HomeMy WebLinkAbout15.D.1. Authorization to Distribute Revised AUAR for Valley Green Corporate Center
CONSENT
CITY OF SHAKOPEE IS: fJ, /,
Memorandum
CASELOG NO.:
TO: Mayor and City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Distribution of Revision to Alternative Urban Area wide Review for Valley
Green Corporate CenterlDean's Lake Residential
MEETING DATE: May 20, 2003
INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION:
Ryan Development has proposed changes in the concept plan for development of the subject site.
Principal among these is an increase in the number of residential units proposed as part of the project.
Because of those changes, a draft revision to the AUAR for the site has been prepared. Council is
asked to authorize distribution ofthe revision for the requisite review and comment period. While
there have been further revisions in the concept plan that currently put the number of residential units
at 499, the analysis in the revision is based on 565 units. The reason for that is that the analysis based
on the larger number of units will also suffice if the number of units is somewhat less
At the close of the review period, staff and WSB will prepare any responses to comments or
amendments required to the document. It will then be sent out for a 1 O-day period during which
"reviewing agencies" can file objections. Based on the fact that none were received for the last
revision to the AUAR, it seems unlikely that any objections would be received to this revision.
AL TERNATIVES:
1. Offer and pass a motion authorizing the distribution of the Revision to the AUAR for Valley
Green Corporate Center for review and comment per Minnesota Rules.
2. Do not authorize distribution, and provide direction to staff and WSB as to any changes the
Council wishes to have made before distribution.
.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer and pass a motion authorizing the distribution ofthe Revision to the AUAR for Valley Green
Corporate Center for review and comment per Minnesota Rules.
/'f' A;A'.v~L
R. Michael Leek
Community Development Director
G:\CC\2003\05-20\auarvalleygreenryan.doc- 1 -
IS. f). I.
--~--_._-- --- -
Due to the high cost in prod S -~e~ t>~
this document, staff reques~ ~
should you find you no longbl
need a copy that you return it to
Tamiin the Planning Department
for future distribution. Thank you.
1;&
wWk'IIYSB
'~:':}i;!m3;
2f i"/'
.
11
ii;
& Associates, Inc.
May 13,2003
~
Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Staff
City of Shakopee .
129 Holmes Street South
Shakopee,~ 55379
..
Re: Revised AUAR for the Valley Green Corporate Center Site
City of Shakopee, ~
WSB Project No. 1281-54
.
Dear Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Staff:
We have completed our revisions to the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR)
environmental document for the proposed Valley Green Corporate Center development in
the City of Shakopee. The AUAR document was modified to reflect the proposed land use
changes presented by Ryan Companies earlier this year. Land use changes anticipate
converting approximately 800,000 square feet of commercial, industrial, warehouse space
to medium-density residential within the Valley Corporate Center site. The Valley Green
Corporate Center site is located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Trunk
Highway 169 and County Road 83.
Attached for your review and your consideration for authorizing distribution is the revised
AUAR document to reflect the proposed changes in land use at the Valley Green Corporate
Center site. If you have any questions, please call me at (763) 287-7182.
Sincerely,
.
WSB & Associates, Inc.
~7n~
Todd Hubmer, P. .
Project Manager
.
Attachment
cc: Andrea Moffatt, WSB & Associates, Inc.
sb ~
.
F:I WPWIM1281-54\051303-hmcc.doc
Minneapoli~ . St. Cloud. Equal Opportunity Employer
REVISION
To The
ALTERNATIVE URBAN AREAWIDE REVIEW
DRAFT
For the
Valley Green Corporate Centerl
Dean's Lake Residential
Initially prepared July 10, 2000 by Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Supplemented July, 2002 by Bolton & Menk, Inc.
Revised May2003 by WSB & Associates, Inc.
()II .
.'4~]- ..
SHAKOPEE
May 2003
Alternative Urban Areawide Review Revision
Valley Green Corporate Center / Deal's Lake Residential
May 2003
Executive Summary
Purpose of Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR Revision)
Ryan Companies US, Inc. (Ryan) has become the master developer of the 265-acre mixed use Valley
Green Corporate Center and Dean's Lake Residential (Valley Green) project. The project is located south
of Trunk Highway 169 (TH 169), east of County State Aid Highway (CSAR 83) and adjacent to Dean's
Lake (Figure i-Vicinity Map). The natural features associated with the property include Dean's Lake,
wetlands and buffer areas, and remnant forest. Valley Green is envisioned as a mixed-use development
that includes a variety of business, commercial and residential land uses with measures to protect and
incorporate the natural features within the site.
Why Revise the Approved AUAR
In April 2003, Ryan Companies proposed additional modifications to the development plan proposed in
the 2002 FAUAR by reducing some of the office/warehouse land use and replacing it with medium
density residential. These changes will involve a land use and zoning change to be approved by the City
Council and Metropolitan Council prior to development. Prior to consideration of these changes by the
City Council, this update to the AUAR has been prepared to study the impacts to the area due to the
proposed changes.
Proiect Description I Historv
In June of 200 1, the City of Shakopee approved a preliminary plat for development of a business park,
referred to as Valley Green Corporate Center. AB part ofthe planning process, an Alternative Urban
Areawide Review (AUAR) was prepared for the property. The City approved the fmal AUAR in July of
2000. In July of2001, Ryan Companies entered into a purchase agreement with the property owners of
Valley Green. As Ryan began to analyze the site and the previously approved plat, they detemiined that
the site could be developed differently to establish a better relationship with the enviromnental features
located on the site and the surrounding land uses. To create this relationship, Ryan, the City, and the
City's consultant, Brauer and Associates, worked collaboratively to create a mixed-use development.
In 2003, Ryan developed a concept plan that reduced the amount of commerciallbusiness park and
increase the amount of medium-density housing. Due to this land use change that will also require a
zoning change, the City decided to revise the AUAR. The 2003 AUAR includes the analysis from the
2002 AUAR (Option A) and analysis for the newly proposed option (Option B) as described below:
Option A: This option was reviewed as part of the July 2002 AUAR and includes
2,000,000 - 2,100,000 square feet of commercial/office space and 258 attached
residential units on 265 acres. The discussion provided in this AUAR is generally the
discussion that was provided and reviewed as part of the July 2002 AUAR.
Option B: This option includes approximately 1,300,000 square feet of
commercial/office space, 565 townhome units (364 attached residential units and 106
unattached units) on 265 acres.
AUAR Revision . Valley Green Corporate Center/Dean's Lake Residential May 2003
Page 2 of 6
A major component of both Option A and B is the creation of a greenway, which circulates through the
commercial and residential components of the property. This greenway will include wildlife habitat,
ecological restoration areas, innovative stormwater treatment areas and pedestrian trails that link together
different components of the development. In addition to the greenway, an ecological protection zone
around the lakeshore has been established which exceeds the width and function requirements of the City.
The built environment is compressed as a result of providing the greenway and lake shore protection zone.
This was accomplished by reducing building setbacks and street right-of-way widths that are typical for
this type of development.
Community Values/Conservation Development
During the concept design process, the City and Ryan Companies undertook a collaborative process to
implement the community values identified in the "Lake Area Master Plan" created by the City for the
Dean's Lake area. This collaborative process was undertaken to implement particular values identified in
the document. The following are some of the community values identified in the 'Lake Area Master
Plan' used to help defme and develop the Valley Green site plan:
. Preserve natural features, habitat, and open space;
. Maintain ecological protection zone along lakeshore;
. Develop an ecological-based approach to stormwater management;
. Maximize park and trail opportunities;
. Develop an ecological and omamentallandscape stewardship program;
. Manage traffic demand;
. Maximize economic benefit;
. Maximize job creation.
Existina Land Uses/Comprehensive Plan References
The City of Shakopee's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map designates two land uses for the property
(see Figure 5). The westerly third of the property is designated Commercial while the remainder of the
property is designated Business Park. Surrounding land uses include TH 169 (Shakopee Bypass) to the
north, CSAH 83 (Canterbury Downs Boulevard) to the west, CSAH 16, (Eagle Creek Boulevard), to the
south, Dean's Lake and single family homes to the south, and undeveloped wetlands associated with
Dean's Lake to the east. The Southbridge residential development is beyond the wetlands to the east.
Property to the north of:rH 169 has been developed for commercial uses. Property to the west ofCSAH
83 is undeveloped and designated Commercial in the Comprehensive Plan.
The property has been rough graded in anticipation of the previously approved preliminary plat in the
areas adjacent to TH 169 and CSAH 83. Dean's Lake and the associated wetlands and woodlands occupy
the south and east portion of the property. The topography of the property is relatively flat, except along
the southerly property line where an existing bluff line is located along CSAH 16. Groundwater and
bedrock on the property varies from three to twenty feet below the surface.
Proposed Land Uses
. Ryan will be requesting modification to the land use designations of the property to
include Medium-Density Residential uses and to eliminate the Commercial land. The
Pllrpose for eliminating the Commercial land use is to allow for uses that will naturally
migrate to the property because of the existing urban infrastructure, environmental
features, and the proposed amenities envisioned for Valley Green.
AUAR Revision Valley Green Corporate Center/Dean's Lake Residential May 2003
Page 3 of 6
.
Traffic Analvsis
The property is lacated at the intersection af Trunk Highway 169 (TH 169) and Caunty State Aid
Highway 83 (CSAH 83), with CauntyState Aid Highway 16 (CSAH 16) located to. the sauth afthe site.
It is propased to. include a mix af retail uses, affice/warehause uses and residential uses. This is a
departure fram the ariginal planned land use, which included a mix af retail and affice/warehause.
Camparisan of the trip generatian estimates of the previausly prapased Valley Green Business Park
versus Option A indicate that the current praposal generates 9,059 fewer vehicles trips per day and will
generate abaut 72 percent af the AM and PM peak hour demand estimated for the earlier Valley Green
proposal. Option A will result in less traffic, and surraunding intersectians will aperate at a LOS D ar
better during critical PM peaks under full build-out conditians.
Far Optian B, given that the current traffic generation prajections (16,982 Net Tatal Trips) are
approximately 25% less than thase included in the July 2002 AUAR (22,701 Net Tatal Trips) which were
29% less than those included in the July 2000 AUAR (31,760 Net Total Trips), it is concluded that
Option B wauld have measurably less detrimental enviranmental impacts than were included in the
accepted AUAR fram July, 2000.
The City af Shakapee is currently not served by the Metrapalitan Transit Service. Instead, the City af
Shakopee is the pravider thraugh Shakopee Area Transit (SAT) alternative transit services. The services
currently provided are: (1) dial-a-ride service within the City af Shakapee; (2) cammuter vanpoals.
Express bus service to. Eden Prairie Center is expected to be reinstated this year.
The transit ridership levels averall have been steadily increasing. With the apening af the new
Blaomingtan Ferry Bridge and US 169, the pace af development in Shakopee has increased significantly.
In arder to meet increased demand, the City will need to. work with ather transit praviders to ensure that
its residents can make the transit cannectians, they need to. get acrass the metrapalitan area to jabs and
ather destinatians.
With the increased residents and development araund the area afthe US 169 and CSAH 83 andwith
CSAH 17, the City has identified the need far a park-and-ride site in these areas. A park-and-ride facility
has been identified in the northwest quadrant of US 169 and CSAH 83 and in the narthwest quadrant of
US 169 and CSAH 17.
The City will be cammitted to. wark with Valley Green COIporate Center to encaurage carpools and
vanpools (within) the prapased site, as it develops."
From the results af the analyses, it is concluded that no. mitigatian measures will be necessary far either
the 2010 ar 2020 projected build years. Hawever, it is suggested that aperatians at all intersectians
studied be monitared in the future to. determine if any raad improvements become necessary.
Vehicle-Related Air Emissions
As part af the ariginal AUAR, vehicle-related air emissians were analyzed to. determine if adverse air
quality impacts wauld accur upan build aut of the praject. Based upon the carban manaxide (CO)
emissions and dispersion analysis, it was determined that the I-hour and 8-haur cancentratians were
below established standards and no. significant adverse air quality impacts would accur.
A detailed vehicle related air emissians analysis was campleted as part afthe Final Alternative Urban
Area Wide Review document prepared for the development in July 2000 (July 2000 F AUAR). Far
AUAR Revisian Valley Green Corporate Center/Dean's Lake Residential May 2003
Page 4 af 6
purposes of responding to this section of the Revised AU AR, results ofthe vehicle related air emissions
analysis completed for the July 2000 F AUAR were used. The analysis that was included in the 2002
AUAR is included in the 2003 AUAR as Option A. Additional analysis for Option B has also been added
to the 2002 AUAR.
The results ofthe analysis for Option A indicated that background carbon monoxide levels added to
vehicle related air emissions model resulted in the ultimate exposure of receptors to carbon monoxide
levels resulting from the proposed development. Understanding that modeled and background levels for
the proposed development under this Amended AUAR will be less than those determined for the
development proposed under the July 2000 F AUAR, and that ultimate levels determined under the July
2000 F AUAR are below state exposure limits, ultimate carbon monoxide levels for Option A will be less
than state exposure limits.
Since the results of the analysis for Option A concluded that no significant adverse Air Quality impacts
would be expected and Option B will generate approximately 25% less total trips at full build than Option
A, it can be concluded that the proposed project win not have any significant adverse Air Quality impacts.
Noise Analvsis .
Noise levels were analyzed for Option B with the previous 2002 AUAR analysis being used for Option A.
The model was run with two receptors, south and northeast. The south receptor (Rl) was located just
south of the proposed residential area near CSAH 16, the northeast receptor (R2) was located near the
northeast comer of the proposed residential area. Worst case conditions (peak hour traffic) were used for
the model runs. The site currently has a tree line along CSAH 16 and this area will remain once
development is complete.
The noise model for Option A in the 2002 AUAR indicated that noise levels will be below state standards
under 2017 build and traffic conditions. The analysis for Option B also indicated that noise levels will be
below state standards under full-build and traffic conditions. However, this are is currently zoned
commercial/business park and as such, the above analysis meets the noise standards for this area.
However, a change in zoning of this area from commercial to residential will lower the noise threshold
standards. Therefore, the traffic associated with the surrounding roads and the development have the
potential to exceed these noise threshold standards. As part of the development, mitigation measures for
the noise will be included
Watermain
The City of Shakopee Public Utility Commission (SPUC) will furnish the public water supply to Valley
Green Corporate Center. Water will be provided to the site via l2-inch watermain from existing trunk
lines located in the right-of-ways of County State Aid Highways 16 and 83, and State Highway 169. The
original AUAR estimated the MUSA's water demand for 554 acres of developable land SQuth of Highway
169 to be 660,000 GPD. Of the 554 acres considered, Valley Green Corporate Center encompasses
approximately 265 acres or 48% of the total area, this equates to a demand of 316,800 GPD (660,000 x
48%). For planning purposes, the estimated water demand to supply Option A is approximately 218,000
GPD. The estimated water demand to supply Option B is approximately 245,810 GPD.
.
Sanitary Sewer
Valley Green falls within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) expansion area granted by the
Metropolitan Council to the City of Shakopee in 1999. Wastewater from Valley Green will be routed to
the adjacent Chaska interceptor (located within the right-of-way of State Highway 169), then collected
and treated by the Metropolitan Council-Environmental Services Division. For planning purposes, it is
AUAR Revision Valley Green Corporate Center/Dean's Lake Residential May 2003
Page 5 of 6
.
estimated that Option A will generate approximately 2l8,000GPD and Option B will generate
approximately 245,8l0GPD.
,
Erosion Control/Stormwater Manaaement/Water Oualitv
Best Management Practices (BMP's) will be used during construction to manage erosion control. Storm
water will be managed on-site through a series of infiltration and ponding areas for both options. Runoff
rates will be controlled to conform to the Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan. Stormwater
ponds and infiltration areas will be utilized to manage water quality in compliance with the City
requirements for storm water entering Dean Lake. Stormwater management and water quality will be
enhanced through implementation of low impact design where possible. The proposed water quality and
rate control is consistent with the original ADAR.
physical Impacts on Water Resources
According to the 2000 ADAR, wetland impacts totaled 0.52-acres. For both Options A and B, additional
impacts of 1.29-acres are anticipated. STS Consultants per their January 27, 1998 report identified
wetlands. Following is a summary ofthe impacted wetlands.
2000 AUAR-Valley Green Cor orate Center Wetland 1m acts
Wetland ID Acres Filled Comments
26- WM 0.23 Monot ic stand of canary reed ss with relict hummocks.
29-MS 0.29 Bulrush marsh with poplar fringe. Numerous mature trees, sapling and
seedlin s were d in back.
Total 0.52
Additional Impacts-Valley Green Coroorate Center/Dean's Lake Residential (Ontion A and B)
Wetland ID Acres Filled Comments .
12-MS 0.35 PEMA,PEMF,PSSIC,PFOIC
28- WS . 0.26 PSSIB,PFOIC
27-WS 0.39 PEMA-Type 1
30-MS 0.29 PEMA- Type 1
Total 1.29 .
Mitigation for the impacts previously identified in the 2000 ADAR were completed on site at a ratio of
2: 1. The mitigation for the additional impacts shown above will be conducted on-site per City,
Watershed, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and US Army Corps of Engineers requirements.
AUAR Revision Valley Green Corporate Center/Dean's Lake Residential May 2003
Page 6 of 6
, DRAFT
Introduction & Summary
A. Introduction
A Final Alternative Urban Area-Wide Review (F AUAR) was adopted by the City of Shakopee on
July 16, 2000 for the area known as Valley Green Corporate Center (VGCC). Subsequently,
Ryan Companies US, Inc. became the master developer ofthe site and proposed modifications to
the original development plan. A Supplement to the F AUAR was prepared and adopted in July,
2002. The supplement discussed the changes in potential environmental impacts, alternatives, and
mitigative measures, as discussed in the F AUAR.
In Apri12003, Ryan Companies proposed additional modifications to the development plan
proposed in the 2002 FAUAR by reducing some of the office/warehouse land use and replacing it
with medium density residential. These changes will involve a land use and zoning change to be
approved by the City Council and Metropolitan Council prior to development. Prior to
consideration of these changes by the City Council, this update to the AUAR has been prepared
to study the impacts to the area due to the proposed changes.
This AUAR outlines two development options. The first option (Option A) is the development
plan outlined and reviewed as part of the July 2002 AUAR. The second option (Option B) is the
proposed option that includes additional townhomes and less office/warehouse space than the
July 2002 AUAR. These options are briefly described below:
Option A: This option was reviewed as part of the July 2002 AUAR and includes
2,000,000 - 2,100,000 square feet of commercial/office space and 258 attached
residential units on 265 acres. The discussion provided in this AUAR is generally the
discussion that was provided and reviewed as part ofthe July 2002 AUAR.
Option B: This option includes approximately 1,300,000 square feet of
commercial/office space, 565 townhome units (364 attached residential units and 106
unattached units) on 265 acres.
These proposed options provide for the area to be developed into a business center to stimulate
economic development, and community growth, while conserving natural resources as originally
reviewed in the past AUAR documents. The business park will contain a mix of office,
warehouse, light industrial and residential sites within the 265-acre site.
It should be noted that the past AUAR's reviewed a 332-acre site. Some reduction in project
area has occurred due to an updated boundary determination and right-of-way dedications. The
project area for both options has been reduced from 332 acres to 265 acres.
B. General Format Utilized in this Document
To provide ease in reviewing Option B and to provide a comprehensive environmental review
document, both Option A andB are discussed throughout this updated AUAR. The discussion
provided for Option A is nearly the same as the discussion provided as part of the previous
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 1
,
AUAR documents for this development. In general, no subst~tive change to the Option A
discussion has been made as part of the development of this updated AUAR. Changes have only
been made in some areas of the discussion of Option A to clarify or provide additional
information as needed.
This updated AUAR has been developed to publicize the necessary revisions through the AUAR
process in order:
. to offer all interested parties ample opportunity to comment, and
. to meet the requirements of the Minnesota's Environmental Review Rules
c. Individual Subject (Question) Format
Where applicable, responses to the questions indicate which option is being discussed and
whether the text came from the 2000 AUAR, 2002 AUAR, new information, or contains
revisions. The text for the Option B analysis is new.
For those unfamiliar with the use of [sic]: Occasionally when direct quotes are used, the original
quote may have contained:
. Misspellings
. Words which reviewers might not be familiar with, .and therefore, believe to be
misspellings
. References which are unclear without the entire document.
The symbol [sic] acknowledges the existence of such occurrences and possibly, a clarification.
Some ofthe appendix content of the previous AUAR's is not repeated in document, but remains
available at the City of Shakopee, if examination is necessary. The document states when
information is available upon request.
City of Shakopee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003AUAR Page - 2
,
1. PROJECT TITLE
1. Project Title. Valley Green Corporate Center /Dean's Lake Residential
2. PROPOSER
2. Proposer. EQB Guidance indicates no response is necessary.
3. RGU
3. RGU City of Shakopee
Contact Person Michael Leek
And Title Community Development Director
Address 129 S. Holmes Street
Shakopee,~ 55379
Phone (952) 233-3800
E-mail Mleek@ci.shakopee.mn.us
4. REASON FOR AUAR I EAW PREPARATION
4. Reason for EA W Preparation. EQB guidance indicates no response is necessary.
5. LOCATION & MAPS
5. Location and Maps.
_ 1/4 Pt of SE 1/4 Section ---2- Township 115N Range 22W
- 1/4 Pt of SW 1/4 Section ~ Township 115N Range 22W
County Scott City/Twp Shakopee, Minnesota
FIGURES are generally located in APPENDIX ~ as follows:
FIGURE I:Location Map
FIGURE 2: USGS Quad Map
FIGURE 3a Option A Site Plan.
FIGURE 3b: Option A Proposed Land Use
FIGURE 4: Option B Site Plan
FIGURE 5: City Zoning Map
FIGURE 6: 1999 Aerial Photo of Site
FIGURE 7: 2000 Aerial Photo of Site
FIGURE 8: Current Cover Types
FIGURE 9: Option A Wetland Impacts
City of Shakopee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 3
I
FIGURE 10: Option B Wetland Impacts
FIGURE lla and lIb: Option A Utility Plan
FIGURE 12: Option B Utility Plan
FIGURE 13: Scott County Soils Map
FIGURE 14: Option A Storm Water Management Plan
FIGURE 15: OptionB Storm Water Management Plan
FIGURE 16: Dean's Lake Watershed Map
FIGURE 17: Area Tributary to K-Mart Linear Pond
FIGURE 18: General Site Grading Drainage Divide
FIGURE 19: Residential Receptor Sites
FIGURE 20: Comprehensive Park and Trail Plan
6. DESCRIPTION
6. Description. Instead of the information called for on the form, the description section of an A UAR should
include the following elements for each major development scenario included:
- anticipated types and intensity (density) of residential and commercia/lwarehouse/light industrial
development throughout the AUAR area;
- infrastructure planned to serve development (roads, sewers, water, storm water 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 to he 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.
Option A (Information from the July 2002 AUAR)
a. The project proposes the creation of a business center to stimulate a balance of economic and community
development with provision for medium density residential housing while conserving the natural ambiance of
Dean's Lake. The business park will contain a mix of 2, 1 00,000 sf of office, warehouse and light industrial sites
as shown on FIGURE 3a. Refer to Proposed Land Use Plan FIGURE 3b. The Option A layout maintains
portions of the original street patterns,
b. The residential portion of the project will consist of approximately 250 owner-occupied homes ranging in
price from $ 175,000 to $ 220,000. The character of the units is anticipated to include:
. Townhouses designed offer a more neighborhood appearance with front stoops fronting on the
streets and placing vehicular access to the rear of the units.
. A three level townhouse that offers generous living areas.
. A condominium that provides two-story and single-level living options.
c. Subsequent to the July 2000 AUAR, the City employed the services of Brauer & Associates to assist in
overall planning activities which included the West Dean's Lake Area. Documentation of the conclusions
reached in these endeavors is shown in APPENDIX C and D. A full copy of the Dean's Lake Area Parks,
Open Space, and Trails Master Plan is available upon request. Ryan Companies, who have assumed the role of
primary developer of the property participated in these planning efforts.
d. Two significant variations from the previous layout discussed in the 2000 AUAR are addressed herein:
. Option A includes the construction of stormwater infiltration areas throughout the site as shown in
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 4
,I
FIGURE 14. Rainfalls which exceed the capacity of these areas to store and infiltrate will overflow
and be directed to the K-Mart Linear Pond on the north side of US 169. The City designed and
constructed this pond to accommodate the VGCC area and areas further south.
. Natural Open Space Conservation Areas have been relocated from strictly adjacent to Dean's Lake
to extend throughout the development as shown on FIGURE 3a. Th~s concept may require that
formal easement rights as a natural area be granted to the City and the City will have to be willing to
accept them. It will further necessitate that the City review, and adjust if necessary, its ordinances
which may call for tightly groomed lawns. The City must also maintain vigilance that individual
occupants of the area do not disturb these Natural Open Space Conservation Areas. These concepts
are discussed in the Community Value Statement for Valley Green Development / West Dean's Lake
Area in the APPENDIX C.
e. Potable water to serve the proposed center will be provided by extensions of the water distribution system
with approval by the Shakopee Public Utility Commission. Wastewater generated by the site will be collected
and treated by the Metropolitan Council- Environmental Services Division. Refer to FIGURES lla and b for
detailed routing of potable watermains and sanitary sewer lines.
f. All stormwater collection and management discussion is contained in ITEMS 12, 17, and 18.
g. Previously, a formal grading plan for VGCC was prepared and submitted to the City on September 21,
1999. Subsequently, it was approved on September 22, 1999. Significant portions of the work shown on that
plan were accomplished prior to the. acceptance of the F AUAR in July 2000.
h. The City of Shakopee is also concluding the reconstruction and relocation of CR 83 and CSAH 16 which
have involved regrading portions of the VGCC site. (Note to reviewers: Please note that as of May 2003, this
work has been completed.)
1. The construction to meet the revised concept plan will require preparation, submission and approval by
appropriate agencies of a new grading plan, prior to construction.
Utility and street construction will complete the improvements associated with the VGCC development and
individual parcels within this site will be made available for sale. Purchasers must then submit appropriate
building and site designs, to all appropriate agencies, that demonstrate compliance with all codes and
regulations.
Option B
a. The business park will contain a mix of approximately 1,300,000 sf of office, warehouse, and light
industrial sites located adjacent to TH169 on 91 acres as shown in FIGURE 4.
b. The residential portion of the project will consist of medium-density residential with approximately 364
attached owner-occupied townhome units and 20 I unattached townhome units on 80 acres of the site.
Housing types are anticipated to include:
. Townhouses designed for a neighborhood appearance with front stoops facing the streets and
vehicular access in the rear of the units.
. Three level townhouses that offer generous living areas
c. Subsequent to the July, 2000 AUAR, the City employed the services of Brauer & Associates to assist in
overall planning activities which included the West Dean's Lake Area. Documentation of the conclusions
reached in these endeavors is included in the APPENDIX C and D. A full copy of the Dean's Lake Area
Parks, Open Space, and Trails Master Plan is available upon request. Ryan Companies, who have assumed
the role of primary developer of the property participated in these planning efforts.
City of Shakopee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 5
d. Option B includes more medium density residential housing and less business park than Option A (July
2002 AUAR). The following features which were included as part of Option A are also included with
Option B. .
. Option B includes construction of storm water management areas throughout the site as
proposed as part of Option A. . Rainfalls that exceed the capacity of these areas to store and
infiltrate will overflow and be directed to the K-Mart Linear Pond on the north side of US
169. The City designed and constructed this pond to accommodate the VGCC area and areas
further south.
. The Natural Space Conservation Areas proposed as part of Option A are also included aspart
of Option B and will provide a trail corridor, park, and conservation areas. This area is
approximately 94 acres.
. The business park located adjacent to TH169 and County Road 83 will be used for
commercial functions, mixed office, warehouse, light industrial, and smaller retail/restaurant.
e. The site will be served by public water with approval from Shakopee Public Utilities Commission.
Wastewater generated on-site will be treated at the Metropolitan Council-Environmental Services Division
Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Facility.
f. Roadways associated with the development will be completed by the developer and be in conformance with
City design standards. Since the July 2002 AUAR, improvements to CR83 and CSAH 16 have been
completed.
g. Phasing of development will start with the utility and street construction. Once this is complete, purchasers
will submit building and site design plans for approval by the appropriate agencies. Development
associated with this site will need to be in conformance with this AUAR, applicable Federal and State
regulations, and City Standards for either option.
Provide a 50 or fewer word abstract for use in EQB Monitor notice:
ABSTRACT:
Project Title: Valley Green Corporate Center / Dean's Lake Residential
Description: The City of Shako pee has prepared a revised AUAR for the previously accepted Valley
Green Corporate Center. Valley Green Corporate Center is a proposed 265-acre mixed business park in the
City of Shako pee, Scott County, MN. This AUAR includes the analysis provided as part of the July 2002
AUAR (Option A) and adds analysis for a newly proposed Option B. Option A includes 2,100,000 sf of
office, warehouse, and light industrial uses with 258 units oftownhomes. Option B includes 1,339,219 sf of
office, warehouse, and light industrial uses and 565 units oftownhomes.
RGU : City of Shakopee, MN
Contact Person: Michael Leek, Community Development Director, 129 South Holmes Street, Shakopee,
MN 55379, (952) 233-3800.
7. PROJECT MAGNITUDE DATA
7. Project Magnitude Data. The cumulative totals of the parameters called for should be given for each major
development scenario, except that information on "manufacturing ': "other industrial ': '1nstitutional':
"agricultural ': and "building heights II is optional.
Option A - July 2002 AUAR
Total Project Area (acres) 265 acres (2002 AUAR indicated 332 acres*) or Length (miles) n/a
Number of Residential Units
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 6
f
Unattached n/a Attached 258
Commercial/Industrial/lnstitutional-Building Area (gross floor space)
Total 2,000,000 - 2.100,000 square feet;
Indicate area of specific uses:
Office to be determined Manufacturing n/a
Retail to be determined Other Industrial n/a
Warehouse to be determined Institutional n/a
Light Industrial to be determined Agricultural n/a
Other Commercial(specify)
Building Height(s)
Detailed information regarding the densities of specific land uses within the business area of Valley Green are
not known at this time, and are noted on the drawings as "Will Build to Suit". See FIGURE 3a. It will be the
responsibility of individual lot owners to propose specific building plans and activities for each developed lot.
All land uses will be consistent with the proposed business park land use, the associated City zoning ordinances,
the Dean's Lake Overall Master Plan (APPENDIX D) and the Community Value Statementfor Valley Green
Development, West Dean's lake Area (APPENDIX C). As mentioned earlier, the business park will containa
mix of office, warehouse, retail, light industrial and commercial uses.
*Due to right-of-way acquisition and updated boundary determination, the site acreage has decreased.
O{)tion B
Total Project Area (acres) 265 acres* or Length (miles) n/a
Number of Residential Units
Unattached 201 Attached 364
Maximum units per building 8
Commercial/Industrial/Institutional Building Area (gross floor space)
Total 1 ,300,000 square feet;
Indicate area of specific uses:
Office to be determined Manufacturing n/a
Retail to be determined Other Industrial n/a
Warehouse to be determined Institutional n/a
Light Industrial to be determined Agricultural n/a
Other Cbmmercial(specify)
Building Height(s) Consistent with zoning district
Option B consists of medium-density residential, business park, and natural open space as shown on FIGURE
4. Specific uses and businesses in the commercial area are not known and buildings are noted as "Will Build to
Suit". All land use will be consistent with City Land Use and Zoning requirements. All land uses will be
consistent with the proposed business park land use, the associated City zoning ordinances, the Dean's Lake
Overall Master Plan (APPENDIX D) and the Community Value Statement for Valley Green Development, West
Dean's lake Area (APPENDIX C). As mentioned earlier, the business park will contain a mix of office,
warehouse, retail, light industrial and commercial uses.
*Due to right-of-way acquisition and updated boundary determination, the site acreage has decreased from the
2002 AUAR.
8. PERMITS
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 7
~
8. Permits and Approvals Required. A listing of major approvals likely to be required by the anticipated types of
development projects should be given. This list will help orient reviewers to 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
Option A
Unit of Government Tvpe of Application Status
Army Corp. of Engineers Section 404 Permit, Clean Water Act (*)
City of Shakopee Re-zoning Request (*)
Preliminary Plat (*)
Final Plat (*)
Site Plan (*)
Storm water discharge to K-Mart Linear Pond (*)
Grading - north of CSAH 16 (revised) (*)
Grading - CSAH 16 & south (*)
Building Permits (**)
Vacation ofCSAH 16 across VGCC (*)
Wetland Conservation Act Approval (*)
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Water Appropriation Permit (construction dewatering) (*)
(MDNR) Additional Wetland Filling with Mitigation (*)
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit; (*)
(MPCA) National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System Permit (NPDES); (*)
Water Quality (Sect. 401) Certification, (*)
Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) Wateimain Extension Permit (*)
Metropolitan Council Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) extension Approved
Scott County Right-of-way Permit for work on CSAH 83 and CSAH 16 (*)
Option B
Unit of Government Type of Application Status
Army Corp. of Engineers Section 404 Permit, Clean Water Act (*)
City of Shakopee Comprehensive Plan Amendment (*)
Re-zoning Request (*)
, Preliminary Plat (*)
Final Plat (*)
Site Plan (*)
Storm water analysis approval (*)
Grading - north ofCSAH 16 (revised) (*)
Grading - CSAH 16 & south (*)
Building Permits (**)
Wetland Conservation Act Approval (*)
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Water Appropriation Permit (construction dewatering) (*)
(MDNR) Additional Wetland Filling with Mitigation (*)
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 8
\
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit; (*)
(MPCA) National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System Permit (NPDES); (*)
Water Quality (Sect. 401) Certification (*)
Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) Watermain Extension Permit (*)
Metropolitan Council Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) extension Approved
Scott County Right-of-way Permit for work on CSAH 83 and CSAH 16 (*)
Note: Permit requests will be submitted upon the completion of the AUAR.
(*) To be applied for by the developer.
(**) To be applied for by individual lot purchasers I building owners.
9. LAND USE
9. Land Use. Describe current and recent past land use and development on the site and on adjacent lands.
Discuss project compatibility with adjacent and nearby land uses. Indicate whether any potential conflicts
involve environmental matters. Identify any potential environmental hazards due to past site uses, such as
soil contamination or abandoned storage tanks, or proximity to nearby hazardous liquid or gas pipelines.
Option A and B (Information obtained from the Julv 2000 AUAR, aerial photograph
review, and information from the site plans)
The project area currently consists of dormant farmland, wooded areas, and wetland. The site is surrounded by
TH169 to the north, CSAH 83 to the west, CSAH 16 to the south, Dean's Lake and single family homes to the
south, and undeveloped wetlands associated with Dean's Lake to the east. The Southbridge residential
development is north and west of Dean's Lake. Property north ofTH169 hasbeen developed for commercial
uses. The land south ofCSAH 16 is owned by the Mdewakanton Sioux Community.
The site's recent history includes a majority of the property being rough graded in anticipation of the previously
approved preliminary plat for the VGCC development. The site currently is used in agricultural production.
Information from the MPCA found no environmentally contaminated sites within the project area.
The City's current zoning plan identifies the area as BP (Business Park) and Bl (Highway Business) as shown
on FIGURE 5. FIGURES 6 and 7 show the 1999 and 2000 aerial photos for the site. The proposed medium-
density residential and business park is consistent with adjacent parcels. Option B proposes more residential
and less commercial than Option A as shown on FIGURES 3a and 4. However, the land use plan will need to
be re-guided and re-zoned to accommodate this development. A natural conservation area with a trail system is
proposed to provide a natural buffer around Dean's Lake and allow residents to interact with the environment.
10. COVER TYPES
10. Cover Types. The following information should be provided instead:
a. cover type map, at least at the scale of a USGS topographic map, depicting:
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 9
I
-wetlands- identified by type (Circular 39)
-watercourses- rivers, streams, creeks, ditches
-lakes- identify protected waters status, and shoreland management classification
-woodlands- breakdown by classes where possible
-grassland- identify native and oldfield
-cropland
-current development
b. 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 generally be provided.
Option A and B (Information from the 2000 AUAR and information from the site
plans)
FIGURES 6 and 7 show the aerial photos from 1999 and 2000. FIGURE 8 shows the current cover types
on the site. In the past, portions of the VGCC were covered with oak savannah. FIGURE 3a shows the
site plan for Option A and FIGURE 4 shows the site plan for Option B.
The site was rough graded approximately three years ago in anticipation of the previously approved
preliminary plat. Several factors were involved in the initial grading of the Valley Green Corporate Center
site and the removal of the trees:
. Tree Removal: The VGCC site was specifically identified in the City's Oak Wilt suppression program
as a "Large Oak Wilt Infection Center within Shakopee". As such, certain mitigation measures
were performed which removed a portion of the trees.
. In addition, a portion of the trees were destroyed by storm damage.
Since it will be the responsibility of individual lot owners to propose specific building and landscaping
plans for each developed lot, it is beyond the scope of this AUAR to precisely "predict" cover types to be
used. Estimates of cover types was not available for Option A. However, general information for Option B
is provided below:
Option A
Before After Before (acres) After (acres)
(acres) (acres)
Wetlands 28.8 30 Lawn! 0 24.2
Landscaping
W oodedIForest 43.1 20.2 Impervious 0.1 150
surface
Brush! 17.3 24.9 Other 6.3 (Storm 15.7 (Storm
Grassland Water Water
Management) Management)
8.7 (Roadbed)*
Cropland 160.7 0
. TOTAL 265 265
Option B
Before After Before (acres) After (acres
(acres) (acres)
Wetlands 28.8 30 Lawn! 0 57.4
Landscaping
Wooded/Forest 43.1 20.2 Impervious 0.1 117
surface
Brush! 17.3 24.7 Other 6.3 (Storm 15.7 (Storm
Grassland Water Water
Management) Management)
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page -10
;
8.7 (Roadbed)*
Cropland 160.7 0
TOTAL 265 265
* Existing CSAH 16 which is proposed for vacation.
11. FISH, WilDLIFE AND ECOLOGICAllY SENSITIVE
RESOURCES
11. Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources.
a. The description of wildlife and fish resources should be related to the habitat types depicted on the cover
types maps (of item 10). Any differences in impacts between development scenarios shouldbe highlighted
in the discussion.
O{>tion A and B (Information from the 2000 AUAR)
The project site overlaps a portion ofland known as the West Dean's Lake Area. The West Dean's Lake Area
consists of woodland, open space, Dean's Lake and a complex of wetlands and marshes.
Fisheries
There are no DNR fishery surveys recorded within this project's boundaries. The adjacent Dean's Lake is a
DNR Public Water (Identification 70-0074) and classified as a Type 4 wetland with an average depth 00 feet
and a maximum depth of 5 feet. Stocking of the lake is limited due to the threat of winter kill. There is the
possibility of fish entering Dean's Lake from Prior Lake, Pike Lake; or Spring Lake through an overflow
channel. However, this would generally only occur during a high water event. If the high water event
coincided with the spawning season, fish could migrate to the wetlands (Daryl Ellison, MDNR - West Metro
Fisheries, by phone conservation and email, Feb. 14.2000).
Although, individuals may have experienced satisfactory fishing in Dean's Lake, "... The low water level in
Dean's Lake, coupled with the significant natural accumulation of organic sediment would likely cause winter
kill of fish, except for the possible survival of rough fish that are tolerant to very low dissolved oxygen levels"
(April 24, 2000 memo to the City froIIlSteven Carlson, STS Consultants). The introduction of higher quality
fish life to Dean's Lake is primarily through overflow from Spring Lake, Prior Lake, and/or Pike Lake through
the overflow channel and in warmer winters, there may be some survival (email dated June 2, 2000 from Steven
Carlson, STS Consultants, to Del Jackman, Bolton Menk).
Although no direct waterway connection is identified, fish migration toward Dean's Lake could occur during
periods of high flow in the Prior Lake/ Spring Lake outlet channel. Winter kill during most years prevents the
development of a permanent, self sustaining fishery in Dean's Lake (Daryll Ellison, MDNR - West Metro Area
Fisheries, by phone conversation! E-mail with Ross Knapper, Feb. 14.2000 and Del Jackman, Bolton and
Menk, June 22, 2000.)
Wildlife
The west portion of the proposed development is grassland that has been converted to agricultural land in past
years. The land around Dean's Lake contains a diverse mix of habitats and natural resources. Three principal
cover types are predominant in making up the area: wetland, woodland, and grassland. Refer to FIGURE 8. It
is expected that wildlife species known to exist locally could populate or migrate through the project site. The
most common are: deer, coyote, turkeys, rabbits, squirrels, raccoons, muskrats, pheasants, ducks, and geese.
Other non-game species such as hawks and other rap tors do migrate through the property. A thorough
biological survey has never been performed for the project site. According to Diana Regenscheid, MDNR-
Division of Wildlife, there have been a few unconfmned cougar sightings in the vicinity, but stated that this
would be "highly unusual andunlikely."
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page-II
;
According to Ms. Regenscheid, development of the property will more than likely have some effect on the
present wildlife. The increase presence of human activity may displace some species or limit wildlife use of the
site. As it exists, the habitat would support wildlife populations through a variety of life cycle needs. There is
the possibility that some of these needs may not be met in the specific project site following development
(Phone conversation with Diana Regenscheid, MDNR- Wildlife Division, by phone conversation and email
with Ross Knapper, Feb. 14,2000).
In order to minimize and lessen the possible displacement of wildlife from the project site, efforts should be
made to avoid negative impacts to wildlife. Where impacts are unavoidable, appropriate mitigation efforts
should be implemented. These mitigation efforts currently consist of re-vegetation of disturbed soils with a mix
of native flora, protection of several existing stands of trees, construction of a 1.2 acre wetland, delineation of a
"no impact zone" around Dean's Lake, as well as maintaining proper building setbacks.
b. For an A UAR, prior consultation with the DNR Natural Heritage program for information about
reports of rare plant and animal species in the vicinity is required. If such consultation indicates the need, an
on-site halJitat 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.
Option Aand B (Information from the 2000 AUAR with minor updates)
Extensive studies and reviews have been conducted by the DNR as part of the County Biological Survey and
Woods End Landscaping, a specialist in native plant "rescue" and transplanting. The DNR report concluded
that "no rare species or Natural Plant Communities" were identified on the Business Park site and "According
. to the review conducted by Mr. Nelson[sic - of Woods End Landscaping}, the native plants were not rare
enough to warrant heroic efforts to protect... " (Steven Carlson, STS Consultants, email to Del Jackman, Bolton
and Menk, May 31, 2000).
Although the Minnesota Rules which govern activities relating to species of special concern states that, "Species
designated as species of special concern are not protected by Minnesota Statutes, section 84.0895 or rules
adopted under that section ....Parts 6134.0100 to 6134.0400 do not address protection of habitat for species
. designated as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern, nor do they obligate anyone to survey
lands for the presence of designated species" (Minnesota Rules 6134.0150), an information request was
submitted to the Minnesota DNR's Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program (APPENDIX F) to
identify all known locations of rare, threatened and endangered species in the vicinity of the project.
The inquiry determined that the following rare, threatened and endangered species are possibly located within a
one-mile radius of the project site.:
. Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocuphalus): The Bald Eagle is considered a special concern species in
the State of Minnesota and labeled "threatened" by the federal government. Bald Eagles have
been spotted north of the project site within a National Wildlife Refuge. Bald Eagles have not
been spotted within the project boundaries and thus will not be directly affected by the proposed
development.
. Hill's Thistle (Cirsium hillii): Hill's Thistle is considered a special concern in the State of
Minnesota and was found in Section 5 of Scott County. Hill's Thistle has not been spotted within
the project boundaries and thus will not be directly affected by the proposed development.
. Dry Prairie (Southeast) Barrens Subtype: A barrens prairie is located east of the proposed
development. The dry prairie is a natural community consisting of sparsely vegetated grasslands,
with often-exposed patches of bare soil. It is given a state rank of 1, meaning it is considered in
greatest need for conservation action. The barren subtype of the dry prairie occurs only on sand
dunes of the Anoka sandplain, and are considered the most distinctive but also the least common
ofthe Region's dry prairies. Rare animals commonly found in barren prairies include the Plains
Pocket Mouse and the Western Hognose Snake. The project site does not contain identified dry
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page -12
I
prairies. The dry prairie located to the east of the project site is not anticipated to be directly
affected by the proposed development.
. Rhombic-Petaled Evening Primrose (Oenothera rhombipetala): Rhombic-Petaled Evening
Primrose is considered a special concern species in the State of Minnesota. It is a large,
conspicuous biennial of sandy habitats. Rhombic-Petaled Evening Primrose was found to the east
of the project site. Rhombic-Petaled Evening Primrose has not been spotted within the project
boundaries and thus will not be directly affected by the proposed development. In addition,
mitigation measures within the project site currently include the re-vegetation of the replacement
wetland and buffer areas with several native species including Rhombic-Petaled Evening
Primrose.
. Plains Pocket Mouse (Perognathus flavescens): The Plains Pocket Mouse is considered a special
concern in the State of Minnesota. This small, long-tailed mouse typically occupies arid to semi-
arid habitats and feeds on the seeds of prairie plants (Coffm and Pfannmuller, 1988). The Plains
Pocket Mouse was found to the east of the project area and has not been spotted within the project
boundaries. Thus it will not be directly affected by the proposed development.
. Gopher Snake (Pituophis melanoleucus): The gopher or bull snake is considered a special
concern species in the State of Minnesota. This snake prefers sandy soils, dry prairies, oak
savannas, and pine barrens (Coffm and Pfannmuller, 1988). Evidence of this species was found to
the east of the project area. The Gopher Snake has not been spotted within the project boundaries
and thus will not be directly affected by the project development.
The land to the north and west of Dean's Lake is considered a mixed emergent marsh and labeled as a
natural community, although no record occurs in the Natural Heritage Program database. No rare
species are known to inhabit this natural community occurrence. However, natural communities are
considered rare features themselves. A mixed emergent fact sheet provided by the DNR's Natural
Heritage Program can be found in APPENDIX F. Plans for the proposed development include a "no
impact zone" around Dean's Lake and minimum building setback distances set the City of Shako pee
zoning ordinances to prevent any negative impacts to the shoreland of Dean's Lake. Additional
mitigation measures have been described in the Water Resource and Water Quality sections of this
report.
Additional Information and Analysis Provided for the 2003 AUAR
The MnDNR was contacted again in the spring of2003; a database check of the project area indicated
the same six species identified in the original search.
The impact of development Option A and B on wildlife in the area will be similar. Both developments
include the conversion of open space to developed space. For wildlife that cannot adapt to urban
settings, displacement will occur as the amount of habitat available will be reduced. While Option A ~
will generally create more impervious surface, Option B will cause more people to be in the area with
the additional medium density housing. However, both options include the same setback and
conservations areas that were proposed in the 2002 AUAR. This natural open space will provide a trail
corridor, park, conservation areas and ecologically based storm water management system while
preserving wetlands, wooded areas, and shoreland areas. The buffer areas created by the 250' setback
from Dean's Lake will preserve an area of habitat within the site for wildlife. This natural open space
has been included in both Option A and B in conformance with the Dean's Lake Area Park, Open
Space, and Master Trail Plan--as well as the Community Value Statement for the Valley Green
Development-West Dean's Lake.
12. PHYSICAL IMPACTS ON WATER RESOURCES
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page-I3
f
12. Physical Impacts on Water Resources. The information called for on the EA W form should be supplied for
any of the infrastructure associated with the A UAR development scenarios, and for any residential or
commercial 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 A UAR should
cover the possible impacts through ,a "worst case scenario'" or else prevent impacts through the provisions
of the mitigation plan.
Option A and B (Information from the 2002 AUAR -the proposed wetland impact and
miti2ation is the same for both Options)
The original development plan in the 2000 AUAR included the filling and corresponding mitigation of 0.52 acres of
wetlands. The construction and re-vegetation of 1.2 acres of wetland and an associated 1.7 acres of buffer has been
completed. The area is developing the anticipated wetland characteristics.
The site plan for the Option A and B requires filling four additional wetland areas covering a total area of 1.29
acres. The impacted wetlands are shown on FIGURE 9 (Option A) and FIGURE 10 (Option B) and
summarized in TABLE 12-1a. The following is a summary of the Wetland Delineation and Wetland Permit
1
Documents (permit documents are available for the previously mitigated wetlands). At this time, no permits
have been prepared for the wetland areas to be mitigated for Option A or B. A full copy of the Wetland
Delineation and Previous Wetland Permit Document is available upon request. This report indicates that
removal of these wetlands is necessary to maintain setbacks as required by local zoning and comply with design
lines, as well as conforming with safe roadway design practices for the streets and to accommodate the
development of the Center. The replacement wetland area will be immediately adjacent to the existing wetland
area on the north side of Dean's Lake. This expansion of existing wetland areas. offers the assurance of the
necessary hydrology to feed and maintain the vegetation within the replacement wetland. This replacement
wetland will be immediately available to wildlife in the vicinity.
TABLE 12-1a Impacted Wetlands See FIGURE (Option A) and FIGURE 10 (Option B)
Wetland ID Acres Filled Designations Comments
12-MS 0.35 PE1{A,PEMF,PSSIC,PF01C Types 1, 6 & 7 - Seasonally flooded
basin / flat, shrub swamp & wooded
swamp.
27-WS 0.39 :pE1{A Type I - Seasonally flooded basin /
flat.
28- WS 0.26 PSSIB, PF01C Type 6 - Saturated shrub swamp &
Type 7 - Seasonally flooded wood
swamo.
30-MS 0.29 PE1{A Type 1 - Seasonally flooded basin /
flat.
Total 1.29
Mitigation for the loss of the impacted wetlands will be done on-site. Plans include the construction of a 2.58-
acre replacement wetland.
The areas designated for wetland replacement are adjacent to the Dean's Lake wetland areas, near US 169, as
shown on FIGURES 9 and 10. By expanding the existing wetland area, there should be minimal acclamation
required for the new wetland habitat.
To date, no Wetland Permit documents have been submitted for Options A or B. The Wetland Permit
Documents, when submitted shall detail the sequence of construction, address the ordinary high water (OHW)
mark for Dean's Lake (747 Mean Sea Level-MSL), and shall comply with the City of Shakopee grading
standards to a design level of748.6 MSL. The previous grading plans also call for a variety of substrate
1
STS Consultants Ltd. 1999. Wetland Delineation and Wetland Permit Documents. Prepared for Valley Green Corporate
Center
City of Shakopee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 14
I
elevations both above and below the design water level, as well as stable slopes. Slopes will be designed to
maximize mitigation efforts. Erosion control will follow applicable Best Management PractIces (BMP's) as
appropriate for soils rated with a 'severe' potential for erosion.2 The Wetland Mitigation Plan shall indicate that
BMP's to be used will include traffic control, erosion control, temporary construction protection, and restoration
seeding.
Final phases of construction will include top dressing and re-vegetation of the replacement wetland, buffer
areas, and all other disturbed soils. The replacement wetland and buffer areas will be re-vegetated with a
wetland seed mixture shown in TABLE 12-2. Additional trees and shrubs located on TABLE 12-3 will be
planted as additional buffer zones.
Seed replacement wetland basin. Seed from elevation 750 MSL down to water (NWL=748.6 MSL) line at time
of seeding.
TABLE 12-2
Modified Mn/DOT 33A
Apply 50 lbs. per acre (PLS)
Species Common Name % of Total Pounds/Acre
Petalostemon purpureum Purple Prairie Clover 1 0.5
Koeleria cristata June Grass 2 1.0
Sporobolus cryptandrus Sand Dropseed 3 1.5
Agropyron trachycaulum Slender Wheat Grass 3 1.5
Stipa viridula Green Needle Grass 5 2.5
Lolium perrene (var. italicum) Annual Ryegrass 8 4.0
Bouteloua gracilis Blue Grama 12 6.0
Bouteloua curtipendula Side-Oats Grama 12 6.0
Schizachyrium scoparium Little Bluestem 13 6.5
Cover Crop * 40 20.0
Forbs: 1 0.5
100% 50.0
PLS - Pure Live Seed
* Oats or winter wheat, depending on time of year.
Note: Purple prairie clover should be inoculated prior to seeding.
Forbs are as follows, for each 1f2 pound forbs mix:
Oenethera rhombipetala (Rhombic-leaved evening primrose) 4 ounces
Geum triflorum (Prairie smoke) 2 ounces
Lupinus perrene (Wild Lupine) 2 ounces
TABLE 12-3
Plantings for Additional Buffer
Adjacent to Founier Property
Shrubs - Viburnum trilobum (American highbush cranberry)
Trees - Equal numbers of the following species:
Ouercus macrocarpa Burr Oak
Acer saccharinum Silver Maple
2 Soil Conservation Service, USDA, Soil Survey Scott County Minnesota, 1959.
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 A UAR Page - 15
,
T ABLE 12~3
Plantings for Additional Buffer
Adjacent to Founier Property
Celtis occidentalis I Hackberry
Some local residents have questioned, informally, if site grading activities could possibly disturb the "seal" of
Dean's Lake, thereby impairing the lake's ability to maintain its level. The answer to this question would
appear to be no. A study by Lower Minnesota River Watershed District engineer Lawrence Samstad (1975) on
the source of water for Dean's Lake and related issues found that Dean'sLake is not hydraulically isolated from
the surficial sand aquifer by tight sediments forming a "seal"; rather, the level of Dean's Lake directly reflects
ambient groundwater levels.. This finding is consistent with two MnDNR studies that focused on the potential
for quarry dewatering effects on Dean's Lake (Beissel and Ford, 1981; Drivas, 1997). In any case, the site
grading is well separated from Dean's Lake and the adjace~t wetland. The possibility of disturbing such a "seal"
even if it existed would be minimal and would not have an impact. 3
13. WATER USE
13. Water Use. With respect to band c, 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. With respect to possible individual appropriations by future
projects, a general assessment of the likely need for such should be included, and if there is potential for major
appropriations or environmental issues assessment of those should be included along with a discussion of mitigation for
potential problems.
Option A and B Gnformation generally from the 2000 AUAR)
a. Will the project involve the installation or abandonment of any wells?' DYes 18/ No
For abandoned wells give the location and the Unique well number. For new wells, or other previously
unpermitted wells, give the location and purpose of the well and the Unique well number (if known).
There are no wells known to exist within the project limits of the site. However, if any are discovered in the course of
the construction, they will be sealed in accordance with all local, State, and Federal regulations.
b. Will the project require an appropriation of ground or surface water (including dewatering)? 18/ Yes DNo
If yes, indicate the source, quantity, duration, purpose of the appropriation, and DNR water appropriation permit
number of any existing appropriation. Discuss the impact of the appropriation on ground water levels.
For both Option A and B, the proposed development may, depending on site conditions and time of year, require a
temporary permit for construction dewatering purposes. Dewatering may be necessary to accommodate construction
of the required infrastructure. Cessation of dewatering will occur once construction has been completed.
c. Will the project require connection to a public water supply? 18/ Yes D No
If yes, identify the supply, the DNR water appropriation permit number of the supply, and the quantity to be used.
Both Option A and B would acquire its water supply from the City of Shakopee Public Utilities Commission
(MnDNR Appropriation Permit Number 806205). In September 1999, the City of Shakopee received approval
for its Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) amendment involving the addition of 554 acres to the MUSA.
These 554 acres of expansion included two areas - a 222-acre property guided for commercial development
located south of CSAH 16 on both sides of CSAH 18 and a 332-acre property guided for business park located
south ofTH169 between Dean's Lake and CSAH 83 (VGCe). The approval for the expansion was evaluated by
3
Erdmann, John, Wenck Associates
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page -16
i
comparing future water demands with current demand. It was estimated that the new MUSA expansion would
require 660,000 gallons per day (gpd) (source: Schoell and Madson July 1999, "Comprehensive Water Plan,
1999 Supplement" prepared for the City of Shakopee). This approval was reviewed and passed by the
Metropolitan Council in September 1999 and was contingent upon the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission's
(SPUC) ability to supply sufficient water to the expansion areas.
It should be noted that since the 2000 AUAR, SPUC has created additional wells in the area to supply the City of
Shakopee. Therefore, the conditions of the Met Council approval have been met.
Option A (New analysis)
Of the 554 acres considered in the MUSA expansion, the VGCC encompasses 265 acres (48%) of this area.
Since 660,000 GPD was the estimated demand for the new MUSA area, 48% of this is 316,800 GPD. The actual
estimated water demand to supply the proposed site is 2l7,692GPD (see equation below).
(0.07 GPD/SF x 2,100,000 sf commercial) + (258 units x 274 GPD residential)==217,692
Connection will be made to the City's public water supply via a l2-inch watermain. Locations of the utilities are
shown on FIGURE 11a and 11b.
Option B (New information)
Of the 554 acres considered in the MUSA expansion, the VGCC encompasses 265 acres (48%) of this area.
Since 660,000 GPD was the estimated demand for the newMUSA area, 48% of this is 316,800 GPD. The actual
estimated water demand to supply the proposed site is 245,810 GPD (see equation below).
(0.07 GPD/SF x 1 ,300,000sf commercial) + (565 units x 274 GPD residential)==245,81 0
Connection will be made to the City's public water supply via a 12-inch watermain. Locations of the utilities are
shown on FIGURE 12. This utility plan shows only major connection points and a more detailed design would
be completed in the future to meet City Standards.
14. WATER RELATED LAND USE MANAGEMENT DISTRICTS
14. Water-related Land Use Management Districts. Such 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.
Option A (Information from the 2000 AUAR with some additional or updated
information )
No formal "water use management district" exists in the area, however, the City's Shoreland Control Ordinance
does establish restrictions on the use of the property adjacent to public waters (Dean's Lake). Dean's Lake is
classified as a Natural Environment Lake. The ordinance establishes a 200' setback from the ordinary high water
(OHW) for multiple family residential developments and a 100' no vegetation clearing zone. The ordinance also
provides for doubling the distances for non-water related uses.
In addition, the provisions of the City Shoreland zoning ordinance state, "...[sic-buildings] iflocated on lots or
parcels with public water frontage, must either be set back double the normal ordinary high water level setback or
be substantially screened from view from the water by vegetation or topography, assuming summer, leaf-on
conditions." Therefore, individual building designers would have the option of constructing appropriate screening
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page -17
,
rather than meeting the increased setbacks. This discussion is beyond the scope of this AUAR since it applies to the
individual building owners.
A proposed grading plan was submitted to the City for review and approval in 1999. At that time, the plan included
a 75-foot no impact zone around the lake shoreline which met the City's Shoreland Ordinance for water related
uses. Since the 1999 grading plan submittal, a more detailed concept plan was developed (Option A) that included a
250' setback with a trail as shown on FIGURE 3a. This 250' setback is in conformance with the recommendations
outlined in the Dean's Lake Area Park, Open Space, and Master Trail Plan.
Individual site plans are beyond the scope of this AUAR, but it is required that all future site activities including
building permit requests be specifically reviewed for compliance with all applicable regulations, including the
Shoreland Ordinance and include doubling the setback distance or providing appropriate screening.
Option B (New information)
The City's Shoreland Ordinance applies to Option B in the same way it applies to Option A. A 200' setback is
required for multiple family residential developments and a 100' no vegetation clearing zone also must be
implemented. The ordinance also provides for doubling the distances for non-water related uses.
Option B provides the same 250' setback as recommended by the Dean's Lake Area Park, Open Space, and Master
Trail Plan. The setback and buffer encompass approximately 94 acres of the site and will contain a trail, park, and
natural open space. FIGURE 4 and 12 show the appropriate setbacks for the proposed development.
Individual site plans are not available as part of this AUAR, but it is required that all future site activities including
building permit requests be specifically reviewed for compliance with all applicable regulations, including the
Shoreland Ordinance and include doubling the setback distance or providing appropriate screening.
15. WATER SURFACE USE
15. Water Surface Use. This item need only be addressed if the AUAR area would include or adjoin recreational water
bodies.
Option A and B (Includes modified text from 2000 AUAR)
Neither Option A nor B contain any recreational water bodies. However, Dean's Lake is a public water adjacent to
the project area. Dean's Lake is shallow, classified as a "Natural Environment" lake, and is suitable for passive
recreational purposes, although fishing and non-motorized boating is known to occur on the lake.
No legal access to Dean's Lake has been eliminated or is proposed as part of either Option A or B. Access to the
lake will continue as it has in the past. Question 14 contains additional information about the setbacks and buffer
areas.
16. EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION
16. Erosion and Sedimentation. 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 special measures that would be added for A UAR purposes should be included.
Option A and B (Information from the 2000 AUAR some modifications and additions)
Question # 19 and FIGURE 13 contain information from the Scott County Soil Survey for the sites.
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page -18
I
The pre-2000 Valley Green site plan included the filling and proposed mitigation of 0.52 acres of wetland using an
on-site location for the replacement. This mitigation has been achieved and the replacement wetland area is
assuming the characteristics of a sustainable wetland.
The design for Option A and B will require some adjustment to the site grading which had been nearly completed.
This adjustment will include the filling of an additional 1.29 acres of wetland, (FIGURE 9 and 10), which will be
mitigated with on-site replacement in a manner similar to the previous 0.52 acres. The construction of this
replacement wetland includes the excavation and grading to achieve proper design elevation and slope gradients.
Steep slopes are present on the site in the area adjacent to CSAH 16. In this area, the site layout for Option A and B
has been designed to minimize disturbances to the steep slopes.
During all construction phases of Option A or B, erosion control will continue to follow the applicable Best
Management Practices (BMP's) to minimize the effects of erosion and sedimentation on Dean's Lake and all
wetland areas. BMP's utilized will include but are not limited to erosion control blankets, silt fences, and staked
hay bales. The particular BMP's chosen should acknowledge that the soils covering most all the site are categorized
as 'severe' for erodability in cuts and fills, and BMP's to mitigate thisimpaGt must be enforced. However, wind
erosion on previously cultivated areas will likely decrease with the introduction of year-round ground cover
(pavements, buildings, lawns, native grasses and wetlands). Following completion of grading and construction all
disturbed soils should bere-vegetated to prevent future wind erosion.
Wind erosion within the subject area of this AUAR will likely decrease when fully developed with the introduction
of year-round ground cover (pavements, buildings, lawns, native grasses and wetlands).
The areas where vegetation has been stripped will be revegetated as a part of the next stage of the development, as
individual building owners present and implement their plans.
Options A and B are subject to. the City's Erosion Control Ordinance. This ordinance requires the development to
incorporate BMP's to reduce soil loss and erosion, exposure of soil must be minimized to the greatest extent
practical, within 30 days of rough grading, the site must be seeded and mulched, and natural vegetation and plant
cover must be maintained whenever possible. No exposed slopes should be steeper in grade than 3 feet horizontal
to 1 foot vertical. Additionally, this development is required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Permit administered by the MPCA.
17. WATER QUALITY - SURFACE WATER RUNOFF
17. Water Quality - Surface Water Runoff For an AUAR the following additional guidance should befollowed in
addition to that in ilEA W Guidelines ":
- it is expected that an A UAR will have a detailed analysis of storm water issues,.
- a map of the proposed storm water management system and of the water bodies that will receive storm water
should be provided,.
- the description of the storm water systems would identify on-site and "regional II 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.
- if present in or adjoining the A UAR area, the following types of water bodies must be given special analyses:
- lakes: within the Twin Cities metro area a nutrient budget analysis must be prepared for any "priority lake II
identified by the Metropolitan Council (see Appendix E of ilEA W Guidelines 11 (1990) or contact the Council
staff). Outside of the metro area, lakes needing a nutrient budget analysis must be determined by consultation
with the MPCA and DNR stafft,.
- trout streams: if storm water 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.
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page -19
I
O{ltion A and B (Information from the 2002 AUAR with some minor additions for Option
ill
The storm water management plan for Option A is shown on FIGURE 14. The storm water management plan for
Option B is shown on FIGURE 15. Land development changes the quantities of nutrients, sediments, and other
pollutants carried away from the site by runoff. Many factors contribute to the changes including the reduction in
use of agricultural herbicides, pesticides and fertilizers; the introduction of year round ground cover; the enhanced
conveyance ofleaf-fall, grass clippings, pet litter, other litter of both natural and human origin; and pollutants from
the atmosphere (both "wetfall" and "dryfall"); lawn fertilizer use; vehicle emissions and mechanical wear; sanding
and salting of streets and sidewalks. Therefore, "BMP's" should be utilized to mitigate pollutant loadings entering
Dean's Lake. The concept plan for Options A and B illustrated in FIGURE 3a and FIGURE 4,respectively, and
described in the Community Value Statementfor Valley Green Development, West Dean's lake Area 4 (see the
APPENDIX C}proposes a concept for the plantings which could significantly decrease the potential for adverse
environmental impacts. Previously, significant portions of the site would have been planted with boulevard sod,
which could require regular use of lawn fertilizers. The revised concept is to designate large portions as 'Natural
Open Space Consetvation Area', including placing easement restrictions on them which permit the City to enforce
natural plantings with more restrictive use offertilizers. In addition, the State of Minnesota has enacted legislation
which will eliminate the use of phosphorous in the Metro area. 5
The Valley Green site lies across the dividing line between two very large watersheds as shown on FIGURE 16 and
17. The direct Dean's Lake watershed is approximately 6,900 acres in size, with only 117 acres coming from
. VGCC. Prior to site grading, the total contributing area from the site was approximately 129 acres. In addition,
during periods of high rainfall the overflow outlet for Prior Lake, Pike Lake and Spring Lake drain through Dean's
Lake, which brings the total to over 9,600 acres, plus the area of Prior Lake, itself. The westerly and southerly
portions of the site (generally, south of CSAH 16) are tributary to the K-Mart linear detention pond on the north side
of US 169, where the runoffhas the opportunity for sedimentation to take place.
Approximately 12 acres of storm water runoff will be diverted directly to the K-mart linear pond on the north side of
US 169. The portion of the VGBP which was tributary to Dean's Lake before site grading was 129.5 acres and the
portion that remains tributary is 117.6 acres. The boundaries of these drainage areas are shown on FIGURE 18.
FIGURE 17 illustrates the planning boundary used in the Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan (CSMP)
for the tributary area flowing toward Dean's Lake. The diagram shows this tributary area extending northward, to the
right-of-way line of US 169.
In 1999, as part of the response to a request for an environmental review, FIGURE 18 was prepared showing a pre-
1999 divide in flow toward Dean's Lake which does not reach the right-of-way line of US 169. Presumably, this
figure was prepared to evaluate the specifics of the preliminary grading which had been performed, and not as an
overall drainage evaluation to determine the health of Dean's Lake. That review was included in FIGURE 17,
where it was decided to restrict the incoming rate of flow to 0.1 cubic foot per second (cfs) per acre.
