The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08-11-25 - City Council Agenda CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Monday, August 11, 2025 Broadcast on Cable TV Channel 16 and northmetrotv.com/lino-lakes-stream Mayor Rafferty, Councilmembers Cavegn, Lyden, Ruhland and Stoesz City Administrator: Karen Anderson CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION, 6:00 P.M. Community Room (not televised) A. Call to Order and Roll Call B. Setting the Agenda: Addition or Deletion of Agenda Items C. Review Regular Agenda D. Adjourn CITY COUNCIL MEETING, 6:30 PM Council Chambers (televised) ➢ Call to Order and Roll Call ➢ Pledge of Allegiance ➢ Public Comment (sign-in prior to start of meeting per Rules of Decorum) ➢ Setting the Agenda: Addition or Deletion of Agenda Items SPECIAL PRESENTATION 1. Consent Agenda A. Consider Approval of Expenditures for August 11, 2025 (Check No. 123270 through 123370) in the Amount of $2,813,947.04 B. Approval of July 28, 2025, City Council Work Session Minutes C. Approval of July 28, 2025, City Council Meeting Minutes D. Approval of Hiring of Part-Time Staff for the Rookery Activity Center E. Approval of Exempt Gambling Permit for Knights of Columbus Council #9905 Page 1 of 679 F. Approval of Resolution No. 25-103 Appointing Election Judges for the 2025 Municipal Election 2. Finance Department Report 3. Administration Department Report A. Consider Appointment of Finance Director, Meg Sawyer B. Consider Appointment of Building Inspector, Meg Sawyer C. Consider Appointment of Firefighter Admin, Meg Sawyer 4. Police Department Report 5. Fire Department Report 6. Public Services Department Report 7. Community Development Report A. Consider Resolution 25-102 Approving Lino Lakes Main Street Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review, Tom Hoffman B. Consider Resolution No. 25-105 Approving 1210 Main Street Accessory Structure Variance, Katie Larsen C. Consider 2nd Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 14-25, Amending City Code Chapter 218.01 (10)(e) Relating to Special Connection Fees, Diane Hankee D. Approving Payment No. 7 and Final, 2024 Street Rehabilitation and Trunk Watermain Project, Diane Hankee E. Approving Trunk Utility Agreement, Natures Refuge North, Diane Hankee F. Consider Resolution No. 25-106 Approving a Joint Powers Agreement for the Continued Operation of the Vadnais Lakes Area Water Management Organization , Michael Grochala 8. Unfinished Business 9. New Business 10. Notices and Communications A. Planning & Zoning Board Meeting, August 13, 2025, at 6:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers. Page 2 of 679 ADJOURNMENT Page 3 of 679 + Expenditures August 11, 2025 Check #123270 to #123370 $2,813,947.04 Significant Disbursements this Period:  R.L. Larson Excavating Inc. - $1,278,489.29 – 2025 Street Reconstruction Project  Staab Construction Corporation - $815,740.96 – Water Treatment Plant Page 4 of 679 Page 5 of 679 Page 6 of 679 Page 7 of 679 Page 8 of 679 Page 9 of 679 Page 10 of 679 Electronic Funds Transfer MN Statute 471.38 Subd. 3 Council Meeting August 11, 2025 Transfer In/(Out) 7/31/2025 Transfer to MM Savings 1,500,000.00 8/1/2025 Council Payroll #08 (3,707.35) 8/1/2025 Council Payroll #08 Federal Deposit (209.06) 8/1/2025 Council Payroll #08 PERA (410.72) 8/1/2025 Council Payroll #08 State (44.94) 8/1/2025 Payroll #16 (243,387.91) 8/1/2025 Payroll #16 Federal Deposit (71,281.79) 8/1/2025 Payroll #16 PERA (63,596.07) 8/1/2025 Payroll #16 State (16,328.86) 8/1/2025 Payroll #16 H.S.A. Bank Pretax (4,615.00) 8/1/2025 Payroll #16 TASC Pretax (1,145.03) 8/1/2025 Payroll #16 Mission Sq 457 Def. Comp #301596 (2,850.00) 8/1/2025 Payroll #16 Mission Sq Roth IRA #706155 (869.23) 8/1/2025 Payroll #16 MSRS HCSP #98946-01 (13,961.46) 8/1/2025 Payroll #16 MSRS Def. Comp #98945-01 (2,455.00) 8/1/2025 Payroll #16 MSRS Roth IRA #98945-01 (1,064.00) Page 11 of 679 Page 1 of 3 Lino Lakes City Council Work Session Minutes DATE: July 28, 2025 TIME STARTED: 6:00 P.M. TIME ENDED: 6:25 P.M. LOCATION: Community Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Rafferty Councilmembers Ruhland, Lyden and Stoesz MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilmember Cavegn Staff Members Present: City Administrator Karen Anderson, City Clerk Roberta Colotti, Community Development Director Mike Grochala, City Planner Katie Larsen, Chief of Police Curt Boehme, Fire Chief Dan L’Allier and City Attorney Jay Squires. 1. Call to Order and Roll Call Mayor Rafferty called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. Setting the Agenda: Addition or Deletion of Agenda Items The City Clerk requested to add two items to the agenda: Establishment of a Budget Work Session Meeting Date and Review of the Order of Business for the Regular Meeting. The Agenda was adopted as amended to include the two items as presented. 3. 2026 Budget Work Session Meeting The City Council reviewed the September 2025 date for submitting the 2026 Preliminary Budget and Levy, and December timeline for submitting the 2026 Final Budget and Levy. It was requested that the Council establish a Special Work Session to provide first review of the proposed 2026 Preliminary Budget and Levy. Council Consensus It was the consensus of the City Council to call a Special Work Session on Monday, August 18th at 6:00 p.m. for the primary purpose of discussing the 2026 Preliminary Budget and Levy. 4. Review Order of Business The City Clerk requested that the Order of Business for the Regular Meeting be amended to hold the Public Comment period after the Special Presentations, noting that there are three special presentations scheduled. Council Consensus It was the consensus of the City Council to amend the regular agenda to move the Public Comment period to after Special Presentations. Page 12 of 679 Page 2 of 3 5. Water Appropriation Permit Contested Case Appeal The Community Development Director reported that on August 30, 2017, the Ramsey County District Court issued a judgement regarding the groundwater management of White Bear Lake and the Prairie Du Chien-Jordan Aquifer. As a result, the City’s Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Water Appropriation Permit 1985- 6168 was amended to include the following requirements: • PREPARE A PLAN TO CONVERT TO SURFACE WATER SOURCE • ENACT AND ENFORCE A RESIDENTIAL IRRIGATION BAN WHEN WHITE BEAR LAKE DROPS BELOW 923.5 • PREPARE AN ENFORCEABLE PLAN TO LIMIT PER CAPITA WATER USE (75 GPD FOR RESIDENTIAL AND 90 GPD TOTAL) • REPORT ANNUALLY ON COLLABORATIVE EFFORTS WITH NE COMMUNITIES TO MEET THE PER CAPITA REQUIREMENTS The City, along with multiple other communities, appealed three of the four amendments and a contested case hearing was held in 2023 before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). The ALJ struck the irrigation ban requirement but left the other amendments in place. Both the White Bear Lake Restoration Association and White Bear Lake Homeowners Association appealed the decision. The six communities involved appealed as well. In July the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled on the appeals and reversed the decision of the ALJ and remanded for further review. The City Attorney recommended that the City ask the Supreme Court to review the decision. Under the Rules any party to a Court of Appeals matter can ask the Supreme Court to exercise its discretionary review power. The Supreme Court does not have to do so. A request is in the form of a Petition for Review, which is a short document highlighting the importance of the case. The Community Development Director requested that the Council place “Authorize the Filing of the Petition for Review” on the July 28, 2025 regular agenda. Council Consensus It was the consensus of the City Council to place “Authorize the Filing of the Petition for Review” as part of the Consent Agenda, on the July 28, 2025 Regular Meeting agenda. 6. City Attorney Notice of Retirement City Attorney Jay Squires provided notice to the City Council that he would be retiring in October of this year. He stated that the City contract is with his firm. He stated that the firm has 20 attorneys and that he has been working with the assigned attorneys to get them up to speed, so they will not miss a step when they become the key contact, after his retirement. Page 13 of 679 Page 3 of 3 Mayor Rafferty and the Council thanked City Attorney Jay Squires for his years of service. 7. Review Regular Agenda The City Council reviewed the regular agenda. The City Planner provided an overview of the Erickson Property zoning ordinance amendment scheduled for second reading/adoption tonight. The Community Development Director reviewed the fee schedule amendment proposed for special connection fees. This item is scheduled for first reading of the ordinance amendment tonight. 8. Adjournment Mayor Rafferty adjourned the meeting at 6:25 p.m. These minutes were approved at the regular Council Meeting on August 11, 2025. ___________________________ ___________________________ Roberta Colotti, CMC Rob Rafferty, City Clerk Mayor Page 14 of 679 Page 1 of 4 LINO LAKES CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES DATE: July 28, 2025 TIME STARTED: 6:30 PM TIME ENDED: 6:59 PM LOCATION: City Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Rafferty, Councilmembers Lyden, Ruhland and Stoesz MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilmember Cavegn Staff Members Present: City Administrator Karen Anderson, City Clerk Roberta Colotti, Community Development Director Mike Grochala, City Planner Katie Larsen, Chief of Police Curt Boehme, Police Department Administrative Assistant Margie Schlueter, Fire Chief Dan L’Allier, Communications Specialist Andrea Turner, and members of the Police and Fire Departments. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Rafferty at 6:30 PM. SETTING THE AGENDA Motion to re-order the agenda to move the Public Comment period after Special Presentations, with the Special Presentations to include a presentation by the Lino Lakes Ambassadors, and to add item 1H “Authorize the Filing of the Petition for Review” for the Water Appropriation Permit Contested Case Appeal to the Consent Agenda. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS Chief of Police Boehme introduced Police Officer Lauren Clayton. Mayor Rafferty administered the Oath of Police Service for Police Officer Lauren Clayton. Fire Chief L’Allier introduced Firefighters Jake Crooks, Benjamin Searles, Scott Schmidt, Timothy Bertz, Gibson Eyestone, Richard LaDoucer, Benjamin Miller and Clayton Follet. Mayor Rafferty administered the Oath of Fire Service for Firefighters Jake Crooks, Benjamin Searles, Scott Schmidt, Timothy Bertz, Gibson Eyestone, Richard LaDoucer, Benjamin Miller and Clayton Follet. RESULT: CARRIED [4-0] MOVER: Stoesz SECONDER: Ruhland AYES: Rafferty, Stoesz, Lyden and Ruhland NAYS: None Page 15 of 679 Lino Lakes City Council Minutes Page 2 of 4 Lino Lakes Ambassadors Emily N and Kaiya N. provided a report on the Ambassador’s 2024-2025 activities. It was noted that the Lino Lakes Ambassador’s parade float won an award at the Isanti parade. They introduced the 2025-2026 Ambassador candidates. PUBLIC COMMENT Mayor Rafferty opened the public comment period at 6:46 p.m. Catherine Decker, 614 Pine Street, Lino Lakes, spoke about 10-22-32 Main Trunk and Branch 4. She stated that she has watched the Watershed District fail to protect her neighbors properties and the basic function of the watershed. She presented a letter outlining the report provided to the Watershed. Chris Stowe, 426 Pine Street, Lino Lakes, presented a written report on the information provided to the watershed at their 7/8/25 meeting. He spoke about wetland credits and their purpose and how they were being used, ethics, and the mechanics of the water flow and the level of understanding of the Watershed members. Motion to close the public comment period at 6:51 p.m. 1. CONSENT AGENDA Motion to Approve Consent Agenda Items 1A through 1H as presented. 2. FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT No Report 3. ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT REPORT No Report 4. POLICE DEPARTMENT REPORT No Report RESULT: CARRIED [4-0] MOVER: Ruhland SECONDER: Stoesz AYES: Rafferty, Lyden, Ruhland and Stoesz NAYS: None RESULT: CARRIED [4-0] MOVER: Stoesz SECONDER: Lyden AYES: Rafferty, Lyden, Ruhland and Stoesz NAYS: None Page 16 of 679 Lino Lakes City Council Minutes Page 3 of 4 5. FIRE DEPARTMENT REPORT No Report 6. PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT No Report 7. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT A. Erickson Property (7590 20th Avenue) i. Motion to waive full reading of Ordinance No. 13-25 Approving Zoning Ordinance Map Amendment (Rezoning) from R, Rural to R2, Two Family Residential Motion to provide second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 13-25 Approving Zoning Ordinance Map Amendment (Rezoning) from R, Rural to R2, Two Family Residential ii. Motion to adopt Resoltuion No. 25-100 Approving Summary Publication of Ordinance No. 13-25. B. Ordinance No. 14-25 Special Connection Fees Motion to waive full reading of Ordinance No 14-25 Amending City Code Chapter 218.01 (10) (e) Relating to Special Connection Fees. RESULT: CARRIED [4-0] MOVER: Stoesz SECONDER: Lyden AYES: Rafferty, Lyden, Ruhland and Stoesz NAYS: None RESULT: CARRIED [4-0] MOVER: Stoesz SECONDER: Lyden AYES: Rafferty, Lyden, Ruhland and Stoesz NAYS: None RESULT: CARRIED [4-0] MOVER: Stoesz SECONDER: Lyden AYES: Rafferty, Lyden, Ruhland and Stoesz NAYS: None RESULT: CARRIED [4-0] MOVER: Stoesz SECONDER: Ruhland AYES: Rafferty, Lyden, Ruhland and Stoesz NAYS: None Page 17 of 679 Lino Lakes City Council Minutes Page 4 of 4 Motion to provide first reading of Ordinance No 14-25 Amending City Code Chapter 218.01 (10) (e) Relating to Special Connection Fees. 8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None 9. NEW BUSINESS None 10. NOTICES AND COMMUNICATIONS Environmental Board Meeting, July 30th at 6:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Rafferty adjourned the meeting at 6:59 p.m. These minutes were approved at the City Council Meeting on August 11, 2025. _________________________ _________________________ Roberta Colotti, CMC Rob Rafferty, City Clerk Mayor RESULT: CARRIED [4-0] MOVER: Stoesz SECONDER: Lyden AYES: Rafferty, Lyden, Ruhland and Stoesz NAYS: None Page 18 of 679 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 1.D. STAFF ORIGINATOR: Meg Sawyer, Human Resources and Communications Manager MEETING DATE August 11, 2025 AGENDA ITEM: Approval of Hiring of Part-Time Staff for the Rookery Activity Center VOTE REQUIRED: Simple Majority INTRODUCTION The Council is being asked to approve the hiring of part-time staff for The Rookery. BACKGROUND Staff is seeking approval to hire part-time personnel to work at The Rookery. The recruiting process has identified candidates that will be a great addition to our staff at The Rookery. RECOMMENDATION Staff Recommends the Council approve the hiring of the part-time personnel listed below: Lillian Yang Lifeguard Naol Geda Lifeguard Eric Zuniga Aquatics Lead Giada Provensano Lifeguard Kalyn Buzay Lifeguard ATTACHMENTS None Page 19 of 679 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 1.E. STAFF ORIGINATOR: Roberta Colotti, City Clerk MEETING DATE August 11, 2025 AGENDA ITEM: Approval of Exempt Gambling Permit for Knights of Columbus Council #9905 VOTE REQUIRED: Simple Majority INTRODUCTION The Minnesota Department of Public Safety, Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement division issues Exempt Permits to nonprofit organizations that conduct lawful gambling on five or fewer days and that award less than $50,000 in prizes during a calendar year. This is not a regular gambling permit which requires a City Council resolution. Instead, the City is asked to acknowledge the permit with either; no waiting period, require a 30-day waiting period or deny the application. BACKGROUND The City is in receipt of the following applications: • Knights of Columbus Council #9905, Raffle to be held at St. Joseph of the Lakes Catholic Church in Lino Lakes on January 3, 2026 RECOMMENDATION Motion to acknowledge and approve the application for Exempt and Excluded Gambling Permit for the Knights of Columbus Council #9905 as presented, with no waiting period. ATTACHMENTS None Page 20 of 679 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 1.F. STAFF ORIGINATOR: Roberta Colotti, City Clerk MEETING DATE August 11, 2025 AGENDA ITEM: Approval of Resolution No. 25-103 Appointing Election Judges for the 2025 Municipal Election VOTE REQUIRED: Simple Majority INTRODUCTION The Municipal Election will be held on Tuesday, November 4, 2025. BACKGROUND Pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes, Election Judges shall be appointed to serve in an election precinct and the appointing authority shall also designate judges to serve as Head Election Judges. Students ages 16 and 17 are eligible to serve as Student Election Judges. Minnesota State Statutes require that appointments be made at least 25 days before the election at which the judges will serve, and that additional appointments may be made after the 25-day mark should the need arise. The attached list of candidates are certified eligible voters who wish to serve as Election Judges, if called to do so for the 2025 Municipal Election. It is requested that, should additional election judges, outside those hereby appointed, be needed within 25 days of the election, that the City Clerk be authorized to appoint additional certified and qualified Head Judges, Regular Election Judges and Student Election Judges. RECOMMENDATION Motion to adopt Resolution No. 25-103, Appointing Election Judges for the 2025 Municipal Election. ATTACHMENTS 1. 25-103 - Resolution - Appointing Election Judges 2025 Page 21 of 679 CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 25-103 APPOINTING ELECTION JUDGES FOR THE 2025 MUNICIPAL ELECTION WHEREAS, the Municipal Election will be held on Tuesday, November 4, 2025; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes, Election Judges shall be appointed to serve in an election precinct and that appointing authority shall also designate judges to serve as Head Election Judges; and, WHEREAS, students ages 16 and 17 are eligible to serve as Student Election Judges; and, WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statutes require that appointments be made at least 25 days before the election at which the judges will serve and that additional appointments may be made after the 25-day mark should the need arise; and, WHEREAS, the attached list of candidates are certified eligible voters and students who wish to serve as Head Judges, Regular Election Judges and Student Election Judges, if called to do so for the 2025 Municipal Election. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Lino Lakes, Minnesota that the attached list of certified eligible voters and Student Election Judges are hereby appointed to serve in the 2025 Municipal Election if called to do so. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that should additional election judges, outside of those hereby appointed, be needed within 25 days of the election, the City Clerk is authorized to appoint additional certified and qualified Head Judges, Regular Election Judges and Student Election Judges. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes on this 11th day of August 2025. ______________________________ Rob Rafferty, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ Roberta Colotti, CMC City Clerk Page 22 of 679 8/7/2025 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 A B C Last Name First Name Position Anderson Lori Election Judge Andrychowicz Joel Election Judge Bayandalai Uyanga Election Judge Berg Darman Election Judge Borys Colleen Head Judge Briss Debra Election Judge Carlson Angela Head Judge Carlson Van Head Judge Carr Dolores Election Judge Cheesebrow Kathryn Election Judge Cheesebrow Tom Election Judge Couture Eileen Head Judge Cravero Andrew Election Judge Dahl Laurinda Election Judge Damiani Kelli Election Judge Dehmer Leo Election Judge Dick Candace Election Judge Donnay-Rice Rhonda Election Judge Fletcher Rebecca Election Judge Hermanson Randy Election Judge Herr Robert Election Judge Howard Ruth Election Judge Hyden Debra Election Judge Jacobson Pamela Head Judge Jacobson Thomas Election Judge Johnson Kimberli Head Judge Kahat Steve Election Judge Kisch Sandra Election Judge Kohler Patrick Election Judge Lahlum Dan Election Judge Lee Jennifer Election Judge Liberty John Election Judge Lincoln Tammy Election Judge Logid Janet Head Judge Lucey Jeff Head Judge Matti Jennifer Election Judge Maxwell Dawn Election Judge McCool Patrick Election Judge Melanson Nathan Election Judge Minar Stephen Election Judge Moberg Lyndell Election Judge Morris Deborah Head Judge Musser Dan Head Judge Nault Ruth Head Judge Nordlund John Head Judge Palmer Denise Head Judge Penn Marg Election Judge Peterson Darren Election Judge Ruble Anne Election Judge Schmidt Barbara Election Judge Sheldon Ann Election Judge Sheldon Thomas Election Judge Simonson Katey Election Judge Stennes-Rogness Suzanne Election Judge Stevenson Mary Jo Election Judge Surma-Heine Loerane Head Judge Ueki Lisa Election Judge Utecht Betty Head Judge Wangert Daryl Election Judge Wedll Jody Election Judge Zola Kenneth Election Judge Page 23 of 679 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 3.A. STAFF ORIGINATOR: Meg Sawyer, Human Resources and Communications Manager MEETING DATE August 11, 2025 AGENDA ITEM: Consider Appointment of Finance Director VOTE REQUIRED: Simple Majority INTRODUCTION The City Council is being asked to approve the promotion of Tracy Thoma to the Finance Director position within the Finance Department. BACKGROUND Staff has completed the recruitment process, provided a conditional offer, and is recommending the approval of Tracy Thoma for the full-time position. Thoma has a strong work history with the City of Lino Lakes, starting as the Payroll/Accounts Payable Technician in 2012 and being promoted to Accountant in January 2019. She has a Bachelor's degree in Accounting from Gustavus Adolphus College. The starting wage for Thoma will be $63.74 per hour, which is step 4 of a 10 step wage scale for the Finance Director position. With the Council's approval, Thoma would start in the position on August 11, 2025. The promotion of Thoma will backfill the Finance Director vacancy that was created on January 24, 2025 due to a resignation. The 2025 Adopted Budget includes one full-time Finance Director. RECOMMENDATION Please approve the promotion of Tracy Thoma to the Finance Director position. ATTACHMENTS None Page 24 of 679 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 3.B. STAFF ORIGINATOR: Meg Sawyer, Human Resources and Communications Manager MEETING DATE August 11, 2025 AGENDA ITEM: Consider Appointment of Building Inspector VOTE REQUIRED: Simple Majority INTRODUCTION The City Council is being asked to approve the appointment of Aleks Moz to the Building Inspector position within the Community Development Department. BACKGROUND Staff has completed the recruitment process, provided a conditional offer, and is recommending the approval of Aleks Moz for the full-time position. Moz previously worked as an intern in the Building Department for the City of Blaine. He has an Associate's Degree from Anoka Technical College. The starting wage for Moz will be $38.53 per hour, which is step 1 of a 7 step wage scale for the Building Inspector position. With the Council's approval, Moz would start in the position on August 18, 2025. The hiring of Moz will backfill the vacancy that was created on August 8, 2024 due to a resignation. The 2025 Adopted Budget includes two full-time Building Inspectors. RECOMMENDATION Please approve the appointment of Aleks Moz to the Building Inspector position. ATTACHMENTS None Page 25 of 679 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 3.C. STAFF ORIGINATOR: Meg Sawyer, Human Resources and Communications Manager MEETING DATE August 11, 2025 AGENDA ITEM: Consider Appointment of Firefighter Admin VOTE REQUIRED: Simple Majority INTRODUCTION The City Council is being asked to approve the appointment of Gabrielle Streater to the Firefighter Admin position within the Fire Department. BACKGROUND Staff has completed the recruitment process, provided a conditional offer, and is recommending the approval of Gabrielle Streater for the full-time Firefighter Admin position. Streater has been a part-time firefighter for the City of Lino Lakes since June 2023 and a paid on-call firefighter with Harris Fire since 2014. She is a certified Firefighter I & II and an Emergency Medical Technician, and she holds a Leadership and Marketing degree from Bethel College. The starting wage for Streater will be $31.34 per hour, which is step 4 of a 10-step wage scale. With the Council's approval, she would start in the position on August 13, 2025. RECOMMENDATION Please approve the promotion of Gabrielle Streater to the Firefighter Admin position. ATTACHMENTS None Page 26 of 679 1 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 7A STAFF ORIGINATOR: Tom Hoffman, Environmental Coordinator MEETING DATE: August 11, 2025 TOPIC: Consider Resolution Number 25-102, Approving Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR VOTE REQUIRED: Simple Majority ______________________________________________________________________________ INTRODUCTION The Council is being asked to consider the approval of Resolution No. 25-102, Approving Lino Lakes Main Street 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 27th 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 Page 27 of 679 2 The Environmental Board reviewed the AUAR at their July 30 meeting and recommended approval of the AUAR by City Council. RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution No. 25-102, Approving Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution No. 25-102 2. Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR Page 28 of 679 CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 25-102 APPROVING LINO LAKES MAIN STREET FINAL ALTERNATIVE URBAN AREAWIDE REVIEW (AUAR) WHEREAS, an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) has been completed for the project pursuant to Minnesota Rules 4410 and identifies and assesses the environmental impacts and mitigation measures associated with the Lino Lakes Main Street Study Area; and WHEREAS, the Lino Lakes Main Street Corridor Study Area is located on approximately 962 acres located in the northwest portion of Lino Lakes and the AUAR was completed pursuant to Minnesota Rules 4410.3610; and WHEREAS, the AUAR was distributed for the required 30-day comment period and published in the EQB Monitor, no agency objections were filed for the AUAR; comments received, and responses developed are included in the public record; and WHEREAS, development in the Lino Lakes Main Street Study Area is expected to comply with all Lino Lakes and review agency standards as well as the mitigation measures outlined in the AUAR; 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 dated August 11, 2025. Adopted by the City Council of Lino Lakes this 11th day of August, 2025. Rob Rafferty, Mayor ATTEST: Roberta Colotti, CMC, City Clerk Page 29 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) August 2025 Prepared for: Prepared by: Page 30 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR i August 2025 Table of Contents 1. Project Title ...................................................................................................................................... 3 2. Proposer........................................................................................................................................... 3 3. RGU ................................................................................................................................................. 3 4. Reason for EAW Preparation .......................................................................................................... 3 5. Project Location ............................................................................................................................... 4 6. Project Description ........................................................................................................................... 7 7. Climate Adaptation and Resilience................................................................................................ 11 8. Cover Types ................................................................................................................................... 17 9. Permits and Approvals Required ................................................................................................... 20 10. Land Use ........................................................................................................................................ 22 11. Geology, Soils, and Topography/Landforms ................................................................................. 31 12. Water Resources ........................................................................................................................... 35 13. Contamination/Hazardous Materials/Wastes ................................................................................ 52 14. Fish, Wildlife, Plant Communities, and Sensitive Ecological Resources (Rare Features) ........... 56 15. Historic Properties.......................................................................................................................... 67 16. Visual ............................................................................................................................................. 67 17. Air ................................................................................................................................................... 67 18. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions/Carbon Footprint .................................................................. 69 19. Noise .............................................................................................................................................. 71 20. Transportation ................................................................................................................................ 72 21. Cumulative Potential Effects .......................................................................................................... 78 22. Other Potential Environmental Effects........................................................................................... 78 Mitigation Plan ...................................................................................................................................... 79 List of Tables Table 1: Development Scenarios ........................................................................................................... 8 Table 2: Climate Considerations and Adaptations .............................................................................. 14 Table 3: Cover Types ........................................................................................................................... 18 Table 4: Trees ...................................................................................................................................... 18 Table 5: Permits and Approvals Required ........................................................................................... 20 Table 6: Lino Lakes 2040 Comprehensive Plan Designations within the AUAR Study Area ............. 24 Table 7: Soil Types .............................................................................................................................. 33 Table 8: Projected Wastewater Demands ........................................................................................... 42 Table 9: Project Water Demands ......................................................................................................... 50 Table 10: MPCA “What’s in My Neighborhood?” Sites ....................................................................... 52 Table 11: Construction Emissions ....................................................................................................... 70 Table 12: Operational Emissions ......................................................................................................... 70 Table 13: Trip Generation Forecasts ................................................................................................... 73 Table 14: Intersection LOS .................................................................................................................. 74 Table 15: Mitigation Plan ..................................................................................................................... 79 List of Figures Figure 1: USGS Map .............................................................................................................................. 5 Figure 2: AUAR Study Area ................................................................................................................... 6 Figure 3: Scenario 1 ............................................................................................................................... 9 Figure 4: Scenario 2 ............................................................................................................................. 10 Figure 5: NCEI County Time Series - Average Temperature Trends for Anoka County .................... 11 Page 31 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR ii August 2025 Figure 6: NCEI County Time Series - Average Precipitation Trends for Anoka County ..................... 12 Figure 7: Existing Cover Types ............................................................................................................ 19 Figure 8: Existing Land Use ................................................................................................................. 23 Figure 9: 2040 Land Use ..................................................................................................................... 25 Figure 10: Existing Zoning ................................................................................................................... 27 Figure 11: Rice Creek Watershed District Floodplain ......................................................................... 29 Figure 12: 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 Figure 15: Minnesota Well Index ......................................................................................................... 40 Figure 16: Full Build – Sewer Infrastructure ........................................................................................ 43 Figure 17: Cross Section View of Drainage and Conservation Framework ........................................ 49 Figure 18: MPCA Sites ........................................................................................................................ 54 Figure 19: Native Plant Communities, Sites of Biodiversity Significance, and Regionally Significant Ecological Areas .................................................................................................................................. 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 Page 32 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 3 August 2025 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 italics. 1. Project Title Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR 2. 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. RGU 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. Page 33 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 4 August 2025 5. Project Location County: Anoka City/Township: Lino Lakes PLS Location (¼, ¼, Section, Township, Range): Section 6 and 7, Township 31N, 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) Page 34 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 5 August 2025 Figure 1: USGS Map Page 35 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 6 August 2025 Figure 2: AUAR Study Area Page 36 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 7 August 2025 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 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. 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. Page 37 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 8 August 2025 Parks and Trails 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 Central Anoka 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 Component Scenario 1 (Current Comprehensive Plan) Scenario 2 (Preferred Development Scenario) Low Density Residential 1,600 units 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 Page 38 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 9 August 2025 Figure 3: Scenario 1 Page 39 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 10 August 2025 Figure 4: Scenario 2 Page 40 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 11 August 2025 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.1 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 5.3 According 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 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-cmip5 2 Climate Explorer Metadata. Available at https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/climate/climate-explorer-metadata.html. 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 CliMAT. 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 Page 41 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 12 August 2025 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.6 Figure 6: NCEI County Time Series - Average Precipitation Trends for Anoka County 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://metrocouncil.org/Communities/Planning/Local-Planning-Assistance/CVA/Tools-Resources.aspx 6 Minnesota CliMAT. 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 Page 42 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 13 August 2025 Additionally, the Metropolitan Council’s Localized Flood Map Screening Tool7 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 7 Localized Flood Map Screening Tool. Metropolitan Council Available at https://metrocouncil.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 https://maps.umn.edu/climatehealthtool/heat_app/. Page 43 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 14 August 2025 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 Resource Category Climate Considerations Project Information Climate Change Risks and Vulnerabilities Adaptations (Scenario 1 and Scenario 2) Project Design Aspects of building architecture/materials choices and site design may impact urban heat island conditions in the surrounding area, including changing climate zones, temperature trends, and potential for extended heat waves. In the coming decades, the location of the study area is anticipated to experience: • Increased annual temperatures • Increased annual precipitation and more frequent heavy rainfall events • Increased freeze thaw cycles • Medium urban heat island effect • Buildings could be constructed with rooftop-ready infrastructure for solar power generation and green or light colored roofs to reduce cooling needs. • Building shells could be designed so that they are more energy efficient by reducing the heating and cooling load. • City ordinance 1007.049 requires that boulevard trees be planted at a rate of one tree per lot for single and two-family properties. 10 • For townhome and multi-family properties, one tree is required for every 70 linear feet of street frontage, according to City zoning ordinance 1007.049. • 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. 10 Source: City Code 1007.049 Page 44 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 15 August 2025 Resource Category Climate Considerations Project Information Climate Change Risks and Vulnerabilities Adaptations (Scenario 1 and Scenario 2) 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 proposed development is in an area with a risk of flooding. • Future design of the study area and associated stormwater management facilities will be completed to reduce the risk of 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. Page 45 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 16 August 2025 Resource Category Climate Considerations Project Information Climate Change Risks and Vulnerabilities Adaptations (Scenario 1 and Scenario 2) Water Resources Current Minnesota climate trends and anticipated climate change in the general location of the project may influence water resources. 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. • Chapter 1011 of City Code requires native buffers around stormwater ponds, wetlands, streams, and ditches, and infiltration where necessary.11 • 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. Contamination/ Hazardous Materials/ Wastes Current Minnesota climate trends and anticipated climate change in the general location of the project may influence the potential environmental effects of generation/use/storage of hazardous waste and materials. Proposed residential and small-scale commercial development is not anticipated to generate hazardous waste or materials. Not applicable. 11 Source: Chapter 1011 of City Code: https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/linolakes/latest/linolakes_mn/0-0-0-24002 Page 46 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 17 August 2025 Resource Category Climate Considerations Project Information Climate Change Risks and Vulnerabilities Adaptations (Scenario 1 and Scenario 2) Fish, Wildlife, Plant Communities, and Sensitive Ecological Resources (Rare Features) Current Minnesota climate trends and anticipated climate change in the general location of the project may influence the local species and suitable habitat. Suitable habitat for species may become unsuitable due to land use changes, increased temperature, and increased runoff. • Native plantings and stormwater BMPs could provide suitable habitat for small mammals, insects, and bird species. • Creation of greenways and/or interconnecting wildlife corridors will be incorporated as development plans advance. 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. Page 47 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 18 August 2025 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 Cover Type Existing (Acres) Proposed for Scenarios 1 and 2 (Acres)13 Wetlands 89 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 Trees Percent Number Percent of Tree Canopy Removed Approximately 50% of the existing tree coverage within the study area. This number assumes most trees around the high-priority wetlands would remain. N/A Number of New Trees Planted N/A 4,80014 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. 14 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 Page 48 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 19 August 2025 Figure 7: Existing Cover Types Page 49 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 20 August 2025 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 Government Type of Application Status Federal U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit To be applied for, if applicable Approved Jurisdictional Determination To be applied for, if applicable U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Incidental Take Permit To be applied for, if applicable Federal Emergency Management Agency Letter of Map Revision To be applied for, if applicable Conditional Letter of Map Revision To be applied for, if applicable Letter of Map Amendment To be applied for, if applicable State Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Antidegradation Assessment To be submitted, if applicable Construction Contingency Plan and Response Action Plan approval To be applied for, if applicable National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Stormwater Permit for Construction Activities and General Permit To be applied for, if applicable Notice of Intent of Demolition To be 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 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources General Permit 97-0005 for Temporary Water Appropriations (need if more than 10,000 gallons per day of water is appropriated) To be applied for; if applicable Preliminary Well Construction Assessment To be applied for; if applicable Water Appropriations Permit To be applied for; if applicable Public Waters Work Permit To be applied for; if applicable Minnesota Department of Health Watermain Plan Review and Extension Approval To be applied for; if applicable Notification of Asbestos Related Work To be applied for; if applicable Page 50 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 21 August 2025 Unit of Government Type of Application Status Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit Approval To be applied for, if applicable Well Location and Construction Approval To be applied for, if applicable Regional Anoka County Right-of-Way Permit To be applied for, if applicable Road Access Permits To be applied for, if applicable Metropolitan Council 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 applicable Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ) Allocation Adjustment To be applied for, if applicable Comprehensive Plan Amendment Review To be applied for, if applicable Local Rice Creek Watershed District 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. Stat. Section 103E.227 (impoundments & diversion) and/or Mn. Stat. Section 103E.805 (abandonment proceedings) To be applied for, if applicable Wetland Delineation Boundary Confirmation To be applied for, if applicable Wetland Conversation Act Replacement Plan Approval To be applied for, if 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 City of Lino Lakes AUAR Approval In process Building Permit To be applied for, if applicable Comprehensive Plan Amendment To be applied for, if applicable Demolition Permit To be applied for, if applicable Surface Water Management Plan Approval To be applied for, if applicable Page 51 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 22 August 2025 Unit of Government Type of Application Status 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 Plan Approval To be applied for, if applicable Use Permit – Floodplain District To be applied for, if applicable 10. Land Use a. Describe: i. Existing land use of the site as well as areas adjacent to and near the site, including parks and open space, cemeteries, trails, 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). Page 52 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 23 August 2025 Figure 8: Existing Land Use Page 53 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 24 August 2025 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 Future Land Use Designation Purpose Low Density Residential Land guided for residential development with 1.6 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. Planned Residential / Commercial 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-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. Urban Reserve Land guided for post-2040 development to promote orderly and efficient expansion of future urban services and to prevent premature expansion. 16 Source: 2040 Comprehensive Plan, City of Lino Lakes Page 54 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 25 August 2025 Figure 9: 2040 Land Use Page 55 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 26 August 2025 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. Future Trails A planned Central Anoka Regional Trail transects the study area along Main Street. Coordination with Anoka County Parks and Recreation will be needed as development occurs along Main Street. 