck Court
Lois Lane
Prairi
eFlower Road
Greenwood Lane
Red
BirchCourt
WhiteBirc h C o u r t
Praire View Place
Lantern C ir cl e
HollyDriveN
Black
Duck
Drive
S
Meadow
Court
O
akwoodLane
Pine St
Elm Street
Elmcrest
Ave
N
Red Clover Lane
IversonCou rt
Smoketree Lane
Wildflower Drive
Bradley Street
Century Trl
Fairmont Drive
MainSt
74th Street
RuffedGrou
s
e
Road
Tele Drive
2nd
Avenue
Blue H eron Drive
Aspe n L a n e
Palomino Lane
Gladstone Drive
Te
alC o urt
Glenview Drive
P
eltier
Lake
Drive
H
ollow
Lane
Jon
Avenue
Connie Lane
Highland Tr ail
Nordin
St
Hudson Tr ail
Laurene
Avenue
Birch
Court
W a r e R oad
Rondeau Lake Rd W
Forsham LakeDrive
BlackDuckDrive
Wild
Turke y Trail
64th Street
Pa rtridgePlace
Stella
Circle
Holly Drive E
White Owl
Drive
Cedar St E
Sherm
a
n
Lake
Road
S
iouxL o o k o u t
Coyote Trail
77th Street W
Marcia Lane
65thStreet
Blackbi
r
d
Lane
LakotaTrl
C h i p pewaT rail
79thStreetW
Lacasse
D
r
iv
e
Myrtle Lane
River BirchPla c e
Carl Street
Molitor Dr
Ru stic Lane
Cripple Cree kPass
Andall Street
MustangLan
e
TrappersXing
N
W
o
o
d
s
Edge
Blvd
F
a
wnLa
n
e
Ware
Road
F o x t a il Court
Ho
k
a
h
D
rive
H ighlandDrive
CountryLane
Arlo Lane
W
o
o
dchuck
Circle
Glenview
Lane
Lamotte Cir
Gaage
Lane
Kelly St
Oak Lane
ShadowLake
Drive
W
Whit e OakRoad
Lone s o m e Pine Trail
ElbeStreet
N
E
Sunrise
Road
Reili n g Road
Bluebill
Lane
Baldwin
Lake
Rd
San
d
h
i
ll
Dr
i
ve
Lilac St
Timberwolf Trail
Green Briar Drive
SargentCourtN
TartLake Ro a d
Maple St
Ulmer Drive
Hokah Drive
Linda Avenue
Cle
a
r
w
a
t
e
r
C
r
e
e
k
Dr
MarshanLane
FoxtailDrive
Pheasant
Run
S
62nd St
Hunters Ridge
Deerwood
Lane
Orange St
KnollDrive
81st St E
Linda Lane
A
u
g
u
st
C
ircle
Ojibway
Pa
Red Maple L ane
AenonPlace
F o x R oad
Talle
Lane
P
h
easant
H
ill
s
Drive
Evergreen Trail
F
ox
Circle
Arrowhead Drive
BaldEagleBoulevard
N
a
ncy
Driv
e
County Rd J
V illi a g e D riv e
12th
Ave
S
AppaloosaLane
White Pine Road
Karth Road
ClearwaterCreek
D
r
D eerwood La ne
Jeanne
Drive
81st St E
77thSt re e t W
Olive St
PattiDrive
MarilynDrive
Lakeview
Drive
Jane
Ave
Sunrise
Drive
Linden Lane
Phelps Road
Nottingham
Lane
Lakeview
Drive
WhippoorwillLane
HickoryP
la
c
e
C ry stal C o u rt
Vicky Lane
Rondeau
Lake
Rd
W
Thomas Street
Otter Lake Drive
Henry Lane
Stallion Lane
Snow
Owl
Lane
4th
Ave
W o o d l a n d D ri v e
Pelican
Place
Elle nC
o
urt
BaldEagleBoulevard
Count r y L a k e s D r i ve
Woodridge
L
a
n
e
Timothy
Ct
2
n
d
A
v
e
n
u
e
Ware
Road
Meadowview
Trail
Carole Drive
Lin d a Circle
Ronde a u L a k e R d E
Market Pla c e Drive
Red F o x R d
Robinson Dr
She r m anLakeRoad
S
h
a
d
o
w
L
a
k
e
D
riv
e
W
StoneybrookDriv e
Pine St
Black
Duck
Drive
RollingHillsD riv e
Rondeau LakeRdE
LangerLane
Leonard
Avenue
Rice
Lak
e
Lane
Rice
Lake
Drive
Diane Court
Holly Court E
Apollo Dr
Service Road
Marvy Street
Joyer
Lane
Hawthorn Road
Rehbein Street
77th Street E
ShadowLakeDriveE
Oak Lane
Old Birch Street
62nd St N
Elmcrest
Ave
N
County
Rd
53
4th
Ave
Vaughan
Court
W
o
o
d
D
u
c
k
T
r
a
il
S h a d o w Lake Drive W
Holly
Drive
N
4th
Ave
Holly Drive E
Aqua Ln
Mead
o
wv
iew
Cour
t
Meadowlark
Court
GoldenrodCircle
Woodrid g e C o u rt
Sunfish
Court
Quarter
Horse
Court
Broken Oak Court
Clydesdale
Circle
Wolf Cir cle
Grey
Squirrel
Road
S a n dpiperDrive
CrippleCreekCourt
Sed geCourt
R u ffedG r o u s e C o u r t
Tomaha
w
k
C
o
u
r
t
Timberwolf Ci
r
c
l
e
Shadow
Lake
Court
E
Whitetail
Ridge
MineralP o i nt
County Rd J
D eerw ood Circle
HighlandCircle
Killdeer Court
H
artford
Circle
LangerCircle
Clearwater Creek Circl
Arro
w
head
C
ourt
IronwoodCircle
20th
Ave
N
Ash St W
80th St E
Sunset
Ave
Main St
20thAveS
Goiffon
R
d
Sunset
Ave
Main St
LakeDrNE
CentervilleRd
Lilac St
Main St
Lilac St
Birch St
North Rd
20th
Ave
S
Ash St Ash St
H
o
d
g
s
o
n
Rd
Birch St
Hodgson
Rd
Apollo Dr
LakeDrNE
LakeDr
Centerville
Rd
20thAveN
A p olloDr
L a k e Dr
County Rd J
Sunset
Ave
Birc h S t
OtterLake Drive
O tt e r L a k e D riv e
Main St
Ash St
Main St
Birch St
Sn
o
w
G
o
o
s
e
T
r
a
i
l
Marshan Ct
Sav. Ct
RICE
C
R
E
E
K
C
H
A
I
N
O
F
L
A
K
E
S
R
E
G
I
O
N
A
L
P
A
R
K
R
E
S
E
R
V
E
Cit
y
o
f
Ce
n
t
e
r
v
i
l
l
e
RONDEAU LAKE (2-15)
FIRM BFE 888
FIS BFE 887.6
OTTER LAKE (2-3)
OHWL 911.5
FIRM BFE 913
FIS BFE 912.7
BALD EAGLE LAKE (62-2)
OHWL 911.0
FIRM BFE 913
FIS BFE 912.5
AMELIA LAKE (2-14)
OHWL 908.1
FIRM BFE 910
FIS BFE 910.2
BALDWIN LAKE (2-13)
OHWL 883.1
FIRM BFE 887
FIS BFE 887.0
RESHANAU LAKE (2-9)
OHWL 883.5
FIRM BFE 887
FIS BFE 887.0
RICE LAKE (2-8)
OHWL 883.1
FIRM BFE 887
FIS BFE 887.0
CENTERVILLE LAKE (2-6)
OHWL 885.0
FIRM BFE 888
FIS BFE 887.9
MARSHAN LAKE (2-7)
OHWL 883.3
FIRM BFE 887
FIS BFE 887.0
PELTIER LAKE (2-4)
OHWL 884.7
FIRM BFE 888
FIS BFE 887.7
WARDS LAKE (2-10)
OHWL 883.7
CEDAR LAKE (2-12)
OHWL 892.9
WILKINSON LAKE (62-43)
OHWL 895.2
SHERMAN LAKE (2-11)
GEORGE WATCH LAKE (2-5)
UNNAMED (2-1)
Ord. 11-95
Ord. 22-97
Ord.
08-95
Ord. 17-03
Ord.
04-04
Ord.
09-88
Ord.
12-03
Ord. 93-10
Ord.
08-90
Ord. 94-14
Ord.
08-02
Ord.
01-14
Ord.
12-04
Ord.
07-16
Ord.
92-15
Ord. 04-16
Ord.
05-18
Ord. 08-99
Ord.
12-18
Ord. 20-03
Ord.
14-99
Ord.
09-99
Ord. 06-14
Ord. 06-91
Ord.
02-14
Ord. 16-01
Ord. 03-05
Ord.
05-03Ord.
26-04
Ord.
03-00
Ord.
06-18
PSP
PSP
PSP
PSP
PSP
GI
LI
LI
GB
GB
GB
R-6
R-4
R-3
R-3
R-3
R-2
R-1X
R-1X
R-1X
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-X
R-X
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
PSPOrd. 12-99
456721
456749
456754
456723
456749
456714
456754
456723
456721
456721
456714456714
")53
")153
")140
")84
")84
§¨¦35E
§¨¦35W
6300
6400
6600
6500
7100
6700
8400
8300
6800
8200
8100
6900
7600
7700
7500
7300
7800
7400
7900
7000
7200
8000
6100
6700
7100
6300
6500
8400
6600
8300
8200
6200
6900
7800
6000
6800
6400
8100
7600
7700
7500
7300
7400
7900
7000
7200
8000
90
0
12
0
0
13
0
0
14
0
0
15
0
0
16
0
0
70
0
11
0
0
40
0
10
0
0
60
0
50
0
80
0
17
0
0
18
0
0
19
0
0
20
0
0
30
0
21
0
0
20
0
0
22
0
0
10
0
23
0
0
24
0
0
24
0
0
22
0
0
21
0
0
19
0
0
17
0
0
16
0
0
14
0
0
12
0
0
10
0
0
80
0
60
0
40
0
30
0
20
0
10
0
0 23
0
0
20
0
0
18
0
0
13
0
0
11
0
0
90
0
70
0
50
0
Zoning Map of Lino Lakes
Lino Lakes
Community Development
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, Minnesota 55014
Phone (651) 982-2400
City of Shoreview City of North Oaks White Bear Township
City of Columbus
Ci
t
y
o
f
B
l
a
i
n
e
Ci
t
y
o
f
H
u
g
o
:
Legend
ZONING
R Rural
R-X Rural Executive
R-1 Single Family Residential
R-1X Single Family Executive
R-2 Two Family Residential
R-3 Medium Density Residential
R-4 High Density Residential
R-5 High Density Residential and Business
R-6 Manufactured Home Park
NB Neighborhood Business
LB Limited Business
GB General Business
LI Light Industrial
GI General Industrial
BC Business Campus
PSP Public Semi-Public
PUD Planned Unit Development
Maps are for illustrative purposes only.
Recent changes may not be included.
Land Use and Zoning Information
should be verified with City Staff.
0 2,000 4,0001,000
DRAWING SCALE IN FEET
Ci
t
y
o
f
C
i
r
c
l
e
P
i
n
e
s
Updated Through Ord. No. 08-22
Effective January 5, 2023
Coordinate System: Anoka County NAD83 Feet
Lambert Conformal Conic
od
d
ev
e
n
odd
even
HOUSE NUMBERING SYSTEM
Anoka County Parcel Data: April 2023 Release
Development Area
3-5
Figure 3-1� Full Build Land Use
Baldw in Lake
Rondeau
Lake
Bald
Eagle
Lake
Wilkinson
Lake
Otter Lake
Amel ia
Lake
Reshanau LakeRice Lake
Centerville
Lake
Marshan Lake
George
Watch
Lake
Peltier Lake
Cedar Lake
Li la c S t
20th Ave S
456721
456749
456754
456721
456749
456714
456754
456714
456723
456721
456721
456714456714
20th Ave
20th Ave
§¨¦35E
§¨¦35W
")153
")140
")84
")84
M ai n St
Main St
M ai n S t
Cedar St
Hodgson
Rd
Lake Dr
Elm St
Birch St
Birc h St
Lake Dr
Sunset Ave
Rondeau
Lake Dr E
As h St
Oak Ln
Apollo Dr
62nd St N
Ash St
Rondeau
Lake Rd W
Centervi
ll
e
Rd
Holl
y Dr
4th Ave
Holly Dr E
Birch St
80th St E
64th St
City of Blaine
City of Columbus
City of Hugo
City of North Oaks White Bear Township ´
Fig ure 3-1
Full Build O ut Land Use
Legend
City of Centerville
Permanent Rural
Low Den sity Reside ntia l
Low Den sity Mixed Residential
Me dium De nsity Resid ential
High Den sity Reside ntial
Plann ed Resid ential / Commercial
Office Residentia l
Signa tur e G ateway District
Commercia l
Town Center
Business Campus
Ind ustrial
Civic and In stitutional
Parks and Open Sp ace
Private Airfield
Open Water
Rig ht-of-Wa y
Municipal Boundary
Parcels
Streams
3,500 0 3,5001,750 Feet Date: 2/7/2 01911/9/2020
Development Area
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Appendix E
Appendix E: Existing and Planned Intersection Control Exhibits
H
O
L
L
Y
D
R
N
R
A
P
P
F
A
R
M
B
L
V
D
M
O
N
A
R
C
H
W
A
Y
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CE
N
T
E
R
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CSAH J/ASH ST
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning
ISGInc.com
DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 LINO LAKES DEVELOPMENTMASTER P-LINO LAKES MN\30671 PRODUCTION FILES\30671 CIVIL 3D\NON PRODUCTION DWGS\TRAFFIC\30671 APPENDICES.DWG SAVED BY: ROSANNA.NOVELLINO
EXISTING INTERSECTION CONTROL 0
SCALE IN FEET
2000 4000 N
STUDY INTERSECTIONX
ISG PROJECT NO. 24-30671
WILKINSON WATERS DEVELOPMENT
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA - 10/14/2024
345 1
2
H
O
L
L
Y
D
R
N
R
A
P
P
F
A
R
M
B
L
V
D
M
O
N
A
R
C
H
W
A
Y
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CE
N
T
E
R
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CSAH J/ASH ST
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning
ISGInc.com
DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 LINO LAKES DEVELOPMENTMASTER P-LINO LAKES MN\30671 PRODUCTION FILES\30671 CIVIL 3D\NON PRODUCTION DWGS\TRAFFIC\30671 APPENDICES.DWG SAVED BY: ROSANNA.NOVELLINO
PROPOSED INTERSECTION CONTROL 0
SCALE IN FEET
2000 4000 N
STUDY INTERSECTIONX
ISG PROJECT NO. 24-30671
WILKINSON WATERS DEVELOPMENT
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA - 10/14/2024
Roundabout
Yield
Roundabout
Yield
345 1
27
6
8
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Appendix F
Appendix F: Existing (2024) Peak Hour Turning Movement Volume
Diagrams
H
O
L
L
Y
D
R
N
R
A
P
P
F
A
R
M
B
L
V
D
M
O
N
A
R
C
H
W
A
Y
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CE
N
T
E
R
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CSAH J/ASH ST
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning
ISGInc.com
DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 LINO LAKES DEVELOPMENTMASTER P-LINO LAKES MN\30671 PRODUCTION FILES\30671 CIVIL 3D\NON PRODUCTION DWGS\TRAFFIC\30671 APPENDICES.DWG SAVED BY: ROSANNA.NOVELLINO
EXISTING TURNING MOVEMENT DIAGRAM 0
SCALE IN FEET
2000 4000 N
STUDY INTERSECTIONX
WEEKDAY AM
WEEKDAY PM
X 1418
X XX
194
16
X
353
79
X
192
17
X
107
5
X
X XX
X 1226
X XX
X 1714
194
X
9
336
X
32
190
X
18
75
X
11
X 1935
X XX
18932911
23817419
13
354
54
30
18
9
8
1
3
18
141
97
75 2613
21035610
282 X22
405 X192
X
X
X
X
51
295
X
25
193
X
X
X
139 X73
385 X19
X XX
X 116
197
X
13
339
X
14
200
X
5
80
X
7
X 209
X XX
345 1
2
ISG PROJECT NO. 24-30671
WILKINSON WATERS DEVELOPMENT
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA - 10/14/2024
Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume
LOCATION: LOCATION: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd -- CSAH J/Ash St QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 16678403
CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: Lino Lakes, MN DATE: DATE: Thu, Jul 18 2024
576 217
10 210 356
41 1 141 256
8 0.920.92 18
12 3 97 390
13 75 26
310 114
Peak-Hour: 7:30 AM -- 8:30 AMPeak-Hour: 7:30 AM -- 8:30 AM
Peak 15-Min: 7:45 AM -- 8:00 AMPeak 15-Min: 7:45 AM -- 8:00 AM
3.1 6.9
10 3.8 2.5
7.3 0 9.9 7.8
37.5 0
25 0 6.2 3.8
15.4 1.3 11.5
4.5 5.3
0
0 0
0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1 0
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At
CSAH 21/Centerville RdCSAH 21/Centerville Rd
(Northbound)(Northbound)
CSAH 21/Centerville RdCSAH 21/Centerville Rd
(Southbound)(Southbound)
CSAH J/Ash StCSAH J/Ash St
(Eastbound)(Eastbound)
CSAH J/Ash StCSAH J/Ash St
(Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU
6:00 AM 0 11 5 0 48 31 2 0 1 5 1 0 5 3 11 0 123
6:15 AM 3 9 2 0 60 24 3 0 0 2 0 0 18 0 11 0 132
6:30 AM 1 8 6 0 80 36 2 0 1 0 0 0 33 0 13 0 180
6:45 AM 3 19 2 0 86 44 2 0 0 0 0 0 43 2 22 0 223 658
7:00 AM 2 13 5 0 98 41 1 0 0 4 1 0 21 4 23 0 213 748
7:15 AM 2 10 9 0 100 24 5 0 0 3 0 0 15 4 19 0 191 807
7:30 AM 2 17 11 0 107 50 0 0 1 1 0 0 25 3 32 0 249 876
7:45 AM 4 14 7 0 88 61 3 0 0 3 1 0 29 8 42 0 260 913
8:00 AM 4 18 3 0 73 54 6 0 0 2 1 0 18 5 35 0 219 919
8:15 AM 3 26 5 0 88 45 1 0 0 2 1 0 25 2 32 0 230 958
8:30 AM 1 24 9 0 95 37 0 0 2 1 1 0 10 3 35 0 218 927
8:45 AM 3 30 8 0 68 45 2 0 0 0 1 0 16 2 25 0 200 867
Peak 15-MinPeak 15-MinFlowratesFlowrates
NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU
All Vehicles 16 56 28 0 352 244 12 0 0 12 4 0 116 32 168 0 1040
Heavy Trucks 4 0 4 0 12 4 0 4 0 8 0 20 56
Buses
Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0
Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Scooters
Comments:
Report generated on 7/22/2024 9:00 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212
Page 1 of 1
Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume
LOCATION: LOCATION: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd -- CSAH J/Ash St QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 16678404
CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: Lino Lakes, MN DATE: DATE: Thu, Jul 18 2024
529 610
11 189 329
43 18 354 421
30 0.920.92 13
57 9 54 533
19 238 174
252 431
Peak-Hour: 4:15 PM -- 5:15 PMPeak-Hour: 4:15 PM -- 5:15 PM
Peak 15-Min: 4:30 PM -- 4:45 PMPeak 15-Min: 4:30 PM -- 4:45 PM
2.5 1
0 1.6 3
0 0 1.4 2.1
0 0
0 0 7.4 2.3
0 0.4 1.1
2.8 0.7
0
0 0
0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At
CSAH 21/Centerville RdCSAH 21/Centerville Rd
(Northbound)(Northbound)
CSAH 21/Centerville RdCSAH 21/Centerville Rd
(Southbound)(Southbound)
CSAH J/Ash StCSAH J/Ash St
(Eastbound)(Eastbound)
CSAH J/Ash StCSAH J/Ash St
(Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU
3:30 PM 4 68 69 0 82 49 2 0 3 6 4 0 15 1 84 0 387
3:45 PM 4 61 32 0 84 50 3 0 2 4 2 0 14 5 87 0 348
4:00 PM 5 63 39 0 81 35 0 0 7 7 8 0 13 7 79 0 344
4:15 PM 5 59 43 0 79 32 1 0 6 9 3 0 13 2 100 0 352 1431
4:30 PM 5 70 59 0 87 45 2 0 5 9 2 0 15 2 89 0 390 1434
4:45 PM 5 46 41 0 83 55 3 0 3 7 3 0 17 4 83 0 350 1436
5:00 PM 4 63 31 0 80 57 5 0 4 5 1 0 9 5 82 0 346 1438
5:15 PM 2 62 19 0 90 61 3 0 1 3 2 0 6 3 88 0 340 1426
5:30 PM 7 54 18 0 85 47 3 0 2 3 1 0 10 4 84 0 318 1354
5:45 PM 6 60 22 0 75 52 8 0 5 6 4 0 9 6 92 0 345 1349
6:00 PM 4 44 18 0 63 37 1 0 3 8 3 0 6 4 67 0 258 1261
6:15 PM 3 34 17 0 76 34 5 0 2 6 1 0 10 7 65 0 260 1181
Peak 15-MinPeak 15-MinFlowratesFlowrates
NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU
All Vehicles 20 280 236 0 348 180 8 0 20 36 8 0 60 8 356 0 1560
Heavy Trucks 0 0 8 8 8 0 0 0 0 4 0 8 36
Buses
Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0
Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Scooters
Comments:
Report generated on 7/22/2024 9:00 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212
Page 1 of 1
Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume
LOCATION: LOCATION: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd -- CSAH 32/Ash St QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 16678401
CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: Lino Lakes, MN DATE: DATE: Thu, Jul 18 2024
404 164
19 385 0
92 25 0 0
0 0.950.95 0
218 193 0 0
73 139 0
578 212
Peak-Hour: 7:30 AM -- 8:30 AMPeak-Hour: 7:30 AM -- 8:30 AM
Peak 15-Min: 7:30 AM -- 7:45 AMPeak 15-Min: 7:30 AM -- 7:45 AM
3.2 3.7
21.1 2.3 0
13 4 0 0
0 0
5 5.2 0 0
11 3.6 0
3.3 6.1
0
0 0
0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0 0
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At
CSAH 21/Centerville RdCSAH 21/Centerville Rd
(Northbound)(Northbound)
CSAH 21/Centerville RdCSAH 21/Centerville Rd
(Southbound)(Southbound)
CSAH 32/Ash StCSAH 32/Ash St
(Eastbound)(Eastbound)
CSAH 32/Ash StCSAH 32/Ash St
(Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU
6:00 AM 7 15 0 0 0 53 0 0 1 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 102
6:15 AM 5 17 0 0 0 69 1 0 4 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 118
6:30 AM 4 16 0 0 0 82 3 0 11 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 156
6:45 AM 13 30 0 0 0 79 1 0 9 0 49 0 0 0 0 0 181 557
7:00 AM 12 23 0 0 0 94 1 0 3 0 45 0 0 0 0 0 178 633
7:15 AM 7 25 0 0 0 84 3 0 11 0 42 0 0 0 0 0 172 687
7:30 AM 12 35 0 0 0 114 5 0 6 0 48 0 0 0 0 0 220 751
7:45 AM 23 30 0 0 0 98 5 0 6 0 51 0 0 0 0 0 213 783
8:00 AM 15 40 0 0 0 83 2 0 4 0 52 0 0 0 0 0 196 801
8:15 AM 23 34 0 0 0 90 7 0 9 0 42 0 0 0 0 0 205 834
8:30 AM 18 44 0 0 0 86 3 0 16 0 41 0 0 0 0 0 208 822
8:45 AM 20 32 0 0 0 72 3 0 12 0 41 0 0 0 0 0 180 789
Peak 15-MinPeak 15-MinFlowratesFlowrates
NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU
All Vehicles 48 140 0 0 0 456 20 0 24 0 192 0 0 0 0 0 880
Heavy Trucks 4 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 24
Buses
Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0
Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Scooters
Comments:
Report generated on 7/22/2024 9:00 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212
Page 1 of 1
Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume
LOCATION: LOCATION: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd -- CSAH 32/Ash St QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 16678402
CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: Lino Lakes, MN DATE: DATE: Thu, Jul 18 2024
304 456
22 282 0
214 51 0 0
0 0.950.95 0
346 295 0 0
192 405 0
577 597
Peak-Hour: 4:30 PM -- 5:30 PMPeak-Hour: 4:30 PM -- 5:30 PM
Peak 15-Min: 4:30 PM -- 4:45 PMPeak 15-Min: 4:30 PM -- 4:45 PM
1.3 1.8
4.5 1.1 0
1.4 2 0 0
0 0
2 2 0 0
1 1.7 0
1.6 1.5
0
0 0
0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At
CSAH 21/Centerville RdCSAH 21/Centerville Rd
(Northbound)(Northbound)
CSAH 21/Centerville RdCSAH 21/Centerville Rd
(Southbound)(Southbound)
CSAH 32/Ash StCSAH 32/Ash St
(Eastbound)(Eastbound)
CSAH 32/Ash StCSAH 32/Ash St
(Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU
3:30 PM 48 107 0 0 0 72 6 0 14 0 65 0 0 0 0 0 312
3:45 PM 48 104 0 0 0 73 5 0 14 0 58 0 0 0 0 0 302
4:00 PM 50 98 0 0 0 54 4 0 5 0 66 0 0 0 0 0 277
4:15 PM 41 118 0 0 0 50 7 0 16 0 59 0 0 0 0 0 291 1182
4:30 PM 45 117 0 0 0 64 7 0 13 0 83 0 0 0 0 0 329 1199
4:45 PM 52 82 0 0 0 56 6 0 15 0 70 0 0 0 0 0 281 1178
5:00 PM 44 106 0 0 0 84 7 0 11 0 77 0 0 0 0 0 329 1230
5:15 PM 51 100 0 0 0 78 2 0 12 0 65 0 0 0 0 0 308 1247
5:30 PM 34 106 0 0 0 64 6 0 21 0 74 0 0 0 0 0 305 1223
5:45 PM 45 111 0 0 0 72 8 0 15 0 53 0 0 0 0 0 304 1246
6:00 PM 32 85 0 0 0 55 6 0 11 0 48 0 0 0 0 0 237 1154
6:15 PM 27 75 0 0 0 68 3 0 10 0 49 0 0 0 0 0 232 1078
Peak 15-MinPeak 15-MinFlowratesFlowrates
NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU
All Vehicles 180 468 0 0 0 256 28 0 52 0 332 0 0 0 0 0 1316
Heavy Trucks 0 8 0 0 8 0 4 0 8 0 0 0 28
Buses
Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0
Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Scooters
Comments:
Report generated on 7/22/2024 9:00 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212
Page 1 of 1
Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume
LOCATION: LOCATION: Monarch Way -- CSAH J/Ash St QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 16678405
CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: North Oaks, MN DATE: DATE: Thu, Jul 18 2024
0 0
0 0 0
89 0 0 87
200 0.960.96 80
205 5 7 220
9 0 20
12 29
Peak-Hour: 8:00 AM -- 9:00 AMPeak-Hour: 8:00 AM -- 9:00 AM
Peak 15-Min: 8:45 AM -- 9:00 AMPeak 15-Min: 8:45 AM -- 9:00 AM
0 0
0 0 0
11.2 0 0 11.5
6 11.3
6.3 20 14.3 5.5
11.1 0 0
16.7 3.4
0
0 0
0
0 0 0
0 0
1 0
0 1
0 0 0
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At
Monarch WayMonarch Way
(Northbound)(Northbound)
Monarch WayMonarch Way
(Southbound)(Southbound)
CSAH J/Ash StCSAH J/Ash St
(Eastbound)(Eastbound)
CSAH J/Ash StCSAH J/Ash St
(Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU
6:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 0 0 7 0 0 33
6:15 AM 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 0 0 0 6 0 0 40
6:30 AM 4 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 47 0 0 1 5 0 0 60
6:45 AM 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 53 0 0 1 13 0 0 70 203
7:00 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 47 1 0 0 12 0 0 62 232
7:15 AM 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 0 0 2 11 0 0 68 260
7:30 AM 6 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 0 0 0 16 0 0 74 274
7:45 AM 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 0 0 2 25 0 0 80 284
8:00 AM 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 54 1 0 1 16 0 0 77 299
8:15 AM 1 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 2 0 1 24 0 0 79 310
8:30 AM 4 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 1 0 2 20 0 0 81 317
8:45 AM 4 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 1 0 3 20 0 0 84 321
Peak 15-MinPeak 15-Min
FlowratesFlowrates
NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU
All Vehicles 16 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 200 4 0 12 80 0 0 336
Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 4 0 20
Buses
Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0
Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 4
Scooters
Comments:
Report generated on 7/22/2024 9:00 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212
Page 1 of 1
Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume
LOCATION: LOCATION: Monarch Way -- CSAH J/Ash St QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 16678406
CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: North Oaks, MN DATE: DATE: Thu, Jul 18 2024
0 0
0 0 0
203 0 0 210
339 0.870.87 197
353 14 13 350
6 0 11
27 17
Peak-Hour: 4:30 PM -- 5:30 PMPeak-Hour: 4:30 PM -- 5:30 PM
Peak 15-Min: 4:30 PM -- 4:45 PMPeak 15-Min: 4:30 PM -- 4:45 PM
0 0
0 0 0
1.5 0 0 1.4
1.8 1.5
1.7 0 0 2
0 0 9.1
0 5.9
0
0 0
0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At
Monarch WayMonarch Way
(Northbound)(Northbound)
Monarch WayMonarch Way
(Southbound)(Southbound)
CSAH J/Ash StCSAH J/Ash St
(Eastbound)(Eastbound)
CSAH J/Ash StCSAH J/Ash St
(Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU
3:30 PM 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 73 2 0 2 47 0 0 130
3:45 PM 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 68 4 0 2 42 0 0 119
4:00 PM 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 68 1 0 4 58 0 0 137
4:15 PM 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 72 4 0 3 44 0 0 127 513
4:30 PM 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 105 3 0 2 51 0 0 166 549
4:45 PM 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 78 3 0 3 52 0 0 138 568
5:00 PM 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 80 5 0 2 50 0 0 140 571
5:15 PM 3 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 76 3 0 6 44 0 0 136 580
5:30 PM 4 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 89 3 0 4 36 0 0 139 553
5:45 PM 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 61 4 0 5 46 0 0 123 538
6:00 PM 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 54 4 0 3 36 0 0 100 498
6:15 PM 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 53 2 0 2 27 0 0 93 455
Peak 15-MinPeak 15-MinFlowratesFlowrates
NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU
All Vehicles 4 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 420 12 0 8 204 0 0 664
Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 8
Buses
Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0
Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Scooters
Comments:
Report generated on 7/22/2024 9:00 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212
Page 1 of 1
Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume
LOCATION: LOCATION: Rapp Farm Blvd -- CSAH J/Ash St QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 16678407
CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: North Oaks, MN DATE: DATE: Thu, Jul 18 2024
0 0
0 0 0
110 0 0 86
190 0.850.85 75
208 18 11 209
35 0 19
29 54
Peak-Hour: 8:00 AM -- 9:00 AMPeak-Hour: 8:00 AM -- 9:00 AM
Peak 15-Min: 8:30 AM -- 8:45 AMPeak 15-Min: 8:30 AM -- 8:45 AM
0 0
0 0 0
5.5 0 0 8.1
6.3 6.7
5.8 0 18.2 5.7
2.9 0 0
6.9 1.9
0
0 0
0
0 0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0 0
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At
Rapp Farm BlvdRapp Farm Blvd
(Northbound)(Northbound)
Rapp Farm BlvdRapp Farm Blvd
(Southbound)(Southbound)
CSAH J/Ash StCSAH J/Ash St
(Eastbound)(Eastbound)
CSAH J/Ash StCSAH J/Ash St
(Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU
6:00 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 1 5 0 0 29
6:15 AM 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 1 0 0 10 0 0 45
6:30 AM 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 0 0 0 7 0 0 60
6:45 AM 3 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 3 0 0 14 0 0 72 206
7:00 AM 5 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 2 0 1 13 0 0 68 245
7:15 AM 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 43 3 0 1 12 0 0 65 265
7:30 AM 5 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 1 0 1 19 0 0 75 280
7:45 AM 7 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 1 0 3 26 0 0 82 290
8:00 AM 7 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 3 0 1 14 0 0 81 303
8:15 AM 5 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 2 0 4 18 0 0 77 315