Apparently, the flora around the Dean's Lake water body is not particularly sensitive as evidenced by 10 years of
obsetvations by STS, "During the re-flagging of the wetland boundary, STS encountered remnants of flagging
placed during previous delineations, suggesting that the wetland plant community had not changed sufficiently to
alter the jurisdictional boundary. Some trees had been impacted by Oak Wilt spread and storm damage, but
6
alteration of the plant community was not obsetved."
The storm water management plan concepts for the two options are the same. The storm water management plan
uses storm water infiltration areas (Option A - FIGURE 14; OptionB - FIGURE 15) and regrading of portions of
the site will be necessary. These changes will eliminate the on-site detention pond concept in favor of promoting the
infiltration of storm water. Stormwater runoff in excess of the infiltration capacity will be directed to the existing K-
4 Bauer & Associates, Ltd., Community Value Statement/or Valley Green Development. West Dean's lake Area, Nov., 2001.
5 Minnesota Department of Agriculture Press Release, April 19, 2002, as available on the Internet at -
hrtp://www.mda.state.mn.us/newsreleases/2002news/apr 19 Ol.htm
6 -
Carlson, Steven J., STS Consultants, Ltd., e-mail to Del Jackman, Bolton & Menk, Inc., May 31,2000, page 3.
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 20
I .
Mart Linear Pond on the north side of US 169. Discharge from the site will be limited to oJ cfs per acre established
in the AUAR dated July 2000 and required by the City.
In general, Option B will have less impervious surface overall than Option A, thus generating less overall runoff.
The infiltration and storm water management areas for either option will be designed in conformance with City
Standards and the mitigation plan outlined in this AUAR.
A "Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan" was completed for the City of Shakopee in 1999 (WSB &
Associates); and subsequently adopted. The Plan includes the following standards:
. All new stormwater systems should comply with the City's Comprehensive Stormwater Management
Plan and provide runofftreatrnent to NURP (National Urban Runoff Program) standards prior to
discharge. NURP standards include:
. Permanent pool volume equal to runoff from the pond's drainage area from a 2.5..:inch storm, plus
an allowance for sedimentation; and
. Permanent pool mean depth of at least 4 feet but less than 10 feet.
. New pond outlets must have oil skimmers that extend at least 4 inches below the water surface and that
limit water velocity below the skimmer to less than 0.5 foot per second for moderate storms (I-year
return interval).
New ponds in the Dean's Lake drainage area must limit the peak discharge rate to a maximum of 0.1 cfs (cubic feet per
second) per acre in a 100-year storm and, as feasible, to 0.05 cfs per acre in a 10-year storm. (These requirements are
primarily for flood-control, but they also enhance water quality because discharge rate limitations increase detention time
and enhance particulate solids settling.)
During the development of the City of Shakopee' s Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan; the entire study area
was analyzed. The study investigated the fully developed condition of the watershed, which is intended to be developed
into a commercial or industrial land uses. Underthe fully-developed condition, the flow at the Trunk Highway 101
culvert is anticipated to be 760 cfs. The City and Prior Lake/Spring Lake Watershed District are currently undertaking a
hydrologic study of the Deans Lake/Prior Lake outlet channel to verify the hydraulic capacity of this channel, and to
recommend changes if necessary.
The City's plan also calls for conformance with (1) the Metropolitan Council's Interim Strategy to Reduce Nonpoint
Source Pollution to All Metropolitan Water Bodies (Frost and Schwanke, 1999), (2) BMPs for urban areas as
. recommended by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (1989), and (3) revised Shoreland Ordinance provisions
following MDNR directives. 7
Adherence to the City's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan, especially the ponding requirements, is required
to mitigate the greater part of any contaminant from the developed site.
b. Identify the routers) and receiving water bodiesfor runofffrom the site. Estimate the impact of the
runoffon the quality of the receiving waters. (If the runoffmay affect a lake consult "EAW
Guidelines" about whether a nutrient budget analysis is needed).
Option A and B (Information developed from past AUAR and the site plans)
The majority of the site presently drains to the north, with the easterly edge of the development closely following the
drainage divide for Dean's Lake, as identified in the City of Shako pee's 1999 Comprehensive Stormwater Management
Plan. Discharge from the project will be limited to the criteria for water quality and quantity as identified in the City's
Stormwater Plan.
7
Erdmann, John, Wenck Associates.
City of Shakopee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 21
I
The proposed design will be consistent with the City's Stormwater Management Plan and maintain the existing drainage
divides. A stormwater infiltration system and on-site stormwater ponding, with adequate dead storage and skimming,
will be implemented throughout the site to reduce non-point source pollution through implementation of Best
Management Practices.
Rate control and water quality will be provided prior to discharging into off-site receiving water bodies. FIGURE 14
(Option A) and FIGURE 15 (Option B) show the preliminary storm sewer design. A network of infiltration basins and
ponds are proposed as part of the stormwatermanagement system. Ponds constructed at lower elevations are designated
for lining, to limit the infiltration rate and thus offer some level of protection to ground water. Ponds constructed at
higher elevations (along the existing CSAH 16) are proposed to be 'dry' and not lined in order to promote feeding the
ground water system. This system of infiltration basins, ponds, and constructed wetlands ultimately discharge into the
Prior Lake's outlet channel, a ditch that leads from Dean's Lake north to the Minnesota River.
The project does not contain any identified trout streams nor will storm water be discharged into any identified trout
stream. Additionally, Dean's Lake is not considered a "priority lake" and thus does not require a nutrient budget.
18. WATER QUALITY - WASTEWATER
18. Water Quality - Wastewater. Observe the following points of guidance in an A UAR:
. only domestic wastewater should be considered in an AUAR---industrial wastewater would be coming
from industrial uses that are excluded from review through an A UAR process;
. wastewater flows should be estimated by land use subareas of the AUAR area; the basis offlow 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 A UARs) to Metropolitan Council regional systems plans, including MUSA expansions, should be
discussed. For non-metro area A UARs, the AUAR must discuss the capacity of the RGU's wastewater
treatment system compared to the flows from the A UAR area; any necessary improvements should be
described;
. if on-site systems will serve part of the A UARthe guidance in "EA W Guidelines" (pages 16-17) should
be followed.
a. Describe sources, quantities~ and composition (except for normal domestic sewage) of all sanitary and
industrial wastewaters produced or treated at the site.
b. Describe any waste treatment methods to be used and give estimates of composition after treatment, or if the
project involves on-site sewage systems, discuss the suitability of the site conditions for such systems.
Identify receiving waters (including ground water) and estimate the impact of the discharge on the quality of
the receiving waters. (If the discharge may affect a lake consult "EAW Guidelines" about whether a
nutrient budget analysis is needed).
c. Ifwastes will be discharged into a sewer system or pretreatment system, identify the system and discuss the
. ability of the system to accept the volume and composition of the wastes. Identify any improvements which
will be necessary.
Option A (Information from the 2000 AUAR and new information)
Option A includes approximately 2,100,000 sf of comm~rciallindustrial development on 135 acres and 258 housing
units.
Wastewater from the VGCC site will be collected and treated by the Metropolitan Council- Environmental Services
Division. Total anticipated volumes of generated waste were not estimated in previous AUAR's but are estimated here
as follows:
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 22
I
Waste generated by business park = 0.07 GPO/sf
Waste generated by residential = 274 GPO/unit
Total Waste Generated= (0.07GPO/sfx 2,100,000sf) + (274 GPO/unit x 258 units)= 217,692 GPO
The proposed development is part of the area recently approved for MUSA expansion. The project site was slated as
business park at the time of this approval by the Metropolitan Council. The Metropolitan Council's Chaska interceptor
is also located adjacent to the site.
Sanitary sewer will be installed as part of the development. The proposed wastewater collection system, interceptor, and
treatment plant all have adequate capacities to accommodate waste generated by development.
Option B
Option B includes approximately 1,300,000 sf of commerciaVindustrial development on 91 acres and 565 housing units.
Wastewater from the VGCC site will be collected and treated by the Metropolitan Council- Environmental Services
Division. The development is anticipated to generated the following wastewater volumes:
Waste generated by business park = 0.07 GPO/sf
Waste generated by residential = 274 GPO/unit
Total Waste Generated= (0.07 GPO/acre x 1,300,000sf) + (274 GPO/unit x 565 units)=245 ,8 10 GPO
The proposed development is part of the area recently approved for MUSA expansion. The project site was slated as
business park at the time of this approval by the Metropolitan Council. The Metropolitan Council's Chaska interceptor
is also located adjacent to the site.
Sanitary sewer will be installed as part of the development. The proposed wastewater collection system, interceptor, and
treatment plant all have adequate capacities to accommodate waste generated by development.
19. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS AND SOIL CONDITIONS
19. Geologic hazards and soil conditions. A map should be included to show any groundwater hazards
identified. A standard soils map for the area should be included.
a. Approximate depth (infeet) to groundwater:_~minimum 5 average
to bedrock: 5 minimum 20 average
Describe any ofthefollowing geologic site hazards to groundwater and also identify them on the site map:
sinkholes, shallow limestone formations or karst conditions. Describe measures to avoid or minimize
environmental problems due to any of these hazards.
Option A and B Gnformation from 2000 AUAR and new information)
There are no known sinkholes or karst formations within the site. Shallow limestone is present on the site. Test
pits excavated on-site have identified sandstone overlaying the limestone.
b. Describe the soils on the site, giving NRCS (SCS) classifications, if known. Discuss soil granularity and
potential for groundwater contamination from wastes or chemicals spread or spilled onto the soils. Discuss
any mitigation measures to prevent such contamination.
Option A and B Gnformation from 2000 AU AR with minor modifications)
FIGURE 13 shows information from the Scott County Soil Survey for the sites. Soils on the site generally
include the following:
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 23
\ ,
CdA - Copas Silt Loam, 0-2%. Very poorly drained soils derived from shallow deposits of silty or loamy
outwash overlying limestone bedrock. Good drainage in most places but is some areas drainage is restricted by
bedrock.
DaA - Dakota Loam, 0-2%. Moderately well to well drained soils that formed under prairie grasses. Found on
sandy outwash plains and terraces. Underlain by sand or fme gravel.
De - Duelm Fine Sandy Loam. 0-3%. Well drained to moderately well drained soils of the terraces derived
from wind and water assorted fme sands.
Dg - Dune Land. Somewhat excessively drained soils consisting of loose sandy material..
EaA - Esterville Sandy loam, 0-2%. Moderately well drained soils that developed under prairie grasses and
sandy outwash plains and terraces.
HeA - Hubbard Loamy Fine Sand, 0-2%. Somewhat excessively drained soils on sandy terraces.
Ia - Isanti Fine Sandy Loam, 0-2%. Poorly drained soils on depressions and flats. Derived from wind and
water sorted fme sands. Water table is high much of the year.
Ma- Marsh. Very poorly drained soils in lakes and ponds.
PbA - Peat and Muck, 0-2%. Organic soils in very poorly drained depressions.
Sc - Stoney Land. Moderately well drained to well drained soils located mainly on terraces. Limestone and
sandstone bedrock underlies this land at depths of 6 to 36 inches.
Ta - Terrace Escarpments. Moderately well to well drained sandy or gravelly soils on narrow, steeply sloping
areas between nearly level terraces and the bottom lands or between one terrace and anotheL
ThB - Terril Sandy Loam, 0-2%. Moderately well to well drained soils.
ZaA, ZaA2, ZaB - Zimmerman Fine Sand, 0-6%. Excessively drained, windblown sands on timbered terraces.
These soils generally are described as having a hydrologic description of A or B. "A" soils have high
infiltration rates from 0.3 to 0.5 inches per hour. "B" soils have moderate infiltration rates of 0.15 to 0.30
inches per hour.
During construction, equipment will require refueling. Fuel is anticipated to be brought to tehs ite as needed
and that not storage will occur on-site. A fueling pad of clay with a slight berm will be constructed on site to
assure that any accidental spills will be contained to prevent fugitive migration of petroleum products.
A Phase I Environmental Assessment was conducted for the property. The assessment indicated that there are
no hazardous materials located on the site.
~ Local residents have suggested that the cessation of dewatering at the nearby Shiely/CAMAS limestone quarry
could cause the water table to rise close to the ground surface, thereby making groundwater more susceptible to
contamination. Located about one mile northeast of the proposed development, the quarry began dewatering in
1967 and currently has a permitted annual dewatering volume of2.75 billion gallons. The quarrying and
dewatering occur in the dolomite limestone bedrock of the Prairie du Chien group.
In the vicinity of the quarry (the proposed development and Dean's Lake) the Prairie du Chien is overlain by
typically 10- to 40 feet of alluvial sand, with a thicker outwash deposit (about 60 to 70 feet) just to the south. A
recent groundwater modeling study conducted for the Metropolitan Council (Barr Engineering, 1998) includes
predictions of the bedrock groundwater level changes that will result from cessation of the quarry dewatering.
Beneath the proposed development, the predicted rebound in Prairie du Chien groundwater level ranges from
less than 1 foot to a maximum of7 feet, occurring at the proposed development's northeast comer.
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 24
.
However, the above predictions do not apply to groundwater levels in the surficial sand aquifer (i.e. to the water
table) in the quarry-proposed development~Dean's Lake vicinity. In this vicinity, the MDNR has investigated
groundwater levels as related to the quarry dewatering on two occasions: during November 1979-July 1980
initially (Beissel and Ford, 1982) and during November 1996 - May 1997 (Drivas, 1997). Both studies entailed
groundwater level observations in the bedrock and the surficial sand during periods within which quarry
dewatering ceased for more than a month and then resumed. Both studies found that, whereas bedrock
groundwater levels clearly responded to dewatering changes, groundwater levels in the surficial sand aquifer
did not. Both studies also found that groundwater levels in the surficial sand were substantially higher than in
the bedrock (6 to 23 feet higher in the 1979-1980 study, based on more than six wells each in the bedrock and
the alluvium; 16 feet higher in the 1996-1997 study, based on the Czaja domestic well in the bedrock and an
adjacent observation well in the surficial sand.)
The two MDNR studies reached essentially the same conclusion concerning the bedrock and surficial sand
aquifers: the aquifers "function as separate systems" (Beissel and Ford, 1982) and apparently are not
"hydrogeologic ally separated" (Dravas, 1997). Therefore, cessation of the quarry dewatering is expected to
yield no significant water table rebound in the area of the proposed development.
20. SOLID WASTES; HAZARDOUS WASTES; STORAGE
TANKS
20. Solid wastes; hazardous wastes; storage tanks. For a, 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. No response is necessary forb. For c,potentiallocations of storage tanks associated with commercial
uses in the AUAR should be identified (e.g. gasoline tanks at service stations).
a. Describe the types, amounts, and compositions of solid or hazardous wastes to be generated, including animal
manures, sludges and ashes produced during construction and operation. Identify the method and location of
disposal. For projects generating municipal solid waste indicate if there is a hazardous waste minimization plan
and routine hazardous waste reduction assessments.
Option A (Information from the 2002 AUAR)
The business portions of the Valley Green Corporate Center /Dean's Lake Residential development will acquire its
solid waste storage and disposal services through private contractors. It will be at the discretion of the individual
business owners to contract with independent solid waste collectors of their choosing. Initial quantities of solid
waste are not known atthis time. Hazardous waste generation is not anticipated on the Valley Green Corporate
Center property.
The proposed 60 acres (approx.) of residential development is required to have solid waste collection and disposal
included with municipal utility services as part of association fee.
Option B
The business portions of the Valley Green Corporate Center !Dean's Lake Residential development will acquire
solid waste storage and disposal services through private contractors. It will be at the discretion of the individual
business owners to contract with independent solid waste collectors of their choosing. Initial quantities of solid
waste are not known at this time. Hazardous waste generation is not anticipated on the Valley Green Corporate
Center property.
The proposed 80 acres (approx,) of residential development is required to have solid waste collection and disposal
included with municipal utility services as part of association fee.
City of Shakopee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 25
.
b. Indicate the number, locatidn; size and use of any above or belowground tanks to be used for storage of
petroleum products or other materials (except water).
Option A and B (Information from the 2002 AUAR with additional information)
A convenience store with gas service is a potential land use within the project site. This convenience store would
be located at the CSAH 83 / CSAH 16 intersection and would require an underground storage tank to store the fuel.
This storage tank should be installed following applicable local, State and Federal guidelines (MN Rule 7150).
It is anticipated that the gas station may also have an above ground propane tank and the businesses within the site
may have fuel tanks on-site. These facilities will be installed and maintained according to applicable local, State
and Federal guidelines.
21. TRAFFIC
21. Traffic. For most AUAR reviews a relatively detailed traffic analysis will be needed, especially if there is to be
much commercial development in the AUAR area or if there are major congested roadways in the vicinity. The
results of the traffic analysis must be used in the response to item 23 and to the noise aspect of item 25.
Instead of responding to the information called for in item 22, the following information 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 A UAR 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 Levels 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 asfar 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.
OPTION A (Information from the July 2002 AUAR - APPENDIX B.2)
Subsequent to the acceptance oftheAUAR dated July, 2000, the City of Shako pee has pursued the reconstruction ofCR
83 and the relocation ofCSAH 16 to the south boundary ofVGCC. "... the improvements to CSAH 83 and CSAH 16 are
currently under constnlction. The improvements are based on traffic projections including, the traffic generation from
the Valley Green Corporate Center original concept plan [sic - as accepted in the July, 2000 AUAR] and additional
background traffic growth on both CSAH 83 and CSAH 16. " 8
Given that the current traffic generation projections (22,701 Net Total Trips9) are approximately 29% less than those
included in the July, 2000 AUAR (31,760 Net Total Trips 10) and Mr. Rickart's statement (above) concerning the actual
design of the road improvements, it is concluded that the project, as currently proposed, would have measurably less
detrimental environmental impacts than were included in the accepted AUAR from July, 2000.
8 Rickart, Charles T., P.E., WSB and Associates, Inc., in email to Ron Roetzel, Bolton & Menk, Inc., dated July 1,2002.
9 RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd., Revision of the Alternative Urban Areawide Review, June 4,2002, page 6.
10 RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd., Revision of the Alternative Urban Areawide Review, June 4,2002, page 5.
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 26
.
The site plan for the Valley Green Corporate Center involves the proposed improvement and realignment of CR
83/CSAH 16. This section summarizes the details of the Traffic Impact Studies 11 conducted to analyze the resulting
traffic impacts. Full details on the Traffic Impact Studies can be found in the APPENDIX B.2.
Existing and Proposed Roadway System
The main roadways of the project site can be found in FIGURE 22-1, APPENDIX B.2. Major roadways include US
169 (principal arterial), CR 83 (A minor arterial) and CSAH 16 (B minor arterial). US 169 is a 4-lane divided highway,
running east to west and acts as the northern border of the project site. US 169 is also the only major parallel route to
the area. CR 83 is a 4-lane highway from US 169 to CSAH 16. It coooects with the City of Shakopee at the Highway
101 intersection, and serves as a major route to Mystic Lake Casino, which is located to the south. CSAH 16 runs east to
west for the majority of the southern boundary of the project site. CSAH 16 eventually heads in a northwest direction
and acts as a major direct link to downtown Shakopee for area residents.
The site plan for the Valley Green Corporate Center includes the proposed improvement and realignment of CR
83/CSAH 16 in accordance with the City of Shakopee' s draft Transportation Plan. An illustration of the proposed
realignment can be found in FIGURE 22-5, APPENDIX B.2. This proposed action would include the straightening of
CSAH 16 along the southern border so that it would intersect with CR 83 at a 90-degree angle and farther to the south.
The portion of CSAH 16 that runs diagonally through the proposed development would be removed.
Local residents have voiced their opposition to the proposed realignment. Many residents along CSAH 16 are opposed
to the realignment because it takes away their direct route to downtown Shakopee. These residents feel the realignment
will require additional travel time through the added segment along CR 83 and two intersections. The 5-year capital
improvement plan for the City of Shakopee includes the extension of 17th A venue (FIGURE 22-5, APPENDIX B.2),
which would give local residents an alternative route to downtown Shakopee. However the City and Scott County need
to agree on the extension of 17th A venue taking place.
Trip Generation Data
According to the Traffic Impact Study 12, "trip generation data was calculated based on a 20 year traffic forecast, and a
background growth rate of 1.5 percent per year. This growth rate is considered reasonable for the area surrounding the
proposed development. Data was generated assuming two different land use options, an "Office Service" land use and a
"Business Park" land use. The "Office Service" land use assumes 25 percent office use and 75 percent warehouse use.
These figures are based on reviews of similar uses in the area."l3 .
Business Park Land Use
Traffic volumes for the trip generation estimates a Business Park land use are illustrated in FIGURE 22-3,
APPENDIX B.2. These traffic volumes include a diversion of approximately 35 percent of the southbound left-
turns from the CR 83/Site Driveway intersection to the CSAH l6/Site Driveway intersection. This diversion is for
southbound AM peak traffic only. Traffic numbers being diverted were determined by calculating the reserve
capacity at the CR 83/County Road 16 and CSAH l6/Site Driveway intersection and rerouting the traffic from the
overcapacity site driveway on CR 83 to the under capacity drive on CSAH 16. This reserve capacity was calculated
at each intersection using critical lane volumes.
11 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.; WSB and Associates, Inc. 1999. Traffic Impact Study for Realignment of CR 83/CSAH 16.
Prepared for Valley Green Corporate Center. .
12 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.; WSB and Associates, Inc. 1999. Traffic Impact Study for Realignment ofCR 83/CSAH 16.
Prepared for Valley Green Corporate Center.
13 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.; WSB and Associates, Inc. 1999. Traffic Impact Study for Realignment ofCR 83/CSAH 16.
Prepared for Valley Green Corporate Center.
City of Shakopee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 27
U. \.
O. dQ
: ~~
- -~
CI).....
0-
n i-
(j I
. Q Q 0
. :2 . ~ =....:l ~
. ~ II'~I~ ~ "'tIll~ ~ .
o ~ 0 (IJ CO !
n . ~ [
g "C "0 l
= = ;
:= , ~:2
n ~ rn ~U~CQ~CQO ~ CIJ ~Uf.t.C)(')CQO
B r.l 0 .... Z 0"" f
Z~6 ~~g '!
~ - C'J'.l ~ - rn .,
I ~ .2 "C CIJ .~ "0 !
. ~ Q = ""'"' Q =
= ~ := N .~ :2
-04 0 d -"" 0
~ "-:8 A ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ .~ '"' ~ U u.l < tr.J tr.J 0
J Oc. t:: Q. 't
o 0 0
Z z
I g g
.-. ~....
t; rn u rn
. ~e) (.)C)CQQc)< cue) (.)OCQOO< !
1.0. Z ~. Z
cu~ cu~ I'
I .... .... . ,
. = = . ..
I - 1-0(
~ ~ I
Q zCQ CQ Q ,I
:2 C'J'.l ::I....:l
~ 'A' p:f , ~ ~. . . tIll' ~ '
0' .~ ~ 0' OJ I I
"C "0' ."
= =..
:2 :=. I
o 0 " .
~ .CIJ ~ C) f.t. CQ ~ CQ ~ G:' rn ~ (.) ~ C) 0 CQ Cl r!
o .... ~ 0""
., = ., ::I .
rn - 0 rn '"'" 0 ;'1"
'-' - Cf.) ....... _ rn
rI:l .-4.~ -- .-4 .S _ I
.- 1:'" .... = 1.0.... , .:
b ~ 1: g . ,. ~ t g Ii:
~ .8 - -<. ~ 0 ~ CQ ~ Q 0 8 -< ~ (.)I~l<l~'til Cl .i
.< \0. ~ ~. '. I I
.:::: ...-4 0 0 i I I,
biJ ~ Z Z I i I::
- I: =! I
~ 0 o.
4)rJ.)~. ~. Ii
~ U uCIJ uCIJ ; I
4) 0 C q C)fO CQ ~ C) ~ c q (.)jO;CQ1Cllo ~
= ;..0 cu ., I cu ' .;: I I'
4) CI) .... _ . I _ _ : I : . II
<( & ~ .a ~ i ~! I i .11
" 4)0 ! lIt )
o c($ i>- rI:l I I : : i,,!1
!. 4) < ~ ~ 0../ 0..1 V : o..i 0../ ! v .il
CJ.c = I: ::I 1:'. I =,
. .- - .- 0: E I] I I: 0 E: ~II ; I: ! i
I t N ~ -..::~ _I ~ ~ .~;~: V
'"'" 4) -. ,e:; CJ :~l~ -04 CJ :~!~I!~
,. .... Q V 1: ';0;;1 ..... Q Oil:'" .....
~ CI.l ff') 4).. ~ =./ 0 I g -:S.i C = !. 0 i = I loS
~ ~ 00 ~ -; ~ U Zjrn \0 r-... . ~ .! fi!Zla \O'r--
~..:l~. ~ tr3 ~ ~ ~<I$j~ ;; g] ~ ~ ~;$I'$llile ~
i>- -< 0: . -5......,- < +: .... ~ -5'- - < .a v
CI) rJ.).:::: ::E ~ i:I: i ::z:: I C'J'.l ::I ~ ~ ~ :::z: :I: ('IJ I = 1:;
~ ~ u rJ.) ~ -i(-:if..;IC) ~ < -< -If-.:f-.U f.t. -<(
, I
.iI...
I I
Office Service Land Use
Traffic volumes for the trip generation estimates an Office Service land use are illustrated in FIGURE 22-4,
APPENDIX B.2. Traffic volumes for the Office Service land use are similar to those of the Business Park use,
but resulted in lower trip generation estimates. Peak AM left-turn volumes for southbound traffic do not change
between the alternatives. However, peak PM left-turn volumes drop by less than 100 vehicles per hour. Again
traffic volumes include a diversion, 25 percent, between the two site driveway intersection and uses the same
methodology as described previously for the Business Park land use.
Both alternatives were analyzed to determine the accuracy of the percentage diverted. The proposed site plan indicates
commercial land uses nearest the access onto CR 83, office/warehouse to the east and office towers in the northeast
comer of the site. It was determined reasonable to assume that familiar users such as office employees could easily
divert to the alternate south access.
Traffic Impacts and Proposed Mitigation
The Valley Green Corporate Center is estimated to result in approximately 32,000 to 40,000 additional weekday trips.
Due to its location (south of US 169), there are few parallel routes to the area. As a result, it is estimated that 55 percent
of site-generated traffic will travel either to the north or from the north on CR 83. This results in peak AM hour volumes
of 1,300 to 1,600 vehicles and problems with the number ofleft tums into the site from the north. The most critical
queuing location is the southbound left turns at the CR 83/Site Driveway intersection. Mitigation for this area could
involve a continuous left-turn lane starting from the CR 83/US 169 south ramp intersection, tapering to a second left-turn
lane. This would add additional storage for the left-turn vehicles. This could easily be accomplished through proper
striping and signing, but would require Mn/DOT approval due to the proximity to the trunk highway ramp intersection.
Queuing problems from US 169 on CR 83 could also be mitigated through the use of special traffic signal timing.
The CSAH 16/Site Driveway intersection should also be reviewed periodically for traffic signal warrants. A traffic
signal is scheduled to be installed by the year 2017 in order to reserve capacity required for the operation of the CR
83/Site Driveway intersection.
According to the results of the Traffic Impact Study 14, all individual intersections will be operating at a Level of Service
(LOS) D or better during both AM and PM peak hours, for the design year 2017. A LOS of A through D is typically
acceptable (under capacity), LOS E is near capacity, and LOS F is over capacity. An overall arterial analysis indicates
that the entire corridor would also be at a LOS D or better for both northbound and southbound traffic during AM and
PM hours. Because of the coordinated system however, arterial.LOS at specific intersections may deteriorate to an E,
and in the case of the north US 169 ramp intersection an F during AM and PM hours. The reduction in LOS at the north
US 169 ramp is a result of the reduction in the amount of green time allocated for the north and south traffic. This
specific cycle length deters from the amount of green time allocated for the side streets" therefore deteriorating the
intersection Levels of Service. TABLE 22-1A shows Level of Service and Queue Length analysis for CR 83-12th Ave
to CSAH 16.
As stated above, the proposed development will generate a significant amount of traffic resulting in unacceptable LOS at
certain locations adjacent to the site. Additional capacity and/or access points should be considered to more effectively
mitigate traffic impacts. The source of the background traffic of 1.5% is accepted by both the City of Shakopee and
Scott County as sufficient to account for future growth in the immediate area. It is recommended that due to the
potential impacts to the LOS ef at the access points to the site, that the City monitor the traffic conditions as the site
develops.
Negotiations for access points to this site are still in progress with both Scott County and Mn/DOT. The RGU may, as a
mitigation measure, impose limits on the size, type and location of particular developments based upon the traffic
impacts of the adjacent access points, and correlate the development potential of this site with the acceptable level of
service of the access points. This can be done as the development occurs, and through monitoring of the traffic volumes
at the access points.
"The City of Shakopee's Transportation Plan includes a chapter on the City's transit system. The City's transit
mission statement is 'To evaluate and improve performance, efficiency, and productivity of local transit system
14 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.; WSB and Associates, Inc. 1999. Traffic Impact Study for Realignment orCR 83/CSAH 16.
Prepared for Valley Green Corporate Center.
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 29
,
identifYing the transit service needs of all citizens and delivering the appropriate transit services while balancing
the available energy and financial resources. '
The City of Shako pee is currently not served by the Metropolitan Transit Service. Instead, the City of Shako pee is
the provider through Shakopee Area Transit (SAT) alternative transit serVices. The services currently provided are:
(1) dial-a-ride service within the City of Shako pee; (2) commuter van pools. Express bus service to Eden Prairie
Center is expected to be re-instated this year.
The transit ridership levels overall have been steadily increasing. With the opening of the new Bloomington Ferry
Bridge and US 169 the pace of development in Shakopee has increased significantly. In order to meet increased
demand, the City will need to work with other transit providers to ensure that its residents can make the transit
connections, they need to get across the metropolitan area to jobs and other destinations.
With the increased residents and development around the area of the US 169 and CR 83 and with CSAH 17 the City
has identified the need for a park-and-ride site in these areas. A park-and-ride facility has been identified in the
northwest quadrant of us 169 and CR 83 and in the northwest quadrant of us 169 and CSAH 17.
The City will be committed to work with Valley Green Corporate Center to encourage carpools and van pools
(within) the proposed site, as it develops." 15
The realignment of CSAH 16 is still under review by the City of Shakopee, and Scott County. The City's traffic
consultant using the existing lane configuration. of CR 83 and CSAH 16 completed a preliminary analysis of a non-
realignment concept. This determined that significant changes in the density of the project would be required in. order to
accommodate the turning traffic. This density however, would not conform to Metropolitan Council policy of smart
growth. Thus, this study at least builds the need for improvements to both CR 83 and CSAH 16.
The realigriment of CSAH 16 also has implications in a regional sense which has impacts that are beyond the scope of
this F AUAR. It is therefore recommended that additional study be completed on this roadway relocation to analyze the
impacts to the current users of CSAH 16 and the existing travel patterns, as well as the impacts to adjacent site
development.
In 1998, representatives from the City of Shako pee and Scott County have held discussions with representatives from
MnlDOT regarding the CR 83 and CSAH 16 concept plan and the traffic impacts to the CR 83 / US 169 interchange.
Concept plans have been developed for this area based upon the comments received from MnlDOT and includes signals
and dual left turn lanes at the westbound US 169 ramp. A copy of these concepts is shown in FIGURE 22-5,
APPENDIX B.2.
Other potential mitigation measures to the site traffic include the extension of 17th A venue to connect with the
intersection of CR 83 and realigned CSAH 16. It is recommended that additional study be completed to review whether
this is a viable improvement to reduce the traffic impacts potentially generated by the development of this site.' This
roadway extension is in the City of Shako pee's Transportation Plan, and would and an important east-west circulation
roadway south of US 169.
OPTION B (U{>dated Analysis - See Appendix B.3)
Subsequent to the acceptance of the AUAR dated July, 2000, and the update dated July, 2002, the City of Shakopee has
pursued and completed the reconstruction ofCSAH 83 and the relocation ofCSAH 16 to the south boundary of the
Valley Green Corporate Center. The improvements were based on traffic projections including the traffic generation
from the Valley Green Corporate Center original concept plan [sic - as accepted in the July, 2000 AUAR] and additional
background traffic growth on both CSAH 83 and CSAH 16." 16
Given that the current traffic generation projections (16,982 Net Total Trips) are approximately 25% less than those
included in the July 2002 AUAR (22,701 Net Total Trips2) which were 29% less than those included in the July 2000
15 Rickart, Chuck, WSB Associates, attachment to E-mail to Del Jackman, Bolton & Menk, June 9, 2000, page 5.
16 Rickart, Charles T., P.E., WSB and Associates, Inc., in email to Ron Roetze1, Bolton & Menk, Inc., dated July 1,2002.
City of Shakopee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003AUAR Page - 30
I
AUAR (31,760 Net Total Trips 17), it is concluded that Option B would have measurably less detrimental environmental
impacts than were included in the accepted AUAR from July, 2000.
The following section summarizes the details of the Traffic Impact Studies 18 conducted to analyze the resulting traffic
impacts. Full details on the Traffic Impact Studies can be found in the APPENDIX B.
Existing and Proposed Roadway System
The main roadways of the project site can be. found in FIGURE 22-1, APPENDIX B.3. Major roadways include US
Highway 169 (principle arteria!), CSAH 83 (A minor arterial) and CSAH 16 (B minor arterial). US Highway 169 is an
east-west, 4-lanedivided highway and acts as the northern border of the project site. US Highway 169 is also the only
major parallel route to the area. CSAH 83 is a 4-lane highway from US 169 to CSAH 16. It connects with the City of
Shakopee at the Trunk Highway 101 intersection, and serves as a major route to Mystic Lake Casino, which is located to
the south. CSAH 16 is an east/west road with ajog on CSAH 83 for the majority of the southern boundary of the project
site. CSAH 16 eventually heads in a northwest direction and acts as a major direct link to downtown Shakopee.
The 5-year capital improvement plan for the City of Shakopee includes the extension of 17th Avenue (FIGUR..€ 22-1,
APPENDIX B.3), which would give local residents an alternative route to downtown Shakopee. However the City and
Scott County need to agree on the extension of 17th A venue taking place.
Data Collection
Turning movement counts had not been collected since completion of the roadway improvements, as proposed in the
July 2000 AUAR~ New data was collected the weeks of April 21 5t and April 28th, 2003 along CSAH 83 during the
morning and afternoon peak hours at the following intersections:
12th Avenue, Secretariat Drive
US Highway 169 West Ramp
US Highway 169 East Ramp
CSAH 16 West and CSAH 16 East
The existing (2003) AM and PM peak hour turning movements and existing lane geometry is illustrated in FIGURES
22-2 and 22-3, APPENDIX B.3, respectively.
Trip Generation Data
Trip generation data for the peak hours of traffic and average daily traffic (ADT) (TABLE 22-1-0PTIONB) was
calculated for the year 2010 (proposed year after full build conditions) using the data and methodologies contained in the
6th Edition of Trip Generation, published by the Institute ofTransportationEngineers (lTE).
Table 22.1.0PTION B
Shako pee Valley Green Corporate Center: Trip Generation
Land Use AM Peak PM Peak
Use Code Size Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total ADT
Detached Townhouse 210 201 Units 38 113 151 130 73 203 1924
Condo/Townhouse 230 364 Units 27 133 160 132 65 197 2133
Hotel 310 90 Rooms 35 25 60 31 33 64 803
Spec. Retail Center 814 7,500 SF 0 0 0 9 11 20 305
17 RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd., Revision o/the Alternative Urban Areawide Review, June 4,2002, page 5.
18 'SRF Consulting Group, Inc.; WSB and Associates, Inc. 1999. Traffic Impact Study for Realignment ofCR 83/CSAH 16.
Prepared for Valley Green Corporate Center.
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 31
I
HTO (Sit-Down) Rest. 832 18,000 SF 87 80 167 118 78 196 2346
Drive-In Bank 912 4,000 SF 29 22 51 110 110 220 1061
Gas/Service w/ Conv. 845 10 Fuel Pas. 51 51 102 67 67 134 1628
Warehousing 150 736,500 SF 272 59 331 90 286 376 3653
General Office 710 494,500 SF 679 ~ 92 771 125 612 737 5445
Total (Gross) 1,218 575 1,793 812 1,335 2,147 19,298
(-4%) (-20% ) (-12% )
Total (Net) 1 ,169 I 552 1,721 650 1 1,068 1,718 16,982
It should be noted that "gross" totals refer to trip volumes without pass-by or shared trip reductions and "net" totals refer
to volumes with these reductions taken into account. Industry accepted standards included within ITE's Trip Generation
Handbook were used to calculate the shared trip and pass-by trip reductions for the currently planned uses.
The trip distribution percentages deveioped for Scott County by SRF Consulting Group, Inc. were used to distribute the
trip generation estimates. The trip generation percentages used are as follows:
. 35 percent to/from the east of US Highway 169;
. 18 percent to/from the east of County Road 16;
. 12 percent to/from the south on CSAH 83;
. 10 percent to/from the west on the future 17th A venue extension;
. 10 percent to/from the west on US Highway 169;
. 5 percent to/from the west on County Road 16;
. 10 percent to/from the north on CSAH 83.
A background growth rate of 1.5 percent per year was added to the data that was collected to develop the 2010 projected
traffic volumes. Based on discussions generated from the 2000 and 2002 AUAR for this site, this growth rate is
considered reasonable for the area surrounaing the proposed development. Projected traffic was also generated for the
year 2020, ten years after completion of the proposed development, utilizing the same growth rate. FIGURES 22-4 and
22-5, APPENDIX B.3 illustrate the projected 2020 build AM and PM peak hour turning movements.
Proposed Access
Access to the site is proposed via three entrances: one on CSAH 83 and two on CSAH 16. The primary commercial
entrance would be on CSAH 83 across from the west leg ofCSAH 16. The fIrst access to the east ofCSAH 83 on
CSAH 16 would be closed to eastbound traffIc (right-inlright-out only). The second access would be a full access into
the residential area.
Traffic Impacts and Proposed Mitigation
The operational analysis was completed using the traffic modeling and simulation software Synchro/SimTraffic Version
5, Build 323. This model is based on the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, published by the Transportation Research
Board. The procedures describe operating conditions at intersections in terms of Level of Service (LOS). These
operations are given letter designations with "A" representing the best operating condition and "F" representing the
worst. Generally, level of service "D" represents the threshold for an acceptable overall intersection operating condition
during a peak hour. The recent construction includes some lanes that are striped to be excluded at this time. The
analysis assumes that these lanes striped out for future use would be re-striped for use with the proposed development.
The extension of 17th A venue to connect with the intersection of CSAH 83 and realigned CSAH 16 was included in the
analysis, since it is included in the City of Shakopee five-year CIP. This roadway extension is in the City of Shakopee's
Transportation Plan, and would add an important east-west circulation roadway south of US 169.
City of Shakopee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 32
J
The Valley Green Corporate Center is estimated to result in approximately 17,000 additional weekday trips. Due to its
location (south of US Highway 169), there are few parallel routes to the area. As a result, it is estimated that 79 percent
of site-generated traffic will travel either to the north or from the north on CSAH 83. This results in AM peak hour
volumes of 1,300 to 2,200 and PM peak hour volumes of 1,500 to 3,200. The most critical queuing locations are at the
westbound left turn lanes at the US Highway 169 west ramp and the southbound left turns at the US Highway 169 east
ramp. The maximum queue lengths are approaching the exiting turn lane lengths; however, the queue lengths are not
exceeding the existing turn lane lengths for the modeled 2020 build condition.
The CSAH 16/Site Driveway intersection should also be reviewed periodically for traffic signal warrants. A traffic
signal is scheduled to be installed by the year 2020 to reserve capacity required for the operation of the CSAH 83/Site
Driveway intersection.
According to the results of the traffic analysis, all individual intersections will be operating at a Level of Service (LOS)
D or better during both AM and PM peak hours, for the design year 2020. A LOS of A through D is typically acceptable
(under capacity), LOS E is near capacity, and LOS F is over capacity. An overall arterial analysis indicates that the
entire corridor would also be at a LOS D or better for both northbound and southbound traffic during AM and PM hours.
Because of the coordinated system, however, arterial LOS at specific intersections may deteriorate to an E, and in the
case of the 12th Avenue intersection, an F during PM peak hours. The reduction in LOS at this intersection is a result of
the reduction in the amount of green time allocated for the north and south traffic. This specific cycle length deters from
the amount of green time allocated for the side streets, therefore deteriorating the intersection Levels of Service.
TABLE 22-2 shows 2020 build Level of Service and Queue Length analysis for CSAH 83-12thAve to CSAH 16.
Table 22-2 - OPTION B
2020 Build Intersection Level of Service / 95th Percentile Queue Lengths
Futurel7tl1
US 169 West US 169 East Ramp CSAH 16 West / Avenue / CSAH
12th Avenue Ramp Site Access 16 East
2020 Build
AM
EB
LT C 92 C 282 D 118 C 75
TH C 95 C D 34 C 45
RT A 40 B 126 A 58 A 44
WE
LT D 83 D 253 D 55 C 45
TH D 61 C D 26 C 81
RT B B 214 B 66 B 236
NB
LT .C 241 D 44 D 119 D 121
TH A 133 C 169 B 99 D 235 B 161
RT A 59 B 98 B 208 A 18
SB
LT D 67 D 116 C 204 C 98
TH B 85 B 119 C 222 C 152 B 81
RT A 46 A 49 A 27 A 86
OVERALL B C C C C
2020 Build
PM
.
City of Shakopee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 33
I
EB
LT C 36 D 100 D 61 C 89
TH B 48 C C 29 C 72
RT A 78 B 77 B 134 B 116
WB
LT C 216 C 298 C 126 C 45
TH C 84 C C 48 C 85
RT B B 114 B 111 A 101
NB
LT D 164 D 70 D 108 D 163
TH A 92 C 140 B 143 B 182 C 157
RT A 67 B 141 A 51 A 53
SB
LT D 93 D 216 D 114 D 203
TH . C 159 C 242 A 228 B 215 B 151
RT A 71 A 98 A 54 B 87
OVERALL B C C R C C
As stated above, the proposed development will generate a significant amount of traffic. However, with the roadway
improvements complete, the LOS is maintained at an overall C or better with no movements below a LOS D.
The City of Shakopee is currently not served by the Metropolitan Transit Service. Instead, the City of Shakopee is the
provider through Shakopee Area Transit (SAT) alternative transit services. The services currently provided are: (1) dial-
a-ride service within the City of Shakopee; (2) commuter vanpoo1s. Express bus service to Eden Prairie Center is
expected to be reinstated this year.
The transit ridership levels overall have been steadily increasing. With the opening of the new Bloomington Ferry
. Bridge and US 169, the pace of development in Shakopee has increased significantly. In order to meet increased
demand, the ~ity will need to work with other transit providers to ensure that its residents can make the transit
connections, they need to get across the metropolitan area to jobs and other destinations.
With the increased residents and development around the area of the US 169 and CSAH 83 and with CSAH 17, the City
has identified the need for a pm-k-and-ride site in these areas. A park-and-ride facility has been identified in the
northwest quadrant of US 169 and CSAH 83 and in the northwest quadrant of US 169 and CSAH 17.
The City will be committed to work with Valley Green Corporate Center to encourage carpools and vanpools (within)
the proposed site, as it develops." 19
From the results of the analyses, it is concluded that no mitigation measures will be necessary for either the 2010 or 2020
projected build years. However, it is suggested that operations at all intersections studied be monitored in the future to
determine if any road improvements become necessary.
Text from the July 2000 AUAR (included here for reference - APPENDIX B.I)
The site plan for the Valley Green Corporate Center involves the proposed improvement and realignment ofCR
83/CSAH 16. This section summarizes the details of the Traffic Impact Studies 20 conducted to analyze the resulting
traffic impacts. Full details on the Traffic Impact Studies can be found in VOLUME 2, APPENDIX C.
Existing and Proposed Roadway System
The main roadways of the project site can be found in FIGURE 22-1, APPENDIX B.L Major roadways include US
169 (principal arterial), CR 83 (A minor arterial) and CSAH 16 (B minor arterial). US 169 is a 4 lane divide highway,
19 Rickart, Chuck, WSB Associates, attachment to E-mail to Del Jackman, Bolton & Menk, June 9,2000, page 5.
20 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.; WSB and Associates, Inc. 1999. Traffic Impact Study for Realignment ofCR 83/CSAH 16.
Prepared for Valley Green Corporate Center.
City of Shakopee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 34
I
running east to west and acts as the northern border of the project site. US 169 is also the only major parallel route to
the area. CR 83 is a 41ane highway from US 16.9 to CSAH 16. It connects with the City of Shakopee at the Highway
101 intersection, and serves as a major route to Mystic Lake Casino, which is located to the south. CSAH 16 runs east to
west for the majority of the southern boundary of the project site. CSAH 16 eventually heads in a northwest direction
and acts as amajor direct link to downtown Shakopee for area residents.
The site plan for the Valley Green Corporate Center includes the proposed improvement and realignment of CR
83/CSAH 16 in accordance with the City of Shakopee' s draft Transportation Plan. An illustration of the proposed
realignment can be found in FIGURE 22-5, APPENDIX B.1. This proposed action would include the straightening of
CSAH 16 along the southern border so that it would intersect with CR 83 at a 90 degree angle and farther to the south.
The portion of CSAH 16 that runs through the proposed development would be removed. Local residents have voiced
their opposition to the proposed realignment. Many residents along CSAH 16 are opposed to the realignment because it
takes away their direct route to downtown. Thus requiring additional travel time through the added segment along CR 83
and two intersections. The 5-year capital improvement plan for the City of Shakopee includes the extension of 17th
Avenue (FIGURE 22-5, APPENDIX B.1), which would give local residents an alternative route to downtown
Shakopee. However the City and Scott County need to agree on the extension of 17th A venue taking place.
Trip Generation Data
According to the Traffic Impact Study 21, "trip generation data was calculated based on a 20 year traffic forecast, and a
background growth rate of 1.5 percent per year. This growth rate is considered reasonable for the area surrounding the
proposed development. Data was generated assuming two different land use options, an "Office Service" land use and a
"Business Park" land use. The "Office Service" land use assumes 25 percent office use and 75 percent warehouse use.
These figures are based on reviews of similar uses in the area.,,22
Business Park Land Use
Traffic volumes for the trip generation estimates assuming a Business Park land use are illustrated in FIGURE 22-
3, APPENDIX B.1. These traffic volumes include a diversion of approximately 35 percent of the southbound left-
turns from the CR 83/Site Driveway intersection to the CSAH 16/Site Driveway intersection. This diversion is for
southbound AM peak traffic only. Traffic numbers being diverted were determined by calculating the reserve
capacity at the CR 83/County Road 16 and CSAH 16/Site Driveway intersection and rerouting the traffic from the
overcapacity site driveway on CR 83 to the under capacity drive on CSAH 16. This reserve capacity was calculated
at each intersection using critical lane volumes.
Office Service Land Use
Traffic volumes for the trip generation estimates assuming an Office Service land use are illustrated in FIGURE
22-4, APPENDIX B.1. Traffic volumes for the Office Service land use are similar to those of the Business Park
use, but resulted in lower trip generation estimates. Peak AM left-turn volumes for southbound traffic do not
change between the alternatives. However, peak PM left-turn volumes drop by less than 100 vehicles per hour.
Again traffic volumes include a diversion, 25 percent, between the two site driveway intersection and uses the same
methodology as described previously for the Business Park land use.
Both alternatives were analyzed to determine the accuracy of the percentage diverted. The proposed site plan indicates
commercial land uses nearest the access onto CR 83, office/warehouse to the east and office towers in the northeast
comer of the site. It was determined reasonable to assume that familiar users such as office employees could easily
. divert to the alternate south access.
Traffic Impacts and Proposed Mitigation
The Valley Green Corporate Center is estimated to result in approximately 32,000 to 40,000 additional weekday trips.
Due to its location (south of US 169), there are few parallel routes to the area. As a result, it is estimated that 55 percent
of site-generated traffic will travel either to the north or from the north on CR 83. This results in peak AM hour volumes
of 1,300 to 1,600 vehicles and problems with the number ofleft turns into the site from the north. The most critical
queuing location is the southbound left turns at the CR 83/Site Driveway intersection. Mitigation for this area could
21 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.; WSB and Associates, Inc. 1999. Traffic Impact Study for Realignment ofCR 83/CSAH 16.
Prepared for Valley Green Corporate Center.
22 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.; WSB and Associates, Inc. 1999. Traffic Impact Study for Realignment of CR 83/CSAH 16.
Prepared for Valley Green Corporate Center.
City of Shakopee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003AUAR Page - 35
.
involve a continuous left-turn lane starting from theCR 83/US 169 south ramp intersection, tapering to a second left-turn
lane. This would add additional storage for the left-turn vehicles. This could easily be accomplished through proper
striping and signing, but would require MnlDOT approval due to the proximity to the trunk highway ramp intersection.
Queuing problems from US 169 on CR 83 could also be mitigated through the use of special traffic signal timing.
The CSAH l6/Site Driveway intersection should also be reviewed periodically for traffic signal warrants. A traffic
signal is scheduled to be installed by the year 2017 in order to reserve capacity required for the operation of the CR
83/Site Driveway intersection.
According to the results of the Traffic Impact Study 23, all individual intersections will be operating at a Level of Service
(LOS) D or better during both AM and PM peak hours, for the design year 2017. A LOS of A through D is typically
acceptable (under capacity), LOS E is near capacity, and LOS F is over capacity. An overall arterial analysis indicates
that the entire corridor would also be at a LOS D or better for both northbound and southbound traffic during AM and
PM hours. Because of the coordinated system however, arterial LOS at specific intersections may deteriorate to an E,
and in the case of the north US 169 ramp intersection a F during AM and PM hours. The loss of LOS at the north US
169 ramp is a result of the amount of green time allocated for the north and south traffic. This specific cycle length
deters from the amount of green time allocated for the side streets, therefore producing unsatisfactory Levels of Service.
The TABLE in APPENDIX B.l shows Level of Service and Queue Length analysis for CR 83-12th Ave to CSAH 16.
As stated above, the proposed development will generate a significant amount of traffic resulting in unacceptable LOS at
certain locations adjacent to the site. Additional capacity and/or access points should be considered to more effectively
mitigate traffic impacts. The source of the background traffic of 1.5% is accepted by both the City of Shakopee and
Scott County as sufficient to account for future growth in the immediate area. It is recommended that due to the
potential impacts to the LOS of the access points to the site, that the City monitor the traffic growth as the site develops.
Negotiations for access points to this site are still in progress with both Scott County and Mn/DOT. The RGU may, as a
mitigation measure, impose limits on the size, type and location of particular developments based upon the traffic
impacts of the adjacent access points, and correlate the development potential of this site with the acceptable level of
service of the access points. This can be done as the development occurs, and through monitoring ofthe traffic volumes
at the access points.
"The City of Shako pee 's Transportation Plan includes a chapter on the City's transit system. The City's transit
mission statement is 'To evaluate and improve performance, efficiency, and productivity of local transit system
identifying the transit service needs of all citizens and delivering the appropriate transit services while
balancing the available energy and financial resources. '
The City of Shakopee is currently not served by the Metropolitan Transit Service. Instead, the City of Shako pee is
the provider through Shakopee Area Transit (SAT) alternative transit services. The services currently provided are:
(1) dial-a-ride service within the City of Shakopee; (2) commuter vanpools. Express bus service to Eden Prairie
Center is expected to be re-instated this year.
The transit ridership levels overall have been steadily increasing. With the opening of the new Bloomington Ferry
Bridge and US 169 the pace of development in Shakopee has increased significantly. In order to meet increased
demand, the City will need to work with other transit providers to ensure that its residents can make the transit
connections, they need to get across the metropolitan area to jobs and other destinations.
With the increased residents and development around the area of the US 169 and CR 83 and with CSAH 17 the City
has identified the need for a park-and-ride site in these areas. Apark-and-ride facility has been identified in the
northwest quadrant of us 169 and CR 83 and in the northwest quadrant of US 169 and CSAH 17.
The City will be committed to work with Valley Green Corporate Center to encourage carpools and vanpools
(within) tbe proposed site, as it develops." 24
The realignment of CSAH 16 is still under review by the City of Shakopee, and Scott County. A preliminary analysis of
23 SRF Consulting Group, Inc.; WSB and Associates, Inc. 1999. Traffic Impact Study for Realignment ofCR 83/CSAH 16.
Prepared for Valley Green Corporate Center.
24 Rickart, Chuck, WSB Associates, attachment to E-mail to Del Jackman, Bolton & Menk, June 9,2000, page 5.
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 36
..
a non-realignment concept was completed by the City's traffic consultant using the existing lane configuration ofCR 83
and CSAH 16. This detennined that significant changes in the density of the project would be required in order to
accommodate the turning traffic. This density however, would not confonn with Metropolitan Council policy of smart
growth. Thus, this study at least builds the need for improvements to both CR 83 and CSAH 16.
The realignment of CSAH 16 also has implications in a regional sense which has impacts that are beyond the scope of
this FAUAR. It is therefore recommended that additional study be completed on this roadway relocation to analyze the
impacts to the current users of CSAH 16 and the existing travel patterns, as well as the impacts to adjacent site
development.
In 1998, representatives from the City of Shakopee and Scott County have held discussions with representatives from
Mn/DOT regarding the CR 83 and CSAH 16 concept plan and the traffic impacts to the CR 83/ US 169 interchange.
Concept plans have been developed for this area based upon the comments received from MnlDOT and includes signals
and dual left turn lanes at the westbound US 169 ramp. A copy of these concepts is shown in FIGURE 22-5,
APPENDIX B.t.
Other potential mitigation measures to the site traffic include the extension of 17th Avenue to connect with the
intersection of CR 83 and realigned CSAH 16. It is recommended that additional study be completed to review whether
this is.a viable improvement to reduce the traffic impacts potentially generated by the development of this site. This
roadway extension is in the City of Shako pee's Transportation Plan, and would and an important east-west circulation
roadway south of US 169.
22. VEHICLE - RELATED AIR EMISSIONS
22. Vehicle-related air emissions. The guidance provided in "EAW Guidelines: should also befollowedfor an AUAR.
Mitigation proposed to eliminate any potential problems may be presented under Item 22 and merely referenced here.
The MPCA staffshould be consulted regardingpossible ISP requirements for certain proposed developments; although
the RGU may not want to assume responsibility for applyingfor an ISP for specific developments, it may be desirable to
coordinate the AUAR and ISP analyses closely.
OPTION A (Text from 2002 AUAR)
Pollutant emissions will be associated with motor vehicles traveling to and from the project. These and other vehicles already
passing through critical intersections contribute to the overall pollutant concentration near the critical intersections serving the
project. The most critical pollutant associated with vehicular traffic is Carbon Monoxide (CO) for which I-hour and 8-hour
ambient air quality standards have been established by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EP A) and the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The MPCA I-hour standard is slightly more stringent than the EP A I-hour standard (35
ppm) and will therefore be used in this air quality assessment for the AUAR. The standards are presented in TABLE 2j-l-
OPTION A.
TABLE 23-1-0PTION A
MPCA AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR CARBON MONOXIDE .
Period Standard
I-hour 30 (parts per million) ppm
8-hour 9 (parts per million) ppm
The following dispersion modeling was conducted as a part of the AUAR dated July, 2000 and reflected higher
traffic volumes, longer wait times and more severe Level of Service conditions than are predicted in the revised scope of
project being considered at this time. Previously (July, 2000), the projected ambient air quality CO levels were
consistently below the MPCA standards for all receptor locations, for both the I hour and 8 hour exposures. Given that
the newly predicted traffic levels, with their corresponding improvements in wait times and Levels of Service, are
considerably below of those use in July, 2000, it is concluded that the ambient air quality will not exceed the MPCA
standards.
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 37
A CO dispersion analysis was performed for four of the six intersections analyzed for traffic in Item 22. Two of
the intersections, CR 83 at 12th Avenue and CSAH 16 at the site access along the south side of the project, are estimated
to have less than 2,400 PM Peak Hour approach movements and are not likely to have the potential for high CO
concentrations based upon air quality screening guidelines developed in the early 1990s by regional air quality task
force. The intersections analyzed for vehicle emissions and air quality are listed in TABLE 23-2.
TABLE 23-2-0PTION A
INTERSECTIONS EXAMINED FOR CO CONCENTRATIONS
PM Peak Hour Approach Volumes (2017)
North/South Roadway East/West Roadway Volume LOS
CR83 12th Avenue 1,972 C
CR83 TH 169 WB Ramp 3,860 D
CR83 TH 169 EB Ramp 5,150 B
CR83 CSAH 16 6.040 E
CR83 17th Avenue (future) 4,130 C
South Site Access CSAH 16 1,570 not available
The MOBILE SA emissions program was used to estimate vehicle emissions in the year 2017 for which the traffic
analysis has been completed. The CAL3QHC dispersion model was used to estimate CO concentrations at receptor
sites near each of the intersections listed in TABLE 23-2-0PTION A. Receptor sites 100 feet from the intersection in
each of four compass quadrants were assumed since land use immediately adjacent to these intersection are currently
undeveloped but could potentially be developed in the future.
Carbon Monoxide Background Concentration
Background CO monitoring was performed in May of 1996 just north of Lake Susan in Chanhassen and
approximately 5.5 miles northwest of the critical intersections analyzed in this AUAR. The observed 1996 background
concentrations have been adjusted to worst case annual (winter) concentrations using seasonal adjustment factors and to
the 2017 projection year using the ratio of 20 17 to 1996 emission rates from the MOBILE 5A emissions model and
assuming an overall regional Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) growth of 2% per year. A vehicle Inspection/Maintenance
program was assumed in 1996 but not in 2017. The results of this adjustment are shown in TABLE 23-3,:,OPTION A.
TABLE 23-3-0PTION A
ADJUSTED CO BACKGROUND CONCENTRATIONS FOR 2017
Factor 1996 2017
Emission rate at 25 mph 23.1 20.0 .
Emission rate ratio from 1996 0.87
Traffic growth at 2% per year 1.52
Seasonal correction factor 1.43
Combined correction 1.88
I-HOUR (ppm) 1.8 3.4
8-HOUR (ppm) 1.6 3.0
Assumptions Used in CO Emission and Dispersion Modeling
The air quality analysis is based upon PM peak hour traffic projections for the year 2017 developed in Question 22.
The U.S. EP A MOBILE 5A emissions model for 2017 was run with the vehicle mix for the Twin Cities Seven-County
Metropolitan Area (without the vehicle inspection and maintenance program that was terminated in 1999). The
CAL3QHC model has been used to estimate downwind concentrations of carbon monoxide at receptor sites adjacent to
critical intersections identified in TABLE 23-2-0PTION A. Eight hour concentrations associated with each roadway
are estimated using a persistence factor of 0.70 applied to the PM peak hour emissions. The assumptions used for the
dispersion model are summarized in TABLE 23-4-0PTION A.
City of Shakopee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 38
TABLE 23-4-0PTION A
ASSUMPTIONS USED IN CO MODELING
Traffic Approach Speed: 25 mph on all roadways
Signal Cycle Time: 150 seconds at all intersections
Green Time: Based upon SYNCHRO model results
Percent Cold Starts: 20%
Vehicle Mix: Metropolitan Area mix with no 11M program
Wind Speed: 1 meter per second
Wind Direction: Direction yielding highest concentration
Projected CO Concentrations
Based upon the approach traffic volumes and the emission assumptions noted above, carbon monoxide
concentrations have been projected for each of the four quadrant receptor sites at each of the intersections for the Build
2017 traffic scenario. PM Peak Hour (I-hour) concentrations are presented in TABLE 23-S-0PTION A. Projected 8-
Hour concentrations for No-Build and Build scenario traffic are presented in TABLE 23-6-0PTION A.
TABLE 23-S-0PTION A
PROJECTED CO I-HOUR CONCENTRATIONS
(Build 2017 - ppm)
Roadway Background TOTAL
CSAH 83/WB ramp
Receptor 1 NE 2.9 3.4 6.3
Receptor 2 SE 2.8 3.4 6.2
Receptor 3 SW 2.5 3.4 5.9
Receptor 4 NW 2.9 3.4 6.3
CSAH 83/EB ramp
Receptor 1 NE 3.5 3.4 6.9
Receptor 2 SE 3.6 3.4 7.0
Receptor 3 SW 4.2 3.4 7.6
Receptor 4 NW 4.6 3.4 8.0
CSAH 83/CSAH 16
Receptor 1 NE 5.8 3.4 9.2
Receptor 2 SE 4.8 3.4 8.2
Receptor 3 SW 4.6 3.4 8.0
Receptor 4 NW 5.8 3.4 9.2
CSAH 83/17Tth Ave
Receptor 1 NE 2.5 3.4 5.9
Receptor 2 SE 2.0 3.4 5.4
Receptor 3 SW 2.2 3.4 5.6
Receptor 4 NW 3.6 3.4 7.0
MPCA STANDARD 30.0
From TABLE 23-5 -OPTION A it can be seen that the highest I-hour CO concentration of 9.2 ppm occurs near the CR
83 and CSAH 16 intersection. However, all of the CO concentrations at this intersection and others are well below the
I-hour 30 ppm ambient air quality standard for Carbon Monoxide.
City of Shakopee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 39
TABLE 23-6-0PTION A
PROJECTED CO 8-HOUR CONCENTRATIONS (Build 2017 - ppm)
Roadway Background TOTAL
CSAH 83/WB ramp
Receptor 1 NE 2.0 3.0 5.0
Receptor 2 SE 2.0 3.0 5.0
Receptor 3 SW 1.8 3.0 4.8
Receptor 4 NW 2.0 3.0 5.0
CSAH 83/EB ramp
Receptor 1 NE 2.5 3.0 5.5
Receptor 2 SE 2.5 3.0 5.5
Receptor 3 SW 2.9 3.0 5.9
Receptor 4 NW 3.2 3.0 6.2
CSAH 83/CSAH 16
Receptor 1 NE 4.1 3.0 7.1
Receptor 2 SE 3.4 3.0 6.4
Receptor 3 SW 3.2 3.0 6.2
Receptor 4 NW 4.1 3.0 7.1
CSAH83/17Tth Ave
Receptor 1 NE 1.8 3.0 4.8
Receptor 2 SE 1.4 3.0 4.4
Receptor 3 SW 1.5 3.0 4.5
Receptor 4 NW 2.5 3.0 5.5
MPCA STANDARD 9.0
From TABLE 23-6-0PTION A, the 8-hour concentration is 7.1 ppm at the CR 83 and CSAH 16 intersection. This
level as well as others projected at critical intersections are below the 9 ppm 8-hour standard for Carbon Monoxide.
Based upon the CO emission and dispersion analysis at these four intersections, it can be seen that the I-hour and 8-
hour concentrations all fall below the established standards so that no significant adverse air quality impacts are expected
in 2017 because of the project.
Given that the above analysis was conducted for traffic levels in excess of the current proposed design, it is
concluded that the MPCA standards will be met by the project, as proposed.
Option B (Additional Analysis)
Vehicle related air emissions are directly related to the amount of motor vehicle travel though an area. The proposed
Option B Valley Green Corporate Center will generate additional traffic on the surrounding roadways.
A detailed Air Quality analysis was completed for the 2002 AUAR (see Option A). This analysis concluded that no
significant adverse Air Quality impacts would be expected.
The current proposed land use will generate approximately 25% less total trips at full build than that in the 2002
AUAR. In addition, the increase in background traffic from 2017 to 2020 is estimated at 4.5% (See Section 21, Traffic).
Based on the fact that the total traffic in 2020 is estimated to be less than that in the 2002 AUAR, it can be concluded
that the proposed project will not have any significant adverse Air Quality impacts.
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 40
23. STATIONARY SOURCE AIR EMISSIONS
23. Stationary source air emissions. This item is not applicable to an A UAR. Any stationary air emissions source
large enough to merit environmental review requires individual review.
No response is necessary per the EQB guidance.
24. DUST, ODORS, NOISE
24. Dust, odors, noise. Dust, odors, and 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 dust
control or 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 trajJic-
generated noise, the noise analysis should be based on the traffic analysis of item 21.
Option A (Information from 2002 AUAR)
The format of this section has been revised. The ADAR dated July 2000 discussed construction impacts and those
impacts at specific intersections in the proposed project area caused by traffic.
. Construction Impacts - No revision is necessary. The same and similar impacts are anticipated.
. Traffic Impacts in Commercial Portion- Given that the revised scope of the project reflects approximately a
29% reduction in traffic generation, it is concluded that the potential impacts will be less than previously
determined and accepted in the ADAR dated July, 2000.
. Impacts on Residential Receptor Sites - The rezoning of approximately 60 acres of Business Park to Residential
housing will allow placement of more critical receptor sites closer to the business park and closer to US 169. A
new investigation of the potential noise impacts is necessary and provided.
Noise Terminology
dB(A) - A umt of sound level expressed in decibels (dB) and A-weighted.
DECIBEL - A unit of sound pressure level, abbreviated as "dB".
dBA A special weighting of sound pressure that approximates human hearing.
dBLin - Raw levels of sound pressure measure as recorded by the equipment.
LIO - Lso - The sound level, expressed in dBA, which was exceeded 10 percent (or 50 percent) of the time in a I
hour screening.
Ldn - Average day-night level which includes a 10 dB weighting factor for night-time readings to allow for
increased sensitivity to noise during the night-time hours. Ldn is equal to the Leq (time weighted average)
when applied to day-time hours only (7 am to 10 pm) activities.
NAC - Refers to "NOISE AREA CLASSIFICATION" as defmed in the Minnesota Rules
. Category 1 refers to RESIDENTIAL
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 41
. Category 2 refers to COMMERCIAL.
. Category 3.refers to INDUSTRIAL.
Construction Impacts
Dust, noise and vibration will be associated with the normal grading and construction activities. The following
measures to minimize noise and dust emissions will be incorporated into the construction procedures for the project:
. All internal combustion motors will be fitted with mufflers and other noise control equipment as specified by the
manufacturer.
. Construction procedures will comply with Minnesota Rules 7005.0050 on the control of fugitive particulate matter
from construction and hauling activities so as to minimize adverse air quality impacts.
. Minnesota Rules 7030.0040 on noise limits during daytime and nighttime hours will be complied with to minimize
any adverse impacts on the noise environment.
Once the project is completed and operational, no unusual dust, odors or noise will be generated except that associated
with mechanical equipment located on or adjacent to some of the buildings within the project.
Traffic Noise Impacts in the New Residential Areas- Daytime (PM Peak Hour)
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) noise standards for residential and commercial land uses are listed in
TABLE 25-1- OPTION A
TABLE 25-1- OPTION A
MPCA DAYTIME NOISE STANDARDS (dBA)
Land Use/Noise Metric Daytime Standard
NAC-I Residential
LIO 65
Lso 60
NAC-2 Commercial
LIO 70
Lso 65
NAC-3 Industrial
LIO 80
Lso .. 75
For the purpose of this study, two receptor sites were chosen in the proposed residential area.
