HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-04-25 - City Council Work Session AgendaCITY COUNCIL AGENDA
C 1 T Y �`` O F Monday, August 4, 2025
IN KE
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION, 6:00 P.M.
Community Room (not televised)
1. Call to Order and Roll Call
2. Setting the Agenda: Addition or Deletion of Agenda Items
3. Biennial Review of Council Compensation
4. Lino Lakes Main Street Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR)
5. Otter Lake Road Extension Improvement Project Update
6. Vadnais Lakes Area Water Management Organization (VLAMO) JPA
Amendments/Update
7. City Administrator Update
8. Notices and Communications
/_11aL611111►IL IVIII
Page 1 of 617
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM 3.
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Roberta Colotti, City Clerk
MEETING DATE August 4, 2025
AGENDA ITEM: Biennial Review of Council Compensation
INTRODUCTION
The Lino Lakes City Charter states that the compensation for the office of Mayor and Council
Member is to be set in accordance with State Law.
BACKGROUND
City Code Section 203.01 Compensation of Mayor and Council Members, states that every two
years the City Council will review the salaries. It is recommended that the City Council review
the City Council salaries to be effective in 2026 in accordance with state law, city code and past
practices.
Minnesota Statute 415.22 states that the Council may set the salaries at an amount to be
established by ordinance and that the date must be effective after the next election. To meet
these timeframes, the ordinance would need to be ratified prior to November 4, 2025. With
the salary increase set to be effective January 1, 2026, or later. If there is interest in making an
amendment, a draft ordinance will be presented for first reading on August 11th.
REQUESTED COUNCIL DIRECTION
1. Council review of the Mayor and Council compensation as required by City Code
Section 203.01 Compensation of Mayor and Council Members.
2. Direction to staff regarding preparing an ordinance amendment regarding the
compensation of the Mayor and Council Members, effective January 1, 2026, or
thereafter.
ATTACHMENTS
1. City Charter - Council Salaries
2. MS 415-11- Setting Council Salaries
3. City Code - Council Salary Amounts
Page 2 of 617
SECTION 2.07. SALARIES.
The Mayor and Council Members shall receive such compensation as is fixed by the Council in accordance with state law.
Any increases in such compensation shall be available in accordance with applicable state law. Other officers and
employees of the City shall receive such salaries or wages as may be fixed by the Council.
Page 3 of 617
MINNESOTA STATUTES 2024 415.11
415.11 SECOND TO FOURTH CLASS CITIES; GOVERNING BODY SALARIES.
Subdivision 1. Set by ordinance. Notwithstanding the provisions of any general or special law, charter,
or ordinance, the governing body of any statutory or home rule charter city of the second, third or fourth
class may by ordinance fix their own salaries as members of such governing body, and the salary of the
chief elected executive officer of such city, in such amount as they deem reasonable.
Subd. 2. After next election. No change in salary shall take effect until after the next succeeding
municipal election.
Subd. 3. Temporary reductions. Notwithstanding subdivision 2 or a charter provision to the contrary,
the governing body may enact an ordinance to take effect before the next succeeding municipal election that
reduces the salaries of the members of the governing body. The ordinance shall be in effect for 12 months,
unless another period of time is specified in the ordinance, after which the salary of the members reverts to
the salary in effect immediately before the ordinance was enacted.
History: Ex1967 c 42 s 1,2; 1976 c 44 s 34; 2009 c 152 s 17
Official Publication of the State of Minnesota
Revisor of Statutes
Page 4 of 617
§ 203.01 COMPENSATION OF MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.
(1) Salaries. The compensation of the Mayor and each Council member shall be established from time to time by City
Council ordinance pursuant to M.S. § 415.11. Effective January 1, 2024, the salary of the Mayor shall be $11,298, and the
salary of each Council member shall be $9,497. Thereafter, every two years the City Council will consider whether a salary
adjustment is warranted. This salary is intended to cover all meetings that may be attended by the Mayor or Council
members except as expressly provided in this section.
(Ord. 07-97, passed 4-28-1997; Am. Ord. 17-01, passed 9-24-2001; Am. Ord. 10-05, passed 10-24-2005; Am. Res. 06-13,
passed 2-13-2006)
(2) Payment. The salaries established hereby are to be paid monthly.
(3) Economic Development Authority (EDA) meetings. The City Council will be compensated for attendance at EDA
meetings at the rate of $40 per meeting.
(Prior Code, § 203.01) (Am. Ord. 07-97, passed 4-28-1997; Am. Ord. 08-18, passed 11-26-2018; Am. Ord. 17-18, passed
11-26-2018; Am. Ord. 06-21, passed 6-28-2021; Am. Ord. 03-23, passed 6-26-2023)
Page 5 of 617
Council Work Session
AGENDA ITEM 4
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Tom Hoffman, Environmental Coordinator
MEETING DATE: August 4, 2025
TOPIC: Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR), Lino Lakes Main
Street Final AUAR
BACKGROUND
In September of 2024, the City Council approved a professional services contract with Kimley
Horn to prepare a master plan and complete an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR).
The study area includes 980 acres of the northwest portion of Lino Lakes. The process has
included multiple community outreach opportunities, involvement of study area stakeholders
and review by the City advisory boards and City Council.
Three development scenarios originally emerged, one being the existing 2040 Comprehensive
Plan. Each scenario maintained essentially the same residential unit count with a mix of land
use types but provided for different design alternatives. Through the design process scenarios
2 and 3 merged into Scenario 2.1, which establishes a gateway into the City at the border with
Blaine. Scenario 1 and Scenario 2.1 are proposed to be carried through the environmental
review process.
Resolution No. 25-51 authorized the preparation of the draft AUAR document. The
development scenarios were analyzed for potential environmental impacts. A mitigation plan
was created to address the environmental impacts.
The draft AUAR became available for public comment on May 271h and closed on June 26, 2025.
Five comment letters were received from government agencies and 12 comment letters were
received from the public. Responses to those comments are included in the AUAR and copies
of the comment letters can be found in Appendix F.
Staff has completed the review process for the Final AUAR and is submitted for the 10-day
objection period. No objections to the final AUAR were submitted
The Environmental Board reviewed the AUAR at their July 30 meeting and recommended
approval of the AUAR by City Council.
Page 6 of 617
RECOMMENDATION
Adopting Resolution 25-102 Approving Lino Lakes Main Street Final AUAR
ATTACHMENTS
1. Final AUAR
2. Resolution 25-102
Page 7 of 617
Lino Lakes Main Street
Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR)
WJ u ly 2025
Prepared for:
CITY,ra
�INOL KES
Prepared by:
Kimley,$)) Horn
Page 8 of 617
Table of Contents
1. Project Title........................................................................................................................
2. Proposer.............................................................................................................................
3. RGU...................................................................................................................................
4. Reason for EAW Preparation............................................................................................
5. Project Location.................................................................................................................
6. Project Description.............................................................................................................
7. Climate Adaptation and Resilience....................................................................................
8. Cover Types.......................................................................................................................
9. Permits and Approvals Required.......................................................................................
10. Land Use............................................................................................................................
11. Geology, Soils, and Topography/Landforms.....................................................................
12. Water Resources...............................................................................................................
13. Contamination/Hazardous Materials/Wastes....................................................................
14. Fish, Wildlife, Plant Communities, and Sensitive Ecological Resources (Rare Features)
15. Historic Properties..............................................................................................................
16. Visual.................................................................................................................................
17. Air.......................................................................................................................................
18. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions/Carbon Footprint......................................................
19. Noise..................................................................................................................................
20. Transportation....................................................................................................................
21. Cumulative Potential Effects..............................................................................................
22. Other Potential Environmental Effects...............................................................................
MitigationPlan..........................................................................................................................
List of Tables
Table 1: Development Scenarios...........................................................................................
Table 2: Climate Considerations and Adaptations................................................................
Table3: Cover Types.............................................................................................................
Table4: Trees........................................................................................................................
Table 5: Permits and Approvals Required.............................................................................
Table 6: Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan Designations within the AUAR Study Area
Table7: Soil Types................................................................................................................
Table 8: Projected Wastewater Demands.............................................................................
Table 9: Project Water Demands...........................................................................................
Table 10: MPCA "What's in My Neighborhood?" Sites.........................................................
Table 11: Construction Emissions.........................................................................................
Table 12: Operational Emissions...........................................................................................
Table 13: Trip Generation Forecasts.....................................................................................
Table14: Intersection LOS....................................................................................................
Table15: Mitigation Plan.......................................................................................................
List of Figures
Figure 1: USGS Map ........................................
Figure 2: AUAR Study Area .............................
Figure 3: Scenario 1.........................................
Figure 4: Scenario 2.........................................
Figure 5: NCEI County Time Series - Average
Temperature Trends for Anoka County
..3
..3
..3
..3
..4
..7
11
17
20
22
31
35
52
56
67
67
67
69
71
72
78
78
79
..8
14
18
18
20
24
33
42
50
52
70
70
73
74
79
..5
..6
..9
10
11
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR
July 2025
Page 9 of 617
Figure 6: NCEI County Time Series - Average Precipitation Trends for Anoka County.....................12
Figure7: Existing Cover Types............................................................................................................19
Figure8: Existing Land Use.................................................................................................................23
Figure9: 2040 Land Use.....................................................................................................................25
Figure10: Existing Zoning...................................................................................................................27
Figure 11: FEMA 100-year Floodplain.................................................................................................29
Figure12: Soil Types...........................................................................................................................34
Figure 13: Surface Water Resources Within the Study Area..............................................................37
Figure 14: Surface Water Resources Within 1 Mile of AUAR Study Area..........................................38
Figure15: Minnesota Well Index.........................................................................................................40
Figure 16: Full Build — Sewer Infrastructure........................................................................................43
Figure 17: Cross Section View of Drainage and Conservation Framework........................................49
Figure18: MPCA Sites........................................................................................................................54
Figure 19: Native Plant Communities, Sites of Biodiversity Significance, and Regionally
Significant
EcologicalAreas..................................................................................................................................66
Figure 20: Traffic Study Intersections..................................................................................................77
List of Appendices
Appendix A: List of Tax Parcels within Study Area
Appendix B: Agency Correspondence
Appendix C: Greenhouse Gas Analysis
Appendix D: Traffic Study
Appendix E: Comment Responses
Appendix F: Comments
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR
July 2025
Page 10 of 617
Alternative Urban Areawide Review
This Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) follows the format of an Environmental
Assessment Worksheet (EAW) (December 2022 version). Where the AUAR guidance provided by
the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) indicates that an AUAR response should differ
notably from what is required for an EAW, the guidance is noted in
Project Title
Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR
Proposer
Proposer: City of Lino Lakes
Contact Person Michael Grochala
Title: Community Development Director
Address: 600 Town Center Pkwy
City, State, ZIP: Lino Lakes, MN 55014-1182
Phone: 651-982-2427
Email: mgrochala@linolakes.us
3. RG U
RGU City of Lino Lakes
Contact Person- Michael Grochala
Title Community Development Director
Address: 600 Town Center Pkwy
City, State, ZIP: Lino Lakes, MN 55014-1182
Phone: 651-982-2427
Email: mgrochala@linolakes.us
4. Reason for EAW Preparation
AUAR Guidance: Not applicable to an AUAR.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR
July 2025
Page 11 of 617
5. Proiect Location
County: Anoka
City/Township: Lino Lakes
PLS Location (1/4, 1/4, Section, Township, Range): Section 6 and 7, Township 31 N, Range
22W
Watershed (81 major watershed scale): Mississippi River — Twin Cities
GPS Coordinates: Approximately 45.196527,-93.132409
Tax Parcel Number: See Appendix A for full list.
At a minimum, attach each of the following to the AUAR:
• US Geological Survey 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map indicating project
boundaries (see Figure 1)
• Map depicting the boundaries of the AUAR and any subdistricts used in the AUAR
analysis (see Figure 2)
• 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)
• Cover types map as required for Item 8 (see Figure 7)
• Land use and planning and zoning maps as required in conjunction with Item 10
(see Figure 8, Figure 9, and Figure 10)
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 4 July 2025
Page 12 of 617
Figure 1: USGS Map
Legend -
e,r•-
...+� Study Area
-c'oo
�� • : � c�a --�Oo '. � 31: � s.,-: �_.:. v _ _ _ 32
00
-------------
yr.
2 yPo � . � - I - � - ,nI Lin • ,q t .t.^ ... •• ••. •I. ,
\ - _ : - - -_ i ' _ .I ,- . •...��-1�1 i' CbrrKibrl Cen�e. ± •_
_ % rat CemKl V �
Ceon
18 �`• U
tm 0 1,500 3,000
-: — — — _e•opyri•gk� Oyl US Feet
- LINO AKES o ' -
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 5 July 2025
Page 13 of 617
Figure 2: AUAR Study Area
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 6 July 2025
Page 14 of 617
6. Project Description
AUAR Guidance: Instead of the information called for on the EAW form, the description section
of an AUAR should include the following elements for each major development scenario
included:
• Anticipated types and intensity (density) of residential and commercial/warehouse/light industrial
development throughout the AUAR area
• Infrastructure planned to serve development (roads, sewers, water, stormwater system, etc.).
Roadways intended primarily to serve as adjoining land uses within an AUAR area are normally
expected to be reviewed as part of an AUAR. More arterial" types of roadways that would cross
an AUAR area are an optional inclusion in the AUAR analysis; if they are included, a more
intensive level of review, generally including an analysis of alternative routes, is necessary.
• Information about the anticipated staging of various developments, to the extent known, and of
the infrastructure, and how the infrastructure staging will influence the development schedule
The AUAR study area encompasses 316 tax parcels on approximately 962 acres in the city of
Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota. The study area is bound by Pine Street NE to the north,
Sunset Avenue (CSAH 53) to the west, Century Trail and Carl Street to the south, and 41n
Avenue to the east. Main Street (CSAH 14) is an east -west road that bisects the study area. The
surrounding area generally consists of private residences ranging from medium -density housing
to farmsteads. The study area is currently used for residential and agricultural (sod) purposes.
Development Scenarios
Two development scenarios evaluated in this AUAR are defined in Table 1 and shown on
Figure 3 and Figure 4. Development within the study area may start as early as Spring 2026
and will be constructed over multiple phases over the next 30+ years, depending on market
conditions.
The intent of the AUAR is to recognize the potential impacts of the maximum build -out and
identify mitigation measures that may be taken to compensate for those impacts.
Redevelopment of the study area would include new infrastructure, including streets, water
service, sewer systems, stormwater infrastructure, and utilities. All of these new services would
be extensions to existing infrastructure or upgrades to existing systems to support the new land
development.
Scenario 1
Scenario 1 (Figure 3) is the city's existing 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Scenario 1 focuses on
higher -density and commercial development along both sides of Main Street, with lower -density
residential development to the north and south. Medium -density housing would bridge the space
between the high -density areas and the low -density areas.
Scenario 2
Scenario 2 (Figure 4) centralizes higher- and medium -density housing and commercial
development near the Lino Lakes/Blaine border around the Main Street and Sunset Avenue, with
low -density prioritized on the eastern side of the study area, backing up to existing Lino Lakes
housing.
Proposed Infrastructure
Roadway Network
In both scenarios, a proposed collector road would serve as a north -south connection from
Robinson Drive to Main Street and continue north to Pine Street. Another collector road is
anticipated to be built to provide an east -west connection from Robinson Drive to 4th Avenue.
Additional neighborhood road connections are expected to be built to link future developments to
these main roads. See Item 20: Transportation for more analysis on the impact the proposed
development will have on the existing transportation system.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 7 July 2025
Page 15 of 617
Parks and TrailE
A portion of the study area for both scenarios is anticipated to be used for city park use, as well
as several greenway systems, which allow for a natural resource enhancement/conservation
area. The area's development will feature the construction of a segment of the Bunker -Chain of
Lakes Regional Trail along Main Street. Upon completion, the trail will span three cities, extend
14.5 miles, and connect to a wider regional trail system. Both scenarios also propose a network
of trails throughout the future development, totaling approximately 41,500 linear feet (LF) of
asphalt trail and 5,200 LF of regional trail.
Utilities
For both Scenarios, the City's existing water and sanitary sewer collection system will need to be
extended to serve the new development. Stormwater management facilities will also need to be
expanded. See Item 12: Water Resources for further analysis of existing and proposed systems.
Development Staging
According to the City's Utility Staging Plan, development near the study area will advance from
south to north, depending on the locations of existing utilities. In Scenario 2, changes in
development staging can be expected due to its variation from the comprehensive plan outlined
in Scenario 1. Additionally, changes may arise from factors such as land ownership patterns,
market conditions, and other influences.
Table 1: Development Scenarios
Low Density Residential
Scenario 1 (Current
Comprehensivemr
1,600 units
Scenario 2
(PreferredComponent
Development
1,500 units
Medium Density Residential
600 units
900 units
High Density Residential
1,200 units
1,100 units
Commercial
60,000 square feet
62,000 square feet
Total Project Area
962 acres
962 acres
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR
July 2025
Page 16 of 617
Figure 3: Scenario 1
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR
July 2025
Page 17 of 617
Figure 4: Scenario 2
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 10 July 2025
Page 18 of 617
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.
Trends in temperature, precipitation, flood risk, and cooling degree days are described below
for the general project location. Some of these climate predictions use specific scenarios
called SSPs (Shared Socioeconomic Pathways) or RCPs (Representative Concentration
Pathways) by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. SSP 245 and RCP 4.5 are
intermediate scenarios where emissions peak around 2040 and then decrease. SSP 370 and
RCP 8.5 are high -emissions scenarios where emissions continue to rise through the
century.' In an intermediate scenario, greenhouse gas emissions stabilize, whereas in a high
emissions scenario, they continue to increase significantly.2
Temperature
According to the National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI), the historical
average temperature in Anoka County between 2004 and 2024 was approximately 45.15°F,
with the lowest average in 2014 (40.5°F) and the highest average in 2024 (48.8°F), as
shown in Figure 5.3According to the Minnesota Climate Mapping and Analysis Tool, the
annual daily average temperature in the study area is projected to increase to 49.2°F from
2040 to 2059 under an intermediate emissions pathway (SSP 245),In 2080-2099, the annual
daily average temperature is projected to further increase to 52.2°F and 54.4°F under an
intermediate (SSP 245) and high emissions pathway (SSP 370), respectively.4
Figure 5: NCEI County Time Series - Average Temperature Trends for Anoka County
Anoka County, Minnesota Average Temperature
April -March
2004 2006
2008 2010 2012
2022 2024
Urban Heat Island
Surfaces and structures such as roads, parking lots, and buildings absorb and re -emit more
heat from the sun than natural landscapes. This can significantly raise air temperature and
1 Climate Explorer Metadata. Available at.https://climate.umn.edu/dnrs-climate-explorer-tool-cmipS
2 Climate Explorer Metadata. Available at https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/climate/climate-explorer-metadata.htm1.
3 National Centers for Environmental Information, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. County Time
Series. Available at: https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/climate-at-a-glance/county/time-series.
4 Minnesota CHMAT. University of Minnesota. Available at
https://app.climate.umn.edu/?output type=modelVal&scenario=ssp370 2080-
2099&model=ensemble&variable=tmax-degF&time frame=yearly&aoi=none#intro pane
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 11 July 2025
Page 19 of 617
overall extreme heat vulnerability in urban areas where there are dense concentrations of
these surfaces. This is referred to as urban heat island effect.
Extreme heat vulnerability means how likely people or communities are to suffer from health
problems due to extreme heat. The Metropolitan Council's Extreme Heat Map Tool shows
land surface temperature for the Twin Cities region with green representing areas of low land
surface temperature, yellow representing medium temperature, and red representing high
temperature. According to the map, the AUAR study area is located in an area of medium
heat vulnerability.5
Precipitation
According to the National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEIS), historic average
annual precipitation in Anoka County between 2004 and 2024 was approximately 30.49
inches, with the lowest average in 2022 (20.97 inches) and the highest average in 2020
(37.6 inches), as shown in Figure 6. Average annual precipitation under an immediate
emissions pathway (SSP 245) in Anoka County from 2040-2059 is projected to be 34.4
inches. From 2080-2099, average annual precipitation is projected to be 33.3 inches and
33.4 under RCP 4.5 and 35.70 under an intermediate (SSP 245) and high emissions
pathway (SSP 370), respectively.'
Figure 6: NCEI County Time Series -Average Precipitation Trends for Anoka County
Anoka County, Minnesota Precipitation
April -March
2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022
965.20mm
914.40mm
863.60mm
812.80mm
762.00mm
711.20mm
660.40mm
609.60mm
558.80mm
508.00mm
2024
Flood Risk
The study area has mapped floodplain from both FEMA and Rice Creek Watershed District
(RCWD). The FEMA floodplain is delineated as Special Flood Hazard Zone A. Zone A is
determined through approximate methods and does not have a base flood elevation
associated with the delineation. The 100-year floodplain is delineated based on the area that
has a 1 % chance or greater of inundation from a flooding source in any given year.
According to RCWD, the majority of the 100-year floodplain within the study area is one foot
in depth or less outside of the ditch systems. Both FEMA and RCWD floodplain areas require
permitting approvals prior to impacts or construction within the floodplain.
5 Extreme Heat Map Tool. Metropolitan Council. Available at https://metrocouncii.org/Communities/Planning/Local-
Plan n i ng-Ass ista n ce/CVA/Tools- Resources. asp
6 Minnesota CliMAT. University of Minnesota. Available at
https://app.climate.umn.edu/?output type=modelVal&scenario=ssp370 2080-
2099&model=ensemble&variable=tmax-deaF&time frame=vearlv&aoi=none#intro Dane
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 12 July 2025
Page 20 of 617
Additionally, the Metropolitan Council's Localized Flood Map Screening Tool' identifies
localized flood hazards, referred to as Bluespots, which are broken into risk categories based
on potential flood water depth. This tool is meant to show potential localized flood risk areas
during short-term, extreme rain events. The tool shows several Primary, Secondary, Tertiary,
and Shallow Bluespots mapped throughout the study area with maximum depths ranging
from 0.37 feet to 8.92 feet. Primary Bluespots are the first areas to fill with water and are
generally considered higher risk, while Secondary Bluespots are separate, isolated low areas
generally considered low risk.
All three sources of flood data show a risk of flooding within the study area. Consideration
should be taken during the design and review of individual proposed development to verify
that appropriate flood mitigation measures are being implemented to protect future
development as well as neighboring properties.
Further analysis of flood risks and mitigation is described in Item 12: Water Resources.
Cooling Degree Days
As defined by the National Weather Service, degree days are based on the assumption that
when the outside temperature is 65°F, heating or cooling is not needed to be comfortable.
Degree days are the difference between the daily temperature mean and 65°F. If the
temperature mean is above 65°F, 65 is subtracted from the mean and the result is the
cooling degree days. For example, if the mean temperature over a 24-hour period is 70°F,
then there have been 5 cooling degree days.8 Cooling degree days are used as a proxy to
estimate cooling needs for buildings.
According to Heat Vulnerability in Minnesota, the number of cooling degree days in 2019 for
Anoka County was 379. The number of cooling days in 2050 for Anoka County is projected
to be 453 and 598 for RCP 4.5 and 8.5, respectively.9
' Localized Flood Map Screening Tool. Metropolitan Council Available at
https://metrocou ncii.org/Communities/Planning/Local-Planning-Assistance/CVA/Tools-Resources.aspx.
8 "What Are Heating and Cooling Degree Days." National Weather Service. Available at
https://www.weather.gov/key/climate heat cool.
9 Heat Vulnerability in Minnesota. Minnesota Department of Health and the University of Minnesota. Available at
httos://mar)s.umn.edu/climatehealthtool/heat aoD/.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 13 July 2025
Page 21 of 617
b. For each resource
category in the table
below, describe 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.
Table 2: Climate Considerations
and Adaptations
.-Climate
Change Adaptations
Risks and
I
(Scenario 1 and Scenario 2)
Vulnerabilities
Project Design
Aspects of building
In the comingBuildings could be constructed
architecture/materials
decades, the with rooftop -ready
choices and site design
location of the infrastructure for solar power
may impact urban heat
study area is generation and green or light
island conditions in the
anticipated to colored roofs to reduce cooling
surrounding area,
experience: needs.
including changing climate
zones, temperature
• Increased Building shells could be
trends, and potential for
annual designed so that they are more
extended heat waves.
temperatures energy efficient by reducing
• Increased the heating and cooling load.
annual City ordinance 1007.049
precipitation requires that boulevard trees
and more be planted at a rate of one tree
frequent heavy per lot for single and two-family
rainfall events properties. 'o
• Increased For townhome and multi -family
freeze thaw properties, one tree is required
cycles for every 70 linear feet of street
• Medium urban frontage, according to City
heat island zoning ordinance 1007.049.
effect • Tree trenches may be used to
provide additional stormwater
capacity.
• New trees and landscaping
planted with future
development could reduce
runoff and mitigate urban heat
island effect. City zoning
ordinance 1007.049 requires a
minimum canopy coverage for
commercial parking areas.
• Permeable pavers may be
used and would reduce runoff
by allowing rain to soak into
the ground.
"Source: City Code 1007.049
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 14 July 2025
Page 22 of 617
Land Use
No 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. A
portion of the study area
is located in a FEMA flood
zone, where there is a 1 %
annual chance of flooding
and a 26% chance of
flooding over a 30-year
period (FEMA Zone A).
More details on flood
areas and risks are
provided in Items 10:
Land Use and 12: Water
Resources.
A portion of the I . Future design of the study area
proposed
and associated stormwater
development is in
management facilities will be
an area with a risk
completed to reduce the risk of
of flooding.
flooding in the AUAR study
area. Buildings will be set at
elevations to maintain
clearance above 100-year
flood elevations. Infiltration
areas, such as native
landscaping, may be used and
would improve water quality
and stormwater runoff in the
project vicinity. Stormwater
and Floodplain Mitigation items
are detailed in Item 12: Water
Resources.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR
15 July 2025
Page 23 of 617
Water Current Minnesota climate
Resources trends and anticipated
climate change in the
general location of the
project may influence
water resources.
Contamination/ Current Minnesota climate
Hazardous trends and anticipated
Materials/ climate change in the
Wastes general location of the
project may influence the
potential environmental
effects of
generation/use/storage of
Water resources
in the general
project area may
become warmer,
more polluted,
and change in
volume due to
increased
temperatures and
runoff. There may
be more
evaporation and
water available
when it rains
leading to an
increase in the
flood potential. It
is projected that
there will be more
severe storm
events with high,
intense rain
amounts which
will require
drainage systems
to be adequately
maintained to
accommodate for
the increase in
water volume.
Proposed
residential and
small-scale
commercial
development is
not anticipated to
generate
hazardous waste
hazardous waste and rr materials.
materials.
• Chapter 1011 of City Code
requires native buffers around
stormwater ponds, wetlands,
streams, and ditches, and
infiltration where necessary."
• Developers will consider native
plants and perennials for
landscaping and stormwater
features to absorb water and
reduce the water demand for
irrigation.
• Water reuse systems may be
implemented to reduce water
usage.
• Stormwater Best Management
Practices (BMPs) will be
designed to weather a 100-
year storm event in
accordance with City /
Watershed requirements as
the property is developed, see
Item 12: Water Resources.
In the event that a greater than
100-year storm event occurs,
site layouts and location of
proposed BMP should be
designed to ensure that
emergency stormwater
overflow routes will be
achievable.
Not applicable.
" Source: Chapter 1011 of City Code:
https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/Iinolakes/latest/Iinolakes_mn/0-0-0-24002
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR
16
July 2025
Page 24 of 617
8. Cover Types
Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after
development.
AUAR Guidance: The following information should be provided:
• A cover type map, at least at the scale of a USGS topographic map, depicting:
o Wetlands (identified by Circular 39 type)
o Watercourses (rivers, streams, creeks, ditches)
o Lakes (identify public waters status and shoreland management classification)
o Woodlands (break down by classes where possible)
o Grassland (identify native and old field)
o Cropland
o Current development
• An overlay map showing anticipated development in relation to the cover types. This
map should also depict any "protection areas," existing or proposed, that will preserve
sensitive cover types. Separate maps for each major development scenario should be
generally provided.
The AUAR study area covers 962 acres of land. Existing and proposed cover types within the
study area are shown in Table 3 and Figure 7 and were determined by reviewing aerial
photography, National Wetland Inventory data, land cover classification maps. There are several
wetlands throughout the study area, primarily in the southwest corner and north central portions
of the study area.12 The majority of the existing land use is wooded and used for agricultural (sod
farms).
Scenario 1 and 2
Table 3 provides a high level estimate for cover types in both scenarios within the AUAR area. A
detailed analysis of impacts on natural and semi -natural land cover types cannot be completed
until specific projects are determined; however, a "Conservation Design Framework" will be used
12 Wetland delineations have not been completed as part of this AUAR; therefore, jurisdictional wetland locations and
exact wetland boundaries have not been confirmed. Wetland delineations will be required as individual development
projects are proposed.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 17 July 2025
Page 25 of 617
to guide future development. This Framework is focused on conservation of natural plant
communities and high quality wildlife habitat. Its use will provide guidance to protect natural plant
community and wildlife conservation in the AUAR area. A summary of the conservation design
principles behind the Framework include:
• Protect streams, lakes, and groundwater by purifying, filtering, and infiltrating surface
runoff to the maximum extent possible
• Preserve, restore, and enhance existing natural and semi -natural areas and wildlife
habitat
• Create wildlife opportunities by restoring and managing wildlife habitat
• Establish wide buffers and connections around and between core and outlier habitats
through greenway corridors
See Item 12: Water Resources for more information on the Conservation Design Framework as is
relates to stormwater facilities and Figure 17 and Figure 18 for potential locations of the
greenway corridors. Additionally, green infrastructure does not currently exist within the study
area. Infiltration systems, tree trenches and tree boxes, wetlands, green roofs, and permeable
pavements could be constructed as part of future development plans.
Table 3: Cover Types
!L7AW
Wetlands
89
Proposed for Scenarios
� 1 and 2 (Acres)"
89
Wooded
155
180
Grassland
13
20
Cropland horticulture
525
0
Lawn/Landscaping
43
285
Ditches/Stormwater
76
196
Impervious Surface
61
192
Total
962 acres
962 acres
Table 4: Trees
Percent of Tree Canopy Approximately 50% of the existing tree N/A
Removed coverage within the study area. This
number assumes most trees around the
high -priority wetlands would remain.
Number of New Trees N/A 4,80014
Planted
Removal or damage to existing trees would have to follow tree replacement guidelines as outlined in
City Ordinance 1007.049.15
13 Note: Proposed cover types are a high level estimate and could change as development occurs within
the study area.
"This was estimated using City Code Section 1007.049 (3) Canopy Cover, (4) Foundation landscape, (5)
Open Areas, (7) Boulevard Trees, and (7)(b) single family and townhome/multi family Boulevard Tree
requirements.
15 Source: City Code 1007.049
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 18 July 2025
Page 26 of 617
Figure 7: Existing Cover Types
:.
Legend
b _
' 4 4 M Q Study Area
i fi l City Boundary
Cover Type
{ p} Grassland
Horticulture
�'• Impervious
Landscaping
Wooded
5 _M Wetlands
T♦ r
Public Drainage
t � r System
Private Drainage
System
Ir
AK
_ ;J�c i ;1YP: �•
Irt'.L. _ �.- � !^:._+E+` 1'•�*'� Y t- i it � A
♦♦i 1
�i. IDI ST
"+R
J MNRTL'E'LN
� _ -siai� eX� ..s _ ARLO L•N o e
MA
._..n• .► .ems .v1 - ` - ;T;. fir.
���� ., f f �' • vY1�, .fir � C •__ �r�.� ~ �� - �- � �=,
f. �• '!. � r .v 4 . ..�i�t z `• ,� •� � - Y fix: �'4j �.
a
�' •ip ,4 �i . � ��� � t
'•ai: d - APPALOOSA �' s�'i!re Esri G �`; cir 0 750 1,500
,T ;► US Feet
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 19 July 2025
Page 27 of 617
9. Permits and Approvals Required
AUAR Guidance: A listing of major approvals (including any comprehensive plan amendments
and zoning amendments) and public financial assistance and infrastructure likely to be required
by the anticipated types of development projects should be given for each major development
scenario. This list will help orient reviewers to the framework that will protect environmental
resources. The list can also serve as a starting point for the development of the implementation
aspects of the mitigation plan to be developed as part of the AUAR.
Table 5: Permits and Approvals Required
Unit of Governmenrmr� .- of Application
Federal
Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit
To be applied for, if
U.S. Army Corps of
applicabie
Approved Jurisdictional Determination
To be applied for, if
Engineers
applicable
U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Incidental Take Permit
To be applied for, if
Service
applicable
Letter of Map Revision
To be applied for, if
applicable
Conditional Letter of Map Revision
To be applied for, if
Federal Emergency
Management Agency
applicable
Letter of Map Amendment
To be applied for, if
applicable
State
Antidegradation Assessment
To be submitted, if
applicable
Construction Contingency Plan and Response
To be applied for, if
Action Plan approval
applicable
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
To be applied for, if
Minnesota Pollution
Stormwater Permit for Construction Activities
applicable
Control Agency
and General Permit
Notice of Intent of Demolition
To applied for, if
applicable
Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit
To be applied for, if
applicable
Section 401 Water Quality Certification
To be applied for, if
applicable
General Permit 97-0005 for Temporary Water
To be applied for; if
Appropriations (need if more than 10,000 gallons
applicable
per day of water is appropriated)
Preliminary Well Construction Assessment
To be applied for; if
Minnesota Department
of Natural Resources
applicable
To be applied for; if
Water Appropriations Permit
applicable
Public Waters Work Permit
To be applied for; if
applicable
Minnesota Department
Watermain Plan Review and Extension Approval
To be applied for; if
applicable
Notification of Asbestos Related Work
To be applied for; if
of Health
applicable
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 20 July 2025
Page 28 of 617
Unit of Government
.- of Application
Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit Approval
To be applied for, if
applicable
Well Location and Construction Approval
To be applied for, if
applicable
Regional EM
Right -of -Way Permit
To be applied for, if
Anoka County
applicable
Road Access Permits
To be applied for, if
applicable
Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit
To be applied for, if
applicable
Direct Connection Permit
To be applied for, if
applicable
Encroachment Permit
To be applied for, if
Metropolitan Council
applicable
Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ) Allocation
To be applied for, if
Adjustment
applicablle
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Review
To be applied for, if
applicable
Local El
Stormwater Management Plan
To be applied for, if
applicable
Erosion and Sediment Control Plan
To be applied for, if
applicable
Floodplain Alteration Permit
To be applied for, if
applicable
Drainage Authority Review and Approval — Mn.
To be applied for, if
Stat. Section 103E.227 (impoundments &
applicable
diversion) and/or Mn. Stat. Section 103E.805
Rice Creek Watershed
abandonment proceedings)
Wetland Delineation Boundary Confirmation
To be applied for, if
District
applicable
Wetland Conversation Act Replacement Plan
To be applied for, if
Approval
applicable
Regional Conveyance Systems Permit
To be applied for, if
applicable
Public Drainage Systems Permit
To be applied for, if
applicable
Appropriation of Public Waters Permit
To be applied for, if
applicable
AUAR Approval
In process
Building Permit
To be applied for, if
applicable
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
To be applied for, if
City of Lino Lakes
applicable
Demolition Permit
To be applied for, if
applicable
Surface Water Management Plan Approval
To be applied for, if
applicable
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 21 July 2025
Page 29 of 617
Unit of Government
.- of Application
Erosion Control Plan
To be applied for, if
applicable
Preliminary/Final Plat
To be applied for, if
applicable
Right -of -Way Permit
To be applied for, if
applicable
Rezoning
To be applied for, if
applicable
Site and Building Plan Approval
To be applied for, if
applicable
Sanitary Sewer Connection Permit
To be applied for, if
applicable
Municipal Water Connection Permit
To be applied for, if
applicable
Planned Unit Development Preliminary and Final
To be applied for, if
Plan Approval
applicable
Use Permit — Floodplain District
To be applied for, if
applicable
10. Land Use
a. Describe:
Existing land use of the site as well as areas adjacent to and near the site,
including parks and open space, cemeteries, trails, and prime or unique
farmlands.
Existing Land Use
The study area is located in the northwest corner of Lino Lakes, bordering Blaine to
the west and Columbus to the north. The study area consists of 316 parcels that are
currently used for agricultural use and low to medium -density housing, mostly located
in the southwest corner of the study area and along Pine Street. The 962-acre study
area is bounded by Sunset Ave to the west, 4th Ave to the east, Pine Street to the
north, and Century Trail and Carl Street to the south. Land uses adjacent to the study
area include residential land to the east and south, a small air park/airport to the
south, agricultural land and open space to the north, and residential housing and
open space to the west. There is one park within the study area and two nearby
parks south of the study area.
According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey,
approximately 134 acres of the study area contain soils that are considered prime
farmland or farmland of statewide importance (see Table 6).
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 22 July 2025
Page 30 of 617
Figure 8: Existing Land Use
Legend
(l
n
n
Q Study Area
City Boundary
Land Use
AGRICULTURAL
AIRPORT
CITY PARK AND
RECREATION
COMMERCIAL
_ INDUSTRIAL
MULTI -FAMILY
CCCJJJ
0
RESIDENTIAL
OPEN SPACE/
CONSERVATION
PUBLIC
RURAL
RESIDENTIAL
SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL
VACANT -
COMMERCIAL
VACANT -
RESIDENTIAL
VACANT -RURAL
RESIDENTIAL
A D
53
n
N
7,j PV`\ON --
- CARL Sl
_z�st AVF NL
•--
� � q
r< THOMAS ST
77TH-Sl----
z
J
�
Source: Esri, Maxar,
APPALOosA — 0
750 1,500
cT
US Feet
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 23 July 2025
Page 31 of 617
ii. Planned land use as identified in comprehensive plans (if available) and any
other applicable plan for land use, water, or resource management by a local,
regional, state, or federal agency.
AUAR Guidance: Water -related land use management districts should be delineated
on appropriate maps, and the land use restrictions applicable in those districts should
be described. If any variances or deviations from these restrictions within the AUAR
area are envisioned, this should be discussed.
2040 Comprehensive Plan
The City of Lino Lake's 2040 Comprehensive Plan was adopted in November 2020
and identifies the study area as low -density residential, medium -density residential,
high -density residential, planned residential/commercial, and urban reserve (see
Figure 9).16
The plan emphasizes balanced growth, environmental stewardship, and integration
of different land uses to enhance the overall living experience in Lino Lakes. A goal
defined in the Plan is to "Increase commercial/residential development in appropriate
and designated areas in the City of Lino Lakes." The City of Blaine's 2040
Comprehensive Plan identifies the land west of the study area as low -density
residential, and the City of Columbus identifies the land north of the study area as
rural residential and as a wildlife management area.
The Comprehensive Plan identified two new city parks and trails throughout the
study area that are anticipated to be built as development occurs to serve future
residential areas.
Table 6: Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan Designations within the AUAR Study Area
WFuture Land Use D-Purpose
Land guided for residential development with 1.6
Low Density Residential to 3 dwelling units per acre. The city's future
residential land use will predominantly be low -
density residential.
Medium Density Residential
Land guided for residential development with 4 to
6 dwelling units per acre.
High Density Residential
Land guided for residential development with 6 to
8 units per acre.
Land guided for a mix of residential, retail, and
office uses to be incorporated within one building,
structure, or development. Residential
development in these areas may include higher -
Planned Residential / Commercial
density housing options with densities ranging
from 8 to 10 units per acre. This land use district
provides opportunities for limited neighborhood -
scale supportive commercial uses that are
accessory to residential.
Land guided for post-2040 development to
Urban Reserve
promote orderly and efficient expansion of future
urban services and to prevent premature
expansion.
16 Source: 2040 Comprehensive Plan, City of Lino Lakes
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 24 July 2025
Page 32 of 617
Figure 9: 2040 Land Use
lNJ
Z
Legend
~
O Study Area
City Boundary
J
°
0 Parcels
0 w
J_z
o
Land Use
a
Agriculture
PINE-5'T NE
Civic and
Institutional
- Commercial
-High Density
Residential
- Industrial
Low Density
Residential
Medium Density
Residential
Park & Open Space
Planned
_ Commercial /
Residential
Private Airfield
Rural Residential
Urban Reserve
HENR.v I 1
MAIN ST
�" .
0 MAN Mai °
• [ 1 750 1,500
Aerial Imagery Courtesy of Nearmap (3%5/2024)
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 25 July 2025
Page 33 of 617
Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) 2020 Plan
The 2020 RCWD Watershed Management Plan outlines goals and strategies to
address watershed challenges. Key focuses include water quality management, flood
control, and natural resource preservation. RCWD aims to improve water quality and
ensure sustainable water resource management through monitoring programs,
watershed modeling, and BMPs. The plan highlights initiatives such as monitoring
programs, BMPs, and stormwater management techniques tailored to the
watershed's unique challenges.
The 2020 Plan will govern RCWD through 2029, and planning for the next update will
begin in 2028.
iii. Zoning, including special districts or overlays such as shoreland, floodplain,
wild and scenic rivers, critical area, agricultural preserves, etc.
Existing Zoning
The majority of the study area is currently zoned R, Rural. The southwest corner of
the study area is zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development (see Figure 9). The
purpose of the rural district is to preserve open land for agricultural purposes,
maintain open space near urban areas, to help guide the development of urban and
rural areas, and to allow urban farms to economically preserve land. The Planned
Unit Development zoning grants flexibility from certain zoning regulations in order to
achieve public benefits that may not otherwise be obtained under standard zoning
regulations. It is further intended that PUDs are to be characterized by central
management, integrated planning and architecture, a higher level of urban amenities,
preservation of natural open space, and more economically efficient use of land.
Existing zoning in Lino Lakes to the east and south of the study area includes Rural,
(R), Light Industrial (LI), General Industrial (GI), General Business (GB),
Neighborhood Business (NB), and Public Semi -Public (PSP). Land in Blaine just
west of the study area includes Development Flex (DF) and Farm Residence (FB).
Zoning to the north of the study area in Columbus and Ham Lake is Rural
Residential.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 26 July 2025
Page 34 of 617
Figure 10: Existing Zoning
N�
73st)AV E.NE_I
1 I I
Q
o w
�_J_z
J
0
a U)
EiST;N Ems}
- _MAIN 1� - — -
PPALOO
Z
Legend
Q Study Area
J
LU
City Boundary
0
°
Parcels
Zoning Description
Rural (R)
Rural Executive (R-
X)
Single Family
Residential (R-1)
q High -Density
Residential (R-4)
Planned Unit
Development (PUD)
Rural Residential
(RR)
Development Flex
(DF)
Farm Residence
(FR)
Neighborhood
Business (NB)
- General Business
(GB)
General Industrial
(GI)
Light Industrial (LI)
- Public Semi -Public
(PSP)
0 750 1,500 \
US Feet
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR
27
July 2025
Page 35 of 617
Other Designations
The study area does not fall within or adjacent to a wild and scenic river, critical area,
agricultural preserve, or shoreland overlay district.
Floodplains within the study area have been identified using the RCWD mapped
floodplains and are shown in Figure 11. Most of the study area is mapped as Flood
Zone A. Additionally, Flood Zone AE is mapped offsite to the south and west. Rice
Creek Watershed District has mapped the area as floodplain in their 2025 floodplain
mapping and modeling update. The floodplain areas from FEMA and RCWD
generally align in location and extent, with FEMA being slightly larger. Requirements
from both agencies must be met for alterations or impacts to the floodplain.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 28 July 2025
Page 36 of 617
Figure 11: Rice Creek Watershed District Floodplain
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 29 July 2025
Page 37 of 617
iv. If any critical facilities (i.e., facilities necessary for public health and safety,
those storing hazardous materials, or those 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.
No critical facilities are proposed as part of future development within the study area.
b. Discuss the project's compatibility with nearby land uses, zoning, and plans listed in
Item 10a above, concentrating on implications for environmental effects.
AUAR Guidance: The extent of conversion of existing farmlands anticipated in the AUAR
should be described. If any farmland will be preserved by special protection programs, this
should be discussed.
If development of the AUAR will interfere or change the use of any existing designated parks,
recreation areas, or trails, this should be described in the AUAR. The RGU may also want to
discuss under this item any proposed parks, recreation areas, or trails to be developed in
conjunction with development of the AUAR area.
The AUAR must include a statement of certification from the RGU that its comprehensive
plan complies with the requirements set out at Minnesota Rules, part 4410.3610, subpart 1.
The AUAR document should discuss the proposed AUAR area development in the context of
the comprehensive plan. If this has not been done as part of the responses to Items 6, 10,
12, 20, and others, it must be addressed here; a brief synopsis should be presented here if
the material has been presented in detail under other items. Necessary amendments to
comprehensive plan elements to allow for any of the development scenarios should be
noted. If there are any management plans of any other local, state, or federal agencies
applicable to the AUAR area, the document must discuss the compatibility of the plan with
the various development scenarios studied, with emphasis on any incompatible elements.
Compatibility with Existing Land Use
Both scenarios are consistent with existing surrounding land uses, which include residential
uses to the south, west, and east. All new development, redevelopment, change in land use,
or change in zoning are required to be consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Consistency with 2040 Comprehensive Plan
Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 assume the transition of the existing agricultural land to
residential and small-scale commercial land uses over a period of 30+ years. They also both
address the full build -out of the area and provide a foundation for future updates to the
Comprehensive Plan. Development of either scenario would not impact existing or future
designated parks, recreation areas, or trails as described in the comprehensive plan.
The City of Lino Lakes has certified that 2040 Comprehensive Plan complies with the
requirements set forth in Minnesota Rules, part 4410.3610, subpart 1.
Existing Zoning
The existing R, Rural zoning does not allow for single-family lots of less than 10 acres or
medium to high -density residential uses. Both scenarios would require a zoning change to
allow for residential and commercial uses.
Rice Creek Watershed District 2020 Plan
Both scenarios would be consistent with the goals and strategies identified in the RCWD
plan.
c. Identify measures incorporated into the proposed project to mitigate any potential
incompatibility as discussed in Item 10b above and any risk potential.
Scenario 1
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 30 July 2025
Page 38 of 617
Scenario 1 is consistent with all rules and regulations pertaining to future land use and would
require a rezoning for the areas designated as Rural. An amendment to the Comprehensive
Plan is required to allocate land for urban services beyond the 2030 utility staging area.
Scenario 2
Scenario 2 would require a comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning for the areas
designated as Rural.
Scenario 1 and Scenario 2
Future development will be required to meet the stormwater requirements of the surface
water management plans of the City of Lino Lakes, Rice Creek Watershed District, and the
MPCA NPDES General Permit. Additionally, all construction and development within will
follow best management practices regarding stormwater, erosion control, and drainage.
The City will coordinate with the Metropolitan Council to increase the Transportation Analysis
Zone (TAZ) allocations, if needed.
11. Geology, Soils, and Topography/Landforms
d. 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.
AUAR Guidance: A map should be included to show any groundwater hazards identified.
According to the Geologic Atlas of Anoka County (Minnesota Geological Survey, 2016), the
AUAR study area is underlain by peat and muck and sand facies.
Bedrock is encountered at varying depths across the AUAR study area, ranging in depth
from approximately 101 to 250 feet below ground surface (bgs) across most of the study
area. Bedrock is comprised of Cambrian systems including Jordan sandstone and St.
Lawrence formation.
No known sinkholes, unconfined/shallow aquifers, or karst conditions were located within the
AUAR study area. Additionally, there are no known limitations regarding geology and
buildability of the project area.
e. 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 soil
limitations, such as steep slopes or 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.
AUAR Guidance: The number of acres to be graded and number of cubic yards of soil to be
moved need not be given; instead, a general discussion of the likely earthmoving needs for
development of the area should be given, with an emphasis on unusual or problem areas. In
discussing mitigation measures, both the standard requirements of the local ordinances and
any special measures that would be added for AUAR purposes should be included. A
standard soils map for the area should be included.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 31 July 2025
Page 39 of 617
According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey, the
area is comprised of eight different soil types (see Table 6 and Figure 12). The erosion
hazard rating included in Table 6 indicates the hazard of soil loss from off -road areas after
disturbance activities that expose the soil surface. Within the study area, the soils are almost
entirely mapped as a slight hazard, meaning that erosion is unlikely under ordinary climate
conditions. The remaining 0.1 % of the study area is mapped as cut and fill land which is not
rated for soil erosion hazard.
A previous Geotechnical Evaluation Report was conducted for a portion of the study area in
2021 for another proposed development that did not advance. Soil borings were conducted
and noted topsoil in the area was mostly black and brown soils consisting of peat with lesser
amounts of clay and silty sand. Topsoil in the area was found to be generally moist in nature.
Discovered below the topsoil was a layer generally consisting of sand, with some silt or
sand -silt mixtures also recorded. This report only covers a portion of the AUAR study area,
south of Main Street to Robinson Drive. It is anticipated that future developers will complete
a geotechnical report that would provide recommendations for structural and foundation
design based on the soil types in the study area.
Topography within the study area varies from 892 to 912 feet above mean sea level in
elevation. The study area generally drains south via agricultural ditches located throughout
the study area.
Scenario 1 and 2
Under Scenarios 1 and 2, grading activities would be designed to preserve the current
drainage patterns and protect the sensitive areas. Grading is expected to be done in phases
as the individual developments are approved and will need to follow the overall drainage
patterns of the area. Building pads will be constructed to meet the floodplain separation
criteria and water quality features and will be graded into the terrain throughout the AUAR
area. Impacts to sensitive areas and natural features will be taken into account when
developing the grading plans for the development and will follow all local, state and federal
guidelines for any impacts to these sensitive areas. Floodplain fill will most likely occur on the
site, and areas of floodplain mitigation will be developed as part of the grading plans for each
development based on their specific impacts. It is unclear on how much fill will be needed for
each development until they are specifically refined and approved by the local jurisdictions,
but in general it is anticipated that earthmoving within the study area will consist of
developing several water feature areas (i.e. stormwater ponds) and using onsite materials to
elevate the building and road areas throughout this area. Some import material may be
required for the specific developments and this material will need to meet the standards for
clean fill as set by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) for residential and
commercial developments.
Where appropriate, slope stabilization will be provided by means of vegetation
establishment, erosion control blankets, or other standard methods of erosion and sediment
control. The proposed development within the AUAR study area will comply with the City of
Lino Lakes erosion and sediment control standards."
A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Construction Stormwater Permit
(NPDES) and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) will be obtained prior to
any earthwork or grading activities within the AUAR study area.
To the extent possible, existing soils will be used for future development. Based on the
NRCS soil map, the site will likely require typical subgrade preparation.
17 Source: Ordinance: �1007.050 DRAINAGE
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 32 July 2025
Page 40 of 617
Table 7: Soil Types
Acres
Unit
Soil Type
Farmland
Erosion
Hydric
HydrologicMap
Percent
Symbol
Classification
Hazard
Rating
Soil Group
Study
Area
Area
Cu
Cut and
Not prime
Not rated
Non-hydric
N/A
1.2
0.1
fill land
farmland
Iw
Isanti fine
sandy
Not prime
Slight
Predominantly
A/D
318.6
32.4
loam
farmland
hydric
Lino
loamy
Farmland of
LnA
fine sand,
statewide
Slight
Predominantly
A/D
35.5
3.6
0 to 4
importance
non-hydric
percent
slopes
Markey
muck,
occasiona
Ma
pon ly 0
Narmland ot prime
Slight
Hydric Soils
A/D
240.3
24.5
to 1
percent
slopes
Mc
Marsh
Not prime
Slight
Hydric
A/D
2.4
0.2
farmland
Rf
Rifle
mucky
Not prime
Slight
Hydric
A/D
258.3
26.3
peat
farmland
Soderville
fine sand,
Farmland of
Predominantly
SoA
0 to 3
statewide
Slight
non-hydric
A/D
98.4
10.0
percent
importance
slopes
Zimmerm
an fine
Not prime
Predominantly
ZmB
sand, 1 to
farmland
Slight
non-hydric
A
27.6
2.8
6 percent
slopes
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 33 July 2025
Page 41 of 617
Figure 12: Soil Types
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 34 July 2025
Page 42 of 617
12. Water Resources
AUAR Guidance: The information called for on the EAW form should be supplied for any of the
infrastructure associated with the AUAR development scenarios, and for any development
expected to physically impact any water resources. Where it is uncertain whether water
resources will be impacted depending on the exact design of future development, the AUAR
should cover the possible impacts through a "worst case scenario" or else prevent impacts
through the provisions of the mitigation plan.
a. Describe surface water and groundwater features on or near the site below.
Surface Water — lakes, streams, wetlands, intermittent channels, and
county/judicial ditches. Include any special designations such as public
waters, shoreland classification and floodplain/floodway, 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.
Kimley-Horn reviewed available background desktop data to identify potential surface
water resources within the study area (see Figure 13). According to National
Wetland Inventory (NWI)18, 156.4 acres of freshwater emergent, freshwater
forested/shrub, and freshwater pond wetlands were identified within the AUAR study
area, as well as 17.5 acres of riverine features. The Rice Creek Watershed District
(RCWD) Comprehensive Wetland Protection Management Plan (CWPMP)
establishes protections to the Wetland Management Corridors. High priority wetlands
establish critical nodes and linkages for what will become the Wetland Management
Corridors. Wetland quality was assessed by looking at the function of the wetland
habitat, characteristic wetland hydrology and water quality, wetland role in
downstream flooding, as well as plant species and community diversity. The
northeastern and southern portions of the study area include wetlands that are
designated as high priority status and are shown in Figure 13.Therefore, a Wetland
Management Corridor is identified within the study area and development practices
must abide by the guidelines identified in Rule F.6. of the CWPMC19. All aquatic
resource data is based upon a desktop review and has not been field verified.
The site generally drains through the existing public and private ditch systems which
bisect the study area from the northwest to the south, with discharges to the onsite
wetlands before flowing offsite to the southeast. The ditches mapped throughout the
study area align with mapped National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) flowlines and
NWI riverine features. These ditches are generally located between agricultural fields
or adjacent to existing roadways and congregate in the southeastern portion of the
study area before flowing offsite to the south. The public ditches located onsite are
part of the Anoka County Ditch (ACD) system 10-22-32, denoted as the Public
Drainage System on Figure 13. Three unnamed Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources (DNR) public water wetlands are mapped in the northeast corner of the
study area and generally align with NWI mapped wetlands.
Multiple NWI wetlands and riverine features are mapped within one mile of the study
area (see Figure 14). These features generally align with offsite high priority
wetlands identified by the Lino Lakes Resource Management Plan. Additionally,
multiple NHD flowlines and waterbodies are mapped within one mile of the study
18 Source: National Wetland Inventory for Minnesota (2019)
19 Source: Rice Creek Watershed District Comprehensive Wetland Protection Management Plan Rule F.6.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 35 July 2025
Page 43 of 617
area. A portion of the mapped NWI, NHD, and Lino Lakes High Priority Wetlands are
mapped adjacent to the study area and are likely extensions of on -site resources.
A review of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's (MPCA) Part 303d Impaired
Waters List within one mile of the study area was conducted. No impaired lakes,
wetlands, or streams were identified within the study area or within one mile of the
study area. Multiple DNR public waterbodies are mapped within one mile of the study
area to the north and southwest. No DNR designated trout streams or public
watercourses were located within the study area or within one mile of the study area.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 36 July 2025
Page 44 of 617
Figure 13: Surface Water Resources Within the Study Area
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 37 July 2025
Page 45 of 617
Figure 14: Surface Water Resources Within 1 Mile of AUAR Study Area
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 38 July 2025
Page 46 of 617
ii. Groundwater — aquifers, springs, and seeps. Include 1) depth to groundwater;
2) if project is within a MDH wellhead protection area; and 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.
According to the Minnesota DNR's Minnesota Hydrogeology Atlas, the depth to water
table in the study area is mapped with an elevation of 0-10 feet and the water table
elevation is mapped from 860 to 920 feet above sea level.
According to the Minnesota Department of Health's (MDH's) Minnesota Well Index,
there are 76 wells within 500 feet of the study area. Well depth was recorded from 59
to 278 feet below the surface, see Figure 15.
According to MDH's Source Water Protection Web Map Viewer, the study area is not
located within a wellhead protection area or drinking water supply management area.
There are also no aquifers, springs, or seeps within the study area.
Scenario 1 and 2
With future stormwater BMPs, no adverse impacts to groundwater are anticipated as
a result of future development projects.
Onsite wells will continue to serve the existing parcels for the foreseeable future. As
development occurs, wells located within the AUAR study area would be properly
sealed by a licensed well contractor prior to redevelopment within the AUAR study
area per Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) well sealing requirements.
If unidentified wells are found, the Department of Health Well division will be notified
and determine if the well is in service or not. Wells will be sealed per the MDH well
sealing requirements by a licensed well driller.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 39 July 2025
Page 47 of 617
Figure 15: Minnesota Well Index
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 40 July 2025
Page 48 of 617
b. Describe effects from project activities on water resources and measures to minimize
or mitigate the effects below.
iii. Wastewater — For each of the following, describe the sources, quantities, and
composition of all sanitary, municipal/domestic, and industrial wastewaters
projected or treated at the site.
AUAR Guidance: Observe the following points of guidance in an AUAR:
• Only domestic wastewater should be considered in an AUAR—industrial wastewater
would be coming from industrial uses that are excluded from review through an AUAR
process
• Wastewater flows should be estimated by land use subareas of the AUAR area; the
basis of flow estimates should be explained
• The major sewer system features should be shown on a map and the expected flows
should be identified
• If not explained under Item 6, the expected staging of the sewer system construction
should be described
• The relationship of the sewer system extension to the RGU's comprehensive sewer plan
and (for metro area AUARs) to Metropolitan Council regional systems plans, including
MUSA expansions, should be discussed. For non -metro area AUARs, the AUAR must
discuss the capacity of the RGU's wastewater treatment system compared to the flows
from the AUAR area; any necessary improvements should be described.
• If on -site systems will serve part of the AUAR, the guidance in the February 2000 edition
of the EAW Guidelines on page 16 regarding item 18b under Residential development
should be followed.
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 existing wastewater infrastructure within the study area includes an existing
12-inch diameter polyvinyl chloride (PVC) sanitary sewer along Robinson Drive
and 15-inch diameter PVC sanitary sewer along Century Trail. A sewer stub
extends to the north from the manhole at the intersection of Robinson Drive and
Century Trail with an invert of 879.78. There is a sanitary manhole at the north
end of Cardinal Way with an invert of 883.18. The sanitary sewer on Cardinal
Way is 10-inch diameter PVC. Inverts are according to record plans for the
Century Farms North development.
Scenario 1 and 2
The types and amounts of wastewater produced will be typical of residential and
commercial uses. The proposed development is expected to generate
approximately 502,000 gallons per day (GPD) of wastewater under Scenario 1
and approximately 557,100 GPD under Scenario 2. This volume was estimated
using the Metropolitan Council's Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) tool for the
following land uses (see Table 8).
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 41 July 2025
Page 49 of 617
Table 8: Projected Wastewater Demands
Wastewater Demand IF Scenario 1 Average Daily Scenario 2 Average Daily
Flow (GPD) Flow (GPD)
•- �• 11 �: 111
• ::11 • 11
• 1 111 11
The City's sanitary sewer collection system will be extended to serve the study
area through a combination of 1) gravity sewer extensions from the existing
sanitary sewer system, and 2) a new trunk sewer, lift station, and forcemain. All
proposed units will be required to connect to the City's sanitary sewer system.
A new trunk line will need be extended from Met Council Interceptor 8361 located
on North Road to the northwest sanitary sewer service sub -district 2J. This is
outlined in the City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan Figure 8-5 with a forcemain
along Sunset Avenue and a lift station north of Main Street. The area would be
served by 10-inch and 12-inch trunk lines along Main Street (see Figure 16).
The City's sanitary sewer district 2 discharges to Metropolitan Council
Environmental Services (MCES) Meter M211 and Interceptor 8361, and MCES
will evaluate necessary improvements to their interceptor system. Wastewater is
then conveyed to the Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Plant (Metro WWTP).
The Metro WWTP has a capacity of 314 million gallons per day (MGD) and
receives 180 MGD of flow as of June 2024. The Metro WWTP is expected to
have capacity to treat demand from both scenarios. The wastewater from the
study area is anticipated to be of typical domestic strength and character, so
pretreatment is not necessary.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 42 July 2025
Page 50 of 617
Figure 16: Full Build — Sewer Infrastructure
�� l
�■ttttttw -�1
i
49
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR
43
Rmom
4t
I
wnite aear rowwi ,,
CITY OP
IN-(KE
Figure 8-5
Full Build Trunk
Legend
N Lift Station
ExiOng Trunk Sewer
— Forcemain
8'
M Future Lift Station
10'
• Future Forcemain
12'
9 MCES Meters
15'
■ MCES Lifl Station
18'
— MCES Forcemain
21'
-- VCFS Gravity Main 24'
Future Trunk Sewer
® Not in Ultimate SennceArea
•--• 8'
; Sanitary Sub -District
• -• 10"
0 Open Water
+--• 12"
Right -of -Way
--• 151,
j- _: Municipal Boundary
---• 18"
F— Parcels
--• 21-
— Streams
�- 30"
3,500 1,750 0 3,500 A
Feet N Date:1119fN10 8-27
July 2025
Page 51 of 617
2) If the wastewater discharge is to a subsurface sewage treatment system
(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.
There are subsurface sewage treatment systems (SSTS) for the existing
properties within the study area. The residential properties within the project area
will remain until such time development starts. The SSTS systems will be
pumped, collapsed, filled, and abandoned per the MPCA chapter 7080 code,
along with any county and city requirements as well.
No subsurface sewage treatment systems (SSTS) are anticipated within the
AUAR study area for either development scenario.
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.
No wastewater discharge to surface waters is anticipated for either development
scenario.
c. 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.
AUAR Guidance: For an AUAR the following additional guidance should be followed in
addition to that in EA Guidelines:
It is expected that an AUAR will have a detailed analysis of stormwater issues
• A map of the proposed stormwater management system and of the water bodies that will
receive stormwater should be provided
• The description of the stormwater systems would identify on -site and "regional' detention
ponding and also indicate whether the various ponds will be new water bodies or
converted existing ponds or wetlands. Where on -site ponds will be used but have not yet
been designed, the discussion should indicate the design standards that will be followed.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 44 July 2025
Page 52 of 617
• If present in or adjoining the AUAR area, the following types of water bodies must be
given special analyses:
o Lakes: Within the Twin Cities metro area, a nutrient budget analysis must be
prepared for any "priority lake" identified by the Metropolitan Council. Outside of
the metro area, lakes needing a nutrient budget analysis must be determined by
consultation with the MPCA and DNR staffs.
o Trout streams: If stormwater discharges will enter or affect a trout stream, an
evaluation of the impacts on the chemical composition and temperature regime
of the stream and the consequent impacts on the trout population (and other
species of concern) must be included.
Environmental Effects
Stormwater runoff can cause a number of environmental problems. When untreated
stormwater drains from man-made locations such as agricultural fields, impervious
surfaces, and construction sites, it can carry sediments and/or chemical pollutants
that harm aquatic ecosystems and wildlife.
It is assumed that infiltration practices will not be allowed onsite due to the assumed
presence of clay and organic soil and high ground water table. Prior to the creation of
the extensive ditch system throughout the site, the area was a marsh. In the event
infiltration requirements cannot be met on the site, alternate means of runoff
abstraction and water quality treatment will need to be reviewed for the site to be in
compliance with current watershed, state, and local stormwater management plans.
The developments will need to follow the minimal impact design standard guidelines
for alternative design as documented in the Minnesota Stormwater Manual for
abstraction such as filtration, irrigation reuse, or other methods to meet the water
quality and abstraction requirements.
Existing Conditions
In existing conditions, the study area is a mix of sod farm, low -density residential,
and forested area. According to the City stormwater database, there are no
stormwater management practices in place to treat stormwater runoff outside of the
Century Farm Subdivisions in the southwest corner of the study area and a large
stormwater quality basin constructed as part of the new roundabout at the
intersection of Sunset Avenue and Main Street. The remainder of the study area has
numerous ditches, county and privately owned, that were constructed in the mid-
1950s. The ditches have been realigned multiple times. Even with the existing ditch
system, there is a significant portion of the site (-40-45% by area) that is covered in
FEMA Zone A floodplain. Rice Creek Watershed District completed floodplain
modeling and mapping in 2025 that shows similar, albeit less, floodplain areas within
the study area.
During Construction
During construction, erosion and sediment control BMPs will be implemented to
prevent impacts to aquatic ecosystems. The proposed alternatives include proposed
impervious surfaces that vary depending on alternative and future design options.
Additionally, the following design/construction standards are to be adhered to during
construction:
• Grading of the water quality basins shall be accomplished using low -impact,
earthmoving equipment to prevent compaction of the underlying soils.
• Water quality basin excavation shall be held 1 foot above the bottom of the
excavation until the contributing drainage areas with exposed soils have
been fully stabilized.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 45 July 2025
Page 53 of 617
• Divert upland drainage areas to prevent runoff from entering the excavated
basins or into the work areas.
• Installation with dry soil conditions is critical to prevent smearing and
compaction. Schedule work for periods of dry weather.
• In the event that the sediment is introduced into the BMP during or
immediately following excavation, remove sediment prior to initiating the next
step in the water quality basin construction process.
• Temporary erosion protection or permanent cover over exposed soil shall be
initiated immediately and completed no later than seven days after an area is
no longer being worked.
• Realignment of the Anoka County Ditch (ACD) system 10-22-32 and private
ditches may be required as development occurs to meet future drainage
requirements and allow for efficient development of the study area.
After Construction
The proposed future development within the AUAR study area will require
compliance with the stormwater rules and standards of the City of Lino Lakes, the
Rice Creek Watershed District, and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) Stormwater Permit for water quality, volume control, rate control,
floodplain management, erosion control, and maintenance/monitoring.
As required by Chapter 1011 of the City of Lino Lakes code of ordinances,
development projects within the AUAR study area will be required to provide
stormwater BMPs to manage the rate, quantity, and quality of the stormwater runoff.
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Permit
requires treatment of 1-inch of runoff for the new impervious area since more than
one acre of disturbance will occur. Additionally, the post -development discharge
rates shall be less than or equal to the existing runoff rates for the 2-, 10-, and 100-
year, 24-hour rainfall events, as required by the Rice Creek Watershed District.
RCWD Rule C: Stormwater Management requires that proposed developments will
provide 1.1 inch of volume reduction over the proposed impervious surface coverage
for the development through a combination of infiltration/filtration/reuse BMPs. The
treatment volume is reduced by a total phosphorus removal factor based on BMP
type as stated in Table C1 of the Rice Creek Watershed Rules (effective 1/1/2025).
Additionally, RCWD requires public linear projects to provide treatment for the
greater of 1.0 inches over the new impervious or 0.5 inches over the new and
reconstructed impervious surface. There is no total phosphorus removal factor for
public linear projects. Treatment is currently planned to be provided through a
distributed approach across the project area. Local water quality basins will be
installed along with each proposed development followed by larger detention areas,
as needed, to provide rate control for multiple proposed developments as well as
provide compensatory storage for floodplain mitigation. The detention areas then
outlet to the greenway corridors to convey stormwater discharge downstream
through naturalized areas to the main discharge points in the south -southeastern
portions of the study area.
Floodplains
The study area includes large areas of FEMA Zone A floodplain and Rice Creek
Watershed 100-year floodplain. The areas of floodplain generally align with the
FEMA floodplain being more expansive across the project site. The FEMA Zone A
floodplain does not have a base flood elevation associated with the mapping
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 46 July 2025
Page 54 of 617
delineations, but the RCWD floodplain data does include base flood elevations. The
base flood elevation at a specific property can be requested from RCWD staff. The
proposed scenarios for development of the project site will result in significant
realignment of existing ditch systems as well as alternation to the floodplains (FEMA
and RCWD).
FEMA delegates the ordinance creation and enforcement to local communities thus
the city of Lino Lakes administers the FEMA floodplain and requires the following be
met for floodplain alteration:
1. Locations where floodway and flood fringe districts are not delineated on the
floodplain maps are considered to fall within the General Floodplain District
and the floodway district standards apply.
a. Once a floodway boundary is determined, the flood fringe district
standards may apply outside of the floodway.
2. All structures located within the flood fringe district must be elevated on fill so
that the lowest floor is at or above the regulatory flood protection elevation.
The full floodplain ordinance can be found in Chapter 1103 of the City of Lino Lakes
Code of Ordinances. Any development should review the current applicable
floodplain ordinance to verify all design standards are met for the proposed
development.
RCWD has additional floodplain impact requirements as stated in Rule E: Floodplain
Alteration:
1. Provide compensatory storage volume.
2. Any structure/embankment placed within the floodplain will be capable of
passing the 100-year flood without increasing 100-year flood elevation.
3. All structures constructed within the floodplain shall have 2 feet of freeboard
to the lowest floor.
4. Drainage/flowage easements are required over stormwater management
facilities, stormwater conveyances, ponds, wetlands, on -site floodplain up to
the 100-year event, or any other hydrologic feature, only if required by the
land use authority.
a. Additionally, open channel systems shall be placed under easement
for the right to the District to maintain the system. A minimum
easement width includes the channel and the area on each side of
the channel within 20 feet of the top of bank.
Areas that are covered by Rule E are also subject to Rule F: Wetland Alteration, as
applicable.
Scenario 1 and 2
The city of Lino Lakes developed a plan to implement greenway corridors as the
"backbone" of the stormwater, floodplain, and wetland management system for the
study area through a conservation design framework. The greenway corridors are
designed to connect the larger and higher quality natural areas. These corridors will
provide three main services: 1) stormwater collection and conveyance, 2) ecological
corridors for wildlife movement and native plant dispersal, and 3) recreational trails
for people. Certain greenway corridors may warrant design for specific wildlife
species, may provide certain stormwater management opportunities, or may need to
accommodate different types of trails or passive recreational uses. Design
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 47 July 2025
Page 55 of 617
considerations may include corridor width, appropriate vegetation structure, human
access and use, and whether or not it is appropriate for a corridor to cross a
particular type of roadway.
Conservation Desian Framework
The City of Lino Lakes expects the current Anoka County ditch system through the
area to remain in place in terms of function, but not in terms of location or overall
quality. The ditch system can be relocated within a proposed development to
facilitate drainage of stormwater runoff, aesthetics, passive recreational facilities, and
habitat creation. The realigned ditch system shall meet the following expectations:
1) Easements
a. RCWD requires a 20-foot easement on either side of the county ditch
system, measured from the top of the bank, to provide access for
maintenance.
b. Lino Lakes proposes an average buffer width of 50-feett on either side of
the county ditch system with a minimum of 20 feet, measured from the
top of the bank, to provide space for the greenway corridor creation.
2) Lake/Pond Construction in -line with Ditch
a. In the event that a proposed development will create an in -line lake or
pond area in relation to the ditch system, the proposed development is
required to provide:
i. RCWD with a 20-foot easement from top of bank along the
alignment of the ditch and extend into the pond based on the
average width of easement at the entrance and exit location of
the ditch into the lake/pond.
ii. The RCWD easement shall be along a bank of the lake/pond, and
not through the center of the pond to limit maintenance
responsibility on the District.
iii. Water Quality Basins shall be provided prior to discharge of
stormwater runoff into the lake/pond.
iv. City requires establishment of a buffer around a constructed
lake/pond with minimum buffer based on function of the BMP.
1. Buffers may vary around the perimeter of the constructed
lake/pond but must meet the minimum and average
distances along their edges.
3) Realignment
a. The city of Lino Lakes is in support of realignment of the county ditch
system when proposed to be consistent with the goals of the master plan.
i. Realignment must be approved by RCWD through Rule I.
ii. Additional buffer widths may be required through land use and
zoning requirements.
See Figure 16 for a cross section view of the easement and buffer requirements.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 48 July 2025
Page 56 of 617
Figure 17: Cross Section View of Drainage and Conservation Framework
iv. 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.
AUAR Guidance: If the area requires new water supply wells, specific information
about that appropriation and its potential impacts on groundwater levels should be
given; if groundwater levels would be affected, any impacts resulting on other
resources should be addressed.
Dewatering
Construction dewatering may be required for the development of the AUAR study
area. No permanent dewatering is anticipated as no underground structures will be
constructed adjacent to a water body. Construction activities associated with
dewatering will include discharging into temporary sedimentation basins to reduce
the rate of water discharged from the site, as well as discharging to temporary
stormwater BMPs. Any temporary dewatering will require a DNR Temporary Water
Appropriations General Permit 1997-0005 if 10,000 gallons per day or 1 million
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 49 July 2025
Page 57 of 617
gallons per year are withdrawn. It is anticipated that the temporary dewatering would
only occur during utility installation and potential construction of building foundations
Estimated Water Supply
Existing water infrastructure within the study area includes a 12-inch diameter ductile
iron pipe (DIP) watermain along Robinson Drive and Century Trail south of the site
and 8-inch DIP watermain on Carl Street (west cul-de-sac). There is a 10-inch DIP
water stub for the Robinson Property off of Cardinal Way and two 12-inch diameter
DIP watermain stubs at the intersection of Robinson Drive and Century Trail.
The City's DNR water appropriation permit currently allows an annual withdrawal
volume of 900 million gallons per year (MGY). The City's existing annual demand
plus the projected annual demand for the study area will exceed this volume.
Therefore, the City's DNR appropriation permit annual withdrawal volume will need to
be amended prior to full build out of the study area.
Scenario 1 and 2
The projected water demand for the proposed development scenarios is
approximately 559,800 gallons per day (GPD) for Scenario 1 and approximately
620,100 GPD for Scenario 2 (see Table 9).
Table 9: Project Water Demands
Water Demands Scenario 1 Average Daily Scenario 2 Average Daily
Flow (GPD) Flow (GPD)
•- 1 111 . 1 111
� • :11 1 11
.M.T.-TITIN 1 11
The City's current water production capacity will not be sufficient to serve the entire
study area. It is anticipated that only a small percentage of the area could be served
by the City's existing system assuming the City's proposed Well No. 7 is constructed
in 2026. The City will need to install new wells, Wells No. 8 and 9, to serve the
entirety of the study area and satisfy City-wide water demands. The 2040
Comprehensive Water Plan provides additional details on water demand for the city
through the projected 2040 planning period.
It is feasible to extend the watermain to serve future lots. However, the size and
layout of the watermain will have to be determined during preliminary design, and the
watermain will need to be looped through the site. At a minimum, the larger 12-inch
diameter trunk watermain will need to be looped through the high density residential
areas. All proposed units will be required to connect to the City's water system.
The City is constructing a water treatment plant for manganese removal which will be
placed in service in the fall of 2026 and will provide adequate treatment capacity
through Well No. 9. The City's total elevated storage volume is 3.5 million gallons
(MG), which is projected to be sufficient for the entire study area.
V. Surface Waters
4) 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
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 50 July 2025
Page 58 of 617
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.
Scenario 1 and 2
As development of the study area begins, wetland impacts will be avoided or
minimized to the extent practicable, especially wetlands which are within the Wetland
Management Corridor under the City of Lino Lakes Comprehensive Water
Management Plan (CWPMP). Future development will comply with all federal, state,
and local wetland requirements including wetland mitigation requirements. If it is
determined that there are impacts to on -site regulated wetlands, wetland banking
credits will be purchased and applicable City of Lino Lakes and/or Minnesota
Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) approvals will be obtained prior to development. If
required, on -site wetland replacement will be evaluated as design progresses within
the AUAR study area. If on -site mitigation is not feasible, mitigation will be provided
via purchase of credits from an approved wetland bank. The mitigation replacement
ratio will be confirmed with RCWD.
Wetlands that will be preserved on site will need to comply with Rice Creek
Watershed District's wetland buffer requirements as outlined in Rule F: Wetland
Alteration.
5) 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.
AUAR Guidance: Water surface use need only be addressed if the AUAR area would
include or adjoin recreational water bodies.
Scenario 1 and 2
Realignment of the ACD system 10-22-32 is proposed in both scenarios. The result
of the realignment of the ACD 10-22-32 must continue to provide sufficient flow
capacity to not impact upstream properties in terms of high-water levels during a
flood event or impact downstream properties in terms of higher discharge rates and
velocities during a flood event. Private ditches may also be rerouted or changed to
facilitate the proposed scenarios but any changes must demonstrate no negative
impact in terms of high-water level, discharge rate, or velocity in the ACD 10-22-32
system. Rice Creek Watershed district requires a buffer of 20 feet on either side of
the creek to complete maintenance and that the buffer be clear of obstructions such
as trees and buildings.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 51 July 2025
Page 59 of 617
No alternations to other surface waters are anticipated as part of the development
scenario. The AUAR study area does not contain and is not adjacent to any
recreational water bodies.
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
groundwater 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.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's (MPCA) What's In My Neighborhood (WIMN)
database was reviewed to determine if any known contaminated properties or potential
environmental hazards are located within 250 feet of the study area. During this review, nine
active sites and one inactive site were found within 250 feet of the study area (see Table 10
and Figure 18).
Table 10: MPCA "What's in My Neighborhood?" Sites
Site Name
Activi
StatusP7�1
Activities
AM
ProgramST0707
Tank leak site, Petroleum
16576
A & L Sold Inc.
Active
remediation, Minimal
Multiple
quantity hazardous waste
Programs
generator
257812
SP 002-614-049
Active
Construction Stormwater
Stormwater
18236
Caroll Busch
Inactive
Tank site leak, Petroleum
Investigation
Residence
remediation
and Cleanup
146100
LeVahn Bros
Active
Hazardous Waste,
Hazardous
Minimal quantity generator
Waste
212682
Century Farm
North 6th Addition
Active21
Construction stormwater
Stormwater
157490
Morell Borrow Pit
Active21
Construction Stormwater
Stormwater
226150
Century Farm
North 71h
Active
Construction stormwater
Stormwater
Anoka County
141380
ditch 10-22032
Inactive
Construction Stormwater
Stormwater
Maintenace
107177
Goldade Richard J
Inactive
UST
Tanks
Future developers will need to complete a Phase 1/11 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA)
prior to construction and coordinate with the MPCA on safe handling and disposal of any
contamination and hazardous materials found on the site prior to and during construction. An
asbestos and regulated materials (ARM) assessment would need to be completed prior to
the demolition of any structures and a demolition notification will be made to the
20 MPCA's database shows these as active; however, the city is aware these projects did not advance and status
should be changed to inactive.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 52 July 2025
Page 60 of 617
MPCA/Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) if asbestos containing material (ACM) is
identified during the ARM assessment. If ACM and/or other regulated solid waste is identified
during the ARM assessment requiring removal, generated solid waste will be disposed of at
an MPCA permitted landfill.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 53 July 2025
Page 61 of 617
Figure 18: MPCA Sites
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 54 July 2025
Page 62 of 617
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.
AUAR Guidance: Generally, only the estimated total quantity of municipal solid waste
generated and information about any recycling or source separation programs of the RGU
need to be included.
According to Anoka County's Hazardous Waste Ordinance 2018-7 and Solid Waste
Management Ordinance number 2022, Anoka County will ensure compliance with applicable
laws, rules, and ordinances related to the management of solid and hazardous waste as
required by Minnesota Statutes, section 473.811.
Construction Generated Solid Waste
Construction of the proposed development would generate construction -related waste
materials such as wood, packaging, excess materials, and other wastes, which would either
be recycled or disposed of in the proper facilities in accordance with City of Lino Lakes
Ordinances and state regulations and guidelines.
Redevelopment of portions of the site may generate earth materials and debris during
demolition activities. Demolition debris is inert material such as concrete, brick, bituminous,
and rock. The solid wastes generated during demolition would be recycled or disposed of at
a state -permitted landfill. For solid waste generated from the completed project, a source
recycling/separation plan would be implemented, and wastes that cannot be recycled would
be managed in accordance with state regulations and guidelines.
Operation Generated Solid Waste
Once constructed, future development should only generate municipal solid waste and
household hazardous waste.
Scenario 1 and 2
Proposed development will generate new demands on solid waste management and
sanitation services provided in the study area. It is estimated that 4.9 pounds of municipal
solid waste (MSW) will be generated per person per day. An average household occupancy
of 2.62 was applied to the estimated residential units based on 2015-2019 US Census
Bureau data. The resulting residential MSW generated per year based upon the number of
residences proposed in Scenario 1 is 6,373 tons, and Scenario 2 is 6,560. It is estimated that
the non-residential (commercial/industrial) waste stream will be 720 tons and 744 tons per
year under Scenario 1 and Scenario 2, respectively.
Under both development scenarios, recycling for buildings in the AUAR study area will be
conducted in accordance with the 2016 Recycling Law (Minnesota Statutes, sections
115A.151 and 115A.552).
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 spills or releases 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.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 55 July 2025
Page 63 of 617
AUAR Guidance: Not required for an AUAR. Potential locations of storage tanks associated
with commercial uses in the AUAR should be identified (e.g., gasoline tanks at service
stations).
No underground or above ground storage tanks have been identified for the proposed
development scenarios.
a. 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 wastes including source
reduction and recycling.
AUAR Guidance: Not required for an AUAR.
Not required for an AUAR.
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 near the
site.
AUAR Guidance: The description of fish and wildlife resources should be related to the
habitat types depicted on the cover types map. Any differences in impacts between
development scenarios should be highlighted in the discussion.
The majority of the land within the AUAR study area has been previously disturbed through
agricultural and private residential development. There are three public water wetlands, one
area of Minnesota Biological Survey Site of Biodiversity Significance, and 21 Regionally
Significant Ecological Areas (RSEAs) located within one mile of the study area (see Figure
19). There are 21 native plant communities within one mile of the study area. Approximately
155 acres of the site consist of wooded land cover and 89 acres of wetlands. Existing cover
types are shown in Figure 7 and Table 3.
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-1074) and/or
correspondence number 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 results.
AUAR Guidance: For an AUAR, prior consultation with the DNR Division of Ecological
Resources for information about reports of rare plant and animal species in the vicinity is
required. Include the reference numbers called for on the EA form in the AUAR and
include the DNR's response letter. If such consultation indicates the need, an on -site habitat
survey for rare species in the appropriate portions of the AUAR area is required. Areas of on -
site surveys should be depicted on a map, as should any `protection zones" established as a
result.
Federally Listed Species
The IPaC project planning tool provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) was
used to identify federally -listed threatened, endangered, and special concern species within
the study area. The IPaC tool identified five federally -listed species within this area:
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 56 July 2025
Page 64 of 617
Monarch Butterfly: The monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) is designated as a
proposed threatened species by the USFWS in 2024 and is documented within
Anoka County. According to the USFWS, there are many potential reasons for the
butterfly's decline, including habitat loss at breeding and overwintering sites, disease,
pesticides, logging at overwintering sites, and climate change. Potential suitable
habitat for the Monarch Butterfly may be located in the unmanicured portions of the
study area.
Rusty Patched Bumble Bee: The rusty patched bumble bee (Bombus affinis) was
designated as a federal endangered species by the USFWS in February 2017 and is
documented within Anoka County. According to the USFWS, habitat for this species
includes grasslands with flowering plants from April through October, underground
and abandoned rodent cavities or clumps of grasses above ground as nesting sites,
and undisturbed soil for hibernating queens to overwinter. The majority of the study
area is located within a low potential zone for the Rusty Patched Bumble Bee and a
section of the southwest corner is located within a high potential zone.21 Potential
suitable habitat for the rusty patched bumble bee may be located in the unmanicured
portions of the study area.
Whooping Crane The whooping crane (Grus Americana) is designated as an
experimental population, non -essential species by the USFWS in Minnesota in 2001
and is documented in Anoka County. Non -essential experimental populations are
treated as threatened species on national wildlife refuges and national park lands,
and as a proposed species on private land. The preferred habitat for the species
includes shallow marshes and adjacent, open grasslands. Potential suitable habitat
for the whooping crane may be located within the study area due to the presence of
mapped NWI wetlands, NHD waterbodies, and Public Water Wetlands within the
study area along with the presence of adjacent unmanicured areas present
throughout the study area.
Western Regal Fritillary: The western regal fritillary (Speyeria idalia) was
designated as proposed threatened by the USFWS in 2024 and is documented in
Anoka County. The western regal fritillary is most often found in native prairie habitat
regions, specifically in prairies that contain violets (Viola sp). Larval development
may occur in upland prairie, and larvae feed exclusively on violets. The adult western
regal fritillary feeds on a variety of floral nectar. Potential suitable habitat for the
western regal fritillary may be located in the unmanicured portions of the study area.
Salamander Mussel: The salamander mussel (Simpsonaias ambiguea) was
designated as proposed threatened 2023. Before the species was federally listed in
2023, it was listed as a threatened species in Minnesota in 1996.
The salamander mussel is a small, thin -shelled mussel that inhabits swift -
flowing rivers and streams with areas of shelter under rocks or in crevices. rivers,
streams, and in some cases lakes with natural flow regimes. Seasonal low flow is
expected in some systems and can be tolerated by salamander mussel, though
periodic drying or intermittent flow in river habitats generally do not support mussels.
No suitable habitat for the salamander mussel was identified within the study area
due to lack of identified deep water flowing streams. Reviewed NWI riverine and
NHD flowline features were considered intermittent in nature and therefore
unsuitable for the salamander mussel.
21 Rusty Patched Bumble Bee Map. Available at
https://www.fws.gov/m idwest/endangered/insects/rpbb/rpbbmap. html
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 57 July 2025
Page 65 of 617
State -Listed Species
Kimley-Horn conducted a review of the DNR Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS) per
license agreement LA-1074. According to the NHIS mapped data, no records within the
study area itself. Within one mile of the study area, 15 species were identified, as listed
below. Additionally, Kimley-Horn initiated consultation with the Minnesota DNR for the study
area. A Natural Herriage Review letter was provided by the DNR and is included in
Appendix B.
A Bristle Berry: A bristle berry (Rubus stipulates) is a Midwestern plant with a very
limited distribution in Minnesota and adjacent states. They are most often found in
shallow wetlands on the Anoka Sandplain. They prefer open and sunny habitats with
soils that consist of a thin layer of peat over a saturated layer of sand. Potential
suitable habitat for a bristle berry may be located within the study area due to the
presence of mapped NWI wetlands, NHD waterbodies, and Public Water Wetlands
within the study area along with the presence of mapped sandy soils within the study
area.
Autumn Fimbry: The autumn fimbry (Fimbristylis autumnalis) is a plant most
commonly found in wet meadows and along the margins of shallow lakes or ponds
on the Anoka sand plain. In many cases these plants occur on level areas with
minimal depth to water table. Potential suitable habitat for the autumn fimbry may be
located within the study area due to the presence of mapped NWI wetlands, NHD
waterbodies, and Public Water Wetlands within the study area along with the
presence of mapped sandy soils within the study area.
Black Huckleberry: The black huckleberry (Gaylussacia baccata) is an understory
shrub most often found in well drained and sandy soils within fire dependent forests.
These species are often associated with fire dependent trees such as the pin oak,
jack pine, and red pines. Potential suitable habitat for the black huckleberry may be
located within the study area due to the forested portions located throughout the
study area.
Blanding's Turtle: Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) is a small reptile, roughly
5-10 inches and is most commonly found in wetland complexes with adjacent sandy
uplands. Suitable wetlands for Blanding's turtle habitat require calm shallow waters
with rich aquatic vegetation. Potential suitable habitat for the Blanding's turtle may be
located within the study area due to the presence of mapped NWI wetlands, NHD
waterbodies, and Public Water Wetlands within the study area along with the
presence of mapped sandy soils within the study area.
Blunt -lobed Grapefern: The blunt -lobed grapefern (Sceptridium oneidense) occurs
in the understory of hardwood forests of maple, birch, ash, and oak trees. Within
these forested areas, the blunt -lobed grapefern is located in moist to wet areas such
as swamp edges and depressions that hold temporary surface water during rain
periods. Sightings of this species generally note that it occurs in scattered clumps
among more common fern species.
Clinton's Bulrush: Clinton's bulrush (Trichophorum clintonii) is a plant that occurs in
a variety of habitats, with few obvious features in common. Conditions are usually
sunny or partially shaded and range from dry to moist. Soils are often sandy or
sandy-loams, though sometimes heavy clay-loams. In Minnesota, these species
have been observed to inhabit open prairies and edges of fire dependent forests.
Potential suitable habitat for the Clinton's bulrush may be located within the study
area due to the forested portions and unmanicured areas located throughout the
study area.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 58 July 2025
Page 66 of 617
Cross -leaved Milkwort: The cross -leaved milkwort (Polygala cruciate) is a plant that
has been observed in Minnesota primarily on wet sandy shores of shallow lakes in
the Anoka Sandplain, and in sandy or peaty meadows or swales. These habitats may
be in low depressions or at the margins of emergent wetlands. Habitats are typically
open and sunny with acidic soils and dynamic water tables. Potential suitable habitat
for the cross -leaved milkwort may be located within the study area due to the
presence of mapped NWI wetlands, NHD waterbodies, and Public Water Wetlands
within the study area along with the presence of mapped sandy soils within the study
area.
Fuller's Bristle -berry: Fuller's bristle -berry (Rubus fulled) is a plant that has been
observed on the Anoka sandplain in swales and wet meadows. Suitable habitat
consists of shallow wetlands sustained by a high-water table and have a ground
layer of sedges, broad-leaved herbaceous plants, and often scattered shrubs.
