Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 09, 2025 - Planning PacketSHAKOPE E Shakopee Planning Commission Regular Meeting Thursday, October 9, 2025 7:00 PM City Hall, 485 Gorman Street Vision: Shakopee is a distinctive river town with a variety of business, cultural, and recreational opportunities in a safe, welcoming, and attractive environment. Our vision is for Shakopee to continue being the place people want to live, work, and play! Mission: Our mission is to deliver high quality services essential to maintaining a safe and sustainable community. We commit to doing this cost-effectively, with integrity and transparency. 1. Roll Call 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Recognition by Planning Commission of interested Citizens 4. Consent Agenda These items are considered routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these unless a Commissioner or staff requests, in which event the item will be removed form consent agenda for separate discussion & action. 4.a Approval of the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from September 4, 2025 5. General Business 5.a PUBLIC HEARING: Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Richland Court 5.b PUBLIC HEARING: Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update 5.c PUBLIC HEARING: Modification of Home Occupancies to Allow Dog Boarding and Daycare 6. Other Business 7. Adjournment If a commissioner has any comments, concerns or questions, he or she should contact the project 1 manager prior to the scheduled meeting date. Also, if a commissioner is unable to attend the meeting for any reason, Please call the Department of Planning and Development at (952)233-9300 as soon as possible. Thank you! 2 SHAKOPEE Agenda Item: Prepared by: Reviewed by: Shakopee Planning Commission October 9, 2025 Approval of the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from September 4, 2025 Rick Parsons 4.a Action to be considered: Approve the meeting minutes from September 4, 2025. Motion Type: Simple Majority Background: Minutes from September 4, 2025. Recommendation: Approve the minutes after review. Budget Impact: N/A Attachments: 09-04-2025 Planning Commission Minutes.docx 3 Planning Commission City of Shakopee Thursday, September 4, 2025 7:00 PM City Hall, 485 Gorman Street 1. Roll Call Present: Commissioners Robbins, Weiler, Forsythe, Ranua and Sandhu Absent: Commissioners Reding and Sepulvado 2. Approval of Agenda Motion by Robbins seconded by Sandhu Passed unanimously 3. Recognition by Board of Adjustment and Appeals of Interested Citizens None 4. General Business None 5. Other Business None 6. Adjournment Motion to Adjourn to October 9th at 7PM by Commissioner Robbins and seconded by Commissioner Ranua. Passed unanimously. 7:13 PM 4 SHAKOPEE Agenda Item: Prepared by: Reviewed by: Shakopee Planning Commission October 9, 2025 5.a PUBLIC HEARING: Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Richland Court Mark Noble, Senior Planner Michael Kerski, Director of Planning and Development Action to be considered: Recommend adoption of Resolution R2025-113, approving the reguiding of property from Suburban Residential to Suburban Edge Residential. Motion Type: Four -Fifths Vote Background: The City of Shakopee is proposing a Comprehensive Plan Amendment on behalf of Matt Logeais, South Oaks Realty Inc. (property owner), to amend the 2040 Comprehensive Plan land use designation for approximately 4.14 acres, legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Beckrich Park Estates, from Suburban Residential to Suburban Edge Residential. The property is currently guided Suburban Residential under the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and had a similar designation under prior plans. Earlier in 2024, the Planning Commission and City Council reviewed a Preliminary and Final Plat for this parcel, titled Richland Court, which was initially submitted as a 10 -lot single-family subdivision. At that time, the property was zoned R-1 B, Urban Residential, and the project was found to be consistent with both the zoning district standards and the applicable comprehensive plan land use guidance. It was also noted that a previous plat for this site, approved in 2006, included six (6) lots. Staff have confirmed that the 2006 approval occurred prior to adoption of the 2030 and 2040 Comprehensive Plans, which introduced more specific density requirements for guided land uses. During review of the 10 -lot proposal, adjacent property owners expressed concerns related to the density and design of the subdivision. Following discussion, the Planning Commission did not support the request. The applicant subsequently granted the City a 60 -day extension and resubmitted a revised plat reducing the number of lots to eight 5 (8) and adjusting the outlot configuration. This revision was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission and approved by the City Council. The approved subdivision met the City's density calculation method, which excludes public right-of-way from the net acreage, resulting in a density of 3.58 units per acre consistent with the R-1 B zoning district (3-5 units/acre) and Suburban Residential land use guidance (3-6 units/acre). However, the Metropolitan Council subsequently determined that the project was not consistent with their density calculation formula, which includes public right-of-way in total acreage. Under their methodology, the development's density calculates to 2.8 units per acre, which falls below the minimum threshold for Suburban Residential. As a result, the Metropolitan Council advised that the City must re -guide the property to Suburban Edge Residential (0.1-3.0 units per acre) to maintain consistency with regional standards and to enable issuance of necessary sewer permits. Reguiding Considerations: The City Council may grant a comprehensive plan amendment when it finds that one or more of the following criteria exists: 1. The original comp plan is in error. Staff support the change in the comp plan, as it would be generally consistent with guiding of residential subdivisions surrounding this development. 2. Significant changes in goals in community goals and policies have taken place. Not necessarily a change, but the intent has been that this area would be developed as a single-family residential neighborhood; in this case, in a density generally consistent with the neighboring subdivisions. 3. Significant changes in city-wide or neighborhood development patterns have occurred. The developer's intent is to construct a single-family residential subdivision utilizing the same guiding as adjacent subdivisions. 4. The comprehensive plan requires another provision. Staff believe that several of these criteria would be met with this proposal as noted above; therefore, staff support the requested reguiding. The intended subdivision is generally consistent with the adjacent developments (single family residential). Recommendation: Staff recommends the Planning Commission forward a positive recommendation to the City Council regarding the reguiding request. 6 Budget Impact: N/A Attachments: Comp Plan Resolution.docx Site Aerial.png RICHLAND COURT final plat.pdf 7 RESOLUTION R2025-113 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO FIGURE 4.12 - PLANNED LAND USE IN THE 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, The City of Shakopee is proposing an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment on behalf of Matt Logeais of South Oaks Realty Inc. (property owner) to amend the 2040 Comprehensive Plan designation for approximately 4.14 acres legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Beckrich Park Estates from Suburban Residential to Suburban Edge Residential. WHEREAS, all required public notices regarding the public hearing for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment were duly sent and posted, and all persons appearing at the hearing have been given an opportunity to be heard thereon; and WHEREAS, the Shakopee Planning Commission considered the request at its meeting of October 9, 2025, and unanimously recommended approval to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Shakopee did review the application on October 21, 2025; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Shakopee hereby adopts the following findings of facts relative to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment request: Criteria #1 The comprehensive plan was in error. Finding #1 Staff support the change in the comp plan, as it would be generally consistent with guiding of residential subdivisions surrounding this development. Criteria #2 Significant changes in community goals and policies have taken place. Finding #2 Not necessary a change, but the intent has been that this area would be developed as a single-family residential neighborhood; in this case, in a density generally consistent with the neighboring subdivisions. Criteria #3 Significant changes in development patterns have occurred. Finding #3 The developer's intent is to construct a single-family residential subdivision utilizing the same guiding as adjacent subdivisions. Criteria #4 The Comprehensive Plan requires a different provision. Finding #4 The comprehensive plan for the subject properties requires an amendment to the future land use designation to allow for the property to be developed as intended. BE IT RESOLVED, to incorporate the changes, the City will modify its official land use map (see attached Exhibit for affected parcels); and 8 FURTHER, approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is contingent upon, and subject to, the required review and response by the Metropolitan Council. After the adoption of the Resolution, the City Clerk shall file certified copies hereof with the County Auditor and County Recorder of Scott County. Adopted in Regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held the 21st day of October, 2025. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: Richard Parsons, City Clerk 9 10 OFFICIAL PLAT COPY (24 O RICHLAND amined evidence of title for this plat and recommend this (7 i Q p SCOTT COUNTY AUDITOR/TREASURER: s SCOTT COUNTY REGISTRAR OF TITLES: '1/1,/!,',",-;'''H :7/ i,1 _--,- 7i V _I ::: ,', _I ,rVI,' 0 0 SHAKOPEE Agenda Item: Prepared by: Reviewed by: Shakopee Planning Commission October 9, 2025 5.b PUBLIC HEARING: Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update Mark Noble, Senior Planner Michael Kerski, Director of Planning and Development Action to be considered: Recommend adoption of Resolution R2025-114 authorizing the adoption of the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Update for the Jackson Township Development Area. Motion Type: Simple Majority Background: The Environmental Quality Board (EQB) requires AUAR updates every five years. This original study was approved in 2020, therefore, staff is requesting review and approval of the update. The AUAR study area is approximately 2,890 acres in size located in the west and south area of the City of Shakopee and in Jackson Township (see attachment for area of study). The AUAR study area includes a range of land uses, from undeveloped open space and recreational areas to commercial and residential development. Several new developments have been built or approved since adoption of the 2020 AUAR. This update accounts for differences between built/approved development and the Build Scenario (Shakopee 2040 Plan) that was part of the original AUAR, as well as updated development/transportation planning projections. Recommendation: Staff recommends the Planning Commission forward a positive recommendation to the City Council regarding the reguiding request. Budget Impact: N/A 13 Attachments: Jackson Township_AUAR_Update_250922.pdf AUAR Update resolution.docx 14 Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Update Prepared for: City of Shakopee SHAKOPEE Prepared by: SRF Consulting Group LS1RF September 22, 2025 SRF Project No. 19234 15 Table of Contents 1. Introduction and purpose 5 2. Update to the environmental review 5 3. Project Title: 5 4. Proposer: 5 5. Responsible Government Unit (RGU): 5 6. Reason for EAW Preparation: 5 7. Project Location- 5 8. Project Description• 6 Future Considerations 8 9. Climate Adaptation and Resilience 8 10. Permits and Approvals Required: 11 11. Land Use: 13 Planned Land Use 13 12. Cover Types: 13 Zoning 14 13. Geology, Soils and Topography/Landforms• 14 14. Water Resources: 14 Surface Water 14 Ground Water 14 Wastewater 15 Stormwater 15 Water Appropriation 15 Surface Waters 17 15. Contamination/Hazardous Materials/Wastes- 17 Contaminated Properties 17 Solid Waste 17 16. Fish, Wildlife, Plant Communities, and Sensitive Ecological Resources (rare features)• 18 State Listed Threatened and Endangered Species 18 Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species 19 Minnesota Biological Survey Sites of Biodiversity Significance 21 Native Plant Communities 22 17. Historic Properties: 23 18. Visual• 24 19. Air: 24 Stationary Source Emissions 24 Vehicle Emissions 24 Dust and Odors 24 20. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions/Carbon Footprint 24 21. Noise: 24 Construction Noise 24 Traffic -Related Noise 24 22. Transportation 24 Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update SRF 16 23. Cumulative Potential Effects: 26 24. Other Potential Environmental Effects: 27 Tables Table 1 Project Magnitude Data — 2020 AUAR Development Scenario 6 Table 2: Updated Development Scenario Based on Built/Approved Development 7 Table 3: Climate Considerations and Adaptations 10 Table 4: Permits and Approvals 12 Table 5: County Well Index (CWI) Within the Study Area 15 Table 6: AUAR Land Use Scenarios 25 Table 7: Daily Trips Comparison 25 Table 8: Shakopee AUAR Infrastructure Improvement Update 26 Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update SRF 17 Appendices Appendix A — Figures Appendix B — Mitigation Plan Update Appendix C — Wastewater Management Memo Appendix D — Stormwater Management Memo Appendix E — Contamination Review Memo Appendix F — IPaC and DNR Information Appendix G — SHPO, MIAC, and OSA information Appendix H — Transportation Memo Appendix I — GHG Emissions Memo Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update SRF 18 1. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE This document provides for an update to the Jackson Township Development Area AUAR. The original AUAR was completed in 2020. This document serves as the first five-year update. An abbreviated version of the EAW questionnaire form (December 2022 version) has been used for this update to assist in the review of this AUAR Update. 2. UPDATE TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This section summarizes the previous AUAR and provides indication of any updates that were needed. 3. PROJECT TITLE: Jackson Township Development Area 4. PROPOSER: City of Shakopee Contact Person: Mark Noble Title: Senior Planner, Planning and Development Address: 485 Gorman St. Shakopee MN 55379 Phone: 952-233-9348 Email: mnoble@shakopeemn.gov 5. RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT UNIT (RGU): City of Shakopee Contact Person: Mark Noble Title: Senior Planner, Planning and Development Address: 485 Gorman St. Shakopee MN 55379 Phone: 952-233-9348 Email: mnoble@shakopeemn.gov 6. REASON FOR EAW PREPARATION: Not applicable to AUAR. 7. PROJECT LOCATION: County: Scott City: Shakopee Sections 2, 3, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 23 and 24, Township 23, Range 115 Watershed: Lower Minnesota River Watershed, Scott Watershed Management Organization Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 5 SRF 19 GPS Coordinates: 44°46'15.52"N, 93°33'23.38"W (Central Point) Tax Parcel Number: Multiple 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Overview The Shakopee AUAR was originally prepared to provide a complete understanding of the cumulative impacts of planned development in seven growth areas that are either currently part of the City of Shakopee (herein referred to as "the City") or are planned to be in the future as part of the City's orderly annexation agreement with Jackson Township. The AUAR Study area is divided into seven Subdistricts, A through G, which correspond with the areas defined in the orderly annexation agreement and an area of Shakopee poised for new growth. They are contiguous and are generally located to the southwest of current Shakopee city boundaries. Figure 1, Appendix A shows the State Location, and Figure 2, Appendix A shows the Study Area. The AUAR Study area is divided into seven Subdistricts, A through G, that correspond with the areas defined in the orderly annexation agreement and an area of Shakopee poised for new growth. They are contiguous and are generally located to the southwest of current Shakopee city boundaries. The city will update the AUAR every five years until all development is completed; this is the first five-year update. Development Scenarios Two development scenarios were included with the original AUAR, in compliance with the AUAR process. This included the No Build (Shakopee 2030 Comprehensive Plan and Scott County 2030 Comprehensive Plan (Areas A through F) Scenario and the Build (Shakopee 2040 Plan) Scenario (Area G). There has been no change to the No Build scenario but approved and planned residential development since the 2020 document has departed slightly from the assumed Build scenario, as shown in Table 1 and Table 2 below. Numbers have been adjusted to reflect built/approved development and updated projections provided by the City and to be consistent with the transportation planning projections. More intense residential development than previously planned has occurred in most subareas. All planned commercial or industrial development is consistent with the previous Build scenario. Table 1 Project Magnitude Data — 2020 AUAR Development Scenario Sub- Developable Units Office SF Manufacturing Warehouse Area Acres SF SF Neighborhood Highway Retail SF Retail SF A B C D E F G Total 152 306 484 418 65 0 283 422 450 161 113 243,331 90,994 90,994 1,437,778 765,719 765,719 1,427,441 1,082,695 1,082,695 81,991 219,195 83,486 15,007 636,351 1,042,324 736,468 20 184 112,122 1,445 1,613 3,108,550 1,939,408 1,939,408 399,679 2,527,265 Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 6 SRF 20 Table 2: Updated Development Scenario Based on Built/Approved Development Sub- Developable Units Office SF Manufacturing Warehouse Neighborhood Highway Area Acres SF SF Retail SF Retail SF A 152 6 306 C 484 D 418 E 65 505 341 1,372 209 123 243,331 1,437,778 1,427,441 F 0 -- G 20 368 Total 1,445 2,918 3,108,550 90,994 765,719 90,994 765,719 1,082,695 1,082,695 1,939,408 81,991 219,195 83,486 15,007 1,939,408 399,679 636,351 1,042,324 736,468 112,122 2,527,265 AUAR Mitigation Plan The mitigation plan that was developed as part of the AUAR process has been revised with this Update. It is included in Appendix B. Water Infrastructure A majority of the study area is currently provided with potable water through individual wells. The Shakopee Public Utility Commission (SPUC) water system includes seven storage tanks, 18 groundwater supply wells and four pumping stations that service the entire community. The system utilizes four pressure zones: Normal Zone, First High Zone, East Zone, and the Second High Zone. The study area is within portions of the Normal, First High, and Second High pressure zones. Sanitary Sewer Infrastructure Similar to water infrastructure, portions of the study area are not connected to municipal sanitary sewer service. Most of the study area is outside the current MUSA boundary, though the boundary is anticipated to expand to cover the entire study area by 2040. Future extension of the sanitary infrastructure is needed to service the area. The study area is located within three sewer sheds based on the City's 2018 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan: West Louisville -Jackson (WLJ), West Jackson (WJ), and South Louisville Jackson (SLJ). The WLJ subdistrict is served by a trunk 24 -inch gravity sewer located within Emery Way west of CR69. The WJ subdistrict is served by an 18 -inch gravity sewer that is currently being extended within the Palomino Trail and Bluff View Developments, located along 17th Avenue, west of Marystown Road. The SLJ subdistrict is served by two sewer extensions, 1) an 18 -inch gravity sewer currently being extended in the Highview Park subdivision, located south of CH 78 and west of Marystown Road, and 2) a 24 -inch gravity sewer located south of 17th Avenue along Lusitano Street. Stormwater Improvements As development proposals are received, the City's existing stormwater policy will be used to review development proposals and mitigate impacts. There are various areas throughout the study area that experience drainage issues during storm and rain events. Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 7 SRF 21 Electrical Infrastructure Improvements According to Shakopee's Long -Range Electric System Plan, three of six of the Jackson Township areas forecasted to be annexed by the City are already serviced by Shakopee Public Utilities (SPU) for electrical service. There is a projected growth in electrical load provided by the City to the currently un-serviced areas in the City's annexation plan of 23.2 mega -volt amperes. Transportation Infrastructure Improvements The study area is currently supported by a network of state, county, and local roadways. Since the original AUAR, several planned improvements to this network have been completed or are planned, both within and adjacent to the study area. One major improvement, the grade -separated interchange at US 169 and Hwy 41/CSAH 78, was completed in 2020, significantly enhancing regional mobility and safety. Additionally, the extension of CSAH 16 to CSAH 69 is anticipated to be completed in the next five years, improving connectivity to Subdistricts A and B and supporting future development within the study area. In addition, Scott County has also implemented multiple infrastructure improvements at key intersections within the AUAR study area. Details on these improvements can be found in the transportation analysis provided in Appendix H. The traffic analysis completed for this AUAR update represents planning level estimates and should be further refined as development occurs and other regional roadway and intersection improvements are pursued. Future Considerations In 2007, area stakeholders analyzed the construction of a new Hwy 41 river crossing between the cities of Shakopee and Chaska. The new crossing was studied to explore opportunities that serve regional traffic, reduce traffic congestion, and protect the floodplain. Multiple corridors were studied through a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), which studied the project impacts on social, economic, and environmental resources in the area. As a result, The C-2 alignment was selected as the preferred alternative through the EIS process. The C-2 alignment is in close proximity to the existing Hwy 41 alignment within this AUAR study area. While the preferred alignment was selected, the new crossing is not planned or programmed within MnDOT's near term projects, and the new alignment was not considered in the traffic analysis for this AUAR. However, the City recognizes the alignment and the findings of the FEIS and will monitor the alignment and future right-of-way needs. It should be noted that the City of Chaska recently reconstructed its downtown segment from a 4 -lane divided roadway to a 2 -lane divided roadway with turn lanes. Similarly, the MN 41 intersection at the MN Rail Frontage Road was rebuilt as a 2 -lane roadway with turn lanes. 9. CLIMATE ADAPTATION AND RESILIENCE Trends in temperature, precipitation, flood risk, and cooling degree days for the AUAR Development Area are described in the below sections and in Table 3. Temperature trends described below utilize the shared Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 8 SRF 22 socioeconomic pathways (SSPs) climate projects. Cooling degree days projections described below utilize Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs). Both SSPs and RCPs are greenhouse gas concentration scenarios used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. SSP 245 and RCP 4.5 are intermediate emissions scenarios in which emissions decline after peaking around 2040. SSP 370 and RCP 8.5 are high emissions scenarios in which emissions continue to rise through the century. Temperature According to the Minnesota Climate Mapping and Analysis Tool (CliMAT),2 the annual daily average temperature in the AUAR Development Area from 1995 to 2014 is 46.0 °F. In 2040-2059, the annual daily average temperature in the AUAR Development Area is projected to increase to 49.8 °F and 51.0 °F under an intermediate emissions scenario (SSP 245) and high emissions scenario (SSP 370), respectively. In 2080-2099, annual daily average temperature is projected to further increase to 52.8 °F and 55.1 °F under SSP 245 and SSP 370, respectively. Heat Island Impervious surfaces and structures such as roads, parking lots, and buildings absorb and re -emit more solar energy than natural landscapes. This effect can significantly increase air temperature and overall extreme heat vulnerability in urban areas where dense concentrations of impervious surfaces exist. This is referred to as the urban heat island effect. According to the Metropolitan Council Extreme Heat Map Tool,3 the AUAR Development Area is susceptible to extreme heat based on the land surface temperature during a heatwave in 2022. Precipitation According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Climate Resilience Evaluation and Awareness Tool (CREAT) Climate Change Scenarios Projection Map,4 there is a projected 3.0% to 13.9% increase in 100 -year storm intensity by 2035 and a projected 5.8% to 27.0% increase in 100 -year storm intensity by 2060 for the AUAR Development Area. Localized Flood Risk The Metropolitan Council Localized Flood Map Screening Tool identifies localized flood hazards,' referred to as Bluespots, which are broken into Primary, Secondary, Tertiary, and Shallow categories based on potential flood water depth. Primary Bluespots are higher risk flood areas, and Shallow Bluespots are typically isolated low areas with lower flood risk. The tool shows several Bluespots within the AUAR Development Area, with maximum depths ranging from 0.26 feet to 22.70 feet. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Climate Explorer Metadata. August 2021. Accessed 23 August 2025 and available at https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/climate/climate-explorer-metadata.html. 2 University of Minnesota. Minnesota Climate Mapping and Analysis Tools. Accessed 23 August 2025 and available at https://app.climate.umn.edu/?output type=modelVal&scenario=ssp370 2080-2099&model=ensemble&variable=tmax- degF&time frame=yearly&aoi=none#intro pane. 3 Metropolitan Council. Extreme Heat Map Tool. 2022. Accessed 23 August 2025 and available at https://metrocouncil.org/Communities/Planning/Local-Planning-Assistance/CVA/Extreme-Heat.aspx. 4 Environmental Protection Agency. Climate Resilience Evaluation and Awareness Tool Climate Change Scenarios Project Map. September 2022. Accessed 23 August 2025 and available at https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=3805293158d54846a29f750d63c6890e. 5 Metropolitan Council. Localized Flood Map Screening Tool. August 2024. Accessed 23 August 2025 and available at https://metrocouncil.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=100fa3012dcc4e288a74cbf4d95027bf. Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 9 SRF 23 Cooling Degree Days Cooling Degree Days is a term used by the National Weather Service to estimate cooling needs for buildings and can be examined as a baseline and projected exposure indicator under the RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5 scenarios. Cooling degree days are indexed units that approximately describe the demand to heat or cool a building. Cooling degree days accumulate based on degrees over 65 °F when cooling is required. For example, cooling degree days for a weather station that records an average daily temperature of 75 °F would be 10. According to Heat Vulnerability in Minnesota,' the number of cooling degree days in 2019 for Scott County was 446. Under the RCP 4.5 scenario, the number of cooling degree days in 2050 for Scott County is projected to be 520. Under the RCP 8.5 scenario, the number of cooling degree days in 2050 for Scott County is projected to be 673. Table 3: Climate Considerations and Adaptations Resource Category Climate Considerations Project Information Climate Change Risks and Adaptations Vulnerabilities Project Design Land Use Aspects of building architecture/materials choices and site design may impact urban heat island conditions in the surrounding area, including changing climate zones, temperature trends, and potential for extended heat waves. No critical facilities (i.e., facilities necessary for public health and safety, those storing hazardous materials, or those with housing occupants Projected climate trends include an increase in temperature and heat island effect, precipitation and localized flood risk, and cooling degree days. Portions of the AUAR Development Area may experience flooding during extreme rain events. 6 University of Minnesota. Heat Vulnerability in Minnesota. 