. Site # I is near the south line of the residential area, near CSAH 16, This area is higher and can hear the traffic
generated by US I 69and CSAH 16 with few barriers.
. Site # 2 is located near the northeast corner of the residential district. Its proximity to Dean's Lake, the treeline
shelter from US 169 and the distance from CR 83& CSAH 16, all serve to reduce the overall noise levels found
in the model.
Three computerized models were prepared to predict the potential noise levels on each site. The following table
(TABLE 25-1b-OPTION A) illustrates the results of computerized modeling of the site and the associated noise
generators with the ~TAMINA 2.0 program.
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 42
!
Table 25-1b - OPTION A - Daytime Noise Modeling - Year 201725
Receptor Site 1 Receptor Site 2
Scenarios S of new Residential NE of new Residential
Near CSAH 16 Toward US 169
1 - Background, Worst Case -
Includes full traffic generated by LlO - 67.6 LlO-65.1
the project with no building LSO- 64.0 LSO- 63.6
construction to attenuate noise ,~
generated..
2 - Possible Scenario - Full
traffic generated with the LlO- 67.1 LlO - 54.6
proposed buildings in-place, LSO- 63.0 L50- 53.4
which will serve to buffer and
attenuate the noise. .
3- Probable Scenario -
Full traffic generated with BOlli L10 - 59.2 (65/55) LlO - 54.6 (65/55)
the proposed buildings in place LSO- 57.3 (60/50) LSO-53.4 (60/50)
and the existing treeline adjacent
to CSAH 16 still in-place. c
PCA residential noise limits
(daytime / nighttime)
The modeling results demonstrate that given the full construction with traffic in the design year 2017, and the
projected traffic volumes of the revised layout; daytime noise levels will not exceed the MPCA noise limits for
residential receptor sites. In fact, for site # 2 (Northeast), the daytime noise levels will not even exceed the nighttime
limits. If some activity in the future (natural or man-made) would severely reduce or eliminate the treeline boundary
adjacent to CSAH 16 (Scenario # 2, above), prompt efforts to repopulate the area with trees or some other noise barrier
should be undertaken to mitigate noise exposure back to the MPCA standards.
Traffic Noise Impacts in the Commercial Areas- Daytime (PM Peak Hour)
The following analysis uses the Traffic Volumes andPattems included in the July, 2000 AUAR
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) noise standards for residential and commercial land uses are listed in
TABLE 25-1-0PTION A. The residential area most likely impacted by noise from immediately adjacent roadways
carrying project traffic are those north of CSAH 16 and south of Dean Lake. Areas adjacent to the critical intersections
serving the project are most likely to be developed as commercial land uses if such development occurs. It should be
noted that under an amendment to Minn. Stat. 9116.07, subd. 2a, these standards no longer apply to roadways except in
the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. A traffic noise impact analysis is still included in this AUAR using the MPCA
standards as planning guidelines although they will be referred to as "standards". Since the project is expected to
generate only minimal traffic during the nighttime hours, this evaluation addresses maximum expected daytime noise
levels.
This noise assessment also addresses the potential impact on noise levels caused by the removal Of trees south of US 169
at the homes south of Dean's Lake. That assessment follows the analysis of noise impacts from immediately adjacent
roadways that is presented below.
Traffic noise levels have been analyzed for the PM Peak Hour which represents the worst case daytime noise levels for
comparison with the MPCA daytime noise standards. Noise levels were analyzed at the receptor sites in the vicinity of
the four critical intersections listed in TABLE 23-2-0PTION A and at the residential area north of CSAH 16 and south
of Dean's Lake. The STAMINA 2.0 highway noise model was used with the estimated Build traffic developed in
Question 21 for the year 2017. An average speed of 40 mph along roadways was assumed near intersections and 45
mph along CSAH 16. A vehicle mix of 3% medium trucks and 1 % heavy trucks was assumed on all of the roadways
25 RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd., Revision of the Alternate Urban Area-wide Review for the Valley Green Corporate Center, June4,
2002, page 11.
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 43
,
near the critical intersections. Medium trucks were estimated at 5% and no heavy trucks were assumed on CSAH 16
south of Dean's Lake.
The projected LIO and L50 noise levels at receptor sites adjacent to the critical intersections for the PM Peak Hour are
presented in TABLE 25-2-0PTION A along with the increase in noise level over the No-Build scenario.
TABLE 25-2-0PTION A [sic- based on traffic counts from July,
2000 AAUR]
PROJECTED PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS
at Critical Intersections (dBA)
Receptor Site (100 feet) LIO L50
CSAH 83 atWB Ramp ,.
NE 72.1 67.9
SE 72.2 68.2
SW 72.2 68.0
NW 71.5 67.2
CSAH 83 atEB Ramp ~-~
". NE 72.7 69.1
SE 7~.9 70.3
SW 73.0 69.3
NW 72.5 68.6
CSAH 83 at CSAH 16
NE 74.4- 71.0
SE 73.5 70.1
SW 73.0 69.4
NW 73.5 ' 70.0
CSAH 83 at 17th Ave.
NE 72.4 68.4
SE 71.7 67.6
SW 72.1 68.0
NW 72.9 68.9
From TABLE 2S-2-0PTION A, it can be seen that the projected noise levels are generally consistent along CR 83 from
US 169 south to the future 17th Avenue. LIO levels are generally above 70 dBA and L50 levels are generally above 65
dBA. A comparison of the projected levels with the NAC-2 (commercial) noise standards is presented in TABLE 25-3-
OPTION A.
TABLE 25-3-0PTION A [sic- based on traffic counts from July, 2000
AAUR]
LEVEL RELATNE TO COMMERCIAL STANDARDS
at Critical Intersections - (dBA)
Receptor Site (100 feet) LIO L50
CSAH 83 at WB Ramp
NE 2.1 - 2.9
SE 2.2 3.2
SW 2.2 3.0
NW 1.5 2.2
CSAH 83 at EB Ramp
NE 2.7 4.1
SE 3.9 5.3
SW 3.0 4.3
City of Shakopee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 A UAR Page - 44
\
TABLE 25-3-0PTION A [sic- based on traffic counts from July, 2000
AAUR]
LEVEL RELATIVE TO COMMERCIAL STANDARDS
at Critical Intersections - (dBA)
NW 2.5 3.6
CSAH 83 at CSAH 16
NE 4.4 6.0
SE 3.5 5.1
SW 3.0 4.4
NW 3.5 5.0
CSAH 83 at 17th Ave.
NE 2.4 3.4
SE 1.7 2.6
SW 2.1 3.0
NW 2.9 3.9
From TABLE 25-3-0PTION A it can be seen that all of the receptor sites are predicted to be over the conunercial noise
standards at all receptor sites. However, as noted below, the higher NAC-3 (industrial) standards can be applied where
certain conditions are met.
Building construction and use are exceptions to the MPCA noise standards:
Exceptions to the MPCA noise standard allow for a higher standard to be applied under specified conditions. Under
Subpart 3 EXCEPTIONS (D) of Minnesota Rules 7030.0050 NOISE AREA CLASSIFICATION, the NAC 3
(industrial) standards can be applied to a land use in NAC 2 (commercial) if the following conditions are met:
(1) the building is constructed in such a way that the exterior to interior sound level attenuation is at least
30 dBA
(2) the building has year-round climate control, and
(3) the building has no areas or accommodations that are intended for outdoor activities
Typical commercial construction will meet these requirements. However, no continuous outdoor uses should be
permitted in areas for which the LIO is 70 dBA or greater or the Lso is 65 dBA or greater.
Assuming that the conditions noted above are met for land uses for which there are no intended outdoor uses, differences
between projected levels and the NAC-3 standards are shown in TABLE 25-4~
TABLE 2S-4-0PTION A [sic- based on traffic counts from July, 2000
AAUR]
PM PEAK HOUR LEVELS RELATIVE TO NAC-3 STANDARDS
at Critical Intersections - (dBA)
Receptor Site (100 feet) LIO Lso
CSAH 83 at WB Ramp
NE -7.9 -7.1
SE -7.8 -6.8
SW -7.8 -7.0
NW -8.5 -7.8
CSAH 83 at EB Ramp
NE -7.3 -5.9
SE -6.1 -4.7
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 45
~
TABLE 25-4-0PTION A [sic- based on traffic counts from July, 2000
AAUR]
PM PEAK HOUR LEVELS RELATIVE TO NAC-3 STANDARDS
at Critical Intersections - (dBA)
SW -7.0 -5.7
NW -7.5 -6.4
CSAH 83 at CSAH 16
NE -5.6 -4.0
SE -6.5 -4.9
SW -7.0 -5.6
NW -6.5 -5.0
CSAH 83 at 17th Ave.
NE -7.6 -6.6
SE -8.3 -7.4
SW -7.9 -7.0
NW -7.1 -6.1
From TABLE 25-4-0PTION A it can be seen that well-constructed commercial buildings (without continuous outside
land uses) are likely to comply with the MPCA noise standards.
Projected noise levels at the residential area north of CSAH 16 and south. of Dean Lake are presented in TABLE 25-5
and compared with the NAC-l (residential) noise standards. It can be seen that for homes within 100 feet of the roadway
centerline, the daytime standards are exceeded by approximately 2 dBA. However, for most homes which are 150 to
200 feet from the roadway centerline, the predicted traffic noise levels are at or below the daytime noise standards for
residential land uses.
TABLE 25-5 -OPTION A [sic- based on traffic counts from July, 2000 AAUR]
PROJECTED NOISE PM PEAK HOUR LEVELS RELATIVE TO NAC-l STANDARDS
at Residential Area North of CSAH 16 - (dBA)
NAC-1 Std. Projected Level Difference
R.eceptor distance from roadway centerline LIO Lso LIO Lso LIO Lso
100 feet 65.0 60.0 66.9 61.2 +1.9 +1.2
200 feet 65.0 60.0 62.0 57.3 -3.0 ~ -2.7
Impact on residential noise levels from the removal of trees on the project site:
Two groups of trees, one immediately south of US 169 and the other just north of Dean's Lake, have been removed
for the City's Oak Wilt mitigation program, as a result of wind damage during 1999, and as a part of project grading /
construction. Each of these tree areas were approximately 2000 feet wide (east to west) and approximately 500 feet deep
(north to south). While no specific studies on the shielding effects of these trees have been made, it can be assumed that
each of these tree barriers provided no more shielding than a solid barrier 20 feet in height. This is consistent with
empirical data that a 100 foot band of dense tree cover would have provided up to 3 dBA attenuation of traffic noise, so
that a 500 foot band could provide up to 15 dBA attenuation, which is the maximum provided by a 20 foot barrier (in
close proximity to the barrier). However, since traffic along US 169 constitutes a line source, i.e. noise emanates from
along the entire highway, these tree barriers only provided partial shielding of the highway. Because of the nature of
noise propagation and depending on the positions of future buildings within VGCC, homes south of Dean's Lake may be
exposed to noise from portions of US 169 that were previously shielded by the trees. However, this potential exposure
was investigated and found to be generally less than 1 dBA, as shown in TABLE 25-6-0PTION A. It is commonly
accepted that the average listener can detect a 3 dBA change in sound levels. Therefore, it is doubtful if this change
would generate much impact.
City of Shakopee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 46
The impact of removing these trees was simulated assuming that each tree band was equivalent to a solid 20 foot
high noise barrier along the east/west extent of the trees. Residential receptor sites along the south edge of Dean Lake
were evaluated. The assumed tree barriers and residential receptor sites are shown in FIGURE 19.
The results of this simulation with and without the simulated trees and therefore the difference in noise attributed to
the trees are presented in TABLE 25-6-0PTION A.
TABLE 25-6-0PTION A rsic- based on traffic counts from Julv. 2000 AAURl
SIMULATED IMPACT OF TREE REMOVAL ON NOISE LEVEL FROM US 169
at Residential Area North of CSAH 16 - (dBA)
Site Trees No Trees Impact
1 45.0 45.8 0.8
2 44.3 45.4 1.1
3 43.6 44.5 0.9
4 44.0 44.8 0.8
5 42.9 43.5 0.6
It can be seen that the maximum impact of just over 1 dBA is expected to occur at Receptor Site #4 which is closest
to Dean's Lake. However, the predicted noise levels at the sites from US 169, which is approximately 3000 feet to the
north, is close to a typical urban ambient noise level that is caused by noise sources within a several mile radius of any
given location. Therefore, while some impact may be noted with the removal of trees, the level of impact is expected to
be generally less than 1 dBA. It should also be noted that the placement of buildings on the project site could provide
some shielding of noise fromUS 169 in lieu of the trees that were removed, and could be more effective because of their
solid construction. However, without a specific building plan, no estimate of potential shielding from future buildings
can be made at this time.
Based upon the analysis of traffic noise levels and the impact of tree removal from the project site, the project is
not expected to have a significant adverse impact on noise levels at either future commercial areas adjacent to critical
intersections or at the residential area adjacent to CSAH 16 and south of Dean Lake.26
The preceding noise analysis for the commercial portion of the site uses the Traffic Volumes and Patterns
included in the July, 2000 AUAR.
Option B (New analysis provided from information based on the site plan)
Construction Impacts: Similar impacts are anticipated as with Option A.
Dust, noise and vibration will be associated with the normal grading and construction activities. The following
measures to minimize noise anddust emissions will be incorporated into the construction procedures for the prgject:
. All internal combustion motors will be fitted with mufflers and other noise control equipment as specified by
the manufacturer.
Once the project is completed and operational, no unusual dust, odors or noise will be generated except that
associated with mechanical equipment located on or adjacent to some of the buildings within the project.
Traffic Impacts in Commercial Portion - Given that the revised scope of the project reflects a reduction in traffic
generation, it is concluded that the potential impacts will be less than previously determined and accepted in the previous
AUAR.
Impacts on Residential Receptor Sites - The revised project scope to reduce the business park and increase the
residential housing will include the placement of hOjlses closer to surrounding adjacent roadways. A new investigation
of the potential noise impacts is necessary and provided.
26
David Braslau, David Braslau and Associates
city of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 47
Noise Terminology
dB(A) - A unit of sound level expressed in decibels (dB) and A-weighted.
DECIBEL - A unit of sound pressure level, abbreviated as "dB".
dBA A special weighting of sound pressure that approximates human hearing.
dBLin - Raw levels of sound pressure measure as recorded by the equipment.
LIO - Lso - The sound level, expressed in dBA, which was exceeded 10 percent (or 50 percent) of the
time in a 1 hour screening.
Ldn - Average day-night level which includes a 10 dB weighting factor for night-time readings to
allow for increased sensitivity to noise during the night-time hours. Ldn is equal to the Leq (time
weighted average) when applied to day-time hours only (7 am to 10 pm) activities.
NAC - Refers to "NOISE AREA CLASSIFICATION" as dermed in the Minnesota Rules
Category 2 refers to COMMERCIAL.
Category 3.refers to INDUSTRIAL.
Traffic Noise Impacts
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) noise standards for residential and commercial land uses are listed in
TABLE 25-1-0PTION B. The residential area most likely impacted by noise from immediately adjacent roadways
carrying project traffic are those north ofCSAH 16 and south of Dean Lake. Areas adjacent to the critical intersections
serving the project are most likely to be developed as commercial land uses if such development occurs. It should be
noted that under an amendment to Minn. Stat. 9116.07, subd. 2a, these standards no longer apply to roadways except in
the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. A traffic noise impact analysis is still included in this AUAR using the MPCA
standards as planning guidelines although they will be referred to as "standards".
TABLE 25-1-0PTION B
MPCA DAYTIME NOISE STANDARDS (dBA)
Land UselNoise Metric Daytime Standard
NAC-I Residential
LIO 65
Lso 60
NAC-2 Commercial
LIO 70
Lso 65
NAC-3 Industrial
LIO 80
Lso 75
The planning guidelines applicable to the proposed project will be Category 2: Commercial. Although there are
residential units located with the proposed development, the entire area is zoned commercial.
For the purpose of this study, three receptor sites were chosen in the proposed residential area.
. Receptor No.1: Located on the western limits of the residential area;
. Receptor No.2: Located on the northern limits of the residential area, east of the Dean Lake Boulevard access;
. Receptor No.3: Located on the southern' limits of the residential area, east of the proposed CSAH 16 access.
City of Shakopee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 48
I
Traffic noise levels have been analyzed for the PM Peak Hour which represents the worst case daytime noise levels for
comparison with the MPCA daytime noise standards and estimated AM peak hour, 6:00-7:00 am. Noise levels were
analyzed at the receptor sites in the residential area north ofCSAR 16 and south of Dean's Lake. The STAMINA 2.0
highway noise model was used with the estimated Build traffic developed in Question 21 for the year 2020. An average
speed of 65 mph along state highways, 45 mph along county roadways and 30 mph along private streets was utilized. A
vehicle mix of 5.9% medium trucks and 4.1 % heavy trucks was assumed on all of the roadways.
The projected LlO and Lso noise levels at receptor sites are presented in TABLE 25-2-0PTION B.
TABLE 25-2-0PTION B
Stamina Noise Modeling Results (2020 Build)
Daytime Nighttime
LlO L50 LlO '" L50
No Barriers
Receptor 1 62 60 60 58
Receptor 2 63 61 62 59
Receptor 3 65 60 64 59
Buildings as Barriers
Receptor 1 61 59 59 57
Receptor 2 62 59 61 58
Receptor 3 65 60 64 59
The modeling results demonstrate that given the full construction with traffic in the design year 2020, and the projected
traffic volumes of the revised layout; daytime and nighttime noise levels will not exceed the MPCA noise limits for
commercial receptor sites.
Traffic,Noise Impacts in the Commercial Areas - Daytime (PM Peak Hour): Similar impacts are anticipated; impacts would
be slightly reduced due to the reduction in generated traffic.
Traffic Noise Impacts in the Residential Areas- Daytime (PM Peak Hour): Similar impacts are anticipated. No residential
units are to be located within 200-ft of any roadway centerline; therefore, the residential receptors would be within the MPCA
Category. 1 standards.
This are is currently zoned commercial/business park and as such, the above analysis meets the noise standards for this
area. However, a change in zoning of this area from commercial to residential will lower the noise threshold standards.
Therefore, the traffic associated with the surrounding rmids and the development have the potential to exceed these noise
threshold standards. As part of the development, mitigation measures for the noise will be included.
25. SENSITIVE RESOURCES
25. Sensitive Resources
a. Archeological, historical, or architectural resources? 0 Yes L'[?l No
For an AUAR, contact with the State Historic Preservation Office is required to determine whether there are
areas of potential impacts to these resources. Ifany 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.
Option A and B (Information from the 2000 AUAR with minor revisions)
A Phase I Archeological Survey was completed by The 106 Group for the development site. The report
indicates that no archeological sites were located within the VGCC project area and that there is little
City of Shakopee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 49
.
probab~lity that the area contains identified archaeological resources of historical significance. This report is
contained within APPENDIX E.
b. Prime or unique farmlands? 0 Yes 181 No
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
Option A and B (Information from the 2000 AUAR with minor revisions)
The project does not contain any prime or unique farmlands. Past land uses have included some agricultural
use, mainly in the north and west portions of the project site. Those areas are considered fair for agricultural
uses consisting of Dakota Loam and Copas Silt Loam. Both soil types have good drainage, although drainage
can be restricted by bedrock in areas of the Copas Silt Loam. The majority of the site is comprised of sandy,
droughty soils on the Dune Lake, Hubbard, Isanti, and Zimmerman series with marshy soils located along the
west edge of Dean's Lake. The southeast portion of the study area is comprised of stoney land and terrace
escarpments.
c. Designated parks, recreation area, or trails? 0 Yes 181 No
Ifdevelopment of the AUAR will interfere or change the use of any existing such resource, this should be
described in the A UAR. 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.
Option A and B (Information from the 2000 AUAR with minor revisions)
The concept plan illustrated in FIGURE 3a and 4 and described in the Community Value Statementfor Valley
Greim Development, West Dean's lake Area (see the APPENDIX C) proposes a concept for natural open space
and trails. Throughout VGCC there is proposed to be areas designated as 'Natural Open Space Conservation
Area'. The Community Value Stdtement recommends that easements be granted to the City which will allow the
construction of trails and recreational use. Both options include the "Natural Open Space Conservation Area".
Proposed development of the project site will not affect any existing public parks, recreation areas or trails. A
portion of the City's Comprehensive Park and Trail Plan is shown on FIGURE 20.
Dean's Lake is classified as a shallow natural environment lake. Much of the land directly around Dean's Lake
consists of marsh and peat muck soils.
d. Scenic views and vistas? 0 Yes 181 No
Any impacts on such resources present in the AUAR should be addressed. This would include both direct
physical impacts andimpacts on visual quality or integrity. "EA W Guidelines: contains a list of possible
scenic resources (page 20).
Neither Option A or B would affect any designate scenic views or vistas.
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 50
l
26. VISUAL IMPACTS
26. Adverse visual impacts. If any non-routine visual impacts would occur from the anticipated development
covered by the MUSA review, this should be discussed here along with appropriate mitigation.
Option A (Information from the 2000 AUAR)
Proposed development will alter the site appearance from a dormant, pre-graded development site to that of a
business park setting with a medium density residential buffer area between the residential area to the south and
the business park. The 1.2 acres of replacement wetland has started to exhibit acceptable characteristics of
wetlands. An additional 1.29 acres of wetland will be filled with 2.58 acres of wetland created as mitigation.
Final site occupancy for the proposed development should include planting trees, shrubs and other landscaping,
at the individual lot owner's discretion. The replacement wetland and buffer areas should be seeded with a mix
of native flora to enhance the natural beauty of the area.
Some . local residents have voiced protest over the removal of several trees from the proj ect area. Their concerns
involve the fact that US 169 is now visible from their homes. Several trees were removed from the north border
of the area. A portion of these were removed in compliance with the City of Shako pee's Oak Wilt Suppression
Program. The perceived adverse visual impacts will be mitigated somewhat with the location of buildings and
the associated landscaping for this development
Option B (Information from the site plan)
Proposed development will alter the site appearance from a dormant, pre-graded development site to that of a
business park setting with a medium density residential buffer area between the residential area to the south and
the business park. More medium density area will be present than provided in Option A. The 1.2 acres of
replacement wetland has started to exhibit acceptable characteristics ofwetlands. An additional 1.29 acres of
wetland will be filled with 2.58 acres of wetland created as mitigation.
Final site occupancy for the proposed development will include planting trees, shrubs and other landscaping, at
the individual lot owner's discretion. The replacement wetland and buffer areas will be seeded with a mix of
native flora to enhance the natural beauty of the area. The landscaping will also meet City Standards, including
the Shoreland Ordinance.
27. COMPATABlllTY WITH PLANS
27. Compatibility with Plans. The A UAR must include a statement of certification from the RGU that its comprehensive
plan. complies with the requirements set out at 4410.3610. subpart 1. The AUAR document should discuss the
proposed A UAR area development in the context of the comprehensive plan. If this has not been done as part of the
responses to items 6,9,19,22, and others, it must be addressed here; a briefsynopsis 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 A UAR area, the document must discuss the compatibility of the plan with
the various development scenarios studied, with emphasis on any incompatible elements.
Option A and B (New information)
Both development options will require the land use to be reguided within the project area and rezoning to occur.
The land use reguiding will need to be approved by the City Council and the Metropolitan Council prior to re-zoning
approval. This is required prior to fmal approval of either development option.
Both development scenarios are also required to conform to the following plans:
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 A UAR Page - 51
. City of Shakopee's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan
. City of Shakopee's Transportation Plan
28. IMPACT ON INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC SERVICES
28. Impact on infrastructure and public services. This item should first of all summarize information on physical
infrastructure presented under items (such as 6, 18, 19 and 22). Other major infrastructure or public services
not covered under other items should be discussed as well -- this includes major social services such as schools,
police, fire, etc. The RGU must be careful to include project-associated infrastructure as an explicit part of the
A UAR review if it is to exempt from project-specific review in the future.
Option A and B (Information from the 2000 AUAR with revisions and additions)
Construction of either option requires the extension of sanitary sewer lines and water mains from the City of
Shakopee. Negative impacts on the City's infrastructure are not anticipated. The project site was included in the
MUSA expansion granted to the City of Shakopee by the Metropolitan Council. Approval of this expansion
required a comprehensive study and proof of the City's ability to serve this area with adequate water and sanitary
sewer service. Other public services such as fIre and police would be provided by the City of Shakopee. County
Road 83 offers a direct link between the City and the VGCC.
Some indirect impacts in the surrounding residential areas may occur because of the employment opportunities that
would be created by the proposed development.
As compared to the 2000 AUAR where no impact on the school district was anticipated, both Option A and B
include multi-family housing. In general, the type oftownhomes that are planned to be constructed generally do not
attract families with school-aged children. However, it is anticipated that some children will be present within the
development, with more children anticipated as part of Option B than A. As part of this AUAR process, the AUAR
will be sent to the School District for comment.
- .
29. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
29. Related Developments; Cumulative impacts. This item does not require a response for an A UAR since the entire
AUAR process deals with cumulative impacts from related developments within the AUAR area.
30. OTHER POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
30. Other Potential Environmental Impacts. If applicable, this item should be answered as requested in the
EA W form.
Two other AUAR's have been completed for this project. The fIrst AUAR was completed in 2000 and
assumed the site would be developed completely into Business Park. The second AUAR was completed in
2002 and was a supplement to the 2000 AUAR. The second AUAR included Business Park and Medium-
Density Residential. The development scenario from the 2002 AUAR is presented here as Option A. The
concept plan for Option B was recently developed and is thus included in this revised AUAR. Since these
AUAR's have been prepared for the site, it is believed that all known potential environmental impacts have
been identifIed.
City of Shakopee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 52
31. SUMMARY OF ISSUES
31. Summary of Issues. The RGU may answer this question as asked by the form, or instead may choose to
provide andExecutive Summary to the document that basically covers the same information. Either way, the
major emphasis should be on: potentially significant impacts, the differences in impacts between major
development scenarios, and the proposed mitigation
An Executive Summary has been provided at the beginning of this document.
City of Shako pee
Valley Green Corporate Center
2003 AUAR Page - 53
. I
APPENDIX
-- -
~ I
wI "l. ."
% -l
t>>, :;::
~l to
<LI
J::I 0
(\jl
...-
I
I
-
\
I
- -'I <(
I~
1<(
I~
I=>
1<(
I
I
I
:I)jied 1
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
wi
t>>
;:.
<
.""t ,__-...-JJ.--___-----L
t'Il' "'\1 " lJ>, ~ I .....".--
I .~I
, ~
o.
I J) I.
I
t--.-l
JO ::l SkJ
EXHIBIT 1 4Cl)r-
SCALE: 1" = 1000'
~ 6110 Blue Circle Dr. PROJECT NUMBER:
RLK Suite #100 VICNTY MAP 2001623M
Minnetonka, Mn.
( XVtBIB1'O I:rD ) 55343 DATE:
~ Pbone: ~952l 933-0972 VAU.E.Y ~ COFPORATE CENTER 3/28/03
Fax: 952 933-1153 SHAKOPEE, MNESOTA SHEET:
L 02003 RLK-Kuusisto, LTD. ~
--~-~--------~-----------
--- --
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0 I
\
I
\
\
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
I
\
\
J ! \
i I
I \
I
I
11 I
I I
I I I
I , I
I I
I f';' /' I
I \ , I
I \ I
I \ I
I i I \
I I
I I
I I
I I I
I I
I II I
I II · . I
I / ~ II 0 0 I
I II O. I
I /"/ 'l/ / \
I II I
I ~/ /// /P \I I
II "
~ // II I
1\ -; " " ~/. II I
11- -- - :::- . I
I
uSGS QUADRANGLE -4(1)- ,
REVISED 1993 I
I
EXHIBIT 2 I
I
SCALE: 1" = 1000' I
I
"" I
6110 Blue Circle Dr. PROJECT NUMBER: I
RLK Suite #100 USGS TOPOCJW'HIC MAP 2001623M I
Minnetonka, Mn. I
55343 DATE: I
( ICUt8IBTO LTD )
~ Phone: 1952l 933-0972 VAU.E.Y ~ COFFORAlE CENTER 3/2B/03 I
Fax: 952 933-1153 SHAKOPEE, ~80TA SHEET: I
02003 RLK-Kuusislo, L TO. I
I
- "-J I
I
I
I
I
--- -.--- - -~----_._- -.- ----.- - ----- ---.-....--
I I~i~ri.-" .~.~F---~===:--= "'~~~ 0:: -~" -~'" I ~ .tlVA~ ~_. . - --.-- --- I
1181HX3 311S ldJ:)NOO
. . xrn -.--.-.-.--.-----------. S:. """'"'''' "11'''' ..""., 'l'ltNQlJNNII'I' '3JdO)f'ffiS I
1ik::r~ ~ ----------;,;;;;:::;;; ::: -~:G=:::__~~;,;..E .. ':lUI 'Sf} S<l!u~dwoJ udll M3J.ND 3J. VMOdMO:J
N33~ nnV^
~ @ I
8 I
--<~P- . , I
~ ~ I
. I
I
<(
~\ il~~, c I
.Q
I: 0. I
.. 0
" 'I,
\ I'i iU c I
j' \ C') CO I
\ \ ~a::
r, =' Q)
ii 0_ I
~ U::i:i5
I
i1i<J.<;f0:dOOO~0 I
~ <( ~ ~ ~ ~
a::C;~~d~o:o:~r-: I
~ ~ ~ <:(NN<n....~NN")<D
~ I
So ~~~
.
, ~ii I
2 ~ ~
w i2
F= ~ ~
~ ~ u
~
- ~ ~
CO z
0 ~ ~ z
Z 0
"""'" Q ~
~ ~
J: ~ .~ is >
o ~
~ ~ ~
>< , z 0
~ 0 o u
~ ~ ~ b
u ~
~ > ~ ~ ;;
~ '"
LU ~ ~
, 0 ~
z 8 ~ ~
~ 0
~ " u
" ~ ~ 0 m
~ 0 0 z , ~ ~
~ z ~ ~ ~ ~ <(
W o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
10- z ~ ~ ~ ~ 1}j ~ ~
= ~II~II I~I
(f)
I
.- I
I:l. I
W I
0 I
Z I
0 I
() <I: I
l- i
I <I:
C
[J lU I
.....
~ iil I
\; >-
j' a: I
"- <I:
_ u_CC_\ ~
~ I
~
CJ)
I
--- --.- ---~ I
---. - I ! --'=::,.'0-" I
~ :;
.. ~~ / lr--~
\ I 1 I
1,,\
'Ii \ I
! II \ I /
11\ \ I
H\ \ ft
H I I I
II I I
" \ \ I
"
f I
,
~ I
I
I
I
I I
I
[--- - - -. ---- -'-'- ----- -_..-,--- - - - '- -- - -- -- - - - ---- - -"'--- -- ---- ----- ---- -- - '-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I~i-i~: ....- ~I ~..~:,,^ ':"'::; -,. >. --,., I ~'NI~~ -,.- --.~-~-. ,~'"" "n"""=O"''' :
')I""lli . ~ - . r _ flj . ..I!.....,",., ,."uT '.rfl'.'
~ i:'f.;-:;'" ---../.<,,: ,~~ ;,.:'_-:5:...=:::-';'~f-~',:::. !i!J~' 'JU\ '511 SJlUedwoJ ue(~ ":iJ:'~3;"ll~~~~;roJ
. ~,.>,; <j'""" ,..._..__.._............. " .' N3]~ )..311"t^ I
'~o I
"i = I
r . I
_-( ~I)---- I, I
, , I
...;r--tJl SP":"vl:..
----
, ~
('(')
C)
~
~
b1)
.~
~
'.'
s;;:
.,.0
L- : ..:;~
r- , 'J. ~...J
=== ~ ~~~
~ "_";20 Z
~ . - 0
:;:: I ~~
..A.. u~
'_ ' ' 0 0
X 11...J::
"' ~
I..U ^ """''' ". '::
. ~
. ,
> J
III k
~ <=-?' i! J
I'f't · .'- .
\u "'if
~ .' 1 . '
;:) l . ,"H .
... _ _ ,6 _ ;: . I;': J
- ...-J 1 i ':j ~. L~~ S .....
; .~ L-c ~"~ i' "'q/l~l ~;~ ",'<I:~~'" :;-i
0... "c." ~__.._~t_~J
. I ww~
Z. ~~;?-.~ g~~ . ~
I JI'f' .c".:; 0... ("Q ~' l,\,I Ill) t.1l ~
I ~ ':.'6 ~ I ~ ~ ~
I ..,J c..-::OO(J)W ~'~I~ ~
I - / ~(J)(J) ~'O ; ~
I / ow:J ~ ( N
I Q o...Zo 41_
I o~Z .' [I I
W CY.:J<t li:1~ ~I~I
I . 0... m "' I w I w, w
I OJ u.J-.J l:i ~I~l~
I _ ~ ~ >I~ oj
" -----1E ~t'STII;(~1 ' ~ I t- VI g ~~ I
lor e? e0S!~~-;:P'-< ZO~;( I . <:: ~ 1,
I.h lE'j'SNSSS -:,P ~ .L""D '.1SE, ! c +t-tl
I ~ -----~----=---_._-~- - - - ~ I ~ ~
r't -Iz~
I U t:-~~.E':~T:~t:~~ 5 <-' ~ 2 i ~
I.. t:'-~GM/.'V "')5it,coo ,""c N z I e I ~,~.
I t:J: i. r:o!...}[r;~_ t':'.'iD ~:;E I ...... ~! ~ I ...... I ~ !
I '" r""") L.lJN....~;\.
~ '-' (I) : ;i : ~
I' ::r I:>",u~~
I 1 .-J !~~;~~
.. Z J III Q
I ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ ~
I ' . "'5
I .. ! 17
l
I .
I 'n'~~~
I - 1 . ",I i i ! 11
I _ .. -...---- L-. ..' . 1&1 : I :'
---- ~---- ~- ---- 'a'o~"""lUl':'iCV""""O:)! ~Iql'o Ci' 9!c;>\'9
I . <I \ 0 :: - "0 ~. Q;l 0 I
i I~I~I~!~ glg.lg
, ~"6Igl~ g,; ~
I ~I~i~l~ ~I~ ~
1 t~~--Ll---.--L............-----.
~ I ~
I<~" g
.. 0 1&1 :.
~ II: I ."
~.f i ~ ;! ~
~ ~ <n (ij i ~______~_
- -
-
~
I
//,
1/
-/I
t/,
'I}/
I
J'J
' /I,
,- '-- ~
'--, '-- ?I
'-- 'I
'<~~
"'t
I
~
-1 c
CO
'I 0::
~' 2
",,,''''
~~ U5
i ~ ~\ co
~ ~ ': ~nr'~ il c
0
-I. ~~8 . """'/! ""5.
~ ;!~ - # 0
~ ~ji ~~ ~
.~ e:'
!~ '~ :J
.l.,,; ..-,....;.;;.'flt(l~ Ol
l p ~ 1" 0Wl::=-~ u:::
!U"iJO'YJ.'ltOOJ""W
= T='.')/
-~
.H'~t /
1I1ZW" .. ,
+--'- 9/
"""'I
~.. "
:J:'"
I ~~ //,..,.:
~~ ',11
I #,c" i~
-; -"",' .., !~
I
I ~~
5U
(~)
I I; I
\
\ ,
I i
iii
...
, ill
I S
1 \ ,
~--- - I,
\'1' 0 I
I. \ c: !
\ ~
I , u)': I
::::>.;
i cn.'; I
(1) .
1 .- ..
i c: ~
r. '" .!
~ o..~ i
I ~ E .:l !
, -I..
f .. o ~ I
~' ~ ," Us
C ~ I
f \ '" i I
>-.
0::: .
-~.
1/ "-~~~
-- I
I
- - ---
r __:;::.:_____
::;:;;. - - ~
-- -1....-_..::-=<-.~ __-::.~:::::"._
~~~;;:::--~~ _..~~~=~",:-~=%~,
-"-- --- -----.--.,-- -- ----,-.'- -_.-- -- -- --- - '- ----------,---'._'- - - -.-- '- -"--- --
I
I "'''' I I I I
mNMMV~ ~~mm~mm ~ ~m ~
oommrnrnrn~rnm--rnrnrn~~rn~rnm~-o
~------rn--~----rnrn-m--oo- I
~~~~N~~N~~~~a~~~~~Ng~~~~
:~~~~.N,~~.~~_~._~.~~N.~~~,~~~,~ I
~ I I
~mOVNM roro-Wrn~O I
I- ,.,.. N (!) V m v C'1 l!'l I'- co co C"l (!) rn lO 0'> (") co N 1.0 0:::11...- ..... 00
> - "'.1.{) ((l CO m ..... ..... ..... ..... N M (!) V CO CO f'-. CO 1'- ,.... O't!) If) r- I
~ 0 N (')"{') <:""!,C"l V v,.."..<:t '<t;'<t.v '<t,,,,,".V '<t v.v v.lt} 1.0 lJ1,1.O
" E "
~ ~ Iii ~ ~ 3 ! ~
'- ." _ '" ili ili.. E :::l 0 ~ _NM'<tlt)(!)r--CQO"lc.....C\lC"'lvtO(,Ot-ro I
! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ .. ~ _ ~ ~ _ i o..~.coyou.Joo.ooo.o.ooo---.---_......-
~ g~~ili"::8.; Uiii;l!!~ ;;:~ O;~;&. 0 !
;0: '!i!ii'i;~ioa: ?,::l5Ui~ s-;;; !2~o't) ~ z
2 ;g~tl~~1l 2~~~~ ~-5 :;:isQ:i~ -g:J z I
~ ;~~~l~~ ~j~~~ ~: [~iiz~{gr ~rJ) (f) g
: ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ '? ~ 8 i E ~ ~ ~! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ a:'~ ~ ~ 6 ~'~ I
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ [ 8 Qi ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ B j ~ ~ ffi E ~, 0 (J) tS ILl ~ to UJ ~ I
a. . .. I- UJ (j) 0 Y """I UJ Y U ~ UJ <9 Z
o 00 !i~II:1 111~11 [WI i I~g ~ 0 (' < ~~~Iw~ ~~~I ~gS~~~~~t:!~~~~ I
-, -- ' lIJ . ;:3:UJ6~a:r:ir~~~8~~~~gif:)5~5ffi I
w ~ow-s~zw>~a~ow z ~ww
~~9~5~~~ilm~~o~~~~~~~O~g I
we~~I~~~~~g~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~o~o~~~zro~ >wzwo~o~c~~w
crw~I~<<~~~~2rr~<I~cocCOC~X2 I
z~m>ww>>O~~2~~u~w~Owm~wrr
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
CL
~ I
~ .
~ I
~ I
~ I
l!)
~ I
::l
9 I
u..
I
I
. I
I .
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
~ I
~ I
~ I
~~ I
~ ~ I
~..=~
~'J:JQ , I
OJ:I~Q 'I I
CON
.... '" '" I I
C ..... ~ I
~O~ I
I
I
I
I
- ------------.--- - ------~-----
I
,
,
I
,
,
N
BOUNDARY LINE:
V ALLEY GREEN BUSINESS PARK.
0 1000
"..,-- I
- -
SCALE FEET
Figure 6: Prior to 1999 Aerial Photo
,
,
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
I
\
I
I
I
\
\
I
\
I
I
I
I
\
\
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
I
\
I
\
\
I
I
I
I
I
III
0
E
I 0 N
I 0
0
I N
I I
I 0
I ""l
I I BOUNDARY LINE: \
"" \
(,) V ALLEY GREEN BUSINESS PARK \
:t \
0
Ii
~
I 0 1000 I
:.:
<( ~-....- I I
:r I
(/l SCALE FEET
./
N
""l
0 Figure 7: 2000 Aerial Photo
("'oj
~
;:
./
~
<(
:r
(/l
./
i
~
-
-
---
I - --
-
-
-
I
!
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
;:: lllJillJ WET LA NO
~ 0 t----j CULTIVATED
<{ r"I _ _ 1000
I. - -
~ SCALE FEE; ( TREES ,____J LAN 0 & GRAS S LAN 0
J:
. LA~ES AND . JUNE. 2000
ON OS Figure 8' C --
. over Types
--- I
I
_" . ~ ---- .-,-- .L18lHX) J.:;'''dl'll OH"l'l1..llll
. ..... ...-, ...... I ,~xl",,[- - ~, --..0 I ~IUVI H.......".,., 10,,,., I.",., ""''''''ll'}~~';';3
/;::.;:.,;:;- .. ~I "-'~-~::::-:: IlW\llnlAIllI 'JUI 'SO 5:llUedwoJ ue,(~ lill~jj~ 131l.^
~"i~i~'~:- ~ '''0','" ..':::'; ";:;:::-:".:-::':'::':.:.~ ~I .
-{ij}- ~.: I
o~~
I
0\ I
~ I
~
!! .~ I
W '" rT . I
@ ~;! ~
'- ~ ~li I
I >
- "
c::J :;; ~
'{ 1 I ..
- .,. !
T ;'; ~
....... . . t
:;,
W W
w
~ ~
u
o <
~ . ~
.
~ . ~
~ - z
I - ~ ~ ~
u ~ u <
I ~ U < (9
~ ~ m ~
~ m ~ ~
I -l ~ :::. 0
~ - 0 z
I IJJ ~ ~ :"i
~ < ~ ~
~ ~ w
I - ~ w >
w ~ >
I , 5: 0 5J
' ~ (9 W w
I I .. z ~ 0
I' , ~ U 0...
I \ w < 0
I; _. x g,; ~
I "~:i" W _ 0... I
_. ,,-,,_.""-- ~: . ;
, J
I \ 1111:
~ I
~~
\
!
--' --, - --- - - I
I
I I I -"-'"1 ~ _._----~~. I
I~ ,"".--.." .~." .~._.m --------- .,,~ ~ =""
~~:E..f~i'.5:.. ~ =======-~_._.-~-~ ~ ~~Il() ~:1IV1~ ~,-""'" h,"~ hm'" 'f)(NOlJNNII't ']]dO)t\fHS
::: :,:=:.... ~ =======-- ~JO ...:_~~F-:i~:::' . . 'JUI 'Sf} 5a!mdwo) u~,{lI ~J.lN30 31 V~Od~OJ
~=~","" ~ SNOISV.~ XltI )..~lIf't> -~__""'",_~j_' N3)~D A)llVA I
I
,
l I
--<it>- : ' I
I
o ~
0 I
..-
l- I
co I
I
>< I
w
I
I
~ >: '<
~ii
== 0::
CO <(
"""" ~ ::l
J: <(
LL
I X 0::
IJJ w
a..
I ..-..
I- 0:: (/)
w
I () <( 0::
::l ()
<( <(
I LL <(
Ok 0:: ex>
L{)
I ~ w C'\I
a.. ........
....... ..-.. z
I ..-.. (/)
C (/) w 0
I w 0:: I-
Z 0:: () <(
I <( () <( (9
<( 0') l-
=' 0') C'\I
I ...... 0') ...-- ~
N ........ 0
I ........ 0
W 0 z z
~ <(
I z <( .....J
<( .....J I-
.....J I- W
I I- W ~
~ W ~
\ ~ ~ 0
I , 0 w
I ~ (9 W (/)
\ z I- 0
I I- () a..
. (/) <( 0
III . a..
I -00 --- __u >< 0::
(\ ~ -- -- --~ -- -.. ~ ~
.:...-.-----, ~ I~~)~_~' .-~'d'> W a..
\ -
I '.1 d
,
I I I 0
I
I
,
I
~
/.;:;::;,.;;:":;;:" ...............,,"/ ~,..,',.. .,,~ ---., --,., I ~J.NI~~ -.. - -_.~. -,-. (mo) l-g,..., A.l"'"
:..too.,. ',,"' ~...... .~ '. '....~.; --. -~. ~_ ___ _ !ilr,". .~"""I.I" '."U1 ""rl'.'
~ .x; f 'J '~'j{]'l'<""" H""n~
~ ~:::... , '. ' :. ,,~< ....;::..-.::.:.:~:?-.:;~~~ ::xl"""'. 'JU/ '5(\ sdluedwoJ ue.{" d31N3J 31'.Od"OO
. ~ ,..c ,'t .y.-.. ...._,,-.....~-.,....~"..... ~ II . U N)3~ A.31lV^
~~"
I ~~
,..."'":-:-, I L- -<-': _".A-,-_ >,
..~-'= -. .....'ff..~~~.tg-.':=-.::c--~.. ....j~. i\ '.' ',/ '.1 II.
'." .....,--+, I::' ....- ~<-_I'. \ .i'\..-
~~. .]!i r-"::---:,:::::,,~-..~~.......... ' , .. _,~ J I"
-~~~ ~:.II; -: '-'::::::''''~'>'>~ / . < ~I
JLJ/ la I . .. .... '''~~>/' '<
__ E J: )1: <"~'~ "-"''''''''''-v ^;....:-'<, ;1.:" ___ ,,;.;
JI. ~ .Eo.OJ.,II'1 / ,,' '.., ,~'\ "--~
\!;! I ~J " :'~"\\ ~ , _
i ~ :=",!/ '. " .~, -"'=
, 0 :J! LJ' .#.' : " .. " . '\ .~. ~'"'='''
w >- iC '" I, . \. '. ,'. ','. "'. ~
en 0: "" 1,\ ",.,. .:- "J I" V
I 0"/ ".~'" I '" \ \, \ / }f."~
Q. to E]' l" , ~ _, \'- \ '.. ....r,.. ~
I ~ ~ I [f ill '1" - ~-- ->:~'~:~ '~...J
~ 'cO i1" -::...~ '- ,'/." z.. ~
.......,~, ~: I, :- _:~"_,:,,=V _.. ~ \\ , ,_\~ ~ ~
..... ""'''~.'' ,..'1.1 Y.,.""n' l ,,~ "~\\' ' '. ~".".'. o:W OJ
" oJ /'1' 3 F. 3'\~\ ~~ \ ,:_, wO
~.'::,-~.:............,-,-,-,,;,;.._''""'=, ::.i - -~ ~ -< \ \ \ :.'___. d:- I- iij
-- ----'..... . , ., ;0" - '"\ . ~--,' .. W (.
----::...." : ;' =! \" s, I I \ .,~./'" ,....., -- ,~o: _
~ "'Ili 1 ~! " 'l" ~~, ,; ~ I >- 0: I ~
'n .;' p. :.- :c:. . \ \ '\\ \{\\ ~ ' : ~ f2 i r--J
-------, ;"', ! '\\ *- ..-'" !:: '" : J-, f\
I . ,', . I z:::> ~
Iii I, I .. __ , \', ',-' ~ ~~_ _.. .. '''_.. ~ ~ ! . ~
---- .,.J! !' i1! -1" L --.. '\ \\S.. -..'..--..___ l~ rT.
"-"-~"l'l' . I~~II '\, \\ _..-.I ~
......-.- . 1 I .. ~ ~ ..' ,. \
._,......-... ..' .., ~ .'
(. ..11 ~I WI ._----": "
"""" ~ J' l:!!I~~I' .....\, ,I
. -]'1 ff"l ../ Q.3:,c ,\, 'f'
r-- "''''-tr.~ .;,. ,;, ~ .;. w\., \.\\
" '..- g: I j ? I \. ::"::\ ~\ \t, ,
r 1"\ ~,.--'., " 'II ' ~ ' "7- ."-...,....or..- .. "_ ~, ;" \I.~ \ ',,0 ~ . "
l,,!J 0'.-..... 'C, 3. ii' L . ')f. ,c....';., ',.cc"~ /....~> .,':,,=-,,,, \ \ I; l\.'~'.\..~"~\\
Pl. t ,,!I ,.( ?,. - .."41",,,' ~ f... '~" ,
~ :'1 - ~_~ - 1 '\\' 11"- ',p....... "-1 _.
~ %\ ~.. ~, ~, // t ~.\\\.:,""., : ,,,-,ce."" \ \2, ~ \. ~ " ,
;>"% .~!- '~! \~ ~~:,\~,,"''''''' \ \\.': . ~\
- ~.,''C.)" \,\.~ \. Fe %\\\. /,
'j /...." ~' J ____ "'\ l'l' ..
~. %~..'''.;. ---,' \.j..'.'\'\.....~~\~\ \ --"'\ \ u-?~ '" ' '
- ~- -~<....-- \ ~,\ "\ \ '\ ~ --- -~~, '"
!OCl \- .~\\ '.'.' ~, :\' ____ /', 0.."
~.,... \ \' ". ~'.\ ~ \ :3.\ /~,'c \. / ~~ '-
..."", ,.\ . -' \' '. __-..-c \ <.. ." .....
't_~~\ ',.._ -i\ \ '_~ _....-. . / ~ ~ .........
:C(-i.0,~ (. \'\ \\ ~ ..'" / ~/ "-... ,.~. ,.....~:- _ ,.. ;
>< -l\ \\.\ \, ',,'" - .~' ,- / ....., ~ ..---......_--,:::-:~ '-"_
'", <;C' , / .... _ '_.-/ "
! I ~.L,-< '. \\. .(/ /--.................'...., . ,,' r" '. 5
.""=1 _\".. / .. / /, / ::2..00:
,. , / / ''., I ,........
'.. ''-.. / .... , . It'..?
~ '-. \0,... . ....... '. . / , '::::i I I W !':
r .............. ...x'........... ......./, >"'V . I.'~ ,.. I ~ tQ
l- .. >--" , 0>(.
..:~~, ~ i ~ '!!J
:JC"'~~c = ~ ..~,..)(, '::-~, ',' _ --:c-....::_~--=-~-r- ,Ii' j r
= t c",'= ..I1U' ~ '\, ." ......---.----.------. .~._f'
}- 1111' ""<c,;'\{ \ c' -' / -;. -~~~4--~-=~~__-~_ I,d ill i
::> Lf~@ [=i~\\\ ~~~=rcl ,-~--' I /,1:\]
,- .._- .... -. '" =<0 . ,. 'Ie; ~" . II L
" ~".. 0._. % ~ = I \ 'L ,0/_ ^.. , " I II"
!:= -'-+- --:::.. '::l .- ~ \ \ T ~ ,'l....J I I \ I
'- :r "= _~=c!c 2: 'I \ \ - -. '/ '.. I r I II
-- . ~ ~ -~~-~~:1"-J :-=:..:-=-..=::~--~ .~.:=- '''Iid
'~""--~~~~''''''''7\ ,I, ~.-.::- _ --:':' \ [' _ : Ilr-------,
.I E - ~o; OJ~L,.~E.. ~ I) I ~ '.Jn~ II ~ c..;~itl!r'tlm'. I ,i III ~
-< -,-- + 3D" ,,:, I ,l'; ..-u,~ I " 'rM-!8rt-.~", III Z
r-- .i~ ~:f:~ ~~ g ~~ I I r ~ ~ I ~..;, I, :' ":- 'I ~ ~
_....-.l. 1,... ""I l ..'......-.._~~I ",..
I 8 ~; \t r ; ~ ~: I -_.. ::...~=: -1 ~"~_.~~.~" , i ! ~ ~
.... .... , \ f '.~ "'.. I 0-, i ~ u..... "U'_"._ I I 1 U 3: ::E
U, \.' ".--' ',' ~. ~::::-:::_~_c,_!~ J\ -
, U W . T"1-r-" I'" '=t:-~-' ,'___--=
..~ /!. I .!
=,-,= 7 '-- / I I Pll '0" 'Ut! 'OJ1 I =
/ . ' C''''~ '__
, I _'_'-:JL'L-'_'_'-'-'-'-'-'\'-'-'-' '11 :=~
.- l 0: l
' ~ V) w CI)
aS. ~ ~~
,....g: ;!;~ cn~
b~ ~~w ~~w
w~ a~> a~>
Z~ ~W~ ~~~
15~ o~Q. o~Q.
i uw u~~ uen~
~
I
I~:;~~'.~' ....-'.~.I ~":' .:;~: =--= ~...:";;;.I ~:1:NI~~~" :..::':::.::.""..: ~:~::,:.::H7':~~,n I
' .",;-. --.-/ ,.o',".~ .":,::;:-=.'=:::;;-.:-:;;~>~ ~J.lftM. 'JIJI 'SA s;JIIJEdwo'\ 1JE.l~ d3J.N3J '''/lO""O:>
...~'.... ""-~-_.~_"".'_A.."'\I II. J U N)3~ A.311V^
i!O
. , - (~)- ::.:
Ii' , I~ I
"
~i" I i 'I
_IF ___,_~_
- '-.~'S ~" I ,/ ~
, :.:: . ('"~-L.."..! .." ::: I
I Z \
~ fi! ,~rJ (j) I
j tJ ~ ! :;. ~; ~
"'~
Z I- ~ ;
zen.. - J., 0 ~
0- J I .,f bJ)
.u;;) l' .- cJ I
,~- ~ ; i : r~ I
'" = --1 ~
",- ~ ----J. ~--~~---- '-I
-.. ",-,' - E~' I
~ '" -'i~=-_~" t ;
r- ..~ " I ;3 --~ -l
(fj. ;' 4 .'---'"""'-'- ~ oJ ';\
A :: --11 ~r' ~:1 j
........ JI~ 1001.
~.'j' s' I i'
~ gll~ r-~l il>L' '1 I
t-fl @ < !O. ~ I Ii
ic~] en::!: g.:' , I
" [0" Olr ,.f.'j /
'~ J ~ w - 1: .
r- ::i k II ~II 0 ':; I I.g... 'L ".'
...... :0. ;.t' t c::: ..... : ~-=' - . ,
05 ~ ~ ~ 17l , '" :;! IFf '''c-,..,o... :;.;
~ ~ F; :i. J ;~. ..,."'... ..-! ~ I
...,... "i: Ir'~JC' ,I' ..c............ , -,
....... ;;. ,;..~...H_..;-... i_. ) -"~ 'f.
"'1 '" ,.~ - -'-----1..' "N'" -. "- ..J 'Z'
~ ..... -... r::- t' A..:.-.. -- _~__ .:. Z 4: _
~ W ':'.. : ~ '---Li.... -_ __ _
~:; ': !, ~ ~,~, ~~ ~ I
w Oen ~ .;{ I ; , ffi~:::;
w >-:: ~: ( I- ijj
enlr ~ ~I(. .\.. . <",
o <( "" "-.~' > I . ex::
>= j"'Ci ~~." iJ: , ,~'"
.' ,~~. If '" ~ '1 ' '" 0 I
~ 10::<111 <ta~ c:.'1 <""'.
~ ~ Ii" "I 1-",
:-. "'IIi ~ 1, I" ,Z::JI
:1:..;r. :~_;" I j<(r-
-oJ -t.:.fi".':-=- ------- t.~ I' ,- T I
- f 11 i': on, I
I- ., ~ ,,'1' , I
:t~::l;:': , I
-.!tl~ ~ R/! 'I I. It / .
-' }.!~. ~ y: I", I \, Ii /' / ~
~~ i:: _ i -, '..... II \ _______:=:-~----\
'"!II IEgl';",,/ ,I ..?- :,.--"---- 'I
~ ~~ fi: gl ~: p , :-...~_ \ ~"" ~ ~ I
[In != 'Jd~ ' 'l_~ \./ .~ - I I I
~:t';-,,-"' ~ J/'''' ' . , . j ;,;-> . .'" "
~I:' '" -'_n_, "p,"~_" __..!" '1 . ,I L : I ,;"' ;c, ..' " .j' ~ .:-
'--"'~ ' L::__ _!".~ ' . I
l . =-=--=-~_-~~:.-"'.,=,:~~::.:~_ -, j\ '..~'. "
, .:._~.__... - - "--'11 :/ r ..--=---:-.~~~.......... i ~ ';:.
~ :3 ~, \l......;:: J( I' --.._,..--....:::... '..... (' \ \
~ ":1 "-~ ~ I. II . . ....:')... ~ / "-
~ : I" JII~I . .-.......~""I
'. _I "~~
: : I !,' I, /'" ........ , '
I ~--, j,lll"" /", '
, 'I'" , , I /.... ,\
~ I' ~ / ;, ~ ", \,,~,
Wi. II r , ~ \
" Ilfil~:j~- !/.hl" ") \~\
[ en'" ," J ~ / / q,
\C. fr ~ I : j: I" , ' '-., / ,,~. \
r ~~i ;'51"".. "v ___ - \\ .
F.,. ~~ L j!,/! -' "~, ,,,,\: ,~\\ I
L .. .. . '""" r J/ !I' - - '-1 \ ,'~\ '~\'
,- ~ 1 l' ,- , \
-f ~:::::::.----:.""''j -::'.. ://11 c: J ~ '~'\\~,\ I' I
. --........' -- -", \,
i ~,-, e'," ~:, '\\
" , .. , " J 2 .~, -.1,\, ~.o \
\ '3 r--ll! JrJ.1 ~ ~D \ \' 'C1~'\\~\\I' J~~~~ '
~ 1 " " I ~ : ~ '! \ \ ~ \~' ~~~ I
'i. j !;; "lll, r--- % :;j \' - ,\ ~~,'J
'.: ;=: 2j ~ - ,-~ ,~ ~.'t \\\\ -~1-::~~
~--------------------------------------------------------- I
I
I I=::--'-'r:r---M- -..-- ~n ->-I-.IIV~-'-------' I
(ls3\I.) !181HX3 A.J.nu.n II
~~~~.:: XTIl ===-~~_: . ..-: -- ::;,:: .;~:_~7:':~~ ~: 'JUI 'S;';~~;d~'~; ~;i~ ....)lN013NM!'l 'J3dOXf'HS I
~3.1N3J 3.lV~Od~O"
.~..._", ----./ SNOISVlJ.:o1 ",.lI~ '-_______, . . N33~V A31"W^
I
'\ ' j -{dr- : :
: i I) ',1
I I II I I'
I 1\ \ I
, I I \ \V \ / - --
, I I \1 \_-_/c~
1 I ~I\~_--/ _-~-I\ o ~
I I 1/_____/ I' @]
I I J r! ;" II
: i :/ /I!J I
I I I I I I l-
I I I /~. I' ea I
II I
I I
>< I
I
ill I
I
I
I
~ I
~ 0 I
~ . I
~ kl ~
~ ~og I
~ ~o I
~ ~ :: I
~ p I
~ ~ ~s~ I
~ ~ I
I
W,' I
I
I
I
I
/ I
I=-
-
aJ ~ .,.y,
0
......
:i:
X
LU
>-
I-- ~
-.
-I --~
.......
IF
:;) I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~ I
" >- I
I
0:: I
0::<( I
UJI- I
1--
<(z I
.~\ ~(]j I
.,.~... . I
00 I
UJUJ I
(f)(f) I
00 I
a.. a.. I
00 !
I
'!l 0::0:: I
1...,-. il. a.. a..
'-
'" . .
% .
"-
~ . I
>. i 1--. .
~ I
" . I
. I I
~ . I
~! ~ ------- I
I I
"/ ,i~~ LI'- I
2_t .~::~-- -~ .- I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
~~----~-----
I I I
I
iffit'" i"" r .' '., '. ."".. I
, " ,,.., ,I,"" " . ~ /"~,//~,!,;-7J "T,C:> I' )
;fl'~ \~'-~) IV;') )' . 'j I;', ;(r)~{i!Nol~~r;' I
IC<~( IV' .c- }, (;/J-;'-"t-e;;~i''2j~jl! -1 (;- I
) (6--::~r H ())'"".. " ,;-Ff,;T '~L~g~\\~, )(~:f~t -"::-
j~~CSJ .I~ II -- \ ; I ~ ;\~( \, ,(? _ ~)\;';-J )--t ::::"V I
N"_.. , II " (r. " ![~ r, ,r. --'-2:'-)~1 I I
C)~-:.I );'1' f~ / (I I' " I'! \ ,(to?, -.11 ;1/1 i I
, ,/. I r\ ~ - I... - '- r~ ../ / i I
, ~ i if' ,', Ij \ F;;I (r - -':p' "
Jj,"_ ~ ii, . ,,'.;:...' }IO) n 11'1 /
/ , '\ r:", ~-\I:
_~ ._~,. ......} _.....? .......':-<lJ-, ./. -t '-J ,- ;.----
~/ (h( \1) ( I (\ I \1 A i, / '"
~) ~t'_ 'j' i--~ ~ )-1 1\
'lli \-, \. '.:. r ! I f-
)~ l\i' r II 1'(." !? I
/_ I" ./ '/ " \
'!./ '1.:,,1 AI C " ,l
';;.L:.l ",-=.J vI' -,,' -::.. ,~ ~- I
~.,J~~-'~~''<tt. / ~ '
",/;--. LC:::11 ~" /, I
:l);.,. \~: ~
rr 1-.. --1-~'fl~L:-2 /' I
v--/"(@ -..1 {\ I I I
Ii -,I"'!!. t\
l"'I' """,/,\ '. I .
1" ~i) j 1 , I
"II'';'~'/)\ f" I ! ' I
',i\" '1 I
)
L-_ _. I ' 1 ~~- I I
~l;! ",i, "1\ 0 I
,-
-- .~ '~-" /1'- ----r---~ ,I!' \ I
\ ' I
.. ., \
r ~: \ \ I
I) J ; '! \ \ I
, .:' , '\ \ '
il') \ \' I
II'
"1-1 ,," \ I
I ..-p :.. I
I '" .........~r::'~ ' I
I t ",<<..~ (
I ,~'J! i I
I
I ~ c..:. ~;--~'y. J I
I ,~
':!-'.~
- I
I , "
z I
\ ' _L \ ",<
~~ ~
, . \ ~3 .... I
! \ ',I I ~~ .
I, ~~ ~ I
l 86 ~
I, ~-lr 0 I
~g VI
0", 0
<< ~ I
~ "
o ~
~tD ~ I
i~i ~
\j 11> \'1) >-V10 IoJ i
<~ ~
1: -;;r:alo.. III
,0 I
I ) I
'i I
/" ,I,
. ;1 I
I
-----~--_.._~_.~. .~..=...::::::::'"'-----------::::::::=::.: I
I
II I
- .,1 _ - - - - - - - I
I I
I
I
I
USGS QUADRANGLE -4(1)-
REVISED 1993
EXHIBIT 13 I
SCAlE: 1" = 1000' I
I
~ PROJECT NUMBER: I
6110 Blue Circle Dr. I
RLK Suite # 100 SCOTT COlMTY SOLS MAP 2001623M
Minnetonka. Mn. DA TE: I
55343
( IWtBIBTO L'1'D ) VAllEf ~'LL.N COfI'ORATE CENTER 3/2B/OO I
~ Phone: ~952l 933-0972 I
Fax: 952 933-1153 SHAKOPEE, MtN:SOTA SHEET:
L 02003 RLK-Kuusisto. LTD. I
-.J I
I
I
I
~_..__.- ---' --. ~
I
I
I r .' .--... ."'" . ....... "'/ ~ -,., -,..'/ ~J.NVAM-"---'----'
I ~:~~;~~:. ~ "" "'.~ ---. ~.. ~Jf'~ . '.!".~''':'I '."101 '.'n:', .~..c.l""'" ij<1C"....~
,.",,,, ~; '~:~: ~:~..,-=,':;-;;~:i2:t~ !~I(U(J. 'JU/ -S11 SJIUpdwoJ Up\~ ~3LN3:) l1....~OcRlO'J
I NJ3~ A]llVi\
I '~'
I ,I
I --(i~ ~::
I
I
I ~~- c' "'J'
I i1 I J ~;;~
I I ~~~
I ",:i:\1
5~-
I (n~~
I r"
8~
I "'oo ~
~ ) I
I ~ I
I I
I C)
l- '" ~ I
. " Z
- ~ "' :S ~ I
r.a ~ !l.O
~ cniXl-Wg? I
a 3~~~z OJ)
...... l.LJ I:<(~ ~ I
I :r: " "'~"'f> .~
;! '" ~ 0 I
I X ~ ~~~,,~ 11 ~ I
o U<n <_
I I ! I
I UJ Ii I
I I
I .- I
I - \
I " I
I W
I
I. :2: I
0 I
I W ~i I
, I
I i "'
'"
I <.;) 3 <( I
~ ".~~ ill I
I ~ '" /.,c"'~~ 0::: I
I :r ". . t&'t.' <(
..... '" l- I
I ~ 'I
'" Z I
1 <if. ill I
I ill :2
I 2 C9 ill
I <( C9 I
Z <( 1
I ~ z I
I 0: " <(
(j) 0 2 I
I W \~ I OJ
I OJ I- 0::: I
':- ..- ~ Z UJ
I ..... D I- 0.. UJ l- I
'\;
1 <r: , (f) :2 :2 <( I
, 0 s: 0.. s: I
I
I $ 0.. (f) 0 2 I
--...;
I UJ UJ UJ 0::: I
I 00> 0 I
~ ~ UJ l-
I ~ 0 (f)
I o 0 0 0 I
I a: ill ill UJ ill I
C9 C9 (f) (f)
I 0 i <( <( 0 0 I
I Z Z 0.. 0.. I
I !- I ~ <i <i 0 0
! 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: I
I Cl) , 0 0 0.. 0..
I I I
I I
I 'L.__ r ---. - ~ .-
I / )= to
I ~r- ", _.,--,----~
< j
I
I
1 I 1.
I \
I ,-' ~
I .'
0 ~
I , ~
I !
I ;
;
-------------------------------------
-- ,- -
I I-"..~-...".~...'~.~.."l----.--- -~.~ -li.o I ~.tII~~~.---'----. :
~~1ir=r~ ~ __ ,____ . __ ..__ ".____. __ m:':.o:lO a:: ~
.~~ ",.61-... _... ~ dIlO (llN:)5)O _.....~...... _. t4f,,..tJ."J '.'~I.' '."]1.. 'o'~N013NNI" 'BdO>l....KS I
::E.,:'~ ~ .----.~;'"" ~ ,~~ -:r~:::::-"E'~,,:~ :J:. ':>UI 'SO s:l~mdwOJ ud~ ~31N~~~D31A1ii~~OJ I
~~~ I
I
~ ~ I
I --<if>-- 8 ' I
" I
~~~ 0 a I
- 0:::> I
~~; @] I
~ z ~
:5>--
, "'~~ I- I
, ~~~ ,.,.. I
Omoo UU I
o w~ IX I
I I CI Co)
i \ ~~ W I
I L- I :1:.. I
I r- I -
I = w~' I ~IIW I
~~ 11.1 \ -W~ I
I f]jj \i!"'o:....:il'" C1lll:C
I .- H~~~~ ~ ~jlii. I
J: ~[~~~~ \ ; =Z~. I
~ ~~....3h: ~ ~ .::t.. I
""" UUlIl:1<_ \ ~~~ ODO
I ~~~ ::I II I
LU ': "a Olle~ I
\ I
F I' I
Z \ \ I
w, I I
, I I
~ \ J I
W \ ~\ i
I &I ~ ' Z I I
~ 101
! <:( \~\ liS I
I ~ : ~: ~ I
I ~ \ '" I f- I
I <:( : : d:i I
~ \ I : UJ ~ I
I ~ I, : I ~ UJ I
I \ I Z " I
I cc:: \: ~~ I
I UJ \5/ 0 ~ I
I L... I~ J f- 0:= I
I r-' D' ..-. Z UJ
'<J " 0.. UJ f- I
I 4: ~ ~~<! I
I ~ ~o..~ I
: ~ 0 ~
---...J ..::::
UJ UJ 0:=
Q > 0
~ >Wf-
~ - 0 ~
~ 000
I..Il"" UJUJUJ
O ~ ~~~ I
. ~ zoo I
L... - 0.. 0.. I
r- <! 0 0
00 0:=0:=0:= I
00..0.. I
I
C~ _. I.."".....:..,;.::..~ ;,:::~. ~'.' -=-- t i
i I
I
f !