Adjacent uplands may also be suitable, if there is direct sunlight and little competition
Potential suitable habitat for the Fuller's bristle -berry may be located within the study
area due to the presence of mapped NWI wetlands, NHD waterbodies, and Public
Water Wetlands within the study area along with the presence of mapped sandy soils
within the study area.
Lance -leaved Violet: The lance -leaved violet (Viola lanceolate) is a plant which
occurs in low, moist meadows with a sandy substrate, moist swales in sand dunes
and savannas, and occasionally on sandy lakeshores. Potential suitable habitat for
the lance -leaved violet may be located within the study area due to the presence of
mapped NWI wetlands, NHD waterbodies, and Public Water Wetlands within the
study area along with the presence of mapped sandy soils within the study area.
Pale Sedge: The pale sedge (Carex pallescens) is a vascular plant that has been
observed on the margins of fire -dependent forests which inhabit pine, spruce, aspen,
and birch. It is most commonly associated with the Lake Superior shoreline but has
been documented in Anoka County as well. Potential suitable habitat for the pale
sedge may be located within the study area due to the forested portions located
throughout the study area.
Slimspike Three -awn: The slimspike three -awn (Aristida longespica) is a vascular
plant that has been observed in wet meadow and wet prairie habitats associated with
the Anoka Sandplain. Soils located in suitable habitat for the three -awn are generally
sandy and saturated for a large portion of the year. Potential suitable habitat for the
slimspike three -awn may be located within the study area due to the presence of
mapped NWI wetlands, NHD waterbodies, and Public Water Wetlands within the
study area along with the presence of mapped sandy soils within the study area.
St. Lawrence Grapefern: The St. Lawrence greapefern (Sceptridium rugulosum) is
a vascular plant that grows in low and moist habitats in brushy or grassy areas and in
open forested areas. It can be found growing in mossy areas in fire -dependent pine
forests. Potential suitable habitat for the grapefern has also been documented in the
transition zone between these habitats and adjacent habitats. The St. Lawrence
grapefern may be located within the study area due to the forested portions located
throughout the study area.
• Swamp Blackberry: The swamp Blackberry (Rubus semisetosus) is a vascular plant
that inhabits moist sand along the margins of groundwater -fed swales or marshes but
also in surface -dry uplands that are just above the water table. These are usually
grass- or sedge -dominated habitats with scattered brush. Potential suitable habitat
for the swamp blackberry may be located within the study area due to the presence
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 59 July 2025
Page 67 of 617
of mapped NWI wetlands, NHD waterbodies, and Public Water Wetlands within the
study area along with the presence of mapped sandy soils within the study area.
• Toothcup: The toothcup (Rotala ramosior) is a vascular plant which typically occurs
on the sandy shores of small shallow lakes set in a savanna landscape. Potential
suitable habitat for the toothcup is unlikely to be present within the study area due to
the absence of larger lakes and lakeshore within the study area.
Tubercled Rein Orchid: The tubercked rein orchid (Platanthera flava var. herbiola)
is a vascular plant which inhabits wet meadows or sunny savanna swales. It also
occurs at the margins of shallow marshy lakes, especially where there is a turf of
low -growing native grasses or sedges. Potential suitable habitat for the trubercled
rein orchid may be located within the study area due to the presence of mapped NWI
wetlands, NHD waterbodies, and Public Water Wetlands within the study area along
with the presence of mapped sandy soils within the study area.
Twisted Yellow -eyed Grass: The twisted yellow -eyed grass (Xyris torta) is a
vascular plant that inhabits wet, sandy shores of shallow lakes in the Anoka
Sandplain and in sandy or peaty meadows or swales. These environments are
typically open and sunny, with acidic soils and fluctuating water tables. Potential
suitable habitat for the twisted yellow -eyed grass may be located within the study
area due to the presence of mapped NWI wetlands, NHD waterbodies, and Public
Water Wetlands within the study area along with the presence of mapped sandy soils
within the study area.
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.
Federally Listed Species
• Monarch Butterfly: The proposed project may affect monarch butterflies and/or
suitable monarch habitat, but disturbances are anticipated to be temporary in nature
and/or insignificant given available foraging and breeding habitat in the surrounding
landscape; therefore, long-term impacts to the monarch butterfly are not anticipated.
Additionally, the use of native species in seed mixes may be used to promote
pollinator friendly habitat within the study area. Current climate trends may impact
the availability of suitable habitat in the study area.
Rusty Patched Bumble Bee: The proposed project may affect the rusty patched
bumble bee and/or suitable bee habitat, but disturbances are anticipated to be
temporary in nature and/or insignificant given available foraging and breeding habitat
in the surrounding landscape; therefore, long-term impacts to the rusty patch bumble
bee are not anticipated. Additionally, the use of native species in seed mixes may be
used to promote pollinator friendly habitat within the study area. Current climate
trends may impact the availability of suitable habitat in the study area.
• Whooping Crane: The proposed project may affect the whooping crane and/or
suitable crane habitat. Given that the whooping crane is designated as an
experimental population, non -essential species by the USFWS and the Proposed
Action would be completed on lands outside of a National Wildlife Refuge or National
Park. The proposed project is not expected to significantly diminish the quality or
extent of whooping crane suitable habitat within the study area vicinity. Therefore,
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 60 July 2025
Page 68 of 617
the proposed project is not anticipated to have an adverse impact on the whooping
crane.
• Western Regal Fritillary: The proposed project may affect the western regal fritillary
and/or suitable fritillary habitat, but disturbances are anticipated to be temporary in
nature and/or insignificant given available foraging and breeding habitat in the
surrounding landscape; therefore, long-term impacts to western regal fritillary are not
anticipated. Additionally, the use of native species in seed mixes may be used to
promote pollinator friendly habitat within the study area. Current climate trends may
impact the availability of suitable habitat in the study area.
• Salamander Mussel: The proposed project is not anticipated to affect the
salamander mussel as a result of the lack suitable mussel habitat identified within the
study area or directly adjacent to the study area.
State -Listed Species
The MnDNR Natural Heritage Review (NHR) letter identified the following state -listed species
may be affected by the proposed project scenarios. Many state -listed plant species were
identified as having the potential to be affected by the proposed development scenarios:
• A Bristle Berry (Rubus stipulates) - State -listed endangered species
• Autumn Fimbry (Fimbristylis autumnalis) - State -listed threatened species
• Black Huckleberry (Gaylussacia baccata) — State -listed threatened species
• Blunt -lobed Grapefern (Sceptridium oneidense) — State -listed threatened species
• Clinton's Bulrush (Trichophorum clintonii) — State -listed threatened species
• Cross -leaved Milkwort (Polygala cruciata) — State -listed endangered species
• Fuller's Bristle -berry (Rubus fulleri) — State -listed threatened species
• Lance -leaved Violet (Viola /anceo/ata) — State -listed threatened species
• Pale Sedge (Carex pallescens) — State -listed endangered species
• Slimspike Three -awn (Aristida longespica var. geniculata) — State -listed
endangered species
• St. Lawrence Grapefern (Sceptridium rugulosum) - State -listed threatened
species
• Swamp Blackberry (Rubus semisetosus) — State -listed threatened species
• Toothcup (Rota/a ramosior) — State -listed threatened species
• Tubercled Rein Orchid (Platanthera flava var. herbiola) — State -listed threatened
species
• Twisted Yellow -eyed Grass (Xyris torta) — State -listed endangered species
Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) is a state -listed threatened species has been
documented in the vicinity of the study area.
Bald and Golden Eagles
Bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) have federal -
level protections under the Bald and Golden Eagle Treaty Act (BGEPA) (16 U.S.C. 668-668d).
Originally enacted in 1940, and since amended, BGEPA prohibits anyone without a permit
issued by the Secretary of the Interior from take of bald or golden eagles, including their parts,
nests, or eggs. In February 2024, the USFWS published a final rule pertaining to the issuance of
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 61 July 2025
Page 69 of 617
permits for eagle incidental take and eagle nest take in the Federal Register (89 FR 9920). The
new rule is effective as of April 12, 2024. Bald and golden eagles have the potential to occur
within the study area. In the event a bald or golden eagle nest is observed within the AUAR
study area, all BGEPA protections will be adhered to, including USFWS Incidental Take
guidelines. If required, an Incidental Take permit will be applied for from the USFWS.
Invasive Species
Invasive species are a major cause of biodiversity loss and are considered biological pollutants
by the DNR. Invasive species can be moved on construction equipment, landscaping equipment,
and other debris.
Stormwater
Stormwater run-off can cause a number of environmental problems. When stormwater drains off
a site, it can carry sediment and pollutants that harm lakes, rivers, streams, and wetlands which
in turn may harm wildlife.
Tree Removal
The AUAR study area contains approximately 155 acres of wooded land (see Figure 7). Forests
and forested areas provide an important natural resource in Minnesota. Forest clearing and tree
removal creates a variety of environmental impacts including habitat destruction, biodiversity
impairment, soil erosion, and loss of carbon sinks. Although some tree removal will be
necessary, the scope of removal will be limited as much as feasible to support the proposed
development. All tree removal will be completed during the winter months (November 1 to March
31) to reduce potential for disease spreading, along with impacts to insects, nesting wildlife, and
bat species. If winter tree clearing is not feasible, technical consultation with the USFWS may be
required. Tree removal will adhere to the City's tree preservation requirements. The City of Lino
Lakes regulates tree preservation and requires builders to submit a tree preservation plan prior
to construction. City staff review these plans and attempt to identify and save as many significant
trees as feasible.22
Other Sensitive Ecological Resources
Two Regionally Significant Ecological Areas (RESAs) are located within the project limits. One
RSEA is entirely located within a previously developed area in the southwest portion of the
AUAR study area and therefore no adverse impacts are anticipated. The second RSEA is
located in a forested area in the east -central portion of the AUAR study area. Ground
disturbance in this area could impact the RSEA. If future development in the area proposes
impacts near the mapped RESA in the east -central portion of the study area, a survey may be
required. If impacts are proposed to the field surveyed resource, avoidance and minimization
measures would be discussed with the DNR to identify next steps. No native plant communities
are located within or adjacent to the study area.
d. Identify measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to
fish, wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological resources.
Federally Listed Species
• Monarch Butterfly: The use of native plant species in seed mixes may be used to
promote pollinator friendly habitat within the study area.
• Rusty Patched Bumble Bee: The use of native plant species, including flowering
plants, in seed mixes may be used to promote pollinator friendly habitat within the
study area. Additional mitigation measures include the minimization of mowing during
the active season, keeping some areas un-mowed, using a high cutting height
(ideally 12-16 inches), and incorporating additional wildflower planting/restoration. As
22 Source: Lino Lakes, Minn., Municipal Code 1008.12 530
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 62 July 2025
Page 70 of 617
the RPBB High Potential Zone in the study area may contain suitable habitat, a
habitat assessment may be required.
• Whooping Crane: No mitigation measures are anticipated to be required.
• Western Regal Fritillary: The use of native plant species in seed mixes may be
used to promote pollinator friendly habitat within the study area.
• Salamander Mussel: Avoidance of swift flowing streams and rivers that display a
rocky substrate is recommended to avoid impacts to the mussel.
State Listed Species
Avoidance and minimization recommendations were provided for the following species below
from the DNR.
• To demonstrate avoidance, a qualified surveyor will need to determine if suitable
habitat exists within the activity impact area and, if so, conduct a survey prior to any
project activities for the following species:
o A Bristle Berry (Rubus stipulates) - State -listed endangered species
o Autumn Fimbry (Fimbristylis autumnalis) - State -listed threatened species
o Black Huckleberry (Gaylussacia baccata) — State -listed threatened
species
o Blunt -lobed Grapefern (Sceptridium oneidense) — State -listed threatened
species
o Clinton's Bulrush (Trichophorum clintonii) — State -listed threatened
species
o Cross -leaved Milkwort (Polygala cruciata) — State -listed endangered
species
o Fuller's Bristle -berry (Rubus fulleri) — State -listed threatened species
o Lance -leaved Violet (Viola lanceolata) — State -listed threatened species
o Pale Sedge (Carex pallescens) — State -listed endangered species
o Slimspike Three -awn (Aristida longespica var. geniculata) — State -listed
endangered species
o St. Lawrence Grapefern (Sceptridium rugulosum) - State -listed
threatened species
o Swamp Blackberry (Rubus semisetosus) — State -listed threatened species
o Toothcup (Rotala ramosior) — State -listed threatened species
o Tubercled Rein Orchid (Platanthera flava var. herbiola) — State -listed
threatened species
o Twisted Yellow -eyed Grass (Xyris torta) — State -listed endangered species
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 63 July 2025
Page 71 of 617
The MnDNR required specific mitigation efforts for the Blanding's turtle, which include:
• Avoid wetland and aquatic impacts during hibernation season, between September
15 and April 15, if the area is suitable for hibernation.
• Limit erosion and sediment control to wildlife friendly erosion control."
• Check bare ground within construction areas for turtles before the use of heavy
equipment or any ground disturbance.
• Inspect trenches, holes, or depressions prior to starting work each day and
immediately prior to filling. Upon completion, holes and trenches must be filled.
• The Blanding's turtle flyer sheet24 must be given to all contractors working in the
area.
• Report any sightings using the DNR Plant and Animal Observation Form."
• If turtles are in imminent danger, move them by hand out of harm's way following
Minnesota DNR's guidelines26; otherwise, they are to be left undisturbed. Directions
on how to move turtles safely can be found at Helping Turtles Across the Road
Additional voluntary mitigation measures were provided in the Natural Heritage Review Letter
which are not required by the DNR, but were still recommended include:
• Recommendations from List 1 of the Blanding's turtle fact Sheet.27 If greater
protection for turtles is desired, implement recommendations from List 2.
• Nesting occurs in open (grassy or brushy) sandy uplands. Blanding's turtles have
been known to nest in residential areas, farm fields, and areas of exposed
soil/sand/sediment (including soil stockpiles and gravel pads). To minimize impacts:
o Avoid impacts to potential nesting habitat from June 1 through September 15,
or
o Exclude Blanding's turtles from potential nesting habitat from May 15 through
July 15. To exclude turtles from potential nesting habitat: Install a barrier,
buried 10 inches, around suitable nesting habitat.
• Minimize impacts to small, vegetated temporary wetlands (Types 2 & 3) as much as
possible.
• Avoid hydro -mulch products that contain any materials with synthetic (plastic) fiber
additives, as the fibers can re -suspend and flow into waterbodies.
• Disturbed ground should be restored to pre -construction contours and re -vegetated
with native species suitable to the local habitat.28
• Culverts should be 36 inches or greater in diameter, at least twice as wide as the
normal width of open water, and have an elliptical bottom, flat bottom, or be
embedded.
• Roads should be ditched, not curbed or below grade. If curbs must be used, install
wildlife friendly curbs to allow turtles to leave the road. Gutters and stormwater inlets
should be designed to prevent turtles from entering the storm sewer.
Sensitive Ecological Resources
The southern RSEA is completely located within an existing housing development, and therefore
no impacts are expected. The RSEA along the eastern border of the study area is currently a
wooded area with some single-family residential use in the vicinity. Potential impacts to this area
are proposed in both AUAR scenarios. Coordination with the DNR is ongoing to determine if
mitigation is needed.
23 Wildlife -friendly Erosion Control Fact Sheet.
24 Blanding's Turtle Flyer Sheet.
25 Plant and Animal Observation Form.
26 Helping Turtles Across the Road Guidelines.
27 Blanding's Turtle Fact Seet.
28 Native Plant ID and Information Guidance.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 64 July 2025
Page 72 of 617
Native Plant Communities
No adverse impacts are anticipated to native plant communities as there is none located within
the AUAR study area or directly adjacent to the study area.
Invasive Species
Invasive species will be controlled onsite during construction. Additionally, both Scenario 1 and
Scenario 2 include areas of added green space with native plantings that may provide some
additional habitat for songbirds, small mammals, and insects.
Stormwater
The proposed development scenarios include stormwater management and treatment of all
stormwater runoff within the AUAR study area (discussed in Item 12.b.ii), which will improve
water quality.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 65 July 2025
Page 73 of 617
x y.
4
' h
Legend
Study Area w—w-w Native Plant Regionally
Communities Signficant Ecological
Areas
Signficance
City Boundary
•�. �� ° _
Cityof• Ham Lake City of Columbus
i _r tY
rub
Wi
'�'_IJ —'J�-� � _ -� F � * � . " 'ski •, �.,��
� o
� � � �� a air •
! •I
r ram° 14,.
i f�
.\1...� .
City of Blaine City of Lino, ' _ _
Ae Iia , �gery Courtesy of,Nearmep (3/5/2024)�
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.
AUAR Guidance: For an AUAR, contact with the State Historic Preservation Office and State
Archeologist is required to determine whether there are areas of potential impacts to these
resources. If any exist, an appropriate site survey of high probability areas is needed to address
the issue in more detail. The mitigation plan must include mitigation for any impacts identified.
A review of Minnesota's Statewide Historic Inventory Portal (MNSHIP) mapper was conducted
for potential historical resources and there are none listed within or adjacent to the study area.
A review of the Office of the State Archaeologist (OSA) mapper was conducted for
archaeological sites inventoried by the OSA and archaeological and cultural sites inventoried by
the Minnesota Indian Affairs Council (MIAC) and there are no known archaeological sites within
the study area.
If a federal nexus is identified during preparation of project permits (if a U.S. Army Corps of
Engineer permit is required due to impacts to regulated wetlands), a Phase I Archaeological
Assessment may be necessary. Additionally, if human remains are recovered at any time during
archaeological investigation or development, all activities must stop and consultation initiated
with the OSA and MIAC.
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.
AUAR Guidance: Any impacts on scenic views and vistas present in the AUAR should be
addressed. This would include both direct physical impacts and impacts on visual quality or
integrity. EA Guidelines contains a list of possible scenic resources.
If any non -routine visual impacts would occur from the anticipated development, this should be
discussed here along with appropriate mitigation.
The AUAR study area includes existing agricultural and residential land that is not near any
unique designated scenic views or vistas. Any development of agricultural land will have an
impact on the visual look of a property. Future development would conform with the city
ordinances for building height, building form, landscape screening, and lighting to avoid impacts
to neighboring properties and species. No significant visual impacts are anticipated.
As building and site designs advance, lighting practices will be selected to address ecological
concerns and prevent avoidable impacts to insects, wildlife, rare plants, and adjacent natural
areas. Guidance from the USFWS to minimize blue light, uplight, and backlight will be adhered to
the extent practicable.
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 and criteria pollutants. Discuss effects to
air quality including any sensitive receptors, human health, or applicable regulatory
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 67 July 2025
Page 75 of 617
criteria. Include a discussion of any methods used to 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.
AUAR Guidance: This item is not applicable to an AUAR. Any stationary air emissions
source large enough to merit environmental review requires individual review.
Not applicable for an AUAR.
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.
AUAR Guidance: Although the MPCA no longer issues Indirect Source Permits, traffic -
related air quality may still be an issue if the analysis in Item 20 indicates that development
would cause or worsen traffic congestion. The general guidance from the EA form should
still be followed. Questions about the details of air quality analysis should be directed to
MPCA staff.
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has developed a screening method
designed to identify intersections that will not cause a carbon monoxide (CO) impact above
state standards. MnDOT has demonstrated that even the 10 highest traffic volume
intersections in the Twin Cities do not experience CO impacts .29 Therefore, intersections with
traffic volumes lower than these 10 highest intersections will not cause a CO impact above
state standards. MnDOT's screening method demonstrates that intersections with total daily
approaching traffic volumes below 82,300 vehicles per day will not have the potential for
causing CO air pollution problems. None of the intersections in the AUAR study area exceed
the criteria that would lead to a violation of the air quality standards.
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.
AUAR Guidance: Dust and odors need not be addressed in an AUAR, unless there is some
unusual reason to do so. The RGU might want to discuss as part of the mitigation plan,
however, any dust control ordinances in effect.
The proposed development may generate temporary fugitive dust emissions during
construction. The City of Lino Lakes regulates dust in accordance with MPCA standards.30
Dust will be generated during the construction process on the site. The contractors will be
required to control dust generation by using watering trucks. The adjacent residential parcels
will be the nearest receptors of the dust. Mitigation of the short-term dust and odor impacts
will be managed through proper coordination and construction planning.
In either scenario, the construction and operation of the project is not expected to generate
objectionable odors.
29 Source: MnDOT CO Hot Spot Screening Method. https://www.dot.state.mn.us/project-development/subject-
guidance/airquality/
process. html#:-:text=The%20Twin%2OCities%20area%20has, carbon%20monoxide%20(CO)%20violations
30 Source: Lino Lakes, Minn., Municipal Code § 1007.043
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 68 July 2025
Page 76 of 617
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 cometo that conclusion and any GHG
emission sources not included in the total calculation.
About Greenhouse Gases (GHGs)
Certain gases in the earth's atmosphere, classified as greenhouse gases (GHGs), play a
critical role in determining the earth's surface temperature. Solar radiation enters the earth's
atmosphere from space. A portion of the radiation is absorbed by the earth's surface and a
smaller portion of this radiation is reflected back toward space. This absorbed radiation is
then emitted from the earth as low -frequency infrared radiation. The frequencies at which
bodies emit radiation are proportional to temperature. Because the earth has a much lower
temperature than the sun, it emits lower -frequency radiation. Most solar radiation passes
through GHGs; however, infrared radiation is absorbed by these gases. As a result, radiation
that otherwise would have escaped back into space is instead "trapped," resulting in a
warming of the atmosphere. This phenomenon, known as the greenhouse effect, is
responsible for maintaining a habitable climate on earth.
The primary GHGs contributing to the greenhouse effect are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane
(CH4), and nitrous oxide (N20). Fluorinated gases also make up a small fraction of the
GHGs that contribute to climate change. Examples of fluorinated gases include
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulfur
hexafluoride (SF6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3); however, it is noted that these gases are
not associated with typical land use development. Human -caused emissions of GHGs
exceeding natural ambient concentrations are believed to be responsible for intensifying the
greenhouse effect and leading to a trend of unnatural warming of the earth's climate, known
as global climate change or global warming.31
Project Related GHG Emissions
This section describes the GHG emissions from the existing buildings within the study area
and include an estimated quantification of the following GHG emissions associated with the
proposed scenarios:
• Carbon dioxide (CO2)
• Nitrous oxide (N20)
• Methane (CHa)
The projected GHG emissions are provided on an average annual basis using the CO2
equivalent (CO2e) and include the proposer's best estimate of average annual emissions
over the proposed life/design service life of future development. The estimates include
emissions from the construction and operating phases of the scenarios. Emissions were
estimated using the US Environmental Protection Agency's Simplified GHG Emissions
Calculator (SGEC) (Version 7 June 2021)32 and are summarized in Table 11 and Table 12
by project phase (i.e., construction and operations) and source type (e.g., combustion from
mobile equipment, off -site electricity) (see Appendix C for tables).
31 Summarized from U.S. EPA, Overview of Greenhouse Gases: https://www.epa.gov/qhqemissions/overview-
greenhouse-gases
32 Source: https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/simplified-qhq-emissions-calculator
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 69 July 2025
Page 77 of 617
Construction emissions for the two proposed scenarios are based on length of construction33
and are from mobile equipment, including passenger cars, light -duty trucks, and medium and
heavy-duty trucks, and construction equipment (both gasoline and diesel).
Existing emissions during operations (full build out of either scenario) include natural gas
(stationary equipment) for heating buildings and water, on -site generator testing, use of off -
site electricity, and off -site waste management. Emissions from cooling and refrigeration
systems are not accounted for in this analysis as GHGs from refrigerants are approximately
less than 5 percent of the total GHG emissions of a building.31
Table 11: Construction Emissions
Table 12: Operational Emissions
b. GHG Assessment
Describe any mitigation considered to reduce the project's GHG emissions.
In both Scenario 1 and Scenario 2, the following are potential design strategies and
sustainability measures that could be taken into consideration for future development
to reduce emissions:
33 Total construction duration of the site is estimated to be completed over 6 to 8 construction seasons, over 30+
years.
34 Source: https://practicegreenhealth.org/sites/default/files/2019-06/PracticeGreenhealth GHG Toolkit 0.pdf
35 Emissions are categorized as either direct or indirect. Scope 1 emissions are direct emissions that are released
directly from properties owned or under the control of the project proposer. This includes, for example, the use of
mobile equipment during construction. Scope 2 and 3 emissions are indirect emissions. Scope 2 emissions are
associated with the offsite generation of purchased electricity and/or steam. Scope 3 emissions are from the offsite
provision of waste management services, including land disposal (landfilling), recycling, and solid waste composting.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 70 July 2025
Page 78 of 617
• Use energy efficient appliances, equipment, and lighting
• Energy efficient building shells
• Encouragement of the use of alternative modes of transportation to and from
the project through site design
• Implement waste best management practices and to recycle and compost
appropriate material when applicable
• On -site landscaping to absorb water
• Trees, tree trenches and additional landscaping could be planted to improve
local air quality, absorb greenhouse gas emissions, and reduce local urban
heat island effect
• Provide electric vehicle ready charging infrastructure
Implementation of the above strategies will be evaluated on a case -by -case basis
based on code requirements, feasibility, availability of materials, schedule, and
tenant considerations.
ii. Describe and quantify reductions from selected mitigation, if proposed to
reduce the project's GHG emissions. Explain why the selected mitigation was
preferred.
The potential mitigation listed in Item 18.b.ii. was selected to comply with best
management practices for new construction and reduce GHG emissions where
practicable during operations.
iii. Quantify the proposed project's predicted net lifetime GHG emissions (total
tons per number 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.
The Next Generation Energy Act requires the state to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions in the state by 80 percent between 2005 and 2050, while supporting clean
energy, energy efficiency, and supplementing other renewable energy standards in
Minnesota. The MPCA's biennial GHG emissions reduction report from 2021
identifies strategies for reducing emissions in the three economic sectors with the
highest emissions — transportation, electricity generation, and agriculture, forestry,
and land use.
In both Scenarios, the expected lifespan of the project is 50 years, this equates to a
total estimated 1,137,850 CO2e metric tons over the lifetime of the development for
Scenario 1 and 1,162,850 CO2e metric tons for Scenario 2 (for operational
emissions). Future developers will evaluate implementing the sustainability measures
listed in Item 18.b.i. to reduce operational emissions to the extent practicable. The
proposed project will be built in compliance with state regulations and city code.
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
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 71 July 2025
Page 79 of 617
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.
AUAR Guidance: Construction noise need not be addressed in an AUAR, unless there is some
unusual reason to do so. The RGU might want to discuss as part of the mitigation plan, however,
any construction noise ordinances in effect.
If the area will include or adjoin major noise sources, a noise analysis is needed to determine if
any noise levels in excess of standards would occur, and if so, to identify appropriate mitigation
measures. With respect to traffic -generated noise, the noise analysis should be based on the
traffic analysis of Item 20.
Existing Noise
The AUAR study area is currently mostly an undeveloped area with 61 acres of existing low to
medium residential homes in the southwest quadrant. The existing noise sources within the
study area consist mainly of noise from the surrounding roadways and land uses. The nearest
receptors to future development are the residential homes in the southwest corner and northern
portion of the study area. These nearest noise receptors will experience noise levels during
construction that are elevated in comparison to existing noise levels. Grading and excavation
activities on site will require heavy construction equipment.
Traffic Generated Noise
A sound increase of 3 A -weighted decibels (dBA) is barely noticeable by the human ear, a 5 dBA
increase is clearly noticeable, and a 10 dBA increase is heard as twice as loud. For example, if
the sound energy is doubled (i.e., the amount of traffic doubles), there is a 3 dBA increase in
noise, which is just barely noticeable to most people. On the other hand, if traffic increases by a
factor of 10, the resulting sound level will increase by about 10 dBA and be heard as twice as
loud.
Scenario 1 and 2
Traffic volumes in the study area are either on roadways that do not have receivers that are
sensitive to noise, or the traffic levels attributable to the future development are well below the
amount that would generate a sound increase that could be noticeable. The change in traffic
noise levels is not anticipated to be readily perceptible.
Construction Noise
As stated in the AUAR guidelines, construction noise need not be addressed unless there is
some unusual reason to do so. No unusual circumstances have been identified that would
necessitate a detailed construction noise analysis.
Scenario 1 and 2
The Lino Lakes Code of Ordinances regulates both the hours of operation for construction
equipment and allowable noise levels. Normal construction hours are 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.,
Monday through Friday. Construction of the proposed project would comply with these
requirements.
Operational Noise
Scenario 1 and 2
The Lino Lakes Code of Ordinances and the MPCA regulate mechanical noise associated with
building operation. Construction equipment would be fitted with mufflers that would be properly
maintained during the construction process. All future development will be required to comply
with these requirements.
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
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 72 July 2025
Page 80 of 617
traffic generated; 3) estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated and time of
occurrence; 4) source of trip generation rates used in the estimates; and 5) availability
of transit and/or other alternative transportation modes.
Traffic Generation
The trip generation of the proposed development scenarios were estimated based on data
from the Institute of Transportation Engineers' Trip Generation Manual, 11r' Edition. A
combination of ITE Land Use Code (LUC) 210 (Single -Family Detached Housing), LUC 215
(Single -Family Attached Housing), LUC 220 (Multifamily Residential, Low rise), and LUC 821
(Shopping Plaza) were utilized to estimate the trip generation potential of the two
development scenarios. Estimated trip generation figures are given below in Table 13.
Table 13: Trip Generation Forecasts
The full traffic study conducted for the AUAR can be found in Appendix D.
Parking
The development will conform to the off-street parking requirements outlined in section
1007.052 of the City of Lino Lakes Code of Ordinances.
Transit
There is no transit service located near the study area.
Bike and Pedestrian Infrastructure
The development of the AUAR site will include connections to the nearby trail systems,
including a regional trail along Main Street which will connect from Lexington Avenue to the
Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Park Reserve trails southeast of the site. Sidewalks will be a
priority for any development that occurs in the AUAR area.
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/accessmanagementlresources.htmi) or a similar local
guidance.
AUAR Guidance: For AUAR reviews, a detailed traffic analysis will be needed, conforming to
the MnDOT guidance as listed on the EA IN form. The results of the traffic analysis must be
used in the response to Items 17 and 19.
A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was completed in May 2025 based on the projected trip
generation of the two proposed scenarios. The results of this study can be found in
Appendix D. Based on the detailed findings of this study, the area's transportation network
is expected to support development within the AUAR study area with mitigation.
The TIA includes intersection capacity analyses for intersections adjacent to the AUAR study
area and included the review of intersection operations at proposed access points (see
locations identified on Figure 18). Other minor access points were included in the analysis
based on the anticipated access locations (see the TIA in Appendix D for more information).
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 73 July 2025
Page 81 of 617
Under the Existing and No -Build conditions, all intersections operate at acceptable Levels of
Service (LOS) without the need for any mitigation (beyond the planned roadway
improvements). Under Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 conditions, operations are anticipated to
be acceptable in the Opening Year (2030) conditions with minimal mitigation required.
Additionally, with operations remaining acceptable in Opening Year (2030) build Scenario 1
& 2, an east -west roadway connection on the south half of the AUAR site is not required from
a traffic operations perspective, however, the connection of Robinson Drive (Access E)
would help improve connectivity to the neighborhoods.
Under Design Year (2045) Build conditions for both scenarios, substantial operational
deficiencies are anticipated, and the roadway network may require significant mitigation
measures including upgrading Main Street to a four -lane road, installing a roundabout at
Main Street & 4th Avenue, and capacity improvements at Main Street & Lake Drive. With
mitigation in place, the study intersections are anticipated to operate acceptably. The
infrastructure improvements within the AUAR site should be evaluated as development
occurs on the site.
The LOS results from SimTraffic (for stop -controlled and signalized intersections) and Rodel
(for roundabouts) are given below in Table 14.
Table 14: Intersection LOS
Traffic Level of Se7i
.. . AdNWM1S&
Location
n. N.
i.
AM Peak Hour
Main Street & Sunset
Roundabout
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
Avenue
Sunset Avenue &
Side Street
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
Robinson Drive
Stop36
Sunset Avenue & Century
Side Street
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
Trail
Stop36
Sunset Avenue & Lilac
Side Street
A
A
A
A
C
A
Street
Stop /
Roundabout36
Pine Street & 411 Avenue
Side Street
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
Stop
Main Street & 411 Avenue
Side Street
B
B
B
B
A
B
A
Stop
411 Avenue & Lilac Street
Side Street
B
B
B
A
C
A
B
Stop
Lake Drive & Pine Street
Side Street
A
A
A
A
B
A
B
Stop
Lake Drive & Main Street
Signal /
B
A
A
A
B
A
B
Roundabout37
36 Ongoing Sunset Avenue improvement project will reconstruct Sunset Avenue & Lilac Street as a single lane
roundabout and convert other intersections to right-in/right-out; expected to be completed by 2030.
37 Existing signal at Lake Drive & Main Street is planned to be replaced by a single -lane roundabout by the studied
Opening Year (2030).
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 74 July 2025
Page 82 of 617
AM Peak Hour
Main Street & Sunset
Roundabout
A
A
A
A
B
B
C
Avenue
Sunset Avenue &
Side Street
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
Robinson Drive
Sto 36
Sunset Avenue & Century
Side Street
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
Trail
Sto 36
Sunset Avenue & Lilac
Side Street
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
Street
Stop /
Roundabout36
Pine Street & 4th Avenue
Side Street
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
Stop
Main Street & 4th Avenue
Side Street
B
A
B
C
A
C
A
Stop
4th Avenue & Lilac Street
Side Street
A
A
A
A
B
A
C
Stop
Lake Drive & Pine Street
Side Street
B
A
A
A
B
A
B
Stop
Lake Drive & Main Street
Signal /
C
A
C
C
C
C
C
Roundabout37
c. Identify measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate project related
transportation effects.
The following provides a summary of the mitigation improvements that were identified as part
of the traffic analysis for the Northwest Main development. Note that the following list is in
addition to the currently planned roadway improvements along Sunset Avenue and at Main
Street & Lake Drive.
Existing (2025) Conditions
• No recommended mitigation
Opening Year (2030) No -Build Conditions
• No recommended mitigation (beyond planned improvements)
Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 Conditions
• Install side street stop control at the site access points.
• Install right turn lanes at all access points along Sunset Avenue & Main Street
• Install a roundabout at any full -access point along Main Street (Access C)
• While not required based on the traffic operations results, it is recommended to connect
Robinson Drive to 4th Avenue (Access E) to improve connectivity.
Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 Conditions
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 75 July 2025
Page 83 of 617
• Install side street stop control at site access points.
• Install right turn lanes at all access points along Sunset Avenue & Main Street
• Install a roundabout at any full -access point along Main Street (Access C)
• While not required based on the traffic operations results, it is recommended to connect
Robinson Drive to 4th Avenue (Access E) to improve connectivity.
Design Year (2045) No -Build Conditions
• No recommended mitigation (beyond planned improvements)
Design Year (2045) Scenario 1 and 2 Conditions
• All Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 Conditions
• Install side street stop control at all access points along 4th Avenue and Pine Street.
• Install southbound right turn lanes at 4th Avenue & Access E (south of Main Street)
• Install northbound left turn lanes at access points on 4th Avenue north of Main Street (Access
F and Access G).
• Expand Main Street to a four -lane road west of Lake Drive
o Includes expanding roundabouts at Sunset Avenue and Access C to 2x1
roundabouts.
• Install a 2x1 roundabout at Main Street & 4th Avenue
• Expand Main Street & Lake Drive roundabout to accommodate northbound left -turn traffic.
• The roundabout is anticipated to require two northbound entry lanes, two exit lanes on the
west leg, and a bypass lane for the eastbound approach
• Expand Main Street & Lake Drive roundabout to accommodate northbound left -turn traffic.
o The roundabout is anticipated to require two northbound entry lanes, two exit lanes
on the west leg, and a bypass lane for the eastbound approach
Note that it is anticipated that the full development of the AUAR area would take up to 30 years.
However, traffic projections as part of an AUAR are typically 20-year analysis horizon. This results in
a conservative analysis for the Design Year as the full site may not be built out yet. All traffic
mitigation should be updated when the AUAR is updated.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 76 July 2025
Page 84 of 617
Study Area 4
City Boundary
.. r
Iltersections
M'• r �F ^Y� f, �� cY,�I1jv i11 a'r• �� l -{y'. 'i`
City�of Ham Lake C ty�of Columbus'
0 Ilk,
an A
0 m AWNS!
.fDIf.
ro
r �y l
ti3`s ' cJlS (S 00 _� ry D
GJr�o — -.� - -
I� VJ30
I — o �
MMMMMM
v
City of Blaine City of Lino Lakes / . - US
i I a Y
�,YAenaLImagery Courtesy of Nearmap (3/5/2024)
21. Cumulative Potential Effects
AUAR Guidance: Because the AUAR process by its nature is intended to deal with cumulative
potential effects from all future developments within the AUAR area, it is presumed that the
responses to all items on the EA IN form automatically encompass the impacts from all
anticipated developments within the AUAR area.
However, the total impact on the environment with respect to any of the items on the EAW form
may also be influenced by past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects outside of
the AUAR area. The cumulative potential effect descriptions may be provided as part of the
responses to other appropriate EA IN items, or in response to this item.
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.
Cumulative effects are defined as the "effect on the environment that results from the
incremental effects of a project in addition to other projects in the environmentally relevant
area that might reasonably be expected to affect the same environmental resources,
including future projects actually planned or for which a basis of expectation has been laid,
regardless of what person undertakes the other projects or what jurisdictions have authority
over the projects."38 The geographic areas considered for cumulative effects are those areas
adjacent to the AUAR study area, and the timeframe considered includes projects that would
be constructed in the reasonably foreseeable future.
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.
There are several reasonably foreseeable future projects that may interact with the
environmental effects of the development scenarios:
Sunset Avenue Reconstruction — Anoka County is planning to reconstruct Sunset
Avenue from Apollo Drive to the Main Street 125th Avenue intersection to add
shoulders, turn lanes, and provide intersection improvements along the corridor,
including roundabouts at 121 st Avenue and Lilac Street. Anoka County is working in
partnership with the Cities of Blaine and Lino Lakes. The project is planned for
construction in the spring of 2027.
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.
The reasonably foreseeable future project may result in impacts to transportation in the
project vicinity. These impacts will be addressed via the regulatory permitting and approval
processes and will be individually mitigated to ensure minimal cumulative impacts occur.
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.
Additional Environmental Effects
There are no other potential environmental effects that have not been addressed in preceding
sections.
38 Minnesota Rules, part 4410.0200, subpart 11 a
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 78 July 2025
Page 86 of 617
Mitigation Plan
This Mitigation Plan is submitted as part of the AUAR to provide reviewers and regulators with an
understanding of the actions that are advisable, recommended, or necessary to protect the
environment and minimize potential impacts by the proposed development scenarios. This Mitigation
Plan has been revised and updated based on comments received during the Draft AUAR comment
period.
This Mitigation Plan is intended to satisfy the AUAR rules that require the preparation of a mitigation
plan that specifies measures or procedures that will be used to avoid, minimize, or mitigate the
potential impacts of development within the AUAR study area. Although mitigation strategies are
discussed throughout the AUAR document, this plan will be formally adopted by the RGU as their
action plan to prevent potentially significant environmental impacts.
The primary mechanism for mitigation of environmental impacts is the effective use of ordinances,
rules, and regulations. The plan does not modify the regulatory agencies' responsibilities for
implementing their respective regulatory programs nor create additional regulatory requirements.
The plan specifies the legal and institutional arrangements that will assure that the adopted
mitigation measures are implemented.
In addition to the anticipated permits and approvals listed in Table 5, the mitigation measures
developed in the AUAR process are outlined in Table 15. The plan is formatted consistent with the
sections of the AUAR for ease of reference.
Table 15: Mitigation Plan
Resource Area
Mitigation
Scenario 1 and 2: Majority of the existing zoning is rural, which serves as a
holding district until municipal services are available. Property will be considered
for rezoning, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, at the time of a
development proposal.
Scenario 2: Would require a comprehensive plan amendment.
Scenario 1 and 2: The City will coordinate with the Metropolitan Council regarding
any modifications needed to the TAZ forecasts for the AUAR study area, if
needed.
Land Use
Scenario 1 and 2: Use the information contained in the AUAR during future
considerations of updates or amendments to the adopted Comprehensive Plan
and Zoning Ordinance. Any future consideration of amendments or updates to the
Comprehensive Plan and Ordinances would follow the city's set procedures and
guidelines for such amendments.
Scenario 1 and 2: Require that tools such as clustering, buffering, and/or
screening be incorporated into future development plans to mitigate potential land
use conflicts.
Scenario 1 and 2: Where required, slope stabilization will be provided by means
of vegetation establishment, erosion control blankets, or other standard methods
of erosion and sediment control. An erosion control plan will be submitted to the
Geology,
City of Lino Lakes and future proposed development within the AUAR study area
Soils, and
will require compliance with the City's erosion and sediment control standards.
Topography
Scenario 1 and 2: An NPDES and SWPPP will be obtained prior to any earthwork
or grading activities within the AUAR study area. Require project proposers to
meet the erosion and sediment control regulations in all applicable regulations,
ordinances and rules of the city and MPCA, and Rice Creek Watershed District.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 79 July 2025
Page 87 of 617
mill rit SM. troTilir-
Scenario 1 and 2: Provide construction oversight to ensure designed sediment
and erosion control measures are being implemented.
Scenario 1 and 2: Future developers would complete a geotechnical report that
would provide recommendations for structural and foundation design based on the
soil types in the study area.
Scenario 1 and 2: If any potential impacts are proposed to
FEMA 100-Year Floodplains as part of development within the
AUAR study area, the applicable City of Lino Lakes and RCWD
approvals will be obtained. Note: RCWD approvals are required
Floodplains
specifically to RCWD's 1 00-ear floodplains.
Scenario 1 and 2: Floodplain alterations will require submittal of
appropriate Letter of Map Change to FEMA to document
changes to floodplain boundaries.
Scenario 1 and 2: Delineate wetlands in accordance with the
Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and
classify wetlands according to Wetlands of the United States
(Circular 39) and Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the
United States.
Scenario 1 and 2: Follow sequencing process of wetland
Wetlands
avoidance, minimization, rectification, and mitigation as outlined
in the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) if wetlands area altered.
If any potential impacts are proposed to regulated wetlands as
part of development within the AUAR study area, the applicable
City of Lino Lakes, WCA, RCWD, and USACE permits will be
obtained.
Scenario 1 and 2: Required wetland buffers will be
incorporated into site design.
Scenario 1 and 2: Realignment of the ACD system 10-22-32 is
proposed in both scenarios. A 20-foot buffer will be maintained
Water
on each side of the ditch as required by RCWD to allow for
Resources
Ditches
regular maintenance. Lino Lakes proposes an average buffer
width of 50 feet on either side to provide space for the greenway
corridor creation. The buffer zone will be clear of obstructions
such as trees and buildings.
Scenario 1 and 2: Stormwater BMPs will be constructed in
accordance with City, RCWD, and MIDS requirements as the
property is developed.
Scenario 1 and 2: Developers are encouraged to use best
practices to reduce chloride use in snow and ice removal.
Scenario 1 and 2: During construction, erosion and sediment
control BMPs will be implemented and maintained to prevent
Stormwater
impacts to aquatic ecosystems.
Scenario 1 and 2: Require stormwater management systems to
be developed in accordance with the current version of the Rice
Creek Watershed District Rules and Chapter 1011 of City Code,
as amended.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 80 July 2025
Page 88 of 617
Scenario 1 and 2: Stormwater BMPs shall follow the order of
implementation of infiltration practices, water reuse, biofiltration,
wet sedimentation, unless site restrictions can be documented
to demonstrate that alternate practices can meet City and
RCWD stormwater requirements and approval by City and
RCWD.
Scenario 1 and 2: Any supplementary volume, sediment, and
other pollutants associated with stormwater originating offsite
that travels through the study area will be accounted for in the
final design of stormwater BMPs.
Scenario 1 and 2: The City will mandate an evaluation of the
feasibility of stormwater reuse for all residential and commercial
developments requiring urban services, such as municipal
water. The City will also recommend planting native and
drought -tolerant species to minimize irrigation requirements.
Scenario 1 and 2: A DNR temporary water appropriation permit
will be obtained for any dewatering that will be needed for
construction.
Scenario 1 and 2: If any unknown wells are found within the
AUAR study area, the wells will be sealed and the sealings sent
to the Department of Health if the termination of the permit is
requested.
Scenario 1 and 2: The City will need to install new wells, Wells
No. 8 and 9, to serve the entirety of the study area and satisfy
City-wide water demands.
Scenario 1 and 2: Monitor water usage and do not permit new
development to proceed if it exceeds the capacity of the water
Water
Appropriation
supply and distributions stem.
Scenario 1 and 2: Construct the water supply and distribution
system in accordance with Minnesota Department of Health
standards and with the goals, policies, and recommendations
set forth in the city's Comprehensive Water System Plan.
Scenario 1 and 2: As necessary, amend the city's
Comprehensive Water System Plan and Capital Improvement
Plan to be consistent with any future amendments or updates to
the Comprehensive Plan that would necessitate expansion or
Water
Resources
alterations to the waters stem.
Scenario 1 and 2: Prepare a Wellhead Protection Plan
amendment for new wells and follow the adopted wellhead
protection plans for Lino Lakes.
Scenario 1 and 2: Continue to implement the City's adopted
water conservation policies which are intended to attenuate
peak water demands throughout the City.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 81 July 2025
Page 89 of 617
NiVARRIM .
Scenario 1 and 2: Mitigation will be regulated through the city's
development approval and permitting process. Proposed
master development plans, planned unit development and
subdivision applications, plats, and/or site plans must address
relevant water conservation mitigation measures prior to final
approval by the city. Implementation of mitigation measures will
be assured through developer agreements with the city, which
will require a financial security for land and infrastructure
improvements and/or revoke the right to acquire building permits
and/or certificates of occupancy until all relevant mitigation
measures have been addressed.
Scenario 1 and 2: Construct and phase appropriately the major
infrastructure improvements needed to expand the capacity of
the wastewater system (i.e. lift stations, forcemains, and
upgrades to the existing systems) in accordance with the
Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan and Capital Improvement
Plan.
Scenario 1 and 2: Amend the Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer
Plan and Capital Improvement Plan to be consistent with any
amendments to the Comprehensive Plan that would necessitate
Wastewater
expansions or alterations to the sanitary sewer system and
regional capacity needs.
Scenario 1 and 2: Each proposed development will be required
to provide a detailed projection of wastewater generation and
flows. These calculations will be checked by the City's
Water
Engineering Consultant.
Resources
Scenario 1 and 2: The City will create a year-end report to
evaluate wastewater increases by major sewer lines and overall
system usage in relation to capacity. Results of this assessment
will become the targets for growth for the following year.
Scenario 1 and 2: Demolition -related waste material, such as wood, concrete, and
glass, will be either recycled or disposed in the proper facilities in accordance with
state regulations and guidelines.
Scenario 1 and 2: Development will generate construction -related waste materials
such as wood, packaging, excess materials, and other wastes, which would be
Contamination
either recycled or disposed in the proper facilities in accordance with state
regulations and guidelines.
/ Hazardous
Waste
Scenario 1 and 2: For solid waste generated from the completed project, a source
recycling/separation plan would be implemented, and wastes that cannot be
recycled would be managed in accordance with state regulations and guidelines.
Scenario 1 and 2: Future developers will need to complete a Phase 1/11
Environmental Site Assessment prior to construction and coordinate with the
MPCA on safe handling and disposal of any contamination and hazardous
materials found on the site prior and during construction.
Fish, Wildlife,
Scenario 1 and 2: State requirements necessitate the control and spread of state
Plant
listed noxious weeds and/or invasive weeds if encountered prior to construction.
Communities,
Methods to avoid spreading noxious weeds and/or invasive species will be
and Sensitive
incorporated into project specifications and/or SWPPP when developed.
Ecological
Scenario 1 and 2: Disturbed areas would be reestablished using appropriate
Resources
nativepollinator-friendly and stabilization seed mixes.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 82 July 2025
Page 90 of 617
milirlit ..
7�
Scenario 1 and 2: Invasive species will be controlled during site construction.
Additionally, appropriate measures will be taken to control the spread of invasive
species will be controlled during construction and landscaping:
• Inspecting construction equipment and removing any visible plant, seeds,
mud, dirt clods, and animals when arriving and leaving a site.
• Using native seed mixes for revegetation whenever possible to encourage
non-invasive plant communities in areas of bare soil post -construction.
• Using mulch, soil, gravel, etc., that is free of invasive species whenever
possible.
• Inspecting soil and plant material during planting for signs of invasive
species and removing or destroying the invasive species or the plant and
associated soil if the invasive species cannot be separated out.
Scenario 1 and 2: Tree clearing activities will be restricted to winter months
(November 1 - March 31). If winter tree clearing is not feasible, technical
consultation with the USFWS may be required. Tree removal will also adhere to
the City's tree preservation requirements.
Any tree removal will have to follow tree preservation requirements, as outlined in
City Code 1007.049, as amended. 39
Scenario 1 and 2: Reseeding herbaceous areas with native seed mixes will be
utilized when possible to avoid impacts to the monarch butterfly and rusty patch
bumble bee.
Scenario 1 and 2: Many state -listed plant species were identified by the DNR
having the potential to be affected by the proposed development scenarios. To
demonstrate avoidance, a qualified surveyor will need to determine if suitable
habitat exists within the activity impact area and, if so, conduct a survey prior to
any project activities. Survey results will determine next steps of species
avoidance, minimization, and permitting process.
Scenario 1 and 2: The DNR required specific mitigation measures to avoid
impacts to the state -listed threatened Blanding's turtle. These efforts included
limiting erosion and wetland impacts, checking bare ground, trenches, holes, and
depressions during construction activities, information orientations, sighting
reporting, and following guidelines for interactions of in -danger turtles.
Scenario 1 and 2: Implement the Conservation Design Framework, which
includes conservation of Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA's), buffering these
natural resources, and establishing greenway corridors throughout the AUAR area
to provide connectivity for ecological and wildlife corridors, regional stormwater
collection and conveyance, and passive recreational opportunities
Scenario 1 and 2: Require public land dedication of priority natural open space
areas through the subdivision process.
Scenario 1 and 2: Require that cash in lieu of public land dedication for
subdivisions within the AUAR area be spent within the AUAR area to purchase,
restore, and/or maintain priority natural open space areas.
Scenario 1 and 2: Establish mechanisms for ecological restoration, management,
stewardship, and education.
Scenario 1 and 2: Consult with the DNR and/or USFWS to determine appropriate
mitigation strategies for activities near the Bald Eagle's nests within the AUAR
area before development occurs within the vicinity of the nests, including reviewing
recommended disturbance limit guidelines developed by the DNR.
39 Source: City Code 1007.049
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 83 July 2025
Page 91 of 617
mgw-
7..
Scenario 1 and 2: If a federal nexus is identified during preparation of project
permits (if a U.S. Army Corps of Engineer permit is required due to impacts to
regulated wetlands), a Phase I Archaeological Assessment may be necessary.
Historic
Resources
Scenario 1 and 2: If human remains are recovered at any time during
archaeological investigation or development, all activities must stop and
consultation initiated with the Office of the State Archaeologist and Minnesota
Indian Affairs Council.
Visual
Scenario 1 and 2: Guidance from the USFWS to minimize blue light, uplight, and
backlight will be adhered to the extent practicable.
Scenario 1 and 2: Construction will generate temporary fugitive dust emissions.
Air
These emissions will be controlled by sweeping or watering as appropriate or as
prevailing weather and soil conditions dictate.
Scenario 1 and 2: To limit GHG emissions/carbon footprint, developers should
consider the following measures:
• Use energy efficient appliances, equipment, and lighting
• Use energy efficient building shells
• Encourage the use of the use of alternative modes of transportation to and
from the project through site design
Greenhouse
Gas (GHG)
Implement waste best management practices and to recycle and compost
Emissions/Car
appropriate material when applicable
bon Footprint
0 Utilize on -site landscaping will absorb water
• Consider trees and tree trenches, and additional landscaping will be
planted to improve local air quality, absorb greenhouse gas emissions, and
reduce local urban heat island effect
• Construct buildings with rooftop -ready infrastructure for solar power
generation
• Provide electric vehicle ready charging infrastructure
Scenario 1 and 2: Construction activities may result in temporarily elevated noise
Noise
levels. The City of Lino Lakes Code of Ordinances regulates both the hours of
operation for construction equipment and allowable noise levels. Construction of
the proposed project would comply with these requirements.
Scenario 1 and 2: Create a monitoring program that closely evaluates traffic
impacts from proposed developments within the AUAR area and implement traffic
mitigation measures as development occurs within the AUAR area.
Scenario 1 and 2: Prioritize alternative travel modes within the AUAR study area
and require project proposers to address alternative travel modes (e.g., bicyclists
and pedestrians) by identifying appropriate accommodations.
Transportation
Scenario 1 and 2: Require that site plans for each of the developments include
measures such as appropriate setback distances, earthen berms, noise walls, and
appropriate site design to reduce the impact of traffic noise to residential areas.
Scenario 1 and 2: Achieve effective traffic operations within the city by requiring
that site plans make use of access management practices to promote safe,
effective traffic flow.
Scenario 1 and 2: Require project proposers to follow the Anoka County Highway
Department Development Review Process Manual.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 84 July 2025
Page 92 of 617
milirlit •.
Scenario 1 and 2: Continue to coordinate capital improvement programming with
applicable transportation authorities.
Scenario 1 and 2: The improvements are intended to represent the minimum level
of infrastructure investment that would be needed to meet acceptable level of
service standards. Additional roadway and non -motorized improvements, beyond
the minimum level, may be identified to accommodate specific development needs
that are identified within the AUAR area. Primary improvements, regardless of land
use scenario, include:
Opening Year (2030) No -Build Conditions
• No recommended mitigation (beyond planned improvements)
Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 Conditions
• Install side street stop control at the site access points.
• Install right turn lanes at all access points along Sunset Avenue & Main
Street.
• Install a roundabout at any full -access point along Main Street (Access C)
• While not required based on the traffic operations results, it is
recommended to connect Robinson Drive to 4th Avenue (Access E) to
improve connectivity.
Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 Conditions
• Install side street stop control at all right-in/right-out site access points.
• Install right turn lanes at all access points along Sunset Avenue & Main
Street.
• Install a roundabout at any full -access point along Main Street (Access C)
• While not required based on the traffic operations results, it is
recommended to connect Robinson Drive to 4th Avenue (Access E) to
improve connectivity.
Design Year (2045) No -Build Conditions
• No recommended mitigation (beyond planned improvements)
Design Year (2045) Scenario 1 Conditions
• All Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 Conditions
• Install side street stop control at all access points along 4th Avenue and
Pine Street.
Transportation
0 Extend Century Trail north to Main Street to accommodate traffic north of
Robinson Drive.
• Install southbound right turn lanes at 4th Avenue & Access E (south of
Main Street)
• Install northbound left turn lanes at access points on 4th Avenue north of
Main Street (Access F and Access G).
• Expand Main Street to a four -lane road west of Lake Drive
o Includes expanding roundabouts at Sunset Avenue and Access C
to 2x1 roundabouts.
• Install a 2x1 roundabout at Main Street & 4th Avenue
• Expand Main Street & Lake Drive roundabout to accommodate northbound
left -turn traffic.
o The roundabout is anticipated to require two northbound entry
lanes, two exit lanes on the west leg, and a bypass lane for the
eastbound approach.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 85 July 2025
Page 93 of 617
IIIIIIIJIN ..
Design Year (2045) Scenario 2 Conditions
• All Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 Conditions
• Install side street stop control at all access points along 4th Avenue and
Pine Street.
• Install southbound right turn lanes at access points along 4th Avenue south
of Main Street (i.e., Access E).
• Extend Century Trail north to Main Street to accommodate traffic north of
Robinson Drive.
• Install northbound left turn lanes at access points on 4th Avenue north of
Main Street (Access F and Access G).
• Expand Main Street to a four -lane road west of Lake Drive
o Includes expanding roundabouts at Sunset Avenue and Access C
to 2x1 roundabouts.
• Install a 2x1 roundabout at Main Street & 4th Avenue
• Expand Main Street & Lake Drive roundabout to accommodate northbound
left -turn traffic.
o The roundabout is anticipated to require two northbound entry
lanes, two exit lanes on the west leg, and a bypass lane for the
eastbound approach
Additionally, the Sunset Avenue & Lilac Street roundabout should be monitored for
potential future improvements, particularly under Scenario 2 conditions.
Scenario 1 and 2: Require a traffic impact analysis for all development projects
within the AUAR area. The traffic impact analysis will assist the City and other road
authorities in determining the appropriate mitigation measures that are required to
mitigate impacts of a specific development proposal.
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 86 July 2025
Page 94 of 617
Appendix Am. List of
Tax Parcels
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR
July 2025
Page 95 of 617
Parcel IDs within Study Area
Parcel ID
063122210002
073122240077
063122220008
073122140003
073122240078
063122220004
073122110007
073122240013
073122320059
073122110003
073122240072
063122230001
073122110005
073122240080
073122320050
073122110002
073122240107
073122320064
063122110008
073122240039
073122240003
063122130001
073122240038
073122230007
063122440002
073122240106
073122240062
063122440008
073122240085
073122320001
063122440006
073122240105
063122320002
063122440012
073122240110
073122320056
063122240001
073122240112
073122310038
063122410003
073122240117
073122310039
063122440009
073122240059
073122320066
063122440004
073122240052
073122320055
073122240083
073122240049
073122320054
073122240066
073122240130
073122230006
073122240069
073122240109
073122230001
073122240068
073122240090
073122220003
073122240030
073122240033
073122230002
073122240037
073122240040
073122320053
073122240074
073122240060
073122240004
073122240012
073122240051
073122320057
073122240070
073122240084
073122320074
073122240065
073122240042
073122320068
073122240063
073122240036
063122210001
073122240081
073122240056
063122120003
073122240006
073122240032
Page 96 of 617
Parcel IDs within Study Area
073122240055
073122240091
073122240163
073122240031
073122240101
073122240200
073122240047
073122240102
073122240201
063122220005
073122240128
073122240022
073122230040
073122240103
073122310042
073122240135
073122240126
073122240025
073122240115
073122320067
073122240014
073122240114
073122240134
073122230010
073122240113
073122240120
073122310041
063122220003
073122320065
073122240026
073122230005
073122240020
063122340002
073122240131
073122240021
063122310001
073122240099
073122240174
073122240028
073122240127
073122240173
073122130001
073122240123
073122240172
073122140001
073122240094
073122240177
073122140007
073122240122
073122240152
063122210003
073122240125
073122240187
073122140002
073122320061
073122240151
073122120001
073122240010
073122240188
073122110001
073122240019
073122240168
073122110008
073122320058
073122240196
073122110006
073122310037
073122240161
073122110004
073122320052
073122240175
063122110007
073122240011
073122240178
063122140001
073122320062
073122240166
063122440003
073122240159
073122240156
063122440001
073122240176
073122240155
063122440007
073122240154
073122240165
063122410002
073122320063
073122240164
063122430001
Page 97 of 617
Parcel IDs within Study Area
063122440011
073122240111
073122240153
073122240082
073122240119
073122240199
073122240067
073122240167
073122240182
073122240064
073122240195
073122240183
073122240053
073122240100
073122240184
073122240048
073122240093
073122240061
073122240071
073122240160
073122240008
073122240073
073122240179
073122240023
073122240075
073122240181
073122240189
073122240076
073122240185
073122240027
073122240086
073122240009
063122440005
073122240089
073122230020
063122420001
073122240029
073122140006
063122440010
073122240129
063122340001
073122240043
073122240108
073122240024
073122240079
073122240136
073122240007
073122240116
073122240045
073122240157
073122240041
073122240034
073122240132
073122240035
073122220004
073122240096
073122240139
073122240138
073122240095
073122240121
073122240057
073122240124
073122240169
073122240118
073122240092
073122240162
073122240050
073122240133
073122240186
073122240058
073122320060
073122240198
073122240046
073122240002
073122310040
073122240098
073122320051
063122210007
073122240054
073122240171
063122210008
073122240044
073122240158
063122220006
073122240097
073122240170
063122110009
073122240104
073122240180
063122110004
Page 98 of 617
Parcel IDs within Study Area
063122110003
073122240203
063122110006
073122240204
063122110005
073122240206
063122120001
073122240205
063122120002
073122240207
073122240197
073122230037
073122240005
073122230036
073122210001
073122230035
073122230014
073122230034
073122410025
073122230033
073122420019
073122230032
073122230039
073122230038
073122240209
073122240213
073122230016
073122240211
073122230031
073122240212
073122230025
073122240210
073122230024
073122230023
073122230022
073122230018
073122230028
073122230029
073122230027
073122230026
073122230021
073122230019
073122230017
073122230030
073122230015
073122240202
Page 99 of 617
Appendix Bm. Agency
Correspondence
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR
July 2025
Page 100 of 617
Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR
MCE #: 2025-00312
Page 1 of 4
- MDEPARTMENT OF
NATURAL RESOURCES
Formal Natural Heritage Review - Cover Page
See next page for results of review. A draft watermark means the project details
have not been finalized and the results are not official.
Project Name: Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR
Project Proposer: City of Lino Lakes
Project Type: Development, Mixed Use
Project Type Activities: Wetland impacts (e.g., dewatering, tiling, drainage, discharge, excavation, fill,
runoff, sedimentation, changes in hydrology);Waterbody or watercourse impacts (e.g., dewatering,
discharge, excavation, fill, runoff, sedimentation, changes in hydrology)); Tree Removal;Grading
TRS: T31 R22 S6, T31 R22 ST T31 R23 S1, T31 R23 S12, T32 R22 S31, T32 R23 S36
County(s): Anoka
DNR Admin Region(s): Central
Reason Requested: Other
Project Description: The site is proposed to be developed into high, medium, and low density residential
housing. A commercial area is proposed along the central western portion of the site as well.
Existing Land Uses: The site is largely agricultural sod farms. Some low density residential residential
areas are present in the northern portion of the study area. Some ...
Landcover / Habitat Impacted: A large portion of the site is agricultural sod farms. Northern and eastern
portions of the site include mixed forest.
Waterbodies Affected: Wetlands and agricultural ditches are present throughout the site. Impacts to
wetlands and ditches will minimized or avoided to the extent practicable....
Groundwater Resources Affected: No change in groundwater resources has been proposed.
Previous Natural Heritage Review: No
Previous Habitat Assessments / Surveys: No
� IMMARY OF AUTOMATED RESULTS
Category
Results
Response By Category
Project Details
Comments
Tree Removal - Recommendations
Ecologically Significant Area
No Comments
No Further Review Required
State -Listed Endangered or
Threatened Species
Needs Further
Review
State -protected Species - Needs Further
Review
State -Listed Species of Special
Concern
Comments
Recommendations
Federally Listed Species
Comments
RPBB High Potential Zone
3/26/20c` ..Of ANof 617
Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR
MCE #: 2025-00312
Page 2 of 4
- MDEPARTMENT OF
NATURAL RESOURCES
March 26, 2025
Project Name: Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR
Project Proposer: City of Lino Lakes
Project Type: Development, Mixed Use
Project ID: MCE #2025-00312
AUTOMATED RESULTS: FURTHER REVIEW IS NEEDED
As requested, the above project has undergone an automated review for potential impacts to rare features.
Based on this review, one or more rare features may be impacted by the proposed project and further
review by the Natural Heritage Review Team is needed. You will receive a separate notification email when
the review process is complete and the Natural Heritage Review letter has been posted.
Please refer to the table on the cover page of this report for a summary of potential impacts to rare features.
For additional information or planning purposes, use the Explore Page in Minnesota Conservation Explorer
to view the potentially impacted rare features or to create a Conservation Planning Report for the proposed
project.
If you have additional information to help resolve the potential impacts listed in the summary results, please
attach related project documentation in the Edit Details tab of the Project page. Relevant information
includes, but is not limited to, additional project details, completed habitat assessments, or survey results.
This additional information will be considered during the project review.
3/26/20c` ..Ofo Nmf 617
Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR
MCE #: 2025-00312
Page 3 of 4
Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR
Aerial Imagery With Locator Map
N 0 0.23 0.45 0.9 1.35 1.8
W+E Mi
S
Q Project Boundary
Project Type: Development, Mixed Use
Project Size (acres): 981.57
County(s): Anoka
TRS: T31 R22 S6, T31 R22 ST T31 R23 S1, T31 R23 S12, T32 R22 S31 +
Esri, TomTom, Garmin, FAO, FJOAA, USGS, EPA, USFWS
Earthstar Geographics
Metropolitan Council, MetroGIS, Esri, TomTom, Garmin, SafeGraph,
Minnesota
Minneapolis
Q;
W v,
3/26/20~170ftf 617
Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR
MCE #: 2025-00312
Page 4 of 4
Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR
USA Topo Basemap With Locator Map
ne Street Northeast
heast
Y
O
Z
N
N
O
0
O
Main Strc,r
I
tea.
Ca
o
v
Lois Lane
I
3
Oak Lar.
�
�
77th Str,
a
0
z
a'
v
- c
w
c Lilac Street Q
^ k
o
�
o+
C
X
Lino Lakes
000h
Rice Cree
Chain of La
N 0 0.23 0.45 0.9 1.35 1.8
W+E Mi
S
Q Project Boundary
Project Type: Development, Mixed Use
Project Size (acres): 981.57
County(s): Anoka
TRS: T31 R22 S6, T31 R22 ST T31 R23 S1, T31 R23 S12, T32 R22 S31 +
Esri, TomTom, Garmin, FAO, IJOAA, USGS, EPA, USFWS
Esn, HASA, HGA, USGS, FEMA
Metropolitan Council, MetrOGIS, Esri, TomTom, Gatmin, SafeGraph,
3126120c` ..WAwf 617
Lino Lakes - Mapping Northwest Main-161280000.3
MCE-2025-00120
Page 1 of 4
DEPARTMENT OF
NATURAL RESOURCES
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Division of Ecological & Water Resources
500 Lafayette Road, Box 25
St. Paul, MN 55155-4025
June 3, 2025
Twin Cities - Environmental (Kimley-Horn)
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
RE: Natural Heritage Review of the proposed Lino Lakes - Mapping Northwest Main-161280000.3,
T31N R22W Sec. 6-7, T31N R23W Sec. 1 and 12, T32N R22W Sec. 31, T32N R23W Sec. 36; Anoka County
Dear Twin Cities - Environmental (Kimley-Horn),
For all correspondence regarding the Natural Heritage Review of this project please include the project ID MCE-
2025-00120 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:
State -listed Species
• Many state -listed plant species, including endangered and threatened species, have been documented
in the project vicinity. State -listed endangered plant species include slimspike three -awn (Aristida
longespica var. geniculata), pale sedge (Carex pallescens), cross -leaved milkwort (Polygala cruciata),
Rubus stipulatus (a bristle -berry), and twisted yellow -eyed grass (Xyris torta). State -listed threatened
plant species include black huckleberry (Gaylussacia baccata), tubercled rein orchid (Platanthera flava
var. herbiola), toothcup (Rotala ramosior), Fuller's bristle -berry (Rubus fulleri), swamp blackberry (Rubus
semisetosus), blunt -lobed grapefern (Sceptridium oneidense) Clinton's bulrush (Trichophorum clintonii)
and lance -leaf violet (Viola lanceolata). State -listed plant species of special concern include autumn
fimbry (Fimbristylis autumnalis) and St. Lawrence grapefern (Sceptridium rugulosum). 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 endangered or threatened plants or
animals, including their parts or seeds, without a permit. To demonstrate avoidance, a qualified
surveyor will need to determine if suitable habitat exists within the activity impact area and, if so,
conduct a survey prior to any project activities.
Surveys must be conducted by a qualified surveyor and follow the standards contained in the Rare
Species Survey Process and Rare Plant Guidance. Visit the Natural Heritage Review page for a list of
certified surveyors and more information on this process. Survey proposals should be submitted to
Reports. NH IS@state.mn.us prior to initiating survey work. Project planning should take into account
Page 105 of 617
Lino Lakes - Mapping Northwest Main-161280000.3
MCE-2025-00120
Page 2 of 4
that any botanical survey needs to be conducted during the appropriate time of the year, which may be
limited. Please consult Review.NHIS@state.mn.us if you have any questions regarding this process.
• Blanding's turtles (Emydoidea blandingii), a state -listed threatened species, have been documented in
the 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 activities associated with the proposed 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. As such, the following avoidance measures are required:
o Avoid wetland and aquatic impacts during hibernation season, between September 15 and April
15, if the area is suitable for hibernation.
o Limit erosion and sediment control to wildlife friendly erosion control.
o Check bare ground within construction areas for turtles before the use of heavy equipment or
any ground disturbance.
o Inspect trenches, holes, or depressions prior to starting work each day and immediately prior to
filling. Upon completion, holes and trenches must be filled.
o The Blanding's turtle flyer must be given to all contractors working in the area.
o Report any sightings using the DNR Plant and Animal Observation Form.
o If turtles are in imminent danger, move them by hand out of harm's way; otherwise, they are to
be left undisturbed. Directions on how to move turtles safely can be found at Helping Turtles
Across the Road.
Additional Blanding's turtle avoidance measures may include, but are not limited to, the following
recommendations:
o Recommendations from List 1 of the Blanding's turtle fact sheet. If greater protection for turtles
is desired, implement recommendations from List 2.
o Nesting occurs in open (grassy or brushy) sandy uplands. Blanding's turtles have been known to
nest in residential areas, farm fields, and areas of exposed soil/sand/sediment (including soil
stockpiles and gravel pads). To minimize impacts:
■ Avoid impacts to potential nesting habitat from June 1 through September 15, or
■ Exclude Blanding's turtles from potential nesting habitat from May 15 through July 15.
To exclude turtles from potential nesting habitat: Install a barrier, buried 10 inches,
around suitable nesting habitat.
■ See the Blanding's turtle fact sheet for more information regarding nesting.
o Minimize impacts to small, vegetated temporary wetlands (Types 2 & 3) as much as possible.
o Avoid hydro -mulch products that contain any materials with synthetic (plastic) fiber additives, as
the fibers can re -suspend and flow into waterbodies.
Page 106 of 617
Lino Lakes - Mapping Northwest Main-161280000.3
MCE-2025-00120
Page 3 of 4
o Disturbed ground should be restored to pre -construction contours and re -vegetated with native
species suitable to the local habitat.
o Culverts should be 36 inches or greater in diameter, at least twice as wide as the normal width
of open water, and have an elliptical bottom, flat bottom, or be embedded.
o Roads should be ditched, not curbed or below grade. If curbs must be used, install wildlife
friendly curbs to allow turtles to leave the road. Gutters and stormwater inlets should be
designed to prevent turtles from entering the storm sewer. For an example, reference "Curb
Design and Small Animals" (Chapter 1, Page 24) in Best Practices for Meeting DNR General
Public Waters Work Permit GP 2004-0001 (state.mn.us).
Please contact Review.NHIS@state.mn.us to confirm that the above required avoidance measures will
be implemented or to inform us that they are not feasible. If the measures are not feasible, a project -
specific avoidance plan will likely be needed.
• The Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS) tracks bat roost trees and hibernacula plus some
acoustic data, but this information is not exhaustive. Even if there are no bat records listed nearby, all of
Minnesota's bats, including the federally endangered northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis),
can be found throughout Minnesota. 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.
Please report incidental sightings of state -listed species via the DNR Plant and Animal Observation Form.
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
Page 107 of 617
Lino Lakes - Mapping Northwest Main-161280000.3
MCE-2025-00120
Page 4 of 4
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
• 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.
• Given the potential presence of state protected species, we encourage submission of Natural Heritage
Review requests to ensure avoidance of take for these species and to determine survey needs as
individual projects are planned.
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 native plant communities, rare species, and other rare features.
However, the NHIS is not an exhaustive inventory and does not contain the locations of all rare features in the
state. Therefore, ecologically significant features for which we have no records may exist within the project area.
If 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. Resubmit by selecting Clone Project as Draft on the project page in MCE.
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 Natural Heritage Review for additional information regarding this process, survey guidance, and
other related information. For information on the environmental review process or other natural resource
concerns, please 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,
"'0eel
Natural Heritage Review Specialist
molly.barrett@state.mn.us
Cc: Melissa Collins, Regional Environmental Assessment Ecologist, Central (Region 3)
Page 108 of 617
►/VI • M IIIX.1ty
V M"M "So
United States Department of the Interior/
1 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: 2025-0076181
Project Name: Lino Lakes AUAR
03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC
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.
Page 109 of 617
Project code: 2025-0076181
03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC
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
1. 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.
2. 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.
2of17
Page 110 of 617
Project code: 2025-0076181
03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC
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
3of17
Page 111 of 617
Project code: 2025-0076181
03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC
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 northern long-eared bat and tricolored bat range -wide 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 voluntaryguidelines 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.
4of17
Page 112 of 617
Project code: 2025-0076181
03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC
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(a)state.mn.us
Wisconsin
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources - Endangered Resources Review Homepage
Email: DNRERReview(a)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
5of17
Page 113 of 617
Project code: 2025-0076181
03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC
PROJECT SUMMARY
Project Code: 2025-0076181
Project Name: Lino Lakes AUAR
Project Type: Mixed -Use Construction
Project Description: The study area is proposed to be developed.
Project Location:
The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:
www.google.com/maps/@45.1992409,-93.13242033378383,14z
z
i
1i
Counties: Anoka County, Minnesota
6 c
Page 114 of 617
Project code: 2025-0076181 03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC
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
Fisheriesl, 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.
7of17
Page 115 of 617
Project code: 2025-0076181
03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC
6* 1r1110161
Whooping Crane Grus americana Experimental
Population: U.S.A. (AL, AR, CO, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KY, LA, MI, MN, MS, MO, NC, Population
NM, OH, SC, TN, UT, VA, WI, WV, western half of WY) Non -
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Essential
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/758
CLAMS
NAME
STATUS
Salamander Mussel Simpsonaias ambigua Proposed
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical Endangered
habitat.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6208
INSECTS
NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus Proposed
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical Threatened
habitat.
Species profile: htWs:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
Rusty Patched Bumble Bee Bombus a f finis Endangered
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical
habitat.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9383
General project design guidelines:
https:Hipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/prof ect/ZZVRWPDATZCB3PYQQZCMK3UHPM/
documents/generated/5967.pdf
Western Regal Fritillary Argynnis idalia occidentalis Proposed
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Threatened
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/12017
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.
8of17
Page 116 of 617
Project code: 2025-0076181
03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC
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.
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 z and the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) 1. 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 avoidance and minimization
measures, as described in the various links on this page.
1. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
2. The Migratory Birds Treated of 1918.
3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
There are Bald Eagles and/or Golden Eagles in your rn oject area.
Measures for Proactively Minimizing Eagle Impacts
For information on how to best avoid and minimize disturbance to nesting bald eagles, please
review the National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines. You may employ the timing and
activity -specific distance recommendations in this document when designing your project/
activity to avoid and minimize eagle impacts. For bald eagle information specific to Alaska,
please refer to Bald Eagle Nesting and Sensitivity to Human Activity.
The FWS does not currently have guidelines for avoiding and minimizing disturbance to nesting
Golden Eagles. For site -specific recommendations regarding nesting Golden Eagles, please
consult with the appropriate Regional Migratory Bird Office or Ecological Services Field Office.
If disturbance or take of eagles cannot be avoided, an incidental take permit may be available to
authorize any take that results from, but is not the purpose of, an otherwise lawful activity. For
assistance making this determination for Bald Eagles, visit the Do I Need A Permit Tool. For
assistance making this determination for golden eagles, please consult with the appropriate
Regional Migratory Bird Office or Ecological Services Field Office.
Ensure Your Eagle List is Accurate and Complete
If your project area is in a poorly surveyed area in IPaC, your list may not be complete and you
may need to rely on other resources to determine what species may be present (e.g. your local
FWS field office, state surveys, your own surveys). Please review the Supplemental Information
9of17
Page 117 of 617
Project code: 2025-0076181
03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC
on Migratory Birds and Eagles, to help you properly interpret the report for your specified
location, including determining if there is sufficient data to ensure your list is accurate.
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to bald or golden eagles on your list, see the "Probability of Presence
Summary" below to see when these bald or golden eagles are most likely to be present and
breeding in your project area.
1►/:\u 10
101.19N0310[MIM.54119]U
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Breeds Dec 1 to
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention Aug 31
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain
types of development or activities.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626
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 (1)
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.
■ probability of presence breeding season I survey effort — no data
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Bald Eagle F 11+1 Jill 1+1- Jill 1-1- +111-11+ Jill III- Jill Jill
10 of 17
Page 118 of 617
Project code: 2025-0076181 03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC
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 avoidance and minimization 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
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) 1 prohibits the take (including killing, capturing, selling,
trading, and transport) of protected migratory bird species without prior authorization by the
Department of Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). The incidental take of migratory
birds is the injury or death of birds that results from, but is not the purpose, of an activity. The
Service interprets the MBTA to prohibit incidental take.
1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
3. 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.
BREEDING
NAME SEASON
American Golden -plover Pluvialis dominica Breeds
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA elsewhere
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/sl2ecies/10561
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Breeds Dec 1 to
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention Aug 31
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626
11 of 17
Page 119 of 617
Project code: 2025-0076181
03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC
NAME
BREEDING
SEASON
Black Tern Chlidonias niger surinamenisis Breeds May 15
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Aug 20
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/sl2ecies/3093
Black -billed Cuckoo Coccyzus erythropthalmus Breeds May 15
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Oct 10
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9399
Bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivorus Breeds May 20
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Jul 31
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9454
Canada Warbler Cardellina canadensis Breeds May 20
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Aug 10
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9643
Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica Breeds Mar 15
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Aug 25
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/sl2ecies/9406
Golden -winged Warbler Vermivora chrysoptera Breeds May 1
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Jul 20
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8745
Grasshopper SparrowAmmodramus savannarum perpallidus Breeds Jun 1 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions Aug 20
(BCRs) in the continental USA
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8329
Lesser Yellowlegs Tringa flavipes Breeds
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA elsewhere
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9679
Marbled Godwit Limosa fedoa Breeds May 1
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Jul 31
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/sl2ecies/9481
Pectoral Sandpiper Calidris melanotos Breeds
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA elsewhere
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9561
12 of 17
Page 120 of 617
Project code: 2025-0076181
03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC
NAME
BREEDING
SEASON
Ruddy Turnstone Arenaria interpres morinella Breeds
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions elsewhere
(BCRs) in the continental USA
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/sl2ecies/10633
Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus Breeds
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions elsewhere
(BCRs) in the continental USA
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9478
Semipalmated Sandpiper Calidris pusilla Breeds
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions elsewhere
(BCRs) in the continental USA
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9603
Short -billed Dowitcher Limnodromus griseus Breeds
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA elsewhere
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9480
Western Grebe aechmophorus occidentalis Breeds Jun 1 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA Aug 31
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/sl2ecies/6743
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina Breeds May 10
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Aug 31
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9431
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 ( j)
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 (1)
13 of 17
Page 121 of 617
Project code: 2025-0076181
03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC
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.
■ probability of presence breeding season I survey effort — no data
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
American Golden -
plover
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Bald Eagle 177
ii7�---i7Non-BCC 1,+1 111 1+1- 1111'-1� +111 —11+ 111' 111— 1111 111�
Vulnerable
Black Tern
BCC Rangewide —��— —+—+ �+�� +�+— +111 JillJill filrt +rt+� �+-- ++++ —+--
(CON)
Black -billed ++++ —+++ ++++ ++++ +111 wq Jill lw loll ll++ ++++ ++��
Cuckoo
BCC Rangewide L -mmm M01
(CON)
Bobolink BCC Rangewide ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++ AN ,+,+ +++0 ++++ ++++ ++++ ++�+
(CON) A
Canada Warbler
BCC Rangewide —��—+—+—'+ Jill Jill IFI— 1—+— —+-- ++++ —+--
(CON)
Chimney Swift BCC Rangewide ++++ ++++ +L+ *A 0+0 1+1+ gill 111, 0+++ ++++ ++++ ++�+
(CON) � ____ ____ ___�
Golden -winged +++— —+++ ++++ ++++ llp� �R+J III+" +$+,++ ++++ ++++ +++—
Warbler
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Grasshopper Sparrow ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ *A 210 RIT TTV ++++ ++++ ++++ ++—+
BCC - BCR mmm mmm
Lesser Yellowlegs
BCC Rangewide
—+++ ++++ ++'— +"+ +—+— +++' —,++ ++++ +++— ++++
(CON)
Marbled Godwit ++++ —+++ ++++ ++++ Jill JIlIf'+' •
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
14 of 17
Page 122 of 617
Project code: 2025-0076181
03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC
Pectoral Sandpiper ++++ ++++ ++++ ,+,+ +101 ++++ ++++ ,+" +0++ ++++ ++++ ++�+
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Ruddy Turnstone —��— —+—+ _+__ +_+— ++'--------- —+-- +—+— —+-- ++++ —+--
BCC-BCR
Rusty Blackbird ++++ ++++ +++� +„� ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++
BCC -BCR
Semipalmated
Sandpiper +++— —+++ ++++ ++++ ++1+ ++++ ++++ ++++ ,+++ ++++ ++++ +++—
BCC -BCR
Short -billed
Dowitcher+— ---+BCC Rangewide
Rangewide
(CON)
Western Grebe ++++ —+++ ++++ ++++ +,++ ++++ ++��
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Wood Thrush — Jill ' �—+-- + ++
—+--
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/librar3r�/
collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds
■ Nationwide avoidance and minimization measures for birds
■ Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/
media/supnlemental-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 FORESTED/SHRUB WETLAND
■ PSS1Ad
15 of 17
Page 123 of 617
Project code: 2025-0076181
03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC
■ PF01A
■ PFOlAd
■ PSS1A
FRESHWATER EMERGENT WETLAND
■ PEM1A
■ PEM1Ad
■ PEM1Cx
■ PEM1Af
• PEM1Cd
■ PEM1F
■ PEM1C
FRESHWATER POND
■ PUBHx
• PABHx
■ PUBFx
• PUBH
■ PABH
• PUBF
RIVERINE
■ R5UBFx
■ R2UBFx
16 of 17
Page 124 of 617
Project code: 2025-0076181
03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC
IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION
Agency: Lino Lakes city
Name: Theo Robinson
Address: 767 N Eustis St #100
City:
St. Paul
State:
MN
Zip:
55114
Email
theo.robinson@kimley-horn.com
Phone:
6516454197
17 of 17
Page 125 of 617
Appendix Co.
Greenhouse Gas
Analysis
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR
July 2025
Page 126 of 617
Back to Intro
Emissions Summary
Guidance
ZEPA CENTER FOR CORPORATE
CLIMATE LEADERSHIP
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
The total GHG emissions from each source category are provided below. You may also use this summary sheet to fill
out the Annual GHG Inventory Summary and Goal Tracking Form as this calculator only quantifies one year of
emissions at a time.
https://www.ePa.gov/climateIeadership/center-corporate-climate-leadership-annual-qhq-inventory-summary-and-goal-tracking
By entering the data below into the appropriate cell of the Annual GHG Inventory Summary and Goal Tracking Form,
you will be able to compare multiple years of data.
If you have multiple Calculator files covering sub -sets of your inventory for a particular reporting period, sum each of
the emission categories (e.g. Stationary Combustion) to an organizational total, which then can be entered into the
Annual GHG Inventory Summary and Goal Tracking Form.
(A) Enter organization information into the orange cells. Other cells on this sheet will be automatically calculated
from the data entered in the sheets in this workbook. Blue cells indicate required emission sources if applicable.
Green cells indicate scope 3 emission sources and offsets, which organizations may optionally include in their
inventory.
The "Go To Sheet" buttons can be used to navigate to the data entry sheets.
Organizational Information:
Organization Name
Organization Address:
Inventory Reporting Period
Existing Conditions
2025
Start:I MM/DD/YY I End:l MM/DD/YY
Name of Preparer:
Phone Number of Preparer:
Date Prepared:
Summary of Organization's Emissions:
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Scope 1 Emissions
Stationary Combustion
534
Mobile Sources
0
Refrigeration / AC Equipment Use
0
Fire Suppression
0
Purchased Gases
0
Location -Based Scone 2 Emissions
�o To Sheet
Purchased and Consumed Electricity
862
3o To Sheet
Purchased and Consumed Steam
0
Market -Based Scope 2 Emissions
Go To Sheet
Purchased and Consumed Electricity
Purchased and Consumed Steam
862
0
Go To Sheet
Total organization Emissions
Total Scope 1 & Location -Based Scope 2 1,396
Total Scope 1 & Market -Based Scope 2 1,396
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
Reductions
Go To Sheet Offsets 0 1 CO2-e (metric tons)
Net Scope 1 and 2 Location -Based Emissions 1,396
Net Scope 1 and 2 Market -Based Emissions 1,396
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Summary)
2of21
Page 127 of 617
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Scone 3 Emissions
Employee Business Travel
0
Employee Commuting
0
Product Transport
0
Waste
261
Required Supplemental Information
Biomass CO2 Emissions from Stationary Sources C
Biomass CO2 Emissions from Mobile Sources C
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Summary)
3of21
Page 128 of 617
Back to Intro Back to Summary Heat Content
Help
Scope 1 Emissions from Stationary Combustion Sources
$EPA CENTER FOR CORPORATE
CLIMATE LEADERSHIP
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Guidance
(A) Enter annual data for each combustion unit, facility, or site (by fuel type) in ORANGE cells on Table 1. Example
entry is shown in first row (GREEN Italics).
- Select "Fuel Combusted" from drop down box.
- Enter "Quantity Combusted" and choose the appropriate units from the drop down box in the unit column. If it's
necessary to convert units, common heat contents can be found on the "Heat Content" sheet and unit conversions on
the "Unit Conversion" sheet.
(B) If fuel is consumed in a facility but stationary fuel consumption data are not available, an estimate should be made
for completeness. See the "Items to Note" section of the Help sheet for suggested estimation approaches.
(C) Biomass CO2 emissions are not reported in the total emissions, but are reported separately at the bottom of the sheet.
Table 1. Stationary Source Fuel Combustion
Source
ID
Source
Description
Source
Area (sq ft)
Fuel
Combusted
Quantity
Combusted
Units
BLR-012
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Residential
East Power Plant
Natural Gas Use
12,517
784,080
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
0,000
10,058
MMBtu
MMBtu
GHG Emissions
Total Organization -Wide Stationary Source Combustion by Fuel Type
Fuel Type
Quantity
Combusted
Units
Anthracite Coal
0
short tons
Bituminous Coal
0
short tons
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Direct 1.0)
6of21
Page 129 of 617
Back to Intro Back to Summary
Scope 2 Emissions from Purchase of Electricity
Help Help - Market -Based Method
,&EPA CENTER FOR CORPORATE
CLIMATE LEADERSHIP
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Guidance
The Indirect Emissions from Purchased Electricity Guidance document provides guidance for quantifying two scope 2 emissions totals, using
a location -based method and a market -based method. The organization should quantify and report both totals in its GHG inventory. The
location -based method considers average emission factors for the electricity grids that provide electricity. The market -based method
considers contractual arrangements under which the organization procures electricity from specific sources, such as renewable energy.
(A) Enter total annual electricity purchased in kWh and each eGRID subregion for each facility or site in ORANGE cells of Table 1.
(B) If electricity consumption data are not available for a facility, an estimate should be made for completeness.
See the "Items to Note" section of the Help sheet for suggested estimation approaches.
(C) Select "eGRID subregion" from drop box and enter "Electricity Purchased."
- Use map (Figure 1) at bottom of sheet to determine appropriate eGRID subregion. If subregion cannot be determined from
the map, find the correct subregion by entering the location's zip code into EPA's Power Profiler:
https://www.epa.gov/egrid/power-profiler#/
(D) See the market -based emission factor hierarchy on the market -based method Help sheet. If any of the first four types of
emission factors are applicable, enter the factors in the yellow cells marked as "<enter factor>". If not, leave the
yellow cells as is, and eGRID subregion factors will be used for market -based emissions. Help - Market -Based Method
Example entry is shown in first row (GREEN Italics) for a facility that purchases RECs for 100% of its consumption, and
therefore has a market -based emission factor of 0.
Tips: Enter electricity usage by location and then look up the eGRID subregion for each location.
If you purchase renewable energy that is less than 100% of your site's electricity, see the
example in the market -based method Help sheet.
Table 1. Total Amount of Electricity Purchased by eGRID Subregion
Market -Based
Use these cells to enter applicable market -based emission factors
Location -Based
Emission Factors
Emissions
Emissions
Source
ID
Source
Description
Source
Area (sq ft)
eGRID Subregion
where electricity is consumed
Electricity
Purchased
(kWh)
CO2
Emissions
(lb/MWh)
CH4
Emissions
(lb/MWh)
N20
Emissions
(lb/MWh)
CO2
Emissions
(lb)
CH4
Emissions
(lb)
N20
Emissions
(lb)
CO2
Emissions
(lb)
CH4
Emissions
(lb)
N20
Emissions
(lb)
Bldg-012
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Residential
East Power Plant
Electricity Use
12,517
784,080
HIMS (HICC Miscellaneous)
MROW (MROWest)
200,000
1,717,201
0
------------------
<enter factor>
------------------
<enter factor>
0
-----------------
<enter factor>
---------------------------
1,886,173.6
0.0
-----------------
204.3
---------- ===
29.2
237,120.0
---------------------------
1,886,173.6
28.6
•------------
204.3
4.4
---------------
29.2
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
Total Emissions for All Sources
1 1,717,2011
1 1,886,173.61
204.31
29.2
1,886,173.61
204.3
29.2
GHG Emissions
CO2 Equivalent Emissions (metric tons)
Location -Based Electricity Emissions 861.8
Market -Based Electricity Emissions 861.8
Notes:
1. CO2, CH4 and N20 emissions are estimated using methodology provided in EPA's Center for Corporate Climate Leadership Greenhouse Gas Inventory Guidance
- Indirect Emissions from Purchased Electricity (January 2016).