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. Page 56 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 27 August 2025 Figure 10: Existing Zoning Page 57 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 28 August 2025 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. Page 58 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 29 August 2025 Figure 11: Rice Creek Watershed District Floodplain Page 59 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 30 August 2025 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 Page 60 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 31 August 2025 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. Page 61 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 32 August 2025 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.17 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 Page 62 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 33 August 2025 Table 7: Soil Types Map Unit Symbol Soil Type Farmland Classification Erosion Hazard Hydric Rating Hydrologic Soil Group Acres within Study Area Percent of Study Area Cu Cut and fill land Not prime farmland Not rated Non-hydric N/A 1.2 0.1 Iw Isanti fine sandy loam Not prime farmland Slight Predominantly hydric A/D 318.6 32.4 LnA Lino loamy fine sand, 0 to 4 percent slopes Farmland of statewide importance Slight Predominantly non-hydric A/D 35.5 3.6 Ma Markey muck, occasionally ponded, 0 to 1 percent slopes Not prime farmland Slight Hydric Soils A/D 240.3 24.5 Mc Marsh Not prime farmland Slight Hydric A/D 2.4 0.2 Rf Rifle mucky peat Not prime farmland Slight Hydric A/D 258.3 26.3 SoA Soderville fine sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes Farmland of statewide importance Slight Predominantly non-hydric A/D 98.4 10.0 ZmB Zimmerm an fine sand, 1 to 6 percent slopes Not prime farmland Slight Predominantly non-hydric A 27.6 2.8 Page 63 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 34 August 2025 Figure 12: Soil Types Page 64 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 35 August 2025 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. i. 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. Page 65 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 36 August 2025 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. Page 66 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 37 August 2025 Figure 13: Surface Water Resources Within the Study Area Page 67 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 38 August 2025 Figure 14: Surface Water Resources Within 1 Mile of AUAR Study Area Page 68 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 39 August 2025 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. Page 69 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 40 August 2025 Figure 15: Minnesota Well Index Page 70 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 41 August 2025 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). Page 71 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 42 August 2025 Table 8: Projected Wastewater Demands Wastewater Demands Scenario 1 Average Daily Flow (GPD) Scenario 2 Average Daily Flow (GPD) Residential 493,200 548,000 Commercial 8,800 9,100 Total 502,000 557,100 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. Page 72 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 43 August 2025 Figure 16: Full Build – Sewer Infrastructure Study Area Page 73 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 44 August 2025 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 EAW 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. Page 74 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 45 August 2025 • 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. Page 75 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 46 August 2025 • 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 Page 76 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 47 August 2025 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 Page 77 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 48 August 2025 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 Design 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-feet 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. Page 78 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 49 August 2025 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 Page 79 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 50 August 2025 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 Flow (GPD) Scenario 2 Average Daily Flow (GPD) Residential 550,000 610,000 Commercial 9,800 10,100 Total 559,800 620,100 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 Page 80 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 51 August 2025 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. Page 81 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 52 August 2025 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 ID Site Name Activity Status Activities Program 16576 A & L Sod Inc. Active Tank leak site, Petroleum remediation, Minimal quantity hazardous waste generator Multiple Programs 257812 SP 002-614-049 Active Construction Stormwater Stormwater 18236 Caroll Busch Residence Inactive Tank site leak, Petroleum remediation Investigation and Cleanup 146100 LeVahn Bros Active Hazardous Waste, Minimal quantity generator Hazardous Waste 212682 Century Farm North 6th Addition Active20 Construction stormwater Stormwater 157490 Morell Borrow Pit Active21 Construction Stormwater Stormwater 226150 Century Farm North 7th Active Construction stormwater Stormwater 141380 Anoka County ditch 10-22032 Maintenace Inactive Construction Stormwater Stormwater 107177 Goldade Richard J Inactive UST Tanks Future developers will need to complete a Phase I/II 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. Page 82 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 53 August 2025 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. Page 83 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 54 August 2025 Figure 18: MPCA Sites Page 84 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 55 August 2025 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. Page 85 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 56 August 2025 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 EAW 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: Page 86 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 57 August 2025 • 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/midwest/endangered/insects/rpbb/rpbbmap.html Page 87 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 58 August 2025 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. Page 88 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 59 August 2025 • 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 fulleri) 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 lanceolata) 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 Page 89 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 60 August 2025 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, Page 90 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 61 August 2025 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 lanceolata) – 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 (Rotala 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 Page 91 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 62 August 2025 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 Page 92 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 63 August 2025 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 Page 93 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 64 August 2025 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.23 • 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.25 • 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. Page 94 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 65 August 2025 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. Page 95 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 66 August 2025 Figure 19: Native Plant Communities, Sites of Biodiversity Significance, and Regionally Significant Ecological Areas Page 96 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 67 August 2025 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. EAW 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 Page 97 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 68 August 2025 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 EAW 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%20Cities%20area%20has,carbon%20monoxide%20(CO)%20violations 30 Source: Lino Lakes, Minn., Municipal Code § 1007.043 Page 98 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 69 August 2025 18. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions/Carbon Footprint a. GHG Quantification – For all proposed projects, provide quantification and discussion of project GHG emissions. Include additional rows in the tables as necessary to provide project-specific emission sources. Describe the methods used to quantify emissions. If calculation methods are not readily available to quantify GHG emissions for a source, describe the process used to come to that conclusion and any GHG emission sources not included in the total calculation. 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 (N2O). 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 (N2O) • Methane (CH4) 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/ghgemissions/overview- greenhouse-gases 32 Source: https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/simplified-ghg-emissions-calculator Page 99 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 70 August 2025 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.34 Table 11: Construction Emissions Scope35 Emission Type Emission Sub-Type Emitant Scenario 1 Project-Related CO2e Emissions Scenario 2 Project-Related CO2e Emissions Scope 1 Combustion Mobile equipment CO2, N2O, CH4 278,006 336,743 Total 278,006 282,965 Table 12: Operational Emissions Scope Emission Type Emission Sub-Type Emitant Existing CO2e Emissions (tons/year) Scenario 1 Project-Related CO2e Emissions (tons/year) Scenario 2 Project-Related CO2e Emissions (tons/year) Scope 1 Combustion Stationary equipment CO2, N2O, CH4 534 7,154 7,291 Scope 2 Off-site electricity Grid-based CO2, N2O, CH4 862 12,066 12,324 Scope 3 Off-site waste management Area CO2, CH4 261 3,537 3,642 Total 1,657 22,757 23,257 b. GHG Assessment i. 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. Page 100 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 71 August 2025 • 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 Page 101 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 72 August 2025 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 Page 102 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 73 August 2025 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, 11th 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 Scenario AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily Total In Out Total In Out Scenario 1 1,992 532 1,460 2,769 1,687 1,082 31,516 Scenario 2 2,029 543 1,487 2,806 1,702 1,104 32,193 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/accessmanagement/resources.html) 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 EAW 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). Page 103 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 74 August 2025 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 Location Traffic Control Level of Service by Scenario, with Mitigation Existing/No-Build Scenario 1 Scenario 2 2025 2030 2045 2030 2045 2030 2045 AM Peak Hour Main Street & Sunset Avenue Roundabout A A A A A A B Sunset Avenue & Robinson Drive Side Street Stop36 A A A A A A A Sunset Avenue & Century Trail Side Street Stop36 A A A A A A A Sunset Avenue & Lilac Street Side Street Stop / Roundabout36 A A A A C A E Pine Street & 4th Avenue Side Street Stop A A A A A A A Main Street & 4th Avenue Side Street Stop B B B B A B A 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Side Street Stop B B B A C A B Lake Drive & Pine Street Side Street Stop A A A A B A B Lake Drive & Main Street Signal / Roundabout37 B A A A B A B 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). Page 104 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 75 August 2025 Location Traffic Control Level of Service by Scenario, with Mitigation Existing/No-Build Scenario 1 Scenario 2 2025 2030 2045 2030 2045 2030 2045 AM Peak Hour Main Street & Sunset Avenue Roundabout A A A A B B C Sunset Avenue & Robinson Drive Side Street Stop36 A A A A A A A Sunset Avenue & Century Trail Side Street Stop36 A A A A A A A Sunset Avenue & Lilac Street Side Street Stop / Roundabout36 A A A A A A A Pine Street & 4th Avenue Side Street Stop A A A A A A A Main Street & 4th Avenue Side Street Stop B A B C A C A 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Side Street Stop A A A A B A C Lake Drive & Pine Street Side Street Stop B A A A B A B Lake Drive & Main Street Signal / Roundabout37 C A C C C C C 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 Page 105 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 76 August 2025 • 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. Page 106 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 77 August 2025 Figure 20: Traffic Study Intersections Page 107 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 78 August 2025 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 EAW 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 EAW 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 121st 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 11a Page 108 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 79 August 2025 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 Land Use 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. 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. Geology, Soils, and Topography 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 City of Lino Lakes and future proposed development within the AUAR study area will require compliance with the City’s erosion and sediment control standards. 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. Page 109 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 80 August 2025 Resource Area Mitigation 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. Floodplains 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 specifically to RCWD’s 100-year floodplains. Scenario 1 and 2: Floodplain alterations will require submittal of appropriate Letter of Map Change to FEMA to document changes to floodplain boundaries. Water Resources Wetlands 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 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. Ditches Scenario 1 and 2: Realignment of the ACD system 10-22-32 is proposed in both scenarios. A 20-foot buffer will be maintained on each side of the ditch as required by RCWD to allow for 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. Stormwater 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 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. Page 110 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 81 August 2025 Resource Area Mitigation 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. Water Appropriation 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 supply and distribution system. 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. Water Resources 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 alterations to the water system. 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. Page 111 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 82 August 2025 Resource Area Mitigation 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. Wastewater 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 expansions or alterations to the sanitary sewer system and regional capacity needs. Water Resources 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 Engineering Consultant. 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. Contamination/ Hazardous Waste 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 either recycled or disposed in the proper facilities in accordance with state regulations and guidelines. 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 I/II 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, Plant Communities, and Sensitive Ecological Resources Scenario 1 and 2: State requirements necessitate the control and spread of state listed noxious weeds and/or invasive weeds if encountered prior to construction. Methods to avoid spreading noxious weeds and/or invasive species will be incorporated into project specifications and/or SWPPP when developed. Scenario 1 and 2: Disturbed areas would be reestablished using appropriate native pollinator-friendly and stabilization seed mixes. Page 112 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 83 August 2025 Resource Area Mitigation 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 Page 113 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 84 August 2025 Resource Area Mitigation Historic Resources 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. 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. Air Scenario 1 and 2: Construction will generate temporary fugitive dust emissions. These emissions will be controlled by sweeping or watering as appropriate or as prevailing weather and soil conditions dictate. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions/Carbon Footprint 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 • Implement waste best management practices and to recycle and compost appropriate material when applicable • 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 Noise Scenario 1 and 2: Construction activities may result in temporarily elevated 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. Transportation 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. 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. Page 114 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 85 August 2025 Resource Area Mitigation 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. Transportation 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. • 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. Page 115 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR 86 August 2025 Resource Area Mitigation 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. Page 116 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR August 2025 Appendix A: List of Tax Parcels Page 117 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR August 2025 Appendix B: Agency Correspondence Page 118 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR August 2025 Appendix C: Greenhouse Gas Analysis Page 119 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR August 2025 Appendix D: Traffic Study Page 120 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR August 2025 Appendix E: Comment Responses Page 121 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR August 2025 Appendix F: Comments Page 122 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR July 2025 Appendix A: List of Tax Parcels Page 123 of 679 Parcel IDs within Study Area Parcel ID 063122220008 063122220004 073122320059 063122230001 073122320050 073122320064 073122240003 073122230007 073122240062 073122320001 063122320002 073122320056 073122310038 073122310039 073122320066 073122320055 073122320054 073122230006 073122230001 073122220003 073122230002 073122320053 073122240004 073122320057 073122320074 073122320068 063122210001 063122120003 063122210002 073122140003 073122110007 073122110003 073122110005 073122110002 063122110008 063122130001 063122440002 063122440008 063122440006 063122440012 063122240001 063122410003 063122440009 063122440004 073122240083 073122240066 073122240069 073122240068 073122240030 073122240037 073122240074 073122240012 073122240070 073122240065 073122240063 073122240081 073122240006 073122240077 073122240078 073122240013 073122240072 073122240080 073122240107 073122240039 073122240038 073122240106 073122240085 073122240105 073122240110 073122240112 073122240117 073122240059 073122240052 073122240049 073122240130 073122240109 073122240090 073122240033 073122240040 073122240060 073122240051 073122240084 073122240042 073122240036 073122240056 073122240032 Page 124 of 679 Parcel IDs within Study Area 073122240055 073122240031 073122240047 063122220005 073122230040 073122240135 073122240115 073122240114 073122240113 063122220003 073122230005 073122240131 073122240099 073122240127 073122240123 073122240094 073122240122 073122240125 073122320061 073122240010 073122240019 073122320058 073122310037 073122320052 073122240011 073122320062 073122240159 073122240176 073122240154 073122320063 073122240091 073122240101 073122240102 073122240128 073122240103 073122240126 073122320067 073122240134 073122240120 073122320065 073122240020 073122240021 073122240174 073122240173 073122240172 073122240177 073122240152 073122240187 073122240151 073122240188 073122240168 073122240196 073122240161 073122240175 073122240178 073122240166 073122240156 073122240155 073122240165 073122240164 073122240163 073122240200 073122240201 073122240022 073122310042 073122240025 073122240014 073122230010 073122310041 073122240026 063122340002 063122310001 073122240028 073122130001 073122140001 073122140007 063122210003 073122140002 073122120001 073122110001 073122110008 073122110006 073122110004 063122110007 063122140001 063122440003 063122440001 063122440007 063122410002 063122430001 Page 125 of 679 Parcel IDs within Study Area 063122440011 073122240082 073122240067 073122240064 073122240053 073122240048 073122240071 073122240073 073122240075 073122240076 073122240086 073122240089 073122240029 073122240129 073122240108 073122240136 073122240045 073122240034 073122220004 073122240138 073122240057 073122240118 073122240050 073122240058 073122240046 073122240098 073122240054 073122240044 073122240097 073122240104 073122240111 073122240119 073122240167 073122240195 073122240100 073122240093 073122240160 073122240179 073122240181 073122240185 073122240009 073122230020 073122140006 063122340001 073122240024 073122240007 073122240157 073122240132 073122240096 073122240095 073122240124 073122240092 073122240133 073122320060 073122240002 073122320051 073122240171 073122240158 073122240170 073122240180 073122240153 073122240199 073122240182 073122240183 073122240184 073122240061 073122240008 073122240023 073122240189 073122240027 063122440005 063122420001 063122440010 073122240043 073122240079 073122240116 073122240041 073122240035 073122240139 073122240121 073122240169 073122240162 073122240186 073122240198 073122310040 063122210007 063122210008 063122220006 063122110009 063122110004 Page 126 of 679 Parcel IDs within Study Area 063122110003 063122110006 063122110005 063122120001 063122120002 073122240197 073122240005 073122210001 073122230014 073122410025 073122420019 073122230039 073122240209 073122230016 073122230031 073122230025 073122230024 073122230023 073122230022 073122230018 073122230028 073122230029 073122230027 073122230026 073122230021 073122230019 073122230017 073122230030 073122230015 073122240202 073122240203 073122240204 073122240206 073122240205 073122240207 073122230037 073122230036 073122230035 073122230034 073122230033 073122230032 073122230038 073122240213 073122240211 073122240212 073122240210 Page 127 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR July 2025 Appendix B: Agency Correspondence Page 128 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR MCE #: 2025-00312 Page 1 of 4 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 S7, 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 SUMMARY 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 3/26/2025 09:07 AMPage 129 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR MCE #: 2025-00312 Page 2 of 4 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. 3/26/2025 09:07 AMPage 130 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR MCE #: 2025-00312 Page 3 of 4 3/26/2025 09:07 AMPage 131 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR MCE #: 2025-00312 Page 4 of 4 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) 3/26/2025 09:07 AMPage 132 of 679 Lino Lakes - Mapping Northwest Main - 161280000.3 MCE-2025-00120 Page 1 of 4 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.NHIS@state.mn.us prior to initiating survey work. Project planning should take into account Page 133 of 679 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 134 of 679 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 135 of 679 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, Molly Barrett Natural Heritage Review Specialist molly.barrett@state.mn.us Cc: Melissa Collins, Regional Environmental Assessment Ecologist, Central (Region 3) Page 136 of 679 03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Minnesota-Wisconsin Ecological Services Field Office 3815 American Blvd East Bloomington, MN 55425-1659 Phone: (952) 858-0793 In Reply Refer To: Project Code: 2025-0076181 Project Name: Lino Lakes AUAR 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 137 of 679 Project code: 2025-0076181 03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC 2 of 17 1. 2. We recommend running the project (if it qualifies) through our Minnesota-Wisconsin Federal Endangered Species Determination Key (Minnesota-Wisconsin ("D-key")). A demonstration video showing how-to access and use the determination key is available. Please note that the Minnesota-Wisconsin D-key is the third option of 3 available d-keys. D-keys are tools to help Federal agencies and other project proponents determine if their proposed action has the potential to adversely affect federally listed species and designated critical habitat. The Minnesota-Wisconsin D-key includes a structured set of questions that assists a project proponent in determining whether a proposed project qualifies for a certain predetermined consultation outcome for all federally listed species found in Minnesota and Wisconsin (except for the northern long-eared bat- see below), which includes determinations of “no effect” or “may affect, not likely to adversely affect." In each case, the Service has compiled and analyzed the best available information on the species’ biology and the impacts of certain activities to support these determinations. If your completed d-key output letter shows a "No Effect" (NE) determination for all listed species, print your IPaC output letter for your files to document your compliance with the Endangered Species Act. For Federal projects with a “Not Likely to Adversely Affect” (NLAA) determination, our concurrence becomes valid if you do not hear otherwise from us after a 30-day review period, as indicated in your letter. If your d-key output letter indicates additional coordination with the Minnesota-Wisconsin Ecological Services Field Office is necessary (i.e., you get a “May Affect” determination), you will be provided additional guidance on contacting the Service to continue ESA coordination outside of the key; ESA compliance cannot be concluded using the key for “May Affect” determinations unless otherwise indicated in your output letter. Note: Once you obtain your official species list, you are not required to continue in IPaC with d-keys, although in most cases these tools should expedite your review. If you choose to make an effects determination on your own, you may do so. If the project is a Federal Action, you may want to review our section 7 step-by-step instructions before making your determinations. Using the IPaC Official Species List to Make No Effect and May Affect Determinations for Listed Species If IPaC returns a result of “There are no listed species found within the vicinity of the project,” then project proponents can conclude the proposed activities will have no effect on any federally listed species under Service jurisdiction. Concurrence from the Service is not required for no effect determinations. No further consultation or coordination is required. Attach this letter to the dated IPaC species list report for your records. If IPaC returns one or more federally listed, proposed, or candidate species as potentially present in the action area of the proposed project – other than bats (see below) – then project proponents must determine if proposed activities will have no effect on or may affect those species. For assistance in determining if suitable habitat for listed, candidate, or proposed species occurs within your project area or if species may be affected by project activities, you can obtain Life History Information for Listed and Candidate Species on our office website. If no impacts will occur to a species on the IPaC species list (e.g., there is no habitat present in the project area), the appropriate determination is no effect. No further consultation or coordination is required. Attach this letter to the dated IPaC species list report for your records. Page 138 of 679 Project code: 2025-0076181 03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC 3 of 17 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 Page 139 of 679 Project code: 2025-0076181 03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC 4 of 17 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 voluntary guidelines for minimizing impacts. Transmission Lines - Migratory birds, especially large species with long wingspans, heavy bodies, and poor maneuverability can also collide with power lines. In addition, mortality can occur when birds, particularly hawks, eagles, kites, falcons, and owls, attempt to perch on uninsulated or unguarded power poles. To minimize these risks, please refer to guidelines developed by the Avian Power Line Interaction Committee and the Service. Implementation of these measures is especially important along sections of lines adjacent to wetlands or other areas that support large numbers of raptors and migratory birds. Page 140 of 679 Project code: 2025-0076181 03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC 5 of 17 ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ Wind Energy - To minimize impacts to migratory birds and bats, wind energy projects should follow the Service’s Wind Energy Guidelines. In addition, please refer to the Service's Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance, which provides guidance for conserving bald and golden eagles in the course of siting, constructing, and operating wind energy facilities. State Department of Natural Resources Coordination While it is not required for your Federal section 7 consultation, please note that additional state endangered or threatened species may also have the potential to be impacted. Please contact the Minnesota or Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources for information on state listed species that may be present in your proposed project area. Minnesota Minnesota Department of Natural Resources - Endangered Resources Review Homepage Email: Review.NHIS@state.mn.us Wisconsin Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources - Endangered Resources Review Homepage Email: DNRERReview@wi.gov We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. Please feel free to contact our office with questions or for additional information. Attachment(s): Official Species List USFWS National Wildlife Refuges and Fish Hatcheries Bald & Golden Eagles Migratory Birds Wetlands OFFICIAL SPECIES LIST This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed action". This species list is provided by: Minnesota-Wisconsin Ecological Services Field Office 3815 American Blvd East Bloomington, MN 55425-1659 (952) 858-0793 Page 141 of 679 Project code: 2025-0076181 03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC 6 of 17 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 Counties:Anoka County, Minnesota Page 142 of 679 Project code: 2025-0076181 03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC 7 of 17 1. ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SPECIES There is a total of 5 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list. Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species. IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries , as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the Department of Commerce. See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce. 1 Page 143 of 679 Project code: 2025-0076181 03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC 8 of 17 BIRDS NAME STATUS Whooping Crane Grus americana Population: U.S.A. (AL, AR, CO, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KY, LA, MI, MN, MS, MO, NC, NM, OH, SC, TN, UT, VA, WI, WV, western half of WY) No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/758 Experimental Population, Non- Essential CLAMS NAME STATUS Salamander Mussel Simpsonaias ambigua There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6208 Proposed Endangered INSECTS NAME STATUS Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743 Proposed Threatened Rusty Patched Bumble Bee Bombus affinis There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9383 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/ZZVRWPDATZCB3PYQQZCMK3UHPM/ documents/generated/5967.pdf Endangered Western Regal Fritillary Argynnis idalia occidentalis No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/12017 Proposed Threatened CRITICAL HABITATS THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S JURISDICTION. YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IF YOUR PROJECT(S) MAY HAVE EFFECTS ON ALL ABOVE LISTED SPECIES. Page 144 of 679 Project code: 2025-0076181 03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC 9 of 17 1. 2. 3. 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 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) . 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. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a) There are Bald Eagles and/or Golden Eagles in your project 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 2 1 Page 145 of 679 Project code: 2025-0076181 03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC 10 of 17 no data survey effort breeding season probability of presence 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. NAME BREEDING SEASON Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626 Breeds Dec 1 to Aug 31 PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report. Probability of Presence () Green bars; the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during that week of the year. Breeding Season () Yellow bars; liberal estimate of the timeframe inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. Survey Effort () Vertical black lines; the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. No Data () A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week. SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Bald Eagle Page 146 of 679 Project code: 2025-0076181 03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC 11 of 17 ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ 1. 2. 3. 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) 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. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a) For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the "Probability of Presence Summary" below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area. NAME BREEDING SEASON American Golden-plover Pluvialis dominica This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10561 Breeds elsewhere Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626 Breeds Dec 1 to Aug 31 1 Page 147 of 679 Project code: 2025-0076181 03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC 12 of 17 NAME BREEDING SEASON Black Tern Chlidonias niger surinamenisis This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3093 Breeds May 15 to Aug 20 Black-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus erythropthalmus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9399 Breeds May 15 to Oct 10 Bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivorus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9454 Breeds May 20 to Jul 31 Canada Warbler Cardellina canadensis This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9643 Breeds May 20 to Aug 10 Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9406 Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 25 Golden-winged Warbler Vermivora chrysoptera This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8745 Breeds May 1 to Jul 20 Grasshopper Sparrow Ammodramus savannarum perpallidus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8329 Breeds Jun 1 to Aug 20 Lesser Yellowlegs Tringa flavipes This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9679 Breeds elsewhere Marbled Godwit Limosa fedoa This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9481 Breeds May 1 to Jul 31 Pectoral Sandpiper Calidris melanotos This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9561 Breeds elsewhere Page 148 of 679 Project code: 2025-0076181 03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC 13 of 17 NAME BREEDING SEASON Ruddy Turnstone Arenaria interpres morinella This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10633 Breeds elsewhere Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9478 Breeds elsewhere Semipalmated Sandpiper Calidris pusilla This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9603 Breeds elsewhere Short-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus griseus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9480 Breeds elsewhere Western Grebe aechmophorus occidentalis This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6743 Breeds Jun 1 to Aug 31 Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9431 Breeds May 10 to Aug 31 PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report. Probability of Presence () Green bars; the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during that week of the year. Breeding Season () Yellow bars; liberal estimate of the timeframe inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. Survey Effort () Page 149 of 679 Project code: 2025-0076181 03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC 14 of 17 no data survey effort breeding season probability of presence Vertical black lines; the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. No Data () A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week. SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC American Golden- plover BCC Rangewide (CON) Bald Eagle Non-BCC Vulnerable Black Tern BCC Rangewide (CON) Black-billed Cuckoo BCC Rangewide (CON) Bobolink BCC Rangewide (CON) Canada Warbler BCC Rangewide (CON) Chimney Swift BCC Rangewide (CON) Golden-winged Warbler BCC Rangewide (CON) Grasshopper Sparrow BCC - BCR Lesser Yellowlegs BCC Rangewide (CON) Marbled Godwit BCC Rangewide (CON) Page 150 of 679 Project code: 2025-0076181 03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC 15 of 17 ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ Pectoral Sandpiper 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 BCC - BCR Short-billed Dowitcher BCC Rangewide (CON) Western Grebe BCC Rangewide (CON) Wood Thrush BCC Rangewide (CON) Additional information can be found using the following links: Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/library/ collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds Nationwide avoidance and minimization measures for birds Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/ media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-and-golden-eagles-may-occur- project-action WETLANDS Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes. For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District. Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to update our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine the actual extent of wetlands on site. FRESHWATER FORESTED/SHRUB WETLAND PSS1Ad Page 151 of 679 Project code: 2025-0076181 03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC 16 of 17 ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ ▪ PFO1A PFO1Ad PSS1A FRESHWATER EMERGENT WETLAND PEM1A PEM1Ad PEM1Cx PEM1Af PEM1Cd PEM1F PEM1C FRESHWATER POND PUBHx PABHx PUBFx PUBH PABH PUBF RIVERINE R5UBFx R2UBFx Page 152 of 679 Project code: 2025-0076181 03/31/2025 15:11:51 UTC 17 of 17 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 Page 153 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR July 2025 Appendix C: Greenhouse Gas Analysis Page 154 of 679 Emissions Summary Guidance (B) The "Go To Sheet" buttons can be used to navigate to the data entry sheets. Organizational Information: Organization Name: Organization Address: Inventory Reporting Period: Start: MM/DD/YY End: Name of Preparer: Phone Number of Preparer: Date Prepared: Summary of Organization's Emissions: Scope 1 Emissions Stationary Combustion 534 CO2-e (metric tons) Mobile Sources 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Refrigeration / AC Equipment Use 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Fire Suppression 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Purchased Gases 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Location-Based Scope 2 Emissions Purchased and Consumed Electricity 862 CO2-e (metric tons) Purchased and Consumed Steam 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Market-Based Scope 2 Emissions Purchased and Consumed Electricity 862 CO2-e (metric tons) Purchased and Consumed Steam 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Total organization Emissions Total Scope 1 & Location-Based Scope 2 1,396 CO2-e (metric tons) Total Scope 1 & Market-Based Scope 2 1,396 CO2-e (metric tons) Reductions Offsets 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Net Scope 1 and 2 Location-Based Emissions 1,396 CO2-e (metric tons) Net Scope 1 and 2 Market-Based Emissions 1,396 CO2-e (metric tons) 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. (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. Existing Conditions 2025 MM/DD/YY 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 . https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/center-corporate-climate-leadership-annual-ghg-inventory-summary-and-goal-tracking Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To SheetGo To Sheet Back to Intro Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Summary)2 of 21 Page 155 of 679 Scope 3 Emissions Employee Business Travel 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Employee Commuting 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Product Transport 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Waste 261 CO2-e (metric tons) Required Supplemental Information Biomass CO2 Emissions from Stationary Sources 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Biomass CO2 Emissions from Mobile Sources 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Summary)3 of 21 Page 156 of 679 Scope 1 Emissions from Stationary Combustion Sources Guidance - Select "Fuel Combusted" from drop down box. (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 Source Source Fuel Quantity ID Description Area (sq ft)Combusted Combusted BLR-012 East Power Plant 12,517 Natural Gas 10,000 MMBtu Residential Natural Gas Use 784,080 Natural Gas 10,058 MMBtu GHG Emissions Total Organization-Wide Stationary Source Combustion by Fuel Type Quantity Combusted Anthracite Coal 0 short tons Bituminous Coal 0 short tons Units (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. - 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. (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 ). Fuel Type Units Back to Intro Back to Summary HelpHeat Content EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Direct 1.0)6 of 21 Page 157 of 679 Scope 2 Emissions from Purchase of Electricity Guidance (C) Select "eGRID subregion" from drop box and enter "Electricity Purchased." https://www.epa.gov/egrid/power-profiler#/ Tips: Enter electricity usage by location and then look up the eGRID subregion for each location. Table 1. Total Amount of Electricity Purchased by eGRID Subregion Source Source Source eGRID Subregion Electricity CO2 CH4 N2O CO2 CH4 N2O CO2 CH4 N2O ID Description Area (sq ft)where electricity is consumed Purchased Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions (kWh)(lb/MWh)(lb/MWh)(lb/MWh)(lb)(lb)(lb)(lb)(lb)(lb) Bldg-012 East Power Plant 12,517 HIMS (HICC Miscellaneous)200,000 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 237,120.0 28.6 4.4 Residential Electricity Use 784,080 MROW (MRO West)1,717,201 <enter factor><enter factor><enter factor>1,886,173.6 204.3 29.2 1,886,173.6 204.3 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 1,717,201 1,886,173.6 204.3 29.2 1,886,173.6 204.3 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 N2O 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. 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. Location-Based Emission Factors Emissions Emissions Market-Based Use these cells to enter applicable market-based emission factors (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. 