I
: " I
: I
~ I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- ---.-- - ----- --.------ --------------------
( ~
""'oJ .tb"l.J'
-
0 !-
W Z
ILl
>
:r ILl
If) a::
0 <
ILl
Ac.: w ~ 0:: >-
:r:<no Z
~114 VlILla:: W 0 0 Vl ....J
. ~j ffie:;.... i= 2 ILl 0 W
~<~w <l a:: Z Z
I- >- U a:: ::l 0 Z
a:: - 0 !- a. <
~oa:<.:> < ~
& 1-' ....u< <:( >-O!Z~ .... u :z:
60 WOJ)<Z :::l w U
""0> - a:: Z w !- 3< a: <.:>
-....-...- ;;2 < Q)< 3= <i59i5 0 !- <l ....
~ -11100:: ....J VI a: w
",0 ~COotr .... 0 ....J
.-. ~~NW !- !- ....
i58~tr~ V')t;j W VI ::l
-<ta::VI"" W .... 0
lJJ<w-<t <OBilQ~~Vl~~ !- a:: w
o 0"" '3ffi~:z~j~ ::;) w
......J::la: ~ 0 I- ""
UJ-<t....Jo < <
55!ioc Bi~:2ti::;t;ju ...J :. ....J
<:( < ~
z!-;::a.. a::~ 'trUJ>-3<"" Q a:: a::
t..LJ1Q)OO::~_< 0
-1 I-CO::lI-I--~lJJ ILl 0 cr:
~SlVlI/)VlUZa.. a. l-
I/) VI a..
~'I If) \ ~ I j . I
I I ~ ~ ! .
~l z
0
CO" ~ <:( 0
\.{'; '"
I.J w ....
I' 'I 0
4......-<<....~-' M ~ ~ 0
CD ~....., U '"
-l ...J ~
CD CD
-
0
c..o
0
...J
CD
UOllfd
,....
-
a
...J
CD <.:>
Z
ii
a.
VI
I
I
I
,
I
.
Aj~B 350 'Nestwood Lake omce AUAR COMMENT RESPONSE WSB Prqect No. 1014-84 Date: May 31,2000
8441 WW(ZBta Boulevard
Mlnl1$8pois, MN 55426 VALLEY GREEN CORPORATE CENTER
: ASSOCIATES. 612-541-4800
INC. FAA 54'-1700 Figure 16
IFRASTRUCTVRE . ENGINEERS . PlANNERS SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
--..- -"----- -..---.---
--~--------
~
00 I-
1-2 :<:
""
>
0 ""
0::
>-0- <(
""
z >-
0:::0::: 0 0
;:: 0 V)
-<( - w Cl
<(<( 0:: Z
>- U a:: ::l 0
0:: ii: 0 t- o..
I-W C3 ~ ~ u.. u
::l W
::JZ 5wi= 3<: 0:: '-'
< 0 Q::l 0 I-- <
W CD 0 -' V'l a::
OJ- 0: 00: u.. 0
I-- I--
--.J <8~0:~ Vl<;:j UJ II?
-'
-' 0::: ~~~~~~~~ I-- 0::
:J w
1-1- <o:w<:<:_<(<( 0 I-
t-wt-. ::E..J:I; <(
i5~:::E~::;~u ...J ~
< ::E
<(0:: c;:lI:dJO:W>-3<:"" W 0::
I-dJ:Je~t::jt~ w 0
~VlV)V)UZa.. 0.. I-
W<( V) II?
0:::2 I \~llf~! . .
~1 <J:~
I
8 I
CD.~ I
~ I
I
f ,
'\ I
"- ,."~ll' [1 I
co ~ ~ 0 ,
'" I
...J ,1.1 a5 r-
- I
CD I
,
0
l.D
0
...J
~ Q)
E
~
"-
-
0
...J
CD I
I
I
I
I
@
,
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
v~B 350 Westwood Lake 01!lal AUAR COMMENT RESPONSE ,
8441 Wa~ Boulevard I
I
Mlnneapolls, MN 55426 VALLEY GREEN CORPORATE CENTER I
I
ASSOCIATES. INC. e12.541~ I
FAA 541.1700 Figure 17 I
'RASTRUCTURE - ENGINEERS - PlANNERS SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA ,
I
I
I
I
I
~~--
~ " S1S3'UOtG . 3W\L.OnlUS'o'lIfi
- ::~::: -:><1 'S38~' ,
"'!0S3~IH '33</Q)fO:IHS
lBI.N3:l 3J. "'llO<RlO:l N33l:l!l A3T'''M ==~ 11
. .,
-'- ....:s.'1..... ~'JfIO~OSt
~
1lll1I1J~i'liji I
l1li111 "II", !
1IM8~,'I,1I i .. i (
DI1IIlljj!,I'Ii' , ~ ll! L
-!:'i,'I", ,
:Jjf.l,lllll , --~/'" ~ -W- i;=
n",,~i:l::: , ~...;
; ~ i
:: 1/1'111 i w.- i~-
i!i !d ....
Ill:::::: rata ~ ..ig :::>
0
......... ."IIIm !I~ n~ >-
I ~lllltll '-, 1 J ~ :5
, W ...J
:fi~:::: ~--, , , <Ii
I II IU/llI .1 I I w
-) ~ :W::: z.
__.J.............. w:
<.>:
'lIflll ,
111111 , ~
"Jill , , ;"l9
III IrlJII ,
~) m::: , ,
,
~~J."'"' I
~""" I ,...-- - - 00
I I
I I
I \ ~
\
\
\ (j)
\ -
I
I \ !; ~
/' / / \ J i ~
.......J/' 1 I \
, , 0 ,
I , , J I b1)
I \ , ,-, I I
~-;~,\ \ I , I
/ , , .~
\'~~\ "~..;> I / , -- / ~
\\ "'\ ~, I , ,
'" ,~ ~'"
\' \\\~ , \
\ \ ",'~ \\ -' ,
\ ',\ ,:-.. 'i... \ --
\ \ \ I ,~ "
\ \"".\' 'I:\~\
" "~ "
\ '\..: I
I I \ :1,
\ \ \ I / /
\ \ \ I
\ \. 1 J -
\ \ 1/ /
\ .... 1\ /
) ;\ " "
I
\ ::? \
,
\ \
\ ii~ !
\ ~a..:1
.. j~'
\ al:z:
\ ~~.
\ 'f'~li
R'~:!!I;;O_""""""'~ \:
.,,-=-===.._c-= _....
, / /
\
\ \
, ,
\ ,
I
" I
r I-
I
< ,
I
I
I
J
I
I
I
\
" I
\ I
II
"
I
I
J
,..
J
I
, ,
I I
I . .
I I -
I ,
I
I
I /-,
J / I
I / I
J I I
I I \
I I ,
, I I
J \ I
, , I
I , I
I , I ,
, ,
J , J ,
I I I I
I , " 1
J , I
J I
, , ,
J -
,
rr~:$, I '/I =-- ....
-
1 / I / -1" \ I I p<i'l/ , / --
I,... \\ J \ \ ,...., I
~ I r l\ I \ \^IIIIAIt
'll'Ge .-- .
,>,
. ..-- .~
i
I
i
i,
~
~.
~
r
~.
~~, EFFECTIVE TREE BARRIERS AND RESIDENTIAL RECEPTOR SITES
cr
~.
::';
,r,..
~~
"c.
;;.
!!I"
tl(~
~
i
~'.
1E
~ Ii
'1'
~
l!i'
~
~:'
i;t
~
ix:'!'
~~
11'; .
~i I:
~~.
;>'C. ,
t (.
-
"
~"!
~~.
1"
~
.
~,
t FIGURE
!l'>'
I
~- DAVID BRASLAU AND ASSOCIA TES
f.
if
I 'I
, I
~i._ J !i
'!" i'l Ii
'1,1
:;1 '1
I' ;
:11 j(
" ,I
i:i ;1
h ~ ,1
~.:' II' "
ir'!
i", I] if
!,!,,' L:!
i: " I
~. ii, i
~~. " I
I. ,
I
, "
I
I 4th "-VI:.
I Vl
z
~
Cl
I
..... .
l
I
I
I
f
I
r.....-.....-.....-""'-
( ~
~
....._.....1
LAKE swaT
l Prior LOok..
IndiOon R..s..rvOo tion
{
I ~
c N
I a: LEGEND 'LEGEND
~ EXISTING PMlCS .... INTERSTATE TRUNIC HIGH\IAY_ @
.... PRlJIOSED NEIGHIIOIlICllID PARK SERVICE AREA - u.s, TRUNIC HICiHIIAY_ lID 3000 1 3000
IU PRIlPOSED C_ITY PMlC SERVICE MEA STATE TRUNIC HIGHIIAY__ 00 ~--- ,
IU -
c:: PMlC SERVICE D!SYRICT - COUNTY STATE AID HIGHIIAY_ @ SCALE FEET
....
t ~ NEW NEIIiHBOIlHIIIID PARI( AtIltS " COUNTY ROAD_ ~
1 N NEW COMMuNITY PARlC AtIltS ,. CORPORATE LDlITS_ 'ClIl._"IIlI:a._
.., PUBLIC ROAD _
0 VliCC SITE = PRIVATE ROAD _ City of Shakopee
=
N
- Comprehensive
S
Park & TraIl Plan
<I:
:r:
~ I FIGURE NO.aO 0"".
:i:
1
Appendix B - Traffic Analysis
\
,
B.I - 2000 AUAR Analysis
r-' . '\' A
'. ., . .
. ., ~ B.A. Mittelsteadt, P.E.
.
350 Westwood Lake Office Bm A. Weiss. P.E.
, WSD 8441 Wayzata Boulevard Peter It Willenbring. P.E.
r-'l Minneapolis, MN 55426 Don2ld W: Sterna. P.E.
J / Ronald B. BraYI P.E.
612-541-4800
j & Associates, Inc. FAX 541-1700
'} December 2, 1999
~<:
..:.:
"'1" Mr. Brad Larson, P .E.
'\
,:: , County Engineer
,D Scott County Highway Department
i 600 Country Trail East
'.. \.
:';iJ Jordan,~ 55352
~} Re: CSAH 83 / CSAH 16 Improvements
...
'F Shakopee, ~
WSB Project No. 1063.21 ' ,
1'J ..
!\,:::,' Dear Mr. Larson: !
'J ~
As you are aware, \ySB & Associates has been working with the City of Shako pee and Valley Green
\..::: Business Park on the proposed CSAH 83 / CSAH 16 improvements for the past two years. We have
C:} recently completed an analysis of revised traffic numbers based on information provided by your
"'\ transportation consultant (SRF Consulting Group). You proVided direction at our August 23, 1999,
~"';-"-.'.-
meeting to meet with SRF and review the trip generation and distribution assurn,ptions for the proj ect
f] and to come to agreement on the traffic numbers. This has been completed, and the memo from SRF
, . dated October 22, 1999, is the result of that meeting and agreement (attached).
'to; .:
,
~ ~ ~ Based on the revised traffic numbers, as outlined in the October 22; 1999, SRF memorandum, we
.~'.'; J have analyzed the proposed. c.orridor and intersections using. the SYNCHRO software. A table
outlining the analysis results, as well as the analysis worksheets, is attached to this letter.
! . The results of the analysis indicate that the individual intersections in the year 2017 will all be
, operating at level of.s'ervice (LOS) D or better during the AM and. PM peak hour. The overall
'J arterial analysis also indicates that the entire corridor would also be operating at an LOS D or better
b, for both northbound and southbound traffic during-the AM aild PM peak hours. However, with the
coordinated system, the arterial LOS at specific intersections in some cases is at an E, and in one
t. "'f case at the north TH 169 ramp intersection an F during both the AM and PM peak hours. It appears
! "nl
'c J that this is primarily a result of the amount of green time allocated for each phase. To accommodate
the coordination ofCSAH 83, the amount of green time allocated for the northbound and southbound
~ movements for specific cycle lengths deters from the amount. of green time allocated for the side
...J streets, therefore producing unsatisfactory levels of service (or those movements.
{
.... '1 ~e length of queue was also reviewed as part oftrus analysis. It was found that the westbound right
.:;-- turn lane and the southbound left turn lane at the Valley Green Corporate Center site
. entrance/CSAH 16 (west) has the potential for backing up into their respective through lanes.
rei
..\
t..l
In.ft'astructure Engineers Planners
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER F:\WPWIN\I063.21\1I 1999.bl.wpd
.
'} '..
J ..
I
, I
'~1 Mr. Brad Larson
j
I Scott County Highway Department
Jordan, MN
j December 2, 1999
I
Page 2
~J ' It should be noted that the traffic volume information provided and the analysis that was conducted'
~.} is for a 20-year traffic forecast. These traffic volumes are based on significantly conservative
assumptions with respect to the development of the Valley Green Corporate Center site, as well as
the adjacent development in the area and background traffic growth along the corridor. Considering
" f this and the results of the analysis, it is our conclusion that the concept plan with the proposed
! geometries would provide the necessary capacity to accommodate these 'developments now and in ;
oj
, 'the future. The traffic signal systems along the corridor can be adjusted with timirig modifications
, 1 as the traffic along the corridor increases. In addition, it is our experience that as congestion occurs
,...."
. along a corridor, vehicles will tend to use alternate, less congested routes to and from a site.
~ J
Therefore, the proposed geometrics of these roadways and the realignment of CSAH 16 will provide
~l the required capacity now and in the future.
t."
It is our understanding from our conversations with you and Brian Sorenson, and your conversations
(1 with the City of Shakopee, that the County is in favor of the proposed realignment of CSAH 16 as
'.} an overall transportation improvement for this area. The, alignment of CSAH 16 (east) with the
proposed 17th A venue to parallel TH 169 on the south side makes sense as a transportation
improvement for the entire region. We do understand that there are additional issues related to this
with respect tathe jurisdiction of 17th Avenue to the west ofCSAH 83. However, at this time, we
(J are not looking for your concurrence on that aspect of the plan. That is an issue that can be
addressed once it is concurred that the realignment of these roadways makes sense and the
'\;.... geometrics as proposed would adequately handle the anticipated traffic volumes on CSAH 83.
:] As you are aware, the improvements of CSAH 83/ CSAH 16 has been a proposal seen by the
1
".' j County over the past two years. The following are key milestones which have occurred in that time
., frame.
/ '
October, 1997 'Feasibility report cdmpleted by Valley Green and submitted t6 the
i! City and County for review.
,:{;:1 January 6, 1998 Comments were received on the feasibility report from Scott County
,. . (Scott Merkley).
;~\
,
, i February 2, 1998 Comments on the feasibility report were addressed and submitted to
the County.
I
) April 21, 1998 The City of Shakopee City Council received the draft city-wide
, i
transportation plan and submitted it to the surrounding agencies for
'"'1 . comments. Th'e transportation plan included the proposed
..,.-~~
;
it..;,_ CSAH 83 I CSAH 16 improvements.
....J
...~..1
.,
F:\WPWIN\I 063.2 1\1 I 1 999-bl.wpd
.
i ~
F
!
, i
: I
~'-1 Mr. Brad Larson
',i
';
Scott County Highway Department
, Jordan, MN
I December 2, 1999
' I
.1
J
Page 3
,,}
August 5, 1998 A meeting was held with Scott County to review the proposed
/-.~ 1" improvements. Scott County required that MnlDOT review the
) proposal.
i August 11, 1998 A meeting was held with Mn/DOT to review the proposed
, ' improvements.
_, "I
'j October, 1998 Mn/DOT provided comments on the proposed concept plan.
,] December 18, 1998 A meeting was held with Scott County to review the changes in the
1'1 proposal based on their comments and Mn/DOT comments.
,,"J December 30, 1998 Additional comments were received from Scott County on the ' ,
revised proposal.
January 8, 1999 The comments from Scott County were addressed and submitted to
Bruce Loney at the City of Shakopee.
IJ March 18, 1999 A letter was sent to Scott County addressing the "A" minor arterial
f":..'::
t\L~;: status of CSAH 83.
~J March 31, 1999 The "A" minor arterial request was submitted by Scott County to the
Met Council.
;'1 June 8, 1999 Scott County provided WSBwith an analysis of the traffic
;1 generation and distribution performed bySRF Consultants.
.: .:i
August 23, 1999 A meeting was held with Scott County to discuss the SRF analysis
results and revisions to the proposed improvements. WSB was ,
directed to meet with SRF to come to an agreement on the traffic
numbers.
September 20,1999_ A TEA 21 application was submitted for federal funding of the
.. CSAH 83 improvements. Scott County provided a letter of support
~,\ for the improvements.
,
! 1
October 14, 1999 A meeting was held with SRF Consultants to review the results of
j their analysis and discuss additional parameters.
,J
October 22, 1999 A memo was received from SRF with revised traffic numbers.
,t~:.].
'[1 As is apparent from this time line, this issue'has received significant attention over the past two
years, as should be the case with suchan important issue. We understand that this will be an
'.J important link in your transportation system, and we feel that the analysis justifies the proposed
: .'
;:-:.,~
;"..:
';;;,./
it F:\WPWIN\I063.21\1I I 999-b\.wpd
\
i,~. .'
.
(I ,
r
~ I
'-"; Mr. Brad Larson
i
, Scott County Highway Department
i
Jordan, MN
I December 2, 1999
I
.l Page 4
:"] improvements. However, if the County still has unaddressed concerns with regard to the future
(.1
traffic along CSAH 83 and CSAH 16, please provide us with direction with respect to what the next
"1 steps you would like us to take to bring this issue to conclusion.
)
Weare hopeful that based on the information we have provided to you, the County can make a
decision with respect to the realignment alternative. Once that step is completed, we would like to
move forward to address the jurisdictional issues.
'1 Should you have any questions or require any additional information on this submittal, please do not
,.;J hesitate to give me a call at (612) 277-5783.
Ij Thank yo.u and the County for all your efforts over the past two years. We hope to hear from you
+...-: .
soon.
"~t Sincerely,
WSB & Associates, Inc.
,J tL'-:r ~
CharIesT. Rickart, P.E.
Project Manager
) c: Bruce Loney, City of Shakopee
Bret Weiss, WSB & Associates, Inc.
Ron Bray, WSB & Associates, Inc.
" 'Project File No. 1063.21
nmlkd
f'J
',>~
t::::~
, .
i
"
< ;
. !,
",j
p:r
L'1
\.-..;J
r"j
^....
t: ::1
':';;:;:i
i~ t F:\WPWIN\I 063.2 1\11 1 999-bl.wpd
\
L ..)
'f ~CT~27~99 FRI 14:52 SRF ~ AX NU. 41~L4L~ r. UL
i-I'
CONSULTING GROUP, I N c.
\ Transportation. Civil- Structural · Environmental · Planning · Traffic · Landscape Architecture · Parking
'i
SRF No. 0993430
'>1 DRAFT MEMORANDUM
~J
..1""~1
J TO: Mr. Bradley 1. Larson, P .E.
Associate Administrator :
SCOTT COUNTY
,:,j
, FROM: Ferrol O. Robinson, Senior Vice President
1 Benjamin Tellefson, Engineer
DATE: October 22, 1999
~"J
,....
.-.:.", SUBJECT: UPDATE TO nm CSAH 83 / CSAH 16 REALIGNMENT REVIEW
! I
'.
;, ;V INTRODUCTION
bi[
(, We have recently met with WSB Associates to discuss the trip generation estimates and traffic
{':','
~.,::)
diversions summarized in the June 8, 1999 memorandum and to review the most recent site plan
r J and roadway design. As requested by WSB Associates, we have prepared an additional trip
t.j' generation estimate alternative for the proposed Valley Green development assuming an "Office
Service" land use for sites numbered 9 - 14. The original trip generation estimate in the
rl June 8th memorandum assumed a "Business Park" land use for these sites. The "Office Service"
i. J land' use was calculated by WSB Associates assuming 25 percent office and 75 percent
warehouse determined from WSB from a review of similar uses in the area. The "Office
Service" land use is similar to the "BUsiness Park" use in the 1997 ITE Trip Generation Reports,
but results in a lower trip generation estimate.
to.., .~
, ':1
':.'J
~i:jf ReSULTS
f>>} The volumes resulting from both the original SRF trip generation estimates and from the trip
;
r.. <1 generation estimates using the WSB "Office Service" land use are displayed in the attached
Figures 1 and 2 respectively. As shown in the attached figures, the southbound a.m. left-turn
j volumes at the intersection of CSAH 83 and the Site Driveway do not change between the two
i
" j alternatives. The p.m. peak left-turn volumes drop by less than 100 vehicles per hour.
'.-1
....,:
~ j It should be pointed out that the volumes displayed in Figure 1 include a diversion of
'LJ
approximately 35 percent of the southbound left-turns from the CSAH 83/Site Driveway
, , intersection to the County Road 16/Site Driveway intersection. This diversion was detennined
;-}
,,~.~ . t :
",'j One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150, Minneapolis, MN 55447-4443
~. J Telephone (612) 475-0010 . Fax (612) 475-2429 · http:/ /www.srfconsulting.com
An Equal Opportunity Employer
') O~T-22-99 FRI 14:~j \)1(1' l' J\A l\V.."I I ..Jl.."I 1...,J ... w..,/
t.
I .' .
:1
r 1
. " Bradley J. Larson -2- October 22, 1999
,
i
'-] by calculating the reserve capacity at the CSAH 83/County Road 16 and County Road 16/Site
,. Driveway intersections and rerouting the traffic from theover-capaci~ site driveway on
l.:..
CSAH 83 to the under-capacity driveway on County Road 16. The reserve capacity was
'j calculated at each intersection using critica1lane volumes. The diversion was only applied to the
southbound left-turning traffic during the a.m. peak hour.
i The volumes displayed in Figure 2 include a diversion of approximately 25 percent'between the
\
\~_.} .tWO site driveway intersections using the same methodology. Both diversions were compared to
r i the proposed site plan in order to detennine if the percentages were reasonable. The proposed
~J site plan displays commercial land . uses nearest the access onto CSAH 83, office/warehouse to
the east, and office towers in the northeast comer of the site. Therefore,' diversion to the alternate
fJ south access is reasonable for familiar users (such as office employees). 1l1e method used to
~< determine the amount of diversion is based on a simple analysis based on intersection capacity.
~;.:
If a more detailed analysis results in available capacity at the CSAH 83/Site Driveway
,1 intersection, fewer trips would divert.
The recent roadway layout was also reviewed during the meeting with WSB A,ssociates. The
most critical queuing location is the southbound left-turns at the CSAH83/Site Driveway
intersection. Additional storage for the left-turn vehicles could be obtained by providing a
t } continuous left-turn lane starting from the CSAH 83/Shakopee bypass south ramp intersection, .
tapering to a second left-turn lane. This could be accomplished through proper. striping and
signing) but would require acceptance by MnlDOT due to the proximity to the trunk highway
Cl ramp intersection. Special traffic signal timing operation may also be used to reduce left-turn
;.,.t queues.
',.,)
, The intersection of County Road 16 and the Site Driveway should be periodically reviewed for
traffic signal w.arrants. The traffic diversion percentages assume a traffic signal installed by
2017 in order to provide the reserve capacity required for operation 'of the CSAH 83/Site
.1' Driveway intersection.
[:,j
t::;{.~
.'12;.:4'
; CONCLUSIONS
;
j
,;
.) . The proposed Valley Green Corporate Center is a substantial amount of development and
i will result in approximately 32,000 to 40,000 additional weekday trips.
I
1':'1 . The background growth rate of 15 percent per year used by WSB is reasonable for the area
..-.~.-
~A surrounding the proposed development.
f<l . The proposed project location south of TH 169 in an area without many parallel routes causes
. : 5S percent of the site-generated traffic to travel to/from the north. This creates left-turn
":.'il
iJ volumes into the site from the north during the a.m. peak hour of 1,300 - 1,600 vehicles.
;.> \
~;"',}
o. 0(.T-22-99 FR I 14: 54 SRF FAX NO. 4752429 1'. U4
\" .'
,'.. .
.
,
,
I
i
Bradley J. Larson -3- October 22, 199~
I
:
<:}
'J . A pe~n.tag~L,of..the le~-tum traffic into the. site was diverted from the CSAH 83/Site
,
. Drivew~y iriters~ction to the County Road 16/Site Driveway intersection based on' capacity
. " constraints at the CSAH 83/Site Driveway intersection.
\ \ . The left-tums at the Site Driveway intersection on CSAH83 are still approximately
1,000 vehicles even with the diversion of traffic to the Site Driveway on County Road 16.
, ,
, From plaiming level analysis, this volume ofleft-tums, combined with the close intersection
,.
J spacing,~ thc potcntial for operations and queuing probletm~""Possible mitigation for this
J problem includes adding a continuous left-turn lane, tapering to a second left-turn lane, and
..1
creating' a special signal timing plan to improve operations and reduce queuing.
:.J . The intersection of County Road 16 should be periodically monitored for traffic signal
~ warrants due to the increase in volumes on County Road 16 with the construction of
17th Street and the diversion of traffic assumed from the Site Driveway on CSAH 83. A
traffic signal was assumed by 2017 in order to accommodate the diverted traffic. Without
'J this sign~, a much lower percentage of left-turns would divert to this driveway. .
t..,",
0' I
(J
;,
L
r]
. .
'.'.j
. I
:':'1
: 'j
~'.: .~
,.}
~,..:.,'
,
i
I
i
", ..f
"':1
:'-'';'
,.
hd
I' :OCT-22-99 FR I 14: JJ ~j{~ ~ AA. !tv. q/~L4L::J r. U:J
.. r '. '
. .
-1 . ~_.~-~-~_.__.
J .
i
I
I -
---
........
ooa L
"'"'"';- 20 (10) Ii Ii
t:t~ .- 10 (101
.J .J, L.. r 10D (2&0) gi t5 Q
1 ~
:.;,:.. (CD):SO J .., t r LjJ ~
(10110--+ ~=:: Q
"-1 (220140 ~ .:.:.: z;
, . ......
.... ...
s.ss
~ ~
;:)
I I
'.,,)
~
~ 1
;, J 1211\ AVE.
...... n
+} -- ;:J
f':~ -...... --
NO'" .. --....... -- ..-.. -..
S,SS g::c
.{....-.. -a
-.. L ..-
oJ> .. 390 (1520 ....
.N-Q ..0
o 0 o. .- 40 (140) r[~
"1 ...J .J, 1. .;-134 (5DD)
, .
(....} (150124OJ .., t r . . (60) 240 J tr
(501150-+ ... ~... (01 0--+ ::l~
(170) to ~ .!!! (160I33D ~ 00
-.... 0"
.. ...
..s.,go
SITE
1m} .
FUiURE 17lh AVE.
.---." -..----...--...---.....-... -------'.."-.--' .. .--.-
'"'I
r
~!
. .t: ~
i
,
iJ -
..
k~ ~ ~ ::: L 35C1 (210) .. ~ L 31D (130)
.. 0 0 04- ID 12301 a 0 .- 410 (2101
f -\ ' J .J, L.. r 30(1301 ...J 4-
. t (3501 520 J .., t r (10) 160 J
;. .J (110)220 --+ :: ... (C70) 110--+
(10)110 -. .. 0 ..
000
'I ~il
; I ,s..g-
.;.1
Jr--'i
l-:::'. XX = AM PEAK
r~..;.J (XX) = PM PEAK .
,<....1 me ONSUl.T"NC G aot/p, INC. SCOTT COUNTY FIGURE
r .'~ 2017 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES
' ,
(...:1
BUILD CONDITIONS 1
f." 1
\ SRP NO. 0993430 CSAH 83/ CSAH 16 REALIGNMENT TRAFFIC STUDY
i.~ .J
".OCT-Z2-99 FR I 14: 56 SRF HI NU. 4'/3Z4L~ r. uo
.'. .\' , ,'. ,
.... ,. ...
. '
~'
('. ~ 4ll\ ".VE-
1 ~ .-1
l !
..~. L 20 (Ia) -' .~ a!
DaD +-10 (1a) S DO C
,oJ J + l. rlO~la) ~ ~ J + r1110(12101
" (4O)30J .., t r ~ .., t
, (10)10--' ....... lit ~ ....
"'1 ....... ~ Q 0_
"':':.' (220}<40--, .:~ l; .:.:
. .T ~~~ u.
~!; !!
r ( ~
LJ ~
~J ~
." ~
,:; 12th AVE. I _
___...L--
rJ
;< N~~
.. ....0
00- L
:-= g 330 11210
i;t .J r l r1~: tl~::
.. 115D)24DJ it r
<~"" 14D) 120 --. .. ;: ...
i.:....:.:. (170) to --, .. .. ...
~.~. ~ 000
1:;;.;;:,- = :: c:
~ ~~o
SITE
: I
iid
FllTURE1711t AVE.
-- ----------------.....- .....
1
i
M
ClDfl
+<.1
:...'.~ -
t} ~ L 310 (110) ,
.. +- :no (210)
{ '1 I I
,} ~ l+-
': J
,.) (ID) S40
(440)170--'
.t
,~,J
'.'-.1
':;-.-:1
r 1 XX = AM PEAK
_J (XX) = PM PEAK .
o
{,l SCOTT COUNTY FIGURE
~"j ~ COIUtlLT1NC C lour, INC. 2017 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES BUILD
, CONDITIONS WITH OFFICEIWAREHOUSE USE 2
.. SRFNO.0993430 CSAH 83/ CSAH 16 REALIGNMENT TRAFFIC STUDY
..
'_I ti m
\ s~
! ~~
(I)....
..... ....
.!!!
r 0
l Q Q 0
. ::s - ~ ::s ~ ~
I' . Q I I I ~ I <( Q I I I o:l I <( <(
::s Z ::s CI) Z ,.,..
0' 0'....
r'1 Y>
'.......1 :s.
'I ~
" "CS "CS
= =
::s ~::s
"'1 ~ rn ~ C) ~ o:l ~ o:l 0 ~ rn ~ C) ~ C) C) o:l Cl
,) ~ 0 -= Z 0-=
~ 0 ,~ ~ 0
~ _ rn p:; - rn
" = =
. , 'C "CS rn .- "CS
,,\ ~ Q = -- t =
! = ~ ::s N ~ ::s
.' ~ 0 ~ 0
~ < ~ Cl ~ o:l Cl Cl Cl .~ < ~ C) ~ <( ~ ~ Cl
,uJ 0 ~ ~ ~
= =
fJ S. S.
, -rn -rn
u . u .
L' ~o C)C)o:loC)$ ~o c)Clo:lOClZ<(
~ . ~ ~ .
.B~ .B~
.~ = =
.. . t-4 t-4
, ~ ~
~ o:l o:l ~
::s Z CI) <( == ~ <(
, ~' ~ · ~ · Z ~ l' ~I' z
J "CS "CS!
t ~ ~ I
~ rn ~c)~o:l~o:l~ ~ rn ~C)~c)Oo:lCl
~ 0 - ~ 0-
i rn ~ ~ rn ~ ~
.; -- - CI) -- - rn
. ! "., '1""4 = '1""4 to:
~ .- "CS .- "CS I I I
-tI) = t = = t =, !
.0 .~ ~ == r .~ ~ == ',i,:
_ ~ 0 - ~ 0 1'1
~ ' .~ < , ~ 0 u.:l o:l u.:l 0 0 c. < ~ C) ~!-<!u.:l u.:l Cl
,<( \0 0 t:: 0 1:: 'I 1 I
?""4 0 0 " i ! ,
;<./ .;: = Z Z i i I I
;",;, ~ < = = .' I 1 'I I
""" .n TI\ 0 0 I,
- \1.1. '-. I ; .1 I -I
~ U "trn i <( urn I; I <(
'. ~ 0 ~ 0 C)iO o:l u.:l C) Z ~ 0 C)iCl:o:l!OICl Z
'7 =.... r.. OJ 1 r... I., I
1 ~ ~ = ~~ II ~~ I I: ji '
OJ c.... - i t-4 I
~ 0 ! I I I
+ ~ i> tI) i . I : ; ;
.JI ~ I c.1 0.1 ' 0.' 0.1
'i ~ ~ c . ~ ~ ~ ' ~i E II)
U.c C =..... =' ! , ::s
_....... .... I I 1 c: . (tI; ~ =
_~ t M ~ .,8 ;~I~l' ~ .g ~:~I ~
,.~,{ ~?""4 ~ U :.s:; !...t:! I .A" "t ..r:::..r::'.A"
.1 .. .. ~ 1I)11:";;i ..... ~ II) I..... .....
t,:) r/) ('f') ~.. rn::S1 ol::sl..r:: ~ rn::s 1:0:::s1 ...t:!
'- f.M co ~ ~ r.. = I 0 ......... r.. =' 0 ";;i
o ~ = $ II) Z,CI) \0 l' . to:_ ~ II) ZiCl),\O l'
_ ~ 0 4,) = >~O\IO\I'- - -a :. -= > 0\:0\1- - -a
.i.',,'.l ~ .::c: ~ .... <( ! \0 i \0 =:r: all).C 0 - <( \0 I \0 I::r: all) 'C
,\ i> = ~ ..r:: :-1- <( II) ~ ..r:: - - <( II)
1 ~ r/) ... ~ ..... I ...... : ...... ! CI) 1:: ~ ..... ...... ...... r^ -, 1::
'<;, , ~ U 00 ~ ~ : ~ ! ~ : C) ~ -< ..( s:! ~: ~ U i ~ -<
'. ,t"
,J ' T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5
-1 Baseline 11/18/99
! Arterial Level of Service: NB CSAH 83
Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dlst Arterial Arterial
Cross Street Class Speed TIme Delay Time (s) (ml) Speed LOS
FUTURE 17TH AVE II 38 13 39 52 0.1 10 E
1""J PROP CSAH 16 II 40 20 45 65 0.2 13 E
. . TH 169 EB OFF RAMRI 38 14 2 16 0.2 34 A
": TH169WBONRAMPlI 40 11 38 49 0.1 9 F
SECRETARIAT DRIVBI 39 7 5 12 0.1 23 C
"I 12TH AVENUE II 37 6 6 12 0.1 19 C
; I Total II 39 71 135 206 0.8 14 D
,
,
\',J Arterial Level of Service: SB CSAH 83
Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial
"1 Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS
'1-1 12TH AVENUE II 38 13 16 29 0.1 18 C
SECRETARIAT DRIVBI 37 6 511 0.1 21 C
.'Ii"l' TH 169 WB O. FF RAMR 39 7 34 41 0.1 7 F
'." TH 169 EB ON RAMP II 40 11 13 24 0.1 18 C
r.. .
PROP CSAH 16 II 38 14 20 34 0.2 16 D
,~ EXIST CSAH 16 II 40 20 12 32 0.2 26 B
,j Total II 39 71 100 171 0.8 17 D
"'J'
Ie:
,:..::..'
..J
';-- }
- j
~".' '1
, 'J
'j";',
k
:! - ~
~ {
i J
,~ !
~. , i
~'-'J
,~.~'-
ll-:-.:.
,.'
"':,;
~"l Synchro Report
~:J Page I
, WSBASS-LJOO
I 12TH AVENUE & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5
-I Baseline 11118/99
,. .
I lanes, Volumes, Timings
i ~ B (i] lLI EI [!) ~ (1) ~ ~ [II ~
" 1 lane Group EBl EBT EBR WBl WBT WBR NBl NBT NBR SBl SBT SBR
---- ,-
Lane Configurations 4't ., ~ , tt. , t+ .,
Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3591 1583 0 3505 0 1770 3617 0 1770 3725 1583
~"1
I','. Fit Perm. 0.950 0.728 0.950 0.814 0.950 0.950
i. Satd. Flow (perm) 0 2712 1583 0 2963 0 1770 3617 0 1770 3725 1583
~: .,"'s
Volume (vph) 30 10 40 100 10 20 380 580 140 80 540 20
:~'1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 46 42 0 144 0 400 796 0 84 596 21
Perm or Prot? Perm Pm+Ov Perm Prot Prot Perm
Phase Number 8 4 1 6 5 2
Maximum Split (s) 22 22 53 108 20 75
Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
glc Ratio 0.13 0.46 0.13 0.33 0.70 0.11 0.48 0.48
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 344 728 375 .590 2532 201 1788 760
C] vIe Ratio 0.13 0.06 0.38 0~68 0.31 0.42 0.33 0.03
i VIS Ratio Prot 0.02 0.23 0.05
VIS Ratio Perm 0.02 0.01 0.05 0.22 0.16 0.01
FJ Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes
~"'. Uniform Delay, d1 44.2 15.9 45.7 32.7 6.6 47.0 18.3 15.6
k.
",.- Actuated GIC Ratio 0.09 0.35 0.09 0.26
". 0.76 0.09 0.59 0.59
Actuated VlC Ratio 0.19 0.08 0.54 0.87 0.29 0.55 0.27 0.02
Percentile St Delay 47.4 21.4 49.3 39.8 4.4 49.6 12.4 10.4
Percentile LOS E C E D A E B B
Queue Length 50th (ft) 21 27 68 .376 105 80 137 8
Queue Length 95th (ft) 41 46 103 463 159 136 214 26
Link Length (ft) 220 220 255 665
50th Up Block Time % 26%
',} 95th Up Block Time % 32%
Tum Bay Length (ft) 300 270 310 330
50th Bay Block Time % 24%
95th Bay Block Time % 30%
Queuing Penalty (veh) 282
i
Cycle Length: 150
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Lost Time: 9
Sum of Critical VIS Ratios: 0.43
Intersection VIC Ratio: 0.46
'~ Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 19.5
~ . : :~
".:..' Intersection Percentile LOS: e
Lj:
: ) 12TH AVENUE & CSAH 83
J, 2
" .)
I
0
r. ..'~
:] Synchro Report
..\ Page I
\",J WSBASS-L300
i
"
I
, ,)
:':1
1 TH 169 W8 ON RAMP & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5
Baseline 11/18199
. >1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings
. ~B~~B~~rn~~~0
i Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
J Lane Configurations "i"i '(I "i"i tt t-f '(I
Satd. Flow (prot) 0 0 0 3539 0 1583 3539 3725 0 0 3725 1583
. 1 Fit Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
;;;;J Satd. Flow (perm) 0 0 0 3539 0 1583 3539 3725 0 0 3725 1583
Volume (vph) 0 0 0 1350 0 130 110 900 0 0 620 90
'.~".1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 1464 0 137 119 994 0 0 686 95
Perm or Prot? Prot Prot Pm+Ov Prot Prot Perm
Phase Number 4 4 1 6 5 2
I Maximum Split (s) 81 81 15 58 11 54
..J Lost Tir:ne (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
',J g/cRatlo 0.52 0.57 0.08 0.37 0.34 0.34
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1840 908 283 1366 1266 538
1 VlC Ratio . 0.80 0.15 0.42 0.73 0.54 0.18
,..j VIS Ratio Prot 0.41 0.01 0.03
v. VIS Ratio Perm 0.08 0.27 0.18 0.06
F Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes
.,1 Uniform Delay, d1 22.4 10.3 49.9 31.2 30.4 26.4
La Actuated GIC Ratio 0.47 0.52 0.07 0.42 0.40 0.40
Actuated VlC Ratio 0.89 0.17 0.47 0.63 0.46 0.15
....'.'.] Percentile St Delay 27.4 13.1 53.2 28.9 26.2 22.5
} Percentile LOS D BED D C
Queue Length 50th (ft) 636 65 59 385 248 60
".. J." Queue Length 95th (ft) 665 92 87 448 333 113
.'::j Link Length (ft) 570 330
"<' 50th Up Block Time % 12%
95th Up Block Time % 12% 5%
J Tum Bay Length (ft) 300 300 200 290
, " 50th Bay Block Time % 30% 36%
95th Bay Block Time % 28% 43% 12%
'L'\ Queuing Penalty (veh) 232 47 26
.<j
" Cycle Length: 150
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
: Lost Time: 9
, .J Sum of Critical VIS Ratios: 0.69
InterSection VIC Ratio: 0.73
i] Intersect~on Percent~le Stop~d Delay: 27.8
bll Intersection Percentile LOS. D
[1 TH 169 WB ON RAMP & CSAH 83
j 4
J
\
.)
" J
S.",
t_-.-
~ ~".~
:' ,) Synchro Report
, 'J Page 2
,c,J WSBASS-LJOO
~ " "j
. ".:\
, 1
...' J
TH 169 EB OFF RAMP & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5
~'\ Baseline 11/18/99
! lanes, Volumes, Timings
I ~ E3 fiJ ~ B [!I ~ [!] [a Q3 [II EJ
lane Group EBl EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBl NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
----
Lane Configurations ~ 'f t.,. 'f'f ~~ tt
Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 0 1583 0 0 0 o 3725 3167 3539 3725 0
~,j Fit Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 0 1583 0 0 0 0 3725 3167 3539 3725 0
Volume (vph) 240 0 330 0 0 0 0 770 1150 100 1880 0
,') Lane Group Flow (vph) 253 0 347 0 0 0 0 852 1368 108 2078 0
Perm or Prot? Prot Pm+Ov Prot Prot Perm Prot
Phase Number 8 8 1 6 5 2
,( Maximum Split (s) 33 33 19 105 12 98
Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
t...:.J glc ,Ratio 0.20 0.31 0.68 0.68 0.06 0.63
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 354 485 2533 2154 212 2359
21 VIC Ratio 0.71 0.71 0.34 0.64 0.51 0.88
VIS Ratio Prot 0.14 0.08 0.0,3 ,
VIS Ratio Perm 0.14 0.23 0.43 0.56
f] Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes
~::.) Uniform Delay, d1 42.6 33.1 7.6 10.3 51.9 17.3
~.;. Actuated GIC Ratio 0.20 0.31 0.68 0.68 0.06 0.63
[J Actuated VIC Ratio 0.72 0.72 0.34 0.63 0.52, 0.88
(":: Percentile St Delay 42.9 33.7 1.4 2.0 50.7 9.6
t..._;. Percentile LOS E D A A E B
Queue Length 50th (ft) 234 293 27 46 49 390
Queue Length 95th (ft) 337 411 35 86 85 548
Link Length (ft) 720 570
50th Up Block Time %
~J 95th Up Block Time % ' 2%
Tum Bay Length (ft) 275 275 285 220
50th Bay Block Time % 8% 19%
95th Bay Block Time % 18% 25% 18%
.(-) Queuing Penalty (veh) 31 41 44
."j
Cycle Length: 150
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Lost Time: 9
Sum of Critical VIS Ratios: 0.78
: ) Intersection VlC Ratio: 0.83
;} Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 10.4
~;:. . Intersection Percentile LOS:B
~.,,:.
'\ TH 169 EB OFF RAMP & CSAH 83
, ]
"j
, ~'-i
. .~t~~
....'
'L:~:1
I Synchro Report
.','. Page 3
ih}
WSBASS-LJOO
"
i
" J PROP CSAH 16 & CSAH 83 T:\ 1 063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5
....":' Baseline 11118/99
....,
1
I Lanes, Volumes, Timings
, ~ B 111 ~ EJ f!I ~ [II ~ ~ [Il ~
I Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
.1
Lane Configurations "i"i tt 'f "i"i t+ 'f'f "i"i tt 'f "i"i +t 'f
'J Satd. Flow (prot) 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 3167 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583
.~.: -.- Fit Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (perm) 3539 3725 1583 35393725 3167 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583
Volume (vph) 240 150 90 130 40 390 140 1290 520 1000 1120 90
r-'":r Lane Group Flow (vph) 261 166 95 141 44 464 151 1426 547 1085 1238 95
I
. j Perm or Prot? Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov
Phase Number 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2
, I Maximum Split (s) 16 20 16 20 14 63 51 100
,) Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
glc f:{atio 0.09 0.11 0.19 0.09 0.11 0.43 . 0.07 . 0.40 0.49 0.32 0.65 0.73
~ 'j Lane Grp Cap (vph) 307 422 295 307 422 1372 260 1490 770 1132 2409 1161
J VIC Ratio 0.85 0.39 0.32 0.46 0.10 0.34 0.58 0.96 0.71 0.96 0.51 0.08
, .
VIS Ratio Prot 0.07 0.02 0.04 0.11 0.04 0.06 0.31 0.01
VIS Ratio Perm 0.04 0.04 0.01 0.04 0.38 0.28 0.33 0.05
'] Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Yes
r Uniform Delay, d1 51.3 46.9 29.5 49.5 45.3 20.0 51.1 33.2 13.3 38.0 10.6 3.7
~~.::
Actuated GlC Ratio 0.09 0.09 0.16 0.11 0.11 0.43 0.07 0.40 0.51 0.32 0.65 0.74
!1 Actuated VlC Ratio 0.85 0.50 0.38 0.36 0.10 0.34 0.60 0.95 0.67 0.96 0.51 0.08
Percentile St Delay 62.2 49.3 30.1 47.2 45.3 20.2 64.6 34.2 12.8 46.7 14.9 5.5
I Percentile LOS F E D E E .C F D B E B B
Queue Length 50th (ft) 128 79 68 65 19 143 77 641 329 540 411 32
Queue Length 95th (ft) #201 114 118 103 39 185 116 #813 411 #625 481 52
Link Length (ft) 420 420 1120 720
50th Up Block Time %
, J 95th Up Block Time % 13%
~:! Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 300 230 230 260 250 465 270
~:~.: 50th Bay Block Time % 24% 14% 12%
r~l 95th Bay Block Time % 27% 14% 20% 7%
. ' .J Queuing Penalty (veh) 140 108 188 38
U
Cycle Length: 150
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Lost Time: 12
Sum of Critical VIS Ratios: 0.80
I,} Intersection VIC Ratio: 0.87
Intersection. Percentile Stopped Delay: 31.6
Intersection Percentile LOS: D
:~ 1 # '95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
;. -~ Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
. I
;'.1
Splits and Phases: PROP CSAH 16 & CSAH 83
.~ 1 .J, 2
,
i~~il
....:.
L...."
.. ~'.i Syncbro Report
, .,
va Page 4
WSBASS-L300
.....
,] FUTURE 17TH AVE & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5
r-.., Baseline 11118/99
j Lanes, Volumes, Timings
l!]B5J[L18[!J@(1)~~[I)~
,\ lane Group EBl ,EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBl NBT NBR SBl SBT SBR,
lane Con~gurations ltlt tt , ltlt tt , ltlt tt , "i"i tt 7'
Satd. Flow (prot) 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583
1 Fit Perm. 0.631 0.539 0.950 0.950
J Satd. Flow (perm) 2351 3725 1583 2008 3725 1583 3539 37251583 3539 3725 1583
Volume (vph) 520 220 110 30 80 350 70 1100 130 770 300 270
'.'] Lane Group Flow (vph) 563 244 116 33 88 368 76 1216 137 835 332 284
. Perm or Prot? Pm+Pt Pm+Ov Pm+Pt Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov. Prot Pm+Ov
.J Phase Number 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2
" Maximum Split (5) 21 33 9 21 10 62 46 98
'.\ Lost Time (5) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
,;,,~, g/c Ratio 0.26 0.20 0.25 0.16 0.12 0.41 0.05 0.39 0.43 0.29 0.63 0.75
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 754 745 390 383 447 644 165 1465 686 1015 2359 1193
'] VlC Ratio 0.75 0.33 0.30' 0.09 0.20 0.57 0.46 0.83 0.20 0.82 0.14 0.24
. .'; VIS Ratio Prot 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.16 0.02 0.01 0.24 0.03
, VIS Ratio Perm .0.10 0.07 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.07 0.33 0.08 0.09 0.15
c CriticalLG? Yes Yes Yes
:) UniformDelay,d1 37.2 39.0 33.1 32.1 45.2 25.0 52.9 31.1 18.7 37.9 8.4 3.6
,-' Actuated G/C Ratio 0.26 0.21 0.26 0.15 0.12 0.38 0.05 0.42 0.45 0.26 0.63 0.75
ActuatedV/C Ratio 0.75 0.31 0.28 0.09 0.20 0.61 0.46 0.78 0.19 0.89 0.14 0.24
Percentile St Delay 37.5 38.2 32.3 32.1 45.2 26.9 52.9 29.5 17.4 42.0 9.0 1.0
..,;{ Percentile LOS D D D D E D E D C E B A
Queue Length 50th (ft) 244 103 ' 90 12 39 271 37 524 78 408 46 12
~':.) Queue Lengt.h 95th (ft) 306 144 149 26 67 373 64 623 126 475 78 24
k:j link Length (ft) 420 420 665 1120
L.o 50th Up Block Time %
95th Up Block Time % 4%
I] Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 300 260 300 260 . 240 235 235
{,j 50th Bay Block Time %, 32% 41 %
95th Bay Block Time % 5% 14% 37% 42%
f1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 5 4 73 128
Cycle Length: 150
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Lost Time: 9
Sum of Critical VIS Ratios: 0..76
Intersection VIC Ratio: 0.80
COJ Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 30.2
W Intersection Percentile LOS: D
ij FUTURE 17TH AVE & CSAH 83
",1
....'."1...
~. ".- "'f
f..:..,:.j .
i.l Synchro Report
I Page 5
'..1 WSBASS-L300
,1' "
SECRETARIAT DRIVE & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5
~'1 Baseline 11/18/99
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
f!J 5J ~ lIJ lIt 0
) Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
-
Lane Configurations
Satd. Flow (prot) 0 0 0 0 0 0
'-:1 Fit Penn. 0.950 0.950
L) Satd. Flow (penn) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Volume (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0
"'J Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
Control Type: Unsignalized
"j
: I
U
t]
f:;..,,-
~"..,,'
'1
!),F-)
I-'.~,
LJ
'''1
j
.. .)
'J
;,.... .
}.'
;
tiJ
. "
': .1
!
i..i
". i
I
i
.:"~
',,:,:J
j SynchroReport,
Page 6
~.. .:~~ WSBASS-L300
l"t
>1
1
~':.. }.
.
.'..'
I T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5
' .J
~-J Baseline 11118/99
\ Arterial Level of Service: NB CSAH 83
,
Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial
i Cross Street Class Speed TIme Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS
.[
I FUTURE 17TH AVE II 38 13 24 37 0.1 14 D
J
PROP CSAH 16 II 40 20 47 67 0.2 12 E
'1 TH 169 EB OFF RAMRI 38 14 7 21 0.2 26 B
TH 169 we ON RAMPlI 40 11 28 39 0.1 11 E
SECRETARIAT DRIWl 39 7 5 12 0.1 23 C
:'-1 12TH AVENUE II 37 6 9 15 0.1 15 D
Total II 39 71 120 191 0.8 15 D
,.:-".
Arterial Level of Service: SB CSAH 83
Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial
~J Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) (ri1i) Speed LOS
12TH AVENUE II 38 13 13 26 0.1 20 C
SECRET ARIA T DRIVBI 37 6 5 11 0.1 21 C
f] TH 169 WB OFF RAMR 39 7 46 53 0.1 5 F
?:.: TH 169 EB ON RAMP II 40 11 5 16 0.1 28 B
C" PROP CSAH 16 II 38 14 137 151 0.2 4 F
EXIST CSAH 16 II 40 20 11 31 0.2 26 B
. I Total II 39 71 217 288 0.8 10 E
I
i
U
'.-':",'
.. ..;
fJ
,;
t
n
:'l
. -'
I
\ 'j
:,}
i~:.
, '.\
:' ..
'". "1
i
,i
fm
:j
:, i Synchro Report
Page 1
\:-':..1 WSBASS-L300
j 12TH AVENUE & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5
Baseline 11/18/99
"'-j Ti .
I Lanes, Volumes,lmmgs
,
~E1~~B~~[!][3~[I]E1
: Lane Group EBl EBT EBR WBl WBT WBR NBl NBT NBR SBl SBT SBR
) lane Configurations tit '(I 4't. 't.. '+t '(I
Satd. Flow {prot} 0 3584 1583 0 3487 0 1770 3614 0 1770 3725 1583
""J Fit Perm. 0.950 0.592 0.950 0.788 0.950 0.950
. Satd. Flow {perm} 0 2205 1583 0 2856 0 1770 3614 0 1770 3725 1583
Volume {vph} 40 10 220 260 10 60 160 530 130 60 620 20
'. '.1 Lane Group Flow {vph} 0 56 232 0 366 0 168 730 0 63 686 21
) Perm or Prot? Perm Pm+Ov Perm Prot Prot Perm
Phase Number 8 4 1 6 5 2
Maximum Split (s) 33 33 29 100 17 88
. : Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
cc,j g/c, Ratio 0.20 0.37 0.20 0.17 0.65 0.09 0.57 0.57
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 441 591 571 307 2337 165 2111 897
'.1 VIC Ratio 0.13 0.39 0.95dl 0.55 0.31 0.38 0.32 0.02
VIS Ratio Prot 0.07 0.09 0.04
, VIS Ratio Perm 0.03 0.08 0.13 0.20 0.18 0.01
Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes
fl Uniform Delay, d1 .37.4 24.6 41.8 43.0 8.9 48.6. 13.1 10.8
tJ Actuated GIC Ratio 0.17 0.30 . 0.17 0.13. 0.71 0.06 0.64 0.64
Actuated VlC Ratio 0.15 0.48 0.75 0.71 0.29 0.55 0.29 0.02
'. 1 Percentile St Delay 39.5 29.6 44.5 47.0 6.9 50.4 10.1 8.2
\ Percentile LOS D DEE B EBB
' Queue Length 50th (ft) 23 178 171 160 131 60 145 7
Queue Length 95th eft} 43 237 221 233 182 110 211 22
link Length (ft) 220 220 255 665
50th Up Block Time %
95th Up Block Time % 8% 5%
I Tum Bay Length (ft) 300 270 310 330
L1 50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
:"1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 9 8
, .!
U Cycle Length: 150
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
. j Lost Time: 9
, i Sum of Critical VIS Ratios: 0.41
Intersection VlC Ratio: 0.43
L.l Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 20.9
fui Intersection Percentile LOS: C
dl Defacto Left Lane. Recede with 1 though lane as a left lane.
Ii
'I 12TH AVENUE & CSAH 83
j,J 2
,/
, J
t1
, "J Synchro Report
') Page I
',l WSBASS-L300
'.. '.\
I
I
; .1
....-J
, J
,J TH 169 WB ON RAMP & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5
Baseline 11/18/99 '
N Lanes, Volumes, Timings
. .,
E!] B liJ 0 a [!J Ell [!] ~ ~'/IJ ~
j Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations ~~ f ~~ ++ Hf
Satd. Flow (prot) 0 0 0 3539 0 1583 3539 3725 0 o 3725 1583
Cl Fit Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
:J Satd. Flow (perm) 0 0 0 3539 0 1583 3539 3725 0 0 3725 1583
c~:
Volume (vph) 0 0 0 1360 0 200 350 690 0 0 1040 220
'~1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 1475 0 211 379 762 0 0 1150 232
Perm or: Prot? Prot Prot Pm+Ov Prot Prot Perm
L Phase Number 4 4 1 6 5 2
Maximum Split (s) 71 71 23 68 11 56
'( lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
..j g/c Ratio 0.45' 0.51 0.13 0.43 0.35 0.35
'L:'c:1
lane Grp Cap (vph) 1604 802 472 1614 1316 559
J VlC Ratio 0.92 0.26 0.80 . 0.47 0.87 0.41
VIS Ratio Prot 0.42 0.01 0.11
~ .., VIS Ratio Perm 0.12 0.20 0.31 0.15
"'1 Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes
I",' Uniform Delay, d1 29.2 14.8 47.9 23.0 34.5 27.9
1"....
i .~,> Actuated GIC Ratio 0.44 0.50 0.13 0.44 0.37 0.37
Actuated VlC Ratio 0.94 0.27 0.83 0.46 0.84 0.40
Percentile St Delay 33.2 15.3 47.0 21.5 34.7 27.1
Percentile LOS D C E C D D
Queue Length 50th (ft) 667 110 182 252 526 172
~ Queue Length 95th (ft) #780 164 #247 290 617 253
i,.;, " ~ link Length (ft) 570 .330
,..,....
l:.......
50th Up Block Time % 15%. 27%
95th Up Block Time % 20% 33%
~J Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 300 200 290
'L:' 50th Bay Block Time % 32% 16% 31%
95th Bay Block Time % 35% 19% 21% 36%
F] Queuing Penalty (veh) 365 35 71 494
Cycle Length: 150
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Lost Time: 9
Sum of Critical VIS Ratios: 0.83
Intersection VIC Ratio: 0.89
'] Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 31.5
L Intersection Percentile LOS: 0
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
,,<1 Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
cj
J
t.J TH 169 WB ON RAMP & CSAH 83
, I 4
,i
'I
:J
,
{~1
LJ
-1 Synchro Report
Page 2
L',J WSBASS-L300
, ;
; ~ :: .;
~._. ..
\
J TH 169 EB OFF RAMP & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5
,.,... . Baseline 11118/99
d 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings
, ~B~0B~~~~~~~
,.1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
I Lane Configurations "i fl tt 'f'{I "i"i tt
Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 0 1583 0 0 0 0 3725 3167 3539 3725 0
"") Fit Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
, Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 0 1583 0 0 0 0 3725 3167 3539 3725 0
Volume (vph) 60 0 160 0 0 0 0 970 1570 290 2100 0
~-l Lane Group Flow (vph) 63. 0 168 0 0 0 0 1072, 1868 314 2322 0
: Perm or Prot? Prot Pm+Ov Prot ' Prot Perm Prot
, Phase Number 8 8 1 6 5 2
, Maximum Split (s) 20 20 16 108 22 114
f Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
'" glc Ratio 0.11 0.20 0.70 0.70 0.13 0.74
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 201 317 2608 2217 448 2756
. J' VlC Ratio 0.31 0.53 0.41 0.84 0.70 0.84
';0' VIS Ratio Prot 0.04 0,05 0.09
VIS Ratio Perm 0.06 0.29 0.59 0.62
A Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes
f,a Uniform Delay, d1 46.5 38.8 7.2 12.5 47.7 10.2
~ ' Actuated GIC Ratio 0.11 0.20 0.71 0.71 0.12 0.74
Actuated VlC Ratio 0.33 0.54 0.40 0.83 '0.75 0.84
".J' Percentile St D~lay 46.9 39.6 5.1 9.2 57.0 3.5
, ' Percentile LOS E 0 B B E A
Queue Length 50th (ft) 58 145 163 483 150 279
'....1 c Queue Length 95th (ft) . 107 224 223 637 198 439
!,':J Link Length (ft) 720 570
" 50th Up Block Time % 4% 2%
, 95th Up Block Time % 11 % 3%
r 1 Turn Bay Length (ft) 275 275 285 220
t J 50th Bay Block Time % 13% 4%
95th Bay Block Time,% 18% 6%
'] Queuing Penalty (veh) 233 84
Cycle Length: 150
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Lost Time: 9
Sum of Critical VIS Ratios: 0.74
Intersection VIC Ratio: 0.79
;) Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 10.0
id Intersection Percentile LOS: B
;\ TH 169 EB OFF RAMP & CSAH 83
, 'I
,
i...J
!
."~"1
r_".
Ik:_
~..j' ~~
Page 3
WSBASS-LJOO
I
I
."'j" ,
, I PROP CSAH 16 & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5
Baseline 11118/99
J Lanes, Volumes, TImings
l!l 13 lil fLJ EI [!J ~ III ~ Q3 [I] ~
lane Group EBl EBT EBR WBl WBT WBR NBl NBT NBR SBl SBT SBR
Lane Configurations '~39 ++ ,- 'illi +t 1'1' lli~ ++ ,- 'i~ t+ ,-
Satd. Flow (prot) 3725 1583 3539 3725 3167 3539 3725, 1583 3539 3725 1583
0'--" Fit Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
".1 Satd. Flow (perm) 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 3167 3539 3725 ; 1583 3539 3725 1583
Volume (vph) 150 50 170 500 140 1520 190 880 180 550 1500 210
,"1 Lane Group Flow (vph) .163 56 179 542 154 1808 206 972 189 596 1658 221
l Perm or Prot? Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov
Phase Number 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2
Maximum Split (s) 11 34 35 58 12 46 35 69
i Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
.1 glc Ratio 0.05 0.21 0.27 0;21 0.37 0.58 0.06 0.29 0.50 0.21 0.44 0.49
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 189 no 422 755 1366 1837 212 1068 792 755 1639 781
] VlC Ratio 0.86 0.07 0.42 0.72 0.11- 0.98 0.97' 0.91 0.24 0.79 1.01 0.28
VIS Ratio Prot ,0.05 0.03 0.15 0.21 '0.06 0.05 0.17 0.02
VIS Ratio Perm 0.02 0.09 0.04 0.36 0.26 0.07 0.45 0.12
f] Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Yes
~, -" '. Uniform Delay, d1 53.5 36.4 18.9 41.6 23.8 22.0 53.5 39.2 8.1 42.4 31.9 15.7
!, ;
f:.~
t_::: Actuated G/C Ratio 0.05 0.11 0.17 0.31 0.37 0.56 0.06 0.30 0.62 0.20 0.44 . 0.49
Actuated V/C Ratio 0.86 0.14 0.68 0.49 0.11 1.01 0.97 0.86 0.19 0.86 1.01 0.28
:1 Percentile St Delay 78.3 45.6 22.7 32.1 23.8 50.5 118.1 35.9 4.1 43.3 104.5 9.7
Percentile LOS F E C D C E F D A E F B
Queue Length 50th (ft) 80 25 92 214 49 802 100 483 31 262 -801 92
") Queue Length 95th (ft) #146 45 142 289 75#1032 #181 #559 54 338 #981 134
'A;: Link Length (ft) 420 420 1120 720
",:,' 50th Up Block Time % 26% 10%
95th Up Block Time % 8% 34% 20%
'j TumBay Length (ft) 300 300 230 230 260 250 465 270
50th Bay Block Time % 31% 33% 20%
95th Bay Block Time % 18% 36% 36% 26%
';'1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 141 693 71 510
,I
, " . Cycle Length: 150
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Lost Time: 12
Sum of Critical VIS Ra,tios: 0.91
IntersectionV/C Ratio: 0.99
; J Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 58.2
, J
Ll-~ Intersection Percentile LOS: E
- Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.
'1 Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
, ., # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
i
(':1
"
::. '.} Synchro Report
;'j
'j Page 4
'i..J WSBASS-L300
"1
~~]
\ I I
, 'j PROP CSAH 16 & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5
,..... Baseline 11/18/99
. 1 PROP CSAH 16 & CSAH 83
I
'l
J
'.'.....J
,"
J
:J
U'
f.,......
,.
L~"
']
J
\]
'l
I
, i
, ) .
"J'
.....
iE. ,
'1
;, J
i
i
I
I
r'-'1
c:.c1
,J
I Synchro Report
:1 Page 5
'." WSBASS-L300
,J FUTURE 17TH AVE & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5
9 Baseline 11/18/99
J Lanes, Volumes, Timings
I E!J EJ [i] ILl B [!J ~ [tJ ~ ~ II] 0
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
---- ----
Lane Configurations "i"i tt r' "i"i tt ., "i"i tt r' "i"i tt r'
"') Satd. Flow (prot) 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583
.' Fit Perm. 0.290 0.691 0.950 0.950
~ :'.: Satd. Flow (perm) 1080 3725 1583 2574 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583
Volume (vph) 350 110 90 130 230 210 130 660 40 410 1170 600
"1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 379 122 95 141 254 221 141 730 42 445 1294 632
..'
Perm or Prot? Pm+Pt Pm+Ov Pm+Pt Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov
Phase Number 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2
~J Maximum Split (s) 34 46 10 22 16 62 32 78
Lost Time (5) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
glc Ratio 0.35 0.29 0.37 0.17 0.13 0.32 0.09 0.39 0.44 0.19 0.50 0.71
f1 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 890 1068 591 491 472 507 307 1465 697 684 1862 1119
VlC Ratio 0.43 0.11 0.16 0.29 0.54 0.44 0.46 0.50 0.06 0.65 0.69 0.56
i.e':: VIS Ratio Prot 0.09 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.04 0.00 0.13 0.12
VIS Ratio Perm 0.06 0.03 0.05 0.04 0.07 0.05 0.20 0.02 0.35 0.28
~ Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Uniform Delay, d1 26.7 30.0 22.3 26.8 46.6 28.9 49.5 26.1 17.1 42.4 21.8 7.1
L>
Actuated G/C Ratio 0.28 0.21 0.29 0.17 0.13 '0.29 '0,.08 0.50 0.55 0.16 0.59 0.72
~>J Actuated V/C Ratio 0.61 .0.16 . 0.21 0.29 0.55 0.48 0.52 0.39 0.05 0.76 0.59 0.56
Percentile St Delay 33.3 36.6 28.9 31.6 '46.9 31.4 50.4 18.5 11.5. 55.0 8.3 5.7
..,:.-. . Percentile LOS D D D D E D E C B E B B
t....
Queue Length 50th (ft) 151 49 68 52 118 173 67 219 18 228 184 . 145
, j Queue Length 95th. (ft) 190 75 112 77 164 246 103 298 42 278 252 220
1..:.'-'
C:, Link Length (ft) 420 420 665 1120
50th Up Block Time %
Ll 95th Up Block Time % "
Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 300 260 300 260 240 235 235
50th Bay Block Time %
L] 95th Bay Block Time % 11% 22% 7% ,2%
Queuing Penalty (veh) 7 104 23 9
_J
Cycle Length: 150
; Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Lost Time: 12
Sum of Critical VIS Ratios: 0.57
'::l Intersection VIC Ratio: 0.62
i j Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 22.9
r; Intersection Percentile LOS: C .
,. , FUTURE 17TH AVE & CSAH 83
' I
)
I
:1
,..-.J
~l
b
L.,
!Hl Synchro Report
i,,:.J Page 6
WSBASS-L300
t: '~l
1
....':4
'r . '
SECRETARIAT DRIVE & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF VOLUMES.sy5
f~l Baseline 11118199
1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings
I l!J "[i] ~ [1J [IJ ~
lane Group EBl EBR NBl NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Satd. Flow (prot) 0 0 0 0 0 0
"] Fit Perm. 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (perm) 0 .0 0 0 0 0
Volume (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0
'l Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
J Control Type: Unsignalized
:,
J
r]
',)
~wJ
.''''
b:
fj
t
;-'1
::;
!) .