Figure 1. EPA eGRID2019, February 2021.
NWPP
CAMX
AZNM �%-
USEPA, eGRID, February 2021
Crosshatching indicates that an area falls within overlapping
eGRID subregions due to the presence of multiple electric
service providers. Visit Power Profiler to definitively determine
the eGRID subregion associated with your location and
electric service provider.
http://www.epa.gov/energy/power-profiler
RMPA
s
�r
MROE
•� RFCM
10,
44, _., RFC
i�
SPNO SRMW
/A
SRMV sPso
.
4 0, /,
ERCT j`� 0
FRCC
IN
A6
NEWE
NYLI
NYCW
Alaska
; Hawaii
Puerto Rico
AKMS
H IOA
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Indirect 1.0)
1 of 2
Page 130 of 617
Back to Intro Back to Summary
Scope 3 Emissions from Waste
Guidance
Help
:.EPA CENTER FOR CORPORATE
CLIMATE LEADERSHIP
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(A) Enter annual waste data in ORANGE cells. Example entry is shown in first row (GREEN Italics).
(B) Choose the appropriate material and disposal method from the drop down options. For the average -data method, use one of the mixed material types, such as mixed
MSW. If the exact waste material is not available, consider an appropriate proxy. For example, dimensional lumber can be used as a proxy for wood furniture.
(C) Choose an appropriate disposal method. Note that not all disposal methods are available for all materials. If there is a #NA or # Value error in the emissions column, you must pick a
new material type or appropriate disposal method.
Table 1. Waste Disposal Weight by Waste Material and Disposal Method (CO2, CH4 and N20)
Source ID
Source Description
Waste Material
Method Disposal
Weight
Unit
CO2e Emissions
k
Bldg-012
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Residential
East Power Plant Finished Goods
Residential Waste
Steel Cans
Mixed MSW municipal solid waste
Landfilled
Landfilled
1,000
437
metric ton
metric ton
22,040
250,418
Residential
Residential Waste
Mixed Recyclables
Recycled
109
metric ton
10,811
GHG Emissions
Total Emissions by Disposal Method
Waste Material
CO2e (kg)
Recycled
10,811
Landfilled
250,418
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Optional 3.0)
1 of 2
Page 131 of 617
Combusted -
Composted -
Anaerobically Digested (Dry Digestate with Curing) -
Anaerobically Digested (Wet Digestate with Curing) -
Total CO2 Equivalent Emissions (metric tons) - Waste 261.2
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Optional 3.0)
2of2
Page 132 of 617
Back to Intro
Emissions Summary
Guidance
&EM CENTER FOR CORPORATE
CLIMATE LEADERSHIP
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
The total GHG emissions from each source category are provided below. You may also use this summary sheet to fill
out the Annual GHG Inventory Summary and Goal Tracking Form as this calculator only quantifies one year of
emissions at a time.
https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/center-corporate-climate-leadership-annual-qhq-inventory-summary-and-goal-tracking
By entering the data below into the appropriate cell of the Annual GHG Inventory Summary and Goal Tracking Form,
you will be able to compare multiple years of data.
If you have multiple Calculator files covering sub -sets of your inventory for a particular reporting period, sum each of
the emission categories (e.g. Stationary Combustion) to an organizational total, which then can be entered into the
Annual GHG Inventory Summary and Goal Tracking Form.
(A) Enter organization information into the orange cells. Other cells on this sheet will be automatically calculated
from the data entered in the sheets in this workbook. Blue cells indicate required emission sources if applicable. Green
cells indicate scope 3 emission sources and offsets, which organizations may optionally include in their inventory.
B) The "Go To Sheet" buttons can be used to naviaate to the data entry sheets.
Organizational Information:
Organization Name:
Organization Address:
Inventory Reporting Period
Scenario 1
2025
Start:I MM/DD/YY I End:I MM/DD/YY
Name of Preparer:
Phone Number of Preparer:
Date Prepared:
Summary of Organization's Emissions:
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Scope 1 Emissions
Stationary Combustion
7,154
Mobile Sources
278,006
Refrigeration / AC Equipment Use
0
Fire Suppression
0
Purchased Gases
0
Location -Based Scope 2 Emissions
Go To Sheet
Purchased and Consumed Electricity
12,066
Go To Sheet
Purchased and Consumed Steam
0
Market -Based Scope 2 Emissions
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Purchased and Consumed Electricity
12,066
Purchased and Consumed Steam
0
Total organization Emissions
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Summary)
1 of 2
Page 133 of 617
Fotal Scope 1 & Location -Based Scope 2 297,221
Fotal Scope 1 & Market -Based Scope 2 297,221
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
Reductions
Go To Sheet Offsets 0 CO2-e (metric tons)
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Jet Scope 1 and 2 Location -Based Emissions 297,22'
Jet Scope 1 and 2 Market -Based Emissions 297,22'
Scone 3 Emissions
Employee Business Travel
0
Employee Commuting
0
Product Transport
0
Waste
3,537
Reauired Suavlemental Information
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Biomass CO2 Emissions from Stationary Sources
0
Biomass CO2 Emissions from Mobile Sources
0
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Summary) 2 of 2
Page 134 of 617
Back to Intro I Back to Summary I Heat Content I Help
Scope 1 Emissions from Stationary Combustion Sources
, &EPA CENTER FOR CORPORATE
CLIMATE LEADERSHIP
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Guidance
(A) Enter annual data for each combustion unit, facility, or site (by fuel type) in ORANGE cells on Table 1. Example
entry is shown in first row (GREEN Italics).
- Select "Fuel Combusted" from drop down box.
- Enter "Quantity Combusted" and choose the appropriate units from the drop down box in the unit column. If it's
necessary to convert units, common heat contents can be found on the "Heat Content" sheet and unit conversions on
the "Unit Conversion" sheet.
(B) If fuel is consumed in a facility but stationary fuel consumption data are not available, an estimate should be made
for completeness. See the "Items to Note" section of the Help sheet for suggested estimation approaches.
(C) Biomass CO2 emissions are not reported in the total emissions, but are reported separately at the bottom of the sheet.
Table 1. Stationary Source Fuel Combustion
Source
ID
Source
Description
Source
Area (sq ft)
Fuel
Combusted
Quantity
Combusted
Units
BLR-012
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Residential
East Power Plant
Natural Gas Use
12,517
3,000,000
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
10,000
133,408
MMBtu
MMBtu
Commercial
Natural Gas Use
60,000
Natural Gas
1,290
MMBtu
GHG Emissions
Total Organization -Wide Stationary Source Combustion by Fuel Type
Fuel Type
Quantity
Combusted
Units
Anthracite Coal
0
short tons
Bituminous Coal
0
short tons
Sub -bituminous Coal
0
short tons
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Direct 1.0) 1 of 2
Page 135 of 617
Lignite Coal
0
short tons
Natural Gas
131,284,600
scf
Distillate Fuel Oil No. 2
0
gallons
Residual Fuel Oil No. 6
0
gallons
Kerosene
0
gallons
Liquefied Petroleum Gases (LPG)
0
gallons
Wood and Wood Residuals
0
short tons
Landfill Gas
0
scf
Total Organization -Wide CO2i CH4 and N20 Emissions from Stationary Source Fuel Combustion
Fuel Type
CO2 (kg)
CH4 (g)
N20 (g)
Anthracite Coal
0.0
0.0
0.0
Bituminous Coal
0.0
0.0
0.0
Sub -bituminous Coal
0.0
0.0
0.0
Lignite Coal
0.0
0.0
0.0
Natural Gas
7,147,133.6
135,223.1
13,128.5
Distillate Fuel Oil No. 2
0.0
0.0
0.0
Residual Fuel Oil No. 6
0.0
0.0
0.0
Kerosene
0.0
0.0
0.0
Liquefied Petroleum Gases (LPG)
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Fossil Fuel Emissions
7,147,133.6
135,223.1
13,128.5
Wood and Wood Residuals
0.0
0.0
0.0
Landfill Gas
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Non -Fossil Fuel Emissions
0.01
0.0
0.0
Total Emissions for all Fuels
7,147,133.61
135,223.1
13,128.5
Total CO2 Equivalent Emissions (metric tons) - Stationary Combustion 7,154.4
Total Biomass CO2 Equivalent Emissions (metric tons) - Stationary Combustion 0.0
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Direct 1.0) 2 of 2
Page 136 of 617
Back to Intro Back to Summary
Scope 1 Emissions from Mobile Sources
Guidance
Help
9EPA CENTER FOR CORPORATE
CLIMATE LEADERSHIP
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(A) Enter annual data for each vehicle or group of vehicles (grouped by vehicle type, vehicle year, and fuel type) in ORANGE cells in
Table 1. Example entry is shown in first row (GREEN Italics). Only enter vehicles owned or leased by your organization on
this sheet. All other vehicle use such as employee commuting or business travel is considered a scope 3 emissions source
and should be reported in the corresponding scope 3 sheets.
- Select "On -Road" or "Non -Road" from drop down box to determine the Vehicle Types available.
- Select "Vehicle Type" from drop down box (closest type available).
- Enter "Fuel Usage" in appropriate units (units appear when vehicle type is selected).
- If mileage or fuel usage is unknown, estimate using approximate fuel economy values (see Reference Table below).
- Vehicle year and Miles traveled are not necessary for non -road equiment.
(B) When using biofuels, typically the biofuel (biodiesel or ethanol) is mixed with a petroleum fuel (diesel or gasoline) for use in
vehicles. Enter the biodiesel and ethanol percentages of the fuel if known, or leave default values.
Biodiesel Percent: 20 %
Ethanol Percent: 80 %
(C) Biomass CO2 emissions from biodiesel and ethanol are not reported in the total emissions, but are reported separately at the bottom of the sheet.
Table 1. Mobile Source Fuel Combustion and Miles Traveled
Source
ID
Source
Description
On -Road or
Non -Road?
Vehicle
Type
Vehicle
Year
Fuel
Usage
Units
Miles
Traveled
7leet-012
HQ Flee
NonRoad
Ships and Boats - Diesel
500
gal
Construction Equipment (non -road g
Construction Equipment
NonRoad
Construction/Mining Equipment - Gasoline (2 stroke)
2007
6,010,282
gal
0
Passenger Cars
Construction Equipment
OnRoad
Passenger Cars - Gasoline
2007
20,439
gal
4,368
Construction Equipment (non -road di
Construction Equipment
NonRoad
Construction/Mining Equipment - Diesel
2007
21,465,291
gal
0
Medium- and Heavy- Duty Trucks
Construction Equipment
OnRoad
Medium- and Heavy -Duty Vehicles - Diesel
2007
42,931
gal
1,560
Light Trucks
Construction Equipment
OnRoad
Light -Duty Trucks - Gasoline
2007
40,069
gal
1,560
Reference Table: Average Fuel Economy by Vehicle Type
Vehicle Type
Average Fuel Economy (mpg)
Passenger Cars
24.1
Motorcycles
44.0
Diesel Buses Diesel Heavy -Duty Vehicles
7.3
Other 2-axle, 4-Tire Vehicles
17.6
,Single unit 2-Axle 6-Tire or More Trucks
7.5
Combination Trucks
6.1
GHG Emissions
Total Organization -Wide Mobile Source Fuel Usage and CO2 Emissions (On -Road and Off -Road Vehicles)
Fuel Type
Fuel Usage
Units
CO2
(kg)
Motor Gasoline
6,070,789
gallons
53,301,531.6
Diesel Fuel
21,508,222
gallons
###########
Residual Fuel Oil
0
gallons
0.0
Aviation Gasoline
0
gallons
0.0
Kerosene -Type Jet Fuel
0
gallons
0.0
Liquefied Petroleum Gas LPG
0
gallons
0.0
Ethanol
0
gallons
0.0
Biodiesel
0
gallons
0.0
,Liquefied Natural Gas LNG
0
gallons
0.0
Com ressed Natural Gas CNG
0
scf
0.0
Total Organization -Wide On -Road Gasoline Mobile Source Mileage and CH4/N20 Emissions
Vehicle Type
Vehicle Year
Mileage (miles)
CH4 (g)
N20 (g)
Passenger Cars - Gasoline
1984-93
0
0.0
0.0
1994
0
0.0
0.0
1995
0
0.0
0.0
1996
0
0.0
0.0
1997
0
0.0
0.0
1998
0
0.0
0.0
1999
0
0.0
0.0
2000
0
0.0
0.0
2001
0
0.0
0.0
2002
0
0.0
0.0
2003
0
0.0
0.0
2004
0
0.0
0.0
2005
0
0.0
0.0
2006
0
0.0
0.0
2007
4,368
31.4
22.7
2008
0
0.0
0.0
2009
0
0.0
0.0
2010
0
0.0
0.0
2011
0
0.0
0.0
2012
0
0.0
0.0
2013
0
0.0
0.0
2014
0
0.0
0.0
2015
0
0.0
0.0
2016
0
0.0
0.0
2017
0
0.0
0.0
2018
0
0.0
0.0
Light -Duty Trucks - Gasoline
(Vans, Pickup Trucks, SUVs)
1987-93
0
0.0
0.0
1994
0
0.0
0.0
1995
0
0.0
0.0
1996
0
0.0
0.0
1997
0
0.0
0.0
1998
0
0.0
0.0
1999
0
0.0
0.0
2000
0
0.0
0.0
2001
0
0.0
0.0
2002
0
0.0
0.0
2003
0
0.0
0.0
2004
0
0.0
0.0
2005
0
0.0
0.0
Note: emissions here are only for the gi
Note: emissions here are only for the di
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Direct 2.0)
1 of 2
Page 137 of 617
2006
0
0.0
0.0
2007
1,560
16.1
9.5
2008
0
0.0
0.0
2009
0
0.0
0.0
2010
0
0.0
0.0
2011
0
0.0
0.0
2012
0
0.0
0.0
2013
0
0.0
0.0
2014
0
0.0
0.0
2015
0
0.0
0.0
2016
0
0.0
0.0
2017
0
0.0
0.0
2018
0
0.0
0.0
Heavy -Duty Vehicles - Gasoline
1985-86
0
0.0
0.0
1987
0
0.0
0.0
1988-1989
0
0.0
0.0
1990-1995
0
0.0
0.0
1996
0
0.0
0.0
1997
0
0.0
0.0
1998
0
0.0
0.0
1999
0
0.0
0.0
2000
0
0.0
0.0
2001
0
0.0
0.0
2002
0
0.0
0.0
2003
0
0.0
0.0
2004
0
0.0
0.0
2005
0
0.0
0.0
2006
0
0.0
0.0
2007
0
0.0
0.0
2008
0
0.0
0.0
2009
0
0.0
0.0
2010
0
0.0
0.0
2011
0
0.0
0.0
2012
0
0.0
0.0
2013
0
0.0
0.0
2014
0
0.0
0.0
2015
0
0.0
0.0
2016
0
0.0
0.0
2017
0
0.0
0.0
2018
0
0.0
0.0
Motorcycles - Gasoline
1960-1995
0
0.0
0.0
1996-present
01
0.01
0.0
Total Organization -Wide On -Road Non -Gasoline Mobile Source Mileage and CH4/N20 Emissions
Vehicle Type
Fuel Type
Vehicle Year
Mileage (miles)
CH4 (g)
N20 (g)
Passenger Cars - Diesel
Diesel
1960-1982
0
0.0
0.0
1983-1995
0
0.0
0.0
1996-2006
0
0.0
0.0
2007-2018
0
0.0
0.0
Light -Duty Trucks - Diesel
Diesel
1960-1982
0
0.0
0.0
1983-1995
0
0.0
0.0
1996-2006
0
0.0
0.0
2007-2018
0
0.0
0.0
Medium- and Heavy -Duty Vehicles -
Diesel
1960-2006
0
0.0
0.0
2007-2018
1,560
14.8
67.2
Light -Duty Cars
Methanol
0
0.0
0.0
Ethanol
0
0.0
0.0
CNG
0
0.0
0.0
LPG
0
0.0
0.0
Biodiesel
0
0.0
0.0
Light -Duty Trucks
Ethanol
0
0.0
0.0
CNG
0
0.0
0.0
LPG
0
0.0
0.0
LNG
0
0.0
0.0
Biodiesel
0
0.0
0.0
Medium -Duty Trucks
CNG
0
0.0
0.0
LPG
0
0.0
0.0
LNG
0
0.0
0.0
Biodiesel
0
0.0
0.0
Heavy -Duty Trucks
Methanol
0
0.0
0.0
Ethanol
0
0.0
0.0
CNG
0
0.0
0.0
LPG
0
0.0
0.0
LNG
0
0.0
0.0
Biodiesel
0
0.0
0.0
Buses
Methanol
0
0.0
0.0
Ethanol
0
0.0
0.0
CNG
0
0.0
0.0
LPG
0
0.0
0.0
LNG
0
0.0
0.0
Biodiesel
0
0.0
0.0
Total Organization -Wide Non -Road Mobile Source Fuel Usage and CH4/N20 Emissions
Vehicle Type
Fuel Type
Fuel Usage
(gallons)
CH4 (g)
N20 (g)
Ships and Boats
Residual Fuel Oil
-
-
-
Gasoline 2 stroke
-
-
-
Gasoline 4 stroke
-
-
-
Diesel
-
-
-
Locomotives
Diesel
-
-
-
Aircraft
Jet Fuel
-
-
-
Aviation Gasoline
-
-
-
Agricultural Equipment
Gasoline 2 stroke
-
-
-
Gasoline 4 stroke
-
-
-
Diesel
-
-
-
LPG
-
-
-
Agricultural Offroad Trucks
Gasoline
-
-
-
Diesel
-
-
-
Construction/Mining Equipment
Gasoline 2 stroke
6,010,282
74,647,697
420,720
Gasoline 4 stroke
-
-
-
Diesel
21,465,291
4,293,058
10,088,687
LPG
-
-
-
Construction/Mining Offroad Trucks
Gasoline
-
-
-
Diesel
-
-
-
Lawn and Garden Equipment
Gasoline 2 stroke
-
-
-
Gasoline 4 stroke
-
-
-
Diesel
-
-
-
LPG
-
-
-
Airport Equipment
Gasoline
-
-
-
Diesel
-
-
-
LPG
-
-
-
Industrial/Commercial Equipment
Gasoline 2 stroke
-
-
-
Gasoline 4 stroke
-
-
-
Diesel
-
-
-
LPG
-
-
-
Logging Equipment
Gasoline (2 stroke)
-
-
-
Gasoline 4 stroke
-
-
-
Diesel
-
-
-
Railroad Equipment
Gasoline
-
-
-
Diesel
-
-
-
LPG
-
-
-
Recreational Equipment
Gasoline 2 stroke
-
-
-
Gasoline (4 stroke)
-
-
-
Diesel
-
-
-
LPG
-
-
-
Total CO2 Equivalent Emissions (metric tons) - Mobile Sources 278,005.8
Total Biomass CO2 Equivalent Emissions (metric tons) - Mobile Sources 0.0
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Direct 2.0)
2 of 2
Page 138 of 617
Back to Intro Back to Summary
Scope 2 Emissions from Purchase of Electricity
Help Help - Market -Based Method
,&EPA CENTER FOR CORPORATE
CLIMATE LEADERSHIP
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Guidance
The Indirect Emissions from Purchased Electricity Guidance document provides guidance for quantifying two scope 2 emissions totals, using
a location -based method and a market -based method. The organization should quantify and report both totals in its GHG inventory. The
location -based method considers average emission factors for the electricity grids that provide electricity. The market -based method
considers contractual arrangements under which the organization procures electricity from specific sources, such as renewable energy.
(A) Enter total annual electricity purchased in kWh and each eGRID subregion for each facility or site in ORANGE cells of Table 1.
(B) If electricity consumption data are not available for a facility, an estimate should be made for completeness.
See the "Items to Note" section of the Help sheet for suggested estimation approaches.
(C) Select "eGRID subregion" from drop box and enter "Electricity Purchased."
- Use map (Figure 1) at bottom of sheet to determine appropriate eGRID subregion. If subregion cannot be determined from
the map, find the correct subregion by entering the location's zip code into EPA's Power Profiler:
https://www.epa.gov/egrid/power-profiler#/
(D) See the market -based emission factor hierarchy on the market -based method Help sheet. If any of the first four types of
emission factors are applicable, enter the factors in the yellow cells marked as "<enter factor>". If not, leave the
yellow cells as is, and eGRID subregion factors will be used for market -based emissions.
Example entry is shown in first row (GREEN Italics) for a facility that purchases RECs for 100% of its consumption, and
therefore has a market -based emission factor of 0.
Tips: Enter electricity usage by location and then look up the eGRID subregion for each location.
Help - Market -Based Method
If you purchase renewable energy that is less than 100% of your site's electricity, see the
example in the market -based method Help sheet.
Table 1. Total Amount of Electricity Purchased by eGRID Subregion
Market -Based
Use these cells to enter applicable market -based emission factors
Location -Based
Emission Factors
Emissions
Emissions
Source
ID
Source
Description
Source
Area (sq ft)
eGRID Subregion
where electricity is consumed
Electricity
Purchased
(kWh)
CO2
Emissions
(lb/MWh)
CH4
Emissions
(lb/MWh)
N20
Emissions
(lb/MWh)
CO2
Emissions
(lb)
CH4
Emissions
(lb)
N20
Emissions
(lb)
CO2
Emissions
(lb)
CH4
Emissions
(lb)
N20
Emissions
(lb)
Bldg-012
...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Residential
East Power Plant
Electricity Use
12,517
1,600
HIMS (HICC Miscellaneous)
MROW (MRO West)
200,000
23,196,200
0
------------------
<enter factor>
------------------
<enter factor>
0
------------------
<enter factor>
0.0
---------------------------
25,478,706.1
0.0
-----------------
2,760.3
•--------------
394.3
237,120.0
---------------------------
25,478,706.1
28.6
------------
2,760.3
4.4
---------------
394.3
Commercia
Electricity Use
60,000
MROW (MRO West)
846,000
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
929,246.4
100.7
14.4
929,246.4
100.7
14.4
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
Total Emissions for All Sources
24,042,2501
26,407,952.5
2,861.0
408.71
26,407,952.5
2,861.01
408.7
GHG Emissions
CO2 Equivalent Emissions (metric tons)
Location -Based Electricity Emissions 12,066.3
Market -Based Electricity Emissions 12,066.3
Notes:
1. CO2, CH4 and N20 emissions are estimated using methodology provided in EPA's Center for Corporate Climate Leadership Greenhouse Gas Inventory Guidance
- Indirect Emissions from Purchased Electricity (January 2016).
Figure 1. EPA eGRID2019, February 2021.
I
NWPP
A� A
I j
CAMX
�Z.� .
r!%
USEPA, eGRID, February 2021
Crosshatching indicates that an area falls within overlapping
eGRID subregions due to the presence of multiple electric
service providers. Visit Power Profiler to definitively determine
the eGRID subregion associated with your location and
electric service provider.
http://www.epa.gov/energy/power-profiler
00,
S R M V/- jj'
00
/i
ERCT
OX
-. J
i
FRCC
A6
NEWE
NYLI
NYCW
� Alaska
Hawaii
Puerto Rico
AKMS'
-
HIOA�'
..
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Indirect 1.0)
1 of 2
Page 139 of 617
y� APRMS
KGD
HIMS
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Indirect 1.0)
2of2
Page 140 of 617
Back to Intro Back to Summary
Scope 3 Emissions from Waste
Help
:.EPA CENTER FOR CORPORATE
CLIMATE LEADERSHIP
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Guidance
(A) Enter annual waste data in ORANGE cells. Example entry is shown in first row (GREEN Italics).
(B) Choose the appropriate material and disposal method from the drop down options. For the average -data method, use one of the mixed material types, such as mixed
MSW. If the exact waste material is not available, consider an appropriate proxy. For example, dimensional lumber can be used as a proxy for wood furniture.
(C) Choose an appropriate disposal method. Note that not all disposal methods are available for all materials. If there is a #NA or # Value error in the emissions column, you must pick a
new material type or appropriate disposal method.
Table 1. Waste Disposal Weight by Waste Material and Disposal Method (CO2, CH4 and N20)
Source ID
Source Description
Waste Material
Method Disposal
Weight
Unit
CO2e Emissions
k
Bldg-012
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Nonresidential Buildings
East Power Plant Finished Goods
Nonresidential Waste
Steel Cans
Mixed MSW municipal solid waste
Landfilled
Combusted
1,000
720
metric ton
metric ton
22,040
341,179
Residential
Residential Waste
Mixed MSW municipal solid waste
Combusted
6,373
metric ton
3,019,807
Nonresidential Buildings
Nonresidential Recycling
Mixed Recyclables
Recycled
180
metric ton
17,852
Residential
Residential Recycling
Mixed Recyclables
Recycled
1,593
metric ton
158,013
GHG Emissions
Total Emissions by Disposal Method
Waste Material CO2e (kg)
Recycled 175,866
Landfilled -
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Optional 3.0)
1 of 2
Page 141 of 617
Combusted 3,360,986
Composted -
Anaerobically Digested (Dry Digestate with Curing) -
Anaerobically Digested (Wet Digestate with Curing) -
Total CO2 Equivalent Emissions (metric tons) - Waste 3,536.9
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Optional 3.0)
2of2
Page 142 of 617
Back to Intro
Emissions Summary
Guidance
&EPA CENTER FOR CORPORATE
CLIMATE LEADERSHIP
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
The total GHG emissions from each source category are provided below. You may also use this summary sheet to fill
out the Annual GHG Inventory Summary and Goal Tracking Form as this calculator only quantifies one year of
emissions at a time.
https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/center-corporate-climate-leadership-annual-qhq-inventory-summary-and-goal-tracking
By entering the data below into the appropriate cell of the Annual GHG Inventory Summary and Goal Tracking Form,
you will be able to compare multiple years of data.
If you have multiple Calculator files covering sub -sets of your inventory for a particular reporting period, sum each of
the emission categories (e.g. Stationary Combustion) to an organizational total, which then can be entered into the
Annual GHG Inventory Summary and Goal Tracking Form.
(A) Enter organization information into the orange cells. Other cells on this sheet will be automatically calculated
from the data entered in the sheets in this workbook. Blue cells indicate required emission sources if applicable. Green
cells indicate scope 3 emission sources and offsets, which organizations may optionally include in their inventory.
B) The "Go To Sheet" buttons can be used to naviaate to the data entry sheets.
Organizational Information:
Organization Name:
Organization Address:
Inventory Reporting Period
Scenario 2
2025
Start:I MM/DD/YY I End:I MM/DD/YY
Name of Preparer:
Phone Number of Preparer:
Date Prepared:
Summary of Organization's Emissions:
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Scope 1 Emissions
Stationary Combustion
7,291
Mobile Sources
336,743
Refrigeration / AC Equipment Use
0
Fire Suppression
0
Purchased Gases
0
Location -Based Scope 2 Emissions
Go To Sheet
Purchased and Consumed Electricity
12,324
Go To Sheet
Purchased and Consumed Steam
0
Market -Based Scope 2 Emissions
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Purchased and Consumed Electricity
12,324
Purchased and Consumed Steam
0
Total organization Emissions
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Summary)
1 of 2
Page 143 of 617
Total Scope 1 & Location -Based Scope 2 356,358
Total Scope 1 & Market -Based Scope 2 356,358
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
Reductions
Go To Sheet Offsets 0 CO2-e (metric tons)
Vet Scope 1 and 2 Location -Based Emissions 356,35E
Vet Scope 1 and 2 Market -Based Emissions 356,35E
Scone 3 Emissions
Go To Sheet
Employee Business Travel
0
Go To Sheet
Employee Commuting
0
Go To Sheet
Product Transport
0
Go To Sheet
Waste
3,642
Reauired Suavlemental Information
Go To Sheet
Go To Sheet
Biomass CO2 Emissions from Stationary Sources
0
Biomass CO2 Emissions from Mobile Sources
0
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
CO2-e (metric tons)
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Summary) 2 of 2
Page 144 of 617
Back to Intro I Back to Summary I Heat Content I Help
Scope 1 Emissions from Stationary Combustion Sources
, &EPA CENTER FOR CORPORATE
CLIMATE LEADERSHIP
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Guidance
(A) Enter annual data for each combustion unit, facility, or site (by fuel type) in ORANGE cells on Table 1. Example
entry is shown in first row (GREEN Italics).
- Select "Fuel Combusted" from drop down box.
- Enter "Quantity Combusted" and choose the appropriate units from the drop down box in the unit column. If it's
necessary to convert units, common heat contents can be found on the "Heat Content" sheet and unit conversions on
the "Unit Conversion" sheet.
(B) If fuel is consumed in a facility but stationary fuel consumption data are not available, an estimate should be made
for completeness. See the "Items to Note" section of the Help sheet for suggested estimation approaches.
(C) Biomass CO2 emissions are not reported in the total emissions, but are reported separately at the bottom of the sheet.
Table 1. Stationary Source Fuel Combustion
Source
ID
Source
Description
Source
Area (sq ft)
Fuel
Combusted
Quantity
Combusted
Units
BLR-012
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Residential
East Power Plant
Natural Gas Use
12,517
30,500,000
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
10,000
135,938
MMBtu
MMBtu
Commercial
Natural Gas Use
62,000
Natural Gas
1,333
MMBtu
GHG Emissions
Total Organization -Wide Stationary Source Combustion by Fuel Type
Fuel Type
Quantity
Combusted
Units
Anthracite Coal
0
short tons
Bituminous Coal
0
short tons
Sub -bituminous Coal
0
short tons
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Direct 1.0) 1 of 2
Page 145 of 617
Lignite Coal
0
short tons
Natural Gas
133,792,398
scf
Distillate Fuel Oil No. 2
0
gallons
Residual Fuel Oil No. 6
0
gallons
Kerosene
0
gallons
Liquefied Petroleum Gases (LPG)
0
gallons
Wood and Wood Residuals
0
short tons
Landfill Gas
0
scf
Total Organization -Wide CO2i CH4 and N20 Emissions from Stationary Source Fuel Combustion
Fuel Type
CO2 (kg)
CH4 (g)
N20 (g)
Anthracite Coal
0.0
0.0
0.0
Bituminous Coal
0.0
0.0
0.0
Sub -bituminous Coal
0.0
0.0
0.0
Lignite Coal
0.0
0.0
0.0
Natural Gas
7,283,658.1
137,806.2
13,379.2
Distillate Fuel Oil No. 2
0.0
0.0
0.0
Residual Fuel Oil No. 6
0.0
0.0
0.0
Kerosene
0.0
0.0
0.0
Liquefied Petroleum Gases (LPG)
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Fossil Fuel Emissions
7,283,658.1
137,806.2
13,379.2
Wood and Wood Residuals
0.0
0.0
0.0
Landfill Gas
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Non -Fossil Fuel Emissions
0.01
0.0
0.0
Total Emissions for all Fuels
1 7,283,658.11
137,806.2
13,379.2
Total CO2 Equivalent Emissions (metric tons) - Stationary Combustion 7,291.1
Total Biomass CO2 Equivalent Emissions (metric tons) - Stationary Combustion 0.0
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Direct 1.0) 2 of 2
Page 146 of 617
Back to Intro Back to Summary
Scope 1 Emissions from Mobile Sources
Guidance
Help
SEPA CENTER FOR CORPORATE
CLIMATE LEADERSHIP
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(A) Enter annual data for each vehicle or group of vehicles (grouped by vehicle type, vehicle year, and fuel type) in ORANGE cells in
Table 1. Example entry is shown in first row (GREEN Italics). Only enter vehicles owned or leased by your organization on
this sheet. All other vehicle use such as employee commuting or business travel is considered a scope 3 emissions source
and should be reported in the corresponding scope 3 sheets.
- Select "On -Road" or "Non -Road" from drop down box to determine the Vehicle Types available.
- Select "Vehicle Type" from drop down box (closest type available).
- Enter "Fuel Usage" in appropriate units (units appear when vehicle type is selected).
- If mileage or fuel usage is unknown, estimate using approximate fuel economy values (see Reference Table below).
- Vehicle year and Miles traveled are not necessary for non -road equiment.
(B) When using biofuels, typically the biofuel (biodiesel or ethanol) is mixed with a petroleum fuel (diesel or gasoline) for use in
vehicles. Enter the biodiesel and ethanol percentages of the fuel if known, or leave default values.
Biodiesel Percent: 20 %
Ethanol Percent: 80 %
(C) Biomass CO2 emissions from biodiesel and ethanol are not reported in the total emissions, but are reported separately at the bottom of the sheet.
Table 1. Mobile Source Fuel Combustion and Miles Traveled
Source
ID
Source
Description
On -Road or
Non -Road?
Vehicle
Type
Vehicle
Year
Fuel
Usage
Units
Miles
Traveled
7leet-012
HQ Flee
NonRoad
Ships and Boats - Diesel
500
gal
Construction Equipment (non -road g
Construction Equipment
NonRoad
Construction/Mining Equipment - Gasoline (2 stroke)
2007
7,280,145
gal
0
Passenger Cars
Construction Equipment
OnRoad
Passenger Cars - Gasoline
2007
24,758
gal
4,368
Construction Equipment (non -road di
Construction Equipment
NonRoad
Construction/Mining Equipment - Diesel
2007
26,000,519
gal
0
Medium- and Heavy- Duty Trucks
Construction Equipment
OnRoad
Medium- and Heavy -Duty Vehicles - Diesel
2007
52,001
gal
1,560
Light Trucks
Construction Equipment
OnRoad
Light -Duty Trucks - Gasoline
2007
48,534
gal
1,560
Reference Table: Average Fuel Economy by Vehicle Type
Vehicle Type
Average Fuel Economy (mpg)
Passenger Cars
24.1
Motorcycles
44.0
Diesel Buses Diesel Heavy -Duty Vehicles
7.3
Other 2-axle, 4-Tire Vehicles
17.6
,Single unit 2-Axle 6-Tire or More Trucks
7.5
Combination Trucks
6.1
GHG Emissions
Total Organization -Wide Mobile Source Fuel Usage and CO2 Emissions (On -Road and Off -Road Vehicles)
Fuel Type
Fuel Usage
Units
CO2
(kg)
Motor Gasoline
7,353,437
gallons
64,563,176.9
Diesel Fuel
26,052,520
gallons
###########
Residual Fuel Oil
0
gallons
0.0
Aviation Gasoline
0
gallons
0.0
Kerosene -Type Jet Fuel
0
gallons
0.0
Liquefied Petroleum Gas LPG
0
gallons
0.0
Ethanol
0
gallons
0.0
Biodiesel
0
gallons
0.0
,Liquefied Natural Gas LNG
0
gallons
0.0
Com ressed Natural Gas CNG
0
scf
0.0
Total Organization -Wide On -Road Gasoline Mobile Source Mileage and CH4/N20 Emissions
Vehicle Type
Vehicle Year
Mileage (miles)
CH4 (g)
N20 (g)
Passenger Cars - Gasoline
1984-93
0
0.0
0.0
1994
0
0.0
0.0
1995
0
0.0
0.0
1996
0
0.0
0.0
1997
0
0.0
0.0
1998
0
0.0
0.0
1999
0
0.0
0.0
2000
0
0.0
0.0
2001
0
0.0
0.0
2002
0
0.0
0.0
2003
0
0.0
0.0
2004
0
0.0
0.0
2005
0
0.0
0.0
2006
0
0.0
0.0
2007
4,368
31.4
22.7
2008
0
0.0
0.0
2009
0
0.0
0.0
2010
0
0.0
0.0
2011
0
0.0
0.0
2012
0
0.0
0.0
2013
0
0.0
0.0
2014
0
0.0
0.0
2015
0
0.0
0.0
2016
0
0.0
0.0
2017
0
0.0
0.0
2018
0
0.0
0.0
Light -Duty Trucks - Gasoline
(Vans, Pickup Trucks, SUVs)
1987-93
0
0.0
0.0
1994
0
0.0
0.0
1995
0
0.0
0.0
1996
0
0.0
0.0
1997
0
0.0
0.0
1998
0
0.0
0.0
1999
0
0.0
0.0
2000
0
0.0
0.0
2001
0
0.0
0.0
2002
0
0.0
0.0
2003
0
0.0
0.0
2004
0
0.0
0.0
2005
0
0.0
0.0
Note: emissions here are only for the gi
Note: emissions here are only for the di
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Direct 2.0)
1 of 2
Page 147 of 617
2006
0
0.0
0.0
2007
1,560
16.1
9.5
2008
0
0.0
0.0
2009
0
0.0
0.0
2010
0
0.0
0.0
2011
0
0.0
0.0
2012
0
0.0
0.0
2013
0
0.0
0.0
2014
0
0.0
0.0
2015
0
0.0
0.0
2016
0
0.0
0.0
2017
0
0.0
0.0
2018
0
0.0
0.0
Heavy -Duty Vehicles - Gasoline
1985-86
0
0.0
0.0
1987
0
0.0
0.0
1988-1989
0
0.0
0.0
1990-1995
0
0.0
0.0
1996
0
0.0
0.0
1997
0
0.0
0.0
1998
0
0.0
0.0
1999
0
0.0
0.0
2000
0
0.0
0.0
2001
0
0.0
0.0
2002
0
0.0
0.0
2003
0
0.0
0.0
2004
0
0.0
0.0
2005
0
0.0
0.0
2006
0
0.0
0.0
2007
0
0.0
0.0
2008
0
0.0
0.0
2009
0
0.0
0.0
2010
0
0.0
0.0
2011
0
0.0
0.0
2012
0
0.0
0.0
2013
0
0.0
0.0
2014
0
0.0
0.0
2015
0
0.0
0.0
2016
0
0.0
0.0
2017
0
0.0
0.0
2018
0
0.0
0.0
Motorcycles - Gasoline
1960-1995
0
0.0
0.0
1996-present
01
0.01
0.0
Total Organization -Wide On -Road Non -Gasoline Mobile Source Mileage and CH4/N20 Emissions
Vehicle Type
Fuel Type
Vehicle Year
Mileage (miles)
CH4 (g)
N20 (g)
Passenger Cars - Diesel
Diesel
1960-1982
0
0.0
0.0
1983-1995
0
0.0
0.0
1996-2006
0
0.0
0.0
2007-2018
0
0.0
0.0
Light -Duty Trucks - Diesel
Diesel
1960-1982
0
0.0
0.0
1983-1995
0
0.0
0.0
1996-2006
0
0.0
0.0
2007-2018
0
0.0
0.0
Medium- and Heavy -Duty Vehicles -
Diesel
1960-2006
0
0.0
0.0
2007-2018
1,560
14.8
67.2
Light -Duty Cars
Methanol
0
0.0
0.0
Ethanol
0
0.0
0.0
CNG
0
0.0
0.0
LPG
0
0.0
0.0
Biodiesel
0
0.0
0.0
Light -Duty Trucks
Ethanol
0
0.0
0.0
CNG
0
0.0
0.0
LPG
0
0.0
0.0
LNG
0
0.0
0.0
Biodiesel
0
0.0
0.0
Medium -Duty Trucks
CNG
0
0.0
0.0
LPG
0
0.0
0.0
LNG
0
0.0
0.0
Biodiesel
0
0.0
0.0
Heavy -Duty Trucks
Methanol
0
0.0
0.0
Ethanol
0
0.0
0.0
CNG
0
0.0
0.0
LPG
0
0.0
0.0
LNG
0
0.0
0.0
Biodiesel
0
0.0
0.0
Buses
Methanol
0
0.0
0.0
Ethanol
0
0.0
0.0
CNG
0
0.0
0.0
LPG
0
0.0
0.0
LNG
0
0.0
0.0
Biodiesel
0
0.0
0.0
Total Organization -Wide Non -Road Mobile Source Fuel Usage and CH4/N20 Emissions
Vehicle Type
Fuel Type
Fuel Usage
(gallons)
CH4 (g)
N20 (g)
Ships and Boats
Residual Fuel Oil
-
-
-
Gasoline 2 stroke
-
-
-
Gasoline 4 stroke
-
-
-
Diesel
-
-
-
Locomotives
Diesel
-
-
-
Aircraft
Jet Fuel
-
-
-
Aviation Gasoline
-
-
-
Agricultural Equipment
Gasoline 2 stroke
-
-
-
Gasoline 4 stroke
-
-
-
Diesel
-
-
-
LPG
-
-
-
Agricultural Offroad Trucks
Gasoline
-
-
-
Diesel
-
-
-
Construction/Mining Equipment
Gasoline 2 stroke
7,280,145
90,419,401
509,610
Gasoline 4 stroke
-
-
-
Diesel
26,000,519
5,200,104
12,220,244
LPG
-
-
-
Construction/Mining Offroad Trucks
Gasoline
-
-
-
Diesel
-
-
-
Lawn and Garden Equipment
Gasoline 2 stroke
-
-
-
Gasoline 4 stroke
-
-
-
Diesel
-
-
-
LPG
-
-
-
Airport Equipment
Gasoline
-
-
-
Diesel
-
-
-
LPG
-
-
-
Industrial/Commercial Equipment
Gasoline 2 stroke
-
-
-
Gasoline 4 stroke
-
-
-
Diesel
-
-
-
LPG
-
-
-
Logging Equipment
Gasoline (2 stroke)
-
-
-
Gasoline 4 stroke
-
-
-
Diesel
-
-
-
Railroad Equipment
Gasoline
-
-
-
Diesel
-
-
-
LPG
-
-
-
Recreational Equipment
Gasoline 2 stroke
-
-
-
Gasoline (4 stroke)
-
-
-
Diesel
-
-
-
LPG
-
-
-
Total CO2 Equivalent Emissions (metric tons) - Mobile Sources 336,743.4
Total Biomass CO2 Equivalent Emissions (metric tons) - Mobile Sources 0.0
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Direct 2.0)
2 of 2
Page 148 of 617
Back to Intro Back to Summary
Scope 2 Emissions from Purchase of Electricity
Help
Help - Market -Based Method
,&EPA CENTER FOR CORPORATE
CLIMATE LEADERSHIP
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Guidance
The Indirect Emissions from Purchased Electricity Guidance document provides guidance for quantifying two scope 2 emissions totals, using
a location -based method and a market -based method. The organization should quantify and report both totals in its GHG inventory. The
location -based method considers average emission factors for the electricity grids that provide electricity. The market -based method
considers contractual arrangements under which the organization procures electricity from specific sources, such as renewable energy.
(A) Enter total annual electricity purchased in kWh and each eGRID subregion for each facility or site in ORANGE cells of Table 1.
(B) If electricity consumption data are not available for a facility, an estimate should be made for completeness.
See the "Items to Note" section of the Help sheet for suggested estimation approaches.
(C) Select "eGRID subregion" from drop box and enter "Electricity Purchased."
- Use map (Figure 1) at bottom of sheet to determine appropriate eGRID subregion. If subregion cannot be determined from
the map, find the correct subregion by entering the location's zip code into EPA's Power Profiler:
https://www.epa.gov/egrid/power-profiler#/
(D) See the market -based emission factor hierarchy on the market -based method Help sheet. If any of the first four types of
emission factors are applicable, enter the factors in the yellow cells marked as "<enter factor>". If not, leave the
yellow cells as is, and eGRID subregion factors will be used for market -based emissions.
Example entry is shown in first row (GREEN Italics) for a facility that purchases RECs for 100% of its consumption, and
therefore has a market -based emission factor of 0.
Tips: Enter electricity usage by location and then look up the eGRID subregion for each location.
Help - Market -Based Method
If you purchase renewable energy that is less than 100% of your site's electricity, see the
example in the market -based method Help sheet.
Table 1. Total Amount of Electricity Purchased by eGRID Subregion
Market -Based
Use these cells to enter applicable market -based emission factors
Location -Based
Emission Factors
Emissions
Emissions
Source
ID
Source
Description
Source
Area (sq ft)
eGRID Subregion
where electricity is consumed
Electricity
Purchased
(kWh)
CO2
Emissions
(lb/MWh)
CH4
Emissions
(lb/MWh)
N20
Emissions
(lb/MWh)
CO2
Emissions
(lb)
CH4
Emissions
(lb)
N20
Emissions
(lb)
CO2
Emissions
(lb)
CH4
Emissions
(lb)
N20
Emissions
(lb)
Bldg-012
...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Residential
East Power Plant
Electricity Use
12,517
30,500,000
HIMS (HICC Miscellaneous)
MROW (MROWest)
200,000
23,681,300
0
------------------
<enter factor>
------------------
<enter factor>
0
------------------
<enter factor>
0.0
---------------------------
26,011,539.9
0.0
-----------------
2,818.1
•--------------
402.6
237,120.0
---------------------------
26,011,539.9
28.6
------------
2,818.1
4.4
---------------
402.6
Commercia
Electricity Use
62,000
MROW (MRO West)
874,200
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
960,221.3
104.0
14.9
960,221.3
104.0
14.9
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
<enter factor>
Total Emissions for All Sources
24,555,5501
26,971,761.2
2,922.1
417.41
26,971,761.2
2,922.11
417.4
GHG Emissions
CO2 Equivalent Emissions (metric tons)
Location -Based Electricity Emissions 12,324.0
Market -Based Electricity Emissions 12,324.0
Notes:
1. CO2, CH4 and N20 emissions are estimated using methodology provided in EPA's Center for Corporate Climate Leadership Greenhouse Gas Inventory Guidance
- Indirect Emissions from Purchased Electricity (January 2016).
Figure 1. EPA eGRID2019, February 2021.
CAMX
USEPA, eGRID, February 2021
Crosshatching indicates that an area falls within overlapping
eGRID subregions due to the presence of multiple electric
service providers. Visit Power Profiler to definitively determine
the eGRID subregion associated with your location and
electric service provider.
http://www.epa.gov/energy/power-profiler
FRCC
NEWE
NYLI
NYCW
--� Alaska
AKMS 1
C7 Hawaii
HIOA�`
Puerto Rico
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Indirect 1.0)
1 of 2
Page 149 of 617
Back to Intro I Back to Summary
Scope 3 Emissions from Waste
Help
,&EPA CENTER FOR CORPORATE
CLIMATE LEADERSHIP
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Guidance
(A) Enter annual waste data in ORANGE cells. Example entry is shown in first row (GREEN Italics).
(B) Choose the appropriate material and disposal method from the drop down options. For the average -data method, use one of the mixed material types, such as mixed
MSW. If the exact waste material is not available, consider an appropriate proxy. For example, dimensional lumber can be used as a proxy for wood furniture.
(C) Choose an appropriate disposal method. Note that not all disposal methods are available for all materials. If there is a #NA or # Value error in the emissions column, you must pick a
new material type or appropriate disposal method.
Table 1. Waste Disposal Weight by Waste Material and Disposal Method (CO2, CH4 and N20)
Source ID
Source Description
Waste Material
Method Disposal
Weight
Unit
CO2e Emissions
k
Bldg-012
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Nonresidential Buildings
East Power Plant Finished Goods
Nonresidential Waste
Steel Cans
Mixed MSW municipal solid waste
Landfilled
Combusted
1,000
744
metric ton
metric ton
22,040
352,552
Residential
Residential Waste
Mixed MSW municipal solid waste
Combusted
6,560
metric ton
3,108,522
Nonresidential Buildings
Nonresidential Recycling
Mixed Recyclables
Recycled
186
metric ton
18,447
Residential
Residential Recycling
Mixed Recyclables
Recycled
1,640
metric ton
162,655
GHG Emissions
Total Emissions by Disposal Method
Waste Material CO2e (kg)
Recycled 181,103
Landfilled -
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Optional 3.0)
1 of 2
Page 150 of 617
Combusted 3,461,073
Composted -
Anaerobically Digested (Dry Digestate with Curing) -
Anaerobically Digested (Wet Digestate with Curing) -
Total CO2 Equivalent Emissions (metric tons) - Waste 3,642.2
EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Optional 3.0)
2of2
Page 151 of 617
Appendix Do. Traffic
Study
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR
July 2025
Page 152 of 617
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
NORTHWEST MAIN
LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA
REPORT CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that this 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.
Jacob Rojer, P.E., PTOE
License No. 56767
6/30/2025
Date
Page 153 of 617
1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................2
2. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS........................................................................4
3. ANALYSIS OF FUTURE BACKGROUND CONDITIONS................................................8
4. ANALYSIS OF SCENARIO 1 CONDITIONS.................................................................12
5. ANALYSIS OF SCENARIO 2 CONDITIONS.................................................................22
6. TURN LANE WARRANT ANALYSIS.............................................................................32
7. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................33
8. APPENDIX....................................................................................................................37
A. TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
B. SIMTRAFFIC ANALYSIS RESULTS
C. TURN LANE WARRANT SHEETS
Northwest Main — Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 154 of 617
Kimley-Horn was retained to prepare a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for the Northwest Main Street
development in Lino Lakes, Minnesota, as the site undergoes the Alternative Urban Areawide Review
(AUAR) process. The site is located along Main Street (on both sides of the street) between the city limits
and 41h Avenue. An aerial view of the study location and surrounding roadway network is presented in
Exhibit 1.
As part of this study, the existing roadway network was analyzed to determine the current operations at the
study intersections. In order to assess the potential impact of the development scenarios on the area
roadway network, site -generated trips were established and added to the background traffic volumes.
Background traffic volumes included the other major development projects in the vicinity. Future traffic
conditions were evaluated for the approximate Opening Year of the proposed development (2030) and a
long-term "Design Year" (2045). Background conditions were analyzed for each study year, along with the
"build" conditions of the two development scenarios. Additionally, an Existing (2025) conditions traffic
analysis was conducted.
This report presents and documents data collection, summarizes the evaluation of existing and projected
future traffic conditions on the surrounding roadways, and identifies recommendations to address the
potential impact of site -generated traffic on the adjacent roadway network.
1.1. REPORT PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this study is to address traffic and transportation impacts of the proposed development on
surrounding streets and intersections. This traffic impact study was prepared based on criteria set forth by
the AUAR guidelines. The following specific information, per AUAR recommended content, should be
provided:
• A description and map of the existing and proposed roadway system, including state, regional, and
local roads to be affected by the development of the AUAR area. This information should include
existing and proposed roadway capacities and existing and projected background (i.e. without the
AUAR development) traffic volumes;
• Trip generation data - trip generation rates and trip totals - for each major development scenario
broken down by land use zones and/or other relevant subdivisions of the area. The projected
distributions onto the roadway system must be included,
• Analysis of impacts of the traffic generated by the AUAR area on the roadway system, including:
comparison of peak period total flows to capacities and analysis of Level of Service and delay times
at critical points (if any);
• A discussion of structural and non-structural improvements and traffic management measures that
are proposed to mitigate problems.
Note: in the above analyses the geographical scope must extend outward as far as the traffic to be
generated would have a significant effect on the roadway system and traffic measurements and projections
should include peak days and peak hours, or other appropriate measures related to identifying congestion
problems, as well as ADTs (average daily traffic).
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 155 of 617
1.2. ANALYSIS METHODOLOGIES
Synchro/SimTraffic 12" edition capacity analysis software was used to evaluate the operating conditions at
stop -controlled and signalized intersections. Specialized roundabout analysis software Rodel was utilized
for the capacity analysis of roundabouts. The capacity of an intersection quantifies its ability to
accommodate traffic volumes and is expressed in terms of level of service (LOS), measured in average
delay per vehicle. LOS grades range from A to F, with LOS A as the highest (best traffic flow and least
delay), LOS E as saturated or at -capacity conditions, and LOS F as the lowest (oversaturated conditions).
A 50-percent confidence interval was utilized for the Rodel analysis (the default value, representing the
median results expected for an intersection).
The LOS grades shown below, which are provided in the Transportation Research Board's Highway
Capacity Manual (HCM), quantify and categorize the driver's discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption, and
travel times experienced as a result of intersection control and the resulting traffic queuing. A detailed
description of each LOS rating can be found in Table 1-1.
Table 1-1: Level of Service Grading Descriptions
Level of
Description'
A
Minimal control delay; traffic operates at primarily free -flow conditions; unimpeded movement within
traffic stream.
B
Minor control delay at signalized intersections; traffic operates at a fairly unimpeded level with slightly
restricted movement within traffic stream.
C
Moderate control delay; movement within traffic stream more restricted than at LOS B; formation of
queues contributes to lower average travel speeds.
D
Considerable control delay that may be substantially increased by small increases in flow; average
travel speeds continue to decrease.
E
High control delay; average travel speed no more than 33 percent of free flow speed.
F
Extremely high control delay; extensive queuing and high volumes create exceedingly restricted traffic
flow.
Highway Capacity Manual, Th Edition.
The range of control delay for each rating (as detailed in the HCM) is shown in Table 1-2.
Table 1-2: Level of Service Grading Criteria
Level of Service
Average Control
Unsignalized Intersections
Delay (s/veh)
at:
Signalized Intersections
'Highway Capacity Manual, nth Edition
2All movements with a Volume to Capacity (v/c) ratio greater than 1 receive a rating of LOS F.
At side -street stop -controlled intersections, overall delay is not reported, and the worst side street delay is
reported in its place. The overall delay at side -street stop -controlled intersections can misrepresent the
operating conditions at the intersection since most vehicles on the main road experience zero delay.
Northwest Main — Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 156 of 617
Kimley-Horn conducted a review of the study area including existing land uses in the surrounding area, the
adjacent street system, current traffic volumes and operating conditions, lane configurations and traffic
controls at nearby intersections, and other key roadway characteristics. This section of the report details
information on the existing conditions.
2.1. AREA LAND USES
The majority of the site is currently agricultural land, though there are sparse residences on the site. The
surrounding parcels are largely occupied by residential developments, with the area to the north being
largely undeveloped.
2.2. EXISTING ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS
The following provides a description of the roadways near the study area
CSAH 14 (Main Street) is a County State Aid Highway (CSAH) that runs east -west through the AUAR area.
Main Street is a currently two-lane undivided roadway throughout the study area. According to the Lino
Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan, Main Street is classified as a Principal Arterial. Based on MnDOT data,
the Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) is approximately 11,900 vehicles per day east of Lexington
Avenue and 9,800 vehicles per day west of Lake Drive, as of 2023. The posted speed limit ranges from 55
miles per hour (mph) near Sunset Avenue to 40 mph east of Lake Drive.
4t' Avenue is a north -south roadway that forms the eastern boundary of the AUAR area. It is a two-lane
undivided roadway and is classified as a major collector according to the Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive
Plan. Based on MnDOT data, the AADT of 41h Avenue is 1,100 vehicles per day south of Main Street, and
500 vehicles per day north of Main Street, as of 2021 and 2023, respectively. The posted speed limit on 41h
Avenue is 50 mph south of Main Street and 45 mph north of Main Street.
County Road 53 (Sunset Avenue) is a north -south roadway along the western boundary of the AUAR
area. Sunset Avenue is a two-lane undivided roadway, and it currently does not continue north of Main
Street. According to the Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan, Sunset Avenue is classified as a major
collector. Based on MnDOT data, the AADT along Sunset Avenue is 5,300 vehicles per day south of Lilac
Street and 3,200 vehicles per day south of Main Street, as of 2022. The posted speed limit is 55 mph north
of Lilac Street and 45 mph south of Lilac Street.
Lilac Street is an east -west roadway located south of the AUAR area. It is a two-lane undivided roadway
and is classified as a Minor Collector according to the Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Based on
MnDOT data, the AADT along Lilac Street is 3,300 west of 41h Avenue, as of 2024. The posted speed limit
is 50 mph.
CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) is a generally north -south roadway located east of the AUAR area. It is a two-lane
undivided roadway and is classified as an A -Minor Reliever north of Main Street and a Principal Arterial
south of Main Street according to the Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Based on MnDOT data, Lake
Drive has an AADT of 9,500 north of Main Street and 11,100 south of Main Street, as of 2022. The posted
speed limit is 55 mph north of Main Street and 50 mph south of Main Street.
Pine Street is an east -west roadway that runs along the northern boundary of the AUAR area. Pine Street
is a two-lane undivided roadway and is currently an unpaved road west of 41h Avenue. According to the Lino
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 157 of 617
Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan, Pine Street is classified as a Major Collector. Based on MnDOT data,
Pine Street has an AADT of 400 west of Lake Street, as of 2021. The posted speed limit is 45 mph.
Robinson Drive is an east -west local road located within the AUAR area. It is a two-lane undivided roadway
with an AADT of 122, based on MnDOT data from 2021. The posted speed limit is 30 mph.
Carl Street is an east -west local road located within the AUAR area. It is a two-lane undivided roadway
with that does not have a posted AADT, based on MnDOT data. There is no posted speed limit; for modeling
purposes, a speed limit of 30 mph is assumed.
Century Trail is an east -west local road located at the southern edge of the AUAR area. It is a two-lane
undivided roadway with an AADT of 687, based on MnDOT data from 2021. There is no posted speed limit;
for modeling purposes, a speed limit of 30 mph is assumed.
The existing geometry and intersection control for the intersections in the study area that will be included
in this analysis are shown in Exhibit 2.
2.3. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE INFRASTRUCTURE
Based on review of the Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan, Main Street is a planned regional trail
corridor and trails along the road will connect to the Rice Creek/Chain of Lakes Park Reserve trails.
Additional trails are proposed within the AUAR area to connect the residential developments to the existing
trail system.
2.4. TRAFFIC COUNT DATA
Turning Movement Counts (TMCs) were collected at the following nine (9) study intersections on Thursday,
April 3, 2025. Nearby schools were in session at the time of data collection. Peak period (7:00 AM - 9:00
AM and 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM) TMCs were conducted at the study intersections except where otherwise
indicated. The counted study intersections include the following:
• Main Street & Sunset Avenue (24-hour TMC)
• Sunset Avenue & Robinson Drive
• Sunset Avenue & Century Trail
• Sunset Avenue & Lilac Street
• 41h Avenue & Pine Street
• Main Street & 41h Avenue (24-hour TMC)
• 41h Avenue & Lilac Street
• Pine Street & Lake Drive
• Main Street & Lake Drive
The TMC data indicates that peak hour traffic volumes occur within the study area from 7:00 to 8:00 AM
and 4:30 to 5:30 PM on a typical weekday. Full turning movement count data is included in Appendix A.
The Existing (2025) traffic volumes are shown in Exhibit 3.
2.5. EXISTING (2025) CONDITIONS CAPACITY ANALYSIS
Existing (2025) conditions capacity analysis was conducted to develop an understanding of the baseline
operating conditions currently present at the study intersections. Existing geometry and intersection control
are shown in Exhibit 2, while the Existing (2025) traffic volumes are shown in Exhibit 3.
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 158 of 617
Capacity analysis was conducted in Synchro 12/SimTraffic for stop -controlled and signalized intersections,
while analysis of roundabouts (i.e., Main Street & Sunset Avenue) was conducted in roundabout analysis
software Rodel with a 50% confidence level. The results of Existing (2025) conditions capacity analysis are
summarized below in Table 2-1.
Based on the analysis results, all movements at the study intersections currently operate at LOS C or
better and all study intersections operate at an overall LOS A or B during the AM and PM peak hours.
The 951h percentile queueing results were reviewed, and all queues are maintained within their provided
storage bays with no significant queueing issues anticipated. The SimTraffic and Rodel analysis reports
can be found in Appendix B.
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 159 of 617
Table 2-1: Existing Year (2025) Level of Service
10perations
by
•-
Intersection
AM Peak Hour
j PIVI Peak Hour
Left Through Right_
Overall*
_MlThrough Right
Overall*
.
A (5.6)
EB
A (5.2)
Main Street
Round-
WB
A (3.8)
A (5.3)
& Sunset
Avenue
about
A (4.9)
A (5.1)
NB
A (3.9)
A (4.3)
SIB
Sunset
Side
EB
Avenue &
Street
WB
A (5.7)
A (2.8)
A (5.7)
A (5.3)
A (2.5)
A (5.3)
NB
A (0.5)
A (0.4)
A (0.7)
A (0.3)
Robinson
Stop
Drive
SB
A (0.7)
A (0.6)
A (0.9)
A (0.6)
Sunset
Side
EB
Avenue &
WB
A (7.6)
A (3.3)
A (7.6)
A (6.1)
A (2.7)
A (6.1)
NB
A (0.6)
A (0.2)
A (1.0)
A (0.7)
CenturyStreet
Stop
Trail
SB
A (0.8)
A (1.2)
A (1.0)
A (0.8)
EB
Sunset
Side
WB
A (6.7)
A (1.5)
A (2.4)
A (6.4)
A (0.8)
A (3.7)
Avenue &
Street
A (6.7)
A (6.4)
Lilac Street
Stop
NB
-
A (0.4)
A (0.1)
-
A (0.9)
A (0.4)
SB
A (1.7)
A (2.1)
-
A (1.8)
A (1.6)
-
EB
-
A (0.0)
A (0.0)
-
A (0.0)
A (0.4)
Pine Street
Side
WB
A (0.8)
A (0.3)
A (0.6)
A (0.2)
A (0.5)
& 4th
Street
A (7.4)
A (4.6)
Avenue
Stop
NB
A (6.3)
A (5.3)
A (3.4)
A (4.6)
A (4.5)
A (3.4)
SB
A (2.2)
A (7.4)
A (0.8)
EB
A (1.5)
A (2.8)
A (2.3)
A (5.1)
A (3.6)
A (3.5)
Main Street
Side
WB
A (7.6)
A (6.0)
A (5.8)
A (8.5)
A (7.4)
A (7.7)
& 4th
Street
B (10.5)
B (10.7)
Avenue
Stop
NB
A (6.9)
B (10.4)
A (3.3)
B (10.7)
A (7.1)
A (4.2)
SB
A (5.1)
B (10.5)
A (3.4)
A (8.6)
A (7.4)
A (3.2)
EB
A(1.2)
A(1.1)
A(0.2)
A(1.3)
A(1.3)
A(0.1)
4th Avenue
Side
WB
A (1.4)
A (1.0)
A (0.2)
A (1.1)
A (0.7)
A (0.2)
& Lilac
Street
B (10.5)
A (9.3)
Street
Stop
NB
A (3.1)
A (8.4)
A (1.7)
A (4.7)
A (9.3)
A (1.9)
SB
A (5.4)
B (10.5)
A (4.3)
A (3.4)
A (7.6)
A (2.8)
EB
A (4.0)
A (1.9)
B (10.0)
A (0.3)
A (1.8)
Lake Drive
Side
WB
& Pine
Street
A (4.0)
B (10.0)
Street
Stop
NB
A (1.3)
A (1.0)
A (1.8)
A (1.7)
SB
-
A (1.0)
A (0.1)
-
A (0.9)
A (0.6)
EB
B (18.9)
C (30.2)
B (11.2)
C (25.8)
C (34.0)
B (10.4)
Lake Drive
WB
C (23.2)
C (24.2)
A (5.1)
C (23.0)
C (30.7)
A (8.5)
& Main
Signal
B (19.9)
C (21.4)
Street
NB
B (19.0)
B (17.7)
A (4.4)
C (21.4)
C (23.7)
A (7.6)
SB
C (21.7)
C (21.0)
A (4.4)
B (19.6)
C (23.7)
A (6.4)
*Delay of worst movement is reported in place of overall delay at side -street stop -controlled intersections.
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 160 of 617
Analysis of the future background conditions was carried out to determine the baseline operating conditions
for the Opening Year (2030) and Design Year (2045) of the proposed development. A review of future traffic
growth and planned geometric changes for the study roadways was conducted for the analysis.
3.1. PLANNED ROADWAY MODIFICATIONS
Sunset Avenue is undergoing a reconstruction project which is expected to include the conversion of Sunset
Avenue & Lilac Street and Sunset Avenue & 121s' Avenue intersections to roundabouts. A median will be
installed along Sunset Avenue and other intersections along the roadway will be converted to right-in/right-
out (including Century Trail, Robinson Drive, and any proposed future access points along Sunset Avenue).
As this project is ongoing, it is expected to be completed by the studied Opening Year (2030).
Anoka County is also planning the installation of a single -lane roundabout at Main Street & Lake Drive. The
estimated completion date of this roundabout is 2028.
As the AUAR area develops, multiple new roadways will be constructed to provide local access to new
developments. Sunset Avenue will be extended north of Main Street to provide access to developments
north of Main Street though it has not been determined if it will extend directly to Pine Street. For the access
assumptions assumed with the site buildout, see §4.1 (Scenario 1) and §5.1 (Scenario 2).
For the purposes of this analysis, it was assumed that there was not an east -west connection in the Opening
year scenario on the south half of the AUAR site, in order to be conservative with the analysis and determine
if the connection is necessary from a traffic operations standpoint, and if access only from Main Street and
Sunset Avenue would be sufficient. However, when the development on the AUAR site south of Main Street
happens, it is anticipated that Robinson Drive would be extended to connect to 4th Avenue to provide an
additional connection.
3.2. FUTURE BACKGROUND GROWTH
An annual background growth rate was calculated by comparing the projected 2040 AADTs included in the
City of Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan to the existing AADTs which were used to develop the
projections (2016). A comparison of the major roadways existing and projected AADTs are shown below in
Table 3-1.
Table 3-1: Roadway AADT Projections and Growth Rates
Existing Traffic
Projected
Traffic
Roadway Segment
2016 AADT
141 AADT
Growth
North of Main Street
8,700
10,000
0.6%
Lake Drive
South of Main Street
11,000
13,200
0.8%
4th Avenue
South of Main Street
1,300
2,500
2.8%
Main Street
East of Lexington Avenue
8,400
13,700
2.1%
Sunset Avenue
South of Main Street
2,400
2,900
0.8%
Lilac Street
West of 4th Avenue
1,850
1,900
0.1%
Based on a review of historical AADT trends in the area, Lake Drive and Sunset Avenue are expected to
exhibit growth rates of about 0.6% to 0.8% while Main Street and 4th Avenue are expected to exhibit higher
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 161 of 617
growth rates of around 2%. Overall, the study roadways are expected to exhibit growth averaging about
1.2% annually.
MnDOT's ESAL worksheet was employed as an additional means of estimating growth rates.
Demographically adjusted growth rates along Main Street, Sunset Avenue, and Lake Drive ranged from
0.5% to 1.7% and averaged 1.2%. The MnDOT ESAL worksheets are included in the Appendix. Based on
both methods of estimation, growth rates in the area are expected to average about 1.2% annually.
Therefore, a 1.2% annual growth rate was selected for all study intersections to account for traffic increases
due to background growth and development.
The Opening Year (2030) No -Build traffic volumes were calculated by growing the Existing (2025) traffic
volumes (Exhibit 3) by a 1.2% annual growth rate for 5 years. The resultant Opening Year (2030) No -Build
traffic volumes are shown in Exhibit 4.
3.3. FUTURE BACKGROUND DEVELOPMENT
No major background developments are known in the area. All background growth of traffic is accounted
for with the selected 1.2% annual growth rate.
3.4. OPENING YEAR (2030) NO -BUILD CAPACITY ANALYSIS
An Opening Year (2030) No -Build Condition analysis was completed to develop an understanding of the
baseline operating conditions for the study area in the opening year. All planned roadway modifications
discussed in §3.1 were included in the capacity analysis. The Opening Year (2030) No -Build traffic volumes
are shown in Exhibit 4. Results of the Opening Year (2030) No -Build conditions capacity analysis are
provided in Table 3-2.
The reconstruction of Sunset Avenue is anticipated to slightly reduce the delays in the short term and the
installation of a roundabout at Main Street & Lake Drive is expected to result in a substantial reduction in
delays, with the intersection improving from LOS B and C in the AM and PM peak hours respectively to
LOS A in both. Other intersections are generally expected to see negligible changes in delays as a result
of short-term background growth. All movements and study intersections are anticipated to operate at LOS
B or better during the AM and PM peak hours.
The 951h percentile queueing results were reviewed, and all queues are expected to remain within their
provided storage bays with no significant queueing issues anticipated. The SimTraffic and Rodel analysis
reports are provided in Appendix B.
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 162 of 617
Table 3-2: Opening Year (2030) No -Build Level of Service
Operations
by
• -
Intersection
Control
Approach
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Left Through Right
Overall*
Left Through Right
Overall*
EB
A (6.3)
A (5.2)
Main Street
Round-
WB
A (4.0)
A (4.5)
& Sunset
Avenue
about
A (5.4)
A (5.4)
NB
A (4.2)
A (5.7)
SB
Sunset
Side
EB
Avenue &
Street
WB
A (2.7)
A (2.7)
A (2.7)
A (2.7)
NB
A (0.6)
A (0.4)
A (0.8)
A (0.4)
Robinson
Stop
Drive
SB
A (0.6)
A (0.4)
Sunset
Side
EB
Avenue &
WB
A (2.9)
A (2.9)
A (3.0)
A (3.0)
NB
A (0.8)
A (0.3)
A (0.9)
A (0.4)
CenturyStreet
Stop
Trail
SB
A (0.8)
A (0.5)
-
EB
Sunset
Avenue &
Round-
A (5.2)
A (4.4)
WB
A (3.4)
A (3.9)
NB
A (4.6)
A (4.9)
Lilac Street
about
SB
A (5.7)
A (3.9)
EB
A (0.0)
A (0.0)
A (0.0)
A (0.1)
Pine Street
Side
WB
A (1.5)
A (0.2)
A (1.3)
A (0.2)
A (0.3)
& 4th
Street
A (7.6)
A (4.9)
Avenue
Stop
NB
A (3.9)
A (5.9)
A (1.7)
A (4.7)
A (4.9)
A (3.6)
SB
A (2.1)
A (7.6)
A (0.9)
EB
A (3.8)
A (2.8)
A (2.2)
A (4.9)
A (3.8)
A (2.4)
Main Street
Side
WB
A (4.6)
A (3.4)
A (2.9)
A (7.5)
A (5.6)
A (4.7)
& 4th
Street
B (10.4)
A (9.9)
Avenue
Stop
NB
A (6.6)
A (7.9)
A (3.9)
A (9.9)
A (7.7)
A (5.6)
SB
A (6.8)
B (10.4)
A (3.6)
A (5.8)
A (9.7)
A (3.2)
EB
A (1.0)
A (1.2)
A (0.6)
A (2.7)
A (1.3)
A (0.3)
4th Avenue
Side
WB
A (1.2)
A (0.7)
A (0.5)
A (0.9)
A (0.8)
A (0.4)
& Lilac
Street
B (10.4)
A (9.8)
Street
Stop
NB
A (3.0)
A (8.9)
A (3.0)
A (3.4)
A (8.9)
A (1.8)
SB
A (6.9)
B (10.4)
A (3.4)
A (4.2)
A (9.8)
A (2.6)
EB
A (4.3)
A (2.1)
A (5.6)
A (0.6)
A (2.1)
Lake Drive
Side
WB
-
-
& Pine
Street
A (4.3)
A (5.6)
Street
Stop
NB
A (1.5)
A (0.7)
-
A (1.7)
A (1.2)
-
SB
A (1.1)
A (0.4)
-
A (0.9)
A (0.3)
EB
A (6.8)
A (6.6)
Lake Drive
Round-
WB
A (5.7)
A (9.6)
& Main
Street
about
A (6.0)
A (9.2)
NB
A (4.8)
B (12.0)
SB
A (6.2)
A (6.5)
*Delay of worst movement is reported in place of overall delay at side -street stop -controlled intersections.
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 163 of 617
3.5. DESIGN YEAR (2045) NO -BUILD CAPACITY ANALYSIS
The Design Year (2045) No -Build Condition analysis was completed to develop an understanding of the
baseline operating conditions for the study area in the long-term without the addition of proposed
development traffic. The background changes to intersection control and geometry discussed in §3.1 were
included in the analysis. The Design Year (2045) No -Build Traffic Volumes are shown in Exhibit 6. Results
of the Design Year (2045) No -Build capacity analysis is included below in Table 3-3.
All movements at the study intersections are anticipated to operate at LOS D or better during the AM and
PM peak hours. Delays are generally expected to see minor increase due to long-term background growth,
particularly at the Main Street & Lake Drive intersection which is anticipated to operate at LOS C during the
PM peak hour.
The 951h percentile queueing results were reviewed and all 951h percentile queues are expected to be
maintained within their provided storage bays. The Main Street & Lake Drive roundabout is anticipated to
see queues of about 450' at the eastbound approach during the PM peak hour, but no movement or
roundabout approach is generally expected to see significant queueing issues. The SimTraffic and Rodel
analysis reports are included in Appendix B.
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 164 of 617
Table 3-3: Design Year (2045) No -Build Level of Service - AM Peak Hour
Operationsby
•-
Intersection
Approac'
M Peak Hour
-J PIVI Peak Hour
-
Left Through Right_
Overall*
Le Right
_ AlThrough
Overall*
EB
A (8.4)
A (6.7)
Main Street
Round-
WB
A (7.6)
A (7.0)
& Sunset
Avenue
about
A (7.6)
A (6.5)
NB
A (4.6)
A (5.1)
SB
Sunset
Side
EB
Avenue &
Street
WB
_
_
A (2.6)
A (2.6)
_
_
A (2.5)
A (2.5)
NB
A (0.8)
A (0.6)
A (0.8)
A (0.7)
Robinson
Stop
Drive
SB
A (0.5)
-
A (0.5)
-
Sunset
Side
EB
Avenue &
Street
WB
-
A (3.5)
A (3.5)
_
-
A (3.3)
A (3.3)
NB
A (1.0)
A (0.2)
A (1.1)
A (0.6)
Century
Stop
Trail
SB
A (0.8)
-
A (0.5)
-
EB
Sunset
Round-
WB
A (3.9)
A (4.1)
Avenue &
Lilac Street
about
A (5.1)
A (4.9)
NB
A (5.8)
A (5.6)
SB
A (4.4)
A (4.2)
EB
-
A (0.2)
A (0.1)
-
A (0.0)
A (0.2)
Pine Street
Side
WB
A (0.7)
A (0.1)
-
A (1.8)
A (0.4)
A (0.7)
& 4th
Street
A (4.6)
A (4.6)
Avenue
Stop
NB
A (4.6)
A (5.7)
A (3.0)
A (4.6)
A (4.4)
A (2.9)
SB
A (2.5)
A (7.8)
-
-
-
A (1.2)
EB
A (3.9)
A (3.1)
A (2.6)
A (5.1)
A (4.4)
A (2.8)
Main Street
Side
WB
A (5.4)
A (4.4)
A (3.9)
A (7.0)
A (6.3)
A (5.4)
& 4th
Street
B (10.6)
B (11.9)
Avenue
Stop
NB
A (9.0)
A (8.9)
A (5.2)
B (11.9)
A (7.7)
A (5.7)
SB
A (6.1)
B (10.6)
A (4.5)
B (10.1)
B (10.5)
A (3.1)
EB
A (0.8)
A (1.3)
A (0.7)
A (1.7)
A (1.6)
A (0.1)
4th Avenue
Side
Wg
A (1.5)
A (1.2)
A (0.3)
A (1.1)
A (0.9)
A (0.4)
& Lilac
Street
B (10.7)
A (9.5)
Street
Stop
NB
A (6.8)
B (10.3)
A (4.0)
A (4.1)
A (9.5)
A (2.4)
SB
A (6.4)
B (10.7)
A (4.0)
A (4.1)
A (9.1)
A (3.0)
EB
A (5.9)
A (2.5)
A (6.6)
A (0.5)
A (2.9)
Lake Drive
Side
WB
_
_
& Pine
Street
A (5.9)
A (6.6)
Street
Stop
NB
A (1.4)
A (0.9)
-
A (2.3)
A (1.4)
-
SB
-
A (1.2)
A (0.5)
-
A (1.1)
A (0.7)
EB
A (9.0)
A (8.6)
Lake Drive
Round-
WB
A (6.8)
C (16.4)
& Main
Street
about
A (7.4)
C (17.1)
NB
A (5.3)
D (27.1)
SB
A (7.6)
A (8.5)
*Delay of worst movement is reported in place of overall delay at side -street stop -controlled intersections.
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 165 of 617
This section of the report outlines the proposed development Scenario 1, summarizes site -specific traffic
characteristics, and develops future traffic projections for the Scenario 1 Build condition of the AUAR site.
Scenario 1 represents the density and land uses presently allowed under the City of Lino Lakes' 2040
Comprehensive Plan.
4.1. DEVELOPMENT CHARACTERISTICS AND SITE ACCESS
The proposed Scenario 1 consists of 1,600 low -density residential units, 600 medium -density residential
units, 1,200 high -density residential units, and 60,000 square feet of commercial space. The following major
access points are included in the traffic modeling for Scenario 1:
• Via "Access A", a right-in/right-out access located along Sunset Avenue south of Main Street.
• Via Robinson Drive along Sunset Avenue.
• Via Century Trail along Sunset Avenue.
• Via "Access B", a right-in/right-out access located along Main Street east of Sunset Avenue.
• Via "Access C", a proposed roundabout along Main Street located midway between Sunset Avenue
and 41h avenue (and east of Access B).
• Via "Access D", a proposed right-in/right-out along Main Street located west of 41h Avenue (and
east of Access C).
• Via "Access E" (Robinson Drive extension), a proposed full -access intersection along 41h Avenue
south of Main Street.
• Via "Access F" and "Access G", both of which are proposed full -access intersections along 41h
Avenue north of Main Street, with Access G being the farther north of the two.
• Via "Access H", a full -access intersection along Pine Street west of 41h Avenue.
• Via the future north leg of the Main Street & Sunset Avenue roundabout.
Only portions of the development are anticipated to be short term developments included in the Opening
Year (2030) analysis. Based on the anticipated future development patterns, Accesses E, F, G, H, and
Access D north of Main Street are not included in the Opening Year (2030) conditions as these portions of
the site are not anticipated to see development by this time. However, as previously noted, when the
development on the AUAR site south of Main Street happens, it is anticipated that Robinson Drive (Access
E) would be extended to connect to 41h Avenue to provide an additional connection, but this is not included
in the analysis because the conservative analysis was used to determine if this Robinson Drive connection
would be necessary from a traffic operations standpoint.
Note that the layout of the site is preliminary and subject to changes; future development plans may modify
the assumed access points and affect how traffic is distributed throughout the site. The access assumptions
outlined above are meant to provide a conservative means of estimating traffic levels at site access points
and other minor access points are likely to be constructed along minor roadways such as 41h Avenue and
Pine Street. It should also be noted that this access plan would only comply with access spacing standards
if the speed limit along Main Street is reduced to 45 mph and each access point would need to be located
'/4 mile apart. Site specific Traffic Impact Analyses should be conducted to determine the geometric,
spacing, and control needs of the site access points.
It is anticipated that the full development of the AUAR area would take up to 30 years. However, traffic
projections as part of an AUAR are typically 20-year analysis horizon. This results in a conservative analysis
for the Design Year as the full site may not be built out yet.
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 166 of 617
4.2. TRIP GENERATION
Proposed development traffic was determined based on data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers'
Trip Generation Manual, III Edition. The manual provides peak hour trips rates/equations, inbound -
outbound percentages that can be attributed to the proposed site.
The site is anticipated to see partial buildout by the studied Opening Year (2030). It is estimated that
approximately 650 single family detached residential units, 350 attached residential units, 90 multifamily
(low-rise residential units) and 30kSF of retail space would be completed by the studied Opening Year.
The anticipated trip generation for the Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 conditions is shown below in Table
4-1. The development is expected to generate 12,047 daily trips, including 788 trips during the AM peak
hour (216 entering and 572 exiting) and 1,142 during the PM peak hour (697 entering and 444 exiting).
Table 4-1:
Proposed Opening
Year
(2030)
Trip Generation
Intensity
AM
Peak Hour
PM
Peak Hour
Land Use Description
Daily
Out
•,
Out
•,
LUC 210 - Single -Family
650 Units
6,130
114
341
455
385
226
611
Detached Housing
LUC 215 - Single -Family
350 Units
3,301
61
184
245
207
122
329
Attached Housing
LUC 220 - Multifamily Low
90 Units
607
9
27
36
29
17
46
Rise Residential
LUC 821 - Shopping Plaza
30 kSF
2,010
32
20
52
76
79
156
Total Site Trips (Opening Year)
12,047
216
572
788
697
444
1,142
The same ITE Land Use Codes were utilized to estimate the trip generation potential of the site at full
buildout. Internal capture rates from ITE were reviewed, but with the majority of the site's trips expected to
be traveling to/from residential land uses, few multi -use trips are anticipated. Therefore, no multi -use
reduction was applied.
A summary of trip generation for the proposed Scenario 1 development at buildout is provided in Table 4-1.
Based on the trip generation calculation, the proposed Scenario 1 development is anticipated to generate
31,516 daily trips, including 1,992 total trips during the AM Peak Hour (532 entering and 1,460 exiting), and
2,769 total trips during the PM Peak Hour (1,687 entering, 1,082 exiting).
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 167 of 617
Table 4-2: Scenario 1 Full Buildout Trip Generation
Intensity
AM
Peak Hour
PM
Peak Hour
Land Use Description
Daily
/ UnitsIn
Out
•
Out
•
LUC 210 - Single -Family 1,600
15,088
280
840
1,120
948
556
1,50 4
Detached Housing
LUC 215 - Single -Family 600
4,320
72
216
288
202
140
342
Attached Housing
LUC 220 - Multifamily Low 1,200
8,088
115
365
480
386
226
612
Rise Residential
LUC 821- Shopping Plaza 60
4,020
64
39
104
153
159
311
Total Site Trips
31,516
532
1,460
1,992
1,687
1,082
2,769
4.3. DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION
The estimated distribution of site -generated traffic on the surrounding roadway network was developed
based on a review of origin -destination data from Replica, a publicly available dataset which utilizes Census
data, land use regulations, aggregate mobile data, transaction data, and real estate transaction data to
model transportation patterns. Based on the origin -destination data and consideration of the existing traffic
patterns and roadway characteristics, the following global distribution was developed:
• 35% to/from west on Main Street
• 25% to/from south on Sunset Avenue
• 20% to/from south on Lake Drive
• 10% to/from east on Lilac Street
• 5% to/from north on Lake Drive
• 5% to/from east on Main Street
The anticipated site trip distribution for Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 conditions is shown in Exhibit 7.
The site traffic assignment, representing traffic volumes associated with the proposed development at the
study intersections, is a function of the estimated trip generation (Table 4-1 and Table 4-2) as well as the
directional distribution listed above. The site trip assignment for Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 conditions
is shown in Exhibit 8.
The Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 traffic volumes were calculated by adding the total development site
trips (Exhibit 8) to the Opening Year (2030) No -Build traffic volumes (Exhibit 5). The Opening Year (2030)
Scenario 1 traffic volumes are shown in Exhibit 9.
The anticipated traffic distribution for the Design Year (2045) Scenario 1 conditions is shown in Exhibit 10.
The site trip assignment for Scenario 1 in the Design Year (2045) is shown in Exhibit 11. The Design Year
(2045) Build traffic volumes were calculated by adding the total Development Site Trips (Exhibit 11) to the
Design Year (2045) No -Build traffic volumes (Exhibit 6). The Design Year (2045) Build traffic volumes are
shown in Exhibit 12.
4.4. OPENING YEAR (2030) SCENARIO 1 CAPACITY ANALYSIS
The Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 analysis was conducted to determine the impacts of the proposed
Scenario 1 development on the short-term operations of the adjacent roadway network. The future year
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 168 of 617
(2030) geometry and intersection control changes discussed in §3.1 as well as the access assumptions
discussed in §4.1 were included in the analysis. Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 traffic volumes are shown
in Exhibit 9. The results of the Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 analysis are shown below in Table 4-3.
Based on the results of the Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 conditions analysis, all intersections are
anticipated to operate at LOS C or better and all individual movements are anticipated to operate at LOS D
or better during the AM and PM peak hours. Comparing the delay and LOS results to the Opening Year
(2030) No -Build scenario indicates that the proposed development Scenario 1 is anticipated to cause some
increases in delay, with the Main Street & Lake Drive and Main Street & 4th Avenue intersections seeing
the most substantial increases. All delays remain within an acceptable range and the overall traffic
operations of the network remain acceptable with the anticipated Opening Year (2030) geometric changes
in place. With operations remaining acceptable in Opening Year (2030) build Scenario 1, an east -west
roadway connection on the south half of the AUAR site is not required from a traffic operations perspective,
however, the connection of Robinson Drive (Access E) would help improve connectivity to the
neighborhoods. The connection of Carl Street is not necessary from a traffic operations perspective. The
95th percentile queueing results were reviewed and all 95th percentile queues are expected to remain within
their provided storage bays. SimTraffic reports are included in Appendix B.
Table 4-3: Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 Level of Service
Operations
by
• -
Intersection
Control
Approach
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Left Through Right
Overall*
Left Through Right
Overall*
EB
A (9.3)
B (11.1)
Main Street
Round-
WB
A (6.3)
A (9.8)
& Sunset
Avenue
about
A (7.3)
A (9.7)
NB
A (5.1)
A (7.1)
SB
A (4.7)
A (5.3)
Sunset
Side
EB
Avenue &
Street
WB
A (3.3)
A (3.3)
A (3.2)
A (3.2)
NB
A (1.2)
A (0.7)
A (1.5)
A (1.0)
Robinson
Stop
Drive
SB
A (0.4)
A (0.3)
Sunset
Side
EB
Avenue &
Street
WB
A (3.6)
A (3.6)
A (5.0)
A (5.0)
NB
A (1.4)
A (0.6)
A (1.8)
A (0.9)
Century
Stop
Trail
SB
A (1.1)
A (0.6)
EB
-
Sunset
Round-
WB
A (3.6)
A (4.6)
Avenue &
Lilac Street
about
A (7.3)
A (6.0)
NB
A (5.8)
A (7.4)
SB
A (8.2)
A (4.7)
EB
A (2.2)
A (0.1)
-
A (0.2)
A (0.0.)
Pine Street
Side
WB
A (1.2)
A (0.2)
-
A (1.1)
A (1.1)
A (0.2)
& 4th
Street
A (7.9)
A (3.3)
Avenue
Stop
NB
A (2.1)
A (6.4)
A (1.4)
A (2.8)
A (3.3)
A (1.4)
SB
A (2.3)
A (7.9)
A (1.2)
Main Street
Side
EB
A (2.8)
A (1.5)
A (0.8)
A (4.1)
A (2.3)
A (0.9)
WB
A (5.7)
A (4.8)
A (3.1)
A (5.3)
A (3.0)
A (1.4)
& 4th
Street
B (10.9)
C (20.3)
Avenue
Stop
NB
A (6.3)
B (10.8)
A (3.1)
C (19.2)
C (20.3)
A (8.4)
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 169 of 617
Operationsby
•-
Intersection
Control
Approach
AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour
Left
Through
Right
Overall*
Left
Through
Right
Overall*
SIB
A (7.7)
B (10.9)
A (2.9)
C (17.0)
C (15.0)
A (6.1)
EB
A (1.8)
A (1.4)
A (0.6)
A (1.7)
A (1.2)
A (0.6)
4th Avenue
Side
WB
A (1.6)
A (1.2)
A (0.5)
A (1.0)
A (1.3)
A (0.5)
& Lilac
Street
A (9.8)
A (9.7)
Street
Stop
NB
A (4.8)
A (8.2)
A (1.8)
A (3.3)
A (9.7)
A (2.4)
SIB
A (5.3)
A (9.8)
A (2.9)
A (4.2)
A (8.4)
A (2.3)
EB
A (5.6)
A (3.6)
A (5.5)
A (3.0)
Lake Drive
Side
WB
& Pine
Street
A (5.6)
A (5.5)
Street
Stop
NB
A (2.1)
A (0.9)
A (1.8)
A (1.4)
SIB
A (1.7)
A (0.2)
A (1.1)
A (0.3)
EB
A (10.1)
A (8.7)
Lake Drive
Round-
WB
A (6.1)
B (14.0)
& Main
Street
about
A (7.5)
C (15.6)
NB
A (5.3)
D (25.3)
SB
A (6.6)
A (8.5)
EB
Sunset
Side
WB
-
-
A (3.5)
A (3.9)
Avenue &
Street
A (3.5)
A (3.9)
Access A
Stop
NB
A (1.1)
A (0.5)
A (1.6)
A (0.3)
SIB
A (1.1)
A (1.0)
-
EB
A (1.9)
A (1.3)
A (3.1)
A (1.7)
Main Street
Side
WB
A (1.4)
A (0.7)
A (2.4)
A (1.5)
& Access B
Street
Stop
A (4.5)
A (5.8)
NB
A (4.5)
A (5.8)
SIB
A (4.1)
A (5.2)
EB
A (5.6)
A (8.3)
Main Street
Round-
WB
A (4.7)
A (5.1)
A (10.7)
A (9.0)
NB
A (4.9)
A (5.1)
& Access C
about
SIB
A (4.4)
A (5.5)
EB
A (1.1)
A (0.6)
A (1.9)
A (1.0)
Main Street
Side
WB
A (1.7)
A (2.9)
-
& Access D
Street
Stop
A (4.3)
A (5.3)
NB
A (4.3)
A (5.3)
SIB
*Delay of worst movement is reported in place of overall delay at side -street stop -controlled intersections.