2019 accessed 23 August 2025 and available at https://maps.umn.edu/climatehealthtool/heat app/. Since the City of Shakopee joined the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's GreenStep program in 2019, the City has adopted several sustainable project design elements including energy efficient public buildings, efficient outdoor lighting and signals, resilient city growth, inclusion on mixed use spaces, a stormwater management assessment, efficient water and wastewater systems, and a focus on green business development and renewable energy. Utilize the GreenStep initiative of designing stormwater management areas to reduce the risk of flooding, including Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 10 SRF 24 Resource Category Climate Considerations Project Information Climate Change Risks and Adaptations Vulnerabilities Water Resources Contamination/ Hazardous Materials/Wastes Fish, wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological resources (rare features) who may be insufficiently mobile) are proposed. Current Minnesota climate trends and anticipated climate change in the AUAR Development Area may influence water resources. Current Minnesota climate trends and anticipated climate change in the AUAR Development Area may influence the potential environmental effects of generation/use/storage of hazardous waste and materials. Current Minnesota climate trends and anticipated climate change in the AUAR Development Area may influence the local species and suitable habitat. Water resources in the AUAR Development Area may become warmer, more polluted, and change in volume due to increased temperatures and runoff. Localized flood risk will be higher with increased precipitation and storm events, which will require adequate maintenance of drainage systems to accommodate the increase in water volume. The proposed AUAR development is not anticipated to generate hazardous waste. Climate trends may change habitat suitability for species in the AUAR Development Area. infiltration basins and filtration systems. Utilize the GreenStep initiative of designing efficient stormwater management areas. Also utilize the GreenStep initiative of community forest and soils, including planting native vegetation to facilitate water absorption. Not applicable. Native plantings and stormwater management areas would provide suitable habitat for species that currently utilize the existing area. * Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Minnesota GreenStep Cities: City of Shakopee. Accessed 24 August 2025 and available at https://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/city-detail/12444. 10. PERM ITS AND APPROVALS REQUIRED: Table 4 lists the anticipated major approvals and permits likely to be required by future development projects. These have not changed since the original AUAR. Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 11 SRF 25 Table 4: Permits and Approvals Unit of Government Type of Permit or Approval Federal U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) State Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) MnDNR MnDNR MnDNR MnDNR Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) MPCA MPCA Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Minnesota Office of the State Archeologist (OSA) Minnesota Council of Indian Affairs (MIAC) Minnesota Office of Administrative Hearings Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) Regional Metropolitan Council Environmental Services Metropolitan Council Lower Minnesota River Watershed District Scott Watershed Management Organization County* Scott County Scott County Section 404 of the Clean Water Act State Endangered Species Review Public Waters Work Permit (if impacting a public water or public water wetland) Temporary Water Appropriation Permit Amendment to Shoreland Ordinance to include the two Natural Environment Lakes within the Study Area Amendment to DNR Water Appropriation Permit 1980-6205 for increased water use Section 401 Certification Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) Permit/Approval Water Main Plan Approval Cultural Resource Coordination Cultural Resource Coordination Cultural Resource Coordination Municipal Boundary Adjustment Environmental Assessments (AUAR) Sanitary Sewer Plan/Connection Approval Comprehensive Plan Amendment Watershed District Permit Watershed Management Organization Approval Access permits to County Roadways Grading Permit* Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 12 SRF 26 Unit of Government Type of Permit or Approval Scott County Scott County Scott County Local City of Shakopee City of Shakopee City of Shakopee City of Shakopee City of Shakopee Subdivision Approval* Rezoning* Building Permits* Grading Permit Subdivision Approval Rezoning Building Permits Site Plan Approval *Permitting with Scott County for grading, subdivisions, rezoning and building permits will be required if development is pursued prior to annexation into the City of Shakopee. 11. LAND USE: The AUAR study area is approximately 2,889 acres in size located to the west and south of the existing City of Shakopee limits (see Figure 1 and Figure 2, Appendix A). The AUAR study area currently includes a range of existing uses, from undeveloped open space and recreational areas to commercial development. Several new developments have been built or approved since the 2020 AUAR completion, as shown in Figure 2, Appendix H, which depicts updated land use assumptions. There have been no changes to the Future Considerations, Prime or Unique Farmland, or Designated Parks, Recreation Areas, and Trails within the study area. Planned Land Use All built or approved developments are consistent with the City's 2040 Planned Land Use map. Portions of the study area have been annexed into the City of Shakopee since the 2020 AUAR completion, while other portions remain within Jackson Township/Scott County jurisdiction. The area currently outside of the City's jurisdiction is not serviced by municipal water or wastewater services. The transportation network within the study area is well established with arterial roadways to service this area. There have been no changes to the City's planned and proposed land uses since 2020. The City's planned land use map will be updated alongside the 2050 Comprehensive Plan, due to be completed in 2028. 12.COVER TYPES: The original AUAR indicated that the study area included a variety of cover types throughout the Subdistricts, ranging from grassland and crop land to lakes and wetlands. The specific building siting, parking layouts and internal street network were not yet determined within the study area. Therefore, the figure identified the general overlay of development areas compared to conservation areas. Since the Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 13 SRF 27 original, portions of the study area have been developed, and the cover types have changed. Approved development is shown in Figure 2 of Appendix H. Zoning The annexed portions of the study area have been assigned to zoning categories, as shown in Appendix A Figure 4. Most of the study area is zoned in a manner consistent with 2040 planned land use and development plans, although portions of Subdistricts A and B that are slated for development are zoned as Agricultural Preserve. This will require coordination to amend zoning in accordance with planned developments and ensure that future development patterns preserve the natural environment. Zoning information was acquired from Scott County,' and the City of Shakopee,' both data sources were used in order to cover the entirety of the study area as shown in Figure 4, Appendix A. There have been no zoning changes for the portions of the study area in Scott County jurisdiction. 13.GEOLOGY, SOILS AND TOPOGRAPHY/LANDFORMS: The existing bedrock, geologic hazards, soil conditions, and potentially contaminated properties were studied using various state resources. No changes were made to this section from the original AUAR. 14.WATER RESOURCES: Surface Water There is no change in this subsection from the original AUAR. As noted in the original AUAR, the Minnesota River defines portions of the western and northern limits of the study area. While located within the study area, there are no specific development plans that propose a use of the Minnesota River. This includes the development of recreational or commercial use of the river for transportation or activity use. There are two nearby water related uses along the Minnesota River. These include a public boat launch within the City of Shakopee and passive water -based recreation opportunities within the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge. Ground Water Water Supply and Water Quality There is no change in this subsection from the original AUAR. As noted in the original AUAR, three aquifers provide the water source for the Shakopee public water supply — Prairie du Chien -Jordan Sandstone, Tunnel City-Wonewoc, and Mt. Simon/Hinckley bedrock. The Prairie du Chien -Jordan sandstone aquifer supplies the greatest quantity of water to the system and is expected to continue to provide the greatest supply in the future. Currently eight wells utilize water from the Prairie du Chien -Jordan sandstone aquifer. The SPUC continues to monitor water quality, heath, and aesthetic concerns. Scott County Minnesota. Scott County Zoning. Accessed 3 September 2025 and available at https://open-data- scottcounty.hub.arcgis.com/datasets/ScottCounty::zoning/explore. $ City of Shakopee. Zoning. Accessed 3 September 2025 and available at https://www.shakopeemn.gov/business development/planning development/zoning map.php Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 14 SRF 28 Wastewater The majority of the study area is currently not serviced by the municipal sanitary system; however, as part of the original AUAR, the City reviewed the estimated sewer needs for the AUAR study area as part of its Sanitary Sewer Master Plan. The current Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) limits align with the City's existing boundary; these are areas within the study area that are in the MUSA. Development within the study area is dependent on the expansion of municipal sewer to service Jackson Township. As the MUSA is expanded and development is pursued, the analysis of this section should be updated. Appendix C includes a Wastewater Management Memo. Information informing this analysis included the City's Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan, 9 the West End - Lower Bluff Lift Station and Trunk Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report,1° and the 2016 West End Sanitary Sewer System Study. (I will send a map of completed improvements to be included in the document.). There are no substantial changes to the assumptions included in the Original AUAR and the City's 2019 Master Plan as part of this AUAR update. Development has occurred within the Study Area and portions of the planned sanitary sewer network has been constructed. One significant piece of this infrastructure is the completion of the West End Lower Bluff Lift Station, which serves the WLJ sanitary sewer subdistrict within the AUAR study area. Appendix C includes a map of the planned and since constructed sanitary sewer network. Stormwater An analysis of changes in stormwater management, including identification of new stormwater management practices (BMPs) installed since the original AUAR has been completed. See Appendix D for the Stormwater Management Memo. Water Appropriation This section has been updated to include the latest Minnesota Geological Survey's County Well Index (CWI) (July 2022) and most recent wellhead plan (WHP) protection information in accordance with City's Wellhead Protection Plan. Figure 3, Appendix A and Table 5 below show 35 current wells within the study area consisting of 33 Domestic Wells and 2 Industrial Wells and an additional 37 wells are located outside the study area within a 500 -foot buffer. Of the wells within the buffer 35 are domestic, one is a test well and one is a monitor well. All of the wells within the study area are shown in Table 5. Those within the buffered zone are marked with an asterisk. The Shakopee Wellhead Protection runs area along the eastern portion of the study area. No further changes have been made to this section. Table 5: County Well Index (CWI) Within the Study Area Well ID Well Type Well Depth (ft) Status 705136 634980 561402 632976 676856 581848 Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic 280 180 261 280 265 180 Active Active Active Active Active Active 9 City of Shakopee. West End Sanitary Sewer Study. November 2016. Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. Copy provided by City of Shakopee on 10 September 2025. 1° City of Shakopee. West End - Lower Bluff Lift Station and Trunk Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report. Prepared by Advanced Engineering and Engineering Services. Copy provided by City of Shakopee on 10 September 2025. Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 15 SRF 29 Well ID Well T pe Well Depth (ft) Status 404373 253026 587569 605935 206807 451132 436482 609840 206806 772251 432854 441519 515779 407610 206813 570166 532175 109882 119567 407611 560332 646361 653060 417580 641541 436428 510438 666281 420696* 420049* 507541* 840766* 441523* 420018* 163482* 221363* 620615* 570136* 570155* 523928* 474608* 404371* 596211* 570130* 678853* 545094* 211858* Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Industrial Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Industrial Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Monitor Well Test Well Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic 200 266 341 227 166 280 320 200 400 200 262 280 240 240 200 220 260 240 305 300 180 340 180 300 300 320 215 220 308 300 133 422 220 300 360 280 320 340 280 260 400 280 260 340 289 240 340 Active Inactive Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Sealed Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 16 SRF 30 Well ID Well Type Well Depth (ft) Status 443665* 625966* 608296* 645906* 589958* 207438* 433603* 570128* 577886* 652972* 585376* 683041* 518198* 761609* 502757* 571456* 605931* 767891* Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Test Well Study Area Improvements No changes were made to this section from the original AUAR. Surface Waters No changes were made to this section from the original AUAR. 300 260 160 241 300 255 320 280 280 360 340 285 260 360 300 320 310 316 Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Sealed Active Active Active Active Active 15.CONTAMINATION/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS/WASTES: Contaminated Properties Potential environmental hazards and agricultural chemical contamination sites were reviewed using the latest Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and Minnesota Department of Agriculture's (MDA) What's in My Neighborhood? Interactive mapping tool. No significant changes to existing conditions in relation to existing contamination or hazards have occurred based on an updated review, available in Appendix E. Solid Waste No changes were made to this section from the original AUAR. The City of Shakopee's City Code 51.03 requires that within the refuse/recycling service area*, the City's contracted garbage hauler shall collect and dispose of refuse, yard waste, and recyclable materials from single-family dwellings, duplexes, and triplexes and all other residential dwelling units that receive individual curbside pickup of refuse. *Refuse/recycling area is defined as the area within the City's metropolitan urban service area (MUSA). Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 17 SRF 31 16. FISH, WILDLIFE, PLANT COMMUNITIES, AND SENSITIVE ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES (RARE FEATURES): State Listed Threatened and Endangered Species According to the DNR's review of the Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS) database, rare features are located within the vicinity of the study area. Appendix F includes correspondence from the DNR (Project Number: 2025-00646; submitted July 23, 2025, review results were received on September 18, 2025). Minnesota's Endangered Species Statute (Minnesota Statutes, section 84.0895) and associated Rules (Minnesota Rules, part 6212.1800 to 6212.2300 and 6134) prohibit the take of endangered or threatened plants or animals, including their parts or seeds, without a permit. Rare species within a one -mile radius of the study area include: • Butternut (luglans cinerea), state -listed endangered tree o To demonstrate avoidance, a qualified surveyor would need to identify any trees that are proposed to be removed. • Kitten -tails (Synthyris bullii), state -listed threatened plant o To demonstrate avoidance, a qualified surveyor would need to determine if suitable habitat exists within the activity impact area and, if so, conduct a survey prior to any project activities. • Hooded arrowhead (sagittaria montevidensis bar. calycina), state -listed threatened plant o To demonstrate avoidance, a qualified surveyor would need to determine if suitable habitat exists within the activity impact area and, if so, conduct a survey prior to any project activities. • Lark sparrow (Chondestes grammacus), state -listed species of special concern o If feasible, the DNR recommends avoiding disturbance to undisturbed grassland areas and tree and shrub removal from May 15 through August 15 to avoid disturbance of nesting birds • Black buffalo (Ictiobus niger), state -listed threatened fish species o If the project area contains suitable spawning habitat, work within the water needs to be avoided from April 1 through mid -June. If this is not feasible, Review.NHIS@state.mn.us would need to be contacted, as further action may be needed. • Mudpuppy (Necturus maculosus), state listed salamander species of special concern o The DNR recommends avoiding work within water from May through July to protect nesting mudpuppies. • Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) and little brown myotis (Myotis lucifugus), both state -listed species of special concern o To minimize impacts, the DNR recommends that tree removal be avoided from June 1 through August 15. • Gophersnake (pituophis catenifer), state -listed species of special concern o Given the presence of these rare snakes, the DNR recommends that the use of erosion control mesh, if any, be limited to wildlife -friendly materials. Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 18 SRF 32 • Sessile -flowered Yellow Cress (Rorippa sessiliflora), plant species of special concern o The DNR recommends that if feasible, avoid suitable habitat. DNR indicated that surveys must be conducted by a qualified surveyor and follow the standards contained in the Rare Species Survey Process' and Rare Plant Guidance.12 The Natural Heritage Review page13 can be visited for a list of certified surveyors and more information on this process. Survey proposals should be submitted to Reports.NHIS@state.mn.us prior to initiating survey work. Project planning should take into account that any botanical survey needs to be conducted during the appropriate time of the year, which may be limited. For any questions regarding this process, Review.NHlS@state.mn.us can be contacted. The DNR further asked that incidental sightings of state -listed species be reported via the DNR Plant and Animal Observation Form.14 The DNR encourages Natural Heritage Reviews as individual projects are planned to 1) to determine if there is any potential for a project to impact state -listed species or other rare features, and 2) to identify measures needed to ensure that a project is complying with state laws related to state -listed species and other rare features Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species The DNR indicated that to ensure compliance with federal law, project proposers should conduct a federal regulatory review using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) online Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) tool. The DNR noted that all projects, regardless of whether there is a federal nexus, are subject to federal take prohibitions. The IPaC review will determine if prohibited take is likely to occur and, if not, will generate an automated letter. The DNR review noted that the northern long-eared bat is federally listed as endangered. The AUAR study area also overlaps with a USFWS Rusty Patched Bumble Bee High Potential Zone. The IPaC project planning tool provided by the USFWS used to identify federally listed threatened and endangered species that may be within or near the study area. Appendix F includes the results of this resource tool. Federally listed species identified from the IPaC search include: • Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis), endangered — May Affect • Tricolored Bat (Perimyotis subflavaus), proposed endangered — May Affect • Rusty Patched Bumble Bee (Bombus affinis), endangered — May Affect • Monarch Butterfly (Danaus Plexippus), proposed threatened — No Effect • Whooping Crane (Grus americana), experimental population, non -essential — No Effect 11 Minnesota DNR. Natural Heritage Review. A Rare Species Survey is Requested. Now What? October 2022. Accessed 19 September 2025 and available at https://files.dnr.state.mn.us/eco/nhnrp/rare-species-survey-process.pdf. 12 Minnesota DNR. Guidance on Collecting and Documenting Rare Plants. April 2022. Accessed 19 September 2025 and available at https://files.dnr.state.mn.us/eco/nhnrp/rare-plant-guidance.pdf. 13 Minnesota DNR. Natural Heritage Review Program. 2025. Accessed 19 September 2025 and available at https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/nhnrp/natural-heritage-review.html. 14 Minnesota DNR. MNDNR Plant and Animal Observations. 2025. Accessed 19 September 2025 and available at https://survey123.arcgis.com/share/5b0a415373c9464bb96751 f3f7cda180?portalUrl=https://arcgis.dnr.state.mn.us/portal. Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 19 SRF 33 Northern Long -Eared Bat and Tricolored Bat Since the original AUAR, the northern long-eared bat (NLEB) was reclassified from federally threatened to endangered; this occurred in spring 2023. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) proposed listing the tricolored bat (TCB) as endangered in 2022. On March 31, 2023, USFWS issued interim NLEB guidance and tools to help stakeholders transition to the endangered classification. In October 2024, USFWS released the final guidance and tools for the NLEB including an updated Northern Long-eared Bat and Tricolored Bat Rangewide Determination Key to assist individuals and organizations seeking to evaluate impacts to these species prior to carrying out activities. These tools also support the conservation of the tricolored bat (TCB), should the species be listed, with the goal of providing compliance predictability and conserve remaining bats within the NLEB and TCB ranges while minimizing impacts to the regulated public. USFWS has updated its regulatory mapping for both the NLEB and TCB. The AUAR study area falls within the range of the NLEB,15 as well as the TCB.16 Each year the GIS data incorporated into the Determination key will be reviewed so that it remains accurate based on the best available information. Federal law under the Endangered Species Act as well as additional rules, agency policies, and consultation requirements, should be reviewed as part of project planning. Rusty Patched Bumble Bee The RPBB lives in colonies that include a single queen and female workers. The colony produces males and new queens in late summer. The RPBB mostly occupies grasslands and tall grass prairies while overwintering in wooded areas.17 A significant portion of the AUAR study area, extending from the Minnesota River to the Strunks Lake basin, is identified as a high -potential habitat for the rusty -patched bumble bee. This high - potential zone continues south to Thole Lake and Odowd Lake and stretches westward as far as Gifford Lake. The RPBB may be impacted by a variety of possible activities associated with development, including herbicide use, pesticide use, land clearing, and soil disturbance/compaction. The use of native plant species, including flowering plants in seed mixes can be used to promote pollinator friendly habitat within grassland and shrubland in the study area. Additional mitigation measures could include the minimization of mowing during the RPBB foraging season, keeping natural areas un-mowed, using a high cutting height, and incorporating additional wildflower planting/restoration. Habitat surveys will occur in coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to determine the potential for RPBB use on the property and potential effects to the species. If applicable, the DNR recommends reseeding disturbed soils with native species of grasses and forbs using BWSR Seed Mixes' or MnDOT Seed Mixes.19 The USFWS RPBB guidance20 provides guidance on avoiding 15 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Northern Long-eared Bat Habitat Map. Accessed 21 August 2025 and available at https://www.fws.gov/species/northern-long-eared-bat-myotis-septentrionalis/map. 16 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Tri-colored Bat Habitat Map. Accessed on 21 August 2025 and available at https://www.fws.gov/species/tricolored-bat-perimyotis-subflavus/map. 17 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Rusty patched bumble bee (Bombus affinis). 2025. Accessed 21 August 2025 and available at https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9383 18 Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources. Seed Mixes. 2025. Accessed 19 September 2025 and available at https://bwsr.state.mn.us/seed-mixes. 19 Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT). Erosion Control and Stormwater Management. Vegetation. Seed. New MnDOT Standard Seed Mixes. 2025. Accessed 19 September 2025 and available at https://www.dot.state.mn.us/environment/erosion/vegetation.html. 20 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). ESA Section 7(a)(2) Voluntary Implementation Technical Assistance for Rusty Patched Bumble Bee. 2025. Accessed 19 September 2025 and available at https://www.fws.gov/media/esa-section-7a2-voluntary-implementation-technical-assistance- rusty-patched-bumble-bee. Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 20 SRF 34 impacts to rusty patched bumble bee and a key for determining if actions are likely to affect the species; the determination key can be found in the appendix. Monarch Butterfly The preferred habitat for the Monarch butterfly is prairie with milkweed and flowering plants. Within the AUAR study area, the land identified for future development has been majorly previously disturbed by agricultural activity and other uses and does not currently contain native prairie vegetation. Consequently, the proposed development is not expected to substantially reduce the quality or extent of suitable Monarch habitat in or near the study area. The use of native plant species in seed mixes could, however, promote pollinator -friendly habitat within the AUAR area. Whooping Crane Non -essential experimental populations of the whooping crane are classified as threatened on National Wildlife Refuge and National Park lands, requiring consultation under Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). On private lands, they are considered proposed species; Section 7(a)(2) consultation is not required, but Federal agencies must avoid actions that would jeopardize the species under Section 7(a)(4). The whooping crane's preferred habitat includes shallow marshes and surrounding open grasslands. No critical habitat has been designated for this species within the study area. While some potential habitat may be present within the study area, the AUAR boundary lies outside National Wildlife Refuge and National Park lands. As a result, non -essential experimental populations do not receive ESA protections in this area, and adverse impacts from the proposed development are unlikely. Minnesota Biological Survey Sites of Biodiversity Significance Minnesota Biological Survey (MBS) sites are within the AUAR study area and are concentrated northwest of Highway 169 largely within the Minnesota Valley State Recreation Area. MBS Sites have varying levels of native biodiversity and are ranked based on the relative significance of this biodiversity at a statewide level. Factors taken into account during the ranking process include the number of rare species documented within the site, the quality of the native plant communities in the site, the size of the site, and the context of the site within the landscape. These include: • Nyssen's Lake— Moderate MBS Site — Sites ranked as Moderate contain occurrences of rare species and/or moderately disturbed native plant communities, and/or landscapes that have a strong potential for recovery. • Gifford Lake Unit and Jackson 10 — Below — These areas were determined to be Below the minimum biodiversity threshold for statewide significance. These areas may have conservation value at the local level as habitat for native plants and animals, corridors for animal movements, buffers surrounding higher quality natural areas, or as areas with high potential for restoration of native habitat. Based on a review of the study area by the DNR's Regional Environmental Assessment Ecologist (REAE), areas within and surrounding the Minnesota Valley State Recreation Area contain native plant communities and wetlands. Development within these areas would be of concern. Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 21 SRF 35 The DNR recommends that the project be designed to avoid impacts to these ecologically significant areas. Actions to avoid or minimize disturbance include, but are not limited to, the following recommendations: • As much as possible, operate within already -disturbed areas. • Avoid MBS Sites and rare NPCs (ranked S1, S2, or S3). • Retain a buffer between proposed activities and the MBS Site. • Minimize vehicular disturbance in the MBS Site (allow only vehicles/equipment necessary for construction activities). • Do not park equipment or stockpile supplies in the MBS Site. • Do not place spoil in the MBS Site or other sensitive areas. • If possible, conduct the work under frozen ground conditions • Use effective erosion prevention and sediment control measures. • Inspect and clean equipment prior to operation and follow recommendations to prevent the spread of invasive species.21 • Revegetate disturbed soil with native species suitable to the local habitat22 as soon after construction as possible. • Use only weed -free mulches, topsoils, and seed mixes. Of particular concern are birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus) and crown vetch (Coronilla varia), two invasive species that are sold commercially and are problematic in prairies and disturbed open areas. Native Plant Communities As noted in the original AUAR, several DNR native plant communities are present within the northern portion of the AUAR study area, primarily within the Minnesota Valley State Recreation Area. NPCs are given a rank that reflects the relative rarity and endangerment of the community type in Minnesota. Ranks range from critically imperiled (51) to secure, common, widespread, and abundant (S5). NPCs with a rank of S1, S2, or S3 are considered rare within Minnesota. As currently proposed, the following DNR Native Plant Communities have been delineated in the direct vicinity of the AUAR study area: • MRn93b: Spikerush - Bur Reed Marsh (Northern) — imperiled (S2) • FFs59a: Silver Maple - Green Ash - Cottonwood Terrace Forest — vulnerable to extirpation (S3) • MHs38c: Red Oak - Sugar Maple - Basswood - (Bitternut Hickory) Forest — vulnerable to extirpation (S3) • MRn93a: Bulrush Marsh (Northern) — vulnerable to extirpation (S3) • WMn82b: Sedge Meadow — uncommon but not rare (S4) • WMn82a: Willow - Dogwood Shrub Swamp — secure and abundant (S5) A calcareous fen (Seminary Fen, Fen ID No. 20977) with state -listed threatened plant species has been documented in the vicinity of the AUAR Study Area. A calcareous fen is a rare and distinctive peat - accumulating wetland that is legally protected in Minnesota. The Wetlands Conservation Act (WCA), authorized by Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.223, states that calcareous fens may not be filled, drained, or 21 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Contract, grant and permit requirements. "Come Clean, Leave Clean." 