8:30 AM 17 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 5 0 3 23 0 0 102 342
8:45 AM 6 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 8 0 3 20 0 0 88 348
Peak 15-MinPeak 15-MinFlowratesFlowrates
NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU
All Vehicles 68 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 192 20 0 12 92 0 0 408
Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 4 0 12
Buses
Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0
Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Scooters
Comments:
Report generated on 7/22/2024 9:00 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212
Page 1 of 1
Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume
LOCATION: LOCATION: Rapp Farm Blvd -- CSAH J/Ash St QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 16678408
CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: North Oaks, MN DATE: DATE: Thu, Jul 18 2024
0 0
0 0 0
208 0 0 203
336 0.900.90 194
368 32 9 353
14 0 17
41 31
Peak-Hour: 4:15 PM -- 5:15 PMPeak-Hour: 4:15 PM -- 5:15 PM
Peak 15-Min: 4:30 PM -- 4:45 PMPeak 15-Min: 4:30 PM -- 4:45 PM
0 0
0 0 0
1.9 0 0 2
2.4 1.5
2.2 0 11.1 2.8
7.1 0 11.8
2.4 9.7
0
0 0
0
0 0 0
0 0
3 3
0 0
0 0 0
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At
Rapp Farm BlvdRapp Farm Blvd
(Northbound)(Northbound)
Rapp Farm BlvdRapp Farm Blvd
(Southbound)(Southbound)
CSAH J/Ash StCSAH J/Ash St
(Eastbound)(Eastbound)
CSAH J/Ash StCSAH J/Ash St
(Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU
3:30 PM 7 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 68 4 0 3 46 0 0 132
3:45 PM 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 74 4 0 1 42 0 0 129
4:00 PM 4 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 6 0 6 51 0 0 132
4:15 PM 3 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 75 5 0 1 49 0 0 138 531
4:30 PM 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 105 7 0 2 50 0 0 168 567
4:45 PM 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 78 10 0 4 50 0 0 148 586
5:00 PM 5 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 78 10 0 2 45 0 0 148 602
5:15 PM 3 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 72 6 0 9 42 0 0 137 601
5:30 PM 7 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 87 7 0 3 38 0 0 146 579
5:45 PM 7 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 63 9 0 12 36 0 0 132 563
6:00 PM 5 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 54 5 0 8 33 0 0 109 524
6:15 PM 4 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 52 9 0 5 22 0 0 95 482
Peak 15-MinPeak 15-MinFlowratesFlowrates
NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU
All Vehicles 8 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 420 28 0 8 200 0 0 672
Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 8
Buses
Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0
Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Scooters
Comments:
Report generated on 7/22/2024 9:00 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212
Page 1 of 1
Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume
LOCATION: LOCATION: Holly Dr -- CSAH J/Ash St QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 16678409
CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: Saint Paul, MN DATE: DATE: Thu, Jul 18 2024
38 22
26 0 12
133 17 5 112
192 0.850.85 107
209 0 0 205
0 0 1
0 1
Peak-Hour: 8:00 AM -- 9:00 AMPeak-Hour: 8:00 AM -- 9:00 AM
Peak 15-Min: 8:30 AM -- 8:45 AMPeak 15-Min: 8:30 AM -- 8:45 AM
10.5 4.5
11.5 0 8.3
8.3 5.9 0 7.1
6.3 7.5
6.2 0 0 6.3
0 0 0
0 0
0
0 0
0
0 0 1
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0 0
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At
Holly DrHolly Dr
(Northbound)(Northbound)
Holly DrHolly Dr
(Southbound)(Southbound)
CSAH J/Ash StCSAH J/Ash St
(Eastbound)(Eastbound)
CSAH J/Ash StCSAH J/Ash St
(Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU
6:00 AM 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 3 21 0 0 0 5 0 0 34
6:15 AM 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 0 0 27 0 0 0 10 0 0 43
6:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 44 0 0 0 11 1 0 64
6:45 AM 0 0 0 0 2 0 6 0 2 48 0 0 0 15 2 0 75 216
7:00 AM 0 0 1 0 4 0 9 0 3 44 0 0 0 15 2 0 78 260
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 5 0 9 0 4 41 0 0 0 14 0 0 73 290
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 5 0 14 0 3 45 0 0 0 24 1 0 92 318
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 6 0 9 0 4 34 0 0 0 31 1 0 85 328
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 3 0 9 0 0 44 0 0 0 22 2 0 80 330
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 5 0 3 0 6 43 0 0 0 22 1 0 80 337
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 4 0 9 0 5 49 0 0 0 38 1 0 106 351
8:45 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 0 6 56 0 0 0 25 1 0 94 360
Peak 15-MinPeak 15-MinFlowratesFlowrates
NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU
All Vehicles 0 0 0 0 16 0 36 0 20 196 0 0 0 152 4 0 424
Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 8 4 8 0 0 4 0 24
Buses
Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0
Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Scooters
Comments:
Report generated on 7/22/2024 9:00 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212
Page 1 of 1
Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume
LOCATION: LOCATION: Holly Dr -- CSAH J/Ash St QC JOB #: QC JOB #: 16678410
CITY/STATE: CITY/STATE: Saint Paul, MN DATE: DATE: Thu, Jul 18 2024
32 95
18 0 14
212 79 16 210
353 0.900.90 194
432 0 0 367
0 0 0
0 0
Peak-Hour: 4:15 PM -- 5:15 PMPeak-Hour: 4:15 PM -- 5:15 PM
Peak 15-Min: 4:30 PM -- 4:45 PMPeak 15-Min: 4:30 PM -- 4:45 PM
0 0
0 0 0
1.9 0 0 1.9
2.5 2.1
2.1 0 0 2.5
0 0 0
0 0
0
0 0
0
1 0 0
1 1
4 4
0 0
0 0 0
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
15-Min Count15-Min CountPeriod Period Beginning AtBeginning At
Holly DrHolly Dr
(Northbound)(Northbound)
Holly DrHolly Dr
(Southbound)(Southbound)
CSAH J/Ash StCSAH J/Ash St
(Eastbound)(Eastbound)
CSAH J/Ash StCSAH J/Ash St
(Westbound)(Westbound)TotalTotal HourlyHourlyTotalsTotalsLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU
3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 3 0 4 0 12 73 0 0 1 45 6 0 144
3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 7 73 0 0 0 41 7 0 133
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 3 0 5 0 10 61 0 0 0 51 3 0 133
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 19 78 0 0 0 46 4 0 153 563
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 5 0 6 0 17 106 0 0 0 49 4 0 187 606
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 24 82 0 0 0 52 2 0 168 641
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 5 0 19 87 0 0 0 47 6 0 166 674
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 18 75 0 0 1 37 4 0 141 662
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 5 0 4 0 18 88 0 0 0 39 6 0 160 635
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 6 0 4 0 13 67 0 0 0 43 2 0 135 602
6:00 PM 0 1 0 0 1 0 4 0 8 58 1 0 0 37 2 0 112 548
6:15 PM 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 5 56 0 0 0 22 3 0 94 501
Peak 15-MinPeak 15-MinFlowratesFlowrates
NorthboundNorthbound SouthboundSouthbound EastboundEastbound WestboundWestbound TotalTotalLeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUULeftLeftThruThruRightRightUU
All Vehicles 0 0 0 0 20 0 24 0 68 424 0 0 0 196 16 0 748
Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 8
Buses
Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 0
Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4 4 12
Scooters
Comments:
Report generated on 7/22/2024 9:00 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212
Page 1 of 1
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Appendix G
Appendix G: Existing (2024) Synchro Analysis Worksheets
HCM 6th AWSC
1: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CSAH J/Ash St 10/10/2024
01 Existing AM 7:30 am 07/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 11 Report
ISG Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 40.5
Intersection LOS E
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 8 3 97 18 141 13 75 26 356 210 10
Future Vol, veh/h 1 8 3 97 18 141 13 75 26 356 210 10
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, % 0 38 0 6 0 10 15 1 12 2 4 10
Mvmt Flow 1 9 3 105 20 153 14 82 28 387 228 11
Number of Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 1 1 2
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 2 1 2
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 1 2 1
HCM Control Delay 10.5 11.5 10.3 60
HCM LOS B B B F
Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 15% 0% 8% 84% 0% 62%
Vol Thru, % 85% 0% 67% 16% 0% 36%
Vol Right, % 0% 100% 25% 0% 100% 2%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 88 26 12 115 141 576
LT Vol 13 0 1 97 0 356
Through Vol 75 0 8 18 0 210
RT Vol 0 26 3 0 141 10
Lane Flow Rate 96 28 13 125 153 626
Geometry Grp 5 5 4b 5 5 4b
Degree of Util (X) 0.175 0.044 0.026 0.251 0.255 1.001
Departure Headway (Hd) 6.602 5.57 7.228 7.241 5.996 5.753
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 543 642 493 495 598 632
Service Time 4.348 3.316 5.301 4.992 3.746 3.78
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.177 0.044 0.026 0.253 0.256 0.991
HCM Control Delay 10.8 8.6 10.5 12.4 10.8 60
HCM Lane LOS B A B B B F
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.6 0.1 0.1 1 1 15.3
HCM 6th TWSC
2: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
01 Existing AM 7:30 am 07/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 11 Report
ISG Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.4
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 25 193 73 139 385 19
Future Vol, veh/h 25 193 73 139 385 19
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 100 - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 4 5 11 4 2 21
Mvmt Flow 27 210 79 151 418 21
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 663 429 439 0 - 0
Stage 1 429 - - - - -
Stage 2 234 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.66 6.275 4.265 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.46 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.86 - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.5383.34752.3045 - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 406 617 1065 - - -
Stage 1 651 - - - - -
Stage 2 778 - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 373 617 1065 - - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 373 - - - - -
Stage 1 598 - - - - -
Stage 2 778 - - - - -
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 14 3.1 0
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1065 - 373 617 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.075 - 0.073 0.34 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.7 0.2 15.4 13.8 - -
HCM Lane LOS A A C B - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - 0.2 1.5 - -
HCM 6th TWSC
3: Monarch Way & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
01 Existing AM 7:30 am 07/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 11 Report
ISG Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.1
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 200 5 7 80 9 20
Future Vol, veh/h 200 5 7 80 9 20
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 6 20 14 11 11 0
Mvmt Flow 217 5 8 87 10 22
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 222 0 323 220
Stage 1 - - - - 220 -
Stage 2 - - - - 103 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.24 - 6.51 6.2
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.51 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.51 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.326 - 3.599 3.3
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1279 - 653 825
Stage 1 - - - - 796 -
Stage 2 - - - - 899 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1279 - 648 825
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 648 -
Stage 1 - - - - 796 -
Stage 2 - - - - 893 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.6 9.9
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 761 - - 1279 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.041 - - 0.006 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.9 - - 7.8 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC
4: Rapp Farm Blvd & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
01 Existing AM 7:30 am 07/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 11 Report
ISG Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.9
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 190 18 11 75 35 19
Future Vol, veh/h 190 18 11 75 35 19
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 1 0 1 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 300 300 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 6 0 18 7 3 0
Mvmt Flow 207 20 12 82 38 21
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 228 0 315 208
Stage 1 - - - - 208 -
Stage 2 - - - - 107 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.28 - 6.43 6.2
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.43 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.43 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.362 - 3.527 3.3
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1251 - 676 837
Stage 1 - - - - 824 -
Stage 2 - - - - 915 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1250 - 668 836
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 668 -
Stage 1 - - - - 823 -
Stage 2 - - - - 905 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 1 10.5
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 719 - - 1250 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.082 - - 0.01 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.5 - - 7.9 -
HCM Lane LOS B - - A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC
5: CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Dr 10/10/2024
01 Existing AM 7:30 am 07/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 11 Report
ISG Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.4
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 17 192 107 5 12 26
Future Vol, veh/h 17 192 107 5 12 26
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 6 6 8 0 8 12
Mvmt Flow 18 209 116 5 13 28
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 121 0 - 0 364 119
Stage 1 - - - - 119 -
Stage 2 - - - - 245 -
Critical Hdwy 4.16 - - - 6.48 6.32
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.48 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.48 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.254 - - - 3.572 3.408
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1442 - - - 624 906
Stage 1 - - - - 891 -
Stage 2 - - - - 782 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1442 - - - 615 906
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 615 -
Stage 1 - - - - 879 -
Stage 2 - - - - 782 -
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.6 0 9.8
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 1442 - - - 788
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.013 - - - 0.052
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.5 0 - - 9.8
HCM Lane LOS A A - - A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0.2
HCM 6th TWSC
6: Wilkinson Lake Blvd 10/10/2024
01 Existing AM 7:30 am 07/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 11 Report
ISG Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 7.4
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 41 0 0 12
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 41 0 0 12
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 0 45 0 0 13
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 1 0 91 1
Stage 1 - - - - 1 -
Stage 2 - - - - 90 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1622 - 909 1084
Stage 1 - - - - 1022 -
Stage 2 - - - - 934 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1622 - 884 1084
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 884 -
Stage 1 - - - - 1022 -
Stage 2 - - - - 908 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 7.3 8.4
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 1084 - - 1622 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.012 - - 0.027 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.4 - - 7.3 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 -
Queuing and Blocking Report
Baseline 10/10/2024
01 Existing AM SimTraffic Report
ISG Page 1
Intersection: 1: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CSAH J/Ash St
Movement EB WB WB NB NB SB
Directions Served LTR LT R LT R LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 40 60 46 43 38 202
Average Queue (ft) 13 29 25 23 17 101
95th Queue (ft) 41 58 46 46 41 187
Link Distance (ft) 174 1551 2074 904
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 160 440
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement EB EB NB SB
Directions Served L R LT TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 45 100 74 9
Average Queue (ft) 18 59 31 1
95th Queue (ft) 50 101 75 14
Link Distance (ft) 2914 298 1724
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Intersection: 3: Monarch Way & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement WB NB
Directions Served LT LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 20 43
Average Queue (ft) 2 17
95th Queue (ft) 22 48
Link Distance (ft) 1272 638
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
Baseline 10/10/2024
01 Existing AM SimTraffic Report
ISG Page 2
Intersection: 4: Rapp Farm Blvd & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement WB NB
Directions Served L LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 5 45
Average Queue (ft) 1 27
95th Queue (ft) 8 51
Link Distance (ft) 352
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Dr
Movement EB SB
Directions Served LT LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 5 52
Average Queue (ft) 1 24
95th Queue (ft) 8 53
Link Distance (ft) 1395 3443
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: Wilkinson Lake Blvd
Movement NB
Directions Served LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 22
Average Queue (ft) 10
95th Queue (ft) 31
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
HCM 6th AWSC
1: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CSAH J/Ash St 10/10/2024
02 Existing PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 11 Report
ISG Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 57.3
Intersection LOS F
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 18 30 9 54 13 354 19 238 174 329 189 11
Future Vol, veh/h 18 30 9 54 13 354 19 238 174 329 189 11
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 7 0 1 0 0 1 3 2 0
Mvmt Flow 20 33 10 59 14 385 21 259 189 358 205 12
Number of Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 1 1 2
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 2 1 2
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 1 2 1
HCM Control Delay 14.2 24.7 17.4 120.3
HCM LOS B C C F
Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 7% 0% 32% 81% 0% 62%
Vol Thru, % 93% 0% 53% 19% 0% 36%
Vol Right, % 0% 100% 16% 0% 100% 2%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 257 174 57 67 354 529
LT Vol 19 0 18 54 0 329
Through Vol 238 0 30 13 0 189
RT Vol 0 174 9 0 354 11
Lane Flow Rate 279 189 62 73 385 575
Geometry Grp 5 5 4b 5 5 4b
Degree of Util (X) 0.57 0.347 0.152 0.163 0.729 1.166
Departure Headway (Hd) 7.74 6.978 9.539 8.497 7.235 7.3
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 469 518 379 425 504 494
Service Time 5.44 4.678 7.539 6.197 4.935 5.386
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.595 0.365 0.164 0.172 0.764 1.164
HCM Control Delay 20.2 13.3 14.2 12.8 27 120.3
HCM Lane LOS C B B B D F
HCM 95th-tile Q 3.5 1.5 0.5 0.6 6 20.5
HCM 6th TWSC
2: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
02 Existing PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 11 Report
ISG Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5.9
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 51 295 192 405 282 22
Future Vol, veh/h 51 295 192 405 282 22
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 100 - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 1 2 1 4
Mvmt Flow 55 321 209 440 307 24
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 957 319 331 0 - 0
Stage 1 319 - - - - -
Stage 2 638 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.63 6.23 4.115 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.83 - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.519 3.3192.2095 - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 270 721 1233 - - -
Stage 1 736 - - - - -
Stage 2 489 - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 210 721 1233 - - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 210 - - - - -
Stage 1 571 - - - - -
Stage 2 489 - - - - -
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 16 3.1 0
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1233 - 210 721 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.169 - 0.264 0.445 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.5 0.5 28.2 13.9 - -
HCM Lane LOS A A D B - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.6 - 1 2.3 - -
HCM 6th TWSC
3: Monarch Way & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
02 Existing PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 11 Report
ISG Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.5
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 339 14 13 197 6 11
Future Vol, veh/h 339 14 13 197 6 11
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 0 0 2 0 9
Mvmt Flow 368 15 14 214 7 12
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 383 0 618 376
Stage 1 - - - - 376 -
Stage 2 - - - - 242 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - 6.4 6.29
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - 3.5 3.381
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1187 - 456 655
Stage 1 - - - - 699 -
Stage 2 - - - - 803 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1187 - 450 655
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 450 -
Stage 1 - - - - 699 -
Stage 2 - - - - 793 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.5 11.6
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 564 - - 1187 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.033 - - 0.012 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 11.6 - - 8.1 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC
4: Rapp Farm Blvd & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
02 Existing PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 11 Report
ISG Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.8
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 336 32 9 194 14 17
Future Vol, veh/h 336 32 9 194 14 17
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 300 300 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 0 11 2 7 12
Mvmt Flow 365 35 10 211 15 18
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 400 0 596 365
Stage 1 - - - - 365 -
Stage 2 - - - - 231 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.21 - 6.47 6.32
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.47 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.47 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.299 - 3.563 3.408
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1111 - 458 658
Stage 1 - - - - 691 -
Stage 2 - - - - 796 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1111 - 454 658
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 454 -
Stage 1 - - - - 691 -
Stage 2 - - - - 789 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.4 12
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 547 - - 1111 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.062 - - 0.009 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 12 - - 8.3 -
HCM Lane LOS B - - A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC
5: CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Dr 10/10/2024
02 Existing PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 11 Report
ISG Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.5
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 79 353 194 16 14 18
Future Vol, veh/h 79 353 194 16 14 18
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 0 2 2 0 0 2
Mvmt Flow 86 384 211 17 15 20
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 228 0 - 0 776 220
Stage 1 - - - - 220 -
Stage 2 - - - - 556 -
Critical Hdwy 4.1 - - - 6.4 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 - - - 3.5 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1352 - - - 369 820
Stage 1 - - - - 821 -
Stage 2 - - - - 578 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1352 - - - 339 820
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 339 -
Stage 1 - - - - 754 -
Stage 2 - - - - 578 -
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 1.4 0 12.6
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 1352 - - - 506
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.064 - - - 0.069
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.8 0 - - 12.6
HCM Lane LOS A A - - B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - - 0.2
HCM 6th TWSC
6: Wilkinson Lake Blvd 10/10/2024
02 Existing PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2024 Baseline Synchro 11 Report
ISG Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 7.9
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 43 0 0 57
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 43 0 0 57