LJ
r. -3
!
i .J
~J
;':'.:'-.
, .
lo.:.
r) Synchro Report
: .1 Page 7
. -!
1',....J
WSBASS-L300
>J
T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF NEWVOLUMES.sy5
"'1 Baseline 11/18/99
I Arterial Level of Service: NB CSAH 83
,""
Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial
Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS
FUTURE 17TH AVE II 38 13 37 50 0.1 10 E
.~J PROP CSAH 16 II 40 20 46 66 0.2 12 E
TH 169 EB OFF RAMRI 38 14 2 16 0.2 34 A
TH 169 WB ON RAMPlI 40 11 35 46 0.1 10 E
':1 SECRETARIAT DRIVW 39' 7 5 12 0.1 . 23 C
12TH AVENUE II 37 6 6 12 0.1 19 C
Total II 39 71 131 202 0.8 14 D
r 1
{
, j Arterial Level of Service: SB CSAH 83
Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial
'-I Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS
J
\, ~: 12TH AVENUE II 38 13 16 29 0.1 18 C
SECRETARIAT DRlVBI 37 6 5 11 0.1 21 C
B TH 169 WB OFF RAMR 39 7 27 34 0.1 8 F
f~:' ". TH 169 EB ON RAMP II 40 11 14 25 0.1 18 C
C~.
PROP CSAH 16 II 38 14 17 31 0.2 18 C
POI EXIST CSAH 16 II 40 20 13 33 0.2 25 B
Total II 39 71 92 163 0.8 17 D,
:~
;:..:,.,
i:<
.;:.~....
(j
~.-. .
;1
,j
;
iq
,..,
';~".::~
tl
[ ~
:j
f J
:
\:..;
~:. .i
~'1
~".J
r' l
:1 Synchro Report
~.".j Page I
WSBASS-L300
{. .i
. 1
,.:,./
~j T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF NEW VOLUMES.sy5
12TH AVENUE & CSAH 83
~l Baseline 11/18/99
Lanes, Volumes, Timings
i ~ E3 5J 0 EI ~ ~ [!] ~ 03 III 0
\
.. J Lane Group EBl EBT EBR WBl WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
----
Lane Configurations .tt ., 4"r. ~ t1+ ~ tt .,
5] Satd. Flow (prot) 0 3591 1583 o 3502 0 1nO 3617 0 1nO 3725 1583
.. Fit Perm. 0.950 0.735 0.950 0.816 0.950 0.950
..;.: Satd. Flow (perm) 0 2738 1583 0 2964 0 1nO 3617 0 1nO 3725 1583
<-1 Volume (vph) 30 10 40 90 10 20 380 570 140 80 490 20
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 46 42 0 134 0 400 784 0 84 542 21
Perm or Prot? Perm Pm+Ov Perm Prot Prot Perm
Phase Number 8 4 1 6 5 2
C':) Maximum Split (s) 22 22 53 108 20 75
I
U Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
g/c Ratio 0.13 0.46 0.13 0.33 0.70 0.11 0.48 0.48
'] Lane Grp Gap (vph) 347 728 375 590 2532 201 1788 760
vIe Ratio 0.13 0.06 0.36 0.68 0.31 0.42 0.30 0_03
t> VIS Ratio Prot 0.02 0.23 0.05
VIS Ratio Perm 0.02 0.01 0.05 0.22 0.15 0.01
'] Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes
...'...'.
c .
~~:. Uniform Delay,d1 44.2 15.9 45.5 32.7 6.5 47.0 18.0 15.6
\.:...:
Actuated GIC Ratio 0.09 0.35 0.09 0.26 o.n 0.09 0.59 0.59.
'J Actuated VIC Ratio 0.19 0.08 0.52 0.87 0.28 0.55 0.25 0.02
Percentile St Delay 47.8 21.7 49.5 39.8 4.3 49.6 12.0 10.3
\.... Percentile LOS E C E D A E B B
"j Queue Length 50th (ft) 21 27 64 376 101 80 121 8
:':...... Queue Length 95th (ft) 41 47 97 463 154 136 191 26
Link Length eft) 220 220 255 665
50th Up Block Time % 26%
; } 95th Up Block Time % 32%
'" Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 270 310 330
50th Bay Block Time % 24%
I 95th Bay Block Time % 30%
.\ Queuing Penalty (veh) 279
Cycle Length: 150
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Lost rime: 9
Sum of Critical VIS Ratios: 0.42
;1 Intersection VIC Ratio: 0.44
U Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 19.4
Intersection Percentile LOS:.e
{~'1 Splits and Phases: 12TH AVENUE & CSAH 83
.~ . '1,
\... j 1 J, 2
i
:1
I
~]
'..
L.
i~ 1 Synchro Report
Page 1
WSBASS-L300
,] RA
TH 169 WB ON MP & CSAffB1lO63.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF NEWVOLUMES.sy5
"] Baseline 11/18/99
I
! Lanes, Volumes, Timings
f!]BIil0E1[!1~[!]~~fJJEI
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations ~~ 1I~"'i t+ t+ 11
c-..j . Satd. Flow (prot) 0 0 0 353. 9 0 1583 3539 3725 0 0 3725 1583
Fit Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
i..,~ Satd. Flow (perm) 0 0 0 3539 0 1583 3539 3725 0 0 3725 1583
r.:' Volume (vph) 0 0 0 1180 0 200 100 880 0 0 570 90
: i Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 1279 0 211 108 972 0 0 630 95
I Perm or Prot? Prot Prot Pm+Ov Prot Prot Perm
Phase Number 4 4 1 6 5 2
Maximum Split (s) 72 72 14 63 15 64
Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
g/c Ratio 0.46 0.54 0.07 0.40 0.41 0.41
''''J. Lane Grp Cap {vph} 1628 855 260 1490 1515 644
V/C Ratio 0.79 0.25 0.42 0.65 0.42 0.15
" VIS Ratio Prot 0.36 0.02 0.03
VIS Ratio Perm 0.11 0.26 0.17 0.06
n Critical LG? Y es Yes Yes
t~ Uniform Delay, d1 26.0 12.8 50.5 27.7 24.1 21.3
Actuated G/C Ratio 0.41 0.49 0.07 0.45 0.46 0.46
'<I Actuated V/C Ratio 0.88 0.27 0.45 0.58 0.37 0.13
.'j Percentile St Delay 30.6 15.5 52.0 26.8 20.9 18.3
. Percentile LOS D C E' D C C
Queue Length 50th (ft) 566 112 55 370 201 54
Queue Length 95th (ft) 610 151 83 436 270 101
Link Length (ft) 570 330
50th Up Block Time % 8%
95th Up Block Time % 11 %
j Tum Bay Length (ft) 300 300 200 290
50th Bay Block Time % 29% 33%
95th Bay Block Time % 29% 39%
; Queuing Penalty (veh) 205 38
Cycle Length: 150
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Lost Time: 9
Sum of Critical VIS Ratios: 0.64
t] Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.68
':<J Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 27.0
!<;,' Intersection Percentile LOS: D
, \ TH 169 WB ON RAMP & CSAH 83
,
:, i 4
i
!
"'''-1
'..,'i
t.:.J
I I
t"Cj Synchro Report
" "
~,} Pqe2
WSBASS-LJOO
'I
j TH 169 EB OFF RAMP & CSAffi:OOJ63.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF NEWVOLUMES.sy5
~l ' Baseline 11/18/99
Lanes. Volumes. Timings
I I!l EI [i] 0 B [!I ~ [I] ~ ~ [I] 0
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
----
Lane Configurations 'i r' tt '(I"f 'i'i tt
~l Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 o 1583 0 0 0 0 3725 3167 3539 3725 0
Fit Penn. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
". Satd. Flow (penn) 1770 0 1583 0 0 0 0 3725 3167 3539 3725 0
Volume (vph) .240 0 280 0 0 0 0 750 1110 100 1640 0
1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 253 0 295 0 0 0 0 828 1320 108 1812 0
Penn or Prot? Prot Pm+Ov Prot Prot Penn Prot
Phase Number 8 8 1 6 5 2
Maximum Split (s) 37 37 22 100 13 91
I Lost Time (5) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
,:,1
g/c Ratio 0.23 0.35 0.65 0.65 0.07 0.59
~ 1 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 401 559 2409 2048 236 2185
Vie Ratio 0.63 0.53 0.34 0.64 0.46 0.83
VIS Ratio Prot 0.14 0.07 0.03
VIS Ratio Perm 0.12 0.22 0.42 0.49
f] Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes
.1<
t'
,._.C., Unifonn Delay, d1 39.8 27.5 9.1 12.2 51.2 19.0
Actuated G/C Ratio 0.21 0.34 0.67 0.67 0.06 0.60
Actuated V/C Ratio 0.68 0.55 0.33 0.63 0.48 0.81
Percentile St Delay 41.3 28.9 1.4 1.8 44.9 10.4
Percentile LOS E D A A E B
Queue Length 50th (ft) . 226 222 27 44 50 332
Queue Length 95th (ft) 325 316 36 59 81 473
Link Length eft) 720 570
50th Up Block Time %
\ l 95th Up Block Time %
Turn Bay Length (ft) 275 275 285 220
50th Bay' Block Time % 24%
"1 95th Bay Block Time % 15% 12% 24%
Queuing Penalty (veh) 22 15 26
i
Cycle Length: 150
I Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
i
! Lost Time: 9
j
Sum of Critical VIS Ratios: 0.70
f j Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.74
~:<:: Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 10.0
w
Intersection Percentile LOS: B
'J Splits and Phases: TH 169 EB OFF RAMP & CSAH 83
;: "~
, ) J, 2
~, ~ 1
, i
, J
""-1
~~;:
~.:;i
;'1 Synchro Report
L."~ Page 3
WSBASS-L300
,1'
PROP CSAH 16 & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF NEWVOLUMES.sy5
'/ Baseline 11/18/99
I Lanes, Volumes, Timings
\ ~B~0a~~~~~~~
, j lane Group EBl EBT EBR WBl WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations "'i"'i +t l' "'i"'i +t 1'1' "'i"'i tt ., "'i"'i tt l'
r-..'J.' Satd. Flow (prot) 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 3167 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583
: . . Fit Penn. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
;" Satd. Flow (perm) 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 3167 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583
" Volume (vph) 240 120 90 110 30 330 140 1290 430 1000 820 90
"1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 261 132 95 119 34 392 151 1426 453 1085 906 ,95
; , Perm or Prot? Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov , Prot Prn+Ov' Prot Pm+Ov
Phase Number 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2
J Maximum Split (s) 15 20 15 20 14 64 51 101
;::J Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
g/c Ratio 0.08 0.11 0.19 0.08 0.11 0.43 0.07 0.41 0.49 0.32 0.65 0.73
f, Lane Grp Cap (vph) 283 422 295 2M 422 1372 260 1515 no 1132 2434 1161
." J VlC Ratio 0.92 '0.31 0.32 0.42 0.08 0.29 0.58 0.94 0.59 0.96 0.37 0.08
[;. VIS Ratio Prot 0.07 0.02 0.03 0.09 0.04 0.05 0.31 0.01
VIS Ratio Penn 0.04 0.04 0.01 0.03' 0.38 0.24 0.24 0.05
f1 ' Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Yes
kJ Uniform Delay,d1 52.1 46.4 30.0 49.9 45.2 19.4 51.1 32.5 12.2 38.0 9.1 3.7
Actuated G/C Ratio 0.08 0.09 0.16 0.10 0.11 0.43 0.07 0.41 0.52 0.32 0.66 0.74
";.'1 Actuated V1CRatio 0.92 0.41 0.38 0.33 0.08 0.29 0.60 0.93 0.56 0.97 0.37 0.08
Percentile St Delay 82.7 48.9 30.8 47.8 45.5 19.8 45.1 34.9 13.9 45.1 12.6 6.1
, Percentile LOS FED E E C E D B EBB
Queue Length 50th (ft) 129 62 69 55 15 118 68 455 187 535 278 36
Queue Length 95th (ft) #213 94,," 119 90 33 155 108 #801 264 #637 341 55
Link Length eft) 420 420 1120 720
50th Up Block Time %
: J 95th Up Block Time % 15%
i' Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 300 230 230 260 250 465 270
50th Bay Block Time % 35% 13%
:1 95th ~ay Block Time % 47%' 14% 23%
..,;. Queumg Penalty (veh) 186 54 183
Cycle Length: 150
I Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Lost Time: 12
Sum of Critical VIS Ratios: 0.80
:j Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.86
LJ Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 33.0
Intersection Percentile LOS: D
, _ # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
,,:1 Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
PROP CSAH 16 & CSAH 83
, I
i
:...1
r.':~
U
..... j Synchro Report
." Page 4
WSBASS-L300
....,1
:.1 FUTURE 17TH AVE & CSAH 8B:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF NEWVOLUMES.sy5
~1 Baseline 11/18/99
, .
"I
.::1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings
l ~ EI 1iJ ILl EI [!J ~ [I) ~ ~.fI] 2]
'! Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations ~~ tt ~ ~~ tt ~ ~~ tt ~ ~~ tt ~
J Satd. Flow (prot) 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583
Fit Perm. 0.688 0.576 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (perm) 2563 3725 1583 2146 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583
Volume (vph) 500 190 110 30 70 320 70 1050 100 460 290 260
"] Lane Group Flow (vph) 542 210 116 33 78 337 76 1160 105 499 320 274
Perm or Prot? Pm+Pt Pm+Ov Pm+Pt Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov
Phase Number 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2
Maximum Split (s) 22 41 10 29 12 64 35 87
Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
9/c Ratio 0.32 0.25 0.31 0.22 0.17 0.39 0.06 0.41 0.45 0.2'1 0.56 0.69
'~j Lane Grp Cap (vph) 944 944 496 537 646 612 212 1515 718 755 2086 1087
VIC Ratio 0.57 0.22. 0.23 0.06 0.12 0.55 0.36 0.77 0.15 0.66 0.15 0.25
k-:: VIS Ratio Prot 0.07 0.01 0.00 0.12 0.02 0.01 0.14 0.03
VIS Ratio Perm 0.11 0.06 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.10 0.31 0.06 '0.09 0.14
!:] Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes
;..: 31.1 33.6 27.4 27.2 29.1 6.0
" Uniform Delay, d1 39.8 25.5 51.4 17.0 41.0 12.1
~"~:
Actuated GIC Ratio 0.32 0.26 0.32 0.21 0.17 0.37 0.06 0.43 0.46 0.20 0.57 0.69
,] Actuated V/C Ratio 0.58 0.22 0.23 0.07 0.12 0.58 0.38 0.73' 0.14 0.71 0.15 0.25
Percentile St Delay 31.6 33.1 77.1 27.5 40.1 27.4 51.7 27.8 15.9 25.9 9.6 4.1
Percentile LOS 0 0 0 0 E D E D C D B A
Queue Length 50th (ft) 213 82 82 11 32 264 36 451 52 155 56 56
Queue Length 95th (ft) 269 117 135 24 57 348 64 569 96 173 80 ,114
Link Length (ft) 420 420 665 1120
50th Up Block Time %
d 95th Up Block Time %
Tum Bay Length (ft) 300 300 260 300 260 240 235 235
50th Bay Block Time % 26%
"<j , 95th Bay Block Time %. 12% 34% 1%
...--: Queuing Penalty (veh) 3 31
~: .~
~.'<...t
Cycle Length: 150
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
I Lost Time: 9
Sum of Critical VIS Ratios: 0.64
r ':~ Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.68
: .1 Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 25.5
LJ Intersection Percentile LOS: D
'I FUTURE 17TH AVE & CSAH 83
,I
':'1
' .
,>1
J Synchro Report
. .
.-,--' Page 5
WSBASS-LJOO
". ~""':!"~.'
i
I
....1 SECRETARIAT DRIVE & CSAffi:oo)63.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 AM PK-SRF NEWVOlUMES.sy5
r,l Baseline 11/18/99
::-";
,(
. ! Lanes, Volumes, Timings
i' r!l 5] 6] [II [II ~
'j Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
, Lane Configurations
'" Satd. Flow (prot) 0 0 0 0 0 0
" ,
.j Fit Perm. 0.950 0.950
i. . Satd. Flow (perm) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Volume (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0
"1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0
. Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
') Control Type: Unsignalized
il
'J'
~.
f),
t::.
t,~,:
']
p'J':
,:,.'.
{..:: ~
:~i
~J
"1'
!
, "J
,
}:';'
.: 'f..~"
\;;,.
'.1
j
'!
,j
[:::1
"'1
~, ~.j
Synchro Report
Page 6
WSBASS-L300
I
: I ,
T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF NEWVOLUMES.sy5
~l Baseline 11/18/99
I Arterial Level of Se~lce: NB CSAH 83
I
Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial
~ Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS
I FUTURE 17TH AVE II 38 13 22 35 0.1 15
D
"} PROP CSAH 16 II 40 20 32 52 0.2 .16 D
,.. TH 169 EB OFF RAMRI 38 14 8 22 0.2 25 B
\~ . TH 169 WB ON RAMPlI 40 11 25 36 0.1 12 E
SECRETARIAT DRIWI 39 7 5 12 0.1 23 C
] 12TH AVENUE II 37 ' 6 9 15 0.1 15 0
Total II 39 71 101 172 0.8 16 D
( Arterial Level of Service: SB CSAH 83
:~cJ
Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel, Dist Arterial . Arterial
'] Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time ($) (mi) Speed LOS
.. '. 12TH AVENUE II 38 13 13 26 0.1 20 C
SECRET ARIA T DRIVEl 37 6 5 11 0.1 21 C
a TH 169 WB OFF RAMR 39 7 34 41 0.1 7 F
, TH 169 EB ON RAMP II 40 11 6 17 0.1 26 B
PROP CSAH 16 II 38 14 43 57 0.2 10 E
, 1 EXIST CSAH 16 II 40 20 13 33 0.2 25 B
Total II 39 71 114 185 0.8 15 D
~. ..
J
"'f
:1
,,",
;...4 .
, /
;
;J
i'; '1
L1
": 1
, !
. ,
(
,
,
V"1
LJ
Synchro Report
Page 1
WSBASS-L300
L:
j 12TH AVENUE & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF NEW VOLUMES.sy5
r.-l Baseline 11118/99
I Lanes, Volumes, Timings
~ B [iJ 0 B [!I I!lI [II ~ ~ [[J ~
j Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
----
Lane Configurations .tt ., .n. ~ tf+ ~ tt .,
J Satd. Flow (prot) o 3584 1583 0 3487 0 1770 3617 0 1770 3725 1583
Fit Penn. 0.950 0.628 0.950 0.790 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (penn) 0 2340 1583 0 2864 0 1770 3617 0 1770 3725 1583
Volume (vph) 40 10 220 260 10 60 160 490 120 60 610 20
"~T Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 56 232 0 366 0 168 674 O. 63 674 21
j Penn or Prot? Perm Pm+Ov Penn Prot Prot Penn
Phase Number 8 4 1 6 5 2
Maximum Split (s) 27 27 24 69 14 59
<I Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
glc Ratio 0.22 0.41 0.22 0.19 0.60 0.10 0.51 0.51
'-J, Lane Grp Cap (vph) 511 648 625 338 2170 177 1896 806
VIC Ratio 0.11 0.36 0.87dl 0.50 0.31 0.36 0.36 0.03
it. VIS Ratio Prot 0.07 0.09 0.04
VIS Ratio Penn 0.02 0.08 0.13 0,19 0.18 0.01
(] Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes
L
r~. : Uniform Delay,d1 26.2 15.6 29.3 30.2 8.2 35.1 12.3 10.2
i:-.:
Actuated GIC Ratio 0.19 0.33 0.19 0.15 0.66 0.07 0.59 0.59
:'1 Actuated VlC Ratio 0.13 0.44 0.68 0.65 0.28 0.48 0.31 0.02
Percentile St Delay 27.8 19.3 31.4 33.3 6.7 36.0 9.6 7.9
Percentile LOS . D C D D B 0 B B
Queue Length 50th (ft) 16 120 120 113 99 43 116 6
. Queue Length 95th (ft) 33 167 164 176 141 86 177 20
Link Length (ft) 220 220 255 665
50th Up Block Time %
IJ 95th Up Block Time %
Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 270 310 330
... 50th Bay Block Time %
Fl 95th Bay Block Time %
C i Queuing Penalty (veh)
,';,:';:\
Cycle Length: 110
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Lost Time: 9
Sum of Critical VIS Ratios: 0.40
tJ Intersection VlC Ratio: 0.44
Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 16.2
..a
k:r Intersection Percentile LOS: C
dl Defacto Left Lane. Recode with 1 though lane as a left lane.
~ j'
.' >.1 Splits and Phases: 12TH AVENUE & CSAH 83
'i. j
1 J. 2
;
. \
c..)
r~J
~:.,'
r '}. Synchro Report
' ,
rl Page I
L,1
WSBASS-L300
,)
: i
, .1
~...~"
;'J .. ~ 169 WB ON RAMP & CSAI'f8W63.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF NEWVOlUMES.sy5
..,.. Baseline 11118199
.'j Lanes, Volumes, Timings
, ~B~0B~~~~~~~
i Lane Group EBl EBT EBR WBl WBT WBR NBl NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
I Lane Configurations - " -,--,~ M - - ++ .,--
Satd. Flow (prot) 0 0 0 3539 0 1583 3539 3725 0 0 3725 1583
"-J
; · Fit Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
L Satd. Flow (perm) 0 0 0 3539 0 1583 3539 3725 0 0 3725 1583
Volume (vph) 0 0 0 1290 0 130 300, 640 0 0 1020 220
r......c.1.. Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 1399 0 137 325 708 0 0 1128 232
I Perm or Prot? Prot Prot Pm+Ov Prot Prot Perm
Phase Number 4 4 1 6 5 2
Maximum Split (s) 52 52 16 49 9 42
) Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0. 3.0 3.0
.'1 glc Ratio 0.45 0.50 0.12 0.42 0.35 0.35
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 1576 792 418 1558 1321 561
"-J V/C Ratio 0.89 0.17 0.78 0.45 0.85 0.41
;J VIS Ratio Prot 0.40 0.01 0.09
VIS Ratio Perm 0.08 0.19 0.30 0.15
A Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes
(J Uniform Delay, d1 21.2 10.3 35.8 17.5 25.0 20.4
(:~I Actuated G/C Ratio 0.43 0.49 '0.12 0.43 0.37 0.37
Actuated V/C Ratio 0.91 0.18 0.78 0.44 0.83 OAO
Percentile St Delay 24.3 10.7 36.2 18.7 25.6 19.9
Percentile LOS C B D C D C
Queue Length 50th (ft) 442 48 117 160 365 123
m.,...;.]...... ~ueue Length 95th (ft) 543 82 #176 216 450 194
Ui!) Unk Length (ft) 570 330
50th Up Block Time % 12%
, '. 95th Up Block Time % 6% 22%
; J.. Tum Bay Length (ft) 300 300 200 . 290
t 50th Bay Block Time % 21% 18%
95th Bay Block Time % 28% 15% 27%
Fl Queuing Penalty (veh) 79 24 286
:~-3
Cycle Length: 110
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Lost Time: 9 .
Sum of Critical VIS Ratios: 0.79
Intersection VlC Ratio: 0.86
LJ Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 23.9
U Intersection Percentile LOS: C
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
11 Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
[ .1 TH 169 WB ON RAMP & CSAH 83
4
~.,c.'J'
!.~<
l"
II Synchro Report
" Page 2
,~J WSBASS-L300
Ii
, .!
.oj
J TH 169 EB OFF RAMP & CSAffi:'&D63.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PMPK-SRF NEWVOLUMES.sy5
~"1 Baseline 11/18/99
I Lanes, Volumes, Timings
) ~ EI fi] fLI EI [!I ~ [II [d Q3 [I] ~
i Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations llj r ++ rr " tt
'] Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 o 1583 0 0 0 o 3725 3167 3539 3725 0
Fit Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
,. , Satd. Flow (perm)
1770 0 1583 0 0 0 0 3725 3167 3539 3725 0
Volume (vph) 60 0 150 0, 0 0 0 880 1420 290 2030 0
~"1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 63 0 158 0 0 0 0 972 1689 314 2244 0
Perm or Prot? Prot Pm+Ov Prot Prot Perm Prot
Phase Number 8 8 1 6 5 2
Maximum Split(s) 20 20 10 73 17 80
i Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
I
l :1
g/c Ratio 0.15 0.22 0.64 0.64 0.13 0.70
.. ) Lane Grp Cap (vph) 274 345 2370 2015 450 2608
( VIC Ratio 0.23 0.46 0.41 0.84 0.70 ' 0.86
.J VIS Ratio Prot 0.04 0.03 0.09
VIS Ratio Perm 0.07 0.26 0.53 0.60
f] Critical LG? Yes Yes
1'-.- Uniform Delay, d1 31.0 26.5 7.5 11.8 34.9 9.5
Actuated GIC Ratio 0.14 0.20 0.66 0.66 0.12 0.72
,] Actuated VIC Ratio 0.26 0.50 0.40 0.81 0.72 0.84
Percentile St Delay 32.0 27.6 5.9 9.7 43.3 4.6
Percentile LOS D D B B E A
Queue Length 50th (ft) 40 94 129 394 117 173
Queue Length 95th (ft) 81 157 199 529 161 476
Link Length (ft) 720 570
50th Up Block Time %
~J 95th Up Block Time % 8% 5%
Turn Bay Length (ft) 275 275 285 220
50th Bay Block Time % 12% 5%
rl 95th Bay Bloel< Time % 21% 9%
d ' Queuing Penalty (veh) 149 81
Cycle Length: 11 0
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
J Lost Time: 9
Sum of Critical VIS Ratios: 0.70
r'l Intersection VIC Ratio: 0.76
~::->~- Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 9.6
,.:.j
t:..;,,:,' Intersection Percentile LOS: B
, 1 TH 169 EB OFF RAMP & CSAH 83
!
I J
i,
Ll
~,.~
I ~...
f:~.~
h"l
;-'-'1
",',.3 Synchro Report
"]
C;:, Page 3
WSBASS-LJOO
..
PROP CSAH 16 & CSAH 83 T:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF NEWVOLUMES.sy5
...-1 Baseline 11118/99
j"
i Lanes, Volumes, Timings
: [!]
EJ iii, en EI [!I ~ II] ~ ~ rll ~
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations ~~ Hr~++ '{I'{I ~~++r~';tr
':1 Satd. Flow (prot) 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 3167 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583
Fit Perm. 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
t.... Satd. Flow (perm) 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 3167 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583
Volume (vph) , 150 40 170 420 120 1290 190 860 150 460 1490 210
r'--1 Lane Group Flow (vph) 163 44 179 455 132 1535 206 950 158 499 1646 221
I Perm or Prot? Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov
Phase Number 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2
Maximum Split (s) 9 23 24 38 10 36 27 53
J Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
, j glc Ratio 0.05, 0.18 0.25 0.19 0.32 0.54 0.06 0.30 OA9 0.22 . OA5 0.51
. 1 'Lane Grp Cap (vph) 193 677 389 676 1185 1699 225 1118 777 772 1693 806
; j VlCRatio 0.84 0.06 OA6 0.67 0.11 0.90 0.91 0.85 0.20 0.65 0.97 0.27
VIS Ratio Prot 0.05 0.03 0.13 0.20 0.06 0.04 0.14 0.02
VIS Ratio Perm 0.01 0.08 0.04 0.29 0.26 0.06 0.44 0.12
POl Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Yes
r ;: Uniform Delay. c;l1 39.2 28.3 15.0 31A 20.1 15.9 38.9 27.5 6.0 49.7 22.3 10.5
t-'.
Actuated G/C Ratio 0.06 0.13 0.19 0.25 0.32 0.51 0.06 0.33 0.58 0.19 0.46 0.51
f1 'Actuated VlC Ratio 0.84 0.09 0.59 0.52 0.11 0.96 0.92 0.77 0.17 0.75 0.97 0.27
Percentile St Delay 60A 31.7 16A 27.6 20.1 20.3 73.9 24.2 4.2 30.9 32.5 5.8
Percentile LOS F D C D C C F C A D D B
Queue Length 50th (ft) 58 14 70 139 33 464 73 214 22 150 498 58
Queue Length 95th (ft) #116 28 116 202 55 #556 #128 324 52 204 #714 87
Unk Length (ft) 420 420 1120 720
50th Up Block Time % 18%
j 95th Up Block Time % 22.% 11%
Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 300 230 230 260 250 465 270
50th Bay Block Time % 26% 7%
:' '[ 95th Bay Block Time % 29% 34% 18%
i Queuing Penalty (veh) 403 34 188
..:.,\
Cycle Length: 110
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
, Lost Time: 12
Sum of Critical VIS Ratios: 0.83
, ., Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.94
. I Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 27A
>j
'~;:J.' Intersection Percentile LOS: D
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
; Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
..j
"
,
PROP CSAH 16 & CSAH 83
~~:1
'",.1
I
Synchro Report
Page 4
WSBASS-LJOO
.
\
I FUTURE 17TH AVE & CSAH 8B:\1063.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF NEWVOLUMES.sy5
'I Baseline 11/18/99
I I T"
i lanes, Vo urnes, Irnmgs
i ~B~0B~~~~~~~
I lane Group. EBl EBT EBRWBl WBT WBR NBl NBT NBR SBl SBT SBR
. Lane ConfiguratIons "i"i tt 'f li"itt , "i"i tt ., li"i tt ,
~ Satd. Flow (prot) 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583
t Fit Perm. 0.375 0.710 0.950 0.950
.,J Satd. Flow (perm) 1397 3725 1583 2645 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583 3539 3725 1583
Volume (vph) 340 100 90 110 210 190 130 650 40 380 1130 580
f,",\ Lane Group Flow (vph) 369 110 95 119 232 200 141 718 42 412 1248 611
i Perm or Prot? Pm+Pt Pm+Ov Pm+Pt Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov
Phase Number 3 8 7 4 1 6 5 2
() Maximum Split (s) 26 38 8 20 12 41 23 52
..J Lost Tir:ne (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
" glc RatIo 0.39 0.32 0.40 0.20 0.15 0.34 0.08 0.35 0.39 0.18 0.45 0.65
" Lane GrpCap (vph) Q94 1185 S33 570 57S 532 290 1287 619 643 1659 1036
J V/C Ratio 0.37 0.09 0.15 0.21 0040 0.38 0049 0.56 0.07 0.64 0.75 0.59
. VIS Ratio Prot 0.08 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.04 0.00 ,0.12 0.12
VIS Ratio Perm 0.07 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.06 0.06 0.19 0.02 0.34 0.26
n Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes Yes
LA Uniform Delay. d1. 17.320.0 14.6 17.6 31,8 19.4 36.7 22.2 14.5 31.7 19.3 6.9
Actuated G/C RatIo 0.31 0.24 0.32 0.19 0.14 0.31 0.08 0.44 0.49 0.16 0.53 0.67
r...'......1. Actuated VlC Ratio 0.50 0.12 0.19 0.22 0.43 0.41 0.50 0.43 0.05 0.71 0.63 0.58
...... Percentile St Delay 21.9 24.6 18.8 20.9 32.5 20.9 36.8 16.9 10.6 38.7 10.1 3.5
Percentile LOS C C C C 0 C D C BOB A
Queue Length 50th (ft) 98 30 46 29 74 103 48 17715 153 178 98
Queue Length 95th (ft) 131 50 80 48 112 165 80 243 37 201 237 148
Link Length (ft) 420 420 665 1120
50th Up Block Time %
, j 95th Up Block Time %
; Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 300 260 300 260 240 235 235
,..' 50th Bay Block Time %
.' 95th Bay Block Time % 2% 10%
'. \ Queuing Penalty (veh) 30
. j
Cycle Length: 110
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Lost Time: 9
Sum of Critical VIS Ratios: 0.57,
!I Intersection VIC Ratio: 0.62
:3 Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 17.5
Cl Intersection Percentile LOS: C
:1 FUTURE 17TH AVE & CSAH 83
U
~-~
~J
[f Synchro ReportG~ ~5
WSBASS-L300
i\
,J
.
I
,./ SECRETARIAT DRIVE & CSAffi:SD63.21\SYNCHRO\CR83 PM PK-SRF NEWVOLUMES.sy5
~1 Baseline 11/18/99
. .
'J lanes, Volumes, Timings
i t!] lil 5J [tJ [!] ~
J lane Group EBl EBR NBl NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
fj Satd. Flow (prot) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fit Perm. 0.950 0.950
t) Satd. Flow (perm) 0 0 0 0 0 0
, \ Volume (vph) , 0 0 0 0 0 0
:,.. Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
r '.'\ Control Type: Unsignalized
I
,
J
;'"
~'l
. . -'
tel
f]
t:>
~::.:'
,'....
':::-~
.J
U
~l
.'_.-J
.~ I
;
'1
."..'
.~ I
. J
1
,)
" J
'--]
.-.-
Le
'j Synchro Report .
"j
Page 6
WSBASS-L300
~
B.2 - 2002 AUAR Analysis (Option A)
u__._..__. ....... '1....."-''-'0.-. 952 238 1671 P.02/11
~
I
-:-~ i
BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC.
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS AND. PLANNERS
10417 exCEI..SIOR BOULEVARD, SUITE TWO I HOPKlNS. MN 55343/ (952) 238-1667/ FAX (952) 238-1671
1
I
i
November 19,2001 Refer to File: 01-57 i
~~~~J[]JL[jlti1J J
MEMORANDUM ,
fI 'l' I' l >. I J '.
"f Uf APR - 8 2002 l!Lji;
TO: Vernon Swing, RLK Kuusisto, Ltd. " 1.-____~J'-. ,I . ,
p_r~~ 1"r]p.:~ tV:::\. tl!!r~)~t ~Y~jr" ~ : /J
",..,..fI'..,_~ t..~" ..,.:.. al/.,,,.~'J~\.~ 'H';V. II
FROM: Edward F. Terhaar ~'~"~""""""~>""'" ,....,..".,~.. ......~..,=~..~. .,.~~.._=<.=~_J
RE: Traffic Study ResultsJor the Valley Green Corporate Center
PURPOSE
This memorandum presents our traffic study results for the Valley Green Corporate
Center in Shakopee, MN. The main purpose of our work was to review and modify .
previously prepared traffic forecasts to account for changes in the proposed development
plan. We then used these forecasted volumes to analyze the expected intersection
operations in the year 2017 on the surrounding roadway system. .
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Traffic volume forecasts prepared by SRF Consulting Group, Inc. were used as the
starting point for development of the modified traffic volume forecasts. These volumes
were presented in a memorandum dated October 22. 1999. that was included in the Draft
AU AR document dated March 17, 2000. We also used trip generation estimates for the
VaIley.Green Corporate Center presented by SRF Consulting Group, Inc. dated June 8,
1999.
PROPOSED DEVELOP.MENT
The current development plan consists of the land uses and sizes shown in Table 1. .' '~
These land uses and sizes were used. to estimate the traffic volumes presented in this
report.
.=:::'::j
~:. '..:j
.1 '1UV- .l :J- C::~~ J. .lb.c!.';J BeNSHOOF & ASSOC. 952 238 1671 P.03/11
' \
J Mr. Vemon Swing ~2~ November 19, 2001
.
t'l
.j Table 1
PronlWJ>il Land Uses
I Land Use Size Units
CondominiumlTownhouse 254 Dwelling Units
~'\ Bank 3 Drive In Windows
i I Gas 12 Vehicle Fueling Positions
".::
Home Improvement 114 840 Square Feet
''''1 ~.
, i Hotel 120 Rooms
,:1 Office 80,000 Square Feet
Office/Showroom 95,000 Square Feet
. i Office/Showroom 96,000 Square Feet
Office/Showroom 152.000 Square Feet
'j Office/Showroom 109,200 Square Feet
. .
,~. " Office/Showroom 84,000 Square Feet
(.j Office/Showroom 102,000 Square Feet
" Office/Showroom 140,000 Square Feet
t::.::'
Office/Showroom 86,000 Square Feet
'" '\ Office/Showroom 105,000 Square Feet
!
Office/ShowrO'om 131,000 Square Feet
~.. -j Office/ShowrooIn lO~.OOO Square Feet
':1 Office/Showroom 63,000 Square Feet
kr Office/Showroom 82,000 Square Feet
U Office/Showroom 112,000 Square Feet
,
:!_':,.:: Office/Showroom 90;000 Square Feet
,.
Office/Showroom 112,500 Square Feet
f" " Office 77,000 Square Feet
; 1
:.j ,
~j::1
r I
I
_ .: i
, ~~:l."'i
1':",')
''J
.'1
f" -\
'" ,
__. ._. .__0 _ 0 ._____ :J....>':::' ':::'..)0 .lb(l r'.1d4/11
, ,
Mr. Vernon Swing -3- November 19, 2001
.
I
i
TRAFFIC FORECASTS
Traffic forecasts were developed for the year 2017 with the proposed Valley Green
Corporate Center in place. The 2017 was chosen in ofder to be consistent with the traffic
forecasts presented in the ADAR.
Forecast Process
The following process was used to complete the 2017 traffic forecasts.
1. Collect 2017 a.m. and p.m. peak hour turn movements forecasts from the AUAR
document.
'..
2. Remove the trips generated by Valley Green Corporate Center based on the trip
generation estimates and trip distribution percentages developed by SRF Consulting"
Group, Inc. This step resulted 'in 2017 base volumes without Valley Green Corporate
Center.
3. Add trips to and from the current develo,pment plan to the base 2017 volumes from
step 2) to 'develop 2017 build volumes for each peak period.' This is done assuming
no capacity constraints at the key inters~ctions. !
Trip Generation "
The a.m. and p.m. peak hout and daily development trip generation projections have been
established using the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (lTE) Trip Generation, 6th
Edition. Table 2 contains the a.m. and p.m. peak hour and daily trip generation estimates
,for proposed land uses contained in the study 'area..
....~":..\
.~~~\
J~UV-L~-~~~l Ib;~~ HcN~HUU~ & ASSOC. 952 238 1671 P.05/11
, , ,
. ,I . , Mr. Vernon Swing -4- November 19, 2001
r'-'l
I
Table 2
Trip Generation Estimates
AM Peak Hour PM Peak .Bout" Dally
.q Land Use Size Units In Ou.t II) Out Trins
:] Condoroinium/Townhouiilc 254 DU 19 93 92 45 1.488
.., Bank 3 ,DrW '40 31 95 95 1234
Gas 12 VFP 61 6) 81 81 1 954
-~1 Home Imnrovement 114.g40 SF S)2 78 ]55 175 4.025
! Hotel 120 RQ'o:ms 4.1 26 39 34 988
Office 80000 SF 110 15 20 99 881
Office/Showroom 95.000 ,SF 102 15 20 94 874
Office/Showroom 96.000 SF 103 J 5 2 J 94 883
Office/Showroom 152.000 SF 163 24 33 149 1.398
Office/Showroom 109200 SF 117 17 23 107 1.004
"} Office/Showroom 84.000 SF 90 13 18 83 772
> Office/Showroom J02000 SF 109 16 22 100 938
Office/Showroom 140000 sP 150 22 ,30 137 1287
~.1. Office/Showroom 86.000 SF 92 13 18 8S 791
J Office/Showroom 105,000 SF 113 16 22 103 965
Office/Showroom 131.000 'SF 140 20' 28 129 1.205
, \ Office/Showroom q 03 000:" SF 110 16 22 J 0 I 947
i Office/Showroom 63.000 SF 68 10 13 62 579
' Office/Showroom 82000 SF 88 J3 18 81 754
Office/ShoWToom 112000 SF 120 17 24110 " 1.030
.1 Office/Showroom 90000 SF 96 14 19 88 828
t;j Office/Showroom] 12 500 SF , 121 ' . 17 24 II 0 I 034
'Office 77.000 'SF 38 5 21 9S 848
fJ' CROSS TOTAL TRIPS " 2.183 567 858 2.257 26.707
t 15 percent reduction for multi~putoose " 327 85 129 . 339 4006
.. NET TOTAL TRIPS 1.856 48Z 729 1.918 22.701
~ :,
. j As shown in the tablet the gross number of trips were reduced by 15 percent to account
i", for mu1ti~purpose trips within the development. This percentage is consistent with the
percentage used in the AUAR and is considered to be consetvatively low for these types
of uses.
For comparisonpurposest the trip generation estimates used in the AUAR are shown in
LJ Table 3.
! \
:1
; .J
) "..
~:~J
~J
1..--'
I
: I
, !
1._1
, . ' - . ~..J'- ""-..JLJ ..LUI.L I . t:JO/ J..L
, .
Mr. Vernon Swing -5- November 19. 2001
.
-.oj
I
Table 3
Trip Generation Estimates Developed for the I
I
Valley Green COrPorate Center ADAR
, AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily
Land Use Size Units In Out In Out Trios ...:i
Bid!! Mats & Lumber 70 000 SF 124 61 13.5 153 2506
Conv. Store wi Gas 5.000 SF 114 114 1;2 152 4235
Sit Down Restaurant 5000 SF ,24 22 33 21 647
Hotel 12S Roo~ 33 21 ~,2 28 1035
Fast~food Restaurant 5,000 SF 127 122 87 80 2482
General Retail 40.000 SF S6 36 165 179 3776
Office 850.000 SF 904 ]24 175 920 6871 ,
';
Office 250.000, SF 341 46 61 316 2682
OfficeJWarehouse 800.000 SF 524 91 131 501 2259
OfficeJWarehouse 100,000 SF 109 20 24 84 1282
OfficeIW arehouse 100.000 SF 109 20 24 84 1282
OfficelW arehouse 175.000 SF 166 29 36 135 2235
OfficelW arehouse 300.000 SF 249 44 58 214 3835
Office/Warehouse 17.5 000 SF 166 29 36 135 2235
GROSS TOTAL TRIPS 3.046 780 1.178 3.002 37365
15 oercent reduction for multi-nUrtlose 457 117 172 450 5.605
NET TOTAL TRIPS 2.S89 663 976 2.552 31.760
A comparison of the two tables reveals that the current proposed development results in ,
fewer generated trips:
Trip Distribution
The trip distribution percentages developed by SRF Consulting Group, Inc. were used to
remove the previous trip generation estimates and to add the current trip generation
numbers. The trip generation percentages are as follows:
. 35 percent to/from the east on T.H. 169
. 18 percent to/from the east on County Road 16
. 12 percent to/from the south on CSAH 83
. 10 percent to/from the west on the future 17th Avenue
. 1 0 percent to/from the west on T .H. 169
. 5 percent to/from the west on County Road 16
. 10 percent to/from the north on CSAH 83 J
A difference in assigning the development trips occurred due to the current assumption
that the development access on County Road 16 east'ofCSAH 83 will bea right inlright
out only access. ,It appears that the original forecasts assumed a full access intersection
along this section of roadway.
. I :'-1 V .L oJ C-t:..J~.L .l.O'-.Jt:.J Ot:I'i::lMUUt- 0. H~~UL . 952 238 1671 P.07/11
.
i
I Mr. Vernon Swing -6- November 19, 200 1
.
Traffic Volumes
, The resultant traffic volume forecasts are shown in Table 3.
j Table 3
Year 2017 Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour Volumes
AM PEAK HOUR obit nbth nbrt sblt sbth sbrt eblt ebth ebrt wblt wbth wbrt
CSAH 83/12tll Avenue 380 562 140 80 467 20 30 10 40 100 10 20
'1
\ CSAH 83IWestbound ramp _92 882 , Il8. na , 547 90 na na na. 1093 0 130
CSAH 83/Eastbound ramn na 734 1087, 100 1550 na 240 0 257 na na na
CSAH 83/CSAH 16 140 1270 409 1021 696 90 240 93 90 140 24 199
,.
~. '-,
, I CSAH 8.3/17th Ave. (future) 70 U42 SO 334 250 228 706 100 110 59 104 330
" .I
o'J
PM p:E;AK HOUR nblt nbtb nbrt .blt sbth sbrt eblt ebth ebrt wblt wbtb wbrt
f] CSAH 83/121b Avenue 160 467 130 60 S:9S 20 40 10 220 Z60 10 60
---.'.
f.
1:...::.
CSAH 831W estbouild ramp 287 627 na na 1015 220 na ns na 1274 ' 0 200
,.
I
I CSAH83/Eastbound ramp 290 1989 60
" na 844 1348 na ' 0 135 na na oa
CSAH 83/CSAH 16 6Z 996 160 401 1500 210 150 36 170 115 96 503
:vJ
I.8J CSAH 83/17th Ave. (future) 130 747 SO 703 1085 496 375 60 90 145 271 286
U
..
n
J
, ,
j
;
m
't.~i
! .1
.J......f- '-....JU ..LUll. r .I::.IO/.L.L
. .
Mr. Vernon Swing -7- November 19, 2001
.
~---l
I
1
!
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
The five analysis intersections were analyzed using the Synchro computer software. We
attempted to use the same signal timing and phasing as presented in the AUAR analysis.
The traffic volumes were adjusted according to our new forecasts. The detailed results of ,
our analysis are shown in Table 4. "
i )
Table 4
Year 2017 Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour Level of Service Results
with 150 Second Cycle Leng1 hs
AM PEAK HOUR nbit nbth nbrt sblt sbth sbrt eblt ebth Ebrt wblt wbth wbrt Overall I
iflteraection
CSAH 83/Uto A.venue D A A E B A E A A E E A C ..
CSAH 83/Westbound ..am)) .s C na pa. C A na na na D D B C ,
"
CSAH 83/Eastbound l'amo na A A..". E A na E E D na na na B I"
..
CSAH 83/CSAH 16 E C B E A A F E A E E C D "
CSAH 83/1 7th Ave. (ruture) E C A E B A F E A D E D Jj
PM PEAK HOUR ,wbrt' , i
nblt nbth nbrt sblt sbth sbrt ,chit ebtb cbrt wblt wbth Overall '_ i
intersection
.
I,
CSAH 83/1tD Avenue E A A E B A D A A E E A c <I
";;J
CSAH 83/Westbound ramn E' C nn na D B na na na D .D A D
j
I
CSAH 83IEastbound ramn na A A E A na E E, E na na na A i
j .",
, I
CSAH 83/CSAH 16 E. B A E A A, F E B E E D C ,
I
CSAH 83/17th Ave. (future) E C A F C A D D B D E C D I
For comparison purposes, the level of service results from the AUAR are stlOwnin Table
S. In general, the level of service results for the current proposal are slightly better than
those presented in the AUAR. The CSAH 83/CSAH 16 intersection improves the most,
especially during the p.m. peak hour.
I t_v ....; C-f..If..I..... ..LU.o...,.JU DCI ~;:Inuur 6< H::l::lU\... . '::J::.~ 238 1671 P.0'3/11
Mr. Vernon Swing -8- November 19, 2001
,
i
Table 5
I Year 2017 Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour Level of Service Results as
Presented in the AUAR
~~AM PEAK HOUR nblt nbtb nbrt sblt sbth sbrt eblt ebth ebrt wblt wbth wbrt Overall
:,1 intersection
i )CSAlI83/12In Avenue 0 A A ,E f3 B E E C E E A C
""CSAH 83/Wcstbound ramD E D na oa 0 C na na na D B B D
i
I
ICSAH 83/Eastbound ramn na A A E B na E E D na na na B'
I '
CSAH 83/CSA1l16 F 0 B E B B F E 0 E E C D
: -: ~
-.:. ,
CSAII 83/17th Ave. (future) E D C E B A D D D D E D D
"1
",,: fM PEAK HOUR obit nbtb' nbrt sbIt IIbth sbrt chIt ebth ebrt wblt wbth wbrt Overall
I intersection
r tSAR 83/12th Avenue, E B B E B B D 0 D E E A C
CSAH 83IWestbound ramu E C na na D 0 na na na D D C D
J ' ,
,
,CSAH 83lEastbound ramn na B B E A na E E D na nn na B
"
"i:SAH 83/CSAH 16 ' F D A E F B F E C D C " 'E E
~:j , .. , ,
'~SAH 83/17th Ave. ((uture) E C 13 E a B D D D D E ",0" C
U The level of service results shownin Table 4 assume a'150 second cycle length for all the
.., .
"
intersections in the corridor.' Fo~ comparison purposes, a cycle of 120 seconds was also
q analyzed for all of the intersections. Overall, the 120 second cycle length resulted in
better level of service results and shorter queue lengths. Therefore, we recommend the
~.. .} consideration of cycle lengths shorter th..an 150 seconds for this corridor. We suggest that
'as volumes increase. the corridor be analyzed to detennine the best overall cycle length
and signal timing settings. A summary of the level of service results with the 120 second
, cycle length is shown in Table 6.
i:J
~:-:.-'
Ii,,'
{ I,
I
f:':~
:'-.1
; :.:~
LJ
~--.'
--" .-. .--. ..... . .----- ;:).)<::. <::'')b lb(l t-' . H:J/ 11
, ' ~
.
.
Mr. Vernon Swing -9~ November 19. 2001
.
Table 6
Year 2017 Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour Level of Service Results with
,,120 Sec,ond,CvCle Lemrtbs )
AM PEAK HOUR nblt nbth nbrt sblt sbth sbrt eblt ebth ebrt wblt wbth - \
wbrt Overall I
, intersectloIl, .
CSAH 83IlZtb Avenue D l3 A D A A D D A D D A C >:/
..1
.:':-:1
CSAH 83/We!ltbound ramn E B oa na C A oa na Na C C B C
CSAH 83/Eastbound ramp B A D A D D D B >;
na na na na on ,.1
CSAH 83/CSAH 16 D D B E B A E D A D D B D
CSAH 83117th Ave. (future) D C A D B A C C A C D C c 'r!
I
PM PEAK HOUR obIt nbtb nbrt sblt sbth sbrt eblt ebth ebrt wblt wbth wbrt wbrt .',.
CSAH 83/1211\ Avenue D A A' D B, A D A B D D A C
CSAH 83/We$tbouud rarop D C on na D A oa na na D D A C ,';
CSAH 83/Eastbound ramn us A A D A oa D D D nn oa na A J
CSAH 83/CSAH 16 E B A D A A D D D D D C C I
CSAH 83/17th Ave. (future) D C A D B A D 0 B D C D C 0:
,L:J
,>.
..~v "'J <-<"><">.1. ...U......1. Oc.I'I;:;lnuur 6< H::l::lU~. '::l::>~ ~~8 1571 P.11/11
'..
.' t.. ..
i <
I Mr. Vernon Swing -10- November 19,2001
'-]
"
,\ CONCLUSIONS
I . The current proposal for Valley Green Corporate Center is estimated to
' i generate net totals of 2,338 a.m. peak hour trips, 2,647 p.rn. peak. hour trips,
and 22,701 daily trips. All of these totals are less than the trip generation
JJ estimates used in the AUAR analysis.
· Using the updated 2017 traffic volumes results in slightly hnproved
l intersection operations assuming the same signal timing and phasing used in
! the AUAR analysis. This analysis assumed a 150 second cycle length for all
intersections.
· Using a 120 second cycle length results in improved level of service an
,- 1 queuing results for the corridor. We recommend the consideration of cycle
J' lengths shorter than 150 seconds for this corridor. We suggest that as volumes
.. . increase, the corridor be analyzed to determine the best overall cycle length
and signal timing settings.
B,.
":":
i.:;~, '
'J
,0\
~..,
.'
"
fJ.'
Ii '
:'1
, j
." :- .~
I
, ;
,(
'n
{:J
,~ I
" 1
;: J
TOTAL P. 11
.._v '-'... _............. ......... v.; UL-I '-'1 IUUI Oc n.....-.JwO'-. ::l;')~ ~;,)o .Lor.L r.IOC:/"):)
.
, BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC.
"j
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS .oj
i
I
10417 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD, SUITE TWO I HOPKlNS, MN 5S343/(952) 238-1667/ PAX (952) 238-1671
i
November l~. 2001 Refer to File: 01-57
MEMORANDUM
'TO: Vernon Swing.'RLK Kuusisto~ Ltd.
FROM: Edward F. Terhaar f(.r"'
RE: Traffic Study Results for the Valley Green Corporate Center
PURPOSE
This memorandum presents our traffic study results for the Valley Green Corporate i
i
Center in Shakopee, MN. The main purpose of our work was to review and modify
previously prepared traffic forecasts to account for changes in the proposed development
plan; We then used these forecasted volumes to analyze the expected intersection
operations in the year 2017 on the surrounding roadway system.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Traffic volume forecasts prepared by SRF Consulting Group, mc. were used as the
starting point for develbpmentofthe modified traffic volume forecasts. These volumes
were presented in a memorandum dated October 22,1999, that was included in the Draft
AUAR document dated March 17, 2000. We also used trip generation estimates for the
Valley Green Corporate Center presented by SRF Consulting Group. Inc. dated June 8,
1999.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The current development plan consists of the land uses and sizes shown in Table 1.
These land uses and sizes were used to estimate tbe traffic volumes presented in this
report.
NUV-~l-~~~l l~:~~ BENSHOOF & ASSOC. 952'238 1671 P.03/35
. Mr. Vernon Swing -2- November 1,2001
Table 1
ProDosed Land Uses
Land Use Size Units
CondominiumITownhouse 254 Dwelling Units
~-j Bank 3 Drive In Windows
; Gas 12 Vehicle Fueling Positions
Home Improvement 114,840 Square Feet
Hotel 120 Rooms
Office 80,000 Square Feet
Office/Showroom 95,000 Square Feet
Office/Showroom 96,000 Square Feet
'<1 Office/Showroom 152,000 Square Feet
, i Office/Showroom 109,200 Square Feet
"J Office/Showroom 84,000 Square Feet .
fl Office/Showroom 102,000 Square Feet
~j Office/Showroom 140,000 Square Feet
Office/Showroom 86,000 Square Feet
') Office/ShoWroom 105,000 Square Feet
, I Office/Showroom 131,000 Square Feet
',',',J Office/Showroom 103,000 $quare Feet
~d Office/Showroom ,63,000 Square Feet
, Office/Showroom 82,000 Square Feet
~"1' Office/Showroom 112,000 Square Feet
L Office/Showroom 90,000 Square Feet
'I Office/Sho'WI'oom 112,500 Square Feet
.:1 Office 77,000 Square Feet
TRAFFIC FORECASTS
i ,:1 Traffic forecasts were developed for the year 2017 with the proposed Valley Green
bJ Corporate Center in place. The 2017 was chosen in order to be consistent with the traffic
foreeasts presented in the AUAR
l
, i
Forec~st frocess
The following process was used to complete the 2017 traffic forecasts.
1. Collect 2017 a.m. and p.m. peak hour turn movements forecasts from the AUAR
~~1 document.
L:d
. - ---- -- -- -...... ,...... II,.,.},-" (,)( n-'~u,-. ::;:::><::: <:::..)l:;j Ib'(l l-'.td4/-5::'
,
, Mr. Vernon Swing -3- November 17 2001
I
i
2. Remove the trips generated by Valley Green Corporate Center based on the trip ,
generation estimates and trip distribution percentages developed by SRF Consulting
Group, Inc. This step resulted in 2017 base volumes without Valley Green Corporate
Center.
3. Add trips to and from the current deVelopment plan to the base 2017 volumes from ,
" ,
(
step 2) to develop 2017 build volumes for each peak period. This is done assuming
no capacity constraints at the key intersections. ':,1
Trip Generation ';-:1
The a.m. and p.rn, peak hour and daily development trip generation projections have been
established using the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation, dh
Edition. Table 2 contains the a.m. and p.m. peak hour and daily trip genera.tion estimates
for proposed land uses contained in the study area.
Table 2
Trip Generation Estimates
AM :Peak Hour PM: :Peak Hour Dally
Land Use Size Units lu Out rn Out Trios
CondominiumtTownhouse 254 DU 19 ' 93 92 45 1.4&8
Bank 3 DIW 40 31 9$ 95 1,234
Gas 12 VFP 61 61 81 81 1.954
Home lmutovement 114 840 SF 92 78 IS' 175 4025
Hotel 120 Rooms 41 26 39 34 988
Office 80.000 SF 110 15 20 99 881 ..
Office/Showroom 9S,OOO SF 102 IS 20 94 874
OfficelSho'WfOotn 96.000 SF 103 15 21 94 883
Office/Showroom 1~2,ooo SF 163 24 33 149 1398
Office/Showroom 109.200 SF 117 17 23 107 1004
Office/Showroom 84.000 SF 90 13 18 83 772
, Office/Showroom 102 000 SF 109 16 22 100 938
Office/Showroom 140.000 SF 150 22 30 137 1.287
Office/Showroom 86.000 SF 92 13 18 85 791
Office/Showroom 105 000 SF 113 16 22 103 %5
Offic:e/Sho'MOOm 131.000 SF 140 20 28 129 1.205
Office/Showroom 103 000 SF no 16 22 101 947
Office/Showroom 63.000 SF 68 10 13 6Z 579
Office/Showroom 82 000 SF 88 1:3 18 81 754
Office/Showroom 112.000 SF 120 17 24 110 1030
Office/Showroom 90 000 SF 96 14 19 88 828
Office/Showroom 112.S00 SF 121 17 24- 110 1.034
Office 77.000 SF 38 S 21 95 848
GROSS TOTAL TRIPS 2.183 Sti7 8!8 2.257 26,707
15 >>en::ent reduction for multi..pWlJOse 327 8S 129 339 4.006
NET TOTAL TRIPS I 1.856 482 729 1.918 22.701
,.
NUV-k11-~k1k11 111:::''::1 BENSHOOF & ASSOC. 952 238 1671 P.05/35
Mr. Vernon Swing -4- November 1, 2001
"'1
1
Trip Distribution
The trip distribution percentages developed by SRF Consulting Group, Inc. were used to
remove the previous trip generation estimates and to add the current trip generation
:,) numbers. The trip generation percentages are as follows:
J
. 35 percent to/from the east on T.R 169
. 18 percent to/from the east on County Road 16
l
, . 12 percent to/from the south on CSAH 83
. 10 percent to/from the west on the future 171h Avenue
. 10 percent to/from the west on T.R. 169
. 5 percent to/from the west on County Road 16
. '10 percent to/from the north on CSAH 83
,
v ~, A difference in assigning the development trips occurred due to the current assumption
t! that the development access on County Road ,16 east of CSAH 83 will be a right inlright
out only access. It appears that the original forecasts assumed a full access intersection at
this location,
, i Traffic Volumes
I
"'J The resultant traffic volume forecasts are shown in Table 3.
L!' Table 3
rl Year 2017 Weekday AX and P.M. Peak Hour Volumes
AM:PEAKHOlJR obIt nbdl hbrt sblt .bth .brt eblt ebtb ebrt wblt wbth wbrt
1. CSAH 83/12110 Avenue 380 562 140 80 467 20 30 10 40 100 10 20
! of CSAH 83IWestbound raDIO 92 ,882 na na S47 90 M na na 1093 ' 0 130
CSAH 83/Eastbound,ramn na. 734 10g1 100 1550 na 240 0 251 DR DR na
CSAJI 83/CSAH 16, 140 1210 409 1021 696 90 240 93 90 140 24 199
CSAH 83/17th Aye. (Itlture) 70 1142 50 334 250 228 706 100 110 59 104 330
PM PEAK HOUR obit Dbth nbrt .blt .bth abrt ~blt ebth ebrt wblt wbtb wbrt
CSAH 83/11111 Avenue 160 467 130 60 59' 20 40 10 220 260 10 60
CSAH83~edboundramD 2.87 627 na DR 1015 220 na na na 1274 0 200
CSAlI 83/Eastbound l'amn na 844 1348 290 1989 na 60 0 135 ala na na.
CSAH 83/CSAH 16 62 996 160 401 IS00 210 1$0 36 170 115 96 503
;:;...,.,;.~
:eej CSAH 83/17tb Ave. (future) 130 747 50 703 108S 496 375 60 90 14:5 271 286
. 4
,,-.J
:. j
t "_V ~.. '-(.JIt.J.. .L.L-t:.,n:.J DCI'1.:;)nUUr 6< H;:l;:lU'-. ':i:::'~ ~.sCl lb','1 P.05/35
Mr. Vernon Swing i
-5- November 1, 2001 .I
-1
I
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS i
The five analysis intersections were analyzed using the Synchro computer software. We [
I
attempted to use the same signal timing and phasing as presented in the AUAR analysis. i
The traffic volumes were adjusted according to our new forecasts. Overall) the !
intersections operate in a very similar manner to the analysis presented in the AUAR, \
The detailed results of our analysis are shown in Table 4.
i
Table 4 i
Year 2017 Weekdav A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour Level of Service Results
AM PEAK HOUR nbli nbth nbrt .blt Ibth .brt eblt ebtb Ebrt wblt wbth wbrt Overall
iutersctti, i
CSAH 83/12Ul Avenue D A A E B A E A A E E A C J
CSAH 83/Westbound ramn , E C na na C A na na na D D :B C
CSAH 83/Ea.stbound ranto na A A E A na E E D na na na B
CSAH 83/CSAH 16 E C B E A A F E A E E C D ,
I
. ~
CSAB 83/17th Ave. (future) E C A E B A "f! E A D E D D
,!
PM PEAK HOUR nblt nbth nbrt sblt .sbth f1brt eblt ebth Ebrt wblt wbth wbrt wbrt i
-
CSAH 83/12U1 Avenue E A A E B A D A A B E A C -;:,;1
CSAlI831Westbound ran'Jp E C na na D B na na na D D A D ''''0
CSAH 83/Eastbound ramn na A A E A na E E E Da- na na A ~
i
CSAH 831CSAH 16 E B A E A A F E B B E D C
CSAIl83/17th Ave. (future) E C A F C A D D B D E C D
The level of service results shown in Table 4 assume a 150 second cycle length for all the
intersections in the corridor, For comparison purposes, a cycle of 120 seconds was also
analyzed for all of the intersections. Overall, the 120 second cycle length resulted in
better level of service results and shorter queue lengths. Therefore, we recommend the ,i
consideration of cycle lengths shorter than 150 seconds fOT this corridor. We suggest that ..,
:)
as volumes increase, the corridor be analyzed to determine the best overall cycle length
and signal timing settings. A summary of the .level of service results with the 120 second
cycle length is shown in Table S. '
.'
NOlJ-01-2001 11:00 BENSHOOF & ASSOC. 952 238 1671 P.l2J7/35
Mr. Vernon Swing ..(i. November 1, 2001
'!
;
Table 5
\' ear 2017 Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour Level of Service Results with
, 120 Second ( vcle Leneths
,
AMPEAKBOUR nblt ..bib nbrt .blt Ibth .brt eblt ebth ~brt wblt wbtb wbri Overall
. j intersection
" CSAH 83/12Pl Avenue 0 B A 0 A A 0 D A D 0 A C
CSAH 83/WeBtbound ramn E B DR IJ3 C A DR na Na C C B C
C-'i
\ CSA.'B: 8JlEastbound ramD na B A 1) A DR D D D na na na B
CSAll 8J/CSAH 16 D D B E B\ A E D A D D B D
i j
:__,1 CSAH 83117th Ave. (future)
D C A D :a A C c A C D C C
;:-] PMPtA1{HOUR nblt nbth ubrt sblt abtb .brt eblt ebth ebrt wblt wbth wbrt wbrt
tl._"'
CSAH 83/12" Avenue D A A' P B A D. A B D D A C
']
f:
t~.. CSAH 83/Westbound ramn D C na na D A na na na D D A C
1"1 CSAH 83/Eutbounrl ramn, na. A A D A na D D D na na na A
..:',\
, \
,,) CSAH 831CSAH 16 E B A D A A D, 1> D D D C C
~ CSAa: 83/17tb Ave. (future) D C A D B A D D B D C 0 C
U CONCLUSIONS
,~.:
. The current proposal for Valley Green Corporate Center is estimated to
"1
-:": ": generate net totals of2,338 a.m. peak: hour trips, 2,647 p.m. peak hour trips,
, c.:} and 22,70 I daily trips. All of these totals are less than the trip generation
estimates used in the A.UAR analysis.
. Using the updated 2017 traffic volumes results in similar intersection
operations assuming the same signal timing and phasing used in the AUAR
analysis. This analysis assumed a 150 second cycle length for all
intersections.
~j . Using a 120 second cycle length results in improved level of service an
" .. queuing results for the corridor. We recommend the consideration of cycle
lengths shorter than 150 seconds forthis corridor. We suggest that as volumes
increase, the corridor be analyzed to determine the best overall cycle length
and signal timing settings.
L"~-"
",,:J
t;::J
~: . 'j
{:,.;;.J
""
l'iUV-IO.I. -0:::::1010.1. .1..1. . 1010 ~cN~HUUr & H~~U~. ';:I~:d:d';sC:l 1E:>,!, 1 1-'. [cli::J/ 3::'
.. .
L:\DATA\1PROffiCl\O 157\Ana1vsis\Svnchro\AMr 2017Post-Build.sv6 10/24/200 1
Arterial L.evel of Service: NB CSAH 83
Arterial Flow RUnning , signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial
Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time {$) (ml) S~ed LOS
EXISTING CSAH 1 G II 40 28.3 28,& 68.8 0.3 17.6 0
PROP.CSAH 16 II 40 33.0 33.3 66.3 0.3 18.1 0
TH 169 ES ON RAMPII 40 26.3 1.1 21.0 0.2 29.3 B
TH 169 WB OFF RAM" 40 17.4 21.6 39.0 0.2 14.Q E
12TH AVENUE II 40 16.2 6,0 21.2 0.1 22.4 c
Total n 119.2 91.1 210.3 1.1 19.1 b
Arterial Level of Service: sa CSAH 83
Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dlat Arterial Arterial
Cross street Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) (ml) Speed LOS
12TH AVENUE II 40 21.1 17.3 38.4 0.2 17.2 0
TH 169 WB ON RAMRI 40 26.7 28.7 63.4 0.2 16.3 E
TH 169 ES OFF RAMII 40 17.4 4.2 21.6 0.2 25.3 C
PROP. CSAH 18 .. 40 25.3 4.8 30.1 0.2 26.3 C
FUTURE 17TH AVENUE 40 33.0 13.2- 46.2 0.3 26.0 C I
n I
Total 123.6 86.2 189.1 1.1 21.5 0 ". ~ ,
Baseline Synchro 4 Report
BBNSHOOF-PX41 Page 1
NOV-01-2001 11:00 BENSHOOF & ASSOC. 952 238 1671 P.09/35
,
i
,:::/ 3: 12TH AVENUE & CSAH 83
L:\PATA\lPROJEC'I\Ol51\Analysis\Svnohro\AM 2017Post-Build.~6 10/24/200 1
Queuel
Lane,G(puD ill. m mm WfU.: WBT - ~ SB,L HI mm
Lane Configurations 0 <2 1 0 <2> 1 2> 1 2 1
,
Volume (vph) 30 10 40 100 10 380 562 80 487 20
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 44 43 0 142 413 763 87 508 22
,1 Turn Type Penn Pm+Ov Perm prot Prot Penn
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases -4 4 8 8
Detector Phases .. -4 5 8 8 5 2 1 a 6
Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Minimum Split (s) , 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 B.O 20.0 2Q.0
Total Split (5) 22.0 22.0 '53.0 22.0 22.0 53.0 108.0 20.0 75.0 75.0
i Total Split (%) 15% 15% 35% 15% 15% 35% 72% ,13% 50% 500",
I
" Yellow Time (8) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
~1 LeadlLag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag
i Lead.Lag OptimIze? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
....,::} , Recall Mode None None None None None None Coord None Coord Coord
r'1 Ad Effct Green (s) 12.8 55.4 12.8 38.6 112.9 12.3 - 86.6 86.6
~' ,
>,
" " Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.37 0.09 0.26 0.75 0.08 0.58 0.58
vie Ratio 0.20 0.07 0.94dl 0.91 0.29 0.60 0.25 0.02
Uniform Delay, d1 63.8 0.0 81.0 54.0 5.4 66.S 15.6 0.0
Percentile Delay 62.5 6.2 60.4 53.2 6.0 65.9 17.3 a.s
Percentlle LOS E A E 0 A E B A
Queue Length 50th (ft) 21 0 66' 394 103 84 124 0
'J Queue Length 95th (ft) 41 23 102 485 160 141 198 16
it.,', Link Length (ft) 1458 1112 617 881
..'....'.