2025. Accessed 19 September 2025 and available at https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/invasives/dnrlands.html. 22 MN Board of Water and Soil Resources. Native Plant ID and Information. 2025. Accessed 19 September 2025 and available at https://bwsr.state.mn.us/native-plant-id-and-information. Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 22 SRF 36 otherwise degraded, wholly or partially, by any activity, except as provided for in a management plan approved by the commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources. Many of the unique characteristics of calcareous fens result from the upwelling of groundwater through calcareous substrates. Because of this dependence on groundwater hydrology, calcareous fens can be affected by nearby activities or even those several miles away. To minimize stormwater impacts, the DNR recommends referring to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)'s General Principles for Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control in the Minnesota Stormwater Manual.23 The DNR noted that calcareous fens are "Special Waters" and a buffer zone may be required. Calcareous fens may be impacted by activities within the fen, activities that affect surface water flows (e.g., stormwater flow, erosion), or activities that affect groundwater hydrology (e.g., groundwater pumping, contamination, discharge, or excavation). The DNR would have concerns regarding any activities that might affect groundwater flows, including groundwater pumping or discharge. To ensure compliance under WCA for specific projects, the DNR asked that the Calcareous Fen Program Coordinator, Keylor Andrews (Keylor.Andrews@state.mn.us), be contacted. If determined that a project will adversely affect the fens in any way, including indirect impacts through the alteration of hydrological conditions, the contact would need to be emailed before the project is initiated to discuss rare species survey process. The DNR noted that if the WCA is applicable to this project, to please note that native plant communities with a Conservation Status Rank of 51 through S3 or wetlands within High or Outstanding MBS Sites of Biodiversity Significance may qualify as Rare Natural Communities (RNC) under WCA. Minnesota Rules, part 8420.0515, subpart 3 states that a wetland replacement plan for activities that modify a RNC must be denied if the local government unit determines the proposed activities will permanently adversely affect the RNC. If the proposed project includes a wetland replacement plan under WCA, the DNR Regional Ecologist24 should be contacted for further evaluation. There is WCA Program Guidance and Information25 can be visited for additional information, including the RNC Technical Guidance.26 17. HISTORIC PROPERTIES: An initial review request of the Minnesota Statewide Inventory Database was submitted to the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), as well as a review form from the Minnesota Indian Affairs Counsil (MIAC) to ensure compliance with Minnesota Stature 138.40, Subd. 3, and a review form to the Minnesota Office of the State Archeologist (OSA) to ensure compliance with Minnesota Statute 138.40, Subd. 3. Review requests were submitted on July 31, 2025. A reminder email was sent to MIAC and OSA on August 21, 2025, with a request to review by September 20, 2025, at the latest. Information regarding the historic properties/cultural resources reviews is available in Appendix G. SHPO replied indicating that they do not 23 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. General principles for erosion prevention and sediment control at construction sites in Minnesota. 2025. Accessed 19 September 2025 and available at https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=General principles for erosion prevention and sediment control at construction sites in Minnesota. 24 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Regional Plant Ecology Program. 2024. Accessed 19 September 2025 and available at https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/eco/regional-plant-ecology-program.html. 25 MN Board of Water and Soil Resources. WCA Program Guidance & Information. 2025. Accessed 19 September 2025 and available at https://bwsr.state.mn.us/wca-program-guidance-and-information. 26 MN Board of Water and Soil Resources. Wetland Conservation Act. Technical Guidance on "Rare Plant Communities." November 2017. Accessed 19 September 2025 and available at https://bwsr.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/2019- 01/Wetland WCA Rare Nat Comm Tech Guidance.pdf. Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 23 SRF 37 have capacity for this type of review request (for an AUAR update). As of 9/18/25, OSA and MIAC have not provided a response. 18. VISUAL: No changes were made to this section from the original AUAR. 19. AIR: Stationary Source Emissions Not applicable to an AUAR. Vehicle Emissions An updated traffic study is included in Appendix H. The traffic generation is within the parameters of the original AUAR, except for Subdistrict C. Subdistrict C's estimated daily trip comparison is 267% of Max Build daily trips. Vehicle emissions are likely to be higher than anticipated in Subdistrict C, based on the analysis of daily trips. Dust and Odors No changes from the original AUAR. 20. GREENHOUSE GAS (GHG) EMISSIONS/CARBON FOOTPRINT: An analysis on Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emission/Carbon Footprint can be found in Appendix I. 21. NOISE: Construction Noise No changes from the original AUAR. Traffic -Related Noise No changes from the original AUAR, except for Subdistrict C. Subdistrict C's estimated daily trip comparison is 267% of Max Build daily trips. Traffic -related noise is likely to be higher than anticipated in Subdistrict C, based on the analysis of daily trips. 22. TRANSPORTATION: An updated transportation analysis memorandum was completed and is included in Appendix H. Key findings from the update are summarized below: Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 24 SRF 38 • Infrastructure Review: Several mitigation measures from the original AUAR have been implemented or are planned. These are summarized in Table 2 and Figure 1 of Appendix H and are documented in the Mitigation Plan Update (Appendix B). • Land Use Changes: Updated land use assumptions reflect a shift toward more residential development, particularly in Subdistrict C, and less employment than the original Max Build scenario assumptions. (see Table 6 below). Table 6: AUAR Land Use Scenarios Land Use Type Comp Plan Max Build AUAR Update Residential Units Retail Employment Non -Retail Employment 1,154 141 1,366 2,013 1,610 8,392 2,918 52 3,265 Trip Generation: Updated daily trip estimates fall between the 2040 Comp Plan and Max Build scenarios. However, Subdistrict C shows a substantial increase in projected trips, indicating the need for further infrastructure evaluation (see Table 7 below). Table 7: Daily Trips Comparison Subdistrict Comp Plan Daily Trip Comparison Max Build AUAR Update A B C D E F G Total Daily Trips 6,201 3,809 284 3,011 254 58 3,455 17,071 13,793 30,723 4,901 13,793 1,166 0 4,850 69,224 7,044 8,763 13,071 6,596 1,165 0 4,857 41,495 • Updated Mitigation Needs: Based on updated traffic forecasts, the revised mitigation measures are summarized in Table 8. Key takeaways include: o Most remaining mitigation measures remain valid. o Some improvements may no longer be needed due to reduced traffic volumes or changes in access o New mitigation measures have been identified at the following locations. These are consistent with previous studies completed within the area. Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 25 SRF 39 ■ Construct right -turn lanes at Marystown Road / US 169 Ramps ■ Restrict or implement traffic control improvements at CR 78 / Zumbro Avenue ■ Provide internal roadway connections in Subdistrict C to CR 15 and CR 69 Table 8: Shakopee AUAR Infrastructure Improvement Update Intersection Improvement Summary May No Longer Be Needed CR 78/Emery Way CR 69/10th Ave/Chaparral Ave CR 69/Vierling Drive CR 69/CR 16 Extension CR 78/CR 77 Comp Plan/Max Build Mitigation Still Needed MN 41 MN 41/Rail Frontage Rd CR 69/US 169 Ramps CR 78/Emery Way CR 78/CR 15 CR 15/128th Street New Mitigation Marystown Road/US 169 Ramps CR 78/ CR 73 (Zumbro Avenue) Subdistrict C Construct signal or roundabout Construct signal or roundabout. Reconstruct Chaparral Ave to align with 10th Ave. Construct signal or roundabout Construct signal or roundabout Construct SB right- and EB left -turn lane Construct 4 -lane divided roadway Construct a traffic signal Construct signal or roundabout Construct SBL Turn Lane Construct signal with turn lanes or roundabout Construct NB and SB left -turn lanes Construct turn lanes Restrict to 3/4 access or construct signal or roundabout Provide direct internal connections to CR 69 and CR 15 Overall, this AUAR transportation update reflects current development conditions and provides refined traffic and infrastructure guidance through 2040. Ongoing monitoring is recommended to assess the timing and need for mitigation as development progresses. 23. CUMULATIVE POTENTIAL EFFECTS: No change from the original AUAR. Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 26 SRF 40 24. OTHER POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: No change from the original AUAR. Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update 27 SRF 41 Appendix A Figures Figure 1 — State Location Area Figure 2 — Project Location Area Figure 3 — Wells (Minnesota Well Index) Figure 4 — Zoning Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update SRF 42 0 >- 0 I-- C O Study Location Shakopee Scott County, MN I GARS R OiUNtY t NxxF$prA 121--N'I______] i SIBLEY r_, ,, -,- C �, `�,r �ti�Vr/ Blle O U N T i ,r P I a i n e Legend Q Study Area Municipalities p - J County Boundary Highways Interstate Highway US Highway State Highway Streams Lakes Otsego Andover Siam Lake rMINN— "r- I . Ramsey �� ANOKA rxlxxeSOTA rr�- ,,! 241--f I ��� �� \Antra C O U IVTY Corcoran Map : Grove --HENNEP COUNT Medina Victori LE SUEUR COUNTY State Location NIxN-$Q A 41 Cha txxxE$orA � I Plym. th Eden Prairie NINN'$f-, 101 Shakopee Prior Lake rSCOU TY coTr rMNNESOTA Farmingto Brooklyn Pa Gold •n Saint Loui ' rk '[ ti NxSr i:l ii Lino Lakes Vadnais Heights r MINNFSO, Bloomin on runxF$QI,q r gan R• nevi l l e avage Bur LI '11 nsville Apple Valley DAKOTA Lakeville COUNTY Figure 1 `)! RICE OUNTY 0 5 10 Miles Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update City of Shakopee 1 43 cc U) U) u) Brickyard ►;layhol, Gifford Louisville Legend Study Area Park Boundaries -+- Railroad DNR Public Water DNR Public Watercourse ,_=_l Municipal Boundary L! ' County Boundary L PLSS AUAR Study Area i Sec. ip RAGUET "RIVERV'J IEW Sec. 3 �-- ` R23W WILDLIFE PARK T'11 vN MANAGEMENT Mobile Nyssens Manor Shakopee Riverview Vierling Tahpah Township 0.5 R23W Holmes Jackson Miles County 2024, Scott Countyr.Z024. Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update City of Shakopee Figure 2 44 0 u) CL cn L Legend Study Area 500ft Buffer Wellhead Protection Areas Wells By Use O Domestic O Monitor Well • Test Well O Industrial Railroad DNR Public Water DNR Public Watercourse Municipal Boundary County Boundary 0.5 O (Co) SCOTT COUNT COUITT Minnesota County Well Index (CWI) .• z Miles 1 EV il+ as a Q ml Shakopee O 4241ppealli West West T, a) Vierling Dri fry West 0 0 m m a) 0 (0 (r 0 ---,t.,_,. __--- - .. ,------s., (--- --tr 11 1 ti 1 e I\JeSt am s i1 cog O 0 13Ct treet West 0 o,(y© gto 0 OO Jackson Shakopee Pnt� Prb•c\ a) CI) N a) oo,k�, 0 ----- --- --- -- -- — -��- - — - CD Engelhaven Utility Association. Image Source: Carver County 2024, Scott County 2024 Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update City of Shakopee Figure 3 45 Path: L:1Projects119900\192341GI5_ProjectslArcGI5_ProlShakopee AUAR Update.aprx Legend Study Area UI City Boundary DNR Public Water DNR Public Watercourse CD Municipal Boundary Shakopee Zoning Districts - 2025 Agricultural Preservation Business Park Community Commercial Q High Density Residential Highway Business A� Light Industrial Medium Density Residential Park and Open Space Planned Unit Development Rural Residential Urban Residential Scott County Zoning - 2025 General Commercial Rural Industrial Heavy Industrial Urban Business Reserve Urban Expansion Reserve Urban Expansion Reserve Cluster Mobile Manor Land Use and Zoning Image Source:lEarver County,2O24; Scott County2024 Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update City of Shakopee Figure 4 46 Appendix B Mitigation Plan Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update SRF 47 SRF SRF Project No. 19234 To: From: Mark Noble Senior Planner, Planning Division City of Shakopee Lydia Statz, AICP, Sustainable Planning Project Manager SRF Consulting Group Date: 9/18/2025 MEMORANDUM Subject: Mitigation Plan Update for Jackson Township Development Area - AUAR Update Mitigation Plan Introduction This Mitigation Plan has been prepared as part of the AUAR for the Jackson Township Development Area, completed for the City of Shakopee to review the potential comprehensive impacts from the development of the City's Orderly Annexation Area in Jackson Township. The AUAR identified the impacts anticipated to result from the development planned within the Envision Shakopee 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The mitigation plan identifies the steps to be taken by the City and/or other responsible parties to avoid or minimize environmental impacts and to mitigate for unavoidable impacts. This mitigation plan was prepared in accordance with the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board's Environmental Review Program, Minnesota Rules 4410.3610. This plan addresses the mitigation methods to be implemented for impacts that could result from the study area development scenario examined in the AUAR. The AUAR determined that impacts related to traffic, surface water, ecologically sensitive resources, utility infrastructure, and potential environmental hazards could result from planned or proposed development. The section below summarizes the impacts and the specific mitigation measures to be implemented to avoid, minimize, or alleviate impacts. A table is included that identifies the potential impacts, proposed mitigation efforts, and responsible parties. Responsible Parties The responsibility for ensuring the implementation of many of the mitigation methods identified in this plan will lie with the City of Shakopee. In these cases, the City's review and www.srfconsulting.com 3701 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 100 I Minneapolis, MN 55416-3791 1763.475.0010 Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer 48 Mark Noble City of Shakopee 9/18/2025 Page 2 of 16 approval of developer's preliminary and final subdivision plans and preliminary and final planned development amendments; land disturbance and erosion control plan and permit reviews; and other approvals required for each phase and component of development will serve as the step where measures to avoid impacts and/or specific mitigation plans and requirements are identified and reviewed. City approval of development plans will be dependent upon reaching agreements with the developer(s) regarding plan elements to reduce environmental impacts, mitigation to be performed for unavoidable impacts, and financial and regulatory assurances that the mitigation plan will be implemented. In addition, the City will inspect the development as it is constructed, or will, through other means, ascertain that the prescribed measures are implemented. However, developers are ultimately responsible for implementing mitigation measures in accordance with plan review and permit requirements. Agencies other than the City of Shakopee also have authority for determining compliance with the regulations within their jurisdiction as part of the approval and permitting requirements. These agencies include, among others: Scott County; Metropolitan Council; Lower Minnesota River Watershed District, Scott Watershed Management Organization; the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA); the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT); the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR); and the Minnesota Department of Health. The AUAR and this mitigation plan list permits and approvals required by these and other governmental regulatory agencies. Responsibility for obtaining all required permits and approvals and for providing mitigation required as part of those approvals lies with the developer(s). Identified Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Plan The following italicized text is from the Environmental Quality Board document, Recommended Content and Format Alternative Urban Areawide Review Documents.' Mitigation Plan. The draft and final AUAR documents must include an explicit mitigation plan. It must be understood that the mitigation plan is a commitment by the RGU to prevent potentially significant impacts from occurring from specific projects. It is more than just a list of ways to reduce impacts —it must include information about how the mitigation will be applied and assurance that it will. Otherwise, the AUAR may not be adequate and/or specific projects may lose their exemption from the individual review. Environmental Quality Board (EQB). Recommended Content and Format: Alternative Urban Areawide Review Documents. 2008. Accessed 2 September 2025 and available at https://www.egb.state.mn.us/sites/eqb/files/documents/AUAR%20guidance%20%28form%29%20-9-09.pdf. SRF 49 Mark Noble City of Shakopee 9/18/2025 Page 3 of 16 The RGU's final action on the AUAR must specifically adopt the mitigation plan; therefore, the plan has a "political" as well as a technical dimension. Based upon the mitigation plan guidelines summarized above, the following table identifies the resource area, anticipated impact, mitigation action, and responsible party. Status is included in the table as ongoing (from the original 2020 AUAR), completed, or new (added with the AUAR update). SRF 50 O 00 Mark Noble 6 ta _ w .� 3 VI %..• ^ ? o z CD) C .DI O 0 0i C - O) 0 CU ._ c O in RS cC a C C >, w a) 7i V Q a c w 0 O •- s CO 0 O 0° �› o Developer a) 0_ O a) 0 a) 0 0 > 0 c .O 47, G � Build (Shakopee 2040 Plan) Scenario will require: • Comprehensive Plan Update (Adoption of draft 2040 Plan) • Annexation of township land into city limits • Zoning amendments Erosion control measures must be permitted through the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District (LMRWD) or Scott Watershed Management Organization (SWMO) • DNR public waters permits will be obtained if impacted by future development. • Mitigation of the wetland impact must occur per the Section 404 of the Clean Water Act with the USACE, the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA), and 301 Water Quality Certification process with the MPCA U (13 O. E 4— O A co E E 3 VI Proposed development may require additional changes, approvals or amendments to policy and regulatory items, such as the Comprehensive Plan, Annexation, and Zoning changes. Proposed development may create erosion and sedimentation. Impacts to public waters may result from proposed development including the fill or modification of the wetland. Impacts to wetlands may results from proposed development including the fill or modification of the wetland. I. C a) E Q 0 N W 0 oC Erosion and Sedimentation DNR public waters Wetlands to U) L Q U) V 3 0 0 U) CL Land Use Geology, Soils, and Topography/Landforms Fish, Wildlife and Ecologically Sensitive Resources Fish, Wildlife and Ecologically Sensitive Resources E O V C O cn O O O L ri N m LO L. - O M W C • C� Lr Q z ; Q • C• 1 2 - O O O � � O N '5 N S- O � W O m Q 0- � c�0 N O N M O 00 rn Mark Noble LO 0 (.n 0 03 0_ a) a) O (6 T 0 _ ^ CM .5 ? C_ = EZ 0) ca (nn�u o 0 Ongoing 0) C 0) 0 Ongoing CU .in o _ a) City of Shakopee a; T 0 0 ° a) Developer W in as a) CC a 0 4 s u v) 0 Mitigation • Best management practices will be deployed during construction for areas that drain to the Minnesota River. • Bluff areas within Subdistrict A should be preserved in accordance with local long-range plans. • Future development in close proximity to the Minnesota Valley State Recreation Area must not interfere with enjoyment of the natural resources/ recreational uses (e.g. noise issues). • Future development should avoid/minimize impacts to native plant communities and wetlands within and in the vicinity of the Minnesota Valley State Recreation Area. • At the time that development is proceeding, consult with the DNR regarding potential botanical survey requirements. as 4— 0 0 s _a , ,./.)+- L c The build scenario includes potential development near existing bluff areas. The build scenario preserves the land within the Minnesota Valley State Recreation Area as a natural/recreational resource area. Potential noise, visual, etc. impacts may from development in close proximity. Proposed development within close proximity of sensitive resources may occur. V a+,D — = a, — a) 0 c6 6 V L a) E __ .� O 03 ° 0• 0 Q v Q ca ,— a, i C ' - C N .— E �-0_.V) 3 : > Vf cC E .c c c6 73 92 L_ a) Bluff Area Native Plant Communities > .C c6 ca C 0 (/) a) O 0 (n a"' a) ct) C C N a) 2 c6 C C - }'cu a) � v) Fish, Wildlife and Ecologically Sensitive Resources Fish, Wildlife and Ecologically Sensitive Resources CU CU U Li RS C m CI c6 0 i N v Q , >, a) DC C D ca 0 cU v) , >, a) '- — CC V —0 V N = U N O C CI v a) CC ii w v) Ln C O C . - v a) I w cn O 00 CT) Mark Noble LO a) a) a) 0 _c O V 0 5 a CU _ E Z I V O Summary of Impact Resource Area C O Cr) 0 7.) a) 0 The following minimization measures are recommended for work within MBS sites: • Minimize vehicular disturbance in the area C a--� C c 0 +J a, CU >, o Ev o CU .—-O ri3 D >, Q O N p cn CD u +J .- 2 cn }' L — c6 Vi v ` L +� > -w c cu 2 N —cu tz V •Q +�a) co a) (6CI — cu c C a) C a) C O_ vt5 cu m > •— v Q O — c6 0 E N 0 �p U Ln v u •cn N N .� .N s o_ a)o Q O v) o L_ nii > (6 Q C cu CU c6 }, O V •� }, .- _ CU 5 CU CT3 N >LE 0 cu V c6 a� 73 O O }, c6 O 2 v' ca a) w co co O O O≥ a) - N CD cn O O c •� CD cu _ Ov O c� O gin can O • � cn > ' v c chi) • O V o co 0 • • • • Ov • c� • • O • do + Q N 4- F •E Q .— o L > Q g -O 0 vi V O C 4- 0 U U 0 F c/1 a) _ 2 C0 73 Cm O u �. >, .o cu > cn O a) - L C co 0 v > O •� - O C (f) L.) a) *u:w c/) Mark Noble LO 0 CU no 0_ a) Q 0 fts O w vl „ .0 O RS 4a O VI V O c.0 C •O O C O O Ongoing Ongoing .O IA CD co CC a O w a O W s � O 0 I O w Q O (1.) s O 0 Developer, City of Shakopee Developer, City of Shakopee C O CI 2 • Calcareous fens may not be filled, drained, or otherwise degraded, wholly or partially, by any activity, except as provided for in a management plan approved by the commission of the DNR per the Minnesota Wetlands Conservation Act. • Any activities that might affect groundwater flows, including groundwater pumping or discharge should be avoided. • Any adverse affects to calcareous fens, including indirect impacts through the alteration of hydrological conditions, must be reported to the DNR. • Tree removal must be avoided within Silver Maple - Green Ash - Cottonwood Terrace Forest native plant community (T 115N, R 23W, Sec. 9). • Consult with the DNR at the time that future development is proceeding to determine if a rare species survey is required. • Tree removal must avoid the bat pupping season (approximately June - July). • Future development should avoid disturbance to undisturbed grassland areas. • Tree and shrub removal from May 15th through August 15th should be avoided. 4.0 (13 CL E O fp E E z Proposed development within close proximity to Calcareous Fens sites may occur. Proposed development within or near the Cottonwood Terrace Forest. Required tree removal for infrastructure and development. Required tree removal and ground disturbance for infrastructure and development. RS v, C a) u_ cm C 0 N L_ co v co V Butternut Little Brown Bat and Big Brown Bat Lake Sparrow and Purple Martin CU a V O CC a) _� CU +� - co w cn CC a) L.) Cl) +7,'5 U co w tr) tY Fish, Wildlife and Ecologically Sensitive Resources Fish, Wildlife and Ecologically Sensitive Resources Mark Noble cil 7; 0 CU _ Z 4-1 RS v, O V 0 Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Completed Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Completed < z Q Z Completed CU XI v) C ill L 03) CU CC a Developer, City of Shakopee Developer, City of Shakopee MnDOT Shakopee Shakopee Shakopee, Scott County Shakopee, Developer Scott County Scott County Scott County, Developer Scott County 0 CO O1 :47, • Tree removal must avoid the bat pupping season (approximately June 1 - August 15). Commitment to winter clearing (November 1 - March 31) is recommended. • Consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to identify potential impacts to rusty patched bumble bee high potential zone. • Bee surveys may be required based on the proposed improvements and regulations in place at the time of any future development. Construct a 4 -Lane Divided Roadway with turn lanes along MN Highway 41 (1) Construct left -turn lanes at the side -street approaches, with potential for future signalization (1) Construct a traffic signal (1) Construct a traffic signal or roundabout (1) Construct a southbound left -turn lane at the Emery Way intersection (1) Construct a traffic signal or roundabout (1) Construct a westbound right -turn lane to accommodate to the heavy westbound movement (1) Construct left -turn lanes at the side -street approaches (1) Construct a traffic signal or roundabout (1) V (5 CP- 0 (5 E>, Required tree removal for infrastructure and development. Required tree removal and ground disturbance for infrastructure and development. �c S v, — CD c CU -o +-, - CD - _ c a, O O •— C6 `, c --F-, v m C/) (n >, T LE O o +,>co N CU +' 2 0 cn o O +, CD `o O > ° s •� o }' a, c W+, O C a, }, a, C . . C a, a, a, via, u aa) +— a) o a, c6 > -O L_ a, (0 a) D c6 Q Si _ '� CU)EE co Northern Long - Eared Bat Rusty Patched Bumble Bee MN 41 and Rail Frontage CR 78 and Emery Way CR 78 and CR 69 a) 1 - 'CC CU V a. 0 til CU cc Fish, Wildlife and Ecologically Sensitive Resources Fish, Wildlife and Ecologically Sensitive Resources Traffic Traffic CD 0 00 Mark Noble LO O rn a, a) a) O O O V -ci 2 •_ 5 a a) FEZ (13 O V1 •.. V O r (71 o ›, V1 . cp. Rs ce O ezi •,47, Summary of Impact Resource Area z z Scott County C a) o o o 0 > vo c a, E U) 0 o E a) -o o C O O) > • a) a, 0 a, 0 E E 0 cad co Construct a westbound Construct left -turn lanes on all approaches (1) CR 78 and CR 79 L.L ce or) N - LO O O N oo (73 Mark Noble City of Shakopee 1:P; vl 0 m al EZ co 4a _ O 0 im 0 ' V 0 Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Completed Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing 4.0 L. MI a CU - col CL 11 CU Scott County Scott County Scott County Scott County, Developer Scott County, Developer Shakopee, Scott County Shakopee, Scott County Shakopee, Scott County Shakopee, Scott County, MnDOT Shakopee, Scott County, MnDOT Shakopee, Scott County, Developer Shakopee, Scott County, Developer 0 (5 DI 2 Construct a traffic signal or roundabout (1) Construct a southbound right -turn lane and a westbound right -turn lane (1) Construct left -turn lanes on all approaches (1) Construct eastbound and westbound left -turn lanes (1) Construct a southbound right -turn lane and eastbound left -turn lane (1) Reconstruct Chaparral Avenue to align with 10th Avenue to create a 4 -leg intersection (1) Construct a traffic signal or roundabout (1) Construct a traffic signal or roundabout (1) Construct a traffic signal or roundabout( 1) Construct a traffic signal or roundabout (1) Construct a northbound and southbound left -turn lane on CR 69 (1) Construct a traffic signal or roundabout (1) V CL _ Ecn EN M VI v) C N �E L u==C ��M•�ai >, • - —0 E >, 4- N —0 —O C D CD _ Q N O > 0, fp v lv� c6 > Q N T 2 v a � a � � o CR78and CR15 CR 78 and CR 73 CR 78 and CR 77 CR 69 and 10th Avenue/Chaparral Avenue CR 69 and Vierling Drive CR 69 and US 169 North Ramp CR 69 and US 169 South Ramp CR 69 and Subdistrict A/B North Access 0) a 0) V M 0 ul CU ce I Idu lL Traffic Traffic Traffic Traffic Traffic Traffic L.L ce co 00 lc) N O au a O Mark Noble d) 0 fts V oil a_Jiv vl O O) Q. 4:1)c R3 _ E Z VI V 0 Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Completed Completed Completed z z z z .0) O >+ 4.0 t. (5 a CD - col CL col CC Shakopee, Scott County, Developer Shakopee, Scott County, Developer Shakopee, Scott County, Developer, Township Shakopee, MnDOT Shakopee, MnDOT Scott County Shakopee, MNDOT Shakopee, MNDOT Scott County, Developer Developer Developer O a al 2 Construct a northbound and southbound left -turn lane on CR 69 (1) Construct a traffic signal or roundabout (1) Construct a northbound and southbound left -turn lane on CR 15 (1) Construct a traffic signal or roundabout (1) Construct a traffic signal or roundabout (1) Construct a traffic signal or roundabout (1) Construct Westbound Right -Turn Lane Construct Northbound Right -Turn Lane Restrict to a 3/4 access or construct a traffic signal or roundabout Provide direct connections to CR 15 and CR 69 • Implement dust control measures (e.g. apply water to exposed soil and limit the extent and duration of exposed soil conditions). • Limit construction noise to daytime hours in accordance with V (ti _ 4- O (5 E E N 22 w , > 2 o 2, N Ol N N c cj a, c a ,_ %-, ,„ c +-, v +, v) •O E c C .. .Etv, w U N N 'M N = o Q Q Various construction activities will be required to achieve the development proposed within the Build Alternative. The range of activities are unknown at this time, though there is a CR 69 and Subdistrict A/B South Access (CR 16) CR 15 and 128th Street Marystown Road and US 169 North Ramp Marystown Road and US 169 South Ramp CR15and CR16 Marystown Road and US 169 North Ramp Marystown Road and US 169 South Ramp CR 78/CR 73 (Zumbro Ave) Subdistrict C Construction Activities C) L Q C) i O oG Traffic Traffic v Traffic Traffic Traffic Traffic Traffic oy) .