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. - 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: (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. Back to Intro Back to Summary Help Help - Market-Based Method Help - Market-Based Method EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Indirect 1.0)1 of 2 Page 158 of 679 Scope 3 Emissions from Waste Guidance Table 1. Waste Disposal Weight by Waste Material and Disposal Method (CO2, CH4 and N2O) Source ID Source Description Waste Material Disposal Method Weight Unit CO2e Emissions (kg) Bldg-012 East Power Plant Finished Goods Steel Cans Landfilled 1,000 metric ton 22,040 Residential Residential Waste Mixed MSW municipal solid waste Landfilled 437 metric ton 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 (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. (A) Enter annual waste data in ORANGE cells. Example entry is shown in first row (GREEN Italics ). Back to Intro Back to Summary Help EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Optional 3.0)1 of 2 Page 159 of 679 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)2 of 2 Page 160 of 679 Emissions Summary Guidance (B) The "Go To Sheet" buttons can be used to navigate to the data entry sheets. Organizational Information: Organization Name: Organization Address: Inventory Reporting Period: Start: MM/DD/YY End: Name of Preparer: Phone Number of Preparer: Date Prepared: Summary of Organization's Emissions: Scope 1 Emissions Stationary Combustion 7,154 CO2-e (metric tons) Mobile Sources 278,006 CO2-e (metric tons) Refrigeration / AC Equipment Use 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Fire Suppression 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Purchased Gases 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Location-Based Scope 2 Emissions Purchased and Consumed Electricity 12,066 CO2-e (metric tons) Purchased and Consumed Steam 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Market-Based Scope 2 Emissions Purchased and Consumed Electricity 12,066 CO2-e (metric tons) Purchased and Consumed Steam 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Total organization Emissions 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. (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. Scenario 1 2025 MM/DD/YY 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 . https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/center-corporate-climate-leadership-annual-ghg-inventory-summary-and-goal-tracking Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Back to Intro Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Summary)1 of 2 Page 161 of 679 Total Scope 1 & Location-Based Scope 2 297,227 CO2-e (metric tons) Total Scope 1 & Market-Based Scope 2 297,227 CO2-e (metric tons) Reductions Offsets 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Net Scope 1 and 2 Location-Based Emissions 297,227 CO2-e (metric tons) Net Scope 1 and 2 Market-Based Emissions 297,227 CO2-e (metric tons) Scope 3 Emissions Employee Business Travel 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Employee Commuting 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Product Transport 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Waste 3,537 CO2-e (metric tons) Required Supplemental Information Biomass CO2 Emissions from Stationary Sources 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Biomass CO2 Emissions from Mobile Sources 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Go To Sheet Go To SheetGo To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Summary)2 of 2 Page 162 of 679 Scope 1 Emissions from Stationary Combustion Sources Guidance - Select "Fuel Combusted" from drop down box. (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 Source Source Fuel QuantityIDDescriptionArea (sq ft)Combusted Combusted BLR-012 East Power Plant 12,517 Natural Gas 10,000 MMBtu Residential Natural Gas Use 3,000,000 Natural Gas 133,408 MMBtu Commercia Natural Gas Use 60,000 Natural Gas 1,290 MMBtu GHG Emissions Total Organization-Wide Stationary Source Combustion by Fuel Type Quantity Combusted Anthracite Coal 0 short tons Bituminous Coal 0 short tons Sub-bituminous Coal 0 short tons Units (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. - 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. (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 ). Fuel Type Units Back to Intro Back to Summary HelpHeat Content EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Direct 1.0)1 of 2 Page 163 of 679 Lignite Coal 0 short tons Natural Gas 131,284,600 scfDistillate 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 CO2, CH4 and N2O Emissions from Stationary Source Fuel Combustion CO2 (kg)CH4 (g)N2O (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 0.0Landfill Gas 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Non-Fossil Fuel Emissions 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Emissions for all Fuels 7,147,133.6 135,223.1 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 Fuel Type EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Direct 1.0)2 of 2 Page 164 of 679 Scope 1 Emissions from Mobile Sources Guidance - 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. Biodiesel Percent:20 % Ethanol Percent:80 % Table 1. Mobile Source Fuel Combustion and Miles Traveled Source Source Vehicle Vehicle Fuel Units Miles ID Description Type Year Usage Traveled Fleet-012 HQ Fleet NonRoad Ships and Boats - Diesel 1990 500 gal 3,670 Construction Equipment (non-road gaConstruction 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 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) 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 Note: emissions here are only for the ga Biodiesel 0 gallons 0.0 Note: emissions here are only for the di Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)0 gallons 0.0 Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)0 scf 0.0 Total Organization-Wide On-Road Gasoline Mobile Source Mileage and CH4/N2O Emissions Vehicle Year Mileage (miles)CH4 (g)N2O (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 1987-93 0 0.0 0.0 (Vans, Pickup Trucks, SUVs)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 On-Road or Non-Road? Average Fuel Economy (mpg) Vehicle Type Fuel Type Vehicle Type Fuel Usage Units - Enter "Fuel Usage" in appropriate units (units appear when vehicle type is selected). (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. (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. (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 "Vehicle Type" from drop down box (closest type available). - Select "On-Road" or "Non-Road" from drop down box to determine the Vehicle Types available. Back to Intro Back to Summary Help EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Direct 2.0)1 of 2 Page 165 of 679 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 0.0201800.0 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 0 0.0 0.0 Total Organization-Wide On-Road Non-Gasoline Mobile Source Mileage and CH4/N2O Emissions Vehicle Type Fuel Type Vehicle Year Mileage (miles)CH4 (g)N2O (g) 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 1960-1982 0 0.0 0.0 1983-1995 0 0.0 0.0 1996-2006 0 0.0 0.02007-2018 0 0.0 0.0 1960-2006 0 0.0 0.0 2007-2018 1,560 14.8 67.2 Methanol 0 0.0 0.0 Ethanol 0 0.0 0.0 CNG 0 0.0 0.0 LPG 0 0.0 0.0Biodiesel00.0 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 CNG 0 0.0 0.0 LPG 0 0.0 0.0 LNG 0 0.0 0.0 Biodiesel 0 0.0 0.0 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 0.0Biodiesel00.0 0.0 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 0.0Biodiesel00.0 0.0 Total Organization-Wide Non-Road Mobile Source Fuel Usage and CH4/N2O Emissions Vehicle Type Fuel Type Fuel Usage (gallons)CH4 (g) N2O (g) Residual Fuel Oil - - - Gasoline (2 stroke)- - - Gasoline (4 stroke)- - - Diesel - - - Locomotives Diesel - - - Jet Fuel - - - Aviation Gasoline - - - Gasoline (2 stroke)- - - Gasoline (4 stroke)- - - Diesel - - - LPG - - - Gasoline - - - Diesel - - - 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 - - - Gasoline - - - Diesel - - - Gasoline (2 stroke)- - - Gasoline (4 stroke)- - - Diesel - - - LPG - - - Gasoline - - - Diesel - - - LPG - - - Gasoline (2 stroke)- - - Gasoline (4 stroke)- - - Diesel - - - LPG - - - Gasoline (2 stroke)- - - Gasoline (4 stroke)- - - Diesel - - - Gasoline - - - Diesel - - - LPG - - - 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 Ships and Boats Aircraft Agricultural Equipment Heavy-Duty Trucks Buses Light-Duty Cars Light-Duty Trucks Medium-Duty Trucks Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles - DDiesel Passenger Cars - Diesel Diesel Light-Duty Trucks - Diesel Diesel Industrial/Commercial Equipment Logging Equipment Railroad Equipment Recreational Equipment Agricultural Offroad Trucks Construction/Mining Equipment Construction/Mining Offroad Trucks Lawn and Garden Equipment Airport Equipment EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Direct 2.0)2 of 2 Page 166 of 679 Scope 2 Emissions from Purchase of Electricity Guidance (C) Select "eGRID subregion" from drop box and enter "Electricity Purchased." https://www.epa.gov/egrid/power-profiler#/ Tips: Enter electricity usage by location and then look up the eGRID subregion for each location. Table 1. Total Amount of Electricity Purchased by eGRID Subregion Source Source Source eGRID Subregion Electricity CO2 CH4 N2O CO2 CH4 N2O CO2 CH4 N2O ID Description Area (sq ft)where electricity is consumed Purchased Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions (kWh)(lb/MWh)(lb/MWh)(lb/MWh)(lb)(lb)(lb)(lb)(lb)(lb) Bldg-012 East Power Plant 12,517 HIMS (HICC Miscellaneous)200,000 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 237,120.0 28.6 4.4 Residential Electricity Use 1,600 MROW (MRO West)23,196,200 <enter factor><enter factor><enter factor>25,478,706.1 2,760.3 394.3 25,478,706.1 2,760.3 394.3 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 24,042,200 26,407,952.5 2,861.0 408.7 26,407,952.5 2,861.0 408.7 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 N2O 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. (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. 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. - 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: (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. 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. Location-Based Emission Factors Emissions Emissions Market-Based Use these cells to enter applicable market-based emission factors Back to Intro Back to Summary Help Help - Market-Based Method Help - Market-Based Method EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Indirect 1.0)1 of 2 Page 167 of 679 EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Indirect 1.0)2 of 2 Page 168 of 679 Scope 3 Emissions from Waste Guidance Table 1. Waste Disposal Weight by Waste Material and Disposal Method (CO2, CH4 and N2O) Source ID Source Description Waste Material Disposal Method Weight Unit CO2e Emissions (kg) Bldg-012 East Power Plant Finished Goods Steel Cans Landfilled 1,000 metric ton 22,040 Nonresidential Buildings Nonresidential Waste Mixed MSW municipal solid waste Combusted 720 metric ton 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 - (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. (A) Enter annual waste data in ORANGE cells. Example entry is shown in first row (GREEN Italics ). Back to Intro Back to Summary Help EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Optional 3.0)1 of 2 Page 169 of 679 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)2 of 2 Page 170 of 679 Emissions Summary Guidance (B) The "Go To Sheet" buttons can be used to navigate to the data entry sheets. Organizational Information: Organization Name: Organization Address: Inventory Reporting Period: Start: MM/DD/YY End: Name of Preparer: Phone Number of Preparer: Date Prepared: Summary of Organization's Emissions: Scope 1 Emissions Stationary Combustion 7,291 CO2-e (metric tons) Mobile Sources 336,743 CO2-e (metric tons) Refrigeration / AC Equipment Use 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Fire Suppression 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Purchased Gases 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Location-Based Scope 2 Emissions Purchased and Consumed Electricity 12,324 CO2-e (metric tons) Purchased and Consumed Steam 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Market-Based Scope 2 Emissions Purchased and Consumed Electricity 12,324 CO2-e (metric tons) Purchased and Consumed Steam 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Total organization Emissions 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. (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. Scenario 2 2025 MM/DD/YY 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 . https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/center-corporate-climate-leadership-annual-ghg-inventory-summary-and-goal-tracking Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Back to Intro Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Summary)1 of 2 Page 171 of 679 Total Scope 1 & Location-Based Scope 2 356,358 CO2-e (metric tons) Total Scope 1 & Market-Based Scope 2 356,358 CO2-e (metric tons) Reductions Offsets 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Net Scope 1 and 2 Location-Based Emissions 356,358 CO2-e (metric tons) Net Scope 1 and 2 Market-Based Emissions 356,358 CO2-e (metric tons) Scope 3 Emissions Employee Business Travel 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Employee Commuting 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Product Transport 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Waste 3,642 CO2-e (metric tons) Required Supplemental Information Biomass CO2 Emissions from Stationary Sources 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Biomass CO2 Emissions from Mobile Sources 0 CO2-e (metric tons) Go To Sheet Go To SheetGo To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet Go To Sheet EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Summary)2 of 2 Page 172 of 679 Scope 1 Emissions from Stationary Combustion Sources Guidance - Select "Fuel Combusted" from drop down box. (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 Source Source Fuel QuantityIDDescriptionArea (sq ft)Combusted Combusted BLR-012 East Power Plant 12,517 Natural Gas 10,000 MMBtu Residential Natural Gas Use 30,500,000 Natural Gas 135,938 MMBtu Commercia Natural Gas Use 62,000 Natural Gas 1,333 MMBtu GHG Emissions Total Organization-Wide Stationary Source Combustion by Fuel Type Quantity Combusted Anthracite Coal 0 short tons Bituminous Coal 0 short tons Sub-bituminous Coal 0 short tons Units (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. - 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. (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 ). Fuel Type Units Back to Intro Back to Summary HelpHeat Content EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Direct 1.0)1 of 2 Page 173 of 679 Lignite Coal 0 short tons Natural Gas 133,792,398 scfDistillate 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 CO2, CH4 and N2O Emissions from Stationary Source Fuel Combustion CO2 (kg)CH4 (g)N2O (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 0.0Landfill Gas 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Non-Fossil Fuel Emissions 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Emissions for all Fuels 7,283,658.1 137,806.2 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 Fuel Type EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Direct 1.0)2 of 2 Page 174 of 679 Scope 1 Emissions from Mobile Sources Guidance - 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. Biodiesel Percent:20 % Ethanol Percent:80 % Table 1. Mobile Source Fuel Combustion and Miles Traveled Source Source Vehicle Vehicle Fuel Units Miles ID Description Type Year Usage Traveled Fleet-012 HQ Fleet NonRoad Ships and Boats - Diesel 1990 500 gal 3,670 Construction Equipment (non-road gaConstruction 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 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) 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 Note: emissions here are only for the ga Biodiesel 0 gallons 0.0 Note: emissions here are only for the di Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)0 gallons 0.0 Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)0 scf 0.0 Total Organization-Wide On-Road Gasoline Mobile Source Mileage and CH4/N2O Emissions Vehicle Year Mileage (miles)CH4 (g)N2O (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 1987-93 0 0.0 0.0 (Vans, Pickup Trucks, SUVs)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 - Enter "Fuel Usage" in appropriate units (units appear when vehicle type is selected). (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. (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. (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 "Vehicle Type" from drop down box (closest type available). - Select "On-Road" or "Non-Road" from drop down box to determine the Vehicle Types available. Average Fuel Economy (mpg) Vehicle Type Fuel Type Vehicle Type Fuel Usage Units On-Road or Non-Road? Back to Intro Back to Summary Help EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Direct 2.0)1 of 2 Page 175 of 679 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 0.0201800.0 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 0 0.0 0.0 Total Organization-Wide On-Road Non-Gasoline Mobile Source Mileage and CH4/N2O Emissions Vehicle Type Fuel Type Vehicle Year Mileage (miles)CH4 (g)N2O (g) 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 1960-1982 0 0.0 0.0 1983-1995 0 0.0 0.0 1996-2006 0 0.0 0.02007-2018 0 0.0 0.0 1960-2006 0 0.0 0.0 2007-2018 1,560 14.8 67.2 Methanol 0 0.0 0.0 Ethanol 0 0.0 0.0 CNG 0 0.0 0.0 LPG 0 0.0 0.0Biodiesel00.0 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 CNG 0 0.0 0.0 LPG 0 0.0 0.0 LNG 0 0.0 0.0 Biodiesel 0 0.0 0.0 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 0.0Biodiesel00.0 0.0 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 0.0Biodiesel00.0 0.0 Total Organization-Wide Non-Road Mobile Source Fuel Usage and CH4/N2O Emissions Vehicle Type Fuel Type Fuel Usage (gallons)CH4 (g) N2O (g) Residual Fuel Oil - - - Gasoline (2 stroke)- - - Gasoline (4 stroke)- - - Diesel - - - Locomotives Diesel - - - Jet Fuel - - - Aviation Gasoline - - - Gasoline (2 stroke)- - - Gasoline (4 stroke)- - - Diesel - - - LPG - - - Gasoline - - - Diesel - - - 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 - - - Gasoline - - - Diesel - - - Gasoline (2 stroke)- - - Gasoline (4 stroke)- - - Diesel - - - LPG - - - Gasoline - - - Diesel - - - LPG - - - Gasoline (2 stroke)- - - Gasoline (4 stroke)- - - Diesel - - - LPG - - - Gasoline (2 stroke)- - - Gasoline (4 stroke)- - - Diesel - - - Gasoline - - - Diesel - - - LPG - - - 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 Industrial/Commercial Equipment Logging Equipment Railroad Equipment Recreational Equipment Agricultural Offroad Trucks Construction/Mining Equipment Construction/Mining Offroad Trucks Lawn and Garden Equipment Airport Equipment Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles - DDiesel Passenger Cars - Diesel Diesel Light-Duty Trucks - Diesel Diesel Ships and Boats Aircraft Agricultural Equipment Heavy-Duty Trucks Buses Light-Duty Cars Light-Duty Trucks Medium-Duty Trucks EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Direct 2.0)2 of 2 Page 176 of 679 Scope 2 Emissions from Purchase of Electricity Guidance (C) Select "eGRID subregion" from drop box and enter "Electricity Purchased." https://www.epa.gov/egrid/power-profiler#/ Tips: Enter electricity usage by location and then look up the eGRID subregion for each location. Table 1. Total Amount of Electricity Purchased by eGRID Subregion Source Source Source eGRID Subregion Electricity CO2 CH4 N2O CO2 CH4 N2O CO2 CH4 N2O ID Description Area (sq ft)where electricity is consumed Purchased Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions (kWh)(lb/MWh)(lb/MWh)(lb/MWh)(lb)(lb)(lb)(lb)(lb)(lb) Bldg-012 East Power Plant 12,517 HIMS (HICC Miscellaneous)200,000 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 237,120.0 28.6 4.4 Residential Electricity Use 30,500,000 MROW (MRO West)23,681,300 <enter factor><enter factor><enter factor>26,011,539.9 2,818.1 402.6 26,011,539.9 2,818.1 402.6 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 24,555,500 26,971,761.2 2,922.1 417.4 26,971,761.2 2,922.1 417.4 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 N2O 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. (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. 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. - 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: (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. 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. Location-Based Emission Factors Emissions Emissions Market-Based Use these cells to enter applicable market-based emission factors Back to Intro Back to Summary Help Help - Market-Based Method Help - Market-Based Method EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Indirect 1.0)1 of 2 Page 177 of 679 Scope 3 Emissions from Waste Guidance Table 1. Waste Disposal Weight by Waste Material and Disposal Method (CO2, CH4 and N2O) Source ID Source Description Waste Material Disposal Method Weight Unit CO2e Emissions (kg) Bldg-012 East Power Plant Finished Goods Steel Cans Landfilled 1,000 metric ton 22,040 Nonresidential Buildings Nonresidential Waste Mixed MSW municipal solid waste Combusted 744 metric ton 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 - (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. (A) Enter annual waste data in ORANGE cells. Example entry is shown in first row (GREEN Italics ). Back to Intro Back to Summary Help EPA Climate Leaders Simplified GHG Emissions Calculator (Optional 3.0)1 of 2 Page 178 of 679 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)2 of 2 Page 179 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR July 2025 Appendix D: Traffic Study Page 180 of 679 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. ____________________ 6/30/2025 Jacob Rojer, P.E., PTOE Date License No. 56767 Page 181 of 679 1 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 TABLE OF CONTENTS 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 APPENDIX A. TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS B. SIMTRAFFIC ANALYSIS RESULTS C. TURN LANE WARRANT SHEETS Page 182 of 679 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 2 1. INTRODUCTION 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 4th 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). Page 183 of 679 3 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 1.2. ANALYSIS METHODOLOGIES Synchro/SimTraffic 12th 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 Service Description1 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. 1Highway Capacity Manual, 7th 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 Service1 Average Control Delay (s/veh) at: Unsignalized Intersections Signalized Intersections A 0 – 10 0 – 10 B > 10 – 15 > 10 – 20 C > 15 – 25 > 20 – 35 D > 25 – 35 > 35 – 55 E > 35 – 50 > 55 – 80 F2 > 50 > 80 1Highway Capacity Manual, 7th 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. Page 184 of 679 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 4 2. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS 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. 4th 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 4th 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 4th 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 4th 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 4th Avenue. According to the Lino Page 185 of 679 5 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 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 • 4th Avenue & Pine Street • Main Street & 4th Avenue (24-hour TMC) • 4th 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. Page 186 of 679 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 6 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 95th 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. Page 187 of 679 7 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 Table 2-1: Existing Year (2025) Level of Service Intersection Control Approach Operations by Movement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Left Through Right Overall* Left Through Right Overall* Main Street & Sunset Avenue Round-about EB A (5.6) A (4.9) A (5.2) A (5.1) WB A (3.8) A (5.3) NB A (3.9) A (4.3) SB - - Sunset Avenue & Robinson Drive Side Street Stop EB - - - A (5.7) - - - A (5.3) WB A (5.7) - A (2.8) A (5.3) - A (2.5) NB - A (0.5) A (0.4) - A (0.7) A (0.3) SB A (0.7) A (0.6) - A (0.9) A (0.6) - Sunset Avenue & Century Trail Side Street Stop EB - - - A (7.6) - - - A (6.1) WB A (7.6) - A (3.3) A (6.1) - A (2.7) NB - A (0.6) A (0.2) - A (1.0) A (0.7) SB A (0.8) A (1.2) - A (1.0) A (0.8) - Sunset Avenue & Lilac Street Side Street Stop EB - - - A (6.7) - - - A (6.4) WB A (6.7) A (1.5) A (2.4) A (6.4) A (0.8) A (3.7) 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) - Pine Street & 4th Avenue Side Street Stop EB - A (0.0) A (0.0) A (7.4) - A (0.0) A (0.4) A (4.6) WB A (0.8) A (0.3) - A (0.6) A (0.2) A (0.5) 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) Main Street & 4th Avenue Side Street Stop EB A (1.5) A (2.8) A (2.3) B (10.5) A (5.1) A (3.6) A (3.5) B (10.7) WB A (7.6) A (6.0) A (5.8) A (8.5) A (7.4) A (7.7) 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) 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Side Street Stop EB A (1.2) A (1.1) A (0.2) B (10.5) A (1.3) A (1.3) A (0.1) A (9.3) WB A (1.4) A (1.0) A (0.2) A (1.1) A (0.7) A (0.2) 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) Lake Drive & Pine Street Side Street Stop EB A (4.0) - A (1.9) A (4.0) B (10.0) A (0.3) A (1.8) B (10.0) WB - - - - - - 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) Lake Drive & Main Street Signal EB B (18.9) C (30.2) B (11.2) B (19.9) C (25.8) C (34.0) B (10.4) C (21.4) WB C (23.2) C (24.2) A (5.1) C (23.0) C (30.7) A (8.5) 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. Page 188 of 679 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 8 3. ANALYSIS OF FUTURE BACKGROUND CONDITIONS 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 & 121st 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 Roadway Segment Existing Traffic Projected Traffic 2016 AADT 2040 AADT Growth Rate Lake Drive North of Main Street 8,700 10,000 0.6% 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 Page 189 of 679 9 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 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 95th 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. Page 190 of 679 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 10 Table 3-2: Opening Year (2030) No-Build Level of Service Intersection Control Approach Operations by Movement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Left Through Right Overall* Left Through Right Overall* Main Street & Sunset Avenue Round- about EB A (6.3) A (5.4) A (5.2) A (5.4) WB A (4.0) A (4.5) NB A (4.2) A (5.7) SB - - Sunset Avenue & Robinson Drive Side Street Stop EB - - - A (2.7) - - - A (2.7) WB - - A (2.7) - - A (2.7) NB - A (0.6) A (0.4) - A (0.8) A (0.4) SB - A (0.6) - - A (0.4) - Sunset Avenue & Century Trail Side Street Stop EB - - - A (2.9) - - - A (3.0) WB - - A (2.9) - - A (3.0) NB - A (0.8) A (0.3) - A (0.9) A (0.4) SB - A (0.8) - - A (0.5) - Sunset Avenue & Lilac Street Round- about EB - A (5.2) - A (4.4) WB A (3.4) A (3.9) NB A (4.6) A (4.9) SB A (5.7) A (3.9) Pine Street & 4th Avenue Side Street Stop EB - A (0.0) A (0.0) A (7.6) - A (0.0) A (0.1) A (4.9) WB A (1.5) A (0.2) - A (1.3) A (0.2) A (0.3) 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) Main Street & 4th Avenue Side Street Stop EB A (3.8) A (2.8) A (2.2) B (10.4) A (4.9) A (3.8) A (2.4) A (9.9) WB A (4.6) A (3.4) A (2.9) A (7.5) A (5.6) A (4.7) 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) 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Side Street Stop EB A (1.0) A (1.2) A (0.6) B (10.4) A (2.7) A (1.3) A (0.3) A (9.8) WB A (1.2) A (0.7) A (0.5) A (0.9) A (0.8) A (0.4) 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) Lake Drive & Pine Street Side Street Stop EB A (4.3) - A (2.1) A (4.3) A (5.6) A (0.6) A (2.1) A (5.6) WB - - - - - - 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) Lake Drive & Main Street Round-about EB A (6.8) A (6.0) A (6.6) A (9.2) WB A (5.7) A (9.6) 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. Page 191 of 679 11 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 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 95th percentile queueing results were reviewed and all 95th 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. Page 192 of 679 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 12 Table 3-3: Design Year (2045) No-Build Level of Service – AM Peak Hour Intersection Control Approach Operations by Movement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Left Through Right Overall* Left Through Right Overall* Main Street & Sunset Avenue Round-about EB A (8.4) A (7.6) A (6.7) A (6.5) WB A (7.6) A (7.0) NB A (4.6) A (5.1) SB - - Sunset Avenue & Robinson Drive Side Street Stop EB - - - A (2.6) - - - A (2.5) WB - - A (2.6) - - A (2.5) NB - A (0.8) A (0.6) - A (0.8) A (0.7) SB - A (0.5) - - A (0.5) - Sunset Avenue & Century Trail Side Street Stop EB - - - A (3.5) - - - A (3.3) WB - - A (3.5) - - A (3.3) NB - A (1.0) A (0.2) - A (1.1) A (0.6) SB - A (0.8) - - A (0.5) - Sunset Avenue & Lilac Street Round-about EB - A (5.1) - A (4.9) WB A (3.9) A (4.1) NB A (5.8) A (5.6) SB A (4.4) A (4.2) Pine Street & 4th Avenue Side Street Stop EB - A (0.2) A (0.1) A (4.6) - A (0.0) A (0.2) A (4.6) WB A (0.7) A (0.1) - A (1.8) A (0.4) A (0.7) 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) Main Street & 4th Avenue Side Street Stop EB A (3.9) A (3.1) A (2.6) B (10.6) A (5.1) A (4.4) A (2.8) B (11.9) WB A (5.4) A (4.4) A (3.9) A (7.0) A (6.3) A (5.4) 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) 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Side Street Stop EB A (0.8) A (1.3) A (0.7) B (10.7) A (1.7) A (1.6) A (0.1) A (9.5) WB A (1.5) A (1.2) A (0.3) A (1.1) A (0.9) A (0.4) 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) Lake Drive & Pine Street Side Street Stop EB A (5.9) - A (2.5) A (5.9) A (6.6) A (0.5) A (2.9) A (6.6) WB - - - - - - 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) Lake Drive & Main Street Round-about EB A (9.0) A (7.4) A (8.6) C (17.1) WB A (6.8) C (16.4) 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. Page 193 of 679 13 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 4. ANALYSIS OF SCENARIO 1 CONDITIONS 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 4th avenue (and east of Access B). • Via “Access D”, a proposed right-in/right-out along Main Street located west of 4th Avenue (and east of Access C). • Via “Access E” (Robinson Drive extension), a proposed full-access intersection along 4th Avenue south of Main Street. • Via “Access F” and “Access G”, both of which are proposed full-access intersections along 4th 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 4th 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 4th 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 4th 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 ¼ 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. Page 194 of 679 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 14 4.2. TRIP GENERATION Proposed development traffic was determined based on data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ Trip Generation Manual, 11th 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 Land Use Description Intensity / Units Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total LUC 210 – Single-Family Detached Housing 650 Units 6,130 114 341 455 385 226 611 LUC 215 – Single-Family Attached Housing 350 Units 3,301 61 184 245 207 122 329 LUC 220 – Multifamily Low Rise Residential 90 Units 607 9 27 36 29 17 46 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). Page 195 of 679 15 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 Table 4-2: Scenario 1 Full Buildout Trip Generation Land Use Description Intensity / Units Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total LUC 210 – Single-Family Detached Housing 1,600 15,088 280 840 1,120 948 556 1,504 LUC 215 – Single-Family Attached Housing 600 4,320 72 216 288 202 140 342 LUC 220 – Multifamily Low Rise Residential 1,200 8,088 115 365 480 386 226 612 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 Page 196 of 679 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 16 (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 Intersection Control Approach Operations by Movement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Left Through Right Overall* Left Through Right Overall* Main Street & Sunset Avenue Round-about EB A (9.3) A (7.3) B (11.1) A (9.7) WB A (6.3) A (9.8) NB A (5.1) A (7.1) SB A (4.7) A (5.3) Sunset Avenue & Robinson Drive Side Street Stop EB - - - A (3.3) - - - A (3.2) WB - - A (3.3) - - A (3.2) NB - A (1.2) A (0.7) - A (1.5) A (1.0) SB - A (0.4) - - A (0.3) - Sunset Avenue & Century Trail Side Street Stop EB - - - A (3.6) - - - A (5.0) WB - - A (3.6) - - A (5.0) NB - A (1.4) A (0.6) - A (1.8) A (0.9) SB - A (1.1) - - A (0.6) - 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 (2.2) A (0.1) A (7.9) - A (0.2) A (0.0) A (3.3) WB A (1.2) A (0.2) - A (1.1) A (1.1) A (0.2) 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 & 4th Avenue Side Street Stop EB A (2.8) A (1.5) A (0.8) B (10.9) A (4.1) A (2.3) A (0.9) C (20.3) WB A (5.7) A (4.8) A (3.1) A (5.3) A (3.0) A (1.4) NB A (6.3) B (10.8) A (3.1) C (19.2) C (20.3) A (8.4) Page 197 of 679 17 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 Intersection Control Approach Operations by Movement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Left Through Right Overall* Left Through Right Overall* SB A (7.7) B (10.9) A (2.9) C (17.0) C (15.0) A (6.1) 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Side Street Stop EB A (1.8) A (1.4) A (0.6) A (9.8) A (1.7) A (1.2) A (0.6) A (9.7) WB A (1.6) A (1.2) A (0.5) A (1.0) A (1.3) A (0.5) NB A (4.8) A (8.2) A (1.8) A (3.3) A (9.7) A (2.4) SB A (5.3) A (9.8) A (2.9) A (4.2) A (8.4) A (2.3) Lake Drive & Pine Street Side Street Stop EB A (5.6) - A (3.6) A (5.6) A (5.5) - A (3.0) A (5.5) WB - - - - - - NB A (2.1) A (0.9) - A (1.8) A (1.4) - SB - A (1.7) A (0.2) - A (1.1) A (0.3) Lake Drive & Main Street Round-about EB A (10.1) A (7.5) A (8.7) C (15.6) WB A (6.1) B (14.0) 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 (3.9) WB - - A (3.5) - - A (3.9) NB - A (1.1) A (0.5) - A (1.6) A (0.3) SB - A (1.1) - - A (1.0) - Main Street & Access B Side Street Stop EB - A (1.9) A (1.3) A (4.5) - A (3.1) A (1.7) A (5.8) WB - A (1.4) A (0.7) - A (2.4) A (1.5) NB - - A (4.5) - - A (5.8) SB - - A (4.1) - - A (5.2) Main Street & Access C Round-about EB A (5.6) A (5.1) A (8.3) A (9.0) WB A (4.7) A (10.7) NB A (4.9) A (5.1) SB A (4.4) A (5.5) Main Street & Access D Side Street Stop EB - A (1.1) A (0.6) A (4.3) - A (1.9) A (1.0) A (5.3) WB - A (1.7) - - A (2.9) - NB - - A (4.3) - - A (5.3) SB - - - - - - *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 Page 198 of 679 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 18 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 & 4th 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 & 4th Avenue sees excessive side street queueing which causes operational issues at the site access points along 4th 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 95th 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 Intersection Control Approach Operations by Movement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Left Through Right Overall* Left Through Right Overall* Main Street & Sunset Avenue Round-about EB F (54.2) F (57.0) F (100+) F (100+) WB F (84.5) F (100+) NB A (7.4) A (9.9) SB A (7.4) A (7.5) Sunset Avenue & Robinson Drive Side Street Stop EB - - - A (3.8) - - - A (4.6) WB - - A (3.8) - - A (4.6) NB - A (1.5) A (1.0) - A (2.1) A (1.3) SB - A (0.5) - - A (0.7) - Sunset Avenue & Century Trail Side Street Stop EB - - - A (4.1) - - - A (6.4) WB - - A (4.1) - - A (6.4) NB - A (1.7) A (0.6) - A (2.5) A (1.4) SB - A (1.5) - - A (1.0) - Sunset Avenue & Lilac Street Round-about EB - 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) Pine Street & 4th Avenue Side Street Stop EB - A (2.1) A (1) A (8.2) - C (17.5) E (44.6) F (57.2) WB A (1.6) A (1) - E (45.9) E (41.9) F (57.2) 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) Main Street & 4th Avenue Side Street Stop EB A (4.6) A (4.2) A (1.9) F (100+) F (100+) F (100+) F (100+) F (100+) WB B (10.8) A (8.7) A (6.2) D (32.2) C (23.4) C (17.9) NB F (81) F (68.5) F (70.3) F (100+) F (100+) F (100+) SB F (100+) F (100+) F (100+) F (100+) F (100+) F (100+) 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Side Street Stop EB A (2.3) A (2.8) A (1) B (14.2) F (100+) F (100+) F (100+) F (100+) WB A (2.1) A (2) A (0.6) F (64.6) F (100+) F (100+) NB A (3.7) B (12.3) A (2) F (100+) F (100+) F (100+) SB A (9.2) B (14.2) A (6) F (51.7) A (9.8) E (47.2) Page 199 of 679 19 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 Intersection Control Approach Operations by Movement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Left Through Right Overall* Left Through Right Overall* Lake Drive & Pine Street Side Street Stop EB A (8.1) - A (5.1) A (8.1) B (11.4) - A (4.3) B (11.4) WB - - - - - - 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) Lake Drive & Main Street Round-about EB F (98.6) E (43.2) D (26.0) F (100+) WB A (8.4) F (57.7) NB A (6.9) F (100+) SB B (10.2) C (17.3) Sunset Avenue & Access A Side Street Stop EB - - - A (4.3) - - - A (4.9) WB - - A (4.3) - - A (4.9) NB - A (1.5) A (0.5) - A (2.0) A (0.5) SB - A (2.2) - - A (1.5) - Main Street & Access B Side Street Stop EB - A (3.3) A (2.3) F (95.7) - D (33.3) D (31.2) F (100+) WB - C (22.8) D (27.8) - A (3.6) A (2.2) NB - - A (6.2) - - F (100+) SB - - F (95.7) - - A (9.2) Main Street & Access C Round-about EB A (9.8) B (10.0) F (100+) F (100+) WB B (11.9) F (100+) NB A (7.8) A (8.6) SB A (7.3) A (8.0) Main Street & Access D Side Street Stop EB - A (2.4) A (1.5) C (16.1) - F (72.0) F (76.8) F (100+) WB - A (3.4) A (1.7) - A (6.7) A (5.2) NB - - A (5.6) - - F (100+) SB - - C (16.1) - - A (8.8) 4th Avenue & Access E Side Street Stop EB A (6.5) - A (4.2) A (6.5) F (100+) - F (100+) F (100+) WB - - - - - - NB A (2.4) A (1.9) - F (100+) F (100+) - SB - A (3) A (2.3) - A (1.1) A (0.5) 4th Avenue & Access F Side Street Stop EB F (100+) - F (100+) F (100+) F (100+) - F (100+) F (100+) WB - - - - - - NB A (3) A (2.2) - A (1.5) A (1.7) - SB - F (100+) F (100+) - F (100+) F (100+) 4th Avenue & Access G Side Street Stop EB A (6.2) - A (4.3) A (6.2) F (100+) - F (100+) F (100+) WB - - - - - - NB A (1.6) A (0.9) - A (1.8) A (1.7) - SB - A (1.3) A (0.4) - F (100+) F (100+) Pine Street & Access H Side Street Stop EB - A (0.5) - A (3.4) - A (0.6) - A (3.1) WB A (1.2) A (1.5) - A (1.9) - - NB - - A (3.4) - - A (3.1) Page 200 of 679 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 20 Intersection Control Approach Operations by Movement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Left Through Right Overall* Left Through Right Overall* SB - - - - - - *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 & 4th 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 4th 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 95th percentile queueing results were reviewed and all 95th 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 Intersection Control Approach Operations by Movement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Left Through Right Overall* Left Through Right Overall* Main Street & Sunset Avenue Round-about (2x1) EB B (12.0) A (9.6) B (13.8) B (13.0) WB A (9.2) B (10.4) NB A (6.4) C (16.7) SB A (5.5) A (5.7) Sunset Avenue & Robinson Drive Side Street Stop EB - - - A (3.9) - - - - (-) WB - - A (3.9) - - A (4.9) NB - A (1.4) A (1.1) - A (2.2) A (1.4) SB - A (0.9) - - A (0.8) - Sunset Avenue & Century Trail Side Street Stop EB - - - A (4.5) - - - - (-) WB - - A (4.5) - - A (6.7) NB - A (1.5) A (0.3) - A (2.1) A (0.6) SB - A (2.0) - - A (1.0) - Page 201 of 679 21 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 Intersection Control Approach Operations by Movement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Left Through Right Overall* Left Through Right Overall* Sunset Avenue & Lilac Street Round-about EB - 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) Pine Street & 4th Avenue Side Street Stop EB - A (2.5) A (1.2) A (8.4) - A (1.5) A (0.9) 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) Main Street & 4th Avenue Round-about (2x1) EB A (3.1) A (3.8) 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) 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Side Street Stop EB A (1.7) A (2.0) A (0.7) C (15.5) A (3.7) A (3.1) A (0.8) 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) Lake Drive & Pine Street Side Street Stop EB B (10.5) - A (6.9) B (10.5) B (12.5) - A (6.1) 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) Sunset Avenue & Access A Side Street Stop EB - - - 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) - Main Street & Access B Side Street Stop EB - A (0.4) A (0.2) A (4.5) - A (0.9) A (0.6) 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) Main Street & Access C Round-about (2x1) EB A (2.5) A (3.4) A (4.2) 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) Page 202 of 679 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 22 Intersection Control Approach Operations by Movement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Left Through Right Overall* Left Through Right Overall* SB - - A (3.4) - - A (4.7) 4th Avenue & Access E Side Street Stop EB - A (0.4) A (0.1) A (3.6) A (7.0) - A (3.6) A (7.0) WB - A (0.4) A (0.1) - - - NB - - A (3.6) A (3.1) A (3.0) - SB - - A (3.4) - A (1.7) A (0.5) 4th Avenue & Access F Side Street Stop EB A (7.1) - A (4.7) A (7.1) B (12.8) - A (4.9) B (12.8) WB - - - - - - NB A (1.8) A (1.7) - A (3.2) A (3.2) - SB - A (1.0) A (0.3) - A (1.7) A (0.7) 4th Avenue & Access G Side Street Stop EB A (7.7) - A (5.1) A (7.7) A (8.9) - A (3.8) A (8.9) WB - - - - - - NB A (2.0) A (1.1) - A (3.5) A (3.8) - SB - A (1.8) A (1.0) - A (1.3) A (0.4) Pine Street & Access H Side Street Stop EB A (6.7) - A (4.3) A (6.7) - A (0.5) - A (3.2) WB - - - A (2.6) - - 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. 5. ANALYSIS OF SCENARIO 2 CONDITIONS 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 4th avenue (and east of Access B). • Via “Access E” (Robinson Drive extension), a proposed full-access intersection along 4th Avenue south of Main Street. • Via “Access F” and “Access G”, both of which are proposed full-access intersections along 4th 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 4th Avenue. Page 203 of 679 23 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 • 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 4th 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 4th 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, 11th 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). Page 204 of 679 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 24 Table 5-1: Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 Traffic Land Use Description Intensity / Units Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total LUC 210 – Single-Family Detached Housing 650 Units 6,130 114 341 455 385 226 611 LUC 215 – Single-Family Attached Housing 350 Units 3,301 61 184 245 207 122 329 LUC 220 – Multifamily Low Rise Residential 90 Units 607 9 27 36 29 17 46 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 Intensity / Units Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total LUC 210 - Single Family Detached Housing 1,500 Units 14,145 263 788 1,050 888 522 1,410 LUC 215 - Single Family Attached Housing 900 Units 6,480 108 324 432 303 210 513 LUC 220 - Low Rise Residential 1,100 Units 7,414 106 334 440 353 208 561 LUC 821 - Shopping Plaza 62 kSF 4,154 67 41 107 158 164 322 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 Page 205 of 679 25 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 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 Intersection Control Approach Operations by Movement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Left Through Right Overall* Left Through Right Overall* Main Street & Sunset Avenue Round-about EB A (10.0) A (7.4) B (11.9) B (10.4) WB A (5.7) B (11.3) NB A (5.3) A (7.4) SB A (5.3) A (5.9) Sunset Avenue & Robinson Drive Side Street Stop EB - - - A (3.5) - - - A (3.4) WB - - A (3.5) - - A (3.4) NB - A (1.1) A (0.7) - A (1.4) A (0.9) Page 206 of 679 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 26 Intersection Control Approach Operations by Movement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Left Through Right Overall* Left Through Right Overall* SB - A (0.4) - - A (0.3) - 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) Page 207 of 679 27 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 Intersection Control Approach Operations by Movement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Left Through Right Overall* Left Through Right Overall* NB A (4.5) A (4.6) SB A (4.0) A (5.1) *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 & 4th 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 95th percentile queueing results were reviewed, and the intersection of Main Street & 4th Avenue sees excessive side street queueing which causes operational issues at the site access points along 4th Avenue. Furthermore, severe queues are anticipated at all roundabouts along Main Street due to insufficient capacity for eastbound and westbound vehicles at peak times. Page 208 of 679 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 28 Table 5-4: Design Year (2045) Scenario 2 Level of Service Intersection Control Approach Operations by Movement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Left Through Right Overall* Left Through Right Overall* Main Street & Sunset Avenue Round-about EB F (100+) F (56.3) F (100+) F (100+) WB D (31.2) F (100+) NB A (9.7) D (33.0) SB C (16.4) B (10.6) Sunset Avenue & Robinson Drive Side Street Stop EB - - - A (4.2) - - - A (5.3) WB - - A (4.2) - - A (5.3) NB - A (1.8) A (1.1) - A (2.5) A (1.7) SB - A (1.1) - - A (0.8) - Sunset Avenue & Century Trail Side Street Stop EB - - - A (5.3) - - - A (6.7) WB - - A (5.3) - - A (6.7) NB - A (1.6) A (0.3) - A (3.5) A (2.2) SB - A (2.1) - - A (1.1) - Sunset Avenue & Lilac Street Round-about EB - E (36.1) - A (9.6) WB A (4.2) A (6.9) NB A (4.5) B (12.6) SB F (52.2) A (7.0) Pine Street & 4th Avenue Side Street Stop EB - A (2.0) A (0.7) A (8.0) - A (1.3) A (0.9) A (4.5) WB A (1.8) A (1.7) - A (3.0) A (2.7) A (0.8) 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) Main Street & 4th Avenue Side Street Stop EB A (5.8) A (4.5) A (2.6) F (100+) F (100+) F (77.7) F (73.8) F (100+) WB A (7.7) A (3.9) A (1.9) D (33.4) D (27.4) C (22.7) NB F (100+) F (88.2) F (81.7) F (100+) F (100+) F (100+) SB F (100+) F (100+) F (100+) F (100+) F (100+) F (100+) 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Side Street Stop EB A (1.8) A (2.1) A (1.1) B (13.0) C (17.3) A (10.0) B (14.6) C (17.3) WB A (2.0) A (1.9) A (0.7) A (2.6) A (8.1) A (8.0) 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) Lake Drive & Pine Street Side Street Stop EB B (11.7) - A (7.4) B (11.7) B (12.7) - A (4.8) B (12.7) WB - - - - - - 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) Lake Drive & Main Street Round-about EB F (100+) E (46.9) D (27.3) F (100+) WB A (8.4) F (58.7) NB A (6.9) F (100+) SB B (10.3) C (17.4) EB - - - A (5.3) - - - A (6.3) WB - - A (5.3) - - A (6.3) Page 209 of 679 29 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 Intersection Control Approach Operations by Movement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Left Through Right Overall* Left Through Right Overall* Sunset Avenue & Access A Side Street Stop NB - A (2.0) A (0.6) - A (3.4) A (0.9) SB - A (1.6) - - A (1.5) - Main Street & Access B Side Street Stop EB - A (2.1) A (0.6) A (8.4) - A (3.9) A (1.6) C (15.2) WB - A (2.1) A (1.3) - B (10.0) A (7.5) NB - - A (8.4) - - C (15.2) SB - - A (6.3) - - B (10.4) Main Street & Access C Round-about EB A (9.3) A (7.9) E (48.6) F (56.1) WB A (7.1) F (77.3) NB A (6.8) A (7.3) SB A (5.5) A (7.1) 4th Avenue & Access E Side Street Stop EB A (5.5) - A (4.0) A (5.5) F (100+) - F (100+) F (100+) WB - - - - - - NB A (2.3) A (1.8) - F (100+) F (100+) - SB - A (2.9) A (2.4) - A (1.2) A (0.8) 4th Avenue & Access F Side Street Stop EB D (26.4) - D (31.8) D (31.8) F (100+) - F (100+) F (100+) WB - - - - - - NB A (3.3) A (2.2) - A (1.5) A (1.3) - SB - B (12.4) A (0.3) - F (100+) F (100+) 4th Avenue & Access G Side Street Stop EB A (5.6) - A (3.4) A (5.6) F (100+) - F (100+) F (100+) WB - - - - - - NB A (1.2) A (0.7) - A (1.5) A (1.4) - SB - A (1.2) A (0.9) - F (100+) F (100+) Pine Street & Access H Side Street Stop EB - A (0.4) - A (3.1) - A (0.6) - A (3.0) WB A (1.4) - - A (2.0) - - 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 & 4th 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 4th 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. Page 210 of 679 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 30 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 Intersection Control Approach Operations by Movement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Left Through Right Overall* Left Through Right Overall* Main Street & Sunset Avenue Round-about (2x1) EB C (18.7) B (12.3) C (19.8) C (18.9) WB A (9.2) C (16.5) NB A (8.2) D (25.0) SB A (8.6) A (7.5) Sunset Avenue & Robinson Drive Side Street Stop EB - - - A (4.6) - - - A (6.0) WB - - A (4.6) - - A (6.0) NB - A (1.9) A (1.2) - A (2.7) A (1.8) SB - A (1.1) - - A (0.8) - Sunset Avenue & Century Trail Side Street Stop EB - - - A (5.4) - - - A (8.0) WB - - A (5.4) - - A (8.0) NB - A (1.7) A (0.3) - A (2.3) A (0.6) SB - A (2.1) - - A (1.2) - Sunset Avenue & Lilac Street Round-about EB - E (36.1) - A (9.6) WB A (4.2) A (6.9) NB A (4.5) B (12.6) SB F (52.2) A (7.0) Pine Street & 4th Avenue Side Street Stop EB - A (1.6) A (0.8) A (4.2) - A (1.4) A (0.6) A (5.4) WB A (2.0) A (1.1) - A (3.0) A (1.9) A (3.2) 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 & 4th Avenue Round-about (2x1) EB A (2.8) A (3.2) A (3.1) A (3.9) WB A (2.1) A (3.7) NB A (4.8) A (5.7) Page 211 of 679 31 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 Intersection Control Approach Operations by Movement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Left Through Right Overall* Left Through Right Overall* SB A (5.0) A (6.1) 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Side Street Stop EB A (1.8) A (2.1) A (1.1) B (14.4) A (3.7) A (3.2) A (1.8) C (16.3) WB A (2.0) A (1.8) A (0.6) A (2.3) A (2.3) A (0.9) 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) Lake Drive & Pine Street Side Street Stop EB B (10.3) - A (5.6) B (10.3) B (10.6) - A (3.7) B (10.6) WB - - - - - - 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) Lake Drive & Main Street Round-about (Multi-Lane) EB A (17.0) B (10.5) A (7.9) C (19.8) WB A (5.3) D (25.1) NB A (2.9) D (28.2) SB A (6.5) B (11.8) Sunset Avenue & Access A Side Street Stop EB - - - A (5.4) - - - A (6.2) WB - - A (5.4) - - A (6.2) NB - A (2.1) A (0.6) - A (3.7) A (1.0) SB - A (1.6) - - A (1.5) - Main Street & Access B Side Street Stop EB - A (1.6) A (0.5) A (8.2) - A (3.6) A (1.7) B (14.6) WB - A (1.7) A (0.3) - A (4.6) A (2.3) NB - - A (6.1) - - B (14.6) SB - - A (8.2) - - B (13.6) Main Street & Access C Round-about (2x1) EB A (2.5) A (3.4) A (3.4) A (4.0) WB A (2.5) A (3.9) NB A (6.1) A (5.9) SB A (5.2) A (5.9) 4th Avenue & Access E Side Street Stop EB A (5.7) - A (3.7) A (5.7) A (5.9) - A (2.7) A (5.9) WB - - - - - - NB A (2.2) A (1.9) - A (2.4) A (2.0) - SB - A (0.6) A (0.1) - A (1.1) A (0.4) 4th Avenue & Access F Side Street Stop EB A (6.9) - A (4.0) A (6.9) A (9.6) - A (3.4) A (9.6) WB - - - - - - NB A (1.7) A (0.5) - A (2.0) A (1.6) - SB - A (1.3) A (0.5) - A (1.1) A (0.6) 4th Avenue & Access G Side Street Stop EB A (5.5) - A (3.7) A (5.5) A (7.7) - A (3.4) A (7.7) WB - - - - - - NB A (1.4) A (0.8) - A (2.2) A (2.5) - SB - A (1.3) A (0.8) - A (1.0) A (0.4) Pine Street & Access H EB - A (0.5) - A (3.1) - A (0.7) - A (2.9) WB A (1.5) - - A (2.1) - - Page 212 of 679 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 32 Intersection Control Approach Operations by Movement AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Left Through Right Overall* Left Through Right Overall* Side Street Stop NB - - A (3.1) - - A (2.9) SB - - - - - - *Delay of worst movement is reported in place of overall delay at side-street stop-controlled intersections. 