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 0 47 0 0 62
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 1 0 95 1
Stage 1 - - - - 1 -
Stage 2 - - - - 94 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1622 - 905 1084
Stage 1 - - - - 1022 -
Stage 2 - - - - 930 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1622 - 879 1084
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 879 -
Stage 1 - - - - 1022 -
Stage 2 - - - - 903 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 7.3 8.5
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 1084 - - 1622 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.057 - - 0.029 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.5 - - 7.3 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0.1 -
Queuing and Blocking Report
Baseline 10/10/2024
02 Existing PM SimTraffic Report
ISG Page 1
Intersection: 1: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CSAH J/Ash St
Movement EB WB WB NB NB SB
Directions Served LTR LT R LT R LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 37 51 110 82 59 322
Average Queue (ft) 17 20 62 52 39 193
95th Queue (ft) 40 41 117 86 62 404
Link Distance (ft) 174 1551 2074 904
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 160 440
Storage Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Intersection: 2: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement EB EB NB
Directions Served L R LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 82 149 66
Average Queue (ft) 30 77 38
95th Queue (ft) 87 142 70
Link Distance (ft) 2914 298
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 100
Storage Blk Time (%) 3
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1
Intersection: 3: Monarch Way & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement WB NB
Directions Served LT LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 31 35
Average Queue (ft) 6 12
95th Queue (ft) 29 37
Link Distance (ft) 1272 638
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
Baseline 10/10/2024
02 Existing PM SimTraffic Report
ISG Page 2
Intersection: 4: Rapp Farm Blvd & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement WB NB
Directions Served L LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 6 31
Average Queue (ft) 2 15
95th Queue (ft) 13 36
Link Distance (ft) 352
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Dr
Movement EB SB
Directions Served LT LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 37 28
Average Queue (ft) 10 17
95th Queue (ft) 35 37
Link Distance (ft) 1395 3443
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: Wilkinson Lake Blvd
Movement NB
Directions Served LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 28
Average Queue (ft) 20
95th Queue (ft) 41
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%) 2
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 1
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Appendix H
Appendix H: Map and Crash Detail Report
Crash Case Listing
Crash Area 1
Route
System
Route
Number Measure Co City Incident
Number Date Time Day of Week Basic Type Num
Veh Sev
Selection Filter:
WORK AREA: County('659447','2') - FILTER: Year('2019','2020','2021','2022','2023','2024') - SPATIAL FILTER APPLIED
Analyst:
Andrea Schmid
Notes:
CR J/Ash St @ CSAH 21 (Centerville Rd)
Report Generated 07/15/2024 MnCMAT 2.0.0 Page 1 of 1
Crash Case Listing
Crash Area 2.5
Route
System
Route
Number Measure Co City Incident
Number Date Time Day of Week Basic Type Num
Veh Sev
04-CSAH 32 7.979 02 Lino Lakes 01140731 10/31/23 0230 TUE SVROR 1 N
04-CSAH 32 7.982 02 Lino Lakes 01001003 01/22/22 1657 SAT SVROR 1 C
04-CSAH 32 7.994 02 Lino Lakes 00977879 12/06/21 1020 MON SVROR 1 N
04-CSAH 32 7.997 02 Lino Lakes 00979834 12/10/21 1718 FRI SSO 2 N
04-CSAH 32 8.022 02 Lino Lakes 00849083 10/23/20 0002 FRI SVROR 1 N
04-CSAH 32 8.025 02 Lino Lakes 01067900 12/17/22 1000 SAT SVROR 1 N
04-CSAH 32 8.043 02 Lino Lakes 00932906 08/07/21 1207 SAT SSO 2 C
04-CSAH 32 8.107 02 Lino Lakes 01149165 12/09/23 0318 SAT SVROR 1 N
04-CSAH 32 8.111 02 Lino Lakes 00680160 01/28/19 0530 MON SVROR 1 N
04-CSAH 32 8.310 02 Lino Lakes 01053870 10/25/22 0519 TUE Other 1 N
04-CSAH 32 8.363 02 Lino Lakes 00739561 08/10/19 1237 SAT Rear End 2 N
04-CSAH 32 8.607 02 Lino Lakes 01117465 06/29/23 2035 THU Other 1 N
04-CSAH 32 8.773 02 Lino Lakes 00808901 05/02/20 1230 SAT Angle 2 N
04-CSAH 32 8.842 02 Lino Lakes 00905478 05/12/21 1519 WED Angle 2 N
04-CSAH 32 8.845 02 Lino Lakes 01017077 04/11/22 1734 MON Angle 2 N
04-CSAH 32 8.849 02 Lino Lakes 00752249 10/04/19 1600 FRI SSO 2 N
04-CSAH 32 8.850 02 Lino Lakes 01134192 09/27/23 1353 WED Other 2 N
Selection Filter:
WORK AREA: County('659447','2') - FILTER: Year('2019','2020','2021','2022','2023','2024') - ROUTE FILTER APPLIED
Analyst:
Andrea Schmid
Notes:
Corridor Between Crash Areas 2 and 3
Report Generated 07/15/2024 MnCMAT 2.0.0 Page 1 of 1
Crash Case Listing
Crash Area 2
Route
System
Route
Number Measure Co City Incident
Number Date Time Day of Week Basic Type Num
Veh Sev
04-CSAH 21 0.262 02 Lino Lakes 00684278 02/05/19 1730 TUE Angle 3 N
04-CSAH 21 0.262 02 Lino Lakes 00741687 08/20/19 1616 TUE Other 2 C
04-CSAH 21 0.267 02 Lino Lakes 01130479 09/08/23 1157 FRI Rear End 2 C
04-CSAH 21 0.270 02 Lino Lakes 00843926 10/01/20 0809 THU SSO 2 N
04-CSAH 21 0.294 02 Lino Lakes 00683030 02/04/19 1016 MON Other 1 N
04-CSAH 32 8.842 02 Lino Lakes 00905478 05/12/21 1519 WED Angle 2 N
04-CSAH 32 8.845 02 Lino Lakes 01017077 04/11/22 1734 MON Angle 2 N
04-CSAH 32 8.849 02 Lino Lakes 00752249 10/04/19 1600 FRI SSO 2 N
04-CSAH 32 8.850 02 Lino Lakes 01134192 09/27/23 1353 WED Other 2 N
Selection Filter:
WORK AREA: County('659447','2') - FILTER: Year('2019','2020','2021','2022','2023','2024') - SPATIAL FILTER APPLIED
Analyst:
Andrea Schmid
Notes:
CSAH 32 (Ash St) @ CSAH 21 (Centerville Rd)
Report Generated 07/15/2024 MnCMAT 2.0.0 Page 1 of 1
Crash Case Listing
Crash Area 3
Route
System
Route
Number Measure Co City Incident
Number Date Time Day of Week Basic Type Num
Veh Sev
Selection Filter:
WORK AREA: County('659447','2') - FILTER: Year('2019','2020','2021','2022','2023','2024') - SPATIAL FILTER APPLIED
Analyst:
Andrea Schmid
Notes:
CSAH 32 (Ash St) @ Monarch Way
Report Generated 07/15/2024 MnCMAT 2.0.0 Page 1 of 1
Crash Case Listing
Crash Area 4
Route
System
Route
Number Measure Co City Incident
Number Date Time Day of Week Basic Type Num
Veh Sev
Selection Filter:
WORK AREA: County('659447','2') - FILTER: Year('2019','2020','2021','2022','2023','2024') - SPATIAL FILTER APPLIED
Analyst:
Andrea Schmid
Notes:
CSAH 32 (Ash St) @ Rapp Farm Blvd
Report Generated 07/15/2024 MnCMAT 2.0.0 Page 1 of 1
Crash Case Listing
Crash Area 5
Route
System
Route
Number Measure Co City Incident
Number Date Time Day of Week Basic Type Num
Veh Sev
Selection Filter:
WORK AREA: County('659447','2') - FILTER: Year('2019','2020','2021','2022','2023','2024') - SPATIAL FILTER APPLIED
Analyst:
Andrea Schmid
Notes:
CSAH 32 (Ash St) @ Holly Dr
Report Generated 07/15/2024 MnCMAT 2.0.0 Page 1 of 1
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Appendix I
Appendix I: Internal Capture Charts
AND AM INTERNAL CAPTURE SUMMARY
LAND USE A LAND USE B
ITE LU Code Varies ITE LU Code 822
Exit to External Size Varies Size <40K Enter from External
88 Total Internal External 2%1 14%6 Total Internal External 62
Enter 30 1 29 Enter 63 1 62
Exit 89 1 88 Exit 42 1 41
29 Total 119 1 118 Total 105 1 104 41
Enter from External 100% 1% 99%
1%1 17%11 100% 1% 99%
Exit to External
RESIDENTIAL
1
MULTI-USE DEVELOPMENT
TRIP GENERATION
RETAIL
1
LAND USE A LAND USE B TOTAL
Net External Trips for Mulit-Use Development
Exit 88 41 130
Enter 29 62 92
1%
Total 118 104 221 INTERNAL CAPTURE
Single-Use Trip Gen. Est. 119 105 224
AND PM INTERNAL CAPTURE SUMMARY
LAND USE A LAND USE B
ITE LU Code Varies ITE LU Code 822
Exit to External Size Varies Size <40K Enter from External
37 Total Internal External 46%37 26%41 Total Internal External 141
Enter 80 37 43 Enter 157 16 141
Exit 53 16 37 Exit 157 37 120
43 Total 133 53 81 Total 314 53 262 120
Enter from External 100% 39% 61%
42%22 10%16 100% 17% 83%
Exit to External
MULTI-USE DEVELOPMENT
TRIP GENERATION
RESIDENTIAL RETAIL
37
16
Enter 43 141 185
Net External Trips for Mulit-Use Development
LAND USE A LAND USE B TOTAL
Exit 37 120 158
Total 81 262 342 INTERNAL CAPTURE
Single-Use Trip Gen. Est. 133 314 447 23%
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Appendix J
Appendix J: Trip Distribution
H
O
L
L
Y
D
R
N
R
A
P
P
F
A
R
M
B
L
V
D
M
O
N
A
R
C
H
W
A
Y
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CE
N
T
E
R
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CSAH J/ASH ST3451
27
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning
ISGInc.com
DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 LINO LAKES DEVELOPMENTMASTER P-LINO LAKES MN\30671 PRODUCTION FILES\30671 CIVIL 3D\NON PRODUCTION DWGS\TRAFFIC\30671 APPENDICES - TRIP DISTRIBUTION.DWG SAVED BY: ROSANNA.NOVELLINO
0
SCALE IN FEET
2000 4000 N
STUDY INTERSECTIONX
ISG PROJECT NO. 24-30671
WILKINSON WATERS DEVELOPMENT
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA - 10/14/2024
ENTERING
EXITING
LT - LEFT MOVEMENT
T - THRU MOVEMENT
RT - RIGHT MOVEMENT
30
%
30
%
40%
70%
70%
40%
3
0
%
3
0
%
25%
25%
5%
TRIP DISTRIBUTION - WILKINSON RESIDENTIAL AM
5%
5%
5%
6
8
H
O
L
L
Y
D
R
N
R
A
P
P
F
A
R
M
B
L
V
D
M
O
N
A
R
C
H
W
A
Y
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CE
N
T
E
R
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CSAH J/ASH ST3451
27
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning
ISGInc.com
DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 LINO LAKES DEVELOPMENTMASTER P-LINO LAKES MN\30671 PRODUCTION FILES\30671 CIVIL 3D\NON PRODUCTION DWGS\TRAFFIC\30671 APPENDICES - TRIP DISTRIBUTION.DWG SAVED BY: ROSANNA.NOVELLINO
0
SCALE IN FEET
2000 4000 N
STUDY INTERSECTIONX
ISG PROJECT NO. 24-30671
WILKINSON WATERS DEVELOPMENT
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA - 10/14/2024
ENTERING
EXITING
LT - LEFT MOVEMENT
T - THRU MOVEMENT
RT - RIGHT MOVEMENT
20
%
20
%
25%
45%
60%
40%
4
0
%
5
5
%
40%
25%
15
%
TRIP DISTRIBUTION - WILKINSON RESIDENTIAL PM
15
%
6
8
H
O
L
L
Y
D
R
N
R
A
P
P
F
A
R
M
B
L
V
D
M
O
N
A
R
C
H
W
A
Y
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CE
N
T
E
R
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CSAH J/ASH ST
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning
ISGInc.com
DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 LINO LAKES DEVELOPMENTMASTER P-LINO LAKES MN\30671 PRODUCTION FILES\30671 CIVIL 3D\NON PRODUCTION DWGS\TRAFFIC\30671 APPENDICES - TRIP DISTRIBUTION.DWG SAVED BY: ROSANNA.NOVELLINO
0
SCALE IN FEET
2000 4000 N
STUDY INTERSECTIONX
345 1
27
6
ISG PROJECT NO. 24-30671
WILKINSON WATERS DEVELOPMENT
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA - 10/14/2024
ENTERING
EXITING
LT - LEFT MOVEMENT
T - THRU MOVEMENT
RT - RIGHT MOVEMENT
35
%
35
%
40%
90%
90%
1
5
%
40%
1
5
%
1
0
%
1
0
%
10%
10%
15
%
15
%
TRIP DISTRIBUTION - WILKINSON RETAIL AM
8
H
O
L
L
Y
D
R
N
R
A
P
P
F
A
R
M
B
L
V
D
M
O
N
A
R
C
H
W
A
Y
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CE
N
T
E
R
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CSAH J/ASH ST3451
27
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning
ISGInc.com
DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 LINO LAKES DEVELOPMENTMASTER P-LINO LAKES MN\30671 PRODUCTION FILES\30671 CIVIL 3D\NON PRODUCTION DWGS\TRAFFIC\30671 APPENDICES - TRIP DISTRIBUTION.DWG SAVED BY: ROSANNA.NOVELLINO
0
SCALE IN FEET
2000 4000 N
STUDY INTERSECTIONX
ISG PROJECT NO. 24-30671
WILKINSON WATERS DEVELOPMENT
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA - 10/14/2024
ENTERING
EXITING
LT - LEFT MOVEMENT
T - THRU MOVEMENT
RT - RIGHT MOVEMENT
30
%
20
%
30%
80%
85%
2
5
%
40%
2
0
%
1
5
%
2
0
%
20%
15%
25
%
20
%
TRIP DISTRIBUTION - WILKINSON RETAIL PM
6
8
H
O
L
L
Y
D
R
N
R
A
P
P
F
A
R
M
B
L
V
D
M
O
N
A
R
C
H
W
A
Y
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CE
N
T
E
R
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CSAH J/ASH ST3451
27
6
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning
ISGInc.com
DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 LINO LAKES DEVELOPMENTMASTER P-LINO LAKES MN\30671 PRODUCTION FILES\30671 CIVIL 3D\NON PRODUCTION DWGS\TRAFFIC\30671 APPENDICES - TRIP DISTRIBUTION.DWG SAVED BY: ROSANNA.NOVELLINO
0
SCALE IN FEET
2000 4000 N
STUDY INTERSECTIONX
ISG PROJECT NO. 24-30671
WILKINSON WATERS DEVELOPMENT
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA - 10/14/2024
ENTERING
EXITING
LT - LEFT MOVEMENT
T - THRU MOVEMENT
RT - RIGHT MOVEMENT
10
%
15
%
25%
30%
3
5
%
4
5
%
50%
40%
5%
TRIP DISTRIBUTION - NORTH OAKS FARMS AM
5%
50% R
60%
50%
57%
47%
3%3%
50% L
50% R 50% L 840%
60%
40%60%
H
O
L
L
Y
D
R
N
R
A
P
P
F
A
R
M
B
L
V
D
M
O
N
A
R
C
H
W
A
Y
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CE
N
T
E
R
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CSAH J/ASH ST3451
27
6
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning
ISGInc.com
DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 LINO LAKES DEVELOPMENTMASTER P-LINO LAKES MN\30671 PRODUCTION FILES\30671 CIVIL 3D\NON PRODUCTION DWGS\TRAFFIC\30671 APPENDICES - TRIP DISTRIBUTION.DWG SAVED BY: ROSANNA.NOVELLINO
0
SCALE IN FEET
2000 4000 N
STUDY INTERSECTIONX
ISG PROJECT NO. 24-30671
WILKINSON WATERS DEVELOPMENT
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA - 10/14/2024
ENTERING
EXITING
LT - LEFT MOVEMENT
T - THRU MOVEMENT
RT - RIGHT MOVEMENT
10
%
20
%
20%
35%
3
0
%
5
5
%
60%
35%
5%
TRIP DISTRIBUTION - NORTH OAKS FARMS PM
5%
65%
40%
62%
37%
3%
3%
3
60% R
40% L
40% R 60% L 835%
65%
35%65%
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Appendix K
Appendix K: Trip Assignment
H
O
L
L
Y
D
R
N
R
A
P
P
F
A
R
M
B
L
V
D
M
O
N
A
R
C
H
W
A
Y
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CE
N
T
E
R
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CSAH J/ASH ST
X XX
X 60
0
X
6
0
X
0
0
X
0
0
X
1
X 40
X XX
X XX
X 00
132
X
0
124
X
0
97
X
0
77
X
0
X 00
X XX
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning
ISGInc.com
DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 LINO LAKES DEVELOPMENTMASTER P-LINO LAKES MN\30671 PRODUCTION FILES\30671 CIVIL 3D\NON PRODUCTION DWGS\TRAFFIC\30671 APPENDICES.DWG SAVED BY: ROSANNA.NOVELLINO
DEVELOPMENT 2025 - TURNING MOVEMENT DIAGRAM 0
SCALE IN FEET
2000 4000 N
STUDY INTERSECTIONX
WEEKDAY AM
WEEKDAY PM
X 00
X XX
0
0
X
0
0
X
0
0
X
0
0
X
X XX
X 00
X XX
X 00
0
X
0
0
X
0
0
X
0
0
X
0
X 00
X XX
0 028
0 051
53
0
0
63
30
31
51
6
40
37
0
0
0 031
0 09
28 X6
30 X0
X
X
X
X
6
0
X
4
0
X
X
X
6 X0
9 X1
X XX
X 00
27
X
0
45
X
0
13
X
0
26
X
0
X 00
X XX
ISG PROJECT NO. 24-30671
WILKINSON WATERS DEVELOPMENT
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA - 10/14/2024
0 XX
0 XX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0 XX
0 XX
345 1
27
6
8
H
O
L
L
Y
D
R
N
R
A
P
P
F
A
R
M
B
L
V
D
M
O
N
A
R
C
H
W
A
Y
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CE
N
T
E
R
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CSAH J/ASH ST
X XX
X 60
17
X
6
15
X
0
21
X
0
6
X
1
X 40
X XX
X XX
X 00
132
X
0
124
X
0
97
X
0
77
X
0
X 00
X XX
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning
ISGInc.com
DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 LINO LAKES DEVELOPMENTMASTER P-LINO LAKES MN\30671 PRODUCTION FILES\30671 CIVIL 3D\NON PRODUCTION DWGS\TRAFFIC\30671 APPENDICES.DWG SAVED BY: ROSANNA.NOVELLINO
DEVELOPMENT 2045 - TURNING MOVEMENT DIAGRAM 0
SCALE IN FEET
2000 4000 N
STUDY INTERSECTIONX
WEEKDAY AM
WEEKDAY PM
X 10
X XX
10
1
X
28
0
X
8
0
X
19
1
X
X XX
X 00
X XX
X 00
11
X
0
29
X
0
8
X
0
20
X
0
X 00
X XX
5 928
5 051
53
9
0
63
30
31
51
6
40
37
4
0
1 031
6 139
28 X9
30 X14
X
X
X
X
7
14
X
6
19
X
X
X
6 X5
9 X2
0 129
0 00
29
13
0
51
23
0
15
6
0
30
5
0
0 00
0 1716
ISG PROJECT NO. 24-30671
WILKINSON WATERS DEVELOPMENT
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA - 10/14/2024
13 4X
12 6X
X
3
2
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
4
4
17 2X
5 1X
345 1
27
6
8
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Appendix L
Appendix L: Future Scenario Peak Hour Turning Movement
Volume Diagrams
H
O
L
L
Y
D
R
N
R
A
P
P
F
A
R
M
B
L
V
D
M
O
N
A
R
C
H
W
A
Y
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CE
N
T
E
R
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CSAH J/ASH ST
X XX
X XX
214
X
X
346
X
X
218
X
X
92
X
X
X XX
X XX
X XX
X 57X
X
X
43
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
41
X 12X
X XX
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning
ISGInc.com
DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 LINO LAKES DEVELOPMENTMASTER P-LINO LAKES MN\30671 PRODUCTION FILES\30671 CIVIL 3D\NON PRODUCTION DWGS\TRAFFIC\30671 APPENDICES.DWG SAVED BY: ROSANNA.NOVELLINO
NO BUILD 2025 - TURNING MOVEMENT DIAGRAM 0
SCALE IN FEET
2000 4000 N
STUDY INTERSECTIONX
WEEKDAY AM
WEEKDAY PM
X 1418
X XX
194
16
X
353
79
X
192
17
X
107
5
X
X XX
X 1226
X XX
X 1714
194
X
9
336
X
32
190
X
18
75
X
11
X 1935
X XX
19133211
23917519
13
358
55
30
18
9
8
1
3
18
142
98
75 2613
21236010
284 X22
409 X194
X
X
X
X
51
295
X
25
193
X
X
X
140 X74
388 X19
X XX
X 116
197
X
13
339
X
14
200
X
5
80
X
7
X 209
X XX
ISG PROJECT NO. 24-30671
WILKINSON WATERS DEVELOPMENT
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA - 10/14/2024
210 XX
350 XX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
220 XX
87 XX
345 1
27
6
8
H
O
L
L
Y
D
R
N
R
A
P
P
F
A
R
M
B
L
V
D
M
O
N
A
R
C
H
W
A
Y
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CE
N
T
E
R
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CSAH J/ASH ST
X XX
X 60
214
X
6
346
X
0
218
X
0
92
X
1
X 40
X XX
X XX
X 570
132
X
43
124
X
0
97
X
0
77
X
41
X 120
X XX
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning
ISGInc.com
DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 LINO LAKES DEVELOPMENTMASTER P-LINO LAKES MN\30671 PRODUCTION FILES\30671 CIVIL 3D\NON PRODUCTION DWGS\TRAFFIC\30671 APPENDICES.DWG SAVED BY: ROSANNA.NOVELLINO
BUILD 2025 - TURNING MOVEMENT DIAGRAM 0
SCALE IN FEET
2000 4000 N
STUDY INTERSECTIONX
WEEKDAY AM
WEEKDAY PM
X 1418
X XX
194
16
X
353
79
X
192
17
X
107
5
X
X XX
X 1226
X XX
X 1714
194
X
9
336
X
32
190
X
18
75
X
11
X 1935
X XX
19133239
23917570
66
358
55
93
48
40
59
7
43
55
142
98
75 2644
21236019
312 X28
439 X194
X
X
X
X
57
295
X
29
193
X
X
X
146 X74
397 X20
X XX
X 116
224
X
13
384
X
14
213
X
5
106
X
7
X 209
X XX
ISG PROJECT NO. 24-30671
WILKINSON WATERS DEVELOPMENT
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA - 10/14/2024
210 XX
350 XX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
220 XX
87 XX
345 1
27
6
8
H
O
L
L
Y
D
R
N
R
A
P
P
F
A
R
M
B
L
V
D
M
O
N
A
R
C
H
W
A
Y
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CE
N
T
E
R
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CSAH J/ASH ST
X XX
X XX
214
X
X
346
X
X
218
X
X
92
X
X
X XX
X XX
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning
ISGInc.com
DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 LINO LAKES DEVELOPMENTMASTER P-LINO LAKES MN\30671 PRODUCTION FILES\30671 CIVIL 3D\NON PRODUCTION DWGS\TRAFFIC\30671 APPENDICES.DWG SAVED BY: ROSANNA.NOVELLINO
NO BUILD 2045 - TURNING MOVEMENT DIAGRAM 0
SCALE IN FEET
2000 4000 N
STUDY INTERSECTIONX
WEEKDAY AM
WEEKDAY PM
X 1418
X XX
194
16
X
353
79
X
192
17
X
107
5
X
X XX
X 1226
X XX
X 1714
194
X
9
336
X
32
190
X
18
75
X
11
X 1935
X XX
23340514
26419321
16
436
67
30
18
9
8
1
3
22
174
120
83 2914
25943910
333 X26
499 X237
X
X
X
X
51
295
X
25
193
X
X
X
171 X90
455 X22
X XX
X 116
197
X
13
339
X
14
200
X
5
80
X
7
X 209
X XX
ISG PROJECT NO. 24-30671
WILKINSON WATERS DEVELOPMENT
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA - 10/14/2024
210 XX
350 XX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
220 XX
87 XX
345 1
27
6
8
X XX
X 57X
X
X
51
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
46
X 12X
X XX
H
O
L
L
Y
D
R
N
R
A
P
P
F
A
R
M
B
L
V
D
M
O
N
A
R
C
H
W
A
Y
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CE
N
T
E
R
V
I
L
L
E
R
D
CSAH 32/ASH ST
CSAH J/ASH ST
X XX
X 60
231
X
6
361
X
0
239
X
0
98
X
1
X 40
X XX
X XX
X 570
132
X
51
124
X
0
97
X
0
77
X
46
X 120
X XX
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning
ISGInc.com
DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\30000 PROJ\30600-30699\30671 LINO LAKES DEVELOPMENTMASTER P-LINO LAKES MN\30671 PRODUCTION FILES\30671 CIVIL 3D\NON PRODUCTION DWGS\TRAFFIC\30671 APPENDICES.DWG SAVED BY: ROSANNA.NOVELLINO
BUILD 2045 - TURNING MOVEMENT DIAGRAM 0
SCALE IN FEET
2000 4000 N
STUDY INTERSECTIONX
WEEKDAY AM
WEEKDAY PM
X 1518
X XX
204
17
X
381
79
X
200
17
X
126
6
X
X XX
X 1226
X XX
X 1714
205
X
9
365
X
32
198
X
18
95
X
11
X 1935
X XX
23841442
26919372
69
445
67
93
48
40
59
7
43
59
178
120
84 2945
26545219
361 X35
529 X251
X
X
X
X
58
309
X
31
212
X
X
X
177 X95
464 X24
0 129
0 116
226
13
13
390
23
14
215
6
5
110
5
7
0 209
0 1716
ISG PROJECT NO. 24-30671
WILKINSON WATERS DEVELOPMENT
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA - 10/14/2024
223 4X
362 6X
X
3
2
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
4
4
237 2X
92 1X
345 1
27
6
8
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Appendix M
Appendix M: Opening Year No Build (2025) Synchro Analysis
Worksheets
HCM 6th Roundabout
1: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CSAH J/Ash St 10/10/2024
03 2025 No Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 7.9
Intersection LOS A
Approach EB WB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 13 281 124 632
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 16 302 130 650
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 751 100 412 149
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 48 442 355 253
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 7.4 5.3 5.6 9.6
Approach LOS A A A A
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves LTR LTR LTR LTR
Assumed Moves LTR LTR LTR LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Follow-Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609 2.609
Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976 4.976
Entry Flow, veh/h 16 302 130 650
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 641 1246 906 1185
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.793 0.930 0.955 0.972
Flow Entry, veh/h 13 281 124 632
Cap Entry, veh/h 509 1159 866 1152
V/C Ratio 0.025 0.242 0.143 0.548
Control Delay, s/veh 7.4 5.3 5.6 9.6
LOS A A A A
95th %tile Queue, veh 0 1 0 3
HCM 6th Roundabout
2: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
03 2025 No Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 6.1
Intersection LOS A
Approach EB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 237 232 443
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 248 247 455
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 430 28 89
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 114 650 186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 7.3 4.4 6.4
Approach LOS A A A
Lane Left Left Left
Designated Moves LR LT TR
Assumed Moves LR LT TR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000
Follow-Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609
Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976
Entry Flow, veh/h 248 247 455
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 890 1341 1260
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.956 0.939 0.973
Flow Entry, veh/h 237 232 443
Cap Entry, veh/h 850 1259 1226
V/C Ratio 0.279 0.184 0.361
Control Delay, s/veh 7.3 4.4 6.4
LOS A A A
95th %tile Queue, veh 1 1 2
HCM 6th TWSC
3: Monarch Way/West Access North Oaks Farms & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/11/2024
03 2025 No Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 200 5 7 80 0 9 0 20 0 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 0 200 5 7 80 0 9 0 20 0 0 0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 6 20 14 11 2 11 2 0 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 217 5 8 87 0 10 0 22 0 0 0
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 87 0 0 222 0 0 323 323 220 334 325 87
Stage 1 - - - - - - 220 220 - 103 103 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 103 103 - 231 222 -
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.24 - - 7.21 6.52 6.2 7.12 6.52 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.21 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.21 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.326 - - 3.599 4.018 3.3 3.518 4.018 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1509 - - 1279 - - 613 595 825 620 593 971
Stage 1 - - - - - - 762 721 - 903 810 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 881 810 - 772 720 -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1509 - - 1279 - - 610 591 825 600 589 971
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 610 591 - 600 589 -
Stage 1 - - - - - - 762 721 - 903 804 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 875 804 - 752 720 -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.6 10.1 0
HCM LOS B A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 744 1509 - - 1279 - - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.042 - - - 0.006 - - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.1 0 - - 7.8 0 - 0
HCM Lane LOS B A - - A A - A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0 - - 0 - - -
HCM 6th TWSC
4: Rapp Farm Blvd & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/11/2024
03 2025 No Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.9