~,(; 50th Up Block Time (%)
~1 95th Up Block TIme (%)
t Turn Bay Length (ft) ,
50th Bay Block ilme %
95th Bay Block Time %
'"J Queuing Penalty (veh)
, '
Cycle Length: 150
Actuated Cycle Length; 150
Offset; 53 (35%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, start of Green
Natural Cycla: 80
Control Type: Actuated~Coordlnated
Total L.ost Time: 8 .
Sum of Critical "'S, Ratios: 0.46
Intersection vIe Ratio: 0.49
Intersection Percentile Signal Delay: 26.1
Intersection percentile LOS:C
dl Defado Left Lane. Recode With 1 though lane as a left lane.
.;~3~
.,~', ."
!'; , ~
~,".j
Baseline Synchro4 Report
BBNSHOOF..Fx41 Page 1
:".,j
I"fUV t:JJ. .::.t:.J(J..L J.J.'~J. o~~~nuur ~ H~~u~. '::I:>~ ~..:SCl 15'(1 P. 10/35
6: SECRET ARIA T DRIVE & CSAH 83'
L:\PAT A\1PROJECI\O lS7\A:nal.Ysis\Synchro\AM 2017Post-Build.sv6 10/24/200 1
Queues
Lane Groul!
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)
Lane Group Flow (vph)
Turn Type ,
Protected Phases I,
PermItted Phases i
Detector Phases
Minimum Initial (5)
, Minimum Split (s)
Total Split (5)
Total SpIlt (%)
Yellow Time (s)
All-Red Time (5)
Lead/Lag"
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Recall Mode
Act Effct Green (s)
Actuated g/e Ratio
vIe Ratio
Unifonn Delay, d1
Percentile Delay
Percentile LOS i
Queue Length 50th (ft)
Queue Length 95th (ft)
LInk Length (ft)
50th Up Block Time (%)
95th Up Block Time (%)
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Cycle Length: 3
Actuated Cycle Length: 3
Offset 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2: and 6:, start of Green
Natural Cycle: 40
Control Type: Pretimed
Totall..ost Time: 0
, Sum of Critical vIs Ratios: 0.00
IntersectIon vie Ratio; 0.00
Intersection Percentile Signal DeJ~y: 0.0
IntersectIon Percentile LOS: A
,.. I
,"
,
Baseline Synchro 4 Report
1 Page 2
BENSHOOF-FX41
NOV-01~2001 11:01 BENSHOOF & ASSOC. 952 238 1671 P.11/35
;
I 8: TH 169 we ON RAMP & CSAH 83
,-, L:\DA T A\lPROJEC1\O 157\Analysis\Srnc:hro\AM 2017Post-Build.!!}'6 , 10/241200 1
Queues
Lane C3ro4,D. YiW. wm li.ID: m mu SBR
Lane configurations 2 1 2 2 2 1
Volume (vph) 1093 130 92 882 547 90
lane Group Flow (vph) 1188 141 100, 959 595 98
'Hi rum Type CustollCustom protPerm
. ,j Protected Phases 5 2 6
Permitted Phases 8 8 6
Detector Phases 8 8 5 2 6 6
i Minimum Initial (5) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 20.0 20.0
Total Split (s) 81.0 81,0 15.0 69.0 54.0 54.0
Total split (%) 54% 54% 10% 46% 36% 36%
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
, ] Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag
; i Lead..lagOptlmlze? ' . Yes Yes Yes
R.ecall Mode None None None Coord Coord Coord
'1 Act Effct Green (s)- 57.4 57.4 9.5 84.6 71.1 71.1
'j Actuated g/O Ratio 0.38 0,38 0.06 0.56 0.47 0.47
'-' vIe Ratio 0.90 0.22 0.46 0.48 0.35 0.12
Uniform Delay, d1 43.7 18.2 61.8 19.8 24.9 0.0
( Percentile Delay 43.1 16.8 72.5 21.6 26.1 5.0
"i Percentile LOS D Bee C A
Queue Length SOth (ft) 563 53 52 249 191 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 575 92 mS1 374 281 39
i.;:J link Length (ft) 720 1200'
,;", 50th Up Block Time (%)
95th Up Block Time (%)
< 1 Turn Bay Length (ft)
iV 50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block TIme %
~. ) Queuing Penalty <'Ie h)
, ,:/,
.: Cycle Length: 150
Actuated CycJeLenQth: 150
Offset: 135 (90%). Referenced to phase 2:NBTand 6:5BT, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Total Lost 11me: 8
Sum of Critical vIs Ratios: 0.62
Intersection vie Ratio: 0,65
, , Intersection Percentile Signal Delay: 31.8
.! Intersection Percentile LOS: C
; , m Volume for 95th percentile queue Is metered by upstream signal.
~~,;l
t:.f
Baseline Syncbro 4 Report
Page 3
BENSHOOF-FX41
l'iUV-~l.-'::::~~l. u.. ~l ~cNoHUU~ & H~~UL. 952 238 1671 P. 12/35
. 11: TH 169 EB ,OFF RAMP & CSAH 83 )
L:\DA T A \1PROJECl\O lS,7\AnalySis\Synchro\AM 2017Post-Buitd.sY6 10/24/200 1
q~eues i
. -
Lane Group gf!b 9B tlfU rnm m mu:
Lane Configurations 1 1 2 2 2 2
Volume (vpl\) 240 257 734 ,1087 100 1550 )
Lane Group Flow (vph) 281 279 798 1182 109 1685 (',~
Tum Type CustomCustom Perm Prot ,
Protected Phases 7 2 1 6 ,
i
Permitted Phases 7 4 2 ,)
Detector Phases 7 4 2 2 1 6
Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Minimum Spilt (5) 8.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 ' 8.0 20.0
Total Spilt (s) 33.0 33.0 105.0 105.0 12.0 98.0
Total Split (%) 22% 22% 70% 70% 8% 65%
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 ,
,;
All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 ,
Leael/Lag Lag Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes
Recall Mode None None Coord Coord None Coord
Act Effct Green (5) 25~7 25.7 104.5 104.5 1.8 116.3
Actuated gfC Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.10 0.70 0.05 0.78
vIe Ratio 0.86 0.88 0.32 0.51 0.61 0.61
Uniform Delay, d1 60.5 48.8 8.9 0.0 69.5 7.2
Percentile Delay 62.9 53.3 1.7 0.3 63.2 4.2
Percentile LOS E 0 A A E: A .1
Queue Length 50th (ft) 247 218 36 2 53 237
Queue length 95th eft) #367 #357 m33 0 m82 258
Link Length (ft) 1080 720
50th Up Block Time (%)
95th Up Block Time (%)
Tum Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Cycle Length: 150
Actuated Cycle Length; 150
Offset 3 (2%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Total Lost Time: 8
SLIm of Critical \its Ratios: 0.63
Intersection vIe Ratio: 0.66
Intersection Percentile Signal Delay: 10.9
Intersection Percentile LOS: B
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
. Queue shown Is maximum after two oycles.
m Volume for 95th percentile queue Is metered by upstream signal.
Baselfue Synchro 4 Report
BENSHOOF..FX41 Page 4
I~UV-~J. -':::~~J. .l.l'Ja.l Ot:.I'i::.t1UUr- 0. H::.::.U..... 'j~~ ~.jl:l lb'(l t-' . l.Y.j;;,
, 14: PROP. CSAH 16 & CSAH 8S
,
L:\DATA. \IPR01EC'I\O IS7\Analyais\Synchro\AM 2011Post-Build.sv6 ,10/24/2001
Queues
Lane C3roull m mr ~ ra!b mn ~ 1fi!b Nei 'tm,B !!!!!:: mn: UB
Lane Configurations 2 2 1 2, 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1
Volume (vph) 240 93 90 140 24 199 140 1270 409 1021 696 90
Lane Group Flow (vph) 261 101 98 152 26 216 152 1380 4451110 757 98
'} Turn Type Prot Pm+Ov prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov prot Prn+Ov
Protected Phases 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7
Permitted Phases - 4 8 2 e
Detector Phases 7 4 5 3 e 1 5 2 3 1 6 7
MInImum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Minimum Split (8) 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 a.o 8.0 20.0 '8.0
Total Spill' (s) 16.0 20.0 14.0 18.0 20.0 51.0 14.0 63.0 16.0 51.0 100.0 16.0
Total Spilt (%) 11% 13% 9% 11" 13% 34% 9% 42% 11% 34% 67% 11%
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (5) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 ' 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
I LeadlLag Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
J
(::j Recall Mode None None None None None None None Coord None None Coord None
, Act Effct Green (s) 15.7 9.6 23.3 11.0 8.8 58.2 9.8 66.4 81.S 47.0 103.7 123.4
'''1 Actuated g/t: Ratio 0.10 0.06 0.16 0.07 0.06 0.39 0.07 0.44 0.54 0.31 0.69 0.82
vie Ratio 0.72 0.45 0.30 0.60 0.13 0.20 0.68 0.88 0.49 1.03 0~31 0.07
"1:'.:<
Unifonn Delay, d1 .65.0 68.1 0.0 67.4 69.1 28.4 68.6 39.6 17.0 51.5 9.7 0.0
"'\ Percentile Delay 90.1 61.3 9.5 67.3 65.5 26.9 n.4 33.3 12.5 67.2 4.8 0.7
'\ Percentile LOS F E A E e C' E C B E A A
..J Queue Length 50th (ft) 133 51 0 75 12 71 76 477 173 ....590 111 5
Queue Length 95th (ft) #224 83 52 114 29 101 m103 m543 m219 #730 141 ' m11
'J . Unk Length (ft) 1636 1847 1681 1080
V...".
(~.~: 50th Up Block Time (%)
95th Up BloCk Time (%)
U Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
Iii> 95th Bay Block TIme %
n 'Queuing Penalty (veh)
. ."l
Cycle Length: 150
Actuated Cycle Length: 150
Offset: 132 (88%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 8:58T, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 140 .
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Total Lost Time: 12
Sum of Critical vis Ratios: 0.81
Intersection vIe Ratlo: 0.88
. ,", IntersectJon Percentile Signal Delay: 39.7
. ! Interse~ion Percentile lOS:.D
... Volume exceeds capacity. queue Is theoretically Infinite.
Queue'shown Is maximum after two cyctes.
,. 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown Is maximum after two cycles.
m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
-:::.-:..,
, :-:.~~
...,',.:.-!
:-:'"f
U
.., Baseline ' Synchro 4 Report
BENSHOOF..FX41 Page 5
:'._j
1 1\-1'V ~. C-c.J'C.J. .l...L.l:.J'::" DCI "'I..;Jnuur Oc H.:l.::JU,,-. ':;1::''::: ':::":'l:l 1b'(1 t-' . 14/ J~
17: FUTURE 17TH AVENUE & CSAH 83
L:\DAT A\lPROJECT\O IS7\Analysis\Synchro\AM 2017Post-Build.sv6 11/112001
Queues ,
Lane Group EBL EBT ~ WeL WIn waR. NBL NBT NBR m SBT ~
Lane Configurations 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 I
Volume (vph) 706 100 110 59 104 330 70 1142 50 334 250 228 "
,
Lane Group Flow (vph) 767 109 120 64 113 359 76 1241 54 363 212 248
Turn Type Pm+?t Pm+Ov Pm+pt Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov :\
Protected Phases 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7 i
\
Permitted, Phases 4 4 8 8 2 e I
Detector Phases 7 4 5 3 a 1 5 2 3 1 6 7
Minimum Initi~1 (5) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Minimum Split (5) 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20,0 8.0
Total Split (s) 21.0 33.0 10.0 9.0 21.0 46.0 10.0 62.0 9.0 46.0 98.0 21.0
Total Split (%) 14% 22% 7% 6% 14% 31% 7% 41% 6% 31% 55%. 14%
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 !
^I/4Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
LeadlLag Lead Lag Lead Lead ' Lag Lead Lead ' Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yas Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Recall Mode None None None None None None None Coord None None Coord None
Act Effol Green (5) 31.1 22.1 32.0 15,1 10.1 43.2 6.0 n.7 B6.7 29.2 101.0 12.2.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.15 0.21 .. 0.10 0.07. 0.29 0.04 0.52 0.58 0.19 0.67 0.81
vIe Ratio 1.35 0.21 0.28 0.23 0.48 0.71 0.55 0.68 0.06" 0.54 0.11 0.19
Uniform Delay, d1 57.4 56.3 0.0 49.0 67.5 47.2 70.7 26.7 3.7 54.4 8.7 0.0
Percentile Delay 126.7 55.9 1.5 48.4- 67.1 46.2 71.1 28.5 7.1 56.3 13.2 0.1
Percentile LOS F E A 0 E 0 e c A E 13 A
Queue Length 50th (ft) -504 50 0 26 57 303 38 462 6 178 56 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) #615 BO 53 46 90 381 67 629 31 212 82 1
Link Length (ft) 1440 1680 1383 1681
50th Up Block Time (%)
95th Up Block Time (%)
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Cycle Length: 150
Actuated Cycle Length: 150
Offset: 68 (45%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green
NaluralCyc;le: 90
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Total Lost Time: 8
Sum of critical vis Ratios: 0.79
Intersection v/c Ratio: 0.83
Intersection Percentile Signal Delay: 51.9
Intersection Percentile LOS: D
- Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically Infinite.
Queue shown Is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown Is maximum after two cycles.
.<
Basew Synchro 4, Report
BENSHOOF-FX41 Page 1
NUV-\d1-2001 11:02 BENSHOOF & ASSOC. 952 238 1671 P.15/35
;
1
j
"1 L:\DAT A\lPROJBC'I\O 1,7\Ana1ysis\Smc!u'o\PM 2017Post~Build.SYo 10/24/2001
, Arterial Level of Service: NB CSAH 83
I
Arterial Flow Running Signal travel Dist Arterial Arterial
Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time (8) (ml) Speed LOS
EXISTING CSAH 16 II 40 28.3 30.2 68.S 0.3 11.1 0
",/ PROP. CSAH 16 II 40 33.0 11.8 44.8 0.3 26.8 C
:j TH 169 EB ON RAMPII 40 26.3 5.4 30.7 0.2 26.8 c
TH 169 we OFF RAMIP 40 17.4 24.2 41.6 0.2 13.1 E
12TH AVENUE II 40 15.2 8.8 24.0 0.1 19.8 0
; Total II 119.2 80.4 199.6 1.1 20.1 0
,1
.
Arterlall.&vel of Service: SB CSAH 83
Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial
Cross street Class S'peed ' Time Dolay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS
:1 12TH AVENUE II 40 21.1 14.1 35.2 0.2 18.7 0
, } TH 169 we ON RAMRI 40 26.7 47.2 73.9 0.2 11.8 F
TH 169 EB OFF RAMM 40 17.4 0.8 18.2 0.2 30.0 B
'J PROP. CSAH 16 II 40 25.3 6.3 30.6 0.2 25.8 C
FUTURE 17TH AVENI1E 40 33.0 22.4 65.4 0.3 21.7 C
Total II 123.5 89.8 213.3 1.1 19.1 0
U
"1
.:.
',I
:;".:....
, ../
Ld
""...-:.:,,
, (i~1
U
Baselme Synchro 4 Report
BBNSHOOF.FX41 Page 1
- ,
I~UV-le:J.l- <:::~Jl~J.l J.J..lQ<::: l:ll:.I'l::>HUUr- lSc H::>::>Ul.... ';352 238 1671 P. 16/35
3: 12TH AVENUE & CSAH 83 ;
L:\DA T A\lPRomcno lS7\Analysis\Synchro\PM 2017Post-Build.SY6 10/24/2001 "'I
Queues I
Lan&. GfOun fm.b m DB WWa Wi! NBL wn: ~ m aB
Lane Configurations Q <2 1 0 <2> 1 2> 1 2 1
Volume (vph) 40 10 220 260 10 160 467 60 595 20 ,
Lane Group Flow (v ph) 0 54 239 0 359 174 649 65 647 22
Turn Type Perm Pm+Ov Perm prot prot Penn j
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 6 i
Detector Phases 4 4 5 8 8 5 2 1 6 6
Minimum InlUal (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
, Minimum Split (8) 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8~O 20.0 20.0 i
Total Split (s) 33.0 33.0 29.0 33.0 33.0 29.0 100.0 17.0 88.0 88.0
Total Split (%) 22% 22% 19% 22% 22% 19% 67% 11% 59% 59%
Yellow rime (s)' 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 I
All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
LeadlLag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimiz:e? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 'Yes
Recall Mode None None None None None None Coord None Coord Coord
Act Effct Green (5) 25.1 48.4 25.1 19.3 104.7 10.4 93.6 93.6
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.32 0.17 0.13 0.70 0.07 0.62 0.62
vIe Ratio 0.15 0.36 1.26dl 0.76 0.27 0.53 0.29 0.0.2 !
Uniform Delay, d1 53.3 0.7 57.5 63.1 8.0 68.7 13.0 0.0
Percentile Delay 51.8 3:9 57.2 62.5 8.8 67.0 14.1 5.0
Percentile LOS 0 A e e A E B A >:'!
Queue Length 50th (ft) 23 3 172 167 114 63 150 0 I
;
Queue length 95th (ft) 45 60 228 243 162 114 214 13
Link Length (ft) 1456 1712 617 887
50th Up Block Time (%)
95th Up Block Time {%)
Tum Bay Length eft)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Cycle Length: 150
Actuated Cycle Length: 150
Offset: 32 (.21%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and6:SBT, start of Green
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Act.uated-CoortJinated
Total lost Time: 12
Sum of Critical vis Ratios: 0.4.2
Intersection vie Ratio: 0.46
Intersection Percentile Signal Delay: 24.7
Intersection Percentile LOS: C
d( Defact.o Left Lane. Reoode with 1 though lane as a left lane.
~~
-
Baseline Synchto 4 Report
BENSHOOF-FX41 Page 1
l'lUV-~l-G~~l 11;~2 ~~N~HUUF & ASSOC. 952 238 1671 P.17/35
i 6: SECRETARIAT ORNE & CSAH 83
;':":-:1' L:\DAT A\lPROJBCI'\OlS7\AnalYSis\Synchro\PM 21l17Post-Build.sy6 10/24/2001
,
Queues
La,,~ ~rou"
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)
Lane Group Flow (vph)
0') Turn Type
:1
'",j Protected Phases
F'ennitted Phase~
"".~ Detector Phases
i Minimum Initial (s)
Minimum Split (s)
Total Split (s)
Total Split (%)
: .J Yellow Time (s)
AII~Redrime (s)
, 'I Lead/Lag
~j lead~lag Optimize?
Recall Mode
":'1 ' , Ad Effct Green (s)
1;;\ ' Actuated glC Ratio
vie Ratio
Uniform Delay, d1
!" -1 Percentile, Delay
, "
<( 'Percentile LOS
Queue'Length 50th (ft)
~ Queue Length 95th (ft.)
..,.,.' Unk Length (ft.)
:\.- 50th Up Block Time (%)
r] 95th Up BloekTime (%)
" ' Tom Bay Length (ft)
t 50th Bay Slack Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
'1 Queuing Penalty (veh)
, ,
'...1., Cycle Length: 3
Actuated Cycle Length: 3
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2: and 6:, Start of Green
Natural cycle: 40
Control Type: Pretimed
:..,.i Total Lost Time: 0
[J Sum of Critical vIs Ratios: 0.00
Intersection vIe Ratio: 0.00
Intersection Percentile Signal Delay: 0.0,
,i Intersection Percentile LOS: A
f~:-'J
[]
Baseline Synchro 4- Report
Page 2
BENSHOOF-FX41
,
"."
NUV-1d1-212101 11:1213 BENSHOOF & ASSOC. 952 238 1671 P.18/35
8: TH 169 we ON RAMP & CSAH 83
L:\DATA\lPROJEC1\0157\An.alysis\Svnc:hro\PM 2017Post-Build,sy6 ' 10/24/2001 I
I
Queues 'I
I
lane 9rouD WI.b WLm - NBT nI SBR
Lane Configurations 2 1 2 2 2 1 ,
i
Volume (vph) 1274 200 287 627 1015 220 I
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1385 217 312 682 1103 239
Turn Type customCustom Prot Penn
Protected Phases 3 5 2 6
Pennltted Phases 3 8 6
Detector Phases 3 8 5 2 6 6
Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Minimum Spilt (s) 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 ,
Total Split (s) 71.0 71.0 23.0 G8,0 56.0 56.0
Total split (%) 47% 41% 15% 45% 37% 37%
Yellow Time (s) 3.S 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 .. ~)
All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
leadl1..ag Lead L.ag Lag
Lead"Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes
Recall Mode None None None Coord Coord Coord
Act Effel Green (s) 64.3 . 64.3 17.6 71.8 55.2 56.2
Actuated g/e Ratio 0.43 0.43 0.12 0.52 0.37 0.37
Vie Ratio 0.94 0.29 0.78 0.37 0.83 0.34 i
Unifonn Pelay, d1 41.1 8.6 64.3 21.5 , 42.6 9.4
Percentile Oelay 43.5 8.9 60.9 24.3 47.2 11.3
Percentile LOS D A E C 0 B i
Queue Length 50th (ft) 640 40 162 223 538 4B
Queue Length 95th (ft) 749 96 214 264 #643 122
link Length (ft) 720 1200
50th Up Block Time (%)
95th Up Block Time (%)
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Btock Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Cycle Length: 150
Actuated Cycle Length: 150
Offset: 54 (36%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 8:S8T, start of Green
Natural Cyele: 90
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Total Lost Time: 12
Sum of Critical vIs Ratios: 0.81
Intersection vie Ratio: 0.88
Intersection Percentile Signal Delay: 38.7
Intersection Percentile LOS: 0
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cyoles.
"'"''OJ
..'--1
Baseline Synchro 4 Report
,.'
, BENSHOOF-FX41 Page 3
NOl)-01-2001 11:03 BENSHOOF & ASSOC. 952 238 1671 P.19/35
11: TH 169 EB OFF RAMP &CSAH 83
, ~.l L:\DAT A\lPMJEC'I\O lS7\Analysis\Synchro\PM 2017Post-Build.sv6 10/24/200 1
Queues
Lane Gro~.9. m EBR ID!I .wm SBL c9.I
Lane Conflgurations 1 1 2 2 2, 2
Volume (vph) 60 135 844 1348 290 1989
Lane Group Flow (vph) 65 147 917 1465 315 2162
.'1 Turn Type CustomCustom Penn Prot
~J Protected Phases 7 2 1 6
Pennitled Phases 7 4 2
Detector Phases 7 4 2 2 1 6
Minimum Initial (5) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Minimum SpIlt (s) 8.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 8;0 20.0
Total split (s) 20.0 20.0 108.0 108.0 22.0 114.0
Total Split (%) 13% 13% 72% 72% 15% 76%
Yellow TIme (5) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (8) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
1 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead
,I Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Ves Yes
LJ Recall Mode None None Coord Coord None Coord
f] Act Effct Green (s) 14.3 14.3 106.8 10e.8 17.0 127.7
Actuated gle Ratio 0.10 0.10 0.71 0.71 0.11 0.85
, \:....:~ vlc Ratio 0.39 0.81 0.36 0.65 0.81 0.72
Uniform Delay, d1 63.e- 50.9 8.3 3.2 65.0 ' 4.2
: i, Percentlle Oelay 63.4 57.1 5.3 1.1 75.8 0.8
Percentile LOS E E A A E A
Queue Length 50th (ft) 60 109 143 41 158 37
Queue Length 95th (ft) 111 #215 m148 mO m184 88
Unk Length (ft) 1080 720
50th Up Block Time r,6)
95th Up Block Time (%)
~ 1 Tum B~y Length (ft)
:':".
" 50th Bay Block Time %
f
95th Bay Block Time %
- ) Queuing Penalty (veh)
'.:. .\
Cycle Length: 150
Aduated Cycle Length: 150
Offset: 78 (52%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, start of Green
Natural Cycle: 70
Control Type: Actuated~Coordlnated
: .,j Total Lost Time: 8
ill Sum of Critical vIs Ratios: 0.69
Intersection vIe Ratio: 0.73
() Intersection Percentile Signal Delay: 8.8
:j Intersection Percentile LOS: A
\ ': t# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shoWn Is maximum after two cycles. '
m Volume for 95th percentile queue Is metered by upstream' signal.
t:i
~.' ..
U
Baseline Synchro 4 Report
BBNSHOOF-FX41 Page 4
I
. .-. -- ---. ..... '-#...... Ut-I '''-'1 IUWI Oc n-.J-.Ju,-_ ';:j:::>~ ~..)tl Ib'(l t-'.~Id/~:'
14: PROP. CSAH 16 & CSAH 83 ~
L:\DATA\lPROffiCT\O lS7\Ana1ysis\Synchro\PM 2017Post-Build.sy6 10/24/200 1
)
Queues
lane GrouD m .EiI ~ WaJ. WIn WB~ NiL NBT mm m!b m DB
Lane Configurations 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 I
I
Volume (vph) 150 36 170 115 96 503 62 996 160 401 1500 210 (
Lane Group Flow .(vph) 163 39 185 125 104 547 67 1083 174 436 1630 228
Tum Type Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pmi'Ov Prot ' Pm+Ov .}
Protected Phases 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7 ;
Pennitted Phases 4 8 2 6 ,,)
Detector Phases 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7
Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 "
Minimum Spilt (5) 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 ,20.0 8.0
Total Spilt (s) 11.0 34.0 12.0 35.0 56.0 35.0 12.0 46.0 35.0 , 35.0 69.0 11.0
Total Split (%) 7% 23% 8% 23% 39% 23% 8% 31% 23% 23% 46% 7%
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3;5 ~.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 ., j
All-Red Time (5) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Lead1Laa Lead Lao Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Leael
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes yes Yes Yes
Recall Mode None None None None None None None Coord None None Coord None
Act Effct Green (s) 7.1 7.0 17.7 12.2 10.2 40.0 7.5 91.1 107.2 25.8 109.3 120.3
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.05 0.05 0.12 0.08 0.07 0.27 0.05 0.61 0.71 0.17 0.73 0.60
vIe Ratio 1.02 0.24 0.57 0.45 0.43 0.73 0.39 0.50 0.15 0.74 0.63 0.18
Unifonn DelaYt d1 71.4 70.0 8.7 65.8 66.3 48.4 69.0 17.2 0.3 58.9 10.6 1.2
Percentile Delay 124.5 a8.6 13.0 66.6 68.4 48.4 a6,9 12.0 0.8 60.6 5.3 0.5
Percentile LOS F E B E E D E B A E A A
Queue Length 50th (ft) ..a6 20 23 62 52 275 35 144 4 202 169 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) #165 40 104 96 83 319 60 322 7 253 365 m11
Unk Length (ft) 1636 1647 1681 1080
50th Up Block Time (%)
95th Up Slock Time (%)
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th BayBlook Time %
95th Bay Bloek Time %
Queuing Penalty'(veh)
Cycle Length: 150
Actuated Cycfe length: 150
Offset: 9 (6%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:s6r, start of Green
Natural Cycle: 80
Control Type: Actuated~Coordinated.
Total Lost Time: 8
Sum of Crtttcal VIs Ratios: 0.64
Intersection vIe Ratio: 0.67
Intersection Percentile Signal Delay: 25.1
Intersection Percentile LOS: C
- Volume exceeds capaoity, queue is theoretically infinite.
Queue shown Is maximum after two oycles.
# 95th percenUle volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer,
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
m Volume for 95th percentile qUeue Is metered by upstream signal.
Baseline Synchro 4 Report
BENSHOOF-FX41 Page 5
NOV-01-2001 11:03 BENSHOOF & ASSOC. 952 238 1671 P.21/35
17: FUTURE 17TH AVENUE & CSAH 83
t: ': '~1 L:\DAT A\lPROJEC1\O 157\AnalY$is\Svnchro\PM 2017PoSl..Build.sy6 10/2412001
:'J
Queues
Lane Grvup ~ m EBR Wi1. ~ WBR m .wI! mm m UI aB
Lane Configurations 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2, 1
Volume (vph) 375 eo 90 145 271 286 130 747 50 703 1085 496
Lane Group Flow (vph) 408, 65 98 158 295 311 141 812 54 764 1179 539
Tum Type Pm+pt Pm+OvPm+pt Pm+Ov prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm'tOv
Protected Phases 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6
Detector PhaSes 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7
i Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ' 4.0 4.0 4.0
Minimum Spirt (5) 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 6.0
Total Split (s) 34.0 46.0 16.0 10.0 22.0 32.0 16.0 62.0 10.0 32.0 78.0 34.0
Total Split <%> 23% 31% 11% 7% 15% 21% 11% 41% 7% 21% 52% 23%
Yellow Time (5) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
AII..Red Time (5) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 '0.5
"] Lead/L.ag Lead Lag lead Lead Lag lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead
"
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Ves Ves Yes Ves Yes Yes Ves Yes Yes . Yes
Recall Mode None None None None None None None Coord None None Coord None
~] Act Effct Green (5) 38.5 28.4 42.3 25.4 16.5 48.5 10.8 68.1 83,6 28.1 85.4 110.7
!>>; Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 ,0.19 0.28 0.17 0.11 0.32 0.07 0.45 0.56 0.19 0.57 0.74
t..,~. . vIa Ratio 0.69 0.10 0.20 0.32 0.76 0.54 0.57 0.51 0.06 1.19 0.59 0.45
Unlfonn Oelay, d1 43.5 51.2 16.3 40.9 64.0 28.0 67,3 29.6 0.0 61.0 21.4 6.8
Percentlle Delay 45.6 45.9 15.1 42.3 64.7 28.8 67.3 30.2 5.1 133.8 22.4 a.3
" Percentile LOS D D B 0 E c E C A F C A
Queue Length 50th. (ft) 169 27 23 60 148 175 69 292, 0 ...468 390 206
Queue Length 95th (fl) 203 45 67 84 202 274 107 392 25 #594 493 242
Unk Length eft) 1440 1680 1383 1681
50th Up Block Time (%)
~] 95th Up Block Time (%)
t Tum Bay l.ength(tt)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
fj QueuIng Penalty (veh)
, ,
Cyete Length~ 1 SO
Actuated Cycle Length: 150
Offset: 98 (64%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 8:SBT, Start of Green
Natural cycle: 75
'I Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
I lotal Lost Time: 8
i(1 ~um of Critical vIs Ratios: 0.68
Intersection vlc Ratio: 0.72
-'I Intersection Percentile Signal Delay: 46.7
I
.- Intersection Percentile LOS: 0
". '
- Volume exceeds capacity, queue Is theoretically Infinite,
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
, 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown Is maxlmum after two cycles.
'~~q
..~ ~-
::,\
t..;:..J
Baseline Syncbro 4 Report
BBNSHOOP-F.X41 Page 6
........
"UV UJ.. C-UUJ. .1..1..tJ'-t c~~~nuur ~ H~~U~. ':::l:>~ ~.58 1671 P.22/35
;
" ,
L:\t)ATA\lPROJEC'I\OlS1\AnalySiS\S~hro\AM 2017Post-Build 120 eyc.sy6 10/24/200 1
Arteriallevel.of Seriie~: NB CSAH 83 ;
i
Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Di$t Arterial Arterial
Cross street Cla$s " Speed ' Time Delay Time (6) (ml) Sf?99d LOS i
EXISTING CSAH 16 II 40 28.3 27.2 65.5 0.3 18.0 0 j
i
PROP. CSAH 16 ,II 40 >33.0 51.4 84.4 0.3 14.2 E
TH 169 EB ON RAMP II 40 25.3 ' 13.1 38.4 0.2 20.8 0 i
TH 169 WB OFF RAMIP 40 17.4 16.6 34.0 0.2 16.0 E !
12TH AVENUE II 40 1S.2 6.1 21.3 0.1 22.3 C
Total II 119.2 114.4 233.6 1.1 11.2 0
I
\
)
Arterial Leyel of Service: sa CSAH 83
Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial
Cross street Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS ,.
12TH AVENUE II 40 Z1.1 16.1 37.2 0.2 17.1 0
'TH 168 WaON RAMRI 40 26.7 25.9 52.6 0.2 16.6 0
,.H 169 EB OFF RAMII 40 11.4 4.6 22.0 0.2 24.8 C
PROP. CSAH 16 II 40 25.3 10.3 35,6 0.2 22.2 C
FUTURE 17TH AVENIJE 40 33.0 13.2 46.2 0.3 26.0 C
Total II 123.5 70.1 193.6 1.1 21,.D 0
l'
:4~~1
,'.';
Baseline Synchro 4 Report
BENSHOOF-FX41 Page 1
NOlJ-01-2001 11:04 BENSHOOF & ASSOC. 952 238 1671 P.23/35
,-..:j
,I 3: 12THAVENUE & CSAH 83
,'.j ~:\DATA\lPROJECf\OlS7\Ana1vsis\Synchro\AM 2017Post-Build 17.0 cYQ.SY6 10/24/2001
, ,
Queues
Lane GrOUD m m eaR WIik ~ S ,NBT SBL mrr ~
LQne Configurations, 0 <2 ' 1 0 <2> 1" 2>, 1 2 1
Volume (vph) 30 10 40 100 10 380 562 80 467 20
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 44 43 0 142 413 763 87 508 22
Tum Type Penn Pm+Ov Perm Prot prot Penn
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 1 6
Pennitted Phases 4 4 8 6
Detector Phases 4' 4 5 8 8 5 2 1 6 6
Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 6.0 20.0 20.0
Total Spilt (5) 29.0 29.0 54.0 29.0 29.0 54.0 66.0 25.0 37.0 37.0
Total Split (%) 24% 24% 45%' 24% 24% 45% 55% 21% 31% 31%
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
"'.J LeadlLag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag
:1
,::J Lead-Lag optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes ."
Recall MOde None None None None None None Coord None Coord Coord
r] Act EffCt Green (s) 10.9 46.2 10.9 31.3 88.2 '11.0 65.8 65.8
, Actuated gle R.atio 0.09 0.39 0.09 0.26 0.74 0.09 0.55 0.55
(,."
~.~t, vlc Ratio 0.18 0.07 0~89d' 0.90 0.30 0.54 0.26 0.03
Untfonn Delay. d1 50.4 0.0 48.3 42.7 5.3 53.4 14.3 0.0
i Percentile Delay 49.2 4.9 45.8 41.9 6.1 51.3 16.1 7.0
Percentile LOS 0 A ,0 D A D B A
Queue Length 50th (fl.) 18 0 49 310 94 65 103 0
,] Queue Length 95th (ft.) 35 19 82 384 155 116 178 113
Link Length (ft) 1456 1712 617 887
tG" 50th Up Block Time (%)
'1 95th Up Block Time (%)
t
t Tum Bay Length, (ft)
t 50th Bay Block Time %
<'.J 95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
"')
'" \
Cycle Length: 120
Actuat6dCyele Length: 120
Offset: 18 (13%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 60 '
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
[J Total Lost Time: 8
sum of Critical vIs Ratfos: 0.46
Intersection vie Ratio: 0.49
, ,. Intersection Percentile Signal Delay: 21.6
, .
;'..1 Intersection Percentile LOS: C
dl Oefaoto Left Lane. Recode WIth 1 though lane as a left lane.
"< !
c.t.:\
r:~{
':,;,j
Baseline Synohro 4- Report
BENSHOOF-FX41 Page 1
l".: ;
I'WV U..L C-t:...IIC"J.1. .J..L.-t.J""'t DCI"i.::lnUUr 0. H.::l:::JUl-. 'j::>~ ~.:Si::l lb'(l t-'.24/S:.>
6: SECRETARIAT DRIVE & CSAH 83
L:\DATA\lPROJECT\0151\Analysis\Synohro\AM 2017Post.Build 120 ~c.sy6 101241200 1
~eues \
lane GroUD
Lane configurations
Volume (vph) ,I
Lane Group Flow (vph) ,i
Turn Type I
Protected Phases
Permitted Phases i
Detector Phases
Minimum Initial (5)
Minimum Spilt (5)
Total Split (s)
Total Spill (Ok)
Yellow Time (5) ,
AII..Red Tlma (s) :::J
Lead/Lag
Lead.Lag Optimize?
Recall Mode .' ~
Act Effct Green (5)
Actuated g/C Ratio
, vIe Ratio
Uniform Delay, d1
Percentile Delay
Percentile LOS
Queue Length 50th (ft)
Queue Length 95th (ft)
Link Length (ft)
50th Up Block rime (Ok)
95th Up Block Time (%)
Tum Bay L.ength (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Cycle Length: 3
Actuated Cycle Length: 3
Offset: 0' (0%). Referenced to phase 2: and 6:, Start of Green
, Natural Cycle: 40
Control Type: Pretimed
Total ,Lost Time: 0
Sum of Critical vis RaUos: 0.00
Intersection vIe Ratio: 0.00
Intersection PercenUle Signal Delay: 0.0
Intenlection Percentile LOS: A
, - .
Baseline Synchro 4 Report
lmNSHOOF-FX41 Page 2
NOV-01-2001 11:04 BENSHOOF & ASSOC. 952 238 1671 P.25/35
',' i 8: TH 169 we ON RAMP & CSAH 83
L:\DATA\lPROJECT\OlS7\Ana1vsis\Synchro\AM 2017Post-Build 120 c;vc.sy6 10/2412001
QueUBs
L.an,Orouo wm: ma HI&: m m !I!B
Lane Configurations 2 1 2 2 2 1
Volume (vph) 1093 130 92 882 547 90
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1188 141 100 959 595 98
- jl Turn Type CustorrCustom prot Perm
c" Protected Phases 5 2 6
Permitted Phases 8 8 6
, I Detector Phases 8 8 5 2 6 6
: Minimum Initial(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Milllmum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 20.0 20.0
Total Split (s) 63.0 63.0 17.0 57.0 40.0, 40.0
Total Split (%) 53% 53% 14% 48% 33% 33%
, , Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.S 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (5) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
, -j LeadlLag Lead Lag Lag
;0 jLead-Lag Optimize? " Yes Yes Yes ..
Recall Mode None None None Coord Coord Coord
q Act Effd Green (s) 47.9 47.9 8.9 64.1 51.2 51.2
:j Actuated g/C Ratio 0.40 0.40 0.07 0.53 0.43 0.43
. vIe Ratio 0.87 0.21 0.39 0.51 0.39 0.13
Uniform Delay. d1 33.1 13.1 53.0 17.8 23.7 0.0
'! Percentile Delay 32.5 11.7 63.0 16.6 25.9 5.5
, 1 Percentile LOS C B E B C A
Queue Length 50th (ft) 429 39 43 141 164 0
;"","1 Queue Length 95th (ft) 439 70 70, 314 257 39
;,~'" LInk Length (ft) 720 1200
\~C<
50th Up Block Time (%)
~ J' 95th Up Block Time C%)
I ' Turn Bay Length (ft)
t 50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
") Queuing Penally (veh)
:: "1
Cycle Length: 120
Actuated Cycle Length: 120
Offset: 77 (64%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:S8T, start of Green
Natural Cycle: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Total Lost TIme: 8
Sum of Critical vIs Ratios: 0.62
IntersectIon vie Ratio: 0.5e
, 1 rnterseetion Percentile Signal Oelay: 25.5
,. Intersection PercentIle LOS: C
t,,:q
;, 'i
i~J
Li Basd.inc Syncbro 4 Repon
'" Pa e3
~~~~1 g
, ,
. .......v '-'.I. '-~c...J~ ~.J..~...... DCI'I;:,nUUr ~ H:::J:::JUl... 952 238 1671 P.25/35
11: TH 169 EB OFF RAMP & CSAH 83 !
L:\DATA\1PROmC1\Ol~7\Analysis\S:rnchro\AM 2017Post-Build 120 cyc.sy~ 10/24/2001
Queuos
Lane qrouD 1mb E tiIll He mlb SBT
Lane Configurations 1 1 2 2 2" 2
Volume (vph) 240 257 734 1087 100 1550 "
,
lane Group Flow (vph) 261 279 798 1182 109 1685
Tqm Type custorrcustom Perm prot
Protected Phases 7 . 2 1 6
Permitted Phases 7 4 2
Detector Phases 7 4 2 2 1 6
Minimum Initial (5) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Minimum Split (s) 8.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0
Total Split (5) , 39.0 39.0 65.0 65.0 18.0 81.0
Total Split (%) 33% 33% 54% 54% 13% 68%
Yellow Time (5) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (5) 0.5 0,5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
LeadlLag Lead Lead Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes
Recall Mode None None Coord Coord None Coord
Act. Effct Green (5) 23.4- 23.4 72.8 72.6 12.0 88.6
Actuated g/C. Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.61 0.61 0.10 0.74
vIe Ratio 0.76 0.84 0.37 0.55 0.32 0.64
Unifonn Oelay. d1 45.6 41.1 12;1 0.0 50.2 7.8
Percentile Delay 44.6 40.3 13.1 0.8 37.2 4.6
PerCentile LOS 0 0 B A 0 A
Queue Length 50th (ft) 193 188 155 0 35 212
QI./eue Length 95th (ft) 261 264 238 34 m58 361
Link Length (ft)' 1080 720
50th Up Block Time (%)
95th Up Block Time (%)
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Cycle Length: 120
Actuated Cycle Length: 120
Offset: 92 (77%). Referenced to phase 2:NST and 6;S6T, start of Green
Natural Cyeie: 60
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Total Lost Time: 8
Sum of Critical vis Ratios: 0.64 "'J
Intef$ectlon vIe RatIo: 0.69
Intersection PercenUle Signal Delay: 10.7
Intersection Percentile LOS: B
m Volume for 95th percenUle queue is metered by upstream signal.
,!,
Baseline Synchro 4 Report
BENSHOOF-FX41 Page 4
NOV-01-'2001 11:05 BENSHOOF & ASSOC. 952 238 1671 P.27/35
14: PROP. CSAH 16 & CSAH 83
f"":..! L:\DATA\lPROJECI\OI,7\Analysis\Svnchro\AM 2017Post-Bulld 120 cyc.sy6 10/24/2001
Queues
Lane GlQ\I~ .Em. W _ WiL war WBR NBL f1mI ~ !lID: UI 1mB
Lane Configurations 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1
Volume (vph) 240 93 90 140 24 199 140 1270 409 1021 age 90
Lane Group Flow (vph) 261 101 98 152 26 216 152 1380 445 1110 757 98
.:.:) Tum Type Pro( Pm+Ov prot Pm+Ov prot Pm+Ov prot Pm+Ov
..J Protected Phases 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 (3 7
Pennitted Phases 4 8 2 6
Oetect9r Phases 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 8 7
Mlnim.um Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4,0 4.0 4.0 4,0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Minimum Split (5) 8.0 20.0 8.0 ' 8.0 20,0 8.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 8.0
Total Split (8) 13.0 21.0 :14.0 12.0 20.0 39.0 14.0 48.0 12.0 39.0 73.0 13.0
Total Split (%) 11% 18% 12% 10% 17% 33% 12% 40% 10% ' 33% 61% 11%
Yellow Time (5) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5. 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 .0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
'. :. ~ Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead lead Lag Lead Lead lag Lead Lead lag Lead
:> Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes ,~Yes Yes
,) Recall Mode None None None None None None None Min None None Min None
(] Act Effct Green (s) 12.9 8.5 21.8 7.9 7.5 45.0 9.2 44.0 55.9 35.0 69.B 66.6
Actuated gle Ratio 0.12 0.08 0.20 0.07 0.07 0.39 0.08 0.39 0.50 0.31 0.63 0.78
:,.. .~. vIe Ratio 0.66 0.37 0.25 Q.63 0.11 0.20 0.53 0.99 0.51 1.03 0.34 0.08
Uniform Oelay, d1 48.0 48.2 0.0 51.1 51.8 21.5 49.9 34.5 11.9 39.0 10.5 0.0
Percentile Delay 72.1 48.9 7.5 51.0 49.0 19.3 49.4 51.4 12.1 69.2 10.3 0.9
Percentile LOS E 0 A 0 0 B 0 0 B E B A
Queue Length 50th (ft) 97 36 0 55 9 51 54 508 131 "'439 128 0
Queue Length 95th (fi) #183 65 44 91 24 80 90 #697 230' #SSg' 174 11
IU Link length (ft) - 1636 1847 1681 ' 1080
50th Up Slack Time (%)
95th Up Block Time (%)
fl Turn Bay Length (fi)
t 50th Bay Block Time %
.,.'
95th Bay Block Time % I
t.'\ Queuing Penalty (veh)
',:,/
Cycle length: 120
Actuated Cycle length: 111.4
Natural Cycle: 140
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Total Lost Time: 12
Sum of Critical vis Ratios: 0.81
Intel$ectlon vIe Ratio: 0.90
Intersection Percentile Signal Delay: 43.0
, " Inten;ection Percentile LOS: 0
... Volume exceeds capacity, queue Is theoretically Infinite.
Queue shown Is maximum after two cycles,
# 95th percentile 'Volume e)(ceeds capacity, queue may be longer. '
Queue shown Is maxlmLlm after two cycles.
, (,,-:';'':1
,", ;':.~"'l
._..1
;:-':j
..~~.;'j
Baseline Synchro 4 Report
Page 5
BENSHOOF-FX41
"" J
I,UV C.J..L '::'~Q.L .L.L'~,,) ~cN~HUUr ~ H~~UC. 952 238 1671 P.28/35
17: FUTURE 17TH AVENUE & CSAH 83
L:\l)A T A\lPRom.c1\O lS7\Analygis\SYncbro\AM 2011Post..BuUd 120 cyc.sy6 1111/2001
Queues ~ r
L~O~ GrouD Em: ill EBR WBL WeT WID! m t:mI tm.R SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1
Volume (vph) 706 100 110 59 104 330 70 1142 50 334 250 228
Lane Group Flow (vph) 767 109 120 64 113 359 76 1241 54 363 272 248
Turn Type pm"'Pt Pm+OvPm+Pt Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov 1
Protected Phases 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 a 7 i
I
Pennitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6
Detector Phases 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7'
Minimum Initial (8) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ;
Minimum Split (s) 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 B.O j
Total Split (s) 25.0 37.0 10.0 8.0 20.0 21.0 10.0 54.0 8.0 21.0 65.0 25.0
Total Split (%) 21% 31% 8% 7% 17% 18% B% 45% 7% 18% 54% 21%
Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 \ '
All-Red Time (5) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Ye~~ Yes
Recall'Made' None None None None None None None Min None None Min None
Act Effct Green (s) 29.5 23.7 33.8 12.7 8.6 28.1 6.1 39.6 48.0 15.6 52.5 77.9
Actuated g/e Ratio 0.30 0.24 0.34 0.13 0.09 0.28 0.06 0.41 0.48 0.16 0.54 0.80
vIe Ratio 0.86 0.13 0.20 0.18 0.37 0.78 0.36 0.86 0.07 0.6S 0.14 0.19 ..
Uniform Delay. d1 30.7 29.8 0.0 26.5 44.6 32.4 46.4 26.2 0.2 39.5 12.0 0.0
Percentile Delay 32.3 32.8 5.2 28.7 47.2 34.2 51.1 27.2 4.3 42.4 13.2 0.5
Percentile LOS C C A C 0 C 0 C A 0 B A
Queue Length 50th (ft) 236 30 0 15 39 215 26 397 0 121 49 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) #344 57 41 33 72 #377 S4 508 18 186 75 13
Link Length (ft) 1440 1680 1383 1681
50th Up Block Time (%)
95th Up Block Time (%)
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Black Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Cycle Length: 120
Actuated Cycle Length: 97.8
Natural Cycle: 90
Control Type; Actuated-Uncoordinated
Total Lost Time: 8
Sum of Critical VIs Ratios: 0.76
Intersection vIe Ratio: 0.81
Intersection Percentile Signal Delay:'27.8
Intersection Percentile LOS: C
# 95th percentile volume exoeeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown Is maximum aftertwo cycles.
l
,-
Baseline Synchro 4 Report
BENSHOOF-FX41 Page 1
NOV-01-2001 11:05 BENSHOOF & ASSOC. 952 238 1671 P.29/35
~, L:\DAT A\lPROJECI\O lS7\Ana1Y8is\Synchro\PM 2017Post-Build 120 cyc.sv6 10/2412061
:!
i Arterial Leve. of Scnvice: NB CSAH 83
Arterial Flow Running Signal ^ Travel Diat Arte rial Arterial
Cross street Class Speed Time DeJa~ TIme (s) (mil S~ed LOS
EXISTING CSAH 16 II 40 28.3 33.1 61.4 0.3 16.2 E
PROP. CSAH 16 II 40 33.0 14.4 47.4 0.3 25.3 C
:1 TH 169 EB ON RAMPII 40 26.3 7.7 33.0 0.2 24.0 C
:..1 TH 169 WB OFF RAMI 40 17.4 24.4 41.8 0.2 13.0 E
12TH AVENUE II 40 15.2 9.6 24.8 0.1 19.2 0
Total II 119.2 89.2 208.4 1.1 ' 19.2 0
Arterial level of Service: sa CSAH 83
,
Arteria) Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial
Cross Street Class Speed Time Delay Time {s} (mi) Speed LOS
I 12TH AVENUE II 40 21.1 14.3 36.4 0.2 18.6 0
I
;,J ''l'H 1 69 WB ON RAMAl 40 26.7 39.4 66.1 0.2 13':2 E
TH 169 EB OFF RAM'" 40 17.4 3.0 20.4 0.2 26.1 C
f J PROP .CSAH 16 II 40 25.3 1.2 32.5 0.2 24.3 C
FUTURE 17TH AVENUE 40 33.0 15.1 48.1 0.3 25.0 C
.....: Total II 123.6 79.0 202.5 1.1 20.1 0
~ \
':,/
~J
;"_:.
tt
iJ
1'1
, 1
~. ~
,
i
<~1
. ".:'"-
\oj
~ .....
ij Baseline Synchro 4 Report
",j , Page 1
BENSHOOF..FX41
,.,..'
. .-. -- ---. .... '-"'-' UL-I '-'1 ,,-,WI OC' n..........JU\.,.o_ :;l;:)c; c;.:>b J.b(l t".':>\d/.j:l
3: 12TH AVENUE & CSAH 83
L:\DATA\lPROJECI\0157\Analvsis\Synchro\PM 2011Post.Build 120 cyc,sy6 ,10/24/200 1
Queues i
i
Lan~Grouo .Em: m Elm ww. wn NBL WIT SBL 9I mm
Lane Configurations 0 <2 1 0 <2> 1 2> 1 2 1
Volume (vph) 40 10 220 260 10 160 467 60 595 20
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 54 239 0 359 174 649 65 847 22
Turn Type Perm ,Pm+Ov Perm prot prot Penn
Protected Phases 4 5 8 5 2 1 6 ' i
Pennitted Phases 4 4 8 6 j
Detector Phases " 4 5 8 8 5 2 1 6 6
Minimum Initial (5) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4,0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Minimum Split (s) 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 20.0 I
Total Split (s) 40.0 40.0 35.0 40.0 40.0 35.0 56.0 24.0 45.0 45.0
Total Spilt (%) 33% 33% 29% 33% 33% 29% 47% 20% 38% 38%
Yellow ilme (s) 3.5 3.S 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 0.5 O.S 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
LeadlLag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Recall Mode None None None None None None COord None Coord Coord ,~
Act Effct Green (s) 21.3 41.8 ' 21.3 16.6 79.1 9.6 70.2 70.2
Actuated ale Ratio 0.18 0.35 0.18 0.14 0.66 o.oa 0.59 0.59
vIe Ratio 0.12 0.39 1.19dl 0.71 0.29 0.46 0.31 0.02 ,-:1
Uniform Delay, d1 41.5 18.2 44.0 49.5 8.3 53.8 12.6 0.0
Percentile Delay 39.3 16.6 43.4 48.6 9.6 52.0 14.3 6.1
Percentile LOS D B D 0 A D B A
Queue Length 50th (ft) 18 87 132 131 83 49 125 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 35 126 174 195 170 93 215 13
Unk Length (ft) 1456 1712 617 887
50th Up Block Time (%)
95Q1 Up Block Time (%)
Tum Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penally (veh)
Cycle Length: 120
Actuated Cycle Length: 120
Offset: 40 (33%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:88T, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 50
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Total Lost Time: 12
Sum of Critloal vis Ratios: 0.42
Intersection vIe Ratio: 0,47
Intersectian Percentile Signal Delay: 22.2
Intersection' Percentile LOS: C
dl Defacto Left Lane. Reoode with 1 though lan8 as a left lane.
Baseline Synchro 4 Report
BENSHOOF..FX41 Page 1
NUV-ldl-~12l01 11:1216 BENSHOOF & ASSOC. 952 238 1671 P.31/35
.:
- :1
,:1 6: SECRET ARIA T DRIVE & C$AH 83
L:\DATA\lPROJBC'I\0157\Analyds\Synchro\PM 2017Post-Build 120 cyo.sy6 10/2412001
Queues
Lane GTQUP
Lane Configurations .
Volume (vph) ,
Lane Group Flow (vph)
:1 Turn Type
Protected Phases .
Permitted Phases
~., -:1 Detector Phases
Minimum Initial (5)
Minimum Split (5) ,
Total Split (s)
Total Split (%)
Yellow TIme (5)
All-Red Time (s)
, , LeadlLag
O!
::1 'lead~Laa Optimize? ,-
Recall Mode
r] Act Effcl Green (5)
~:~ Actuated g/C Ratio
vIe Ratio
Uniform Delay,d1
Percentile Delay
Percentil,e LOS
Queue Length 50th (1;t)
Queue Length 95th (ft.)
Unk Length (ft)
50th Up Block Time (%)
d gSth Up Block nme (%)
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block TIine %
;']' Queuing Penalty (veh)
Cycle Length: 3
Actuated Cycle L.ength: 3
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced 10 phase 2: and 8:, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 40
Control Type:.Pretimed
Total Lost Time: 0
Sum of Critical vIs Ratios: 0.00
Inter.;ectlon vIe Ratio: 0.00
1 Intersection Percentile Signal Oelay: 0,0
, :j Inler.;ect1on Percentile LOS: A
, y".~;J
;:,"3
;..:':1
~~
Basoline Synchro 4 RQport
BENSaOOF-FX41 Page 2
,.. -- ---- -- -- UL...I-'......IIUUI- Oc t"1.,:).;)U....... '::l:,~ 238 1671 P.32/35
8: TH 169 we ON RAMP & CSAH 83 )
L:\DATA\lPROJEC1\01S7\Analvs1S\Svnchro\PM 2017Post-Build 120 cyc.sy6 10/24/200 1
Queuu
. LaneGroup ~ WBR .wib W BISBR
Lane Configurations 2 1 2 2 2 1 !
Volume (vph) 1274 200 287 627 1015 220 i
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1385 217 312 682 1103 239
Turn Type Customcustom Prot Perm
Protected Phases 3 5 2 6
Permitted Phases 3 8 6
Detector Phases 3 8 5 2 6 6
Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 .,
..., )
.. j
Minimum Split (5) . 8.0 20.0 8.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 I
Total Spilt (s) 57.0 57.0 11.0 63.0 46.0 46.0 '
Total Spilt (%) ~ 48% 48% 14% 53% 38% 38%
Yellow Time (8) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 '!
All-Red Time (5) 0.5 O.S 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
leadlLag Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes
Recarr Mode None None None Coord Coord Coord " ~..'
Act Effct Green (s) 51.6 51.6 12.9 60.5 43.5 43.5
Actuated g1C Ratio 0.43 0.43 0.11 0.50 0.36 0.36 \
vie Ratio 0.94 0.28 0.8:4- 0.38 0.86 0.34 ,','!
Uniform Delay. d1 32.7 3.7 52.6 18.3 35.4 3.1
Percentlle Delay 36.4 5.0 54.0 24.4, 39.4 5.6
Percentile LOS 0 A 0 C 0 A :;
Queue Length 50th (ft) 507 0 116 219 4~ 15
Queue Length 95th eft) #656 59 #195 283 #545 73
Unk l.ength (ft) 720 1200
50th Up Block Time (%)
95th Up BIQckTJme (%)
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Cycle Length: 120
Actuated Cycle Length: 120
Offset: 76 (83%), ~ererenced to phase 2:N6T and 6;S6T. start of Green
Natural Cyole: 90
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Total Lost Time: 12
Sum of Critical vIs Ratios: 0.81
Inte~ctJon vIe R~tlo: 0.90
Intersection Percentile Signal Delay: 32.9
Intersection Percentile LOS: C ' .
'# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown Is maximum after two cycles,
::2i:~
Baseline Synchro 4 Report
Page 3
BENSHOOP-FX41
NOV-01-2001 11:06 BENSHOOF & ASSOC. 952 238 1671 ' P.33/35
i
11: TH 169 EB OFF RAMP & CSAH a3
..~ " L:\DATA\1PROJBC'l'\Ol~~!s\SYl1Chro\PM 2017Post.Build 120 cyc:sy6 10/24/2001
Queues
L..aolLGroUll m 911 wu: fiB UJ. u.I
Lane Configurations 1 1 2 2 2 2
Volume (vph) 60 135 844 1348 290 1989
lane Group Flow (vph) 85 147 917 1485 315 2182
~~.J Turn Type CustolTCustom Penn Prof
Protected Phases, 7 2 1 6
Pennltted Phases 7 .. 2
Detector Phases 7 4 2 2 1 6
Minimum Inltlal (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Minimum Split (s) 8.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 8.0 20.0
Total Split (s) 25.0, 25.0 72.0 12.0 23.0 95.0
Total Split (%) 21% 21% 60% eO% 19% 79%
,,' Yellow Time (5) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (s) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
, '--J Lea~ag Lag Lag Lead
,'J _ Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes ,".'"
i..:'.J Recall Mode None None Coord Coord None Coord
rl Act Effct Green (5) 14.5 14.5 18.1 78.1 15.4 97.5
t:.:::;: Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.65 0.65 0.13 0.81.
".'.:1' vIe Ratio 0.30 0.69 0.40 0.67 0.71 0.75
Unifonn Delay, d1 48.1 42.5 9.9 2.5 50.2 5.4
Percentile Delay 46.4 41.6 7.7 1.2 51.7 ,3.0
, Percentile LOS 0 0 A A 0 A
Queue Length 50th eft) 47 93 103 0 115 82
Queue Length 95th (ft) S6 1SS 215 o m128 451
Wok Length eft) 1080 720
50th Up Block Time (%)
f] 95th Up Block Time (%>
l: Turn Bay Length (ft)
L 50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay SIock Time %
':-1 QueuIng Penalty (veh) .
! Cycle Length: 120
Actuated Cycle Length: 120
Offset: e (5%), Referenced to pha~e 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 70
Control Type~ Actuated.CoordJnated '
Total Lost Time: 8
Sum ofCrltlcaf VIs Ratios: 0,70 '
Intersection VIe Ratio: 0.74
, i Intersection PerQantlle SIgnal Delay: 8.0
Intersection Percentile LOS: A
m Volume for 95th percentile queue Is metered by upstream signal.
" ~::~
r:.-~
;c:,:1
Baseline Syncbro 4 Report
BENSHOOF-FX41 Page 4
I~UV-10.l-<:::1010.l l.l.!d( ~cN~HUUr ~ H~~UC. 952 238 1671 P.34/35
14: PROP. CSAH 16 & CSAH 83
L:\DATA\lPROJEC1\O 157\Analysis\Synclu'o\PM 2017Post-Build.120 cy-c.Sy6 10/24/2001
Queues
Lane GrOJ.fD m En .em ww. ~ WiB. ~ MIll tmB m UI mm
Lane Configurations 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 ,
Volume (vph) 150 36 17.0 115 98 503 62 996 160 401 1500 210 I
Lane Group Flow (vph) 163 39 185 125 104 547 67 1063 174 438 1630, 228
Turn Type Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov . Prot Pm+Ov Prot Pm+Ov j
Protected Phases 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7
Pennitted Phases 4 8 2 6
Detector Phases 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 a 7
Minimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4,0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 I
MInimum Split (5) 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20,0 8.D
Total ;Spilt (s) 14.0 22.0 14.0 12.0 20.0 26.0 14.0 60.0 12.0 2&.0 72.0 14.0
Total Gpllt (%) 12% 18% 12% 10% 17% 22% 12% 50% 10% 22% 60% 12%
Yellow Time (5) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (5) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 . 0.5 0.5 0.5
Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lead I..ag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead
Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
-Recall Mode None None None None None None None Coord None None-'Coord None
Ad. Effct Green (s) 9.5 9.4 21.0 12.8 8.8 33.2 9.2 65.3 82.1 20.4 76.5 90.0
Actuated g/C Rallo 0.08 0.08 0.18 0.11 0.07 0.28 0.08 0.54 0.68 0.17 0.64 0.75 i
vie Ratio 0.60 0.14 0.61 0.34 0.40 0.65 0.25 0.56 0.15 0.75 0.72 0.18
Uniform Delay, d1 ,53.4 53.7 38.8 49.7 51.6 30.3 52.2 19.0 0.0 47.3 15.7 0.0
Percentile Delay . 53.5 49.9 36.6 52.1 52.7 31.2 63.8 14.4 3.6 51.6 7.2 0.2
Percentfle LOS 0 ,0 0 D D c E B A 0 A A
Queue Length 5Oth,(ft) 63 14 111 49 41 174 24 278 33 148 316 4
Queue Length 95th (ft.) 100 32 180 81 69 234 m40 357 m53 212,317 m3
Unk Length (ft) 1636 1847 1681 1080
50th Up Block Time (%)
95th Up alack Time (%)
Tum Bay L.ength (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Bloe~ Time %
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Cycle Length: 120
Actuated Cycle Length: 120
Offset: 28 (23%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, start of Green
Natural Cycle: 80
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
Total Lost Time; 8
Sum of Critical vIs Ratios: 0.65
Intersection vie Ratio: 0.69
Intersection Percentile Signal Delay: 21.2
Intersection Percentile LOS: C
hi Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
,
<
~'7-J
~"i-~
......\
....-,
Basel.inC Synchro 4 Report
BENSHOOP.PX41 PageS
NUV-1d1-2001 11:07 BENSHOOF & ASSOC. 952 238 1671 P.35/35
. 17: FUTURE 17TH AVENUE & CSAH 83
L:\DATA\lPROJECT\0151\Analvsis\SYllchro\PM 2017Post-Build 120 cvc:sv() 10/2412001
Queues
Lane Group , EBL ElI EBR WIlL wm: WBR HaL NBT NBR OJ. mil ~
Lane Configurations 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 . 1
Volume (vph) 375 eo 90 145 271 286 130 741 50 703 1085 498
Lane Group Flow (vph) 408 es 98 158 295 311 141 812 54 764 1179 539
I Tum Type Pm+Pt Pm+OvPm+?t Pm+Ov Prot Pm+ov Prot Pm+ov
\ Protected Phases 7 4 5 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 e 7
...:1
Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 6
Detector Phases 7 4 5" 3 8 1 5 2 3 1 6 7
Minimum Initial (8) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Minimum Split (s) 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 6.0 8.0 20.0 8.0
Total Split (s) 19.0 31.0 13.0 8.0 20.Q 39.0 13.0 42.0 8.0 39.0 68.0 19.0
Total Split (%) 16% 26% 11% 7% 17% 33% 11% 35% 7% 33% 57% 16%
.. , Yellow Time (5) . 3,5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
All-Red Time (5) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 ' 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
1 LeadILag Lead l-ag Lead ,Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead
, I ,_ Lead-Lag ~ptimile? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes ., Yes Yes yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
."j Recall Mode None None None None None None None Coord None None Coord None
Act Effct Green (s) 30.2 22.0 33.9 21.2 14.3 49.3 8.7 43.8 56.9 31.0 65.1, 85.0
IJ Actuated g/e Ratio 0.25 0.18 0.28 0.18 0.12 0.41 0.07 0.37 0.47 0.26 0.55 0.71
,J vIe Ratio 0.73 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.70 0.46 0.57 0.63 0.07 0.86 0.60 0.47
Uniform Delay, d1 34.9 41.7 9.7 32.7 50.0 21.2 53.8 32.1 0.0 42.4 18.7 8.8
'j Percentile Delay 37.3 37.8 10.9 35.6 50.6 21.0 54.0 33.1 6.3 38.3 15.1 7.5
i Percentile LOS 0 0 B 0 D C 0 '0 A 0 B A
Queue Length 50th (ft) 132 21 13 ,47 116 140 55 283 0 279 333 199
Queue Length 95th (ft) 177 41 52 74 163 210 89 367 26 322 401 279
Link Length (ft) 1440 1680 1383 1681
50th Up Block TIme (%)
95th Up Block Time (%)
, J Turn BllY Length (ft)
i 50th Bay Block Time %
95th Bay Block Time %
"1 Queuing Penalty (veh)
, ,
:".,
Cycle Length: 120
ActuatEid cycle Length: 120
Offset: 88 (73%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green
Natural Cycle: 75
Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated
, ,
; Total Lost Time: 8
Sum of Critical vIs RatIos: 0.64
Jnte~ectlon vIe RatJo:O.69
, Intersection Percentile Signal Delay: 27.3
i Intersection Peroentlle LOS: C
~...:-,
U
LJ
Base1iDc . Syncluo .. Report
BENSHOOP.FX41 Page 6
, i
TOTAL P.35
,
B.3 - 2003 AUAR Analysis (Option B)
~ANHA&9BN ~
EDEN PRAIRlS
1_ 1'01'. II.TlZ 1990 POP. 39,311
(@
..--
11.1"'-.-
.. .... cr.
..--
..--
a._...
...-...
a._...
..-...
..-....
..-...
..-... @
......-.....
...MUC....
..........
- .....
~ @ 11i!...