}' O U z 1.7.; }, 0 u O co L.L ce C) Mark Noble a) O_ 0 _c O O cil a) VI O t+ _ E Z 4-1 p O &- VI •.. V O C 'O C' O >+ 4-0 t. (5 a CD — cil _ 0 CL VI CD Cc L_ a) 0 Tu cu 0 Developer in coordination with Shakopee Public Utilities (SPU) 0 a DI 2 the City's noise ordinance per City Code 130.45. • Construction equipment house be fitted with mufflers and properly maintained. • Noise mitigation measures should be identified as future development occurs (e.g. installation of noise barriers). Extend trunk water main and other water distribution features to accommodate expansion Construction of additional supply well #23 (Well #23 needed to support development outside of study area) V RS E {i O i E E ill potential for noise and dust from activities. C }' Q ai a) +_' (o ate--+ > 2 _ O C >, cn Q ti, a a -0a N cn U co i 2 Ura • -o N O a3 a, •• °� C ca ED E >, U O —_73 —c ' § oa v) ate-' CU CD a, v, a6 L_ E >, +J vi v >, >-0 c U E cn O �. — a✓ O �I- s'.� As a result of future development, the existing water supply system will need to be extended to provide service to new areas. New development areas will increase the water supply need, along with increased needs from surrounding development areas. a) v) 'o z U z- 4 - CO IL - Water Supply Water Supply MI &- a CU i 0 OC CU ' N O z a, a3 c U q- Infrastructure and Public Services Infrastructure and Public Services Mark Noble a) Q fts O O VI O 7 4-1 p° 1- tn ...J O a 0 u � C O Ongoing Ongoing c C O >+ t. (5 a CD — cil O CL vl CD cc v) Developer in coordination with SPU Developer in coordination with the City of Shakopee Developer in coordination with the City of Shakopee City of Shakopee O a al Fi 2 Construction of a 500,000 -gallon elevated storage tank Extend city water service as development occurs. Extend sanitary sewer service as development occurs. Construct forcemain and gravity mains throughout study area to provide sanitary service to development areas and allow for future extension Construct lift stations to service study area and future development areas. Two lift stations are identified within study area, of which one was recently completed (West End Lower Bluff LS). Two additional lift stations will be needed beyond the study area to service adjacent growth. V MI CL E O ns E 0 New development areas will increase the water supply need, along with increased needs from surrounding development areas. As a result of future development, the existing water supply system will need to be extended to provide service to new areas. As a result of future development, the existing sanitary system will need to be extended to provide service to new areas. As a result of future development, the existing sanitary system will need to be extended to provide service to new areas. As a result of future development, the existing sanitary system will need to be extended to provide service to new areas. Water Supply Water Supply Sanitary Sewer Sanitary Sewer Sanitary Sewer to a) a W V 1- = O OC Infrastructure and Public Services Infrastructure and Public Services Infrastructure and Public Services Infrastructure and Public Services U) 2 v v •- 2 11 N a) u CU cn LO N � O t co a) a O Mark Noble O O fts V En Li) Q el, 1.1 VI V O N U 0) 0 z z >% 4-0 a CD _ O Ce City of Shakopee Developer in coordination with the City of Shakopee Developer �o� o a, . _ ,7) a, -0 D o_ c o c6 T 22 m Q U a) C 0 i 0 CO al 2 Expansion and water quality improvements of the Upper Valley Drainage Ditch (regional facility). Continue to employ City policies and regulations for onsite surface water management. Stormwater runoff will be permitted through the LMRWD or SWMO. Consult with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), Office of the State Archeologist (OSA), and the Minnesota Indian Affairs Council (MIAC) regarding existing data and any requirements/recommendations regarding cultural resource evaluations and field surveys. Consult with the Minnesota SHPO under Section 106 of the Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (36 CFR 800) when using federal funds, permits, or authorizations in a federal CL Ecu — O L EE E cn As a result of potential development, stormwater water runoff rates may increase with increased impervious surface in the study area. Increased volumes may impact existing facilities. As a result of potential development, stormwater water runoff rates may increase with increased impervious surface in the study area. As a result of potential development, stormwater water runoff rates may increase with increased impervious surface in the study area. co ca ovi ate-+ i N 1-u M +, N CZ 0 Q }' E o a, a) a5 V L A-, a--+ N o o o u a) o - 0 a) O a, - co > CI s LE u u a -0_a co co Water Quality - Stormwater Runoff Water Quality - Stormwater Runoff Water Quality - Stormwater Runoff L' 0 v) I O) L _O D O u a) (1) s u v Ma (1) a CU V &- 0 CC Infrastructure and Public Services Infrastructure and Public Services Infrastructure and Public Services cn a) —� a) cn o —I a CNJ cNi rn Mark Noble LLO O Ltl 0 a_ vl O rucEz v� O V O z via 1. CO CL cn 0 0- vl a) ce Developer, in coordination with City of Shakopee c 0 co 0) 2 undertaking. Should archeological materials be discovered at a project site, communicate with SHPO, OSA, and other agencies as appropriate. Any land acquired or developed with LWCF monies cannot be converted to anything other than outdoor recreational use unless replacement land of at least equal fair market value and reasonably equivalent usefulness is provided. Guidelines to submit a conversion request is available on the DNR website.2 V MI Om E O ns E in As a result of potential development, there may be potential impacts to parks funded by the LWCF. The MN Valley State Recreation Area within the study area is on the Minnesota DNR list of grant funded parks. Section 6(f)/Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Act to a) icC a) V L O a WCOCU i 4- u u - i N N n a u -O L_ cn U) C co Q C CU O CD CD C Cv U U) C CU E CU O L Q E C6 a=+ C CU O Q 0 CU cu U) C O U CU O Cll co C O U Cll U) U) C 0 CU C Cll U) C Cll E Cll O 0 E CD C C6 O O 00 C C C co Q co CD O C co cu E U) C O C6 _C C6 Cll 5 m X co 2 CU 4--, co cu O C CU O U) CU CO Q Cll C6 U) C O C O U C co D cu U) Q U) C Cv E C1 Cll Cll 0 U) co 0 Cll N Cll Cll O U) C CO a- O 00 O L 4-- 1 CD ▪ C CU (/) C O U C6 C O C6 110 E Cll F Cll N 6 CU co E Cn CU E O > U C6 C co www.dnr.state.mn.us 2 Minnesota DNR. Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). 2025. Accessed 3 September 2025 and available at htt Mark Noble City of Shakopee 9/18/2025 Page 16 of 16 Future Environmental Concerns or Impacts Not Anticipated in this AUAR and Mitigation Plan Although steps have been taken to identify potential future conditions based on the best information currently available, as development plans are completed and more information becomes available, or as regulatory requirements change, environmental concerns or issues that differ from those addressed in the AUAR or Mitigation Plan may be identified. Also, new information or mitigation methods may be developed after the approval of this Plan. In these instances, the development plans would be reviewed to identified measures to avoid, minimize and mitigate for impact consistent with the new information, while maintaining the basic intent and process identified in this Plan. Actions Beyond the Scope of this AUAR and Mitigation Plan The City is responsible for permits/approvals and related mitigation for regulatory issues and impacts under its local jurisdiction (e.g., traffic improvements). Private developers are responsible for obtaining all permits necessary from all governmental agencies having jurisdiction over their development. www.srfconsulting.com 3701 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 100 I Minneapolis, MN 55416-3791 1763.475.0010 Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer 63 Appendix C Wastewater Management Memo Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update SRF 64 SRF To: From: Date: Subject: MEMORANDUM SRF Project No. 19234 Alex Jordan, P.E. City Engineer, City of Shakopee Alicia Bock, Lead, Environmental Planning 9/12/2025 Wastewater Memo — Jackson Township Development Area - AUAR Update Wastewater Memo Introduction You (Alex Jordan, P.E., City Engineer, City of Shakopee) provided a review of sewer system information to SRF on September 10, 2025, indicating that the AUAR update is consistent with the original AUAR and the City's Sanitary Sewer Master Plan. A figure was provided (see Figure 1, Enclosures) showing sewer that has been installed within the study area since the original AUAR. Enclosures • Figure 1 — Planned and Completed Trunk Sanitary Sewer Extensions 1 City of Shakopee. City of Shakopee Sanitary Sewer Master Plan. Adopted by the Shakopee City Council under Resolution R2019-135 on December 17, 2019. Accessed 12 September 2025 and available at https://cros2.revize.com/revize/shakopee/Documents/Government/Department/Public%20Works/Sanitary%20Sewer/Sanitary%20Se wer%20Master%20Plan.pdf. www.srfconsulting.com 3701 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 100 I Minneapolis, MN 55416-3791 1763.475.0010 Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer 65 a ■ GIJ iv 0 2 E ■ Fut Exi ,, Gravity Sewer Laterals a-0 RICES Interceptor FLitore For * r a ri U U 1, 8 _ 'hi ii_ tier If IlL ill ,,,L- 1 :LW. '-' 1S 4. y N anua w 4 I: iv 1, . AP IOW i 1 l(wil r GO (1) CU we" Trip .-.... ,u ,-. - it ok. ( 4.. pnny iiMo7ch evil r1 L.,-, • • ▪ -44.1 S • i U IM — — V, Vc iisS' L,-, S i SkL_ '44411111111k r 4( Agoomm 1144.1 *- pIoe'J� .a� r t Appendix D Stormwater Management Memo Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update SRF 67 SRF From: Date: Subject: Kirby Templin, Environmental Engineer Alex Jordan, PE, City Engineer City of Shakopee Erin Hunker, PE, CFM SRF Consulting Group, Inc. September 3, 2025 Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update Stormwater Memo Introduction MEMORANDUM SRF Project No. 19234.00 The Jackson Township Development Area AUAR was developed by SRF Consulting Group, Inc. (SRF) in February 2020 (hereon referred to as the 2020 AUAR). The Stormwater section in the AUAR still applies to this update. Stormwater Improvements All built or approved developments are consistent with the City's 2040 Planned Land Use map and have followed the design and permitting requirements for stormwater management in the project area. Figure 1 shows the stormwater BMPs and infrastructure that have been added along with associated developments since the 2020 AUAR. The portion of the AUAR area located north and west of TH 169 will need to be further studied and understood as development occurs. 19234 Jackson_AUAR Update StormwaterMemo www.srfconsulting.com 3701 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 100 I Minneapolis, MN 55416-3791 1763.475.0010 Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer 68 O) (0 0 N > _ -0 C6 O U CO CD - e, ▪ CO ▪ N >< O O >,W p O) Cll }, CD 0 -a .= N Qa) C= 0 CO 1EU Cawzcncn g 2l° r U 1 • m 9 69 2l° Cu ca eL c a CO 0 0 CO F ct N Cll 0 CCS C!) c!. U) •U Appendix E Contamination Review Memo Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update SRF 70 SRF To: From: Date: Subject: Mark Noble Senior Planner, Planning Division City of Shakopee Alicia Bock, Environmental Planning Lead SRF Consulting Group 8/8/2025 MEMORANDUM SRF Project No. 19234 Desktop Contamination Review for Jackson Township Development Area - AUAR Update Contamination Review Introduction Potential environmental hazards and agricultural chemical contamination sites were reviewed as part of a desktop contamination review for the Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Study Area on July 31, 2025, using the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and Minnesota Department of Agriculture's (MDA) What's in My Neighborhood? (WIMN) Interactive mapping tool. This desktop contamination review is not intended to replace a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) performed by ASTM Standard E1527-21. SRF did not verify the database information for accuracy. Therefore, further environmental review is recommended as needed for specific projects prior to performing any follow-up investigation work (e.g., subsurface borings) to verify WIMN source information. The data from WIMN is not considered sufficient for meeting environmental due diligence requirements. The data is also not considered survey quality and should not be used as the basis for legal decisions. Sites that are located outside of the study area but within the 500 ft buffer zone are indicated within the table with an asterisk. Study Area Sites Table 1 and Table 2 identify potentially contaminated sites found within the study area based on information available from the MPCA and MDA databases, respectively. Figure 2 in the Enclosures shows the 60 MPCA sites and 2 additional MDA sites located within the study area with the adjacent 500 ft buffer area consisting of 21 MPCA sites. There are a variety of site types across this study area including hazardous waste, stormwater, water quality, feedlots investigation and cleanup, solid waste, and tanks. Figure 2 in the Enclosures depicts the locations of these sites. www.sriconsulting.com 3701 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 100 I Minneapolis, MN 55416-3791 1763.475.0010 Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer 71 Mark Noble City of Shakopee Table 1: MPCA Known or Potentially Contaminated Sites 8/8/2025 Page 2 of 5 Site Name ID No. Site Type Active Site No. 2008 Airport Improve - Granit Falls C00026334 Stormwater No 6 Ace Auto LLC MNS000307856 Hazardous Waste Yes 28 Acorn Mini Storage* C00025152 Stormwater Yes 19 Allen Advertising MN R000042820; MNRNE3586; MNRNE39JV RN E39JV Multiple Programs Yes 68 Anderson Bus Co MN0000692228 Hazardous Waste Yes 9 Appliance Service MND082520461 Hazardous Waste Yes 73 Arasan Apartments C00059191 Stormwater Yes 64 Autumn Acres C00006117 Stormwater No 27 Basset Cultured Marble & Granite LLC 13900111; MNS000102483 Multiple Programs Yes 55 Bonnevista Terrace Manufactured Home Com MN0051985 Water Quality Yes 53 Cargo Van -Go Inc MNR000067181 Hazardous Waste Yes 2 Chaska Forcemain Phase III* C00005351 Stormwater No 75 Chaska Lime Sludge (PVP180)* VP29380 Investigation and Cleanup Yes 45 Circle K Store 2746246 LS0007887; LS0015811; LS0019058; TS0014398 Multiple Programs Yes 50 Contech Engineered Solutions LLC LS0014168; MND982221194; MNR0533G6; MNR05384X Multiple Programs Yes 70 Countryside 2nd Addition C00050923; SU B0052855; SU B0053389; SUB0054704; SUB0054706; SUB0055154; SUB0055393; SUB0055837; SUB0059314; SUB0060558; SU B0060822; SU B0063215 Stormwater Yes 13 Diemold Tool Inc MND985687144 Hazardous Waste No 46 Ditch Witch Of Minnesota T50119741 Tanks Yes 39 Ditch Witch of Minnesota Inc — Shakopee MNR000077263 Hazardous Waste Yes 38 Dueco T50054629 Tanks Yes 48 SRF 72 Mark Noble City of Shakopee 8/8/2025 Page 3 of 5 Site Name ID No. Site Type Active Site No. DUECO - Shakopee C00027546 Stormwater Yes 65 DW Auto/Truck Service LLC* MNR000105510 Hazardous Waste Yes 76 Econo Used Cars MN0000341271 Hazardous Waste Yes 10 Ed Breeggeemann Farm 139-61019 Feedlots Yes 15 Former SuperAmerica #4439 LS0014045; LS0020854; MNR000019281; R000019281; TS0019404 Multiple Programs Yes 22 Fritz Cabinetry & Furniture MNR000019653 Hazardous Waste Yes 3 Garza Motors* MN0000289363 Hazardous Waste Yes 58 Gopher State Truck Stop* MND985712744; SA-gen; VP4510; VP4511 Investigation and Cleanup Yes 67 Hardrives Inc MND981201114 Hazardous Waste No 5 Highview g hvi ew Park C00066791 Stormwater Yes 41 Indy Specialty* MN0000124636 Hazardous Waste Yes 14 Jackson Elementary School* T50125309 Tanks Yes 29 Jackson Heights Mobile Home Park* MN0057967 Multiple Programs Yes 37 Jimmys CRC - Shakopee MNR000057026 Hazardous Waste No 57 Johnny's Auto Sales & Repair MNS000205765 Hazardous Waste Yes 4 Kevin Lusignan Co MNS000132449 Hazardous Waste Yes 7 Ladybug Childcare Center* C00046800 Stormwater Yes 31 Lex Motors LLC MNR000052795 Hazardous Waste Yes 36 Master Motorworx MNS000115725 Hazardous Waste Yes 49 MN River Valley Industrial Park - Modspa C00027966 Stormwater No 51 MN Ryan Shakopee Site LS0017006; VP23820 Investigation and Cleanup Yes 24 MnDOT Residential Acquisition LS0006551 Investigation and Cleanup Yes 60 MnDOTT Theis Auto SA-gen; VP17830 Investigation and Cleanup Yes 63 Mobile Manor Drive C00046323 Stormwater Yes 42 Mobile Manor Park MN0056197 Water Quality Yes 17 Moms Landscaping & Design LLC MNS000159657 Hazardous Waste Yes 40 New Horizon Academy* C00049744 Stormwater Yes 56 SRF 73 Mark Noble City of Shakopee 8/8/2025 Page 4 of 5 Site Name ID No. Site Type Active Site No. Norbert And Larry Theis* PRE000022 Investigation and Cleanup Yes 71 OTI Inc Yard Waste and SSOM Facility PBR000957; PBR001401 Solid Waste Yes 44 Park Place Storage Condominiums C00049349 Stormwater Yes 32 Patriot Auto Sales LS0015522 Investigation and Cleanup Yes 30 Pcocs Pero Locos Autobody MNR000067026 Hazardous Waste Yes 74 Plehal First Addition* C00055247 Stormwater Yes 25 Powers Second Addition C00056739 Stormwater Yes 21 Quality Heating & Air Services Inc MNS000166058 Hazardous Waste Yes 78 R&R Marine C00052986 Stormwater Yes 77 Randy LaTour Farm 139-60863 Feedlots Yes 18 River Valley Business Park C00064989 Stormwater Yes 35 Roger Plekkenpol Farm 139-104488 Feedlots Yes 43 Ron's Mechanical Inc MN5000162172 Hazardous Waste Yes 72 Scott County Substation C00038127 Stormwater Yes 12 Shakopee Veterinary Clinic MNS000158618 Hazardous Waste Yes 54 Shakopee Vet Clinic C00053451 Stormwater Yes 47 SP 7005-107 (CP T169-03) C00035820 Stormwater No 16 SP 7005-57 (TH 101) Bypass C00003313 Stormwater No 61 SPU West Shakopee Sub C00062539 Stormwater Yes 20 Tbk Auto Body MNR000024489 Hazardous Waste Yes 52 TH 169/TH 41/CSAH 78 DDI 147th St. Overpass C00048331 Stormwater Yes 1 TH 169 Crossovers C00048755 Stormwater Yes 8 The Preserve at Stonebrooke* C00004544 Stormwater No 33 Theis Farm Site* MNS000129908 Hazardous Waste Yes 26 Twin City Concrete Pumping Inc* MNS000199646; 5000199646; PBR001071; TS0131128 Multiple Programs Yes 80 Urzua Auto Repair Inc MNS000170456 Hazardous Waste Yes 62 Water Tank 8* C00056856 Stormwater Yes 66 Weidt Property* MNR000055517 Hazardous Waste No 69 SRF 74 Mark Noble City of Shakopee 8/8/2025 Page 5 of 5 Site Name ID No. Site Type ' Active Site No. West End Lower Bluff Utility Improvements* C00062748 Stormwater Yes 34 Wheeler Consolidated Inc LS001 TS00552005200 Multiple Programs Yes 79 MN D985742295; Wheeler Consolidated/Wheeler Lumber MNR0536VR; Multiple Programs Yes 23 MN R0538TY Windermere South 4th Addition* C00059760 Stormwater Yes 59 Windermere South 5th * C00060905 Stormwater Yes 11 Zeus Off Road MN5000307712 Hazardous Waste Yes 81 Source: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. What's in My Neighborhood Geospatial Data. 2025. Accessed 8 August 2025 and available at https://www.pca.state.mn.us/about-mpca/whats-in-my-neighborhood. *Denotes sites that are located outside the study area but within the 500 ft buffer zone of the study area. Table 2: MDA Known and Potential Sources of Agricultural Contamination Case File Name Case File No. Investigation Type Contaminant Status UNKNOWN PLK101000540 Emergency Unknown Closed MMCD PLK101063294 Emergency Pesticides Closed The potential for soil contamination from residential, retail, and office/warehouse uses is considered relatively low. To date, storage or handling of hazardous materials or chemicals is not known or anticipated within the study area that could contaminate groundwater. For any structures or uses involving hazardous materials, all applicable federal, state, and local regulations for their handling must be followed. Conclusion Prior to redevelopment in the vicinity of the sites listed in this desktop analysis, it is recommended that a subsurface environmental investigation is completed by a qualified team of environmental professionals (trained, licensed staff of geologists and engineers) to determine if contaminated soil and/or groundwater may be encountered during a project. In some cases, a full Phase II ESA may be needed to evaluate the presence or absence of petroleum products, hazardous substances, or other environmental contaminants in the site's subsurface per the ASTM E1903-11 Standard Guide. Furthermore, a Response Action Plan / Construction Contingency Plan (RAP/CCP) should be in place prior to disturbance sites in order that contaminated materials (if encountered) are managed in accordance with all relevant local, state, and federal regulations. Enclosures • Figure 1 — Study Area • Figure 2 — MPCA/MDA What's in My Neighborhood Sites SRF 75 CD CO d7 a Study Location Shakopee Scott County, MN GARS R OiUNtY t NxxF$prA 121--N'I______] i SIBLEY r_, ,, -,- C �, `�,r T's Vr/ Blle O U N T i P I a i n e Legend Q Study Area Municipalities p - J County Boundary Highways Interstate Highway US Highway State Highway Streams Lakes State Location Otsego Andover Siam Lake rMINN— "r- I . Ramsey �� ANOKA rxlxxeSOTA rr�- ,,! 241--f I ��� �� \Antra C O U IVTY Corcoran Map : Grove --HENNEP COUNT Medina Victori LE SUEUR COUNTY NIxN-$Q A 41 Cha txxxE$orA � I Plym. th Eden Prairie NINN'$f-, 101 Shakopee Prior Lake r SCOTTCOU TY rMNNESOTA Farmingto Brooklyn Pa Gold •n Saint Loui ' rk �n:Nxscr.a Lino Lakes Vadnais Heights r MINNFSO, Bloomin on" r r■ gan R• nevi l l e avage Bur LI '11 nsville Apple Valley DAKOTA Lakeville COUNTY Figure 1 `)! RICE OUNTY 0 5 10 Miles i Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update City of Shakopee 1 76 0_ cc a> CO O h: L 1Projects1190001192341GIS Projects\Arc a Gifford Louisville Legend Study Area 1500ft Buffer Railroad DNR Public Water DNR Public Watercourse L T) Municipal Boundary Ell ll County Boundary What's in My Neighborhood Sites - MPCA Feedlots Hazardous Waste • A 76 Investigation and Cleanup Multiple Programs Solid Waste Stormwater Tanks Water Quality What's in My Neighborhood Sites - MDA APesticides AUnknown 65 Nyssens 43 a) a) z Q o c6 H 0.5 MPCA/MDA What's in my Neighborhood 1 Miles Chanhassen Shakopee 11 66 24 r64� West 59 47 54. 4A, oaci 26 21* 31 29 13 30th Street Wes Jackson Image Source: Carver County 2024, Scott County 2024 Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update City of Shakopee Figure 2 77 Appendix F IPaC and DNR Information • Minnesota -Wisconsin Federal Endangered Species Determination Key • Whooping Crane and Monarch Butterfly Determination Key • Northern Long Eared Bat and Tri-Colored Bat Determination Key • Rusty Patch Bumble Bee Determination Key • DNR Natural Heritage Review Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update SRF 78 United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Minnesota -Wisconsin Ecological Services Field Office 3815 American Blvd East Bloomington, MN 55425-1659 Phone: (952) 858-0793 In Reply Refer To: Project Code: 2025-0133323 Project Name: Jackson Township Development Area - AUAR Update 08/08/2025 16:26:07 UTC Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location or may be affected by your proposed project To Whom It May Concern: This response has been generated by the Information, Planning, and Conservation (IPaC) system to provide information on natural resources that could be affected by your project. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) provides this response under the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543), the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668d), the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712), and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.). Threatened and Endangered Species The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirement for obtaining a Technical Assistance Letter from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. The Service recommends that verification be completed by visiting the IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested through the IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list. Consultation Technical Assistance Please refer to refer to our Section 7 website for guidance and technical assistance, including step-by-step instructions for making effects determinations for each species that might be present and for specific guidance on the following types of projects: projects in developed areas, HUD, CDBG, EDA, USDA Rural Development projects, pipelines, buried utilities, telecommunications, and requests for a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) from FEMA. 79 Project code: 2025-0133323 08/08/2025 16:26:07 UTC We recommend running the project (if it qualifies) through our Minnesota -Wisconsin Federal Endangered Species Determination Key (Minnesota -Wisconsin ("D -key")). A demonstration video showing how-to access and use the determination key is available. Please note that the Minnesota -Wisconsin D -key is the third option of 3 available d -keys. D -keys are tools to help Federal agencies and other project proponents determine if their proposed action has the potential to adversely affect federally listed species and designated critical habitat. The Minnesota -Wisconsin D -key includes a structured set of questions that assists a project proponent in determining whether a proposed project qualifies for a certain predetermined consultation outcome for all federally listed species found in Minnesota and Wisconsin (except for the northern long-eared bat- see below), which includes determinations of "no effect" or "may affect, not likely to adversely affect." In each case, the Service has compiled and analyzed the best available information on the species' biology and the impacts of certain activities to support these determinations. If your completed d -key output letter shows a "No Effect" (NE) determination for all listed species, print your IPaC output letter for your files to document your compliance with the Endangered Species Act. For Federal projects with a "Not Likely to Adversely Affect" (NLAA) determination, our concurrence becomes valid if you do not hear otherwise from us after a 30 -day review period, as indicated in your letter. If your d -key output letter indicates additional coordination with the Minnesota -Wisconsin Ecological Services Field Office is necessary (i.e., you get a "May Affect" determination), you will be provided additional guidance on contacting the Service to continue ESA coordination outside of the key; ESA compliance cannot be concluded using the key for "May Affect" determinations unless otherwise indicated in your output letter. Note: Once you obtain your official species list, you are not required to continue in IPaC with d -keys, although in most cases these tools should expedite your review. If you choose to make an effects determination on your own, you may do so. If the project is a Federal Action, you may want to review our section 7 step-by-step instructions before making your determinations. Using the IPaC Official Species List to Make No Effect and May Affect Determinations for Listed Species 1. If IPaC returns a result of "There are no listed species found within the vicinity of the project," then project proponents can conclude the proposed activities will have no effect on any federally listed species under Service jurisdiction. Concurrence from the Service is not required for no effect determinations. No further consultation or coordination is required. Attach this letter to the dated IPaC species list report for your records. 2. If IPaC returns one or more federally listed, proposed, or candidate species as potentially present in the action area of the proposed project — other than bats (see below) — then project proponents must determine if proposed activities will have no effect on or may affect those species. For assistance in determining if suitable habitat for listed, candidate, or proposed species occurs within your project area or if species may be affected by project activities, you can obtain Life History Information for Listed and Candidate Species on our office website. If no impacts will occur to a species on the IPaC species list (e.g., there is no habitat present in the project area), the appropriate determination is no effect. No further consultation or coordination is required. Attach this letter to the dated IPaC species list report for your records. 