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 190 18 11 75 35 19
Future Vol, veh/h 190 18 11 75 35 19
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 1 0 1 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 300 300 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 6 0 18 7 3 0
Mvmt Flow 207 20 12 82 38 21
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 228 0 315 208
Stage 1 - - - - 208 -
Stage 2 - - - - 107 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.28 - 6.43 6.2
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.43 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.43 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.362 - 3.527 3.3
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1251 - 676 837
Stage 1 - - - - 824 -
Stage 2 - - - - 915 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1250 - 668 836
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 668 -
Stage 1 - - - - 823 -
Stage 2 - - - - 905 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 1 10.5
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 719 - - 1250 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.082 - - 0.01 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.5 - - 7.9 -
HCM Lane LOS B - - A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC
5: CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Dr 10/11/2024
03 2025 No Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.4
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 17 192 107 5 12 26
Future Vol, veh/h 17 192 107 5 12 26
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 6 6 8 0 8 12
Mvmt Flow 18 209 116 5 13 28
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 121 0 - 0 364 119
Stage 1 - - - - 119 -
Stage 2 - - - - 245 -
Critical Hdwy 4.16 - - - 6.48 6.32
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.48 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.48 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.254 - - - 3.572 3.408
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1442 - - - 624 906
Stage 1 - - - - 891 -
Stage 2 - - - - 782 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1442 - - - 615 906
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 615 -
Stage 1 - - - - 879 -
Stage 2 - - - - 782 -
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.6 0 9.8
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 1442 - - - 788
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.013 - - - 0.052
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.5 0 - - 9.8
HCM Lane LOS A A - - A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0.2
HCM 6th TWSC
6: South Access Wilkison/Wilkinson Lake Blvd 10/11/2024
03 2025 No Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 7.4
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 41 0 0 12
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 41 0 0 12
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - 47 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 0 45 0 0 13
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 1 0 91 1
Stage 1 - - - - 1 -
Stage 2 - - - - 90 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1622 - 909 1084
Stage 1 - - - - 1022 -
Stage 2 - - - - 934 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1622 - 884 1084
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 884 -
Stage 1 - - - - 1022 -
Stage 2 - - - - 908 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 7.3 8.4
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 1084 - - 1622 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.012 - - 0.027 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.4 - - 7.3 -
HCM Lane LOS A - - A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 -
Queuing and Blocking Report
10/10/2024
03 2025 No Build AM SimTraffic Report
Page 1
Intersection: 1: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CSAH J/Ash St
Movement EB WB NB SB
Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 37 62 41 66
Average Queue (ft) 7 23 18 33
95th Queue (ft) 40 63 46 70
Link Distance (ft) 151 1544 2058 882
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement EB NB SB
Directions Served LR LT TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 72 16 52
Average Queue (ft) 37 2 15
95th Queue (ft) 78 19 48
Link Distance (ft) 685 270 1709
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: Monarch Way/West Access North Oaks Farms & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement WB NB
Directions Served LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 4 34
Average Queue (ft) 1 20
95th Queue (ft) 6 46
Link Distance (ft) 1276 637
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
10/10/2024
03 2025 No Build AM SimTraffic Report
Page 2
Intersection: 4: Rapp Farm Blvd & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement WB NB
Directions Served L LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 19 50
Average Queue (ft) 5 26
95th Queue (ft) 26 52
Link Distance (ft) 352
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Dr
Movement EB SB
Directions Served LT LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 15 49
Average Queue (ft) 2 23
95th Queue (ft) 18 53
Link Distance (ft) 1395 3443
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: South Access Wilkison/Wilkinson Lake Blvd
Movement NB
Directions Served LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 29
Average Queue (ft) 9
95th Queue (ft) 30
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
HCM 6th Roundabout
1: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CSAH J/Ash St 10/10/2024
04 2025 No Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 9.2
Intersection LOS A
Approach EB WB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 63 463 471 581
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 63 471 473 596
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 648 301 425 99
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 47 597 286 673
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 6.0 9.0 11.1 8.0
Approach LOS A A B A
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves LTR LTR LTR LTR
Assumed Moves LTR LTR LTR LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Follow-Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609 2.609
Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976 4.976
Entry Flow, veh/h 63 471 473 596
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 713 1015 895 1247
Entry HV Adj Factor 1.000 0.983 0.996 0.975
Flow Entry, veh/h 63 463 471 581
Cap Entry, veh/h 713 998 891 1216
V/C Ratio 0.088 0.464 0.529 0.478
Control Delay, s/veh 6.0 9.0 11.1 8.0
LOS A A B A
95th %tile Queue, veh 0 3 3 3
HCM 6th Roundabout
2: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
04 2025 No Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 7.6
Intersection LOS A
Approach EB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 376 656 333
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 383 667 337
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 312 56 213
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 238 639 510
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 7.8 8.3 6.2
Approach LOS A A A
Lane Left Left Left
Designated Moves LR LT TR
Assumed Moves LR LT TR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000
Follow-Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609
Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976
Entry Flow, veh/h 383 667 337
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 1004 1303 1110
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.982 0.984 0.988
Flow Entry, veh/h 376 656 333
Cap Entry, veh/h 985 1282 1097
V/C Ratio 0.382 0.512 0.303
Control Delay, s/veh 7.8 8.3 6.2
LOS A A A
95th %tile Queue, veh 2 3 1
HCM 6th TWSC
3: Monarch Way/West Access North Oaks Farms & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
04 2025 No Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 339 14 13 197 0 6 0 11 0 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 0 339 14 13 197 0 6 0 11 0 0 0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 0 0 2 2 0 2 9 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 368 15 14 214 0 7 0 12 0 0 0
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 214 0 0 383 0 0 618 618 376 624 625 214
Stage 1 - - - - - - 376 376 - 242 242 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 242 242 - 382 383 -
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.1 - - 7.1 6.52 6.29 7.12 6.52 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.1 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.1 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.2 - - 3.5 4.018 3.381 3.518 4.018 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1356 - - 1187 - - 404 405 655 398 401 826
Stage 1 - - - - - - 649 616 - 762 705 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 766 705 - 640 612 -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1356 - - 1187 - - 400 400 655 387 396 826
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 400 400 - 387 396 -
Stage 1 - - - - - - 649 616 - 762 696 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 756 696 - 628 612 -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.5 12 0
HCM LOS B A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 535 1356 - - 1187 - - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.035 - - - 0.012 - - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 12 0 - - 8.1 0 - 0
HCM Lane LOS B A - - A A - A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0 - - 0 - - -
HCM 6th TWSC
4: Rapp Farm Blvd & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
04 2025 No Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.8
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 336 32 9 194 14 17
Future Vol, veh/h 336 32 9 194 14 17
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 300 300 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 0 11 2 7 12
Mvmt Flow 365 35 10 211 15 18
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 400 0 596 365
Stage 1 - - - - 365 -
Stage 2 - - - - 231 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.21 - 6.47 6.32
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.47 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.47 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.299 - 3.563 3.408
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1111 - 458 658
Stage 1 - - - - 691 -
Stage 2 - - - - 796 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1111 - 454 658
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 454 -
Stage 1 - - - - 691 -
Stage 2 - - - - 789 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.4 12
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 547 - - 1111 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.062 - - 0.009 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 12 - - 8.3 -
HCM Lane LOS B - - A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC
5: CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Dr 10/10/2024
04 2025 No Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.5
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 79 353 194 16 14 18
Future Vol, veh/h 79 353 194 16 14 18
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 0 2 2 0 0 2
Mvmt Flow 86 384 211 17 15 20
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 228 0 - 0 776 220
Stage 1 - - - - 220 -
Stage 2 - - - - 556 -
Critical Hdwy 4.1 - - - 6.4 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 - - - 3.5 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1352 - - - 369 820
Stage 1 - - - - 821 -
Stage 2 - - - - 578 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1352 - - - 339 820
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 339 -
Stage 1 - - - - 754 -
Stage 2 - - - - 578 -
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 1.4 0 12.6
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 1352 - - - 506
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.064 - - - 0.069
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.8 0 - - 12.6
HCM Lane LOS A A - - B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - - 0.2
HCM 6th TWSC
6: South Access Wilkison/Wilkinson Lake Blvd 10/10/2024
04 2025 No Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 7.9
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 43 0 0 57
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 43 0 0 57
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - 47 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 0 47 0 0 62
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 1 0 95 1
Stage 1 - - - - 1 -
Stage 2 - - - - 94 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1622 - 905 1084
Stage 1 - - - - 1022 -
Stage 2 - - - - 930 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1622 - 879 1084
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 879 -
Stage 1 - - - - 1022 -
Stage 2 - - - - 903 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 7.3 8.5
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 1084 - - 1622 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.057 - - 0.029 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.5 - - 7.3 -
HCM Lane LOS A - - A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0.1 -
Queuing and Blocking Report
10/10/2024
04 2025 No Build PM SimTraffic Report
Page 1
Intersection: 1: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CSAH J/Ash St
Movement EB WB NB SB
Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 31 77 130 76
Average Queue (ft) 10 38 62 26
95th Queue (ft) 34 79 133 68
Link Distance (ft) 151 1544 2058 882
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement EB NB SB
Directions Served LR LT TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 108 52 62
Average Queue (ft) 59 19 26
95th Queue (ft) 127 57 66
Link Distance (ft) 685 270 1709
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: Monarch Way/West Access North Oaks Farms & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement WB NB
Directions Served LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 32 30
Average Queue (ft) 6 14
95th Queue (ft) 31 39
Link Distance (ft) 1276 637
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
10/10/2024
04 2025 No Build PM SimTraffic Report
Page 2
Intersection: 4: Rapp Farm Blvd & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement WB NB
Directions Served L LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 13 34
Average Queue (ft) 2 18
95th Queue (ft) 19 38
Link Distance (ft) 352
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Dr
Movement EB SB
Directions Served LT LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 59 41
Average Queue (ft) 21 19
95th Queue (ft) 73 44
Link Distance (ft) 1395 3443
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: South Access Wilkison/Wilkinson Lake Blvd
Movement NB
Directions Served LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 32
Average Queue (ft) 21
95th Queue (ft) 43
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%) 3
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Appendix N
Appendix N: Opening Year Build (2025) Synchro Analysis
Worksheets
HCM 6th Roundabout
1: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CSAH J/Ash St 10/10/2024
05 2025 Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 9.3
Intersection LOS A
Approach EB WB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 119 321 158 642
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 143 342 169 661
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 751 146 495 228
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 138 518 399 260
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 9.8 6.0 6.8 11.5
Approach LOS A A A B
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves LTR LTR LTR LTR
Assumed Moves LTR LTR LTR LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Follow-Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609 2.609
Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976 4.976
Entry Flow, veh/h 143 342 169 661
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 641 1189 833 1094
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.831 0.939 0.936 0.971
Flow Entry, veh/h 119 321 158 642
Cap Entry, veh/h 533 1116 780 1062
V/C Ratio 0.223 0.288 0.203 0.604
Control Delay, s/veh 9.8 6.0 6.8 11.5
LOS A A A B
95th %tile Queue, veh 1 1 1 4
HCM 6th Roundabout
2: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
05 2025 Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 6.2
Intersection LOS A
Approach EB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 242 239 454
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 253 254 468
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 441 33 89
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 116 661 198
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 7.4 4.5 6.5
Approach LOS A A A
Lane Left Left Left
Designated Moves LR LT TR
Assumed Moves LR LT TR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000
Follow-Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609
Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976
Entry Flow, veh/h 253 254 468
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 880 1334 1260
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.957 0.940 0.971
Flow Entry, veh/h 242 239 454
Cap Entry, veh/h 842 1254 1223
V/C Ratio 0.287 0.190 0.371
Control Delay, s/veh 7.4 4.5 6.5
LOS A A A
95th %tile Queue, veh 1 1 2
HCM 6th TWSC
3: Monarch Way/West Access North Oaks Farms & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
05 2025 Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 200 5 7 80 0 9 0 20 0 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 0 213 5 7 106 0 9 0 20 0 0 0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 6 20 14 11 2 11 2 0 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 232 5 8 115 0 10 0 22 0 0 0
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 115 0 0 237 0 0 366 366 235 377 368 115
Stage 1 - - - - - - 235 235 - 131 131 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 131 131 - 246 237 -
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.24 - - 7.21 6.52 6.2 7.12 6.52 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.21 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.21 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.326 - - 3.599 4.018 3.3 3.518 4.018 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1474 - - 1263 - - 574 562 809 580 561 937
Stage 1 - - - - - - 748 710 - 873 788 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 851 788 - 758 709 -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1474 - - 1263 - - 571 558 809 561 557 937
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 571 558 - 561 557 -
Stage 1 - - - - - - 748 710 - 873 782 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 845 782 - 738 709 -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.5 10.3 0
HCM LOS B A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 716 1474 - - 1263 - - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.044 - - - 0.006 - - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.3 0 - - 7.9 0 - 0
HCM Lane LOS B A - - A A - A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0 - - 0 - - -
HCM 6th TWSC
4: Rapp Farm Blvd & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
05 2025 Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.9
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 190 18 11 75 35 19
Future Vol, veh/h 190 18 11 75 35 19
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 1 0 1 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 300 300 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 6 0 18 7 3 0
Mvmt Flow 207 20 12 82 38 21
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 228 0 315 208
Stage 1 - - - - 208 -
Stage 2 - - - - 107 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.28 - 6.43 6.2
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.43 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.43 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.362 - 3.527 3.3
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1251 - 676 837
Stage 1 - - - - 824 -
Stage 2 - - - - 915 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1250 - 668 836
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 668 -
Stage 1 - - - - 823 -
Stage 2 - - - - 905 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 1 10.5
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 719 - - 1250 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.082 - - 0.01 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.5 - - 7.9 -
HCM Lane LOS B - - A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC
5: CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Dr 10/10/2024
05 2025 Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.4
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 17 192 107 5 12 26
Future Vol, veh/h 17 192 107 5 12 26
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 6 6 8 0 8 12
Mvmt Flow 18 209 116 5 13 28
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 121 0 - 0 364 119
Stage 1 - - - - 119 -
Stage 2 - - - - 245 -
Critical Hdwy 4.16 - - - 6.48 6.32
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.48 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.48 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.254 - - - 3.572 3.408
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1442 - - - 624 906
Stage 1 - - - - 891 -
Stage 2 - - - - 782 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1442 - - - 615 906
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 615 -
Stage 1 - - - - 879 -
Stage 2 - - - - 782 -
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.6 0 9.8
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 1442 - - - 788
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.013 - - - 0.052
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.5 0 - - 9.8
HCM Lane LOS A A - - A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0.2
HCM 6th TWSC
6: South Access Wilkison/Wilkinson Lake Blvd 10/10/2024
05 2025 Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.8
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 41 0 0 12
Future Vol, veh/h 97 0 41 77 0 12
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - 47 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 105 0 45 84 0 13
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 105 0 279 105
Stage 1 - - - - 105 -
Stage 2 - - - - 174 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1486 - 711 949
Stage 1 - - - - 919 -
Stage 2 - - - - 856 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1486 - 690 949
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 690 -
Stage 1 - - - - 919 -
Stage 2 - - - - 830 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 2.6 8.8
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 949 - - 1486 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.014 - - 0.03 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.8 - - 7.5 -
HCM Lane LOS A - - A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 -
HCM 6th TWSC
7: North Access Wilkison & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
05 2025 Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.2
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 218 0 0 92 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 218 0 1 92 0 4
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 237 0 1 100 0 4
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 237 0 339 237
Stage 1 - - - - 237 -
Stage 2 - - - - 102 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1330 - 657 802
Stage 1 - - - - 802 -
Stage 2 - - - - 922 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1330 - 656 802
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 656 -
Stage 1 - - - - 802 -
Stage 2 - - - - 921 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.1 9.5
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 802 - - 1330 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 - - 0.001 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.5 - - 7.7 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC
8: CSAH 32/Ash St & East Access North Oaks Farms 10/10/2024
05 2025 Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 6
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 220 0 0 87
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 220 0 0 87
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 0 239 0 0 95
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 334 239 0 0 239 0
Stage 1 239 - - - - -
Stage 2 95 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 661 800 - - 1328 -
Stage 1 801 - - - - -
Stage 2 929 - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 661 800 - - 1328 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 661 - - - - -
Stage 1 801 - - - - -
Stage 2 929 - - - - -
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 0
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 1328 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - - -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 0 0 -
HCM Lane LOS - - A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0 -
Queuing and Blocking Report
10/10/2024
05 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report
Page 1
Intersection: 1: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CSAH J/Ash St
Movement EB WB NB SB
Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 37 68 47 71
Average Queue (ft) 8 28 19 33