4.5. DESIGN YEAR (2045) SCENARIO 1 CAPACITY ANALYSIS
Capacity analysis was conducted for the Design Year (2045) Scenario 1 conditions to determine the long-
term effects of the proposed development. The background changes to intersection control discussed in
§3.1 were included along with the addition of the proposed development access points. The Design Year
(2045) build Scenario 1 volumes are shown in Exhibit 12. Capacity analysis results for the Design Year
(2045) Scenario 1 conditions are provided in Table 4-4.
Results of the Design Year (2045) Scenario 1 conditions analysis shows that with the addition of the
proposed development site traffic and long-term background growth, multiple operational issues are
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 170 of 617
anticipated at the study area. With the full buildout of Scenario 1, Main Street is generally expected to be
over the capacity of a two-lane road and would likely need to be expanded to four lanes. Furthermore, the
intersection of Main Street & 41h Avenue does not operate acceptably with side street stop control under
Design Year (2045) Scenario 1 conditions. A roundabout is likely the best option at this intersection in the
long term. SimTraffic and Rodel queueing results were reviewed, and the intersection of Main Street & 41h
Avenue sees excessive side street queueing which causes operational issues at the site access points
along 41h Avenue. Furthermore, severe queues are anticipated at all roundabouts along Main Street.
Additionally, Sunset Avenue is anticipated to experience heavy traffic during the AM peak hour due to the
school traffic at this time. The southbound approach at the Sunset Avenue & Lilac Street roundabout is
anticipated to operate at LOS D with long 951h percentile queues (54 vehicles). However, the roundabout
operates at an overall LOS C and operations along the corridor are not expected to present an issue.
Table 4-4:
Design Year (2045) Scenario
1 Level
of Service
Operations
by
• -
Intersection
Control
Approach
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Left Through Right
Overall*
Left Through Right Overall*
EB
00
Main Street
Round-
WB
0�
& Sunset
Avenue
about
NB
A (7.4)
�
00
A (9.9)
Sunset
EB
WB
A (3.8)
-
Avenue &
Side
A (4.6)
Robinson
Street
Stop
A (3.8)
A (1.3) A (4.6)
NB
A (1.5)
A (1.0)
A (2.1)
Drive
SB
A (0.5)
A (0.7)
Sunset
EB
WB
A (4.1)
Avenue &
Side
A (6.4)
Century
Street
Stop
A (4.1)
A (1.4) A (6.4)
NB
A (1.7)
A (0.6)
A (2.5)
Trail
�_SB
A (1.5)
A (1.0)
EB
-
-
Sunset
Round-
A (6.1)
WB
A (4.1)
Avenue &
about
C (21.9)
A (8.9)
Lilac Street
NB
A (4.3)
B (11.4)
SB
D (30.1)
A (6.4)
EB
A (2.1)
A (1)
C (17.5)
Pine Street
Side
WB
A (1.6)
A (1)
& 4th
Street
A (8.2)
Avenue
Stop
NB
A (3.8)
A (5.1)
A (2.1)
A (4.7) A (4.0)
A (3.0)
SB
A (2)
A (8.2)
-
A (1.0)
EB
A (4.6)
A (4.2)
A (1.9)
Q
al 11
Main Street
Side
D (32.2) C (23.4)
C (17.9)
WB
B (10.8)
A (8.7)
A (6.2)
& 4th
Street
• •
• •
Avenue
Stop
NB
SB
EB
IMLIM#E
A(2.3)
211111131
A(2.8)
A(1)
0000
00
4th Avenue
Side
00
00
WB
A (2.1)
A (2)
A (0.6)
& Lilac
Street
B (14.2)
• •
Street
Stop
NB
A (3.7)
B (12.3)
A (2)
SB
A (9.2)
B (14.2)
A (6)
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 171 of 617
Operations
by
• Movement
Intersection
• •
Approach
Left Through Right
Overall*
Left Through Right Overall*
EB
A (8.1) A (5.1)
B (11.4) A (4.3)
Lake Drive
Side
_
WB
& Pine
Street
A (8.1)
B (11.4)
Street
Stop
NB
A (2.7) A (1.2)
A (2.8) A (3.0)
SB
A (2.1) A (0.7)
A (1.4) A (0.7)
EB
': •
Lake Drive
Round-
WB
A (8.4)
& Main
Street
about
ii0l
NB
A(6.9)
SB
B (10.2)
EB
-
Sunset
Side
A (4.9)
WB
A (4.3)
-
Avenue &
Street
A (4.3)
A (4.9)
Access A
Stop
NB
A (1.5)
A (0.5)
A (2.0)
A (0.5)
SB
A (2.2)
A (1.5)
-
EB
A (3.3)
A (2.3)
D (33.3)
D (31.2)
Main Street
Side
WB
C (22.8)
D (27.8)
A (3.6)
A (2.2)
& Access B
Street
Stop
NB
A(6.2)
SB
EB
A (9.8)
Main Street
Round-
B (10.0)
WB
B (11.9)
NB
A (7.8)
& Access C
about
A (8.6)
SB
A (7.3)
A (8.0)
EB
A (2.4)
A (1.5)
ZIUMAGM
Main Street
Side
WB
A (3.4)
A (1.7)
A (6.7)
A (5.2)
& Access D
Street
Stop
C (16.1)
NB
A (5.6)
if
SB
C (16.1)
A (8.8)
EB
A (6.5)
A (4.2)
4th Avenue
Side
Street
A (6.5)
WB
NB
A (2.4)
A (1.9)
-
& Access E
Stop
SB
A (3)
1 A (2.3)
A (1.1)
A (0.5)
EB
-
if
4th Avenue
Side
WB
of
NB
A (3)
A (2.2)
A (1.5)
A (1.7)
& Access F
Stoept
SB
EB
-
A (6.2)
11
A (4.3)
-
11
4th Avenue
Side
Street
A (6.2)
WB
NB
A (1.6)
A (0.9)
-
A (1.8)
A (1.7)
& Access G
Stop
SB
A(1.3)
A(0.4)
11
Side
EB
A (0.5)
A (0.6)
Pine Street
& Access H
Street
A (3.4)
- A (3.1)
WB
A (1.2)
A (1.5)
A (1.9)
NB
-
A (3.4)
Stop
A (3.1)
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 172 of 617
*Delay of worst movement is reported in place of overall delay at side -street stop -controlled intersections.
4.6. DESIGN YEAR (2045) SCENARIO 1 MITIGATED CAPACITY ANALYSIS
Based on the operational deficiencies of the network in the unmitigated scenario, the following mitigation
measures are recommended for the Design Year (2045) Scenario 1 conditions:
• Install a roundabout at Main Street & 41h Avenue
• Expand Main Street to 4 lanes west of Lake Drive
o This includes converting all roundabouts along Main Street (at Sunset Avenue, Access C,
and 41h Avenue) to 2x1 roundabouts.
• Expand Main Street & Lake Drive roundabout to accommodate northbound left -turn traffic.
o The roundabout is anticipated to require two northbound entry lanes, two exit lanes on the
west leg, and a bypass lane for the eastbound approach.
A Design Year (2045) Scenario 1 Mitigated capacity analysis was conducted in order to test the impacts of
the proposed mitigations on operations at the study intersections. The Design Year (2045) Scenario 1 traffic
volumes are shown in Exhibit 12.
Results of the Design Year (2045) Scenario 1 Mitigated capacity analysis are included below in Table 4-5.
With the proposed mitigations in place, all intersections and individual movements are expected to operate
at LOS D or better in the AM and PM peak hours. The SimTraffic and Rodel 951h percentile queueing results
were reviewed and all 951h percentile queues are expected to remain within their provided storage bays with
no significant queueing issues anticipated. Based on the results of this analysis, acceptable traffic
operations are expected to be maintained with the proposed mitigations in place. SimTraffic and Rodel
analysis reports are included in Appendix B.
Table 4-5: Design Year (2045) Scenario 1 Mitigated Level of Service
Operationsby
•-
Intersection
Control
Approach
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Left Through Right
Overall*
Left Through Right
Overall*
EB
B (12.0)
B (13.8)
Main Street
Round-
WB
A (9.2)
B (10.4)
& Sunset
about
A (9.6)
B (13.0)
Avenue
(2x1)
NB
A (6.4)
C (16.7)
SB
A (5.5)
A (5.7)
Sunset
EB
WB
A (3.9)
A (4.9)
Avenue &
Side
Robinson
Street
Stop
A (3.9)
- (-)
NB
A (1.4)
A (1.1)
A (2.2)
A (1.4)
Drive
SB
A (0.9)
-
A (0.8)
Sunset
EB
WB
A (4.5)
-
A (6.7)
Avenue &
Side
Century
Street
Stop
A (4.5)
- (-)
NBA
(1.5)
A (0.3)
A (2.1)
A (0.6)
Trail
SB
A (2.0)
A (1.0)
-
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 173 of 617
Operations
by
• -
Intersection
Control
Approach
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Left Through Right
Overall*
Left Through Right
Overall*
EB
-
-
Sunset
Avenue &
Lilac Street
Round-
about
C (21.9)
A (8.9)
WB
A (4.1)
A (6.1)
NB
A (4.3)
B (11.4)
SB
D (30.1)
A (6.4)
EB
-
A (2.5)
A (1.2)
-
A (1.5)
A (0.9)
Pine Street
& 4th
Avenue
Side
Street
Stop
A (8.4)
A (6.9)
WB
A (2.5)
A (1.3)
-
A (2.8)
A (2.4)
A (0.4)
NB
A (4.2)
A (4.8)
A (2.3)
A (6.9)
A (4.9)
A (4.6)
SB
A (3.3)
A (8.4)
A (1.1)
EB
A (3.1)
A (3.8)
Main Street
& 4th
Avenue
Round-
about
(2x1)
A (3.8)
A (4.7)
WB
A (2.2)
A (4.4)
NB
A (5.2)
A (6.5)
SB
A (6.2)
A (7.1)
EB
A (1.7)
A (2.0)
A (0.7)
A (3.7)
A (3.1)
A (0.8)
4th Avenue
& Lilac
Street
Side
Street
Stop
C (15.5)
B (14.3)
WB
A (2.2)
A (2.3)
A (0.8)
A (2.3)
A (3.0)
A (1.1)
NB
A (5.8)
B (11.0)
A (2.7)
A (7.9)
B (14.2)
A (7.9)
SB
B (11.9)
C (15.5)
A (7.4)
B (11.3)
B (14.3)
A (6.2)
EB
B (10.5)
-
A (6.9)
B (12.5)
-
A (6.1)
Lake Drive
& Pine
Street
Side
Street
Stop
B (10.5)
B (12.5)
WB
_
_
NB
A (2.5)
A (1.5)
_
A (3.3)
A (3.3)
SB
A (2.0)
A (0.8)
A (1.6)
A (0.7)
Lake Drive
& Main
Street
Round-
about
(Multi-
Lane)
EB
B (14.3)
B (10.4)
A (7.8)
C (19.5)
WB
A (7.8)
D (27.7)
NB
A (6.1)
C (24.8)
SB
A (9.5)
B (11.7)
EB
-
-
Sunset
Avenue &
Access A
Side
Street
Stop
A (4.0)
A (5.1)
WB
A (4.0)
A (5.1)
NB
A (1.4)
A (0.5)
A (2.0)
A (0.6)
SB
A (1.6)
A (1.5)
-
EB
A (0.4)
A (0.2)
A (0.9)
A (0.6)
Main Street
& Access B
Side
Street
Stop
A (4.5)
A (5.1)
WB
A (0.4)
A (0.2)
A (0.6)
A (0.2)
NB
A (3.9)
A (4.7)
SB
A (4.5)
A (5.1)
EB
A (2.5)
A (4.2)
Main Street
& Access C
Round-
about2
A (3.4)
A (4.4)
WB
A (2.6)
A (4.0)
NB
A (6.1)
A (6.9)
SB
A (5.6)
A (6.1)
Main Street
& Access D
Side
Street
Stop
EB
A (0.4)
A (0.1)
A (3.6)
A (0.7)
A (0.4)
A (4.7)
WB
A (0.4)
A (0.1)
A (1.0)
A (0.5)
NB
-
A (3.6)
-
A (3.9)
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 174 of 617
Operations
by
. -
Intersection
Control
Approach
AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour
Left
Through
Right
Overall*
Left
Through
Right
Overall*
SB
A (3.4)
A (4.7)
EB
A (0.4)
A (0.1)
A (7.0)
A (3.6)
4th Avenue
Side
WB
A (0.4)
A (0.1)
-
& Access E
Street
Stop
A (3.6)
A (7.0)
NB
A (3.6)
A (3.1)
A (3.0)
SB
A (3.4)
-
A (1.7)
A (0.5)
EB
A (7.1)
A (4.7)
B (12.8)
A (4.9)
4th Avenue
Side
Street
A (7.1)
B (12.8)
WB
_
_
NB
A 1.8)
A (1.7)
_
A (3.2)
A (3.2)
_
& Access F
Stop
SB
-
A (1.0)
A (0.3)
A (1.7)
A (0.7)
EB
A (7.7)
A (5.1)
A (8.9)
A (3.8)
4th Avenue
Side
Street
A (7.7)
A (8.9)
WB
_
NB
A (2.0)
A (1.1)
_
A (3.5)
A (3.8)
& Access G
Stop
SB
A (1.8)
A (1.0)
A (1.3)
A (0.4)
EB
A (6.7)
A (4.3)
A (0.5)
Pine Street
Side
WB
A (2.6)
& Access H
Street
Stop
A (6.7)
A (3.2)
NB
A 1.9)
A (1.3)
A (3.2)
SB
A (1.5)
A (0.5)
*Delay of worst movement is reported in place of overall delay at side -street stop -controlled intersections.
This section of the report outlines the proposed development Scenario 2, summarizes site -specific traffic
characteristics, and develops future traffic projections for the Scenario 2 build condition of the AUAR site.
Scenario 2 represents an alternative development plan to the City of Lino Lakes' 2040 Comprehensive Plan
and as such would require an amendment to the plan.
5.1. DEVELOPMENT CHARACTERISTICS AND SITE ACCESS
The proposed Scenario 2 consists of 1,500 low -density residential units, 900 medium -density residential
units, 1,100 high -density residential units, and 62,000 square feet of commercial space. The following major
access points are included in the traffic modeling for Scenario 2:
• Via "Access A", a right-in/right-out access located along Sunset Avenue south of Main Street.
• Via Robinson Drive along Sunset Avenue.
• Via Century Trail along Sunset Avenue.
• Via "Access B", a right-in/right-out access located along Main Street east of Sunset Avenue.
• Via "Access C", a proposed roundabout along Main Street located midway between Sunset Avenue
and 41h avenue (and east of Access B).
• Via "Access E" (Robinson Drive extension), a proposed full -access intersection along 41h Avenue
south of Main Street.
• Via "Access F" and "Access G", both of which are proposed full -access intersections along 41h
Avenue north of Main Street, with Access G being the farther north of the two.
• Via "Access H", a full -access intersection along Pine Street west of 41h Avenue.
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 175 of 617
• Via the future north leg of the Main Street & Sunset Avenue roundabout.
Most access points are the same as in Scenario 1, with Access B being located significantly closer to Sunset
Avenue and the development being concentrated largely in the areas at the northeast and southeast corner
of the Main Street & Sunset Avenue roundabout. Note that in order to comply with the Anoka County Access
Spacing standards, the speed limit along Main Street would need to be reduced to 45 mph and Access B
would need to be located midway between Sunset Avenue and Access C (1/4 mile). Site specific traffic
analysis should be conducted to determine the final geometric, spacing, and control needs of the access
points.
Similar to Scenario 1, only portions of the development are anticipated to be short term developments
included in the Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 analysis. Based on the anticipated future development
patterns, Accesses E, F, G, H, and Access D north of Main Street are not included in the Opening Year
(2030) conditions as these portions of the site are not anticipated to see development by this time. However,
as previously noted, when the development on the AUAR site south of Main Street happens, it is anticipated
that Robinson Drive (Access E) would be extended to connect to 41h Avenue to provide an additional
connection, but this is not included in the analysis because the conservative analysis was used to determine
if this Robinson Drive connection would be necessary from a traffic operations standpoint.
Note that the layout of the site is preliminary and subject to significant changes; future development plans
may modify the assumed access points and affect how traffic is distributed throughout the site. The access
assumptions outlined above are meant to provide a conservative means of estimating traffic levels at site
access points and other minor access points are likely to be constructed along minor roadways such as 41h
Avenue and Pine Street. Minor access points are generally not expected to affect the results and findings
of the study and thus are excluded from the analysis.
It is anticipated that the full development of the AUAR area would take up to 30 years. However, traffic
projections as part of an AUAR are typically 20-year analysis horizon. This results in a conservative analysis
for the Design Year as the full site may not be built out yet.
5.2. TRIP GENERATION
Proposed development traffic was determined based on data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers'
Trip Generation Manual, III Edition. The manual provides peak hour trips rates/equations, inbound -
outbound percentages that can be attributed to the proposed site.
The site is anticipated to see partial buildout by the studied Opening Year (2030). It is estimated that
approximately 650 single family detached residential units, 350 attached residential units, 90 multifamily
(low-rise residential units) and 30kSF of retail space would be completed by the studied Opening Year.
The anticipated trip generation for the Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 conditions are shown below in
Table 5-1. Note that the trip generation for the Opening Year (2030) is anticipated to be the same for both
development Scenarios, but the scenarios differ in access and traffic distribution. The development is
expected to generate 12,047 daily trips, including 788 trips during the AM peak hour (216 entering and 572
exiting) and 1,142 during the PM peak hour (697 entering and 444 exiting).
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 176 of 617
Table 5-1: Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 Traffic
Land Use DescriptionDailyIntensit
In
Out
•,
Out
•,
LUC 210 - Single -Family
650 Units
6,130
114
341
455
385
226
611
Detached Housing
LUC 215 - Single -Family
350 Units
3,301
61
184
245
207
122
329
Attached Housing
LUC 220 - Multifamily Low
90 Units
607
9
27
36
29
17
46
Rise Residential
LUC 821 - Shopping Plaza
30 kSF
2,010
32
20
52
76
79
156
Total Site Trips (Opening Year)
12,047
216
572
788
697
444
1,142
Table 5-2 provides a summary of trip generation for Scenario 2. Based on the trip generation calculation,
the proposed development is anticipated to generate 32,193 daily trips, including 2,029 total trips during
the AM Peak Hour (543 entering and 1,487 exiting), and 2,806 total trips during the PM Peak Hour (1,702
entering, 1,104 exiting).
Table
5-2: Scenario
2 Development
Trip
Generation
Land Use Description
DailyIntensity
Units
In
Out
•
Out
•
LUC 210 - Single Family
1,500
14,145
263
788
1,050
888
522
1,410
Detached Housing
Units
LUC 215 - Single Family
900 Units
6,480
108
324
432
303
210
513
Attached Housing
LUC 220 - Low Rise
1,100
7,414
106
334
440
353
208
561
Residential
Units
LUC 821 - Shopping
62 kSF
4,154
67
41
107
158
164
322
Plaza
Total Site Trips
32,193
543
1,487
2,029
1,702
1,104
2,806
5.3. DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION
The estimated distribution of site -generated traffic on the surrounding roadway network was developed
based on a review of the roadway network, area development pattern, and access to the proposed
development. The anticipated global distribution of passenger vehicle site traffic to the Scenario 2
development is anticipated to be the same as Scenario 1. The expected global traffic patterns are as follows:
• 35% to/from west on Main Street
• 25% to/from south on Sunset Avenue
• 20% to/from south on Lake Drive
• 10% to/from east on Lilac Street
• 5% to/from north on Lake Drive
• 5% to/from east on Main Street
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 177 of 617
The full site trip distribution for Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 is shown in Exhibit 13. The site traffic
assignment, representing traffic volumes associated with the proposed development at the study
intersections, is a function of the estimated trip generation (Table 5-1 and Table 5-2) and the directional
distribution listed above. The site trip assignment for Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 is shown in Exhibit
14.
The Opening Year (2030) Build traffic volumes were calculated by adding the total Development Site Trips
(Exhibit 14) to the Opening Year (2030) No -Build traffic volumes (Exhibit 5). The Opening Year (2030)
Build traffic volumes are shown in Exhibit 15.
The Design Year (2045) Scenario 2 site traffic distribution is shown in Exhibit 16. The site trip assignment
for Scenario 2 in the Design Year (2045) is shown in Exhibit 17. The Design Year (2045) Build traffic
volumes were calculated by adding the total Development Site Trips (Exhibit 17) to the Design Year (2045)
No -Build traffic volumes (Exhibit 6). The Design Year (2045) Build traffic volumes are shown in Exhibit 18.
5.4. OPENING YEAR (2030) SCENARIO 2 CAPACITY ANALYSIS
The Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 conditions analysis was conducted to determine the impacts of the
proposed development on the short-term operations of the adjacent roadway network. The future year
(2030) geometry and intersection control changes discussed in §3.1. All site access points were assumed
to be side street stop controlled for the analysis. The Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 traffic volumes are
shown in Exhibit 14. The results of the Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 conditions analysis is shown in
Table 5-2.
Based on the results of the Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 conditions analysis, all intersections are
anticipated to operate at LOS C or better and all individual movements are anticipated to operate at LOS D
or better during the AM and PM peak hours. Comparing the delay and LOS results to the Opening Year
(2030) No -Build scenario indicates that the proposed development Scenario 2 is anticipated to cause some
increases in delay, with the Main Street & Lake Drive and Main Street & 4th Avenue intersections seeing
the most substantial increases. All delays remain within an acceptable range and the overall traffic
operations of the network remain acceptable with the anticipated Opening Year (2030) geometric changes
in place. With operations remaining acceptable in Opening Year (2030) build Scenario 2, an east -west
roadway connection on the south half of the AUAR site is not required from a traffic operations perspective,
however, the connection of Robinson Drive (Access E) would help improve connectivity to the
neighborhoods. The connection of Carl Street is not necessary from a traffic operations perspective. The
95th percentile queueing results were reviewed and all 95th percentile queues are expected to remain within
their provided storage bays. SimTraffic reports are included in Appendix B.
Table 5-3: Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 Level of Service
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 178 of 617
Intersection
Control
Approach
SB
Operations
AM Peak Hour
Left Through Right
A (0.4)
by
Overall*
• -
PM Peak Hour
Left Through Right
A (0.3)
Overall*
Sunset
Avenue &
Century
Trail
Side
Street
Stop
EB
A (3.8)
A (3.9)
WB
A (3.8)
A (3.9)
NB
A (1.4) A (0.6)
A (1.6) A (0.8)
SB
Sunset
Avenue &
Lilac Street
Round-
about
EB
A (7.3)
A (6.0)
WB
A (3.6)
A (4.6)
NB
A (5.8)
A (7.4)
SB
A (8.2)
A (4.7)
Pine Street
& 4th
Avenue
Side
Street
Stop
EB
A (0.3)
A (0.0)
A (7.1)
A (0.0)
A (0.1)
A (3.0)
WB
A (0.6)
A (0.2)
A (1.3)
A (0.3)
A (0.4)
NB
A (2.0)
A (7.1)
A (0.9)
A (2.7)
A (3.0)
A (1.4)
SB
A (2.4)
-
A (1.3)
Main Street
& 4th
Avenue
Side
Street
Stop
EB
A (2.6)
A (1.8)
A (1.4)
B (11.9)
A (4.8)
A (2.6)
A (1.5)
C (18.5)
WB
A (7.0)
A (4.4)
A (5.0)
A (5.6)
A (3.0)
A (1.5)
NB
A (8.1)
B (11.9)
A (3.4)
C (17.7)
C (18.5)
A (6.8)
SB
A (9.0)
-
A (3.6)
C (15.0)
-
A (5.2)
4th Avenue
& Lilac
Street
Side
Street
Stop
EB
A (1.6)
A (1.7)
A (0.7)
A (9.9)
A (2.8)
A (1.6)
A (2.8)
A (9.4)
WB
A (1.4)
A (1.1)
A (0.5)
A (1.1)
A (1.3)
A (0.4)
NB
A (3.6)
A (9.7)
A (1.9)
A (4.7)
A (9.4)
A (2.3)
SB
A (5.3)
A (9.9)
A (2.6)
A (5.0)
A (8.9)
A (2.4)
Lake Drive
& Pine
Street
Side
Street
Stop
EB
A (4.9)
A (2.8)
A (4.9)
A (6.5)
A (2.2)
A (6.5)
WB
NB
A (0.8)
A (0.7)
A (1.4)
A (1.2)
SB
-
A (0.5)
-
A (0.3)
Lake Drive
& Main
Street
Round-
about
EB
B (10.1)
A (7.5)
A (8.7)
C (15.9)
WB
A (6.1)
B (13.4)
NB
A (5.3)
D (25.3)
SB
A (6.6)
A (8.5)
Sunset
Avenue &
Access A
Side
Street
Stop
EB
A (3.5)
A (4.1)
WB
A (3.5)
A (4.1)
NB
A (1.0)
A (0.2)
A (1.8)
A (0.5)
SB
-
Main Street
& Access B
Side
Street
Stop
EB
A (2.2)
A (1.7)
A (4.4)
A (3.1)
A (2.0)
A (5.2)
WB
A (0.8)
A (0.5)
A (1.6)
A (0.9)
NB
A (4.4)
A (5.2)
SB
A (3.4)
A (5.0)
Main Street
& Access C
Round
about
EB
A (5.6)
A (5.0)
A (7.1)
A (8.1)
WB
A (4.5)
A (9.5)
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 179 of 617
*Delay of worst movement is reported in place of overall delay at side -street stop -controlled intersections.
5.5. DESIGN YEAR (2045) SCENARIO 2 CAPACITY ANALYSIS
Capacity analysis was conducted for the Design Year (2045) Scenario 2 conditions to determine the long-
term effects of the proposed development. The background changes to intersection control discussed in
§3.1 were included along with the addition of the proposed development access points. The Design Year
(2045) Scenario 2 traffic volumes are shown in Exhibit 18. Capacity analysis results for the Design Year
(2045) Scenario 2 conditions are provided in Table 4-4.
Results of the Design Year (2045) Scenario 2 conditions analysis shows that with the addition of the
proposed development site traffic and long-term background growth, multiple operational issues are
anticipated at the study area. Similar to the results for Scenario 1, Main Street is generally expected to be
over the capacity of a two-lane road and would likely need to be expanded to four lanes. The intersection
of Main Street & 41h Avenue does not operate acceptably with side street stop control under Design Year
(2045) Scenario 1 conditions. A roundabout is likely the best option at this intersection in the long term.
The Sunset Avenue & Lilac Avenue roundabout may also see minor operational issues during the AM peak
hour due to school traffic, though LOS E operations at the intersection during this time likely do not
necessitate further improvements. The intersection and the Sunset Avenue corridor should be monitored
closely, however, as the road is anticipated to be nearing the capacity of a two-lane road under the Design
Year (2045) Scenario 2 conditions.
SimTraffic and Rodel 951h percentile queueing results were reviewed, and the intersection of Main Street &
41h Avenue sees excessive side street queueing which causes operational issues at the site access points
along 41h Avenue. Furthermore, severe queues are anticipated at all roundabouts along Main Street due to
insufficient capacity for eastbound and westbound vehicles at peak times.
■
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 180 of 617
Table 5-4: Design Year (2045) Scenario 2 Level of Service
Operations
by
• -
Intersection
Control
Approach
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Left Through Right
Overall*
Left Through Right
Overall*
Main Street
Round-
WBD
(31.2)
& Sunset
Avenue
about
NBA
(9.7)
7c(16.4)
D (33.0)
SB
B (10.6)
Sunset
Side
EB
Avenue &
Street
WB
A (4.2)
A (4.2)
A (5.3)
A (5.3)
NB
A (1.8)
A (1.1)
A (2.5)
A (1.7)
Robinson
Stop
Drive
SB
A(1.1)
-
A(0.8)
Sunset
Side
EB
Avenue &
Street
WB
A (5.3)
A (5.3)
A (6.7)
A (6.7)
NB
A (1.6)
A (0.3)
A (3.5)
A (2.2)
Century
Stop
Trail
SB
A(2.1)
A(1.1)
EB
-
-
Sunset
Round-
WB
A (4.2)
A (6.9)
Avenue &
Lilac Street
about
A (9.6)
NB
A (4.5)
B (12.6)
A (7.0)
SB
EB
A (2.0)
A (0.7)
A (1.3)
A (0.9)
Pine Street
Side
WB
A (1.8)
A (1.7)
-
A (3.0)
A (2.7)
A (0.8)
& 4th
Street
A (8.0)
A (4.5)
Avenue
Stop
NB
A (3.7)
A (3.3)
A (2.1)
A (4.5)
A (2.8)
A (2.5)
SB
A (2.1)
A (8.0)
-
A (1.7)
EB
A (5.8)
A (4.5)
Main Street
Side
D (33.4)
D (27.4)
C (22.7)
WB
A (7.7)
A (3.9)
& 4th
Street
iis
Avenue
Stop
NB
SB
EB
��
A (1.8)
��
A (2.1)
A (1.1)
C (17.3)
A (10.0)
B (14.6)
4th Avenue
Side
WB
A (2.0)
A (1.9)
A (0.7)
A (2.6)
A (8.1)
A (8.0)
& Lilac
Street
B (13.0)
C (17.3)
Street
Stop
NB
A (4.9)
B (11.0)
A (4.9)
A (8.6)
C (16.9)
A (8.3)
SB
A (8.8)
B (13.0)
A (5.1)
A (8.2)
A (9.2)
A (3.5)
EB
B (11.7)
A (7.4)
B (12.7)
A (4.8)
Lake Drive
Side
WB
-
-
& Pine
Street
B (11.7)
B (12.7)
Street
Stop
NB
A (2.2)
A (1.4)
A (3.2)
A (3.0)
SB
A (2.1)
A (0.9)
A (1.5)
A (0.8)
EB
D (27.3)
Lake Drive
Round-
WB
A (8.4)
& Main
Street
about
11
NB
A(6.9)
SB
B (10.3)
C (17.4)
EB
A (5.3)
WB
A (5.3)
A (6.3)
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 181 of 617
Operations
by
. -
Intersection
Control
Approach
AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour
Left
Through
Right
Overall*
Left
Through
Right
Overall*
Sunset
Side
NB
A (2.0)
A (0.6)
A (3.4)
A (0.9)
Avenue &
Street
Access A
Stop
SB
A (1.6)
A (1.5)
-
EB
A (2.1)
A (0.6)
A (3.9)
A (1.6)
Main Street
Side
WB
A (2.1)
A (1.3)
B (10.0)
A (7.5)
& Access B
Street
Stop
A (8.4)
C (15.2)
NB
-
A (8.4)
C (15.2)
SB
A (6.3)
B (10.4)
EB
A (9.3)
WB
A (7.1)
Main Street
Round-
A (7.9)
NB
A (6.8)
& Access C
about
A (7.3)
SB
A (5.5)
A (7.1)
EB
A (5.5)
A (4.0)
-
4th Avenue
Side
Street
A (5.5)
WB
_
NB
A (2.3)
A (1.8)
_
& Access E
Stop
SB
A (2.9)
A (2.4)
A (1.2)
A (0.8)
EB
D (26.4)
D (31.8)
If
4th Avenue
Side
Street
D (31.8)
WB
NB
A (3.3)
A (2.2)
A (1.5)
A (1.3)
& Access F
Stop
SB
-
B(12.4)
A(0.3)
If
EB
A (5.6)
-
A (3.4)
If
4th Avenue
Side
Street
A (5.6)
WB
N B
A (1.2)
A (0.7)
A (1.5)
A (1.4)
& Access G
Stop
SB
A(1.2)
A(0.9)
11
EB
A (0.4)
A (0.6)
Pine Street
Side
WB
A (1.4)
A (2.0)
& Access H
Street
Stop
A (3.1)
A (3.0)
NB
A (3.1)
A (3.0)
SB
-
-
-
*Delay of worst movement is reported in place of overall delay at side -street stop -controlled intersections.
5.6. DESIGN YEAR (2045) SCENARIO 2 MITIGATED CAPACITY ANALYSIS
Based on the operational deficiencies in the unmitigated scenario, the following mitigation measures are
recommended for the Design Year (2045) Scenario 2 conditions:
• Install a roundabout at Main Street & 41h Avenue
• Expand Main Street to 4 lanes west of Lake Drive
o This includes converting all roundabouts along Main Street (at Sunset Avenue, Access C,
and 41h Avenue) to 2x1 roundabouts.
• Expand Main Street & Lake Drive roundabout to accommodate northbound left -turn traffic.
o The roundabout is anticipated to require two northbound entry lanes, two exit lanes on the
west leg, and a bypass lane for the eastbound approach.
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 182 of 617
A Design Year (2045) Scenario 2 Mitigated capacity analysis was conducted in order to test the effects of
the proposed mitigations on the roadway network. The Design Year (2045) Scenario 2 traffic volumes are
shown in Exhibit 18. Along with the background changes discussed in §3.1, the mitigation listed above in
§5.5 was included in the analysis.
Results of the Design Year (2045) Scenario 2 Mitigated capacity analysis are included below in Table 5-4.
All intersections operate at an overall LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hour, with the exception
of the previously mentioned Sunset Avenue & Lilac Street roundabout which is anticipated to operate at
LOS E during the AM peak hour due to heavy school traffic at this time. While this intersection and the
Sunset Avenue corridor as a whole should be monitored for future improvements upon the full buildout of
the site, no mitigation is anticipated to be required for Design Year (2045) Scenario 2 conditions.
The 95th percentile queueing results from SimTraffic and Rodel were reviewed and all 95th percentile queues
are expected to remain within their provided storage bays. The Sunset Avenue & Lilac Street roundabout
is anticipated to see extended queues at the southbound approach due to school traffic during the AM peak
hour, but the delay of this approach being just over 50s indicates that these queues likely dissipate quickly.
No other significant queueing issues are anticipated. The SimTraffic and Rodel analysis reports are
included in Appendix B.
Table
5-5: Design
Year (2045) Scenario 2
Mitigated
Level of Service
Operationsby
Movement
Intersection
Control
Approach
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Left Through Right
Overall*
Left Through Right
Overal
EB
C (18.7)
C (19.8)
Main Street
Round-
WB
A (9.2)
C (16.5)
& Sunset
about
B (12.3)
C (18.9)
Avenue
(2x1)
NB
A (8.2)
D (25.0)
SB
A (8.6)
A (7.5)
Sunset
EB
WB
A (4.6)
-
A (6.0)
Avenue &
Side
Robinson
Street
Stop
A (4.6)
A (6.0)
NB
A (1.9)
A (1.2)
A (2.7)
A (1.8)
Drive
SB
A (1.1)
A (0.8)
Sunset
EB
WB
-
A (5.4)
A (8.0)
Avenue &
Side
Century
Street
Stop
A (5.4)
A (8.0)
NB
A (1.7)
A (0.3)
A (2.3)
A (0.6)
Trail
SB
A (2.1)
A (1.2)
EB
-
Sunset
Round-
WB
A (4.2)
A (6.9)
Avenue &
Lilac Street
about
A (9.6)
NB
A (4.5)
B (12.6)
A (7.0)
SB
EB
A (1.6)
A (0.8)
A (1.4)
A (0.6)
Pine Street
Side
WB
A (2.0)
A (1.1)
A (3.0)
A (1.9)
A (3.2)
& 4th
Street
A (4.2)
A (5.4)
Avenue
Stop
NB
A (4.2)
A (4.4)
A (2.3)
A (5.4)
A (4.5)
A (3.5)
SB
A (2.0)
A (8.0)
-
A (1.0)
Main Street
Round-
EB
A (2.8)
A (3.1)
WB
A (2.1)
A (3.7)
& 4th
about
A (3.2)
A (3.9)
Avenue
(2x1)
NB
A (4.8)
A (5.7)
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 183 of 617
Operations
by
• -
Intersection
Control
Approach
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Left Through Right
Overall*
Left Through Right
Overall*
SB
A (5.0)
A (6.1)
EB
A (1.8)
A (2.1)
A (1.1)
A (3.7)
A (3.2)
A (1.8)
4th Avenue
Side
WB
A (2.0)
A (1.8)
A (0.6)
A (2.3)
A (2.3)
A (0.9)
& Lilac
Street
B (14.4)
C (16.3)
Street
Stop
NB
A (7.5)
B (11.8)
A (3.0)
A (8.2)
B (14.1)
A (3.3)
SB
B (11.5)
B (14.4)
A (7.2)
A (9.5)
C (16.3)
A (5.0)
EB
B (10.3)
-
A (5.6)
B (10.6)
-
A (3.7)
Lake Drive
Side
WB
& Pine
Street
B (10.3)
B (10.6)
Street
Stop
NB
A (2.3)
A (1.3)
A (3.0)
A (3.0)
SB
A (2.0)
A (0.9)
A (1.6)
A (0.8)
Round-
EB
A (17.0)
A (7.9)
WB
A (5.3)
D (25.1)
Lake Drive
about
& Main
Street
(Multi-
B (10.5)
C (19.8)
NB
A (2.9)
D (28.2)
Lane)
SB
A (6.5)
B (11.8)
EB
-
Sunset
Side
WB
-
A (5.4)
-
A (6.2)
Avenue &
Street
A (5.4)
A (6.2)
Access A
Stop
NB
A (2.1)
A (0.6)
A (3.7)
A (1.0)
SB
A (1.6)
A (1.5)
-
EB
A (1.6)
A (0.5)
A (3.6)
A (1.7)
Main Street
Side
WB
A (1.7)
A (0.3)
A (4.6)
A (2.3)
& Access B
Street
Stop
A (8.2)
B (14.6)
NB
A (6.1)
B (14.6)
SB
A (8.2)
B (13.6)
EB
A (2.5)
A (3.4)
Main Street
Round-
WB
A (2.5)
A (3.9)
& Access C
about
(2x1)
A (3.4)
A (4.0)
NB
A (6.1)
A (5.9)
SB
A (5.2)
A (5.9)
EB
A (5.7)
A (3.7)
A (5.9)
A (2.7)
4th Avenue
Side
Street
A (5.7)
A (5.9)
WB
NB
A 2.2)
(
A (1.9)
-
A (2.4)
A (2.0)
& Access E
Stop
SB
-
A (0.6)
A (0.1)
-
A (1.1)
A (0.4)
EB
A (6.9)
A (4.0)
A (9.6)
-
A (3.4)
4th Avenue
Side
Street
A (6.9)
A (9.6)
WB
NB
A 1.7)
A (0.5)
A (2.0)
A (1.6)
& Access F
Stop
SB
-
A (1.3)
A (0.5)
A (1.1)
A (0.6)
EB
A (5.5)
A (3.7)
A (7.7)
-
A (3.4)
4th Avenue
Side
Street
A (5.5)
A (7.7)
WB
NB
A 1.4
( )
A (0.8)
A (2.2)
A (2.5)
& Access G
Stop
SB
A( .
(0.8)
A (1.0)
A (0.4)
Pine Street
EB
A (0.5)
A (0.7)
& Access H
A (3.1)
A (2 9)
WB
A (1.5)
-
A (2.1)
1
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 184 of 617
*Delay of worst movement is reported in place of overall delay at side -street stop -controlled intersections.
The need for turn lanes along CSAH 70 was evaluated using the methodologies laid out in the National
Cooperative Highway Research Program's Report 457 on the need for major -road turn lanes at side -street
stop -controlled intersections. Turn lane warrants were conducted at all stop -controlled site access points
for each applicable turning movement. Results of the turn lane warrant analysis are given below in Table
6-1.
Table 6-1: Access Point Turn Lane Warrant Analysis Results
ScenarioTurn Lane Warrant Result By
Intersection•
• 1 Scenario
2030 2045 2030 2045
Sunset Avenue & Access A
NBR
MET MET MET MET
EBR
MET
MET MET
MET
Main Street & Access B
WBR
MET
MET MET
MET
EBR
MET
MET
-
Main Street & Access D
WBR
-
MET -
-
NBL
-
Not Met -
Not Met
4th Avenue & Access E
SBR
-
MET -
MET
NBL
-
MET -
MET
4th Avenue & Access F
SBR
-
Not Met -
Not Met
NBL
-
MET -
MET
4th Avenue & Access G
SBR
-
Not Met -
Not Met
The results of the analysis indicate that under both Scenario 1 and Scenario 2, right turn lanes are warranted
on all access points along Sunset Avenue and Main Street. Additionally, the access point along 41h Avenue
south of Main Street (Access E) meets the warrant for only a southbound right turn lane, while the access
points along 41h Avenue north of Main Street (Accesses F and G) meet the warrant only for a northbound
left turn lane. Further traffic analysis should be conducted as the site develops to confirm the need for
geometric improvements after the access locations and development characteristics have been finalized.
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 185 of 617
A traffic analysis was performed to quantify the impacts of the proposed development on the adjacent
roadway network and study intersections. No -Build, and Build conditions were analyzed in the Opening
Year (2030) and the Design Year (2045). An Existing Year (2025) analysis was also conducted.
7.1. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
The proposed development site is located along Main Street between Sunset Avenue and 41h Avenue in
Lino Lakes, MN. There are two development scenarios included in the AUAR; Scenario 2 represents the
densities, and land uses presently allowed in the City of Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan, while
Scenario 1 represents an alternative development to the City of Lino Lakes' 2040 Comprehensive Plan and
as such would require an amendment to the plan. The study area intersections include the following:
• Main Street & Sunset Avenue
• Sunset Avenue & Robinson Drive
• Sunset Avenue & Century Trail
• Sunset Avenue & Lilac Street
• 41h Avenue & Pine Street
• Main Street & 41h Avenue
• 41h Avenue & Lilac Street
• Pine Street & Lake Drive
• Main Street & Lake Drive
The listed intersections were analyzed in the following scenarios:
• Existing Year (2025)
• Opening Year (2030) No -Build
• Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1
• Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2
• Design Year (2045) No -Build
• Design Year (2045) Scenario 1
• Design Year (2045) Scenario 2
Both Scenarios are anticipated to include numerous access points off Sunset Avenue, Main Street, 41h
Avenue, and Pine Street. It is anticipated that the full development of the AUAR area would take up to 30
years. However, traffic projections as part of an AUAR are typically 20-year analysis horizon. This results
in a conservative analysis for the Design Year as the site may not be fully developed by then.
7.2. BACKGROUND CONDITIONS CAPACITY ANALYSIS SUMMARY
A capacity analysis was conducted for Existing Year (2025) traffic conditions at the study intersections to
determine current operating conditions of the roadway network. Based on the analysis, all intersections and
individual movements are estimated to operate at LOS C or better.
A capacity analysis was conducted for the Opening Year (2030) No -Build traffic conditions at the study
intersections to determine baseline conditions for the 2030 analysis year. Analysis included numerous
background improvements including new roundabouts at Sunset Avenue & Lilac Street and Main Street &
Lake Drive. Based on the analysis, all study intersections and individual movements are anticipated to
operate at LOS B or better, with the operations seeing an overall improvement as a result of the upcoming
roadway projects.
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 186 of 617
A capacity analysis was conducted for the Design Year (2045) No -Build traffic conditions at the study
intersections to determine baseline conditions for the 2045 analysis year. Analysis included the upcoming
background geometry changes that will be in place by the Opening Year but no further changes to geometry
and control were assumed. All study intersections are anticipated to operate at LOS C or better and all
intersection movements/roundabout approaches are anticipated to operate at LOS D or better.
7.3. SCENARIO 1 CONDITIONS CAPACITY ANALYSIS SUMMARY
A capacity analysis was conducted for the Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 traffic conditions at the study
intersection. It was found that the addition of site traffic causes some increases in network delays compared
to the Opening Year (2030) No -Build conditions. All study intersections are anticipated to operate at an
overall LOS C or better and all individual movements/roundabout approaches operate at LOS D or better.
Additionally, with operations remaining acceptable in Opening Year (2030) build Scenario 1, an east -west
roadway connection on the south half of the AUAR site is not required from a traffic operations perspective,
however, the connection of Robinson Drive (Access E) would help improve connectivity to the
neighborhoods. The connection of Carl Street is not necessary from a traffic operations perspective.
Under Design Year (2045) Scenario 1 traffic conditions, it was found that significant operational deficiencies
could be caused by the full buildout of the proposed Scenario 1 development and mitigation measures are
likely required if traffic reaches these levels. Main Street sees operational issues due to capacity constraints
on eastbound and westbound traffic at the roundabouts and 41h Avenue sees severe side street delays at
the intersection with Main Street. Therefore, it is anticipated that Main Street may need to be expanded to
four lanes west of Lake Drive under the buildout conditions of Scenario 1 and a roundabout may be needed
at Main Street & 41h Avenue. The infrastructure improvements within the AUAR site should be evaluated as
development occurs on the site.
Analysis of the Design Year (2045) Scenario 1 Mitigated traffic conditions indicated that with the proposed
improvements in place, all study intersections are anticipated to operate acceptably.
7.4. SCENARIO 2 CONDITIONS CAPACITY ANALYSIS SUMMARY
A capacity analysis was conducted for the Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 traffic conditions at the study
intersection. It was found that the addition of site traffic causes some increases in network delays compared
to the Opening Year (2030) No -Build conditions. All study intersections are anticipated to operate at an
overall LOS C or better and all individual movements/roundabout approaches operate at LOS D or better.
Additionally, with operations remaining acceptable in Opening Year (2030) Build Scenario 2, an east -west
roadway connection on the south half of the AUAR site is not required from a traffic operations perspective,
however, the connection of Robinson Drive (Access E) would help improve connectivity to the
neighborhoods. The connection of Carl Street is not necessary from a traffic operations perspective.
Under Design Year (2045) Scenario 2 traffic conditions, it was found that significant operational deficiencies
could be caused by the full buildout of the proposed Scenario 2 development and mitigation measures are
likely required if traffic reaches these levels. Main Street sees operational issues due to capacity constraints
on eastbound and westbound traffic at the roundabouts and 41h Avenue sees severe side street delays at
the intersection with Main Street. Therefore, it is anticipated that Main Street may need to be expanded to
four lanes west of Lake Drive under the buildout conditions of Scenario 2 and a roundabout may be needed
at Main Street & 41h Avenue. The infrastructure improvements within the AUAR site should be evaluated as
development occurs on the site.
Analysis of the Design Year (2045) Scenario 2 Mitigated traffic conditions indicated that with the proposed
improvements in place, all study intersections are anticipated to operate acceptably. Some minor
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 187 of 617
operational deficiencies may also be present along Sunset Avenue in the AM peak hour due to the presence
of school traffic, but the anticipated level of delay does not necessitate further improvement.
7.5. MITIGATION PLAN
The following provides a summary of mitigation improvements that were identified as part of the traffic
analysis for the proposed development.
Existing (2025) Conditions
• No recommended mitigation
Opening Year (2030) No -Build Conditions
• No recommended mitigation (beyond planned improvements)
Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 Conditions
• Install side street stop control at the site access points.
• Install right turn lanes at all access points along Sunset Avenue & Main Street
• Install a roundabout at the full -access point along Main Street (Access C)
• While not required based on the traffic operations results, it is recommended to connect Robinson
Drive to 4th Avenue (Access E) to improve connectivity.
Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 Conditions
• Install a roundabout at the full -access point along Main Street (Access C)
• Install side street stop control at all other site access points.
• Install right turn lanes at all access points along Sunset Avenue & Main Street
• While not required based on the traffic operations results, it is recommended to connect Robinson
Drive to 4th Avenue (Access E) to improve connectivity.
Design Year (2045) No -Build Conditions
• No recommended mitigation (beyond planned improvements)
Design Year (2045) Scenario 1 Conditions
• All Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 conditions mitigations
• Install side street stop control at all access points along 41h Avenue and Pine Street.
• Install southbound right turn lanes at 41h Avenue & Access E (south of Main Street)
• Install northbound left turn lanes at access points on 41h Avenue north of Main Street (Access F and
Access G).
• Expand Main Street to a four -lane road west of Lake Drive
o Includes expanding roundabouts at Sunset Avenue and Access C to 2x1 roundabouts.
• Install a 2x1 roundabout at Main Street & 41h Avenue.
• Expand Main Street & Lake Drive roundabout to accommodate northbound left -turn traffic.
o The roundabout is anticipated to require two northbound entry lanes, two exit lanes on
the west leg, and a bypass lane for the eastbound approach
Design Year (2045) Scenario 2 Conditions
• All Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 conditions mitigations
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 188 of 617
• Install side street stop control at all access points along 411 Avenue and Pine Street.
• Install southbound right turn lanes at access points along 41h Avenue south of Main Street (i.e.,
Access E).
• Install northbound left turn lanes at access points on 41h Avenue north of Main Street (Access F and
Access G).
• Expand Main Street to a four -lane road west of Lake Drive
o Includes expanding roundabouts at Sunset Avenue and Access C to 2x1 roundabouts.
• Install a 2x1 roundabout at Main Street & 41h Avenue
• Expand Main Street & Lake Drive roundabout to accommodate northbound left -turn traffic.
o The roundabout is anticipated to require two northbound entry lanes, two exit lanes on
the west leg, and a bypass lane for the eastbound approach
Note that it is anticipated that the full development of the AUAR area would take up to 30 years. However,
traffic projections as part of an AUAR are typically 20-year analysis horizon. This results in a conservative
analysis for the Design Year as the full site may not be built out yet. All traffic mitigation should be updated
when the AUAR is updated.
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 189 of 617
41
t' . 1 J'4.
w,
.x •e
t'
- _ F' 'c. ,��i'l.• T �: iT;, �'r[� . -� "• � , i �Tl: �jK' . 1-
r
it I
rt r� yrrr j ��h i (r 5'�j • :a, tf 'a _ , t
�C 11 Ytu
� �' •Te -. �. .. .. •�. .•\qI i f � ► r �-is •pS'i�1• �D:k., a � ^e `{ '�' '�? �-!,= i
�• � . • �Y��'. � '" � � � . .,� •, �r• �' it ♦ � •
frn1MA+r+>• � a� yy 4�" • r � � �i � i
� � / yr' r '� • " iF-
yy
1.4
• Y +J
r t I J IF
�wi j �, r jr,j{' a 'tiu �r _ �• t• "�73i +�r� `
• _�- � � �%' '"�, t �. Y� � • P' �,� eR; � �, t fin• >..
Robinson Dr>>'•��
g- j;��' � r. 4 i a. J;/+rrJS• f '!(j�-r 1 r r• l�� - r{4 _ • ("a.�{'��z1'�r ��.�� , r
�/ •�T f �r,- `, � ` Ste,•• r. t' - .M ' :T 3- f.- -�' . ` � �`' d►�"
•yYQy. ' r y •>+ '� w , cPi� '1%.,��i�' r�` `, r_ �� _,_�ti � ,r '?��M'.n..
il. _,►•. Q' �y!� • v f ,= id ..J♦— - J y . / p;f,,�c ` f . „''
I may. Q ."� r .�,�� � 'if'• • i •{ �a I i�`J'. � � 1 � ''S. �
�:.• :Y •rt '».. � � ����I;J rat + •r .�. Yf � Via; � ,f � 1 ..'�._��la'�� �J' /- �� ,,��.�
• _ err 1' : '� + �" `8'Y `r r� ..�'�� ~ r' ' + '� J,,,A - �' '� •l .. r rT�'T;
i7•• :• .• � t 4
!'� - �: h Lilac St- .� � • �._. s r
14
{`.} ,��,; .� '1 t r •�,� �:.�- LEGEND _
J' AUAR Boundaries
�"i1►� +*;" Nj= 0 :� "�i; <" o�!! '•~.= ; I _ , Existin
g Y Stud Intersections
r. _ f R .r �.� } r h.�.. -• '=�t�' T� L4' l � c •.rw' - . �... V� O
!; �,
i rM •• `�' r��i'��,.'t s� ar. ]lir��t•�.i►l�'�".K`tA".lh > _ ! '!r. _ � ..WPM - , f �.�.' �.a�IR� i•` ;' �"
EXHIBIT 1
Kimley>>> Horn AUAR BOUNDARIES & STUDY INTERSECTIONS
NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN
Page 190 of 617
� � ��{�' • �"' � art ,� �'!i` �. •
� . � � � ' �''�►^ � X-! ' � Ir�`�.�'k?� �+`C.�"n�'�1! :��� rJ' L-iirt:�:7,� +Jr a ' ; +Z l ;5.� s '.,,d'.
M
ddp—
JI
r.:, • ."` ' ., . TiR mid.: Y? k
J�
v.kL
.r � � t i f, � .� ..�.� � � s ♦ t" - 1 - '�w 1` � ��f ijil�ir .
'.�r.'r., -♦ , _ ..7 YA• - �1 , '� .3 yR± ,--4 °.',' ,if�'�! ��� 3 t5 �'t:lo
Itc - 1y1,\ y /<J. , {' �, -- - _ T .• �'. A, A�.,.- A� � a.-��y � .r, f r``..��, 1`,t,. .� `v.'�x,� i.. ^J �„ � . , * l_Rw •-
't,! i� C'/ � `+'D ! ' 1 1 r" / a tot a • J.
F t N� r1y�.tjAr �,#ja��eyska A` �I rtqr POP
,'t` - � , � a y- V _r � I _ _ �Y,R��'J i��raw; - ,�.Si `�`�', � i�11 r � �i �.• ` .j i \Y!
14
.1 • � t�I � � � w've c• ` ,,,,� ; ;I;' Y� � �� f.• e �- �.�1►-�slssNa• r� �j •x
1 �s , � �_:... � �,- ei Y ". s � tNr��! _, t • � ;f J � � � _ t r r
a�
�, �1 1 �� � -- ` � '�� . � .! ,���.•v�f;`'�. �f��J �lria.4 '( -ram_ � a, \. ` `;ti
4 lfl��yy : 7'.� a!�� s si\ d �{yyZ �'.j��Y j•
131
� � ,J • � ";. �` -.tt is � ' - • -� --. � � F' `-'� _ •.r a ���'i-• f-� �L y � !L
Robinsont
' �"aj s � � 1 • `y! 1r �`:r ,u � - � �Ir' ` •��4E �G %Q� � t a �, '�j. • fit' � - Y 7' n' �
q..
JU,'N' rA
r - T-. i `Ir 1� � t� ti• . { �: _. `f � 5+. '`,K 4 � v " � t.`T f ,,�i <<, ! Y
VA
-
�� LEGEND
�: v1• '�11,� " ."`+ �a `. r — - �1 3y O Study Intersections
• - !J.i1aF. Sa ,� ` • :,, - • Existing Stop Control
77 Existing Signal Control
Roundabout
� �� r 1 r•. €5 _ z'; ► Channelized Turn r�
ft~ UP
EXHIBIT 2
Kimley>>> Horn EXISTING GEOMETRY AND INTERSECTION CONTROL
NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN
Page 191 of 617
• : . TJ< [ter 4• r V
k
�'
�, r%.Y� _ `w. , �t'%r /�( �J•� F•1'1.•{�; -a �iL-v d. JI,� � � I• '�
L,• � _ _ .�.;. .. ..r.�.,.. Pine._ `� �•p�.�y�j " ".-
<f `Tr � �• 7•� �•�'� � �'1� .-;... A�. �1.. v 1'1�. Y •;< r \. y•v ri±`jt'.'.i�
� I Orly - _�'�' •-��,• ' �_ �` '� s (, ,: Vij.��; Fs„ f JL .• `�-�t� _ ,� - � 1 `•V�. 1 +yr
_ �rvr r, • r'y 'i r w� •" , t3�Raf.. .3 �' E� y `i 3 (5)
* �( w0.=11I1 _ rr. 0 (0) (� ' w 7 (4)pf- I T -
i- Y i ve 1s r • 5 (5) v 11 (11)
LEM
N'kj
,f �• _ �Y A Y A 1� ►j'•'�' t rro .ir p'...,i �j,.( i
.� 'fJ YY
1
r 7
f` r! t I i 1 , r ati t rye ti Jk r
All. � 200 (446) �� € .�j' 1� I i '• A'( ge774--��
50(39)
W ire
Vv
311 (362) ratiav! I �. t . r i, A_
f 219 (148) t I' Qrry Y n ? (! •?k ° x` r, ,F s.
_ ` �'"s, � ' ' � t�_ �1',� ►. I ,• ` � •'s .kt�l',`! _, a, • *F+�' 'r;,. r I � �,•. r r., f _ w ¢
r Main1.4
Irk• i • �" '� l t.r {..rf�:i . L�'t'1 �• i �. ^ �• ♦ ( - 7
ff
.�. -,•♦ I� r4!! !' �II. ` ��t• ;.i rn v � 4 (7) wii� rro ' ^ �... /^ f ',[ y. !• cal
r� - 15 (7) ,..i K. .;. - ♦-• . f' II I�I II � 232 (433) ... '� 11 (30)
�� s~Y E� y y r- 11 (7) I' we . ` r
; y, r , J I l ` 130 (240)
35 (12) ,tt2� \► `>. _ )..v t•�. �i •�''�rl, •'' Qy�i1l �'"r-� r '- E' •L Y
Y _ , C • Robins
233 (193)
y f r o
T I t R1 T i,1 311 (380) M �Sr t y ,"' ? "W.'114 (152) �" I T �', �f m'N l.• I�r.. r`[ y g ' �tF: ',. r�• ' •e .•� 28 (5)�.. �ii •T 1. ,� ♦ •fit' !':j, t"' •_ij,�[ �r .` 190(176)� rn 1� rn
I f •` 7 + '! r� j � r e� # 7 • er��f't : �•i i !. t(3l y!aPl 60 (83)
,ter- rt rn - .. ,. •,, - �. , M• ` ` - { c�i rn Mm
�'. - - f��' _ r i i � .�� t�'f•rk [• ..i�3 �� ify / 3r � j�P' -` �'/ t [ _.• ' i
J rn , _ .� s.'K• . .t4'O• fi- •} _+ y •♦S '�1�.•'"C �1AcGftlJ)"i'►+:j• c{ -'u.
•� ^ p � 4 +�, �`� + • �t . T f t•.. 4 �, 15 •e.
rn o 14 11 w tL i{• r �•:f4.1.� ti 1 _'t' �7�„� f t ;�'r7*1
�w" .� W `� •� 43 (24)
' • T I - r �»ti ' t` E� L `j F— 45 (117)
49 (6)
�Ih ../ ice. I '� N M W ;��•• Tr
E `•. �' ►1 HTa rev Q w• fXT 1 93(74) co corn _. ® t �^ `l•
•af - r :. / • o r 'j�". -'•, `.}fie. t .,1,.
IV 21 (57) r' Jt f Zs .• ® ..:..
i.iac Sty
LEGEND
Study Intersections
OfXX (XX) AM (PM) Peak Hour Volumes
Ill•. afYf..S GA`t.A'fs•1 _ , . �. M'• .. --�L .a :�i• ':711�A{;- : J . 111� Y,i.'1 -!L . ��� I
EXHIBIT 3
Kim ey>>> Horn EXISTING (2025) TRAFFIC VOLUMES
NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN
Page 192 of 617
ddp—
M .'w1wr.:+ • ."`� ' ., . +�TiR mid.: Y? k
kL
.r r t i f, � ,� ..�., � � s ♦ t" - 1 - '�• 1` � ��f ijil�ir .
'00.'r., -♦ , _ ..7Y - �1 , '�• .3 yR± ,--4 °.',' ,if�s� -�- 3 t5 �'t ` ,. ,, k _ 2 '- , t' W -
•Y ��� { Jib- � � T � ' 'l+.'� '�9. ,� r y Ilk•e
.Ic - may,.\ � _<{ T _- Y � � � A}�,• r. ��L � � �.`e. At.' j��' „ � +,I •J f� . _ l � -.
Yam_ •� 1 - 1'i� +X�r bt+'Dli-. / elf
It 9
�` t r 5�y. j•r..•' s 7 i +A� i.k
I` _ � ` i .yy - y, O "�� I — ~ T'��J i��Maw; _ �SI ,y{�.�yP�� .� �Y' � "i � �•� _ j =
i . t w fv! �,; (� ; • jar + n
Aw
Ir
1� - �j.�. ` - ` •;�• ;:`,`,., -�J ems;''. , _ - 'Vi
"� .
Robinson
- .mac . � ,T ��r. y i I . �i •ii6'r'f a�� .i j►.T.1'�+'�";"' �f
! •lti / r i� t
.� w L - � 3� .�i' �.'if {f- Y � f,�! .+:\•."�C .�.AcG��J�t:�►S� _\_ - v.;
- MOM
WOO
•� r , • a_
N.. •�:; r• J�`,w• ij - ,' tag, ,� ��
LEGEND
i-'t... `_. r �` 1 - �11 •'' �, i O Study Intersections
■o■ Existing Stop Control '
Existing Signal Control
��
Note: All changes are anticipated 0 Roundabout
we
to be in place by 2030. ► Channelized Turn
C2vir
EXHIBIT 4
Kimley>>> Horn PLANNED FUTURE GEOMETRY AND INTERSECTION CONTROL
NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN
Page 193 of 617
IF
.r>K ' '�►^�X-! ��k? �+��n�'Zl,: rl Liirt::7•+Jr • ` ; +> i a r, s'.d'.
ZIP- OWN
Ir
ir
.n pb•7 _a f� II II 1I2 (6)
_ ter. rf, • 7' �' , 3�R ' 4 " +1 y `> 4 (6)
3(4)�
6 (6) M = 12 (12)
•�i- . it �4 \ ♦ ' �I M M C•
y.
t ' - • t. _ ii�i'y.�i�"��gF s V ..•l,a,j?. ��` y ,kv.'..�� .1 "'ill'!•.'s''�-i� _ -
I- ' � ` � �f , C "� ` _� r ..•'dad v.���.��,,jj•,,�"',�a
j �j''
� 213 (474)
54(42) ►,� i K' " )+ •. ..J; .r �. q
qp
331 (385)
3 'J1�'L!'y • 1
— r 233(158)�, a --fa� � �' ��- ��'3k r•. �. { C�: ��{.� , ``n
labT +? t
Ilk
►-sb
Main - _ - ; - ;4
'{�if1Yc•.
o '� 5(8)
5421 ,.•�. ., �;�i. ^ frr " `r "' 'f.
i I I I
o` �`247 (360) ? t�'�y.`t► +/ — a• .: rn 12 (32)
C 12 (8) �� . • r ,c :. I I 1138 (255)
sr— 248 (205)
Robinson
122 (162) _ I T 1...� N d1e .` 1{ 30 (g) �i ' f• • ;� C 202 (187)
64(89)VN
61 38 A11fr • f i tiR �� .y.l i
,��
7(301
F— 48 (125)
' T y sP_ 53 (7) ti
�
(13) �
9
�• v rn +-23(61) e. d !.•. .,� j ';'
�44(39)
"la�!.� -- — - � � <•. �; ' i 74,E � i"' y _
LEGEND
r v
•.Y C r O
�•� , !� �, � � // Study Intersections
rPeak Hour Volumes
XX XX
vNenw. it
.
EXHIBIT 5
Kim ey>>> Horn OPENING YEAR (2030) NO -BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES
NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN
Page 194 of 617
Pik-
f'rj./ -`: -- 1, _ - I,� - i , �. %1 � -. l •. � ,.: .•.. ' •'� a-...•1r ` ..�• 7^ �'] � � • - _ +�,r ' �r.
-r � �� I • V• fit, �� � � .`� � I, �
1l,2 (7) Ml�
_ �Yrv�+c, • 7 y 1 � , t3�LR� 4 � W y r— 4 (7) Z 1 Ed I
71
R�l'►'rj�. ,. � ! '�° � `j� l' . � 'w ' - -'z 0 (0) �, f� /� _ 9 (6)
3(4)14(14)
�
yid'?
b
_ ,e.Si �j'•.'/}P f - S'C
� 254 (567) �s fr •�� rn•,. .J�,. r��kp+w
• 1 ' 395 (460) r, -
�.� 279(188)�, �`= �a 3-fa '��' x`j- �,';l'.ASic!� -� �' {�Q1•i< �Y�
Main SR'��__'.'• t�,, ���1�
-
v /^
t
M 65 (25) 7' 'L ' " + f' y <-- 295 (550) �tl • 14 39 t. e
c Z, • 14 (9) F' .=� ry y . Il<-- 166 (305)
[ L y 296 (246)
Robinson - '- *, 2(32)_
fe"r 395 (483) K4 .r ti 145 (193) T
1) N V i •'r y l{ t f ��4E 36 (7) �.. n i O`/- w!tU► ijl : 242 (224) c
�' ., 1 _ '!., �+ ,�i. ,1+6•'1's: •• 77 (106) `2 v
I it
ate ,'- i fir—' �.• 3L � Af ' r `� I% .c�) ��F �;�' _ • / If�,►'(�V�r) -�� - s1'� =.� .K'
crn 73 (45)
�58 (149) • 4 >� 7y . a
63 (8) ./
t�i1. N N QY' ,�. �� _ • _f 11 (16) -J, I T
119 (94)
4— 27 (73) i �` r Jr'Y.J r .. r', �'• ,
53 (46) (/i . _, gip• ' !s�j �rY r L� ` - 1 �.i_ . ��. 14a
LEGEND
Study Intersections
XX (XX) AM (PM) Peak Hour Volumes
,6i»�>fli
Kimley>))Horn
EXHIBIT 6
DESIGN YEAR (2045) NO -BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES
NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN
Page 195 of 617
5%
S Crle '
,L
4% [28%] 14 % 35 %
s�_
14%
0 26% [4%] 0 7% [9%] —� o o [31% l P'
j II II II � [21 /o] o ] o `
I�
y
� 24% —� - I I T I 1� ' I f 1 � - li °r`' -`: �1--wse�all�•:
'- •.'i i%�'►*''' 7 •- `war �1, "Y. :.RJR,
6% moo ,
�firs
+Ir
t)F
[r +pit
o C� - 35
Main St21
�� •.�- �: 5%
T'
'lk— N N N
Access A N N N � -!,�e
�� i rye.
'�3 • ,1 W V V � 4 �: h\y�[•.` t� • 1-�?rr, n + �r •�: r: tf . T i.( r `,
T Y.: t t�
r VG' Robinson D � �l % ;� ;'
h i..7.0 • .N : i . � +�• [30%] : Lt . a [5%] �
78: 'rd
Potential Roadway « ,,;.•. Itj �lr^ a;�
Connection �.r.. �;:• ;. `
T F G r
Jh o, - . 7 "• I A, ,CC`(bVim: >
ti 1 _ _ -
F.. 'f f`; 4 .: [5%]� SST .� LEGEND '
VA �: ® • 0 2030 Development Areas
I':. "`� ��'ems% � d... •T .r•,.x ?, � -i. "..' ..e �
,'_: �� 3 r. �� •, _& ,--+: ,�''xi Global Traffic Distribution
to
• •.'� Inbound Site Traffic
St �. /o .•; ,t ` IN Outbound Site Traffic
• i •' + fit,, ' h ,rr
• t" z 9
Art O Full Access Intersection
f''��, i'y Oral ' _r ! x, • RIRO Intersection
'i• y _ 25 �o P y .€ - �` F r ® Roundabout
..�A.� .. w :'J�c�t-.`,.vy sus•., _ _ •��7L, i -i .r-.. _. ,. •.; 5.. _k. ...rt ---- .. ...,_t •la .. 3-. a.�--11ri1�_ :� .).', .Y�'• _Lr��r �nCi4��1►l � . lr `'i _ '.' .
EXHIBIT 7
Kimley>>> Horn OPENING YEAR (2030) SCENARIO 1 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION
NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN
Page 196 of 617
� � ��� �✓ + .► JI �i�' it ++ . �,%•«id s
t L
v cfl
22 70
,. 169 (152) J h 30 (98) +- 76 (244)
4- 30 (98)y
28
28 (91)
9
120 (93) 79 (199) 67 (89) -4 177 (138)
4-0
y '�••� E! Y �i 74 (58) 17 (56) 13 (42) �, o 15 (49) �. S +
Xi
52 (167) � a o o !SJ' .y �T.+: �, •
r..
e .
4 y.
= �!' r L 4. •.mot NP
1 .
t
Main St
m
Access A
%i V u �,� \i'. _ �ii��• 1'�'t it n + �r .'; r: •r
�- ! .. � -•j � 1'c . i � Q Q Q - ~ [ + (�'i � <— 65 (209) .`vY•�� ,r .'q+--^�!�. � ��:+r-J -4�
11 (35)
- . r 2 �a Robinson Dr
172 (133) t :� .rtt 29 (22) _41
29 (22) — • 29 (22) �
` ...� �.E`a i►.�;; R ., 114(89)-4, M
r Potential Roadway{{
k _ 46 (36) j�� c 1 y � Lj 11 (35)dl-
yj •_s
li �� �. g •'. ;
Q a_�• / 29 (22)
�� �11(35)_.� t: �t J}. LEGEND
st• 4't v N _ . >' r' •�� • !'r- .41}(, t. yN.
`� ' •� �� .� � �' '1 � ,� +'���,<'� � �<� �` `'f .��� 4 �i 0 2030 Development Areas J
r r. �' _ =• s. �, + 1 xx (xx) AM (PM) Peak Site Trips
Lilaf St���' t j i,. �,
" .j• ' �� k O Full Access Intersection
T n v �. ! �' ,�;�� _�, • RIRO Intersection
Roundabout
—J& r—: i1 : a LJ-. �.Oy SPi�''J', _ _ AWL. 2U i ' i .><-.. . .. �': �.. t .['...rl. _ ...,_ ':� r 1'. 7.--.71� y. t 1 .� -✓� J i ( t. .r`/.. �• r
EXHIBIT 8
Kimley>>> Horn OPENING YEAR (2030) SCENARIO 1 SITE TRIPS
NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN
Page 197 of 617
r
2 tl✓ 'dam . 4 r i�� r T j„ . t o o 0 (4)
��: ra TniY�l7rwsa r `' jv oI II 12 (6)
�k� 4 6 E� y
r
I •1 0 (0) J 8 (5) I
3 (4)
12 (12) �,
►� M 22 (70) '� 15 (49
I +-445 (667) 1 h <- 296 (613) +- 342 (759) r 4 `'"'
30 (98)
N N
I I I F 333 (567) 443 (643) 431 (533) - 4 541 (582)
128 (100) 17 (56) —,, rn 13 (42) �, o rn 15 (49) ! ti•.4 _ ..3 e„�
16 (42) J"
383 (552) � � � � o
246 (200) �, o � v Ir
f f , . - M.•T �� If tr
GAP
CIO
Access A H �,� ,. �T.� J,''«• • . i' ti
'k— 46 (36) N GJ vNi
' V V GJ
h - o '�5 8
IV . a a V i II II I <- 312 (669) 1C r el o N L 12 (32) 4r
1G►�"p�• �. [ . Q E� y `l 12 (8) .. • I I 1149 (290)
_ 0 0 C: • � �`'E� � _, E� •L y � 248 (205) �i
�j� M Robinson ;3' ' Q 5032537) I T
„)1 _ .P! y ( ) a a 151 (184) T
59 (28) �, r 231 (209)
J. •r �'� L' .. •y W O' ono
Potential Roadway �� ,� n ; � �1-:-• �j '� ;�,
i>- Connection+✓!r�.4
G3, rn o S]4��' �� 117► o (ri cmo 18 (65)
R M M r I F-59(160) 3 eT. IA
107 E''1 W .�_ 53 (7)
flnTcVz;_ � . ," .a 9(13)� I I 1rf�+ < •. L ;'
to'. Q 7- �� ��a g r.:� 1 128 (101)vf
�34(96) �� �: i •T >~.� �1: LEGEND
't 4t u'<D N N M 3 ' �.. ` ... ,'. . ' �! r' , •M ".w.�]1a �" y�'r'r' _
44 (39) t/ir�' "�:.J�'w.rl` -
-•fir, W `� s _����`,�1' 4w, `v 0 2030 Development Areas
St $��'r xx (xx) AM (PM) Peak Traffic Volume
�'•�"►��� x)V4� Full -Access Intersection
1sy • RIRO Intersection
r
'!t` ri .j 'ram ''t••1. IC ~1
•
Roundabout
.r��. !; w : aQ C�f.O11P�' _ _ AWL 2u
i -i .i . L. t': _�.. t .['...rl_ _ ._. ...,� ':� r 1'. 7.-- •71��.. y. t1AM•-��"iw��,� . . /... ! r
EXHIBIT 9
Kimley>>> Horn OPENING YEAR (2030) SCENARIO 1 TRAFFIC VOLUMES
NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN
Page 198 of 617
' ^ `• - i ` lit.; ^'°`'�i ;�" .:til � '�" 1, r ;: i a
PL
rkA
[2%] '
u [ ]
Access G x , [2%]
o
N M 1
2% [40%] 5% [191Iol
p,. .� 6%
•� 2% Q
I I 11 [289/6] 38% [2%] 0 20% [4%] 15% [15%] o
Ey i � [15%] 5% -747 % y 5% �♦ v i (., II 1 -
3% IF Access . ;� �I y
—yw
cur'.
[9%1� f + r• r y �Ki+f + f s r
wd
wa
Access A ¢ r� L r
nl % -f�; Y.'V: '•',w .+si` /i...�`r t.I'} r/�. 'a
I u m +— 15% '.•L. t 'l . 1 T
Access E 2/ 5% i
Robinson Dr 12° E' !.
y i l [15%] I T w 3
!] J T t•
a- 1 3 % [2%] � = = f .'w' • ,. Q'� [5%]
• r 3 t " �• •a.Vr
(a�"�cTj (I � �` �,,�o :1,�, � 11�" ` V � `�'`�`"�� _•+.: _ jam_
;; u>• �� "(`! Carl St
N M
s
LEGEND
i 5% 20%
.� Development Location ,
0Global Traffic Distribution
.� •� [5°i] v1 !- r- a �� •�.• 1 ,.,. r X% Inbound Site Traffic
Lilac St % r' ', w 7` [X%] Outbound Site Traffic
r '� .t_•�. ^.�� O Full -Access Intersection
� "�.%'�• _ �` � 1 � ,�% �` $ ' . � -''� <„•� yr.
RIRO Intersection
Roundabout
,^ r sll..c^.. �'• � = -it - �•,,! .. _ .. . ti :. ,w.����.•� �=�;1.��\ -:...� ���tl ' \�Y:�.� i`- %.v• 11:
EXHIBIT 10
Kimley>>> Horn DESIGN YEAR (2045) SCENARIO 1 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION
NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN
Page 199 of 617
er�4•.aC�' r' A' fir"- - - , e tV" - -.. 0 1 - %.( ` ■ ,..a �.. t
Pine St
.� 53 (169) 11 (34)
_ 16 (51)� r �F kA
( r •
-11 If - • Jam' v
1✓ , 4 o i V 29 (22)
y
sty• 'rm� .. � 1 Q v a � J ._.
it c rQ 29 (22) _ T
Access G
u I 1 44 (32)
JAE
I595 (467) II II +—304 (290) II F— 15 (11) T
0 Qi 131 (97) %2
N
N 11 (34) 58 (186) I , t' v ~ 4 s
N oII IoI � 409 (303) 231 (663) N 165 (381) —+ N Q y r,• r:
219 (162) 27 (84) N 37 (118) m��r.
11 (34) _'
159 (506) —4 rn
4- ? 131 (97)
ji
x .a
1A .�, r .�
VA
'
ti ti
ram.
1fifl(\. J-,,y� - - 4: y u V �� i. J �i ,� , f •e, s T
� UL`T.,' oa,yo, Access A w ¢ o
�
rT; I . cf c �' y Q _ 43 (135)
f1 r� �, � � � 80 (253) I,• � v lk
R- —� '. i. ,[►l, ,t.� ? �: + 11 (34) ti.: , ' r � 27 (84)
Access E •:►
+ o '� Robinson Dr 64(202)� T (� ~ •.
1
219 (162) c^o v .. 44 (32) T
a f 45 (72) —!4, n < ` :X ' 73 (54)
248 (184to
i •ly, J O>
Carl St
..T L
~r ..� •S� M N �I IO '� 37 (118)
16(51)
rr N M 58 (43)
27 (84)
! e
•a
".Kr F'•� f rf `�� T Q 88 (65)_j, T .�F 44 (32) - r
f V J
,
' : � ' �ji . J�.•� M � r M <0 1A 58 (43) � `� � �
16(51> � � � � M 1�, c�'�[!�••'�-� ' '■' LEGEND '
4'
73 (54) V1 <• , r '. Development Location
T ��Lilae St~ _ _ () AM (PM) Peak Site Trips
ti O� M � "' , _ -��'� •• ` ' •� �' ' •� Full -Access Intersection
�T ��� � � � � � � • RIRO Intersection
� .< +'.;��, ��• �, � .�,: -- � � �' - Q Roundabout
.sA. � .. w •:'� ram.-.': . ••. _ e . ..• , " � .><. r _ : -weir .. � �Y',' .�: . ..�tl:' ���'`'' . '.-!
EXHIBIT 11
Kimley>>> Horn DESIGN YEAR (2045) SCENARIO 1 SITE TRIPS
NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN
Page 200 of 617
Kimley>))Horn
EXHIBIT 12
DESIGN YEAR (2045) SCENARIO 1 TRAFFIC VOLUMES
NORTHWEST MAIN - LINO LAKES, MN
Page 201 of 617
5%
S •� -- Crt'e
Age, .y
r � • � •'fie• F ♦ _ I r _ •
►s � 6% 5
v
12%[15%] � 18% •._*s` fi''
j III[11%] 13% [12%1 a - [18%] —4
W - ' •
•� Ei � 6 % u o 9 S.
i -Xi'Z rr d' ;' ►' -
1 s % ! r �_
Ir
o Main St 5%
35 /o �"
Access A °4A::,
Q) 4) It k
IV NA
•' '-1I ..J, V V V • ., 30°,c ' a + n ^ : r: ! • r : ,•r. 1: ` a o rf
iR. t. ,[► Q Q u [ +! • vt•r R"--^e� a� { it
T (� -s o o ' •; E
Robinson D
0
[30%] . ' [5%] t
[8%] : -.-�. - . r. dal , k r.(' •,
Potential RoadwaY '! .e-•
Connection t.s a
A
a
`? •' Kr F:. 'f �>►' T f ,. 4 [5%]Sri LEGEND '
e.
• �4���n' � � � "' r •' r �,.' :�=� r:' �' , s, •.�� � � � ;: ® � 0 2030 Development Areas -
c�� Global Traffic Distribution
%A.`r
• .'� Inbound Site Traffic
Lilaf St �. /o .•. \t ` IN Outbound Site Traffic
•t" z
�,� � , .-, . , i _ f a - r •� r � �� � ,� �'-.:,+ .• ,,?+ O Full -Access Intersection
i �,` ri ,, : r 7�` /F.'`�, ! Oral ' _r ! <1 • RIRO Intersection r
wn - ///j.► ® Roundabout
; toll
r _ _ ]L i <.. ;5 _r ...rt: •:3• a sr- :-, �'• ��i ��i"' +lr' i`'i �'
EXHIBIT 13
Kimley>>> Horn OPENING YEAR (2030) SCENARIO 2 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION
NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN
Page 202 of 617
Wl-
r tit r ,l,'�► rM'` h
low# 4'' �: `�. Calf •7 .• •y,
-
N
N �
►� N � 13 (42) II II +F; • 1
,. +-112 (150) E�
vim
26 (84) r, 15 (49) ++�;►1+s•. -
j <— 63 (49) 97 (144) ° 103 (80) -4
I II II _ F
46 (36) y, 13 (42) �, 13 (42)
32 (105)
✓ ' 30 (98) v o Xr i*••• `.rr
E:w 13 (42)
oil
Main St
CIO
VI N S + i•�rt•i .f
46 (36)
V
Access A Qwr
•R•- yl� `t :r " ` - ,,, .'s i .r}, r 'R"r'r° :.~ii:i- 11 (35) -4r
-A
D Robinson _ '• ,� ,� ;�,
��• lip - . ti .P!' Y . ! 5::.: •' +t 172 (133) `� ' 29 (22)
'7"a' '� _ cr - OD - f� ` 'tl�'+ �4r+. • ( ) r�: - tt �
29 (22)
2922 ^�
Jt' ;iri Potential Roadway
Connection ��w`••�. �.._
~� .-i' , • � � � FZ ' 1i']4►e' •� "O'er � N 'L 11 (35)
11 (35) alL.
34 (27)
%y y. �. .�' ,��� s cis.'(• !jr �� `JVA
Pr
:. 11 (35> ,.� *-L E G E N D
kn,.�� 'i�. ,�� 0 2030 Development Areas
41 Lilac St '�'�—j- r , . xx (xx) AM (PM) Peak Site Trips
j _ r Full -Access Intersection
�T .�,f, v r/ �� • RIRO Intersection
►'� r Q �^
r � � .< +�` 1' � :,: "�; �.: • Js .€�� - �`//. . �u�` F: � Roundabout '
.r�A. � w :� C�'f-.�0� 1P��'� _ _ .���' i -1 .r .. _ - :a - i'. 7-.71���.. y. � t �a .� -✓� 4���1+ /... ! ~ r '
EXHIBIT 14
Kimley>>> Horn OPENING YEAR (2030) SCENARIO 2 SITE TRIPS
NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN
Page 203 of 617
b
W,
13 (42)
NII +-378(665)
-A V
15 (49) _j^
26(84)
—
276(523)rt1
. I 1 4 •- - lilt
I
461(588) 467 (524) —4
i
13(42) 13 (42) J90
%> 4r— 100 (78)
37 (112) t
361(483)
XT,
246 (200) Zj, � v
1E
�2
1k
qt- in Wa St
'Xk t ,
ccess A
V1
46(36) 4A $A
txv � al+ ai .. � �� •.�,%�' � � '� 5 (8) > n .,'r. �a `"•+ t� l• !.r , T ,-�.'.r � � � a
<-- 312 (6-91
V 12 (8) 12 (32)
r*T-
2(27)
Robinson DrxlNimk
503 (537)
C 151(184)
IL• / V% —J,
JK. 59 (28) —4, � T �
231(209)—)-
14% —74,
63- 178(178)
'i M Y`•® I •. .. L�.. e.f%•. t,. •'• `O/, •1 aD OODD
ILI —100(57)
Potential
Connection
18 (65)
59 (160)
95 (65) sr-_ 53 (7)
>
r rM., 9(13) T
128 (101)
a
7 (3) �2
1A
+1. �� r� / ,r.,•. 'ir , a to r ® 1
34 (96)
LEGEND
PV
44 Li I
Al� 2030 Development Areas
Lilac St xx (xx) AM (PM) Peak Traffic Volume
Full -Access Intersection
Intersection
% RIRO
F•
Roundabout
lit
AWL. 2u
Kirnley))) Horn
EXHIBIT 15
OPENING YEAR (2030) SCENARIO 2 TRAFFIC VOLUMES
NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN
Page 204 of 617
Iflu AL � mot. _ � • i i � T �7 3% .RQI Z
3 `�( ? r ��. `� y 1✓ ' i�,,;�,, Gl [2%]
[5 % ] �r `or •IRY1171:^..w. = ww ' " �. u
lid .,�'. :'• e-}r,rµ�
Access G
4% r
..► 3%[24%] 8%[8%1
.. sI 7%
F.
(- [149/6] 24% [6%1 8% [9%] _ 9!. d a •.
13%] 5% �.. 'cam 7%c'.1 7.7
4-0
rip
22/0 X" . IXr jr• �I�
3°'° Access IF _
[5%]� \ f L''l r• ., r +,`Yc •�Yi
_ 1'1j,;rI & ,I W t L . *
c
%
Access A
�6%
Access E .� 2%F
Robinson Dr 6%-1`1 T f
' 17%]w .t ► 3%
�•""� l
N �
�, r, rv� ..-�d• u l:i ��`-YI',�` -.�; J ;� , • ..�'► 'L�'. :�, Jam' f �:�'�S 1 ., -..-
�� u�y Carl Stop
YvT:, N [ 1 M 1 1G•lk
a' 1 7%] 20%
[uf: LEGEND
Development Location ,
_ N
I. `1x% Global Traffic Distribution
- • � A,
[5° ] X% Inbound Site Traffic
Lilac St ,� [X%] Outbound Site Traffic
T r� 10% w,
r` o j "' {r} _ rp ',, .t_•�.di ^.�� r O Full -Access Intersection
xR �i •. T' t l'' /{
•., t / �4 �<< r,:¢'`es �, • RIRO Intersection
j' *' _50/( 4 C _ {� ,�d ® Roundabout
M. nZ0I IN�
EXHIBIT 16
Kimley>>> Horn DESIGN YEAR (2045) SCENARIO 2 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION
NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN
Page 205 of 617
EXHIBIT 17
Kimley>>> Horn DESIGN YEAR (2045) SCENARIO 2 SITE TRIPS
NORTHWEST MAIN - LINO LAKES, MN
Page 206 of 617
A:111. im
_ — ., _ �. �. � mom. - -.I �____+ �•
_ 4 1 I I <- 13 (41)
`.� 53 (169) 20 (58)-rt�..F ;l Ir
LA
•r 't f• ' ,` Y 1 ..-� �` g (11) � � I ai ' ' s �: ' ~.,i !' � ) 33 26—� A ,��Y ' o V ( )
rhYn "� . v o °D �•
M V
.`. a r 39 (28)
t
Y r-•i� Access G
• '� 27 (85) o '� 22 (68) r
1I691 (932) II I II <-- 480 (840) 15 (11) --.t a
t
rn ui
o 104 (77) �. a
49 (153) I T I ,'i. M ca'o -'-
Z- 16 (51) I Q
F- 462 (722) 654 (1006) M 612 (766) -� o^-
IFA
272(205) 27 (85) -'4. = 38 (119)
` 60 (178) -.1
i 514 (834)
.w 295 (239)
o , Access IF 15 11 '
T ,• .fir �'' �"x'":
Main St — �� �? ��� •a �.,y, _
Access A m
��.
ioa, of of 1A 90
ss
39 (111) ra_.� ,.' r- '.''� zz� V o
i
+ V Q V I I I F 387 (839) ' "'ram 14 (39)
sI 25 (43) <- 193 (390)
.yam Access E �, r- 296 (246)
Robinson Dr 35(134)_
n ao +P!` , , 648 (645) T• 190 (226) _INT
o: Y.' " f ` 77 (63) !n 7: 4 rye . 316 (279)
330(294)� a
• �,. ` Z2 o
154 (91) �'r.or-- v *.yl� - �yd 0�-' �
•;�;J:- T f .� � i Lei` ., � - �. � � ,t.
ja
132 (89) N V Jr. I I +—96 (268)
,I 63 (8)
38 (101) �` T
" T (55) _ u` tt
y �. 74 �J T T 223 (171)
2 G!
65 (192) LEGEND
- 127 (101) M (/i r" L rr
Development Location
Lilac St- ` , w, . xx (xx) AM (PM) Peak Hour Volumes
Full -Access Intersection
T'i`t't N `� '� r I �- ->w� 't�'+"" • RIRO Intersection
ws1►�i _ Roundabout
EXHIBIT 18
Kimley>>> Horn DESIGN YEAR (2045) SCENARIO 2 TRAFFIC VOLUMES
NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN
Page 207 of 617
Appendix A: Turning Movement Counts
Appendix B: SimTraffic Reports
Appendix C: Turn Lane Warrant Sheets
Northwest Main - Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 208 of 617
Appendix A:
Turning Movement Counts
Northwest Main — Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 209 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: 4th Ave & Lilac St
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 1
Turnina Movement Data
Start Time
Left
Lilac St
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Lilac St
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
7:00 AM
3
20
2
25
6
10
4
20
0
1
0
1
6
7
1
14
60
7:15 AM
4
18
0
22
5
11
2
18
0
1
1
2
10
4
4
18
60
7:30 AM
2
15
0
17
2
8
3
13
0
1
0
1
7
3
1
11
42
7:45 AM
0
18
0
18
1
10
0
11
0
2
1
3
9
3
1
13
45
Hourly Total
9
71
2
82
14
39
9
62
0
5
2
7
32
17
7
56
207
8:00 AM
1
19
0
20
2
8
2
12
0
0
0
0
4
1
2
7
39
8:15AM
1
9
0
10
2
11
1
14
0
0
4
4
1
1
1
3
31
8:30 AM
1
6
2
9
0
11
3
14
0
2
0
2
3
4
1
8
33
8:45 AM
3
9
0
12
4
6
1
11
1
2
3
6
2
1
0
3
32
Hourly Total
6
43
2
51
8
36
7
51
1
4
7
12
10
7
4
21
135
...BREAK...