2 of 17 80 Project code: 2025-0133323 08/08/2025 16:26:07 UTC 3. Should you determine that project activities may affect any federally listed, please contact our office for further coordination. Letters with requests for consultation or correspondence about your project should include the Consultation Tracking Number in the header. Electronic submission is preferred. Northern Long -Eared Bats Northern long-eared bats occur throughout Minnesota and Wisconsin and the information below may help in determining if your project may affect these species. Suitable summer habitat for northern long-eared bats consists of a wide variety of forested/wooded habitats where they roost, forage, and travel and may also include some adjacent and interspersed non -forested habitats such as emergent wetlands and adjacent edges of agricultural fields, old fields and pastures. This includes forests and woodlots containing potential roosts (i.e., live trees and/or snags ≥3 inches dbh for northern long- eared bat that have exfoliating bark, cracks, crevices, and/or hollows), as well as linear features such as fencerows, riparian forests, and other wooded corridors. These wooded areas may be dense or loose aggregates of trees with variable amounts of canopy closure. Individual trees may be considered suitable habitat when they exhibit the characteristics of a potential roost tree and are located within 1,000 feet (305 meters) of forested/wooded habitat. Northern long-eared bats have also been observed roosting in human -made structures, such as buildings, barns, bridges, and bat houses; therefore, these structures should also be considered potential summer habitat and evaluated for use by bats. If your project will impact caves or mines or will involve clearing forest or woodland habitat containing suitable roosting habitat, northern long-eared bats could be affected. For bat activity dates, please review Appendix L in the Range -wide Indiana Bat and Northern Long - Eared Bat Survey Guidelines. Examples of unsuitable habitat include: ■ Individual trees that are greater than 1,000 feet from forested or wooded areas, ■ Trees found in highly developed urban areas (e.g., street trees, downtown areas), ■ A pure stand of less than 3 -inch dbh trees that are not mixed with larger trees, and ■ A monoculture stand of shrubby vegetation with no potential roost trees. If IPaC returns a result that northern long-eared bats are potentially present in the action area of the proposed project, project proponents can conclude the proposed activities may affect this species IF one or more of the following activities are proposed: ■ Clearing or disturbing suitable roosting habitat, as defined above, at any time of year, ■ Any activity in or near the entrance to a cave or mine, ■ Mining, deep excavation, or underground work within 0.25 miles of a cave or mine, ■ Construction of one or more wind turbines, or ■ Demolition or reconstruction of human -made structures that are known to be used by bats based on observations of roosting bats, bats emerging at dusk, or guano deposits or stains. If none of the above activities are proposed, project proponents can conclude the proposed activities will have no effect on the northern long-eared bat. Concurrence from the Service is not required for No Effect determinations. No further consultation or coordination is required. Attach this letter to the dated IPaC 3 of 17 81 Project code: 2025-0133323 08/08/2025 16:26:07 UTC species list report for your records. If any of the above activities are proposed, and the northern long-eared bat appears on the user's species list, the federal project user will be directed to either the northern long-eared bat and tricolored bat range -wide D - key or the Federal Highways Administration, Federal Railways Administration, and Federal Transit Administration Indiana bat/Northern long-eared bat D -key, depending on the type of project and federal agency involvement. Similar to the Minnesota -Wisconsin D -key, these d -keys helps to determine if prohibited take might occur and, if not, will generate an automated verification letter. Additional information about available tools can be found on the Service's northern long-eared bat website. Whooping Crane Whooping crane is designated as a non -essential experimental population in Wisconsin and consultation under Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act is only required if project activities will occur within a National Wildlife Refuge or National Park. If project activities are proposed on lands outside of a National Wildlife Refuge or National Park, then you are not required to consult. For additional information on this designation and consultation requirements, please review "Establishment of a Nonessential Experimental Population of Whooping Cranes in the Eastern United States." Other Trust Resources and Activities Bald and Golden Eagles - Although the bald eagle has been removed from the endangered species list, this species and the golden eagle are protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. It is the responsibility of the project proponent to survey the area for any migratory bird nests. If there is an eagle nest on -site while work is on -going, eagles may be disturbed. We recommend avoiding and minimizing disturbance to eagles whenever practicable. If you cannot avoid eagle disturbance, you may seek a permit. A nest take permit is always required for removal, relocation, or obstruction of an eagle nest. For communication and wind energy projects, please refer to additional guidelines below. Migratory Birds - The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) prohibits the taking, killing, possession, transportation, and importation of migratory birds, their eggs, parts, and nests, except when specifically authorized by the Service. The Service has the responsibility under the MBTA to proactively prevent the mortality of migratory birds whenever possible and we encourage implementation of recommendations that minimize potential impacts to migratory birds. Such measures include clearing forested habitat outside the nesting season (generally March 1 to August 31) or conducting nest surveys prior to clearing to avoid injury to eggs or nestlings. Communication Towers - Construction of new communications towers (including radio, television, cellular, and microwave) creates a potentially significant impact on migratory birds, especially some 350 species of night -migrating birds. However, the Service has developed voluntary guidelines for minimizing impacts. Transmission Lines - Migratory birds, especially large species with long wingspans, heavy bodies, and poor maneuverability can also collide with power lines. In addition, mortality can occur when birds, particularly hawks, eagles, kites, falcons, and owls, attempt to perch on uninsulated or unguarded power poles. To minimize these risks, please refer to guidelines developed by the Avian Power Line Interaction Committee and the Service. Implementation of these measures is especially important along sections of lines adjacent to wetlands or other areas that support large numbers of raptors and migratory birds. 4 of 17 82 Project code: 2025-0133323 08/08/2025 16:26:07 UTC Wind Energy - To minimize impacts to migratory birds and bats, wind energy projects should follow the Service's Wind Energy Guidelines. In addition, please refer to the Service's Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance, which provides guidance for conserving bald and golden eagles in the course of siting, constructing, and operating wind energy facilities. State Department of Natural Resources Coordination While it is not required for your Federal section 7 consultation, please note that additional state endangered or threatened species may also have the potential to be impacted. Please contact the Minnesota or Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources for information on state listed species that may be present in your proposed project area. Minnesota Minnesota Department of Natural Resources - Endangered Resources Review Homepage Email: Review.NHIS@state.mn.us Wisconsin Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources - Endangered Resources Review Homepage Email: DNRERReview@wi.gov We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species Please feel free to contact our office with questions or for additional information. Attachment(s): ■ Official Species List ■ Bald & Golden Eagles ■ Migratory Birds OFFICIAL SPECIES LIST This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed action". This species list is provided by: Minnesota -Wisconsin Ecological Services Field Office 3815 American Blvd East Bloomington, MN 55425-1659 (952) 858-0793 5 of 17 83 Project code: 2025-0133323 08/08/2025 16:26:07 UTC PROJECT SUMMARY Project Code: Project Name: Project Type: Project Description: 2025-0133323 Jackson Township Development Area - AUAR Update Residential Construction The Shakopee AUAR was originally prepared to provide a complete understanding of the cumulative impacts of planned development in seven growth areas that are either currently part of the City of Shakopee or are planned to be in the future as part of the City's orderly annexation agreement with Jackson Township. The AUAR Study area is divided into seven Subdistricts, A through G, that correspond with the areas defined in the orderly annexation agreement and an area of Shakopee poised for new growth. They are contiguous and are generally located to the southwest of current Shakopee city boundaries. Two development scenarios were included with the original AUAR, in compliance with the AUAR process. This included the No Build (Shakopee 2030 Comprehensive Plan and Scott County 2030 Comprehensive Plan) Scenario and the Build (Shakopee 2040 Plan) Scenario. Project Location: The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:// www.google.com/maps/@44.7731483,-93.56009769512806,14z n Sir It Counties: Scott County, Minnesota 6 of 17 84 Project code: 2025-0133323 08/08/2025 16:26:07 UTC ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SPECIES There is a total of 6 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list. Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species. IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheriesi, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the Department of Commerce. See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions. 1. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce. 7 of 17 85 Project code: 2025-0133323 08/08/2025 16:26:07 UTC MAMMALS NAME STATUS Northern Long-eared Bat Myotis septentrionalis No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9045 Tricolored Bat Perimyotis sub flavus No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10515 BIRDS NAME Whooping Crane Grus americana Population: U.S.A. (AL, AR, CO, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KY, LA, MI, MN, MS, MO, NC, NM, OH, SC, TN, UT, VA, WI, WV, western half of WY) No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/758 INSECTS NAME Endangered Proposed Endangered STATUS Experimental Population, Non - Essential Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743 Rusty Patched Bumble Bee Bombus affinis finis There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location overlaps the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9383 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/S6V765SBNJD6RJHXLV3OWLIXWA/documents/ generated/9225.pdf Western Regal Fritillary Argynnis idalia occidentalis No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/12017 STATUS Proposed Threatened Endangered Proposed Threatened CRITICAL HABITATS There is 1 critical habitat wholly or partially within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. NAME STATUS Rusty Patched Bumble Bee Bombus affinis finis Proposed https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9383#crithab 8 of 17 86 Project code: 2025-0133323 08/08/2025 16:26:07 UTC BALD & GOLDEN EAGLES Bald and Golden Eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act 2 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) 1. Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to Bald or Golden Eagles, or their habitats, should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate avoidance and minimization measures, as described in the various links on this page. 1. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940. 2. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918. 3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a) There are Bald Eagles and/or Golden Eagles in your project area. Measures for Proactively Minimizing Eagle Impacts For information on how to best avoid and minimize disturbance to nesting bald eagles, please review the National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines. You may employ the timing and activity -specific distance recommendations in this document when designing your project/ activity to avoid and minimize eagle impacts. For bald eagle information specific to Alaska, please refer to Bald Eagle Nesting and Sensitivity to Human Activity. The FWS does not currently have guidelines for avoiding and minimizing disturbance to nesting Golden Eagles. For site -specific recommendations regarding nesting Golden Eagles, please consult with the appropriate Regional Migratory Bird Office or Ecological Services Field Office. If disturbance or take of eagles cannot be avoided, an incidental take permit may be available to authorize any take that results from, but is not the purpose of, an otherwise lawful activity. For assistance making this determination for Bald Eagles, visit the Do I Need A Permit Tool. For assistance making this determination for golden eagles, please consult with the appropriate Regional Migratory Bird Office or Ecological Services Field Office. Ensure Your Eagle List is Accurate and Complete If your project area is in a poorly surveyed area in IPaC, your list may not be complete and you may need to rely on other resources to determine what species may be present (e.g. your local FWS field office, state surveys, your own surveys). Please review the Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles, to help you properly interpret the report for your specified location, including determining if there is sufficient data to ensure your list is accurate. For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to bald or golden eagles on your list, see the "Probability of Presence Summary" below to see when these bald or golden eagles are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area. 9 of 17 87 Project code: 2025-0133323 08/08/2025 16:26:07 UTC NAME BREEDING SEASON Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626 PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY Breeds Dec 1 to Aug 31 The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report. Probability of Presence (") Green bars; the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during that week of the year. Breeding Season ( ) Yellow bars; liberal estimate of the timeframe inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. Survey Effort ( ) Vertical black lines; the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. No Data ( ) A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week. probability of presence breeding season survey effort no data SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Bald Non-BCCe liii11111111 liii liii 1111 1111 1111 ,u" II!* nu -1I Vulnerable Additional information can be found using the following links: • Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management • Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/library/ collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds 10 of 17 88 Project code: 2025-0133323 08/08/2025 16:26:07 UTC • Nationwide avoidance and minimization measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/ def ault/f Iles/documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf • Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/ media/supplemental-inf ormation-migratory-birds-and-bald-and-golden-eagles-may-occur- proj ect-action MIGRATORY BIRDS The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) 1 prohibits the take (including killing, capturing, selling, trading, and transport) of protected migratory bird species without prior authorization by the Department of Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). 1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918. 2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940. 3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a) For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the "Probability of Presence Summary" below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area. NAME American Golden -plover Pluvialis dominica This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10561 Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus BREEDING SEASON Breeds elsewhere Breeds Dec 1 to This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention Aug 31 because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws. gov/ecp/species/1626 Black Tern Chlidonias niger surinamenisis This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3093 Black -billed Cuckoo Coccyzus erythropthalmus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9399 Breeds May 15 to Aug 20 Breeds May 15 to Oct 10 11 of 17 89 Project code: 2025-0133323 08/08/2025 16:26:07 UTC NAME Bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivorus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9454 Canada Warbler Cardellina canadensis This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9643 Cerulean Warbler Setophaga cerulea This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2974 Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9406 Eastern Whip -poor -will Antrostomus vociferus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10678 Golden -winged Warbler Vermivora chrysoptera This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8745 in the continental USA in the continental USA in the continental USA in the continental USA in the continental USA in the continental USA Grasshopper Sparrow Ammodramus savannarum perpallidus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8329 Henslow's Sparrow Centronyx henslowii This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3941 Le Conte's Sparrow Ammospiza leconteii This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9469 Lesser Yellowlegs Tringa flavipes This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9679 in the continental USA in the continental USA in the continental USA BREEDING SEASON Breeds May 20 to Jul 31 Breeds May 20 to Aug 10 Breeds Apr 22 to Jul 20 Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 25 Breeds May 1 to Aug 20 Breeds May 1 to Jul 20 Breeds Jun 1 to Aug 20 Breeds May 1 toAug 31 Breeds Jun 1 to Aug 15 Breeds elsewhere 12 of 17 90 Project code: 2025-0133323 08/08/2025 16:26:07 UTC NAME Long-eared Owl asio otus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3631 Marbled Godwit Limosa fedoa This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9481 Pectoral Sandpiper Calidris melanotos This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9561 Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9398 in the continental USA in the continental USA in the continental USA in the continental USA Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9478 Semipalmated Sandpiper Calidris pusilla This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9603 Short -billed Dowitcher Limnodromus griseus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9480 Upland Sandpiper Bartramia longicauda This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9294 Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9431 PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY BREEDING SEASON Breeds Mar 1 to Jul 15 Breeds May 1 to Jul 31 Breeds elsewhere Breeds May 10 to Sep 10 Breeds elsewhere Breeds elsewhere Breeds elsewhere Breeds May 1 toAug 31 Breeds May 10 toAug 31 The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental 13 of 17 91 Project code: 2025-0133323 08/08/2025 16:26:07 UTC Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report. Probability of Presence ( I) Green bars; the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during that week of the year. Breeding Season ( ) Yellow bars; liberal estimate of the timeframe inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. Survey Effort ( ) Vertical black lines; the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. No Data ( ) A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week. SPECIES JAN FEB American Golden - plover BCC Rangewide (CON) Bald Eagle Non -BCC Vulnerable Black Tern BCC Rangewide (CON) Black -billed Cuckoo BCC Rangewide (CON) Bobolink BCC Rangewide (CON) Canada Warbler BCC Rangewide (CON) Cerulean Warbler BCC Rangewide (CON) probability of presence breeding season survey effort no data MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ++++ ++++ 4++ +++-I 4++ +++1 ++++ 1-+++ 0+-4 ++++ FE++ 1111111111116 I 66 ii;i Amin+ Nu 1111 4++ ++++ k+++ +-RI I I ++++ ++++ 11 f++ +++I ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++4 ++ II 1111 I I I++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ 4-+++ +++-1- ++++ I I! LI 1 1111 -HU+ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ -4++ ++++ ++++ -4++ +if II II I I 11+ -4++ ++++ ++++ 14 of 17 92 Project code: 2025-0133323 08/08/2025 16:26:07 UTC Chimney Swift BCC Rangewide (CON) Eastern Whip -poor - will BCC Rangewide (CON) Golden -winged Warbler BCC Rangewide (CON) Grasshopper Sparrow BCC - BCR Henslow's Sparrow BCC Rangewide (CON) SPECIES Le Conte's Sparrow BCC Rangewide (CON) Lesser Yellowlegs BCC Rangewide (CON) Long-eared Owl BCC Rangewide (CON) Marbled Godwit BCC Rangewide (CON) Pectoral Sandpiper BCC Rangewide (CON) Red-headed Woodpecker BCC Rangewide (CON) Rusty Blackbird BCC - BCR Semipalmated Sandpiper BCC - BCR Short -billed Dowitcher BCC Rangewide (CON) ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ MI++ ++++ ÷+++ *4+ IIII+++t1111 11111111 IIII II I iii 1111111 I I I IIII IIII I TIT 31++ ++++ ÷+++ ++++ _4++ _,+++ ++++ -4++ +10+ I i I I +++++++++++++++01L-1-+++++ tt I I I I ++++ ++++ ÷±+÷ ++++ 111-++++++-I++++I-+++ JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ++++ _++- -++++++f ++++ i I i I i i i i III +++l++++- ++++++++ ++++ ++++IIII +-FE+ ++ ++++ ++++ +++-I ++++H-01+ -4++ +++4 I.+++ +Iii 7Ti-7 7-77-7 -77++ +++4 +++ +++I 1-±+± *4+ i-+++ ÷++÷ +++I Mill ++++ ++++ ++++ III, j$++ ++++ +++÷ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ +++1 ++*+ -4++ ++++ -4++ -4++ 111+ ÷+++ ++1+ ++++ ÷++÷ ++++ -4++ ++++ -H-++ ++++ II++ -4++ ++++ ÷±+÷ ++++ IIIIIIIIIF++++HW++++++++++*I+4iIHIIIIIIF++ Upland Sandpiper ++++ --+++ ++++ ++I I BCC - BCR 1++ ++++.IIII IIII++++ *FE+ ++++ -F-~++ A Mil 15 of 17 93 Project code: 2025-0133323 08/08/2025 16:26:07 UTC Wood Thrush BCC Rangewide (CON) -- _r ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++I+ -FE++ I I -F-E ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ Additional information can be found using the following links: • Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management • Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/library/ collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds • Nationwide avoidance and minimization measures for birds • Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/ media/supplemental-inf ormation-migratory-birds-and-bald-and-golden-eagles-may-occur- proj ect-action 16 of 17 94 United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Minnesota -Wisconsin Ecological Services Field Office 3815 American Blvd East Bloomington, MN 55425-1659 Phone: (952) 858-0793 In Reply Refer To: Project code: 2025-0133323 Project Name: Jackson Township Development Area - AUAR Update 08/12/2025 13:36:24 UTC Subject: Technical Assistance letter for 'Jackson Township Development Area - AUAR Update' for specified threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location consistent with the Minnesota -Wisconsin Endangered Species Determination Key (Minnesota -Wisconsin DKey). Dear Alex Gaber: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) received on August 12, 2025 your effect determination(s) for the 'Jackson Township Development Area - AUAR Update' (Action) using the Minnesota -Wisconsin DKey within the Service's Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) system. The Service developed this system in accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) (87 Stat. 884, as amended; 16 U.S.C 1531 et seq.). Based on your responses to the Service's Minnesota -Wisconsin DKey, you made the following effect determination(s) for the proposed Action: Species Monarch Butterfly (Danaus plexippus) Whooping Crane (Grus americana) Listing Status Determination Proposed No effect Threatened Experimental No effect Population, Non - Essential Determination Information Thank you for informing the Service of your "No Effect" determination(s). No further coordination is necessary for the species you determined will not be affected by the Action. Additional Information Sufficient project details: Please provide sufficient project details on your project homepage in IPaC (Define Project, Project Description) to support your conclusions. Failure to disclose important aspects of your project that would influence the outcome of your effects determinations may negate your determinations and invalidate this letter. If you have site -specific information that leads you to believe a different determination is more appropriate for your 95 Project code: 2025-0133323 IPaC Record Locator: 257-167857630 08/12/2025 13:36:24 UTC project than what the Dkey concludes, you can and should proceed based on the best available information. Future project changes: The Service recommends that you contact the Minnesota -Wisconsin Ecological Services Field Office or re-evaluate the project in IPaC if: 1) the scope or location of the proposed Action is changed; 2) new information reveals that the action may affect federally listed species or federally designated critical habitat in a manner or to an extent not previously considered; 3) the Action is modified in a manner that causes effects to listed species or designated critical habitat; or 4) a new species is listed or critical habitat designated. If any of the above conditions occurs, additional consultation with the Service should take place before project changes are final or resources committed. For non -Federal representatives: Please note that when a project requires consultation under section 7 of the Act, the Service must consult directly with the Federal action agency unless that agency formally designates a non -Federal representative (50 CFR 402.08). Non -Federal representatives may prepare analyses or conduct informal consultations; however, the ultimate responsibility for section 7 compliance under the Act remains with the Federal agency. Please include the Federal action agency in additional correspondence regarding this project. For projects that intersect with or are adjacent to Tribal lands: The Service has federal Trust responsibilities and a strong commitment to working with Tribal governments to help sustain fish and wildlife resources for future generations. Tribal governments should be provided with sufficient opportunity to express their perspectives and/or concerns for proposed projects. If your project intersects with Tribal lands or impacts culturally sensitive resources, please engage with the federally recognized Tribe to ensure they have an opportunity to provide input on this project. Species -specific information Bald and Golden Eagles: Bald eagles, golden eagles, and their nests are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (54 Stat. 250, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 668a -d) (Eagle Act). The Eagle Act prohibits, except when authorized by an Eagle Act permit, the "taking" of bald and golden eagles and defines "take" as "pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest or disturb." The Eagle Act's implementing regulations define disturb as "... to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available, (1) injury to an eagle, (2) a decrease in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, or (3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior." Additional Species Requiring Review In addition to the species described above, the following species or critical habitats may also occur in your project area and are not covered by this conclusion: ■ Northern Long-eared Bat Myotis septentrionalis Endangered ■ Rusty Patched Bumble Bee Bombus affinis finis Endangered ■ Tricolored Bat Perimyotis sub flavus Proposed Endangered ■ Western Regal Fritillary Argynnis idalia occidentalis Proposed Threatened DKey Version Publish Date: 08/11/2025 2 of 8 96 Project code: 2025-0133323 IPaC Record Locator: 257-167857630 08/12/2025 13:36:24 UTC Coordination with the Service is not complete if additional coordination is advised above for any species. DKey Version Publish Date: 08/11/2025 3 of 8 97 United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Minnesota -Wisconsin Ecological Services Field Office 3815 American Blvd East Bloomington, MN 55425-1659 Phone: (952) 858-0793 In Reply Refer To: Project code: 2025-0133323 Project Name: Jackson Township Development Area - AUAR Update Federal Nexus: no Federal Action Agency (if applicable): 08/08/2025 17:09:05 UTC Subject: Technical assistance for 'Jackson Township Development Area - AUAR Update' Dear Alex Gaber: This letter records your determination using the Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) system provided to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) on August 08, 2025, for 'Jackson Township Development Area - AUAR Update' (here forward, Project). This project has been assigned Project Code 2025-0133323 and all future correspondence should clearly reference this number. Please carefully review this letter. Your Endangered Species Act (Act) requirements are not complete. Ensuring Accurate Determinations When Using IPaC The Service developed the IPaC system and associated species' determination keys in accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA; 87 Stat. 884, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and based on a standing analysis. All information submitted by the Project proponent into IPaC must accurately represent the full scope and details of the Project. Failure to accurately represent or implement the Project as detailed in IPaC or the Northern Long-eared Bat and Tricolored Bat Range -wide Determination Key (Dkey), invalidates this letter. Determination for the Northern Long -Eared Bat and Tricolored Bat Based on your IPaC submission and a standing analysis completed by the Service, you determined the proposed Project will have the following effect determinations: Species Listing Status Determination Northern Long-eared Bat (Myotis septentrionalis) Endangered May affect Tricolored Bat (Perimyotis sub ffavus) Proposed May affect Endangered 98 Project code: 2025-0133323 IPaC Record Locator: 257-166749656 08/08/2025 17:09:05 UTC Other Species and Critical Habitat that May be Present in the Action Area The IPaC-assisted determination key for the northern long-eared bat and tricolored bat does not apply to the following ESA -protected species and/or critical habitat that also may occur in your Action area: • Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus Proposed Threatened • Rusty Patched Bumble Bee Bombus affinis Endangered • Western Regal Fritillary Argynnis idalia occidentalis Proposed Threatened • Whooping Crane Grus americana Experimental Population, Non -Essential Critical Habitats: • Rusty Patched