95th Queue (ft) 41 70 50 74
Link Distance (ft) 151 1544 2058 882
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement EB NB SB
Directions Served LR LT TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 83 22 69
Average Queue (ft) 32 3 18
95th Queue (ft) 84 21 64
Link Distance (ft) 685 270 1709
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: Monarch Way/West Access North Oaks Farms & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement WB NB
Directions Served LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 4 34
Average Queue (ft) 0 18
95th Queue (ft) 0 45
Link Distance (ft) 1276 637
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
10/10/2024
05 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report
Page 2
Intersection: 4: Rapp Farm Blvd & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement WB NB
Directions Served L LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 19 50
Average Queue (ft) 5 25
95th Queue (ft) 25 50
Link Distance (ft) 352
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Dr
Movement EB SB
Directions Served LT LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 20 59
Average Queue (ft) 4 23
95th Queue (ft) 21 58
Link Distance (ft) 1395 3443
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: South Access Wilkison/Wilkinson Lake Blvd
Movement NB
Directions Served LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 29
Average Queue (ft) 10
95th Queue (ft) 32
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
10/10/2024
05 2025 Build AM SimTraffic Report
Page 3
Intersection: 7: North Access Wilkison & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement
Directions Served
Maximum Queue (ft)
Average Queue (ft)
95th Queue (ft)
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 8: CSAH 32/Ash St & East Access North Oaks Farms
Movement
Directions Served
Maximum Queue (ft)
Average Queue (ft)
95th Queue (ft)
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
HCM 6th Roundabout
1: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CSAH J/Ash St 10/10/2024
06 2025 Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 12.1
Intersection LOS B
Approach EB WB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 196 521 526 611
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 196 529 528 626
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 648 388 525 212
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 190 665 319 705
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 8.3 11.9 15.8 10.3
Approach LOS A B C B
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves LTR LTR LTR LTR
Assumed Moves LTR LTR LTR LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Follow-Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609 2.609
Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976 4.976
Entry Flow, veh/h 196 529 528 626
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 713 929 808 1112
Entry HV Adj Factor 1.000 0.985 0.996 0.976
Flow Entry, veh/h 196 521 526 611
Cap Entry, veh/h 713 915 805 1085
V/C Ratio 0.275 0.569 0.654 0.563
Control Delay, s/veh 8.3 11.9 15.8 10.3
LOS A B C B
95th %tile Queue, veh 1 4 5 4
HCM 6th Roundabout
2: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
06 2025 Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.1
Intersection LOS A
Approach EB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 383 688 369
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 390 700 373
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 342 63 213
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 244 669 550
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 8.3 8.8 6.6
Approach LOS A A A
Lane Left Left Left
Designated Moves LR LT TR
Assumed Moves LR LT TR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000
Follow-Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609
Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976
Entry Flow, veh/h 390 700 373
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 974 1294 1110
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.982 0.984 0.988
Flow Entry, veh/h 383 688 369
Cap Entry, veh/h 956 1273 1097
V/C Ratio 0.401 0.541 0.336
Control Delay, s/veh 8.3 8.8 6.6
LOS A A A
95th %tile Queue, veh 2 3 1
HCM 6th TWSC
3: Monarch Way/West Access North Oaks Farms & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
06 2025 Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 339 14 13 197 0 6 0 11 0 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 0 384 14 13 224 0 6 0 11 0 0 0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 0 0 2 2 0 2 9 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 417 15 14 243 0 7 0 12 0 0 0
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 243 0 0 432 0 0 696 696 425 702 703 243
Stage 1 - - - - - - 425 425 - 271 271 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 271 271 - 431 432 -
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.1 - - 7.1 6.52 6.29 7.12 6.52 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.1 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.1 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.2 - - 3.5 4.018 3.381 3.518 4.018 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1323 - - 1138 - - 359 365 615 353 362 796
Stage 1 - - - - - - 611 586 - 735 685 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 739 685 - 603 582 -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1323 - - 1138 - - 355 360 615 342 357 796
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 355 360 - 342 357 -
Stage 1 - - - - - - 611 586 - 735 675 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 729 675 - 591 582 -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.4 12.7 0
HCM LOS B A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 489 1323 - - 1138 - - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.038 - - - 0.012 - - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 12.7 0 - - 8.2 0 - 0
HCM Lane LOS B A - - A A - A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0 - - 0 - - -
HCM 6th TWSC
4: Rapp Farm Blvd & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
06 2025 Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.8
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 336 32 9 194 14 17
Future Vol, veh/h 336 32 9 194 14 17
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 300 300 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 0 11 2 7 12
Mvmt Flow 365 35 10 211 15 18
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 400 0 596 365
Stage 1 - - - - 365 -
Stage 2 - - - - 231 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.21 - 6.47 6.32
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.47 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.47 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.299 - 3.563 3.408
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1111 - 458 658
Stage 1 - - - - 691 -
Stage 2 - - - - 796 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1111 - 454 658
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 454 -
Stage 1 - - - - 691 -
Stage 2 - - - - 789 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.4 12
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 547 - - 1111 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.062 - - 0.009 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 12 - - 8.3 -
HCM Lane LOS B - - A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC
5: CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Dr 10/10/2024
06 2025 Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.5
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 79 353 194 16 14 18
Future Vol, veh/h 79 353 194 16 14 18
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 0 2 2 0 0 2
Mvmt Flow 86 384 211 17 15 20
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 228 0 - 0 776 220
Stage 1 - - - - 220 -
Stage 2 - - - - 556 -
Critical Hdwy 4.1 - - - 6.4 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 - - - 3.5 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1352 - - - 369 820
Stage 1 - - - - 821 -
Stage 2 - - - - 578 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1352 - - - 339 820
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 339 -
Stage 1 - - - - 754 -
Stage 2 - - - - 578 -
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 1.4 0 12.6
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 1352 - - - 506
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.064 - - - 0.069
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.8 0 - - 12.6
HCM Lane LOS A A - - B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - - 0.2
HCM 6th TWSC
6: South Access Wilkison/Wilkinson Lake Blvd 10/10/2024
06 2025 Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.4
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 43 0 0 57
Future Vol, veh/h 124 0 43 132 0 57
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - 47 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 135 0 47 143 0 62
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 135 0 372 135
Stage 1 - - - - 135 -
Stage 2 - - - - 237 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1449 - 629 914
Stage 1 - - - - 891 -
Stage 2 - - - - 802 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1449 - 609 914
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 609 -
Stage 1 - - - - 891 -
Stage 2 - - - - 776 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.9 9.2
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 914 - - 1449 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.068 - - 0.032 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.2 - - 7.6 -
HCM Lane LOS A - - A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0.1 -
HCM 6th TWSC
7: North Access Wilkison & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
06 2025 Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.2
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 346 0 0 214 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 346 0 6 214 0 6
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 376 0 7 233 0 7
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 376 0 623 376
Stage 1 - - - - 376 -
Stage 2 - - - - 247 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1182 - 450 670
Stage 1 - - - - 694 -
Stage 2 - - - - 794 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1182 - 447 670
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 447 -
Stage 1 - - - - 694 -
Stage 2 - - - - 788 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 10.4
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 670 - - 1182 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.01 - - 0.006 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.4 - - 8.1 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC
8: CSAH 32/Ash St & East Access North Oaks Farms 10/10/2024
06 2025 Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2025 Synchro 11 Report
Page 6
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 350 0 0 210
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 350 0 0 210
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 0 380 0 0 228
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 608 380 0 0 380 0
Stage 1 380 - - - - -
Stage 2 228 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 459 667 - - 1178 -
Stage 1 691 - - - - -
Stage 2 810 - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 459 667 - - 1178 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 459 - - - - -
Stage 1 691 - - - - -
Stage 2 810 - - - - -
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 0
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 1178 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - - -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 0 0 -
HCM Lane LOS - - A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0 -
Queuing and Blocking Report
10/10/2024
06 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report
Page 1
Intersection: 1: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CSAH J/Ash St
Movement EB WB NB SB
Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 31 77 130 76
Average Queue (ft) 10 38 62 26
95th Queue (ft) 34 79 133 68
Link Distance (ft) 151 1544 2058 882
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement EB NB SB
Directions Served LR LT TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 108 52 62
Average Queue (ft) 59 19 26
95th Queue (ft) 127 57 66
Link Distance (ft) 685 270 1709
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: Monarch Way/West Access North Oaks Farms & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement WB NB
Directions Served LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 32 30
Average Queue (ft) 6 14
95th Queue (ft) 31 39
Link Distance (ft) 1276 637
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
10/10/2024
06 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report
Page 2
Intersection: 4: Rapp Farm Blvd & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement WB NB
Directions Served L LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 13 34
Average Queue (ft) 2 18
95th Queue (ft) 19 38
Link Distance (ft) 352
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Dr
Movement EB SB
Directions Served LT LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 59 41
Average Queue (ft) 21 19
95th Queue (ft) 73 44
Link Distance (ft) 1395 3443
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: South Access Wilkison/Wilkinson Lake Blvd
Movement NB
Directions Served LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 32
Average Queue (ft) 21
95th Queue (ft) 43
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%) 3
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
10/10/2024
06 2025 Build PM SimTraffic Report
Page 3
Intersection: 7: North Access Wilkison & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement
Directions Served
Maximum Queue (ft)
Average Queue (ft)
95th Queue (ft)
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 8: CSAH 32/Ash St & East Access North Oaks Farms
Movement
Directions Served
Maximum Queue (ft)
Average Queue (ft)
95th Queue (ft)
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Appendix O
Appendix O: Design Year No Build (2045) Synchro Analysis
Worksheets
HCM 6th Roundabout
1: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CSAH J/Ash St 10/10/2024
07 2045 No Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 10.6
Intersection LOS B
Approach EB WB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 13 343 137 770
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 16 370 144 792
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 918 109 500 179
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 53 535 434 300
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 8.8 6.0 6.4 13.5
Approach LOS A A A B
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves LTR LTR LTR LTR
Assumed Moves LTR LTR LTR LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Follow-Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609 2.609
Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976 4.976
Entry Flow, veh/h 16 370 144 792
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 541 1235 829 1150
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.793 0.927 0.952 0.972
Flow Entry, veh/h 13 343 137 770
Cap Entry, veh/h 429 1145 789 1117
V/C Ratio 0.030 0.300 0.174 0.689
Control Delay, s/veh 8.8 6.0 6.4 13.5
LOS A A A B
95th %tile Queue, veh 0 1 1 6
HCM 6th Roundabout
2: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
07 2045 No Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 6.9
Intersection LOS A
Approach EB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 237 284 519
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 248 302 534
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 505 28 109
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 138 725 221
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 8.0 4.8 7.4
Approach LOS A A A
Lane Left Left Left
Designated Moves LR LT TR
Assumed Moves LR LT TR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000
Follow-Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609
Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976
Entry Flow, veh/h 248 302 534
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 824 1341 1235
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.956 0.939 0.972
Flow Entry, veh/h 237 284 519
Cap Entry, veh/h 788 1259 1200
V/C Ratio 0.301 0.225 0.433
Control Delay, s/veh 8.0 4.8 7.4
LOS A A A
95th %tile Queue, veh 1 1 2
HCM 6th TWSC
3: Monarch Way/West Access North Oaks Farms & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
07 2045 No Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 200 5 7 80 0 9 0 20 0 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 0 200 5 7 80 0 9 0 20 0 0 0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 6 20 14 11 2 11 2 0 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 217 5 8 87 0 10 0 22 0 0 0
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 87 0 0 222 0 0 323 323 220 334 325 87
Stage 1 - - - - - - 220 220 - 103 103 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 103 103 - 231 222 -
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.24 - - 7.21 6.52 6.2 7.12 6.52 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.21 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.21 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.326 - - 3.599 4.018 3.3 3.518 4.018 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1509 - - 1279 - - 613 595 825 620 593 971
Stage 1 - - - - - - 762 721 - 903 810 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 881 810 - 772 720 -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1509 - - 1279 - - 610 591 825 600 589 971
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 610 591 - 600 589 -
Stage 1 - - - - - - 762 721 - 903 804 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 875 804 - 752 720 -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.6 10.1 0
HCM LOS B A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 744 1509 - - 1279 - - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.042 - - - 0.006 - - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.1 0 - - 7.8 0 - 0
HCM Lane LOS B A - - A A - A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0 - - 0 - - -
HCM 6th TWSC
4: Rapp Farm Blvd & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
07 2045 No Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.9
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 190 18 11 75 35 19
Future Vol, veh/h 190 18 11 75 35 19
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 1 0 1 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 300 300 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 6 0 18 7 3 0
Mvmt Flow 207 20 12 82 38 21
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 228 0 315 208
Stage 1 - - - - 208 -
Stage 2 - - - - 107 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.28 - 6.43 6.2
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.43 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.43 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.362 - 3.527 3.3
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1251 - 676 837
Stage 1 - - - - 824 -
Stage 2 - - - - 915 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1250 - 668 836
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 668 -
Stage 1 - - - - 823 -
Stage 2 - - - - 905 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 1 10.5
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 719 - - 1250 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.082 - - 0.01 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.5 - - 7.9 -
HCM Lane LOS B - - A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC
5: CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Dr 10/10/2024
07 2045 No Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.4
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 17 192 107 5 12 26
Future Vol, veh/h 17 192 107 5 12 26
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 6 6 8 0 8 12
Mvmt Flow 18 209 116 5 13 28
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 121 0 - 0 364 119
Stage 1 - - - - 119 -
Stage 2 - - - - 245 -
Critical Hdwy 4.16 - - - 6.48 6.32
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.48 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.48 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.254 - - - 3.572 3.408
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1442 - - - 624 906
Stage 1 - - - - 891 -
Stage 2 - - - - 782 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1442 - - - 615 906
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 615 -
Stage 1 - - - - 879 -
Stage 2 - - - - 782 -
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.6 0 9.8
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 1442 - - - 788
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.013 - - - 0.052
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.5 0 - - 9.8
HCM Lane LOS A A - - A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0.2
HCM 6th TWSC
6: South Access Wilkison/Wilkinson Lake Blvd 10/10/2024
07 2045 No Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 7.4
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 46 0 0 12
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 46 0 0 12
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - 47 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 0 50 0 0 13
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 1 0 101 1
Stage 1 - - - - 1 -
Stage 2 - - - - 100 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1622 - 898 1084
Stage 1 - - - - 1022 -
Stage 2 - - - - 924 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1622 - 870 1084
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 870 -
Stage 1 - - - - 1022 -
Stage 2 - - - - 895 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 7.3 8.4
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 1084 - - 1622 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.012 - - 0.031 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.4 - - 7.3 -
HCM Lane LOS A - - A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 -
Queuing and Blocking Report
10/10/2024
07 2045 No Build AM SimTraffic Report
Page 1
Intersection: 1: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CSAH J/Ash St
Movement EB WB NB SB
Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 17 56 56 101
Average Queue (ft) 3 20 25 56
95th Queue (ft) 22 60 60 110
Link Distance (ft) 151 1544 2058 882
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement EB NB SB
Directions Served LR LT TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 71 12 74
Average Queue (ft) 30 3 25
95th Queue (ft) 76 16 67
Link Distance (ft) 685 270 1709
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: Monarch Way/West Access North Oaks Farms & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement WB NB
Directions Served LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 8 34
Average Queue (ft) 1 21
95th Queue (ft) 9 44
Link Distance (ft) 1276 637
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
10/10/2024
07 2045 No Build AM SimTraffic Report
Page 2
Intersection: 4: Rapp Farm Blvd & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement WB NB
Directions Served L LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 15 36
Average Queue (ft) 2 20
95th Queue (ft) 14 44
Link Distance (ft) 352
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Dr
Movement EB SB
Directions Served LT LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 10 37
Average Queue (ft) 1 23
95th Queue (ft) 11 43
Link Distance (ft) 1395 3443
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: South Access Wilkison/Wilkinson Lake Blvd
Movement NB
Directions Served LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 23
Average Queue (ft) 11
95th Queue (ft) 33
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
HCM 6th Roundabout
1: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CSAH J/Ash St 10/10/2024
08 2045 No Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 11.9
Intersection LOS B
Approach EB WB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 63 564 520 708
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 63 574 522 726
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 789 330 506 118
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 55 698 346 786
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 7.0 11.7 14.8 10.3
Approach LOS A B B B
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves LTR LTR LTR LTR
Assumed Moves LTR LTR LTR LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Follow-Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609 2.609
Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976 4.976
Entry Flow, veh/h 63 574 522 726
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 617 986 824 1223
Entry HV Adj Factor 1.000 0.983 0.996 0.975
Flow Entry, veh/h 63 564 520 708
Cap Entry, veh/h 617 968 820 1193
V/C Ratio 0.102 0.582 0.634 0.593
Control Delay, s/veh 7.0 11.7 14.8 10.3
LOS A B B B
95th %tile Queue, veh 0 4 5 4
HCM 6th Roundabout
2: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
08 2045 No Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 9.2
Intersection LOS A
Approach EB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 376 800 390
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 383 814 395