6. TURN LANE WARRANT ANALYSIS 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 Intersection Movement Turn Lane Warrant Result By Scenario Scenario 1 Scenario 2 2030 2045 2030 2045 Sunset Avenue & Access A NBR MET MET MET MET Main Street & Access B EBR MET MET MET MET WBR MET MET MET MET Main Street & Access D EBR MET MET - - WBR - MET - - 4th Avenue & Access E NBL - Not Met - Not Met SBR - MET - MET 4th Avenue & Access F NBL - MET - MET SBR - Not Met - Not Met 4th Avenue & Access G NBL - MET - MET 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 4th Avenue south of Main Street (Access E) meets the warrant for only a southbound right turn lane, while the access points along 4th 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. Page 213 of 679 33 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 7. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 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 4th 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 • 4th Avenue & Pine Street • Main Street & 4th Avenue • 4th 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, 4th 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. Page 214 of 679 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 34 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 4th 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 & 4th 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 4th 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 & 4th 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 Page 215 of 679 35 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 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 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. 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 Page 216 of 679 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 36 • 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). • 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 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. Page 217 of 679 NOT TO SCALE 14COUNTY 14COUNTY 23COUNTY 53COUNTY 35W 53COUNTY EXHIBIT 1 AUAR BOUNDARIES & STUDY INTERSECTIONS NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN AUAR Boundaries Existing Study Intersections LEGEND 53COUNTY Page 218 of 679 NOT TO SCALE 14COUNTY 14COUNTY 23COUNTY 53COUNTY 35W EXHIBIT 2 EXISTING GEOMETRY AND INTERSECTION CONTROL NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN LEGEND Study Intersections Existing Stop Control Existing Signal Control Roundabout Channelized Turn Page 219 of 679 NOT TO SCALE 14COUNTY 14COUNTY 23COUNTY 53COUNTY 35W LEGEND Study Intersections AM (PM) Peak Hour VolumesXX (XX) EXHIBIT 3 EXISTING (2025) TRAFFIC VOLUMES NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN Page 220 of 679 NOT TO SCALE 14COUNTY 14COUNTY 23COUNTY 53COUNTY 35W EXHIBIT 4 PLANNED FUTURE GEOMETRY AND INTERSECTION CONTROL NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN LEGEND Study Intersections Existing Stop Control Existing Signal Control Roundabout Channelized Turn Note: All changes are anticipated to be in place by 2030. Page 221 of 679 NOT TO SCALE 14COUNTY 14COUNTY 23COUNTY 53COUNTY 35W LEGEND Study Intersections AM (PM) Peak Hour VolumesXX (XX) EXHIBIT 5 OPENING YEAR (2030) NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN Page 222 of 679 NOT TO SCALE 14COUNTY 14COUNTY 23COUNTY 53COUNTY 35W LEGEND Study Intersections AM (PM) Peak Hour VolumesXX (XX) EXHIBIT 6 DESIGN YEAR (2045) NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN Page 223 of 679 NOT TO SCALE 14COUNTY 14COUNTY 23COUNTY 53COUNTY 35W EXHIBIT 7 OPENING YEAR (2030) SCENARIO 1 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN LEGEND 2030 Development Areas Global Traffic Distribution Inbound Site Traffic Outbound Site Traffic Full-Access Intersection RIRO Intersection Roundabout Potential Roadway Connection Page 224 of 679 NOT TO SCALE 14COUNTY 14COUNTY 23COUNTY 53COUNTY 35W EXHIBIT 8 OPENING YEAR (2030) SCENARIO 1 SITE TRIPS NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN LEGEND 2030 Development Areas AM (PM) Peak Site Trips Full-Access Intersection RIRO Intersection Roundabout xx (xx) Potential Roadway Connection Page 225 of 679 NOT TO SCALE 14COUNTY 14COUNTY 23COUNTY 53COUNTY 35W EXHIBIT 9 OPENING YEAR (2030) SCENARIO 1 TRAFFIC VOLUMES NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN LEGEND 2030 Development Areas AM (PM) Peak Traffic Volume Full-Access Intersection RIRO Intersection Roundabout xx (xx) Potential Roadway Connection Page 226 of 679 NOT TO SCALE 14COUNTY 14COUNTY 23COUNTY 53COUNTY 35W 53COUNTY53COUNTY EXHIBIT 10 DESIGN YEAR (2045) SCENARIO 1 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN LEGEND Development Location Global Traffic Distribution Inbound Site Traffic Outbound Site Traffic Full-Access Intersection RIRO Intersection Roundabout Page 227 of 679 NOT TO SCALE 14COUNTY 14COUNTY 23COUNTY 53COUNTY 35W EXHIBIT 11 DESIGN YEAR (2045) SCENARIO 1 SITE TRIPS NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN 53COUNTY53COUNTY LEGEND Development Location AM (PM) Peak Site Trips Full-Access Intersection RIRO Intersection Roundabout xx (xx) Page 228 of 679 NOT TO SCALE 14COUNTY 14COUNTY 23COUNTY 53COUNTY 35W 53COUNTY53COUNTY EXHIBIT 12 DESIGN YEAR (2045) SCENARIO 1 TRAFFIC VOLUMES NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN LEGEND Development Location AM (PM) Peak Hour Volumes Full-Access Intersection RIRO Intersection Roundabout xx (xx) Page 229 of 679 NOT TO SCALE 14COUNTY 14COUNTY 23COUNTY 53COUNTY 35W EXHIBIT 13 OPENING YEAR (2030) SCENARIO 2 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN LEGEND 2030 Development Areas Global Traffic Distribution Inbound Site Traffic Outbound Site Traffic Full-Access Intersection RIRO Intersection Roundabout Potential Roadway Connection Page 230 of 679 NOT TO SCALE 14COUNTY 14COUNTY 23COUNTY 53COUNTY 35W EXHIBIT 14 OPENING YEAR (2030) SCENARIO 2 SITE TRIPS NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN LEGEND 2030 Development Areas AM (PM) Peak Site Trips Full-Access Intersection RIRO Intersection Roundabout xx (xx) Potential Roadway Connection Page 231 of 679 NOT TO SCALE 14COUNTY 14COUNTY 23COUNTY 53COUNTY 35W EXHIBIT 15 OPENING YEAR (2030) SCENARIO 2 TRAFFIC VOLUMES NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN LEGEND 2030 Development Areas AM (PM) Peak Traffic Volume Full-Access Intersection RIRO Intersection Roundabout xx (xx) Potential Roadway Connection Page 232 of 679 NOT TO SCALE 14COUNTY 14COUNTY 23COUNTY 53COUNTY 35W 53COUNTY53COUNTY EXHIBIT 16 DESIGN YEAR (2045) SCENARIO 2 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN LEGEND Development Location Global Traffic Distribution Inbound Site Traffic Outbound Site Traffic Full-Access Intersection RIRO Intersection Roundabout Page 233 of 679 NOT TO SCALE 14COUNTY 14COUNTY 23COUNTY 53COUNTY 35W EXHIBIT 17 DESIGN YEAR (2045) SCENARIO 2 SITE TRIPS NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN 53COUNTY53COUNTY LEGEND Development Location AM (PM) Peak Site Trips Full-Access Intersection RIRO Intersection Roundabout xx (xx) Page 234 of 679 NOT TO SCALE 14COUNTY 14COUNTY 23COUNTY 53COUNTY 35W EXHIBIT 18 DESIGN YEAR (2045) SCENARIO 2 TRAFFIC VOLUMES NORTHWEST MAIN — LINO LAKES, MN 53COUNTY53COUNTY LEGEND Development Location AM (PM) Peak Hour Volumes Full-Access Intersection RIRO Intersection Roundabout xx (xx) Page 235 of 679 37 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 8. APPENDIX Appendix A: Turning Movement Counts Appendix B: SimTraffic Reports Appendix C: Turn Lane Warrant Sheets Page 236 of 679 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 38 Appendix A: Turning Movement Counts Page 237 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: 4th Ave & Lilac StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 1 Turning Movement Data Start Time Lilac St Lilac St 4th Ave 4th Ave Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left 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 8:15 AM 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 3 4 0 7 0 0 2 2 1 1 1 3 16 % Trucks 2.9 1.3 0.0 1.5 9.1 1.4 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 7.1 2.9 1.5 2.9 3.1 2.2 1.9 Page 238 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: 4th Ave & Lilac StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 2 04/03/2025 7:00 AMEnding At04/03/2025 6:00 PM LightsBusesTrucks 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 33 0 6 2 32 2 Ou t 37 3 7 4 36 2 In 70 3 13 6 68 4 To t a l Li l a c S t [ W B ] R 55 0 1 54 T 28 5 4 3 27 8 L 33 3 0 30 69 67 136 0 1 1 4 2 6 73 70 143 Out In Total 4th Ave [NB] L T R 5 36 26 0 1 0 0 0 2 5 37 28 Lil a c S t [ E B ] To t a l 58 1 6 9 59 6 In 26 8 2 4 27 4 Ou t 31 3 4 5 32 2 32 1 1 34 L 23 0 1 3 23 4 T 6 0 0 6 R Turning Movement Data Plot Page 239 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: 4th Ave & Lilac StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 3 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (7:00 AM) Start Time Lilac St Lilac St 4th Ave 4th Ave Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left 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 240 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: 4th Ave & Lilac StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 4 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 7:00 AMEnding At04/03/2025 8:00 AM LightsBusesTrucks 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 10 5 3 2 10 0 Ou t 62 2 3 57 In 16 7 5 5 15 7 To t a l Li l a c S t [ W B ] R 9 0 1 8 T 39 1 2 36 L 14 1 0 13 32 6 38 0 1 1 1 0 1 33 7 40 Out In Total 4th Ave [NB] L T R 0 4 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 2 Lila c S t [ E B ] To t a l 11 9 5 4 12 8 In 77 2 3 82 Ou t 42 3 1 46 8 1 0 9 L 67 1 3 71 T 2 0 0 2 R Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:00 AM) Page 241 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: 4th Ave & Lilac StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 5 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (4:00 PM) Start Time Lilac St Lilac St 4th Ave 4th Ave Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left 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 242 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: 4th Ave & Lilac StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 6 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 4:00 PMEnding At04/03/2025 5:00 PM LightsBusesTrucks 4th Ave [SB] Out In Total 55 33 88 0 0 0 0 0 0 55 33 88 10 9 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 9 14 R T L 10 4 0 0 10 4 Ou t 14 4 2 0 14 2 In 24 8 2 0 24 6 To t a l Li l a c S t [ W B ] R 21 0 0 21 T 12 0 2 0 11 8 L 3 0 0 3 14 37 51 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 37 51 Out In Total 4th Ave [NB] L T R 2 19 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 19 16 Lila c S t [ E B ] To t a l 22 1 0 2 22 3 In 91 0 0 91 Ou t 13 0 0 2 13 2 15 0 0 15 L 74 0 0 74 T 2 0 0 2 R Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:00 PM) Page 243 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: 4th Ave & Main St/125th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 1 Turning Movement Data Start Time Main St Main St 4th Ave 4th Ave Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left 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 12:15 AM 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 1:15 AM 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 2:15 AM 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 3:15 AM 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 0 64 6 70 3 71 1 75 2 2 2 6 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 244 of 679 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 245 of 679 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 10:15 PM 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 11:15 PM 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 246 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: 4th Ave & Main St/125th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 4 04/03/2025 12:00 AMEnding At04/04/2025 12:00 AM LightsBusesTrucks 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 41 2 1 99 15 40 0 7 Ou t 40 8 3 13 6 14 39 3 3 In 82 0 4 23 5 29 79 4 0 To t a l Ma i n S t [ W B ] R 57 8 1 48 T 39 2 1 12 1 12 37 8 8 L 10 5 7 1 97 399 391 790 5 0 5 17 13 30 421 404 825 Out In Total 4th Ave [NB] L T R 175 85 131 0 0 0 4 2 7 179 87 138 Ma i n S t [ E B ] To t a l 82 4 7 28 23 1 85 0 6 In 41 6 4 15 10 2 42 8 1 Ou t 40 8 3 13 12 9 42 2 5 13 4 1 7 14 2 L 38 2 8 11 90 39 2 9 T 20 2 3 5 21 0 R Turning Movement Data Plot Page 247 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: 4th Ave & Main St/125th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 5 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (6:30 AM) Start Time Main St Main St 4th Ave 4th Ave Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left 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 248 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: 4th Ave & Main St/125th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 6 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 6:30 AMEnding At04/03/2025 7:30 AM LightsBusesTrucks 4th Ave [SB] Out In Total 13 27 40 0 0 0 2 1 3 15 28 43 7 15 5 0 0 0 0 1 0 7 16 5 R T L 31 7 8 0 30 9 Ou t 25 7 15 1 24 1 In 57 4 23 1 55 0 To t a l Ma i n S t [ W B ] R 2 0 0 2 T 24 5 15 1 22 9 L 10 0 0 10 51 19 70 0 0 0 1 2 3 52 21 73 Out In Total 4th Ave [NB] L T R 7 4 8 0 0 0 0 1 1 7 5 9 Ma i n S t [ E B ] To t a l 57 2 1 23 59 6 In 32 9 0 8 33 7 Ou t 24 3 1 15 25 9 7 0 1 8 L 29 6 0 7 30 3 T 26 0 0 26 R Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (6:30 AM) Page 249 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: 4th Ave & Main St/125th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 7 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (3:15 PM) Start Time Main St Main St 4th Ave 4th Ave Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left 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 250 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: 4th Ave & Main St/125th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 8 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 3:15 PMEnding At04/03/2025 4:15 PM LightsBusesTrucks 4th Ave [SB] Out In Total 43 12 55 0 0 0 0 1 1 43 13 56 8 2 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 9 2 2 R T L 40 0 1 3 39 6 Ou t 47 1 8 1 46 2 In 87 1 9 4 85 8 To t a l Ma i n S t [ W B ] R 6 0 0 6 T 45 7 8 1 44 8 L 8 0 0 8 19 53 72 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 53 72 Out In Total 4th Ave [NB] L T R 23 16 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 16 14 Ma i n S t [ E B ] To t a l 88 9 4 10 90 3 In 41 0 3 1 41 4 Ou t 47 9 1 9 48 9 21 0 0 21 L 38 0 3 1 38 4 T 9 0 0 9 R Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (3:15 PM) Page 251 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: 4th Ave & Pine StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 1 Turning Movement Data Start Time Pine St Pine St 4th Ave 4th Ave Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left 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 7:15 AM 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 8:15 AM 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 4:15 PM 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 5:15 PM 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 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 4 0 0 2 2 14 % Trucks -7.1 23.8 17.1 0.0 20.0 0.0 5.6 10.5 0.0 6.9 6.3 0.0 0.0 66.7 12.5 9.3 Page 252 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: 4th Ave & Pine StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 2 04/03/2025 7:00 AMEnding At04/03/2025 6:00 PM LightsBusesTrucks 4th Ave [SB] Out In Total 22 14 36 0 0 0 0 2 2 22 16 38 1 10 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 10 3 R T L 46 3 1 42 Ou t 36 2 1 33 In 82 5 2 75 To t a l Pin e S t [ W B ] R 7 0 0 7 T 10 2 1 7 L 19 0 0 19 45 59 104 0 0 0 5 4 9 50 63 113 Out In Total 4th Ave [NB] L T R 17 15 27 0 0 0 2 0 2 19 15 29 Pin e S t [ E B ] To t a l 53 2 12 67 In 28 1 6 35 Ou t 25 1 6 32 0 0 0 0 L 12 1 1 14 T 16 0 5 21 R Turning Movement Data Plot Page 253 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: 4th Ave & Pine StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 3 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (7:15 AM) Start Time Pine St Pine St 4th Ave 4th Ave Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 7:15 AM 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 254 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: 4th Ave & Pine StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 4 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 7:15 AMEnding At04/03/2025 8:15 AM LightsBusesTrucks 4th Ave [SB] Out In Total 2 5 7 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 6 8 0 5 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 5 0 R T L 13 1 1 11 Ou t 6 1 1 4 In 19 2 2 15 To t a l Pin e S t [ W B ] R 2 0 0 2 T 3 1 1 1 L 1 0 0 1 16 9 25 0 0 0 3 2 5 19 11 30 Out In Total 4th Ave [NB] L T R 3 0 6 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 0 6 Pine S t [ E B ] To t a l 19 2 8 29 In 15 1 4 20 Ou t 4 1 4 9 0 0 0 0 L 5 1 1 7 T 10 0 3 13 R Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:15 AM) Page 255 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: 4th Ave & Pine StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 5 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (4:00 PM) Start Time Pine St Pine St 4th Ave 4th Ave Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left 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 4:15 PM 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 256 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: 4th Ave & Pine StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 6 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 4:00 PMEnding At04/03/2025 5:00 PM LightsBusesTrucks 4th Ave [SB] Out In Total 6 4 10 0 0 0 0 1 1 6 5 11 1 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 2 1 R T L 16 0 0 16 Ou t 11 0 0 11 In 27 0 0 27 To t a l Pin e S t [ W B ] R 2 0 0 2 T 3 0 0 3 L 6 0 0 6 11 24 35 0 0 0 1 0 1 12 24 36 Out In Total 4th Ave [NB] L T R 9 4 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 4 11 Pine S t [ E B ] To t a l 20 0 2 22 In 7 0 1 8 Ou t 13 0 1 14 0 0 0 0 L 4 0 0 4 T 3 0 1 4 R Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:00 PM) Page 257 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Lake Dr & Main StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 1 Turning Movement Data Start Time Main St Main St Lake Dr Lake Dr Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left 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 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 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 258 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Lake Dr & Main StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 2 04/03/2025 7:00 AMEnding At04/03/2025 6:00 PM LightsBusesTrucks 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 13 9 7 44 8 13 4 5 Ou t 15 9 7 38 10 15 4 9 In 29 9 4 82 18 28 9 4 To t a l Ma i n S t [ W B ] R 91 10 0 81 T 74 8 14 8 72 6 L 75 8 14 2 74 2 1616 1628 3244 8 10 18 58 58 116 1682 1696 3378 Out In Total Lake Dr [NB] L T R 308 700 620 1 3 6 3 38 17 312 741 643 Ma i n S t [ E B ] To t a l 28 6 2 24 58 29 4 4 In 14 0 5 12 30 14 4 7 Ou t 14 5 7 12 28 14 9 7 47 2 6 5 48 3 L 66 1 1 16 67 8 T 27 2 5 9 28 6 R Turning Movement Data Plot Page 259 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Lake Dr & Main StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 3 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (7:15 AM) Start Time Main St Main St Lake Dr Lake Dr Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left 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 260 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Lake Dr & Main StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 4 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 7:15 AMEnding At04/03/2025 8:15 AM LightsBusesTrucks 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 31 9 14 2 30 3 Ou t 39 3 15 1 37 7 In 71 2 29 3 68 0 To t a l Ma i n S t [ W B ] R 15 2 0 13 T 14 2 7 1 13 4 L 23 6 6 0 23 0 480 237 717 1 4 5 26 14 40 507 255 762 Out In Total Lake Dr [NB] L T R 44 93 100 0 2 2 1 5 8 45 100 110 Ma i n S t [ E B ] To t a l 63 1 3 24 65 8 In 36 8 1 11 38 0 Ou t 26 3 2 13 27 8 10 7 0 2 10 9 L 19 3 0 5 19 8 T 68 1 4 73 R Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:15 AM) Page 261 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Lake Dr & Main StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 5 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (4:15 PM) Start Time Main St Main St Lake Dr Lake Dr Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left 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 262 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Lake Dr & Main StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 6 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 4:15 PMEnding At04/03/2025 5:15 PM LightsBusesTrucks 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 43 5 8 2 42 5 Ou t 49 7 11 3 48 3 In 93 2 19 5 90 8 To t a l Ma i n S t [ W B ] R 36 5 0 31 T 26 7 2 1 26 4 L 19 4 4 2 18 8 432 642 1074 3 1 4 9 26 35 444 669 1113 Out In Total Lake Dr [NB] L T R 130 293 219 0 0 1 1 19 6 131 312 226 Ma i n S t [ E B ] To t a l 94 0 5 10 95 5 In 42 1 3 2 42 6 Ou t 51 9 2 8 52 9 15 6 1 1 15 8 L 18 1 1 1 18 3 T 84 1 0 85 R Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:15 PM) Page 263 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Lake Dr & Pine StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 1 Turning Movement Data Start Time Pine St Lake Dr Lake Dr Eastbound Northbound Southbound Left Right App. Total Left Thru App. Total Thru 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 Hourly 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 Hourly 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 5 42 47 47 0 47 98 % Trucks 0.0 9.1 6.3 13.2 4.7 5.0 6.0 0.0 5.9 5.5 Page 264 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Lake Dr & Pine StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 2 04/03/2025 7:00 AMEnding At04/03/2025 6:00 PM LightsBusesTrucks Lake Dr [SB] Out In Total 865 746 1611 10 3 13 42 47 89 917 796 1713 11 735 0 3 0 47 11 785 R T 0 0 0 0 Ou t 0 0 0 0 In 0 0 0 0 To t a l Fa k e A p p r o a c h [ W B ] 774 878 1652 4 11 15 51 47 98 829 936 1765 Out In Total Lake Dr [NB] L T 32 846 1 10 5 42 38 898 Pin e S t [ E B ] To t a l 10 1 2 9 11 2 In 58 1 4 63 Ou t 43 1 5 49 19 0 0 19 L 39 1 4 44 R Turning Movement Data Plot Page 265 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Lake Dr & Pine StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 3 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (7:15 AM) Start Time Pine St Lake Dr Lake Dr Eastbound Northbound Southbound Left Right App. Total Left Thru App. Total Thru 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 266 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Lake Dr & Pine StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 4 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 7:15 AMEnding At04/03/2025 8:15 AM LightsBusesTrucks 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 0 0 0 0 Ou t 0 0 0 0 In 0 0 0 0 To t a l Fa k e A p p r o a c h [ W B ] 205 163 368 4 10 14 20 17 37 229 190 419 Out In Total Lake Dr [NB] L T 2 161 1 9 2 15 5 185 Pine S t [ E B ] To t a l 16 2 3 21 In 14 1 1 16 Ou t 2 1 2 5 5 0 0 5 L 9 1 1 11 R Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:15 AM) Page 267 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Lake Dr & Pine StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 5 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (4:00 PM) Start Time Pine St Lake Dr Lake Dr Eastbound Northbound Southbound Left Right App. Total Left Thru App. Total Thru 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 268 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Lake Dr & Pine StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 6 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 4:00 PMEnding At04/03/2025 5:00 PM LightsBusesTrucks 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 0 0 0 0 Ou t 0 0 0 0 In 0 0 0 0 To t a l Fa k e A p p r o a c h [ W B ] 223 335 558 0 0 0 3 10 13 226 345 571 Out In Total Lake Dr [NB] L T 16 319 0 0 1 9 17 328 Pine S t [ E B ] To t a l 44 0 1 45 In 23 0 0 23 Ou t 21 0 1 22 6 0 0 6 L 17 0 0 17 R Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:00 PM) Page 269 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Lilac St & 4th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 1 Turning Movement Data Start Time Lilac St Lilac St 4th St 4th St Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left 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 270 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Lilac St & 4th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 2 04/03/2025 6:00 AMEnding At04/03/2025 4:00 PM LightsBusesTrucks 4th St [SB] 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 24 3 3 1 23 9 Ou t 26 2 3 3 25 6 In 50 5 6 4 49 5 To t a l Li l a c S t [ W B ] R 44 0 0 44 T 15 9 0 2 15 7 L 59 3 1 55 97 83 180 2 1 3 3 4 7 102 88 190 Out In Total 4th St [NB] L T R 12 40 31 1 0 0 0 1 3 13 41 34 Lil a c S t [ E B ] To t a l 36 3 6 0 36 9 In 17 9 2 0 18 1 Ou t 18 4 4 0 18 8 16 1 0 17 L 15 6 1 0 15 7 T 7 0 0 7 R Turning Movement Data Plot Page 271 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Lilac St & 4th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 3 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (6:00 AM) Start Time Lilac St Lilac St 4th St 4th St Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left 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 272 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Lilac St & 4th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 4 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 6:00 AMEnding At04/03/2025 7:00 AM LightsBusesTrucks 4th St [SB] Out In Total 21 78 99 1 1 2 0 0 0 22 79 101 9 33 36 0 1 0 0 0 0 9 34 36 R T L 13 9 3 1 13 5 Ou t 10 0 0 2 98 In 23 9 3 3 23 3 To t a l Li l a c S t [ W B ] R 6 0 0 6 T 45 0 1 44 L 49 0 1 48 87 18 105 2 1 3 0 3 3 89 22 111 Out In Total 4th St [NB] L T R 3 8 7 1 0 0 0 0 3 4 8 10 Lila c S t [ E B ] To t a l 16 1 4 0 16 5 In 10 5 2 0 10 7 Ou t 56 2 0 58 7 1 0 8 L 92 1 0 93 T 6 0 0 6 R Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (6:00 AM) Page 273 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Lilac St & 4th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 5 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (3:00 PM) Start Time Lilac St Lilac St 4th St 4th St Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left 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 274 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Lilac St & 4th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 6 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 3:00 PMEnding At04/03/2025 4:00 PM LightsBusesTrucks 4th St [SB] Out In Total 79 24 103 0 1 1 1 0 1 80 25 105 6 2 16 1 0 0 0 0 0 7 2 16 R T L 10 4 0 0 10 4 Ou t 16 2 3 1 15 8 In 26 6 3 1 26 2 To t a l Li l a c S t [ W B ] R 38 0 0 38 T 11 4 0 1 11 3 L 10 3 0 7 10 65 75 0 0 0 3 1 4 13 66 79 Out In Total 4th St [NB] L T R 9 32 24 0 0 0 0 1 0 9 33 24 Lila c S t [ E B ] To t a l 20 2 2 0 20 4 In 74 0 0 74 Ou t 12 8 2 0 13 0 9 0 0 9 L 64 0 0 64 T 1 0 0 1 R Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (3:00 PM) Page 275 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Pine St & 4th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 1 Turning Movement Data Start Time Pine St Pine St 4th Ave 4th Ave Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left 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 6:15 AM 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 3:15 PM 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 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 % Buses -33.3 0.0 9.1 0.0 25.0 0.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 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 276 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Pine St & 4th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 2 04/03/2025 6:00 AMEnding At04/03/2025 4:00 PM LightsBusesTrucks 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 24 1 1 22 Ou t 15 0 1 14 In 39 1 2 36 To t a l Pin e S t [ W B ] R 1 0 0 1 T 4 0 1 3 L 10 0 0 10 26 32 58 0 0 0 0 1 1 26 33 59 Out In Total 4th Ave [NB] L T R 9 7 16 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 7 17 Pin e S t [ E B ] To t a l 22 2 0 24 In 10 1 0 11 Ou t 12 1 0 13 0 0 0 0 L 2 1 0 3 T 8 0 0 8 R Turning Movement Data Plot Page 277 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Pine St & 4th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 3 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (6:00 AM) Start Time Pine St Pine St 4th Ave 4th Ave Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left 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 6:15 AM 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 278 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Pine St & 4th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 4 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 6:00 AMEnding At04/03/2025 7:00 AM LightsBusesTrucks 4th Ave [SB] Out In Total 2 10 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 10 12 0 6 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 4 R T L 8 0 0 8 Ou t 4 0 0 4 In 12 0 0 12 To t a l Pin e S t [ W B ] R 0 0 0 0 T 1 0 0 1 L 3 0 0 3 14 6 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 6 20 Out In Total 4th Ave [NB] L T R 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 Pine S t [ E B ] To t a l 10 0 0 10 In 7 0 0 7 Ou t 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 L 2 0 0 2 T 5 0 0 5 R Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (6:00 AM) Page 279 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Pine St & 4th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 5 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (3:00 PM) Start Time Pine St Pine St 4th Ave 4th Ave Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left 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 3:15 PM 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 280 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Pine St & 4th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 6 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 3:00 PMEnding At04/03/2025 4:00 PM LightsBusesTrucks 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 16 1 1 14 Ou t 11 0 1 10 In 27 1 2 24 To t a l Pin e S t [ W B ] R 1 0 0 1 T 3 0 1 2 L 7 0 0 7 12 26 38 0 0 0 0 1 1 12 27 39 Out In Total 4th Ave [NB] L T R 7 5 14 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 5 15 Pine S t [ E B ] To t a l 12 2 0 14 In 3 1 0 4 Ou t 9 1 0 10 0 0 0 0 L 0 1 0 1 T 3 0 0 3 R Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (3:00 PM) Page 281 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Pine St & Lake DrSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 1 Turning Movement Data Start Time Pine St Lake Drive Lake Drive Eastbound Northbound Southbound Left Right App. Total Left Thru App. Total Thru 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 0 5 5 2 0 2 8 % Buses 0.0 4.8 2.9 0.0 0.8 0.8 0.4 0.0 0.3 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 282 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Pine St & Lake DrSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 2 04/03/2025 6:00 AMEnding At04/03/2025 4:00 PM LightsBusesTrucks 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 0 0 0 0 Ou t 0 0 0 0 In 0 0 0 0 To t a l Fa k e A p p r o a c h [ W B ] 534 631 1165 3 5 8 51 23 74 588 659 1247 Out In Total Lake Drive [NB] L T 20 611 0 5 2 21 22 637 Pin e S t [ E B ] To t a l 62 1 3 66 In 34 1 0 35 Ou t 28 0 3 31 14 0 0 14 L 20 1 0 21 R Turning Movement Data Plot Page 283 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Pine St & Lake DrSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 3 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (6:00 AM) Start Time Pine St Lake Drive Lake Drive Eastbound Northbound Southbound Left Right App. Total Left Thru App. Total Thru 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 284 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Pine St & Lake DrSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 4 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 6:00 AMEnding At04/03/2025 7:00 AM LightsBusesTrucks 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 0 0 0 0 Ou t 0 0 0 0 In 0 0 0 0 To t a l Fa k e A p p r o a c h [ W B ] 283 209 492 1 2 3 40 6 46 324 217 541 Out In Total Lake Drive [NB] L T 4 205 0 2 0 6 4 213 Pine S t [ E B ] To t a l 23 0 0 23 In 18 0 0 18 Ou t 5 0 0 5 7 0 0 7 L 11 0 0 11 R Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (6:00 AM) Page 285 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Pine St & Lake DrSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 5 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (3:00 PM) Start Time Pine St Lake Drive Lake Drive Eastbound Northbound Southbound Left Right App. Total Left Thru App. Total Thru 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 286 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Pine St & Lake DrSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 6 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 3:00 PMEnding At04/03/2025 4:00 PM LightsBusesTrucks Lake Drive [SB] Out In Total 413 249 662 3 1 4 15 12 27 431 262 693 7 242 0 1 1 11 8 254 R T 0 0 0 0 Ou t 0 0 0 0 In 0 0 0 0 To t a l Fa k e A p p r o a c h [ W B ] 251 422 673 2 3 5 11 17 28 264 442 706 Out In Total Lake Drive [NB] L T 16 406 0 3 2 15 18 424 Pine S t [ E B ] To t a l 39 1 3 43 In 16 1 0 17 Ou t 23 0 3 26 7 0 0 7 L 9 1 0 10 R Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (3:00 PM) Page 287 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave & Century TrlSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 1 Turning Movement Data Start Time Eastbound Approach Century Trail Sunset Ave Sunset Ave Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left 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 0 8 0 8 14 % Trucks ----1.1 -0.0 0.9 -0.7 0.0 0.7 0.0 1.3 -1.2 0.9 Page 288 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave & Century TrlSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 2 04/03/2025 7:00 AMEnding At04/03/2025 6:00 PM LightsBusesTrucks 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 10 6 0 3 10 3 Ou t 11 4 1 2 11 1 In 22 0 1 5 21 4 To t a l Ce n t u r y T r a i l [ W B ] R 27 0 1 26 T 0 0 0 0 L 87 1 1 85 702 738 1440 5 4 9 9 5 14 716 747 1463 Out In Total Sunset Ave [NB] L T R 0 663 75 0 2 2 0 5 0 0 670 77 Ea s t b o u n d A p p r o a c h [ E B ] To t a l 0 0 0 0 In 0 0 0 0 Ou t 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 L 0 0 0 0 T 0 0 0 0 R Turning Movement Data Plot Page 289 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave & Century TrlSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 3 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (7:30 AM) Start Time Eastbound Approach Century Trail Sunset Ave Sunset Ave Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left 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 290 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave & Century TrlSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 4 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 7:30 AMEnding At04/03/2025 8:30 AM LightsBusesTrucks 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 11 0 3 8 Ou t 26 0 1 25 In 37 0 4 33 To t a l Ce n t u r y T r a i l [ W B ] R 6 0 1 5 T 0 0 0 0 L 20 0 0 20 193 130 323 3 2 5 4 0 4 200 132 332 Out In Total Sunset Ave [NB] L T R 0 125 5 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 125 7 Ea s t b o u n d A p p r o a c h [ E B ] To t a l 0 0 0 0 In 0 0 0 0 Ou t 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 L 0 0 0 0 T 0 0 0 0 R Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:30 AM) Page 291 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave & Century TrlSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 5 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (4:00 PM) Start Time Eastbound Approach Century Trail Sunset Ave Sunset Ave Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left 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 292 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave & Century TrlSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 6 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 4:00 PMEnding At04/03/2025 5:00 PM LightsBusesTrucks 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 45 0 0 45 Ou t 31 0 0 31 In 76 0 0 76 To t a l Ce n t u r y T r a i l [ W B ] R 7 0 0 7 T 0 0 0 0 L 24 0 0 24 240 284 524 0 0 0 0 0 0 240 284 524 Out In Total Sunset Ave [NB] L T R 0 249 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 249 35 Ea s t b o u n d A p p r o a c h [ E B ] To t a l 0 0 0 0 In 0 0 0 0 Ou t 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 L 0 0 0 0 T 0 0 0 0 R Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:00 PM) Page 293 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave & Lilac StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 1 Turning Movement Data Start Time Lilac St Sunset Ave Sunset Ave Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Right App. Total Thru Right App. Total Left 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 6 0 6 3 1 4 14 % Trucks 0.0 2.4 1.3 0.9 0.0 0.7 2.1 0.1 0.4 0.6 Page 294 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave & Lilac StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 2 04/03/2025 7:00 AMEnding At04/03/2025 6:00 PM LightsBusesTrucks 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 29 1 3 3 28 5 Ou t 30 8 4 2 30 2 In 59 9 7 5 58 7 To t a l Li l a c S t [ W B ] R 16 7 4 1 16 2 L 14 1 0 1 14 0 1054 823 1877 16 16 32 1 6 7 1071 845 1916 Out In Total Sunset Ave [NB] T R 677 146 13 3 6 0 696 149 Fa k e A p p r o a c h [ E B ] To t a l 0 0 0 0 In 0 0 0 0 Ou t 0 0 0 0 Turning Movement Data Plot Page 295 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave & Lilac StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 3 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (7:00 AM) Start Time Lilac St Sunset Ave Sunset Ave Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Right App. Total Thru Right App. Total Left 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 296 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave & Lilac StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 4 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 7:00 AMEnding At04/03/2025 8:00 AM LightsBusesTrucks 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 56 0 1 55 Ou t 62 0 1 61 In 11 8 0 2 11 6 To t a l Li l a c S t [ W B ] R 21 0 0 21 L 41 0 1 40 448 123 571 7 7 14 1 0 1 456 130 586 Out In Total Sunset Ave [NB] T R 104 19 6 1 0 0 110 20 Fa k e A p p r o a c h [ E B ] To t a l 0 0 0 0 In 0 0 0 0 Ou t 0 0 0 0 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:00 AM) Page 297 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave & Lilac StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 5 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (4:45 PM) Start Time Lilac St Sunset Ave Sunset Ave Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Right App. Total Thru Right App. Total Left 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 298 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave & Lilac StSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 6 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 4:45 PMEnding At04/03/2025 5:45 PM LightsBusesTrucks 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 10 6 0 2 10 4 Ou t 11 2 2 0 11 0 In 21 8 2 2 21 4 To t a l Li l a c S t [ W B ] R 62 2 0 60 L 50 0 0 50 251 304 555 1 2 3 0 4 4 252 310 562 Out In Total Sunset Ave [NB] T R 246 58 0 2 4 0 250 60 Fa k e A p p r o a c h [ E B ] To t a l 0 0 0 0 In 0 0 0 0 Ou t 0 0 0 0 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:45 PM) Page 299 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave &Main St/125th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 1 Turning Movement Data Start Time Main St Main St Sunset Ave Eastbound Westbound Northbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru App. Total Left Right App. Total Int. Total 12:00 AM 0 8 2 10 0 1 1 1 0 1 12 12:15 AM 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 1:15 AM 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 2:15 AM 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 3:15 AM 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 4:15 AM 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 300 of 679 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 11:15 PM 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 2.0 Page 301 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave &Main St/125th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 3 04/03/2025 12:00 AMEnding At04/04/2025 12:00 AM LightsBusesTrucks Fake Approach [SB] Out In Total 74 0 74 0 0 0 0 0 0 74 0 74 43 0 6 85 20 42 0 1 Ou t 42 7 7 10 5 19 41 5 3 In 85 8 3 19 0 39 83 5 4 To t a l Ma i n S t [ W B ] T 38 8 1 10 4 16 37 6 1 L 39 6 1 3 39 2 1756 1735 3491 14 9 23 20 28 48 1790 1772 3562 Out In Total Sunset Ave [NB] L R 1303 432 4 5 22 6 1329 443 Ma i n S t [ E B ] To t a l 10 2 7 1 46 22 4 10 5 4 1 In 52 0 7 26 98 53 3 1 Ou t 50 6 4 20 12 6 52 1 0 74 0 0 74 L 37 6 9 15 79 38 6 3 T 13 6 4 11 19 13 9 4 R Turning Movement Data Plot Page 302 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave &Main St/125th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 4 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (7:15 AM) Start Time Main St Main St Sunset Ave Eastbound Westbound Northbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru App. Total Left 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 303 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave &Main St/125th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 5 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 7:15 AMEnding At04/03/2025 8:15 AM LightsBusesTrucks Fake Approach [SB] Out In Total 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 34 7 8 1 33 8 Ou t 25 0 13 1 23 6 In 59 7 21 2 57 4 To t a l Ma i n S t [ W B ] T 20 2 13 1 18 8 L 48 0 0 48 254 122 376 3 1 4 2 0 2 259 123 382 Out In Total Sunset Ave [NB] L R 93 29 0 1 0 0 93 30 Ma i n S t [ E B ] To t a l 80 0 4 23 82 7 In 51 9 3 10 53 2 Ou t 28 1 1 13 29 5 4 0 0 4 L 30 9 0 8 31 7 T 20 6 3 2 21 1 R Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:15 AM) Page 304 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave &Main St/125th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 6 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (4:15 PM) Start Time Main St Main St Sunset Ave Eastbound Westbound Northbound Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru App. Total Left 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 305 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave &Main St/125th AveSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 7 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 4:15 PMEnding At04/03/2025 5:15 PM LightsBusesTrucks Fake Approach [SB] Out In Total 7 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 7 43 0 1 3 42 6 Ou t 49 1 8 1 48 2 In 92 1 9 4 90 8 To t a l Ma i n S t [ W B ] T 44 9 8 1 44 0 L 42 0 0 42 183 201 384 1 2 3 0 0 0 184 203 387 Out In Total Sunset Ave [NB] L R 147 54 0 2 0 0 147 56 Ma i n S t [ E B ] To t a l 11 0 7 3 9 11 1 9 In 52 0 2 1 52 3 Ou t 58 7 1 8 59 6 7 0 0 7 L 37 2 1 1 37 4 T 14 1 1 0 14 2 R Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:15 PM) Page 306 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave & Robinson DrSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 1 Turning Movement Data Start Time Robinson Dr Sunset Ave Sunset Ave Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Right App. Total Thru Right App. Total Left 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 307 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave & Robinson DrSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 2 04/03/2025 7:02 AMEnding At04/03/2025 6:02 PM LightsBusesTrucks Sunset Ave [SB] Out In Total 589 697 1286 6 4 10 4 7 11 599 708 1307 657 40 4 0 7 0 668 40 T L 11 6 0 2 11 4 Ou t 12 7 0 6 12 1 In 24 3 0 8 23 5 To t a l Ro b i n s o n D r [ W B ] R 34 0 1 33 L 93 0 5 88 745 630 1375 9 7 16 7 4 11 761 641 1402 Out In Total Sunset Ave [NB] T R 556 74 5 2 4 0 565 76 Fa k e A p p r o a c h [ E B ] To t a l 0 0 0 0 In 0 0 0 0 Ou t 0 0 0 0 Turning Movement Data Plot Page 308 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave & Robinson DrSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 3 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (7:17 AM) Start Time Robinson Dr Sunset Ave Sunset Ave Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Right App. Total Thru Right App. Total Left 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 309 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave & Robinson DrSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 4 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 7:17 AMEnding At04/03/2025 8:17 AM LightsBusesTrucks 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 15 0 1 14 Ou t 43 0 2 41 In 58 0 3 55 To t a l Ro b i n s o n D r [ W B ] R 10 0 1 9 L 33 0 1 32 286 113 399 4 1 5 2 2 4 292 116 408 Out In Total Sunset Ave [NB] T R 106 7 0 1 2 0 108 8 Fa k e A p p r o a c h [ E B ] To t a l 0 0 0 0 In 0 0 0 0 Ou t 0 0 0 0 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (7:17 AM) Page 310 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave & Robinson DrSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 5 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (4:32 PM) Start Time Robinson Dr Sunset Ave Sunset Ave Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Right App. Total Thru Right App. Total Left 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 311 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Ave & Robinson DrSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 6 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 4:32 PMEnding At04/03/2025 5:32 PM LightsBusesTrucks 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 49 0 0 49 Ou t 18 0 0 18 In 67 0 0 67 To t a l Ro b i n s o n D r [ W B ] R 6 0 0 6 L 12 0 0 12 188 224 412 1 1 2 1 0 1 190 225 415 Out In Total Sunset Ave [NB] T R 187 37 1 0 0 0 188 37 Fa k e A p p r o a c h [ E B ] To t a l 0 0 0 0 In 0 0 0 0 Ou t 0 0 0 0 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (4:32 PM) Page 312 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Rd & Century TrlSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 1 Turning Movement Data Start Time Century Trl Sunset Ave Sunset Ave Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Right App. Total Thru Right App. Total Left 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 9 2 11 1 9 10 24 % Buses 0.0 13.0 3.4 2.3 4.9 2.5 5.3 1.6 1.8 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 313 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Rd & Century TrlSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 2 04/03/2025 6:00 AMEnding At04/03/2025 4:00 PM LightsBusesTrucks Sunset Ave [SB] Out In Total 404 552 956 12 10 22 3 4 7 419 566 985 534 18 9 1 4 0 547 19 T L 60 0 3 57 Ou t 89 1 3 85 In 14 9 1 6 14 2 To t a l Ce n t u r y T r l [ W B ] R 23 1 3 19 L 66 0 0 66 600 424 1024 9 11 20 4 2 6 613 437 1050 Out In Total Sunset Ave [NB] T R 385 39 9 2 2 0 396 41 Fa k e A p p r o a c h [ E B ] To t a l 0 0 0 0 In 0 0 0 0 Ou t 0 0 0 0 Turning Movement Data Plot Page 314 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Rd & Century TrlSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 3 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (6:00 AM) Start Time Century Trl Sunset Ave Sunset Ave Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Right App. Total Thru Right App. Total Left 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 315 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Rd & Century TrlSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 4 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 6:00 AMEnding At04/03/2025 7:00 AM LightsBusesTrucks Sunset Ave [SB] Out In Total 132 396 528 7 5 12 2 2 4 141 403 544 386 10 5 0 2 0 393 10 T L 16 0 0 16 Ou t 57 1 1 55 In 73 1 1 71 To t a l Ce n t u r y T r l [ W B ] R 14 1 1 12 L 43 0 0 43 429 126 555 5 6 11 2 1 3 436 133 569 Out In Total Sunset Ave [NB] T R 120 6 6 0 1 0 127 6 Fa k e A p p r o a c h [ E B ] To t a l 0 0 0 0 In 0 0 0 0 Ou t 0 0 0 0 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (6:00 AM) Page 316 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Rd & Century TrlSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 5 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (3:00 PM) Start Time Century Trl Sunset Ave Sunset Ave Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Right App. Total Thru Right App. Total Left 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 317 of 679 Kimley-Horn4201 Winfield Road Suite 600 Warrenville, Illinois, United States 60555(630) 487-5550 ethan.scowcroft@kimley-horn.com Count Name: Sunset Rd & Century TrlSite Code:Start Date: 04/03/2025Page No: 6 Peak Hour Data 04/03/2025 3:00 PMEnding At04/03/2025 4:00 PM LightsBusesTrucks 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 44 0 3 41 Ou t 32 0 2 30 In 76 0 5 71 To t a l Ce n t u r y T r l [ W B ] R 9 0 2 7 L 23 0 0 23 171 298 469 4 5 9 2 1 3 177 304 481 Out In Total Sunset Ave [NB] T R 265 33 3 2 1 0 269 35 Fa k e A p p r o a c h [ E B ] To t a l 0 0 0 0 In 0 0 0 0 Ou t 0 0 0 0 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot (3:00 PM) Page 318 of 679 39 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 Appendix B: SimTraffic/Rodel Reports Page 319 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/24/2025 Existing (2025) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 1 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)3.0 Page 320 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/24/2025 Existing (2025) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 2 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 3.0 0.2 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.6 Total Del/Veh (s)19.9 Total Zone Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.7 Total Del/Veh (s)260.4 Page 321 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/24/2025 Existing (2025) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 3 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) Page 322 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/24/2025 Existing (2025) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 4 Intersection: 5: 4th Avenue & Pine Street Movement WB NB SB Directions Served LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)6 29 29 Average Queue (ft)0 5 8 95th Queue (ft)4 21 28 Link Distance (ft)7093 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 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 LTR LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)6 34 65 64 Average Queue (ft)1 5 19 31 95th Queue (ft)8 23 52 54 Link Distance (ft)5087 1167 1004 5211 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Page 323 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/24/2025 Existing (2025) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 5 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 (%)1 Queuing Penalty (veh)1 Zone Summary Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 1 Page 324 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/24/2025 Existing (2025) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 1 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)1.9 Page 325 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/24/2025 Existing (2025) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 2 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 2.4 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.9 Total Del/Veh (s)21.4 Total Zone Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)1.0 Total Del/Veh (s)134.8 Page 326 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/24/2025 Existing (2025) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 3 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 WB NB SB Directions Served LR R LT Maximum Queue (ft)61 4 35 Average Queue (ft)24 0 8 95th Queue (ft)44 3 31 Link Distance (ft)5087 1967 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)275 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Page 327 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/24/2025 Existing (2025) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 4 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 EB WB NB SB Directions Served LT LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)85 31 42 29 Average Queue (ft)9 2 15 11 95th Queue (ft)42 15 33 32 Link Distance (ft)5120 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 LTR LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)15 10 61 31 Average Queue (ft)1 0 24 15 95th Queue (ft)7 5 48 36 Link Distance (ft)5087 1167 1004 5211 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Page 328 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/24/2025 Existing (2025) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 5 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 Page 329 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/24/2025 No Build (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 1 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 1.6 0.1 0.2 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)3.0 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 2.1 0.2 Total Del/Veh (s)4.3 2.1 1.5 0.7 1.1 0.4 1.0 Page 330 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/24/2025 No Build (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 2 Total Zone Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.3 Total Del/Veh (s)28.3 Page 331 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/24/2025 No Build (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Movement WB 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) Page 332 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/24/2025 No Build (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 4 Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Movement EB WB NB SB Directions Served LT LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)14 46 28 47 Average Queue (ft)0 4 8 18 95th Queue (ft)5 23 22 42 Link Distance (ft)5120 5554 5217 5142 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Movement WB NB SB Directions Served LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)37 56 66 Average Queue (ft)5 16 31 95th Queue (ft)23 46 53 Link Distance (ft)1167 1004 5217 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)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 Page 333 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/24/2025 No Build (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 1 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)2.1 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 2.