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4:00 PM
4
13
1
18
1
34
7
42
2
7
12
21
3
0
1
4
85
4:15 PM
3
28
0
31
0
26
3
29
0
3
2
5
5
3
2
10
75
4:30 PM
3
17
1
21
1
32
8
41
0
4
0
4
2
2
6
10
76
4:45 PM
5
16
0
21
1
28
3
32
0
5
2
7
4
4
1
9
69
Hourly Total
15
74
2
91
3
120
21
144
2
19
16
37
14
9
10
33
305
5:00 PM
0
16
0
16
6
35
7
48
1
2
1
4
3
0
3
6
74
5:15 PM
1
8
0
9
0
20
3
23
0
2
1
3
4
0
2
6
41
5:30 PM
2
12
0
14
1
15
4
20
1
2
0
3
1
0
3
4
41
5:45 PM
1
10
0
11
1
20
4
25
0
3
1
4
4
1
3
8
48
Hourly Total
4
46
0
50
8
90
18
116
2
9
3
14
12
1
11
24
204
Grand Total
34
234
6
274
33
285
55
373
5
37
28
70
68
34
32
134
851
Approach %
12.4
85.4
2.2
-
8.8
76.4
14.7
-
7.1
52.9
40.0
-
50.7
25.4
23.9
-
-
Total %
4.0
27.5
0.7
32.2
3.9
33.5
6.5
43.8
0.6
4.3
3.3
8.2
8.0
4.0
3.8
15.7
-
Lights
32
230
6
268
30
278
54
362
5
36
26
67
66
33
30
129
826
Lights
94.1
98.3
100.0
97.8
90.9
97.5
98.2
97.1
100.0
97.3
92.9
95.7
97.1
97.1
93.8
96.3
97.1
Buses
1
1
0
2
0
3
1
4
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
2
9
Buses
2.9
0.4
0.0
0.7
0.0
1.1
1.8
1.1
0.0
2.7
0.0
1.4
1.5
0.0
3.1
1.5
1.1
Trucks
1
3
0
4
1 3
4
0
7
1 0
0
2
2
1 1
1
1
3
1 16
Trucks
2.9
1.3
0.0
1.5
1 9.1
1.4
0.0
1.9
1 0.0
0.0
7.1
2.9
1 1.5
2.9
3.1
2.2
1 1.9
Page 210 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
m
w
m
J
D a v> m o o io
4th Ave [SB]
Out In Total
122 129 251
3 2 5
1 3 4
126 134 260
30 33 66
1 0 1
1 1 1
32 34 68
R T L
N 1 4
04/03/2025 7:00 AM
Ending At
04/03/2025 6:00 PM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
69 1 67 136
0 1 1
4 2 6
73 70 143
Out In Total
4th Ave [NB]
A r
m
y
� y
rrww�� wwm��
Turning Movement Data Plot
Count Name: 4th Ave & Lilac St
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 2
Page 211 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: 4th Ave & Lilac St
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 3
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (7.00 AM)
Start Time
Left
Lilac St
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Lilac St
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
7:00 AM
3
20
2
25
6
10
4
20
0
1
0
1
6
7
1
14
60
7:15 AM
4
18
0
22
5
11
2
18
0
1
1
2
10
4
4
18
60
7:30 AM
2
15
0
17
2
8
3
13
0
1
0
1
7
3
1
11
42
7:45 AM
0
18
0
18
1
10
0
11
0
2
1
3
9
3
1
13
45
Total
9
71
2
82
14
39
9
62
0
5
2
7
32
17
7
56
207
Approach %
11.0
86.6
2.4
-
22.6
62.9
14.5
-
0.0
71.4
28.6
-
57.1
30.4
12.5
-
-
Total %
4.3
34.3
1.0
39.6
6.8
18.8
4.3
30.0
0.0
2.4
1.0
3.4
15.5
8.2
3.4
27.1
-
PHF
0.563
0.888
0.250
0.820
0.583
0.886
0.563
0.775
0.000
0.625
0.500
0.583
0.800
0.607
0.438
0.778
0.863
Lights
8
67
2
77
13
36
8
57
0
4
2
6
31
17
6
54
194
% Lights
88.9
94.4
100.0
93.9
92.9
92.3
88.9
91.9
-
80.0
100.0
85.7
96.9
100.0
85.7
96.4
93.7
Buses
1
1
0
2
0
2
1
3
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
2
8
% Buses
11.1
1.4
0.0
2.4
0.0
5.1
11.1
4.8
-
20.0
0.0
14.3
3.1
0.0
14.3
3.6
3.9
Trucks
0
3
0
3
1
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
% Trucks
0.0
4.2
0.0
3.7
7.1
2.6
0.0
3.2
-
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.4
Page 212 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
4th Ave [SB]
Out In Total
20 54 74
3 2 5
0 0 0
23 56 79
6 17 31
1 0 1
0 0 0
7 17 32
R T L
N 1 4
N o„ S Peak Hour Data Z A o o w ti o
w
04/03/2025 7:00 AM
Ending At
04/03/2025 8:00 AM
Lights u
a M o o r fL Buses
Z Trucks ♦I I I I-
h t 0
L T R
0 4 2
0 1 0
0 0 0
0 5 2
32 1 6 38
0 1 1
1 0 1
33 7 40
Out In Total
4th Ave [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:00 AM)
Count Name: 4th Ave & Lilac St
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 4
Page 213 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: 4th Ave & Lilac St
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 5
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (4.00 PM)
Start Time
Left
Lilac St
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Lilac St
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
4:00 PM
4
13
1
18
1
34
7
42
2
7
12
21
3
0
1
4
85
4:15 PM
3
28
0
31
0
26
3
29
0
3
2
5
5
3
2
10
75
4:30 PM
3
17
1
21
1
32
8
41
0
4
0
4
2
2
6
10
76
4:45 PM
5
16
0
21
1
28
3
32
0
5
2
7
4
4
1
9
69
Total
15
74
2
91
3
120
21
144
2
19
16
37
14
9
10
33
305
Approach %
16.5
81.3
2.2
-
2.1
83.3
14.6
-
5.4
51.4
43.2
-
42.4
27.3
30.3
-
-
Total %
4.9
24.3
0.7
29.8
1.0
39.3
6.9
47.2
0.7
6.2
5.2
12.1
4.6
3.0
3.3
10.8
-
PHF
0.750
0.661
0.500
0.734
0.750
0.882
0.656
0.857
0.250
0.679
0.333
0.440
0.700
0.563
0.417
0.825
0.897
Lights
15
74
2
91
3
118
21
142
2
19
16
37
14
9
10
33
303
Lights
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
98.3
100.0
98.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.3
Buses
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Buses
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Trucks
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
Trucks
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.7
0.0
1.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.7
Page 214 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
4th Ave [SB]
Out In Total
55 33 88
0 0 0
0 0 0
55 33 88
Z
14 0 0 14 L
N 1 4
_NONN Noo' JS Peak Hour Data tA;oo; Aoopo
m -
w
o o Ending
At 4:00 PM N
Ending At � ^' o c J— rP
m c 04/03/2025 5:00 PM
o a Lights o u
o N ro o o e� K Buses r r w o o w iv o
Z Trucks ♦ —
h t 0
L T R
2 19 16
0 0 0
0 0 0
2 19 16
14 1 37 51
0 0 0
0 0 0
14 37 51
Out In Total
4th Ave [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:00 PM)
Count Name: 4th Ave & Lilac St
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 6
Page 215 of 617
Kimley ,)) Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: 4th Ave & Main St/125th Ave
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 1
Turnina Movement Data
Start Time
Left
Thru
Main St
Eastbound
Right
App. Total
Left
Main St
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
12:00 AM
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
12:15AM
0
2
1
3
0
3
0
3
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
7
12:30 AM
0
2
0
2
0
5
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
12:45 AM
0
2
0
2
0
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
Hourly Total
0
7
1
8
0
10
0
10
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
20
1:00 AM
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
1:15AM
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1:30 AM
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1:45 AM
0
2
0
2
0
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
Hourly Total
0
3
0
3
0
6
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
2:00 AM
0
4
1
5
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
2:15AM
0
3
1
4
0
6
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
2:30 AM
0
3
1
4
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
2:45 AM
0
2
0
2
0
4
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
Hourly Total
0
12
3
15
0
12
0
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
27
3:00 AM
0
5
1
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
3:15AM
0
2
1
3
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
5
3:30 AM
0
9
2
11
0
6
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
19
3:45 AM
0
12
4
16
0
8
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
25
Hourly Total
0
28
8
36
0
15
0
15
1
0
0
1
0
2
1
3
55
4:00 AM
0
8
2
10
0
8
0
8
2
0
1
3
0
0
3
3
24
4:15 AM
0
23
3
26
0
11
0
11
0
0
1
1
2
1
0
3
41
4:30 AM
0
36
5
41
1
14
0
15
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
58
4:45 AM
1
37
12
50
2
11
0
13
0
0
3
3
0
1
1
2
68
Hourly Total
1
104
22
127
3
44
0
47
2
0
6
8
2
2
5
9
191
5:00 AM
0
26
7
33
1
22
0
23
1
0
0
1
1
4
2
7
64
5:15 AM
0
46
9
55
6
39
0
45
2
0
2
4
0
4
1
5
109
5:30 AM
0
71
6
77
2
41
0
43
1
0
3
4
3
6
1
10
134
5:45 AM
0
72
16
88
5
40
0
45
1
0
1
2
1
3
1
5
140
Hourly Total
0
215
38
253
14
142
0
156
5
0
6
11
5
17
5
27
447
6:00 AM
0
68
7
75
2
47
0
49
4
1
4
9
0
1
3
4
137
6:15 AM
0
70
7
77
2
52
2
56
0
0
3
3
1
1
2
4
140
6:30 AM
1
109
8
118
4
62
1
67
0
1
1
2
2
4
1
7
194
6:45 AM
1 0
64
6
70
1 3
71
1
75
2
2
2
6
1 1
7
3
11
162
Hourly Total
1
311
28
340
11
232
4
247
6
4
10
20
4
13
9
26
633
7:00 AM
7
64
6
77
1
49
0
50
3
0
3
6
2
2
3
7
140
Page 216 of 617
7:15 AM
0
66
6
72
2
63
0
65
2
2
3
7
0
3
0
3
147
7:30 AM
2
53
0
55
4
50
1
55
4
1
2
7
1
1
4
6
123
7:45 AM
1
62
3
66
2
50
0
52
1
1
0
2
5
4
3
12
132
Hourly Total
10
245
15
270
9
212
1
222
10
4
8
22
8
10
10
28
542
8:00 AM
2
47
0
49
2
50
0
52
2
0
1
3
0
5
3
8
112
8:15 AM
1
59
2
62
1
61
1
63
0
0
1
1
0
0
2
2
128
8:30 AM
2
57
2
61
1
39
1
41
0
3
0
3
4
0
3
7
112
8:45 AM
0
56
2
58
1
37
1
39
1
0
1
2
0
0
1
1
100
Hourly Total
5
219
6
230
5
187
3
195
3
3
3
9
4
5
9
18
452
9:00 AM
1
40
3
44
2
38
1
41
2
0
0
2
0
2
2
4
91
9:15 AM
0
46
7
53
0
44
0
44
1
0
2
3
4
2
1
7
107
9:30 AM
3
58
2
63
1
43
4
48
0
0
4
4
0
2
1
3
118
9:45 AM
3
50
1
54
2
44
3
49
1
1
2
4
1
3
1
5
112
Hourly Total
7
194
13
214
5
169
8
182
4
1
8
13
5
9
5
19
428
10:00 AM
3
46
1
50
1
46
0
47
0
1
2
3
0
2
2
4
104
10:15 AM
2
55
0
57
3
41
1
45
0
1
2
3
1
0
0
1
106
10:30 AM
1
46
1
48
0
51
1
52
2
1
2
5
0
0
4
4
109
10:45 AM
1
65
2
68
5
53
0
58
3
5
2
10
1
1
2
4
140
Hourly Total
7
212
4
223
9
191
2
202
5
8
8
21
2
3
8
13
459
11:00 AM
1
56
1
58
1
65
1
67
3
0
2
5
0
2
2
4
134
11:15 AM
2
44
0
46
0
69
1
70
0
0
2
2
2
0
5
7
125
11:30 AM
0
51
0
51
3
51
2
56
0
2
0
2
0
1
1
2
111
11:45 AM
4
56
0
60
3
59
2
64
2
4
0
6
2
2
2
6
136
Hourly Total
7
207
1
215
7
244
6
257
5
6
4
15
4
5
10
19
506
12:00 PM
1
50
0
51
0
52
0
52
8
0
1
9
0
3
0
3
115
12:15 PM
4
53
1
58
2
37
1
40
4
0
1
5
0
1
3
4
107
12:30 PM
0
65
1
66
0
49
1
50
2
2
4
8
1
1
0
2
126
12:45 PM
2
56
1
59
2
63
2
67
4
0
0
4
1
1
1
3
133
Hourly Total
7
224
3
234
4
201
4
209
18
2
6
26
2
6
4
12
481
1:00 PM
0
48
2
50
1
59
1
61
1
2
3
6
1
1
1
3
120
1:15 PM
1
42
7
50
1
52
0
53
1
1
1
3
0
1
0
1
107
1:30 PM
2
67
5
74
1
66
1
68
3
2
3
8
0
1
2
3
153
1:45 PM
1
74
3
78
2
63
1
66
11
3
2
16
3
2
0
5
165
Hourly Total
4
231
17
252
5
240
3
248
16
8
9
33
4
5
3
12
545
2:00 PM
3
56
2
61
1
72
0
73
11
2
6
19
1
2
5
8
161
2:15 PM
4
63
2
69
1
88
0
89
4
4
2
10
2
1
0
3
171
2:30 PM
9
65
2
76
3
96
0
99
5
0
3
8
0
3
3
6
189
2:45 PM
2
70
5
77
1
112
2
115
5
1
12
18
1
1
1
3
213
Hourly Total
18
254
11
283
6
368
2
376
25
7
23
55
4
7
9
20
734
3:00 PM
5
70
3
78
2
85
0
87
8
1
6
15
1
1
5
7
187
3:15 PM
3
91
4
98
2
126
1
129
5
4
3
12
0
0
2
2
241
3:30 PM
4
121
2
127
2
113
2
117
11
3
8
22
2
2
3
7
273
3:45 PM
6
81
3
90
1
104
2
107
1
3
1
5
0
0
2
2
204
Hourly Total
18
363
12
393
7
428
5
440
25
11
18
54
3
3
12
18
905
4:00 PM
8
91
0
99
3
114
1
118
6
6
2
14
0
0
2
2
233
4:15 PM
7
87
0
94
1
102
2
105
3
1
2
6
0
1
5
6
211
4:30 PM
2
101
0
103
4
114
1
119
4
2
4
10
0
0
5
5
237
4:45 PM
4
71
2
77
2
88
1
91
3
6
2
11
1
3
1
5
184
Hourly Total
21
350
2
373
10
418
5
433
16
15
10
41
1
4
13
18
865
5:00 PM
4
44
3
51
0
62
1
63
2
1
0
3
1
1
1
3
120
5:15 PM
3
58
1
62
2
69
1
72
2
1
0
3
0
1
2
3
140
5:30 PM
4
61
0
65
1
61
1
63
3
1
0
4
0
1
1
2
134
Page 217 of 617
5:45 PM
1
54
3
58
2
49
1
52
1
1
1
3
0
3
1
4
117
Hourly Total
12
217
7
236
5
241
4
250
8
4
1
13
1
6
5
12
511
6:00 PM
3
45
1
49
1
58
1
60
4
1
2
7
1
0
4
5
121
6:15 PM
1
51
2
54
1
57
1
59
1
3
1
5
0
1
1
2
120
6:30 PM
3
53
0
56
0
47
2
49
3
2
2
7
0
1
3
4
116
6:45 PM
4
57
3
64
0
47
2
49
4
1
1
6
1
0
1
2
121
Hourly Total
11
206
6
223
2
209
6
217
12
7
6
25
2
2
9
13
478
7:00 PM
1
46
1
48
0
36
0
36
0
1
0
1
0
2
2
4
89
7:15 PM
1
32
1
34
0
55
0
55
1
3
0
4
1
1
2
4
97
7:30 PM
3
32
0
35
1
35
1
37
0
1
0
1
1
1
0
2
75
7:45 PM
2
30
0
32
0
21
2
23
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
2
58
Hourly Total
7
140
2
149
1
147
3
151
1
6
0
7
3
4
5
12
319
8:00 PM
1
33
2
36
0
25
0
25
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
62
8:15 PM
2
29
1
32
0
32
0
32
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
65
8:30 PM
1
16
1
18
0
21
0
21
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
39
8:45 PM
0
24
0
24
0
14
0
14
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
39
Hourly Total
4
102
4
110
0
92
0
92
1
0
0
1
0
0
2
2
205
9:00 PM
1
10
1
12
0
20
0
20
0
0
1
1
0
1
1
2
35
9:15 PM
0
11
2
13
1
18
0
19
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
33
9:30 PM
0
6
2
8
0
14
1
15
5
0
4
9
0
1
0
1
33
9:45 PM
0
7
0
7
0
12
0
12
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
21
Hourly Total
1
34
5
40
1
64
1
66
8
0
5
13
0
2
1
3
122
10:00 PM
1
6
1
8
0
8
0
8
4
0
7
11
0
0
0
0
27
10:15PM
0
9
0
9
0
5
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
14
10:30 PM
0
6
0
6
1
4
0
5
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
13
10:45 PM
0
6
0
6
0
11
0
11
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
18
Hourly Total
1
27
1
29
1
28
0
29
5
1
7
13
0
1
0
1
72
11:00 PM
0
9
1
10
0
8
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
18
11:15PM
0
6
0
6
0
5
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
11:30 PM
0
7
0
7
0
5
0
5
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
13
11:45 PM
0
2
0
2
0
3
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
Hourly Total
0
24
1
25
0
21
0
21
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
47
Grand Total
142
3929
210
4281
105
3921
57
4083
179
87
138
404
54
106
125
285
9053
Approach %
3.3
91.8
4.9
-
2.6
96.0
1.4
-
44.3
21.5
34.2
-
18.9
37.2
43.9
-
-
Total %
1.6
43.4
2.3
47.3
1.2
43.3
0.6
45.1
2.0
1.0
1.5
4.5
0.6
1.2
1.4
3.1
-
Lights
134
3828
202
4164
97
3788
48
3933
175
85
131
391
48
100
120
268
8756
Lights
94.4
97.4
96.2
97.3
92.4
96.6
84.2
96.3
97.8
97.7
94.9
96.8
88.9
94.3
96.0
94.0
96.7
Buses
1
11
3
15
1
12
1
14
0
0
0
0
4
1
1
6
35
Buses
0.7
0.3
1.4
0.4
1.0
0.3
1.8
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.4
0.9
0.8
2.1
0.4
Trucks
7
90
5
102
7
121
8
136
4
2
7
13
2
5
4
11
262
Trucks
4.9
2.3
2.4
2.4
6.7
3.1
14.0
3.3
2.2
2.3
5.1
3.2
3.7
4.7
3.2
3.9
2.9
Page 218 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
m J S
M
w
W
O
v — a
4th Ave [SB]
Out In Total
267 268 535
2 6 8
17 11 28
286 285 571
120 100 48
1 1 4
4 5 2
125 106 54
R T L
N 1 4
04/03/2025 12:00 AM
Ending At
04/04/2025 12:00 AM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
h t 0
L T R
175 85 131
0 0 0
4 2 7
179 87 138
399 1 391 790
5 0 5
17 13 30
421 404 825
Out In Total
4th Ave [NB]
Turning Movement Data Plot
Count Name: 4th Ave & Main St/125th Ave
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 4
Page 219 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (6.30 AM)
Count Name: 4th Ave & Main St/125th Ave
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 5
Start Time
Left
Main St
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Main St
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
6:30 AM
1
109
8
118
4
62
1
67
0
1
1
2
2
4
1
7
194
6:45 AM
0
64
6
70
3
71
1
75
2
2
2
6
1
7
3
11
162
7:00 AM
7
64
6
77
1
49
0
50
3
0
3
6
2
2
3
7
140
7:15 AM
0
66
6
72
2
63
0
65
2
2
3
7
0
3
0
3
147
Total
8
303
26
337
10
245
2
257
7
5
9
21
5
16
7
28
643
Approach %
2.4
89.9
7.7
-
3.9
95.3
0.8
-
33.3
23.8
42.9
-
17.9
57.1
25.0
-
-
Total %
1.2
47.1
4.0
52.4
1.6
38.1
0.3
40.0
1.1
0.8
1.4
3.3
0.8
2.5
1.1
4.4
-
PHF
0.286
0.695
0.813
0.714
0.625
0.863
0.500
0.857
0.583
0.625
0.750
0.750
0.625
0.571
0.583
0.636
0.829
Lights
7
296
26
329
10
229
2
241
7
4
8
19
5
15
7
27
616
% Lights
87.5
97.7
100.0
97.6
100.0
93.5
100.0
93.8
100.0
80.0
88.9
90.5
100.0
93.8
100.0
96.4
95.8
Buses
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
% Buses
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.0
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
Trucks
1
7
0
8
0
15
0
15
0
1
1
2
0
1
0
1
26
% Trucks
12.5
2.3
0.0
2.4
0.0
6.1
0.0
5.8
0.0
20.0
11.1
9.5
0.0
6.3
0.0
3.6
4.0
Page 220 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
4th Ave [SB]
Out In Total
13 27 40
0 0 0
2 1 3
15 28 43
7 tl
5
0 0
007 5R L
N 1 4
� J S Peak Hour Data
m
w
`- 6:30 AM Ending
At r�
Ending At c u' c J— �O
- 04/03/2025 7:30 AM
N m Lights
N N O O N t= Buses
Z Trucks —
h t 0
L T R
7 4 8
0 0 0
0 1
7 5 9
51 1 19 70
0 0 0
1 2 3
52 21 73
Out In Total
4th Ave [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (6:30 AM)
Count Name: 4th Ave & Main St/125th Ave
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 6
Page 221 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (3.15 PM)
Count Name: 4th Ave & Main St/125th Ave
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 7
Start Time
Left
Main St
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Main St
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
3:15 PM
3
91
4
98
2
126
1
129
5
4
3
12
0
0
2
2
241
3:30 PM
4
121
2
127
2
113
2
117
11
3
8
22
2
2
3
7
273
3:45 PM
6
81
3
90
1
104
2
107
1
3
1
5
0
0
2
2
204
4:00 PM
8
91
0
99
3
114
1
118
6
6
2
14
0
0
2
2
233
Total
21
384
9
414
8
457
6
471
23
16
14
53
2
2
9
13
951
Approach %
5.1
92.8
2.2
-
1.7
97.0
1.3
-
43.4
30.2
26.4
-
15.4
15.4
69.2
-
-
Total %
2.2
40.4
0.9
43.5
0.8
48.1
0.6
49.5
2.4
1.7
1.5
5.6
0.2
0.2
0.9
1.4
-
PHF
0.656
0.793
0.563
0.815
0.667
0.907
0.750
0.913
0.523
0.667
0.438
0.602
0.250
0.250
0.750
0.464
0.871
Lights
21
380
9
410
8
448
6
462
23
16
14
53
2
2
8
12
937
Lights
100.0
99.0
100.0
99.0
100.0
98.0
100.0
98.1
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
88.9
92.3
98.5
Buses
0
3
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
Buses
0.0
0.8
0.0
0.7
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.4
Trucks
0
1
0
1
0
8
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
10
Trucks
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.2
0.0
1.8
0.0
1.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
11.1
7.7
1.1
Page 222 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
4th Ave [SB]
Out In Total
43 12 55
0 0 0
0 1 1
43 13 56
6 2 2
0 0 0
1 0 0
9 2 2
R T L
N 1 4
��o� Noon JS Peak Hour Data FZA�oom o,w�o
w
3:15 PM Ending
At u c '
Ending At — �
- 04/03/2025 4:15 PM
a, m Lights �, o
O� a rn v m o o n K Buses r r m o o w co a s
Z Trucks ♦ —
h t 0
L T R
23 16 14
0 0 0
0 0 0
23 16 14
19 1 53 72
0 0 0
0 0 0
19 53 72
Out In Total
4th Ave [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (3:15 PM)
Count Name: 4th Ave & Main St/125th Ave
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 8
Page 223 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: 4th Ave & Pine St
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 1
Turnina Movement Data
Start Time
Left
Pine St
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Pine St
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
7:00 AM
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
2
1
2
1
4
0
2
0
2
9
7:15AM
0
0
2
2
0
1
1
2
4
0
1
5
0
1
0
1
10
7:30 AM
0
0
2
2
1
1
0
2
0
0
2
2
0
1
0
1
7
7:45 AM
0
6
5
11
0
0
1
1
0
0
2
2
0
1
0
1
15
Hourly Total
0
6
10
16
3
2
2
7
5
2
6
13
0
5
0
5
41
8:00 AM
0
1
4
5
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
2
0
2
1
3
11
8:15AM
0
0
2
2
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
5
8:30 AM
0
1
1
2
1
2
1
4
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
7
8:45 AM
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
3
0
0
0
0
3
Hourly Total
0
2
7
9
2
3
1
6
2
3
3
8
0
2
1
3
26
... BREAK ...
4:00 PM
0
2
0
2
2
2
2
6
2
3
5
10
0
0
1
1
19
4:15PM
0
1
3
4
1
1
0
2
3
1
5
9
0
0
1
1
16
4:30 PM
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
3
4:45 PM
0
1
0
1
2
0
0
2
4
0
0
4
1
2
0
3
10
Hourly Total
0
4
4
8
6
3
2
11
9
4
11
24
1
2
2
5
48
5:00 PM
0
1
0
1
1
2
1
4
0
1
3
4
1
1
0
2
11
5:15PM
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
3
1
2
3
6
0
0
0
0
9
5:30 PM
0
1
0
1
2
0
0
2
2
2
1
5
1
0
0
1
9
5:45 PM
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
3
0
1
2
3
0
0
0
0
6
Hourly Total
0
2
0
2
8
2
2
12
3
6
9
18
2
1
0
3
35
Grand Total
0
14
21
35
19
10
7
36
19
15
29
63
3
10
3
16
150
Approach %
0.0
40.0
60.0
-
52.8
27.8
19.4
-
30.2
23.8
46.0
-
18.8
62.5
18.8
-
-
Total %
0.0
9.3
14.0
23.3
12.7
6.7
4.7
24.0
12.7
10.0
19.3
42.0
2.0
6.7
2.0
10.7
-
Lights
0
12
16
28
19
7
7
33
17
15
27
59
3
10
1
14
134
Lights
-
85.7
76.2
80.0
100.0
70.0
100.0
91.7
89.5
100.0
93.1
93.7
100.0
100.0
33.3
87.5
89.3
Buses
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
Buses
-
7.1
0.0
2.9
0.0
10.0
0.0
2.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.3
Trucks
0
1
5
6
1 0
2
0
2
2
0
2
4
1 0
0
2
2
1 14
Trucks
7.1
23.8
17.1
1 0.0
20.0
0.0
5.6
10.5
0.0
6.9
6.3
1 0.0
0.0
66.7
12.5
1 9.3
Page 224 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
4th Ave [SB]
Out In Total
22 14 36
0 0 0
0 2 2
22 16 38
W3 0 0 3 L
N 1 4
04/03/2025 7:00 AM
Ending At
04/03/2025 6:00 PM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
h t 0
L T R
17 15 27
0 0 0
2 0 2
19 15 29
45 1 59 104
0 0 0
5 4 9
50 63 113
Out In Total
4th Ave [NB]
N
m
i r 0 0 0 0 N O N W o
Turning Movement Data Plot
Count Name: 4th Ave & Pine St
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 2
Page 225 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: 4th Ave & Pine St
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 3
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (7.15 AM)
Start Time
Left
Pine St
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Pine St
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
7:15AM
0
0
2
2
0
1
1
2
4
0
1
5
0
1
0
1
10
7:30 AM
0
0
2
2
1
1
0
2
0
0
2
2
0
1
0
1
7
7:45 AM
0
6
5
11
0
0
1
1
0
0
2
2
0
1
0
1
15
8:00 AM
0
1
4
5
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
2
0
2
1
3
11
Total
0
7
13
20
1
3
2
6
5
0
6
11
0
5
1
6
43
Approach %
0.0
35.0
65.0
-
16.7
50.0
33.3
-
45.5
0.0
54.5
-
0.0
83.3
16.7
-
-
Total %
0.0
16.3
30.2
46.5
2.3
7.0
4.7
14.0
11.6
0.0
14.0
25.6
0.0
11.6
2.3
14.0
-
PHF
0.000
0.292
0.650
0.455
0.250
0.750
0.500
0.750
0.313
0.000
0.750
0.550
0.000
0.625
0.250
0.500
0.717
Lights
0
5
10
15
1
1
2
4
3
0
6
9
0
5
0
5
33
% Lights
-
71.4
76.9
75.0
100.0
33.3
100.0
66.7
60.0
-
100.0
81.8
-
100.0
0.0
83.3
76.7
Buses
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
% Buses
-
14.3
0.0
5.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
16.7
0.0
-
0.0
0.0
-
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.7
Trucks
0
1
3
4
0
1
0
1
2
0
0
2
0
0
1
1
8
% Trucks
-
14.3
23.1
20.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
16.7
40.0
-
0.0
18.2
-
0.0
100.0
16.7
18.6
Page 226 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
4th Ave [SB]
Out In Total
2 5 7
0 0 0
0 1 1
2 6 8
0 0 5
0 0 0
1 0 0
1 5 0
R T tL
N 1 4
omry�� o00o JS Peak Hour Data ZAwooN w
w
7:15 AM
Ending
At
Ending At
04/03/2025 8:15 AM
a m
Lights
Z0 v a rn o o M K Buses Trucks ♦ —
h t 0
L T R
3 0 6
0 0 0
2 0 0
5 0 6
16 1 9 25
0 0 0
3 2 5
19 11 30
Out In Total
4th Ave [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:15 AM)
Count Name: 4th Ave & Pine St
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 4
Page 227 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: 4th Ave & Pine St
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 5
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (4.00 PM)
Start Time
Left
Pine St
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Pine St
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
4:00 PM
0
2
0
2
2
2
2
6
2
3
5
10
0
0
1
1
19
4:15PM
0
1
3
4
1
1
0
2
3
1
5
9
0
0
1
1
16
4:30 PM
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
3
4:45 PM
0
1
0
1
2
0
0
2
4
0
0
4
1
2
0
3
10
Total
0
4
4
8
6
3
2
11
9
4
11
24
1
2
2
5
48
Approach %
0.0
50.0
50.0
-
54.5
27.3
18.2
-
37.5
16.7
45.8
-
20.0
40.0
40.0
-
-
Total %
0.0
8.3
8.3
16.7
12.5
6.3
4.2
22.9
18.8
8.3
22.9
50.0
2.1
4.2
4.2
10.4
-
PHF
0.000
0.500
0.333
0.500
0.750
0.375
0.250
0.458
0.563
0.333
0.550
0.600
0.250
0.250
0.500
0.417
0.632
Lights
0
4
3
7
6
3
2
11
9
4
11
24
1
2
1
4
46
Lights
-
100.0
75.0
87.5
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
50.0
80.0
95.8
Buses
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Buses
-
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Trucks
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
Trucks
-
0.0
25.0
12.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
20.0
4.2
Page 228 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
N 1 4
...N� 0000 JS Peak Hour Data ZANooN goo�o
w
4:00 PM
Ending
At
Ending At J— �
04/03/2025 5:00 PM
a m
Lights
o a Buses r Z r m o o rn o o Trucks ♦ —
h t 0
L T R
9 4 11
0 0 0
0 0 0
9 4 11
11 1 24 35
0 0 0
1 0 1
12 24 36
Out In Total
4th Ave [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:00 PM)
Count Name: 4th Ave & Pine St
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 6
Page 229 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Lake Dr & Main St
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 1
Turnina Movement Data
Start Time
Left
Main St
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Main St
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Lake or
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Lake or
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
7:00 AM
30
32
11
73
42
25
3
70
5
22
19
46
4
60
19
83
272
7:15 AM
26
58
12
96
67
31
4
102
6
18
20
44
3
63
20
86
328
7:30 AM
31
63
18
112
77
45
2
124
6
23
21
50
3
56
25
84
370
7:45 AM
31
43
21
95
54
36
4
94
17
34
31
82
3
45
30
78
349
Hourly Total
118
196
62
376
240
137
13
390
34
97
91
222
13
224
94
331
1319
8:00 AM
21
34
22
77
38
30
5
73
16
25
38
79
2
34
16
52
281
8:15 AM
21
34
20
75
39
33
4
76
8
22
18
48
6
41
26
73
272
8:30 AM
20
33
10
63
38
26
4
68
10
17
29
56
7
30
22
59
246
8:45 AM
22
32
18
72
43
37
9
89
13
23
24
60
4
26
29
59
280
Hourly Total
84
133
70
287
158
126
22
306
47
87
109
243
19
131
93
243
1079
... BREAK ...
4:00 PM
25
46
10
81
49
56
6
111
23
74
55
152
7
25
34
66
410
4:15 PM
44
47
20
111
50
80
8
138
23
91
52
166
9
40
37
86
501
4:30 PM
52
52
20
124
52
67
10
129
34
72
51
157
8
30
25
63
473
4:45 PM
31
39
28
98
46
59
9
114
31
87
64
182
5
45
30
80
474
Hourly Total
152
184
78
414
197
262
33
492
111
324
222
657
29
140
126
295
1858
5:00 PM
31
45
17
93
46
61
9
116
43
62
59
164
4
50
39
93
466
5:15 PM
41
41
18
100
54
55
7
116
22
66
71
159
6
34
34
74
449
5:30 PM
36
45
21
102
29
64
4
97
32
63
42
137
2
37
27
66
402
5:45 PM
21
34
20
75
34
43
3
80
23
42
49
114
3
22
24
49
318
Hourly Total
129
165
76
370
163
223
23
409
120
233
221
574
15
143
124
282
1635
Grand Total
483
678
286
1447
758
748
91
1597
312
741
643
1696
76
638
437
1151
5891
Approach %
33.4
46.9
19.8
-
47.5
46.8
5.7
-
18.4
43.7
37.9
-
6.6
55.4
38.0
-
-
Total %
8.2
11.5
4.9
24.6
12.9
12.7
1.5
27.1
5.3
12.6
10.9
28.8
1.3
10.8
7.4
19.5
-
Lights
472
661
272
1405
742
726
81
1549
308
700
620
1628
64
602
423
1089
5671
Lights
97.7
97.5
95.1
97.1
97.9
97.1
89.0
97.0
98.7
94.5
96.4
96.0
84.2
94.4
96.8
94.6
96.3
Buses
6
1
5
12
2
8
0
10
1
3
6
10
1
1
3
5
1 37
Buses
1.2
0.1
1.7
0.8
0.3
1.1
0.0
0.6
0.3
0.4
0.9
0.6
1.3
0.2
0.7
0.4
1 0.6
Trucks
5
16
9
30
14
14
10
38
3
38
17
58
11
35
11
57
183
Trucks
1.0
2.4
3.1
2.1
1.8
1.9
11.0
2.4
1.0
5.1
2.6
3.4
14.5
5.5
2.5
5.0
3.1
Page 230 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
w
w yy
V
� N
0 V
Lake Dr[SB]
Out In Total
1253 1089 2342
9 5 14
53 57 110
1315 1151 2466
423 602 64
3 1 1
11 35 11
437 638 76
R T L
N 1 4
04/03/2025 7:00 AM
Ending At
04/03/2025 6:00 PM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
h t 0
L T R
308 700 620
1 3 6
3 38 17
312 741 643
1616 1 1628 3244
8 10 18
58 58 116
1682 1696 3378
Out In Total
Lake Dr [NB]
p m o o m V O
3
m
1 A 'p w N i0 A— rti
m
Turning Movement Data Plot
Count Name: Lake Dr & Main St
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 2
Page 231 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Lake Dr & Main St
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 3
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (7.15 AM)
Start Time
Left
Main St
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Main St
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Lake Dr
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Lake or
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
7:15 AM
26
58
12
96
67
31
4
102
6
18
20
44
3
63
20
86
328
7:30 AM
31
63
18
112
77
45
2
124
6
23
21
50
3
56
25
84
370
7:45 AM
31
43
21
95
54
36
4
94
17
34
31
82
3
45
30
78
349
8:00 AM
21
34
22
77
38
30
5
73
16
25
38
79
2
34
16
52
281
Total
109
198
73
380
236
142
15
393
45
100
110
255
11
198
91
300
1328
Approach %
28.7
52.1
19.2
-
60.1
36.1
3.8
-
17.6
39.2
43.1
-
3.7
66.0
30.3
-
-
Total %
8.2
14.9
5.5
28.6
17.8
10.7
1.1
29.6
3.4
7.5
8.3
19.2
0.8
14.9
6.9
22.6
-
PHF
0.879
0.786
0.830
0.848
0.766
0.789
0.750
0.792
0.662
0.735
0.724
0.777
0.917
0.786
0.758
0.872
0.897
Lights
107
193
68
368
230
134
13
377
44
93
100
237
10
182
85
277
1259
% Lights
98.2
97.5
93.2
96.8
97.5
94.4
86.7
95.9
97.8
93.0
90.9
92.9
90.9
91.9
93.4
92.3
94.8
Buses
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
2
2
4
0
0
1
1
7
% Buses
0.0
0.0
1.4
0.3
0.0
0.7
0.0
0.3
0.0
2.0
1.8
1.6
0.0
0.0
1.1
0.3
0.5
Trucks
2
5
4
11
6
7
2
15
1
5
8
14
1
16
5
22
62
% Trucks
1.8
2.5
5.5
2.9
2.5
4.9
13.3
3.8
2.2
5.0
7.3
5.5
9.1
8.1
5.5
7.3
4.7
Page 232 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Lake Dr[SB]
Out In Total
213 277 490
2 1 3
9 22 31
224 300 524
85 182 10
1 0 0
5 16 1
91 198 11
R T L
N 1 4
F�MN� ooNo JS Peak Hour Data ZAN ow !2
w
`- 04/03/2025 7:15 AM
Ending At c �' a -
- 04/03/2025 8:15 AM
,o Lights
O� m N M Buses r r� rn o o n� cO �"' o o
Z Trucks ♦ —
h t 0
L T R
44 93 100
0 2 2
1 5 8
45 100 110
480 1 237 717
1 4 5
26 14 40
507 255 762
Out In Total
Lake Dr [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:15 AM)
Count Name: Lake Dr & Main St
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 4
Page 233 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Lake Dr & Main St
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 5
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (4.15 PM)
Start Time
Left
Main St
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Main St
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Lake Dr
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Lake or
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
4:15 PM
44
47
20
111
50
80
8
138
23
91
52
166
9
40
37
86
501
4:30 PM
52
52
20
124
52
67
10
129
34
72
51
157
8
30
25
63
473
4:45 PM
31
39
28
98
46
59
9
114
31
87
64
182
5
45
30
80
474
5:00 PM
31
45
17
93
46
61
9
116
43
62
59
164
4
50
39
93
466
Total
158
183
85
426
194
267
36
497
131
312
226
669
26
165
131
322
1914
Approach %
37.1
43.0
20.0
-
39.0
53.7
7.2
-
19.6
46.6
33.8
-
8.1
51.2
40.7
-
-
Total %
8.3
9.6
4.4
22.3
10.1
13.9
1.9
26.0
6.8
16.3
11.8
35.0
1.4
8.6
6.8
16.8
-
PHF
0.760
0.880
0.759
0.859
0.933
0.834
0.900
0.900
0.762
0.857
0.883
0.919
0.722
0.825
0.840
0.866
0.955
Lights
156
181
84
421
188
264
31
483
130
293
219
642
25
160
125
310
1856
Lights
98.7
98.9
98.8
98.8
96.9
98.9
86.1
97.2
99.2
93.9
96.9
96.0
96.2
97.0
95.4
96.3
97.0
Buses
1
1
1
3
2
1
0
3
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
8
Buses
0.6
0.5
1.2
0.7
1.0
0.4
0.0
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.8
0.3
0.4
Trucks
1
1
0
2
4
2
5
11
1
19
6
26
1
5
5
11
50
Trucks
0.6
0.5
0.0
0.5
2.1
0.7
13.9
2.2
0.8
6.1
2.7
3.9
3.8
3.0
3.8
3.4
2.6
Page 234 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Lake Dr[SB]
Out In Total
480 310 790
1 1 2
25 11 36
506 322 828
125 160 25
1 0 0
5 5 1
131 165 26
R T L
N 1 4
Peak Hour Data t p; o w u m N UAN 0
W �.
m en 04103/20254:15 PM N N A a
Ending At m N c m m— m
c 04/03/2025 5:15 PM
� m
'5 rn rn Lights m
O N N amD Buses r- A A N N N si
Z Trucks
h t 0
L T R
130 293 219
0 0 1
1 19 6
131 312 226
432 1 642 1074
3 1 4
9 26 35
444 669 1113
Out In Total
Lake Dr [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:15 PM)
Count Name: Lake Dr & Main St
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 6
Page 235 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Lake Dr & Pine St
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 1
Turnina Movement Data
Start Time
Left
Pine St
Eastbound
Right
App. Total
Left
Lake Dr
Northbound
Thru
App. Total
Thru
Lake or
Southbound
Right
App. Total
Int. Total
7:00 AM
0
2
2
2
47
49
52
0
52
103
7:15 AM
0
0
0
1
45
46
63
0
63
109
7:30 AM
1
3
4
3
38
41
52
0
52
97
7:45 AM
3
4
7
1
39
40
58
0
58
105
Hourly Total
4
9
13
7
169
176
225
0
225
414
8:00 AM
1
4
5
0
63
63
45
0
45
113
8:15 AM
1
1
2
2
40
42
61
0
61
105
8:30 AM
1
2
3
3
43
46
35
0
35
84
8:45 AM
0
2
2
1
41
42
40
0
40
84
Houdy Total
3
9
12
6
187
193
181
0
181
386
... BREAK...
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4:00 PM
2
4
6
3
84
87
61
1
62
155
4:15 PM
1
5
6
3
84
87
64
1
65
158
4:30 PM
2
4
6
8
98
106
48
2
50
162
4:45 PM
1
4
5
3
62
65
36
1
37
107
Houdy Total
6
17
23
17
328
345
209
5
214
582
5:00 PM
3
3
6
3
47
50
38
1
39
95
5:15 PM
2
2
4
1
57
58
40
2
42
104
5:30 PM
0
3
3
3
55
58
52
2
54
115
5:45 PM
1
1
2
1
55
56
40
1
41
99
Hourly Total
6
9
15
8
214
222
170
6
176
413
Grand Total
19
44
63
38
898
936
785
11
796
1795
Approach %
30.2
69.8
-
4.1
95.9
-
98.6
1.4
-
-
Total %
1.1
2.5
3.5
2.1
50.0
52.1
43.7
0.6
44.3
-
Lights
19
39
58
32
846
878
735
11
746
1682
Lights
100.0
88.6
92.1
84.2
94.2
93.8
93.6
100.0
93.7
93.7
Buses
0
1
1
1
10
11
3
0
3
15
Buses
0.0
2.3
1.6
2.6
1.1
1.2
0.4
0.0
0.4
0.8
Trucks
0
4
4
1 5
42
47
47
0
47
1 98
Trucks
0.0
9.1
6.3
1 13.2
4.7
5.0
6.0
0.0
5.9
1 5.5
Page 236 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
N
m F J
w
in - v
0 a v
Lake Dr[SB]
Out In Total
865 746 1611
10 3 13
42 47 89
917 796 1713
04/03/2025 7:00 AM
Ending At
04/03/2025 6:00 PM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
Yam■
774 1 878 1652
4 11 15
51 47 98
829 936 1765
Out In Total
Lake Dr [NB]
Turning Movement Data Plot
Count Name: Lake Dr & Pine St
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 2
Page 237 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Lake Dr & Pine St
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 3
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (7.15 AM)
Start Time
Left
Pine St
Eastbound
Right
App. Total
Left
Lake Dr
Northbound
Thru
App. Total
Thru
Lake or
Southbound
Right
App. Total
Int. Total
7:15 AM
0
0
0
1
45
46
63
0
63
109
7:30 AM
1
3
4
3
38
41
52
0
52
97
7:45 AM
3
4
7
1
39
40
58
0
58
105
8:00 AM
1
4
5
0
63
63
45
0
45
113
Total
5
11
16
5
185
190
218
0
218
424
Approach %
31.3
68.8
-
2.6
97.4
-
100.0
0.0
-
-
Total %
1.2
2.6
3.8
1.2
43.6
44.8
51.4
0.0
51.4
-
PHF
0.417
0.688
0.571
0.417
0.734
0.754
0.865
0.000
0.865
0.938
Lights
5
9
14
2
161
163
196
0
196
373
Lights
100.0
81.8
87.5
40.0
87.0
85.8
89.9
-
89.9
88.0
Buses
0
1
1
1
9
10
3
0
3
14
Buses
0.0
9.1
6.3
20.0
4.9
5.3
1.4
-
1.4
3.3
Trucks
0
1
1
2
15
17
19
0
19
37
Trucks
0.0
9.1
6.3
40.0
8.1
8.9
8.7
-
8.7
8.7
Page 238 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Lake Dr[SB]
Out In Total
166 196 362
9 3 12
15 19 34
190 218 408
0 196
0 3
0 19
0 218
R T
N 1
Peak Hour Data
m o u> y
w
7:15 AM Ending
At _
Ending At E;
°1 _ 04/03/2025 8:15 AM 1.
a
o m
' Lights
0"� '^ Buses o 0 o o o ,�
Trucks —
205 1 163 368
4 10 14
20 17 37
229 190 419
Out In Total
Lake Dr [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:15 AM)
Count Name: Lake Dr & Pine St
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 4
Page 239 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Lake Dr & Pine St
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 5
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (4.00 PM)
Start Time
Left
Pine St
Eastbound
Right
App. Total
Left
Lake Dr
Northbound
Thru
App. Total
Thru
Lake or
Southbound
Right
App. Total
Int. Total
4:00 PM
2
4
6
3
84
87
61
1
62
155
4:15 PM
1
5
6
3
84
87
64
1
65
158
4:30 PM
2
4
6
8
98
106
48
2
50
162
4:45 PM
1
4
5
3
62
65
36
1
37
107
Total
6
17
23
17
328
345
209
5
214
582
Approach %
26.1
73.9
-
4.9
95.1
-
97.7
2.3
-
-
Total %
1.0
2.9
4.0
2.9
56.4
59.3
35.9
0.9
36.8
-
PHF
0.750
0.850
0.958
0.531
0.837
0.814
0.816
0.625
0.823
0.898
Lights
6
17
23
16
319
335
206
5
211
569
Lights
100.0
100.0
100.0
94.1
97.3
97.1
98.6
100.0
98.6
97.8
Buses
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Buses
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Trucks
0
0
0
1
9
10
3
0
3
13
Trucks
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.9
2.7
2.9
1.4
0.0
1.4
2.2
Page 240 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Lake Dr[SB]
Out In Total
325 211 536
0 0 0
9 3 12
334 214 548
5 206
0 0
0 3
5 209
R T
N 1
Peak Hour Data
u
4:00 P Ending
At M _
Ending At E;
°1 04/03/2025 5:00 PM
a Z
Lights �
0' o N Buses o 0 0 0 m
Trucks L I—
h T
L T
16 319
0 0
1 9
17 328
223 335 558
0 0 0
3 10 13
226 345 571
Out In Total
Lake Dr [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:00 PM)
Count Name: Lake Dr & Pine St
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 6
Page 241 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Lilac St & 4th Ave
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 1
Turnina Movement Data
Start Time
Left
Lilac St
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Lilac St
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th St
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th St
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
6:00 AM
2
19
2
23
13
13
0
26
2
5
2
9
9
5
4
18
76
6:15 AM
3
20
1
24
16
8
2
26
0
1
4
5
9
8
1
18
73
6:30 AM
0
33
1
34
9
10
0
19
2
1
2
5
9
12
4
25
83
6:45 AM
3
21
2
26
11
14
4
29
0
1
2
3
9
9
0
18
76
Hourly Total
8
93
6
107
49
45
6
100
4
8
10
22
36
34
9
79
308
BREAK ..
3:00 PM
2
9
0
11
3
26
6
35
0
10
9
19
3
0
2
5
70
3:15 PM
2
22
0
24
2
31
14
47
5
7
10
22
5
2
1
8
101
3:30 PM
5
17
1
23
2
25
11
38
3
11
4
18
5
0
2
7
86
3:45 PM
0
16
0
16
3
32
7
42
1
5
1
7
3
0
2
5
70
Hourly Total
9
64
1
74
10
114
38
162
9
33
24
66
16
2
7
25
327
Grand Total
17
157
7
181
59
159
44
262
13
41
34
88
52
36
16
104
635
Approach %
9.4
86.7
3.9
-
22.5
60.7
16.8
14.8
46.6
38.6
-
50.0
34.6
15.4
-
-
Total %
2.7
24.7
1.1
28.5
9.3
25.0
6.9
41.3
2.0
6.5
5.4
13.9
8.2
5.7
2.5
16.4
-
Lights
16
156
7
179
55
157
44
256
12
40
31
83
52
35
15
102
620
Lights
94.1
99.4
100.0
98.9
93.2
98.7
100.0
97.7
92.3
97.6
91.2
94.3
100.0
97.2
93.8
98.1
97.6
Buses
1
1
0
2
1
2
0
3
1
0
0
1
0
1
1
2
8
Buses
5.9
0.6
0.0
1.1
1.7
1.3
0.0
1.1
7.7
0.0
0.0
1.1
0.0
2.8
6.3
1.9
1.3
Trucks
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
3
0
1
3
4
0
0
0
0
7
Trucks
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.1
0.0
0.0
1.1
0.0
2.4
8.8
4.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.1
Page 242 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
om o A cO o f
H
m
w
U
m
J
0�2 a o m r o o r [r
4th St[SBI
Out In Total
100 102 202
1 2 3
1 0 1
102 104 206
15 35 52
1 1 0
0 0 0
16 36 52
R T L
N 1 4
04/03/2025 6:00 AM
Ending At
04/03/2025 4:00 PM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
h t 0
L T R
12 40 31
1 0 0
0 1 3
13 41 34
97 1 83 180
2 1 3
3 4 7
102 88 190
Out In Total
4th St [NB]
p p o o p w W 0
r
m
r � y
Turning Movement Data Plot
Count Name: Lilac St & 4th Ave
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 2
Page 243 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Lilac St & 4th Ave
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 3
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (6.00 AM)
Start Time
Left
Lilac St
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Lilac St
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th St
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th St
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
6:00 AM
2
19
2
23
13
13
0
26
2
5
2
9
9
5
4
18
76
6:15 AM
3
20
1
24
16
8
2
26
0
1
4
5
9
8
1
18
73
6:30 AM
0
33
1
34
9
10
0
19
2
1
2
5
9
12
4
25
83
6:45 AM
3
21
2
26
11
14
4
29
0
1
2
3
9
9
0
18
76
Total
8
93
6
107
49
45
6
100
4
8
10
22
36
34
9
79
308
Approach %
7.5
86.9
5.6
-
49.0
45.0
6.0
-
18.2
36.4
45.5
-
45.6
43.0
11.4
-
-
Total %
2.6
30.2
1.9
34.7
15.9
14.6
1.9
32.5
1.3
2.6
3.2
7.1
11.7
11.0
2.9
25.6
-
PHF
0.667
0.705
0.750
0.787
0.766
0.804
0.375
0.862
0.500
0.400
0.625
0.611
1.000
0.708
0.563
0.790
0.928
Lights
7
92
6
105
48
44
6
98
3
8
7
18
36
33
9
78
299
% Lights
87.5
98.9
100.0
98.1
98.0
97.8
100.0
98.0
75.0
100.0
70.0
81.8
100.0
97.1
100.0
98.7
97.1
Buses
1
1
0
2
1
1
0
2
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
6
% Buses
12.5
1.1
0.0
1.9
2.0
2.2
0.0
2.0
25.0
0.0
0.0
4.5
0.0
2.9
0.0
1.3
1.9
Trucks
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
0
3
% Trucks
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
30.0
13.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
Page 244 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
4th St [SB]
Out In Total
21 78 99
1 1 2
0 0 0
22 79 101
9t34
36
0 0
0 0
936R L
N 1 4
or o� JS Peak Hour Data0
m -
w
04/03/2025 6:00 AM
Ending At A o a J— m
m c 04/03/2025 7:00 AM
Lights u
N w o co 0 0 �o K Z Buses r r o w w w Trucks ♦ —
h t 0
L T R
3 8 7
1 0 0
0 0 3
4 8 10
87 1 18 105
2 1 3
0 3 3
89 22 111
Out In Total
4th St [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (6:00 AM)
Count Name: Lilac St & 4th Ave
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 4
Page 245 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Lilac St & 4th Ave
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 5
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (3.00 PM)
Start Time
Left
Lilac St
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Lilac St
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th St
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th St
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
3:00 PM
2
9
0
11
3
26
6
35
0
10
9
19
3
0
2
5
70
3:15 PM
2
22
0
24
2
31
14
47
5
7
10
22
5
2
1
8
101
3:30 PM
5
17
1
23
2
25
11
38
3
11
4
18
5
0
2
7
86
3:45 PM
0
16
0
16
3
32
7
42
1
5
1
7
3
0
2
5
70
Total
9
64
1
74
10
114
38
162
9
33
24
66
16
2
7
25
327
Approach %
12.2
86.5
1.4
-
6.2
70.4
23.5
-
13.6
50.0
36.4
-
64.0
8.0
28.0
-
-
Total %
2.8
19.6
0.3
22.6
3.1
34.9
11.6
49.5
2.8
10.1
7.3
20.2
4.9
0.6
2.1
7.6
-
PHF
0.450
0.727
0.250
0.771
0.833
0.891
0.679
0.862
0.450
0.750
0.600
0.750
0.800
0.250
0.875
0.781
0.809
Lights
9
64
1
74
7
113
38
158
9
32
24
65
16
2
6
24
321
Lights
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
70.0
99.1
100.0
97.5
100.0
97.0
100.0
98.5
100.0
100.0
85.7
96.0
98.2
Buses
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
Buses
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.9
0.0
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
14.3
4.0
0.6
Trucks
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
4
Trucks
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
30.0
0.0
0.0
1.9
0.0
3.0
0.0
1.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.2
Page 246 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
4th St [SB]
Out In Total
79 24 103
0 1 1
1 0 1
80 25 105
6 2 6
1 0 0
0 0 0
7 2 16
R T L
N 1 4
FNryoo moos JS Peak Hour Data tA�oo� O00
A A
m -
W n
o o o o 04/03/2025 3:00 PM
Ending At a oET
m 04/03/2025 4:00 PM
m o Lights Buses u
cv o ro o o K r r o -i m w n°'i o
Z Trucks ♦ —
h t 0
L T R
9 32 24
0 0 0
0 0
9 33 24
10 1 65 75
0 0 0
3 1 4
13 66 79
Out In Total
4th St [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (3:00 PM)
Count Name: Lilac St & 4th Ave
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 6
Page 247 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Pine St & 4th Ave
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 1
Turnina Movement Data
Start Time
Left
Pine St
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Pine St
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
6:00 AM
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
2
0
1
1
2
1
0
0
1
6
6:15AM
0
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
1
3
0
4
8
6:30 AM
0
0
2
2
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
0
2
6
6:45 AM
0
0
2
2
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
2
0
3
7
Hourly Total
0
2
5
7
3
1
0
4
2
2
2
6
4
6
0
10
27
BREAK ..
3:00 PM
0
1
1
2
2
1
0
3
0
1
3
4
0
2
0
2
11
3:15PM
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
3
2
1
6
9
0
0
0
0
12
3:30 PM
0
0
2
2
2
0
1
3
1
0
5
6
0
0
0
0
11
3:45 PM
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
4
3
1
8
0
0
0
0
10
Hourly Total
0
1
3
4
7
3
1
11
7
5
15
27
0
2
0
2
44
Grand Total
0
3
8
11
10
4
1
15
9
7
17
33
4
8
0
12
71
Approach %
0.0
27.3
72.7
-
66.7
26.7
6.7
-
27.3
21.2
51.5
-
33.3
66.7
0.0
-
-
Total %
0.0
4.2
11.3
15.5
14.1
5.6
1.4
21.1
12.7
9.9
23.9
46.5
5.6
11.3
0.0
16.9
-
Lights
0
2
8
10
10
3
1
14
9
7
16
32
4
8
0
12
68
Lights
-
66.7
100.0
90.9
100.0
75.0
100.0
93.3
100.0
100.0
94.1
97.0
100.0
100.0
-
100.0
95.8
Buses
0
1
0
1
1 0
1
0
1
1 0
0
0
0
1 0
0
0
0
1 2
Buses
-
33.3
0.0
9.1
0.0
25.0
0.0
6.7
1 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1 0.0
0.0
-
0.0
2.8
Trucks
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
Trucks
-
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.9
3.0
0.0
0.0
-
0.0
1.4
Page 248 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
ON N O N O O O O J
CI
W
N
a
4th Ave [SB]
Out In Total
8 12 20
0 0 0
0 0 0
8 12 20
0 8 4
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 8 4
R T L
N 1 4
04/03/2025 6:00 AM
Ending At
04/03/2025 4:00 PM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
h t 0
L T R
9 7 16
0 0 0
0 0 1
9 7 17
26 1 32 58
0 0 0
0 1 1
26 33 59
Out In Total
4th Ave [NB]
N
m
r � u
r O O N-m o
Turning Movement Data Plot
Count Nam
Site Code:
Start Date:
Page No: 2
Pine St & 4th Ave
04/03/2025
Page 249 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Pine St & 4th Ave
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 3
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (6.00 AM)
Start Time
Left
Pine St
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Pine St
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
6:00 AM
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
2
0
1
1
2
1
0
0
1
6
6:15AM
0
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
1
3
0
4
8
6:30 AM
0
0
2
2
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
0
2
6
6:45 AM
0
0
2
2
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
2
0
3
7
Total
0
2
5
7
3
1
0
4
2
2
2
6
4
6
0
10
27
Approach %
0.0
28.6
71.4
-
75.0
25.0
0.0
-
33.3
33.3
33.3
-
40.0
60.0
0.0
-
-
Total %
0.0
7.4
18.5
25.9
11.1
3.7
0.0
14.8
7.4
7.4
7.4
22.2
14.8
22.2
0.0
37.0
-
PHF
0.000
0.250
0.625
0.875
0.375
0.250
0.000
0.500
0.500
0.500
0.500
0.750
1.000
0.500
0.000
0.625
0.844
Lights
0
2
5
7
3
1
0
4
2
2
2
6
4
6
0
10
27
% Lights
-
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
-
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
-
100.0
100.0
Buses
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
% Buses
-
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-
0.0
0.0
Trucks
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
% Trucks
-
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-
0.0
0.0
Page 250 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
4th Ave [SB]
Out In Total
2 10 12
0 0 0
0 0 0
2 10 12
0 4 6
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 6 4
R T tL
N 1 4
00000 000o JS Peak Hour Data ZA0000 .00wo
m
w
04/06:00 AM
� — `" ~ � Endingng At At
04/03/2025 7:00 AM J
a m
Lights o
in o o ro u> o o u� K Z Buses r r w o o w N o o N Trucks ♦ —
h t 0
L T R
2 2 2
0 0 0
0 0 0
2 2 2
14 1 6 20
0 0 0
0 0 0
14 6 20
Out In Total
4th Ave [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (6:00 AM)
Count Name: Pine St & 4th Ave
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 4
Page 251 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Pine St & 4th Ave
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 5
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (3.00 PM)
Start Time
Left
Pine St
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Pine St
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
4th Ave
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
3:00 PM
0
1
1
2
2
1
0
3
0
1
3
4
0
2
0
2
11
3:15PM
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
3
2
1
6
9
0
0
0
0
12
3:30 PM
0
0
2
2
2
0
1
3
1
0
5
6
0
0
0
0
11
3:45 PM
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
4
3
1
8
0
0
0
0
10
Total
0
1
3
4
7
3
1
11
7
5
15
27
0
2
0
2
44
Approach %
0.0
25.0
75.0
-
63.6
27.3
9.1
-
25.9
18.5
55.6
-
0.0
100.0
0.0
-
-
Total %
0.0
2.3
6.8
9.1
15.9
6.8
2.3
25.0
15.9
11.4
34.1
61.4
0.0
4.5
0.0
4.5
-
PHF
0.000
0.250
0.375
0.500
0.583
0.375
0.250
0.917
0.438
0.417
0.625
0.750
0.000
0.250
0.000
0.250
0.917
Lights
0
0
3
3
7
2
1
10
7
5
14
26
0
2
0
2
41
Lights
-
0.0
100.0
75.0
100.0
66.7
100.0
90.9
100.0
100.0
93.3
96.3
-
100.0
-
100.0
93.2
Buses
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
Buses
-
100.0
0.0
25.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
9.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-
0.0
-
0.0
4.5
Trucks
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
Trucks
-
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.7
3.7
-
0.0
-
0.0
2.3
Page 252 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
4th Ave [SB]
Out In Total
6 2 8
0 0 0
0 0 0
6 2 8
0 2 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 2 0
R T L
N 1 4
oNryo� o00o JS Peak Hour Data ZA,00 �„Ao
w
3:00 PM
Ending
At
Ending At
04/03/2025 4:00 PM J
a m
Lights
Z0 Buses m o o -i Trucks ♦ —
h t 0
L T R
7 5 14
0 0 0
0 0 1
7 5 15
12 1 26 38
0 0 0
0 1 1
12 27 39
Out In Total
4th Ave [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (3:00 PM)
Count Name: Pine St & 4th Ave
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 6
Page 253 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Pine St & Lake Dr
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 1
Turnina Movement Data
Start Time
Left
Pine St
Eastbound
Right
App. Total
Left
Lake Drive
Northbound
Thru
App. Total
Thru
Lake Drive
Southbound
Right
App. Total
Int. Total
6:00 AM
1
2
3
0
55
55
80
0
80
138
6:15 AM
1
4
5
0
55
55
81
0
81
141
6:30 AM
2
3
5
2
48
50
80
1
81
136
6:45 AM
3
2
5
2
55
57
72
0
72
134
Hourly Total
7
11
18
4
213
217
313
1
314
549
BREAK .,.
3:00 PM
2
3
5
3
99
102
53
2
55
162
3:15 PM
4
5
9
1
105
106
75
4
79
194
3:30 PM
0
2
2
7
121
128
57
2
59
189
3:45 PM
1
0
1
7
99
106
69
0
69
176
Hourly Total
7
10
17
18
424
442
254
8
262
721
Grand Total
14
21
35
22
637
659
567
9
576
1270
Approach %
40.0
60.0
-
3.3
96.7
-
98.4
1.6
-
-
Total %
1.1
1.7
2.8
1.7
50.2
51.9
44.6
0.7
45.4
-
Lights
14
20
34
20
611
631
514
8
522
1187
Lights
100.0
95.2
97.1
90.9
95.9
95.8
90.7
88.9
90.6
93.5
Buses
0
1
1
1 0
5
5
1 2
0
2
1 8
Buses
0.0
4.8
2.9
1 0.0
0.8
0.8
1 0.4
0.0
0.3
1 0.6
Trucks
0
0
0
2
21
23
51
1
52
75
Trucks
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.1
3.3
3.5
9.0
11.1
9.0
5.9
Page 254 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
IL
65
d
a n o H Z
O N O y
Lake Drive [SB]
Out In Total
625 522 1147
5 2 7
21 52 73
651 576 1227
8 514
0 2
1 51
9 567
R T
N 1
04/03/2025 6:00 AM
Ending At
04/03/2025 4:00 PM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
+1 t
L T
20 611
0 5
2 21
22 637
534 631 1165
3 5 8
51 23 74
588 659 1247
Out In Total
Lake Drive [NB]
Turning Movement Data Plot
Count Name: Pine St & Lake Dr
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 2
Page 255 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Pine St & Lake Dr
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 3
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (6.00 AM)
Start Time
Left
Pine St
Eastbound
Right
App. Total
Left
Lake Drive
Northbound
Thru
App. Total
Thru
Lake Drive
Southbound
Right
App. Total
Int. Total
6:00 AM
1
2
3
0
55
55
80
0
80
138
6:15 AM
1
4
5
0
55
55
81
0
81
141
6:30 AM
2
3
5
2
48
50
80
1
81
136
6:45 AM
3
2
5
2
55
57
72
0
72
134
Total
7
11
18
4
213
217
313
1
314
549
Approach %
38.9
61.1
-
1.8
98.2
-
99.7
0.3
-
-
Total %
1.3
2.0
3.3
0.7
38.8
39.5
57.0
0.2
57.2
-
PHF
0.583
0.688
0.900
0.500
0.968
0.952
0.966
0.250
0.969
0.973
Lights
7
11
18
4
205
209
272
1
273
500
Lights
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
96.2
96.3
86.9
100.0
86.9
91.1
Buses
0
0
0
0
2
2
1
0
1
3
Buses
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.9
0.9
0.3
0.0
0.3
0.5
Trucks
0
0
0
0
6
6
40
0
40
46
Trucks
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.8
2.8
12.8
0.0
12.7
8.4
Page 256 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Lake Drive [SB]
Out In Total
212 273 485
2 1 3
6 40 46
220 314 534
1 272
0 1
0 40
1 313
R T
N 1
Peak Hour Data
o N O O H O O O O T
m y
w
y 6:00 AM
Ending
At
Ending At _E;
°1 04/03/2025 7:00 AM
a
Lights o o m
0 Buses
Trucks —
h T
L T
4 205
0 2
0 6
4 213
283 209 492
1 2 3
40 6 46
324 217 541
Out In Total
Lake Drive [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (6:00 AM)
Count Name: Pine St & Lake Dr
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 4
Page 257 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Pine St & Lake Dr
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 5
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (3.00 PM)
Start Time
Left
Pine St
Eastbound
Right
App. Total
Left
Lake Drive
Northbound
Thru
App. Total
Thru
Lake Drive
Southbound
Right
App. Total
Int. Total
3:00 PM
2
3
5
3
99
102
53
2
55
162
3:15 PM
4
5
9
1
105
106
75
4
79
194
3:30 PM
0
2
2
7
121
128
57
2
59
189
3:45 PM
1
0
1
7
99
106
69
0
69
176
Total
7
10
17
18
424
442
254
8
262
721
Approach %
41.2
58.8
-
4.1
95.9
-
96.9
3.1
-
-
Total %
1.0
1.4
2.4
2.5
58.8
61.3
35.2
1.1
36.3
-
PHF
0.438
0.500
0.472
0.643
0.876
0.863
0.847
0.500
0.829
0.929
Lights
7
9
16
16
406
422
242
7
249
687
Lights
100.0
90.0
94.1
88.9
95.8
95.5
95.3
87.5
95.0
95.3
Buses
0
1
1
0
3
3
1
0
1
5
Buses
0.0
10.0
5.9
0.0
0.7
0.7
0.4
0.0
0.4
0.7
Trucks
0
0
0
2
15
17
11
1
12
29
Trucks
0.0
0.0
0.0
11.1
3.5
3.8
4.3
12.5
4.6
4.0
Page 258 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Lake Drive [SB]
Out In Total
413 249 662
3 1 4
15 12 27
431 262 693
7 WT2
0
1
8
R
N 1
Peak Hour Data
6 m M y O O O O T
m y
w
3:00 PM Ending
At _
Ending At E;
°1 04/03/2025 4:00 PM
0 0
Lights �
0 ry o M N Buses o 0 0 0 m
Trucks —
h T
L T
16 406
0 3
2 15
18 424
251 422 673
2 3 5
11 17 28
264 442 706
Out In Total
Lake Drive [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (3:00 PM)
Count Name: Pine St & Lake Dr
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 6
Page 259 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Turnina Movement Data
Count Name: Sunset Ave & Century Trl
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 1
Start Time
Left
Eastbound Approach
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Century Trail
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Sunset Ave
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Sunset Ave
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
7:00 AM
0
0 0
0
5
0 3
8
0
36 1
37
1
29 0
30
75
7:15 AM
0
0 0
0
5
0 0
5
0
28 1
29
1
40 0
41
75
7:30 AM
0
0 0
0
4
0 3
7
0
20 2
22
2
41 0
43
72
7:45 AM
0
0 0
0
3
0 1
4
0
18 2
20
1
62 0
63
87
Hourly Total
0
0 0
0
17
0 7
24
0
102 6
108
5
172 0
177
309
8:00 AM
0
0 0
0
6
0 1
7
0
38 2
40
0
46 0
46
93
8:15 AM
0
0 0
0
7
0 1
8
0
49 1
50
1
31 0
32
90
8:30 AM
0
0 0
0
4
0 0
4
0
33 3
36
1
17 0
18
58
8:45 AM
0
0 0
0
5
0 2
7
0
10 2
12
1
20 0
21
40
Hourly Total
0
0 0
0
22
0 4
26
0
130 8
138
3
114 0
117
281
... BREAK ...
4:00 PM
0
0 0
0
8
0 0
8
0
66 12
78
3
60 0
63
149
4:15 PM
0
0 0
0
5
0 5
10
0
71 5
76
4
57 0
61
147
4:30 PM
0
0 0
0
4
0 2
6
0
59 11
70
1
52 0
53
129
4:45 PM
0
0 0
0
7
0 0
7
0
53 7
60
2
47 0
49
116
Hourly Total
0
0 0
0
24
0 7
31
0
249 35
284
10
216 0
226
541
5:00 PM
0
0 0
0
6
0 3
9
0
56 7
63
1
33 0
34
106
5:15 PM
0
0 0
0
7
0 2
9
0
47 10
57
2
30 0
32
98
5:30 PM
0
0 0
0
5
0 2
7
0
46 7
53
6
42 0
48
108
5:45 PM
0
0 0
0
6
0 2
8
0
40 4
44
2
22 0
24
76
Hourly Total
0
0 0
0
24
0 9
33
0
189 28
217
11
127 0
138
388
Grand Total
0
0 0
0
87
0 27
114
0
670 77
747
29
629 0
658
1519
Approach %
0.0
0.0 0.0
-
76.3
0.0 23.7
-
0.0
89.7 10.3
-
4.4
95.6 0.0
-
-
Total %
0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0
5.7
0.0 1.8
7.5
0.0
44.1 5.1
49.2
1.9
41.4 0.0
43.3
-
Lights
0
0 0
0
85
0 26
111
0
663 75
738
28
617 0
645
1494
Lights
-
- -
-
97.7
- 96.3
97.4
-
99.0 97.4
98.8
96.6
98.1 -
98.0
98.4
Buses
0
0 0
0
1
0 1
2
0
2 2
4
1
4 0
5
11
Buses
-
- -
-
1.1
- 3.7
1.8
-
0.3 2.6
0.5
3.4
0.6 -
0.8
0.7
Trucks
0
0 0
0
1
0 0
1
0
5 0
5
1 0
8 0
8
1 14
Trucks
- -
-
1.1
- 0.0
0.9
-
0.7 0.0
0.7
1 0.0
1.3 -
1.2
1 0.9
Page 260 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Lu 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O J S
L H
N
2
a
O
0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
W
Sunset Ave [SB]
Out In Total
689 645 1334
3 5 8
5 8 13
697 658 1355
0 617 28
0 4 1
0 8 0
0 629 29
R T L
N 1 4
04/03/2025 7:00 AM
Ending At
04/03/2025 6:00 PM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
h t 0
L T R
0 663 75
0 2 2
0 5 0
0 670 77
702 1 738 1440
5 4 9
9 5 14
716 747 1463
Out In Total
Sunset Ave [NB]
Z
O
A V
p
O'O
p
W
i
N
N�-
'm
Turning Movement Data Plot
Count Name: Sunset Ave & Century Trl
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 2
Page 261 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (7.30 AM)
Count Name: Sunset Ave & Century Trl
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 3
Start Time
Left
Eastbound Approach
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Century Trail
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Sunset Ave
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Sunset Ave
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
7:30 AM
0
0 0
0
4
0 3
7
0
20 2
22
2
41 0
43
72
7:45 AM
0
0 0
0
3
0 1
4
0
18 2
20
1
62 0
63
87
8:00 AM
0
0 0
0
6
0 1
7
0
38 2
40
0
46 0
46
93
8:15 AM
0
0 0
0
7
0 1
8
0
49 1
50
1
31 0
32
90
Total
0
0 0
0
20
0 6
26
0
125 7
132
4
180 0
184
342
Approach %
0.0
0.0 0.0
-
76.9
0.0 23.1
-
0.0
94.7 5.3
-
2.2
97.8 0.0
-
-
Total %
0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0
5.8
0.0 1.8
7.6
0.0
36.5 2.0
38.6
1.2
52.6 0.0
53.8
-
PHF
0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000
0.714
0.000 0.500
0.813
0.000
0.638 0.875
0.660
0.500
0.726 0.000
0.730
0.919
Lights
0
0 0
0
20
0 5
25
0
125 5
130
3
173 0
176
331
% Lights
-
- -
-
100.0
- 83.3
96.2
-
100.0 71.4
98.5
75.0
96.1 -
95.7
96.8
Buses
0
0 0
0
0
0 1
1
0
0 2
2
1
3 0
4
7
% Buses
-
- -
-
0.0
- 16.7
3.8
-
0.0 28.6
1.5
25.0
1.7 -
2.2
2.0
Trucks
0
0 0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0 0
0
0
4 0
4
4
% Trucks
-
- -
-
0.0
- 0.0
0.0
-
0.0 0.0
0.0
0.0
2.2 -
2.2
1.2
Page 262 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Sunset Ave [SB]
Out In Total
130 176 306
1 4 5
0 4 4
131 184 315
0 173 3
0 3 1
0 4 0
0 180 4
R T L
N 1 4
00000 000o JS Peak Hour Data ZA�o N ;ow�o
�- 04/03/2025 7:30 AM 'z
Ending At
04/03/2025 8:30 AM —
o Lights m
w 50 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o K Buses r r o 0 0 0 o a W
Z Trucks ♦ —
h t 0
L T R
0 125 5
0 0 2
0 0 0
0 125 7
193 1 130 323
3 2 5
4 0 4
200 132 332
Out In Total
Sunset Ave [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:30 AM)
Count Name: Sunset Ave & Century Trl
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 4
Page 263 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (4.00 PM)
Count Name: Sunset Ave & Century Trl
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 5
Start Time
Left
Eastbound Approach
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Century Trail
Westbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Sunset Ave
Northbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Sunset Ave
Southbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Int. Total
4:00 PM
0
0 0
0
8
0 0
8
0
66 12
78
3
60 0
63
149
4:15 PM
0
0 0
0
5
0 5
10
0
71 5
76
4
57 0
61
147
4:30 PM
0
0 0
0
4
0 2
6
0
59 11
70
1
52 0
53
129
4:45 PM
0
0 0
0
7
0 0
7
0
53 7
60
2
47 0
49
116
Total
0
0 0
0
24
0 7
31
0
249 35
284
10
216 0
226
541
Approach %
0.0
0.0 0.0
-
77.4
0.0 22.6
-
0.0
87.7 12.3
-
4.4
95.6 0.0
-
-
Total %
0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0
4.4
0.0 1.3
5.7
0.0
46.0 6.5
52.5
1.8
39.9 0.0
41.8
-
PHF
0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000
0.750
0.000 0.350
0.775
0.000
0.877 0.729
0.910
0.625
0.900 0.000
0.897
0.908
Lights
0
0 0
0
24
0 7
31
0
249 35
284
10
216 0
226
541
Lights
-
- -
-
100.0
- 100.0
100.0
-
100.0 100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0 -
100.0
100.0
Buses
0
0 0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0 0
0
0
Buses
-
- -
-
0.0
- 0.0
0.0
-
0.0 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 -
0.0
0.0
Trucks
0
0 0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0 0
0
0
Trucks
-
- -
-
0.0
- 0.0
0.0
-
0.0 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 -
0.0
0.0
Page 264 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Sunset Ave [SB]
Out In Total
256 226 482
0 0 0
0 0 0
256 226 482
0 216 10
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 216 10
R T L
N 1 4
000o JS Peak Hour Data
00000 ZA�oo J NooNo
�- 04/03/2025 4:00 PIA 'z
Ending At ' z�
04/03/2025 5:00 PM -
o Lights m
w 50 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o K Buses r r p o o p o o m o
Z Trucks ♦ -
h t 0
L T R
0 249 35
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 249 35
240 1 284 524
0 0 0
0 0 0
240 284 524
Out In Total
Sunset Ave [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:00 PM)
Count Name: Sunset Ave & Century Trl
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 6
Page 265 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Sunset Ave & Lilac St
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 1
Turnina Movement Data
Start Time
Left
Lilac St
Westbound
Right
App. Total
Thru
Sunset Ave
Northbound
Right
App. Total
Left
Sunset Ave
Southbound
Thru
App. Total
Int. Total
7:00 AM
9
7
16
19
6
25
7
53
60
101
7:15 AM
9
2
11
21
4
25
10
94
104
140
7:30 AM
13
3
16
23
1
24
14
178
192
232
7:45 AM
10
9
19
47
9
56
5
90
95
170
Hourly Total
41
21
62
110
20
130
36
415
451
643
8:00 AM
4
8
12
30
5
35
6
32
38
85
8:15 AM
9
7
16
22
0
22
11
34
45
83
8:30 AM
4
7
11
18
7
25
5
40
45
81
8:45 AM
12
2
14
18
5
23
3
64
67
104
Hourly Total
29
24
53
88
17
105
25
170
195
353
... BREAK...
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4:00 PM
1
11
12
79
15
94
4
26
30
136
4:15 PM
5
22
27
52
12
64
12
37
49
140
4:30 PM
8
9
17
67
6
73
8
34
42
132
4:45 PM
9
14
23
52
16
68
11
49
60
151
Hourly Total
23
56
79
250
49
299
35
146
181
559
5:00 PM
8
20
28
66
18
84
9
57
66
178
5:15 PM
11
14
25
72
12
84
13
50
63
172
5:30 PM
22
14
36
60
14
74
13
46
59
169
5:45 PM
7
18
25
50
19
69
11
46
57
151
Hourly Total
48
66
114
248
63
311
46
199
245
670
Grand Total
141
167
308
696
149
845
142
930
1072
2225
Approach %
45.8
54.2
-
82.4
17.6
-
13.2
86.8
-
-
Total %
6.3
7.5
13.8
31.3
6.7
38.0
6.4
41.8
48.2
-
Lights
140
162
302
677
146
823
139
914
1053
2178
Lights
99.3
97.0
98.1
97.3
98.0
97.4
97.9
98.3
98.2
97.9
Buses
1
1
2
13
3
16
0
15
15
33
Buses
0.7
0.6
0.6
1.9
2.0
1.9
0.0
1.6
1.4
1.5
Trucks
0
4
4
1 6
0
6
1 3
1
4
14
Trucks
0.0
2.4
1.3
0.9
0.0
0.7
1 2.1
0.1
0.4
0.6
Page 266 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Sunset Ave [SB]
Out In Total
839 1053 1892
14 15 29
10 4 14
863 1072 1935
914 139
15 0
1 3
930 142
T L
1 4
04/03/2025 7:00 AM
Ending At
04/03/2025 6:00 PM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
t 0
T R
677 146
13 3
6 0
696 149
1054 1 823 1877
16 16 32
1 6 7
1071 845 1916
Out In Total
Sunset Ave [NB]
fN0 W W UNmi O
O A N N 3 y
♦ o y
1m0 V N V si
Turning Movement Data Plot
Count Name: Sunset Ave & Lilac St
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 2
Page 267 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Sunset Ave & Lilac St
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 3
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (7.00 AM)
Start Time
Left
Lilac St
Westbound
Right
App. Total
Thru
Sunset Ave
Northbound
Right
App. Total
Left
Sunset Ave
Southbound
Thru
App. Total
Int. Total
7:00 AM
9
7
16
19
6
25
7
53
60
101
7:15 AM
9
2
11
21
4
25
10
94
104
140
7:30 AM
13
3
16
23
1
24
14
178
192
232
7:45 AM
10
9
19
47
9
56
5
90
95
170
Total
41
21
62
110
20
130
36
415
451
643
Approach %
66.1
33.9
-
84.6
15.4
-
8.0
92.0
-
-
Total %
6.4
3.3
9.6
17.1
3.1
20.2
5.6
64.5
70.1
-
PHF
0.788
0.583
0.816
0.585
0.556
0.580
0.643
0.583
0.587
0.693
Lights
40
21
61
104
19
123
36
408
444
628
Lights
97.6
100.0
98.4
94.5
95.0
94.6
100.0
98.3
98.4
97.7
Buses
1
0
1
6
1
7
0
6
6
14
Buses
2.4
0.0
1.6
5.5
5.0
5.4
0.0
1.4
1.3
2.2
Trucks
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
Trucks
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.2
Page 268 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Sunset Ave [SB]
Out In Total
125 444 569
6 6 12
0 1 1
131 451 582
408 36
6 0
1 0
415 36
T L
1 4
75 Peak Hour Data
-
�1 N O O N
04/03/2025 7:00 AM
n —
c Ending At ,�
Q 04/03/2025 8:00 AM a o c
m
Lights o u
0 0 0 Buses y
Trucks I I—
■3Y
T R
104 9
6 1
0 0
110 20
448 123 571
7 7 14
1 0 1
456 130 586
Out In Total
Sunset Ave [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:00 AM)
Count Name: Sunset Ave & Lilac St
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 4
Page 269 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Sunset Ave & Lilac St
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 5
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (4.45 PM)
Start Time
Left
Lilac St
Westbound
Right
App. Total
Thru
Sunset Ave
Northbound
Right
App. Total
Left
Sunset Ave
Southbound
Thru
App. Total
Int. Total
4:45 PM
9
14
23
52
16
68
11
49
60
151
5:00 PM
8
20
28
66
18
84
9
57
66
178
5:15 PM
11
14
25
72
12
84
13
50
63
172
5:30 PM
22
14
36
60
14
74
13
46
59
169
Total
50
62
112
250
60
310
46
202
248
670
Approach %
44.6
55.4
-
80.6
19.4
-
18.5
81.5
-
-
Total %
7.5
9.3
16.7
37.3
9.0
46.3
6.9
30.1
37.0
-
PHF
0.568
0.775
0.778
0.868
0.833
0.923
0.885
0.886
0.939
0.941
Lights
50
60
110
246
58
304
46
201
247
661
Lights
100.0
96.8
98.2
98.4
96.7
98.1
100.0
99.5
99.6
98.7
Buses
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
1
1
3
Buses
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.3
0.6
0.0
0.5
0.4
0.4
Trucks
0
2
2
4
0
4
0
0
0
6
Trucks
0.0
3.2
1.8
1.6
0.0
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.9
Page 270 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Sunset Ave [SB]
Out In Total
306 247 553
0 1 1
6 0 6
312 248 560
201 46
1 0
0 0
202 46
T L
1 4
75 Peak Hour Data
m F 0 0 0 0 O N 'po 0
W � —
Fh
04/03/2025 4:45 PM
n — Ending At
04/03/2025 5:45 PM r N o
m
Lights N N o u ii 0 o 0 0 o Buses
Trucks —
■3Y
T R
246 58
0 2
4 0
250 60
251 304 555
1 2 3
0 4 4
252 310 562
Out In Total
Sunset Ave [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:45 PM)
Count Name: Sunset Ave & Lilac St
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 6
Page 271 of 617
Kimley >)) Horn
Kimley-Horn Count Name: Sunset Ave &
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Main St/125th Ave
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 1
Turnina Movement Data
Start Time
Left
Main St
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Main St
Westbound
Thru
App. Total
Left
Sunset Ave
Northbound
Right
App. Total
Int. Total
12:00 AM
0
8
2
10
0
1
1
1
0
1
12
12:15AM
0
5
0
5
1
5
6
0
0
0
11
12:30 AM
0
4
2
6
0
3
3
0
0
0
9
12:45 AM
0
3
1
4
0
1
1
0
0
0
5
Hourly Total
0
20
5
25
1
10
11
1
0
1
37
1:00 AM
0
1
1
2
1
1
2
0
1
1
5
1:15AM
0
2
0
2
0
3
3
0
0
0
5
1:30 AM
0
3
0
3
0
5
5
0
0
0
8
1:45 AM
0
2
0
2
0
3
3
0
0
0
5
Hourly Total
0
8
1
9
1
12
13
0
1
1
23
2:00 AM
0
0
1
1
0
3
3
0
0
0
4
2:15AM
0
3
1
4
0
1
1
0
0
0
5
2:30 AM
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2:45 AM
0
3
0
3
0
1
1
1
0
1
5
Hourly Total
0
6
3
9
0
5
5
1
0
1
15
3:00 AM
0
4
0
4
0
2
2
0
0
0
6
3:15AM
0
3
0
3
0
5
5
0
1
1
9
3:30 AM
0
4
1
5
0
1
1
0
0
0
6
3:45 AM
0
2
1
3
0
4
4
0
0
0
7
Hourly Total
0
13
2
15
0
12
12
0
1
1
28
4:00 AM
0
6
0
6
0
1
1
1
0
1
8
4:15AM
0
3
0
3
0
2
2
2
0
2
7
4:30 AM
0
11
2
13
1
5
6
1
0
1
20
4:45 AM
0
15
1
16
2
6
8
0
1
1
25
Hourly Total
0
35
3
38
3
14
17
4
1
5
60
5:00 AM
0
11
5
16
1
9
10
0
2
2
28
5:15 AM
0
25
4
29
1
13
14
3
1
4
47
5:30 AM
1
40
7
48
1
14
15
7
2
9
72
5:45 AM
0
48
9
57
1
12
13
3
1
4
74
Hourly Total
1
124
25
150
4
48
52
13
6
19
221
6:00 AM
0
34
9
43
1
22
23
6
0
6
72
6:15 AM
1
55
13
69
5
40
45
6
2
8
122
6:30 AM
1
80
17
98
2
42
44
14
3
17
159
6:45 AM
0
75
44
119
2
38
40
9
7
16
175
Hourly Total
2
244
83
329
10
142
152
35
12
47
528
7:00 AM
1
69
26
96
7
50
57
16
9
25
178
7:15 AM
0
74
55
129
11
43
54
13
8
21
204
7:30 AM
2
104
82
188
18
49
67
23
8
31
286
7:45 AM
1
64
56
121
14
58
72
28
6
34
227
Hourly Total
4
311
219
534
50
200
250
80
31
111
895
8:00 AM
1
75
18
94
5
52
57
29
8
37
188
8:15 AM
2
65
29
96
8
57
65
25
2
27
188
8:30 AM
0
53
18
71
6
56
62
20
1
21
154
8:45 AM
0
61
29
90
5
49
54
13
7
20
164
Hourly Total
3
254
94
351
24
214
238
87
18
105
694
9:00 AM
2
42
24
68
8
42
50
17
5
22
140
9:15 AM
2
56
25
83
9
54
63
30
4
34
180
9:30 AM
2
53
14
69
5
39
44
30
7
37
150
9:45 AM
0
57
8
65
4
37
41
7
3
10
116
Hourly Total
6
208
71
285
26
172
198
84
19
103
586
10:00 AM
1
41
5
47
3
39
42
15
2
17
106
10:15 AM
1
49
12
62
6
39
45
16
5
21
128
10:30 AM
0
57
9
66
3
41
44
8
6
14
124
10:45 AM
1
48
18
67
2
46
48
15
5
20
135
Hourly Total
3
195
44
242
14
165
179
54
18
72
493
11:00 AM
0
38
11
49
6
38
44
10
7
17
110
11:15 AM
0
54
14
68
2
44
46
19
7
26
140
11:30 AM
0
37
11
48
9
45
54
17
6
23
125
11:45 AM
0
65
15
80
3
56
59
12
6
18
157
Hourly Total
0
194
51
245
20
183
203
58
26
84
532
12:00 PM
1
52
14
67
9
60
69
14
4
18
154
Page 272 of 617
12:15 PM
1
47
6
54
9
62
71
10
2
12
137
12:30 PM
1
49
10
60
6
46
52
17
5
22
134
12:45 PM
0
50
17
67
9
56
65
14
6
20
152
Hourly Total
3
198
47
248
33
224
257
55
17
72
577
1:00 PM
1
46
10
57
5
56
61
16
8
24
142
1:15 PM
0
48
20
68
4
39
43
10
6
16
127
1:30 PM
0
63
11
74
2
50
52
19
7
26
152
1:45 PM
0
54
20
74
6
55
61
11
7
18
153
Hourly Total
1
211
61
273
17
200
217
56
28
84
574
2:00 PM
0
44
14
58
1
60
61
18
6
24
143
2:15 PM
0
48
21
69
6
51
57
18
6
24
150
2:30 PM
0
69
25
94
10
60
70
20
8
28
192
2:45 PM
1
60
20
81
3
69
72
30
14
44
197
Hourly Total
1
221
80
302
20
240
260
86
34
120
682
3:00 PM
2
55
21
78
12
76
88
50
7
57
223
3:15 PM
2
59
29
90
5
87
92
39
10
49
231
3:30 PM
1
64
38
103
6
94
100
26
12
38
241
3:45 PM
3
66
24
93
9
112
121
50
12
62
276
Hourly Total
8
244
112
364
32
369
401
165
41
206
971
4:00 PM
1
63
15
79
2
100
102
41
12
53
234
4:15 PM
2
93
26
121
11
117
128
46
16
62
311
4:30 PM
1
115
41
157
6
121
127
37
15
52
336
4:45 PM
2
76
34
112
15
98
113
32
11
43
268
Hourly Total
6
347
116
469
34
436
470
156
54
210
1149
5:00 PM
2
90
41
133
10
113
123
32
14
46
302
5:15 PM
1
81
32
114
8
114
122
36
16
52
288
5:30 PM
2
92
31
125
11
116
127
29
12
41
293
5:45 PM
0
67
22
89
9
94
103
29
9
38
230
Hourly Total
5
330
126
461
38
437
475
126
51
177
1113
6:00 PM
0
46
18
64
4
68
72
38
7
45
181
6:15 PM
1
51
23
75
6
66
72
30
8
38
185
6:30 PM
1
56
21
78
9
60
69
24
11
35
182
6:45 PM
3
48
16
67
4
52
56
19
6
25
148
Hourly Total
5
201
78
284
23
246
269
111
32
143
696
7:00 PM
2
47
21
70
5
58
63
12
3
15
148
7:15 PM
2
46
13
61
2
64
66
14
7
21
148
7:30 PM
0
54
13
67
6
47
53
14
7
21
141
7:45 PM
3
54
13
70
5
50
55
8
11
19
144
Hourly Total
7
201
60
268
18
219
237
48
28
76
581
8:00 PM
2
38
7
47
4
35
39
14
2
16
102
8:15 PM
1
35
14
50
8
50
58
6
3
9
117
8:30 PM
1
33
13
47
4
33
37
12
1
13
97
8:45 PM
4
29
18
51
1
19
20
19
2
21
92
Hourly Total
8
135
52
195
17
137
154
51
8
59
408
9:00 PM
3
31
11
45
2
24
26
13
4
17
88
9:15 PM
3
29
7
39
1
36
37
12
0
12
88
9:30 PM
2
15
12
29
3
18
21
5
2
7
57
9:45 PM
0
25
4
29
2
14
16
5
1
6
51
Hourly Total
8
100
34
142
8
92
100
35
7
42
284
10:00 PM
0
11
4
15
1
21
22
3
0
3
40
10:15 PM
0
11
7
18
0
14
14
8
3
11
43
10:30 PM
0
8
4
12
2
22
24
4
1
5
41
10:45 PM
0
7
4
11
0
16
16
2
0
2
29
Hourly Total
0
37
19
56
3
73
76
17
4
21
153
11:00 PM
1
10
4
15
0
11
11
2
1
3
29
11:15PM
1
7
1
9
0
6
6
2
0
2
17
11:30 PM
1
6
1
8
0
5
5
1
1
2
15
11:45 PM
0
3
2
5
0
9
9
1
4
5
19
Hourly Total
3
26
8
37
0
31
31
6
6
12
80
Grand Total
74
3863
1394
5331
396
3881
4277
1329
443
1772
11380
Approach %
1.4
72.5
26.1
-
9.3
90.7
-
75.0
25.0
-
-
Total %
0.7
33.9
12.2
46.8
3.5
34.1
37.6
11.7
3.9
15.6
-
Lights
74
3769
1364
5207
392
3761
4153
1303
432
1735
11095
Lights
100.0
97.6
97.8
97.7
99.0
96.9
97.1
98.0
97.5
97.9
97.5
Buses
0
15
11
26
3
16
19
4
5
9
54
Buses
0.0
0.4
0.8
0.5
0.8
0.4
0.4
0.3
1.1
0.5
0.5
Trucks
0
79
19
98
1
104
105
22
6
28
231
Trucks
0.0
2.0
1.4
1.8
0.3
2.7
2.5
1.7
1.4
1.6
1 2.0
Page 273 of 617
Kimley>>)Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
co 6
N
N
h
O
O
n
J
O
N
O
CO
W
C
C
ON
LL1
N
M
M
N
M
�
M
0
LLO'J
N
1N
M
M
Fake Approach [SB]
Out
In
Total
74
0
74
0
0
0
0
0
0
74
0
74
J
04/03/2025 12:00 AM
Ending At
04/04/2025 12:00 AM
Lights
Z
Buses
Trucks
h 0
L R
1303 432
4 5
22 6
1329 443
1756
1735
3491
14
9
23
20
28
48
1790
1772
3562
Out
In
Total
Sunset Ave [NB]
I�
\I
Turning Movement Data Plot
Count Name: Sunset Ave &
Main St/125th Ave
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 3
Page 274 of 617
Kimley >)) Horn
Kimley-Horn Count Name: Sunset Ave &
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Main St/125th Ave
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 4
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (7.15 AM)
Start Time
Left
Main St
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Main St
Westbound
Thru
App. Total
Left
Sunset Ave
Northbound
Right
App. Total
Int. Total
7:15 AM
0
74
55
129
11
43
54
13
8
21
204
7:30 AM
2
104
82
188
18
49
67
23
8
31
286
7:45 AM
1
64
56
121
14
58
72
28
6
34
227
8:00 AM
1
75
18
94
5
52
57
29
8
37
188
Total
4
317
211
532
48
202
250
93
30
123
905
Approach %
0.8
59.6
39.7
-
19.2
80.8
-
75.6
24.4
-
-
Total %
0.4
35.0
23.3
58.8
5.3
22.3
27.6
10.3
3.3
13.6
-
PHF
0.500
0.762
0.643
0.707
0.667
0.871
0.868
0.802
0.938
0.831
0.791
Lights
4
309
206
519
48
188
236
93
29
122
877
Lights
100.0
97.5
97.6
97.6
100.0
93.1
94.4
100.0
96.7
99.2
96.9
Buses
0
0
3
3
0
1
1
0
1
1
5
Buses
0.0
0.0
1.4
0.6
0.0
0.5
0.4
0.0
3.3
0.8
0.6
Trucks
0
8
2
10
0
13
13
0
0
0
23
Trucks
0.0
2.5
0.9
1.9
0.0
6.4
5.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.5
Page 275 of 617
Kimley>>)Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
co FO 7 N N V O O a J
� W
W
O
Fake Approach [SB]
Out
In
Total
4
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
4
S Peak Hour Data
04/03/2025 7:15 AM
Ending At
04/03/2025 8:15 AM
Lights
Z
Buses
Trucks
h 0
L R
93 29
0 1
0 0
93 30
254
122
376
3
1
4
2
0
2
259
123
382
Out
In
Total
Sunset Ave [NB]
I�
\I
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:15 AM)
Count Name: Sunset Ave &
Main St/125th Ave
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 5
Page 276 of 617
Kimley >)) Horn
Kimley-Horn Count Name: Sunset Ave &
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Main St/125th Ave
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 6
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (4.15 PM)
Start Time
Left
Main St
Eastbound
Thru Right
App. Total
Left
Main St
Westbound
Thru
App. Total
Left
Sunset Ave
Northbound
Right
App. Total
Int. Total
4:15 PM
2
93
26
121
11
117
128
46
16
62
311
4:30 PM
1
115
41
157
6
121
127
37
15
52
336
4:45 PM
2
76
34
112
15
98
113
32
11
43
268
5:00 PM
2
90
41
133
10
113
123
32
14
46
302
Total
7
374
142
523
42
449
491
147
56
203
1217
Approach %
1.3
71.5
27.2
-
8.6
91.4
-
72.4
27.6
-
-
Total %
0.6
30.7
11.7
43.0
3.5
36.9
40.3
12.1
4.6
16.7
-
PHF
0.875
0.813
0.866
0.833
0.700
0.928
0.959
0.799
0.875
0.819
0.906
Lights
7
372
141
520
42
440
482
147
54
201
1203
Lights
100.0
99.5
99.3
99.4
100.0
98.0
98.2
100.0
96.4
99.0
98.8
Buses
0
1
1
2
0
1
1
0
2
2
5
Buses
0.0
0.3
0.7
0.4
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.0
3.6
1.0
0.4
Trucks
0
1
0
1
0
8
8
0
0
0
9
Trucks
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.2
0.0
1.8
1.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.7
Page 277 of 617
Kimley>>)Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
cE
o
r
rn
o
o
n
F
m
w
(n
C
ON
N
N
N
A
F
Fake Approach [SB]
Out
In
Total
7
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
7
S Peak Hour Data
04/03/2025 4:15 PM
Ending At
04/03/2025 5:15 PM
Lights
Z
Buses
Trucks
h 0
L R
147 54
0 2
0 0
147 56
183
201
384
1
2
3
0
0
0
184
203
387
Out
In
Total
Sunset Ave [NB]
1►fi
\I
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:15 PM)
Count Name: Sunset Ave &
Main St/125th Ave
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 7
Page 278 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Sunset Ave & Robinson Dr
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 1
Turnina Movement Data
Start Time
Left
Robinson Dr
Westbound
Right
App. Total
Thru
Sunset Ave
Northbound
Right
App. Total
Left
Sunset Ave
Southbound
Thru
App. Total
Int. Total
7:02 AM
8
6
14
20
2
22
1
29
30
66
7:17 AM
9
4
13
19
2
21
1
72
73
107
7:32 AM
12
3
15
20
2
22
2
99
101
138
7:47 AM
6
2
8
36
3
39
1
61
62
109
Hourly Total
35
15
50
95
9
104
5
261
266
420
8:02 AM
6
1
7
33
1
34
3
27
30
71
8:17 AM
5
4
9
23
2
25
5
32
37
71
8:32 AM
5
2
7
21
0
21
2
20
22
50
8:47 AM
11
1
12
12
0
12
1
30
31
55
Hourly Total
27
8
35
89
3
92
11
109
120
247
... BREAK...