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 366 56 261
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 290 693 609
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 8.5 10.5 7.4
Approach LOS A B A
Lane Left Left Left
Designated Moves LR LT TR
Assumed Moves LR LT TR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000
Follow-Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609
Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976
Entry Flow, veh/h 383 814 395
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 950 1303 1057
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.982 0.983 0.988
Flow Entry, veh/h 376 800 390
Cap Entry, veh/h 933 1281 1045
V/C Ratio 0.403 0.625 0.374
Control Delay, s/veh 8.5 10.5 7.4
LOS A B A
95th %tile Queue, veh 2 5 2
HCM 6th TWSC
3: Monarch Way/West Access North Oaks Farms & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
08 2045 No Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 339 14 13 197 0 6 0 11 0 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 0 339 14 13 197 0 6 0 11 0 0 0
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 0 0 2 2 0 2 9 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 368 15 14 214 0 7 0 12 0 0 0
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 214 0 0 383 0 0 618 618 376 624 625 214
Stage 1 - - - - - - 376 376 - 242 242 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 242 242 - 382 383 -
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.1 - - 7.1 6.52 6.29 7.12 6.52 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.1 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.1 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.2 - - 3.5 4.018 3.381 3.518 4.018 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1356 - - 1187 - - 404 405 655 398 401 826
Stage 1 - - - - - - 649 616 - 762 705 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 766 705 - 640 612 -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1356 - - 1187 - - 400 400 655 387 396 826
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 400 400 - 387 396 -
Stage 1 - - - - - - 649 616 - 762 696 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 756 696 - 628 612 -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.5 12 0
HCM LOS B A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 535 1356 - - 1187 - - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.035 - - - 0.012 - - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 12 0 - - 8.1 0 - 0
HCM Lane LOS B A - - A A - A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0 - - 0 - - -
HCM 6th TWSC
4: Rapp Farm Blvd & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
08 2045 No Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.8
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 336 32 9 194 14 17
Future Vol, veh/h 336 32 9 194 14 17
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 300 300 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 0 11 2 7 12
Mvmt Flow 365 35 10 211 15 18
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 400 0 596 365
Stage 1 - - - - 365 -
Stage 2 - - - - 231 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.21 - 6.47 6.32
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.47 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.47 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.299 - 3.563 3.408
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1111 - 458 658
Stage 1 - - - - 691 -
Stage 2 - - - - 796 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1111 - 454 658
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 454 -
Stage 1 - - - - 691 -
Stage 2 - - - - 789 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.4 12
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 547 - - 1111 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.062 - - 0.009 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 12 - - 8.3 -
HCM Lane LOS B - - A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC
5: CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Dr 10/10/2024
08 2045 No Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.5
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 79 353 194 16 14 18
Future Vol, veh/h 79 353 194 16 14 18
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 0 2 2 0 0 2
Mvmt Flow 86 384 211 17 15 20
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 228 0 - 0 776 220
Stage 1 - - - - 220 -
Stage 2 - - - - 556 -
Critical Hdwy 4.1 - - - 6.4 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 - - - 3.5 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1352 - - - 369 820
Stage 1 - - - - 821 -
Stage 2 - - - - 578 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1352 - - - 339 820
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 339 -
Stage 1 - - - - 754 -
Stage 2 - - - - 578 -
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 1.4 0 12.6
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 1352 - - - 506
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.064 - - - 0.069
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.8 0 - - 12.6
HCM Lane LOS A A - - B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - - 0.2
HCM 6th TWSC
6: South Access Wilkison/Wilkinson Lake Blvd 10/10/2024
08 2045 No Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 7.9
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 51 0 0 57
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 51 0 0 57
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - 47 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 0 55 0 0 62
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 1 0 111 1
Stage 1 - - - - 1 -
Stage 2 - - - - 110 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1622 - 886 1084
Stage 1 - - - - 1022 -
Stage 2 - - - - 915 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1622 - 856 1084
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 856 -
Stage 1 - - - - 1022 -
Stage 2 - - - - 884 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 7.3 8.5
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 1084 - - 1622 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.057 - - 0.034 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.5 - - 7.3 -
HCM Lane LOS A - - A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0.1 -
Queuing and Blocking Report
10/10/2024
08 2045 No Build PM SimTraffic Report
Page 1
Intersection: 1: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CSAH J/Ash St
Movement EB WB NB SB
Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 31 110 164 113
Average Queue (ft) 15 52 68 43
95th Queue (ft) 40 121 147 106
Link Distance (ft) 151 1544 2058 882
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement EB NB SB
Directions Served LR LT TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 100 54 56
Average Queue (ft) 51 14 24
95th Queue (ft) 107 56 50
Link Distance (ft) 685 270 1709
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: Monarch Way/West Access North Oaks Farms & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement WB NB
Directions Served LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 23 40
Average Queue (ft) 4 14
95th Queue (ft) 23 51
Link Distance (ft) 1276 637
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
10/10/2024
08 2045 No Build PM SimTraffic Report
Page 2
Intersection: 4: Rapp Farm Blvd & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement WB NB
Directions Served L LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 10 58
Average Queue (ft) 2 18
95th Queue (ft) 13 52
Link Distance (ft) 352
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Dr
Movement EB SB
Directions Served LT LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 38 33
Average Queue (ft) 15 21
95th Queue (ft) 45 41
Link Distance (ft) 1395 3443
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: South Access Wilkison/Wilkinson Lake Blvd
Movement NB
Directions Served LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 37
Average Queue (ft) 27
95th Queue (ft) 44
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%) 4
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Appendix P
Appendix P: Design Year Build (2045) Synchro Analysis
Worksheets
HCM 6th Roundabout
1: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CSAH J/Ash St 10/10/2024
09 2045 Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 13.7
Intersection LOS B
Approach EB WB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 119 387 172 800
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 143 414 184 824
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 939 156 597 258
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 143 625 485 312
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 12.5 6.8 8.0 18.3
Approach LOS B A A C
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves LTR LTR LTR LTR
Assumed Moves LTR LTR LTR LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Follow-Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609 2.609
Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976 4.976
Entry Flow, veh/h 143 414 184 824
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 530 1177 751 1061
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.831 0.935 0.935 0.971
Flow Entry, veh/h 119 387 172 800
Cap Entry, veh/h 440 1100 702 1030
V/C Ratio 0.270 0.352 0.245 0.777
Control Delay, s/veh 12.5 6.8 8.0 18.3
LOS B A A C
95th %tile Queue, veh 1 2 1 8
HCM 6th Roundabout
2: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
09 2045 Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 7.1
Intersection LOS A
Approach EB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 264 295 530
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 277 314 545
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 514 35 114
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 145 755 235
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 8.7 4.9 7.6
Approach LOS A A A
Lane Left Left Left
Designated Moves LR LT TR
Assumed Moves LR LT TR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000
Follow-Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609
Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976
Entry Flow, veh/h 277 314 545
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 817 1331 1228
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.953 0.940 0.972
Flow Entry, veh/h 264 295 530
Cap Entry, veh/h 779 1252 1194
V/C Ratio 0.339 0.236 0.444
Control Delay, s/veh 8.7 4.9 7.6
LOS A A A
95th %tile Queue, veh 2 1 2
HCM 6th TWSC
3: Monarch Way/West Access North Oaks Farms & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
09 2045 Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 200 5 7 80 0 9 0 20 0 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 6 215 5 7 110 5 9 0 20 17 0 16
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 6 20 14 11 2 11 2 0 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 7 234 5 8 120 5 10 0 22 18 0 17
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 125 0 0 239 0 0 398 392 237 401 392 123
Stage 1 - - - - - - 251 251 - 139 139 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 147 141 - 262 253 -
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.24 - - 7.21 6.52 6.2 7.12 6.52 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.21 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.21 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.326 - - 3.599 4.018 3.3 3.518 4.018 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1462 - - 1261 - - 546 544 807 560 544 928
Stage 1 - - - - - - 734 699 - 864 782 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 835 780 - 743 698 -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1462 - - 1261 - - 531 537 807 539 537 928
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 531 537 - 539 537 -
Stage 1 - - - - - - 730 695 - 859 777 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 814 775 - 719 694 -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.2 0.5 10.4 10.6
HCM LOS B B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 695 1462 - - 1261 - - 676
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.045 0.004 - - 0.006 - - 0.053
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.4 7.5 0 - 7.9 0 - 10.6
HCM Lane LOS B A A - A A - B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0 - - 0 - - 0.2
HCM 6th TWSC
4: Rapp Farm Blvd & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
09 2045 Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.7
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 190 18 11 75 35 19
Future Vol, veh/h 198 18 11 95 35 19
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 1 0 1 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 300 300 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 6 0 18 7 3 0
Mvmt Flow 215 20 12 103 38 21
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 236 0 344 216
Stage 1 - - - - 216 -
Stage 2 - - - - 128 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.28 - 6.43 6.2
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.43 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.43 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.362 - 3.527 3.3
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1243 - 650 829
Stage 1 - - - - 818 -
Stage 2 - - - - 895 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1242 - 642 828
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 642 -
Stage 1 - - - - 817 -
Stage 2 - - - - 885 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.8 10.6
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 697 - - 1242 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.084 - - 0.01 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.6 - - 7.9 -
HCM Lane LOS B - - A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC
5: CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Dr 10/10/2024
09 2045 Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.3
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 17 192 107 5 12 26
Future Vol, veh/h 17 200 126 6 12 26
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 6 6 8 0 8 12
Mvmt Flow 18 217 137 7 13 28
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 144 0 - 0 394 141
Stage 1 - - - - 141 -
Stage 2 - - - - 253 -
Critical Hdwy 4.16 - - - 6.48 6.32
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.48 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.48 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.254 - - - 3.572 3.408
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1414 - - - 599 881
Stage 1 - - - - 871 -
Stage 2 - - - - 775 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1414 - - - 591 881
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 591 -
Stage 1 - - - - 859 -
Stage 2 - - - - 775 -
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.6 0 10
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 1414 - - - 763
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.013 - - - 0.054
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.6 0 - - 10
HCM Lane LOS A A - - B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - - 0.2
HCM 6th TWSC
6: South Access Wilkison/Wilkinson Lake Blvd 10/10/2024
09 2045 Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.9
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 46 0 0 12
Future Vol, veh/h 97 0 46 77 0 12
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - 47 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 105 0 50 84 0 13
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 105 0 289 105
Stage 1 - - - - 105 -
Stage 2 - - - - 184 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1486 - 702 949
Stage 1 - - - - 919 -
Stage 2 - - - - 848 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1486 - 678 949
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 678 -
Stage 1 - - - - 919 -
Stage 2 - - - - 819 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 2.8 8.8
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 949 - - 1486 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.014 - - 0.034 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.8 - - 7.5 -
HCM Lane LOS A - - A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 -
HCM 6th TWSC
7: North Access Wilkison & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
09 2045 Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.1
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 218 0 0 92 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 239 0 1 98 0 4
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 260 0 1 107 0 4
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 260 0 369 260
Stage 1 - - - - 260 -
Stage 2 - - - - 109 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1304 - 631 779
Stage 1 - - - - 783 -
Stage 2 - - - - 916 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1304 - 630 779
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 630 -
Stage 1 - - - - 783 -
Stage 2 - - - - 915 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.1 9.6
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 779 - - 1304 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.006 - - 0.001 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.6 - - 7.8 0
HCM Lane LOS A - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC
8: CSAH 32/Ash St & East Access North Oaks Farms 10/10/2024
09 2045 Build AM 7:30 am 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 6
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.3
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 220 0 0 87
Future Vol, veh/h 4 4 237 2 1 92
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 4 4 258 2 1 100
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 361 259 0 0 260 0
Stage 1 259 - - - - -
Stage 2 102 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 638 780 - - 1304 -
Stage 1 784 - - - - -
Stage 2 922 - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 637 780 - - 1304 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 637 - - - - -
Stage 1 784 - - - - -
Stage 2 921 - - - - -
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 10.2 0 0.1
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 701 1304 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.012 0.001 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 10.2 7.8 0
HCM Lane LOS - - B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0 0 -
Queuing and Blocking Report
10/10/2024
09 2045 Build AM SimTraffic Report
Page 1
Intersection: 1: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CSAH J/Ash St
Movement EB WB NB SB
Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 17 56 56 101
Average Queue (ft) 3 20 25 56
95th Queue (ft) 22 60 60 110
Link Distance (ft) 151 1544 2058 882
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement EB NB SB
Directions Served LR LT TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 71 12 74
Average Queue (ft) 30 3 25
95th Queue (ft) 76 16 67
Link Distance (ft) 685 270 1709
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: Monarch Way/West Access North Oaks Farms & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement WB NB
Directions Served LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 8 34
Average Queue (ft) 1 21
95th Queue (ft) 9 44
Link Distance (ft) 1276 637
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
10/10/2024
09 2045 Build AM SimTraffic Report
Page 2
Intersection: 4: Rapp Farm Blvd & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement WB NB
Directions Served L LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 15 36
Average Queue (ft) 2 20
95th Queue (ft) 14 44
Link Distance (ft) 352
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Dr
Movement EB SB
Directions Served LT LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 10 37
Average Queue (ft) 1 23
95th Queue (ft) 11 43
Link Distance (ft) 1395 3443
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: South Access Wilkison/Wilkinson Lake Blvd
Movement NB
Directions Served LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 23
Average Queue (ft) 11
95th Queue (ft) 33
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
10/10/2024
09 2045 Build AM SimTraffic Report
Page 3
Intersection: 7: North Access Wilkison & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement
Directions Served
Maximum Queue (ft)
Average Queue (ft)
95th Queue (ft)
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 8: CSAH 32/Ash St & East Access North Oaks Farms
Movement
Directions Served
Maximum Queue (ft)
Average Queue (ft)
95th Queue (ft)
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
HCM 6th Roundabout
1: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CSAH J/Ash St 10/10/2024
10 2045 Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 17.8
Intersection LOS C
Approach EB WB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 196 632 580 755
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 196 642 582 774
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 806 422 617 231
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 199 777 385 833
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 10.4 17.2 24.8 14.8
Approach LOS B C C B
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves LTR LTR LTR LTR
Assumed Moves LTR LTR LTR LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Follow-Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609 2.609
Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976 4.976
Entry Flow, veh/h 196 642 582 774
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 607 897 735 1090
Entry HV Adj Factor 1.000 0.984 0.997 0.975
Flow Entry, veh/h 196 632 580 755
Cap Entry, veh/h 607 883 733 1063
V/C Ratio 0.323 0.716 0.791 0.710
Control Delay, s/veh 10.4 17.2 24.8 14.8
LOS B C C B
95th %tile Queue, veh 1 6 8 6
HCM 6th Roundabout
2: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
10 2045 Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 10.2
Intersection LOS B
Approach EB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1 1 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 399 848 430
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 407 862 436
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 396 64 276
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 316 739 650
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 9.3 11.6 8.1
Approach LOS A B A
Lane Left Left Left
Designated Moves LR LT TR
Assumed Moves LR LT TR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000
Follow-Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609
Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976
Entry Flow, veh/h 407 862 436
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 921 1293 1041
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.980 0.983 0.986
Flow Entry, veh/h 399 848 430
Cap Entry, veh/h 903 1271 1027
V/C Ratio 0.442 0.667 0.419
Control Delay, s/veh 9.3 11.6 8.1
LOS A B A
95th %tile Queue, veh 2 5 2
HCM 6th TWSC
3: Monarch Way/West Access North Oaks Farms & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
10 2045 Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 339 14 13 197 0 6 0 11 0 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 23 390 14 13 226 13 6 0 11 12 0 9
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 0 0 2 2 0 2 9 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 25 424 15 14 246 14 7 0 12 13 0 10
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 260 0 0 439 0 0 768 770 432 769 770 253
Stage 1 - - - - - - 482 482 - 281 281 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 286 288 - 488 489 -
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.1 - - 7.1 6.52 6.29 7.12 6.52 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.1 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.1 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.2 - - 3.5 4.018 3.381 3.518 4.018 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1304 - - 1132 - - 321 331 609 318 331 786
Stage 1 - - - - - - 569 553 - 726 678 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 726 674 - 561 549 -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1304 - - 1132 - - 308 318 609 302 318 786
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - 308 318 - 302 318 -
Stage 1 - - - - - - 555 539 - 708 669 -
Stage 2 - - - - - - 707 665 - 536 535 -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.4 0.4 13.3 14.3
HCM LOS B B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 453 1304 - - 1132 - - 410
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.041 0.019 - - 0.012 - - 0.056
HCM Control Delay (s) 13.3 7.8 0 - 8.2 0 - 14.3
HCM Lane LOS B A A - A A - B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0.1 - - 0 - - 0.2
HCM 6th TWSC
4: Rapp Farm Blvd & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
10 2045 Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.7
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 336 32 9 194 14 17
Future Vol, veh/h 365 32 9 205 14 17
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 300 300 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 0 11 2 7 12
Mvmt Flow 397 35 10 223 15 18
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 432 0 640 397
Stage 1 - - - - 397 -
Stage 2 - - - - 243 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.21 - 6.47 6.32
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.47 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.47 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.299 - 3.563 3.408
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1081 - 432 631