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)5.6 0.6 2.1 1.7 1.2 0.9 0.3 1.2 Page 334 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/24/2025 No Build (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 2 Total Zone Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 Total Del/Veh (s)27.0 Page 335 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/24/2025 No Build (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Movement WB 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) Page 336 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/24/2025 No Build (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 4 Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Movement EB WB NB SB Directions Served LT LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)77 55 44 30 Average Queue (ft)11 4 18 13 95th Queue (ft)46 25 34 34 Link Distance (ft)5120 5554 5217 5142 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 LTR LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)32 16 56 35 Average Queue (ft)3 1 26 17 95th Queue (ft)16 7 45 38 Link Distance (ft)5072 1167 1004 5217 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)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 Page 337 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/24/2025 No Build (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 1 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.1 1.6 0.1 0.2 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)3.3 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 1.9 0.2 Total Del/Veh (s)5.9 2.5 1.4 0.9 1.2 0.5 1.2 Page 338 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/24/2025 No Build (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 2 Total Zone Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.3 Total Del/Veh (s)31.4 Page 339 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/24/2025 No Build (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Movement WB 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) Page 340 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/24/2025 No Build (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 4 Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Movement EB WB NB SB Directions Served LT LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)10 42 38 53 Average Queue (ft)1 3 11 21 95th Queue (ft)8 20 28 45 Link Distance (ft)5120 5554 5217 5142 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 LTR LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)10 35 75 70 Average Queue (ft)0 5 21 32 95th Queue (ft)5 24 54 55 Link Distance (ft)5072 1167 1004 5217 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)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 Page 341 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/24/2025 No Build (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 1 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)2.2 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 2.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)6.6 0.5 2.9 2.3 1.4 1.1 0.7 1.3 Page 342 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/24/2025 No Build (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 2 Total Zone Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.3 Total Del/Veh (s)29.0 Page 343 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/24/2025 No Build (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Movement WB 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) Page 344 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/24/2025 No Build (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 4 Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Movement EB WB NB SB Directions Served LT LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)56 49 57 34 Average Queue (ft)11 4 20 15 95th Queue (ft)40 24 44 37 Link Distance (ft)5120 5554 5217 5142 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 LTR LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)32 21 54 40 Average Queue (ft)1 1 27 19 95th Queue (ft)14 9 46 39 Link Distance (ft)5072 1167 1004 5217 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)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 Page 345 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 1 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.1 1.1 0.2 0.2 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)2.9 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)5.6 3.6 2.1 0.9 1.7 0.2 1.4 Page 346 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 2 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)1.1 0.6 1.7 4.3 1.4 14: 4th Avenue & Access E Performance by movement Movement NBT SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)1.8 0.9 1.2 15: 4th Avenue & Access F Performance by movement Movement NBT SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)1.9 0.1 0.5 16: 4th Avenue & Access G Performance by movement Movement NBT SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)0.0 1.2 1.0 17: Access H & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBT WBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.7 0.3 Total Zone Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.3 Total Del/Veh (s)34.3 Page 347 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Movement WB 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) Page 348 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 4 Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Movement EB WB NB SB Directions Served LT LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)15 46 52 46 Average Queue (ft)1 5 16 18 95th Queue (ft)7 27 39 43 Link Distance (ft)1790 5554 1310 1282 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 LTR LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)16 33 50 63 Average Queue (ft)1 5 17 34 95th Queue (ft)10 23 45 53 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)32 29 11 Average Queue (ft)8 2 0 95th Queue (ft)25 15 8 Link Distance (ft)7093 1359 2481 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Page 349 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 5 Intersection: 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Movement WB 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 NB SB Directions Served TR TR Maximum Queue (ft)44 47 Average Queue (ft)18 20 95th Queue (ft)43 45 Link Distance (ft)643 640 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 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) Page 350 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 6 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) Page 351 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 7 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 Page 352 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 1 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.3 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)2.2 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 2.9 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)5.5 0.4 3.0 1.8 1.4 1.1 0.3 1.3 Page 353 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 2 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)1.5 0.0 1.1 16: 4th Avenue & Access G Performance by movement Movement NBT SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.1 17: Access H & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBT WBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.6 0.4 Total Zone Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.4 Total Del/Veh (s)63.8 Page 354 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Movement WB 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) Page 355 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 4 Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Movement EB WB NB SB Directions Served LT LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)64 55 87 34 Average Queue (ft)13 4 31 13 95th Queue (ft)45 26 68 34 Link Distance (ft)1817 2789 1450 1292 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 LTR LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)30 6 48 50 Average Queue (ft)2 0 25 23 95th Queue (ft)15 5 45 44 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)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) Page 356 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 5 Intersection: 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Movement WB 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 NB SB Directions Served TR TR Maximum Queue (ft)48 59 Average Queue (ft)17 18 95th Queue (ft)43 45 Link Distance (ft)643 959 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 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) Page 357 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 6 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) Page 358 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 7 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 Page 359 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 06/26/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 1 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.1 1.0 0.2 0.2 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)3.5 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)5.0 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)8.1 5.1 2.7 1.2 2.1 0.7 2.3 Page 360 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 06/26/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 2 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 15.9 15.0 0.1 0.1 9.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)4.7 8.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)0.5 1.2 1.5 3.4 2.7 Total Zone Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)9.3 Total Del/Veh (s)444.9 Page 361 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 06/26/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Movement WB 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 EB WB NB SB Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)4 21 58 30 Average Queue (ft)0 2 28 10 95th Queue (ft)3 12 44 31 Link Distance (ft)2985 7093 1860 728 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Page 362 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 06/26/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 4 Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Movement EB EB WB NB SB Directions Served LT R LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft) 107 20 94 347 1293 Average Queue (ft)22 1 18 119 898 95th Queue (ft)72 8 62 323 1504 Link Distance (ft)1790 5554 1310 1282 Upstream Blk Time (%)21 Queuing Penalty (veh)92 Storage Bay Dist (ft)300 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) 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) Page 363 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 06/26/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 5 Intersection: 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Movement WB 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 WB NB SB Directions Served TR TR TR Maximum Queue (ft)23 50 102 Average Queue (ft)2 20 33 95th Queue (ft)20 46 83 Link Distance (ft)1790 650 528 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Page 364 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 06/26/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 6 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) Page 365 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 06/26/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 7 Intersection: 17: Access H & Pine Street Movement WB NB 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 Page 366 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 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 1 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.4 3.4 0.2 0.3 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)5.7 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.4 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)0.4 0.2 0.4 0.2 3.9 4.5 0.6 Page 367 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 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 2 13: Access D & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement Movement EBT EBR WBT WBR NBR SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)0.4 1.3 1.0 3.5 2.8 Total Zone Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.3 Total Del/Veh (s)76.0 Page 368 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 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 Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Movement WB 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 EB WB NB SB Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)4 42 55 30 Average Queue (ft)0 4 28 10 95th Queue (ft)3 23 45 32 Link Distance (ft)2985 7093 1860 728 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Page 369 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 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 4 Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Movement EB WB NB SB Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)33 51 52 180 Average Queue (ft)4 10 22 62 95th Queue (ft)21 36 49 118 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 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) Page 370 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 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 5 Intersection: 11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Movement NB SB 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 NB SB Directions Served TR TR Maximum Queue (ft)52 56 Average Queue (ft)19 27 95th Queue (ft)46 50 Link Distance (ft)638 516 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)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) Page 371 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 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 6 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 Page 372 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 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 1 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 1.0 3.1 0.0 0.7 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 Total Del/Veh (s)4.6 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 1.9 0.2 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.2 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 Total Del/Veh (s)0.9 0.6 0.6 0.2 4.7 5.1 0.8 Page 373 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 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 2 13: Access D & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Performance by movement Movement EBT EBR WBT WBR NBR SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.3 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)0.5 2.6 2.6 3.2 2.7 Total Zone Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.3 Total Del/Veh (s)92.2 Page 374 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 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 Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Movement WB 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 WB NB SB Directions Served LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)46 100 43 Average Queue (ft)7 46 3 95th Queue (ft)31 80 23 Link Distance (ft)7093 1882 728 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Page 375 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 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 4 Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Movement EB WB NB SB Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)62 16 65 89 Average Queue (ft)26 2 29 47 95th Queue (ft)56 12 52 82 Link Distance (ft)2549 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 SB 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) Page 376 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 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 5 Intersection: 11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Movement NB SB 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 SB 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) Page 377 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 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 6 Intersection: 15: 4th Avenue & Access F Movement EB NB SB Directions Served LR LT TR Maximum Queue (ft)81 104 9 Average Queue (ft)39 28 0 95th Queue (ft)66 74 5 Link Distance (ft)905 1068 1856 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)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 Page 378 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 1 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)6.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s) 28.9 Total Del/Veh (s)154.5 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 1.9 0.2 Total Del/Veh (s)11.4 1.3 4.3 2.8 3.0 1.4 0.7 2.6 Page 379 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 2 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.2 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s) 23.7 24.9 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 13.5 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s) 739.3 798.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 194.3 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s) 697.2 656.8 0.0 0.0 35.8 0.0 133.6 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s) 63.9 106.5 0.0 0.0 26.7 24.0 30.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)0.6 1.9 1.8 3.1 2.3 Total Zone Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)49.4 Total Del/Veh (s)1431.1 Page 380 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Movement WB 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 EB WB NB SB Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft) 358 284 66 62 Average Queue (ft)34 38 33 6 95th Queue (ft)211 194 51 33 Link Distance (ft)2956 7093 1882 728 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Page 381 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 4 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) Page 382 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 5 Intersection: 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Movement WB 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) Page 383 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 6 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) Page 384 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 1 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 7 Intersection: 17: Access H & Pine Street Movement WB NB 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 Page 385 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 1 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 1.1 0.1 0.2 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)3.1 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)4.9 2.8 0.8 0.7 1.7 0.5 1.3 Page 386 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 2 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)1.9 1.1 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 Del/Veh (s)1.5 0.0 0.5 16: 4th Avenue & Access G Performance by movement Movement NBT SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.7 0.5 17: Access H & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBT WBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.7 0.3 Total Zone Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.3 Total Del/Veh (s)33.3 Page 387 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Movement WB 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) Page 388 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 4 Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Movement EB WB NB SB Directions Served LT LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)28 58 66 54 Average Queue (ft)0 7 14 19 95th Queue (ft)5 34 38 43 Link Distance (ft)2506 5554 1310 1282 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 LTR LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)10 27 52 65 Average Queue (ft)1 4 17 33 95th Queue (ft)8 19 45 52 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 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) Page 389 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 5 Intersection: 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Movement WB 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 NB SB Directions Served TR TR Maximum Queue (ft)55 33 Average Queue (ft)20 14 95th Queue (ft)46 38 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 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) Page 390 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2030) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 6 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 Page 391 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 1 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.3 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)2.3 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 1.6 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)6.5 0.4 2.2 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.3 1.2 Page 392 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 2 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.1 17: Access H & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBT WBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.6 0.4 Total Zone Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.4 Total Del/Veh (s)53.4 Page 393 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Movement WB 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 WB NB SB Directions Served LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)6 35 44 Average Queue (ft)0 19 4 95th Queue (ft)6 39 26 Link Distance (ft)7093 1882 728 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Page 394 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 4 Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Movement EB WB NB SB Directions Served LT LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft) 129 58 76 51 Average Queue (ft)17 6 30 14 95th Queue (ft)69 34 63 37 Link Distance (ft)2518 2789 1450 1292 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 LTR LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)35 5 51 64 Average Queue (ft)3 0 26 23 95th Queue (ft)19 0 44 51 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)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) Page 395 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 5 Intersection: 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Movement WB 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 NB SB Directions Served TR TR Maximum Queue (ft)43 35 Average Queue (ft)18 15 95th Queue (ft)43 39 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 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) Page 396 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2030) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 6 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 Page 397 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 1 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.5 3.3 0.2 0.4 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.5 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 Total Del/Veh (s)4.0 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)11.7 7.4 2.2 1.4 2.1 0.9 2.6 Page 398 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 2 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.4 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)0.4 1.4 1.6 3.1 2.4 Total Zone Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.6 Total Del/Veh (s)270.3 Page 399 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Movement WB 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 WB NB SB Directions Served LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)32 55 31 Average Queue (ft)2 28 9 95th Queue (ft)15 44 30 Link Distance (ft)7093 1860 728 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Page 400 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 4 Intersection: 6: 4th Avenue & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Movement EB EB WB NB SB Directions Served LT R LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)90 22 128 393 1199 Average Queue (ft)18 1 23 124 495 95th Queue (ft)66 10 80 381 1229 Link Distance (ft)2506 2789 1310 1282 Upstream Blk Time (%)5 Queuing Penalty (veh)15 Storage Bay Dist (ft)300 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) 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) Page 401 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 5 Intersection: 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Movement WB 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 NB SB Directions Served TR TR Maximum Queue (ft)70 62 Average Queue (ft)26 27 95th Queue (ft)55 52 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 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) Page 402 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2045) - AM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 6 Intersection: 15: 4th Avenue & Access F Movement EB NB SB Directions Served LR LT TR Maximum Queue (ft) 138 33 128 Average Queue (ft)45 4 20 95th Queue (ft)132 20 157 Link Distance (ft)628 1282 1885 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)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 Page 403 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 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 1 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.4 3.4 0.2 0.4 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)4.8 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.4 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.6 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.6 Total Del/Veh (s)1.6 0.5 1.7 0.3 6.1 8.2 2.0 Page 404 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 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 2 14: 4th Avenue & Access E Performance by movement Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)0.5 1.5 2.2 3.1 2.5 Total Zone Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.4 Total Del/Veh (s)78.2 Page 405 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 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 Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Movement WB 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 EB WB NB SB Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)4 28 67 30 Average Queue (ft)0 2 29 11 95th Queue (ft)3 15 50 33 Link Distance (ft)2985 7093 1860 728 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Page 406 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 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 4 Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Movement EB WB NB SB Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)50 62 65 134 Average Queue (ft)5 12 22 59 95th Queue (ft)27 41 55 108 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 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) Page 407 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 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 5 Intersection: 11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Movement NB SB 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) Page 408 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 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 6 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 Page 409 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 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 1 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 1.1 3.0 0.0 0.8 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 Total Del/Veh (s)3.7 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 2.0 0.2 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.2 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)1.1 1.2 1.0 1.1 0.1 0.1 1.1 Total Del/Veh (s)3.6 1.7 4.6 2.3 14.6 13.6 4.3 Page 410 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 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 2 14: 4th Avenue & Access E Performance by movement Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.2 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (s)0.7 2.1 1.9 2.9 2.3 Total Zone Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)0.7 Total Del/Veh (s)114.1 Page 411 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 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 Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Movement WB 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 WB NB SB Directions Served LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)38 98 47 Average Queue (ft)4 38 4 95th Queue (ft)23 65 26 Link Distance (ft)7093 1882 728 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Page 412 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 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 4 Intersection: 7: 4th Avenue & Lilac Street Movement EB WB NB SB Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)84 34 60 80 Average Queue (ft)25 2 28 37 95th Queue (ft)62 15 52 64 Link Distance (ft)2549 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)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) Page 413 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 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 Intersection: 11: Access B & CSAH 14 (Main Street) Movement NB SB 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 EB NB SB Directions Served LR LT TR Maximum Queue (ft)61 48 4 Average Queue (ft)28 12 0 95th Queue (ft)51 37 3 Link Distance (ft)905 737 1856 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Page 414 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 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 6 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 Page 415 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 1 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)2.7 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.2 Total Del/Veh (s)9.8 8: CSAH 23 (Lake Drive) & Pine Street Performance by movement Movement EBL EBT EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 1.9 0.2 Total Del/Veh (s)12.7 0.4 4.8 3.2 3.0 1.5 0.8 2.7 Page 416 of 679 SimTraffic Performance Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 2 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Performance by movement Movement WBR NBT NBR SBT All Denied Del/Veh (s)0.2 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.2 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)1.2 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.6 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s) 382.9 301.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 61.9 Total Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (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 Del/Veh (s)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 Total Del/Veh (s)0.6 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.3 Total Zone Performance Denied Del/Veh (s)9.1 Total Del/Veh (s)1162.8 Page 417 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 3 Intersection: 2: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Robinson Drive Movement WB 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 EB WB NB SB Directions Served LTR LTR LTR LTR Maximum Queue (ft)4 44 51 44 Average Queue (ft)0 7 29 4 95th Queue (ft)3 32 46 25 Link Distance (ft)2956 7093 1882 728 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Page 418 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 4 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) Page 419 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 5 Intersection: 10: CR 53 (Sunset Avenue) & Access A Movement WB 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 NB SB Directions Served TR TR Maximum Queue (ft)60 65 Average Queue (ft)24 28 95th Queue (ft)54 53 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) 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) Page 420 of 679 Queuing and Blocking Report 04/28/2025 Build Scenario 2 (2045) - PM Peak Hour Main Street Corridor Development - Lino Lakes, MN SimTraffic Report Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.Page 6 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 Page 421 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & 4th Ave - 2045 Scenario 1 Mitigation Run number 41 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 4th Ave SB None 420 462 167 988 0.4250 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 WB None 449 180 843 2200 0.2041 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 4th Ave SB None 6.24 6.24 3.00 A A 2 Main St EB None 3.07 3.07 2.58 A A 3 4th Ave NB None 5.20 5.20 0.89 A A 4 Main St WB None 2.23 2.23 1.00 A A Page 422 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & 4th Ave - 2045 Scenario 1 Mitigation Run number 41 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 423 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & 4th Ave - 2045 Scenario 1 Mitigation Run number 43 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 4th Ave SB None 322 939 507 806 0.3993 2 Main St EB None 958 219 1042 2158 0.4439 3 4th Ave NB None 261 969 208 795 0.3283 4 Main St WB None 990 456 774 1905 0.5198 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 4th Ave SB None 7.11 7.11 1.82 A A 2 Main St EB None 3.80 3.80 2.81 A A 3 4th Ave NB None 6.48 6.48 1.34 A A 4 Main St WB None 4.38 4.38 3.41 A A Page 424 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & 4th Ave - 2045 Scenario 1 Mitigation Run number 43 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 425 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & 4th Ave - 2045 Scenario 2 Mitigation Run number 49 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 4th Ave SB None 293 461 122 989 0.2964 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 WB None 451 132 786 2251 0.2004 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 4th Ave SB None 5.03 5.03 1.58 A A 2 Main St EB None 2.79 2.79 2.27 A A 3 4th Ave NB None 4.82 4.82 0.72 A A 4 Main St WB None 2.11 2.11 0.95 A A Page 426 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & 4th Ave - 2045 Scenario 2 Mitigation Run number 49 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 427 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & 4th Ave - 2045 Scenario 2 Mitigation Run number 51 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 4th Ave SB None 227 965 358 797 0.2850 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 WB None 993 330 753 2039 0.4869 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 4th Ave SB None 6.09 6.09 1.09 A A 2 Main St EB None 3.05 3.05 1.99 A A 3 4th Ave NB None 5.73 5.73 1.06 A A 4 Main St WB None 3.69 3.69 2.87 A A Page 428 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & 4th Ave - 2045 Scenario 2 Mitigation Run number 51 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Global Results Performance and Accidents 2045 PM Peak Global Performance Parameter Units Entries Bypasses Total Arrive Flows veh/hr 2297 2297 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 Page 429 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2030 Scenario 1 Run number 12 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Access C SB None 137 446 43 929 0.1475 2 Main St EB None 472 127 456 1097 0.4301 3 Access C NB None 149 556 43 871 0.1711 4 Main St WB None 341 148 557 1086 0.3139 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service 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 Page 430 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2030 Scenario 1 Run number 12 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 431 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2030 Scenario 1 Run number 15 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR 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 WB None 760 184 631 1067 0.7121 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service 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 Page 432 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2030 Scenario 1 Run number 15 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 433 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2030 Scenario 2 Run number 18 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Access C SB None 80 400 26 953 0.0839 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 WB None 342 84 564 1120 0.3053 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Access C SB None 3.99 3.99 0.32 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 Page 434 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2030 Scenario 2 Run number 18 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 435 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2030 Scenario 2 Run number 21 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR 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 Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Access C SB None 5.05 5.05 0.25 A A 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 Page 436 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2030 Scenario 2 Run number 21 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 437 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2045 Scenario 1 Run number 24 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Access C SB None 189 902 74 688 0.2746 2 Main St EB None 695 163 928 1078 0.6445 3 Access C NB None 277 789 69 748 0.3703 4 Main St WB None 670 306 760 1003 0.6680 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Access C SB None 7.31 7.31 1.73 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 Page 438 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2045 Scenario 1 Run number 24 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 439 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2045 Scenario 1 Run number 28 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Access C SB None 140 1118 210 574 0.2438 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 WB None 1058 347 917 981 1.0781 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service 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 Page 440 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2045 Scenario 1 Run number 28 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 441 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2045 Scenario 2 Run number 31 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Access C SB None 148 695 71 797 0.1856 2 Main St EB None 699 127 716 1097 0.6369 3 Access C NB None 237 749 76 769 0.3081 4 Main St WB None 540 227 759 1045 0.5169 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service 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 Page 442 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2045 Scenario 2 Run number 31 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 443 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2045 Scenario 2 Run number 34 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Access C SB None 110 1069 218 600 0.1833 2 Main St EB None 1038 182 996 1068 0.9717 3 Access C NB None 176 974 234 650 0.2708 4 Main St WB None 1027 283 867 1015 1.0119 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service 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 Page 444 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C - 2045 Scenario 2 Run number 34 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 445 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C (2x1) - 2045 Scenario 1 Run number 41 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Access C SB None 189 902 74 821 0.2303 2 Main St EB None 695 163 928 2218 0.3134 3 Access C NB None 277 789 69 864 0.3207 4 Main St WB None 670 306 760 2065 0.3244 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service 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 Page 446 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C (2x1) - 2045 Scenario 1 Run number 41 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 447 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C (2x1) - 2045 Scenario 1 Run number 44 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Access C SB None 140 1191 237 710 0.1971 2 Main St EB None 1216 198 1133 2180 0.5577 3 Access C NB None 206 1195 219 709 0.2906 4 Main St WB None 1058 370 1031 1997 0.5299 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service 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 Page 448 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C (2x1) - 2045 Scenario 1 Run number 44 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 449 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C (2x1) - 2045 Scenario 2 Run number 50 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Access C SB None 189 766 71 872 0.2166 2 Main St EB None 699 169 786 2212 0.3161 3 Access C NB None 277 792 76 862 0.3212 4 Main St WB None 540 297 772 2075 0.2603 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service 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 Page 450 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C (2x1) - 2045 Scenario 2 Run number 50 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 451 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C (2x1) - 2045 Scenario 2 Run number 54 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR 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 WB None 1027 337 831 2032 0.5054 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service 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 Page 452 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Access C (2x1) - 2045 Scenario 2 Run number 54 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 453 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) No-Build Run number 14 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Main St EB None 388 480 270 888 0.4371 2 Lake Dr NB None 224 335 533 915 0.2448 3 Main St WB None 398 257 302 988 0.4027 4 Lake Dr SB None 327 423 232 838 0.3901 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Main St EB None 6.77 6.77 2.40 A A 2 Lake Dr NB None 4.77 4.77 0.92 A A 3 Main St WB None 5.65 5.65 1.98 A