Bumble Bee Bombus affinis Endangered You may coordinate with our Office to determine whether the Action may cause prohibited take of the species listed above. Conclusion Further coordination with the Service is voluntary for those species with a determination of "May Affect." A "May Affect" determination in this key indicates that the project, as entered, is not consistent with the questions in the key. Not all projects that reach a "May Affect" determination are anticipated to result in adverse impacts to listed species. Through the technical assistance process, the Service might be able to provide information that either indicates incidental take is not reasonably certain to occur, or the Service might be able to provide recommendations that enable the project to be conducted in a way that avoids the likelihood of incidentally taking listed bats. Please contact our Minnesota -Wisconsin Ecological Services Field Office for more information. The Service has developed interim voluntary guidance for non- federal actions involving forest habitat modification that may affect the northern long-eared bat. Review the guidance posted here for more information for NLEB: https://www.fws.gov/species/ northern-long-eared-bat-myotis-septentrionalis and TCB: https://www.fws.gov/species/ tricolored-bat-perimyotis-subflavus Federal agencies must consult with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) when an action may affect a listed species. Tricolored bat is proposed for listing as endangered under the ESA, but not yet listed. For actions that may affect a proposed species, agencies cannot consult, but they can confer under the authority of section 7(a) (4) of the ESA. Such conferences can follow the procedures for a consultation and be adopted as such if and when the proposed species is listed. Should the tricolored bat be listed, agencies must review projects that are not yet complete, or projects with ongoing effects within the tricolored bat range that previously received a NE or NLAA determination from the key to confirm that the determination is still accurate. Projects that receive a may affect determination for tricolored bat through the key, should contact the appropriate Ecological Services Field Office if they want to conference on this species. DKey Version Publish Date: 08/05/2025 2 of 11 99 United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Minnesota -Wisconsin Ecological Services Field Office 3815 American Blvd East Bloomington, MN 55425-1659 Phone: (952) 858-0793 In Reply Refer To: Project code: 2025-0133323 Project Name: Jackson Township Development Area - AUAR Update Federal Nexus: no Federal Action Agency (if applicable): 08/08/2025 17:12:11 UTC Subject: Technical Assistance letter for 'Jackson Township Development Area - AUAR Update' for rusty patched bumble bee that may occur in your proposed project location consistent with the Rusty Patched Bumble Bee Range Wide Determination Key (RPBB DKey). Dear Alex Gaber: This letter records your determination using the RPBB DKey within the Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) system provided to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) on August 08, 2025, for 'Jackson Township Development Area - AUAR Update' (here forward, Project). This project has been assigned Project Code `2025-0133323' and all future correspondence should clearly reference this number. Please carefully review this letter. Your Endangered Species Act (Act) requirements are not complete. Ensuring Accurate Determinations When Using IPaC Determination Keys The USFWS developed the IPaC system and associated species' determination keys in accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA; 87 Stat. 884, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). All information submitted by the Project proponent into the IPaC must accurately represent the full scope and details of the Project. Failure to accurately represent or implement the Project as detailed in IPaC or the RPBB DKey, invalidates this letter. Determination for the Rusty Patched Bumble Bee Based on your answers and the assistance of the USFWS' RPBB DKey, you made the following effect determination for the proposed Action: Species Listing Status Determination Rusty Patched Bumble Bee (Bombus affinis) finis) Endangered May affect 100 Project code: 2025-0133323 'PaC Record Locator: 257-166749828 08/08/2025 17:12:11 UTC Consultation with the USFWS is not complete. Your agency's ESA section 7 consultation requirement for rusty patched bumble bee with the USFWS is not complete, and further consultation with the USFWS is required. Review the Rusty Patched Bumble Bee technical assistance for Surveyors and Researchers and obtain an Endangered Species Act permit, if recommended by the technical assistance. Contact the local USFWS Ecological Services Field Office as needed. Other Species and Critical Habitat that May be Present in the Action Area The IPaC-assisted determination key for the rusty patched bumble bee does not apply to the following ESA -protected species and/or critical habitat that also may occur in your Action area: • Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus Proposed Threatened • Northern Long-eared Bat Myotis septentrionalis Endangered • Tricolored Bat Perimyotis sub flavus Proposed Endangered • Western Regal Fritillary Argynnis idalia occidentalis Proposed Threatened • Whooping Crane Grus americana Experimental Population, Non -Essential Critical Habitats: • Rusty Patched Bumble Bee Bombus affinis Endangered Coordination with the USFWS is advised for any species and/or critical habitat listed above. You should coordinate with our Office to determine whether the Action may affect the species and/or critical habitat listed above and if further consultation is required. Note that reinitiation of consultation would be necessary if a new species is listed or critical habitat designated that may be affected by the identified action before it is complete. If you have any questions regarding this letter or need further assistance, please contact the local Ecological Services Field Office and reference Project Code `2025-0133323' associated with this Project. See the top of this letter for the Project Code. Additional Information Sufficient project details: Please provide sufficient project details on your project homepage in IPaC (Define Project, Project Description) to support your conclusions. Failure to disclose important aspects of your project that would influence the outcome of your effects determinations may negate your determinations and invalidate this letter. If you have site -specific information that leads you to believe a different determination is more appropriate for your project than what the Dkey concludes, you can and should proceed based on the best available information. Future project changes: The Service recommends that you contact the local Ecological Services Field Office or re-evaluate the project in IPaC if: 1) the scope or location of the proposed Action is changed; 2) new information reveals that the action may affect rusty patched bumble bee in a manner or to an extent not previously considered; 3) the Action is modified in a manner that DKey Version Publish Date: 07/18/2025 2 of 6 101 Project code: 2025-0133323 1 PaC Record Locator: 257-166749828 08/08/2025 17:12:11 UTC causes effects to rusty patched bumble bee; or 4) or critical habitat is designated. If any of the above conditions occur, additional consultation with the Service should take place before project changes are final or resources are committed. Species -specific information Bald and Golden Eagles: Bald eagles, golden eagles, and their nests are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (54 Stat. 250, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 668a -d) (Eagle Act). The Eagle Act prohibits, except when authorized by an Eagle Act permit, the "taking" of bald and golden eagles and defines "take" as "pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest or disturb." The Eagle Act's implementing regulations define disturb as "... to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available, (1) injury to an eagle, (2) a decrease in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, or (3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior." If you observe a bald eagle nest in the vicinity of your proposed project, you should follow the National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (May 2007). For more information on eagles and conducting activities in the vicinity of an eagle nest, please visit our regional eagle website or contact the local Ecological Services Field Office. If the Action may affect bald or golden eagles, additional coordination with the Service under the Eagle Act may be required. DKey Version Publish Date: 07/18/2025 3 of 6 102 Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update (SRF Project #19234) MCE-2O25-OO646 Page 1 of 6 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Division of Ecological & Water Resources 500 Lafayette Road, Box 25 St. Paul, MN 55155-4025 September 18, 2025 Alex Gaber SRF Consulting Group, Inc. RE: Natural Heritage Review of the proposed Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update (SRF Project #19234), T115N R23W Sections 2-3, 9-11, 13-16, and 22-24; Scott County Dear Alex Gaber, For all correspondence regarding the Natural Heritage Review of this project please include the project ID MCE- 2025-00646 in the email subject line. As requested, the Minnesota Natural Heritage Information System has been reviewed to determine if the proposed project has the potential to impact any rare species or other significant natural features. Based on the project details provided with the request, the following rare features may be impacted by the proposed project: Ecologically Significant Areas • A calcareous fen (Seminary Fen, Fen ID No. 20977) with state -listed threatened plant species has been documented in the vicinity of the proposed project. A calcareous fen is a rare and distinctive peat - accumulating wetland that is legally protected in Minnesota. The Wetlands Conservation Act (WCA), authorized by Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.223, states that calcareous fens may not be filled, drained, or otherwise degraded, wholly or partially, by any activity, except as provided for in a management plan approved by the commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources. Many of the unique characteristics of calcareous fens result from the upwelling of groundwater through calcareous substrates. Because of this dependence on groundwater hydrology, calcareous fens can be affected by nearby activities or even those several miles away. For more information regarding calcareous fens, please see the Calcareous Fen Fact Sheet. To minimize stormwater impacts, please refer to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's General Principles for Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control in the Minnesota Stormwater Manual. Please note that calcareous fens are "Special Waters" and a buffer zone may be required. Calcareous fens may be impacted by activities within the fen, activities that affect surface water flows (e.g., stormwater flow, erosion), or activities that affect groundwater hydrology (e.g., groundwater pumping, contamination, discharge, or excavation). The DNR would have concerns regarding any activities that might affect groundwater flows, including groundwater pumping or discharge. 103 Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update (SRF Project #19234) MCE-2O25-OO646 Page 2 of 6 To ensure compliance under WCA, please contact the Calcareous Fen Program Coordinator, Keylor Andrews (Kevlor.Andrews@state.mn.us). If it is determined that the project will adversely affect the fens in any way, including indirect impacts through the alteration of hydrological conditions, you will need to contact EMAIL before the project is initiated to discuss rare species survey process (see below in State -listed Species). • The Minnesota Biological Survey (MBS) has a Site of Biodiversity Significance (MBS Sites) within the project boundary. MBS Sites have varying levels of native biodiversity and are ranked based on the relative significance of this biodiversity at a statewide level. Factors taken into account during the ranking process include the number of rare species documented within the site, the quality of the native plant communities in the site, the size of the site, and the context of the site within the landscape. o Nyssen's Lake— Moderate MBS Site — Sites ranked as Moderate contain occurrences of rare species and/or moderately disturbed native plant communities, and/or landscapes that have a strong potential for recovery. o Gifford Lake Unit and Jackson 10— Below — These areas were determined to be Below the minimum biodiversity threshold for statewide significance. These areas may have conservation value at the local level as habitat for native plants and animals, corridors for animal movements, buffers surrounding higher quality natural areas, or as areas with high potential for restoration of native habitat. Several DNR Native Plant Communities (NPC) are within the vicinity of the proposed project. NPCs are given a rank that reflects the relative rarity and endangerment of the community type in Minnesota. Ranks range from critically imperiled (S1) to secure, common, widespread, and abundant (S5). NPCs with a rank of S1, S2, or S3 are considered rare within Minnesota. As currently proposed, the following DNR Native Plant Communities have been delineated in the direct vicinity of the proposed project: o MRn93b: Spikerush - Bur Reed Marsh (Northern) — imperiled (S2) o FFs59a: Silver Maple - Green Ash - Cottonwood Terrace Forest — vulnerable to extirpation (S3) o MHs38c: Red Oak - Sugar Maple - Basswood - (Bitternut Hickory) Forest — vulnerable to extirpation (S3) o MRn93a: Bulrush Marsh (Northern) — vulnerable to extirpation (S3) o WMn82b: Sedge Meadow — uncommon but not rare (S4) o WMn82a: Willow - Dogwood Shrub Swamp — secure and abundant (S5) The DNR recommends that the project be designed to avoid impacts to these ecologically significant areas. Actions to avoid or minimize disturbance include, but are not limited to, the following recommendations: o As much as possible, operate within already -disturbed areas. o Avoid MBS Sites and rare NPCs (ranked S1, S2, or S3). o Retain a buffer between proposed activities and the MBS Site. o Minimize vehicular disturbance in the MBS Site (allow only vehicles/equipment necessary for construction activities). o Do not park equipment or stockpile supplies in the MBS Site. o Do not place spoil in the MBS Site or other sensitive areas. o If possible, conduct the work under frozen ground conditions. 104 Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update (SRF Project #19234) MCE-2O25-OO646 Page 3 of 6 o Use effective erosion prevention and sediment control measures. o Inspect and clean equipment prior to operation and follow recommendations to prevent the spread of invasive species. o Revegetate disturbed soil with native species suitable to the local habitat as soon after construction as possible. o Use only weed -free mulches, topsoils, and seed mixes. Of particular concern are birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus) and crown vetch (Coronilla varia), two invasive species that are sold commercially and are problematic in prairies and disturbed open areas. Ecologically Significant Areas can be viewed using the Explore page in Minnesota Conservation Explorer (MCE) or their GIS shapefiles can be downloaded from the MN Geospatial Commons. Reference the MBS Site Biodiversity Significance and Native Plant Community websites for information on interpreting the data. To receive a list of Ecologically Significant Areas in the vicinity of your project, create a Conservation Planning Report using the Explore page in MCE. • If the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) is applicable to this project, please note that native plant communities with a Conservation Status Rank of S1 through S3 or wetlands within High or Outstanding MBS Sites of Biodiversity Significance may qualify as Rare Natural Communities (RNC) under WCA. Minnesota Rules, part 8420.0515, subpart 3 states that a wetland replacement plan for activities that modify a RNC must be denied if the local government unit determines the proposed activities will permanently adversely affect the RNC. If the proposed project includes a wetland replacement plan under WCA, please contact your DNR Regional Ecologist for further evaluation. Please visit WCA Program Guidance and Information for additional information, including the RNC Technical Guidance. State -listed Species • State -listed endangered and threatened plant species have been documented in the vicinity of the proposed project. Minnesota's Endangered Species Statute (Minnesota Statutes, section 84.0895) and associated Rules (Minnesota Rules, part 6212.1800 to 6212.2300 and 6134) prohibit the take of endangered or threatened plants or animals, including their parts or seeds, without a permit. o Butternut (Juglans cinerea), a state -listed endangered tree, has been documented within the proposed project boundary. This species occurs in mesic hardwood forests with loamy or alluvial soils or in sandy soil if the water table is relatively near the surface. It is perhaps most common on river terraces elevated several feet or more above the active floodplain, where it is protected from siltation and flood scouring. This species is susceptible to a lethal fungal disease called butternut canker (Sirococcus clavigignenti-juglandacearum). Nearly all of Minnesota's butternuts are dead or dying from the fungus, triggering the protected status of this tree within the state. To demonstrate avoidance, a qualified surveyor will need to identify any trees that are proposed to be removed. o Kitten -tails (Synthyris bullii), a state -listed threatened plant, has been documented in the vicinity of the proposed project. Habitat includes oak savanna communities, dry prairies, and oak - dominated fire dependent forests. The Minnesota populations are largely restricted to the bluffs and terraces of the St. Croix, Mississippi, and Minnesota River valleys, with many populations 105 Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update (SRF Project #19234) MCE-2O25-OO646 Page 4 of 6 occurring in the greater Twin Cities area. Plants show a preference for partial shade to full sunlight and upper slopes. Soils are most often, well -drained sandy to gravelly soil. To demonstrate avoidance, a qualified surveyor will need to determine if suitable habitat exists within the activity impact area and, if so, conduct a survey prior to any project activities. o Hooded arrowhead (Sagittaria montevidensis var. calycina), a state -listed threatened plant, has been documented in the vicinity of the proposed project along the shores of the Minnesota River. Hooded arrowhead is found along large silt and sandy areas that are exposed in May and June. Their habitat is very dependent on rainfall which means they may not appear every year. To demonstrate avoidance, a qualified surveyor will need to determine if suitable habitat exists within the activity impact area and, if so, conduct a survey prior to any project activities. Surveys must be conducted by a qualified surveyor and follow the standards contained in the Rare Species Survey Process and Rare Plant Guidance. Visit the Natural Heritage Review page for a list of certified surveyors and more information on this process. Survey proposals should be submitted to Reports.NHIS@state.mn.us prior to initiating survey work. Project planning should take into account that any botanical survey needs to be conducted during the appropriate time of the year, which may be limited. Please consult Review.NHIS@state.mn.us if you have any questions regarding this process. • Black buffalo (Ictiobus niger), a state -listed threatened fish species, have been documented within the Minnesota River in the vicinity of the proposed project. This species is found in the sloughs, backwaters, and impoundments of large rivers and spawns from April through mid -June. Minnesota's Endangered Species Statute (Minnesota Statutes, section 84.0895) and associated Rules (Minnesota Rules, part 6212.1800 to 6212.2300 and chapter 6134) prohibit the take of threatened or endangered species without a permit. If the project area contains suitable spawning habitat, work within the water needs to be avoided from April 1 through mid -June. Contact Review.NHIS@state.mn.us if this is not feasible, as further action may be needed. • Mudpuppy (Necturus maculosus), a state -listed salamander species of special concern, have been documented within the Minnesota River in the vicinity of the proposed project. Submerged structures, such as rocks, logs, or boards are essential habitat components for this species. This species is particularly vulnerable to deterioration in water quality, especially increased siltation. As such, it is important that effective erosion prevention and sediment control practices be implemented and maintained during construction and operation of the proposed project. We recommend avoiding work within water from May through July to protect nesting mudpuppies. • Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) and little brown myotis (Myotis lucifugus), both state - listed species of special concern, have been documented in the vicinity of the proposed project. During the winter these bats hibernate in caves and mines. During the active season (approximately April - November) they roost underneath bark, in cavities, or in crevices of both live and dead trees; and in human structures such as buildings and bridges. Activities that may impact bats include, but are not limited to, wind farm operation, any disturbance to hibernacula, and destruction/degradation of habitat. Tree removal can negatively impact bats by destroying roosting habitat, especially during the pup rearing season when females are forming maternity roosting colonies and the pups are not able to fly. To minimize impacts, we recommend that tree removal be avoided from June 1 through August 15. 106 Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update (SRF Project #19234) MCE-2O25-OO646 Page 5 of 6 • Lark sparrow (Chondestes grammacus) and purple Martin (Progne subis), both state -listed bird species of special concern, have been documented in the vicinity of the project. Lark Sparrows are found in open, grass land areas with scattered trees and shrubs. They build their nest on the ground, in a shrub or a small tree. Purple Martins nest in colonies and typically near water. In urban areas, they nest almost exclusively in nest boxes; while in rural areas they can be found nesting in cavities, such as woodpecker holes. If feasible, avoid disturbance to undisturbed grassland areas and tree and shrub removal from May 15 through August 15 to avoid disturbance of nesting birds. • Gophersnake (Pituophis catenifer), a state -listed species of special concern, has been documented in the vicinity of the proposed project and may be encountered on site. These nonvenomous snakes prefer grassy areas with sandy and gravel soils. Given the presence of these rare snakes, the DNR recommends that the use of erosion control mesh, if any, be limited to wildlife -friendly materials. • Sessile -flowered Yellow Cress (Rorippa sessiliflora), a plant species of special concern, has been documented in the vicinity of the proposed project along the shores of the Minnesota River. It is an annual species that occurs in early successional habitats along the Mississippi and Minnesota rivers. It occurs on seasonally exposed river sediments. If feasible, avoid suitable habitat. • Please visit the DNR Rare Species Guide for more information on the habitat use of state -listed species and recommended measures to avoid or minimize impacts. • Please report incidental sightings of state -listed species via the DNR Plant and Animal Observation Form. Federally Protected Species • To ensure compliance with federal law, conduct a federal regulatory review using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) online Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) tool. Please note that all projects, regardless of whether there is a federal nexus, are subject to federal take prohibitions. The IPaC review will determine if prohibited take is likely to occur and, if not, will generate an automated letter. • The northern long-eared bat is federally listed as endangered, please see USFWS Northern Long-eared Bat for additional information. • The area of interest overlaps with a U.S Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Rusty Patched Bumble Bee High Potential Zone. The rusty patched bumble bee (Bombus affinis) is federally listed as endangered and is likely to be present in suitable habitat within High Potential Zones. From April through October this species uses underground nests in upland grasslands, shrublands, and forest edges, and forages where nectar and pollen are available. From October through April the species overwinters under tree litter in upland forests and woodlands. The rusty patched bumble bee may be impacted by a variety of land management activities including, but not limited to, prescribed fire, tree - removal, haying, grazing, herbicide use, pesticide use, land -clearing, soil disturbance or compaction, or use of non-native bees. If applicable, the DNR recommends reseeding disturbed soils with native species of grasses and forbs using BWSR Seed Mixes or MnDOT Seed Mixes. The USFWS RPBB guidance provides guidance on avoiding impacts to rusty patched bumble bee and a key for determining if actions are likely to affect the species; the determination key can be found in the appendix. 107 Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update (SRF Project #19234) MCE-2O25-OO646 Page 6 of 6 Environmental Review and Permitting • Given the potential presence of state protected species, we encourage submission of Natural Heritage Review requests to ensure avoidance of take for these species and to determine survey needs as individual projects are planned. • Please include a copy of this letter and the MCE-generated Final Project Report in any state or local license or permit application. Please note that measures to avoid or minimize disturbance to the above rare features may be included as restrictions or conditions in any required permits or licenses. The Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS), a collection of databases that contains information about Minnesota's rare natural features, is maintained by the Division of Ecological and Water Resources, Department of Natural Resources. The NHIS is continually updated as new information becomes available and is the most complete source of data on Minnesota's native plant communities, rare species, and other rare features. However, the NHIS is not an exhaustive inventory and does not contain the locations of all rare features in the state. Therefore, ecologically significant features for which we have no records may exist within the project area. If additional information becomes available regarding rare features in the vicinity of the project, further review may be necessary. For environmental review purposes, the results of this Natural Heritage Review are valid for one year; the results are only valid for the project location and project description provided with the request. If project details change or the project has not occurred within one year, please resubmit the project for review within one year of initiating project activities. Resubmit by selecting Clone Project as Draft on the project page in MCE. The Natural Heritage Review does not constitute project approval by the Department of Natural Resources. Instead, it identifies issues regarding known occurrences of rare features and potential impacts to these rare features. Visit Natural Heritage Review for additional information regarding this process, survey guidance, and other related information. For information on the environmental review process or other natural resource concerns, please contact your DNR Regional Environmental Assessment Ecologist. Thank you for consulting us on this matter and for your interest in preserving Minnesota's rare natural resources. Sincerely, Digitally signed by Molly Barrett 771016y, 30,44,ett Date: 2025.09.18 13:32:56 -05'00' Natural Heritage Review Specialist molly.barrett@state.mn.us Cc: Melissa Collins, Regional Environmental Assessment Ecologist, Central (Region 3) Cc: Amanda Weise, Regional Ecologist, Central (Region 3) Cc: Jennie Skancke, Wetlands Program Coordinator Cc: Keylor Andrews, Calcareous Fen Program Coordinator 108 Appendix G SHPO, MIAC, and OSA Information Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update SRF 109 SRF From: Date: Subject: MEMORANDUM SRF Project No. 19234 Mark Noble Senior Planner, Planning Division City of Shakopee Alicia Bock, Lead, Environmental Planning 9/2/2025 Cultural Resources — Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update Cultural Resources Introduction A review request was sent to the Minnesota SHPO on July 24, 2025. Due to capacity constraints, SHPO indicated that they were unable to provide updated information for the study area (see Attachments). As an alternative, SHPO recommended using the Minnesota Statewide Historic Inventory Portal (MnSHIP) online public map as a starting point (see Figure 1).1A review of the project area in the MnSHIP map identified 11 MnSHIP points within the project boundary, along with inventoried polygons and lines. These are shown in Figure 1 and listed in Table 1. The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank. Minnesota Department of Administration. MnSHIP GIS Data Portal. Accessed 2 September 2025 and available at https://mnship.gisdata.mn.gov/. www.srfconsulting.com 3701 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 100 I Minneapolis, MN 55416-3791 1763.475.0010 Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer 110 Mark Noble City of Shakopee Figure 1: MnSHIP Online Application Review of the Study Area (boundary in black) lf Ds5inWry bow otor- Table 1: MnSHIP Property Listings within the Study Area ,33rd Street Wes: by !