Stage 1 - - - - 668 -
Stage 2 - - - - 786 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1081 - 428 631
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 428 -
Stage 1 - - - - 668 -
Stage 2 - - - - 779 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.4 12.4
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 520 - - 1081 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.065 - - 0.009 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 12.4 - - 8.4 -
HCM Lane LOS B - - A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC
5: CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Dr 10/10/2024
10 2045 Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.5
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 79 353 194 16 14 18
Future Vol, veh/h 79 381 204 17 15 18
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 0 2 2 0 0 2
Mvmt Flow 86 414 222 18 16 20
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 240 0 - 0 817 231
Stage 1 - - - - 231 -
Stage 2 - - - - 586 -
Critical Hdwy 4.1 - - - 6.4 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 - - - 3.5 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1339 - - - 349 808
Stage 1 - - - - 812 -
Stage 2 - - - - 560 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1339 - - - 320 808
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 320 -
Stage 1 - - - - 745 -
Stage 2 - - - - 560 -
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 1.4 0 13.2
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 1339 - - - 477
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.064 - - - 0.075
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.9 0 - - 13.2
HCM Lane LOS A A - - B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - - 0.2
HCM 6th TWSC
6: South Access Wilkison/Wilkinson Lake Blvd 10/10/2024
10 2045 Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.5
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 51 0 0 57
Future Vol, veh/h 124 0 51 132 0 57
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - 47 - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 135 0 55 143 0 62
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 135 0 388 135
Stage 1 - - - - 135 -
Stage 2 - - - - 253 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1449 - 616 914
Stage 1 - - - - 891 -
Stage 2 - - - - 789 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1449 - 593 914
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 593 -
Stage 1 - - - - 891 -
Stage 2 - - - - 759 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 2.1 9.2
HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 914 - - 1449 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.068 - - 0.038 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.2 - - 7.6 -
HCM Lane LOS A - - A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0.1 -
HCM 6th TWSC
7: North Access Wilkison & CSAH 32/Ash St 10/10/2024
10 2045 Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.2
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 346 0 0 214 0 0
Future Vol, veh/h 361 0 6 231 0 6
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 392 0 7 251 0 7
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1
Conflicting Flow All 0 0 392 0 657 392
Stage 1 - - - - 392 -
Stage 2 - - - - 265 -
Critical Hdwy - - 4.12 - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.218 - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1167 - 430 657
Stage 1 - - - - 683 -
Stage 2 - - - - 779 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1167 - 427 657
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 427 -
Stage 1 - - - - 683 -
Stage 2 - - - - 774 -
Approach EB WB NB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 10.5
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT
Capacity (veh/h) 657 - - 1167 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.01 - - 0.006 -
HCM Control Delay (s) 10.5 - - 8.1 0
HCM Lane LOS B - - A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC
8: CSAH 32/Ash St & East Access North Oaks Farms 10/10/2024
10 2045 Build PM 4:30 pm 07/18/2045 Synchro 11 Report
Page 6
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.1
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 350 0 0 210
Future Vol, veh/h 2 3 362 6 4 223
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 2 3 393 7 4 242
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 647 397 0 0 400 0
Stage 1 397 - - - - -
Stage 2 250 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 436 652 - - 1159 -
Stage 1 679 - - - - -
Stage 2 792 - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 434 652 - - 1159 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 434 - - - - -
Stage 1 679 - - - - -
Stage 2 789 - - - - -
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 11.7 0 0.1
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 543 1159 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.01 0.004 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 11.7 8.1 0
HCM Lane LOS - - B A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0 0 -
Queuing and Blocking Report
10/10/2024
10 2045 Build PM SimTraffic Report
Page 1
Intersection: 1: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & Wilkinson Lake Blvd/CSAH J/Ash St
Movement EB WB NB SB
Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 48 106 127 145
Average Queue (ft) 22 59 78 44
95th Queue (ft) 54 127 133 133
Link Distance (ft) 151 1544 2058 882
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: CSAH 21/Centerville Rd & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement EB NB SB
Directions Served LR LT TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 118 82 67
Average Queue (ft) 56 24 33
95th Queue (ft) 113 79 70
Link Distance (ft) 685 270 1709
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: Monarch Way/West Access North Oaks Farms & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement WB NB
Directions Served LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 4 37
Average Queue (ft) 1 16
95th Queue (ft) 9 44
Link Distance (ft) 1276 637
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
10/10/2024
10 2045 Build PM SimTraffic Report
Page 2
Intersection: 4: Rapp Farm Blvd & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement WB NB
Directions Served L LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 15 34
Average Queue (ft) 2 14
95th Queue (ft) 14 38
Link Distance (ft) 352
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 300
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: CSAH 32/Ash St & Holly Dr
Movement EB SB
Directions Served LT LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 44 37
Average Queue (ft) 19 20
95th Queue (ft) 50 43
Link Distance (ft) 1395 3443
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: South Access Wilkison/Wilkinson Lake Blvd
Movement NB
Directions Served LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 32
Average Queue (ft) 24
95th Queue (ft) 43
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%) 3
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Queuing and Blocking Report
10/10/2024
10 2045 Build PM SimTraffic Report
Page 3
Intersection: 7: North Access Wilkison & CSAH 32/Ash St
Movement
Directions Served
Maximum Queue (ft)
Average Queue (ft)
95th Queue (ft)
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 8: CSAH 32/Ash St & East Access North Oaks Farms
Movement
Directions Served
Maximum Queue (ft)
Average Queue (ft)
95th Queue (ft)
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Appendix Q
Appendix Q: Right-Turn Warrant Analyses
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection.
INPUT
Value
50
427
14
OUTPUT
Value
29
right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Variable
Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h:
Guidance for determining the need for a major-road
Do NOT add right-turn bay.
Roadway geometry:
Variable
Major-road speed, mph:
Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h:
Right-turn volume, veh/h:
2-lane roadway
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Ri
g
h
t
-
T
u
r
n
V
o
l
u
m
e
,
v
e
h
/
h
Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h
Add right - turn bay
Right Turn Warrant - Intersection 3 EB - PM Peak Hour - Build Year
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection.
INPUT
Value
50
252
13
OUTPUT
Value
56
right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Variable
Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h:
Guidance for determining the need for a major-road
Do NOT add right-turn bay.
Roadway geometry:
Variable
Major-road speed, mph:
Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h:
Right-turn volume, veh/h:
2-lane roadway
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Ri
g
h
t
-
T
u
r
n
V
o
l
u
m
e
,
v
e
h
/
h
Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h
Add right - turn bay
Right Turn Warrant - Intersection 3 WB - PM Peak Hour - Build Year
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection.
INPUT
Value
50
221
17
OUTPUT
Value
65
right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Variable
Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h:
Guidance for determining the need for a major-road
Do NOT add right-turn bay.
Roadway geometry:
Variable
Major-road speed, mph:
Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h:
Right-turn volume, veh/h:
2-lane roadway
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Ri
g
h
t
-
T
u
r
n
V
o
l
u
m
e
,
v
e
h
/
h
Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h
Add right - turn bay
Right Turn Warrant - Intersection 5 WB - PM Peak Hour - Build Year
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection.
INPUT
Value
45
361
1
OUTPUT
Value
78
right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Variable
Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h:
Guidance for determining the need for a major-road
Do NOT add right-turn bay.
Roadway geometry:
Variable
Major-road speed, mph:
Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h:
Right-turn volume, veh/h:
2-lane roadway
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Ri
g
h
t
-
T
u
r
n
V
o
l
u
m
e
,
v
e
h
/
h
Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h
Add right - turn bay
Right Turn Warrant - Intersection 7 EB - PM Peak Hour - Build Year
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection.
INPUT
Value
30
368
6
OUTPUT
Value
2416
right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Variable
Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h:
Guidance for determining the need for a major-road
Do NOT add right-turn bay.
Roadway geometry:
Variable
Major-road speed, mph:
Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h:
Right-turn volume, veh/h:
2-lane roadway
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Ri
g
h
t
-
T
u
r
n
V
o
l
u
m
e
,
v
e
h
/
h
Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h
Add right - turn bay
Right Turn Warrant - Intersection 8 NB - PM Peak Hour - Build Year
24-30671 ASH STREET TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY – LINO LAKES, MN
Architecture + Engineering + Environmental + Planning Appendix R
Appendix R: Left-Turn Warrant Analyses
Figure 2 - 5. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection.
2-lane roadway (English)
INPUT
Value
50
5%
427
239
OUTPUT
Value
522
CALIBRATION CONSTANTS
Value
3.0
5.0
1.9
Variable
85th percentile speed, mph:
Percent of left-turns in advancing volume (V A), %:
Advancing volume (VA), veh/h:
Opposing volume (V O), veh/h:
Variable
Average time for left-turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s:
Limiting advancing volume (V A), veh/h:
Guidance for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay:
Left-turn treatment NOT warranted.
Variable
Average time for making left-turn, s:
Critical headway, s:
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Op
p
o
s
i
n
g
V
o
l
u
m
e
(
V
O),
v
e
h
/
h
Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h
Left-turn treatment
warranted.
Left-turn
treatment not
warranted.
Left Turn Warrant - Intersection 3 EB - PM Peak Hour - Build Year
Figure 2 - 5. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection.
2-lane roadway (English)
INPUT
Value
50
5%
252
404
OUTPUT
Value
437
CALIBRATION CONSTANTS
Value
3.0
5.0
1.9
Variable
85th percentile speed, mph:
Percent of left-turns in advancing volume (V A), %:
Advancing volume (VA), veh/h:
Opposing volume (V O), veh/h:
Variable
Average time for left-turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s:
Limiting advancing volume (V A), veh/h:
Guidance for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay:
Left-turn treatment NOT warranted.
Variable
Average time for making left-turn, s:
Critical headway, s:
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Op
p
o
s
i
n
g
V
o
l
u
m
e
(
V
O),
v
e
h
/
h
Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h
Left-turn treatment
warranted.
Left-turn
treatment not
warranted.
Left Turn Warrant - Intersection 3 WB - PM Peak Hour - Build Year
Figure 2 - 5. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection.
2-lane roadway (English)
INPUT
Value
50
18%
432
210
OUTPUT
Value
306
CALIBRATION CONSTANTS
Value
3.0
5.0
1.9
Variable
85th percentile speed, mph:
Percent of left-turns in advancing volume (V A), %:
Advancing volume (VA), veh/h:
Opposing volume (V O), veh/h:
Variable
Average time for left-turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s:
Limiting advancing volume (V A), veh/h:
Guidance for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay:
Left-turn treatment warranted.
Variable
Average time for making left-turn, s:
Critical headway, s:
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Op
p
o
s
i
n
g
V
o
l
u
m
e
(
V
O),
v
e
h
/
h
Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h
Left-turn treatment
warranted.
Left-turn
treatment not
warranted.
Left Turn Warrant - Intersection 5 EB - PM Peak Hour - Existing
Figure 2 - 5. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection.
2-lane roadway (English)
INPUT
Value
50
17%
470
221
OUTPUT
Value
309
CALIBRATION CONSTANTS
Value
3.0
5.0
1.9
Variable
85th percentile speed, mph:
Percent of left-turns in advancing volume (V A), %:
Advancing volume (VA), veh/h:
Opposing volume (V O), veh/h:
Variable
Average time for left-turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s:
Limiting advancing volume (V A), veh/h:
Guidance for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay:
Left-turn treatment warranted.
Variable
Average time for making left-turn, s:
Critical headway, s:
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Op
p
o
s
i
n
g
V
o
l
u
m
e
(
V
O),
v
e
h
/
h
Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h
Left-turn treatment
warranted.
Left-turn
treatment not
warranted.
Left Turn Warrant - Intersection 5 EB - PM Peak Hour - Build Year
Figure 2 - 5. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection.
2-lane roadway (English)
INPUT
Value
45
1%
237
361
OUTPUT
Value
1176
CALIBRATION CONSTANTS
Value
3.0
5.0
1.9
Advancing volume (VA), veh/h:
Opposing volume (V O), veh/h:
Variable
Variable
Variable
85th percentile speed, mph:
Percent of left-turns in advancing volume (V A), %:
Critical headway, s:
Average time for left-turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s:
Limiting advancing volume (V A), veh/h:
Guidance for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay:
Left-turn treatment NOT warranted.
Average time for making left-turn, s:
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Op
p
o
s
i
n
g
V
o
l
u
m
e
(
V
O),
v
e
h
/
h
Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h
Left-turn treatment
warranted.
Left-turn
treatment not
warranted.
Left Turn Warrant - Intersection 7 WB - PM Peak Hour - Build Year
Figure 2 - 5. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection.
2-lane roadway (English)
INPUT
Value
30
1%
231
368
OUTPUT
Value
1378
CALIBRATION CONSTANTS
Value
3.0
5.0
1.9
Variable
85th percentile speed, mph:
Percent of left-turns in advancing volume (V A), %:
Advancing volume (VA), veh/h:
Opposing volume (V O), veh/h:
Variable
Average time for left-turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s:
Limiting advancing volume (V A), veh/h:
Guidance for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay:
Left-turn treatment NOT warranted.
Variable
Average time for making left-turn, s:
Critical headway, s:
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Op
p
o
s
i
n
g
V
o
l
u
m
e
(
V
O),
v
e
h
/
h
Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h
Left-turn treatment
warranted.
Left-turn
treatment not
warranted.
Left Turn Warrant - Intersection 8 SB - PM Peak Hour - Build Year
1
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD
ITEM 6B
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Tom Hoffman, Environmental Coordinator
DATE: November 26, 2024
REQUEST: Peltier Ponds PUD Concept Plan Review
CASE NUMBER: PC2024-004
CR2024-004
APPLICANT: Lennar
Josh Metzer
16355 36th Ave N, Suite 100
Plymouth, MN 55127
OWNER: Hal & Pam Leibel
7566 Peltier Lake Drive
Lino Lakes, MN 55038
BACKGROUND:
The applicant, Lennar, is proposing a master planned development located on
the West side of 20th Ave N (CSAH 54) just across from Watermark, East of
Peltier Lake Drive, and North of the Centerville border. The development
contains approximately 125.02 gross acres, 79.21 developable and consists of
mix of residential housing The proposed development is called Peltier Ponds.
Future land use applications may include:
• Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
• Rezoning property from R, Rural to PUD, Planned Unit Development
• PUD Preliminary Plan/Preliminary Plat
• PUD Final Plan/Final Plat.
This staff report is based on a review of the following documents:
• Applicant Narrative prepared by Lennar dated November 12, 2024
• Peltier Ponds Development PUD Concept Plan prepared by James R Hill
dated November 11, 2024
ANALYSIS
Current Zoning and Land Use
2
Current Zoning R, Rural
Current Land Use Agricultural
Future Land Use per
2040 Comp Plan
Medium Density, High Density, and
Signature Gateway
Utility Staging Area Stage 1A (2018-2025)
Stage 1B (2025-2030)
Current Proposal
The attached applicant’s narrative provides a detailed description of the project.
Per the narrative, “The proposed land uses 74 (74) – CMA back to back
townhome, 39 (39) CMS row townhome, 149 (149) single-family lots.”
Residential
The applicant is proposing the following mix and number of housing types:
Housing Type # Units
CMA back-to-back
Townhomes = 74
CMS row Townhomes = 39
Single-Family = 149
262
The residential development transitions from townhomes along 20th Avenue
North and the SE corner of the proposed property to sing-family lots in the
interior of the property heading west to Peltier Lake Dr. Trails, sidewalks and
stormwater ponds are included throughout the development.
Commercial
No commercial use being proposed on site.
General Site Characteristics
The 125.02-acre site is predominately used for agricultural purposes or existing
in a natural state with associated wetlands covering the site. The site is
immediately west of Watermark development that consists of single family
residential uses and park and open space amenities.
3
Land Cover
Pre-settlement land cover (Marschner) was forested big woods.
The Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) identifies the
southeastern parcel as deciduous forest and cattail marsh. This area currently
wetlands scattered throughout the site . Moving north the land transitions to
cultivated herbaceous vegetation. This area of the site is currently agricultural
and farmed for row crops.
Soils
The soils within the agricultural area consist of Nessel Fine sandy loam and
Hayden fine sandy loam. These consist of a layer of silty sand and sandy lean
clay. The top layer of silty sand is categorized as Hydrologic soil group B along
with silty clay loam Group D.
Based on the soil boils provided onsite infiltration will be limited due to the layer
of silty clay loam and sandy clay. Infiltration may be possible in soil group B
where an adequate depth of soil exists for infiltration.
Groundwater was also observed throughout the site at an average depth of 8’.
Peltier lake at the time of borings was at an elevation of 882-884’ which would be
consistent with the water levels found in the boring log. It is expected that the
ground water in this area is tied into the NWL of Peltier Lake.
The sandy, well drained areas offer the potential for stormwater infiltration,
provided groundwater separation requirements can be met.
Rare, Unique, or Significant Resources
A Rare plant survey was completed by Midwest Natural Resources on
September 15, 2024. 16 potential rare species were identified using the DNR’s
online Rare Species Guide associated with wetland habitat.
During the site visit no state-listed plant species were found during the late -
season rate plant survey. It is to be noted that the survey occurred outside the
appropriate time window to search for early and mid-season rare species. Based
on the disturbance and degradation of the existing habitat it is unlikely that any of
these species are established on this site.
Stormwater Management
Peltier Lake is identified as an impaired water by the MPCA for excess nutrients.
The project provides the opportunity to eliminate agricultural runoff from the site
4
and create stormwater management systems that improve water quality entering
the lake. With the conversion of agricultural land to residential development
there will be a nutrient and sediment loading reduction. However, it is also
imperative that the site meet the city and RCWD requirements for stormwater
runoff to limit pollutant runoff.
The concept plan includes nine stormwater ponds. A stormwater management
plan must be submitted at the Preliminary Plat phase. Larger ponds are
proposed running parallel to the wetland areas. This will allow for treatment prior
to discharge into the adjacent wetland complex.
Existing drainage flows from east to west. There is significant elevation change
from the east side of the site to the west (change of elevation from 906’-890’).
Opportunities exist to incorporate a stormwater treatment train that filters and
treats stormwater runoff as it flows through the site. An y opportunities to
incorporate natural treatment systems into the site should be encouraged.
There is an existing waterway onsite that discharges directly to Peltier Lake, a
stormwater management BMP should be installed prior to the start of the
waterway to reduce sediment and pollutants leaving the site.
Options for infiltration should be evaluated and used where practicable. Capacity
is limited to existing drainages and infiltration and water retention should be used
where feasible.
Use of stormwater for irrigation purposes for the site should be evaluated and if
feasible required as part of site development.
Flood Plain
The southeastern corner of the site falls within a Zone A floodplain. This is an
area where the 100-year flood elevation has been determined by approximate
means. No buildings are proposed to be in the floodplain area.
Grading and construction of storm water management best management
practices (BMP’s) are permissible with the flood plain. Any filling of flood plain
will require mitigation and FEMA approval.
Shoreland District
The subject property is located within the Shoreland Management Overlay
District of Peltier Lake. Shoreland Districts extend 1,000’ from the Ordinance
High Water Level of the water body. Peltier Lake is classified as Natural
Environment lakes. Natural Environment Lakes are generally small, often
shallow lakes with limited capacities for assimilating the impacts of development
and recreational use.
5
City Code Section 1102.13 details additional Shoreland Planned Unit
Development (PUD) requirements. PUD development allows the city and
developer to work in partnership to achieve creative conservation design
elements that preserve open space, and unique natural features and resources.
For purposes the Environmental Boards review priority considerations should be
given to:
1) Amount of open space (50% minimum).
2) Building heights (36’ maximum).
3) Increased building setbacks from the Lake (150’ minimum). The concept
shows approximately 170’ from Peltier.
4) Amount of impervious surface (35% maximum).
Wetlands
The Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) administers the Wetland
Conservation Act (WCA) for this area. Any wetland impacts will need to be
approved by RCWD. Wetlands preserved on site will need to meet RCWD and
City buffer requirements.
There are nineteen wetlands identified on site. A majority of the wetlands (13)
are shown within the currently farmed area of the parcel. These wetlands are
considered degraded and have a lower biological value. Any wetlands that are
impacted will need to meet mitigation requirements.
Larger wetlands on the south side of the parcel are within the RCDW wetland
management corridor and will require a 50’ buffer. The extent of the wetlands
and corridor will be evaluated with preliminary plans. It is likely additional
wetlands will be included within these protected areas. Wetlands in these areas
will be placed under a conservation easement with the project.
All wetlands that are preserved onsite should be managed and restored as
possible. Mitigation and management to enhance wetland function and benefits
should be fully investigated.