A 4 Lake Dr SB None 6.15 6.15 1.80 A A Page 454 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) No-Build Run number 14 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 455 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) No-Build Run number 17 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Main St EB None 438 395 525 958 0.4572 2 Lake Dr NB None 686 374 459 951 0.7212 3 Main St WB None 492 594 466 837 0.5879 4 Lake Dr SB None 323 597 489 851 0.3795 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Main St EB None 6.60 6.60 2.27 A A 2 Lake Dr NB None 11.96 11.96 6.50 B B 3 Main St WB None 9.57 9.57 3.76 A A 4 Lake Dr SB None 6.53 6.53 1.67 A A Page 456 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) No-Build Run number 17 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 457 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 Run number 28 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Main St EB None 560 480 335 888 0.6308 2 Lake Dr NB None 267 393 647 887 0.3010 3 Main St WB None 409 329 331 951 0.4299 4 Lake Dr SB None 338 477 261 812 0.4161 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Main St EB None 10.12 10.12 5.59 B B 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 Page 458 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 Run number 28 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 459 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 Run number 32 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Main St EB None 571 395 733 958 0.5959 2 Lake Dr NB None 825 418 548 929 0.8882 3 Main St WB None 527 753 487 755 0.6980 4 Lake Dr SB None 358 770 510 760 0.4709 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Main St EB None 8.72 8.72 3.92 A A 2 Lake Dr NB None 25.27 25.27 16.68 D D 3 Main St WB None 13.98 13.98 5.99 B B 4 Lake Dr SB None 8.50 8.50 2.43 A A Page 460 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) Scenario 1 Run number 32 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 461 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 Run number 36 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Main St EB None 560 480 335 888 0.6308 2 Lake Dr NB None 267 393 647 887 0.3010 3 Main St WB None 409 329 331 951 0.4299 4 Lake Dr SB None 338 477 261 812 0.4161 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Main St EB None 10.12 10.12 5.59 B B 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 Page 462 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 Run number 36 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 463 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 Run number 38 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Main St EB None 571 395 733 958 0.5959 2 Lake Dr NB None 825 418 548 929 0.8882 3 Main St WB None 527 753 487 755 0.6980 4 Lake Dr SB None 358 770 510 760 0.4709 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Main St EB None 8.72 8.72 3.92 A A 2 Lake Dr NB None 25.27 25.27 16.68 D D 3 Main St WB None 13.98 13.98 5.99 B B 4 Lake Dr SB None 8.50 8.50 2.43 A A Page 464 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 Run number 38 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 465 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Design Year (2045) No-Build Run number 20 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Main St EB None 464 574 323 838 0.5537 2 Lake Dr NB None 267 400 638 883 0.3022 3 Main St WB None 476 306 361 963 0.4942 4 Lake Dr SB None 391 506 276 799 0.4894 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Main St EB None 8.97 8.97 4.03 A A 2 Lake Dr NB None 5.32 5.32 1.24 A A 3 Main St WB None 6.77 6.77 2.92 A A 4 Lake Dr SB None 7.55 7.55 2.73 A A Page 466 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Design Year (2045) No-Build Run number 20 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 467 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Design Year (2045) No-Build Run number 25 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Main St EB None 523 473 627 917 0.5701 2 Lake Dr NB None 820 447 549 914 0.8971 3 Main St WB None 590 707 557 779 0.7576 4 Lake Dr SB None 386 714 583 790 0.4888 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Main St EB None 8.59 8.59 3.55 A A 2 Lake Dr NB None 27.15 27.15 17.85 D D 3 Main St WB None 16.40 16.40 7.88 C C 4 Lake Dr SB None 8.46 8.46 2.60 A A Page 468 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Design Year (2045) No-Build Run number 25 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 469 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Deisgn Year (2045) Scenario 1 Run number 41 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Main St EB None 829 618 456 814 1.0179 2 Lake Dr NB None 373 497 917 836 0.4461 3 Main St WB None 503 448 422 890 0.5654 4 Lake Dr SB None 451 623 329 743 0.6070 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Main St EB None 98.60 98.60 80.92 F F 2 Lake Dr NB None 6.89 6.89 2.21 A A 3 Main St WB None 8.41 8.41 3.90 A A 4 Lake Dr SB None 10.20 10.20 4.54 B B Page 470 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Deisgn Year (2045) Scenario 1 Run number 41 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Global Results Performance and Accidents 2045 AM Peak Global Performance Parameter Units Entries Bypasses Total Arrive Flows veh/hr 2156 2156 Capacity veh/hr 3283 3283 Average Delay sec/veh 43.20 43.20 L.O.S. (Signal)A – F D D L.O.S. (Unsig)A – F E E Total Delay veh.hrs 25.87 25.87 Page 471 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Deisgn Year (2045) Scenario 1 Run number 44 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Main St EB None 793 502 933 902 0.8788 2 Lake Dr NB None 1158 531 761 871 1.3295 3 Main St WB None 674 867 536 697 0.9673 4 Lake Dr SB None 469 967 566 657 0.7140 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Main St EB None 26.04 26.04 16.53 D D 2 Lake Dr NB None 546.24 546.24 597.75 F F 3 Main St WB None 57.74 57.74 28.40 F F 4 Lake Dr SB None 17.28 17.28 6.44 C C Page 472 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Deisgn Year (2045) Scenario 1 Run number 44 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 473 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Deisgn Year (2045) Scenario 2 Run number 47 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Main St EB None 836 619 458 814 1.0272 2 Lake Dr NB None 375 497 921 836 0.4485 3 Main St WB None 503 451 421 888 0.5661 4 Lake Dr SB None 452 625 329 742 0.6092 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Main St EB None 105.68 105.68 86.03 F F 2 Lake Dr NB None 6.91 6.91 2.23 A A 3 Main St WB None 8.44 8.44 3.91 A A 4 Lake Dr SB None 10.27 10.27 4.58 B B Page 474 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Deisgn Year (2045) Scenario 2 Run number 47 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 475 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Deisgn Year (2045) Scenario 2 Run number 50 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Main St EB None 799 503 935 902 0.8860 2 Lake Dr NB None 1160 533 766 870 1.3332 3 Main St WB None 675 867 536 696 0.9692 4 Lake Dr SB None 470 968 566 656 0.7163 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Main St EB None 27.25 27.25 17.41 D D 2 Lake Dr NB None 551.70 551.70 604.70 F F 3 Main St WB None 58.67 58.67 28.87 F F 4 Lake Dr SB None 17.42 17.42 6.51 C C Page 476 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Deisgn Year (2045) Scenario 2 Run number 50 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 477 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Expanded Roundabout S1 Run number 33 Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR 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 WB None 503 456 433 1047 0.4806 4 Lake Dr SB None 451 623 336 825 0.5466 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Main St EB Yield 17.18 9.79 14.28 16.55 4.83 C A B 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 Page 478 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Expanded Roundabout S1 Run number 33 Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 479 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Expanded Roundabout S1 Run number 36 Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR 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 WB None 674 1076 611 810 0.8317 4 Lake Dr SB None 469 1083 665 754 0.6221 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Main St EB Yield 8.52 6.61 7.82 3.39 1.50 A A A 2 Lake Dr NB None 27.65 27.65 24.68 D D 3 Main St WB None 24.79 24.79 13.53 C C 4 Lake Dr SB None 11.74 11.74 4.45 B B Page 480 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Expanded Roundabout S1 Run number 36 Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Global Results Performance and Accidents 2045 PM Peak Global Performance Parameter Units Entries Bypasses Total Arrive Flows veh/hr 2804 290 3094 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 Page 481 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Expanded Roundabout S2 Run number 42 Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR 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 WB None 503 459 435 1045 0.4811 4 Lake Dr SB None 452 625 337 824 0.5483 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Main St EB Yield 17.50 9.99 14.53 17.01 5.05 C A B 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 Page 482 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Expanded Roundabout S2 Run number 42 Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 483 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Expanded Roundabout S2 Run number 45 Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR 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 WB None 675 1079 612 809 0.8343 4 Lake Dr SB None 470 1086 666 753 0.6244 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Main St EB Yield 8.57 6.67 7.87 3.42 1.54 A A A 2 Lake Dr NB None 28.18 28.18 25.19 D D 3 Main St WB None 25.11 25.11 13.72 D D 4 Lake Dr SB None 11.82 11.82 4.49 B B Page 484 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 29-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Lake & Main - Expanded Roundabout S2 Run number 45 Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Global Results Performance and Accidents 2045 PM Peak Global Performance Parameter Units Entries Bypasses Total Arrive Flows veh/hr 2810 294 3104 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 Page 485 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Existing (2025) Conditions Run number 39 Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development2025 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2025 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave EB None 530 50 280 1168 0.4539 2 Main St NB None 111 311 269 970 0.1145 3 Main St WB None 250 80 342 1160 0.2156 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave EB None 5.64 5.64 3.69 A A 2 Main St NB None 3.93 3.93 0.48 A A 3 Main St WB None 3.83 3.83 1.04 A A Page 486 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Existing (2025) Conditions Run number 39 Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development2025 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 487 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Existing (2025) Conditions Run number 42 Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development2025 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2025 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave EB None 510 39 583 1173 0.4346 2 Main St NB None 193 362 187 1000 0.1930 3 Main St WB None 485 137 418 1130 0.4292 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave EB None 5.19 5.19 2.05 A A 2 Main St NB None 4.32 4.32 0.65 A A 3 Main St WB None 5.34 5.34 2.01 A A Page 488 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Existing (2025) Conditions Run number 42 Project: Lino Lakes NW / Main Street Development2025 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 489 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Opening Year (2030) No-Build Run number 49 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave EB None 564 92 298 1145 0.4927 2 Main St NB None 156 331 325 960 0.1626 3 Main St WB None 267 123 364 1136 0.2351 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave EB None 6.32 6.32 4.59 A A 2 Main St NB None 4.21 4.21 0.73 A A 3 Main St WB None 4.02 4.02 1.18 A A Page 490 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Opening Year (2030) No-Build Run number 49 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 491 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Opening Year (2030) No-Build Run number 53 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave EB None 543 55 620 1165 0.4661 2 Main St NB None 219 385 213 988 0.2217 3 Main St WB None 516 159 445 1118 0.4614 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave EB None 5.52 5.52 2.32 A A 2 Main St NB None 4.53 4.53 0.77 A A 3 Main St WB None 5.70 5.70 2.28 A A Page 492 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Opening Year (2030) No-Build Run number 53 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Global Results Performance and Accidents 2030 PM Peak Global Performance Parameter Units Entries Bypasses Total Arrive Flows veh/hr 1278 1278 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 Page 493 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2030 Scenario 1 Run number 88 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 63 697 29 819 0.0769 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 Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 4.65 4.65 0.31 A A 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 Page 494 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2030 Scenario 1 Run number 88 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Global Results Performance and Accidents 2030 AM Peak Global Performance Parameter Units Entries Bypasses Total Arrive Flows veh/hr 1474 1474 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 Page 495 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2030 Scenario 1 Run number 91 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 49 915 84 711 0.0689 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 Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 5.27 5.27 0.23 A A 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 Page 496 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2030 Scenario 1 Run number 91 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 497 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2030 Scenario 2 Run number 97 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 206 601 82 871 0.2364 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 Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 5.31 5.31 1.21 A A 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 Page 498 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2030 Scenario 2 Run number 97 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 499 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2030 Scenario 2 Run number 100 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 160 840 259 751 0.2131 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 Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 5.88 5.88 0.84 A A 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 Page 500 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2030 Scenario 2 Run number 100 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Global Results Performance and Accidents 2030 PM Peak Global Performance Parameter Units Entries Bypasses Total Arrive Flows veh/hr 2037 2037 Capacity veh/hr 3665 3665 Average Delay sec/veh 10.36 10.36 L.O.S. (Signal)A – F B B L.O.S. (Unsig)A – F B B Total Delay veh.hrs 5.86 5.86 Page 501 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Design Year (2045) No-Build Run number 56 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave EB None 674 95 669 1143 0.5896 2 Main St NB None 187 395 374 927 0.2017 3 Main St WB None 617 147 435 1122 0.5497 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave EB None 8.37 8.37 8.10 A A 2 Main St NB None 4.60 4.60 0.99 A A 3 Main St WB None 7.60 7.60 6.53 A A Page 502 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Design Year (2045) No-Build Run number 56 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Global Results Performance and Accidents 2045 AM Peak Global Performance Parameter Units Entries Bypasses Total Arrive Flows veh/hr 1478 1478 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 Page 503 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Design Year (2045) No-Build Run number 59 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave EB None 648 66 741 1159 0.5590 2 Main St NB None 262 460 254 948 0.2765 3 Main St WB None 617 190 532 1101 0.5601 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave EB None 6.65 6.65 3.34 A A 2 Main St NB None 5.07 5.07 1.04 A A 3 Main St WB None 7.01 7.01 3.37 A A Page 504 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 24-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Ave - Design Year (2045) No-Build Run number 59 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Global Results Performance and Accidents 2045 PM Peak Global Performance Parameter Units Entries Bypasses Total Arrive Flows veh/hr 1527 1527 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 Page 505 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2045 Scenario 1 Run number 108 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 73 1213 33 540 0.1352 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 Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 7.42 7.42 0.57 A A 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 Page 506 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2045 Scenario 1 Run number 108 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 507 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2045 Scenario 1 Run number 111 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 55 1280 83 519 0.1061 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 Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 7.46 7.46 0.34 A A 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 Page 508 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2045 Scenario 1 Run number 111 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 509 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2045 Scenario 2 Run number 114 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 327 1114 106 595 0.5496 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 Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 16.41 16.41 8.68 C C 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 Page 510 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2045 Scenario 2 Run number 114 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 511 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2045 Scenario 2 Run number 118 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 242 1193 288 564 0.4289 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 Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 10.55 10.55 2.21 B B 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 F F Page 512 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main Street & Sunset Avenue 2045 Scenario 2 Run number 118 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 513 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main & Sunset 2x1 Roundabout - Design Year (2045) Build Scenario 1 Run number 55 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 73 1238 33 720 0.1014 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 Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 5.49 5.49 0.45 A A 2 Main St EB None 12.04 12.04 14.84 B B 3 Sunset Ave NB None 6.38 6.38 3.04 A A 4 Main St WB None 9.17 9.17 11.69 A A Page 514 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main & Sunset 2x1 Roundabout - Design Year (2045) Build Scenario 1 Run number 55 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 515 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main & Sunset 2x1 Roundabout - Design Year (2045) Build Scenario 1 Run number 58 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 55 1378 93 666 0.0825 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 Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 5.70 5.70 0.28 A A 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 Page 516 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main & Sunset 2x1 Roundabout - Design Year (2045) Build Scenario 1 Run number 58 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 517 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main & Sunset 2x1 Roundabout - Design Year (2045) Build Scenario 2 Run number 53 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 327 1118 109 766 0.4268 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 Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 8.58 8.58 3.75 A A 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 Page 518 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main & Sunset 2x1 Roundabout - Design Year (2045) Build Scenario 2 Run number 53 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 519 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main & Sunset 2x1 Roundabout - Design Year (2045) Build Scenario 2 Run number 50 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR 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 Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 7.54 7.54 1.67 A A 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 Page 520 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Main & Sunset 2x1 Roundabout - Design Year (2045) Build Scenario 2 Run number 50 Project: Lino Lakes Northwest / Main Street Development2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 521 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 No-Build Run number 30 Project: Lino Lakes NW/Main Street Development2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 491 44 179 1077 0.4560 2 Lilac St NB None 139 480 55 901 0.1543 3 Sunset Ave WB None 67 156 463 1081 0.0620 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 5.66 5.66 3.02 A A 2 Lilac St NB None 4.59 4.59 0.67 A A 3 Sunset Ave WB None 3.42 3.42 0.22 A A Page 522 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 No-Build Run number 30 Project: Lino Lakes NW/Main Street Development2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 523 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 No-Build Run number 35 Project: Lino Lakes NW/Main Street Development2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 260 39 378 1144 0.2273 2 Lilac St NB None 329 246 53 1033 0.3185 3 Sunset Ave WB None 100 317 258 995 0.1005 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 3.94 3.94 0.81 A A 2 Lilac St NB None 4.92 4.92 1.30 A A 3 Sunset Ave WB None 3.90 3.90 0.31 A A Page 524 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 No-Build Run number 35 Project: Lino Lakes NW/Main Street Development2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 525 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 Scenario 1 Run number 44 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 667 44 273 1077 0.6195 2 Lilac St NB None 193 652 59 806 0.2394 3 Sunset Ave WB None 78 239 606 1036 0.0753 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 8.17 8.17 6.68 A A 2 Lilac St NB None 5.79 5.79 1.27 A A 3 Sunset Ave WB None 3.63 3.63 0.28 A A Page 526 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 Scenario 1 Run number 44 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 527 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 Scenario 1 Run number 47 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 407 39 609 1144 0.3559 2 Lilac St NB None 503 379 67 962 0.5228 3 Sunset Ave WB None 135 513 369 891 0.1516 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 4.69 4.69 1.53 A A 2 Lilac St NB None 7.42 7.42 3.09 A A 3 Sunset Ave WB None 4.61 4.61 0.50 A A Page 528 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 Scenario 1 Run number 47 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 529 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 Scenario 2 Run number 50 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 667 44 273 1077 0.6195 2 Lilac St NB None 193 652 59 806 0.2394 3 Sunset Ave WB None 78 239 606 1036 0.0753 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 8.17 8.17 6.68 A A 2 Lilac St NB None 5.79 5.79 1.27 A A 3 Sunset Ave WB None 3.63 3.63 0.28 A A Page 530 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 Scenario 2 Run number 50 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 531 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 Scenario 2 Run number 53 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2030 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 407 39 609 1144 0.3559 2 Lilac St NB None 503 379 67 962 0.5228 3 Sunset Ave WB None 135 513 369 891 0.1516 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 4.69 4.69 1.53 A A 2 Lilac St NB None 7.42 7.42 3.09 A A 3 Sunset Ave WB None 4.61 4.61 0.50 A A Page 532 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2030 Scenario 2 Run number 53 Project: Main Street Northwest2030 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 533 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 No-Build Run number 38 Project: Lino Lakes NW/Main Street Development2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 312 53 407 1072 0.2910 2 Lilac St NB None 394 295 70 1002 0.3931 3 Sunset Ave WB None 80 380 309 961 0.0833 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 4.38 4.38 1.38 A A 2 Lilac St NB None 5.79 5.79 2.55 A A 3 Sunset Ave WB None 3.95 3.95 0.32 A A Page 534 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 No-Build Run number 38 Project: Lino Lakes NW/Main Street Development2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 535 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 No-Build Run number 41 Project: Lino Lakes NW/Main Street Development2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 312 46 453 1140 0.2737 2 Lilac St NB None 394 295 63 1007 0.3913 3 Sunset Ave WB None 119 380 309 962 0.1238 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 4.19 4.19 1.04 A A 2 Lilac St NB None 5.62 5.62 1.80 A A 3 Sunset Ave WB None 4.14 4.14 0.39 A A Page 536 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 No-Build Run number 41 Project: Lino Lakes NW/Main Street Development2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 537 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 Scenario 1 Run number 68 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 927 126 307 1076 0.8615 2 Lilac St NB None 299 106 931 1107 0.2701 3 Sunset Ave WB None 169 264 141 1024 0.1651 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 30.81 30.81 54.09 D D 2 Lilac St NB None 4.29 4.29 1.30 A A 3 Sunset Ave WB None 4.07 4.07 0.69 A A Page 538 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 Scenario 1 Run number 68 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 539 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 Scenario 1 Run number 71 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 577 100 822 1111 0.5193 2 Lilac St NB None 815 119 558 1101 0.7403 3 Sunset Ave WB None 224 698 236 792 0.2829 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 6.39 6.39 2.99 A A 2 Lilac St NB None 11.42 11.42 7.85 B B 3 Sunset Ave WB None 6.10 6.10 1.13 A A Page 540 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 Scenario 1 Run number 71 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Global Results Performance and Accidents 2045 PM Peak Global Performance Parameter Units Entries Bypasses Total Arrive Flows veh/hr 1616 1616 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 Page 541 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 Scenario 2 Run number 74 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 AM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 992 127 332 1075 0.9224 2 Lilac St NB None 302 165 937 1075 0.2808 3 Sunset Ave WB None 192 267 201 1022 0.1879 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 52.22 52.22 88.29 F F 2 Lilac St NB None 4.48 4.48 1.37 A A 3 Sunset Ave WB None 4.19 4.19 0.81 A A Page 542 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 Scenario 2 Run number 74 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 AM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 543 of 679 Page 1 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 Scenario 2 Run number 77 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - Full Geometry Operational Results 2045 PM Peak - 60 minutes Flows and Capacity Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Flows (veh/hr) Arrival Flow Entry Bypass Opposing Flow Entry Bypass Exit Flow Capacity (veh/hr) Capacity Entry Bypass Average VCR Entry Bypass 1 Sunset Ave SB None 627 101 893 1111 0.5646 2 Lilac St NB None 819 164 564 1077 0.7605 3 Sunset Ave WB None 293 701 282 790 0.3707 Delays, Queues and Level of Service Leg Leg Names Bypass Type Average Delay (sec) Entry Bypass Leg 95% Queue (veh) Entry Bypass Level of Service Entry Bypass Leg 1 Sunset Ave SB None 7.02 7.02 3.59 A A 2 Lilac St NB None 12.55 12.55 8.76 B B 3 Sunset Ave WB None 6.93 6.93 1.70 A A Page 544 of 679 Page 2 of 2Report dated 25-Apr-2025 Rodel Version 1.96 Scheme: Sunset & Lilac - 2045 Scenario 2 Run number 77 Project: Main Street Northwest2045 PM Peak 50% Confidence Level Daylight conditions Rodel-Win1 - 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 Page 545 of 679 Northwest Main – Lino Lakes, MN Traffic Impact Analysis │ June 2025 40 Appendix C: Turn Lane Warrant Sheets Page 546 of 679 Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. INPUT Value 55 411 56 OUTPUT Value 18 right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway: Add right-turn bay. Roadway geometry: Variable Variable Guidance for determining the need for a major-road Major-road speed, mph: Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h: Right-turn volume, veh/h: Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h: 2-lane roadw ay 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Ri g h t - T u r n V o l u m e , v e h / h Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h Add right - turn bay Access A - 2030 Scenario 1 NBR Warrant Page 547 of 679 Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. INPUT Value 50 699 56 OUTPUT Value 16 right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway: Add right-turn bay. Roadway geometry: Variable Variable Guidance for determining the need for a major-road Major-road speed, mph: Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h: Right-turn volume, veh/h: Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h: 2-lane roadw ay 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Ri g h t - T u r n V o l u m e , v e h / h Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h Add right - turn bay Access B - 2030 Scenario 1 EBR Warrant Page 548 of 679 Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. INPUT Value 50 737 70 OUTPUT Value 15 right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway: Add right-turn bay. Roadway geometry: Variable Variable Guidance for determining the need for a major-road Major-road speed, mph: Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h: Right-turn volume, veh/h: Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h: 2-lane roadw ay 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Ri g h t - T u r n V o l u m e , v e h / h Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h Add right - turn bay Access B - 2030 Scenario 1 WBR Warrant Page 549 of 679 Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. INPUT Value 50 631 49 OUTPUT Value 18 right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway: Add right-turn bay. Roadway geometry: Variable Variable Guidance for determining the need for a major-road Major-road speed, mph: Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h: Right-turn volume, veh/h: Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h: 2-lane roadw ay 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Ri g h t - T u r n V o l u m e , v e h / h Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h Add right - turn bay Access D - 2030 Scenario 1 EBR Warrant Page 550 of 679 Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. INPUT Value 50 1015 51 OUTPUT Value 10 right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway: Add right-turn bay. Roadway geometry: Variable Variable Guidance for determining the need for a major-road Major-road speed, mph: Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h: Right-turn volume, veh/h: Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h: 2-lane roadw ay 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Ri g h t - T u r n V o l u m e , v e h / h Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h Add right - turn bay Access D - 2045 Scenario 1 WBR Warrant Page 551 of 679 Figure 2 - 5. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. 2-lane roadway (English) INPUT Value 42 26% 262 208 OUTPUT Value 302 CALIBRATION CONSTANTS Value 3.0 5.0 1.9 Critical headway, s: Average time for left-turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s: Limiting advancing volume (VA), veh/h: Guidance for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay: Left-turn treatment NOT warranted. Average time for making left-turn, s: Advancing volume (VA), veh/h: Opposing volume (VO), veh/h: Variable Variable Variable 85th percentile speed, mph: Percent of left-turns in advancing volume (VA), %: 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700Op p o s i n g V o l u m e ( V O), v e h / h Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h Left-turn treatment warranted. Left-turn treatment notwarranted. Access E - 2045 Scenario 1 NBL Warrant Page 552 of 679 Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. INPUT Value 50 208 101 OUTPUT Value 70 right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway: Add right-turn bay. Roadway geometry: Variable Variable Guidance for determining the need for a major-road Major-road speed, mph: Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h: Right-turn volume, veh/h: Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h: 2-lane roadw ay 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Ri g h t - T u r n V o l u m e , v e h / h Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h Add right - turn bay Access E - 2045 Scenario 1 SBR Warrant Page 553 of 679 Figure 2 - 5. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. 2-lane roadway (English) INPUT Value 45 30% 508 240 OUTPUT Value 268 CALIBRATION CONSTANTS Value 3.0 5.0 1.9 Advancing volume (VA), veh/h: Opposing volume (VO), veh/h: Variable Variable Variable 85th percentile speed, mph: Percent of left-turns in advancing volume (VA), %: Critical headway, s: Average time for left-turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s: Limiting advancing volume (VA), veh/h: Guidance for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay: Left-turn treatment warranted. Average time for making left-turn, s: 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700Op p o s i n g V o l u m e ( V O), v e h / h Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h Left-turn treatment warranted. Left-turn treatment notwarranted. Access F - 2045 Scenario 1 NBL Warrant Page 554 of 679 Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. INPUT Value 45 240 17 OUTPUT Value 166 right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway: Do NOT add right-turn bay. Roadway geometry: Variable Variable Guidance for determining the need for a major-road Major-road speed, mph: Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h: Right-turn volume, veh/h: Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h: 2-lane roadw ay 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Ri g h t - T u r n V o l u m e , v e h / h Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h Add right - turn bay Access F - 2045 Scenario 1 SBR Warrant Page 555 of 679 Figure 2 - 5. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. 2-lane roadway (English) INPUT Value 45 41% 367 159 OUTPUT Value 274 CALIBRATION CONSTANTS Value 3.0 5.0 1.9 Advancing volume (VA), veh/h: Opposing volume (VO), veh/h: Variable Variable Variable 85th percentile speed, mph: Percent of left-turns in advancing volume (VA), %: Critical headway, s: Average time for left-turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s: Limiting advancing volume (VA), veh/h: Guidance for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay: Left-turn treatment warranted. Average time for making left-turn, s: 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700Op p o s i n g V o l u m e ( V O), v e h / h Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h Left-turn treatment warranted. Left-turn treatment notwarranted. Access G - 2045 Scenario 1 NBL Warrant Page 556 of 679 Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. INPUT Value 45 159 17 OUTPUT Value 352 right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway: Do NOT add right-turn bay. Roadway geometry: Variable Variable Guidance for determining the need for a major-road Major-road speed, mph: Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h: Right-turn volume, veh/h: Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h: 2-lane roadw ay 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Ri g h t - T u r n V o l u m e , v e h / h Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h Add right - turn bay Access G - 2045 Scenario 1 SBR Warrant Page 557 of 679 Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. INPUT Value 55 416 56 OUTPUT Value 18 right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway: Add right-turn bay. Roadway geometry: Variable Variable Guidance for determining the need for a major-road Major-road speed, mph: Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h: Right-turn volume, veh/h: Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h: 2-lane roadw ay 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Ri g h t - T u r n V o l u m e , v e h / h Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h Add right - turn bay Access A - 2030 Scenario 2 NBR Page 558 of 679 Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. INPUT Value 50 630 42 OUTPUT Value 18 right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway: Add right-turn bay. Roadway geometry: Variable Variable Guidance for determining the need for a major-road Major-road speed, mph: Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h: Right-turn volume, veh/h: Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h: 2-lane roadw ay 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Ri g h t - T u r n V o l u m e , v e h / h Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h Add right - turn bay Access B - 2030 Scenario 2 EBR Page 559 of 679 Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. INPUT Value 50 707 42 OUTPUT Value 16 right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway: Add right-turn bay. Roadway geometry: Variable Variable Guidance for determining the need for a major-road Major-road speed, mph: Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h: Right-turn volume, veh/h: Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h: 2-lane roadw ay 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Ri g h t - T u r n V o l u m e , v e h / h Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h Add right - turn bay Access B - 2030 Scenario 2 WBR Page 560 of 679 Figure 2 - 5. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. 2-lane roadway (English) INPUT Value 42 9% 196 182 OUTPUT Value 477 CALIBRATION CONSTANTS Value 3.0 5.0 1.9 Critical headway, s: Average time for left-turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s: Limiting advancing volume (VA), veh/h: Guidance for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay: Left-turn treatment NOT warranted. Average time for making left-turn, s: Advancing volume (VA), veh/h: Opposing volume (VO), veh/h: Variable Variable Variable 85th percentile speed, mph: Percent of left-turns in advancing volume (VA), %: 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700Op p o s i n g V o l u m e ( V O), v e h / h Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h Left-turn treatment warranted. Left-turn treatment notwarranted. Access E - 2045 Scenario 2 NBL Page 561 of 679 Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. INPUT Value 50 182 85 OUTPUT Value 83 right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway: Add right-turn bay. Roadway geometry: Variable Variable Guidance for determining the need for a major-road Major-road speed, mph: Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h: Right-turn volume, veh/h: Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h: 2-lane roadw ay 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Ri g h t - T u r n V o l u m e , v e h / h Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h Add right - turn bay Access E - 2045 Scenario 2 SBR Page 562 of 679 Figure 2 - 5. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. 2-lane roadway (English) INPUT Value 45 24% 358 188 OUTPUT Value 305 CALIBRATION CONSTANTS Value 3.0 5.0 1.9 Advancing volume (VA), veh/h: Opposing volume (VO), veh/h: Variable Variable Variable 85th percentile speed, mph: Percent of left-turns in advancing volume (VA), %: Critical headway, s: Average time for left-turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s: Limiting advancing volume (VA), veh/h: Guidance for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay: Left-turn treatment warranted. Average time for making left-turn, s: 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700Op p o s i n g V o l u m e ( V O), v e h / h Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h Left-turn treatment warranted. Left-turn treatment notwarranted. Access F - 2045 Scenario 2 NBL Page 563 of 679 Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. INPUT Value 45 188 17 OUTPUT Value 259 right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway: Do NOT add right-turn bay. Roadway geometry: Variable Variable Guidance for determining the need for a major-road Major-road speed, mph: Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h: Right-turn volume, veh/h: Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h: 2-lane roadw ay 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Ri g h t - T u r n V o l u m e , v e h / h Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h Add right - turn bay Access F - 2045 Scenario 2 SBR Page 564 of 679 Figure 2 - 5. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. 2-lane roadway (English) INPUT Value 45 42% 284 128 OUTPUT Value 283 CALIBRATION CONSTANTS Value 3.0 5.0 1.9 Advancing volume (VA), veh/h: Opposing volume (VO), veh/h: Variable Variable Variable 85th percentile speed, mph: Percent of left-turns in advancing volume (VA), %: Critical headway, s: Average time for left-turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s: Limiting advancing volume (VA), veh/h: Guidance for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay: Left-turn treatment warranted. Average time for making left-turn, s: 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700Op p o s i n g V o l u m e ( V O), v e h / h Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h Left-turn treatment warranted. Left-turn treatment notwarranted. Access G - 2045 Scenario 2 NBL Page 565 of 679 Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. INPUT Value 45 128 17 OUTPUT Value 524 right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway: Do NOT add right-turn bay. Roadway geometry: Variable Variable Guidance for determining the need for a major-road Major-road speed, mph: Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h: Right-turn volume, veh/h: Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h: 2-lane roadw ay 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Ri g h t - T u r n V o l u m e , v e h / h Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h Add right - turn bay Access G - 2045 Scenario 2 SBR Page 566 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR July 2025 Appendix E: Comment Responses Page 567 of 679 1 OVERVIEW 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. AGENCY COMMENTS Comment Response 1. Metropolitan Council Item 6 - Project Description 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. Thank you for your review. Comment noted. Item 7 - Climate Adaptation and Resilience 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. Comment noted. The City will encourage developers to consider adaptation strategies to reduce impervious surface. Page 568 of 679 2 Comment Response Item 9 - Permits and approvals 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 Comment noted. Item 10 – Land Use 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. Comment noted. Item 10 – Land Use, Parks (received during 10-day objection period) Page 569 of 679 3 Comment Response The planned Central Anoka Regional Trail overlaps the 962-acre study area. This regional trail has a Met Council-approved long-range plan, most recently amended in 2018. Anoka County Parks and Recreation is the Regional Park Implementing Agency that manages Central Anoka Regional Trail. The AUAR needs to reference the planned Central Anoka Regional Trail in Section 6. Project Description and Section 10. Land Use, parts ii, b, and c. The Parks and Trails section of Section 6 currently states that “the area’s development will feature the construction of a segment of the Bunker-Chain of Lakes Regional Trail along Main Street” (pg. 8). This sentence needs to reference Central Anoka Regional Trail instead of Bunker (Hills)-Chain of Lakes Regional Trail. Bunker Hills-Chain of Lakes Regional Trail coincides with Elm Street, approximately 2.0 miles south of Central Anoka Regional Trail, which is planned to travel along Main Street (125th Avenue NE). Council Parks and Trails staff appreciate that “both scenarios also propose a network of trails through the future development, totaling 41,5000 linear feet (LF) of asphalt trail and 5,200 LF of regional trail” (pg. 8). The Final AUAR has been updated to correct the trail name and include a description in project Section 6. Project Description and Section 10. Land Use. Item 12 – Water Resources – water supply Chloride management best practices should be considered and implemented during the winter months to limit impacts to surrounding water bodies and wetlands. Comment noted. The City encourages developers to use best practices to reduce chloride use in snow and ice removal. Page 570 of 679 4 Comment Response 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. Comment noted. 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. Comment noted. 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. The City is mandated to prioritize infiltration practices as required by the MPCA. In cases where infiltration is not permitted, reuse alternatives will be considered. The City will also recommend planting native and drought- tolerant species to minimize irrigation requirements. Page 571 of 679 5 Comment Response 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. Comment noted. 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. Comment noted. The updated Anoka County Geologic Atlas was reviewed and included in Final AUAR. Item 18 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions 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 designs with the sun and horizon to maximize solar energy gain during the winter and minimize solar energy gain in the summer. Comment noted. The City will encourage developers to consider home orientation and energy- efficient design. Item 20 – Transportation, Transit 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. Comment noted. Page 572 of 679 6 Comment Response 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. Comment noted. 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. Comment noted. 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 I-35W and I-35E corridors near Lino Lakes, but there is no other existing or planned service to this study area currently. “Buses” was removed from the list on pg. 80. 