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3:47 PM
1
0
1
6
4
10
1
2
3
14
Hourly Total
1
0
1
6
4
10
1
2
3
14
4:02 PM
4
0
4
65
7
72
1
15
16
92
4:17 PM
2
2
4
51
3
54
5
36
41
99
4:32 PM
2
4
6
45
5
50
5
49
54
110
4:47 PM
6
0
6
41
6
47
3
45
48
101
Hourly Total
14
6
20
202
21
223
14
145
159
402
5:02 PM
2
1
3
49
10
59
2
48
50
112
5:17 PM
2
1
3
53
16
69
2
36
38
110
5:32 PM
6
2
8
43
5
48
2
42
44
100
5:47 PM
6
1
7
28
8
36
3
25
28
71
Hourly Total
16
5
21
173
39
212
9
151
160
393
Grand Total
93
34
127
565
76
641
40
668
708
1476
Approach %
73.2
26.8
-
88.1
11.9
-
5.6
94.4
-
-
Total %
6.3
2.3
8.6
38.3
5.1
43.4
2.7
45.3
48.0
-
Lights
88
33
121
556
74
630
40
657
697
1448
Lights
94.6
97.1
95.3
98.4
97.4
98.3
100.0
98.4
98.4
98.1
Buses
5
1
6
5
2
7
0
4
4
17
Buses
5.4
2.9
4.7
0.9
2.6
1.1
0.0
0.6
0.6
1.2
Trucks
0
0
0
4
0
4
0
7
7
11
Trucks
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.7
0.0
0.6
0.0
1.0
1.0
0.7
Page 279 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Sunset Ave [SB]
Out In Total
589 697 1286
6 4 10
4 7 11
599 708 1307
t657 40
4 0
7 0
668 40
T L
1 4
04/03/2025 7:02 AM
Ending At
04/03/2025 6:02 PM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
■�Y
T R
556 74
5 2
4 0
565 76
745 630 1375
9 7 16
7 4 11
761 641 1402
Out In Total
Sunset Ave [NB]
0 p
� O O
A p
_ o
0
r o w
Turning Movement Data Plot
Count Name: Sunset Ave & Robinson Dr
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 2
Page 280 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Sunset Ave & Robinson Dr
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 3
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (7.17 AM)
Start Time
Left
Robinson Dr
Westbound
Right
App. Total
Thru
Sunset Ave
Northbound
Right
App. Total
Left
Sunset Ave
Southbound
Thru
App. Total
Int. Total
7:17 AM
9
4
13
19
2
21
1
72
73
107
7:32 AM
12
3
15
20
2
22
2
99
101
138
7:47 AM
6
2
8
36
3
39
1
61
62
109
8:02 AM
6
1
7
33
1
34
3
27
30
71
Total
33
10
43
108
8
116
7
259
266
425
Approach %
76.7
23.3
-
93.1
6.9
-
2.6
97.4
-
-
Total %
7.8
2.4
10.1
25.4
1.9
27.3
1.6
60.9
62.6
-
PHF
0.688
0.625
0.717
0.750
0.667
0.744
0.583
0.654
0.658
0.770
Lights
32
9
41
106
7
113
7
254
261
415
Lights
97.0
90.0
95.3
98.1
87.5
97.4
100.0
98.1
98.1
97.6
Buses
1
1
2
0
1
1
0
3
3
6
Buses
3.0
10.0
4.7
0.0
12.5
0.9
0.0
1.2
1.1
1.4
Trucks
0
0
0
2
0
2
0
2
2
4
Trucks
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.9
0.0
1.7
0.0
0.8
0.8
0.9
Page 281 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Sunset Ave [SB]
Out In Total
115 261 376
1 3 4
2 2 4
118 266 384
254 7
3 0
2 0
259 7
T L
1 4
75 Peak Hour Data
W ~ O
04/03/2025 7:17 AM A o N c
— Ending At o
04/03/2025 8:17 AM
Lights r w
0 0 0 Buses
Trucks —
■�Y
T R
106 7
0 1
2 0
108 8
286 113 399
4 1 5
2 2 4
292 116 408
Out In Total
Sunset Ave [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:17 AM)
Count Name: Sunset Ave & Robinson Dr
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 4
Page 282 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (4.32 PM)
Count Name: Sunset Ave & Robinson Dr
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 5
Start Time
Left
Robinson Dr
Westbound
Right
App. Total
Thru
Sunset Ave
Northbound
Right
App. Total
Left
Sunset Ave
Southbound
Thru
App. Total
Int. Total
4:32 PM
2
4
6
45
5
50
5
49
54
110
4:47 PM
6
0
6
41
6
47
3
45
48
101
5:02 PM
2
1
3
49
10
59
2
48
50
112
5:17 PM
2
1
3
53
16
69
2
36
38
110
Total
12
6
18
188
37
225
12
178
190
433
Approach %
66.7
33.3
-
83.6
16.4
-
6.3
93.7
-
-
Total %
2.8
1.4
4.2
43.4
8.5
52.0
2.8
41.1
43.9
-
PHF
0.500
0.375
0.750
0.887
0.578
0.815
0.600
0.908
0.880
0.967
Lights
12
6
18
187
37
224
12
176
188
430
Lights
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.5
100.0
99.6
100.0
98.9
98.9
99.3
Buses
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
2
Buses
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.0
0.4
0.0
0.6
0.5
0.5
Trucks
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
Trucks
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.5
0.2
Page 283 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Sunset Ave [SB]
Out In Total
193 188 381
1 1 2
0 1 1
194 190 384
176 12
1 0
1 0
178 12
T L
1 4
Peak Hour Data
m o
0
A A o o rn -
04/03/20254:32PM _ 1.
- Ending At o
04/03/2025 5:32 PM
Lights r w
ii 0 o 0 0 o Buses o o °y^
Trucks -
■�Y
T R
187 37
1 0
0 0
188 37
188 224 412
1 1 2
1 0 1
190 225 415
Out In Total
Sunset Ave [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:32 PM)
Count Name: Sunset Ave & Robinson Dr
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 6
Page 284 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Sunset Rd & Century Trl
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 1
Turnina Movement Data
Start Time
Left
Century TH
Westbound
Right
App. Total
Thru
Sunset Ave
Northbound
Right
App. Total
Left
Sunset Ave
Southbound
Thru
App. Total
Int. Total
6:00 AM
8
5
13
25
3
28
3
48
51
92
6:15 AM
9
3
12
21
1
22
4
91
95
129
6:30 AM
20
4
24
28
0
28
2
165
167
219
6:45 AM
6
2
8
53
2
55
1
89
90
153
Hourly Total
43
14
57
127
6
133
10
393
403
593
BREAK .,.
3:00 PM
8
0
8
82
7
89
1
21
22
119
3:15 PM
4
3
7
72
7
79
2
41
43
129
3:30 PM
5
5
10
55
14
69
5
40
45
124
3:45 PM
6
1
7
60
7
67
1
52
53
127
Hourly Total
23
9
32
269
35
304
9
154
163
499
Grand Total
66
23
89
396
41
437
19
547
566
1092
Approach %
74.2
25.8
-
90.6
9.4
-
3.4
96.6
-
-
Total %
6.0
2.1
8.2
36.3
3.8
40.0
1.7
50.1
51.8
-
Lights
66
19
85
385
39
424
18
534
552
1061
Lights
100.0
82.6
95.5
97.2
95.1
97.0
94.7
97.6
97.5
97.2
Buses
0
3
3
1 9
2
11
1 1
9
10
1 24
Buses
0.0
13.0
3.4
1 2.3
4.9
2.5
1 5.3
1.6
1.8
1 2.2
Trucks
0
1
1
2
0
2
0
4
4
7
Trucks
0.0
4.3
1.1
0.5
0.0
0.5
0.0
0.7
0.7
0.6
Page 285 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Sunset Ave [SB]
Out In Total
404 552 956
12 10 22
3 4 7
419 566 985
534ML
94547T
1 4
04/03/2025 6:00 AM
Ending At
04/03/2025 4:00 PM
Lights
Buses
Trucks
t 0
T R
385 39
9 2
2 0
396 41
600 424 1024
9 11 20
4 2 6
613 437 1050
Out In Total
Sunset Ave [NB]
0 o w 0
♦ � W
o
IAO � O N si
Turning Movement Data Plot
Count Name: Sunset Rd & Century Trl
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 2
Page 286 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Sunset Rd & Century Trl
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 3
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (6.00 AM)
Start Time
Left
Century Trl
Westbound
Right
App. Total
Thru
Sunset Ave
Northbound
Right
App. Total
Left
Sunset Ave
Southbound
Thru
App. Total
Int. Total
6:00 AM
8
5
13
25
3
28
3
48
51
92
6:15 AM
9
3
12
21
1
22
4
91
95
129
6:30 AM
20
4
24
28
0
28
2
165
167
219
6:45 AM
6
2
8
53
2
55
1
89
90
153
Total
43
14
57
127
6
133
10
393
403
593
Approach %
75.4
24.6
-
95.5
4.5
-
2.5
97.5
-
-
Total %
7.3
2.4
9.6
21.4
1.0
22.4
1.7
66.3
68.0
-
PHF
0.538
0.700
0.594
0.599
0.500
0.605
0.625
0.595
0.603
0.677
Lights
43
12
55
120
6
126
10
386
396
577
Lights
100.0
85.7
96.5
94.5
100.0
94.7
100.0
98.2
98.3
97.3
Buses
0
1
1
6
0
6
0
5
5
12
Buses
0.0
7.1
1.8
4.7
0.0
4.5
0.0
1.3
1.2
2.0
Trucks
0
1
1
1
0
1
0
2
2
4
Trucks
0.0
7.1
1.8
0.8
0.0
0.8
0.0
0.5
0.5
0.7
Page 287 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Sunset Ave [SB]
Out In Total
132 396 526
7 5 12
2 2 4
141 403 544
366 0
5 0
2 0
393 10
T L
1 4
Peak Hour Data
m o
c 04/03/2025 6:00 AM .2
n — Ending At _
Q 04/03/2025 7:00 AM r A o o A
Lights Q1
0 0 o Buses w o u
Trucks —
■�Y
T R
120 6
6 0
1 0
127 6
429 126 555
5 6 11
2 1 3
436 133 569
Out In Total
Sunset Ave [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (6:00 AM)
Count Name: Sunset Rd & Century Trl
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 4
Page 288 of 617
Kimley >>> Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Count Name: Sunset Rd & Century Trl
Site Code:
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555 Start Date: 04/03/2025
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Page No: 5
Turnina Movement Peak Hour Data (3.00 PM)
Start Time
Left
Century Trl
Westbound
Right
App. Total
Thru
Sunset Ave
Northbound
Right
App. Total
Left
Sunset Ave
Southbound
Thru
App. Total
Int. Total
3:00 PM
8
0
8
82
7
89
1
21
22
119
3:15 PM
4
3
7
72
7
79
2
41
43
129
3:30 PM
5
5
10
55
14
69
5
40
45
124
3:45 PM
6
1
7
60
7
67
1
52
53
127
Total
23
9
32
269
35
304
9
154
163
499
Approach %
71.9
28.1
-
88.5
11.5
-
5.5
94.5
-
-
Total %
4.6
1.8
6.4
53.9
7.0
60.9
1.8
30.9
32.7
-
PHF
0.719
0.450
0.800
0.820
0.625
0.854
0.450
0.740
0.769
0.967
Lights
23
7
30
265
33
298
8
148
156
484
Lights
100.0
77.8
93.8
98.5
94.3
98.0
88.9
96.1
95.7
97.0
Buses
0
2
2
3
2
5
1
4
5
12
Buses
0.0
22.2
6.3
1.1
5.7
1.6
11.1
2.6
3.1
2.4
Trucks
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
2
2
3
Trucks
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.0
0.3
0.0
1.3
1.2
0.6
Page 289 of 617
Kimley>»Horn
Kimley-Horn
4201 Winfield Road Suite 600
Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555
(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com
Sunset Ave [SB]
Out In Total
272 156 428
5 5 10
1 2 3
278 163 441
148 8
4 1
2 0
154 9
T L
1 4
75 Peak Hour Data
QI O O O O O p O W p O
N
Ending At5 3:00 PM
c 04/03/2025 4:00 PM
Lights r Q1
0 0 0 Buses oo u
Trucks —
■�Y
T R
265 33
3 2
1 0
269 35
171 298 469
4 5 9
2 1 3
177 304 481
Out In Total
Sunset Ave [NB]
Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (3:00 PM)
Count Name: Sunset Rd & Century Trl
Site Code:
Start Date: 04/03/2025
Page No: 6
Page 290 of 617
Appendix B:
SimTraffic/Rodel Reports
Northwest Main — Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 291 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/24/2025
2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 5.7 2.8 0.5 0.4 0.7 0.6
1.0
3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail Performance by
movement
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1
0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 7.6 3.3 0.6 0.2 0.8 1.2
1.6
4: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement WBL WBT WBR NBT NBR SBL
SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 3.1 0.0
0.0 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 6.7 1.5 2.4 0.4 0.1 1.7
2.1 2.0
5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT
NBR SBL
SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.1
0.1 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.3 6.3 5.3
3.4 2.2
7.4 3.5
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR
NBL NBT
NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.5 2.8 2.3 7.6 6.0 5.8 6.9 10.4 3.3 5.1 10.5 3.4
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 4.3
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.2 1.1 0.2 1.4 1.0 0.2 3.1 8.4 1.7 5.4 10.5 4.3
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 3.0
Existing (2025) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1
Page 292 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/24/2025
8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 3.0 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 4.0 1.9 1.3 1.0 1.0 0.1 1.0
9: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.2 1.6 0.5 1.7 1.6 0.3 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 18.9 30.2 11.2 23.2 24.2 5.1 19.0 17.7 4.4 21.7 21.0 4.4
9: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.6
Total DelNeh (s) 19.9
Total Zone Performance
Denied DellVeh (s) 0.7
Total DelNeh (s) 260.4
Existing (2025) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 2
Page 293 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive
Movement
WB SB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
44
5
Average Queue (ft)
20
0
95th Queue (ft)
40
4
Link Distance (ft)
1079
1423
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail
Movement
WB
SB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
65
5
Average Queue (ft)
25
0
95th Queue (ft)
50
6
Link Distance (ft)
576
1743
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 4: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Lilac Street
Movement
WB SB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
53
27
Average Queue (ft)
20
2
95th Queue (ft)
41
15
Link Distance (ft)
5087
1967
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Existing (2025) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/24/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 3
Page 294 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/24/2025
Intersection: 5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street
Movement WB NB SB
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)
LTR
LTR
LTR
6
29
29
0
5
8
4
21
28
7093
5136
728
Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement
WB
NB
SB
Directions Served
LTR
LTR
LTR
Maximum Queue (ft)
58
30
38
Average Queue (ft)
4
9
16
95th Queue (ft)
29
24
38
Link Distance (ft)
5545
5211
5136
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street
Movement EB WB NB SB
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)
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
6
34
65
64
1
5
19
31
8
23
52
54
5087
1167
1004
5211
Existing (2025) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
SimTraffic Report
Page 4
Page 295 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/24/2025
Intersection: 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street
Movement EB NB
Directions Served
LR LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
27 21
Average Queue (ft)
8 1
95th Queue (ft)
24 11
Link Distance (ft)
7093 1359
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 9: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
NB
SB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
84
187
76
256
193
32
50
89
42
32
214
53
Average Queue (ft)
36
83
28
92
58
6
14
22
5
5
70
12
95th Queue (ft)
72
156
60
179
132
24
38
61
24
20
147
38
Link Distance (ft)
5545
3209
3100
1978
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
300
300
250
250
300
200
300
300
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 1
Existing (2025) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 5
Page 296 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/24/2025
2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 5.3 2.5 0.7 0.3 0.9 0.6 0.8
3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail Performance by movement
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 6.1 2.7 1.0 0.7 1.0 0.8 1.1
4: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement WBL WBT WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.4
Total DelNeh (s) 6.4 0.8 3.7 0.9 0.4 1.8 1.6 1.7
5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR
SBR All
Denied DellVeh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.4 0.6 0.2 0.5 4.6 4.5 3.4
0.8 2.5
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT
NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DellVeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 5.1 3.6 3.5 8.5 7.4 7.7 10.7 7.1 4.2 8.6 7.4 3.2
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 5.7
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.3 1.2 0.1 1.1 0.7 0.2 4.7 9.3 1.9 3.4 7.6 2.8
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DellVeh (s) 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 1.9
Existing (2025) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1
Page 297 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/24/2025
8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 2.4 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 10.0 0.3 1.8 1.8 1.7 0.9 0.6 1.5
9: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.1 2.0 0.6 1.9 1.9 0.8 2.0 0.7 0.0 0.6
Total DelNeh (s) 25.8 34.0 10.4 23.0 30.7 8.5 21.4 23.7 7.6 19.6 23.7 6.4
9: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.9
Total DelNeh (s) 21.4
Total Zone Performance
Denied DellVeh (s) 1.0
Total DelNeh (s) 134.8
Existing (2025) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 2
Page 298 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive
Movement
WB SB
Directions Served LR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 23 20
Average Queue (ft) 11 1
95th Queue (ft) 29 10
Link Distance (ft) 1079 1423
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail
Movement
WB
SB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
44
25
Average Queue (ft)
19
2
95th Queue (ft)
37
12
Link Distance (ft)
576
1743
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 4: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Lilac Street
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)
WB NB SB
LR
R
LT
61
4
35
24
0
8
44
3
31
5087
1967
275
Existing (2025) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/24/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 3
Page 299 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street
Movement
NB SB
Directions Served
LTR
LTR
Maximum Queue (ft)
39
40
Average Queue (ft)
17
2
95th Queue (ft)
39
17
Link Distance (ft)
5136
728
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
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)
EB
WB
NB
SB
LT
LTR
LTR
LTR
85
31
42
29
9
2
15
11
42
15
33
32
5120
5545
5211
5136
Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street
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)
EB WB NB SB
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
15
10
61
31
1
0
24
15
7
5
48
36
5087
1167
1004
5211
Existing (2025) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/24/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 4
Page 300 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/24/2025
Intersection: 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street
Movement EB NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
30
37
Average Queue (ft)
7
5
95th Queue (ft)
23
23
Link Distance (ft)
7093
1359
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 9: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
NB
SB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
L
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
142
192
75
181
235
51
115
246
146
37
136
66
Average Queue (ft)
59
78
29
73
113
15
43
90
27
12
51
13
95th Queue (ft)
114
148
60
136
202
41
92
179
82
33
103
42
Link Distance (ft)
5545
3209
3100
1978
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
300
300
250
250
300
200
300
300
Storage Blk Time (%)
0
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
3
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 3
Existing (2025) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 5
Page 301 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/24/2025
2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 2.7 0.6 0.4 0.6 0.8
3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.1 1.6 0.1 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 2.9 0.8 0.3 0.8 0.9
5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL
SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
0.1 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.2 3.9 5.9 1.7 2.1
7.6 3.0
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT
NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 3.8 2.8 2.2 4.6 3.4 2.9 6.6 7.9
3.9 6.8 10.4 3.6
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 3.3
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 1.0 1.2 0.6 1.2 0.7 0.5 3.0 8.9 1.7 6.0 10.4 3.4
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 3.0
8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 2.1 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 4.3 2.1 1.5 0.7 1.1 0.4 1.0
No Build (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1
Page 302 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/24/2025
Total Zone Performance
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.3
Total DelNeh (s) 28.3
No Build (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 2
Page 303 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
54
Average Queue (ft)
22
95th Queue (ft)
42
Link Distance (ft)
1079
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail
Movement
WB
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
48
Average Queue (ft)
22
95th Queue (ft)
41
Link Distance (ft)
576
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street
Movement
NB SB
Directions Served
LTR
LTR
Maximum Queue (ft)
29
30
Average Queue (ft)
5
9
95th Queue (ft)
22
30
Link Distance (ft)
5142
728
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
No Build (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/24/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 3
Page 304 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement EB WB NB SB
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)
LT
LTR
LTR
LTR
14
46
28
47
0
4
8
18
5
23
22
42
5120
5554
5217
5142
Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street
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)
WB
NB
SB
LTR
LTR
LTR
37
56
66
5
16
31
23
46
53
1167
1004
5217
Intersection: 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street
Movement
EB NB
Directions Served
LR LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
34 15
Average Queue (ft)
9 1
95th Queue (ft)
27 8
Link Distance (ft)
7093 1359
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
No Build (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/24/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 4
Page 305 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/24/2025
2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 2.7 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.7
3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 3.0 0.9 0.4 0.5 0.8
5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR
SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.1 1.3 0.2 0.3 4.7 4.9 3.6
0.9 2.7
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT
NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 4.9 3.8 2.4 7.5 5.6 4.7 9.9 7.7
5.6 5.8 9.7 3.2
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 5.0
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 2.7 1.3 0.3 0.9 0.8 0.4 3.4 8.9 1.8 4.2 9.8 2.6
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 2.1
8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 2.1 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 5.6 0.6 2.1 1.7 1.2 0.9 0.3 1.2
No Build (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1
Page 306 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/24/2025
Total Zone Performance
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 27.0
No Build (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 2
Page 307 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive
Movement
Directions Served R
Maximum Queue (ft) 23
Average Queue (ft) 11
95th Queue (ft) 28
Link Distance (ft) 1079
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail
Movement
WB
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
48
Average Queue (ft)
18
95th Queue (ft)
39
Link Distance (ft)
576
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street
Movement
NB SB
Directions Served
LTR
LTR
Maximum Queue (ft)
44
45
Average Queue (ft)
21
3
95th Queue (ft)
41
20
Link Distance (ft)
5142
728
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
No Build (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/24/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 3
Page 308 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement EB WB NB SB
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)
LT
LTR
LTR
LTR
77
55
44
30
11
4
18
13
46
25
34
34
5120
5554
5217
5142
Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street
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)
EB
WB
NB
SB
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
32
16
56
35
3
1
26
17
16
7
45
38
5072
1167
1004
5217
Intersection: 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street
Movement
EB NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
28
50
Average Queue (ft)
10
6
95th Queue (ft)
26
31
Link Distance (ft)
7093
1359
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
No Build (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/24/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 4
Page 309 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/24/2025
2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 2.6 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.9
3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.1 1.6 0.1 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 3.5 1.0 0.2 0.8 1.1
5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL
SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
0.1 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.1 0.7 0.1 4.6 5.7 3.0 2.5
7.8 3.2
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT
NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 3.9 3.1 2.6 5.4 4.4 3.9 9.0 8.9
5.2 6.1 10.6 4.5
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 4.0
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 0.8 1.3 0.7 1.5 1.2 0.3 6.8 10.3 2.5 6.4 10.7 4.0
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 3.3
8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 1.9 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 5.9 2.5 1.4 0.9 1.2 0.5 1.2
No Build (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1
Page 310 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/24/2025
Total Zone Performance
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.3
Total DelNeh (s) 31.4
No Build (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 2
Page 311 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
74
Average Queue (ft)
23
95th Queue (ft)
49
Link Distance (ft)
1079
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail
Movement
WB
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
64
Average Queue (ft)
25
95th Queue (ft)
48
Link Distance (ft)
576
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street
Movement
NB SB
Directions Served
LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft)
28 35
Average Queue (ft)
7 11
95th Queue (ft)
25 34
Link Distance (ft)
5142 728
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
No Build (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/24/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 3
Page 312 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement EB WB NB SB
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)
LT
LTR
LTR
LTR
10
42
38
53
1
3
11
21
8
20
28
45
5120
5554
5217
5142
Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street
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)
EB
WB
NB
SB
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
10
35
75
70
0
5
21
32
5
24
54
55
5072
1167
1004
5217
Intersection: 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street
Movement
EB NB
Directions Served LR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 27 33
Average Queue (ft) 11 1
95th Queue (ft) 27 16
Link Distance (ft) 7093 1359
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
No Build (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/24/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 4
Page 313 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/24/2025
2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 2.5 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.8
3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 3.3 1.1 0.6 0.5 0.9
5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR
SBR All
Denied DellVeh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.2 1.8 0.4 0.7 4.6 4.4 2.9
1.2 2.5
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT
NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DellVeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 5.1 4.4 2.8 7.0 6.3 5.4 11.9 7.7
5.7 10.1 10.5 3.1
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DellVeh (s) 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 5.6
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.7 1.6 0.1 1.1 0.9 0.4 4.1 9.5 2.4 4.1 9.1 3.0
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DellVeh (s) 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 2.2
8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All
Denied DellVeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 2.1 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 6.6 0.5 2.9 2.3 1.4 1.1 0.7 1.3
No Build (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1
Page 314 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/24/2025
Total Zone Performance
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.3
Total DelNeh (s) 29.0
No Build (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 2
Page 315 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
39
Average Queue (ft)
14
95th Queue (ft)
32
Link Distance (ft)
1079
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail
Movement
WB
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
40
Average Queue (ft)
17
95th Queue (ft)
37
Link Distance (ft)
576
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street
Movement
NB SB
Directions Served
LTR
LTR
Maximum Queue (ft)
30
56
Average Queue (ft)
20
5
95th Queue (ft)
39
29
Link Distance (ft)
5142
728
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
No Build (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/24/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 3
Page 316 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement EB WB NB SB
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)
LT
LTR
LTR
LTR
56
49
57
34
11
4
20
15
40
24
44
37
5120
5554
5217
5142
Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street
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)
EB
WB
NB
SB
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
32
21
54
40
1
1
27
19
14
9
46
39
5072
1167
1004
5217
Intersection: 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street
Movement
EB NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
41
61
Average Queue (ft)
10
7
95th Queue (ft)
28
32
Link Distance (ft)
7093
1359
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
No Build (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/24/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 4
Page 317 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/28/2025
2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 3.3 1.2 0.7 0.4 1.0
3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.1 1.1 0.2 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 3.6 1.4 0.6 1.1 1.4
5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL
SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 2.2 0.1 1.2 0.2 2.1 6.4 1.4 2.3
7.9 3.0
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT
NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 2.8 1.5 0.8 5.7 4.8 3.1 6.3 10.8
3.1 7.7 10.9 2.9
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 2.9
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 1.8 1.4 0.6 1.6 1.2 0.5 4.8 8.2 1.8 5.3 9.8 2.9
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 2.9
8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 5.6 3.6 2.1 0.9 1.7 0.2 1.4
Build Scenario 1 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1
Page 318 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/28/2025
10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Performance by movement
Movement WBR
NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 3.5
1.1 0.5 1.1 1.2
11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBT
EBR WBT WBR NBR SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.9
1.3 1.4 0.7 4.5 4.1 1.8
13: Access D & CSAH 14 (Main
Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBT
EBR WBT NBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.1
0.6 1.7 4.3 1.4
14: 4th Avenue & Access E Performance by movement
Movement NBT
SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.8
0.9 1.2
15: 4th Avenue & Access F
Performance by movement
Movement NBT
SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.9
0.1 0.5
16: 4th Avenue & Access G Performance by movement
Movement NBT
SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 0.0
1.2 1.0
17: Access H & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT
WBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.0 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.7 0.3
Total Zone Performance
Denied DellVeh (s)
0.3
Total DelNeh (s)
34.3
Build Scenario 1 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 2
Page 319 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
67
Average Queue (ft)
28
95th Queue (ft)
51
Link Distance (ft)
1079
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail
Movement
WB
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
68
Average Queue (ft)
30
95th Queue (ft)
53
Link Distance (ft)
576
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street
Movement
NB SB
Directions Served
LTR
LTR
Maximum Queue (ft)
28
31
Average Queue (ft)
5
9
95th Queue (ft)
21
30
Link Distance (ft)
1860
728
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 1 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 3
Page 320 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement EB WB NB SB
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)
LT
LTR
LTR
LTR
15
46
52
46
1
5
16
18
7
27
39
43
1790
5554
1310
1282
Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street
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)
EB
WB
NB
SB
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
16
33
50
63
1
5
17
34
10
23
45
53
5072
1167
1004
3850
Intersection: 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street
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)
EB NB SB
LR
LT
T
32
29
11
8
2
0
25
15
8
7093
1359
2481
Build Scenario 1 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 4
Page 321 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
61
Average Queue (ft)
27
95th Queue (ft)
50
Link Distance (ft)
911
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
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)
NB SB
TR TR
44 47
18 20
43 45
643 640
Intersection: 13: Access D & CSAH 14 (Main Street
Movement
NB
Directions Served
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
43
Average Queue (ft)
17
95th Queue (ft)
43
Link Distance (ft)
650
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 1 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 5
Page 322 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/28/2025
Intersection: 14: 4th Avenue & Access E
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: 15: 4th Avenue & Access F
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: 16: 4th Avenue & Access G
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)
Build Scenario 1 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 6
Page 323 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/28/2025
Intersection: 17: Access H & Pine Street
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
Build Scenario 1 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 7
Page 324 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/28/2025
2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 3.2 1.5 1.0 0.3 1.1
3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 5.0 1.8 0.9 0.6 1.4
5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR
SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.2 2.8 3.3 1.4
1.2 1.7
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT
NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.1 0.1
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 4.1 2.3 0.9 5.3 3.0 1.4 19.2 20.3
8.4 17.0 15.0 6.1
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.3
Total DelNeh (s) 3.7
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 1.7 1.2 0.6 1.0 1.3 0.5 3.3 9.7 2.4 4.2 8.4 2.3
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 2.2
8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 2.9 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 5.5 0.4 3.0 1.8 1.4 1.1 0.3 1.3
Build Scenario 1 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1
Page 325 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/28/2025
10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Performance by movement
Movement WBR
NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 3.9
1.6 0.3 1.0 1.4
11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBT
EBR WBT WBR NBR SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 3.1
1.7 2.4 1.5 5.8 5.2 2.8
13: Access D & CSAH 14 (Main
Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBT
EBR WBT NBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.9
1.0 2.9 5.3 2.4
14: 4th Avenue & Access E Performance by movement
Movement NBT
SBT All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0
0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.7
0.6 1.4
15: 4th Avenue & Access F
Performance by movement
Movement NBT
SBT All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0
0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.5
0.0 1.1
16: 4th Avenue & Access G Performance by movement
Movement NBT
SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.1 0.1
17: Access H & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT
WBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 0.0
0.6 0.4
Total Zone Performance
Denied Del/Veh (s)
0.4
Total DelNeh (s)
63.8
Build Scenario 1 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 2
Page 326 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
40
Average Queue (ft)
20
95th Queue (ft)
36
Link Distance (ft)
1079
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail
Movement
WB
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
59
Average Queue (ft)
26
95th Queue (ft)
48
Link Distance (ft)
576
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street
Movement
NB SB
Directions Served
LTR
LTR
Maximum Queue (ft)
34
57
Average Queue (ft)
20
5
95th Queue (ft)
39
29
Link Distance (ft)
1882
728
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 1 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 3
Page 327 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement EB WB NB SB
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)
LT
LTR
LTR
LTR
64
55
87
34
13
4
31
13
45
26
68
34
1817
2789
1450
1292
Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street
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)
EB
WB
NB
SB
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
30
6
48
50
2
0
25
23
15
5
45
44
5072
1167
1004
3711
Intersection: 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street
Movement
EB NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
32
40
Average Queue (ft)
9
5
95th Queue (ft)
27
23
Link Distance (ft)
7093
1359
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 1 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 4
Page 328 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
57
Average Queue (ft)
21
95th Queue (ft)
48
Link Distance (ft)
1094
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
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)
NB SB
TR TR
48 59
17 18
43 45
643 959
Intersection: 13: Access D & CSAH 14 (Main Street
Movement
NB
Directions Served
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
43
Average Queue (ft)
16
95th Queue (ft)
42
Link Distance (ft)
702
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 1 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 5
Page 329 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/28/2025
Intersection: 14: 4th Avenue & Access E
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: 15: 4th Avenue & Access F
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: 16: 4th Avenue & Access G
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)
Build Scenario 1 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 6
Page 330 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/28/2025
Intersection: 17: Access H & Pine Street
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
Build Scenario 1 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 7
Page 331 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
06/26/2025
2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 3.8 1.5 1.0 0.5 1.2
3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.1 1.0 0.2 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 4.1 1.7 0.6 1.5 1.7
5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL
SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 2.1 1.0 1.6 1.0 3.8 5.1 2.1 2.0
8.2 2.0
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT
NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 18.3 17.0 14.6
Total DelNeh (s) 4.6 4.2 1.9 10.8 8.7 6.2 81.0 68.5
70.3 360.1 302.5 326.4
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 3.5
Total DelNeh (s) 84.1
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 2.3 2.8 1.0 2.1 2.0 0.6 3.7 12.3 2.0 9.2 14.2 6.0
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 5.0
8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 8.1 5.1 2.7 1.2 2.1 0.7 2.3
Build Scenario 1 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1
Page 332 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
06/26/2025
10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Performance by movement
Movement WBR
NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 4.3
1.5 0.5 2.2 2.1
11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBT
EBR WBT WBR NBR SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
0.0 15.9 15.0 0.1 0.1
9.0
Total DelNeh (s) 3.3
2.3 22.8 27.8 6.2 95.7
16.9
13: Access D & CSAH 14 (Main
Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBT
EBR WBT WBR NBR SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1
0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 2.4
1.5 3.4 1.7 5.6 16.1
3.4
14: 4th Avenue & Access E Performance by movement
Movement EBL
EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DellVeh (s) 0.2
0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 6.5
4.2 2.4 1.9 3.0 2.3
3.6
15: 4th Avenue & Access F Performance by movement
Movement EBL
EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 4.7
8.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1.9
Total DelNeh (s) 151.8
120.5 3.0 2.2 141.0 116.2
99.8
16: 4th Avenue & Access G Performance by movement
Movement EBL
EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 6.2
4.3 1.6 0.9 1.3 0.4
2.3
17: Access H & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT
WBL WBT NBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 0.5
1.2 1.5 3.4 2.7
Total Zone Performance
Denied DellVeh (s)
9.3
Total DelNeh (s)
444.9
Build Scenario 1 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 2
Page 333 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
61
Average Queue (ft)
33
95th Queue (ft)
56
Link Distance (ft)
1079
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail
Movement
WB
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
72
Average Queue (ft)
32
95th Queue (ft)
54
Link Distance (ft)
576
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street
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)
EB WB NB SB
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
4
21
58
30
0
2
28
10
3
12
44
31
2985
7093
1860
728
Build Scenario 1 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
06/26/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 3
Page 334 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
06/26/2025
Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement EB EB WB NB SB
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)
LT
R
LTR
LTR
LTR
107
20
94
347
1293
22
1
18
119
898
72
8
62
323
1504
1790
5554
1310
1282
21
92
300
Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street
Movement
EB
WB
NB
SB
Directions Served
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
Maximum Queue (ft)
47
49
58
130
Average Queue (ft)
5
9
21
56
95th Queue (ft)
26
32
50
95
Link Distance (ft)
5072
1167
1004
3850
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street
Movement EB NB SB
Directions Served
LR
LT T
Maximum Queue (ft)
69
72 18
Average Queue (ft)
28
7 1
95th Queue (ft)
53
37 14
Link Distance (ft)
7093
1359 2481
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 1 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
SimTraffic Report
Page 4
Page 335 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
62
Average Queue (ft)
28
95th Queue (ft)
54
Link Distance (ft)
911
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement
WB
NB
SB
Directions Served
TR
TR
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
519
47
209
Average Queue (ft)
155
20
52
95th Queue (ft)
588
49
145
Link Distance (ft)
606
643
640
Upstream Blk Time (%)
12
Queuing Penalty (veh)
112
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 13: Access D & CSAH 14 (Main Street
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)
WB NB SB
TR
TR
TR
23
50
102
2
20
33
20
46
83
1790
650
528
Build Scenario 1 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
06/26/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 5
Page 336 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
06/26/2025
Intersection: 14: 4th Avenue & Access E
Movement EB NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
90
32
Average Queue (ft)
42
4
95th Queue (ft)
68
21
Link Distance (ft)
798
3850
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 15: 4th Avenue
& Access F
Movement
EB
NB
SB
Directions Served
LR
LT
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
518
43
1107
Average Queue (ft)
145
7
285
95th Queue (ft)
441
28
1069
Link Distance (ft)
628
1282
1885
Upstream Blk Time (%)
4
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 16: 4th Avenue
& Access G
Movement EB NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
79
56
Average Queue (ft)
40
7
95th Queue (ft)
66
32
Link Distance (ft)
1130
1885
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 1 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
SimTraffic Report
Page 6
Page 337 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 17: Access H & Pine Street
Movement
WEEM,
Directions Served
LT LR
Maximum Queue (ft)
11 70
Average Queue (ft)
1 38
95th Queue (ft)
7 60
Link Distance (ft)
2985 947
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 204
Build Scenario 1 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
06/26/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 7
Page 338 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/29/2025
2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 3.9 1.4 1.1 0.9 1.4
3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.4 3.4 0.2 0.3
Total DelNeh (s) 4.5 1.5 0.3 2.0 2.0
5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL
SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 2.5 1.2 2.5 1.3 4.2 4.8 2.3 3.3
8.4 2.3
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT
NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1
0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.7 2.0 0.7 2.2 2.3 0.8 5.8 11.0
2.7 11.9 15.5 7.4
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 5.7
8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 10.5 6.9 2.5 1.5 2.0 0.8 2.5
10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.4
Total DelNeh (s) 4.0 1.4 0.5 1.6 1.6
11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT WBR NBR SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.2 3.9 4.5 0.6
Build Scenario 1 (2045) MITIGATED - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1
Page 339 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/29/2025
13: Access D & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT WBR NBR SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1
0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 0.4 0.1 0.4 0.1 3.6 3.4
0.5
14: 4th Avenue & Access E Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2
0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 7.1 4.7 1.8 1.7 1.0 0.3
2.8
15: 4th Avenue & Access F Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0
0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 7.7 5.1 2.0 1.1 1.8 1.0
2.4
16: 4th Avenue & Access G Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 6.7 4.3 1.9 1.3 1.5 0.5
2.4
17: Access H & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT WBL WBT NBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 0.4 1.3 1.0 3.5 2.8
Total Zone Performance
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.3
Total DelNeh (s) 76.0
Build Scenario 1 (2045) MITIGATED - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 2
Page 340 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
62
Average Queue (ft)
31
95th Queue (ft)
53
Link Distance (ft)
1079
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail
Movement
WB
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
78
Average Queue (ft)
32
95th Queue (ft)
58
Link Distance (ft)
576
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street
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)
EB WB NB SIB
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
4
42
55
30
0
4
28
10
3
23
45
32
2985
7093
1860
728
04/29/2025
Build Scenario 1 (2045) MITIGATED - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 3
Page 341 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/29/2025
Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street
Movement EB WB NB SIB
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)
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
33
51
52
180
4
10
22
62
21
36
49
118
2549
1167
1004
3850
Intersection: 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street
Movement
EB
NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
76
93
Average Queue (ft)
31
9
95th Queue (ft)
60
47
Link Distance (ft)
7093
1359
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A
Movement WB
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
67
Average Queue (ft)
29
95th Queue (ft)
56
Link Distance (ft)
911
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 1 (2045) MITIGATED - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 4
Page 342 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/29/2025
Intersection: 11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement
NB SIB
Directions Served
TR
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
59
58
Average Queue (ft)
18
22
95th Queue (ft)
45
48
Link Distance (ft)
631
628
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 13: Access D & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
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)
NB SIB
TR TR
52 56
19 27
46 50
638 516
Intersection: 14: 4th Avenue & Access E
Movement
EB NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
98
26
Average Queue (ft)
43
3
95th Queue (ft)
76
17
Link Distance (ft)
798
3850
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 1 (2045) MITIGATED - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 5
Page 343 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/29/2025
Intersection: 15: 4th Avenue & Access F
Movement
EB NB
Directions Served
LR LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
102 44
Average Queue (ft)
40 11
95th Queue (ft)
71 36
Link Distance (ft)
628 948
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 16: 4th Avenue & Access G
Movement
EB
NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
80
53
Average Queue (ft)
40
7
95th Queue (ft)
64
31
Link Distance (ft)
1130
1885
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 17: Access H & Pine Street
Movement
WB NB
Directions Served
LT LR
Maximum Queue (ft)
12 74
Average Queue (ft)
1 40
95th Queue (ft)
7 65
Link Distance (ft)
2985 947
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
Build Scenario 1 (2045) MITIGATED - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 6
Page 344 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/29/2025
2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 4.9 2.2 1.4 0.8 1.7
3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 1.0 3.1 0.0 0.7
Total DelNeh (s) 6.7 2.1 0.6 1.0 1.8
5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR
SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.5 0.9 2.8 2.4 0.4 6.9 4.9 4.6
1.1 3.9
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT
NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.2
0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 3.7 3.1 0.8 2.3 3.0 1.1 7.9 14.2
3.6 11.3 14.3 6.2
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 4.6
8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 1.9 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 12.5 1.4 6.1 3.3 3.3 1.6 0.7 3.0
10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 5.1 2.0 0.6 1.5 1.8
11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT WBR NBR SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 0.9 0.6 0.6 0.2 4.7 5.1 0.8
Build Scenario 1 (2045) MITIGATED - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1
Page 345 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/29/2025
13: Access D & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT WBR NBR SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1
0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 0.7 0.4 1.0 0.5 3.9 4.7
0.9
14: 4th Avenue & Access E Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2
0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 7.0 3.6 3.1 3.0 1.7 0.5
2.8
15: 4th Avenue & Access F Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0
0.3
Total DelNeh (s) 12.8 4.9 3.2 3.2 1.7 0.7
3.1
16: 4th Avenue & Access G Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 8.9 3.8 3.5 3.8 1.3 0.4
3.2
17: Access H & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT WBL WBT NBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 0.5 2.6 2.6 3.2 2.7
Total Zone Performance
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.3
Total DelNeh (s) 92.2
Build Scenario 1 (2045) MITIGATED - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 2
Page 346 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
58
Average Queue (ft)
25
95th Queue (ft)
46
Link Distance (ft)
1079
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail
Movement
WB
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
72
Average Queue (ft)
29
95th Queue (ft)
56
Link Distance (ft)
576
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street
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)
WB
NB
SIB
LTR
LTR
LTR
46
100
43
7
46
3
31
80
23
7093
1882
728
04/29/2025
Build Scenario 1 (2045) MITIGATED - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 3
Page 347 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/29/2025
Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street
Movement EB WB NB SIB
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)
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
62
16
65
89
26
2
29
47
56
12
52
82
2549
1167
1004
3711
Intersection: 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street
Movement
EB
NB
SIB
Directions Served
LR
LT
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
76
89
9
Average Queue (ft)
26
23
0
95th Queue (ft)
55
65
0
Link Distance (ft)
7093
1359
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
325
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A
Movement WB
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
55
Average Queue (ft)
22
95th Queue (ft)
48
Link Distance (ft)
1094
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 1 (2045) MITIGATED - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 4
Page 348 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/29/2025
Intersection: 11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement
NB SIB
Directions Served
TR
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
34
49
Average Queue (ft)
16
20
95th Queue (ft)
40
46
Link Distance (ft)
631
948
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 13: Access D & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement
NB
SIB
Directions Served
TR
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
41
54
Average Queue (ft)
14
24
95th Queue (ft)
40
49
Link Distance (ft)
690
1026
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 14: 4th Avenue & Access E
Movement
EB NB
Directions Served
LR LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
74 56
Average Queue (ft)
37 11
95th Queue (ft)
62 39
Link Distance (ft)
624 3711
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 1 (2045) MITIGATED - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 5
Page 349 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/29/2025
Intersection: 15: 4th Avenue & Access F
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)
EB NB SIB
LR
LT
TR
81
104
9
39
28
0
66
74
5
905
1068
1856
Intersection: 16: 4th Avenue & Access G
Movement
EB
NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
72
62
Average Queue (ft)
37
20
95th Queue (ft)
60
53
Link Distance (ft)
1097
1856
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 17: Access H & Pine Street
Movement
WB NB
Directions Served
LT
LR
Maximum Queue (ft)
27
69
Average Queue (ft)
2
35
95th Queue (ft)
14
56
Link Distance (ft)
2956
1520
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
Build Scenario 1 (2045) MITIGATED - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 6
Page 350 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/28/2025
2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 4.6 2.1 1.3 0.7 1.6
3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 6.4 2.5 1.4 1.0 2.1
5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR
SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 17.5 44.6 45.9 41.9 57.2 4.7 4.0 3.0
1.0 26.7
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT
NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 3.1 1.3 0.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.0 179.1
103.9 1011.1 919.3 804.9
Total DelNeh (s) 195.9 190.8 150.0 32.2 23.4 17.9 3558.0 3392.1
3417.9 3549.7 3368.7 3452.7
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 6.1
Total DelNeh (s) 312.5
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 37.9 54.6 66.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 207.3 166.6 160.2 64.6 159.8 143.7 201.2 225.1 167.4 51.7 9.8 47.2
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 28.9
Total DelNeh (s) 154.5
8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 1.9 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 11.4 1.3 4.3 2.8 3.0 1.4 0.7 2.6
Build Scenario 1 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1
Page 351 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/28/2025
10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 4.9 2.0 0.5 1.5 1.8
11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT WBR NBR SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 23.7 24.9 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1
13.5
Total DelNeh (s) 33.3 31.2 3.6 2.2 117.9 9.2
21.3
13: Access D & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT WBR NBR SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1
0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 72.0 76.8 6.7 5.2 133.6 8.8
45.2
14: 4th Avenue & Access E Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 739.3 798.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
194.3
Total DelNeh (s) 2173.4 1906.8 1927.9 1830.8 1.1 0.5
1250.6
15: 4th Avenue & Access F Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 697.2 656.8 0.0 0.0 35.8 0.0
133.6
Total DelNeh (s) 3109.6 2806.9 1.5 1.7 2877.4 2670.4
788.8
16: 4th Avenue & Access G Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 63.9 106.5 0.0 0.0 26.7 24.0 30.1
Total DelNeh (s) 772.6 943.2 1.8 1.7 825.2 916.2 424.0
17: Access H & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT WBL WBT NBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 0.6 1.9 1.8 3.1 2.3
Total Zone Performance
Denied DellVeh (s) 49.4
Total DelNeh (s) 1431.1
Build Scenario 1 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 2
Page 352 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
51
Average Queue (ft)
24
95th Queue (ft)
46
Link Distance (ft)
1079
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail
Movement
WB
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
77
Average Queue (ft)
29
95th Queue (ft)
54
Link Distance (ft)
576
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street
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)
EB WB NB SB
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
358
284
66
62
34
38
33
6
211
194
51
33
2956
7093
1882
728
Build Scenario 1 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 3
Page 353 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/28/2025
Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement EB EB WB NB SB
Directions Served
LT
R
LTR
LTR
LTR
Maximum Queue (ft)
1831
375
825
1458
1298
Average Queue (ft)
1400
190
221
1440
1292
95th Queue (ft)
2353
498
607
1526
1308
Link Distance (ft)
1817
2789
1450
1292
Upstream Blk Time (%)
12
92
99
Queuing Penalty (veh)
118
240
316
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
300
Storage Blk Time (%)
59
Queuing Penalty (veh)
47
Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street
Movement
EB
WB
NB
SB
Directions Served
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
Maximum Queue (ft)
1588
1182
543
164
Average Queue (ft)
287
286
110
49
95th Queue (ft)
1075
1055
363
190
Link Distance (ft)
5072
1167
1004
3711
Upstream Blk Time (%)
17
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street
Movement EB NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
57
101
Average Queue (ft)
22
23
95th Queue (ft)
44
67
Link Distance (ft)
7093
1359
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 1 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
SimTraffic Report
Page 4
Page 354 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
62
Average Queue (ft)
25
95th Queue (ft)
51
Link Distance (ft)
1094
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement
EB
NB
SB
Directions Served
TR
TR
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
966
91
60
Average Queue (ft)
302
27
23
95th Queue (ft)
1000
75
54
Link Distance (ft)
917
643
959
Upstream Blk Time (%)
17
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 13: Access D & CSAH 14 (Main Street
Movement
EB NB SB
Directions Served
TR
TR
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
1391
118
57
Average Queue (ft)
659
37
25
95th Queue (ft)
1673
96
50
Link Distance (ft)
1380
702
1038
Upstream Blk Time (%)
4
Queuing Penalty (veh)
47
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 1 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 5
Page 355 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 14: 4th Avenue & Access E
Movement
EB NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
631
3721
Average Queue (ft)
495
2252
95th Queue (ft)
837
4508
Link Distance (ft)
624
3711
Upstream Blk Time (%)
51
31
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
90
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 15: 4th Avenue & Access F
Movement
EB
NB
SB
Directions Served
LR
LT
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
912
5
1861
Average Queue (ft)
734
0
1570
95th Queue (ft)
1164
5
2388
Link Distance (ft)
904
1292
1856
Upstream Blk Time (%)
47
67
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
161
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 16: 4th Avenue & Access G
Movement
EB NB SB
Directions Served
LR
LT
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
1107
45
1890
Average Queue (ft)
500
5
744
95th Queue (ft)
1226
25
1936
Link Distance (ft)
1097
1856
1882
Upstream Blk Time (%)
21
13
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
19
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 1 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 6
Page 356 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 17: Access H & Pine Street
Movement
WEEM,
Directions Served
LT LR
Maximum Queue (ft)
17 68
Average Queue (ft)
1 34
95th Queue (ft)
9 54
Link Distance (ft)
2956 1520
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 1038
Build Scenario 1 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 7
Page 357 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/28/2025
2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 3.5 1.1 0.7 0.4 1.0
3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.1 1.1 0.1 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 3.8 1.4 0.6 1.1 1.4
5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL
SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 0.3 0.0 0.6 0.2 2.0 7.1 0.9 2.4
7.6 2.5
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT
NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 2.6 1.8 1.4 7.0 4.4 5.0 8.1 11.9
3.4 9.0 11.4 3.6
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 3.1
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 1.6 1.7 0.7 1.4 1.1 0.5 3.6 9.7 1.9 5.3 9.9 2.6
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 3.1
8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All
Denied DellVeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 4.9 2.8 0.8 0.7 1.7 0.5 1.3
Build Scenario 2 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1
Page 358 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/28/2025
10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Performance by movement
Movement WBR
NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 3.5
1.0 0.2 1.2 1.2
11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBT
EBR WBT WBR NBR SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 2.2
1.7 0.8 0.5 4.4 3.4 1.7
14: 4th Avenue & Access E Performance by movement
Movement NBT
SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.9
1.1 1.4
15: 4th Avenue & Access F
Performance by movement
Movement NBT
SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.5
0.0 0.5
16: 4th Avenue & Access G Performance by movement
Movement NBT
SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 0.0
0.7 0.5
17: Access H & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT
WBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.0 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 0.0
0.7 0.3
Total Zone Performance
Denied DelNeh (s)
0.3
Total DelNeh (s)
33.3
Build Scenario 2 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 2
Page 359 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
71
Average Queue (ft)
29
95th Queue (ft)
55
Link Distance (ft)
1079
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail
Movement
WB
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
63
Average Queue (ft)
27
95th Queue (ft)
52
Link Distance (ft)
576
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street
Movement
NB SB
Directions Served
LTR
LTR
Maximum Queue (ft)
30
29
Average Queue (ft)
7
8
95th Queue (ft)
26
28
Link Distance (ft)
1860
728
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 2 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 3
Page 360 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement EB WB NB SB
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)
LT
LTR
LTR
LTR
28
58
66
54
0
7
14
19
5
34
38
43
2506
5554
1310
1282
Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street
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)
EB
WB
NB
SB
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
10
27
52
65
1
4
17
33
8
19
45
52
5072
1167
1004
3850
Intersection: 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street
Movement
EB NB
Directions Served
LR LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
30 10
Average Queue (ft)
9 1
95th Queue (ft)
26 6
Link Distance (ft)
7093 1359
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 2 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 4
Page 361 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
49
Average Queue (ft)
23
95th Queue (ft)
48
Link Distance (ft)
911
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
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)
NB SB
TR TR
55 33
20 14
46 38
643 640
Intersection: 14: 4th Avenue & Access E
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)
Build Scenario 2 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 5
Page 362 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/28/2025
Intersection: 15: 4th Avenue & Access F
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: 16: 4th Avenue & Access G
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: 17: Access H & Pine Street
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
Build Scenario 2 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 6
Page 363 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/28/2025
2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 3.4 1.4 0.9 0.3 1.0
3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 3.9 1.6 0.8 0.6 1.3
5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR
SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.1 1.3 0.3 0.4 2.7 3.0 1.4
1.3 1.5
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT
NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.1 0.1
0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 4.8 2.6 1.5 5.6 3.0 1.5 17.7 18.5
6.8 15.0 19.3 5.2
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.3
Total DelNeh (s) 3.8
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 2.8 1.6 2.8 1.1 1.3 0.4 4.7 9.4 2.3 5.0 8.9 2.4
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 2.3
8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 1.6 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 6.5 0.4 2.2 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.3 1.2
Build Scenario 2 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1
Page 364 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/28/2025
10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Performance by movement
Movement WBR
NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 4.1
1.8 0.5 1.4 1.6
11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBT
EBR WBT WBR NBR SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 3.1
2.0 1.6 0.9 5.2 5.0 2.4
14: 4th Avenue & Access E Performance by movement
Movement NBT
SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0
0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.6
0.6 1.3
15: 4th Avenue & Access F
Performance by movement
Movement NBT
SBT All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0
0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.6
0.1 1.2
16: 4th Avenue & Access G Performance by movement
Movement NBT
SBT All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 0.0
0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.1 0.1
17: Access H & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT
WBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 0.0
0.6 0.4
Total Zone Performance
Denied DelNeh (s)
0.4
Total DelNeh (s)
53.4
Build Scenario 2 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 2
Page 365 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
52
Average Queue (ft)
19
95th Queue (ft)
39
Link Distance (ft)
1079
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail
Movement
WB
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
49
Average Queue (ft)
22
95th Queue (ft)
37
Link Distance (ft)
576
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street
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)
WB
NB
SB
LTR
LTR
LTR
6
35
44
0
19
4
6
39
26
7093
1882
728
Build Scenario 2 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 3
Page 366 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement EB WB NB SB
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)
LT
LTR
LTR
LTR
129
58
76
51
17
6
30
14
69
34
63
37
2518
2789
1450
1292
Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street
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)
EB
WB
NB
SB
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
35
5
51
64
3
0
26
23
19
0
44
51
5072
1167
1004
3711
Intersection: 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street
Movement
EB NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
26
43
Average Queue (ft)
9
5
95th Queue (ft)
25
25
Link Distance (ft)
7093
1359
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 2 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 4
Page 367 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
53
Average Queue (ft)
25
95th Queue (ft)
49
Link Distance (ft)
1094
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
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)
NB SB
TR TR
43 35
18 15
43 39
643 959
Intersection: 14: 4th Avenue & Access E
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)
Build Scenario 2 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 5
Page 368 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/28/2025
Intersection: 15: 4th Avenue & Access F
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: 16: 4th Avenue & Access G
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: 17: Access H & Pine Street
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
Build Scenario 2 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 6
Page 369 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/28/2025
2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 4.2 1.8 1.1 1.1 1.7
3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.5 3.3 0.2 0.4
Total DelNeh (s) 5.3 1.6 0.3 2.1 2.2
5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL
SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 2.0 0.7 1.8 1.7 3.7 3.3 2.1 2.1
8.0 2.0
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT
NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.2
0.0 0.0 2.4 3.3
Total DelNeh (s) 5.8 4.5 2.6 7.7 3.9 1.9 114.8 88.2
81.7 223.2 218.9 222.9
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.5
Total DelNeh (s) 50.2
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.8 2.1 1.1 2.0 1.9 0.7 4.9 11.0 3.5 8.8 13.0 5.1
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 4.0
8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 11.7 7.4 2.2 1.4 2.1 0.9 2.6
Build Scenario 2 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1
Page 370 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/28/2025
10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Performance by movement
Movement WBR
NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2
0.0 0.0 0.6 0.4
Total DelNeh (s) 5.3
2.0 0.6 1.6 2.0
11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBT
EBR WBT WBR NBR SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.6
0.6 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1
0.3
Total DelNeh (s) 2.1
0.6 2.1 1.3 8.4 6.3
2.4
14: 4th Avenue & Access E Performance by movement
Movement EBL
EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 5.5
4.0 2.3 1.8 2.9 2.4
3.3
15: 4th Avenue & Access F
Performance by movement
Movement EBL
EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 26.4
31.8 3.3 2.2 12.4 0.3
13.0
16: 4th Avenue & Access G Performance by movement
Movement EBL
EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2
0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 5.6
3.4 1.2 0.7 1.2 0.9
1.9
17: Access H & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT
WBL WBT NBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 0.4
1.4 1.6 3.1 2.4
Total Zone Performance
Denied DelNeh (s)
0.6
Total DelNeh (s)
270.3
Build Scenario 2 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 2
Page 371 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
91
Average Queue (ft)
36
95th Queue (ft)
68
Link Distance (ft)
1079
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail
Movement
WB
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
101
Average Queue (ft)
37
95th Queue (ft)
71
Link Distance (ft)
576
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street
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)
WB
NB
SB
LTR
LTR
LTR
32
55
31
2
28
9
15
44
30
7093
1860
728
Build Scenario 2 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 3
Page 372 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/28/2025
Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement EB EB WB NB SB
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)
LT
R
LTR
LTR
LTR
90
22
128
393
1199
18
1
23
124
495
66
10
80
381
1229
2506
2789
1310
1282
5
15
300
Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street
Movement
EB
WB
NB
SB
Directions Served
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
Maximum Queue (ft)
45
52
61
108
Average Queue (ft)
5
10
20
48
95th Queue (ft)
24
36
52
84
Link Distance (ft)
2549
1167
1004
3850
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street
Movement EB NB SB
Directions Served
LR
LT T
Maximum Queue (ft)
92
60 11
Average Queue (ft)
33
7 0
95th Queue (ft)
69
35 8
Link Distance (ft)
7093
1359 2481
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 2 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
SimTraffic Report
Page 4
Page 373 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
75
Average Queue (ft)
41
95th Queue (ft)
66
Link Distance (ft)
911
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
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)
NB SB
TR TR
70 62
26 27
55 52
643 640
Intersection: 14: 4th Avenue & Access E
Movement
EB NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
58
10
Average Queue (ft)
32
0
95th Queue (ft)
52
8
Link Distance (ft)
798
3850
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 2 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 5
Page 374 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 15: 4th Avenue & Access F
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)
EB NB SB
LR
LT
TR
138
33
128
45
4
20
132
20
157
628
1282
1885
Intersection: 16: 4th Avenue & Access G
Movement
EB
NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
63
34
Average Queue (ft)
35
4
95th Queue (ft)
55
20
Link Distance (ft)
1130
1885
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 17: Access H & Pine Street
Movement
WB NB
Directions Served
LT
LR
Maximum Queue (ft)
6
62
Average Queue (ft)
0
34
95th Queue (ft)
4
54
Link Distance (ft)
2985
947
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 15
Build Scenario 2 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 6
Page 375 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/29/2025
2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 4.6 1.9 1.2 1.1 1.7
3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.4 3.4 0.2 0.4
Total DelNeh (s) 5.4 1.7 0.3 2.1 2.2
5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL
SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.6 0.8 2.0 1.1 4.2 4.4 2.3 2.0
8.0 2.1
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT
NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1
0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.8 2.1 1.1 2.0 1.8 0.6 7.5 11.8
3.0 11.5 14.4 7.2
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 4.8
8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 10.3 5.6 2.3 1.3 2.0 0.9 2.4
10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.4
Total DelNeh (s) 5.4 2.1 0.6 1.6 2.1
11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT WBR NBR SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.6
Total DelNeh (s) 1.6 0.5 1.7 0.3 6.1 8.2 2.0
Build Scenario 2 (2045) MITIGATED - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1
Page 376 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/29/2025
14: 4th Avenue & Access E Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBR
NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2
0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 5.7 3.7
2.2 1.9 0.6 0.1
2.0
15: 4th Avenue & Access F Performance
by movement
Movement EBL EBR
NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.1
0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0
0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 6.9 4.0
1.7 0.5 1.3 0.5
1.8
16: 4th Avenue & Access G Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBR
NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.2
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 5.5 3.7
1.4 0.8 1.3 0.8
2.1
17: Access H & Pine Street Performance
by movement
Movement EBT WBL
WBT NBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 0.5 1.5
2.2 3.1 2.5
Total Zone Performance
Denied DelNeh (s)
0.4
Total DelNeh (s)
78.2
Build Scenario 2 (2045) MITIGATED - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 2
Page 377 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
82
Average Queue (ft)
35
95th Queue (ft)
63
Link Distance (ft)
1079
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail
Movement
WB
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
84
Average Queue (ft)
37
95th Queue (ft)
67
Link Distance (ft)
576
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street
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)
EB WB NB SIB
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
4
28
67
30
0
2
29
11
3
15
50
33
2985
7093
1860
728
04/29/2025
Build Scenario 2 (2045) MITIGATED - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 3
Page 378 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/29/2025
Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street
Movement EB WB NB SIB
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)
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
50
62
65
134
5
12
22
59
27
41
55
108
2549
1167
1004
3850
Intersection: 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street
Movement
EB
NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
76
63
Average Queue (ft)
30
8
95th Queue (ft)
59
36
Link Distance (ft)
7093
1359
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A
Movement WB
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
84
Average Queue (ft)
40
95th Queue (ft)
66
Link Distance (ft)
911
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 2 (2045) MITIGATED - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 4
Page 379 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/29/2025
Intersection: 11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement
NB SIB
Directions Served
TR
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
52
65
Average Queue (ft)
22
29
95th Queue (ft)
46
58
Link Distance (ft)
643
640
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 14: 4th Avenue & Access E
Movement
EB
NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
58
26
Average Queue (ft)
33
1
95th Queue (ft)
51
9
Link Distance (ft)
798
3850
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 15: 4th Avenue & Access F
Movement
EB NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
57
42
Average Queue (ft)
34
5
95th Queue (ft)
52
25
Link Distance (ft)
628
657
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 2 (2045) MITIGATED - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 5
Page 380 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/29/2025
Intersection: 16: 4th Avenue & Access G
Movement EB NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
70
38
Average Queue (ft)
39
3
95th Queue (ft)
59
19
Link Distance (ft)
1130
1885
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 17: Access H
& Pine Street
Movement
WB
NB
Directions Served
LT
LR
Maximum Queue (ft)
6
73
Average Queue (ft)
0
32
95th Queue (ft)
0
56
Link Distance (ft)
2985
947
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
Build Scenario 2 (2045) MITIGATED - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 6
Page 381 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/29/2025
2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 6.0 2.7 1.8 0.8 2.1
3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 1.1 3.0 0.0 0.8
Total DelNeh (s) 8.0 2.3 0.6 1.2 2.0
5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR
SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.4 0.6 3.0 1.9 3.2 5.4 4.5 3.5
1.0 3.1
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT
NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.2
0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 3.7 3.2 1.8 2.3 2.3 0.9 8.2 14.1
3.3 9.5 16.3 5.0
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 3.7
8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 2.0 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 10.6 0.6 3.7 3.0 3.0 1.6 0.8 2.7
10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 6.2 3.7 1.0 1.5 2.7
11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBT WBR NBR SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 1.1 1.2 1.0 1.1 0.1 0.1 1.1
Total DelNeh (s) 3.6 1.7 4.6 2.3 14.6 13.6 4.3
Build Scenario 2 (2045) MITIGATED - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1
Page 382 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/29/2025
14: 4th Avenue & Access E Performance by movement
Movement EBL
EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2
0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 5.9
2.7 2.4 2.0 1.1 0.4
2.0
15: 4th Avenue & Access F
Performance by movement
Movement EBL
EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.1 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0
0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 9.6
3.4 2.0 1.6 1.1 0.6
1.8
16: 4th Avenue & Access G Performance by movement
Movement EBL
EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 7.7
3.4 2.2 2.5 1.0 0.4
2.2
17: Access H & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT
WBL WBT NBR All
Denied DellVeh (s) 0.1
0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 0.7
2.1 1.9 2.9 2.3
Total Zone Performance
Denied DelNeh (s)
0.7
Total DelNeh (s)
114.1
Build Scenario 2 (2045) MITIGATED - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 2
Page 383 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
71
Average Queue (ft)
31
95th Queue (ft)
59
Link Distance (ft)
1079
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail
Movement
WB
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
66
Average Queue (ft)
29
95th Queue (ft)
53
Link Distance (ft)
576
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street
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)
WB
NB
SIB
LTR
LTR
LTR
38
98
47
4
38
4
23
65
26
7093
1882
728
04/29/2025
Build Scenario 2 (2045) MITIGATED - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 3
Page 384 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/29/2025
Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street
Movement EB WB NB SIB
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)
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
84
34
60
80
25
2
28
37
62
15
52
64
2549
1167
1004
3711
Intersection: 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street
Movement
EB
NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
64
84
Average Queue (ft)
24
21
95th Queue (ft)
45
57
Link Distance (ft)
7093
1359
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A
Movement WB
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
80
Average Queue (ft)
39
95th Queue (ft)
66
Link Distance (ft)
1094
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 2 (2045) MITIGATED - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 4
Page 385 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement
NB SIB
Directions Served
TR
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
69
71
Average Queue (ft)
22
27
95th Queue (ft)
50
55
Link Distance (ft)
643
959
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 14: 4th Avenue & Access E
Movement
EB
NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
64
26
Average Queue (ft)
30
2
95th Queue (ft)
54
12
Link Distance (ft)
624
3711
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 15: 4th Avenue & Access F
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)
EB
NB
SIB
LR
LT
TR
61
48
4
28
12
0
51
37
3
905
737
1856
04/29/2025
Build Scenario 2 (2045) MITIGATED - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 5
Page 386 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/29/2025
Intersection: 16: 4th Avenue & Access G
Movement EB NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
59
59
Average Queue (ft)
34
9
95th Queue (ft)
54
36
Link Distance (ft)
1097
1856
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 17: Access H
& Pine Street
Movement
WB
NB
Directions Served
LT
LR
Maximum Queue (ft)
12
61
Average Queue (ft)
0
31
95th Queue (ft)
6
52
Link Distance (ft)
2956
1520
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 0
Build Scenario 2 (2045) MITIGATED - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 6
Page 387 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/28/2025
2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 5.3 2.5 1.7 0.8 1.9
3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail Performance by movement
Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 6.7 3.5 2.2 1.1 2.6
5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR
SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.1 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1.3 0.9 3.0 2.7 0.8 4.5 2.8 2.5
1.7 2.6
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT
NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 69.1 39.5
0.0 0.0 85.8 145.0
Total DelNeh (s) 101.3 77.7 73.8 33.4 27.4 22.7 2917.1 2578.2
2757.6 2571.3 2592.7 2392.6
6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 2.7
Total DelNeh (s) 246.9
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total DelNeh (s) 17.3 10.0 14.6 2.6 8.1 8.0 8.6 16.9 8.3 8.2 9.2 3.5
7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Performance by movement
Movement All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 9.8
8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBL EBT EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 1.9 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 12.7 0.4 4.8 3.2 3.0 1.5 0.8 2.7
Build Scenario 2 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1
Page 388 of 617
SimTraffic Performance Report
04/28/2025
10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Performance by movement
Movement WBR
NBT NBR SBT All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.2
0.0 0.0 0.5 0.2
Total DelNeh (s) 6.3
3.4 0.9 1.5 2.5
11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement
Movement EBT
EBR WBT WBR NBR SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 1.2
1.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1
0.6
Total DelNeh (s) 3.9
1.6 10.0 7.5 15.2 10.4
6.6
14: 4th Avenue & Access E Performance by movement
Movement EBL
EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied DelNeh (s) 382.9
301.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
61.9
Total DelNeh (s) 1716.2
1954.9 1161.9 1167.2 1.2 0.8
849.8
15: 4th Avenue & Access F Performance by movement
Movement EBL
EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 90.6
90.1 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0
13.0
Total DelNeh (s) 1488.7
1480.9 1.5 1.3 1601.7 1574.2
632.3
16: 4th Avenue & Access G Performance by movement
Movement EBL
EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
All
Denied Del/Veh (s) 1.8
0.7 0.0 0.0 3.3 5.4
1.3
Total DelNeh (s) 284.7
305.5 1.5 1.4 269.1 219.4
150.5
17: Access H & Pine Street Performance by movement
Movement EBT
WBL WBT NBR All
Denied DelNeh (s) 0.1
0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1
Total DelNeh (s) 0.6
2.0 2.0 3.0 2.3
Total Zone Performance
Denied DelNeh (s)
9.1
Total DelNeh (s)
1162.8
Build Scenario 2 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 2
Page 389 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
60
Average Queue (ft)
27
95th Queue (ft)
49
Link Distance (ft)
1079
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Century Trail
Movement
WB
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
64
Average Queue (ft)
28
95th Queue (ft)
51
Link Distance (ft)
576
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street
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)
EB WB NB SB
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
4
44
51
44
0
7
29
4
3
32
46
25
2956
7093
1882
728
Build Scenario 2 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 3
Page 390 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
04/28/2025
Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
Movement EB EB WB NB SB
Directions Served
LT
R
LTR
LTR
LTR
Maximum Queue (ft)
2122
375
914
1461
1302
Average Queue (ft)
772
105
235
1425
1279
95th Queue (ft)
1964
381
731
1578
1380
Link Distance (ft)
3252
2789
1450
1292
Upstream Blk Time (%)
86
87
Queuing Penalty (veh)
201
197
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
300
Storage Blk Time (%)
30
Queuing Penalty (veh)
19
Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street
Movement
EB
WB
NB
SB
Directions Served
LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
Maximum Queue (ft)
298
315
72
58
Average Queue (ft)
42
17
30
29
95th Queue (ft)
160
159
57
52
Link Distance (ft)
5072
1167
1004
3711
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street
Movement EB NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
61
94
Average Queue (ft)
23
24
95th Queue (ft)
48
67
Link Distance (ft)
7093
1359
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 2 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
SimTraffic Report
Page 4
Page 391 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A
Movement
Directions Served
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
75
Average Queue (ft)
39
95th Queue (ft)
64
Link Distance (ft)
1094
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street)
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)
NB SB
TR TR
60 65
24 28
54 53
643 959
Intersection: 14: 4th Avenue & Access E
Movement
EB NB
Directions Served
LR
LT
Maximum Queue (ft)
632
3673
Average Queue (ft)
408
1606
95th Queue (ft)
804
3614
Link Distance (ft)
624
3711
Upstream Blk Time (%)
44
5
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
10
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Build Scenario 2 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 5
Page 392 of 617
Queuing and Blocking Report
Intersection: 15: 4th Avenue & Access F
Movement
EB NB SB
Directions Served
LR
LT TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
909
21 1862
Average Queue (ft)
479
1 1183
95th Queue (ft)
1012
9 2336
Link Distance (ft)
904
1292 1856
Upstream Blk Time (%)
19
38
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
72
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 16: 4th Avenue & Access G
Movement
EB
NB
SB
Directions Served
LR
LT
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
832
50
1039
Average Queue (ft)
195
6
232
95th Queue (ft)
637
28
848
Link Distance (ft)
1097
1856
1882
Upstream Blk Time (%)
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 17: Access H & Pine Street
Movement
WB NB
Directions Served
LT LR
Maximum Queue (ft)
28 65
Average Queue (ft)
1 31
95th Queue (ft)
10 53
Link Distance (ft)
2956 1520
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 499
Build Scenario 2 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
04/28/2025
SimTraffic Report
Page 6
Page 393 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & 4th Ave - 2045 Scenario 1 Mitigation
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
g
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
420
Entry Bypass
462
Flow
167
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
988 0.4250
1 4th Ave SB
2
Main St EB
None
761
322
560
2048 0.3716
3
4th Ave NB
None
156
867
216
834 0.1871
4
Main St W B
None
449
180
843
2200 0.2041
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
4th Ave SB
None
6.24
6.24
2
Main St EB
None
3.07
3.07
3
4th Ave NB
None
5.20
5.20
4
Main St WB
None
2.23
2.23
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
3.00
2.58
0.89
1.00
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A
A A
A A
A A
Report dated 29-Apr-2025
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number41
Page 1 of 2
Page 394 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & 4th Ave - 2045 Scenario 1 Mitigation
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1786
1786
Capacity
veh/hr
6070
6070
Average Delay
sec/veh
3.79
3.79
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
1.88
1.88
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number41
Page 395 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & 4th Ave - 2045 Scenario 1 Mitigation
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Bypass
Leg
Leg Names
Arrival Flow
Type
Entry Bypass
1
4th Ave SB
None
322
2
Main St EB
None
958
3
4th Ave NB
None
261
4
Main St W B
None
990
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Flows (veh/hr)
Opposing Flow
Entry Bypass
939
219
969
456
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
4th Ave SB
None
7.11
7.11
2
Main St EB
None
3.80
3.80
3
4th Ave NB
None
6.48
6.48
4
Main St WB
None
4.38
4.38
Exit
Flow
507
1042
208
774
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
806 0.3993
2158 0.4439
795 0.3283
1905 0.5198
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
1.82
2.81
1.34
3.41
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A
A A
A A
A A
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number43
Page 396 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & 4th Ave - 2045 Scenario 1 Mitigation
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
2531
2531
Capacity
veh/hr
5664
5664
Average Delay
sec/veh
4.72
4.72
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
3.32
3.32
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number43
Page 397 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & 4th Ave - 2045 Scenario 2 Mitigation
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
g
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
293
Entry Bypass
461
Flow
122
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
989 0.2964
1 4th Ave SB
2
Main St EB
None
760
217
537
2160 0.3518
3
4th Ave NB
None
140
778
199
868 0.1613
4
Main St W B
None
451
132
786
2251 0.2004
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
4th Ave SB
None
5.03
5.03
2
Main St EB
None
2.79
2.79
3
4th Ave NB
None
4.82
4.82
4
Main St WB
None
2.11
2.11
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bvoass
2.27
0.72
0.95
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A
A A
A A
A A
Report dated 29-Apr-2025
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number49
Page 1 of 2
Page 398 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & 4th Ave - 2045 Scenario 2 Mitigation
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1644
1644
Capacity
veh/hr
6268
6268
Average Delay
sec/veh
3.17
3.17
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
1.45
1.45
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number49
Page 399 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & 4th Ave - 2045 Scenario 2 Mitigation
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
g
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
227
Entry Bypass
965
Flow
358
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
797 0.2850
1 4th Ave SB
2
Main St EB
None
842
188
1004
2191 0.3843
3
4th Ave NB
None
235
848
182
841 0.2794
4
Main St W B
None
993
330
753
2039 0.4869
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
4th Ave SB
None
6.09
6.09
2
Main St EB
None
3.05
3.05
3
4th Ave NB
None
5.73
5.73
4
Main St WB
None
3.69
3.69
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
1.09
1.99
1.06
2.87
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A
A A
A A
A A
Report dated 29-Apr-2025
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 51
Page 1 of 2
Page 400 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & 4th Ave - 2045 Scenario 2 Mitigation
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
2297
Total
2297
Arrive Flows veh/hr
Capacity
veh/hr
5868
5868
Average Delay
sec/veh
3.90
3.90
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
2.49
2.49
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 51
Page 401 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2030 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Leg
Leg Names
Bypass
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
None
Entry Bypass
137
Entry Bypass
446
1 Access C SB
2
Main St EB
None
472
127
3
Access C NB
None
149
556
4
Main St W B
None
341
148
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Capacity (veh/hr)
Exit
Capacity
Average VCR
Flow
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
43
929
0.1475
456
1097
0.4301
43
871
0.1711
557
1086
0.3139
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Access C SB
None
4.41
4.41
0.62
A
A
2
Main St EB
None
5.60
5.60
2.90
A
A
3
Access C NB
None
4.86
4.86
0.77
A
A
4
Main St WB
None
4.67
4.67
1.66
A
A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 12
Page 402 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2030 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1099
1099
Capacity
veh/hr
3984
3984
Average Delay
sec/veh
5.06
5.06
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
1.55
1.55
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 12
Page 403 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2030 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr) Capacity (veh/hr)
Le Le Names Bypass Arrival Flow Opposing Flow Capacity Average VCR
g g Type pp g Exit p Y g
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass Flow Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
1 Access C SB None 107 804 140 740 0.1446
2 Main St EB None 666 174 737 1073 0.6209
3 Access C NB None 115 700 140 795 0.1447
4 Main St W B None 760 184 631 1067 0.7121
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Access C SB
None
5.51
5.51
0.47
A
A
2
Main St EB
None
8.28
8.28
4.30
A
A
3
Access C NB
None
5.13
5.13
0.46
A
A
4
Main St WB
None
10.71
10.71
6.37
B
B
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 15
Page 404 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2030 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1648
1648
Capacity
veh/hr
3675
3675
Average Delay
sec/veh
9.00
9.00
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
4.12
4.12
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 15
Page 405 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2030 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
9
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
80
Entry Bypass
400
Flow
26
Entry
953
Bypass Entry Bypass
0.0839
1 Access C SB
2
Main St EB
None
495
89
391
1117
0.4430
3
Access C NB
None
103
545
39
877
0.1175
4
Main St W B
None
342
84
564
1120
0.3053
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Leg Leg Names Bypass
Type
1 Access C SB None
Average Delay (sec)
Entry Bypass Leg
3.99 3.99
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
0.32
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A
A
2
Main St EB
None
5.62
5.62
3.05
A
A
3
Access C NB
None
4.52
4.52
0.49
A
A
4
Main St WB
None
4.46
4.46
1.56
A
A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 18
Page 406 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2030 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1020
1020
Capacity
veh/hr
4068
4068
Average Delay
sec/veh
5.00
5.00
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
1.42
1.42
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 18
Page 407 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2030 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
9
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity
p Y
Average VCR
g
Entry
Bypass Entry Bypass
Flow
Entry Bypass
Entry
Bypass
1
Access C SB
None
62
778
84
754
0.0823
2
Main St EB
None
615
133
707
1094
0.5620
3
Access C NB
None
80
622
126
836
0.0957
4
Main St WB
None
760
102
600
1111
0.6843
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry
Bypass Leg
Entry
Bypass
Entry
Bypass
Leg
A
A
1 Access C SB None
5.05 5.05
0.25
2
Main St EB
None
7.09
7.09
3.39
A
A
3
Access C NB
None
4.63
4.63
0.29
A
A
4
Main St WB
None
9.47
9.47
5.60
A
A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 21
Page 408 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2030 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1517
1517
Capacity
veh/hr
3795
3795
Average Delay
sec/veh
8.07
8.07
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
3.40
3.40
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 21
Page 409 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2045 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Leg
Leg Names
Bypass
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
None
Entry Bypass
189
Entry Bypass
902
1 Access C SB
2
Main St EB
None
695
163
3
Access C NB
None
277
789
4
Main St W B
None
670
306
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Capacity (veh/hr)
Exit
Capacity
Average VCR
Flow
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
74
688
0.2746
928
1078
0.6445
69
748
0.3703
760
1003
0.6680
Leg
1
Leg Names
Access C SB
Bypass
Type
None
Average Delay (sec)
Entry Bypass
7.31
Leg
7.31
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
1.73
Level of Service
Entry Bypass
Leg
A
A
2
Main St EB
None
9.80
9.80
9.07
A
A
3
Access C NB
None
7.82
7.82
2.76
A
A
4
Main St WB
None
11.93
11.93
11.56
B
B
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 24
Page 410 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2045 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1831
1831
Capacity
veh/hr
3518
3518
Average Delay
sec/veh
10.02
10.02
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
B
B
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
B
B
Total Delay
veh.hrs
5.10
5.10
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 24
Page 411 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2045 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
9
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
140
Entry Bypass
1118
Flow
210
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
574 0.2438
1 Access C SB
2
Main St EB
None
1216
191
1067
1064 1.1431
3
Access C NB
None
206
1058
197
606 0.3399
4
Main St W B
None
1058
347
917
981 1.0781
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass Leg
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Access C SB
None
7.98 7.98
0.86
A
A
2
Main St EB
None
265.63 265.63
303.66
F
F
3
Access C NB
None
8.64 8.64
1.37
A
A
4
Main St WB
None
159.55 159.55
151.37
F
F
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 28
Page 412 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2045 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
2620
2620
Capacity
veh/hr
3225
3225
Average Delay
sec/veh
188.82
188.82
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
F
F
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
F
F
Total Delay
veh.hrs
137.42
137.42
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 28
Page 413 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2045 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Leg
Leg Names
Bypass
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
Exit
None
Entry Bypass
148
Entry Bypass
695
Flow
71
1 Access C SB
2
Main St EB
None
699
127
716
3
Access C NB
None
237
749
76
4
Main St W B
None
540
227
759
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry
Bypass Entry Bypass
797
0.1856
1097
0.6369
769
0.3081
1045
0.5169
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Access C SB
None
5.45
5.45
0.90
A
A
2
Main St EB
None
9.33
9.33
8.51
A
A
3
Access C NB
None
6.78
6.78
1.94
A
A
4
Main St WB
None
7.09
7.09
4.56
A
A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 31
Page 414 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2045 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1624
1624
Capacity
veh/hr
3709
3709
Average Delay
sec/veh
7.86
7.86
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
3.55
3.55
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 31
Page 415 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2045 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Leg
Leg Names
Bypass
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
None
Entry Bypass
110
Entry Bypass
1069
1 Access C SB
2
Main St EB
None
1038
182
3
Access C NB
None
176
974
4
Main St W B
None
1027
283
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Capacity (veh/hr)
Exit
Capacity
Average VCR
Flow
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
218
600
0.1833
996
1068
0.9717
234
650
0.2708
867
1015
1.0119
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Access C SB
None
7.08
7.08
0.61
A
A
2
Main St EB
None
48.57
48.57
37.52
E
E
3
Access C NB
None
7.30
7.30
1.02
A
A
4
Main St WB
None
77.25
77.25
60.69
F
F
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 34
Page 416 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2045 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
2351
2351
Capacity
veh/hr
3333
3333
Average Delay
sec/veh
56.07
56.07
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
E
E
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
F
F
Total Delay
veh.hrs
36.62
36.62
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 34
Page 417 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C (2x1) - 2045 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Leg
Leg Names
Bypass
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
None
Entry Bypass
189
Entry Bypass
902
1 Access C SB
2
Main St EB
None
695
163
3
Access C NB
None
277
789
4
Main St W B
None
670
306
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Capacity (veh/hr)
Exit
Capacity
Average VCR
Flow
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
74
821
0.2303
928
2218
0.3134
69
864
0.3207
760
2065
0.3244
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Access C SB
None
5.61
5.61
1.19
A
A
2
Main St EB
None
2.50
2.50
1.81
A
A
3
Access C NB
None
6.07
6.07
1.93
A
A
4
Main St WB
None
2.64
2.64
1.91
A
A
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number41
Page 418 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C (2x1) - 2045 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1831
1831
Capacity
veh/hr
5967
5967
Average Delay
sec/veh
3.41
3.41
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
1.74
1.74
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number41
Page 419 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C (2x1) - 2045 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Leg
Leg Names
Bypass
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
None
Entry Bypass
140
Entry Bypass
1191
1 Access C SB
2
Main St EB
None
1216
198
3
Access C NB
None
206
1195
4
Main St W B