+ d 3r6 A .p.oeWest .rid Fk+�t.17 Y+1est 31ath Avenue West Tahpah.rk Lions Park • LL 16 Shakopee West Mlddle 5ch�o1 Mtlund Sefiee� $225 7th Avenue E &Dowd 9/2/2025 Page 2 of 3 4th Avenue East Shakopee East Middle 5eheel tip$ MnSHIP Points NR Listed or Eligible • Inventor-ed Sea nehno Gaff CEu MnSHIP Lines NR Listed of Erg u:� Inventor MnSHIP Polygons NR'L seed or Elig ble Inventar ed Reference Layers Boundaries fl Historic Inventory Number Property Name Property Type MnSHIP ID Address SC-JAC-00015 commercial building Building 94169 12706 Chestnut Blvd SC-JAC-00016 Auto Depot Building 94170 12701 Johnson Memorial Dr SC-JAC-00006 Jackson Town Hall Building 94160 Off Co. Hwy 15 SC-JAC-00005 Farmstead Building 94159 Off Co. Hwy 15 SC-JAC-00013 Weckman House Building 94167 2183 Colburn Dr SC-JAC-00011 Ferrozzo House Building 94165 2130 Colburn Dr. SC-JAC-00012 Koesters House Building 94166 2140 Colburn Dr SC-JAC-00010 ECSY Partnership House Building 94164 1181- Bonnevista Dr SC-JAC-00009 Macllister Housse Building 94163 2500 Strunks Rd SC-JAC-0000 Stone House Building 94161 Unknown SC-JAC-00003* Strunk-Nyssen House Building 94157 Off U.S. Hwy 169 *Denotes National Register Listed or Eligible SRF 111 Mark Noble City of Shakopee 9/2/2025 Page 3 of 3 In addition, the OSA maintains an online public map; however, it does not allow project location files to be uploaded. For specific projects within the study area, it is recommended that the OSA be contacted directly, and a project review form be submitted. Conclusion This review does not constitute adequate identification or a complete project review under state or federal historic preservation laws. Project -specific evaluations must be conducted as individual projects within the AUAR study area advance, in consultation with the Minnesota SHPO under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (36 CFR 800), when federal funds, permits, or authorizations are involved in a federal undertaking.? Additional coordination may also be required with the OSA,' the MIAC,4 and other appropriate organizations. Attachments 1. SHPO response email (August 21, 2025) 2 Minnesota Department of Administration. Submitting a Project for Review. Accessed 2 September 2025 and available at https://mn.gov/admin/shpo/environmental-review/submit/. 3 Minnesota Department of Administration. Your Role -Government. Accessed 2 September 2025 and available at https://mn.gov/admin/archaeologist/government/your-role/. Minnesota Indian Affairs Council. Project Review Form Instructions. Accessed 2 September 2025 and available at https://mn.gov/indian-affairs/cultural-resources/project-review-form jsp. SRF 112 Alicia Bock From: Sent: To: Subject: GraggJohnson, Kelly (ADM)<kelly.graggjohnson@state.mn.us> Thursday, August 21, 2025 12:27 PM Alicia Bock RE: Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update - SHPO Review Request External Sender Warning: This message was sent from an external sender. Do not click on any links or open any attachments unless you know and trust the sender. Hi Alicia -we recommend you include the information you gathered from MnSHIP in the AUAR update, so that this information is included in the public document. We do not have the capacity to provide technical assistance on these types of planning documents. Thanks, Kelly m I DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION SIAM HISTORIC ARES'ERVAT[OH OFFICE Kelly Gragg-Johnson (she/her/hers) I Environmental Review Specialist 50 Sherburne Avenue, Suite 203 Saint Paul, MN 55155 (651) 201-3285 I kelly.graggjohnson@state.mn.us This message may be from an external email source. Do not select links or open attachments unless verified. Report all suspicious emails to Minnesota IT Services Security Operations Center. Greetings, I am following up with some additional schedule information regarding the AUAR update and the data request (below email from July). Would it be possible to receive a response back by September 20 at the latest? Here's the full schedule to be able to meet the 5 -year update deadline: a. SRF drafts update —July 15- Sep 5 b. City reviews draft - Sept 8-12 c. SRF Revises — Sept 15-19 d. Submit AUAR to EQB - September 23 i. SRF submit on behalf of City e. Public comment and agency review period — Sept 30 -Oct 14 1 113 f. Planning Commission Meeting- October 9 i. Use public hearing portion as public meeting g. Final updates/edits after public comment period - October 13-17 h. Final City Council meeting -October 21St i. EQB Monitor notice - October 28 j. EQB Publish Date - November 4 k. Final deadline November 7 (fully accepted) Sincerely, Alicia Alicia Bock She/Her/Hers Lead, Environmental Planning SRF Consulting Group 3701 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 55416-3791 Direct: 763-340-1824 I abock@srfconsulting.com SRF srfconsulting.com I Facebook I Linkedln I Twitter I Vimeo I Instagram CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this email message and any attachments are confidential and are intended solely for addressee. The information may also be legally privileged. This transmission is sent in trust, for the sole purpose of delivery to the intended recipient. *Why are pronouns important? From: Alicia Bock Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2025 11:08 AM To: MN ADM ENV Review SHPO <errreviewshpo@state.mri.us> Subject: Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update - SHPO Review Request Greetings, Please see the attached review request form and project description for the Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update. Project figures and the previous inventory forms (for reference) are available for download here: El 250724_Jackson Township Development Area AUAR Update_Attachments Sincerely, Alicia Alicia Bock She/Her/Hers Lead, Environmental Planning SRF Consulting Group 3701 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 55416-3791 Direct: 763-340-1824 I abock@srfconsulting.com 2 114 IRF srfconsulting.com I Facebook I LinkedIn I Twitter I Vmeo I Instagram CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this email message and any attachments are confidential and are intended solely for addressee. The information may also be legally privileged. This transmission is sent in trust, for the sole purpose of delivery to the intended recipient. *Why are pronouns important? 3 115 Appendix H Transportation Memo Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update SRF 116 [SRF To: From: Date: Subject: Mark Noble, Senior Planner City of Shakopee Brent Clark, PE, Project Manager Eric Wurst, EIT, Engineer II 9/15/2025 Shakopee AUAR Transportation Analysis Update Introduction MEMORANDUM SRF Project No. 19234 The Shakopee Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Transportation Analysis was developed by SRF Consulting Group, Inc. (SRF) in February 2020 (hereon referred to as the Shakopee AUAR). This comprehensive study evaluated the transportation impacts and mitigation measures associated with development within the southwestern orderly annexation area of Jackson Township. The study area is generally bounded by MN Highway 41 to the west, County Road 78 to the south, County Road 79 to the east, and US 169 to the north. Since completion of the Shakopee AUAR, the following studies have been conducted within the AUAR development area: 1) Highview Park Residential Development Traffic Study, SRF Consulting (February 2023) a. The Highview Park residential development proposed a higher density than assumed in the Shakopee AUAR, prompting a traffic study to determine if additional mitigation would be needed prior to site development. The study recommended future internal connections to CR 69 and CR 15, monitoring of the CR 78/Zumbro Avenue intersection, potential early traffic control improvements at CR 78/CR 15, and identified pedestrian crossing alternatives for CR 78. 2) Marystown Road Corridor Study — Design Update, SRF Consulting (April 2024) a. The Marystown Road Corridor Study, originally completed in 2020, was updated to reflect post -pandemic travel patterns and current development conditions along the corridor. The update supported final design efforts for a 2025/2026 roundabout reconstruction project, which includes two study intersections within the Shakopee AUAR area, to improve safety, capacity, and multimodal connectivity. While these studies have helped determine specific geometric design improvements and monitor individual development parcels, the Shakopee AUAR is required to be updated every five (5) years until the site is fully developed. Therefore, the purpose of this transportation analysis update is to collect updated traffic data, provide a comprehensive overview of current land use assumptions and mitigation status, and evaluate whether previous mitigation remains sufficient or if additional improvements are necessary. The following sections provide the assumptions, analysis, and recommendations for consideration. www.srfconsulting.com 3701 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 100 I Minneapolis, MN 55416-3791 1763.475.0010 Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer 117 Shakopee AUAR Transportation Analysis Update 9/15/2025 Page 2 of 15 AUAR Assumptions The Shakopee AUAR was reviewed to identify key assumptions associated with land use, evaluation scenarios, trip generation, and mitigation/infrastructure improvements. The evaluation scenario assumptions, as well as infrastructure mitigation status, are summarized in the following sections. Evaluation Scenarios/Land Use As part of the Shakopee AUAR, two future build scenarios were evaluated and summarized below: • 2040 Comp Plan Scenario: This scenario reflected land use and staging assumptions consistent with the adopted Scott County 2040 Comprehensive Plan and the draft City of Shakopee 2040 Comprehensive Plan, which were considered aligned. It represented a growth scenario based on officially adopted planning documents and was used as the baseline or "no -build" alternative. • Max Build Scenario: This scenario reflected the City of Shakopee's full build -out potential based on feasible development capacity within the AUAR study area. Land use assumptions were developed in coordination with City staff using parcel -level planned land use and developable acreages. The Shakopee AUAR evaluated and developed mitigation improvements for both the Comp Plan and Max Build scenarios. The current land use proposal, referred to as the "AUAR Update" scenario, is based on the most up to date land use projections for the AUAR development area. Note these projections take into account developments that have recently been constructed, developments that have gone through and/or are going through the City of Shakopee's approval process, as well as future land use predictions, including parcels that are not expected to redevelop by 2040 based on discussions with City staff. A detailed summary of the specific parcel assumptions and differences in trip generation is provided later in this document. A summary of the previous and current land use assumptions within the Shakopee AUAR is shown in Table 1. Household projections have increased and now exceed the Max Build scenario. Conversely, both retail and non -retail employment projections fall below the Max Build scenario, with retail employment even slightly lower than the original Comp Plan assumptions. These differences indicate a shift toward more residential -driven growth, with overall development intensity remaining within the bounds of what the AUAR process is intended to evaluate albeit with a heavier emphasis on housing and less on employment uses than originally envisioned. Table 1 AUAR Land Use Scenarios Land Use Type Comp Plan Max Build AUAR Update 1 Residential DU Retail Employment Non -Retail Employment 1,154 141 1,366 2,013 1,610 8,392 1 Employment estimates were derived from development square footage assumptions. 2,918 52 3,265 SRF 118 Shakopee AUAR Transportation Analysis Update 9/15/2025 Page 3 of 15 Infrastructure Review Several improvements were identified as part of the Shakopee AUAR. The specific mitigation associated with each scenario are summarized in Table 2. Note the table also summarizes whether the improvement has been or is planned to be implemented (highlighted in blue) and corresponds to Figure 1. The remaining mitigation that has not been implemented ranges from turn lane modifications to traffic control (i.e. roundabout/signal) improvements. Table 2 Shakopee AUAR Infrastructure Improvement Review Intersection Improvement Summary Implementation Status 2040 Comp Plan MN 41 Construct 4 -lane divided roadway Not Implemented MN 41/Rail Frontage Rd Construct turn lanes on side -street approaches Implemented in 2024 Marystown rystown Rd/US 169 RampsConstruct signal or roundabout Implementation Planned for 2025/2026 CR 15/CR 16 Construct signal or roundabout Implemented in 2022 CR 15/CR 78 Construct left -turn lanes on all approaches Not Implemented Max Build MN 41/Rail Frontage Rd Construct a traffic signal Not Implemented CR 78/Emery Way Construct signal with turn lanes or roundabout Not Implemented CR 78/CR 69 Construct signal with turn lanes or roundabout Implemented in 2024 CR 78/CR 73 (Zumbro) Construct EB and WB left -turn lanes Implemented in 2021 CR 78/CR 15 Construct signal with turn lanes or roundabout Not Implemented CR 78/CR 77 Construct SB right- and EB left -turn lane Not Implemented CR 78/CR 79 Construct signal with turn lanes or roundabout Implemented in 2025 CR 69/10th Ave/Chaparral Ave Construct signal or roundabout. Reconstruct Chaparral Ave to align with 10th Ave Not Implemented p CR 69/Vierling Drive Construct signal or roundabout Not Implemented CR 69/US 169 Ramps Construct signal or roundabout Not Implemented CR 69 Subdistrict AB 69/Subdistrict Access signal with turn lanes or roundabout. g Implementation Planned When East Leg Constructed CR 69/CR 16 Extension Construct signal or roundabout 2 Not Implemented CR 15/128th Street Construct NB and SB left -turn lanes Not Implemented 2 Note that southbound left -turn and northbound right -turn lanes are anticipated as part of the CR 16 extension project. However, the west leg of the intersection is no longer assumed in this study, which may affect the need for future traffic control improvements. SRF 119 0 N peon uMoJsit.JeW U 0 0 I• • I U 000] I •, • •, LL HO I • V N N'fo'N N O s -k N O U 6L HO 96 HO £L HO 69 HO LLI LLI J a) -0 cp • a) N - a) E E EO a> a) o a) a O O L L Q Q as E E a) a) 0 L E U) a) co eL .N CO O O vi co F- < a) � O Q 9 ca 0_ co 0 o (i) U cr) Lfi M � N � O(n Shakopee AUAR Transportation Analysis Update 9/15/2025 Page 5 of 15 In addition to infrastructure improvements, there have been updates to access assumptions within the study area. As part of the planned extension of CR 16 (17th Avenue) to CR 69, a west leg of the intersection is no longer assumed, removing a potential access point to Subdistrict B that had been included in the original AUAR. Instead, Subdistrict B is expected to rely on the future internal roadway connection between Emery Way and the current "Optum" intersection directly south of the US 169 interchange, which was previously assumed in the original study. A development parcel in the southeast quadrant of Subdistrict B may also have direct access to CR 78. In addition, while not included in the original AUAR or listed in Table 2, a pedestrian underpass was constructed just west of the CR 78/Zumbro Avenue intersection. This improvement was constructed to enhance pedestrian safety and connectivity, particularly for nearby residents accessing the new Jackson Commons Park. AUAR Update Scenario The current AUAR Update scenario land use and trip generation were reviewed and compared to the previous AUAR assumptions. The following sections outline the current land use, trip generation data associated with the updated assumptions, and whether previous mitigation remains sufficient or if additional improvements are necessary. Land Use As mentioned previously, the current AUAR Update scenario is based on the most up to date land use projections within the Shakopee AUAR development area. These projections take into account developments that have been recently constructed/open, developments that have gone through and/or are going through the City of Shakopee's approval process, as well as future land use predictions, including parcels that are not expected to redevelop by 2040. A detailed breakdown of the land use assumptions per parcel are shown in Figure 2. Note that developments that have been constructed or have been through/currently going through the City of Shakopee's approval process are highlighted in purple, future land use predictions are highlighted in blue, and parcels not expected to redevelop by 2040 are shown without color. Each specific subdistrict land use assumptions were compared to the previous AUAR assumptions and are shown in Table 3. The updated land use projections show notable shifts primarily in Subdistricts A, B, C, and D. Subdistrict A has increased residential development but reduced employment compared to previous assumptions. Subdistricts B and D have significantly lower employment than the Max Build scenario, yet their projections remain between the Comp Plan and Max Build levels. Subdistrict C shows a substantial increase in residential development beyond prior Max Build estimates. Meanwhile, Subdistricts E, F, and G generally align with the Max Build assumptions. SRF 121 Shakopee AUAR Transportation Analysis Update 9/15/2025 Page 6 of 15 Table 3 Land Use Comparison Subdistrict Land Use Type 3 Land Use Comparison Comp Plan Max Build AUAR Update 4 A Residential DU Retail (Emp) Non -Retail (Emp) 304 0 990 334 539 1,003 505 0 750 B Residential DU Retail (Emp) Non -Retail (Emp) 361 422 341 0 709 0 160 4,958 1,207 C Residential DU Retail (Emp) Non -Retail (Emp) 30 450 1,372 0 63 0 4 0 2 D Residential DU Retail (Emp) Non -Retail (Emp) 238 339 209 34 188 34 117 2,344 1,191 E Residential DU Retail (Emp) Non -Retail (Emp) 15 113 123 7 11 0 7 0 7 F Residential DU Retail (Emp) Non -Retail (Emp) 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 G Residential DU Retail (Emp) Non -Retail (Emp) 200 355 368 100 100 18 87 87 108 3 DU = Dwelling Unit 4 Bold italics indicate land uses that exceed the previous Max Build assumptions, while bold italics in red highlight land uses that substantially exceed those assumptions. SRF 122 M N N a a) c c, co -0 N X co LLI • _ • O Q Co • - Q N cn 0 c mIli zcn 17th Avenue .� r zt 66213 peon UMolSAJeW 9 U , 9: eC A 69 2/O W e- L a Co 0 Co 0 Co F 4) a) eL O co ce cer) co U) U M � N � _O Shakopee AUAR Transportation Analysis Update 9/15/2025 Page 8 of 15 Trip Generation The forecasts developed for the original Shakopee AUAR were largely based on the Scott County Regional Travel Demand Model, supplemented by NCITE trip rates applied to socio-economic datasets to estimate trip generation by subdistrict. However, for this AUAR update, a more simplified forecasting approach was utilized. Note the regional travel demand model is now outdated, and with increased clarity around current and planned development in the AUAR area, it was deemed more appropriate to apply ITE trip generation rates directly to land use assumptions. While the forecasting methodology differs, both approaches generate daily trip estimates by subdistrict, allowing for a direct comparison between the original AUAR scenarios and the updated projections. This comparison is summarized in Table 4, while Figure 3 illustrates where daily trip generation has increased or decreased compared to the Max Build scenario. Given that routing patterns can be heavily influenced by the parcel location, identifying trip generation differences at the subdistrict level can help pinpoint where potential impacts to the roadway network may occur. Table 4 Daily Trips Comparison Subdistrict II Daily Trip Comparison Comp Plan Max Build AUAR Update 5 A B C D E F G 6,201 3,809 284 3,011 254 58 3,455 13,793 30,723 4,901 13,793 1,166 0 4,850 7,044 8,763 13,071 6,596 1,165 0 4,857 Total Daily Trips 17,071 69,224 41,495 5 Bold italics indicate trip generation that exceed the previous Max Build assumptions, while bold italics in red highlight trip generation that substantially exceed those assumptions. SRF 124 Qo cg O O C) C:, C) r r peon uMwsAJeW LC) 0 Co 96 HO 4 O CD N 69 HO 0 co o p o .L O N CJ �� � N N- 0O o _a _aNn c0 V �-0 N D O = N U m m m 0 m 7 Q s- X >G CC5 U N CD CO a) CU u) , L L L (� 0 a) ca D O OZDZ o U) U) O E O 0 o_ I- N Co E N W a) co eL a Co O Co 0 Co ct < a) Q 0 c, eL co � o (i) U /\ o cf) M � N � _O OUJ Shakopee AUAR Transportation Analysis Update 9/15/2025 Page 10 of 15 Key findings of the trip generation comparison are summarized in the bullets below: • The AUAR Update falls between the Comp Plan and Max Build Scenarios: The total daily trips projected in the AUAR Update fall between the 2040 Comp Plan and Max Build Scenarios, but with notable geographic shifts in trip density: o The south side (Subdistrict C) shows a significant increase in projected trips. o The east side (Subdistrict G and E) remains generally consistent with the Max Build scenario. o The west side (Subdistricts A, B, and D) aligns more closely with the Comp Plan scenario, and reflects less intensive development than previously assumed in the Max Build. • Subdistrict C Surpasses Max Build Assumptions: Subdistrict C is the only area where projected daily trips in the AUAR Update exceed the Max Build scenario, at more than 2.5 times the previously forecasted volumes. While the Highview Park Traffic Study previously evaluated potential traffic impacts from increased development in this area, the current land use assumptions go beyond those studied, indicating a need to review infrastructure and operations in this subdistrict and surrounding roadways. Therefore, the following section evaluates whether previously recommended mitigation measures remain necessary given the updated trip forecasts, and identifies where prior improvements may no longer be needed, or where new improvements may be required to address changes in development intensity and traffic patterns, particularly in Subdistrict C. SRF 126 Shakopee AUAR Transportation Analysis Update 9/15/2025 Page 11 of 15 Infrastructure Review Based on the changes in both trip density and location, future peak hour turning movement counts were developed, and intersection operations were reviewed to determine whether previously identified infrastructure mitigation remains necessary, or if additional improvements are warranted. As previously discussed in the Trip Generation section, the traffic forecasting methodology was refined as part of this AUAR update. Accordingly, future peak hour turning movements were developed based on new existing turning movement counts, a general background growth rate, and trips generated by the AUAR development area, as detailed below. The updated peak hour forecasts are included in Attachment 1 of this document. • Existing turning movement counts were collected in May 2025 at several study intersections (shown in Attachment 1) to establish a new base volume set for the AUAR study area. Counts were collected while area schools were in session to reflect typical weekday conditions. However, it should be noted that some localized road closures by Scott County occurred near the time of the counts, which may have slightly influenced travel patterns. • A general background growth rate of one half (0.5) percent was applied to the existing peak hour traffic volumes. This growth rate is consistent with previous studies within the area, and represents a conservative estimate, given the AUAR development area is expected to account for a majority of future growth within the study area. • Trip generation estimates for the proposed land uses were developed for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours and daily basis using the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. These trips were distributed to the adjacent roadway network based on existing travel patterns and engineering judgement. To evaluate future traffic operations, an intersection capacity analysis was completed using Synchro/SimTraffic software. All infrastructure improvements that have already been implemented or are planned to be implemented were assumed within the model. The focus of the analysis was to determine whether any remaining mitigation measures from the previous AUAR are still warranted under the updated traffic forecasts. Results of the analysis, summarized in Table 3 and illustrated in Figure 4, indicate that several mitigation measures identified in the previous AUAR may no longer be needed based on the updated traffic forecasts, while others remain necessary to accommodate development through 2040. Additionally, a few new mitigation measures have been identified in response to changes in projected traffic patterns and development assumptions, as further discussed below. SRF 127 Shakopee AUAR Transportation Analysis Update 9/15/2025 Page 12 of 15 Table 3 Shakopee AUAR Infrastructure Improvement Update Intersection May No Longer Be Needed Improvement Summary CR 78/Emery Way Construct signal or roundabout CR 69/10th Ave/Chaparral Ave Construct signal or roundabout. Reconstruct Chaparral Ave to align with 10th Ave. p g CR 69/Vierling Drive Construct signal or roundabout CR 69/CR 16 Extension Construct signal or roundabout CR 78/CR 77 Construct SB right- and EB left -turn lane Comp Plan/Max Build Mitigation Still Needed MN 41 Construct 4 -lane divided roadway 6 MN 41/Rail Frontage Rd Construct a traffic signal CR 69/US 169 Ramps Construct signal or roundabout CR 78/Emery Way Construct SBL Turn Lane CR 78/CR 15 Construct signal with turn lanes or roundabout CR 15/128th Street Construct NB and SB left -turn lanes New Mitigation Marystown Road/US 169 Ramps Construct turn lanes CR 78/CR 73 (Zumbro Avenue) Restrict to 3/4 access or construct signal or roundabout Subdistrict C Provide direct connections to CR 69 and CR 15 6Although a 4 -lane divided river crossing is still expected to be needed long term, the City of Chaska recently reconstructed its downtown segment from a 4 -lane divided roadway to a 2 -lane divided roadway with turn lanes. Similarly, the MN 41 intersection at the MN Rail Frontage Road was recently rebuilt as a 2 -lane roadway with turn lanes. Given the limited number of river crossings in the area, the long-term capacity of this corridor will require further discussion and evaluation by area stakeholders. SRF 128 C) N • 6L dO peon UMOJSA.JBM/ 0 Cb • • ♦ U ♦• • Kt ♦ ♦ ♦ vo • • • • •\ *Construct Traffic Signal LL ai) 1 J0 J L e O V Co di) £L di) 0 c ao a) co Z Co -0 m a� a5 Co c 0 C J O N cs E Z Z co ; 5 co E c c 0) O O p co E E Cl) t1 a) a� `) 0 E a) r, i 0 N cv 0. coo Shakopee AUAR Transportation Analysis Update 9/15/2025 Page 14 of 15 Several mitigation measures identified in the previous AUAR under Max Build scenario may no longer be needed. This is due to the following: • These mitigation measures were largely associated with the Max Build scenario, and the current development proposal is less intensive, particularly near the affected intersections. • Access changes have occurred that reduce demand at certain intersections. For example, the west leg of the CR 69/CR 16 Extension intersection is no longer planned. Additionally, most development in Subdistrict D is expected to access the system via the MN 41/Dem- Con intersection, rather than through CR 69. The "new" mitigation measures have largely been identified in previous studies, as summarized below: • Marystown Road/US 169 Ramps — Based on the findings of the Marystown Road Corridor Study — Design Update, the project team prioritized safety for both vehicles and pedestrians. As a result, additional turn lanes/circulating lanes were not desired by the project team unless they were essential from a traffic operations perspective. Therefore, the roundabout designs allow for future modifications if needed, including the following. Additionally, the potential for two southbound circulating lanes will be evaluated as part of future roadway rehabilitation projects. o A westbound right -turn lane at the US 169 North Ramp o A northbound right -turn lane at the US 169 South Ramp • Subdistrict C — As outlined in the Highview Park Residential Development Traffic Study, direct connections are recommended from future residential developments in Subdistrict C to CR 69 and CR 15. These connections would provide alternative routes for local traffic and reduce demand at the CR 78/Zumbro Avenue intersection. • CR 78/Zumbro Drive — The intersection should be monitored and, if traffic volumes or safety concerns warrant, either restricted to a three-quarter access or upgraded to a traffic signal or roundabout. Note that these infrastructure improvement updates are based on the latest development assumptions. All mitigation alternatives should continue to be monitored over time to determine if and when improvements are needed. SRF 130 Shakopee AUAR Transportation Analysis Update 9/15/2025 Page 15 of 15 Summary SRF has completed an updated transportation analysis for the Shakopee AUAR, located in the southwestern orderly annexation area of Jackson Township, MN. Key findings of the transportation analysis update are summarized below. • Infrastructure Review: Several mitigation measures have been or are planned to be implemented, as shown in Figure 1. • Land Use Changes: Residential growth has increased beyond the previous Maximum Build projections, while retail and employment growth has remained similar to the Comp Plan ("no build") assumptions, indicating a shift toward more housing -focused development. • Trip Generation: Updated daily trip generation falls between the original 2040 Comp Plan and Max Build scenarios, with notable increases in the southern subdistrict (Subdistrict C), warranting further evaluation of infrastructure needs. • Updated Mitigation Needs: Based on updated traffic forecasts, the revised mitigation needs are summarized in Table 3 and Figure 4. Key takeaways include: o Most remaining mitigation measures remain valid. o Some improvements may no longer be needed due to reduced traffic volumes or changes in access. o New mitigation measures have been identified at the following locations. These are consistent with previous studies completed within the area. • Construct right -turn lanes at Marystown Road / US 169 Ramps • Restrict or implement traffic control improvements at CR 78 / Zumbro Avenue • Provide direct internal roadway connections in Subdistrict C to CR 15 and CR 69 Overall, this AUAR transportation update reflects current development conditions and provides refined traffic and infrastructure guidance through 2040. All mitigation measures should continue to be monitored to determine if and when implementation is needed. Shakopee AUAR Transportation Section Update 250915.docx SRF 131 ATTACHMENT 1 EIRF 0 0 C 0 a) co U) > ca Q ca -0 � Ca 1 (JJ O O Ca o 0 0 ) r U U o U) Q c c�OC 0 Lt Ca CL 0_2 O ca ca mu) . cm V)��U= 00000 N O (f) .. 