2. Anoka County Item 6 - Project Description Multiple comments. Thank you for your review. Comments noted and applicable edits have been made in Final AUAR. Item 7 - Climate Adaptation and Resilience Multiple comments. Comments noted and applicable edits have been made in Final AUAR. Item 8 - Cover Types Page 573 of 679 7 Comment Response Multiple comments. Comments noted and applicable edits have been made in Final AUAR. Item 9 - Permits and approvals Multiple comments Comments noted and applicable edits have been made in Final AUAR. Item 20- Transportation, Traffic Table 5-3: Opening Year (2030) Scenario 2 Level of Service Speed limit varies from 55 MPH to 40 MPH between Lexington Ave. and Lake Dr. Comment noted and speed limit edit has been made in the Final AUAR. CSAH 17 (Lexington Ave) should be added to the study area as the traffic from the potential development will likely have impacts on the CSAH 17 corridor. Specifically, the intersection of CSAH 14 and CSAH 17. In earlier coordination with Anoka County staff in March 2025, it was decided to not include Lexington Ave as a study intersection since it is an existing signal-controlled intersection and a 4-lane divided road and any traffic from this future development will likely be insignificant to the growth in Blaine. Number doesn't match Appendix value Number has been updated to 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 574 of 679 8 Comment Response Do these accesses meet Anoka County intersection spacing guidelines? 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 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. Check LOS grades Checks were performed on all tables. Some corrections were made to reported LOS and delay. Note that worst movement delay is reported at side street stop controlled intersections instead of overall delay. Does expanding Main St. to 4 lanes significantly improve operations for NB side street approach? Yes, congestion and lack of gaps along Main Street is anticipated to represent an issue for right turning 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 575 of 679 9 Comment Response Does school traffic not cause issues for Scenario 1? School traffic does cause delays under Scenario 1 conditions. These delays are worse under Scenario 2 conditions because the 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 Location of commercial land use is proposed to abut the Lino Lakes/Blaine city boundary. The City of Blaine has identified low-density residential land use for the parcel abutting Lino Lakes. If commercial land use is proposed, the city of Blaine would encourage certain zoning requirements for the commercial development to address compatibility between single family and commercial land uses. Thank you for your review and comment noted. The City will require future developers to include tools such as buffering and/or screening between new developments and adjacent, less dense areas in their development plans The AUAR identifies proposed bike and pedestrian trails from Sunset Avenue to Lexington Avenue, 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. Comment noted. The roundabout at Sunset and Main Street is designed to service parcels on the north side of Main 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. Comment noted. Page 576 of 679 10 Comment Response The well map on pages 39/40 should identify all private wells abutting the subject site, not just within 150’. The well buffer has been updated 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 project area that are described in the draft AUAR. Thank you for your review. Figure has been added in the Final 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. Comment noted. The City encourages developers to use best 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 strategic places will be beneficial. The goal is to develop with winter maintenance in mind and use less salt. Comment noted. The City will encourage developers to keep 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 chlorides. Comment noted. 5. Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) District encourages early coordination on permitting matters, including a pre-application meeting between RCWD, developers, and Lino Lakes. Thank you for your review. 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 into Anoka County Ditch (ACD) 10-22-32. Comment noted. Other designations, Page 28 Page 577 of 679 11 Comment Response 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. Comment noted. The figure in the Final AUAR has been updated with RCWD floodplain data. Stormwater – 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 on pages 18 and 44. Comment noted. The text has 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 ACD 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 with selection of drilling locations. Comment noted. 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 through Rule I, consistent with 103E. Comment noted. RCWD requires 20 feet (also referenced on p. 46) from top of bank to either side for a buffer to complete required maintenance. Ditch and buffer requirements have been added to the final AUAR. The ditch must remain open and trees or other structures are prohibited in the maintenance corridor may not obstruct access. Ditch and buffer requirements have been added to the final AUAR. Page 578 of 679 12 Comment Response Item 8 – Cover Types 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. Comment noted. The City will encourage developers to consider BMP’s such as Iron Enhanced Sand 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 1/1/2025. Date correction made in the Final AUAR. Floodplains, Page 45 Numbered item 4 should identify that drainage/flowage easements need to be provided only if required by the land use authority. Easement language has been added to the Final AUAR. Continuing onto page 46, “Areas that are covered by Rule E are also subject to Rule F: Wetland Alteration, as applicable.” As applicable has been added to 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 floodplains and not FEMA. Note has been added to the 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 77/78 Page 579 of 679 13 Comment Response 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). 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. PUBLIC COMMENTS Comment Response 1. Daryl Wangert 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! The developer would be required by the city/watershed to do floodplain mitigation and revise the floodplain boundary (LOMR submittal to FEMA) so flood insurance will not be required. Everything must be elevated above the flood plain boundary and any changes to the boundary must be submitted to FEMA to update the flood insurance maps within 6 months of construction completion. Page 580 of 679 14 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 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. Comment noted. The scope of the AUAR did not evaluate changing the location of the land uses in the two scenarios. As site development advances, specific residential and commercial land use boundaries should be generally followed and considered somewhat flexible in order to accommodate natural features, land 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 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. Comment noted. 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 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. Comment noted. The City will coordinate with the County for consideration. 4. Sue Bass Page 581 of 679 15 Comment Response 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! 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. 5. James Bosak 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. There is no plan currently to extend 121st Avenue to Robinson Drive. The road network shown on the scenario figures was only a concept to give a Page 582 of 679 16 Comment Response 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. 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). 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. Comment noted. The City underwent a multi- phased engagement process to determine the scenarios to evaluate in the AUAR. More information about the process can be found on the project website here: https://mappingnwmain.com/process and engagement summaries of the feedback we collected can be found here: https://mappingnwmain.com/resources The intent of this process was to gather community feedback on the scenarios and establish development criteria for future projects in this area, without impacting citywide sewered residential average densities of 3-5 units per acre as required by the Metropolitan Council. Scenario 1 is based on the City's existing 2040 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 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 Any proposed floodplain alterations by future developers will require the submittal of an appropriate Letter of Map Change to FEMA and Page 583 of 679 17 Comment Response 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. the applicable City of Lino Lakes and RCWD approvals will need to be obtained. To the extent 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 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. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was completed as part of the AUAR and based on projected trip generation, the area's transportation network is expected to support development within the study area with mitigation (see Appendix D). 7. James Kukkonen 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 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 of next steps required. The City has met with both the Centennial and Forest Lake School Districts through this process, and district 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 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 Comment noted. The City will encourage future developers to consider the climate adaptions and sustainability measures identified in Section 7 and 18 of the AUAR. Page 584 of 679 18 Comment Response 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. Stormwater BMPs will be required to adhere to both City and RCWD standards for development and long-term maintenance. These will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for each location as it is developed. 9. Kevin and Tammy Dunrud 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. A Traffic Impact Analysis was conducted for both land use scenarios (see Appendix D of the AUAR). A connection between Carl Street to Century Trail is not necessary from a traffic operations perspective. Please see the mitigation plan of the AUAR for a full list of traffic mitigation strategies. 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 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 The City will encourage developers to consider tools such as clustering, vegetation buffers, and screening to mitigate potential land use conflicts. Page 585 of 679 19 Comment Response 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. 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. 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 for this area. No 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 road and there is an airstrip that also ends at 4th and there are no sidewalks planned. As development occurs along 4th Avenue, the City will consider trails and/or sidewalks along 4th Avenue. We realized we forgot to add one item to our list of comments. We are also concerned about the water table with the sod farm being a floodplain and how that might impact our property. We have a wood foundation and have had absolutely no water problems. We would like to keep it that way. Future development will require the construction of local water quality basins and larger detention areas to provide compensatory storage for floodplain mitigation. See the mitigation plan in 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 Carl Street, a few feet from the study area. This is a rural area, with large lots and open green areas. We have Blanding turtles that nest every year in our yards and surrounding areas. We have 4 sets of Sandhill Cranes that breed and make their home here on Carl Street. We also have Bald Eagles, owls, waterfowl, pheasants, turkeys, deer and bear. Seven miles north is Carlos Avery Wildlife Management Area. This is an important wildlife refuge of marshlands, lakes and swamps which provide habitat for the migratory Sandhill cranes and Eagles, in addition to habitat 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 Creation of greenways and/or interconnecting wildlife corridors and buffers will be incorporated as development plans advance. Native habitat and wetland buffers will enhance biodiversity and improve the environmental functionality of the study area. See the mitigation plan of the Final AUAR which has been updated with the DNR’s mitigation strategies for protected species. Page 586 of 679 20 Comment Response 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” 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. Comment noted. 11. Betsy Garcia 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? Future design of the study area and associated stormwater management facilities will be completed to reduce the risk of flooding in the AUAR study area. Buildings will be set at elevations to maintain clearance above 100-year flood elevations, which would also result in re- mapping the floodplain and obtaining approval from FEMA for the changes. Infiltration areas may be used and would improve water quality 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 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, The AUAR’s purpose is to focus on the environmental impacts of the proposed development. The existing condition of the property as a sod farm is in compliance with the MN Department of Agriculture guidelines and regulations. The MN Department of Page 587 of 679 21 Comment Response 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? Agriculture would be the regulatory agency to contact for this information. In addition, future developer will need to complete a Phase I 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 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. Comment noted. If you would like to meet to discuss the project, please reach out to us at: mappingnwmain@linolakes.us 12. John Grattan I would prefer scenario 2, but there is still way too much high density housing in every option. Comment noted Page 588 of 679 Lino Lakes Main Street - AUAR July 2025 Appendix F: Comments Page 589 of 679 Metropolitan Council (Regional Office & Environmental Services) 390 Robert Street North, Saint Paul, MN 55101-1805 P 651.602.1000 | F 651.602.1550 | TTY 651.291.0904 metrocouncil.org An Equal Opportunity Employer 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. Page 590 of 679 Page - 2 | June 26, 2025 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 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 591 of 679 Page - 3 | June 26, 2025 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 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 I-35W and I-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:\CommDev\LPA\Communities\Lino Lakes\Letters\Lino Lakes 2025 Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR Ok With Comments 23082-1.docx Page 592 of 679 Metropolitan Council (Regional Office & Environmental Services) 390 Robert Street North, Saint Paul, MN 55101-1805 P 651.602.1000 | F 651.602.1550 | TTY 651.291.0904 metrocouncil.org An Equal Opportunity Employer August 1, 2025 Michael Grochala, Community Development Director City of Lino Lakes 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014-1182 RE: City of Lino Lakes – Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review (FAUAR) – Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR Metropolitan Council Review File No. 23082-2 Metropolitan Council District No. 11 Dear Michael Grochala: Council staff has conducted a review of this Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review (FAUAR) and Mitigation Plan to determine its accuracy and completeness in addressing regional concerns. Council staff commented on the draft AUAR in its June 26, 2025 letter. The study area includes 962 acres located in the City’s northwest, bisected by Main Street and between Pine Street and Carl Street. The staff review has concluded that the FAUAR addresses previous comments and is complete and accurate with respect to regional concerns and raises no major issues of consistency with Council policies. The Council does not object to the FAUAR but is providing the following advisory comments. Item 6 - Project Description, Forecasts (Todd Graham, 651-602-1322) 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, 2120 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. The City acknowledges this comment and will coordinate with Met Council staff (p. 79). Item 7 – Climate Adaptation and Resilience (Shawn James 651-602-1233) In Table 2 Climate Considerations and Adaptations, the proposer notes that a minimum tree canopy coverage is required for commercial parking areas per City Zoning Ordinance 1007.049. To ensure that trees reach maturity and their potential canopy coverages, Council staff recommend that adequate soil volumes be provided for root system growth. The Minnesota Buildings, Benchmarks & Beyond (B3) Guidelines recommend minimum soil volumes of 400 cubic feet (c.f.) for small trees, 800 c.f. for medium trees, and 1,200 c.f. for large trees. Mature tree canopies are necessary for effective stormwater runoff reduction and urban heat island mitigation. Item 9- Permits and Approvals, Wastewater (Roger Janzig 651-602-1119) The AUAR also correctly identifies a future Metropolitan Council project that will be required to provide additional capacity for this area of the City. There is adequate reserve capacity in the existing system to accommodate the projected growth until the aforementioned project is completed. Coordination between the City and the Council will be necessary to identify the specific location and elevation of the local forcemain improvements identified in the AUAR, that Page 593 of 679 Page - 2 | August 1, 2025 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL will be necessary to service the increased development in the AUAR area. The forcemain will be provided a connection point to the new interceptor facility. 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. 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, which differs from the existing 2040 Plan. Any changes to land use, density, or intensity that deviates from the adopted comprehensive plan will require a comprehensive plan amendment, independent of the AUAR and will be subject to additional Council review. Item 10- Land Use, Parks (Colin Kelly, 651-602-1361) The planned Central Anoka Regional Trail overlaps the 962-acre study area. This regional trail has a Met Council-approved long-range plan, most recently amended in 2018. Anoka County Parks and Recreation is the Regional Park Implementing Agency that manages Central Anoka Regional Trail. The AUAR needs to reference the planned Central Anoka Regional Trail in Section 6. Project Description and Section 10. Land Use, parts ii, b, and c. The Parks and Trails section of Section 6 currently states that “the area’s development will feature the construction of a segment of the Bunker-Chain of Lakes Regional Trail along Main Street” (pg. 8). This sentence needs to reference Central Anoka Regional Trail instead of Bunker (Hills)-Chain of Lakes Regional Trail. Bunker Hills-Chain of Lakes Regional Trail coincides with Elm Street, approximately 2.0 miles south of Central Anoka Regional Trail, which is planned to travel along Main Street (125th Avenue NE). Council Parks and Trails staff appreciate that “both scenarios also propose a network of trails through the future development, totaling 41,5000 linear feet (LF) of asphalt trail and 5,200 LF of regional trail” (pg. 8). 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, wetlands, and soils. 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. This will help to 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. Page 594 of 679 Page - 3 | August 1, 2025 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 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. This will conclude the Council’s review of the FAUAR. The Council will take no formal action on the FAUAR. If you have any questions regarding the review 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 Emma Dvorak, Sector Representative/Principal Reviewer Reviews Coordinator N:\CommDev\LPA\Communities\Lino Lakes\Letters\23082-2 Lino Lakes Main Street AUAR\Lino Lakes 2025 Lino Lakes Main Street Final AUAR Ok 23082-2.docx Page 595 of 679 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 596 of 679 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, Chris Green 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 597 of 679 4325 Pheasant Ridge Drive NE #611 | Blaine, MN 55449 | T: 763-398-3070 | F: 763-398-3088 | www.ricecreek.org BOARD OF MANAGERS Jess Robertson Steven P. Wagamon Michael J. Bradley Marcie Weinandt John J. Waller Anoka County Anoka County Ramsey County Ramsey County Washington County 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. o 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. Page 598 of 679 2 • 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. Page 599 of 679 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 600 of 679 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 601 of 679 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 602 of 679 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 603 of 679 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 604 of 679 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 605 of 679 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 606 of 679 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 607 of 679 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 608 of 679 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 609 of 679 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 610 of 679 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 611 of 679 1 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 7B STAFF ORIGINATOR: Katie Larsen, City Planner MEETING DATE: August 11, 2025 TOPIC: Consider Resolution No. 25-105 Approving 1210 Main Street Accessory Structure Variance VOTE REQUIRED: Simple Majority ______________________________________________________________________________ INTRODUCTION The applicant and property owner of 1210 Main Street, Bruce Amdahl, submitted a Land Use Application for a variance to allow for the construction of a metal building on a lot less than 5 acres. Tentative Review Schedule: Complete Application Date: June 11, 2025 60-Day Deadline: August 10, 2025 60-Day Extension: October 9, 2025 Environmental Board Meeting: N/A Park Board Meeting: N/A Planning & Zoning Board Meeting: July 9, 2025 City Council Work Session: August 11, 2025 City Council Meeting: August 11, 2025 BACKGROUND This staff report is based on the following submittals: • Applicant Narrative • Boundary Survey prepared by Bro Land Surveying, LLC dated June 4, 2025 • Original Building Permit Application • Revised Building Permit Application ANALYSIS Page 612 of 679 2 The lot is 4.91 acres and is zoned R, Rural. On January 6, 2025, the applicant submitted a building permit application to the City to construct a 40ft x 64ft accessory building with metal panel siding with vertical orientation and exposed fasteners on the entire building. The accessory structure would be 107ft from the front lot line and 18ft from the west lot line. Per City Code Section 1007.044(10): Rural, residential and special zoning district accessory buildings. The following establishes accessory buildings requirements allowed on a property according to lot size and zoning district. For the purposes of this section, lot size for metes and bounds properties shall include roadway easements. (e) Less than five acres. 5. Metal sheet or metal panel siding with vertical orientation is prohibited. Metal horizontal lap siding is allowed. 6. Exterior walls shall be similar in appearance to standard wood or masonry residential construction. The accessory building shall be covered with shingles, tiles, or a standing seam metal roof. The building permit application was not approved because metal panel siding with vertical orientation and exposed fasteners is prohibited on lots less than 5 acres. On May 19, 2025, the applicant submitted revised building plans to construct the same size accessory building with LP wood panel siding with vertical orientation and roof shingles. On May 29, 2025, the building permit application was approved. On June 6, 2025, the applicant submitted the land use application for a variance requesting the original proposed metal building be allowed. Staff recommended denial of the variance because it did not meet the variance criteria detailed in City Code Section 1007.018(3)(a). Planning & Zoning Board The Planning & Zoning Board reviewed the application on July 9, 2025 and recommended approval of the variance. Discussion points included: • 4.91 acres is very close to 5 acres • There are other metal accessory structures in the neighboring area • Higher traffic speed on Main Street makes structure less visible Findings of Fact Page 613 of 679 3 Resolution No. 25-105 details the Planning & Zoning Board’s findings of fact. Additional Comments 1. Outdoor storage shall be compliant with City Code Section 1007.048. 2. Off-street parking shall be compliant with City Code Section 1007.052. 3. Home occupation shall be compliant with City Code Section 1007.056. 4. Construction-related businesses are not permitted uses on the property. 5. Per City Code Section 1007.044(10)(e) 2. Total allowable accessory building footprint shall be limited to the following: a. One attached garage and one detached building, or b. Two detached accessory buildings. 6. Existing non-compliant accessory structures shall be removed prior to issuing a building permit. This includes but is not limited to the storage containers currently onsite. RECOMMENDATION The Planning & Zoning Board recommended approval of the 1210 Main Street accessory structure variance. ATTACHMENTS 1. Site Location & Aerial Map 2. Applicant’s Narrative 3. Boundary Survey 4. Original Building Permit Plan 5. Revised and Approved Building Permit Plan 6. Resolution No. 25-105 Page 614 of 679 1414 Legend Parcels July 1, 2025± Map Powered By Datafi 1 in = 300 Ft 1210 Main Street1Site /RFatiRn $eriaO MaS Page 615 of 679 1210 Main Street July 1, 2025 Map Powered By Datafi Page 616 of 679 2. Applicant Narrative vĂŐĞϲϭϳŽĨϲϳϵ 3. Boundary Survey vĂŐĞϲϭϴŽĨϲϳϵ 4. Original Building Permit Plan WĂŐĞϲϭϵŽĨϲϳϵ I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Signature: _______________________________ Typed or Printed Name: ____________________ Date______________ Lic.No._______________ “FOR STRUCTURAL SCOPE ONLY” 40154 Wayne C. Linderman 5/22/25 Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 (612)405-6109 LECLinderman@gmail.com www.LindermanEC.com SHINGLE ROOF LP WOOD LP WOOD SHINGLE ROOF SHINGLE ROOF SHINGLE ROOF LP WOOD LP WOOD 14 ' - 0 " 64'-0" BRUCE AMDAHL 1210 MAIN ST LINO LAKES VENT RIDGE VENT RIDGE VENT RIDGE VENT RIDGE 5/12 RHYLVH DQG ASSURYHG %XLOGLQJ PHUPLW PODQ Page 620 of 679 1 CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 25-105 APPROVING 1210 MAIN STREET ACCESSORY STRUCTURE VARIANCE WHEREAS, the City received a land use application for 1210 Main Street accessory structure variance; and WHEREAS, City staff completed review of the proposed variance based on the following submittals: • Applicant Narrative • Boundary Survey prepared by Bro Land Surveying, LLC dated June 4, 2025 • Original Building Permit Application • Revised Building Permit Application; and WHEREAS, the legal description of the property addressed 1210 Main Street is as follows: THAT PRT OF NW1/4 OF NW1/4 OF SEC 10 TWP 31 RGE 22 DESC AS FOL, BEG AT NW COR OF SD 1/4 1/4, TH E ALG N LINE OF SD 1/4 1/4 224.5 FT, TH S PRLL/W W LINE OF SD 1/4 1/4 TO INTER/W N LINE OF S 273.98 FT O F SD 1/4 1/4, TH W PRLL/W SD N LINE TO W LINE OF SD 1/4 1/4, TH N ALG SD W LINE TO POB, EX W 16.5 FT OF N 416 FT THEREOF, EX RD, SUBJ TO EASE OF REC; and WHEREAS, on January 6, 2025, the applicant submitted a building permit application to the City to construct a 40ft x 64ft accessory building with metal panel siding with vertical orientation and exposed fasteners on the entire building.; and WHEREAS, City Code Section 1007.044(10): Rural, residential and special zoning district accessory buildings. The following establishes accessory buildings requirements allowed on a property according to lot size and zoning district. For the purposes of this section, lot size for metes and bounds properties shall include roadway easements. (e) Less than five acres. 5. Metal sheet or metal panel siding with vertical orientation is prohibited. Metal horizontal lap siding is allowed. 6. Exterior walls shall be similar in appearance to standard wood or masonry residential construction. The accessory building shall be covered with shingles, tiles, or a standing seam metal roof; and Page 621 of 679 2 WHEREAS, the building permit application was not approved because metal panel siding with vertical orientation and exposed fasteners is prohibited on lots less than 5 acres; and WHEREAS, on May 19, 2025, the applicant submitted revised building plans to construct the same size accessory building with LP wood panel siding with vertical orientation and roof shingles; and WHEREAS, on May 29, 2025, the building permit application was approved; and WHEREAS, on June 6, 2025, the applicant submitted the land use application for a variance requesting the original proposed metal building be allowed; and WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Board reviewed and recommended approval of the variance on July 9, 2025. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Lino Lakes, Minnesota that: FINDINGS OF FACT Per City Code Section 1007.018(3): (a) Criteria and findings of fact. No variance shall be granted unless it meets all the criteria in divisions 1. through 6. below, or unless division 7. below applies. The city shall make findings regarding compliance with these criteria. 1. The variance shall be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this chapter. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of Chapter 1007: Zoning Code. Per City Code Section 1007.000(2) Intent and purposed. This chapter is adopted for the purpose of: (a) Protecting the public health, safety, comfort, convenience and general welfare. (b) Dividing the City of Lino Lakes into zones and districts restricting and regulating therein the location and use of structures and land and lot size. 2. The variance shall be consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan. The variance is consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan. Per the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the lot is guided Urban Reserve. Land is preserved for post-2040 urban development. Land use prior to 2040 is limited to agriculture related uses and single family residential limited to one unit per 10 acres. Accessory buildings are permitted uses. 3. There shall be practical difficulties in complying with this chapter. “Practical difficulties,” as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner Page 622 of 679 3 proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this chapter. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. There are practical difficulties in complying with this chapter. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner. 4. The plight of the landowner shall be due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. The lot size is 4.91 acres which is slightly less than the required 5 acres. 5. The variance shall not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance shall not alter the essential character of the locality. There are other metal accessory structures in the locality. 6. A variance shall not be granted for any use that is not allowed under the ordinance for property in the zoning district where the subject site is located. Accessory structures are allowed in R, Rural zoning districts. 7. In accordance with M.S. § 462.357, Subd. 6, variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in M.S. § 216C.06, Subd. 14, when in harmony with the zoning ordinance. Not applicable. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the variance to allow for the construction of an accessory building with metal panel siding with vertical orientation and exposed fasteners on the entire building is approved with the following conditions: 1. Existing non-compliant accessory structures shall be removed prior to issuing a building permit. This includes but is not limited to the storage containers currently onsite. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes this _________day of ______________, 2025. ___________________________ Rob Rafferty, Mayor Page 623 of 679 4 ATTEST: ___________________________ Roberta Colotti, CMC, City Clerk Page 624 of 679 1 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 7C STAFF ORIGINATOR: Diane Hankee PE, City Engineer MEETING DATE: August 11, 2025 TOPIC: Consider 2nd Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 14-25, Amending City Code Chapter 218.01 (10)(e) Relating to Special Connection Fees VOTE REQUIRED: Simple Majority ______________________________________________________________________________ INTRODUCTION Staff is requesting council consideration of the 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 14-25 to amend City Code Chapter 218.01 (10)(e) for special connection fees. BACKGROUND On June 10, 2025 the City Council accepted the Feasibility Study’s for the 2024/2025 Street Reconstruction and Sewer and Water Extension Project for both the Colonial Woods and Pine Haven neighborhoods. The funding identified a special connection fee for each neighborhood as follows: i. Colonial Woods Sewer $4,000 Water $3,908 Total $7,908 ii. Pine Haven Sewer $2,647 Water $3,280 Total $5,927 The sanitary sewer and watermain have now been installed and tested and ready for connection. The next step is establish the special connection fee. The City held a public hearing on July 28, 2025 for the amendment where there were no comments received. The full ordinance will be published and no resolution for a summary publication will be required. RECOMMENDATION Page 625 of 679 2 Staff is recommending approval of the 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 14-25 amending City Code Section 218.10 (10)(e) relating to special connection fees. ATTACHMENTS 1. Ordinance No. 14-25 Page 626 of 679 1st Reading: July 28, 2025 Publication: August 19, 2025 2nd Reading and Adoption: August 11, 2025 Effective: September 18, 2025 CITY OF LINO LAKES ORDINANCE NO. 14-25 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 218.01 (10) (E) RELATING TO SPECIAL CONNECTION FEES The City Council of Lino Lakes ordains: Section 1. City Code Chapter 218.01 (10)(e) Relating to City Trunk Utility Connection Fees is hereby amended to include the following: 3. Special Connection Fees In addition to the charges above, the following projects shall have special connection fees: 2025 Street Reconstruction and Municipal Sewer and Water Extension i. Colonial Woods Sewer $4,000 Water $3,908 ii. Pine Haven Sewer $2,647 Water $3,280 Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this 11th day of August, 2025. ____________________________ Rob Rafferty, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ Roberta Colotti, CMC, City Clerk Page 627 of 679 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 7D STAFF ORIGINATOR: Diane Hankee, PE City Engineer MEETING DATE: August 11, 2025 TOPIC: Consider Resolution No. 25-107, Approving Payment No. 7 and Final, 2024 Street Rehabilitation and Trunk Watermain Project VOTE REQUIRED: Simple Majority ___________________________________________________________________ INTRODUCTION Staff is requesting Council consideration to finalize the 2024 Street Rehabilitation and Trunk Watermain Project. BACKGROUND On February 12, 2024, the City Council passed Resolution 24-13, awarding the contract for the 2024 Street Rehabilitation and Trunk Watermain Project to Park Construction Company in the amount of $1,875,110.71 for the base bid and the bid alternate. Construction of the project began in spring of 2024 and was completed in fall of 2024. The final contract amount is $1,743,343.50 for the 2024 Street Rehabilitation Project. Funding for the project is through the Pavement Management fund and the Water Operating fund. RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of Resolution No. 25-107 Approving Payment No. 7 and Final, 2024 Street Rehabilitation and Trunk Watermain Project in the amount of $21,821.81 to Park Construction Company. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution No. 25-107 2. Pay Request No. 7 & Final – 2024 Street Rehabilitation and Trunk Watermain Project Page 628 of 679 CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 25-107 RESOLUTION APPROVING PAYMENT NO. 7 AND FINAL FOR THE 2024 STREET REHABILITATION AND TRUNK WATERMAIN PROJECT WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 24-13 of the Council adopted on February 12, 2024, awarding the contract for the 2024 Street Rehabilitation and Trunk Watermain Project to Park Construction Company in the amount of $1,875,110.71; and WHEREAS, a complete summary of costs are detailed in Payment No. 7 (Final) where the final Base Bid amount and the Bid Alternate for the 2024 Street Rehabilitation and Trunk Watermain Project was $1,743,343.50; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota that Payment Request No. 7 (Final) is approved in the amount of $21,821.81 for the 2024 Street Rehabilitation and Trunk Watermain Project. Adopted by the Council of the City of Lino Lakes this 11th day of August 2025. _______________________________ Rob Rafferty, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________ Roberta Colotti, City Clerk Page 629 of 679 July 22, 2025 WĂŐĞϲϯϬŽĨϲϳϵ 2024 Street Rehabilitation and Trunk Water Main Project Final Pay Voucher 7 Page 2 of 7 Payment Summary No. Up Through Date Work Certified Per Voucher Amount Retained Per Voucher Amount Paid Per Voucher 1 05/02/2024 $422,919.50 $21,145.98 $401,773.52 2 05/30/2024 $869,748.80 $43,487.44 $826,261.36 3 06/27/2024 $135,950.20 $6,797.51 $129,152.69 4 07/26/2024 $269,181.50 $13,459.07 $255,722.43 5 10/09/2024 $39,877.60 ($67,513.22) $107,390.82 6 12/17/2024 $1,233.20 $12.33 $1,220.87 7 07/14/2025 $4,432.70 ($17,389.11) $21,821.81 Funding Category Name Work Certified To Date Less Amount Retained Less Previous Payments Amount Paid This Voucher Total Amount Paid To Date Operating Fund $158,049.90 $0.00 $156,469.41 $1,580.49 $158,049.90 Pavement Management Fund $588,386.20 $0.00 $578,114.16 $10,272.04 $588,386.20 Stormwater Utility Fund $39,109.70 $0.00 $38,718.40 $391.30 $39,109.70 Trunk Water Fund $957,797.70 $0.00 $948,219.72 $9,577.98 $957,797.70 Accounting Number Funding Source Amount Paid This Voucher Revised Contract Amount Funds Encumbered To Date Paid Contractor To Date 1 Local $10,272.04 $634,299.31 $634,299.31 $588,386.20 2 Local $391.30 $46,801.50 $46,801.50 $39,109.70 3 Local $9,577.98 $1,019,679.60 $1,019,679.60 $957,797.70 4 Local $1,580.49 $174,330.30 $174,330.30 $158,049.90 Contract Item Status Line No. Item Description Unit Unit Price Contract Quantity Quantity This Voucher Amount This Voucher Quantity To Date Amount To Date 1 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS $99,300.00 1 0 $0.00 1 $99,300.00 2 2101.502 CLEARING EACH $485.00 31 0 $0.00 31 $15,035.00 3 2101.502 GRUBBING EACH $76.50 30 0 $0.00 25 $1,912.50 4 2104.502 REMOVE CASTING EACH $240.00 36 0 $0.00 36 $8,640.00 5 2104.502 REMOVE CASTING EACH $240.00 1 0 $0.00 1 $240.00 6 2104.502 SALVAGE CASTING EACH $240.00 40 0 $0.00 40 $9,600.00 7 2104.502 REMOVE DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH $368.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 8 2104.502 REMOVE GATE VALVE & BOX EACH $1,290.00 12 0 $0.00 12 $15,480.00 9 2104.502 REMOVE HYDRANT EACH $1,860.00 2 0 $0.00 2 $3,720.00 10 2104.502 SALVAGE STRUCTURE EACH $264.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 11 2104.502 SALVAGE SIGN EACH $40.80 10 0 $0.00 3 $122.40 12 2104.503 SALVAGE CHAIN LINK FENCE L F $53.20 15 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 Page 631 of 679 2024 Street Rehabilitation and Trunk Water Main Project Final Pay Voucher 7 Page 3 of 7 Contract Item Status Line No. Item Description Unit Unit Price Contract Quantity Quantity This Voucher Amount This Voucher Quantity To Date Amount To Date 13 2104.503 SAWING CONCRETE PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) L F $5.60 100 0 $0.00 100 $560.00 14 2104.503 SAWING BIT PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) L F $0.01 4800 0 $0.00 4800 $48.00 15 2104.503 REMOVE CURB & GUTTER L F $10.00 1680 0 $0.00 1628 $16,280.00 16 2104.503 SALVAGE CURB L F $20.40 120 0 $0.00 80 $1,632.00 17 2104.504 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT S Y $13.80 90 0 $0.00 70 $966.00 18 2104.504 REMOVE CONCRETE PAVEMENT S Y $21.40 100 0 $0.00 105 $2,247.00 19 2104.504 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT S Y $10.70 90 0 $0.00 45 $481.50 20 2104.504 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT S Y $43.20 1630 0 $0.00 1543 $66,657.60 21 2104.504 REMOVE WATER MAIN L F $8.30 54 0 $0.00 56 $464.80 22 2104.518 REMOVE TIMBER DECK S F $124.00 6 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 23 2104.601 SALVAGE AND REINSTALL LANDSCAPE STRUCTURES L S $5,990.00 1 0 $0.00 1 $5,990.00 24 2104.603 ABANDON WATER MAIN L F $17.60 850 0 $0.00 850 $14,960.00 25 2106.507 EXCAVATION - COMMON C Y $0.01 650 20 $0.20 20 $0.20 26 2106.507 EXCAVATION - SUBGRADE C Y $0.01 420 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 27 2106.507 SELECT GRANULAR EMBANKMENT (CV) C Y $0.01 420 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 28 2106.507 EXCAVATION - CHANNEL AND POND C Y $42.00 150 0 $0.00 120 $5,040.00 29 2106.601 DEWATERING LS $29,800.00 1 0 $0.00 1 $29,800.00 30 2106.610 EXPLORATORY EXCAVATION HOUR $259.00 20 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 31 2108.504 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE 5 S Y $1.10 2780 0 $0.00 110 $121.00 32 2123.610 SKID LOADER HOUR $173.00 15 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 33 2123.610 STREET SWEEPER (WITH PICKUP BROOM) HOUR $173.00 30 0 $0.00 27 $4,671.00 34 2123.610 UTILITY CREW HOUR $601.00 60 0 $0.00 15 $9,015.00 35 2130.523 WATER MGAL $56.00 40 0 $0.00 95.2 $5,331.20 36 2211.509 AGGREGATE BASE (CV) CLASS 5 TON $0.01 580 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 Page 632 of 679 2024 Street Rehabilitation and Trunk Water Main Project Final Pay Voucher 7 Page 4 of 7 Contract Item Status Line No. Item Description Unit Unit Price Contract Quantity Quantity This Voucher Amount This Voucher Quantity To Date Amount To Date 37 2232.504 MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE S Y $1.65 1290 0 $0.00 1290 $2,128.50 38 2232.504 MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE (1.5") S Y $1.40 13470 0 $0.00 13470 $18,858.00 39 2232.504 MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE (2.0") S Y $1.70 1720 0 $0.00 1720 $2,924.00 40 2331.603 JOINT ADHESIVE L F $0.64 16100 0 $0.00 16100 $10,304.00 41 2360.504 TYPE SP 9.5 WEAR CRS MIX (2,B) 3.0" THICK S Y $53.40 90 0 $0.00 60 $3,204.00 42 2360.509 TYPE SP 9.5 BIT MIXTURE FOR PATCHING TON $182.00 310 0 $0.00 171 $31,122.00 43 2360.509 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (2,B) TON $88.50 2730 0 $0.00 2702 $239,127.00 44 2360.509 TYPE SP 12.5 NON WEAR COURSE MIX (2,B) TON $105.00 80 37.1 $3,895.50 37.1 $3,895.50 45 2501.602 TRASH GUARD FOR 15" PIPE APRON EACH $880.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 46 2503.601 CLEAN STORM SEWER LS $10,400.00 1 0 $0.00 1 $10,400.00 47 2503.602 RECONNECT SANITARY SEWER SERVICE EACH $782.00 3 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 48 2503.602 TELEVISE SANITARY SEWER SERVICE EACH $570.00 6 0 $0.00 7 $3,990.00 49 2504.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING WATER MAIN EACH $1,550.00 14 0 $0.00 14 $21,700.00 50 2504.602 HYDRANT ASSEMBLY EACH $9,110.00 3 0 $0.00 3 $27,330.00 51 2504.602 6" GATE VALVE & BOX EACH $3,570.00 2 0 $0.00 2 $7,140.00 52 2504.602 8" GATE VALVE & BOX EACH $4,600.00 1 0 $0.00 1 $4,600.00 53 2504.602 10" GATE VALVE & BOX EACH $5,540.00 1 0 $0.00 1 $5,540.00 54 2504.602 12" GATE VALVE & BOX EACH $6,980.00 3 0 $0.00 3 $20,940.00 55 2504.602 16" GATE VALVE & BOX EACH $23,600.00 2 0 $0.00 2 $47,200.00 56 2504.602 IRRIGATION SYSTEM REPAIR EACH $270.00 5 0 $0.00 10 $2,700.00 57 2504.602 SACRIFICIAL ANODE BAG (32 LB) EACH $782.00 13 0 $0.00 13 $10,166.00 58 2504.602 ADJUST GATE VALVE EACH $445.00 9 0 $0.00 9 $4,005.00 59 2504.603 6" WATERMAIN DUCTILE IRON CL 52 L F $82.80 30 0 $0.00 22 $1,821.60 60 2504.603 16" WATERMAIN DUCTILE IRON CL 52 L F $129.00 150 0 $0.00 105 $13,545.00 Page 633 of 679 2024 Street Rehabilitation and Trunk Water Main Project Final Pay Voucher 7 Page 5 of 7 Contract Item Status Line No. Item Description Unit Unit Price Contract Quantity Quantity This Voucher Amount This Voucher Quantity To Date Amount To Date 61 2504.603 12" PVC WATERMAIN L F $93.20 60 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 62 2504.603 12" PVC WATERMAIN (DIRECTIONAL DRILLED) L F $171.00 2370 0 $0.00 2400 $410,400.00 63 2504.603 18" WATERMAIN HDPE (DIRECTIONAL DRILLED) L F $280.00 880 0 $0.00 863.4 $241,752.00 64 2504.604 4" POLYSTYRENE INSULATION S Y $72.50 10 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 65 2504.608 DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS LB $10.40 7021 0 $0.00 2089 $21,725.60 66 2506.502 INSTALL CASTING EACH $948.00 36 0 $0.00 36 $34,128.00 67 2506.502 INSTALL CASTING EACH $880.00 1 0 $0.00 1 $880.00 68 2506.602 INSTALL STRUCTURE EACH $932.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 69 2506.602 GRATE CASTING SPECIAL EACH $164.00 40 0 $0.00 40 $6,560.00 70 2506.602 CHIMNEY SEAL EACH $289.00 36 0 $0.00 72 $20,808.00 71 2511.507 RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS II C Y $124.00 8 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 72 2521.518 6" CONCRETE WALK S F $16.70 322 0 $0.00 376 $6,279.20 73 2531.503 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618 L F $36.00 930 0 $0.00 1199 $43,164.00 74 2531.503 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN SPECIAL L F $36.00 740 0 $0.00 410 $14,760.00 75 2531.504 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT S Y $94.30 90 0 $0.00 70 $6,601.00 76 2531.618 TRUNCATED DOMES S F $61.80 80 0 $0.00 32 $1,977.60 77 2554.603 PORTABLE NON-CONCRETE BARRIER L F $20.40 140 0 $0.00 140 $2,856.00 78 2554.603 RELOCATE PORTABLE NON- CONCRETE BARRIER L F $7.65 140 0 $0.00 140 $1,071.00 79 2557.602 REPAIR DOG FENCE EACH $211.00 4 0 $0.00 3 $633.00 80 2557.603 INSTALL CHAIN LINK FENCE L F $124.00 15 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 81 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS $5,920.00 1 0 $0.00 1 $5,920.00 82 2563.610 FLAGGER HOUR $191.00 20 0 $0.00 20 $3,820.00 83 2564.602 INSTALL SALVAGED SIGN EACH $179.00 10 3 $537.00 3 $537.00 84 2573.502 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH $200.00 40 0 $0.00 41 $8,200.00 Page 634 of 679 2024 Street Rehabilitation and Trunk Water Main Project Final Pay Voucher 7 Page 6 of 7 Contract Item Status Line No. Item Description Unit Unit Price Contract Quantity Quantity This Voucher Amount This Voucher Quantity To Date Amount To Date 85 2573.503 SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG TYPE WOOD FIBER L F $3.05 400 0 $0.00 1000 $3,050.00 86 2574.507 COMMON TOPSOIL BORROW C Y $45.70 330 0 $0.00 294 $13,435.80 87 2574.508 FERTILIZER TYPE 3 LB $2.00 105 0 $0.00 30 $60.00 88 2575.504 SODDING TYPE LAWN S Y $11.00 2000 0 $0.00 2220 $24,420.00 89 2575.504 ROLLED EROSION PREVENTION CATEGORY 25 S Y $6.10 300 0 $0.00 500 $3,050.00 90 2575.505 SEEDING ACRE $51,000.00 0.06 0 $0.00 0.06 $3,060.00 91 2575.505 RAPID STABILIZATION METHOD 2 ACRE $5,100.00 0.5 0 $0.00 1 $5,100.00 92 2575.508 SEED MIXTURE 33-261 LB $51.00 2 0 $0.00 6 $306.00 93 2104.502 REMOVE CASTING EACH $240.00 4 0 $0.00 4 $960.00 94 2104.502 SALVAGE CASTING EACH $240.00 2 0 $0.00 2 $480.00 95 2104.503 SAWING BIT PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) L F $1.95 110 0 $0.00 144 $280.80 96 2104.503 REMOVE CURB & GUTTER L F $16.00 70 0 $0.00 144 $2,304.00 97 2104.504 REMOVE CONCRETE PAVEMENT S Y $13.80 60 0 $0.00 50 $690.00 98 2104.504 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT S Y $10.50 30 0 $0.00 32 $336.00 99 2123.610 SKID LOADER HOUR $173.