None
1058
370
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Capacity (veh/hr)
Exit
Capacity
Average VCR
Flow
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
237
710
0.1971
1133
2180
0.5577
219
709
0.2906
1031
1997
0.5299
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Access C SB
None
6.10
6.10
0.68
A
A
2
Main St EB
None
4.17
4.17
3.94
A
A
3
Access C NB
None
6.89
6.89
1.13
A
A
4
Main St WB
None
4.03
4.03
3.34
A
A
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number44
Page 420 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C (2x1) - 2045 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
2620
2620
Capacity
veh/hr
5596
5596
Average Delay
sec/veh
4.43
4.43
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
3.22
3.22
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number44
Page 421 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C (2x1) - 2045 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Leg
Leg Names
Bypass
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
None
Entry Bypass
189
Entry Bypass
766
1 Access C SB
2
Main St EB
None
699
169
3
Access C NB
None
277
792
4
Main St W B
None
540
297
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Capacity (veh/hr)
Exit
Capacity
Average VCR
Flow
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
71
872
0.2166
786
2212
0.3161
76
862
0.3212
772
2075
0.2603
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Access C SB
None
5.15
5.15
1.06
A
A
2
Main St EB
None
2.48
2.48
1.81
A
A
3
Access C NB
None
6.08
6.08
1.93
A
A
4
Main St WB
None
2.45
2.45
1.38
A
A
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 50
Page 422 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C (2x1) - 2045 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1705
1705
Capacity
veh/hr
6021
6021
Average Delay
sec/veh
3.35
3.35
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
1.59
1.59
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 50
Page 423 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C (2x1) - 2045 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr) Capacity (veh/hr)
Le Le Names Bypass Arrival Flow Opposing Flow Capacity Average VCR
g 9 Type pp g Exit p Y g
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass Flow Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
1 Access C SB None 140 1143 221 729 0.1921
2 Main St EB None 1038 162 1121 2219 0.4678
3 Access C NB None 206 962 238 798 0.2583
4 Main St W B None 1027 337 831 2032 0.5054
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Access C SB
None
5.92
5.92
0.66
A
A
2
Main St EB
None
3.42
3.42
2.75
A
A
3
Access C NB
None
5.87
5.87
0.95
A
A
4
Main St WB
None
3.86
3.86
3.10
A
A
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 54
Page 424 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Access C (2x1) - 2045 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
2411
2411
Capacity
veh/hr
5777
5777
Average Delay
sec/veh
3.96
3.96
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
2.65
2.65
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 54
Page 425 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
g
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
388
Entry Bypass
480
Flow
270
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
888 0.4371
1 Main St EB
2
Lake Dr NB
None
224
335
533
915 0.2448
3
Main St W B
None
398
257
302
988 0.4027
4
Lake Dr SB
None
327
423
232
838 0.3901
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Main St EB
None
6.77
6.77
2
Lake Dr NB
None
4.77
4.77
3
Main St WB
None
5.65
5.65
4
Lake Dr SB
None
6.15
6.15
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
2.40
0.92
1.98
1.80
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A
A A
A A
A A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 14
Page 426 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1337
1337
Capacity
veh/hr
3629
3629
Average Delay
sec/veh
5.95
5.95
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
2.21
2.21
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 14
Page 427 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
g
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
438
Entry Bypass
395
Flow
525
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
958 0.4572
1 Main St EB
2
Lake Dr NB
None
686
374
459
951 0.7212
3
Main St W B
None
492
594
466
837 0.5879
4
Lake Dr SB
None
323
597
489
851 0.3795
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Main St EB
None
6.60
6.60
2
Lake Dr NB
None
11.96
11.96
3
Main St WB
None
9.57
9.57
4
Lake Dr SB
None
6.53
6.53
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
2.27
6.50
3.76
1.67
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A
B B
A A
A A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 17
Page 1 of 2
Page 428 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1939
1939
Capacity
veh/hr
3597
3597
Average Delay
sec/veh
9.24
9.24
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
4.98
4.98
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 17
Page 429 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
g
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
560
Entry Bypass
480
Flow
335
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
888 0.6308
1 Main St EB
2
Lake Dr NB
None
267
393
647
887 0.3010
3
Main St W B
None
409
329
331
951 0.4299
4
Lake Dr SB
None
338
477
261
812 0.4161
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
10.12
Leg
10.12
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
B
Leg
B
1 Main St EB
None
5.59
2
Lake Dr NB
None
5.29
5.29
1.23
A
A
3
Main St WB
None
6.13
6.13
2.24
A
A
4
Lake Dr SB
None
6.60
6.60
2.02
A
A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 28
Page 430 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1574
1574
Capacity
veh/hr
3538
3538
Average Delay
sec/veh
7.51
7.51
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
3.28
3.28
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 28
Page 431 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
g
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
571
Entry Bypass
395
Flow
733
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
958 0.5959
1 Main St EB
2
Lake Dr NB
None
825
418
548
929 0.8882
3
Main St W B
None
527
753
487
755 0.6980
4
Lake Dr SB
None
358
770
510
760 0.4709
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Main St EB
None
8.72
8.72
2
Lake Dr NB
None
25.27
25.27
3
Main St WB
None
13.98
13.98
4
Lake Dr SB
None
8.50
8.50
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
3.92
16.68
5.99
2.43
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A
D D
B B
A A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 32
Page 1 of 2
Page 432 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
2281
2281
Capacity
veh/hr
3402
3402
Average Delay
sec/veh
15.89
15.89
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
B
B
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
C
C
Total Delay
veh.hrs
10.07
10.07
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 32
Page 433 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
g
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
560
Entry Bypass
480
Flow
335
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
888 0.6308
1 Main St EB
2
Lake Dr NB
None
267
393
647
887 0.3010
3
Main St W B
None
409
329
331
951 0.4299
4
Lake Dr SB
None
338
477
261
812 0.4161
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
10.12
Leg
10.12
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
B
Leg
B
1 Main St EB
None
5.59
2
Lake Dr NB
None
5.29
5.29
1.23
A
A
3
Main St WB
None
6.13
6.13
2.24
A
A
4
Lake Dr SB
None
6.60
6.60
2.02
A
A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 36
Page 434 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1574
1574
Capacity
veh/hr
3538
3538
Average Delay
sec/veh
7.51
7.51
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
3.28
3.28
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 36
Page 435 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
g
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
571
Entry Bypass
395
Flow
733
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
958 0.5959
1 Main St EB
2
Lake Dr NB
None
825
418
548
929 0.8882
3
Main St W B
None
527
753
487
755 0.6980
4
Lake Dr SB
None
358
770
510
760 0.4709
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Main St EB
None
8.72
8.72
2
Lake Dr NB
None
25.27
25.27
3
Main St WB
None
13.98
13.98
4
Lake Dr SB
None
8.50
8.50
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
3.92
16.68
5.99
2.43
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A
D D
B B
A A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 38
Page 1 of 2
Page 436 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
2281
2281
Capacity
veh/hr
3402
3402
Average Delay
sec/veh
15.89
15.89
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
B
B
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
C
C
Total Delay
veh.hrs
10.07
10.07
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 38
Page 437 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Design Year (2045) No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
g
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
464
Entry Bypass
574
Flow
323
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
838 0.5537
1 Main St EB
2
Lake Dr NB
None
267
400
638
883 0.3022
3
Main St W B
None
476
306
361
963 0.4942
4
Lake Dr SB
None
391
506
276
799 0.4894
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Main St EB
None
8.97
8.97
2
Lake Dr NB
None
5.32
5.32
3
Main St WB
None
6.77
6.77
4
Lake Dr SB
None
7.55
7.55
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
4.03
1.24
2.92
2.73
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A
A A
A A
A A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 20
Page 438 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Design Year (2045) No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1598
1598
Capacity
veh/hr
3484
3484
Average Delay
sec/veh
7.36
7.36
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
3.27
3.27
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 20
Page 439 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Design Year (2045) No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Bypass
Leg
Leg Names
Arrival Flow
Type
Entry Bypass
1
Main St EB
None
523
2
Lake Dr NB
None
820
3
Main St W B
None
590
4
Lake Dr SB
None
386
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Flows (veh/hr)
Opposing Flow
Entry Bypass
473
447
707
714
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Main St EB
None
8.59
8.59
2
Lake Dr NB
None
27.15
27.15
3
Main St WB
None
16.40
16.40
4
Lake Dr SB
None
8.46
8.46
Exit
Flow
627
549
557
583
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
917 0.5701
914 0.8971
779 0.7576
790 0.4888
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
3.55
17.85
7.88
2.60
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A
D D
C C
A A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 25
Page 440 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Design Year (2045) No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
2319
2319
Capacity
veh/hr
3400
3400
Average Delay
sec/veh
17.12
17.12
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
B
B
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
C
C
Total Delay
veh.hrs
11.03
11.03
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 25
Page 441 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Deisgn Year (2045) Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Bypass
Leg
Leg Names
Arrival Flow
Type
Entry Bypass
1
Main St EB
None
829
2
Lake Dr NB
None
373
3
Main St W B
None
503
4
Lake Dr SB
None
451
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Flows (veh/hr)
Opposing Flow
Entry Bypass
618
497
448
623
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Main St EB
None
98.60
98.60
2
Lake Dr NB
None
6.89
6.89
3
Main St WB
None
8.41
8.41
4
Lake Dr SB
None
10.20
10.20
Exit
Flow
456
917
422
329
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
814 1.0179
836 0.4461
890 0.5654
743 0.6070
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
80.92
2.21
3.90
4.54
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
F F
A A
A A
B B
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number41
Page 442 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Deisgn Year (2045) Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
Capacity
veh/hr
Average Delay
sec/veh
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
Total Delay
veh.hrs
Entries
2156
3283
43.20
D
E
25.87
Bypasses
Total
2156
3283
43.20
D
E
25.87
Report dated 25-Apr-2025
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number41
Page 2 of 2
Page 443 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Deisgn Year (2045) Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Bypass
Leg Leg Names
Type
None
Arrival Flow
Entry Bypass
793
1 Main St EB
2 Lake Dr NB
None
1158
3 Main St W B
None
674
4 Lake Dr SB
None
469
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Flows (veh/hr)
Opposing Flow
Exit
Entry Bypass
Flow
502
933
531
761
867
536
967
566
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Main St EB
None
26.04
26.04
2
Lake Dr NB
None
546.24
546.24
3
Main St WB
None
57.74
57.74
4
Lake Dr SB
None
17.28
17.28
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
902 0.8788
871 1.3295
697 0.9673
657 0.7140
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
16.53
597.75
28.40
6.44
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
D D
F F
F F
C C
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number44
Page 444 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Deisgn Year (2045) Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
3094
3094
Capacity
veh/hr
3127
3127
Average Delay
sec/veh
226.31
226.31
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
F
F
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
F
F
Total Delay
veh.hrs
194.51
194.51
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number44
Page 445 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Deisgn Year (2045) Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Bypass
Leg
Leg Names
Arrival Flow
Type
Entry Bypass
1
Main St EB
None
836
2
Lake Dr NB
None
375
3
Main St W B
None
503
4
Lake Dr SB
None
452
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Flows (veh/hr)
Opposing Flow
Entry Bypass
619
497
451
625
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Main St EB
None
105.68
105.68
2
Lake Dr NB
None
6.91
6.91
3
Main St WB
None
8.44
8.44
4
Lake Dr SB
None
10.27
10.27
Exit
Flow
458
921
421
329
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
814 1.0272
836 0.4485
888 0.5661
742 0.6092
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
86.03
2.23
3.91
4.58
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
F F
A A
A A
B B
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number47
Page 446 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Deisgn Year (2045) Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
2166
2166
Capacity
veh/hr
3281
3281
Average Delay
sec/veh
46.09
46.09
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
D
D
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
E
E
Total Delay
veh.hrs
27.73
27.73
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number47
Page 447 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Deisgn Year (2045) Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Bypass
Leg
Leg Names
Arrival Flow
Type
Entry Bypass
1
Main St EB
None
799
2
Lake Dr NB
None
1160
3
Main St W B
None
675
4
Lake Dr SB
None
470
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Flows (veh/hr)
Opposing Flow
Entry Bypass
503
533
867
968
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Main St EB
None
27.25
27.25
2
Lake Dr NB
None
551.70
551.70
3
Main St WB
None
58.67
58.67
4
Lake Dr SB
None
17.42
17.42
Exit
Flow
935
766
536
566
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
902 0.8860
870 1.3332
696 0.9692
656 0.7163
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
17.41
604.70
28.87
6.51
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
D D
F F
F F
C C
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 50
Page 448 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Lake & Main - Deisgn Year (2045) Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
3104
3104
Capacity
veh/hr
3125
3125
Average Delay
sec/veh
228.59
228.59
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
F
F
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
F
F
Total Delay
veh.hrs
197.09
197.09
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 50
Page 449 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development
Scheme: Lake & Main - Expanded Roundabout S 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
g
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Flow
Entry
Bypass Entry Bypass
1
Main St EB
Yield
504 325
618 618
456
814
752 0.6189 0.4321
2
Lake Dr NB
None
372
517
929
1251
0.2973
3
Main St W B
None
503
456
433
1047
0.4806
4
Lake Dr SB
None
451
623
336
825
0.5466
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
17.18 9.79
Leg
14.28
Entry Bypass
16.55 4.83
Entry Bypass
C A
Leg
B
1 Main St EB
Yield
2
Lake Dr NB
None
6.11
6.11
2.85
A
A
3
Main St WB
None
7.82
7.82
5.31
A
A
4
Lake Dr SB
None
9.54
9.54
6.46
A
A
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 33
Page 450 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development
Scheme: Lake & Main - Expanded Roundabout S 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries
Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1830
325
2155
Capacity
veh/hr
3937
752
4689
Average Delay
sec/veh
10.48
9.79
10.37
L.O.S. (Signal)
A— F
B
A
B
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
B
A
B
Total Delay
veh.hrs
5.33
0.88
6.21
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 33
Page 451 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development
Scheme: Lake & Main - Expanded Roundabout S 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le Le Names Bypass
g g Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Flow
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
1 Main St EB Yield
503 290
504 504
1047
901 829 0.5582 0.3498
2 Lake Dr NB None
1158
533
764
1315 0.8803
3 Main St W B None
674
1076
611
810 0.8317
4 Lake Dr SB None
469
1083
665
754 0.6221
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Main St EB
Yield
8.52 6.61
7.82
2
Lake Dr NB
None
27.65
27.65
3
Main St WB
None
24.79
24.79
4
Lake Dr SB
None
11.74
11.74
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
3.39 1.50
24.68
13.53
4.45
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A A
D D
C C
B B
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 36
Page 452 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development
Scheme: Lake & Main - Expanded Roundabout S 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries
2804
Bypasses
290
Total
3094
Arrive Flows veh/hr
Capacity
veh/hr
3781
829
4610
Average Delay
sec/veh
20.87
6.61
19.53
L.O.S. (Signal)
A— F
C
A
B
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
C
A
C
Total Delay
veh.hrs
16.25
0.53
16.79
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 36
Page 453 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development
Scheme: Lake & Main - Expanded Roundabout S2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
g
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Flow
Entry
Bypass Entry Bypass
1
Main St EB
Yield
506 330
619 619
458
814
752 0.6218 0.4390
2
Lake Dr NB
None
375
519
935
1249
0.3001
3
Main St W B
None
503
459
435
1045
0.4811
4
Lake Dr SB
None
452
625
337
824
0.5483
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
17.50 9.99
Leg
14.53
Entry Bypass
17.01 5.05
Entry Bypass
C A
Leg
B
1 Main St EB
Yield
2
Lake Dr NB
None
6.18
6.18
2.91
A
A
3
Main St WB
None
7.85
7.85
5.34
A
A
4
Lake Dr SB
None
9.60
9.60
6.53
A
A
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number42
Page 454 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development
Scheme: Lake & Main - Expanded Roundabout S2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries
Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1836
330
2166
Capacity
veh/hr
3933
752
4685
Average Delay
sec/veh
10.60
9.99
10.51
L.O.S. (Signal)
A— F
B
A
B
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
B
A
B
Total Delay
veh.hrs
5.40
0.92
6.32
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number42
Page 455 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development
Scheme: Lake & Main - Expanded Roundabout S2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le Le Names Bypass
g g Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Flow
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
1 Main St EB Yield
505 294
505 505
1050
901 828 0.5608 0.3549
2 Lake Dr NB None
1160
535
769
1314 0.8831
3 Main St W B None
675
1079
612
809 0.8343
4 Lake Dr SB None
470
1086
666
753 0.6244
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Main St EB
Yield
8.57 6.67
7.87
2
Lake Dr NB
None
28.18
28.18
3
Main St WB
None
25.11
25.11
4
Lake Dr SB
None
11.82
11.82
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
3.42 1.54
25.19
13.72
4.49
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A A
D D
D D
B B
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number45
Page 456 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development
Scheme: Lake & Main - Expanded Roundabout S2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries
2810
Bypasses
294
Total
3104
Arrive Flows veh/hr
Capacity
veh/hr
3776
828
4604
Average Delay
sec/veh
21.18
6.67
19.81
L.O.S. (Signal)
A— F
C
A
B
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
C
A
C
Total Delay
veh.hrs
16.53
0.54
17.08
Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number45
Page 457 of 617
2025 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Existing (2025) Conditions
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2025 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Bypass
Leg
Leg Names
Type
1
Sunset Ave EB
None
2
Main St NB
None
3
Main St WB
None
Flows (veh/hr)
Arrival Flow Opposing Flow Exit
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass Flow
530 50 280
111 311 269
250 80 342
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Sunset Ave EB
None
5.64
5.64
2
Main St NB
None
3.93
3.93
3
Main St WB
None
3.83
3.83
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
1168
0.4539
970
0.1145
1160
0.2156
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
3.69
0.48
1.04
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A
A A
A A
Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 39
Page 458 of 617
2025 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Existing (2025) Conditions
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2025 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
891
891
Capacity
veh/hr
3297
3297
Average Delay
sec/veh
4.92
4.92
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
1.22
1.22
Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 39
Page 459 of 617
2025 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Existing (2025) Conditions
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2025 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Bypass
Leg
Leg Names
Type
1
Sunset Ave EB
None
2
Main St NB
None
3
Main St WB
None
Flows (veh/hr)
Arrival Flow Opposing Flow Exit
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass Flow
510 39 583
193 362 187
485 137 418
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Sunset Ave EB
None
5.19
5.19
2
Main St NB
None
4.32
4.32
3
Main St WB
None
5.34
5.34
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
1173
0.4346
1000
0.1930
1130
0.4292
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
2.05
0.65
2.01
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A
A A
A A
Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number42
Page 460 of 617
2025 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Existing (2025) Conditions
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2025 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1188
1188
Capacity
veh/hr
3304
3304
Average Delay
sec/veh
5.11
5.11
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
1.69
1.69
Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number42
Page 461 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Opening Year (2030) No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Leg
Leg Names
Bypass
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
Exit
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Flow
564
92
298
1 Sunset Ave EB
None
2
Main St NB
None
156
331
325
3
Main St W B
None
267
123
364
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Sunset Ave EB
None
6.32
6.32
2
Main St NB
None
4.21
4.21
3
Main St W B
None
4.02
4.02
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
1145
0.4927
960
0.1626
1136
0.2351
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
4.59
0.73
1.18
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 49
Page 462 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Opening Year (2030) No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
987
987
Capacity
veh/hr
3240
3240
Average Delay
sec/veh
5.36
5.36
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
1.47
1.47
Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number49
Page 463 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Opening Year (2030) No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Leg
Leg Names
Bypass
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
Exit
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Flow
543
55
620
1 Sunset Ave EB
None
2
Main St NB
None
219
385
213
3
Main St W B
None
516
159
445
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
1165 0.4661
988 0.2217
1118 0.4614
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Leg Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass Leg
Entry Bypass
None
5.52 5.52
2.32
1 Sunset Ave EB
2 Main St NB
None
4.53 4.53
0.77
3 Main St W B
None
5.70 5.70
2.28
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 53
Page 464 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Opening Year (2030) No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
1278
Total
1278
Arrive Flows veh/hr
Capacity
veh/hr
3271
3271
Average Delay
sec/veh
5.43
5.43
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
1.93
1.93
Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 53
Page 465 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2030 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
g
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
63
Entry Bypass
697
Flow
29
Entry
819
Bypass Entry Bypass
0.0769
1 Sunset Ave SB
2
Main St EB
None
645
263
498
1051
0.6136
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
296
421
485
980
0.3021
4
Main St WB
None
470
257
460
1005
0.4675
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
4.65
Leg
4.65
Entry Bypass
0.31
Entry Bypass
A
Leg
A
1 Sunset Ave SB
None
2
Main St EB
None
9.25
9.25
7.90
A
A
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
5.13
5.13
1.66
A
A
4
Main St WB
None
6.27
6.27
3.37
A
A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 88
Page 466 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2030 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
1474
Total
1474
Arrive Flows veh/hr
Capacity
veh/hr
3855
3855
Average Delay
sec/veh
7.27
7.27
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
2.98
2.98
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 88
Page 467 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2030 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
g
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
49
Entry Bypass
915
Flow
84
Entry
711
Bypass Entry Bypass
0.0689
1 Sunset Ave SB
2
Main St EB
None
794
189
775
1093
0.7266
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
392
612
371
879
0.4462
4
Main St WB
None
695
304
700
1040
0.6683
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh) Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Bypass
Type
Entry Bypass
5.27
Leg
5.27
Entry Bypass
0.23
Entry Bypass
A
Leg
A
1 Sunset Ave SB
None
2
Main St EB
None
11.11
11.11
8.42
B
B
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
7.07
7.07
2.51
A
A
4
Main St WB
None
9.75
9.75
6.38
A
A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 91
Page 468 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2030 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1930
1930
Capacity
veh/hr
3723
3723
Average Delay
sec/veh
9.65
9.65
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
5.17
5.17
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 91
Page 469 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2030 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
g
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
206
Entry Bypass
601
Flow
82
Entry
871
Bypass Entry Bypass
0.2364
1 Sunset Ave SB
2
Main St EB
None
644
309
498
1027
0.6270
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
288
466
485
956
0.3012
4
Main St WB
None
402
281
473
993
0.4047
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
5.31
Leg
5.31
Entry Bypass
1.21
Entry Bypass
A
Leg
A
1 Sunset Ave SB
None
2
Main St EB
None
10.00
10.00
8.81
A
A
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
5.27
5.27
1.67
A
A
4
Main St WB
None
5.67
5.67
2.53
A
A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 97
Page 470 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2030 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1540
1540
Capacity
veh/hr
3848
3848
Average Delay
sec/veh
7.36
7.36
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
3.15
3.15
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 97
Page 471 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2030 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
g
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
160
Entry Bypass
840
Flow
259
Entry
751
Bypass Entry Bypass
0.2131
1 Sunset Ave SB
2
Main St EB
None
795
224
776
1074
0.7402
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
397
648
371
859
0.4619
4
Main St WB
None
685
414
631
981
0.6985
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
5.88
Leg
5.88
Entry Bypass
0.84
Entry Bypass
A
Leg
A
1 Sunset Ave SB
None
2
Main St EB
None
11.87
11.87
9.13
B
B
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
7.43
7.43
2.70
A
A
4
Main St WB
None
11.34
11.34
7.57
B
B
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 100
Page 472 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2030 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
2037
Capacity
veh/hr
3665
Average Delay
sec/veh
10.36
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
B
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
B
Total Delay
veh.hrs
5.86
Bypasses
Total
2037
3665
10.36
B
B
5.86
Report dated 25-Apr-2025
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 100
Page 2 of 2
Page 473 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Design Year (2045) No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Leg
Leg Names
Bypass
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
Exit
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Flow
674
95
669
1 Sunset Ave EB
None
2
Main St NB
None
187
395
374
3
Main St W B
None
617
147
435
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
1143
0.5896
927
0.2017
1122
0.5497
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Leg Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass Leg
Entry Bypass
None
8.37 8.37
8.10
1 Sunset Ave EB
2 Main St NB
None
4.60 4.60
0.99
3 Main St W B
None
7.60 7.60
6.53
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
Report dated 24-Apr-2025
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 56
Page 1 of 2
Page 474 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Design Year (2045) No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
1478
Total
1478
Arrive Flows veh/hr
Capacity
veh/hr
3193
3193
Average Delay
sec/veh
7.57
7.57
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
3.11
3.11
Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 56
Page 475 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Design Year (2045) No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Leg
Leg Names
Bypass
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
Exit
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Flow
648
66
741
1 Sunset Ave EB
None
2
Main St NB
None
262
460
254
3
Main St W B
None
617
190
532
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Sunset Ave EB
None
6.65
6.65
2
Main St NB
None
5.07
5.07
3
Main St W B
None
7.01
7.01
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
1159
0.5590
948
0.2765
1101
0.5601
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
3.34
1.04
3.37
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 59
Page 476 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Design Year (2045) No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
1527
Total
1527
Arrive Flows veh/hr
Capacity
veh/hr
3208
3208
Average Delay
sec/veh
6.53
6.53
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
2.77
2.77
Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 59
Page 477 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2045 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
9
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
73
Entry Bypass
1213
Flow
33
Entry
540
Bypass Entry Bypass
0.1352
1 Sunset Ave SB
2
Main St EB
None
866
437
849
956
0.9062
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
407
597
701
887
0.4590
4
Main St WB
None
957
315
689
976
0.9806
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass Leg
7.42 7.42
Entry Bypass
0.57
Entry Bypass
A
Leg
A
1 Sunset Ave SB
None
2
Main St EB
None
54.22 54.22
78.60
F
F
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
7.38 7.38
3.44
A
A
4
Main St WB
None
84.51 84.51
116.71
F
F
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 108
Page 478 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2045 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
2303
2303
Capacity
veh/hr
3358
3358
Average Delay
sec/veh
57.05
57.05
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
E
E
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
F
F
Total Delay
veh.hrs
36.49
36.49
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 108
Page 479 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2045 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
9
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
55
Entry Bypass
1280
Flow
83
Entry
519
Bypass Entry Bypass
0.1061
1 Sunset Ave SB
2
Main St EB
None
1247
295
1040
1036
1.2039
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
406
859
472
747
0.5436
4
Main St WB
None
1116
350
915
1015
1.0992
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass Leg
7.46 7.46
Entry Bypass
0.34
Entry Bypass
A
Leg
A
1 Sunset Ave SB
None
2
Main St EB
None
320.99 320.99
403.45
F
F
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
9.93 9.93
3.49
A
A
4
Main St WB
None
176.67 176.67
189.61
F
F
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 111
Page 480 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2045 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
2824
2824
Capacity
veh/hr
3316
3316
Average Delay
sec/veh
213.13
213.13
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
F
F
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
F
F
Total Delay
veh.hrs
167.19
167.19
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 111
Page 481 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2045 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
9
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
327
Entry Bypass
1114
Flow
106
Entry
595
Bypass Entry Bypass
0.5496
1 Sunset Ave SB
2
Main St EB
None
869
567
873
886
0.9806
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
496
643
763
862
0.5755
4
Main St WB
None
749
475
663
894
0.8378
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass Leg
16.41 16.41
Entry Bypass
8.68
Entry Bypass
C
Leg
C
1 Sunset Ave SB
None
2
Main St EB
None
119.57 119.57
129.66
F
F
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
9.68 9.68
5.79
A
A
4
Main St WB
None
31.17 31.17
45.44
D
D
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 114
Page 482 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2045 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
2441
2441
Capacity
veh/hr
3237
3237
Average Delay
sec/veh
56.30
56.30
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
E
E
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
F
F
Total Delay
veh.hrs
38.17
38.17
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 114
Page 483 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2045 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
9
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
242
Entry Bypass
1193
Flow
288
Entry
564
Bypass Entry Bypass
0.4289
1 Sunset Ave SB
2
Main St EB
None
1251
386
1049
987
1.2671
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
659
865
509
744
0.8858
4
Main St WB
None
978
606
914
877
1.1155
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass Leg
10.55 10.55
Entry Bypass
2.21
Entry Bypass
B
Leg
B
1 Sunset Ave SB
None
2
Main St EB
None
411.32 411.32
517.18
F
F
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
33.04 33.04
21.65
D
D
4
Main St WB
None
199.92 199.92
192.23 1F
F
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 118
Page 484 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2045 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
3130
3130
Capacity
veh/hr
3172
3172
Average Delay
sec/veh
234.64
234.64
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
F
F
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
F
F
Total Delay
veh.hrs
204.00
204.00
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 118
Page 485 of 617
2045 AM Peak Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
50% Confidence Level Scheme: Main & Sunset 2xl Roundabout - Design Year (2045) Build Scenario 1
Daylight conditions Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
9
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
73
Entry Bypass
1238
Flow
33
Entry
720
Bypass Entry Bypass
0.1014
1 Sunset Ave SB
2
Main St EB
None
866
445
867
1337
0.6477
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
407
600
711
966
0.4212
4
Main St WB
None
957
315
692
1554
0.6157
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Sunset Ave SB
None
5.49
5.49
2
Main St EB
None
12.04
12.04
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
6.38
6.38
4
Main St WB
None
9.17
9.17
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
0.45
14.84
3.04
11.69
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A
B B
A A
A A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 55
Page 486 of 617
2045 AM Peak Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
50% Confidence Level Scheme: Main & Sunset 2xl Roundabout - Design Year (2045) Build Scenario 1
Daylight conditions Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
2303
2303
Capacity
veh/hr
4578
4578
Average Delay
sec/veh
9.64
9.64
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
6.17
6.17
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 55
Page 487 of 617
2045 PM Peak Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
50% Confidence Level Scheme: Main & Sunset 2xl Roundabout - Design Year (2045) Build Scenario 1
Daylight conditions Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
9
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
55
Entry Bypass
1378
Flow
93
Entry
666
Bypass Entry Bypass
0.0825
1 Sunset Ave SB
2
Main St EB
None
1247
315
1119
1542
0.8087
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
606
1029
531
807
0.7508
4
Main St WB
None
1116
356
1277
1515
0.7368
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
5.70
Leg
5.70
Entry Bypass
0.28
Entry Bypass
A
Leg
A
1 Sunset Ave SB
None
2
Main St EB
None
13.82
13.82
17.91
B
B
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
16.70
16.70
10.97
C
C
4
Main St WB
None
10.38
10.38
11.37
B
B
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 58
Page 488 of 617
2045 PM Peak Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
50% Confidence Level Scheme: Main & Sunset 2xl Roundabout - Design Year (2045) Build Scenario 1
Daylight conditions Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
3024
3024
Capacity
veh/hr
4530
4530
Average Delay
sec/veh
12.98
12.98
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
B
B
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
B
B
Total Delay
veh.hrs
10.90
10.90
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 58
Page 489 of 617
2045 AM Peak Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
50% Confidence Level Scheme: Main & Sunset 2xl Roundabout - Design Year (2045) Build Scenario 2
Daylight conditions Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
9
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
None
Entry Bypass
327
Entry Bypass
1118
Flow
109
Entry
766
Bypass Entry Bypass
0.4268
1 Sunset Ave SB
2
Main St EB
None
869
568
876
1225
0.7095
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
496
662
774
942
0.5265
4
Main St WB
None
750
478
680
1395
0.5375
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
8.58
Leg
8.58
Entry Bypass
3.75
Entry Bypass
A
Leg
A
1 Sunset Ave SB
None
2
Main St EB
None
18.70
18.70
27.32
C
C
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
8.24
8.24
5.23
A
A
4
Main St WB
None
9.19
9.19
8.95
A
A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 53
Page 490 of 617
2045 AM Peak Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
50% Confidence Level Scheme: Main & Sunset 2xl Roundabout - Design Year (2045) Build Scenario 2
Daylight conditions Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
2442
2442
Capacity
veh/hr
4328
4328
Average Delay
sec/veh
12.30
12.30
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
B
B
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
B
B
Total Delay
veh.hrs
8.34
8.34
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 53
Page 491 of 617
2045 PM Peak Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
50% Confidence Level Scheme: Main & Sunset 2xl Roundabout - Design Year (2045) Build Scenario 2
Daylight conditions Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le g
Le Names
9
Bypass
Type
Arrival
Flow Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity
p Y
Average VCR
g
Entry
Bypass Entry Bypass
Flow
Entry
Bypass
Entry
Bypass
1
Sunset Ave SB
None
242
1290
331
700
0.3456
2
Main St EB
None
1252
407
1125
1453
0.8618
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
659
1077
580
789
0.8356
4
Main St WB
None
978
645
1088
1235
0.7921
Delays, Queues and Level of
Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry
7.54
Bypass Leg
7.54
Entry
1.67
Bypass
Entry
A
Bypass
Leg
A
1 Sunset Ave SB
None
2
Main St EB
None
19.81
19.81
28.17
C
C
3
Sunset Ave NB
None
25.05
25.05
19.18
D
D
4
Main St WB
None
16.52
16.52
17.54
C
C
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 50
Page 492 of 617
2045 PM Peak Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development
50% Confidence Level Scheme: Main & Sunset 2xl Roundabout - Design Year (2045) Build Scenario 2
Daylight conditions Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
3131
3131
Capacity
veh/hr
4177
4177
Average Delay
sec/veh
18.94
18.94
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
B
B
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
C
C
Total Delay
veh.hrs
16.47
16.47
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 50
Page 493 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes NW/Main Street Development
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Leg
Leg Names
Bypass
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
Exit
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Flow
491
44
179
1 Sunset Ave SB
None
2
Lilac St NB
None
139
480
55
3
Sunset Ave W B
None
67
156
463
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
1077
0.4560
901
0.1543
1081
0.0620
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Leg Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass Leg
Entry Bypass
None
5.66 5.66
3.02
1 Sunset Ave SB
2 Lilac St NB
None
4.59 4.59
0.67
3 Sunset Ave W B
None
3.42 3.42
0.22
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
Report dated 25-Apr-2025
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 30
Page 1 of 2
Page 494 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes NW/Main Street Development
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
697
697
Capacity
veh/hr
3058
3058
Average Delay
sec/veh
5.23
5.23
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
1.01
1.01
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 30
Page 495 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes NW/Main Street Development
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Bypass
Leg
Leg Names
Type
1
Sunset Ave SB
None
2
Lilac St NB
None
3
Sunset Ave W B
None
Flows (veh/hr)
Arrival Flow Opposing Flow Exit
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass Flow
260 39 378
329 246 53
100 317 258
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Sunset Ave SB
None
3.94
3.94
2
Lilac St NB
None
4.92
4.92
3
Sunset Ave W B
None
3.90
3.90
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
1144
0.2273
1033
0.3185
995
0.1005
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
0.81
1.30
0.31
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A
A A
A A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 35
Page 496 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes NW/Main Street Development
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
689
689
Capacity
veh/hr
3172
3172
Average Delay
sec/veh
4.40
4.40
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
0.84
0.84
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 35
Page 497 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Bypass
Leg
Leg Names
Type
1
Sunset Ave SB
None
2
Lilac St NB
None
3
Sunset Ave W B
None
Flows (veh/hr)
Arrival Flow Opposing Flow Exit
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass Flow
667 44 273
193 652 59
78 239 606
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Sunset Ave SB
None
8.17
8.17
2
Lilac St NB
None
5.79
5.79
3
Sunset Ave W B
None
3.63
3.63
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
1077
0.6195
806
0.2394
1036
0.0753
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
6.68
1.27
0.28
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A
A A
A A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number44
Page 498 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
938
938
Capacity
veh/hr
2919
2919
Average Delay
sec/veh
7.31
7.31
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
1.90
1.90
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number44
Page 499 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Bypass
Leg
Leg Names
Type
1
Sunset Ave SB
None
2
Lilac St NB
None
3
Sunset Ave W B
None
Flows (veh/hr)
Arrival Flow Opposing Flow Exit
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass Flow
407 39 609
503 379 67
135 513 369
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Sunset Ave SB
None
4.69
4.69
2
Lilac St NB
None
7.42
7.42
3
Sunset Ave W B
None
4.61
4.61
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
1144 0.3559
962 0.5228
891 0.1516
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
1.53
3.09
0.50
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A
A A
A A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number47
Page 500 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1045
1045
Capacity
veh/hr
2996
2996
Average Delay
sec/veh
6.00
6.00
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
1.74
1.74
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number47
Page 501 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Bypass
Leg
Leg Names
Type
1
Sunset Ave SB
None
2
Lilac St NB
None
3
Sunset Ave W B
None
Flows (veh/hr)
Arrival Flow Opposing Flow Exit
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass Flow
667 44 273
193 652 59
78 239 606
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Sunset Ave SB
None
8.17
8.17
2
Lilac St NB
None
5.79
5.79
3
Sunset Ave W B
None
3.63
3.63
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
1077
0.6195
806
0.2394
1036
0.0753
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
6.68
1.27
0.28
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A
A A
A A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 50
Page 502 of 617
2030 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
938
938
Capacity
veh/hr
2919
2919
Average Delay
sec/veh
7.31
7.31
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
1.90
1.90
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 50
Page 503 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Leg
Leg Names
Bypass
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
Exit
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Flow
407
39
609
1 Sunset Ave SB
None
2
Lilac St NB
None
503
379
67
3
Sunset Ave W B
None
135
513
369
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Sunset Ave SB
None
4.69
4.69
2
Lilac St NB
None
7.42
7.42
3
Sunset Ave W B
None
4.61
4.61
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
1144 0.3559
962 0.5228
891 0.1516
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
1.53
3.09
0.50
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 53
Page 504 of 617
2030 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2030 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1045
1045
Capacity
veh/hr
2996
2996
Average Delay
sec/veh
6.00
6.00
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
1.74
1.74
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 53
Page 505 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes NW/Main Street Development
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Le 9
Le Names
9
Bypass
Type
,arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
PP 9
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
P Y 9
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Flow
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
312
53
407
1 Sunset Ave SB
None
1072 0.2910
2
Lilac St NB
None
394
295
70
1002 0.3931
3
Sunset Ave W B
None
80
380
309
961 0.0833
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass Leg
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass Leg
None
4.38 4.38
1.38
1 Sunset Ave SB
A A
2 Lilac St NB
None
5.79 5.79
2.55
A A
3 Sunset Ave W B
None
3.95 3.95
0.32
A A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 38
Page 506 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes NW/Main Street Development
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
786
786
Capacity
veh/hr
3035
3035
Average Delay
sec/veh
5.05
5.05
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
1.10
1.10
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 38
Page 507 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes NW/Main Street Development
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Bypass
Leg
Leg Names
Type
1
Sunset Ave SB
None
2
Lilac St NB
None
3
Sunset Ave W B
None
Flows (veh/hr)
Arrival Flow Opposing Flow Exit
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass Flow
312 46 453
394 295 63
119 380 309
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Sunset Ave SB
None
4.19
4.19
2
Lilac St NB
None
5.62
5.62
3
Sunset Ave W B
None
4.14
4.14
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
1140
0.2737
1007
0.3913
962
0.1238
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
1.04
1.80
0.39
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A
A A
A A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number41
Page 508 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Lino Lakes NW/Main Street Development
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 No -Build
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
825
825
Capacity
veh/hr
3108
3108
Average Delay
sec/veh
4.87
4.87
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
1.12
1.12
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number41
Page 509 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Leg Leg Names
1 Sunset Ave SB
2 Lilac St NB
3 Sunset Ave W B
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Flow
Entry
Bypass Entry Bypass
None
927
126
307
1076
0.8615
None
299
106
931
1107
0.2701
None
169
264
141
1024
0.1651
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass Leg
30.81 30.81
Entry Bypass
54.09
Entry Bypass Leg
D D
1 Sunset Ave SB
None
2 Lilac St NB
None
4.29 4.29
1.30
A A
3 Sunset Ave W B
None
4.07 4.07
0.69
A A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 68
Page 510 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1395
1395
Capacity
veh/hr
3207
3207
Average Delay
sec/veh
21.89
21.89
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
C
C
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
C
C
Total Delay
veh.hrs
8.48
8.48
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 68
Page 511 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Leg Leg Names
1 Sunset Ave SB
2 Lilac St NB
3 Sunset Ave W B
Flows (veh/hr)
Capacity (veh/hr)
Bypass
Type
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
pp g
Exit
Capacity Average VCR
p Y g
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Flow
Entry
Bypass Entry Bypass
None
577
100
822
1111
0.5193
None
815
119
558
1101
0.7403
None
224
698
236
792
0.2829
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Sunset Ave SB
None
6.39
6.39
2
Lilac St NB
None
11.42
11.42
3
Sunset Ave W B
None
6.10
6.10
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
2.99
7.85
1.13
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A
B B
A A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 71
Page 512 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 Scenario 1
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
1616
Total
1616
Arrive Flows veh/hr
Capacity
veh/hr
3004
3004
Average Delay
sec/veh
8.88
8.88
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
3.99
3.99
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 71
Page 513 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Bypass
Leg
Leg Names
Type
1
Sunset Ave SB
None
2
Lilac St NB
None
3
Sunset Ave W B
None
Flows (veh/hr)
Arrival Flow Opposing Flow Exit
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass Flow
992 127 332
302 165 937
192 267 201
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
1075 0.9224
1075 0.2808
1022 0.1879
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
95% Queue (veh)
Level of Service
Leg Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass Leg
52.22 52.22
Entry Bypass
88.29
Entry Bypass Leg
F F
1 Sunset Ave SB
None
2 Lilac St NB
None
4.48 4.48
1.37
A A
3 Sunset Ave W B
None
4.19 4.19
0.81
A A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 74
Page 514 of 617
2045 AM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 AM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1486
1486
Capacity
veh/hr
3173
3173
Average Delay
sec/veh
36.31
36.31
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
D
D
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
E
E
Total Delay
veh.hrs
14.99
14.99
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 74
Page 515 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Operational Results
2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes
Flows and Capacity
Flows (veh/hr)
Leg
Leg Names
Bypass
Arrival Flow
Opposing Flow
Exit
Entry Bypass
Entry Bypass
Flow
627
101
893
1 Sunset Ave SB
None
2
Lilac St NB
None
819
164
564
3
Sunset Ave W B
None
293
701
282
Delays, Queues and Level of Service
Bypass
Average Delay (sec)
Leg
Leg Names
Type
Entry Bypass
Leg
1
Sunset Ave SB
None
7.02
7.02
2
Lilac St NB
None
12.55
12.55
3
Sunset Ave W B
None
6.93
6.93
Capacity (veh/hr)
Capacity Average VCR
Entry Bypass Entry Bypass
1111
0.5646
1077
0.7605
790
0.3707
95% Queue (veh)
Entry Bypass
3.59
8.76
1.70
Level of Service
Entry Bypass Leg
A A
B B
A A
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 1 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 77
Page 516 of 617
2045 PM Peak
50% Confidence Level
Daylight conditions
Project: Main Street Northwest
Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 Scenario 2
Rodel-Winl - Full Geometry
Global Results
Performance and Accidents
2045 PM Peak Global Performance
Parameter
Units
Entries Bypasses
Total
Arrive Flows
veh/hr
1739
1739
Capacity
veh/hr
2978
2978
Average Delay
sec/veh
9.61
9.61
L.O.S. (Signal)
A — F
A
A
L.O.S.(Unsig)
A—F
A
A
Total Delay
veh.hrs
4.64
4.64
Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Page 2 of 2
Rodel Version 1.96 Run number 77
Page 517 of 617
Appendix C:
Turn Lane Warrant Sheets
Northwest Main — Lino Lakes, MN
Traffic Impact Analysis I June 2025
Page 518 of 617
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major -road right -turn bay at a two-way stop -controlled intersection.
INPUT
Roadway geometry:
2-lane roadway
Variable
Value
Major -road speed, mph:
55
Major -road volume (one direction), veh/h:
411
Right -turn volume, veh/h:
56
OUTPUT
Variable
Value
Limiting right -turn volume, veh/h:
18
Guidance for determining the need for a major -road
right -turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Add right -turn bay.
Access A - 2030 Scenario 1 NBR Warrant
140
s
120
100
E
2 80
0
> 60
c
L
40
20
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Major -Road Volume (one direction), veh/h
Page 519 of 617
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major -road right -turn bay at a two-way stop -controlled intersection.
mMrr
Roadway geometry:
2-lane roadway
Variable
Value
Major -road speed, mph:
50
Major -road volume (one direction), veh/h:
699
Right -turn volume, veh/h:
56
OUTPUT
Variable
Value
Limiting right -turn volume, veh/h:
16
Guidance for determining the need for a major -road
right -turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Add right -turn bay.
Access B - 2030 Scenario 1 EBR Warrant
Page 520 of 617
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major -road right -turn bay at a two-way stop -controlled intersection.
OWN
Roadway geometry:
2-lane roadway
Variable
Value
Major -road speed, mph:
50
Major -road volume (one direction), veh/h:
737
Right -turn volume, veh/h:
70
OUTPUT
Variable
Value
Limiting right -turn volume, veh/h:
15
Guidance for determining the need for a major -road
right -turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Add right -turn bay.
Access B - 2030 Scenario 1 WBR Warrant
140
Add right - turn bay
120
----
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
a�
m
100
E
80
o
>
60..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
c
40
20
0
200
400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Major -Road Volume (one direction), veh/h
Page 521 of 617
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major -road right -turn bay at a two-way stop -controlled intersection.
OWN
Roadway geometry:
2-lane roadway
Variable
Value
Major -road speed, mph:
50
Major -road volume (one direction), veh/h:
631
Right -turn volume, veh/h:
49
OUTPUT
Variable
Value
Limiting right -turn volume, veh/h:
18
Guidance for determining the need for a major -road
right -turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Add right -turn bay.
Access D - 2030 Scenario 1 EBR Warrant
140
Add right - turn bay
120
----
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
a�
m
100
E
80
0
>
60
c
.
40
20
0
200
400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Major -Road Volume (one direction), veh/h
Page 522 of 617
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major -road right -turn bay at a two-way stop -controlled intersection.
OWN
Roadway geometry:
2-lane roadway
Variable
Value
Major -road speed, mph:
50
Major -road volume (one direction), veh/h:
1015
Right -turn volume, veh/h:
51
OUTPUT
Variable
Value
Limiting right -turn volume, veh/h:
10
Guidance for determining the need for a major -road
right -turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Add right -turn bay.
Access D - 2045 Scenario 1 WBR Warrant
140
Add right - turn bay
120
----
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
a�
m
100
E
80
0
>
60
c
40
20
0
200
400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Major -Road Volume (one direction), veh/h
Page 523 of 617
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
Variable
" percentile speed, mph:
rcent of left -turns in advanci
vancing volume (VA), veh/h:
OUTPUT
Value
42
%: 26%
262
208
Variable
Value
Limiting advancing volume (VA), veh/h:
302
Guidance for determining the need for a major -road left -turn bay:
Left -turn treatment NOT warranted.
CALIBRATION CONSTANTS
Variable
Value
Average time for making left -turn, s:
3.0
Critical headway, s:
5.0
Average time for left -turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s:
1.9
Access E - 2045 Scenario 1 NBL Warrant
800
t
700
0 600
m 500
= 400
> 300
c 200
a 100
0
O
0
Itreatment not
100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h
Page 524 of 617
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major -road right -turn bay at a two-way stop -controlled intersection.
INPUT
Roadway geometry:
2-lane roadway
Variable
Value
Major -road speed, mph:
50
Major -road volume (one direction), veh/h:
208
Right -turn volume, veh/h:
101
OUTPUT
Variable
Value
Limiting right -turn volume, veh/h:
70
Guidance for determining the need for a major -road
right -turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Add right -turn bay.
Access E - 2045 Scenario 1 SBR Warrant
140
Add right - turn bay
120
----
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
a�
m
100
E
80
0
>
60
c
40
20
0
200
400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Major -Road Volume (one direction), veh/h
Page 525 of 617
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
Variable
" percentile speed, mph:
rcent of left -turns in advanci
vancing volume (VA), veh/h:
OUTPUT
Value
45
%: 30%
508
240
Variable
Value
Limiting advancing volume (VA), veh/h:
268
Guidance for determining the need for a major -road left -turn bay:
Left -turn treatment warranted.
CALIBRATION CONSTANTS
Variable
Value
Average time for making left -turn, s:
3.0
Critical headway, s:
5.0
Average time for left -turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s:
1.9
Access F - 2045 Scenario 1 NBL Warrant
800
t
700
0 600
m I
= 400
> 300
c 200
a 100
0
O
0
Itreatment not
100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h
Page 526 of 617
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major -road right -turn bay at a two-way stop -controlled intersection.
INPUT
Roadway geometry:
2-lane roadway
Variable
Value
Major -road speed, mph:
45
Major -road volume (one direction), veh/h:
240
Right -turn volume, veh/h:
17
OUTPUT
Variable
Value
Limiting right -turn volume, veh/h:
166
Guidance for determining the need for a major -road
right -turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Do NOT add right -turn bay.
Access F - 2045 Scenario 1 SBR Warrant
Page 527 of 617
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
Variable
Value
85thpercentile speed, mph:
45
Percent of left -turns in advancing volume (VA), %:
41 %
Advancing volume (VA), veh/h:
367
Opposing volume (Vo), veh/h:
159
OUTPUT
Variable Value
Limiting advancing volume (VA), veh/h: 274
Guidance for determining the need for a major -road left -turn bay:
Left -turn treatment warranted.
CALIBRATION CONSTANTS
Variable
Value
Average time for making left -turn, s:
3.0
Critical headway, s:
5.0
Average time for left -turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s:
1.9
Access G - 2045 Scenario 1 NBL Warrant
800
t
700
o 600
500
E 400
� 300
c 200
.y
0 100
CL
-
O 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h
Page 528 of 617
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major -road right -turn bay at a two-way stop -controlled intersection.
INPUT
Roadway geometry:
2-lane roadway
Variable
Value
Major -road speed, mph:
45
Major -road volume (one direction), veh/h:
159
Right -turn volume, veh/h:
17
OUTPUT
Variable
Value
Limiting right -turn volume, veh/h:
352
Guidance for determining the need for a major -road
right -turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Do NOT add right -turn bay.
Access G - 2045 Scenario 1 SBR Warrant
140
s
120
100
E
2 80
0
> 60
c
L
40
20
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Major -Road Volume (one direction), veh/h
Page 529 of 617
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major -road right -turn bay at a two-way stop -controlled intersection.
INPUT
Roadway geometry:
2-lane roadway
Variable
Value
Major -road speed, mph:
55
Major -road volume (one direction), veh/h:
416
Right -turn volume, veh/h:
56
OUTPUT
Variable
Value
Limiting right -turn volume, veh/h:
18
Guidance for determining the need for a major -road
right -turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Add right -turn bay.
Access A - 2030 Scenario 2 NBR
140
s
120
100
E
2 80
0
> 60
c
L
40
20
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Major -Road Volume (one direction), veh/h
Page 530 of 617
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major -road right -turn bay at a two-way stop -controlled intersection.
INPUT
Roadway geometry:
2-lane roadway
Variable
Value
Major -road speed, mph:
50
Major -road volume (one direction), veh/h:
630
Right -turn volume, veh/h:
42
OUTPUT
Variable
Value
Limiting right -turn volume, veh/h:
18
Guidance for determining the need for a major -road
right -turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Add right -turn bay.
Access B - 2030 Scenario 2 EBR
140
s
120
100
E
2 80
0
> 60
c
L
40
20
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Major -Road Volume (one direction), veh/h
Page 531 of 617
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major -road right -turn bay at a two-way stop -controlled intersection.
INPUT
Roadway geometry:
2-lane roadway
Variable
Value
Major -road speed, mph:
50
Major -road volume (one direction), veh/h:
707
Right -turn volume, veh/h:
42
OUTPUT
Variable
Value
Limiting right -turn volume, veh/h:
16
Guidance for determining the need for a major -road
right -turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Add right -turn bay.
Access B - 2030 Scenario 2 WBR
Page 532 of 617
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
Variable
Value
85thpercentile speed, mph:
42
Percent of left -turns in advancing volume (VA), %:
9%
Advancing volume (VA), veh/h:
196
Opposing volume (Vo), veh/h:
182
OUTPUT
Variable Value
Limiting advancing volume (VA), veh/h: 477
Guidance for determining the need for a major -road left -turn bay:
Left -turn treatment NOT warranted.
CALIBRATION CONSTANTS
Variable
Value
Average time for making left -turn, s:
3.0
Critical headway, s:
5.0
Average time for left -turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s:
1.9
Access E - 2045 Scenario 2 NBL
800
t
700
o 600
500
E 400
� 300
c 200
.y
0 100
CL
'
O 0
warranted.
treatment not
warranted.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h
Page 533 of 617
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major -road right -turn bay at a two-way stop -controlled intersection.
INPUT
Roadway geometry:
2-lane roadway
Variable
Value
Major -road speed, mph:
50
Major -road volume (one direction), veh/h:
182
Right -turn volume, veh/h:
85
OUTPUT
Variable
Value
Limiting right -turn volume, veh/h:
83
Guidance for determining the need for a major -road
right -turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Add right -turn bay.
Access E - 2045 Scenario 2 SBR
140
s
120
100
E
2 80
0
> 60
c
L
40
20
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Major -Road Volume (one direction), veh/h
Page 534 of 617
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
Variable
Value
85thpercentile speed, mph:
45
Percent of left -turns in advancing volume (VA), %:
24%
Advancing volume (VA), veh/h:
358
Opposing volume (Vo), veh/h:
188
OUTPUT
Variable Value
Limiting advancing volume (VA), veh/h: 305
Guidance for determining the need for a major -road left -turn bay:
Left -turn treatment warranted.
CALIBRATION CONSTANTS
Variable
Value
Average time for making left -turn, s:
3.0
Critical headway, s:
5.0
Average time for left -turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s:
1.9
Access F - 2045 Scenario 2 NBL
800
t
700
o 600
500
E 400
� 300
c 200
.y
0 100
CL
'
O 0
warranted.
treatment not
warranted.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h
Page 535 of 617
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major -road right -turn bay at a two-way stop -controlled intersection.
INPUT
Roadway geometry:
2-lane roadway
Variable
Value
Major -road speed, mph:
45
Major -road volume (one direction), veh/h:
188
Right -turn volume, veh/h:
17
OUTPUT
Variable
Value
Limiting right -turn volume, veh/h:
259
Guidance for determining the need for a major -road
right -turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Do NOT add right -turn bay.
Access F - 2045 Scenario 2 SBR
140
s
120
100
E
2 80
0
> 60
c
L
40
20
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Major -Road Volume (one direction), veh/h
Page 536 of 617
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
Variable
Value
85thpercentile speed, mph:
45
Percent of left -turns in advancing volume (VA), %:
42%
Advancing volume (VA), veh/h:
284
Opposing volume (Vo), veh/h:
128
OUTPUT
Variable Value
Limiting advancing volume (VA), veh/h: 283
Guidance for determining the need for a major -road left -turn bay:
Left -turn treatment warranted.
CALIBRATION CONSTANTS
Variable
Value
Average time for making left -turn, s:
3.0
Critical headway, s:
5.0
Average time for left -turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s:
1.9
Access G - 2045 Scenario 2 NBL
800
t
700
o 600
500
E 400
� 300
c 200
.y
0 100
CL
'
O 0
warranted.
treatment not
warranted.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h
Page 537 of 617
Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major -road right -turn bay at a two-way stop -controlled intersection.
INPUT
Roadway geometry:
2-lane roadway
Variable
Value
Major -road speed, mph:
45
Major -road volume (one direction), veh/h:
128
Right -turn volume, veh/h:
17
OUTPUT
Variable
Value
Limiting right -turn volume, veh/h:
524
Guidance for determining the need for a major -road
right -turn bay for a 2-lane roadway:
Do NOT add right -turn bay.
Access G - 2045 Scenario 2 SBR
140
s
120
100
E
2 80
0
> 60
c
L
40
20
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Major -Road Volume (one direction), veh/h
Page 538 of 617
Appendix E.ff
Comment Responses
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR
July 2025
Page 539 of 617
Pursuant to Minnesota Rules, part 4410.3610, subpart 5a(C), the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) shall revise the environmental analysis
document based on comments received during the comment period. The RGU shall include in the document a section specifically responding to
each timely, substantive comment received that indicates in what way the comment has been addressed.
The 30-day Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) comment period began May 27, 2025, and comments were accepted through June 26,
2025. Five comment letters were received from government agencies and 12 comment letters were received from the public. Responses to
those comments are included in the following sections, and copies of the comment letters are included in Appendix F.
AGEiW..T ....,mivir-im i a
1. M
olitan Council
Itemject Description
The AUAR presents two scenarios for planned land use and accompanying development. Scenario
Thank you for your review.
1 has an ultimate capacity of 3,400 housing units, 60,000 sq. ft. of commercial use, with intense
Comment noted.
mixed residential and commercial arrays along Main Street. Scenario 2, the preferred scenario,
includes 3,500 housing units, 62,000 sq. ft. of commercial use, with greatest intensity shifted 1/3
mile west of the Scenario 1 concept, at Main Street & Sunset. Should future development result in
ultimate levels of Scenarios 1 or 2, the result would exceed citywide forecasts for Lino Lakes. The
AUAR area includes parts of Transportation Analysis Zones # 182 (south of Main) and 183 (north of
Main). In its 2040 Comprehensive Plan the City expected additions of 814 households, 2,120
population, and 18 jobs in these two zones during 2020-2040. Council staff may recommend a
different allocation at the time of the 2050 Plan update.
Item 7 - Climate Adaptation and Resilience
The discussion of anticipated climate trends is adequate; however, the AUAR would benefit from
Comment noted. The City will
considering if different scenarios merit different adaptations. The list of adaptations is well suited
encourage developers to consider
to both scenarios, but the project proposer should consider how the different scenarios lend
adaptation strategies to reduce
themselves to different street patterns and how adaptations like clustering development could
impervious surface.
reduce the impervious surfaces associated with single-family residential uses.
Page 540 of 617
m9 -Permits and approvals
7The
City will need to amend their comprehensive plan to reflect the proposed land use changes,
Comment noted.
development staging, and the corresponding wastewater flow projections before any MPCA
sanitary sewer extension permit applications can be recommended for approval by the Council.
This information will allow the Council time for the needed improvements, to ensure capacity is
available for growth within the AUAR project area
Item 10 — Land Use
The land uses presented in Scenario 1 appear consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan.
Comment noted.
Scenario 2 proposes high and medium density housing, and commercial development around Main
Street and Sunset Avenue, with low -density on the eastern side of the subject site. Any changes to
land use, density, or intensity that deviates from the adopted comprehensive plan will require a
comprehensive plan amendment process independent of the AUAR and will be subject to
additional Council review.
Item 12 — Water Resources — water supply
Comment noted. The City
Chloride management best practices should be considered and implemented during the winter
encourages developers to use best
months to limit impacts to surrounding water bodies and wetlands.
practices to reduce chloride use in
snow and ice removal.
Page 541 of 617
The AUAR states that the city's current water appropriation is not sufficient to meet the additional
Comment noted.
demand required by either scenario 1 or 2, and that additional water supply will be needed.
Before developing, the city should work with the Minnesota DNR (DNR) and surrounding
communities to assess the potential impacts of additional pumping on source water aquifers,
connected ecosystems, and surrounding wells and ensure water will be available to meet future
demands associated with this and other developments. Potential wellfield expansion in Lino Lakes
and by nearby communities could impact each other and nearby private wells. The current use of
the Prairie du Chien and Jordan aquifers as the sole source of water may need to be evaluated.
Increasing the efficiency of water use by commercial, institutional, and industrial users may help
eliminate or delay the need for additional water supply infrastructure, and lower costs for the city
utility and its rate payers. Estimated water demands for scenarios 1 and 2 are equivalent to about
36% of the city's current water demands and 23% of demand in 2040, per the Lino Lakes 2040
Comprehensive Plan.
If new wellfields are developed in the area, the city should consider the compatibility of these and
Comment noted.
additional development scenarios with Drinking Water Supply Management Areas (DWSMAs) and
Wellhead Protection Plan goals. Any wells that are identified and abandoned during development
should be sealed according to Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) standards.
The City is mandated to prioritize
infiltration practices as required by
Capturing and storing water to be used for residential or commercial irrigation (or other purposes)
the MPCA. In cases where
would lessen flood risks for both development scenarios, while offsetting the demand for outdoor
infiltration is not permitted, reuse
water uses. Using treated source water for outdoor purposes is costly, inefficient, and generates
alternatives will be considered.
additional stress on sources and surrounding ecosystems during the summer months. Lessening
The City will also recommend
these stressors improves the sustainability of supply sources and water supply systems.
planting native and drought -
tolerant species to minimize
irrigation requirements.
Page 542 of 617
Much of the proposed development for scenarios 1 and 2 is in areas mapped as flood prone.
Comment noted.
Drainage ditches, pipes, and culverts are currently used to drain and route water out of the area
for sod farming, lessening infiltration and altering near surface hydrology. However, as
development proceeds, any new infrastructure including roads, homes, business, and utilities will
contend with flood risk. The removal of drain tiles, ditches, etc. creates an opportunity for the city
to restore wetland function in the area, thereby increasing infiltration and potential aquifer
recharge and improving ground and surface water quality, with the added benefit of additional
habitat and green space. The reduction of flood risk through nature -based water management can
help to improve the longevity of developed infrastructure, with added climate adaptation and
mitigation benefits.
The Anoka Co. Geologic Atlas reference on page 31 section 11 is out of date. An update to the
Comment noted. The updated
Anoka Co. Atlas part A was completed in 2013, with part B following in 2016. The AUAR should be
Anoka County Geologic Atlas was
updated to reflect and consider modern mapped geologic and hydrogeologic conditions. The AUAR
reviewed and included in Final
should also consider water table information included in the geologic atlas's and estimated by the
AUAR.
DNR in 2014. Soils in this area are either hydric or formerly hydric (drained hydric). These areas
were wetlands prior to drainage and development for commercial agricultural purposes. New
developments would contend with high water tables seasonally and during periods of increased
precipitation.
Item 18 — Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The anticipated greenhouse gas emissions are reasonable and the proposed mitigation measures
Comment noted. The City will
are appropriate. An additional mitigation measure to consider is the orientation of new homes and
encourage developers to consider
overhang designs with the sun and horizon to maximize solar energy gain during the winter and
home orientation and energy -
minimize solar energy gain in the summer.
efficient design.
Item 20 — Transportation, Transit
Roadways: The AUAR accurately identifies Main Street (CSAH 14) as a principal arterial. Any
Comment noted.
proposed additional or changed access to a principal arterial should consult the Transportation
Policy Plan (TPP) functional classification guidance before finalizing any proposed access changes
to a principal arterial Imagine 2050 TPP Functional Classification.
Page 543 of 617
Transit: The AUAR accurately notes that there is not any existing transit service in the area.
Comment noted.
However, as this area develops, with the AUAR study area and neighboring developments, the city
should be considering ways in which transit services could be extended to serve this area in the
future as it develops, which could aid in mitigating future traffic impacts.
Aviation: The AUAR site is not within the Anoka County -Blaine airport 3-mile influence area,
Comment noted.
however there is a private turf air strip (Lino Air Park) located just south of the AUAR study area.
The city should consider compatibility with and potential impacts to the facility for any
development proposals within the AUAR study area.
The Draft AUAR correctly states, "There is no transit service located near the study area" (page
"Buses" was removed from the list
69). Table 15 Draft Mitigation Plan includes a mitigation measure stating, "Prioritize alternative
on pg. 80.
travel modes within the AUAR study area ... (e.g., buses, bicyclists, and pedestrians)" (page 80). The
authors should remove "buses" from the parenthetical list on page 80. The study area is in Transit
Market Area 5, which indicates that the level of density in the surrounding area is not well suited
for regular -route transit service. Metro Transit operates commuter express routes in the 1-35W
and 1-35E corridors near Lino Lakes, but there is no other existing or planned service to this study
area currently.
2. Anoka County
Item 6 - Project Description
Thank you for your review.
Multiple comments.
Comments noted and applicable
edits have been made in Final
AUAR.
Item 7 - Climate Adaptation and Resilience
Comments noted and applicable
Multiple comments.
edits have been made in Final
AUAR.
Item 8 - Cover Types
Page 544 of 617
Comments noted and applicable
Multiple cormments.
edits have been made in Final
AUAR.
Item 9 - Permits and approvals
Comments noted and applicable
Multiple comments
edits have been made in Final
AUAR.
Item 20- Transportation, Traffic
Table 5-3: Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 Level of Service
Comment noted and speed limit
Speed limit varies from 55 MPH to 40 MPH between Lexington Ave. and Lake Dr.
edit has been made in the Final
AUAR.
In earlier coordination with Anoka
County staff in March 2025, it was
decided to not include Lexington
CSAH 17 (Lexington Ave) should be added to the study area as the traffic from the potential
Ave as a study intersection since it
development will likely have impacts on the CSAH 17 corridor. Specifically, the intersection of
is an existing signal -controlled
CSAH 14 and CSAH 17.
intersection and a 4-lane divided
road and any traffic from this
future development will likely be
insignificant to the growth in
Blaine.
Number has been updated to
Number doesn't match Appendix value
match the appendix value in the
TIA.
7.6 s delay should be LOS A
The LOS has been updated in the
TIA and AUAR.
Verify values shown in Table match those provided in appendix B
Values have been verified in the
TIA.
Page 545 of 617
Access locations shown are
preliminary and subject to change.
Because Main Street is a Principal
Arterial, the proposed access
locations do not conform to the
Do these accesses meet Anoka County intersection spacing guidelines?
County's Access Spacing
Guidelines but are generally
consistent with the existing access
conditions along Main Street. The
final locations of access points will
be coordinated with the county.
Checks were performed on all
tables. Some corrections were
made to reported LOS and delay.
Check LOS grades
Note that worst movement delay
is reported at side street stop
controlled intersections instead of
overall delay.
Yes, congestion and lack of gaps
along Main Street is anticipated to
represent an issue for right turning
Does expanding Main St. to 4 lanes significantly improve operations for NB side street approach?
vehicles if Main Street were to
remain a two-lane road under
buildout conditions. Expanding
Main Street to four -lanes removes
this issue.
Where is info for Main St & Access D?
Added results for Main Street &
Access D to the table.
Page 546 of 617
School traffic does cause delays
under Scenario 1 conditions.
These delays are worse under
Scenario 2 conditions because the
Does school traffic not cause issues for Scenario 1?
development is more
concentrated on the west side of
the site under Scenario 2 and
Sunset Avenue sees higher traffic
levels as a result.
7.4 Scenario 2 Conditions Capacity Analysis Summary
Scenario 2?
Corrected to say Scenario 2.
3. City of Blaine
Thank you for your review and
Location of commercial land use is proposed to abut the Lino Lakes/Blaine city boundary. The City
comment noted. The City will
of Blaine has identified low -density residential land use for the parcel abutting Lino Lakes. If
require future developers
el
elopers
commercial land use is proposed, the city of Blaine would encourage certain zoning requirements
include tools such buffering
for the commercial development to address compatibility between single family and commercial
and/or screening between newdevelopments
land uses.
and adjacent, less
dense areas in their development
plans
The AUAR identifies proposed bike and pedestrian trails from Sunset Avenue to Lexington Avenue,
Comment noted.
which is in Blaine. While we understand the need for such trails, this would require capital
planning by the city as a cost -share for installation of the trails is likely required from Anoka
County.
The roundabout at Sunset and Main Street is designed to service parcels on the north side of Main
Comment noted.
Street for both Blaine and Lino Lakes. It should be noted that the city of Blaine discourages cross -
jurisdictional road connections of city streets. Design of future roads from the roundabout should
be discussed with the City of Blaine to encourage traffic and access compatibility between
development in each city.
Page 547 of 617
The well map on pages 39/40 should identify all private wells abutting the subject site, not just The well buffer has been updated
within 150'. in the Final AUAR.
4. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Wastewater
A figure should be provided that shows the location of the major sewer system features in the
Thank you for your review. Figure
project area that are described in the draft AUAR.
has been added in the Final AUAR.
Watershed
Comment noted. The City
With this development, there will be an increase in impervious area. Design considerations should
encourages developers to use best
be taken to reduce salt usage which could lead to a chloride impairment for nearby resources.
practices to reduce chloride use in
snow and ice removal.
Planning to store snow in areas that won't increase icy areas as the pile melts and planting trees in
Comment noted. The City will
strategic places will be beneficial. The goal is to develop with winter maintenance in mind and use
encourage developers to keep
less salt.
winter maintenance in mind as
site planning advances.
There is a ditch in the Southeast corner of the project area that has had high chloride samples
collected. While not impaired, being proactive may help keep it off of the impaired waters list for
Comment noted.
chlorides.
5. Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD)
District encourages early coordination on permitting matters, including a pre -application meeting
Thank you for your review.
between RCWD, developers, and Lino Lakes.
Comment noted.
The Water Appropriation Permit Program is managed by Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources (DNR). The District would, however, review a copy of the dewatering plan for discharges
Comment noted.
into Anoka County Ditch (ACD) 10-22-32.
Other designations, Page 28
Page 548 of 617
7Thissection references RCWD floodplain mapping. The District recently (2025) updated floodplain
using recent Anoka County LiDAR reflecting significant changes to region conveyanceComment
noted. The figure in the
A figure similar to Figure 11: FEMA 100-year Floodplain utilizing updated RCWD data
Final AUAR has been updated with
could be included.
RCWD floodplain data.
Storm water — Existing Conditions, Page 44
Rice Creek Watershed District completed floodplain modeling and mapping in 2022 that shows
similar, albeit less, floodplain areas within the study area." 2022 floodplain mapping is referenced
Comment noted. The text has
on pages 18 and 44.
been updated to 2025.
Water Appropriation — Dewatering and Estimated Water Supply, Page 48
The District will review a copy of the dewatering plan for discharges into ACID 10-22-32.
Comment noted.
The District understands the City's current water production capacity is not sufficient to serve the
entire study area. Its DNR appropriation permit will need to be amended prior to full build out of
the study area to allow for two additional wells. The District encourages thoughtful consideration
Comment noted.
with selection of drilling locations.
Modification of Anoka County Ditch 10-22-32
Early coordination with the 103E public drainage authority (RCWD) for any modifications to the
drainage system is encouraged.
Comment noted.
The system may be relocated as necessary (p. 46), without decreasing its capacity, through the
statutory petition process to the 103E public drainage authority (RCWD), approved by RCWD
Comment noted.
through Rule I, consistent with 103E.
RCWD requires 20 feet (also referenced on p. 46) from top of bank to either side for a buffer to
Ditch and buffer requirements
complete required maintenance.
have been added to the final
AUAR.
The ditch must remain open and trees or other structures are prohibited in the maintenance
Ditch and buffer requirements
corridor may not obstruct access.
have been added to the final
AUAR.
10
Page 549 of 617
Item 8 — Cover Types
The District supports efforts to infiltrate and filter stormwater and mitigate runoff. Above and
Comment noted. The City will
beyond basic requirements including implementation of BMP's such as Iron Enhanced Sand Filter
encourage developers to consider
(IESF) to address dissolved phosphorus, and stormwater re -use systems for reducing volume are
BMP's such as Iron Enhanced Sand
encouraged where applicable.
Filter.
After Construction, Page 45
The paragraph regarding RCWD Rule C: Stormwater Management identifies that the Rice Creek
Watershed Rules were most recently updated on 1/1/2021. This date should be corrected to
Date correction made in the Final
1/1/2025.
AUAR.
Floodplains, Page 45
Numbered item 4 should identify that drainage/flowage easements need to be provided only if
Easement language has been
required by the land use authority.
added to the Final AUAR.
Continuing onto page 46, "Areas that are covered by Rule E are also subject to Rule F: Wetland
As applicable has been added to
Alteration, as applicable."
this statement in the Final AUAR.
Water Resources, Page 76
In the Floodplains row, please identify that RCWD approvals relate specifically to RCWD's 100-year
Note has been added to the
foodplains and not FEMA.
Mitigation Plan in the Final AUAR.
Both Development Scenarios include lands within the floodplain, RCWD rules require all proposed
development to quantify impacts to floodplain and address, mitigate, according to rule.
Comment noted.
Fish, Wildlife, Plant Communities, and Sensitive Ecological Resources, Page 77178
11
Page 550 of 617
Include language that permits are required from the DNR for the taking of an endangered or
threatened species (Minnesota Statutes section 84.0895 and Minnesota Rules parts 6212.1800-
2100).
PUBLIC COMMENTS
1. Daryl Wangert
The need for a take permit is
dependent on survey results as
well as site design. Once the
survey is conducted, the presence
or absence of state -listed species
will be identified, and specific
avoidance and mitigation
measures will be required only if
state -listed species are discovered.
If required avoidance and
minimization measures are not
feasible with the proposed
project, then a take permit would
be required.
The developer would be required by the
city/watershed to do floodplain mitigation and
Natural integration, open housing without interest in income, race, religion, or
revise the floodplain boundary (LOMR submittal
political affiliations. A reasonable density with disclosure as to effects of building
to FEMA) so flood insurance will not be required.
on low fema flood plain. Cracked foundation and soft Baggy backyard possible over
Everything must be elevated above the flood
time, reduced value over time due to floods. Certainly disclose the possibility of
plain boundary and any changes to the boundary
flood insurance requirements!
must be submitted to FEMA to update the flood
insurance maps within 6 months of construction
completion.
12
Page 551 of 617
Comment Response
2. Sam Bennett
I was the one who suggested bringing the park in towards the high density and
commercial areas. This was intended to make the park more accessible to those
Comment noted. The scope of the AUAR did not
most likely to use it and drive mutually beneficial activities most simply, being able
evaluate changing the location of the land uses in
to buy lunch and enjoy the playground. Instead the high density was stretched out
the two scenarios. As site development advances,
to the park. Which does make it more accessible to many users it does not close
specific residential and commercial land use
the gap between the commercials and park space and now a much higher
boundaries should be generally
percentage of single family lots are adjacent to the density. Overall, I don't see
followed and considered somewhat flexible in
enough benefit for option 2.1 over 2.0. it feels like a hybrid of "islands of density"
order to accommodate natural features, land
that was first to be eliminated.
assembly and other physical issues.
My primary concern with option 2.1 is that drives the most impactful development
into the center where it cannot be avoided. It would be more practical to keep
that more compact so the back half can have reduced impacts. The park should be
the center of this higher density area and please design the park to be adjacent to
the commercial and higher density areas. That way it can be accessed by the most
Comment noted.
people and events benefit small businesses. This is a great opportunity to close the
street and have a block party, holiday stroll, or Blue Heron Days but that's not
nearly as beneficial if the green space and commercial spaces are so divorced.
3. Christina Narwid
With the additional development in the NW Main corridor, I worry about the traffic
going to Centennial Middle School and High School. There is a plan in place to
make Sunset Avenue safer, but I would love to see the Sunset bridge over 35W
Comment noted. The City will coordinate with
have a pedestrian/bike lane. That is the main route from this neighborhood to the
the County for consideration.
schools so there are many kids riding their bikes to get to those locations. It is
already unsafe and there will be even more traffic with the increased density.
4. Sue Bass
13
Page 552 of 617
If you put the street through from Main Street to Century Trail and Robinson Dr
you are going to create a freeway along Robinson Drive as most people, instead of
going to the traffic circle at Main and Sunset are going to cut down Century Trail
and turn on Robinson. Robinson at that point is a straight shot/short cut to Sunset.
It is going to create horrible traffic for people living on or near Robinson. People
will not use Century Trail because it winds so much. There needs to be some way
to funnel the traffic away from Robinson. PLEASE!
5. James Bosak
Both scenarios appear to show an extension of 121st that would run along the
A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was completed as
part of the AUAR to study projected future traffic
trip generation (see Appendix D). A site -specific
traffic impact analysis will also be required for
proposed development projects within the AUAR
area to determine the appropriate mitigation
measures that may be required.
Robinson Drive is identified as a collector street
in the City's Comprehensive Plan. As a collector
street, it is intended to handle a higher volume of
traffic; however, Sunset Avenue and Main Street
allow for a much quicker drive than
neighborhood streets, and the roundabout at
Main Street & Sunset Avenue sees low levels of
delay currently and minimal delay expected in
the future. Cutting through the neighborhood is
estimated to take at least 10-20 seconds longer
than the alternative roads. Additionally, cutting
through the neighborhoods from Main Street
onto Sunset Avenue will not be possible due to
planned right-in/right-out restrictions along
Sunset Avenue at Robinson Drive and Century
Trail. Overall, it is not anticipated that a
significant number of vehicles would cut through
the neighborhood.
There is no plan currently to extend 121" Avenue
north side of my property at 7798 Sunset and connect to Robinson Drive. I cannot to Robinson Drive. The road network shown on
imagine what value such a road might have since it essentially parallels St nset. the scenario figures was onlv a concept to Rive a
14
Page 553 of 617
Comment
What it would do for me personally is completely destroy the value of my
property, at least to me. Please let me know as soon as possible if this is a serious
possibility so that I can start looking for another place to live. If that road is built
neither of the scenarios will make any difference to me since I would not be living
in Lino Lakes anymore.
Response
sense of how the infrastructure could be laid out
to coincide with the changes in land use;
however, future developers would propose
specific road networks for City review and would
need to align with the access points shown in the
Traffic Impact Analysis (see Appendix D of the
AUAR).
Comment noted. The City underwent a multi -
phased engagement process to determine the
scenarios to evaluate in the AUAR. More
I am not sure what more feedback on this issue will achieve, guessing it's probably
information about the process can be found on
just a mandatory part of the whole AUAR process and will not have any impact
the project website here:
whatsoever on what is eventually allowed to go forward. I would hope that by now
https://mappingnwmain.com/process and
the wishes of the residents living in close proximity to the proposed development
engagement summaries of the feedback we
area are fairly well known, i.e. "Slow the Grow". Simply put those wishes are; the
collected can be found here:
lowest possible housing density and the highest possible green natural space
https://mappingnwmain.com/resources
possible. At 3400 or 3500 units neither of the scenarios presented come close to
achieving this, at least in my view. Dividing the 962 acres by 3450 units gives about
The intent of this process was to gather
only .28 acres per unit. But it is really even lower than this since at significant
community feedback on the scenarios and
portion of the 962 acres are already fully developed (not sure why they were even
establish development criteria for future projects
included in the study). I would be interested to know what the process and criteria
in this area, without impacting citywide sewered
were that determined what the appropriate density should be. If this was
residential average densities of 3-5 units per acre
explained in the AUAR report I must have missed it. There must have been some
as required by the Metropolitan Council. Scenario
consistent considerations since both scenarios come up with almost the same
1 is based on the City's existing 2040
overall density.
Comprehensive Plan, aiming to maintain
consistent housing units and densities across
scenarios in line with City-wide density
requirements.
In order for the density proposed to be achieved it looks to me like it will be at a
Any proposed floodplain alterations by future
very high cost since according to the map presented in the AUAR about half of the
developers will require the submittal of an
acres are in the FEMA flood zones. An awful lot of dirt will have to be moved
appropriate Letter of Map Change to FEMA and
15
Page 554 of 617
Comment
Response
around. Oh well, I'm sure some developer will be allowed to give it a try, hopefully
the applicable City of Lino Lakes and RCWD
not one convicted of theft by swindle. For what it's worth, between the two
approvals will need to be obtained. To the extent
scenarios presented, this resident votes for scenario 1.
possible, existing soils will be used for future
development. Please see item 12 for additional
floodplain mitigation strategies.
6. William Grant
Sunset is a short street that is already problematic to turn left out of the
A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was completed as
neighborhood in the morning. Putting high density all centered on Sunset will
part of the AUAR and based on projected trip
make a problem worse. The higher density should be farther East closer to the
generation, the area's transportation network is
major roadways. That is Scenario 1.
expected to support development within the
study area with mitigation (see Appendix D).
7. James Kukkonen
Appropriate improvements to infrastructure will
be required by future developers to support
development in a sustainable way. See the
Mitigation Plan section in the AUAR for a full list
As a current resident of Century Trail I would prefer a scenario with low density
of next steps required. The City has met with
development. My concerns would include the increased traffic, use of local
both the Centennial and Forest Lake School
resources and added pressure on local schools. I am not against growth but I do
Districts through this process, and district
believe we need to consider the effects of increasing too much in a small area
leadership had no concerns about how the
development scenarios would affect enrollment,
operations or funding. Furthermore, the
proposed development growth aligns with the
projected growth of both school districts.
8. Teresa O'Connell
Water and lighting are my concerns. Water this area I believe was tiled for farming
Comment noted. The City will encourage future
so with that in mind keeping the water on this site with slow release into the soil or
developers to consider the climate adaptions and
sewer system is important. Whatever system is used plan ahead on making
sustainability measures identified in Section 7
maintenance of these water areas easily accessible. Decided in advance before
and 18 of the AUAR.
16
Page 555 of 617
CommentResponse
sales happen to the future landowners who will be responsible for cost and
maintenance of the water devices. If a retention pond is put in, I believe they need
Stormwater BMPs will be required to adhere to
to be cleaned out between 15 to 20 years after being built. The developer could
both City and RCWD standards for development
choose to build each lot with a rain garden in and that also has to be maintained
and long-term maintenance. These will be
and cleaned out, yearly would be good. There are many options for controlling
evaluated on a case -by -case basis for each
water but currently from what I have observed this is not being planned during the
location as it is developed.
development of the land. Lighting since this area already has development around
it on the South, North and East side maintaining lighting as close to what is in the
surrounding area is important. Dark sky cities are becoming more and more
popular and since full build out is not planned for another 30 years. Talk with the
10- and 13-year-olds over at Lino Lakes Stem school and get them involved I
suspect they have dreams of what the future will look like. They will be the ones
living there but at the same time the current neighbors' needs should be met.
35 W which is very close to this site sees more traffic than Main St, Sunset and 4th
streets see on a daily basis and there are no streetlights between Lexington and
going north to Lake dr. on 35 W.
9. Kevin and Tammy Dunrud
A Traffic Impact Analysis was conducted for both
Our first priority is to leave Carl Street alone. There are many pedestrians and
land use scenarios (see Appendix D of the AUAR).
bicyclists that use this road along with the residential homes that would be highly
A connection between Carl Street to Century Trail
impacted if this were to connect to other roadways as part of the development -too
is not necessary from a traffic operations
much traffic. This is a street we call home and it has been here for a lot longer
perspective. Please see the mitigation plan of the
than a new development. We will already have a very different quality of life with
AUAR for a full list of traffic mitigation strategies.
the development across the street. It would be great to keep one thing the same.
Additional road infrastructure improvements
within the AUAR study area will be evaluated as
development occurs on the site.
As we are an existing neighborhood on the southside of Carl Street, we would like
The City will encourage developers to consider
to ask that the development put in trees at the far south end of the quadrant along
tools such as clustering, vegetation buffers, and
Carl Street to provide a noise and view buffer of the development. Again, this
screening to mitigate potential land use conflicts.
17
Page 556 of 617
CommentResponse
development will affect our quality of life, and trees would be a good faith effort
on the developers' part to show they want to do well with existing neighborhoods.
The City is constructing a water treatment plant
As there will need to be a new water treatment plant built for this development as
for manganese removal which will be placed in
well as new roads and roundabouts, we are very concerned how this will impact
service in the fall of 2026 and will provide
our taxes. Our taxes took a big jump this year and we don't feel we should be
adequate treatment capacity for this area. No
taxed for these services as we will not benefit at all from the water and roads.
additional water treatment plants are anticipated
for this area. The Water Treatment Plant is
funded by users of the municipal water system.
Finally, we are concerned about traffic on 4th Ave. Many people walk along this
As development occurs along 41h Avenue, the City
road and there is an airstrip that also ends at 4th and there are no sidewalks
will consider trails and/or sidewalks along 41h
planned.
Avenue.
Future development will require the construction
We realized we forgot to add one item to our list of comments. We are also
of local water quality basins and larger detention
concerned about the water table with the sod farm being a floodplain and how
areas to provide compensatory storage for
that might impact our property. We have a wood foundation and have had
floodplain mitigation. See the mitigation plan in
absolutely no water problems. We would like to keep it that way.
the AUAR for full list of floodplain mitigation
strategies.
10. Kristen Iverson
My concern is the negative impact of traffic, high density and commercial buildings
this will have on our natural environment and ecosystem in the study area. I live on
Creation of greenways and/or interconnecting
Carl Street, a few feet from the study area. This is a rural area, with large lots and
wildlife corridors and buffers will be incorporated
open green areas. We have Blanding turtles that nest every year in our yards and
as development plans advance. Native habitat
surrounding areas. We have 4 sets of Sandhill Cranes that breed and make their
and wetland buffers will enhance biodiversity and
home here on Carl Street. We also have Bald Eagles, owls, waterfowl, pheasants,
improve the environmental functionality of the
turkeys, deer and bear. Seven miles north is Carlos Avery Wildlife Management
study area. See the mitigation plan of the Final
Area. This is an important wildlife refuge of marshlands lakes and swamps which
AUAR which has been updated with the DNR's
provide habitat for the migratory Sandhill cranes and Eagles, in addition to habitat
mitigation strategies for protected species.
for the Blanding turtles, deer, waterfowl and upland birds. This is a protected
ecosystem that needs to be protected, including the surrounding land south of
lu:
Page 557 of 617
CommentResponse
Carlos Avery in which we live and reside in. We cannot allow high density homes
and apartment buildings, in addition to commercial areas to destroy this
ecosystem. Migratory birds aloft at night migrate through our area, with stops to
Carlos Avery Wildlife Refuge. It is important to eliminate outdoor lighting and
parking lot lighting as much as possible, and to reduce the amount of reflective
windows to help birds get safely to their destinations.
In summary, Lino Lakes needs to locate commercial and high density areas to Lake
Drive and to nearby areas near Interstate 35. Let's make that area the "downtown"
Comment noted.
area. The area in this NW quadrant, near Carlos Avery, is a precious ecosystem. We
must make sure that as much natural habitat is saved.
11. Betsy Garcia
Future design of the study area and associated
stormwater management facilities will be
It is my understanding the Lino Lakes Flood Plain Administrator is responsible for
completed to reduce the risk of flooding in the
assuring compliance with FEMA guidelines &local ordinances regarding any
AUAR study area. Buildings will be set at
development of land on the current Robinson Sod Farm.
elevations to maintain clearance above 100-year
Because my property abuts this sod farm just to the east, I want to assure the
flood elevations, which would also result in re -
proposed mitigation interventions will protect my land from any flooding.
mapping the floodplain and obtaining approval
Additionally, what communication will be provided identifying the specific
from FEMA for the changes. Infiltration areas
interventions, and to whom would I report any negative sequelae related to
may be used and would improve water quality
flooding that could possibly occur as a result of the interventions in the future?
and stormwater runoff in the project vicinity.
Additional stormwater and floodplain mitigation
items are detailed in section 12 of the Final
AUAR.