8 -('
- ...
~ - :;-........................
~ '
'I
M'_ ~
$ ~
_ .... @J @
~ a
ll~ ~ Da .._.;.
b - - -- ~<
~~ @ l!!..~......, 1990 1'01'.11.412
ll_ ~~ ~
-~ ~. - ~ .. ~...~
~~
SCALE
0 4000
I I
...:... Date: December 2001
Alternative Urban Areawide Review
SHAKOPEE
Y&ott CSAH 83 at T.H. 169 S. Ramps Area Location Map
City of Shakopee - Scott County, MN Figure 'j..Z -I
S"01354-00'sjr'AUAR Fig,dgn
Map - W:\01281-54\Synchro\2003 Am Pk.sy6 2003 AM Peak
Volumes 5/9/2003
ii
~ 12TH AVENUE
~
SECRETARIAT DRIVE ~
, ~ R'*^P 7H 169 We
1\-\ '\ 69 \j\J~ 11tt,
OFF RAM
O)-v -- p
71; 169 €e OFF R .... I'--
-v N R'*^P
0)0
N-v 1\-\ '\ 69 E.B 0
AMp {1~~
~
28~ tt('r
31 N ..q-
N co
N ('I')
~o
t"') ~o
~ t"')C'l
Jfie~ ~
PROP CSAk1-46 0 Site Access
:
.Jf ~
208.Jf ~ (J) (J)
O~ (J) (J)
()) ())
~ (..) (..)
86~ (..) (,)
<.( <.(
Q) Q)
- ~
U5 CI)
..... :=288 U
~ C'l C'l ~o
FUTURE 17TH~ JtiC~ ~4 o 0 EXIST
o~ lliir - ~- ~
O~ 0-7 ~
0-7 0 0') <0 ~ -7
~ ~
J
Baseline W:\01281-54\Synchro\2003 Am Pk.sy6
'~, ,,/,;7-7
I ;'-') v..,/.4.. ~- .:--
Map - W:\01281-54\Synchro\2003 Pm Pk.sy6 2003 PM Peak
Volumes 5/9/2003
11'
~ 12TH AVENUE
~
SECRETARIAT DRIVE ~
~R~P ~1~
11-\ '\ 69 \N_ 'Yyti ' We OFF R
r:: ~ -- AMp
TH 169€8 Il') C\l ~ N RAMP
OFF RAMp li~~ 1\-\ '\ 69 EB 0
~
5~ 1'1'f('
35 ~ -q- (j)
-q- I'--
~ N
~
~o
...-N ~
L- LOCO 0
....- ...- ~ 0
PROP CSA~ ,) ll~~ 0 Site Access
ad ~i { -7 CfJ CfJ
---"- LO.... -7 CfJ CfJ
0----" .... (') Q) Q)
~ (.) (.)
200.-.... (.) (.)
.... ~ <( <(
Q) Q)
..... .....
Ci5 Ci5
o ~ ~140 L ~
~ t"'>l'- ~o
FUTURE 17TH~ JtlQ ~13 0 0., 0 EXI
o~ 11jir O~ -,' 8:f' =:;
O~ Ot--N ~
~ ('t) T'""
~ "<t
Ji
C/)
Baseline W:\01281-54\Synchro\2003 Pm Pk.sy6
'~"_ "" -ZL-.j
r7 ~"l..v".'-
, /
i
Map - W:\01281-54\Synchro\2020 Bid AM Pk.sy6 2020 Bid AM Pk
Volumes 5/9/2003
ii
<E- 12TH AVENUE
--7
SECRETARIAT DRIVE -
, ~ p.W\P iH 169 We
1r\'\69~R 11ii
Of:F RAM
0>0> -- p
iH 169 ca OFF R 1"-1"-
CD \\-\ '\ 69 E6 ON RAMP
.... 0
","co
AMp rJ(~
--7'
373~ i l' ((
1 88 LO t-..
o co
..;:t <0
018
~ (O!;;r ~ :=22
PROP CSA~ Jfj,~, 100 Site Access
-.?' ---7
268-.?' 0> Ll') (") ---7 en en
58~ <Xl N '</" en en
N (0 (") Q) <D
~ <.) <.)
128~ <.) ~
<(
.$ .$
U5 U5
N (\") en ~61 i I
~ (\")0 /'-. ~171
FUTURE 17TH~ J{lC~ JC52 EXIST CSAH 16
122~ ,),)i i (' ~
~
57~ 0 I.!) l.t)
~ com.....
75~ N I.!)
~i
(f)
U
Baseline W:\01281-54\Synchro\2020 Bid AM Pk.sy6
........'
7;'U-./:'-; ZZ-7
Map - W:\01281-54\Synchro\2020 BId PM Pk.sy6 2020 Bid PM Pk
Volumes ' 5/9/2003
1'1'
~ 12TH AVENUE
-7
SECRETARIAT DRIVE ~
~ ON RAMP IH 169 We
11-\'\0 . 01=1= RAMp
IH 169 128 OFF RAMp N RN'AP
1\-\ '\69 EB 9-
-- ~
6l[< 1'0)1' cr ~
154
o ("')
CD r-...
"-
C'\l "-528
~ It')........ ~53
~~g ~
PROP C~6 Jtt~~ ,~.~ Site Access
106~ ii gs~ ~
33~ N r--..... ~
en en
~ en en
26~ Q) Q)
u u
u u
<( <(
2 .!B
U5 i:i5
"-279 i j
~ """0 1'-- ~209
COIt')("t) ~
FU1URE 17~VE Jftr~ ~86 EXIST CSAH
233~ '1'111 r 749---7 10~ -:>
646_ -:>
172-:> :g: ~ ~ ---7
281:::::: (V) (0
("t)
Ji
(J)
()
Baseline W:\01281-54\Synchro\2020 Bid PM Pk.sy6
-"'" ... '
/77..:/": 1 Z -~
,
Appendix C -- Community Value Statement for Valley
Green Development
." (:onservation Development Planning City of Shako pee
Community Value Statement
for
Valley Green Development I West Deans lake Area
Date: November 27, 20001 (Updated January 4,2002)
From: Jeff Schoen bauer, Vice President
Brauer & Associates, Ltd.
Conse'rvation Development Planning Consultant to the City of Shakopee
Overview
The initiative to undertake a collaborative planning process between the city and the developer for the Valley Green
, development area was an outgrowth of the Deans Lake Area Master Pla.n completed by the city in July of 2001. From the city's
perspective, the objective defined in the master plan was to maximize the community values associated with the development
of this area to exceed that which is already provided under city ordinance. The key values being sought include:
~ Maintaining an ecological protection zone and adjoining buffer zone along the lakeshore.
~ Preserving as much natural open space along the west side of the lake as feasible.
~ Providing a linear trail corridor along the west side of the lake that links to other trails defined under the master plan.
~ Expanding natural open spaces and trails into and through the development area in a meaningful way.
~ Using ecologically-based approaches to stormwater management
~ Reducing the extent of impervious surface to the extent possible.
~ Establishing an ecological stewardship program for natural areas.
City Staff and Consultant Role in the Project
City staff's role in the project was to provide information about city development requirements, standards, procedures, and
input on a variety of development issues affecting the development's final form. Under the conservation development
approach, city staff also took a proactive role in discussing development issues so that the developer had a greater sense of
staff's concerns about specific issues. This proved valuable to the city's consultant and the developer as the development plan
emerged.
The city's consultant, Brauer & Associates, ltd. (in collaboration with Applied Ecological Services, Inc.), worked with the
developer on behalf of the city to prepare a development plan consistent with the conservation development approach to
planning as defined under the Deans Lake Master Plan. Importantly, Brauer's express role was to maximize the community
values derived from the development in a manner that was consistent with the Deans lake Master Plan, as well as the broader.
vision for the community as a high quality place to live, work, and recreate. Throughout the planning process, the Brauer team,
in concert with staff, strove to achieve the highest possible outcome within the context of an economically-viable development
Planning Context
From a historical perspective, much debate has occurred in recent years about the development plans for the Valley Green
develapment Area, Ultimately, a preliminary plat for the property was accepted by the City Council, which allows the current
land owner to move farward with development of the property in accordance,with city requirements. In general, the
development proposed by the current owner would be a cammercial/business park development consistent with ather past
developments within the city, If the property is not sold to another party, it would be expected that a "piecemeal" appraach
would be taken by the current land owner until the site is fully developed.
Brauer & Associates, ltd, 1
I
, . Conservation Development Planning City of Shakopee: ,
i
'. Since the time that the preliminary plat was approved, Ryan Companies US, Inc. (Ryan) has expressed an interest in purchasing'
and developing the site from the current land owner, under the assumption that a, favorable development plan could be
reached with the city through a collaborative planning process. Recognizing the challenges associated with this property in the
past, Ryan agreed to work collaboratively with the city in preparing a development plan that maximizes community values
while still being an economically~viable development The pretense being that a win-win development solution could be found.
r ,',
if the two parties worked together throughout the planning process. Ryan also agreed to participate in this process because the k
company felt that building a strong level of trust with the city and the neighborhood was necessary if a successful plan was to f.",:,:
emerge - especially given the history of the site.
The forthcoming community value statement focuses on the values that the city would realize from the development plan being
prepared by Ryan to the city for consideration. Note that for comparison purposes, the accepted preliminary plat for Valley
Green Corporate Center, ofteri referred to as the Albinson plan, is used to illustrate the key differences between what is already [
approved and what might be achieved if the Ryan plan is ultimately approved in lieu of the Albinson plan. L
Comparison of Development Plans f",'
I
t :
'1;.:
For comparison purposes, three development plans have been considered, including:
~ Valley Green Preliminary Plat Development Plan - represents a development plan associated with the preliminary plat
approved by the city. (This is also referred to as the Albinson Plan.)
~ Ryan Residential/Commercial Plan..,.. represents a proposed plan that includes a residential component in addition to the
commercial development proposed under the Valley Green Plan. ,
~ Ryan Commercial Plan - represents a proposed plan that is all commercial, should the city not accept the residential ! '
component. L
As a basis for comparison of development plans, Brauer requested that Ryan provide acreage breakdowns for each of the r
conceptual proposals. These are accompanied with color graphics that relate to the various land use categories. (Exhibit A 1
should be referred to for these graphics and additional acreage breakdowns.) The following table summarizes the key acreage
comparisons between development plans. r'
Acreage Totals Under Various Development Plans r '"
Description Valley Green / Ryan Residential/Ryan Comm. Plan Comments
Albinson Plan Commercial Pian'S'
I
Gross Parcel Area 272.4 272.4 272.4 Remains the same for each plan. L
Park" 15.8 15.8 15.8 Remains consistent with area defined under '
(defined as part of Preliminary Plat approved for the site. Includes about !
preliminary plat) 10,2 acres of wetland. L
ROW Dedication 17.7 29.87 22.16 For roadway infrastructure. .
,
Wetland Area * 18.0 20.43 20.91 Does not include 10.2 acres of wetland listed under \
Park in the second row oftlle table. \
Net Site Area 220.9 206.32 213.56 r
I,
Gross Floor Area 85.1 61.84 55.05 Under Ryan Residential/Commercial Plan, floor area [
for residential is 13.54 acres and 48.3 acres for
" commercial. I
t
General Green Space 20.7 25.55 19.99 This relates to areas around buildings, parking lots, and L
Area roadways.
Highway Buffer" 6.6 6.7 6.61 This relates to strip along H""Y. 169. , "
Shoreline 4.4 10.16 8.53 This relates to the 150', 200', and 250, setback areas. t
Conservation Area *
Natural Open Space 8.7 38.90 42.83 This relates to the areas of the site that will be
Conservation Area* preserved as natural open space.
-~~""'''_'''''''''''''~I'':'~'1~~I''1'!_<'l''~~''''''~___'''~_'''~_[IP'(~'''''f'''r",w'''''''''OI<t<<<<,_"_'''''''''.,..",''''''..._______'_...............".....~....~''''...............'.!''......~"..-...,~..........."
,I f'fa~'A'(~'::l~ ,r;.;'-a:rP-p-! '~~:.~~~~'P'~L~'~tIJtl~Tf;~~:f ..-:$<:!, 1;/;;1' !,{~j~~p.':~:x:i~ry_,"~~~N~.~l!if~:'J: ','''1:' I ~., ';.t t!:;,I~ ~'~,~~~!~~~!i~rit~.l :~~:t:~:f1J:lf: ';~ril~~v;i~ ?i~~.J~~~~'-~~~~~(rl~,,~ i;~~~;t. '~;:l~t~ 'Ir,:~;fj~i':J~t~ i()n..4t '(f;;1ta.~fj'~~Ir,) I ' :;~~l
~\.,;",o'N:~N: ~.:,..>>:,~l.I'ilt<V't:>....~"..,ll;l',~t"'.".. ......; ,;(",1., ['1<.1" '~\..".;.r:;:/1 ~ "'I,',V"''''',' ".;;tl1Vb,:-"f:', ,'~",~"" l~,..~);.:~~..,'~""w'~,l,I<".."."v:v.~ /.H1>'.!""'''~ 11,""~.f{,I-....Ij;<:'S!!..~;'....f'r"'_+~"l''''\:.. ,,,'
~~. ,"h:~., IJ""I:~ ~I;jj 'O\."".d~~~~~Jli!!J.r4"f~l!-:~.qh,, ,1!U~"'l:f.;t~bl'lt1. ~D\l"Jl'~Jt, 'I' it~ll. ,", :f ..t~~~',',l ~ t' ,q,' f':1, ~J.:" :., j', " ~-r,\"'- .Ii' 3m~,;,Jt, \ ;,;'h'~":H.l~\l ~_llt" .<. 1;" L~~)jll .d~~~l:t Il. l,j'l,t", ,l t,:. I, I 'l j ~:JV'\"'" u; !
':t, rT'~ ~:~..,~ ~,:,. 1\:":1''': :Y~.7..:?:::",r;:1~:~;.~~~ZT!~:~~:~lrr'rr';'l ~":s~!lr(I~'~tl?i>f7'..:r:rmr:ir;;f<1" r;" '::' :~::...f:;:tf.'i.:;,,: '~'; '~:.~~ ~:"'?-;,~'~"";i{j~;7~:!. ji,'\ l'I''f":;'rr,,:r~~:~,.~,;,~".t.:; f~. l\~:~~'~' ~:~ [:"~", "'~'~. :p~~ ~;: "i:"~ ., :~~';" ~,~ ,';~' \ " .
\:ti?~~$J.~:l~~,~~~f~~t""'i~i~';;...~~f~%~~~:~s,;, :~/Z~:~~.:~;~'r;.r~f.f.';;'~~~ajt~~,~ 1 ..' t'i ~'''~!llll\''"l''\ .~~;, i ~J;;~}J~Affit;,:'1;I,.i ,.~~ ~H~~fltM~~,\~Ir~~,,~,~~jRt~~,?J trl\J~~~r )~J%i ..;"~~~Jr~r,h.~"i.!r;'\:~'..n,;;lJ"f,:~r\t~ , ,. ~~.
tN~' i:'- ::'\'r./ijltlt~:;:f~;l~:~~~~:i<<:;~lt~JUi~~t.~~'lJ~~{~~k~tiiJ{Ji;J:\;/: i"!~;f~;li:~~~;;~:f:!' :;o.'1,;;~ltf;;11,~~~,~~~~f.::.:h;~;,\h:;.:;~; l' (.;,!~: ': :i~li~j.:.r1rl~"~;:;.f15J~~~MI\:-;;~f.;~1'f~~I{~~.;~;!~{il. ~;lci"~~Jl~':~l" :,~i;,;:'~;:f, :::1: ~'" ,i' ':~ ':.':;': ; ',; , ,;'
, ~~~~~".,f~~j./~~nhflft%WL~I:b~ 'l~:~~}/J~~$"P/:""n>l J:::!1'rG-lf,.,. ;;\",.) "~ 1 ,,'i::'II:'f~~'l" "";r-: ': I~! 1,I'I'~ll,~ 'I" ", 0<.' ,:':,;":"1"\,"(-;1 H!f:~~" ~:>.G.~,1 Pi',~,'l>j""~~j"'<';'X;t;,;~~h"i.:.!~X\.<J~lr~~Uii' ""'~"',1~;~ rr ~:, " " 't~: ',' ''',' 'I, } ,"~,
Brauer & Associates, ltd. 2
..
. . Conservation Development Planning City of Shako pee
The information presented in the table establishes baseline information about the development and provides pertinent
information that is used in the forthcoming summary of community values achieved by the project.
Residential Versus Commercial land Use Decision
As defined above, one of the development proposals includes a residential component in lieu of commercial/business land
'-. uses. This opportunity arose out of the design charrette process (i.e., collaborative design meetings) in which the city's team, led
by Brauer, and the developer's team considered various ways to approach land use decisions. From the developer's
perspective, the every changing nature of the economy and the land development environment suggests that a residential
development could be economically feasible, especially given its location relative to parks, open spaces, and trails. The
approved Valley Green, or Albinson, plan, was based on the assumption that the guided land use was the most economically-
viable approach and did not pursue adding a residential component to the development
From the perspective of the city, Ryan's interest in developing this property presents an opportunity to reconsider past land use
decisions if doing so results in favorable outcomes for the city as it strives to maintain a high quality of life in the community,
retain its historic character, and foster a strong sense of place in its residential neighborhoods. To this end, there are some
compelling reasons for the city to consider this approach, as follows:
~ The Deans lake area is a unique community asset that offers the exact type of living environment people hold in high regard
- including nature, trails, open space, parks, convenience to roadway systems, jobs nearby, etc. As defined in Exhibit B, the
Deans lake area is one of a limited number of areas within the city that have these qualities.
~ Higher amenity settings, sllch as the Deans lake area, tend to hold-up/enhance property values initially and over time.
~ Greater design flexibility of residential (versus commercial) development provides more opportunity to preserve critical open
space and natural resource areas along the lakeshore.
~ A "softer" transition between natural open space/park setting and commercial development can be achieved, which is
important in that the relationship of this developmentto the lake affects the character of the entire Deans Lake area. ,
~ Encroachment of trucks, cars, and larger structures along the lakefront is precluded, which in turn provides a more pleasant
aesthetic setting for p~rk and trail users.
The vision as defined in the Deans Lake Master Plan adds strength to this perspective, whereby the master plan seeks to
maximize the value of the natural amenities surrounding !Deans Lake by creating a high quality living environment (See Exhibit
D.) Under a commercial development scenario adjacent to the lake, the"natural amenities of the area are simply used as a
buffer between the lake and larger commercial buildings and parking lots. Recognizing that private land development will likely
continue to occur over time around the entire lake, the challenge for the city lies in dire~ing that development to the highest
and best use of the land in the context of the larger vision for the community. The challenge for the developer rests in
presenting a development plan to the city that is compelling enough to warrant a revision to past land use decisions. The
residential/commercial development plan presented by Ryan attempts to achieve this end.
Summary of Community Values Achieved
Throughout the planning process, the city' team, lead by Brauer, has focused on maximizing community values in a meaningful
way. The following summarizes the extent to which the development proposal was able to achieve these ends. To aid in this
evaluation, a comparison between Valley Green's approved preliminary plat and the proposed residential/commercial
development by Ryan is also provided.
Preserve Natural Features. Habitat. Open Space
As indicated in the previous table, there is considerable variability between proposals in the number of acres that are defined as
conservation areas - which are defined as lands that will remain as natural open space once the development is completed.
Even though the overaU acreage of green space between developments is less pronounced, the Ryan plan offers more acres
under conservation area designation. This is of considerable importance in that these lands would be included under a
conservation easement that would offer perpetual protection from encroachment or other land uses. (Note that the
conservation easement would allow for public trails,) As part of the development package, these easements would be legally
recorded with the city to ensure their indefinite protection as natural open space. The developer, however, would still be
responsible to manage and maintain these lands, as defined under the forthcoming Stewardship Program. The following table
provides a comparison of development proposals.
Brauer & Associates, ltd, 3
, . Conservation Development Plannin~ City of Shakopee
,
, Valley Green Preliminary Plat Ryan Residential/Commercial Plan Public Values Achieved/Flexibility Required
,
Creen space is absorbed into the Emphasis is placed on consolidating green Considerably more natural resource/open ~' '
development plan, with much of it space lands into meaningful natural open space lands would be restored and preserved (,
consumed in areas of limited direct space areas that have greater community under the Ryan development plan,
community value - e.g" around buildings, value. These natural areas would also be Meaningful linkage to the other natural areas r ..
in right-of-ways, between parking tots, and used to buffer adjoining land uses, around Deans lake would also be created, L
in unconnected green space, especially near the lakeshore. which has ecological and wildlife values. The '
conservation areas also provide the r
Conservation Area Acreage Totals_ Conservation Area Acreage Totals _ opportunity for using ecologically-based I
Park land under prelim. plat: 15.80 ac. Park land under prelim. plat: 15.80 ac. stormwater management techniques, as well
Wetland area: 18.0 ac. Wetland area: 20.43 ac. as providing more public trails.
Highway buffer: 6.6 ac. Highway buffer: 6.7 ac.
Shoreline conservation area: 4.40 ac. Shoreline conservation area: 10.16 ac. Note that some flexibility on certain city ,
!..
Natural open space area: 8.70 ac. Natural open space area: 38.90 ac. standards would be required, as defined by ;;.
Total: 53.5 ac. Total: 91.99 ac. the developer's package.
Agreement Parameters: Under the agreement framework, the city and developer would continue to collaborate on the actual
landscape design for the natural/conservation areas. This would include preparing the specifications to be used for native plant
materials selection. Note that under the agreement parameters, the developer would be responsible for all costs associated with '
restoring the natural areas. The level of commitment by the developer to restoring natural areas woulq be defined as part of the
formal dev.elQPrnent package submitted to the city to ensure consensus on this issue as part of the formal approvals process.
Exhibit D provides an overview of the vegetative plan concept
;.:
~
Maintain Ecological Protection Zone Along lakeshore
As defined under the Deans Lake Area Master Plan, protecting the ecologiCal and natural aesthetic qualities of the west r
shoreline of Deans lake was of considerable"and justifiable, importance to the community and neighborhood. Under the I
existing city ordinance, if the proposed development is of a comm~rcial/business nature, the minimal requirements associated ""
with the shoreline include: ...:'
~ 1 SO' structure setback from the ordinary high water mark. (200' under a residential land use.)
~ Visual screening from the lake to a level of 75% opacity during leaf-on conditions. '['
~ lacking ability to provide visual screening, an additional 150' setback is required, totaling up to 300' from the ordinary high i
water mark. l
Whereas the Valley Green development plan is obligated to achieve these minimal requirements, applying the opacity f'
ordinance does offer some challenges in terms of how that is functionally determined. Under the Ryan development plan, the [
proposed residential development setback from the shoreline is a minimum of 250', This is of considerable importance in that
not only is the ordinance exceeded, the additional land adjacent to the lake also provides more area to restore working !
ecological systems that have both an aesthetic and functional value. As part of the development package, the shoreline would f
be included under a conservation easement that would be legally recorded with the city. The developer, however, would still \
be responsible to manage and maintain these lands, as defined under the forthcoming Stewardship Program. The following J
table provides a comparison of development proposals as it relates to the shoreline. I
I
I
,
L
L
i.
I
I
!
i.".
Brauer & Associates, Ltd. f
4 ,
i
. . Conservation Development Plannin~ City of Shakopee
Valley Green Preliminary Plat ~ Ryan Residential/Commercial Plan Public Values Achieved/Flexibility Required
Minimal standard would be met, with Developer responded to the city's desire to Under the Ryan plan, the shoreline area
some opportunity to go beyond the increase the shoreline setback to the would be covered under a conservation
ordinance if it fit the development maximum depth possible. The residential easement, thus providing additional
footprint Challenge would be the opacity development footprint provided more assurance that it will never be encroached
issue, with the developer potentially using flexibility in achieving this than did the upon. The major benefit to the city is greater
approaches to achieve opacity that are not commercial development, which tends to protection of the shoreline, greater
consistent with ecological objectives set for be more rigid and of a larger scale. opportunity for buffering the trail from the
along the shoreline. development, and more opportunity to
Conservation Area Acreage Totals _ restore functioning ecological systems
Conservation Area Acreage Totals _ 150' setback line: 4.40 ac. adjacent to the lake.
Within 1 SO' setback line: 4.40 ac. Additional setback to 200': 2.87 ac.
Total: 4.40 ac. Additional setback to 250': 2.89 ac. Note that some flexibility on certain city
Total: 10.16 ac. standards may be required, as defined by the
developer's package.
Agreement Parameters: Under the agreementframework, the city and developer would continue to collaborate on the actual
design for the restoration plan for the shoreline area. Of particular importance would be defining how this area would be
restored to achieve ecological objectives as well as creating a visual buffer. between the lake and the development Note that
under the agreement parameters, the developerwould be responsible for all costs associated with restoring the shoreline area.
The level of commitment by the developer to restoring natural areas would be defined as part of the formal development
package submitted to the city to ensure consensus on this issue as part of the formal approvals process. Exhibit D provides a
cross-section of the intent of the shoreline restoration.
Ecologically-Based'Approach to Stormwater Management
"
Using ecologicallY-9ased approaches to st6rmwater managementto increase levels of infiltration on the site, slow ~he reJea~e
rate of stormwater to downstream systems, and improve overall water quality in the process was a major objective for the city's
team. Whereas the Valley Green development plan followed standard practices and city standards in this regard, the city's team
saw numerous opportunities to take a more ecologically-based approach to stormwater management on the site. Specific
opportunities include:
.. Using natural systems in lieu of mechanically engineered systems to control stormwater runoff. This includes natural drainage
swales, infiltration "rain gardens", and ecologically-based ponding/wetland systems.
.. Managing stormwater on-site to avoid the need for off-site stormwater ponding.
.. Using natural systems to infiltrate stormwater along the shoreline to reduce flow rates into the lake and maintain very high
water qualities that exceeds that which is typically achievable using traditional NURP pond systems.
.. Reducing the extent of impervious surface to the extent possible to minimize the need for built stormwater management and
conveyance systems.
Note that the stormwater management system would be an integral and seamless part of the natural areas, whereby the desired
public open space values are achieved at the same time. Exhibit E highlights some of these opportunities in graphic form. The
following table provides a comparison of development proposals as it relates to the stormwater management
Valley Green Preliminary Plat Ryan Residential/Commercial Plan Public Values Achieved/Flexibility Required
Follows typical stormwater management The goal with the stormwater system as Under the Ryan plan, the developer would
approach, with significant use of NURP proposed is to. manage stormwater in an , be managing stormwater onsite as part of a
ponds, Lacking an interconnected natural ecologically-sound manner tha,t is beneficial larger natural open space system. The public
system (as shown on the Ryan plan), to the site and downstream systems, would benefit through an increase in open
greater reliance on built storm sewers space and also be assured that stormwater is
would be expected - which reduces'the managed in an ecolo.gically-favorable
capacity to infiltrate sto.rmwater onsite. manner, The project would also. be an
example of how the city can work with the
development community to. better manage
storm water onsite to. reduce the dependance
and cost o.f developing offsite stormwater
management systems.
Brauer & Associates, Ltd, 5
!
:
. Conservation Development Planning City of Shakope~
, Agreement Parameters: Under the agreement framework, the city and developer would continue to collaborate on designing
the ecologically-based stormwater management system. Note that city engineering staff would be particularly involved in this F"
aspect of the project to ensure that the final plan would meet or exceed all city standards and requirements. Although the i
!
design for the system would be collaborative, the developer would ultimately be responsible for the system's final function and i
performance once built. Note that under the agreement parameters, the developer would be responsible for all costs associated f:
with creating the stormwater management system. The level of commitment by the developer to doing so would be defined as t,:
part of the formal development package submitted to the city to ensure consensus on this issue as part of the formal approvals L,
process. Exhibit E provides an overview of the stormwater management plan concept. ~.,
;
!
Maximize Park and Trail Opportunities
Consistent with the vision of the Deans Lake Area Master Plan, maximizing park and open space opportunities in this ;
development area was a major objective of the city's team. Whereas the Valley Green development plan is obligated to provide {
a linear trail along the shoreline, there are few assurances that additional trails would be provided within the developmentarea
itself. Although sidewalks and other typeso{trails would have likely been included in the Valley Green development plan, the f;
true public values of those amenities is uncertain since they would not be located in a defined park area or natural open space i
that connects to the larger system.
Under the Ryan Plan, a looped core trail system would be integrated into the natural open space conservation area that runs
through the development This loop would connect directly to the linear trail along the shoreline, which then links directly to
the larger trail system proposed under the Deans Lake Area Master Plan. t
f
With respect to parks, both development scenarios include the 15.80 acres of park land and park dedication fund commitments i
defined under the Valley Green preliminary plat. Each also includes the 150' shoreline setback area and other adjoining open
spaces. From that point, however, the differences are substantial in that all of the land area previously defined as conservation r
areas under the Ryan plan would be open space that could be enjoyed by the public via trails and visually as one drives through {
the development (See Exhibit O.)The following table provides a comparison of development proposals as it relates to the parks
and trails. f'
Valley Green Preliminary Plat Ryan Residential/Commercial Plan Public Values Achieved/Flexibility Required
Parks and open space land totals 28.90 Parks and open space land totals 64.86 Considerably more miles of trails are r
acres (as defined on page 4). acres (as defined on page 4). provided under the Ryan plan. Of equal
importance, the location of those trail are in
length of trail along shoreline is Length of trail along shoreline and through high value settings that appeal to people, t
approximately 0.96 miles. the conservation area within the versus along a busy roadway with little visual
development is 2.72 miles. Small and physical separation between the trail
neighborhood parkes) would also be users and vehicular traffic.
provided for residential area, as would t
i
public access to trails. ,
l
Agreement Parameters: Under the agreement framework with the developer, the city would be involved in determining where r
the trails would be located in the various conservation areas as defined on the Ryan plan. Exhibit 0 provides an overview of the
trail system within the development. The developer would be responsible to connect these core trails to individual
development sites'as they are developed. Note that under the agreement parameters, the developer would be responsible for i
all development costs associated with the park and trail system considered above. The developer would also remain the owner 1
of the land and be responsible for long-term maintenance of the trails. (The city would be assured public access to the trails l
through a legal agreement.) f'
Ecological and Ornamental landscape Stewardship Program
To ensure the long-term vitality and health of the natural ecological systems within the conservation easements, parks, and
natural areas, the developer has agreed to create and implement a stewardship program. Although the City of Shakopee does
not currently have such a program, there are numerous models that can be used as a basis for developing a program for this
specific site. Since this is new to the city and developer, development of the program would be undertaken jointly as part of a
continued collaboration on the project.
Brauer & Associates, ltd. 6
. Conservation bevelopment Planning City of Shakopee
"
.., Specific agreement parameters most often associated with this type of program include:
. Initial restoration of the natural systems contained within the conservation easements and defined natural areas. The
developer would agree to complete this work as part of the site development and in accordance with the Stewardship
Program's specifications. The city would work with the developer to ensure that methods used are consistent with the city's
expectations. Note that a word of caution is required with respect to wetland systems associated with Deans Lake. The
practicality of restoring these areas requires additional evaluation since it is uncertain as to how effective restoration of these
areas can be given the changes that have occurred over time in lake levels and the ecological systems affected by those
changes. >'
,. Year-to-year management of natural areas located within the conservation easements and natural areas. This includes
maintenance of the ecologically-based stormwater management system to ensure it functions properly.
In addition to the stewardship of natural systems, the developer has also agreed to manage and maintain all ornamental
landscapes throughout the site. This would include landscaping that is either on a specific piece of property as well as that is
found within the public rights-oF-ways. The following table provides a comparison of development proposals as it relates to the
, '". ecological stewardship.
Valley Green Preliminary Plat Ryan Residential/Commercial Plan Public Values Achieved/Flexibility Required
Developer would be responsible for all Developer would be responsible for Long-term assurance that the natural areas
ornamental landscape outside of the city stewardship of both ornamental landscapes and ornamental landscapes will be managed
tights-of-ways and defined natural areas. and natural areas throughout the properly in the future would be assured
Would likely not propose significant development The stewardship program under the Ryan plan. Whereas the
landscaping in publicrights-of-way since would be a legally-defined perpetual ornamental landscape under the Valley
city would not want to provide long-term obligation of the developer. This would Green plan would be maintained, there is
maintenance. likely be achieved through a little assurance of a long-term commitment to
homeowners/business association that , ' the natural areas.
Likely to be little ongoing commitment to would be set up by the developer.
ecological stewardship, other than the
initial restoration of the site during
development
Agreement Parameters: Inasmuch as maintaining the ornamental landscape is common place, establishing a stewardship
program for the natural areas within the development is ofequal importance. Under the agreement framework with Ryan, a
stewardship program would be prepared and implemented as part of the development package. This would include a legal
agreement with the city that would obligate the developer to long-term financial support of the program. The city's role under
the agreement would be limited to periodic oversight to erisure that the plan is being appropriately implemented. Exhibit F
provides an example of a legal agreement between the city and the developer for natural areas. This agreement would be
expanded to cover ornamental landscapes as well. An overview of the potential costs that would be incurred by the developer
for implementing a natural area stewardship program is also provided. Note, however, that this will require refinement as the
project moves into final design.
list of Exhibits
The following is the list of exhibits previously referred to:
~ Exhibit A - Development concepl:$ with acreage breakdowns,
. Exhibit B - Aerial of city illustrating the setting of the development.
~ Exhibit C - Deans lake Area Master Plan. ;'
~ Exhibit D - Conservation easement delineation (parks, open space, and trails).
. Exhibit E - Stormwater management plan concept for Ryan development plan.
.. Exhibit F - ,Stewardship program example, with cost projections and funding approaches.
Brauer & Associates, Ltd. 7
. . ~onservation Development Planning City of Shako pee
l
'. Developer's Package
c
r, .
The Community Values Statement and accompanying exhibits define the community values that would be derived from the f
,
, ,
Ryan development plan should it be accepted by the city. The accompanying Developer's Package provided by the developer
defines the development package being proposed in more detail. F"
Specific information requested of the developer by the city's consultant to be included in the development package includes L,;
the following: f
~ Development plan, illustrating the various aspects of each of the three development plans.
I
~ Acreage and area breakdowns for each plan. t
~ Residential component:
Type of housing units proposed, including elevations showing character and square footage. I'
- ,
- Anticipated market value. ". ~
- Total number of units proposed, including units per acre breakdowlJ.
- Variations from city standards, if any. f'
- Strategy for development and expected timeframe for completion. r
~ Commercia1/business component:
- Type of development envisioned and expectation of marketplace during development cycle.
- Variations from city standards, if any,
- Strategy for development and expected timeframe for completion.
~ Rights-of-way and roadway related:
~
- Rights-of-way widths for all streets being proposed, with cross-sections. f
;.
- Roadway widths, with cross-sections. ,
- Provisions for utility easements.
r
Intent of Concept Review / Next Step in the Planning Process
The intent of the concept review phase of the project is to set forth, in good faith, as complete of a development package for
the Valley Green development area as possible for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council. Through
collaboration and candid discussions prior to formal submittal, the prospects for arriving at a development plan that will offer
high community values while being economically-viable is considerably enhanced. The concept review phase includes: I
1) Meetingwith local neighborhood group to review development plan and receive feedback. l
2) Meeting with Planning Commission to review development plan and address pertinent issues and concerns. Although a
, formal vote will not be taken, candid feedback from members is desired. l
3) Meeting with City Council to review development plan and address pertinent issues and concerns. Again, no formal vote will '.
be taken, but candid feedback from members is desired.
At the end of the concept review, the city's and developer's teams will address all pertinent issues and concerns and determine f
"
how the project should move forward. Assuming that the project has merit after the concept review phase, the developer will ,
prepare a formal submittal to the city for the project. As previously defined, this would include continued collaboration r
between the city and the developer to ensure that the agreements made in principle are actually realized as part of the formal
development package. (Note that city staff has prepared a possible timeline for the formal approvals process that is included in \
the concept review package.)
City Team Role in Refining the Development Package f
,
As defined above under the agreement parameters, the city's team would have a continuing role in planning and designing the r
development through subsequent phases. This continued involvement provides the city with greater assurance that the
iO-.....
development agreement proposed under this concept review and in formal development submittals yet to come are adhered to
and that the city's interests as set forth under the agreements are protected. '
With respect to professional fees, the developer has agreed in principle to set aside funding in an escrow account to cover
future costs incurred by the city for consultants working on its behalf on the items listed under the agreement parameters
previously defined. The extent and terms of this agreement would be defined as part of the formal approvals process to protect
the interests of the city and the developer.
Brauer & Associates, Ltd. 8
.' :Conservation Development Planning City of Shako pee
Summary Statement
Through the collaborative effort between the city and developer, the development plan presented here offers the city the
opportunity to achieve higher community values than the previously approved Albinson plan. The collaborative process also
gives the city an opportunity to revisit previous land use decisions and determine the land use option that best serves its
interests in maintaining a high quality of life in the community.
Through each teams' recognition and respect for each others objectives, concerns, and perspectives, a plan emerged that is
believed to capture the essence of the conservation approach to development. This was done in spite of the fact that the site
itself was challenging and that both restraint and flexibility were needed to reach an agreeable and successful conclusion;
From the perspective of the consultant working on behalf of the city, a very reasonable and responsible balance between
ecology, culture, and economy has been reached for this site. It is our opinion that each party worked together in good faith
and that a superior development proposal resulted for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council.
IT">'
.;,\,
I,:"
..
H:\JEFF\2000\OO-38 Dean, Shakopee\Valley Green related\value statement file nav 29\community value statement.wpd
Brauer & Associates, Ltd. 9
. Conservation Development Planning City of Shako pee
:.
(H
i
l
f-"
f."
[.,
r
!
Exhibit A L
\
Development Concepts c'
i'
t
with Acreage Breakdown
(See Package Under Separate Binding)
f
"
1
t
"-
'I
I
\.
L'
I
l
(
\.
r
I
1
f
i
I'
l
I
1
i
Brauer & Associates, Ltd,
~ Co ~
~ en -
w -
~ :;) I- U
<CJ: ~ -
w 0 . ~ CQ u.r
~-~ wO - :J:
~:I:- enZ :J:
~u w< I-
VlWW :I:...J )(
Zu..:r: 1-< u..
~u..1- en- u.r
OOZ wI- 0
OZ
\.U~i: \.U
:I::l:1- ~'O ...I
1-1-- wU; <C
v)~3: >\.U
~c:: -
W\.UVl ~
I-Q:lW zO .
;2~3 ~~~ I.U
I-=>< c.~~ <C
c.nZ>
=>0...1 l-o..Z
~w~ Zc..o
=1- \.U<~
~-=> ~z-
:S~~ c..<>
~~z 9w~
,~:: ~ \.UI-cn
>U5cn
wO- w w
:I: ...J OC::Z
I-\.U-<C \.UUU;
~z=> :1:0:::>
00' I-I-c::l
"
rI ~ II
.
:..
II
l
r,
,",-.
"
r "
<
r-,
J . ,
- I · ,
il i I j] Ii;
f i S 1! .~-3
1: ~ '~~ ~!
~~ l ~ ..:if;;
$" 8 1 ~i~
~io~l ;~jl<~~
~'I..1 i~nl~
1'. 1fl 'III'} f
!bdl~I~. I
at ~ _
f'
II ! fa IL. .'. (
~1 l 1l HI
t1 ll~ H. lJl
its "'" Ii" ~
g . a ~,~ .2 ~o
E" B.. f -5,...
~U~h j~ 'H
~ IH ~li III Hil
dh ~H ol~ :z
'" .. ~
1 1 dJ I
11 h ! ~ Ii}
~j -n 8;'",!'
n5 11! i] [1'1
l!IH ~ w 2 ,h
"-ii. t" t,L !*"J
~ ~{ lr,h t'~!!
tl "I >'"tl ~.i' 'I'
0<: ~ i" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.. 'Ii
i i!l 'J. ~}111HI I
~ ".' !.. 0'. o. ,
~ .~<; '" ,.-
0..... rot ..,
t'
, '
.
~ {
,
,
'0'
ct
~ ~ I
~ . ,
~ ~
< ~
~ .m I
~ ~
(':
... .Jl ,
<U
~ ~
~ m {
~ 0 .
Q ~
- I
~Z ~
.- .<f 0
C~ u
=~ ~
E~ ~ .
Ew I I
Q I- 0 ,
UU~ I~
= fo::E a I
I- "'l:l ... . m .
- .- ...I
=is~
:2-=&.I.l
>< ::s >
w~O
"I "',
.!i :::h
~ u~.'
! {irE'
I ' l .),.
( r-,
I I ,~' I ~ '!l12 LLJ
I _i:1J C<:
UC<:~<
:I:<ZVI
I I ~ ~ ~ ~ .=
I 'I' ~e~i U
I , ~ Z Z 0 ,,~
o ~ Q....J i~
~ I ~ til ~ 0 'i
-1' -JO>G 3:1
OLLJfllO. J .'-_J
U~VI....J
I ..:(JZO__
~ lS 8 ~_o
I 9~fll~~./
LLJ-J :l-
I ~Z~VlO
OO:la5<~ "'
I \ s
I ! , i
:-:. I ~ ( ~ ~I '
,.. ~ u , 'LLJ
i ~i !*I: Z
I ' '-..... ~ ai ~~~ 2
I I 10 1 ~ ' ~~I ~
Ii,.. e~!i t;
1 :I: S z:~! ~
C>: g ~p, ~
I '1'1 2 8 ~_H a..
' :I: 1;/ -. ..aU w
\ !' I Q~ ill) 5
I IlILLJ~ i h "i'~
I I, 0 ,0
' I " __~___.... ' .. , J:
I II I '" 1;5 'VI
. , I I I ~ 'l~ u.
1 .. . '_' 0
\ {I/I ol~: ~ J:
I'" ~J. :', " U
I ' " t. ' ", ,.'1;;
I I ____,..__._..,.:,.___.. ' , '
II : I I'i ' :"_::::~' .~
\ ,I, " I' .. ',,''':
" ,I ".W
\ " " I:; 'MY''',,, ':t;
~, ': , -........--w.,....."u;;;:;-- '<
" , c!
..' <
\' '" ': J:
': :. u
\ :. 0: ,
,',: '" <:
I :', ',', ..(
\ :.... :,....
, ,
I Z
I Q
\--', ',', ~
I,,: ; "l..
\ ::\\.\: ~ W
Ii;""" u Z..-
\ " ::; _1J'l
COj::: ...I ...I
I :lz _
'\' ~ w ..... W ~
I :..' ~:::;: Z
' .' ""-w
I II "",;: as\.) W C
" " ,~': ai < ai 1-
\ li ::\~\.... '!l:; ~ ... r-
", 'ii', ' i:1J ~ Z Z ,...
\ ;:' ::,~,', zfll 0 .~
," ,::', 0..... - w,Z
: \ ,,', ;', ',: i= -< :< ~
~ ;,' : ; "... \CO '" ~ 3: ~ < <C
- ~-:::=c..~Ci./ ' ,--~~~;. "." 2 ~ gj ~ ~ ~ w
' ~ r" \ "\,;:;:'{:, Z t;; 0 ~ ~ U
I \\,: "', 8 0 ~:l ~ ~
II \\"" ',','" 'c<:Z W ~ W ~
'~:" C',;', w< 0 -< '"
\ """ :' ': ': 0<1\ Z > Z -
"';;' ,; :' I, z :: :l C2
II \. :::' II :l~ < ~ 0 IJ'l
", , , " L5 ..... uJ w Z
\ \. ':::, " c<:c>: ~ u _
' '\'. ::: " > <0 0 ~ 1- W
\" ',:: II ~ 0 u. Z Vl = r- Q..
';,':\11 ~ z~ ~ a5 0<0
,', ", " u.o ~ ~ < t; W _ >
,I '" :" U::I a.. -J :> ..: _ ~
'" ~', " : LS VI :l ;;;: ;> \) .......
\ '\,::: \ ':11 ~ ~ 01 ~ ~ ~ ~ _ w ~...
'", 'II < Z _ < _ .... _ riA
\ ',:::',', " ::! uJ W t;; u.I t;; Z _.., ~
'" I ~ 5 8 -~ - W - Z ~
..... < ....J (;S - (;S \.) ::J: 0 <C'
I I 0 ~uE::.
Vl
~
I-
~~
I-w
I'" O\~
I '" ~~
I illl' U I ~~ r
,I, zz. Z" I
I III ~g ~i'= b
I I,' ~<: J ~o
' ~ ~
' Sz ~~
I II' "0'< '1>15
I', "N::; J ~a:
' o"~ ~i'=
~I JJI' I ~~!';~ ~~~~!il
r- '< co Vl I .....0 :> 0 U
~......w ;;>oc..::Jx
=> ~ - Oc.. <""
' ~;l;~ . ~~" .~"
I I ~':a t ~~..~ 00
I C1~~< ~~
I , _ ~_
I D! ~ Z I- ~ ~';:_,
I ' ~) ~~~ ~12 r
3zo XVl (
x~g! 1-_
" ( 's;1 01- W
X 0"'" I-
' \ I "'z~" ~
'- " < - t: :E
! .~ 'z~~~
' ; <o~~
I i :E~C1Vl
D!o
~~ ,
~u_ ,
3'~'" ,
~~'~@
~@wo f
:5 $0 co" 0: :<l '" .
~~ m . ~~
0""1"-;:;; \" CJZ
~~~ol~ z2
~~-~ ~ ,,~
t: :;t :E t::i 1:3; U z .1.'..'," '
~~~~, x ~~
~i$",,, " ~~
~ . ~ 2' "z .
o g CJ "" & 2~ 9
oz~ ~ ~~ ~_ ~
--"0,,, ~ o'=~" z
"'" U~" " j;! "'1 \;l 0 0 "
HIj~:::: ~~. 6~ ~~ ~l'.
-"z'"" ~ z~~" u
zooz"" 'Z~ <''" '= 0
::;:: ~\^ 0 '" ~ ~ ~ z,' D!.:> on -'
~~- " -. ~> ~~
,.;, iii o~ ~w _U [.'
.,,, UZ,,~ ~~ ~l;;" .
io Vl5 i;:;; z>~ "
-;:::.~ ~8' 0<s o~~ ,
~> <D! c.. ~oVl
f&f<~(j ti;ttJ 6i=~
l-;2oz~ @D! ..zg!w {
~ozoo Vl8o<~~ I
:5U=>i=Z, ~o=>Q!~> :
~-'~~2 ~odz~~ ,
0g!1-~D! :::lI-ZQc..Vl
~ l;; ~ " "I- W < 0 - '< 0 => 1-"
< ~~ U~~,,~O ~ r
~<w~ @~o~~ Go=>~~u.o> Z
~" ~ >0:5 w~_ ~ I
~"" . ~~<3w~ ~m 'Z@~ LLl .
g~~ ~', ~~;t~8 ~12~ ~ " ~
" " ~ ',. · " , l
< ~ ~ ,. .. -
~~ o~. ',\\ \ sa
~~ " ;'" ....
I- 3: :E ;, 'a, ' Z
~ 0 ~ ~';, ':r :, f' ,
> ~ C1 ~ '. '.' . .
x.....Q!\>- , '.. <:
""Vl "1." ~
2 Iii ~ . "k .
X I- <\~ ,. ". I-
z'l>~o "',,, oJ ~
- > 0 ~. ..t .... ....
'" 5 W ".... . , ., ... ,,'!
z ~ w".. '.. _ _..
- 0 ~ D ": , " ',', I- U i
";;t;;~jZ:" "
~ ':/ ,'I , · '. , - '-" Z
-~'~~~, W~~
--- . , - 0;:
":::-r ".: ': I ;.. ~ U1!,
' '. , , .c
II \ ....." . l!~l ;; oJ z
\ " " . Ill" ....
I I \.. , ." . _ 0 <t
'.' ", 1 i"" :t: ...J
\ "., >< I- CI..
\ .... '" LLl <Il
. I ,.
\ \:..., \\ ,
\ ' ',',,'
I. "
\
\
. Co'tiservation Development Planning - City of Shakopee
November 27, 2001
Exhibit F - Stewardship Program Example
, ,~
Since developing and implementing a stewardship program is a new aspect of the development package, the following provides
an overview of potential costs for the program, funding options available, and an example of a stewardship fund agreement
Cost Projections and Funding Options
The following table provides a cost projection using unit costs. The table is provided to define the potential magnitude of
investment needed to achieve desired ecological objectives. Note that since a technical evaluation of the site has not been
completed, the costs shown. are typical averages on a per acre basis. Actual costs will likely vary, perhaps even considerably, as
the final design for natural areas is completed for the project.
Projected Restoration Costs (Years 1 - S)
Cover Type Estimated Acres Cost/Acre Projected Cost
Oak Savanna/Forest System 12.0 5,500 66,000
(Brushing and restoration)
Prairie/Upland Grassland System 28,0 3,000 84,000 ,
Wetland System 30.0 3,000 90,000
Ecological Ponds 8.0 8,500 68,000
(Plantings only, pond development is part of grading costs)
Reestabnshment of Oak Savanna I Forest System 6.0 20,000 120,000
(For area along shoreline to create visual buffer)
r:; (Cost range would be between $10,000 and $30,OOO/acre, depending
'.:;"
\ on conditions found and size of planting.
Enhanced Upland Prairie System 8.0 10,000 80,000
(More extensive use of wildflowers, etc, in select locations)
Total Potential Cost 'for Remedial Work (One Time Cost) 508,000
Projected Yearly long-Term Maintenance and Management Costs (Years 5 and beyond)
Cover Type Estimated Acres Cost/Acre Projected Cost
Oak Savanna/Forest System 18.0 200 3,600
Prairie/ Upland Grassland System , 28.0 200 5,600
Wetland System 30.0 300 9,000
Ecological Ponds 8.0 300 2,400
(Periodic sand removal. trash cleanup, and restoration)
Enhanced Upland Prairie System 8.0 500 4,000
,
Total Potential Cost for Yearly Maintenance Work 24,600
With respect to funding, the recommended approach is as follows:
~ Developer completes initial restoration of the natural systems within the cOnservation easements that are impacted by past
and future grading and site development activities. The developer would cover these costs directly at the time of
development Establishing the ornamental landscape and streetscape would also be the responsibility of the developer at
the time of development.
~ Developer establishes an endowment fund for restoring the remaining natural areas across the site and for ongoing
m,aintenance of all natural areas included in the development area. This would be expanded to include the ornamental
landscape as well.
Brauer & Associates, ltd. 1
. Con-servation Development Planning City of Shakopee
There are two funding options for the endowment fund:
1) Developer provides an initial contribution to the fund. The interest from this principal investment will be used for year to f'
year stewardship activities, minus 10 percent which is reinvested in the fund to build it up over time as a hedge against f.
int1ation and unknown costs.
2) Developer creates an association of homeowners and businesses that make yearly contributions to the fund.. 90% of the r... '.
proceeds would be used for the year's activities, with 10% being invested into the capital fund to again build it upover f
time as a hedge against inflation and unknown costs.
,
In all likelihood, a combination of the two funding options is expected. The actual amount of the contributions required for the i,
fund would be defined as part of the final developer's agreement with the city for the project once ,a final development plan is '
completed. It is recommended that the agreement between the city and the developer be formalized as part of the final "
development package so that it is part of the formal approvals process. Note also that in some cases, the city has also i
contributed to this fund as part of an overall agreement, although that has not been considered thus far as part of this project t
Example of Stewardship Fund Agreement f'
.
To add context to this discussion, attached is an example of a stewardship fund created as partof a conservation development
project in the City of Minnetonka, Minnesota. Although the details would change, the example covers the issues very well and
could serve as a model for this project
,
\
~:
I
f,..'.,',."...'
l'
'1
L
f
1
i
r
I
l
f .
H:\JEFF\2000\OO-38 Dean Shakopee\Valley Green related\value statement file nov 29\exhibit F stewardship program.wpd
Brauer & Associates, Ltd. 2
. c)l. t-\ l t>rr r .- ...~~ l:::..lA.J ~p":) fl.l \ ~OFY~l~E.1>
l1Go ~~~,...,. 1N.'foP'<"l.Al10t\). }..O '"DutLK.,.,
. . ~M?~E.. A-U-o...v~D tv rrHotfT Wf-. rm:r..
~~~S"10t\.., f)eo"
CLARION HILLS STEWARDSHIP FUND AGREEMENT "=$i2 ,.,. \'-"'t
~U\:i:...'K- ... A S'SCC..
This Agreement is made between Minnstar Builders, Inc. ("Minnstar'), a Minnesota
corporation, 7500 West 78th Street, Edina MN 55439, and the City ofMinnetonka ("City''), a
Minnesota municipal corporation, 14600 Minnetonka Blvd., Minnetonka MN 55345.
The City approved various land use applications submitted by Minnstar for property legally
described on attached Exhibit A, ("Clarion Hills"). Minnstar and the City engaged in a
cooperative approach toward the development of this property, using conservation development
principles. As part of the development proposal approved by the City, Minnstar and the City
agreed to establish an endowment fund for supporting on-going stewardship of ecologically
,_..'. sensitive areas in Clarion Hills.
Therefore, the parties agree as follows:
1. Fund Created. This Agreement establishes the Clarion Hills Stewardship Fund (the
"Fund"), to be financed and administered in accordance with this Agreement. The principal
of the Fund will consist of all contributions received pursuant to paragraphs 2 and 3 below
and from any other donor. In addition, the principal will be increased annually by anamOlmt
equal to ten percent of the investment earnings generated by the Fund in the previous year.
The remaining investment earnings will not accrue to the principal and will forever be treated
as accumulated investment earnings available for expenditure in accordance with this
Agreement.
2. Initial Contributions. The Fund will be initially financed by Minnstar's contribution of
$90,000 and the City's contributions of $20,000 in unrestricted funds and $31,050 in park
dedication funds. Payment of these amounts into the Fund will completed no later than the
date that the City issues the first certificate of occupancy for any construction in Clarion
Hills.
3. Annual Contributions. The Fund will also receive funds on an annual basis from the
Clarion Hills Homeowner's Association (the "Association"). The Association will annually
pay $100 for each residential unit in Clarion Hills that has received a certificate of occupancy ,
, from the City. The amount of the unit fee will be increased every five years commencing
January 1,2006, by the lesser of either (a) 10% or (b) a percentage amount equal to the
percentage increase, if any, in the U.S. Department of Labor) Bureau of Labor Statistics
Consumer Price Index (All Items, All Consumers, 1982-1984=100) which occurred during
the previous five-year period for the Midwest Urban Region Consolidated Metropolitan
Statistical Area. The Association will pay the fees by January 31 of each year, accompanied
by a report reciting the number of residential units that have been constructed and the units
which have paid the fee. The Association will be responsible for collecting the amounts from
each of the respective residential units, but the City will have the right to specially assess the
outstanding amount and any costs of collection against each unit that has not paid the fee to
the Association or to the City. Minnstar agrees on behalf of itself and all future owners of
@
'.
..
r. :
property in Clarion Hills that the City can make these special assessments without notice or a ;,
f:
hearing. On behalf of itself and all future owners of property in Clarion Hills, Minnstar
waives all rights to contest the validity of these special assessments. t" ~ - .
, '
t.
4. Custodian of the Fund. The City will be the custodian of the Fund and will create a
separate account for the Fund. The City will invest the Fund's money in the same manner as f'
! ,
other City funds, in accordance with the City's written investment policy. On behalf of itself i
and all future owners of property in Clarion Hills, Minnstar waives all claims against the City ,
resulting from the City's custody and administration of the Fund, except for claims caused t'
by the City's gross negligence or intentional misconduct. The City may choose at a later date \
to delegate custody and administration of the Fund to a separate trust agency, subject to r'
approval of the Association's Board of Directors, which approval may not be unreasonably , ,
r
withheld. t
5. Purposes of the Fund. The Fund will be used to pay:
a. the costs of implementing the Clarion Hills Ecological Stewardship Program (the
"Program" attached as Exhibit B), I
,
b. the costs of buying the property described on attached Exhibit C if in accordance with
the provisions of paragraph 6 below, f ,
c. the reasonable costs of Fund administration by any third party, t
d. the reasonable costs of collections,
e. the reasonable costs of enforcing the tenns of this Agreement or the Conservation r'
::>:>
Easements covering Clarion Hills property, and
f. the reasonable costs of restoring property damaged in violation of the Conservation
~,..
Easements. t
The party bringing the colleCtion or enforcement action or restoring property will fIrst r
attempt to recover the costs from the responsible party. If those costs are not recovered, then
the Fund may be 'used to reimburse those costs. The Fund will not be used for any costs
associated with the trail, rest station and overlook constructed at the tenninus of the trail, or ~
landscaping, all of which are to be constructed ,and maintained by the City within the trail i
l
easement area that will be created bya separate and subsequent trail easement agreement
between the Minnstar and the City. The City will be solely responsible for maintenance of f'
that trail, rest station, overlook, and associated landscaping. (
6. Expenditure Limitations. Expenditures from the Fund will be made only from accumulated l
investment earnings whenever possible. Expenditures may be made from principal, but may
not exceed an amount greater than the equivalent of the fund's investment earnings for the
prior two consecutive years. If expenditures from principal are made, either they must be [,
structured as a loan to repay the principal, or no further expenditures of any kind may be "
, made from the Fund until investment earnings have reestablished the principal at an amount !
equal to that existing before the expenditures plus ten percent of the investment earnings that
would have been earned per year if the principal had not been reduced. Notwithstanding I
2 @ I
\, -
'.
I
. .
these limitations, the City may use up to $50,000 of the principal of the Fund to buy the
property described on the attached Exhibi~ C, as long as the remaining principal is not less
than $140,000.
7. Expenditure Procedures. The City Manager and the Association will cooperate in
determining what work should be done to implement the Program. Before a contract is
signed for work to implement the Program, the specifications for the work must by reviewed
and approved by the Association's Board of Directors and the City Manager.
8. Exceptions. Exceptions to the terms provided above may be made only upon approval by
two-thirds of the members of the Association's Board of Directors and two-thirds of the
members of the City Council.
9. Periodic Review. The Association and the City will review this agreement every five years
to determine if any changes should be made.
10. Termination, Amendment. This Agreement may be amended or terminated only upon
approval by two-thirds of the members of the Association's Board of Directors and two-
thirds of the members of the City Council.
11. Elimination of Association. If the Association is disbanded, actions that require approval of
the Association's Board of Directors will be approved by a vote of the owners ofpropert}r in
Clarion Hills, counting only one owner per Unit, with the same percentage of votes required
for any action as required under this Declaration.
12. Covenant. The provisions of this Agreement apply to and bind the parties and each owner of
any part of Clarion Hills, and their respective successors and assigns, and must be included in
the Declaration establishing the Master Homeowners Association.
,..
13. Withdrawal from Participation. The City Council may decide to withdraw from
participation in the implementation of this Agreement, but not before five years have past
since execution of this Agreement. If the City Council decides to withdraw, the Fund will
continue to exist subject to the restrictions provided above, except that the Association will
undertake all obligations provided in paragraphs 3, 4, 7, and 9 without any involvement from
l' . the City.
Date: MINNSTAR BUILDERS, INC.
By
Its
3
(j)
. .
,
r
Date: ^ t:
CITY OF MINNETONKA "
!.
Ie,
r,
t;:
\';:",
By
Its Mayor ;
r
f. .
And
Its City Manager r
~-' ,
~.
STATE OF MINNESOTA} SS L
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
,
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of ,2001, by t..
; the of Minnstar Builders, Inc., on behalf of f
the corporation. I
r:
Notary Public 't
STATE OF MINNESOTA } . r
ss r
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ,
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of , 2001, by r
\
Karen J. Anderson and John Gunyou, the Mayor and City Manager respectively of the City of l
Minnetonka, on behalf of the corporation.
r
Notary Public j
i
I
i
4 I
l'
BJ r
!
;" .'
DRAFTED BY:
City of Minnetonka
14600 Minnetonka Boulevard
Minnetonka, :MN 55345
952-939-8200
}"':
5
@
.
r
i
EXHIBIT A L,
I
Clarion Hills f'
l
k'
Lots 1 through 11, inclusive, Block 1;
Lots 1 through 7, inclusive, Block 2; r-
,
Lots 1 through 4, inclusive, Block 3; f
Lots 1 through 3, inclusive, Block 4; r
Lots 1 through 3, inclusive, Block 5;
Lots 1 through 3, inclusive, Block 6; \
Lots 1 through 3, inclusive, Block 7; ll-hs, 0JOUL..l:> be:. r":
Lots 1 through 3, inclusive, Block 8; !
Lots 1 through 3, inclusive, Block 9; A LE..(?,l:) L 1)-t...'f)N lTIQA..I
Lots 1 through 3, inclusive, Block 10; Of f'~-e.. CoM~AC.\C..:V~--r~
Lots 1 through 3, inclusive, Block 11;
Lots 1 through 3, inclusive, Block 12; E.J::..'SE,M OJ\' Z6N6)
Lots 1 through 3, inclusive, Block 13;
Lots 1 through3, inclusive, Block 14; IMCLUDl/\t& .J.. SuK-c/6\jtP f
i
Lots 1 through 3, inclusive, Block 15; /)A).-'Y,
Lots 1 through 3, inclusive, Block 16; and [ ,
Outlots A, B,C, D, and E;
Clarion Hills, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof.
['
.,":".,-:
T
J
'-:,
t
!
r
f" '
(
l
t
"",
(Jj'>"'; ",
t "",..~
,~' J!f
, ,'.,
Exhibit B General Covenant for Clarion Hills Ecological Stewardship Program
Exhibit B: General Covenant for Clarion Hills Ecological
Stewardship Program
Overview: This covenant is a stipulated part of the Clarion Hills Stewardship Agreement between
Minnstar Builders, Inc. and the City of Minnetonka. The covenant defines the:
. Areas covered under the stewardship program.
. Stewardship program technical requirements for areas within and outside of the conservation
easements.
. Protocol for administration of the stewardship program.
Areas Covered Under the Stewardship Program: All areas that fall within the legally-defined
conservation easement for the Clarion Hills development shall be preserved and managed as a natural
open space in accordance witMhe Stewardship Program Technical Requirements for Conservation
,Easements defined below. All areas that fall outside of the legally-defined conservation easement shall be
managed in accordance with the Stewardship Program Technical Requirements for Areas Outside of the
Conservation Easements.
Stewardship Program Technical Requirements for Conservation Easements: The technical
requirements for restoring and managing the natural areas within conservation easements are defined
under the following documents:
. Technical specifications for restoring and managing resources: This is entitled City of
Minnetonka Standard Specifications for Eco/ooical Stewardship ProGram - Adapted for Clarion Hills
Develooment. These specifications shall be used exclusively for the stewardship program. Note that
the City of Minnetonka reserves the right to update these specifications in future years at their,
discretion to ensure consistency with the stewardship programs being used for city parks and 'open
spaces.
. Mapping: Two maps are included under the technical requirements for the stewardship program. The
first map is entitled Initial EcolOGical Restoration Mac, which establishes the initial restoration zones
across the site. These zones correlate to the Restoration and ManaGement Schedule, as defined
below. Included on this map is the restoration work completed by the developer in 2001. This was
done to avoid any confusion with the restoration work that the Homeowner's Association will be
responsible for in subsequent years, which will be funded through the Stewardship Fund. The second
map is entitled the Lona- Term EcolOGical Manaoement Map, which defines various management
zones across the site once the initial restoration is completed. All of this work is to be funded through
the Stewardship Fund. This map also correlates with the Restoration and Manaoement Schedule.
Note that these maps are subject to revision in accordance with the administrative protocol defined
below.
. Restoration and Management Schedule: This outlines the work to be completed each year for the
next 15 or so years. The schedule correlates with the mapping as defined above. Note that this
schedule is subject to revision in accordance with the administrative protocol defined below.
. Restriction of Uses within Conservation Easements: All uses within the defined conservation
easements shall be limited to ecological stewardship. No grading, drainage structures, built structures,
storage areas, lawn clippings, composting, etc. shall be allowed within the easement without previous
approval by the Homeowner's Association and the City of Minnetonka. Use of the area for recreational
vehicles (motorized and non-motorized) is strictly prohibited, with the exception of established trails
for pUblic use.
. Signage of the Conservation Easement: The conservation easement shall be legally defined and
clearly marked in the field to ensure that all homeowners know exactly where the easement line is
relative to their property. These markings shall provide the necessary visual cues for enforcement of
restrictions. Note that standardized signs as per City of Minnetonka standards shall be permanently
placed and recorded for each property within, the Clarion Hills development. A total of three signs shall
be provided for each property - one each where the conservation easement and side-yard property
lines intersect and one between these two In line with the conservation easement. Note that the side
yard signs can also be used for the adjacent properties. Installation of the signs shall be in
accordance with the sign specification.
1 W
Exhibit B General Covenant for Clarion Hills Ecological Stewardship Program
Stewardship Program Technical Requirements for Areas Outside of the Conservation Easements: ' . ,
;,
The technical requirements for these areas are limited to the following: t
~, ,
. Avoiding the use of undesirable and/or invasive plant species as defined by the City of Minnetonka.
The purpose of this requirement is to avoid the introduction and spread of non-native and invasive f"
plant species into natural open spaces within the city,. The Homeowner's Association shall request . '
from the City Forestry and Natural Resources Manager an updated list of acceptable and non- t,:
acceptable plants on a yearly basis. All properties owners within the Clarion Hills development shall .'
adhere to this requirement (,
1
1
. Adherence to a defined list of acceptable fertilizers, pesticides, chemicals, and other products to avoid ,
(
, harm to the natural ecological systems within the development The products that are acceptable and
their rate of application should be defined by the Homeowner's Association after review with their ,
"
ecologist and the City Forestry and Natural Resources Manager. All homeowners should be "
compelled to use only products and application rates approved by the Association. Note that should ,
the City of Minnetonka adopt guidelines for such products, the Homeowner's Association shall f"
thereafter adopt them for the Clarion Hills development. f
t
Protocol for Administration of the Stewardship Program: The follOWing defines the specific protocol
for administering the program on a year to year basis: i
. The Homeowner's Association shall meet with the City Forestry and Natural Resource Manager for
the City of Minnetonka each year to review the stewardship work to be completed during the following
year. The meeting shall be initiated by the Homeowner's Association during the month of October to (
aI/ow adequate time to prioritize stewardship needs and arrange for the work to be completed by a r
;,
contractor that is pre-qualified by the City of Minnetonka follOWing the city's standard procedures. The ~ '
work to be perfolT!1ed unqer the stewardship program shall be limited to that which can be funded f
through the Stewardship Fund.