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 100 2123.610 STREET SWEEPER (WITH PICKUP BROOM) HOUR $173.00 2 0 $0.00 2 $346.00 101 2123.610 UTILITY CREW HOUR $601.00 4 0 $0.00 4 $2,404.00 102 2130.523 WATER MGAL $0.01 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 103 2232.504 MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE (1.5") S Y $2.30 1110 0 $0.00 1125 $2,587.50 104 2331.603 JOINT ADHESIVE L F $0.64 1250 0 $0.00 1250 $800.00 105 2360.509 TYPE SP 9.5 BIT MIXTURE FOR PATCHING TON $204.00 10 0 $0.00 9.7 $1,978.80 106 2360.509 TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (2,B) TON $92.60 180 0 $0.00 183 $16,945.80 107 2504.602 ADJUST GATE VALVE EACH $307.00 1 0 $0.00 1 $307.00 108 2506.502 INSTALL CASTING EACH $1,060.00 4 0 $0.00 4 $4,240.00 Page 635 of 679 2024 Street Rehabilitation and Trunk Water Main Project Final Pay Voucher 7 Page 7 of 7 Contract Item Status Line No. Item Description Unit Unit Price Contract Quantity Quantity This Voucher Amount This Voucher Quantity To Date Amount To Date 109 2506.602 GRATE CASTING SPECIAL EACH $880.00 2 0 $0.00 2 $1,760.00 110 2506.602 CHIMNEY SEAL EACH $289.00 4 0 $0.00 8 $2,312.00 111 2531.503 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN SPECIAL L F $54.90 70 0 $0.00 144 $7,905.60 112 2573.502 STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION EACH $201.00 2 0 $0.00 2 $402.00 113 2574.507 COMMON TOPSOIL BORROW C Y $176.00 3 0 $0.00 3 $528.00 114 2574.508 FERTILIZER TYPE 3 LB $2.00 1 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 115 2575.504 SODDING TYPE LAWN S Y $14.00 20 0 $0.00 19 $266.00 Bid Totals: $4,432.70 $1,743,343.50 Project Category Totals Category Amount This Voucher Amount To Date ALTERNATE 1 - ASPEN LANE $0.00 $47,833.50 SCHEDULE A - BASE BID $4,432.70 $1,695,510.00 Contract Change Item Status CC CC No. Line No. Item Description Units Unit Price Contract Quantity Quantity This Voucher Amount This Voucher Quantity To Date Amount To Date Contract Change Totals: Contract Change Totals No. Contract Change Description Amount This Voucher Amount To Date Material On Hand Additions Line No. Item Description Date Added Comments Material On Hand Balance Line No. Item Description Date Added Used Remaining Page 636 of 679 1 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 7E STAFF ORIGINATOR: Diane Hankee PE, City Engineer MEETING DATE: August 11, 2025 TOPIC: Consider Resolution No. 25-108, Approving Trunk Utility Agreement, Natures Refuge North VOTE REQUIRED: Simple Majority ______________________________________________________________________________ INTRODUCTION Staff is requesting City Council consideration to approve a Trunk Utility Agreement for the installation of utilities at Natures Refuge North. BACKGROUND On May 12, 2025 the City Council approved the PUD preliminary plan and plat for the Natures Refuge North project. The applicant, M/I Homes of Minneapolis/St. Paul, LLC, is proposing to plat and develop a 94-lot residential subdivision on 60 acres north of Natures Refuge. On May 27, 2025 the City Council approved a Grading Agreement for the Natures Refuge North project. The applicant has commenced grading on the site. The applicant has requested to start installing the trunk utilities including the deep sanitary sewer lift station manhole in the fall of 2025. M/I Homes will acknowledge through the Trunk Utility Agreement that they are completing this work at their own risk and prior to final plat approval. Final plat will be presented City Council on September 8, 2025. The applicant is required to submit a cash escrow to cover City Costs in the amount of $145,032.00 along with a letter of credit in the amount of $3,120,729.00 to secure completion of the improvements. RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of Resolution No. 25-108 for a Trunk Utility Agreement, Natures Refuge North. ATTACHMENTS Page 637 of 679 2 1. Resolution No. 25-108 2. Trunk Utility Agreement Page 638 of 679 CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 25-108 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE TRUNK UTILITY AGREEMENT FOR NATURES REFUGE NORTH WHEREAS, the City Council approved the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Preliminary Plan/Preliminary Plat for the Natures Refuge North on May 12, 2025, and WHEREAS, the City has reviewed the utility plans and found them to be in conformance with the City Standard Specifications for Construction, and WHEREAS, The Developer of the Natures Refuge North project is required to submit a cash escrow to cover City Costs in the amount of $145,032.00 and a letter of credit in the amount of $3,120,729.00 to secure completion of the utility improvements. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Lino Lakes that the Trunk Utility Agreement between M/I Homes of Minneapolis/St. Paul LLC. and the City of Lino Lakes for the Natures Refuge North PUD is hereby approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute such agreement on behalf of the City. Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this 11th day of August, 2025. _______________________________ Rob Rafferty, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________ Roberta Colotti, City Clerk Page 639 of 679 TRUNK UTILITY AGREEMENT Natures Refuge North THIS AGREEMENT is made this _____ day of ____________, 2025, by and between the City of Lino Lakes (“City”), a Minnesota municipal corporation, and M/I Homes of Minneapolis/St. Paul LLC. (“Developer”). 1. Subdivision. Developer received preliminary plat approval from the City by Resolution No. 25-61 for a plat known as Natures Refuge North (“Subdivision”). Unless otherwise stated, all terms and conditions of this Agreement relate to work within the Subdivision. 2. Legal Description of Property. The Legal Description is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 3. Developer Plans. a. The subject property shall have sanitary sewer, water, and storm sewer utilities installed in accordance with the following Developer Plans, original copies of which are on file with the City Engineer. The Developer Plans may be prepared and revised after entering into this Agreement but must be approved by the City before commencement of any work. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Agreement, this Agreement shall control. b. The Developer Plans as of the date of this Agreement are Natures Refuge North 1st Addition Sanitary Sewer, Watermain, Storm Sewer and Street Construction Plans containing 19 sheets, prepared by Carlson McCain, dated June 26, 2025. The street construction portion of the plans are not party to this agreement. 4. Trunk Utility Installation Prior to Final Plat Approval. The Developer may install sanitary sewer, water, and storm sewer utilities on the Exhibit A property at its sole cost in conformance with the Developer Plans. In the event the early utility installation work needs to be modified due to changes in the Developer plans required by the City or other jurisdictional authority, Developer shall make the changes at its own expense. Developer expressly acknowledges that installing utilities on the site prior to receiving full project approvals is done at the Developer’s sole risk. 5. Permits. The Developer shall be responsible for securing all utility installation and development approvals and all other required permits from all appropriate Federal, State, Regional and Local jurisdictions prior to the commencement of the utility installation and construction. 6. Developer Improvements. The Developer shall secure a contractor to install the improvements described in this paragraph, or otherwise required herein to be installed by Developer, hereinafter referred to as the “Developer Improvements,” which Page 640 of 679 Natures Refuge North Trunk Utility Agreement August 11, 2025 page 2 contractor shall be approved by the City in its absolute and sole discretion. The Developer Improvements shall be constructed per the City Standard Specifications for Construction January 2024. The estimated cost of Developer Improvements is as shown on Exhibit B attached hereto. All Developer Improvements shall require City inspection and approval and, where appropriate, the approval of any other governmental agency having jurisdiction. The Developer shall construct and install at the Developer's sole cost and expense the following improvements according to the following terms and conditions: a. Site Grading. Not applicable to this Agreement. There is a separate Grading Agreement for Exhibit A property Resolution No. 25-66. b. Site Improvements i. The street right-of-way, storm water storage ponds, and surface water drainage ways are to be graded per a separate early grading agreement. Surface water management systems shall be maintained by the Developer until they are accepted by the City. ii. The Developer shall be responsible for ascertaining that site geotechnical and groundwater conditions are adequate and conforming with the site improvements as proposed. The Developer shall provide testing from an approved testing company. iii. The Developer shall install sanitary sewer, water, and storm sewer utilities. The Developer’s engineer shall certify in writing, with an as-built survey, that utility installation complies with the approved construction plans. iv. The Developer shall promptly clear dirt and debris within public rights-of- way and drainage and utility easements resulting from construction by the Developer, its purchasers, builders and contractors within five (5) days after notification by the City. The Developer shall be responsible for all necessary street and storm sewer maintenance, including street sweeping, unless otherwise released by the City. 7. Time of Performance. The Developer shall install all required improvements enumerated in Paragraph 6 by November 30, 2025. The Developer may request a reasonable extension of time from the City, and the City will consider the extension in its sole discretion. If the extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases and the extended completion date. Page 641 of 679 Natures Refuge North Trunk Utility Agreement August 11, 2025 page 3 8. City Improvements. No City installed improvements are proposed to be constructed. 9. Record Drawings. a. Upon project completion, Developer shall submit record drawings, in electronic format, of utilities constructed by Developer. The files shall be drawn in Anoka County NAD 83 Coordinate system and provided in both AutoCAD .dwg and Adobe .pdf file formats. The plans shall include accurate locations, dimensions, elevations, grades, slopes and all other pertinent information concerning the complete work. b. No securities will be fully released until all record drawings have been submitted and accepted by the City Engineer. 10. Faithful Performance of Construction Contracts and Security. a. The Developer will fully and faithfully comply with all terms and conditions of any and all contracts entered into by the Developer for the installation and construction of all Developer Improvements. Concurrent with the execution hereof by the Developer, the Developer will furnish to, and at all times thereafter maintain with the City, a cash deposit, certified check, or Irrevocable Letter of Credit, based on thirty-five (35%) percent of the total estimated cost of Developer's Improvements as determined by the City Engineer. b. Irrevocable Letter of Credit. If an Irrevocable Letter of Credit is utilized, it shall be for the exclusive use and benefit of the City of Lino Lakes and shall state that it is issued to guarantee and assure performance by the Developer of all the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement and construction of all required improvements referenced therein in accordance with the ordinances and specifications of the City. The letter shall be in a form, and from a bank, as approved by the City. The City reserves the right to draw, in whole or in part, on any portion of the Irrevocable Letter of Credit for the purpose of guaranteeing the terms and conditions of this agreement. The Irrevocable Letter of Credit shall be automatically extended for additional periods of one year from present or future expiration dates on an annual basis, unless at least sixty (60) days prior to the expiration date, the Community Development Director and City Engineer, are notified by certified mail or overnight courier, that the Letter of Credit will not be extended. c. Alternatively, the Developer may enter into a Public Improvement Surety Agreement, subject to City approval. d. Reduction of Security. The Developer may request reduction of the Letter of Credit or cash deposit based on prepayment or the value of the completed improvements at the time of the requested reduction. Page 642 of 679 Natures Refuge North Trunk Utility Agreement August 11, 2025 page 4 11. Warranty. The Developer warrants all utility work required to be performed by it against poor material and faulty workmanship for a period of two years after its completion and acceptance by the City. Prior to final acceptance of the Developer Improvements the City shall require a Surety Bond or Cash Escrow to cover the warranty provisions of this Agreement. The amount shall be 20 % of the original cost of construction identify in Exhibit B. 12. Dedication. The Developer shall grant to the City, at no cost to the City, temporary public drainage and utility easements covering the sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer utility improvements. The temporary easements for sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer shall be co-extensive with street right-of-way and permanent easements within which the utilities are located, as those rights-of-way and easements are shown on the Preliminary Plat. The temporary easements shall be in effect until a final plat is approved over said easement area. The required easements shall be in writing, in recordable form, containing such terms and conditions as the City shall determine. 13. Ownership of Improvements. Upon completion and City acceptance of the sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer installation those improvements, lying within the approved easements, shall become City property without further notice or action. Unless the improvements are to be deemed private infrastructure. 14. Recording and Release. The Developer agrees that the terms of this Trunk Utility Installation Agreement shall be a covenant on any and all property included in the Subdivision. The Developer agrees that the City shall have the right to record a copy of this Agreement with the Anoka County Recorder to give notice to future purchasers and owners. This shall be recorded against the Subdivision described on Page 1. 15. Escrow for City’s Costs. a. The Developer agrees to establish a non-interest bearing escrow account with the City in an amount determined by the City Administrator or their designee for the payment of all costs incurred by the City related to the development of the Subdivision including, but not limited to, the following (See Exhibit B for breakdown of costs): i. Administration - 3% of Developer Improvement Costs ii. Estimated City Engineering and Legal Costs b. If the above escrowed amounts are insufficient, the Developer shall make such additional deposits as required by the City. The City shall have a right to reimburse itself from the Escrow with suitable documentation supporting the charges. Page 643 of 679 Natures Refuge North Trunk Utility Agreement August 11, 2025 page 5 16. Developer Fees. Not Applicable. 17. Assessment of Charges and Waiver of Rights. Not Applicable. 18. Building Permits. No building permits will be issued and no connections to the municipal utilities will be allowed until the filing of the final plat. 19. Hours of Construction Activity. All construction activity shall be limited to the hours as follows: Monday through Friday 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Sunday and Holidays No working hours allowed 20. Insurance and Indemnity. Developer or its general contractor shall take out and maintain until one year after the City accepted the Developer Improvements, public liability and property damage insurance covering personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise out of the Developer's or general contractor’s work, as the case may be, or the work of its subcontractors or by one directly or indirectly employed by any of them. Limits for bodily injury and death shall be not less than Five Hundred Thousand and no/100 ($500,000.00) Dollars for one person and Two Million and no/100 ($2,000,000.00) Dollars for each occurrence; limits for property damage shall be not less than One Million and no/100 ($1,000,000.00) Dollars for each occurrence; or a combination single limit policy of Two Million and no/100 ($2,000,000.00) Dollars or more. The City, its employees, its agents and assigns shall be named as an additional insured on the policy, and the Developer or its general contractor shall file with the City a certificate evidencing coverage prior to the City signing the plat. The certificate shall provide that the City must be given ten days advance written notice of the cancellation of the insurance. The certificate may not contain any disclaimer for failure to give the required notice. Developer shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its officers, employees, and consultants from any loss, injury or damage arising out of or related to the early installation of utilities authorized by this Agreement. 21. Developer’s Default. In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, including but not limited to attorney and engineering fees, provided the Developer is first given notice of the work in default, not less than 48 hours in advance. This Agreement is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, levy the cost in whole or in part as a Page 644 of 679 Natures Refuge North Trunk Utility Agreement August 11, 2025 page 6 special assessment against the Subject Property. Developer waives its rights to notice of hearing and hearing on such assessments and its right to appeal such assessments pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, chapter 429. 22. General. a. Binding Effect The terms and provisions hereof shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, representatives, successors and assigns of the parties hereto and shall be binding upon all future owners of all or any part of the Subdivision and shall be deemed covenants running with the land. b. Validity. If a portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph or phrase in this agreement is for any reason held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect or void any of the other provisions of the Development Agreement. c. Notices Whenever in this Agreement it shall be required or permitted that notice or demand be given or served by either party to this Agreement to or on the other party, such notice or demand shall be delivered personally, or mailed by United States mail to the addresses below, or sent by email to the email address below. Such notice or demand shall be deemed timely given when delivered personally or when deposited in the mail in accordance with the above or when emailed. The addresses of the parties are as set forth until changed by notice given as above. M/I Homes of Minneapolis/St. Paul, LLC Attn: John Rask 5354 Parkdale Drive #100 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 jrask@mihomes.com Community Development Director City of Lino Lakes 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014 mgrochala@linolakes.us Page 645 of 679 Natures Refuge North Trunk Utility Agreement August 11, 2025 page 7 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the Developer have caused this Development Agreement to be executed in their respective corporate names by their duly authorized officers, all as of the date and year first written above. CITY OF LINO LAKES By _________________________ Mayor ATTEST By _________________________ City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS COUNTY OF ANOKA ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on ________ day of ____________, 2025, by Rob Rafferty as Mayor of the City of Lino Lakes on behalf of said City. _______________________________ Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS COUNTY OF ANOKA ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on ________ day of ____________, 2025, by Roberta Colotti as City Clerk of the City of Lino Lakes on behalf of said City. _______________________________ Notary Public Page 646 of 679 Natures Refuge North Trunk Utility Agreement August 11, 2025 page 8 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 647 of 679 Natures Refuge North Trunk Utility Agreement August 11, 2025 page 9 Execution page of the Developer to the Development Agreement, dated as of the date and year first written above. DEVELOPER By ______________________ Its ______________________ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS COUNTY OF __________ ) On this _______ day of _______________, 2025, before me, a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared ____________, __________________ of ___________________. (Developer), who executed the foregoing instrument. ______________________________ Notary Public This instrument was drafted by: City of Lino Lakes 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, Minnesota 55014 Page 648 of 679 Natures Refuge North Trunk Utility Agreement August 11, 2025 page 10 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of Property SW1/4 OF NE1/4 OF SEC 5 TWP 31 RGE 22, EX RD SUBJ TO EASE OF REC And THE N1/2 OF NW1/4 OF SE1/4 OF SEC 5 TWP 31 RGE 22, SUBJ TO EASE OF REC Page 649 of 679 Natures Refuge North Trunk Utility Agreement August 11, 2025 page 11 EXHIBIT B Securities, Escrows & Fees Page 650 of 679 7/28/2025 EXHIBIT B Securities, Escrows & Fees PROJECT: Natures Refuge N Trunk Utility Installation AgreementNUMBER OF REU's:0 APPLICANT: M/I Homes of Minneapolis/St. Paul, LLC NO. OF LOT FRONTAGES 0 AREA (LOT 1 BLOCK 1):0 IMPROVEMENTS COST DEVELOPER IMPROVEMENT COSTS (Public) SITE GRADING $0 EROSION CONTROL $0 LANDSCAPING $0 TRAIL $0 STREETS $0 STORM SEWER CONST.$326,735 SANITARY SEWER CONST.$1,080,631 WATERMAIN CONST.$642,374 ENGINEERING & SURVEYING $30,746 Total $2,080,486 Letter of Credit Amount X 150%$3,120,729 ESCROW for CITY'S COSTS ADMINISTRATION $62,415 ENGINEER PLAN REVIEW $1,500 ENGINEER CONSTRUCTION SERVICES $72,817 PROJECT FINAL DOCUMENTS & CITY ENGINEER $2,300 STREET LIGHT INSTALLATION $0 STREET & STORMWATER MAINTENANCE $3,000 PROPERTY TAXES $0 TRAFFIC AND SIGNING IMPROVEMENTS $0 BOULEVARD TREE PLANTING $0 Total $142,032 DEVELOPMENT FEES PARK DEDICATION $0 PARK DEDICATION CREDIT $0 Subtotal Park Dedication Fee $0 AUAR $0 GIS MAPPING FEE $0 STREET LIGHTING OPERATION $0 Total $0 TRUNK SANITARY SEWER TRUNK CHARGE PER ACRE $0 AVAILABILITY CHARGE PER SAC UNIT $0 TRUNK SANITARY SEWER CREDIT $0 TRUNK WATERMAIN TRUNK CHARGE PER ACRE $0 AVAILABILITY CHARGE PER SAC UNIT $0 TRUNK WATERMAIN CREDIT $0 TOTAL TRUNK SEWER & WATER FEES $0 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT $0 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT CREDIT $0 TOTAL SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT FEES $0 Total $0 Letter of Credit Amount X 35% $0 SUMMARY OF SECURITIES, ESCROW & FEES SECURITY: DEVELOPER IMP'MENT COSTS $3,120,729 ESCROW FOR CITY COSTS $142,032 DEVELOPMENT FEES $0 SECURITY: TRUNK FEES $0 Page 651 of 679 1 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 7F STAFF ORIGINATOR: Michael Grochala, Community Development Director MEETING DATE: August 11, 2025 TOPIC: Consider Resolution No. 25-106 Approving a Joint Powers Agreement for the Continued Operation of the Vadnais Lakes Area Water Management Organization VOTE REQUIRED: ______________________________________________________________________________ INTRODUCTION Staff is requesting City Council consideration to approve the Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) for the Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization (VLAWMO). 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 103B.201 through 103B.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 103B.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. Page 652 of 679 2 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. 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: 1. 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. Page 653 of 679 3 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.). 11. The two amendments adopted in 2019 are incorporated into the JPA (insurance and liability & revenue bond authority). RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of Resolution No. 25-106. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution No. 25-106 2. Amended JPA Page 654 of 679 CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 25-106 RESOLUTION APPROVING A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR THE CONTINUED OPERATION OF THE VADNAIS LAKE AREA WATER MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION WHEREAS, the City has been a member of the Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization (“VLAWMO”) since it was originally establishment in 1983; and WHEREAS, the City’s participation in VLAWMO allows it to address its obligation under Minnesota Statutes, sections 103B.201 through 103B.253 to manage surface water within the watershed; and WHEREAS, the current joint powers agreement, which is a cooperative effort of all member communities with land in the watershed, expires on December 31, 2026; and WHEREAS, the attached joint powers agreement, which is incorporated herein by reference, updates the language in the joint powers agreement to better reflect how VLAWMO has actually operated for years, recognizes the storm sewer utility fee imposed by VLAWMO as its primary funding source, and provides for the continued operation of VLAWMO through January 1, 2036; and WHEREAS, the VLAWMO has funded many projects throughout the watershed, including in the City, which has contributed to improved surface water quality and ecological integrity within the watershed; and WHEREAS, the City Council determines it is in the best interests of the City to continue its participation in the VLAWMO to further its goals of improving water quality and in furtherance of satisfying its obligations to properly manage surface water in accordance with the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Lino Lakes, Minnesota that 1. The attached Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization Joint Powers Agreement is hereby approved and entered into by the City. 2. The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute the attached joint powers agreement on behalf of the City. Page 655 of 679 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes this 11th day of August, 2025. ___________________________ Rob Rafferty, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________ Roberta Colotti, CMC, City Clerk Page 656 of 679 1 VADNAIS LAKE AREA WATER MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT THIS JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into 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 (individually a “Member” and collectively the “Members”). RECITALS A. The Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization (“VLAWMO”) was organized in 1983 and is located in the northeast metro area within Ramsey 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. §§ 103B.201 to 103B.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 special 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 hereby reaffirmed as the entity charged with the authority and responsibility to manage VLAWMO. I. VLAWMO has also established a Technical Commission that performs a variety of functions to assist with VLAWMO’s operations and assist with developing VLAWMO’s annual budget. Page 657 of 679 2 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. § 103B.231, Minn. R., chap. 8410, and such other law as may apply. 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 Reaffirming the Establishment. The Members hereby reaffirm and ratify the establishment and continued operation of the “Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization” pursuant to the Act and such other laws and rules as may apply. 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 map 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 DEFINITIONS 2.1 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 given them in this section. (a) “Agreement” means this Agreement developed pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 103B.211 & 471.59 and which reestablishes and continues the Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization. (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. Page 658 of 679 3 (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 of its appointed Director. (d) “Area” means the boundaries of the Vadnais Lake Area Watershed as set forth on the official map incorporated herein by reference. (e) “Board of Directors” or “Board” means the governing board of VLAWMO consisting of one elected official from each of the Members which are parties to this Agreement. (f) “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. (h) “Commissioner” means a person appointed by each Member to the Technical Commission. (i) “Director” means the elected official appointed by each Member as its representative on the Board of Directors. (j) “Governing Body” means the city council of a Member city or the town board of the Member town. (k) “Local Water Management Plan” means a plan adopted by the each of the Members pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 103B.235 and Minn. R., part 8410.0160. (l) “Member” means each of the cities and the town that are parties to this Agreement. (m) “Special Legislation” means 2008 Minn. Laws Chap. 366, Art. 6, Sec. 47. (n) “Storm Sewer Utility” or “SSU” means the public utility established by VLAWMO pursuant to the Special Legislation. The Board establishes and certifies to the County for collection within the Area a Storm Sewer Utility fee for the management of surface water. Page 659 of 679 4 (o) “Technical Commission” or “TEC” means the commission established herein that is composed of technically skilled persons, appointed by each Member. (p) “Vadnais Lake Area Watershed” or “Watershed” means the area contained within a line drawn around the extremities of all terrain whose surface drainage is tributary to Vadnais Lake as shown on the official watershed map incorporated herein by reference. (q) “VLAWMO” means the “Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization” that is reestablished and continued pursuant to this Agreement. (r) “Watershed Management Plan” means a plan adopted by VLAWMO pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 103B.231. SECTION III ORGANIZATION OF VLAWMO 3.1 Board of Directors. The governing body of VLAWMO shall be the “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. 3.2 Appointment of Directors. Each Member shall appoint one representative to serve as the Member’s Director on the Board. The appointment process shall comply with the requirements in Minn. Stat. § 103B.227, subds. 1 and 2. 3.3 Appointment of Alternate Directors. Each Member may appoint one representative to serve as the Member’s Alternate Director on the Board. A Member’s Alternate Director may attend the meetings of the Board, but shall only be counted as part of the quorum and be allowed to vote on matters before the Board in the absence of the same Member’s Director. 3.4 Eligibility to Serve. Each Member shall determine the eligibility or qualification standards for its Director and Alternate Director appointments. Only current elected officials on the governing body of the Member are eligible to serve as a Director or Alternate Director. 3.5 Terms of Office. Directors and Alternate Directors serve three-year terms of office, which shall commence from the date of their appointment and will continue until their successors are selected. Each Member shall notify 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 Alternate Director, it shall provide VLAWMO written notice within 10 days of the removal. The governing body of the Member shall act within 90 days to appoint an elected official to fill the vacancy and shall promptly provide VLAWMO written notice of such appointment. Page 660 of 679 5 3.7 Vacancies. A Member shall notify 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 requirements of Minn. Stat. § 103B.227, subd. 2 and appoint someone to fill the vacancy. The Member shall promptly notify VLAWMO of the appointment in writing. The appointed person shall serve the unexpired term of the position. 3.8 Appointment of Technical Commission Commissioners. Each Member to this Agreement shall appoint one Commissioner, and may also appoint one Alternate Commissioner, to serve on the Technical Commission. A Member shall promptly appoint someone to fill a vacancy in its Commissioner or, if applicable, Alternate Commissioner positions. 3.9 Compensation. Directors, Alternate Directors, Commissioners, and Alternate Commissioners shall serve without compensation and without an expense allowance from VLAWMO. A 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 their service, in the discretion of the Member. 3.10 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, a Secretary-Treasurer, and such other officers as it deems necessary to conduct its meetings and affairs. An Alternate Director may not serve as an officer of VLAWMO. 3.11 Duties of Board Officers. (a) Chair. The Chair shall preside over meetings of the Board, sign checks, and review audits. In the absence of the Chair, the Vice Chair shall perform the Chair’s duties. In the absence of the Chair or Vice Chair, the Secretary-Treasurer shall 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. (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 elected Chair resigns or is removed from the Board. (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 records, 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 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 Page 661 of 679 6 another person, the Secretary-Treasurer shall supervise the performance of those duties. 3.12 Quorum. A majority of the Directors shall constitute a quorum at all Board meetings. No business or decision of the Board may be made without a quorum. 3.13 Meetings. Regular meetings of the Board shall be held on a schedule 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 and public notice shall be 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. 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. 3.15 Committees. The Board may establish such committees and subcommittees as it deems appropriate. At least one Board member shall be appointed as the Chairperson of each committee and all committees shall regularly report their activities to the Board. 3.16 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 IV POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS 4.1 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. No such amendment shall be adopted unless the language of the proposed amendment is 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 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 Data. The Board, in order to give effect to the purposes of the Act, may: (a) Acquire and record appropriate data within the Area; and Page 662 of 679 7 (b) 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 goals 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 VLAWMO in order to maximize the use of resources. 4.5 Transfer of Drainage System. VLAWMO shall have the authority 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 the Act and must be in conformance with the Watershed Management Plan. 4.6 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 County by November 30th each year to be placed on property taxes payable in the following year. 4.7 Capital Improvements. (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 Program, it will undertake the process to include it in the Watershed Management Plan, its budget, and to work cooperatively with the affected Member 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 each party toward the project, including associated engineering, planning, legal, and administrative costs. Page 663 of 679 8 (d) County Levy. 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 Watershed in accordance with its adopted plans. 4.9 Watershed Operations. The Board may order any Member to acquire, operate, construct or maintain dams, dikes, reservoirs and appurtenant works in accordance with adopted plans. 4.10 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. 4.11 Entrance upon Land. To the extent permitted by law, or with the owner’s permission, the Board or its designated representatives may enter upon lands within or outside the Watershed to make surveys and investigations to accomplish the purposes of VLAWMO and the Act. 4.12 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, any litigation, and on such other matters as the Board may request. 4.13 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 Office. VLAWMO shall maintain an office within the Area. All notices to VLAWMO shall be mailed or delivered to such office. 4.15 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: (a) VLAWMO is a separate and distinct public entity to which the Members have transferred all responsibility and control for action taken pursuant to this Agreement. (b) 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 in carrying out the terms of this Agreement. This Agreement does not constitute a waiver on the limitations of liability set forth in Minn. Stat. § 466.04. Page 664 of 679 9 (c) Nothing herein shall be construed to provide insurance coverage or indemnification to an officer, employee, or volunteer of any Member 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. (d) 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 Minn. Stat. § 471.59, subd. 1a, 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 Agreement except to the extent they have expressly agreed in writing to be responsible for the acts or omissions of the other Members. (e) 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 Financial Records. The Board shall maintain the books and accounts of VLAWMO consistent with generally accepted accounting principles. 4.17 Audit. The Board shall annually cause an independent certified audit of the books and accounts of VLAWMO. 4.18 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 Employees. The Board may employ or subcontract with such persons or entities as it determines are needed to fulfill defined responsibilities of VLAWMO with the approval of the Board. 4.20 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 and other applicable laws. 4.21 Annual Report to Members. The Board shall make and file a report with the administrator of each Members at least once each year that includes the following information: (a) The financial condition of VLAWMO; (b) The status of all VLAWMO projects and work; and Page 665 of 679 10 (c) The business transacted by VLAWMO and other matters which affect the interests of VLAWMO. 4.22 Records. VLAWMO’s books, reports and records shall be available for and open to inspection at reasonable times. 4.23 Planning. (a) Watershed Management Plan (Plan). 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 for approval. The Plan shall be compliant with 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. § 103B.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 be consistent with the Plan and state law. After consideration, but before adoption of a new or revised local water management plan, each Member 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, the local plan shall be deemed approved consistent with applicable state laws. 4.24 Other Powers. The Board may exercise such other powers 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 Members. SECTION V RESPONSIBILITIES AND DUTIES OF TECHNICAL COMMISSION 5.1 Establishment. The Board has established, and shall maintain, a Technical Commission (“TEC”) that provides technical expertise for the planning and operation of VLAWMO programs and projects. Each Member shall appoint one Commissioner, and may appoint one Alternate Commissioner, to serve on the TEC. Each Member shall determine the eligibility or qualification standards for its TEC appointments, following guidelines Page 666 of 679 11 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 day-to-day operations 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 meeting of the TEC each calendar year 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 appropriate. An Alternate Commissioner may not serve as an officer of the TEC. 5.4 Meetings. Regular monthly 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 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 Annual 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 appropriate 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 Page 667 of 679 12 typically occurs at the June Board meeting, but can occur at a different meeting as 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 1st each year to certify the SSU charges to the County Auditors for collection on the upcoming year’s property taxes. (f) Budget Adjustments. Before December 31st 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 year. (g) 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 the current year. 6.2 Funding. The annual budget is funded by one or more of the following: (a) The primary source of funding for the annual budget is the SSU charges imposed on properties within the Watershed each year pursuant to the Special Legislation. (b) Member contributions toward specific capital improvement projects. (c) 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 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. (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 using 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. Page 668 of 679 13 (b) Formula. To the extent a Member assessment is established, it shall be calculated based upon the following formula: (1) Forty percent (40%) based upon the assessed valuation of all real property of each government unit within the Area; (2) Forty percent (40%) based upon the total area of the property within each governmental unit with the Area; and (3) Twenty percent (20%) based upon the population of each governmental unit within the Area. (c) Payment. Each Member shall pay its Member assessment amount: (1) no later than January 31st in the year in which it is due; or pay one-half (1/2) of the assessment by January 31st of the year due and pay the second one-half (1/2) of the assessment by August 31st 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 Program and Funding. (a) Preparation. Each year the Board shall prepare a Capital Improvement Program and budget for Capital Improvements anticipated to be started or completed in the following year as described in the Watershed Management Plan. Each proposed Capital Improvement shall be specifically identified and its estimated cost and time for completion shall be provided. Only Capital Improvements included in the Watershed Management Plan, or its amendments, may be included in the capital improvement budget. (b) Funding. Capital Improvements may be funded by a combination of funds budgeted by VLAWMO as part of its annual budget, grants received by VLAWMO, and expenditures made directly by one or more Members. For jointly funded projects, VLAWMO shall agree in writing with the Members making direct contributions toward the Capital Improvement the amounts of funding and the responsibilities toward constructing and maintaining the Capital Improvement. 6.5 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 Minn. Stat., chap. 103B. 6.6 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 Page 669 of 679 14 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 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 Disbursements. 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 and the TEC’s Finance Officer for review and a copy provided to the Board. Checks issued by VLAWMO shall be signed by the VLAWMO Administrator and the Board Chair. The Secretary-Treasurer shall maintain a bond in the amount of at least $10,000. VLAWMO will be responsible for paying the premium on said bond. 6.9 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 VII DURATION OF THIS JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT 7.1 Duration of Agreement. Each Member agrees to be bound by the terms of this Agreement until December 31, 2036, 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 Member. 7.2 Termination of Agreement. This Agreement may be terminated prior to December 31, 2046, by the unanimous consent of the Members. If the Agreement is to be terminated, a notice of the intent to dissolve 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. Page 670 of 679 15 7.3 Dissolution. In addition to termination as provided above, any Member may petition the Board of Directors to dissolve 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 resolution recommend that VLAWMO be dissolved. Said resolution shall be submitted to each Member and if ratified by three-fourths of the governing bodies of all eligible Members within sixty (60) days, said Board shall dissolve VLAWMO allowing a reasonable time to complete work in progress, pay any outstanding obligations, and to dispose of personal property owned by 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 transferred, either jointly or severally, to the Members after all VLAWMO’s obligations are paid. The Board may determine to allocate and transfer VLAWMO assets to members in accordance with the formula set out herein for determining Member assessments. SECTION VIII MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 8.1 Adoption of Agreement. This Agreement shall be in full force and effect upon the filing of a copy of the resolution approving said Agreement by all six members. Said resolutions shall be filed with the Chair. VLAWMO shall provide each a Member a fully executed copy 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 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 any party may pursue any options available to it under 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”). Any entity 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 the governing bodies of the Members. Amendments will only take effect if adopted by all Page 671 of 679 16 governing bodies of the Members. Adopted amendments shall be evidenced by appropriate 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 any other party 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 Agreement to be executed in accordance with the authority of Minn. Stat. §§ 103B.211 and 471.59. Page 672 of 679 17 CITY OF GEM LAKE Adopted on the ____ of _______________ 2025. BY THE CITY COUNCIL _________________________________ Mayor Attest: _________________________ Clerk Page 673 of 679 18 CITY OF LINO LAKES Adopted on the ____ of _______________ 2025. BY THE CITY COUNCIL _________________________________ Mayor Attest: _________________________ Clerk Page 674 of 679 19 CITY OF NORTH OAKS Adopted on the ____ of _______________ 2025. BY THE CITY COUNCIL _________________________________ Mayor Attest: _________________________ Clerk Page 675 of 679 20 CITY OF VADNAIS HEIGHTS Adopted on the ____ of _______________ 2025. BY THE CITY COUNCIL _________________________________ Mayor Attest: _________________________ Clerk Page 676 of 679 21 CITY OF WHITE BEAR LAKE Adopted on the ____ of _______________ 2025. BY THE CITY COUNCIL _________________________________ Mayor Attest: _________________________ Clerk Page 677 of 679 22 WHITE BEAR TOWNSHIP Adopted on the ____ of _______________ 2025. BY THE TOWN BOARD _________________________________ Chairperson Attest: _________________________ Clerk Page 678 of 679 ? A@96 £¤61 £¤61 £¤61 §¨¦694 §¨¦35E Anoka Washington Ramsey Gem Lake Vadnais Heights North Oaks Little Canada Lino Lakes White Bear Twp. White Bear Lake West Vadnais Sucker Teal East Vadnais Gilfillan Charley Pleasant Deep Oak Knoll Pond Gem West Goose East Goose Birch Ox Amelia Wilkinson Tamarack FishBlack Basswood Lambert Rice Grass Long RC D 1 3 RCD 1 4 (Lamb e r t Creek) m /DNHV 3XEOLF'UDLQDJH 6\VWHPV 6WUHDPVDQG 'LWFKHV &LWLHV ,QWHUVWDWH 86+LJKZD\ 6WDWH+LJKZD\ &RXQW\5RDGV 11DWLRQDO :HWODQG ,QYHQWRU\ :HWODQGV 0LOHV Page 679 of 679