Opportunity exists on the site to establish and restore an upland buffer in excess
of 40’ wide along the western edge of the “built” area. Stormwater ponds are
allowed within buffer areas.
Greenway System, Parks and Trails
The 2040 Comprehensive Plan does show areas of value for natural resource
conservation related to wetlands on the site. The greenway system consists of a
6
Natural Resource Conservation area running along the wetland and trunk storm
sewer. Conservation easements should extend from the wetlands on the NE
quandrant of the parcel to Peltier lake through the greenway.
Peltier Lake road should be realigned through the development and a trail
system with public use will be incorporated into the existing lake frontage.
Realigning the road will create the opportunity for public use, shoreline
restoration, and extended trail system through this corridor.
Conservation easements should be provided over all open space and wetland
areas. The goal of this project is to extend the greenway corridor and trail
system by connecting it to existing infrastructure to the east. Watermark park
and trail system is located directly east of this property. The ultimate goal is to
connect these greenways with future development and acquisition of land
creating a link between the open space corridor.
A future neighborhood park is also shown in this area. A future park is proposed
along the greenway corridor and along the existing storm sewer outlet prior to
Peltier Lake.
Tree Preservation
A Tree Preservation and Mitigation Plan will be required for existing trees that are
proposed to be removed. The area has been farmed and few desirable trees
exist within this area. On the northern end of the project tree removal should be
limited to provide screening from existing houses on the south side of Rehbein
St.
The southwest corner of the property has trees that are shown for removal.
These areas appear to be outside of the basic use area and will require
mitigation. Provide calculations in future submittals showing the basic use area
for the property and areas of environmentally sensitive areas.
Tree preservation protection and mitigation will be required for trees that are
remaining onsite.
Landscaping
Boulevard trees are required at the rate of one (1) tree per lot frontage for single
family and two-family lots. Townhomes and multi-family properties require one
tree per 70 feet of linear feet of road frontage. Open areas shall be landscaped.
Landscape screening and buffers shall be installed along CSAH 54/20th Street.
Noise mitigation techniques and berms along CSAH 54/20th Street
7
may be required at the time of development. The landscape plans shall comply
with Section 1007.043 (17), Required Screening, Landscaping and Buffer Yards
of the zoning ordinance.
Environmental Review Considerations
This area is part of the I-35 E Corridor AUAR. As part of the AUAR an
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) will be required. The process
operates according to rules adopted by the state’s Environmental Quality Board
(EQB). The EAW document is designed to provide a brief analysis and overview
of the potential environmental impacts for a specific project and to help the City,
referred to as the Responsible Government Unit (RGU), determine whether an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is necessary. The questions contained
within the document are established by the EQB.
The EAW is not meant to approve or disapprove a project, but is simply a source
of information to guide other approvals and permitting decisions. In fact it is one
of the advantages to larger scale development projects. Preparation of the EAW
will help inform the design of the project before the submittal of a formal
development application.
The public comment period lasts for 30 days. During that period all interested
parties may submit written comments to the City. At the end of the 30 day
period, the City reviews all of the public comments, as well as the content of the
EAW to determine whether the project needs further changes or analysis. The
City will prepare a written response to all substantive comments received during
the public comment period.
Once completed the City Council will determine if potential impacts of the project
are significant enough to require the preparation of an Environmental Impact
Statement. If not, the Council will adopt a finding of no significant impact and the
environmental review process ends. The developer may then begin to prepare
the design of the project and the land use application information.
Drinking Water Protection
The southern portion of the site is within the Lino Lakes Drinking Water Supply
Management Area (DWSMA). This area is considered to be of moderate
vulnerability and will need to be accounted for during development. A majority of
the stormwater bmp’s and development is proposed outside of the DWSMA.
The Minnesota Well Index indicated no known locations of a well on the property.
Proof should be provided of the well sealing and septic system removal if a septic
system existed.
8
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff has the following recommendations for consideration by the board:
1. The buffer for wetland 10 appears to connect to the rear property line of
lots 8 &9 block 12. Where possible ensure buffers are met and expanded
prior to private property to limit future encroachment from adjacent
property owners.
a. Provide increased buffer widths around wetland where the trail is
going past these locations. Buffers should be extended throughout
the park land to provide pretreat of runoff before discharging to the
wetlands.
b. Show buffers in between the trail and existing channel shown on
the proposed plans.
c. All wetlands should be included in conservation easements.
d. This area is included in the RCWD wetland corridor plan . With
future submittals impacts and mitigation of wetlands will be
required.
i. Wetlands falling within the wetland corridor will require 50’
buffers
2. The project will disturb more than an acre of soil and will be required to
obtain an NPDES permit. Proof of permit shall be required before
construction.
a. A SWPPP shall be required in additional submittals as required by
the MPCA meeting sections 5.2-5.26
b. Final erosion and sediment control will be reviewed with future
submittals
c. Redundant perimeter control will be required around all wetlands
onsite where a 50’ natural buffer cannot be maintained during
construction. Redundant perimeter control should be spaced 3 -5’
apart.
3. Rice Creek Watershed District shows Anoka County Ditch 72 branch 1
running through the site. Verify the location and use of the ditch with the
watershed. Ditch location and drainage should be shown on the plan set if
it is required to be maintained.
4. The project site is located with the I-35 E corridor AUAR. As part of the
planning the AUAR mitigation checklist should be used.
a. This are is listed as an area of cultural significance and will need to
be investigated.
9
5. Building setbacks to Peltier Lake should be shown on the plant set to
confirm 150’ setback requirements are met.
6. Confirm building heights, open space, and impervious cover within the
shoreland area to confirm all requirements are being met.
7. Building height should be limited to a maximum of 36’ or less in the
shoreland zone. Confirm heights of buildings on future submittals.
8. Provide conservation easements over all wetland and open space in the
development to ensure connectivity with existing and future development.
a. A contiguous path should be created from the lake extending east
to 35E and beyond.
9. Retain 50’ wide drainage & utility easement over trunk storm sewer.
10. Provide removal of dead ash trees within dedicated park and open space
to limit maintenance required by the city once ownership is transferred.
11. Within the tree preservation plan break down the removals between the
basic use area and where mitigation is required.
a. Stormwater BMP’s are not included in the basic land use area.
Currently removal of trees is being shown for stormwater ponding
and would require mitigation.
12. Provide additional detail on stormwater management BMP’s. Infiltration
should be proposed where feasible based on soil types and depth of
groundwater.
13. A stormwater treatment train that filters and treats stormwater runoff as it
flows through the site should be developed. Any opportunities to
incorporate natural treatment systems into the project should be
encouraged.
14. Use of stormwater for irrigation purposes for the site should be evaluated
and if feasible required as part of site development. Larger stormwater
ponds constructed for fill should be evaluated for water reuse.
15. The southern portion of the site is within the Lino Lakes drinking water
supply management area.
a. This area is considered moderately vulnerable, and considerations
should be taken into account for the proposed project.
10
ATTACHMENTS
1. General Location Map
2. Project Narrative
3. Peltier Ponds PUD Concept Plan
NARRATIVE: Peltier Ponds - Single-Family & Townhome Residential Community
U.S. Home, LLC, dba Lennar, is pleased to submit this request for Sketch Plat Review for a proposed single-
family and townhome community composed of 262 homes.
Existing Conditions
The subject property is located on the west side of 20th Ave N (CSAH 54) just across from Watermark, east
of Peltier Lake Drive, and north of the Centerville city border. The site is 125.02 gross acres (79.21 net
developable acres) in size and is currently farmed agricultural land with wetlands and pockets of wooded
upland and lowland. The site is currently guided Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential,
and High Density Residential. Nineteen wetlands have been delineated on the site totaling 15.66 acres in
size.
Guided Land Uses and (current use of land) surrounding the subject property include:
• North – Guided Urban Reserve (single-family residential – Rehbein’s Peltier View);
• West – Guided Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, and Open Water (two
single-family homesteads and Peltier Lake);
• Southwest – Guided Medium Density Residential (50-acre single-family homestead)
• South – City of Centerville (single-family residential and open space);
• East – Guided Low Density Mixed Residential (20th Ave N & Watermark).
Description of Requests
Lennar is requesting Sketch Plat Review of the proposed single family and townhome community named
Peltier Ponds. Eventually we will request a rezoning of the subject property from Rural to PUD to align
with the guided Land Use of the property and will be submitting a Preliminary Plat application upon
completion of the Sketch Plat process.
Proposed Homes and Architecture
Peltier Ponds will consist of single-family homes and townhomes with a similar variety to those built in
Watermark.
CMA
back-to-back
townhome
CMS
row
townhome
55-foot
single-family
lots
65-foot
single-family
lots
80-foot
single-family
lots
Bedrooms 3 3 2 to 4 3 to 5 3 to 5
Home Sq Ft 1770-1800 1800-1900 942-2400 1920-3876 1920-3876
Garage Stalls 2 2 2 to 3 3 3 to 4
Garage Sq Ft 405 379-388 396-744 634-731 634-951
Price Range TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Unit Count 74 39 75 49 25 262
Infrastructure
Peltier Ponds is located adjacent to existing residential developments. As a result, infrastructure is readily
available for extension to serve this development.
Access for the new neighborhood will be provided through the westward extension of Watermark Way
and a southward extension of Gordon Ave. Access will also be provided from Peltier Lake Drive on the
north, however, from this point Peltier Lake Drive will be moved away from the lake and redirected
internally into the new neighborhood. The existing Peltier Lake Drive will be abandoned and possibly
turned into a trail in the future.
The single-family homes and all but four of the row townhomes will be served by public streets with a
curb-to-curb street width of 32 feet. The back-to-back townhomes will all be served by private streets.
Public Park, Open Space, Trails, and Sidewalks
Lennar is proposing the dedication of 11.14 acres of land in the central and west portions of the site
intended for a City park. Approximately 7.7 acres of the site is being preserved in open space. When
including the park, ponding areas, and wetlands 58.3 acres will be open space which constitutes 47% of
the site. We intend to include a series of trails within the community, final locations and alignment will
be determined as we move further along with grading and stormwater design, but at this point there are
1.08 miles of trails proposed. Sidewalks will be constructed on one side of each public street. The public
park areas will be deeded to the City and trails within the park will be maintained by the City. Common
open spaces will likely be owned by the HOA and trails outside of park maintained by the HOA.
Trees and Landscape Buffers
Given the long-term agricultural use of the property, and large presence of wetlands, much of the site is
void of trees. There are, however, a few large clusters of trees in the southern wetlands, along the north
property line, near the homesteads by the lake, and around the creek in the center of the site where the
park is proposed to be located. There was a total of 2,190 trees were inventoried. As with most new
residential developments Lennar is proposing the removal of 318 trees from the site, which means roughly
85.5% will be preserved. Lennar will be planting trees in accordance with City Code requirements.
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Goals
The Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan guides the subject properties Low Density Residential, Medium
Density Residential, and High Density Residential. This is a complicated site to design to meet density
requirements given the scattered location of wetlands and the need to provide ponding, but PUD zoning
would provide the flexibility to offer the proposed mix of townhomes and three base lot width standards
for the single-family homes to achieve the density required by the Comp Plan. The proposed plan meets
density requirements in the Low Density area but is below minimum density in the Medium Density area
and High Density areas. However, as the tables below demonstrate, the overall minimum density range
needed (3.0 units/acre) can be reached when combining Low, Medium, and High Density calculations
together. This, along with 18.84 acres being preserved in park/open space, the preservation of wetlands
and trees, and the creation of a public park, the proposed concept plan aligns with goals outlined in the
Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan.
Leibel Property
Use Net
Acres
Density
Unit Range
Proposed
Units Density
LDR (1.6 - 3.0 units/acre) 35.69 58 - 108 99 2.77 units/acre (within density requirements)
MDR (4.0 - 6.0 units/acre) 28.53 114 – 172 112 3.93 units/acre (below minimum density required)
HDR (6.0 - 8.0 units/acre) 15.00 90 - 120 51 3.40 units/acre (below density requirements)
79.21 222 - 344 262 3.31 units/acre
Goal 1: Create a unified vision and future for the city, promote a well-planned community, prevent
fragmented development, address the impacts of development and redevelopment on natural
resources, aesthetics and view corridors, and provide balanced land use and connectivity that ensures
the integration of both sides of the regional park.
• Preserving open space, providing park dedication and trails, and/or providing stormwater
management areas, in excess of minimum standards to implement the Greenway System and Rice
Creek Watershed District’s Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan.
• Restoring/enhancing ecological systems.
• Managing stormwater using natural filtration and other ecologically based approaches.
• Providing life-cycle and affordable housing.
Peltier Ponds will be preserving 18.84 acres of upland open space (58.3 acres of open space if
ponding and wetland areas were included) which is 47% of the site. This plan proposes the
dedication of a 11.14-acre park at the west side of the community near Peltier Lake. Of the 15.58
acres of wetland located on the site 14.55 acres will be preserved along with the creation of 6.35
acres of wetland buffers. Five of the wetlands (2.44 acres combined) on site are being restored
from their current farmed agricultural state to revitalized wetlands. As mentioned, there will be
nine (9) stormwater ponds constructed which will treat stormwater runoff prior to it entering the
natural systems of wetlands, creeks, and lakes. By offering two types of townhomes and the
various floorplans that can be built on 55-foot, 65-foot, and 80-foot wide lots Peltier Ponds will
certainly provide Lino Lakes residents options for life-cycle housing.
Goal 3: Ensure housing development is compatible with existing and adjacent land uses and provides
accessibility to key community features and natural amenities.
• Link trails to parks, lakes, and schools.
• Encourage pedestrian activity in residential areas by providing sidewalks and trails as well as
connections to existing and future pedestrian or transit facilities.
We are working to define the final layout for trails, but the goal will be to provide connections
between the Peltier Ponds park, Peltier Lake, and 20thAve/Hwy 54 which would provide a
connection to Watermark trails and Watermark Park. Sidewalks will also be provided on all public
streets.
Goal 4: Maintain safe neighborhoods and community areas.
• Develop neighborhoods with mixed housing styles that promote diversity and attract all age
groups.
The proposed mix of homes should attract buyers of all ages and demographics from young single
first-time buyers, couples, families with children, empty-nesters, and retirees.
Goal 7: Sustain Lino Lakes’ Natural Resources which make it such a desirable place to live.
• Protect and preserve the natural resources throughout the city.
• Continue to promote the use of Planned Unit Developments (PUD) as the city’s preferred
development process to implement the Greenway System.
Please see comments provided for Goal 1 and Goal 3 above. In addition, 1,872 trees will be
preserved out of the 2,190 trees existing on site today. Many of which are located in the proposed
park and open spaces.
Comprehensive Plan Parks, Open Space, and Trail Goals
Goal 1: Continue development and maintenance of an appropriate balance of active and passive
recreational activities to serve the diverse needs of the community for people of all ages and abilities,
including, where possible, neighborhood parks, larger multi-use community parks and the Rice Creek
Chain of Lakes Park Reserve (Regional Park).
• Acquire, reserve, develop and maintain sufficient park and open space land to fulfill the identified
and projected needs of the present and future populations.
• Continue, whenever possible, inclusion of neighborhood parks in future developments and
planned redevelopments.
• Direct and manage activities in an appropriate manner by balancing the use of programming
activities in the neighborhood parks.
As mentioned in the response for Land Use Goal 1, this plan proposes the dedication of an 11.14-
acre park near the center and west area of the community.
Goal 2: Collaborate with Anoka County to guarantee and improve public access of the Rice Creek Chain
of Lakes Park Reserve (Regional Park) waterways for recreational use and enjoyment of the community.
• Identify, develop and maintain new public access points to area lakes and waterways so that
residents can enjoy these unique recreational opportunities.
There is an opportunity for the City to create and offer a new public access point to Peltier Lake
at the western edge of the proposed park dedication area.
Goal 3: Develop, maintain and connect the current and proposed trails and greenway systems in the
City of Lino Lakes and the Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Park Reserve (Regional Park) in a manner that
preserves and sustains the natural environment.
• Preserve the open character of Lino Lakes through the preservation of natural open space and the
establishment of greenway corridors.
• To the extent possible, require an interconnected trail system to be developed concurrently with
the infrastructure of the subdivision or new development.
Please see comments provided for Land Use Goal 3 above.
Goal 4: Identify, protect and preserve the desirable natural areas and ecological and aquatic resources
of the community.
• Where possible, restore damaged or misused natural and ecologically significant areas to their
original state.
• Require natural space buffers, where appropriate, around wetlands to preserve their function and
value.
Please see wetland comments provided for Land Use Goal 1 above.
Goal 5: To provide city residents with parks, trails, greenways and natural areas for protection of the
natural environment, recreational uses, as visual/physical diversions from the hard surfacing of urban
development, and as a means to maintain the character, ambiance, appearance and history of the
community.
• The city shall reserve the right to acquire land within all development areas for park, natural open
space, greenways and trail purposes.
• Parkland dedication policies and ordinances shall be used by the city to require each developer
(of all land use categories) to dedicate land, or at the discretion of the city provide a payment in
lieu for all or part, for parks, trails, greenways and open space acquisition and development.
• Alternatives to direct acquisition of property, such as conservation easements, shall be used
where appropriate to set aside land for park and open space purposes.
Please see comments provided for Land Use Goal 1 and Goal 3 above. The proposed open spaces
would be placed under conservation easements.
Goal 7: Identify important existing natural resources for protection and work cooperatively with
developers and landowners to encourage healthy natural resource systems to retain the existing
natural character of the community through education.
• Encourage the preservation of natural vegetation including plants of oak savannas, prairies,
woodlands, wetlands and aquatic vegetation to be a design consideration for new subdivisions.
As mentioned above, this plan will restore and preserve 2.44 acres of wetlands, preserve trees,
and create new open spaces for natural vegetation to grow.
Schedule
Land development work (grading) would begin in Spring 2025 with continued grading and utility/street
construction getting started in Summer 2025. The overall project will likely be developed in four phases.
Lennar estimates full occupancy of the community will occur approximately 5 years from the date sales
begin.
Lennar has a long-standing history of building successful communities throughout the Twin Cities,
including similar such as Watermark (Lino Lakes), North Meadows (Blaine), and Willowbrooke (Oakdale).
We invite you to visit any of these communities and our website at lennar.com/new-
homes/minnesota/minneapolis-st-paul. We look forward to this opportunity to continue working with
the City of Lino Lakes and thank the City for its support.
Regards,
Josh Metzer
Land Entitlement Manager
Lennar Minnesota
29
9
9
W
E
S
T
C
.
R
.
4
2
,
S
U
I
T
E
1
0
0
,
B
U
R
N
S
V
I
L
L
E
,
M
N
5
5
3
0
6
PH
O
N
E
:
9
5
2
.
8
9
0
.
6
0
4
4
w
w
w
.
j
r
h
i
n
c
.
c
o
m
PL
A
N
N
E
R
S
/
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
S
/
S
U
R
V
E
Y
O
R
S
DRAWN BY
DATE
REVISIONS
PLM
7/29/24
CAD FILE
24205cp.dwg
PRO-ECT NO.
24205-00
SHEET 1 OF 1
Ja
m
e
s
R
.
H
i
l
l
,
I
n
c
.
PE
L
T
I
E
R
P
O
N
D
S
LI
N
O
L
A
K
E
S
,
M
I
N
N
E
S
O
T
A
CO
N
C
E
P
T
P
L
A
N
FO
R
LE
N
N
A
R
The Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 14, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka
County, Minnesota
AND
The South Half of Lot 1, Auditor’s Subdivision No. 47 Revised, Anoka County, Minnesota,
EXCEPT that certain part of the South Half of Government Lot 1, Section 14, Township 31,
Range 22, Anoka County, Minnesota, now known as the South Half of Lot 1, Auditor’s
Subdivision No. 47 Revised, described as follows: Beginning at the North Quarter Corner of
said Section 14, as the same is marked by a stone monument; thence West along the Section
line for 156 feet to a point near the centerline of a public road; thence South 6 degrees West,
following the general line of said public road, for 662.95 feet to the centerline of said
Government Lot 1, and the point of beginning of the tract hereby described; thence East,
along said Government Lot centerline for 200.29 feet; thence South, at right angles for 180
feet; thence West at right angles for 261.71 feet, more or less, to the centerline of aforesaid
public road; thence North 12 degrees 21 minutes East, along said road centerline, to
aforesaid centerline of Government Lot 1; thence East along said Government Lot centerline
for 22 feet to the point of beginning.
AND
The Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 14, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka
County, Minnesota.
AND
The North Half of Lot 1, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NUMBER 47 REVISED, Anoka County,
Minnesota, EXCEPT the following described real property: That part of the North Half of
Government Lot 1, Section 14, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County, Minnesota described
as follows: Commencing at the North Quarter corner of said Section 14; thence North 89
degrees 35 minutes 06 seconds West along the North line of said Section 14 a distance of
148.88 feet to the Meander corner and the centerline of Town Road; thence South 5 degrees
57 minutes 00 seconds West along said centerline of Town Road a distance of 331.55 feet to
the actual point of beginning of the tract to be hereby described; thence continuing South 5
degrees 57 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of 84.40 feet; thence South 15 degrees 18
minutes 48 seconds West along said centerline a distance of 251.26 feet to its intersection
with the South line of said North Half of Government Lot 1 as monumented; thence
South 88 degrees 58 minutes 52 seconds East along said South line a distance of 354.76 feet;
thence North 0 degrees 24 minutes 54 seconds East a distance of 330.56 feet; thence North
89 degrees 35 minutes 06 seconds West a distance of 282.00 feet to the actual point of
beginning. Also known as a part of Lot 1, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 47 REVISED, Anoka
County, Minnesota.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
A. 8/14/24: Updated layout
B. 8/27/24: Updated layout
C. 8/28/24: Density table
D. 11/11/24: Concept Revision
IC