. The Homeowner's Association shall hire an ecologist that is pre-qualified by the City of Minnetonka
following the city's standard procedures to oversee the work being done, Note that the city's staff time
commitment each year shall be limited to the meeting in October and periodic site visits at their ['
discretion to make sure that the ecological work is being done in accordance with the stewardship ',"
program requirements. Day-to-day oversight of the stewardship program shall be the responsibility of
the Homeowner's Association and their qualified representatives. Final decisions on yearly schedules '/"
shall be made by the Homeowner's Association, with final approval of the program by the City of 1
Minnetonka.
· ' The Homeowner's Association shall be responsible for enforcement of the provisions of the ecological r
stewardship program.
. At the discretion of the Homeowner's Association, a Natural Resource Committee can be formed to
provide oversight ofthe stewardship program. A three person group shall be the minimum size for the
Committee. !
f
L
Referenced Attachments:
. City of Minnetonka Standard Specifications for Ecological Stewardship Program - Adapted. for Clarion r
Hills Development.
. Initial Ecological Restoration Map \
. long':'Term Ecological Management Map
. Restoration and Management Schedule I
l
[
\
I
H:\JEFF\1 ~c:chenmll<.a\exhlblt B covenant for st8W8ldahlp progrem,wpd l
2 IJ
.
Restoration and Management Schedule
Clarion Hills Development - Minnetonka, MN
Prepared by Applied Ecological Services, Inc.
30-Apr-01
Tasks Year 2 - 2002 (ENDOWMENT) Acres
2002 Initial Restoration Area: -
2a. Brushing 1.9
2b. Burning 1.9
2c. Seeding/Planting 0.25
2d. Herbiciding 025
2e. Remedial Brush Management 1
2f. Burning (Prioritize 2001 Initial Resto Area) 2.5
'2g, Enhancement Planting 0.5
2h. Remedial Weed Control 1
2i. Ecological Review 18
TOTAL YEAR TWO 27.3
Tasks Year 3 (ENDOWMENT) Acres
2003 Initial Restoration Area: -
3a. Brushing 2
3b. Burning 2
3c. Seeding/Planting 0.25
3d. Herbiciding 0.25
3e. Remedial Brush Management ' 1
3f, Burning (Prioritize 2001-2002 Initial Resto Areas) 2.5
3g. Enhancement Planting 0.5
3h. Remedial Weed Control 1
3i. Ecological Review 18
TOTAL YEAR THREE 27.5
Tasks Year 4 (ENDOWMENT) Acres
2004 Initial Restoration Area: -
4a. Brushing 1.9
4b. Burning 1.9
4c. Seeding/Planting 0.25
4d. Herbiciding 0.25
Page 1 of 4
@
. . ,
:
4e. ,Remedial Brush Management 1 t.
4f. Burning (Prioritize 2001~2003 Initial Resto Areas) 2.5
4g. Enhancement Planting 0.5 (:.'
!
4h. Remedial Weed Control 1 ,L
4i. Ecological Review 18
TOTAL YEAR FOUR 27.3
i
Tasks Year 5 (ENDOWMENT) j
Acres
2005 Initial Restoration Area: -
;
5a. Brushing 1
,
5b. Burning 1
5c. Seeding/Planting 0.25 C'
5d. Herbiciding 0.25 t'
5e. Remedial Brush Management 1
Sf. Burning (Prioritize 2001-2004 Initial Resto Areas) 2.5
, ,
5g. Enhancement Planting 0.5
5h. Remedial Weed Control 1
5i. Ecological Review 18
TOTAL YEAR FIVE 25.5 ,
\
Tasks Year 6 (ENDOWMENT) Acres
2006 Initial Restoration Area: - t
6a. Brushing 1.3
6b. Burning 1.3
6c. Seeding/Planting 0.25 f~(
6d. Herbiciding 0.25
6e. Remedial Brush Management 1
6f. Burning (Prioritize 2001-2005 Initial Resto Areas) 2.5 '!
6g. Enhancement Planting 0.5 l.-,
6h.'Remedial Weed Control 1
6i. Ecological Review 18 t
TOTAL YEAR SIX 26.1
Tasks Year 7 (ENDOWMENT) Acres r
2007 Initial Restoration Area: - \
l".
7a. Brushing 1.6
7b. Burning 1.6 I'
7c. Seeding/Planting 0.25
!
7d. Herbiciding 0.25
7e. Remedial Brush Management 1 1
7f. Burning (Prioritize 2001-2006 Initial Resto Areas) 2.5
7g. Enhancement Planting 0.5
7h. Remedial Weed Control 1 t
' '
7i. Ecological Review 18
TOTAL YEAR SEVEN 26.7
Tasks Year 8 (ENDOWMENT) Acres \
8a. Remedial Brush Management 1 I
8b, Burning (Unit 1 Areas) 2.5 i
!
Page 2 of 4 , [
~
i
. ,
8c. Enhancement Planting 0.5
8d. Remedial Weed Control 1
8e. Ecological Review 18
TOTAL YEAR EIGHT 23
Tasks Year 9 (ENDOWMENT) Acres
9a. Remedial Brush Management 1
9b. Burning (Unit 2 Areas) 2.5
9c. Enhancement Planting 0.5
9d. Remedial Weed Control 1
ge. Ecological Review 18
iOTAl YEAR NINE 23
Tasks Year 10 (ENDOWMENT) Acres
10a. Remedial 8rush Management 1
10b. Burning (Unit 3 Areas) 2.5
10c. Enhancement Planting 0.5
1 ad. Remedial Weed Control 1
'10e. Ecological Review 18
.
TOTAL YEAR TEN 23
Tasks Year 11 (ENDOWMENT) Acres
11 a. Remedial Brush Management 1
11 b. Burning (Unit 4 Areas) , 2.5
11 c. Enhancement Planting 0.5
11 d. Remedial Weed Control 1
11 e. Ecological Review 18
TOTAL YEAR ELEVEN 23
Tasks Year 12 (ENDOWMENT) Acres
12a. Remedial Brush Management 1
12b. Burning (Unit 1 Areas) 2.5
12c. Enhancement Planting 0.5
12d. Remedial Weed Control 1
12e, Ecological Review 18
TOTAL YEAR TWELVE 23
, ' Tasks Year 13 (ENDOWMENT) Acres
13a. Remedial Brush Management 1
13b. Burning (Unit 2 Areas) 2.5
13c. Enhancement Planting 0.5
13d. Remedial Weed Control 1
13e. Ecological Review 18
TOTAL YEAR THIRTEEN 23
Tasks Year 14 (ENDOWMENT) Acres
14a. Remedial Brush Management 1
, 14b. Burning (Unit 3 Areas) 2.5
Page 3 of4 6
.
:
r"
14c. Enhancement Planting 0.5 \,,'
tn
14d. Remedial Weed Control 1
14e. Ecological Review 18 [:
TOTAL YEAR FOURTEEN 23
Tasks Year 15 (ENDOVVMENT) Acres r
i
15a. Remedial Brush Management 1 I
15b. Burning (Unit 4 Areas) 2.5
15c. Enhancement Planting 0.5 I
15d. Remedial Weed Control 1 j.
,
15e. Ecological Review 18
TOTAL YEAR FIFTEEN 23 F',
, '
[
Tasks Year 16 (ENDOWMENT) Acres
16a. Remedial Brush Management 1
16b. Burning (Unit 1 Areas) 2.5
16c. Enhancement Planting 0.5
16d. Remedial Weed Control 1
16e. Ecological Review 18 ,
I
TOTAL YEAR SIXTEEN 23
r
f'
"
r
l
t
'I
i
L'
I
I
1
!
l.
, !
!
i
I
t,
Page 4 of 4 !
@ I
\
.
.
CITY OF MINNETONKA
STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR
ECOLOGICAL STEWARDSHIP PROGRAM
ADAPTED FOR
CLARION HILLS DEVELOPMENT
Revised
April 2001
@J
<
Appendix D - West Dean's Lake Park Master Plan
South bridge Community / Ueans Lake Area I 1'\1"1" I I'\I"'--LLJ
OVERALL TRAIL PLAN 1 NEIGHBORHOOD PARK PRESERVE 5 SMAll PARK PARCEL 9 OPEN SPACE
May 10, 2001 Approximately 50 acres. developed fOf recre...lional uses Beoe...th p"""'C line easement aOO J'dft of ponding area No! I.1rge enough foe any ceae...tional developm<-nt. ......_11100
as well as a nature pc""""" (see enlargement plan), (Of housing development. Provide minimal development Suggest mainlaining it as nalural green space, ""~~'I.,.('It2)J.-,J
2 OPEN SPACE (see enlargement plan), 10 SMAll PARK PARCEL
Not large enough foe any recreational development. 6 OPEN SPACE Pcovides neighbochood ronnection to !rails and in(""",,1
Suggest maintaining it as natural green space, BeI1(>.ath p"""'c line easement aOO J'dft of Deans ldke green spare,
3 OPEN SPACE an,a, Pcovides access to trail system, 11 SMAll PARK PARCEl
No! large enough foe any ceaealional development. 7 OPEN SPACE large enough fOf minmal recreational development (see
Suggest mainlaining it as natural green space, Not large enough foe any recreational development enlargement plan),
4 OPEN SPACE Suggest ll1<linl.1ining it as natural green space, 12 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PARCEL
Paft of grt.'Cf1way syslem I power line easement along 8 OPEN SPACE Will help provide ballfields, open field space and
Soulhbridge Parkway_ Trail system located in greenway Not large enough (oc any recn-ational development playground activities foe the neighbochood,
with areas cJ: interest aOO seating along trail. Naturall Suggest maintaining it as natural green space oe provide
native landscape theme, some small romer ornamental planting beds,
pa ~ South bridge Community / Deans Lake Area Master Plan Project ~
. lllO ... ...
HAKOPEE GRAI'IDC SCAl.E
- -- - ---.-- ~.. -- --~.._.- ~,- -~ -
) ,
Appendix E - The 106 Group Phase I Archeological
Review i
106 group ltd.
r.:l cultural resources
",,1
", I
1,,:,1 management
PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICALSURVEYFOR THE
, J
i< PROPOSED VALLEY GREEN CORPORATE CENTER
".:'.'
;: U! SHAK.OPEE, SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
L.J
" } SHPO File No. 2000-1523
. . ,.
Ii'..:. Minn. Archaeological License No. 00-032
"l.'..'.'
BMI No. Tll.20132
~ The 106 Group Project No. 00-16
~,;, '.,
t)
n
(}'
.iT!
'd
i:~'..
~t;'
r] Submitted to:
i Bolton & Menk, In.c.
t.
n
j
i Submitted by:
The 106 Group Ltd.
.l
;'1
\i.'....
It......;-.:
, )
~l
J
, April 2000
'.j
, "'"~~-
f:.
l.."
r uf 370 Selby Ave.
>, 81. Paul, MN 55102
i~ :. http://www,106group,com
!:j Tel: 651.290.0977 Fax: 651.290.0979
,
~J
Pi
Fl
i PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE
F! PROPOSED V ALLEY GREEN CORPORATE CENTER
' !
[j SHAKOPEE, SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
[1
[J SHPOFile No. 2000-1523
Minn. Archaeological License No. 00-032
0 Bl\.fi No. Tll.20132
The 106 Group Project No., 00-16
n
PI, Submitted to:
i. ~,. Bolton & Menk, Inc.
W 1515 EastHighway 13
Burnsville, Minnesota 55337-6857
'.?'.
[j
Submitted by:
n The 106 Group Ltd.
,.-.) The Dacotah Building
370 Selby A venue
li St. Paul, MN55102
[J Principal Investigator and Report Author:
Elizabeth J. Abel
r1
, j
[}
n
-, ,
61 April 2000
[J
'"""j
, r
",.1
[1 Valley Green Corporate Center
Phase I Archaeological Survey
r."~,l.. P~i
Ll
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
[;
During April 2000, The 106 Group Ltd. completed a Phase I archaeological
ITj rec~nna~ssance survey for the propo~ed Valley Green Corporate Center development
. project m Shakopee, Scott County, Mmnesota. The survey was undertaken on behalf of
F Bolton & Menk, Inc., in order to assist the City of Shakopee in the completion of an
[1 Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR). In accordance with the Minnesota Field
Archaeology Act, the survey was conducted under Minnesota Archaeological License No.
[.1' 00-032, issued by the Office of the State Archaeologist. Site preparation requires a U.S.
bJ Army Corps of Engineers Nationwide (Section 404) permit for the alteration of wetlands;
therefore, the survey was conducted in accordance with the regulations implementing
IT.]: Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (36 CFR Part
tL 800).
rl The survey area includes approximately 332 acres (134 hectares) located in the
~:j SE'A of Section 9 and the SW~ of Section 10, T115N, R22W, Scott County, Minnesota.
The Phase I survey included background research to identify recorded sites and previous
n surveys within the project and a one-mile (1.6-kilometer [km]) vicinity, and a field
U investigation consisting of pedestrian sur:vey and shovel test excavations. A total of 14'
.. ' shovel tests were excavated in areas assessed as having a moderate or better potential for
~ containing intact arch~eological resources. Tests reache~maximum d~pths ran~ing
, between 57 and 90 centimeters (cm) below the surface, well mto the underlymg SUbSOIl.
rJ The survey identified no archaeological ,sites within the project's area of potential
L effect, and indicates that there is little probability that the project area contains
n unidentified archaeological resources of historical significance. '
l.:::;1
:
~ J
~1
f4~
q
" J
',.,.,,1
w
g.~'.'~,',
CJ
UI.
:'::'
~,;;
J
FI Valley Green Corporate Center
Phase I Archaeological Survey
r-1 Page ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
r'
, I
, MANA GEMENT SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... i
['1
(:: J TABLE OF CONTENTS ........ .............................~....................................................... ......... ....................... ii
LIST 0 F FIGURES .............................................................................,........................................................ iii
["1
: .::1 LIST 0 F TAB LES .................. .......................................................................................... ........................... iv
r,: . 'i 1.0 INTR 0 D U cn ON ................................... ......~........................... .......................... ............... ................. 1
l:J '
, .... 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTIN G ........................................................................................................ 3
o 3.0 METH 0 DS ...... .................................................................................................... ................................ 4
4.0 BACK GR 0 UNO RESEA R CH ................................................................ .......... ................................ 6
n
',:1 5. 0 RESULTS ....................................................................................;....................... .................. .............. 8
6.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................. 11
0, 7.0 REFEREN CES .................................................................................................................... .............. 12
Uul APPENDIX A: MINNESOTA ARCHAEOLOGICAL LICENSE........................................................ 14
APPENDIX B: PROJECT CORRESPONDENCE ................................................................................15
[.1 APPENDIX C: LIST OF PROJECT PERSONNEL.............................................................................. 16
o
[i
n
k,l
i..~-;,J
fl
.,1
[.'."i
i
~D
',..."...'1
:<<
i.;,:.:::J
~ :J
,I
':';'j
Ll Valley Green Corporate Center
Phase I Archaeological Survey
[1 Page iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Li
FIGURE 1. PROJECT LOCA TION ...................................................................................................................... 2
D FIGURE 2. PROmCT PLAN..... .................................. ............... ........................ ........... ....... ..................... ......... 9
[1
LJ
"
0
D
. ,
[1:
[J
~. ".,:..
U
:1
k
":1
U
U
"
'0"'
."".
''"~
, 1
U
"
U
'~
".~::~.
t.".,-.
m
I.'...
J
II Valley Green Corporate Center
Phase I Archaeological Survey
Q Pageiv
II LIST OF TABLES
[1 ' TABLE 1: REPRESENTATIVE SOn.. PROFll..E, SHOVEL TEST 8 ........................................................................... 8
..
[]
LI
[J
[1
,[l
, ,
':':J
b
..,
LJ
[1
Li
W
,:>:
";'.'
LJ
Li
I
ITl
I..
U
; :
. 1
W
J Valley Green Corporate Center
Phase I Archaeological Survey
r.-:-J Page 1
,<<I
~
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1 1
1
-'
'j The 106 Group Ltd. conducted a Phase I archaeological survey for the proposed
U Valley Green Corporate Center project on April 14 and April 17, 2000. The survey was
completed under contract to Bolton & Menk, Inc;, in order to assist the City of Shakopee
"1 in completing an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR). The Valley Green
Corporate Center project entails the development of 332 acres (134 hectares) as a
'....1 , business park, containing a' mix of office, warehouse, retail, light industrial, and
commercial use. Grading for the. project site requires an Army Corps of Engineers
i..j Nationwide (Section 404) permit. Therefore, the survey was conducted in accordance
....
with the regulations implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
U of 1966, as amended (36 CFR Part 800). In accordance with the Minnesota Field
f
_.:--,: Archaeology Act, the survey was conducted under Minnesota Archaeological License No.
00-032, issued by the Office of the State Archaeologist. The 332-acre (l34.:.hectare)
0 survey area is located in the SElA of Section 9 and the SW1A of Section 10, T115N,
1.-':
L.: R22W, Scott County, Minnesota.
r:,) The primary objective of the Phase I archaeological survey was to determine if
'J
i., any archaeological sites located within the area of potential effect (APE) of the Valley
,:,,;..1 Green Corporate Center project are potentially eligible for inclusion on the National
UJ ' Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The Phase I archaeological survey for this project
included: (1) research on previously reported sites and archaeological surveys within one
U mile (1.6 kilometers [lan]) of the project area; (2) a review of historic plat maps of the
project area to assess the potential for historical archaeological resources; and (3) a field
survey, including pedestrian reconnaissance and shovel test excavations, to identify
J archaeological resources within the project's construction limits.
"
The following report details the methods, results, and recommeQ.~ations for the
J Phase I survey performed for the Valley Green Corporate Center project. Chapter 2
includes information on the environmental setting of the project area. ,.. Chapter 3
describes the survey methods employed. Chapter 4 presents the results of the background
U research for the project area. Chapter 5 discusses the results of the field investigation.
(~:~:;t Chapter 6 summarizes the survey results and presents recommendations for the project.
Chapter 7 is the bibliography for the report. Appendix A is a copy of the Minnesota
U Archaeological License issued to the principal investigator, Appendix B contains
' ,
pertinent project-related correspondence, and Appendix C is a list of The 106 Group
:J project personnel.
~ .
l1
s,::_:_
':.:'"";':'
......
f,';
'J
F:
:J
~'.<
LI KEY ~~>J"~
n II PROJECT LOCATION \........,..
"
LI
D
"
0
L
.,'1
Q
.'.'
S
0
t
i
:~
:......:..
.... ~ '.
f<~:
U
J
.' ,
j
'1
L~
:\ i
i 1
, J SOURCE: USGS QUADRANGLE 7.S MINUTE SERIES. EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA (1967, PR1993).
U VALLEY GREEN CORPORATE CENTER PROJECT LOCATION
PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY
SHAKOPEE, SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA N
~ W-+E
f':
".,. t
0 l! 1 MILE
, S
U 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 FEET
- - - ,
..
FIGURE 1
j
, I Valley Green Corporate Center
Phase I Archaeological Survey
~ P~3
:.1
r-, 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
i
1._ _,
n The project area lies in the northeastern portion of Scott County, Minnesota,
:J within the Minnesota River valley. It is bounded to the north by Trunk Highway (TH)
, 169; to the south by the south section line of Sections 9 and 10, T114N, R22W; to the
" : westby County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 83; and to the east by Deans Lake. The
;! current land use has been a mix of cultivated land, wooded areas, open, grassy areas, and
marsh surrounding Deans Lake.
The geomorphic region for the project is the Minnesota Valley Outwash,
consisting of nearly level to rolling terraces or outwash and bottomlands along the river
"l (Agricultural Experiment Station 1973:10). The Valley Green Corporate Center project
d is situated on outwash and terraces and does not encompass river bottoms. Consequently,
the soils within the project are made up of loamy sand overlying sand and gravel. The
fl project area contains soils belonging to the Hubbard, EstherviIle, Waukegan, and
U Zimmerman series, and marsh land (Harms 1959). Although the portion of the project
,_' area where shovel tests were excavated is mapped as Terril sandy loam, 0-6 percent slope
;J (Harms 1959:22), the soil profiles in the test excavations most closely matched those
(,- described for Hubbard fine sand, 0-2 percent slope. The Hubbard fine sand profile
!~,::.]..' described by the Soils Conservation Service (Harms 1959) consists of a,pproximatelY 7
1:':;9 inches (18 centimeters [cm)) of very dark brown loamy fine sand over 13 inches (33 em)
i0.' of dark brown fine sand, over a subsoil of dark brown fine sand that extends to a depth of
,] approximately 38 inches (97 cm).
The dominant vegetation over the project area and vicinity at the start of the
1 historic era consisted of prairie grasses, with forest covering the river bottoms. At the
LJ time the present field survey was conducted, grading and site preparation had begun in
the lower-lying, northern and western portions of the project, which had been under
'.l cuIfivation. However, the southern portion of the project, above the 760-feet (ft.) cant. our
: ' line (see Figure 1), was intact. This area was covered in a mixture of grasses and trees,
including oak, prickly ash and juniper, with the heaviest forest cover occurring on the
Q terrace escarpment north ofCSAH 16.
n
L.J
:.'-j,1
..
t .:
tJ'O;:
l;.'~ '
...'.:..
I....
i....'.
tJ':"
-.,..;...
...
~ I
;
'i:.;.;.J
HI Valley Green Corporate Center
Phase I Archaeological Survey
[""'...'.,.1 Page 4
".!
"
3.0 METHODS
Li
~] The objective of the Phase I archaeological survey was to determine if there are
~J archaeological resources within the Valley Green Corporate Center project area that are
potentially eligible for inclusion on the NRHP. The field survey was conducted by
L'.'.-1 Elizabeth J. Abel, Kristen M. Zschomler, and Heidi Ekstrom on April 14 and April 17,
J 2000. All work was conducted in accordance with the SHPO Guidelines for
Archaeological Projects in Minnesota (1993), the Secretary of the Interior's Standards
L' " and Guidelines forArcheology and Historic Preservation (48 Federal Register 44716-
"i 44740), and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Treatment of
Archaeological Properties: A Handbook (1980).
U The area of potential effect (APE) for archaeological resources includes the entire
332-acre (134-hectare) parcel slated for development as the Valley Green Corporate
rq Center project. Prior to the field survey, The 106 Group conducted preliminary
[j background research at the Minnesota Historical Society and the State Historic
.. .' Preservation Office (SHPO). The purpose of the background research was to identify any
rJ previously recorded sites within the project area, and to assess what types of sites the
L project area might potentially contain. ,Staff reviewed the SHPO records to identify
1:' ',' previously reported sites and surveys within one mile (1.6 Ian) of the project area. In
lliJ addition, staff also reviewed historical plat maps of the project area to assess the potential
, for historical archaeological resources.
U A preliminary visual survey was conducted of the entire project area. Areas
considered to have low potential for containing cultural resources included low-lying,
1"'1 poorly drained areas; inundated areas; areas with a greater than 15 percent grade; and
t.J extensively disturbed or eroded areas in which Holocene deposits have been significantly
disturbed. Areas considered to have a moderate or better potential include elevated, well-
L~ dr~ined areas wit~in 150 m (500 ft.) of Deans ~ake. The 7.5-minuteseries Eden Pra~rie, ,
i Mznn., topographIc quadrangle (U.S. GeologIcal Survey [USGS] 1967, photorevIsed
1993) indicates that Deans Lake may once have occupied a larger area within the project
tl than it does at ~re~ent, extending west and northwest (see. Figure 1). we. ll-drained,
~J elevated areas wIthin 150 m (500 ft.) of the former potential extent of the lake were
induded in the portions of the project assessed as having moderate to better potential for
L','.'.'l containing archaeological resources.
, j
Much of the project area below (north of) the 760-ft. contour line on the USGS
L! topographic qu~drangle wa.s already graded at the t.ime ~he field su~ey began. B~c~use
, the graded portIOn of the SIte was generally low-Iymg, It was conSIdered to have llIruted
B.:-."j. pot.ential for containing archaeological sites. This portion of the project was subjected to
U walkover and visual inspection, but no systematic pedestrian survey was conducted here
because of its limited potential and the extensive disturbance.
'..1
f~l!
~
f. .j
! i
W
LI Valley Green Corporate Center
Phase I Archaeological Survey
0 Page 5
L: The southern portion of the project area, above the 760-ft. contour line, was intact
at the time of the survey. This well-drained area may have bordered Deans Lake during
wetter climatic periods when the lake potentially filled a more extensive basin.
[1 Consequently, this portion of the project was assessed as having a moderate or better
probability of containing archaeological resources. Less than 25 percent of the ground
surface was visible in this area, and shovel test excavations were the primary survey
[1 method used. Archaeologists conducted a pedestrian reconnaissance of this portion of the
project at 2S-meter (m) (82-ft.) intervals to determine whether any cultural features were
evident and to determine the optimal locations for shovel test excavations. Shovel test
U excavations were conducted at IS-m (SO-ft.) intervals. Tests were circular pits measuring
approximately 35 em (14 in.) in diameter, and excavated into the underlying subsoil.
Soils excavated from shovel tests were screened through lA-inch hardware cloth to ensure
'0 the consistent recovery of cultural materials.
rn Fieldwork was documented through the field supervisor's log of daily activities,
which recorded the locations, methods, and results of reconnaissance testing. All shovel
tests were numbered individually and mapped in relation to existing natural and cultural
'U features. Standard documentation of shovel test excavations included descriptions of soil
stratigraphy, texture, inclusions (natural and/or cultural), degree of compactness and
Munsell@ color chart hue, value and chroma.
~
...:~ :,: Copies of project documentation, including correspondence, records research,
.',.'. field notes, and maps, are maintained by The 106 Group Ltd. at its offices in St. Paul.
U
"1
I
Ii
....
U
M
;":.
I>,;t
".':1.
, 1
U
1'- ."J
:. j
U
f
'0
.
:;.-..,
, ,
U
U
.-..
[J Valley Green Corporate Center
..
Phase I Archaeological Survey
[1 Page 6
4.0 BACKGROUND RESEARCH
U
~J Prior to the field investigation, The 106 Group staff conducted a review of the
L SHPO site files for known archaeological sites and previously surveyed areas within one
mile (1.6 km) of the Valley Green Corporate Center project area. Research indicated that
LI there are no recorded sites within the project area. There are, however, recorded sites
within a one-mile (1.6-km) radius of the project area.
i I Since the rnid-1970s, a number of archaeological investigations have been
I conducted in the general vicinity of the project area in Scott County, largely in response
L'
,',
to federal- and state-mandated cultural resource inventory, evaluation, and mitigation
J requirements. These have resulted in the identification of several American Indian
;. : habitation and mound sites, artifacts and lithic scatters, and cultural material findspots, as
well as post-contact, Euro-American sites in Scott County. Few of the recorded
g archaeological sites in the region and in the county have been either intensively tested or
~ ,,": investigated through extensive excavation and analysis, and many have not been
J identified or dated beyond the level of the major cultural tradition.
Site 21SC25 is located in the NY2,of the SE'A of Section 2, T1l5N, R22W. The
:.1 site is an earthwork that is possibly a burial mound, although the site has not been
authenticated. Several other habitation and mound group sites. have been identified in the
ilij. general vicinity of the project, but they are located two or more miles from the Valley
J Green Corporate Center project area. Known sites in the vicinity tend to be located on
the bluff edge overlooking the Minnesota River floodplain as well as adjacent to the
riverine and lacustrine features within the Minnesota River bottomlands or floodplains.
J A number of surveys have been conducted with negative results within one mile
(1.6 km) of the project area. Woolworth (1976) surveyed the WY2 of Section 15 and the
J EY2 of Section 16, Tl15N, R22W, and did not identify any sites. Mather (1995)
conducted a reconnaissance survey covering the NY2 of the NE'A of Section 10, T115N,
R22W, reporting no sites in the area. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (Berg 1995) surveyed
~..~ an area roughly covering the SW'A and SY2 of the NWl,4 of Section 15; the SE'A and the
"
d SY2 of the NE'A and the NE-NEIA of Section 16; and NY2 of the NE'A and the NE-NW'A
';".1
of Section 21. That survey was also negative. The 106 Group Ltd. (Peterson and
'I Schmidt 1997) conducted a Phase I survey immediately east of the current project arejl for
1
i.....I the proposed Southbridge Development. This survey of 550 acres (223 hectares) within
the BE'A of Section 10, the SW'A and the WY2 of the SE'A of Section 11, the NY2 of the
I NEl,4 of Section 15, and the NY2 of the NW'A and the NW-NE'A of Section 14 was
J negative.
;j Background research also included a review of historic plat maps of the project
:..."
, .,
t, area to assess the.. potential for historical archaeological sites. Maps from 1858, 1890,
] 1898, 1913, and 1944 wereexarnined during the review. The 1890 plat (c. M. Foote &
~,:-..
'J
' '
LJ ,Valley Green Corporate Center
Phase I Archaeological Survey
(1 Page 7
L,j Co.) is the first map to show a structure within the project area. The 80 acres forming the
south half of the SEtA of Section 9 belonged to a John Kline, and this was presumably,his
house. The house is shown on plat maps from 1898 (Northwest Publishing Company),
[J 1913 (Webb Publishing Company), and 1944' (Dahlgren), with the same 80-acre parcel
, belonging to a Christ Anderson throughout these decades. The property does not predate
1870 and is not associated with any historically significant events or persons.
El
b
0
,,'
[1'
U
W
','
U
1,1
L '
W
I
;
W
~
":'iI
,.~~~
"'1
0
i
J,
w
'~l
f^7.
u
U
<,.J
'I
,...
'..l
Ll Valley Green Corporate Center
Phase I Archaeological Survey
Q ~8
" , 5.0 RESULTS
Li
:i
,:1
fl The Phase I field investigation of the proposed Valley Green Corporate Center
t...J project area was conducted on April 14 and April 17, 2000. The field methods included a
walkover and visual inspection of the entire project area to assess the condition of the
r[ portions of the project that had a moderate or better potential for containing significant
L archaeological resources.
,
i Grading and preparation of the site for development had begun prior to the field
61 survey. Site preparation included demolition of the residence that stood in the southeast
portion of the project area, and grading of the surrounding land, as well as grading/filling
D and drainage pond construction north of the approximately 760-f1. contour on the USGS
ILl topographic map. However, the project area at the base of the escarpment running along
the southern edge of the project area above the 760-ft. contour was intact. From a review
D of the USGS top.ographic qua~ran~le, th~s area may have formed t?e south~rn shore of
lW Deans Lake dunng wetter clImatIc penods when the lake and Its assocIated marsh
;':.;.1' expanded. A. s a conseq~ence, this ~or:tion of the pr~ject area w.as assessed as having a
L moderate or better potentIal for contammg archaeologIcal resources.
" Archaeologists conducted a pedestrian survey of the higher potential area in the
~~ southern portion of the project (above the 760-ft. contour) at 25-m (82-ft.) intervals to
. ,\ determine the optimal locations for shovel test excavations and to identify any surface
U evidence of archaeological features or materials. The area is covered largely in grasses
I:,. with scattered trees and brush, with denser tree cover immediately adjacent to the foot of
the escarpment. Although modern appliances and trash were strewn throughout the
{ \ wooded escarpment.and along its base in some locations, the survey identified no surface
U evidence of archaeological features or artifacts.
A total of 14 shovel tests were excavated within the southern portion of the
w project area as indicated in Figure 2. Tests extended into the underlying sand subsoil, and
reached maximum depths of between 57 and 90 em below the surface. A typical soil
1.111 profile exposed during testing included a surface horizon of very dark gray (lOYR 311)
U fine loamy sand over a thick horizon of dark grayish-brown (10YR 3/2) fine sand,
overlying a brown (10YR 4/3) fine sand subsoil. Table 1 outlines a typical shovel test
']
U profile as exposed in Shovel Test 8.
Table 1: Representative Soil Profile, Shovel Test 8
, ;
i !
W Depth below Munsell Color
Surfa~e Desi nation
t;?? 0-19 crn 10YR 3/1
o 19- 63 crn 10YR 3/2
63->80 em 10YR 4/3
~ 1
J
U
~ z '"
0: j III
0( D.. 0::
t- I- ;:)
gj 0 !2
I- III Ii.
~ ~
w 0
~ 0::
x D..
>- en
~.
C7\
:!l
J I
?
~
~ -=u=- 0:: 0
, III >- en
I- III III
.. Z > z
I e III 0:: Z
/ i ~ I :-, ~ ~ ~'
IBh ~ ~ ~
.HIII ~~~
z.( 0
IIIXUl
III ~ .
ll::....1II
e>....1II
>--0.
111111 0
..I Ul li::
..I 0( .(
.... J: J:
~D..Ul
t ",'.'"
,
'I
i,: J Valley Green Corporate Center
Phase.! Archaeological Survey
'--I Page 10
I
Background research, shovel' test excavations and pedestrian reconnaissance
'I produced negative results. The Phase I survey identified no archaeological resources
i
i within the project area.
,)
.......
~1
I
-
:j
''';''';
[]
c.,
i',,-
"1
:
, "J
. -,;-.
~~~:..
r]
t,
!'1
, ,\
: ,,1
,
j
,~ I
U
,~ , ,I
<
!
" J
Fl
u
'j
::,.
i i
1
L,J
I>) Valley Green Corporate Center
Phase I Archaeological Survey
(1 Page 11
:-.~
6.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
l>\
""'.,'
,',','
IJ During April 2000, The 106 Group completed a Phase I archaeological survey of
,:-:. the proposed Valley Green Corporate Center project area in Shakopee, Minnesota. The
project area includes approximately 332 acres (134 hectares) within the SElAof Section 9
[I and the SWIA of Section 10, Tl15N, R22W, Scott County. The survey was conducted
under contract with Bolton & Menk, Inc., in order to assist the City of Shakopee in
completion of an AUAR, and in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic
l' Preservation Act, as amended (36 CFR Part 800).
.. :
.,
The survey included background research to identify previously recorded sites and
l\ previous archaeological investigations within the project area and within a one-mile (1.6
)
:l
l':.~ kilometer) radius of the project. The project area contains no recorded sites and no
[) portion of the present project has been previously surveyed. In addition, background
research included a review of historic plat maps to assess the project area's historical
;:.,'" archaeological potential. While a residence occupied the southwest portion of the project
"-'.
[1 area from the late 1800s until its recent demolition, the property lacks association with
historically significant persons or events.
.1
biJ The field survey included a walkover and visual inspection of the entire project
area to assess which portions possessed a moderate or better potential for containing
intact archaeological resources. A slightly elevated portion of the site along the base of
lJ the escarpment bordering the project's southern margin was identified as the only area of
the project with moderate or better . archaeological sites potential. This area was
intensively surveyed through pedestrian reconnaissance and shovel test excavations. The
[1 field survey identified no archaeological resources.
The Phase I survey identified no archaeological sites within the Valley Green
L, Corporate Center project area, and indicates that there is little probability that the project
area contains unidentified archaeological resources of historical significance. The 106
Group therefore recommends that the project warrants no further archaeological
b1 investigation.
.....'1
,',:;
II
. ,
LJ
,
~ci
t:
,'-
,; J
[t
.. .J
L!
"{
".--1
LJ Valley Green Corporate Center
Phase I Archaeological Survey
Q Page 12
'-"
Li 7.0 REFERENCES
(] Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
1980 Treatment of Archaeological Properties: A Handbook. Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation, Washington, D.C.
(J Agricultural Experiment Station [ABS]
1973 Minnesota Soil Atlas: ,Sf; Paul Sheet. . Miscellaneous Report 120.
II Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Minnesota, St. Paul.
Wi
U Berg, R. E.
1995 A Phase I Sample Reconnaissance of Land within the Shakopee Mdewakanton
Community in' Scott County, Minnesota. Bureau of Indian Affairs, Minneapolis
n Area Office, Minneapolis.
f'
~ Bolton & Menk, Inc.
.'
0 2000 Draft Alternative Urban Area- Wide Review (AUAR), Valley Green Corporate
Center. Bolton & Menk, Inc., Burnsville. Prepared for the City of Shakopee, Scott
County, Minnesota. Copy on file at the City of Shakopee and The 106 Group, St.
~. Paul.
td.,
I......
I.....;
Dahlgren, T. A.
J 1944 Plat Book and Atlas of Scott County, Minnesota. T. A. Dahlgren, Shakopee,
Minnesota. Microfilm map on file at the Minnesota Historical Society.
II Foote, C. M. & Co.
I
; ! 1890 Map of Ramsey and Hennepin Co.unties, with adjacent portions of Anoka,
w.I
Wright, Carver, Scott, Dakota & Washington Counties, Minnesota. C. M. Foote &
Co., Minneapolis. Map on file at the Minnesota Historical Society.
~
Harms, G. F.
W 1959 Soil Survey: Scott County, Minnesota. United States Department of
f:':': Agriculture, Soils Conservation Service, in cooperation with the Minnesota
...;.,
: <\ Agricultural Experiment. Station. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington,
I D.C.
W
d Mather, D.
1995 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of Proposed Limestone Quarry
..' Expansion in Shakopee, Scott' County, Minnesota. Loucks & Associates, Inc.,
i Maple Grove, Minnesota. Copy on file at the State Historic Preservation Office, St.
'u
,i-.;.~. Paul.
J
~:: :'
,. ""
\"..1
I ,
;J
[I Valley Green Corporate Center
Phase I Archaeological Survey
F-' Paoe 13
I j e
I I
...../
. Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
II 1981 Minnesota Statewide Archaeological Survey Summary: 1977-1980. Report
.....' submitted to the Minnesota Legislature. Minnesota Historical Society, St. Paul.
CJ 1993 SHPO Guidelines for Archaeological Projects in Minnesota. State Historic
..... Preservation Office, Minnesota Historical Society, St. .Paul.
Pj
J Northwest Publishing Co.
1898 Plat Book of Scott County, Minnesota. Northwest Publishing Co. Microfilm
;'1 map on file at the Minnesota Historical Society.
U
Peterson, R. J., and A. J. Schmidt
f'J 1997 Phase I Archaeological Survey for the Southbridge Development (formerly
U known as"East Dean Lake Development"), Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota.
The 106 Group Ltd., St. Paul. .Prepared for Shakopee Crossings LP, Edina,
o Minnesota. Copy on file at the State Historic Preservation Office, St. Paul.
r.', Webb Publishing Company
;J 1913 Atlas and Farmers' Directory of Scott County, Minnesota. Published by The
, Farmer: A Journal of Agriculture;St. Paul, Minnesota. Microfj.lm map on file at
f~ the Minnesota Historical Society.
Woolworth, A.
~J' 1976 AnArchaeological Survey of a Possible Sludge Deposition Site in Eagle Creek
i ; Township, Scott County, Minnesota. Prepared for the Metropolitan Waste Control
,- Commission, St. Paul. On file at the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office,
;J St. Paul.
.J
~.,."
.,,,,il
.';(;:1
'J'
, ,
:J
ft.~.:l.'
;~
fJ'
~,.:
LJ
[j Valley Green Corporate Center
Phase I Archaeological Survey
r-] Page 14
[i'
I
[J
[1
[I APPENDIX A
ld
n MINNESOTA ARCHAEOLOGICAL LICENSE
d
B
L
rJ
I
I.
('"
rJ
",-:',"
f:-':"
I":"':"
rJ
I
K-.:.
c..:.:....
r""
. I
1 :.:
. 1
; .:1
~
!
\ J
8
!;.,cj
1(;.,'"
fl
' .
" j
~,
I
~"'. ',:
.~
~ '" ..-'
W
~.'":J
tJ
t::
')
1
U
- - . . - . - - - . .".
[] 2000 LICENSE TO COKDUCT ARCHAEOLOCICALINVESTIGATIONS
ON STATE OR STATE SUDJ)lVISION LANDS (per 'MINNF.SOT A 8TA TUTES 138.36)
[-1 ~ Th!s license, number: 00-032 in effect through: 01.31.2001
[) is issued to: Eliz.1belh J. A bel as Princlpallnve.~tigC1tcJr
The 106 Group Ltd.
The Dacotah Building. 370 Selby Avenue
[J, 51. Paul, MN 55102
." Work shall be conducted according to the Terms and Conditions established by the State Archaeologist Ilnd the Director
[1 of the MinnesotaHis!orical Society as specified in the Field Archaeology Act, MN ST 138.36. Cemetery authentications
should be referred to lhe Office of the Slate Archaeologist. Human remains are not to be disturbed in n!!Y manner; if
. '. sllch remains are located. immedinlely conract the Office of the Slate Archaeologist fOI' additional information.
[J FOR: :;ite reconnaissnnce I ideiltificnrion
.
RE: Scott COllllty, Tl1SNlR22W/Section 9/SEY.; Section lO/SWV.; Valley Green Corporate Center construction;
0 per 13o!tl1n & Menk, Inc.; see 111,,0 appended appliClltion materials: SHPO no.:none indicated
SP:EClAL CONDITIONS:
B
' .
NU: Does nol i.ncludc restlfonnal excavation or datli recovery.
0 All project documents (field [lotos, photographs. etc.) and recovered clllturnl materials shall be ctlrated at an institution
which meets federal curation $tandardi:. All arti[~ctc; and documents shall receive appropril1to field and pos~fiold
conservation and treatment. .~
ffiJ
.:'!:.: This license rllllllber must bc ci.ted on the report cover and any and all correspondence relaling to the
'. '
The licensee must submit copies ofrclnte.d site forms, project reports and other requested material
[J Failure to conform to the Terms and Conditions of this license i,.; sufficient/or revocation mid r lfusaZl
licenses.
r.l ~
. ~J S'l'A TF. ARCHAEOLOGIST
f! 1) ate
[J MINNESOTA lIJSTORTCAL SOCIETY
rJ Pate
:::j
LJ
'-"
f 1
u
f.~:f
~
U
f>
j
!
I
'-0'
II Valley Green Corporate Center
Phase I Archaeological Survey
n Page 15
(01
[I
..1
'.1
fJ
fl
[I ~
1
.....1 APPENDIX B
-.:./
fJ PROJECT CORRESPONDENCE
.-."
0
jl;-.,..'
"J
L
..
I.
I
r'."
~J
,.
LJ
[1
J
L;
, 1
L
-
, 1
L'
.;
'. 'J
LJ
Cl
....
h::
'-1
fl
iIIJ
, .1
. ;
, j
.
, ... -". - .
Li - ~
11
[l
MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY
SI A IE HISTORIC PRFSERV A IION OFFICE
II
.1 March 15, 2000
I
[] Mr. Ross Knapper
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
[l 515 North Riverfront Drive
Mankato, MN 56001-3499
RE: VaHey Green Corporate Center
[.) BMI Project No. T11.20132
T115 R22 S9 & S10, Shakopee, Scott County
. , SHPO Number: 2000-1523
U Dear Mr. Knapper:
n Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the above project. It has been reviewed
pursuant to the responsibilities given the Minnesota Historical Society by the Minnesota Historic
bJ Sites Act and the Minnesota Field Archaeology Act.
",
[l We believe that there is a good probability that unreported archaeological properties may be present
in the project area. , Therefore, we recommend that a survey of the area be completed. The survey
~J musUneet the requir.ements of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Identification and
Evaluation, and should include an evalua'tion of National Register eligibility for any properties which
','.,',
are identified. For your information, we have enclosed a list of consultants who have expressed an
interest in undertaking such surveys.
[J If the project area can be documented as previously disturbed or previously surveyed, we will re-
evaluate the need for survey. Previously disturbed areas are those where the naturally occurring
U post-glacial soils and sediments have been recently removed. Any previpus survey work m!Jst'meet
contemporary standards.
I Please note that this comment letter does not address the requirements of Section 106 of the
' I National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36CFR800. procedures of the Advisory Council on
' I
l..' Historic Preservation for the protection of historic properties. If this project is considered for federal
'\ assistance, or requires af~derallicense or permit, it should be submitted to our office with reference
Lj to the appropriate federal agency.
"."
If you have any questions on our review of this project, please contact me at (651 )296-5462.
{ 1
, 1
LJ Sincerely,
, < ~~
.....1 ..... . I' .
i . " ..... '" .
1..' Dennis A. Gimmestad : :. :::~.. :,;. .1'\ ~::.. : :. '~:- ." '. "
Government Programs and Compliance Officer ...., .'......,.
~ ~. ~ t ~.
'.-
(.. " , .
Enclosure: List of Consultants
,Ee)
I
'tiJ
r I - \
I '
lJ :H.'i KELLOGG BOt-LEV-AllD \VEST I 5.\t:\T P,WI.. i\I/:\i\'ESOTA ,':;10:1-1')0(, fTEI.EI'1l0NE: (,;'1-2%-(,1:16
tJ Valley Green Corporate Center
Phase I Archaeological Survey
[1 Page 16
!
Lj
[J
[1
L'
..; APPENDIX C
'"..:1
LJ LIST OF PROJECT PERSONNEL
[1
LJ .'
U
LJ
Ll
. ..J
L!
Lf
.:... .~
.....,.-.j
[1
. ,
L!
'J
fj
r ,\
. ,
-
I'
"
I i
..
I l f
, . i Valley Green Corporate Center
Phase I Archaeological Survey
[I Page 17
L j Project Personnel
! L.J' Principal Investigator Elizab,eth J. Abel, M.A.
, Archaeologists Kristen M. Zschomler, M.A.
C1 Heidi Ekstrom
L.,J
Report Authors Elizabeth J. Abel, M.A.
U Graphics Joe Malmberg
[1
U
o
t. ::.']
WI
LJ
U
r
I..,,!
~)
~
U'l
','I
j
, ~
I
~
~..
.:-..'
--
,]
.~
J
,
Appendix F - Information from DNR Natural Heritage
Database
. ~
~
. '"
, ...
, .0 0
o ..
-, C QJ
N 2
II.' .;~
, ~
....
>- 0 ..::
~ ., ~
P ...
..:: '" >-
m ... PI
.'. ~: <( ~
. " .0 c.:I >
r ~~ ~ <(
. ~ ~
S::'" 0 0
OJ:: c.:I (/)
:EO> C! ~
.~' .... .0:
, en 100 ~
... >. p.o
.. Po :E
'" 0
, ~u
II
. E ~
. Sene b
8 ; B..c::
f:: e - ";i '0
o ~ {g 3>'=
U In 0
t. (/) e ~ ~(fj
, ... p. .... ~ 5
~ J:: g: c:: ~
u .... 'C
. 100 ON Q.,ui
en :l ~ "" 2:! 1::
, ... z- o'
II' (/)" M Nc.:Ic.:I ~ Q.,
. ..:: IX) ~ > CIl .... U
I ~., ~ ""c.:I8 >..::
N e "" c.:IO:E eelS (fj
..:: ~ _ "'c.:I~g: e
z s:: c.:I ~~c.:I"" ><U
'" 0 ...:I m~~ U-
.... '. ~ z C! '" P c.:I U - "CI. !3
~ ~ ~""(/)~~!:l c:~
s:: _(/) u <( .... ...
'" Oc.:lZ"'(/)Z U) c:
Cl ., Cl ~e:lc.:l~~(/) :E ":
t g>! e:.'.l~o=sCl I-' U)
c.:I ... =mi:!",= . a
. u.... (/)~ --'" U)-
100 P - 0 U Q.,
.: c.:I., c.:I !:;! (I) ~ ~ (I) 0 U U
!( = ~ :i!~~:<iil- !3 U
..::.....; "'...:I c.:IE-< U":: o!3
~ ~ (BHS~(/)~ U) 0
"::::l o-pp.o~... U U)
1I.'.c". 0... U 0 III <( Z ex: U
. U III U P....(/):E..:Ic.:I _""
Z Z 0 ~~-~~!( e";i
PI ~ ..:I c.:I":: (/)U ::s !-<
c.:I ..:: s:: (I)...... P - ~
..:: Z '" ~="::~=(I) ZelS 1;;
C! ~ ~ c.:I:E~c.:I!(~ =
_.. >O::E: Z c.:I P IX = Z ... ..... _
~ ~ :s:;;"'!:;go 0 elS
I ..:l c.:I ~ ..:: >- z ..:: ~ -c: .9-
<( ..:I. ... ..:: c.:I c.:I p.o t)
'. > : U 0 0 ... ... ~ .~
; ~ .e
.' ~ fr~
'.... ou
(I) (I) U
J'.r:..
: ~ ~~~
I". '" i( UU UUU .-"_. U 0 2:!
.Q Z ~ 1>0 '" '" '" '" = ~ ....
'" :t: (/) (/) (I) CIl rIl CIl = ;;> ::s
., .u ..... ..... c:r
- ~ (I) ::i:=2:!
.,.. ~ .....oeuU)
In ~ 0 i( '" ..-
I "'100 WE-< ~ u~c:
" "'0 ~(I) ..:I 1;;UO
t ~ ti5 ~-r;j
, ~..:: -<.~
., >oZ o_C::
..... U $ 0 . 0 s c.
. ~~ 2~ 0 ocu
ra. .::l 100 ... U c.:I N U Q.,
..' ..k"::W M"'~~""~ f.< '-"~ =
~~ p.~ oo~~~~ Z ..... 0
z U'" ..c:: =::
.. U 3: 3: 3: 3: 3: 3: ..:: co 0 .~
'" 0 C! N N N N N l'l '" .~ ""
~ Z N N N N N N .-
0" IX ..::..::..::..::..::..:: rIl ~ >c:
.. s:: 0 _ ~
'''"' .,., zzzzzz..:: O~ ~
s::e "'''''''''''''''' 0 u ~
, S::., 1>0' ..................... U .!3~
~~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~ . .
I
I Mixed EmerBentMarsh Fact Sheet
I -
I
i " -
I
i
II ....
il'o
~
c:
..
.$
""
lJ
I -;
. 'S
~ 0
;.~... - ~,: :g
, Q.
:Q: ,
I '<; !
Cl i
~ ,
.
Fig. 15.2 Mixed emergent marsh in McLeod's Slough, a backwater of the St. Croix River in northern Washington County (see site ti
r 32). The marsh is dominated by river bulrush and prairie cordgrass. Broad-leaved arrowhead is in the foreground. The largest i
remaining mixed emergent marshes in the Region are in river backwaters. !
J
~
.................. ..................................... .0........................... .0_........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ "
,
Status: 4 Soils and substrate impoundments and displacement by cattail '~
J {
Structure Occurs on alluvial and lacustrine silt or marsh; many marshes remain along the St., ~
An open wetland community dominated by sand; standing water during much of the Croix and Rum rivers and portions of the
graminoid and forb species that grow above growing season. Mississippi River. !;
, I;
the water level; cattails account for less Historic distribution Existing acreage: 2,100 or more G
than half of the vegetation cove./'; frequent Along the margins of major rivers, espe- Number of known locations: 95 ~
open-water pools and channels containing cially in backwater channels or in shallow ,
II ~
floating or submerged aquatic plants. sloughs, along the margins of lakes and Common plant species ,
~:
,
~
Other characteristics ponds, and in small closed basins; most -Ground layer "
i
Common at lake and stream margins; extensive across south-central and eastern FORBS I
I" Anoka County and adjacent Washington St. John's-wort (Hypericum majus) ,
occurs in basins where the water is too I
deep for wet meadow or where a peat mat and Chisago counties; occurred on all of Boneset (Eupatorium perfoliatum) I
the landforms in the Region. Cut-leaved bugleweed (Lycopus I
supporting rich fen or poor fen has not I
I developed; may be dominated by only one Present distribution american us) I
or two species during high-water years; Differs Significantly from historic distri- Common bladderWort (Utricularia vulgaris)
Broad-leaved arrowhead (Sagitta ria .~
diverse native graminoids and forbs typi- bution; losses throughout Anoka County latifolia) if
t cally colonize mudflats or exposed mucky because of county ditch systems developed Blue vervain (Verbena hastata)
channels during drought yeilrs. in the early 1900s; other losses caused by "
~:
, [126] Chapter 15 r
I
I
I'
f f;
, :~
~
.
Mixed Emergent Marsh Fact Sheet
(cant.)
GRAMINOIDS -
Blue-joint (Calamagrostis canadensis)
Softstem bulrush (Scirpus validus
var. creber)
A species of sedge (Carex scoparia) Spring peeper (Pseudacris crucifer)
Three-way sedge (Dulichium
arundinaceum) - Chorus frog (P. triseriata)
Small's spike-rush (Eleocharis smallii) Green frog (Rana clamitans) Snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina)
Woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus) Northern leopard frog (R. pipiens) Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii)
Reed canary-grass (Phalaris arundinacea) Painted turtle (Chrysemys picta) Disturbance indicators and threats
Characteristic plant species Characteristic animal species Lack of native plants on mudflats during
River bulrush (Scirpus f1uviatilis) Least bittern (lxobrychus exi/is) drought years; abundant reed canary-grass.
, Giant bur-reed (Sparganium eurycarpum) Virginia rail (Ral/us limicola) Threats include hydrologic alterations
Black tern (Chlidonias niger) caused by ditches, draining, dikes, and
Small's spike-rush (Eleocharis smal/ii) Marsh wren (Cistothorus palustris) dams; invasion by pur~le loosestrife; nutri-
Rare plant species Yellow-headed blackbird (Xanthocephalus ent-rich runoff and exces~ sedimentation
- Waterwillow (Decodon verticil/atusJ xanthocephalus) from surrounding farms, roads, lawns, and
Walter's barnyard grass (Echinochloa Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea bfandingii) developed land; storm water runoff; unsea-
walteri) sonable water level fluctuations in managed
I Animals of mixed emergent marshes impoundments; incremental damage by
Aquatic animals predomin!'lte in this com- small areas of dredging or filling.
munity, although terrestrial species forage Associated natural communities
I along the marsh perimeter. The height and River beach, floodplain forest, lake beach, i
I
structure of emergent vegetation are impor- cattail marsh, alder swamp, willow swamp, I
tant to nesting birds and breeding frogs and wet meadow, and rich fen.
toads. The amount of open water associ-
ated with the community and any con-
nection with a lake or river can influence
I the species of waterbirds and turtles Examples
found here.
1. Boot Lake Scientific and Natural Area
Common animal species 7. Martin-Island-Linwood Lakes
J -Breeding birds Regional Park: Linwood Lake
Canada goose (Branta canadensis) 17. Rum River (west of Walbo Landing)
Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) i
32. McLeod's Slough i
Sora (Porzana carolina) I,
( American coot (Fulica americana) L
Marsh wren (Cistothorus palustris)
Common yellowthroat (Geothfypis trichas) ~7
~ Swamp sparrow (Mefospiza georgiana) American bittern
Red-winged blackbird (Agefaius
phoeniceus) Rare animal species
f, -Mammals American bittern (Botaurus fentiginosus)
Common muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus) i-:
Common moorhen (Gal/inula chforopus) i'"
Common raccoon (Procyon lotor) Sandhill crane (Grus canadensis) II~
-Amphibians and reptiles , Wilson's phalarope (Phalaropus tricolor) ~;*
j American toad (Bufo american us) Forster's tern (Sterna forsteri) -.;"".
Emergent Marshes [127]
,",--.
CoffiJi, B. and L, PfannmuIIer, (cds), 1988. Minnesota's Endangered Flora and Fauna, UniversitY of ~l
,C,;"il:'
Minnesota Press, Minneapolis for the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 'tgt,
:~-;~~~~-
.
I
Appendix G - Mitigation Plan
(The attached plan is the plan that was submitted as part of the 2002
AUAR. It will be revised based on comments received from the review
of the 2003 AUAR, if necessary.)
MITIGATION PLAN
INTRODUCTION
The Mitigation Plan, as submitted is comprehensive and is intended to address issues contained in the
FAUAR dated July, 2000 and the Supplement dated July, 2002.
This Mitigation Plan is submitted as a part of the Alternate Urban Area-wide Review (AUAR) process to
provide reviewers, regulators, and prospective tenants with an understanding of the actions necessary to
protect the environment and limit impacts by the proposed project Many of the potential environmental
impacts within the project boundary are associated with the specific improvements, activities and
operations of tenants who will choose to locate within Valley Green Business Park. Therefore, those
impacts cannot be precisely defined until the appropriate proposals are made.
The primary vehicles for mitigation are the effective use of existing codes, rules, and regulations together
with the enforcement options which pertain thereto. These enforcement options include:
. Execution of a Comprehensive Development Agreement which may include Planned Unit
Development (PUD) Requirements
. Enforcement of the Permitting Requirements of All Agencies
. Require Submission of Performance Bonds
. Initiation of Civil Suits & Restraining Orders
This recommended mitigation plan is divided into three levels:
1. Goals - This level defines broad concepts to be achieved.
a. ,Strategies - This level identifies basic philosophies which could help achieve the
related goal.
1. Actions - This level precisely lists key activities which may be employed to
achieve the associated goal.
MITIGATION PLAN
GOAL 1 - Fulfill and maintain the public's expectations for the character of the city as defmed by
numerous comprehensive plans (including the Dean's Lake Area Park, Open Space and Trail
Master Plan), the zoning ordinance, etc.
Protection Strategies:
A-- Modifications to such expectations must be subject to appropriate review and approval by the
governing agencies and authorities. These reviews may include public hearings and an
opportunity for the public to comment.
.1) Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee, Scott County, various State and Federal
agencies, and special districts.
.2) Action Required: Rigorous enforcement of amendment and variance procedures.
B- Execution of a Development Agreement between the City and the developer.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee and the developerRyan Companies.
C -- Execution of performance bonds to provide surety to the City that all necessary requirements are
met. The amount should be as required by the Development Agreement.
.1) Responsible Parties: The developer(Ryan Companies). and the City of Shakopee.
.2) Action Required: Careful review of the amount of the bonds to assure adequacy.
D -- Enforcement by all governing authorities of their respective rules and regulations
.1) Responsible Parties: All appropriate agencies.
.2) Action Required: Rigorous enforcement of the rules, regulations and Development
Agreement.
GOAL 2 - Development of a native vegetation "conservation district" within a business corporate center
environment which utilizes stormwater infiltration areas.
Protection Strategies:
A-- In the pre-development phase, rigorously review stormwater handling plans to assure NURP
standard of treatment prior to release to the infiltration areas.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee, the developer (Ryan Companies).
B -- Coordination of standards applied to the "Conservation Area"
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee, the developer (Ryan Companies), future
tenants ofVGCC.
.2) Actions Required:
. Review of current municipal ordinances for potential conflicts between the orderly
appearance standard of lawn care as defined for introduced species of grass and the more
natural (and therefore longer) growth patterns of native grasses.
MITIGATION PLAN
. Either waiving strict enforcement of these standards as a part of the Development
Agreement or revising the existing ordinances to allow for the development of
"Conservation Areas" with different front-end standards and maintenance standards.
. Prohibit future tenants from mowing native vegetation, planting unapproved species of
vegetation, etc.
GOAL 3 - Perpetuate the wetland habitat surrounding Dean's Lake for continued use by wildlife.
Protection Strategies:
A-- As development moves forward, all plans to mitigate wetland impacts should be carefully
reviewed by all appropriate agencies.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shako pee, the developer (Ryan Companies), BWSR,
DNR and any other appropriate agencies.
B- The City and developer should include should in the Development Agreement such provisions
that are necessary to define vegetation for the "conservation areas" as well as all wetlands.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee and the developer, Ryan Companies.
C -- The developer's plans include a planting schedule of a variety of native grasses and forbes. This
should be documented in the Development Agreement and enforced.
.1) Responsible Parties : The developer(Ryan Companies). and the City of Shako pee.
Assistance by the DNR or other appropriate agencies may be helpful.
D-- Monitor the health of the native wetlands, the "replacement wetlands" and storm water detention
ponds to assure self sustaining growth and maturation of the desired species.
.1) Responsible Parties : Within the warranty period defined by the Development
Agreement the developer, Ryan Companies. Once public ownership of the wetlands and
ponds has been accepted, the City of Shakopee.
E -- In reviewing the plans, observing the construction and monitoring the health of wetland areas, the
City must be prepared to solicit the expertise of outside agencies and consultants, as necessary.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee
GOAL 4 - Allow and promote passive recreational uses of Dean's Lake and the surrounding park lands.
Protection Strategies:
A-- Ryan should provide easements for a public walking path to access the areas adjacent to the lake
from dedicated streets within the Valley Green development.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee and the developer, Ryan Companies. .
B -- The City should accept the easement for public use and may at a future date choose to include it
in the City trail system.
)
MITIGATION PLAN
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee
GOAL 5- Preserve the water quality of Dean's Lake.
Protection Strategies:
A-- Consider the establishment of a watershed district for the entire Blue Lake watershed as
delineated in the City's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan.
.1) Responsible Parties: All appropriate agencies.
,
B -- Initially, provide testing of the current water quality to define the background water quality.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shako pee, DNR, or the water district, if created.
.2) Action Required: All records and results should be made available to the City,
Scott County, the DNR, and the watershed district, if created..
c-- Annually, provide testing to determine the extent of change.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee, DNR, .or the water district, if created.
.2) Action Required: All records and results should be made available to the City,
Scott County, the DNR, and the watershed district, if created.
D-- Periodically, test both the on-site and the off-site runoff reaching the Lake to help identify the '
sources of any pollutants.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee, DNR, or the water district, if created.
.2) Action Required: All records and results should be made available to the City and
Scott County.
E -- Limit and control degradation to the water quality reaching Dean's Lake.
.1) Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee and all public agencies with water quality
authority within the watershed.
.2) Action Required: Rigorous enforcement of the City's Comprehensive Stormwater
Management Plan including adherence to the Best Management Practices (BMP's) for
stormwater.
F -- Continue the cooperative relationship of all public and private agencies within the immediate
Dean's Lake watershed (6,900 acres).
.1) Responsible Parties: All included agencies.
G-- Create and maintain a vegetative strip along the Prior Lake overflow channel.
.1) Responsible Parties: All public agencies with authority over the route of the channel
and all land owners adjacent to the channel.
H-- Increase public awareness of the effects of residential and agricultural fertilizers on water quality.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shako pee and all public agencies with water quality
authority within the watershed.
MITIGATION PLAN
.2) Action Required: Develop and conduct periodic educational programs for
residents.
GOAL 6 - Stabilize water levels in Dean's Lake.
Protection Strategies:
A-- Implement the proposed plan to construct, maintain and operate a water level control structure
north of US 169.
.1) Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee, DNR, Mn/DOT, or the water district, if
created.
GOAL 7 - Limit the visual impacts of the development from Dean's Lake and the properties south of
CSAH 16.
Protection Strategies:
A-- Rigorous enforcement of the City's Shoreland Ordinance regarding setbacks.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee.
B-- Encourage tree planting along street boulevards and around stormwater detention ponds within
the proj ect area.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee and the developer, Ryan Companies.
.2) Action Required: It may be useful to include these-requirements in the
Development Agreement.
C -- Rigorous enforcement of the City's zoning ordinance concerning building height.
.1) Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee, individual lot purchasers and tenants.
.2) Action Required: Encourage use of screening with berms and plantings.
D-- Rigorous enforcement of City ordinances regarding signage and lighting.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee, individual lot purchasers and building tenants.
GOAL 8 - Limit the impacts of traffic generated by activities within the'{)roject area.
Protection Strategies:
A-- Identify high traffic activities to be conducted within the project area.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee, individual lot purchasers and building tenants.
,
MITIGATION PLAN
.2) Action Required: Require the necessary information as a part of the initial building
permit request process. This includes a site traffic impact study which should encompass the
access points on Co. Rd 18 and CSAH 16, and include the existing traffic on these roadways
at the time of lot development.
B-- Monitor traffic levels of ingress and egress to the site, and on the collector and arterial streets
surrounding the site.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee, Scott County, Mn/DOT, Met Council and
other interested agencies.
.2) Action Required: Enforce maintenance of the Level-of~Service (LOS) for the
access points of the overall development to a minimum LOS ofD. This may include denial
of specific development types due to the high traffic generating impacts to the site, access
points aild surrounding streets.
C -- Monitor changes in tenant traffic activity level and implement any necessary changes to the
City's transportation system.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee, individual lot purchasers and building tenants.
.2) Action Required: Require the necessary information as a part of the building
permit request process for remodeling and alterations.
D-- Monitor traffic generation generated on the adjacent roadways generated by the development
and/or modification of adjacent developments and properties.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee, Scott County, Mn/DOT, Met Council and
other interested agencies.
.2) Actions Required:
. Possible reduction of cycle times to 100' seconds. See Table 22-1 c in the response to the
Shakopee Environmental Protection Association (SEP A) comments to the Supplement.
. Future consideration of the changes to affect traffic should be made in partnership with
other stakeholders to develop Transportation Demand Management Strategies to reduce
the Peak Hour traffic demand on the surrounding roadway network.
E -- Continue to develop and complete the proposed improvements of collector and arterial roadways
in the surrounding area.
.1) Responsible Parties : City of Shako pee, Scott County, Mn/DOT, Met Council and
other interested agencies.
.2) Action Required: Implement the reconstruction / relocation ofCSAH 16, CR 21,
CR 83 and 17th Avenue.
F -- Monitor and update the City's Comprehensive Transportation Plan, when necessary.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee
GOAL 9 - Limit the noise impacts of the development on the properties south of CSAH 16.
Protection Strategies:
j
MITIGATION PLAN
A-- Separate theissues of
. Noise generation from initial construction,
. Noise generation from US 169, and
. Noise generation from tenant activity.
.2) Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee, Mn/DOT, individual lot purchasers and
building tenants.
B-- Establish a natural vegetation buffer (i.e. Oak Savannah) within the sh~reland impoact one.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee and the developer, Ryan Companies.
c -- Vigorous'enforcement of the City's ordinances regarding noise generation.
.1) Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee, individual lot purchasers and building tenants. '
D-- Limit hours of construction activity and allowable construction noise.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee.
E -- Encourage tree planting along street boulevards within the project site.
.1) Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee and the developer, Ryan Companies.
.2) Action Required: It may be useful to include these requirements in the
Development Agreement.
F -- Encourage landscaping and screening of individual building sites to reduce noise transmission.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee, individual lot purchasers and building tenants.
G-- Monitor the health of the treeline identified in the noise modeling to shelter the proposed
residential properties. The presence of this treeline was identified as essential to the mitigation
of noise in the southwesterly end of the residential area.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee, owners & tenants within the area.
GOAL 10 - Limit the air quality impacts of traffic generated by the development and the activities
of individual building tenants.
Protection Strategies:
A-- Regulate air emissions through enforcement of State Air Quality Standards
.1) Responsible Parties : MPCA, City of Shakopee
.2) Action Required: Monitoring could be performed on a sporadic basis, if
complaints are received. If found to exceed the State standards, a permanent monitoring
station could be installed. Once the source of the any excessive emissions is identified,
appropriate action can be developed and implemented.
B -- Minimize dust generation during construction activities.
.1) Responsible Parties: City of Shakopee, Scott County, the developer - Ryan
Companies, individual lot purchasers and building tenants.
" ,
MITIGATION PLAN
C -- Monitor changes in tenant air emissions potential.
.1) Responsible Parties : City of Shakopee, MPCA and building tenants.
.2) Action Required: Require the necessary information as a part of the building
permit request process for remodeling and alterations.