0 U) C ca .O 0 � J ca � V 0 J f5 = 0 V U 43 ca o_ a) 0 O swept,' au pd umwsAJeL 0. end IeaaedegO 0 0 OO CR 16 (17th Ave) ocge �, e O LL dO O 128th Street W 0 co e O O env oaquinz 69 dO O CO v ap uoO cua p 6L dO 9L dO £L dO X La CL 0 - a) 0 U) .( > ca 0 ca 0 0_ H Q a < (1) — a) co o o `n o U) M N a) N O O N O N a) E a) 0 a) C,) 7,3 cn a O ca O CO F 4) 4) O cO 0 3 0 U M � N � N O UJ Appendix GHG Emissions Memo Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update SRF 135 SRF To: From: Date: Subject: MEMORANDUM Mark Noble, Senior Planner City of Shakopee Derek Tollette, Environmental Planner, SRF Consulting Group September 19, 2025 Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update SRF Project No. 19234.00 Introduction Since the Next Generation Energy Act was signed into law in 2007,1 it has been important for Minnesota Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) documents to include information about the potential effects of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and carbon footprint of proposed projects. The original Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) for the Jackson Township Development Area was completed in 2020. This memorandum serves as the 5 -year update to the GHG emissions and carbon footprint analyses for the No Build and Build Development Scenarios, as described in the AUAR document. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions/Carbon Footprint a. GHG Quantification: For all proposed projects, provide quantification and discussion of project GHG emissions. Include additional rows in the tables as necessary to provide project -specific emission sources. Describe the methods used to quantify emissions. If calculation methods are not readily available to quantify GHG emissions for a source, describe the process used to cometo that conclusion and any GHG emission sources not included in the total calculation. GHG emissions for each Development Scenario were quantified using the methodologies for developing a carbon footprint laid out in the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board's (EQB's) Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Guidance (June 2024)2 and the EQB's Climate Calculator Tool (May 2025).3 GHG emissions from the No Build Development Scenario consist of existing operation emissions that include building energy consumption and hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) leakage. GHG emissions from the Build Development Minnesota Legislature. 2024 Minnesota Statutes. Chapter 216H: Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Accessed 4 September 2025 and available at https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/216h. 2 Environmental Quality Board (EQB). Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) guidance: Developing a carbon footprint and incorporating climate adaptation and resilience. Updated by EQB staff June 2024. Accessed 20 August 2025 and available at https://www.eqb.state.mn.us/sites/eqb/files/2024 eaw climate guidance 2.pdf. EQB Climate assessments. Climate Calculator Tool. Updated by EQB staff May 2025. Accessed 18 August 2025 and available at https://www.egb.state.mn.us/environmental-review/climate-assessments. www.srfconsulting.com 3701 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 100 I Minneapolis, MN 55416-3791 1763.475.0010 Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer 136 Mark Noble, Senior Planner September 19, 2025 City of Shakopee Page 2 of 3 Scenario consists of construction emissions that include material inputs, transportation of material inputs, employee commuting, construction equipment, construction land use change, and construction waste, along with the operation emissions included in the No Build Development Scenario and additional on -road vehicles as a result of development. Analyses for GHG emissions for the No Build and Build Development Scenarios are included in Attachment A. GHG Assessment i. Describe any mitigation considered to reduce the project's GHG emissions. Development plans are concept -level during this phase of site planning, however the following design strategies and sustainability measures would be considered to reduce GHG emissions: • Encourage and integration of alternative modes of transportation. • Energy efficient building shells. • Use of energy efficient appliances, equipment, and lighting. • Implement waste best management practices, including recycling and composting appropriate materials when applicable. • Utilize native landscaping and trees to improve local air quality, absorb GHG emissions, and reduce local urban heat island effect. • Provide electric vehicle charging infrastructure. • Include solar photovoltaic installations. • Compact, mixed -use development patterns which allow residents to minimize vehicle miles traveled. Implementation of the above strategies would be evaluated on a case -by -case basis based on feasibility, code requirements, schedule, and tenant considerations. ii. Describe and quantify reductions from selected mitigation, if proposed to reduce theproject's GHG emissions. Explain why the selected mitigation was preferred. In addition to the mitigation measures listed above, the proposed Development would increase residential and commercial density within the project area. Table 1 shows a summary of existing land use under the existing (No Build) and Build Scenarios. Table 1 Development Scenarios for the GHG Analysis No Build Build Land Use Residential Commercial Industrial Units 138 Area (sq. ft.) 345,000 681,098 346,770 Units 2,918 Area (sq. ft.) 7,295,000 6,035,494 3,878,816 SRF 137 Mark Noble, Senior Planner September 19, 2025 City of Shakopee Page 3 of 3 Residential density would remain consistent with existing development in the project area (approximately 3 units per acre for single family homes) and include a 130 -unit apartment complex. The additional 5,354,396 square feet of commercial spaces would allow for the creation of mixed -use zones that allow residents to drive less and thus emit fewer GHGs. It is also assumed that future development would incorporate trail and sidewalk connections to the surrounding network, allowing for a reduction in single -occupancy vehicle travel. iii. Quantify the proposed projects predicted net lifetime GHG emissions (total tons/# of years) and how those predicted emissions may affect achievement of the Minnesota Next Generation Energy Act goals and/or other more stringent state or local GHG reduction goals. Minnesota's Next Generation Energy Act requires the state to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the state by 80% between 2005 and 2050, while supporting clean energy, energy efficiency, and supplementing other renewable energy standards. The City of Shakopee 2040 Comprehensive Plan includes a recommendation to establish a climate action plan with clear, realistic GHG reduction goals and strategies.4 Any development will utilize GHG reduction strategies outlined in the City's climate action plan to help support the City's and state's goals of GHG emissions reduction. Table 2 shows the predicted emissions of the Development Area for the No Build and the Build Scenarios over the lifespan of 50 years. Table 2 GHG Emissions Summary for the Development Scenarios without Mitigation Strategies Total Emissions Net Total Building Area Total Emissions (tons/year) Emissions (square feet) per Building Area (tons/year) (tons/sqft) No Build Build 21,441 223,124 201,683 1,372,868 17,209,310 0.78 0.71 Developments within the Build Scenario may also implement any applicable state or local GHG goals as determined by the City or project proposers. Project proposers may also explore additional sustainability measures such as examples listed in Section i above to reduce operational emissions to the extent practicable. The proposed developments would be constructed in compliance with state regulations and city building codes. Jackson Township Development Area — AUAR Update, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Carbon Footprint Memorandum 4 Envision Shakopee. Shakopee 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Updated by the City of Shakopee 2019. Accessed 22 August 2025 and available at https://cld.bz/6IkEdse/368/. SRF 138 Background nformation r.) O 0 V7 L O I vi � U k • Q) N -z • E O N co (13 co• z N cuL O • 0 Q z • O U (O (I) �z E o o z O O 05 5 ?t, U � O j, co o .0 �Iv • Q) L 011) O L • U z �O W L Complete all required fields before proceeding to the User Inputs tab N co a) Q a) a) 0 0 C 0 F- O a) c:7 Q C6 U a) E E O 9 Co U) CO Ca a) 7 a) CC1) Q 0 (/) Subp. 36, Land use conversion, including golf courses Project Name Project Category (primary Project Category (secondary Location (County a) >- Building Construction Project? H u (13 a) O IMMMF 2,889.0 CO CO N- 4,478.0 44,779.5 3,177.9 3,177.9 >+ cts 0 47. co O a) a) co to c v N ir3 .c_ ca u) c i o a = }' CJ CO .+ Cl) 0 C O }' L CO Q O O E � 0 — V -0 C CU O p 8 +; 0) a O ♦�' co CO t7 '= 0o L,3- < a *Defaults are dependent on total project acreage and are only applicable to building construc 000 000000 N N Construction Start Date N O N Operational Year Operational Lifetime (Years Cs co co N 345, 000.0 681,098.0 346,770.0 i V Q o 'O O H 4- Cr - N Cl) a co i 2 C M 0 Tora }' L co d a) d O OC u _ 4- Cr Cl) a) i Q � _ M To O S co) _ 4S- Srai cp Q 2 Fi = m O 0) Ca a) C9 Electricity Provider a) O d Q O cO V; 0 a) a) a) a) 117 W O D! C O fi 1� = V O • i C. • W . CD 0• '; i7) CD O S cu W N 45 t.) C L O d 0 c O Portion of Building Natural Gas Consumption to be Supplied from Renewable Sources V) C.) CD s- 0 V Please specify the preferred unit in which to present emissions in the Results tab. C O U N o ,0 O 4) N ,U V N O) • U N• i z O O O � O O .z , = (7) a.) Q) ��0) O = L O O 4 . Q. Ca O 2 o Q) ,U O N (13 co 2 O Ca N O CO � • Ca • Q U O • 0) O ,• ,.._ E Oo o 5 O O cu - U N U 7O 0) Q O O N 0) ct3'f O_ N ;ion Source Include Emission Applicable to Source? Project Category? la! inputs No Yes ;portation of material inputs Dyee commuting No Yes truction equipment No Yes use change (construction) No Yes truction waste No Yes ing energy consumption Yes Yes production No No al gas and oil products No No trial processes No No eakage Yes Yes use change (operations) No No lad vehicles No Yes ment of waste on -site No No ment of wastewater on -site No No ment of waste off -site No Yes is fermentation No No re management O Project Phase Er Construction M; Construction Tr Construction Er Construction Cc Construction La Construction Cc Operation Bt Operation Cc Operation Nz Operation Ini Operation HF Operation La Operation Or Operation Tr Operation Tr Operation Tr Operation Er Operation M; User Inputs (Step 2) % % m / » ? ,%)f m :22, y � � 2 / § t a fQ k � w � § 2 fw � R 2 _ k ' @ � / f / 2 / @ w ? � ± � / § ./ / � 2 § 2� $ � / � : 2 m = % 2 w 3 % § / / / \ a % § % o § 2 •.) � � 2 � © / § f cri 1 / m 2 y / / § ® k % L:3 � / \ f @ � O E / \ \ ± 2 @f \ � y 2 2 f "it) @ � ( $ f 63 c 2 f \�$ [ / /§ 2 O 0 O $ 0 Coal Production : 3 k O \R 4 k E Employee Commuting # E • : 0 Construction Phase Operational Phase L O M E 0 0 U 0 0 e6 O O 67 Refer to the Buildings O d a- d C 2. a 'S a m Enter notes into the yellow cells below to document assumptions, data sources, notes for reviewers, special circumstances, or other helpful information specific to your project, if desi Constructio Material inputs N C '- ca .= *, e' C O ++ t) L a" ic C E E 113 a.+ m E _Q V 2+ raw C E En C O v O ma O L Q °� cu csl. v Vic 0 v N ca E U J 0 Operation _ C O E v So O 73 L O C ca -13 caw 1 O 0 2 L ca m U z Only asphalt produced. Other industrial buildings include storage and shipping for steel and portable buildings. Industrial processes HFC leakage Land use change (operations) On -road vehicles Treatment of waste on -site Treatment of wastewater on -site Treatment of waste off -site Enteric fermentation Manure management Mitigation Measures Adaptation Strategies Summary Results (Step 4b) 0) •� O i ca OCr Q o a) 0 -0 F3 O -) Wco U N co a) O U O m a) U -Q a) O O o � Q N a) 0 a) U ) 0 a) QQ) cn .O � O O O O � U - 'Z O (13 CO OL) O k i N O O i) cz ON o o E ci)2 a Q) Q O Q .to 0 N m Q � O co 22 Q Q O Co41 U Q. o °� � 41/i) co S O io o U E o_O O U U � ff). � UO FT) L c O U O O 0 N o N a) o E a) F At U _c 4-) o 7 J Y }' J O c E _Qcn co I U N O C °- T,„ N U E N S C C � Ui U E E L O O U Do N N C (o co _O E �. W cn E Z+' o o H co+' T 2 Emission sources excluded from calculations and hidden below: Generate Summary Report Lifetime Emissions a N N C a).O a) N _ Cl) 2 W C C a 21,440.79 20,787.26 co Lo ri co 21,440.79 a) 1,072,039.31 co rn co co 1,072,039.31 O N co N a) .O M co ++ N c M W M 0 Construction Operation Building energy consumption a) Total O) ca co 2 a) 0 U ca t a U_ I Emissions Equivalencies Q O 0 a) 0 Q Q O .P3 c? 2 0 Q O O Uj O o 2 D O Q. O 0 n3 O 2 U U -°Q N U a) i a) a) Q L I=1) a) a) O O O a) 0 O o_ CO 33 N 0 Q � Q O O U o Q N 2 E N L.6-- 7/) 0 a) o a) Cumulative emissions are equivalent to... Emissions from Emissions from tons of waste recycled instead of landfilled Emissions avoided by Annualized emissions are equivalent to... gasoline -powered passenger vehicles driven for one year f N O) Emissions from Emissions from Carbon sequestered by Background nformation V7 L I L (13 E a) a) U U CO E a) ct U O co 0 O §. a) a) U s- 0 co (13 (13 a) O a) O 0 0 a) O a) O O 0 O -45 a) 0 Q �Iv a) a) U a) Q Ca U a) E E 0 1 Co U) CD Ca a) 7 a) CNr) (/) Subp. 36, Land use conversion, including golf courses Project Name Project Category (primary Project Category (secondary Location (County U) a) >- Building Construction Project? H u (13 - a) O IMMMIr 2,889.0 CO CO 4,478.0 44,779.5 3,177.9 3,177.9 1 co 4,478.0 44,779.5 3,177.9 3,177.9 > cts C� r. O N- O co O a) cm co to c N .c_ co V C . V17130 L N OO V 73 al L v) C O o o O '-a) }' p CO CO m Q a) C C O c.) .E li L a +� V 2 J -a C a) O ) ( < o N N Construction Start Date O N Operational Year 1.0 Operational Lifetime (Years *Defaults are dependent on total project acreage and are only applicable to building construc cp 6 CO CO It 4:I I:k I:k It It ply. It It It It rk It It I:k I I 4— Cr :7--;% N 4— Cr cn G) i 0 4- a) a a i Q Cr COc'�a�CD L 'a r- C r- Q V Q M S co C CO To LEi 'O }' L To C O 5 CL iC 43 EV; = -15 L cu O E d O C }' 0) Ca O C9 Electricity Provider a) O t d Q Q O a) a) I.L CO 0 a) a) a) u W fi 1� = V C 0) O L V � W 'v d (13 a) d W oe 1 O W N 46 -C.) C L O d 0 c 0 O Portion of Building Natural Gas Consumption to be Supplied from Renewable Sources V) a) C.) CD s- 0 RS C) Please specify the preferred unit in which to present emissions in the Results tab. C O C U N o ,0 O 4) N ,U V N O) • U N• i z O O O � O O .z , = (7) a.) Q) ��0) O = L O O 4 . Q. Ca O 2 o Q) ,U O N (13 co 2 O Ca N O CO � • Ca • Q U O • 0) O ,• ,.._ E Oo o 5 O O cu - U N U 7O 0) Q O O N 0) ct3'f O_ N ;ion Source Include Emission Applicable to Source? Project Category? la! inputs Yes Yes ;portation of material inputs Dyee commuting Yes Yes truction equipment Yes Yes use change (construction) Yes Yes truction waste Yes Yes ing energy consumption Yes Yes production No No al gas and oil products No No trial processes No No eakage Yes Yes use change (operations) No No lad vehicles Yes Yes ment of waste on -site No No ment of wastewater on -site No No ment of waste off -site No Yes is fermentation No No re management O Project Phase Er Construction M; Construction Tr Construction Er Construction Cc Construction La Construction Cc Operation Bt Operation Cc Operation Nz Operation Ini Operation HF Operation La Operation Or Operation Tr Operation Tr Operation Tr Operation Er Operation M; Z O 0 C G1 O O User Inputs (Step 2) Coal Production 0 v ca G1 E Employee Commuting Construction Phase To V L = 2 L L O t. O co Unknown Domestic oltsawoa uMOU9Ufl uMOU9uf uMou9uf uMou9uf uMou9uf uMou9uf c giclicIgggilgi—g z' 3,744.00 18,668.00 40,654.00 610,441.00 o O O 8,147.00 66,082.00 69,634.00 R 0 a O 6-N a Aluminum Asphalt Glass Insulation (residential) Insulation (commercial) Steel Wood Products H i m N Y U U 0 m U Construction Stage E N i 0_ CD O N U C O Transportation Mode ti Sinale Occupancy Vehicle 0 O rn C) ft m r 00 I c � R c o R � a O O O O O O O O O O O O R L y v 7 s o E 41 c c 1 311) 0:17s, U o O o, O N W o O O O O o N of O E c RooOO�0000OooaoC°,°O 'L^ V C O i O a in O O O O O O O O O O O N O p O E. p E N 0 O O oo O N O O O O O O 0 0 0 3 i E. NOOOOOOoOC°,°,°oOOO d J 7 L N V C 4mo vU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C c O . r o L C v y?3 i U m o U O O O, O N m O O O O O O N N O d a iC R0 x L 0 a, 0 0 0 O O ao O O O. (4)O t O Z .4 L d a 45 O O O O O O O O O O O N O p O C O p E d 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w]S I— LL m m cn 2 N N 0 0 m m 2 N N 0 0 m m N N N N 0 0 m m N N N N 0 0 m m N U N N 0 0 m m (A N N 0 0 m m m N N N 0 0 0 H C d fl. .5 W Air Compressors Cement and Mortar Mixers Concrete/Industrial Saws Cranes Excavators Forklifts Generator Sets Graders Pavers Paving Equipment Rollers Rubber Tired Dozers Scrapers Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Welders Defaults are only applicable to building construction projects. Values are dependent on the number of project acres. O V 3 N p N mO a 204.40 415.00 OO, 209E88 m 000• O O O O O O O O O O O O 824.90 0.00 QO 0 V O O O O O 0 O O iv0 0 a � Ln O N vv r 8 N O( v �� iE) ao 0oOO �+�j 7'- 03. 0 0 0 O o 0 0 0 rn 0 00 Cfl O a Wetlands, forested Wetlands, not forested Forest Rivers and streams Brush and grassland Cropland Livestock rangeland/pastureland Lawn/landscaping Green Infrastructure: Constructed wetlands, paved Green Infrastructure: Constructed wetlands, vegetated Green Infrastructure: Constructed green roofs Green Infrastructure: Constructed permeable pavements Impervious surface Stormwater pond (wet sedimentation basin) H N N g C O J E Z Number of mature trees removed Number of new trees planted 2 0 O Loss Rate (%) N C 0 O O ri L4' V 0 O r c 0 O 0 O co 67 0 O ti M Tc d 1 E F Q Q 92 a Operational Phase \ % \ \ / E / E 6 E \ $ \ 7 / \ / Refer to the Buildings 15\-g wE 2. '15 'S '5 m \ \ 2 \ $ 9 Enter notes into the yellow cells below to document assumptions, data sources, notes for reviewers, special circumstances, or other helpful information specific to your project, if desi • To O N 4'2 N L co 0- U) Q Q 'Q V J 0) N 1, -- II 2 Zr) O_ ) N N L co m 0- U) Q Q Lo (Ni O N Q) 2 N > `N (B L C C6 to U) n L co co O N _ (� tB C N a) C -0C E N O Q O N N N L ca g 0- u) co co cc ti co vi o — .C in m C KNIMErall Constrt. Average material inputs for one 2,500 square foot home: 60 tons concrete, 15 tons wood, 3 tons asphalt, 3 tons steel, 3 tons brick, 1 ton glass, 1 ton insulation, 0.5 ton aluminum. Business parks: 100,000 tons concrete, 10,000 tons steel, 5,000 tons asphalt, 500 tons wood, 250 tons brick,150 tons glass, 10 tons aluminum, 15 tons insulation. 356 acres of new development. Assumed 89 acres (one-fourth) from brush/grassland and 267 acres (three -fourths) from cropland. No differentiation between open water and stormwater ponds. U) C .— ca * , C o ++ v L E 113 C a.+ m E E _Q V En 1 ra S av C .2 E 4) O C ca o ' L °) v m v ca a c1 inc Inc ca 2H ca E U -i 0 Operation _ C o o E o c) L .2 t). O 12 v o o_ 7O c ca cc c 2 L .5 o ca m U z N In No additional industrial materials expected to be produced. VMT data received from SRF Traffic. Industrial processes HFC leakage Land use change (operations) On -road vehicles Treatment of waste on -site Treatment of wastewater on -site Treatment of waste off -site Enteric fermentation Manure management Mitigation Measures Adaptation Strategies Summary Results (Step 4b) 0) � O Q L a) -' c, ocr N O a) 0 -0 F3 cB U N co a) O Cr U (13 O m a) .5 -Q• a) Q) O Q3 N O � Q N a) 4) N 0N a) a) QQ) O (I) � O 1--O U - 'Z Ca E(13 CO O k ( O O i) 45 O N 0 E -0 a .— E .to i •• N 76 � m O Q) Q � o co 2 O '-.Em". U Q. o OQ3 Q. ai •2 0 41/2, () 2 O a) a) a) H a) O a) a) O a) C � O L . U } a) c6 cn co U vii c W a) U ai- O a O N c vi O U n O F- c6 2 c aca O N N N Z N Oa) -;,1 O H Emission sources excluded from calculations and hidden below: Generate Summary Report Lifetime Emissions U) O O N V, U C .O N N 2 W C C a 8,359.23 6,137.37 N. c) N N. co ,- O CO N- 0) O 3.06 214,765.19 202,638.36 7,972.21 4,154.62 N N N O N V . a' O E W 0 459,757.87 cU L6 in 12,908.31 10,049.57 co co o 49.74 L. 00 11,812,085.39 O 0 438,471.36 228,503.97 12,271,843.27 a) ca a Construction Material inputs Transportation of material inputs Employee commuting Construction equipment Land use change (construction) Construction waste Operation Building energy consumption a) O) CZ ca a) 0 L I On -road vehicles Total Q a) a a) 0 a) Q O .P3 •a? E N Q O U c4 O QO z N O Q3 Q. z O 0 .Q a) a U -0 O U a) Q a) N � Q O• a) N EPA GHG E a) a) a) O O a - -c a2, m c . a cg O -!.(4) W N 0 ,N OV .p o o W F° E Cumulative emissions are equivalent to... miles driven by an average gasoline -powered passenger vehicle Emissions from gallons of gasoline consumed tons of waste recycled instead of landfilled Annualized emissions are equivalent to... gasoline -powered passenger vehicles driven for one year Emissions from Emissions from Carbon sequestered by RESOLUTION R2025-114 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA AUTHORIZING THE ADOPTION OF THE ALTERNATIVE URBAN AREAWIDE REVIEW (AUAR) UPDATE FOR THE JACKSON TOWNSHIP DEVELOPMENT AREA WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee, as the responsible governmental unit (RGU), prepared an AUAR and Mitigation Plan Update which identifies and assesses the environmental impacts and mitigation measures associated with the Jackson Township Development Area, and distributed this plan for comments, with notice published in the EQB Monitor, consistent with Minnesota Rule 4410.3610; and WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee prepared a revised/final AUAR and Mitigation Plan Update that included responses to comments received, including agency comments in connection with the AUAR and Mitigation Plan Update and distributed final documents to state agencies and the Met Council; and WHEREAS, the comments received and the City's responses to these comments are included in the public record for the AUAR Update; and WHEREAS, no objections to the AUAR and Mitigation Plan Update have been received; and WHEREAS, the AUAR and Mitigation Plan Update is an informational document that will assist the City of Shakopee in guiding development of the subject area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of Shakopee hereby adopts the AUAR and Mitigation Plan Update for Jackson Township Development Area. Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held the 21ST day of October, 2025. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: Richard Parsons, City Clerk 154 SHAKOPEE Agenda Item: Prepared by: Reviewed by: Shakopee Planning Commission October 9, 2025 PUBLIC HEARING: Modification of Home Occupancies to Allow Dog Boarding and Daycare Michael Kerski, Planning and Development Director Michael Kerski 5.c Action to be considered: Recommend approval of Ordinance to city council. Motion Type: Simple Majority Background: The City Council has received multiple complaints regarding dog boarding and daycare operations occurring within single-family residential neighborhoods. These activities are being conducted by homeowners who advertise and manage their services through online platforms such as Rover and similar apps. A recent review identified more than 1,000 homes within the community that are actively listed for such services. In response to these concerns, the City Council held two workshops to discuss issues related to in -home boarding and daycare operations, including the number of dogs on - site, pick-up and drop-off activity, and overall neighborhood impacts. Input was also received from several residents currently operating these businesses. Councilmembers expressed concern about the number of dogs being cared for in residential areas, particularly when the total exceeds the number of pets owned by the resident. Following these discussions, the Council directed staff and the City Attorney to prepare amendments to the City's home occupation regulations to address this issue. The proposed ordinance revisions would establish clear standards and process to regulate in -home dog boarding and daycare operations, ensuring consistency with neighborhood character and public safety. Here are the highlights of the proposed 155 regulations: Home businesses that temporarily care for dogs not owned by the resident must: • Obtain and annually renew a permit, subject to city inspection. • Require a permit even if no compensation is received (e.g., via apps like Rover). • Limit care to a maximum of 4 non -owner dogs at a time. • Restrict outdoor activity to fenced rear yards. • Notify landlords if the home is rented; HOA rules still apply. • No unattended outdoor dogs (except via video monitoring or personal presence). • Continuous barking over 3 minutes counts as a violation. • Drop-off/pick-up hours: 7:00 a.m.-9:00 p.m. • Overnight boarding allowed, up to 180 days per year. • Provide off-street parking for clients; no street stacking allowed. • Keep proof of vaccinations for all boarded dogs (rabies, distemper, Bordetella). • Maintain records of all non -owner dogs, available for city review. • No boarding of sick or aggressive dogs. • Commercial kennels or large-scale operations are prohibited in single-family zones. • Breeding or selling dogs as part of the business is prohibited. Recommendation: Recommend to the city council Ordinance O2025-021, Amending Section 151.007(G) of the Shakopee City Code relating to Home Occupation Permits for Dog Daycare. Budget Impact: N/A Attachments: 156 O2025-021 dog daycare.docx 157 ORDINANCE NO. O2025-021 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AMENDING SECTION 151.007(G) OF THE CITY CODE RELATING TO HOME OCCUPATION PERMITS FOR DOG DAYCARE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 151.007(G) of the Shakopee City Code is amended to read as follow: G. Criteria for granting a home occupation. 1. Application for a home occupation shall be made to the Zoning Administrator. 2. An application, meeting all of the following criteria, shall be granted approval upon administrative review by the Zoning Administrator: a. The activity does not involve warehousing, except incidental storage of merchandise offered for sale in connection with the home occupation; b. The home occupation may be carried on by persons residing in the dwelling unit and not more than one employee who does not reside in the dwelling unit; c. Shall provide off-street parking for the employee; d. All material or equipment shall be stored within an enclosed structure; e. Objectionable noise, vibration, smoke, dust, electrical disturbances, odors, heat, glare, or other nuisance factors shall not be discernible at the property line; f. The home occupation shall not create excessive automobile traffic within the neighborhood; g. Shall not have any receipt or delivery of merchandise, goods, or supplies except through the U.S. mail, similar parcel delivery service, or personal vehicles not exceeding one ton; and h. May have outside off-street parking of no more than one commercial vehicle or vehicle identified for business purposes, not to exceed one ton capacity which is used for both personal and business transportation. The vehicle shall be owned by and registered to an occupant of the property and parked in a screened location; and i. Shall meet the zone's off-street parking requirements for all vehicles. 3. In addition to the above criteria, a home occupation permit for the temporary care, keeping, boarding, of dogs not owned by the resident of the home must also meet the following criteria. a. No resident shall operate an in -home dog daycare or boarding facility without first obtaining a permit. The permit shall be renewed annually, and shall be subject to inspection and review by City staff; b. A permit is required whether or not compensation is received, including arrangements through online platforms or similar services; c. A maximum of four (4)) dogs, excluding the operator's own household pets, may be boarded or cared for on the premises at any one time.; 1 SH155-23PL-1048087.v2 158 d. Outdoor Activity shall be limited to the rear yard or fenced area of the property if the location has one; e. If the home is an apartment or other type of housing without a yard and rented, the landlord shall be made aware of the business; f. These rules do not supersede any HOA rules that may limit the number of dogs or businesses at a residence. g. Dogs shall not be left outdoors unattended which can include video surveillance or personal attendance; h. Continuous barking or noise disturbances for more than three minutes shall constitute a permit violation; i. Dog drop off and pick up shall be limited to 7:00 AM - 9:00 PM; j. Overnight boarding is permitted, provided the total number of days does not exceed 180 days per calendar year; k. The operator shall provide adequate off-street parking for client drop off and pick up, 1. No on -street stacking or congestion shall be permitted; m Proof of current vaccinations (i.e., rabies, distemper, Bordetella) shall be required for all boarded dogs; n. Operators shall maintain record of all animals boarded and make such records available to the City upon request including number of non -owner dogs on premise, copies of vaccinations for those dogs; o. Sick or aggressive animals shall not be boarded; p. Commercial Kennels or Large -Scale dog boarding facilities are prohibited in single-family residential zoning districts; q. Breeding or the sale of dogs as a part of a home occupation is prohibited Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance becomes effective from and after its adoption and publication. Passed in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota held on the 21st day of October 2025. Mayor of the City of Shakopee Attest: Rick Parsons, City Clerk 2 159