I am concerned regarding contaminated soil on the sod farm which already has or
The AUAR's purpose is to focus on the
will occur during mitigation secondary to fertilizers, pesticides and other chemicals.
environmental impacts of the proposed
These have been used for years on the sod farm, and would like to know what EPA
development. The existing condition of the
approved testing or other methods will be done to determine levels of toxic
property as a sod farm is in compliance with
pollutants, harmful particulates or emissions from the helicopter crash, farm
the MN Department of Agriculture guidelines and
vehicles and machinery. Would the testing include Nitrogen Oxides,
regulations. The MN Department of
19
Page 558 of 617
Comment.•
Hydrocarbons, Greenhouse gases, ammonia and other identified agriculturally
Agriculture would be the regulatory agency to
related particles that contain substances linked to respiratory or potentially cancer
contact for this information. In addition, future
related harm to humans and wildlife. How will these findings be proactively
developer will need to complete a Phase I
communicated to residents?
Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) that will
document site contamination and next steps. If
contaminated soils are present that do not meet
residential reuse requirements they will be
hauled offsite and disposed of per MPCA
guidelines. Dust BMPs will be in place during
construction to minimize the potential for dust.
Lastly, it would have been beneficial and prudent for our Lino Lakes residents to
receive a synopsis of your very well organized and extensive findings in layman's
terms, including avoidance of professional jargon. We are far from experts in your
Comment noted. If you would like to meet to
field and in conversations with neighbors who read or tried to read the AUAR
discuss the project, please reach out to us at:
report, it was impossible for them to understand or interpret findings, especially
mappingnwmain@linolakes.us
technical data reports. Thus, it was not possible to reply to a report when you
don't understand it in the first place.
12. John Grattan
I would prefer scenario 2, but there is still way too much high density housing in
Comment noted
every option.
20
Page 559 of 617
Appendix F.z
Comments
Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR
July 2025
Page 560 of 617
METROPOLITAN
C O U N C I L
June 26, 2025
Michael Grochala, Community Development Director
City of Lino Lakes
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
RE: City of Lino Lakes — Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) — Lino Lakes Main Street
Metropolitan Council Review File No. 23082-1
Metropolitan Council District No. 11
Dear Michael Grochala:
The AUAR study area encompasses approximately 962 acres located in the City's northwest, bisected by Main
Street and between Pine Street and Carl Street. The AUAR proposes two scenarios. Scenario 1 is the city's existing
2040 Comprehensive Plan which focuses higher -density and commercial development along both sides of Main
Street, with lower -density residential development to the north and south. Scenario 2 centralizes higher- and
medium -density housing and commercial development near the Lino Lakes/Blaine border around the Main Street
and Sunset Avenue, with low -density prioritized on the eastern side of the study area Metropolitan Council staff
completed its review of the Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR to determine its accuracy and completeness in
addressing regional concerns. Staff conclude that the AUAR is complete and accurate with respect to regional
concerns and does not raise major issues of consistency with Council policies. However, staff offers the following
comments for your consideration:
Item 6 - Project Description, Forecasts (Todd Graham, 651-602-1322)
The AUAR presents two scenarios for planned land use and accompanying development. Scenario 1 has
an ultimate capacity of 3,400 housing units, 60,000 sq. ft. of commercial use, with intense mixed residential
and commercial arrays along Main Street. Scenario 2, the preferred scenario, includes 3,500 housing units,
62,000 sq. ft. of commercial use, with greatest intensity shifted 1/3 mile west of the Scenario 1 concept, at
Main Street & Sunset. Should future development result in ultimate levels of Scenarios 1 or 2, the result
would exceed citywide forecasts for Lino Lakes. The AUAR area includes parts of Transportation Analysis
Zones # 182 (south of Main) and 183 (north of Main). In its 2040 Comprehensive Plan the City expected
additions of 814 households, 2,120 population, and 18 jobs in these two zones during 2020-2040. Council
staff may recommend a different allocation at the time of the 2050 Plan update.
Item 7 — Climate Adaptation and Resilience (Shawn James, 651-602-1233)
The discussion of anticipated climate trends is adequate; however, the AUAR would benefit from
considering if different scenarios merit different adaptations. The list of adaptations is well suited to both
scenarios, but the project proposer should consider how the different scenarios lend themselves to different
street patterns and how adaptations like clustering development could reduce the impervious surfaces
associated with single-family residential uses.
Item 9- Permits and Approvals, Wastewater (Roger Janzig, 651-602-1119)
The City will need to amend their comprehensive plan to reflect the proposed land use changes,
development staging, and the corresponding wastewater flow projections before any MPCA sanitary sewer
extension permit applications can be recommended for approval by the Council. This information will allow
the Council time for the needed improvements, to ensure capacity is available for growth within the AUAR
project area.
Metropolitan Council (Regional Office & Environmental Services)
390 Robert Street North, Saint Paul, MN 55101-1805
P 651.602.1000 1 F 651.602.1550 1 TTY 651.291.0904
metrocouncil.org
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Page 561 of 617
Item 10 - Land Use (Emma Dvorak, 651-602-1399)
The land uses presented in Scenario 1 appear consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Scenario 2
proposes high and medium density housing, and commercial development around Main Street and Sunset
Avenue, with low -density on the eastern side of the subject site. Any changes to land use, density, or
intensity that deviates from the adopted comprehensive plan will require a comprehensive plan amendment
process independent of the AUAR and will be subject to additional Council review.
Item 12 - Water Resources, Surface Water (Maureen Hoffman, 651-602-8026)
Chloride management best practices should be considered and implemented during the winter months to
limit impacts to surrounding water bodies and wetlands.
Item 12 - Water Resources, Water Supply (John Clark, 651-602-1452)
The AUAR states that the city's current water appropriation is not sufficient to meet the additional demand
required by either scenario 1 or 2, and that additional water supply will be needed. Before developing, the
city should work with the Minnesota DNR (DNR) and surrounding communities to assess the potential
impacts of additional pumping on source water aquifers, connected ecosystems, and surrounding wells and
ensure water will be available to meet future demands associated with this and other developments.
Potential wellfield expansion in Lino Lakes and by nearby communities could impact each other and nearby
private wells. The current use of the Prairie du Chien and Jordan aquifers as the sole source of water may
need to be evaluated. Increasing the efficiency of water use by commercial, institutional, and industrial
users may help eliminate or delay the need for additional water supply infrastructure, and lower costs for the
city utility and its rate payers. Estimated water demands for scenarios 1 and 2 are equivalent to about 36%
of the city's current water demands and 23% of demand in 2040, per the Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive
Plan.
If new wellfields are developed in the area, the city should consider the compatibility of these and additional
development scenarios with Drinking Water Supply Management Areas (DWSMAs) and Wellhead
Protection Plan goals. Any wells that are identified and abandoned during development should be sealed
according to Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) standards.
Capturing and storing water to be used for residential or commercial irrigation (or other purposes) would
lessen flood risks for both development scenarios, while offsetting the demand for outdoor water uses.
Using treated source water for outdoor purposes is costly, inefficient, and generates additional stress on
sources and surrounding ecosystems during the summer months. Lessening these stressors improves the
sustainability of supply sources and water supply systems.
Much of the proposed development for scenarios 1 and 2 is in areas mapped as flood prone. Drainage
ditches, pipes, and culverts are currently used to drain and route water out of the area for sod farming,
lessening infiltration and altering near surface hydrology. However, as development proceeds, any new
infrastructure including roads, homes, business, and utilities will contend with flood risk. The removal of
drain tiles, ditches, etc. creates an opportunity for the city to restore wetland function in the area, thereby
increasing infiltration and potential aquifer recharge and improving ground and surface water quality, with
the added benefit of additional habitat and green space. The reduction of flood risk through nature -based
water management can help to improve the longevity of developed infrastructure, with added climate
adaptation and mitigation benefits.
The Anoka Co. Geologic Atlas reference on page 31 section 11 is out of date. An update to the Anoka Co.
Atlas part A was completed in 2013, with part B following in 2016. The AUAR should be updated to reflect
and consider modern mapped geologic and hydrogeologic conditions. The AUAR should also consider
water table information included in the geologic atlas's and estimated by the DNR in 2014. Soils in this area
are either hydric or formerly hydric (drained hydric). These areas were wetlands prior to drainage and
development for commercial agricultural purposes. New developments would contend with high water
tables seasonally and during periods of increased precipitation.
Item 18 - Greenhouse Gas (GHG) (Shawn James, 651-602-1233)
The anticipated greenhouse gas emissions are reasonable and the proposed mitigation measures are
appropriate. An additional mitigation measure to consider is the orientation of new homes and overhang
Page - 2 1 June 26, 2025 1 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
Page 562 of 617
designs with the sun and horizon to maximize solar energy gain during the winter and minimize solar
energy gain in the summer.
Item 20 - Transportation, Transit (Joe Widing, 651-602-1822)
Roadways: The AUAR accurately identifies Main Street (CSAH 14) as a principal arterial. Any proposed
additional or changed access to a principal arterial should consult the Transportation Policy Plan (TPP)
functional classification guidance before finalizing any proposed access changes to a principal arterial -
Imagine 2050 TPP Functional Classification.
Transit: The AUAR accurately notes that there is not any existing transit service in the area. However, as
this area develops, with the AUAR study area and neighboring developments, the city should be
considering ways in which transit services could be extended to serve this area in the future as it develops,
which could aid in mitigating future traffic impacts.
Aviation: The AUAR site is not within the Anoka County -Blaine airport 3-mile influence area, however there
is a private turf air strip (Lino Air Park) located just south of the AUAR study area. The city should consider
compatibility with and potential impacts to the facility for any development proposals within the AUAR study
area.
Item 20 - Transportation, Transit (Barrett Clausen, 612-349-7596)
The Draft AUAR correctly states, "There is no transit service located near the study area" (page 69). Table
15 Draft Mitigation Plan includes a mitigation measure stating, "Prioritize alternative travel modes within the
AUAR study area ... (e.g., buses, bicyclists, and pedestrians)" (page 80). The authors should remove
"buses" from the parenthetical list on page 80. The study area is in Transit Market Area 5, which indicates
that the level of density in the surrounding area is not well suited for regular -route transit service. Metro
Transit operates commuter express routes in the 1-35W and 1-35E corridors near Lino Lakes, but there is no
other existing or planned service to this study area currently.
The Council will not take formal action on the AUAR. If you have any questions or need further information, please
contact Emma Dvorak, Principal Reviewer, at 651-602-1399 or via email at emma.dvorak@metc.state.mn.us.
Sincerely,
Angela R. Torres, AICP, Senior Manager
Local Planning Assistance
CC: Tod Sherman, Development Reviews Coordinator, MnDOT - Metro Division
Gail Cederberg, Metropolitan Council District No. 11
Judy Sventek, Water Resources Manager
Emma Dvorak, Sector Representative/Principal Reviewer
Reviews Coordinator
N:ICommDeOLPAICommunitieslLino LakeslLetterslLino Lakes 2025 Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR Ok With Comments 23082-1.docx
Page - 3 1 June 26, 2025 1 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
Page 563 of 617
M-)MINNESOTA POLLUTION
CONTROL AGENCY
Marshall Office 504 Fairgrounds Road I Suite 200 1 Marshall, MN 56258-1688 1 507-537-7146
800-657-3864 Use your preferred relay service I info.pca@state.mn.us I Equal Opportunity Employer
June 18, 2025
VIA EMAIL
Michael Grochala
City of Lino Lakes
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, Minnesota 55014
mgrochala@linolakes.us
RE: Lino Lakes Main Street -Alternative Urban Areawide Review
Dear: Michael Grochala
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Alternative Urban Areawide Review
(AUAR) for the Lino Lakes Main Street project (Project) located in Anoka County, Minnesota. The Project
consists of 316 tax parcels on approximately 962 acres in the city of Lino Lakes, Anoka County,
Minnesota. The study area is bounded by Pine Street NE to the north, Sunset Avenue (CSAH 53) to the
west, Century Trail and Carl Street to the south, and 4th Avenue to the east. Main Street (CSAH 14) is an
east -west road that bisects the study area. The surrounding area generally consists of private residences
ranging from medium -density housing to farmsteads. The study area is currently used for residential and
agricultural (sod) purposes. Regarding matters for which the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPCA) has regulatory responsibility and other interests, the MPCA staff has the following comments for
your consideration.
Wastewater
• A figure should be provided that shows the location of the major sewer system features in the
project area that are described in the draft AUAR.
Watershed
• With this development, there will be an increase in impervious area. Design considerations
should be taken to reduce salt usage which could lead to a chloride impairment for nearby
resources.
Planning to store snow in areas that won't increase icy areas as the pile melts and planting
trees in strategic places will be beneficial.
• The goal is to develop with winter maintenance in mind and use less salt.
There is a ditch in the Southeast corner of the project area that has had high chloride
samples collected. While not impaired, being proactive may help keep it off of the impaired
waters list for chlorides.
We appreciate the opportunity to review this Project. Please be aware that this letter does not
constitute approval by the MPCA of any or all elements of the Project for the purpose of pending or
future permit actions by the MPCA. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the Project Proposer to secure
any required permits and to comply with any requisite permit conditions. If you have any questions
Page 564 of 617
Michael Grochala
Page 2
June 18, 2025
concerning our review of this AUAR, please contact me by email at chris.green@state.mn.us or by
telephone at 507-476-4258.
Sincerely,
c>'vt-If
This document has been electronically signed.
Chris Green, Project Manager
Environmental Review Unit
Resource Management and Assistance Division
CG:rs
Attachment
cc: Dan Card, MPCA
Melinda Neville, MPCA
Nicole Peterson, MPCA
Lauren Dickerson, MPCA
Innocent Eyoh, MPCA
Deepa deAlwis, MPCA
David Sahli, MPCA
Julie Henderson, MPCA
Amy Timm, MPCA
Page 565 of 617
V,"VIR
r N��,N!RICE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
June 26, 2025
City of Lino Lakes
Michael Grochala, Community Development Director
Re: Lino Lakes Main Street Draft AUAR May 2025
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input on the Lino Lakes Main Street Draft AUAR. Rice Creek
Watershed District (RCWD) has reviewed the draft plan and affirms many sections of the plan and
highlights a few sections for further consideration.
With regards to RCWD, permitting requirements lists erosion control, stormwater management,
floodplain management, public drainage system rules, and wetlands for regulatory compliance.
o The District encourages early coordination on permitting matters including a pre -
application meeting between RCWD, developers, and Lino Lakes.
o The Water Appropriation Permit Program is managed by Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources (DNR). The District would, however, review a copy of the dewatering
plan for discharges into Anoka County Ditch (ACD) 10-22-32.
Other designations, Page 28
o This section references RCWD floodplain mapping. The District recently (2025) updated
floodplain polygons using recent Anoka County LiDAR reflecting significant changes to
region conveyance systems. A figure similar to Figure 11: FEMA 100-year Floodplain
utilizing updated RCWD data could be included.
• Stormwater— Existing Conditions, Page 44
o "Rice Creek Watershed District completed floodplain modeling and mapping in 2022 that
shows similar, albeit less, floodplain areas within the study area." 2022 floodplain
mapping is referenced on pages 18 and 44.
See the previous comment regarding recent updates to floodplain polygons.
Water Appropriation — Dewatering and Estimated Water Supply, Page 48
o The District will review a copy of the dewatering plan for discharges into ACD 10-22-32.
The District understands the City's current water production capacity is not sufficient to
serve the entire study area. Its DNR appropriation permit will need to be amended prior
to full build out of the study area to allow for two additional wells. The District encourages
thoughtful consideration with selection of drilling locations.
RCWD supports efforts to protect wellhead protection areas through its
regulatory program and is willing to collaborate on stormwater reuse projects.
4325 Pheasant Ridge Drive NE #611 1 Blaine, MN 55449 1 T: 763-398-3070 1 F: 763-398-3088 1 www.ricecreek.org
BOARD OF
MANAGERS
Jess Robertson
Anoka County
Steven P. Wagamon Michael J. Bradley
Anoka County
Ramsey County
Marcie Weinandt
Ramsey County
John J. Waller
Washington County
Page 566 of 617
• Stormwater Section, Page 43
o Modification of Anoka County Ditch 10-22-32
• Early coordination with the 103E public drainage authority (RCWD) for any
modifications to the drainage system is encouraged.
• The system may be relocated as necessary (p. 46), without decreasing its capacity,
through the statutory petition process to the 103E public drainage authority
(RCWD), approved by RCWD through Rule I, consistent with 103E.
• RCWD requires 20 feet (also referenced on p. 46) from top of bank to either side
for a buffer to complete required maintenance.
• The ditch must remain open and trees or other structures are prohibited in the
maintenance corridor may not obstruct access.
• Section 8 Cover Types, Page 19
o "Infiltration systems, tree trenches and tree boxes, wetlands, green roofs, and permeable
pavements could be constructed as part of future development plans."
• The District supports efforts to infiltrate and filter Stormwater and mitigate
runoff. Above and beyond basic requirements including implementation of BMP's
such as Iron Enhanced Sand Filter (IESF) to address dissolved phosphorus, and
stormwater re -use systems for reducing volume are encouraged where
applicable.
• After Construction, Page 45
o The paragraph regarding RCWD Rule C: Stormwater Management identifies that the
Rice Creek Watershed Rules were most recently updated on 1/1/2021. This date should
be corrected to 1/1/2025.
• Floodplains, Page 45
o Numbered item 4 should identify that drainage/flowage easements need to be provided
only if required by the land use authority.
o Continuing onto page 46, "Areas that are covered by Rule E are also subject to Rule F:
Wetland Alteration, as applicable."
• Water Resources, Page 76
o In the Floodplains row, please identify that RCWD approvals relate specifically to
RCWD's 100-year floodplains and not FEMA.
• Fish, Wildlife, Plant Communities, and Sensitive Ecological Resources, Page 77/78
o Include language that permits are required from the DNR for the taking of an endangered
or threatened species (Minnesota Statutes section 84.0895 and Minnesota Rules parts
6212.1800-2100).
• Both Development Scenarios include lands within the floodplain, RCWD rules require all proposed
development to quantify impacts to floodplain and address, mitigate, according to rule.
21
Page 567 of 617
Date Submitted: 5/27/2025
Name: Daryl Wangert
Subject: Housing
Comment: Natural integration, open housing without interest in income, race, religion, or political
affiliations. A reasonable density with disclosure as to effects of building on low fema flood plain.
Cracked foundation and soft saggy backyard possible over time, reduced value over time due to floods.
Certainly disclose the possibility of flood insurance requirements!
Address: 7868 Century Trail, Lino Lakes, MN 55014
Page 568 of 617
Date Submitted: 05/27/2025
Name: Sam Bennett
Subject: 2.1 Thoughts
Comment: I was the one who suggested bringing the park in towards the high density and commercial
areas. This was intended to make the park more accessible to those most likely to use it and drive
mutually beneficial activities most simply, being able to buy lunch and enjoy the playground.
Instead the high density was stretched out to the park. Which does make it more accessible to many users
it does not close the gap between the commercials and park space and now a much higher percentage of
single family lots are adjacent to the density.
Overall, I don't see enough benefit for option 2.1 over 2.0. it feels like a hybrid of "islands of density" that
was first to be eliminated.
Address: 6841 Lakeview Dr, Lino Lakes, MN 55014
Page 569 of 617
Date Submitted: 05/28/2025
Name: Christina Narwid
Subject: 35W and Sunset Bridge
Comment: With the additional development in the NW Main corridor, I worry about the traffic going to
Centennial Middle School and High School. There is a plan in place to make Sunset Avenue safer, but I
would love to see the Sunset bridge over 35W have a pedestrian/bike lane. That is the main route from
this neighborhood to the schools so there are many kids riding their bikes to get to those locations. It is
already unsafe and there will be even more traffic with the increased density.
Address: 7768 Pinto Lane, Lino Lakes, MN 55014, United States
Page 570 of 617
Date Submitted: 05/28/2025
Name: Sue Bass
Subject: Robinson Drive
Comment: If you put the street through from Main Street to Century Trail and Robinson Dr you are
going to create a freeway along Robinson Drive as most people, instead of going to the traffic circle at
Main and Sunset are going to cut down Century Trail and turn on Robinson. Robinson at that point is a
straight shot/short cut to Sunset. It is going to create horrible traffic for people living on or near Robinson.
People will not use Century Trail because it winds so much. There needs to be some way to funnel the
traffic away from Robinson. PLEASE!
Address: 197 Shetland Ln, Lino Lakes, MN 55014, United States
Page 571 of 617
Date Submitted: 05/28/2025
Name: James Bosak
Subject: Both Scenarios
Comment: Both scenarios appear to show an extension of 121st that would run along the north side of
my property at 7798 Sunset and connect to Robinson Drive. I cannot imagine what value such a road
might have since it essentially parallels Sunset. What it would do for me personally is completely destroy
the value of my property, at least to me. Please let me know as soon as possible if this is a serious
possibility so that I can start looking for another place to live. If that road is built neither of the scenarios
will make any difference to me since I would not be living in Lino Lakes anymore.
Address: 7798 SUNSET AVE, LINO LAKES, MN 55014, United States
Date Submitted: 06/03/2025
Name: James Bosak
Subject: feedback
Comment: I am not sure what more feedback on this issue will achieve, guessing it's probably just a
mandatory part of the whole AUAR process and will not have any impact whatsoever on what is
eventually allowed to go forward. I would hope that by now the wishes of the residents living in close
proximity to the proposed development area are fairly well known, i.e. "Slow the Grow". Simply put
those wishes are; the lowest possible housing density and the highest possible green natural space
possible. At 3400 or 3500 units neither of the scenarios presented come close to achieving this, at least in
my view. Dividing the 962 acres by 3450 units gives about only .28 acres per unit. But it is really even
lower than this since at significant portion of the 962 acres are already fully developed (not sure why they
were even included in the study). I would be interested to know what the process and criteria were that
determined what the appropriate density should be. If this was explained in the AUAR report I must have
missed it. There must have been some consistent considerations since both scenarios come up with
almost the same overall density. In order for the density proposed to be achieved it looks to me like it will
be at a very high cost since according to the map presented in the AUAR about half of the acres are in the
FEMA flood zones. An awful lot of dirt will have to be moved around. Oh well, I'm sure some
developer will be allowed to give it a try, hopefully not one convicted of theft by swindle. For what it's
worth, between the two scenarios presented, this resident votes for scenario 1.
Address: 7798 SUNSET AVE, LINO LAKES, MN 55014, United States
Page 572 of 617
Date Submitted: 05/28/2025
Name: William Grant
Subject: Prefer Scenario 1
Comment: Sunset is a short street that is already problematic to turn left out of the neighborhood in the
morning. Putting high density all centered on Sunset will make a problem worse. The higher density
should be farther East closer to the major roadways. That is Scenario 1.
Address: 102 Century Trail, Lino Lakes, MN 55014, United States
Page 573 of 617
Date Submitted: 05/30/2025
Name: James Kukkonen
Subject: Main Development
Comment: As a current resident of Century Trail I would prefer a scenario with low density
development. My concerns would include the increased traffic, use of local resources and added pressure
on local schools. I am not against growth but I do believe we need to consider the effects of increasing
too much in a small area.
Address: 7824 Century Trail, Circle Pines, MN 55014, United States
Page 574 of 617
Date Submitted: 06/03/2025
Name: Teresa O'Connell
Subject: AUAR project main street
Comment: Water and lighting are my concerns. Water this area I believe was tiled for farming so with
that in mind keeping the water on this site with slow release into the soil or sewer system is important.
Whatever system is used plan ahead on making maintenance of these water areas easily accessible.
Decided in advance before sales happen to the future landowners who will be responsible for cost and
maintenance of the water devices. If a retention pond is put in, I believe they need to be cleaned out
between 15 to 20 years after being built. The developer could choose to build each lot with a rain garden
in and that also has to be maintained and cleaned out, yearly would be good. There are many options for
controlling water but currently from what I have observed this is not being planned during the
development of the land.
Lighting since this area already has development around it on the South, North and East side maintaining
lighting as close to what is in the surrounding area is important. Dark sky cities are becoming more and
more popular and since full build out is not planned for another 30 years. Talk with the 10- and 13-year-
olds over at Lino Lakes Stem school and get them involved I suspect they have dreams of what the future
will look like. They will be the ones living there but at the same time the current neighbors' needs should
be met.
35 W which is very close to this site sees more traffic than Main St, Sunset and 4th streets see on a daily
basis and there are no streetlights between Lexington and going north to Lake dr. on 35 W.
Address: 1000 Main St., Lino Lakes, MN 55014, United States
Page 575 of 617
Date Submitted: 06/25/2025
Name: Kevin and Tammy Danrud
Subject: AUAR Comments
Comment: First, thank you for allowing public input into this process. After reviewing the AUAR, we
are in favor of Scenario 2. However, we still have comments, questions and concerns over this scenario.
1. Our first priority is to leave Carl Street alone. There are many pedestrians and bicyclists that use this
road along with the residential homes that would be highly impacted if this were to connect to other
roadways as part of the development -too much traffic. This is a street we call home and it has been here
for a lot longer than a new development. We will already have a very different quality of life with the
development across the street. It would be great to keep one thing the same.
2. As we are an existing neighborhood on the southside of Carl Street, we would like to ask that the
development put in trees at the far south end of the quadrant along Carl Street to provide a noise and view
buffer of the development. Again, this development will affect our quality of life, and trees would be a
good faith effort on the developers' part to show they want to do well with existing neighborhoods.
3. As there will need to be a new water treatment plant built for this development as well as new roads
and roundabouts, we are very concerned how this will impact our taxes. Our taxes took a big jump this
year and we don't feel we should be taxed for these services as we will not benefit at all from the water
and roads.
4. Finally, we are concerned about traffic on 4th Ave. Many people walk along this road and there is an
airstrip that also ends at 4th and there are no sidewalks planned.
Address: 314 Carl Street, Lino Lakes, MN 55014
Page 576 of 617
Date Submitted: 06/25/2025
Name: Kristen Iverson
Subject: AUAR Response
Comment: Hello,
I have a few concerns I would like to address in response to the AUAR study.
My concern is the negative impact this will have on traffic, and on our natural environment and
ecosystems in the study area and surrounding areas. I live on Carl Street, very close to the study area. This
is a rural area with larger lot sizes and open green areas.
We have Blanding Turtles that nest every year in our yards and surrounding areas. We currently have four
sets of Sandhill Cranes that breed and make their home here on Carl Street. We also have Bald Eagles,
numerous Owls, waterfowl, pheasants, turkey, deer and bear. Roughly seven miles north is Carlos Avery
Wildlife Management Area. This is an important wildlife refuge that contains marshland, lakes and
swamps that provides habitat for migratory birds and other wildlife species. This ecosystem needs to be
protected, including the land south of Carlos Avery in which we live and reside in. Many of these animals
live amongst us on Carl Street and in the surrounding forest areas and open fields near us.
We cannot allow high density homes and apartment building high rises, in addition to commercial
buildings, in this area because it will destroy this ecosystem. Migratory birds aloft at night migrate
through our area on Carl Street and surrounding neighborhoods, with stops to Carlos Avery Wildlife
Refuge.
It is important to eliminate outdoor lighting and parking lot lighting as much as possible, and to help
reduce the amount of reflective glass on windows to help get the birds safely to their destinations.
In summary, Lino Lakes needs to locate their commercial and high density developments to areas by Lake
Drive and Interstate 35. Let's make the Lake Drive area the new "downtown" area, and let's not ruin
peaceful residential neighborhoods with abundant wildlife with close proximity to Carlos Avery Wildlife
Management Area. This is a precious ecosystem with natural habitat that has to be saved and protected.
Thank you for your time.
Address: 352 Carl St, Lino Lakes, MN 55014, United States
Page 577 of 617
Date Submitted: 06/26/2025
Name: Betsy Garcia
Subject: Soil Contamination and Floodplains
Comment: Thank you for compiling the AUAR report.
1) It is my understanding the Lino Lakes Flood Plain Administrator is responsible
for assuring compliance with FEMA guidelines & local ordinances regarding any development of land on
the current Robinson Sod Farm.
Because my property abuts this sod farm just to the east, I want to assure the proposed mitigation
interventions will protect my land from any flooding. Additionally, what communication will be
provided identifying the specific interventions, and to whom would I report any negative sequelae related
to flooding that could possibly occur as a result of the interventions in the future?
2) i am concerned regarding contaminated soil on the sod farm which already has or will occur during
mitigation secondary to fertilizers, pesticides and other chemicals. These have been used for years on the
sod farm, and would like to know what EPA approved testing or other methods will be done to determine
levels of toxic pollutants, harmful particulates or emissions from the helicopter crash, farm vehicles and
machinery. Would the testing include Nitrogen Oxides, Hydrocarbons, Greenhouse gases, ammonia and
other identified agriculturally related particles that contain substances linked to respiratory or potentially
cancer related harm to humans and wildlife. How will these findings be proactively communicated to
residents?
Lastly, it would have been beneficial and prudent for our Lino Lakes residents to receive a synopsis of
your very well organized and extensive findings in layman's terms, including avoidance of professional
jargon. We are far from experts in your field and in conversations with neighbors who read or tried to read
the AUAR report, it was impossible for them to understand or interpret findings, especially technical data
reports. Thus, it was not possible to reply to a report when you don't understand it in the first place. .
Address: N/A
Page 578 of 617
Date Submitted: 05/28/2025
Name: John Grattan
Subject: Housing Density
Comment: I would prefer scenario 2, but there is still way too much high density housing in every
option.
Address: N/A
Page 579 of 617
CITY OF LINO LAKES
RESOLUTION NO.25-
102
APPROVING Lino Lakes Main Street Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review
(AUAR)
WHEREAS, an AUAR Update has been completed forth project pursuant to Minnesota
Rules 4410 and identifies and assesses the environmental impacts and mitigation measures
associated with the Lino Lakes Main Street Corridor.
WHEREAS, the Lino Lakes Main Street Corridor Area is located on approximately 962 acres
located in the northwest portion of Lino Lakes and was updated pursuant to Minnesota
Rules 4410.3610
WHEREAS, the AUAR Update was distributed for the required 30-day comment period and
published in the EQB Monitor, no agency objections were filed for the AUAR Update;
comments received, and responses developed are included in the public record
WHEREAS, development in the Lino Lakes Main Street Corridor Area is expected to comply
with all Lino Lakes and review agency standards as well as the mitigation measures outlined
in the AUAR Update.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by The City Council of The City of Lino Lakes hereby
adopts the Lino Lakes Main Street Final Area Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update dated
August 11, 2025.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Lino Lakes this 11th day of August, 2025.
Rob Rafferty, Mayor
ATTEST:
Roberta Colotti, CIVIC,
City Clerk
Page 580 of 617
CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 5
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Michael Grochala
WORK SESSION DATE: August 4, 2025
TOPIC: Otter Lake Road Right of Way Acquisition Update
BACKGROUND
The City Council authorized the preparation of plans and specifications for the Otter Lake Road
Extension Project in August of 2023. Design work has been ongoing, and final design is at the
60% stage. WSB Inc. was retained in September of 2024 to handle right-of-way acquisition for
the City.
The project will require acquisition of permanent right-of-way, utility and drainage easements
as well as temporary construction easements. Approximately 8 parcels are affected by the
project. Appraisals preparation for the individual parcels are nearing completion, and staff
expects to be ready to make offers in September.
While we are anticipating completing acquisition through direct purchase with property owners
the City will initiate eminent domain proceedings, in part, to establish a possession date to
allow for project construction. Staff is working with the City Attorney to set up the schedule
for this process. Staff will likely be requesting City Council consideration to authorize staff to
make offers in late August. Consideration to proceed with eminent domain proceedings
would follow likely in September.
REQUESTED COUNCIL DIRECTION
None required. Information only.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft right of way parcel map
1
Page 581 of 617
PARCEL 12
EXISTING COUNTY DITCH 55 MAIN TRUNK
C �R mot,
t>
tit
tit t�4� j
PARCEL 11
� t1
I I.
I I
� I
I �
L7
EXISTING COUNTY DITCH 55 BRANCH 8
PARCEL 10
Lu
PARCEL 13Lu
wl
ar i
N I
/
/
/
/
/
/
/////N'
I� \
� I o
n
a
HERITAGE PARKWAY N
r_.
\ I I I ORAttJAGEAND I STEASEMENT
AQtPlAT
OE AfAIN STREET SHOPPES
•\ I Ill i_____________________ --
---------
EXISTING RCWD EASEMENT
r--=� O
I —
�\ � ~
C
Q I
�-
DRAINAG94ND UTILITv
EASEMENT P PLAT OF -
OTTERC SING
SECONDA ITIOIN-
z
(D PARCEL 4 PARCEL 5
w � -I� � � I\ o -
` I /' QP 0/� y
~-
Q tip.
I 8 LLJ
Q N Y
ILL.
I I
Q �/ -
A$EMERYPER PLAT OF 2f' Y Z
' TTE GROSSING- _ O _ — — — — — — — } if
Q �14
�------- r— -- N i C----LOT ] LOT I W
BEAND
\�` 0���0 i �' B�QCK 1EESH PPESCK 1 ; i _�'�i BELLA``I\�VI Legend
\'O PO I` ` .� j1R�NAGE AN DRAINAGEANDU 1 2NDAD ITION I - \
0 ` T�GA6ENIPPIRE - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ X
P*E L 1 I I D Von 1 NO_ o���o� P NEW RIGHT OF WAY
gL0 i 1" = ' CROSSING TREET II C� 1 NEW PERM ESMT
12 FT WIO NOKA COUNN EASEMENT
_ _ - 0 P P E S I I 8�0 ^ FOR DRAI GE, TRAIL, AND UTILITY PURPOSES,
N f I - _ _ - _ , - I I ," PER DOC' 0'a 1975188.0o1 & 1975188.002
LL r P,y y I I '� I I I .'
Lt_�, � D1 — NEW TEMP ESMT
DISCLAIMER �� ����°
�ANOKA COUNTY HIGHWAY_RIGHT-OF=WAY PLAT NO. 75 _ °� �` '°' ----- CONSTRUCTION LIMITS
claimer: PERMANENT ^ ^ 12FTWIDEPERMANENT EASEMENT PER _
This Plan Will Change Prlof To Construction. An Plans For Development EASEMENT C.S.A.H. NO. I`T> ANOKACOUNTYHIGHWAV RIGHT -OE -WAY PlATN0. 65
g v P `FO SLOPING
MAIN STREET ( 200
Adjacent To The Roadway Should Be Confirmed By Contacting: FOR sLovwG PURPOSES _
PER DOD. NO. Is-1..1 ANOKA COUNTY HIGHWAY RIGHT —OE., WAY PLAT NO. 65
wsbSCALE IN FEET
No Responsibility Is Assumed For Plans Developed Based On This Layout couNry 7+
0 84
Otter Lake Road Extension - Right of Way Strip Map
IN KE IF 7/28/2025
Page 582 of 617
w-IMUN.13=9041M..2n
CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 6
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Michael Grochala, Community Development Director
WORK SESSION DATE: August 4, 2025
TOPIC: Vadnais Lakes Area Water Management Organization (VLAWMO)
JPA Amendments/Update
BACKGROUND
Since the early 1980's, communities in the metropolitan area have been required to manage
surface water in accordance with the Metropolitan Water Management Program set out in
Minnesota Statutes, sections 10313.201 through 10313.253 ("Act"). To address that requirement,
the City, together with the other communities in the watershed, adopted a joint powers
agreement in 1983 to form the Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization
("VLAWMO"). VLAWMO is a joint powers watershed management organization under
Minnesota Statutes, section 10313.211 and is authorized to carry out the duties under the Act.
Since its formation, VLAWMO has developed, adopted, and updated its watershed
management plan as required by the Act. It has also undertaken, on its own and in cooperation
with the member communities, water quality and restoration projects throughout the
watershed. VLAWMO is in the process of updating its watershed management plan and is
working to update the JPA at the same time.
The JPA has been amended and renewed since its original adoption, with the current JPA set to
expire on December 31, 2026. The JPA was last updated and readopted in 2016. The updated
JPA is the result of a detailed review and work to incorporate VLAWMO's long-standing
practices and procedures. This update also includes recognizing the storm sewer utility fee as
VLAWMO's primary source of funding. VLAWMO was originally funded through a cost sharing
assessment to each community.
As with any joint powers agreement, all member communities need to adopt the same
agreement language. VLAWMO staff worked with member community staff to seek review and
comments. Staff reviewed the City's comments at the June 2, 2025, work session. Those
comments were then incorporated into the JPA.
Page 583 of 617
The Board considered the revised JPA at its June 25, 2025, meeting and adopted a resolution to
approve forwarding the JPA to the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) for review and
then to the member communities. VLAWMO submitted the JPA to BWSR for review and then
made some revisions to respond to BWSR's comments.
City staff made some final comments on July 31,2025 which have since been incorporated into
the document. The finalized JPA is now before the City Council for consideration and approval.
While the wording was substantially updated to create the current JPA, there were relatively
few substantive changes. The primary changes from the previous agreement are:
The specific years each group of Board members are to serve was removed.
2. It was made clear the secretary -treasurer can delegate duties of the position as
currently occurs.
3. Requires a majority vote on matters coming before the Board.
4. The storm water utility and the authorizing special legislation is called out and is
recognized as the primary funding source for VLAWMO.
5. The process for capital improvement projects was more specifically spelled out.
6. Expanded the language on the Technical Commission to further detail its role and
authority.
7. The budgeting and funding processes were updated to reflect the current process and
to make clear Member assessments are no longer used to fund VLAWMO's operations.
Member assessments, which is the primary source of funding the operations of most WMOs, is
still in the agreement as a possibility if it ever needs to be relied on to help fund VLAWMO's
operation.
8. Revised the capital improvement language to reflect how projects are currently funded.
9. The appeal and arbitration process was replaced with a dispute resolution process that
focuses on mediation as the primary method to seek resolution.
10. Various miscellaneous provisions were added to address basic statutory requirements
(such as data practices and audit compliance) and other general agreement provisions
(governing law, etc.).
Page 584 of 617
11. The two amendments adopted in 2019 are incorporated into the JPA (insurance and
liability & revenue bond authority).
REQUESTED COUNCIL DIRECTION
Staff is requesting City Council direction to place on the JPA on the August 11, 2025, City
Council agenda for consideration
ATTACHMENTS
1. VLAWMO Administrator/Attorney Overview of Changes
2. Redline of draft agreement.
Page 585 of 617
#'J,JVLAWM 0 800 County Rd E East, Vadnais Heights, MN 55127
www.VLAWMO.org
rg
office@vlawmo.org
Vadnais Lake Area (651) 204-6070
Water Management Organ i .
To: Connie Taillon, City of White Bear Lake, Environmental Specialist/Water Resources
Engineer
Kevin Kress, City of North Oaks, City Administrator
Mike Grochala, City of Lino Lakes, Community Development Director
Jim Hauth, City of Vadnais Heights, Public Works Director
Melissa Lawrence, City of Gem Lake, Administrative Assistant
Dale Reed, White Bear Township, Public Works Director
From: Phil Belfiori - VLAWMO Administrator and Troy Gilchrist - VLAWMO Attorney
Date: August 1, 2025
Re: Final Updated VLAWMO Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) for City Council /Town Board
Consideration, Action/Signature- Revised with Updated Sect. 3.14 language.
Please find attached (See Attachment 1) the VLAWMO Joint Powers Agreement ("JPA")for
consideration and action by your respective City Council/Town Boards.
Background
As you are aware from the first draft of the VLAWMO JPA packet sent to you on April 24,
2025, VLAWMO is working to update its Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) in conjunction with its
work to develop the 2027-2036 Watershed Management Plan. The current JPA was adopted
in 2016 and will expire on December 31, 2026. While the current JPA will not expire until next
year, VLAWMO determined the concurrent review and update of the JPA and the Watershed
Management Plan is the most efficient and will help ensure the documents are properly
aligned.
As such, VLAWMO staff and Troy Gilchrist (VLAWMO Attorney) have prepared the enclosed
final JPA which is the result of a detailed review and work to incorporate VLAWMO's long-
standing practices and procedures. The primary changes from the previous JPA are
summarized in the attached sample city /township staff memo and sample resolutions (see
Attachment 3). The most import of these changes is the recognition that the storm sewer
utility fee is VLAWMO's primary source of funding. The overall goal was to better align the JPA
with how VLAWMO actually operates and has operated for many years. An effort was also
made to streamline the language as much as possible.
VLAWMO staff sent the draft JPA to member community staff for review and comments on
April 24, 2025. Comments were received from four member community staff. The updated
JPA reflects revisions where relevant and or necessary per these comments. Many of the
comments were non -substantive and involved minor revisions to language for clarification,
Page 586 of 617
VLAWMO
Vadnais Lake Area
Water Management Organizatw i
800 County Rd E East, Vadnais Heights, MN 55127
www.VLAWMO.org
office@vlawmo.org
(651) 204-6070
consistency, or grammar. The following highlights the substantive changes made to the draft
JPA based on the member community staff comments received in May:
1. The language about the "final budget" needing to be adopted by December 31 was
revised to reflect to indicate that any budget adjustments required to allocate carry-
overfunds need to be made by December 31 (Sec. 6.1(f) )
2. If there was ever a member assessment, the date by which that decision needs to be
made was changed from September 1 to July 1 to better accommodate the city
budgeting process (Sec. 6.3).
3. The duration of the JPA was revised back to previous language, which was 10 years;
(Sec. 7.1). The JPA can be amended at any time in the future if needed (Sec. 8.4).
4. The method for selecting a mediator if the parties cannot agree on a mediator under
the dispute resolution process in Sec. 8.2 was revised to have the Chair make the
selection or, if the Chair's community is involved, then to have the Vice -Chair make
the selection.
5. Revisions to Sec 7.4 regarding the allocation of assets if VLAWMO was dissolved to
remove references to real property.
6. The voting requirement to approve the annual budget was revised. (see note below
regarding subsequent comments from BWSR).
The VLAWMO Board considered the revised JPA at its June 25, 2025 meeting and adopted a
VLAWMO Resolution 05-2025 (See attachment 4) to approve forwarding the JPA to BWSR
for review and then to the member communities.
The draft JPA was then sent to BWSR for review and comment as is required by State law.
Upon review, BWSR provided four comments which were mostly minor and focused on
detailed policy matters related to Board meeting logistics /noticing and adding a reference
related to the VLAWMO annual report work plan. The BWSR also commented that the voting
requirement section included in VLAWMO's annual budget process (referred to in Sections 3
and 6 of the JPA) require a majority vote. Staff made these revisions to respond to BWSR's
comments and the revised the JPA. On Tues. July 29, 2025, VLAWMO staff sent out the final
update JPA to member community staff. The City of Lino Lakes staff then sent an email on
Wed. July 30, 2025 regarding a question on the proposed language in section 3.14 of the
JPA regarding voting requirements for capital improvements. Based on this question and
subsequent discussions, VLAWMO revised the language in Section 3.14 as follows:
Page 587 of 617
VLAWMO
Vadnais Lake Area
Water Management Organization
800 County Rd E East, Vadnais Heights, MN 55127
www.VLAWMO.org
office@vlawmo.org
(651) 204-6070
3.14 Voting. Each Director shall have one (1) vote in all matters coming before the
Board. Approval of all matters, except capital improvement projects, will be
determined by a simple majority of Directors present and voting at the meeting. The
Board must approve a capital improvement project by a two-thirds vote of the Directors
present and voting at a meeting before a contract may be let to construct the project.
This revised language was agreed to by the majority of member community staff including
the City of Lino Lakes, Vadnais Heights, Gem Lake and White Bear Lake and was approved
as complying with requirements by BWSR. This above mentioned revised language in
section 3.14 has now been incorporated into Attachment 1 (the Final updated JPA) and is
now ready to be brought before the City Council /Town Board for consideration and
approval.
Request to Member Community Staff
VLAWMO staff would respectfully request City Council/Town Board consideration and action
on the attached JPA (Attachment 1) by Friday September 26, 2025 if possible. This timing
would allow for best "fit" and alignment with the anticipated timing with the upcoming
VLAWMO Board consideration of the next version of the VLAWMO Watershed Management
Plan later this Fall /Early Winter.
If you have any remaining legal based questions, please contact VLAWMO Attorney Troy
Gilchrist at Troy@townlawcenter.com. If you have any remaining non -legal questions, please
contact Phil Belfiori at Phil.belfiori@vlawmo.orj�.
VLAWMO staff (Phil) will call each of you individually to discuss timing, determine if you need
any additional information, and to see if you have any remaining questions.
Attachments:
1. Final updated JPA and final updated VLAWMO boundary map exhibit for
consideration and action by City Council's and Town Board
2. "Redlined" JPA version comparing revisions made comparing attachment 1 to the
2017 VLAWMO JPA
3. Templates/ sample city council /town board staff memo and sample resolutions
for use by member community staff for City Council and Town Board meeting
packets (4 total documents)
4. VLAWMO approved resolution 05-2025 from their meeting on June 25, 2025
CC:
Kevin Watson - kevin.watson@cityvadnaisheights.com
David Pecchia - di)ecchia@linolakes.us
Pat Christopherson - Pat.Christopherson@whitebeartownship.orFf
Lindy Crawford - Irawford@whitebearlake.org
Page 588 of 617
VADNAIS LAKE AREA WATER MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
TO PROTECT- AND MANAGE THE
IVADNAIS LAKE AREA SALATERS14
THIS JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT; ("Agreement") is made and entered into as
the last date ofexeetAie , by and between the participating units of local government of the
Cities of Gem Lake, Lino Lakes, North Oaks, Vadnais Heights, and White Bear Lake and the
Township of White Bear here -after- r-ef€frod-te-asMeffibers" -(individually as�a "Member"—,
" and collectively the ' ,
ublie a "Members").
RECITALS
A. The Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization ("VLAWMO") was organized
in 1983 and is located in the northeast metro area within Ramsev and Anoka counties.
B. VLAWMO is responsible for an approximately 24.2 square mile watershed that
encompasses the City of North Oaks, along with portions of the Cities of White Bear Lake,
Gem Lake, Vadnais Heights, Lino Lakes, and White Bear Township and includes 17 lakes,
1 creek, and over 1000 wetlands as shown on the map maintained by VLAWMO.
C. Local government units in the metropolitan area are required by the Metropolitan Water
Management Program (Minn. Stat. && 10313.201 to 10313.255) ("Act") to plan for and
manage surface water.
D. Under the Act, one of the options available to local government units to satisfy its
requirements is to adopt a: joint powers agreement pursuant to Minn. Stat. & 471.59 to
establish a watershed management organization to jointly plan for and manage surface
water within a watershed.
E. The Members elected to exercise their authority under the Act to adopt a joint powers
agreement establishing VLAWMO to cooperatively manage and plan for the management
of surface water within the watershed.
F. The original joint powers agreement has been updated over time and the term of the current
joint powers agreement expires on December 31, 2026.
G. VLAWMO is funded in large part by storm sewer utility fees certified to the respective
County Auditors and imposed by the Counties on properties within the watershed as
authorized by pecial legislation adopted by the Minnesota Legislature in 2008 (2008
Minn. Laws Chap. 366, Art. 6, Sec. 47).
H. The Members previously acted pursuant to their authority to establish the "Vadnais Lake
Area Water Management Organization Board of Directors" ("Board") and said Board is
Page 589 of 617
hereby reaffirmed as the entity charged with the authority and responsibility to manage
VLAWMO.
L VLAWMO has also established a Technical Commission that performs a varietv of
functions to assist with VLAWMO's operations and assist with developing VLAWMO's
annual budget.
J. The Board has previously acted to adopt a Watershed Management Plan for the watershed
and has regularly updated the Watershed Management Plan in accordance with Minn. Stat.
10313.231, Minn. R., chap. 8410, and such other law as maygpply.
K. The Members desire to enter into this Agreement to reaffirm VLAWMO and the Board in
furtherance of its efforts to continue working cooperatively to prepare and administer a
watershed management plan to manage surface water within the watershed in accordance
with the Act and Minn. R., chap. 8410.
AGREEMENT
In consideration of the mutual promises and agreements contained herein, the Members
mutually agree as follows:
SECTION I
ESTABLISHMENT AND GENERAL PURPOSE
1.1 Pie-Reaffirmina the Establishment. The Members herebv reaffirm and ratifv the
establishment and continued operation of the "Vadnais Lake Area Water Management
Organization 'pursuant to Minnesota Seette„ 471co
dependent upon the sineer-e desire of eaeh Member- tower-k eeeper-atively to meet ,
- . r-ements of the Metfopolitan Sur-faee Water- Management statute, Minnesota StatutesT
rof ,., e to the "Act". and such other laws and rules as may apply.
PAM
.asr�!es��sers .rs�ese!� .e�s�!s:re!1
2
Page 590 of 617
.............
e) prevent erosion of soil into suffaee wa4er- systems-,L
seeufe other- benefits assoeia4ed with the proper- fnanagefnefA of sur-faee a
gr-ouadwatef, and be in meor-danee with the Aet.-
1.2 General Purpose. The general purpose of this Agreement is to continue VLAWMO and its
work on behalf of the Members to cooperatively adopt, administer, and update as needed
the Watershed Management Plan, and to carry out the purposes identified in Minn. Stat. §
103B.201 and the other provisions of the Act. The plan and programs shall operate within
the boundaries of VLAWMO as identified in the official man filed with the Minnesota
Board of Soil and Water Resources. The most current version of the official map defining
the boundaries of the Watershed is incorporated herein by reference. The boundaries of the
Watershed are subject to change utilizing the procedure set out in Minn. Stat. § 103B.225
as may be needed to better reflect the hydrological boundaries of the Area.
SECTION II
ALADNAIS LAKE AREA WATERSHED
C TIl11%1 111
DEFINITIONS
2.1 For ,.,,f.. oses of thi^ groomer*,Definitions. The definitions contained in Minn. Stat. §
103B.205 and Minn. R., part 8410.0020 are hereby adopted by reference, except that the
following terms shall have the meanings as de kied them in this section.
"Agreement" means this Mien.
(a) "Agreement" T is �� developed pursuant to Mipmes t Statute
SeetienMinn. Stat. §§ 103B.211 & 471.59 and which reestablishes and
continues the Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization (^Ir ^ WN4Gq
(b) "Alternate Commissioner" means the person appointed by a Member to serve as its
alternate to represent the Member on the Technical Commission in the absence or
disability of its appointed Commissioner.
(c) "Alternate Director" means the person appointed by a Member to serve as its
alternate to represent the Member on the Board in the absence or disability
appointed Director.
Page 591 of 617
(d) "Area" --Themeans the boundaries of the Vadnais Lake Area Watershed as set forth
on the map set fefth on Appendixa ere-a-fter- r-efefrete-as the "Area". official
map incorporated herein by reference.
(e) `Board of Directors" or `Board" --T-hemeans the governing board of VLAWMO
consisting of one elected official from each of the Members which are parties to this
Agreement.
( ) "Capital Improvement" means a physical improvement that has an extended useful
life. A capital improvement is not directed toward maintenance of an in -place
system during its life expectancy. A study or a research project do not constitute a
capital improvement that must be included in the Watershed Management Plan.
(g) "Capital Improvement Program" means an itemized program for at least a five-
year prospective period, and any amendments to it, subject to at least biennial
review, setting forth the schedule, timing, and details of specific contemplated
capital improvements by year, together with their estimated cost, the need for each
improvement, financial sources, and the financial effect that the improvements will
have on the local government unit or watershed management organization.
•
11
ff- ":.
(h) "Commissioner" —Ameans a person appointed by each Member to the Technical
Commission.
(i) "Director" means the elected official appointed by each Member as aits
representative teon the Board of Directors.
�:r�srt�sseses�srrsert�
(i) "Governing Body" means the city council of a Member city or the town board of the
Member town _
9
Page 592 of 617
(k) "Local Water Management Plan" - Ameans a plan adopted by the each of the
me bersMembers pursuant to Minnesota S, i9*Minn. Stat. § 103B.235
and Minn. R., part 8410.0160.
(1) "Member" means each of the cities and the town that
mare parties to this Agreement.
(m)"Special Legislation" means 2008 Minn. Laws Chap. 366, Art. 6, Sec. 47.
n) "Storm Sewer Utilitv" or "SSU" means the public utilitv established by VLAWMO
pursuant to the Special Legislation. The Board establishes and certifies to the
Countv for collection within the Area a Storm Sewer Utilitv fee for the management
of surface water.
(o) "Technical Commission" —Aor "TEC" means the commission established herein
that is composed of a -technically skilled per -so i erp sons, appointed by each Member.
tp)__"Vadnais Lake Area Watershed" Theor "Watershed" means the area contained
within a line drawn around the extremities of all terrain whose surface drainage is
tributary to Vadnais Lake ^r as deser-ibed i "ppen i "as shown on the official
watershed map incorporated herein by reference.
(g)_"VLAWMO" The abbreviated name of the of-ganization er-eated by this
Agreement, the full name f.z,hie 4means the "Vadnais Lake Area Water
Management Organization—." that is reestablished and continued pursuant to this
Agreement.
(r) "Watershed Management Plan"-Ameans a plan adopted by VLAWMO pursuant to
Minnesota St t tes Seetio„Minn. Stat. § 103B.231.
SECTION III
SECT -!ON 11%
ORGANIZATION OF VLAWMO; RESPONSIBILITIES OF MEMBERS
3.1 Subdivision 4 . Board of Directors. -The governing body of the--VLAWMO shall be 4sthe
"Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization Board of Directors." The Board of
Directors is comprised of a total of six (6) Directors. The parties hereby reaffirm the
establishment and continued operation of the Board of Directors, which shall carry out the
purposes and have the powers as provided in this Agreement.
Subdivision . Appointment of Directors. Each Member shall appoint one representative-,-)43e
must be an eleeted offleial, to the Bear-d, and said representative shall be ealled a " ". to
serve as the Member's Director on the Board. The appointment process shall flow M" nes t ,
Statutes, Seetiencomply with the requirements in Minn. Stat. § 103B.227, Subdivisions ' and 2
Page 593 of 617
• 7�TSS!ESf�T.l�rS}.�'iS.T.!ll�if�S!f�!!}�!!t'�. 35.
OF, 11 1
(a) TheAppointment of Alternate Directors appeii ed b . Each Member magppoint one
representative to serve as the Cities of Line 1 _§;1II and White Bear- r k,v as Member's
Alternate Director on the Tew-nshipBoard. A Member's Alternate Director may attend
the meetings of �x'"'�ear-the Board, but shall be appointed for- three year- tefms, the
begat€-hnEkwas j�n,�d-everythree years rthere —after,
(b) The Dir-eetor-s appointed by the Cities of NoAh Oaks, Gem Lake and Vadnais Heights
sonly be counted as part of the quorum and be ,
the beginning date of whieh is janttat=), 1, 2014 and evei:y three years there aften
3.3 The tefm of office of eaeh Dir-eeto-. shall e e4omallowed to vote on matters before
the date of their- appointment and will eentifme tintil their- sueeessor-s are seleeted. A
r,;,-eeto,.s appointed to fill a vaeaney shall s *Board in the mmainde absence of the
tefm of sesame Member's Director .
3.4 Subdivision Eli ig bility to Serve. Each Member shall determine the eligibility or
qualification standards for its Director appeint ent. Eligible appointees n+,,and
Alternate Director appointments. Only current elected officials and eempliant with
Minnesota Sta4utes, Seetion 103B.227, whieh, among other- things, provides that 18eal
upon the governing body of gevenmneat staff may fietthe Member are eligible to serve as
a Director: or Alternate Director.
3.5 Subdivision c. Deeer-dTerms of Appointment. Each g&vemmental t 4Office. Directors
and Alternate Directors serve three-year terms of office, which shall,
folio commence from the date of their appointment of -and will continue until their
successors are selected. Each Member shall notifv VLAWMO Administrator of its
appointments.
3.6 Removal. Directors and Alternate Directors shall serve at the will and consent of the
Members that appointed them. If a Member removes a Director or c,,,,, esse,. r,;,.eete, file
-aAlternate Director, it shall provide VLAWMO written notice within 10 days of the
removal. The eoverniniz bodv of the Member shall act within 90 days to annoint an elected
official to fill the vacancy and shall promptly provide VLAWMO written notice of such
appointment_
3.7 Vacancies. A Member shall notifv VLAWMO in writing within 10 days of the occurrence
of a vacancy in its Director or Alternate Director positions. VLAWMO will notify BWSR
of the vacancy within 30 days of receiving the notice of a vacancy as required by Minn.
Stat. § 103B.227, subd. 1. The Member shall comply with the Seer-etaty Treasure- of th-o
requirements of Minn. Stat. & 103B.227, subd. 2 and appoint someone to fill the
vacancy. The Member shall promptly VLAWMO of the appointment in writing_.
The appointed person shall serve the unexpired term of the position.
Page 594 of 617
� ��77.f ■ !ESff!�TlR'J�.
3.8 Subdivision '. A_ppointment of Technical Commission Commissioners.
Each Member to this Agreement shall appoint one Commissioner, and may
also appoint one a'eAlternate Commissioner, to serve on the Technical Commission.
A Member shall nromntly annoint someone to fill a vacancv in its Commissioner or. if
applicable, Alternate Commissioner positions.
3.9 Subdivision Compensation. Directors, Alternate Directors, Commissioners, and
Alternate Commissioners shall serve without compensation and without an expense
allowance from VLAWMO. AA Director or Alternate Director may be reimbursed for out-
of-pocket expenses incurred on VLAWMO business with the approval of the Board. A
Member may compensate its Director, Alternate Director, Commissioner, and Alternate
Commissioner for Iertheir service, in the discretion of the Member.
3.10 Subdivision 4—.Annual Meeting; Election of Officers. At a meeting of the Board held no
later than April of each calendar year, also known as the Annual Meeting, the Board shall
elect from among the Directors a Chair, Vice Chair, aka Secretary -Treasurer, and such
other officers as it deems necessary to conduct its meetings and affairs ("O f fieefs"` _ An
Alternate Director may not serve as an officer of VLAWMO.
3.11 Duties of Board Officers.
4) a Chair. The Chair shall preside over meetings of the Board, sign checks, and i-nreview
audits. In the absence of the Chair, the Vice Chair shall perform this he Chair's
duties. In the absence of the Chair or Vice Chair, the Secretary -Treasurer shall
pe—.serve as the presiding officer at the Board meeting_ The Chair shall retain all
rights of a Director to speak, make motions, and vote on matters coming before the
Board_
2)(b) Vice Chair. The Vice Chair shall preside at meetings when the Chair is absent and
shall automatically be promoted to complete the annual term of the Chair if the then
etiffentelected Chair resigns or is removed from the Board.
3)(c) Secretary -Treasurer. The Secretary -Treasurer shall maintain a record of the
proceedings of the Board, be responsible for the custody of the Board's recordsof the
Beaf , see that notices are duly given, and complete such other duties as the Board
may assign. The Secretary -Treasurer shall also be responsible for all monies of
VLAWMO and shall periodically report the fiscal condition of VLAWMO to the
7
Page 595 of 617
Board. The Secretary -Treasurer may delegate one or more of its duties to another
officer or the VLAWMO Administrator. If the duties of the Secretary -Treasurer are
delegated to a VLAWN40 empleyeeanother person, the Secretary -Treasurer shall
supervise the performance of those duties.
3.12 Subdivision X uorum. A majority of the Members p,-e&entDirectors shall constitute a
quorum at all Board meetings. No business or decision of the Board may be made without
a quorum.
3.13 Subdivision 4. Meetings. Regular meetings of the Board shall be held at least bi mefld4y
on a day and time seleetedschedule adopted by the Board. All meetings of the Board are
subject to the Minnesota Open Meeting Law. Notice of the time and place of each
meeting shall be sent to all Members, provided to and public
infoFmation, and follow notice requirem@iirroutlined Minnesota Statutes, c.7cctienS a e
provided as required by Minn. Stat. § 13D.04. Board meeting agendas shall be posted on
VLAWMO's website. Meetings shall be conducted in accordance with the most current
version of Robert's Rules of Order, or such other rules as may be adopted by the Board.
Subdivision c. Voting. Each Director shall have one (1) vote in all matters, as follo=
(a) appr-evaWfcomin bg efore the proposed ammal VLAWN40 operating budget shall
a o f ^ simple ,r r-ity oard. Approval of all s
matters, except capital improvement projects will ,.^,, ife appfaval of
(e) approval of all others 1 will be determined by a simple majority of Directors
present and voting.
3.14 Subdivision at the meeting. tree —The Board must approve a capital
improvement project by a two-thirds vote of the Directors present and voting at a meeting
before a contract may be let to construct the project.
3.15 Committees. appeiThe Board may establish such committees and subcommittees as it
deems appropriate. At least one Board member shall be4he appointed as the Chairperson
of each committee and all committees shall regularly report their activities to the Board.
3.16 Subdivision -T.—Public Participation. The Board may appoint such committees and
subcommittees composed of citizens as needed to provide for public participation and input
in watershed activities and the responsibilities of VLAWMO. Such citizen committees
shall be advisory.
SECTION VIIV
RESPONSIBILITWSPOWERS, AND DUTIES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Page 596 of 617
4.1 Subdivision.Policies and Procedures. The Board shall adopt rules and regulations as it
deems necessary to carry out its duties and the purpose of this Agreement. Such rules and
regulations may be amended from time to time in either a regular or special meeting of the
Board rr-ovi oa tha4 noti .o of No such proposed amendment has been given to ee
Dir-eeter- at least ten (10) days prior- to the meeting at shall be adopted unless the
language of the proposed amendment will included in the packet for the meeting at
which it is considered. These rules and regulations, after adoption, shall be recorded in the
VLAWMO policy book.
4.2 Subdivision''. Watershed Management Plan (Plan). The Board shall adopt a water
management plan, as required by the Act. The Plan shall be subject to the appropriate
governmental unit review as required by the Act.
4.3 Subdivision Data. The Board, in order to give effect to the purposes of the Act, may:
4}LaLAcquire and record appropriate data within the Area; and
2}O)j Establish and maintain devices for acquiring and recording hydrological or other data
within the Vadnais Lake Area Watershed.
4.4 Studies. VLAWMO is
authorized to conduct studies as it deems appropriate to carry out its purposes and to further
the coals of the Watershed Management Plan. Nothing in this Agreement limits the
authority of Members to conduct separate or concurrent studies on any matter under study
by VLAWMO. The Member shall make every effort to coordinate its studies with the
VLAWMO in order to maximize the use of resources.
4.5 Subdivision c. Transfer of Drainage System. VLAWMO shall have the authority
> >
and other-
applieable to accept the transfer of drainage systems in the watershed, to repair,
improve, and maintain the transferred drainage systems, and to construct all new drainage
systems and improvements of existing drainage systems in the watershed. All such
activities and projects shall be carried out in accordance with the powers and procedures set
forth in Minnesota Stat es, Chapters 103B an thee- ^ „lieable la ,the Act and must be in
conformance with the Watershed Management Plan adopted pur-stia-at to Minnesota
Statutes, Chapters 103A thr-ettgh 103 R—_
4.6 Subdivision Storm Sewer Utility Fee. VLAWMO is authorized pursuant to the Special
Legislation and this Agreement developed pursuant to Minn. Stat. 103B.211 to establish
and impose on nonexempt properties within the Area a storm sewer utility fee pursuant to
Minn. Stat. & 444.075 to pay for the management of water within the watershed. The storm
sewer utility fee shall be approved by the Board and, as required by the Special Legislation,
certified to the County Auditors in Anoka County and Ramsey Countyby November 30tn
each year to be placed on property taxes payable in the following_ year.
4.7 Capital Improvements.
0
Page 597 of 617
(a) Authority. VLAWMO is authorized to undertake, construct, and maintain capital
improvements within the Area and may cooperate with one or more Members in the
construction and maintenance of such improvements.
(b) New Capital Improvements. A proposed new capital improvement may be initiated by
VLAWMO, the TEC, or by one or more Members. If the Board agrees to include the
proposed capital improvement in its Capital Improvement.Ealeh Program, it will
undertake the process to include it in the Watershed Management Plan, its budget, and
to work cooperatively with the affected Member agrees to ,.,,,,tr4b„ a its
as needed to complete the Capital Improvement.
c) Costs. VLAWMO may use funds budgeted by the Board for the capital improvement
as well as any funds received from grants and any other outside funding sources. If
VLAWMO works cooperatively with one or more Members to construct a capital
improvement, the parties will enter into a cooperative agreement that identifies the
responsibilities and cost share of ,
whieh inel de -leach party toward the project, including associated engineering,
planning, legal, and administrative costs, based on the benefit to be r-eleeived by eaeh
Member- orather-entityfr-ofn the pr-vvemeH4 er- management p vjeEi. The BOar-d
shall submit, in > >
setting fei4h in
�C„�.a;.,;�;,.,, '. County Lew. Nothing in this Agreement limits the authority of
VLAWMO to undertake capital improvements and to certify the costs to the County
for collection in accordance with Minn. Stat. $ 103B.251.
4.8 Water Conveyances. The Board may order any Member to
construct, clean, repair, alter, abandon, consolidate, reclaim or change the course of
terminus of any ditch, drain, storm sewer, water course, natural or artificial, that affects the
Vail ail Takes ^ Watershed in accordance with its adopted plans.
4.9 Subdivision 4. Watershed Operations. The Board may order any 106al goVefflMeftt
tMember to acquire, operate, construct or maintain dams, dikes, reservoirs and
appurtenant works in accordance with adopted plans.
4.10 Subdivision °. Storm and Surface Waters. The Board shall regulate, conserve and control
the use of storm and surface water within the Vadnais Lakes Area Watershed pursuant to
its Watershed Management Plan.
10
Page 598 of 617
4.11 Subdivision 10. Entrance upon Land. To the extent permitted by Minnesota Stat *-slaw,
or with the owner's permission, the Board or its designated representatives may enter upon
lands within or outside the Vadn is bakes -Area -Watershed to make surveys and
investigations to accomplish the purposes of VLAWMO and the Act.
4.12 Subdivision Legal and Technical Assistance. The Board may obtain and provide legal
and technical assistance as it determines is needed, including in connection with its on-
going operations and projects, as well i er efa� litigation, and on such other
pr-eeeedings between one or- more of its Member-s and any other- pelitieal subdivision,
eemmission, board or- ageney r-elating to the planning or- eonstmetion of f4eilifies to
ra stef T ..ater-s w4h4 matters as the Ar-e-aBoard may request.
4.13 Subdivision ". Permits. VLAWMO shall cooperate with appropriate local, state, and
federal agencies in obtaining required permits and shall review permits issued by local
units of government to accomplish the purposes identified in Section I of this Agreement.
4.14 Subdiyision'3. Office. VLAWMO shall maintain an office within the Area. All notices
to VLAWMO shall be mailed or delivered to such office.
4.15 Subdivision 14. Insurance and Liability. VLAWMO may contract for or purchase such
insurance as the Board deems necessary for its protection. The Members agree as follows
with respect to the liability of VLAWMO and the Members:
4}LaLVLAWMO is a separate and distinct public entity to which the Members have
transferred all responsibility and control for action taken pursuant to this Agreement.
2-}O)j VLAWMO shall defend and indemnify the Members, and their officers, employees,
and volunteers, from and against all claims, damages, losses, and expenses, including
attorney fees, arising out of the acts or omissions of the Board ^rosin carrying
out the terms of this Agreement. This Agreement does not constitute a waiver on the
limitations of liability set forth in Minnesota Statutes, seetionMinn. Stat. § 466.04.
-3,)LcLNothing herein shall be construed to provide insurance coverage or indemnification to
an officer, employee, or volunteer of any nwmberMember for any act or omission for
which the officer, employee, or volunteer is guilty of malfeasance in office, willful
neglect of duty, or bad faith.
4)td)_To the fullest extent permitted by law, action by the Members to this Agreement are
intended to be and shall be construed as a "cooperative activity," and it is the intent of
the Members that they shall be deemed a "single governmental unit" for purposes of
liability, as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, seet o- minn. Stat. § 471.59, subd. la, and
provided further that for purposes of that statute, each part to this Agreement
expressly declines responsibility for the acts and omissions of another Member. The
Members are not liable for the acts or omissions of another Member to this
11
Page 599 of 617
Agreement except to the extent they have expressly agreed in writing to be
responsible for the acts or omissions of the other Members.
--}Any excess or uninsured liability shall be borne equally by all the Members, but this
does not include the liability of any individual officer, employee or volunteer that
arises from his or her own malfeasance, willful neglect of duty, or bad faith.
4.16 Subdivision 15. Financial Records. The Board shall maintain the books and accounts of
VLAWMO consistent with generally accepted accounting principles and pr-evide
4.17 Subdivision '6. Audit. The Board shall annually cause an independent certified audit of
the books and accounts of VLAWMO.
4.18 Subdivision ". Claims. To the extent required by Minnesota Statutes, VLAWMO shall
be responsible for damages caused by it. All Minnesota Statutes governing notices of
claims and limits on municipal liability shall be applicable to VLAWMO. To the extent
permitted by Minnesota Statutes, VLAWMO shall be treated as a single municipal entity
for municipal liability purposes.
4.19 Subdivision Employ. The Board may employ or subcontract tewith such persons
or entities as it determines are needed to fulfill defined responsibilities of VLAWMO with
the approval of the Board.
4.20 Subdivision 19. Contracts. The Board may make such contracts and enter into such
agreements as necessary to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement. Any such contract
or agreement shall be in accordance with the Uniform Municipal Contracting Law;
Minnesota Statutes, Seetion 471.345, the joint Powers Aet, Minnesota Statutes, Seeti
471.59, and other applicable laws.
4.21 . Annual Report to Members. The Board shall make and file a report to
alwith the administrator of *eeach Members at least once each year ;„ gthat includes
the following information:
I}(a) theThe financial condition of VLAWMO;
-2}(b) theThe status of all VLAWMO projects and work; and
-3}(c) theThe business transacted by VLAWMO and other matters which affect the
interests of VLAWMO.
4.22 Subdivision 21. Records. VLAWMO's books, reports and records shall be available for
and open to inspection at reasonable times.
12
Page 600 of 617
4.23 Subdivision '�. Planninjz.
..,,.MAWARLIVAIM•
, � • . , , •
,A-
�-
,� • ,�
....... ...... IN -
(a) rubdivisi ,,, & Watershed Management Plan (Plan). The G,.,,..,,. i&&i i VLAWMO
shall prepare and/or update a watershed management plan; as required by the
Act. The Plan, either a new one or an updated one, shall be recommended to the
Board o sfor approval. The Plan shall be compliant with "eta
13
Page 601 of 617
Statn�-=Minn. Stat., chap. 103B and applicable Minnesota
Rules. The Plan shall be subject to the appropriate governmental unit review as
required by the Act.
(b) . Local Water Management Plan. As provided in
Minn. Stat. § 10313.235, once VLAWMO adopts a new or revised watershed
management plan, each Member and any other local government unit within the Area
shall review its local water management plan for changes needed for it to be
consistent with the new or revised Watershed Management Plan. Each local water
management plan shall inel de sha be consistent with the Plan and state law. After
consideration, but before adoption of a new or revised local water management plan
by the g v ent l unit, each Member or- any thee- govemmental units i the Area
shall submit its water management plan to the Board. The Board shall within sixty
(60) days approve or disapprove the plan or parts thereof. If the Board fails to
complete its review within the prescribed period, and unless an extension is agreed to
by the Member other- leea4 R e„*a' • „it, the local plan shall be deemed
approved consistent with applicable state laws.
4.24 Other Powers. The Board may exercise such other bowers necessary and incidental to the
implementation of the purposes set forth herein as authorized by the Members.
4.25 Special Tax District. Nothing in this Agreement limits the authority of a Member to
establish a special tax district pursuant to its authority under Minn. Stat. 103B.245 or such
other law as may apply.
4.26 Amendments to this Agreement. The Board may recommend changes in this Agreement to
the Members. This Agreement may be amended only by the agreement of all of its
Memherg_
SECTION V
RESPONSIBILITIES AND DUTIES OF TECHNICAL COMMISSION
"MIT-rawN Mrs 1 ,
14
Page 602 of 617
♦
rz
INM
5.1 Establishment. The Board has established. and shall maintain. a Technical Commission
("TEC")that provides technical expertise for the planningand operation of VLAWMO
programs and projects. Each Member shall appoint one Commissioner, and mayqppoint
one Alternate Commissioner, to serve on the TEC. Each Member shall determine the
eli ig bili . or qualification standards for its TEC appointments, following_ guidelines
promulgated by the Board. The VLAWMO Administrator shall serve as a non -voting
member of the TEC.
5.2 Duties and Responsibilities. The TEC. through the VLAWMO Administrator and other
VLAWMO employees, shall administer the da.-t�yoperations of VLAWMO and shall
review VLAWMO expenditures. The TEC has the authority to review and approve
VLAWMO's monthly expenditures and may approve capital improvements in accordance
with a policy adopted by the Board. The Board may assign additional duties and
responsibilities to the TEC as it may determine are appropriate.
5.3 Technical Commission Officers. At the first meetiniz of the TEC each calendar vear the
Commissioners shall appoint from among its members a Chair, Vice -Chair, Financial
Officer, and Liaison to the Board. The TEC shall assign duties to the officers as it deems
gppropriate. An Alternate Commissioner may not serve as an officer of the TEC.
5.4 Meetings. Reeular monthlv meetings of the TEC shall be held on a day and time selected
by the Commissioners. All meetings of the TEC are subject to the Minnesota Open
Meeting Law. Notice of the time and place of each meeting shall be sent to all
Commissioners, and provided to the public requesting this information, and follow notice
requirements outlined in Minn. Stat. & 13D.04. Meetings shall be conducted in accordance
with the rules adopted by the TEC or, if a specific set of rules has not been adopted, then
15
Page 603 of 617
the latest version of Roberts Rules of Order. Each Commissioner shall have one vote. A
majority of the Commissioners present shall constitute a quorum at all TEC meetings. In
the absence of a quorum, a scheduled meeting shall be opened, re -scheduled, and
adjourned.
SECTION VI
FINANCING VLAWMO
6.1 Subdivision . Annual Ape. ating Budget. ,The
annual VLAWMO budget, which includes both operational costs and capital improvement
costs, shall be developed and approved as provided in this section.
(a) Staff Prepares Draft. VLAWMO staff shall work with the Board shall gppropriate
Member staff to prepare a preliminary draft long range budget, which shall include the
proposed budget for the upcoming year and the proposed SSU rates.
(b) Budget Subcommittee Recommendation. VLAWMO staff shall present the
preliminary draft budget to the budget subcommittee. The budget subcommittee is
responsible for reviewing and making a recommendation to the Board regarding the
proposed budget and the SSU rates.
(c) Budget Approval. The Board shall consider the annual budget as recommended by the
budget subcommittee and act on it. A majority vote of Directors present and voting is
required to approve the annual budget. The Board may modify the annual budget
proposed by the budget subcommittee. This review and approval of the annual budget
typically occurs at the June Board meeting, but can occur at a different meetingas s the
Board may determine is appropriate.
(d) SSU Rate Approval. The Board shall consider and act to approve the SSU rates. This
review and approval typically occurs at the August Board meeting, but can occur at a
different meeting as the Board may determine is appropriate.
(e) SSU Charge Certification. The Board shall act by November Is' each year to certify
the SSU charges to the County Auditors for collection on the upcomingg year's
grope , taxes.
(f) Budget Adjustments. Before December 31 St each year, the Board shall consider and
make such adjustments to the annual budget as may be needed to allocate funds being
carried over into the following ealeadar- year, The budget shall provide ftmds to
operate NILAWN40 for- the next ea4endar- year, The proposed operating budget and the
sotffees for- those funds shall by r-eeofnmendedm-y��ar.
W Work Plan. Included with the annual activity report required by Minn. R., part
8410.0150 shall be a work plan specifying the activities planned to be undertaken and
a summary of the budget for approval to Memaer- �.—current year.
Page 604 of 617
6.2 Funding. The annual budget leis funded by one or more of the following:
The primary source of
Minne-setafunding for the annual budget is the SSU chargesposed on properties
within the Watershed each year pursuant to the Special Legislation.
(b) Member contributions toward specific capital improvement projects.
LcL�-VLAWMO may also receive ,grants to help fund specific capital improvements.
(d) If the funds collected from the SSU charges and grants are not sufficient to fully fund
an ameuvA approved budget, the Board may exercise any other authority
available to it under law to fund the budget including, but not limited, Member
assessments.
6.3 Member Assessments.
4-)(a) Authorized. A Member assessment may be iMposed to cover an anticipated
shortfall in VLAWMO's annual budget. A Member assessment amount shall be
calculated usiniz the formula set out in this section. At least 10 days prior to the
meeting at which the Board considers acting on a proposed Member assessment,
VLAWMO shall provide each Member written notice of the proposed Member
assessment that identifies the amount to be paid by each Member. Members; shall be
given an opportunity to be heard at the meeting before the Board acts on the Member
assessment. A Member assessment must be approved by at least a majority of the full
Board by no later than July 1st for collection in the following year. If approved,
VLAWMO shall notify each Member in writing of the approved Member assessment
amount.
(b) Vr n WN40 operates StoF.,, Wa4e - Utility , .,,,tho -ize *Formula. To the State 0Mitmeseta and approved by the Nlember-s;
based on an awmal extent a Member assessment as ao*o,.minea i Subdivision 2 in this
Seetion;;-and
��r.. . ..S!Iee�_
17
Page 605 of 617
7�LSll7�E!!!V.RvrvmRM!*.lRM.RTrV R%"f !—!!S5.
(b) The awmal r- „ ibu4io of eae Member- ^ the efAiv �is established, it shall be
v l calculated based upon the following formula:
4)CLForty percent (40%) based upon the assessed valuation of all real property of
each government unit within the Area;
2)kaForty percent (40%) based upon the total area of the property within each
governmental unit with the Area; and
-3)taTwenty percent (20%) based upon the population of each governmental unit
within the Area.
�c„�,a;.,;�;^-' �. Payment. Each Member shall pay its Member assessment amount: (1)
no later than January 3 1 " in the year in which it is due; or pay one-half (1/2,) of the
assessment by January 3 Vt of the year due and pay the second one-half (1/2) of the
assessment by August 3 1 " of the year due. If a Member fails to pay its assessment by
the applicable due dates, it will be required to pay a one percent(1 %) per month
service on the unpaid amount due.
6.4 Capital Improvement Pfojeet�Program and Funding. On or- before July 1 of ea
(a) Preparation. Each year the Board shall prepare a
pregr-a nCapital Improvement Program and budget for prejeetsCapital Improvements
anticipated to be started or completed in the following year as described in the
Water -Watershed Management Plan. Each proposed prey Capital Improvement shall
be asecifically identified and its estimated cost and time for completion shall
be provided. Only p,-oje is deser- be Capital Improvements included in the Watershed
Management Plan, or its amendments, may be included in the capital improvement
budget.
Funding in the e . ita ; o e t budget shall be ealeulated as F follows:
..
18
Page 606 of 617
18
Page 606 of 617
Capital Improvements may be funded by a
combination of funds budgetedy VLAWMO as part of its annual budget, grants
received by VLAWMO, and expenditures made directly by one or more govemmental
unit(s), they will be provided the eppoAunity to o 0 and approve
or-
disappr-oveMembers. For jointly funded projects, VLAWMO shall agree in writing with
the eapital improvement budget within , sixty rtim days f mee rt ,. Members making
direct contributions toward the Bead's Capital Improvement ; and
' the sour-ee-and
amounts of suefunds shall be show finding and=
fhLff the eapitalimprovefnei*budget is approved, as pr-ovided above,e-aehgov ental
unit shall eentr-ibt4e its budgeted share of the eost-oft
esponsibilities toward
constructing said ^ pita ei# r eet and maintainingthe
Improvement.
6.5 Subdivision c_ Governmental Unit Financing. Members may establish a watershed
management tax district in the Area for the purpose of paying costs of the engineering and
planning required to develop a watershed management plan for the Area. After the plan is
adopted and approved, a tax district may be established for the purpose of paying capital
costs of projects described in the plan (including normal and routine maintenance of
projects). If required, the tax district shall be established by ordinance adopted after a
hearing by a local government unit, following provisions of Minnesota St t tes,
GhaptefMinn. Stat., chap. 103B.
6.6 Subdivision Reserve Funds. The Board may accumulate reserve funds for the purposes
herein mentioned and may invest funds of the Board not currently needed for its operations
in the manner and subject to the laws of Minnesota applicable to statutory cities. Any and
all reserve funds must be clearly indicated on the annual financial audit provided to the
Members.
6.7 Subdivision '. Gifts; Grants; Loans. VLAWMO may, within the scope of this
Agreement, accept gifts, apply for and use grants or loans of money or other personal
property from the United States, the State of Minnesota, a unit of government, or other
governmental unit or organization or any person or entity for the purposes described herein;
may enter into any reasonable agreement required in connection therewith, shall comply
with any laws or regulations applicable thereto, and may hold, use, and dispose of such
money or personal property in accordance with the terms of the gift, grant, loan, or
agreement related thereto.
6.8 Subdivision Disbursements. A14-VLAWMO disbursements on budget items shall be
reviewed and approved by the Technical Committee. A report of all disbursements shall be
sent to the Board's Secretary -Treasurer of the Beard and the finanee offieor f the
Teehnieal Co missie TEC's Finance Officer for review.- and a copyprovidedto the
Board. Checks issued by VLAWMO shall be signed by
the VLAWMO Administrator may be-aut zed to sign eheeks. An Offieersand the Board
19
Page 607 of 617
Chair. The Secretary -Treasurer shall maintain a bond shall be maintained by VLAAq�40
in the amount of at least $10,000. VLAWMO will be responsible for paying the premium
on said bond.
6.9 Subdivision °. Revenue Bonds to Secure MPCA Loan. VLAWMO is given express
authority to issue revenue bonds in a principal amount not to exceed $800,000 (the
"Bonds") to secure the Loan to finance the Project. The term "Bonds" shall also include
bonds issued to refund and refinance the Bonds. As provided in Minn. Stat. § 471.59,
subd. 11, the Bonds shall be revenue obligations of VLAWMO which are issued on behalf
of the Members, and shall be issued subject to the conditions and limitations set forth in
Minn. Stat. § 471.59, subd. 11. The Bonds shall be payable solely from VLAWMO's
revenues including its storm water utility fees. VLAWMO may not pledge to the payment
of the Bonds the full faith and credit or taxing power of the Members. No bonds,
obligations or other forms of indebtedness other than the Bonds may be issued by
VLAWMO without the prior consent of the Members.
SECTION IXVII
DURATION OF THIS JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
7.1 Subdivision ' . Duration of Agreement. Each Member agrees to be bound by the terms of
this Agreement until December 31, 24262036, and that it may be continued thereafter at the
option of the Members. This Agreement shall be in full force and effect upon the filing of
certified copy of the resolution approving said Agreement by each gevemmenW
tm4Member.
7.2 Termination of Agreement. This agreetAgreement may be terminated
prior to januafy 1, 2025mQecember 31, 2046, by the unanimous consent of the
partie embers. If the agree neitAgreement is to be terminated, a notice of the intent to
dissolve4he VLAWMO shall be sent to the Board of Water and Soil Resources and to
Ramsey and Anoka Counties at least 90 days prior to the date of dissolution.
7.3 Subdivision Dissolution. In addition to the manner- idea i Subdivision
termination as provided above, any memberMember may petition the Board of Directors to
dissolve the agme-mePA.this Agreement. Upon ninety (90) days' notice in writing to the
clerk of each Member, the Board of Water and Soil
Resources, and to Anoka and Ramsey County, the Board shall hold a hearing and upon a
favorable vote by a majority of all eligible votes of then existing Board members, the
Board may by R�resolution recommend that the-VLAWMO be dissolved. Said
ResehA4oaresolution shall be submitted to each Member and if
ratified by three -fourths of the eetineilsof all eligible meffl-ber-sMembers
within six 60) days, said Board shall dissolve tIit-VLAWMO allowing a reasonable time
to complete work in progresspay any outstanding obligations, and to dispose of personal
property owned by4he VLAWMO.
7.4 Assets. Upon a set of findings and order for dissolution of VLAWMO by
the State Board of Water and Soil Resources, all personal property of VLAWMO shall be
20
Page 608 of 617
transferred, either jointly or severally, to the govefftmental tmits of NILAWMO.
SuehMembers after all VLAWMO's obliizations are paid. The Board may determine to
allocate and transfer of-VLAWMO assets may be madeto members in
prepertienaccordance with the total eontr-ibu4ion of eae formula set out herein for
determining Member .assessments.
SECTION VIII
01 ME TAW.IKiirMr• ears:re!�s!cs�e!�e��ssi!�,
Subdivisio„ . MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
8.1 Adoption of Agreement. This agree P&ntAgreement shall be in full force and effect upon
the filing of aid copy of the resolution approving said agreementAgreement by all
six members. Said fesehAienresolutions shall be filed with the Chair of the existing
yr n WN40 ..,,, , VLAWMO shall provide each a Member a fullv executed copv of this
Agreement.
8.2 Dispute Resolution. The Members agree that any dispute related to this Agreement that
cannot be resolved by discussions among the Board and a Member shall be submitted to
mediation. The mediation shall notify all members in writing f its e ff-eetive da4e and shall
set the da4e for- the next be conducted in accordance with a process agreed to by
the parties involved in the dispute. If the parties are not able to mutually agree on a
mediator, each party shall provide a list of two mediators to VLAWMO. The Chair shall
select the mediator from the combined list. If, however, the Chair is from a Member that is
a party to the dispute. then the Vice -Chair shall select the mediator from the combined list.
Each party to the mediation shall be responsible for its own costs in mediation and shall
share equally in the costs of the mediator and all other costs of mediation. If the dispute is
not resolved in mediation, the parties may agree to submit the dispute to binding arbitration
or M party may pursue any ptions available to it under this ,,,,..ended joint U,,wo«�
Agreement. law to seek a resolution of the dispute.
8.3 Data Practices. VLAWMO shall comply with the requirements of Minn. Stat., chap. 13,
the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act ("MGDPA"). Anv entitv with which
VLAWMO contracts is required to comply with the MGDPA as provided in Minn. Stat. §
13.05. The contractor shall be required to notify the Board if it receives a data request and
to work with VLAWMO to respond to it.
8.4 Amendments. The Board may recommend changes and amendments to this Agreement to
21
Page 609 of 617
the governing bodies of the Members. Amendments will only take effect if adopted by all
governing bodies of the Members. Adopted amendments shall be evidenced by
aqppropriate resolutions or certified copies of meeting minutes of the governing bodies of
each party filed with the Board and shall, if no effective date is contained in the
amendment, become effective as of the date all such filings have been completed.
8.5 Waiver. The delay or failure of any party of this Agreement at any time to require
performance or compliance by an. other . of any of its obligations under this
Agreement shall in no way be deemed a waiver of those rights to require such performance
or compliance.
8.6 Headings and Captions. The headings and captions of these paragraphs and sections of this
Agreement are included for convenience or reference only and shall not constitute a part
hereof.
8.7 Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including the recitals and the official boundary map
(which are incorporated in and made part of this Agreement), contains the entire
understanding of the Members concerning the subject matter hereof. This Agreement
supersedes and replaces the prior joint powers agreement among the Members regarding
VLAWMO and such prior agreement is hereby terminated. Any outstanding obligations of
the Members under the prior agreement are not affected by the termination and shall be
continued under this Agreement.
8.8 Examination of Books. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 16C.05, subdivision 5, the books,
records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of the Board are subject to
examination by the State.
8.9 Governing Law. The respective rights, obligations, and remedies of the Members under
this Agreement and the interpretation thereof shall be governed by the laws of the State of
Minnesota which pertain to agreements made and to be performed in the State of
Minnesota.
8.10 Counterparts. This Agreement shall be executed in several counterparts and all so executed
shall constitute one Agreement, binding on all of the Members hereto. Each party to the
agreement shall receive a fully executed copy of the entire document following adoption
by all Members.
8.11 Notice. To the extend this Agreement requires a notice to be mailed to a Member, the
notice requirement may be satisfied by VLAWMO emailing the notice to its primary
contact for the Member.
8.12 Statutory References. All references to statutes in this Agreement include any amendments
made thereto and any successor provisions.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned governmental units, by action of their
governing bodies, have caused this agree n-e-ltAgreement to be executed in accordance with the
22
Page 610 of 617
authority of Minnesota Stat{ttes, SeEtienmsMinn. Stat. &§ 103B.-211 and 471.59.
23
Page 611 of 617
CITY OF GEM LAKE By
Adopted on the of 2025.
Attest:
Clerk
BY THE CITY COUNCIL
Maw
24
Page 612 of 617
CITY OF LINO LAKES By
Adopted on the of 2025.
Attest:
Clerk
BY THE CITY COUNCIL
Maw
25
Page 613 of 617
CITY OF NORTH OAKS By
Adopted on the of 2025.
Attest:
Clerk
BY THE CITY COUNCIL
Maw
26
Page 614 of 617
CITY OF VADNAIS HEIGHTS By
Adopted on the _ of 2025.
Attest:
Clerk
BY THE CITY COUNCIL
27
Page 615 of 617
CITY OF WHITE BEAR LAKE By
Adopted on the _ of 2025.
BY THE CITY COUNCIL
Attest:
Clerk
Page 616 of 617
WHITE BEAR TOWNSHIP By
Adopted on the of 2025.
Attest:
Clerk
BY THE TOWN BOARD
Chairperson
29
Page 617 of 617